Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
Assessment Point: MN-17 The following data are excerpts from multiple reports. While the same location in the Menomonee River watershed is represented, the assessment point IDs differ. Throughout the following data, Assessment Point MN-17 is also represented by: o Reach 908 o North 70th Street o RI-09 o Menomonee River Downstream of Honey Creek
45 t u
C ii tt y o ff C y o CEDARBURG CEDARBURG
43
C ii tt y o ff C y o MEQUON MEQUON
41 t u 45 t u
WILLOW CREEK
NOR-X-WAY CHANNEL
43
LIT TLE MENOMONEE RIVER UPPER MENOMONEE RIVER
45 t u 41 t u
C ii tt y o ff C y o GLENDALE GLENDALE
LILLY CREEK
45 t u
43
BUTLER DITCH
41 t u
C ii tt y o ff C y o B R O O K F II E L D BROOKF ELD
C ii tt y o ff C y o M II L W A U K E E M LWAUKEE
C ii tt y o ff C y o WAUWATOSA WAUWATOSA
45 t u
UNDERWOOD CREEK
43 41 t u 18 t u
94
DOUSMAN DITCH
18 t u
18 t u
94
o ff SHA SHA
94 18 t u
SOUTH BRANCH UNDERWOOD CREEK
894
C ii tt y o ff C y o W E S T A L L II S WEST ALL S
41 t u
HONEY CREEK
C ii tt y o ff C y o N E W B E R L II N NEW BERL N
45 t u
94
C ii tt y o ff C y o G R E E N F II E L D GREENF ELD
894
43
LEGEND
Water Waterbodies Watersheds Subwatersheds Combined Sewer Area Civil Divisions
0 0.5
1 Miles 2
Watershed Map
WATERSHED RESTORATION PLAN MENOMONEE RIVER WATERSHED
November 10, 2008
45 t u
G " )
T " ) M " )
T " )
@ ?
145
@ ?
181
N.
BR.
NORTH BRANCH MENOMONEE RIVER
@ ?
57
Y " )
E
NO
PIG EO N
E CRE
PIT LAKE
43
@ ?
175
145
41 t u 45 t u BARK LAKE
BAR
MENOM O
W.
RI VE R
F " )
NE
ME NO MO . NEE BR
RIVER
E
LITTLE MENOMONEE CREEK
RI
" )
G
VE R
@ ?
CREEK
@ ?
167
C ii tt y o ff C y o MEQUON MEQUON
ME NO MO NE E
N MO
EE
@ ?
32
K
W " )
@ ?
167 Y " )
@ ?
167
@ ?
57
@ ?
181
WILLOW CREEK
NOR-X-WAY CHANNEL
LITTLE
@ ?
145
CH AN NE L
@ ?
175
CREEK
@ ?
57
LAC du COURS
WIL LOW
AY
NOR-X -W
Y " ) YY " )
RIV
ER
PP " )
@ ?
175 W " )
B " ) G " )
IN D
CREEK
VV " ) J " )
V VV " " ) )
Y " )
LILLY
K
RIV ER
Q " ) V " )
FISH
Q " ) F " )
Q " )
@ ?
32
CREEK
LITTLE
@ ?
57
@ ?
145
43
WAUK E MIL
@ ?
74
@ ?
100
ME
@ ?
100
@ ?
100
@ ?
32
@ ?
74
45 t u 41 t u
@ ?
181
O M
O NE
. CR
N IA
W " )
NO ME
NEE MO
RI V ER
C ii tt y o ff C y o GLENDALE GLENDALE
S " ) W " )
ER RIV
PP " )
@ ?
74
@ ?
145
LILLY CREEK
E WHIT
@ ?
74
S " )
45 t u @ ?
100 E " )
@ ?
57
SUS SEX
VV " )
43
" )
YY K " ) K " ) EE " )
@ ?
181
E CR E
K
EE " )
J " )
BUTLER DITCH
LINCOLN
Y " )
@ ?
190
@ ?
190
@ ?
190
CREEK
@ ?
190 J " )
@ ?
100
@ ?
145
@ ?
57
41 t u
@ ?
164
C ii tt y o ff C y o B R O O K F II E L D BROOKF ELD
45 t u
UN
C ii tt y o ff C y o M II L W A U K E E M LWAUKEE
DE
RIV ER
JJ " )
CREEK
PE
TJ " ) Y " )
UKE WA
FT " )
M " )
OD RW O
E
M " )
FOX
43
RIVER
ER RIV
MENO M
ONE E
94
DOUSMAN DITCH
41 t u
DOUSMAN
K EE CR
18 t u
DITCH
" )
J
JJ " )
18 t u
DEER
CRE E K
18 t u
94
A A
94
SOUTH BRANCH UNDERWOOD CREEK
t u
18
894
@ ?
181
@ ?
59 D " ) Y " )
AR PL PO
@ ?
59
@ ?
59
@ ?
59
ER RIV
O " )
@ ?
100 D " )
C ii tt y o ff C y o W E S T A L L II S WEST ALL S
41 t u KINNICKINNIC
LYONS
@ ?
32
D " ) ES " )
T " ) NN
" )
HO Y NE
HONEY CREEK
E CR EK
W IL
C ii tt y o ff C y o N E W B E R L II N NEW BERL N
SO
@ ?
9
Y " ) U " )
U " )
@ u ? t 45
100
C ii tt y o ff C y o G R E E N F II E L D GREENF ELD
@ ?
36
PA RK
94
CR.
@ ?
164
" )
O I " )
I " )
894
CREEK
@ ?
38
43
UPPER KELLY LAKE
LOWER KELLY LAKE
Y " ) N " )
" )
Y
@ ?
24
MILL
EK CR E
I " )
@ ?
119
OK
ES " )
@ ?
24
LEGEND
Water Waterbodies Watersheds Subwatersheds Civil Divisions
Aerial Map
WATERSHED RESTORATION PLAN MENOMONEE RIVER WATERSHED
October, 14, 2008
45 t u
MN-1
C ii tt y o ff C y o MEQUON MEQUON
43
MN-1 MN-3
41 t u 45 t u
MN-2 MN-10
!
MN-3
!!
MN-2
!
MN-4 MN-4
MN-6 MN-5
MN-10
43
!
MN-9
MN-7
C ii tt y o ff C y o
MN-7
GLENDALE GLENDALE
45 t u
MN-8
!!
MN-12
MN-9
! !
MN-11
43
MN-12 MN-8
MN-15
41 t u
C ii tt y o ff C y o B R O O K F II E L D BROOKF ELD
45 t u
C ii tt y o ff C y o M II L W A U K E E M LWAUKEE
C ii tt y o ff C y o WAUWATOSA WAUWATOSA
MN-13 MN-13
MN-14
94 18 t u
!
MN-14
18 t u
MN-15 MN-17
43 41 t u 18 t u
! ! MN-16 ! MN-17
94
A A
18 t u
94
MN-18
! MN-18
894
C ii tt y o ff C y o W E S T A L L II S WEST ALL S
41 t u
C ii tt y o ff C y o N E W B E R L II N NEW BERL N
45 t u
MN-16
C ii tt y o ff C y o G R E E N F II E L D GREENF ELD
94
894
43
LEGEND
Assessment Points Water Routing Reach Tributary Area Watersheds Waterbodies Civil Divisions
MN-17
! ! !
LEGEND
!
" "
C ii tt y o ff C y o WAUWATOSA WAUWATOSA
!
76th S
MN-17
! ! !
uemound Rd. Bl
Greenfield Av.
LEGEND
Land Use
Agriculture Low Density Residential High Density Residential Commercial
Institutional and Governmental Outdoor Recreation, Wetlands, Woodlands and Open Lands Transportation, Communication and Utilities Manufacturing and Industrial Civil Division
Menomonee River - Variance Standards/Targets Constituent Measure Variance Standard - Geomean not to exceed Fecal Coliform Dissolved Oxygen (DO) Total Suspended Solids (TSS) Total Phosphorus (TP) Variance Standard - Less than 10% of all samples/month Variance Standard - Minimum Concentration USGS Median TSS Reference Concentration (estimated background concentration) Planning Guideline Richards Baker Flashiness Index (quantifies the frequency and rapidity of short-term changes in stream flow; the index ranges from 0 - 2, with 0 being constant flow) Standard/Target 1,000 counts/100 ml 2,000 counts/100 ml 2 mg/l 17.2 mg/l 0.1 mg/l
Flashiness
indicator only
Menomonee River Watershed Restoration Plan Fact Sheet MN-17, Reach 908, RI-09, Menomonee River Downstream of Honey Creek (North 70th Street)
Data resulting from model runs:
Figure Flashiness index Dissolved oxygen v. days per year Fecal coliform v. days per year
Overall Project Analysis Team Assessment The Flashiness Index quantifies the frequency and rapidity of short-term changes in stream flow. The index ranges from 0 Good Good Variable (some good, some bad)
to 2, with 0 being constant flow. The flashiness is reasonably good at this location. Typically, aquatic communities need 5 mg/l or more of dissolved oxygen to survive. Concentrations at this site are consistently above this level as well as the variance standard of 2 mg/l. For recreational uses, lower fecal coliform counts (a measure of bacteria) are better (preferably under 400 counts / 100ml). The counts on majority of the days are either below 400 or above 5,000. A potential goal in this case may be to determine the conditions that create the above 5,000 days and discourage recreational use on days that meet these conditions. As there is a variance that allows the fecal coliform to reach 2,000 counts, another goal could be to find ways to decrease coliform loads in order to increase the number of days that have fewer than 2,000 counts. Phosphorus is a nutrient that can lead to increased growth of algae. The concentrations are at or below the 0.1 mg/l planning standard on most of the days, but the concentrations exceed 0.5mg/l on some of the days. Suspended solids cause water to become cloudy, which is aesthetically unpleasant. They can also clog the gills of fish and invertebrates, make feeding difficult, and lead to sediment deposition (poor habitat). The concentrations are less than 25 mg/l on most of the days. These samples have chloride concentrations that are below levels that are toxic to fish and invertebrates. However, a common source of chloride is road salt and there is no winter data. Note that concentrations in March samples (which include snow melt and spring runoff) are higher than the rest of the year. Winter chloride concentrations in samples would be expected to exceed Marchs chloride concentrations. Notice the decline in dissolved oxygen concentrations during the summer. This is normal due to the decreased solubility of oxygen in warmer water. While the ranges of values are fairly consistent throughout the year, note that the median value declines during in the summer swimming season. This may be related to the die-off of bacteria due to solar radiation. Also note that the summer accounts for many of the below 400 days mentioned above while the winter has many of the above 5,000 days. While the ranges of values are fairly consistent throughout the year, note that the median value increases in March. This may be related to snow melt. Also note that concentrations are lower in May (75th percentile below 0.1 mg/l); this could be due to increased plant uptake. Suspended solids are relatively low year-round and slightly lower during the winter months. This is probably linked to a number of factors including frozen conditions, decreased construction activities, and low-impact storms (snow doesnt pound the soil like rain).
Phosphorus v. days per year Suspended solids v. days per year Monthly chloride grab samples (CL not from models) Monthly dissolved oxygen Monthly fecal coliform Monthly phosphorus Monthly suspended solids
Moderate to Poor Good Inconclusive (no winter data) Very Good to Good Moderate to Poor
Figure Chloride by flow (Cl not from models) Dissolved oxygen by flow Fecal coliform by flow
Overall Project Analysis Team Assessment Inconclusive (no It is difficult to assess chloride trends without data from the winter months; however, it appears that when chloride is not being actively applied, some amount is in a reservoir (sediment). This chloride is gradually released and is particularly winter data) Good Moderate to Poor
noticeable during mid-to-dry conditions. During higher flow conditions, the concentration becomes diluted. Note that the decline in dissolved oxygen occurs at low flows. This is likely due to a combination of decreased water agitation and higher temperatures (low flow conditions are often associated with the warm summer months). Generally, a pollutant that is present at high concentrations during high flows and low concentrations during low flows (fecal coliform, in this case) is attributed primarily to non-point sources. The infrequent sewer overflows (once every 2-5 years) would only contribute during the high flows when substantial non-point loads are already present. Note that during any period with the highest flows, fecal coliform counts exceed the variance standard. During moist conditions, the counts exceed the variance standard over 50% of the time. During low flows, the variance standard is met all of the time. This would be the safest time for any recreational uses (boating, swimming, wading, etc.). Concentrations of phosphorus are greatest at high and low flows. This suggests a background source of phosphorus that is particularly noticeable at low flows (perhaps from non-contact cooling water) as well as non-point sources of phosphorus at high flows. The concentrations of suspended solids increase with increased flows, suggesting contributions from non-point sources. The suspended solids may come from runoff that carries a sediment load, from stream bank erosion, or re-suspended stream sediments.
Flashiness Index
Reach RI-09
Flashiness Index
North 70th Street (908) 1200 AVERAGE DAILY FLOW (CFS) 1000 800 600 400 200 0
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Assessment Point
MN-17 Menomonee River Downstream of Honey Creek
Statistic
Condition Existing
6,926 63 1,124 196 3,622 81 496 130 11.1 11.1 100 0.111 0.074 66 1.13 1.07 16.3 6.0 0.0057 0.0024
Mean (cells per 100 ml) Percent compliance with single sample standard (<400 cells per 100 ml) Geometric mean (cells per 100 ml) Days of compliance with geometric mean standard (<200 cells per 100 ml)
Mean (cells per 100 ml) Percent compliance with single sample standard (<400 cells per 100 ml) Geometric mean (cells per 100 ml) Days of compliance with geometric mean standard (<200 cells per 100 ml)
Dissolved Oxygen
Mean (mg/l) Median (mg/l) Percent compliance with dissolved oxygen standard (>5 mg/l)
Total Phosphorus
Mean (mg/l) Median (mg/l) Percent compliance with recommended phosphorus standard (0.1 mg/l)
Total Nitrogen
Copper
400
360
320
280
240
200
160
120
80
40
0 0-1 1-2 2-3 3-4 4-5 5-6 6-7 7-8 8-9 9-10 >10
Average DO (mg/L)
360
320
280
240
200
160
120
80
40
360
320
280
240
200
160
120
80
40
0 0-0.05 0.05-0.1 0.1-0.15 0.15-0.2 0.2-0.25 0.25-0.3 0.3-0.35 0.35-0.4 0.4-0.45 0.45-0.5 >0.5
Average TP (mg/L)
360
320
280
240
200
160
120
80
40
Concentration (mg/L)
100
10
High Flows
Moist Conditions
Mid-range Flows
Dry Conditions
Low Flows
1
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Flow Duration Interval (%)
Concentration (mg/L)
10
1
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Flow Duration Interval (%)
1.E+04
C onc e ntra tion (c fu/1 0 0 m L)
1.E+03
1.E+02
1.E+01
1.E+00
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Flow Duration Interval (%)
Concentration (mg/L)
0.10
0.01
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Flow Duration Interval (%)
Concentration (mg/L)
100
10
1
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Flow Duration Interval (%)