Estimation of constituent concentrations, densities, loads, and yields in lower Kansas River, northeast Kansas, using regression models and continuous water-quality monitoring, January 2000 through December 2003

Abstract

For more information about the USGS and its products: Telephone: 1-888-ASK-USGS World Wide Web: http://www.usgs.gov/ Any use of trade, product, or firm names in this publication is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Government.Although this report is in the public domain, permission must be secured from the individual copyright owners to reproduce any copyrighted materials contained within this report. Suggested citation:Rasmussen, T.J., Ziegler, A.C., and Rasmussen, P.P., 2005, Estimation of constituent concentrations, densities, loads, and yields in lower Kansas River, northeast Kansas, using regression models and continuous water-quality monitoring, DefinitionsAltitude, as used in this report, refers to distance above the vertical datum. Concentrations of chemical constituents in water are given either in milligrams per liter (mg/L) or micrograms per liter (µg/L).Diurnal, as used in this report, means having a daily cycle.Specific conductance is given in microsiemens per centimeter at 25 degrees Celsius (µS/cm at 25 °C).Water year is the 12-month period beginning October 1 and ending September 30. The water year is designated by the year in which it ends. For example, the year ending September 30, 1999, is called the "1999 water year." Calculation of Loads AbstractThe lower Kansas River is an important source of drinking water for hundreds of thousands of people in northeast Kansas. Constituents of concern identified by the Kansas Department of Health and Environment (KDHE) for streams in the lower Kansas River Basin include sulfate, chloride, nutrients, atrazine, bacteria, and sediment. Real-time continuous water-quality monitors were operated at three locations along the lower Kansas River from July 1999 through September 2004 to provide in-stream measurements of specific conductance, pH, water temperature, turbidity, and dissolved oxygen and to estimate concentrations for constituents of concern. Estimates of concentration and densities were combined with streamflow to calculate constituent loads and yields from January 2000 through December 2003. The Wamego monitoring site is located 44 river miles upstream from the Topeka monitoring site, which is 65 river miles upstream from the DeSoto monitoring site, which is 18 river miles upstream from where the Kansas River flows into the Missouri River. Land use in the Kansas River Basin is dominated by grassland and cropland, and streamflow is affected substantially by reservoirs.Water quality at the three monitoring sites varied with hydrologic conditions, season, and proximity to constituent sources. Nutrient and sediment concentrations and bacteria densities were substantially larger during periods of increased streamflow, indicating important contributions from nonpoint sources in the drainage basin.During the study period, pH remained well above the KDHE lower criterion of 6.5 standard units at all sites in all years, but exceeded the upper criterion of 8.5 standard units annually between 2 percent of the time (Wamego...

Monitoring suspended sediments and associated chemical constituents in urban environments: lessons from the city of Atlanta, Georgia, USA Water Quality Monitoring Program

“…Again, this requires a series of concurrent samples/measurements to generate site-specific turbidity/SSC rating curves. Lastly, just as discharge has been used effectively to predict dissolved concentrations in limited cases, turbidity also has been used to predict fluvial sediment-associated constituent concentrations and bacteria levels (e.g., Rasmussen et al 2005Rasmussen et al , 2008. If this approach could be successfully applied in the case of the COA monitoring program, substantive cost savings from reduced sampling and subsequent laboratory analyses could be achieved.…”

“…It would have been extremely useful, as well as cost-efficient, to be able to apply the same rating curve technique for estimating SSC and/or suspended sediment fluxes to sediment chemistry. That approach has been applied successfully elsewhere, for estimating some dissolved (e.g., discharge) and some sediment-associated (e.g., turbidity) constituent concentrations and/or fluxes, as well as for bacteria (e.g., Christensen 2001;Goolsby et al 2001;Vanni et al 2001;Rasmussen et al 2005Rasmussen et al , 2008Stelzer and Likens 2006). Based on correlation coefficients, the surrogate showing the most promise of providing usable sediment-associated chemical estimates in the COA watersheds was SSC itself.…”

Measuring Suspended Sediment

“…Site-specific empirical calibrations are required to convert measurements to reliable cross-sectional SSC estimates. The technology is relatively mature, and has been shown to provide reliable data at a number of USGS streamgages (Uhrich, 2002;Schoellhamer and Wright, 2003;Melis et al, 2003;Uhrich and Bragg, 2003;Wright and Schoellhamer, 2005;Rasmussen et al, 2005;Schoellhamer et al, 2007;Buchanan and Morgan, 2011) and other sites (Pratt and Parchure, 2003;Lewis, 2002). As noted previously, the cost of an in situ turbidimeter with sonde (sensor), wiper, and controller in 2012 is approximately $5500.…”

Surrogate Technologies for Monitoring Suspended‐Sediment Transport in Rivers

“…Bulk -optical instruments lack moving parts (unless outfi tted with optical wipers), can be deployed in situ to collect time -series data, and provide rapidsampling capability. The technology is relatively mature, and has been shown to provide reliable data at several USGS streamgages (Uhrich 2002 ;Melis et al 2003 ;Schoellhamer & Wright 2003 ;Uhrich & Bragg 2003 ;Rasmussen et al . 2005 ) and other sites (Lewis 2002 ;Pratt & Parchure 2003 ).…”

“…Empirical relations between turbidity and SSC have been modeled using linear regression analysis (Walling 1977 ;Gilvear & Petts 1985 ;Buchanan & Schoellhamer 1995 ;Lewis 1996 ;Christensen et al . 2000 ;Uhrich & Bragg 2003 ;Lietz & Debiak 2005 ;Rasmussen et al . 2005 ).…”