Burnt River Basin Project
Dark Canyon
Di vi sion, Ore gon
WASHINGTON
BURNT
RIVER
BASIN
OREGON
IDAHO
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, EDUCATION, AND WELFARE
-------
WATER QUALITY CONTROL STUDY
BURNT RIVER BASIN PROJECT
DARK CANYON DIVISION
OREGON
AN INVESTIGATION OF QUALITY CONDITIONS IN THE BURNT RIVER BASIN
DISCLOSES NO FUTURE NEED FOR STORAGE FOR WATER QUALITY CONTROL
AS EXISTING DEVELOPMENT WILL CONTINUE TO PROVIDE SUFFICIENT FLOW
REGULATION. FUTURE WATER REQUIREMENTS AND QUALITY PROJECTIONS
ARE BASED ON ECONOMIC, DEMOGRAPHIC, AND ENGINEERING STUDIES.
Prepared at the Request of the
U. S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Bureau of Reclamation, Region 1
Snake River Development Office
Boise, Idaho
By the
U. S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, EDUCATION, AND WELFARE
Federal Water Pollution Control Administration, PNW
Portland, Oregon
April, 1966
-------
TABLE of CONTENTS
LIST OF TABLES iv
LIST OF FIGURES iv
I. INTRODUCTION
A. Request and Authority 1
B. Purpose and Scope 1
C. Acknowledgments 1
II. SUMMARY OF FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS
A. Summary of Findings 2
B. Conclusions 4
III. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
A. Location 7
B. Proposed Project 8
IV. STUDY AREA DESCRIPTION
A. Location and Boundaries 10
B. Geography and Topography 10
C. Climate 11
D. Principal Communities & Industries 11
V. WATER RESOURCES OF THE STUDY AREA
A. Surface Water
1. Quantity 12
2. Quality 15
B. Ground Water
1. Quantity 16
2. Quality 17
VI. THE ECONOMY
A. General 19
B. Present 19
C. Factors Influencing Future Growth 21
D. Future 22
ii
-------
Page No.
VII. WATER REQUIREMENTS—MUNICIPAL & INDUSTRIAL
A. Past and Present Water Use 24
B. Forecast of Future Water Needs 25
VIII. WATER QUALITY CONTROL
A. Need for Control 27
B. Municipal, Industrial, &
Agricultural Pollution 28
C. Water Quality Criteria 29
D. Flow Regulation 30
IX. BENEFITS 32
X. BIBLIOGRAPHY 34
APPENDIX A-l to A-4
iii
-------
TABLE No.
LIST OF TABLES
Title
Page No.
III-l Proposed Reservoirs, Burnt River Basin ...... g
V-l Expected Mean Monthly Low Flows Under Unregulated
Conditions, Burnt River at Hun ting ton ....... ^2
VI- 1 Study Area Population, 1930-60 .......... 20
VI-2 Estimated Population, Burnt River Basin ...... 23
VIII-1 Required Streamflow Regimen for Quality Control
Purposes, Burnt River Basin ............ 31
APPENDIX
1 Historical (Regulated) Flows at Huntington,
Burnt River Basin, Oregon ............. A-l
2 Natural Flow at Huntington (Adjusted for Regulation) ,
Burnt River Basin, Oregon ............ A-2
3 Representative Analyses of Surface Waters,
Burnt River Basin, Oregon ............. A-3
4 Representative Analyses of Ground Water,
Burnt River Basin, Oregon ............. A-4
*****
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure No. Title Page No.
1 Location Map ................... Back Cover
2 Schematic Diagram ................. 12
iv
-------
I. INTRODUCTION
A. Request and Authority
The request for this report was made by the U. S. Bureau of
Reclamation, Region I, Snake River Development Office, Boise, Idaho,
by letter dated October 23, 1964. Authority for the investigation
and report is the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, as amended
(33 U.S.C. 466X(b)).
B. Purpose and Scope
This investigation was conducted to advise the Bureau of
Reclamation on the need for and value of storage for water quality
control in the Burnt River Project, Dark Canyon Division. The Burnt
River drainage basin lies in the southern portion of Baker County,
Oregon.
Available data on water uses, waste sources, and water quality
in the study area were examined, evaluated, and projected. Evaluations
are based on projected conditions for periods to 1985 and 2010. The
economic base study prepared for this purpose is summarized in the
report.
C. Acknowledgments
Assistance in this investigation was provided by officials of
the town of Huntington, the Oregon-Portland Cement Company, the
Oregon State Sanitary Authority, and the U. S. Bureau of Reclamation,
The cooperation of persons within these organizations is gratefully
acknowledged.
1
-------
II. SUMMARY of Findings and Conclusions
A. Summary of Findings
1. The Bureau of Reclamation is evaluating the availability
of water for irrigation of new lands and as a supplement for lands
presently inadequately irrigated. Municipal, industrial, and domestic
water supply needs, flood control, and other multi-purpose uses are
being studied to coordinate the use of new facilities with the existing
Unity Reservoir. Development of multi-purpose storage at the Hardman
site on the South Fork of Burnt River and at the Dark Canyon site on
the main stem (see Location Map, back cover) is being considered as
a source of additional water. The enlargement of existing Unity Dam
and Reservoir is also being considered as an alternate to storage at
the Dark Canyon site.
2. The study area covered in this report is the entire
Burnt River drainage basin which is comprised roughly of the southern
half of Baker County, Oregon. The principal community in the area is
Huntington; other communities are Dixie, Durkee, Pleasant Valley,
Bridgeport, Hereford, and Unity.
3. The 1960 population of the study area was 1,110, of which
about 700 lived in the Huntington area. Economic studies show only
limited potential for population growth. The economic base of the
Burnt River valley is agriculture, and water resource development is
oriented principally toward this base.
4. The drainage area of the Burnt River Basin is about
1,100 square miles. Existing water resource development in the basin
consists of Unity Reservoir (total capacity of 25,820 acre-feet) and
four small reservoirs (aggregate storage capacity of about 3,900
acre-feet).
-------
5. The average annual runoff of the basin is 82,530 acre-
feet, as measured at the lower-most gaging station on the river. The
one-in-ten year low mean annual runoff of the Burnt River is 37,600
acre-feet. Before regulation by Unity Reservoir, the river was often
dry during July and August.
6. Municipal and industrial (M&I) water use in the study
area presently averages about 0.8 million gallons per day (mgd).
About 80 percent of this use is for industrial purposes (Union Pacific
Railroad and Oregon-Portland Cement Company).
7. In addition to being the major source for M&I supply,
surface water is used for irrigation, fish and game propagation,
stock watering, and recreation. Stream waters of the basin receive
irrigation return flows and waste waters from M&I sources.
8. The mineral quality of waters in upper watershed areas
of Burnt River is excellent; i.e., dissolved solids are about 100
parts per million (ppm). Waters in lower reaches of the river are
higher in mineral content but are suitable for all uses, including
M&I water supply. The organic matter discharged to the river from
M&I waste sources and land drainage has been adequately assimilated
under regulated flow conditions in recent years without detriment to
the requirements of fish and other aquatic life. Discharge of untreated
sewage to the river from the City of Huntington, however, has created
conditions hazardous to public health.
9. The only sewage collection system in the basin is located
at Huntington. Preliminary plans have been made to install a secondary
waste treatment plant. When this plant is in operation, the loading
to the river (including uncontrolled runoff wastes from urban and
rural areas) is expected to average about 100 population equivalents
(PE) per day.
-------
B. Conclusions
1. The population of the study area will be 1,600 by 1985
and 1,900 by 2010.
2. Water quality should be provided in the Burnt River
at a level to protect fish and wildlife, maintain recreational
opportunities, safeguard public health, and preserve the attractiveness
of stream waters. In addition to the need for adequate waste treatment-
including effluent disinfection and controlled surface drainage—there
is a need for assured quantities of streamflow in the lower reaches of
the river to assimilate residual waste materials. Control of flow to
maintain dissolved oxygen (DO) at and above a minimum of 5 milligrams
per liter (mg/1) in the critical zone of the river during the summer
and early fall months will provide protection of all stream uses,
including passage of anadromous fish and propagation of resident fish
species.
3. Even with adequate waste treatment providing 85 percent
reduction of oxygen-demanding wastes, the remaining loads, together
with uncontrolled loads from urban and rural runoff, pose a potential
hazard to stream uses, particularly if further development of the
basin's water resources for irrigation results in a reduction of
streamflows. Daily residual loads to the river from all sources by
the years 1985 and 2010 are expected to be relatively small, averaging
about 120 and 150 FE, respectively. It is anticipated that additional
irrigation return flows created by the proposed project will not
significantly degrade Burnt River water quality. It is possible,
however, that nutrients contained in these waters, together with other
factors, may at times stimulate excessive biological growths.
-------
4. Waters stored at the Dark Canyon site would consist
partly of irrigation return flows originating from lands located
upstream. Biological growths stimulated by nutrients in these waters
would, upon decomposition in the reservoir, be expected to reduce DO
concentrations at lower depths of the impoundment.
5. Without specific releases of water to the lower Burnt
River from storage, the average monthly low flows at Huntington having
a recurrence frequency of once-in-ten years would be less than one
cubic foot per second (cfs) in July and zero in August. Under these
conditions, flows below Huntington would consist mainly of waste
effluent. Regulation provided by Unity Reservoir has resulted in
average monthly flows at Huntington during July and August of 25 cfs
or more each year since the beginning of its operation in 1938. With
the proposed irrigation project, however, this flow could be expected
to be considerably reduced.
6. A total minimum sustained flow of 5 cfs will adequately
control water quality in the lower reaches of Burnt River (below the
proposed Dark Canyon Dam) throughout the 50-year study period, provided
that waters released from storage contain a DO concentration of at
least 5 rag/I and that all M&I wastes receive adequate treatment—at
least 85 percent biochemical oxygen demand (BOD) removal. This minimum
flow would complement waste control at the source and would not be a
substitute for adequate waste treatment. An annual draft-on-storage—
of approximately 600 acre-feet would be required to maintain this control
of water quality.
I/ Annual draft-on-storage is the sum of incremental excesses of needed
releases over inflows during a climatic year (April through March).
-------
7. Storage releases in excess of 5 cfs, as now provided by
Unity Reservoir, will continue to control water quality in the river
basin. These releases enhance the attractiveness of the stream and
otherwise affect the well-being of the more than 1,000 residents in
the area. The benefits derived from water quality maintenance in the
Burnt River are both tangible and intangible and are widespread both
in area and type of beneficiary.
8. The minimum value of water quality control storage is
equal to the cost of providing regulation by the cheapest single-
purpose alternative reservoir that could be built in the absence of
the proposed project. The minimum value assignable to an annual draft-
on-storage of 600 acre-feet in either Dark Canyon Reservoir or enlarged
Unity Reservoir for water quality control is estimated to be $28,770
or $48.00 per acre-foot based on a 100-year project design life, an
annual operation and maintenance expense of $4,200, and interest at
3.125 percent. However, inasmuch as continued flow regulation by Unity
Reservoir is expected to meet all future requirements, no monetary
benefit for quality control can be attributed to the proposed project.
If the proposed development curtails streamflow to less than 5 cfs, then
the project should be assessed a cost or damage of $28,770 per year.
9. Waters available from Burnt River are of adequate quality
and quantity to meet projected M&I demands through the 50-year study
period. Also, as long as the quality of ground water is protected,
this source is expected to adequately supply the needs of the smaller
communities in the basin.
-------
III. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
A. Location
Storage requirements of the proposed Dark Canyon Division of the
Burnt River Project would be met by development at two sites. The
first is Hardman Dam and Reservoir on the South Fork Burnt River
8 miles upstream from the existing Unity Dam. The other is Dark
Canyon Dam and Reservoir on the main stem Burnt River 37 miles down-
stream from Hardman Dam. The enlargement of existing Unity Dam and
Reservoir is also being considered as an alternative to storage at
the Dark Canyon site. Dark Canyon Dam is 18 air-miles south of Baker,
Oregon, and 42 air-miles northwest of Weiser, Idaho (see Location Map,
back cover).
The drainage area of the South Fork Burnt River at Hardman Dam is
approximately 45 square miles. Runoff of the South Fork originates
entirely from snowmelt on a heavily timbered watershed. Topography,
climate, and cover on the watershed are conducive to a sustained year-
around runoff. Flows increase moderately in the spring. During the
latter part of the irrigation season, the South Fork very seldom drops
below 25 cfs. The average, maximum, and minimum annual runoff at the
Hardman Dam site are 25,400, 32,600, and 17,500 acre-feet, respectively.
as determined from recorded and estimated flows for the period 1928
through 1955.
The Burnt River above Dark Canyon Dam drains an area of about
650 square miles. Runoff of Burnt River at the dam site comes from
spills at Unity Reservoir in the spring, runoff between Unity Reservoir
and the Dark Canyon site, irrigation return flows from the Bridgeport
area, and waste flows from upstream diversions. The average, maximum,
and minimum annual runoff of the river at this site with present
upstream development are estimated to be 48,600, 104,700, and 15,800
acre-feet, respectively.
-------
The drainage area above Unity Dam is about 308 square miles. The
North, West, Middle, and South Forks of the Burnt River flow into
Unity Reservoir. The average, maximum and minimum runoff into Unity
Reservoir, as determined from recorded and estimated flows for the
period 1928 through 1964, are 60,000, 108,000, and 22,500 acre-feet,
respectively.
B. Proposed Project
The proposed Dark Canyon Division will be integrated with the
existing Burnt River Project to supply water for irrigation on new
lands, to provide a supplemental supply for lands now inadequately
irrigated, and to serve other multi-purpose needs, including M&I
water supply, water quality control, flood control, fish and wildlife,
and recreation. Approximately 5,500 acres of irrigated land would be
provided a supplemental irrigation water supply, and about 5,000 acres
would be provided a full irrigation water supply. These lands are
scattered along the Burnt River from near Unity on the South Fork
down to Huntington near the mouth of the river.
With either Hardman and Dark Canyon Reservoirs or Hardman and
enlarged Unity Reservoirs in the plan of development, storage in the
Burnt River Basin will control about two-thirds of the average annual
discharge of the river at Huntington. Principal features of the
proposed reservoirs are given in TABLE III-l. A minimum sustained
release would be provided from Dark Canyon Reservoir. Minimum
releases from Hardman Reservoir and from existing or enlarged Unity
Reservoir might not be maintained during part of the storage season
8
-------
of dry years. However, the increased return flow resulting from
project irrigation will assure that a live stream is maintained a
short distance below the Hardman and Unity dam sites.
The quality of water impounded in Dark Canyon Reservoir will be
affected somewhat by irrigation return flows. Nutrients carried by
drainage from irrigated lands will tend to accumulate in the reservoir
and thereby stimulate algal growth. Unity Reservoir will be similarly
affected but to a lesser degree. If lands above Hardman Reservoir
remain undeveloped, nutrient build-up would be limited.
Flow requirements for water supply and water quality control are
centered at Huntington, which is located near the confluence with the
Snake River. Huntington, with a population of about 700 persons, is
the only community of significant size in the basin.
TABLE III-1
PROPOSED RESERVOIRS
Reservoir
HARDMAN
DARK CANYON ....
ENLARGED UNITY. . .
(alternate to
Dark Canyon)
Storage
Class
Total
Inactive
Usable
Total
Inactive
Usable
Total
Inactive
Active
Storage
(acre-feet)
14 000
1,850
12,150
12,000
2,000
10,000
52,000
5,800
46,200
Water Surface
Elevation
(feet)
4 ^?n
4,296
3,323
3,255
3,842
3,793
Surface
Area
(acres)
9">7
f.j 1
80
210
95
1,450
520
-------
IV. STUDY AREA DESCRIPTION
A. Location and Boundaries
The Burnt River drainage basin in Baker County, Oregon, comprises
the study area of this report (see Location Map, back cover). Huntington
is the principal community. The basin also contains several smaller
communities including Dixie, Durkee, Pleasant Valley, Bridgeport, Unity,
and Hereford. Agriculture forms the primary economic activity in the
study area.
B. Geography and Topography
The Burnt River is formed by the junction of its North, West,
Middle, and South Forks, which drain part of the southeastern slopes
of the Blue Mountains in East-Central Oregon. The river flows eastward
53 miles to join the Snake River near Huntington. U. S. Highway 30
and the main line of the Union Pacific Railroad follow the river from
its mouth to Durkee. U. S. Highway 26 traverses the eastern part of
the basin.
Draining approximately 1,100 square miles, the basin is about 25
to 30 miles wide at each end, 8 miles wide near the center, and 55 miles
long. The western part of the basin lies almost wholly in the timbered
Blue Mountains. The central part of the basin is characterized by high,
steep, grassy, rolling hills which rise from narrow canyons to elevations
of about 5,000 feet above sea level. In the eastern part of the basin,
tributary streams have wider valleys which contain cultivated irrigation
areas surrounded by rolling sage- and grass-covered hills at elevations
up to 4,000 feet above sea level.
The Burnt River Valley, throughout most of its length, is narrow
and canyon-like. In several areas, however, it broadens appreciably
and is relatively flat bottomed. One such area is just north of Unity;
a second, and the largest, lies between the mouth of North Fork Burnt
River and Bridgeport; and a third is in the vicinity of Durkee.
10
-------
C. Climate
The climate of the study area is typically semi-arid, although
local areas of higher elevations are moderately wet. Normal annual
precipitation varies from 10 inches near Unity to 40 inches in the
extreme western portion. The average for the basin is approximately
15 inches. Precipitation is fairly evenly distributed, with some
variation in the dry areas throughout the year; whereas, in wetter
areas, increased amounts occur during the winter months. The propor-
tion occurring as snow increases with elevation and is about 30 percent
of the total at the 3,000-foot level.
Hot, dry summers are characteristic of the area. Although nights
are cool, daytime temperatures above 90 degrees Fahrenheit ( p) are
common and occasionally exceed 100 F. Winters are generally mild,
but short periods of sub-zero temperatures occur occasionally. The
growing season in agricultural areas ranges from 150 to 180 days.
Significant storms affecting this area are those consisting of
widespread precipitation. Such storms occur chiefly during the winter
months and have an average duration of three days. Convective-type
storms of a more localized nature occur chiefly during the summer
months and, because of the short duration and small areal coverage,
are of little significance.
D. Principal Communities and Industries
The present population of the study area is approximately 1,100.
Huntington, with a population of about 700, is the only notable
community in the area. In addition to livestock raising, the cement
mill at Lime is the only significant industry.
11
-------
V. WATER RESOURCES of the Study Area
A. Surface Water
1. Quantity
In 1933, the Bureau of Reclamation, in cooperation with the
State of Oregon, investigated the possibility of developing storage on
Burnt River as a source of late-summer water supply. Unity Dam and
Reservoir and the present Burnt River Irrigation Project were then
built, following the plan developed from this investigation. The
reservoir, completed in 1938, has a total capacity of 25,820 acre-
feet, with 25,220 acre-feet as active storage. The surface area of
the reservoir, when full, is 926 acres. Unity Dam is located about
70 miles upstream from the river's mouth and has a drainage area of
308 square miles (see FIGURE 2. Schematic Diagram).
Burnt River Basin waters are used to irrigate about 23,000
acres of land located in three non-contiguous valleys along the main
stream. Water is supplied by gravity diversions of natural flow and
supplemented by water stored in four small reservoirs, with an aggre-
gate storage capacity of about 3,900 acre-feet, and by Unity Reservoir.
Highest streamflows, which result from melting of winter
snows, usually occur in March or April. The duration of the high-
water stage is short, and the rate of flow diminishes rapidly. At
the beginning of the irrigation season, water supply is sufficient
for lands now irrigated, but natural runoff must be augmented from
storage reservoirs as the season advances.
12
-------
J_
Alder Creek
Hunting ton
Durkee
DARK CANYON r-
RESERVOIR SITE \\\L
w I /
• Bridgeport
Hereford •
UNITY RESERVOIR^,
25,220
LEGEN D
U.S.G.S. Goge
Dam a Reservoir
_-Diversion Dom
• Community
HJnity
HARDMAN
RESERVOIR SITE
WATER QUALITV CONTROL STUDY
BURNT RIVfc'R PROJECT
BURNT RIVER BASIN, OREGON
SCHEMATIC DIAGRAM
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HE ALTH, EDUCATIONS WELFARE
Federal Water Pollution Control Administration, P. N.W.
REGION IX (DATE. 3/661 PORTL*ND.O*EGON
-------
A frequency analysis was calculated for the uncontrolled
Burnt River runoff at Huntington and is presented in TABLE V-l. The
annual mean flows (with recurrence intervals of five, ten, and twenty
years) and the typical monthly distribution of annual mean flows are
shown. Monthly mean flows were determined for purposes of calculating
draft-on-storage needs.
TABLE V-l
EXPECTED MEAN MONTHLY LOW FLOWS UNDER UNREGULATED CONDITIONS
BURNT RIVER AT HUNTINGTON. OREGON
Month
February. . . .
May
June
July
August
September . . .
December. ...
ANNUAL MEAN . .
Percent of
Annual Mean
62.7
. . 93.4
. . 178.4
455.6
165.3
. . 58.1
1.1
. . 0.1
. . 15.3
. . 52.0
55.7
. . 66.5
Recurrent
Five
(cfs)
48
72
137
351
127
45
0.8
0.1
11.8
40
43
51
. . 77
:e Interva
Ten
(cfs)
33
49
93
237
86
30
0.6
0.0
8.0
27
29
35
52
ils - Years
Twenty
(cfs)
23
34
64
164
60
21
0.3
0.0
5.5
19
20
24
36
rf
Since 1938, streamflow regulation by reservoir storage has
substantially increased flows during the months of June, July, August,
and September. Although regulation has been primarily for irrigation
purposes, other stream users have also benefited. These include water
supply for the town of Huntington and the Union Pacific Railroad which,
respectively, have rights to 0.5 cfs (360 acre-feet per year) and
450 acre-feet per year.
14
-------
Summaries of recorded streamflows and flows Chat would exist
without releases from existing storage are included in the Appendix.
Historical data were derived from the U. S. Geological Survey gage
located near Huntington. The drainage area at that point'is 1,093
square miles. The average discharge for the period of record is
114 cfs (82,530 acre-feet per year). Maximum recorded daily discharge
of 2,190 cfs occurred in February 1957. Before regulation by Unity
Reservoir, the river was often dry during July and August. Streamflow
regulation has improved this situation, although there are indications
that flows are curtailed somewhat during periods of reservoir filling.
2. Quality
In general, water quality throughout the Burnt River Basin
is suitable for all present and expected future uses. The analyses of
Burnt River water samples show a variation in chemical quality in the
river system with respect to high and low flow and a general increase
in dissolved mineral concentrations in a downstream direction.
Samples for mineral analyses, collected in 1958-60 by the
U. S. Geological Survey in the headwaters of the Burnt River, generally
had dissolved solids contents of less than 100 ppm during high-flow
periods and less than 200 ppm during low-flow periods (see Appendix).
In the lower reaches of the Burnt River, the nature and magnitude of
the dissolved solids has been changed somewhat by return flow from
irrigation. Dissolved solids content increased from an average of
about 100 ppm in the headwaters to about 350 ppm at Huntington. Water
was generally of a calcium bicarbonate type, except in a few tributaries
where water contained appreciable sodium concentrations during low-flow
periods.
15
-------
The Burnt River Basin has very little industrial activity.
A large cement plant at Lime, Oregon, utilizes part of a sizeable
deposit of limestone. Waste waters, high in solids content and having
characteristic gray color, are occasionally discharged to the river
from this plant but apparently have very little effect on the chemical
quality of the river. Although complete data are not available,
chemical and bacteriological quality of the river is adequate for
the water uses of this sparsely settled basin.
B. Ground Water
1. Quantity
Quantities of ground water sufficient for farm and domestic
use are generally available from the alluvium located along the main
stem Burnt River and its tributaries. Although many parts of the
remainder of the basin have not yet been drilled or tested, it is
not believed that large supplies of good quality ground water exist.
Yields of individual wells of moderate depth range from less than 1 to
more than 50 gallons per minute (gpm), depending upon the hydrologic
characteristics of the aquifer at each well location.
Maximum sustained yields of the existing wells in the area
are about 75 gpm. Considering the low permeability of most of the
rocks in the Burnt River Valley, it is concluded that most aquifers
in the Valley would yield water too slowly to sustain the large
continuous draft needed for irrigation.
16
-------
2. Quality
Chemical quality data indicate that, except for a few
localities, ground water in the Burnt River Valley is satisfactory
for all existing uses. Samples of water from seven wells were
collected in September 1963 and analyzed for mineral content. These
data are included in the Appendix. Analyses of samples from four of
these wells indicate that waters are of suitable chemical quality for
irrigation and most other uses. Analyses of samples from two other
wells indicate that the water from these wells may be undesirable for
irrigation due to relatively high concentrations of boron and sodium.
A sample from still another well contained 205 ppm nitrate, which is
far in excess of the 45 mg/1 recommended by the USPHS as the maximum
allowable concentration of nitrate in drinking water.
Comparison of the analyses of ground and surface water
shows that, as is usual, the ground water generally has greater
concentrations of dissolved minerals than the surface water. For
example, the specific conductance, which is an indication of concen-
tration of dissolved minerals, ranged from 433 to 1,590 and averaged
about 884 micromhos in the ground water samples. The specific
conductance of the surface water samples ranged from 89 to 677 and
averaged only about 536 micromhos.
17
-------
VI. THE ECONOMY
A. General
The economic base area used in this study conforms to the Burnt
River drainage basin. Fifty-year economic and demographic projections
have been made to year 2010 from the base year of 1960, with an inter-
mediate point at year 1985. These projections serve as a basis for
estimating future MScI water use and for estimating waste loads that
will be discharged to the Burnt River.
B. Present
Agriculture is the principal economic activity of the study area.
Livestock raising has been the most important type of agriculture in
the basin since the area was settled, and an increasing portion of the
total available farm area is being used for hay and pasture land.
Existing irrigated lands, comprising about 23,000 acres, are utilized
primarily to support beef production with forage and winter feed crops.
Irrigated land at lower elevations is suitable for growing potatoes,
sweet corn, sugar beets, and onions. Processing markets for these and
other commodities have developed rapidly at several nearby communities,
including Ontario (a food processing center about 25 miles from
Huntington), Weiser, Nyssa, Payette, and Fruitland. The regional
service center, Boise, also provides we 11-developed service markets
accessible to the study area.
The Oregon-Portland Cement Company plant at Lime, with its
associated limestone quarry at Durkee, is the only manufacture-based
industry in the study area. Present production of the plant is about
1.2 million barrels per year. Limestone is abundant, and major
construction projects in the central and lower basin of the Snake
River promise ample market support for the facility far into the future,
19
-------
The direction of population change in the study area over the
last three decades is shown in TABLE VI-1. The picture of declining
rural population that the table presents is a typical one for an
agricultural area. The rate of decline, however, is remarkably steep.
There are few places in the Pacific Northwest that lost population
during the 1940's, a period of explosive growth for the region. The
rather less severe decline in population of the community of Huntington
seems explainable in terms of habit, ability to provide the functions
of a minor rural service depot, and employment opportunities in nearby
communities.
TABLE VI-1
STUDY AREA POPULATION. 1930-60
Location Number of Persons
1930 1940 1950 1960
Huntington 803 741 733 689
All Other 970 885 648 423
TOTAL . . 1773 1626 1381 1112
Annual Rate of Change
1930-40 1940-50 1950-60 1930-60
-0.8 -0.1 -0.6 -0.5
-0.9 -3.2 -4.3 -2.8
-0.9 -1.7 -2.2 -1.6
NOTE: For 1960, the study area is assumed to be coterminous with the
census division "Huntington". For prior years, the precincts
"Huntington", "Rye Valley", "Bridgeport", "Durkee", "Connor
Creek", and "Weatherby" (an area slightly smaller than the 1960
census division) are assumed to represent the study area.
SOURCE: U. S. Census of Population, 1950 and 1960.
20
-------
C. Factors Influencing Future Growth
Relying largely on agriculture for its economic livelihood, the
Burnt River Basin's future development must be related to the evolu-
tion of agriculture in the Central Snake River area. The likely
course is marked by existing trends. The predominant factors which
will influence the economic future of the study area to the year 2010
seem to be (1) continuing decline in farm employment opportunities
as a result of farm consolidation, (2) continuing erosion of the
service base at Huntington as farm populations drop and residents
of the area turn increasingly to markets in larger communities,
(3) expanded agricultural outputs resulting from additional irrigation,
and (4) steady operation of the one manufacturing industry.
Development of a substantial manufacturing industry appears most
unlikely. The area is not favorably oriented to major markets for
heavy manufacturing industries. The presently known mineral resources
present little prospect of intensive exploitation. The absence of
educational and cultural resources generally associated with industries
employing advanced technology precludes likelihood of establishment of
science-based industries.
21
-------
D. Future
The irrigation projects under study are the principal modifying
factors to be considered in gaging the future of the area. If the
history of other irrigation developments may be used to interpret
probable effects in the study area, additional irrigation can be
expected to slow the downward course of population.
Although it is recognized that row crops could be grown on some
land in the basin, it is anticipated that water supplies furnished by
the Dark Canyon Division will be used primarily to produce additional
feed and forage for livestock. Any agricultural outputs are more
likely to result in expansion of food processing activities in the
Ontario service area than in establishment of processing in the
Burnt River Basin.
Under the Dark Canyon plan of development, approximately 5,500
acres of irrigated land would be provided a supplemental irrigation
water supply and about 5,000 acres would be provided a full irrigation
water supply. These lands are scattered along the Burnt River from
near Unity on the South Fork down to Huntington near the mouth of the
river.
In the past, logging and sawmilling have contributed to the
economy of the basin. However, future development of the basin's
timber resource will probably take place near Baker, Oregon, where
moderate expansion of the forest products industry is expected to
take place.
22
-------
The cement-producing facility at Lime appears to be the principal
force sustaining population in the area. As the only producer of
cement in a large area marked by major construction projects, the
plant may well experience sharp rise in output over the study period.
Expansion of capacity to 5 million barrels per year (the median size
of modern plants) between years 1985 and 2010 may be postulated for
design purposes.
Neither the recent history of the area nor the prospects of
economic development outlined above suggests vigorous population
expansion during the study period. A projection based on past
trends would suggest continuing decline. However, in the interest
of consistency and to provide a margin for error, an allocation
method has been used which con-
TABLE VI-2
sists of the application of growth ESTIMATED POPULATION
rates to groups of communities of BURNT RIVER BASIN
a certain size class. These rates Location Number of Persons
were developed in the economic ~ 1960 1985 2010
forecast for the Central Snake
Huntington 689 800 1000
River Basin. This procedure sug- All Other 423 800 9QQ
gests a population for Huntington TOTAL 1112 1600 1900
of roughly 800 by year 1985 and
1,000 by year 2010 (see TABLE VI-2).
It should be noted, however, that establishment of a moderately
sized factory in the area would create conditions for expansion of
greater magnitude. Conversely, failure of new irrigation opportunities
might result in slower growth or even decline.
23
-------
VII. WATER REQUIREMENTS
Municipal & Industrial
A. Past and Present Water Use
Irrigation has been Che prevailing water use in the Burnt River
Basin for more than 30 years. Other uses are minimal and include
farm uses, such as stock watering, and domestic water supply. The
cement plant at Lime has a modest requirement, as does the Union
Pacific Railroad shop at Huntington.
The Burnt River Basin is presently developed to the extent that
about 23,000 acres (mostly in narrow areas along the river) are being
irrigated with natural flows, 25,220 acre-feet of storage in Unity
Reservoir, and 3,900 acre-feet in four other reservoirs.
The Huntington municipal water facilities serve approximately
700 persons at the average rate of 150,000 gallons per day (gpd).
Water is obtained from a well and an infiltration gallery on the
Burnt River. The water plant has a rated capacity of 480,000 gpd
(0.75 cfs). Other communities in the study area have less than 200
residents and are served by wells or other individual facilities.
The Oregon-Portland Cement plant, producing about 1.2 million
barrels per day, uses approximately 540,000 gpd for cooling and
190,000 gpd is consumed in the slurry process. Thus, total demand
from the river is approximately 730,000 gpd or 1.1 cfs. The Union
Pacific Railroad has a water right of 450 acre-feet per year, which
is an average of about 0.6 cfs.
24
-------
B. Forecast of Future Water Needs
Projections developed in the Economy Section indicate that no
substantial increase in population or economic activity, with the
exception of the cement plant, will occur in the study area within
the next 50 years. It is probable, therefore, that future demands
for municipal and industrial water will not increase significantly.
Installed capacity of the municipal plant at Huntington is considered
adequate to meet future needs. Similarly, future rail activities in
the area are not expected to create an additional need for water.
Increased production at the cement plant (to 5 million barrels per
year) will require an estimated 1.7 mgd (2.7 cfs) for cooling and
process water in year 2010. This includes about 900,000 gpd for
cooling and about 800,000 gpd for the slurry process.
25
-------
VIII. WATER QUALITY CONTROL
A. Need for Control
Water quality control needs in the Burnt River Basin reflect
requirements of several water uses. M&I demands, although limited,
require a relatively constant supply of good quality water. Irriga-
tion is the major water use in the study area and requires water free
of chemical constituents which are harmful to crops and soils.
Recreational use of the reservoirs and streams in the basin
for boating, fishing, camping, picnicking and swimming is another
legitimate use of the water resource which necessitates quality
control. Basic recreational facilities are included in the plan
of development for the proposed reservoirs. A forest camp and several
good sites for cabins exist near the proposed Hardman Reservoir site.
Unity Dam and associated irrigation development on Burnt River
has virtually eliminated runs of anadromous fish, such as chinook
salmon and steelhead trout. Through the years, unscreened diversion
of the river to irrigated lands has contributed substantially to the
destruction of fish in the course of their migration downstream.
Moreover, passage upstream to spawning and rearing areas was
completely blocked by construction of Unity Dam in 1937.
However, numerous species of resident fish are present in the
basin and a variety of fishing opportunities are available to the
sportsman. Unity Reservoir is managed as a trout fishery and
receives intensive angling use. Warm water fishes (such as crappie,
bass and perch) inhabit the lower portion of the Burnt River near
its confluence with the Snake River.
27
-------
Provision of a dead storage pool in each of the reservoirs,
minimum sustained releases from Dark Canyon Reservoir of 25 cfs
(April through July) and 10 cfs (August through March), free public
access, and screens on the headworks of the project canal diverting
from the Burnt River below the Dark Canyon site are all included in
the plan of the proposed project to protect sport-fishery use of the
river.
The existing and proposed reservoirs are anticipated to become
increasingly important to the recreation-seeking public for fishing,
boating, and other related activities.
B. Municipal, Industrial, & Agricultural Pollution
The City of Huntington contributes the only significant amount of
municipal wastes discharged to the Burnt River. The present quantity
of this waste is estimated to average 105 PE, including wastes from
rural and urban land drainage. Secondary treatment (85 percent BOD
removal) of domestic wastes from Huntington has been assumed. Based
on projections developed in the economic study (Chapter VI), by year
1985 municipal wastes discharged to the river will amount to approxi-
mately 120 PE and by year 2010 will amount to about 150 PE.
Industrial wastes (specifically, from the cement plant at Lime),
after adequate treatment or control, are not of a nature that would
seriously affect quality of the Burnt River, although operational
difficulties experienced at the plant occasionally permit discharge
of wastes which cause considerable turbidity in the river. Although
the plant is expected to expand, no pollutional load is projected
for this or any other industrial source.
28
-------
Irrigation return flows may degrade Burnt River water quality as
minerals are leached from irrigated lands. Studies conducted in the
Yakima River Basin, for instance, indicate that significant algal
and other aquatic growth has been stimulated in the lower reaches of
the river by nutrients contained in irrigation return flows (X-5).
Storm water may also occasionally wash livestock wastes into the water
courses. The nature and magnitude of waste constituents discharged to
the river from these and other agricultural practices, even with
increased irrigation, are not expected to change much in the future.
C. Water Quality Criteria
On the basis of this analysis of present and anticipated water
use, DO has been selected as the governing criteria that determines
the need for and value of storage for quality control purposes.
Objectives for DO were set at a level adequate to support a desirable
aquatic environment for the purpose of enhancing wildlife and recrea-
tional potentialities. In particular, the oxygen level below the
proposed Dark Canyon Reservoir is designed to maintain resident
species of fish. This requires a minimum of 5 mg/1 of DO at all
points in the Burnt River downstream from the proposed reservoir.
Control at this level would also provide adequate quality for recrea-
tion and for protection of the river's natural attractiveness.
In selecting the above criteria, the probable effect of nutrients
on water quality has been evaluated and indicates that nitrates and
phosphates will not reach concentrations sufficient to cause objec-
tionable algal blooms in the streams or reservoirs of the basin under
present and projected conditions of development. Thus, increased
irrigation will not adversely affect downstream water uses.
29
-------
D. Flow Regulation
Regulation necessary to achieve the above stated quality objective
is based on streamflows required to assimilate present and projected
organic waste loads. Provision of adequate treatment of municipal
wastes has been assumed in establishing the waste loads to be
assimilated by the river. In this report, adequate treatment has
been considered capable of reducing the organic waste loads by at
least 85 percent at each source before discharge to the stream.
Streamflows required to maintain the objective under 1960, 1985,
and 2010 conditions were computed by means of a technique for balancing
the oxygen supply with oxygen consumed in the stream. The results show
that, through the year 2010, a flow of 5 cfs during the summer would be
sufficient to assimilate organic wastes.
In consideration of all stream uses, a minimum sustained flow of
5 cfs should be maintained in the lower reaches of the river to insure
sufficient flow for proper waste assimilation. As indicated in
TABLE VIII-1, there will continue to be a need through the 50-year
study period for an annual draft-on-storage of nearly 600 acre-feet.
This is the storage required to maintain streamflows for adequate
quality control in the lower reaches of the river on a one-in-ten
year low-flow recurrence basis.
A minimum sustained release is provided from Unity Reservoir under
the operating schedule presently employed. If the proposed reservoir
at the Dark Canyon site is constructed, provision should also be made
to release sufficient water so that at least 5 cfs would continuously
flow through the lower reaches to the mouth of Burnt River.
The comprehensive study presently under way by the Federal Water
Pollution Control Administration will consider future water supply
and quality control needs of the area in the context of basin-wide
needs. Storage in this project will be considered as a part of the
comprehensive study.
30
-------
TABLE VIII-1 ,
REQUIRED STREAMFLOW REGIMEN FOR QUALITY CONTROL PURPOSES-
BURNT RIVER BASIN. OREGON
Month
January . .
February. .
March . . .
April . . .
May ....
Julv. . . .
Augu st. . .
September .
October . .
November. .
December. .
ANNUAL. . .
Design
Low Flow
(cfs)
. . 33
. . 49
. . 93
. . 237
. . 86
. . 30
. . 0.6
. . 0.0
. . 8.0
. . 27
. . 29
. . 35
Required
Streamf low
(cfs)
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
21
Draft-on-Storage—
(acre-feet)
0
0
0
0
0
0
270
310
0
0
0
0
. ... 580
J7 Based on adequate treatment of organic wastes
discharged to stream.
2j This is the additional quantity needed downstream
at Huntington and does not include storage and
transmission losses.
31
-------
IX. BENEFITS....Water Quality Control
Storage releases for control of water quality, in addition to
adequate waste treatment, are needed in the Burnt River to protect
fish and wildlife, maintain recreational opportunities, safefuard
public health, and preserve the aesthetic attractiveness of stream
waters. A population of more than 1,000 persons located in areas
contiguous to about 30 miles of the lower river is affected by this
control. The precise value of benefits assignable to releases
necessary to serve these uses or to prevent damage to these uses,
however, is not readily measurable. Many benefits — such as those
resulting from reduced stream temperature, decreased concentrations
of dissolved solids, maintenance of the aquatic habitat, increased
land values along the stream, and general protection of aesthetic
values—are particularly difficult to assess in monetary terms.
Because multiple values are realized through control of water quality
by flow regulation, the composite value of benefits assignable to
storage for this purpose is considered at least equal to the cost
of the most reasonable alternative means of providing the same level
of water quality in the absence of the proposed project.
Since the results achieved by flow regulation relate primarily to
control of waste effluents and urban and rural land runoff, the only
reasonable or known equivalent alternative means of achieving similar
results in the absence of the project is by release of water from a
single-purpose storage facility. Alternatives such as underground
disposal of waste, transportation of waste out of the basin, or other
means of handling the collectible portion of wastes would be neither
feasible nor produce similar results. Several sites exist on Burnt
River tributaries where alternative storage could be impounded to
furnish an annual draft of 600 acre-feet. The cost to construct this
32
-------
impoundment was estimated from average construction costs of similar-
sized reservoirs in the Snake River Basin, and is estimated to be
$28,770 or $48.00 per acre-foot, with operation and maintenance
expenses of $4,200 annually and interest at 3.125 percent on a
100-year basis.
Monetary benefits for water quality control applicable to the
proposed Burnt River Project are based upon existing conditions in
the river basin. Because regulation of streamflow by Unity Reservoir
now maintains a perennial release in excess of 5 cfs., no benefit for
water quality control can be realized by development of the proposed
project. On the other hand, if a flow of 5 cfs is not maintained,
thus causing adverse water quality conditions at Huntington, the
project would then be assessed a cost or damage of $28,770 per year.
Continued regulation of Burnt River streamflows in the future
would maintain full protection of water quality in the Burnt River
and, to a lesser degree, in downstream reaches of the Snake River.
The adverse effect of all organic wastes entering the river, including
those collectible wastes remaining after adequate treatment, would be
reduced to acceptable levels, as measured in terms of dissolved
oxygen (DO) requirements. In addition, soluble nutrients discharged
to the river from irrigation, from the municipal treatment plant
(constituents which are not significantly reduced by available
treatment methods), and from other sources would be moderately
reduced in concentration by flow regulation.
The benefits derived from water quality maintenance in the Burnt
River Basin are both tangible and intangible and are widespread both
in area and types of beneficiaries.
33
-------
X. BIBLIOGRAPHY
1. U. S. Army Corps of Engineers, North Pacific Division, Portland,
Oregon, Review Report on Columbia River and Tributaries, Appendix I,
Middle and Lower Snake River Basin, October 1, 1948.
2. U. S. Bureau of Reclamation, Region I, Boise, Idaho, and
U. S. Army Corps of Engineers, Walla Walla, Washington,
Upper Snake River Basin, Volume IV, Part 2, Project Plans.
Studies, and Data. 1961.
3. L. B. Laird, U. S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 417-D,
U. S. Government Printing Office, Chemical Quality of the
Surface Waters of the Snake River Basin, 1964.
4. Don Price, Open file report, U. S. Geological Survey, Portland,
Oregon, Ground Water Reconnaissance in the Burnt River Valley.
Baker County, Oregon, September 1964.
5. USDHEW, Public Health Service, Region IX, Portland, Oregon,
Return Irrigation Water, Characteristics and Effects, May 1960
6. K. M. Mackenthun, Symposium on Streamflow Regulation for Quality
Control, USDHEW, The Effects of Nutrients on Photosynthetic
Oxygen Production in Lakes and Reservoirs, June 1965.
34
-------
APPENDIX
-------
M.E.G.
12/23/65
APPENDIX
A-l
TABLE 1
HISTORICAL (REGULATED) FLOWS AT HUNTINGTON
BURNT RIVER BASIN, OREGON
(cfs)
Year
1927-28
-29
1929-30
31
32
33
34
1934-35
-36
-37
* -38
-39
1939-40
-41
-42
-43
-44
1944-45
-46
-47
-48
-49
1949-50
-51
-52
-53
-54
1954-55
-56
-57
-58
-59
1959-60
-61
-62
-63
Oct.
61.8
13.0
11.4
1.6
0.0
15.6
13.3
13.3
20.2
9.0
50.3
46.6
66.0
35.0
178.0
73.6
83.4
38.9
110.6
120.3
68.2
214.5
203.2
152.9
110.6
169.0
242.3
185.4
29.3
76.4
63.4
82.9
170.4
62.2
29.3
71.5
Nov.
94.8
43.7
35.3
11.8
3.4
39.4
34.6
16.1
23.2
23.2
68.2
36.1
48.2
40.2
116.2
48.2
144.3
100.2
42.0
77.3
47.1
87.4
131.1
114.3
94.2
82.4
174.8
100.9
30.3
67.2
70.6
79.0
120.2
36.1
28.6
55.5
Dec.
107.4
52.0
73.1
43.9
19.5
29.1
58.2
33.5
22.4
26.8
193.8
35.0
38.8
38.8
178.6
93.0
162.6
31.1
35.8
113.9
126.9
87.9
97.6
133.4
96.0
91.1
130.2
79.7
29.3
65.1
86.3
110.6
65.9
38.8
27.6
53.6
Jan.
94.0
52.0
53.6
39.0
35.8
35.8
80.5
47.0
31.2
20.2
120.3
23.4
31.1
38.9
174.3
151.0
35.0
23.4
45.5
191.9
133.4
133.4
97.6
87.9
104.1
97.6
96.0
84.6
178.9
50.4
97.5
92.7
42.8
42.8
27.6
34.1
Feb.
186.5
69.6
96.5
48.2
48.2
32.0
85.8
49.1
41.8
34.3
106.5
21.4
21.4
123.4
153.2
293.4
25.7
25.7
146.4
121.4
71.5
164.4
107.2
114.4
130.4
117.9
71.5
50.0
228.5
232.0
368.0
80.4
47.0
34.1
32.2
232.1
March April
264.0 623.9
231.0 206.7
143.2 43.7
110.7 191.6
299.2 719.3
76.1 485.4
96.1 55.5
127.5 342.0
102.8 651.8
98.5 268.0
174.3 1224.2
166.6 528.2
159.0 552.1
414.0 424.2
244.0 952.0
461.0 1488.3
23.4 56.1
131.7 424.2
432.5 1062.2
47.8 463.9
65.0 642.0
426.0 843.7
164.2 596.7
365.9 966.4
286.2 1347.9
242.3 571.5
61.8 215.1
27.6 20.0
614.6 1270.6
315.5 539.5
422.8 897.5
78.0 225.2
65.9 480.2
38.8 120.2
65.0 453.8
71.5 215.1
May
242.8
99.2
13.0
8.1
291.0
350.4
13.0
74.1
83.4
100.2
266.4
142.6
163.6
200.5
276.9
369.1
142.6
189.9
265.0
214.6
461.8
292.7
256.9
224.4
190.2
416.3
185.4
117.1
422.8
382.1
765.9
91.0
208.4
226.8
221.1
177.3
June
59.3
52.1
10.1
6.7
50.4
70.7
9.6
9.6
28.8
30.6
38.5
82.0
90.3
131.1
158.4
240.0
41.2
190.9
181.6
166.5
342.9
168.1
181.5
146.3
198.3
510.9
105.9
161.3
198.3
163.0
270.6
53.8
190.9
128.2
75.6
94.1
July
3.3
6.5
1.6
1.6
3.3
2.6
0.0
0.0
0.6
0.0
28.1
44.1
37.2
56.6
72.5
79.4
57.7
48.6
65.0
59.4
77.2
58.5
65.0
52.8
87.0
82.1
50.4
39.8
70.7
84.5
120.4
55.3
71.4
60.0
56.9
66.6
Aug.
2.6
1.6
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.6
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
41.8
48.6
56.6
58.8
56.6
73.7
56.6
72.5
80.5
61.8
68.3
75.2
65.0
68.3
73.1
81.3
71.5
60.1
81.3
58.5
99.2
42.3
60.0
56.6
55.3
63.4
Sept.
0.0
3.4
0.0
0.0
0.0
4.0
4.0
1.7
4.0
8.7
48.7
48.7
37.0
39.3
100.6
133.5
88.8
95.9
119.4
119.4
138.8
131.5
124.4
95.8
119.4
126.9
124.4
6.7
85.7
55.5
111.0
87.4
62.9
34.6
47.1
72.3
Average
144.3
69.2
39.9
38.4
122.5
95.1
37.4
59.3
83.6
51.5
196.0
102.0
108.4
133.5
221.2
290.2
77.1
114.2
214.7
146.2
186.8
223.3
173.9
209.7
235.2
215.5
127.6
76.4
269.2
173.5
280.0
89.8
132.0
73.6
93.2
99.6
SOURCE: U. S. Bureau of Reclamation
*Unity Reservoir in operation.
-------
M.E.G.
12/27/65
APPENDIX
A-2
TABLE 2
NATURAL FLOW AT HUNTINGTON (ADJUSTED FOR REGULATION)
BURNT RIVER BASIN, OREGON
(cfs)
Year
1927-28
-29
1929-30
-31
-32
-33
-34
1934-35
-36
-37
* -38
-39
1939-40
-41
-42
-43
-44
1944-45
-46
-47
-48
-49
1949-50
-51
-52
-53
-54
1954-55
-56
-57
-58
-59
1959-60
-61
-62
-63
Oct.
61.8
13.0
11.4
1.6
0.0
15.6
13.3
13.3
20.2
9.0
50.4
59.2
52.3
72.7
138.4
74.7
93.4
57.7
100.4
122.8
80.2
168.8
176.9
144.3
102.8
141.7
174.9
144.4
43.4
43.1
52.0
68.4
165.9
64.0
38.7
92.7
Nov.
94.8
43.7
35.3
11.8
3.4
39.3
34.6
16.1
23.2
23.2
68.2
76.0
57.5
66.9
117.3
69.3
134.0
146.0
75.3
108.4
79.5
117.4
138.7
126.8
108.0
92.6
171.2
112.8
47.4
82.0
90.6
103.9
133.8
82.8
62.3
107.1
Dec.
107.3
52.0
73.1
43.9
19.5
29.1
58.2
33.5
22.4
26.8
193.7
67.8
51.4
66.2
181.4
106.2
133.8
75.0
80.9
170.2
131.9
112.6
106.6
154.0
116.3
107.4
139.7
87.7
188.8
123.4
96.5
159.2
86.2
69.9
66.0
116.8
Jan.
94.0
52.0
53.6
39.0
35.8
35.8
80.5
47.0
31.2
20.2
120.2
46.8
46.3
63.3
173.2
150.2
58.7
54.3
86.3
162.5
149.5
136.5
110.4
117.1
118.3
141.9
118.8
84.6
190.9
101.9
109.2
136.8
74.3
70.3
76.9
67.8
Feb.
186.7
69.6
96.4
48.2
48.2
32.0
85.9
49.1
41.8
34.3
106.4
52.2
91.6
127.2
153.3
260.7
58.6
48.2
153.6
189.3
123.4
163.1
124.0
178.0
139.0
170.0
161.6
60.7
237.8
346.6
470.7
135.2
80.9
101.8
85.9
380.2
March April
263.8 623.8
230.8 206.8
143.2 43.7
110.6 191.7
299.2 719.3
76.1 485.4
96.0 55.5
127.5 342.0
102.8 651.8
98.4 268.1
174.3 1239.8
316.0 603.0
374.1 552.1
541.5 504.7
292.4 1117.3
534.2 1709.1
105.6 161.8
158.0 543.7
483.8 1188.4
247.5 482.2
138.6 761.3
499.0 1019.3
212.2 839.2
402.1 1112.6
303.2 1514.1
341.8 746.9
174.0 380.6
47.0 146.6
700.8 1376.5
358.0 528.9
420.5 1065.5
184.5 326.2
241.4 610.8
156.6 234.4
142.0 611.4
155.3 234.0
May
242.8
99.2
13.0
8.1
291.1
350.4
13.0
74.1
83.4
100.2
260.5
82.9
89.8
193.0
291.8
367.6
105.8
257.4
288.2
139.6
551.2
298.6
308.6
225.8
308.8
413.2
110.3
155.2
427.5
286.1
104.2
48.6
149.5
118.0
151.6
151.3
June
59.3
52.1
10.1
6.7
50.4
70.7
9.6
9.6
28.8
30.6
20.7
18.6
10.1
108.4
104.1
184.6
29.4
109.8
95.8
82.4
327.7
74.1
122.4
62.4
121.9
486.7
72.1
66.6
119.8
45.1
216.5
0.0
83.2
41.4
0.0
6.9
July
3.3
6.5
1.6
1.6
3.3
2.6
0.0
0.0
0.6
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
35.3
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Aug.
2.6
1.6
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.6
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Sept.
0.0
3.3
0.0
0.0
0.0
3.9
3.9
1.6
3.9
8.4
0.0
9.3
2.8
35.6
36.4
42.4
36.4
22.6
58.8
46.1
73.1
56.8
50.3
24.0
57.5
38.8
47.5
0.0
16.8
0.0
24.2
34.1
17.0
7.7
0.0
0.0
AVERAGE:
Average
144.3
69.2
39.9
38.4
122.5
95.1
37.4
59.3
83.6
51.5
185.4
110.8
110.4
148.3
216.5
289.8
76.6
122.5
216.7
145.2
200.9
220.0
181.9
211.2
239.4
222.7
128.6
75.6
278.4
158.1
300.3
99.4
136.6
78.6
102.4
107.6
141.8
NOTE: The above flows are estimated for natural (unregulated) conditions and
equal recorded and estimated historical flow, plus change of storage
in Unity Reservoir.
SOURCE: U. S. Bureau of Reclamation.
*Unity Reservoir in operation.
-------
APPENDIX
TABLE 3
REPRESENTATIVE ANALYSES OF SURFACE WATERS
BURNT RIVER BASIN, OREGON
Location and Date of Sample
NF Burnt River
Analyses near Whitney
9/17/59
High or Low Flow Low
Discharge, cfs
Chloride (Cl), ppm 1.1
Fluoride (F), ppm
Nitrate (NO ), ppm
Dissolved Solids—
Specific Conductance— 254
pH 8.5
Hardness as CaCO ,ppm:
Calcium-Magnesium 106
Non-Carbonate 0
4/6/60
High
0.0
0.2
0.0
86
89
7.4
36
0
SF Burnt R.
Near Unity
4/6/60
0.0
0.2
0.0
103
119
7.5
44
0
Burnt R. Below Unity Burnt River
Res. near Hereford at Durkee
9/17/59
Low
41
3.6
— — —
368
7.6
132
15
9/2/60
Low
82
2.1
0.4
1.2
191
255
7.5
94
2
4/6/60
High
173
2.1
0.4
1.2
188
274
7.6
103
0
9/29/60
Low
43
5.0
0.4
0.0
386
558
8.4
218
0
Burnt R.
7/25/58
-
100
4.6
0.4
1.2
384
548
8.0
220
14
near Huntington
9/17/59
Low
80
6.0
0.6
0.6
471
677
8.5
252
0
4/6/60
High
2.1
0.4
1.9
200
289
7.6
112
0
DATA SOURCE: U. S. Geological Survey, Professional Paper 417-D
a/ Dissolved Solids—Residue on evaporation at 180 °C., ppm.
b_/ Specific Conductance—Micromhos at 25 °C.
CO
-------
APPENDIX
TABLE
REPRESENTATIVE ANALYSES OF GROUND WATERS
BURNT RIVER BASIN, OREGON
(Samples Collected 9/24/63 & 9/25/63)
Analyses
Depth of Water-Bearing Zone (feet)
Temperature (°F)
Calcium (Ca), ppm
Magnesium (Mg) t ppm
Sodium (Na) , ppm
Potassium (K) , ppm
Bicarbonate (HCO-j), ppm
Carbonate (Co) , ppm
Sulfate (SO^), ppm
Chloride (Cl), ppm
Nitrate (N03), ppm
Boron (B) , ppm
Sodium Absorption Ratio (SAR)
Residual Sodium Carbonate (Me/I.)
Specific Conductance
(micromhos at 25° C)
PH
Durkee
ffiaji
Area
ffZBDl
30+ 931-983
60
67
19
80
18
410
0
88
7.1
6.2
0.6
2.2
1.86
774
7.3
68
0.8
1.0
212
1.6
372
82
12
12
0.0
3.6
37
8.72
871
9.4
Unity Dam
Site Area
ffZHEl
220-232
280-282
58
44
24
49
21
225
0
135
19
4.3
0.0
1.5
-.51
683
7.0
Hereford Area
#27A1
74-81
54
109
109
38
7.8
626
0
91
49
205
0.0
0.6
-4.14
1,400
7.6
Bridgeport Area
#25PL i
-
54
72
5.1
14
5.5
212
0
59
2.8
0.0
0.06
0.4
-.52
436
7.5
E26PL #29 Bl
-
54
18
6.7
397
15
11
0
1.4
24
0.0
2.3
20
17.38
1,590
7.8
-
53
21
8.5
23
4.7
95
0
50
9.9
0.0
0.0
1.1
-.18
433
7.2
DATA SOURCE: U. S. Bureau of Reclamation .
-------
PAGE NOT
AVAILABLE
DIGITALLY
------- |