Search USGS⌕ Search

Geology topics

Douglas Moyer

Publications and source records attributed to Douglas Moyer.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources
USGS2015

U.S. Geological Survey Chesapeake science strategy, 2015-2025—Informing ecosystem management of America’s largest estuary

Executive Summary The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) has the critical role of providing scientific information to improve the understanding and management of the Chesapeake Bay ecosystem. The USGS works with Federal, State, and academic science partners to provide research and monitoring, and communicate results of these activities to enhance ecosystem management for both the Chesapeake and other National ecosystems. The USGS Chesapeake Science Strategy was prepared to guide science activities to address the Chesapeake Bay Watershed Agreement (2014–2025), to support the Department of the Interior (DOI) involvement in the Bay restoration efforts, and align with the USGS Mission Area (MA) Science strategies. The Chesapeake Bay is our Nation’s largest estuary, and provides critical goods and services to the people, fish, and wildlife that use the 64,000-square-mile watershed. The Chesapeake Bay watershed contains over 3,600 species of fish, wildlife, and plants and provides spawning grounds for many ecologically and economically important species including striped bass and blue crabs. The Bay watershed lies in the heart of the Atlantic Flyway and has 29 species of waterfowl, about 1 million of which winter in the region. The size of the Chesapeake seafood harvest is third in the Nation, only behind the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans. Along with agricultural production, tourism, and recreation, the estimated economic value of the services from the Chesapeake Bay watershed is about $100 billion annually. However, the health of the Bay ecosystem began to decline at the beginning of the 20th century due to overfishing and increasing human population and associated land change. The Chesapeake Bay Program (CBP) is the Federal-State cooperative effort that started in 1983 to restore the Bay and watershed. Given the ecological and economic importance of the Chesapeake ecosystem, President Obama issued an Executive Order (EO) in 2009 for increased Federal leadership in the CBP to enhance the pace of restoration, and the supporting strategy was released in 2010. The EO directed the Federal Government, including the U.S. Department of the Interior (DOI), represented by the National Park Service (NPS), the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service (FWS), and the USGS, to expand its efforts and increase leadership to restore the Bay and its watershed. The USGS and other Federal agencies expanded their activities in 2011 to meet the President’s Chesapeake EO. Since the EO was released, there have been several important changes in the USGS, DOI, and the CBP including: (1) the Chesapeake Bay Watershed Agreement, (2) increased DOI leadership in the CBP, and (3) the release of the USGS MA science strategies. The EO strategy served as a foundation for the Chesapeake Bay Watershed Agreement that was signed in 2014 by the CBP Partners, and has goals and outcomes to be met by 2025. The USGS developed the Chesapeake Science Strategy to guide our activities to address the Chesapeake Bay Watershed Agreement, DOI leadership in the CBP, and USGS MA strategies. Improving the understanding of fish and wildlife population and health, and the factors affecting their condition is the emphasis of the Strategy. The science focuses on documenting the critical ecosystem connections in the Chesapeake, and providing implications to enhance decision making for restoration and conservation activities. The revised Strategy has four themes that address 7 of the 10 goals in the Chesapeake Bay Watershed Agreement: Enhance science to support restoration, and conservation of fish, wildlife, and critical habitats. Characterize and explain changes in water quality, and its effect on freshwater and estuarine ecosystems. Assess and forecast effects of climate and land change on ecosystem conditions. Synthesize and provide information to support ecosystem management. The structure and function of biological communities of the Bay and its watershed are extremely complex and are affected by a variety of stressors and conditions. To better define the issues being addressed, the USGS has developed cross-cutting questions that define some of the most important scientific challenges where multiple disciplines and collaborators are needed to address an issue. The initial questions include: How do land and climate changes affect freshwater fish communities, health, and habitats? What are the relations among land use, water quality, contaminants, and the health of fish and wildlife? How are coastal wetlands and their carrying capacity for waterbirds affected by changing climate and land use? How is the water quality of rivers and estuaries responding to restoration actions, and changing land use? What are some of the best opportunities for management actions to benefit multiple restoration outcomes?

Delaware, Maryland, New York, Pennsylvania, Virgin↗
USGS2015

Fluvial geomorphology and suspended-sediment transport during construction of the Roanoke River Flood Reduction Project in Roanoke, Virginia, 2005–2012

Beginning in 2005, after decades of planning, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) undertook a major construction effort to reduce the effects of flooding on the city of Roanoke, Virginia—the Roanoke River Flood Reduction Project (RRFRP). Prompted by concerns about the potential for RRFRP construction-induced geomorphological instability and sediment liberation and the detrimental effects these responses could have on the endangered Roanoke logperch ( Percina rex ), the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) partnered with the USACE to provide a real-time warning network and a long-term monitoring program to evaluate geomorphological change and sediment transport in the affected river reach. Geomorphological change and suspended-sediment transport are highly interdependent and cumulatively provide a detailed understanding of the sedimentary response, or lack thereof, of the Roanoke River to construction of the RRFRP. Bed-sediment composition was usually finer in post-construction than pre-construction measurements, yet the annual changes in composition were not significantly different; thus, there was minimal evidence that RRFRP construction practices alone induced fining of bed materials. Cross-sectional surveys revealed variability in bankfull and base-flow channel geometry metrics, but no significant differences in this variability were detected between pre- and post-construction measurements, excluding designed alterations in channel geometry. A lack of channel-forming streamflow events, however, limited the ability to fully characterize the stability of the constructed channel and floodplain features, as bankfull flow events occurred only 2 of the 8 years of study. Therefore, additional channel surveys may be needed in the future, once sufficient channel-forming events have occurred, to fully assess stability. Relations between turbidity and suspended sediment were statistically indistinguishable between the upstream and downstream limits of the RRFRP construction reach. These relations did not change over time, indicating no significant changes in suspended-sediment composition or source in the construction reach during the period of study. Results of the geomorphological and suspended-sediment monitoring components were largely in agreement and consistent with those of a related effort that monitored the logperch population before and during construction. These findings suggest that construction and sediment-control practices sufficiently protected in-stream habitat and the organisms that inhabit those locations, namely the Roanoke logperch, during the period monitored.

Virginia↗
USGS2015

Evaluation and application of regional turbidity-sediment regression models in Virginia

Conventional thinking has long held that turbidity-sediment surrogate-regression equations are site specific and that regression equations developed at a single monitoring station should not be applied to another station; however, few studies have evaluated this issue in a rigorous manner. If robust regional turbidity-sediment models can be developed successfully, their applications could greatly expand the usage of these methods. Suspended sediment load estimation could occur as soon as flow and turbidity monitoring commence at a site, suspended sediment sampling frequencies for various projects potentially could be reduced, and special-project applications (sediment monitoring following dam removal, for example) could be significantly enhanced. The objective of this effort was to investigate the turbidity-suspended sediment concentration (SSC) relations at all available USGS monitoring sites within Virginia to determine whether meaningful turbidity-sediment regression models can be developed by combining the data from multiple monitoring stations into a single model, known as a “regional” model. Following the development of the regional model, additional objectives included a comparison of predicted SSCs between the regional model and commonly used site-specific models, as well as an evaluation of why specific monitoring stations did not fit the regional model.

Virginia↗
USGS2013

Total nutrient and sediment loads, trends, yields, and nontidal water-quality indicators for selected nontidal stations, Chesapeake Bay Watershed, 1985–2011

The U.S. Geological Survey, in cooperation with Chesapeake Bay Program (CBP) partners, routinely reports long-term concentration trends and monthly and annual constituent loads for stream water-quality monitoring stations across the Chesapeake Bay watershed. This report documents flow-adjusted trends in sediment and total nitrogen and phosphorus concentrations for 31 stations in the years 1985–2011 and for 32 stations in the years 2002–2011. Sediment and total nitrogen and phosphorus yields for 65 stations are presented for the years 2006–2011. A combined nontidal water-quality indicator (based on both trends and yields) indicates there are more stations classified as “improving water-quality trend and a low yield” than “degrading water-quality trend and a high yield” for total nitrogen. The same type of 2-way classification for total phosphorus and sediment results in equal numbers of stations in each indicator class.

Delaware, Maryland, New York, Pennsylvania, West V↗
USGS2013

Knowledge and understanding of dissolved solids in the Rio Grande–San Acacia, New Mexico, to Fort Quitman, Texas, and plan for future studies and monitoring

Availability of water in the Rio Grande Basin has long been a primary concern for water-resource managers. The transport and delivery of water in the basin have been engineered by using reservoirs, irrigation canals and drains, and transmountain-water diversions to meet the agricultural, residential, and industrial demand. In contrast, despite the widespread recognition of critical water-quality problems, there have been minimal management efforts to improve water quality in the Rio Grande. Of greatest concern is salinization (concentration of dissolved solids approaching 1,000 mg/L), a water-quality problem that has been recognized and researched for more than 100 years because of the potential to limit both agricultural and municipal use. To address the issue of salinization, water-resource managers need to have a clear conceptual understanding of the sources of salinity and the factors that control storage and transport, identify critical knowledge gaps in this conceptual understanding, and develop a research plan to address these gaps and develop a salinity management program. In 2009, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) in cooperation with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), New Mexico Interstate Stream Commission (NMISC), and New Mexico Environment Department (NMED) initiated a project to summarize the current state of knowledge regarding the transport of dissolved solids in the Rio Grande between San Acacia, New Mexico, and Fort Quitman, Texas. The primary objective is to provide hydrologic information pertaining to the spatial and temporal variability present in the concentrations and loads of dissolved solids in the Rio Grande, the source-specific budget for the mass of dissolved solids transported along the Rio Grande, and the locations at which dissolved solids enter the Rio Grande. Dissolved-solids concentration data provide a good indicator of the general quality of surface water and provide information on the factors governing salinization within the Rio Grande study area. The pattern in dissolved-solids concentrations along the Rio Grande is one of increasing concentration with increasing distance downstream from Elephant Butte and Caballo Reservoirs. The concentration of dissolved solids in the Rio Grande doubles (approximately 500 to 1,000 mg/L) from below Elephant Butte Reservoir to El Paso and increases by more than a factor of 5 (approximately 500 to 3,200 mg/L) from below Elephant Butte Reservoir to Fort Quitman. Marked increases in the concentration of dissolved solids commonly coincide with contributions from agricultural drains, wastewater-treatment plants, regional groundwater, and upward-flowing saline groundwater. The greatest factor, from the surface-water system, in controlling dissolved solids in the Rio Grande is the amount of water that is being transported or stored. Annual variation in streamflow is influenced primarily by climate (precipitation and evaporation) and management of Elephant Butte and Caballo Reservoirs (water storage and release cycles). Seasonal variation in streamflow within the Rio Grande study area is generally categorized generally as irrigation (March–September) and nonirrigation (October–February) seasons; with streamflow in the Rio Grande is highest during the irrigation season and lowest during the nonirrigation season. Dissolved-solids loads during the irrigation season decrease between Leasburg and Fort Quitman primarily because of irrigation diversions and losses to the underlying alluvial aquifer. Conversely, dissolved-solids loads during the nonirrigation season increase between Caballo Dam and Fort Quitman primarily because of the inflow of dissolved solids from agricultural drains, wastewater-treatment plants, and groundwater with elevated concentrations of dissolved solids. Many studies have mass-balance budgets that account for the mass of dissolved solids transported along the Rio Grande. Results from mass-balance budgets developed for dissolved solids indicated that (1) the inflow of saline groundwater, inflow of regional groundwater, and chemical reactions between mineral phases are the primary sources controlling dissolved solids in the Rio Grande, and (2) groundwater pumping and mineral precipitation are causing a net storage of dissolved solids in the Leasburg to El Paso and El Paso to Fort Quitman reaches of the Rio Grande. Looking forward, multiple water-resource managers from State and local agencies in New Mexico and Texas and Federal agencies formed the Rio Grande Salinity Management Coalition with the goal to reduce the amount of dissolved solids that are transported and stored in the Rio Grande study area. The recommendations for additional monitoring to assist the coalition are as follows: -Monitoring: Couple water-quality and streamflow monitoring in the Rio Grande and agricultural drains; perform groundwater-seepage investigations in the Rio Grande and major agricultural drains; nonitor groundwater water-quality conditions in the Mesilla and Hueco Basins. -Focused Hydrogeology Studies at Inflow Sources: Map dissolved-solids concentrations in the Rio Grande and underlying alluvial aquifer; perform hydrogeologic characterization of subsurface areas containing unusually high concentrations of dissolved solids. -Modeling of Dissolved Solids: Develop models to simulate the transport and storage of dissolved solids in both surface-water and groundwater systems.

New Mexico;Texas↗
USGS2012

Nutrient and suspended-sediment trends, loads, and yields and development of an indicator of streamwater quality at nontidal sites in the Chesapeake Bay watershed, 1985-2010

The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) updates information on loads of, and trends in, nutrients and sediment annually to help the Chesapeake Bay Program (CBP) investigators assess progress toward improving water-quality conditions in the Chesapeake Bay and its watershed. CBP scientists and managers have worked since 1983 to improve water quality in the bay. In 2010, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) established a Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) for the Chesapeake Bay. The TMDL specifies nutrient and sediment load allocations that need to be achieved in the watershed to improve dissolved oxygen, water-clarity, and chlorophyll conditions in the bay. The USEPA, USGS, and state and local jurisdictions in the watershed operate a CBP nontidal water-quality monitoring network and associated database that are used to update load and trend information to help assess progress toward reducing nutrient and sediment inputs to the bay. Data collected from the CBP nontidal network were used to estimate loads and trends for two time periods: a long-term period (1985-2010) at 31 "primary" sites (with storm sampling) and a 10-year period (2001-10) at 33 primary sites and 16 "secondary" sites (without storm sampling). In addition, loads at 64 primary sites were estimated for the period 2006 to 2010. Results indicate improving flow-adjusted trends for nitrogen and phosphorus for 1985 to 2010 at most of the sites in the network. For nitrogen, 21 of the 31 sites showed downward (improving) trends, whereas 2 sites showed upward (degrading) trends, and 8 sites showed no trends. The results for phosphorus were similar: 22 sites showed improving trends, 4 sites showed degrading trends, and 5 sites indicated no trends. For sediment, no trend was found at 40 percent of the sites, with 10 sites showing improving trends and 8 sites showing degrading trends. The USGS, working with CBP partners, developed a new water-quality indicator that combines the results of the 10-year trend analysis with results from a greater number of sites (64 primary sites) where loads and yields of total nitrogen and phosphorus and sediment could be calculated. The new indicator shows fewer significant trends for the 10-year time period than for the long-term time period (1985-2010). For 2001-10, total nitrogen trends were downward (improving) at 14 sites and upward (degrading) at 2 sites; no trend was found at 17 sites. For total phosphorus, 12 sites showed improving trends, 4 sites showed degrading trends, and 17 sites showed no trend. For total sediment, most sites (21) did not exhibit a significant trend; 3 sites showed improving trends, and 10 sites showed degrading trends. Few significant trends were seen at the 16 secondary sites: improving trends for total nitrogen at 4 sites, improving trends for total phosphorus at 2 sites, and a degrading trend for sediment at 1 site. Total streamflow to the Chesapeake Bay was 20 percent higher in 2010 than in 2009 and is considered to be within the normal range of flow, whereas annual streamflow at 28 sites was greater in 2010 than in 2009. No trends in daily streamflow were detected at the 31 long-term sites. Combined loads for the farthest downstream nontidal monitoring sites (called "River Input Monitoring sites") increased 33 percent for total nitrogen, 120 percent for total phosphorus, and 330 percent for total sediment from 2009 to 2010. The large increase in phosphorus and sediment loads in 2010 was caused in large part by two large storm events that occurred during the spring in the Potomac River Basin. Yields (load per watershed area) of total nitrogen in the Chesapeake Bay watershed decreased from north to south (New York to Virginia). No spatial patterns were discernible for total phosphorus or sediment.

Delaware, Maryland, New York, Pennsylvania, Virgin↗
USGS2012

Comparison of two regression-based approaches for determining nutrient and sediment fluxes and trends in the Chesapeake Bay watershed

Nutrient and sediment fluxes and changes in fluxes over time are key indicators that water resource managers can use to assess the progress being made in improving the structure and function of the Chesapeake Bay ecosystem. The U.S. Geological Survey collects annual nutrient (nitrogen and phosphorus) and sediment flux data and computes trends that describe the extent to which water-quality conditions are changing within the major Chesapeake Bay tributaries. Two regression-based approaches were compared for estimating annual nutrient and sediment fluxes and for characterizing how these annual fluxes are changing over time. The two regression models compared are the traditionally used ESTIMATOR and the newly developed Weighted Regression on Time, Discharge, and Season (WRTDS). The model comparison focused on answering three questions: (1) What are the differences between the functional form and construction of each model? (2) Which model produces estimates of flux with the greatest accuracy and least amount of bias? (3) How different would the historical estimates of annual flux be if WRTDS had been used instead of ESTIMATOR? One additional point of comparison between the two models is how each model determines trends in annual flux once the year-to-year variations in discharge have been determined. All comparisons were made using total nitrogen, nitrate, total phosphorus, orthophosphorus, and suspended-sediment concentration data collected at the nine U.S. Geological Survey River Input Monitoring stations located on the Susquehanna, Potomac, James, Rappahannock, Appomattox, Pamunkey, Mattaponi, Patuxent, and Choptank Rivers in the Chesapeake Bay watershed. Two model characteristics that uniquely distinguish ESTIMATOR and WRTDS are the fundamental model form and the determination of model coefficients. ESTIMATOR and WRTDS both predict water-quality constituent concentration by developing a linear relation between the natural logarithm of observed constituent concentration and three explanatory variables—the natural log of discharge, time, and season. ESTIMATOR uses two additional explanatory variables—the square of the log of discharge and time-squared. Both models determine coefficients for variables for a series of estimation windows. ESTIMATOR establishes variable coefficients for a series of 9-year moving windows; all observed constituent concentration data within the 9-year window are used to establish each coefficient. Conversely, WRTDS establishes variable coefficients for each combination of discharge and time using only observed concentration data that are similar in time, season, and discharge to the day being estimated. As a result of these distinguishing characteristics, ESTIMATOR reproduces concentration-discharge relations that are closely approximated by a quadratic or linear function with respect to both the log of discharge and time. Conversely, the linear model form of WRTDS coupled with extensive model windowing for each combination of discharge and time allows WRTDS to reproduce observed concentration-discharge relations that are more sinuous in form. Another distinction between ESTIMATOR and WRTDS is the reporting of uncertainty associated with the model estimates of flux and trend. ESTIMATOR quantifies the standard error of prediction associated with the determination of flux and trends. The standard error of prediction enables the determination of the 95-percent confidence intervals for flux and trend as well as the ability to test whether the reported trend is significantly different from zero (where zero equals no trend). Conversely, WRTDS is unable to propagate error through the many (over 5,000) models for unique combinations of flow and time to determine a total standard error. As a result, WRTDS flux estimates are not reported with confidence intervals and a level of significance is not determined for flow-normalized fluxes. The differences between ESTIMATOR and WRTDS, with regard to model form and determination of model coefficients, have an influence on the determination of nutrient and sediment fluxes and associated changes in flux over time as a result of management activities. The comparison between the model estimates of flux and trend was made for combinations of five water-quality constituents at nine River Input Monitoring stations. The major findings with regard to nutrient and sediment fluxes are as follows: (1)WRTDS produced estimates of flux for all combinations that were more accurate, based on reduction in root mean squared error, than flux estimates from ESTIMATOR; (2) for 67 percent of the combinations, WRTDS and ESTIMATOR both produced estimates of flux that were minimally biased compared to observed fluxes(flux bias = tendency to over or underpredict flux observations); however, for 33 percent of the combinations, WRTDS produced estimates of flux that were considerably less biased (by at least 10 percent) than flux estimates from ESTIMATOR; (3) the average percent difference in annual fluxes generated by ESTIMATOR and WRTDS was less than 10 percent at 80 percent of the combinations; and (4) the greatest differences related to flux bias and annual fluxes all occurred for combinations where the pattern in observed concentration-discharge relation was sinuous (two points of inflection) rather than linear or quadratic (zero or one point of inflection). The major findings with regard to trends are as follows: (1) both models produce water-quality trends that have factored in the year-to-year variations in flow; (2) trends in water-quality condition are represented by ESTIMATOR as a trend in flow-adjusted concentration and by WRTDS as a flow normalized flux; (3) for 67 percent of the combinations with trend estimates, the WRTDS trends in flow-normalized flux are in the same direction and magnitude to the ESTIMATOR trends in flow-adjusted concentration, and at the remaining 33 percent the differences in trend magnitude and direction are related to fundamental differences between concentration and flux; and (4) the majority (85 percent) of the total nitrogen, nitrate, and orthophosphorus combinations exhibited long-term (1985 to 2010) trends in WRTDS flow-normalized flux that indicate improvement or reduction in associated flux and the majority (83 percent) of the total phosphorus (from 1985 to 2010) and suspended sediment (from 2001 to 2010) combinations exhibited trends in WRTDS flow-normalized flux that indicate degradation or increases in the flux delivered.

Delaware, Maryland, New York, Pennsylvania, Virgin↗
USGS2010

Weighted regressions on time, discharge, and season (WRTDS), with an application to Chesapeake Bay River inputs

A new approach to the analysis of long‐term surface water‐quality data is proposed and implemented. The goal of this approach is to increase the amount of information that is extracted from the types of rich water‐quality datasets that now exist. The method is formulated to allow for maximum flexibility in representations of the long‐term trend, seasonal components, and discharge‐related components of the behavior of the water‐quality variable of interest. It is designed to provide internally consistent estimates of the actual history of concentrations and fluxes as well as histories that eliminate the influence of year‐to‐year variations in streamflow. The method employs the use of weighted regressions of concentrations on time, discharge, and season. Finally, the method is designed to be useful as a diagnostic tool regarding the kinds of changes that are taking place in the watershed related to point sources, groundwater sources, and surface‐water nonpoint sources. The method is applied to datasets for the nine large tributaries of Chesapeake Bay from 1978 to 2008. The results show a wide range of patterns of change in total phosphorus and in dissolved nitrate plus nitrite. These results should prove useful in further examination of the causes of changes, or lack of changes, and may help inform decisions about future actions to reduce nutrient enrichment in the Chesapeake Bay and its watershed.

Maryland, Virginia↗
USGS2009

Continuous Turbidity Monitoring in the Indian Creek Watershed, Tazewell County, Virginia, 2006-08

Thousands of miles of natural gas pipelines are installed annually in the United States. These pipelines commonly cross streams, rivers, and other water bodies during pipeline construction. A major concern associated with pipelines crossing water bodies is increased sediment loading and the subsequent impact to the ecology of the aquatic system. Several studies have investigated the techniques used to install pipelines across surface-water bodies and their effect on downstream suspended-sediment concentrations. These studies frequently employ the evaluation of suspended-sediment or turbidity data that were collected using discrete sample-collection methods. No studies, however, have evaluated the utility of continuous turbidity monitoring for identifying real-time sediment input and providing a robust dataset for the evaluation of long-term changes in suspended-sediment concentration as it relates to a pipeline crossing. In 2006, the U.S. Geological Survey, in cooperation with East Tennessee Natural Gas and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, began a study to monitor the effects of construction of the Jewell Ridge Lateral natural gas pipeline on turbidity conditions below pipeline crossings of Indian Creek and an unnamed tributary to Indian Creek, in Tazewell County, Virginia. The potential for increased sediment loading to Indian Creek is of major concern for watershed managers because Indian Creek is listed as one of Virginia's Threatened and Endangered Species Waters and contains critical habitat for two freshwater mussel species, purple bean (Villosa perpurpurea) and rough rabbitsfoot (Quadrula cylindrical strigillata). Additionally, Indian Creek contains the last known reproducing population of the tan riffleshell (Epioblasma florentina walkeri). Therefore, the objectives of the U.S. Geological Survey monitoring effort were to (1) develop a continuous turbidity monitoring network that attempted to measure real-time changes in suspended sediment (using turbidity as a surrogate) downstream from the pipeline crossings, and (2) provide continuous turbidity data that enable the development of a real-time turbidity-input warning system and assessment of long-term changes in turbidity conditions. Water-quality conditions were assessed using continuous water-quality monitors deployed upstream and downstream from the pipeline crossings in Indian Creek and the unnamed tributary. These paired upstream and downstream monitors were outfitted with turbidity, pH (for Indian Creek only), specific-conductance, and water-temperature sensors. Water-quality data were collected continuously (every 15 minutes) during three phases of the pipeline construction: pre-construction, during construction, and post-construction. Continuous turbidity data were evaluated at various time steps to determine whether the construction of the pipeline crossings had an effect on downstream suspended-sediment conditions in Indian Creek and the unnamed tributary. These continuous turbidity data were analyzed in real time with the aid of a turbidity-input warning system. A warning occurred when turbidity values downstream from the pipeline were 6 Formazin Nephelometric Units or 15 percent (depending on the observed range) greater than turbidity upstream from the pipeline crossing. Statistical analyses also were performed on monthly and phase-of-construction turbidity data to determine if the pipeline crossing served as a long-term source of sediment. Results of this intensive water-quality monitoring effort indicate that values of turbidity in Indian Creek increased significantly between the upstream and downstream water-quality monitors during the construction of the Jewell Ridge pipeline. The magnitude of the significant turbidity increase, however, was small (less than 2 Formazin Nephelometric Units). Patterns in the continuous turbidity data indicate that the actual pipeline crossing of Indian Creek had little influence of downstream water quality; co

Scientific Investigations Report↗
USGS2009

A Comparison of Turbidity-Based and Streamflow-Based Estimates of Suspended-Sediment Concentrations in Three Chesapeake Bay Tributaries

Fluvial transport of sediment into the Chesapeake Bay estuary is a persistent water-quality issue with major implications for the overall health of the bay ecosystem. Accurately and precisely estimating the suspended-sediment concentrations (SSC) and loads that are delivered to the bay, however, remains challenging. Although manual sampling of SSC produces an accurate series of point-in-time measurements, robust extrapolation to unmeasured periods (especially highflow periods) has proven to be difficult. Sediment concentrations typically have been estimated using regression relations between individual SSC values and associated streamflow values; however, suspended-sediment transport during storm events is extremely variable, and it is often difficult to relate a unique SSC to a given streamflow. With this limitation for estimating SSC, innovative approaches for generating detailed records of suspended-sediment transport are needed. One effective method for improved suspended-sediment determination involves the continuous monitoring of turbidity as a surrogate for SSC. Turbidity measurements are theoretically well correlated to SSC because turbidity represents a measure of water clarity that is directly influenced by suspended sediments; thus, turbidity-based estimation models typically are effective tools for generating SSC data. The U.S. Geological Survey, in cooperation with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Chesapeake Bay Program and Virginia Department of Environmental Quality, initiated continuous turbidity monitoring on three major tributaries of the bay - the James, Rappahannock, and North Fork Shenandoah Rivers - to evaluate the use of turbidity as a sediment surrogate in rivers that deliver sediment to the bay. Results of this surrogate approach were compared to the traditionally applied streamflow-based approach for estimating SSC. Additionally, evaluation and comparison of these two approaches were conducted for nutrient estimations. Results demonstrate that the application of turbidity-based estimation models provides an improved method for generating a continuous record of SSC, relative to the classical approach that uses streamflow as a surrogate for SSC. Turbidity-based estimates of SSC were found to be more accurate and precise than SSC estimates from streamflow-based approaches. The turbidity-based SSC estimation models explained 92 to 98 percent of the variability in SSC, while streamflow-based models explained 74 to 88 percent of the variability in SSC. Furthermore, the mean absolute error of turbidity-based SSC estimates was 50 to 87 percent less than the corresponding values from the streamflow-based models. Statistically significant differences were detected between the distributions of residual errors and estimates from the two approaches, indicating that the turbidity-based approach yields estimates of SSC with greater precision than the streamflow-based approach. Similar improvements were identified for turbidity-based estimates of total phosphorus, which is strongly related to turbidity because total phosphorus occurs predominantly in particulate form. Total nitrogen estimation models based on turbidity and streamflow generated estimates of similar quality, with the turbidity-based models providing slight improvements in the quality of estimations. This result is attributed to the understanding that nitrogen transport is dominated by dissolved forms that relate less directly to streamflow and turbidity. Improvements in concentration estimation resulted in improved estimates of load. Turbidity-based suspended-sediment loads estimated for the James River at Cartersville, VA, monitoring station exhibited tighter confidence interval bounds and a coefficient of variation of 12 percent, compared with a coefficient of variation of 38 percent for the streamflow-based load.

Scientific Investigations Report↗
USGS2007

Changes in streamflow, concentrations, and loads in selected nontidal basins in the Chesapeake Bay Watershed, 1985-2006

Water-quality and streamflow data from 34 sites in nontidal parts of the Chesapeake Bay watershed are presented to document annual nutrient and sediment loads and trends for 1985 through 2006, as part of an annual evaluation of water-quality conditions by the U.S. EPA Chesapeake Bay Program. This study presents the results of trends analysis for streamflow, loads, and concentrations. Annual mean flow to the bay for 2006 (78,650 cubic feet per second) was approximately 1 percent above the long-term annual mean flow from 1937 to 2005. Total freshwater flow entering the bay for the summer season (July-August-September) was the only season classified as 'wet' in 2006. For the period 1985 through 2006, streamflow was significantly increasing at two of the 34 sites. Observed (bias-corrected) concentration summaries indicate higher ranges in concentrations of total nitrogen in the northern major river basins (Pennsylvania, Maryland, and northern Virginia) than in the southern basins in Virginia. Results indicate almost half of the monitoring sites in the northern basins exhibited significant downward bias-corrected concentration trends in total nitrogen over time; results were similar for total phosphorus and sediment. Generally, loads for all constituents at the nine River Input Monitoring Program (RIM) sites, which comprise 78 percent of the streamflow entering the bay, were lower in 2006 than in 2005. The loads for total nitrogen are below the long-term average loads at eight of the nine RIM sites and total phosphorus and sediment loads are also below the long-term average at seven RIM sites. Combined annual mean total nitrogen flow-weighted concentrations from the nine RIM sites indicated an upward tendency in 2006; in contrast, total phosphorus and sediment indicated a downward tendency. From 1990 to 2006 for the 9 RIM sites, the mean concentrations of total nitrogen, total phosphorus, and sediment were 3.49, 0.195, and 116 milligrams per liter, respectively. Flow-weighted concentrations for phosphorus and sediment were lowest in the Susquehanna River at Conowingo, Md., most likely because of the trapping efficiency of three large reservoirs upstream from the sampling point. For all 34 sites and all constituents, trends in concentrations (not adjusted for flow) showed 12 statistically significant upward trends and 59 statistically significant downward trends for the period 1985 through 2006. When trends in concentrations are adjusted for flow, they can be used as indicators of human activity and effectiveness of management actions. The flow-adjusted trends indicated significant downward trends at approximately 74, 68, and 32 percent of the sites for total nitrogen, total phosphorus, and sediment, respectively. This may indicate that management actions are having some effect in reducing nutrients and sediments.

Delaware, Maryland, New York, Pennsylvania, Virgin↗
USGS2007

Development of relations of stream stage to channel geometry and discharge for stream segments simulated with Hydrologic Simulation Program-Fortran (HSPF), Chesapeake Bay Watershed and adjacent parts of Virginia, Maryland, and Delaware

The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), Chesapeake Bay Program (CBP), Interstate Commission for the Potomac River Basin (ICPRB), Maryland Department of the Environment (MDE), Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation (VADCR), and University of Maryland (UMD) are collaborating to improve the resolution of the Chesapeake Bay Regional Watershed Model (CBRWM). This watershed model uses the Hydrologic Simulation Program-Fortran (HSPF) to simulate the fate and transport of nutrients and sediment throughout the Chesapeake Bay watershed and extended areas of Virginia, Maryland, and Delaware. Information from the CBRWM is used by the CBP and other watershed managers to assess the effectiveness of water-quality improvement efforts as well as guide future management activities. A critical step in the improvement of the CBRWM framework was the development of an HSPF function table (FTABLE) for each represented stream channel. The FTABLE is used to relate stage (water depth) in a particular stream channel to associated channel surface area, channel volume, and discharge (streamflow). The primary tool used to generate an FTABLE for each stream channel is the XSECT program, a computer program that requires nine input variables used to represent channel morphology. These input variables are reach length, upstream and downstream elevation, channel bottom width, channel bankfull width, channel bankfull stage, slope of the floodplain, and Manning's roughness coefficient for the channel and floodplain. For the purpose of this study, the nine input variables were grouped into three categories: channel geometry, Manning's roughness coefficient, and channel and floodplain slope. Values of channel geometry for every stream segment represented in CBRWM were obtained by first developing regional regression models that relate basin drainage area to observed values of bankfull width, bankfull depth, and bottom width at each of the 290 USGS streamflow-gaging stations included in the areal extent of the model. These regression models were developed on the basis of data from stations in four physiographic provinces (Appalachian Plateaus, Valley and Ridge, Piedmont, and Coastal Plain) and were used to predict channel geometry for all 738 stream segments in the modeled area from associated basin drainage area. Manning's roughness coefficient for the channel and floodplain was represented in the XSECT program in two forms. First, all available field-estimated values of roughness were compiled for gaging stations in each physiographic province. The median of field-estimated values of channel and floodplain roughness for each physiographic province was applied to all respective stream segments. The second representation of Manning's roughness coefficient was to allow roughness to vary with channel depth. Roughness was estimated at each gaging station for each 1-foot depth interval. Median values of roughness were calculated for each 1-foot depth interval for all stations in each physiographic province. Channel and floodplain slope were determined for every stream segment in CBRWM using the USGS National Elevation Dataset. Function tables were generated by the XSECT program using values of channel geometry, channel and floodplain roughness, and channel and floodplain slope. The FTABLEs for each of the 290 USGS streamflow-gaging stations were evaluated by comparing observed discharge to the XSECT-derived discharge. Function table stream discharge derived using depth-varying roughness was found to be more representative of and statistically indistinguishable from values of observed stream discharge. Additionally, results of regression analysis showed that XSECT-derived discharge accounted for approximately 90 percent of the variability associated with observed discharge in each of the four physiographic provinces. The results of this study indicate that the methodology developed to generate FTABLEs for every s

Chesapeake Bay Watershed↗
USGS2006

Changes in streamflow and water quality in selected nontidal basins in the Chesapeake Bay Watershed, 1985-2004

As part of an annual evaluation of water-quality conditions by the Chesapeake Bay Program, water-quality and streamflow data from 32 sites in nontidal parts of the Chesapeake Bay watershed were analyzed to document annual nutrient and sediment trends for 1985 through 2004. This study also formalized different trend tests and methodologies used in assessing the effectiveness of man-agement actions in reducing nutrients and sediments to the Chesapeake Bay. Trends in streamflow were tested at multiple time scales (daily, seasonal, and annual), resulting in only one significant trend (annual-mean streamflow for the Choptank River near Greensboro, Md.). Total freshwater flow entering the bay for the July-August-September 'summer' season 2004 was the highest ever estimated for that 3-month period (1937-2004). Observed (unbiased) concentration summaries indi-cate higher ranges in total-nitrogen concentrations in the northern major river basins, those in Pennsylvania, Maryland, and northern Virginia, compared to the more southern basins in Virginia. Almost half of the monitoring sites in the northern basins exhibited significant downward trends in total nitrogen with time. Comparisons with total phosphorus and sediment showed similar results to total nitrogen. Monthly and annual loads were available for the River Input Monitoring Program sites from the U.S. Geological Survey. Although loads were significantly reduced from 2003, in 2004, the combined estimated total nitrogen loads were the third highest since 1990, whereas total phosphorus and sediment loads were the fifth highest. A flow-weighted concentration (FWC) is useful in evaluating changes through time. Combined annual mean total nitrogen FWC from the 9 River Input Monitoring Program sites indicated a downward tendency from 1985 through 1998 and an upward tendency since 2001. From 1990 to 2004, the mean concentrations of total nitrogen, total phosphorus, and sediment were 1.58, 0.085, and 51 milligrams per liter, respectively. Flow-weighted concentrations for phosphorus and sediment were lower in the Susquehanna River at Conowingo, Md., most likely due to the trapping efficiency of three large reservoirs upstream from the sampling point. Trends in concentrations, not adjusted for flow, identified 10 statistically significant upward trends, and 50 statistically significant downward trends in concentration for the period 1985 through 2004. Trends in concentrations, when adjusted for flow, can be used as an indicator of human activity and management actions. The flow-adjusted trends indicated significant downward trends at approx-imately 72, 81, and 43 percent of the sites for total nitrogen, total phosphorus, and sediment, respectively. This indicates that management actions are having some effect in reducing nutrients and sediments.

Delaware, Maryland, New York, Pennsylvania↗
USGS2004

Changes in streamflow and water quality in selected nontidal sites in the Chesapeake Bay Basin, 1985-2003

Water-quality and streamflow data from 33 sites in nontidal portions of the Chesapeake Bay Basin were analyzed to document annual nutrient and sediment loads and trends for 1985 through 2003 as part of an annual evaluation of water-quality conditions by the Chesapeake Bay Program. As part of this study, different trend tests and methodologies were evaluated for future use in assessment of the effectiveness of management actions in reducing nutrients and sediments to the Chesapeake Bay. Trends in streamflow were tested at multiple time scales (daily, monthly, seasonal, and annual), resulting in only one significant trend (annual flow for Choptank River near Greensboro, Md.). Data summaries for observed concentrations indicate higher ranges in total-nitrogen concentrations in the northern five major river basins in Pennsylvania, Maryland, and Virginia compared to the southern five basins in Virginia. Similar comparisons showed no distinct differences for total phosphorus. Flow-weighted concentration is useful in evaluating changes through time for the Susquehanna, Potomac, and James Rivers. Results indicate the Potomac River had the highest flow-weighted concentrations (2.5 milligrams per liter) for total nitrogen, and the Potomac and James Rivers averaged about the same (0.15 milligram per liter) for total-phosphorus concentrations. Flow-weighted concentrations were lowest in the Susquehanna River for phosphorus and sediment because of the trapping efficiency of three large reservoirs upstream from the sampling point. Annual loads were estimated by use of the U.S. Geological Surveys ESTIMATOR model. Annual nutrient and sediment loads in 2003 were the second highest total nitrogen, total phosphorus, and sediment loads for the River Input Monitoring sites since 1990. Trends in concentrations, when adjusted for flow, can be used as an indicator of human activity and management actions. The flow-adjusted trends indicated significant decreasing trends at approximately 55, 75, and 48 percent of the sites for total nitrogen, total phosphorus, and sediment, respectively. This suggests management actions are having some effect in reducing nutrients and sediments. Sampling protocols for the river inputs to the bay have targeted high flows. Because this sampling strategy creates the potential for bias in estimated loads and trends, calculations are limited to flow-adjusted loads and trends in this report.

Scientific Investigations Report↗
USGS2003

Patterns and sources of fecal coliform bacteria in three streams in Virginia, 1999-2000

Surface-water impairment by fecal coliform bacteria is a water-quality issue of national scope and importance. In Virginia, more than 175 stream segments are on the Commonwealth's 1998 303(d) list of impaired waters because of elevated concentrations of fecal coliform bacteria. These fecal coliform-impaired stream segments require the development of total maximum daily load (TMDL) and associated implementation plans, but accurate information on the sources contributing these bacteria usually is lacking. The development of defendable fecal coliform TMDLs and management plans can benefit from reliable information on the bacteria sources that are responsible for the impairment. Bacterial source tracking (BST) recently has emerged as a powerful tool for identifying the sources of fecal coliform bacteria that impair surface waters. In a demonstration of BST technology, three watersheds on Virginia's 1998 303(d) list with diverse land-use practices (and potentially diverse bacteria sources) were studied. Accotink Creek is dominated by urban land uses, Christians Creek by agricultural land uses, and Blacks Run is affected by both urban and agricultural land uses. During the 20-month field study (March 1999?October 2000), water samples were collected from each stream during a range of flow conditions and seasons. For each sample, specific conductance, dissolved oxygen concentration, pH, turbidity, flow, and water temperature were measured. Fecal coliform concentrations of each water sample were determined using the membrane filtration technique. Next, Escherichia coli (E. coli) were isolated from the fecal coliform bacteria and their sources were identified using ribotyping (a method of 'genetic fingerprinting'). Study results provide enhanced understanding of the concentrations and sources of fecal coliform bacteria in these three watersheds. Continuum sampling (sampling along the length of the streams) indicated that elevated concentrations of fecal coliform bacteria (maximum observed concentration of 290,000 colonies/100 milliliters (col/100mL) could occur along the entire length of each stream, and that the samples collected at the downstream monitoring station of each stream were generally representative of the entire upstream reach. Seasonal patterns were observed in the base-flow fecal coliform concentrations of all streams; concentrations were typically highest in the summer and lowest in the winter. Fecal coliform concentrations were lowest during periods of base flow (typically 200?2,000 col/100mL) and increased by 3?4 orders of magnitude during storm events (as high as 700,000 col/100mL). Multiple linear regression models were developed to predict fecal coliform concentrations as a function of streamflow and other water-quality parameters. The source tracking technique provided identification of bacteria contributions from diverse sources that included (but were not limited to) humans, cattle, poultry, horses, dogs, cats, geese, ducks, raccoons, and deer. Seasonal patterns were observed in the contributions of cattle and poultry sources. There were relations between the identified sources of fecal coliform bacteria and the land-use practices within each watershed. There were only minor differences in the distribution of bacteria sources between low-flow periods and high-flow periods. A coupled approach that utilized both a large available source library and a smaller, location-specific source library provided the most success in identifying the unknown E. coli isolates. BST data should provide valuable support and guidance for producing more defendable and scientifically rigorous watershed models. Incorporation of these bacteria-source data into watershed management strategies also should result in the selection of more efficient source-reduction scenarios for improving water quality.

Water-Resources Investigations Report↗
USGS2003

Use of the Hydrological Simulation Program-FORTRAN and bacterial source tracking for development of the fecal coliform total maximum daily load (TMDL) for Accotink Creek, Fairfax County, Virginia

Impairment of surface waters by fecal coliform bacteria is a water-quality issue of national scope and importance. Section 303(d) of the Clean Water Act requires that each State identify surface waters that do not meet applicable water-quality standards. In Virginia, more than 175 stream segments are on the 1998 Section 303(d) list of impaired waters because of violations of the water-quality standard for fecal coliform bacteria. A total maximum daily load (TMDL) will need to be developed by 2006 for each of these impaired streams and rivers by the Virginia Departments of Environmental Quality and Conservation and Recreation. A TMDL is a quantitative representation of the maximum load of a given water-quality constituent, from all point and nonpoint sources, that a stream can assimilate without violating the designated water-quality standard. Accotink Creek, in Fairfax County, Virginia, is one of the stream segments listed by the State of Virginia as impaired by fecal coliform bacteria. Watershed modeling and bacterial source tracking were used to develop the technical components of the fecal coliform bacteria TMDL for Accotink Creek. The Hydrological Simulation Program-FORTRAN (HSPF) was used to simulate streamflow, fecal coliform concentrations, and source-specific fecal coliform loading in Accotink Creek. Ribotyping, a bacterial source tracking technique, was used to identify the dominant sources of fecal coliform bacteria in the Accotink Creek watershed. Ribotyping also was used to determine the relative contributions of specific sources to the observed fecal coliform load in Accotink Creek. Data from the ribotyping analysis were incorporated into the calibration of the fecal coliform model. Study results provide information regarding the calibration of the streamflow and fecal coliform bacteria models and also identify the reductions in fecal coliform loads required to meet the TMDL for Accotink Creek. The calibrated streamflow model simulated observed streamflow characteristics with respect to total annual runoff, seasonal runoff, average daily streamflow, and hourly stormflow. The calibrated fecal coliform model simulated the patterns and range of observed fecal coliform bacteria concentrations. Observed fecal coliform bacteria concentrations during low-flow periods ranged from 25 to 800 colonies per 100 milliliters, and peak concentrations during storm-flow periods ranged from 19,000 to 340,000 colonies per 100 milliliters. Simulated source-specific contributions of fecal coliform bacteria to instream load were matched to the observed contributions from the dominant sources, which were cats, deer, dogs, ducks, geese, humans, muskrats, and raccoons. According to model results, an 89-percent reduction in the current fecal coliform load delivered from the watershed to Accotink Creek would result in compliance with the designated water-quality goals and associated TMDL.

Virginia↗
USGS2003

Use of the Hydrological Simulation Program-FORTRAN and bacterial source tracking for development of the fecal coliform total maximum daily load (TMDL) for Blacks Run, Rockingham County, Virginia

Impairment of surface waters by fecal coliform bacteria is a water-quality issue of national scope and importance. Section 303(d) of the Clean Water Act requires that each State identify surface waters that do not meet applicable water-quality standards. In Virginia, more than 175 stream segments are on the 1998 Section 303(d) list of impaired waters because of violations of the water-quality standard for fecal coliform bacteria. A total maximum daily load (TMDL) will need to be developed by 2006 for each of these impaired streams and rivers by the Virginia Departments of Environmental Quality and Conservation and Recreation. A TMDL is a quantitative representation of the maximum load of a given water-quality constituent, from all point and nonpoint sources, that a stream can assimilate without violating the designated water-quality standard. Blacks Run, in Rockingham County, Virginia, is one of the stream segments listed by the State of Virginia as impaired by fecal coliform bacteria. Watershed modeling and bacterial source tracking were used to develop the technical components of the fecal coliform bacteria TMDL for Accotink Creek. The Hydrological Simulation Program-FORTRAN (HSPF) was used to simulate streamflow, fecal coliform concentrations, and source-specific fecal coliform loading in Blacks Run. Ribotyping, a bacterial source tracking technique, was used to identify the dominant sources of fecal coliform bacteria in the Blacks Run watershed. Ribotyping also was used to determine the relative contributions of specific sources to the observed fecal coliform load in Blacks Run. Data from the ribotyping analysis were incorporated into the calibration of the fecal coliform model. Study results provide information regarding the calibration of the streamflow and fecal coliform bacteria models and also identify the reductions in fecal coliform loads required to meet the TMDL for Blacks Run. The calibrated streamflow model simulated observed streamflow characteristics with respect to total annual runoff, seasonal runoff, average daily streamflow, and hourly stormflow. The calibrated fecal coliform model simulated the patterns and range of observed fecal coliform bacteria concentrations. Observed fecal coliform bacteria concentrations during low-flow periods ranged from 40 to 7,000 colonies per 100 milliliters, and peak concentrations during storm-flow periods ranged from 33,000 to 260,000 colonies per 100 milliliters. Simulated source-specific contributions of fecal coliform bacteria to instream load were matched to the observed contributions from the dominant sources, which were cats, cattle, deer, dogs, ducks, geese, horses, humans, muskrats, poultry, raccoons, and sheep. According to model results, a 95-percent reduction in the current fecal coliform load delivered from the watershed to Blacks Run would result in compliance with the designated water-quality goals and associated TMDL.

Virginia↗