MassDEP Water Quality Monitoring in the Merrimack Watershed: Therese Beaudoin MassDEP Division of Watershed Management

Transcription

1 MassDEP Water Quality Monitoring in the Merrimack Watershed: Therese Beaudoin MassDEP Division of Watershed Management

2 Overview Descriptions of the various monitoring programs conducted by MassDEP from In-depth look at the SMART program Comparison of total phosphorus in the Concord and Nashua watersheds with 4 other watersheds in Central Massachusetts Evaluation of trends in total phosphorus in the Concord and Nashua watersheds

3 Rotating Basin Cycle Division of Watershed Management (DWM) 5-Year Rotating Basin Cycle Designed to provide basin planning information for NPDES and WMA permits, status of major rivers, and modeling and loading information Began 5-year monitoring throughout the Merrimack watershed in the early 1970s Monitoring conducted in the Merrimack watershed since 1995 include: Concord 1996, 2001 Merrimack 2004 Nashua 1998, 2003 Shawsheen 1995, 2000 Water quality parameters included: temperature, ph, dissolved oxygen, specific conductivity, total dissolved solids, % oxygen saturation total alkalinity, chlorides, color, hardness, total suspended solids, turbidity ammonia-n, nitrate-nitrite-n, total nitrogen, total phosphorus, total coliform, E. coli

4 Probabilistic Monitoring DWM began probabilistic monitoring of wadeable streams in MA in 2010 Probabilistic monitoring in the Merrimack watershed was conducted in 2010 (pilot) and 2015 as follows: Concord - 25 stations Merrimack - 13 stations Nashua - 8 stations Shawsheen - 10 stations Probabilistic monitoring of Merrimack watershed lakes will be conducted in The number of lakes that will be monitored has not yet been determined. Water quality parameters include: Continuous temperature and DO Nutrients Chloride Color Turbidity Bacteria Metals

5 Other DWM Monitoring Programs Biological monitoring Conducted in the same watershed and years as water quality monitoring Includes some or all of the following ecological compartments: Algae/phytoplankton Periphyton Aquatic macroinvertebrates Fish population Fish toxics Additional water quality monitoring projects Baseline Lakes Monitoring 1999, 2000, 2001, 2003, 2004 Nutrient Criteria for Lakes 2003, 2004 Study to determine the relationship between chlorides and specific conductivity in freshwater

6 SMART Program SMART Program: Strategic Monitoring and Assessment for River basin Teams Conducted at 5 strategically-located stations in each watershed to identify trends in water quality, evaluate the success of regulatory programs, and determine natural variability in background conditions In the Merrimack watershed, SMART was conducted in these major tributaries: Concord Nashua Parameters included: temperature, ph, dissolved oxygen, specific conductivity, total dissolved solids, % oxygen saturation total alkalinity, chlorides, hardness, total suspended solids, turbidity ammonia-n, nitrate-nitrite-n, total nitrogen, total phosphorus total coliform, E. coli

7 TP in SMART - trends The following slides present a preliminary evaluation of statistical trends in total phosphorus measured in the Concord and Nashua watersheds between 1999/2000 through The statistical evaluation has not yet been fully reviewed and are considered to be draft at this time.

8 TP (mg/l) Summary Statistics Watershed Concord Concord Concord Concord Nashua Nashua Nashua River ASSABET RIVER (2 stations) CONCORD RIVER NASHOBA BROOK SUDBURY RIVER NASHUA RIVER (3 stations) NORTH NASHUA RIVER SQUANNACOOK RIVER

9 SMART Total Phosphorus How does total phosphorus in the Merrimack River tributaries compare to TP in other Central Mass watersheds?

10 SMART Total Phosphorus

11 SMART Total Phosphorus: Concord

12 SMART Total Phosphorus: Nashua

13 SMART TP (mg/l) Summary Statistics Watershed Median mean STD Min Max N Concord Nashua

14 TP (mg/l) Total Phosphorus in the Concord Watershed TP: Mean ± SD Trend Analysis: P < (Kendall s Tau Correlation Coefficient = )

15 TP (mg/l) Nashua River Watershed TP: Mean ± SD Trend Analysis: P < (Kendall s Tau Correlation Coefficient = )

16 SMART TP (mg/l) Summary Statistics for Each River Watershed River Median Mean STD Min Max N Concord ASSABET RIVER Concord CONCORD RIVER Concord NASHOBA BROOK Concord SUDBURY RIVER Nashua NASHUA RIVER Nashua NORTH NASHUA RIVER Nashua SQUANNACOOK RIVER

17 TP (mg/l) Assabet River TP: Mean ± SD Trend Analysis: P < (Kendall s Tau Correlation Coefficient = )

18 TP (mg/l) Concord River 0.25 TP: Mean ± SD Trend Analysis: P < (Kendall s Tau Correlation Coefficient = )

19 TP (mg/l) Nashoba Brook 0.2 TP: Mean ± SD Trend Analysis: P = (Kendall s Tau Correlation Coefficient = )

20 TP (mg/l) Sudbury River 0.05 TP: Mean ± SD 0.04 Trend Analysis: P = (Kendall s Tau Correlation Coefficient = )

21 TP (mg/l) North Nashua River TP: Mean ± SD Trend Analysis: P < (Kendall s Tau Correlation Coefficient = ) North Nashua River

22 TP (mg/l) Nashua River TP: Mean ± SD 0.6 Nashua River Trend Analysis: P < (Kendall s Tau Correlation Coefficient = )

23 TP (mg/l) Squannacook River 0.07 TP: Mean ± SD 0.06 Squannacook River Trend Analysis: P < (Kendall s Tau Correlation Coefficient = )