EPA-905/9-74-013
                 US BWRONMNT^Pg^gggM ACBiCY
                       WiMHNMnl W BVr%MIAiBnM3n I IMWKIHM*
              CHEAT UKB MIUmVE OON1MCT PROGRAM
                                      DECEMBER 1974

-------
Copies of this document are available
   to the public through the
National  Technical  Information  Service
     Springfield, Virginia  22151

-------
WATER POLLUTION INVESTIGATION: DETROIT AND ST. CLAIR RIVERS
                             by

        ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROL TECHNOLOGY CORPORATION
                     Ann Arbor, Michigan
                    In fulfillment of

                EPA Contract No. 68-01-1570

                         for the

           U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
                         Region V
         Great Lakes Initiative Contract Program
             Report Number: EPA-905/9-74-013
             EPA Project Officer: Howard Zar
                      December 1974

-------
This report has been developed under auspices of the Great
Lakes Initiative Contract Program.  The purpose of the
Program is to obtain additional data regarding the present
nature and trends in water quality, aquatic life, and waste
loadings in areas of the Great Lakes with the worst water
pollution problems.   The data thus obtained is being used
to assist in the development of waste discharge permits
under provisions of the Federal Water Pollution Control
Act Amendments of 1972 and in meeting commitments under
the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement between the U.S.
and Canada for accelerated effort to abate and control
water pollution in the Great Lakes.

This report has been reviewed by the Enforcement Division,
Region V, Environmental Protection Agency and approved
for publication.  Approval does not signify that the
contents necessarily reflect the views of the Environmental
Protection Agency, nor does mention of trade names or
commercial products  constitute endorsement or recommenda-
tion for use.
                           m

-------
                                           ABSTRACT

This report  presents the results of a  historical review and water quality survey of the
St.  Clair and Detroit  Rivers.   It includes a three-dimensional,  steady-state  model for the
Detroit  River, which  will allow for the projection of future water quality based on the
results of various  management schemes for the  Detroit Area.

The historical survey  illustrates a  gradual upgrading of water  quality in the region  over
the past decade, as a  result of pollution abatement programs.   The water quality surveys
performed  have provided heretofore  lacking or  dated  information  with regards to  the
biological communities  and sediment chemistry.

This  report  was submitted  in fulfillment of  Contract Number  68-01-1570,  by  the
Environmental   Control   Technology  Corporation,  under   the  sponsorship   of   the
Environmental  Protection Agency.  Work  was completed as  of  August, 1974.

-------
                     TABLE OF CONTENTS


                                                     Page
Section I          Conclusions                         1


Section II         Recommendations                     3

Section III        Introduction                        6

Section IV         Historical Background               10

Section V          Water Quality Survey                58

Section VI         Mathematical Model for
                     Detroit River                     184

Section VII        Water Quality Projections           239

Section VIII       References                          244

-------
                                     FIGURES





No.                                                                         Page
1            Water Quality Survey Area                                         °




2            Trends in Chloride Concentration, St. Clair River - SR 26.7            27




3            Trends in Chloride Concentration, St. Clair River - SR 17.5            28




4            Trends in Chloride Concentration, St. Clair River - SR 13.7            29




5            Trends in Chloride Concentration, St. Clair River - SR 10.0N & 10.0S   31




6            Trends in Chloride Concentration, Detroit River - DT 20.6             36




7            Trends in Chloride Concentration, Detroit River DT 14.6              37




8            Trends in Chloride Concentration, Detroit River-DT12.0W            38




9            Trends in Chloride Concentration, Detroit River - DT - 8.7W           39




10           Trends in Chloride Concentration, Detroit River - DT 3.9              40



11           Trends in Phenol Concentration, Detroit River DT 8.7W               41




12           Trends in Total Coliform Concentrations, Detroit River DT30.8W      42




13           Trends in Total Coliform Concentrations, Detroit River DT 20.6        43




14           Trends in Total Coliform Concentrations, Detroit River DT 14.6        44



15           Trends in Total Coliform Concentrations, Detroit River DT 12.0W      45




16           Trends in Total Coliform Concentrations, Detroit River DT 9.3E        46




17           Trends in Total Coliform Concentrations, Detroit River DT 8.7W       47




18           Trends in Total Coliform Concentrations, Detroit River DT 3.9         48




19           Sampling Station Locations                                        61-63




20           Mean Biochemical Oxygen Demand                                 71-73




21           Mean Chemical Oxygen Demand                                   74-76




22           Mean Cadmium Concentration                                     78-80




23           Mean Chromium Concentration                                    81-83




24           Mean Copper Concentration                                       84-86

-------
                               FIGURES






No.                                                                      Page





25           Mean Lead Concentration                                       88-90




26           Mean Mercury Concentration                                    91-93




27           Mean Nickel Concentration                                     94-96




28           Mean Zinc Concentration                                       98-100




29           Mean Manganese Concentration                                  101-103




30           Mean Iron Concentration                                       104-106




31           Mean Kjeldahl Nitrogen Concentration                            109-111




32           Mean Nitrate Nitrogen Concentration                             113-115




33           Mean Total Phosphorus Concentration                            116-118




34           Benthos Sampling Stations 1973-1974                            132-134




35           Dominant Taxa - Detroit and St. Clair Rivers                       140-142




36           Benthos St. Clair/Detroit Rivers                                 145-147




37           Shannon-Weaver Diversity - November 1973 Benthos                149




38           Shannon-Weaver Diversity - May 1974                            150




39           Detroit River Mean Chlorophyll ^Concentration                    156



40           Mean Chlorophyll jj Concentrations -  November 1973               157



41           Mean Chlorophyll_a Concentrations -  May 1974                    158




42           Phytoplankton Species Richness (S-1/lnN) - August 1973            166



43           Phytoplankton Species Richness (S-1/lnN) - November 1973          157




44           Phytoplankton Species Richness (S-1/lnN) - May 1974              153




45           Phytoplankton Species Diversity (31 - August 1973                 159




46           Phytoplankton Species Diversity (3) - November 1973              IJQ




47           Phytoplankton Species Diversity (cD - May  1974                    ~L1~L




48           Percent Tolerant versus Intolerant Taxa Detroit River               178-179




49           Uniform Rectangular Volume                                   ^gy




50           Model Segmentation - Upper Detroit River                        189

-------
                                FIGURES


No.                                                                        Page
51           Model Segmentation - Lower Detroit River                           190

52           Average Chloride Concentration - Detroit River DT 17.4W - 1968        194

53           Model Verification-chloride, Detroit River DT 14.6 and 12.0-1968   '  196

54           Model Verification-Chloride, Detroit River DT3.7W and 2.9-1968     197

55           Model  Verification - Chloride, Detroit River DT 20.6 and 17.4W - 1969  198

56           Model Verification - Chloride, Detroit River DT 14.6W and 12.0W - 1969 199

57           Model Verification-Chloride, Detroit River DT3.7W and 3.9-1969     200

58           Model Verification - Chloride, Detroit River DT 20.6 and 19.0 -  1972     202

59           Model Verification - chloride, Detroit River DT 14.6W and 12.0W - 1972  203

60           Model Verification-Chloride, Detroit River DT8.7W and 3.9-1972     204

61           Model Verification - Phenol, Detroit River DT  17.4W and 14.6W - 1968   206

62           Model Verification - Phenol, Detroit River DT  12.0W and 8.7W - 1968    207

63           Model Verification - Phenol, Detroit River DT 3.9 - 1968               208

64           Model Verification - Phenol, Detroit River DT  17.4W and 14.6W - 1969   209

65           Model Verification - Phenol, Detroit River DT  12.0W and 8.7W - 1969    210

66           Model Verification - Phenol, Detroit River DT  19.0 and  14.6W -  1972     211

67           Model Verification - Phenol, Detroit River DT  12.0W and 8.7W - 1972    212

68           Model Verification - Total Iron, Detroit River DT 17.4W and 14.6W - 1968216

69           Model Verification - Total Iron, Detroit River DT 12.0W and 8.7W - 1968 217

70           Model Verification - Total Iron, Detroit River DT 3.9- 1968            218

71           Model Verification - Total Iron, Detroit River DT 17.4W and 14.6W - 1969219

72           Model Verification - Total Iron, Detroit River DT 12.0W and 8.7W - 1969 220

73           Model Verification - Total Iron, Detroit River DT 3.9 - 1969            221

74           Model Verification - Ammonia Nitrogen, Detroit River DT 19.0 and 14.6W222
             1972

-------
                               FIGURES
No.                                                                        Page


75           Model Verification - Ammonia Nitrogen, Detroit River DT 12.0W        223
             and8.7W- 1972

76           Model Verification - Ammonia Nitrogen, Detroit River DT 3.9 - 1972     224

77           Model Verification - Ammonia Nitrogen, Detroit River DT 19.0 and
             14.6W-1972                                                    225

78           Model Verification - Ammonia Nitrogen, Detroit River DT 12.0W and 8.7W
             and 8.7W-1972                                                  226

79           Model Verification - Ammonia Nitrogen, Detroit River DT 3.9-1972    227

80           Model Verification - Total Phosphorus, Detroit River DT 19.0 and       229
             14.6W- 1971

81           Model Verification - Total Phsophorus, Detroit River DT 12.0W and
             8.7W-1971                                                      230

82           Model Verification - Total Phosphorus, Detroit River DT 3.9 - 1971      231

83           Model Verification - Total Phosphorus, Detroit River DT 19.0 and
             14.6W-1972                                                    232

84           Model Verification - Total Phosphorus, Detroit River DT 19.0 and
             14.6W-1973                                                    233

85           Model Verification - Total Phosphorus, Detroit River DT 12.0W and
             8.7W-1972                                                      234

86           Model Verification - Total Phosphorus, Detroit River DT 12.0W and
             8.7W-1973                                                      235

87           Model Verification - Total Phosphorus, Detroit River DT 3.9 - 1972      236

88           Model Verification - Total Phosphorus, Detroit River DT 3.9 - 1973      237
                                         Xll

-------
                                   TABLES

No.                                                                           Page


1             IJC Survey (1946-1948) - Stations                                 15

2             IJC Survey (1946-1948)- Analyses                                 15

3             Summary of Daily Average Waste Loads in Detroit River - United
              States Side (1963-1964)                                          2 °

4             Current Monitoring Transects                                     22

5             Water Quality Standards for the St.  Clair and Detroit Rivers           25

6             Allowable Heavy Metal Concentrations                             25

7             Statistical Evaluation of Means - St.  Clair River 1968 versus 1973      33

8             Average Phenol Concentration - Detroit River (1962-1973)           4-9

9             Average Ammonia Nitrogen Concentration - Detroit River (1962-1973)51

10            Average Nitrate Nitrogen Concentrations - Detroit River (1964-1973)  52

11            Average Total Phosphorus Concentrations- Detroit River (1968-1972) 53

12            Average Total Iron Concentrations - Detroit River (1967-1973)        55

13            Average Dissolved Solids Concentrations- Detroit River (1971-1973)   56

14            Statistical Evaluation of Means - Detroit River 1968 versus 1973       57

15            Station Locations                                                59-60

16            Sediment Correlation Matrix                                      128

17            Menhenick Formula Calculations - St. Clair River Benthos            143

18            Detroit River; Selected Stations Compared by Biomass and
              Shannon-Weaver Diversity                                         152

19            November Similarity Matrix, Benthos, Detroit River                  153

20            May Similarity Matrix, Benthos, Detroit River                       153

21            Detroit River Phytopigments                                      155

22            Mean Chlorophyll^at Four Study Areas                           155

23            Ratios of Chlorophylls£/a and b/a -  St. Clair and  Detroit Rivers        160
                                           xi 11

-------
                                 TABLES




No.                                                                       Page





24           Values of Chlorophyll Ratios b/a and c/a                           159




25           Mean Number of Phytoplankton                                  161




26           Dominant Groups of Phytoplankton                               162-163




27           Phytoplankton Similarity - St. Clair River                           174




28           Phytoplankton Similarity - Detroit River, August 1973                175




29           Phytoplankton Similarity - Detroit River, November 1973             175




30           Phytoplankton Similarity - Detroit River, May 1974                  176




31           Negative Loads for Model - Phenol and  Iron - Detroit River            214
                                    Xiv

-------
                               ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The  assistance of Mr. Joe Bodrie, owner and captain of the charter vessel "Clipper", in
the performance of the three surveys  is acknowledged  with  sincere thanks.

The support and assistance of personnel from the U.  S. Environmental Protection Agency,
the State  of Michigan, and  the  Province of  Ontario was  appreciated.

This report  was prepared  by a team  composed of  J. E.  Schenk,  D. A. Scherger, J. J.
Goldasich, R.  L. Weitzel,  P.  B.  Simon, and  D. E. Jerger, all of Environmental Control
Technology  Corporation, with typing and final  preparation for publication accomplished
by S. Conant.  The assistance of  Dr. Raymond P. Canale  of the University of Michigan
in the mathematical  modeling effort is also  gratefully acknowledged.
                                         xv

-------

-------
                                       SECTION I

                                     CONCLUSIONS
The connecting waters of the Great Lakes  in the Detroit area  are significantly  affected
by  surrounding land  uses and  pollutional  inputs.  This fact has been observed since the
earliest  investigations of these waters,  although the most  recent data indicates a degree
of recovery of water quality  over the past decade.

Only  minor changes  in the  chemical  quality  of the waters of the St. Clair River  were
observed between milepoints SR 39.0 and SR 13.7.  Localized problems exist with respect
to certain  parameters below wastewater  outfalls.   A  degree  of enrichment in nutrients
and metals was observed in the downstream sediments of  this river, although the degree
of enrichment  was minor.

The biological communities in the St. Clair River are, in general, characteristic of unpolluted
waters.   Dredging  operations  obviously  affect  the benthic community, otherwise this
population is characterized  by clean water forms  adapted to rapid current and  hard
substrates,   "^he  phytoplankton population  is dominated by  the diatoms, and does not
vary significantly throughout the  river.

The chemical  characteristics  of  the  Detroit  River  change  substantially  between the
headwaters at  Lake St. Clair and  the mouth at Lake  Erie.   Most parameters experience
increased concentrations,  particularly below the  influences exerted  by the  Rouge  River
and the Detroit Wastewater Treatment Plant. Similarly, enrichment of the sediments exists
with respect  to most parameters  in  this downriver  area.

Established  water  quality standards and/or  goals are  presently being  met, with the
occassional exception of phenol  and mercury in the  St. Clair  River, and generally  with
respect  to  total  coliforms, phenol  and  mercury  in  the Detroit  River.  Water  quality
projections using the developed mathematical model for the Detroit  River  and  present
effluent limitations indicate  that  the goal of  2  pg/i  average phenol concentration will
be met  by 1977.

The biological communities are similarly altered in the downstream region. The upstream
area is characterized by the presence of clean-water or intermediate benthic  forms, while

                                           1

-------
the region between DT 18.0 and DT  12.0W is populated by pollution tolerant organisms.
A  limited recovery of the benthic fauna exists from DT 9.3 downstream to Lake  Erie.
The  phytoplankton  community  shows considerable  variation with  time and  distance,
although there is  a  slight  increase in number  of individuals in  the downstream  region.

The mathematical  model  developed for the Detroit River was verified using several different
water quality  parameters.  The  model is verified only for the U. S.  side of the river at
the present time as Canadian loading  information was not available at the time of  writing
this report.  The model  can  be  used  to  help evaluate  the  expected results of alternative
management plans for the river  system.

-------
                                      SECTION  II
                                 RECOMMENDATIONS

 This  program was designed to assess the present water quality of the connecting waters
 of  the  Great Lakes in the Detroit area, and to obtain the  information  necessary to fill
 existing data gaps and to allow for projections of future water quality.  Due to necessary
 limitations in the scope of this project, many of the factors initiated  to accomplish  the
 program objectives should be continued  to  provide a more  long-term  data base and  the
 means to make more accurate projections of water quality.   The tools developed during
 the performance of this project should facilitate the accomplishment of these objectives.

 The comprehensive  monitoring programs presently being carried  out by the  state and
 provincial agencies should suffice in documenting any changes in water quality. A primary
 objective in this regard, however, should be to refine the data storage and retrieval systems
 so that all data collected on the subject  water  can be evaluated.   Continued monitoring
 of the sediment phase should be undertaken to assess more fully the importance of this
 phase as a  source and/or  sink  for pollutants in the  aqueous phase.

 Additional work is  required  in the development  of  analytical techniques to  allow  for
 broadening  the  scope  of the monitoring program.  Two  notable areas of needed study
 are the sediment exchange phenomenon and the determination of pesticides in the sediment
 material.  Techniques developed with regard to these two areas will allow for more accurate
 determinations of future water quality  by means  of the developed model.

 The biological  monitoring initiated as a portion of this project should  be continued  on
a more  routine  basis, as well as being broadened in scope.  A broader scope of benthic
 macroinvertebrate  samples should  be  undertaken  in  order  to define  the  response  of
 individual  communities  to specific pollutional  inputs.   Samples should be  analyzed
taxonomically and similarity and diversity calculations performed on the obtained  data.
The microhabitat requirements  for each  group  of  organisms should  also be  recorded so
that a total  ecological  picture of the benthos  communities in all areas samples  can  be
obtained.

Although the analysis of phytoplankton as performed in  this study can serve to indicate
general trends of distribution,  it fails to indicate  the potential of these waters for the
ultimate  development of  nuisance algae.   It is  recommended that  algal assay studies  be

-------
undertaken to determine  the  relative  level  of significant nutrient enrichment at various
locations throughout the system.  It is also recommended that more extensive evaluation
of photo-pigment concentrations  be performed on a continuing basis, which would allow
for an evaluation of  any shift in phytoplankton species dominants.

Two areas  of recommended  study  which were not  within the  scope of this project are
biomagnification  of pollutants  and study  of  other  segments of the  microbiological
communities.  Biomagnification potential should  be determined by analyzing the body
tissues of various biological communities for the presence of heavy metals and pesticides.
Those  communities deserving  of  study include the  fish and benthos.  Because  bacteria
and fungi are the primary agents in the turnover of metabolizable materials and in the
concentration and  precipitation  of certain  minerals,   the examination  of  microbial
production and  decomposition at various stations should  be initiated.

The mathematical model developed  for the  Detroit  River should be continually  updated
to reflect any alterations which may occur in the river system.  This can be accomplished
by  reverifying the  model  using  new  loading information  and  water  quality data  as it
becomes available.  The model should  also  be verified for the Canadian side of the river
once the necessary  loading  information  is obtained. Additional sampling and evaluation
of the  river between DT 19.0 and  DT I4.6W should be undertaken to more fully understand
the drop  in  phenol  and  iron concentrations which  occur.   This may allow  for the
development  of  a mathematical representation of this "sink" for incorporation into the
model.

Investigation  and further verification of phosphorus  concentrations, especially below the
Detroit Waste Treatment Plant, should be undertaken  to aid in explaining the difference
between measured and projected concentrations.  This is  especially important if the model
is  to  be interfaced  with the  Hydroscience  Model developed for Lake Erie.

Throughout the  modeling program  the most critical areas of the river appeared  to be
between  DT  19.0 and DT 14.6W,  and along  the U.  S. and Canadian  shoreline to DT
3.9.   Additional  studies  in these areas should include information on heavy metals and
other  water quality parameters which may be  incorporated into the modeling program.
In this way,  the full  predictive  capabilities of the  model  can be developed and made
available to those agencies responsible for  water quality  management in this region.

Finally, it would be desirable  to continue the mathematical modeling initiated during this
project.  An obvious extention of  this work  would  be  the development  of a model for

-------
the St. Clair  River similar to  the one developed  for the  Detroit  River.   The  second
recommended  modeling effort is the development of a dynamic model for Lake St. Clair.
The  third potential  area for continued  work  in  this  regard  would  be the development
of non-steady state  models for the two river systems, or portions thereof..   This total
effort, when coupled  with   an expanded,  on-going  monitoring program, will provide
essentially all of the necessary  tools for effective water quality management planning in
the area.

-------
                                     SECTION  III

                                    INTRODUCTION
GENERAL

The  water quality  of  the  Great Lakes system  has evolved as one of  the  most critical
issues of  the environmental  movement, particularly  during the  past decade.  Serving as
the primary water resource of the  highly industrialized  and urbanized area  of the upper
midwestern  United  States and most populous region of Canada, it is logical that extensive
efforts towards the protection and enhancement of the  quality of these waters be made.
As a result  of several  international agreements,  most noticeably the  U. S. Federal Water
Pollution  Control Act  (FWPCA) Amendments of  1972 and the U. S.-Canada Water Quality
Agreement  of  1972,  which  have been  promulgated,  the  Great Lakes  area  has been
experiencing, and will  continue to  experience,  an infusion  of pollution  control measures,
as well as studies into the existing quality of these waters and additional measures which
can be taken  to protect this  vital natural  resource  for future  generations.

The  most critical  of the Great Lakes from a  water quality aspect is undoubtedly Lake
Erie.  This critical  nature evolves  from the fact  that this water body is most susceptible
to manifestations of water pollution  of all  the Great Lakes, due primarily to its physical
characteristics,  as well  as  the  fact that it  serves as the primary water resource for  the
densely populated  Detroit-Toledo-Cleveland-Buffalo area of the  United States, and  the
developing area of  southern Ontario.

The  greatest affect  on the overall water quality of  Lake Erie has been determined to
be the Detroit area, served  by the connecting  waters  of  the St. Clair River,  Lake St.
Clair, and the Detroit River.   Approximately 93 percent of the total inflow to Lake Erie
emanates  from the  Detroit  River, consequently the following reported investigation  on
the existing and projected quality of these waters will serve to indicate to a considerable
degree the  corresponding conditions which can be anticipated  in  Lake  Erie.
LOCATION

The water bodies of concern  in  this investigation serve  as  the  connecting  waters from

-------
Lake  Huron  to Lake  Erie.  A map of this  area is presented  in Figure 1.  Water from
Lake  Huron  enters  the St.  Clair  River in the Port  Huron-Sarnia  area, and  travels for
approximately  64 km  (39 miles) before entering  Lake St.  Clair.  With the exception of
the Port Huron-Sarnia area at the river's headwaters, the shoreline is much  less developed
than the downstream Detroit River, and subsequently this body of water experiences less
pollutional inputs and  consequently less serious water quality degradation than the waters
further  downstream.

Lake  St. Clair  is a relatively  small body of water in  the Great Lakes chain,  with a surface
area of  1,110 square km  (430 square miles) and  natural  volume of 3.4 cubic km (4,500
million  cubic yards).  Several  small tributaries enter into  the  lake, however  98  percent
of the total  water input  is derived from the St.  Clair River.   The  area around  the lake
is  not highly developed, with the exception of the southern portions of the western shore
where the northeastern suburbs of Detroit  are located.  Water  quality affects from these
suburbs are  minimal however,  since the wastewater from  this area  is transported to the
Detroit   facility for  treatment  and discharge.  Localized  effects on the water quality do
occur, however, due to the  inflow of the Clinton River  and combined sewer overflows.

The outflow of  Lake  St.  Clair (mean discharge of 5,400  m3/sec or 190,000 cfs)  flows
into the Detroit River and  thence  to Lake  Erie after traversing approximately 51  km
(32 miles).  It is this portion  of the connecting waters where the most significant pollution
and degradation  of water quality  occurs.

The lower Detroit River (below the confluence with the Rouge  River) is the most critical
portion  due to the discharge of municipal and industrial wastes from this point downstream.
OBJECTIVES

The  primary objectives of the  study  reported  herein  is the delineation  of the existing
water quality and the prediction of the degree of enhancement of water quality  in this
region  with  the  inauguration  of  "best practicable" and "best available" treatment  of
wastewaters.   In order to accomplish this  prime objective,  three basic program elements
were pursued.

The  first  task element was a thorough review of the literature with  respect to  previous
studies performed  in  the water  bodies of concern.  An additional apsect of this task was
to access the available data sources (state and provincial water quality monitoring agencies

-------
Figure 1
 WATER QUALITY SURVEY AREA

-------
and the  STORET system)  in order to  determine the scope of  information  available.

Based on the evaluation of the  existing  data  base, a field survey program was developed
that would  serve to  remedy  certain deficiences in presently  available  information, and
to provide some degree of verification  of the  previously obtained data.  Task  two was
then the performance  of three separate  water quality surveys to provide the desired
additional information.

The  third  task  element was  the  development and  verification  of a  steady-state,
three-dimensional mathematical  model of  the Detroit  River.  The  model was developed
to treat  conservative substances  and non-conservative substances which  follow first order
reaction  kinetics.  The use of  such a model will  allow  for a better  definition  of  waste
inputs as well as assisting in the determination  of the  impact on water quality of higher
degrees  of wastewater treatment.

-------
                                     SECTION  IV

                             HISTORICAL BACKGROUND
PREVIOUS COMPREHENSIVE STUDIES

The earliest recorded systematic survey of water quality in this general area was performed
by the U.  S. Geological  Survey in  1906-19071.  This study determined the general water
quality in  Lake  Erie and Lake  Huron, but did not concern itself with the waters included
in the  present study area.   The basic findings indicated high quality of water both above
and  below  the  Detroit  area with  respect to  the  chemical  parameters monitored.   No
bacteriological testing  was  included in  this study,  thus this  important parameter cannot
be evaluated for this  early period.

Prior to the U.  S. Geological Survey study only isolated data from samples collected by
various water treatment  plants  are  available.  Since the great majority of the  intakes for
these plants were purposely established in open- lake  locations to avoid  the influence of
localized pollution sources, the  analyses from these sites are relatively useless in establishing
the general water quality  existing  during  that  period of time.

In 1913, a survey  of  coliform bacteria in the  Detroit River, and certain other areas of
the Great Lakes, was performed under the auspices  of the International Joint Commission
o
.   Although bacteriological technology and manner of  reporting results  has changed
significantly since  that  time,  this study  is  important  in  that it  provides the  first
comprehensive evidence  of the deterioration of the bacteriological quality of the water
due to human activity and the change  in land  usage.  The results of this study indicated
that, due primarily to the absence of  sewage  treatment  and  the presence of numerous
outfalls along  the Rouge and  Detroit  Rivers, average coliform densities  as measured by
the Phelps Index increased  from 5 per  100  ml  to  11,592 per 100 ml between the head
of the Detroit  River and  its  mouth.   These results can  be  crudely  converted from this
index to MPN  values  by multiplying the index values by 2.4,  resulting  in median MPN
values of  12 and 27,800 at the head and  mouth,  respectively.   In addition, the findings
of this study indicated the significant shoreline effects, particularly below the developing
industrial  complex  in  the  vincinity of  the  Rouge  River.

Significant additional  contributions to  the data base for this region did  not occur until
                                          10

-------
the decade after World War II. Three major investigations were initiated during this period,
two involving water quality  investigations as they  applied to raw water supplies for local
units of government, and the third a general water  quality investigation under the auspices
of the  International Joint Commission.

Detroit Water  Supply Report,  1948
 In 1948,  a report  evaluating the effect  of  combined  sewer overflows into the Detroit
 River on the raw water supply for the City of Detroit was prepared by a board of consulting
          o
 engineers   .   This report provides  little  in  the way of newly acquired data, however it
 does summarize certain aspects of water quality as it was observed  at the municipal water
 intake at  Water  Works Park  at  the  head of Belle Isle.   Among  the  findings contained
 in this  report  that pertain to water quality in  the Detroit River are the following:

      a.    Pollution  of Lake St. Clair and the Detroit  River has increased over the years,
           and this is  reflected  in  the raw water quality.

      b.    The maximum MPN  in any sample of the raw water at the intake during recent
           years was 15,000  per 100 cc. and the maximum daily average was 7,030 per
           100 cc.

      c.    For the most  part the high MPN values follow rains and are accompanied by
           recognizable increases in  turbidity, but this  is not always  the case.

 Wayne County Water Supply Report,  1955

 A second  investigation of  river quality  for water  supply  purposes  during  this period was
 performed by  Hazen  and Sawyer for Wayne County  .   In  addition to summarizing
 previoulsy  obtained data,  this study included detailed  investigations of water quality of
 the lower  Detroit River and the western end  of Lake Erie. Since this study was concerned
 with the determination of water quality with respect to its usefulness as a potable supply,
 the main emphasis was on  bacteriological quality and chloride levels as tracers of pollution
 and an  indication of  current distribution.  The results of this study illustrated once again
 the significant  shoreline effects of pollution, due to the relatively high rate of flow in
 the river which retards transverse mixing. This is shown  in the median coliform density
 observed from  Detroit Water  Board  sampling (1952-1955) and their study at Range C-1
 (approximately milepoint  17.0W). The results for these four years, as well as previous
 IJC data,  showed median  coliform  densities at a point  approximately 1,500 feet from
the west shore to range between 100 and  300 per  100 ml, while densities near the western
shore ranged between 40,000 and 100,000  per  100 ml.
                                         11

-------
This same condition of relatively high quality bacteriologically  in mid-river water and low
quality  (median coliform densities greater than  10,000 per 100 ml) in the water near
shore was observed  from the confluence of  the  Rouge  River  to the head of Grosse  lie.
At  this point the higher bacterial densities  were observed to  exist only in the Trenton
Channel on  the west shore of Grosse lie, with the water  in the Fighting  Island Channel
to the east of  Grosse  Me exhibiting much lower  median coliform densities. Based on  the
coliform data obtained  in this  study  the following  observations were  made.

      a.    A relatively small effect of upstream  pollution and combined sewer  overflows
           from  Detroit and Windsor was found to exist at Fort Wayne (milepoint 20.6)
           during dry weather.  At this point the shore pollution was found to  be limited
           to a narrow  band, and low coliform densities prevail to within a few hundred
           feet of both shores.

      b.    The most important  sources of sewage pollution along the United States shore
           in the lower part of the Detroit River were determined to be the Detroit Sewage
           Treatment Plant  effluent and the Rouge  River.

      c.    The decrease in coliform density  from  the United  States shore to  the center
           of  the river  is rapid throughout  this section of the river (milepoint 20.6 to
           Lake Erie).

      d.    Characterization of  the  lower Detroit  River as the "sewer for Metropolitan
           Detroit" is not warranted.  The Trenton Channel does serve this purpose,  but
           the quality of the main flow of  the  river is affected to only  a  slight degree.

      e.    The water in the middle of the  river  does not escape all  pollution, but  the
           rate of diffusion of  shore pollution  toward the  center  of  the main flow is
           low.   The best water  is generally found  at or near  the eastern side of  the
           ship channel.

Additional coliform analyses were  performed during periods  of intense storms to show
quantitatively the effects of wet weather and subsequent combined  sewer overflows.   A
total of eight  sampling  points were selected in  order to  evaluate water quality on both
sides of the shipping channel at the following  ranges:

      Fort Wayne (approximately  milepoint  20.6)

      Grassy Island  (approximately milepoint 15.4)
                                        12

-------
      Fighting  Island South  Light (approximately milepoint 12.OE)

      Stony Island (approximately milepoint 8.7E)
It was observed that the median coliform density near shore at  Fort Wayne during wet
weather was 82 times the median coliform density during dry weather.  However,  1000
feet from shore the median  density during wet weather was only three times the density
during dry  weather.  Similarly, the western station at Grassy Island showed an increase
of nine times, while the eastern  station showed  only  a  two fold  increase.   Results at
Fighting Island South Light were similar to those  at Grassy Island, while the Stony  Island
stations showed nine fold increase  at  the western station  and  a corresponding six fold
increase at the eastern station.  The conclusions drawn from  this  phase  of the study were
as follows:

      a.    While the coliform  density in the mid-river water is greater following rains
           than in dry  weather, the  relative  increase is  small.

      b.    Shore pollution does not make its way across the river in concentrated slugs.
           The pollution that reaches the main  stream is mixed with a large volume of
           water and  diluted  many  times.

      c.    The effect of shore pollution on mid-river water quality increases moderately
           with distance down the Detroit River as  far as Fighting Island South  Light;
             below this point the effect is greater.
Analysis of the chloride data obtained in  this study indicated the same general pattern
with respect to pollution  along the western shore.  Average chloride  concentrations at
stations across the  Detroit River above the  Rouge  River inflow were relatively constant,
varying between 6.7 and 7.8  mg/l.  Starting at the Rouge River the chloride concentrations
along the United States shore were high, however relatively uncontaminated water, with
chloride  levels between 8 and 10 mg/l, was observed within a few hundred feet offshore.
An important  difference was  observed between the coliform and chloride  distributions,
however,  in that a  sharp  increase in chloride  levels was found between Fighting  Island
and the  Fighting Island Channel.  These high levels were undoubtedly due to the leaching
from the waste beds located  on the Island.  The  influences of  these  concentrations of
chloride  were observed  to occur in the Amhertsburg Channel  to the east of Bois Blanc
Island, and to have  relatively little impact on the Livingston Channel between Bois Blanc
Island  and Grosse Me.   This  information  provides further  substantiation on  the tendency
of the pollution to "streamline" along the shore.
                                       13

-------
International Joint Commission Pollution Survey, 1951

The  real foundation of systematic  evaluation of water quality in this region was initiated
during the time interval  between these two  studies.   On April 1, 1946, the governments
of Canada and the United States directed the International Joint Commission to  inquire
into  and  report on the pollution of the  St. Clair River, Lake St. Clair, and  the  Detroit
River.   This investigation extended  over the period July,  1946  to December, 1948, with
the final report of the findings being submitted to the two  governments in October,  1950
The  principal findings from this  study  were summarized  as  follows:

     a.    These  waters are seriously  polluted  in  many places on  both  sides of the
           boundary.  The most serious pollution exists in the St. Clair River below Port
           Huron and Sarnia, in Lake St.  Clair along the west shore, in the Detroit River
           below Belle Isle, and in Lake Erie at the west end.  There is progressive over-all
           degradation of the water  between  Lake Huron and  Lake  Erie.

     b.    There  is a  transfer  of  pollution from  each  side of  the boundary to the other.
           This  has been demonstrated  by float studies, by  analytical  results, and  by
           accidental  discharges of specific substances.   (It should be noted that these
           findings  are  not necessarily in contradiction  of the  previous studies  which
           emphasized the tendency of pollution to remain close to the shore, with the
           central  channel of  the river remaining  relatively clean.  Since approximately
           50 percent of  the total flow passes through the central  portion  of the river,
           the relatively high volume of water will  tend to dilute any pollutants entering
           this section  to a greater extent than in the near shore areas with relatively
           low flow rates.)

     c.    There has been, and remains a  potential  for, injury to the health and property
           on both sides of the  boundary.

     d.    Substantial progress has been made in control or elimination of pollution during
           the period of  the  investigation.

 The surveys  performed as  a part of this investigation encompassed  sampling stations ranging
 from the southern portion of  Lake Huron (approximately four  miles above the head  of
 the  St.  Clair River) to  western Lake Erie. The extent of this survey effort can be seen
 in the number of stations established, as shown in Table 1.

                                       14

-------
                                        Table 1
Body of Water

Lake  Huron  (southern
      end)
Number of transects
Total number of stations
                                    47
St.  Clair River
       12
        59
Lake  St. Clair and
      tributaries
                                   111
Detroit  River
       10
       197
In addition, a total of six  stations were established on four tributaries to the St. Clair
River and six stations  on four tributaries to the Detroit River.  The number of samples
collected and number  of analyses  performed during this study are presented  in Table 2.
                                        Table 2
Area of Source
Lake Huron
St. Clair River
Lake St. Clair
Detroit River
Lake Erie
Municipalities
Industries
Total
Bacteriological
Examinations
94
1688
1979
3806
534
1337
-
9438
Chemical
Samples
272
3082
2389
4295
746
494
788
12056
Examinations
Determinations
544
9431
14240
23894
3722
3327
7436
62594
                                       15

-------
The  importance of this study does not lie solely with the breadth of the survey, however,
but also  in the establishment  of a systematic grid  of sampling locations and designations
of these  sampling  points,  to allow for  the correlation of the  evaluation of trends in
water quality as a function  of time.  In addition to  the above accomplishment,  two highly
significant results of this study were  the establishment of IJC objectives for water  quality,
and  the  establishment of  a  technical  committee  to maintain  continuing contact with
pollution control efforts and subsequent effects with respect to water quality in the area.

The  basic parameters  utilized  in this study for evaluating the extent of pollution were
total coliform levels and phenol  concentrations.  The water at the southern end of Lake
Huron was observed to be  of good  sanitary quality and relatively free of  any effects of
pollution. Median colifrom  MPN values were generally  in the range  of  5 per  100 ml or
less,  which  is essentially  the  same as the levels observed in  1913. Similarly,  high water
quality was shown by chemical analysis,  with dissolved oxygen ranging  between 9  and
11 ppm, average BOD values  from 0.5 to 1.5 ppm, and a maximum phenol level of 4
ppb.

The  high quality of the water entering the St.  Clair River from  lake Huron was observed
to continue in the middle  third of  the  stream for a  considerable distance downstream
from the headwaters at milepoint SR - 39.0. High coliform  levels showed heavily polluted
zones near both shores in the upper section of the river, reflecting the discharge of untreated
sewage from Port Huron, Marysville, and Sarnia,  and  the  highly  polluted waters of  the
Black River.  Median coliform levels increased from five at the head of the  St.  Clair River
to 5,400 near the United States  shore at SR  - 35.4, showing the  influence of the Black
River which enters the  river  approximately  one   mile  upstream from  this  point. The
Canadian shore  is seen to  be similarly  influenced with median coliform  values of 930
below  Sarnia (SR - 35.4) and  2,400 at Cornunna  (SR  - 30.1 E). This bacterial pollution
tended toward  a more uniform distribution across  the entire river at  milepoint SR - 17.5,
with median levels of 1700,  180, 170, 240,  430  at  distances from the United States
shore of 100, 1200,  1700,  2200, and 2600 feet,  respectively. The water leaving the  St.
Clair River was  observed  to have a bacterial load of coliform  organisms 200 times greater
than the water  entering  the  river  from  Lake Huron.

The  intensity and distribution  of pollution in  Lake St. Clair were seen to be influenced
by the  division  of flows  through  the  St.  Clair  flats, the direction of winds, the lake
                                           -16-

-------
currents, the  intermittent discharge of combined sewer overflows, the effects  of  natural
purification.   Basically, the water within the lake was found to be of good bacterial  quality
except in localized areas. The  eastern portion of the  lake was found to be relatively free
from pollution, with  the  exception  of a one to  two mile zone  at  the mouths  of the
Chenal Ecarte and  Thames River.  Higher levels of coliform organisms were observed in
the northwestern portion of the lake, particularly at the outlets of the north and  middle
channels of the St. Clair River  and  the Clinton River.  These sources, along with combined
and storm sewer overflows from the lakeside communities, result in relatively higher levels
of pollution along the western  shore of the lake.  Patterns of relative phenol concentrations
follow the  same general spatial  relationship as the coliform values, which  is to be expected
since both  parameters are influenced by the same water movement. Average phenol values
were  found to be  generally below 10 ppb.

The  analytical results for the Detroit River  showed a littoral stratification similar  to that
observed in the St. Clair River, with pollution effects remaining near the  respective shores
in the upper  reaches and spreading  and diffusing across the  entire width  of  the  stream
below Fighting  Island. Median coliform  levels  approached  100 per 100 ml along both
shores at the  entrance to the  Detroit River, with a value of about 10 at midstream.  A
significant  increase in coliform levels was observed on the United  States side at the head
of Belle  Isle  as a  result  of  combined  sewer overflows emanating from Conners  Creek.
Median  coliform  levels at this range (DT - 29.2W)  were 200,000 and  93,000 per 100
ml at distances offshore of 50 and 100 feet, respectively.  Moving downstream, the bacterial
pollution retained its shore hugging characteristics, although the zones of higher coliform
levels were observed to extend  farther out from  shore.  Upstream from Zug  Island - Rouge
River industrial complex  (DT - 20.6), median coliform  levels  of 24,000 per 100 ml were
observed at the United  States shore, decreasing to 2,400 per 100 at  a  distance  of 300
feet  from shore.   Median values near  the  Canadian  shore  at  this range  were 8,200 and
2,400 at offshore distances of 100 and 400  feet,  respectively.  The mid-river median levels
at this range  increased to 93 per 100 ml.  Bacterial pollution from the Rouge River and
the  Detroit Sewage  Treatment Plant  have  an  immediate  effect  on  the  United  States
shoreline,  resulting  in  a  median  coliform  level of 93,000  at DT -  19.0  just  0.8  mile
downstream from  the Rouge River.  Surface currents from the Rouge River - Zug Island
area  were observed to tend to  cross the  international  boundary and to flow to the east
of Fighting Island.   This  results in a  relatively uniform distribution of coliform across
this  channel  at  levels between  1,500 and 3,500 per  100 ml.  The channel to the west
of Fighting Island was characterized by high coliform levels near the United States shore
                                        17

-------
and extending about  one half the distance to  the  Island.  Median coliform levels from
this point  to the island  shore were  about 100 per 100  ml.   As the  flow  continues
downstream to Grosse  lie, the heavier pollution along the  United  States shore tends  to
enter  the  Trenton Channel  on the west side of the Island  resulting in observed median
coliform  levels of  10,000 per  100  ml and higher. The flow  on the east side of  the Island
shows the  pollution  fairly well distributed  across the channel  at  milepoint 9.3E, with
median  levels ranging from  1,100 to  9,300.   At range  DT -  3.9, across the  mouth  of
the river, the bacterial pollution on the  Canadian side remained constant at about 5,000
MPN, while an increase was observed on the United States side due to the highly polluted
waters from  the  Trenton Channel, with  median values  reaching 43,000 per  100  ml.

Significant  concentrations of  phenol were observed  primarily on the  United States side
of the river  downstream  from the Rouge River.  Average phenol values  at this transect
(DT - 19.0) ranged from  11 to 39 ppb  for a distance  of 400 feet offshore, due to discharge
of phenols  from  the Rouge River (average concentration of 79 ppb) and  the Detroit Sewage
Treatment  Plant.  Phenol concentrations upstream from this  transect and on the Canadian
side are generally 8  ppb  or  lower. These elevated phenol concentrations were observed
to remain  near the United  States shore, with  the primary  pollution  resulting  from this
parameter occurring in the Trenion Channel on the west side of Grosse lie, where average
concentrations of 12 to 24 ppb were determined. Significant phenol pollution was observed
in Monguagan Creek,  which enters the Trenton Channel  immediately below the sampling
transect DT - 12.0W.   This  tributary exhibited an average phenol concentration of 3,490
ppb.  At range DT -  3.9, the phenol  concentration  exhibited generally the same pattern
as the coliform,  in that there is a diffusion across the river, with  higher  concentrations
on the United States  side due to  the quantities added from the Trenton Channel.  BOD
and ammonia results showed  low values above  the mouth of the   Rouge River, with
somewhat  elevated levels below this  point.

Comparing the average coliform results between the 1913 study and the 1946-1948 study,
it was observed that, while Lake Huron had remained essentially constant, the total bacterial
load at the mouth of the Detroit River had  increased  approximately three fold.  The
overall increase from  Lake Huron  to the mouth  of  the Detroit River  was approximately
800 times  in 1913 and over 2,400 in  1946-1948.

U. S. P. H.  S. Water Quality Survey,  1965

In March of 1962 a conference was held  at the  request of the State of  Michigan to discuss
the present status of  pollution in  the southeast Michigan area.  As an outgrowth of this

                                       18

-------
conference, the  Detroit River-Lake Erie Project was established by the United States Public
Health Service to determine the extent of pollution in the United States portion of the
Detroit River and  the Michigan section  of Lake Erie.  In addition, this project was to
investigate the principal sources of pollution in this  area, the contribution from these
sources, the effect of pollution on various water uses, and to prepare a plan  for pollution
abatement in the area.

In order to provide this information,  a comprehensive study was initiated in 1962, with
                                           fi
the final  report  presented  in  April of 1965  .  This  report provides a detailed  analysis
of the various water usages in the area, population and  manufacturing trends, municipal
and  industrial waste sources  and their  characteristics, and description of water  quality.

The  investigation of bacteriological  quality showed that  the total coliform concentration
near the United States shore, from Belle  Isle to the mouth of the  river, were significantly
affected  by storm  overflows,  showing a five  to ten fold increase during these periods.
Under dry conditions, the  coliform level was not found  high  enough to interfere with
any water uses, except below  the Rouge  River and the  Detroit Sewage Treatment Plant
outfall, in the United States section  of the river.  During  or following periods of sufficient
rainfall to cause  overflow of combined sewers, however, the entire river  below Belle  Isle
was found to  be polluted to the extent that it is unsafe for recreational usage. In addition
to total  coliform determinations,  fecal coliform and  fecal streptococcus analyses were
performed during the course of this study. Fecai coliforms were found to comprise from
30 to 90  percent of the  total  coliform population, with the higher values occurring below
the Rouge River during wet periods.  At the mouth of the river the fecal coliform densities
ranged from 30 to 65 percent of the total of 1,000 to 10,000 per 100 ml. Fecal streptococci
levels were  considerably lower than coliform levels,  particularly  during  wet conditions.

One  of the more critical chemical  parameters  investigated was the phenol concentrations
in the river.   IJC objectives call for average phenol concentrations not to exceed 2 y g/l
and maximum values not to exceed 5 yg/l, in order to prevent taste and oodors  in water
supplies^   .   These criteria were exceeded at all ranges in  the  Detroit River during  the
study period.  Average  phenol concentrations in the  upper Detroit  River  ranged from
3 to 5  yg/l, while a near shore station just below the Rouge River exhibited an  average
concentration of  28 yg/l. High phenol levels were particularly noticeable in the tributaries
of the Detroit River with maximum values of  10,980  yg/l and 290  yg/l in Monguagon
Creek  and the Rouge River,  respectively.  Average phenol concentrations  in these  two
tributaries were 1500 and  12  yg/l, respectively.   Average  concentrations at the mouth
of the Detroit River ranged from 4 to 9 yg/l on the United States side of the  International
Boundary, with  from 33 to 70 percent of the samples taken within  5,500 feet of shore
showing concentrations  in excess of 5   yg/l.

                                        19

-------
The  other chemical parameters investigated  include:   solids, chloride   iron, biochemical
oxygen demand (BOD), dissolved oxygen (DO), nitrogen compounds, phosphates, pH, ABS,
alkalinity, chemical oxygen  demand  (COD), cyanide, hardness and  certain  toxic metals.
Although,  in  general,  no  serious  problems were  encountered  with respect to  the
concentrations of these  materials, and little  in the way of specific trends was delineated,
there was illustrated a general degradation of quality  below the  Rouge  River.  This was
particularly true with respect to chlorides,  BOD, COD,  and certain  heavy metals.

Biological analysis  was incorporated as a portion  of this  study, with investigations made
of microscopic plants  and  animals  and bottom  dwelling  organisms.   The free-floating
phytoplanktonic organisms were found to be relatively unchanged through  the course of
the river, with the population  basically dependent on those plankton which enter from
Lake St.  Clair. The sewage fungus, Sphaerotillus , was found growing attached to submerged
objects, being particularly abundant below the  Rouge  River  and Detroit Sewage Treatment
Plant outfall.   Of the biological  communities analyzed, the benthic organisms most clearly
illustrated the  effects of pollution.  Bottom samples collected at the headwaters above Belle
Isle  contained  a variety  of clean-water associated  species,  such  as  caddisfly  larvae.
Downstream  from  Belle  Isle,  along the Michigan  shore,  there no longer existed  the
pollution-sensitive organisms, rather  a preponderance of  sludge worms and  leeches were
collected.  Forms with intermediate  tolerances were  found  along the United States shore
from approximately range DT  - 25.0 to the  confluence of the  Rouge  River.  At this
point a  band  of  extremely pollution  tolerant organisms existed, with  essentially  no
clean-water forms  observed  further downstream.

This study also included a comprehensive study of waste loadings from municipalities and
industries in the general area.   A summary of the waste loadings determined from this
survey  is presented in Table 3.

Table 3.   SUMMARY OF DAILY AVERAGE WASTE  LOADS IN DETROIT  RIVER -
           UNITED STATES SIDE  (1963-1964)
Source
Industrial
Total waste
flow (MG)
1090
Phenols
(Ibs)
1410
Cyanides
(Ibs)
1030
                                                           Ammonia  Oils
                                                           (Ibs)       (aal)
                                                               8530      3350
                                                             Suspended
                                                             Solids  (Ibs)
                                                                 822000
Municipal
541
1270
34300
16000
626000
Total             1631            2680      1033            42830     19350     1448000
The  analysis  of  water quality and waste loadings as determined in this study showed a
general improvement in water quality in  the  lower  Detroit River when compared to the
                                      20

-------
IJC survey of  1947-1948. This was particularly true with respect to coliforms and phenol.
The  major reasons for this  improvement appeared to  be the progress made in  pollution
abatement by the industrial segment during the  preceeding fifteen years.   Reduction of
70 to 80  percent  in total loadings of phenol, cyanide, and oil was achieved by industry
during this period, along with a 22 percent  reduction in ammonia loading and 51 percent
reduction  of suspended solids  loading.  Municipal sources were not analyzed during the
previous survey, so no  similar evaluation could  be made for this sector.

Subsequent to this survey (1962-1963) routine monitoring of river water quality and point
source discharges  has  been  performed  by  the  Michigan  and Ontario Water  Resources
Commissions.   The data from these surveys are  forwarded to the IJC for their use as
well  as the Commissions'.  Summary reports based on this data are periodically prepared
by the IJC which  evaluate the  progress being made in pollution abatement.  These results
will  be  considered in the discussion of water quality  trends  later  in this report.
EXISTING MONITORING PROGRAMS

Since the conclusion of the comprehensive study  of the Detroit River performed by the
U. S. Public Health Service, a continuing water  quality survey program of the Detroit
area  interconnecting waters has been  maintained  by various governmental  agencies.   At
the present time,  The State of Michigan and the Province of Ontario have  the  prime
responsibility for the monitoring of these waters.  In addition, the U. S. E. P. A. provides
continuing surveillance at selected stations.  Although certain stations which  were sampled
by the  Public Health  Service and  in the early  portion of the monitoring program have
been abandoned, and  certain other stations  have been  established  in  recent  years,  the
current  program has continued numerous stations which have been sampled several times
each year for the present decade.   The  information from these stations allows for the
examination of  trends in water quality with respect to  several parameters.

The river transects currently  being  monitored (1973) season, each of which generally has
a number of stations  located across the  river,  are  listed  in Table  4.

In addition to  the  continuing  monitoring  program,  additional  studies  are  performed
periodically, such  as industrial waste surveys, and the extensive  study  of Lake St. Clair
performed  by the Michigan  Water  Resources Commission in  the summer  of  1973.
                                       21

-------
Table 4,  CURRENT MONITORING TRANSECTS
   Transect
St. Clair River
    SR 39.0
    SR 35.0
    SR 34.4
    SR 33.9
    SR 33.1
    SR 30.7
    SR 26.7
    SR 17.5
    SR 13.7
    SR 10.0 S
    SR 10.0 N
    SR  7.6 N
    SR  4.1 N

Detroit River
    DT 30.8 W
    DT 30.7 E
    DT 25.7
    DT 20.6
    DT 20.2
    DT 19.0
    DT 17.0 E
    DT 14.6 W
    DT 13.12
    DT 12.0 W
    DT  9.3 E
    DT  8.7 W
                     Stations per transect
           United States Agencies   Canadian Agencies
    DT
    DT
    DT
6.7 E
6.2 E
3.9
2



6
7
6
6
6
3
3
3
3
7
3
5
2
2
3
6
6
6
6
6




7
4
                  6
                  3
                  7

                  3
                  8
                  3
11
                          2
                          5
                          4
                          9
                          3
 2
 1
12

-------
WATER QUALITY TRENDS

Methodology

The water quality  data  obtained by governmental  agencies  within  the  United States is
on  file in the STORET system  maintained by the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency.
A similar system, maintained by the Ontario Ministry of  the Environment, contains the
data obtained by the Canadian  agencies.   Due  to  time restrictions, only the STORET
system  was accessed in order to obtain the data which would allow for the delineation
of  water  quality trends  for the two rivers of  concern in this  project.   A  total of six
transects in each of the  rivers  were used in the  analysis, since these milepoints were the
ones containing sufficient long-term data  to allow for meaningful  interpretation.

In  general, the  data was analyzed  by  using the  annual averages for various parameters
at the selected  stations.   In order  to  reduce  the affect  of  any anomalies in the data,
three year moving averages were computed, thereby considering larger sample sizes (15-20
observations).   Based on the preliminary analysis of such data transformation, it appeared
that a random  grouping  of yearly averages  would best portray the  average water quality
conditions for specific periods  of time.  Based on the data available and trends observed
from annual averages, the St. Clair River was grouped into the years 1946-1947, 1964-1969,
and 1970-1973,  while the Detroit River was evaluated  by comparing 1962-1963  data with
that from 1971-1973.  Any statistical error  which might have  been induced  by comparing
averages for various time  durations was not investigated.  It must also  be stressed  that
the concentration values  observed do not take into  account any variation in total river
discharge. Indications are that  the discharge has  increased  approximately  10 percent  over
the last  decade  (see Appendix  D-3).

While the above approach  provided a  degree of  qualitative  indication  of  water quality
trends over the past decade, a more rigorous analysis was made by a statistical comparison
of the  mean annual values at  selected  stations  for the years 1968 and  1973.

Statistical evaluation of yearly  means of selected chemical and biological parameters was
accomplished utilizing a t-test of the differences between two  means.  The null hypothesis
is that  if the  two  samples come from  the  same population, they must have  the same
parametric mean (   y * =  v~  )•  This  test assumes equal variances  in the two samples.
An  alternative test considers two  samples from different populations being heteroscedastic
(i.e. variances  not  equal).

Testing  the homogeniety  of variances of two sample  sets was done  utilizing  the F test,
which calcualtes  the ratio of the greater variance over the lesser one. When the homogeniety
of variance assumption  was not tenable, the differences between the means were tested
using  the t' test.   The confidence  limits for all  tests were  95  percent.

                                    23

-------
The  formulae  used  in  evaluating the data are  summarized  as  follows:


A. Testing the homogeniety of variances.
     H.,:  a
             05 ^  ^1' ^2 ^               accept null hypothesis


             05 ^  V-|, V2)               accept alternative hypothesis
B. t-test means of two samples

                                     o           r\
     null hypothesis accepted (HQ:  a -j     =   a 2 )
     H0:
     H :
    ^  < t.05  ^V^, \/2^                  accept null hypothesis


    ^  > t.05  "•  V-|, V2                  accept alternative hypothesis

C. t'  test means of two samples


    alternative hypothesis accepted (H^:  a ^  =/ a 2  '

    H0  :   u,    =   U2


    H1   :   P1   ^   P  2


    *' s <  tf 05                         accept null hypothesis


    *' s >  tf 05                         accept alternative hypothesis
                                       24

-------
Finally, the data output from the STORET system was examined to check the compliance
of water quality  with  established  standards and goals.   The  water  quality standards
established by the State of Michigan for  the St.  Clair and Detroit  Rivers are summarized
in Table  5 7.

Table 5.   WATER  QUALITY  STANDARDS  FOR  THE  ST. CLAIR AND  DETROIT
RIVERS

     Chlorides                  50 mg/l monthly  average

     Dissolved Oxygen             6 mg/l

     Filtrable  Iron              0.3 mg/l

     pH                        6.7 to  8.5

     Fecal  Coliform            200 per 100 ml

     Toxic Substances          limited  to  concentrations  established  in   Federal
                               Standards

For  the  purposes  of evaluating the concentration  of  toxic  heavy  metals,  the levels
                                                                     0
recommended in the Water Quality Criteria-1972,  published by EPA were used0. Pertinent
recommended criteria from  this report are shown in  Table 6.

Table 6.  ALLOWABLE  HEAVY  METAL  CONCENTRATIONS

     Cadmium        30  micrograms per liter

     Chromium       50  micrograms per liter

     Copper          0.1 x  96 hour-LCgg    *

     Lead            30  micrograms per liter

     Mercury         0.05  microgram  per  liter  average
                     0.2 microgram per liter maximum

     Nickel           0.02  x 96 hour-LC50

     Zinc            0.005  x 96 hour-LC50    *

*LC       values  not  established for this water
                                    25

-------
St.  Clair River

Prior  to  1970, comprehensive data collection on the St.  Clair River was limited  to  the
survey undertaken in 1946-1948 under the auspices of the International Joint Commission,
as reported  in the historical  review.  In the  mid-fifties,  and again  in the mid-sixties,  a
limited amount of water quality data was obtained, particularly with respect to the phenol
concentrations.  Insufficient data is available for these periods to  perform a rigorous trend
analysis,  however, certain  general observations can be made  for this period.   Routine,
systematic  monitoring  of the St. Clair  River  at a number of new,  as well  as at  several
previously established stations, has existed since 1970. The continued monitoring of these
stations will  provide greater  insight into overall water quality of the river,  however  the
four  recently  established  stations  do  not  provide sufficient  data to  allow for  the
establishment of any trend. Consequently, only the six on-going stations will be considered
in this  analysis.   Furthermore, only  chloride and  phenol concentrations have received
enough  emphasis at these stations to allow for a  systematic analysis.
Results
Chlorides  - The chloride concentrations at the head of the river  (SR  39.0) have remained
relatively  constant, with discrete samples ranging  from 3 to 12 mg/l, and annual average
values  ranging  from 4.7 to 6.7 mg/l.  A variation of the average  chloride concentration
can be seen, however, at station SR  26.7 (Figure 2).  The station located  100 feet from
the United  States shore showed a slight improvement from  1946 to 1969 (8.1  mg/l to
7.6 mg/l), however, the most  recent data shows the average values  1,900  feet from  the
United States shore going from 8.2 mg/l  (1946- 1947) to  13.3  mg/l during the late 1960's
and back  down to 7.4  during  1970-1973. These changes are also reflected  in  mid-river
water quality, where the average chloride concentration has risen from 5 mg/l in 1946-1947
to 6.6 mg/l  and 7.2 mg/l  for  1964-1969  and 1970-1973,  respectively.

The next  station downstream for which continuing data is available is located at SR  17.5
(Figure 3).   The average chloride levels for three different sampling periods  can be seen
to remain relatively constant in  the western portion of the river,  except for the  station
located 100  feet from shore, where the level has increased from approximately 8.5  mg/l
in both 1941-47 and 1964-65, to 10.6 during the period  1970-73. Results obtained near
the Canadian shore follow closely the conditions observed at SR 26.7, where a large increase
was observed in 1964-65, with a reduction in chloride levels found since 1970.  The same
conditions observed at SR 17.5, were found  at  station 13.7 (Figure 4).
                                          26

-------
                                            LZ
                     Chloride  Concentration  (mg/1)
                                                                      ho
                                                                      O
    O
    O
cc
rr
O
rc
3

C


CO
    vC

    C
    N3


    §
f
ftt
   CO
   O
   O
   to
   (—'
   O
   O
   O
   O
                                                                                     C
                                                                                     »-(
                                                                                     (t

                                                                                     N5
                                                                                     (t
                                                                                     O
                                                                                     l-l
                                                                                     I-1'
                                                                                     C.
                                                                                     ft
                                                                                     rr
                                                                                     i-i
                                                                                     te
                                                                                     rr
                                                                                     CO
                                                                                      n
                                                                                      ro
                                                    U>

-------
                           Figure 3.  .  Trends in chloride concentration  St.  Clair River SR 17.5
o
•H
» c
  0)
  o
  CJ
  o
  u
   16
 o  12
                                                                                              1964-1965

                                                                                              X
                                                                                                 1970-1973

                                                                                                       /

                                                                                                     /

                                                                                                   /
                                                                                                 .946-1947
0
                                               I
                                                           I
                                 I
                                 I
2400
              300
                          600
900
1200
                                                  1500
1800
                                                                            2100
                                       Distance  from U.S.  Shore  (ft.)
                                                                                                   270U

-------
      Figure 4.   Trends in chloride concentration St.  Clair River  SR  13.7
N>
o
•l-l
4-1
tti
1-1
4->
C
0)
O
C
O
o

0)
T3
•H
    O
       16
       12
        0
                                                                                   1964-1969
                                                                                ^1970-1973
                                                                                 946-1947
                            1
1
1
1
                     300
                           600        900         1200      1500

                           Distance  from  U.  S.  Shore (ft.)
                                                                                   Truir

-------
The final station  for which sufficient monitoring has been performed to allow an analysis
of water quality  trends  is located  at SR 10.0, which is  located below the point where
the river splits  into a north and south channel around  Harsons Island.  Results obtained
in the south channel follow closely the results obtained  at SR 17.5 and SR 13.7, with
a relatively large increase in chlorides between  1946-47 and 1964-65, with a small decrease
observed since  1970.  The  north  channel can be  seen  (Figure 5) to  have  experienced
a continual  increase  in chloride  levels, although the magnitude of this increase  has been
relatively small (6.8 mg/l to 8.9 mg/l).

Phenol - Phenol levels were found to be relatively high at  most stations monitored during
the 1946-47 survey, with all  stations having at least one  sample which  exceeded the  IJC
objectives of a  maximum 5  y g/l, and many stations exhibiting maximum concentrations
of 100  to  400  y g/l.  Sampling programs during the 1950's showed phenols to  remain
a problem,  however,  a  marked  decrease  in phenol  concentrations was observed.  Only
one sample exhibited  a concentration in excess of 50 yg/l, however, a total of 33 stations
had maximum concentrations in excess of the 5 y g/l objective.  During  the  1960's,  the
number of stations where the maximum value was exceeded was reduced to  19, and  the
maximum concentration observed  was  30  y  g/l.

By the 1970's, only two stations continued to exhibit a significant concentration of phenol:
SR  30.7 and SR  33.1.   In both cases,  the high maximum values  were observed only at
one station located nearest to the Canadian shore, and to have little effect on the offshore
water quality.  For example, the maximum  concentrations observed during this period
occurred in 1973 at SR  33.1, 2,030 feet from the United States shore, with a range
of 1 to 21  yg/l  for six samples, and an  average of 5.67 y g/l. During this same period,
the station  located  100 feet  further out from shore ranged from  1  to 2 Mg/l, with an
average  of  1.67.  The effect  of  this concentration  was manifest in the next downstream
station (SR  30.7  - 3,700  feet) where the phenol concentration ranged from  1 to 7 yg/l,
with an average of 3.33.  Here the effect could be observed  further from  shore (SR 30.7
- 3,550 feet) where the values ranged from 1 to 4 with  an  average of 2.33.   Downriver
from  this point,  no values  above 4   yg/l were  observed.

It is thus obvious that considerable progress has been made in preventing phenol pollution
in the river. With the possible exception of the industrial  area south of Sarnia, the phenol
pollution sources  have  been  reduced to the  level where  IJC objectives for the river are
being met.

                                          30

-------
              Chloride  Concentration  (mg/1)
                                OO
                                                           CTi
    to
    O
    O
O
o
o
H-
CO
rt
03
3
O
n>

H)



§
    VO
    O
    O
             h-1
             o
00
cr
o

ro
O -P- OO to 


to
O
O



O^
o
o


VO
O
O
111!


"" oo
&3
f~^
o
oo

•••



—

\\
\
1
&
1\
LV
\
\ \
\\
\\
\\
\ \
^ "ft
^ \l_.
I— • VO tTi
vO ^J -P-
J> O 1
CT> 1 I-1
1 I-1 vo
t — ' vO 0"*
VO ~J v^i
                                                                                   H-
                                                                                   cm
                                                                                   a
                                                                                   l-i
                                                                                   0)
                                                                                   3
                                                                                   a.
                                                                                   co
                                                                                   n
                                                                               H-
                                                                               a
                                                                               n>

                                                                               n
                                                                               o
                                                                               3
                                                                               o
                                                                               n>
                                                                               3
                                                                               rt
                                                                               H
                                                                               03
                                                                               rt
                                                                               H-
                                                                               O
                                                                               3

                                                                               CO
                                                                               rt
                                                                                o



                                                                                H-




                                                                                H-


                                                                                0)





                                                                                CO



                                                                                M
                                                                                O

                                                                                O
                                                                                    03
                                                                                    3
                                                                                    C/3
                                                                                    !«

                                                                                    i—1
                                                                                    o

                                                                                    o

                                                                                    en

-------
Other parameters - Other parameters of interest in establishing water quality have received
systematic, continuing investigation only since the late 1960's or early  1970's.  A small
amount of information on coliform and ammonia concentrations was obtained during the
1946-47 survey, however, the methods of analyses used for these parameters has changed
such that little  insight is gained  in comparing these earlier  values with  those obtained
during the more recent surveys.

Total coliform data was obtained in 1946-47 by the MPN method, whereas the membrane
filter method  has been utilized in more recent surveys.  Qualitative indications are that
a decrease in this parameter has occurred over the last two decades.  Mean total coliform
levels are  low at all stations (less than 1,000 per  100 ml) with maximum values within
the IJC goal of  1,000 per 100 ml. Fecal coliforms, although monitored only for the last
decade, show  the same trend, generally accounting for approximately 10 to 50  percent
of the total coliform  population.

Ammonia nitrogen was determined in 1946-47,  and  is  included in current monitoring
programs.  In  general, ammonia was  not detected  during  the earlier survey, however the
increased  sensitivity of current analytical techniques with respect to ammonia precludes
attributing the presently  detected levels to an actual increase in concentration.   Nitrate
nitrogen  and phosphorus were monitored periodically during the late  1960's, and have
been  routinely monitored since  1970  with  no appreciable  trend being observed during
this  period.

Little variation  in  suspended or dissolved solids has been observed, with the  exception
that the most  recent  sampling season saw a significant increase in suspended solids at
the upstream stations.  This is too short a time span  to state affirmatively that a trend
is developing, however it does warrant paying particular attention to this parameter during
subsequent sampling  seasons.

Statistical evaluation of the  data  from the St. Clair  River was  made for  stations  located
at milepoints  SR 39.0 and  SR  13.7.  The results of comparing 1968 and 1973 mean
values is  presented in  Table  7.   The  three parameters for which significant differences
of annual  means could be established were chlorides, nitrates,  and total coliforms.  As
is  shown  in Table 7,  the chloride concentration at stations near the  Canadian shore at
SR 13.7 have decreased significantly over  the past five years.  The nitrate concentration
has exhibited  a  significant decrease at  milepoints SR 39.0 and SR 13.7 at most stations
monitored.  The  total  coliform level, however, was observed to have increased significantly
at the head end  of the river.  Phenol  and iron concentrations  were also  tested, however
no  significant variation could be established  between these two periods.

                                        32

-------
     Table 7.    STATISTICAL EVALUATION OF MEANS -  ST.  GLAIR RIVER  1968 versus 1973
     River Mile
       39.0
Distance from shore (ft,)
     100
  4 foot depth

 30 foot depth

    1500
Chlorides
Nitrates


1968>1973

1968>1973
Total Coliforms
                                                                                      1968<1973
                                                                                      1968<1973
       13.7
     100
     700
    1000
    1400
    1900
                                                     1968>1973
                                                     1968>1973
                1968>1973

                1968>1973

                1968>1973
U)
U)

-------
Generally  speaking, the most recent surveillance data shows the water quality of the St.
Clair  River to  be in  compliance with  established  standards and goals.
Detroit  River
As discussed in the previous sections, the past  two decades have seen increased  activity
in the assessment and control of the water  quality of the area.  Prior  to 1962, only
limited  studies were undertaken  to assess the  water quality conditions,  thus  making a
detailed trend analysis for this time period extremely difficult. Some general conclusions
can be made, however, by considering the 1913, 1948, and 1962 studies performed under
the auspices of the International  Joint Commision.  The data from these studies has been
discussed in the previous  sections and the following conclusions made.  During the time
period of  1913  to  1948 the general water quality of the Detroit River continued to
deteriorate as measured by coliform bacteria and  phenols. After the 1948 study, substantial
progress in pollution abatement was realized, and subsequently the general water quality
improved  between  1948  and  1962.

In 1962 a  comprehensive study the United States Public Health Service was initiated  in
order to further assess the existing water quality.  A number of stations established during
this  study  have been continually monitored  up  to the present time.  Since 1966 most
of these stations have been maintained by  the Michigan and Ontario  Water  Resources
Commissions.   The data  obtained during the  course of the  monitoring program provides
a data base for evaluating the trends in the water quality of the river over the past ten
years.  The following discussion analyzes the changes in water quality over  the past decade
as measured by several water quality parameters. These parameters include total coliform,
phenols, chlorides,  ammonia nitrogen, nitrate nitrogen, total phosphorus, total iron,
cyanide, and total  dissolved solids.

The STORET system maintained  by EPA contains the water quality data from the United
States Public  Health Service  and Michigan Water Resources Commission  surveys.  This
retrieval system was used to access the  data and  to provide annual  statistical summaries
for all  of  the  stations  which have been monitored.  A similar system  is maintained by
the  Province of  Ontario, however this system  could not be accessed in time to include
the  data from this source.
                                          34

-------
A total  of  23 stations  located at six different milepoints along the Detroit River were
used  in  the  analysis.   These stations span the entire  length of the river from the head
of the river at Lake St. Clair to the mouth of the river at Lake Erie.  The stations were
chosen based on their  location in the river and on the amount of data which was available.
Each  of  these stations was sampled five or  six times during each  year,  this sampling
occurring approximately  once a month  from late  April  to  early October.

Results -
Chlorides - The chloride concentrations have remained relatively constant at the head of
the river varying from 8-10  mg/l.   There appears to have  been a significant decrease,
however, in  the  concentrations  in the  lower  portions of  the  river (milepoint 14.6 and
below).  The largest decreases wery found  at stations in the Trenton Channel at milepoint
8.7W.   Graphical comparisons of the  1962-63 versus 1971-73 chloride  levels  are shown
in Figures 6-10. These decreases have resulted in the water quality now complying with
the chloride  standard.

Phenol  -  Phenol  concentrations  have also  generally decreased  during  the last ten years.
Again  the most  significant reduction has  occurred in the Trenton  Channel at milepoing
8.7W.   Only two stations exhibited an increase in phenol  concentration; both of these
being  located  at  milepoint  14.6.   Even  though a general reduction  has occurred, the
near-shore stations in the lower river, and all of the stations  in the Trenton Channel,
continued to exceed  IJC  goals of 2  pg/l  average and 5.0  ug/l  maximum.  Comparisons
of the  data  for  various years is given  in  Table  8 and  Figure  11.

Total coliform  -  It was difficult to assess a trend with regards to total  coliform.  Primary
sources of coliform loadings  are the combined  sewer overflows located  along the river.
Due  to the intermittent nature  of these discharges, the sampling conditions as  a function
of time since the last  rainstorm,  size of the storm, etc., are very critical when considering
the coliform  concentrations.  This  is illustrated  by the fact that for any given year large
variations occur between the maximum and minimum levels recorded.  At several stations
these variations span several  orders  of  magnitude (e.g. 100-10,000/100 ml).  Because of
this  large fluctuation, examining the data on a  year to  year  basis provided  little help
in defining a trend.   At any given  milepoint, several stations  would show an increase,
while others showed decreased concentrations. Analyzing the data using three year moving
averages, however,  tended to  smooth out  the  yearly fluctuations and  indicated that, on
the average,  some  changes have occurred.   Figures 12 through  18 present graphical
comparisons  of the averages for the  years 1962-63, 1967-69, and 1970-72.  In all cases,
                                     35

-------
              Figure 6. .Trends  in  chloride  concentrations  Detroit River  -  DT 20.6
   10
6   8
o
•H
4-J
ctf
a)
a

8   5
QJ

?   4
                                  1962-1963
                               JL
         100
500                       1000

     Distance from U. S.  shore  (ft.)
                                                                                  1500

-------
      Figure 7.  Trends in Chloride  Concentration - Detroit River  DT 14.6
bO
P
O
•H
4-)
CO
M
4-1
C

-------
OJ
oo
       Figure 8.  Trends in  chloride Concentrations - Detroit  River DT 12.0 W


          60
       bfl
       O
      •H
       QJ
       o
       c
       o
       CJ

       0)
       -d
       •r-t
       o
          50
          40
          30
20
          10
           0
                                                   1962-1963
                                                                  1971-1973
                                                        J_
                  TCJO                  500

                     Distance from U. S. shore  (ft.)
                                                     1,000

-------
                          Chloride  Concentration  (mg/1)
                                                                     CTv
                                                                     O
   o
   o
CO
rt
03
3
o
ft)

i-h
i-S
O
3
CO


OT

O

tt>
Hi
rt
   o
   o
o
o
o
                                                                                     H-
                                                                                     OP
                                                                                     d
                                                                                     K
                                                                                     ro

                                                                                     MD
                                                                                     H
                                                                                     H
                                                                                     0)
                                                                                     co


                                                                                     5-
                                                                                     ro

                                                                                     o
                                                                                     o
                                                                                     3
                                                                                     O
                                                                                     (D
                                                                                     03
                                                                                     rt
                                                                                     H-
                                                                                     O
                                                                                     3
                                                                                     O
                                                                                     ro
                                                                                     rt
                                                                                     H
                                                                                     O
                                                                                     H-
                                                                                     rt
   Ui
   o
   o
                                                                                     CO

-------

-------
   Figure  H-  Trends  in phenol concentration  Detroit  River  -  8.7  W
   50
   40
   30
   20
0)
X
PM
   10
   0
 1
                                                        1
                                                                         1962-1963


                                                                         1971-1973
  1
         100
500                       1,000

       Distance from U. S. shore (ft.)
1,500

-------
      Figure 12.   Trends in total coliform concentrations - Detroit River
                     30.8 W
  10,000
   1,000
o
o
                                        1971-1973
w
^
cu
     100
                                  1962-1963
      1C
50
OO
S
                                                  5W
                  Distance from U.  S. shore (ft.)
                                  42

-------
           Figure 13.   Trends  in total coliform concentrations  Detroit Riv
                          DT 20.6
 100,000   —
  10,000
E

o
o
w
>-l
0)
   1,000
     100   _
      10
                   250          500        1,000       1,500

                     Distance  from U.  S.  shore (ft.)
270^0
                                   43

-------
      Figure 14.  Trends in total coliform concentrations - Detroit River
                    DT 14.6
100,000
 10,000
  l.OOC
   100
                                    1967-1969
                    1970-1972
                    —.	—-—
                    1962-1963
_L
                                       _L
               250        500         1,500      2,000
                Distance from U. S. shore  (ft.)
                                44

-------
     Figure  15.   Trends in total coliform concentrations Detroit  River
                   12.0 W
   100,000 —
o
o
w
!~i
OJ


1
C
10,000
     1,000
      100
                                             1970-1972
             100
                                 500

                    Distance from U. S. shore (ft.)
1,000
                                    A5

-------
   Figure  16
Trends in total coliform concentrations

  DT 9.3 E
                       - Detroit  River
   100,000
    10,000
o
o
w
5-4
    1,000
                                     1971-1972
      100
   I
I
                 1000            2000                  5000

                        Distance from U.  S.  shore (ft.)
                                 46

-------
     Figure 17.   Trends  in total  coliform concentrations Detroit River

                   DT 8.7  W
  100,000
   10,000
o
o
w
c   1,000
      100
                                 1967-1969
              1970-1972
                       mr
                  ID	£7700"

Distance from U. S.  shore (ft.)
                                  47

-------
        Figure  18.  Trends in total coliform concentrations  Detroit River

                      DT 3.9
  100,000
o
o
ca



-------
TABLE 8. AVERAGE PHENOL CONCENTRATION- DETROIT RIVER
         (1962-1973)

Station      Feet from
Milepoint    U.S. shore     1962-63     1967-69     1971-73

  30.0           100          3.5         2.0         1.0
                 300          3-5         2.0         1.0

  20.6            50          3.7         2.7         1.2
                 400          3.5         2.0         1.2
                1000          3.6         2.0         1.2

  14.6           100          8.0         5.7         6.7
                 400          7.2         4.3         5.9
                1000          4.1         2.0         2.6

  12.OW          122          9.0         5-3         5.3
                 490          8.2         5-0         4.6
                 880          8.5         3.2         3.4

   8.7W           80         41.0        21.2         7.4
                 480         12.0         6.2         4.8
                 980         10.0         4.2         4.6
                1240          7.0         3-7         3.8

   3-9          2500          9.5         5-9         5.9
                5500          5.0         3.7         4.0
                7500          3.7         2.3         2.7
                9500          3.2         2.4         1.5
               11500          3-0         2.3         1.0
               15000          3-1         2.1         1.0
               16500          2.7         2.0         1.0
               18500          2.5         2.0         1.1
               19000          2.4         2.0         1.0
  Note:  all concentrations as ug/1 phenol
                          49

-------
the average total coliform concentrations appear to be  higher  for  the  time periods of
1967-69  and 1970-72 than they  were during the early  sixties.   The overall indication
is that the coliform levels increased from the early sixties through  the rest of the decade.
The  concentrations have decreased in the last few years  but are still higher  than during
the Public Health  Service Study of  1962.

The  International  Joint  Commission objective for total  coliform  is  1,000/100 ml. The
only stations which met these  standards were at milepoint 30.8, and some stations at
milepoint  20.6.   Thus,  even  though the  trend appears  to  be a  slight  decrease in
concentrations  since  1969, most of the stations are  still  above the recommended levels.

Nutrients - Ammonia and nitrate nitrogen have been routinely monitored at most stations
since  1966, while phosphorus has been  monitored routinely  since  1968. Prior to these
dates only a small  amount of scattered information  is available. Thus, except for a  few
stations at milepoints 30.8 and  3.9,  sufficient data was available to make an assessment
only for the last  six or  seven  years. The data for ammonia,  nitrate,  and phosphorus  is
presented in Tables 9,  10,  and  11,  respectively.

Ammonia nitrogen levels have remained  relatively constant  for  most stations during the
last six years.  The only  stations  exhibiting  any significant change were those near shore
in  the Trenton Channel.  In  this area, as measured at milepoint  8.7W,  the concentrations
have decreased 20 to 30 percent.

The  nitrate concentrations have increased at most stations  since  1967.  The stations at
milepoint 30.8 are only ones which  have remained constant during recent years.  Some
nitrate data for 1964-65 was  available  for stations at milepoints 30.8  and 3.9.   At 30.8
the nitrate  levels appear  to  be 50 percent lower for the 1967-69 period than  1964-65,
and since 1967 they  have remained constant. At milepoint 3.9 the 1967-69 levels were
also  lower than those measured in  1964-65.   However, the  levels have increased since
1967 and  are presently  as  high as,  or  higher than, the 1964-65  levels.

Phosphorus - Total phosphorus  concentrations have decreased at all stations since  1968.
Again, the most significant drop has occurred in the Trenton Channel  at milepoint 8.7W.
Close to  50 percent reduction in phosphorus concentrations has been realized at the near
shore station in this area.

Iron  - Total iron  concentrations  have  decreased  since 1967 at most stations along the
river.  The  near shore  stations in  the Trenton  Channel showed the  largest reduction,
                                      50

-------
TABLE 9.   AVERAGE AMMONIA-NITROGEN CONCENTRATIONS  -  DETROIT
          RIVER (1963-1973)

Station       Feet from
Mllep.olnt     U.S. shore   1963-65   1967-69    1969-71    1971-73

  30.8            100        .11        .04      0.7       .05
                  300        .14        .03        .04       .04

  20.6             50                   .03        .05       .05
                  400                   .03        .05       .05
                 1000                   .05        .08       .07

  12.0            122                             .46       .45
                  490                             .16       .19
                  880                             .08       .10

   8.7W            80                   .59        .43       .41
                  480                   .28        .20       .24
                  980                   .13        .12       .14
                 1240                   .11        .11       .11

   3.9           2500                   .57        .60       .55
                 5500                   .27        .32       .29
                 7500                   .17        .22       .17
                 9500                   .06        .07       .09
                11500                   .08        .08       .08
                15000                   .04        .03       .05
                16500                   .03        .04       .05
                18000                   .03        .05       .07


  Note:  All concentrations  are  mg/1  as  Nitrogen
                          51

-------
TABLE 10.AVERAGE NITRATE NITROGEN  CONCENTRATIONS - DETROIT
         RIVER  (1964-1973)
Station     Feet
Milepoint   U.S. Shore   1964-65    1967-69   1969-71  1971-73

30.8W          100         .23        .12       .12        .13
               300         .22        .14       .11        .10

20.6            50                   .09       .11        .17
               400                   .10       .12        .16
              1000                   .10       .12        .15

14.6           100                   .25       .38        .51
               400                   .18       .25        .26
              1000                   .16       .20        .21

12.OW          122                            .26        .31
               490                            .20        .26
               880                            .17        .24

 8.7W           80                   .29       .41        .43
               480                   .23       .35        .37
               980                   .17       .22        .26
              1240                   .20       .24        .24

 3-9          2500                   .34       .64        .63
              5500         .25        .20       .32        .46
              9500         .22        .15       .18        .25
             11500         .21        .15       .20        .22
             15000         .20        .15       .16        .20
             16500         .20        .17       .16        .18
             18500         .26        .20       .19        .23
Note:   All concentrations  are  mg/1 Nitrogen
                         52

-------
TABLE 11. AVERAGE TOTAL PHOSPHOROUS CONCENTRATION - DETROIT
          RIVER (1968-1972)
Station      Feet from
Milepolnt    U.S. Shore            1968-70       1970-72
30.8W            100                 .16           .06
                 300                 .08           .05

20.6              50                 .13           .10
                 400                 .07           .06
                1000                 .10           .08

1^.6             100                 .18           .13
                 400                 .16           .11
                1000                 .09           .07

12.OW            122                 .24           .18
                 490                 .15           .12
                 880                 .11           .10

 8.7              80                 .41           .22
                 480                 .23           .15
                 980                 .17           .13
                1240                 .16           .12

 3.9            2500                 .36           .24
                5500                 .22           .17
                7500                 .15           .13
                9500                 .12           .08
               11500                 .08           .06
               15000                 .07           .05
               16500                 .07           .04
               18500                 .08           .04

Mote:   All concentrations  as  mg/1  as  Phosphorous
                          53

-------
presumably  due to  increased industrial pollution  control.   The total  iron data is given
in Table 12.   It can be seen in this  table that the iron  concentrations below DT 14.6,
exceed  the  present  standards.

Dissolved  Solids - Dissolved solids  information  is only available for 1971 through 1973
at most stations.  During this short period, however, all  stations have  shown an increase
in total dissolved  solids concentrations.   In some cases  these increases are greater than
20 percent.   Even though  this parameter  has only been routinely monitored for the past
three years, the indication is that the  levels are continually  increasing, however they are
well  within  established standards.   Data  for dissolved solids is presented in  Table  13.

Cyanide - Cyanide has been monitored  for  several years because  of  its  potential toxic
effect on the river.  Except for a few instances in the early sixties, cyanide concentrations
have remained constant in the river  at  a level of approximately  0.01 mg/l.

Statistical  results - The results of statistically evaluating the  mean annual values for 1968
and  1973 for the Detroit  River are presented  in  Table 14.  Chlorides were observed to
have decreased significantly at two  stations, both  relatively  near the United States shore
at milepoints 12.0W and 3.9.   Iron  concentrations  also decreased at three stations on
these two transects.  The  nitrate concentration was observed to have  increased at three
stations in the downriver region.  The most important  results were observed with respect
to the phosphorus concentration which  has decreased  significantly at  nearly all stations
below  milepoint  12.0W.  No statistically significant changes were  observed with respect
to total coliform  and ammonia nitrogen concentrations  between  these  two  years.

Summary  - In general, the water quality of the river has improved over  the past ten years.
The  chloride, phenol, phosphate, and iron concentrations have all decreased.  The past
four years have shown signs that  the coliform levels  may  be  dropping,  although more
time will be required to determine if this trend will continue.  The decrease in concentration
of these parameters  appears to  indicate that the industrial and  combined  sewer overflow
control programs  are  beginning  to  have  a positive effect on  the  river water quality.
                                          54

-------
TABLE 12.  AVERAGE TOTAL IRON CONCENTRATIONS - DETROIT
          RIVER (1967-1973)
Station     Feet from
Milepoint   U.S. Shore    1967-69   1969-71   1971-73

30.8           100          513       431       264
               300          372       355       297

20.6            50          399       480       415
               400          333       365       278
              1000          311       373       263

14.6           100          854       692       641
               400          614       650       571
              1000          507       493       389

12.OW          122                    789       719
               490                    698       610
               880                    484       490

 8.7W           80         1240      1145       918
               480         1079       858       642
               980          733       633       548
              1240          568       581       496

 3.9          2500          980       826       706
              5500          804       597       600
              7500          668       526       502
              9500          574       421       421
             11500          538       408       358
             15000          550       376       297
             16500          564       475       354
             18500          643       52Q       587

Note:  All concentrations are ug/1 as  Iron
                          55

-------
TABLE 13.  AVERAGE DISSOLVED SOLIDS CONCENTRATIONS - DETROIT
          RIVER (1971-1973)
Station     Feet from
Mllepolnt   U.S. shore        1971        1972       1973

30.8            100           133         134         168
                300           127         143         165

20.6             50           129         132         162
                400           123         116         158
               1000           121         119         160

1^.6            100           139         151         187
                400           141         150         163
               1000           132         138         152
               2000           131         139         153

12.0            122           166         175         192
                490           148         148         162
                880           136         149         165

 8.7 W           80           167         182         193
                480           143         140         168
                980           142         139         167
               1240           137         148         170

 3-9           2500           173         192         188
               5500           151         164         163
               7500           140         162         162
               9500           129         153         162
              11500           125         150         157
              14500           130         145         158
              16500           155         197         180
              18500           189         212         218
              19000           230         245         210

-------


River mile
30.8 W

20.6


1A.6


12.0 W


8. 7 W



3.9








Table 14. STATISTICAL EVALUATION
Distance from
shore (ft.) Chlorides
100
300
50
400
1000
100
400
1000
122 1968>1973
490
880
80
480
980
1240
2500
5500 1968>1973
7500
9500
11500
15000
16500
18500
19300
OF MEANS - DETROIT RIVER 1968 versus 1973

Phenols Nitrates Phosphates
— — —
1968>1973
— _ __
_ _ _
_
_
— _ -.
_
1968>1973
1968<1973
- -
— — _
1968>1973
1968<1973
1968>1973
1968<1973 - 1968>1973
_ _
1968<1973 1968>1973
1968>1973 - 1968>1973
1968>1973
1968>1973
- _ _
1968>1973
1968>1973


Iron
—
-
_
_
-
_
_
-
1968>1973
1968>1973
-
_
_
-
-
_
_
_
1968>1973
-
_
_
_
-

-------
                                      SECTION V

                             WATER QUALITY SURVEY

INTRODUCTION

Methodology

Field  investigations were made during three seasonal  periods, with surveys performed on
August 14-16, 1973 (summer period), November 6-8, 1973  (fall period) and May 13-15,
1974  (spring period). A 42 foot, steel-hulled vessel was equipped with the necessary cranes,
winches,  and other sampling  equipment for the survey operation. Due to the extended
range  of the study area, each survey required three days for completion. In  order to insure
the reliability  of the analytical results,  samples were returned to the laboratory at the
end of each day for analysis of those parameters which could  not be determined in-situ
at each sampling location.

Station  transects across the  river were  located  by  means of  conspicuous landmarks.
Distances from shore  were measured  by a visual rangefinder in order to determine when
the survey  vessel was  on station.

Station  Locations

The specific sampling stations to be surveyed were chosen on the basis of the historical
data  base for  the area,  existence of on-going monitoring programs or surveys by other
groups,  presence of  significant  wastewater  inputs,   and  required  information for the
modeling effort. As discussed earlier, the State  of Michigan  and the  Province of Ontario
have programs of comprehensive water quality monitoring for both the St. Clair and Detroit
Rivers. The cross river transects to be used for this study were thus  chosen to coincide
with those established and monitored by the agencies of these governments. Since budgetary
restrictions precluded sampling at all stations maintained  by these agencies,  the stations
surveyed  at each selected  transect were chosen to  provide  a  representative  overview of
each transect  area. The  stations  selected and  numbering  system followed are  presented
in Table  15 and Figure 19.
                                          -58-

-------
                  TABLE  15.  STATION LOCATIONS


               River Transect    Distance  from Western
Station No.     (mile point)        Shore  (ft. )	 Station Description

1 SR 39

2 SR 39

3 SR 13

4 SR 13

5 DT 30

6 DT 30

7 DT 30

8 DT 20

.0

.0

. 7

.7

.8

.8

.7

.6
7
400

800

400

1,400

100

1,000

900

50

St. Glair R. at mou
of Lake Huron
St. Glair R. at mou
of Lake Huron
St. Glair R. near
Algonac
St. Glair R, near
Algonac
Detroit River west
of Peach Island
Detroit River west
of Peach Island
Detroit River east
of Peach Island
Detroit River app .
                                                       3,400  ft.  south  of
                                                       Ambassador Bridge
    9           DT 20.6                1,000           Detroit  River  app.
                                                       3,400  ft.  south  of
                                                       Ambassador Bridge
    10          DT 19.0                  100           Detroit  River  at
                                                       mouth of Rouge River
    11          DT 19.0                2,500           Detroit  River  at
                                                       mouth of Rouge River
    12          DT 17.0  E                900           Detroit  River  at  east
                                                       side of head  of
                                                       Fighting Island
    13          DT 16.0  W                100           Detroit  River  below
                                                       mouth of Ecorse  River
    14          DT 16.0  W              4,000           Detroit  River  below
                                                       mouth of Ecorse  River
    15          DT 14.6  W                100           Detroit  River  west
                                                       side of tip of
                                                       Grosse  lie

    16          DT 11'5                L200           Detroit River east of
                                                      Grosse lie at mouth
                                                      Rivier Aux Canards
    17          DT U-5                4,000           Detroit River east of
                                                      Grosse lie at mouth
                                                      Rivier Aux Canards
                               59

-------
                  TABLE  15.  STATION LOCATIONS (cont.)

               River Transect   Distance from Western
Station No.     (mile point)        Shore (ft.)          Station Description

    18          DT  8.7                  80            Detroit River in
                                                        Trenton Channel at
                                                        Elizabeth Park
    19          DT  3.9               2,500            Mouth of Detroit Rive
    20          DT  3.9               5,500            Mouth of Detroit Rive
    21          DT  3.9              13,000            Mouth of Detroit Rive
    22          DT  3.9              16,500            Mouth of Detroit Rive
                                  60

-------
Figure  19.  Sampling  station locations
                                                 LAKE HURON
       LAKE
     ST. CLAIfl
                                                 ONTARIO
                            61

-------
Figure 19.(cont.)-   Sampling station locations
          X
               MICHIGAN
                          62

-------
Figure 19.(cent.)-  Sampling station locations
                      ECORSE RIVER
               MONGUASON CREEK
        MICHIGAN
                        20*     21» 22'
                         LAKE  ERIE
                               63

-------
CHEMISTRY

Introduction

The  existing  monitoring program  of  the  various governmental  agencies provide a great
deal  of information  with respect  to  the  more common  water  quality parameters, such
as oxygen  demanding  carbonaceous material  (BOD and  COD), nutrients  (nitrogen and
phosphorus species) and some specific toxic materials and heavy metals (iron, phenol and
cyanide).   Parameters  which have received  little attention include the broader range  of
heavy metals and pesticides in the aqueous phase, as well as the entire range of materials
present in  the  sediment phase.

The  objective of surveys performed  as a portion of this study was the closing of gaps
and deficiencies in the  existing data base, as well as providing verification of existing data.
Consequently, the chemical portion of the survey encompassed three basic elements:   an
analysis of the  aqueous phase, including  a broad spectrum of metal ions  and  pesticides
in addition to the more common  water quality parameter;evaluation of the heavy metal,
nutrient, and organic  content of  the sediment;  and a  preliminary determination of the
potential for this same material to be released from the sediment into the aqueous phase.

Methodology

Field Sampling  -

Insitu measurements  of dissolved oxygen, temperature, and specific conductance were made
at measured depths using a remote sensing probe cluster.  The oxygen sensing device was
of the polarographic  type electrode utilizing a fluorocarbon semipermeable membrane. The
sensing  unit was fitted with an agitation device which precluded an oxygen concentration
gradient around the  probe.  The  variation  in partial  pressure of  oxygen as a function
of temperature and depth  was compensated for internally by  the device.  The thermistor
in this  oxygen  probe  was used to sense  water temperature and data readout  was made
on  the same  meter  by means  of  switch selection.   Insitu measurement of specific
conductance was accomplished through the use of a remote sensing  platinum conductivity
cell.   Data output was by the direct-reading meter.  For all  insitu measurements,  depth
was  determined by  calibration of the probe cluster supporting cable.

Water samples for laboratory analysis  were taken with a two liter vertical Van Dorn bottle.

                                        64

-------
Samples  were obtained from the surface, approximately half the total river depth, and
approximately one meter from the river bottom, and composited in nonmetallic vessels
for subsequent distribution  to proper transport and storage containers.  The fraction of
sample for analysis of the Biochemical Oxygen Demand was transferred immediately to
an  incubation bottle  and refrigerated until  it was transported to the laboratory at the
end of the day.  Sample fractions for Chemical Oxygen  Demand were transferred to glass
containers  and were  preserved with  sulfuric acid  (1  ml 1^804 per  100 ml sample) and
refrigerated.  One  liter  fractions of  the  composite samples were transferred  to  linear
polyethylene containers and  preserved with nitric acid  (1 ml HNO3  per  100 ml sample)
for subsequent metal  ion analysis.  Four  liter sample fractions were drawn for the analysis
of chlorinated organics.   These  samples  were stored  in reagent  quality glass containers
with teflon liners and refrigerated at 4°C until analysis was initiated.

A gravity  stratification corer  was the primary means  for  procuring  sediment  samples,
although during the  first survey a Ponar dredge  was employed  where satisfactory core
samples could not be obtained.   Since  samples obtained by the  Ponar dredge are  more
disturbed than those obtained by means of the coring device, efforts were made to reduce
the need for the Ponar. Consequently, for the second and third surveys, the coring device
was  modified to  provide  positive sample  recovery whenever the bottom material  was
appreciably penetrable.  The corer was finned and weighted and outfitted with a positive
retention coring head.  The  coring tube itself was  lined with a removable polycarbonate
sleeve so that core samples  could be removed essentially  untouched. Upon removal of
the sample, the  sleeve was fitted with water-tight end caps  so that no loss of interstitial
liquid would occur prior to analysis.

Sediment samples  taken by  either device were refrigerated on board ship until they could
be transported to the laboratory at  the end of each sampling  day.  Upon receipt in the
laboratory  they  were frozen  and stored  at  minus 20°C until  analysis was  initiated.

Analytical  Procedures

In general,  all methods of chemical  analysis were taken from widely approved compilations
of analytical  procedures     . Where methods were unavailable or insufficient to provide
the desired information, alternate analytical procedures were employed after their accuracy
and precision had been statistically verified. A brief synopsis of the analytical methodology
is  contained  in  the paragraphs that  follow.

Aqueous phase - Aqueous samples for the analysis of five-day  Biochemical Oxygen Demand
                                        65

-------
        were allowed to warm from their refrigerated condition and to equilibrate  with
respect to oxygen concentration at 20°C.  Initial dissolved oxygen levels were determined,
the vessels were sealed, and the samples were incubated in the  dark for five days at  20°
C.  Final oxygen  levels were  measured after this  incubation period and the BODg was
calculated.  All dissolved oxygen determinations were made by  means of a polarographic
electrode  device.

The analysis of Chemical Oxygen  Demand (COD) in the water samples was accomplished
through the standard potassium dichromate-sulfuric acid reflux method. The dichromate
oxidant was 0.025 JN_ in concentration.

Total  concentrations  of  the  metals cadmium, chromium, copper, iron, lead, manganese,
mercury, nickel, and  zinc were determined  in acidified water samples.  High  temperature
flameless  atomic  absorption  spectrophotometry  was  employed  for all metals  except
mercury, nickel, and  zinc.  Mercury was analyzed using the cold vapor atomic absorption
technique  of  Hatch  and Ott   .   Nickel and  zinc  were  analyzed  using conventional
air-acetylene flame atomic absorption spectrophotometry. The method of standard addition
was utilized throughout in order to compensate for matrix effects on instrument calibration.

The analysis of water samples for chlorinated organic species was performed in accordance
with the  procedures  outlined by the Environmental  Protection Agency '.   The  samples
were triple  extracted  with  15 percent  (v/v) ethyl ether in hexane and  the extracts dried
with anhydrous sodium sulfate.  (All solvents used in the characterization of organic species
were  of  "Distilled in Glass" quality purchased from  Burdick  and  Jackson, Muskegon,
Michigan.)   The extracts were then concentrated and  transferred to the top  of a column
of florisil  (activated  at 550 °C for 24  hours).  The chlorinated species were eluted with
15 percent  ethyl  ether in hexane and  again concentrated.  The  concentrations were then
subjected  to analysis by vapor phase chromatography utilizing an electron capture detector.
The resultant peaks were integrated  either together or discretely to provide  either "total
chlorinated  hydrocarbon"  levels  or  the concentration of  individual  pesticide  species.
Calibration  of  instrument  response was accomplished  using external standards.

Sediment phase -  Sediment  samples were thawed and extruded  from the  polycarbonate
sleeve in preparation  for subsequent analyses. Physical descriptions  were noted while the
sediment  was  wet.  Where core samples were  available, the  top  five centimeter  section
was isolated, weighed and placed in an  evaporating  dish to  air dry to constant weight.
In the case of Ponar grab  samples, the  entire  sample was homogenized while wet and
                                          66

-------
a 200 gram  subsample was  weighed,  transferred  to  an evaporating  dish, and  air dried.
After the dry weights were  recorded,  all  sediment samples were ground with a mortar
and  pestle.   Stones larger than five mm were manually excluded.   No distinct sieving
of the sediment  was undertaken.

The  analysis of carbonaceous material in the sediments included the determination of COD
using the potassium dichromate-sulfuric acid  digestion method  '.   Volatile solids were
determined by ashing the samples at 550° C for 24 hours. Kjeldahl nitrogen was measured
by the  digestion-distillation-titration technique ^'    . Nitrate-nitrogen was  obtained  by
refluxing the sediment in  acid  media followed by filtration and reaction with Brucine
sulfate under the controlled temperature conditions of the extended  Brucine  method   '.
Total phosphorus  was determined  by vanadomolydophosphoric acid test  following a
persulfate-sulfuric acid digestion.

Sediment samples for  metal  analysis (with the exception of mercury) were  prepared  by
dry ashing at 550  °C for 24 hours, acid leaching the residue with a  nitric acid - hydrogen
peroxide solution, and  removing the undissolved  residue by filtration.  The filtrate was
analyzed for cadmium, chromium, copper, iron,  lead,  manganese,  nickel and zinc using
conventional  air-acetylene flame atomic absorption spectrophotometry. Mercury analysis
                                                      1R
was  accomplished using  a  wet digestion of the sediment  .  The finely divided samples
were allowed to react overnight with fuming nitric acid and potassium dichrbmate. Excess
hydroxylamine  hydrochloride  was  then  added  and  the sample  vessel  was  degassed.
Reduction  of the  mercury  with  stannous chloride  was followed by detection of the
elemental mercury  using the cold  vapor atomic absorption method   .

Sediment samples for  analysis  of chlorinated organic  species were taken after  they had
air dried to constant weight at room temperature (approximately 25°C). An eight hour
soxhlet  extraction  was  performed  using chloroform  as the solvent. The  extract was
evaporated to dryness on a water bath  to  remove the chloroform. Caution was  exercised
to prevent excessive drying which could result in degradation of the pesticides. The residue
was taken up in  15 percent  (v/v)  ethyl ether  in hexane and the fractions were  collected
and  concentrated for final detection by electron capture vapor phase chromatography.
Calibration was accomplished by means of external  standards.   Extraction and clean-up
recoveries were verified using spiked samples.

Sediment exchange  experiments -  In  order to gather preliminary  information on the
potential for component exchange from the bottom  sediments to the aqeuous phase, a
10 gram sample  of dried sediment was agitated in an air-tight vessel containing 250  ml

                                  67

-------
of exchange water.  This exchange water for samples from the first survey consisted of
deoxygenated  distilled water.   However, the lack  of  hardness and alkalinity in this water
resulted in unrealistic exchange levels and subsequently, exchange experiments for the final
two surveys utilized a synthetic "river water".  This synthetic exchange water contained
100 mg/l calcium hardness and sufficient alkalinity to buffer the system to pH 8.25. Such
concentrations approximate fairly closely the major constituents in the St. Clair and Detroit
River  waters.  Throughout all the exchange studies, the dissolved oxygen of the exchange
water was intentionally less than 0.5 mg/l in order to simulate the most favorable conditions
for exchange  - that is,  anaerobic  conditions - as well as the conditions which are likely
to exist  in the  river sediments.

The sealed exchange vessels were  agitated on a  reciprocating shaker  (10 cm strokes, 100
cycles  per minute) for 10 days  at room  temperature.   The  samples were then allowed
to settle for 24 hours and the  supernatant was decanted off.  No centrifugation or filtration
was employed to  remove suspended particulates.  Aliquots of the supernatant were used
for subsequent chemical  analysis.

The COD of  the  exchange water was  determined by  the potassium dichromate-sulfuric
acid digestion  procedure.   Total phosphorus was measured using acid digestion procedure.
Total   phosphorus  was  measured  using  the   persulfate-sulfuric   acid   digestion  and
vanadomolybdophosphoric acid detection.   Nitrate-nitrogen was measured after refluxing
in acid media through  the extended  Brucine method.  Kjeldahl-nitrogen in the exchange
water  was isolated by  the standard digestion  and distillation procedures.  However,  in
order  to provide sufficient sensitivity, the detection of this nitrogen form was accomplished
                                      1V 1R
with an  ammonia gas sensing electrode ''I0  .

The metal concentrations in the exchange water  were  determined by atomic  absorption
spectrophotometry.  Cadmium, chromium, copper, iron, lead, manganese, nickel,  and zinc
were  all  determined after digesting the  exchange samples with nitric acid  and hydrogen
perioxide.  Mercury was not determined  in the exchange waters due to the limited sample
volumes  available.

Results

Aqueous  phase  -

The analytical results  obtained on the water samples collected during the three surveys
are summarized  in Figures 20  through 30, which present the mean values for each station.
                                          68

-------
The discrete values obtained for each individual sample are presented in the  Appendix,
Tables A-1 through A-7.  Throughout this discussion, notation is based on station number,
rather than river  mile  and distance from shore.  These station numbers are  defined in
Figure  19 and Table  15.

Dissolved oxygen  - The data resulting from the insitu measurement of dissolved oxygen
is presented in the Appendix, Tables A-1 through A-3. Analysis of this data reveals that
during the summer survey (August 1973) the overall  dissolved oxygen level  rose slightly
from the head of the  St. Clair River to its  mouth  (8.3  to 8.7).  Very little variation
in dissolved oxygen concentrations was observed as a function of depth, with the exception
of  station 1,  which had a somewhat  higher  concentration at the surface.   No dissolved
oxygen levels below  6.0 mg/l were observed at any station  or  depth.   More substantial
variation  in dissolved  oxygen concentration as a function  of depth was observed in the
Detroit River during this survey.  Although the  dissolved oxygen concentration at the
surface was 6.7 mg/l or greater at all stations, half of the stations exhibited values below
6 mg/l at depths ranging from 3 to 10 meters (10 to 34 feet). The overall average dissolved
oxygen concentration  was observed to  drop from a  value of 7.6  mg/l at the head end
of  the  river  to 7.0 mg/l at  the mouth.

During  the  November survey, dissolved oxygen levels were generally higher  than during
the  previous  survey,  undoubtedly due  to  the higher oxygen  solubility  at  the  lower
temperature.  The two very low values reported at station 1  are probably due to equipment
malfunction.  A greater variation of dissolved oxygen  with  respect to  depth was observed
in the St. Clair River and the head  of the Detroit River.   The levels were more constant
with  depth  in all of the  Detroit River  other  than the headwaters.

Dissolved  oxygen levels of less than 6.0 mg/l were observed in  the St. Clair River  at stations
2 and 4  near  the bottom.  The Detroit River yielded only  two values below 6.0 mg/l.
These were recorded in 24  feet of water  at stations 5 and 6.  During this  November
survey,  the  net change in dissolved  oxygen from the  head to the mouth of the Detroit
River was an  increase of  about 3 mg/l.

The May  survey  indicated very  little  dissolved oxygen gradient as a function of depth
in either  of the two rivers.   Similarly, neither of the  rivers exhibited dissolved oxygen
concentrations below 6.0 mg/l.  There was no net change in the  average dissolved oxygen
from  the  head to the  mouth of the St. Clair  River,  while the  average concentration  in
the Detroit  River decreased  from 11.6  to  10.9 mg/l  between the  head and  the mouth.
                                          69

-------
Temperature - Virtually all stations appeared  to  be  relatively homogeneous from surface
to maximum depth with regards to temperature during all three surveys. The temperature
differential between  upstream and downstream stations followed different patterns in the
two  river systems.   In the St.  Clair River,  the average temperature decreased 1.4°C at
the time of the  August survey,  and  increased 0.9°C at the time of the May survey, with
no change being evident  during  the  November survey.  The Detroit River  was observed
to experience a temperature increase during all three surveys, amounting to 1.7°C in August,
0.5°C  in  November,  and  3.I°C in May.

Specific Conductance - Specific conductance was measured insitu at each station during
each of the three surveys.   (Tables  A-1  through A-3.)

A survey of the  specific conductance data  reveals a  reasonably well-defined trend of
increasing conductance (and  hence increasing dissolved ion concentration)  as the waters
progress  from the head of the St. Clair River, through  Lake St. Clair  and subsequently
to the mouth of the  Detroit River.  The net overall effect observed  in the August survey
is an increase in conductance  of 50 percent. Such a  trend  is  not evident in the data
from the November survey.  Indeed, no net change was observed through the total system.
During the  May  survey, the trend of increasing conductance was again evident,  though
the net increase  through  the total system amounted to only  about 40 percent.

Biochemical Oxygen Demand - Analysis of the  biochemical oxygen  demand (BOD)  data,
presented in Figures 20 and Tables A-4 through A-6, indicates that the BOD load entering
the St. Clair River is relatively small.   Mean BOD  levels at station 3  and 4 in  the St.
Clair  River is relatively small.  Mean  BOD levels at  station 3 and 4  in the St. Clair  River
are only slightly higher than the upstream stations 1 and 2.   Very little change in the
mean BOD  is observed in the Detroit River prior to stations 10 and 11.   At this  point
the  loadings from the Rouge  River  and adjacent industrial  and municipal outfalls are
reflected in the  elevated  BOD at station  10.  Waters on the Canadian  side of the river
at this milepoint are still relatively unaffected, with BOD levels essentially the same as
influent waters from Lake St. Clair  (stations  5-7).  The elevated  BOD is  evident  at all
stations along the western shore  of the river from station 10 to the point of entry into
Lake Erie.  At the same time, the BOD  in and to the east of the shipping channels appear
to remain  essentially constant  to the interface with Lake Erie.

Chemical Oxygen Demand - Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD) data for the aqueous phase
follow much the same pattern  as BOD (Figure  21 and Tables A-4 through A-6).   Little
difference is seen  in the values  from the headwater and mouth stations of the St. Clair
                                         70

-------
Figure  20. Mean biochemical oxygen  demand
water
(ing/ 1)
-
                                              LAKE HURON
     LAKE
   ST. CL/Ufl
                          71

-------
Figure 2Q.Mean biochemical oxygen demand
          (continued)
                           72

-------
Figure  20.Mean biochemical oxygen  demand
            (continued)
water
(mg/1)
-
                   19.   20*     2> 22

                        C.*KE  CRIE  I
        MICHIGAN
                            73

-------
Figure 21.Mean chemical oxygen demand
                           74

-------
Figure 21.Mean chemical oxygen demand
           (continued)
      waeer (mg/l)
      sediment (fflg/g)
                                                   LAKE HURON
                                 SOUTH CHANNEL
      CAKE
    ST. CL.UH
                             75

-------
Figure 21.Mean chemical oxygen demand
          (continued)
                           76

-------
River.  No appreciable differences are observed in the Detroit River until stations 10 and
11.  At station  10 the  COD approximately doubles - following  the  same pattern  as the
BOD at that station.  By contrast, COD values for station 11 remain close to the level
observed  at stations 5,  6, and  7.  An evident increase in COD  is seen at station 12  in
the Canadian waters, where only a very slight increase in  mean  BOD was observed.  As
in the  case with BOD, elevated COD  values are noted at all stations along the United
States  shore  of  the river.  Canadian  waters below station 12 are only slightly higher  in
COD than  the influent water from  Lake St.  Clair.

Trace metals - A  major consideration  in the chemical field monitoring program was to
provide information on the  concentrations of trace metals in the water column.  Since
little historical data was available, the information  generated during this phase of the study
would  serve  as a preliminary step in diagnosing the condition of the rivers in terms of
trace metals.  Nine metals were  chosen for study,  primarily on the availability of relevant
toxicity information. The metals included were:  cadmium, chromium, copper, iron, lead,
manganese,  mercury, nickel  and zinc.

Mean cadmium concentrations in the water column (Figure 22)  do not vary appreciably
from the  head of the St. Clair  River  to the  confluence  of  the Rouge River with the
Detroit River.   At station 10  the mean cadmium concentration rises approximately 67
percent over levels observed  upstream.   This  level  is maintained downstream  along the
United States shoreline and  into  the Trenton Channel.   At  station  18, below most of
the industrial outfalls on the United  States shore, the mean cadmium concentration rises
to three times the levels observed at stations 5, 6, and 7.  This level falls off only slightly
by the time the water reaches station  19. Cadmium levels in the  remainder of the Detroit
River remain essentially the  same  as background  levels until stations 21 and  22  where
mean concentrations are approximately 33 percent higher  than influent water from Lake
St.  Clair.

Chromium  results are summarized in  Figure 23.  Unlike cadmium, a  variation in aqueous
chromium  levels does occur  in  the St. Clair  River stations and the upriver stations of
the Detroit River  (stations 5-9).  Mean levels range from 2.7 to 6.1 y g/l, with station
1 being the lowest  and  station 3 the highest.  The levels above station 10 in the Detroit
River vary  from 4.3 to  12.1  yg/l. From station  10 downstream along the  United  States
shore to  Lake  Erie, chromium  concentrations remain  high (10.8 to 17.1   yg/l).   The
remainder of the downriver stations reflect concentrations  which  do not vary appreciably
from background levels at stations 5,  6, and  7.

Mean copper concentrations  observed  in the water column are  presented  in Figure 24.
                                           77

-------
Figure  22.Mean cadmium  concentration
            water (ug/1)
            ladimenc (mg/kg)
                                      MICHIGAN
                                                            LAKE HURON
                                          SOUTH CHANNEL
            ST
                                78

-------
Figure 22.Mean cadmium concentration
          (continued)
                           79

-------
Figure  22 .Me_aj\_ f^dmjLjarn concentration
           continued;
                            80

-------
Figure 23.Mean chromium concentration
           wacer (ug/1)
           sediment (mg/kg)
                                                        LAKC MUROM
          ST.
                              81

-------
Figure 23. Mean .chromium concentration
          (continued)
                          82

-------
Figure 23.Mean chromium concentration
          (continued)
                          83

-------
Figure 24.Mean  copper  concentration
           water (ug/1)
           sediment (mg/kg)
                                                          LAKE HUnON
             LAKE
           ST. CLAII1
                               84

-------
Figure 24.Mean copper concentration
          (continued)
                           85

-------
Figure 24.Mean  copper concentration
          (contimSedT
                    19.   20*     2> 22 •

                          LAKE CRIE
                           86

-------
Differences in the mean concentrations in the St. Clair  River indicate slightly higher levels
of this metal at Stations  1  and 4.  Waters entering the Detroit River from Lake St. Clair
contain between  4.6 and 7.1   yg/l  of total copper.   A substantial enrichment  is seen
along the  United  States shoreline as early as station 8.  The concentrations rise even higher
at stations 10 and 13 (12.3 and  15.0 yg/l  respectively), and remain elevated along the
western shore until the waters enter Lake Erie at station 19.   Unlike  heavy metals  already
reviewed,  mean copper  levels are  elevated at  the mid-river station 14.  (This level is due
primarily  to  a very  high level  observed during  the May survey.)  Along the Canadian
shoreline,  no appreciable  change is seen in copper concentration from the influent levels
of Lake  St.  Clair until station 22  (Lake Erie  interface).

Lead  levels in the St. Clair River were observed to remain essentially constant from  the
headwater to the  mouth  (Figure 25).  Mean  concentrations in the water column  remain
around 2  yg/l.  Influent water to the Detroit River are also of this concentration. Elevated
levels are observed  on both sides  of the river as early  as  stations 8 and  9, although
contamination along the  United States shore is by far more evident.  Waters at  station
10  are approximately  three  times the  background  concentration,  while  the  waters
downstream on the United States side reach five times the background level. The evidence
of the lead loadings is notable at stations 19 and  20.   The Canadian waters do undergo
some enrichment  in lead as they  move  downstream,  however  the  mean  concentrations
observed  in this  area never  equal  the corresponding values  in waters along the  western
shore.

Data  on  aqueous mercury  levels  were collected during the  November and  May  surveys
only.  This information  is  summarized in Figure 26  and presented in Tables A-5  and
A-6.  Mean mercury concentrations in the St. Clair River range between  1.3 and 4.6 yg/l,
with  the  upstream stations averaging approximately twice the  level of the  downstream
stations.   Influent waters to the Detroit River  show  a two-fold increase in this heavy
metal over stations 3 and 4 in the lower St. Clair River - apparently  the result of activity
in the Lake St. Clair basin.  No further  enrichment is seen  throughout the entire length
of the Detroit River, with the notable exception of station 12. At this point, total mercury
in the water column averages 6.4  y g/l.   It should  be noted  that  a  rather substantial
difference was observed between  aqueous mercury  levels  recorded during  the November
survey and the May  survey  with substantially  higher  levels  observed in November.  In
                                                                  Q
general, observed  values were  higher  than EPA  recommended levels   .

Nickel concentrations in the aqueous phase was  monitored during all three field surveys.
Mean concentrations are presented in Figure  27.  A review  of the  mean values indicates
                                      87

-------
Figure  25. Mean lead concentration
            water (ug/1)
            sediment (mg/kg)
                                                           LAKE HURON
                                                            ONTARIO
1.9
104
__»_ 3
W4
2.1
27
              LAKE
            ST. CLAIM
                                 88

-------
Figure 25.Mean lead concentration
          (continued)
                          89

-------
Figure 25.Mean lead Soncentration
          (continued)
                          90

-------
Figure 26.Mean  mercury concentration
           water (ug/1)
           sediment (mg/kg)
                                                         LAKE HURON
            LAKf
         ST. CLAIH
                             91

-------
Figure  26..Mean. merciiry concentration
  6      CcontinuedT
                           92

-------
Figure  26.Mean mercury concentration (continued)
                      19.   20*    21*  22 •
                           LAKE CRIE
                           93

-------
Figure 27.Mean nickel concentration
             water (ug/1)
             sedtmenc (mg/kg)
                                                          LAKE HURON

18
37
-*- 3
ALGONAC
A=>^
14
44

            ST.
                              94

-------
Figure 27.Mean nickel concentration
           (continued)
                         95

-------
Figure 27.Mean nickel concentration
          (continued)
                          96

-------

-------
Figure  28.yiean  .zinc  concentration
           water  (ug/L)
            sediment (mg/kg)
                                                             LAKE HURON
                                       MICHIGAN
                                                              ONTARIO
52
86
_^_ 3
ALGONAC
7* -*-
82
91

                                            SOUTH CHANNEL
               LAKE
            ST. CLAin
                                 98

-------
Figure  28.Mean zinc concentration
            (continued)
         water (ug/1)
         sediment (mg/kg)
          X
                             99

-------
Figure 28.Mean  zinc  concentration
           (continued)
84
346
.
I
J_ 19. 2
7 ''
Y ft", ^A
\ '-'; ^9
65
270
                                21» 22 •

                          LAKE ERIE
                             100

-------
Figure 29.Mean manganese  concentration
            water (ug/1)
            sediment (mg/kg)
                                                         LAKE MUnON
            LAKE
          ST. C LA 111
                              101

-------
Figure 29.Mean manganese concentration
          (continued)
                          102

-------
Figure 29.Mean manganese concentration
           (continued)
                      19.   20"    21- 22
                           /LAKE CR1E
                            103

-------
Figure  30. Mean iron concentration
       water  (ug/l)
       sediment (mg/g)
                      I
                     —<&—
                                    SOOTH  CHANNEL
        LAKE
      ST. CLAIIl
                                  104

-------
Figure 30.Mean iron concentration
          (continued)
                         105

-------
Figure 30.Mean iron concentration
          (continued)
                          106

-------
recorded for station 7 is more than  ten times higher than that of stations 1 and 2.  Iron
at stations 8, 9, and 11 remain somewhat over 500 yg/l, however the mean  level recorded
at station 10 was 1780  yg/l.  Station 12  is similarly enriched.  Waters along the United
States shoreline remain heavily enriched in iron through station  19 where  the total iron
concentration averages 2,300 yg/l.   Canadian waters below station 11 are  also enriched,
with mean  values never falling below 830 yg/l.

Pesticides - In addition to the monitoring of heavy metals, an important area of investigation
in the  chemical  field survey program included  toxic  organic  substances,  particularly
chlorinated  pesticides.  In an attempt to obtain a preliminary indication of the level of
these substances in  the  water column, samples were collected during the August 1973
survey for analysis  of the gross  level of chlorinated  hydrocarbons present.  (In such an
analysis  the species present in  a  routine analysis  for  chlorinated  pesticides  are not
differentiated,  but rather the total area of a vapor phase  chromatogram is integrated as
a unit and  the results are  present  in terms of some arbitrary chlorinated hydrocarbon
standard.)   Results of these  analyses are contained in the appended Table A-4.  The first
survey indicated  fairly uniform  levels in the St. Clair River with  the exception of station
1 which was about 35 percent higher than the other three stations.   Levels in the influent
waters to the  Detroit River were somewhat lower than  in the St. Clair  River, but were
observed to have increased  in concentration  by the time they  had reached stations 10
and  11. The only further increases were reported at station 18 below most of the industrial
outfalls along  the Trenton  Channel,  and  station  21 at  the  interface with Lake Erie.
Following  requests  by  the  federal   project  monitor and state  environmental  agency
personnel, the analysis for gross chlorinated hydrocarbon  content  was replaced by analysis
for specific  chlorinated pesticides on  samples  taken  during subsequent surveys.  Included
in the  list  of pesticides determined were endrin, aldrin, dieldrin, lindane,  heptachlor,
heptachlor epoxide, DDT, ODD, and DDE. Polychlorinated biphenyls were not included
in the discrete analyses, though such substances are included in the  chlorinated hydrocarbon
analysis carried out on  the  August  1973 samples.  The results of the discrete pesticide
analysis are  presented in the  Appendix, Table A-7. A  review of this data reveals substantial
variation throughout the St. Clair and Detroit River systems.   However, since rigorous
interpretation of discrete pesticide  levels  is beyond  the  scope of this project, the data
presented in this report serves primarily to add to the relatively  limited bank of information
available on discrete pesticide concentrations in these  two river systems.

Sediment Phase  -
The sampling  program  for  the  sediment  phase  was  conceived  primarily to  provide
information on this relatively neglected portion of the St. Clair and Detroit River systems.
                                      107

-------
This program was not designed  as a comprehensive evaluation of sediment history in  tho
river bottoms,  but rather  it was  intended  to  provide a preliminary  characterization of
the sediment condition of these rivers. As a result, analyses were  limited to determining
total sediment content of a given constituent, rather than differentiating the various forms
of the constituent as  a function  of particle  size  distribution. Eh, pH,  and/or depth.

The  parameters  to be  studied  during the sediment surveys were  chosen to  include
carbonaceous loadings, the biological nutrients nitrogen and phosphorus, the most common
heavy metals, and chlorinated organic species.  A brief description of sediment morphology
was recorded for  each sample collected.  A compilation of all the sediment data generated
during  the  three  surveys  is contained  in the  appended  Tables  A-8  through A-11.
Summarized data for  many  of  the  parameters are presented  in figure form within  the
body of this report.  The values indicated in such figures represent the arithmetic average
of all data for  a  given parameter gathered at a particular station during the three  surveys.
In some cases the average is calculated from less than  three values, and in a few instances
no  mean value is reported at all.  Sediment samples were not always obtainable by  the
methods employed, therefore, certain sampling stations have no recorded  sediment data
for one  or  more of  the sampling dates.

Mean values for  Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD) are presented  in  Figure 21.  Review
of this data indicates an apparent increase  in the sediment COD burden as the St. Clair
River travels from Lake Huron to  Lake St. Clair.  This increase amounts to approximately
a doubling of the COD  concentration.  Sediments at the head of the Detroit River (stations
5, 6, and 7) are approximately half  that observed at the mouth of the St. Clair River
(stations 3  and  4).  Progressing down  the  Detroit  River, a substantial  increase in  the
background COD is seen at station 8, while the value recorded in the  Canadian waters
at that milepoint (station 9) is relatively low.  Mean values for  stations in Canadian waters
below this  milepoint are relatively  constant at 40-50 mg/kg to the Lake  Erie interface.
Stations along  the United States  shore, however,  are varied and generally exhibit much
higher concentrations than the Canadian counterparts.  Sediment concentrations  at stations
10,  13 and 19 are about an order of  magnitude higher than those at  the head of  the
river.  Physical descriptions of the samples taken at these three stations further  indicate
that these are  areas  where organic  deposition  is  appreciable.

The Kjeldahl-nitrogen values, recorded in Figure 31,  characterize the reduced nitrogen forms
present in the  river sediments.    From  this data  it is evident that some increase in  the
mean level  of  reduced nitrogen forms  in the sediment  does occur as the waters of  the
St. Clair  River descend from Lake Huron.  In comparison to  station 1 this  increase  is
                                           108

-------
Figure 31.Mean  kjeldahl nitrogen concentration

sediment
(mg/kg)
                                                    LAKE MUROM
            LAKE
          ST. CLAin
                           109

-------
Figure 31. Mean Jcjel
          (continue
nitrogen concentration

sediment
(rag/kg)
   110

-------
Figure  31.Mean kj'eldahl nitrogen  concentration
           (continued)

sediment
(mg/kg)
                      19.  20*     21* 22»

                            LAKE  CRIC
            MICHIGAN
                            111

-------
relatively small, but when compared to the very low level recorded at station 2, this increase
becomes appreciable. Mean concentrations recorded at the  head of the Detroit River are
about 300  mg/kg lower than stations 3 and 4 in the St. Clair, ranging between 310 and
430  mg/kg.  As  in the case of COD,  Kjeldahl-nitrogen enrichment occurs at station  8
along the United States shore, while sediments  underlying Canadian waters at the  same
river mile (station 9) show little change from values recorded at  the head  of the  river.
The  sediments  along the  United  States shore,  beginning  with station  10, show every
appreciable enrichment in  reduced  nitrogen forms all the way downstream  to the  Lake
Erie  interface.  Mean values at stations 10, 13, 19 and 20 range between 1140 and  2220
mg/kg.   Canadian sediments, beginning at station 12, show significant enrichment also.
Mean values recorded at stations 16  and 17 are over 1000 mg/kg, and the mean at station
21 is 690  - almost twice  the  level  recorded  at the  head  of  the  river.

One  of  the oxidized forms of nitrogen-nitrate - was measured  in the sediment samples
and  the  mean concentrations are recorded in Figure 32.   Levels for the St. Clair  River
do not  indicate any appreciable difference in this nitrogen from between the head and
mouth of the river.  Stations 1 and 4,  however, are notably higher (about  100 percent)
than stations 2 and 3.   Mean values  at the  head  of the  Detroit  River range from 66
to 93 mg/kg  (as nitrogen).  Descending down the river, some increase is seen  at stations
9 and 10, however the only appreciable differences observed in the Detroit River sediments
occur at stations 13, 19, and  20.   The mean concentrations recorded  at these stations
range from 228 to 359  mg/kg.

The  level  of  total  phosphorus  in  the sediment  samples  was determined to provide
information on  any accumulation of this biostimulant in the sediment phase.  Overall  mean
concentrations for this parameter  are presented  in  Figure 33.  Values for  the St. Clair
River stations indicate some  accumulation of phosphorus in the surface sediments as the
river descends from Lake  Huron.   As  was observed for  Kj eldahl  and  nitrate nitrogen,
phosphorus levels at station 2 appear to be appreciably lower than other areas surveyed
in the  St.  Clair  River  (370  mg/kg  versus  620  to 960  mg/kg).  Mean phosphorus
concentrations  at  the  head  of the Detroit  River  range between  570  and 850 mg/kg.
Sediment levels further downstream  in the Detroit River show appreciable  enrichment over
these background levels at stations  10,  13, 15, 17, 19, and 20.  Enrichment in the  mean
concentrations of  stations  15 and 17 amounts to about 30 percent. At station 10 the
increase  is  approximately 100  percent.  Sediment from station 13 averages  more than
3600 mg/kg.  Station 20 at the Lake Erie interface records a mean  concentration of 1070
mg/kg.  Station 19, however, is by far the most phosphorus rich sediment observed during
the study.   With an exceptionally  high average  of   5160  mg/kg, the  sediment at this
                                         112

-------
Figure 32.Mean nitrate nitrogen  concentration

sediment
(mg/kg)
                                                     LAKE HURON
            LAKE
          ST CLA1I1
                           113

-------
Figure 32.Mean nitrate nitrogen concentration
          (continued)

sediment
(mg/kg)
                          114

-------
Figure  32.Mean nitrate  nitrogen concentration
           (continued)
                                             
-------
Figure 33.Mean  total phosphorous concentration

ledimene
(»g/VCB)
                                                    LAKE HURON
           LAKE
          ST. ClAln
                           116

-------
Figure 33. Mean  total  phosphorous concentration
           (continued)

sediaent
(mg/kg)
                                            LAKE ST. CLAIR
                           L17

-------
Figure  33.Mean total phosohorous concentration
          (continued)

(•dimenc
(ng/kg)
                     19.   20*     2>  22«

                           LAKE C!JI£
          MICHIGAN
                           118

-------
station is enriched by  more than 4000 mg/kg over sediment at the head of the Detroit
River.

Sediment samples  were analyzed for the same heavy  metals as in the aqueous samples.
These  analyses included cadmium, chromium, copper, iron,  lead, manganese,  mercury,
nickel, and zinc. As previosuly noted, discrete analytical results are contained in appended
Tables A-8 through A-10, while analytical averages are presented in figure form throughout
the text  of this report.
Average cadmium concentrations for the St. Clair and Detroit River systems are presented
in Figure  22.  Values for the stations in the St. Clair range from 0.5 to 2.9  mg/kg, with
station 2  reporting the very low  level of  0.5  mg/kg.Essentially  no difference is seen in
the level of sedimentary cadmium between the upstream and downstream stations of this
river. Levels of 0 to 4 mg cadmium per kg dry sediment are common for glacially derived
sediment.   Thus the levels observed in the St.  Clair River indicate little anthropogenesis
of this very  toxic  heavy  metal.  Cadmium concentrations at stations 5,  6 and 7 in  the
Detroit  River are similarly  low.   As  the  river descends toward  Lake  Erie,  however,
enrichment in cadmium is observed at stations 10, 13, 19 and 20. At station 10 a mean
concentration  of  6.2 mg/kg  is reported.   The  mean  value at station 13 is  8.5 mg/kg -
more than four times the background levels at the head of the  river.  The sediments
at stations 19 and 20  contain 7.6 and 6.5 mg/kg respectively.  This amounts to a  net
enrichment of approximately 200 percent over background levels.  Elsewhere in the Detroit
River, enrichment in sedimentary  cadmium  is neglibible.

The  summarized results of sediment chromium analyses are presented in Figure 23. Mean
concentrations  upstream  in  the  St.  Clair  River range between  20 to 30 mg/kg.  The
downstream stations 3 and 4 report mean  levels of 39 and 80 mg/kg respectively.  The
increase at station  4 appears to be relatively significant. Similarly, the mean concentration
recorded at station 5 in the  Detroit River  is considerably higher than those recorded at
stations 6 and 7.  Background levels of 30 to  40 mg/kg are present in most of the  less
polluted areas of the Detroit (e.g.  stations 6, 7,  14,  16  and  17).  Chromium enrichment
occurs principally at stations  10, 13, 19 and 20.  From the mean values reported in Figure
23, some  enrichment may also be  occurring at stations 8 and 21.  An exceptionally high
chromium concentration (2680 mg/kg) was recorded at station 13 during the August 1973
survey, which accounts in large part for the very high mean value  reported for this station.
A notable phenomenon concerning chromium in the sediments  lies in the  fact that, in
general, the concentrations determined were lower on each succeeding  survey.  Whether
                                          119

-------
this resulted from scouring, release of this material due to solubility relationships, or some
other phenomenon could not  be determined.

Sediment copper concentrations are  presented  in  Figure  24.   The mean concentrations
recorded in the St. Clair River range from 11 to 16 mg/kg, with the highest value recorded
at station 1  and the lowest at station  2.   The limited range  of  the values observed in
the St.  Clair  River indicates  little anthropogenic influx of  this trace metal. Copper levels
in the sediment at the head of the Detroit  River are comparable  to  those of several  in
the St.  Clair  River.  Substantial enrichment  along the United States shore occurs as early
as station 8.  The mean concentration at station  10 is  87 mg/kg.   At station  13 the
average  is 116 mg/kg - nearly  an order of  magnitude higher than background levels at
the head of the river. Stations 19 and 20 also show the presence of anthropogenic copper.
Sediments in  Canadian  waters undergo  little,  if any, enrichment.

Average  lead  concentrations  are presented in Figure 25.   Values from the St. Clair River
show appreciable variation.   While a  relatively low  level (6  mg/kg) is recorded at  station
2, stations 1  and 4 exhibited values of  approximately  30 mg/kg.  A relatively high level
of 104  mg/kg was recorded at station  3, although this value is largely  the  result of an
exceptionally  high  concentration recorded  on the  sample taken  in  August 1973 (see
appended Tables A-8 through A-10).  Sediments at the head of the  Detroit River range
from  15 to 30 mg/kg, values which are common in deep-water sediments of glacial  origin.
With  the exception of  certain stations along the United States shore,  mean sediment lead
levels throughout  the river fall into this  range.  At stations  8, 10,  13,  19  and 20, the
effect of anthropogenic lead  is obvious from the very high mean concentrations observed.
A slight increase over  background levels is  observed at stations  13 and 21 also.

Mercury concentrations in the river sediments were determined on samples taken during
the November and May surveys.  The summarized  results of these analyses are presented
in Figure 26.  Mean values  for the St. Clair River sediments are  relatively  low, ranging
from  0.06 to 0.53  mg/kg.   Station 4 records the highest concentration  in the St.  Clair
River, 0.53 mg/kg, though interpretation of this fact is hindered by the very limited number
of samples analyzed for mercury.  Sediments at the head of the Detroit River have mercury
content  similar to  those of the  St.  Clair  River, averaging  0.19  to  0.50  mg/kg. All
downstream stations  in the  Detroit, with the  exception  of 10, 12,  13,  19  and 20, fall
into this general range.  Mean levels for stations 13 and 20 are only slightly higher than
the background concentrations.   The mean values  for stations 19 and 10, however, are
three and four times the maximum background, respectively.  The average concentration
for station 12 is approximately an order of  magnitude  higher than  background  levels.
                                          120

-------
This high value is due to the relatively high mercury content of the November sediment
sample from station  12 (see  appended Table A-9).  In order to  evaluate the credibility
of this value, the analytical accuracy of this particular determination was checked and
found to  be  correct.   In addition, it is interesting to  note that the high sediment content
recorded  at this  point  during November correlates well  with a  relatively high aqueous
mercury  concentration  observed at station 12  during the  same sampling  period  (see
appended Table A-5).

Sediment nickel content was determined on all  river  bottom samples taken during the
August,  November,  and May  surveys.   The summarized  results of these analyses are
presented in Figure 27.  Mean values for  the  St. Clair River sediments range from 10
to 44 mg/kg, with the  lowest  level again at station 2 and the highest at station 4.  From
the values in this figure, there is an apparent increase in nickel as  the river descends from
Lake  Huron.  This  observation  should  be tempered with the fact  that  the  nickel
concentrations observed in sediments taken throughout the St. Clair  River are within the
range found  naturally in unpolluted sediment of  this type.  This is equally true for the
mean values observed at the  head of  the Detroit River (ranging from  24 to 32 mg/kg).
Elsewhere  in the Detroit  River,  stations  along  the United  States shoreline show  no
appreciable  enrichment over background except  for stations  13  and 19, which average
142 and  66 mg/kg respectively.  A lesser increase is apparent at  stations 10,  12, 15 and
18, though the levels observed at  these points are comparable to those of stations 3 and
4  in the  St. Clair River.

Average sedimentary  zinc concentrations are presented in Figure 28.  In the case of zinc,
a  substantial enrichment is seen  in downstream  sediments of the St.  Clair  River over
background  levels of the upstream sediment.   Mean values  at stations  1  and 2 are 59
and 33 mg/kg, respectively,  whereas those at stations 3 and 4  are 86  and  91  mg/kg,
respectively.  Mean concentrations at the head of the Detroit River vary  between 44 and
81 mg/kg.  Although this is a substantial gradient for  samples from  the  same milepoint,
values from 20 to 100  mg/kg are  normally encountered in unpolluted deep-water  glacial
clays  of  the type found at this milepoint.  Thus the possibility exists that the gradient
may result from  such natural causes  as variation in  particle  type and size, rather than
anthropogenic influxes of zinc.  Mean concentrations along the Canadian shore, with the
exception of stations 12 and  21, lie within the range observed at the head of the river.
Station 12 shows significant  enrichment in sedimentary zinc, as  does station 1.   Along
the United States  shoreline, a vast amount  of zinc has found its  way into the sediment
at station 10.  The  mean concentration recorded here was  385  mg/kg.  The situation
is similar at  station 13 where the average was 335 mg/kg. The zinc content  drops somewhat
at station 15, to  an  average  of 97  mg/kg.   However, the  Lake  Erie interface stations
of 19 and 20, which receive the  waters from along the United States shoreline, record
                                         121

-------
average  concentrations of 346 and  270 mg/kg,  respectively.  Such  levels  indicate very
significant inputs of anthropogenic  zinc.

Manganese  in  the sediment phase is of paritcular interest for  its sorption ability when
present  as a  hydrous metal oxide.  Like iron, it plays an important role in retaining metals
and  nutrient species in the bottom sediments. Mean  values for sedimentary manganese
are presented  in Figure 29.   Sediments from the  head  of  the St. Clair River average 190
to 380  mg/kg, while those at the downstream stations are somewhat higher at 430 and
580  mg/kg.   Thus, as with aqueous manganese concentrations, there appears to  be an
increase in  sedimentary manganese as the river descends from  Lake Huron.  Mean values
at the head of  the  Detroit River range from 370  to  420  mg/kg -  somewhat less than
the lower stations in the St. Clair  River.  Canadian  waters downstream  in the Detroit
River show little enrichment in sedimentary manganese to the Lake Erie  interface. United
States stations are generally  higher  than  corresponding Canadian stations, though, with
the exception  of station 10,  they do not show major changes in the sediment manganese
loadings.

Because of  its sorption characteristics, iron is one  of the  most  important constituents
in the sedimentary environment.   Its role in  regulating  sediment exchange processes is
                19 20 21
well  documented  '  '   .  Primarily for this reason, iron  was determined in all sediment
samples taken during the August,  November,  and May surveys.   Mean values for  these
analyses are presented in Figure 30. A review of this data indicates a net increase  in
sedimentary iron as the St.  Clair River descends from Lake  Huron.  Mean concentrations
recorded at stations 1 and  2 are 12,300 and 4,300  mg/kg respectively, while those  at
the downstream stations 3 and 4  are 16,900 and 19,100 mg/kg, respectively.  Iron content
of the  sediment at the head of  the Detroit River averages  between 12,500 and 13,100
mg/kg - very close to that observed at station 1  in  the St.  Clair  River.  Elsewhere in the
Detroit  River  sediments show appreciable variation, from a low of 7,800 mg/kg  at station
14 to a high of 27,100 mg/kg at station 10. The highest mean concentrations found  in
the  Detroit River occur  along  the  United States  shoreline,  where  other  heavy metal
enrichment  was observed (stations  10, 13 and  19).

In addition  to nutrient and heavy metal analysis  an attempt was made  to determine the
chlorinated  organic species present  in  the  sediment samples collected  during  the  three
surveys.  Due to the large background  of  other  organic materials present in the majority
of the  river sediments, it was not  possible to obtain  satisfactory results  with currently
available analytical techniques.
                                           122

-------
 Sediment Exchange -

 The sediment exchange studies were designed to investigate procedures for estimating the
 potential input of chemical constituents from the bottom sediments into the aqueous phase.
 The influence  of such  an input on the water  quality of the river can  be important in
 the formulation of  a mathematical model of the river basin, and in projecting future water
 quality.   Estimation of sediment exchange inputs,  however, is  difficult and at present
 can  only  be accomplished through empirical methods.   Such ethods as reported Such
 methods as reported in the literature are widely divergent in terms of technique and are
 usually tailored to  specialized simulations.  Consequently, the procedures used during this
 study  were varied  and  modified in  an attempt to find a satisfactory  compromise in
 simulating  conditions which  exist in  the two river basins of  concern.

 The experimental   systems used  on sediments  from the  three field surveys have been
 described  earlier.   The only major change  after the onset  of the  experiments was  the
 substitution of  "synthetic river water" for reagent water as the exchange medium  for
 sediments obtained during the November and May surveys.  This synthesized  river  water
 contained  calcium hardness   and  carbonate  alkalinity  in  concentrations  closely
 approximating those found in the actual river water. This substitution had profound effects
 in the exchange levels  of certain constituents.

 The results of the exchange experiments are presented in the appended Tables A-12 through
 A-14.  The parameters  represented in this table include Chemical Oxygen  Demand (COD),
 Kjeldahl nitrogen,   nitrate-nitrogen, total  phosphorus, cadmium, chromium, copper, iron,
 manganese,  nickel,  lead, and zinc.

 Reviewing the data in  Appendix  Tables A-12 through  A-14, the exchangable quantity of
 COD in the  November and  May  sediments  ranged  from  less  than  0.1  percent to 2.49
 percent.  The use of adjusted-hardness water had apparently little effect on the exchangable
 COD.  Kjeldahl-nitrogen, on  the other hand, seemed to  be substantially  affected by  the
 use of "synthetic river  water".  Values for the November and May sediments ranged from
 1.0 to 6.1 percent, while those  of the first experiment  (August sediments) were  much
 higher.  The effect on nitrate-nitrogen  was  not so evident.  While exchange values  for
the experiments using "synthetic river water" ranged from 0.21  to 27.2 percent, the values
from  the  August samples were observed to fall  both above  and  below this range.  Total
phosphorus  exchange did not appear to be affected by  the medium change.  Values  for
the November  and  May sediments ranged from 0.21 to 4.58 percent, while those from
August  were generally  in this same range. The affect of carbonate hardness was  quite
apparent on the exchange coefficients of five of the  metals studied.  Copper exchange

                                          123

-------
in the "synthetic river  water" ranged from 0.02 to  0.5  percent  (November and  May
surveys), while values as high as 55.2 percent were observed with reagent water medium.
Iron was exchanged at between 0.07  and 3.50 percent in experiments with the November
and May sediments, while the August sediments exchanged to a much greater extent  with
the reagent water medium.  The effect was very similar with manganese, which exchanged
from  0.18 to 4.27 percent  in  the "synthetic river water".   Nickel exchange values in
the adjusted - hardness water ranged from 1.2 to 4.8 percent. Though insufficient analytical
sensitivity was  established for nickel  during  the first exchange experiment, the one value
that is reported is much higher than the corresponding values from subsequent experiments
in which  the  "synthetic river  water" was used.  Zinc, was most affected in the use of
water with carbonate alkalinity.  Whereas  exchange waters during  the first experiment
reagent water leached from  10.4 to  97.4 percent of the total sedimentary  zinc, the use
of "synthetic  river water"  dropped the exchange efficiency into the 0.3 to 5.9 percent
range.  Cadmium, chromium, and lead exhibited only  slight variations between exchange
in the two  media.

Discussion
Aqueous phase - In discussing the condition of the aqueous phases of  the  St. Glair and
Detroit River systems, it is advantageous to deal with each of the rivers  individually.  The
St.  Clair River, being a narrow, deep, and rapid flowing body is distinctly different from
the generally wider and lower  velocity Detroit  River.

The hydrology of the St. Clair River and the relative abundance and placement of industries
along the river reflect themselves  directly  in the water quality  of the river system. Data
gathered during the present study  indicate that dissolved oxygen, temperature and specific
conductance are only slightly influenced by inputs to the river  system.  The velocity and
turbulence  in the  river virtually  preclude  concentration  gradients of any appreciable
magnitude.

Some  influence  by  pollutional  inputs  is seen in the area of oxygen demanding material
(BOD  and COD), though this influence is relatively small.  Heavy  metals in the aqueous
phase  of  the St. Clair  River are  enriched  at  certain points, particularly stations 1 and
4, though the magnitude of  the enrichment limits the physical  significance of the  inputs.
The same holds true for chlorinated organic  species.

The Detroit River system is rather a different case. The physical geography of this system
is such that a  large  percentage of the shoreline  is covered by residential  and industrial
                                          124

-------
development, thus the pollutional inputs to this river system are much greater in magnitude.
This is compounded by  the somewhat slower velocity and the presence of backwater areas.
The  result  is that pollutional  inputs have a significant  effect on the water quality in the
Detroit River.

Dissolved oxygen in the Detroit  River shows much greater variation than in the St. Clair
River, especially during the summer months when water temperature rises. At certain points
in the  river, particularly along the United States shore and  downstream  from the Rouge
River, the dissolved oxygen concentrations dip to undesirable levels.  At station  19, where
the river velocity is drastically reduced,  oxygen demanding  materials further deplete the
available DO.

The  distribution of oxygen  demanding materials in the Detorit River follows closely the
distribution of heavy metals and other contaminants.  Generally,  the most polluted areas
lie downstream from the Rouge  River.  From station  10 south to  Lake Erie, the waters
adjoining the United States shoreline are highly enriched in a  wide variety of contaminants.
Waters  adjoining  the Canadian  shoreline at  station  12  seem also  to  be  carrying an
appreciable pollutant burden  - particularly mercury.

One  very significant increase in the aqueous phase of both  the St.  Clair and the Detroit
Rivers  which was noted  during the field  surveys was total iron. The net  increase through
the combined  St. Clair-Detroit River systems  amounts to more than an order of magnitude.
Where  mean concentrations of  less than 100  mg/l  are present in the  headwaters of the
St.  Clair River, waters entering Lake  Erie from  the  Detroit  River contain 830 to 2,300
mg/l, on the average.  Such an enrichment is particularly significant because of the sorption
potential of hydrous iron oxides for heavy metals and biostimulants such as phosphorus
.  In  addition, there is  some  evidence that such  a shift in  aqueous iron concentrations
can  result  in  a shift in the  dominant type of algae  from  greens to more undesirable
           0|T
blue-greens    .

Sediment  Phase - As stated earlier, the intent of  the  sediment analysis  program was to
provide information on  an important area of the river systems where only minor amounts
of such information  has been obtained to date.  To  this  end,  the  surveys were quite
successful.   Nonetheless, results gathered  during  these surveys should be considered only
the initial  effort for an on-going study of the sediment phase in the  Detroit  River and
the St. Clair River.  The information gathered on sampling techniques, analytical techniques
and  treatment of sediment data has  been appreciable and  should serve as the  basis for
                                          125

-------
further  study.

Sediment sampling, for example, was found to  be  difficult in  sections of the two rivers
where high  velocity and greater depth were  encountered.   The  use  of a gravity-coring
device  for  sampling had  been  chosen for its  ability  to  recover  relatively undisturbed
sediment profiles.  By comparison, a dredge  sampler, such as the Ponar device, takes a
sample  with a high surface  area to  depth ratio and disturbs the sediment  so that  no
sectioning of  the  sample by depth can be accurately accomplished.   The samples taken
with the corer from  the  Detroit and St.  Clair River bottoms were  recovered with the
oxidized surface layer  relatively intact.  Sectioning of the cores to obtain the upper five
centimeter  layer  of sediment for  analysis was  thus  a  fairly accurate  process.

Some difficulty in obtaining core samples during the August 1973 survey was encountered
with the original coring device.  Despite the weight  of the device (24.5 kg)  the current
in the St.  Clair  River and  at  the  head of the Detroit River  caused  the  coring tube to
strike the bottom at  an angle substantially  different from  the  ideal  90° .   The Ponar
dredge sampler was used  as a  backup and thus many of the sediment samples gathered
during this survey are dredge samples rather than cores. The coring device was subsequently
modified by adding weights and a  finned guidance section resulting in a total weight of
30  kg.   The sediment retaining  head  was  also  changed to  provide better  capture in
unconsolidated bottom materials.  The resulting corer proved  to be much more efficient
during the  two remaining surveys.  Nonetheless, there were times  when no representative
bottom  sample could  be obtained  either with the   corer or the dredge sampler.   If the
river bottom was covered with relatively large stones or unconsolidated sand, neither device
produced a satisfactory sample. Such limitations have been mentioned by other researchers
26

In evaluating  the trends of  constitutents  in the river  bottoms,  the lack  of  one  or two
of the three possible  samples at a given station is a significant limitation.  Mean values
for the St.  Clair River, for example, are often  based on less than three determinations.
Despite this limitation, some important conclusions can be drawn  from the data gathered
during this study.  The  St.  Clair River does  show enrichment  in certain sedimentary
constitutents (e.g. COD, Kj eldahl-nitrogen, total phosphorus,  chromium,  zinc, manganese
and  iron)  as it  descends from  Lake Huron.   In  most instances,  however, this increase
is relatively small.   The Detroit River sediments,  on the other  hand, show substantial
enrichment  in many  parameters, though this occurs primarily along  the  United  States
shoreline.   Stations 10, 13, 19, and 20 were  found to be major zones of deposition for
most of the constituents surveyed.  Station  12,  along the  Canadian shoreline, showed
                                           126

-------
somewhat  the  same  characteristics,  especially  with respect to the  toxic  heavy metal,
mercury.

Some corollary  information on the  mechanisms for retention  of certain constituents in
the sediment phase can be  developed from the data generated in this phase  of the study.
Table  16  is a  compilation of correlation  analysis results  between  two  hypothesized
mechanisms for such retention and  several constituents determined in the  St. Clair and
Detroit River bottom samples.

The higher the correlation coefficient, the stronger  is the relationship between mechanism
and  constituent.   For examples, the  adsorption capacity  of iron, present as the hydrous
metal oxide,  is very important  in the  scavenging and retention of cadmium and manganese.
It appears to be  somewhat less important for the remaining  constitutents, though  the
relationship is significant for every constituent  except  mercury. Similarly,  the chelation
and sorption  by organic species, represented in this correlation by COD, is very important
with regard to  cadmium, copper and  zinc, and somewhat less so for all others, again with
the exception of  mercury.   Three other major sediment components are thought to  be
of importance  in  retention and scavenging calcium carbonate,  clay fraction and sulfide
19,20,21  since these materials were not determined in this study, they cannot be evaluated
with the data presently available.
Sediment Exchange  -

In the  sediment exchange  experiments carried out  in  this study, the  most favorable
conditions for  release of sedimentary constitutents to the aqueous phase were utilized.
This provided simulation of the "worst possible" condition  for pollutional inputs from
the sediments.  In reality, such conditions do not exist, except when the aerobic-anaerobic
interface in the sediments rises to, or above, the sediment-water interface.  Under conditions
usually  found in  the Great  Lakes,  dissolved  oxygen is present in the waters immediately
above the sediments at  levels greater than 1  mg/l.  This results in a superficial layer  of
oxidized sediment which serves as  a barrier to  the transport  of sedimentary constituents
into  the aqueous  phase.  The migration  of  metals and nutrient species  dissolved in the
sedimentary interstitial liquid is halted at this barrier.  At the same time, this layer serves
as a  scavenger of phosphates, metals  and other species directly from the aqueous phase.
As  a consequence of this  "semi-permeability",  appreciable  build-up  of environmental
pollutants in the  surface layer is  often observed, which  in  turn  makes the stability  of
                                         127

-------
Table  16.  SEDIMENT CORRELATION MATRIX
                     Total Iron
Chemical Oxygen Demand
Specie
Cd
Cr
Cu
Fe
Hg
Mn
Ni
Pb
Zn
Total Phos-
phorus

n
26
41
n
41
41
41
41
26
41
41
41
41
41



(r)
.810
.592
,755
-
.015
.851
,672
.556
.723
.616
Minimum Significant Correlation
r (95%) r (9970)
.470 .565
.373 .454
(r)
.849
.635
.840
.753
.125
.526
,690
,622
.812
..748



                        128

-------
this trapping  layer exceedingly important.

In  relatively unpolluted waters, oxidized surface  layer ranges in thickness  from a  few
millimeters  to 2 to  3 centimeters.  The  exact thickness varies, especially in  areas where
density-stratification occurs, according to the organic deposition to the sediments and the
availability of oxygen in the waters immediately above the sediments.  If there is depletion
of oxygen in  the hypolimnion, for example, or  if the  organic loadings to the sediments
are substantial, the thickness of this oxidized layer will decrease until the aerobic-anaerobic
interface  rises  to the  sediment-water interface.  At this point, relatively abrupt releases
of  reduced manganese  and nitrogen forms (as well  as  phosphate,  silicate,  carbonate
alkalinity and  ferrous iron) result in significant changes in the quality  of the overlying
      9O
waters u  .  In some cases, an order of magnitude increase in  the  rate of phosphorus
release to the  water column has been observed^7 . These sediment derived solutes are
then mixed throughout the overlying waters  in a manner   determined primarily  by  flow
pattern and turbulence.

During recent summers, sediments in the central basin of Lake  Erie  have undergone the
process described above as  a result of dying  plankton  forming a strongly reducing layer
                                       97
on  the  bottom, two  centimeters thickz/  .   Even when excess dissolved oxygen is
reintroduced,  (for example, during overturn) recovery  of the oxidized layer  is slow  and
the barrier  it  provides  remains unstable  for  sometime.

There are four major factors which regulate the depth of the aerobic-anaerobic interface
and hence the  exchange of sediment constituents into the aqeuous phase. They include:
(a)  turbulence; (b) oxygen demand; (c) texture of the sediment surface; and (d) dissolved
oxygen in the overlying water.   In  the  present study, an approximation was made for
each of these factors which  produced  the most favorable conditions for sediment exchange.
To  accurately  extrapolate  the  data generated in this study, further  work  is needed to
determine  exchange  coefficients under  conditions of higher  oxygen  content, lower
turbulence,  and with sediment water interfaces which more closely approximating those
of the actual  river  bottoms.
                                          129

-------
BIOLOGY

Introduction

The  assessment  of the existing ecological status of an area can best be based upon the
evaluation of data obtained by monitoring various biological communities.  As the study
of water quality becomes ecologically oriented, the question of the relationship between
animal and  plant  communities and the chemical characteristics of  the  water must be
explored.    The classical  response  of  organisms (if  such a  response  exists) to  their
environment has been detailed frequently, beginning as  far back as  1850,  although one
of the first  practical applications was contained in the saprobian system of  Kolkwitz and
Marsson™, which was based  on a check  list of organisms and their response to organic
wastes.

The  biological  phase of the current study was  directed  at using to the greatest extent
possible, the available  historical records and data amassed  on the biological characteristics
of the interconnecting waterways in the study region as well as adjacent areas.  Communities
selected as important "on site" monitors of water quality within the area were the benthic
macroinvertebrates and the phytoplankton.

The  benthos are directly subjected to adverse conditions  of existence as a result of their
habitat requirements and their general inability to move great distances by self locomotion "
.  The varied responses of different taxa of benthos give accurate and valuable information
on existing  as  well  as  indications  of past conditions  in  a particular river section.   As
organisms that  comprise the benthic communities respond differently than  other taxa to
environmental stress, the use of historical records of these responses  is invaluable.  Some
species, due to  niche  specificity,  cannot tolerate any appreciable  water quality changes,
whereas  others  can tolerate a  wide range of conditions.  In general terms, a natural,
unpolluted system will  support many different taxanomic groups and few  individuals of
each specie.  In a polluted or otherwise altered area the converse  is true, with many
organisms of each  of a few species being present.  The  benthic community was used both
to complement  historical records  of the area and because of  their intraspecific response
to changes  in environmental quality.

The  phytoplankton community was  considered to be important for all the aforementioned
reasons, as well as the part they play in Lake Erie.   The phytoplankton are, by  nature,
free  floating and  are therefore transported by currents both vertically and horizontally.
                                          130

-------
It  is  the  horizontal  disturbance,  and  more  specifically the  upstream-downstream
relationships,  that  were of  interest.   By studying the changes in  the  phytoplankton
community from the  upstream areas through to  Lake Erie  it was hoped  that the point
at which bloom causing  organisms began to become significant could be identified. Once
this area was  determined, the vector of pollution could be isolated and appropriate steps
taken toward correction of the problem. In addition to this specific aim, the  phytoplankton
were  studied  to indicate present  environmental quality.  When the algal community is
                                                                                 Of)
studied in its entirety, that  group may give reliable information as to water quality   .

Methodology

Field  Sampling  -

Station locations for benthic macroinvertebrate collections  in  the St. Clair and  Detroit
Rivers were chosen  to be concomitant, where possible, with those locations sampled during
the United States  Public Health  Service  study of  19646 (Figure  34).  Each of  the 22
collection  sites were  sampled  during  the first survey (August  1973) to  qualitatively
determine  if they were worthy  of further quantitative evaluation.  As this was the  case
with  all sites  selected, the  quantitative benthic study  was  undertaken during the  two
subsequent  surveys (November  1973,  May 1974).  Two samples were secured from each
of  the  station sites to  allow for gross similarity comparisons and  increased statistical
reliability.

A Ponar grab. Wildlife Supply Company (No. 1725), was  chosen as  the best method of
securing benthic macroinvertebrate samples.  Both  the  St. Clair and  Detroit Rivers have,
for the most part,  comparatively hard substrates and high flows, making them amenable
to application of the Ponar Grab  sampler.  The Ponar has an effective sampling  area of
23  x  23 centimeters (0.0529 m^)  and weighs approximately  37 kg, as used in this study.
Upon retrieval, all benthic samples were washed on board, using a Ponar wash frame (Wildco
No. 188).  This provides an  efficient method for field washing - out of fines and silts,
leaving  all  organisms and particles larger than  520    m.  The prewashed samples were
then transferred into one  liter  bottles containing  freshwater, labeled and put  aside for
later fixing.  Each  sample was fixed at the end of the day with 70 percent ethyl  alcohol
or in the case  of samples containing high percentages of annelid worms 45 percent formalin
solution"^'**"   .  Macroinvertebrate animals were hand picked from  all samples prior to
identification,  counting and  cataloging.

Samples for phytoplankton analysis were taken from four areas of the Lake Huron - Lake
                                           131

-------
Figure 34 .   Benthos  sampling stations 1973-1974
                                                           LAKE HURON
                                           SOUTH CHANNEL
                  LAKE
                ST. CLAIR
                                  132

-------
Figure 34  (cont.) Benthos  sampling stations  1973-197^
                                                  LAKE ST CLAIR
                X
                     MICHIGAN
                                 133

-------
Figure  34  (cont.) Benthos sampling stations 1973-197*1
                       MONGUAGON CHEEK
                MICHIGAN
                                20»    21. 22.
                                LAKE ERIE
                                   134

-------
Erie  connecting waters.  These areas included:  Stations 1  and 2 - St. Clair River at Lake
Huron; stations 3 and 4 -  St. Clair River in the vicinity  of  Algonac, Michigan; stations
5, 6, and 7  at Peach  Island,  mile  mark 30.8, upper Detroit  River; and stations 19, 20,
21, and 22, mile  mark 3.9, lower Detroit River (Figure 34).   A composite water sample
composed of three (3) volumes of  a horizontal type Van  Dorn water sample bottle (2.1
liter  volume), was obtained at each station.  Samples were collected from subsurface (0.5
m), one-third depth,  and near bottom (approximately  0.5 m  above  the bottom).

Replicate  liter (1000  ml) subsamples were taken for pigment extraction and chlorophyll
analysis.   The subsamples for  chlorophyll measurements were kept on  ice and transferred
to the laboratory  for analysis.   Replicate  250 ml subsamples were taken from each
composite collection and preserved in Lugol's iodine solution until analysis was performed.

Analytical  Procedures  -

General - After the biological communities were sorted, counted, identified, and catalogued,
various biomathematical  indicies were applied  to aid in the characterization  of species
associations and population similarities throughout the study region. Those indices directed
at specific communities are discussed within the respective community subsections.  The
biomathematical expressions used to describe the taxanomic complexes of all communities
studied are presented  in  the  following paragraphs.

The  expressions used to describe species richness at specific sites sampled during the three
                                                                            07
survey periods have been shown to  correlate well with changes in water quality   .  One
formula is expressed  as:

Richness = S-1/lnN

      where:      S=   number of species

                 N=   total individuals            Margalef^

                 ln=   natural  log

The  second formula  used was:  Richness   d = S/ v/Nf   Menhinick^y

Richness (diversity)  is lowest  when the community is composed  of many individuals of
one  species (diversity  =  0)^  .  Diversity  increases when limiting or inhibiting factors
                                          135

-------
are removed; the species complex becomes more  diverse and the community  is referred
to as being more stable. Such stability is the combined effect of several species undergoing
minor  but differing  shifts in population numbers  as  a result of reproduction, mortality,
and response to environmental  factors '   .

The numerical assessment of population and community similarity was accomplished  by
applying Pirolot's  or Sorenson's Similarity Coefficient42,43  . ^'^ formula  is:
2 c/a+b

     where:     a =   number of species in population "A"

                b =   number of species in population "B"

                c =   number of species common  in  both "A" and  "B"

The  calculated values indicate a percent similarity when multiplied by 100; the level of
significance  being chosen arbitrarily or statistically.   Brown  ^ indicates that researchers
of benthic communities often use 0.60 (60 percent) as a  level of significant similarity.

Perhaps the  most accepted  measurements  of  diversity are based  on  indices which are
borrowed  from information theory   .  These  measures of "informational diversity" are
expressions of the degree  of uncertainty involved in predicting the  species identity of
a randomly  selected  individual.  The more  diverse an assemblage, the  more uncertain the
prediction  and, conversely,  the  less  diverse,   the  more  certain  the prediction.   The
informational  diversity  of  a  collection  is given by:

d  =  (n-j/N) Iog2 (n-j/N)           Shannon's formula ^



     where:     N  =  number of  individuals of all  species in  the  collection

                n.|  =  the number of individuals of  each species

Although  each biomathematical  expression  of community  diversity, richness or similarity
is extremely efficient and permits summarization of large amounts of information regarding
numbers and  kinds of  organisms, it is essential to  relate  the  derived numbers to each
other,  and  to  biomass  determinations.    In  addition   to  this  interrelationship, the
                                           136

-------
macrohabitat requirement of species or groups of taxa were  considered when discussing
the  biological  communities  present  in  the  interconnecting  waterways  and  possible
environmental factors contributing to the specific biological development found to exist.

Benthos -

The  previously picked benthic samples were transferred  to a  glass  petri dish or Syracuse
watch glass and hand sorted by gross taxonomic characteristics. Groups of taxa were then
placed under a Bausch and  Lomb variable zoom (10X - 70X) microscope for identification
and enumeration. Taxanomic keys used were Pennak^ , Usinger  , Needham and Needham °
,  Leonard and Leonard47  , Burks48 , Edmondson49  , Hamilton  et  al50, Hiltunen3^ ,
          m          RQ
Johannsen01  , Klemm0^ . The taxanomic data was then applied to various indices of
species richness and expressions of faunal similarity and  diversity described earlier.

Various analytical procedures specific to the benthic population were biomass (wet weight),
subsampling,  and  clearing of the annelid  worms for identification. The macroinvertebrate
biomass determinations were made  on a Mettler Type H-6 analtyical balance. The biomass
determinations were  made on  the  entire  sample following  removal of all external
preservative  by  blotting on  filter paper for one  minute.  The  cases  of caddis flies
(Trichoptera)  were  excluded but  shells  of mollusks  and  crustaceans were included in
                                                                                   o
biomass wet weights.   The calculation used for wet weight of benthic invertebrates (g/mz)
was:

     wet  weight  of organisms in  all samples (g)
                        Q
     area of sampler (m   )  x number of samples

Some benthic samples, notably those from stations 13 and 14, contained such large numbers
of small  organisms  (annelid worms) that it was impractical  to  pick  or count them all.
In these samples the larger organisms and bits of detritus were removed by hand picking.
The  remaining sample  was made up to  definite volume and  aerated and agitated to  a
homogenous mix.   While the sample was thoroughly  mixed a subsample of twenty five
percent of the original volume was removed by a dipper.  This  aliquot was then treated
as described above  for identification.  The total number of  organisms per sample was
then obtained by multiplying  the  number in  the  subsample by the aliquot percentage.

Representative oligochaeta  were  cleared  prior  to  mounting  to enable visual observation
                                                  00
of the  identifying characters employed in  Hiltunen's00 taxonomic key.  Suspension of
the organisms for several days (three to  five) in Amman's lactophenol was found  to be
the best  method  of clearing.  Amman's  lactophenol is comprised of 100 g phenol, 100
                                         137

-------
ml  lactic acid,  200 ml  glycerine and 100 ml distilled water.


Phytoplankton - The subsamples for chlorophyll  measurements were first filtered  through
Whatman, Type GF/C,  glass fiber  paper.  Analytical  techniques were similar to those
spectrophotometric methods  described by  Slack, et al^ .  Filtered  samples were tissue
ground  in 90 percent aqueous acetone and MgCOg, centrifuged, and absorbance of the
centrifugate  read at wavelengths of  750 nm, 663 nm, 645 nm and 630 nm on a Varian
Techtron, Model 635 spectrophotometer.  Chlorophyll a was quantified from the following
formulas:

chlorophyll^ (y g/ml)  = 11.64e663      - 2.16e645      + 0.10e630

chlorophyll ^_ (p g/ml)  = derived value ( ug/ml) x  extract volume  (ml)
                     volume collected (1)

Before completing these calculations a turbidity  correction was made by subtracting the
750 nm reading from each absorbance.  Data  is  presented  as mean chlorophyll a (   g/l)
at each station, compared with other stations, and correlated with mean total numbers
of phytoplankton  (no./I).

Replicate  250 ml  subsamples  were taken  from  each  composite collection, preserved in
Lugol's iodine  solution,  and  taken  to  the  laboratory for species identification  and
enumeration.  After shaking,  a  ten  milliter aliquot was removed  from each  subsample,
placed in  a counting chamber, permitted to settle for a period of not less than ten hours,
and examined on  a  Wild,  Model M-40, (400X magnification) inverted  lens microscope.
From these  replicate samples a composite  species list  of phytoplankton was constructed
expressing the occurrence  of individuals as mean numbers/ml.  These data were compared
through the  use  of  species richness  indices, Shannon-Weaver diversity,  and  population
similarity  as discussed earlier.
                                          138

-------
 Results

 Benthos  •

 St. Clair  River - The benthic macro!nvertebrate assemblage of the St. Clair River is strikingly
 homogenous, see Figure 35, Appendix B-1, and B-2. Only one genus was collected during
 the  May and November sampling runs at  the  upstream  stations (1  and 2); the North
 American prosobranch Goniobasis sp. Stations 3 and 4 were also dominated by Goniobasis,
 although  the  appearance   of   the  lighter  Trichoptera  such   as   Hvdrophvschae.
 Cheumatopsychae, Macrgnemum, Brachycentrus and  Athripsodes  was documened,  see
 Appendix B-1 and  B-2.   Biomass calculations  (grams/meter^ ) for the four stations on
 the  St.  Clair River,  averaged 20.92  and  31.60  for the  November and  May  surveys
 respectively;  this  represents a two percent decrease from November to May.  Following
 is the  mean  biomass  of macroinvertebrates  at  the four stations in the St. Clair River:

 Station                                  X Biomass
                              November             May
 1                             11.50                  4.30
 2                            62.00                 58.10
 3                            19.28                 12.00
 4                              -                    52.00
"X"                            30.92                  31.60
The May survey yielded an average of  45 percent fewer organisms (total numbers) than
the same  stations  sampled in  November 1973.

The diversity and richness calculations  applied to the benthic community sampled in the
St.  Clair River generated  real  numbers only through  the Menhinick formula  (S/\/~N),
Table 17.  The population density was low at both the upstream and downstream transect;
although much lower upstream (165 versus 302  individuals per  meter^ ) during the May
1974 survey.

From these data the  St. Clair  River  demonstrated an undiversified  macroinvertebrate
community consisting of organisms indigenous to, and adapted for, rapidly flowing water
with hard underlying substrates   ''

Detroit  River - The Detroit River demonstrated a  narrow range of benthic taxa and average
numbers of genera during both the May and November  survey dates. The average number
                                      139

-------
Figure  35.   Dominant taxa Detroit and St.  Glair Rivers
                                                                      UAKE HURON
               Dominant taxa/I dominance
                 November 1973
                   May 1974
Goniobasis  sp./lOOZ
Gohiobas is  so./100%


  Goniobasis  sp . /1007.
  Goniobasis  sp./1007.
           PORT  HURON
                                            MICHIGAN
                                                           Gonxobasis sp.  36
              LAKE
            ST. CLAIfl
                                140

-------
Figure   35  (cont.)-   Dominant taxa  Detroit  and  St.  Glair Rivers
Dominant  taxa/7. dominance
 November 1973
    M^ L974Cheumatopsychae sp.  37%
                                                            LAKE ST. CLAIR
                                                           Cheumatopsychae sp .  61'
                                            Hydropsy chae sp
                               Hdropsychae sp. 907.
                                                            Macronemum sp. 60%
                                                            Hydropsychae sp.78%
                      Macronemma sp.  33%
                      Hydropsychae sp~.  75%
        Goniobasis  sp. 267.
        Hexagenia  sp . 3-37.7
        Pontoporeia  affinis 337.
                                             Limnodrilus cervica 46%
      Sphaerium sp.  297.
      Limnodrilus  cervica 63%
                                              Dina microstoma o//.
                                                          Tanypus sp.  92%
                                                          Limnodrilus cervica 867
                                141

-------
Figure  35  (cont.).   Dominant taxa  Detroit  and  St.  Glair Rivers
          Dominant  taxa/% dominance
           November  1973
              May  1974
                                                                Limnodrllus  cervica  97%
                                                                LicnodriLus  cervica  92%
                               ECORSE RIVER
                  Limnodrilus cervica 99%
                  Limnodnlus cervica  111.
          Lunnodrilus cervica 331
          Dina micros coma 637.
                      MOMGUACON CREEX
                                                                   Pnysa sp.  40
             saamoryctides calirom
                                                                 Liamocrilus
          Pnysa  sp. 1007.
          ghysa sp. 537.
       Lymnaea  sp. 40T1
                               Chirotiomidae 49Z
                                                           Pisidiun sp .  Z9"i
                            19.    20»      2>  22 •
                                                                  Spnaerium  50"/
                                                                     indium 507. ~
                                142

-------
 Table  17.  MENHENICK FORMULA CALCULATIONS - ST. CLAIR RIVER
            BENTHOS

November       Station    123
_          2
X Biomass/m
  (wet weight)           11.5     62.00    19,28

X Individuals/m2         66      359      217

Shannon Weaver Diversity
  (X)                     0.00     0.00      1.39

Richness  (X)  (S-l/lnN)    0.00     0.00      1.65

Richness  (X)  (S/  N)      0.50     0,22      1.49
May_            Station    1234
_          2
X Biomass/m
  (wet weight)            4.30    58.10    12.00     52.00

X Individuals/m2         28      302      113      491

Shannon Weaver Diversity
  (X)                     0.00     0.00     0,71      0.44

Richness (X)  (S-l/lnN)    0.00     0.00     0.84      0.47

Richness (X)  (S/  N)      0.85     0.27     1.03      0.50
                          143

-------
of genera  collected  at various transects, grouped with references to location on the river,
were: six for the "upstream" area, four in the "middle"  region,  and three in the "mouth"
area.  The upstream area was represented by stations 5, 6 and  7 in the vicinity of Peach
Island: the middle area  was delineated by stations 8-15  and  encompassed the area from
the  Detroit  Harbor Terminals,  Incorporated  to  the  northwestern  tip  of  Grosse  He
(approximately 8.6  river  miles)  near the Trenton  Channel,  while the mouth area was
considered as stations  16-22; Figure 34.  The  Canadian side of the river had one more
genus than the American side, considering the average for all samples of both quantitative
surveys; five  genera versus four genera respectively.  Important  also are the kinds of taxa
found to  be  indigenous to the analogous Canadian  and  United  States  stations.  Stations
5 and 8 located in  United States waters produced primarily Amphipoda, Gastropoda and
Ephemeroptera, while corresponding Canadian sample sites (7 and 9) were dominated by
Trichoptera and Gastropoda. The  downstream points sampled  in the vicinity of Mud Island
on the  United States side (stations 10, 13, 14) yielded  Gastropoda, Sphaeriidae, and
an overwhelming  population  of Annelid  worms.  Samples from  Canadian waters (stations
12,  16, 17,  21,  and 22) along the same reach  produced Amphipoda, Ephemeroptera,
Chironominae,  and  some   Tubidificidae (annelid worms).   The  "mouth" area  stations
(15,  18, 19, and 20) located on the United States side consisted of Gastropoda, Hirundinea,
Tubificidae and Chironomidae.  Most generally, the United States waters were observed
to have a benthic population most often associated with areas of low water quality54,55,41,8

The  population density figures (Figure 36) for the Detroit  River vary greatly with the
region in  question.   The upstream transect adjacent to  Peach  Island demonstrates close
replication between  the  two shoreline stations (numbers  5 and 7), while the sample located
in the shipping channel (station  6) had a lower  population density than the  near shore
stations on the November quantitative benthos survey. The higher numbers  of  benthic
animals during the November survey  at stations 5 and 7 decreased drastically in the sampling
during May 1974; from 1947 to 198 individuals per square meter for station 5, and 2665
to 170 individuals per square meter for station  7, a 90 percent  and 94  percent reduction,
respectively.  Station number 6 had an increase of benthic animals during the six  months
intervening, from  217 to 388 animals per square meter, representing a 44 percent increase.
The  taxa collected were very similar during both the November 1973 and May 1974 sample
runs, consisting primarily  of  Trichopterans of the family  Hydropsychidae at all stations.
Population density  followed much  the same trend  of  decreasing numbers of organisms
at stations 8, 9 and 11,  although  the  total number of animals recovered was less than
the initial river influent stations.  The area  sampled  just below  the Detroit River - Rouge
River confluence showed the converse community  seasonal variation, that is,  the two
samples had  an increase of approximately  42 percent  from November to  May  (993 to
1701 individuals/m^ ).   Station  12,  located between Fighting Island and the Canadian
                                      144

-------
Figure  36.   Benthos St.  Glair/Detroit  Rivers
           November 1973 individuals/nT
           May 1974 individuals/m2
                                                                   LAKE  HURON
                                         MICHIGAN
                                          ALSCNAC
                                 NORTH CHANNEL
                                            SOUTH  CHANNEL
            LAKE

         ST. CLAIIl

-------
Figure 36"  (cont.)-   Benthos  St.  Glair/Detroit  Rivers
                                  2
          November 1973 individuals/m
          May 1974 individuals/m2
                                                        LAKE ST. CUAIS
                              146

-------
Figure 36  (cont.)-   Benthos  St. Glair/Detroit Rivers
         November 1973 individuals/m
         May 1974 individuals/m2
                           ECORSE RIVER
      -A-
           MICHIGAN
                             147

-------
shore near  LaSalle, Ontario, produced  similar population densities on both surveys (1753
                   fy
and  1720 animals/m^ ).  The November survey generated primarily  Chironomidae of the
genus Tenypus (Meigen), while  the  May  samples were dominated by the annelid worm
Limnodrilus cervix.  The substrates collected  at stations 13 and 14 were populated by
extremely large numbers of Tubificidae, 411, 701 and 229,017 individuals per square meter
at station  13  for  the  November and  May surveys,  respectively.  Station  14 had lower,
although still inordinately high populations of  Tubificidae, numbering 14,735 and 2,873
animals per square meter for the November and  May surveys,  respectively.  Ljmnod_rjlus
cervix and _L. angustipenis were the dominant forms (Figure 35). The next four river miles
(12.0 -  8.0) were characterized by  relatively  constant population densities  and benthic
community development.   The  transect consisting of sample  stations  19-22 (river  mile
3.9)  was  predominated  by  Gastropoda such  as  Lymnaea,  Physa,  and  Valvata sp.  in
November  while  Hexagenia sp.  dominated in the May collections.  Population  densities
ranged from 38 individuals per square meter  for station  22 in May to  907 per square
meter for station 20 in November. See Figure 35  for a composite of dominant taxa  collected
at the various  stations.

The  species richness (S/v/TvT and S-1/lnN) of the northern most  transect in the Detroit
River shows a  high degree of similarity for both near-shore communities, and each indicate
a diverse benthic population.  With  respect to  station 6 richness, November samples had
a lower diversity in the channel than  comparable near-shore  samples, however in  May
the  biomathematically derived figures  showed that all transect stations  to be  close in
community richness.   Station  8 had a higher species richness than station  9  on  both
sampling dates, although both stations  8 and 9 showed an increased richness of taxa as
compared to the upstream  stations  in all but one sample; the May  sample at station 9.
This was due  to the recovery of only one taxa of the  Hydropsychidae, see Appendix
B-1 and B2.  Subsequent November samples  indicate species richness values ranging from
1.37 at station 15 to 0.02 at station  13 where an average of the replicate samples produced
21,779  individuals per square meter  represented by only three taxa.  The May  data
produced  values ranging from  1.50  at  station  21 to  0.06 again at station 13  (12,115
individuals per square  meter represented  by six taxa).

The  Shannon-Weaver  (3) diversity (informational theory)  was calculated  on all samples
although only  selected  transects point  up interesting  biological responses in the Detroit
River benthic  faunal assemblage, Figures 37 and  38.  These transects  are delineated by
stations 5,  6, and 7 at Peach Island (river mile 30.8); 10 and 11 just  below the confluence
of the Rouge and  Detroit  Rivers (river mile 19.0);  13 and 14  between Mud Island and
Grassy Island  (river mile  14.6),  station 15 in  Trenton Channel (river  mile  12.0W), and
                                        148

-------
        Figure  37.   Shannon-Weaver diversity  - November 1973 Benthos
1.5





1.3



1.1




0.9




0.7





0.4




0.3
FLOW

-------
         Figure  38.   Shannon-Weaver diversity - May 1973
Ln
O
        1.5 ^
        1.3
     FLOW
                    U.S.
                    SHORE

-------
stations  16 and 17 just east of Grosse lie in the Fighting  Island Channel (river mile 9.3).
The diversity  of a particular community  is best understood when it is related  to biomass
figures derived from  that community^"  ,  Table  18.   At the initial transect, November
diveristy calculations  show station  6 to have  both the lowest diversity, 0.50,  and  lowest
                                      f\
mass of animals recovered (1.04 grams/m^) while the near  shore, and thus more protected,
station 5 yielded biomass numbers of 6.62 grams per square meter and 20.04 grams per
square meter, respectively.  The diversity of each community was 1.47.   From this one
would expect  the animals at station 7 to be more robust than those at station 5, assuming
either the  same taxa  were taken at each  location or that  heavier forms were represented
in the sample if different taxa were  recovered, or  both.   In  this case, both assumptions
were observed to hold true.  Station 7 was represented by  several Pleurocerid Gastropods,
a  relatively heavy organism, while station  5  had  only one individual of this  taxa. The
May collection of this transect pointed up the seasonal fluctuation of macrofaunal benthos
in the Detroit Rver.  The channel  location (station 6) reported a higher diversity (0.77)
and  biomass  (11.15 g/m^ )  than either  near  shore  station.   The presence of the cold
water stenotherm, Pontoporeia affinis (Lindstrom), was also first noticed at station 6  during
this  survey.

The  two locations sampled  below the mouth of  the  Rouge River  indicated very high
diversities  in  November  (1.64  for  station 10  and  0.92 for  station  11) while they were
lowered  to 0.97 and  0.00, respectively, in the May collection.  Benthic biomas was also
greatly reduced between November and May.  Station 10 had the highest on each sampling
date with  values of 31.10  in  November  and  9.44 individuals per square meter in May,
while station  II had values of 1.66 and 0.86 in  November and May, respectively.  Stations
13 and  14 had an extremely low diversity  of  benthic forms  while the  biomass was high.
The  indications of an organically enriched substrate  in the  vicinity of  Mud  Island are
unquestionable with biomass numbers of  133.70 and 66.85 grams per square meter. The
stations  near  Grosse  lie  (15,  16, and 17) show a  general  increase in the diversity from
the upstream  stations of 12, 13, and 14, while the biomass  decreases.  Station 15  shows
the lowest diversity and  highest biomass of these  three stations however and is therefore
considered to  be somewhat  lower  in  overall  quality to 16 and 17.  See  Tables 19 and
20 for computed  similarity values for all  Detroit River  stations.

To summarize then, the  upstream stations in  the  Detroit River are characterized by high
population densities,  richness, and  diversity and  are  dominated  by animals in the order
Trichoptera.   Samples taken  in the section  of  the river below the Rouge  River to Grosse
Me are extremely  high in total numbers  of individuals, with a subsequent low diversity
and richness, high biomass and consisted almost exclusively  of Tubificidae and Sphaeridae.
                                        151

-------
    Table  18 .   DETROIT RIVER,  SELECTED STATIONS COMPARED BY BIOMASS
                  AND SHANNON-WEAVER DIVERSITY
Station
_   November 1973
X Biomass   Shannon-Weaver
       May 1974
X Biomass    Shannon-Weaver
5
6
7
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
6.62
1.04
20.04
31.10
1.66
2.54
133.70
13.33
22.10
*
6.10
1.47
0.50
1.47
1.64
0.92
0.30
0.04
0.16
0.43
*
1.23
                                                    3.65
                                                   11.15
                                                   10.51

                                                    9.44
                                                    0,36

                                                   11.98
                                                   66.85
                                                    9.58

                                                    5.43
                                                    2.91
                                                    0.94
                                                  0.34
                                                  0.77
                                                  0.49

                                                  0.97
                                                  0.00

                                                  0.55
                                                  0.63
                                                  0.32

                                                  0.47
                                                  0.81
                                                  0.84
  *no sample
                                152

-------
Ul
OJ
     Station
        5
        6
        7
        8
        9
       10
       11
       12
       13
       14
       15
       18
        5
        6
        7
        8
        9
       10
       11
       12
       13
       14
       15
       18
Table 19, NOVEMBER SIMILARITY MATRIX, BENTHOS DETROIT RIVER
6 7 8 9 10
0.40 0.85 0.42 0.40 0.24
0.32 0.33 0.31 0.00
0.74 0.60 0.19
0.47 0.29
0.13







Table 20. MAY SIMILARITY MATRIX,
6 7 8 9 10
0.33 0.40 0.57 0.40 0.00
0.80 0.86 0.80 0.00
0.67 1.00 0.00
0.67 0.67
0.00







11
0.38
0.22
0.30
0.15
0.14
0.55






BENTHOS
11
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.57






12
0.40
0,00
0,32
0.17
0.31
0.40
0.44





DETROIT
12
0.00
0,22
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.18
0.25





13
0.14
0.00
0.11
0.18
0.00
0.67
0.50
0.57




RIVER
13
0.18
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.46
0.40
0,29




14
0.35
0.00
0.29
0.43
0.13
0.83
0.36
0.40
0.67




14
0.25
0.00
0.00
0,00
0.00
0.40
0.57
0,18
0.77



15
0.53
0.17
0.43
0.38
0.12
0.57
0.62
0.67
0.36
0.57



15
0.33
0.00
0.40
0.00
0.40
0.50
0.80
0.22
0,55
0,75


18
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
1.00

18
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.50
0.57
0.22
0.55
0.75
1.00
1.00

-------
Stations in the vicinity of Grosse lie show medium numbers of individuals, diversity, and
richness with  low biomass and richness  with  low biomass figures.   The stations in this
area  were  dominated by Phvsa  and Tubificids although some Ephemeroptera such as
Hexaqenia began  to appear.   The lake area stations are characterized by low to medium
numbers, diversity, and richness  with a  low biomass and were dominated by  mollusks.

 Phytoplankton -

 Phytoplankton populations in the St.  Clair and Detroit Rivers were compared in terms
 of chlorophyll a, b, and £  (pg/l), number of  individuals/ml, percent dominance by major
 taxanomic groups, comparison of abundant species, species richness (S-1/lnN) and (S//N),
 species diversity  (Shannon-Weaver  expression),  and  population  similarity  (2c/a  + b).
 Contrary   to  other  aspects of  this  survey,  e.g.,  chemistry  and  benthic   sampling,
 Phytoplankton measurements were collected from four areas of  the  two rivers.   This
 included  transects in the upper and lower (upstream  and downstream)  portions of the
 St. Clair  River and upper and lower (upstream  and downstream)  portions of the Detroit
 River.

 Chlorophyll  - The results of the chlorophyll measurements are presented in Tables 21,
 22 and 23 and  Appendix  C-1;  trends are shown  by Figures 39, 40, and  41. Values are
 given  for  collections taken during November  1973 and May  1974. Measurements from
 the August  1973 collection were extremely variable,  with  large experimental  error, and
 thus were not tabulated.   The  techniques were refined and  greater sensitivity with less
 variability was achieved  in  later  measurements.  In most cases replicate  samples had fairly
 similar values (Appendix C-1).  During November the two  stations in the upper St. Clair
 River  (stations 1  and 2) showed nearly identical mean levels of the respective chlorophyll
 measurements although this did  not hold true during May 1974 (Table  21).  In the lower
 St. Clair  River (stations 3 and 4) the November and May chlorophyll levels were similar.
 Table  21  further indicates  that  greater variability  occurred  in  the  Detroit River transects
 (stations  5-7  and 19-22) than  in the St.  Clair River transects.

 Mean  chlorophyll a levels were  similar in the upper and lower  St.  Clair River during both
 the November and May collections  (Table 22).   However, the mean chlorophyll a^ levels
 between the  upper and  lower Detroit River differed  between  November  and May (Table
 22 and Figure 39).  During  November the mean level of  chlorophyll a_\n the upper Detroit
 River  was less than that  measured in the lower Detroit River, however the opposite was
 true during May (Table  22).  At either time the Detroit  River produced more chlorophyll
 JL ( p g/0   than did the  St. Clair River.  This trend can be seen  in Figures 40 and 41.
                                       154

-------
Station
            Table  21    DETROIT RIVER PHYTOPIGMENTS
                         Mean  Chlorophyll a, b, £  (yg/1)
      November 1973
Chi.  a   Chi. b   Chi. c
        May 1974
Chi. a   Chi. b   Chi. c
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
19
20
21
22
1
1
0
1
1
0
2
1
1
1
3
.2
.2
.8
.4
.4
.6
.4
.2
.2
.8
.0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
.5
.6
.2
.2
.2
.4
.4
.2
.8
.2
.4
1
1
1
1
1
0
1
1
2
1
1
.2
.7
.0
.0
.1
.4
.4
.0
.6
.2
.2
2.
0.
1.
1.
3.
2.
-
2.
3.
1.
2.
0
8
0
2
8
0

2
8
8
5
0.5
0
0.1
0.4
0.7
0.6
-
0.6
0.7
0.2
0.4
2
0
0
1
2
2

2
2
1
1
.0
.6
.6
.6
.2
.0
-
.6
.5
.4
.3
        Table 22.
      MEAN CHLOROPHYLL a  (ug/1) AT FOUR  STUDY AREAS
         Precision approximated according to Slack et
River Areas
              November 1973
                                      Chlorophyll a Precision  (yg/1)
              May 1974

Upper
Lower
Upper
Lower

St. Glair R.
St. Glair R.
Detroit R.
Detroit R.
n
4
4
6
8

1.
1.
1.
1.

2
1
5
8

± o
± o
± °
+ 0

.13
.13
.11
.09
n
4
4
4
8

1
1
2
2

.4 +
.2 +
.9 +
.6 +

0
0
0
0

.13
.13
.13
.09
                                155

-------
Figure  39.Detroit  River  mean  chlorophyll a  concentration  (ug/D
                           November 1973

                             May  1974
LAKE ST. CLAIH
                        Detroit  Slver phytopigments were aeastirad at trwo
                        locations, aila mark 3.9  (lower Detroit River)  and
                        mile mark 30.3 (upper Detroit Siver)
            MICHIGAN
                                                          ONTAfllO
                                   156

-------
  Figure   40.  Mean  Chlorophyll  a  Concentrations  (yg/1)
                          November  1973
4.0
.0
2.0


1.0
0.9
^ 0.8
2 0.7
^s
«' n 6
Chlorophyll
o o <
-P- Ui <
0.3
0.2
0. 1

—





—
_

—
—







i*****
!***«"
'**•*«
!•*•••
>*•*•*
'**•*!
|:|:|:
|:j:|:
***•*'
'•*« *«
* • *•*
1
























:::::
2

































*****
x*i
*****
•*•*•
::-:'-
'•*""!
»*t*»*

jijii:
•;•;•;
3





















|:|:j
• *• * >
*•* •*
i" »* •'
;;'••:•
!*•*• '
:j:|:
4











I
1




i"« *•


• *•*•

\l'mt\\
!•!•!•
*"*•*'
•*»*•
t-t'i
'*•***
*****
5






















1 " **i
i * * "|
* * **'
: :|:j
6















•X'
i *•"•
iji:
:•'£
*•*•'
:|:|i
*•"•'
:•:•;
**.v
*•**'
!*»"•'
*• *•'
'.''.',
'•:'•:•
*»* **
7











1
1





•Xv


*'•*•*«
•*•*»'
*•***!
•*•" •'
*•*•*!
*****!
::::::
**•*•'
'"*"•'
;X;
19


















'*•""*
]}:]:
X>;
'.•.*"


******
* ' *• '
** »*!
2C
















xi|:
II
*•"•*'
£3

;!•:•:
!;X;
'***•*
!«X*
•*•"•"
******
!'X"
*•'•:"
21














• * •*•
• • •
*"*•*
*•*• *
•X'
• *•*•
• *• *•
***•*
• • •
•••:•:
>:i:|:
:•:•:•
•*•*•'
il
.•••.•
.*.•.'
:•:):]
******
• "»'*'
• *• •*
:'•:•:'
':'•:'•:
''•:'•:''
.|:i:':
•X'l
:':'•':'•
•x",
•***•'
"•X-
\\













Upper St. Clair  Lower        Upper Detroit
    River    St. Clair River     River
Lower Detroit River
                          157

-------
   4.0
   3.0
   2.0
w>
to!
1.0
0.9
0.8
0.7

0.6

0.5
>•>  0.4
ex
o

^  °'3
o
   0.2
            Figure 41.  Mean Chlorophyll £ Concentration  (yg/1)
                                   "May 1974
   0.1
       Upper St.  Clair  Lower  St.    Upper Detroit
            River      Clair  River    River
                                                   19   20   21    22
                                                       Lower Detroit River
                                  158

-------
The levels of chlorophyll & ( ug/D presented in Table 21  indicate that there was similar
production in both the St. Clair and  Detroit Rivers during  November, while there was
greater production in the  Detroit River during  May.  Little emphasis should be placed
on chlorophyll  c. as an independent measure, as the literature suggests this measurement
is often variable and  has  a poor level of precision^ .  Chlorophyll jc_ does indicate the
abundance of certain  algal  groups and  will be used in a ratio of chlorophyll_c/a to  show
trends  throughout this river system.   A  similar ratio, chlorophyll b/a, will be used in
this manner.

Ratios as calculated  for  replicate samples  are  presented  in Table 23.   The  ratio of
chlorophyll Jj/a. was most  often greater during  November than during May (Table 23),
this is verified  by the list of mean values by river and transect in Table  24.   A similar
trend  was  observed in the chlorophyll ratio_c/_a. Mean levels were always greater during
November  than  during May (Table 24).
Table 24.   VALUES OF CHLOROPHYLL RATIOS b/a. AND  c/a_
                                 November  1973       May 1974
                              b/a         .c/a        b/a          c/a
Upper St. Clair River           0.49        1.33        0.15          0.82
Lower St. Clair River           0.19        1.07        0.19          0.91
St. Clair River                 0.34        1.20        0.21          0.87
Upper Detroit River            0.29       0.89        0.24          0.82
Lower Detroit River            0.29        1.05        0.21          0.78
Detroit River                  0.29       0.99        0.18          0.79

Phytoplankton Abundance and Dominance - Total number of phytoplankton  individuals
were determined from microscopic examination of replicate samples and expressed as mean
number of individuals/ml  river water.  The general trend observed was an increase in the
number of species and total  number of individuals from the St. Clair River through the
Detroit River (Appendix C-2).  Samples from the Detroit River carried the greater number
of total  species.   Numbers of total  individuals/ml seemed  quite variable throughout the
survey although during Novmeber 1973 there was little variation between all  sample points.
Mean total numbers of individuals/ml ranged from 227 - 9695 during  August; 526 - 1147
during November; and 1113 - 3208 during May (Appendix C-2).  The upper Detroit River
(stations 5-7)  carried the greater  number of  individuals/ml  during August while  having
fewer species  than other  river areas.  During  the other surveys the downstream  Detroit
                                    159

-------
TABLE  23.   RATIOS OF CHLOROPHYLLS c/a AND b/a - ST. GLAIR AND
             DETROIT RIVERS

                        November 1973                May 1974
Station/Sample         Chlorophyll ratios       Chlorophyll ratios
  number               c/a            b/a       c/a            b/a
1A
IB
2A
2B
3A
3B
4A
4B
5A
5B
6A
6B
7A
7B
19A
19B
20A
2 OB
21A
21B
22A
22B
1.30
0.86
0.85
2.30
1.00
1.80
0.80
0.67
0.82
0.76
-
1.50
0.46
0.92
0.93
0.60
2.83
1.89
0.84
0.53
0.26
0.52
0.40
0.43
0.23
0.90
0.33
0.20
0.07
0.17
0.18
0.18
0.14
0.86
0.14
0.23
0.27
0.10
0.67
0.68
0.21
0.06
0.12
0.19
0.47
1.39
0.50
0.92
0.50
0.59
1.44
1.11
0.55
0.64
0.93
1.17
-
-
1.38
0.86
0.75
0.54
0.64
1.00
0.48
0.57
0.11
0.35
0
0
0
0.12
0.31
0.33
0.15
0.22
0.26
0.33
-
-
0.33
0.24
0.20
0.16
0.16
0.09
0.19
0.13
                                160

-------
River transect (stations 19-22)  produced the largest phytoplankton  population.  These
trends can  be seen in Table 25 and Appendix C-2.  Mean number of individuals/ml were
always less in the St. Clair River than in the Detroit River. The total plankton populations
at the upstream  and downstream  Detroit River transects were similar (no./ml) when the
means and variance  are taken into consideration (Table 25).
Table 25.        MEAN NUMBER OF PHYTOPLANKTON INDIVIDUALS/ml + ONE
                STANDARD DEVIATION
Date            Area                                 Mean
August 73       St. Clair River              392.5       98.9
                Detroit River              3137.0      3683.5
                Upstream                 3466        5383.5
                Downstream              2808        2119.5
November 73
St. Clair River
Detroit River
Upstream
Downstream
645.8
934.1
9257
940.5
100.4
T53.4
233.3
103.1
May 74
St. Clair River
Detroit River
Upstream
Downstream
1386.0
2476.8
2274.0
2578.0
241.3
751.4
1213.4
639.6
The dominant group of phytoplankton  organisms was the diatoms (Bacillariophyta)  in
all cases.  This held true at all  stations during each collecting period (Table 26).  During
August  and  November  1973 the second  and third dominants  were the  green  algae
(Chlorophyta) and blue green algae  (Cyanophyta), respectively.   The second  dominant
group during May 1974 was the Chrysophyta (golden-brown algae exclusive of the diatoms).

The dominant diatom species in  the  St. Clair  River  (stations 1-4)  during August were
Cyclotella  spp.,   Stephanodiscus  astraea,  and  Tabellaria  flocculosa  (Appendix  C-3).
Pelogloea bacillifera was the dominant blue-green alga while Chlorella vulgaris, Elakatothrix
gelatinosa, and Selenastrum minutum  were the dominant green algal species.  Dominant
species in the upper and  lower St. Clair  River were similar during August.

In the Detroit River (August 1973) the domiannt species were Cyclotella spp.,.C. catenata,
Melosira  italica,  Navjcula  spp., Nhzschia spp.,  and Ste_phanodiscus  astraea.   Cyanarcus
                                      161

-------
                           Table  26.   DOMINANT GROUPS  OF  PHYTOPLANKTON BY PERCENT

                                         St. Glair  and  Detroit  Rivers (Aug,  Nov 73 and May 74)
  Date
  August 73
a-.
hJ
  November 73
tation Cyanophyta
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
19
20
21
22
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
19
20
21
22
13
4
7
12
7
21
5
13
6
4

23
19
22
16
5
6
3
3
4
2
2
.2
.7
.5
.8
.0
.3
.2
.4
.4
.6
-
.6
.2
.9
.9
.9
.3
.5
.8
.6
.8
.5
Chlorophyta
17.
39,
11.
20.
15.
19.
19.
18.
12.
15.
-
4.
12.
10,
7,
9.
5.
18.
16.
6,
4.
16.
5
3
6
1
0
8
4
9
0
0

7
9
0
7
2
8
0
4
8
7
9
Chrysophyta
2
3
7
5
0
10
2
0
0
2

1
2
2
1
6
2
1
2
2
3
5
.5
,4
.2
.0
.2
,5
.6
,5
.8
.8
-
.0
.3
.2
.4
.9
.0
.8
.2
.4
.2
.2
Bacillariophyta Other
59
46
62
55
77
40
71
66
80
76

68
55
60
70
67
82
69
76
73
81
58
.0
.3
.9
.7
.5
.8
.9
.9
,7
.1
-
.6
.1
.6
.2
.4
.5
.7
.7
.8
,4
.9
7
6
10
6
0
7
0
0
0
1

2
10
4
4
10
3
6
0
12
7
16
.8
.3
.7
.4
.3
.6
.9
.2
.5
.5
-
.2
.4
,3
.3
.6
.4
.6
.8
.3
.8
.1

-------
                    Table 26. (Cont.).  DOMINANT GROUPS OF PHYTOPLANKTON BY PERCENT
                                         St.  Glair and Detroit Rivers (Aug. Nov 73 and May 74)
Date       Station
May 74       1
             2
             3
             4
             5
             6
             7
            19
            20
            21
            22
Cyanophyta
2.5
2.1
3.0
2.3
1.9
2.5
1.0
1.7
2.0
1.5
Chlorophyta
3.5
4.1
4,9
2.9
3.2
3.0
3.7
3,0
4.3
2,9
Chrysophyta
14.2
13,9
16.2
19.9
10.1
14.1
0.4
10,0
13.0
14,3
Bacillariophyta
76.2
65,7
71.3
71.8
82.6
79,4
94.3
84.1
79.9
---81.5
Others
3.6
14.0
4.6
3.3
2.1
1.0
0.6
1.1
0.6
a

-------
hamiforrnis  and Marsoniella  elegans were  the dominant blue-green species, especially at
station  5 of the upstream  Detroit  River  transect.   At the downstream transect  several
species  of blue-green algae were equally abundant and the blue-greens were more  diverse
at the downstream transect than at the upstream transect  (Appendix C-3).  The  August
collections in the Detroit River had many green algal  species  of which Ankistrodesmus
falcatus, A. spiralis,  Pianktosphaeria gelatinosa,  Scenedesrnus abundans, S. quadrj£auda,
and Selenastrum minutum were common. As with the blue-green algae, the greens appeared
to be  more diverse  at the  downstream stations.

The order of dominance  in the St.  Clair River during  November 1973  was the diatoms,
blue-green, and green algae  (Table 26).  Of the  diatoms Asterionella  formosa.  Cyclotella
spp., Fragilaria  crotonensis, Melosira  ijaJlca,,, Stephanodjscus  astraea, and SyjTedra_spp. were
equally common at all four St. Clair River  stations (Appendix C-3).  Fragilaria crotonensis
was the  most  abundant, equalling between 20 and 30 percent of the  total  individuals/ml
at the four  St. Clair River stations.  Coelosphaerium  naegelianum, Microcystis aeruginosa,
                                      I mill •	• •» ••>••••. .n..    i *ft in.aa.i.... mumn' - —«—•^w-.-B*™**** ,.v „ . ^^.atL^^a*™ '
and Pelogloea bacillifera were the blue-greens which  were common  to all St. Clair River
stations.  Of these,  Microcystis aeruginosa was consistently more abundant  although  an
occassional species dominated this group at specific stations, e.g., Aph anocapsa ejachisla
at  station 1.   The common  green algae species were Ankistrodesmus falcatus, Gojenkjrna,
radiata, and Oocystis gloeocystiformis.

In the Detroit  River during November the diatoms were dominant followed by  the green
and blue-green algae.  The extent to  which the diatoms were dominant was  slightly higher
in the Detroit  River than in the  St. Clair River  (Table 26).  The blue-green algae were
only one-half to one-third as dominant  in  the Detroit  River as  in the St. Clair  River and
the degree of dominance of the green algae varied between stations. Common and abundant
diatom  species included  Amphora  sp.,  Asterionella  formosa,  CycloteMa spp.,  £ra<3ilaria
crotonensis,  Melosira italica, Navicula spp., JNIjtzschia palea, StejihajTOdiscus  astraea, and
Synedra  spp.   (Appendix C-3).     Blue-green species  which   were  common  included
Chroococcus  limneticus,  Coelosphaerium   naegelianum,  Microcystis  aeruginosa,  and
Oscillatoria minima,  although this and other species of  Oscillatoria were common at the
downstream  transect  (stations  19-22).    Common  species  of green algae  included
Ankistrodesmus falcatus, A^spiraMs,  Scenedesrnus abundans, S. bijuga,  S. quadricauda, and
Selenastrum  minutum.    The  species  Dinobryon  calciformis  and  C).  sertularia   of  the
Chrysophyta were also common at most  stations (Appendix  C-3).

Although the diatoms remained as the dominant group during May 1974, the Chrysophyta
were of second importance  rather than the  Cyanophyta or  Chlorophyta.  The common
                                       164

-------
diatom species in the St. Clair River were Asterionella formosa, Cyclotella spp.,  Fragilaria
crptonensis,  Rh|^jsolenia eriensis, Synedra spp., and TabeMlaria flocculosa.  The common
and  abundant species  of  Chrysophyta  were  Djjnpbp£on sertularia and  D. tabellariae
(Appendix C-3).

Dominant  diatom species in  the  Detroit  River  (May  1974)  were  Asterionella  formosa,
Cyclotella  spp., Fragilaria capucma,  F^ crotongQgjg. Mejosj^a  varicins,  Syjiedra spp., and
Tabellaria flocculosa.  In  addition to these, CycloteMa glomerata and Riizosolenia eriensis
were abundant at the downstream transect and less so at the upstream transect.  Dinobryon
sertulajria^and D. tabel|armejvere the dominant species of Chrysophyta.  Of the blue-green
algae  the common  forms  were Oscillatoria  hamelii and  (D.  Ijmnetica. Ankistrodesmus
falcatus and A. spiral is were the common species of  green algae in the Detroit River during
May 1974 (Appendix C-3).

At  several  stations during  all three collecting periods  there was  an abundance  (7 to  16
percent) of "other forms" (Table 26 and Appendix C-3). These were phyto-flagellates
and were classified as  Rhodomonas lacustus and Chroomonas sp.   It should be noted
that those  individuals recorded  as Chroomonas sp. may not necessarily be of this taxon
and should most  probably be  labelled as  "Unidentified Flagellates".
Richness and  Diversity  - The data with  regards to richness and diversity are summarized
in Appendix C-3 and trends are depicted in  Figures 42-47. For these comparisons, two
richness formulas were used which are "ratio-type" expressions of which only one (S-1/lnN)
was plotted as a histogram. In addition to the species richness calculations, species diversity
(H) was  determined  by  the  Shannon-Weaver  equation which  is  a "log-proportional"
expression,  with  the  numbers of each  species  being of relative importance.

Species richness increased from the  upper St. Clair River to  its downstream area  during
August 1973  and greatest richness  occurred  along the  United States shore (Figure 42).
At the upstream Detroit River transect  species richness was  slightly lower than found
at the downstream  St.  Clair  River transect.  Richness was lowest along the United States
shore at  the upper Detroit  River transect.  In  the lower Detroit River, species richness
was greatest along the United States shore and  lower near mid-channel.   Species richness
increased greatly from  the upstream to  the downstream Detroit River  transects  during
August (Figure 42).

During November 1973, species richness was higher than during  August  at most stations
                                       165

-------
               Figure  42.  Phytoplankton Species Richness  (S-l/lnN)  - August  73
                                                                                 ower Detroit
                                                                                    River
 Flow
United States Shore
                                   Jpp~er Detroit River

                  Tower St.  Glair River

Upper St.  Glair River

-------
                     Figure  43.   Phytoplankton Species Richness (S-l/lnN) - November 1973
8

7

6


5

4
 Flov  >'^*"

 United States Shore

•— .
6

-------
                   Figure 44 .  Phytoplankton Species Richness  (S-l/lnN)  -  May  74
CTv
00
           8
                                                                                            Lower Detroit
                                                                                                 River
           Flow  "^

           United States Shore
                                   Jpper Detroit River

                 Lower St. Glair River

Upper St.  Glair River

-------
                       Figure 45 .  Phytoplankton Species Diversity  (3)  - August  73
o\
4.0

3.5

3.0

2.5

2.0

1.5

1.0

0.5

0



Flow
     United States Shore
                                                                                         Lower Detroit
                                                                                            River
                                                                Jpper Detroit River

                                                Lower St. Clair River

                              Upper St. Clair River

-------
                  Figure A6.  Phytoplankton Species Diversity  (d) - November  1973
O
4.0


3.5


3.0


2.5


2.0


1.5


1.0


0.5


0
            Flow
         United  States  Shore
                                                                                            Lower Detroit
                                                                                                  River
                                                                        Uppei
                                                                   jr Detroit River

                                                 Lower St. Glair River
                                      Upper  St.  Glair  River

-------
               Figure 47 .   Phytoplankton Species Diversity (d) - May 74
4.0


3.5

3.0


2.5

2.0


1.5


1.0
  Flow _^-


United States shore
                                                                                  ..ower Detroit
                                                                                     River
                                                             pper
                    St. Clair River

Lower St. Clair River
                            IT	C> j

-------
 (Figure 43).  In the St.  Clair River species richness increased from the upstream to the
 downstream transect, a trend similar to that seen during August.  However, rather than
 one station exhibiting  dominance over  another within a transect, derived  richness values
 within  a  transect were similar.   High species richness occurred at the  upstream Detroit
 River transect and increased from the United States shore, to mid-channel, to the Canadian
 shore.  At the lower  Detroit River transect the  highest richness values occurred nearest
 the  United States  shore,  decreased  towards mid-channel, and  increased again  at station
 22 (Figure 43).  Mean species richness was higher in the upper Detroit  River (6.99) than
 it was  downstream  (5.95).

 Overall, species richness  was  lowest during May  1974  and was uniform throughout all
 stations with few exceptions (Appendix  C-2,  Figure  44).   Derived richness values from
 the  upstream Detroit  River  transect were very similar  at  the time  of  this survey, with
 a  slight increase at the  lower Detroit  River transect.   As occurred in the  August and
 November collections,  species richness values in the lower Detroit River were higher near
 the  United States  shore  than at mid-channel.

 Species diversity (d) exhibited more uniform trends than did species richness  (S-1/lnN).
 During  August  1973  diversity increased  from the  upper to  the lower St.  Clair  River,
 decreased  slightly at the  upper  Detroit River transect, and  dropped to its lowest values
 at the lower Detroit River transect (Appendix C-2,  Figure 45).
During November 1973, species diversity was higher at most stations than during August.
Similar to  the Aigust collections,  diversity  increased from the upper  to  the lower St.
Clair  River  and also increased at  the  upper Detroit Rver transect (Appendix C-2).   In
any comparison between transects diversity was similar.  At the downstream Detroit River
transect there was a decrease in  diversity, although stations 19 and  22  had values similar
to many of the upstream stations (Figure  46).

Greatest uniformity  in species diversity  between all stations was observed during May 1974.
The only shift was a slight increase in diversity after the upstream St. Clair River transect.
The Detroit  River carried a slightly more diverse phytoplankton population than did the
St.  Clair River  during  May  (Appendix  C-2,  Figure  47).   Contrary to the low diversity
seen at the  downstream Detroit River transect during August and November, this transect
produced  a  diverse  population during  May.

Similarity -  There was a low  degree of  similarity between phytoplankton  populations  in
                                        172

-------
the St. Clair River (stations 1-4) during August and  November 1973 with somewhat higher
similarity during May  1974  (Table 27).  Stations 1 and 2 of the upstream St. Clair Rver
transect  were  less  than  50 percent similar (0.431) at the  time of the August survey.
Likewise, station pairs 1/3 and 2/3 were less than or equal to 50 percent similar.  Greatest
similarity was  between station pairs involving  station 4.

Parallel  trends  in similarity were observed in the St. Clair River during November (Table
27).  Station pair 1/2 had the lowest similarity (0.522) which approaches the lower limit
of similarity (arbitrarily selected as 50 percent).  Station pairs 2/3 and 3/4 were the most
similar,  and  similarity was highest  in paired combinations involving  stations  3 or 4 of
the lower  St.  Clair  River.

Highest overall  similarity in phytoplankton populations in the St.  Clair River was observed
during May  1974.   Station  pair  1/2 which had no, or low, similarity at earlier dates,
was similar at the 65 percent level (0.657) during May.  Downstream station pairs exhibited
higher similarity, and, as before,  highest similarity usually involved  paired combinations
with  stations 3 and 4.

Similarity of phytoplankton populations between stations in the Detroit  River  was low
during August  and  November 1973.  Values slightly below to slightly above the arbitrary
50  percent  level  of  similarity were  not  uncommon (Tables 28 and 29).  As seen  in the
St.  Clair  River, similarity during  August was  very  low.   There  appeared to be  slightly
higher similarity  within the downstream Detroit River transect than within the upstream
transect during August. Cross pairing of stations between upper and  lower Detroit River
transects produced  very low population similarity  (Table  28).

During  November there  was higher plankton similarity  between  stations  in the  Detroit
River than  during August.   When stations within  a transect (upstream or downstream)
were  paired  similarity was  always greater than  50 percent, usually  near the 60 percent
level.  Furthermore,  there was good  similarity between station pairs of different transects,
e.g., 5/19, 6/20, 7/20, etc., with no value  being less than  55 percent and most being
above 60 percent.

High  levels  of  similarity  occurred during  May  1974 (Table  30).  Since no sample was
obtained from  station  7  there  are fewer comparisons to  make in  the Detroit River.  At
the downstream transect,  adjacent station pairs were more similar than nonadjacent pairs,
i.e., 19/20,  20/21,  and 21/22 were  more similar  than 19/21, 19/22, and 20/22.  This
                                        173

-------
Table 27.  PHYTOPLANKTON  SIMILARITY  -  ST.  CLAIR RIVER
             Piriot's Similarity Coefficient    2c
                                               a+b
A:  August 73
Stations         1234
  1
  2             0.431
  3             0.500      0.459
  4             0.566      0.619      0.571
B:  November 73
Stations         1          2          3          4
   1
   2            0.522
   3            0.579      0.759
   4            0.613      0.667      0.729
C:   May 74
Stations         1234
   1
   2            0.657
   3            0.627      0.725
   4            0.667      0.732      0.647
                                174

-------
Table  28
Stations
   5
   6
   7
  19
  20
  21
  22
PHYTOPLANKTON SIMILARITY - DETROIT RIVER, AUGUST 1973
  Pirlot's Similarity Coefficient    2c
                                             20

5
0.464
0.508
0.500
0.454
0.533



0
0
0
0

6

.542
.457
.454
.533
a + b
7 19


0.526
0.500 0.602
0.603 0.500
21
                                            0.554
Table  29.
Stations
   5
   6
   7
  19
  20
  21
  22
PHYTOPLANKTON SIMILARITY - DETROIT RIVER, NOVEMBER 1973
  Pirlot's  Similarity Coefficient    2c
                                                     21
0
0
0
0
0
0
5
.660
.589
.653
.690
.611
.636

0
0
0
0
0
6
.602
.602
.630
.550
.583
7

0.
0.
0.
0.

615
645
568
619
a + b
19


0.
0.
0.


624
543
577
20



0.686
0.651
        22
                                                                0.649
                                 175

-------
Table  30.  PHYTOPLANKTON SIMILARITY - DETROIT RIVER, MAY 1974
             Pirlot's Similarity Coefficient   2c
                                              a+b

Stations           5         6        7        19      20     21       22

   5

   6             0.779

   7              -         -

  19             0.729     0.744

  20             0.703     0.779     -       0.760

  21             0.737     0.711     -       0.643    0.725

  22             0.693     0.711     -       0.643    0.622  0.773
                                176

-------
same trend  was seen during  August and  November (Tables  28 and 29).  During May the
cross-pairings  between transects  also produced high levels of similarity, none being less
than  69 percent.

Discussion

Benthos -

The St. Clair River is characterized by a benthic community  adapted to living in a  rapidly
flowing system, with hard substration at the headwaters and somewhat more fines, detritus,
etc. in  the  lower reaches.   The preponderance of the Gastropod Goniobasis sp. at the
headwaters  illustrates this fact, as this  organism has an extremely heavy shell and is able
to  maintain a hold on hard  surfaced substratum  in high velocity flow situations   .  The
environmentally critical condition throughout  the  St. Clair  River would  seem to be flow
velocity and not pollution, posed on the observed benthic macrofauna. The species collected
are intolerant to  mildly  tolerant to pollutant additions or presence  .  The Detroit River,
although influenced  by current velocity, evidences major pollutional conditions throughout
the benthic  community in several regions. The transect  at Peach Island shows a community
unaffected by  major pollutional sources.  The presence of  the  Hydorpsychid  caddisflies
and Amphipods is characteristic  of a healthy southern Michigan river. The lowered  total
numbers and  diversity during  the  May survey was  undoubtedly  due to increased  flow
produced by  snow  melt and  spring  rains.    From  these initial stations located  at the
headwaters of the river to river  mile 20  there is a progressive degradation  of the benthic
community.  Below the  reach  associated with the Rouge River confluence  to Mud Island
an  abrupt change  in the benthos is evident.   Samples taken  between  river miles 19.0 and
12.0W had severely  limited benthic communities, all of which  had population structures
of greater than 70 percent tolerant species. This condition is  indicative of severely polluted
environments57 (Figure  48).  The fact that  samples collected near Mud Island had not
fewer than  98 percent  tolerant forms,  primarily  Limnodrilus, is evidence of a higher
polluted situation.  The stations downstream from this area along the  United States shore,
and particularly through  the  headwaters of the Trenton Channel, also  had very high levels
of  tolerant  benthic  forms,  animals that can grow and develop in a wide range  of
environmental  conditions.    These species   are  generally  insensitive  to   a  variety  of
environmental stresses such as the highly  organically enriched areas previously mentioned.
The river below  station  15  (river  mile 12.0W) begins a natural recovery in the  benthic
community  (Table 19), although this "recovery"  is faster along the Canadian  shore and
in the main  channel. However, at  river mile 3.9, which can technically  be considered Lake
Erie,  the  converse  is true  with  respect to presence of tolerant forms.   Stations 21 and
22  have high  percentages  of pollution tolerant or facultative organisms. This condition
is due to the  shifting of bottom and not entirely to pollutional enrichment from  farther
upstream.  The principal animals collected here were the Sphaeriidae, which are capable
of surviving  for sustaiped periods the moving and shifting substration by closing the mantle.
The oligohumic Chironomid  Tanytarsus was  also  collected  in "this area.
         '  "                        *                        "  * •.,
                                       177                     •       •

-------
Figure 48.   Percent tolerant versus intolerant taxa at
              Benthos stations in theVpetroit River,
              November 1973 and May 1
    -intolerant forms
    -Trichoptera,  Ephememrop
     Amphipoda, Gastropoda


    -tolerant forms
 xxx - no sample
                    1 73

-------
03
  0)
  I

-------
The overall  pattern of the macrobenthonic community in the Detroit Rver, then, is one
of a relatively  healthy  and diverse  assemblage  from  near  the  headwaters to just above
the Rouge  River.   At this point the influence  on the rivers benthos by  industrial and
municipal discharges, compounded  by natural  conditions,  is  altogether  drastic.   Low
numbers of species are represented  by very high  numbers of individuals and the forms
are largely tolerant to environmental  stress.
Phytoplankton  -

Phytoplankton  populations in the Lake  Huron-Lake  Erie connecting waters (i.e., the St.
Clair and  Detroit Rivers)  are probably more important in terms of their potential rather
than their present development.   The occurrence and abundance of phytoplankton in  a
lotic ecosystem (running-water)  is  dependent  upon  many  factors, and  the extent of
development is at  most  minimal when  compared to a lentic  system (standing-water).
Limnologists who have studied lotic systems basically agree that rivers are dependent upond
adjoining  lakes, pools, backwaters,  and  tributaries for plankton organisms and that the
development of these populations is affected  by current velocity,  turbidity, and  age of
the water°°'°°'°0  .  River plankton is  therefore a composite of a pparticular drainage
and  will  vary,  often significantly,  with time and distance.   Some species are able to
reproduce  to   significant  numbers  in  rivers depending  on  rate of  flow  and  nutrient
availability.  Common river species  are  included  in  the  genera Fragilaria, Synedra,
Asterionella, Cyclotella,  and  Stephanodiscus  and  the  green  algae  Scenedesmus and
Pediastrum *** ®'  .  As current velocity slows, and temperature and nutrients increase, there
are shifts  in dominant species from  diatoms to green  and  blue-green algae   . These
conditions develop near the banks of a river before they do  at mid-channel, thus initiating
more "well-developed"  plankton populations along the edges of a  river (i.e., more total
species  and total individuals)^4,59,60

When rivers flow into  lake  systems,  the planktonic organisms are almost immediately
subjected  to a  different set of conditions and respond accordingly.  Some species decline
in numbers while others  reach "bloom" proportions depending upon   their autecology,
responding  to   changes  in  pH,  alkalinity,  nutrient   availability,  light  penetriation,
temperature, sedimentation,  and  a wealth  of other  physical-chemical  parameters.   This
in part  dictates the development of phytoplankton  in  the  St.  Clair  and  Detroit  River
systems.  Plankton from  Lake  Huron  is subjected first  to  river conditions, specifically
a fast flow rate as  it enters  the  St.  Clair River, and  is later  subjected to  lake conditions
                                        180

-------
as it  enters  Lake St.  Clair.   These same waters, after a relatively short rention time  in
Lake  St.  Clair,  are  again  subjected to lotic conditions in  the Detroit  River, only to be
eventually deposited in  the  western basin of Lake Erie.

The use of chlorophyll measurements gives an indication of algal biomass as it represents
about one to  two  percent  of the algal  dry  weight  .   Also  the  amount of different
chlorophyll forms (a, J), andjc) give an indication of the taxonomic group or groups of
                       fi1 R^ fi*^
algae  which  are  present   ''     . The data which have  been presented show that the
upstream  and downstream transects of the St. Clair River supported similar algal biomass
when  expressed  as chlorophyll  a (yg/l), with the downstream transect being slightly lower.
This is the probable result of  the fast  flow rate and the lack of new sources of plankton
which are occassionally  added to any  river system.  Lake Huron plankton, measured at
the beginning of the  St.  Clair River,  maintains a similar level  as it passes to the lower
St. Clair  River  measured  near Algonac,  Michigan before it  enters  Lake St. Clair.  This
is  not to  say that  the population  remained  static. The population probably decreases
and increases as the  river descends to Lake St. Clair, however in total, it is not too different
between the  upstream and downstream  areas.

This is further shown  by little difference in the mean  number of individuals/ml between
river  areas.  Species  richness, diversity,  and population similarity  indicate  a  changing
plankton  population from upstream to downstream in the  St.  Clair River.   It appears
as if different populations enter the  St.  Clair River on opposite shores and becomes mixed
with  distance downstream.  Dominant species are similar,  while there are shifts  in the
commona  and occassional  species.   Population similarity stabilization as it nears Lake St.
Clair.  At  no  point did extremely  low levels of species  richness or species diversity occur
in the St. Clair  River.  This river relfects  Lake Huron phytoplankton and, due to physical
factors, has little potential to develop into a nusiance phytoplankton  population.

When  chlorphyll data collected on this survey  are compared to other studies similar results
prevail.  Data for 1973 from  the Ontario  Ministry of the Environment indicated an overall
mean  chlorophyll a_  level of  1.2 yg/l at the beginning of the St. Clair River.  At a similar
downstream transect the Ontario data indicates an overall mean chlorophyll  a  level  of
about  1.04  yg/.   Analyses  from  this survey produced chlorophyll jj_values of  1.2 and
1.4 (+0.13) yg/l at the upstream transect  and  1.1 and 1.2 (+0.13) ug/l at the downstream
transect.   ChlorophyllJ^ levels in this survey  and from the Ontario  data are in the range
of 0.2-0.6 yg/l.

From  two collecting periods in the Detroit River (November and May) it was shown that
                                       181

-------
the upstream and downstream areas produced similar, yet different, chlorophyll aJevels.
However,  when  mean values of  all samples are  considered there was a slight increase at
the downstream area (i.e.,  2.04   ug/l chlorophyll ^ upstream  as  opposed  to  2.4  u g/l
downstream).  This is contrary to the St. Clair River trend which showed a slight decrease
in  chlorophyll  a_ with distance  downstream.  Data from the Ontario surveys  of  1973
indicated  a decrease in chlorophyll a^ in going from the upstream to the downstream  areas
of the  Detroit  River  (mean  upstream concentration of  5.9  \i g/l;  mean  downstream
concentration  of 3.4 yi g/l).  These  data  represent many more measurements than this
survey,  and  extended over a 12 month period.  In the current survey the little difference
in  chlorophyll b_ did not affect the chlorophyll  b/a_ratio which suggests similar plankton
populations  in  the two areas of the Detroit River.

Species  richness, diversity,  and  similarity  support the trends shown by  the chlorophyll
data.   The  lower  Detroit  River was not  greatly  different from the upstream  area. The
downstream transect was  shown to carry slightly  more green and blue-green algal species
during August and  November.  This trend, discussed earlier,  occurs as  rate of flow begins
to decrease  and temperature and nutrient  availability increases.   Dominant and common
species  were characteristic of river plankton as discussed earlier.   Species  richness and
diversity were  low at only one or  two stations  on different dates but were  otherwise
relatively  high.   Richness  was at  times  greatest  along the  shore areas, a trend of river
plankton suggested by other researchers54,59,60  ^ anc| va|ues increased slightly in  going
downstream, except during November.   This is the result of an increase  in  the number
of species, as the total number of individuals did not change  greatly.  Shannon-Weaver
species  diversity tended  to decrease  at the  downstream  Detroit River transect, a  trend
usually  associated with declining conditions of  water quality.  The degree of difference
between the upstream and downstream  transect  was not,  however, extreme.

A general overall trend of increasing  numbers of  individuals/ml was seen in  moving from
the upper St.  Clair River  to the lower Detroit  River.  Likewise  species richness increased
with distance from the St.  Clair  River to  the lower Detroit River while species diversity
was  similar  to  slightly  lower.  This is not different from the trend shown  in  1966 and
1967 where there was 540 asu/ml at Sarnia and  720 asu/ml at Windsor (1966) and 434
asu/ml  and  79  asu/ml (1967) respectively^4.   An "asu/ml" is a calculated  surface area
of individuals, similar to,  but less meaningful than, volumetric biomass determinations (1
asu/ml  =  400 u2 ).

At no time was there  a  plankton population  of "bloom"  proportions.  Sawyer^  has
                                       182

-------
indicated  that total inorganic nitrogen levels of 0.30 mg/l and orthophosphate-phosphorus
levels of 0.01 mg/l are sufficient to initiate blooms of nuisance algae.  Levels determined
in the present survey  were not of this  magnitude.  As stated earlier, the concern of the
Detroit River and its phytoplankton  population  is  its potential  to  produce  "bloom"
conditions of nuisance algae in  Lake Erie.   In  order  to  better define this potential and
the acute role  of plankton  in the  Detroit  River  it is recommended that tests using the
                    fifi
algal  assay procedure00 be  pursued.   A  project  of this nature  could better predict the
critical  levels and ratios of  nitrate,  phosphate, and carbon.
                                        183

-------
                                     SECTION  VI

                MATHEMATICAL  MODEL FOR  THE DETROIT  RIVER

INTRODUCTION

A  steady  state mathematical model was developed for the Detroit  River from  its head
at  Lake St.  Clair to  its mouth at Lake Erie.  The basic computer program used for this
study is the Steady State Modeling Program  (SSMP) developed by Canale and Nachiappan
67

Several assumptions were made during the  model construction.  The first assumption of
steady state conditions was inherent in  the choice of SSMP as a model.  This choice
was based on  several considerations including the type of river data generated from  past
and present monitoring programs; the industrial and municipal loading data available, and
the general characteristic of the  river system.  As  discussed previously  in this report, the
monitoring network along the river generally obtains samples once a month for six months
during each  year.  Industrial surveys are performed  by  grab samples being taken at various
times during the year.  Recently, a self-monitoring program  by the industries was initiated
with  grab or composite samples being taken a few times each  month.  Considering this
data base, all simulation runs are based on average steady state conditions for a six month
period in  any given  year.

SSMP is capable of handling one, two, or three dimensional  analysis.  A three dimensional
system was  chosen for the Detroit  model in order to  provide maximum flexibility  in use
of the  model.  This system is  designed so that, in  addition  to considering the  water
interfaces  (lateral and  longitudinal)  between segments, the sediment-water interface along
the bottom  of the river can also be included.  As more sediment and sediment exchange
information becomes available, it is hoped  that this flexibility will allow the simulation
of the water-sediment boundary exchange conditions for such parameters as nutrients and
metals.

For  most  of the parameters to be discussed, conservative kinetics (reaction rate = 0)  have
been  assumed.  However, the  model is capable of simulating first order reaction kinetics
and  a coupled system, such as  BOD-DO.

Thus the  Detroit  River model developed during this study is a three dimensional,  steady
state  model with an option of choosing a simulation for conservative substances or those
which follow first order reaction  kinetics.
                                       184

-------
 MODEL FORMULATION

 Theory

 The development of the  Detroit model is based on the laws of continuity. In examining
 the continuity equation  (see Equation 1  and  2) it can be seen that two distinct types
 of  mechanisms  are involved in altering the concentration of a chemical or biological
 substance.   The first mechanism involves the concept of reaction kinetics.   Kinetic
 expressions  can be dependent on a  number  of parameters including concentration,
 temperature, pH etc.  The second mechanism  involves mass transfer concepts including
 advective flow (bulk flow) and  dispersive flow  (small  scale movement and concentration
 gradient effects).

 It is not possible to solve Equation 2 directly for natural systems. Therefore it is necessary
 to make approximations which are equivalent to considering a body of water as a network
 of finite interconnected  segments as shown in  Figure 49. The steady state continuity
 equation with  first order kinetics can  then be reduced to the following:

    dC,
 vk_Ji =0=  n -QkjC«kjck+ ekjcj)+Ekj(Cj-ck)>-vkKkck+wk     ^.


where:
      C,  = concentration  of  water  quality variable  in segment
       K   k, (mg/1)
      V,  = volume of segment k,  (eft)


      Q, .  = net flow from  segment  k to segment  j (positive
        •"*    ward)  (cubic  feet per  second)
      a, .  =  finite  difference weight given by ratio  of flow
        3     to  dispersion, 0
-------
       Rate  of Change of i
       vith  time within a
       cell
       (weight/time)
Rate of Input of  i
by convection» dis-
persionj sedimenta-
tiorii or migration
from adjaceht cells
(weight/time)
Rate of Output of
i by convection»
dispersion,  sedi-
roentationj  or
migration from
adjacent cells
(weight/time)
Rate of Production
of i by growth»
excretion,  or
dissolution tfithin
cell
(weight/time)
Rate of Disap-
pearance of  i by
uptake, predation,
respiration, death,
or precipitation
(weight/time)
                                                                                                                      (1)
       Composltiort Change
         ilyclrodynamic Mechanism
                                 Reaction Mechanism
00
       ACCUMULATION
                                       V-(EVC)-V<(UO
         DISPERSION  BULK FLOW'
                                          4-
                                                                (2)
                                    REACTION

-------
                             Figure 49.  Uniform  Rectangular Volume
00
                                                                                               'k3
                                                                                                 Jk5
                                                                      'kl

-------
The  above units  for the  parameters  are those  commonly used  in practice and may  be
changed  according to  user preference.

For a river system represented by n segments (cells) the solution to equation 3 is obtained
by solving  a set of n simultaneous equations in n unknowns. There are several numerical
methods for solving such a set of equations. SSMP uses a Gaussian eleimination technique.

Equation three is applicable to single dependent variables,  such as chloride, BOD, and
coliform.   Other  systems, such as dissolved oxygen, are coupled to other quality systems.
The  mass balance for  a coupled  system  such  as D.O. would be as follows:

       dC,
where C^  is the saturation value of  D.  O., Kgk is the reaeration coefficient in segment
k, K^  is the  deoxgenation coefficient,  L is  the  biochemical  oxygen demand and +W
is now  interpreted  as  sources  and  sinks  of  D. 0.  such as  benthal  demands  and
photosynthetic production or respiration.  With  Lk known from previous calculations,
the final  solution of Equation 4 is similar to the solution of  Equation  3.

Thus, the river is represented as a three dimensional network of interconnected completely
mixed  segments, characterized according  to the physical properties of a particular river
system.

A more detailed discussion of the theory and solution techniques is given in the  Appendix
D.

River Characteristics  and Segmentation

The  Detroit River was divided into 73  segments.  The resulting system of coupled segments
is represented  in Figures 50 and  51.  The size, number and placement of the segments
was based on an examination of available  water quality  data, location of major wastewater
inputs and on  the flow  pattern of the river.   In analyzing this information, it was found
that the  Upper  Detroit  River (Peach  Island  to Zug  Island) was  fairly  uniform  in the
concentration of various pertinent parameters and contained few waste inputs. Therefore,
large segments were used in  this section  of the river with generally two  segments across
                                       188

-------
Figure 50. Model Segmentation
           Upper Detroit River
                                                   LAKE ST. CLAIR
 X
         MICHIGAN
                                               Note: Not  Drawn  to Scale
                                                     Approx.  only
                   189

-------
                            23-26
                    37-40
        HONGUAGOW CREEX
  Four  Segments
  Across  Channel
MICHIGAN
         56-59
         60-63
                                                   Note; Not  Drawn to Scale
                                                         Appro*,  only

-------
the river and each segment  approximately two miles in  length. In the lower river (below
Zug  Island)  the characteristics changed  considerably. There are many  waste inputs along
the banks of the  river and large  concentration gradients  were found between shoreline
stations and center channel  stations.  As  a result, a more detailed segmentation was used
in  this portion of the  river.  An example is the Trenton Channel  running between the
U. S. shore and Grosse Me. This portion of the river is only  1000-1500 feet wide. However,
because of the large concentration gradients, the river width  was divided  into four segments.
The  segments were also much shorter than the upper segments due to the large number
of waste inputs.  This more  detailed characterization was followed throughout the Trenton
Channel  all  the way  to  Lake  Erie.   The  rest of  the river  was divided using similar
considerations as discussed  above (concentration  gradients, waste  inputs, flow routing).
Islands located in  the river were handled  by starting new segments on each side of the
Island and splitting the flow according  to  the  available flow routing information. A few
of the very  small islands were incorporated within one segment. Several  segments in the
river were designed to contain water-sediment  boundary conditions. The choice of these
segments was based on general characteristics  of the river (depth, water velocity, proximity
to waste inputs, etc.) and  on  information gained during  the  core sampling portion of
the survey program.  The cross sectional  area of the water-sediment interface was calculated
for these designated segments and incorporated with the physical description in the model.

The  schematization was prepared using  U. S. Department  of Commerce,  National Ocean
Survey, Lake Survey  Center, navigation chart No. 400, scale 1:15,000. These maps  were
used to determine the cell widths, characteristic  lengths, depths, and volumes. Flow routing
                                                                      /^
for the river was  obtained  from the U.  S.  Public  Health Service report0  .

The  flow rate in the  Detroit River is  exceptionally steady.   The average discharge for
the period of 1936 through  1973 was approximately 185,000 cfs. The average flow during
1962 through  1964 was 170,000 cfs.  Flow  rates have been somewhat higher in the last
few  years averaging  200,000 to 220,000  cfs.  A table of flow rates  used  in the model
for various  years is given  in Appendix  D.  Flow information was obtained  from the U.
S.  Department of  Commerce  Lake  Survey Center.

Kinetics
As discussed  previously, both  conservative substances and substances following first order
reaction kinetics may be simulated using the model.  In most cases the parameters chosen
                                        191

-------
 in this  study were  of  a  conservative nature. The  type of kinetics assumed  for each of
 the specific parameters will  be  indicated in the discussion with respect to  the individual
 parameters.

 Dispersion

 Specific  dye tracer  studies were  not part of this  project and consequently it  was not
 possible  to calculate dispersion coefficients from such  data. However,  the  Public  Health
 Service  report contained some dye  tracer  information  on a  qualitative basis, and also
 included maps indicating zones of pollution and the  paths they  traveled.   Examination
 of river water quality information gathered since the Public Health report  supported the
various  zones and pathways which had been defined earlier.   This  information, coupled
with the  large flow  rates and  swift velocities  characteristic of the river,  indicated that
advective  (bulk)  flow was the  major type  of  mass transfer in the river.

 Several  dispersion coefficients  were tried ranging  from .01   to  .25 sq. miles/day.   A
coefficient of .05 sq. miles/day for lateral dispersion and a coefficient of .10 for longitudinal
dispersion gave good results.  These  values were tested using chloride data for 1968 and
 1969.   A further discussion of this  procedure  is given in  the  chloride discussion  below.
These values appear  reasonable in light of the characteristics of the Detroit  River mentioned
above.

 VERIFICATION

The previous section detailed the Detroit  River model in its general form and considered
the physical representation of the river.   These characteristics  (segmentation, flow rates,
flow patterns, dispersion), when  input  to the  general  modeling program (SSMP),  define
the model  specifically  for the Detroit  River  system.  As such,  they remain constant
regardless of which  chemical parameter  (chloride, phenol,  etc.) is chosen for simulation.
The following section will discuss  the individual parameters which were  modeled, and will
consider the input variables which change  for each specific parameter.  These variables
include  input loads,  boundary  conditions, and  reaction kinetics.

The river water quality data used in the verification for each  parameter was obtained
from various sources  including, Public  Health Service  report,  U. S. Environmental Protection
Agency  Storet System, and  the  Ontario  Ministry  of the Environment Water Quality
 Information System.  Data  obtained from  these sources  was  averaged for each  of the
                                       192

-------
years investigated  (i.e. at milepoint  14.6  station,  100 feet from shore, average chloride
concentration, 1968, was 35  mg/l). These average values were then plotted versus distance
from shore for  each  mile point along the river.  Segments  defined  in the model were
then  matched with the appropriate mile points, and the widths of these  segments were
marker) on the graphs at the proper intervals. The model treats each segment as a completely
mixed cell and  consequently, overall averages were obtained  for each appropriate width
by using individual station values, drawing a curve through them, calculating the area under
the curve, and dividing by the width.  Ai example is given below to illustrate this procedure.

Average chloride values for 1968 at milepoint 17.4W were obtained from the Storet System.
Information was available for  stations located  at 100, 200, 400, 800,  1200,  1600, and
1900 feet from  the U. S. shore. The average concentration of chloride  for each of these
stations was 23.6, 19.6, 14.4, 12.4, 10.8, 10.4, and  10.5 mg/l  respectively.  These averages
were based on  samples taken  from  April through  October,  1968.  Using these values,
a plot of concentration versus distance from shore was developed. (See Figure  52). Three
model segments (19,  20, and  21)  are located  at  milepoint  17.4W.   These widths were
defined as 900 feet, 800 feet and 700 feet, respectively.  Thus segment 19 includes the
area  from 0-900 feet from the U. S. shore,segment 20 includes 900-1700 feet and segment
21 includes 1700-2400 feet.  These widths are  marked on  Figure  52.   An average value
for each segment was then obtained  by  calculating the area under the curve and dividing
by the  width. Average  values  were obtained  in this manner  for all milepoints at which
data  was  available.   These averages were  then  used to compare the actual  river quality
data  with  the concentrations predicted  by the  model.

Industrial  and municipal waste input data  was  obtained  from various sources, including
the  Michigan  Water  Resources  Commission's monitoring  programs, the   industrial
self-monitoring  program. City of Detroit Waste  Treatment Plant records, and  the  Public
Health Service Report.  The  various industrial and  municipal  outfalls  were located from
maps provided by the  Michigan Water Resources Commission.  A listing of these outfalls
and  the segments into which they flow is given  in Appendix D.   Each  industry contained
one,  two or many outfalls. In the case of those  industries with several outfalls, the loading
for each outfall was calculated,  and then combined into one load for the industry. Loadings
were obtained by averaging available  data on a  yearly basis.  The  type  of data available
differed widely  in frequency of sampling,  types of samples, parameters measured, etc.
Where possible, averages were obtained from monthly or semi-monthly  reports.  For some
cases the data was scattered, but could be  used to obtain approximate  values.  In other
                                       193

-------
                     Figure  52. Average Chloride Concentration
                                Detroit River Dt 17.4W   1968
  16
bO
E
        100
Segment 19
1

Segment 20
1

Segment 21
1
500 1000 1500 2000
                        Distance from U.S. shore (feet)

-------
cases  certain information,  such as flow rates, was not available  at the precise  sampling
time,  but information was available  from other time periods or  other records. In these
cases averages were again approximated and generally reported as ranges of values.  Finally,
in some instances  little or  no information was found, and best estimates had to be made
based on data of previous years or other general information obtained.  A complete listing
of loadings  used  for various  runs  is given in Appendix D.

Boundary  conditions  were  established  from  river  quality  data.    In  general,  the
concentrations  found  at milepoint 30.8 and milepoint 20.6  were similar,  as  no major
industrial  or municipal plants have outfalls in  this  section of the river.  Consequently,
boundary  conditions were  determined from data available at these two  milepoints. These
boundary  concentrations were entered  into the model  to serve as a starting  level of the
various  model  simulations.
DISCUSSION

Chloride

During  1968 and  1968, a survey of industrial waste discharges along the Detroit River
was conducted by the Michigan Water Resources Commission.  This survey indicated that
the major  sources of chloride from the United States side of the river were Wyandotte
Chemical Corporation (north and south works) and  Pennwalt Chemicals Corporation. Other
major sources were  the  Detroit Wastewater Treatment Plant,  Wayne County  Wastewater
Treatment  Plant and the Rouge River.   The loading  data provided by this survey was
used as input  data in the model.  During  the same time period,  river water quality data
was being  obtained  through the monitoring  network.

Chloride was  assumed to be  a conservative substance for all simulation  runs. Thus the
reaction coefficient  k  was set equal to zero  (k=0).

Having defined the input loads and  kinetics for the system, the only remaining unknown
was the magnitude of  the dispersion coefficient.  As  discussed earlier, some  information
was available  for  use  in estimating the lateral and  longitudinal  dispersion coefficients.
                                                          r\
Several  coefficients were tried ranging  from  0 to .25 miles   /day for  lateral dispersion
                  r\
and 0  to  1.0 miles  /day for longitudinal  dispersion.  A reasonable fit of the data was
obtained using .05 miles^ /day for lateral  dispersion  and .10 miles^/day for  longitudinal
dispersion.   The results for  selected  stations are presented in  Figures 53-57.  A complete
                                       195

-------
cr>
50




40




30
             •8 20
             •H
             o
               10
               50




               40
            bO
   30

•a
•H

o  20




   10




    0
            &
            o
                            Figure  53  . Model verification - chloride

                                        Detroit River - DT 14.6 and 12.0 -  1968
                                           DT 14.6 W
                  • average measured concentration


                  — model predicted concentration
                                             J_
                1
                    100       400           800          1,200


                            Distance from U. S. shore   (ft.)
DT 12.0 W
                            I
     1
                                           1
                     100     300       600       900        1,200


                             Distance from U. S. shore   (ft.)
                           1,600
                                                                     2,000

-------

1— 1
bO

-------
00
     bO
     E
               100
                     Figure 55.  Model verification - chloride
                                 Detroit River DT  20.6 and  17.4W  1969


                                 DT 20.6
                         • average  measured concentration


                         — Model  predicted concentration
                                                     I
i}00           800          1200
       Distance  from  U.S.  shore  (ft.)
               100
                                  DT 17.

5
bO
e
~
d


20
16


12
Q
o
n

_ *



•
* • • •
.
II 1 1 1
   500              1000             1500


       Distance  from U.S.  shore   (ft.)
                                                                                2000

-------
Figure  56. Model Verification - chloride



•H
M
e
rH
U


rH
M
H
U
50
'
140-
30
20
10
0
V C I/ J. V_l X L- JX-LVCl — 1^ J. J-1 . U W aiiU J.C..UKV J-^U^
DT H.6W
— • average measured concentration
— model predicted concentration

' •
' 1
	 1 	 I . , ,
100 500 1000 1500 2000
Distance from U.S. shore (ft.)
50
10
30
20
10
0
DT 12. OW
^»


.
	 L 1 ,
100 5nA 1000
            Distance from U.S.  shore (ft.)

-------
NJ
O
O
                      Figure 57,
      bQ
         30
         20
         10
                100
    50


    40


_   30
rH

j=   2°


o   10


     0
               1000
                            Model Verification - chloride
                            Detroit River DT 8.7 W and 3.9 1969
                                  DT 8.7 W
                                               • average measured concentration

                                              _ model predicted concentration
                                              I
                                                          I
                       500              1000             1500
                           Distance from U.S. shore (ft.)
                                 DT 3.9
                             JL
                       5000             10000            15000
                            Distance from U.S. shore (ft.)
20000

-------
 listing of industrial  loads and  model results is given in Appendix D.  At this point, the
 results of the model simulation were quite good.  However, for full verification, additional
 data; preferably  under different loading conditions, needed to be  examined.

 Additional loading information and river water quality data were available  for the years
 1972 and  1973.  The results for these simulations are presented in Figures 58-60.   A
 complete listing  of  loads and model  output is given  in  Appendix  D.  The  comparison
 of  model output with river data again  was quite good.  These runs  were made  without
 further adjustments of the dispersion  coefficients.

 The model  was tested for five separate years (1963, 68, 69,  72, 73).  In 1963, 68 and
 69  the total  loadings to the river were much higher than in 1972 and  1973. The reduction
 in  loading and subsequent  water quality  improvement has been  discussed in the trend
 analysis  section of this report.  The  model simulation also reflected this water quality
 improvement.

 During the test runs for 1963,  (see Appendix D), using data from the Public Health Service
 Report,  it was found  that all predicted chloride levels were  lower  than the measured
 concentrations.   Upon further examination, however,  it was found  that this should  be
 expected.  In the Public Health  Service Report, a mass balance of chloride was presented
 which  indicated  that  the measured loadings accounted for only a  portion of the total
 chloride  measured in  the river.  Thus,  it would  be expected  that predicted  levels using
 these loads would be somewhat lower than actual values. The spatial distribution predicted
 by  the  model  did follow the  general  pattern of  the measured values. By increasing the
 loading  levels,  to account for  the  discrepancy in the massbalance, the results correlated
 with the river data.  This case serves to illustrate the point that a model  is only  as good
 as the data available.The analyst's care in choosing proper input data and  the  subsequent
 interpretation of the  results is an important part of  using a  model  as a tool.  In this
 case, the results of the model  indicated a problem, and upon  further examination of the
 data, the discrepancy  between  loading data  and river levels was found. Thus, the results
 of model supported  the results of the Public Health Service Report from which the input
 data had been taken.

 Overall the predicted levels  for each year agreed quite  well with  observed data.  In each
case, it was possible to predict the average concentrations of  chloride in  the  river using
only waste input  data and the appropriate flow rates. The dispersion coefficent  was chosen
based on 1968 data  and was not changed in the  simulation for other years.  This same
                                        201

-------
           12
                        Figure 58-  Model Verification - chloride
                                   Detroit  River DT 20.6 and 19.0 1972

                                   DT 20.6
       50
       E
                                                                 average measured
                                                                 concentration

                                                                 Model predicted
                                                                 concentration
ro
o
to
                 100
                                         I
MOO           800          1200

       Distance from U.S. shore (ft.)
           15
           10
                                   DT  19.0
            0
                 100
                           I
              I
I
400           800           1200

       Distance from U.S.  shore (ft.)

-------
       bO
       E
           15
F igure 59. Model verification - chloride
           Detroit River - DT 111. 6W and 12. OW  1972

           DT 1H.6W
           10
                                               • average measured concentration

                                               — model predicted concentration
fo
O
LO
                  100
                               JL
                          _L
         500               1000             1500

            Distance from U.S. shore  (ft.)
2000
       bO
           2*1
           16
                                  DT  12.OW
                 100
         500               1000

           Distance from U.S. shore  (ft.)

-------
NJ
o
     to
                        Figure 60.
            30
20
            10
                  100
                       Model  verification -  chloride
                       Detroit  River DT 8.7W and  3.9   1972
                                   DT 8.7W
                                                        • average measured concentration

                                                        — model predicted concentration
                                I
                                                 _L
                    500              1000    .         1500
                      Distance  from  U.S.  shore  (ft.)
            50 I
                                  DT 3.9
M
^H
H
U
30
20
10
0
•
" 1 	 	 •
•
j_ •
i


•

1 |
                                                                 15000
                                  Distance  from  U.S.  shore  (ft.)
                                                                      20000

-------
model was  used  for all of the other parameters to be discussed  in this section with no
changes in the basic segmentation or dispersion  coefficients.

It should  be mentioned here that all discussion has centered on  the United States shore
and center sections of the river.  At the time of verification, Canadian loading information
for the Canadian shoreline was not available. Thus the model at  this time has only been
verified for the United States side of the river.

Water quality data for 1973 was received from the Ontario Ministry of the Environment.
Examination of this data and preliminary  runs using  the  model indicated three major
sources of chloride loading to the  river. These areas were defined as:  near the Canadian
Rock Salt Company Ltd., near the waste beds at the south end  of  Fighting Island, and
in the Amherstburg Channel near Amherstburg, Ontario.   Preliminary estimates for these
loads were  made  and  the  results of the model compared favorably with water quality
data.   However, these  are only preliminary results and must  be supported by additional
loading and  water quality data.   It is hoped  that this can be  accomplished in  the near
future so  that a fully verified model for the entire  river can be made available.
Phenol

Industrial survey data for the years 1963,  1968,  1969, 1972, and  1973 indicated  that
the following industries were discharging  phenol:   Allied  Chemical,  Great  Lakes Steel,
Pennwalt Chemicals,  McLouth Steel  and  Mobil  Oil. The  Detroit Wastewater Treatment
Plant and the  Rouge  River were also  sources of  phenol  loadings to  the river.

Phenol is normally considered  a non-conservative substance in an aquatic system.  However,
the time of  passage in the lower  Detroit  River from Zug Island to  Lake  Erie is very
short (   12  hours).  Therefore,  it was assumed that any degradation of phenol due to
biological activity would probably be small, and treating phenol as conservative substance
(k=0) would be reasonable for  this river system.   As can be seen  in  the  results, the
assumption proved  to be adequate  for  most sections  of  the  river.

The  results for various years at selected stations are shown in Figures 61-67.   A complete
listing of model outputs and  loadings for  the  river is given in Appendix D.   The initial
verification runs showed good correlation  between model results and field data.  In each
case,  the model predicted  increase  in  phenol concentration below a  discharge point
compared closely with  the  increase measured  in the field.   However, at two milepoints
                                        205

-------
ho
O
     60
     3
     O
     c
        12
                   Figure 61  . Model verification - phenol
                               Detroit River - DT 1?.4 W and 14.6W 1968
                                  DT 17.4 W
                                      I
                                       • average measured concentration

                                       — model predicted concentration
                                       1
100        400          800           1,200

       Distance from U.  S.  shore  (ft.)
                                                               1,600
     fctO
        12
                                  DT 14.6 W
o
c
<1>
a
4
n
•
•
* . •
r 1
II 1 1 1
             100          500              1,000

                    Distance from U.S. shore  (ft.)
                                                1,500
2,000

-------
NJ
O
     0
     c
     a
                     Figure 62  .  Model verification - phenol
                                 Detroit River - DT 12.0 W and 8. ?W  1968
                                    DT 12.0 W
                        _L
                        J_
                                        • average measured concentration

                                        —model predicted concentration
J.
100       400           800          1,200

        Distance from U. S. shore  (ft.)
     \
        20 _
        15 -
                                    DT 8.7 W
iH
O
c
0)
a



10


5

0



_

0

.
1
II 1 1
100 500 1,000 1,500
                     Distance from U. S. shore  (ft.)

-------
                           Figure  63 .  Model  verification - phenol
                                       Detroit  River - DT 3.9 - 1968
         10
                                          DT 3.9
                                                  • average measured concentration


                                                 — model predicted concentration
KJ
o
oo
      O
      c
      d>

      o.
6




H
                                      •   •
          0
                I
                      I
1
1
              1,000
                    5,000               10,000               15,000


                           Distance from U. S. shore  (ft.)

-------
  12
 M  o
 a.  o
 0

 §
x;
 a
              Figure 64  . Model verification  - phenol

                          Detroit River - DT  17.4 W  and  14.6  W  1969
       100
                            DT 17.4 W
                  i
              JL
                               • average measured concentration



                              — model predicted concentration
                                             _L
400           800          1,200



 Distance from U. S. shore  (ft.)
TTSSo
  12
fan
                           DT 14.6 W
0
c
0)
JC



4
0


	

	 1 	 ll|,
                                     1,000



                  Distance from U. S. shore   (ft.)
                                     1,500
              2,000

-------
              Figure 65 .  Model  verification -  phenol
                          Detroit  River  - DT 12.0  W and  8.7W  1969
8
x"-v
X 6
faO
3.
rH
O
c
5 2
P.
0
M

DT 12.0 W
— •
• 1
-
II I 1
100 400 800 1,20
o
                                              • average  measured  concentration

                                              _ model  predicted concentration
              Distance from U.  S.  shore   (ft.)
20 _
     100
                            DT 8.7  W
rH
bO
rH
O
c
(1)
45
fi,

15

10



5
*s
0


—



*





|
II 1 1
   500              1,000

Distance from U.  S.  shore   (ft.)
1,500

-------
   12
 faO
o
c
    0
       100
                Figure 66  .  Model verification - phenol

                            Detroit  River - DT 19.0 and 14.6W- 1972
                              DT 19.0
                                             • average measured concentration


                                             — model predicted concentration
               400           800          1,200


             Distance from U.  S.  shore  (ft.)
8




6
to
o
c
2  2
         1
                              DT 14.6 W
                                    1
       100           500               1,000



                Distance  from U.  S.  shore  (ft.)
 .
                                                    1,500
2,000

-------
ho
         O

         £  2
         x:
         a
                       Figure 67  .  Model verification - phenol

                                   Detroit River - DT- 12.0 W and 8.7 W  1972
                                         DT 12.0 W     • average measured concentration


                                                      — model predicted concentration
                            I
                _L
I
                100       1JOO           800          1200


                        Distance from U. S. shore  (ft.)
         iH


         *>  8
                100
                                   DT 8.7 W
phenol
o j=-
1
•
1
1 1 1
     500             1,000



Distance from U.S.  shore  (ft.)
        1,500

-------
(14.6W and  3.9)  the  model  predicted  levels  were much  higher  than the  measured
concentrations.

An examination of the measured phenol  concentrations at milepoints 17.4W and  14.6W
(see Figure  61 and 64) shows that a considerable drop in phenol levels occurs between
there two stations.   At the present  time there is no documented evidence as to exact
nature  of  the  phenol   "sink".    There   is   some  information  that  indicates  a
sorption-sedimentation process may be responsible for the drop  in concentration.  This
section of the river (between  17.4  and 14.6) is wider and shallower than the immediate
upstream  sections,  and river  velocities  appear to be slower.  The Detroit Wastewater
Treatment  Plant, and  the  Rouge River and  Great Lakes Steel are all located  just above
milepoint 17.4W.  Each of these are sources of suspended solids, iron,  and other heavy
metals, in addition to  phenol.  In analyzing the iron data for this section  of the river,
it  can  be seen that iron concentrations follow a pattern similar to the phenol levels. The
iron concentrations decrease considerably through this section of the river.  Core samples
taken during the survey program also indicated an increase of iron and other  heavy metals
in  the sediment in this area.  A more  detailed discussion of the sediment condition is
given in  the  chemistry section of  this report.

A  similar drop in phenol concentration also  occurred between milepoints 8.7W and 3.9.
The decrease in this area was much  less than  at the upstream sections but river conditions
and  sediment  samples were similar in both  cases.

In   order  to simulate  these  decreases  in  phenol concentrations, negative  loads  were
introduced for those segments of the model located in the  areas discussed above (between
17.4W and  14.6W and between 8.7W and 3.9).   A listing of the  negative loads used  in
given in  Table 31.   At the present time the choice of appropriate  negative loads is an
empirical process.  However, in the future, as more information becomes available in these
critical areas,  it may be possible to develop  a mathematical relationship to  define these
processes. This relationship could then be incorporated into the model, and based on the
appropriate  input  parameters,  the  model  could  be  used  to  predict  the   decreased
concentrations in these areas.

Iron
The  program for simulating  iron  concentrations in the river followed the same  general
pattern as for chloride and phenol.  Loading information was obtained from survey data
                                      213

-------
Table 31 .   NEGATIVE LOADS FOR MODEL - PHENOL AND IRON - DETROIT RIVER

                                 Phenol
Area of river
mile points

17.4 W - 14.6 W
 8.7 W -  3.9
17.4 W - 14.6 W
Model segment


    23

    30

    60

    61
    23
    30
                                 Iron
1963
#/day
200
400
600
600

-
1968
#/day
400
650
200
200
60000
100000
1969
#/day
200
400
200
200
50000
100000
1972
#/day
300
500
100
200
40000
80000
1973
#/day
300
500
100
200
40000
80000

-------
which indicated Great Lakes Steel, McLouth Steel, Firestone Tire and Rubber, the Detroit
Wastewater Treatment Plant, Wayne County Wastewater Treatment  Plant and  the Rouge
River as sources of iron input  to the river.  Iron was considered a conservative substance
for all areas  of the river.

A comparison of the model predicted levels versus field data for several stations is given
in Figures 68-73.  As in the case of phenol, the results were quite good except at milepoint
14.6W.   The drop  in iron concentration  between 17.4W and 14.6W paralleled the drop
in the phenol concentrations.  This phenomenon was handled in the same manner as phenol.
The  negative loads used for iron are given  in  Table  31.

Ammonia
The  Public Health Service Study   indicated that the  major input of ammonia-nitrogen
to the river was the Detroit Waste Treatment Plant. The  Detroit Plant has not monitored
ammonia levels in the effluent during past years, and  consequently, the only data found
was  from  the 1963  Public  Health  Service Study.   Assuming the ammonia-nitrogen
concentration  (8.0  mg/l  NHg -N) has remained  relatively constant, and using flow data
measured at the  plant, it was possible to estimate the  loading levels for several years.
These estimated values, along with  measured loadings  from other sources  (see Appendix
D), were used in  the model. As in the case of  phenol, ammonia  nitrogen was assumed
to be a conservative substance for this river system.  Because of the short time of passage
in the system, the effects of nitrification in the river appear to be small. Several  test
runs were made to check this assumption.   If the oxidation of ammonia is assumed to
follow first order kinetics, the model  can be used to project the effects of this oxidation
on ammonia concentrations.   The normal range of the first order reaction  coefficient for
ammonia is 0.1  to 0.6/day.  A value  of 0.6/day was  used in  the  model and the results
were  compared with  the output using the  conservative asssumption.  The difference in
concentrations between the two outputs was negligible.  Thus the conservative assumption
appears to be  adequate for this particular river system. The results of the model projections
compared with measured levels is given in  Figures 74-79.  As  can  be seen, the simulated
levels compare quite  well with  measured levels  in the river.

It would appear from this study that the estimated levels for the Detroit Waste Treatment
Plant are reasonable.   However,  these  levels should be verified as data becomes available.
Detroit  personnel  have indicated that ammonia  concentrations will  be  monitored on a
routine  basis in the near future.  As this information  becomes available, the assumptions
                                       215

-------
hfl
0)
           100
                   Figure  68.  Model  verification  total  iron
                              Detroit River  DT  17. 4W and  14.6W  1968
                         DT  17.
                                           •average measured  concentration

                                          — Model  Predicted concentration
1
0
1 1 1
A _
	 1 	 L_
          400           800          1200
          Distance from U.S. shore (ft.)
                                        i£oo
bO
(Li
    1.2
100
                                   DT 14.6W
                         1
  500              1000

Distance from U.S. shore (ft.)
1500
                                                                            20SO

-------
   1.2



5    -8
Jp

«»    .4
          100
                 Figure 69.
                    I
Model verification total iron
Detroit River DT 12.OW and 8.7W  1968
                             DT 12. OW
                                  1
                                                  • average measured  concentration

                                                 — model predicted concentration
                    400           800          1200

                    Distance from U.S. shore  (ft.)
fe
   1.2
1-1    D
\   • o
fc>0
          100
                             DT 8.7W
                    400           800          1200

                    Distance from U.S. shore  (ft.)

-------
00
        1.2
          . 8
      M
                            Figure  70. Model Verification total iron
                                       Detroit River DT 3-9  1968
                                       DT 3.9
                       • average measured  concentration

                      — model  predicted concentration
                I
I
1
                                                                        1
                                     20000
                1000
5000                10000

Distance from U.S.  shore (ft.)
                                         15000

-------
          100
                  Figure 71.  Model verification total iron
                             Detroit River DT 17.4W and 14.6W  1969
                             DT 17. 4W
                                                   • average measured concentration

                                                  — model predicted concentration
bO
~ 2
0)
&H
0

.

_J 	 1 • 1 	 f 	 f-
400           800           1200         1600

        Distance from U.S. shore (ft.)
fctC
E
0)
    1.2
     .8
          100
                        1
                            DT 14.6W
                     i
                                                          ,
    500               1000             1500

      Distance  from U.S. shore (ft.)
                                                                           2000

-------
 1.2
         Figure 72.  Model verification total iron

                    Detroit River DT 12.OW and 8.7W  1969

         DT 12.OW
        100
 1.5
 1.0
bO
E
(U
                  I
              1
1
400           800          1200
Distance from U.S.  shore (ft.)
                                  DT 8.7W
                            • average measured concentration

                            _ model predicted concentration
                               I
                           I
        100
400           800           1200

Distance from U.S.  shore (ft.)

-------
         1.2
          .8
K3
                             Figure 73   Model verification total iron
                                        Detroit River DT 3.9  196Q
                                        DT 3.9
                       • average measured concentration

                      — model predicted concentration
                  I
I
1
                                         1
                                                                                              1
                  1000
 5000                10000

Distance from U.S. shore (ft.)
                                        15000
                                     2000D

-------
         Figure 74  .  Model Verification  - Ammonia  Nitrogen Detroit River -
                        DT 19.0 and 14.6  W -  1972
N>
      bC
      e
      53
      i
      m
      ffi
      53
6
         .2
          0
                                    DT  19.0
               J_
I
              100       400            800
                 Distance  from U.  S.  shore  (ft.)
                                                • average  measured concentration
                                               	 model  predicted concentration
                                         1200
      53
       on
      53
          .6
          .4
          .2
          0
                I
                                     DT 14.6 W
              100        400
                 Distance  from U.  S.  shore  (ft.)
                                           I
                                         TZUCT

-------
l-o
K3
    Figure 75 .


       .6
     Model verirication - ammonia nitrogen
     Detroit  River - DT 12.OW and 8.7W  1Q?2
                                  DT  12.0  W
                                           • average measured concentratioi

                                          — model predicted concentration
                       I
100       400           800          1200

       Distance from U.  S.  shore  (ft.)
       .6
                                 DT 8.7 W
to '"
I .2
en
S
0
^

1
II 1 1 1
100 400 800 1200 1600
                  Distance from U. S. shore  (ft.)

-------
                   Figure  76  . Model verification  -  ammonia  nitrogen
                               Detroit River - DT  3-9  -  1972
K3
NO
-p-
       .6
             1,000
                                          DT  3.9
                              • average measured concentration
bO
3 .4
i
on
K
.2
0
w
1 	

i

— i 	 ... i i i ' i
5,000               10,000              15,000

    Distance from U.  S. shore  (ft.)

-------
NJ
N3
                       Figure  77 . Model verification  - ammonia nitrogen
                                   Detroit River - DT  19.0-and 14.6W-  1973
              .6
               .4
            1   ?
            oo  • £-
               0
                                            DT 19.0
 • average measured concentration

— model predicted concentration
                                                          _L
                   100       400           800           1200

                          Distance from U. S. shore   (ft.)
           bO
           E
            I

           X
                0
                                           DT  14.6  W
                                            JL
                    100        400            800           1200


                           Distance  from  U.  S. shore  (ft.)

-------
NH3-N (m
g/1)- NH3-N (mg/
'D
o ro -fcs 

p-t)
H^
CD
3
c!
CO
o
W o
»

CO
3*
0
t-J
fD


x-^»
l-t) (—1
ct ro
o
•—s O









M
C^
O
o
1
—






""

A









_





0







«•
•


o ro 4=- ON
1
1
0
o


O
01
ct jr
P O
3 o
o
CD

f-^
>-$
O
3
.— 1
<— (
*
a
K-3 co oo
o
CO O
CO
—i 3*
O
s: ^
CD


x-x
1-^
Ct
• 1— '
v-^ ro
0
o




•••


A









""" """^"^

c












J
i
1

* **!
P-
OT
0)

00

.

OS
 O
ct CL
4 fD
O M
P-
ct <
/T^
(U
P- P-
O ^ M)
H) fD P-
4 0
i_i p
ro i ct
P-
o GO
h3 3
s:
M 1
ro
. p
0 g

^ o
3
. P H-
* 3 P
3 P D,
O < 3
a- a> OOP-
04 . ct
L_J f\\ 1 l-rf

r~
— **• — >j j
M 5* O
"O CD TO

H
! fD
fD 3 M3
••»


h
lj • fD VO
* P — J
O 01 UJ
ct e
fD ""i

C
•L fD
r^
»-"
O
O 0
3 0
0 3
fl> O
3 fD
ct 3

H
rt
5 Ct
•» t_l
K" ' i
ct p

h
* ct
0 P-
3 0


3

-------
                            Figure 79  .  Model verification - ammonia nitrogen
                                        Detroit River - DT 3-9 - 1973
NJ
NJ
.6
5 .«
60
1
sT -2
0
"~ DT 3«9 • average measured concentration
* — model predicted concentration
1

1
i •
* i 	 , — , 	 •
1 1 1 1*1
1,000 5,000 10,000 15,000
                             Distance from U.  S. shore (ft.)

-------
made during  these  phases of the modeling programs should be checked and documented.
The  model should be run using measured ammonia concentrations and checked with data
generated  by the river  monitoring  network.

Phosphorus

Total phosphorus loading information was available from industrial surveys and municipal
treatment  plant operating reports.   Using this data, and  assuming  total phosphorus to
be a conservative substance, the model  was run  for the years  1971, 1972,  and  1973.

The  results of  these  runs are presented  in  Figures 80-88.  Comparisons between model
projected  levels and measured concentrations were not as good for phosphorus as for the
parameters discussed previously.  For all stations except milepoint 3.9,  the predicted total
phosphorus concentrations was  higher than measured  levels.  The largest difference was
at milepoint  19.0 just below the Detroit Waste  Treatment Plant outfall.  At the present
time, there does not  appear to be a  plausible  explanation  for  this difference.

The  Detroit Treatment  Plant is the major contributor of phosphorus to the river at this
time.  As  such,  the phosphorus  concentration of all of the downstream segments  in the
model  are influenced greatly  by the Detroit  load.  If  the difference  between measured
and predicted concentrations just below the Detroit Plant can be resolved, it appears that
the  downstream measured   concentrations would  agree  quite  well  with  the  model
predictions.

Application

The  steady state model  developed for  the  Detroit River has been tested and verified for
several parameters.   The  model is capable of projecting the steady  state distribution of
parameters such as chlorides, phenol,  iron, ammonia and total  phosphorous.  However,
the use of the model as a  tool  in evaluating the effects of future  waste loads depends
largely on the judgment and skill of the analyst.  A thorough understanding of the basic
assumptions inherent  in the model development, and  recognition of  various limitations
and problems which occurred during the verification are of the  utmost importance when
using the  model for  projection  purposes.

The  model can  be  a  helpful  tool in evaluating  alternate plans  for the management of
the river system. The application of the model  for parameters such as chloride  is fairly
                                       228

-------
IS5
to
 bO
 1
E-t
    .3
    .2
    .1
               Figure  80-  Model verification  total  phosphorous
                           Detroit River DT  19.0 and 14.6W  1971
         100
                               DT 19.0
                    1
                                     ±
                                                  • average  measured concentration

                                                  — model  predicted concentration
                                               ±
          400  •         800          1200

           Distance from U.S. shore (ft.)
   .3
^  '2
to
P-.
 I
EH
    0
                          DT 14.6W
100
500              1000

Distance from US shore  (ft.)
                                                          1500
                                                                              2000

-------
to
u>
     bO
     PL4
      I
100
                        Figure  81. Model  verification total phosphorous
                                  Detroit  River  DT 12.OW and 8.7W  1971
                                  DT  12.OW
                           I
                                                     • average  measured concentration

                                                     — model  predicted concentration
400           800          1200

Distance from U.S. shore (ft.)
      to
                                 DT 8.7W
                           1
                        1
                            1
                100
          400          800           1200

          Distance from U.S. shore  (ft.)
                                         1600

-------
            Figure 82.  Model verification - Total Phosphorous
                       Detroit  River DT 3-9  1971
1000
                       DT 3-9
                                              • average measured concentration

                                             — model predicted concentration
^~^
r-i
60
E

(X, . 1
I
EH

0
i
*
p 1 '

""""^""''— I
*
	 1 	 1 III
5000                10000
Distance from U.S. shore (ft.)
15000
                                                                          2000D

-------
OH
 i
EH
                  Figure  83  Model verification  Total Phosphorous
.3
^ .2
rH
M
£
^ .1
PH
1
EH
0
Detroit River DT 19.0 an
DT 19.0
~ • avera
MB
. *
« 1
— model
	 1 	 L_
                                                average measured concentration

                                              — model predicted concentration
            100
           100
400          800           1200

Distance from U.S.  Shore (ft.)





        DT 14.6W
                                                           .
                    1000             1500

   Distance from U.S.  shore (ft.)
                                                                           2000

-------
t-o
OJ
OJ
      .  .3
     bO  • ^
     6
     OH
     cL  .1
100
      Figure  84  Model verification - Total Phosphorous
                 Detroit River DT 19-0 and ll|.6W  1973
                                    DT  19.0
                                    • average measured concentration

                                   — model predicted concentration
                                      i
400           800          1200

Distance from U.S. shore (ft.)
              100
                                    DT  14. 6W
rH
W>
F

i

.2


.1

0
—
9

,

, I 1 	 1 	 1_
              5oo              1000

              Distance from U.S. shore (ft.)
                                                              1500
                                                       2000

-------
                     Figure 85  Model verification Total Phosphorous
                                Detroit River DT 12.OW and 8.?W 1972
N3
      bO
      E
      PH
       I
      EH
          .2
          .1
               100
                                DT 12.OW
                          I
              I
                        • average measured concentration

                       — model predicted concentration
                            I
400           800           1200
Distance from U.S. shore-(ft.)
                                DT 8.7W
      M
      E
       I
      EH
                100
                                        1
                            1
400           800           1200

Distance from U.S.  shore (ft.)
                                         1600

-------
     bO
     E
     PL,
     I
         .3
         .2
         .1
                      Figure 86.  Model verification Total  Phosphorous
                                 Detroit River DT 12.OW and  8.7W  1973
                                DT 12.OW
                                    • average measured concentration

                                   — model predicted concentration
S3

-------
                            Figure 87.   Model verification Total Phosphorous
                                        Detroit River  DT 3-9  1972
U3
.3
.2
H
bO
.1
1
EH
0
DT 3.9
• average measured concentration
— model predicted concentration
<^^mm"^^^

\

"~ ^" ""* "^ _
• •
II 1 1 1
1000 5000 10000 15000 200QD
                               Distance from U.S.  shore (ft.)

-------
                           Figure 88.  Model verification Total Phosphorous
                                      Detroit River  DT 3.9  1973
ho
U)
     hO
(X,
 I
          .3
          .2
          . 1
                1
                 1000
                                      DT 3.9
                                                   • average measured concentration

                                                  — model predicted concentration
                                                1
                            5000                 10000

                            Distance  from U.S.  shore  (ft.)
                                                                        1
15000
                                                                                        2000
J-

-------
straightforward. Through the use of appropriate input loads, the effects of various loading
levels,  outfall placement, and  other  conditions  can  be  estimated.  Proper interpretation
of model  output can provide insight not only to the effects of waste discharges on river
water quality,  but also  to  other utlimate  effects in the water quality of Lake Erie.

The model  can also  aid  in  pinpointing those areas of  the river which are most critical
in terms of  water quality.   The evaluation of  phenol  and iron conditions in the river
serves as a  good example.  As discussed earlier, the section of river  between milepoints
17.4W and 14.6W  showed a decrease in both phenol and iron levels.  During the modeling
program it became obvious that  this area deserved special  attention because of this drop
in concentration and  the large  effects on the downstream areas.  The results of  the model
study were substantiated and supported by the biological and chemical data obtained during
the surveys.   Thus, this  area  is considered a  special section of the river and  should be
considered in more detail during future studies on  the river. The end segments of the
model  are designed to provide input data for Lake Erie. It  is anticipated that the Detroit
model  can be  used in  conjunction with the  Hydroscience Model  for lake  Erie to  aid
in evaluating alternative plans for the management  of  this section of the Great Lakes.
Through the proper  use  of  these  models,  the changes in water quality  due  to various
control  programs  along  the  Detroit River and  changes  in  the  water quality of Lake St.
Clair can  be evaluated  according to their  impact on the  Lake  Erie  system.

As  in the case of  any model,  the Detroit River model should  be updated and  reverified
as additional data  becomes  available.  A program of continual  revaluation will assure  that
the model  reflects current river conditions and will help establish the model as  a valuable
asset in the  management of the river  system.
                                        238

-------
                                     SECTION  VII

                           WATER  QUALITY  PROJECTIONS
The  water quality  projections discussed  in this section are based on observed historical
trends in  water quality, analytical  results obtained during this  study, and  application of
the developed  mathematical model, using tentative effluent limitations provided  by the
State of Michigan.  Each of these areas has been discussed in previous sections, and serves
as a foundation for the projection of water quality under  various control  alternatives.
Industrial  loadings are based on permits issued by the State of Michigan under the National
Pollutant  Discharge  Elimination System.  While these permits are still under review  and
may be altered to some degree, they do provide an  indication of future loadings that
can be expected. This loading data, utilized in conjunction with the developed mathematical
model, allows  a quantitative  projection of future levels for pollutants  such  as chloride,
phenol, ammonia nitrogen,  phosphorus and total iron.  Background and loading data for
other parameters such as heavy metals  is not sufficient at this time to allow a quantitative
projection of future levels, however, anticipated water quality conditions can be discussed
on a qualitative basis.  It should be understood at this time that all of the various projections
made,  whether qualitative or quantitative,   are based on  a set of assumed conditions.
(Flow  rates,  flow pattern,  incoming water quality for  Lakes St.  Clair  and Huron,  etc.)
If these conditions change, the resultant water quality  may vary appreciably from the
projected  levels.

For each of the projections  in which the mathematical model was used, several assumptions
were needed.   The  boundary conditions for the  incoming water to the  river were set
based on  1973 measured values.  The flow rate was  assumed to be  175,000 cfs, which
is a  low flow compared to  recent years.  It was felt that a conservative set of conditions
would be best for the projection of critical conditions.  The model  is based on an established
flow and  mixing  pattern,  thus  it is assumed  in these projections that no  major changes
in the flow pattern will occur.

The  segmentation scheme for the model is detailed in the modeling section  of this  report.
                                           239

-------
For purposes of discussion, the concentrations mentioned will be the average concentration
in one  segment.  Therefore,  when a maximum average concentration is discussed  and
compared with a water quality standard, that concentration will represent the highest level
for all segments of the river.   In most cases this high level will occur in a shoreline segment
near a  major outfall.  It should be noted that  in most cases the segments  in the center
of the river will be much lower in concentration. Also, the entire discussion and projections
using the model are for  the  U. S.  side of the river only. The Canadian side of the river
has not been  included as the model was not verified  for Canadian shoreline stations nor
was any industrial loading data for the Canadian side available at the time of this  report.

Little change in existing quality can  be anticipated in the St. Clair River. Generally speaking,
the St.  Clair River  is presently characterized  by high  quality water, and compliance with
more stringent effluent guidelines will simply assure  that this high quality  continues.  The
primary parameter of concern with regards to meeting  current international  water  quality
guidelines for  the St. Clair  River  is phenol. In recent  years the  concentration  of  this
parameter has failed to  meet the  established guidelines of 2  yg/l  average and 5  yg/l
maximum near the  Canadian shore at milepoints SR  30.7  and  SR 33.1,  and near the
United States shore at milepoints SR 33.9, SR 34.4, and SR 35.0. Compliance by industries
on both sides  of the river with the effluent guidelines established in  1972 amendments
is  necessary  in  order to decrease the river concentration of this material to  the  desired
level.

Similarly, the upstream portion of the Detroit River (above the confluence with the Rouge
River) is presently of such a quality as to meet present standards.   The only  major  sources
of waste  loads  in this section of  the  river are  combined sewer overflows from the City
of Detroit.   In  the  past these overflows  had a  large influence  on the water quality.  In
recent  years,  however,  the  City  of Detroit has implemented a control  system whereby
overflow occurrences have been greatly  reduced, and consequently exerted less detrimental
influence  on water  quality.
The lower section of the Detroit River (Zug Island to  Lake Erie) receives the largest waste
loads, and  is  the area  where water  quality standards are violated  most often.  At the
present  time,  phenol  standards of 2.0   yg/l average and  5  yg/l maximum are violated
at shoreline stations from the  Detroit Waste Treatment Plant to  Lake Erie.  As indicated
in the trend analysis, there has been considerable improvement in the river even though
standards are  still violated at some stations.  This improvement  has  been due largely to

                                          240

-------
the Industrial Control Program  that has been initiated.  Many industries are now meeting
effluent  guidelines and  it is anticipated  that  more  will comply in the future.

The mathematical  model was  used to project anticipated future levels of five chemical
constituents  in the Detroit River.  These parameters include  chloride,  phenol, ammonia
nitrogen, phosphorus and total iron.  The projections made with the model  are for the
year 1977 and are based on the industrial loadings authorized under the National Permit
Program. Effluent loadings for the Detroit Wastewater Treatment Plant  (Det WWTP) were
based on available information where possible,  although in the ammonia nitrogen, chloride,
and iron simulations, values  had  to be  assumed.   For each case where an estimated
concentration was  used, an average flow  rate of one billion gallons per  day (1 BCD) was
assumed.

As  mentioned  previously, the  chloride standard  of  50 mg/l  is  presently achieved at all
points in the river. Simulation,  assuming  an average of 175 mg/l in the Det WWTP effluent
and allowed  loadings for all industries, showed a maximum average concentration  of 48
mg/l.   This occurred below the industrial outfalls in the Trenton Channel  (Segment 37).
It is important to  note that the  chloride loadings allowed  under  the permits are generally
higher than the present discharge levels.   Therefore, if it present industrial discharge levels
are  maintained the chloride standard will  continue  to  be  met.

It was stated earlier that the phenol standard was violated at many near  shore areas of
the  Detroit River.  The  new phenol  limitations placed on  the industries and  on the Det
WWTP (93 Ib/day) are  much lower than  the levels presently being discharged, and  were
entered into  the model.  As discussed  in the modeling  section it was necessary to insert
a phenol "sink"  in the model  in  order  to verify the results.  The exact  nature of  this
sink and its  interrelationship   with  other parameters  are  not  completely  understood.
Therefore no loss of phenol to such a "sink" was  assumed for projections using the model.
By  removing  this sink, the projection may  be more conservative than the actual conditions
warrant.   The  results showed  that near shore segments at  milepoint 8.7W and 3.9 (the
most critical  reaches) would average 3.0 ppb of phenol.  This  would indicate a violation
of the standard at those  locations, however, this  degree of violation is minimal, and thus
it is difficult to state definitely whether  the standard will  be  violated.  Also,  any effects
of degradation or sorption-sedimentation   of this material will serve to further decrease
its concentration in the aqueous phase.  The large  reduction  in  the total  pounds of phenol
entering  the river  will definitely result  in a significant improvement in  the water quality
                                          241

-------
with respect  to phenol contamination  should  be realized.

Ammonia nitrogen  levels should decrease as the  new discharge levels are met. The exact
degree of reduction will depend primarily  on the removal attained by the Det WWTP.
Little data on the Det WWTP ammonia levels is available, consequently  three simulations
were carried  out.    The first run was based on  1  BCD flow, and 8 mg/l NhU -N from
the Det WWTP and all industries in compliance with the permits. Runs 2 and 3 are based
on a Dat WWTP discharge of 4 and 1 mg/l, respectively. The results from these simulations
show that with .030 mg/l  NHo  -N entering the  river from  Lake St. Clair a maximum
average  concentration  of from 0.41 to  0.21  mg/l can be expected  (high  level based  on
Det WWTP 8  mg/l, low level  based on Det WWTP 1  mg/l).   This represents a reduction
in the ammonia nitrogen concentration of between 25 and 75 percent in the  near shore
areas.

The  phosphorus projections were also  based on various estimated effluent levels from the
Detroit  plant  and compliance  by the  various  industries with the permit program.  The
present  standard for phosphorus  for the Det WWTP is 4750  Ibs/day, or 0.56 mg/l at one
billion gallons per day flow.  Simulation using this loading along with allowed industrial
discharges  showed  a maximum  average  concentration expected  of 0.13 mg/l,  whereas
presently the value  is averaging 0.18 mg/l. A second run with the  Detroit plant discharging
at an average  level of 1  mg/l, the established  international  goal,  showed  an expected
maximum of 0.14 mg/l.  Thus the new limitations will definitely  decrease the phosphorus
concentrations in the  river, and  in fact  those  areas along the shoreline  can  be expected
to drop  by approximately  20-30 percent in  phosphorus concentration.

Iron values obtained during the model verification are based on total iron measurements.
The  standard  for iron  is set  on filtrable iron concentration,  and consequently cannot be
compared directly  with model output.  Two effluent levels of 4 and 9  mg/l T-Fe were
used as  esimates for the Det WWTP. The results of the simulation indicated  a substantial
reduction in  total  iron concentration with a maximum average value of 0.57  or 0.70 mg/l
depending on the assumed Detroit plant  loading. This represents a substantial reduction
in iron  levels, and while it is not clear whether  the 0.03 mg/l filtrable iron  standard will
be met, it is anticipated that the  river will show a marked reduction  in iron concentration.
Graphical representation of the above projections is given in Appendix D-9.

Five-day biochemical oxygen demand (BODg) and total suspended solids were not modeled
in this  study.  The BOD  of the river was not large although the area  near the  Detroit

                                     242

-------
Wastewater Plant and Rouge River definitely showed a BOD increase.  The Detroit plant
has been discharging  on the order of one half million  pounds per day of BODg .  The
new  discharge level is expected to be much lower with a standard of 200,000-250,000
Ibs/day.  This will  definitely  aid  the river by lowering the  oxygen demand.  Similarly,
the Det  WWTP  and  the  various  industries are required to  lower the suspended solids
discharged to the river by better than  50 percent in  almost  all  cases.  This will enhance
the water quality, not  only by an improvement  in  the aqueous phase,  but also by an
improvement  in the  sediment condition, with  fewer solids,  along with sorbed materials,
being settled to the  bottom.

In summation, it is apparent that  the water quality in most cases has improved in recent
years.  The new limitations issued for discharges indicate that this trend will continue
and that water  quality  standards  will  either be  met or approached  very closely in the
next few years.   The exact fate  of some of the  trace metals and the role  of sediment
chemistry has not been defined adequately to  make  a complete evaluation at this time.
However,  it  is  hoped that further research  in these areas  will  provide  the necessary
information to assess their  importance in river management.
                                 243

-------
                                SECTION VIM

                                REFERENCES
1.      Dole, R. B., The Quality of Surface Waters in the United States, Part 1. Analyses
       of Waters East of the  One Hundredth  Meridian.  U. S.  G. S. Water Supply Paper
       236 (1909).

2.      Progress Report of the  IJC on  the Reference by the  U.  S. and  Canada in the
       Pollution of Boundary  Waters. International Joint Commission. U. S. Govt. Printing
       Office (1918) - dated  January  16, 1914.

3.      Greeley, A. M.,  Pirnie, and W. Storrie,  Fox Creek Drainage, Detroit Water Supply,
       and  Related Problems.   January 1948.

4.      Report to  Baord of County Road Commissioners, Wayne County, Michigan,  on
       Additional  Water Supply for Wayne County.  Hayen and Sawyer Engineers.  1955.

5.      Report of  the International Joint Commission United States and  Canada on the
       Pollution of Boundary  Waters.   1951.

6.      Vaughn, R.  and  G.  L. Harlow. Report on Pollution of the Detroit River, Michigan
       Waters  of  Lake Erie, and Their Tributaries.  U.  S. Dept. of Health, Education,
       and Welfare, Public Health Service, Division of Water Supply and Pollution Control.
       April 1965.

7.      Water  Quality Standards - State  of Michigan.   1973.

8.      National Academy  of Science &  National Academy of Engineering.  Water Quality
       Criteria - 1972.  U. S.  E. P. A.  Report No. EPA-R- 373033.

9.      Methods for Chemical Analysis  of Water and Wastes.   Cincinatti,  Environmental
       Protection  Agency, 1971. 312 p.

10.     Chemistry  Laboratory  Manual  - Bottom Sediments.   Environmental  Protection
       Agency, Great Lakes Region Committee on Analytical  Methods,  1969. 101  p.

11.    Methods for Organic Pesticides in Water and Wastewater.  Cincinnati, Environmental
       Protection  Agency, 1971. 51  p.

12.    Handbook  for Analytical Quality  Control in Water and Wastewater Laboratories.
       Cincinnati,  Environmental Protection  Agency, 1972.   98 p.
                                        244

-------
13.    Annual Book of ASTM Standards:  Part 23.  Philadelphia,  American Society for
       Testing and Materials, 1972.  1010 p.

14.    Standard  Methods for the Examination of Water and  Wastewater,  13th edition.
       New  York, American  Public Health Association,  1971.  874  p.

15.    Hatch,  W. R. and W. L.  Ott.   Determination of Sub.  Microgram Quantities of
       Mercury by Atomic Absorption Spectrophotometry.  Analytical  Chemistry.  40
       (14):   2085-2087,  December  1968.

16.    Bouchard, A.   Determination  of Mercury after Room Temperature  Digestion by
       Flameless Atomic Absorption.   Atomic  Absorption Newsletter.  12 (5): 115-117,
       September 1973.

17.    Simon, P.  B. and J. E. Schenk.   Refined Techniques for the Monitoring of Water
       Quality.   Environmental  Control  Technology Corporation.  (Presented at  165th
       National Meeting of the American Chemical  Society. Dallas.   April  8-13, 1973.)
       37 p.

18.    Thomas,  R. F. and  R. L. Booth.  Selective  Electrode Measurement  of Ammonia
       in Water and Wastes.  Environmental Science and Technology. 7:  523-526, June
       1973.

19.    Jenne,  E.  A.   Controls on  Mn, Fe, Co, Ni, Cu and Zn Concentrations in Soils
       and Water: the Significant Roie of Hydrous Mn and Fe Oxides. In: Trace Inorganics
       in Water,  Gould, R. F. (ed.). Washington, D.  C., American Chemical Society, 1968.
       p. 337-388.

20.    Mortimer,  C. H.  Chemical Exchanges between Sediments and  Water in the Great
       Lakes  -  Speculations on  Probable Regulatory  Mechanisms.    Limnology  and
       Oceanography.  16 (2):   387-404, March 1971.

21.    Iskandar,  I. K., and D. R. Keeney.  Concentration of Heavy Metals in Sediment
       Cores from Selected Wisconsin  Lakes.  Environmental Science and Technology.  8:
       165-170,  February  1974.

22.    Bortleson,  G. C., and G. F.  Lee.   Recent Sedimentary  Histroy of  Lake Mendota,
       Wisconsin.  Environmental Science and Technology. 6: 799-808, September 1972.

23.    Edawald,  J. K., and  J. B.  Upchurch, and C. R. O'Melia.  Phosphates  in Sediments
       of Pamlico Estuary,  Environmental Science  and  Technology.  8:  56-58,  January
       1974.

24.    Posselt, H. S.,  and  W. J. Weber.   Removal of Cadmium from Waters and Wastes
       by Sorption on Hydrous  Metal  Oxides  for Water Treatment.   In: Chemistry of
       Water Supply, Treatment and  Distribution, Rubin, A. J. (ed.).   Ann Arbor, Ann
       Arbor Science  Publishers,  Inc., 1974. p. 89-108.
                                        245

-------
25.    Morton,  S.  D.,  and  T.  H.  Lee.   Algal  Blooms -  Possible Effects  of  Iron.
       Environmental Science and Technology.  8:  673-674, July 1974.

26.    Sly, P. G. Bottom  Sediments Sampling.   In:  Proceedings of the 12th Conference
       on Great  Lakes  Research.   1969.  p. 83-898.

27.    Burns,  N.  M. and C. Ross. Nutrient Relationships in a Stratified Entrophic Lake.
       In:   Proceedings of the  14th Conference on  Great Lakes Research.  1971.

28.    Kolkwitz,  R. and M. Marsson.  Oekologte der  tierischen Saprobien.  Internationale
       Revue  gesamten  Hydrobiologie  Hydrographie,  2:  126-152.

29.    Ingram, W. M., K. M. Mackenthun, and A. F. Bartsch, Biological Field Investigative
       Data for  Water Pollution Surveys.  Washington, D. C.,  U. S. Government Printing
       Office, July, 1966.  139 p.

30.    Palmer, C. M., Aigae  as Biological  Indicators  of  Pollution. - Transactions of the
       1956  Seminar,  Robert A. Taft Sanitary  Engineering Center, U. S.  Public Health
       Service, Cincinnati, Ohio, p.  60-69.

31.    Howmiller, R. P., A Comparison of the Effectiveness of  Ekman and Ponar Grabs.
       Transactions of the American Fisheries Society.  100:  560-564,  July 1971.

32.    Hudson,  P.  L., Quantitative  Sampling with  Three Benthic Dredges. Transactions
       of the American  Fisheries Society.   99: 603-607,  1970.

33.    Powers, C. F. and  A. Robertson, Design and  Evaluation of an All-Purpose Benthos
       Sampler.   Great  Lakes Research Division, University of Michigan. Special Report
       30.  1967.   p. 126-133.

34.    Flannagan, J. F., Effeciencies  of Various Grabs and Cores in Sampling Fresh Water
       Benthos.   Journal  Fisheries  Research Board of Canada. 27:  1691-1700, 1970.

35.    Pennak, R W.,  Fresh-Water  Invertebrates of the  United States. New York,  the
       Ronald Press Company,  1953.   769  p.

36.    Hiltunen,  J.  K.,  Keys  to the  Tubificid and Naidid Olizocharta of  the Great Lakes
       Region.  Great Lakes  Fishery  Laboratory.  Ann Arbor,  Michigan.  April, 1970.
       27 p.

37.    Wilhm, J.  L.,  Comparison of Some  Diversity  Indices  Applied to Populations of
       Benthic Macro-Invertebrates in a Stream  Receiving Organic Wastes.  Journal Water
       Pollution   Control  Federation.  39: 1673-1683, October  1967.

38.    Margalif,  R., Diversidad de Especies en las Comunidades Naturales. Proc. Inst. Biol.,
       Apl., 9:5, 1951.

39.    Menhinick, E. F.,  A Comparison of Some Species  - Individuals Diversity Indices
       Applied to Samples of Field Insect.   Ecology.  45:  859,   1964.
                                         246

-------
40.    Nargalef, R., Perspectives in  Ecological Theory.  Chicago,  University, of Chicago
       Press, 1968.  111  p.

41.    Reid, G. K.,  Ecology of Inland Waters and Estuaries. New York, Peinhold Publishing
       Corporation.   1961.  375 p.

42.    Simpson, G. G.,  Notes on the  Measurement  of  Faunal Resemblance.  American
       Journal  of  Science, Bradley Volume.   258-A: 300-311, 1960.

43.    Brown, S. D., Grouping Plankton Samples by  Numerical Analysis.  Hydrobiologia.
       33: 289-301,  1969.

44.    Cairns, J.  and K L. Dickson.   A Simple Method for the  Biological Assessment
       of the Effects of Waste Discharges on Aquatic Bottom Dwelling Organisms.  Journal
       Water Pollution  Control  Federation. 43 (5):  755-772,  May, 1971.

45.    Usinger, R. L., Aquatic Insects of California.  Berkeley and Los Angeles, University
       of California Press,  1956. 508 p.

46.    Needham,  J. G. and P.  R.  Needham, A  Guide to the Study of Freshwater Biology.
       San  Francisco, Holden-Day,  Inc., 1962.  p. 18-78.

47.    Leonard, J. W. and  F.  A.  Leonard. Mayflies of  Michigan Trout Streams. Bloomfield
       Hills,  Michigan, Cranbrook Institute of Science,  1962.  139 p.

48.    Burks, B. D., The Mayflies, or Ephemeroptera of Illinois. Bullentin, Natural History
       Survey Division.   26: 216 p., May 1953.

49.    Edmondson, W. T.  Freshwater Biology. New York,  John  Wiely and Sons, Inc.,
       1959.  1248 p.

50.    Hamilton,  A., O. A.  Seather  and  D.  R. Oliver.   Classification of the  Nearctic
       Chironomidae.  Fisheries  Research  Board of Canada.  Technical  Report  No. 124,
       42 p. 1969.

51.    Johannsen,  0. A.,  Aquatic  Deptera.    Entomological Reprint  Specialists.   Los
       Angeles, CA.  1969.  368 p.

52.    Klemm,  D. J.  The Leeches  (Annelida:  Hirundinea)  of Michigan  - A Definitive
       Work.  Michigan Academician IV  (4):  405-44. 1972.

53.    Slack, K. V., R. C. Averett, P. E. Greeson, and  R.  G. Lipscomb. 1973. Techniques
       of Water -  Resources Investigations of the United States Geological Survey:  Chapter
       A4, Methods for Collection and Analysis of Aquatic Biological and Microbiological
       Samples.  165 p.

-------
54.    Hynes, H.  B. N., The Ecology of Rmning Waters.  Toronoto, University of Toronto
       Press,  1972.  555 p.

55.  Ruttner, F.,  Fundamentals of  Limnology.  Toronto, University of Toronto Press.,
       1966.   295 p.

56.    Bender, M., Virginia Institute of Marine Science, Gloucher Point, Virginia.   1973
       Personal Communication.

57.    Wurtz, C.  B., Stream Biota and Stream  Pollution.  Sewage and Industrial Wastes.
       27 (11):  1270-1278, November 1955.

58.    Kofoid, C A.,  1903.    The  plankton  of the  Illinois River,  1894-1899,  with
       introductory notes upon the  hydrography of  the Illinois River and its basin.  Part
       I.  Quantitative  investigations and general results. Bull. III.  State Lab.  Nat.  His.,
       6:  95-629.

59.    Hynes, H.  B. N., The Biology of Polluted Waters. (Toronto: University of Toronto
       Press,  1960).   202 p.

60.    Welch, Paul S., Limnology.  (New York:   McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc., 1952).
       538 p.

61.    Weber, Cornelius I., 1973. Recent developments in the measurement of the response
       of  plankton  and  periphyton to  changes in their environment. In:  Bioassay
       Techniques and  Environmental Chemistry, Gary  E. Glass, ed. Ann Arbor:  Ann
       Arbor  Science Publishers,  Inc.  p.  119.

62.    Round, F.  E., The Biology of the Algae (New  York:  St.  Martins Press, 1965).

63.    Stokes,  Leo  W.,  Theodore  A.  Olson,  and Theron  0.  Odlang,  1970.   The
       photosynthetic pigments of Lake Superior periphyton and their relation to primary
       productivity.    Bulletin  18,  Water  Resources  Research  Center, University  of
       Minnesota.   150  p.

64.    International  Lake Erie Water Pollution  Board and the  International Lake Ontario
       - St.  Lawrence  River Water Pollution  Board.  1969. Pollution of Lake Erie,  Lake
       Ontario, and the  International Section of the St. Lawrence  River. Report to the
       International  Joint Commission.   Volume 2, Lake Erie.  316 p.

65.    Sawyer, C. N.  1954.   Factors involved  in disposal of sewage effluents to  lakes.
       Sewage and Industrial Works, 26  (3):   317-325.

66.    Mitchell, Dee.  1973.  Algal bioassays  for  estimating the effect of added materials
       upon  the  planktomic  algae  in surface  waters.  In:  Bioassay  Techniques and
       Environmental  Chemistry,  Gary E. Glass, ed. Ann Arbor:   Ann Arbor Science
       Publishers,  Inc. p. 153.

67.    Canale R. P., and Nachiappan, S.  Steady State Modeling Program -  Application
       Manual, University of  Michigan Sea Grants Program, Tech. Report No. 27.  March,
       I S//£,


                                        248

-------
APPENDIX

-------
Table A-l;
Aqueous Phase (Insitu) Data Summary -
August 1973 Survey
Station     Depth    Dissolved   Temp
            (ft.)    Oxygen      (°C)
                     (rog/1)
                             Specific
                             Conductance
                             (ymho)
   6


   7
   8
  0
  6
 12
 18
  0
  6
 12
 18
 30
  0
  6
 12
 18
 30
  0
  6
 12
 18
  0
  6
 12
 18
 24
 30
  0
  6
 12
  0
  6
 12
 18
 24
  0
  6
 12
 18
 30
  0
  6
 12
 18
                       10.2
                        7.7
                        6.7
                        6.1
                        8.8
                        8.8
                        8.7
                        8.8
                        8.8
                        9,3
                        9.4
                        9.0
                        8.2
                        6.8
                        9.2
                        9.2
                        8.9
                        7.9
                        9.3
                        9.1
                        6.0
                        4.8
3.5
  1
  7
8.
8.
8.4
9.3
9.0
8.8
7.5
6.8
9.1
8.8
8.7
6.6
5.6
8.7
8.3
8.2
8.0
23.0
22.5
22.2
22.3
23.0
23.0
22.7
21.9
21.9
21.0
21.8
21.1
21.2
20.8
20.8
21.0
20.9
20.9
23.5
22.5
22.5
23.0
22.9
23.0
23.1
23.1
23.1
23.3
23.0
23.2
23.1
23.1
23.8
24.0
24.0
23.9
23.5
23.2
23.2
23.3
23.1
200
182
189
202
198
202
201
194
194
203
208
212
209
207
195
194
198
198
240
238
231
225

260
255
257
257
250
250
251
257
253
269
269
269
268
272
260
261
260
261
                          250

-------
Table A-l: Aqueous Phase  (In.situ) Data  Summary  <-
                  1973 Survey  (continued)
Station
Depth
(ft.)
Dissolved
Oxygen
(mg/1)
Temp.   Specific
(°C)    Conductance
        (ymho)
 10



 11


 12
 13
 14
 15
 16
 17
 18
 30
  0
 12
 18
 30
  0
 12
 30
  0
  6
 12
 18
 30
  0
  6
 12
 18
 24
  0
  6
  9
 30
  0
  6
 12
 18
 30
  0
  6
 12
 18
 30
  0
  6
 12
 18
 30
  0
  6
 12
 18
 22
  5.0
  7.4
  7.7
  8.3
  4.4
  8.6
  8.8
  8.0
  7.9
  7.4
  6.3
  5.4
  4.9
  8.3
  8.4
  8.0
  7.2
  6.3
  8.9
  9.2
  8.6
  7.2
  8.2
  8.3
  8.0
  7.0
  5.2
  8.5
  8.2
  7.8
  8.2
  7.8
  8.2
  7.9
  7.2
  6.1
  5.6
  8.6
  7.6
  7.4
23.1
24.5
24.2
24.0
24.0
23.8
23.9
24.0
23.8
23.8
23.8
23.8
23.8
24.7
24.3
24.0
24.1
24.1
24.0
24.0
24.0
23.9
24.4
24.0
24.0
24.1
24.1
24.0
23.9
23.9
23.9
23.9
24.0
23.0
22.9
22.9
22.8
25.0
24.8
26.0
24.3
24.0
267
307
285
282
284
261
261
263
287
281
281
278
283
282
282
283
282
282
265
262
261
263
283
282
282
282
282
270
268
268
269
272
295
290
285
283
288
287
310
313
312
301
                          251

-------
 Table A-l; Aqueous Phase (Insitu) Data Summary -
            August 1973  Survey (continued)
Station
Depth
(ft.)
Dissolved
Oxygen
(mg/1)
Temp.   Specific
( C)    Conductance
        (ymho)
  19


  20


  21


  22
  0
  6
 10
  0
  6
 12
  0
  6
 12
  0
  6
 12
 18
 30
 34
  6.7
  6.3
  5.9
  8.9
  8.1
  7.6
  8.9
  8.6
  8.1
  8.4
  8.1
  7.0
  4.9
  3.4
  3.8
 26.0
 26.0
 26.0
 25.0
 24.9
 24.9
 24.9
 24,8
 24,8
 24.0
 24.0
 23.9
 24.0
 24.0
 24.0
342
339
339
308
309
311
299
298
297
298
.293
292
291
292
287
                         252

-------
  Table A-2:
  Aqueous Phase (Insitu) Data Summary -
  November 1973 Survey
Station



   1

   2


   3


   4


   5


   6


   7


   8


   9


  10


  11


  12

  13


  14
Depth
(ft.)
  6
 24
  0
 12
 24
  0
 12
 24
  0
 12
 30
  0
 12
 24
  0
 12
 24
  0
 12
 24
  0
 12
 24
  0
 12
 30
  0
 12
 30
  0
 12
 30
  0
 12
  0
 12
 24
  0
  3
Dissolved
Oxygen
(mg/1)

  3.0
  0.6
 11.7
  9.4
  5.2
 11.5
  8.3
  8.8
 11.8
  8.4
  5.3
 12.8
  7.2
  5.2
 12.6
  6.4
  5.2
 12.6
 11.6
  7.5
 12.6
 12.4
 11.5
 12.4
 12.4
  6.9
 11.3
 11.3
  9.0
 12.2
 12.1
 11.7
 12.8
 12.8
 12.0
 11.8
 11.8
 12.8
 12.4
Temp.
Specific
Conductance
(ymho)
10.0
10.0
10.0
10.0
10.0
10.0
10.0
10.0
10.0
10.0
10.0
6.0
7.0
7.5
8.0
8.0
8.0
6.5
6.5
6.5
7.5
7.5
7.5
7.6
7.6
7.8
8.0
8.0
8.0
7.5
7.5
7.5
6.5
6.5
7.0
8.0
8.0
7.0
7.0
142
150
191
189
189
200
192
192
198
198
190
170
172
169
170
173
169
185
185
180
170
170
170
170
170
169
188
170
165
160
160
160
205
220
192
190
192
178
178
                         253

-------
  Table A-2:



Station



  15


  16


  17

  18


  19

  20

  21
  22
Aqueous Phase (Insitu) Data Summary -
November 1973 Survey  (continued)
                   Temp.   Specific
                   (°C)    Conductance
                           (ymho)
Depth
(ft.)
0
12
30
0
12
24
0
6
0
12
18
0
6
0
12
No data
0
12
Dissolved
Oxygen
(mg/1)
11.5
11.5
12.0
13.2
13.0
13.2
13.4
13.4
11.0
11.4
11.3
11.6
11.6
12.0
-
obtained:
12.8
12.8
8.0
8.0
8.0
7.0
7.0
7.0
6.5
6.5
8.0
8.0
8.5
8.0
8.0
8.0
185
182
175
215
218
218
278
270
205
200
210
170
172
161
                 Equipment malfunction
                    7.0      460
                    7.0      380
                         254

-------
   Table A-3;   Aqueous Phase (Insitu) Data Summary ~
               May 1974 Survey


Station     Depth    Dissolved   Temp.   Specific
            (ft.)    Oxygen      (°C)    Conductance
                     (mg/1)              (ymho)

   1          0
             10
             20
             30
   2          0
             10
             20
             30
   3          0
             10
             20
             30
   4          0
             10
             20
             30
   5          0
             10
             20
   6          0
             10
             20
             30
   7          0
             10
             20
             30
   8          0
             10
             20
             30
   9          0
             10
             20
             30
  10          0
             10
             20
             30
  11          0
             10
             20
             30
                          255
12.6
12.4
12.4
12.2
12.8
12.6
12.6
12.6
13.0
12.7
12.6
12.6
12.4
12.2
12.2
12.4
11.8
11.8
11.7
11.7
11.6
11.6
11.5
11.6
11.4
11.3
11.2
11.6
11.4
11.4
11.3
12.0
11.6
11.4
11.4
9.8
9.5
9.6
10.8
11.2
11.3
11.4
11.3
7.0
6.9
6.9
6.8
6.0
6.3
6.3
7.5
7.8
7.0
7.0
7.0
8.0
8.0
7.9
7.8
9.0
8.9
8.8
7.8
7.7
7.6
7.4
7.9
7.7
7.5
7.4
9.0
8.8
8.5
8.5
8.0
8.0
7.9
7.9
10.9
9.8
9.0
9.0
8.5
8.3
8.1
8.1
133
133
133
135
131
132
131
132
167
158
167
160
155
155
153
153
200
200
205
208
208
206
206
231
230
230
230
220
220
218
215
190
190
188
190
270
220
240
215
185
188
188
186

-------
  Table A-3:   Aqueous Phase (Insitu) Data Summary -
              May 1974 Survey (continued)

Station     Depth    Dissolved   Temp.   Specific
            (ft.)    Oxygen      (°C)    Conductance
                     (mg/1)              (ymho)

  12          0        8.8       11.8
  13          0       10.4       10.0
             10       10.6       10.0
             20       10.8       10.5
             30       11.1       10.6
  14          0       11.4       11.0
  15          0       10.4       11.3      201
             10       10.4       11.1      200
             20       10.4       11.2      199
             30       10.6       11.0      193
  16          0       11.2        9.9      233
             10       11.0        9.2      237
             20       11.0        9.2      238
             30       11.0        9.0      240
  17          0       11.0       10.1      277
  18          0       10.5       11.9      233
             10       10.3       11.7      230
             20       10.4       11.3      228
  19          0       10.2       13.0      235
             10       10.2       12.5      223
  20          0       10.9       11.0      173
             10       11.0       11.0      174
  21          0       11.2       10.5      170
             10       11.2       10.3      170
             20       11.2       10.3      170
  22          0       11.3       10.5      199
             10       11.2       10.4      195
                          256

-------
                                               Table A-4:  Aqueous phase data summary - August 1973 survey
Parameter
                Units
                                                                                 Stations




                                                                                 10     11     12     13    14    15     16    17    18    19    20    21
                                                                                                                                                         22
Date taken
BOD
COD
Cd
Cr
Cu
Fe
Hg
Mn
Hi
Pb
Zn
"-n Chlorinated
-
mg/1
mg/1
ug/1
Ug/1
Ug/1
Ug/1
.. _ / 1
ug/ 1
ug/1
ug/1
ug/1
ug/1
ug/1
14
0.9
10.2
0.47
4.9
6.3
50
1.7
11
1.7
221
0.66
14
0.9
12.9
0.45
9.9
4.7
70
2.1
11
2.1
66
0.51
14
0.3
9.9
0.35
14.2
3.4
120
4.5
15
2.0
48
0.46
14
1.9
9.2
0.62
10.1
7.9
120
4.0
15
2.3
90
0.50
15 .
2.4
8.0
0.49
9.8
3.9
960
19.0
23
2.3
66
0.30
15
1.2
9.7
0.35
11.8
11.2
420
11.7
19
1.6
72
0.44
15
0.8
8.7
0.35
16.8
3.1
2490
21.8
15
2.1
96
0.25
15
1.8
.10.7
0.29
5.5
4.0
550
14.4
27
1.9
48
0.32
15
1.1
8.2
0.28
27.8
3.4
490
12.4
15
1.7
54
0.48
15
4.6
17.9
0.64
15.1
13.3
2600
30.5
23
4.2
72
0.50
15
1.1
12.9
0.25
7.9
2.3
490
11.8
11
1.7
36
0.58
16
1.5
8.7
0.33
13.0
5.4
2170
26.9
11
1.8
54
0.37
15
3.9
12.9
0.68
21.6
18.8
4750
52.6
23
5.3
96
0.36
15
1.7
12.2
0.30
8.3
3.1
1420
12.9
11
1.4
42
0.54
15
3.9
10.4
0.55
8.3
7.1
2020
26.2
23
3.2
60
0.22
16
1.5
12.7
0.34
18.7
5.2
1150
15.3
19
2.2
60
0.46
16
0.7
10.2
0.35
19.5
4.0
1250
14.6
15
1.9
66
0.38
15
4.2
12.4
0.90
16.3
12.3
2690
27.0
19
5.4
84
0.73
15
2.6
14.2
0.75
21.3
10.7
4850
43.6
47
6.4
78
0.43
15
1.9
8.2
0.53
20.0
6.8
1420
17.9
23
3.5
60
0.53
15
2.6
8.0
0.43
6.2
6.0
1570
16.9
19
3.0
84
0.67
15
0.6
8.0
0.33
21.3
2.8
1040
12.5
15
2.2
48
0.58

-------
OO
                                                              Table A-5:  Aqueous phase data summary - November 1973 survey






              Parameter      Units                                                    Stations




                                          1     2     3     4     5     6     7      8      9      10    11    12    13    14     15     16     17     18    19    20    21     22






              Date taken      -          6666777777788878877789




              BOD           mg/1         1.0   1.0   1.6   1.2   1.2   1.2   1.4    1,4   1.2   3.3   1.0   1.9   3.3   1.9    2.7    1.4    2.0    3.8   2.8   1.2   1.6    1.8




              COD           mg/1         3.0   4.2   6.0   6.5   6.7   7.5   5.7    4.2   6.2   7.5   4.2   13.4  10.5  6.2    10.0   6.7    10.5   12.2   11.9   6.5   11.9  9.0




              Cd            yg/1         0.24  0.15  0.19  0.13  0.26  0.37   0.41  0.54  0.27   0.68   0.43   0.31  0.66  0.24  0.81   0.14   0.23   1.58   1.46   0.26   0.23  0.46




              Cr            ug/1         2.6   5.8   3.4   3.4   3.8   5.1   6.2    6.4   7.4   13.5   6.6   8.4   18.6  7.1    9.7    3.6    10.3   17.1   13,7   5.8   5.0    7.4




              C"            yg/1         7.0   5.4   8.5   7.2   6.6   4.8   10.5  20.4  10.9   13.3   8.8   9.0   9.0   5.3    9.1    3.5    5.0    13.7   12.7   6.4   4.3    8.9




              Fe            Vg/1         160   120   300   230   460   490   1000  650   800   1340   720   1320  1120  650    1170   670    1710   1670   980   560   570    1260




              Hg            yg/1         6.1   9.0   2.4   4.8   4.2   8.3   7.3    6.6   1.1   7.0   7.7   12.0  6.5   2.8    1.6    5.5    6.4    4.1   5.1   5.3   4.6    5.8




              Mn            Mg/1         3.7   2.8   6.5   5.9   7.8   9.7   14.2  6.8   13.8   22.0   9.0   21.9  18.9  9.7    18.3   9.2    27.5   22.2   18.1   8.6   10.7  20.1




              Ni            yg/1         11    23    19    15    11    11    15     15     15     23     15    23     27     15     19     11     15     19     23     15     11     15




              Pb            yg/1         4.2   3.7   3.1   3.2   2.7   3.5   4.6    10.9  5.8   7.2   4.5   4.7   7.7   3.6    6.0    3.2    3.4    10.8   6.5   3.6   3.3    6.4




              Zn            yg/1         56    35    56    63    63    49    84     155   91     84     70    56     42     42     70     56     70     141   84     70     56     84

-------
                                                Table A-6:   Aqueous  phase  data  summary  - May  1974  survey






Parameter      Units                                                    Stations




                            1     2     34     5     6     7      8      9      10   11     12     13     14     15     16     17   18      19     20     21    22






Date taken     -           13    13    13    13    14    14    14     14     14    14     14     15     15     15     14     14    14    14    14    14    14    14




&OD           mg/1         1.6   1.3   2.1   1.6   1.8   1.8   1.7    2.1    2.2   3.4   1.5    2.5    1.8    2.6    2.9    1.3   1.6   3.2   3.8   1.6   1.6   1.8




COD           mg/1         3.9   5.1   6.7   5.2   5.3   5.4   4.8    6.7    3.5   13.0   6.2    9.8    8.9    7.1    11.8   3.2   7.6   14.2  13.1  7.9   7.0   6.3




Cd            ug/1         0.42  0.15  0.13  0.15  0.12   0.28   0.23   0.17   0.18 0.34   0.12   0.19   0.37   0.20   0.35   0.16  0.24  0.53  0.65  0.15  0.67  0.57




Cr            ug/1         0.6   0.5   0.6   1.1   0.9   10.5   1.0    1.0    1.2   8.6   1.3    7.2    9.9    4.6    14.3   1.6   1.7   13.0  16.3  4.4   1.8   1.7




Cu            ug/1         4.6   4.2   3.2   6.4   3.4   5.4   5.5    6.4    8.5   10.3   6.3    6.0    17,3   40.6   8.6    6,5   8.2   13.4  12.5  6.5   7,0   18.0




Fe            yg/1         70    30    200   250   330   350   490    330    330   1410   470    730    940    540    820    500   690   1490  1060  860   350   350




Kg            ug/1         0.4   0.1   0.1   <0.1  4.6   0.3   0.6    0.2    0.1   <0.1   0.1    0.8    0.7    0.1    0.1    0.8   0,1   0.3   0.1   0.1   0.1   0.3




Mn            Ug/1         3     3     8     5     10    10    15     10     10    6     15     44     37     21     28     13    17    41    33    25    10    10




Ni            ug/1         7     27    19    11    15    11    11     11     19    27     31     47     27     27     27     15    23    31    23    15    19    15




Pb            VZ/i         0.7   1.0   0.6   0.7   0.9   1.0   1.3    1.3    1.3   7.1   1.3    6.4    15.8   7.3    11.9   4.1   4.1   13.7  14.7  5.8   4.0   6.4




Z°            ug/1         57    51    53    93    59    77    86     64     77    84     69     142    130    110    101    107   94    86    90    66    72    95

-------
                                                      Table A-7:   Aqueous  phase  (pesticides)  data  summary  - November  and May  surveys

         Parameter      Units                                                     Stations

                                     1     2     3     k     5     6    7     8      9      10   11    12    13    14    15    16    17    18    19    20    21    22
         November 1973 survey

         Lindane       ng/1
         Heptachlor    ng/1
         Aldrin        ng/1
         Heptachlor Epoxide ng/1
         p, p' DDE     ng/1
         Dieldrin      ng/1          -    <20   <20   <20    <20    <20   <20   <20   <20   <20   <20   <20   <20   <20   <20   <20   <20   <20   <20   <20   <20   <20
         p, p' TDE (ODD)  ng/1        -    <30   <30   <30    <30    <30   <30   <30   <30   <30   <30   <30   <30   <30   <30   <30   <30   <30   <30   <30   <30   <30
         Endrin        ng/1          -    <40   <40   <40    <40    <40   <40   <40   <40   <40   <40   <40   <40   <40   <40   <40   <40   <40   <40   <40   <40   <40
         p, p' DDT     ng/1          -    <30   <30   60    60    30    <30   <30   <30   <30   <30   <30   <30   <30   <30   30    51    45    <30   30    <30   <30

         May 1974 survey

g       Lindane       ng/1         
-------
                                   Table A-8:  Sediment phase data summary - August 1973 survey
Parameter

Date taken
COD
TVS
Kjeldahl-n
N03-N
Total-P
Cd
Cr
Cu
Fe
Hg
Mn
Ni
Pb
Zn
Units

-
mg/g
% Dry Wt.
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/g
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
Stations
1
14
NS
NS
SS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
2
14
3
6.0
170
72
370
0.5
20
11
4.3
-
190
10
6
33
3
14
25
9.7
290
124
590
1.4
50
13
7.1
-
280
25
266
61
4
14
40
10.7
820
152
1010
1.7
124
12
17.4
-
650
41
24
95
5
15
13
9.6
310
91
850
1.5
87
10
13.1
-
420
32
15
81
6
15
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
7
15
9
3.6
450
86
600
0.7
47
4
8.2
-
260
17
13
39
8
15
52
7.4
620
79
860
1.5
55
45
8.2
-
330
20
108
86
9
15
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
10
15
157
12.2
1400
34
2090
11.9
473
161
36.9
-
1090
47
242
424
11
15
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
12
16
11
2.4
270
99
500
0.9
33
9
5.5
-
210
13
29
88
13
15
209
21.0
5010
274
7010
16.2
2680
199
38.6
-
730
289
384
444
14
15
28
4.7
650
74
810
0.7
42
5
7.8
-
210
14
14
40
15
15
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
16
16
31
4.3
610
67
610
2.3
61
14
11.2
-
480
26
17
56
17
16
27
9.0
450
87
890
1.2
41
12
6.7
-
300
15
25
63
18
15
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
19
15
197
15.7
1340
331
10000
10.0
795
88
31.6
-
720
87
160
404
20
15
20
6.8
380
323
3420
3.4
328
35
10.2
-
260
39
52
266
21
15
48
9.1
750
135
1090
3.2
186
19
13.6
-
490
31
41
149
2:
15
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
SS
NS
NS - No sample

-------
                                                Table A-9:   Sediment  phase  data  summary - November  1973  survey
Parameter
                Units
                                                                        Stations
                                                                                  10
                                                                                        11
                                                                                              12
                                                                                                    13
                                                                                                          14
                                                                                                                15
                                                                                                                      16
                                                                                                                            17
                                                                                                                                  18
                                                                                                                                        19
                                                                                                                                              20
                                                                                                                                                    21
                                                                                                                                                          22
Date taken
COD
TVS
Kjeldahl-N
N03-N
Total-P
Cd
Cr
Cu
Fe
Hg
Mn
Nl
Pb
Zn
»g/g
I Dry Wt.
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/g
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
6
18
4.1
420
162
620
2.9
30
16
12.3
0.18
380
32
29
59
6
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
6
47
6.3
820
93
760
2.4
47
11
21.0
0.12
490
41
25
92
6
48
5.0
360
172
910
2.4
35
14
20.8
0.53
510
46
30
87
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
19
5.1
310
93
540
2.1
30
14
12.5
0,50
380
31
30
70
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
109
6.7
960
94
790
3.5
47
21
15,2
4,12
580
43
58
131
7
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
8
35
7.7
650
95
780
2.9
40
13
15.2
8.00
550
36
29
69
8
110
5.5
1000
632
2910
5.3
166
103
21.2
0.43
510
95
144
335
8
31
5.8
590
77
520
2.1
33
14
7.1
0.17
120
20
29
67
7
37
7.0
570
78
930
2.7
40
15
15.0
0.18
560
38
29
70
8
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
8
32
8.4
870
207
1180
2.7
55
12
22.8
0.86
960
45
30
90
7
NS
. NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
7
148
11.9
1450
553
3730
8.2
217
92
21.4
2.32
540
73
125
350
7
109
11.4
1770
267
1440
7.5
180
55
20.7
0.97
480
57
101
266
6
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
8
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
           NS - No  sample

-------
                                                               Table A-10:  Sediment phase data summary - May 1974 survey
ON
Paraneter

Date taken
COD
TVS
Kj eldahl-N
N03-N
Total-P
Cd
Cr
Cu
Fe
Hg
Mn
Nl
Pb
Zn
Units

-
mg/g
% Dry Wt.
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/g
mg/kg
mg/kg
nig /kg
mg/kg
ing /kg
Stations
1
13
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
2
13
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
3
13
46
9.0
910
65
660
3.1
20
17
22.5
<.01
520
44
21
105
4
13
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
5
14 '
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
6
14
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
7
14
14
3.0 '
420
45
660
2.6
16
14
17.7
0.19
480
30
21
49
8
14
NS
•NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
9
14
5
3.6
360
126
690
3.1
14
14
17.4
0.20
500
29
16
47
10
14
120
14.1
1060
366
1590
3.3
32
78
29.1
0.39
1120
37
152
601
11
14
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
12
15
88
6.8
1740
67
1020
3.1
39
20
11.6
0.31
340
59
54
214
13
15
51
8.0
660
171
1100
4.1
36
47
18.2
0.78
480
43
339
225
14
15
73
5.1
670
73
660
2.6
22
30
8.6
0.20
230
22
38
124
15
14
36
9.7
530
49
930
3.3
26
19
15.1
0.03
550
41
29
124
16
14
85
8.1
1470
89
700
2.8
15
19
13.3
0.40
390
30
42
101
17
14
86
12.1
2280
41
670
2.3
13
9
14.7
«.01
300
29
17
49
18
14
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
19
14
86
5.6
980
78
1740
4.6
48
69
13.2
0.58
330
37
84
284
20
14
76
10.7
1580
93
1350
8.5
56
32
20.2
0.42
480
44
80
278
21
14
40
3.4
630
63
430
2.1
9
12
6.8
0.17
230
15
29
84
22
14
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
                            NS - No sample

-------
Table

Survey
August
1973

















November
1973















A-ll;

Sample
2

3
4
5
7
8
10

12
13

14
16
17
19
20
21

1

3
4
6
10

12
13
14

15
17
19

20

Sediment
August,
Description -
November and May
Sampling Device Color
Ponar

Ponar
Ponar
Corer
Ponar
Corer
Corer

Ponar
Corer

Corer
Ponar
Ponar
Ponar
Ponar
Ponar

Corer

Corer
Corer
Corer
Corer

Corer
Ponar
Corer

Corer
Corer
Corer

Corer

Vary

Vary
Gray
Gray
Vary
Gray
Gray-
Black
Vary
1 Gray-
Black
Gray
Gray
Vary
Black
Black
Gray-
Black
Vary

Vary
Vary
Vary
Gray-
Black
Gray
Black
Gray-
Black
Gray
Gray
Gray-
Black
Gray-
Brown
                De s c r iption

                Coarse sand  &  gravel

                Coarse sand  &  gravel
                w/some gray  ooze
                Ooze w/pea size stones
                Ooze w/pea size stones
                Sand & coarse  gravel
                Fine gravel
                Ooze

                Sand & gravel
                Ooze

                Very fine sand & gravel
                w/some plant materal
                Ooze w/pea size stones
                Sand w/gray  ooze
                Sand w/black ooze
                Sand w/black ooze
                Sand w/ooze


                Sand w/coarse  gravel

                Coarse gravel  w/gray
                ooze
                Fine gray ooze w/sand
                & gravel
                Coarse gravel  w/gray
                ooze
                Ooze overlain  w/black
                cinder & gravel
                Fine sand w/ooze &
                small stones
                Ooze
                Sand w/small stones,
                organic material &
                plant material
                Ooze w/sand &  small
                stones
                Ooze w/surface layer of
                living macrophytes
                Ooze w/some fine sand

                Ooze
264

-------
  Table A-ll:
     Sediment Description -
     August,  November and May Surveys
     (continued)
Survey   Sample  Sampling Device  Color
May
1974
 3

 7

 9

10
12

13
14

15

16

17

19

20

21
Corer

Corer

Corer

Corer
Corer

Corer
Corer

Corer

Corer

Corer

Corer

Corer

Corer
Gray

Vary

Vary

Black
Brown-
Black
Black
Brown
                                  Gray-
                                  Brown
                                  Gray-
                                  Brown
                                  Brown-
                                  Black
                                  Brown-
                                  Black
                                  Brown-
                                  Gray
                                  Brown
Description

Ooze w/gravel

Gray ooze overlain by
2 cm of sand & gravel
Gray ooze w/sand &
gravel
Sand & black ooze
Ooze w/some detrital
material
Ooze
Sand & ooze w/some
detrital material
Sand & gravel w/gray
ooze
Sand & ooze

Ooze w/some detrital
material
Ooze w/some sand

Ooze w/some stones
and shells
Sand w/some gray ooze
                          265

-------
                                                Table A-12:  Sediment exchange data summary - August 1973 survey
Parameter

COD
Kjeldahl-N
N03-N
Total-P
Cd
Cr
Cu
Fe
Mn
Ni
Pb
Zn
Units

Z
%
Z
z
z
z
z
z
z
z
z
z
Stations
1
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
2
6.40
4.2
12.2
2.2
2.6
6.8
6.3
3.7
5.8
-
2.5
-
3
0.83
2.7
3.4
0.2
0.7
0.3
2.7
1.1
6.1
<48
0,04
41
4
0.57
3.2
11.8
7.8
0,8
1.7
5.1
4.8
2,9
<49
1.2
45
5
0.30
2.6
8.4
2.0
0,5
0.7
3.9
2.2
1.6
<44
1,6
85
6
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
N5
NS
NS
7
0.86
4.9
3.3
0.4
2,2
0,5
7.2
<1.0
.2,1
,65
0.8
97
8
0.68
0.8
4.9
0,6
3,7
1,0
2.5
2.9
<2,5
,85
0.2
52
9
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
10
1.18
3.8
23,8
0.5
0,3
0.3
0.8
0.6
0,8
<36
0,08
10
1!
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
                                                                                              12
                                                                                                    13
                                                                                                          14
                                                                                                                15
                                                                                             2,35  0.93  2.52  NS




                                                                                             9.4   14.8  21,9  NS




                                                                                             6.0   9,3   100.0 NS




                                                                                             2.6   0.6   9,8   NS




                                                                                             1,8   0,4   2,9   NS




                                                                                             1,3   0,1  16,1   NS




                                                                                             7.4   1.4  55,2   NS




                                                                                             4.7   2,2   8,6   NS





                                                                                             4.3   4,7  63,3   NS




                                                                                              -   23.2   r-     NS




                                                                                             0.5   Q.05  3,5   NS




                                                                                             78    23    <•     NS
                                                                                                                      16
                                                                                                                            17
                                                                                                                                  18
                                                                                                                                        19
                                                                                                                                              20   21
                                                                                                                                                          22
0.40  4.15  NS    0.85  5.90  1.96  SS




1.6   16.8  NS    3.4   17.8  4.1   NS




11.2  79.1  NS    2.7   9.0   6.4   NS




2.5   12.7  NS    0.2   1.7   1.7   NS




1,3    3.5  NS    0.4   6.1   0.7   Nb



l\H    8,4  NS    0,3   2,9   0,8   NS




3.0   33.4  NS    1,4  19.7   3.2   NS




                  0.8  12.8   3.5   NS
2.2   68.1  NS





1,8   38.3  NS




<69    "    NS




0,8    3.0  NS




            NS
                  1.2   6.9   3.9   NS




                 •< 21   S49   "42   NS




                  0.1   1.7   0.4   NS




                   14    60    22   NS
NS - No Sample




Percentages are based on total concentration in dry sediment

-------
                                                Table A-13;  Sediment exchange data summary <- November 1973 survey
Parameter

COD
Kjeldahl-N
NO -N
Total-P
Cd
Cr
Cu
Fe
Mn
Ni
Pb
Zn
Units

t
Z
z
z
z
X
z
z
z
z
z
z
Stations
1
0.69
3.8
0.86
2.8
0.7
1,0
0.3
0.23
1.05
< 1.9
2.1
2.4
2
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
3
1.06
1.3
0.22
2.0
0.7
0,6.
0.3
0.10
O.A9
<1. 5 <
2.3
0.8
4
0.03
1.7
0.58
1.8
0.8
0,7
0.3
0.07
0.33
1.3
1.9
0.9
5
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
us
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
6
2,49
3.6
0,32
1.2
1.1
i?
0.4
0.14
1.31
< 1.9
2.1
1.1
7
NS
NS
NS
NS
N5
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
a
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
9
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
10
0.09
5,5
1.49
1.7
0,4
M
0.2
0.26
0.33
2,1
1.0
1.3
11
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
12
0,66
1,8
0,21
1.6
QV6
0X5
0.3
0.14
1.07
< 1.7
2,1
1.4
' 13
0,48
3.8
27.2
0.8
0,7
QV2
0.03
0.33
1.36
2.1
0.4
1.3
14
2,05
3.1
2.08
4,6
0,7
*,*
0.09
0.65
4.27
3,5 <
2.2
1.6
15
0,78
3,5
2,18
1,4 '
0V5
0,6
0.1
0.12
0.88.
1.6
1.9
1.1
16
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
17
1.88
2,5
0.28
1,1
0,4

-------
                                              Table A-14;   Sediment exchange data summary r- May 1974  survey
Parameter

COD
KJeldahl-N
N03-N
Total-P
Cd
NJ
£ Cr
Cu
Fe
Mn
Nl
Pb
Zn
Units

Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
%
Z
Z
Z
Z
Stations
1
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
N3
NS
NS
NS
73
2
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
US
rr.
3
0.60
2.6
7.23
4.6
1.0
3.3
0.2
0.70
0.81
4.3
2.7
l.C
4
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
»tc»
5
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
MO
6
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
N5
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
MC
7
0.92
1.0
8.67
1,0
0.7
1,6
0,1
0.25
0,25
2,0
3.0
1.2
8
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
MS
9
3.2
3.1
4.21
1.9
0.6
0,1
0.38
0.50
<2.1
3.9 '
J.,3
10
0.19
1,3
2.43
0.2
1.2
1,6
0.02
0.19
0.81
2.2
0.6
0,3
1
NS
NS
NS
NS
US
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
                                                                                              12
                                                                                                    13    14
                                                                                                                15     16
                                                                                                                            17
                                                                                                                                 18
                                                                                             0,65   0,52   0,36  0.81   0.35  1.41  NS




                                                                                             5.2    3.8    3.0   1.9    3.0   5.1   NS




                                                                                             4,48   1,46   4.93  24.7   5.62  27.8  NS




                                                                                             1.9    0.5    2.0   0.7    3.4   3.5   NS



                                                                                             2.3    0.7    0.9   1.1    1.1   1.7   NS




                                                                                             0,8    1,4    2,2   1,3    7,8  16.9   NS




                                                                                             0.08   0,04   0,07  0.09   0.08  0.5   NS




                                                                                             0.23   0,10   0.71  0.32   0.43  3.50  NS




                                                                                             3.56   1.25   0.39  0.18   0.21  2.33  NS




                                                                                             2.2    1.6    2.7  <1.5  <2.0   4.8   NS




                                                                                             1.1    0.2    1.9   2.0    1.5   4.0   NS




                                                                                             0.4    0.3    1,2   0.6    0.6   5.9   NS
                                                                                                                                        19
                                                                                                                                              20
                                                                                                                                                    21
                                                                                                                                                         22
0.37  0.45  0.34  NS




5.8   3.0   6.1   NS




3.46  3.98  5.71  NS




0.4   1.2   3.1   NS



0.5   0.5   1.1   NS




0.5   0.7   3.6   NS




0.02  0.06  0.2   NS




0.24  0.24  0.75  NS




1.27  1.33  0.30  NS




1.6  il.4  /<4.0   NS




0.7   0.8   2.4   NS




0,4   0.5   1.2   NS
NS - no sample




Percentages are baaed on total concentration In dry sediment

-------
                                       APPENDIX  B-l
                                           14
                                                     DETROIT RIVER BENTHOS
                                                       November 1973

                                                               15
                                                                                   17
                                                                                   B
Trlchoptera
  Hydropsychldae
    Chcumatopsychae (Wallengren)
    HTdropsyehae (Piecet)
    Hacroncmuia (Bummeister)

  Brachycenrridae
    Bracnycentrus (Curtis)
  Lepcocerldae
    Athripsodes (Billbarg)

Acari
  Tromb i di forma
  Parasitengona
  HygrobaCidaa
    Hygrobates (Koch 1837)

Ephemeroptera
  Heptageniidae
    Stenonema Ithaca

Amphipoda
  Talitridae
    Hyalella azteca
                    (Saussure)

  Gammaridae
    Gamma rus faseiatus (Say)
Gastropoda

  Pleuroceridae
    Goniobasis (Lea) sp,  1
    Coniobasis (Lea) sp,  2

  Planorbidae
    Helisoma (Swainaon)

  Amniocolidae
    Bithinla tencaeulaea L,
  Valvatidae
    ValvaCa sp.
  Physidae
    Physa (Draparnaud)

  Lymnaeldae
    Lymnaea sp.
  Ancylidae
    Femssia  (Walker)
Pelecypoda
  Sphaerildae
    Snhaerium  (Scopoli)
    FTsidium (Pfaiffer

CoelenteraCa

  Hydridae
    Hydra sp.
Annelida
  OllgochaeCa

  Tubificidae
    LiCTiodrilus eervica
    Fsacimoryecides ealiforr.ianus
    _      ^
  Hirudinea
  Erpobdellidae
    Dina microstoma
Dipcera
  Chironomldae

  Tanypodinae
    Tanypus (Meigen)

Porlfera
  (5 x 3 nm)

Turbellaria
  y.acroatomtda
  Macroscomidae
    Macroatomura  (0. Schmidt)

  Taxa
  Individuals

X Blomaaa/m  (wee weight)
X Indlvlduals/m2
Shannon-Weaver Diversity
Richness (X) (S-l/lnN)
                                                 14
                                                                                  12
                                                                                                   31
                                       970
                                        16
 542
  2
                                        6
                                      1000
  4
559
 5
20
Richneas fx") (S//"R)
                                          13.33
                                         14735
                                           0.16
                                           0.6B
                                           0.19
      5
     16
22.10
 340
 0.43
  1.37
  1.19
 4
30
6.10

567
1.23
0.90

0.76
 1
31
                                                     269
                                                        1.13
                                                        378
                                                        8:88

                                                        0.26

-------
  L
                                                          APPENDIX  B-l
                                                              DETOOIT  RIVES  BENTHOS
                                                                Novemb«r  1973
                                                             19
                                                                                           20
r
       Trichoptera
         Hydropsychidae
           Chcumncopsyehae  (Wallengren)
           Hvclropsvchae  (Piecat)
           Hacronegium  (Burnmeiatar)
         Brachycencridaa
           BrachvcenCTua  (Curtia)
         L«pcacerida«
           Achripsodes  (Billberg)
       Acari
         Trombidlfozma
         Parasicengooa
         Hygrobatidaa
           Hygrobates  (Koch 1837)
       Ephemeroptara
         H«D:agenilda«
           Scenonema  Ithaca
       Amphipoda.
         Talicridaa
           Hyalella aztaca  (S«ua»ura)
         Gaomaridae
           Sanaa raa faaciacua  (Say)
       Caacropoda
         ?leuroc3ridae
           Goniobaais  (L«a) jp,  1
                             p,  2
          ?lanortaidaa
            Halisoma  (Suainaon)
          Aatniocolidae
            Bichinia  ;er.caculaea L.
          Valvacidaa
            Valvaea sp.
          ?hyiidae
            ?hvaa  (Draparaaud)
          L/nmaaidaa
            L'nanaea sp .
          Ancylidaa
            Ferris a la  (Walkaw)
        Palacypoda
          Sphaeriidaa
            Sphaorl.um  (Scopoli)
                   ~
                                                 15

                                                  5

                                                  9
12

16

23
                                                                                21
                                                                                            17
        CoeleaceraCa
         Hydridaa
           Hydra «p.
        Annelida
         Oligochaaca
         Tubificidae
           Liamodrilua  ggrvlca
                           ea
                               fornianua
         Hirudinea'*
         Erpobdellida*
           Dina aieroseoma
Diptara
  Chironomidaai
  Tanypodina*
    Tanvous
Porifara
  (5 x 3 on)
Turb«llaria
  Macrostomida
  Macroacomida«
    Macroscomum (0.
                                                                                       29
                                                                                                   13
                            Schmidt)
          Taxa
          Individual*
        X 31ornaai/m  (wet weight)
        X IndividualWm2
        Shannon-W«aver Diversity (X)
        Rlchnei*  (X)  (S-l/lnH)
        Richneaa  (X)  (S/
-------
L
                                                 APPENDIX  B-l
                                                         DETROIT RIVER BENTHOS
                                                           November 1973
                                                   6                   7                    8                   9
                                               A        B          AS          AfB          A         8
     Tricnopcera
       Hydropaychidae
         Cheuma cop sye has (Wallengren)          11        3          2        IS                             1
         Hydropayehae (Pictee)                   7                   5        10                  122
         Macronemuin (Burnaeiatar)                                 126        42        1         I          62
       Brachycen cri daa
         Srachyeer.gjua (Curtia)                                     10
       Lepcocerldaa
         Athripaodea  (Sillberg)
     Acari
       Trombidiforaa
       Parasitengoaa
       Hygrobacidae
         Hygrobaeea (Koch 1337)                                      I
     Ephemeroocera"                                                                                    ..
       Hcpcageniida*
         Scenonema  Ithaea                                                                                            4
     Amphipoda
       Talicridaa
         Hyalalla aztaea (S«uj«ur»)                                 2

                  Saaciacua (S»y)                                   72          1
     Gastropoda
       Fleuroccrlda*
         Goniobasia (Laa) sp,  1                                              10         2        4                   1
         Goniooasis (Lea) sp.  2                                               331                   1
       Planocbida*
         Helisoma  (Sw-ainson)
       Aumicolidae
                 tstiraculata  t..                 1
       Valvatidaa
         Valvaca ap.
       Physidae
         Physa  (Brapamaud)
       Lyvnaeida*
         Lymnaea sp.
       Ancylidaa
     Peleeypoda
       Sohaeriidac
         Sohaeri'jm  (Scopoli)                                         ^         ^           3         2
         ftJTaI™~(?faiffer)                    12                             1
     Coelancarata
       Sydridaa
         Hydra ap.
     Annelida
       Oligochaaca
       Tubificidae
         Lianodrllua  ceTvlea                                         46
         P s ammo >ycc ice's  californianua
       Hirudin««'*
       Ercobdailidaa
         Sina aleroacoiaa                                                               ^
     Dipcera3
       Chironomldae                                                24        7
       Tanypodinae
     Porif era
       (5x3 mm)
     Turbellaria
       Macros coral da
       Macros com! dae
        Macroarotmaa  (0.  Schmidt)
     _  Individual.
     X  aiomaas/a   (wee  weight)
     X  Individuals /a
     Shannon-Weaver Diversity  (X)
     Richness  (X)  (S-l/lnM)
     !Uchn«»!i  (X)  (S/
-------
L
                                                      APPENDIX  B-l
                                                            DETROIT RIVER BENTHOS
                                                              November 1973
      Trichoptera
        H'/dropsychidae
          Cheumatopsyehae (Wallengren)
          Hydropsychae (Pietet)
          Macronemum (Bummaister)
        Brachycentridae
          Brachyeentrus (Curtis)
        Leptoceridac
          Athripsodea (BUlberg)
      Ac art
        Trombldifora*
        Parasitengona
        Hygrobatidae
          HygrobatesOCoch 1837)
      Ephemeropteral-
        Heptageniidae
          SEenonema Ithaca
      Amphlpoda
        TaliCridae
          Hyalella azteca (Saussure)
        Gananaridae
          Gammarua fasciarus (Say)
      Gastropoda
        Pleuroceridae
          Goniobasls (Lea) ap.  1
          GoniobasT? (Lea) sp.  2
        Planorbidae
          Helisoma (Swainson)
        Anmtcolidae
          Bithinia tentaculata L.
        Valvatidae
          Valyata sp.
        Physida*
          Physa (Draparnaud)
        Lyonaeidaa
          Lymnaea sp.
        Ancylldae
          Ferrissia (Walker)
      Pelecypoda
        Sphaeriidae
          Sphaerlum (Scopoli)
          Pisidiuai (Pfeiffer)
      Coelenterata
        Hydridaa
          Hydra sp.
      Annelida
        Oligochacca
        Tubificidae
          Linmodrilus cerviea
          Fsammoryctides  califomianus
        Hirudinea
        Erpobdellidas
          Dina microstoma
      Olptera
        Chironomldae
        Tanypodinae
          Tanypus  (Melgcn)
      Porifera
        (5 x 3 an)
      Turballaria
        Macrostoolda
        Macrostorn!dae
          Macroscomum  (0. Schmidt)
  Taxa
  Individuals
X Biomass/m  (wee weight)
X Individuals/m2
Shannon-Weaver Diversity <
Richness (X) (S-l/ln»)
Richness (X) (S//TT)
                                           56
                                           19
                                21
                                41
21
           17
                                            24
                                             8
                                                       18
                                                                       1
                                                                     21
            1
           17
 5
13
 5
10
  7
111
                                                    11.5
                                                     66
                                                     0.00
                                                     0.00
                                                     o.so
    62.00
      359
      0.00
      0.00
      0.22
    19.28
     217
     1.39
     1.65
     1.49
                6.62
                1947
                1.47
                1.24
                0.45
11
95
                                                                    272

-------
                                                 APPENDIX B-l
                                              10
                                      DETROIT RIVER
                                        November 1973

                                                11
                                 B          A        B
                                                                                     12
                                                         13
Triehoptera
  Hydropsychidae
    Cheumatopsychae (Wallengren)
    Hydropaychae (Pietet)
    Racronemum (Burnmeister)
  Brachycentridae
    Braehycentrus
(Curtis)
  Leptoceridae
    Athripsodea (Billberg)

Acari
  Tromb i di forme

  Paraaitengona

  HygrobaCidae
    Hygrobates (Koch 1837)

Ephemeroptera
  Heptageniidae
    Stenonema Ithaca

Amphipoda

  Talitridae
    Hyalella azteca (Saussure)

  Gammarldae
    Gammarus faseiatua  (Say)

Gastropoda

  Pleuroceridae
    Coniobasis (Lea) sp. 1
    Goniobasis (Lea) sp. 2

  Planorbidae
    Helisoma (Suainson)

  Amniocolidae
    Bithinia tentaculata L.

  Valvatidae
    Valvaca ap.

  Phystdae
    Physa (Draparnaud)

  Lymnaeidae
    Lymnaea sp.

  Ancylidas
    Ferrissia (Walker)

Pelecypoda
  Sphaeriidae
    Sphaerium (Scopoli)
    PiTidlum (Pfeiffer

Coelenterata

  Hydridae
    Hydra sp.

Annelida

  Oligochaeta
  Tubificidae
    Liamodrilua cervlca
    Fsanmoryctidea ealifornianua
  Hirudinea
  Erpobdellidae
    Dina microstoma
Diptera

  Chironomidae
  Tanypodinae
    Tanypus (Meigen)
Porifera

  (5 x 3 mm)

Turbellaria

  Macrostomida

  Macrostomidae
    Macrostomum (0. Schmidt)
  Taxa
  Individuals

X Biomass/m  (wet  weight)
X Individuals/m2

Shannon-Weaver Diversity (!t)
Richness (X) (S-l/lnN)
Richness (X)
                                21
                                 3
                                14
           17
           26
         12
          1
                               14400     28900
                                  97       142
                                                                                                                 17
                                                                       103
                       6
                      36
16
 6
69
 3
44
 5
19
 4
74
  2
112
    3
14499
    3
290S9
                         31.10
                          993
                          1.64
                          1.29
                          0.86
               1.66
               596
               0.92
               0.95
               0.80
                        2.54
                        1753
                        0.30
                        0.48

                        0.33
                                   133.70
                                   411701
                                     0.04
                                     0.20
                                     0.02
                                                                273

-------
       Trichopeera

         Hydropaychidaa
           Cheumatopayehag  (Wallengrtn)
           ilydropsyehaa
         BrechycentTida*
           Braehycencrug (Curtla)

         Lapcoceridaa
                       (Btllb«rg)
                                                    APPENDIX  B-2
                                                      13
                                                  *        b
                                                             DETROIT RIVER BENTHOS
                                                                 .nay 1974
   13
•        b
    16
a        b
       Ac»ri

         Troobidi.forsM

         Para«it«ngon»

         Hygrobatida*
           HygTQbacaa (Koch 1937)
       Ephemeropcera
         Eph«me.rlda«
           Ephemera alaulana  (tJa_Lk»r)
           Hexagenia (Mala
Anphipod*
Haustoriida*
Poncaoor-ia affinis CLindaeroai)
Gastropoda
Plaurocerida*
Conxobasls (!.«») 3p. 1
Goniooas:.3 (La») su, 2
?lanorbida«
HelljQtna (Swainson) 3 3
PTiysida*
Phyaa (Braparaaud) 15 1
Amnicolida*
Pyr^-aiooaia sp.
Bichinia cancaculaca CL.) 43 1
Pelecypoda
Sphaeriida«
Sohaeravon (Scoooli)
Pisidium (Pfeiffar) 1
Anna 11 da
Olijochaaca
Tufaificida*
Lipnodrilua eervieii 12237 5860 280
Linnoanlus ansjuscioenis 4102 1606
PsamraoT^ccides calf ironianua 21
lubiiex cubirax
Hir-jdine»
Dina aieroatoma 139 198 1 13
Hcmiptara
Corixida* (i-nmatmr*)
Chironomida*
Chiro-noniina*
TanytaTs-ua 07an der Wulp)
Chironomua (Xeigen)
Tax* 7 S 33
Individual* 1SS37 7693 282 22
!f 3iomaa»/m2 (wet««ight> 66.35 9.58
X Individual* /a2 229017 2873
Shannon-Weaver Diveralcy (T) Q-43 0.32
Richncs* (X) S-l/lnH 0-59 0.50
Rlchnes* (3t5 S/YTT 0.06 0.41




2





10
2
3 9
1 21




14 33
1 34 14 12
5.43 2.91
330 246
0.47 0.81
0.43 0.78
0.85 0.83
r
                                                              274

-------
L
                                   ,               APPENDIX  B-2

                                                        OETKOIT RIVER BENTHOS
                                                             May 1974

                                              9                .10                   11                  12
Trtchoptara                            '  «          b       a   .      b          a         b          •
  Hydropaychldaa
    Cheufflgtopsyehae (Wallengran)                   1
    Hydropsycfaae (flctae)                3

  Braehyeentrida*
    Brachycenerua (Curtii)

  Lepcocerida«
    Athrlpsod«» (Billbarg)

Acari
  Troobidifora»

  Paraaitangon*

  Hygrobatida*
    Hygrobatea fltoca 1937)
          Epheaarldae
            Ephemera simulans  (V«lkar)
            Hexaggnij. (Walafa)


        Aaiphipoda

          Hauacoriida.«
            ?oncoporeia affinls  (Linda trom)


        Gaacropoda
          ?leurocer±da«
            Goniobasia  (Laa) «p. 1
            Goniobasia  (L«a) ap. Z

          ?lanorbida«
            Hellaoma, (Suainson)

          Fhysida*
            ?hyaa (Draparnaud)

          Aonicolidac
            Pyrguloosia ap.
                     £«ntacalac» (L.)
         Pslecypoda

           Spha«riidae
             Sohaerium  (Scopoli)                                   29         9
             Pisidimn "(Pf alffer)                                    1


         Annslida

           Oligochaaca

           lubificidaa
             Limodrilug eaTVica                                   99        15          I                  102        33
             Limnodrilua Anirusciaenia                                                                       9
             Fsamnoryccidaa ealjlronianm
             Tubifex cubifax                       ,           ,   21

           Hirudinea
             Olnj aieroatoma                                       24                    2
                                             ^
         Hemipcara

           Corixidae (Immacura)                                                                                       l_
         Chiroaomidaa

           Chlronooinae
                                 Wulp)
             Chironomus (Maigaa)


         Tax*

         Individual*


         X Biomaaa/o2 (v«e weight)


         5t lndiviiiu«la/m2


         Shannon-Weaver Div*t»iC7 (X)


         Rlchneaa (X) S-1/lnH


         Richneaa 
-------
                                                   APPENDIX  B- 2
       Trlchopt.r.
         Hydropsychidaa
           Cheumntopavehaa (Wallengran)
           Hvdropayehao CyieeaO

         Br»chyc«ntTidaa
           Brachveentrm (Curti*)

         L«ptoctrlda«
           Athrlpsodaa (Billbars)

       Aearl
         Tramb t diforaa

         ?«rmiic«ngon4

         Hygrob«cida«
           Hyf.Tob«ia« CKoch 1937)
                                                        DETROIT RIVER  BENTHOS
                                                              May  1974
         Ephem«rld««
           Sphemera simulana (Valkar)
           Hexagania (Waiaqj


       AmpbjLpo4a;
         H«u«coriida«
           Poncooorala afiinis (Liadstnram)
?l»uroc*rid»«
  Conlobasia a«») §p. 1
  GonioOasj.3 (L««) rp. 2

Planorbida*
           (Swainson)
           ?hysa (Dr»p«rn*ud)

         Amnicolida*
           Pyrgulopaia sp.
           3ichinid cencaculata (t. ) •

       ?«l«cypoda
         Sphaarildaa
           Sphaeriua (Scopoli)
           FiaTdium (Pfeiffar)

       Annelida.

         Oligochacca
Tubificida*
  Llamodrllua
  Liamoonlus
                        ar^rica
           FsamiEoryerj.dea galzironianq*
           Tublfex cuoliex
         31rudin««
           Dina Bicroatoam

       Hcaiptara
         Corlzldaa (imuoxra)

       Qironoroidaa
         Chironominaa
           Tanytarsua (Van d«r Wilp)
           Chironomua 
-------
Trichopcera
  Hydropaychidae
     §heuBijcop8ye-    ,	
     ydropsychae (Pictec)
                             (Wallengisn)
           Brachycenerida*
             Braehycentrua (Curtia)

           Leptoceridae
             Aehripsodea (BUlberg)

         Acarl
           Troml ulfoniM

           Paraaicangooa,

           Hygrobacid««
             Hygrpbatea (Koch 1937)

         Ephemeropcera
           Epheffleridae
             Ephemera aiaulana (Walk«r)
             ffexagenia (Waj.
-------
                                                        APPENDIX  B-2
         Trichoptor*
           Hydropsychidae
             Choum.iconsychae (Wallongrtn)
             llYdropavchac. (f'leect)

           Brachycentrida*
             Brachyeenerua (Curtis)

           L«pcocerida»
             Athripsodea (Blllb«rg}
         Acari

           Troobtdifom*

           Parasitangooa

           Hygrobatida*
             Hygrobacea (Koch 1937)


         Eph«meropc«ra
           E?h«merida«
             Ephemera aiaulana  (WaiJwr)
             Hexagenia

         Asphlpoda
           Eaustorlida*
             PonCoporeia afjfinia

         Gaatrapoda
           Pleuroceridaa
             Goniobasla (L«*) Jp.  1
             GonioqasT? (L«a) »^,  Z

           Planorfaida*
             HeJUaoma  (Swainaoa)
17
DETROIT RIVER BENTHOS
     May 1974

x          .    18   v
              Physa  (Orapamaud)

            Acmicalidaa
              Pyr^ul-oosia  sp
         Hsmiptara
           Corixidaa (immacur*)

         Chironomidaa
           Chironooina*
             Tjnytarsua CVan der Wulp)
             Chxronomua (Meigen)


         Tax*

         Individual*


         X Biomasa/m2 (wet weight)


         Z Individuala/a2


         Shannon-Weaver Dlversley (2)


         Richnosa  (3f) S-l/lnU


         Rlchncsa  (X)
r
                                                            278
                                    a    «•   b
Sichinia cencaculaCa, (I.)
Sphaeriidaa
Sphaerium (Scopoli)
PlsnUum (Pfeiffer)
Annelida
Oligochaeea
Tubificida*
Lianodrllua eerv-tea
Liinnodr^lus ^n^uacioenia
i*3cinnorvccides calnronianua
Tup;.^ex :ufai.£ax
Hlrudine*
Dina microstoma
1
5 4-
13 3


3 4 1
1 41
12
1

2
L L



1 6
4 9
0.94
123
0.84
1.14
0.35
3 0
12 0
1.26
226
0.37
0.30
O.S7
6 6
23 28
9.39
529
1.43
1.50
1.13
1
1
5.42
38
0.32
0.46
1.08
2
3






-------
          Appendix C-l
  Detroit River Phytopigments -
Chlorophylls a, b, and £ (ug/1)
  November 1973 and May 1974
Sample
Number
1A
IB
2A
2B
3A
3B
4A
4B
5A
5B
6A
6B
7A
7B
19A
19B
20A
20B
21A
21B
22A
22B
Chi. a
1.0
1.4
1.3
1.0
1.2
0.5
1.5
1.2
1.1
1.7
0.7
0.6
3.5
1.3
1.5
1.0
0.6
1.9
1.9
1.7
3.4
2.7
November 1973
Chi. b
0.4
0.6
0.3
0.9
0.4
0.1
0.1
0.2
0.2
0.3
0.1
0.7
0.5
0.3
0.4
0.1
0.4
1.3
0.4
0.1
0.4
0.5
Chi. c
1.3
1.2
1.1
2.3
1.2
0.9
1.2
0.8
0.9
1.3
-0.1
0.9
1.6
1.2
1.4
0.6
1.7
3.6
1.6
0.9
0.9
1.4
Chi. a.
1.8
2.3
0.4
1.2
0.4
1.7
1.6
0.9
4.0
3.6
2.7
1.2
-
-
2.4
2.1
4.0
3.7
2.5
1.1
2.7
2.3
May 1974
Chi. b
0.2
0.8
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.2
0.5
0.3
0.6
0.8
0.7
0.4
_
-
0.8
0.5
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.1
0.5
0.3
Chi.
0.9
3.2
0.2
1.1
0.2
'' i.o
2.3
1.0
2.2
2.3
2.5
1.4
_
-
3.3
1.8
3.0
2.0
1.6
1.1
1.3
1.3
              279

-------
00
o
                                          APPENDIX C-2

                               PHYTOPLANKTON SUMMARY


Total Species (S)

1
31
St.
2
20
Clair
3
41
River
4
22
Detroit River
August 1973
5 6
28
28
7
31
19
64
20
69
21
32
22
-
Mean total individuals/
ml (N)
Richness (S/ VN)
Richness (S-l/lnN)
Diversity (d)
400
1.55
5.01
2.65
527
0.87
3.03
2.51
345
2.21
6.85
2.90
298
1.27
3.69
2.71
9695
0.28
2.94
1.29
277
1.68
4.80
2.59
427
1.50
4.95
2.89
2018
1.42
8.28
2.43
5209
0.96
7.95
1.93
1197
0.92
4.37
2.17
-
-
-
-
November 1973
Total Species (S)
33
36
43
42
43
51
52
52
41
29
45
Mean total individuals/
ml (N)
Richness (S/ YN)
Richness (S-l/lnN)
Diversity (d)
Mean Chlorophyll a
(yg/D

Total Species (S)
601
1.35
5.00
2.53
1.2

34
526
1.57
5.59
2.82
1.2

36
741
1.58
6.36
2.90
0.8

33
715
1.57
6.24
2.82
1.4
May
35
682
1.65
6.44
3.12
1.4
1974
38
948
1.66
7.29
2.86
0.6

39
1147
1.54
7.24
3.94
2.4

-
963
1.68
7.42
2.97
1.2

47
803
1.45
5.98
2.64
1.2

53
944
0.94
4.09
2.43
1.8

38
1052
9.39
6.32
3.08
3.0

37
Mean total individuals/
ml (N)
Richness (S/V~&)
Richness (S-l/lnN)
Diversity (d)
1700
0.82
4.44
2.63
1346
0.98
4.86
2.61
1113
0.99
4.56
2.71
1385
0.94
4.70
2.55
3132
0.68
4.60
2.76
1416
1.04
5.24
2.64
-
-
-
-
3208
0.83
5.70
2.68
3032
0.96
5.49
2.97
2174
0.81
4.81
2.72
1899
0.85
4.77
2.54
    Mean Chlorophyll a
      (yg/D
2.0   0.8   1.0
1.2
3.8   2.0
2.2
3.8
1.8
2.5

-------
 Cyanophyta:
  Anabaena  flos-aquae (Lyngb.)
     Uulirebisson
  A_^ schcremctiovt Elcnkin
  A.  spiroidos var.  crassa Lemm.
  Annbnonopsis elcnkinil Miller
  Aphanocapsa elnchlsta West & West
  Aphnnothece fioljL?A5°M (Hcnn.)  Lemm.
  A.  microspora (Mcncgh.) Rabenhorst
  Arthrospira goraontiana Setchell
  Chroococcus dispcrsus (Kelssl.)
     Lemm.
  C_._ limneticus Lemra.
  C_^ turgidus (KueCz.) Naegeli
  Coolosphaeriun naegclianum Unger
  Cyanarcus haipiformis Pascher
  DacCylococcopsijL acicularls Lemm.
  D^_ fascicularis Lemm.
  D_._ rhaphidioides Hansgirg
  5L smithli Chodat & Chodat
  Lyngbya sp. Agardh
  L. Itranetica Letnm.
  Marssoniella elegans Lemm.
  Mcrlsmopedia glauca  (Ehr.) Naegeli
   M. tenuissima Lemm.
   Mlcrocystis aeruginosa Kuetz.
   Oscillatorla sp. Vaucher
   0. aRardhii Gomont
   0^ annusta, Koppe
   0. h.-imclil Frcmy
   CK_ limnetica Lemm.
   0. minima Gicklhorn
   Pelor'.loea bncillifera Lauterborn
   Rhnphidiopsis curvata Fritsch & Rich
Chlorophyta:
  Actinastrum hantzsehii var. fluviatile
    Schroeder
  Ankistrodesmus braunii (Naeg.) Brunnthaler
  A^ convolutus Corda
  A^ falcatus (Corda) Ralfs
  A_^ spiralis (Turner) Lemm.
  Characiura falcatum Schroeder
  C.  linmeticum Lemm.
  Chariopsis longisslma Lemm.
  Chlorella yulgaris BeyerincK
  Chlorococcum humicola (Naeg.)  Rabenhorst
  Clostcriopsis longisslma var.  tropica
    West & West
  Closterium sp. Nitzsch
  Coclastrum cambricum Archer
  C.  microporum Naegeli in A. Braun
  C.  scabrum Reinsch
  £^ sphnoricum Naegeli
  Cosmarium sp.  Corda
  Crucigenia quadrata Morren
                                                          DETROIT RIVER  PHYTOPLANKTON
                                                        (mean number of individuals/ml from replicate samples)
                                                                  August  1973
                                                      1                2*                3                    It*
                                                       15
35
                18
                                                       15
39
               114
                                                       37
                                                             281

-------
                                                    DETROIT RIVER PHYTOPLANKTON
                                            (mean number of individuals/ml from replicate sample)
continued                                                  August  1973
                                                     12*               3                     4
  C^. Cctrapcdia  (Kirch.) West Si West                                22                6
  Elakatothrix p.elattnosa Wille                      4              30                6                    15
  GolenkliUa radiaca  (Chod.) Wllle                   *
  Kirchnericlla  elon^ata G. H. Smith
  K^ subsolitaria G.  S. Smith
  Laserhelmla ciliaca  (Lag.) Chodat
  L. lonniseca (Lemm.) Printz
  L._ quadrisoca  (Lemm.) G. M. Smith                  2
  L. subsala Lenm.
  Mougeotia sp.  (C.A. Agardh) Wtttrock                               4
  Nephrocytium agardhianum Naegeli
  Oedogonium sp. Link
  Oocystis gloeocystiformis Borge
  0^. lacustris Chodat
  O_._ novae-semliae Wille                             2
  0. pusilla Hansgirg
  0_._ submarina Lagerheim                                                                  '
  Pediascrmn boryanum  (Turp.) Meneghini
  P. duplex var. clathratum (A. Braun)
    Lagerheim
   ?_._ simplex var.  duo
-------
                                                  DETROIT RIVER PHYTOPLANKTOU
                                         (mean number of Indtvlduals/ml from rrplicace samples)
                                                          August  1973
  continued                                         ,                +
                                                    1               2                3                     4
  M.  caudata Iwanoff
  H.  urnafonnls Prescott                                                             .
  Ophioeytiuin copitatum Wolle
  Synura uvclla Ehr.                                2                                i                     ,
  —i	—	                                                                      /                     ^
Bacillariophyta:
  Achnauthgs spp. Bory                                             26                2
  Amphora sp. Ehr.
  Asterionella formosa Hassall                     01                                .„
  	 	                             a                               19                     i
  Chaetoceras sp. Ehr.
  Cocconeis sp. Ehr.                                                                 ,
  Coscinodiscus rothii (Ehr.) Grun.
  Cyclotella spp. Kuetz.                          H3              go              IQQ
  C^ catcnata Brun.
  Cymatopleura solea  (Breb.) W. Smith
  Cymbella spp. Agardh                                                               .
  Diatoma tenue var.  elongatum  (Lyngb.)
  D.  vulgare Bory
  Diploneis sp. Ehr.
  Epithemia zebra  (Ehr.) Kuetz.
  Frafiilaria spp. Lyngbye                         15                                jc
  F_^ brcvistriata var. inflata  (Pant)  Hust.
  F.  capucina Desm.
  F.  crotonensis Kitton                                            22                 8                    ?fi
  F._ inflata
  F.  pinnata Ehr.
  Gomphonema spp. Agardh
  Gyrosifima sp. Hassall
  Molosira pranulata  (Ehr.) Ralfs
  IL. islandica 0. Muell.
  Hi. italics   (Ehr.)  Kuetz.
  M^ varians C. A. Ag.
  Navicula spp. Bory                               472                    4
  N.  pupula Kuetz.                                                                  -
  N^ tripunctata  (0.  F. Muell) Bory
  Hitzschia spp. Hassali                                                            2
  N^ acicularis W. Smith
  ?L_ dj.ssipa.ta  (Kuetz.) Grun.
  N^_  frustulum Kuetz.
  ?L-  linearts  W.  Smith
  N. palea  (Kuetz.) W.  Smith                                                                             .
  IT. sigmoidea  (Ehr.) W.  Smith
  N^. tryblionella  Hantzsch
  Opephora martyi  Heribaud
  Pinnularia sp. Ehr.
  Rhizosolenia eriensis H. L.  Smith
  Rhoicosphenia curvata (Kuetz.) Grun.                                              «
  Rhopalodia gibba  (Ehr.)  0. Muell.               2
  Stephanodiscus asEraea  (Ehr.) Grun.            19              30               20                   30
  Surirella sp. Turpin
  Synedra spp.  Ehr.                              43                                47
  S.  actinastroides Lemm.
  £._  ulna (Nitz.) Ehr.
  Tabcllaria flocculosa (Roth) Kuetz.            19              96               26                   22
                                                          283

-------
                                                   DETROIT RIVER PHYTPPI.ANKTON
                                                 (mean number of  iiuiividvi.il.s/nil  from replicate samples)
                                                                   .  August 197J                         *
                                                  1               2*               3                    4
continued

Pyrrhophyta:
  Ceratlum hirundinclla  (0. F. Muell.)            4
    Dujardin
  Glenodintum ponnrdlformc  (Linde.)               474                    4
    Schiller
  G^ pulvisculus  (Ehr.)  Stein
Euglenophyta:
  Colacium arbuscula  Stein
  Euglena sp. Ehr.
  Tracholomonas sp. Ehr.                                                           2
  T. robusta Swirenko
  T^ yolvoclna Ehr.
Other Flagellates:
  Chroomonas sp.  Hansglrg                        4
  Chrysococcus sp.  Klebs
  Cryptomonas sp.  Ehr.                            6                                9
  Nephroselmis olivacea  Stein                     4              26                9                   15
  Rhodomonas lacustris Pascher                    9                               13

  Total  Number of Species (S)                    31              20               41                   22
  Mean Total Individuals/ml (N)                 400             527              345                   298
  Richness  (S/VTl)                              1.55            0.87             2.21                  1.27
  Richness  (S-l/lnN)                            5.01            3.03             6.85                  3.69
  Shannon-Weaver  Diversity  (I)                  2.65            2.51             2.90                  2.71
 *indicates single samples rather than replicates
                                                         284

-------
                                                     DETROIT RIVER PHYTOPLANKTON
                                           (mean number  of  individuals/ml  from  replicate samples)
                                                              August  1973
Cyanophyta:                                 5*           6           7*           19          20          21*           22**
  Anabaena flos-aquae  (Lyngb.)
    DeBrebisson
  A^ schorcmetievi Elenkin                                                       2           8
  A. spiroides var. crassa Lemm.           49
  Anabaenopsls elcnkinii Miller                                                              4
  Aphanocapsa elachista West & West
  Aphanothece gelatinosa (Henn.) Lemm.
  A. microspora (Menegh.) Rabenhorst                                                        48
  Arthrospira gomontiana Setchell                                                4
  Chroococcus dlspersus (Keissl.)
    Lemm.                                  25                       42
  
-------
continued
                                               5*
  C^ tctrapedia  (Kirch.) West & West
  Elakatothrix eclntinosa Wille               25
  Golcnklnla radlata (Chod.) Wille
  Kirchncriella clonf.ata G. M. Smith
  K^ subsolitaria G. S. Smith
  Lagerhoimia ciliata  (Lag.) Chodat
  LJ. long!seta (Lemm.) Printz
  L.  quadriseta  (Lemm.) G. M. Smith
  L.  subsala Lemm.
  Mougeotia sp.   (C.A. Agardh) Wittrock
  Nephrocytium agardhianum Naegeli
  Oedogonium sp.  Link                         62
  Oocystis gloeocystiformis Borge
  0.  lacustris Chodat
  
-------
  continued
                                                    DETROIT RIVER PHYTOPI.ANKTON
                                       (mean number of individuals/ml from replicate  samples)
                                                             August  1973
                                                 5*          6           7*           19
                                                                                                 20
                                                                                                             21*
                                                                                                                           22**
  M. caudata Iwanoff                            12
  M. urnaformis Prescott
  Ophiocytium capltatum Wolle
  Synura uvella Ehr.
Bacillariophyta:
  Achnanthes spp.  Bory
  Amphora sp. Ehr.
  Asterionella 1'ormosa Hassall                  25
  Chaetoceras sp.  Ehr.
  Cocconeis sp. Ehr.
  Coscinodiscus rothii (Ehr.) Grun.
  Cyclotella spp.  Kuetz.                       7134
  C_._ catenata Brun.
  Cymatopleura solea  (Breb.) W. Smith
  Cymbella spp. Agardh
  Diatoma tenue var. elongatum  (Lyngb.)
  D_._ vulgare Bory
  Diploneis sp. Ehr.
  Epithemia zebra  (Ehr.)  Kuetz.
  Fragilaria spp.  Lyngbye
  t\ brevistrlata var. InfLata  (Pant) Hust.
  F. capucina Desm.
  t\ crotonensis Kitton
  H inflata
  F_._ pinnata Ehr.
  Gomphonema spp.  Agardh
  Gyrosigma sp. Hassall
  Melosira granulata  (Ehr.) Ralfs
  £L_ islandica 0.  Hue 11.
  M_^ italica   (Ehr.) Kuetz.                    209
  M._ varians C. A. Ag.
  Navicula spp. Bory                            25
  N. pupula Kuetz.
  N^ tripunctata  (0. F. Muell)  Bory
  Nitzschia spp.  Hassall                       111
  ?L- acicularis W. Smith
  ft_. dissipata (Kuetz.) Grun.
  N_^ frustulum Kuetz.
  N^ linearis W.  Smith
  N^ palea (Kuetz.) W. Smith
  N^ siRmoidea (Ehr.) W.  Smith
  N^_ tryblionella Hantzsch
  Opephora martyi Heribaud
  Pinnularia sp.  Ehr.
  Rhizosolenia eriensis H. L. Smith
  Rhoicosphenia curvata (Kuetz.) Grun.
  Rhopalodla Ribba (Ehr.) 0. Muell.
  Stephanodiscus astraea (Ehr.) Grun.
  Surirella sp. Turpin
  Synedra spp.  Ehr.
  S. actinastroides Letnm.
  S^ ulna (Nitz.)  Ehr.
  Tabellaria flocculosa (Roth)  Kuetz.
           33
75
           30
 2

10
66

41


55




41
19

 1
                          2
                          2
                         17
                        167
                        961
                         17
79

 4


41

 2

 6
              2

             23

              9

              2
              2
                           6
                           8
                           2
                           2
                          10

                        1918
                        1992
92

 9


21




59
            17

            17
             4
                        553
                         37
                                       4

                                      37


                                      18
184

 11
  7
            26

            15
                                                             287

-------
    continued
            DETROIT RIVER PHYTOPLANKTON
   (mean number of Individuals from replicate samples)
                    Auf.ust 1973
  5*           6          7*          19          20
                                                                                                              21*
                                                                                                                           22**
    Pyrrhophyca:
      Ceratiurn hirundinella (0.  F.  Muell.)
        Dujarjin
      Glenodinium penardiformc (Linde.)
        ScnTller
      G^_ pulvtsculus (Ehr.) Stein
    Euglenophyta-
      Colacium arbuscula Stein
      Euglena sp.  Ehr.
      Trachelomonas  sp.  Ehr.
      T.  robusta  Swirenko
      T^ volvocina Ehr.
    Other Flagellates:
      Chroomonas  sp.  Hansgirg
      Chrysococcus sp.  Klebs
      Cryptamonas  sp.  Ehr
      Nephroselmis olivacea Stein
      Rhodomonas  lacustris  Pascher
  25
               3
              16
                                       2
                                       2

                                      22
                                                                                                              18
      Total  Number  of  Species  (S)
      Mean Total  Individuals/ml  (N)
      Richness  (S/V~N)
      Richness  (S-l/lnN)
      Shannon-Weaver Diversity (d)
  28
9695
0.28
2.94
1.29
  28
 277
1.68
4.80
2.59
  31
 427
1.50
4.95
2.89
  64
2018
1.42
8.28
2,43
  69
5209
0.96
7.95
1,93
  32
1197
0.92
4.37
2.17
 *indicates single samples rather than replicates
**no samples from this station
                                                              288

-------
                                                     DETROIT  RIVER PIIYTOl'LANKTON
                                              (mean number of  individuals/ml from  replicate  samples)
                                                           November 1973
                                                        1234
Cyanophyta:
  Anabaona flos-aquac (Lyngb.)
    DoBrebisson
  A. scheremotlevi Elenkin
  A. spiroidos var. crassa Lemm.
  Anabaenopsis elenkinil Miller
  Aphanocapsa elachista West & West                    63
  Aphanothoce geiatinosa (Henn.) Lcinm.
  A. microspora  (Menegh.) Rabenhorst
  Arthrospira gomontiana Setchell
  Chroococcus dispersus  (Keissl.)
    Lemm.                                              11                        30            8
  C. limneticus Lemm.                                   4
  £i. turgidus (Kuetz.) Naegeli                                       9            4           11
  Coelosphaerium naegelianum Unger                      9           11            6            2
  Cyanarcus hamiformis Pascher                          2
  Dactyloooccopsis aeicularis Lemm.
  D_._ faseicularis Lemm.
  D^_ rhaphidioides Hansgirg
  !L_ smithii Chodat & Chodat
  Lyngbya  sp. Agardh                                                                           4
  ku limnetlca Lemm.                                                 7            8           10
  Marssoniella elegans Lemm.
  Merismopodia glauca (Ehr.) Naegeli
  M. tenuissima Lemm.
  Microcystls aeruginosa Kuetz.                        17            61           52           34
  Osctllatoria sp. Vaucher
  0^ agardhii Gomont                                   10            11                         6
  0. angusta Koppe                                                                             ^
  2_u hamelii Fremy
  0_._ limnctica Lemm.
  0_._ minima Gicklhorn
  Pelogloea bacillifera Lauterborn                     26            2           70           42
  Rhaphidiopsis  curvata Fritsch ft Rich
Chlorophyta:
  Actinastrum hantzschii var.  fluviatile
    Schroeder
  Ankistrodesmus braunii (Naeg.) Brunnthaler
  A. convolutus Corda
  A. falcatus (Corda) Ralfs                                        32          11             8
  A. spiralis (Turner) Lemm.                                        2
  Characium falcatum Schroeder
  C. limnoticum Lemm.
  Chariopsis lonp.issima Lemm.
  Chlorclla vulgaris Beyerinck
  Chlorococcum humicola (Naeg.) Rabenhorst
  ClostGriopsis longissima var. tropica
    West & West                      ~                             22
  Closterium sp.  Nitzsch
  Coelastrum cambricum Archer
  C. microporum Nac(;eli in A.  Braun
  C. scabrum Reinsch
  C. sph;icricum Naegeli
  Cosmarium sp.  Corda                                               222
  Crucif.eriia quadrata Morren                                                    15            8
                                                              289

-------
  continued
                                                              DETROIT RIVER 1'HYTOPl.ANKTON
                                                   (mean number of indiviilu^ls/ml  from replicate samples)
                                                                       November  1973
  C^ tctrapcdta  (Kirch.)  West & West
  Elakatothrix flnl.itinosa Wille
  Golenklnia rodiata (Chod.) Wille
  Kirchneriella  elongata  G.  M.  Smith
  L. subsolitaria  G. S. Smith
  Lagerheimia cillata  (Lag.) Chodat
  L. longtseta  (Lemm.)  Printz
  L. quadriseta  (Lerara.) G.  M.  Smith
  L. subsala Lemm.
  Mougeotia sp.  (C. A.  Agardh)  Wittrock
  Nephrocytium agardhianum Naegeli
  Oedogonium sp. Link
  Oocystis gloeocystiformis Borge
  0_._ lacustris Chodat
  !L_ novae-semliae Wille
  0^ pusilla llansgirg
  0. submarina Lagerheim
  Pediastrum boryanum  (Turp.) Meneghini
  P. duplex var. clathratum  (A.  Braun)
    Lagerheim
  P. simplex var.  duodenarium (Bailey)
    Rabenhorst
  L. tetras  (Ehr.)  Ralfs
  Phymatodoci s sp.  Nordstedt
  Planktosphacria  gelatinosa G, M. Smith
  Pleurotaenium  sp. Naegeli
  Polyblopharidcs  sp.  Dangeard.
  Rhiy.oclonium sp.  Kuetz.
  Scencdosmus abundans (Kirch.) Chodat
  S. bijuRa  (Turp.) Lagerheim
  S. dcnticulatus  Lagerheim
  •L. dimorphus  (Turp.)  Kuctz.
  S. incrassaculus Eohlin
  §_._ opoliensis  P.  Richter
  S_._ quadricauda (Turp.)  de Brebisson
  Schrooderia sctiqera Lemra.
  Selenastrum F_i_nm.um  (Naeg.) Collins
  §-^ yestii G. M/ Smith
  Staurastrum sp.  Meyen
  Tetradesmus vjl'jeonsinpnse G.  M. Smith
  Tetraodrgn cnu^itum  (Corda) Hansgirg
  T^ duosplniim Ackley
  T^ lunula  (Reir.bch)  Vlille
  T. minimum (A. ;H-aun) llansgirg
  T._ rpgul are Kuetz.
  T. trtj'.ouuni vur   firnrtle (Reinsch) DeLoni
  TetraHjpora 1 i^"-,hris  Lemm.
  TotraHtrum sj: '.':tTEc'ni.icforme  (Schroedcr) Lemm.
  Trcub.rria t_r_i.i_r;)-ndiciil_ata Bernard
  Ulothrlx sp. K''Utz.
Chrysophytar
  Dtcor.is ph.-^f.f.lj^s Fott
            up.  rhr.
              13
                           10
10
                                        11
                                         2
                                        2

                                        2


                                        2

                                        2
                                                          290

-------
continued

  D^ bnvaricum Imhof
  D^ cnlciformis Bach
  D^ dtvcrKons Imhof
  D. sortularta Ehr.
  D^ tabollarino (Letran.) Pascher in
    Pascher & Lcmm.
  Kophyrion ovum Pascher
  Lap.ynion ampullaceum (Stokes) Pascher
  Mallomonas acaroides Perty
  M. caudata Iwanoff
  M. urnaformis Prescott
  Ophiocytiura capitatum Wolle
  Synura uvella Ehr.
Bacillariophyta:
  Achnanthes spp.  Bory
  Amphlpleura sp.  Kuetz.
  Amphora sp.  Ehr.
  Asterionella formosa Hassall
  Chaetoceras sp.  Ehr.
  Cocconeis sp. Ehr.
  Coscinodiseus rothii (Ehr.) Grun.
  Cyclotella spp.  Kuetz.
  C^ glomerata Bachmonn
  C. catenata Brun.
  Cymatopleura elliptica (Breb.) W. Smith
  C^ solea (Breb.)  W. Smith
  Cymbella spp. Agardh
  Diatoma tenue var. elongatum (Lyngb.)
  D. vulgare Bory
  Diplonois sp. Ehr.
  Epithemia zebra (Ehr.) Kuetz.
  Fraftilaria spp.  Lyngbye
  F_^ brevistriata var. inflata (Pant) Hust.
  F. capucina Desm.
  F_._ crotonensis Kitton
  j\_ inflata
  F_^ pinnata Ehr.
  Gomphonema spp.  Agardh
  Gyrosigma sp. Hassall
  Melosira distans  (Ehr.) Kuetz.
  M^ granulata (Ehr.) Ralfs
  M^ islandica 0.  Muell.
  M^ italica (Ehr.) Kuetz.
  M. varians C. A.  Ag.
  Navicula spp. Bory
  N._ pupula Kuetz.
  N^ scutelloides  W. Smith
  N^ tripunctata (0. F. Muell) Bory
  Nitzschia spp. Hassall
  N_^ acicularis W.  Smith
  IL. dissipata (Kuetz.) Grun.
  N. frustulum Kuetz.
            DETROIT RIVER PHYTOPLANKTON
   (mean number of individuals/ml from replicate samples)
                     November 1973
   1234
 15
 76
  6
 19
              2A

               6
207
             113
 30

  6
23

 4
  2
 78
              83

               4
                           21
                          150
28

 6



15
                                         10
              50



              32

              17
                                       212
35

 8
 2
                                        13

                                         4
                                                             291

-------
continued

  1L  Hnonrla w-  Smlch
  N.  palca  (Kuctz.)  W.  Smith
  ?L  sir.moidca  (Ehr.)  M.  Smith
  N_._  tryblionella Hantisch
  Opephora  martyi Hcribaud
  Pinnularia sp.  Ehr.
  Rhizosolenia   orionsis  H. L.  Smith
  Rhoicosphenia  eurvaca (Kuetz.)  Grun.
  Rhop.-Uodia gibba (Ehr.)  0.  Muell.
  Stephanodiscus  astraea  (Ehr.)  Grun.
  Surirella sp.  Turpin
  S_._  an,°ustata Kuetz.
  S_^  oval is Breb.
  Syneara spp. Ehr.
  S.  actinastroides  Lemn.
  S^_  ulna (Nitz.)  Ehr.
  Tabellaria flocculosa (Roth)  Kuetz.
Pyrrhophyta:
  Certatium hirundinella  (0.  F.  Muell.)
    Dujarain
  Glenodinium penardiformc (Linde.)
    Schiller
  £._  pulvisculus  (Ehr.) Stein
  Gymnodinium fuscum-(Ehr.) Stein
Euglenophyta:
  Colacium  arbuscula Stein
  Euglona sp. Ehr.
  E.  convoluta Korshikov
  Phascus sp. Dujardin
  Lepocinclis glabra Drezepolski
  Trachclomonas  sp.  Ehr.
  T.  robusta Swirenko
  T._  volvocina Ehr.
Other Flagellates:
  Chroraulina sp.   Cienkowski
  Chroomonas sp.  Hansgirg
  Chrysococcus  sp. Klebs
  Cryptomonas  sp. Ehr.
  Nephroselmia  olivaeea Stein
  RhodoF.onas lacustris Pascher
  Unidentified  flagellate
  Total  Number  of Species (S)
  Mean Total Individuals/ml (N)
  Richness  (S/ V~H)
  Richness  (S-l/lnN)
  Shannon-Weaver  Diversity (of)
                                                                   DETROIT  RIVER  PHYTOPLANKTON
                                                        (mean number of  individuals/ml from replicate samples)
                                                                          November 1973
 13

 33
601
1.35
5.00

2.53
              15
              63
              47
 36
526
1.57
5.59

2.82
                            3
                           24
                           30
                           24
 43
741
1,58
6.36

2.90
                           22
                            2
                                        72
                                        17
                                        24
 42
715
1,57
6.24

2.82
                                                                292

-------
CyanophyCa:
  Annh.non_A flos-aquae  (Lyngb.)
    DcBrcbisson
  A^ schcremcticvi Elenkln
  A. splroidus var. crassa Lonun.
  Anabacnopsis elcnklnil Miller
  Aphanocapr.a clachista West & West
  Aphanothccc >'.elatinosa (Henn.) Lemtn.
  A. microspora (Mcnegh.) Rabenhorst
  Arthrospira Romontiana Setchell
  Chroococcus dispersus (Keissl.)
    Lemro.
  C. llmneticus Lemm.                          g
  C_._ turfiidns (Kuetz.) Naegeli                n
  Coelosph.iGrium n.iegelianum Unger             2
  Cyanarcus hamiformls Pascher
  Dactylococcopsis aeicularis Lemm.
  D. fascicularis Letnra.
  D. rhaphidloides Hansgirg
  D^_ smithii Chodat &  Chodat
  Lyngbya sp. Agardh
  L. limnetlca Lemm.
  Marssoniella elegans Lemm.
  Merlsmopcdla glauoa  (Ehr.) Naegeli
  M. tenutssima Lenun.
  Microcystis aeruginosa Kuetz.               19
  Oscillatorla sp. Vaucher
  0. apardhli Gomont
  0^_ anr.usta Koppe
  0. hamclil Fremy
  0^_ Hjanetlca Lomm.
  O. minima Gicklhorn
  Pelogloea bacillifera Lauterborn
  Rhaphicliopsis curvata Fritsch & Rich

Chlorophyta:
  Aetinastrum hantzschii var. fluviatile
    Schroeder
  Ankistrodesmus braunii (Naeg.) Brunnthaler
  A. convolutus Corda
  A. falcatus (Corda) Ralfs                  15
  A. spiralis (Turner) Lemm.                  g
  Characium falcatum Schroeder                2
  C. lirnncticum Lemm.
  Chariopsis lonsissima Lemm.
  Chlorclla vulgaris Beyerinck
  Chlorococcum humicola (Naeg.) Rabenhorst
  Clostcrjxipsis lonsissima var. troplca
    West & West
  Closterium sp.  Nitzsch
  Coelar.trum cambricum Archer
  C. microporum Naegeli in A. Braun
  C. scabrum Rcinsch
  C. sphaericum Naegeli
  Cosmqrtum sp.  Corda
  Cruclf.enia qnndrata Morrcn
                                                                   DETROIT RIVER PHYTOPLANKTON
                                                    (mean number of individuals/ml from replicate samples)
                                                                           November 1973
                                                        6        7        19        20        *21        22
 5

 2

26

 4
17
17
                   4
                  15

                  10
                   2
                              11
                       4

                       9

                       6
                       9
         2
        26
        46
        30

        20
         9
10
 2
11
 4
43
35
                                                             293

-------
continued

CL tetropcdia  (Kirch.)  West  & West
Elakatothrix gelatinosa Wille
Golenklnia radiata (Chod ) Wille
Kirchncriclla  elonf.ata  G.  M.  Smith
K_._ subsolitaria  G. S. Smith
Lagerheimia ciliata  (Lag.) Chodat
L. Icagiseta  (Lemm.)  Printz
ki. q^adriseta  (Lemm.) G.  M.  Smith
L. subsala Lemm.
Mougeotia sp.  (C. A.  Agardh)  Wittrock
Nephrocytium ap.ardhianum Naegeli
Ocdogonium sp. Link
Oocystis gloeocystiformis Borge
0. lacustris Chodat
0. novae-semliae Wille
0. pusilla Hansgirg
0. submarina Lagerheim
Pediastrum boryanum  (Turp.)  Meneghini
^- duplex var. clathratum  (A.  Braun)
  Lagerheim
P_; simplex var.  duodenarium  (Bailey)
  Rabenhorst
Ei tetras  (Ehr.) Ralfs
Phycatodocis  sp. Nordstedt
Plar.ktosphaeria  Re latinos a G.
Pleurotaenium  sp.  Naegeli
PolyblopharjLdes  sp.  Dangeard.
Bhizoclonium  sp. Kuetz.
Seer.edesrous abundang (Kirch.) Chodat
S_._ bijuga  (Turp.)  Lagerheim
S. denticulatus  Lagerheim
S._ cimorphus  (Turp.) Kuetz.
S. incrassatutus Bohlin
S_._ opolionsis  P. Richter
•L- guadricauda (Turp.)  de Brebisson
Schroederia sotif'cra
                                    Smith
  Selenastrum  miniitum (Naeg.) Collins
  •L. yestii  G.  K.' Smith
                                                                      DETROIT RIVER 1'IIYTOI'LANKTON
                                                        (mean number  of individuals/ml from replicate samples)
                                                                              November 1973
                                                       5        6         ?          19         20        *21
                                                               10
                                                                6
  Sta'jrostrum  sp.  Meyen
  Tetradosmus  wi-iconsincnse G.  M.  Smith
  Tetraedron caudptun (Corda)  Hansgirg
  T,_ duospinum Ackley
  "L- !"""!?  (Rcinsch)  Wille
  T_._ ainlmum (A.  Braun) Hansgirg
  T._ regularc  Kuetz.
  T. trif.onim  var.  gracllc (Reinsch) Detoni
  Tctraapora lacu', t-_ri s Lemm.
  Tctrastrum HI .T.IT o^cninoforroo  (Schroeder) Lemm.
  Trc'Aqria trj/ir.ii!'nd.iculata  Bernard
  Ulothrtx sp. Kcutz.
Chrysophyta:
  Dtcorjj; phru-.po),;^ Kott
  Dinobrygn ap. F.hr.
22
13
30

17

 2

 8
 6
21
 2
 7

35


 2

 4

 2
                                                                                                                     22
15
 4
 9
15
 2
 2
           28

            6



            2

            2
                                                          294

-------
                                                                   DETROIT RIVF.R PHYTOI'LANKTON
                                                      (mean number of individuala/ml from replicate  samp lea)
                                                                         November 1973
continued

  D.  bavai'icum Imhof
  D.  calclformts Bach
  D.  divcrr.cns Imhof
  5i. sertularta Ehr.
  iL tabcllariae (Leram.) Faschcr in
    Pascher & Lemm.
  Kephvrion ovum Pascher
  Lap.ynion ampullaceum  (Stokes) Pascher
  Mallomonas acaroides  Perty
  M;_ caudata Iwanoff
  M^ urnaformis Prescott
  Ophiocyclum capitatum Wolle
  Synura uvclla Ehr.
Bacillariophyta:
  Aehnanthes spp.  Bory
  Amphipleura sp.  Kuetz.
  Amphora sp. Ehr.
  Asterionella formosa  Hassall
  Chaetoceras sp.  Ehr.
  Cocconeis sp. Ehr.
  Coscinodiscus rothii  (Ehr.) Grun.
  Cyelotella spp.  Kuetz.
  C_^ glomerata Bachmann
  C_._ catenata Brun.
  Cymatopleura elliptica  (Breb.) W.  Smith
  £._ solea (Breb.) W. Smith
  Cymbella spp. Agardh
  Diatoma tcnue var.  elongatum  (Lyngb.)
  D._ vulr.are Bory
  Diploncis sp. Ehr.
  Epitheala zebra  (Ehr.)  Kuetz.
  Fragilaria spp.  Lyngbye
  F_^ brevistriata  var.  inflata  (Pant)  Hust.
  F. capuclna Desm.
  F. crotoncnsis Kitton
  F_^ inflata
  ¥^_ pinnata Ehr.
  Gomphonema spp.  Agardh
  Gyrosi?,ma sp. Hassall
  Helosira distans .(Ehr.) Kuetz.
  *L. Rranulata  (Ehr.) Ralfs
  H_^ islandica 0.  Muell.
  M^ italica  (Ehr.)  Kuetz.
  5L. yarians C. A. Ag.
  Navicula spp. Bory
  N. pupula Kuetz.
  N._ scutolloidcs  W.  Smith
  N._ tripunctata  (0.  F. Muell)  Bory
  Nitzschia spp. Hassall
  ?L. acicularis W.  Smith
  tL_ dlnslpata  (Kuetz.) Grun.
  N. frustulum Kuetz.
5

15

26
6

15
7

17
19

 8

11
.35




6

30

21

8

2
4
234


15
2
4

96

24
2
17

2

118




21
9
28
2
19


4
2
22
81
76
4
2

52
4
9

6

2

2
11
20

 A

 9
 6
*21

30
22

30


21
                                                 11
8
52

2
68
15
8

2


15
30 6 11 4 15
133 152 85 113 277
4
267 9
96 216 131 95 114
8
8 6
2
4
4
6
17 6 19
2
170

2
41

2




37
                                      233
                                                170
                                                           131
                                      22

                                       7
                                        22

                                        41
                                                 18
                                                  4
                                          59

                                          26



                                          33
                                                             295

-------
continued

  N^_  lincnris  W.  Smith
  *L-  Paloa  (Kuetz.)  W.  Smith
  NL_  sir.moidea (Ehr.)  W.  Smith
  N.  tryblionclla Hantzsch
  Opophora  m.irtyt Heribaud
  Pinnul.irJa sp.  Ehr.
  Rhizosolcnla  eriensis  H. L.  Smith
  Rhoicosphcnia  curvata (Kuetz.)  Grun.
  Rhopalodia gibba (Ehr.)  0.  Muell.
  Stephanodlscus  astraea  (Ehr.)  Grun.
  Surirella sp.  Turpin
  S.  angustata Kuetz.
  S_._  ovalis Breb.
  Synedra spp. Ehr.
  S.  actinagtroides  Lemm.
  S_._  ulna (Nitz.)  Ehr.
  Tabellaria flocculosa (Roth)  Kuetz.
Pyrrhophyta:
  Certatium hirundinella  (0.  F.  Muell,)
    Dujardin
  Glenodinlum  penardiforme (Linde.)
    Schiller
  G_._  pulvisculus  (Ehr.) Stein
  Gymnodinium  fuscunr(Ehr.) Stein
Euglenophyta:
  Colacium  arbuscula Stein
  Euglena sp.  Ehr.
  E^_  convoluta Korshikov
  Fhascus sp.  Dujardin
  Lepoeinclis  glabra Drezepolski
  Trachelomonas  sp.  Ehr.
  T\_  robusta Swirenko
  £_._  volvocina Ehr.
Other Flagellates:
  Chromulina sp.  Cienkowski
  Chroomonas sp.  Hansgirg
  Chrysococcus sp. Klebs
  Cryptomonas  sp. Ehr.
  Nephroselmis olivacea Stein
  Rhodomonas lacustris  Pascher
  Unidentified flagellate
  Total- Number of Species  (S)
  Mean Total Individuals/ml (N)
  Richness  (S/ VTl)
  Richness  (S-l/lnN)
  Shannon-Weaver Diversity (3")

    *indicates  single samples  rather than replicates
             DETROIT RIVKR PHYTOPI.ANKTON
(mean number of individuals/ml from replicate samples)
                     November 1973
             6        7
5
 4
19
   21
   26
   10
   26
            22
            28
            24
            24
                      70
                       7
                       2
                      39
                     59
                     11
                     65
                                19
                           186
                                22
                                32
20
 8
 4
                                           17
                                          48
                                          41
                                          56
*21
  7
 15
                                                     22
                                                     41
                                                    74
22
17
28
                                                                21
                                                                39
                                                               68
                                                               93
43
682
1.65
6.44
3.12
51
948
1,66
7,29
2,86
52
1147
1,54
7.24
3.04
52
963
1.68
7,42
2,97
41
803
1.45
5.98
2,64
29
944
0,94
4.09
2.43
45
1052
9.39
6.32
3,08
                                                              296

-------
                                                                      DETROIT  RIVER PHYTOPLANKTON
                                                         (mean number  of  individuals/ml,  from replicate samples)
                                                                              May 1974
Cyanophyta:
  Aiialxien.-i flos-aquac (Lyngb.)
    Dcllrebisson
  A^ schoremetievt Elenkin
  AL splroides var. erassa Lemra.
  Anabacnopsis elenklnii Miller
  Aphanoc.ipsa elachiata West & West
  Aphanothccc Rolatinosa (Henn.) Lemm.
  A. microspora  (Henegh.) Rabenhorst
  Arthrospira Kornonti.ina Setchell
  Chroococcus dispersus (Keissl.)
    Lemm.
  C_._ limneticus Lemm.
  C. turgldus (Kuetz.) Naegeli
  Coelosphaerium naegelianum Unger
  Cyanarcus hamiformis Pascher
  Dactylococcopsis acicularis Lemm.
  D. faseicularis Lemm.
  D^_ rhaphidioldes Hansgirg
  IL. smithii Chodat & Chodat
  Lyngbya sp. Agardh
  L. limnetica Lemm.
  Marssoniella elesans Lemm.
  Merismopedia glauc'a (Ehr.) Naegeli
  M. tenutssima Lemm.
  Microcystis aeruainosa Kuetz.
  Oscillatoria sp. Vaucher
  O. agardhii Gomont
  0. anRusta Koppe
  O_._ hamelii Fremy
  0. limnotica Lemm.
  0_._ minlna Gicklhorn
  Pelogloca bacillifera Lauterborn
  Rhaphidiopsis curvata Fritsch & Rich

Chlorophyta:
  Actinastrum hantzschii var. fluviatile
    Schroeder
  Ankistrodesmus braunii (Naeg.) Brunnthaler
  A. eonvolutus Corda
  A. falcatus (Corda) Ralfs
  A. spiralis (Turner) Lemm.
  Characium falcatum Schroeder
  C. limneticum Lemm.
  Chariopsis longissioa Lemm.
  Chlorella vulgaris Beyerinck
  Chlorococcum humicola (Naeg.) Rabenhorst
  Closteriopsis lon^lssima var. tropica
    West & West
  Closterium sp.  Nitzsch
  Coelastrum cambricum Archer
  C. microporum Naegeli in A. Braun
  C. scabrum Reinsch
  C. sphaoricum Naegeli
  Cosmarium sp.  Corda
  Cruclp.cnla guadrata Morren
8

35
                  16
                  2
                     2

                     18
                      15

                      4
                      9
32
2
35
4
37
7
26
2
                                                             297

-------
                                                                 DETROIT RIVi:R HIYTOPLANKTON
                                                     (mean number of individu,,l«/ml from  replicate
                                                                           May 1974
  continued

  £j.  tetrapodta (Kirch.)  West & West
  Elnkatothrlx  i;c latinos a Wille
  GolenkJnia  radlata  (Chod.)  Wille
  Kirchncriclla elongata  G.  M.  Smith
  K^  subsolitaria  G.  S.  Smith
  Lagcrheimia ciliata (Lag.)  Chodat
  L.  longiscta  (Lemm.)  Printz
  L.  quadriseta (Lemm.)  G.  M. Smith
  L.  subsala  Lemm.
  MouRcotia sp.  (C. A.  Agardh)  Wittrock
  Hephrocyttum  a^ardhianum Naegeli
  Oedogonlum  sp.  Link
  Oocystis glococystiformis Borge
  0^_  lacustris  Chodat
  0.  novae-semliae Wille
  OL_  pusilla  Hansgirg
  0.  submarina  Lagerheim
  Pediastrum  boryanum (Turp.) Meneghini
  P_._  duplex var. clathratum  (A.  Braun)
                   'duodenarium (Bailoy)
   L. tetras  (Ehr.)  Ralfs
   Phymatodocis  sp.  Nordstedt
   Planktosphacria gelattnosn G.  M.  Stnith
   Pleurotaenium sp.  Naegeli
   Polyblepharides sp.  Dangeard.                        _
   Rhizoclonium  sp.  Kuetz.
   Sccnedesmus abundans (Kirch.)  Chodat                _
   S^_ bijuga  (Turp.)  Lagerheim                         ,
   S^_ denticulatus Lagerheim
   S.  dimorphus  (Turp.) Kuetz.
   £L_ incrassatulus  Bohlin
   S_^ opoliensis P.  Richccr
   S^ quadricauda (Turp.) de Brebisson
   Schroederia setlgera Lemm.
   Selenastrum minutum  (Naeg.)  Collins
   S_^ westii G.  M. Smith
   Staurastrum sp. Meyen
   Tetradesmus wisconsinensc  G. M. Smith
   Tetraedron caudatum  (Corda)  Hansgirg
   T._ duospinum  Ackley
   "L. lunula (Reinsch)  Wille
   T^ minimum (A.  Braun)  Hansgirg
   T^_ rcgularc Kuetz.
   T^ trlgonum var. gracile  (Reinsch) Detoni
   Tctraspora lacustris  Lemm.
   Tctrastrum staurof.eniaoforme (Schroeder) Lemm.
   Treubaria tri.-ippondiculata Bernard
   Ulothrix sp.   Keutz.
Chrysophyta:
   Diccras phnsoolus Fott
  Dinohryon sp.  Ehr.
                                                         298

-------
continued

  IL. bny.irlcum Imhof
  D^ calrtformis Bach
  D^_ divi'fp.ens Imhof
  D^ scrmlnrla Ehr.
  D^ tnliollariae (Lcmm.) Pascher In
    Pascher & Lemm.
  Kephvrion ovum Pascher
  Lap.ynion ampullaceum (Stokes) Pascher
  Mallomonas acaroidcs Perty
  M. caudata Iwanoff
  M. urnaformis Prescott
  Ophiocytium eapitatum Wolle
  Synura uvella Ehr.
Baclllariophyta:
  Achnanthes spp. Bory
  Amphipleura sp. Kuetz.
  Amphora sp. Ehr.
  Asterionella formosa Hassall
  Chaetoceras sp. Ehr.
  Cocconcis sp. Ehr.
  Coscinodiscus rothil (Ehr.) Grun.
  Cyclocella spp. Kuetz.
  C. glotnerata Bachmann
  C. catenata Brun.
  Cymatopleura elliptlca (Breb.) W. Smith
  C_._ solea (Breb.)  W. Smith
  Cymbella spp. Agardh
  Diatoma tenue var. elonp,atum (Lyngb.)
  D. vulj'.are Bory
  Diploneis sp. Ehr.
  Epithcmia zebra (Ehr.)  Kuetz.
  Fraflilaria spp.  Lyngbye
  F._ brevistriata var. inflata (Pant) Hust.
  F. capucina Desm.
  F._ crotonensis Kitton
  F._ inflata
  F. pinnata Ehr.
  Gomphonema spp. Agardh
  Gyrosigma sp. Hassall
  Melosira distans  (Ehr.) Kuetz.
  M. granulata (Ehr.) Ralfs
  M^ islandica 0. Muell.
  M.. italica (Ehr.)  Kuetz.
  M.  varians C.  A.  Ag.
  Navicula spp.  Bory
  H.  pupula Kuetz.
  N^ seutelloides W.  Smith
  N_^ tripunctata  (0.  F. Muell)  Bory
  Nitzschia spp.  Hassall
  N_._ acicularis W.  Smith
  N.  dissipata  (Kuetz.) Grun.
  N.  frustulum  Kuetz.
              DETROIT RITCR PHYTOPLANKTON
(mean number of individuals/ml from replicate samples)
      1
      4

      78
      98
      61
     2
     2

    104
    30

    33
    41
   216
   81
   7
   11
   May 1974
   2
   15
   6
  115
   50
    2
  11



  19

  4
 79
245
                     22
                     4
                     15
139
 41
50



59

13
                                          155
                      24
                      57
                      4
                     2
                     13
                       4
                       35
207
 32
                                                                  54
47
                                                                 2
                                                                 4
                                                                 26
                     15
                    146
                    24
                                                                17
                                                             299

-------
continued
     linoarls W. Smith
?L
    _    
-------
                                                        *5
Cyanophyta:
  Aiiobacn.i flos-aquau  (Lynch.)
  ~~ Deiu-cbisuon
  A. schoronipficvi  Rlcnkin
  A. spiroidcr. var.  £tvu\sn^ Leinm.
  Anabacnopsis eleiikinil  Miller
  Aphancc.ipn.i elachistj West &  '..'ost
  Aphanotheco Rol.it uuria  (Honn  )  Lcmin.
  A. micros per a  (Mencgh.) Rabonl'orst
  Arthrosplra gomontiana  Setchell
  Chroococcus dispersus (Kcissl.)
    Lemm.
  C, limneticus  Letnm.
  C^_ turpidus  (Kuetz.) Naegcli
  Coelosphaorium nao^olianum Ungcr
  Cyanarcus hamlformis Pascher
  Dactylococcopsis  acicularis Leirjn.
  D. fasciculnris Lcmm.
  EL_ rhaphldioldes  Hansgirg
  D^_ smithii  Chodat & Chodat
  Lyngbya  sp. Agardh
  L. limnetica Lemm.
  Marssoniclla elo^.ana Lemin.
  Merismopt-dia glauca  (Chr.) N.tegell
  M. tcnuissima  Leram.
  Microcysuis agrup.inosa KueLz.
  Oscillatoria  sp.  Voucher
  QL_ agardhii Gomorit
  0. anfjusta  Koppe
  0^_ hamcliji  Fremy
  0. llmnctica Lemm.
  0_^ min i ma  Gicklhoin
  Pelogloea  bacilli foi.i LauCerborn
  Rhaphidiopnis  curv.iL.i FriLr.cli & Rich
Chlorophyta:
  Aetinastrum hantzschii  var. fluviatile
    Schroeder
  Ankistrodesmus  braunii  (Naeg.)  Brunnthaler
  A. convolutus  Corda
  A. falcatus (Corda)  Ralfs
  A. spiralis (Turner)  Lemm.
  Characium falcatrum Schroeder
  C. limneticum Lemm.
  Charlopsis longissima Lemm.
  Chlorella vulRarls Beyorinck
  Chlorococcum humleola (i!aeg.) Rabenhorst
  Clostoriopsls  lonslssima var. troplca
    West & West
  Clostorlum sp.  Nitzsch
  Coclastrum cambricum Archer
  C. microporum Nacgeli iri A. Braun
  C. scnhrum Rcinsch
  C. sph.icrlcum Nacgeli
  Cosmarjjjm sp.  Corda
  Cruel p.r'tiia quadra I:a  Morren
                    DETROIT RIVER PIIYTOPLANKTON
           (mean number  of individuals/ml from replicate  aamolcu)
                           May 197A                          V
           6        **7        19        20        21
                                                                                                                      22
18
39
 2

11

15
 6
15
 A
19

13
15
22

 9
13
                                                               19
55
18
22
 2
59
37
 2
45
24
61
 7
26
15
                                                            301

-------
                                                     DETROIT RIVER PHYTOPLANKTON
                                        (mean number of iiulivlilu.il •,/ml  from  i i>pl i c.i to  s/imp lea)
  continued
                                                             May 1974
                                                          *5       6
                                                                             **7
                                                                                         19
                                                                                                   20
                                                                                                             21
                                                                                                                         22
  C.  tetrapcdta (Kirch.) West & West
  Elakatothrix fielatinosa Wille
  Colenkinla radiat.i (Chod.) Wille
  Klrchneriella elonfiata G. M. Smith
  K^ subsolitaria G. S. Smith
  Lagerheimia cillata (Lag ) Chodat
  L.  longiseta (Lemm.) Printz
  L.  quadriseta (Lemm.) G. M. Smith
  L.  subsala Lemm.
  Mougeotia sp. (C. A. Agardh) Wittrock
  Nephrocytlum agardhianum Naegeli
  OedoRonium sp.  Link
  Oocystis gloeocystifomiis Borge
  0.  lacustris Chodat
  0.  novae-semliae Wille
  0.  pus i11a Hansgirg
  0.  submarina Lagerheim
  Pediaatrum boryanum (Turp.) Meneghini
  P.  duplex var.  clathratum (A. Braun)
    Lagerheim
  P.  simplex var.  duodenarium  (Bailey)
    Rabenhorst
  P_^ tetras (Ehr.) Ralfs
  Phymatodocis sp. Nordstedt
  Planktosphaeria gelatinosa G. K. Smith
  PIeurotaeniura sp.  NaegelJ
  Polyblepharides sp.  Dangeard.
  Rhizoclonium sp. Kuetz.
  Scenedestnus abundans (Kirch.) Chodat
  S. bijuga (Turp.)  Lagerheim
  S, denticulatus Lagerheim
  S. dimorphus (Turp.) Kuetz.
  S. incrassatulus Bohlin
  S. opoliensis P. Richter
  S. quadricauda  (Turp.) de Brebisson
  Schroederia sotigc.ra Lenrni.
  Selenastrum minutum (Naeg.) Collins
  S_._ westii G. M. Smith
  Staurastrum sp. Meyen
  Tetradesmus visconsinense G. M. Smith
  Tetraedron caudatum (Corda) Hansgirg
  T. duospinum Ackley
  T^ lunula (Reinsch)  Wille
  T. minimam (A.  Braun) Hansgirg
  T. regulare Kuetz.
  Zj. trigonum var. gracile  (Reinsch) Detoni
  Tetraspora lacustria Lemm.
  Tetrastrum ataurogeniaeforme  (Schroeder) Lemm.
  Treubaria triappendiculata Bernard
  Ulothrix sp. Keutz.
Chryaophyta:
  Diceras phascolua Fott
  Dinobryon sp. Ehr.
11
                                                            302

-------
continued

  D^_ bavaricum Imhof
  Si calciformis Bach
  D. divorfiens Imliof
  D^ sertularia Ehr.
  D^_ tabellariae (Letnm.) Pascher in
    Pascher & Lemm.
  Kephyrion ovam Pascher
  Lagynion ampullaceum (Stokes) Pascher
  Mallomonas acaroides Perty
  M^ caudata Iwanoff
  M. urnaformis Prescott
  Ophiocytium capitatum Wolle
  Synura u\'ella Ehr.
Bacillariophyta:
  Achnanthes spp. Bory
  Amphipleura sp. Kuetz.
  Amphora sp.  Ehr.
  Asterionella formosa Hassall
  Chaetoceras sp. Ehr.
  Coeconels sp. Ehr.
  Coscinodiscus rothii (Ehr.) Grun.
  Cyclotella spp. Kuetz.
  C^ glomerata Bachmanri
  C_._ catenata Brun.
  Cymatopleura elliptica (Breb.) W. Smith
  C. solea (Breb.)  W  Smith
  Cymbella spp. Agardh
  Diatoma tenue var. elongatum (Lyngb.)
  EL_ vulgare Bory
  Diploneis sp. Ehr.
  Epithemia zebra (Ehr.) Kuetz.
  Fragilaria spp. Lyngbye
  Ei brevistriata var. inflata (Pant) Hust.
  F. capucina Desm.
  F. crotonensis Kitton
                DETROIT RIVER PHYTOI'LANKTON
(mean number of individuals/ml from replicate  samples)
                       May 1974
              *5       6         **7         19        20

               7       13
             218
              92
            145
             48
            358

             22



             55
            273
            343
  F.  pinnata Ehr.
  Gomphonema spp. Agardh
  Gyrosigma sp. Hassall
  Melosira distans (Ehr.) Kuetz.
  M.  granulata (Ehr.) Ralfs
  M^ islandica 0. Muell.
  M._ italica (Ehr.) Kuetz.
  M.  varians C. A. Ag.
  Navicula spp. Bory
  N_^ pupula Kuetz.
  N^ scutelloides W.  Smith
  ?L_ tripunctata (0.  F. Muell) Bory
  Nitzschia spp.  Hassall
  N^ acicularis W. Smith
  N_._ disslpata (Kuetz.) Grun.
  N.  frustulum Kuetz.
             59
            295
              8
              7
             59
              4
 130
  57
  31

  2
  50
 32
 32
249
 46

  8
  6
  9
 35
   2
  10
  13
 142
  65
                      203
                      760
                        2
                       24
                        6
196
255
 59
 54
316
 19
  6
  6
 35
           264
            41
  10

   9
 148
  31
   6

  71
 181
 57

170
362
 67

 74
 30
185
 28
  2
  6
  9
 11
 41
  2
            21

             2


           233
            46
  13

  6
  98
                      26
                      17
152
249
 13
 50
 70
 76
  6
  2
  6
 50
            207
             52
  8
  4
  4
 92
             22
  2

  2

  8

187
122
  4
 63
 30
  2
 30
 30
                                                               303

-------
continued
                                                            DETROIT RIVKR PIIYTOI'LANKTON
                                          (mean  number  of  individuals/ml from replicate samples)
                                                                   May 1974
  N^ Uncarts W. Smith
  N^ palea  (Kuetz.) W. Smith
  NL_ sigmoiden  (Ehr.) W. Smith
  fL_ tryblionel la Hantzsch
  Opephora ma r t y 1 Herlbaud
  Plnnularla sp. Ehr.
  Rhlzosolenig  crlensls H. L. Smith
  Rholcosphcnia curvata  (Kuetz.) Grun.
  Rhopalodia aihba  (Ehr.) 0. Muell.
  Stephanodl scus astraea (Ehr.) Grun.
  Surlrella sp. Turpin
  S. angustata Kuetz.
  S_._ oval is Breb.
  Synedra spp. Ehr.
  §_._ actlnastroides Lemm.
  S_^ ulna (Nitz.) Ehr.
  Tabellaria f locculosa  (Roth) Kuetz.
Pyrrhophyta:
  Certatlum hirundlnella (0. F. Muell.)
    Dujardin
  Glenodinium penardiforme  (Linde.)
    Schiller
  G_._ pulvisculus (Ehr.) Stein
  Gymnodlnium fuscum  (£hr.) Stein
Euglenophyta:
  Colacium arbuscula Stein
  Eufllena sp. Ehr.
  £_._ convoluta Korshikov
  Phaseus sp. Dujardin
  Lepocinclis glabra Drezepolski
  Trachelomonas sp . Ehr.
  T_._ robusta Swirenko
  T\_ volvocina Ehr.
Other Flagellates:
  Chromullna sp. Cienkowski
  Chroomonas sp. Hansgirg
  Chrysococcus sp.  Klebs
  Cryptomonas sp . Ehr .
  Nephroselmls olivacea Stein
  Rhodomonas lacustris Pascher
  Unidentified flagellate
  Total Number of Species (S)
  Mean Total Individuals/ml (N)
  Richness  (S/ VT)
  Richness  (S-l/lnN)
  Shannon-Weaver Diversity  (3)

  *indicates single samples rather than replicates
  **no samples from this station
  *5

  11
  15
  63
  11
 391
 409
  52
  38
3132
0,68
4.60
2,76
  6
   4
  19
   6
           92

            2
            6
          223
          266
                                                                               **7
   8

  39
1416
1,04
5,24
2,64
19
4
15
8
20
32
17
7
21
4
35
10
22

9
4
                      115
                                 56
                        4
                      304
                                351
                                 131

                                   2
                                  26
                                          369
                                          447
                                           13
                                           11
                                           10
                                           100
                                                     15
                                                    386
                                                    354
142


 23

  2

349


408
47
3208
0,83
5,70
2,68
53
3032
0,96
5.49
2,97
38
2174
0.81
4.81
2.72
37
1899
0.85
4.77
2.54
                                                                304

-------
                    APPENDIX D-l
                 Modeling Theory
A general methodogy for modeling biological production in
aquatic systems has been described in an earlier report by
Canale (1970).   This work emphasized the transient behavior
of relatively complex ecosystems in single homogeneous
zones.  The ultimate goal of the project was to suggest how
the annual cylce of phytoplankton and nutrient behavior
might be simulated mathematically.  The report described the
complex kinetics of the system as characterized by nonlinear
reaction terms  and time-variable rate coefficients.
A relatively simpler class of problems is also of interest.
These problems  are concerned with the steady state distri-
bution of species whose decay or production tendency can be
decribed b^j first order kinetic formulations .   The following
list of water quality variables has been traditionally
analyzed using  such assumptions:
         1) Total dissolved solids or conductivity
         2) Chlorides
         3) Any Conservative Chemical Species
         4) Total Coliform Bacteria
         5) Dissolved Oxygen
         6) Biological Oxygen Demand
         7) Radioactive Isotopes
         8) Nitrogen (Nitrification Process)
This report describes a general user-oriented  program capable
of calculating  the three-dimensional steady state distribu-
tion of the above water quality variables in aquatic systems.
Mathematical models which can be useful for informed manage-
ment of water resources must be based on the diverse
chemical, physical, and biological mechanisms  active in the
system.  These  mechanisms are recognized by appropriate
terms in equations of continuity for each chemical or
                          305

-------
                    APPENDIX D-l

biological element of interest.   Essentially,  two distinct
types of mechanisms are recognized.   First,  are those pro-
cesses which alter the concentration  of  material within a
closed system due to departures of  the state from a chemi-
cal equilibrium state.  The study of  the rate  of changes
toward or away from this equilibrium  state  is  called kine-
tics.  The kinetic expressions may  be dependent on species
concentration, temperature, light intensity,  and pH.
A second process which can bring  about changes in the con-
centration of species results from  the mechanical action of
the fluid circulation and the subsequent dilution of con-
centration gradients.  The bulk behavior of the circulation
is characterized by gross convective  transfer,  while the
random small-scale fluid movement is  accounted for by
dispersion coefficients and transfer  due to concentration
gradients alone.  The above ideas are summarized by Equation
1'which is a descriptive statement  of the continuity law
for any material.  Equation 2'expresses  this same law in
mathematical form for a general three-dimensional system.
A direct solution of Equation 2'for natural systems is not
possible.  Therefore in practice  it is necessary to use
approximations which are equivalent to considering a con-
tinuous body of water as a series of  finite interconnected
segments as shown in Figure \.'.  In  this  case,  the steady-
state continuity equation with  first  order  kinetics reduces
to the following:
      dC
        Vlv  rt-_. r- f  C\  /   f* _1_  n  /"* \ I Tn  f f^  /"i \ i T T "\7 (~* l.T.T
      	 =y= £ { _M . (a . L, -r  6,  . U . )T~EM . 1 G . ~Lt ) } - V, K, U. ~rW,
     If             if ~\  l^T If   l/"~l  "I    U* TT   If     IF if K  U*
     K-J*.      i    K-J  !*"J K-   K-J  J    K.J   J   K.     is. IX K.  tv.

where:
     C,  = concentration of water  quality variable in segment
      *   k, (mg/1)
     V,  = volume of segment k,  (eft)
                           306

-------
                     APPENDIX D-l
     Q, . = net  flow  from segment  k to  segment j  (positive
        -'   ward)  (cubic  feet  per  second)

     a, . = finite  difference  weight given by ratio of flow
        •*   to dispersion,  0
-------
                     APPENDIX D-l


          akk " J^kj+V+W-Qkk kk+Ekk           (50
and
               Wk - Wk+CB                   <6'>
where Cg is the boundary concentration of  the  variable C  and
must be known.
If Qkk is negative then,
               a, ,  = E (Q. . o. .+E. :)+V. K, +Q, , B, , +E, ."      ,-,^
                kk   . vxkj kj   kj    k k xkk kk  kk      (7 )
and
               Wk =
The n equations would then be given by:

               3-T i «i "•" 3-1 oGr> °T~  	 ~<~3-i  C   =
                11 1    12 2             In n
               a ^CT + a 0C0 +  	+a  C   - W
                nl 1    n2 2            nn n    n
where the boundary conditions are incorporated into W, 's.

There are a number of numerical procedures for solving such
a set of n simultaneous equations in n unknowns.   The SSMP
uses an MTS subroutine called SLE1 which uses the  Gaussian
elimination technique.
Equation 3 is suitable for single dependent variables that
are not forced by outputs from other quality  systems.  Examples
of such a type are chloride, coliform, and BOD.  Other water
quality variables such as dissolved oxygen are coupled to
other systems.  The utilization of oxygen depends  on  the  dis-
tribution of BOD, and therefore it is necessary to first
                            308

-------
                     APPENDIX D-l

obtain  the distribution  of  BOD  and  then  use  these  results
in a continuity  equation for D.O,
Thus, the mass balance equation for D,0,  is:
                                                        (10-)
V, dCk =0=E { -Q  . (0, . C, +B,  . C . )+K  '. (C . -C. )  +V, K , (C . -C, ) -V, K ,, L. + W.
 k~3tf    j   kj   kJ  k  kJ J   kJ  J   k    k  akv sk  k'   k  dkTc-  k
where C ^ is the  saturation value of  D.O. , K , is  the reaera-
tion coefficient  in  segment k,  K,,  is the  deoxygenation
coefficient, L is  the biochemical oxygen demand and  +W is
now interpreted as sources  and  sinks  of  D.O. such  as ben thai
demands and photosynthetic production or respiration.  With
L, known from previous calculations,  the final solution  of
Equation 10" is similar  to  solution of Equation 3".
As spatial approximations to derivatives  have been used  in
Equations 3" and  10", some  error are  introduced into the
analysis.  One of  the errors is  "psuedo  or numerical disper-
sion."  It appears due to the assumption  of  completely mixed
finite volumes.  Numerical dispersion is  defined by  Equation
11-.
When akj = 1/2, E      is zero.
On the other hand, it can be shown that for a positive  solu-
tion the terms off the main diagonal in the left-hand side of
Equation 9  should be non-positive.  This condition is
satisfied if
Writing Equation 12  in another way, it is seen that L, . must
                                                       ^J
be chosen such that,
          r
          Lkj<
                            309

-------
                    APPENDIX D-l


For the case of zero numerical dispersion a, . = 1/2 and
                 2E, .A, .
If a, .  is set equal to 1/2 and L,  . is chosen in such a way
    KJ                           KJ
as to satisfy Equation 14', then it may be necessary to
handle many segments.  However, if a,  . differs very much
                                    KJ
from 1/2, then numerical dispersion would be high.  Further,
making a, .  = 1/2 does not imply the best solution for the
        KJ
case of unequal-sized segments.

In SSMP a, .  is first set equal to
         KJ

                   L.
            akj   _J	
                   T  4- T
                    k + Lj
In other words, the segment whose center is nearer to the
interface would have more weightage in determining the con-
centration at the interface in Equation 3",  The value of
a, . is then checked against Equation  12',  If it is not
 KJ
satisfied,  then
                                      £
            a,  . is made equal to  1 -  _k1	
                                      ~       ~
                                     *• ^kj

Choosing proper spatial grids for approximations  to  the
differential equations is still very much  an  art.  The more
numerous the segments in a model, the more accurate  the
resulting solution.  However, in such cases the  computer
costs may be very high, so a compromise  is necessary.  Con-
siderations of computer size, nature of  problems,  degree  of
accuracy, simplicity of the resulting finite  difference
equations, and availability of verifying field data  all  in-
                            310

-------
                    APPENDIX D-l

fluence the choice.  For additional details concerning these
questions the reader is referred to Thomann (1971),
                            311

-------
                         APPENDIX D-2
           Industrial Outfalls - Detroit River
Industry                                            Model Segment

U.S. Rubber Co.                                          5
Anaconda - American Brass                                9
Allied Chemical (W-100, W107)                           11
Great Lakes Steel (W47-53, 56, 101)                     15
Allied Chemical (¥113,114)                              15
Great Lakes Steel Hot Strip (W43)                       19
Great Lakes Steel Rolling Mill (W32-Hl,70)              19
Wyandotte Chemical - North Works                        31
Wyandotte Chemical - South Works                        37
Pennwalt Chemicals                                      37
Firestone Tire and Rubber                               37
McLouth Steel  (W8-11)                                   49
Mobil Oil Company                                       56
Chrysler Corp. (W2, 2a, 3, 6)                           60
Monsanto (W4,  5,  139)                                   60
McLouth Steel  (Wl)                                      60


  *OUTFALLS DESGINATED W - are according to
   Michigan Water Resources System
                               312

-------
                         APPENDIX D-3
            Flow Rates - Detroit River Model
    Year                                        Flow (cfs)

    1963                                        175,000

    1968                                        180,000

    1969                                        180,000

    1971                                        200,000

    1972                                        200,000

    1973                                        200,000

Note:   These are the average flow rates
       used to obtain the results for
       the Detroit Model.
                              313

-------
                        APPENDIX D-4
                  Chloride Loads - Detroit River
                  1963      1968      1969      1972      1973
Allied Chemical    45
Great Lakes Steel
  Main Plant       18
Detroit Waste
  Treatment Plant 562       1050*     1100*     1180*     1280*
Rouge River       310        270       245       120       120
Wyandotte-North  1300       1500      1400        30        30
Wyandotte-South    65        560       370       100        60
Pennwalt          510         30        20       230       200
Wayne Co. Treat-
  ment Plant       35         50*       60*       90*       95*

All loads as thousands (1000) of #/day
*estimated using increase flow rates and concentration measured
 in 1963
                                314

-------
                            APPENDIX D-4

      Chloride Concentrations (U. S. Public Health Loadings)
                       Detroit River - 1963
Mile Point

  20.6



  17.4 W



  14.6 W


  12.0 W



   8.7 W



   3.9



  3.9 
-------
Mile Point

  20.6


  17.4 W


  14.6 W


  12.0 W



   8.7 W


   3.9
                  APPENDIX D-4
Chloride Concentrations (estimated loadings)
             Detroit River - 1963

     Model Segment
       Numbers

        11-13
        19-21
        31-33
        37-39
        56-59
        67-70
   3.9 (cont.)    71-73
AMC
MFC
AMC
MFC
AMC
MPC
AMC
MPC
AMC
MPC
AMC
MPC
AMC
MPC
8
8
19
16
29
29
48
47
50
44
40+
44
12
9
8
8
10
8
14
13
25
23
28
24
40
39
12
_
8
8
10
8
10
10
18
13
20
14
22
23
35
-










13
16


  All values as mg/1

  AMC - average measured concentration based on stations located
        within corresponding model segment

  MPC - model predicted concentration
                                 316

-------
                           APPENDIX D-4

                       Chloride Concentrations
                      DETROIT RIVER -  1968
              Model Segment
                Numbers
Mile Point


  20.6


  17.4 W



  14.6 W


  12.0 W



   8.7 W



   3.9



   3.9 (cont.)
All values as mg/1


AMC - average measured concentration based on stations located
      within corresponding model segment

MPC - model predicted concentration
9-11

19-21

31-33

37-39

56-59 *

67-70

71-73

AMC
MPC
AMC
MPC
AMC
MPC
AMC
MPC
AMC
MPC
AMC
MPC
AMC
MPC
9
9
14
14
30
29
45
44
42
40
45+
40
10
10
9
9
11
9
13
12.4
18
22
22
23
41
35
20
-
9
9
10
9
10
10
13
13
14 '
14
22
22
40+
-










14
15


                                  317

-------
                             APPENDIX  D-4

                        Chloride Concentrations
                        DETROIT RIVER - 1969
Mile Point


  20.6



  17.4 W



  14.6 W


  12.0 W



   8.7 W



   3.9
Model Segment
  Numbers

   9-11
  19-21
  31-33
  37-39
  56-59
  67-70
   3.9 (cont.)    71-73
AMC
MPC
AMC
MPC
AMC
MPC
AMC
MPC
AMC
MPC
AMC
MPC
AMC
MPC
8
8
13
13
26
27
35
37
35
34
40+
34
9
9
8
8
8.5
8
11
11
15
21
20
21
34
31
16
-
8
8
8.5
8
10
9
12
12
12
13
19 12
20 14
35+
-
  All values as mg/1


  AMC - average measured concentration based on stations located
        within corresponding model segment

  MPC - model predicted concentration
                                   318

-------
                           APPENDIX  D-4
                      Chloride Concentrations
                      DETROIT RIVER - 1972
              Model Segment
                Numbers
Mile Point


  20.6



  17.4 W



  14.6 W



  12.0 W



   8.7 W



   3.9



   3.9 (cont.)
All values as mg/1


AMC - average measured concentration based on stations located
      within corresponding model segment

MPC - model predicted concentration
9-11

15-17

31-33

37-39

56-59

67-70

71-73

AMC
MPC
AMC
MPC
AMC
MPC
AMC
MPC
AMC
MPC
AMC
MPC
AMC
MPC
8
8
13
13
13
13
20
21
20
20
25+
19
9
9
8
8
8
8
11
11
12
12
13
12
22
18
17
16
8
8
8
8
9
9
10
11
11
11
15 10
13 11
30+
26
                                319

-------
                             APPENDIX  D-4
                        Chloride Concentrations
                        DETROIT RIVER -  1973
Mile Point


  20.6



  17.4 W



  14.6 W



  12.0 W



   8.7 W



   3.9
Model Segment
  Numbers

   9-11
  15-17
  31-33
  37-39
  56-59
  67-70
   3.9 (cont.)    71-73
AMC
MPC
AMC
MPC
AMC
MPC
AMC
MPC
AMC
MPC
AMC
MPC
AMC
MPC
9
9
14
14
15
14
20
21
16
20
25
20
10
10
9
9
9
9
11
12
13
13
13
14
18
18
18
17
9
9
9
9
10
10
10
12
12
12
13 12
14 12
30+
27
  All values as mg/1


  AMC - average measured concentration based on stations located
        within corresponding model segment

  MPC - model predicted concentration
                                  320

-------
                        APPENDIX D-5

                      Phenol Loads
                      Detroit River
Allied Chemical

Great Lakes Steel
  Main Plant

Detroit Waste
  Treatment Plant

Rouge River

Wyandotte-North

Pennwalt

Wayne Co. Treat-
  ment Plant

Mclouth Steel

Mobil Oil
1963
2
370
1260
400
34
300
12
20
350
1968
74
150
1390*
60
-
85
20
-
240
1969
62
130
1400*
70
-
22
20
-
260
1972
65
80
1600
20
-
16
25
-
3
1973
50
110
1750
20
-

25
-
3
All loads in #/day

^estimated values
                                321

-------
                             APPENDIX D-5
                         Phenol Concentrations
                        DETROIT RIVER -   1963
Mile Point


  20.6



  17.4 W



  14.6 W


  12.0 W



   8.7 W



   3.9
Model Segment
  Numbers

   9-11
  15-17
  31-33
  37-39
  56-59
  67-70
   3.9 (cont.)     71-73
AMC
MPC
AMC
MPC
AMC
MPC
AMC
MPC
AMC
MPC
AMC
MPC
AMC
MPC
2
2
11
10
8
8
16
17
30
25
6
8
2
3
2
2
3
2
6
5
16
7
12
8
5
6
1
3
2
2
2
2
3
3
10
5
8
5
4
4
1
2










4
4


  All values as mg/1

  AMC - average measured concentration based on stations located
        within corresponding model segment

  MPC - model predicted concentration
                                   322

-------
                             APPENDIX  D-5
                         Phenol Concentrations
                        DETROIT RIVER - 1968
Mile Point


  20.6



  17.4 W



  14.6 W



  12.0 W



   8.7 W



   3.9
Model Segment
  Numbers

   9-11
  19-21
  31-33
  37-39
  56-59
  67-70
   3.9 (cont.)     71-73
AMC
MFC
AMC .
MPC
AMC
MPC
AMC
MPC
AMC
MPC
AMC
MPC
AMC
MPC
2
2
9
8
5
5
6
6
11
12
6
6
2
2
2
2
5
2
3
3
5
4
5
4
5
5
2
2
2
2
4
2
2
2
4
3
4
3
3 2
3 3
2
2
  All values as mg/1


  AMC - average measured concentration based on stations located
        within corresponding model segment

  MPC - model predicted concentration
                                   323

-------
                             APPENDIX  D-5
                         Phenol Concentrations
                        DETROIT RIVER -   1969
Mile Point


  20.6



  17.4 W



  14.6 W



  12.0 W



   8.7 W



   3.9



   3.9 (cont.)
Model Segment
  Numbers

   9-11



  19-21



  31-33



  37-39



  56-59



  67-70



  71-73
AMC
MPC
AMC
MPC
AMC
MPC
AMC
MPC
AMC
MPC
AMC
MPC
AMC
MPC
2
2
9
9
7
6
6
7
13
13
8
8
2
3
2
2
3
2
4
4
5
5
5
5
7
7
2
2
2
2
3
2
2
2
4
4
4
4
4 3
4 4
2
2
  All values as mg/1


  AMC - average measured concentration based on stations located
        within corresponding model segment

  MPC - model predicted concentration
                                    324

-------
                             APPENDIX  D-5
                          Phenol Concentrations
                        DETROIT RIVER -  1972
Mile Point

  20.6


  17.4 W


  14.6 W


  12.0 W


   8.7 W


   3.9
Model Segment
  Numbers

   9-11
  15-17
  31-33
  37-39
  56-59
  67-70
   3.9 (cont.)     71-73
AMC
MPC
AMC
MPC
AMC
MPC
AMC
MPC
AMC
MPC
AMC
MPC
AMC
MPC
1.5
1.5
7
8
5
5
6
6
8
7
6
5
1
2
1.5
1.5
2
2
3
3
5
4
5
4
4
4
1
2
1.5
1.5
1
1
2
2
4
3
4
3
2 1
3 3
1
2
  All values as mg/1

  AMC - average measured concentration based on stations located
        within corresponding model segment

  MPC - model predicted concentration
                                  325

-------
                           APPENDIX D-5
                       Phenol Concentrations
                      DETROIT RIVER - 1973
              Model Segment
                Numbers
Mile Point


  20.6



  17.4 W



  14.6 W



  12.0 W



   8.7 W



   3.9



   3.9 (cont.)
All values as mg/1


AMC - average measured concentration based on stations located
      within corresponding model segment

MFC - model predicted concentration
9-11

15-17

31-33

37-39

56-58

67-70

71-73

AMC
MPC
AMC
MPC
AMC
MPC
AMC
MPC
AMC
MPC
AMC
MPC
AMC
MPC
i
1
7
8
5
5
5
6
5
6
5
4
1
2
1
1
1
1
3
3
4
4
4
4
3
3
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
4
3
3
3
2 2
3 2
1
1
                                 326

-------
Great Lakes Steel
  (Zug Island)
Detroit Waste Treatment
  Plant
Rouge River
Great Lakes Steel
  Rolling + Hot Strip
Wayne County
Firestone
McLouth Steel
                          APPENDIX D_6
                          Iron Loads
                         Detroit River
                         1968
1969
   8
1972
1973
67*
11
220
.35*
.25
5
75*
7
170
.35*
.25
15*
180
6
4
.5
.2
5
180
6
4
.
.
5



5
2

All loadings in thousands (1000) of #/day
*estimated values
                               327

-------
Mile Point


    20.6



    17.4 W



    14.6 W



    12.0 W



     8.7 W



     3.9
                             APPENDIX  D-6

                      Total Iron Concentrations
                         Detroit River - 1968
Model Segment
  Numbers
      9-11
     19-21
     31-33
     37-39
     56-58
     67-70
     3.9 (cont.)
     71-73
AMC
MFC
AMC
MFC
AMC
MPC
AMC

AMC
MPC
AMC
MPC
AMC
MPC
.35
.35
2.0
1.6
.87
.96
1.0
.97
1.1
1.1
1.2
1.1
.45
.46
.35
.35
.40
.37
.56
.66
.78
.83
1.0
.83
1.0
1.0
.50
.42
.35
.35
.40
.35
.45
.46
.55
.67
.80
.70
.80 .60
.81 .71
.60
.40
    All values as mg/1

    AMC - average measured concentration based on stations located within
          corresponding model segment

    MPC - model predicted concentration
                                    328

-------
                             APPENDIX D-6

                      Total Iron Concentrations
                         Detroit River - 1969
Mile Point
    20.6
    17.4
    14.6 W
    12.0 W
     8.7 W
     3.9
Model Segment
  Numbers

      9-11
     19-21
     31-33
     37-39
     56-58
     67-70
     3.9 (cont.)
     71-73
AMC
MPC
AMC
MPC
AMC
MPC
AMC
MPC
AMC
MPC
AMC
MPC
AMC
MPC
.35
.35
1.5
1.4
.87
.85
.85
.84
1.4
1.3
1.0
1.3
.50
.43
.35
.35
.40
.37
.56
.56
.70
.72
1.2
.74
.80
1.1
.40
.40
.35
.35
.40
.35
.45
.45
.48
.58
.72
.60
.70
.74
.60
.39










.60
.61


    All values as mg/1

    AMC - average measured concentration based on stations located within
          corresponding model segment

    MPC - model predicted concentration
                                    329

-------
Mile Point


    20.6



    19.0



    14.6 W



    12.0 W



     8.7 W



     3.9
                             APPENDIX  D-6

                      Total Iron Concentrations
                        Detroit River - 1972
Model Segment
  Numbers
      9-11
     15-17
     31-33
     37-39
     56-58
     67-70
     3.9 (cont.)
     71-73
AMC
MFC
AMC
MPC
AMC
MPC
AMC
MPC
AMC
MPC
AMC
MPC
AMC
MPC
.40
.40
1.0
1.0
.66
.65
.76
.67
.86
.76
1.2
.76
.45
.40
.40
.40
.40
.40
.45
.47
.73
.57
.80
.60
1.1
.71
.45
.38
.40
.40
.40
.40
.43
.40
.62
.48
.67
.49
,80
,57
.50
.38










.60
.50


    All values as mg/1

    AMC - average measured concentration based on stations located within
          corresponding model segment

    MPC - model predicted concentration
                                    330

-------
Mile Point


20.6



19.0



14.6 W


12.0 W



 8.7 W



 3.9



 3.9 (cont.)
          APPENDIX D-6

  Total Iron Concentrations
    Detroit River - 1973

Model Segment
  Numbers
  9-11
 15-17
 31-33
 37-39
 56-58
 67-70
 71-73
AMC
MPC
AMC
MPC
AMC
MPC
AMC
MPC
AMC
MPC
AMC
MPC
AMC
MPC
.35
.35
1.0
1.0
.66
.65
.66
.66
.75
.75
.80
.75
.40
.40
.35
.35
.25
.36
.45
.47
.55
.57
.50
.57
.80
.70
.30
.38
.35
.35
.25
.35
.40
.40
.50
.48
.48
.48
.60 .50
.56 .50
.50
.38
All values as mg/1

AMC - average measured concentration based on stations located withii
      corresponding model segment

MPC - model predicted concentration
                               331

-------
                           APPENDIX D-7
                        AMMONIA LOADING
                         DETROIT RIVER
                               1972         1973
Great Lakes Steel Main Plant    18           20
Detroit Waste Treatment Plant   51*          59*
Rouge River                      1            1
Wyandotte - North                3            3
Pennwalt                         0.5          0.5
Wayne County                     3*           4*
McLouth Steel                    1            1

All loadings in thousand's (1000) of #/day
^estimated values
                               332

-------
Mile Point
            APPENDIX  D-7
   Ammonia Nitrogen Concentrations
        Detroit River - 1972
Model Segment
  Numbers
20.6

19.0

14.6 W

12.0 W

8.7 W

3.9

3.9 (cont.)

9-11

15-17

31-33

37-39

56-58

67-70

71-73

AMC
MFC
AMC
MPC
AMC
MPC
AMC
MPC
AMC
MPC
AMC
MPC
AMC
MPC
.04
.04
.29
.29
.40
.30
.35
.36
.35
.37
.46
.36
.10
.07
.04
.04
.06
.05
.15
.17
.15
.24
.20
.24
.35
.33
.05
.06
.04
.04
.06
.04
.05
.07
.10
.17
.15
.18
.20
.23
.05
.05










.13
.19


All values as mg/1
AMC - average measured concentration
      corresponding model segment
MPC - model predicted concentration
                        - based on stations located within
                                333

-------
                             APPENDIX D-7

                   Ammonia Nitrogen Concentrations
                        Detroit River - 1973

Mile Point      Model Segment
                  Numbers

   20.6              9-11



   19.0             15-17



   14.6 W           31-33



   12.0 W           37-39



    8.7 W           56-58



    3.9             67-70



    3.9 (cont.)     71-73




   All values as mg/1

   AMC - average measured concentration based on stations located within
         corresponding model segment

   MFC - model predicted concentration
AMC
MPC
AMC
MPC
AMC
MPC
AMC
MPC
AMC
MPC
AMC
MPC
AMC
MPC
.03
.03
.33
.32
.34
.33
.40
.41
.38
,41
.40
.40
.02
.08
.03
.03
,03
.03
.08
.19
.20
.27
.20
,27
.40
.37
.03
.06
.03
.03
.03
.03
.05
.08
.10
.19
.13
.20
.15 .04
,26 .21
.04
.05
                                    334

-------
                          APPENDIX D-8

                  Total Phosphorous Loadings
                         Detroit River

                          1971      1972      1973

Detroit Waste Treatment
  Plant                   27,000    37,000    48,000
Wayne County               3,000     3,000     3,000


All values as #/day
                               335

-------
                             APPENDIX  D_8
                     Total Phosphorous Concentrations
                        DETROIT RIVER -  1971

Mile Point      Model Segment
                  Numbers

  20.6             9-11



  19. Q •:          15-17
              !i

  14.6 W          31-33



  12.0 W          37-39



   8.7 W          56-58



   3.9            67-70



   3.9 (cont.)    71-73



  All values as mg/1


  AMC - average measured concentration based on stations located
        within corresponding model segment

  MPC - model predicted concentration
AMC
MPC
AMC
MPC '
AMC
MPC
AMC
MPC
AMC
MPC
AMC
MPC
AMC
MPC
.03
.03
.10
.14
.10
.13
.14
.19
.19
.13
.22
.18
.04
.06
.03
.03
.02
.03
.08
.09
.11
.12
.15
.12
.20
.17
.03
.05
.03
.03
.02
.03
.05
.06
.07
.09
.12
.10
.15
.12
. .03
.05










.09
.10


                                     336

-------
                           APPENDIX  D-8
                Total Phosphorous Concentrations
                      DETROIT RIVER -  1972

              Model  Segment
                Numbers
Mile Point


  20.6


  19.0



  14.6 W


  12.0 W


   8.7 W


   3.9


   3.9 (cont.)
All values as mg/1


AMC - average measured concentration based on stations located
      within corresponding model segment

MPC - model predicted concentration
9-11

15-17

31-33

37-39

56-58

67-70

71-73

AMC
MPC
AMC
MPC
AMC
MPC
AMC
MPC
AMC
MPC
AMC
MPC
AMC
MPC
.04
.04
.09
.17
.10
.17
.12
.23
.14
.21
.20+
.21
.07
.06
.04
.04
.03
.04
.07
.11
.07
.14
.12
.15
.20
.20
.05
.05
.04
.04
.03
.04
.03
.06
.05
.11
• .08
.11
.12
.14
.04
.05
                                  337

-------
                             APPENDIX  D_8
                      Total Phosphorous Concentrations
                        DETROIT RIVER -  1973
Mile Point      Model Segment
                  Numbers

  20.6             9-11



  19.0            15-17



  14.6 W          31-33



  12.0 W          37-39



   8.7 W          56-58



   3.9            67-70



   3.9 (cont.)    71-73
AMC
MPC
AMC
MPC
AMC
MPC
AMC
MPC
AMC
MPC
AMC
MPC
AMC
MPC
.05
.05
.13
.22
.13
.21
.13
.26
.18
.25
.17+
.25
.06
.08
.05
.05
.04
.05
.07
.14
.10
.18
.10
.19
.16
.23
.04
.07
.05
.05
.04
.05
.06
.08
.06
.14
.07
.15
.11 .07
.18 .15
.04
.06
  All values as mg/1


  AMC - average measured concentration based on stations located
        within corresponding model segment

  MPC - model predicted concentration
                                    338

-------
                                                   APPENDIX D-9
                                       ASSUMED LOADINGS FOR WATER QUALITY PROJECTIONS
OJ
   Source
Chloride
1 OOP// /day

1460a
120


1300
550
509*
95





Phenol
///day
37
161
93
20




3.8*
25

26
20
0.5

Ammonia Nitrogen
///day
125
9034*
8340b
33000^
67000
1000


3486*
352
65
4000

834



Phosphorus
///day


4750
400


875*


3000
33*


16.7*
520
Iron
///day

2250***
330006
6000
3700***
1300***



500
50*
3050***



Allied Chemical Semet Solvay Division
Great Lakes Steel - Blast Furnace Div.
Detroit Wastewater Treatment Plant

Rouge River**
Great Lakes Steel - Hot Strip Mill
Great Lakes Steel - Rolling Mill
Wyandotte Chemical North Works
Wyandotte Chemical South Works
Pennwalt Chemical
Wayne County Waste Treatment Plant**
Firestone Tire and Rubber
McLouth Steel - Trenton Plant
Mobil Oil Company
Chrysler Corporation
Monsanto Company
McLouth Steel - Gibraltar Plant
* max. allowable loads, average value not available
** estimated values based on 1972-1973 values
*** permit loading given in mg/1, assumed load based on total plant flow est. and 3 mg/1 average
                                                                                                                 27
   a based on 1 BCD and 175 mg/1 ave.
   b,c,d based on 1 BCD and 1,4 and 8 mg/1 respectively
   e based on 1 BCD and 4 mg/1 average

-------
                                                 APPENDIX D-9

                                  Water Quality Projections -  Chloride
                                             Detroit River - 1977
CO
-O
o
            15
            10
        bO
        6   5
                    J_J	L
                    100  200   300
500
800      1000

   Feet from U.S.  shore
                                                                                     Dt. 19.0
1500
2000
            50


            40


            30


            20
        oo
        6   10
                   TW"
500
         1000      1200
   Feet from U.S.  shore
                                               Dt,  12,OW
                                               1500

-------
                            APPENDIX D-9
                  Water Quality Projections - Chloride
                      Detroit River - 1977
iH
0
t-l
oo
e
50
40
30
20
10
0
— Dt, 8.7W
—

Ill II
10&
500       700          1000       1200

                 Feet from U.S.  shore
rH
U
i-l
00
e
50
40
30
20
10
0
Dt. 3,9
1

%

II II
1,000 5,000 10,000 15,000
                                     Feet from U.S.  shore

-------
                                            APPENDIX D-9
                                  Water Quality Projectioas >- Phenol

                                        Detroit River - 1977
                                                                                 Dt, 19.0
o
a

-------
                                                     APPENDIX D-9

                                         Water Quality Projections - Phenol

                                               Detroit River - 1977
u>
*-
UJ
        o


        I  3
        OC
        3.
           1




           0
                                                                                      Dt. 8.7W
           I     I     I
         I
                    100   200  300
                             500
        1,000

Feet from U.S.
   1,200

shore
        O
        c
        a)
        .c
2




1




0
                                                                                      Dt. 3.9
                    J	

                    1,000
                             5,000
       J	

        10,000
                 15,000

-------
                                       APPENDIX l)-9
                     Water Duality Projection - Ammonia Nitrogen
                                  Detroit River - 1977
.50
.40
.30
.20
.10
0
_
Dt. 19.0
~~ Detroit WWTP - 8 mg/1 ave.

—
lit 'i


| | | | ( , 	 __
1UU 200 300 500 1000 1500
                               Feet from U,  S,  shore
.50  __
         1,000
5,000
          10,000

Feet from U.S. shore
                                                                           Dt, 3.9
a
on
§ .30
rH
If .20
.10
0
1



II 1 1
15,000

-------
                           APPENDIX D-9

            Water Quality- Projection - Ammonia Nitrogen
                        Detroit River - 1977
.30
.25

.20
S5
5zT -15
•H
"« .10
0
.05
0
CJ
t
— Dt, 19,0
Detroit WWTP - 4.0 mg/1 avg
—
—

1
—

1 1 1 1 I 1
100 200 300 500 1000 1500
m Feet from U.S. shore
.30
.25
.20
2
sf *15
l-i
~M .10
0
.05
0
'
1
Dt. 3.9
-,
-
i —
—

II 1 1
1,000
5,000                   10,000

        Feet from U.S. shore
15,000

-------
                                      APPENDIX D-9
                        Water Quality Projection - Ammonia Nitrogen
                                  Detroit River - 1977
CO
.£>
,15
.10
^ -05
^ °
~ob
0
Dt, 19.. 0
__ Detroit WWTP - 1,0 mg/1 ave, d
— •
till 1 1
100 200 300 500 1000 1500
                                    Feet from U.S. shore
       K
       00
       a
.25

.20

.15

.10

.05

0
                                                                       Dt. 3.9
         1,000
                                        5,000                  10,000

                                               Feet from U.S. shore
15,000

-------
                                                  APPENDIX D-9

                                        Water Quality Projections  -  Iron

                                             ' Detroit River  - 1977


d
0
M
"S

.7
.6
.5
.4
.3
.2
.1
0
—
__ Dt. 19.0

—
i

—
—
till 1 1
100  200  300      500

           Feet from U.S. shore
                                                                1000
                        1500
CO
.fs





a
o
M
H
r-i
00
&


.6
C
. 3

.4

.3
.2

,1
0
—

1

__ Dt. 12. OW

—

•
—
I 1 1 1 II
                    100   200  300      500

                                Feet from U.S. shr>r*>
1000
                                                     1200

-------
    .6

    .5
°   .«
                                            'APPENDIX  D-9
                                  Water Quality  Projections  -  Iron
                                       Detroit  River  -  1977
                                                                                          Dt.  8.7W
.2
.1
n
—
—
1
100
CO


1 1 1
200 300 500
Feet from U.S. shore


1
1000



1
1200

                                                                                                                     A
    .6

    .5

g   .4
oo
e
.3

.2

.1

0
             1,000              5,000
                        Feet from U.S.  shore
                                                      10,000
                                                                                                                 \ ''"1
                                                                                           Dt.  3.9
15,000

-------