-------
Table 3-3 gives details of water use information for principal
municipalities. The table includes projections for major water service
areas to the years 1980 and 2020.
Industrial Water Supply
The major demand for self-supplied industrial water occurs in
the general areas shown in Table 3-4. Projections contained in the
table were developed following consideration of anticipated increases
in industrial activity and water use efficiency factors.
Recreation
The Bureau of Outdoor Recreation (BOR) and the Bureau of Sport
Fisheries and Wildlife both of the Department of the Interior have
prepared reports concerning the recreational, fish, and wildlife aspects
of the Lake Michigan Basin. (9,10) The BOR has estimated that the
annual pressure on the entire Lake Michigan Basin as a whole was
176,000,000 activity days for water-oriented and water related recrea-
tion. Projections indicate that water oriented recreation in the Lake
Michigan Basin may well increase more than threefold by the year 2000.
Green Bay including Little and Big Bays de Noc and the Door
Peninsula is highly important from a recreational use standpoint. The
users of the larger pleasure boats find the Green Bay area ideal for
their purposes. Approximately 7,000 recreational boats use the waters
of the Bay during the boating season. It is large enough area to be
challenging to their boats and boating ability, yet it is safer than
the main body of Lake Michigan. Thus the Green Bay-Bay de Noc area is
becoming a mecca for the weekend sailor.
While the Lower Fox River is no longer used for commercial boat-
ing, some 1,000 boats passed through the locks on some part of the
River in 1963, indicating the use of this area by pleasure craft.
Recreational use of southern Green Bay has been limited consider-
ably due to pollution for many years. Swimming at Bay Beach Park on
the east Bay shore has been prohibited by the Green Bay Health
Department for approximately 25 years. All types of fishing in the
Green Bay City vicinity are now virtually non-existent, due to pollution.
Irrigation
The present (i960) water usage for irrigation in the Green Bay
study area is estimated to be approximately 12 mgd on the average
during the growing season. Irrigation is most extensive in the Fox
River watershed, (ll) It is anticipated that this usage will increase
threefold by 1980. While irrigation plays no significant role in the
water quality problems described in Chapter 6, it is a use that bears
3-2
-------
TABLE 3-3
SUMMARY OF MUNICIPAL WATER SUPPLIES
AND PROJECTED INCREASES IN WATER USAGE
IN PRINCIPAL SERVICE AREAS
GREEN BAY WATERSHED -AREA
Location
Necauriee
Gladstone
Escanafca
Iron Mountain -
Source
Wells-W
Surface-S
S
S
S
S
Population
Served
(1962)
Michigan
6, ICO
4,800
15,4oo
15,000
Demand
1962
(&GD)
1.14
0.62
1.72
1.4l
Demand
1980
(MGD)
3-9
Demand
2020
(MOD)
4.1
Kingsford
Mencminee
Marinette
Menorainee-Marinette
Area
Green Bay
Green Bay Are
Appleton
Appleton Area
Neenah
Menasha
S 11,000
Wisconsin
S 14,000
1.5
S
S
w&s
S
w&s
S
S
66,000
52,700
19,700
15,300
9.4
12.8
6.16
16.3
3-50
4.55
5-0
23
27
5.0
-------
TABL3 3-3 (Cont'd)
Location
Treble, 3-D.
De Pere
Kaukauna
Oshkosh
Fond Du Lac
Source
Wells-W
Surface-S
W
W
W
S
W
Populati on
Served
(1962)
12,500
11;2CO
10,400
46,300
33,600
Demand Demand
1962 1980
(KGD) (KGD)
0.81
1.84
0.80
4.20
3.20
Demand
2020
(KGD)
(l) Municipal demand includes industrial water supplied by the
municipal supply.
(2) Includes Green Bay, Allouez, Ashuabenon, De Pere, and Preble, Wise.
(3) Includes Kaukauna, Kimberly, Little Chute, Appleton, Keenah, and
Menasha, Wisconsin.
-------
TABLE 3-!+
SELF-SUPPLIED INDUSTRIAL WATER DEMAND
(KGD)
Area 1959 1980 2020
Lower Pox River^1) 127 214 3^4
Oshkosh 14 20 38
Marinette-Mencminee 43 63 78
Escanaba 5 6 9
(l) Includes: Neenah, Menasha, Appleton, Kaukauna,
De Pere, and Green Bay
-------
watching in terms of water demands during low stream flow conditions
particularly as the irrigation demand increases in the future.
Fish and Aquatic Life
The cleaner central and northern waters of Green Bay and its
tributaries support a wide variety of fish. Important species include
trout, smallmouth bass, walleyed pike, northern pike and panfish.
Little and Big Bays de Noc are cited as being particularly important
from a fishery standpoint. The tributary fishery is important for
recreational use while the waters of Green Bay are important from both
a recreational and a commercial standpoint. (10,13)
Lake Michigan's western shore plays an interesting role in the
migration pattern of many bird species. The protection afforded by
this area causes many waterfowl and shorebirds to concentrate along
this extensive north-south coast, especially during periods of
seasonal migration. The southwest and west shores of Green Bay for
example are areas of shallow water containing a variety of desirable
aquatic plants which provide suitable habitat for migrating fowl.
Further south, however, the polluted discharges from the Fox River
are creating conditions unfavorable to these aquatic plants.
Wildlife and Stock Watering
The present (i960) agricultural water use for stock watering
in the Green Bay watershed is approximately 9 mgd. (11,12) Projections
of this usage indicate that the demand will more than double by 2020.
This particular water usage does not plan a significant role in the
water quality problems described in Chapter 6.
Hydropower
There are 37 hydroelectric installations in the Green Bay study
area. These plants have an installed capacity of approximately
200,000 kilowatts (KW). Plant locations are summarized in Table 3-5
by river basin.
TABLE 3-5
HYDROELECTRIC INSTALLATIONS
GREEN BAY WATERSHED
Number of Approximate Capacity
River Basin Installations KW
Escanaba 5 12,000
Menominee 15 110,000
Peshtigo 5 22,000
Oconto 3 3,500
Fox 9 25,000
3-3
-------
There are approximately 26 potential hydroelectric sites which,
if developed, would provide an additional 120,000 KW capacity.
Under low stream flow conditions the operation of these instal-
lations can seriously effect downstream water quality. Wisconsin laws
require that a minimum of 25$ of the stream flow be passed through the
facilities at all times. Michigan has no such requirements. As can
be seen from the Chapter 6 discussion of present water quality
problems, releases from these installations may be inadequate under
low flow conditions to maintain desirable downstream water quality
conditions.
Commercial Shipping
There are several commercial harbors in the Green Bay Area.
The St. Lawrence Seaway has made world ports of the cities adjoining
Green Bay. Commercial shipping cargoes at the City of Green Bay
consist primarily of plywood, veneers, pulpwood, and iron and steel
products. Green Bay Harbor is located on Green Bay at the mouth of
the Fox River. The widened channel in the Fox River is 24 feet deep
to a point beyond the Chicago and North Western Railway bridge and
19 feet deep to De Pere. This channel also has three turning basins.
The Fox River provides a channel 6 feet deep from De Pere to the
mouth of the Wolf River. Traffic in this section has declined in
recent years; no commercial traffic was reported in 1963.
Kenominee-Marinette Harbor is located at the mouth of the
Menominee River. Waterborne commerce at Menominee Harbor consists
primarily of car-ferry traffic and the receiving of coal and lime-
stone. Car-ferry steamers operate throughout the year between this
port and Frankfort, Michigan.
Escanaba Harbor is situated on the west shore of Little Bay de
Noc. Extensive ore docks and wharves have been built and slips
adjacent thereto have been provided by railway and other corporations.
This Harbor moves more tons of traffic than any other harbor in the
Green Bay Area.
Gladstone Harbor is located on the western shore of Little Bay
de Noc about eight miles north of Escanaba. Petroleum products are
the major items of traffic.
A summary of 1964 vessel traffic in the various ports of
Green Bay is given below in Table 3-6.
3-4
-------
TABLE 3-6
VESSEL TRAFFIC, GREEN BAY AREA
Vessel Traffic
Port (Tons) Vessel Movements
Green Bay, Wise, (includes De Pere) 2,516,659 988
Menominee, Michigan-
Marinette, Wisconsin 453,553 480
Escanaba, Michigan 7,707,940 1,108
Gladstone, Michigan 278,849 188
By 1980 and 2020 this tonnage is expected to increase somewhat,
however, the actual number of ship movements may be expected to remain
approximately the same due to anticipated increase in vessel size.
Cooling Water
Thermo-electric generating installations exert a major demand
for cooling water. There are 27 such plants in the Green Bay Watershed.
These plants have a total installed capacity of just under 500,000 KW
and require an estimated 700 KGD for cooling purposes. Thirteen of
these plants are located along the Fox River from Lake Winnebago to
Green Bay. The waste heat from these plants intensify the water
quality problems along the Lower Fox River as discussed in Chapter 6.
On the average water passing through the cooling condensers of such
installations raise the incoming water temperature some 12-13°F on a
once through basis.
Waste Assimilation
Use of streams in the Green Bay Basin for waste assimilation is
one of the predominant present day uses, and in several locations the
cause of extreme problems in water pollution control. These will be
discussed in Chapters 4 and 6.
Esthetics
Since the esthetic appearance of streams and lakes is an in-
tangible quantity there are no numerical factors by which it can be
rated. It is, nevertheless, a very important factor in determining
the recreational potential of the Fox-Green Bay Area. Camping,
picnicking, sightseeing, while not directly water-oriented activities,
are considerably enhanced as an experience by esthetically pleasing
water. Pollution robs the water of its esthetic value for such
activities.
Since this area will be called upon to provide recreation for
many people from out of this area it is very important that the area
3-5
-------
and the waters of the area be kept esthetically pleasing. It is also
important, if not more important, that the area is attractive and
remains so to those people who live there every day of the year.
Water Quality Goals
The preceding discussion of water uses now being practiced as
well as the anticipated growth of these uses presupposes that adequate
water, both in quantity and quality, will be available to accommodate
them. Quantity factors have already been prescribed in Chapter 2.
Quality factors require consideration of both technical needs of the
water uses to be accommodated and judgment with respect to compatibility
of water quality requirements of competing water uses. The development
of Water Quality Criteria is a first step in the development of the
quality factors needed in water pollution control.
The establishment of water quality criteria for the significant
water uses of the Lake Michigan Basin was accomplished through the
organization of four water quality work groups chaired by a member of
the Technical Committee shown in Table 1-2. These work groups consisted
of representatives of the states, municipalities and industries of the
Lake Michigan Basin.
These four work groups, The Municipal Work Group; The Industrial
Work Group; The Fish, Aquatic Life, and Recreation Work Group; and the
General Work Group considered water quality needs to support eleven .
specific water uses, namely:
Municipal Water Supply
Industrial Water Supply
Recreation - Whole and Partial Body Contact
Irrigation
Fish and Aquatic Life
Wildlife and Stock Watering
Hydropower
Commercial Shipping
Cooling Water Supply
Waste Assimilation
Esthetics
The criteria developed by the four work groups give maximum or minimum
desirable concentrations of various water quality parameters, above or
below which the stated water uses would be adversely affected. Limits
were not set for all water quality parameters but rather for those
parameters which are generally most significant in the Lake Michigan
Basin. The findings of the water quality work groups are summarized
in Table 3-7. Minimum dissolved oxygen requirements and maximum
coliform, phosphate, phenol, and ammonia nitrogen concentrations are
most pertinent to water quality problems within the study area.
3-6
-------
In the study area there are certain sectors in which specific
uses discussed in this Chapter are being jeopardized. The affected
are indicated on Table 3-1 by means of an asterisk. In these sectors,
where pollution is adversely affecting water quality to the extent
that the established water quality criteria are not met, the criteria
become the water quality goals to be met by pollution control
measures. Further discussion of the water quality problems in the
study area is contained in Chapter 6. These areas will be protected
through the comprehensive water pollution control action program for
the Green Bay Area outlined in Chapter 9.
3-7
-------
3ARAMETER
jLtions For Any One Sample
WATER USE WATER QUALITY 1
(Maximum or Minimum Concentre
("^05) a^JI^S
v^n^)^:
(*°II PToqsajqj;)
(x-ea) s-iopo
(OT) 3£**m
T/3a fx-em)
J^S®
I/Sra (XTsnz)
T/HtU /-.
(x-ettfj JI-%M
T/SuifxBun £a05
(x^atj (i\
(xw)
(XTBtn)
(xisni)
T/Sm
(X"8tfC) SVSW
T /Sen
(x^ai) aptjcottiD
(»., »^«
(=9u^) Hd
I^Sui (uftn) oa
Rl
00
o
"o?
oo
o
H
0
^O
oo
H
H
O
O
LT\
H
O
a
1
c~ o
• *
C— ON
O
00
Municipal Water
Source
H
o
CU
o
o
t^
IT*
o
p
§
o
OO
o
ir\
OJ
0
H
O
in
OJ
o
H
IA O^
O
H
Industrial Process
Water
<
o
o
o
UA
•
o
oo
Recreational-V/hole
Body Contact
ra
o
ON
o
tr\
OJ
O
H
Recreational-Limited
Body Contact
Irrigation
o
ON
0
UN
o
H
8
UN
OJ
0
V£> O"
0
00
Fish and Aquatic
Life-Tolerant
t—
03
0
lf\
O
r4
8
OJ
o
^0>
o
Fish and Aquatic
Life-Facultative
CO
VQ
o
ITv
O
*
H
8
ir\
OJ
O
^)ON
O
MD
Fish and Aquatic
Life-Intolerant
0
OJ
OJ
LTNC\
Wildlife and Live-
stock Watering
o
LPv
OJ
u^ON
Hydroelectric Pover
o
ITN
OJ
LAO^
, ,.
Commercial Shipping
o
ON
o
UN
OJ
8
c—
ir\ ON
Cooling
o
H
o
*
H
Esthetics
3
UN ON
o
H
Waste Water
Assimilation
i
i
d
•
•
r
F
H"
to
0)
See Following
-------
TABLE 3-7 (Continued)
(l) Coliform Guides
Coliform Guide A - Recreational whole body contact use. The
water uses for which this guide is intended are those that entail
total and intimate contact of the whole body with the water. Examples
of such use are swimming, skin diving, and water skiing, in which the
body is totally immersed and some ingestion of the water may be
expected. Recommended guide value for coliforms is 1,000 per 100
milliliters (1,000/100 ml). For all waters in which coliform levels
are below the guide value of 1,000/100 ml, the water is considered
suitable provided there is proper isolation from direct fecal con-
tamination as determined by a sanitary survey. Situations may arise
wherein waters having coliform counts somewhat higher than the guide
value can be used, provided supplemental techniques are used to
determine safe bacterial quality. The analysis for fecal streptococci
is more definitive for determing the presence of organisms of
intestinal origin, and is suggested as the supplemental technique to
be employed. Based on a very limited amount of information, a limit
for fecal streptococci of about 20/100 ml is suggested providing there
is an accompanying limit on the coliform level. As a provisional
limit, it is suggested that a coliform level of 10,000/100 ml be
permitted provided the fecal streptococcus count is not more than
20/100 ml, and provided also that there is proper isolation from
direct fecal contamination as determined by a sanitary survey.
Coliform Guide B - Recreational, limited body contact use and
commercial shipping ^barge traffic). The water uses for which this
guide is intended are those that entail limited contact between the
water user and the water. Examples of such uses are fishing, pleasure
boating, and commercial shipping. Recommended guide value for coli-
forms is 5,000/100 ml. For all waters in which coliform levels are
below this guide value, the water is considered suitable for use,
provided there is proper isolation from direct fecal contamination as
determined by a sanitary survey.
For waters which have coliform levels above the guide value and
such levels are evidently caused primarily by organisms of other than
fecal origin, .the limiting count may be as high as 50,000/100 ml,
provided the fecal streptococci count is not more than 100/100 ml.
The provisional coliform limit of 50,000/100 ml is based on an
examination of reported and measured data for the Illinois River Basin
streams. It is believed to be an acceptable limit for taking into
consideration, and providing for the occurrence of, background coli-
form levels. With the accompanying limit on fecal streptococci, it is
reasonable to expect that the danger of infection by enteric organisms
-------
TABLE 3-7 (Continued)
will be remote. It is understood that the provisional limit would
be subject to modification as more analytical data are accumulated
and critically reviewed.
Coliform Guide C - Applies to Municipal Water Source. Where
municipal water treatment includes complete rapid-sand filtration
or its equivalent, together with continuous postchlorination, source
water may be considered acceptable if the coliform concentration
(at the intake) averages not more than 5*000 per 100 ml in any one
month, and the count exceeds this number in not more than 20 percent
of the samples in any one month. Samples should be tested at least
once daily.
Coliform Guide D - Applies to Industrial Process Water at the
source. Although the requirements of this use will vary widely with
the processes of a particular industry, Coliform Guide C, for
municipal source, is considered generally applicable. As covered by
food and drug acts and other regulations, water incorporated into
products for human ingestion should, of course, meet finished
drinking water standards.
(2) Odors, Threshold Number
The differences in type of odors makes it difficult to assign
numbers for water quality goals with respect to this parameter. For
some types of odors the difficulty of removal is greater than for
others. To reach acceptable treated levels, experience has shown
that it is more difficult to reduce a "hydrocarbon" type odor of 6
threshold units than an algae-type odor of 15 units. It is therefore
felt that a maximum limit on hydrocarbon odors be 6, and the average
daily odor be less than 4 units.
-------
-------
CHAPTER 4
WASTE SOURCES
General
Green Bay and the streams tributary to it receive an estimated
waste load of 500>000 pounds of 5-day 20QC biochemical oxygen demand
(BODr;) per day. Approximately 440,000 pounds of BOD^ are from in-
dustry with separate discharges. The majority of this waste load is
discharged into Green Bay from the Fox River. Significant waste loads
are also discharged at the mouth of the Menominee, Oconto, Peshtigo,
and Escanaba rivers.
The following paragraphs summarize the major waste sources in
the Green Bay Area. The consequences of these discharges are described
in Chapter 6.
Municipal Wasteg
Approximately 454,000 people, served by 75 municipal sewage
treatment facilities, discharged some 51,000 pounds of 6005 per day
to the streams tributary to Green Bay. This is discharged as treated
sewage from an untreated load of nearly 126,600 pounds of BOD^ per day.
This represents an overall reduction of 60$. Of the 75 municipal
sewage treatment plants in the Basin eight are located along the Lower
Fox River between Neenah-Menasha and the Bay. These eight plants dis-
charge 30,200 pounds of BOD 5 per day or 60$ of the total for the Basin.
Of the 75 treatment plants in the Basin, 54 plants provide
secondary treatment. A municipal waste inventory of major communities
is given in Table 4-1.
By 1980 the total waste load treated by municipal plants is
projected to reach 190,000 pounds of BOD/j per day. This assumes that
by 1980 the total municipal population will be served by sewage treat-
ment plants. Of this 190,000 pounds of BOD^ per day 100,000 pounds
will come from domestic sources while 90,000 will come from industries
connected to public sewers. With a ^Q% treatment efficiency in terms
of BODj reduction the discharged load should be 19,000 pounds per day,
or only about one-third the present municipal discharge. By the year
2020 the total waste load treated by municipal plants is projected to
reach 370,000 pounds of BOD 5 per day, of which 230,000 will come from
domestic sources while 140,000 will come from connected industry. With
a 95/£ treatment efficiency attained by 2020, the discharged BOD 5 load
would remain about 19,000 pounds per day.
4-1
-------
a
M
t** |n~-|
5 CQ
8 c^
gS
l'*™** lift ^«
-^
rH fe fSi
"*" ' ^ §
H SM M
1 05 W
-* s °
H |§
w S „
^J s ^
E-i M W
W ^
« >H
Sg
& ^
o o
M
tJ
(U
&0
cd
A W
O AJ
CQ
Q
ffi W
CCJ f*^4
C!
o t?
•H CU
•P -P
aj o
y §
ft 3
t^ 0
•g
cu
1
£
cu
^
o
§ ^3
CQ J3
o o
d
§
Receiving
Stream
•rt
Comznun
0
co
ft
o
o
CO
o
H
1
,-j.
fr
H
0
o
& $
-p
cu
•H
CU
(Xf
d ^
H
1
£
O
M
2
£
1
o
o
0
o
1
0
o
oo
00
ON
O
O
CO
OJ
O
s
CM
=
£
H
r_{
co
•H
«
Peshtigo
o
bo
Peshti
o
o
o
o
H
O
ITS
,-4
O
O
O
CO
H
&
1
£
•H
K
Menominee
CU
8
o
CO
OJ
o
LfN
i-l
O
O>
OO
ITN
r-\
&
&
d
0
o
cu
ra
%
H
rW
CU
8
Portage C
^
Escana
o
s
^f
1
LTv
O
MD
CM
l/N
^
1
£
£•4
cu
J>
•H
W
X
Q
O Ps<
f ,
H
Jj:
»3
8
a
»
CU
•p
•H
1
•P
CO
"S
3
o
O 0 O
SCO OO
oo O
CV? \Q cT
MD f—
0 O O
O O U>
O LTv -*
O CO O
ON i-t H
r-i rH
CO O Q
OJ O O,
co o t-
CO H -*
^>
•i
o
o
o o o
CO CO CO
O ^O - ON
OJ
I • •
tc
CD O
in -P
« Q) CU
CO CM H
CU Pi
M 0^ P<
O O O
o -a- o
O ITN CO
H -*"
O O 0
000
H ^t- VO
LTN l/N ON
§ 1 §
LTN U"N O
iH
•> •-. H.
CO H >8
ITN t— OO
OJ OJ OJ
= -•• =
CU
*
« § |
i-H CO CD,
+* •" •§
5 3 s
o
8
vo"
CO
§
cT
IfN
ITS
£
QL
CO
&
i
£
$
t^
oo
co
g
g
CU CO
A4 CD
Little La
Buttes D
tii
3
£
cu
cu
-------
CO
w
gte
HH ^3
EJ 1 — 1
5 CQ
p o
^O H
« is
•B 2 ^
K hj P
O 33 ^
o S <
N_/
r_ t^
-x ^^
i w. °
H >s M
- ee; w
o o
H EH H
j. SS^
H H <^
^ M W
9 ca 9
^ M^ H
^^
^i
S w
M 05
O O
W
^)
^
•Ti
d>
bD
fn
efl KJ
JS CM
f V
V
01
•H
O
S?n
c8 W
« PH
C
O TJ
•H 0)
P P
aj u
_J fli
r_3 w
«-* CJ
QJ ri
0 0
CM O
•s
O
^J
^5
w S
aj q
l~l ^&l
, _l
s
bO
c
•H S
K* TO
•H >
P
•H
C
?
0
O O O OJ O
8O O H O
OJ OJ -* UA
•S *\ •* *S
i-H H OJ H
H 00
O O O O O
0 O O OO O
0 O O LTA O
»x *v »s ^ •>
^j- O 00 ^ oo
10, VO H H
§t/\ u~\ o O
oo vo no o
O VO t- oo oo
oo cT vo* ^p ^
oo ir\
!
fl = : = =
O
to V
2 $ K
•H
•H
X «
o
£< "«
H
?-( O
0) O O O O O 12
ft 00 J- t- OA -3-
D -* t- O t- H
l>- LA OJ CO VO
H H
O
w>
rt Ai
ja 0)
g s-i ^ to
B > =
IS -H fn -H
K
-« X H X
05 O -H O =
i-3 pt< CO &4
O
05
ka
P3 rC 0)
•rJ w C bD
0 a -H 03
id ^! o H P
g ,C ft JH JH
O CO -H
0)
o
05
I
o
vo
J-
•N
ITS
O
o
-d-
»s
u~\
H
8
no
UA
&
€
a
o
O
(U
CO
o
0
Jd-
H
H
to
&•
a
o
T3
e
o
I-J
£
&
%
oo
•<
,H
O
•\
VO
g
OO
^r
j;
o
00
o
LTs
H
fH
(!)
>
•H
PC
fl
o
Q>
hD
•H
PH
0)
H
H
•H
£
O
-p
&
•H
H
O
O
O
vo
*\
cu
o
0
o
*\
UA
H
g
OO
vo"
£
&
_tf
bo
H
M
0)
>
•H
tf
o
fi
I
o
oo
in
o
o
ON
ro
•H
(1)
0)
c
•H
s
LTV
O,
•H
PC
c
•H
1
S3
•H
«
p
O -r)
M W
H
7
to
0>
a
I
*
-------
Industrial Wastes
By far the largest source of waste in the Green Bay Area is
industry with separate discharges (not connected to municipal plants).
"t present, industries are discharging some 440,000 pounds of BODc per
day. The waste flow from these industries is more than 160 mgd.
Almost the entire separately discharged waste load in the Green
Bay Basin is being discharged by the pulp and paper mills in the Area.
All other industrial sources(of greater than 100 pounds of BODj per
day) in the ^rea amount to only 2,000 pounds of BOD^ per day.
sin industrial waste inventory is -resented in Table 4-2.
Following the National and area trends, it is assumed that industrial
growth will continue in the Green Bay Area. It is also expected that
industrial waste treatment will greatly improve. The net result should
be a significant decrease in the waste load discharged to the streams.
By 1980 industries with separate discharges are expected to
have an untreated 6005 waste load of 1,140,000 pounds per day with a
flow of 250 mgd. With the recommended 90$ treatment in effect, the
discharged waste load should be about 114,000 pounds of BODc per day
or less than one-third the present discharge from industry. By the
year 2020 untreated industrial waste is projected to be approximately
2,000,000 pounds of 6005 per day at a flow of 410 mgd. With an an-
ticipated 95$ treatment in effect, the discharge load would be 100,000
pounds per day of BODj or less than one-fourth the present industrial
discharge to the streams.
It is anticipated most of the future industrial growth will take
place along the Lower Fox River Areas. This concentration of industry
along 39 miles of stream serves to magnify the need for extensive waste
treatment facilities.
Combined Sewers
It has been estimated that a quantity, equivalent to 3 to 5
percent of all raw waste-water flow in combined sewer systems, is
annually discharged to streams by overflows.(16) It is also known
that a far greater percentage of the solids are discharged to streams
from overflows. This is due to the fact that the sludge deposited in
the sewers is flushed out by the storm flow.
Of the 75 communities with public sewer systems in the Area
about 50 have separate sewer systems. However, because most of the
larger communities have combined systems, about 70 percent of the
population is served by combined systems.
4-2
-------
rA
S
M
H
S
O
^5
1/N §
H x—
^ S
i
§ ^
^^ II
i^ w
^^
i*
j
^
CQ
P
H
eceived
K
eatment
EH
CO to H
S
in 5?
Q -0
PQ rQ
H
-p
fl
S ~*
3 L^
H 3
W
Wrt\ P4
W rW
o > 43
rH O P
S < ;§
c
0
•H
+5
Oj
o
S
o
3
Company K
eg
vealls i
oS
co h
reens ,
adbinde
£2
0
^^-
CO
•S
in
g
•V
CO
CO
o
1 ™
K
«
g
^t
d
^
«
c
0)
(U
S
^p
p
•H
bO
5
o
&
Green Bay
c
o
•H
+3
c
a)
j~
-p
CQ
03 C
0) O
^i •r-1
-P
vealls f
evapora
K! 08
CO
IV
H
OJ
OS
LA
-3"
o->
I/N
3
r-
d
_
=
•
r$
o
ft
&
0)
ft
o5
Charmin P
08
d
poratio
M
5. ^)
o io
O ti
K) 03
38
0
OJ
I—I
in
H
O
CVJ
oS
VQ
^t
CO
oo
H
00
d
-
=
h
o
S1
ft
torathon
§
o
o
bO
^
08
CQ
3
P
eg
Q
CO
£"• 1
•V
O
00
o
•V 1
co
OJ
ITN
OJ
CO
H
tn o
CO t~
.
gj
G)
= ^
&
•
%J
h ca
O
CD
o.
03
PH
CO
|
ij
Combined
a
H
r^
Co
o
S
a
^
dbinder
Co
O
g
o
bO
3
O
-d-
ON
CO
5
t-
•v
OJ
ON
VO
21
01
t-
OJ
^
M
•g
W
A5
JH
5
O
Kimberly
B
•H
I
o»
0
0
•H
O
ft
1
O
J-
01
•^
in
H
O
CM
^3
CO
CO
vo
t-
t-
o
c
o
1^
CJ
ft
J^
0)
p5
V
+J
Consolida
-------
s***.
ta
H
^ l>
? g
£ M
o pc
o o
LfA <
H
*""" ^
OJ O
' EH
«-»i" £H
W
frl t**
t— 5 sj
m H
«rf
EH M
H
^
§
PS
u2
;D
g
H
0)
•rl
-.
• ti a}
P( -H Tl
03 H\
0 O f
03 CO H
,
LT\ct3'
P tl
a>
H
P
C
H4^
•EC|
^M
(^j
Cy j
co (a J3
CD > p
H O 3
g g 0
c
o
•H
P
03
0
O
OJ
^
&
PI
s
o
0
C
O
0
t50
r-H
fH
* 0)
w ti
r-4 C
r-1 -H
cd r^
o> ir!
> o3
00 JH
o
O
»-,
t —
o
8
*\
00
oo
h
O ("O
•H H
K H
O
P
C
O
O
o
o\
OJ
OJ
w
H
lC
O
-p
G
O
O
o
6
o
^
P4
<8
o
o
CO
a
03 -H
Oi T3
> a
o
o
w
•s
03
•P
bD
C
tQ
t( C
O
o3 *H sj 03
C75 > CQ CO
O
o
ON
•N
OJ
OJ
LTN
•
i/^
cu
£*
•H
OJ
0)
C
•rt
S
O
O
OO
•^
c^—
H
H
•
o
H
O
O
CTs
«s
OJ
UA
ro
•
£- —
0
r-t
c\
o
•
H
O
H
O
o
LTN
•\
OJ
o
LT\
H
vo
CO
VO
a
o
CO
w
0)
o
C!
-------
?
M
P
§
l^^^ **f
*T3 *5»
i ~
5 &
**— •*
* t3 Co
ft -H "O
CO 5 H
4
PQ rQ
H
13
H P
Sd S
ftjj
01 CO fi
H & P
•H rQ O
s < s
ti
o
•H
+5
s
o
CO
^
^>
1
O
0 fl
S 3
0 0
C^* DJ
o o
^ ^
P -p
rt) 4)
•S S
08 e8
CO CD CD CO
fl) m | QJ dJ p GJ
? 1 ? P ? £ ?
CO (fl CO A) CD W
co c/5 co CQ co u>
c\j i on i co j*
IA CM CM
O CO O O
«» 1 1 •» «,
H H H
*^
jj
gCO 1 H 1 b- H
O « • • •
^H O H H
K
p4
p>
rH
fQ
M
CJ
KH \Q H on -d~ IA
H H t^ t4 t- c-^
ro m on on on on
rt
0 05
p A
tiD O +5 p
JQ -H f3 ^3 CO f-i
h pq ^H P o
^ ?N *rn rH ^^ i~i
•H O ,G 0} O -H
« PL, JZ S h) O
c
•H
H
0
g
+>
fll
2
08
CD
Pico
OS ^
o
VO
I
0?
fl
IA
CO
(si
on
-
flu
(D
i
*S
^
2
c
OS
•H
H
O
&
^.|
•P
0)
H
O
+»
fl>
co
a ^ S
g CD P
fc V W
Ps CO CD
1 1
a
o o
00 -^~
vo on
ro
O c—
H 0
H H
on ^f-
oo co
on on
x^^
h CU
CU ^H ^
& S5
* ^?
^ ^f _§)
P H 'O
CQ O c5
t3 ^3 W
^l S
CO
5
i
f
•v
H
s
^O
co
*
o
IA
00
on
*-^
fa
^
E ^— ^
ti
0
•H
U
s
*H
^
I*
•H
Sp
Q
t,|
^
3
fc
08
CD
9
£
i
o^
CO
o
o
i
0
•P
3
w
o>
K
o
s
o
I-/1
d
o
•H
3
-------
Table 4-3 below lists the major communities in the Green Bay
Area and-the type of sewer system they have.
TABLE 4-3
Major Community Sewer Systems
Community Type of System
Green Bay Combined
De Pere Combined
Appleton Separate-Combined
Little Chute Combined
Kimberly Separate
Kaukauna Combined
Neenah-Menasha Separate-Combined
Fond du Lac Separate
Oshkosh Separate-Combined
Oconto Combined
Peshtigo Combined
Marinette Combined
Menominee Separate-Combined
Iron Mountain Combined
Escanaba Separate
Gladstone Combined
Agriculture and Land Runoff
Pesticides
Pesticides used in the Green Bay Area include insecticides,
fungicides and herbicides. In applying the pesticides, particularly
in large-scale aerial spraying, some of the material goes directly into
the water. Algicides and aquatic weed control chemicals are directly
applied to the water but, with proper precaution, bad effects can be
minimized. Of the materials applied on land by spraying, dusting or
as granular formulations much of the pesticide gets onto or into the
soil. Although much of the material reaching the ground is lost
through chemical reactions during the first few hours after applica-
tion, it is the persistent pesticide that reaches the soil, or goes
directly into the water, that is of concern in water quality.
The greatest amount of the pesticides used in the Area are
applied on fruits and vegetables. There are two areas of extensive
applications of pesticides, one located in the potato producing area
in Langlade County and the other in the cherry orchard region of the
Door Peninsula.
4-3
-------
Table 4-4 shows the approximate amounts used in the area. For
the two areas mentioned above, DDT accounts for the largest amount.
Because little is known concerning the long term effects of
pesticides, further evaluation of the problem in the Green Bay Area
should be incorporated into the program for the enhancement and pro-
tection of the water quality of Green Bay.
Fertilizers
In certain areas of the Green Bay Area the soil is only
moderately productive and chemical fertilizers are used for high crop
yields. Approximately 35 percent of these commercial fertilizers are
applied in the spring and the remaining 15 percent are applied in the
fall. Improper application, particularly in the spring, can result
in the excessive loss of fertilizers into the streams. Feedlots and
barnyards are also big contributors of nutrient wastes. The liquid
part of the manure contains on the average, 45 percent nitrogen and
65 percent potash. Fertilizer use estimates show that approximately
5,400 tons per year of nitrogen and 13,000 tons per year of phosphate
have recently been used in the Area.
A substantial amount of the phosphate found in the Lake Michigan
tributaries originate as runoff from rural lands. Its subsequent
effect, overfertilization of the Great Lakes requires that greater con-
sideration be given to proper land use practices. Due to the importance
of phosphates as related to Green Bay water quality a separate section
dealing with sources of phosphate appears later in this Chapter. More
quantitative material is presented in that section.
Summary
A sound land use management program designed to minimize
erosion which results in the loss of soil, fertilizers and pesticides
to streams is essential to the enhancement and protection of the quality
of waters in the Area.
Federal Installations
The Federally-owned or Federally-leased installations listed
below discharge waterborne wastes in the Green Bay, Wisconsin Area.
Installations that discharge to municipally-operated sewerage systems
have not been listed since the Federal Government does not control the
treatment provided.
4-4
-------
TABLE h-k
INSECTICIDES USED IK THE KAJCR COUNTIES
OF THE GREEN EA.Y AREA-WISCONSIN^T)
Commercial Fruit and Vegetable Production
Counties Approx. Pounds Used- 1962
Florence and Forest 600
Langlade lli-0,000
Oconto 9.800
Shawano 550
Waupaca 21,400
Outagamie 13,800
Brown 19,100
Door 185,300
Waushara 62,500
Winnetego 7^000
Marquette 4l,200
Fond du Lac _
Total 506,650
-------
Locks and Dams on the Lower Fox River
There are sixteen locks and nine dams on the Lower Fox River
operated by the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers, Chicago District.
Normal operations run from May to November, and only 'pleasure craft
use the River during this time. The locks are usually attended by
one man at each location for eight hours a day, except for the Menasha
and De Pere Locks which are attended sixteen hours a day. The
residences at the locks are typical one-family dwellings and are used
on a year-round basis. A list of the locks and dams and the facilities
at each is shown in Table 4-5.
TABLE 4-5
Sanitary Facilities
Locks and Dams - Lower Fox River
Site
Appleton L & D #1
Appleton L & D ^3
^.ppleton L & D #4
Cedar Lock & Dam
Kaukauna L 8r D #1
Kaukauna Lock #2
Kaukauna Lock #3
Kaukauna Lock #4
Rapid Croche Lock
and Dam
Little Kaukauna
Lock ft. Dam
De Pere Lock & Dam
Buildings_
1 Residence
Lock Tool House
Lock Tool House
1 Residence and
Lock Tool House
Residence and
Warehouse
Residence
Lock Tool House
Lock Tool House
1 Residence
1 Residence
Residence
Wastes Discharged
200 gallons per day(gpd)
to a 500-gal. septic
tank and tile drain field
1 privy - seldom used
1 privy - seldom used
200 gpd to 500-gal.
septic tank & drain
tile system
300 gpd to septic tank
system
500 gpd to septic tank
system
1 privy - seldom used
1 privy - seldom used
200 gpd to 50C-gal.septic
tank ?i tile drain field
200 gpd to 500-gal.septic
tank (.' tile drain field
400 gpd t
tank •>/ tile drain field
500-rral. septic
4-5
-------
Green Bay Harbor Light Station
The U. 3. Coast Guard Light Station in Green Bay is manned by
3 men for 24 hours a day between April 15 and December 15. The sani-
tary wastes generated at the Station amount to about 150 gpd and are
discharged to Green Bay with no treatment. The Coast Guard is presently
negotiating for the purchase of an experimental extended aeration
package sewage treatment plant for use at installations of this nature.
Sherwood Point Light Station
This U. S. Coast Guard Light Station is located on Green Bay,
along Sherwood Avenue, Sturgeon Bay, Wisconsin. All sanitary wastes
generated at this facility (280 gpd) are discharged to a septic tank -
drain field system.
Sturgeon Bay Canal Life Boat Station
This facility, located in Sturgeon Bay, Wisconsin is served by
a septic tank and drain field system. Approximately 1,300 gpd of
sanitary wastes are discharged to the system.
Plum Island Lifeboat Station
The U. S. Coast Guard Plum Island Lifeboat Station is located
in the Porte Des Morts Strait, Door County, Wisconsin. During the
navigation season approximately 900 gpd of sanitary wastes are dis-
charged to a septic tank - tile drain field system.
Ships and Boats
The vessels plying the waters of Green Bay represent a poten-
tial source of pollution of the Bay. The possible sources of pollution
include cargo spillage, dunnage, ballast and bilge waters, fuel spills,
garbage and sanitary wastes. Uncontrolled discharge of these wastes
can result in serious pollution problems for beaches, shore property,
recreational waters, fish and aquatic life, and municipal and indus-
trial water supplies.
While all new vessels built since 1952 specifically for use on
the Great Lakes have been equipped with waste treatment facilities,
ocean-going ships generally have no provision for waste treatment. The
majority of these ocean-going vessels are designed to discharge sani-
tary wastes from multiple outlets making onboard waste collection and
treatment an expensive and complex installation.
4-6
-------
Vessel waste discharges may endanger the-health of persons using
Green Bay for body-contact sports. It has been reported that pollution
from recreational boats has necessitated closing of at least one beach
on the Door County Peninsula.(18)
The U. S. Public Health Service' has established regulations
governing vessel waste discharges in the Great Lakes based upon their
legal responsibility for the interstate control of communicable diseases.
Restricted areas have been established in which the discharge of sewage,
ballast or bilge water, from vessels is prohibited. Restricted areas
include the water within a three mile radius of domestic water intakes.
These restrictions apply to the waters within a three mile radius of the
water intakes for the major communities of Escanaba, Menominee, Gladstone
and Nahma, Michigan and Marinette, Wisconsin.(19)
Dredging
Maintenance dredging of Green Bay Harbor is done by the Corps
of Engineers to maintain authorized navigation depths. Dredged
materials are usually disposed of in the deep (over 50 feet) waters of
Green Bay. Such disposal of any organic material which may be dredged
produces a polluted zone in the dumping area.
Legislation passed in 1962 authorized an increase in project
depths for Green Bay Harbor. The Corps plans to start work on 'deepening
of the Harbor during this (1966) construction season. The proposed
work has been coordinated with the appropriate Starte and Federal agencies,
with the result that all dredgings considered to contain pollutional
material will be deposited either on shore or within a diked area to be
constructed by the Corps in Green Bay about two miles north of the mouth
of the Fox River. The capacity of the diked disposal area will also
accommodate the maintenance dredging for a number of years into the
future.
Phosphates
Transport to Streams and Lakes from
Rural Lands
In order to assess the relative amounts of phosphate and other
substances transported to streams by rural runoff in the Lake Michigan
Watershed during 1963-1964, the GLIRB Project conducted a sampling
study of eight streams draining small rural watersheds.(20)
The amount of total soluble phosphate reaching streams from land
runoff, in the Green Bay Area, as estimated from samples taken ion the
eight pilot watersheds, is about 1,167,000 pounds annually or about 0.1
pounds per acre of watershed.
t-7
-------
Municipal Sources
Domestic sewage is relatively rich in phosphorus compounds.
Most of this phosphorus comes from human excreta and synthetic deter-
gents. The amount of phosphorus released by human metabolic processes
is a function of protein intake and for the average person in the
United States, this release is considered to be about 1.5 grams per
day.(21) Synthetic detergent formulations contain large amounts of
phosphates. It is estimated that 2.5 grams per day per capita of
phosphorus are discharged to sewer systems as a result of the use of
synthetic detergents.
When the above per capita figures for phosphorus from human
excreta and detergents are expanded to cover the entire sewered popu-
lation of the Green Bay Area the quantity becomes quite large as
shown below. The GLIRB Project municipal waste inventory shows that
451,000 people are served by sewer sysiems in the Area.
From a study of five sewage treatment plants in Illinois and
Indiana it was found that the average phosphate removal was 38 percent.
Using the above figures on population and the per capita phosphorus
discharged, along with the average percent removal, it is estimated
that a total of approximately 2,770,000 pounds of soluble phosphate
are discharged to the waters of the area from humans and detergents
each year. Of this total, 867,000 pounds are discharged directly to
Green Bay while 1,903,000 pounds are discharged to its tributaries.
Tributary Mouth Sampling
In addition to the land runoff sampling from the eight small
subbasins discussed above, sampling stations were established at the
mouths of major tributaries to Green Bay. These stations were also
sampled continuously for one year during the same period in which the
land runoff stations were sampled.
Sampling at the mouths of the tributaries made it possible to
measure the total phosphate load reaching Green Bay. When the dis-
charge from the rivers was determined a summary showed a total of
approximately 4,270,000 pounds of soluble PO^ being discharged to the
Bay annually.
Summary
The amount of phosphate reaching streams from land runoff, in
the Green Bay Area, estimated from samples taken on 8 pilot watersheds
is about 1,167,000 pounds annually.
4-8
-------
An estimated 2.7 million pounds of phosphate are discharged
annually in municipal waste effluents in the Area. It is estimated
that 867,000 pounds of phosphate are discharged to Green Bay annually.
Based on sampling of major Green Bay tributaries at the mouth,
about 4,270,000 pounds of total soluble phosphate goes into the Bay
annually from tributaries. Thus, the present annual phosphate input
to Green Bay is around 5 million pounds. Water quality problems which
result from this nutrient input are discussed in Chapter 6.
-------
-------
CHAPTER 5
LAKE CURRENTS
Background
Intensive studies of currents and temperature changes were made
by the GLIRB Project in and adjacent to Green Bay as part of the study
program for the Great Lakes. Lake current studies were limited to the
main passage between Green Bay and Lake Michigan. Three separate tem-
perature studies were made in Green Bay during 1962 and 1963. Automatic
recording current meters and thermographs were used in the studies.
In addition to the present effort, there have been several other
studies. R. Johnson has published three reports on the water quality
conditions in the Escanaba region in I960, 1962, and 1963.(22,23,24)
In 1964, J. Saylor reported on current studies of the U. S. Lake Survey
in the Sturgeon Bay Canal.(25) In 1965, Dr. C. Mortimer reported on a
power spectra analysis of water level data obtained at the City of
Green Bay.(26)
General Patterns
Winds, seiches, and tidal effects are the primary factors which
influence the flow of water in Green Bay. Wind is the principal energy
source for putting the water in motion. The movement of water is
modified by bottom topography. Generally, water movement tends to
parallel the shore as the waier depth decreases.
Density plays a role in the movement of materials discharged
into the Bay. A pollutant discharged into the Bay can rise, sink or
come to rest on the thermocline depending on its initial density with
respect to the density of the water.
The free oscillation of a water mass in its basin is known as a
seiche. Although differences in water elevation in Green Bay are not
exceptionally large, seiches and tides have been recorded in Green Bay
since the time of the earliest French explorers. Seiches and tides
produce rhythmic changes in elevation but contribute little to the
transport or mixing of water.
Existing currents, or the absence of currents, also affect the
mixing of a pollutant. If a pollutant is discharged into the Bay
during near calm periods, it will build up into a stationary mass. If
5-1
-------
the pollutants are discharged into an existing current, it will be
diluted by the moving water. The initial dilution depends on the rate
of discharge of the pollutant and the speed of the current. Mixing
studies conducted by the GLIRB Project in the Great Lakes show that
small dilution ratios of Bay water to pollutants can produce severe
local problems depending on the amount of pollutant discharged.
The most important types of motion are turbulent mixing and
transport. Mixing refers to the rate of dilution of a pollutant.
Transport.is the net movement of a water mass from one area to another.
The principal tributary inflow into Green Bay is the Fox River.
The Fox and other rivers, such as the Peshtigo, Oconto, Menominee, and
Escanaba contribute, on an annual average, from 10,000 to 11,000 cubic
feet per second to the Bay. This inflow represents a turnover period
of about 15 years in the Bay. In October 1963»the period of the GLIRB
Project current studies, the flow averaged about 4000 to 5000 cfs.
The discharge of the several streams and rivers into Green Bay
produces a net flow of water into Lake Michigan. The net surface flow
is to the northeast with a return compensating flow in the deeper
layers.
Green Bay becomes thermally stratified weeks before the adjacent
deeper water of Lake Michigan. The shallow southern end of the Bay is
nearly 13°F warmer than the deeper north end in June, and more than
22°F warmer than the deeper lake water. P.ecords in June 1962 and May
and June 1963 show that the thermal stratification in Green Bay is
separate from the main portion of the Lake.
Figure 5-1 shows the temperature differences between various
parts of Green Bay and the Lake proper. Major influxes of Lake water
would certainly affect the thermal structure of the Bay and retard the
rapid heating which occurs if the Lake controlled the Bay circulation.
The wind patterns for the late summer and early fall of 1963,
which included the period of the current studies, show that the highest
percentage of the net flow was from the directions west through south-
southwest. For the late fall and winter months of 1963-1964 the
highest percentage of the net flow, or prevailing wind was from the
directions west through northwest. April of 1964 is the only month
that showed a prevailing wind from Lake Michigan, an east-southeast
wind. For May-August of 1964 the prevailing wind was south through
southwest.
5-2
-------
<£>
%
°0
o
CO
o
Q
UJ
OL
o
CO
a:
w
Q-
Z
UJ
o
OJ
o
o
o
CO
\
10
OJ
c\j
CVl
UJ
cc
(T
UJ
a.
2 o
U O
N
£M
(O
O O
CM io ^r
SH313W Nl HldSO
O
CVJ
tn
_
_l O
- o:
Q-
cO
CO
UJ W
^<
< QO
o
UJ I
C3 O
X UJ
O *
UJ <
en
-------
Although the water in Green Bay has a circulation independent
of Lake Michigan there are daily and seasonal interchanges. In late
fall and spring, winds from Lake Michigan undoubtedly bring in large
volumes of water from the Lake which are trapped in the Bay. These
influxes probably do not extend into the Bay more than a few miles, but
most of the water is trapped and does not return to the Lake, This
type of influx is less important than the daily input from the Lake
through the many passages between the Bay and the Lake, as was observed
from current meter measurements.
Current data in Big Rock Passage shows a constant reversal of
flow every 12 hours. The reversal is due to seiche and tidal activity
in the Bay and lake. The tidal influence in Green Bay has been re-
ported by Johnson, Saylor and Mortimer in their earlier studies.
Mortimer suggests that one of the Green Bay periods is driven into
resonance by the nine-hour Lake period. The principal mode for Green
Bay is approximately 11.2 hours. Although the current reverses every
12 hours the upper 60 feet show a net outflow and the lower depths
show a net inflow into the Bay. The net outflow is far greater than
the inflow as would be expected. The net inflow from the Lake to the
Bay in the lower layers is slightly greater than the combined flow of
all streams and rivers entering the Bay. The inflow acts in the same
manner as a major river entering the Bay. Although the circulation of
the Bay is completely independent of the Lake, the water quality of
the Bay will reflect the large inflow from the Lake.
Summary
On the basis of temperature and wind effects Green Bay appears
to be an independent Lake separate from Lake Michigan. Local inter-
action between the Bay and the Lake produce a changing current
pattern every 12 hours. The seiche or wind coupling with the Lake,
plus inflow from Lake Michigan below the 60 feet depth and occasional
northeast storms, act to dilute portions of the northern basin of the
Bay with inflows from Lake Michigan. The southern reaches of the Bay,
south of the Sturgeon Bay Canal, are probably not affected by any in-
flows from the Lake.
5-3
GPO 826-535-8
-------
CHAPTER 6
PRESENT WATER QUALITY AND PROBLEMS
General
The information and interpretations presented in this discussion
are based on data collected by the GLIRB Project during its water
quality studies of the Lake Michigan Basin (1962-1964). The GLIRB,
Project studies have been supplemented by data obtained from the States
of Wisconsin and Michigan and regional and local agencies.
Summary
The chemical, biological and bacteriological data presented on
the subsequent pages are the basis for the following conclusions with
respect to water quality effects:
1. The water quality of parts of Green Bay may be considered
as separate from Lake Michigan, because of the relatively minor mixing
of its waters which results in a differing water quality from the main
body of the Lake.
2. Areas of degraded water quality are generally confined to
zones near the mouths of tributary streams, harbors, and population
centers where treated and untreated waste discharges are prevalent.
3. The principal water quality problems of the degraded areas
are due to high concentrations of ammonia, phosphate and phenol, and
low dissolved oxygen concentrations resulting from organic wastes.
The presence of tolerant benthic animals in large numbers, along with
dense concentrations of plankton algae, and the presence of high
concentrations of coliform bacteria also indicate degraded water
quality conditions.
4. The region most degraded is at the southern tip of Green
Bay adjacent to the mouth of the Fox River.
5. Other degraded zones appear at the mouths of the Oconto,
Peshtigo, Menominee and Escanaba Rivers.
6. The Lower Fox River, tributary to Green Bay, is grossly
polluted, contributing the bulk of the phosphate, ammonia, phenol
and organic contaminants and having at times little or no dissolved
oxygen for distances exceeding 20 miles.
7. The coliform levels in the Lower Fox River have been found
to be as high as 600,000 per 100 ml. Other biological analyses
confirm the gross pollution of this stream.
6-1
-------
8. The Oconto River, between Oconto Falls and its mouth, is
severely degraded by organic pollution.
9. The Peshtigo River below Peshtigo to its mouth is also
severely degraded from organic pollution.
10. The Menominee River is degraded by organic pollution for
25 to 30 miles below Niagara, Wisconsin.
11. Other streams tributary to Green Bay show varying degrees
of pollution as generally reflected in the quality of water near the
tributary mouths.
Physical and Chemical Aspects
Green Bay
Table 6-1 presents a summary of the physical and chemical data
collected by the GLIRB Project and Figure 6-1 indicates the approxi-
mate location of the sampling stations. The Bay was divided into the
selected zones as shown in the figure to facilitate interpretation of
the collected data. These zones, except for tributary mouths, harbors,
and near-shore areas, represent areas of similar water quality.
Examination of Table 6-1 shows the following significant water
quality variations:
1. It is apparent that there is a severe depletion of dissolved
oxygen in Zone 1. Some oxygen depletion is evident near the mouth of
the Peshtigo River, in Zone 3«
2. The concentration of phosphate in Zone 1 is far above the
level of 0.03 mg/1 considered critical for the stimulation of algal
blooms. (22) Levels of phosphate in other zones also exceed the
critical levels except for Zone 5.
3. Ammonia nitrogen levels are highest in Zone 1 but are con-
sistently high throughout the other zones in Green Bay.
4. Nitrate nitrogen values are significantly low throughout
the Bay.
5. Chloride, dissolved solids and sulfate are highest in Zone
1, showing the extent to which the Fox River outflow affects the
water quality of the Bay, and the lack of mixing in this zone.
6. The high concentration of phenols found in Zone 1 is due
to industrial waste discharges to the Fox River.
6-2
-------
VO
$
I— 1
S "bB
w s
CD OO C
VO 'H
S ON
M l-t T3
0)
CO -N W
W t— W
S H d>
O *H
NJ >i ft
>M p (3
CO
CO 1 fi
rv> j— i
en CJ
P OJ -P
CO n5
{j^J pr*1 Lj
CC £H 4-1
5 cj
h-3 ^D QJ
<£
•
co
•
K
•
SO
^
<^
•
CO
•
£=H
•
-p
CO
•
to
-
o
OJ
-d-
C—
H
-d-
OJ
i
i
IA
OJ
H
LA
•
VO
-Cjt"
OJ
rH
•
OJ
LA
OJ
O
H
O
t* —
OJ
cu
1 — 1
•
o
c—
OJ
rH
o
•
o
ro
H
O
rH
-d-
•
O
H
ro
•
ON
£• —
OJ
LA
O
CM
LA
OJ
LA
t-
rH
~^t
H
rH
OJ
OJ
VO
VO
-^J~
OJ
-d-
OJ
CO
OJ
o
H
O
ON
OJ
ro
H
•
O
o
ro
LA
O
«
O
ON
OJ
CO
o
H
CO
d
H
CO
•
ON
ro
ro
VO
ON
H
ro
ro
l-
H
rH
OJ
OJ
ro
O
r-l
ON
LA
O
ro
ro
•
OJ
H
ro
CO
O
O
H
ro
f<_
H
*
O
OJ
ro
C-
O
•
O
rH
OO
_^-
o
H
ON
ON
I*1-"
«
C-
t—
t-
ON
r-l
ro
r*i -^J"
H
LA
VO
rH
ro ro
co
O
6
ro ON
ro
ro
»
VO
OJ ro
H ^
n
-d- 0)
H
OJ ft.
cd
co
OJ ro
rH CM VO
0 H
LA ,0
° S
o fe;
H
OJ C3 ON
H -P ^
0 H
EH
ro
rH
t
O
rH 0
H t-
H
ON
0
•
0
OJ LA
H J-
rH
ro
0
H
O
•
0
H
OJ
•
ON
0 H
r-l ro
H
co
•
(^
Q)
-P
•H
H
CO
ro
in
tfl
O
f-t
O
•H •
B CO
(1)
a H
•r) ft
*rj 05
cu ra
en
co CH
-------
Sturgton Boy
ZONE 2
GREAT LAKES 8 JLLINOIS
RIVER BASINS PROJECT
GREEN BAY
SAMPLING STATIONS- 1963
U S.DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
FEDERAL WATER PGL LUTION CONTROL ADMIN
Chicago,Illinois
FIGURE 6-1
-------
A comparison of the above findings with the Water Quality
Criteria presented in Table 3-6 indicates that several beneficial water
uses are being jeopardized. To further emphasize the seriousness of
the waste discharges into Green Bay the two significant nutrients,
ammonia nitrogen and phosphate, are shown in Figures 6-2 and 6-3.
These figures give the concentrations and approximate average daily
loadings from the larger tributaries. The Fox River is the most im-
portant contributor, discharging 6,670 pounds of phosphate daily. The
Menominee River is the next, largest contributor with 1,930 pounds per
day. The Fox River discharges 37,200 pounds of ammonia nitrogen per
day or almost three times as much as the Oconto River the next highest
contributor, at 9,840 pounds per day. Other sources of nutrient load-
ings have also been discussed in Chapter 4.
Green Bay Tributaries
Two programs of study were carried out by the GLIRB Project with
respect fo water quality of the tributaries. The first consisted of
weekly sampling of tributary mouths to determine average annual
loadings discharged to Green Bay, as well as water quality variability.
The second consisted of intensive studies of stretches of certain
tributaries to determine the effect of organic wastes on stream oxygen
resources.
The data obtained from the first study program are summarized
in Tables 6-2 and 6-3. The phosphate and ammonia nitrogen data are
also shown in Figures 6-2 and 6-3. From these data it is apparent
that the Fox River is the principal contributor of nutrients to the Bay
and its contribution is greater than the combined totals of all of the
other streams. The presence of the toxic metals, copper, zinc, nickel,
and lead in detectable amounts can be considered as a potential threat
to water uses involving fish and aquatic life. The other constituents
serve to differentiate the chemical water quality of the various
streams. The composition of the dissolved matter found may reflect
the effects of minerals leached from the ground, municipal or industrial
waste discharges, or urban and rural runoff. Except for the nutrients
previously cited, these inputs have relatively little influence on the
chemical water quality of the Bay,
To show the effect of organic loadings on the oxygen resources
of the Fox River, a typical profile of the dissolved oxygen and
biochemical oxygen demand concentrations found during this study are
shown in Figure 6-4. The high BOD levels carried by the Lower Fox
result in the complete absence of dissolved oxygen for a stretch of
eleven miles and levels of less than 2 ir.g/1 for over twenty miles.
Fish and desirable aquatic life cannot survive under such degraded
oxygen conditions and the stream is unsuitable for other uses. This
is indicated in Tables 3-1 and 3-7. The odors and anaerobic gases
released by this pollution makes the stream esthetically undesirable
6-3
-------
OJ
1
VO
w
gl
EH
nJ
O
CV
O
•rl
CO
H
O
_-+
0
CO CO
H -d
<;
r> w ,-( rH to
to tr; i HOT!
[x) EH co c(J co »rl
(i; VQ P CQ H
>•) ON O -rl O
.-P < H EH P CO
TJ fy; pa»
o e> •
a)
W £<
o o
§
W
5
S
CC
-=»•
i
O CO CO
-d- H CO
CO
ON
I
-d- OJ
« co •
ON H CJ\
CO
OJ
1
H COVO
CM H H
LA
t-
OJ CO CM
LA H -d"
ON
LA
1
tACO t-
CW H H
LA
CO
CM
1
H VD
•— CO ON
OJ H H
OO
LA
d
1
CO t-
-d- CO
• oo •
OHO
00
CM
O
1
H 0
• CO •
OHO
CO
t-
H
& CO O
LA H CM
.00 • t-
H H H CO
LA
-*
d
JO J- O
OJ H t~-
• co • VD
o H o VD
gj £) O fd
^ 1
'^j
O
CO
1
ON oj co
co j- co
o
H
1
CM O
• CM •
ON J- N-
O
CVJ
1
CO
IA OJ •
H -d- IA
VO
VO
1
LA
CM OJ •
OJ J CO
ON
OJ
H -^ CO
co
i
CM VO
VO CM ON
CM -d- H
CO
CO
CO
1
CM O
ON O
• OJ •
o -J- o
CO
-d"
d
i
o -*
CM O
. o •
o J- o
o
CO
VD
H ONO
00 .0-3-
• CM • CO
CM J- O ON
o
LA
d
1
t^- CO
• OJ • OJ
O ^ O t~
0} p O T3
°CJ
P
O
o
0
CO
CO
1
00 J" _H;
OO J- OJ
f-
H
1
CO VO
* -^ »
ON J- H
OJ
t—
1
ON
*
H -4- O
H-*
fO
, — 1
I
co
-d- -d- •
OJ -4" H
_^f-
OJ
H -* OJ
OJ
H
OJ
H
1
H CM
CM -3- H
H
H
H
|
LA O
J- CM
« CO •
O coo
O
LA
d
.^8
d co d
Q
CO
d
i
-d- VO
H O OJ
• CO « f—
o on o VD
OO
CM
d
i
CO H
0 0-d-
« CM • OO
O-d- 0 oo
cd ,Q cj ^
OJ|
W)
•rl
P
Q
0)
p-1
ON
OJ
1
co co oj
OJ H OJ
^
t
VO
1
^t 0
• CO •
-d- H J-
O
ON
1
CO o
• OO «
t- H -d-
co
CM
1
IA
t-CO •
H H vo
cy
(*)
co tr\ i
f~1 i™n —3"
r>-
oo
H
-d- i
H H-d-
LA
IA
d
|
C7N ON
CO O
• CO •
OHO
VD
LTN
CM
1
VO . 0
• CO «
H H 0
Q
CO
d
r
-d- LTN O
CM O O
• CO • OJ
0 H O-d-
IA
H
d
1
d 8ft
• LA • CJ\
O H O H
efl ,Q 0 T3
(U
C
•H
O
fl
cu
S
O
LA
1
O IA [^
-d- -d- CO
CO
CO*
i
O O
• LA •
t— J- VO
LA
»
-^-
1
r- o
« LA •
CM -d- oj
00
.^j-
i
^j-
O LA «
CVJ J" C--
o
CO
1
H O
• O •
t— CM-d-
co
ft
|
O-d- 5^
OJ OJ H
^-
CO
d
|
LA CO
-d" H
. LTN •
0 J- 0
O
LA
H
1
S C>
• LA «
O -d* O
LP\
CO
d
OJ OJ
H O CO
• tA • H
O -d" O OJ
CM
OJ
d
i
o o
• LA • CO
O CM O t-
03 ,Q O -d
WcJ
r-t
O
p^
oo
i
CO -d- co
CM J- H
H
ON
i
O t-
l>--d- -d*
O
LA
1
CO ON
OJ-d- H
O
LA
O
O-d- •
CM -d- H
t-
t-
VD-d- i
H -d- VD
ft
OJ
VD -d" CM
H-d- t-
LA
H
H
i
H ^*
-d- H
• °J ^
O -d" O
LA
CO
d
i
S "o
d^d
c—
H
d
i
H -4"
H O CO
• OJ • O
O -d" O VO
OO
ro
d
1
O O ON
d co d on
CS ^3 O TJ
OJj
•8
a
CJ
CO
w
-------
-p
o
0
0
CM
1
vo
W
i
03
O
CM
£j
•r|
CO
H
0
ef
CO
T3
(I)
•d
fl TO
H 4> tJ
03 ft -H
-P CO H
O p! O
EH CO 03
tJ
H tQ
HOT)
CO CO -H
•P 10 H
O -r-l O
H O CO
J5J
1
W)
p^
OO
o
a
J3
oo
W
,3
iH rO
.p ,3 -d-
O O O
E-i CO Pn
•H
f-
oo
i
LfN C*-~ CO
OOH CM
O
-*
i
H f-
. b- .
OOH CM
H
t^l
1
i/N CM
• t- •
l/NH CM
O
H
I
H O
-d- H OO
U>
CO t- i
H H CM
i--i
OO
IA
i
O CO
-d- ^^O
CM H H
CO
t-
«
H
I
CT\ LA
CO H
OHO
ON
jj*
6*
-d- 0
CJ O
OHO
-3"
O
1
vo1 o >-
« Is- • VO
O H 0 CO
oo
CO
oo
1
ON H
tf\ O VO
H H O VO
85,0 0 -d
r^
•rl
Oj
03
t—
00
i
J- CO t-
ro H CM
ON
VD
I
N- CM
• CO •
tr\ H-4-
I/N
CM
O LTN
• CO •
CM H H
OO
OO
OCO H
CM H H
00
CO I
LTN H OO
O"\
Q
CM
i
SO O
ON ITN t—
H H H
9}
•
O
|
LfN OO
CM CM
O H O*
CO
H
6
»
H H
• L/™\ •
OHO
CM
H
O
i
H ON
H O U-N
• l/N .OO
O H O H
O
O
H
i
CO -J-
H O O
•CO • CM
O H O CM
05 ,Q O T3
cy ,c
•P CO
•H -H
CO
03
S
a
0
•H
^
o
•p
H
•3
4^
ft
o
X!
CD
•V
Jj
O
,H
G
O ^i -p
JH 0) >> ft fl
•P H -H ft
O *H bD1^-' O £H
O 3 ft
QJ ^—^ bD a to
bo ^ O O 0>
0} CU 3 as o o >
II II IF II
«J ,£> CJ T3 HI
vS
ON
H
•V
VO
S>j
£
i
m
^Q
tr\
H
*X
CM
H
0)
fl
CM|
00
vo
C7N
H
•s
CM
-------
CO
£>
S
f-t
0
a
to
3
CO
EH CQ „_,
g8 S
en «
H O HI EH
W § >n 0
i-q W
•rt
PC
.d-
0
• CO
0 H
u. °°
* H
CO
* H
OJ
°CO
O H
CO
* H
ON
O
« CO
O H
I O i
oo
-3-
1
X> ON
• CO •
OO H OJ
VO
H
1
^ CO O
H H H
H
OJ
1
CO
-d-CO •
H H ON
r— ^s—*f~ -
OJ ,0 0
X'l
X
o
fa
UN
O
• OJ
0-3- -
* OJ
-d-
oo
o
• OJ
O-d
CO
o
• OJ
O-d-
a. °J
* -d-
H
O
• OJ
O -d-
-d
H
6
O H
H 0
• OJ •
O -3- O
ON
oo
i
CO OJ
• OJ •
H -d- H
-d
_d
CO MD
• OJ •
00-3- OJ
VJ3
H
I
oo
-d- OJ •
H J- ON
^^ /— v^— »
«J ^ 0
OJ 1
o
p
r]
O
O
ir\
0
•-d-
0 J- i i
* J- II
-d-
-d-
O
O -d- ii
oo
O
O -d- ii
* J- . it
LfN
H
O-d- ii
O O
VQ H
H O
OJ O ON CO
HO 0 O
• _d- . • co •
0-d- O OHO
H -d-
-d- H
i i
oo co OJ ON
• _^- • • co •
H .d- O H H O
^O H
-3- 00
1 1
UN 00 t~ VO
. j- • • CO •
OJ -d- H OJ H H
OJ OJ
OO H
1 1
UN O
OJ -d- • H CO •
H -d- CO H H ON
. — >s-*.s~+ OO | CO P O
CtJ f 0
OJ T 0)
o
(^ a
\o
o
• UN
O^t
LfN
* -d-
oo
o
• IfN
a^t-
OO
o
• u-\
O -d-
UN
* -d-
VD
O
• LfN
0^}"
H
r-
CP
CO CO
H O
. LA •
0-d- O
oo
H
I
H IT\
i LTN •
H -d- O
-d-
OJ
CO O
• UN •
H -d H
CO
OJ
1
O UN O
OJ .d- H
*»~n — .*— v
Cj rO Cl
OJ |
Ti
b
Pn
-p •
ftQJ
(UP
' — » O-H
H X w
^«. 0> O
KH »vO
VJL/ *^ i-i(
a >s
. °°
rf d°
^-^ M-J
• 0}
O OH
r— — ' P bo
o a
• -d" P b£>H
O -d- ' ' i i CQ sjra
4) -H
-P T*«J
fn OO
•in O-P VO
o. -=f i . 0 o G ON
* -d- ' • i l . 0 0) H
>> c8 w
•P H CD H
O -d" ' ' 1 I -P C8 JH J-i
•H Oi -> 0)
W 0) WVO ,Q
fj ^H 0) O
OO 0 ftp! >i HJ
O «J H Cfl O
• -d- to COS O
O -d- ' ' i i -P 0) >
05 P ii
. -H CQ CO OO
& '3H-g
H W 0 ^4}
< ' ^ ' C H
* , ^ ^^-^ ^Tco ^ §°
H^ 0 HHO OH d ^ °
ct) w
fs OJ
ON -* 3 S
o oj 01N° ^_,g;^g
. _;+ . oj c-- • _3- co • • ** ^
ONJ-^I- HHCO HHON || H II
•~v/-^x-x ^~v<-»rv-v C^*-s'x~x nj X3 O
CCJXIO tf^CJ Cj^Qcj Ur"
OJ |
P oo I
05 OOI I
a T3
-------
-4QOOO
LEGEND
I [mg/l
•fLbs/DAY
GREAT LAKES 8 ILLINOIS
R'VER BASINS PROJECT
GREEN BAY S TRIBUTARIES
AMMONIA NITROGEN
March,l963-April,l964
j DEPARTMENT i.f THt NTERIOR
FEDERAL WATLfi f-'.LLUTiON CONTROL AOMIN
Chicago, lllino.s
FIGURE 6-2
-------
7,000
0.50
LEGEND
I |mg/l
•[Lbs/DAY
GREAT LAKES 8 ILLINOIS
RiV.FR BASINS PROJECT
GREEN BAY & TRIBUTARIES
TOTAL SOLUBLE PHOSPHATE
March,l963-April, 1964
U.S DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
FEDERAL WATER POLLUTION CONTROL ADMIN.
Chicago,Illinois
FIGURE 6-3
-------
E
0 t
° o
fi Z
6 o
o c
e O O
J E CB °
° S
Q US
« s«
^
Q
2 ?
2 1
UJ 6
J£ x 0. I-I w ^ J
|j3">|*^5 °II
occ5o8?-5^S?;
OO
£ o
SsSlIS;
• o -o J £ a o o
O « ± o O O o
(D O _lU^CDtD —
iO(oN o> ff>o— wro^f
«s
is £ §
o = o j:
t ° ° P
s . cs
ni — • *•
T C °- O
i ~ » o
K S -1 Q ffi
in
-------
and very objectionable for recreational uses such as boating, water
skiing, and similar aquatic sports. The organic loadings causing this
highly polluted condition are known to originate primarily from the
discharges of the many pulp and paper mills located along the Lower
Fox River. The inventory of industrial waste discharges is given in
Chapter 4.
The heavy organic loadings responsible for the polluted condi-
tions of the Lower Fox River carry their effects into Green Bay in the
zone near the River mouth, as discussed earlier.
The Oconto River, between the City of Oconto Falls and its
mouth has been affected in a similar manner, by industrial wastes.
Data collected by the State of Wisconsin indicate the highly anaerobic
condition of this stream.
Biological Findings
General
The kinds and numbers of aquatic plants and animals inhabiting a
particular body of water, and the stream or lake bottom beneath it,
reflect the quality of water that has generally prevailed in the area
for an extended period of time. Some plants and animals are capable,
by virtue of physiological features or living habits, of withstanding
polluted conditions. They multiply rapidly when competition with less
tolerant forms is eliminated. Examples of pollution-tolerant animals
are the sludgeworms, bloodworms, leeches, and pulmonate snails, that
exist in the decaying organic sediment which builds up from the
setteable organic solids present in most waste discharges. A benthic
(bottom-dwelling) population consisting of many kinds of organisms
with low numbers of each species is typical of unpolluted waters. The
relative scarcities of pollution-sensitive organisms, usually scuds,
and the concomitant abundance of pollution-tolerant forms, usually
sludgeworms, are considered reasonable indicators of lake areas sub-
jected to organic enrichment if all other conditions are favorable.
Plankton algae are microscopic, chlorophyll-bearing plants sus-
pended in the water. The density of algae in the water is dependent
upon several factors, including the concentration of nutrients. All
other factors being favorable, the higher the concentration of nutrients,
the greater will be the density of algal growth. To a degree, they also
indicate the quality of the water in that the kinds and numbers of algae
present depend on the chemical and physical composition of the water in
which they originated and in which they live.
Green Bay
Deleterious effects of waste discharges from tributaries were
evident in a number of areas of Green Bay. The bottom fauna consisted
almost entirely of pollution-tolerant sludgeworms and bloodworms which
6-4
-------
thrive in the rich organic sediments. A depression of clean-water
associated bottom animal populations, probably as a result of waste
discharges from the Fox, Menominee, Oconto and Peshtigo Rivers was
exhibited.
The Bay exhibited dense concentrations of plankton algae. Pig-
mented flagellates, blue-greens and greens predominated. These types
are typical of waters subject to organic enrichment.
Southern Green Bay and Fox River Tributary Data
The type of bottom found at the southern tip of Green Bay was
mostly organic sediment. This is a favorable habitat for the pollution-
tolerant sludgewornis and bloodworms which were the predominant organisms.
Total populations in 1962 and 1963 ranged from 5,000 to 15,000 organisms
per square meter near the mouth of the Fox River and gradually decreased
to about 500 organisms per square meter ten miles out into the Bay. See
Figure 6-5. Some pollution-sensitive snails were found about five miles
from the mouth of the Fox River, indicating a trend toward improved
water quality.
The highest phytoplankton populations, as in the case of the
benthic fauna, occurred near the mouth of the Fox River as shown in
Firure 6-6. In July 1963, total populations of 20,000 per milliliter
were found. These numbers decreased to 5,000 to 10,000 about ten miles
out into the Bay. The kinds of phytoplnakton in this area were mostly
preen flagellates, centric diatoms and green coccoids, common in
enriched waters. Blue-green forms were also found in large numbers,
from 700 to 1,500 per milliliter. They are generally considered
pollution-tolerant.
Biological degradation was further indicated by a large phyto-
plankton bloom in southern Green Bay in July 1963. Counts were over
60,000 per milliliter. Large floating masses of Cladophora, a
filamentous preen algae, was found in southern Green Bay near the
western shore.
Green Bay - Oconto River Tributary Area
Benthic populations ranged from 2,000 to 5,000 organisms per
square meter near the mouth of the Oconto River in 1962 and 1963. See
Figure 6-5. Five miles from the mouth, populations had decreased to
about 500 bottom animals per square meter. The bottom deposits
consisted mostly of organic sediment. The Oconto River area was pre-
dominated by bloodworms rather than sludgeworms and a few pollution-
sensitive scuds existed less than two miles from its mouth.
Green flagellates and green coccoids predominated the phyto-
plankton in the adjacent Bay area, ranging from 1,000 to 20,000 per
6-5
-------
LEGEND
Nos of Organism*/So M«ter
O I 2 3 4
I I I
scale in miles
GREAT LAKES 8 ILLINOIS
RIVER BASINS PROJECT
BENTHIC FAUNA POPULATIONS
GREEN BAY NEAR THE OCONTO
AND FOX RIVERS, 1962-1963
U S DEPARTMENT OF THE. INTERIOR
FEDERAL WATER POLLUTION CONTROL ADMIN
Chicago.lllinois
FIGURE 6-5
-------
LEGEND
PhytoplonKton per Milliliter
10,0 0 0 —20,00 0
scale in miles
GREAT LAKES 8 ILLINOIS
RIVER BASINS PROJECT
PHYTOPLANKTON POPULATIONS
GREEN BAY NEAR THE OCONTO
AND FOX RIVERS —JULY, 1963
U S DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
FEDERAL WATER POLLUTION CONTROL ADMIN
Chicago,Illinois
L 6-6
-------
milliliter as shown in Figure 6-6. The proportion of diatoms was higher
in the Bay than in the Oconto River. Numbers of algae were considerably
less on the eastern shore of Green Bay, ranging from 500 to 5,000 per
milliliter.
Green Bay - Menominee and Peshtigo Rivers Tributary Areas
In 1962 and 1963 there were fewer bottom animals in the vicinity
of the mouths of the Menominee and Peshtigo Rivers than there were in
southern Green Bay. See Figure 6-7. A population of 800 per square
meter, which consisted mainly of pollution-tolerant bloodworms and
sludgeworms, was found near the mouth of the Peshtigo River. Twenty-
five hundred organisms per square meter, mostly sludgeworms and blood-
worms, were found at the mouth of the Menominee River. Rapid improve-
ment in conditions and a predominantly sandy bottom were shown by the
1,300 scuds per square meter found in Green Bay about three miles from
the mouth of the Menominee River.
As shown in Figure 6-8, similar numbers of plankton algae,
ranging from 1,000 to 5,000 per milliliter, were found in the Menominee
and Peshtigo Rivers and the adjacent waters of Green Bay in July 1963.
The kinds of algae in these regions were green flagellates and centric
diatoms, typical of enriched waters.
Adjacent Lake Michigan
In constrast to the waters in Green Bay, the northern part of
Lake Michigan exhibited good water quality. This portion of the Lake
was devoid of large numbers of sludgeworms. Generally, densities were
less than 500 per square meter. Clean-water associated scuds were
found in concentrations up to 2,000 per square meter. Bottom animal
populations increased in Lake Michigan at the outlet of Sturgeon Bay,
a possible result of enrichment by Green Bay waters. Light penetration
of over 16 meters as measured with a secchi disc occurred in the
northern waters of the Lake. In contrast, the lowest value, 0.2 meters,
was found in Green Bay Harbor.
Green Bay Tributaries
Fox River. Biological investigations of the Fox River were
conducted during October 1962 and May 1963. Six sampling stations were
established from De Pere to the mouth of the River at intervals varying
from one-half to two miles. There was an absence of bottom animals at
each station during the first survey, indicating that the Lower Fox
River was extremely polluted. Papermill woodwastes and ooze constituted
the major portion of the bottom materials observed from De Pere down-
stream to Green Bay.
In May 1963, low numbers of bottom animals, 220 to 830 per square
meter, occurred at each station. Pollution-tolerant sludgeworms and
6-6
GPO 826-535-6
-------
LEGEND
Not. of Organitmt/Sq. Mtter
enommee
Marinette
GREAT LAKES 8 ILLINOIS
RIVER BASINS PROJECT
BENTH1C FAUNA POPULATIONS
GREEN BAY NEAR MENOMINEE
AND PESHTIGO RIVERS, 1962-196
U S.DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
FEDERAL WATER POLLUTION CONTROL ADMIN
Chicago,Illinois
tea It in miles
-------
87° 30'
45° 15
LEGEND
PhytoplonK ton per Millilitcr
500 — IOOO
1000—5OOO
5000 —10,000
Q
87°I5'
N
GREAT LAKES 8 ILL'NOIS
RIVER BASINS PROJECT
PHYTOPLANKTON POPULATIONS
GREEN BAY NEAR THE MENOMINEE
AND PESHTIGO Rl VER S-JULY, 1963
U S DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
FEDERAL WATER POLLUTION CONTROL ADMIN
Chicago,Illinois
FIGURE 6-8
-------
bloodworms were predominant among the bottom fauna. Only a few pollution-
sensitive forms, 10 per square meter, were found at DePere and two miles
downstream.
Phytoplankton populations were predominantly composed of green
and blue-green coccoid forms, typical of organically enriched streams.
Peak populations of 28,300 phytoplanktons per milliliter occurred
during a sampling survey in August 1964.
Oconto River. The Oconto River, between the City of Oconto and
the River's mouth, was sampled for bottom animals during May 1963 and
for phytoplankton from June 1963 to March 1964. The section of the
River studied was found to be severely polluted. Populations of
pollution-tolerant sludgeworms and bloodworms, the only fauna foifid,
ranged from 400 to over 2,500 per square meter.
Floating masses of pollution-tolerant filamentous blue-green
algae were observed at all stations. Phytoplankton counts were high,
with an observed midsummer peak count of 75,000 per milliliter. Green
coccoids, flagellates and blue-green filamentous forms, typical of
organically enriched streams, predominated.
Below the Oconto sewage treatment plant the bottom type changed
from sand to decaying organic matter and sand. This provided a more
suitable substrate for sludgeworm growth indicated by the increase in
the sludgeworm populations near the mouth of the River.
Peshtigo River. The Peshtigo River was sampled for benthic
organisms in May 1963 and for phytoplankton from June 1963 until
March 1964. Good water quality conditions were found above the Badger
Paper Mills in Peshtigo. Bottom samples contained many organisms
associated with clean waters, such as scuds and mayfly larvae. The
phytoplankton population also reflected good water quality at this
station. Counts were low — 2,400 organisms per milliliter was the
summer peak. There was also a wide diversity of genera, mainly within
the pennate and centric diatom groupings.
A drastic deterioration in water quality occurred, however, in
the few remaining miles of the stream to its mouth. The bottom
organism population consisted mostly of large numbers of sludKeworms
and bloodworms, over 2,000 per square meter. All other pollution-
tolerant forms were absent. Sphaerotilus or sewage fungus growths
were observed. The dominant bottom type was ooze. The degraded con-
ditions were apparently the combined result of waste discharge from
the Peshtigo sewage treatment plant and the Badger Paper Mills.
Menominee River. Bottom dwelling animals were samrled during
October 1962 and May 1963- Phytoplankton samples were collected from
Anril to October 1963. Four stations were established at approximate
three-quarter mile intervals upstream from the River mouth.
6-7
-------
The quality of the Menominee River as it entered Green Bay was
degraded. Only pollution-tolerant benthic organisms were found and
over 800 sludgeworms per square meter were collected near the mouth.
The total lack of organisms at some stations and reduction in numbers
at others in October indicated that degraded conditions through the
summer practically eliminate the small bottom-dwelling community.
The River above the sewage treatment plants of Menominee and Marinette
seemed to be in slightly better condition. More kinds of organisms,
even though few in number, were found there.
A peak of 10,700 phytoplankton per milliliter was noted in
April 1963. The dominant phytoplankton which were present, centric
diatoms and green flagellates, are usually considered relatively
insensitive to pollution. Heavy growths of fungus were found at all
stations and indicated poor water quality.
Ford River. Biological sampling of the Ford River consisted
of a phytoplankton survey. Samples were collected from June 1963 to
March 1964 in the Ford River, Michigan. The phytoplankton data in-
dicated excellent water quality. Total counts were very low throughout
the year. Twenty-one hundred organisms per milliliter was the
September maximum. Pennate diatoms, which are clean-water associated,
predominated the population.
Escanaba River. Bottom Samples were collected from the
Escanaba River during May 1963 and indicated degraded conditions. The
mouth of the River was devoid of bottom animals. Upstream 1.7 miles,
large numbers of pollution-tolerant bloodworms, over 2,900 per square
meter, were collected. Only a few pollution-sensitive forms were
found. Pulp and paper mill wastes predominated the bottom materials
two miles upstream. Three miles upstream the River bed was flat,
hard rock covered with slime and fungus.
Whitefish River. The Whitefish River, sampled near the mouth
for bottom animals during may 1963, was moderately degraded. The
bottom materials were predominately sand. The fauna was composed of
pollution-tolerant clams and bloodworms, over 1,700 per square meter.
Microbiological Aspects
General
The kinds and numbers of bacteria found in a given volume of
water provide valuable information with respect to the sources of
contamination likely to render the waters unfit or of impaired
quality for certain uses, particularly water supply, and recreation.
Coliforms, fecal coliforms and fecal streptococci indicate the likely
presence of wastes of human or animal fecal origin, with the danger
of associated pathogenic organisms such as typhoid, paratyphoid and
6-8
-------
salmonellae, and enteric parasites. The higher the numbers, the
greater chance that enteric pathogens are present, with the corres-
pondingly greater threat to the health of those exposed to or
consuming such waters. To assess the sanitary quality of the waters
of the Green Bay Area, the GLIRB Project conducted microbiological
testing during the 1962 to 1964 studies.
Green Bay and Tributary Mouths
In general, throughout the open Bay waters, the coliform
densities were less in the northern parts than in the south Bay
areas. The higher coliform densities occurred near urban centers
and at the confluence of the tributaries as shown in Figure 6-9.
The highest total coliform counts were encountered near the Menominee,
Escanaba and Sturgeon Rivers and were in the range of 110 - 1,000 per
100 ml. At the east end of the Sturgeon Bay inlet the same range
existed.
Fecal streptococci values, obtained from a survey study in
1962 indicate a range from 1 - 130 per ml. near the Menominee River
mouth. Ranges at the Escanaba River mouth and in the Sturgeon Bay
area were 1-24 and 1-16 per ml. respectively.
A summary of the bacterial densities found near the mouths of
the tributaries is shown in Table 6-4. Few samples were collected
near the mouth of the Fox River in Green Bay, because of the shallow
depths prevailing at that time which prevented the collecting of
samples outside of the dredged channel.
Fox River Survey
In Aupust and November 1964, the Fox River, between Lake
Winnebago and Green Bay, was sampled for total coliform and fecal
streptococci densities. The results are shown in Figures 6-10 and
6-11. Total coliform densities ranged from less than 1,000 to
600,000 per 100 ml. In general, the densities observed in Aupust
were higher than those observed during the November study. Highest
densities were found from Little Rapids upstream to the Kimberly,
Wisconsin area.
Fecal streptococci findings follow the same general patterns
as the coliform results. Streptococci densities ranged from five to
7,000 per ml. Highest densities-were found in both August and
November between little Rapids and Kimberlay, Wisconsin.
One noteworthy observation found in comparisons of the coliform
and fecal streptococci densities is that total coliforms were highest
in August, whereas fecal streptococci counts were highest in the
November study. This may further substantiate what has been observed
6-9
-------
GREAT LAKES & ILLINOIS
RIVER BASINS PROJECT
DISTRIBUTION OF COLIFORM BACTERIA
PER lOOml.GREEN BAY-LAKE MICHIGAN
1963
U S DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
FEDERAL WATER POLLUTION CONTROL ADMIN
Chicago,Illinois
6-9
-------
TABLE 6-4
DETERMINATIONS OF BACTERIAL DENSITIES
IN
GREEN BAY NEAR TRIBUTARY MOUTHS
1962-1963
Total Coliform
(per 100 cl.)
Fecal Streptococci
(per T-il.)
Location
Menominee River @
Green Bay
Escanaba River @
Green Bay
Sturgeon Bay
Area
Fox River <§
Green Bay
Oconto River @
Green Bay
No. Geo.
Samples Range. Mean
22
16
13
7
6
-------
V)
- UJ
_J -3
_J O
- cc
CL
oO
V)
wz
LJ CO
^ <
< CD
o
^ OQ u)
H z g>
tn o •
z c/> >
UJ — O
0 ? H
I £ c
O > °
O X
o o
u.
o E
£C < —.':
O _1 o
UJ
x z
t- o
_1
cr
i-
UJ
Q
0
UJ
I
f-
UJ
>
O
CD
UJ
o
UJ
S
oc
oc
Q
z
C3PO 826-535-5
FIGURE 6-10
-------
o
o
o
o"
8
a
oh
41 •
6
o
c
3
O
a>
"O
T7 JC
— O
O. O
o _1
.
a> O H
CP
\
\
X
\
\
\
\
i,
V)
_l O
— CC
CL
CO
en
en?
< OD
_J
tr
O
w
LU
CO
2
Q z o>
_ o —
o .° -
o i2
0 &
o ~
o cr
t- LU
Q. >
^0:0
^ X <
O
LU
U.
o
z
•o
c
o
Q .E
DC < =
O _1
n- O
**• ft*
UJ £
U. t-
£5
|£
Is
< 5
^ I
UJ *
Q _1
UJ
Q
UJ
U_
X
I-
o
UJ
o
CO
UJ
ce
LU
cc
•" = o
_l < Z
o
o
o
o
•|iu| jad saiji sue Q
I o o a j
FIGURE6-I
-------
in other studies in different areas, that fecal streptococci tend to
persist longer in the spring and fall seasons.
Evaluation of both coliform and fecal streptococci densities
in this 34 miles of the Fox River indicates pollution of fecal origin.
Consumers dependent upon these water resources are exposed to serious
health hazards as well as increased water processing costs.
Waste Assimilation
Based on a consideration of the location of municipal and
industrial waste discharges in the Green Bay Area and the character-
istics of the waters receiving these wastes, four reaches of streams
were selected for waste assimilation studies. These were the Lower
Fox River, Menomirtee River below Niagara and certain reaches of the
Oconto and Peshtigo Rivers.
Lower Fox River
Waste assimilation stream studie^ were conducted by the GLIRB
Project to determine the total streamflow required to meet a range of
water quality goals in the Lower Fox River. The 34 mile stretch of
the Lower Fox River from Appleton to Green Bay is the most critical
reach within the River. In 1964, intensive stream investigations were
conducted on this reach during June, August and November.
A computer program was utilized to develop a mathematical model
which reproduced the stream conditions observed during these intensive
sampling periods. Using projected flow and quality data for the waste
inputs within the study reach of the stream, the model was used to
compute the total streamflows required for flow regulation for water
quality control. It has been assumed that a 90% 5-day BOD (BOD5) re-
moval will be provided by 1980 and a 95$ BODr removal will be pro-
vided by 2020 for both municipal and industrial waste discharges.
Based on the desired uses of the Lower Fox River as given in
Table 3-1 and a consideration of the water quality criteria necessary
to support these uses, a minimum dissolved oxygen concentration of
3.0 mg/1 was the minimum water quality goal in this reach of stream.
The maintenance of this minimum goal will assure the absence of
nuisance odor conditions; permit recreational use involving body
contact (when municipal waste treatment plants provide effluent
disinfection); support some fish and other aquatic life; and in
general provide for the esthetic enjoyment of unpolluted surface waters.
The ranges of total streamflow required to maintain a minimum
DO concentration of 3 mg/1 are 290 to 2700 cfs in 1980 and 200 to 3800
cfs in 2020. It should be remembered that these are only estimates of
the required streamflow and are no better than the weakest assumption
made in developing the stream model.
6-10
-------
The ability of existing streamflow to meet the above demand
is assessed by comparing the maximum required flows in 1980 and 2020
with the 7 day once-in-10-year low flow given in Table 2-2. Thus it
can be concluded that streamflow regulation or increased treatment,
beyond 95$ BOD removal, may be required if the water quality goal of
3 Mg/1 DO is to be maintained.
Other Critical Reaches
The projected future untreated waste load of the areas
selected as being most critical were determined. The degree of treat-
ment efficiency appropriate to the date of the projection was employed
to determine the waste load to the stream. A stream flow approximating
the once-in-10-year 7 day low flow at the point of waste input was
selected as being critical as far as water quality control ivas con-
cerned. Based on consideration of the stream uses and water quality
criteria as given in Tables 3-1 and 3-7, the water quality parameter
of concern was the dissolved oxygen (DO) content of the stream.
Computations summarized in Table 6-7 show the flow regulation will not
be necessary for water quality control below Niagara on the Menominee
River, Oconto Falls on the Oconto River and Peshtigo on the Peshtigo
River provided that adequate waste treatment is utilized.
6-11
-------
£3
O EH
S3 O
O W
O CO
M W
UN
^cfl
•d §
% 1
-p -H
•H q
IH -H O
0 S £5
C
O
•H
Tl -P
CD CO
-P H in
Oj Ct) Hp
HOC
3 -H CD
O -p O
H S C
CO JH O
O O O
X— >
£}£*
x— ••
Co ^^\^'^,
CD CM W
fc^ E
-P v-"
CO CD
-P "C
73 -P S
CD H Q
-P -3
H
^
^-N
-d-
H
\
bO
S
CM
id
5
CO C
S H CD
•H CO bfl
•P -P fo>
to o K
W -P O
fl
_ . q
T3 >»-H
C C?4J
CO TJ CO
O
Q) r- o
hO H
cO f-,
CD rtt -P
•H ® «»
•H f>j
3 >
o 5
*H H
fl «M
-H £
•H 5
« H H
O
to o
s^q
•o ^^ •
T3 CO
CD Q S
-P M 3
O CD
CD CD ft
•n+s .p
O CO CO
^i CO
(L, S
CD
P
£*! ^
•H O
K -rl
O -P
^ Cfl
OH O
OH Q
«* n3
•
co
^
t^
CM
O
f>-
H
^
f-(
CD-->,
>• 0
•H •
« CM
CM
O
-P CD
C H
O >rl
0 3
o>2-
o
•
3
o
(^
u>
co
H
H
cfl
ti.
O
£
O
o
o
0
•
-*
o
•
ir\
vO
-4- cn
* •
O CM
O
H
CM
O
-4-
VfN
•X
h
CD
>
^^
rH
CD •
CD UN
c to
•H
Ej CD
IS
«
u%
•
S
1
8
CM
O
CO
ft
n)
bC
CO
•H
S
O
I
-*
o
•
-4"
1
vO
~* c^>
• •
O CM
to
sO
« -4-
•
O O
tflH
•H
•P CD
45 H
CO •!-(
CD S
fL, v-x
C^v
*
C--
0
c5
to
o
C>0
•H
-P
45
co
«
(X,
8
I
0)
CO
b -O
H H
CD I
43
-------
CHAPTER 7
QUALITY IMPROVEMENT MEASURES
General
The problems of water pollution control in the Green Bay Area
are complex. Solutions to these problems will of necessity involve
a comprehensive program which includes construction of new sewerage
facilities; and continuous and intensive monitoring of operating pro-
cedures, treatment plant efficiency, and water quality conditions to
determine necessary additional construction and operation needs as
they arise. In addition, flow regulation may be required to attain
the desired water quality in the Lower Fox River even after a high
degree of waste treatment is accomplished. These phases of the com-
prehensive program for pollution control in the Green Bay Area are
discussed in the following paragraphs.
Municipal Waste Treatment
The immediate goal in the treatment of municipal wastes is
the provision of biological (secondary) treatment at each waste
treatment plant. Such treatment is considered adequate in terms of
present technology and provides 90 percent BOD^ removal. Adequate
effluent disinfection is also considered to be a necessity in the
study area particularly where recreational use of the receiving
waters is prevalent. There is also a present need for increased
phosphate removal.
There are approximately 75 municipal sewerage facilities in
the Green Bay Area. Of these 52 provide secondary biological waste
treatment.(14) Municipal waste treatment construction needs for
the major communities of the Green Bay Area are shown on Table 7-1.
These needs are based on waste flow and waste load projections to
the year 1980.
It is estimated that the total cost of needed municipal plant
improvements shown in Table 7-1 but excluding facilities specifically
for phosphate removal, is $7,900,000. Of this amount some $5,400,000
will be required for municipal waste treatment needs along the Lower
Fox River. The average annual cost per person for the immediate
municipal waste treatment construction needs and for the perpetuation
of these new facilities and existing municipal waste treatment facil-
ities is estimated to be $3.20. This is based on the present sewered
population.
7-1
-------
CO
•8
£
• • CD
O O G
Q) tU O
n co s
CO
o
H
co s
•% -H
CD
G ^
CD CD
CD O,
Jjj CD
O Q
CO
g
O
0)
S °
•N O
-p
0) rS
-P
a>
P, -H
G
•rt
CO
§
O
CO
•H
ti
-------
CD
C
43 S
G -H
CD -p
S o
CD Q)
60
k
EH
ft
o
o
CO
£j
•tH
W
G
O
0
CO
•rH
N
-P
•H
s
ii
s
o
o
£5
•^
G
•H
, — (
JH
0)
CQ
0
8
£>-
*
J-4
EH
«
0
CD
CO
JH
•H
00
G
O
O
10
1*^
*l
G -H
0«
C
•H
CO
G
O
O
CO
•H
a
-------
Industrial Waste
AS described in Chapter 4 pulp and paper mill waste are the
largest source of pollution in the Green Bay Area. Re-examination of
Table 4-2 will show that in general industries of the Area provide
only limited waste treatment facilities. Many of the plants only
screen waste while others provide some lagooning, settling or evapora-
tion of the sulfite liquor. While research has been conducted for
some time to determine new and more profitable ways to use the waste
products of the paper industry, gross pollution of public and inter-
state waters continues.
Minimum industrial treatment needs are listed in Table 7-2.
In developing this list it was considered that the equivalent of
secondary waste treatment as described in the preceding section would
be required. In some areas such as the Lower Fox River, additional
treatment (beyond 90$ BOD^ removal) and/or flow regulation may be re-
quired if the desired water quality goals are to be met. The rec-
ommended BODc; load limits shown on Table 7-2 were arrived at by
estimating the present raw load and projecting this figure to 1930 by
using an industrial growth 'multiplier. Then a 90/o BODc removal of
the 1980 raw load was applied. The present raw load used in the above
calculation was estimated from a knowledge of the existing discharged
waste load and existing treatment practices.
In addition to necessary reduction in the organic waste load
from industry certain other measures are necessary. These include re-
duction of suspended solids and secondary biological treatment and
disinfection of plant sanitary wastes.
Combined Sewers
Historically, the development of our Nation's sewer system
followed a general pattern. Diversion of storm water was the earliest
concern of communities. Discharges were made directly to water-
courses, usually at many points. La'ter these sewer systems were used
to carry sanitary sewage also. HS the public became increasingly
aware of the need for treatment of sanitary wastewater, the many short
sewers discharging untreated domestic waste to various points in
streams were provided with interceptors and the collection system
modified to deliver the waste to a single point - the treatment plant.
When sanitary and storm water are combined it is necessary in times of
high flow to have the sewers overflow directly to the stream.
Studies of combined sewer systems have indicated that the com-
bined overflow contain from 3 to 5 percent of the average annual un-
treated domestic sewage. During storms as much as 95 percent of the
sewage flow is discharged with the storm water runoff. Storm water
7-2
GPO 826—535—4
-------
1
•H
CO
("T"]
g
o
CO
plj
£— t
CO
•=3^
l~^
M
C£
EH
00
O
M
«
O
-a;
s
CV Ct!
1 f~~) •SZ*
I k_^ ^^
p"!
CO <
go
EH
O W
M PJ
EH H
0 O
Q
prl
S
g
CO
CD >5
W) cS
cd I
0
CO •
Q £> C
H CD
0 •>— ' CO
-P CD
CO SH
Cd PH
^
P
W rH
cd
^ >
o o
-P 05
C «
-P Q
cd Q
-P CD CQ
CD EH \3?.
O f~i ^-^
o cd
TJ -P
C C
O CD
O H
CD cd
CO >
O 0
u^ o
H C\J
*\ *\
sO O
r-l
cd
CD
^
O O
o o°\ o^
CT •« *t
t-M «\ *^
fn £} !3
CD
1
C cd5 ^
O OQ CQ
•H
-P C C
cd CD CD
O CD CD
Q ^ ^
bo
•H •
ttd O
ct3 C_5
rM
0 ?H
>j(S
cd
<3 G '^
S ^ JJJ
O S X
o c5 o
o
0
o
•%
s,Q
r-i
O
O
NO
-^J"
cri
po
c
CD
CD
5-<
0
O
^
O
o
-4-
CN
O
-4"
«T
c\?
&
CQ
c
0
CD
f-,
•
O
O
CD
a,
H
.H
O
O
f^
fV\
crj
Ci
0}
pJ
cd
O
u
J_!
CD
PH
a"
i
rH
&
EH
OOOO U"N
O O O vD CV
*v *N |
u~\ C^-
i—t
OOOO 00
CM C^vO O H
u~\ o^
CO
o
3
T)
C H O O O n)
rO CD CD CD CD CO
S 43 H rH H CO
O -3 O, p, O, CD
O
0
?-i O
CD . •
rt o cc o o •
OH O &, O
cfi ti J«H C_}
C/5 _M PM (1) 0
^ ?-( p^ fX £H
h-l o -P cd
ci5 CD JM d-i
^J [>i T^ 'C CD
•H CD O JH W -H
,g ^ CO CD -P
0 -H O -H O !c
O ti! O CEj C£, ^3
OOOO 0 O
rH CN LPv O ^O rH
\ ^ ^^ ^
CD rW r«l ft SH 0 rW •*""*
cd tiO cX , — i p., ( — ( o p-i I>
p-iCcdo OHO-H
cd Ok g O Q
^-> CDCDWCDUOCDa
cd firQ^ bO^T3^ CD
cd O -H -H CD -H CQ -H S
S3 '"b O fccj CQ trf •>— ' tcj v— '
-------
co
o
en
13
CO
M
E-i
CO
Q
P=3
o
-p
o
O
CNi
CQ
•H
—I
-P
•H
1-3
CD
•p T!
£ %
3 s
T) '"^ O
03 >i O
O 03 CD
t-3 T) PH
^^^
Ej £-3
fn
-P !>i
CO oj
•^
CD 1 -P
bO *-A C
J-l CD
oJ • w
x: co CD
O £> f-i
CO r-l OH
h v~"
d)
-p
CO
^
^-j
CT^~x
w 1 — 1
03
^ >
O 0
-P 0)
G fti
CD
£^ i/^
•P -P Q
I £"-S.
00= =
O t>b O
03^
T^ -4-^
C G
O CD
O H
(D 03
CO f>
O O
o o
O £>-
*\ "\
-* H
^i H
CD
>
•H
PC!
o
bC
•H
•P
fi O O
CO O O
CD O O
1 CO CM
O O^i C\!
-P
C
O
O «
O CO
rj
Gl fe -S 0 -H
O en bfl en
•H o G -H G
-P -p o -P O
03 C O X! O
o o co en en
O O -H CD -H
^ 0 S PH 3:
CO
H
H
•H
O ^
O
in
IH CD
ft 03
O3 PH
>5 0-.
t-p CD
-P bO
S 0 T3
O O c^
o co ra
^ ~ ~ ~
o o o o
O C\2 vO O
O H xO OJ
o" c>
H 1 — 1
CD
K*
'H >H
& CD
J>
CD -H
G
CD -> * ^ o3
0X4 CNi -ci" C"^ O
u> H co
W
CD G CD CD K
+3 -H CD C CD G ^-H
-pen Go3 Go3 oicn
CD G -H M -H M ?-( C
CO g -H S -H o3 O
•HO O,G OX! bOO
few GO CO 03CO
Oj -rl CD -rl CD -rj -H -H
^ 3: g g g S 5s
o*
o
« •
O O (H ^sj
0 O CD in
ft 03
P £-1 ct) i — }
CD CD Pt O
ft ft
03 o3 G t^
O-. D-, o H
X! h
+i -p +3 CD
-P -P 03 £>
0 0 JH S
O O cd -H
CO CO g W
cv
o
LfN
03 C
& 03
03 JC5
O O
en -H
ft
!H
o
o
03
CD
-------
alone was demonstrated to carry significant amounts of pollution load,
particularly in the early portions of storms when a flushing action
occurs in the sewers. The storm water washes large amounts of de-
posited sludge out of the sewers. For example, data from Buffalo,
New York some years ago indicated that one-third of the City's annual
production of sewage solids overflowed v/ithout treatment, although
only 2 to 3 percent of the sewage volume actually overflowed.(16)
The need for solutions to the problems caused by overflows from
combined sewer systems is pressing and is receiving much current
attention.(23) The Water 'Duality Act of 1965 established a four-year
program of grants and contract authority to demonstrate new or im-
proved methods to eradicate the problems of combined sewer overflows.
Until economically feasible methods for solving the problems
are developed, existing combined sewer systems should be patrolled.
Overflow regulating structures should be adjusted to convey the
maximum practicable amount of combined flows to and through waste
treatment facilities. Combined sewers should be prohibited in all
newly developed urban areas and in coordination with urban renewal
projects.
Reduction of Nutrients
There is an immediate need for the reduction of the nutrient
loads to Green Bay. Concentrations of phosphate in nearly every zone
in Green Bay were far above the level of 0.03 rag/1 considered critical
for the stimulation of algal blooms. That portion of Green Bay at the
mouth of the Fox River had a phosphate (P0/f) concentration of 0.20 mg/1
many times the 0.03 critical level. At present Green Bay receives some
5 million pounds of phosphate annually from its watershed. The
largest single tributary source is the Fox River which discharges
2,^00,000 pounds annually.
The degree of phosphate removal attained by the municipal and
industrial treatment plants in the Green Bay Area is not known.
However, the removal of phosphates is known to vary among plants of
similar design for reasons that are not always evident. Research in
progress shows promise of accomplishing substantial removals at
nominal cost. It may be necessary in the future to use some form of
advanced waste treatment to further remove phosphates.
Plant Operation
It is not enough for a community to build a secondary biologi-
cal waste treatment plant; the plant must also be operated efficiently.
Of the 52 communities in the Green Bay Area with secondary treatment
7-3
-------
plants, several are operating at less than 85$ efficiency in the
removal of BOD5. A review of the available inventory data relating
to the design capacities and removal efficiency of treatment plants
in the area indicates that the following plants which presently pro-
vide secondary treatment, need operational improvements:
Green Bay, Wisconsin
Wrightstown, Wisconsin
Oshkosh, Wisconsin
Birnamwood, Wisconsin
Markeson, Wisconsin
Wautonia, Wisconsin
New London, Wisconsin
Manana, Wisconsin
Peshtigo, Wisconsin
Escanaba, Michigan
Little Chute, Wisconsin
Fond du Lac, Wisconsin
Berlin, Wisconsin
Bonduel, Wisconsin
Montello, Wisconsin
Hortonville, Wisconsin
lola, Wisconsin
Shawano, Wisconsin
Crandon, Wisconsin
Overloading of the following existing secondary facilities
has contributed to low treatment efficiencies;
De Pere, Wisconsin
Appleton, Wisconsin
Pardeeville, Wisconsin
Lena, Wisconsin
Stephenson, Michigan
Kaukauna, Wisconsin
North Fond du Lac, Wisconsin
Glintonville, Wisconsin
Coleman, Wisconsin
Proper plant operation nust follow proper plant design in
order to efficiently reach the goals of water pollution control. The
importance and value of proper plant operation must be emphasized at
all levels of public authority. Effective operation can be encouraged
by means of a routine inspection program. Inspections should be con-
ducted by the appropriate State agencies on at least an annual basis
for the small and medium-sized plants, and at least, bi-annually for
the larger plants.
The Wisconsin Sewage Works Operators Association administers a
voluntary sewage treatment plant operators' certification program in
Wisconsin. A mandatory certification plan is under consideration.
The voluntary program is commendable and can provide definite incen-
tive for the proper operation of waste treatment plants. However, a
mandatory program is preferrable to insure the proper qualifications
of operators. Michigan already has a mandatory program.
State-sponsored operator training programs are also a useful
tool for elevating the level of overall plant performance. The exist-
ing training program in Wisconsin is a step in the right direction and
consists of a 3-day biennial course sponsored by the State Board of
7-4
-------
Health, University of Wisconsin, and the League of Wisconsin
Municipalities. However, the V,risconsin program does not compare
favorably with the frequency and duration of such training sponsored
by other states. Michigan for example sponsors annual training pro-
grams. Today, with increasing activity in the field of water pollution
control at the Federal, State and local levels operator training courses
should be conducted at least annually.
Monthly operation reports should be submitted to the States
water pollution control agencies from each municipal and industrial
waste treatment facility. These reports should contain sufficient
information to describe waste treatment efficiency and the quality
and quantity of the effluent discharged to the. water of the Green Bay
Area. Monthly operational reports would provide the State with more
current information and would enable them to take much quicker action
concerning needed improvements.
Monitoring
The maintenance of desirable water quality on a continuing
basis calls for a routine monitoring program covering the significant
water quality parameters at strategic points.
The monitoring program of the Wisconsin Committee on Water
Pollution should be strengthened and coordinated with the other agencies
at the Federal, State and local levels. The monitoring program of the
Michigan Water Resources Commission should be expanded to include
those streams in the Green Bay Area within the State of Michigan. The
Federal Water Pollution Control Administration will cooperate and
assist the Committee and Commission to the fullest extent of its re-
sources and personnel in expanding its monitoring program.
The industries, municipalities and other agencies, discharging
wastes within the study area, should submit monthly reports to the
appropriate State agency concerning the quality and quantity of the
wastes discharged. These reports could, in many cases, be combined
with the monthly operational report which was discussed under "Treatment
Plant Operation."
The overall monitoring program should be geared to provide an
adequate picture of all wastes being discharged to the waters of the
area and serve to indicate trends in water quality or the need for
additional water quality improvement measures.
Flow Regulation
Water quality levels for various streamflows at k critical Green
Bay tributary locations were determined as discussed in Chapter 6. In
7-5
-------
one instance, the Lower Fox River, it appears that streamflow regula-
tion may be required to improve water quality even after a high degree
of xvaste treatment efficiency is achieved. However, flow regulation
will not be considered as a qualit:' improvement measure until after a
high degree of treatment is attained. Flow regulation will not be used
as a substitute for treatment measures recommended in this report.
State 'Jat _er__P_o 11 ut ion.Control Program
The Federal Water Pollution Control Act recognizes the primary
responsibility of the States in the control and prevention of water
pollution. The effectiveness of a State program, however, is depen-
dent upon adequate funds and personnel with which to accomplish this
mission.
The States of Michigan and "Wisconsin have achieved commendable
success in the control of water pollution with the staff and funds
available. However, even though much has been accomplished by the
States in controlling conditions, much remains yet to be done. In
1964, the Public Administration Service prepared a survey report for
the Public Health Service concerning the budgeting and staffing of
State programs.(29) This report, containing suggested guidelines for
use in evaluating the adequacy of State water pollution control programs,
may be of assistance to Michigan and Wisconsin in terms of evaluating
their present x^ater pollution control efforts.
In view of the water pollution control problems still existing
in Michigan and V.'isconsin, consideration should be given by the States
to an accelerated program to match the needs of the States for clean
water for all legitimate uses. An accelerated State water pollution
control program utilizing fully the resources and programs of the
Administration will ensure the earliest possible accomplishment of
our common goal - more effective use of our water resources.
7-6
-------
CHAPTER 8
PROGRAM IMPLEMENTATION
The implementation of the comprehensive water pollution control
program for Lake Michigan Basin will involve the combined efforts of
the water pollution control agencies at all levels of government.
Specific recommendations for implementing the Lake Michigan Comprehensive
Water Pollution Control Program, and for coordinating the subbasin
programs will be contained in the Summary Report for Lake Michigan,
which will be the final report in the Lake Michigan series. The
recommendations contained in this report will in no way conflict with
recommendations contained in the Green Bay Area water pollution control
program, nor will it interfere in any way with any steps taken to
implement those recommendations.
Accordingly it is recommended that the Comprehensive Water
Pollution Control Program contained herein serve as the basis for
improvement of the quality of the waters in the Green Bay Area. The
Federal Water Pollution Control Administration will cooperate and
assist to the fullest extent of its resources and personnel in each
action taken to achieve objectives consistent with the Program.
-------
-------
CHAPTER 9
BENEFITS
Implementation of the recommendations which comprise the
above action program will result in substantial improvement in the
quality of the waters in the Green Bay Area. The program objec-
tives, however, are more specific and have been developed to provide
water of satisfactory quality for both present and planned uses as
shown on Table 3-1. Accomplishment of program objectives will result
in both tangible and intangible benefits to the people of the Green
Bay Area in particular, and to the people of the States of Uisconsin,
Michigan and the Nation as a whole. As the waters of Lake Michigan
serve many States and are of National importance, all will share in
the benefits resulting from the enhancement and protection of these
waters for both present and future needs.
Residents of the study area will benefit from the assurance
of a safer, more palatable water supplied to their homes, business
establishments, industries, schools and public buildings. Owners of
property adjacent to and near bodies of water will derive increased
esthetic enjoyment and enhanced property values from the elimination
of ugliness and unsightly conditions resulting from water pollution,
including nuisance algal blooms stimulated by over-fertilization.
Michigan and Wisconsin residents and visitors from out-of-state
who use the Area streams and lakes for swimming, water skiing, boating
and other water-oriented sports will be protected against infectious
diseases which can be spread as a result of water pollution. The
sports fisherman will find additional fishing areas to challenge his
skill and improved fishing as a benefit of enhanced water quality.
As a return on their investment in improved water quality, in-
dustry will share in the benefits through assurance of consistency in
the quality of process water needed for many of its products and other
water needs.
In addition to these immediate and direct benefits resulting
from the control of pollution, the preservation and protection of
the quality of the waters of Lake Michigan and the Great Lakes is an
important benefit and essential to the Nation's continued growth and
prosperity. This immense fresh water resource, the greatest in the
world, is bepinnin? to show the effects of man's carelessness. lake
9-1
-------
Erie is a clear,demonstration that size is no protection against
pollution and that man has the capability of destroying the useful-
ness of even a major water resource.
The Calumet, Milwaukee and Green Bay Areas of Lake Michigan are
already affected adversely by pollution. Should the Lake as a whole
reach critical levels of nutrients or other persistent contaminants, it
would require many decades before remedial measures could result in
restoration of satisfactory water quality.
9-2
-------
BIBLIOGRAPHY
1. Surface Water Records of Wisconsin, 1964. U. S. Department
of the Interior, Geological Survey District Office, Madison,
Wisconsin.
2. Surface Water Records of Michigan,_1964. U. 3. Department
of the Interior, Geological Survey District Office, Lansing,
Michigan.
J>. Flow Characteristics of Wisconsin Streams. U. 3. Department
of the Interior, Geological Survey District Office, Madison,
Wisconsin (November, 1963).
4. Drought Flow of Michigan -Streams. University of Michigan,
School of Public Health, Department of Environmental Health,
Ann Arbor, Michigan, I960 and 1964. Supplement.
5. Climatological Data, Wisconsin Annual Summary, 1964. U. 3.
Department of Commerce, Weather Bureau, Asheville, N.C. (196$),
6. Glimatological Data, Michigan Annual Summary, 1964. U. S.
Department of Commerce, Weather Bureau, Asheville, N.C. (1965).
7. U. S. Census of Manufactures; 1947. 1954. 1958, 1963. U. S.
Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, U. d. Government
Printing Office, Washington, D. C. (1949, 1957, 1961, 1965).
3. Water Duality Criteria. Appendix No. 8, Lake Michigan Basin
Report, U. S. Department of the Interior, F//PCA, Great Lakes-
Illinois River Basins Project, Chicago, Illinois (to be
published).
9. Water Oriented Outdoor Recreation Lake Michigan Basin. U. S.
Department of the Interior, Bureau of Outdoor Recreation, Lake
Central Region, nnn Arbor, Michigan (June 1965).
10. Fish and Wildlife as Related to.Water quality of the Lake
Michigan Basin. U. 3. Department of the Interior, Fish and
Wildlife Service, Minneapolis, Minnesota (1965).
11. United States Census of Agriculture 1959_» Wisconsin Counties.
U. 3. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census (1961).
12. United States Census of Agriculture 1959. Michigan Counties.
U. 3. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census (1961).
-------
BIBLIOGRAPHY (Cont'd.)
13. Report on Commercial Fisheries Resources of the Lake Michigan
Basin. U. S. Department of the Interior,-' Fish and Wildlife
Service, Bureau of Commercial Fisheries, 1965.
14. Municipal Waste Facilities 1962 Inventory. Public Health
Service Publication No. 1065, Vol. 5., U. S. Government Printing
Office, Washington, D. C. (1963).
15. Industrial Waste Sources. Great Lakes-Illinois River Basins
Project Inventory Information. Unpublished.
16. Pollutional Effects of Stormwater and Overflows from Combined
Sexier Systems. Public Health Service Publication No. 1246.
U. S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D. C. (November 1964).
17. Wisconsin Commercial Fruit and Vegetable Production Crop Acreage
and Insecticide Use Survey, 1962. Department of Entomology,
College of Agriculture, University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wisconsin.
18. Lake Michigan Pollution, Wisconsin Department of Resource
Development, Madison, Wisconsin (January 3, 1963).
19. Discharge of Vessel Wastes in Fresh Water Rivers and Lakes -
The Great Lakes and ConnectingWaters. Public Health Service
Interstate ^arantine Regulation, Federal Register (September
16, I960).
20. Runoff as a Source of Phosphate in the Waters of Streams and Lakes.
Preliminary Report prepared by H. Hall, U. S. Department of Health,
Education and Welfare, FWPCA, GLIRB Project, Chicago, Illinois
(February 1966).
21. Chemistry for Sanitary Engineers. C. N. Sawyer, McGraw-Hill
Book Co., Inc., New York, N, Y. (I960).
22. Johnson, Russell L. I960. Limnology and the Sanitary Engineer.
Proc. Third Conference on Great Lakes Research. University of
Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, pp. 43-49.
23. Johnson, Russell L. 1962. Factors Affecting Winter quality of
Lake Water. Proc. Fifth Conference on Great Lakes Research.
University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, pp. 150-158.
24. Johnson, Russell L. 1963. Tides and Seiches in Green Bay.
Proc. Sixth Conference on Great Lakes Research. University of
Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, pp. 51-54.
-------
BIBLIOGRAPHY (Cont'd.)
25. Saylor, James H. 1964. Survey of Lake Michigan Harbor Currents.
Proc. Seventh Conference on Great Lakes Research. University of
Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, pp. 362-368.
26. Mortimer, C. H. 1965. Spectra of Long Surface V.aves and Tides
in Lake Michigan and at Green Bay, Wisconsin. Proc. Eighth
Conference on Great Lakes Research. University of Michigan,
Ann Arbor, Michigan, pp. 304-325.
27. Some New^Aspects of Phosphates in Relation to Lake Fertilization.
C. N. Sawyer, Sewage and industrial Wastes, Vol. 24, Ho. 6
(June 1952).
28. Storm V.rater^Cpntrgl Looks Like Costliest Pollution Fight Yet.
Engineering News Record, New York, N. Y. (March 31, 1966).
29. Staffing and Budgetary Guidelines for State Water Pollution
Control Agencies. Public Administration Service, Chicago,
Illinois (1964).
GPO 826—535—2
------- |