Collaborative Water-Quality Monitoring in the Big Thompson Watershed

1
Collaborative Water-Quality Monitoring in the Big
Thompson Watershed

• Juliane B. Brown
• USGS-BTWF Liaison
• Colorado District

Rob R. Buirgy BTWF Coordinator Loveland, Colorado
2
Where is the Big Thompson Watershed?

• The Big Thompson River originates in Rocky
  Mountain National Park, and flows east to the
  South Platte River, through the city of Loveland.
• It supplies water for much of NE Colorado.
• Receives and delivers west-slope water through
  the Bureau of Reclamation (BOR) Colorado Big
  Thompson project.

3
Big Thompson Watershed
4
(No Transcript)
5
Who is the Big Thompson Watershed Forum?

• A group of water providers and other interested
  parties who are concerned about water quality in
  the Big Thompson Watershed.
• The Forums mission is to assess and protect
  water quality in the Big Thompson Watershed.

6
Why is the BTWF interested in Water Quality?

• Some reservoirs currently have elevated
  concentrations of nutrients and manganese.
• Fish kills occur with some frequency.
• Effects of forest fires on water quality.
• Impacts from growth and development within the
  extended basin could further affect water
  quality.
• Safe Drinking Water Act and Clean Water Act
  affect water providers and dischargers.

7
Increasing Need for Water-Quality Monitoring

• Clean Water Action Plan
• Source Water Protection
• Watershed Groups
• Growth and Development
• Conversion of Water Supplies from Agricultural to
  Municipal
• Increased Recreational Use

8
Past Water-Quality Monitoring Efforts
9
Past Water-Quality Monitoring Efforts

• Variability in sample collection, analytical
  methods, and data management.
• Data were not shared among all parties.
• Duplication of sampling was common.
• Limited geographic scope of monitoring.

10
Current Status

• Partners BTWF, Ft. Collins, Greeley, Loveland,
  Tri-District Water Utility, BOR, NCWCD, CDWR,
  CSU.
• Funding Voluntary contributions from
  participants on a cost-shared basis.
• Budget 280,000 annually.

11
Current Status

• 19 Professional Sites.
• 22 Volunteer Sites.
• Monthly / Bi-Monthly sampling.
• NWIS / In-house STORET data management.
• Password protected web-delivered data.

12
Future Activities

• Merged Professional / Volunteer program.
• Development of interactive data base/Web page.
• Interpretation and analysis of water-quality
  data.
• Reports on water-quality conditions and trends.
• Coordinated monitoring with west slope portion of
  the basin.

13
Why did BTWF ask USGS to be involved?

• USGS can work with the many partners involved
  with the effort.
• USGS involvement lends increased credibility to
  data produced.
• USGS already involved in monitoring in the
  watershed.
• USGS can offer matching funds.

14
Why did BTWF ask USGS to be involved?

• USGS has well recognized and documented sampling
  and analysis protocols.
• USGS National Water-Quality Laboratory (NWQL) has
  highly regarded QA/QC procedures.
• USGS NWQL has capability to run low-level
  nutrients.
• USGS has capability to measure streamflow.

15
USGS Involvement When? Where? How?

• When and Where
• August 2001
• Spring 2001
• How
• Sampling and measurement.
• Low-level nutrient analysis.
• Data management and review.

16
Big Thompson Watershed
C120
Buckhorn Creek
Fort Collins
C50
North Fork
I-25
C40
T10
M10
M40
M60
M70
M50
M150
Drake
M20
M130
M140
M30
M80
M90
Big Thompson
Big Thompson
C20
Estes Park
Loveland
C30
Johnstown
Milliken
Berthoud
Pinewood Spgs
Little Thompson
South Platte
C10
Site Symbols
Site Type
Sampling Frequency
15/yr
Main Stem
M10
BTWF Professional Monitoring Program Watershed
Boundary Sampling Site Locations
Tributary
15/yr
T20
Canal
15/yr
C10
17
USGS Involvement Why?

• PPB/EWI Protocol
• Records
• Equipment
• Trained Personnel
• Q measurements
• Processing
• NWIS

National Field Manual for the Collection of
Water-Quality Data http//water.usgs.gov/owq/Field
Manual/
18
Sites and Sampling

• Cross-sections
• Seasons
• Mixing
• Low/high flows
• Safety
• Access
• BTWF objectives

19
Seasonal Contrasts
Summer 2001
Winter 2002
20
Equipment Contrasts
DH-81 sample wand and 1-L Teflon-nozzle sample
bottle.
Bridge board and AA Flow meter w/ 30 lb weight.
21
Challenges Overcome

• Route delivery logistics.
• Difficult field conditions.
• Multi-lab coordination.
• Data management.
• Overall program coordination.

22
Future Considerations

• Monitoring program
• publication.
• Stage-discharge ratings.
• Expanded program.
• Data analysis?
• Turn-around times.
• Coordination with other
• monitoring.

23
C120
BTWF Professional and Volunteer
Monitoring Sampling Site Locations
R40
Fort Collins
Buckhorn Creek
C50
I-25
North Fork
C40
T10
M10
M70
M60
VT40
M40
Drake
M50
VM30
M150
M80
Big Thompson
M20
M140
M30
M90
VM50
C20
Big Thompson
VM40
M110
M130
VM10
C30
Estes Park
Loveland
VM20
VT10
Johnstown
Milliken
Berthoud
Little Thompson
VT30
Pinewood Spgs
South Platte
C10
VT20
Site Symbols
Sampling Frequency
Site Type
Main Stem
15/year
M10
Tributary
15/year
T10
Canal
15/year
C10
Watershed Boundary
Reservoir
18/year
R40
VT10
24
Parting Thoughts...

• Collaborative monitoring programs can work.
• Establishing a collaborative monitoring program
  has many challenges -- most of which can be
  overcome.
• Federal agencies play a critical role to ensure
  comparable, high quality data are collected in
  collaborative efforts.
• Successful collaborative professional-volunteer
  efforts could benefit from further study and
  recognition in peer-reviewed literature.