I
MBHk m
y,
iirisHi •
-a ¦ u L
j
.....
THE
OF
1
SEEP
BIOTA OF
I
mmm H ",j
1Y11
TECHNICAL INVESTIGATIONS BRANCH
SURVEILLANCE & ANALYSIS DIVISION
AUGUST, 1977
-------
THE EFFECT OF SALINE SEEP
ON THE
BIOTA OF FIVE RESERVOIRS IN MONTANA
by
Thomas E. Braidech
Aquatic Biologist
TECHNICAL INVESTIGATIONS BRANCH
SURVEILLANCE AND ANALYSIS DIVISION
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
REGION VIII
AUGUST, 1977
Document is available to the public from the National Technical Information
Service, U.S. Department of Commerce, Springfield, VA 22161
-------
DISCLAIMER
This report has been reviewed by the Surveillance and Analysis
Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region VIII and approved
for publication. Mention of trade names or commercial products does not
constitute endorsement or recommendation for use.
1
-------
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Thanks 1s extended to the chemistry staff of the former National
Field Investigations Center - Cincinnati, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency for analysis of the chemistry samples, and to the biology staffs
of the former National Field Investigations Center - Cincinnati and the
Technical Investigations Branch, Region VIII, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency for collection and analysis of the biology samples.
11
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page No.
ABSTRACT iv
LIST OF FIGURES v
INTRODUCTION 1
CONCLUSIONS 3
METHODS AND MATERIALS 4
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 5
Tunis Reservoir 5
Booth Reservoir 5
Bramlette Reservoir 8
Birkland Reservoir 10
Hanford Reservoir 12
Shonkon and Highwood Creeks j 14
BIBLIOGRAPHY . 15
APPENDIX A 16
iii
-------
ABSTRACT
The effects of saline seeps on the biota of five small reservoirs
in north-central Montana were studied. It was determined that the saline
seeps cause increases in the amounts of TDS, conductivity, heavy metals,
nutrients, chlorides and sulfates in the reservoir. The benthic fauna
exhibited taxanomic changes from reservoir to reservoir. This was probably
a result of the varying degrees of salinity found. The most probable
cause for the elimination of fish from the reservoirs was the increase
in total dissolved solids. At the time of the study the streams flowing
from the study area were not affected by the saline seeps. However, the
amount of salts, etc. in the streams could increase after a rainfall and
be discharged to the Missouri River.
iv
-------
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure Page No.
1 SALINE SEEP FORMATION 2
2 TUNIS RESERVOIR 6
3 BOOTH RESERVOIR 7
4 BRAMLETTE RESERVOIR 9
5 BIRKLAND RESERVOIR 11
6 HANFORD RESERVOIR 13
v
-------
INTRODUCTION
The Highwood Bench, located in Chouteau Country in north-central
Montana, is an area beset with problems from saline seeps destroying a
sizeable portion of land for agriculture. Saline seeps are areas mostly
in dry cropland that are salty and wet for all or part of the year, often
with salt crusts. The problem stems from the geology of the northern
Great Plains where the surface material is glacial till up to 70 feet
thick which is underlain by a relatively impermeable layer of marine shale.
Saline seeps are formed when water from precipitation moves through the
salt laden glacial till and collects on the impermeable marine shale
forming a "perched" water table. The collected water then moves down
slope to a swale or discharge area where it moves to the surface and
evaporates leaving the characteristic salt crust (Figure 1). Saline seeps
are aggravated by the crop-fallow system of agriculture used in the area.
This type of dry land agriculture incorporates the practice of leaving
a field fallow every other year, thereby allowing the moisture in the soil
to build up. Thus, the excess moisture in the ground increases the risk
of saline seeps.
At the request of the Montana Department of Health and Environmental
Sciences, a biological and chemical investigation of saline seep affected
farm ponds on the Highwood Bench area of Montana was conducted from June 13
to 19, 1974 by personnel from the National Field Investigations Center -
Cincinnati of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and Region VIII EPA.
The purpose of the study was to determine the effect of the saline seeps
on the biota of five small reservoirs in the Highwood Bench and to ascertain
whether surface waters flowing to the Missouri River are degraded by an
influx of saline waters. The water bodies studied were Tunis Reservoir
(used as a control and not actually situated on the Highwood Bench),
Booth Reservoir, Bramlette Reservoir, Birkland Reservoir and Hanford
Reservoir.
1
-------
ro
Fig. 1 Saline Seep Formation
Precipitation
Swale(discharge area)
Upland Fallow Field
(recharge area)
3
Saline Seep
Water
Impermeable Shale
-------
CONCLUSIONS
1. The chemical differences between Tunis Reservoir and the other
reservoirs studied is quite dramatic. These changes include increases
in TDS, conductivity, heavy metals, nutrients, chlorides and sulfates.
2. The chemical and biological differences between Booth Reservoir, the
only reservoir to contain fish other than the control reservoir, and
Bramlette Reservoir, the next more saline reservoir, were minor;
indicating that the water in Booth Reservoir may be nearing the toxic
level for trout.
3. The benthic fauna exhibited taxanomic changes from reservoir to
reservoir. This phenomenon was probably a result of the varying
degrees of salinity found.
4. Certain of the heavy metals found in the reservoirs were at levels
which had previously been reported as toxic to fish. However, the
extreme hardness of the reservoirs mitigate some of the toxic effect
of the metals. The most probable cause for the elimination of fish
from the reservoirs was the increase of total dissolved solids.
5. Unless the saline seep problem 1n the vicinity of Booth Reservoir
can be remedied, the fish in that body of water will probably die.
6. Data obtained from creeks flowing from the study area showed them
to be unaffected by the saline seeps. However, the measurements were
taken after the spring flush and during a dry period. Some increase!
in salts, etc. could occur in these streams after a rainfall and
be discharged to the Missouri River.
3
-------
METHODS AND MATERIALS
In the reservoirs all quantitative benthic samples were collected
in triplicate with an Ekman dredge. At most stations samples were taken
at three points along a transect. The sites were labelled A, B, and C,
referring to near the left bank, middle, and near the right bank of the
reservoir, respectively. The left and right banks were determined as if
an observer were standing on the dam looking up the reservoir. Qualitative
benthic samples were taken along the shoreline from the rooted aquatic
plants growing there. In the streams, qualitative samples were collected.
After collection the samples were washed through a No. 30 U.S. Standard
Sieve to remove the bulk of the substrate material. The sample remaining
in the seive was placed in a labelled plastic jar, preserved with formalde-
hyde, and transported to the laboratory.
In the laboratory the benthic organisms were picked from the samples
and placed in plastic petri dishes according to general groupings. Later,
all organisms were identified to genus, in most cases.
Physical measurements of temperature, conductivity, dissolved oxygen
and pH were obtained using a water quality monitoring system. Readings
were taken at one meter intervals through the water column at each site.
Water samples for chemical analysis were taken from the surface
thermocline and bottom waters at the center station of each transect.
Parameters measured were ammonia, nitrite, nitrate, total kjeldhal nitrogen,
soluble phosphorus, total phosphorus, total dissolved solids, chloride
sulfate, sulfide, and metals. All the above analyses were run in accordance
with Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater, 13th Edi-
tion with the exception of the metals which were analyzed on an emission
spectrophotometer.
4
-------
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
All data tables are contained in Appendix A. The macroinvertebrate
data for the reservoirs are displayed in Tables 1 through 6. Physical
data obtained from the profiling of the reservoirs are contained in
Table 7. Chemical data are contained in Table 8 and metals data in
Tables 9 through 12.
To facilitate matters, the findings for each reservoir will be dis-
cussed separately with a section at the end to compare the differences
found in the parameters measured.
TUNIS RESERVOIR
Tunis Reservoir (Figure 2) is a small (about 10 acres), shallow
(3 meters was the maximum depth found), reservoir located to the northwest
of the Highwood Bench. This body of water was chosen as the control
because 1t was unaffected by the saline seep.
Data obtained from profiling (Table 7) show a slight thermocline,
low conductivity of 375-500 umhos/cm2, dissolved oxygen, ranging from
13.0-4.1 mg/1 and high pH of 9.2 to 10.4.
Chemical data obtained from samples taken during the survey (Table 8)
show phosphorus and total Kjeldahl nitrogen levels in the lake at levels
which could support algal growth. This probably accounts for the profuse
rooted aquatic growths, which were observed at all locations in the reser-
voir.
Metals data from the emission spectrophotometer scan show no metals
reach what is considered to be a toxic level in the reservoir (Table 9).
The State of Montana routinely stocks this reservoir with Rainbow
trout which appear to be surviving well. The benthic fauna (Table 1)
are typical for a small pond situation. The most prevalent taxa are
Oligochaeta and the Chironomidae larvae Chironomus sp., Procladius sp.,
and Tanypus sp. The average number of taxa found was 9.6 per replicate
and the average total number of organisms was 35,854 per m2 per replicate.
The Oligochaeta were by far the most numerous organism found ranging from
6321/m' at station 1 rep. 1 to 80,754/m2 at station 2C rep. 2.
BOOTH RESERVOIR
Booth Reservoir (Figure 3), with a surface area of approximately
50 acres, was the largest of the reservoirs studied. Also it was the only
other reservoir found to contain fish (Rainbow trout). The trout were
stocked on a regular basis by the owner.
5
-------
r iv3 vt vi- <£
TUNIS RESERVOIR
-smi
STA. 2
STA.
STA. 3
opprox scole ^
100 meters
6
-------
FIGURfc 3
BOOTH RESERVOIR
STA.4
-------
The profuse growths of rooted aquatic plants noted in Tunis Reservoir
were not found in this reservoir. Profile data showed an abrupt increase
in conductivity over Tunis Reservoir from a range of 375-500 ymhos/cm2 in
Tunis to a range of 3800-5000 ymhos/cm2 in Booth. The thermocline in this
reservoir was quite strong; the water temperature decreased about 5.5°C be-
tween 5 and 7 meters. The dissolved oxygen level in the deeper waters
(9 to 10 meters) dropped to 2.8 mg/1 from an average of 9.1 mg/1 in the
epilimnion at station 3B near the dam. This indicates that anoxic
conditions could develop in the hypolimnion later in the summer. pH
values were lower than those found in Tunis Reservoir and are more in
line with those expected in natural waters (7.8 to 8.6).
The chemical data, when compared with results from Tunis, show higher
levels of Nitrogen for all species measured, while phosphorus levels were
somewhat lower. The amount of phosphorus found was still ample to support
algae growth. Total Dissolved Solids (TDS), chloride and sulfate all
showed substantial increases in concentration from amounts found in Tunis
Reservoir. In Booth Reservoir, TDS averaged 5329 mg/1, chlorides averaged
62 mg/1 and sulfates averaged 3415 mg/1.
The metals data obtained (Table 10)1 show that magnesium, cadmium and
lead all reached levels that have been reported by various sources as
being toxic to fish. In addition, the amounts of nickle, zinc, and copper
were nearing toxic levels.
The benthic fauna exhibited a shift in order of the most prevalent
taxa. In this reservoir Chironomus sp. achieves the status of being the
most numerous organism found, with the Oligochaeta and Procladius sp.
following in order. The damsel flies (Zygoptera) showed a marked increase
in number averaging 403 per replicate compared to 14 per replicate in
Tunis Reservoir. When compared to Tunis the average number of taxa
found decreased from 9.6 to 8.2 per replicate and the average number of
organisms per replicate also decreased from 35,854/m2 to 4578/nr.
BRAMLETTE RESERVOIR
At approximately 40 years old, Bramlette Reservoir was the oldest
reservoir studied. The reservoir held fish (Rainbow trout) until about
1971 when all the fish died. To try to remedy the cause, the reservoir
was drained in 1972 and refilled. However, the total dissolved solids
remained high and no fish would survive. The only vertebrate inhabiting
the lake at the time of the study was the mudpuppy (Necturus sp.).
The profile data showed a strong thermocline at about 3 meters.
The conductivity data showed a slight increase from the level found in
Booth Reservoir, ranging from 4800 to 5400 ymhos/cm'. Dissolved oxygen
levels were definitely lower than those found in Tunis and Booth Reservoirs.
The amount of dissolved oxygen varied from a high of 7.0 mg/1 to a low of
0.0 mg/1. pH remained about the same as was recorded for Booth, ranging
between 8.8 and 7.6.
8
-------
FIGURE4
BRAMLETTE RESERVOIR
STA.I
STA.2
100 meters
STA. 3
9
-------
The amount of nutrients, TDS, chloride and sulfate found showed an
increase over levels in Booth Reservoir (Table 8). TDS, chloride and
sulfate increased from averages of 5329 mg/1, 62 mg/1, and 3451 mg/1 in
Booth to averages of 6166 mg/1, 65 mg/1 and 4458 mg/1 in Bramlette reser-
voir, respectively. In addition, sulfide at a level of 1.0 mg/1 was found
at one location where the dissolved oxygen was 0.0 mg/1.
The results of the metals scan (Table 11) are similar to those
obtained from Booth Reservoir with magnesium, cadmium and lead at reported
toxic levels. However, the amounts found in Bramlette Reservoir are
greater than those in Booth Reservoir. Also the levels of nickle, zinc, and
copper were nearing toxic levels.
The benthic fauna again exhibited a change with the Chironomid
Einfeldia sp. becoming the most numerous organism found. The Oligochaeta
and Chiro'nomus sp. follow in order. All of these organisms, however, are
not evenly cistributed throughout the samples. Procladius sp., although not
the most numerous, is the most evenly distributed. Also, in this reservoir,
the beetles (Coleoptera) achieve a place of prominence among the benthic
fauna. When compared to the results from Tunis Reservoir the average number
of taxa found per replicate declined to 5.3 and the average total number of
organisms decreased to 1960/m.
BIRKLAND RESERVOIR
Birkland Reservoir 1s approximately the same size as Bramlette Reservoir
(15 acres); 1t is, however, about twice as deep at the deepest point (9 meters).
The reservoir was stocked with Rainbow trout, however, they all died in
about 1971. Since that time no fish have been able to survive in the reser-
voir.
The profile data indicate that this reservoir, like those previous,
thermoclined at about 3 meters. Conductivity increased over levels found
in Bramlette Reservoir ranging between 5800 and 6800 ymhos/cnr. Dissolved
oxygen values showed an approximate 5 mg/1 increase at 2 meters from levels
found at the surface, probably because of phytoplankton layering, and zero
dissolved oxygen values were obtained near the bottom at three locations
in the reservoir. pH values remained at approximately the same values as
found in both Booth and Bramlette Reservoirs ranging from 8.9 to 8.2.
Again the values for the chemical analyses in Table 8 showed substan-
tial increases over previously discussed reservoirs. The amount of nutrients
found in the water column was extremely high (Table 8). TDS averaged
7724 mg/1, chloride nearly doubled from previously recorded levels in the
other reservoirs to 123 mg/1, and sulfate averaged 5658 mg/1. Also a sulfide
value of 1.7 mg/1 was found at one location in the reservoir, again associated
with a 0.0 mg/1 dissolved oxygen value.
Results of the metals scan were similar to previous results with
magnesium, cadmium and lead achieving possibly toxic levels. However, the
amounts of these metals found did not increase over the amounts found 1n
Bramlette Reservoir.
10
-------
FIGURE 5
BIRKLAND RESERVOIR
scole.
100 meters
11
-------
The benthic fauna was dominated by Chironomus sp. with Glyptotendipes sp.
and Oligochaeta making up most of the other organisms found. Also the
Amphipod Hyalella sp. was in large numbers at selected stations. The average
number of taxa per replicate was 9.9 and the average total number of organisms
was 2793/m •
HANFORD RESERVOIR
Hanford Reservoir was the smallest (about 1 to 2 acres and shallowest
(2 meter maximum depth) reservoir studied. It was built in about 1966 and
has never been able to support fish.
The profile data indicate a thermocline between 1 to 2 meters of depth.
Conductivity was extremely'high ranging between 28,000 and 32,000 ymhos/cmz.
The dissolved oxygen level was fairly low ranging between 4.8 and 5.2 mg/1.
pH was somewhat lower than that recorded in the previous reservoirs ranging
between 8.1 and 8.4.
Nutrient values (Table 8) were the highest recorded for the survey.
TDS, chloride and sulfate averaged 57,950 mg/1, 303 mg/1, and 45,650 mg/1,
respectively.
Data from the metals scan (Table 9) indicate that nickle, chrome,
magnesium, arsenic, vanadium, aluminum, cadmium, lead and copper all reached
levels which could be toxic to fish.
The major organism found in this reservoir was the Amphipod Hyalella sp.
The most that can be said of the benthic fauna is that it was sparse! THe
average number of taxa was 1.7 per replicate and the average total number
was 258/m .
SH0NK0N AND HIGHW00D CREEKS
Data obtained from Shonkon and Highwood Creeks show them to be relatively
unaffected by the saline seeps. However, the measurements were taken after
the spring flush and during a dry period. Some increase in salts, etc. could
occur after a rainfall.
In general, the data show the quality and quantity of the benthic fauna
in the reservoir are adversely affected by increases in TDS. It is interesting
to note.that the Oligpchaeta attained numbers of up to 80.754/m2 lin Tunis
Reservoir, but was not found in numbers of more than 4214/mz in any of the
other reservoirs; indicating that the Oligochaeta, although normally associated
with pollution, are adversely affected by high total dissolved solids. The
average number of taxa found per replicate was also the greatest in Tunis
reservoir, indicating that the diversity of the benthos is also adversely
affected by high TDS.
The Chironimidae, as a group, exhibit the least effect from high salinity.
Although the total numbers and most numerous taxon vary from reservoir to
12
-------
figure 6
HANFORD RESERVOIR
100 meters
13
-------
reservoir* they were the most abundant group of organisms found in all of
the reservoirs, except Tunis.
While several heavy metals in the saline affected reservoirs reached
levels which have been reported as toxic to fish, the hardness of the water
in these water bodies probably negated the toxic effect of the metals.
It is interesting to note that while all reservoirs contained amounts
of nutrients adequate for algae growth, rooted aquatic plants, in large
quantities, were only observed in Tunis reservoir. The lack of rooted
aquatic plants in the other reservoirs may be because of the effects of the
saline seep.
From the data collected, it appears the single most probable cause of
the extinction of fish from the reservoirs was the increase in total dissolved
solids. It is also probable that unless the saline seep problem in the vicinity
of the Booth farm can be remedied, the fish in Booth reservoir will also die
out.
14
-------
BIBLIOGRAPHY
A Comprehensive Plan for the Control and Reclamation of Saline Seep in
Montana. A Report to the Governor of Montana by the Governor's
Emergency Committee on Saline Seep.
Bahls, Lorerj L. and Marvin R. Miller. Saline Seep in Montana.
Brown, Paul L. and Hayden Ferguson. Crop and Soil Management for Possible
Control of Saline Seeps in Montana. Prepared for the Alberta Dryland
Soil Salinity Workshop, Lethbridge, Alberta, Jan. 18-19, 1973.
Cade, Leland. Saline Seeps, Summer-fallow in More Trouble, pgs. 6-7
Montana Farmer-Stockman, 60(17):6, 8-10 May 17, 1973.
Miller, Marvin R. Saline-Seep Development in Montana and Adjacent Areas -
Hydrogeological Aspects.
Proceedings Governor's Saline Seep Emergency Meeting; April 25, 1973,
Helena, Montana. Cooperative Extension Service, Montana State Univ.,
Bozeman, Montana
Rawson, D.S. and J.E. Moore. The Saline Lakes of Saskatchewan. The
Canadian Journal of Research. Vol. 22, pp. 141-201, December 1944.
Saline-Seep, Preliminary: Possible Control Practices, Folder 148, June
1973. Cooperative Extension Service, Mo.itana State Univ. Bozeman,
Montana.
Stewart, B.A. et al, Control of Water Pollution from Cropland. Vol. 1,
Nov. 1975
The Control and Prevention of Saline Seeps on Fallow Land; A Progress
Report, March 1971, U.S.D.A.
Tomlinson, William. A Review of Literature Pertaining to the Toxicity of
Substances Present in Saline Seep. 1974.
15
-------
APPENDIX A
16
-------
TABLE 1
TUNIS RESERVOIR
MONTANA
6/19/74
Station No.
Depth
Replicate No.
2.5m
KSci
OIL
Oual
I
3
Qua!
~ 1
Organisms
AnpMpoda
Hyalella sp.
Polmonata
Pnysa sp.
Hel1 soma sp.
Olptera
Chfronoml dae
CMronomus sp.
cncotopus sp.
Einfei3iT"»p.
EukieWerlella sp.
GlyptotefldlMS Sp.
HeterotlssocTidlus sp.
Orthocladlus sp.
Prociadius sp.
Tanypus sp.
Tanvtarsus sp.
Tissociadvus sp.
Culleldae
Chaoborus sp.
Certtopogonldae
731
43 43
Be»U sp.
Antomvldae
Llmnophors sp.
Ephemeroptera
Baetldae
Amelatus sp.
Catnissp.
Zygopteri
Co#naro1on1dae
Enalfaoeme sp.
nHHurrnr
LetttSIi
Ceues s«.
4644
43
172
129
516
86
3956
86
43
344
387
21$
129
3956
86
86
64S
301
215
43 129
129 86
129 129
43
43
3269
43
64$
731
1419 21 $0
43
43
43
731
473
43
129 301
43
129
344
473
129
344
86
43
43
43
4472
86
1032
258
86
129
2924
1247
301
3913
43
1720
21$
172 21$
86 I
86
172
387
86
2S8
43
Slo
43
86
43
bIC
43
86
2S8'
301
1204
129
43
86
64$ 301 473
21$
1376
43
43
43
1720
172
172
Hydracarlna
ColeopUra
Dytlscldae
Hydroporus sp.
Dytlscus sp.
Helodldat
Cyphron sp.
Curcu11on1dH
Hal 1 pi 1 dae
Hallplus sp.
QMgocheata
HlrudfttM
Hematoda
Number/in2
Number of Ttxa
6321 12855
43
12900 18273
10 12
129 43
10879
473
16985
13
17630 27778 31691
344
22834 31390 35666
9 13 11
15394 14491 21328
301
21543 19221 27735
9 6 7
$1944 80754 6600$
172 172 172
$4782 82302 67123
14 8 8
Quel
12
40033 $$$$6 21328
43 43 1935
42699 S7S77 25885
8 7 10
Oual
17
17
-------
TABLE 2
BOOTH RESERVOIR
MONTANA
6/19/74
Station No.
1A
IB
1C
Depth
4m
4m
3m
Replicate No.
1 2
3 1
2
3
1 2
3
ID
Qual
1
Organisms
Amphipoda
Hyalella sp.
Pulmonala
Physa sp.
Helisoma sp.
Diptera
Chironimidae
Ablabesmvla sp.
Chironomus sp.
Cryptochironomus sp.
Einfeldia sp.
Eukiefferiella sp.
Glyptotendipes sp.
Psectrocladius sp.
Polypedllum sp".
Procladius sp.
Tanypus sp.
Tanytarsus sp.
TissocladTus sp.
Pupae
Cul1c1dae
Cnaoporus sp.
Ceratopoyonldae
Bezzla sp.
Ephemeroptera
Beatidae
Ameletus sp.
Trlcoptera
Lep'ocerldae
Leptocella sp.
Limnephilidae
Llmnephilus sp.
Phryganeidae
Phryqanea sp.
Zygoptera
Coenargionldae
Enallaqama sp.
Ishnura sp.
Hemi ptera
Corixidae
Coleoptera
Dyt1sc1dae
Hydroporus sp.
Hal 1 piIdae
Hallplus sp.
Oligocheata
Hlrudlnea
o
Number/m
Number of Taxa
215 688
1161
516
430
989
258
473
43
129
43
43
344
43
43
1978
774
989
387
43
86
43 860 688
86
86
731 344 5848
3956 2881 11610
7 12 11
2365 516 301
129
129 215 129
5590 4171 3870
903 86 129
516 301 430
387
86 86 43
430
43
43 43
1161 215 258
215 344 172
43
1032 1 849 817
43
12556 7912 6622
12 12 11
1892 2666 2967
129 946
172 43 473
86 172 172
2064 2064 2236
86 774 172
1118 731 1247
516 172 43
86 129
43 43
43
43
430 903 1032
43
43
3999 4214 4644
10535 12384 13975
12 14 11
Qual
10
18
-------
Table 2 - continued
Station No. 2A 2B 2C _2D
Depth 6m 10m 5m Qua!
Replicate No. 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1
Organisms
Amphipoda
Hyalella sp.
Oiptera
Chironimidae
Ablabesmyia sp.
774 43 43 215 215
Pulmonaia
Phvsa so. 43 ,-n 43 Q
Helisoroa sp. 85 129 129 Q
86 43 43 43 43 172
Chi ro nonius sp. 43 258 387 1247 1849 989 344 86 43
Cryptochironomus sp. 43
Einfeldia sp. 43 129 129 172 129
Eukiefferiella sp. 86
Glyptotendipes sp. 43 946 129 43 86 172 Q
Psectrocladlus sp. 9
Polypedilum sp. 43 43
Procladius sp. 946 1247 559 559 688 860 129 86
Tanypus sp". 43
Tanytarsus sp. "
TissocladTus sp.
Pupae
tulicidae
Chaoborus sp.
ueratopoqonidae
Bezzia sp. 36
129 43 43
43 60 43
Ephemeroptera
Beatidae 43
Ameletus sp. Q
Trlcoptera
leptoceridae 43 43
Leptocella sp. 43 Q
Limnephilidae
Umnephilus sp.
Phryganeidae
Phryganea sp. 43 J
Zygoptera
Coenargionidae 1247 172 43 774 387 1548
Enallagama sp. 86 43 43 Q
Ishnura sp.
Hemiptera
Corixidae
Coleoptera
Dytiscidae
Hydrooorus sp.
Hal 1 piidae
Hall pi us sp.
Oligocheata 1849 301 301 215
Hlrudinea
Number/m2 1118 6923 1419 2365 2666 2236 1806 1333 2623 Qual
Number of Taxa 5 15 5 8 5 7 9 10 11 11
19
-------
Table 2 - continued
Station 3A 3B 3C 30
Depth 8m 10m 9m Qual
Replicate 1 2 3__ 1 2 3 1 2 3
Oraanisms
Amphipoda
Hyalel la sp. 43 Q
Pulmonaia
Phvsa sp.
He!isoma sp. 43
Diptera
Chironimidae
Ablabesmvia sp. 172 129 Q
Chironomus sp. 129 215 2107 2107 1376 1591 688 129
CryptochiTonomus sp. 43 43
Einfeldia sp! 817 1333 43 129 43
Eukiefferiella sp.
filyptotendipes sp. 86 989 430 430 129 Q
Psectrocladius sp. Q
Pol.ypedilum sp.
Procladius sp. 1419 1462 45 774 602 1032 774 129 387
Tanypus slT.
Tanytarsus sp. Q
Ussocladius sp.
Pjp<"i 129
Cuncidae
Chaoborus sp. 43 129 129 43
leratoooaonidae
Bezzia sp.
Ephemeroptera
Beatldae
Ameletus sp. Q
Tricoptera
Leptocerldae
Leptocella sp. 172
Hmnephilidae
HmnephHus sp.
Phryganeldae
Phryganea sp.
Zygoptera
Coenargionidae Q
Enallaaama sp. Q
Ishnura sp. Q
Hemiptera
Corlxidae
Coleoptera
Dyt1sc1dae
Hvdroporus sp.
HallpUdae
Haliplus sp.
Q
Oligocheata 86 86 4 3 4 3 4 3 Q
Hirudinea
Number/m2 2537 3053 2451 3225 3010 3010 2795 989 645 Qual
Number of Taxa 55 7 555 346 11
20
-------
Table 2 - continued
Station Wo. 4A 48 4C 40
Depth 3m 4m 4m Qual
Replicate Ho. 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1
Organisms
Amphipoda
Hyalella sp. 817 43 645 129 602 430 Q
Pulmonala
Physa sp. 86 86 oc 2
Helisoma sp.
43 86 43 86 Q
Dlptera
Chironlmidae
Ablabesmvla so. 387 43 215 473 602 .43 473 129 Q
Chi'ro nonius so. 4773 6493 3569 6579 5461 4257 1 806 5805 2 365
CrvDtochironomus SP.
Einfeldia sp: 430 43 387 129 129 43 Q
Eukiefferiella sp. _
Gyptotendipes "sp. 430 430 645 1 29 86 Q
Psectrocladius sp.
Polypedilum sp. ...
Procladiussp. 688 504 860 43 Q
Tanypus sp.
Tanytarsus sp. Q
Tissocladius so. Q
Pupae 387 129 387 43 129 86 344 43
v-l1c1Jae
Chaoborus sp. 43 86 129
Ceratopogonidae
Bezzia sp. 43 172 1
Ephemeroptera ,
Beatidae 43 43
Ameletus sp. 129
Trlcoptera
Leptoceridae Q
Leptocella sp. 43 Q
limnephilidae
Limnephilus sp.
Phryganeidae
Phryganea sp. 43
Zygoptera
Coenargionldae 86 43 1 72 1 72 Q
Enallaoama sp. 86 86 172 129 Q
Ishnura sp. 43 q
Hem1ptera
Corlxidae g
Coleoptera
Dytiscidae
Hvdroporus sp. q
Haliplldae
Haliplus sp. 43
01 igocheata ms 387 473 129 645 86 Q
Hirudinea Q
Number/in2 7972 9288 6407 7224 7921 5633 2236 7869 3526 Qual
Number of Taxa 9 8 10 12 10 5 9 9 19
21
-------
TABLE 3
•
BRAMLETTE RESERVOIR
MONTANA
6/13/74
Station No.
1A
IB
Depth
4.5m
5m
Replicate No.
12-3 1
2
3
1C ID
4.5m Qua!
Oraani sms
Amphipoda
. Hyalella sp. Q
Diptera
Chironomidae
Ablabesmyia sp.
Chironomus sp. 129 129 86
Cri cotopus sp.
Cryptochironomus sp. 43 43 43
Einfeldia sp. 43
Glyptotendipes sp.
Paratanytarsus sp.
Procladius sp7 688 559 559 172 301 129 516 172 86
Psectrocladius sp. .86 43
Psectrotanypos sp. 43
Tanypus spT" 43 86 129 129
¦Tanytarsus sp. 86
TissoclaJTus sp. 43
Culicidae
Chaoborus sp. 43
Ceratopogonidae
Bezzia sp. 43 43
Tabanidae
Chrysops sp.
Ephaneroptefa
Beatidaa
Amaletus sp.
Tricoptera
Leptoceridea
Arthripsodes sp.
Leptocella sp.
Oecetis sp.
Zygoptera
Coenargionldae 43
Enallagama sp.
Ishnura sp.
Coleoptera
HalipHdae
Hallplus sp.
Dydtiscidae
Hydroporus sp.
Rhantus sp.
OUgochaeta
Number/m2 688 774 731 301 602 258 731 215 258 Qual
Number of Taxa 143 353 523 1
22
-------
Table 3 - continued
Station No,
2A
2B
2C
Depth
2m
3.5m
3.5m
Replicate
1 2
3
1 2 3
1 2 3
Organisms
43
43
43
86
86
86
86
43
5848
5160
172
86
43
43
86
43
387
43
129
215
43
129
43
129
43
20
Qua\
1
Amphipoda
Hvalella sp. 43 43 129
Diptera
Chironomidae
Ablabesmyia sp. 43 Q
ChironomuF"sp. ""
CricotopuT sp.
Cryptocnfronomus sp.
EinfeldialiT 86 86 43 5848 5160 5074 Q
Glyptotendipes sp. 1"""
Paratan.ytarsus sp.
Procladius sp. 43 86 43 387 43 129 215 258
.Psectrocladius sp.
Psectrotanypos sp.
fenypus sp.
Tanytarsus sp.
tissocladfus sp.
Cullcldae
Chaoborus sp.
Ceratogpogonldae
Bezzia sp. 43 301 129 172
Tabanidae
Chrysops sp. 43 Q
Ephemeroptera (J
Beatldae
Ameletus sp.
Trlcoptera
Leptoceridea
Arthriosodes sp. 43 43 86 Q
Leptocella sp. 43 129 86 43 86 4 3 Q
Oecetis sp. 129
Zygoptera
Coenargionldae
Enallagama sp. q
Ishnura sp. 43 q
Coleoptera.
Haliplldae Q
Haliplus sp. 43
Dydtlscidae
jjydroporus sp. 43
Rhantus sp.
OUgochaeta 602 344 1505 301 1161 1290 903 516 Q
Number/m2 688 817 1896 645 903 1505 7826 6665 6106 Qual
Number of Taxa 397 577 77 6 12
23
-------
Table 3 - continued
Station No.
3A
38
DeDth
2.5m
3m
Repl icate
1 2
3
1 2
3
Organisms
3C 3D
_lm Qual
Arophipoda
Hyalella sp. 129 344 Q
Diptera
Chironomidae
Ablabesmvia sp. 86 688 602 43 43 43 Q
Chironomus sp. 43 43 43 129 1247 1839 3569 Q
Cricotopus sp. 43
Cryptochironomus sp.
Einfeldia sp. 215 86 43 86 86 Q
Glyptotendipes sp. 86
Paratan.ytarsus sp. 43
Procladius sp. 86
PsectroclTdius sp. 129 1806 430
Psectrotanypos sp.
Tanypus sp. 43
Tanytarsus sp. 43 215 86 43 Q
TissocladTus sp. 989 Q
Culicidae
Chaoborus sd.
Ceratopogonidae
Bezzia sp. 43 215 258 215 129
Tabanidae
Chrysops sp.
Ephemeroptera
Beatidae 1
Ameletus sp.
Tricoptera
Leptoceridea
Arthripsodes sp.
Leptocella sp. 86
Oecetis sUT. 43
Zygoptera
Coenargionidae 258 774 43 43
Enal laaania sp. Q
Ishnura sp. 43 Q
Coleoptera
Ha 1 i pi idae 43 43 43 1505 1892 430
Haliol us sp.'
Dydtiscidae
Hydroporus sp. Q
Rhantus sp. Q
Oligochaeta 172 43 86 215 43 516
Number/m2 129 387 516 3182 4558 1462 3311 2537 5246 Qual
Number of Taxa 34 6 715 6 466 11
24
-------
Station No.
1A
IB
Depth
7.5m
9«
i
Replicate No.
1
2 3
1
2
3
Organlsas
AapMpoda
Hrallella sp. 43 43 *3
Pulconata
Physa sp.
Dlptera
Chirononldae 43
Ablabeswvia sp. 43 43
Cardtocladtus sp.
Chironoous sp. 215 129 129 215
Conchapelopia sp.
Cncotopus sp.
Dicotendipcs sp.
Elnfeldia sp.
Eukiefferiella sp.
Glyptotendipes sp.
Goel di ch \ ronowus sp.
Pa raretr i ocneaus sp.
Procladius sp.
fO Psectrotanypus sp,
Tanvpus sp. 43
TissocladiuS sp.
Ceratopogonioae
Bezzia sp.
Ephyridae
Ephyra sp.
Tabanldae
Chrysops sp.
Zygoptera
Coenargionldae 43
Coenagion sp.
Enallaqawa sp.
Tshnura sp.
Henlptera
Corixldae 43
Motonectldae
Coleoptera
Haliplidae
Hal1 plus sp.
Hydrophilidae
Enochus sp.
Hydrochus sp.
OHgocheaU
NiMber/«2 43 258 215 172 1 72 258
Number of Taxa 1 2 4 2 2 2
TABLE 4
BIRKLAHD RESERVOIR
MONTANA
6/17-18/74
1
4m
2
3
Qual
1
1.5m
2m
6m
1
2
3
1
2
3
1 2 3
86
86
Q
2537
2838
1376
86
43
86
43
86
86
86
43
43
Q
301
86
43
129
172
301
2150
2021
Q
1763
1720
602
3741
2537
5246
1860 2666 6321
43
344
43
387
473
2709 301
430 1 849 1462
43
43
86
43
43
43
43
43
129
127
258 86
129
129 129 129
43
43
43
43
43
43
344 43
1548 2537 2623
8 8 4
Qual
7
774 602
8557 5803
8 9
301
2537
5
688 301 344
5031 5160 7396
5 8 7
1903 2838
2 4
6450
4
-------
Table 4 - continued
Station No.
3
4
4
5
Depth
3m
1.5m
Qual
lm
Replicate No.
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
1
2
3
Organisms
Anphipoda
Hvallela sp.
86
43
43
Q
1376
989
344
Pulmonata
Physa sp.
43
43
Q
43
Diptera
Chironomidae
Ablabesm.yia sp.
Cardiocladius sp.
Chironomus sp.
Conchapelopia sp.
Cricotopus sp.
Dicotendipes sp.
Einfeldia sp.
Eukiefferiella sp.
Glyptotendipes sp.
Goeldichironomus sp.
Parametriocnemus sp.
Procladius sp.
Psectrotanvpus sp.
Tanypus sp.
Tissocladius sp.
Ceratopogonidae
Bezzia sp.
Ephyridae
Ephyra sp."
Tabanidae
Chrysops sp.
688
43
86
43
645
43
127
2064
1161
43
602
43
512
172
1849
43
731
172
Q
Q
Q
q
q
43
5977
43
86
817
903
43
127
86
127
Zygoptera
Coenargionidae
Coenaqion sd.
Enallagama sp.
Ishnura sp.
258
43
172
43
q
q
86
Hemiptera
Corixidae
Notonectidae
q
q
Coleoptera
Hal 1 pi i dae
Hal 1 pi us sp.
Hydrophilidae
Enochus sp.
Hydrochus sp.
43
q
01Igocheata-
129
516
43
129
43
43
Number/mc
Number of Taxa
2236
11
43
1
3954
6
774
3
559
2
3225
9
qual
13
7525
5
2924
7
727
5
26
-------
TABLE 5
Station No.
Organisms
HANFORD RESERVOIR
MONTANA
6/17/74
Depth 2m_
Replicate No. 1 2
Amphipoda
Hyalella sp. 215 602
Diptera
Chironimidae 86
Tanypus sp. 172
Cncotopus sp. 129
Tissocladius sp.
Ceratopogonidae
BfiZZla. sp. 43
Ephemeroptera
Beatidae
Ameletus sp. 129
Zygoptera
Coenargionidae
Enallaqama sp.
Oligocheata 86
Total number 129 301 1032
Number of Taxa 2 2 4
27
-------
TABLE 6
MONTANA SALINE SEEP
6-20-74
Organisms
Highwood Creek Shonkon Creek
Amphipoda
Hyalella sp. q
Diptera
Chironimidae
Cricotopus sp, g
Heterotisocladius sp. Q
Ceratopogonidae
Bezzla sp. q
SimuIitiae
Simulium sp. Q q
Ragionidae
Atherix sp. Q
Ephemoroptera
Baetidae
Ameletus sp. Q
Baetls sp. q Q
Isonychia sp.
Hseudochoeon sp. Q
Slphionurus sp. g
I ricory tholes sp. g
Heptageniidae
Heptagenia sp. Q
Tricoptera
Hydropsychidae
Cheumatopsyche sp. g
Leptoceridae :
Athripsodes sp. g
Odonata
Anisoptera
Aeshna sp. g
Zygoptera
Coenagriori sp. g
Hemiptera
Corixidae Q
Naucoldae
Pelocyoris sp. Q
Ambrysus sp. g
Coleoptera
Elmidae
Optioservus sp. y
OHgochaeta Q
Number/m^ Qual Qual
Number of Taxa 14 10
28
-------
TABLE 7
MONTANA SALINE SEEP
6/74
STATION PROFILES
Station No.
Reservoir and Depth Date Temperature
(m) (°C)
Tunis 1 6/19/74
0 22.0
1 22.0
2 21.0
3 20.0
2A 6/19/74
0 22.5
1 22.0
2 21.5
2.5 20.5
2B 6/19/74
0 22.5
1 22.5
2 22.0
3 20.0
2C 6/19/74
0 23.5
1 23.0
1.5 23.0
3 6/19/74
0 25.0
1 24.0
1.5 22.0
Dissolved
Conductivity Oxygen pH
ymhos/cm2 (mg/1)
450 10.3 9.9
450 10.1 9.9
400 13.2 9.9
400 9.8 9.9
450 10.2 10.1
425 8.6 10.0
400^ 10.0 10.0
400 7.0 9.5
450 11.6 10.2
450 9.7 10.0
425 10.8 9.9
375 5 4 9.2
450 13.0 10.2
450 11.2 10.1
425 8.2 9.8
500 12.0 10.4
475 10.8 10.4
400 4.1 9.8
-------
Table 7 (con't.)
Reservoir
Station No.
and Depth
(m)
Date
Temperature
(C°)
Booth
1A
0
1
2
3
4
6/15/74
13.5
18.5
18.5
17.5
16.0
IB
6/15/74
co
o
1C
0
1
2
3
3.5
0
1
2
3
6/15/74
21.0
20.0
19.0
18.0
17.0
19.0
18.5
18.0
17.0
2A
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
6/16/74
20.0
19.5
19.0
19.0
18.5
17.0
13.5
2B
0
1
2
6/16/74
21.0
20.5
20.0
Dissolved
Conductivity Oxygen pH
umhos/cnr (mg/1)
4500 10.8 8.6
4500 10.8 8.6
4500 10.8 8.6
4400 10.0 8.4
4200 8.8 8.3
4500 9.8 8.6
4600 10.1 8.6
4500 10.2 8.5
4300 9.5 8.4
4200 9.5 8.4
4500 10.0 8.6
4500 10.0 8.5
4400 10.4 8.5
4300 10.4 8.4
4800 10.0 8.6
4700 10.2 8.6
4600 9.2 8.6
4600 10.4 8.5
4600 9.6 8.5
4200 8.6 8.3
4000 5.8 8.0
4800 10.0 8.6
4700 9.4 8.6
4600 9.6 8.6
-------
Table 7 (con't)
Reservoir
Station No.
and Depth
(m)
Date
Temperature
(Co)
Booth
(con't.)
2B
3
4
5
6
7
3
9
10
6/16/74
19.5
19.0
17.5
15.5
12.5
11.0
10.0
10.0
2C
0
1
2
3
4
5
6/16/74
22.0
21.0
20.0
19.5
19.0
17.0
3A
3B
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
0
1
2
6/16/74
6/16/74
22.0
22.0
21.0
20.0
19.5
17.5
15.0
12.0
11.0
23.5
22.0
21.0
Dissolved
Conductivity Oxygen pH
umhos/cm2 (mg/1)
4600 9.9 8.5
4500 9.7 8.5
4400 8.6 8.3
4100 5.2 7.9
4000 5.1 7.9
3900 4.4 7.9
3900 4.0 7.8
3800 3.3 7.8
4800 9.0 8.6
4700 9.6 8.6
4500 9.2 8.6
4500 9.3 8.5
4500 9.8 8.5
4200 7.6 8.3
4900 9.0 8.6
4800 8.7 8.6
4700 9.0 8.6
4600 9.2 8.5
4500 9.4 8.5
4300 7.6 8.3
4100 4.8 7.9
4000 4.6 7.9
4000 4.3 7.9
5000 8.1 8.6
4800 10.0 8.6
4600 8.8 8.5
-------
Table 7 (con't)
Reservoir
Station No.
and Depth
(m)
Date
Temperature
-------
Table 7 (con't)
Reservoi r
Station No.
and Depth
(m)
Date
Temperature
(C°)
Booth
(con't.)
4C
0
1
2
3
4
6/15/74
21.0
21.0
20.5
20.5
20.5
Bramlette
1A
0
1
2
3
4
4.5
6/13/74
20.5
20.5
20.0
13.0
10.5
9.5
IB
0
1
2
3
4
5
5.5
6/13/74
22.0
22.0
22.0
16.0
12.5
10.0
9.0
1C
0
1
2
3
4
5
6/13/74
23.0
22.5
17.0
11.0
9.5
8.5
Dissolved
onductivity Oxygen pH
umhos/cm2 (mg/1)
4700 10.2 8.6
4700 9.8 8.6
4700 9.2 8.6
4800 9.4 8.6
4800 9.3 8.6
4900 5.8 8.6
4900 6.4 8.6
4800 5.9 8.6
5200 6.4 8.4
4900 6.0 8.4
4800 3.4 8.2
5100 6.2 8.6
5000 6.2 8.6
5000 6.3 8.6
5100 5.0 8.3
5000 4.9 8.4
5000 1.4 8.1
5000 0.6 8.0
5100 5.2 8.6
5000 5.8 8.6
5000 3.5 8.3
5000 5.2 8.4
4800 2.4 8.2
5100 - 7.9
-------
Table 7 (con't)
Reservoir
Station No.
and Depth
(m)
Date
Temperature
(CQ)
Bramlette
(con1t)
2A
0
1
2
6/14/74
19.0
19.0
19.5
2B
0
1
2
3
6/13/74
21.0
21.0
20.0
14.0
2C
0
1
2
3
4
6/14/74
19.5
20.0
20.0
15.0
13.0
3A
0
1
2
2.5
6/14/74
20.5
20.0
20.0
3B
0
1
2
3
6/14/74
21.0
20.5
20.0
16.0
3C
0
1
6/14/74
22.5
22.0
Dissolved
Conductivity Oxygen pH
pmhos/cm2 (mg/1)
4900 7.0 8.G
4900 7.0 8.6
4900 6.9 8.6
5000 6.0 8.8
5000 6.1 8.8
4800 5.2 3.8
5100 4.2 8.2
4900 6.9 8.6
4900 6.8 8.6
4900 ;6.5 8.6
5100 5.2 8.3
5100 4.8 8.2
5000 6.6 8.5
5000 5.5 8.4
5000 4.7 8.4
5000 6.1 8.5
4900 4.9 8.5
4800 3.4 8.4
5400 ' 0.0 7.6
5200 6.3 8.5
5000 6.8 8.5
-------
Table 7 (con't)
Reservoir
Station No.
and Depth
(ra)
Date
Temperature
Birkeland
1A
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
6/17/74
24.0
23.5
20.5
15.0
12.0
11.0
10.0
9.0
IB
1C
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
0
1
2
3
4
6/17/74
6/17/74
25.0
24.0
20.0
16.0
13.0
11.0
10.0
9.0
3.5
3.0
24.5
23.0
20.0
15.5
13.5
2A
0
1
2
6/18/74
22.0
22.0
19.0
Dissolved
Conductivity Oxygen pH
umhos/cnr (mg/1)
6300 7.7 8.7
6200 7.4 8.7
6800 1 2.4 8.5
6200 7.2 8.5
5800 5.6 8.4
5330 3.3 8.4
5800 2.5 3.4
5300 0.0 8.3
6500 8.5 3.8
6200 7.2 8.8
6700 12.2 8.6
6200 6.8 8.5
6000 5.0 8.5
5900 3.4 8.4
6000 2.2 8.4
5800 0.0 8.4
5800 0.0 8.4
5800 0.0 8.4
62U0 8.1 8.8
6100 7.6 8.3
6600 12.8 8.6
6300 6.7 8.5
6200 5.2 8.5
6200 8.9 8.9
6000 8.8 8.9
5900 9.0 8.2
-------
Table 7 (con't)
Reservoir
Station No.
and Depth
(m)
Date
Temperature
Birkeland
(con't)
2B
0
1
2
6/18/74
22.0
22.0
19.0
2C
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
6/18/74
23.0
22.5
19.0
15.0
11.5
10.0
9.0
0
1
2
2.5
6/18/74
25.0
24.0
19.5
14.0
0
1
6/18/74
25.0
25.0
Hanford
0
1
2
6/17/74
21.0
21.0
18.5
0
1
6/17/74
22.0
22.0
Dissolved
Conductivity Oxygen pH
vmhos/cm^ (mg/1)
6200 9.0 8.9
6200 9.0 8.9
6800 12.8 8.7
6200 8.3 8.9
6200 8.2 8.9
6800 12.7 8.7
6400 7.1 8.6
6200 3.4 8.5
6000 0.1 8.4
5800 0.0 8.4
6500 8.5 8.9
6300 9.1 8.9
6800 12.8 8.7
6400 8.4 8.6
6600 7.1 8.9
6400 6.6 8.9
32000 5.1 8.4
32000 5.2 8.4
28000 4.5 8.1
32000 4.8 8.4
31000 4.8 8.4
-------
TABLE 8
MONTANA SALINE SEEP
CHEMICAL ANALYSES
6/74
Station
Reservoi r Number
Depth
in Meters
Ammonia
mg/1
N02+N0^-N
TKN
mg/1
Soluble P
mg/1
Total P
mg/1
TDS
mg/1
Chloride
mg/1
Sulfate
mg/1
Sulfide
mg/1
Tunis 2B
0
0.1
<0.1
1.6
0.06
0.09
382
12
192
0
2.75
0.1
<0.1
1.5
0.11
0.11
373
12
221
0
Booth IB
0
0.5
0.8
1.9
0.04
0.05
5160
61
3170
0
3.5
0.1
0.8
1.7
0.04
0.08
5110
60
3250
0
2B
0
0.2
0.7
1.9
0.04
0.06
5490
64
3550
0
6
0.1
0.8
1.9
0.06
0.07
5680
67
3950
0
10
0.9
0.6
2.2
0.06
0.09
5210
61
3020
0
3B
0
1.0
0.6
1.9
0.02
0.07
5190
60
3260
0
a
6
0.2
0.8
2.1
0.06
0.07
5470
63
3650
0
9.5
0.4
0.6
2.1
0.02
0.08
5640
66
3900
0
4B
0
0.7
0.6
2.2
0.02
0.06
5130
61
3500
0
3.5
0.1
0.3
1.7
0.02
0.08
5210
60
3260
0
Bramlette IB
0
0.6
8.4
3.6
0.09
0.09
5500
60
3950
0
3
0.6
1.6
3.0
0.11*
0.06*
6540
71
5800
0
5
1.2
4.6
3.8
0.12
0,12
7720
61
5780
0
2B
0
0.8
8.6
3.6
0.05
0.09
5520
61
3880
0
3
0.8
4.2
3.7
0.07
0.08
6400
71
4440
0
3B
0
0.6
7.2
3.7
0.07
0.09
5540
61
3550
0
2
0.8
6.8
3.7
0.05
0.09
5560
61
3450
0
3
2.8
1.3
7.2
0.96
0.98
6550
71
4810
1.0
Birkland IB
0
0.5
7.4
4.0
1.66
1.67
_
•
0
2
1.0
1.3
4.1
1.42
1.26
7700
122
6020
0
5
0.7
0.5
4.0
1.18
1.20
8540
133
6300
0
9
3.6
0.4
4.9
1.24
1.36
8540
135
6160
4
2C
0
0.4
8.4
4.5
1.7
1.74
6230
102
4740
0
2
0.5
5.4
5.1
1.34
1.55
7680
123
5380
0
4
1.0
0.5
4.5
1.46
1.50
8390
133
6190
0
6
1.6
0.7
4.8
1.65
1.79
8420
133
6120
1./
4
0.75
1.0
4.6
4.6
1.62
1.64
6290
103
4350
0
Hanford 1
0
~>2**
356
18.0
0.03
0.11
58100
305
45600
0
2
~2**
356
18.0
0.05
0.12
57800
unn
45700
0
Shonkon Creek
<0.1
<0.1
0.5
0.02
0.11
458
5
202
0
Highwood Creek
<0.1
<0.1
0.4
0.04
0.08
204
5
54
0
* Sample rerun with Total still less than soluble.
** Samples were run numerous times but interferences could not be overcome.
-------
TABLE 9
MONTANA SALINE SEEP
TOTAL METALS SCAN (mg/1)
Reservoir
or Stream
Station No
Depth in
Meters
Tunis
Reservoir
Hanford Reservoir
Shonkon
Creek
Highwood
Creek
•
2B
1
1
1
0
2.75
0
2.0
Ni
<0.02
<0.02
<5.0
<5.0
<0.02
<0.01
Ca
20.0
20.0
400
400
20.0
8.0
Cr
<0.01
<0.01
<3.0
<3.0
<0.01
<0.008
Ba
0.04
0.03
<2.0
<2.0
0.07
0.02
Sn
<0.05
0.06
<5.0
<5.0
<0.07
<0.04
Mg
32.0
30.0
7400
7360
25.0
11.1
V
<0.04
<0.04
<10.0
<10.0
<0.05
<0.03
Mo
<0.006
<0.005
<2.0
<2.0
<0.007
<0.004
Ti
<0.03
<0.03
<1.0
<1.0
0.04
0.04
Li
0.03
0.02
0.7
1.0
<0.02
<0.008
As
<0.2
<0.2
<4.0
<4.0
<0.3
<0.2
Tl
<0.03
0.04
<10.0
<10.0
<0.04
<0.02
A1
<0.1
<0.1
<20.0
<20.0
1.0
0.7
Ga
<0.01
<0.01
<10.0
<10.0
<0.02
<0.01
Sr
0.3
0.3
8.0
8.0
1.0
0.3
Sm
0.3
0.3
<10.0
<10.0
<0.3
<0.2
Zn
<0.02
<0.02
<2.0
<2.0
<0.02
<0.01
Cd
<0.002
<0.002
<0.3
<0.3
<0.002
<0.001
Mn
0.006
0.06
<0.3
<0.3
<0.02
0.01
Fe
0.03
0.05
<1.0
<1.0
1.0
0.8
Pb
<0.07
<0.06
<1.0
<1.0
<0.08
<0.05
Be
<0.0003
<0.0003
<0.09
<0.1
<0.0004
<0.003
Sb
<0.02
<0.02
<5.0
<5.0
<0.02
<0.01
Cu
0.008
<0.005
<2.0
<1.0
<0.007
<0.004
-------
TABLE 10
Station Mo. IB
Depth in
Meters
Ni
<0.5
<0.5
Ca
200
200
Cr
<0.2
<0.2
Ba
0.6
<0.2
Sn
0.7
0.9
Mg
290
290
V
<1.0
<1.0
Mo
<0.2
<0.2
Ti
0.2
0.2
Li
0.09
0.1
As
<0.3
<0.3
Tl
<1.0
<1.0
A1
<2.0
<2.0
Ga
<1.0
<1.0
Sr
3.0
3.0
Sm
3.0
3.0
Zn
<0.2
<0.2
Cd
<0.03
<0.03
Mn
0.1
0.2
Fe
<0.1
<0.1
Pb
2.0
<1.0
Be
0.01
<0.009
Sb
<0.4
<0.4
Cu
0.2
<0.1
MONTANA SALINE SEEP
BOOTH RESERVOIR - 6/15 - 16/74
TOTAL METALS SCAN (mg/1)
2B 3B 43
0
6.0
10
0
6
9.5
0
3.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
100
200
.100
200
200
200
.200
100
<0.2
<0.3
<0.3
<0.2
<0.3
<0.3
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
0.8
<0.2
0.5
0.5
0.8
0.6
0.3
<0.4
0.9
<0.5
0.6
<0.4
0.7
0.8
0.6
300
310
320
300
310
340
310
300
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.1
0.2
<0.1
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.04
0.1
0.05
0.08
0.09
0.1
• 08
0.07
<0.3
<0.3
<0.4
<0.3
<0.3
<0.4
<0.3
<0.3
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<2.0
<2.0
<2.0
<2.0
<2.0
<2.0
<2.0
<2.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
2.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
<1.0
4.0
<1.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
2.0
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.03
<0.03
<0.03
<0.03
<0.03
<0.04
<0.03
<0.03
0.1
0.4
0.5
0.1
0.4
0.7
0.1
0.1
<0.1
0.2
<0.1
<0.1
0.2
0.2
<0.1
0.2
<1.0
2.0
<2.0
2.0
2.0
<2.0
2.0
2.0
<0.009
0.01
<0.009
0.01
0.01
<0.01
0.01
<0.009
<0.4
<0.4
0.5
<0.4
<0.5
<0.5
<0.4
<0.4
<0.1
0.2
<0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
<0.1
-------
TABLE 11
MONTANA SALINE SEEP
BRAMLETTE RESERVOIR - 6/13 - 14/74
TOTAL METALS SCAN (mg/1)
Station No.
IB
2B
3B
Depth in
Meters
0
3
5
0
3
0
2
3
Ni
<0.5
<0.6
<0.7
<0.5
<0.7
<0.5
<0.5
<0.6
Ca
100
"200
200
100
100
100
100
200
Cr
<0.3
<0.3
<0.3
0.3
<0.4
0.3
<0.3
<0.3
Ba
<0.2
0.7
0.5
0.5
<0.3
<0.2
0.3
<0.3
Sn
<0.5
1.0
<0.7
0.6
0.9
0.8
<0.5
0.9
Mg
560
670
720
560
690
550
580
660
V
<1.0
<2.0
<2.0
<1.0
<2.0
<1.0
<1.0
<2.0
Mo
<0.2
<0.3
<0.3
<0.2
<0.3
<0.2
<0.2
<0.3
Ti
<0.1
0.2
<0.2
0.1
<2.0
0.2
<0.1
<2.0
Li
0.1
0.3
0.2
0.2
0.1
0.2
0.2
0.2
As
<0.4
<0.5
<0.5
<0.4
1.0
<0.4
<0.4
<0.5
Tl
<1.0
<2.0
<2.0
<1.0
<2.0
<1.0
<1.0
<2.0
A1
<2.0
<3.0
<3.0
<2.0
<3.0
<2.0
<2.0
<3.0
Ga
<1.0
<1.0
<2.0
<1.0
<2.0
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
Sr
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
Sm
<1.0
2.0
<2.0
2.0
<2.0
2.0
<1.0
2.0
Zn
<0.2
<0.3
<0.3
<0.2
<0.3
<0.2
<0.2
<0.3
Cd
<0.04
<0.04
<0.05
<0.04
<0.05
<0.03
<0.03
<0.04
Mn
0.1
0.4
0.8
0.1
0.6
0.2
0.2
5.0
Fe
<0.1
<0.2
<0.2
<0.1
<0.2
0.2
<0.1
0.5
Pb
<2.0
4.0
<2.0
3.0
<2.0
2.0
2.0
3.0
Be
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
Sb
<0.5
<0.6
<0.7
<0.5
0.8
<0.5
<0.7
<0.6
Cu
<0.2
0.2
<0.2
0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
-------
TABLE 12
MONTANA SALINE SEEP
BIRKLAND RESERVOIR 6/17 - 18/74
TOTAL METALS SCAN (mg/1)
Station No.
IB
2C
4
Depth in
0.75
Meters
0
2
5
9
0
2
4
6
Ni
<0.6
<0.7
<0.3
<0.3
<0.2
<0.7
<0.8
<0.8
<0.2
Ca
100
100
200
300
200
100
200
100
200
Cr
<0.3
<0.4
<0.2
<0.2
<0.1
<0.4
<0.4
<0.4
<0.1
Ba
<0.3
<0.3
<0.1
0.3
<0.1
<0.3
<0.4
<0.4
<0.1
Sn
<0.6
<0.6
0.9
• 1.0
<0.7
<0.6
<0.8
<0.7
<0.7
Mg
500
580
660
690
490
580
680
700
500
V
<2.0
<2.0
<0.6
<0.6
<5.0
<2.0
<2.0
<2.0
<0.5
Mo
<0.3
<0.3
<0.09
<0.09
<0.07
<0.3
<0.4
<0.4
<0.07
Ti
<0.2
<0.2
<0.5
<0.5
<0.4
0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.4
Li
<0.2
0.2
0.3
0.8
0.6
0.3
0.3
0.1
0.4
As
<0.4
<0.5
<4.0
<4.0
<3.0
<0.3
<0.6
<0.6
<3.0
Tl
<2.0
<2.0
<0.5
<0.5
<0.4
<2.0
<2.0
<2.0
<0.4
A1
<3.0
<3.0
<2.0
<2.0
<2.0
<3.0
<3.0
<3.0
<2.0
Ga
<1.0
<2.0
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<2.0
<2.0
<2.0
<0.2
Sr
2.0
2.0
2.0
3.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
Sra
<2.0
<2.0
<4.0
5.0
<3.0
<2.0
<2.0
<2.0
<3.0
Zn
<0.2
<0.3
<0.2
<0.2
<0.1
<0.3
<0.3
<0.3
<0.1
Cd
<0.04
<0.05
<0.03
<0.03
<0.02
<0.05
<0.05
<0.05
<0.02
Mn
0.1
0.4
0.3
0.5
0.06
0.5
1.0
<0.7
<0.05
Fe
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.4
0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.1
Pb
<2.0
<2.0
<1.0
3.0
2.0
<2.0
<2.0
<2.0
1.0
Be
<0.01
<0.01
<0.006
<0.006
<0.004
<0.01
<0.02
<0.02
<0.004
Sb
<0.6
<0.7
<0.3
<0.3
<0.2
<0.6
<0.8
<0.8
<0.2
Cu
<0.2
<0.2
<0.09
<0.1
<0.07
0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.07
-------
TECHNICAL REPORT DATA
(Please read Instructions on the reverse before completing)
'¦mm?2-77-004
3. RECIPIENT'S ACCESSIOI*NO.
4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE
The Effect of Saline Seep on the Biota of Five
Reservoirs in Montana, June, 1977
6. REPORT DATE
6. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE
7. AUTHOR(S)
Thomas E. Braidech
8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NO.
S&A/TIB-34
9. PERFORMING ORG MSIIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS
Technical Investigations Branch
Surveillance & Analysis Division
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region VIII
Denver. Colorado
10. PROGRAM ELEMENT NO.
11. CONTRACT/GRANT Nb.
12. SPONSORING AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS
13. TYPE OF REPORT AND PERIOD COVERED
14. SPONSORING AGENCY CODE
15. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES
16. ABSTRACT
The effects of saline seeps on the biota of five small reservoirs in north-
central Montana were studied. It was determined that the saline seeps cause
increases in the amounts of TDS, conductivity, heavy metals, nutrients, chlorides
and sulfates in the reservoir. The benthic fauna exhibited taxanomic changes
from reservoir to reservoir. This was probably a result of the varying degrees
of salinity found. The most probable cause for the elimination of fish from the
reservoirs was the increase in total dissolved solids. At the time of the study
the streams flowing from the study area were not affected by the saline seeps.
However, the amount of salts, etc. in the streams could increase after a rainfall
and be discharged to the Missouri River.
17. KEY WORDS AND DOCUMENT ANALYSIS
a. DESCRIPTORS
b. IDENTIFIERS/OPEN ENDED TERMS
c. cosati Field/Group
salinity
macrolnvertebrates
fish
conductivity
heavy metals
small reservoirs
saline seep
Montana
18. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT
Release to the Public
10. SECURITY CLASS (ThisReport)'
Unclassified
21. NO. OF PAGES
V7
20. SECURITY CLASS (Thispage)
Unclassified
22. PRICE
EPA Form 2220-1 (9-73)
------- |