monitoring and assessment reportdeq.state.wy.us/wqd/watershed/downloads/monitoring...ambient ph at...

Shirley Basin Reservoir

-1-

WYOMING DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITYWATER QUALITY DIVISION

MONITORING AND ASSESSMENT REPORT

WATERBODY: Shirley Basin Reservoir - WYNP10180005

CLASS: Class 3B

DESIGNATED USES: Aquatic life other than fish, primary contact recreation, wildlife, industry,agriculture, and scenic values

1996 305(b) REPORT AND303(d) LIST.

Though classified as 3B, this waterbody was listed as partially supportive forcold-water fisheries uses. Impairment suspected to be caused by nutrients andsedimentation. Sources were reported as rangeland.

AUTHOR: Eric Hargett

INTRODUCTION

WATERBODY - Shirley Basin Reservoir (SBR) is a small impoundment located northwest of Medicine Bow, Wyoming

in northern Carbon County. SBR is a public waterbody surrounded by land operated by the Bureau of Land Management

(BLM). Estimated mean depth of SBR is around 8.5 feet with a maximum depth of 15 feet. Total surface area of the

lake is 0.31 mi2 (17 acres). The reservoir receives inflows from three unnamed intermittent streams. Water that flows

over the spillway will enter an unnamed drainage that is tributary to Muddy Creek. The entire SBR watershed is located

in the Wyoming Basin level III ecoregion (Omernik and Gallant 1987) and the Rolling Sagebrush Steppe level IV

ecoregion (Chapman et al. 2003). The watershed is largely comprised of marine deposits from the Steele Shale (USGS

1985). The quality of water in SBR and its tributaries is influenced by the surrounding geology which can result in

elevated conductivity and total dissolved solids. Soils and geology in the watershed are erodible and streams in the area

may carry large sediment loads in response to precipitation events. Primary uses on or near SBR are recreation

(predominantly angling and camping) and wildlife habitat. Secondary uses are livestock grazing.

WYPDES PERMITTED FACILITIES

No permitted facililties discharge into SBR.

REPORT OBJECTIVE

The State of Wyoming’s 1996 305(b) Report and 303(d) List indicated that SBR was partially supportive for cold-water

fisheries uses. However, the current 3B classification of SBR does not list cold-water fisheries as a designated use. The

Wyoming Department of Environmental Quality - Water Quality Division (WDEQ/WQD) conducted an assessment of

SBR in July 2002. Additional data used in this report include information gathered by the Wyoming Game & Fish

Department (WGFD). The purpose of this report is to present the findings of the 2002 WDEQ/WQD assessment,


-2-

evaluate available WGFD information, and provide a determination of whether designated uses assigned to SBR are

supported.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

All collection, analysis, and evaluation of SBR data was conducted in accordance with approved assessment procedures

as outlined in the following documents:

1) Manual of Standard Operating Procedures for Sample Collection and Analysis. (WDEQ/WQD 2001a).

2) Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) for Beneficial Use Reconnaissance Project (BURP) Water Quality

Monitoring. (WDEQ/WQD 2001b).

3) Wyoming’s method for determining water quality condition of surface waters. (WDEQ/WQD 2002).

Vertical profiles for dissolved oxygen, specific conductance, temperature, and redox potential were measured with a YSI

600XLM multi-parameter SONDE probe lowered to desired depths.

WDEQ/WQD ASSESSMENT STATIONS

Descriptive information and data collected on SBR assessment stations (Map 1).

Station ID ChemicalData

PhysicalData

Legal (Sec / T / R) Latitude Longitude Elevation(ft)

Pelagic YES NO SENW of Sec. 12,T26N, R80W

42° 14' 25.65" -106° 22' 08.11" 7010

Littoral North YES YES NENW of Sec. 12,T26N, R80W

42° 14' 33.87" -106° 22' 11.64" 7010

Littoral SE YES YES SENW of Sec. 12,T26N, R80W

42° 14' 25.37" -106° 22' 05.45" 7010

Qualitative habitat, chlorophyll ", depth profiles, and water chemistry data were collected at the above stations on

7/23/2002.

CHEMICAL DATA

Data described in the following paragraphs can be found in Table 1 and Figure 1. Although SBR is currently classified

as 3B, all water quality data will be compared to the numeric criteria that is protective of cold-water fisheries uses

applicable to class 2AB and 2B waters. Where applicable, comparisons of SBR data to class 3B criteria are also

provided. Water temperatures at the deepest location in the reservoir were either slightly above or below the


-3-

WDEQ/WQD (2001) maximum criteria of 20°C for a cold water fishery. Water temperatures within the littoral areas

generally exceeded this numeric temperature criterion, though were expected because of the shallowness of these areas

coupled with direct insolation. Ambient pH at all stations was above the upper limit of 9.0 (WDEQ/WQD 2001).

Considering there are no anthropogenic sources in the watershed that could influence pH, the high pH is believed to be

caused by elevated photosynthetic rates from aquatic macrophytes and phytoplankton which is supported by the high

dissolved oxygen concentrations in the upper water column. Under these conditions, photosynthetic organisms will

deplete available free CO2 and will use dissolved carbonates and bicarbonates (released from sediments and organic

matter through decomposition, geology, humic soils) as their source of carbon. The production of hydroxyl ions from

the photosynthesis of these carbon sources can be responsible for increases in lake pH that may exceed 10 in late

morning to late afternoon in lakes undergoing high photosynthetic rates (Cole 1994, Wetzel 1983). Considering the pH

of SBR was measured within this time period in the presence of phytoplankton and aquatic macrophyte beds, this

explanation makes sense.

All sites were characterized by an oxidizing environment. Though SBR is subject to intensive wind mixing, the reservoir

may be dimictic and appeared to be weakly stratified near the dam as evidenced by the clinograde profiles for

temperature, dissolved oxygen, and conductivity. In littoral regions and the epilimnion of the Pelagic site, dissolved

oxygen concentrations were above the acceptable one-day minimum dissolved oxygen criterion of 8 mg/L that is

protective of cold-water fisheries (WDEQ/WQD 2001). Dissolved oxygen concentrations in the hypolimnion were less

than 8 mg/L though expected for a weakly stratified reservoir. High dissolved oxygen in the littoral regions was due to

super-saturation from aquatic macrophytes. Conductivities ranged from 4861 to 5371 uS/cm and were expected with

a watershed comprised of erodible marine deposits. SBR exhibited a reverse chemocline or steep salinity gradient where

the epilimnion was more saline than the lower hypolimnion. This indicates SBR was receiving an influx of saline water

that had not had sufficient time to completely mix in the reservoir. The three streams that feed SBR were flowing on

the day of the assessment and likely delivered the saline water to the epilimnion. The lake was pale green in color which

was attributed to suspended algae. Lake transparency in July 2002 was optimal with Secchi disk readings at or near

reservoir depth.

Total phosphorous and nitrate-nitrogen concentrations at all stations were below detection levels (<0.1 mg/L). Recent

guidance by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA 2000) recommends that total-phosphorous

and nitrate-nitrogen concentrations less than 0.01 and 0.05 mg/L, respectively, may be protective of aquatic life uses for

lakes and reservoirs in the Wyoming Basin ecoregion. Because of the high detection limits, it is unknown whether total

phosphorous and/or nitrate-nitrogen concentrations at all sites were below the federally recommended nutrient criteria.

Ammonia concentrations at all sites were either non-detect (<0.1 mg/L) or detectable but below the pH and temperature-


-4-

dependent ammonia chronic criterion (<0.389 mg/L) that is protective of early life stages for aquatic life when salmonids

are present (WDEQ/WQD 2001). Chlorophyll " ranged from 2.1 to 3.3 mg/m3 and were greater than the federally

recommended minimum chlorophyll " concentration (spectrophotometrically derived) of 1.4 mg/m3 (USEPA 2001).

These results may be suggestive of nutrient enrichment, though these recommended criteria were developed for a broad

region and may not be applicable to SBR.

The Carlson Trophic State Index (TSI) is a quantitative method used to classify and assess general water quality of a lake

(Carlson 1979). The index is a measure of the trophic status of a lake or reservoir using several measures of water

quality including: Secchi disk transparency, chlorophyll " concentrations, and total phosphorous levels. TSI ranges

along a scale of 0 (ultra-oligotrophic) to 100 (hyper-eutrophic). The total phosphorous TSI considers SBR to be near

hyper-eutrophic. However, these values are not representative of trophic status because the detection limit (0.1 mg/L)

was used in the calculation which results in an overestimation of trophic status. The Secchi TSI was initially developed

for small lakes with depths greater than thirteen feet and is therefore not applicable to the Littoral North and Littoral SE

sites even though they exhibited maximum water transparency. The Secchi TSI value of 40 for the Pelagic site (4 meters

depth) indicated SBR is mesotrophic. This trophic status is supported by the mean chlorophyll " TSI of 40, which also

indicates mesotrophic conditions. Lakes with this trophic status are generally characterized by moderately clear water,

adequate oxygen throughout the year and in some cases, the hypolimnion of shallow stratified lakes may become anoxic

(Cole 1994). Mesotrophic lakes are considered productive but not nutrient enriched. Because of the shallowness of the

lake and constant wind mixing, bottom sediments may contribute to internal nutrient loading. Based on available

information, there is no known significant anthropogenic sources of nutrients to SBR.

PHYSICAL DATA

Habitat condition at two littoral regions of SBR were evaluated with the use of the shore-line habitat characterization

qualitative assessment procedure (WDEQ/WQQ 2001a). Qualitative habitat assessment data can be found on Table 2.

Littoral North - This habitat assessment station represented the “least-impacted” region of the reservoir. Along the north

shore, riparian vegetation cover was adequate with a diversity of sedges and rushes (Photo 1). Although a portion of

the littoral region was exposed due to low water, 40-75% of the littoral region along the north shore was represented by

emergent vegetation such as rushes and sedges with an abundance of submerged aquatic macrophytes. Fish were

observed utilizing the littoral region. Substrate composition along the north shoreline and littoral regions consisted

predominantly of sand, silt and clay. Filamentous algae were considered common along the shoreline though no blooms

were observed in open water. No blue-green algae were present. Conditions at this site were representative of


-5-

littoral/riparian conditions along the upper 1/3 of SBR.

Littoral SE - This habitat assessment station represented the “most-impacted” littoral region of the reservoir and is

representative for approximately 2/3 of SBR shoreline. The riparian region along the southeast shore was >75% bare

ground with the remainder comprised of sedges and rushes (Photo 2). However, this area was an exposed littoral region

that otherwise would be inundated during normal high water conditions. Around 40-75% of the ‘active’ littoral region

on the date of sampling was largely comprised of emergent and submerged aquatic macrophytes. Fish were observed

within the submerged vegetation. Both the littoral zone and shoreline were largely comprised of sand, silt and clay with

some artificially placed cobble and gravel, particularly along the dam. Filamentous algae were considered common

along the shoreline though no blooms were observed in open water. No blue-green algae were present. This southeast

shore along with other areas in the lower portion of the reservoir, including the upstream face of the dam (Photo 3), were

experiencing erosion from wind and wave action. Grazing pressure appeared to inhibit the establishment of riparian

vegetation along a few selected areas of the shoreline above the normal high water mark. Throughout this area, riparian

vegetation appeared stressed due to the last few years of drought conditions and low water levels. Combined, these

factors have produced an unstable shoreline which may contribute additional sediment to the reservoir, particularly under

normal high water conditions.

No indications of excessive reservoir sedimentation from outside sources were noted (e.g. sediment deltas at mouths of

tributaries and loss of open water). Along the upper end of the reservoir, low water levels had exposed a few small

islands and some littoral regions normally inundated under high water conditions.

HISTORICAL AND ANCILLARY INFORMATION

Current Status of the Fishery - SBR is managed by the WGFD as a basic yield rainbow trout (Onchorynchus mykiss)

fishery. WGFD stocks approximately 2000 sub-catchable rainbow trout annually (WGFD, unpublished information).

No other fishes are known to occur in SBR. The WGFD has not observed any algal blooms in SBR (WGFD, personal

communications).

A gill net survey conducted by WGFD in May 2004 captured 54 rainbow trout with a mean length of 15.1 inches and

1.5 pounds. Spot creel data collected in June 2005 showed a mean catch rate of 2.4 fish per hour (WGFD, unpublished

information).


-6-

QUALITY ASSURANCE/QUALITY CONTROL

Environmental data collected by WDEQ/WQD from SBR was collected in accordance with methods, procedures, and

techniques listed in the Methods section of this report. Station QA/QC reports for each sample station are attached to

this report. Physical, biological, and chemical data collected during 2002 were determined to be complete and accurate.

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

Classification - The WGFD annually stocks rainbow trout in SBR. Because SBR successfully supports a cold-water

fishery, the current 3B classification appears inaccurate and should be reevaluated.

Water Quality - Water temperatures throughout the deeper portion of the reservoir were slightly above (0.3 above the

criterion) or below the numeric criterion protective of cold water fisheries uses. Water temperatures in the littoral regions

were above the numeric temperature criterion though were associated with the inherent shallowness of these areas

combined with direct insolation. Water temperatures throughout the lake did not exceed 25°C, which is considered the

upper tolerance limit for trout (Walthers and Nener 1998). Considering the available information and the apparent

success of the cold-water fishery in SBR during the recreation season, elevated water temperatures in certain areas of

the reservoir do not appear to compromise the ability of the lake to sustain a cold-water fishery.

SBR did exceed the pH criteria though this was considered natural due to high photosynthetic rates by aquatic

macrophytes and phytoplankton. Based on temperature and dissolved oxygen profiles, SBR appears to weakly stratify

during the summer months and may be dimictic. Dissolved oxygen concentrations in the littoral regions and epilimnion

of the pelagic region were above the minimum criteria protective of aquatic life uses and/or early life stages of aquatic

life. The abnormally high dissolved oxygen concentrations in the littoral regions were due to super-saturation from

aquatic macrophytes.

Because of the high detection limits of the 2002 samples, it is unknown whether total phosphorous and nitrate-nitrogen

concentrations were below the federally recommended nutrient criteria for lakes in the Wyoming Basin ecoregion. The

mean chlorophyll " concentration (a surrogate to evaluate nutrient enrichment) exceeded the federally recommended

minimum chlorophyll " concentration of 1.4 mg/m3 for lakes in the Wyoming Basin ecoregion. However, this is a

recommended criteria are for a large region and are not necessarily lake specific. SBR may receive internal nutrient

loading from the lake sediments, though anthropogenic sources of nutrients to the lake are believed negligible. The mean

TSI for Secchi disk and chlorophyll " indicates SBR is mesotrophic. Mesotrophic lakes are considered productive but

not nutrient enriched. Though light appears to play no limiting role in phytoplankton growth, no algal blooms were


-7-

observed. The abundance of aquatic macrophytes in the littoral regions appeared to be the result of optimal light

penetration to the lake bottom and water naturally high in minerals. Considering the available information, SBR does

not appear to be subjected to anthropogenic nutrient enrichment.

Habitat Quality - In the “least-impacted” area of SBR, shoreline and littoral habitat consists of submerged and emergent

macrophytes and sand/silt substrates. These areas are found along the upper 1/3 of the reservoir and provide adequate

fish cover. The “most-impacted” area of SBR is found along the southeast shore adjacent to the dam and is

representative of the lower 2/3 of SBR including the upstream face of the dam. Bare ground is prevalent in these areas

with minimal riparian vegetation to stabilize the shoreline. Submerged vegetation was common in the littoral regions

and provided adequate fish cover. The shoreline in the ‘impacted’ area was experiencing erosion from wave and wind

action. Grazing pressure limited establishment of riparian vegetation in some areas. Lastly, riparian vegetation appeared

stressed due to drought and low water levels further exacerbating shoreline erosion.

Sedimentation was listed as a possible source of ‘impairment’ to SBR in the 1996 303(d) list. No deltas or loss of open

water due to accumulated sediment was noted during the 2002 assessment. Based on the available information, the

reservoir does not appear to receive excessive anthropogenic sources of sediment. However, the unstable shorelines

along most of SBR may result in internal sediment contributions to the reservoir. At present, there is no information to

suggest internal sediment loading is compromising the ability of SBR to support designated uses.


-8-

DETERMINATION

! A review of the chemical, physical, and/or biological data collected on Shirley Basin Reservoir in addition to

other sources of information suggests that on the date of sampling and based on its current classification:

1) Fully-supportive of aquatic life other than fish. However, it should be noted that Shirley Basin Reservoir

also supports designated uses associated with cold-water fisheries.

2) Fully supportive of wildlife, industrial, aesthetic value, and agricultural uses.

! Review of biological and chemical data collected on SBR are insufficient to determine fish consumption and

contact recreation use support.

RECOMMENDATIONS

1) Consider a reclassification of Shirley Basin Reservoir.

2) Conduct future E. coli monitoring to determine contact recreation use support.

3) If reclassified to a class 2 water, fish tissue sampling will be needed to determine fish consumption use support.

4) To fully understand nutrient concentrations, stratification and natural variability in lake conditions, additional data

would be needed.

5) Explore best management practices to help minimize shoreline erosion from wind and wave action with the realization

that the erosion potential is largely facilitated by dynamic fluctuations in water level. Manage grazing pressure to

minimize shoreline erosion where appropriate.

SIGNATURES:

___________________________________________________________ ____________________________

Author Date

___________________________________________________________ ____________________________

Peer Reviewer Date

___________________________________________________________ ____________________________

Monitoring Supervisor Date


-9-

LITERATURE CITED

Carlson, R.E. 1979. A trophic state index for lakes. Limnology and Oceanography 22:361-369.

Chapman, S.S., S.A. Bryce, J.M. Omernik, D.G. Despain, J. Zumberge, and M. Conrad. 2003. Ecoregions of Wyoming(color poster with map, descriptive text, summary tables and photographs). Reston, Virginia. U.S. Geological Survey(map scale 1:1,400,000).

Cole, G.A. 1994. Textbook of Limnology 4th Ed. Waveland Press, Inc., Prospect Heights, Illinois. 412 pp.

Omernik, J. M. and A. L. Gallant. 1987. Ecoregions of the west-central United States (map). United StatesEnvironmental Protection Agency, Corvallis, OR.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). 2001. Ambient Water Quality Criteria Recommendations. InformationSupporting the Development of State and Tribal Nutrient Criteria - Lake and Reservoirs in Nutrient Ecoregion III. Officeof Water. EPA 822-B-01-008.

U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). 1985. Geologic map of Wyoming. Compiled by J.D. Love and A.C. Christansen.Sheets 1,2, and 3. Reston, VA. G85135.

Walthers, L.C. and J.C. Nener. 1998. Water temperature monitoring in the Nicola River, B.C. 1995: Implications ofmeasured temperatures for anadromous salmonids. Canadian Manuscript Report of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 2443.

Wetzel, R.G. 1983. Limnology 2nd Edition. Saunders College Publishing, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. 753 pp.

WDEQ/WQD. 2001. Wyoming Water Quality Rules and Regulations, Chapter 1, Wyoming Surface Water QualityStandards. Water Quality Division, Cheyenne, WY.

WDEQ/WQD. 2001a. Manual of Standard Operating Procedures for Sample Collection and Analysis. WyomingDepartment of Environmental Quality, Water Quality Division, Watershed Program, Cheyenne, WY.

WDEQ/WQD. 2001b. Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) for Beneficial Use Reconnaissance Project (BURP)Water Quality Monitoring. Wyoming Department of Environmental Quality, Water Quality Division, WatershedProgram, Cheyenne, WY.

WDEQ/WQD. 2002. Wyoming’s method for determining water quality condition of surface waters. WyomingDepartment of Environmental Quality, Water Quality Division, Cheyenne, WY.


-10-

Pelagic Pelagic Littoral North Littoral SE

Date 7/23/2002 7/23/2002 7/23/2002 7/23/2002

Depth (m) 1 3.5 0.5 0.5

Time 1303 1308 1425 1407

Temperature C 20.2 18.6 19.6 21.5

pH 9.28 9.25 9.28 9.29

Conductivity (uS/cm) 5035 4802 4984 5188

Dissolved Oxygen (mg/L) 8.3 6.3 17.9 17.9

Alkalinity (mg/L as CaCO3) 750 740 730 740

Nitrate (mg/L as N) <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

Total Phosphorus (mg/L) <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

Total Ammonia (mg/L) 0.1 0.2 <0.1 <0.1

Secchi Disk (m) 4 NA 1 1.5

Chlorophyll a (mg/m3) 2.1 NC 3.3 NC

TSI for Secchi Disk 40 NA 60 54.2

TSI for Chlorophyll a 37.9 NC 42.3 NC

*TSI for Total Phosphorous 70.6 70.6 70.6 70.6

Sheen None None None None

Color Pale Green Pale Green Pale Green Pale Green

Odor None None None None

*Total phosphorous value w as set at the detection limit of 0.1 mg/L

NA = Not applicable ; NC = Not collected

Table 1 - Physicochemical results and Trophic State Index scores for Shirley Basin Reservoir. July 2002. CarbonCounty.


-11-

Littoral North 7/23/2002

Littoral SE 7/23/2002

aRiparian VegetationTrees 0 0

Shrubs 1 1Herbs, Forbs, Grasses, Grass-like Plants 2 1

Standing w ater vegetation 0 0Bare ground / human development 2 4

bLittoral VegetationFloating macrophytes 0 0

Rooted macrophytes (emergent) 2 3Rooted macrophytes (submergent) 3 3

Total littoral vegetation 3 3

cShoreline Substrate CompositionBedrock (>4096 mm) 0 0

Boulder (256-4096 mm) 0 0Cobble (65-255 mm) 1 2

Gravel (2-64 mm) 3 2Sand (0.062-1.9 mm) 3 2Silt/Clay (<0.062 mm) 2 3

bLittoral Substrate CompositionBedrock (>4096 mm) 0 0

Boulder (256-4096 mm) 0 1Cobble (65-255 mm) 1 1

Gravel (2-64 mm) 1 3Sand (0.062-1.9 mm) 1 3Silt/Clay (<0.062 mm) 4 2

Submerged w oody debris 0 0

c Shoreline zone is 1 m from the waterline back onto the land

0 = Absent

1 = Sparse (<10% aerial coverage)

2 = M oderate (10-40% aerial coverage)

3 = High (40-75% aerial coverage)

4 = Dominant (>75% aerial coverage)

a Riparian zone is 15 m along shoreline and 15 m back onto the land

b Litto ral zone is 15 m along shoreline and 10 m from the shoreline to the water or out to a safe wading distance

Table 2 - Qualitative lake habitat assessment for Shirley Basin Reservoir. July 2002. Carbon County.


-12-



Fish Cover (w ithin the littoral zone)Aquatic vegetation 2 2

Floating or submerged snags (>0.3 m diam.) 0 0Brush or w oody debris (<0.3 m diam.) 0 0

Inundated standing trees (>0.3 m diam.) 0 0Overhanging vegetation (<1 m abv. Surface) 0 0

Rock ledges or sharp drop-offs 0 1Boulders 0 1

Man-made structures (docks, pilings, rip-rap) 0 0



Biological ParametersFilamentous Algae Common Common

Periphyton (shoreline only) Rare AbundantFish Common Common

High Water Line (from present lake level)Vertical distance (ft) 3-3.5 3-3.5

Hortizontal distance (ft) 65 35

Shoreline bank angle 0-30 degrees 0-30 degrees

0 = Absent

1 = Present but sparse

2 = Present in moderate to heavy density

Table 2 (cont.) - Qualitative lake habitat assessment for Shirley Basin Reservoir. July 2002. Carbon County.


-13-

0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

6.0

7.0

8.0

15.0 20.0 25.0 30.0

Temperature (C)D

epth

(m)

Pelagic Littoral North Littoral SE

0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

6.0

7.0

8.0

0.0 20.0 40.0 60.0 80.0 100.0

Oxidation Reduction Potential (mV)

Dep

th (m

)


Figure 1 - Vertical profiles for temperature and redox potential on Shirley Basin Reservoir. July 2002. CarbonCounty.


-14-

0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

6.0

7.0

8.0

4800.0 5000.0 5200.0 5400.0

Conductivity (uS/cm)

Dep

th (m

)


0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

6.0

7.0

8.0

0.0 5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0

Dissolved Oxygen (mg/L)

Dep

th (m

)


Figure 1 (cont.) - Vertical profiles for conductivity and dissolved oxygen on Shirley Basin Reservoir. July 2002.Carbon County.


-15-

Map 1 -Shirley Basin Reservoir and surrounding area.


-16-

Map 2 -Shirley Basin Reservoir and WDEQ/WQD monitoring stations. July 2002. Carbon County.


-17-

Photo 1 - Littoral/riparian zone at the Shirley Basin Reservoir Littoral North site. July 2002. Carbon County.


-18-

Photo 2 - Littoral/riparian zone at the Shirley Basin Reservoir Littoral SE site. July 2002. Carbon County.


-19-

Photo 3 - Upstream face of Shirley Basin Reservoir dam. Note erosion from wind and wave action. July 2002. Carbon County.

monitoring and assessment reportdeq.state.wy.us/wqd/watershed/downloads/monitoring...ambient ph at...

Documents