status and trends of detroit lake water quality

Norman Buccola

Margaret Kennedy

Portland District

Oct 26, 2019

STATUS AND TRENDS OF

DETROIT LAKE WATER

QUALITY

2

GOALS OF STATUS AND TRENDS ANALYSIS

1. Organize USACE synoptic survey data (2007

to present) into database (Aquarius Samples)

2. Better understand typical algal growth patterns

and how they may relate to climatic conditions,

watershed land management, and/or Detroit

Dam operations

3. Relate current conditions to historic; observe

trends for Portland District Lakes

3

OUTLINE

–Portland District Water

Management and Water

Quality

–Detroit Lake background

–Brief history of data

collection efforts

–Status and Trends • Temperature

• Nutrients

• Trophic State Index

• Planktonic growth trends

4

WATER MANAGEMENT AND WATER QUALITY

There are 22 USACE reservoirs, each one is

managed and monitored with respect to its

authorized purpose(s)

Naturally occurring lakes positioned similarly to

Detroit Reservoir tend to be nutrient poor,

minimal productivity

Changing average annual water temperatures

and adjusted management practices may be

influencing reservoir productivity

5

DETROIT LAKE PHYSICAL FEATURES

Drainage area: 437 mi² (1,132 km²)

Lake Elevation

– Maximum pool: 1,574 ft (480 m)

– Full pool: 1,569 ft (478 m)

– Usable storage (1,425.0 to 1,563.5 ft) =

321,000 acre feet (396,000,000 m3)

– Max Depth: 450 ft (137 m)

Image Credit: Detroit Recreation Area Business Association

URL: https://www.detroitlakeoregon.org/

6

TYPICAL OPERATION

–Flood Risk Management

(Oct-June)

–Conservation season

(May-November)• Coincides with Chinook spawning

– (flow targets, temperature operations)

• Coincides with recreation period

• Coincides with peak biologic productivity

7

HISTORY OF DATA COLLECTION EFFORTS

1953: Detroit Dam Constructed

1980:

• Oregon Lakes Atlas study (EPA-

funded)

1996:

• Larson Limnological Reports (pre-1996)

• Includes Initial biological studies (60’s-

80’s)

2000-Present:

• Continuous monitoring (temperature and

dissolved gas) at gages begins

2010-Present:

• City of Salem regular sampling

(weekly/monthly)

• USACE synoptic sampling (every 3-5 yrs)

8

HISTORY OF DATA COLLECTION EFFORTS

1953: Detroit Dam Constructed

1980:

• Oregon Lakes Atlas study (EPA-

funded)

1996:

• Larson Limnological Reports (pre-1996)

• Includes Initial biological studies (60’s-

80’s)

2000-Present:

• Continuous monitoring (temperature and

dissolved gas) at gages begins

2010-Present:

• City of Salem regular sampling

(weekly/monthly)

• USACE synoptic sampling (every 3-5 yrs)

9

HISTORY OF DATA COLLECTION EFFORTS

1953: Detroit Dam Constructed

1980:

• Oregon Lakes Atlas study (EPA-

funded)

1996:

• Larson Limnological Reports (pre-1996)

• Includes Initial biological studies (60’s-

80’s)

2000-Present:

• Continuous monitoring (temperature and

dissolved gas) at gages begins

2010-Present:

• City of Salem regular sampling

(weekly/monthly)

• USACE synoptic sampling (every 3-5 yrs)

10

ANNUAL PEAK EPILIMNETIC TEMPERATURE

Data before 2000 hand-

extracted from data

sheets (fewer samples)

Data 2010-2018 from

continuous data loggers

Size of font indicates

relative number of samples

per year

11

CALCULATING TROPHIC STATE

Utilize method developed by the state of Florida

• Older TSI (Carlson, 1977) calculation

methods utilize one parameter to solve

for final TSI

• This approach uses three parameters

to solve for a final TSI that accounts for

the limiting nutrient in the reservoir

• Will allow analysis of nutrient availability

and overall water quality over time

0-59: good

60-69: fair

70-100: poor

Figure Credit: Table 2-8 1996 WATER-QUALITY ASSESSMENT FOR THE STATE

OF FLORIDA SECTION 305(B) MAIN REPORT

URL for Resource:

http://www.pinellas.wateratlas.usf.edu/shared/learnmore.asp?toolsection=lm_tsi

12

PEAK TN:TP RATIO NEAR LAKE SURFACE

• Values 2011-2019 from

City of Salem

• Lack of long-term data

make trends difficult to

assess

Phosphorus limited

Size of font indicates relative

number of samples per year

Nitrogen limited

Transition zone

13

ANNUAL PEAK TROPHIC STATE

• Values prior to 2011

are self-reported

• Values 2011-2019

calculated from City of

Salem and USACE

data

• Data gaps make

trends difficult to

assess

Size of font indicates

relative number of samples

per year

14

TYPICAL BLOOM TIMING

Typical May/June bloom

coinciding with full pool

Second bloom can be as

big as first

15

BLOOM TIMING BY YEAR

Typical May/June bloom

coinciding with full pool

Wet years (2011): delayed

Dry years (2015): can

have second bloom in late

summer

16

DOMINANT PLANKTON SPECIES BY YEAR

• Typical May/June bloom

of Dolichospermum

• Drier years:

Second bloom of

Aphanizomenon

• Wet years:

Preceded by Asterionella

(2011, 2012)

or Followed by Chroococcus

(2014, 2017)

17

Plankton Species Description

Aphanizomenon sp Cyanobacteria;

potentially toxin-

producing

Chroococcus

microscopicus

Cyanobacteria

Dolichospermum sp. Cyanobacteria;

potentially toxin-

producing

Heteroleibleinia sp Cyanobacteria

Plankton

Species

Description

Asterionella

formosa

Diatom

Melosira Diatom

Rhodomonas

minuta

Cryptomonad;

free-

swimming

with

cholorplasts

PLANKTON SPECIES

Birger Skjelbred

Jacob Kann - USGSApothecia

greenwaterlab.com

greenwaterlab.com

Kristian Peters

ncma.bigelow.org

National Park Service

greenwaterlab.com

18

SUMMARY

Photo of Detroit Marina in fall, 2015 Photo credit: By Twelvizm: https://www.flickr.com/photos/twelvizm/20258652110/in/dateposted-public/, CC BY-SA 3.0,

https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=42236165

• Typically 1 large algal bloom in

May/June (Dolichospermum)

• Dry years: can have another

cyano bloom in late summer

• Wet years: delayed bloom, can be

dominated by diatoms

• Suggestions for future analysis?

Detroit algae bloom in October, 2015 Photo credit: USACE

19

Brandin Hilbrandt (City of Salem)

Kurt Carpenter (USGS)

Contacts:

Norm Buccola

norman.Buccola@usace.army.mil

Margaret Kennedy

margaret.l.kennedy@usace.army.mil

Holly Bellringer

Holly.H.Bellringer@usace.army.mil

Tina Lundell

Tina.M.Lundell@usace.army.mil

THANK YOU

20

ANNUAL PEAK BY MONTH FOR EACH PARAMETER

Data prior to 2010 hand-

extracted from data

sheets (field trips per

year)

Temperature data 2010-

2018 from data loggers

Caveats: Fewer samples

prior to 2000.

Numbers indicate

number of sample

years

21

DETERMINATION OF DEPTH TO THERMOCLINE

Identification of thermocline in historic data sets

through two main approaches:

[ 1 ] Direct Inspection of Numeric Result

• Identifying the first significant drop in

temperature (relative to your data set)

[ 2 ] Inspection via Construction of Graph

• Identifying the first significant drop in

temperature (relative to your data set)

Reported information:

Depth to Thermocline and Temperature at the

bottom of the epiliminion

22

DETERMINATION OF DEPTH TO THERMOCLINE

Identification of thermocline in historic data sets

through two main approaches:

[ 1 ] Direct Inspection of Numeric Result

• Identifying the first significant drop in

temperature (relative to your data set)

[ 2 ] Inspection via Construction of Graph

• Identifying the first significant drop in

temperature (relative to your data set)

Reported information:

Depth to Thermocline and Temperature at the

bottom of the epiliminion

23

DETERMINATION OF DEPTH TO THERMOCLINE

Identification of thermocline in historic data sets

through two main approaches:

[ 1 ] Direct Inspection of Numeric Result

• Identifying the first significant drop in

temperature (relative to your data set)

[ 2 ] Inspection via Construction of Graph

• Identifying the first significant drop in

temperature (relative to your data set)

Reported information:

Depth to Thermocline and Temperature at the

bottom of the epiliminion

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

20

0 10 20 30 40 50

Depth (m) v. Temp (c)

EPILI

MNION

METALIMNION

H Y P O L I M N I O N

24

DEPTH TO THERMOCLINE