UMPQUA  RIVER BASIN, OREGON
              Tiller And Galesville Projects
      WASHINGTON
         OREGON
                          MONT.
D A H 0
         Area
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Federal Water Pollution Control Administration

-------
                    WATER SUPPLY AND WATER QUALITY CONTROL STUDY



     TILLER   AND   GALESVILLE   PROJECTS

             UMPQUA   RIVER   BASIN,   OREGON
     An investigation defining present and potential water needs
for municipal and industrial (M&I) supply and  stream flow needs
for maintenance of water quality  in Umpqua River Basin has been
made.   A need for additional source  development for M&I supply
and for storage for  regulation of stream flow for water quality
control is  revealed.   Future  water  requirements  and quality
projections are  based on economic, demographic, and engineering
studies.
    Prepared   at   the   Request   of   the
    By   the
                         U.  S.  Army Engineer District,  Portland
                           Corps of Engineers,  Portland,  Oregon
                               U0  S.  Department of the Interior
                 Federal  Water  Pollution Control Administration
                             Northwest Region,  Portland,  Oregon


                                                 September  1966

-------
               TABLE of CONTENTS
                                                       Page
       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  	    6
       A.  Location	    6
       B.  Proposed Projects  	    6

  IV.  STUDY AREA DESCRIPTION 	    7
       A.  Boundaries	    7
       B.  Physical Features and Climate  	    7

   V.  WATER RESOURCES OF THE STUDY AREA	    8
       A.  Surface Water  	    8
       B.  Groundwater	   12

  VI.  THE ECONOMY	   13
       A.  General	   13
       B.  Present	   13
       C.  Factors Influencing Future Growth  ....   16
       D.  Future	   17

 VII.  WATER REQUIREMENTS--MUNICIPAL AND INDUSTRIAL  .   19
       A.  Present Water Use	   19
       B.  Existing Source Development  	   20
       C.  Projected M&I Demands and Storage
           Requirements 	   20
VIII.  WATER QUALITY CONTROL  	   22
       A.  Need for Control	   22
       B.  Waste Loads	   26
       C.  Water Quality Objectives 	   28
       D.  Evaluation of Flow Regulation
           Requirements 	   29
  IX.  BENEFITS	   32

       A.  Water Supply-Municipal and Industrial .  .   32
       B.  Water Quality Control  	   33
   X.  BIBLIOGRAPHY	   34

       APPENDIX

-------
                       LIST OF TABLES
Table
   V-l  Umpqua Basin Hydrologic Summary 	   8
   V-2  Expected Average Annual Yield 	   9
  VI-1  Population, By Service Areas and Incorporated
          Places, Douglas County, April 1960  	  15
  VI-2  Projected Future Employment, By Major Industry,
          Douglas County, 1980, 2000, 2020  	  17
  VI-3  Projected Population, By Service Areas and
          Incorporated Places, Douglas County, 1980,
          2000, 2020	18
 VII-1  Present Municipal and Industrial Water Demand  .  19
 VII-2  Present and Projected Municipal and Industrial
          Water Demand	21
VIII-1  Present Anadromous Fish Spawning Populations   .  22
VIII-2  Present and Projected Salmonid Fish
          Populations	25
VIII-3  Municipal and Industrial Waste Loads--1965  .  .  26
VIII-4  Present and Future Waste Loads Discharges to
          Umpqua Streams  	  27
VIII-5  Flow and Storage Requirements 	  30
VIII-6  Tiller Reservoir — Stream Temperature Control   .  31
                           ******
                       LIST OF FIGURES

Figure

   V-l  Mean Monthly Flows 1933-1962  	   9
   V-2  One in Ten Year Low Flow Recurrences	10
  VI-1  Employment Distribution 	  13
VIII-1  Anadromous Fish Spawning Areas  	  23
VIII-2  Anadromous Fish Activities in South Umpqua  .  .  24
VIII-3  Recommended Temperature Regime for Salmonid
          Production	28
VIII-4  D.O.-Flow Relationships 	  29

-------
 I. INTRODUCTION

 A.   REQUEST AND AUTHORITY

      The request for this investigation was  made by the U.  S.  Army
 Corps of Engineers,  Portland  District,  Portland, Oregon,  in a
 letter dated May 25,  1965.

      Authority  for  the  investigation is:   (1)  the Memorandum of
 Agreement,  dated November 4,  1958,  between the Departments  of  the
 Army and Health, Education, and  Welfare,  relative to the  Water
 Supply Act  of 1958,  as  amended  (43  U.S.C.  390b); and (2)  the
 Federal Water Pollution Control  Act,  as amended (33 U.S.C.  466
 e£ seq.).

 B.   PURPOSE AND SCOPE

      The purpose of  this  report  is  to define the need  for and  the
 value of storage for  municipal and  industrial  water supply  and for
 water quality control in  the  Tiller and Galesville projects, cur-
 rently under study by the U.  S.  Army  Corps of  Engineers.

      The study  area considered is the Umpqua River Basin, but
 particular  attention  has  been given to  the service areas  and stream
 reaches of  the  South  Umpqua,  Cow Creek,  and  the  main stem Umpqua
 that  could  be influenced  by storage releases from the  Tiller or
 Galesville  sites.

      Projections  of future waste loads, water  quality,  and  water
 use have been developed for 1980, 2000, and  2020,  based on  the
 resource potential of Douglas County, which  almost coincides with
 the boundaries  of the Umpqua  Basin.   Data used  in the  evaluation
 of flow requirements  is taken from  the  Oregon  Coast  comprehensive
 studies being conducted by the Federal Water Pollution Control
Administration.

 C.  ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

      Information  for  this report was  provided by  officials  of  the
communities and water districts studied, the Oregon Water Corpora-
 tion, Douglas County Department of Water Resources, Oregon  State
Board of Health, Oregon State Water Resources Board, the Oregon
State Sanitary Authority, the Oregon State Game  Commission, the
Oregon  State Fish Commission,  the U. S.  Bureau of  Sport Fisheries
and Wildlife, and the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers, Portland
District office.  The assistance of these individuals  is gratefully
acknowledged.  The use of information contained  in  the bibliography
is also acknowledged.

-------
II. SUMMARY of Findings and Conclusions

A.  SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
     1.  The Tiller and Galesville multiple-purpose reservoir
projects, proposed by the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers, are
located in the Umpqua River Basin in southwestern Oregon.  Both
projects are located in, and will serve, the South Umpqua subbasin
and downstream main stem Umpqua River areas.  Project purposes
being considered are flood control, municipal and industrial water
supply, irrigation, fish and wildlife enhancement, water quality
control, recreation, and power generation.
      2.   The South Umpqua River  has  a drainage  area of  1,780 square
 miles and an average  annual  runoff of about  2.0 million acre-feet.
 Critical flow in South Umpqua River  near  Roseburg  on  a  one-in-ten
 year recurrence frequency is 80  cfs, occurring  in  August  and
 September.   Water quality during times  of such  flows  is detrimental
 to use of the South Umpqua for anadromous fishlife and  recreation.
 Dissolved oxygen concentrations  during  the summer  and early fall
 have dropped to 5 mg/1 for periods  ranging from several days to
 several weeks, and temperatures  have averaged 75 F, with  maximums
 over 80°F.
      3.   Total  population  of  Douglas  County  in  1960 was 68,500.
 Over two-thirds of  the  total  population  (47,000) resided in  the
 South Umpqua Basin—about  35,000  of whom lived  in  the Roseburg
 service  area, the county's largest population center.  Future
 economic growth in  the  Umpqua Basin,  dependent  on  forest products
 industries and  food processing, is expected  to  occur primarily in
 the Roseburg area.  Basin  population  is  expected to increase to
 85,000 by 1980, to  106,000 by 2000, and  to  132,000 by 2020.  The
 Roseburg service area is projected  to contain about 90,000 persons
 by 2020.

-------
      4.   Present municipal and industrial water use is about
 11.0 million  gallons per day (mgd);  over 60 percent of the demand
 is in the Roseburg area.   Surface water is the primary source and,
 with treatment,  is of suitable quality for M&I use.

      Future M&I  demands are projected to be 22, 29 and 46 mgd for
 1980, 2000, and  2020, respectively.   Future needs are concentrated
 in the South Umpqua Basin where, aside from Roseburg and Myrtle
 Creek, existing  supplies will not meet projected demands.
      5.   Diversionary  uses  of  stream waters in the Umpqua Basin,
 in addition to  M&I  water supply,  are irrigation,  mining,  and
 power generation.   Instream uses  are the  anadromous fishery, resi-
 dent  fishery, water-contact and streamside  recreation.   The South
 Umpqua has  an annual escapement of about  10,000 salmon  and steel-
 head--less  than half the anadromous fish  population of  the North
 Umpqua.   Recreational  use is intense, particularly on the stretch
 of the South Umpqua that meanders through the  Roseburg  area.
     6.  Municipal and industrial waste sources in the Umpqua
Basin are spread throughout the South Umpqua region and the Rose-
burg area.  Total raw waste production in South Umpqua subbasin
in 1965 was about 37,000 population equivalents (PE), with over
85 percent of the total produced in the Roseburg area.  After
treatment, these wastes were discharged to streams of the basin
with a total oxygen demand of 5,900 PE, a reduction in bio-chemical
oxygen demand (BOD) of about 84 percent.

     After adequate treatment—which, for design purposes, was
selected to be at least 85 percent reduction of BOD--future
waste loads are expected to increase to a maximum of about
41,500 PE by the year 2000.  Increased treatment efficiencies
to about 90 percent BOD removal are expected to maintain this
level through 2020.

-------
 B.   CONCLUSIONS

      1.   Municipal  and industrial water demands will exceed the
 reliable  supply at  varying times and places throughout the study
 period... ,By the end of the study period,  an annual draft-on-
 storage—   from proposed Tiller or Galesville Reservoir of 2,350
 acre-feet to yield  7.65 mgd of supplemental supply (July-
 September)  will be  required to meet  the 46 mgd  demand.   About  55
 percent of  the demand  will be  in the Roseburg service area where
 the  North Umpqua supply is expected  to meet the demand.   First
 need for  storage will  begin about the time of assumed project
 completion  (1975).

      2.   The annual value  of storage in Tiller  or  Galesville
 Reservoir for M&I water supply is estimated to  be  $220,900,  based
 on least-cost single-purpose alternative  storage costs  amortized
 on a 50-year basis  at  3.125 percent  interest.

     3.  Minimum DO concentrations of  7 mg/1 must  be maintained
 the  year around  in  the  South Umpqua  to protect  and enhance  the
 existing anadromous  fish runs.  With  control of  temperature  (see
 FIGURE VIII-3),  as  recommended by  the  fishery agencies,  fish will
 be migrating,  feeding,  and  spawning  in most reaches of  the river
 throughout  the year.  With  temperature control,  anadromous fish
 production  is  expected  to be more  than four times  present pro-
 duction.

     4.  Water quality  during  low  flow periods does not  now meet
 the  above objectives for the South Umpqua  River.   Computations
 utilizing present and projected waste  loadings show that by  2000
 DO levels may be  expected  to drop below 3  mg/1 in  the months of
 August and  September, even  after wastes have received adequate
 treatment.

     5.  There is an immediate need for an annual draft-on-storage
 from Tiller or Galesville Reservoirs of 16,000 acre-feet to pro-
 vide a minimum average  flow of 190 cfs for control of DO in  the
 months of July, August, September and  October.  After adequate
 treatment of all wastes, a draft-on-storage of 51,000 acre-feet
will be needed to deliver a minimum flow in South Umpqua below
 Roseburg of 340 cfs  for this control through the same four criti-
 cal months by the year  2000.  Waste loads  after 2000 are expected
_!/ Annual draft-on-storage is the sum of incremental excesses of
   needed releases over inflows during a climatic year (April to
   April).

-------
 to remain  fairly  constant, due  to  increased  treatment  efficiency;"
 therefore, no  additional  storage requirements  are  anticipated
 through  2020.

      6.  Temperature  enhancement can be accomplished in  the  South
 Umpqua with  flows  from  the Tiller  project.   To meet fishery
 requirements,  flow releases  from Tiller Reservoir  ranging  from
 1,200 to 1,400 cfs would  be  required to maintain temperatures of
 less  than  70 F.

      7.  Storage  releases from  Tiller or Galesville Reservoirs  for
 water quality  control would  benefit a potential population of
 120,000 persons residing  along  50-60 miles of  South Umpqua River
 and would maintain conditions suitable for fishing and other
 recreational uses  of  the  river.  With control  of DO, annual  anad-
 romous fish spawning  can  be  maintained in numbers  upward of  10,000.
 Releases for temperature  control would increase these numbers to
 an estimated 46,000 annually.

      8.   The benefits derived from flow regulation for water
 quality control in the South Umpqua River are  both tangible  and
 intangible and would accrue after an adequate  degree of waste
 treatment has been provided at all major waste sources.  The
 riparian owners, downstream water users, and the population  of  the
 surrounding area would be the major recipients of  the benefits
 of this control.  As beneficiaries are widespread  throughout Lmpqua
 River Basin and the State of Oregon, the cost  to provide quality
 control regulation in Tiller or Galesville Reservoirs would  be
 non-reimbursable.

      9.   The cost of providing flow regulation on  a single-purpose
 basis is considered to be a reasonable measure of  the value  of  the
widespread quality control benefits.  Based on least-cost  single-
 purpose storage costs in  South Umpqua Basin, the minimum value  of
 the benefit assignable to an annual draft-on-storage of 51,000
 acre-feet in Tiller and/or Galesville Reservoirs is $640,000 or
 about $12.50 per acre-foot.

    10.   The value of the water quality benefit associated with
 storage releases for temperature control and flow  stabilization is
 considered equal to the value of the enhanced  anadromous fishery.
 This value will be calculated by the U. S. Fish and Wildlife
 Service.

    11.   After the project is in operation, a  system of water
 quality and waste monitoring and stream flow forecasting will be
 needed to effectively regulate flow for water  quality control.

-------
III. PROJECT  DESCRIPTION
A.  LOCATION

     The Umpqua River Basin, located in southwestern Oregon,  drains
an area of 4,560 square miles.   The major drainage feature  of the
basin is the main stem of the Umpqua River,  which extends 111 miles
inland from the Pacific Ocean to the junction of its North  and
South Forks.  The North Umpqua extends an additional 105 miles to
its headwaters in the Cascade Mountains; the South Umpqua meanders
through the densely populated Roseburg area  and extends some  104
miles to the Rogue-Umpqua divide.

     The proposed Tiller and Galesville project sites are located
in the South Umpqua drainage, as shown on the foldout location map
(inside back cover).  The Tiller Reservoir site is located  near
the town of Tiller on the South Umpqua at River Mile 75. Drain-
age area at the site is about 450 square miles.  The Galesville
site is located on Cow Creek, a tributary of the South Umpqua,
near Azalea at River Mile 60.  Drainage area of the reservoir
is some 76 square miles.

B.  PROPOSED PROJECTS

     Project purposes include irrigation, flood control, municipal
and industrial water supply, water quality control, fishery en-
hancement, recreation, and power generation.

     As proposed by the U. S. Army Corps of  Engineers,  the  Tiller
and Galesville projects will have  storage capacities of 545,000
acre-feet and 71,000 acre-feet,  respectively, about 11  percent of
the Umpqua Basin's 5.4 million acre-feet annual yield.   With  this
storage, one-in-ten low flows of 80 cfs in the South Umpqua could
be increased to over 1,000 cfs;  low flows in the main stem  Umpqua
could be augmented from 730 cfs  to almost two thousand  cfs.   As
discussed in succeeding chapters of this report, such increases
in flow will directly benefit water quality  in those streams.

-------
IV. STUDY AREA DESCRIPTION
A.  BOUNDARIES

     The study area for this report is the Umpqua River Basin;
the boundaries of the basin are nearly coincidental with the
boundaries of Douglas County.   (See location map.)

     Study emphasis has been placed on the South Umpqua River
drainage and on the main stem of the Umpqua River, since these
areas can be served by the proposed projects, and since they
contain about 70 percent of the study area population.
B.  PHYSICAL FEATURES AND CLIMATE

     Topographically, the basin is composed of three definable
segments:  the coastal range, the central valley,  which includes
the South Umpqua Valley, and the Cascades.   Most of the basin is
forested (89 percent), with agricultural and other non-forest
areas limited to the valleys of the main tributary streams.   There
is a total of some 660,000 acres of farm land, with 150,000  acres
in crops; about 12,000 acres are irrigated.

     The climate is generally mild, with warm, dry summers and
cool, wet winters.  There is little snow, except in the high
Cascades.  Precipitation ranges from an annual total of 28 inches
at Riddle to over 100 inches along the crest of the Coast Range
of mountains.  Average length of the growing season is  about 200
days in the central valley.

-------
V.  WATER RESOURCES of the Study Area

A.  SURFACE WATER

     1.  Water Resource Development

     Existing water resources development  in the  Umpqua  Basin  is
not extensive, consisting primarily of  several  hydro-power  struc-
tures in the headwaters of the North Umpqua.  There  are  no  large
impoundments on the South Umpqua River,  Cow Creek, or  Calapooya
Creek.  Irrigation and water supply developments  consist of
pumping stations, with few diversion or ponding structures.

     A total of 400,000 acre-feet of surface water rights has  been
allocated in the basin; over 82 percent of this is for hydro-
electric power and other non-consumptive uses.

     2.  Hydrology

     The hydrology of the pertinent streams in  the Umpqua system
is summarized in TABLE V-l.  Figures are based  on water  records
from 1933 to 1962.
                           TABLE V-l
             UMPQUA RIVER BASIN HYDRO-LOGIC SUMMARY

                  Ann. Aver. Ann.   Max.      Min.     1/10
                    Yield    Mean  Flow of  Flow of  Low
                   Million   Flow  Record   Record   Flow
       Stream	ac-ft.    cfs   cfs	cfs	cfs
   Umpqua River
     at Elkton       5.4    7,600  218,000   640     729

   S. Umpqua at
     Brockway        2.1    3,000  102,000    36      79
   Cow Creek nr.
     Riddle	0.7      820   38.000    20      20
     The Umpqua system is characterized  by high winter flows and
summer droughts.   Over eighty  percent  of the total annual yield
occurs from November 1 to May  1,  as  illustrated by the hydrograph

-------
                FIGURE V-l
        MEAN MONTHLY FLOWS', 1933-1962
 o
        Umpqua River at Elkton, 1933-1962
             TABLE V-2
    EXPECTED AVERAGE ANNUAL YIELD
         UMPQUA BASIN - CFS
                     Recurrence
                     Interval
   - Years
   Stream
10
20
Umpqua - Elkton     5,700  4,500  3,650

South Umpqua -
  Brockway          2,300  1,880  1,530

Cow Creek - Riddle    550    400    300
              of  the  Umpqua River
              at  Elkton (FIGURE
              V-l).   The  critical
              months  for  maintain-
              ing adequate  flows
              are July, August,
              September,  and
              October.
     3.  Frequency
           Analysis

     Average annual
yields for the Umpqua,
South Umpqua, and Cow
Creek for various re-
currence periods are
shown in TABLE V-2.

     For design pur-
poses, the one-in-ten
recurrence period was
selected to determine
flow requirements and
the resultant need
for storage for water
quality control.  The
basis for selection
was protection of the
anadromous fishery
during the critical
summer months.  During
the months of July,
August, September,
and October, the one-
in-ten and the one-in-
twenty frequency
flows are similar.
The monthly distri-
bution of one-in-ten
year flows is shown
in FIGURE V-2 (fol-
lowing page).

-------
                                           Note Difference In
                                           Graph Scales,
J FMAMJ JASOND
 Umpquo River ot Elkton
  JFMAMJ JASOND
South Umpqua R.ot Brockway
JFMAMJ JASOND
  Cow Creek at Riddle
                                 WATER SUPPLY a WATER QUALITY CONTROL STUDY
                                       UMPQUA RIVER BASIN. OREGON

                                       ONE IN TEN YEAR LOW
                                        FLOW  RECURRENCES
                                UNITEDSTATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
                                  Federal Water Pollution Control Administration
                                REGION IX   (DATE! 6/66)	PORTLAND.OREGON
                                                             FIGURE V-2

-------
     4.  Present Water Quality

     The following table summarizes available data from the files
of the Oregon State Sanitary Authority, U. S. Geological Survey,
and the Federal Water Pollution Control Administration by present-
ing the ranges of several key water quality parameters for the
critical summer months of July through September.  Additional
water quality data is appended.

                            TABLE V-3
                      WATER QUALITY SUMMARY
                       UMPQUA RIVER BASIN
Stream
Umpqua
South Umpqua
Cow Creek
DO
mg/1
8.6-9.7
6.2-12.1
7.3-9.5
BOD5
mg/1
1.1-2.2
0.0-2.5
0.8-1.2
Temp.
°F
82-51
94-51
85-55
Coliform Bact.
MPN/100 ml
400-2,000
10-13,000
10-800
     As indicated, organic waste assimilation requirements are not
high enough to cause severe dissolved oxygen (DO) depression.  DO
levels in the South Umpqua frequently drop below 7 mg/1, but con-
centrations below 6 mg/1 are uncommon, except during extreme low
flows, when values below 5 mg/1 have been observed.

     Temperature is a severe water quality problem in the Umpqua
system, particularly in the South Umpqua drainage.  Temperatures
in the South Umpqua and Cow Creek during the months of July and
August average about 75 F, well above the maximum temperatures
recommended for anadromous fish.  Maximums have reached 98°F.
Temperatures in the main stem Umpqua average about 70 F.

     Bacterial contamination resulting from discharge of inade-
quately disinfected sewage and from land drainage is evident.  The
most severe problems occur in the South Umpqua as it passes through
the Roseburg area.

     As indicated in the appended data, ranges of pH, hardness,
and total dissolved solids are well within the limits for any
raw water use anticipated in the basin.  High sediment concentra-
tions from soil erosion are a seasonal phenomenon associated with
periods of high surface runoff and stream flow.
                                                              11

-------
     5.  Water Quality of Projected Storage Releases

     Steep slopes with sediment production ratings at 150-500 mg/1
of particulate matter cause inflows into both Tiller and Galesville
Reservoirs to be turbid and fairly high in nutrients.  During
periods of heavy logging, organic matter and nutrients are higher.

     According to estimates made by the Oregon Water Resources
Board  (OWRB), mass average reservoir temperatures will be highest
in September.  Stratification will occur in both reservoirs with
September bottom-to-surface temperatures ranging from 44 to 67 F
in Tiller and from 53 to 74°F in Galesville.

     Based on probable nutrient levels and temperature character-
istics, it is reasonable to assume that both reservoirs will
experience heavy algal blooms.  These blooms, together with other
settling organics, could eventually cause depletions of DO at
lower levels, due to decay of organic matter and lack of reaera-
tion.  For this reason, multiple level outlets should be provided
to permit control of DO in reaches immediately below these struc-
tures.
 B.   GROUNDWATER

      Little  information is  available  on groundwater  hydrology in
 the  Umpqua River  Basin.   The  North Umpqua River has  extensive
 areas of  volcanic pumice, which act as  reservoirs, soaking up
 large quantities  of  moisture  during the wet season and  releasing
 it  throughout the dry  summer  months.   The relatively high base
 flow of the  North Umpqua River reflects these  conditions.   Prima-
 rily clay-type soils are found throughout the  remaining areas of
 the  Umpqua Basin; although  clay soils are capable of holding more
 water than pumice, the water  moves into, through, and out of the
 clay very slowly. Most winter precipitation runs off as surface
 flow, and little  water is released during the  summer.

      Only the Milo Academy  relies on  groundwater for a  community
 water supply in the  South Umpqua River Basin.   A few industries
 have developed well  supplies, but quantities pumped  are small.
 12

-------
VI. THE  ECONOMY

A.   GENERAL

     The  demand  for  water  for municipal and industrial purposes,
and the amount and character of waste waters resulting from such
uses,  are determined largely by the activities associated with a
region's  economic base.  The purpose of this section is to pre-
sent economic and demographic data to be used as a basis for pro-
jecting the needs for water  for municipal and industrial purposes
and for estimating the  future amounts and types of waste and land
drainage  material that  may be expected to occur in the Umpqua River
Basin with  the expanded development anticipated in the future.

B.   PRESENT

     1.   Industry and Employment

     The  economy of  Douglas  County is very heavily dependent on
harvesting and processing  the  county's timber resource as shown in
                                          FIGURE VI-1.   About 91 per-
                                          cent of all manufacturing
                                          employment  in the county
                                          in 1960 was in lumber  and
                                          wood products.   Agricul-
                                          tural employment is rela-
                                          tively less important  in
                                          Douglas County than in
                                          either the  State or Na-
                                          tion as a whole.   Aside
                                          from timber harvesting
                                          and  processing,  mining
                                          is the only other major
                                          industry sector  in which
                                          Douglas County employ-
                                          ment  equals or exceeds
                                          the  national  average.
                                          The  234 persons  employed
                                          in mining in  April 1960
                                          represented about  the  same
                                          percentage  of total em-
                                          ployment  in Douglas
                                          County  as that industry
                                          represented in the  Uni-
                                          ted  States  as a whole.
      FIGURE VI-1
EMPLOYMENT DISTRIBUTION
                   I960
•                    DOUGLAS
                    COUNTY
                  pi UNITED
                  Ilil STATES

                 EMPLOYMENT
                DISTRIBUTION
                                                      13

-------
The U. S. Veterans' Hospital at Roseburg and tourism and recrea-
tion activities provide some employment in service industries;
but, even so, total employment in service industries is well below
the proportion in the State and Nation.  This is due to the fact
that Douglas County is within an area for which Portland and Eu-
gene provide numerous services, such as trade, education, and
finance.

     2.  Population

     The total labor force of 24,289 in Douglas County in April
1960 supported a population of 68,458; that is, the ratio of
population to labor force was 2.8 to 1.  TABLE VI-1 shows the
allocation of county population among the incorporated places and
non-urban portions of the county.  A large part of the population
is concentrated in the narrow valleys near the junction of the
North and South Umpqua Rivers.  About 31,000 persons (45 percent
of county total) live within a radius of ten miles from the center
of Roseburg.-   Another 10,000 live in other towns along the main
highway and railroad bisecting the county from north to south, and
most of the remaining population is along this central artery,
outside incorporated places but suburban in nature.  The only
significant population center outside this central strip is
Reedsport, located on the Umpqua estuary, with a population of
about 3,000.  Most of the county is very sparsely settled, with
large areas of virtually uninhabited and mountainous national
forest land.

     About 45,000 persons (two-thirds of county total) live in
the portion of the county drained by the South Umpqua River.  The
North Umpqua subbasin is more rugged and has a population of only
about 8,000.  The main stem of the Umpqua, below the confluence
of the North and South Forks and including such minor tributaries
as Elk Creek and Calapooya Creek, has a population of about 16,000.
                                           21
     According to the most recent estimate,—  Douglas County popu-
lation increased less than 2,000 from 1960-1964, or about 2.6
percent, compared with an increase of nearly 8 percent for the
State as a whole during the same period.

_!/ This includes the following Census Divisions:  Roseburg, East
   Roseburg, Lookingglass, Riverdale, Wilbur, Winchester, and a
   portion of Melrose.
2_/ Oregon State Board of Census estimate for July 1, 1964.
 14

-------
                           TABLE VI-1
      POPULATION, BY SERVICE AREAS AND INCORPORATED PLACES
                DOUGLAS COUNTY, APRIL, 1960

                                                      Population
	City or Area	April 1. 1960

Douglas County (Umpqua River Basin), TOTAL 	   68,458
  Reedsport-Gardiner Service Area  	    5,246
    Reedsport City	    2,998
    Unincorporated Portion 	    2,248
  Roseburg Service Area  	   35,100
    Myrtle Creek City	    2,231
    Oakland City	      856
    Roseburg Urban Area, Total 	   16,543
      Roseburg City  	   11,467
      "Barnes" (densely-developed suburb)	    5,076
    Sutherlin City	    2,452
    Winston City	    2,395
    Unincorporated Portion 	   10,623
  Remainder of County  	   27,976
    Drain City	    1,052
    Elkton City	      146
    Glendale City	      748
    Riddle City	      992
    Yoncalla City	      698
    Canyonville City	    1,089
    Unincorporated Portion 	   23,387
                                                               15

-------
C.  FACTORS INFLUENCING FUTURE GROWTH

     The outlook for growth of the Douglas County economy depends
on possibilities for (1) maintaining or increasing the annual tim-
ber harvest and (2) diversifying the economy, either by further
fabrication or greater utilization of the timber harvest, or by
development of new types of resources.  It is assumed that the
log cut in Douglas County will decline during the study period to
about 80 percent of the present level.  A redistribution of the
use of the resource is expected, with smaller sawmills disappearing
as a result of competitive pressures and output at the larger saw-
mills declining.  This will be accompanied by an increase in output
at plywood mills.   However, due to increasing productivity per
worker per hour, employment in lumber and wood products is expected
to decline in the future.  Therefore, expansion of the economy will
have to come from diversification.

     Raw materials are available within Douglas County  to support
additional pulp and paper manufacture.  The  possibility of the
establishment of a new mill at the confluence of the North and
South Umpqua Rivers by 1980 has been considered, but planned ex-
pansion of existing facilities at Gardiner,  Coos Bay, Toledo, and
Springfield should take up the available resource.  It  is assumed,
therefore, that no new pulp and paper operations will be built in
the Umpqua Basin within the planning period.

     Other resources exist, but they do not appear to have a poten-
tial for providing large employment.   Employment in mining is
expected to remain at about its present level and to continue to
occur primarily in the Riddle area.   Increased irrigated acreage
is expected to support a moderate-sized food-processing industry,
located in the Roseburg area, by 1980.  Although food-processing
expansion is not expected to provide for large employment in the
future, it will be a major contributor to future waste loads.  By
1980, food-processing capacity in the South Umpqua is projected to
increase by about 300 tons per day; further expansion to about
600 tons per day may be expected by 2020.

     A moderate-sized meat-processing plant may also be located in
the Roseburg area by 1980.  Sheep grazing presently provides a raw
material, but it seems probable that most of the animals will con-
tinue to go to established packing plants outside the county.
Employment in service industries is expected to increase due to
tourist and recreational development.
 16

-------
D.  FUTURE

     1.  Projected Employment

     On the basis of preceding considerations, a projection of
future employment by major industry group in Douglas County is
given in TABLE VI-2.
                            TABLE VI-2
          PROJECTED FUTURE EMPLOYMENT, BY MAJOR INDUSTRY
                 DOUGLAS COUNTY, 1980, 2000, 2020
Industry Group
Agriculture 	
Forest Management & Fisheries . .

Manufacturing. TOTAL 	
Employment, nearest thousand
1980 2000 2020
. . . 1.0 1.0 1.0
. . . 0.3 0.4 0.5
. . . 0.3 0.3 0.3
. . . 9.9 10.9 11.5
  Logging, Lumber, Wood Products. .8.3       8.2        8.1
  Primary Metals	0.2       0.3        0.3
  All Other Durables	0.3       0.5        0.6
  Food & Kindred	0.4       0.8        1.1
  Printing, Publishing & Allied . .   0.3       0.4        0.5
  All Other Non-Durables & Misc.  .   0.4       0.7        0.9

Construction	1.5        1.8        2.3
Services	14.7       20.1       27.3
Military	0.1        0.2        0.3
Unemployed	1.5        1.8        2.3

TOTAL LABOR FORCE	29.3       34.5       45.5
     2.  Projected Population

     The projected labor force, as illustrated, would support a
total county population of 85,000 in 1980, 106,000 in 2000, and
132,000 in 2020, based upon a labor-force-to-population ratio
similar to the existing one.  The allocation of this projected
                                                                17

-------
future total county population to the cities and service areas
within the county, while highly arbitrary, is required for plan-
ning purposes.  A projected allocation is shown in TABLE VI-3.  It
is based upon the assumption that population in the rural portions
of the county will remain at about the present level or decrease
slightly, that population in the smaller incorporated places will
increase 'at the average for the county, and that the remainder and
largest part of the projected population increase would accrue to
the larger cities, particularly Roseburg.
                             TABLE VI-3
   PROJECTED POPULATION,  BY  SERVICE AREAS & INCORPORATED  PLACES
               DOUGLAS COUNTY,  1980,  2000,  2020
     City or Area
 Population, nearest thousand
1980          2000          2020
Douglas County, TOTAL

  Reedsport Service Area
    Reedsport City
    Rural portion

  Roseburg Service Area
    Myrtle Creek City
    Oakland City
    Roseburg Urban Area
    Sutherlin City
    Winston City
    Rural portion

  Remainder of County
    Drain City
    Elkton City
    Glendale City
    Yoncalla City
    Canyonville City
    Riddle City
    Rural portion
85.0
106.0
132.0
                            11.0
 18

-------
VII. WATER REQUIREMENTS
      Municipal & Industrial


A.  PRESENT WATER USE

     The majority of the Umpqua River Basin's municipal and indus-
trial (M&I) water needs are met from surface water sources.  The
following table summarizes the present M&I water use and sources
of supply for  the study area.
                           TABLE VII-1
           PRESENT MUNICIPAL AND INDUSTRIAL WATER
Subbasin
User
South Umpqua:
Roberts Creek W.D.
Winston-Dillard W.D.
Tri-City W.D.
Myrtle Creek W.D.
Cany onvi lie
Roseburg
Milo Academy
Industrial
TOTAL
Cow Creek:
Riddle
Glendale
Industrial
TOTAL
Calapooya Creek:
Oakland
Sutherlin
Industrial
TOTAL
Est.
Popl.
Served

3,000
3,000
750
2,240
1,200
13,500
400
—
24,090

990
1,000
—
1,990

1,100
2,500
—
3,600
Water
Munic-
ipal

0.24
0.19
0.09
0.39
0.14
2.80
0.05
—
3.90

0.10
0.12
—
0.22

0.11
0.40
—
0.51
Demand
Indus-
trial

0.06
0.06
—
0.06
—
0.25
—
2.96
3.39

0.03
--
3.18
3.21

0.07
0.03
0.06
0.16
(MGD)
Total

0.30
0.25
0.10
0.45
0.14
3.05
0.05
2.96
7.30

0.13
0.12
3.18
3.43

0.18
0.43
0.06
0.67
Source

South Umpqua
South Umpqua
South Umpqua
N. Myrtle Cr.
O'Shea Cr.
North Umpqua
Groundwater
South Umpqua


Cow Cr.
Cow Cr.
Cow Cr.


Calapooya Cr.
Calapooya Cr.
Calapooya Cr.

                                                              19

-------
B.  EXISTING SOURCE DEVELOPMENT

     Present demands are concentrated in the Roseburg Service Area.
The City of Roseburg obtains its water from the North Umpqua, but
its suburbs utilize the South Umpqua.  The four separate water
systems which supply the service area (Roberts Creek, Winston-
Dillard, Tri-City, and Roseburg) provide chemical treatment, fil-
tration, and disinfection because of seasonal turbidity, color
and odor problems, and bacterial contamination.  The major portion
of industrial water used in the South Umpqua is supplied through
these four systems.  Other communities in the study area obtain
municipal water from individual systems on the South Umpqua, Cow
Creek, or Calapooya Creek.  Industrial supplies on the Cow Creek
have been developed by Hanna Nickel Smelting Company and Monroe
Lumber Company.
C.  PROJECTED M&I DEMANDS AND STORAGE REQUIREMENTS

     The forecast of future demands is based on economic projections
and present consumption rates for the various communities.  Per
capita consumption rates average 115 gpd with peak summer demands
of over three times the average use.  Average per capita rates are
projected to increase to over 190 gpd by 2020.  Future industrial
demands are based on production forecasts with the heaviest users
being food processing and forest products.

     Study area demands for M&I water for the years 1980, 2000, and
2020 are projected to total 22.0, 28.8, and 46.0 mgd, respectively.
About 55 percent of this demand will occur in the Roseburg Service
Area.  Industrial water demands will constitute about 60 percent of
the projected M&I demand.

     TABLE VII-2 shows the projected water demands and the supple-
mental storage requirements needed  to meet these needs.  Future
demands for M&I water supply in the South Umpqua Basin will neces-
sitate the most supplemental storage.  Minimum natural stream flow
of the South Umpqua is fully appropriated (240 cfs of consumptive
rights); and, in fact, is over-appropriated during critical years.
In addition, the Oregon Water Resources Board has established a
minimum flow of 60 cfs at the mouth of the South Umpqua.  (The
minimum observed flow of record is  36 cfs.)  Limited storage will
be needed on Cow Creek to meet future demands.
 20

-------
      Supplemental  storage requirements  for  the Roseburg Service
Area  are based on  the projections for suburban areas.   The  City's
North Umpqua River supply is considered adequate to  meet  future
demands for the urban area.  However, consideration  should  be
given to a  South Umpqua  supply  to meet  peak demands.
                                     TABLE VIl-2
                 PRESENT AND PROJECTED MUNICIPAL AND INDUSTRIAL WATER DEMAND
                	UMPQUA RIVER BASIN	
  Area and Consumer
  Water       Projected
Use (MOD)   Water Demands (MCD)
 Present   1980    2000   2020
                           Supplemental M&I
                      Storage Requirements (ac-ft.)
                      Present     1980   2000     2020
South Umpqua;

  Roseburg        . ,
  Suburban Roseburg—
  Roberts Creek
  Wins ton-Dl Hard
  Tri-CIty
  Myrtle Creek W.D.
  Canyonvllle
  Milo Academy   2/
  Private industry—

Cow Creek;

  Riddle
  Glendale
  Private industry

Calapooya Creek;

  Oakland
  Sutherlln
  Private Industry

TOTAL
  3.05

  0.30
  0.25
  0.10
  0.45
  0.14
  0.05
  2.96
  0.13
  0.12
  3.18
  0.18
  0.43
  0.06
 4.50
 0.60
 0.60
 0.60
 0.15
 0.50
 0.30
 0.10
10.00
 0.30
 0.15
 3.44
 0.17
 0.50
 0.10
 6.10
 0.83
 0.83
 0.83
 0.21
 0.62
 0.41
 0.16
13.60
 0.41
 0.21
 3.44
 0.21
 0.83
 0.10
 11.40   22.01   28.79
10.00
 1.28
 1.28
 1.26
 0.46
 0.93
 0.68
 0.18
23.50
 0.68
 0.46
 3.44
 0.46
 1.28
 0.10

46.01
10
         ISO
 45
 30
150
                260
                90
100
 60
580
                100
 480
 310
  15

 230
  70
1,800
               85
              125
                                                       15
                                                                375  1,190    3,115
I/ This area will most probably be served from the North Umpqua River.  A system study is
   underway currently.

21 Pulp and paper not included.
      Based on TABLE VII-2, total M&I storage needs applicable  for
 inclusion in Tiller Reservoir are about 3,100 acre-feet.   However,
 the Olalla Reservoir  project  (U. S.  Bureau  of Reclamation) has an
 appropriation of 760  acre-feet of storage  for M&I water  supply to
 supplement the  Roberts Creek-Winston-Dillard supplies.   When  this
 is subtracted,  a total of 2,350 acre-feet  of storage is  applicable
 for inclusion in the  Tiller  project.  It should  be noted, however,
 that there is no authority within the study area to contract  for
 the storage.
                                                                          21

-------
VIII. WATER QUALITY CONTROL

A.  NEED FOR CONTROL

     Water uses requiring controlled water quality include munici-
pal and industrial water supply, resident and anadromous fishery,
and recreation.  Although these uses are discussed for the entire
Umpqua Basin, particular emphasis has been given to the uses on the
South Umpqua and Cow Creek, which could be served by the proposed
projects.

     1.  Municipal and Industrial

     As discussed in the preceding chapter, both the existing and
potential water supply sources for municipalities and industries
are the surface waters of the main stem Umpqua, Cow Creek, South
Umpqua, and Calapooya Creek.

     2.  Fishery

     The Umpqua River and tributaries support extensive populations
of anadromous fish, including Chinook and Coho salmon and steelhead
and cutthroat trout.  Resident trout also inhabit the river system.
The anadromous fish, which spawn and rear in the basin, contribute
to a large sport fishery along the various tributaries and in the
ocean, as well as to the offshore commercial fishery.  Preliminary
figures from a survey conducted by Oregon State University in 1965
give some indication of intensity of the sport fishery in the basin.
In that year, total effort by Oregon residents was estimated to be
about 350,000 fisherman trips.  The estimated sport catch was about
97,000 salmon and steelhead and over 200,000 trout.  Some of the
salmon caught in the ocean were probably produced in other streams.
In addition to Oregon residents, fishing pressure from out-of-
state tourists is increasing steadily with the completion of access
roads and camping facilities.
     As shown in FIGURE
                            TABLE VIII-1 - PRESENT ANADROMOUS FISH
                           SPAWNING POPULATIONS—UMPQUA RIVER BASIN
VIII-1. nearly every                          North   South
stream in the Umpqua Ba-      Species	Umpqua  Umpqua   Total
sin is used by anadromous         ^^
fish for spawning, rear-    J   ^             >20Q            »
ing, or migration.  Pres-  Coho                   Q      Q0       Q
ent spawning P^^tion           steelhead   4,800    -     4,800
estimates for the North    winter Steelhea(J   7;700   6.0o0  13 700

Ust!dUin SSffyS-l.                      2MOO  TOIOOO  34^00


22

-------
       Chinook Salmon
       Steelhead
       Coho Salmon

 WATER SUPPLY8 WATER QUALITY CONTROL STUDY
      UMPQUA RIVER BASIN, OREGON

       ANADROMOUS  FISH
        SPAWNING AREAS
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
  Federal Water Pollution Control Administration
REGION IX   (DATE! 6/661        PORTLAND,OR EGON
                          FIGURE Vlll-l

-------
     Although both streams still have  extensive  fishery today,
there has been a deterioration of  the  stream environment in the
basin, and particularly  in the South Umpqua,  which has reduced
fish populations.  The Oregon State Game  Commission estimates that
runs have been reduced by over 70  percent from historic populations.
A considerable portion of this reduction  can be  attributed to deg-
radation of the South Umpqua.

     Anadromous fish activities in the South Umpqua are illustrated
in FIGURE VIII-2.  In general, summer  and fall temperatures and
stream flows in the lower South Umpqua are undesirable for salmonid
species which are using  the stream at  that time.   Low summer stream
flows and high water temperatures  restrict the -rearing potential
in the South Umpqua and  delay fall Chinook and Coho from entering
the river to spawn.  Summer steelhead  are not present in the stream
for the same reasons.
                            FIGUHE VII I- 2
               ANADROMOUS FISH ACTIVITIES IN SOUTH UMPOUA RIVER
ACTIVITY
Adu Its Upst ream
Holding
Spawn ing and
1 ncuba t i on
Juven i 1 as
in St reams
F inge r 1 ings
Downst ream
J F M A M J 1 A S 0

rst
Coho

_JJ
!






SI
Ch




FCh
Coho



r
S






S



SWSt


:h







s


I
SCh



SCh Coho SS



:Ch' Co'ho SSt' WS






t
S



w


N D
FCh
J
I
ho
J
|
^_

FCh

r1

r
oho
SCh |

1

St

FChj
oho



Ch WSI



SSt
LOCATION
Ma i nslem
and Tr i bs
Upper MS
Lower MS
Upper MS
Lower MS
Tnbs
Ma jnst en
and Tr ibs
Ma inslem
and Tr i bs
QUALITY REQM'T
D.O. TEMP. °F
7
7
7
7
7
43-55
50-65
43-55
43-67
45-65
Species Legend SCh - Spring Chinook: FCh - Fall Chinook.
SSt - Spring Stee 1 head. wsi - Winter Steelhead, Coho - Coho
  24

-------
     With higher flows and resultant lower temperatures, the early
segments of Chinook and Coho salmon runs would migrate and spawn
about one month earlier, and the lower river could be used more
extensively for spawning and rearing.  With this stream regimen,
the lower Umpqua River could be used much more extensively for
spawning and rearing.

     The present salmonid fishery and projected future populations
with the Tiller project are shown in TABLE VIII-2.

                            TABLE VIII-2
          PRESENT AND PROJECTED SALMONID FISH POPULATIONS

                                                     Projected wfth
	Present	Tiller Project

Spring Chinook                        600                 7,400
Fall Chinook                          600                21,000
Coho                                2,800                 3,000
Winter Steelhead                    6,000                 9,300
Summer Steelhead                      --                  5,000
     3.  Recreation

     Recreational use of the Umpqua Basin streams is intense, a
function of established recreational habits.  Other than game
fishing, recreational water uses include boating, water-contact
sports, picnicking, and camping.  Since each stream has many
points of access, user statistics to show intensity of demand
are only partially available.  However, an impressive rise in the
number of visits to State parks in the basin indicates a trend in
water-oriented recreation.  Day visits to all State parks have
doubled between 1960 and 1965.  Parks providing water activities
show even more spectacular attendance growth.

     In addition to State facilities, the South Umpqua is
extensively used by Roseburg residents for picnicking, swimming
and other water-contact recreation.  Although several city parks
are located on the lower South Umpqua, the stream is not aestheti-
cally appealing during summer low flow periods.  A combination of
low flow, high temperatures, profuse algal growths, and floating
solids damage the recreation potential of the stream.
                                                               25

-------
B.  WASTE LOADS

     1.  Municipal and Industrial

     Because of the importance of dissolved oxygen content of water,
both as a measure of pollution and as a requirement for fish life,
municipal and industrial waste loads are expressed in terms of
their oxygen consumption—the biochemical oxygen demand (BOD). This
demand is expressed in terms of population equivalents (FE) for
this report.


     Present municipal and  industrial waste  loadings  for  the
Umpqua Basin are  shown in Appendix B and summarized in TABLE VIII-3
by major  loading  point.

                             TABLE VIII-3
            MUNICIPAL AND INDUSTRIAL WASTE LOADS—1965
                        UMPQUA RIVER BASIN
Loading Point
Canyonville
Glendale
Riddle
Roseburg Area
Drain
Remainder of Basin
Total
Raw P.E.
1,200
900
1,000
32,350
1,100
525
37,075
Discharged P.E.
180
150
250
5,100
150
70
5,900
Receiving Stream
S . Umpqua
Cow Creek
Cow Creek
S . Umpqua
Elk Creek


     The South Umpqua  receives  the major  portion  of  basin wastes,
with loading points  concentrated  in  the Roseburg  area.   The
Roseburg service area,  as  defined in Chapter  VI,  produces over  85
percent of  the total basin wastes.   Although  Sutherlin  is currently
discharging to the North Umpqua,  it  is considered close enough  to
the Roseburg area to be included  for planning purposes.   Wastes
from the coastal communities  of Reedsport and Gardiner  are not
included because ocean outfalls remove wastes from the  sphere of
influence of the Umpqua streams.

     There  are no major industrial wastes with separate outfalls
in the basin, except for the  paper mill at Gardiner  which dis-
charges to  the ocean.   Food processing operations discharge  to
municipal systems and  are  included in the municipal  loads listed.
 26

-------
      Total waste  production of  the  basin,  excluding the coastal
 communities  and industries,  is  about  37,000 PE.   All basin wastes
 receive  treatment before  discharge; over-all reduction of wastes
 is  about 84  percent, with about 5,900 PE discharged to the water-
 course.

      Future waste  load projections are based on the  economic  fore-
 casts presented in Chapter VI.  The following assumptions  have
 been made:   (1) future food  processing and  other  industries in  the
 Roseburg  area will be connected to municipal systems:   (2) addi-
 tional pulp and paper expansion will  be  located on  the  coast; and
 (3) municipal and  industrial wastes will receive  at  least  85  per-
 cent  treatment in  1980 and 2000 and at least 90 percent  treatment
 by 2020.  From these assumptions, projected  future waste loads  are
 shown in  TABLE VIII-4.  It should be  noted  that due  to  assumed
 increases in treatment efficiency, 2020 projected loads are less
 than  those for 2000.

                            TABLE VIII-4
                  PRESENT AND FUTURE WASTE  LOADS
                   DISCHARGED TO UMPQUA STREAMS
                     (Population equivalents)
Loading Point
Canyonville
Glendale
Riddle ,
Roseburg Service Area-
Drain
Remainder of Basin
Total
1965
200
200
300
5,100
200
100
5,900
1980
300
200
300
22,600
300
200
23,900
2000
400
200
400
39,800
400
300
41,500
2020
400
200
400
38,800
300
200
40,300
a/ Includes the communities of Myrtle Creek, Winston, Dillard,
   Sutherlin, Winchester, and Oakland.
     Increases in municipal and industrial waste loads are anti-
cipated to occur primarily in the Roseburg area.  Not only is popu-
lation growth centered in this area but large increases in food
processing wastes are forecast.  Food processing wastes account
for the large increase in waste loads between 1965 and 1980.
                                                                27

-------
C.  WATER QUALITY OBJECTIVES

     Water quality control evaluations  consider  primarily  those
water quality and water pollution  control  problems  which can be
improved or maintained by stream flow regulation.   For  the South
Umpqua and its tributaries, these  include  dissolved oxygen,
temperature, and nuisance aquatic  growths  and  are associated with
maintenance of fishlife, water  recreation,  and aesthetic environ-
ment.  The benefits associated  with water  quality control  for these
uses are widespread.  Water quality objectives have been developed
for the various water uses based on the following indicators.

     1.   Dissolved Oxygen

     The dissolved oxygen (DO)  objective for the South  Umpqua is
delimited by anadromous fishery requirements—the use requiring
the highest DO level.  Other uses  served at this level  are recrea-
tion and aesthetic conditions.  Since salmon and steelhead use the
stream at all times of the year for either  spawning, rearing, or
migration, a minimum objective  of  no less  than 7 mg/1 must be main-
tained in the lower South Umpqua throughout the year.   DO  satura-
tion is required in headwater areas for fish spawning and  incubation.

     2.  Temperature
     Temperature  requirements  for  the  South Umpqua are also governed
mainly  by  the  anadromous  fishery,  but  recreation and general stream
                                       conditions benefit from cooler
                                       water temperatures.   The fol-
                                       lowing illustration  (FIGURE
                                       VIII-3)  shows the temperature
                                                    Maximum tempera-
                                             should not exceed 70 F
                                      regimen for anadromous fish
                                      production.
                                      tures
                                      during  July and August,  to
                                      facilitate fish migration,
                                      holding and rearing;  by  mid-
                                      September, temperatures  should
                                      not exceed 57 F to obtain
                                      optimum egg survival.

                                           Maintenance of DO and
                                      temperature levels to protect
and restore the anadromous fishery in the South Umpqua would aid in
the abatement of biological nuisance problems.
   V;
                           JUN JUL AUG SEP
             RECOMMENDED TEMPERATURE
            REGIME for SALMONID PRODUCTION
  28

-------
     3.  Bacteria

     Bacterial objectives for recreation and water  supply use  are
1,000 MPN and 5,000 MPN, respectively.  Treatment,  including disin-
fection, is required to reduce bacterial concentrations.
D.  EVALUATION OF FLOW REGULATION REQUIREMENTS

     Flow regulation for quality control  is  required in the South
Umpqua River to maintain the present  and  future  use  of the stream.
The maintenance and enhancement of  the  anadromous  fishery is the
critical use requiring additional flow.   Controlled  storage re-
leases are needed to:  (1) maintain dissolved oxygen concentrations
of at least 7 mg/1 during the months  of July, August,  September,
and October and (2) lower downstream  water  temperatures during the
same period.
     D.O -FLOW RELATIONSHIPS
          FIGURE Vlll-t
      100      200
        FLOW IN C.F.S.
SOUTH UMPQUA RIVER BELOW ROSEBUR6
300
                                             1.  Dissolved Oxygen

                                             DO-flow relationships
                                        have been computed for  the
                                        South Umpqua for  present
                                        and projected  loading condi-
                                        tions.  Two of these curves
                                        are shown in FIGURE VIII -4.
                                        Under present  loading
                                        conditions, the one-in-ten
                                        drought flows  of  80 cfs
                                        in August and  September
                                        would result in average
                                        DO levels of about 5 mg/1.
                                        Under projected loading
                                        conditions, the year 2000
                                        with 85 percent treatment
                                        is the most critical.   With-
                                        out flow regulation, DO con-
                                        centrations during the  crit-
                                        ical period would drop  below
  _
 3 mg/1.  Diurnal fluctuations from these values would  be  about
 1 mg/1.  Under minimum recorded daily flows  (36 cfs) near-septic
 conditions would occur.
                                                                29

-------
     Flow requirements,  in  combination with adequate treatment, and
storage requirements  to  meet  deficiencies under one-in-ten drought
conditions are shown  for the  four  critical months in TABLE VIII-5.
Reservoir releases are not  needed  during the rest of the year to
maintain over 7 mg/1  DO  throughout the study period.  However, it
should be noted that, if future  development of the basin signifi-
cantly alters projected  conditions,  releases may be required during
winter months.

                               TABLE VII1-5
                          FLOW AND STORAGE REQUIREMENTS
                   SOUTH UMPQUA  BELOW ROSEBURG SEWAGE TREATMENT PLANT
Present
Month
July
Aug.
Sept.
Oct.
TOTAL
i/ Based
Base Flow
Ave.Mo.l/
cfs
163
79
79
186

on one In ten
Dissolved
Oxygen
Objective
OK/I
7
7
7
7

Flow
Req'd
cfs
192
192
192
192

drought recurrence
Storage
Releases
Req'd
AF
1,785
6,950
6,830
370
15.935
at Brockway
1980
Flow
Req'd
cfs
240
240
240
240

gage.
Storage
Releases
Req'd
AF
4,740
9,900
9,600
3.320
27.560

Flow
Req'd
cfs
335
335
335
335


2000
Storage
Releases
Req'd
AF
10,580
15,750
15,250
9.150
50.730


Flow
Req'd
cfs
327
327
327
327


2020
Storage
Releases
Req'd
AF
10,100
15,250
14,750
8.670
MjTTO

      Based on this analysis, there is an immediate need  for an
 annual draft-on-storage—  of 16,000 acre-feet and a maximum study
 period need of 51,000 acre-feet.

      2.   Temperature

      As shown in Chapter V, Section 4, present temperatures during
 the  summer months in the South Umpqua exceed those desirable  for
 the  existing and potential fish production.  Fishery agencies have
 indicated that there would be considerable enhancement of anadromous
 fish runs in the South Umpqua if temperatures could be lowered.
 Although it is beyond the scope of this agency to recommend fishery
 enhancement, the feasibility of meeting fishery objectives with
 the  Tiller project has been examined to assist fishery agencies.

      Fishery enhancement criteria are temperatures of 57 F or
 lower by mid-September and as low as possible during the summer.
 Examination of the State Water Resources Board study entitled


 I/ Annual draft-on-storage is the sum of incremental excesses of
   needed releases over inflows during a climatic year  (April to April),
 30

-------
Water Temperature Prediction and Control - Umpqua River Basin 1964
shows that the recommended temperatures could be maintained almost
to the mouth of the South Umpqua in all months except September
and October with releases from the Tiller project.  Fall tempera-
tures could be met by allowing higher summer temperatures (up to
72°F) at the mouth and thereby conserving colder water for fall
release.

     A schedule developed by the Corps of Engineers showing probable
releases from the Tiller Reservoir and the associated temperature
regimen for the South Umpqua is shown in TABLE VIII-6.

                            TABLE VIII-6
                        SOUTH UMPQUA RIVER
          TILLER RESERVOIR - STREAM TEMPERATURE CONTROL
Month
October
November
December
January
February
March
April
May
June
July
August
September
Desired
Probable
Release
Rate cfs
612
350
350
350
350
350
525
858
1,139
1,471
1,244
885
temperature
Predicted Temperature F
Recommended Jf At the Max. at
Criteria °F' Dam the Mouth
53
50
45
43
43
46
48
55
65
67
62
56
at midpoint
52
46
39
40
40
40
45
51
55
55
52
52
from dam
60
51
43
40
46
48
55
61
68
71
67
66
to mouth.
Mean at
the Mouth
57
48
41
40
44
46
53
58
65
67
64
63

                                                              31

-------
IX. BENEFITS
A.  WATER SUPPLY - MUNICIPAL AND INDUSTRIAL

     A future need for storage for municipal and industrial water
exists in the Umpqua Basin as described in Chapter VII.   By the
year 2020, supplemental storage to yield 7.65 mgd or 2,350 acre-
feet will be needed.  First need will begin at about the time of
assumed project completion (1975).

     The value of this storage has been estimated by approximating
the single-purpose cost that would be required to develop the
needed supply in the absence of the Tiller and Galesville Projects.
The most likely alternative source available is on Jackson Creek
(Sec. 2, T30S, R1E).  Based on this alternative, the annual value
of 2,350 acre-feet of storage in the project including operation
and maintenance is estimated to be $220,900, with a 50-year amor-
tization at an interest rate of 3.125 percent.
 32

-------
B.  WATER QUALITY CONTROL

     the various uses requiring controlled water quality  (fishlife,
recreation, and general aesthetics) were discussed in detail in
Chapter VIII, and it has been shown that the anadromous fishery
requirements are the most stringent.  Other uses, however, will
benefit from the higher DO and reduced temperatures.  Storage
releases from the Tiller and Galesville Projects are needed in
addition to adequate treatment to protect and maintain these uses.
Failure to provide flow regulation would allow further degradation
in the stream environment and cause further reduction of  the South
Umpqua fish population.

     Beneficiaries of flow regulation for water quality control
are widespread throughout the Umpqua Basin and the State  of Oregon;
neither the polluters who contribute to the water quality degrada-
tion nor the users who benefit from the improved quality  can be
specifically identified.  The cost of water quality control in
these projects is, therefore, non-reimbursable.

     The minimum value of storage for water quality control in the
South Umpqua is considered to be equal to the least-cost  alter-
native in the absence of the Tiller Project.  Waste disposal under-
ground, transmission of wastes downstream to the main stem Umpqua,
and waste lagooning are not feasible in the Umpqua Basin.  The
least-cost alternative would be a single-purpose reservoir located
on Jackson Creek below the confluence of Luck Creek in Section 2,
T30S, RlE, which could provide the required flow regulation.


     Based on this alternative, the minimum value assignable to an
annual draft-on-storage of 51,000 acre-feet, based on a 50-year
amortization at a rate of 3.125 percent,  is estimated to be
$640,000.

     The value of storage for fishery enhancement (temperature
control and flow stabilization) is assumed to be the value of the
enhanced fishery as determined by the fishery agencies concerned.
                                                              33

-------
X. BIBLIOGRAPHY

 1.  Umpqua River Basin; Oregon State Water Resources Board, Oregon,  1958.

 2.  Water Rights Summary, Umpqua River Drainage Basin;
     Oregon State Water Resources Board

 3.  Water Temperature Prediction and Control Study, Umpqua River Basin;
     Oregon State Water Resources Board, February, 1964.

 4.  Some Water Problems and Hydrologic Characteristics of the Umpqua Basin;
     U. S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, July, 1960.

 5.  Surface Water Records of Oregon;
     U. S. Department of Interior, Geological Survey.

 6.  Census of Population; Department of Commerce, Bureau of Census.

 7.  Umpqua River Valley - Pulp and Paper Development Study;
     Sandwell and Company, Inc., March, 1958.

 8.  Annual Reports. Fisheries Division; Oregon State Game Commission.

 9.  The Character of Douglas County;
     Douglas County Planning Commission, September,  1955.

10.  Employment and Payrolls in Covered Industries;
     Quarterly Reports, Unemployment Compensation Commission.

11.  Water Resources Study, Umpqua River Basin, Olalla Reservoir. Oregon;
     USDHEW, PHS, Region IX, Portland, Oregon, September, 1963.

12.  Sediment Production Rating, Umpqua Basin. Oregon; Working Paper No. 9,
     USDHEW, PHS, REGION IX, Portland, Oregon, January, 1962.

13.  Population Growth in Sutherlin;
     Bureau of Municipal Research, University of Oregon, 1959.

14.  Water Supply and Distribution Study. City of Drain;
     Cornell, Rowland, Hayes, & MerryfieId, Corvallis, Oregon, Aug., 1955.

15.  Municipal Water Facilities. 1963 Inventory. Region IX;
     USDHEW, PHS, Washington, D.C.

16.  Municipal Waste Facilities, 1962 Inventory. Region IX;
     USDHEW, PHS, Washington, D.C.

17.  Oregon Outdoor Recreation, A Study of Non-Urban Parks & Recreation;
     Oregon State Highway Department, June, 1962.

34

-------
APPENDIX  A

-------
                               APPENDIX A




                                 Table 1
OSSA-USGS BASIC DATA AND MONITORING STATION LOCATIONS
UMPQUA RIVER BASIN
Sta.
No.
SU5

SU4

CCA

CC3

CC2

CC1

SU3

SU2

SU1

NU3

NU2

NUl

U5

U4

U3

EC1

U2

Ul

Stream and
River Mile
S Umpqua
Ul 12-48
S Umpqua
U112-45
Cow Creek
U112-41-35
Cow Creek
U112-41-34
Cow Creek
U112-41-3
Cow Creek
U112-41-1
S Umpqua
U112-34
S Umpqua
U112-18
S Umpqua
U112-8
N Umpqua
U112-27
N Umpqua
U112-15
N Umpqua
U112-2
Umpqua
U86
Umpqua
U74
Umpqua
U16
Elk Creek
U43-0.1
Umpqua
U43
Umpqua
U24
Location Sampling Data Data Sta. Type
Description Monthly Quar. Available Mon. B.D.
Hwy 22 Br. at x
Day's Creek
Co. Rd. 2 mi. No. x
of Canyonville
% mi. upstream x
from Glendale STP
\ mi. dnstream x
from Glendale STP
^ mi. upstream x
from Riddle STP
% mi. dnstream x
from Riddle STP
US Hwy 99 Br. at x
Myrtle Creek
Old Hwy 99 Br.6 mi.x
S of Roseburg
Melrose x

Lone Rock Br. x

Clover Creek Br. x

Garden Valley Br. x

Umpqua Bridge x

Tyee Bridge x

Kellogg Bridge x

Elkton x

Elkton x

Scottsburg x

x 7-14-59 to
I/ 11-9-61
7-14-59 to
10-17-60
7-15-59 to
10-17-60
7-14-59 to
10-17-60
7-14-59 to
10-17-60
7-14-59 to
10-17-60
7-14-59 to
10-17-60
7-14-59 to
10-17-60
x 7-14-59 to
I/ 11-9-61
x 7-14-59 to
II 11-9-61
7-14-59 to
10-17-60
7-14-59 to
10-17-60
7-14-59 to
10-17-60
7-14-59 to
10-17-60
7-14-59 to
10-17-60
7-14-59 to
10-17-60
x 7-14-59 to
I/ 11-9-61
7-14-59 to
10-17-60
x

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

II Started 2-22-61

-------
 APPENDIX A
                                                             Table 2
                                             UMPQUA RIVER BASIN WATER QUALITY SUMMARY
                  	Average July-September OSSA Water Quality Analyses	    Significant Basic Data Overall Averages	
                              DO                   Cond.
       River           Temp  (7=    BODs    PBI    (jimho/ 	M P N	  Hard, as CaCOg       Color           Turbidity
Sta.    Mile	pH   (°C)  Sat) (mg/1)  (mg/1)    cm)	Value	Comment  (mg/1)  Comment    Units   Comment    Units    Comment

SU5   U112-48     8.3   22   110   0.4      < 1      135       190       (1) (2)     44    Soft         20    High         11      High
                                                         190 overall                              (80 max)            (74 max)

SU4   U112-45     8.3   23   110   0.6      <1      135       160       (1)(5)
                                                         920 overall

CC4   U112-41-35  7.4   23   102   0.5      <1      124       540       (1) (3)
                                                         330 overall

CC3   U112-41-34  7.3   23   112   0.9      <1      133    24,500       (1)(4)
                                                         17,600 overall

CC2   U112-41-3   8.1   24   113   0.4      <1      148      < 260       (1)(2)
                                                         180 overall

CC1   U112-41-1   8.3   21   125   1.2      <1      150      2,180       (1)(4)   	
                                                         6,700 overall

SU3   U112-34     7.9   22   104   1.5      <1      150   >16,000       (1)(4)
                                                         >7,500 overall

SU2   U112-18     8.1   23    97   0.9      <1      160       560       (1)(5)
                                                         1,320 overall

SU1*  U112-8      8.0   22   105   1.7      <1      159    >4,000       (1) (4)     56    Soft  to       25    High         12     High
	                                     >9,800 overall                 mod.  hard  (140 max)          (58 max)
(1) Requires chlorination;  (2)  OK for  all recreational purposes;  (3)  OK for all  recreational purposes  but swimming;  (4)  NG for all
recreational purposes;  (5)  Questionable for recreation.
*  Basic data stations.
                                     	(Continued)

-------
 APPENDIX A
Table 2    (Continued)
Average July-September OSSA Water Quality Analyses
Sta.
NU3*

NU2

NU1

U5

U4

U3

EC1

U2*

Ul

River
Mile
U112-27

U112-15

U112-2

U86

U74

U61

U43-0 . 1

U43

U24

Temp
DH (°C)
7.7 18

7.8 18

7.8 20

7.9 21

8.1 22

8.2 22

8>1a/ 23b/

8.2«/ 23l/

8.0 23

DO
(%
Sat)
103

105

98

97

102

105

109£/

112

107

BOD5
(mg/1)
0.6

0.6

0.4

0.4

0.4

0.5

l.S^/

2.2S/

0.5

Cond.
FBI (umho/
(mg/1) cm)
 «» _— _• ..

-- --

« »•• »• _« M. __

-.

• • __ «• «_ __ ._

32 Soft 24 High 17 High
(140 max) (85 max)
--

 (1) Requires chlorination;  (2) OK  for  all  recreational  purposes;  (3)  OK for all  recreational purposes but swimming;  (4) NG for all
recreational purposes;  (5)  Questionable  for  recreation.
a/ 9.4 max., 7-18-60.   b/ 28 max.,  7-18-60).   c/  72 rain.,  8-11-59.  d/  >6.5 max.,  8-5.1-59.  e./ 9.1 max., 7-18, 8-15-60.
I/ 27 max., 7-18-60.  £/>9.0max., 9-9-59.
* Basic data station.
**High counts during spring months.

-------
APPENDIX  B

-------
                               APPENDIX B
                        PHS Water Quality Survey
                           Umpqua River Basin
                           August 18-21, 1963

                       Sampling Station Locations
No.
Location
Remarks
COW-1     Cow Creek near mouth
COW-2     Cow Creek above Riddle
COW-3     Cow Creek near Azalea

COW-Spec  Cow Creek at Riddle Water
           Intake
SU-5      S. Umpqua above Milo

SU-4      S. Umpqua at Riddle Bridge
SU-3      S. Umpqua at Dillard Bridge
SU-2      S. Umpqua at VA Hospital
SU-1      S. Umpqua at mouth

NU-2      N. Umpqua at Lone Rock Br.
NU-1      N. Umpqua at mouth
NU-Spec   N. Umpqua at Winchester Dam
CAL-2     Calapooya at Oakland
CAL-1     Calapooya at Umpqua

CAL-Spec  Calapooya near Nonpareil
EC-2      Elk Creek near Drain
EC-1      Elk Creek at Elkton
UR-2      Elk Creek at Umpqua
UR-1      Elk Creek at Elkton
                               Sample from new bridge.
                               Sample at USGS gage.
                               Sample underneath bridge on Grants
                                Pass Highway (99) near Quinos Cr.
                               Sample from new bridge.

                               1 mile upstream of Milo Academy
                                at Corn Creek Road.
                               Veterans Admin. Hosp. Bridge
                               Sample from boat float at County
                                Park.
                               Bridge east of Glide.
                               County Park.

                               Water intake.
                               Sample from bridge % mile upstream
                                from mouth.
                               Sutherlin water intake.
                               Sample from bridge.
                               Sample from bridge.
                               Sample from bridge.
                               Sample from bridge.

-------
APPENDIX B
PHS Water Quality Survey

Sample _!/
COW-1
COW- 2
COW- 3
SU-4
SU-5
COW Special
SU-1
SU-2
SU-3
NU-1
NU-2
NU- Special
CAL-1
CAL-2
EC-1
EC- 2
UR-1
UR-2
CAL Special
Souther land Special
* Count/ 100 ml.
_!/ List of sampling
Umpqua River Basin
Bacteriological Data
8/20-22/63

Total Coliforms*
Midnight Noon
200 110
800 <10
200 60
1,300 60
<100 10
20
7,000 700
700 390
13,000 490
180 80
220 80
150
1,800 2,300
200 620
240 1,000
16,000 7,200
2,000 1,500
490 410
3,200
630
stations shown in Table


Fecal Coliforms*
Midnight
20
10

-------
                               APPENDIX B
                STREAM DISCHARGE DATA, UMPQUA RIVER BASIN
                PHS Water Quality Survey - August, 1963
Gaging Station

Jackson Creek near
Tiller 	
South Umpqua River at
Tiller 	
Cow Creek near Azalea . .
Cow Creek near Riddle . .
South Umpqua River near
North Umpqua River at
Calapooya Creek near

15
23
75
15
55
143
940
16

16
23
72
15
55
141
913
15
Date
17
22
70
15
52
139
868
14
of Discharge (cfs)
18
22
68
15
50
135
814
14
19
22
68
14
50
133
832
14
20
21
66
14
50
130
877
12
21
21
66
14
52
126
886
11
22
21
66
15
52
126
895
9.8
23
21
66
15
52
130
868
12
Umpqua River near Elkton. 1110 1160 1130 1120 1090 1080 1080 1090  1090

Elk Creek near Drain. . .  3.4  3.4  3.0  3.0  2.6  2.6  1.8  1.4   1.8

-------
               APPENDIX B

PHS WATER QUALITY SURVEY, UMPQUA RIVER BASIN
            August 18-21. 1963
Date

8/18/63
8/19/63
8/19/63
8/19/63
AVERAGE
8/19/63
8/19/63
8/19/63
8/19/63
AVERAGE
8/18/63
8/19/63
8/19/63
8/19/63
AVERAGE
8/19/63
8/19/63
8/19/63
8/19/63
8/19/63
AVERAGE.
Time

2330
0655
1205
1735

0015
0710
1245
1750

2145
0450
1030
1555

1125
0045
0730
1315
1805

Station

COW-1
COW-1
COW-1
COW-1

COW-2
COW-2
COW-2
COW-2

COW-3
COW-3
COW-3
COW-3

COW Spec.
SU-4
SU-4
SU-4
SU-4

Temp.

22
20
21
22
21
20
18
21
22
20
19
15
18
22
18
21
20
20
22
23
21
Milligrams per liter (mg/1)
pH
8.26
8.08
8.39
8.50
8.31
8.00
7.90
8.44
8.45
8.20
7.42
7.42
7.74
7.61
7.55
8.38
8.00
8.08
8.92
8.74
8.44
DO

8.5
7.7
9.0
9.5
8.7
7.9
8.1
9.5
9.4
8.7
7.3
7.7
8.9
8.5
8.1
9.4
7.9
8.0
9.9
9.5
8.8
BOD,.
0.9
0.8
1.1
1.2
1.0
1.0
0.6
0.9
0.8
0.8
1.0
0.5
0.8
1.2
0.9
0.9
0.9
0.5
1.2
0.0
0.6
Hardness

63
62
-_
--
62
65
67
••••
--
66"
55
56
--
—
56
62
58
59
--
--
5?
Sol.PO,

0.10
0.08
—
0.04
0.07
nil
nil
•••»••
0.03
0.01
0.08
0.03
____
0.04
0.05
0.05
0.02
0.08

0.06
0.05
Total Solids

110
___
130
___
120^
112
-._-
118

115
100
___
104
___
102
102
130
--.-
120
___
125
Cl B

8.0
8.1
___ ___
___ ___
sTo
7.6
7.6
___ ___
_-._ ___
7.6
3.0
2.7
-__ ___
___ ___
2.8
r*. *
	 Trace
if
7.5 Trace
7.7
___
... 	
776"
                (continued)

-------
PHS WATER QUALITY SURVEY. UMPQUA RIVER BASIN (continued)
Date

8/18/63
8/19/63
8/19/63
8/19/63
AVERAGE
8/20/63
8/20/63
8/20/63
8/20/63
AVERAGE
8/19/63
8/20/63
8/20/63
8/20/63
AVERAGE
8/20/63
8/20/63
8/20/63
8/20/63
8/20/63
AVERAGE
8/20/63
8/20/63
8/20/63
8/20/63
AVERAGE.
Time

2240
0545
1125
1625

0030
0735
1300
1845

2335
0655
1217
1805

1700
0050
0745
1310
1850

0110
0800
1330
1910

Station

SU-5
SU-5
SU-5
SU-5

NU-1
NU-1
NU-1
NU-1

NU-2
NU-2
NU-2
NU-2

NU Spec.
SU-1
SU-1
SU-1
SU-1

SU-2
SU-2
SU-2
SU-2

Temp.
°C

20
20
21
23
21
19
18
20
21
20
17
15
17
18
17
20
23
20
23
23
22
22
21
23
24
. 22
Milligrams per
pH

8.18
7.78
8.50
8.70
8.29
8.00
7.90
8.18
8.56
8.16
7.78
7.70
8.06
8.60
7.88
8.10
8.98
8.24
8.89
9.48
8.90
8.55
8.52
8.40
8.80
8.57
DO

8.1
7.9
9.3
9.7
8.8
8.8
8.9
9.3
9.3
9.1
9.4
9.5
10.5
10.5
10.0
9.7
8.5
7.0
10.7
12.1
9.6
8.9
8.1
6.2
9.3
8.1
BOD
5
0.9
1.0
1.1
0.4
0.8
1.3
1.3
1.2
1.9
1.4
1.8
1.4
1.4
2.0
1.6
2.8
2.0
2.1
1.7
2.2
2.0
1.2
1.8
2.0
2.2
1.8
Hardness

-50
50
—
..
50
22
—
—
—
22
23
-.
—
.-
23
22
68
—
..
—
68
68
—
--
—
68
Sol. PO,
^
0.03
nil

0.03
0.02
0.12
0.09
0.12
0.08
0.10
0.14
0.18
0.13
0.14
0.15
0.09
0.39
0.37
0.35
0.39
0.38
0.08
0.06
0.07
0.12
0.08
Liter (mg/1)
Total Solids

110
...
120
...
115

...
-.-
...
...
...
...
...

...
	
...
...
...
	
...
...
...
...
...
_-_

Cl

7.7
7.6

...
7.6
1.8
2.3
...

2.0
1.5
2.1
...
...
1.8

10.2
10.6

	
10.4
10.2
10.4
...

10.3

B

...
...

...

...
...
...
...

nil
...
nil
...
nil

._.
...
...
	
•••i •»
B-.
...
...
...
...
                        (continued)

-------
PHS WATER QUALITY SURVEY, UMPQUA RIVER BASIN (continued)
Date

8/19/63
8/20/63
8/20/63
8/20/63
AVERAGE .
8/20/63
8/21/63
8/21/63
8/21/63
AVERAGE .
8/20/63
8/21/63
8/21/63
8/21/63
AVERAGE .
8/20/63
8/21/63
8/21/63
8/21/63
AVERAGE.
8/21/63
8/21/63
8/21/63
8/21/63
AVERAGE.
Time

2300
0615
1121
1730
2330
0555
1145
1720
2230
0500
1045
1630
2350
0605
1200
1730
0030
0630
1245
1800
Station

SU-3
SU-3
SU-3
SU-3
UR-1
UR-1
UR-1
UR-1
UR-2
UR-2
UR-2
UR-2
EC-1
EC-1
EC-1
EC-1
EC-2
EC-2
EC-2
EC-2
Temp.
°C

22
20
22
25
22
23
22
22
23
22
20
20
20
22
. 20
21
20
22
23
22
19
17
19
21
. 19
Milligrams per Liter (mg/1)
J2H_
8.30
7.89
8.18
8.90
8.32
8.62
8.56
8.62
8.78
8.64
8.20
8.10
7.94
8.48
8.18
8.15
7.72
8.14
8.44
8.11
7.84
7.90
7.80
8.66
8.05
DO

8.2
7.7
8.7
9.8
8.6
9.1
8.6
8.8
9.7
9.0
9.2
8.6
8.6
9.3
8.9
8.7
6.7
8.0
10.1
8.4
7.4
7.6
9.8
10.1
8.7
BODC

1.8
1.5
1.6
2.5
1.8
2.2
1.5
1.4
1.5
1.6
1.3
1.2
1.4
1.1
1.2
1.9
1.6
1.7
1.1
1.6
1.6
1.6
1.9
1.2
1.6
Hardness

67
67
• ••
—
__
Sol. PO,.

0.11
0.07
0.10
0.09
0.09
•» ••••••
••••MM
•• MMM
MMW ••
._--
Total Solids Cl B

9.1
10.0
~ ~9~76 ~^T
3.1
3.1
3.1
nil
3.1
3.0
3.1
16.4 	
15.9
16.2 	
27.7 	
31.7 	
29.7 	
                      (continued)

-------
                              PHS WATER QUALITY  SURVEY,  UMPQUA RIVER BASIN  (continued)
Date

8/20/63
8/21/63
8/21/63
8/21/63
AVERAGE .
8/20/63
8/21/63
8/21/63
8/21/63
AVERAGE .
8/21/63
Time

2240
0510
1100
1640

0110
0700
1315
1830

1340
Station

CAL-1
CAL-1
CAL-1
CAL-1

CAL-2
CAL-2
CAL-2
CAL-2

CAL Spec.
Temp.
°C

21
20
20
22
. 21
22
20
22
22
22
19
Milligrams per Liter (mg/1)
PH

8.06
7.72
7.62
8.18
7.90
7.84
7.92
7.90
8.08
7.68
8.10
DO

8.9
7.6
8.1
9.8
8.6
8.9
8.0
8.2
9.2
8 6
8.7
BODC Hardness Sol. PO,

2.1
1.8
1.0
1.0
1.5
1.5
1.4
1.5
0.9
13
1.0
Total Solids Cl

-
	
5.2
5.2
5.2

	
4.9
4.6
4.8
2.2
B

...
___
	
	
...
...
	
	
___
___
--
* Trace = Less than 0.02 mg/1.  Analytical procedure used not accurate for this amount.

NOTE:  Tests were run on selected samples for the following ingredients and found to be nil:
Turbidity,
Color,
Kjeldahl Nitrogen, &
Suspended Solids.

-------
APPENDIX  C

-------
                                                    APPENDIX C
                      1965 INVENTORY OF MUNICIPAL AND INDUSTRIAL WASTE SOURCES AND TREATMENT
                                          UMPQUA RIVER BASIN, OREGON
Watercourse
Community or
Industry
River Mile
Est. Pop.
1960
Untreated
Waste PE
Treatment
Design
Capacity
PE
Cons t .
Date
Discharged
Waste
PE
South Umpqua River            112
Tiller                        112-75
  Tiller Ranger Sta.                          --             50
Milo Academy                  112-69           300          300
Canyonville                   112-51         1,089        1,200
Cow Creek                     112-47.2
  Glendale                    112-47-41        748          900
    Glendale Plywood                          --           n/a
    Robert Dollar Co.                         —           n/a
  Hanna Nickel Smelting Co.   112-47-6        —        Inorganic
  Riddle                      112-47-2         992        1,000
    C&D Lumber Co.                            --           n/a
Myrtle Creek                  112-38         2,231        2,400
  Myrtle Cr. Plywood                          --           n/a
VanDine Creek                 112-36
  VanDine Meat Co.                            —            750
Dillard                       112-27
  Forest Ind. Inc.                            —           n/a
  Roseburg Lumber Co.                         —           n/a
Douglas H. S.                 112-25           600          600
Winston                       112-21         2,395        1,800
Green S. D.                   112-17         1,200        1,600
Deer Creek                    112-11
  Dixonville                  112-11-1        —           n/a
    Douglas Veneer Co.                        —           n/a
N. Roseburg S. D.             112-10         6,500        7,500
Roseburg                      112-8         11,467        15,000
  Umpqua Dairy Products                       —           (360)
  Evans Products Co.                          —           n/a
  National Plywood                            --           n/a
Town & Country Trailer Park                    125          125
Septic Tank
Secondary
Secondary

Secondary
  n/a
  n/a
Ponds
Secondary
  n/a
Secondary
  n/a

Lagoon
No system
  n/a
  n/a
Secondary
Secondary
Lagoon

  n/a
  n/a
Secondary
Secondary
City Sewer
  n/a
  n/a
Secondary
n/a
   450
 2,400

 1,000
n/a
n/a

 2,000
n/a
 3,000
n/a
n/a
n/a
   800
 3,500
 2,000

n/a
n/a
 4,000
20,000
n/a
n/a
   300
n/a
1956
1961

1957
n/a
n/a
n/a

n/a
n/a
n/a
1963
1957
1963

n/a
n/a
1951
1958

n/a
n/a
1960
    0
   45
  L80

  150
 n/a
 n/a
    0
  250
 n/a
  480
 n/a
 n/a
 n/a
   90
  300
  240

 n/a
 n/a
1,100
2,400

 n/a
 n/a
   15

-------
                                                    APPENDIX C
                                           UMPQUA RIVER BASIN INVENTORY
                                                                                                       Page 2
Watercourse
Community or
Industry
North Umpqua River
Lake Creek
Diamond Lake Rec. Area
Susan Creek State Park
Glide
Eugene Veneer Co.
Sutherlin Creek
Sutherlin
Nordic Plywood
Calapooya Creek
Oakland
Martin Bros. Timber Co.
Elk Creek
Yoncalla Creek
Yoncalla
Drain
Drain Plywood
Clover leaf Packing Co.
Elkton
Reedsport
River Mile
112
112-94
112-94-12

112-29

112-5
112-5-8

102-7
103-15

49
49-26
49-26-3
49-24


48
11
Est. Pop.
1960



—
260
—

2,452
—

856
—


641
1,052
—
—
—
2,998
Reedsport Creamery & Cheese
U. S. Plywood
Gardiner
International Paper Co.
Winchester Bay

9

2
—
550
—
1,000
Untreated
Waste PE



50
—
n/a

2,700
n/a

—
n/a


--
1,000
n/a
100
--
3,000
1,000
n/a
—
120,000
1,000
Treatment



Septic Tank
No system
n/a

Secondary
n/a

No system
n/a


No system
Secondary
n/a
Septic Tank
No system
None
None
n/a
No system
Ocean outfall
None
Design
Capacity
PE



—
—
n/a

3,500
n/a

—
n/a


—
2,000
n/a
—
—
—
—
n/a
—
--
— —
Const.
Date



--
--
n/a

1956
n/a

--
n/a


--
1960
n/a
--
--
--
--
n/a
—
--
— —
Discharged
Waste
PE



0
—
n/a

500
n/a

--
n/a


--
150
n/a
0
--
3,000
1,000
n/a
—
0
1,000
*n/a - Not available

-------
 PAGE NOT
AVAILABLE
DIGITALLY

-------