&EPA
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Region V
Great Lakes National
Program Office
536 South Clark Street, Room 932
Chicago, IL 60605
EPA-905/9-79-005-A
March, 1979 ^ ,
V.I ^- '
Maumee River
Pilot Watershed Study
Watershed
Characteristics And
Pollutant Loadings
Defiance Area, Ohio
-------
The United States Environmental Protection Agency was created because of
increasing public and governmental concern about the dangers of pollution
to the health and welfare of the American people. Noxious air, foul water,
and spoiled land are tragic testimony to the deterioration of our natural
environment.
The Great Lakes National Program Office (GLNPO) of the U.S. EPA, was
established in Region V, Chicago to provide a specific focus on the water
quality concerns of the Great Lakes. GLNPO provides funding and personnel
support to the International Joint Commission activities under the US-
Canada Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement.
Several land use water quality studies have been funded to support the
Pollution from Land Use Activities Reference Group (PLUARG) under the
Agreement to address specific objectives related to land use pollution to the
Great Lakes. This report describes some of the work supported by this Office
to carry out PLUARG study objectives.
We hope that the information and data contained herein will help planners
and managers of pollution control agencies make better decisions for
carrying forward their pollution control responsibilities.
Dr. Edith J. Tebo
Director
Great Lakes National Program Office
-------
EPA-905/9-79-005-A
March 1979
THE MAUMEE RIVER BASIN PILOT WATERSHED STUDY
Volume I
Watershed Characteristics and Pollutant Loadings
by
Terry J. Logan
Principal Investigator
(Grant R005145)
Agronomy Department
Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio 43210
Ohio Agricultural Research and Development Center
Wooster, Ohio 44691
Robert C. Stiefel, Principal Investigator
(Grant R005336)
Water Resources Center
Ohio State University
Columbus, Ohio 43210
for
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Chicago, Illinois
Project Officer
Eugene Pinkstaff
Great Lakes National Program Office
This study, funded by a Great Lakes Program grant from the U.S. EPA,
was conducted as part of the Task C-Pilot Watershed Program for the
International Joint Commission's Reference Group on Pollution from
Land Use Activities.
GREAT LAKES NATIONAL PROGRAM OFFICE
U. S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY, REGION V
536 SOUTH CLARK STREET, ROOM 932
CHICAGO, ILLINOIS 60605
R-
-------
DISCLAIMER
This report has been reviewed by the Region V Office, U. S.
Environmental Protection Agency and approved for publication.
Approval does not signify that the contents necessarily reflect
the views and policies of the U. S. Environmental Protection
Agency, nor does mention of trade names or commercial products
constitute endorsement or recommendation for use.
-------
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency was created because
of increasing public and governmental concern about the dangers
of pollution to the health and welfare of the American people.
Noxious air, foul water, and spoiled land are tragic testimony
to the deterioration of our natural environment.
The Great Lakes National Program Office (GLNPO) of the U.S. EPA,
was established in Region V, Chicago to provide a specific focus
on the water quality concerns of the Great Lakes. GLNPO provides
funding and personnel support to the International Joint Commission
activities under the US-Canada Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement.
Several land use water quality studies have been funded to support
the Pollution from Land Use Activities Reference Group (PLUARG)
under the Agreement to address specific objectives related to
land use pollution to the Great Lakes. This report describes
some of the work supported by this Office to carry out PLUARG study
objectives.
We hope that the information and data contained herein will help
planners and managers of pollution control agencies make better
decisions for carrying forward their pollution control responsi-
bilities.
Dr. Edith J. Tebo
Director
Great Lakes National Program Office
ii
-------
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
Work on this project was funded by a grant from U. S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Region V, Chicago, with Gene Pinkstaff, Project Officer,
and Ralph Christensen, Grants Officer.
Much of the work on watershed loading was done by John Adams, formerly
with the Great Lakes Basin Commission and now with the Corps of Engineers,
Lake Erie Wastewater Management Study (LEWMS), Buffalo. We are indebted to
Dr. David Baker, Heidelberg College, Tiffin, Ohio; Dr. Steve Yaksich, LEWMS,
Buffalo; and personnel of the Black Creek, Indiana study for providing us
with tributary loading data.
This study was the combined effort of many individuals at the Ohio
State University. They include Dr. Larry Wilding, Dr. Neil Smeck, Dr. Wayne
Pettyjohn, Dr. Earl Whitlach, and Dr. Glenn Schwab. Graduate students whose
thesis work contritubed to the study are Fred Rhoton, Dennis McCallister, Dan
Green, and Tom Naymik.
The technical support of Rodney Smith and Ted Pohlman was critical to
the success of the project, and special thanks are due to Dr. Robert Stiefel,
Director, Water Resources Center, for his continued interest and support of
the project.
Land use and soil data provided by Dr. Tom Cahill, Resource Management
Associates, West Chester, Pa. are greatfully acknowledged.
111
-------
ABSTRACT
Five small agricultural watersheds and eight plots in the Maumee
River Basin of Ohio were instrumented for measurement of sediment and
nutrients leaving the land under prevailing land use management. These
results were compared with loadings from larger watersheds in the Basin
and downstream tributary loads. Studies were also conducted on sediment
transport, adsorption-desorption of sediment-P, and heavy metal and
pesticide loss from the Basin.
Monitoring during 1975-1977 showed that there were significant
differences in sediment and nutrient losses among different soil types
in the Basin. Greatest sediment losses occurred on the level and very
poorly drained, high-clay lake plain soils as well as the sloping,
dissected lake plain clay soils. Losses were intermediate on moderately
sloping, till-plain soils and very low on level soils with good internal
drainage characteristics when they are tile-drained. Comparison with
larger drainage areas in the Basin showed that snow melt and frontal
spring storms resulted in significant sediment and nutrient movement
across the entire Basin on large and samll watersheds, while summer
convective storms were localized and had less effect on downstream
pollutant loads.
The phosphorus, sediment transport, heavy metals, and pesticide
studies are discussed in Volume 2 of this report.
iv
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
DISCLAIMER
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
ABSTRACT iv
LIST OF TABLES vii
LIST OF FIGURES ix
1. SUMMARY *
2. IMPLICATIONS FOR REMEDIAL MEASURES AND RECOMMENDATIONS 1
2.1 Recommendations for Maumee River Basin 3
2.2 General recommendations for the Great Lakes 4
3. INTRODUCTION 4
3.1 Study approach 5
3.2 Study methods 6
3.21 Monitoring sites in Defiance County 9
3.22 Surface Runoff and Tile Drainage Measurement — 18
Defiance County sites
3.23 Surface Runoff and Tile Drainage Measurement — 27
Hoytville Plots
3.24 Analysis of watershed and plot water samples 32
3.3 Calculations of loadings 35
3-31 Major and minor subbasins 35
3.32 Experimental plots 36
3.33 Other loading estimates 36
3-34 Application of experimental plot data to 37
major basin data
If. RESULTS 38
4.1 Description of the Basin 38
4.11 Topography and drainage 38
it. 12 Geology 38
4.13 Hydrology 111
4.2 Land use and practices l4_l
4.21 Land use 111
4.22 Agricultural practices in the Basin 44
4.23 County crop rotations kh
4.24 Tillage practices and timing of farm operations 58
4.25 Livestock 6l
4.26 Point sources 6l
4.3 Soils in the Maumee River Basin 6l
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued)
Page
k.k Loa_ding results 66
Ij.Hl Defiance watersheds and Hoytville plots 66
k.h2 Overview of watershed loadings 78
k.k3 Discussion of monthly loadings 95
k.hk Point source load summary 99
U.l+5 Diffuse source loads 99
k.h6 Precipitation in the Maumee River Basin 1975-76 115
k.kl Storms and runoff 118
U.U8 Storms and sediment transport 121
k.k9 Relationship of gross erosion and sediment delivery 12U
k.klO Utility for extrapolation 126
5- REFERENCES 129
6. APPENDIX 132
VI
-------
LIST OF TABLES
Page
Table No.
1 Summary of watershed sites and plots 8
2 Summary of crop management practices on 28
Defiance county sites
3 Summary of crop management practices on 33
the Hoytville plots (19711-1977)
U Numbers of observations in study watersheds 36
5 Population data by county (PLUARG Task B) H5
6 Land use in the Maumee and Portage River U6
Basins by subbasin (Resource Management
Associates, West Chester, Pa.)
7 Agricultural land use in planning subarea U.2 (PLUARG 55
Task B)
8 Crop production in the Maumee River Basin - 56
acres harvested (1975-1976)
9 Acreage of major rotation by county in the 59
Maumee River Basin
10 Tillage fractions used in the Basin (% of county) 60
11 Intensive livestock operations by county, 1969 62
12 Acreage of major soil series in the Maumee River 65
Basin (Series with more than 10,000 hectares)
13 Flow and precipitation at Defiance watersheds 67
and Hoytville plots (1975-1977)
1^4-23 Concentration and load of pollutants from Defiance 68
watersheds and Hoytville plots
2k Total and unit area loads for watersheds in Maumee °3
and Portage River Basins
25-28 Monthly loadings Maumee River at Waterville, Portage 8U
River at Woodville, Sites 2 and 6 Black Creek
29-30 Monthly load, unit area yield, flow-weighted mean 90
concentration, flow and precipitation, Maumee
River at Waterville and Portage River at Woodville
31 Loadings (metric tons) of chloride in the Maumee 9^
and Portage River Basins
32 Summary of monthly unit area sediment yields 96
(kg/ha/month)
v ii
-------
LIST OF TABLES (continued)
Page
Table No.
33 Watershed sediment yield as percentage of area 97
weighted mean plot sediment yield
3^ Watershed total phosphorus yield as percentage 98
of area weighted mean plot total phosphorus
yield
35 Point source loadings, Maumee River Basin 100
36 Monthly point source loadings, Maumee River Basin 101
37-^0 Unit area yields of sediment and nutrients from 102
Maumee River at Waterville, Portage River at
Woodville, Sites 2 and 6 Black Creek
hl-h2 Total diffuse loads of sediment and nutrients 106
from Maumee River at Waterville and Portage
River at Woodville
^3-^8 Unit area yields of sediment and nutrients from 108
Defiance county watersheds and Hoytville plots
^9 Unit area yields of sediment and nutrients of llU
all plots (weighted by distribution of soil type
in the Maumee Basin)
50 Summary of precipitation data - Maumee River Basin 116
51 Precipitation of storm and non-storm periods - 1975 119
52 Precipitation of storm and non-storm periods - 1976 119
53 Summary of storms producing significant runoff 120
5^ Phosphorus and suspended sediment transport during 123
individual storm events of 1975
55 Estimated annual gross erosion rates for plots 125
Vlll
-------
LIST OF FIGURES
Page
Figure No.
]_ Sampling sites in the Maumee River Basin 7
2 Layout of Hammersmith Roselms watershed ( heavy line H
denotes the monitored area)
3 Hammersmith Roselms (lOX) watershed, Defiance County, 12
Ohio
k Layout of Crites Roselms watershed ( heavy line denotes 13
the monitored area)
5 Layout of Rohrs Lenawee watershed (heavy line denotes lH
the monitored area and dotted lines are tile)
6 Lenawee (30X) watershed, Defiance County, Ohio 15
1 Layout of Heisler Blount watershed (heavy line 16
denotes the monitored area and dotted lines
are tile)
8 Blount (itOX) watershed, Defiance County, Ohio IT
9 Layout of Speiser Paulding watershed (heavy line 19
denotes monitored area and dotted lines are tile)
10 Paulding (50X) watershed, Defiance County, Ohio 20
11 Sediment drop box used to collect runoff from 21
Defiance coun~fcy watersheds
12 System for monitoring and sampling runoff at Defiance 22
county watersheds
13 Sample containers for runoff and tile drainage at 23
Defiance county watersheds
lU Flume and Coshocton wheel for sampling component 25
plot runoff at Hammersmith Roselms watershed.
Defiance county, Ohio
15 System for monitoring and sampling tile flow 26
16 Runoff and tile drainage plots at OARDC research 31
station, Hoytville, Ohio
IT Flow sheet: Runoff and tile drainage samples 3^
18 Glacial deposits of the Maumee Basin (modified 39
from Pettyjohn, Hayes, and Schultz, 197U)
19 Rivers of the Maumee Basin 1*0
IX
-------
Figure No.
LIST OF FIGURES (continued)
Page
20 Average annual precipitation, in inches, for the ^2
period 1931-1960 (modified from Ohio Water Plan
Inventory, 1962)
21 The Maumee River Basin metropolitan areas ^3
22 Soil associations in the Maumee River Basin 63
(Black Creek Report, 1977)
23 Flow hydrographs for Maumee River at Waterville, 1975 79
2^ Flow hydrographs for Maumee River at Waterville, 1976 80
25 Flow hydrographs for Portage River at Woodville, 1976 8l
26 Flow hydrographs for Black Creek, site 2, 1975 82
27 Precipitation at Defiance, Ohio: Normal, 1975, 1976 117
28 Scatter diagram— peak storm discharge vs. basinwide 122
total storm precipitation
29 Sediment yield as a function of drainage area 127
-------
-1-
1. SUMMARY
The results of this study produced a number of important findings
about pollution from land use in the Maumee River Basin and re-emphasized
what we already knew:
1. The Basin is made up of fine-textured soils of high natural
fertility that, produce sediment during runoff in relation to their
slope, internal drainage, and susceptibility to sediment transport.
2. Most of the Basin (-V 70%) is in intensive row-crop agriculture
where, for the most part, the soils are fall-plowed and are bare from
November to June.
3. Much of the agricultural land is drained by subsurface tile
or surface drains and is served by a vast network of man-made or
modified ditches.
U. The period of active sediment transport is in late winter or
early spring and the severity of erosion and sediment transport is
determined by soil moisture and snow-melt conditions during initial thaw.
5. Phosphorus is the major pollutant from the Maumee River Basin,
and the high phosphate content of suspended sediments reflects the high P
levels in Basin soils and the enrichment of P in sediment due to clay
enrichment during transport and adsorption of soluble P in the stream.
6. Levels of pesticides and trace metals in the Maumee River were
low and reflect background levels in Basin soils and normal metal
contributions from groundwater.
2. IMPLICATIONS FOR REMEDIAL MEASURES AND REGOMMENDATIONS_
The efficiency of a particular remedial measure, "best management
practice "or conservation practice in reducing the contribution of
pollution to the Great Lakes from land runoff must be considered from
a variety of viewpoints. There is a fairly well-developed body of
knowledge regarding the reduction in gross erosion, which may be obtained
through the use of a particular practice. Although there is some
uncertainty among scientists as to the absolute efficiency of the
different practices, the "C," cropping management, and"P," erosion
control practice, factors of the Universal Soil Loss equation which have
been extensively compiled by the Soil Conservation Service, USDA, can
give an excellent idea of the relative efficiency of the different com-
bination of land management systems that can be used by farmers to
reduce gross erosion.
On the other hand, our knowledge of how these practices alter
the sediment—and pollutant and nutrient—delivery ratio is still
seriously lacking. Several studies have indicated that the delivery
ratio, i.e. sediment actually delivered to drainage ways divided by
gross erosion, is significantly decreased by the application of some
management practices. This is primarily because some practices are
most efficient in reducing the movement of relatively larger-size soil
particles. The resultant runoff, enriched with fine particles, can
move much further than the larger particles. It is also well known
that the fine particle-size fraction is the fraction which carries with
it most of the particulate adsorbed bio-available phosphorus. As a
-------
-2-
result an erosion control practice, which is efficient in reducing gross
erosion, may be less efficient in reducing delivery of phosphorus to
the Great Lakes. Considerably more research will be necessary before
it can be determined how efficient a management practice is in reducing
phosphorus loadings relative to gross erosion. It must be borne in mind,
though, that a management practice which produces a 50$ reduction in
gross erosion will also produce a significant reduction in phosphorus
loading, probably on the order of 25 to hd%, or 50 to 80% of the
reduction in gross erosion.
Another aspect of the effectiveness of BMPs is the cost per unit
area of application per unit of pollutant reduction. The cost must be
assessed against the particular pollutant most important to the Great
Lakes, i.e. phosphorus. The above discussion of practice efficiency
again becomes important. Consider, for example, the installation of
grassed waterways. This is a practice designed primarily to abate
gully erosion in areas of concentrated runoff. In gully erosion the
principal erodant is subsurface soil that is generally low in phosphorus,
which is considered to be bio-available. So, this practice does little
to reduce phosphorus pollution to the Great Lakes. At the same time,
it is extremely important to the farmer, because it prevents the
ruination of his fields by gully formation.
For another example, consider the installation of parallel terraces
with tile outlets (PTOs ). A PTO installation consists of a series of
berms of soil constructed across the swale, relatively closer together
or farther apart depending on the length and degree of the slope across
which they are constructed. A tile line is laid along the bottom of
the swale beginning just behind ^he highest berm. Behind each berm
a vertical tile is connected to the main tile and extending to the
height of the berm above ground level. The vertical tile is perforated
so that water may enter it and flow through a control orifice into
the main tile to a drainageway at the bottom of the slope. The PTO
serves the same function as the grassed waterway in eliminating gully
erosion, but it serves a function which the grassed waterway cannot.
Because flow is restricted at the vertical tile outlet, water is ponded
behind the berm and phosphorus-bearing sediment can be settled out.
The grassed waterway cannot perform this function.
The initial cost of the PTO is higher than the grassed waterway
but in the long-term may cost less. Maintenance costs may be less for
the PTO. More importantly, very little land is taken out of production-
only about 50 square feet around the vertical tile, while the entire
length of the waterway is out of production. Also, especially important
to contour plowing, there is no obstacle to continuous operation of
machinery across the slope.
Another management practice which may be of great importance to
diffuse source pollution control, but which has previously been considered
only as a production enhancement practice, is the installation of under-
ground tile drainage. The Pilot Watershed Study in the Maumee River
basin has shown evidence that in areas of flat, poorly drained soil
sediment and nutrient yields may be reduced significantly by the
installation of tile drainage. Further, tile drainage reduces moisture
levels in imperfectly drained soils and improves the moisture retention
capacity of the soil. This factor will cause attenuation of runoff
during storms. Peak velocities that cause streambank erosion should
also be reduced. Another factor for the use of tile is the fact that
-------
-3-
the no-tillage crop management system may be employed on a greatly
enlarged list of soil types when tile drainage is employed.
Also, the increased production obtained through the use of tile
will offset many of the costs of other conservation practices which
must be employed. While it is too early to assess how much of an
impact tile drainage may have on diffuse source pollution reduction,
it is becoming evident that it will be an important BMP for poorly
drained high clay watersheds. A low level of cost-sharing should be
sufficient to increase the installation of tile.
2.1 Recommendations for Maumee River Basin
1. Point source reduction of P should continue to be pursued, especially
for Toledo because of its high delivery to the Western Basin of Lake Erie.
2. Heavy metals and pesticides are not a problem at the present time,
but pesticides in water and sediment should be periodically scanned
to identify any new compounds or other toxic organics which may
come on the scene in the future.
3. Conservation practices should be accelerated to reduce erosion on
the cultivated sloping soils of the Basin. These include the Morley
soils with slopes > 6% or better in the till plain regions of the
Basin and the Roselms soils with 2-6% slopes in the lake plain region.
h. Maximum sediment load occurs in the period January - March, and, there-
fore, conservation practices should maximize residue cover during
that period. No-till should be recommended on the well-drained
Morley soils and chisel plow on the Roselms.
5- Gully erosion is common on the dissected upland soil associations
such as Morley-Blount and Roselms. Grassed waterways with or without
tile drainage is recommended for these critical areas.
6. Grass buffer strips between field boundaries and drainage ditches are
recommended in the Maumee because of the large network of drainage
ditches in the Basin. This recommendation is especially important
in the lake plain region, where ditches are more numerous and the soils
are high in clay.
7- Reduced tillage can not be justifiably recommended on the level (A slope)
soils of the Basin because of their low soil loss and the crop manage-
ment difficulties associated with reduced tillage on these soils.
However, subsurface (tile) drainage appears to reduce runoff and
soil loss on these soils in addition to improving crop production.
Therefore, accelerated tile drainage installation is recommended on
the level, poorly drained soils of the Basin.
8. The Paulding soil is very high in clay and possesses low hydraulic
conductivity; as a result, tile drainage is not recommended on this
soil. Further research is needed to develop acceptable crop management
(including drainage) practices which will maintain crop productivity
and reduce soil loss and transport.
-------
-h-
9- Soils in the Maumee are high in clay, relatively high in total P,
and, because of its high clay content, the suspended sediment is
enriched in total P. Plant-available P levels in watershed soils
are generally adequate for maximum crop production. Educational
programs should stress the importance of following soil test
recommendations, and soil fertility research is needed to better
define sufficiency levels of available P in soil.
2.2 General Recommendations for the Great Lakes
1. Point source phosphorus reductions must be continued with emphasis
on those discharges which are on the lake shore and on main stem
tributaries.
2. Soil-loss reductions from intensively cultivated cropland should be
accelerated with emphasis on the medium and fine textured soils on
sloping land. The critical area concept should be on a soil-type
basis, utilizing both erodibility (Universal Soil Loss Equation "k"
factor) and transportability (percent clay) as determinants.
3- Cropland erosion control should be geared to the period (season) of
maximum erosion and transport. In much of the Great Lakes region
this period is from January through April. Residue management
to keep the soil in place is likely to be more effective than
measures to reduce sediment transport, especially on the finer soils.
H. Phosphorus fertilizer and manure management should more accurately
reflect crop requirements and soil-test levels. Summaries of soil
test results should be used to monitor available nutrient levels in
regions of intensive cultivation.
5. Modeling should proceed to determine the degree of soluble, available
and total P reduction that might be attained per unit of sediment
reduction.
6. A tributary monitoring program should be developed to periodically
scan water and sediment for toxic chemical discharges.
3. INTRODUCTION
The Maumee River was chosen by PLUARG to be one of four pilot water-
sheds to be studied on the U. S. side of the Great Lakes drainage basin
as part of Task C - pilot watershed studies. Since there was already
an ongoing PL-92-500 Sec. 108 demonstration project in Black Creek basin,
an Indiana tributary to the Maumee, the Task C project was directed to
the Ohio portion of the Maumee to supplement the work being done in Black
Creek.
The objectives of PLUARG are to determine the effects of prevailing
land use practices on pollution entering the Great Lakes. Specifically,
the PLUARG Task C objectives are to answer the following questions:
1. From what sources and from what causes (under what conditions,
management practices) are pollutants contributed to surface
and ground water?
2. What is the extent of pollutant contributions and what are the
unit area loadings by season from a given land use or practice
to surface or ground water?
-------
-5-
3- To what degree are pollutants transmitted from sources to
boundary vaters?
h. Are remedial measures required? What are they and how effective
might they be?
5. Were deficiencies in technology identified? If so, what is
recommended?
As we will see later, the Maumee River Basin is primarily
agricultural in land use, and studies by the U. S. Army Corps of
Engineers (1975) and the Great Lakes Basin Commission (l9?8) have
indicated that diffuse sources account for about 75% of the phosphorus
and nitrogen entering Lake Erie from the Maumee. Because of the
previous monitoring efforts on the Maumee by the Corps of Engineers,
it was decided to place emphasis in the Task C project on soil and
nutrient loss from small agricultural watersheds and on specialized
studies on sediment transport.
Specific objectives of this study are:
1. To determine the effects of land-use practices on the loss of
sediment and associated chemicals from representative small
agricultural watersheds in the Basin and to compare these
data with downstream reference samples.
2. To study and determine the physical, chemical and mineralogical
properties of major soils in the Basin and relate these data
to their susceptibility to erosion and fluvial transport.
3. To determine the physical, chemical, and mineralogical properties
of suspended sediments and bottom sediments in order to identify
fluvial transport mechanisms and to evaluate equilibrium
stabilities of minerals in suspended and bottom sediments.
k. To determine phosphate sorption-desorption and precipitation
interactions with sediment characteristics and concentration
levels.
5- To determine heavy metals leaving small agricultural watersheds
as contrasted to downstream reference sources.
This report presents the findings of our studies in the period 1975-77.
It will draw on the research of other workers in the Maumee to give as
complete a picture as possible.
3.1 Study Approach
The basic approach of this study was to measure the generation of
sediment and nutrients from intensively cultivated cropland under prevailing
management practices and to compare these losses with the yield of the
same materials at the downstream discharge point. The study investigated
the differences in pollutant generation on several of the major soils of
the Maumee Basin and determined the effects of season and soil characteris-
tics on sediment and nutrient generation. Pollutant transport by tile
drainage was also studied because of the extensive use of underground
tile for drainage in the Basin.
-------
-6-
The chemical and mineralogical nature of suspended and "bottom
sediments was studied and compared to the soils of the Basin in order
to tetter understand the changes in sediment during fluvial transport.
Levels of heavy metals in soil, sediment and surface and ground water
were surveyed throughout the Basin; pesticides in sediment were also scanned.
Yields of sediment and nutrients from the Black Creek Sec. 108
study in Allen County, Indiana were used for comparison with those
from the small plots studied in Ohio and the downstream yields at
Waterville (approximately 90% of the drainage basin).
3.2 Study Methods
The basic approach of this study was to measure sediment and
nutrient loss from small agricultural watersheds and plots on major
soils in the Maumee River Basin and compare these losses with those
from larger areas in the Basin.
Five sites were chosen in Defiance County on four major soils of
the Basin (Figure 1 and Table l) ranging from 0.6 to 3.2 hectares in area.
Surface runoff was monitored at all sites and tile drainage on the Lenawee,
Paulding and Blount sites. A continuous-flow monitoring svstem and
integrated sampler were used so that all events were monitored and
sampled. The sampling period was from May 1975 - May 1977. All
sites were fall-plowed and planted to soybeans, so differences in
sediment and nutrient loss are a function of soil differences. Rain-
fall was monitored at each site. At the OARDC branch research station
in Wood County, eight plots (O.OU ha) on Hoytville soil were subjected
to a number of different tillage treatments, and runoff and tile drainage were
monitored. Sediment and nutrient loading data were obtained from
two other study areas in the Maumee, the Black Creek Sec. 108 study in
Allen County, Indiana and the monitoring study by Heidelberg College
at Waterville, Ohio on the main stem of the Maumee (Figure l). Similar
dataware also obtained from the Portage River TMACOG Sec. 208 study.
The Portage River Basin is adjacent to the Maumee and has similar land
use.
The drainage areas of the various study sites vary from 0.0^-3.2
hectares for the Ohio Task C study to 735 to 890 hectares in the Black
Creek study, 1109 km in the Portage, and 17,058 km at Waterville.
Comparison of unit area sediment and nutrient losses from these areas
will give some indication of delivery ratio, and a comparison of
monthly losses will indicate active runoff periods on the upland land-
scape as well as for the whole Basin.
Table h describes the data sets used in this study as obtained
from the studies described above. The data pertaining to the Black
Creek Watersheds are from Purdue University (Black Creek Report, 1977).
The data for the Maumee River at Waterville and the Portage. River
at Woodville were obtained from the River Studies Laboratory at
Heidelberg College, Tiffin, Ohio. The River Studies Laboratory performed
all sampling and laboratory analysis for both the USACOE and TMACOG. The
sampling for both programs were pefformed in exactly the same fashion
differing only in the time period of performance. Sampling was
continuous from January 1975 to June 1977 (the period covered in this
report), and is continuing.
-------
FIGURE 1. SAMPLING SITES IN THE MAUMEE RIVER BASIN.
Jhe Maumee River Basin
,4k Water samples
"jit Watersheds
1 — Hammersmith Roselms
2 — Crites Roselms
3 — Lenewee
4 — Blount
5 — Paulding
6 — Hoytville Plots
#— Continuous mass
transport stations
o Continuous rain
gaging stations
fl t __ '0
50 _ M
MICHIGAN
OHIO
I.-*-—v >
I
—J
-------
TABLE 1. SUMMARY OF WATERSHED SITES AND PLOTS.
CODE
111
201
301 &
302
501 &
502
1*02
6ll to
682
DOMINANT
SOIL
Roselms
Roselms
Lenawee
Paulding
Blount
Hoytville
PHYSIOGRAPHIC
REGION
A
Lake
Plain
V
Till
Plain
Lake
Plain
GEOLOGIC SLOPE
MATERIALS (%}
DEFIANCE COUNTY
A 3-15
3-5
Lake
Clays
< 1
vk i
Clay Loam 3-k
Till
WOOD COUNTY
Clay < 1
Till
HECTARES
3.2
0.6
0.8
0.1
1.0
0.9
0.0^
DRAINAGE
SYSTEM REMARKS
Surface Complex Slopes
Surface —X — -^
121 >jc
Surface & 111
Tile
Surface &
Tile
Surface & Dissected Uplands
Tile ,
Co
Surface & OARDC Drainage
Tile Plots
-------
-9-
Physical, chemical and mineralogical characteristics of major soils
in the Basin, as well as suspended and bottom sediments, vere determined
to better understand how soil is eroded and transported and the changes
that sediment undergoes during fluvial transport. In particular, the
chemistry of soil and sediment phosphorus was studied to determine how
soluble P is adsorbed and/or desorbed by sediment and the extent to
which sediment is enriched with P during erosion and transport.
The concentration of heavy metals in Basin soils, bottom sediments,
stream and well water, and bedrock were surveyed to determine major
sources of metals in the Basin. Mixing of point source metal discharge
with sediment in the river and uptake by stream vegetation was determined
by detailed sampling above and below a chromium discharge on the Ottawa
River at Lima, Ohio.
The phosphorus, pesticide and metal studies are reported in Volume 2
of this Report and will not be discussed further in this volume.
3.21 Monitoring Sites in Defiance County
Five small agronomic sites were chosen in Defiance County to
monitor soil and nutrient loss under prevailing crop management
practices. The sites chosen are dominated by a single soil series
and the five sites represent four of the more important series in the
Basin: Paulding, Blount, Roselms and Lenawee (similar to Latty). The
sites were selected with the following criteria:
1. Topography was typical for that series
2. The watershed was dominated by a single series
3. The watershed could be defined hydrologically
h. There were no septic tank or livestock waste discharges
within the' watershed
5. Cooperation from the landowner was available
6. Site was accessible from the road, had adequate flow
outlet, and electrical service could be brought to the site.
Using these criteria, a large number of sites were examined and
five were selected. Table 1 summarizes the site characteristics and
Figure I identifies their location. A more detailed description of
each site is given next. A 3-digit code was used to identify the
sites and for identification of samples from each site:
First digit: 1-6 identifies the primary site
Second digit: 0-8 identifies the sub-site within the primary site
Third digit: 102; 1 refers to surface runoff and 2 to tile
drainage, which were monitored separately.
-------
-10-
Hammersmith Roselms (IPX): This site is located in the central area
of Defiance County and in the Lake Plain. The soil and plot map is
given in Figure 2 , and the area is shown in Figure 3 . The drainage
area is 3.2 ha (8.0 acres) and is composed of Roselms on most of the
area with Broughton on the steep slopes. The watershed has well—
defined drainage way (Figure 3 ), and the monitoring system is placed
at the point where the drainage way exits the watershed. Slopes vary
from 1-3$ on the more level part of the watershed to as high as 15$
where the landscape breaks into the drainage way. Three monitoring
sites were developed on this site, surface drainage of the entire
watershed (ill) and two small plots, one on top of the slope "break
(121), the other on the more sloping area (131) which was occupied
by Broughton soil. Monitoring was established by summer of 1975-
The sub plots were 3 m x 13-3 m ( 10 ft x ^3-5 ft) in area. The
subplots were designed to study the relative soil and nutrient loss
from two different slope components on the same watershed.
Crites Roselms (20X); This site is located in the north central area
of Defiance County in the Lake Plain. The soil and plot map is given
in Figure ^ . The drainage area is 0.6 ha (1.6 acres) and has a
fairly uniform slope (3-5$), with Roselms soil dominating the area.
The entire area was monitored for surface runoff (201). The site
was considered to be a duplicate for the Hammersmith Roselms site
(ill) although it does not have as steep slopes. The Roselms soils
are the most steeply sloping soils in the Lake Plain and are formed as
the drainage cuts its way into the headland, resulting in well—
developed channels which are susceptible to gully erosion.
Rohrs Lenawee (30X): This site is located in the western area of
Defiance County and near the edge of the Lake Plain. The soil and
plot map is given in Figure 5 , and the area is illustrated in
Figure 6 . The area surface drained (301) and monitored is 0.8 ha
(2.0 acres) and was outlined by throwing up a berm around the area.
The very flat nature of the soils in the area make it impossible to
define a natural drainage area. The soils in the plot area are
Lenawee and Hoytville over lacustrine clay. In order to study the loss
of sediment and nutrients by tile drainage, 3 lines of tile were in-
stalled in the plot area. Standard 10 cm (h inch) diameter corrugated
plastic tile was laid by a trencher to a depth of 3 feet. Tile
lines were TO m (250 feet) long and spaced lU m (50 feet) apart
(recommended spacing in the area). The central tile line was monitored,
and, by having lines on either side of the one being monitored, the
drainage area (0.1 ha, 0.29 acre) could be computed. The tile drainage
area was entirely in Lenawee soil.
Heisler Blount (UOX); This site is located in the northwest corner
of Defiance County and is in the till plain region of the Maumee
River Basin. The soil and plot map is given in Figure 7 and
illustrated in Figure 8 . The area is bermed on the upslope perimeter
and on the lower side to channel the flow toward the flume. The upper
part of the site is Blount loam while the lower end is Mermill loam,
which represents the unconsolidated soil eroded from the top of the
slope and deposited downslope. The surface drainage area (Uoi) is
0.8 ha (2.1 acres). A previously installed tile system was also
monitored (kQ2),and the drainage area has been estimated to be between
2 and U acres. The tile drainage pattern shown in the plot diagram
(dotted lines) (Figure 7 ) is only speculative.
-------
-11-
FIGURE 2. LAYOUT OF HAMMERSMITH ROSELMS WATERSHED. (HEAVY LINE
DENOTES THE MONITORED AREA.)
Hammersmith Roselms (10X)
Location: Noble township, T4N, R48, Sec. 6,
Abandoned Road ^
BvB - Broughton scl
BvC2 - Broughton scl
BwDa - Broughton Clay
Pa - Paulding Clay
RsA • Roselms scl
RsB - Roselms scl
RsB2 - Roselms scl
1 inch = 165 feet
-------
-12-
(P|PPPi^^^M!P®%^^
4 r *
A: Sampling shelter. Front end is open to allow runoff to enter the
sediment drop box.
B, C: Component plots on different slope positions, showing the V-shaped
flumes .
FIGURE 3. HAMMERSMITH ROSELMS (lOX) WATERSHED, DEFIANCE COUNTY, OHIO.
-------
-13-
FIGURE 4. LAYOUT OF CRITES ROSELMS WATERSHED (HEAVY LINE DENOTES
MONITORED AREA)
Crites Roselms (20X)
Location: Tiffin township, T5N, R4E, Sec. 19, NWx/4
RsA - Roselms scl
RsB - Roselms scl
RsA/L - Roselms scl over loam
HnA - Haskins loam
1 inch = 165 feet
-------
F1GURE 5. LAYOUT OF ROHRS LENAWEE WATERSHED (HEAVY LINE DENOTES
MONITORED AREA AND DOTTED LINES ARE TILE)
Rohrs Lenawee (30X)
Location: Mark township, T4N, R2E, Sec. 18, NWV4
Hv* - Hoytville clay over lacustrine
La - Latty silty clay
Le - Lenawee scl
1 inch = 165 feet
-------
-15-
FIGUEE 6. LENAWEE (30X) WATERSHED, DEFIANCE COUNTY, OHIO.
-------
-16-
FIGURE 7. LAYOUT OF HEISLER BLOUNT WATERSHED (HEAVY LINE DENOTES
THE MONITORED AREA AND DOTTED LINES ARE TILE.)
Heisler Blount (40X)
Location: Farmer township, T5N, R2E, Sec. 19, NWV4
BnA - Blount loam
BnB - Blount loam
GIB - Glynwood loam
Md - Mermill loam
Pm - Pewamo silty clay loam
1 inch = 165 feet
-------
-17-
FIGURE 8. BLOUNT (1*OX) WATERSHED, DEFIANCE COUNTY, OHIO.
-------
-18-
Speiser Paulding (50X): This site is located in the south-central
area of Defiance County in the Lake Plain region. The soil and plot
map is given in Figure 9 and illustrated in Figure 10 . The
major part of the plot is occupied by Paulding-Roselms clay, a
series which has all the characteristics of a typical Paulding clay
but whose clay content is minimal for Paulding. About a third of
the plot is Paulding clay itself. The surface-drained area (501)
is 0.9 ha (2.5 acres) and is defined by throwing up a berm,as was
done for the Lenawee site. This soil is normally surface-drained
by using shallow field ditches, and, in this instance, the ditches were
used to carry surface runoff to the sampler. Tile drains were installed
in the same manner as for the Lenawee site; the central tile 55-T m
(.220 feet) was monitored with a drainage area of O.U9 ha (0.23 acres).
3.22 Surface Runoff and Tile Drainage Measurement - Defiance County Sites
Surface Runoff: It was decided early in the development of this
research that sophisticated instrumentation of the sites in Defiance
County was not feasible or warranted. A number of physical restraints
guided the selection of monitoring devices: both small and large events
must be monitored; equipment would have to be automatic because events
on small areas are very rapid and the sites had to be serviced by a
single technician; it was important to be able to operate in the winter
because much of the runoff occurs in the initial storms after thawing
in the early spring; there was a general lack of hydraulic head at all
sites. The system that was developed had the following basic principle:
the runoff was channeled over a drop structure and a known fraction
of the flow was intercepted. The intercepted flow was then passed over
a Coshocton wheel,which intercepted another fraction. This water
then discharged into a sump. A sump pump of known discharge rate
(gallons per minute) was activated when water in the sump reached a
given level. The pump was connected to a timer,which recorded time of
pumping. The water was pumped up into a container from which a sample
could be taken. By knowing the fraction of total runoff intercepted
and the pump rate and time of pumping, total runoff in a given interval
was calculated. The sample taken from the pump discharge represented
runoff for that interval. Samples were taken after each event.
A diagram of the equipment used is given in Figures 11 , 12 and 13.
Figure 11 shows a standard SCS concrete drop-box, which is used to carry
runoff from surface drains to the stream or drainage ditch without
causing undue erosion of the bank. A similar structure was used at all
five sites in Defiance County. The perimeter of the box was levelled
so that flow would be uniform around it. A flume with adjustable
vertical slit (Figure 12 ) was bolted to the front rim of the drop-box.
The runoff from the slit fell over a Coshocton wheel (Figure 12 ) and
then from the Coshocton wheel into a sump,which was bolted to the floor
of the drop-box (Figure 12 ). The runoff was pumped by a "Haynes
Demon Drainer" submersible pump. This particular model was used
because it would pump to near-dryness and this prevented an accumula-
tion of sediment in the sump. Recovery of sediment was tested in
the laboratory during the development and calibration of this equipment
and was found to be acceptable. The pump was activated by electrodes
set to turn on when approximately 0.1 inch of runoff was received. The
pump could also ce activated manually. The pump was connected to a
timer,which could either accumulate pumping time or be reset between events,
-------
-19-
FIGURE 9. LAYOUT OF SPEISER PAULDING WATERSHED (HEAVY LINE DENOTES
MONITORED AREA AND DOTTED LINES ARE TILE.)
Speiser Paulding (SOX)
Location: Delaware township,
T4N, R3E, Sec. 15, SWV4
Pa - Paulding clay
RsA - Paulding - Roselms clay
1 inch =165 feet
-------
-20-
FIGURE 10. PAULDING (50X) WATERSHED, DEFIANCE COUNTY, OHIO,
-------
-21-
& > ' -VJT^
Se- -'•'"
FIGURE 11. SEDIMENT DROP BOX USED TO COLLECT RUNOFF FROM DEFIANCE
COUNTY WATERSHEDS.
-------
-22-
A: Variable slit flume which diverts fraction of runoff into Goshocton
wheel (B).
C: Sump collects discharge from Coshocton wheel; discharge is then
pumped into sample container (Figure 13).
FIGURE 12. SYSTEM FOR MONITORING AND SAMPLING SURFACE RUNOFF AT
DEFIANCE COUNTY WATERSHEDS.
-------
-23-
.'C'3$i$&:
A: Sump for collecting runoff. Contains sump pump which discharges into
sample container (B) .
C: Sample container for tile drainage.
FIGURE 13. SAMPLE CONTAINERS FOR RUNOFF AND TILE DRAINAGE AT DEFIANCE
COUNTY WATERSHEDS.
-------
-2k-
The runoff was pumped into a 20-gallon plastic garbage can with a
fitted lid (Figure 13). After each event, a subsample (usually 1
gallon) was taken from the container "by a faucet at the "bottom after
thorough mixing. The remaining sample was discarded. The entire
system was housed in a shed open only at the front,where the drop-box
faced the field. The equipment was winterized "by the use of heat
lamps directed onto the Coshocton wheel and mounted in the sump and
garbage can lids. Heating tape was used for all pipes. Even during
the extremely low temperatures of 1977» the system never failed to
operate during winter events.
Two subplots on the Hammersmith Roselms watershed (Figure 3 )
were established to measure runoff losses of sediment and nutrients
from different slope positions on the landscape. One plot was
situated on the top, more level portion of the watershed, while the
other was placed on the steep, breaking part of the watershed as it
sloped into the drainage channel. A steel V-flume was used to
concentrate flow from the plot, which was bermed on the sides and rear
to contain flow. The plots were 3 by 13.3m in size. A 2.5 cm-buried
pipe with an inlet at the bottom and center of the flume carried
runoff to the sampling shelter (Figure 3 ). A portion of the
runoff was taken by a Coshocton wheel device (Figure 1^), where it
was collected and the volume measured manually. Samples were taken
after each event for analysis.
Tile drainage. In all cases, a single tile line was monitored,
except for the Blount site (k02),where a small tile system was
monitored by intercepting the main at the point where it discharged
into the drainage ditch. The tile was usually at a depth of 3 feet,
and a specially constructed fiberglas sump was set into the ground
in the same sampling shelter used for surface runoff. The sump (Figure 15'
intercepted the tile and collected all discharge. As in the case of
surface runoff, a calibrated sump pump was used to pump the water
out of the sump. A timer was used as before to measure pumping time?
and the pump was activated at a given water level by electrode; it
could also be activated manually. An orifice inserted into the
discharge pipe from the pump delivered a sample of the water to a
20-gallon plastic garbage can,where it was subsampled as described
previously. This sample was considered to be representative of the
tile flow for a given time interval,since all of the flow was sampled.
The amount of sample taken by the orifice was adjusted by a valve.
Sample Handling and Processing - All sites in Defiance County
were serviced by technician every 48 hours or sooner if significant
precipitation occurred, A 1-gallon subsample of the sample in the
garbage can was taken after thorough mixing and the remainder discarded.
Sumps were pumped dry manually after subsampling, time of pumping
was recorded and rainfall at the site was measured from a manual
rain gauge. Samples were stored in a refrigerator at U° C at field
headquarters until they could be transported to the laboratory at
Columbus. Samples usually reached the laboratory within 7 days or
less. Additional measurements taken in the field included depth of
snow cover, depth to frozen soil and all pertinent details on
field operations (times of planting, plowing, harvesting, rates of
fertilization, etc.).
-------
-25-
FIGURE lh. FLUME AND COSHOCTON WHEEL FOR SAMPLING COMPONENT PLOT
RUNOFF AT HAMMERSMITH ROSELMS WATERSHED, DEFIANCE COUNTY,
OHIO.
-------
-26-
A: Fiberglas sump which intersects field tile. Contains submersible
sump pump with flow-activating electrodes.
B: Sampling valve which diverts portion of sump pump discharge into
sample container.
-------
-27-
Cropping practices: Agreements were made with all the farmer-
operators to farm the sites to our specifications. All sites were
fall-plowed with moldboard plow and planted to soybeans in the
spring. Fall plowing is the most common cultural practice in
Defiance County and many other counties in the Maumee River Basin
(Table 10 ), and soybeans are a major crop in the region (Table 8).
Therefore, the practices used in 1975-1977 were representative of
those used in the Basin. Arrangements were also made to throw up
berms around the defined plot area. A summary of practices is given
in Table 2.
3.23 Surface Runoff and Tile Drainage Measurement"- Hoytville plots
In 197*1, a research facility was constructed at the NW Branch,
Ohio Agricultural Research and Development Center (OARDC),located
at Hoytville in Wood County (Figure 1) . to study the loss of soil
and nutrients by runoff and tile drainage. Eight plots, each 30.5 m
(100 ft) x 12.1 m (hO ft) were laid out, four in a block with a
sampling house in the center (Figure 16 ). Each plot was trenched
to a depth of four feet and heavy plastic sheeting was placed against
the plot wall; the soil was then backfilled to hold the plastic in
place. Earth berms (15-30 cm high) were raised on the sides of the
plots and seeded with fescue. The back of the plots were left open to
allow passage of equipment; a berm was then formed after each operation
to enclose the plot. A concrete gutter was built on the other end of
the plots with a 10 cm (h inch) diameter drain to collect runoff.
The drain was connected by 10 cm (h inch) plastic pipe (placed at
90 cm depth) to the sampling house. A 10 cm (h inch) perforated
corrugated plastic tile was installed in the center of each plot at
a depth of 90 cm. The tiles were also connected by 10 cm (h inch)
solid pipe to the sampling house. Additional field tile was placed
outside the plot area to keep water other than that intercepted by
the plots from entering the area. The hydraulic conductivity of
the soil (Hoytville clay) was low enough to prevent any significant
water movement between plots. The area between the plots and sampling
house was seeded with fescue to prevent erosion.
The sampling procedure used was similar to that used to measure
tile drainage on the Defiance County sites. Fiberglas sumps inter-
cepted the flow from the surface runoff and tile drain lines. Sump
pumps (Hydromatic submersible pump) and timers were used to measure
flow as described previously, and water was sampled as before by
placing an orificein the discharge line from the sump pump. The
sampled water was collected in 1-gallon or 5-gallon plastic bottles
housed in a refrigerated (h° C) compartment, so that the samples
were refr"; Derated immediately. Samples were returned to the laboratory
at Columbus within 1 week or less. Samplers were serviced daily and
sumps were pumped dry between events. Precipitation records were
kept by the personnel at the research station, vhich has a 20-year weather
record.
The facility was completed early in 1975, and none r.'low and
sediment monitoring was initiated in April 1975; wat-:v quality
sampling was begun in May 1975- The previous fall, ~; plots were
fall-plowed and left bare until planting in Ma;/ Y975 • Jhe area had
been in sod for at least 10 years prior to construction of the plots
and had received no fertilizer during that period. In May 1975,
-------
-28-
TABLE 2. SUMMARY OF CROP MANAGEMENT PRACTICES ON DEFIANCE COUNTY SITES
Tillage
Planting
Fertilization
Pesticides
Harvest
Tillage
Planting
Fertilization
Pesticides
Hammersmith Roselms (lOX)
Disked on May 25
Moldboard-ploved
Nov. 7
Soybeans planted on
May 25 in 30-inch
rows
None
None
Oct. 16
12-15 bu/ac
Disked May 27;
partially washed out
on May 29, redisked
June 10, chisel plowed
Oct. 15
May 27; replanted
June 10, soybeans
drilled in 9 inch
rows
None
1 Ib/ac Lorox;
1 qt/ac Lasso
May 27
1976
Harrowed and disked
May 12
Moldboard plowed
Oct. 5
Soybeans planted
May 12 in 30-inch
rows
200 Ib/ac of
19-19-19 broadcast
April lit
None
Oct. 2
15 bu/ac
Grites Roselms (20X)
1976
Disked April 12
1977*
Disked May
Soybeans drilled May 22,
no germination; replanted
June 8 in 30-inch rows
None
1 Ib/ac Lorox; 2 qt/ac
Lasso; at planting
Soybeans planted
in 9~inch rows
May 2i*
None
None
197'
Harvest
Oct. 5; 30 bu/ac
Oct. U; 20 bu/ac
-------
-29-
TABLE 2. (CONTimJED)
Tillage
Planting
Fertili zer
Pesticides
Harvest
Tillage
Planting
Fertilization
Pesticides
Disked May 25
Fall-plowed Oct. 16
Rohrs Lenawee (30X)
1976
Disked May 13
Fall-plowed Oct. 23
Soybeans planted in
30- inch rows May 25
130 Ib/ac 0-23-30
May 25 applied in
row
10 l"b/ac Lasso-banded
at planting
Soybeans planted in
30- inch rows May 20
130 Ib/ac 0-23-30
banded May 20
10 Ib/ac Lasso-
banded at planting
Oct. 5; U5 bu/ac Oct. 8; kO-k5 bu/ac
Heisler Elount
1975
Disked May 2k
Fall-plowed Oct. 15
Soybeans planted in
30-inch rows May 2k
None
1 Ib/ac Lorox,
2 qt/ac Lasso
May 2k
1976
Disked May 13
Oct. 12 chisel- plowed
Soybeans drilled
May 13
100 Ib/ac U-10-10
liquid fertilizer
May 13
1 Ib/ac Lorox, 2 qt/ac
Lasso May 13
1977
1977
Harvest
Oct. 5; 30 bu/ac
Oct. k; 30 bu/ac
-------
-30-
TABLE 2. (CONTINUED)
Speiser Paulding (50X)
Tillage
Planting
Fertilization
Pesticides
1975
DiskedMay 16
chisel plowed Oct. 23
Soybeans planted
May 20 in 30-inch rows
None
8 Ib/ac granular
Amiben at planting
1976
April 26 disked
Oct. 23 chisel plowed
Soybeans planted
May 22 5.n 30-inch rows
None
8 Ib/ac granular
Amiben at planting
* Monitoring of all sites was discontinued in May, 1977 5 the project termination date,
-------
-31-
FIGURE 16. RUNOFF AND TILE DRAINAGE PLOTS AT OARDC RESEARCH
STATION, HOYTVILLE, OHIO.
-------
-32-
soybeans were planted and the monitoring period, May-November 1975, was
used to measure the variability between plots. Table 3 summarizes
all crop management activity in 1975-1977. in November 1975 a tillage
variable was made on the plots. Four tillage treatments were selected:
1. Moldboard-plow in the fall
2. Chisel-plow in the fall
3. Strip-rototill in the fall
IK No till
These four treatments were assigned at random within each of the two
blocks, the blocks serving as replicates. In the strip-rototill
tillage treatment, a rototiller was used to cultivate a strip of soil
approximately 15 cm wide and 15 cm deep, the strips spaced at 30-inch
(76 cm) intervals, leaving crop residue between the strips. All tillage
treatments were made parallel to the long axis, as well as planting. In
fall 1976, a single disking was substituted for the rototill treatment.
The effectiveness of tillage for erosion control is a function of the
amount of the soil surface that is kept covered by crop residue. In terms
of percent residue cover, the treatments might be ranked:
no-till > strip-rototill > chisel-plow > moldboard-plow
It should be recognized that soybeans provide less residue cover than
corn. On Morley soil, no-till corn gave 53-78$ cover while no-till
soybeans gave only 26%; chisel-plow corn was 29-57$ as compared to
12% for soybeans, and moldboard-plow gave h% with corn and only 1%
with soybeans ( Mannering and Johnson, 1975).
As can be seen from Table 3 } no nitrogen fertilizer was added
to the plots.
3.2i4 Analysis of watershed and plot water samples
The water samples received from the various sites were processed
and analyzed for a number of parameters; some parameters were measured
on all samples, some were measured on periodic samples ,while others were
measured on all samples for a period of time and then discontinued.
As soon as samples were received in the laboratory, the 1-gallon
polyethylene bottles were shaken thoroughly and a 250 ml sample was placed
in another bottle and refrigerated (Figure 17 ). If the sample contained
significant amount of sediment, the remainder of the sample was treated
with 100 ml of IN MgCl2 per gallon to flocculate the sediment. The sediment
was allowed to settle, the supernatant discarded ,and the sediment was
freeze-dried and saved for further analysis. A 100 ml sample of the
unfiltered sample was filtered through a preweighed 1.0 urn Nucleopore
membrane filter. The sediment and filter were oven-dried, reweighed,
and sediment concentration calculated. The filtered solution was
refrigerated until further analysis. Tests showed that a 1.0 urn filter
was effective in retaining fine clay. The filtered sample was routinely
analyzed for: pH, electrical conductivity (E. C.), Ca, Mg, K, Na, C03,
HC03, N03 + N02 , NH3 , and filtered reactive-P. Analysis for pH, E. C.,
C03, HC03, Ca, Mg, K, and Na was discontinued after one year because
of lack of variability of the data and the secondary importance of those
parameters.
-------
-33-
TABLE 3. SUMMARY OF CROP MANAGEMENT PRACTICES ON THE HOYTVILLE PLOTS
(1974-1977).
197^
1. Tillage - plots were fall-moldboard plowed and leveled in August
1975
1. Tillage - seedbed was prepared by cultivating on May 15
2. Planting - soybean variety "Beeson" was planted on May 15, using a
2-row planter and 30-inch spacing
3. Pesticide - 0.5 Ib/ac Sencor, 2.25 Ib/ac Lasso, May 16
k. Harvest - beans were combined on October 7, using a research small
plot harvester. Yield was measured (59-^ bu/ac)
5. Tillage - Plots were tilled according to treatment on October 30
6. Fertilization - 3^ kg/ha P and 100 kg/ha K were broadcast on the
plots just prior to tillage
1976
1. Tillage - seedbed wr.s prepared by field cultivation on May 5
(except no-till plots,which were untouched)
2. Fertilization - row fertilizer 7 kg/ha N, 12 kg/ha P, 22 kg/ha K; May 5
3. Planting - Planted "Williams" variety soybeans on May 5; 30-inch rows
h. Pesticide - 0.5 Ib/ac Sencor, 2 qts/ac Lasso, 1 Ib/ac Roundup
5. Harvest - October 5 (1*1.1 bu/ac)
6. Fertilizer - 31* kg/ha P and 83 kg/ha K was broadcast before tillage;
October 26
7- Tillage - November 5
1977
1. Tillage - All plots except no-till were field-cultivated on May 13
2. Fertilization - 7 kg/ha N, 12 kg/ha P and 22 kg/ha K was applied in
row at planting; May 13
3. Planting - "Beeson" variety soybeans in 30-inch rows; May 13
It. Pesticide - 0.5 Ib/ac Sencor, 2 qts/ac Lasso, 1 Ib/ac Roundux)
5. Harvest - September 29 (H8.3 bu/ac)
-------
FIGURE 17. FLOWSHEET: RUNOFF AND TILE DRAINAGE SAMPLES.
Reactive
ortho-P
1 gal. polyeth.
unfiltered water
Wet
Sediment
Cation
Exchange
Capacity
NT
<2 u
Mineralogy
\
Sediment
Concentration
Flocculate IN BaClg decant"
Particle size
Distribution
Unfiltered
Sample
Polyethl. bottle
Filtered vith
I'.O u Nucleopore
filter
Filtered water
50-100 ml. poly.
Ca
Mg
K
Na
CO.
HCO,
PH
E.C.
Total N
Total P
Carbonates
Organic
Carbon
i
U)
-------
-35-
The unfiltered sample was analyzed for: total P, total N, and
carbonates; organic carbon was analyzed for a few samples.
Some samples were occassionally analyzed for other parameters and
these will be discussed later for those specific studies. All procedures
used are given in Appendix.
3.3 Calculation of Loadings
3.31 Major and Minor Sub-basins
Loadings for the Maumee and Portage River basins and the two Black
Creek sub-basins were estimated by the use of the Beale ratio estimator and
the algorithm for its solution provided in the Task C Handbook (IJC, 1976)
and other communications (Clark, 1977). The theory behind and the utility
of the estimator has been discussed by several other investigators
(Konrad et al, 1977) (Sonzongni et al, 1978) (Ostry et al, 1978), and will
not be discussed further here beyond justification for the method of
stratification used.
Sampling methods in the Maumee and Portage River studies meet the
requirements of randomness in that samples have been taken from the
two rivers every six hours, except for equipment downtime, for over
three years. Of these samples at least one has been analyzed every day.
In the event of a rise in the hydrograph due to the occurrence of storm
runoff, all four of the samples taken during the course of a day and
for the duration of the runoff event are analyzed. Sampling frequency
is not otherwise altered during storms.
In the Black Creek studies the sampling is non-random. Samples
there were taken on a one-sample-per-week basis except in the case of
a storm of more than 2.5 cm of surface runoff to start stage-actuated
automatic sampler with collection of samples at 30-minute intervals.
A third flow regime is designated for all flows between a defined base-
flow (flow < 0.0221 m3/sec at site 2 or < 0.0107 nr/sec at site 6)
and the large-event flows (flow > 0.218 m /sec at site 2 and site 6).
No samples are specifically collected in this flow interval unless they
were by chance collected during the once-weekly grab-sampling program.
Since it was desirable to determine loadings on a monthly basis for
the purpose of examining variations in sediment and nutrient delivery
through the year, twelve strata across one year of data are immediately
created. For the Maumee and Portage three additional strata are defined
within each month:
1) baseflow - level of flow within each month below in which hour-to-hour
variations in flow appear to be random;
2) rising hydrograph - the upside of the hydrograph; and
3) falling hydrograph - the downside and return to baseflow or
new storm.
At the Black Creek sites the same strata are defined and a fourth for all
small-event flows in the interval defined above is used. The only other
-------
-36-
difference in definition of strata for Black Creek is that the baseflow
value is uniform throughout the year, whereas for the major basins it
is defined differently for each month.
Thereafter, calculation of loadings and the error term proceed
as described in Sonzogni et al (1978).
Table 1* summarizes the observations used in the loading calculations.
TABLE 4. NUMBERS OF OBSERVATIONS IN STUDY WATERSHEDS
Dissolved
Inorganic
Phosphorus
Maumee
Portage
Black
Creek
Site 2
Black
Creek
Site 6
1975
1976
1977
1975
1976
1977
1975
1976
1975
1976
Ii77
601
1*09
^87
569
368
61*1
397
^55
1*09
Total
Phosphorus
1*68
631*
1*21
1*27
568
387
61*1
397
1*55
1*09
Suspended
Sediment
^59
619
1*20
1*65
568
388
6Uo
397
^55
1*09
Nitrate+
Nitrite-N
1*65
623
396
502
573
368
61*1
397
1*5^
1*09
Ammonia-N
1*73
590
1*13
1*60
575
366
61*1
397
1*52
1*09
3.32 Experimental Plots
Loadings from the thirteen experimental plots were calculated strictly
by the multiplication of a "flow-weighted mean" concentration by the total
flow for each storm event for surface runoff and total periodic flow from
tiles. These plots are very small (O.OU-3.2 ha} and surface flow is
ephemeral, occurring only for the duration of storm events. Flow from
the tiles is more sustained but still intermittent. The total flow from
each event is continuously sampled and composited by a flow-proportional
pump. The concentration of the composite sample is considered to represent
the flow-weighted mean concentration of the runoff occurring during a
single storm event. Loadings from these plots are presented in tabular
form for each month of the two-year sampling period for comparison with
the monthly loadings of the other basins.
3.33 Other Loading Estimates
All calculations of loadings, including total loads and unit area
yields,are based .on the mean daily load determined for each month for
the major and sub-basins and on the total monthly load calculated for the
experimental plots. The standard error of the mean daily loading estimates
is presented in the tables with those estimates. There is no error term
presented for the experimental plot-loading estimates.
-------
-37-
3.3^ Application of Experimental Plot Data to Major Basin Data
The experimental plot watersheds vere chosen as representative of
major soil groups found in the Maumee Basin. In order to compare the
yields from these plots to yields from the other watersheds in the study,
it was necessary to derive some mean value of the yields from the plots.
A simple arithmetic mean would of course weight soils that occur less
frequently too much and soils that are abundant too lightly. We felt
that an area-weighted mean could be used to effect the extrapolation of
the experimental plot data for the comparison.
Obviously, the six soils of the plots do not perfectly represent
all the soils found in the Maumee River Basin, but they do represent
all major physiographic types found and a full range of slope categories,
drainage types and soil textures. The only purpose of this reclassification
is to provide figures for the extrapolation. No further use should or
will be made of these figures. The soil series and their area weights are:
Area Weight
Roselms (3-15$ slope) 0.05
Roselms (3-5$ slope) 0.23
Lenawee 0.15
Blount 0.28
Paulding 0.08
Hoytville 0.21
-------
-38-
4. RESULTS
4.1 Description of the Basin
4.11 Topography and drainage
The low relief topography of the Basin is the result of glacial action and
subsequent stream erosion. Elevations around the perimeter of the Basin are
about 305 m (1000 ft), while the central lowland, the Maumee Lake Plain averages
about 183 m (600 ft). The drainage patterns of the Maumee River and its tribu-
taries are governed by the various moraines which are found in the Basin (Figures
18 and 19). The St. Marys River, flowing northwest from Shelby County, Ohio and
the St. Joseph flowing southwest from Hillsdale County, Michigan are examples
of moraine-controlled drainage. They converge at Fort Wayne and flow northeast
as the Maumee because of the dam-like effects of the Ft. Wayne and Wabash
moraines. Other major tributaries to the Maumee are the Auglaize, Blanchard, and
Tiffin Rivers. The low relief, and fine texture of the Basin soils, result in
overall poor drainage for the soils in the Basin. Northwest Ohio, formerly
known as the Black Swamp, was one of the last areas in Ohio to be settled with
widespread agriculture only in the last 100 years or less. Drainage improvements
are required on greater than 80% of all soils in the Basin, with the better
drained soils occuring in the glacial till plain region on the perimeter of the
Basin where there is more relief. Tile drainage is the most common method of
drainage improvement, although surface channel drains are used as well, es»
pecially on the very heavy-textured Lake Plain soils, such as Paulding, whose
low hydraulic conductivities make them unresponsive to tile drainage. The ex-
tensive and growing network of tile and surface drainage in the Maumee River
Basin is served by a vast network of drainage ditches and man-made or improved
channels. The low relief of the Basin results in a continuous problem of drain-
age outlet;tile outlets are frequently inundated during the spring rains, and
the main channels often flood their banks. Water will stand on the field for days
until the major channels drain sufficiently to permit upstream drainage. The
Basin, then, responds slowly to rainfall as evidenced by the broad hydrographs
recorded downstream. This optimizes the opportunities for sediment deposition
in the ditches and channels, a factor which is compensated for by the high clay
content of the soils in the Basin. The continuous ditch clean out programs in
the Basin are testimony to the process of sediment deposition, although some
sediment is contributed from stream bank erosion.
The Maumee River and its tributaries are intercepted by several dams,
notably the Cedarville Reservoir on the St. Joseph, the Power Dam on the
Auglaize, and Independence Dam on the Maumee. These will detain some sediment,
but detention of the fine suspended sediment is probably minimal.
4.12 Geology
The exposed bedrock in the Basin is chiefly Silurian limestone and dolomite;
Devonian shale crops out north of the Maumee River, and some Mississippean
sandstone is exposed along the northern edge of the Basin. Glacial drift of
varying thickness covers the bedrock from Kansan, Illinoian, and Wisconsian
periods. Prior to the Wisconsian glaciation, the Teays-Stage drainage constituted
the only extensive network of ancient valleys in the area. Surficial deposits
are either morainal till or lake clays and these regions (FigurelS) are desig-
nated till plain or lake plain. In addition, a number of beach ridges associated
-------
-39-
Coluwbut / 5 0 $ 10
i t "X
Hi let
FIGURE 18. GLACIAL DEPOSITS OF THE MAUMEE BASIN (MODIFIED FROM PETTYJOHN,
HAYES AND SCHULTZ, 1974.)
-------
-ko-
FIGURE 19. RIVERS OF THE MAUMEE BASIN
-------
-Ui-
with the Wisconsian age Lake Maumee are found in the Basin. The Maumee River
Basin can be visualized as a shallow pond with a spout, the moraines (Figure 18)
the rim of the pan, the lake plain, the bottom,and the Maumee River entering
Lake Erie the spout. The soils of the Basin, their drainage, erosion hazard,
etc. are determined by these glacial features. A more complete description of
the Maumee Basin glacial geology is given by Forsyth (1965, 1966), Golthwait,
White and Forsyth (1961), Herdendorf (1970), Hough (1958), Indiana Geological
Survey (1956), Stout (1943), Wayne (1958), Wayne and Zumberge (1965) and
Zumberge (1960).
4.13 Hydrology
The Maumee River Basin is in the north temperate zone; its climate is humid ,
with warm summers and mildly cold winters. Mean annual temperature is 11°C
(51°F) for the period 1931-1960. Mean monthly maximum temperature approaches
24°C (75°F) in July with mean monthly minimum temperature of -3°C (27°F) in
January. The frost-free season averages about 170 days (Ohio Water Commission,
1967).
The mean annual precipitation in the Maumee River Basin is 864 mm (34 inches),
based on U.S. Weather Bureau records (1931-1960). The distribution within the
Basin is given in Figure 20. The lowest monthly rainfall between 1921 and 1965
was 0.5 mm (0.02 inches) in October, 1963 at Lima; the highest, also at Lima was
232 mm (9.14 inches) in May, 1954. At Hoytville in 1975, 231.6 mm (9.12 inches)
was received in August. Water loss in the Basin, mean rainfall minus mean
streamflow averages 610 mm (24 inches).
The streams in the Maumee have relatively low gradients and long lengths.
The Maumee itself has a gradient of 24.6 cm/km (1.3 feet/mile) for 241.5 km
(150 miles). The St. Joseph, St. Marys, Auglaize,and Blanchard Rivers, all
about 161 km (100 miles), have gradients of 58.7, 47.3, 60.6, and 17.0 cm/km
(3.1, 2.5, 3.2,and 0.9 feet/mile), respectively (Ohio Division of Water, 1960).
The Tiffin River, 96.6 km long (60-miles), has a gradient of only 22.7 cm/km
(1.2 feet/mile) (Pettyjohn, Hayes and Shultz, 1974).
The mean annual stream flow in the Maumee River Basin is approximately
203-275 mm (8-11 inches).
Naymik (1977) has recently completed an extensive survey of ground water
in the Maumee River Basin. Percent of total discharge attributed to ground water
in 1973 at Waterville, the last downstream gauging station, accounted
for 32-39% of the total discharge.
4.2 Land use and practices
4.21 Land Use
The Maumee River Basin drains 17,058 km2 (6,586 mi2) into the Western
Basin of Lake Erie at Toledo. It has 73.7, 19.1, and 7.2% of its acreage in
Ohio, Indiana,and Michigan, respectively. Seventeen Ohio counties, four in
Indiana and two in Michigan are wholy or partially in the Basin. Figure 21
identifies the communities in the Basin, 19 of which have populations greater
than 5000. Of the approximately 1.4 million population, about 75% is centered
in the Toledo (580,000), Fort Wayne (281,000), Lima (171,500) and Findlay (30,000)
areas.
-------
-U2-
FIGURE 20. AVERAGE ANNUAL PRECIPITATION, IN INCHES, FOR THE PERIOD
1931-1960 (MODIFIED FROM OHIO WATER PLAN INVENTORY, 1962)
-------
-Us-
FIGURE 21. THE MAUMEE RIVER BASIN METROPOLITAN AREAS.
-------
-kk-
Table 5 gives the total and urban populations for the counties that are wholely
in the Basin or have a large percentage of their area in the Basin. The area of
each county is also given. This data is taken from the PLUARG Task B report
for planning subarea (PSA) 4.2. Table 6 gives land use in the Maumee and Portage
River Basins by sub-basins. This data is reproduced here with permission of
Resource Management Associates, West Chester, Pa. it was prepared under contract
with the Lake Erie Wastewater Management Study, Corps of Engineers, Buffalo
District. Cropland represented 65-80% of the total area with deciduous forest
the next largest land use with 5-13%. Urban land uses represented a small
portion of the various basins, reemphasizing the fact that the Maumee and Portage
Basins have primarily intensive row crop agriculture as its dominant land use.
4.22 Agricultural Practices in the Basin
Agriculture in the Maumee River Basin is dominated by the production of
only 5 crops: corn, soybeans, wheat, oats,and hay. Other crops, including
sugar beets and vegetables for processing and the fresh market are very impor-
tant economically, but account for less than 5% (Table 7) of the total acreage
harvested in any county in the Basin. Table 8 summarizes the totals of acreages
harvested of the five crops in each county of the Basin. For most counties the
figures represent the mean of production in 1975 and 76. Data were obtained
from the 1976 publications of the Michigan, Indiana and Ohio Crop Reporting
Services. In addition to the production data these reports were used to derive
crop yield, tillage practice,and dates of tillage, planting,and harvesting data.
The soils of the Maumee River Basin are highly productive for these
crops and precipitation (34.06 in, 86.5 cm) is ample for nonirrigated agriculture.
The soils of the Basin are all associated with a glacial origin and include lake
deposits, till plain, outwash plain and scattered deposits of sand in beach
ridges, ancient sand bars,and ground and end moraines. Particle-size distribu-
tions are dominated by the clay fraction, and most soils have high organic-matter
content. The greatest single agricultural problem is the provision of drainage.
When adequate drainage is provided, usually through subsurface tile drains, corn
yields in excess of 140 bu/ac are not uncommon. It has been estimated that
upwards of 50% of the cropland in the Maumee Basin is underdrained.
4.23 County Crop Rotations
In order to derive C, tillage or conservation practice, factors for the
Universal Soil Loss Equation}it was necessary to quantify the acreage of crop-
land in the Basin in a variety of logical crop rotations. Observations of
typical rotations and practices suggest six assumptions which enable the use of
the county production data to calculate the acreage of cropland in each county
which is typically in one of 7 rotation patterns.
The assumptions are:
1. The effect of soil type and physiography on crop rotation is
sufficiently accounted for by using county crop-reporting statistics.
2. All wheat is in a corn-soybean-wheat rotation.
A. 50% of acres of hay harvested modifies this rotation to: C SG W M
B. 100% of all oats are planted in the spring following corn.
-------
TABLE 5, POPULATION DATA BY COUNTY (PLUARG TASK B)
TOTAL POPULATION
PLANNING SUBAREA 4.
Indiana
Adams
Allen
De Kalb
Ohio
Allen
Auglaize
Defiance
Fulton
Hancock
Henry
Lucas
Mercer
Paulding
Putnam
Van Wert
Williams
Wood
To Convert
Square Miles
1940
2
21,254
155,084
24,756
73,303
28,037
24,367
23,626
40,793
22,756
344,333
26,256
15,527
25,016
26,759
25,510
51,796
From
(sq mi)
1950
22,393
183,722
26,023
88,183
30,637
25,925
25,580
44,280
22,423
395,551
28,311
15,047
25,248
26,971
26,202
59,605
1960
24,643
232,722
28,271
103,691
36,147
31,508
29,301
53,686
25,392
456,931
32,559
16,792
28,331
28,840
29,968
72,596
To
1970
26,871
280,455
30,837
111,144
38,602
36,949
33,071
61,217
27,058
483,594
35,558
19,329
31,134
29,194
33,669
89,722
Square Kilometers (sq
Number
Urban
1970
11,433
225,184
12,052
76,428
16,126
19,742
13,450
38,897
7,791
56,008
11,312
2,983
3,622
14,627
11,192
48,582
km)
Percent Land
Urban Area
1970
42.5
80.3
39.1
68.8
41.8
53.4
40.7
63.5
28.8
94.1
32.1
15.4
11.6
50.1
33.2
54.1
mi2l970
345
671
366
410
400
412
407
532
416
343
444
417
486
409
421
619
Area
in
Basin
410
341
412
333
392
416
154
212
417
486
409
421
193
Multiply
2.59
%
in
Basin
100.0 i
85.3 yl"
100.0
81.7
73.7
100.0
44.8
46.8
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
31.3
By
-------
-U6-
TABLE 6. LAND USE IN THE MAUMEE AND PORTAGE RIVER BASINS BY SUBBASIN
(RESOURCE MANAGEMENT ASSOCIATES, WEST CHESTER, PA.)
St. Joseph
Land Use
Single-Family Residential
Multiple-Family Residential
Mobile Home
Commercial and Services
Industrial
Institutional
Extractive
Urban Open Space
Other Urban
Cropland, Undif f erentiated
Truck Crops
Orchards and Bush-Fruit
Horticulture
Old Field Vegetation
Farmsteads
Row Crops
Field Crops
Brushland
Deciduous Forest
Rivers and Streams
Lakes
Reservoirs
Wetlands, Forested
Wetlands, Non-Forested
Construction Activity
Improved Roads
Unimproved Roads
Railroads
Airports
Utilities
Total area
St. Marys
Land Use
Residential, Undif f erentiated
Single -Family Residential
Multiple" Family Residential
Mobile Home
Commercial and Services
Industrial
Institutional
River Basin
Area
Hectares
8496
72
36
612
432
468
216
2016
180
200412
36
72
72
252
1548
144
36
9756
38916
7812
2376
1044
720
1080
324
14940
468
1332
108
36
294,012
River Basin
Area
Hectares
36
6300
108
108
792
576
720
Percent of
Total Area
2.89
0.02
0.01
0.21
0.15
0.16
0.07
0.69
0.06
68.16
0.01
0.02
0.02
0.09
0.53
0.05
0.01
3.32
13.24
2.66
0.81
0.36
0.24
0.37
0.11
5.08
0.16
0.45
0.04
0.01
Percent of
Total Area
0.02
3.01
0.0 =
0.05
0.38
0.2 •'
0.:.4
-------
-1*7-
TABLE 6. (CONT.)
Land Use
Extractive
Urban Open Space
Cropland, Undifferentiated
Truck Crops
Orchards and Bush-Fruit
Old Field Vegetation
Farmsteads
Brushland
Deciduous Forest
Rivers and Streams
Lakes
Reservoirs
Wetlands, Forested
Wetlands, Non-Forested
Beaches, Mudflats , and Unvegetated Areas
Construction Activity
Improved Roads
Unimproved Roads
Railroads
Airports
Utilities
Total area
Blanchard River
Land Use
Single— Family Residential
Commercial and Services
Industrial
Institutional
Extractive
Urban Open Space
Cropland, Undifferentiated
Truck Crops
Orchards and Bush-Fruit
Old Field Vegetation
Feedlots
Farmsteads
Other Agriculture Land
Row Crops
Field Crops
Brushland
Deciduous Forest
Coniferous Forest
Area
Hectares
396
1512
158562
36
108
36
1728
2664
15813
6084
2376
360
648
72
36
36
9261
216
720
72
108
209,484
Basin
Area
Hectares
1800
108
144
72
270
396
92961
900
9
108
36
1314
36
3240
1314
882
7668
72
Percent of
Total Area
0.19
0.72
75.69
0.02
0.05
0.02
0.82
1.27
7.55
2.90
1.13
0.17
0.31
0.03
0.02
0.02
4.42
0.10
0.34
0.03
0.05
Percent of
Total Area
1.47
0.09
0.12
0.06
0.22
0.32
75.90
0.73
0.01
0.09
0.03
1.07
0.03
2.65
1.07
0.72
6.26
0.06
-------
-US-
TABLE 6. (CONT.)
Land Use
Mixed Forest
Rivers and Streams
Lakes
Reservoirs
Wetlands, Forested
Wetlands, Non-Forested
Improved Roads
Unimproved Roads
Railroads
Airports
Utilities
Total area
Auglaize River Basin (Except
Land Use
Single-Family Residential
Multiple" Family Residential
Mobile Home
Commercial and Services
Industrial
Institutional
Extractive
Urban Open Space
Cropland, Undif ferentiated
Truck Crops
Orchards and Bush-Fruit
Old Field Vegetation
Farmsteads
Other Agriculture Land
Brush land
Deciduous Forest
Unidentified
Rivers and Streams
Lakes
Reservoirs
Wetlands, Forested
Wetlands, Non-Forested
Beaches, Mudflats, and Unvegetated Areas
Construction Activity
Improved Roads
Unimproved Roads
Railroads
Airports
Utilities
Total area
Area
Hectares
54
3690
72
144
36
108
5850
216
891
72
9
122,472
Blanchard)
Area
Hectares
12708
72
108
684
2196
720
684
3132
336960
108
36
252
3024
36
3600
30456
36
12672
576
1656
324
144
36
144
21456
432
2592
72
180
435,096
Percent of
Total Area
0.04
3.01
0.06
0.12
0.03
0.09
4.78
0.18
0.73
0.06
0.01
Percent of
Total Area
2.92
0.02
0.02
0.16
0.50
0.17
0.16
0.72
77.44
0.02
0.01
0.06
0.70
0.01
0.83
7.00
0.01
2.91
0.13
0.38
0.07
0.03
0.01
0.03
4.93
0.10
0.60
0.02
0.04
-------
TABLE 6. (CONT.)
Maumee Direct Drainage Above
Land Use
Single-Family Residential
Multiple -Family Residential
Mobile Home
Commercial and Services
Industrial
Institutional
Extractive
Urban Open Space
Cropland, Undiff erentiated
Farmsteads
Row Crops
Field Crops
Brushland
Deciduous Forest
Rivers and Streams
Lakes
Reservoirs
Wetlands, Forested
Wetlands, Non-Forested
Construction Activity
Improved Roads
Unimproved Roads
Railroads
Airports
Utilities
Total area
Tiffin River Basin
Land Use
Single-Family Residential
Commercial and Services
Industrial
Institutional
Extractive
Urban Open Space
Cropland, Undiff erentiated
Orchards and Bush-Fruit
Old Field Vegetation
Feedlots
Farmsteads
Defiance
Area
Hectares
4176
108
72
468
540
216
108
1296
55224
468
9
9
1080
6300
2700
72
216
36
36
180
4248
144
612
216
72
78,606
Area
Hectares
4284
396
288
288
36
612
143856
36
72
36
1476
Percent of
Total Area
5.31
0.14
0.09
0.60
0.69
0.27
0.14
1.65
70.25
0.60
0.01
0.01
1.37
8.01
3.43
0.09
0.27
0.05
0.05
0.23
5.40
0.18
0.78
0.27
0.09
Percent of
Total Area
2.18
0.20
0.15
0.15
0.02
0.31
73.19
0.02
0.04
0.02
0.75
-------
-50-
TABLE 6 (CONT.)
Land Use
Brushland
Strip Cropping
Deciduous Forest
Coniferous Forest
Rivers and Streams
Lakes
Reservoirs
Unidentified
Wetlands, Forested
Wetlands, Non-Forested
Construction Activity
Improved Roads
Unimproved Roads
Railroads
Airports
Utilities
Total area
Maumee
Land Use
Single -Family Residential
Mobile Home
Institutional
Urban Open Space
Cropland, Undif f erentiated
Old Field Vegetation
Farmsteads
Brushland
Deciduous Forest
Rivers and Streams
Reservoirs
Improved Roads
Railroads
Total area
Area
Hectares
4320
36
21168
108
6120
756
360
36
288
288
288
10116
540
576
108
72
196,560
Below Waterville
Area
Hectares
816
72
36
252
13720
36
360
288
2436
540
72
972
252
19,852
Percent of
Total Area
2.20
0.02
10.77
0.05
3.11
0.38
0.18
0.02
0.15
0.15
0.15
5.15
0.27
0.29
0.05
0.04
Percent of
Total Area
4.11
0.36
0.18
1.27
69.11
0.18
1.81
1.45
12.27
2.72
0.36
4.90
1.27
-------
-51-
TABLE 6. (CONT)
Entire Maumee Basin
Land Use
Residential, Undif ferentiated
Single-Family Residential
Multiple "Family Residential
Mobile Home
Commercial and Services
Industrial
Institutional
Extractive
Urban Open Space
Other Urban
Cropland, Undif ferentiated
Truck Crops
Orchards and Bush-Fruit
Horticulture
Old Field Vegetation
Feedlots
Farmsteads
Other Agriculture Land
Row Crops
Field Crops
Brushland
Strip Cropping
Deciduous Forest
Coniferous Forest
Mixed Forest
Unidentified
Rivers and Streams
Lakes
Reservoirs
Unidentified
Wetlands, Forested
Wetlands, Non-Forested
Beaches, Mudflats ,and Unvegetated Areas
Construction Activity
Improved Roads
Unimproved Roads
Railroads
Airports
Utilities
Total area
Area
Hectares
36
41796
360
396
3492
4392
2628
1710
10260
216
1133227
1296
261
72
792
72
11658
108
3393
1359
23346
36
130265
180
54
36
44110
6228
4284
36
2196
1728
108
1116
74943
2196
7947
792
549
1,517,674
Percent of
Total Area
40. Ul
2.75
0.02
0.03
0.23
0.29
0.17
0.11
0.68
0.01
74.67
0.09
0.02
0.00
0.05
A r\ , , .
L U . U 1
0.77
0.01
0.22
0.09
1.54
*Q.U1
8.58
0.01
40.01
<.0.01
2.91
0.41
0.28
<0.01
0.14
0.11
0.01
0.07
4.94
0.14
0.52
0.05
0.04
-------
-52-
TABLE 6. (CONT)
Portage Below Woodville
Land Use
Single -F ami ly Residential
Multiple -family Residential
Mobile Home
Commercial and Services
Industrial
Institutional
Extractive
Urban Open Space
Other Urban
Disrupted Cropland
Cropland, Undiff erentiated
Truck Crops
Orchards and Bush-Fruit
Old Field Vegetation
Farmsteads
Other Agriculture Land
Brushland
Deciduous Forest
Rivers and Streams
Lakes
Wetlands, Forested
Wetlands, Non-Forested
Beaches, Mudflats ,and Unvegetated Areas
Construction Activity
Improved Roads
Unimproved Roads
Railroads
Utilities
Total area
Portage Above Woodville
Land Use
Unidentified
Unidentified
Single-Family Residential
Multiple- Family Residential
Mobile Home
Commercial and Services
Industrial
Institutional
Extractive
Area
Hectares
716
4
40
104
64
72
152
252
32
220
25189
564
64
336
664
144
648
2852
1368
112
260
296
32
8
736
44
124
8
35,105
Area
Hectares
4
4
1364
8
8
111
354
108
97
Percent of
Total Area
2.04
0.01
0.11
0.30
0.18
0.21
0.43
0.72
0.09
0.63
71.75
1.61
0.18
0.96
1.89
0.41
1.85
8.12
3.90
0.32
0.74
0.84
0.09
0.02
2.10
0.13
0.35
0.02
Percent of
Total Area
40.01
<0.01
1.31
0.01
0.01
0.11
0.34
0.10
0.09
-------
-53-
TABLE 6. (CONT.)
Land Use
Urban Open Space
Other Urban
Disrupted Cropland
Cropland, Undif f erentiated
Truck Crops
Horticulture
Old Field Vegetation
Feedlots
Farmsteads
Other Agriculture Land
Brushland
Unidentified
Unidentified
Deciduous Forest
Rivers and Streams
Lakes
Wetlands, Forested
Wetlands, Non-Forested
Beaches, Mudflats, and Unvegetated Areas
Construction Activity
Improved Roads
Unimproved Roads
Railroads
Utilities
Total area
Entire Portage Basin
Land Use
Unidentified
Unidentified
Single-Family Residential
Multiple-Family Residential
Mobile Home
Commercial and Services
Industrial
Institutional
Extractive
Urban Open Space
Other Urban
Disrupted Cropland
Cropland, Undiff erentiated
Truck Crops
Orchards and Bush-Fruit
Area
Hectares
674
87
6277
81805
334
92
196
8
1441
559
960
4
4
6063
722
322
12
42
33
28
2131
80
292
12
10,4236
Area
Hectares
4
4
2080
12
48
215
418
180
249
926
119
6497
106994
898
64
Percent of
Total Area
0.65
0.08
6.02
78.48
0.32
0.09
0.19
0.01
1.38
0.54
0.92
0.00
0.00
5.82
0.69
0.31
0.01
0.04
0.03
0.03
2.04
0.08
0.28
0.01
Percent of
Total Area
^0.01
Z0.01
1.49
0.01
0.03
0.15
0.30
0.13
0.18
0.66
0.09
4.66
76.79
0.64
0.05
-------
-5H-
TABLE 6. (CONT.)
Land Us e
Horticulture
Old Field Vegetation
Feedlots
Farmsteads
Other Agriculture Land
Brushland
Unidentified
Unidentified
Deciduous Forest
Rivers and Streams
Lakes
Wetlands, Forested
Wetlands, Non-Forested
Beaches, Mudflats,and Unvegetated Areas
Construction Activity
Improved Roads
Unimproved Roads
Railroads
Utilities
Total area
Area
Hectares
92
532
8
2105
703
1608
4
4
8915
2090
434
272
338
65
36
2867
124
416
20
139,341
Percent of
Total Area
0.07
0.38
0.01
1.51
0.50
1.15
0.01
0.01
6.40
1.50
0.31
0.20
0.24
0.05
0.03
2.06
0.09
0.30
0.01
-------
-55-
TABLE 7. AGRICULTURAL LAND USE IN PLANNING SUBAREA 4.2 (PLUARG TASK B)
Crop
Wheat
Oats
Rye
Barley
Misc. Small Grains
Corn for Grain
Corn Silage
Soybean
Dry E. D. Beans
Sugar Beets
Potatoes
Fruits
Comm. Vegetables
Comm. Sod
Alfalfa Hay
Clover & Timothy Hay
Cropland Pasture
Idle Cropland
Total Cropland
Improved Pasture
Improved Pasture
N . Improved Pasture
Total Pasture
I/
Total Ag. Land
Acres 2/
509.5
207-2
9.1
2.5
0
1,201.0
66.7
1,526.2
0
33.6
U.3
10.9
hh.h
0.9
258. h
185.9
92.9
581.6
U, 735-1
81.3
132.5
213.8
U, 9U8. 9
Current Normal
Hectares 2/
206.2
83.9
3.7
1.0
0
U86.0
27.0
617.6
0
13.6
1.7
k.h
18.0
O.U
10U.6
75.2
37-6
235-^
1,916.3
32.9
53.6
86.5
2,002.8
_!/ Current normal represents present area estimate based on 1958-1972 average
2_/ Measurement is in thousands of acres or hectares
_3/ Totals may not add due to rounding
-------
-56-
TABLE 8. CROP PRODUCTION IN THE MAUMEE RIVER BASIN - ACRES HARVESTED (1975-1976)
Crop
County
Allen, Oh.
Defiance, Oh.
Fulton, Oh.
Hancock, Oh.
Henry, Oh.
Lucas, Oh.
Paulding, Oh.
Putnam , Oh .
Van Wert, Oh.
Williams, Oh.
Wood, Oh.
Auglaize, Oh.
Hardin, Oh.
Mercer, Oh.
Hillsdale, Mi.
Lenawee , Mi.
DeKalt, Ind.
Allen, Ind.
Adams , Ind .
Corn
59,550
39,950
95,800
82,950
77,550
27,550
51,050
7l+, 1+00
80,000
59,250
107,250
67,200
79,950
81,500
81+, 600
121,120
1+9,500
89,300
60,900
Soybeans
63,250
75,100
56,300
109,500
86,250
3l+, 700
82,650
100,600
102,1+00
58,150
113,150
58,250
89,050
78,000
2^,3^5
86,050
39,700
83,200
62,900
Wheat
36,300
1+1+,650
31,850
66,600
1+7,300
13,650
1+6,800
52,100
Hi, 000
1+2,900
73,850
33,100
1+7,600
1+0,150
23,515
61,060
19,500
U2,300
27,700
Oats
7,000
10,900
5,550
6,800
9,000
1,600
18,1+00
8,800
10,100
8,700
15,200
13,700
11,300
20,900
8,380*
13,500*
6,300
13,800
6,700
Hay
9,250
6,600
8,750
12,500
10,350
3,050
6,1+50
15,950
6,600
11,850
17,150
21,1+00
lit, 700
25,200
28,573"*"
16,61+9*
12,600
ll+,500
11,200
* 1971+-1975
T 1971+ Census of Agriculture
-------
-57-
Th e resulting rotation is: C 0 Sb W
3. The remaining corn and soybeans after 2 is in corn-soybean rotation: C Sb
4. Any remaining corn or soybeans after 3 is: Cont. C or Cont. Sb.
5. 50% of acres of hay harvested is in permanent pasture
6. All other crops are ignored because * very small percentage of total
cropland is involved,
Rotations:
1. C Sb W
2. C Sb W M
3. C 0 Sb W
4. C Sb
5. Cont C
6. Cont Sb
7. Permanent Pasture
The first assumption is not strictly true when the data are to be used
calculation of soil loss estimates. This is especially true when the county
is in an uplands section of the watershed and portions of the county are hilly,
while other areas may be very flat. This effect will be partially offset by
weighting the rotations,which include winter cover, spring plowing,and meadow,
toward the soils which are known to occur on a rolling landscape.
Assumption 2 is obvious from the magnitude of the production of these
crops. Almost all farmers in the Basin attempt to utilize this profitable
rotation. Assumptions 2A and 2B are known to be predominant alternatives.
The 50% of acres of hay harvested is an arbitrary figure which will be lower
in uplands counties where permanent pasture is more important, and higher in
lakebed and till-plain areas where there is very little permanent pasture.
Assumption 5 follows directly and includes the remainder of the acres of hay
harvested in permanent pasture. Assumption 2B is a common alternative for the
inclusion of oats in a rotation. Following oats, the field is planted to winter
wheat. All oats are included in this rotation. The resultant rotation is
corn-soybeans-oats-wheat.
Assumption 3 places the remainder of the corn and soybeans, except for the
absolute difference between the acreage in corn and soybeans, into a corn-
soybean rotation. Assumption 4 places the difference between corn and soybean
acreage harvested, whichever is greater, into monoculture of that crop:
continuous corn or continuous soybeans.
The last assumption places all cropland into production of the five major
crops. As stated earlier, the production of sugar beets and vegetables is
economically important in the Basin but accounts for less than 5% of the cropland
in any of the counties.
-------
-58-
These assumptions provide seven equations in seven unknowns to calculate
the seven major rotations found in the watershed:
(C 0 Sb W) = Oats x 4
(C Sb W M) = (.5 (Hay)) x 4
(Permanent Pastures) = 05 (Hay)) x 1
(C Sb W) = ((Wheat) - (Oats +0.5 Hay)) x 3
(C Sb) = ((lesser of C or Sb) - Wheat) x 2
if C Sb
(Cont. Sb) = (Soybeans - Corn) x 1
if Sb C
(Cont. Corn) = (Corn - Soybeans) x 1
Each result is multiplied by the number of years in the rotation (e.g. there
are four years in C SG 0 W rotation) and gives the average number of acres in
each of the seven rotations in each county in a given year. Table 9 lists the
results of the calculations.
4.24 Tillage practices and timing of farm operations
The nature and timing of tillage operations in the Maumee River Basin
are influenced, as they are anywhere, by the nature of the soils, weather
patterns,and prevailing popular notions. Most soils are wet and difficult to
till during the spring. Since crop yields are significantly reduced by late
planting,most farmers take the opportunity of dry fall weather to plow their
land and reduce the risk of losses due to a wet spring. The moldboard plow
is by far the predominant tillage implement.
USDA-SCS District Conservationists were surveyed in an earlier study
of erosion in the Maumee River Basin (Maumee Level B Study Erosion and
Sedimentation Technical Report, 1975) as to the extent of common tillage practices
in each county in the Basin. Table 10 lists the results of that survey. Some
changes in the originally published table have been made as a result of
further interviews taken during this study with agronomists familiar with the
Basin.
It is apparent that conventional fall tillage with the moldboard plow
is by far the dominant practice,with 60% of the cropland in the Basin being
tilled in this manner. With the emergence of powerful tractors capable of
plowing more land at a very high rate of speed,it is also apparent that the
percentage of fall-plowed land will continue to grow for at least several years.
The third column represents a form of tillage which is growing rapidly
in the Maumee Basin; it is usually applied on land to be planted to winter
wheat following soybeans. This system is growing in popularity because it is
accomplished rapidly and permits earlier planting of wheat. The system is
also amenable to till-plant systems in which tillage, fertilization,and planting
are accomplished in a single operation. Unfortunrtely there is some question
as to whether or not this form of reduced tillage reduces soil loss. Approxi-
mately 30% of the soybean residue is incorporated, leaving a mulch of only
about 1600 Ibs/acre or approximately 30% surface coverage. Mannering and Johnson(1975)
have^eported that low percentages of residue cover in fall reduced-tillage
systems may be less effective in controlling soil loss than conventional fall
tillage due to the offsetting effect of roughness obtained in plowing.
-------
-59-
TABLE 9. ACREAGE OF MAJOR ROTATION BY COUNTY IN THE MAUMEE RIVER BASIN.
County *
Allen
Defiance
Fulton
Hancock
Henry
Lucas
Paulding
Putnam
Van Wert
Williams
Wood
Auglaize
Hard in
Mercer
Hillsdale, Mi.
Lenawee, Mi.
DeKalb, Ind.
Allen, Ind.
C Sb W
74,025
86,650
65,775
160,650
99,375
31,575
75,525
105,975
82 , 800
84,825
150,225
26,100
86,850
19,950
2,545
113,200
20,700
63,750
C Sb W M
18,500
13,200
17,500
25,000
20,700
6,100
12,900
31,900
13,200
23,700
34,300
42,800
29,400
50,400
57,146
39,300
25,200
29,000
C 0 Sb W
28,000
43,600
22,200
27,200
36,300
6,400
73 , 600
35,200
40,400
34,800
60 , 800
54,800
45,200
83 , 600
33,520
54,000
25,200
55,200
C Sb
46,500
--
48,900
32,700
60,500
27,800
8,500
44,600
78,000
30,500
66,800
50,840
64,700
75,700
1,660
49,980
40,400
81,800
Permanent
Cont. C Cont. Sb. Pasture
3,700 4,625
35,150 3,300
39,500 -- 4,375
26,550 6,250
8,700 5,175
7,150 1,525
31,600 3,225
26,200 7,975
22,400 3,300
1,100 -- 5,925
5,900 8,575
8,680 -- 10,700
9,100 7,350
3,500 -- 12,600
60,255 -- 14,287
35.Q70 -- 9,825
9,800 -- 6,300
6,100 -- 7,250
*0hio, unless otherwise indicated.
-------
-60-
T/BLE 10. TILLAGE FRACTIONS USED IN THE BASIN (%OF COUNTY)
Allen, Oh.
Defiance, Oh.
Fulton, Oh.
Hancock, Oh.
Henry, Oh.
Lucas, Oh.
Paulding, Oh.
Putnam, Oh.
Van Wert, Oh.
Williams, Oh.
Wood, Oh.
Auglaize, Oh.
Hardin, Oh.
Mercer, Oh.
Hillsdale, Mi.
Lenawee , Mi.
De Kalb, Ind.
Allen, Ind.
Adams, Ind.
1
39
10
1+0
10
28
25
5
30
20
15
10
5^
38
3U
TO
39
Ho
10
35
2
50
89
50
65
TO
65
95
50
55
85
69
ho
60
62
27
50
U5
60
60
3
10
0
9
5
0
10
0
15
3
0
20
5
1
3
2
5
0
20
3
U
1
1
1
5
0
0
0
5
2
0
1
1
1
1
1
1
5
2
2
5
0
0
0
15 (6)*
2 (2)
0
0
0
20 (4)
0
0
0
0
0
0
5(5)
10(3)
8(1)
0
1. Conventional,Spring Plow, Plant, Cultivate
2. Conventional, Fall Plow, Plant, Cultivate
3. Disk, Plant, Cultivate (minimum tillage)
k. No tillage
5. Other forms of minimum tillage. Number in parentheses indicates type of
tillage reported-* (1 - chisel plow, disc and plant; 2 - fall chisel
plow; 3 - chisel plow; 4 - fall chisel plow; 5 - field cultivate; 6 - fall
and spring chisel plow)
-------
-61-
4.25 Livestock
Table Hsummarizes livestock production in Maumee River Basin counties.
Mercer County is the major poultry producer, while Fulton County is the major
cattle (primarily dairy) and swine producer. Most livestock operations in
the Basin are confined systems. Loss of nutrients from improper handling of
wastes can be a localized problem but does not appear to greatly contribute
to nutrient loads in the Maumee Basin.
4.26 Point Sources
Urban and rural nonfarm land use has been studied extensively by others
(TMACOG Sec. 208, Maumee Level B study, LEWMS) and will not be discussed here.
The major point source discharges above Waterville are at Fort Wayne and Lima.
The City of Toledo is the major point source in the Basin but is not included
in Waterville loadings since it lies below Waterville. Toledo's input of
nutrients must be considered a major source of nutrients to the Western Basin
of Lake Erie because of its proximity to the lake.
4.3 Soils in the Maumee River Basin
The soils of the Maumee River Basin are developed under glacial deposits
of recent origin. The last phases of the late Wisconsin glacial period occurred
less than 8000 years ago. Soil parent materials can be divided into four groups:
- glacial till associated with the various moraines in the Basin and also
intermorainal areas
- lacustrine sediments in the Lake Plain region
- beach ridges associated with the glacial Lake Maumee
- stream alluvial deposits.
Figure 22(Black Creek study, 1977) shows the distribution of major soil
associations in the Basin. The Morley-Blount-Pewamo and Blount-Pewamo associa-
tions account for the greatest acreage of soils in the Basin. Formed in glacial
till, they occur along the perimeter of the Basin and constitute the more sloping
region of the watershed. The Hoytville-Toledo-Napanee association occurs in
the central basin and ±s formed from till and lacustrine materials. In the
center of the Basin, the Paulding-Latty-Roselms association occurs in the Lake
Plain. Table 12 identifies the major soil series and their percentages in the
entire Basin and in the Ohio area.
The Maumee Basin soils are very fertile. Because of their youthful
nature, they are high in native fertility. Intensive crop production in the
Basin has been achieved over the last 70-80 years by extensive drainage of
these poorly drained soils. While this vast network of surface and tile drains,
man-made ditches,and modified natural streams has made cultivation of these
soils possible, there is little doubt that this has contributed to an accel-
eration of sediment transport in the Basin. The major soils of the Basin are
high in clay and, therefore, most susceptible to transport once they are eroded.
-------
TABLE 11. INTENSIVE LIVESTOCK OPERATIONS BY COUNTY, 1969 (PLUARG TASK B)
Poultry
PSA 1+.2
Indiana
Adams
Allen
De Kalb
Ohio
Allen
Auglaize
Defiance
Fulton
Hancock
Henry
Lucas
Mercer
Paulding
Putnam
Van Wert
Williams
Wood
No.
Farms
21*
10
1
8
2
3
19
7
8
1
29
2
15
1*
5
3
Number
1+80,000
298,030
10,000
176,372
20,000
68,500
316,361*
130,38^
189,826
10,000
716,831*
20,000
200,132
1*6,600
55,500
1*3,760
To
Estimated
Livestock Total
Cattle
No.
Farms
26
1+3
31+
37
20
122
32
21
11
8
28
1*
66
59
Convert From
Pounds ( Ib )
Number
3,978
8,107
6,06l
6,286
3^507
27,060
6,895
5,086
2,531+
M56
957
It, 801
1+00
12,^58
11,01*0
Estimated Animal Waste
Svine
No.
Farms
87
87
1*0
1+1
70
28
111
1+3
31
17
121
5
72
23
38
22
To
Kilograms (kg)
Wet Lbs/Day
Number
29,851
31,828
12,982
12,316
21*, 61*7
12,529
1+5,209
16,131
10,759
5,5^9
39,166
1,779
23,81*6
6,1*61
ll+,557
8,838
Multiply
0.1+51+
Poultry
ll+8,92l*
89,599
3,100
5l+, 675
6,200
21,235
98,072
1+0,1*19
58,81*6
3,100
222,218
6,200
62,01+0
1)4,1*1*6
17,205
13,565
By
Cattle
198,900
1+95,350
303,050
3ll+,300
1+07,050
175,350
1,353,000
31+!*, 750
25l+, 300
126,700
21*2,800
1+7,850
21*0,050
20,000
622,900
522,000
Swine
298,510
318,280
129,820
123,160
21*6,1*70
125,290
1*52,090
161,310
107,590
55,1+90
391,660
17,790
238,1*60
61*, 610
11+5,570
88,380
-------
-63-
Michigan
Indiana
FIGURE 22. SOIL ASSOCIATIONS IN THE MAUMEE RIVER BASIN (BLACK CREEK REPORT, 1977).
-------
-64
LEGEND
SOILS DOMINANTLY FORMED IN GLACIAL TILL
BLOUNT-PEWAMO ASSOCIATION: Depressional to gently sloping,
very poorly drained to somewhat poorly drained soils that have
clayey subsoils.
10
MORLEY-BLOUNT-PEWAMO ASSOCIATION: Depressional to
moderately steep, very poorly drained to moderately well-drained
soils that have clayey subsoils.
MIAMI-CONOVER ASSOCIATION: Nearly level to moderately steep,
well-drained and somewhat poorly drained soils that have loamy sub-
soils.
HILLSDALE-FOX ASSOCIATION: Gently sloping to moderately steep,
well-drained soils that have loamy subsoils.
HOYTVILLE-TOLEDO-NAPPANEE ASSOCIATION: Depressional to
gently sloping, very poorly drained and somewhat poorly drained soils
that have clayey subsoils.
SOILS DOMINANTLY FORMED IN WATER-DEPOSITED
MATERIAL, ORGANIC MATERIAL, AND EOLIAN MATERIAL
CAR LISLE-MONTGOMERY ASSOCIATION: Depressional and nearly
level, very poorly drained soils that have organic and clayey subsoils.
PAULDING-LATTY-ROSELMS ASSOCIATION: Depressional and
nearly level, very poorly drained and somewhat poorly drained soils
that have clayey subsoils.
HANEY-BELLMORE-MILLGROVE ASSOCIATION: Depressional to
strongly sloping, very poorly drained, moderately well-drained, and
well-drained soils that have loamy subsoils.
MEFtMILL-HASKINS-WAUSEON ASSOCIATION: Depressional and
nearly level, very poorly drained and somewhat poorly drained soils
that have loamy and clayey subsoils.
OTTOKEE-GRANBY ASSOCIATION: Depressional to sloping, very
poorly drained, poorly drained, moderately well-drained soils that
have sandy subsoils.
FIGURE 22. (COHTINUED)
-------
-65-
TABLE 12. ACREAGE OF MAJOR SOIL SERIES IN THE MAUMEE RIVER BASIN (SERIES
WITH MORE THAN 10-,000 HECTARES)"*"
Soil Series
Blount
Hoytville
Pewamo
Fremont- Volusia*
Paulding
Latty
Morley
Nappanee
Millgrove
Roselms
Sloan
Lenawee
Glynwood
Mermill
Fulton
Miami
Wauseon
Toledo
Area
Hectares
217,679
165,480
165,396
115,309
65,772
52,299
49,410
34,520
28,234
24,120
23,595
21,348
16,209
13,887
13,284
13,140
13,024
10,953
1,043,659
Percent of
Total Area
14.34
10.90
10.90
7 . 60*
4.33
3.45
3.26
2.27
1.86
1.59
1.55
1.41
1.07
0.92
0.88
0.87
0.86
0.72
68.78%
*Includes Brookston, Toledo and other dark-colored soils.
"^Unpublished data. Lake Erie Wastewater Management Study, Corps of Engineers,
Buffalo District, Buffalo, N.Y.
-------
-66-
Erosion and subsequent sediment transport are a function not only of slope
but also the infiltration capacity of these soils during different times
of the year. Slope is a major factor in the till-plain regions of the Basin,
which constitute the Basin perimeter, while the more level lake plains soils
are greatly affected by antecedent moisture prior to rainfall and snow-melt
and the effectiveness of drainage systems in removing excess water. These
factors will be discussed later. More detailed description of soil properties
are given in Volume 2 of this Report.
^• ^ Loading results
k.hl Defiance Watersheds and Hoytville Plots
Precipitation and flow from the various sites are given in Table 13
Monitoring began in April 1975 on the Hoytville plots and in July and August
on the Defiance watersheds. Summer rain was above normal in 1975, 1976
was somewhat of a dry year,and 1977 was normal. Surface runoff was highest
on the sloping Roselms soil and the level Paulding soil. The Blount soil
was intermediate as was Hoytville,while the Lenawee soil had very little
surface runoff. Tile flow was highest on the Hoytville soil and lowest on
the Paulding. On the level Lenawee, Hoytville and Paulding soils, surface
runoff was inversely related to tile drainage, the more poorly structured
Paulding soil giving very little tile flow and the highest surface runoff.
Tile drainage, therefore, would appear to reduce surface runoff on those
soils which have sufficient hydraulic conductivity to respond to tile
drainage. On all sites, both surface runoff and tile drainage were con-
centrated in the spring months from the first thaw through May. During
this period, soils are saturated and infiltration is minimal.
Soil and nutrient losses for each site are given in Tables 14-23.
The results from the Hoytville plots were averaged, since there were
no significant differences among the various tillage treatments. Surface
runoff on the Hoytville plots (Table 22) was low enough that tillage had
little effect on soil or nutrient loss.
Sediment - Soil loss was highest on the Paulding site in all years,
followed by the more sloping Roselms and Blount sites, while losses from
the Lenawee and Hoytville soils were minimal. From the standpoint of
best management practices to reduce soil loss, no-tillage is feasible on
the Blount soil if it is tile-drained,and chisel-plow can be used on the
Roselns. Lenawee and Hoytville require no conservation tillage if they
are drained. Paulding soil remains the greatest problem because this
soil does not respond to tile drainage and is probably too poorly drained
for reduced tillage. Sediment in tile was low on all sites ( < 250 kg/ha).
Phosphorus - Most of the P loss in surface runoff occurred as
sediment-P and, therefore, followed soil loss closely. As a result,
total-P loss was highest on the Paulding soil. Soluble-P moves very
slowly through soil,and most of the P loss by tile drainage was sediment-P.
The Hoytville plots were the only sites to receive significant amounts of
P fertilizer,and there was an increasing trend for filtered reactive-P
and total-P loss in runoff and tile flow from 1975 to 1977.
-------
-67-
TABLE 13. FLOW AND PRECIPITATION AT DEFIANCE WATERSHEDS
AND HOYTVILLE PLOTS (1975-1977)
1975*
§
111
201
301
302
401
402
501
502
6x1
6x2
Flow
7-6
14.1
0.0
10.2
5.0
5.8
19.9
0.9
4.7*
24.3*
Ppt
42.4
42.8
42.6
42.6
39-8
43.8
52.1
52.1
79.4
79.4
1976
Flow
cent
36.1
16.5
2.6
9-0
15-6
11.5
23.4
2.8
19.1
22.8
Ppt
imi=t':'r!:)
66.2
66.7
59.2
59.2
66.1
66.1
61.5
61.5
67.9
67.9
1977 f
Flow
17.8
30.1
6.4
7.0
17.6
9-3
39-4
0.0
11.2
25.7
Ppt
35-4
38.3
32.1
32.1
34.5
34.5
35-8
35-8
94.4
94.4
* Monitoring began in April on Hoytville plots (6x1, 6x2)
and in July and August on the other watersheds.
T Monitoring was terminated May 31 on all sites except
the Hoytville plots.
* Values given are means of all eight plots.
§ See Table 1 for plot designations.
-------
TABLE 14. CONCENTRATION AND LOAD OF POLLUTANTS FROM HAMMERSMITH ROSELMS (111) SURFACE RUNOFF
Sediment
Filtered
reactive-P
Total-P
(Nitrate
+ nitrite)-N
1975
1976
1977
Concentration (ug/ml) Load Concentration (ug/ml) Load Concentration (ug/ml) Load
High Low FM+ (kg/ha) High Low FWM (kg/ha) High Low F/M (kg/ha)
5850 2U2 2235 1785
0.36 0.01 0.08 0.06
39 1156 37lH 6560 202 809 128H
0.25 0.0 0.05 0.18 0.05 0.01 0.03 0.Ok
3.1+5 0.22 1.35 0.83 3-90 0.00 0.76 2.15
9.2 0.0 2.9 2.0 27.6 0.0 6.2 19-9
2.08 0.26 0.78 1.2U
9.0 2.0 5-7 9-0
Ammonia-N
Total-N
5-3
19.8
0.0
1.6
0.9
8.0
O.lt
5A
H.I
39.8
0.0
0.0
0.7
8.6
1.5
27.6
0.0
21.8*
0.0 0.0
0.6* k.2*
0.0
6.6*
* In 197T> TKN was measured instead of total-N
+ Flow weighted mean concentration
CO
-------
TABLE 15. CONCENTRATION AND LOAD OF POLLUTANTS FROM CRITES ROSELMS (201) SURFACE RUNOFF
1975
1976
1977
Sediment
Filtered
reactive-P
Total-P
(Nitrate
+ nitrite)-N
Ammonia-N
Total-N
Concentration (ug/ral) Load Concentration (ug/ml) Load Concentration (ug/ml) Load
High Low FWM+ (kg/ha) High Low FWM (kg/ha) High Low FATM (kg/ha)
8010 311 U596 5085 101+96 75 1563 2291+
0.56 0.02 0.08 o.io 0.19 o.oo 0.07 o.io
6.^0 0.11 1.21+ 1.37
9.5 0.0 1+.3 1+.9
l+.l 0.0 2.0 1.9
28.1+ 7.6 11. h 12.6
7.80 0.00 1.26 1.60
15.1+ 0.0 5-0 7-3
1.7 0.0 0.1+ 0.7
22.2 1.6 8.5 12.5
5091 118 722 1938
0.07 0.01 0.02 0.06
3.17 0.26 0.79 2.11
5.0 0.0 2.2 1+.9
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
8.3* 0.0* 2.3* 6.3*
i
ON
VQ
I
* In 1977, TKN was measured instead of total-N
+ Flow weighted mean concentration (FWM)
-------
TABLE 16. CONCENTRATION AND LOAD OF POLLUTANTS FROM ROHRS LENAWEE (301) SURFACE RUNOFF
Sediment
Filtered
rea.ctive-P
Total-P
(Nitrate
+ nitrite)-N
Aramonia-N
Total-N
1975
1976
1977
Concentration (ug/ml) Load Concentration (ug/ml) Load Concentration (ug/ml) Load
High Low FWM+ (kg/ha) High Low FWM (kg/ha) High Low FWM (kg/ha)
_*
262k 262k 262k 686
0.16 0.16 0.16 0.01+
* There was no surface runoff from this site in 1975
t
There was only one event in 1976
69 361 20k
1.18 0.15 0.97 0.55
k.30 k.30 k.30 1.00 1.89 0.26 0.1*6 0.26
k.6 k.6 k.6 1.1 13.6 1.1 10.k 5.9
0.6 0.6 0.6
0.1
0.0 2.3
15.3 15.3 15.3 3.6
0.5
o
i
Missing data
-------
TABLE 17. CONCENTRATION AND LOAD OF POLLUTANTS FROM ROHRS LENAWEE (9302) TILE DRAINAGE
Sediment
Filtered
reactive-P
Total-P
(Nitrate
+ nitrite)-N
1975
1976
1977
Concentration (ug/ml) Load Concentration (ug/ml) Load Concentration (ug/ml) Load
High Low Y'M+ (kg/ha) High Low FWM (kg/ha) High Low TOM (kg/ha)
506 0 173 157 281 0 105 3 it 169 0 91 57
0.08 0.00 0.05 O.Qii- O.itO 0.00 0.09 0.07 0.26 0.01 0.13 0.08
8.10 0.00 0.93 0.8U
18.6 0.0 10.8 9-7
1.85 0.00 0.31 0.2>t
11-1 0.0 6. it 5.1
1.68 0.21 0.71 O.U
2U.1 8. it 12.0 7-5
Ammonia-N
Total-N
U. 2
13.0
0.0
lt.0
0.5
9-7
0.5
8.2
2.5
11.9
0.0
3.3
0.8
8.7
O.it
7.0
l.it 0.0
10.2* 0.0*
0.1
6.7*
0.1
It. 2*
* In 1977, TKN was measured instead of total-N
+ Flow weighted mean concentration (FWM)
-------
TABLE 18. CONCENTRATION AND LOAD OF POLLUTANTS FROM HEISLER BLOUNT (401) SURFACE RUNOFF
Sediment
1975
1976
1977
Concentration (ug/ml) Load Concentration (ug/ml) Load Concentration (ug/ml) Load
High Low F/7M+ (kg/ha) High Low FWM (kg/ha) High Low FWM (kg/ha)
2927 h89 20lh 891
7866 5k 2U55 3i»2l 2091 33^ 676 1055
Filtered
reactive-P
Total-P
(Nitrate
+ nitrite )-N
Ammonia-N
Total-N
0.18 0
^.5^ 0
7.0 0
7.1 0
13.6 1
.01
• 5V
.0
.0
.6
0.09
2.57
k.k
2.2
7.8
o.ok
I. Ik
1.8
1.0
3.5
o.ko
8.25
7.1
8.3
21.9
0.00
0.00
0.0
0.0
2.9
0.07
1.68
3.1
1.1
10.1
0.08 0.03
2.33 1.57
k.3 20.0
1.1 0.0
1^.1 7.8*
0.00
0.57
6.2
0.0
1.5*
0.02
1.13
11.6
0.0
k. 7*
0.02
1.76
18.1
0.0
7-3*
* In 1977, TKN was measured instead of total-N
+ Flow weighted mean concentration (FWM)
i
-^
rv>
-------
TABLE 19. CONCENTRATION AND LOAD OF POLLUTANTS FROM HEISLER BLOUNT (402) TILE
Sediment
1975
1976
1977
Concentration (ug/ml) Load Concentration (ug/ml) Load Concentration (ug/ml) Load
High Low FWM+ (kg/ha) High Low FWM (kg/ha) High Low FWM (kg/ha;
1561 0 250 128 1365 0 21*0 2lt5 ^22 0 130 107
Filtered
reactive-P
Total-P
(Nitrate
+ nitrite )-N
Ammonia-N
Total-N
0.26
1.00
19.6
1*4.3
27-0
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.0
*4.0
0.05
0.19
12.5
1.1
15.8
0.03
0.09
6,*4
0.6
8.1
0.*45
2.60
32.8
2.8
la. 7
0.
0.
0.
0.
1.
00 0.07 0.08
00 0.3*4 0.35
0 8.*4 8.6
0 0.1 0.1
6 10.0 10.2
0.06
0.79
2*4.9
1.5
20.8*
0.00
0.26
7.1
0.0
0.0*
0.0*4
0.35
12.2
0.2
5-7*
0.03
0.28
10.1
0.1
*t. 7*
i
— Q
U)
* In 1977, TKN was measured instead of total-N
+ Flow weighted mean concentration (FWM)
-------
TABLE 20. CONCENTRATION AND LOAD OF POLLUTANTS FROM PAULDING (501) SURFACE RUNOFF
Sediment
1975
1976
1977
Concentration (ug/ml) Load Concentration (ug/ml) Load Concentration (ug/ml) Load
High Low FWM+ (kg/ha) High Low FWM (kg/ha) High Low FWM (kg/ha)
15927 230 2590 U576 7263 111* 2131 kk3k 7888 372 1098 38^9
Filtered
reactive-P
Total-P
(Nitrate
+ nitrite)-N
Ammonia-N
Total-N
0
6
8
3
.09
.16
.8
.2
28.7
0.01
0.20
0.0
0.0
U.I
0.07
l.lU
3.6
0.7
11.6
0.
1.
6.
i.
20
13
97
3
1
.U
0.30
U.75
6.6
2.U
19-5
0.01
o.U5
0.0
0.0
2.0
0.12
1.93
2.6
0.8
8.U
0.25
U.02
5-5
1.6
17.5
0.63
8.18
lU.l
l.U
1U.9*
0.00
1.U7
1.1
0.0
2.6*
0.29
1-97
U.I
1.3
3.5*
1.02
6.89
1U.3
1.6
12.3*
* In 1977, TKN was measured instead of total-N
+ Flow weighted mean concentration
-------
TABLE 21. CONCENTRATION AND LOAD OF POLLUTANTS FROM PAULDING (502) TILE DRAINAGE
1975
1976
1977
Sediment
Filtered
reactive-P
Total-P
(Nitrate
+ nitrite)-N
Ammonia-N
Total-N
Concentration (ug/ml) Load Concentration (ug/ml) Load Concentration (ug/ml) Load
High Low FWM+ (kg/ha) High Low FrfM (kg/ha) High Low FWM (kg/ha)
2583 o 1192 100
0.35 0.01 0.08 0.01
5.28 0.00 1.51* 0.11
9-7 0.0 5-3 O.U
12.0 0.0 1.1 0.1
l6.it 5.7 10.5 0.8
607 0 353 89
0.22 0.00 0.03 0.01
0.90 0.00 0.31 0.08
U2.6 0.0 32.5 8.2
2.8 0.0 0.3 0.1
U5.U U.I 35-7 9.0
_*
* There were no events in 1977-
-------
TABLE 22. CONCENTRATION AND LOAD OF POLLUTANTS FROM HOYTVILLE PLOTS (6 x 1) SURFACE RUNOFF
(MEAN OF ALL EIGHT PLOTS)
Sediment
Filtered
reactive-P
Total-P
(Nitrate
+ nitrite)-N
Ammonia-N
Total-N
1975
1976
1977
Concentration (ug/ml) Load Concentration (ug/ml) Load Concentration (ug/ml) Load
High Low FWM+ (kg/ha) High Low FWM (kg/ha) High Low FrfM (kg/ha)
lUlSO 0 1891
3.92 0.00 0.31
0.01
5.85 0.00 0.82 0.16
13-7 0.0 2.9 1.2
3832 0 105 58
1.79 0.00 0.32 0.17
5.85 0.00 0.56 0.30
13.2 0.0 1.2 0.6
8632 0 235 218
9-02 0.00 0.66 0.63
9.18 0.00 1.12 1.10
29.14 0.0 h.O k.2
9.5 0.0 1.5 0.6 16.U 0.0 0.6 0.3 7.0 0.0 0.3 0.2
6U.O 0.0 6.6 2.h 71-0 0.0 3.0 1.5 19-7* 0.0* 1.0* 0.8*
* In 1977, TKN was measured instead of total-N
+ Flow weighted mean concentration (FWM)
-------
TABLE 23. CONCENTRATION AND LOAD OF POLLUTANTS FROM HOYTVILLE PLOTS (6 x 2) TILE DRAINAGE
1975
1976
1977
Sediment
Filtered
reactive-P
Concentration (ug/ml) Load Concentration (ug/ml) Load Concentration (ug/ml) Load
High Low FWM+ (kg/ha) High Low FWM (kg/ha) High Low FWM (kg/ha)
197 0 111 28 1*1*08 0 26 50
0.66 0.00 0.05 0.09 5-01 0.00 0.09 0.23
1769 0 136
0.88 0.00 0.07 0.13
Total-P
(Nitrate
+ nitrite )-N
Ammonia-N
Total-N
3.86
17.6
16.6
16.9
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.0
0.27
7-5
2.8
8.6
0.11
15-3
5-2
17.5
8.05
19.5
3.5
16.2
0.00 0.20
0.0 5-1
0.0 0.3
0.0 5.8
0.1*0
10.6
0.5
11.9
5.56
21. T
2.1
10.9*
0.00
0.0
0.0
0.0*
0.32
8.7
0.1
1.2*
0.73
20.5
0.2
2.3*
* In 1977* TKN was measured instead of total-N
+ Flow weighted mean concentration (FWM)
-------
-78-
Nitrogen - None of the sites received any nitrogen fertilizer during
the study period,since soybeans were grown in all cases. In all cases,
most of the nitrogen loss was as N03-N. Ammonia-N loss was low and
organic-N (sediment-N) was only significant at the higher soil loss levels.
Nitrate-N losses were similar to amounts added to soil in precipitation
(~ 15 kgN/ha/yr).
k.k2 Overview of Watershed Loadings
Figures 23-26 give hydrographs for the Maumee and Portage Rivers
and one of the Black Creek Watersheds. The flashier nature of the Black
Creek watershed is due to its smaller drainage area and higher percentage
of sloping soils.
Table ^k presents the total (all pollution sources) annual sediment
and nutrient loading and unit area yields for all study watersheds in the
Ma\unee and Portage River basins,including the Black Creek watershed sub-basin
and the experimental plots in Defiance and Wood Counties, Ohio. The loading
for the Maumee does not include any of the point or diffuse loading from
the City of Toledo or the drainage below the gauging station at Waterville.
Tables 25 through 28 present the monthly loading rates (metric
tons/day) during each month of the study periods on the Maumee, Portage,
and the two Black Creek Watershed sub-basins. The figures presented in
these tables are the results of the application of the Beale Ratio Estimator
method of calculation to the chemical measurements and continuous flow records
at each of the sampling sites.
Tables 29 and 30 present the total monthly and annual loads, flow
weighted mean concentrations,and monthly and annual total transport unit
area yields for the Maumee and Portage River basins. Also presented, in
the last three columns of each table,are the mean daily flow, basinwide
runoff,and mean basinwide precipitation for each month of the study period.
Table 31 presents the monthly and annual total chloride loading for
1975 and 1976 for the Maumee and Portage River basins. The unit yields of
chloride for 1975 and 1976 were for the Maumee 127 and 77 kg/ha/yr,and
for the Portage 138 and 100 kg/ha/yr. These yields are at the high
extreme of chloride loadings for general agriculture and at the low extreme
of general urban land use as observed in other Task C pilot watershed
studies. The loadings appear to be directly related to flow and do not
appear to be drastically reduced in the low flow relative to the high flow
months. Certainly much of the chloride orginates as a result of road
deicing operations. The lesser reduction in the Portage River relative
to the Maumee in the low flow year, 1976, is probably a result of a higher
degree of urbanization and larger percentage of point source inputs into
that basin. The City of Bowling Green is not located within the watershed
but does discharge its sewage treatment plant and a considerable portion of
its urban runoff to the Portage rather than the Maumee.
-------
FIGURE 23. FLOW HYDROGRAPHS FOR MAUMEE RIVER AT WATERVILLE, 1975
CO
Li.
O
O
_J
LL.
CC
LU
CO
nflUMEE RIVER a
UflTERVILLE * UY 1975
\o
O* I
0.00
APR
MAY
60.00 90.00
'JUN JUL
DRY OF UY
120.00
'AUG
1975
150.00
'SEP
180.00
-------
FIGURE 24. FLOW HYDROGRAPHS FOR MAUMEE RIVER AT WATERVILLE, 1976
CO
LL,
O
I
O
U.
cc
UJ
en
CO
nfluriEE RIVER a
UflTERVILLE * UY 1976
CO
O
I
20.00
'OCT
^w 40.00 60.0,0
NOV -DEC
WY 1976 751001 TO 760101
80.00
100.00
JAN
-------
FIGURE 25. FLOW HYDROGRAPHS FOR PORTAGE RIVER AT UOODVILLE, 1976
CO
o
I
3
o
UL
-------
FIGURE 260 FLOW HYDROGRAPHS FOR BLACK CREEK, SITE 2, 1975
o
LL)
CO
CO
o
cc
LU
CO
3-
0.00
IAN
BLflCK CREEK SITE 2
CY 1975
I
Co
30.00
FEB
60.00
'MAR
90.00
»PR
180.00
DflY OF CY - 750101 THRU 750630
-------
TABLE 24. TOTAL AND UNIT AREA LOADS FOR WATERSHEDS IN MAUMEE AND PORTAGE RIVER BASINS
DISSOLVED PHOSPHORUS
TOTAL LdAD YIELD
WATERSHED
MAUMEE
PORTAGE
Dluck Creek
Site 2
Block Creek
Site 6
PLOT ui
(Roselms)
PLOT 201
(Ror.elmo)
PLOT 301 + 302
(I.onawce)
PLOT 101 + /.02
(IltOllllt)
PLOT 501 + 502
(1'nuldlng)
PLOTS 611 to 682
(lloytville)
(Mean of all plots)
YEAR
1975
1976
1975
1«J7G
1975
1976
1975
1976
1975
1976
1975
1976
1975
1976
1975
1976
1975
1976
1975
1976
(MT/YR) (KC/HA/YR)
561.
399.
39.3
26.4
0.188
0.070
0.123
0.085
1.92(-4)*
6. 40 (-4)
6.50(-5)
6.50(-5)
4.0(-5)
9.6(-5)
7.2(-5)
1.53(-4)
1.5(-4)
2.9(-4)
1.2(-5)
1.2(-5)
0.342
0.243
0.35
0.24
0.199
0.075
0.173
0.119
0.06
0.20
0.11
0.11
0.05
0.12
0.08
0.17
0.15
0.29
0.29
0.29
TOTAL rilOEPIIORUS
(HT/YU) (KC/HA/YR)
3,440.
2,505.
160.6
92.5
6.2
0.70
3.7
0.40
2.9(-3)
7.8(-3)
9.2(-4)
l.K-3)
7.5(-4)
2.2(-4)
1.3(-3)
3.0(-3)
2.3(-3)
4. 6 (-3)
_
3.2(-5)
2.10
1.53
1.45
0.03
6.60
0.72
5.06
0.619
0.92
2.43
1.54
1.79
0.94
0.27
1.40
3.38
2.33
4.58
_
0.81
SEDIMENT
(HT/YR) (KG/KA/YR)
1,609,989.
1,509,105.
105,251.
40,727.
2,864.
237.
2,800.
208.
5.71
11.87
3.05
1.38
0.125
0.614
0.914
3.29
4.67
4.52
4.8C-2)
3.3(-3)
982.
920.
949.1
367.2
3,040.
251.
3,922.
291.
1783.
3710.
5083.
2293.
156.
768.
1016.
3661.
4672
4518
1192.
82.
DRAINAGE
(NITRATE-NITRITE) N AREA (SURFACE)
(MT/YR) (KC/IIA/YR) (IIA)
31,864.
12,207.
2,167.
739.
15.8
3.4
5.1
1.0
7.2(-3)
7.2(-2)
3.3(-3)
4.9(-3)
8.7(-3)
4.6(-3)
8.3(-3)
1.3(-2)
7.5(-3)
1.5(-2)
7.4(-4)
5.2(-4)
19.3
7.4 1,639,500.
19.5 110,900.
6.66
16.82 942.
3.62
7.06 714.
1.46
2.24 3.2
22.41 |
CO
5.52 0.6 f
8.22
10.88 0.8
5.77
9.25 0.9
14.49
7.50 1.0
15.37
18.59 0.04
13.08
*1.92(-4) - 1.92 x 10"4
-------
TABLE 25. MONTHLY LOADINGS, MAUMEE RIVER AT WATERVILLE
DISSOLVED 1'llOSl'llOUUS
MEAN DAILY
LOAD
(MT/DAY)
STANDARD
ERROR
TOTAL PHOSPHORUS
MEAN DAILY
LOAD
(MT/DAY)
STANDARD
ERROR
SUSPENDED SEDIMENT
MEAN DAILV
LOAD
(MT/DAY
STANDARD
ERROR
NITRATE-wrnilTK - N
MEAN DAILY
LOAD
(MT/OAY)
STANDARD
ERROR
AMMONIA - H
HKAN DAILY
LOAD
(MT/DAY)
STANDARD
ERROR
1975 JAN
FED*
MAR*
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEH
OCT
NOV
DEC
YEAR
1976 JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
NOV
DEC
YKAR
2.0
3.50
2.74
1.354
1.784
2.074
0.483
0.247
1.178
0.318
0.314
2.604
1.851
8.246
1.392
0.407
0.543
0.359
0.245
0.100
0.106
0.078
0.026
0.088
0.038
0.081
0.038
0.06o
0.021
0.020
0.028
0.050
0.074
0.040
0.702
0.035
0.031
0.064
0.019
0.024
0.007
0.002
0.014
0.004
0.009
23.9
27.1
8.62
4.81
11.60
8.86
1.95
0.777
3.46
1.11
1 .11
20.84
3.69
52.49
21.33
1.18
2.308
1.295
0.748
0.285
0.235
0.330
0.128
0.279
0.184
1.01
0.994
0.085
0.027
0.089
0.046
0.172
2.41
0.196
2.51
1.51
0.084
0.149
0.026
0.023
0.010
0.004
0.024
0.004
0.008
11546.
9967.
2102.
2167.1
6012.7
5425.5
1189.0
325.9
1012.9
304.9
153.9
129 75. '6
387.6
34790.8
13526.2
475.2
850.5
453.1
236.2
78.9
49.6
80.3
11.6
17.3
160.2
808.6
760.2
83.9
17,2
70.0
9.82
14.0
2215.7
58.7
3101.9
1411.3
45.6
75.2
12.8
6.26
3.63
1.93
26.6
0.82
1.64
187.
188.
106.
110.8
134.2
148.2
16.6
4.57
15.0
9.03
7.49
122.4
35.7
232.3
39.5
21.6
39.9
29.4
8.90
0.819
0:075
0.110
0.441
1.61
2.05
5.44
3.17
1.88
0.128
0.162
0.443
0.556
1.88
1.90
21.15
7.37
1.92
1.66
1.50
0.510
0.076
0.008
0.039
0.041
0.168
5.82
6.93
6.44
2.057
2.185
1.087
0.669
0.425
1.320
0.798
0.348
2.022
6.886
19.08
3.044
1.403
0.898
0.683
0.315
0.197
0.078
0.131
0.134
0.248
0.259
0.550
0.194
0.975
0.104
0.099
0.062
0.066
0.155
l
CO
0.393
1.51
0.252
0.358
0.247
0.054
0.032
0.031
0.006
0.017
0.018
0.029
-------
TABLE 25. (CONTINUED)
DISSOLVED I'llOSl'IlORUS
MEAN DAILY
LOAD
(MT/DA10
STANDARD
ERltOR
TOTAL PHOSPHORUS
MEAN DAILY
LOAD
(HT/UAY)
STANDARD
KRROR
SUSPENDED SEDIMENT
MEAN DAILY
LOAD
(MT/DAY
STANDARD
ERUOR
NITJlATE+NraiTE - JI
MEAN DAILY
1.0 At
(MT/DAY)
STAHDARD
ERROR
AMMONIA - N
MEAN DAILY
LOAD
(MT/DAY)
STANDARD
ERROR
1977 JAN
FEU
MAR
APR
MAY
JUH
JUL
AUC
SEP
OCT
NOV
DEC
YEAR
0.120
1.396
3.173
2.689
0.952
0.202
0.022
0.097
0.122
0.078
0.020
0.009
0.166
1.984
24.05
31.35
6.15.
0.559
0.015
0.146
3.35
6.68
0.37
0.025
2.43
50.90
12194.1
18730.7
3064.2
159.0
0.65
80.41
1959.2
4538.2
271.6
8.05
0.938
6.87
243.3
234.8
92.5
3.64
0.074
1.53
7.26
4.02
1.38
1.38
0.487
7.79
13.37
3.59
2.58
0.293
0.143
1.22
0.766
0.552
1.50
0.028
I
CO
-------
TABLE 26. MONTHLY LOADINGS, PORTAGE RIVER AT WOODVILLE
DISSOLVED PHOSPHORUS
MEAN DAILY
LOAD
(Mt/DAY)
STANDARD
ERROR
TOTAL PHOSPHORUS
MEAN DAILY
LOAD
(MT/DAY)
STANDARD
ERROR
SUSPENDED SEDIMENT
HEAN DAILY
LOAD
(MT/UAY)
STANDARD
ERROR
NITRATE -(-NITRITE - N
MEAN DAILY
LOAD
(MT/DAY
STANDARD
ERROR
AMMONIA - H
HEAN DAILY
LOAD
(MT/DAY
STANDARD
ERROR
1975 JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
NOV
DEC
YEAR
1976 JAN
FED
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEl'
OCT
NOV
UEC
YEAH
0.178
0.241
0.129
0.071
0.158
0.120
0.024
0,016
0.172
0.045
0.015
0.135
0.198
0.495
0.023
0.026
0.050
0.019
0.017
0.014
0.008
0.006
0.012
0.035
0.013
0.019
0.015
0.005
0.014
0.010
0.002
0.001
0.007
0.003
0.003
C.007
0.005
0.044
0.001
0.002
0.004
0.001
0.001
0.001
0.0003
0.001
0.001
0.002
0.885
1.13
0.236
0.101
1.181
0.291
0.044
0.027
0.330
-0.138
0.051
0.909
0.413
2.316
0.077
0.051
0.155
0.048
0.036
0.026
0.027
0.008
0.016
0.043
0.063
0.088
0.015
0.008
0.122
0.016
0.004
0.003
0.016
0.024
0.017
0.142
0.030
0.168
0.009
0.002
0.029
0.005
0.001
0.002
0.002
0.001
0.001
0.002
450.5
546.6
63.9
9.04
1022.4
129.0
6.67
4.07
836.5
30.4
2.61
421.7
101.7
1185.9
26.6
5.18
75.2
13.2
7.17
5.68
7.25
0.47
0.26
0.724
58.9
72.8
10.6
0.92
161.6
17.5
0.97
0.27
305.2
6.83
1:30
92.5
16.8
200.6
5.79
0.38
30.9
4.05
0.43
1.28
0.72
0.089
0.036
0.353
12.94
20.61
5.57
2.93
12.48
6.14
0.091
2.32
1.71
0.31
7.18
3.45
14.52
1.35
0.99
3.60
0.862
0.072
0.084
0.046
0.047
0.153
0.171
0.319
0.340
0.404
0.136
0.650
0.504
0.016
0.121
0.100
0.12
0.42
0.23
1.00
0.060
0.44
0.416
0.104
o!oi4
0.010
0.004
0.006
0.011
0.006
0.298
0.388
0.159
0.036
0.227
0.100
0.010
0.112
0.044
0.017
0.159
0.616
0.024
0.058
0.051
0.058
0.028
0.012
0.012
0.009
0.002
O.OOU
0.106
0.066
0.052
0.039
0.004
0.026
0.029
0.001
0.019
0.005
0.002
0.017
0.030
0.031
0.017
0.007
0.011
0.004
0.001
0.001
0.001
0.0004
0.002
0.005
Co
-------
TABLE 26. (CONTINUED)
DISSOLVED 1'IIOSPHOIIUS
MI:AN DAILY
LOAD
(Mt/DAY)
STANDARD
ERROR
TOTAL PHOSPHORUS
MEAN DAILY
LOAD
(MT/DAY)
STANDARD
ERROR
SUSPENDED SEDIMENT
MEAN DAILY
LOAD
(MT/DAY)
STANDARD
ERROR
NITRATB+NITRITE - N
MEAN DAILY
LOAD
(MT/DAY
STANDARD
EKROR
AMMONIA - N
MEAN DAILY
LOAD
(MT/DAY
STANDARD
ERROR
1977 JAN
FEU
HAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUC
SEP
OCT
NOV
DEC
YliAR
0.138
0.508
0.315
0.188
0.005
0.025
0.006
0.004
0.013
0.006
0.002
0.001
0.187
0.792
1.123
0.601
0.250
0.042
0.009
0.014
0.101
0.036
0.023
0.002
1.85
66.3
502.5
153.4
70.0
1.21
0.23
21.2
78.9
18.0
13.9
0.050
0.057
0.527
26.64
18.25
5.99
0.067
0.010
0.046
0.56
1.20
0.18
0.007
0.305
1.571
0.690
0.380
0.057
0.010
0.0001
0.241
0.067
0.049
0.025
0.001
1
CO
-j
1
-------
TABLE 27. MONTHLY LOADINGS, BLACK CREEK, SITE 2
DISSOLVED rnnsriionus
MEAN UATI,Y
1.0 Al)
(Mt/DAY)
STANDARD
r.iuum
± (MT/DAY)
TOTAL rnosriioiuis
MEAN DAILY
LOAD
(HI/DAY)
STANDAIU)
EKIIOH
±(Kf/DAY)
nUSJ'ENliEB SEDIMENT
MEAN DAILY
LOAD
(NT/DAY)
STANDARD
KKKOR
HITRATIvlNITHITE - H
MEAN DAILY
l.UAU
(MT/DAY
STANUAIU)
f.IUlOK
AIIMOIUA - N
UK AH DAILY
LOAD
(MT/DAY
STANDARD
EllROH
1975 JAN
FED
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUC
SKI'
OCT
NOV
DEC
YEAR
1976 JAM
FED
MAR
APR
HAY
JUN
.JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
NOV
DEC
YEAR
0.0111
0.0013
0.0012
0.0011
0.0011
0.0008
0.0
0.0003
0.0003
0.0
0.0008
0.0007
0.002
0.0030
0.0009
0.0001
0.0001
0.0001
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.001
0.0002
0.0
0.0004
0.0004
0.0002
0.00003
0.0001
0.0001
0.0
<0. 00005
<0. 00005
0.0
'0.00005
0.0001
<0. 00005
0.0002
0.0003
<0. 00005
<0. 00005
<0. 00005
0.0
0.0
0.0
<0. 00005
<0. 00005
0.0
0.0073
0.012
0.0041
0.0035
0.035
0.034
0.0
0.0014
0.0035
0.0001
0.0042.
0.0229
0.0005
0.0125
0,0043
0.0003
0.0002
0.0001
0.001
0.0
0.0
0.0001
0.0002
0.0
0.0026
0.0063
0.0004
0.0000
0.0086
0.0042
0.0
0.0001
0.0005
<0. 00005
.0.0005
0.0042
<0. 00005
0.0009
0.0006
0.0001
<0. 00005
< 0.00005
<0. 00005
0.0
0.0
<0. 00005
<0. 00005
0.0
3.84
7.79
2.12
1.70
36.57
36.75
0.0
0.423
0.788
0.021
1.02
1.86
0.161
4.85
2.07
0.114
0.075
0.041
0.0093
0.0
0.0
0.038
0.043
0.0
1.85
4.77
0.29
0.48
13.82
8.35
0.0
0.015
0.145
0.003
0.073
0.20
0.009
0.73
0.22
0.0042
0.007
0.0003
0.0011
0.0
0.0
0.0014
0.017
0.0
0.030
0,023
0.033
0.027
0,026
0.025
0.0
0.0009
0.0017
0.0001
0.0082
0.014
0.0022
0.024
0.016
0.0003
0,0007
0.0001
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0005
0,0006
0.0
0.012
0.0087
0.0022
0.0017
0.011
0.0007
0.0
0.0001
0.0002
0.0001
0.0002
0.001
0.0003
0.0011
0.0031
0.0006
0.0004
0.0001
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0001
0.0001
0.0
0,0072
0.0066
0.0038
0.0034
0.0039
0.0020
0.0
0.0006
0.0006
0,0001
0.0014
0.0018
0.0027
0.008U
0.0019
0.0004
0.0004
0.0001
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0005
0.0016
0.0
0.0022
0.0022
0.0003
0.0007
0.0014
0.0003
0.0
<0. 00005
0.0001
<0. 00005
0.0002
0.0012
1
CD
Cc
0.0006
0.0004
0.0012
<0. 00005
0.0001
<0. 00005
0,0
0.0
0.0
0.0001
0.0002
0.0
-------
TABLE 28. MONTHLY LOADINGS, BLACK CREEK, SITE 6
DISSOLVED 1'IIOSl'IIORUS
MEAN DAILY
LOAD
(Mt/UAY)
STANDARD
ERIlOll
TOTAL I'llOSrilOUUS
MEAN DAILY
LOAD
On7i>AY)
STANDARD
ERROR
SUSPENDED SEDIMENT
HliAN DAILY
LOAD
(MT/DAY)
STANDARD
ERROR
NITRATKI NITRITE - N
UK AN DAILY
LOAD
(MT/DAt
STANDAIU)
EUROU
AMI IONIA - H
HEAM DAILY
LOAD
(MT/DAY
STANDARD
KRKOK
1975 JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
HAY
JUN
JIIL
AUG
SEI1
OCT
NOV
DEC
YEAR
1976 JAN
KEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JIIH
JUL
AUG
SEP
GOT
NOV
DEC
0.0011
0.0009
0,004
0.0005
0.0014
0.0015
0.0001
0.0001
0.0001
0.0
0.0004
0.0008
0.0
0.0021
0.0004
0.0002
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0001
0.0001
>0. 00005
0.0001
0.0001
0.0001
<0. 00005
-
> 0.00005
<0. 00005
0.0001
0.0001
-
0.0001
0.0001
<0. 00005
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0062
0.021
0.0022
0.0017
0.077
0.060
0.0018
0,0002
0.0007
0.0001
0.0051
0.031
0.0003
0.020
0.0025
0.0011
0.0001
0.0
0.0001
0.0
0.0
0.0001
0.0
0.0
0.0012
0.004
0.0002
0.0002
0.008
0.0097
0.0002
0.0001
0.0002
<0. 00005
0.0018
0.006
<0. 00005
0.0011
0.0005
0.0001
<0. 00005
0.0
<0. 00005
0.0
0.0
<0. 00005
0.0
0.0
3.10
6.40
1.51
1.03
47.7
25.5
1.17
0.13
0.41
0.072
1.06
5.93
0.215
5.87
1.30
0.48
0.139
0.49
0.021
0.016
0.0
0.030
0.0082
0.0
1.01
0.58
0.15
0.216
10.1
4.00
0.19
0.039
0.28
0.0055
0.18
1.28
0.009
0.54
0.099
0.028
0.005
0.006
0.0022
0.004
0.0
0.002
<0. 00005
0.0
0.108
0.089
0.067
0.051
0.046
0.098
0.0043
0.0008
0.0035
0.0003
0.012
0.051
0.0053
0.051
0.028
0.025
0.0063
0.0014
0.0
0.0001
0.0
0.0000
0.0
0.0
0.028
0.006
0.005
0.006
0.006
0.009
0.0008
0.0004
0.0005
<0.0000'
0.002
0.006
0.0004
0.001
0.0008
0.0009
0.0004
0.0003
0.0
0.0001
0.0
0.0001
0.0
0.0
0.0048
0.0083
0.0039
0.0052
0.016
0.005
0.0004
0.0001
0.0005
0.0001
0.002
0.0027
0.0015
0.007
0.002
0.003
0.0002
0.0
0.0001
0.0001
0.0
0.0001
0.0
0.0
0.001
0.0013
0.0005
0.0010
0.007
0.0008
0.0001
-
0.0002
<0. 00005
0.0004
0.0003 £
V£
1
0.0004
0.0003
0.001
0.0002
-
0.0
0.0
0.0001
0.0
<0. 00005
0.0
0.0
-------
-90-
TABLE 29. MONTHLY LOAD, UNIT AREA YIELD, FLOW WEIGHTED MEAN CONCENTRATION
FLOW AND PRECIPITATION, MAUMEE RIVER AT WATERVILLE
DISSOLVED INORGANIC PHOSPHORUS
TOTAL LOAD
(HT/PERIOD)
[FWM]
(MG/L)
YIELD
(KG/HA)
TOTAL PHOSPHORUS
TOTAL LOAD.
(MT/PERIOD)
[FVM]
(KG/L)
YIELD
(KG/HA)
1
SUSPlrVaED SEDIMENT
TOTAL LOAD
(MT/PERIOD)
[FWM]
(MG/L)
YIELD
(KG/HA)
1975 JAN
FE3
MAR
APR
MAY
JUS
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
N07
DEC
YEAR
1976 JAH
?E3
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JOT.
AUG
SEP
OCT
SOV
DEC
YEAR
1977 JAN
FE3
MAR
APR
KAY
JUN
YEAR
62.0
98.0
84.9
40.6
55.3
62.2
15.0
7.7
35.3
9.9
9.4
80.7
561.0
57.4
239.1
43.1
12.2
16.3
10.8
7.6
3.1
3.2
2.5
0.79
2.8
399.4
3.7
38.8
98.4
80.7
29.5
6.1
0.087
0.106
0.141
0.090
0.103
0.116
0.093
0.046
0.160
0.089
0.084
0.129
0.155
0.117
0.045
0.055
0.079
0.082
0.094
0.076
0.152
0.064
0.030
0.072
0.154
0.353
0.094
0.093
0.082
0.127
0.038
0.060
0.052
0.025
0.033
0.033
0.009
0.005
0.022
0.006
0.006
0.049
0.342
0.035
0.146
0.026
0.007
0.010
0.007
0.005
0.002
0.002
0.002
0.0005
0.002
0.243
0.002
0.024
0.060
0.049
0.01<5
0.004
740.9
758.8
267.2
144.4
359.6
265.9
60.4
24.1
103.8
34.4
35.0
645.9
3440.4
114.5
1522.3
661.3
35.:
71.5
38.8
23.2
8.8
7.0
10.2
3.8
8.6
2505.3
4.8
55.6
724.9
940.4
190.5
16.8
1.044
0.824
0.445
0.321
0.670
0.497
0.37fr
0.144
0.471
0.308
0.313
1.03
0.309
0.744
.684
0.160
0.338
0.297
0.287
0.216
0.335
0.265
0.146
0.227
0.199
0.513
0.692
1.082
0.528
0.350
0.452
0.463
0.163
0.088
0.219
0.162
0.037
0.015
0.063
0.021
0.021
0.394
2.10
0.070
0.929
0.403
0.022
0.044
0.024
0.287
0.005
0.004
0.006
0.002
0.005
1.53
0.003
0.034
0.442
0.573
0.116
0.010
357926.
279076.
65131.
65015.
186393.
162766.
36853.
10104.
30337.
9452.
4617.
402223.
1609989.
12016.
1008933.
419313.
14256.
26367.
13592.
7321.
2445.
1438.
2491.
347.
536.
1509105.
75.3
1425.
378013.
561919.
94992.
4771.
504.3
303.2
108.4
144.4
347.1
304.3
229.6
60.3
137.9
84.6
41.3
32.4
493.2
433.7
64.5
124.6
103.8
90.7
59.9
70.7
. 64.5
13.3
14.1
3.1
13.4
360.3
646.3
263.2
99.6
213.3
170.2
39.7
39.6
113.7
99.3
22.5
6.2
18.5
5.3
2.8
245.9
982.
7.3
615.4
255.8
8.7
16.1
8.3
4.5
1.5
0.9
1.5
0.2
0..3
920.
0.0
0.9
230.6
342.7
57.9
2.9
-------
TABLE 29. (CONTINUED)
-91-
NIT^VTpJJfIT^ITE_S,
TOTAL LOAD
(MT/PERIOD)
[FKMJ
(MG/L)
YIELD
(KC/HA)
TOTAL LOAD
(HT/PEH.IOD)
[FWM]
(MC/L)
YIELD
(KG/HA)
MEAN DAILY
FLOW
(M**3/S)
RUNOFF
(cm)
TOTAL
PRECIPITATION
(cm)
5797.
5264.
3286.
3326.-
4160.
4447.
515.
142.
449.
280.
225.
3793
31634.
1107
6737
1224.
647.
1239
383.
276.
25.4
2.3
3.4
13.2
49.3
12207.
29.1
192.3
7511.0
7043,
2867.
109.2
8.17
4.72
5.47
7.39
7.75
8.31
3.21
0.35
2.04
2.51
2.01
6.06
2.99
3.29
1.27
2.93
5.85
6.74
3.42
0.63
0.107
0.038
0.507
1.31
1.21
1.77
7.20
8.10
7.94
2.28
3.54
3.21
2.00
2.03
2.54
2.71
0.31
0.0*
0.27
0.171
0.137
2.31
19.3
0.68
4.11
0.75
0.40
0.76
0.54
0.169
0.016
0.001
0.002
o.ooa
0.030
7.44
0.02
0.12
4.60
4.30
1.75
0.07
180.4
194.0
199.6
61.7
67.7
32.6
20.7
13.2
39.6
24.7
10.4
81.3
925.9
213.5
553.4
94.4
A'..l
27.8
20.5
9.8
6.1
2.3
4.1
3.4
7.7
985.1
15.1
218.2
414.4
107.7
80.0
8.7
0.254
0.211
0.332
0.137
0.126
0.061
0.129
0.079
0.130
0.221
0.093
0.130
0.576
0.271
0.098
0.190
0.131
0.156
0.121
0.150
0.111
0.105
0.130
0.203
0.627
2.01
0.395
0.124
0.222
0.182
0.110
0.118
0.122
0.038
0.041
0.020
0.013
0.003
0.024
0.015
0.006
0.050
0.564
0.130
0.338
0.058
C.026
0.017
0.013
0.006
0.004
0,001
0.003
0.002
0.005
0.601
O."009
0.133
0.253
0.066
0.049
0.005
266.2
382.0
225.3
174.6
201.4
207.3
60.2
62.3
85.4
41.9
43.3
234.7
151.0
139.0
849.6
362.8
85.7
79.4
50.8
30.3
15.3
8.16
14.5
10.1
14.3
159.2
9.03
45.0
393.1
337.0
135.3
18.6
54.8
4.34
5.64
3.68
2.77
3.30
3.23
0.99
1.04
1.35
0.69
0.69
3.84
31.59
2.26
12.98
5.92
1.35
1.30
0.81
0.48
0.25
0.13
0.73
0.51
0.72
27.44
0.14
0.66
6.39
5.30
2.20
0.29
2.34
6.48
6.40
5.60
7.01
9.32
12.40
9.86
15.60
6.90
5.22
6.35
6.34
97.52
6.44
7.32
8.06
5.39
6.57
8.83
7.90
4.34
6.64
6.23
1.44
2.07
71.26
-------
-92-
TABLE 30„ MONTHLY LOAD, UNIT AREA YIELD, FLOW WEIGHTED MEAN CONCENTRATION,
FLOW AND PRECIPITATION, PORTAGE RIVER AT WOODVILLE
DISSOLVED INORGANIC PHOSPHORUS
TOTAL LOAD
(MT/PERIOO)
[FWM]
OtC/L)
YIELD
(KG/HA)
TOTAL PHOSPHORUS
TOTAL LOAD
(MT/PERIOD)
[FWIJ
(MG/L)
YIELD
(KG/HA)
SUSPENDED SEDDiENT
TOTAL LOAD
(MT/PERIOD)
[FWM]
(MG/L)
YIELD
(KG/HA)
1975 JAN
FEB
KAR
APR
K.A.Y
JUN
JCL
AUC
SEP
OCX
N07
DEC
YEAS
1976 JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
ADG
SE?
OCT
NOV
DEC
YEAR
1977 JAN
FE3
MAR
APS
MAT
JDN
YEAR
5.5
6.3
3.9
2.2
4.9
3.6
0.75
0.43
5.1
1.4
0.45
4.2
39.3
6.1
13.8
0.7
0.8
1.6
0.6
0.52
0.43
0.23
0.18
0.37
1.09
26.4
4.27
14.2
9.77
5.63
2.64
0.75
0.117
0.118
0.145
0.170
0.114
0.211
0.246
0.026
0.153
0.098
0.093
0.100
0.128
0.109
0.014
0.054
0.112
0.128
0.170
0.158
0.159
0.156
0.277
0.564
0.913
0.760
0.109
0.108
0.126
0.332
0.050
0.061
0.035
0.020
0.044
0.032
0.007
0.004
0.046-
0.013
0.004
0.038
0.354
0.055
0.124
0.006
0.007
0.014
0.005
0.005
0.004
0.002
0.002
0.010
0.238
0.039
0.128
o.oaa
0.051
0.024
0.007
27.4
31.6
7.1
3.1
36.6
8.7
1.4
0.83
9.9
4.3
1.5
28.2
160.6
12.3
64.8
2.4
1.5
4.8
1.4
1.11
0.80
0.81
0.24
0.47"
1.34
92.5
5.80
22.2
34.8
18.0
7.75
1.25
0.580
0.554
0.265
0.243
0.854
0.512
0.44*
0.045
0.294
0.299
0.309
0.737
0.267
0.512
0.043
0.105
0.349
0.327
0.362
0.294
0.558
0.207
0.353
0.691
1.24
1.19
0.389
0.347
0.369
0.557
0.247
0.285
0.064
0.02.8
0.330
0.078
0.013
0.007
0.089
0.039
0.014
0.254
1.45
0.115
0.534
0.022
0.014
0.043
0.013
0.010
0.007
0.007
0.002
0.012
0.834
0.052
0.200
0.314
0.162
0.070
0.011
13965.
14744
1917
280.3
31693.
3369
206.7
126.3
25096.
211.8
78.4
12793.
105251.
3154.
33204.
825.3
155.3
2332.
395.5
222.4
176.0
217.6
14.5
7.8
22.5
40Z27.
57.4
1855.9
15578.1
4601.0
1295.6
36.3
295.4
258.3
71.4
21.6
739.5
227.0
67.4
6.8
745.6
66.0
16.2
335.
65.8
262.
16.4
10.7
i.;«,-.
89.4
72.5
64.7
149.9
12.5
5.9
11.6
367.2
12.3
99.1
174.2
88.4
104.5
16.1
125.9
132.9
17.3
2.5
285.8
34.9
1.9
1.1
226.3
1.9
0.7
115.4
949.1
28.4
299.4
7.4
1.4
21.0
3.6
2.0
1.6
2.0
0.1
0.2
0.5
10.7
140.5
41.5
11.7
0.3
-------
TABLE 30. (CONTINUED)
-93-
NITRATE+NITRITS-N
TOTAL LOAD
(HI/PERIOD)
401.1
577.1
167.2
90.9
386.9
184.3
2.8
69.6
53.0
9.9
222.4
2167.
107.0
406.6
41.8
23.3
111.6
25.9
2.23
2.59
1.44
1.45
4.58
5.30
739.
1.20
14.30
825.8
547.4
185.7
2.00
[FWMJ YIEI
(MG/U (KCA
|>MMONTA-tt MEAN OAILY TOTAL
X TOTAL LOAD 1 (ml HELD ™W RUNOFF PRECIPITATION
IA) (^/PERIOD) | (MG/L) (KG/HA) (H**3/S) (c.) (cm)
8.49 3.61 9-2 0.195 0.080 17.7 4.26
10.11 5
6.23 1
7.02 0
9.03 3
10.81 1
0.15 0
20 10.9 0.190 0.100 23.7 5.14
51 4.8 0.177 0.043 10.1 2.42
82 1.1 0.086 0.010 5.01 1.17
.49 7.0 0.164 0.063 16.1 3.87
.66 3.0 0.027 6.48 6.48 1.51
1.15 0.28
.03 0.3 0.016 0.003 6.94 1.69
2.07 0.63 3.4 0.100 0.031 13.1 3.04
3.71 0
2.04 0
5.32 2
19
2.23 0
3.21 3
0.83 0
1.95 0
8.08 1
5.35 0
.43 1.4 0.096 0.013 6.23 1.50
.09 0.5 0.103 0.005 1-88 0.44
.01 4.9 0.129 0.044 14.3 3.44
.54 47.9 0-43 10.13 28.71
19.1 0.398 0.172 18.0 4.32
.96 23.1 0.182 0.208 50.8 11.03
.67 1.8 0.036 0.016 18.9 4-55
.33 1.5 0.106 0.014 5.64 1.31
.26 1.5 0.106 0.014 5.64 1.31
.01 1.8 0.130 0.016 5.18 1.25
.23 0.8 0.192 0.007 1-71 0.40
0.73 0.20 0.38 0.124 0.003 1-15 0.28
0.95 0.02 0.37 0.136 0.003 1.02 0.25
0.99 0.01 0.28 0.190 0.003 0.56 0.13
!.25 0.01 0.06 0.051 0.0005 0.44* 0.10
3.47
0.234 0.177 0-51* 0.12
2.75 0.005 3.27 1.69 0.029 0.28* 0.07
6.66 52.7 0.48 8.55 24.22
0.38 0.016 9.41 2.01 0.085 1-76 0.42
0.79 0.133 44.0 2.35 0.397 7.79 1.69
9.23
10.50
8.84
0.89
7.45 21.40 0.24 0.193 33.6 8.07
11.4 0.22 0.103 20.2 4.70
1.67 1.77 0.034 0.016 7.19 1.73
0.02 0.31 0.139 0.003 0.87 0.20
4.84 1.16
-------
TABLE 31. LOADINGS (METRIC TONS) OF CHLORIDE IN THE MAUMEE
AND PORTAGE RIVER BASINS
Maumee
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov
Dec
Year
Portage
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov
Dec
Year
~^ ' --
26,011
32,731*
25,11*6
19,868
22,188
22,127
7,1*82
7,723
10,078
5,177
5,391
2^,713
208,638
127 kg/ha/yr
1,992
2,025
1,1*00
876
1,81*2
1,011
318
962
1,623
992
5^3
1,721
15,305
-Ly iu
12,887
52,536
27,181
8,335
8,533
3^509
1,738
895
1,590
1,109
2,336
126,136
77 kg/ha/yr
2,356
3,992
1,892
71*8
311
231
191*
126
105
122
178
11,01*9
138 kg/ha/yr 100 kg/ha/yr
-------
-95-
U.lj3 Discussion of Monthly Loadings
The yield per unit area per month from the study area watersheds
varied greatly throughout the 2-1/2 years of monitoring. The variation
in seasonal loading for all watersheds was much more pronounced than the
variation in monthly loadings between watersheds. Table 32 summarizes the
yeild per unit area per month of sediment from all watersheds. Tables 33
and 3U express the ratio of each watershed yield to the area weighted mean^
yi*ld of the experimental plots for sediment and total phosphorus, respectively.
Table 32 must be consulted in conjunction with Tables 33 and 3!* ,
because when the magnitude of the watershed and plot yields is not very
large,the percent difference is not really significant.
The most interesting point to note is that,in many instances during
the late winter and spring months when the magnitudes of the yields are
very large. the percentage difference between watersheds may not be
very large! That is, the yield per unit area from the Maumee Basin
as a whole is similar to the yields from the plots.
In February 1976 the yield from the Maumee was 76$ and 127$ for
sediment and phosphorus, respectively, of the yield from the plots. The
same pattern is repeated during several other winter months: December 1975,
March 19?6, March, April,and May 1977- These six months accounted for 92,,
of the total sediment load from the Maumee River Basin during the comparison
period July 1975 to June 1977- Most of the transport took place in only
a few days during those months.
Of the storms in 1975 and 1976 (precipitation records for 1977 were
not available) which produced such large sediment transport events, all were
basinwide storms with rainfall on the order of 2.5 to U cm over a period of
two to seven days. Runoff ranged from 60$ to 177$ of basinwide mean pre-
cipitation. Considerable snowmelt was included in the February 1976 storms.
The second major point of comparison is the summer period,when
intense storms can produce considerable sediment movement on Very small
areas without that sediment appearing at the major basin stations. The
most significant case in point occurred during August 1975 when total monthly
precipitation records were set throughout the Maumee River Basin. The
•basinwide mean precipitation total was 15-60 cm. It must be said that
much of this occurred in relatively long duration summer coldfront storms
of much less intensity than the usual summer convective storms. However,
the experimental plots did experience their maximum monthly soil loss of
the study period during this month: 1,206 kg/ha (basin soil area weighted
mean), about 23$ of the total soil loss during the comparison period
described above.
These storms were basinwide yet produced only 1.0** cm of runoff
(6.6$ of total precipitation) in the Maumee River at Waterville. Less than
0.5 of 1$ of the plot soil loss appeared in runoff at Waterville. The
outlets of most of the plots are located where these fields drain into
confined natural or manmade drainage channels. The ultimate fate of sediment
washed from fields during these periods cannot be accurately determined.
There are two major possibilities. First, it may be temporarily stored^
in the drainage network until the spring,when major runoff events wash it
to the river and Lake Erie. Or, since these drainage channels often become
completely dry during the late summer, the sediment stored during that
period may become so indurated that it can leave the channel only by
periodic ditch maintenance dredging. It is well known that ditches in the
Maumee Basin are mostly aggrading and do require such maintenance. The lack
-------
TABLE 32. SUMMARY OF MONTHLY UNIT AREA SEDIMENT YIELDS (kg/ha/month)
Maumee Portage Site 2 Site 6 Plots
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov
Dec
216.0
168.0
39.0
39.0
112.0
98.0
22.0
.1
18.0
5-7
2.8
2U3.0
126.0
138.0
18.0
2.1
286.0
35-0
1.5
0.8
226.0
8.2
O.U
118.0
102.0
190.0
U9.0
33.0
1,569.0
812.0
38.0
h.O
13.0
2.1
33.0
195-0
165.0
30*1.0
90.0
69.0
1,586.0
1,5^2.0
0.0
16.0
31.0
0.0
Ul.O
79.0
l*+9.0
1,206.0
267.0
l*t.O
58.0
277-0
1976
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov
Dec
7-2
608.0
253.0
8.6
16.0
8.2
h.k
1-5
0.9
1.5
0.2
0.3
28.0
310.0
7.1
1.1
21.0
3.2
1.7
1.2
1.6
0.0
0.0
0.0
6.8
180.0
**2.o
15.0
*t.3
1.3
O.h
0.2
0.0
0.7
0.0
0.0
k.9
195.0
88.0
2.7
1.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
50.0
829.0
6*15.0
3.6
26.0
191.0
221.0
0.0
9.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
1977
Jan 0.0 0.2 — __ o.o
Feb 0.9 16.0 — __ 136 !o
Mar 228.0 1*10.0 — __ *t37'o
Apr 339.0 lil.o — __ 1^83*0
May 57.0 19.0 — __ 139 !o
2.9 0.0 — __
-------
-97-
TABLE 33. WATERSHED SEDIMENT YIELD AS PERCENTAGE OF AREA
WEIGHTED MEAN PLOT SEDIMENT YIELD-
1975
Jul
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov
Dec
1976
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov
Deo
1977
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
Maumee
15.0
1.0
6.7
U2.0
5.0
87.0
15-0
76.0
39.0
239.0
6l.O
U.O
2.0
*
*
*
*
*
*
1.0
52.0
70.0
la.o
8.0
Portage
1.0
0.0
8U.6
6l.O
1.0
142.0
1+7.0
39.0
1.0
31.0
79.0
2.0
1.0
*
*
»
*
*
*
12.0
32.0
9.0
lll.O
0.0
Site 2
26.0
0.0
5-0
15-0
58.0
70.0
iH.O
23.0
7-0
Ul6.0
16.0
1.0
0.0
*
*
*
*
*
*
—
—
—
—
Site 6
0.0
1.0
12.0
0.0
70.0
28.0
10.0
2l|.0
lli.O
76.0
k.O
0.0
0.0
*
*
*
*
*
*
—
—
—
—
—
— No watershed data
* No significant yield from plots
-^Weighted mean plot sediment yield is the mean sediment yield from
the small watersheds weighted on the basis of distribution of the
plot soil type by area in the Maumee Basin.
-------
-98-
TABLE 3l+. WATERSHED TOTAL PHOSPHORUS YIELD AS PERCENTAGE OF
AREA WEIGHTED MEAN PLOT TOTAL PHOSPHORUS YIELD
Maumee Portage Site 2 Site 6
20.0 o.O 52.0 o.O
0-0 0.0 0.0 7.0
32.0 LU.o 11.0 7)1.0
80.0 260.0 0.0 0.0
7-0 0.0 223.0 198.0
77-0 Vf.o 210.0 197.0
1976
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov
Dec
1977
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
111.0
127.0
1*7-0
*
150.0
7.0
0.0
*
*
0.0
#
*
*
9.0
66.0
61*. o
3U.O
0.0
189.0
82.0
0.0
*
91*. o
0.0
0.0
X
*
0.0
*
*
*
8U.O
kh.o
16.0
15.0
0.0
6.0
86.0
9-0
*
0.0
0.0
0.0
*
*
0.0
*
*
*
—
0.0
66.0
18.0
*
0.0
0.0
0.0
*
*
0.0
*
*
*
—
— No watershed data
* No yield from plots
-------
-99-
of variability in sediment and nutrient transport between the experimental
plots, minor and major sub-basins poses a very important point for the
management of diffuse source pollutant transport. If it can be assumed,
or ultimately proven, that the sediment dislodged from the soil profile
during the winter months is delivered to the river mouth monitoring
stations at a very high delivery ratio and that sediment dislodged during
the summer months does not play an important role in the pollution of
the Great Lakes .then a drastic revision of the land management practices
currently promoted by the Soil Conservation Service will be required.
Practices which control summertime erosion will not significantly
reduce transport to Lake Erie. The most common tillage practice currently
employed in the Basin, fall moldboard plowing, may have to be, wherever
feasible, abandoned. Modern tillage and non-tillage crop production
systems which maintain a cover of the previous year's crop residue on
the surface of the land will have to be adopted.
U. W* Point Source Load Summary
The point source loadings for major sub-basins of the Maumee River
Basin are summarized in Table 35- These loadings were summarized from
the detailed point source inventory, which was made by the Lake Erie
Wastewater Management Study (1975)- The figures for the subtotal for
the Maumee River above Waterville and the grand total for the Maumee
River at the mouth are larger than the sum of the sub-basintotals. This
is because the LEWMS report did not prepare sub-basintotals from their
data files and did not map the location of all point sources. The sub-basin
totals in Table 35 were made by locating the entities on the maps and
ascribing the load to the sub-basin . Since many of the very small discharges
were not locatable on the maps,their loads do not appear in the sub-basin
totals, but they are included in the major basin totals.
Table 36 is the monthly sub-basin loading summary. It was prepared
on the assumption that point source loadings are continuous,throughout
the year, and is simply one twelfth of the total annual load. Reliable
data on the annual loading of suspended solids were not available.
U.l*5 Diffuse Source Loads
Tables 37-^0 present the diffuse source yield per unit area for
the Maumee, Portage, Black Creek-Site 2,and Black Creek-Site 6,
respectively. Tables Ul and k2 present the total diffuse source loading
for the Maumee and the Portage, respectively. Both monthly and annual
values for each watershed and parameter are given.
Tables h3 through h$ present the unit area yields by months for all
the Maumee Task C Pilot Watershed Study Experimental plots. These are total
diffuse source loads (there are no point sources). On the plots which
were tiled, Lenawee, Blount, Paulding and Hoytville, the figures represent
the total of surface and tile transport. Table U9 is the "basinwide
soil area weighted mean" yield of the plots. The yield of each plot was
weighted into a mean figure for use in the extrapolation of basinwide
loading comparisons. The method of area weighting was described earlier
in this report. The yields in Table kQ for the Hoytville soil are the
mean of the yields from 8 separate plots. There were no measurements
of yield from any of the plots prior to July 1975 except the Hoytville
plots, where sampling began in May 1975.
-------
-100-
IABLE 35. POINT SOURCE LOADINGS, MAUMEE RIVER BASIN
Total P Ortho P (N02+N03)-N NH^N Organic N
Basin
St. Joseph
St. Marys
Tiffin
*
Auglaize (m. s.)
Blanchard
*
Little Auglaize
A
Ottawa
Auglaize (Total)
Maumee @ Defiance
Maumee @ Waterville
Subtotal
Maumee Below Waterville
GRAND TOTAL
(Mt/Yr)
29.1
5.0
26.3
26.9
29.3
28.6
66.1
150.9
51.3
30.0
321.4
314.2
635.6
(Mt/Yr)
14.3
2.5
13.2
13.5
14.6
14.2
33.1
75.4
25.7
15.0
160.7
157.1
317.8
(Mt/Yr)
37.8
19.1
97.7
55.6
86.0
31.2
43.7
216.5
306.8
27.0
704.9
919.1
1624.0
-^
(Mt/Yr)
38.0
20.3
89.0
34.3
109 4
37.3
241.5
422.6
362.8
58.0
1026.4
1100.9
2127.3
(Mt/Yr)
14.9
6.1
27.3
14.3
32.3
11.0
71.8
129.4
108.3
14.6
311.3
326.1
637.4
Sum to Auglaize (Total)
-------
-101-
TABLE 36. MONTHLY POINT SOURCE LOADINGS, MAUMEE RIVER MSIN
Total P Ortho P (N03+N02>-N
"NH -N Organic-N
Basin
St. Joseph
St. Marys
Tiffin
*
Auglaize (m.s.)
ft
Blanchard
*
Little Auglaize
*
Ottawa
Auglaize (Total)
Maumee @ Defiance
Maumee @ Waterville
Subtotal
Maumee Below Waterville
GRAND TOTAL
(Mt/Mo)
2.43
.42
2.19
2.24
2.44
2.38
5.51
12.58
4.28
2.50
26.78
26.18
52.97
(Mt/Mo)
1.19
.21
1.10
1.13
1.22
1.18
2.76
6.28
2.14
1.25
13.39
13.09
26.48
(Mt/Mo)
3.15
1.59
8.14
4.63
7.17
2.60
3.64
18.04
25.57
2.25
58.74
76.59
135.33
(Mt/Mo)
3.17
1.69
7.42
2.86
9.12
3.11
20.13
35.22
30.23
4.83
85.53
91.74
177.28
(Mt/Mo)
1.24
.51
2.28
1.19
2.69
.92
5.98
10.78
9.03
1.22
25.94
27.18
53.12
Sum to Auglaize (Total)
-------
-102-
TABLE 37. UNIT AREA YIELDS OF SEDIMENT AND NUTRIENTS FROM MAUMEE RIVER AT
WATERVILLE
1975
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov
Dec
1976
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov
Dec
1977
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
1975
1976
1977
Dissolved
Inorganic
Phosphorus
0.029
0.052
0.043
0.017
0.025
0.030
0.001
0.000
0.013
0.000
0.000
0.040
0.026
0.136
0.018
0.000
0.002
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.016
0.051
0.041
0.010
0.000
0.249
0.182
0.117
, Total Suspended
Phosphorus Sediment
0.430
0.442
0.145
0.071
0.200
0.144
0.020
0.000
0.047
0.004
0.005
0.373
0.052
0.902
0.382
0.005
0.027
0.008
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.019
0.433
0.551
0.098
0.000
1.882
1.376
1.101
\f O l\\ ft / mf^n i~^ *. mm
215.7
168.2
39.3
39.2
112.4
98.1
22.2
6.1
18.3
5.7
2.8
242.5
7.2
608.2
252.7
8.6
15.9
8.2
4.4
1.5
0.9
1.5
0.2
0.3
0.0
0.9
227.9
338.7
57.3
2.9
.
970
910
628
N03-N
3.46
3.14
1.94
1.97
2.47
2.64
0.27
0.05
0.24
0.13
0.10
2.25
0.63
4.03
0.70
0.36
0.71
0.50
0.13
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.08
4.51
4.21
1.69
0.03
18.672
7.052
10.528
NH4-N
0.05
0.06
0.06
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.07
0.28
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.08
0.19
0.01
0.00
0.00
0.193
0.364
0.295
-------
-103-
TABLE 38. UNIT AREA YIELDS OF SEDIMENT AND NUTRIENTS FROM PORTAGE RIVER
AT WOODVILLE
1975
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov
Dec
Dissolved
Inorganic
Phosphorus
0.037
0.049
0.023
0.007
0.031
0.020
0.000
0.000
0.034
0.000
0.000
0.025
Total
Suspended
Phosphorus Sediment
0.221
0.262
0.040
0.002
0.304
0.054
0.000
0.000
0.064
0.013
0.000
0.228
125.6
137.7
17.5
2.1
285.5
34.6
1.5
0.8
226.0
8.2
0.4
117.5
N03-N
3.54
5.13
1.48
0.72
3.41
1.59
0.00
0.00
0.55
0.40
0.01
1.93
NH4-N
0.00
0.01
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
1976
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov
Dec
0.042
0.117
0.000
0.000
0.001
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
1977
0.089
0.581
0.000
0.000
0.017
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
28.1
309.8
7.1
1.1
20.7
3.2
1.7
1.2
1.6
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.89
3.72
0.30
0.19
0.93
0.16
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.07
0.12
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
1975
1976
1977
0.026
0.117
0.075
0.038
0.011
0.000
0.226
0.161
0.267
0.026 0.2
0.176 16.4
0.288 140.1
0.137 41.2
0.044 19.4
0.000 0.0
1.188 957
0.688 375
0.672 217
0.00
0.06
7.37
4.86
1.60
0.00
18.751
6.186
13.888
0.00
0.31
0.10
0.01
0.00
0.00
0.014
0.208
0.425
-------
TABLE 39.
UNIT AREA YIELDS OF SEDIMENT AND NUTRIENTS FROM BLACK CREEK
WATERSHED: SITE 2
1975
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov
Dec
Dissolved
Inorganic
Phosphorus
Total
Phosphorus
Suspended
Sediment
N03-N
0.033
0.024
0.010
0.013
0.043
0.045
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.010
0.023
ivg/ lid/ UHJULU
0.197 101.70
0.618 189.95
0.066 49.38
0.048 32.50
2.527 1569.43
1-904 811.80
0.053 38.19
0.000 3.96
0.016 12.75
0.000 2.05
0.156 33.45
1-014 194.83
3.54
2.63
2.19
1.61
1.50
3.11
0.13
0.01
0.10
0.00
0.37
1.66
NH4-N
0.151
0.241
0.122
0.159
0.520
0.153
0.007
0.000
0.010
0.000
0.057
0.082
1976
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov
Dec
1975
1976
1977
0.000
0.062
0.010
0.003
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.199
0.075
0.000
0.003
0.610
0.076
0.029
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
6.599
0.717
0.000
6.76
180.42
42.47
14.98
4.26
1.25
0.38
0.21
0.00
0.67
0.00
0.00
[^•Q- / 1*\ o / *» A a T*
3040
251
0
0.16
1.55
0.90
0.78
0.19
0.03
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
16.826
3.617
0.000
0.043
0.209
0.059
0.089
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
1.502
0.401
0.000
-------
-105-
TABLE 40. UNIT AREA YIELDS OF SEDIMENT AND NUTRIENTS FROM BLACK CREEK
WATERSHED: SITE 6
1975
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov
Dec
Dissolved
Inorganic
Phosphorus
Total
Phosphorus
Suspended
Sediment
N03-N
NH4-N
________ _ — -_ Icg/ha/month - -- -
0.026
0.031
0.030
0.025
0.026
0.013
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.013
0.009
0.278
0.435
0.139
0.109
1.481
1.391
0.000
0.022
0.109
0.000
0.139
0.955
164.60
303.57
89.92
69.37
1585.64
1542.06
0.00
16.24
31.05
0.00
40.80
78.63
1.19
0.80
1.32
1.03
1.02
0.95
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.24
0.50
0.278
0.227
0.130
0.109
0.135
0.050
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.025
0.043
1976
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov
Dec
1975
1976
1977
0.000
0.102
0.017
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.173
0.119
0.000
0.000
0.471
0.148
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
5.057
0.619
0.000
4.86
195.00
87.75
2.73
1.13
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Kg/ha/year ~
3922
291
0
0.00
0.87
0.59
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
7.056
1.459
0.000
0.082
0.325
0.048
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.034
0.000
0.998
0.489
0.000
-------
-106-
TABLE 41. TOTAL DIFFUSE LOADS OF SEDIMENT AND NUTRIENTS FROM MAUMEE RIVER AT
WATERVILLE
1975
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov
Dec
1976
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov
Dec
1977
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
1975
1976
1977
Dissolved
Inorganic
Phosphorus
48.3
85.7
71.3
27.4
41.6
49.0
1.3
0.0
22.1
0.0
0.0
67.1
43.7
226.3
29.5
0.0
3.2
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
26.7
84.7
67.4
15.8
0.0
413.728
302.698
194.713
Total
Phosphorus
""™ metric
714
734
240
118
332
239
33
0
77
7
9
619
87
1497
634
9
44
13
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
31
718
914
163
0
3122
2283
1826
Suspended
Sediment
357926
279076
65162
65010
186394
162765
36859
10103
30387
9452
4617
402244
12016
1008933
419312
14256
26366
13593
7322
2446
1488
2489
348
536
75
1425
378017
561921
94990
4770
1609989
1509101
1041199
N03-N
5737
5210
3226
3266
4100
4388
455
82
392
220
167
3734
1047
6681
1165
590
1177
824
216
0
0
0
0
0
0
138
7482
6986
2808
51
30977
11699
17465
NHA-N
i m ^:*—
93
115
112
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
126
472
7
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
139
327
23
0
0
320
605
489
-------
-107-
TABLE 42. TOTAL DIFFUSE LOADS OF SEDIMENT AND NUTRIENTS FROM PORTAGE RIVER
AT WOODVILLE
1975
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov
Dec
1976
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov
Dec
1977
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
1975
1976
1977
Dissolved
Inorganic
Phosphorus
4.1
5.5
2.6
0.7
3.5
2.2
0.0
0.0
3.8
0.0
0.0
2.8
4.7
13.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
2.9
12.9
8.3
4.3
1.2
0.0
25.106
17.857
29.596
Total Suspended
Phosphorus Sediment
metric
25
29
4
0
34
6
0
0
7
1
0
25
10
64
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
20
32
15
5
0
132
76
75
13928
15271
1943
235
31657
3833
169
88
25058
905
42
13035
3115
34356
787
119
2293
359
184
138
181
0
0
0
20
1822
15540
4565
2157
0
106163
41533
24104
N03-N
392
569
164
79
378
176
0
0
61
44
1
214
98
413
33
21
103
17
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
7
817
539
177
0
2080
686
1540
NH4-N
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
9
14
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
35
11
1
0
0
2
23
47
-------
-108-
TABLE 43. UNIT AREA YIELDS OF SEDIMENT AND NUTRIENTS FROM WATERSHED:
SOILTYPE: ROSELMS
111
Dissolved
Inorganic
Phosphorus
Total
Phosphorus
Suspended
Sediment
NH4-N
1975
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov
Dec
1976
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov
Dec
1977
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
1975
1976
1977
kg/ha/month
0.000
0.030
0.000
0.010
0.020
0.010
0.114
0.040
0.010
0.010
0.000
0.020
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.010
0.010
0.020
0.010
0.000
0.060
0.204
0.050
0.420
0.250
0.000
0.000
0.250
0.000
1.005
0.880
0.000
0.360
0.020
0.200
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.390
0.370
0.410
0.000
0.920
2.465
1.170
960.00
520.00
0.00
96.00
207.00
12.00
1035.71
1727.00
57.00
489.00
23.00
402.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
93.00
252.00
680.00
258.00
0.00
, .
kg/ha/year
1783
3746
1283
0.39
0.16
0.00
0.13
1.56
1.84
7.80
6.22
1.48
2.90
0.11
2.33
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
1.61
2.45
5.07
0.99
0.00
2.240
22.679
10.120
0.180
0.000
0.000
0.210
0.100
0.000
0.797
0.000
0.300
0.000
0.000
0.590
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.490
1.687
0.000
-------
-109-
TABLE 44. UNIT AREA OF SEDIMENT AND NUTRIENTS FROM WATERSHED:
SOILTYPE: ROSELMS
2'01
1975
Dissolved
Organic
Phosphorus
Total
Phosphorus
Suspended
Sediment
kg/ha/month
N03-N
NH4-N
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov
Dec
1976
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov
Dec
1977
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
1975
1976
1977
0.000
0.040
0.030
0.000
0.020
0.020
0.000
0.093
0.020
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.030
0.020
0.010
0.010
0.000
0.110
0.113
0.070
0.000
0.250
0.190
0.020
0.040
1.040
0.000
0.725
0.880
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.210
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.410
1.000
0.370
0.330
0.000
1.540
1.815
2.110
0.00
4153.99
248.00
11.00
74.00
596.00
62.00
793.36
1186.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
279.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
237.00
741.00
768.00
191.00
0.00
kg/ha/year
5083
2320
1937
0.15
1.86
0.00
0.01
1.41
2.09
2.15
0.31
1.43
0.00
0.00
0.00
1.34
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
2.51
1.94
1.04
0.00
0.00
5.520
5.231
5.490
0.430
1.570
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.130
0.380
0.259
0.020
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.080
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
2.130
0.739
0.000
-------
-110-
TABLE 45. T.7NIT AREA YIELDS OF SEDIMENT AND NKERIENTS FROM WATERSHED: 301 + 302
SOILTYPE: LENAWEE
Dissolved
Inorganic
Phosphorus
Total
Phosphorus
Suspended
Sediment
NOq-N
1975
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov
Dec
1976
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov
Dec
1977
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
1975
1976
1977
kg/ha/month
NH4-N
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.050
0.000
0.114
0.010
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.160
0.540
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.050
0.124
0.700
0.650
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.010
0.280
0.000
0.238
0.040
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.290
0.350
0.030
0.100
0.000
0.940
0.278
0.770
13.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
4.00
139.00
0.00
768.50
25.00
0.00
1.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
38.00
216.00
4.00
1.00
0.00
,
Kg/ha/year — —
156
794
259
0.53
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.26
10.09
0.14
2.35
2.41
0.52
0.41
0.01
0.01
O.OQ
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
1.39
10.63
0.88
2.09
0.00
10.880
5.851
14.990
0.020
0.040
0.000
0.000
0.130
0.340
0.040
0.394
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.580
0.010
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.530
0.434
0.590
-------
-111-
TABLE 46. UNIT AREA YIELDS OF SEDIMENT AND NUTRIENTS FROM WATERSHED:
SOILTYPE: BLOUNT
401 + 402
1976
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov
Dec
1977
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
1975
1976
1977
0.000
0.020
0.000
0.000
0.030
0.030
0.000
0.042
0.100
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.030
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.010
0.040
0.010
0.000
0.080
0.171
0.060
0.000
0.800
0.080
0.010
0.160
0.350
0.040
0.797
1.110
0.010
0.010
0.390
0.700
0.000
0.000
0.350
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.640
1.590
0.070
0.000
1.400
3.407
2.300
11.00
643 . 00
54.00
0.00
84.00
224.00
42.00
1179.68
1109.00
1.00
2.00
654.00
714.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
103.00
397.00
648.00
12.00
0.00
1016
3702
1160
0.50
0.96
0. 15
0.05
2.72
4.87
1.05
6.63
2.65
1.09
0.70
1.26
1.34
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
2 . 59
13.76
13.37
1.91
0.00
9.250
14.718
31.630
0.120
0.900
0.040
0.000
0.440
0.230
0.900
0.093
0.010
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.310
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.050
0.000
0.000
0.000
1.730
1.313
0.050
-------
-112-
TABLE 47. BNIT AREA YIELDS OF SEDIMENT AND NUTRIENTS FROM WATERSHED:
SOILTYPE: PAULDING
501 + 502
Dissolved
Inorganic
Phosphorus
Total
Phosphorus
Suspended
Sediment
N03-N
1975
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov
Dec
1976
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov
Dec
1977
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
1975
1976
1977
kg/ha/month
NH4-N
0.200
0.000
0.000
0.090
0.010
0.030
0.020
0.020
0.145
0.120
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.860
0.020
0.260
0.010
0.000
0.150
0.285
1.150
0.000
0.020
0.000
0.860
0.070
0.160
1.220
0.460
0.994
3.090
0.000
0.010
0.070
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
1.500
3.350
1.550
0.000
2.330
4.624
6.400
0.00
1768.00
105.00
2040.00
119.00
106.00
534.00
281.00
1400.28
2804.00
0.00
0.00
76.00
5.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
511.00
1351.00
1118.00
868.00
0.00
kg/ha/year
4672
4566
3848
0.00
0.57
0.11
2.29
0.80
2.27
1.46
1.37
2.15
3.10
0.24
0.18
8.38
0.02
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
6.69
3.12
4.27
1.94
0.00
7.500
15.444
16.020
0.000
0.350
0.050
0.070
0.010
0.290
0.540
0.840
0.870
0.140
0.000
0.000
0,000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
1.310
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
1.310
1.850
1.310
-------
-113-
TABLE 48. UNIT AREA YIELDS OF SEDIMENT AND NUTRIENTS FROM WATERSHED:
SOILTYPE: HOYTVILLE
61 + 62
1975
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov
Dec
1976
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov
Dec
1977
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
1975
1976
1977
Dissolved
Inorganic
Phosphorus
0.039
0.037
0.000
0.008
0.022
0.008
0.045
0.116
0.054
0.196
0.031
0.007
0.008
0.000
0.008
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.217
0.039
0.022
0.023
0.022
0.275
0.304
0.324
Total
Suspended
Phosphorus Sediment
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.108
0.202
0.023
0.030
0.163
0.101
0.428
0.163
0.052
0.062
0.007
0.015
0.008
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.343
0.271
0.188
0.163
0.307
0.527
0.836
1.272
804.00
244.00
10.10
65.00
26.00
7.00
17.00
17.00
1.40
40.39
29.00
2.60
4.80
1.40
2.90
0.13
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
8.00
10.00
2.00
42.00
178.00
kg/ha/year ~
1190
83
240
N03-N
9.26
3.54
0.04
0.34
1.74
0.36
0.16
3.17
1.44
6.21
2.92
0.71
1.87
0.11
0.02
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.72
4.77
5.18
3.22
0.72
18.605
13.285
14.606
NH4-N
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000,
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.008
0.007
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.015
-------
TABLE 49. UNIT AREA YIELDS OF SEDIMENT AND NUTRIENTS OF ALL PLOTS (WEIGHTED
BY DISTRIBUTION OF SOILTYPE IN THE MAUMEE BASIN)
1975
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov
Dec
1976
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov
Dec
1977
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
1975
1976
1977
Dissolved
Inorganic
Phosphorus
Total
Phosphorus
Suspended
Sediment
kg/ha/month
N03-N
NH4-N
0.000
0.021
0.020
0.000
0.012
0.019
0.003
0.067
0.041
0.001
0.001
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.150
0.100
0.040
0.010
0.000
0.072
0.113
0.300
0.101
0.302
0.147
0.005
0.070
0.484
0.047
0.737
0.808
0.000
0.018
0.118
0.251
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.210
0.660
0.860
0.290
0.060
1.109
1.979
2.080
148.60
1205,50
266.80
13.50
58.10
277.30
49.50
828.99
645.30
3.60
26.10
190.70
221.10
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
136.00
437.00
483.00
139.00
37.00
.
kg/ha/year
1970
1965
1232
2.26
0.73
0.54
0.50
1.31
4.19
1.34
3.28
2.65
0.64
0.74
1.03
0.80
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
2.28
7.26
5.80
1.73
0.15
9.530
10.483
17.220
0.157
0.627
0.014
0.000
0.172
0.202
0.407
0.261
0.012
0.015
0.000
0.000
0.140
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.190
0.020
0.000
0.000
0.000
1.172
0.835
0.210
-------
-115-
k. U6 Precipitation in the Maumee River Basin 1975-76
Rainfall data for the period 1975-76 was obtained for all hourly
recording rain gauge stations in Ohio and Indiana. There are no such
stations in or near the Michigan portion of the Maumee Basin. These
records of hourly precipitation are readily available from the National
Climatic Center of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.
There are ih weather reporting stations in or very near the Maumee Basin
with recording rain gauges. Of these Ik, 8 had sufficiently complete
records of rainfall during the 1975-76 period for this analysis. Figure 1
shows the location of all recording rain gauges in and near the Maumee
Basin.
Since this analysis is primarily concerned with the relationships
of rainfall erosion and runoff,it was necessary to determine whether
precipitation was in the form of rain or snow (or ice, etc.). This
was done through the use of NOAA's Local Climatological Data reports for the
cities of Toledo and Fort Wayne. These monthly reports are available
only for primary weather data-gathering stations in larger cities.
Precipitation, rain or snow, moisture equivalent, depth of snow on the
ground, daily ranges and means of temperatures as given in the reports
provide indices of the nature of the storms. This information was used
to determine whether a particular storm was rain or snow. The effect
of snow on the ground was not taken into account rigorously in the cal-
culation of rainfall erosion indices. This will not be a serious effect
because it seemed that there was usually very little snow on the ground
at the beginning of most rainfall storms.
1975 and 1976 were years of moderate extremes of precipitation in
the Maumee River Basin. Table 50 summarizes the total precipitation,
normals, and departures from normal for the eight stations with adequate
precipitation data for the two years. The last column, Area Weight,
indicates the weight of the given station, determined by the method
of Thiessen (1911), in the calculation of area weighted mean basin
precipitation.
1975 was wet, 97-5 cm (33.Uo in.), 11.0 cm (U.31* in.) above normal;
1976 was dry, 71.27 cm (28.06 in.), 15-2 cm (6.00 in.) below normal. Normal
total annual precipitation for the basin is 86.5 cm (3^.06 in.). The
mean of the two years was 8k.k cm (33.22 in.) and only 2.1 cm (0.8l in.)
below normal.
Although it would appear that the water budget of the watershed was
not degraded over the period,it will become apparent in the discussion
of runoff (below) that the excesses of 1975 had little effect on the
deficiency of 1976.
The distribution of the deviance in precipitation is also interesting.
Figure 27 is a graph of normal 1975 and 1976 monthly precipitation at
Defiance, Ohio. During both 1975 and 1976 precipitation did not deviate
from normal to any great degree during the early months of the year,
January through May, or during the fall months, September through October.
The greatest deviations took place during the summer of 1975, June, July,
and August, when for the three months precipitation was a total of 21.9 cm
(8.6U in.) above normal. During 1976 precipitation was considerably below
normal in April, May, June, August, November,and December. The implications
of these deviations on runoff, gross erosion,and sediment delivery will be
discussed in later sections.
-------
-116-
TABLE 50
SUMMARY OF PRECIPITATION DATA
MAUMEE RIVER BASIN
Defiance
Findlay
Lima
Pandora
St. Karys
Toledo
Ft . Wayne
Kendallville
Maumee Basin
Normal
cm.
84.63
90.47
90.27
90.37
86.79
80.09
90.93
87.78
86.5
1975
101.2
98.0
95.3
93.9
90.9
98.0
93.3
101.0
97.5
Departure
16.6
7.6
5.0
8.6
4.1
17.9
2.4
10.6
11.0
1976
64.9
79.5
82.3
65.9
69.9
73.1
66.8
87.4
71.27
Departura
-19.7
-11.0
- 8.0
-24.5
-16.9
- 7.0
-24.2
- .4
-15.2
Area
Weight
1. Mean of Lima and Findlay
2. Mean of Ft. Wayne and Defiance
Mean 1975, 76 : 84.4
Departure : -2.1
-------
FIGURE 27. NORMAL, 1975 AM* 1976 PRECIPITATION AT DEFIANCE, OHIO
Inches
— 6.0
— 5.0
~ U.O
3.0
2.0
1.0
H
—]
1
ru
NORMAL
1975
1976
JAM FEE MAR APR MAY JUN ' JUL AUG SEP OUT NOV DEC
-------
-118-
In his description of the rainfall erosion factor, R, of the
Universal Soil Loss Equation,Wischmeier (1965) defines a storm as a
period of precipitation of 1.2? cm (0.5 in.) unbroken by 6 hours of
non-measurable precipitation. This definition has generally been used
in this analysis although storms of as little as 1.09 cm (0.^3 in.)
have been included. Tables 51 and 52 summarize the storm and non-storm
rainfall at each station and for the Maumee Basin for 1975 and 1976,
respectively. There is very little difference between the two years
in the percentage of rainfall that came in storms and non-storms, 60.8$
as storms in 1975 and 55.9$ as storms in 1976. There is, of course, a
great difference in total storm precipitation between the two years because
of the large difference in total rainfall. Rainfall meeting the definition
of a storm fell somewhere in the Maumee River Basin on a total of 67
days in 1975 and 52 days in 1976. Of the total number of storm days,
16 in 1975 and 10 in 1976 were of a frontal or basinwide nature. These
storms are usually associated with warm fronts advancing across the basin
from the west or southwest. This is apparent from the intensity and
duration of the rainfall events and the relative time of beginning of the
storms as they advance across the basin. The remainder are convective
and cold front storms .which may be of high intensity but usually have a
shorter duration and are more localized.
^.^7 Storms and Runoff
There are several very important questions about the relationships
of storms, runoff, gross erosion ,and sediment delivery which remain
largely unanswered. It has been common practice to treat the summer
through early fall months, when the most energetic storms occur, as the
most serious period of erosion. If bare soil and identical antecedent
moisture conditions are assumed ,the previous statement is true, but this
is seldom the case in a natural system. During July and August, when the
most intense thunderstorms may occur, the canopy cover in a corn-soybean
agricultural watershed may be nearly 100$. The energy of these storms,
as accumulated for calculation of the rainfall erosion factor, may be
almost completely dissipated on the leaves of the crops. Large raindrops
are broken down and finally reach the surface at reduced velocity and
total kinetic energy. Gross sheet erosion is drastically reduced, compaction
and sealing of the soil surface is reduced, and infiltration remains higher
for a longer time during the storm which is usually of shorter duration
than the winter storm. Runoff from equivalent total precipitation storms
in the summer is only a small fraction of the runoff from the similar
storm in the winter.
Table 53 is a summary of all storms in the Maumee Basin during 1975
and 1976 which produced significant rises in the hydrograph at Waterville,
Ohio. The Waterville gauge drainage area, 16,353 sq km (6,311* sq mi) is the
farthest gauge downstream and measures almost total basin runoff. The
hydrographs of sub-basins have not been examined. The numerals identifying
the type of storm indicate how widespread the occurrence of rainfall
was over the basin: (l) All stations reported storm class rainfall on
the same day ~ a basinwide storm; (2) All but 1 or 2 stations report a
storm rainfall on the same day—a near basinwide storm; (3) All
stations report storm rainfall over a period of 2 or more days, but all
stations do not report storms on every day—a basinwide storm of extended
duration; and (h) Less than 6 stations reported storm rainfall, but there
was a significant rise in the hydrograph at Waterville. P is the basinwide
area weighted total precipitation.
-------
-119-
TABLE 51
PRECIPITATION OF STORM AND NON-STORM PERIODS - 1975
1975
Defiance
Findlay
Lima
Pandora
St. Marys
Toledo
Ft. Wayne
Kendallville
MAUMEE BASIN
STORM
62.8
64.5
55.1
63.2
52.3
56.7
59.9
56.1
59.3
%
62.0
65.8
57.9
63.9
57.5
57.9
64.2
55.6
60.8
NON-STORM
38.5
33.5
40.1
35.8
38.6
41.3
33.4
44.8
38.2
%
38.0
34.2
42.1
36.1
42.5
42.1
35.8
44.4
39.2
TABLE 52
PRECIPITATION OF STORM AND NON-STORM PERIODS - 1976
1976
Defiance
Findlay
Lima
Pandora
St. Marys
Toledo
Ft. Wayne
Kendallville
MAUMEE BASIN
STORM
31.5
45.2
46.5
40.2
38.9
38.1
41.3
61.5
39.8
%
48.5
56.9
56.5
60.9
55.6
52.1
61.8
68.4
55.9
NON-STORM
33.4
34.3
35.8
25.7
31.0
35.0
25.5
28.4
31.4
%
51.5
43.1
43.5
39.1
44.4
47.9
38.2
31.6
44.1
-------
STORM
NUMBER
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
IS
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
SUMMARY OF
STORM
DATE
1975
1/8
1/28
2/22
3/7
3/28
4/18
4/23-4/24
4/27
5/5
5/20-5/22
6/1 -6/11
6/11
6/14
6/22-6/25
7/3
7/18-7/19
8/1 -8/5
8/15
8/21-8/22
8/26-8/30
9/5
/..:. 9/11
10/17-10/18
11/29-11/30
12/6
12/14-12/15
1976
1/25
2/16 to
2/22
3/3 -3/5
4/24-4/25
5/6
5/30-6/1
6/18
6/23-6/24
8/5 -8/6
STORMS
TYPE
2
1
1
2
2
2
4
4
4
3
3
1
1
4
4
3
3
2
3
3
2
2
3
4
4
1
4
1
3
3
3
1
2
1
3
2
-120-
TABLE 53
PRODUCING SIGNIFICANT RUNOFF
TOTAL BASIN
PRECIP
(cm)
1.49
1.68
2.79
1.42
1.32
1.37
0.63
0.58
1.68
3.30
1.80
2.16
1.88
0.61
1.88
4.22
4.57
2.31
2.36
2.57
1.93
2.36
2.06
1.27
.38
2.54
1.04
3.94
2.62
3.12
2.24
1,93
2.18
2.57
1.60
MAXIMUM
FLOW
(m /sec)
895.
569.
1,399.
282.
411.
175.
413.
362.
382.
612.
385.
170.
640.
255.
135.
187.
61.2
91.8
161.
155.
234.
176.
154.
388.
235.
869.
462.
1,940.
1,926.
1,450
317.
182.
160.
31.1
78.2
14.4
PEAK
FLUX
(MT/DAY)
60,872.
27,669.
106,141.
1,996.
7,711.
1,034.
11,431.
4,863.
6,350.
43,364.
9 , 435 .
2,867.
37,376.
7,484.
1,869.
2,504.
392.
"699.
2,123.
3,329.
4,200.
3,003
1,089.
5,969.
1,080
78,926
2,359.
127,914.
57,607.
84,369.
2,005.
1,016.
595.
224.
466.
59.9
-------
-121-
A 1.68 cm (0.66 in.) basinwide storm during the winter (1/28/75)
produced a peak mean daily discharge of 569 cu.m/s (20,100 cfs),while
a 2.16 cm (0.85 in.) basinwide storm during the summer gave a peak mean
daily discharge of only 170 cu m/sec ( 6,010 cfs). In general,there is
very little relation between total basin precipitation and basinwide
runoff. Figure 28 is a scatter plot of peak mean daily discharge
vs. mean basinwide precipitation,which shows the wide scatter of points
and correlation coefficient of 0.2297 (r = 0.0527) for this relationship.
The largest storm event during the period of observation, P = ^.57 cm
(1.80 in.), 8/1-8/5/1976,produced a peak mean daily discharge of only
6l cu.m/sec (2,l60 cfs),which is less than one half of the mean annual
daily discharge (136 cu.m/sec (U,8l3 cfs)).
The point of this comparison has to do with the question of sediment
delivery. Sediment delivery of basinwide gross erosion and land wash to
the gauge (a daily sediment record station) at Waterville has been
estimated to be approximately 11$ of gross erosion (GLBC, 1975).
h.tyQ Storms and Sediment Transport
Table 5^ is taken from a report on nonpoint source pollution
(Baker, 1976),which was prepared for the Toledo Metropolitan Area
Council of Governments as part of an Areawide Water Quality Management
Planning Study (PL 92-500 Sec. 208). Total flow, sediment,and phosphorus
transport are summarized for eight storm events which occurred during
1975. Several large storms which occurred prior to April 25 are not
included. Also, storms during August are not included because the
automatic samplers had been taken out of service for other studies.
During the unmeasured period,United States Geological Survey records
indicate that storms on January 8 and February 22 produced the highest
peak flows and sediment transport of individual storm events during the
year.
The storms included in Table 5^ are ranked according to total
storm flow, total suspended solids mass transport,and flow weighted mean
concentration of suspended solids. Most of the storms fall fairly well
into order,with total flow rank corresponding with total load and flow
weighted mean concentration rank. The greatest exception is the storm
of Nov. 30,which ranked third in total volume of runoff but sixth and
seventh in total suspended solids transport and flow weighted mean
concentration. The major reason for the shift in rank order between total
flow and solids transport is the association of this storm with snow-melt
runoff.
Beginning on November 2h snow began accumulating on the ground at
both Toledo and Ft. Wayne ,reaching a maximum depth of 7-6 cm (3 in.) and
10.2 cm (k in.) at each city, respectively,on November 27. Total liquid
equivalent was 2.2 cm (0.72 in.) at Toledo and 1.0 cm (O.'kO in.) at Ft.
Wayne. Depth of snow on the ground at other stations in the Basin is
unknown. By the beginning of rainfall precipitation on November 29,the
snow depth at both cities had dropped to 2.5 cm (1.0 in.). By the time
the rainfall had ended on November 30 ,there was no snow on the ground
at either city.
The ratio of sediment transport between the storm of December 15
(the largest flow and sediment transport storm) and the snow-melt storm
of November 2k is 17:1. The ratio of flows was 1.7:1. Antecedent
moisture conditions were similar prior to both storms (wet). Soil was not
-------
OJ
CM
H
I
coo
ujo:
Oh-
cc »— »
OCCL.
oo
COUJ
oou
cccc
LUO
CO
CO
CM
t>0
4-
4-
4-
4-
4-4-
III II
68 L 9 S
«l
-f-
t
•
e
i
z
cDl
Mil
i i i i
68L 9
*l
I i
i i
S f
I
1
8
I
1
Z
7QL
i I i i i i i i
1 r r 1 •
68 L Q
XI
11 1 — i
S >
1 —
E
— i
Z
i01
39UHH3SIQ WUOiS
o
o
cc
cu
u
U4
CC
CU
en
en
CQ
en
£
H-
-------
TABLE
PHOSPHORUS AND SUSPENDED SEDIMENT TRANSPORT DURING INDIVIDUAL STORM EVENTS 0? 1975
Haumee River
Dates
Start
04/25
05/21
06/05
06/15
07/19
10/19
11/30
12/15
Finish
04/28
05/25
,06/07
06/18
07/22
10/30
12/06
12/20
Total Phosphorus
Flow (raj)
1.054xl08
1. 760xl08
8.570xl07
1.460xl08
3.900xl07
7.900xl07
l.SSOxlO8
2.630xl08
Load (ke)
4,135x10*
1.427xl05
3.730x10*
1.618xl05
1.640x10*
2.670x10*
7.140x10*
3.706xl05
(TP)
We. Mean Cone.
.3923
.8108
.4352
1.108
.4205
.3380
.4606
1.409
Suspended Solids (SS)
Flow (in-1)
1.104xl08
1.759xl08
8.570xl07
I.460xl08
3.900xl07
7.900xl07
1.540xl08
2.63Qxl08
Load (kg) Wt. Mean Cone.
2.291xl07
8.363xl07
2.290xl07
1.222xl08
l.lOOxlO7
7.400xl06
1.480xl07
2.513x10°
207.5
475.4
267.2
837.0
282.1
93.67
96.10
955.5
SIR Of TP
g of SS
1.891
1.706
1.629
1.324
1.491
3.608
4.793
1,475
'.
.58
1.30
.71
1.59
1.66
.81
.65
1.00
Rank
Q
5
2
6
4
8
7
3
1
Order of Storms
080 [SS] Ft
4
3
5
2
7
8
6
1
6
3
5
2
4
8
7
1
8
3
6
2
1
5
7
4
-------
-12 U-
frozen in either case and basin cover conditions vere probably identical,
since the storms were separated by only two weeks.
Although it would be unwise to draw conclusions based on two
storms, two observations can be made. The first observation is well
known: rain falling on snow does not erode soil. The second has been
the subject of considerable controversy and deals with the transport
of eroded soils out of watersheds: does soil which enters the drainage
network leave the watershed,or is it transported over a long period of
time in a series of jumps with each successive runoff event? "if the
latter mechanism is the case ,then the relationship between basin runoff
and sediment transport should not be significantly altered by the fact
that the runoff producing rain falls on snow. Sediment delivery to
downstream stations should be more a function of channel velocity than
the condition of the watershed at the time of rainfall, and the storm
of November 29-30 should have transported 8 to 10 times as much sediment
as it did. The observation then, based on the comparison of these two
storms, is that sediment transported to a defined channel during a storm
event probably moves completely out of the watershed during the storm in
which it entered the drainage network.
k.k9 Relationship of Gross Erosion and Sediment Delivery-
Table 55 presents the estimated mean annual soil loss as determined
for each of the experimental plots by the Universal Soil Loss Equation,
the actual 2-year experimental mean annual sediment delivery and the sediment
delivery ratio for each of the plots. The delivery ratio ranged from 6.3%
on the Blount and Lenawee plots to 62% for the Paulding. The Blount soil
had the coarsest texture and the Paulding the finest texture of the plots.
The extremely high sediment delivery ratio of the very fine textured
soils points to a need for special attention to these soils in management
programs. Although gross erosion on these soils may be very low (and
therefore are not flagged as "problem erosion areas") .their very high
sediment delivery ratios make them a problem for Great Lakes water quality.
The Paulding soil had absolutely the highest soil (and nutrient) loss of
all the experimental plots.
Application of the "basin soil area weight" gives a basinwide gross
erosion rate of 22.3 mt/ha/yr (10.0 t/a/yr) and 2.7 mt/ha/yr (l.Ol t/a/yr)
at the outlet of the plots, or a 12.3$ sediment delivery ratio. This is
further reduced to 0.9U mt/ha/yr in the Maumee River at Waterville, a
delivery ratio of h.2%. This estimate of gross erosion for the basin is
probably overestimated. The Great Lakes Basin Commission (GLBC, 1975)
estimated a basinwide gross erosion rate of 6.3 mt/ha/yr ( 2.8 t/a/yr),
and the sediment delivery ratio with respect to this value is lk.9%.
The true annual sediment delivery ratio probably lies somewhere between
the two values: k.2% to lk.9%. It must be remembered,though, as was
pointed out in the discussion of monthly sediment delivery, that the
sediment delivery ratio approaches 1 during the late winter/spring period
and 0 during the summer months.
In the Portage River Basin the estimated annual gross erosion rate
is_8.0 mt/ha/yr (3.5 t/a/yr) (TMACOG, 1976). As previously mentioned,
this basin is quite homogeneous in soil type. The Hoytville soil series
accounts for h3% of the basin. The Hoytville soil experimental plots are
located in the Portage River basin near Hoytville, Ohio. The slope length
on the plots is not representative of the slope length of the Hoytville
soil series: plots 80 feet, basinwide around 500' and up to 1,200'.
-------
TABLE •"
SOIL
TYPE
ROSELMS
ROSELMS
LENAWEE
BLOUNT
PAULDING
HOYTVILLE
ESTIMATFH ANNUAL GROSS hlUISI UN Kftlt-> nm fLUIS — — .
PLOT
111
201
301
401
501
au
R
130
130
130
130
130
125
x K x
0,49
0,49
0,29
0,43
0,49
0,24
n/iciuurnc c
LS
0,6
0,33
0.16
0,8
0,16
0,10
;nii AUF
x C
0,46
0.46
0,46
0,46
0,46
0,46
'i WPTRHTFH
X P
1,0
1,0
1,0
1,0
1,0
1,0
MEAN
A
= (T/A/Y)
= 17,6
= 9.7
= 2,8
= 20,6
= 4,7
1,4
- 10.0
(MT/HA/YR)
39,4
21,7
6,3
46,1
10.5
3.1
22,3
MEASURED
SEDIMENT
DELIVERY
(MT/HA/YR)
3.4
4,7
0,4
2.9
6,5
0.5
2.7
DELIVERED
RATIO
(I)
8.6
21.7
6.3
6.3
61.9
16,1
12.3
i
H
ro
i
-------
-126-
The LS factor of the USLE would range to approximately double the
plot LS factor, or up to about 0.2 The fact that the plots were all
underdrained is also considered to have significantly reduced gross
erosion The two-year mean annual soil loss from the plots was about
0.5 mt/ha/yr compared to the USLE estimated gross erosion rate (not
considering tile drainage) of 3.1 mt/ha/yr, or about 16% sediment
delivery ratio. Sediment delivery for the Portage River basin during
2-1/2 years of monitoring averaged 0.53 mt/ha/yr, virtually the same
value as at the outlet of the plots. The sediment delivery ratio
of the basin (estimated basinwide gross erosion vs. measured sediment
delivery) was 6.3$.
it.itlO Utility for Extrapolation
One of the principal objectives of the Task C - Pilot Watershed
Studies is to provide information which can be used to extend the
knowledge gained in those studies to unstudied (or unmeasured) areas of
the Great Lakes watershed. The problem of extrapolating data obtained
in land runoff studies over a period of little more than two years to a
general case must be considered tenuous. That is the caveat which must
be expressed with the presentation of this information.
Much of the information useful for extrapolation to other areas
has been presented in detail elsewhere in this report. Sediment and
nutrient yields from specific soil types and their seasonal variations
have been discussed in detail. The discussion of measured yields in
relation to estimated gross erosion rates in conjunction with soil
physical and chemical properties should be particularly useful The
parameters of the USLE given for the experimental plots should enable
other investigators to relate to the nature of the plots. Taking into
account the other soil properties presented,others should be able to
determine how these results compare to the work they are doing and how to
improve nutrient and sediment delivery estimates being made for other
watershed areas.
A commonly utilized extrapolation parameter is the relationship
between drainage basin size and sediment yield. Many different forms
of regression analysis were attempted to determine such a relationship
for the Maumee River Basin studies. It had been hoped that a drainage
area/sediment yield relationship could be determined within seasons
for_the Maumee subbasins, but this was made impossible because short-term
variations in rainfall patterns, snow melt, antecedent moisture, etc.
caused much more of the variance in the data than the difference in
watershed size. Within months.sediment and nutrient yields were virtually
independent of drainage basin size.
The best relationship between yield and watershed area was found
to be between study period mean annual yield and log drainage basin size.
The regression line for this relationship is shown in Figure 29 . The
points plotted are not the points which determine the regression. The
regression line is determined by the 2 to 2-1/2 year mean annual sediment
yield and Iog10 of the drainage basin size. The effects of meteorological
variations are significantly reduced as is the variance among drainage
basin sizes. The regression line is determined from the following data set
-------
FIGURE 29. SEDIMENT YIELDS AS A FUNCTION OF DRAINAGE AREA
oc
>-
CC
CD
UJ
en
UJ
cc
en
(3
1x10"2 IxKT1 1
Sediment Delivery = 2,226.8 - 227.9 log.n (Drainage Area)
R - -0.8290
R - 0.687
1x106 1x107
LEGEND
a PLOTS - 1975
A PLOTS - 1976
+ RI.L - 1975
ro
-------
-128-
Plots
Black Creek
Site 6
Black Creek
Site 2
Portage River
Maumee River
Drainage Area
(Hectares)
1.0
7:U
9142
110,900
1,639,500
log D.A.
(log ±u Hectares)
0.
2.855
2.9714
5.0145
6.215
Sediment
Delivery
(kg/ha/yr)
1,968
2,107
1,6^6
658
860
Regression of Sediment Delivery and log1Q (Drainage Area):
Sediment Delivery 2,226.8 - 227.91og10 (Drainage Area)
R = -0.8290 R2 = 0.687
The points plotted in Figure 29 represent (see legend) single-year
sediment yields from each of the study area watersheds. Also, the + (plus)
and * (diamond) symbols at 1.0 hectares (they are superimposed on one
another at 1976 kg/ha/yr and 1975 kg/ha/yr, respectively) represent the
soil area weighted mean of the plot sediment yields,which are individually
represented by the C-1 (square) and A (triangle) symbols.
A similar regression was performed for total phosphorus yield based
on the same criteria (two-year mean annual total phosphrous yield):
Area
(Hectares )
1.0
71^
9^2
110,900
1,639,500
Total Phosphorus Yield
kg/ha/yr
2.28U
2.838
3.658
0.938
1.629
Total P Yield (kg/ha/yr) = 3.229 = 0.2631og Area (Hectares)
R = -0.5901 R2 = 0.3W
It is apparent that total phosphorus yield is less dependent on
drainage basin size than is sediment delivery. It has been shown that
runoff sediment is enriched with clay-size particles relative to the
soil from which it originated. Runoff sediment had clay content ranging
from 53 to 96$,while the surface soils ranged from 27 to %%. Suspended
sediments in the Maumee River at Waterville are lh% total clay (USGS, 1972),
indicating further enrichment of the runoff sediment with increasing drainage
basin size. It was also shown that the clay fraction is enriched with
phosphorus relative to the surface soils. It is therefore apparent that
as the clay-size fraction is preferentially transported to the main stem of
the river, phosphorus is also preferentially transported to the mouth.
-------
-129
5. REFERENCES
1. Agronomy Guide, 1978-1979. Bulletin 472. Cooperative Extension
Service, Ohio State University.
2. Baker, D. B. 1976. Heidelberg College, River Studies Laboratory.
Water Quality Studies in the Maumee, Portage, Sandusky and Huron River
Basins. Prepared for the Toledo Metropolitan Area Council of Governments,
Area Wide Waste Water Quality Management Planning Study.
3. Black Creek Study. 1973. Environmental Impact of Land Use on Water
Quality. Work plan. USEPA, Region V. EPA-G005103.
4. Clark, J. 1977. Personal communication. IJC, Windsor, Ont.
5. Corps of Engineers, DOA, Buffalo District. 1975. Lake Erie Wastewater
Management Study, Preliminary Feasibility Report, Volume II. Appendix
A. Water quality inventory.
6. Final Report on the Black Creek Project. Technical report. Environmental
Impact of Land Use on Water Quality. 1977. EPA-905/9-77-007-B.
7. Forsyth, J. L. 1965. Contribution of Soils to the Mapping and
Interpretation of Wisconsin Tills in Western Ohio. Ohio Jour. Sci.
65:20-25.
8. Forsyth, J. L. 1966. The Geology of the Bowling Green Area, Wood
County, Ohio. The Compass, Sigma Gamma Epsilon. 43:23-29.
9. Goldthwait, R. P., G. W. White and J. L. Forsyth. 1961. Glacial Map
of Ohio. USGS Misc. Inv. Map. 1-316.
10. Herendorf, C. E. 1970. Sand and Gravel Resources of the Maumee River
Estuary, Toledo to Perrysburg, Ohio. Ohio Dept. Nat. Res., Geol. Survey.
Report No. 76.
11. Hough, J. L. 1958. Geology of the Great Lakes. Univ. 111. Press,
Urbana. 313 p.
12. Indiana Crop Reporting Service. Field Crops (Corn, Soybeans, Wheat,
Oats and Hay) Reports, Undated.
13. Indiana Geological Survey. 1956. Geologic Map of Indiana. Indiana
Geol. Survey Atlas Min. Res. No. 9.
14. International Joint Commission. 1976. Task C Handbook. Windsor, Ontario,
15. Konrad, J. G., G. Chesters and K. W. Bauer. 1977. Menomonee River
Pilot Watershed Study, prepared by staff of Wisconsin Department of
Natural Resources, University of Wisconsin System Water Resources
Center, and Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission for the
Pollution From Land Use Activities Reference Group, International
Joint Commission, Windsor, Ontario.
16. Lake Erie Wastewater Management Study, Preliminary Feasibility Report,
Volume I. 1975. Corps of Engineers, Buffalo District.
-------
-130-
17. Mannering, J. V. and C. B. Johnson. 1975. Fall Tillage Has Impact
on Soil Loss. In Environmental Impact of Land Use on Water Quality
Progress Report, Black Creek Project, Allen County, Indiana, USEPA.
18. Maumee River Basin Pilot Watershed Study. 1976. Semi-annual report.
October. Unpublished.
19. Michigan Crop Reporting Service, Michigan Agricultural Statistics
Annual Report 1977, June 1977.
20. Naymik, T. G. 1977. A Digital Computer Model for Estimating Bedrock
Water Resouces, Maumee River Basin, NW Ohio. Ph.D. Dissertation
The Ohio State University. '
21. Ohio Crop Reporting Service, Ohio Agricultural Statistics, Annual
Report 1976, May 1977.
22. Ohio Division of Water. 1960. Water Inventory of the Maumee River
Basin. Ohio Water Plan Inventory. No. 11. Ohio Dept. Nat. Res.
112 p.
23. Ohio Division of Water. 1962. Ohio Hydrologic Atlas. Ohio Div.
of Water, Water Plan Inventory, No. 13.
24. Ohio Water Commission. 1967. The Northwest Ohio Water Development
Plan. Ohio Dept. Nat. Res. 299 p.
25. Ostry, R. C. , and R. C. Hore. 1978. Grand River Pilot Watershed Study.
Prepared by the staff of the Ontario Ministry of the Environment for
the Pollution From Land Use Activities Reference Group, International
Joint Commission, Windsor, Ontario.
26. Pettyjohn, W. A., L. R. Hayes and T. R. Schultz. 1974. Concentration
and Distribution of Selected Trace Elements in the Maumee River Basin,
Ohio, Indiana and Michigan. Water Res. Center. Ohio State University.
27. Sonzogni, W. C., T. J. Monteith, W. N. Bach and V. G. Hughes. 1978.
U. S. Great Lakes Tributary Loadings. Task D. Great Lakes Basin
Commission.
28. Stout, W., K. Ver Steeg, and G. F. Lamb. 1943. Geology of Water
in Ohio. Ohio Dept. Nat. Res., Div. of Geol. Survey. Bull. 44, 694 p.
29. Thiessen, A. J. 1911. Precipitation for Large Areas. Mon. Weather
Review. Vol. 39. 1082-1084.
30. USDA, Soil Conservation Service. 1975. An Estimation of Soil Loss and
Sediment Yield for the Maumee River Basin, Using the Universal Soil Loss
Equation and Linear Programming Models. Erosion and Sedimentation
Technical Paper, Maumee River Basin Level B Study, Great Lakes Basin
Commission, Ann Arbor, Michigan.
31. U.S. Department of Interior, Geological Survey. 1972. Water Resources
Data for Ohio. Part 2. Water quality records. USGS, Columbus, Ohio.
-------
-131-
32. Wayne, W. J. 1958. Glacial Geology of Indiana. Indiana Geol.
Survey Atlas Min. Res. Map No. 10.
33. Wayne, W. J. and J. H. Zumberge. 1965. Pleistocene Geology of
Indiana and Michigan. In Quaternary of the United States, Princeton
Univ. Press, 635 p.
34. Wischmeier, W. J. and D. D. Smith. 1965. Predicting Rainfall - Erosion
Losses from Cropland East of the Rocky Mountains. Agricultural
Handbook No. 282, Agricultural Research Service - U. S. Dept. of
Agriculture and Purdue Agricultural Experiment Station, Washington, D. C.
-------
6. APPENDIX
-132-
Analytical Methods and References
Analysis
1. pH
Method
Glass electrode; 1:1 soil-
water and soil - 0.01M CaCl?
Reference
2. Organic carbon Dry combustion
3. Electrical Con- Conductance meter
ductivity
Dissolved oxygen Probe
Calcite +
dolomite
Carbonates +
Bicarbonates
7- Cation exchange
capacity
8. Cation exchange
capacity for
clays
9- Particle size
distribution
Gasometric with Chittek
apparatus
Titration with HC1
Sum of exchangeable bases
plus hydrogen. Hydrogen
by TEA-BaCl2 pH 8.2
Saturate with M BaCl2
and determine Ba by X-ray
fluorescence
Pipet method
10. Soil fractionation Sedimentation
11. BOD
Modified Winkler Method
Winters, E., and R. S.
Smith. 1929. Ind.
Eng. Chem. Anal. Ed.
1:202-203.
USDA Handbook 60. 195U.
Diagnosis and Improvement
of Saline and Alkali Soils,
Methods for Chemical
Analysis of Water and
Wastes. EPA. 1971.
Dreimanis, A. 1962.
J. Sediment, Petrol.
32:520-529.
Methods of Soil Analysis.
1965. Amer. Soc. Agron.
Mono. 9. Para 62 - 3-k
Methods of Soil Analysis.
Amer. Soc. Agron. Mono.
9- 1965. Para 57-U
Methods of Soil A.nalysis.
Amer. Soc. Agron. Mono. 9.
1965. Para
Rutledge, E. M. , L. P.
Wilding, M. Elf i eld.
1967. Soil Sci. Soc.
Amer. Proc. 31:287.
Methods for Chemical
Analysis of Water and
Wastes. EPA. 1971.
-------
-133-
Analysis
Method
12. Amorphous Fe and Acid ammonium oxalate
Al extraction
13. Amorphous Si
Free Fe and Al
oxides
15-
Phosphorus
adsorption
capacity
16. Total N
17. Organic N
18. Ammonia
19. Nitrate
*
20. Total P
2i. Org. P
22. Inorganic P
*
23. Available P
2k.
25.
26.
Exchangeable
cations
Alkali dissolution
Citrate-dithionate-
bicarbonate extraction
Langmuir adsorption
isotherm
Kjeldahl digestion
Total-inorganic NCNH^ + NC>3)
Steam distillation with MgO
Steam distillation with MgO
and Devarda's alloy
Perchloric acid digestion
Ignition method
Ascorbic acid-reduced
phosphomolybdate
Bray PI extraction
Replace with IN BaCl
Reference
Saunders , W. M. H. ,
1965. New Zeal. J.
Agr. Res. 8:30-57-
Hashimoto, I. and M. L.
Jackson. I960. Clays
and Clay Minerals .
7th Conf. 102-113.
Pergamon Press.
Mehra, 0. P. and M. L.
Jackson. I960. Clays
and Clay Minerals . 7th
Conf. 317-327. Pergamon
Press.
Olsen, S. R. and F. S.
Watanabe. Soil Sci .
Soc. Amer. Proc .
Methods of Soil Analysis,
Amer. Soc. Agron. Mono.
9, 1965. Para Q3-k .
Methods of Soil Analysis,
1965.
Amer. Soc. Agron. Mono.
9, Para Bk-3.
ASA Mono. 9, Para 73-2.
ASA Mono. 9, Para 73-3.
Murphy, J. an d J. P.
Riley. 1962. Anal.
Chim. Acta. 27:31-36.
Bray, R. H. and L. T.
Kurtz. 191*5. Soil
Sci. 59:39-^5.
Potassium, sodium Emission spectroscopy
Calcium, magnesium Atomic absorption spectroscopy
* P measured by asorbic acid - reduced phosphomolybdate as in item 22.
-------
-13U-
Analysis
27. Chloride
28. Si, Fe, Al
29. Total K, Fe
30. Total Al, 3i
31. Trace Metals
32. Pesticides
33. Mineralogy
Method
^ titration
Atomic absorption
X-ray fluorescence
HF digestion. Al and Si
analysis by atomic absorption
Atomic absorption
Gas chromatography
X-ray diffraction
Reference
USDA Handbook No. 60.
195^. Diagnosis and
Improvement of Saline
and Alkali Soils.
Wilding, L. P., L. R.
Drees, N. E. Smeck and
G. F. Hall. 1971.
Till: A Symposium.
R. P. Goldthwait, Ed.
Ohio State Univ. Press.
Pgs. 290-317.
Wilding, L. P., L. R.
Drees, N. E. Smeck and
G. F. Hall. 1971.
Till: A Symposium,
R. P. Goldthwait, Ed.
Ohio State Univ. Press.
Pgs. 290-317.
-------
-335-.
TECHNICAL REPORT DATA
(Please read Instructions on the reverse before completing)
1. REPORT NO.
EPA-905/9-79-005-A
3. RECIPIENT'S ACCESSION NO.
4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE
Maumee River Basin, Ohio, Pilot Watershed Study. Volume
1. Watershed Characteristics and Pollutant Loadings
5. REPORT DATE March 1979-Date
of preparation
6. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE
7.AUTHORIS) Terry J. Logan, Agronomy Department, Robert C.
Stiefel, Water Resources Center, Ohio State University
8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NO.
9. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS
Ohio State University
Research Foundation
1314 Kinnear Road
Columbus, Ohio 43212
10. PROGRAM ELEMENT NO.
2BA645
11. CONTRACT/GRANT NO.
Grants R005145-01 and
R005336-01
12. SPONSORING AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS
Great Lakes National Program Office
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region V
536 South Clark Street, Room 932
Chicago, Illinois 60605
13. TYPE OF REPORT AND PERIOD COVERED
Final Report, May 1975-May 197
14. SPONSORING AGENCY CODE
15. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES This study, funded by Great Lakes Program grants from the U.S. EPA,
was conducted as part of the Task C-Pilot Watershed Program for the International Joint
Commission's Reference Group on Pollution from Land Use Activities.
16. ABSTRACT
Five small agricultural watersheds and eight plots in the Maumee River Basin
of Ohio were instrumented for measurement of sediment and nutrients leaving the land
under prevailing land use management. These results were compared with loadings from
larger watersheds in the Basin and with downstream tributary loads. Studies were also
conducted on sediment transport, adsorption-desorption of sediment-P, and heavy metal
and pesticide loss from the Basin.
Monitoring during 1975-1977 showed that there were significant differences in sediment
and nutrient losses among different soil types in the Basin, Greatest sediment losses
occurred on the level and very poorly drained, high-clay lake plain soils as well as
the sloping, dissected lake plain clay soils. Losses were intermediate on moderately
sloping, till-plain soils and very low on level soils with good internal drainage
characteristics when they are tile-drained. Comparison with larger areas in the Basin
showed that snow melt and frontal spring storms resulted in significant sediment and
nutrient movement across the entire Ba'sin on large and small watersheds, while summer
convective storms were localized and had less effect on downstream pollutant loads.
The phosphorus, sediment transport, heavy metals, and pesticide studies are discussed
in Volume 2 of this report.
17.
KEY WORDS AND DOCUMENT ANALYSIS
DESCRIPTORS
b.lDENTIFIERS/OPEN ENDED TERMS C. COSATI Field/Group
Agricultural pilot watershed, agricultural
runoff, agricultural pollutant loadings,
sediment transport, sediment adsorption/
desorption, heavy metals, nutrients, soil
types/sediment and nutrient loss
Ohio State University,
Pollution form Land Use
Activities, Great Lakes
Basin, International
Joint Commission
18. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT
Document is available to the public through
the National Technical Information Service,
l-Spr i nrrf •ita'M \7a 991 £1
19. SECURITY CLASS (ThisReport)
None
21. NO. OF PAGES
146
20. SECURITY CLASS (This page)
22. PRICE
EPA Form 2220-1 (R«v. 4-77) PREVIOUS EDITION is OBSOLETE
6USGPO: 1979 — 652-885
------- |