TFL 49 ECOLOGICAL STEWARDSHIP PROJECT 2004 Annual...

WATER QUALITY MONITORINGFor the

TFL 49 ECOLOGICAL STEWARDSHIP PROJECT

2004 Annual Report

Prepared forRIVERSIDE FOREST PRODUCTS LIMITED

byDOBSON ENGINEERING LTD.

#4, 1960 Springfield RoadKelowna, BC

V1Y 5V7

March, 2005

Water Quality Monitoring / TFL 49 - 2004 Annual Report i

File: 544-001 Project: 24062 Date: March 2005 DOBSON ENGINEERING LTD.

Table of Contents

1.0 INTRODUCTION.................................................................................................................. 1

2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION .................................................................................................. 2

2.1 SAMPLING LOCATIONS .......................................................................................................... 2

2.2 AUTOMATED SAMPLING ........................................................................................................ 3

2.3 DISCRETE SAMPLING ............................................................................................................. 3

2.4 SAMPLING DATES .................................................................................................................. 4

2.5 QUALITY ASSURANCE AND QUALITY CONTROL.................................................................... 5

2.6 CLIMATIC CONDITIONS AND STREAM DISCHARGE ................................................................ 5

3.0 ANALYSIS RESULTS .......................................................................................................... 6

3.1 TURBIDITY............................................................................................................................. 7

3.2 SUSPENDED SOLIDS ............................................................................................................... 9

3.3 TEMPERATURE....................................................................................................................... 9

3.4 CONDUCTIVITY.................................................................................................................... 10

4.0 CONCLUSIONS .................................................................................................................. 12

5.0 RECOMMENDATIONS..................................................................................................... 15

Water Quality Monitoring / TFL 49 - 2004 Annual Report ii


Tables

Table 1Sampling Site Locations and EMS Identification Numbers

Table 2Automated Sampling Parameters

Table 3Sampling Dates and Parameters Analyzed

Table 4Discrete Turbidity Values – Clear Flow Vs Turbid Flow

Table 5Automated Turbidity Values – Clear Flow Vs Turbid Flow

Table 6Automated Temperature Data Summary

Table 7Automated Conductivity Data Summary

Water Quality Monitoring / TFL 49 - 2004 Annual Report iii


APPENDICES

APPENDIX ARationale for Indicators and Measurables

APPENDIX BWater Quality Monitoring Sites – Location Maps

APPENDIX C2004 Water Quality Data Summary – Tables 1-4

APPENDIX D2004 Laboratory Result Reports

APPENDIX E2004 Site Visit Records

APPENDIX FClimate and Stream Discharge Data


Riverside Forest Products Limited

TFL 49 Ecological Stewardship Project

Water Quality Monitoring Project - 2004Annual Report

1.0 INTRODUCTION

This report summarizes the work completed in 2004 for the TFL 49 long-term water qualitymonitoring project. The water quality monitoring project forms part of the effectivenessevaluation of forest development for Riverside Forest Products Ltd. Ecological StewardshipPlan (formerly Sustainable Total Resource Management Pilot Project). The project isfocused on Tree Farm License (TFL) 49 in the Okanagan and Shuswap basins. Water qualitymay be one of the indicators used to measure the “results” of changes to forest managementproposed for the TFL. Fish species and other aquatic organisms also rely on thesewatersheds as a source of habitat and food.

Monitoring sites were initially located on four streams in the TFL (Powers Creek, LamblyCreek, Whiteman Creek and Bolean Creek). In 2002, the stations at Powers Creek andBolean Creek were removed from service. The station at Powers Creek has beendiscontinued with the site fully dismantled since it was determined that additional data fromthis stream was no longer required. The facility at Bolean Creek is still in place and the sitecould be reactivated when funding is available to operate the station. The goal of this projectis to determine the baseline water quality for representative streams on the TFL and to usethis data as part of the long term monitoring program of the effectiveness of the changes inforest management and as input to the adaptive management program.

For the period 2000-2001, Forest Renewal BC provided funding for this project under itsstrategic objective relating to strengthening sustainable forest management (SSFM). Animportant purpose of SSFM is to pilot alternative approaches to forestry that balanceenvironmental, social and economic objectives. Funding for 2002 through 2004 wasprovided in part by the Forest Investment Account (FIA).

The approach to the development of the long-term water quality monitoring has beenpatterned after the framework decided upon for the Stewardship Plan (for details refer toseparate report Stewardship Plan Elements). This framework addresses the components ofscale, time and location through a hierarchy of criteria and indicators patterned after thoseagreed to by the Canadian Council of Forest Ministers (CCFM). This approach utilizes amonitoring approach that measures specific indicators to ensure certain criteria are met. Foradditional information on indicators and measureables, refer to Appendix A. This project

Water Quality Monitoring / TFL 49 - 2004 Annual Report 2


follows the standards established by the Resources Information Standards Committee(RISC).

The criterion this project is designed to monitor is The quality of soil, water and landresources on TFL 49 are sustained. The criterion to be met for Lambly Creek is that waterquality will not exceed established water quality objectives. For watersheds where waterquality objectives have not been established, attainment of guidelines for drinking water,aquatic life or aesthetics should not be impaired by proposed forest development.

This report is linked to other TFL baseline inventory projects (e.g. fish, riparianmanagement, and wildlife) and will form part of the larger ecological forest managementmodel being developed for the TFL.

2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION

In 2001, automated water quality monitoring stations were established on four creeks in theTFL (Powers, Lambly, Whiteman and Bolean Creeks). Based on a recommendation fromthe 2001 report “The Powers Creek station is no longer required for this project…” thePowers Creek station was discontinued. Due to budget concerns, the station at Bolean Creekhas not been activated since 2002 and data was only collected at Lambly Creek andWhiteman Creek. At each station, water quality data was collected at 15 minute intervals.This data was routinely downloaded and stored in a database for reference. During routinesite visits, the accuracy and precision of the probes was confirmed using known standardsolutions, portable field meters and manual grab samples, which were sent to a laboratoryfor analyses. This data can be compared with baseline data that was established fromprevious water quality studies. In addition to water quality monitoring, water level andprecipitation were collected at the Lambly Creek site to aid in understanding the affects ofstreamflow and precipitation on water quality. The Water Survey of Canada (WSC) operatesa hydrometric station at the Whiteman Creek site.

2.1 Sampling Locations

The automated water quality stations at Powers, Lambly and Bolean Creeks werepreviously established as part of other FRBC projects, and had been in operation priorto 2001. The station at Whiteman Creek was established March 24, 2001 at which timethe operation of the other three stations was taken over by Dobson Engineering Ltd. (onbehalf of Riverside Forest Products Ltd). The Powers Creek and Bolean Creek siteswere not in operation during 2002/03. The sites were chosen to provide water samplesthat are representative of the areas affected by forest development. Access concernswere also addressed during site selection (Refer to Table 1 and Appendix B - locationmaps) for sampling site locations.



Table 1Sampling Site Locations and EMS * Identification Numbers

Site Location Co-ordinates*EMS I.D.Number

Lambly CreekLambly Creek at the LakeviewIrrigation District intake. 49o 57' 27''N

119o 33' 20''WE223216

Whiteman CreekWhiteman Creek at the Water Surveyof Canada Hydrometric Station08NM174

50o 12' 49''N119o 32' 19''W

E244481

*Environmental Monitoring System – a provincial database for discrete sampling data.

2.2 Automated Sampling

A variety of equipment has been employed to collect and log data every 15 minutes atthe two sites. The equipment used and parameters measured at each site are presented inTable 2. Data was not collected at Powers and Bolean Creeks from 2002 - 2004.

Table 2Automated Sampling Parameters

Parameters MeasuredSite Turbidity Temperature Conductivity pH Dissolved

OxygenPrecipitation Water

Level*Lambly � � � - - � �

**Whiteman � � � - - - -

*Equipment included an Analite turbidity sensor, a YSI conductivity sensor, a YSI temperature sensor and a ForestTechnology Systems tipping bucket rain gauge, all connected to a FTS Model FWS-12-NH data logger. Water levelwas measured with a Stevens pressure transducer.

**Equipment included a Hydrolab Corporation Datasonde 4 multiprobe connected to a Campbell Scientific Inc.Model CR510 data logger.

2.3 Discrete Sampling

Discrete samples are collected to confirm that the automated sensors are providingreasonable results. Water sampling was conducted according to Resources InformationStandards Committee standards as described in the Ambient Freshwater and EffluentSampling Manual (Water Quality Branch, 1994).

Water samples were collected and analyzed for turbidity (and suspended solids whenturbidity values were greater than 5 NTU). Turbidity (and suspended solids) can beimpacted by forest development as a result of surface erosion from roads and landslides1

as well as channel erosion resulting from increased peak flows.

1 MacDonald, L.H., A.W. Smart and R.C. Wissmar. 1991. Monitoring Guidelines to Evaluate Effects of ForestryActivities on Streams in the Pacific Northwest and Alaska.



Samples were collected in clean one-liter plastic bottles, placed with ice in an insulatedcooler and delivered to Caro Environmental Services for analysis.

Prior to 2003, both turbidity and suspended solids were analyzed on all sampling dates.On many occasions, when turbidity values were less than 5 NTU (primarily during theclear flow period) the corresponding suspended solids concentrations were below thedetection limit. Therefore, suspended solids analyses were not conducted during2003/2004 unless the turbidity values were greater than 5 NTU.

In addition to the samples collected for laboratory analyses, field measurements forturbidity, water temperature, air temperature, and conductivity are also recorded toconfirm proper automated sensor operation. Field turbidity is measured using aLaMotte Model 2020 Turbidimeter, water temperature and air temperature aremeasured using a Checktemp 1 digital thermometer, and conductivity is measured inthe field using an Oakton CON 200 Series conductivity/temperature meter. The fieldinstruments are checked/calibrated against known standards prior to each field use.

2.4 Sampling Dates

Typically the greatest variability in water quality occurs during peak flows generatedfrom spring snowmelt freshet. In order to measure the water quality variability duringthe freshet; samples were collected weekly May through June. Samples were collectedmonthly outside of this period, with additional samples collected following rain events.Refer to Table 3 for sample dates.

Table 3Sampling Dates and Parameters Analyzed

Sampling Dates Parameter SetApril 8, 2004 Turbidity, Suspended SolidsApril 23, 2004 TurbidityMay 6, 2004 TurbidityMay 13, 2004 TurbidityMay 21, 2004 TurbidityMay 28, 2004 TurbidityJune 3, 2004 TurbidityJune 10, 2004 TurbidityJune 17, 2004 TurbidityJuly 19, 2004 TurbidityJuly 27, 2004 TurbidityAugust 18, 2004 TurbiditySeptember 1, 2004 TurbiditySeptember 28, 2004 TurbidityOctober 19, 2004 Turbidity



2.5 Quality Assurance and Quality Control

Discrete water sampling was conducted according to Resources Information StandardsCommittee standards as described in the Ambient Freshwater and Effluent SamplingManual (Water Quality Branch, 1994). The samples were delivered to the laboratorywithin 24 hours of collection and were maintained at or below 10�C. The automateddata collection was conducted according to the Automated Water Quality MonitoringField Manual (Water Management Branch, 1999). Portable field instruments were alsoused at each site visit to confirm proper function of the automated sensors and to ensuredata quality objectives were being met (Refer to Appendix C Tables 1-4).

The Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks Guidelines for Interpreting WaterQuality Data (1998) discuss the use of replicate samples as a check for laboratoryprecision. When triplicate samples are taken, precision is expressed as percent relativestandard deviation. For triplicates, a percent relative standard deviation of 18% or less isconsidered acceptable precision. The Guidelines for Interpreting Water Quality Datastates that in order to use Relative % Standard Deviation as a precision check, theanalytical values must be at least five times the Method Detection Limit (MDL).Because most of the water samples collected during 2004 have turbidity and suspendedsolids values less than 5 times the detection limit, replicate analyses were not conductedduring this period.

All water samples were sent to a registered laboratory (Caro Environmental Services)under the Environmental Data Quality Assurance (EDQA) program to ensure dataaccuracy.

2.6 Climatic Conditions and Stream Discharge

Intense rainfall, rapid warming and rain-on-snow events can result in increased surfacerun-off and stream flow. Although the maximum peak flow events in the BC interior arethe result of spring snowmelt, sustained summer and autumn rainfall also result inincreased surface run-off and stream flow. The increased surface run-off and increasedstream flow can cause increased turbidity and increased suspended sedimentconcentrations in the streams throughout the year.

Environment Canada climate data indicates that in 2004, the Southern BC MountainsRegion experienced the 3rd warmest and 36th wettest spring on record since 1948 (57years of record). The summer of 2004 was the 4th warmest and 14th wettest on recordand the autumn was the 28th warmest and 5th wettest on record. (Refer to Appendix F –Climate and Stream Discharge Data). Hourly precipitation data is collected each year atthe Lambly Creek site, this data is also found in Appendix F.

Water Survey of Canada data for Whiteman Creek indicates the maximum dailydischarge for 2004 occurred on May 2, 2004 and was 4.98 m3/s, which equates to a 2-year return period peak flow event. Although discharge is not recorded at the LamblyCreek site, water level is. The maximum daily water level occurred on May 3, 2004 at



the Lambly Creek site, and it is likely that Lambly Creek experienced a similar peakflow return period, as did Whiteman Creek.

Dobson Engineering Ltd. staff maintained general notes on weather conditions duringthe spring of 2004. Daytime air temperatures were very warm from April 30, 2004through May 3, 2004 (up to 30 �C in valley bottom). Daytime temperatures recorded atthe Kelowna Airport ranged from 22 �C to 26 �C during the same period. The elevatedair temperatures resulted in increased snowmelt, which contributed to the maximumdaily discharge.

Both Lambly and Whiteman Creeks experienced an early, smaller flow event fromApril 10-16, 2004 (refer to charts in Appendix F). The maximum daily air temperaturesin Kelowna from April 9th to April 13th 2004 ranged from 21 �C to 25 �C and the snowpack had melted up to approximately the 1200 m elevation on the south slopes aroundthe city (Dobson Engineering Ltd. observations).

Although the maximum flows in the creeks occur during the spring melt, many smallerincreased flow events followed periods of rain during the summer and fall.

3.0 ANALYSIS RESULTS

All water samples were sent to Caro Environmental Services for turbidity and suspendedsolids analyses. Results of laboratory analyses have been entered in EnvironmentalMonitoring System (EMS) – the provincial data base for water quality data. The followingsections provide a summary of the laboratory analysis results and Tables 1 and 3 inAppendix C provide the detailed results.

The TFL 49 Water Quality 2000/2001 Annual Report discusses the rationale used toestablish baseline data. Limited baseline data from 1969-1971 is available for Powers Creek,Lambly Creek and Whiteman Creek but additional data for Powers and Lambly Creeks isavailable from 1996-1999. Automated water quality data was collected at Bolean Creekfrom 1997 to 2000 as part of the Salmon River Watershed Study. In cases where existingdata (1969-1971) is limited, the current data collected will become the baseline data. Thedata collected from 1996-2000 at Powers, Lambly and Bolean Creeks will also form part ofthe baseline data set.

Results of the laboratory analyses have been entered in the Environmental MonitoringSystem (EMS) database – the provincial database for water quality data. The followingsections provide a summary of the analyses for 2004 (both discrete samples and automateddata). Tables 1 and 3 in Appendix C provide the detailed discrete data results andAppendix D contains the Laboratory Result Reports. There were incidents at both sites thatcaused erroneous automated turbidity and conductivity data (leeches and insects attached tothe sensors, extremely low flows resulting in sensors out of the water, interference fromdirect sunlight). Suspect data has been removed from the analysis set.



3.1 Turbidity

Turbidity is a measurement that describes the “cloudiness” of water. Suspendedparticles in water cause incoming light to scatter and give water a cloudy appearance.The suspended particles can include clay, silt, fine sand, organic material (leaf litter,algae, and other micro-organisms. In the context of domestic water, turbidity isimportant as suspended particles can impair the effectiveness of various disinfectionprocesses and is aesthetically displeasing. In many BC interior streams, spring freshetand rain events bring with them sediment laden water, which cause peaks in turbiditylevels. Health Canada’s guideline for drinking water that does not receive treatment toremove turbidity is a maximum of 1 NTU (nephelometric turbidity units). Theacceptable turbidity level for raw water that is to be chlorinated is � 5 NTU if it can bedemonstrated that disinfection is not compromised by the use of the less stringent value.

In snowmelt dominated watersheds, turbidity tends to be higher during the springfreshet period mainly as a result of increased surface run-off and peak stream flows. Forthe TFL the spring freshet, resulting from snowmelt in the upper elevations, typicallyoccurs from April through June. Based on this information the turbidity data has beendivided into two separate periods: clear flow period and turbid flow period. The turbidflow period coincides with spring freshet between April 1 to June 30 with the clear flowperiod occurring during the remainder of the year. In 2004 discrete turbidity sampleswere collected 15 times at both Lambly and Whiteman Creeks. The turbidity data isarranged by flow period in Tables 4 and 5.

Table 4 Discrete Turbidity Values – Clear Flow Vs Turbid Flow

Clear Flow Period (July 1 – March 31)

Turbid Flow Period(April 1 – June 30)

Year # OfSamples

Range(NTU)

Mean(NTU)

# OfSamples

Range(NTU)

Mean(NTU)

Lambly Creek2001 12 0.50 – 0.95 0.68 7 0.87 – 2.30 1.612002 9 0.15 – 0.65 0.40 2 1.20 – 1.40 1.302003 7 0.35 – 1.10 0.79 8 0.65 – 3.50 1.682004 6 0.35 – 1.60 0.69 9 0.70 – 3.00 1.38

Whiteman Creek2001 12 0.20 – 1.60 0.55 7 0.90 – 3.50 2.142002 9 0.15 – 0.40 0.26 9 1.90 - 125 18.82003 8 0.15 – 5.20 0.96 8 0.95 – 3.00 1.862004 6 0.15 – 1.10 0.42 9 0.90 – 5.20 2.06

All of the discrete turbidity values for both creeks are normal and lie within the range ofnatural variability.



It is difficult to compare this data to the baseline turbidity data as the baseline data useda different method and different units (JTU instead of NTU).

Table 5Automated Turbidity Values – Clear Flow Vs Turbid Flow

Clear Flow Period (July 1 – March 31)

Turbid Flow Period(April 1 – June 30)

Year % � 5NTU

% > 5NTU

RangeNTU

MeanNTU

% � 5NTU

% > 5NTU

RangeNTU

MeanNTU

Lambly Creek (13 451 records) Lambly Creek (8 635 records)2001 99% 1% 0.0 – 133.7 <0.1 96% 4% 0.0 – 264.8 0.27

(11 485 records) (3 289 records)2002 99.97% .03% 0.0 – 8.8 0.6 98% 2% 0.0 – 40.4 1.03

(8 711 records) (5 177 records)2003 99.9% 0.10% 1.40 – 124.9 2.19 99.6% 0.4% 1.5 – 36.8 2.21

(13 503 records) (7 102 records)2004 99.7% 0.30% 0.0 – 20.2 0.42 94.7% 5.3% 0.0 – 30.8 1.58

Whiteman Creek (9 122 records) Whiteman Creek (8 315 records)2001 *95% *5% *0.0 – 141.0 *1.2 *65% *35% *0.0 – 172.0 *5.5

(8 821 records) (6 472 records)2002 99.6% 0.4% 0.0 – 7.8 0.03 79% 21% 0.0 – 272 7.4

(12 431 records) (5 411 records)2003 99.6% 0.4% 0.0 – 491 0.19 93.4% 6.6% 0.0 – 118 1.55

(13 048 records) (7 632 records)2004 98.8% 1.2% 0.0 - 675 0.64 85.6% 14.4% 0.0 - 127 2.09

*Data sets are not reliable, sensor interference occurred on many occasions (ambient light, obstructions in creek). Astable configuration was established after August 21, 2001 all readings prior to this date are suspect.

High turbidity values occurred at both sites on several occasions in both the clear flowand turbid flow periods. However, most of the readings during the clear flow period arebelow the 5 NTU guideline, which indicates good water clarity. Many of the shortduration turbidity spikes (values >50 NTU) are likely the result of sensor interferencecaused by relatively large pieces of debris in the water (leaf litter, aquatic insects etc.).The lower incidence of values exceeding 5 NTU in Lambly Creek vs Whiteman Creekduring both flow periods is likely due in part to reservoirs in the upper watershedreducing the impact from increased flows.

Turbidity data was lost at Lambly Creek from April 26 to May 13 due to interferencefrom organic debris in the sensor tube and equipment failure. The highest turbidityreading in Lambly Creek (30.8 NTU) occurred on April 13, 2004 (turbidity valuesexceeded 5 NTU from April 10-16, 2004). This coincides with the early flow eventreferred to in Section 2.6.

All of the turbidity events in Lambly Creek corresponded with rising water levels(rising water caused by snowmelt, rainfall and Lakeview Irrigation District activities).



From April 25 to May 6 the sensors at Whiteman Creek were partly buried in sand,which resulted in lost turbidity data. Elevated turbidity values persisted during theturbid flow period, and coincided with the peak stream flow events. Although therewere distinct turbidity events during the turbid flow period, the highest turbidity reading(675 NTU) occurred during the clear flow period (October 22 at 8:30 PM during a rainevent).

The highest turbidity readings in Whiteman Creek occurred during rainy periods in thefall. In 2003, it was discovered that there was sediment entering Whiteman Creek fromnear the 12 km mark on the Whiteman FSR (which runs adjacent to the creek). Duringperiods of steady rain, sediment laden runoff leaves the outsloped portion of the roadand enters the creek. Additional sediment enters the creek when vehicles travel theroads during the rainy periods. Overview road assessments conducted in 2004 confirmthis is still occurring, and is likely the cause of the high turbidity during rainy periods.

The water quality criteria/target for turbidity in Lambly Creek (maintain at least 90% ofthe turbid flow period data below 5 NTU, and maintain at least 99% of the clear flowperiod turbidity data below 5 NTU) was met in 2004 (refer to Appendix A).

The reservoirs/lakes in the Lambly Creek watershed buffer/reduce sediment transport tothe lower stream reaches. The lack of reservoirs/lakes in the Whiteman Creek watershedincreases the likelihood of sediment transport to the lower stream reaches. For thisreason, targets for turbidity in Whiteman Creek should be less stringent than the LamblyCreek targets.

Automated turbidity measurements at Lambly and Whiteman Creeks were reliable. Allvalues used in the analysis set met the data quality objectives (automated values werewithin +/- 2 NTU of the lab confirmation and field measurements).

3.2 Suspended Solids

Suspended solids are reported as milligrams/litre (mg/l) and refer to the concentration ofsuspended solid material in the water. Suspended solids contribute directly to turbidityand can interfere with disinfection processes in drinking water. There is no guideline forsuspended solids in raw untreated drinking water, however elevated suspended solidscan have detrimental impacts on aquatic life.

Suspended solids analyses were not conducted during 2003/2004 unless the turbidityvalues were greater than 5 NTU. Suspended solids was analyzed once in WhitemanCreek (April 8, 2004 – 3 mg/l). This value coincided with the maximum discreteturbidity value at this site.

3.3 Temperature

Temperature is important to the quality of drinking water supplies for both health andaesthetic reasons. As water temperature increases, so does the potential for biological



growth. Increased biological growth can increase chlorine demand and reduce theeffects of the chlorination process. In addition, decaying organics in the water can causetaste and odour problems for the consumer. The maximum temperature guideline fordrinking water quality is 15�C. Field temperature readings were collected at each sitevisit to confirm the automated sensor accuracy. The Ministry of Water, Land and AirProtection data quality objectives state that confirmed water temperatures should bewithin 1�C of the automated sensor reading. The data quality objectives for temperaturewere met at both sites, therefore the automated data is considered accurate. Theautomated temperature data is summarized in Table 6.

Table 6Automated Temperature Data Summary

Year Range (�C) Mean (�C) # Dates >15�C*Lambly Creek - Baseline Range (0.0�C – 24.3�C)

2001 0.4 – 18.8 8.4 332002 0.0 – 18.2 10.1 262003 0.0 – 20.1 10.6 512004 0.1 – 19.9 9.2 53

Whiteman Creek - Baseline Range (1.1�C – 24.5�C)2001 0.1 – 16.4 7.5 72002 0.0 – 16.9 8.5 92003 0.0 – 17.3 9.8 382004 0.1 – 17.2 8.6 34

*The aesthetic guideline for drinking water quality is 15�C. Any day where at least one 15 minute period was greaterthan 15�C is included.

Stream temperature exceeded the BC drinking water guideline on several occasions atboth sites during June, July and August, however this is not unusual during summermonths. The extreme dry, hot weather during the summers of 2003 and 2004 is thecause of the highest stream temperatures recorded at both sites since 2001. The last twosummers also had the most dates on which stream temperatures were at or above 15� C.Despite the extreme summer weather, all the values were within the baselinetemperature ranges. The objective established for temperature for Lambly Creekaddresses only sites immediately above and below anthropogenic activity. Since the2004 project did not include monitoring in this fashion, this objective is not applicableto the above data set. Objectives for temperature in Whiteman Creek are not in place.

3.4 Conductivity

Conductivity refers to the ability of a substance to conduct an electric current. Theconductivity of a water sample provides an indication of the amount of dissolved ions inthe water and as the ion or dissolved solid concentration increases, so does theconductivity. Conductivity is measured in microsiemens per centimeter (�S/cm) and canrange from 50 �S/cm to 1500 �S/cm in natural waters.



Increased stream flows, resulting from precipitation or snowmelt events, tend to dilutedissolved ions, resulting in decreased conductivity values. Conversely, when increasedamounts of dissolved solids are delivered to the stream, specific conductivity levelsincrease. Although conductivity is not one of the indicators for this study, measuring itis useful in understanding seasonal water quality dynamics as well as trouble shootingsuspicious data. For example, instances where stream flow was too low forrepresentative analysis (for all parameters) were detected by zero conductivity readings(sensor out of the water). This information allows confirmation of erroneous data, whichmight otherwise not be detected.

There is no established drinking water quality guideline for conductivity in BritishColumbia, however the Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks Guidelines forInterpreting Water Quality Data suggest that conductivity can be mathematicallyconverted to total dissolved solids (TDS). There is a criterion of 500 mg/L of TDS,which approximately equates to a conductivity of 700 �S/cm. Field conductivityreadings were collected at each site visit to confirm the automated sensor accuracy. TheMinistry of Water, Land and Air Protection data quality objectives state that confirmedconductivity values should be within 3% of the automated sensor reading. For the mostpart, the data quality objectives for conductivity were met at both sites, therefore theautomated data is considered accurate. The conductivity summary values are in Table 7.

Table 7Automated Conductivity Data Summary

Year Range (�S/cm) Mean (�S/cm)Lambly Creek (22 186 Readings)

2001 59 - 234 137(14 936 Readings)

2002 51 - 274 144(17 284 Readings)

2003 54 - 255 138(22 234 Readings)

2004 19 - 250 139Whiteman Creek (21 747 Readings)

2001 26 - 334 199(17 362 Readings)

2002 64 - 362 224(18 812 Readings)

2003 67 - 420 255(21 791 Readings)

2004 62 – 332 212

The conductivity values for both sites are within the expected natural range, and did notexceed 700 �S/cm. Where baseline data is available for conductivity, objectives havenot been established.



4.0 CONCLUSIONS

� Due to project funding concerns in 2004, data was only collected at the Lambly Creekand Whiteman Creek stations.

� The Lambly Creek station will be useful as a long-term water quality monitoring site.There is data originating in 1969, data collected by the former Ministry of Environment,Lands and Parks (1996-1999) as well as the seasonal data collected to date. SinceRiverside Forest Products Limited will continue development in the watershed, thisstation would be valuable as an index station.

� Four years of data have been collected at Whiteman Creek. A minimum of five yearsdata (over a broad range of climatic conditions) should adequately characterize thenatural variability in water quality in Whiteman Creek.

� Increased air temperatures can result in increased snow melt and streamflow. Airtemperatures from April 30 through May 3, 2004 were as high as 30�C in the Okanaganvalley bottom, which resulted in increased run-off and streamflow in the study streams.This increased run-off and stream flow caused increased turbidity and increasedsuspended solids concentrations.

� Both creeks experienced an early flow increase between April 13 and 16, 2004, howeverthis was not the annual peak flow event. The annual peak flow in Whiteman Creekoccurred on May 2, 2004 and was 4.98 m3/s, which equates to a 2-year return periodevent. Lambly Creek does not have an active hydrometric station, however water levelswere recorded. The maximum water level in Lambly Creek occurred on May 3, 2004and it is assumed that this equates to a similar peak flow return period as recorded atWhiteman Creek.

� The maximum turbidity in Lambly Creek occurred during the early flow increase onApril 13, 2004 at 12:15 AM and was 30.8 NTU (turbidity readings were greater than5 NTU from April 10-15, 2004).

� The maximum turbidity reading for Whiteman Creek was 675 NTU and occurred onOctober 22, 2004 at 8:30 PM. Although a site visit was not conducted on this date, themaximum turbidity likely resulted from sediment laden water entering the creek from theWhiteman FSR at the 12 km marker. This was observed during rainstorms on severaloccasions in both 2003 and 2004. There were several turbidity events during Septemberand October that coincided with the rainy periods. These events likely resulted from thedrainage off the Whiteman FSR at the 12 km mark.

� The Whiteman FSR at the 12 km marker was a source of sediment to Whiteman Creekduring October rainstorms. Routine road maintenance (grading) should help reduce thepotholes at this location. Maintaining a windrow along the creek side of the road shouldreduce the sediment input at this location.



� For Lambly Creek, 94.7% of the automated turbidity values were �5 NTU during theturbid flow period and 99.7% of the turbidity values were �5NTU during the clear flowperiod. This data meets the water quality criteria/target suggested in Appendix A(maintain at least 90% of the turbid flow period data below 5 NTU, and maintain at least99% of the clear flow period turbidity data below 5 NTU).

� For Whiteman Creek, 85.6% of the automated turbidity values were �5 NTU during theturbid flow period and 98.8% of the turbidity values were �5NTU during the clear flowperiod.

� Although turbidity criteria/targets are not currently in place for Whiteman Creek, theyshould be less stringent than the Lambly Creek targets. The reservoirs/lakes in theLambly Creek watershed buffer/reduce sediment transport to the lower stream reaches.The lack of reservoirs/lakes in the Whiteman Creek watershed increases the likelihood ofsediment transport to the lower stream reaches.

� In general, turbidity and suspended solids concentrations peak during the onset of thespring freshet, and as turbidity increases, so does suspended solids. Suspended solidsvalues do not correlate strongly with low level turbidity values (less than 5 NTU). Astronger correlation exists between the two parameters when turbidity values are higherthan 5 NTU.

� Water temperature patterns in 2004 were similar to 2003. Lambly Creek watertemperature exceeded 15�C on 53 days in 2004 and the maximum temperature recordedwas 19.9�C on July 25, 2004. Whiteman Creek water temperature exceeded 15�C on 34days and the maximum temperature recorded was 17.2�C on August 16, 2004. Althoughthe maximum daily temperatures in June, July and August exceeded the 15�C guidelineon several occasions at both sites, this is not unusual during the summer months.Temperature values in 2004 indicate no deviation from the baseline temperature data(Lambly Creek baseline range is 0.0�C – 24.3�C, Whiteman Creek baseline range is1.1�C – 24.5�C).

� Conductivity ranged from 19 �S/cm to 250 �S/cm in Lambly Creek and 62 �S/cm to332 �S/cm in Whiteman Creek. There is no pre-forest development (1969-1971) dataavailable for conductivity, however, the conductivity values for both sites are within theexpected natural range (50 �S/cm to 1500 �S/cm) and did not exceed the guideline of700 �S/cm.

� Where applicable, the water quality data collected in 2004 remains within the range ofthe baseline conditions. Baseline (pre-forest development) data for turbidity, suspendedsolids, and conductivity for Lambly and Whiteman Creeks is limited (data only availablefrom 1969-1971).



� The water level and precipitation data that was collected is useful to aid in understandingtemporal changes in water quality (i.e. rainstorms and elevated stream flows can affectturbidity and water chemistry).

� Site specific effectiveness monitoring was not conducted in 2004.



5.0 RECOMMENDATIONS

� During road maintenance in 2005, the windrow along the creek side of the WhitemanFSR at the 12 km marker should be improved. This will reduce the sediment deliverypotential from the road to Whiteman Creek.

� The water quality data collected to date suggests that the turbidity criteria/targets forWhiteman Creek should be less stringent than those established for Lambly Creek. ForLambly Creek the targets are “maintain 90% of the turbid flow period turbidity databelow 5 NTU and maintain 99% of the clear flow period turbidity data below 5 NTU.”For Whiteman Creek the recommended targets should be “maintain 80% of the turbidflow period turbidity data below 5 NTU and maintain 89% of the clear flow periodturbidity data below 5 NTU.”

� Water quality monitoring at the two sites should continue through 2005 since RiversideForest Products Limited has proposed forest development in the watersheds, andadditional data collection is required to better characterize the temporal water qualityvariability in the study streams.

� In 2005, stream flow data should be collected for Lambly Creek as an addition to therecommended automated water quality data and water levels.

� Manual sampling should be conducted weekly during freshet and at least monthly duringthe summer and fall and efforts to sample within 24 hours of late summer/fall rainstormevents should continue.

� The list of monitoring parameters should be limited to turbidity, suspended solids andwater temperature. Suspended solids analysis should only be conducted when turbidityvalues are greater than 5 NTU.

� Consideration should be given to establishing a new station on the Upper Salmon Riverto collect data to characterize water quality in that part of the TFL.

� Consideration should be given to establishing water quality monitoring stationsimmediately above and below future forest development at selected sites within the TFL.Discharge, turbidity, suspended solids and water temperature data should be recorded atthese sites.

APPENDIX A

Rationale for Indicators and Measureables

Forest Stewardship Project Results Based Water Quality

Rationale for Indicators, Measurables, andThresholds/Targets/Ranges

Introduction

The objective for determining long-term water quality as a component of the ForestStewardship Plan (FSP) is to maintain and protect water resources obtained from thewatersheds within the TFL. In the TFL there are community and non-communitywatersheds that supply drinking water to various communities in both the Okanagan andShuswap basins. Fish and other aquatic organisms also rely on these watersheds for asource of habitat and food. Three key indicators have been selected to measure the waterquality in the TFL: turbidity, water temperature and discharge. As outlined in Section 7(Monitoring) of the Forest Stewardship Plan, this program has been formatted to includethe coarse, medium and fine filter approach to determine if the objectives of this programare being met.

The following sections outline the rationale for using the selected indicators as well ashow the program will move from the baseline data collection phase to the monitoringphase and to the adaptive management phase.

Rationale for using the selected Indicators

Although there are several parameters used for measuring water quality, the ones mostlikely affected by forest development activities are turbidity, water temperature anddischarge. If other issues arise (fire, fertilization, etc.), the list of selected indicators andthe monitoring plan can be modified to accommodate these changes in forestmanagement.

Turbidity (and suspended solids) can be impacted by forest development as a result ofsurface erosion from roads and landslides (MacDonald et al, 1991). Although otherparameters are important with respect to drinking water quality, turbidity best identifieschanges in water quality that result from surface erosion.

Water temperature can be affected by loss of stream shading resulting from riparianharvesting (Teti, 1998). Changes in discharge and channel morphology can also affectwater temperatures (MacDonald et al, 1991).

Discharge (peak flows, low flows and the annual water yield) can be affected by forestdevelopment activities (MacDonald et al, 1991, Teti, 1993). Harvesting can causeincreased snow accumulation on the ground (loss of canopy interception). As well as an

increase in snow accumulation, the melt rate in cleared areas is accelerated (loss ofshading) (Streamline, 2003). These two factors can combine to change the timing andmagnitude of springtime peak flows (earlier and more intense flows) (Teti, 1993).Increased peak flows can have negative effects on stream channel stability and waterquality (increased flows can result in increased bank erosion and sedimentinput/mobilization) (MacDonald et al, 1991). Harvesting can increase summer low flows.Once trees are removed, evapotranspiration is reduced, and this increases the amount ofsub-surface or groundwater available (Teti, 1993).

Baseline Data Collection Phase

The historic data collected in the Okanagan Basin Study (1969 to 1972) is proposed to berepresentative of "baseline water quality conditions" for Powers Creek, Lambly Creek,Whiteman Creek and Naswhito Creek since these watersheds were relatively undisturbedat that time (Dobson, 2001). Discharge data was collected as far back as 1920 on severalstreams in the TFL. Although much of this data was collected intermittently, it isproposed that the existing data for these streams (prior to the early 1970’s) may beconsidered as baseline data (recognizing recent Environment Canada research suggestsstream flows are changing due to global climate change).

Recent water quality data collected in Powers Creek, and Bolean Creek (1996-2000), anddata collected in Lambly Creek (1996-2003) and Whiteman Creek (2001-2003) suggestsno change in key water quality parameters since this time, so this data may be consideredpart of the baseline data set as well (Dobson, 2003).

Once baseline data is established for various streams within the TFL and the projectbecomes operational, the project will progress to the monitoring phase.

Monitoring Phase - Strategies

A difficult and complex issue to address is the overall condition of the all the watershedsthroughout the TFL (Dobson, 2001). Since monitoring every stream channel andwatershed is impractical, monitoring procedures have been developed to address thisissue. By using key “index” long-term stations (Lambly, Whiteman and Bolean Creeksetc.) combined with “roving” stations (portable automated stations run short/mid term inother watersheds) and more site-specific stations (above and below active development)water quality can be assessed throughout the TFL. The information can be used to formbaseline data sets in unmeasured watersheds and, where baseline data already exists, theinformation can be measured against baseline conditions.

Coarse Filter Approach - Long Term Data Collection

Long term data will be collected at index stations (Lambly Creek and Whiteman Creek)to assess the water quality at a watershed level. Additional index stations are beingconsidered in the upper Salmon River watershed as well as in Bolean Creek. This datamay also be used to indicate water quality trends for other nearby watersheds with similarphysical characteristics (watershed size, geology, soils, topography, etc.).

Medium Filter Approach - Roving Station Data Collection

Data will be collected in various watersheds that do not have a long term index stationassociated with them. The level of forest development activity in a watershed will beconsidered when scheduling selected watersheds for these installations. The timing offorest development activity will also be considered when scheduling the time of year (ifless than 1 year) these type of stations will be in place.

Fine Filter Approach - Site Specific Data Collection

It is proposed to collect site specific data immediately upstream and downstream fromactive forest development sites (upstream and downstream from active harvest or roadbuilding sites). These sites would be chosen so as to represent development in the variousBEC zones. This data may be evaluated with an index station or roving station data in thesame watershed to compare and contrast the results. The duration that these monitoringinstallations would be operational will be based on the level of success in achieving thedesired results and on any water quality impacts that may be identified.

The results of the monitoring phase will be reviewed to determine if the target waterquality conditions are being achieved. In cases where it appears that the targets are notachieved, further investigations/assessments will be conducted. The results will beincorporated into the Adaptive Management Phase.

Adaptive Management Phase

This phase allows for changes in both the monitoring program as well as changes inforest development practices. If it becomes evident that the target water qualityconditions are not being met due to forest practices, then forest practices may have to bemodified. If it is evident that the desired water quality results may be inappropriate, thenit is possible to revisit the desired results.

1. Indicator: Turbidity

Rationale: Turbidity is a measurement that describes the “cloudiness” of water.Suspended particles in water cause incoming light to scatter and give water a cloudyappearance. The suspended particles can include clay, silt, fine sand, organic material(leaf litter, algae, and other micro-organisms (Hammer, 1986). In the context of domesticwater, turbidity is important as suspended particles can impair the effectiveness ofvarious disinfection processes and is aesthetically displeasing. In many BC interiorstreams, spring freshet and rain events bring with them sediment laden water, whichcause peaks in turbidity levels. Health Canada’s guideline for drinking water that doesnot receive treatment to remove turbidity is a maximum of 1 NTU (nephelometricturbidity units). The acceptable turbidity level for raw water that is to be chlorinated is �5 NTU if it can be demonstrated that disinfection is not compromised by the use of theless stringent value.

In snowmelt dominated watersheds, turbidity tends to be higher during the spring freshetperiod mainly as a result of increased stream flows. For the TFL the spring freshet,resulting from snowmelt in the upper elevations, typically occurs from April to June.Based on this information the turbidity data is divided into two separate periods: clearflow period and turbid flow period. The turbid flow period coincides with spring freshetbetween April 1 to June 30 with the clear flow period occurring during the remainder ofthe year (Dobson, 2003).

Automated turbidity measurement is subject to interference from direct sunlight, aquaticorganisms, bubbles and large pieces of debris (leaf litter etc.) which can result inerroneous data (MWLAP, 1999). Because of the potential for errors in continuous datacollection, changes in turbidity that persist for greater than a 1 hour period can beconsidered true changes. This method of data assessment helps filter out short livedturbidity spikes that are usually the result of sensor interference. In addition to the abovestated criteria, large turbidity spikes (versus ramping up of turbidity values) may alsoindicate sensor interference. In cases where “spikey” data is problematic, turbidity valueswill be assessed over a 30 day period. In all cases data sets must be critically assessed todetermine the reliability of the data (Cavanagh et al, 1998).

Measurable: Nephelometric Turbidity Units (NTU)

Threshold: Site specific, however, using Lambly Creek as an example: When usingautomated sampling (typically from March to November), maintain 90%of the continuous data at <5NTU during the turbid flow period andmaintain 99% of the continuous data at <5 NTU during the clear flowperiod.

Target: In streams where background turbidity levels are 5 NTU or less,development should not result in increases greater than 2 NTU. In streamswith background turbidity >5 NTU, development should not result inincreases greater than 10% of background values.

Range: Site specific, using the baseline ranges where they exist.

What to measure? Key streams (index streams), measure at point immediately upstream from private/Crownland interface, or immediately upstream from Point of Diversion for water intakes. Sitespecific monitoring upstream and downstream from active road building/maintenancesites and or active cut-blocks or treatment sites (Harvesting, site preparation, etc.).

How to measure it? Maintain long term monitoring stations on key index streams (Lambly Creek andWhiteman Creek) and establish other key index stations to cover the Salmon Riverportion of the TFL. Additional roving stations in selected developed watersheds can beused as a “check-up” station to monitor additional watersheds on a short-term basis. Sitespecific monitoring above and below active forest development sites can be used for sitespecific effectiveness monitoring. Collect routine grab samples or use automatedequipment for continuous measurements (following RISC standards).

What to measure against? Canadian Drinking Water Guidelines, provincial guidelines, background informationwhere it exists. Also in the case of above and below monitoring sites, measure treatedsites against untreated sites.

What does the measurement mean? If no change in results from background, infer that there is no negative effect from thetreatment sites. If changes are detected, investigate possible sources both natural andforest development related, and adjust practices to solve any potential problems.

2. Indicator: Stream TemperatureRationale: Stream temperature describes the amount of thermal energy in the water.Temperature is important to the quality of drinking water supplies for both health andaesthetic reasons. As water temperature increases, so does the potential for biologicalgrowth. Increased biological growth can increase chlorine demand and reduce the effectsof the chlorination process (Hammer, 1986). In addition, decaying organics in the watercan cause taste and odour problems for the consumer. Air temperature and direct solarradiation affect water temperature (Teti, 1998). The maximum temperature guideline fordrinking water quality is 15�C (Nagpal et. al., 1998), however it is not unusual for thistemperature to be exceeded during the warm summer months.

Measurable: Degrees Celcius (�C)

Threshold: Maximum daily temperature not to exceed 25�C (based on data from indexstreams).

Target: Ideally, maintain temperature at or below 15�C at the Point of Diversionfor community watersheds (recognizing that extreme summer airtemperatures can result in extreme water temperatures). MWLAP, 2001states: “The natural temperature cycle characteristic of the site should notbe altered in amplitude or frequency by human activities”. Using LamblyCreek as an example, during the summer months, temperature not toexceed 15�C on more than 33 dates during periods of “*normal” summerair temperatures. (*normal as defined by Environment Canada)

Range: 0-25�C based on index stream data.

What to measure?Key streams (index streams), measure at point immediately upstream from private/Crownland interface, or immediately upstream from Point of Diversion for water intakes. Sitespecific monitoring upstream and downstream from active road building/maintenancesites and or active cut-blocks or treatment sites (harvesting, site preparation, etc.).

How to measure it?Use automated/continuous temperature logging devices (RISC approved).

What to measure against? Background levels, drinking water guidelines for various water uses (drinking water,aquatic life, recreation).

What does the measurement mean? Stream temperatures exceeding the drinking water guidelines (15�C) should only occurduring the hottest summer months. If the threshold or target is exceeded, investigateforest development in the watershed and assess for potential loss of shading on streams,or water diversions (water re-directed via roads, ditches and cutblocks). Adjust practicesto alleviate problems.

3. Indicator: Discharge

Rationale: Discharge refers to the volume and rate that water flows in a stream. Streamdischarge patterns are primarily affected by local climatic conditions and interior streamsexperience peak discharge during the spring time snow melt period (Teti, 1993). Intenserainstorms can also affect discharge, as can groundwater levels, soil conditions,watershed geometry and topography. Changes in discharge are important with respect todomestic and agricultural water supplies and aquatic life. Forest development can affectlow flows, peak flows and annual water yield (MacDonald et al, 1991, Teti, 1993). Ifstream flow is not directly measured, the Peak Flow Hazard Rating is a method used toassess the potential impacts forest development has on streamflow patterns. This methoduses GIS data to assess the amount of development (road building and forest coverremoval) and the potential effects this has on streamflow patterns. Depending on theintensity of development, there are three peak flow hazard categories: low, moderate andhigh.

Measurable: Cubic meters per second (m3/s), peak flow hazard rating

Threshold: No net negative affect on channel stability or water quality related toincreased peak flows. If using peak flow hazard ratings, manage thewatershed to ensure the peak flow hazard does not exceed a moderaterating.

Target: Maintain flows in streams to normal levels (possibly use known dischargedata on nearby streams to estimate what normal levels are in streams withunknown baseline data).

Range: Site specific, to be determined.

What to measure?Key streams (index streams), measure at point immediately upstream from private/crownland interface, or immediately upstream from Point of Diversion for water intakes. Sitespecific monitoring would not be effective for this parameter.

How to measure it?Using approved standards (RISC) measure channel cross sectional area and watervelocity at various discharges to establish a stage (level) discharge curve (prediction chartrelating various water levels to corresponding discharges. The formula used is Q=AxV,where Q= discharge in m3/s, A= cross sectional area of the channel in m2 and V=watervelocity in m/s.

What to measure against?Normal (once established) flow patterns (timing and magnitude of flows).

What does the measurement mean?If flow patterns (hydrographs) exceed or significantly vary from the baseline data, thendevelopment needs to be assessed and current snowpack research data could be assessedto determine if climatic conditions or if forest development contributed to the changes inflow patterns.

References

Cavanagh, N., R.N. Nordin, L.G. Swain, and L.W. Pommen. 1998. Guidelines forInterpreting Water Quality Data (Field Test Edition) Water Quality BranchEnvironmental Protection, BC Environment, Victoria, BC.

Dobson Engineering Ltd., 2001. TFL 49 Stewardship Project, Water Quality ProjectAnnual Report for 2000-2001.

Dobson Engineering Ltd., 2003. Water Quality Monitoring for the TFL 49 ForestEcological Stewardship Project.

Hammer, M.J. 1986. Water and Wastewater Technology, 2nd edition. John Wiley &Sons, Toronto, Ontario.

Health and Welfare Canada. 1996. Guidelines for Canadian Drinking Water Quality,Sixth Edition. Minister of Supply and Services Canada. Canada Communication GroupPublishing, Ottawa, Canada K1A 0S9. ISBN 0-660-16295-4

MacDonald, L.H., A.W. Smart and R.C. Wissmar. 1991. Monitoring Guidelines toEvaluate Effects of Forestry Activities on Streams in the Pacific Northwest and Alaska

Ministry of Water Land and Air Protection, 1999. Automated Water Quality Monitoring(Field Manual). Water Management Branch, Victoria, BC.

Ministry of Water Land and Air Protection, 2001. Water Quality Guidelines forTemperature – Overview Report. Water Protection Branch, Victoria, BC.

Nagpal, N.K., L.W. Pommen, and L.G. Swain. 1998. British Columbia approved WaterQuality Guidelines (Criteria). Water Management Branch, Environment and ResourceManagement Department, Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks, Victoria, BC.

Streamline Watershed Management Bulletin, Vol 7 Number 1, Winter 2003. Forrex–Forest Research Extension Partnership, Kamloops, BC.

Teti, P. 1998. The Effects of Forest Practices on Stream Temperature A Review of theLiterature.

Teti, 1993. Ministry of Forests Research Extension Note #7, Harvesting and Streamflow

APPENDIX B

Water Quality Monitoring Sites – Location Maps

APPENDIX C

2004 Water Quality Data Summary – Tables 1 - 4

Appendix C - Table 1

Discrete Sample Results for Lambly Creek (E223216)

Turbid FlowDate Time Temp Turb S.S. Cond. Turb. S.S.

2004/04/08 815 2.9 3.00 n/a 127.7 3 n/a2004/04/23 830 3.5 2.00 n/a 93.4 2 n/a2004/05/06 1030 5.6 1.50 n/a 66.6 1.5 n/a2004/05/13 800 5 0.90 n/a 76.3 0.9 n/a2004/05/21 815 7.8 0.95 n/a 74.4 0.95 n/a2004/05/28 1100 8 1.60 n/a - 1.6 n/a2004/06/03 800 7.9 0.70 n/a 89.1 0.7 n/a2004/06/10 1030 11.2 1.00 n/a 105.2 1.00 n/a2004/06/17 730 8.4 0.75 n/a 113 0.75 n/a2004/07/14 900 12.6 0.65 n/a 188 N 9 02004/07/27 630 12.4 1.60 n/a 214 Max 3.00 -2004/08/18 900 13.8 0.70 n/a 100.4 Min 0.70 -2004/09/01 945 11.8 0.45 n/a 134 Mean 1.38 -2004/09/28 930 8.0 0.40 n/a 191.52004/10/19 1145 5.5 0.35 n/a 218 Clear Flow

Maximum 13.80 3.00 0.00 218.00 0.65 n/aMinimum 2.90 0.35 <1 66.60 1.6 n/aMean/Median 8.29 1.10 <1 127.97 0.7 n/aStd Deviation 3.43 0.72 n/a 53.13 0.5 n/a

0.4 n/a0.35 n/a

N 6 0Max 1.60 -Min 0.35 -Mean 0.69 -


Discrete Samples for Whiteman Creek (E244481)Turbid Flow Period

Date Time Temp Turb S.S. Cond. Turb. S.S.2004/04/08 1015 2.4 5.2 3 152.7 5.2 32004/04/23 1030 3.7 1.9 n/a 99.7 1.9 n/a2004/05/06 1245 5 2.4 n/a 71.4 2.4 n/a2004/05/13 1015 5 1.7 n/a 92.0 1.7 n/a2004/05/21 945 7.3 1.7 n/a 87.8 1.7 n/a2004/05/28 1245 7.5 1.8 n/a 89.4 1.8 n/a2004/06/03 1030 8 1.4 n/a 105.7 1.4 n/a2004/06/10 1200 10.5 1.5 n/a 121.4 1.5 n/a2004/06/17 930 9.1 0.9 n/a 135.2 0.9 n/a2004/07/14 1115 13.1 1.1 n/a 224.0 N 9 12004/07/27 845 13 0.35 n/a 286.0 Max 5.20 3.002004/08/18 1115 16.1 0.2 n/a 329.0 Min 0.90 3.002004/09/01 1200 11.9 0.15 n/a 333.0 Mean 2.06 n/a2004/09/28 1200 8.6 0.3 n/a 309.02004/10/19 1345 5.4 0.4 n/a 324.0 Clear Flow Period

Maximum 16.10 5.20 6 333.00 Turb. S.S.Minimum 2.40 0.15 <1 71.40 1.1 n/aMean/Median 8.65 1.34 <1 206.45 0.35 n/aStd Deviation 4.36 1.43 N/A 104.42 0.2 n/a

0.15 n/a0.3 n/a0.4 n/a

N 6 0Max 1.10 n/aMin 0.15 n/aMean 0.42 n/a


2004 Lambly Autostation Data Verification

Turbidity Conductivity Temperature

Lab Auto *Field Lab Auto Field Lab Auto FieldDate Time

2004/04/08 815 3.00 4.5 3.00 - 123.0 127.7 - 2.9 2.92004/04/23 830 2.00 3.3 2.65 - 91.0 93.4 - 3.9 3.52004/05/06 1030 1.50 - 1.71 - 59.0 66.6 - 5.9 5.62004/05/13 800 0.90 0.80 0.81 - 73.0 76.3 - 5.1 5.02004/05/21 815 0.95 0.10 0.71 - 73.0 74.4 - 8.1 7.82004/05/28 1100 1.60 0.30 1.20 - 74.0 - - 8.1 8.02004/06/03 800 0.70 0.10 0.70 - 89.0 89.1 - 8.1 7.92004/06/10 1030 1.00 0.60 0.77 - 105.0 105.2 - 11.7 11.22004/06/17 730 0.75 0.10 0.43 - 111.0 113.0 - 8.8 8.42004/07/14 900 0.65 0.40 0.01 - 184.0 188.0 - 12.8 12.62004/07/27 630 1.60 0.80 0.14 - 208.0 214.0 - 12.8 12.42004/08/18 900 0.70 0.70 0.91 - 100.0 100.4 - 14.0 13.82004/09/01 945 0.45 0.40 0.41 - 133.0 134.0 - 12.2 11.82004/09/28 930 0.40 0.00 0.11 - 192.0 191.5 - 8.8 8.02004/10/19 1145 0.35 0.00 0.11 - 211.0 218.0 - 5.8 5.5

*Field Value is the average of three sample measurements taken at each site visit.


2004 Whiteman Autostation Data Verification

Turbidity Conductivity Temperature

Lab Auto *Field Lab Auto Field Lab Auto FieldDate Time

2004/03/31 1600 - 0 0.46 - 224.0 238.0 - 2.3 2.62004/04/08 1015 5.20 5.20 5.86 - 136.0 152.7 - 2.4 2.42004/04/23 1030 1.90 0.00 2.06 - 98.0 99.7 - 4.0 3.72004/05/06 1245 2.40 3.60 3.50 - 69.0 71.4 - 5.5 5.02004/05/13 1015 1.70 2.20 1.97 - 80.0 92.0 - 5.2 5.02004/05/21 945 1.70 1.60 1.83 - 78.0 87.8 - 7.6 7.32004/05/28 1245 1.80 1.30 1.68 - 82.0 89.4 - 7.7 7.52004/06/03 1030 1.40 0.00 1.33 - 93.0 105.7 - 8.4 8.02004/06/10 1200 1.50 0.00 1.59 - 112.0 121.4 - 10.7 10.52004/06/17 930 0.90 0.00 0.85 - 122.0 135.2 - 9.3 9.12004/07/14 1115 1.10 0.00 0.21 - 214.0 224.0 - 13.8 13.12004/07/27 845 0.35 0.00 0.04 - 275.0 286.0 - 13.8 13.02004/08/18 1115 0.20 0.00 0.00 - 323.0 329.0 - 16.4 16.12004/09/01 1200 0.15 0.00 0.00 - 324.0 333.0 - 12.3 11.92004/09/28 1200 0.30 0.00 0.16 - 294.0 309.0 - 9.0 8.62004/10/19 1345 0.40 0.00 0.00 - 302.0 324.0 - 5.8 5.4

*Field Value is the average of three sample measurements taken at each site visit.

Lambly Creek Turbidity (2004)

0.0

5.0

10.0

15.0

20.0

25.0

30.0

35.0

40.020

04 M

ar 2

9

2004

Apr

05

2004

Apr

12

2004

Apr

19

2004

Apr

26

2004

May

02

2004

May

09

2004

May

16

2004

May

23

2004

May

30

2004

Jun

06

2004

Jun

12

2004

Jun

19

2004

Jun

26

2004

Jul

03

2004

Jul

10

2004

Jul

17

2004

Jul

23

2004

Jul

30

2004

Aug

06

2004

Aug

13

2004

Aug

20

2004

Aug

27

2004

Sep

02

2004

Sep

09

2004

Sep

16

2004

Sep

23

2004

Sep

30

2004

Oct

07

2004

Oct

13

2004

Oct

20

2004

Oct

27

2004

Nov

03

2004

Nov

10

Date

Turb

idity

(NTU

)

Lambly Water Temperature (2004)

0

5

10

15

20

25

2004

Mar

29

2004

Apr

05

2004

Apr

12

2004

Apr

18

2004

Apr

25

2004

May

02

2004

May

09

2004

May

15

2004

May

22

2004

May

29

2004

Jun

05

2004

Jun

11

2004

Jun

18

2004

Jun

25

2004

Jul

02

2004

Jul

08

2004

Jul

15

2004

Jul

22

2004

Jul

29

2004

Aug

04

2004

Aug

11

2004

Aug

18

2004

Aug

25

2004

Aug

31

2004

Sep

07

2004

Sep

14

2004

Sep

20

2004

Sep

27

2004

Oct

04

2004

Oct

11

2004

Oct

17

2004

Oct

24

2004

Oct

31

2004

Nov

07

2004

Nov

13

Date

Tem

pera

ture

(*C

)

Whiteman Creek Turbidity (2004)

0

10

20

30

40

3/4/04 0:00 4/23/04 0:00 6/12/04 0:00 8/1/04 0:00 9/20/04 0:00 11/9/04 0:00 12/29/04 0:00

Date

Turb

idity

(NTU

)

Whiteman Creek Temperature (2004)

0

5

10

15

20

25

3/4/04 0:00 4/23/04 0:00 6/12/04 0:00 8/1/04 0:00 9/20/04 0:00 11/9/04 0:00 12/29/04 0:00

Date

Tem

pera

ture

(*C

)

APPENDIX D

2004 Laboratory Result Reports

APPENDIX E

2004 Site Visit Records

Whiteman Creek (EMS# E244481) March 31, 2004 (16:00 PST)

Field MeasurementsWater Temperature – 2.6 �C Water Level – 0.80mConductivity – 238�S/cm Turbidity – (0.45) (0.48) (0.45) NTU

Data Logger Clock: Mar 31, 2004 15:59:52 Chronograph (Watch): Mar 31, 2004 16:01:07

Sensor Readings (Arrival)Battery #2 – 12.48 V TDS – 0.143Water Temp – 2.34 �C Dissolved Oxygen – N/ApH – 8.84 Dissolved Oxygen – N/AConductivity – 224 �S/cm Turbidity – 0.00 NTUData Downloaded to file: No Download, Sensors installed.

Sensor Readings (Departure)Battery – 12.4 V TDS – 0.143Water Temp – 2.31�C Dissolved Oxygen – N/ApH – 8.38 Dissolved Oxygen – N/AConductivity – 224 �S/cm Turbidity – 0.00 NTU

Comments: Sensors installed, flow and turbidity elevated, color low. Channel substrate visible,no sample collected. WSC weir increased damage, wing wall broken down, wood forms exposedand could likely cause interference with turbidity readings. Wood removed and flow patternschanged.

Whiteman Creek (EMS# E244481) April 8, 2004 (10:00 PST)

Field MeasurementsWater Temperature – 2.4 �C Water Level – 0.90 mConductivity – 152.7 �S/cm Turbidity - (5.85) (5.87) (5.85) NTU

Data Logger Clock: April 8, 2004 9:56:08 Chronograph (Watch): April 8, 2004 9:55:25

Sensor Readings (Arrival)Battery #2 – 12.31 V TDS – 0.087Water Temp – 2.25 �C Dissolved Oxygen – N/ApH – 8.53 Dissolved Oxygen – N/AConductivity – 136 �S/cm Turbidity – 4.8 NTUData Downloaded to file: WhiApr08.dat

Sensor Readings (Departure)Battery – 12.3 V TDS – 0.087Water Temp – 2.41 �C Dissolved Oxygen – N/ApH – 8.51 Dissolved Oxygen – N/AConductivity – 136 �S/cm Turbidity – 5.2 NTU

Comments: Approximately 40% overcast skies, approx. 11.5 C air temperature. Flow turbidityand colour are elevated. Warm over the last few days (nearly 20*C in Kelowna), noprecipitation. Sample collected at 10:15 PST. No problems noted at site.


Field MeasurementsWater Temperature – 3.7 �C Water Level – 0.975m (0.945 on Apr. 20 WSC)Conductivity – 99.7�S/cm Turbidity – (2.11) (1.98) (2.09) NTU


Sensor Readings (Arrival)Battery #2 – 12.23 V TDS – 0.063Water Temp – 4.0 �C Dissolved Oxygen – N/ApH – 8.57 Dissolved Oxygen – N/AConductivity – 98 �S/cm Turbidity – 0.00 NTUData Downloaded to file: WhiApr23.dat.

Sensor Readings (Departure)Battery – 12.21 V TDS – 0.063Water Temp – 4.06�C Dissolved Oxygen – N/ApH – 8.25 Dissolved Oxygen – N/AConductivity – 98 �S/cm Turbidity – 0.3 NTU

Comments: 100% overcast, air temp. approx. 9*C. Past weather very warm (April 9-13 valleytemperatures 20-25 *C, no precipitation in valley bottom, but warming = snowmelt and elevatedstream flows. Sample collected at 10:30 PST.




Sensor Readings (Arrival)Battery – 12.24 V TDS – N/AWater Temp – 5.41 �C Dissolved Oxygen – N/ApH – N/A Dissolved Oxygen – N/AConductivity – 78 �S/cm Turbidity – 10.6 NTUData Downloaded to file: WhiApr27.dat

Sensor Readings (Departure)Battery – 12.22 V TDS – N/AWater Temp – 5.45 �C Dissolved Oxygen – N/ApH – N/A Dissolved Oxygen – N/AConductivity – 80 �S/cm Turbidity – 7.8 NTU

Comments: Approximately 50% overcast skies, approx. 14 *C air temperature. Flow color andturb all elevated today. Sample not collected. Cleaned probes, magnetite and sand on sensors.12:30 readings, problems with bubbles and sun shade cloth again. Volume of sand accumulated,partly buried sensor, interference with turbidity readings over last week or so, values suspect.

Whiteman Creek (EMS# E244481) May 6, 2004 (12:30 PST)


Data Logger Clock: May 6, 2004 12:37:55 Chronograph (Watch): May 6, 2004 12:38:27

Sensor Readings (Arrival)Battery – 12.19 V TDS – N/AWater Temp – 5.45 �C Dissolved Oxygen – N/ApH – N/A Dissolved Oxygen – N/AConductivity – 69 �S/cm Turbidity – 6.8 NTUData Downloaded to file: WhiMay06.dat


Comments: Discard all turb readings since last visit. Sensors low in deployment tube, sandinterfering with sensors. Weather 40% O/C, air 13*C.


Field MeasurementsWater Temperature – 5.0 �C Water Level – 1.015 mConductivity – 92 �S/cm Turbidity - (1.90) (2.12) (1.90) NTU




Comments: Flow color and turb are lower than last visit. 10% OC and 14*C air temp. Samplecollected at 10:15 PST. No problems apparent at site today. Turbidity readings still erratic, butlow level (<5 NTU), likely sand is still impairing turbidity data. Should shovel out sand fromsensor area during clear flow period.






Comments: Flow and turb elevated, color down, 90% overcast, air 10*C. Sample collected at9:45, no real problems noted at site, still minor interference with sand at the sensors, occasionallarge single turbidity spikes, likely interference from sand/organics – remove from analyses.






Comments: Light rain, approx. 100 % overcast skies. Flow up again, rain over last several daysappears to have delivered sand at sensor again (partly buried). Cleaned probes and raised sensorsin tube approx. 6-8 inches, sample collected at 12:45 PST.

Whiteman Creek (EMS# E244481) June 3, 2004 (10:15 PST)


Data Logger Clock: June 3, 2004 10:15:36 Chronograph (Watch): June 3, 2004 10:14:42

Sensor Readings (Arrival)Battery – 12.10 V TDS – N/AWater Temp – 8.3 �C Dissolved Oxygen – N/ApH – N/A Dissolved Oxygen – N/AConductivity – 93 �S/cm Turbidity – 0.00 NTUData Downloaded to file: WhiJun03.dat


Comments: Low flow turb and color. Sample collected at 10:30 PST, no problems noted at sitethis time. Sensors out of sand.






Comments: 100% overcast, light rain, air temperature approximately 13*C. Low flow, turb andcolor. Sensors appear ok, but some erratic data, does not have the signature of a turbidity event(random/erratic values on June 5th).






Comments: Air temperature approx. 20 *C, 5% overcast skies. Low flow, turb and color.Sample collected at 9:30, no problems noted at site.






Comments: Low flow turb and color, approx 30% overcast and air temperature 31*C. Sensorsnow partly out of water, and shade cloth around deployment tube appears to have been tamperedwith. Some erratic data over last several days, but low water. Interference likely from directsunlight, adjusted shade cloth to shield sensors again and lowered sensors.

Whiteman Creek (EMS# E244481) July 14, 2004 (10:50 PST)

Field MeasurementsWater Temperature – 13.1 �C Water Level – 0.68 m (0.726 July 6 WSC)Conductivity – 224 �S/cm Turbidity - (0.20) (0.23) (0.20) NTU

Data Logger Clock: July 14, 2004 10:54:15 Chronograph (Watch): July 14, 2004 10:53:38

Sensor Readings (Arrival)Battery – 11.96 V TDS – N/AWater Temp – 13.7 �C Dissolved Oxygen – N/ApH – N/A Dissolved Oxygen – N/AConductivity – 213 �S/cm Turbidity – 0.00 NTUData Downloaded to file: WhiJul14.dat


Comments: 10% overcast and air around 25*C. Flow, colour and turbidity low, sample collectedat 11:15 PST.

Whiteman Creek (EMS# E244481) July 27, 2004 (08:30 PST)



Sensor Readings (Arrival)Battery – 11.89 V TDS – N/AWater Temp – 13.54 �C Dissolved Oxygen – N/ApH – N/A Dissolved Oxygen – N/AConductivity – 275 �S/cm Turbidity – 0.00 NTUData Downloaded to file: WhiJul27.dat


Comments: Flow still low, sensors appear to be functioning properly. Sample collected at 8:45PST. 0% overcast, air temperature 25*C. Replaced Battery #2 (11.95 V) with Battery #3 (12.25V)

Whiteman Creek (EMS# E244481) August 6, 2004 (11:30 PST)


Data Logger Clock: Aug. 6, 2004 11:35:27 Chronograph (Watch): Aug. 6, 2004 11:34:38

Sensor Readings (Arrival)Battery – 11.4 V TDS – N/AWater Temp – 13.84�C Dissolved Oxygen – N/ApH – N/A Dissolved Oxygen – N/AConductivity – 305 �S/cm Turbidity – 0.00 NTUData Downloaded to file: WhiAug06.dat


Comments: Flow very low, sensors nearly out of water, but all appears well today. Flow is stillclean and clear.




Sensor Readings (Arrival)Battery – 10.4 V TDS – N/AWater Temp – 16.25 �C Dissolved Oxygen – N/ApH – N/A Dissolved Oxygen – N/AConductivity – 323 �S/cm Turbidity – 0.00 NTUData Downloaded to file: WhiAug18.dat


Comments: 0% overcast, air temp 26.4*C. Replaced Battery #3 (11.3 V) with Battery #1 (12.28 V).Sample collected at 11:15. Major turbidity pulse in stream on August 6th. Intense rain fell after departurefrom site on Aug. 6 (9.9 mm at Lambly station), evidence of on site erosion near WSC shed, fresh (butnow dry) sand and mud deposits around edge of creek at station. Pulse on August 6 likely local sedimentinput resulting from intense rainfall.


Field MeasurementsWater Temperature – 13.6 �C Water Level – 0.621 mConductivity – N/A Turbidity - N/A


Sensor Readings (Arrival)Battery – 12.0 V TDS – N/AWater Temp – 13.7 �C Dissolved Oxygen – N/ApH – N/A Dissolved Oxygen – N/AConductivity – 330 �S/cm Turbidity – 0.00 NTUData Downloaded to file: WhiAug23.dat


Comments: No sample collected, post rain event visit. 100% overcast, light rain and airtemperature 12*C. Flow color and turbidity still low. Overview of road system identified erosionand sediment input has been occurring at the 12 km Whiteman FSR location. Turbidity event onAugust 22 from 8:45 to 12:00.

Whiteman Creek (EMS# E244481) September 1, 2004 (11:45 PST)


Data Logger Clock: Sept. 1, 2004 11:50:47 Chronograph (Watch): Sept. 1, 2004 11:51:13

Sensor Readings (Arrival)Battery – 11.95 V TDS – N/AWater Temp – 12.2 �C Dissolved Oxygen – N/ApH – N/A Dissolved Oxygen – N/AConductivity – 325 �S/cm Turbidity – 0.00 NTUData Downloaded to file: WhiSep01.dat


Comments: Sample collected at 12:00, flow color and turbidity still low. No apparent problems.






Comments: Sample not collected, flow color and turbidity still low. 100% overcast, air 10*C.Sand cleared from around sensor location, flushed out area using shovel. Removed decayingwood forms from concrete weir. Cleaned probes, silt and magnetite accumulations.






Comments: Sample collected at 12:00, 0% overcast, air temperature 15.5 *C. flow color andturbidity still low. Turbidity events observed on September 17 and 18th (approx 9 mm rain on the17th and 20 mm on the 18th recorded at the Lambly Creek station).

Whiteman Creek (EMS# E244481) October 8, 2004 (8:00 PST)


Data Logger Clock: Oct. 8, 2004 8:14:01 Chronograph (Watch): Oct. 8, 2004 8:14:59

Sensor Readings (Arrival)Battery – 11.67 V TDS – N/AWater Temp – 5.75 �C Dissolved Oxygen – N/ApH – N/A Dissolved Oxygen – N/AConductivity – 303 �S/cm Turbidity – 0.00 NTUData Downloaded to file: WhiOct08.dat


Comments: Sample not collected, flow, colour and turbidity still low. No problems observed atstation.

Whiteman Creek (EMS# E244481) October 19, 2004 (13:30 PST)



Sensor Readings (Arrival)Battery – 11.67 V TDS – N/AWater Temp – 5.75 �C Dissolved Oxygen – N/ApH – N/A Dissolved Oxygen – N/AConductivity – 303 �S/cm Turbidity – 0.00 NTUData Downloaded to file: WhiOct19.dat


Comments: Sample collected at 13:45, flow up, but color and turbidity still low. Turbidityevents noted on October 17th and 18th (10 mm rain at Lambly site on the 17th & 6 mm on the18th).

Whiteman Creek (EMS# E244481) November 16, 2004 (11:15 PST)


Data Logger Clock: Nov. 16, 2004 11:20:18 Chronograph (Watch): Nov. 16, 2004 11:22:51

Sensor Readings (Arrival)Battery – 11.57 V TDS – N/AWater Temp – 1.79 �C Dissolved Oxygen – N/ApH – N/A Dissolved Oxygen – N/AConductivity – 238 �S/cm Turbidity – 0.00 NTUData Downloaded to file: WhiNov16.dat

Sensor Readings (Departure)Battery – N/A TDS – N/AWater Temp – N/A Dissolved Oxygen – N/ApH – N/A Dissolved Oxygen – N/AConductivity – N/A Turbidity – N/A

Comments: Sample not collected, flow up again, but color and turbidity still low. Equipmentremoved from service for the year. Should remove sand accumulations prior to freshet in 2005,as many dates were affected by sand particles partly burying the sensors.

Lambly Creek (EMS# E223216) March 29, 2004 (17:45 PST)

Field MeasurementsWater Temperature – 3.3 �C Water Level – Below Staff GaugeConductivity – 213 �S/cm Turbidity - (0.47) (0.62) (0.57) NTU

Data Logger Clock: March 29, 2004 5:47:11 Chronograph (Watch): March 29, 2004 5:47:21

Sensor Readings (Arrival)Water Level – N/A Specific Conductance – N/AWater Temp – N/A Turbidity – N/AConductivity – N/A Back up Battery – N/A

Data Downloaded to file: N/A

Sensor Readings (Departure)Water Level – 0.616 m Specific Conductance – N/AWater Temp – 3.7 �C Turbidity – 3.3 NTU (point data, not averaged)Conductivity – 200 �S/cm Back up Battery – 12.8 V

Comments: Initial site set up, sensors put in place. Sample not collected today. Skies 0%overcast, air temperature 10*C. Auto sensor calibrated – 0.3 NTU in DI water, 21.6 NTU in 20NTU Standard. Creek very clear water.

Lambly Creek (EMS# E223216) April 8, 2004 (08:00 PST)



Sensor Readings (Arrival)Water Level – 1.172 m Specific Conductance – N/AWater Temp – 2.9 �C Turbidity – 7.6 NTU (point data, not averaged)Conductivity – 123 �S/cm Back up Battery – 12.2 V

Data Downloaded to file: Yes


Comments: 100% overcast, air temp 8*C and light rain beginning. No problems noted at site.


Field MeasurementsWater Temperature – 3.5 �C Water Level – 1.285Conductivity – 93.4 �S/cm Turbidity - (2.45) (2.80) (2.70) NTU




Sensor Readings (Departure)Water Level – 1.277 m Specific Conductance – 51 �S/cmWater Temp – 6.3 �C Turbidity – 3.4 NTU (point data, not averaged)Conductivity – 80 �S/cm Back up Battery – 12 V

Comments: Sample collected at 8:30. Skies 100% overcast air at 11*C. Cleaned probes,conductivity chamber plugged with caddisfly larvae. Flow and colour elevated, turb same as lastvisit. Battery #1 = 12.06 Volts.







Comments: Approx. 50% overcast, air temp. 9*C. Flow colour and turbidity all elevated. Largeamounts of debris in deployment tube, problems with data. Attempts to flush material out (cedarfragments) only partly successful. Previous data suspect.

Lambly Creek (EMS# E223216) May 6, 2004 (10:15 PST)



Sensor Readings (Arrival)Water Level – 1.355 m Specific Conductance – N/AWater Temp – 5.8 �C Turbidity – N/A sensor not functionalConductivity – 59 �S/cm Back up Battery – 11.9 V


Sensor Readings (Departure)Water Level – 1.355 m Specific Conductance – N/AWater Temp – 5.8 �C Turbidity – N/A sensor not functionalConductivity – 59 �S/cm Back up Battery – 11.9 V

Comments: 0% overcast, air temp approx. 17 *C. Turbidity sensor taken out of service, problemwith wiper (replaced on May 7 with old Powers Creek unit). Changed Battery #1 (11.7 V) withBattery #4 (12.43V). Sample collected at 10:30.







Comments: Flow and turbidity low level but colour up. 0% overcast, air temperature 13*C.Sample collected at 8:00. Turbidity erratic, cedar needles in tube, flushed again, re-positionedsensor carousel. Turbidity sensor seems ok now – replaced May 7 with old Powers Creek unit.




Sensor Readings (Arrival)Water Level – 1.281 m Specific Conductance – N/AWater Temp – 8.0 �C Turbidity –0.2 NTU (point data, not averaged)Conductivity – 73 �S/cm Back up Battery – 12.4 V


Sensor Readings (Departure)Water Level – 1.280 m Specific Conductance – N/AWater Temp – 8.0 �C Turbidity –0.3 NTU (point data, not averaged)Conductivity – 73 �S/cm Back up Battery – 12.4 V

Comments: 10 % overcast, air temp 13*C. Sample collected at 8:15. Flow up, but turbidity andcolor low still. No problems noted at site today.


Field MeasurementsWater Temperature – 8.0 �C Water Level – 1.31 mConductivity – N/A Turbidity - (1.20) (1.24) (1.16) NTU

Data Logger Clock: Did not connect to logger Chronograph (Watch): May 28, 2004 11:12:48

Sensor Readings (Arrival)Water Level – N/A Specific Conductance – N/AWater Temp – N/A Turbidity – N/AConductivity – N/A Back up Battery – N/A

Data Downloaded to file: No

Sensor Readings (Departure)Water Level – N/A Specific Conductance – N/AWater Temp – N/A Turbidity – N/AConductivity – N/A Back up Battery – N/A

Comments: 100 % overcast, light rain, air temp approx. 13*C. Flow and colour up, but turbiditylows still. Too much rain and hail, did not connect computer to datalogger on this date.

Lambly Creek (EMS# E223216) June 3, 2004 (8:45 PST)



Sensor Readings (Arrival)Water Level – 1.235 m Specific Conductance – N/AWater Temp – 8.3 �C Turbidity -.3 NTU (point data, not averaged)Conductivity – 88 �S/cm Back up Battery – 12.1 V


Sensor Readings (Departure)Water Level – 1.235 m Specific Conductance – N/AWater Temp – 8.3 �C Turbidity – -.3 NTU (point data, not averaged)Conductivity – 88 �S/cm Back up Battery – 12.1 V

Comments: Skies 0% overcast and air approx. 18*C. Low flow, color and turbidity. Noticeablyless tea colour to the water since last visit. Sample collected at 8:45.







Comments: 100% overcast skies, light rain, air temperature 15*C. Routine site visit. Low flowcolor and turbidity, sample collected at 10:30. Replaced battery #3 (11.8 Volts) with Battery #1(12.3 Volts).




Sensor Readings (Arrival)Water Level – 1.164 m Specific Conductance – N/AWater Temp – 8.8 �C Turbidity – -.3 NTU (point data, not averaged)Conductivity – 111 �S/cm Back up Battery – 12.0 V



Comments: Skies 0% overcast, air temperature approx. 12.4*C. Low flow turb and color.Sample collected at 7:30, no problems noted at site.







Comments: Skies 0% overcast, air temp. 28*C. Flow, colour and turbidity all low, sample notcollected. No problems noted at site today.

Lambly Creek (EMS# E223216) July 14, 2004 (9:00 PST)

Field MeasurementsWater Temperature – 12.6 �C Water Level – Below staff gaugeConductivity – 188 �S/cm Turbidity - (0.01) (0.01) (0.01) NTU




Sensor Readings (Departure)Water Level – 0.625 Specific Conductance – N/AWater Temp – 12.9 �C Turbidity – 0.0 NTU (point data, not averaged)Conductivity – 184 �S/cm Back up Battery – 12.0 V

Comments: Flow very low, colour and turbdity low. Skies 0% overcast, air temp 23*C. Samplecollected at 9:00, no problems at site. Flow not over weir past station, but through bypass pipe.

Lambly Creek (EMS# E223216) July 27, 2004 (06:15 PST)

Field MeasurementsWater Temperature – 12.4 �C Water Level – below staff gaugeConductivity – 214 �S/cm Turbidity - (0.12) (0.15) (0.14) NTU





Comments: Skies 0% overcast, air temp approx. 9*C, low flow turb and color. Turbidity sensorseems fine, flow still below pressure transducer location. Sample collected at 6:30.

Lambly Creek (EMS# E223216) August 6, 2004 (9:30 PST)

Field MeasurementsWater Temperature – 12.6 �C Water Level – below staff gaugeConductivity – 166.8 �S/cm Turbidity - (0.31) (0.38) (0.35) NTU





Comments: Low flow turbidity and color – low water check visit. Skies 100% overcast, air tempapprox. 18*C. Sample not collected. All appears to be functional, even at such low water levels.

Lambly Creek (EMS# E223216) August 18, 2004 (8:45 PST)

Field MeasurementsWater Temperature – 13.8 �C Water Level – Below Staff GaugeConductivity – 100.4 �S/cm Turbidity – (0.92) (0.87) (0.95) NTU





Comments: 0 % overcast, air temperature 25 *C. Sample collected at 9:00. No problems notedat site.

Lambly Creek (EMS# E223216) September 1, 2004 (10:00 PST)

Field MeasurementsWater Temperature – 11.8 �C Water Level – Below Staff GaugeConductivity – 134 �S/cm Turbidity – (0.41) (0.45) (0.37) NTU





Comments: 100 % overcast air temperature 15*C, light rain and windy. Flow and turbidity low,but colour increased again. Sample collected at 9:45.


Field MeasurementsWater Temperature – 10.0 �C Water Level – 1.14 mConductivity – 86.4 �S/cm Turbidity – (0.42) (0.48) (0.48) NTU





Comments: 100 % overcast air temperature 12*C and lightly raining. Flow and, colourincreased again but turbidity low. Sample not collected. Turbidity event on Sept 7 to 9th, changedbatteries, #2 (6.11Volts), with #4 (12.46 Volts).


Field MeasurementsWater Temperature – 8.0 �C Water Level – Below 1.04 mConductivity – 191.5 �S/cm Turbidity – (0.11) (0.12) (0.11) NTU


Sensor Readings (Arrival)Water Level – 1.046 m Specific Conductance – N/AWater Temp – 8.2 �C Turbidity – -.9 NTU (point data, not averaged)Conductivity – 194 �S/cm Back up Battery – 11.2 V


Sensor Readings (Departure)Water Level – 1.045 m Specific Conductance – N/AWater Temp – 8.2 �C Turbidity – -0.9 NTU (point data, not averaged)Conductivity – 193 �S/cm Back up Battery – 11.2 V

Comments: 0 % overcast air temperature 10*C. Flow is up, but colour and turbidity low.Sample collected at 9:30.

Lambly Creek (EMS# E223216) October 8, 2004 (10:00 PST)

Field MeasurementsWater Temperature – 7.4 �C Water Level – Below Staff GaugeConductivity – 212 �S/cm Turbidity – (0.13) (0.20) (0.17) NTU


Sensor Readings (Arrival)Water Level – 0.613 m Specific Conductance – N/AWater Temp – 7.8 �C Turbidity – -0.7 NTU (point data, not averaged)Conductivity – 204 �S/cm Back up Battery – 13.0 V



Comments: Replaced backup battery supply, 100 % overcast air temperature 13*C and lightlyraining. Flow turbidity and colour all low. Sample not collected.

Lambly Creek (EMS# E223216) October 19, 2004 (11:30 PST)

Field MeasurementsWater Temperature – 5.5 �C Water Level – 1.01 mConductivity – 218 �S/cm Turbidity – (0.11) (0.11) (0.11) NTU





Comments: 100 % overcast air temperature 7.5*C. Flow is up but turbidity and colour are low.Sample collected at 11:45, no problems noted at site.

Lambly Creek (EMS# E223216) November 16, 2004 (14:00 PST)

Field MeasurementsWater Temperature – 1.8 �C Water Level – 1.05 mConductivity – 181.4 �S/cm Turbidity – (0.00) (0.00) (0.00) NTU

Data Logger Clock: Nov. 16, 2004 14:06:54 Chronograph (Watch): Nov. 16, 2004 14:08:18



Sensor Readings (Departure)Water Level – N/A Specific Conductance – N/AWater Temp – N/A Turbidity – N/AConductivity – N/A Back up Battery – N/A

Comments: 40 % overcast air temperature 3.6*C. Flow still elevated, turbidity and colour low.Sample not collected. Equipment removed from service on November 16, 2004.

APPENDIX F

Climate and Stream Discharge Data

Appendix F - South BC Mountains Environment Canada Climate Data (1948-2004)Regional Precipitation Departures From Normal - Ranked Wettest to Driest, 1948 - 2004Regional Temperature Departures From Normal - Ranked Warmest to Coolest, 1948 - 2004

Rank Yr Dep. % Yr Dep. °C Yr Dep. % Yr Dep. °C Yr Dep. % Yr Dep.

°C1 1996 51.9 1992 2.6 1993 71.1 1958 2.4 1959 66.1 1987 2.12 2002 47.7 1994 2.3 1948 64.7 1998 2.1 1996 61.7 1998 1.63 1990 38.1 2004 2.3 1983 51.3 1961 2.1 1985 37.1 1953 1.64 1997 36.9 1998 2.2 1995 45.4 2004 1.8 1998 34 1967 1.55 1988 36.5 1993 2.2 1976 43.1 2003 1.6 2004 33.7 1963 1.56 2003 31 1987 1.9 1964 37.4 1967 1.5 1973 27.6 1988 1.37 1959 29.5 1983 1.7 1999 35.7 1992 1.3 1958 26.9 1962 1.38 1981 26.6 1958 1.6 1981 30.4 1994 1.1 1986 26 1981 1.29 1984 26.2 1988 1.6 1954 29 1979 1.1 1990 23.7 1949 1.210 1974 23.7 1980 1.4 1957 25.8 1970 1 1961 23.3 1980 1.211 1960 23.3 1981 1.3 1990 25.3 1990 1 1992 22.8 1952 1.212 1948 23.3 1986 1.3 1963 25.1 1989 0.7 2003 22.3 1954 1.213 1993 19.9 1990 1.2 1980 23.3 1978 0.7 1995 20.8 1989 1.114 1961 18.8 1969 1.2 2004 19.3 1971 0.7 1984 18.9 1974 115 1980 17.8 1949 1.1 1989 18.8 1965 0.6 1966 16.4 1979 0.916 1955 15.6 1957 1.1 1982 18.6 2002 0.6 1955 14.7 1969 0.917 1968 15.5 1995 1.1 1959 17.9 1985 0.6 1951 14.4 1995 0.918 1978 14.7 1961 0.9 1991 17.5 1977 0.6 1964 13.9 1997 0.919 1998 13.8 1973 0.9 1972 16.8 1987 0.6 1950 10.7 2001 0.820 2000 12.7 1963 0.8 1953 16.5 1991 0.5 1968 9.8 1976 0.821 1969 10.9 1985 0.7 1997 15.3 1986 0.5 1963 9.3 1999 0.722 1986 10.5 1977 0.7 1996 12.9 1982 0.4 1988 8.5 1957 0.623 1977 10.2 2001 0.7 1968 9.6 1969 0.4 1962 8.4 1990 0.524 1972 10 2000 0.7 1975 9.6 1950 0.3 1969 7 1994 0.425 1964 9.7 1978 0.6 1966 9.5 1948 0.3 1982 4.6 1991 0.326 1991 9.2 1968 0.6 1988 7.2 1997 0.3 1994 4.5 2002 0.327 1966 8.8 1984 0.5 1969 6.2 1996 0.2 1997 4 1993 0.328 1987 6.6 1979 0.5 1962 5.9 1960 0.1 1980 2.9 2004 0.329 1950 6.2 1991 0.4 1987 3.7 1951 0.1 1977 2.3 1960 0.330 1989 6 1959 0.4 1986 3.2 1984 0 1967 1.4 1966 0.331 1967 5.9 1989 0.4 1952 0.5 1956 0 1999 1.3 1983 0.232 1976 5.1 1953 0.3 2001 0.4 1988 -0.1 1978 1.2 2003 0.133 1994 2.3 1956 0.2 1977 -0.7 1981 -0.1 1971 -1.1 1975 034 1995 1.4 1952 0.2 2000 -0.9 1972 -0.1 1965 -1.2 1992 035 1953 1.2 1997 0.2 1978 -1.5 2000 -0.1 1960 -2.9 1968 036 2004 -2 1999 0.2 1992 -1.8 1963 -0.1 1954 -4.5 1948 -0.137 1962 -2.7 2003 0.1 1971 -1.9 1974 -0.1 1975 -5.7 2000 -0.138 1999 -3 1966 0.1 1984 -2.3 2001 -0.1 1989 -5.9 1965 -0.239 1954 -4 1972 0.1 1955 -4.6 1983 -0.2 1991 -5.9 1986 -0.340 1971 -5 1970 -0.1 1994 -4.6 1995 -0.3 1949 -6.4 1958 -0.341 1951 -5.5 1960 -0.1 1965 -5.1 1975 -0.3 1970 -7.2 1982 -0.442 1957 -9.2 1996 -0.2 1956 -6.5 1973 -0.4 1983 -8.9 1956 -0.443 1983 -10 1971 -0.3 1950 -12.3 1999 -0.4 1981 -11.1 1951 -0.544 1985 -11.2 1974 -0.3 1949 -15.5 1952 -0.4 1953 -13.1 1971 -0.645 1982 -15 1976 -0.3 1960 -15.7 1953 -0.5 1972 -15.9 1964 -0.646 1979 -15.3 1962 -0.5 1998 -15.8 1949 -0.6 1948 -16.5 1950 -0.847 1963 -15.6 1948 -0.7 1951 -18.2 1980 -0.7 1974 -16.9 1978 -0.948 2001 -15.6 1965 -0.8 1961 -19.7 1968 -0.7 2000 -20.1 1972 -0.949 1992 -16.2 1951 -0.8 1974 -20.5 1955 -0.7 1956 -20.8 1977 -1.150 1970 -18.6 1982 -0.9 1985 -25.4 1962 -0.7 1957 -23 1973 -1.351 1958 -18.8 1964 -0.9 1958 -26.8 1959 -0.7 2002 -26.5 1959 -1.552 1949 -19.5 1950 -0.9 1970 -30.7 1993 -0.7 1993 -27.3 1970 -1.653 1952 -23.2 1975 -1.2 2002 -33.2 1966 -0.8 2001 -28.1 1984 -1.754 1973 -23.4 1967 -1.3 2003 -35.2 1964 -0.9 1979 -35.1 1996 -1.855 1965 -24.7 2002 -1.8 1979 -35.8 1957 -1.2 1987 -40.8 1961 -1.956 1956 -25.3 1954 -1.9 1973 -37 1976 -1.3 1976 -42.7 1955 -2.457 1975 -27.5 1955 -2.9 1967 -49.2 1954 -1.6 1952 -58.8 1985 -4.1

Fall Precip. Fall Temp.Spring Precip. Spring Temp. Summer Precip. Summer Temp.

Lambly Creek and Kelowna Airport Precipitation (mm)(April through October, 2001 - 2004)

2001 2002 2003 2004Month Lambly Kelowna Lambly Kelowna Lambly Kelowna Lambly KelownaApril 33.8 33.9 - 10.2 - 30.6 19.3 10.5May 26.2 25.8 - 44.0 33.5 26.2 78.0 48.5June 56.6 47.0 17.3 20.5 22.3 21.2 32.3 36.5July 33.5 45.4 13.2 12.4 0.3 0 5.1 19.0Aug. 32.5 20.4 17.8 19.2 2.5 2.4 76.9 79.5Sept. 24.4 27.8 19.6 17.4 15.2 24.6 54.6 45.5Oct. 67.6 35.8 2.8 7.2 63.3 58.2 36.1 30.0

Total 274.6 236.1 *70.7 130.9 *137.1 163.2 302.3 269.5*Total does not include April and/or May data which was not collected in 2002/03.

Whiteman Creek - Maximum Daily Discharge and Recurrence Intervals (1971-2004)

Whiteman Creek (08NM174)Area (ha): 11200

Year Max Daily Discharge (m3/s) m3/s/ha RankProbability of Exceedance

Recurrance Interval

1971 12.3 0.00110 4 34 0.4 10.53% 9.501972 13.8 0.00123 2 34 0.4 4.68% 21.381973 4.67 0.00042 27 34 0.4 77.78% 1.291974 9.23 0.00082 9 34 0.4 25.15% 3.981975 11.6 0.00104 5 34 0.4 13.45% 7.431976 6.68 0.00060 17 34 0.4 48.54% 2.061977 2.78 0.00025 32 34 0.4 92.40% 1.081978 8.67 0.00077 12 34 0.4 33.92% 2.951979 5.07 0.00045 21 34 1.4 60.87% 1.641980 4.18 0.00037 30 34 0.4 86.55% 1.161981 4.89 0.00044 24 34 0.4 69.01% 1.451982 9.17 0.00082 10 34 0.4 28.07% 3.561983 9.98 0.00089 7 34 0.4 19.30% 5.181984 8.77 0.00078 11 34 0.4 30.99% 3.231985 6.29 0.00056 18 34 0.4 51.46% 1.941986 8.57 0.00077 13 34 0.4 36.84% 2.711987 7.32 0.00065 16 34 0.4 45.61% 2.191988 4.56 0.00041 28 34 0.4 80.70% 1.241989 4.99 0.00045 22 34 0.4 63.16% 1.581990 4.83 0.00043 25 34 0.4 71.93% 1.391991 6.13 0.00055 19 34 0.4 54.39% 1.841992 2.1 0.00019 34 34 0.4 98.25% 1.021993 7.66 0.00068 15 34 0.4 42.69% 2.341994 4.52 0.00040 29 34 0.4 83.63% 1.201995 5.95 0.00053 20 34 0.4 57.31% 1.741996 11 0.00098 6 34 0.4 16.37% 6.111997 20 0.00179 1 34 0.4 1.75% 57.001998 7.74 0.00069 14 34 0.4 39.77% 2.511999 13.4 0.00120 3 34 0.4 7.60% 13.152000 4.77 0.00043 26 34 0.4 74.85% 1.342001 2.57 0.00023 33 34 0.4 95.32% 1.052002 9.67 0.00086 8 34 0.4 22.22% 4.502003 3.61 0.00032 31 34 0.4 89.47% 1.122004 4.98 0.00044 23 34 0.4 66.08% 1.51

Max 20.0Min 2.1Mean 7.4*Probability of exceedance based on Gringorten equation --- P.E.=Rank-a/n+1-(2a), Recurrance Interval =1/P.E.

Maximum Daily Discharge - Whiteman Creek Above Bouleau Creek (WSC #08NM174) 1971-2004

0

5

10

15

20

25

1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010

Year

Max

imum

Dai

ly D

isch

arge

(m3/

s)

Mean 7.4 m3/s

4 Year Event

12 Year Event

54 Year Event

2 Year Event

TFL 49 ECOLOGICAL STEWARDSHIP PROJECT 2004 Annual...

Documents

Transcript of TFL 49 ECOLOGICAL STEWARDSHIP PROJECT 2004 Annual...