“I“ w-'
' .‘ ‘ ‘ >00: .

STREAM WATER QUALITY AS RELATED TO
UBIB‘ANEZANON OF ”9 WATERSHED

This}: he fire Dogma of M. 5.
MICHEGAN STATE UNWEBBITY

Alvin Lee Jensen

1966

Illllllml

31

WW Lu! 1m in fl 1111 “W l

 

‘ LIBRARY

Michigan State
University

 

firal‘rflq EJHF; _&j'.‘ll\!]
Q i 1““ ’ I
‘iiv thi Uu:;_. ultra-I

W“;
ZZ/s/y'
3;: gig?”

' '1 . C! ”3‘1."
{”41“ ".5 I,’

I. 4: wivdw

3?"

LP“ IE 1 6 1899
JUI: 51:31 7-333“

037433.319 23%

STREAM WATER QUALITY AS RELATED TO

URBANIZATION OF ITS WATERSHED

BY

Alvin Lee Jensen

A THESIS

Submitted to
Michigan State University
in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of

MASTER OF SCIENCE

Department of Fisheries and Wildlife

1966

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I thank Dr. Robert C. Ball for continuous financial
support, and for giving me freedom to pursue my own goals.
His dedication to the task of improving the quality of
American life through preserving the quality of our natural
bodies of water, and the energy with which he pursues this
task will be a continued inspiration to me. I thank
Dr. Frank Peabody for doing the bacteriological analyses
appearing in this thesis. I thank my wife Joan for allow-
ing me to spend most of my time in pursuit of my academic
career. I thank my committee members and I thank all others
who have in some way contributed to this work, for it could
not have been completed without many of their suggestions.

This work was supported by the National Institutes of
Health through research grant 711111.

ii

"America today stands poised
on a pinnacle of wealth and
power, yet we live in a
land of vanishing beauty,
of increasing ugliness, of
shrinking open space, and
of an over-all environment
that is diminished daily by
pollution and noise and
blight."

Udall, 1963

iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page
INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
DESCRIPTION OF STUDY AREA. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

METHODS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10

Sampling Procedures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
Bacteriological Methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
Bioassay Procedures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
Bottom Sampling Methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
Chemical Methods. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14

Total Alkalinity as CaCO3. . . . . . . . . . . 14
Ammonia Nitrogen . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14

Biochemical OxygenODemand. . . . . . . . . . 15
Conductivity at 18 Centigrade . . . . . . . . 15
Nitrate Nitrogen . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
Nitrite Nitrogen . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
Organic Nitrogen . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
Dissolved Oxygen . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16

Total and Ortho—phosphorous. . . . . . . . . . 17
Physical Methods. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
Total Residue. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
Temperature. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
pH . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
Turbidity. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
Velocity of River Waters . . . . . . . . . . . 18
Distance Between Stations. . . . . . . . . . . 18
Statistical Methods. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22

Alkalinity. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20

Dissolved Oxygen. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
Biochemical Oxygen Demand . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56
Phosphorous . . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
Summary of Nitrogen Determinations. . . . - . . . 54
Results and Discussion of Physical Tests. . . . . . 58
pH . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58
Temperature. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59
Total Residue. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59

Turbidity. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60

iv

TABLE OF CONTENTS - Continued Page

Conductivity. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69
Bacteriology. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70
Bottom Sampling Data. . . . . . . . . . . . . 79
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION OF DRAIN EFFLUENT ANALYSES . . . 86
SUMMARY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9O
LITERATURE CITED. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 95
APPENDICES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 97

LIST OF TABLES

TABLE Page

1. Summary of randomized block design analysis of
variance and test for linearity for river total
alkalinity determinations. . . . . . . . . . . . . 22

2. Data for diurnal oxygen determinations . . . . . . 27

5. Summary of one-way analysis of variance and test
for linearity for river dissolved oxygen determin-
ations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55

4. Data for determination of biochemical oxygen
demand rate constant . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59

5. Summary of one—way analysis of variance and test
for linearity for river station biochemical oxygen
demand determinations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42

6. Summary of one-way analysis of variance and test
for linearity for river total—phosphorous determin-
ations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55

7. Summary of one-way analysis of variance and test
for linearity for river ortho-phosphorous determin-
ations O O O O C O O O O O O O O O O O O O C O O O 55

8. Summary of one-way analysis of variance and test
for linearity for river station nitrate nitrogen . 56

9. Summary of one-way analysis of variance and test
for linearity for river ammonia nitrogen determin-
ations O O O O O O O O O O O C O O O O O O O O O O 56

10. Summary of randomized block design analysis of
variance for ammonia nitrogen determinations . . . 57

11. Summary of one-way analysis of variance and test
for linearity for river organic nitrogen . . . . . 57

12. Summary of one-way analysis of variance and test
for linearity for river pH determinations. . . . . 67

vi

LIST OF TABLES - Continued

TABLE

15.

14.

15.

16.

17.

18.

19.

Page
Summary of one-way analysis of variance and test
for linearity for river turbidity measurements. . . 67
Summary of randomized blocks design analysis of
variance for river temperatures . . . . . . . . . . 68
Summary of one—way analysis of variance for river
conductivity determinations . . . . . . . . . . . . 71
Most probable number of gram negative bacteria per
100 ml. at river sampling stations. . . . . . . . . 76
Summary of bottom organisms . . . . . . . . . . . . 82
Summary of one-way analysis of variance and test
for linearity for tubificidae . . . . . . . . . . . 85
Summary of one—way analysis of variance for
Chironominae. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85

vii

LIST OF FIGURES

FIGURE

1.
2.

5.

4.
5.
6.

10.

11.

12.

15.

Map of study area. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Average yearly discharge of the Red Cedar River at
Farm Lane. . O C O C O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0

Mean values for total alkalinity at river sampling
Stations 0 O O O O C O O O O O O O O O O O O C O O

Diurnal oxygen curves for 9-17—64. . . . . . . . .
Diurnal oxygen curves for 8-15-64. . . . . . . . .
BOD and dissolved oxygen curves. . . . . . . . . .

Mean values for total—phosPhorous at sampling
stations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Mean values for pH determinations at river
Sampling stations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Mean values for temperature determinations at
river sampling stations. . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Mean values for turbidity measurements at river
sampling stations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Mean values for conductivity determinations at
river sampling stations. . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Most probable number of gram—negative bacteria per
100 ml. at river sampling stations . . . . . . . .

Mean number of Tubificidae per square foot at
river sampling stations. . . . . . . . . . . . . .

viii

24
29
51
48

52

62

64

66

75

78

84

LIST OF APPENDICES

APPENDIX Page
A. Drain effluent sampling data. . . . . . . . . . . 97
B. Description of drains entering river. . . . . . . 107

C. River station sampling data . . . . . . . . . . . 115

ix

INTRODUCTION

This study of a 2.65 mile reach of the Red Cedar River
is part of an extensive program of studies on the river
which began in 1958. Brehmer (1958) reported on a study of
nutrient accrual, uptake, and regeneration. He indicated
100 ug. phosphorus per liter and 0.5 mg. inorganic nitrogen
per liter are introduced into the river from Williamston's
Sewage Treatment Plant during normal river flow. But these
nutrients appeared to have been removed within a distance of
0.6 miles downstream. Vannote (1961) investigated the
chemistry and hydrology of the river and its tributaries.
Vannote reported a significant gradient of phosphorous enrich-
ment with distance downstream. Grezenda (1960) stated run-
off is the major source of inorganic nitrogen, while sanitary
drains are the main source of phosphorous. Data of these
workers indicates there is a significant amount of pollution
entering the river. Determinations made at Farm Lane indi-
cated 9.46 metric tons of nitrogen are flushed downstream
annually. This does not take into consideration the contribu-
tion from East Lansing's Kalamazoo Street Sewage Treatment
Plant.

King (1964) states Fowlerville plating plant wastes have

eliminated all aquatic macrofauna, except Tubificidae, for a

distance of 15 miles downstream from the plating plant.
King also reports inorganic sediments from highway construc-
tion have reduced Red Cedar aufwuchs production 68 percent.

The study described here was motivated by visible signs
of stream deterioration between Hagadorn Road and East
Kalamazoo Street. Objectives of this study were to locate
pollutant sources, determine the amounts entering the river
and to evaluate effects of these pollutants on water quality
and on composition of river bottom fauna. For clarification,
pollution as used in this study, is defined as every con-
tamination or alteration of physical, chemical, or biological
properties of a lake or stream which will or may lower its
value to man.

Water pollutants can be separated into three categories:
industrial pollutants including pesticides, erosional products,
and domestic sewage. Determinations made during this study
were directed towards establishing the level of domestic and
erosional pollution. These were the most obvious sources of
pollution. This is not to underestimate the importance of
other pollutants, of which there are many.

In this study an effort has been made to integrate
biology, chemistry, and sanitary engineering, for the problem
of water pollution is not completely encompassed by any one
of these disciplines. Perhaps water pollution studies are
best interpreted from the perspective of human ecology--the

study of the relationships between man and his environment.

DESCRIPTION OF STUDY AREA

The Red Cedar River is a central, lower Michigan warm-
water stream arising from a marshy area near Cedar Lake in
Marion Township. The Red Cedar River flows 40 miles through
Michigan farmland and woodlots, flowing by several small
towns, through city parks, and through the campus of a large
university before its confluence with the Grand River at
Lansing, Michigan. King (1964) describes aspects of the river
biology, Vannote (1961) describes the river hydrology and
phosphate chemistry, and Meehan (1958) describes the river
climatology.

This study was completed on the river reach located be-
tween Hagadorn Road and East Kalamazoo Street. The study
section is 2.65 miles in length. Stream width varies from
25 to 80 feet. Water depths vary from 15 inches over silt—
covered sand flats to approximately 6 feet in the impoundment
formed by a dam located at the study section mid-point.

The dam was constructed primarily to provide a reservoir
to be used as a source of cooling water for Michigan State
University power plants. A secondary use of the impoundment
is for recreation, but poor water quality presently limits
this use.

During this study period from August 1964 to November,
1964, volume flow of the Red Cedar River was considerably

less than the average summer flow from 1947 to 1965.

5

.mCOHumum mQHHmEmm Hm>HH mo
mGOHumooH mCH30£m .mwum wvsum mo mm: .H mudmflm

 

 

           

 

 

 

 

    

A! - I , o
to
2.. I. . \
.1 _ 4 .5: 4o
cow. 8.. ave n 2255 I
2.23.. U «W
2.5.2.22: 3525 035.2322 M A. o
@2523 55 T mm
3
2.33 o o
0
335 Foo... __ u
m
a 20.25 L
A
K
T
m
«é E
« a.
«9

.w

6o

o

m 29.25
_ 20.25
t 22.25
02429
¢u7r¢
rhea:

 

 

Figure 2 illustrates a dramatic decrease in volume flow of
the Red Cedar during the past several years. A correlation
study of ground water, precipitation, and cfs flow of the

Red Cedar indicated decreased flow is poorly correlated with
both precipitation and ground water. Regression coefficients
obtained were 0.55 and -0.16 respectively. A more complete
analysis of available data is necessary.

Bottom sampling showed the river bed at Hagadorn Road
to be coarse gravel covered with two or more inches of silt.
Silt accumulation is thought to be caused by decreased carry-
ing capacity of waters entering the impoundment where velocity
decreases, and ability to carry particles in suspension
diminishes.r Decaying leaves and other detritus blanket the
stream bed of the large pond-like area upstream from Farm
Lane Bridge.

Above East Kalamazoo Street, below drain 58, a large
sludge bed has formed, and extends downstream for nearly a
quarter mile. Below the Kalamazoo Street Sewage Treatment
Plant sludge beds several feet thick have formed, and in some
locations nearly protrude from the water surface.

Recent years have brought a large increase in construc-
tion along the banks of the Red Cedar River between Hagadorn
Road and East Kalamazoo Street. New apartment buildings and
university facilities are numerous. Construction of these
buildings, roads, and bridges has resulted in the flushing

of a huge sediment load into the river. Rapid growth of

Figure 2.

Average yearly discharge for the Red Cedar
River for 1947-1964. (Data from U. S.
Geological Survey.) Regression equation
calculated for data is,

§ = 550.81 - 13.95 x

Y = Estimated discharge in cubic feet per
second.

X = Time in years from 1947 = 0.

mom.

”mm.

.mm.

mom.

hum.

mmm.

”mm.

.09

me.
NVm.

 

0
0 0 0 0

ozoowm mun. Puma 0530 z. mom<IomE

YEA RS

Michigan State University, East Lansing, and Meridian Town-
ship has antiquated their waste-water collection system.

And adequate treatment of the increased volume of sewage has
required construction of a new sewage treatment plant. This
new plant began operations about one year after completion ‘
of this study. A further study is planned to determine if
construction of this new plant has improved the quality of

the Red Cedar River waters.

ME THOD S

Scientific analyses are subject to two types of error,
determinate and indeterminate. Determinate errors can be
controlled. Errors of method, operative errors, and instru-
mental errors are examples of determinate errors. This form
of error can be minimized by using an accurate procedure for
analysis combined with careful laboratory work (Kolthoff and
Sandell, 1952).

Indeterminate errors cannot be controlled. If the same
individual repeatedly performs the same analysis, using the
same technique, his measurements will always differ among
themselves to some extent. It is assumed that this form of
error follows the normal distribution (Kolthoff and Sandell,
1952).

Methods of analysis selected for inclusion in Standard
Methods for Analysis of Water and Wastewater (1960) are con-
sidered by authorities to be the most reliable and accurate
procedures available. For this reason all analyses performed
in this study were completed using methods outlined in

Standard Methods (1960).
SamplingiProcedures

Stream physical and chemical sampling programs can be

separated into three types (Tindall and Mickley, 1964).

10

11

1. Collection of grab samples‘

2. Long term sampling programs at selected river
stat1ons.

5. Time of flow studies utilizing dye markers or
radioactive tracers.

The second type of sampling program was used in this study.
For this type of program it is assumed the water mass sampled
at downstream stations is comparable with the water mass
sampled upstream except for substances which have entered the
river between sampling stations. Type 5 sampling programs
give the most accurate data. But Tindall and Mickley state
type 5 sampling programs give nearly the same results as the
type 2 sampling program.

Five sampling stations were established in the study
area. Station 1 was located at Hagadorn Road upstream from
the Michigan State University impoundment.1 Station 2 was
located at the end of the Michigan State University canoe
dock in the middle of the impoundment. Station 5 was located
about 100 feet downstream from the East Kalamazoo Street
Bridge. (You will note that there are two Kalamazoo Street
Bridges mentioned in the text, so for clarification station
5 is downstream from the bridge in front of Michigan State
University's famous "Sparty".) Station 4 was located a few
feet upstream from Harrison Street Bridge, and station 5 was
located at the downstream end of the East Kalamazoo Street
Bridge which lies a little east of the Lansing city limits.

At stations 1, 2, and 5 samples for chemical and physical

12

analyses were collected from mid-stream using a two liter
Kemmerer sampler. At stations 5 and 4 shallow water pro—
hibited use of the Kemmerer, so samples were collected from
mid—stream at these stations by submerging a bottle about
one foot beneath the water surface.

All samples to be used for chemical and physical analy-
ses were placed into 500 ml. dichromate rinsed polyethylene
bottles. To one bottle concentrated sulfuric acid was added,
adjusting the pH to approximately 2. Contents of this bottle
were used for ammonia, nitrate, nitrite, and organic nitrogen
determinations.

Drains were located by boating and by walking along the
river bank. Distance from each drain to some easily identi-
fiable object was paced off to give approximate drain loca-
tion. Where possible an estimate of drain diameter was made.
Samples of drain effluent were collected where possible by
catching the effluent as it spilled into the river. For sub—
merged drains samples were taken from the river directly in

front of the drain Opening.

Bacteriological Methods

For sampling, sterile sampling bottles with ground glass
st0ppered wide necks were obtained from the Michigan State
University Department of Microbiology stockroom. Water samples
were obtained by dropping a sample bottle, with a cord at—

tached around its neck, from a bridge near each sampling

15

station. Sampling bottles were dropped rapidly through the
water surface to a depth of approximately one foot. Samples
were brought to Dr. Frank Peabody of the Michigan State Uni-
versity Department of Microbiology for analysis using the

fermentation tube technique.
Bioassay Procedures

Two bioassays were performed on samples of a drain efflu-
ent suspected of contributing to conditions responsible for
the 1964 fish kill which occurred below the impoundment. The
first bioassay was performed by placing three guppies (Lebistes

reticulatus) into each of two 250 ml. flasks. To one flask

 

200 ml. of aquaria water had been added, to the other flask 50
ml. of drain effluent and 150 ml. of aquaria water had been
added. The second bioassay was performed using procedures
described in Standard Methods (1960). River water was used
for controls and dilutions. Blackside darters (Percina
maculata) obtained from the river were used as test organisms

and 25 liter aquaria were used to replace the 250 ml. flasks.
Bottom Sampling Methods

Bottom samples were collected with an Ekman dredge. At
each station three scoops were taken for each sampling period.
One scoop was taken at mid-stream, and one approximately half-
way between mid-stream and each shore. Samples were screened

with a 50 mesh sieve to remove silt and fine sand, then

14

placed into glass pint jars for the trip back to the labora-
tory. Samples were analyzed by hand within two days after

collection. Organisms were counted and identified.

Chemical Methods

 

Total Alkalinity as CaC03

For each alkalinity determination a titration curve was
obtained by recording the sample pH on a Beckman model H2
glass electrode pH meter after addition of 0, 2, 4, 6, 7, 8,
9, 10, 12, 14, and 16 ml. of standardized 0.02 N sulfuric
acid to 100 ml. of sample (Kolthoff and Sandell, 1952).
Points were plotted on standard graph paper, and ml. of acid
required to lower sample pH to 4.5 was recorded. This number
was used to calculate total mg. per liter alkalinity as

CaCOa by the following formula (Standard Methods, 1960).

Total alkalinity as (ml. H2804)(0.02)(50000)
mg. liter"1 CaC03 = 100

Ammonia Nitrogen

 

Mg. per liter ammonia nitrogen was determined by the
distillation method described in Standard Methods (1960),
except that boric acid buffer solution pH was determined
prior to distillation of a 100 ml. sample, and ml. of 0.02 N
sulfuric acid required to return sample pH to the original
value was determined potentiometrically (Kolthoff and Sandell,

1952). A titration curve was obtained by recording boric acid

15

buffer solution pH on a Beckman model H2 glass electrode
pH meter after addition of 0, 0.5, 1.0, 1.5, 2.0, 2.5, and

5.0 ml. of standard acid.

Biochemical Oxygen Demand

Mg. per liter biochemical oxygen demand was determined

by the method described in Standard Methods (1960), using a

 

one liter graduated cylinder to mix together samples, dilu-
tion water, and mineral nutrients. Samples were not seeded,
and were not treated for residual chlorine, other than to
set on the laboratory bench for approximately one hour prior
to testing. No corrections for temperature were made.
Dissolved oxygen determinations for BOD measurements were
made using the azide modification of the Winkler Method

(Standard Methods, 1960).

 

Conductivity at 180 Centigrade

Resistance was measured on an Industrial Instruments
model RC-7 portable conductivity meter. Resistance measure-

ments were corrected to 180 C. by the formula

R18 = Rt (1 + 0.02 A t).

Temperature-corrected resistance was transformed into

resistivity by the formula,

resistance
cell constant = 1.8955

 

resistivity =

16

Conductivity was obtained by taking the reciprocal of

resistivity (Standard Methods, 1960).
Nitrate Nitrogen

Mg. per liter nitrate nitrogen plus nitrite nitrogen was
determined by the reduction method described in Standard
Methods (1960), the only modification being that ml. of acid
were determined potentiometrically rather than colorimetrically.
Nitrate nitrogen was obtained by subtracting nitrite nitrogen

from the reduction nitrogen determination.

Nitrite Nitrogen

 

Mg. per liter nitrite nitrogen was determined by the method

described in Standard Methods (1960).

 

Organic Nitrogen

Organic nitrogen determinations were made on the residues
remaining from the ammonia determinations using the Kjeldahl

method described in Standard Methods (1960).

 

Dissolved Oxygen

Determinations for mg. per liter and percent saturation
dissolved oxygen were made using the azide modification of the
Winkler Method as described in Standard Methods (1960). Samples
were collected with a Kemmerer water bottle, where possible,

and siphoned into 500 ml. glass stoppered bottles, allowing

17

the bottles to overflow about 150 ml. to expel trapped air.
MnSO4, H2804, and alkali-iodide-azide reagents were then
added. The samples were titrated upon returning to the

laboratory.
Total and Ortho-Phosphorous

The ammonium molybdate, (NH4)2MoO4, test with stannous
chloride as the reducing agent was used for phosphorous de-

terminations (Standard Methods, 1960).

Physical Methods

 

Total Residue

 

Total residue was determined by evaporating a 200 ml.
sample to dryness as described in Standard Methods (1960).
Samples were boiled nearly to dryness, then removed from the
hot plate to prevent popping which would have resulted in loss
of residue. Samples were then placed in a Cenco gravity con-
vection oven set at 1050 C. and left overnight. Samples were

weighed the following morning.

Temperature

 

Temperature measurements were made using a laboratory
thermometer held with the bulb about one foot below the water

surface.

18

1%

pH determinations were made immediately upon returning
to the laboratory, using a Beckman model H2 glass electrode

pH meter.

Turbidity

 

Turbidity determinations were made using a Bausch and
Lomb photoelectric colorimeter calibrated with a Jackson Candle
Turbidimeter. The slit was adjusted to admit light of 410 mu.
wave length. Correction for intrinsic color of sample was
made using a filtered sample to adjust the colorimeter to 100

percent transmittance.

Velocity of River Waters

 

Stream velocity was calculated from U.S.G.S. volume flow
data and dimensions of the river channel at Farm Lane. At
Farm Lane the river channel is approximately 4 feet deep and

120 feet wide. During the period of this study stream volume

flow was 16 cfs. By the calculation é§_ = ié, it was esti—
560 .JL.

3500
mated that river velocity was 0.05 feet per second.

Distances Between Stations

 

Distances between stations were estimated by molding a
string to the shape of the river on a map, then straightening
out the string, and measuring its length. Distance was then

obtained from the map scale.

19

Statistical Methods

 

Data for each chemical, physical, and biological analysis,
except bacteriological, were tested for linearity. For each
test that did not deviate significantly from linearity, a re-
gression analysis was calculated to determine if means of
sampling stations (treatments), were significantly different.
If data deviated significantly from linearity, a one-way
analysis of variance or randomized block design analysis of
variance was used to test for significance of differences among
sampling station means (Li, 1964).

If significant differences did exist among stations, the
data were further analyzed to locate the significantly differ—
ent means.

For all tests the level of significance was taken to be
0.05. The null hypothesis to be tested in each case was that
there were no significant differences among sampling station
means. The alternate hypothesis in each case was that there
were significant differences between sampling station means.

If the regression analysis, one-way analysis of variance,
or randomized block design analysis of variance indicated
significant differences existed between sampling station means,
then the proper modification of Scheffe's test was used to
locate those means that were significantly different (Guenther,

1964).

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Alkalinity

Total alkalinity, expressed as mg. per liter CaCOs, is
a measure of the concentration of hydroxides, carbonates,
bicarbonates and other salts of weak acids dissolved in
natural waters. Relationships between major ionic species
re5ponsible for alkalinity in natural waters are given by the

following chemical equations (Sawyer, 1960).

- +
C02 + H20 : H2C03 : HC03 + H
++ -
M(HC03)2 : M + 2 HC03
— = +
HC03 : C03 + H
C03= + H20 : HC03_ + OH—

These substances are in dynamic equilibrium as indicated by
the double arrows.

Increasing the concentration of a component in the
carbonate system increases that components activity and chemi-
§§-) ., which upsets the equilibrium'

dni T,P,nJ

(Moore, 1962). In re-establishing equilibrium the ratio of

cal potential (

mass flow out of the component with higher chemical potential
to mass flow in decreases until the chemical potentials for
all components are again equal (Moore, 1962).

The formulas for the carbonate and bicarbonate ionization

constants K1 and K2 derived from the Mass Action law are,

20

21

LH+JIHCOB"J

 

 

= = ‘11
K1 [H2C03] 4.4 X 10
+ =
[H ][C031] -7
K2 [HCOg-J 4.3 X 10

The quantities in the brackets represent molar concentrations
of components. From the magnitude of the dissociation con-
stants it can be seen that carbonic acid is an extremely weak
acid. Carbonate and bicarbonate ions constitute powerful
buffers. Carbonates are the main buffer constituents of
natural waters (Hutchinson, 1957).

Data for total alkalinity concentrations at river sampling
stations deviated significantly from linearity. And a random—
ized block analysis of variance, Table 1, failed to show any
significant differences between means for sampling stations.
Figure 5 does illustrate, however, a total alkalinity increase
in the pond-like area of the impoundment, and a considerable
increase below the Kalamazoo Street Sewage Treatment Plant.

The linear regression equation

§ = 212.85 + 12.65 x

Y = Estimated mg. per liter total
alkalinity as CaCOs.

X = Miles downstream from Station 1

shows a gradual increase in total alkalinity from Station 1
to Station 5.
Increased alkalinity in the impoundment may be due to

large algae populations. Sawyer (1960) states that large algae

22

Table 1. Summary of randomized block design analysis of
variance and test for linearity for river alkalinity

determinations.

 

 

 

Source SS df MS Fexpt F0.95
Treatment 4790.17 4 1197.54 0.94 2.65

Blocks 10400,55 6 1755.59 1.85 2.51

Regression 4719.09 1 4719.09 5.75 4.12

Deviation 14898.91 5 4966.50 5.95 2.87

from linearity

Error 22424 24 954.54

Total 57614.75 54

 

Figure 5.

25

Mean values for mg. per liter total alkalinity
as CaCOa measured at river sampling stations.
Distances on abscissa are proportional to the
distances between stations in miles. Each value
is the means of 7 observations.

n

O O
8 5 2 9
2 I

0040 w< >._._Z_.._<v..._< 12.—.0... tutu. mwads.

 

I60

SAMPLING STATION

25

populations increase alkalinity by removing C02 from the
water. From the system of equations describing alkalinity
dynamics, it can be seen that removal of C02 will increase
C03= and OH- concentrations. Other sources of alkalinity
are animal and plant resPiration, sediments, and numerous
drains entering the river.

High alkalinity concentrations are not known to have
undesirable effects on stream inhabitants. Increased alkalin-
ity is likely to increase populations of mussels which utilize
CaCOa for shell construction (Pennak, 1955). High alkalinity
concentrations do, however, decrease usefulness of a river for
municipal and industrial purposes. Burroughs (1960) states

that salts are the most objectionable pollutant in industrial

cooling waters.
Dissolved Oxygen

Dissolved oxygen in natural waters comes from three
sources (Reid, 1961).

1. Ground water and surface run-off.

2. Photosynthesis.

5. Physical reaeration.
Ground water has a variable but usually low dissolved oxygen
concentration. Surface run-off usually will be near satura—
tion with dissolved oxygen.

Photosynthetic production of oxygen is responsible for

diurnal fluctuations in oxygen levels, and may be reSponsible

26

for other diurnal pulses (Bamforth, 1962). During the day
plants remove carbon dioxide from the water and replace it
with oxygen. At night, when photosynthesis ceases, plant
oxygen production ceases, and then both plants and animals
consume oxygen in the process of reSpiration. Odum (1959)
has used diurnal oxygen curves to construct dissolved oxygen
rate of change curves from which plant productivity estimates
were made.

In this study two diurnal oxygen curves were obtained
for each sampling station. These curves could not be used
to estimate productivity by Odum's upstream-downstream method
as oxygen concentrations consistently decreased rather than
increased, as the river flowed downstream. The diurnal
curves obtained show an increased "pulse" with distance down—
stream, indicating the downstream area of the study section
may be subsisting on oxygen produced upstream.

From the engineering viewpbint physical reaeration is the
most important source of dissolved oxygen in natural waters,
as the photosynthetic source does not operate at night and
during the winter it is considerably reduced. Saturation
deficit, temperature, depth, and degree of agitation determine
the rate of physical reaeration (Phelps, 1944). The oxygen
diffusion process through unit water surface cross section in
unit time can be formulated in the empirical partial differen—

tial equation known as Fick‘s Law (Moore, 1962).

27

 

 

 

 

Table 2. Diurnal oxygen determinations at river sampling
stations.
8-15-64
. ppm Oxygen
Station 4:00 AM 8:00 AM 5:00 PM 4:00 AM
1 9.6410.56 8.70i0.00 9.7810.02 9.9410.00
2 5.56i0.00 5.81:0.10 7.0810.41 6.58i0.10
5 4.8110.14 5.2511.00 5.4710.24 5.05i0.00
4 5.1510.00 5.45il.05 4.61iO.20 2.8610.00
5 1.58iO.49 1.8411.17 5.27+0.80 1.8010.07
9-17-64
. ppm Oxygen
Statlo“ 4:50 AM 9:00 AM 1.00 PM 5:00 PM 4:00 AM
1 10.5010.51 9.57i0.82 9.45iO.49 9.66iO.55 9.9710.00
2 8.06iO.12 7.8010.00 7.6010.16 8.58:0.55 8.0610.41
5 6.9510.20 7.15i0.00 7.7510.70 7.0510.10 6.41iO.10
4 5.4510.17 5.7510.17 6.4010.18 6.4510.00 4.9110.07
5 2.7510.10 2.9710.29 5.54iO.14 5.57iO.28 2.0510.14

 

28

Figure 4. Diurnal oxygen curves for each sampling
station for 9-17—64. Each value is the
mean of 5 observations.

 

 

 

STAT I ON

 

I 0.00

o
0.
9

 

4
2 3
a N m
N 0 I
m n M
M m m
T S
S
0 0 0 O
0. 0 m. 0. 0.
8 Z 6 5 4

zwo>x0 ou>..0wm.o amt... cum .0!

STATION 5

3.00

200

LOO

3(33

840nm

2<OnHN.

Iconno.

In 005

82—090

In on”?

Iconuu

118“.

!< Onuo.

3(005

I< OMB

8(003

TIME IN HOURS

50

Figure 5. Diurnal oxygen curves for each sampling
station for 8—15-64. Each value is the
mean of 5 observations.

 

 

I
STATION 2
STATION 3
STATION 4

STATION
STATION 5

 

 

 

I0.00

z 9.00 _.
8.00 +-
7.00
6.00 —
5.00 ..
4.00 -—
3.00
2.00

mo>xo om>.._omw_o amt]. «ma .0:

Ida“?

8(Oflm

3(09N.

8a0fl0.

Suofin

Snoflo

Snoߢ

Inoflu

Incas—

8(Oflo.

3<Onno

2(090

340»;

TIME IN HOURS

52

_-_RI.§9
(10) s - Nof (5X)T

where, S Oxygen rate of flow across interface.
C = Oxygen molar concentration in unit volume.
x = Gradient of oxygen diffusion.
R = Gas law constant.
N0 = Avogadro's number.
f = The force required to give oxygen particles

unit velocity. Termed the molar frictional
coefficient.

D = $1? , is termed the diffusion coefficient.
0

Equation 10 indicates temperature, oxygen molecular properties,
saturation deficit, and area of contact between the air-water
interface directly influence physical reaeration. As tempera—
ture increases it can be seen from equation 10 that diffusion
increases, but from the ideal gas law, PV = nRT, it can be

seen that as temperature increases oxygen solubility decreases.
The solubility factor is the more important and at higher
temperatures dissolved oxygen concentrations are lower. From
the Nernst equation and the expression for chemical potential,
it can be deduced that increased oxygen saturation deficit will
increase diffusion rate of flow of oxygen across the air-water
interface. Only steady state conditions were considered in the
above discussion. Ficks second law of diffusion, %%'= D(%§)T,

'describes the time rate of change of oxygen concentration

(Moore, 1962).

55

An adequate supply of oxygen is an essential prerequisite
for survival of aerobic aquatic life. Oxygen requirements of
an aquatic organism varies with activity and environmental
temperature. Oxygen concentration in ppm. is not a sufficient
criterion for determining if oxygen concentrations are adequate.
It is rather the oxygen partial pressure that is essential,
as oxygen must diffuse into the organism's circulatory system
by the same physical laws that govern its diffusion into the
water (Ruch and Fulton, 1960). This implies oxygen concen-
tration in ppm. should first be corrected for pressure differ-
ences, and then percent saturation calculated.

Tarzwell (1959) reviewed the literature on oxygen require-

ments for aquatic organisms. Wiebe and Fuller (1954) found
oxygen consumption of black bass increased 282 percent when
the water temperature was increased from 150 C. to 250 C.
Less than 75 percent dissolved oxygen saturation was shown by
Graham (1949) to reduce activity of speckled trout (Salvelinus
fontinalis). Engineers Phelps (1944) and Theralt (1927) con-
cluded it is desirable to maintain oxygen saturation levels at
from 70 to 75 percent.

Oxygen data obtained for river sampling stations did not
deviate significantly from linearity, and the regression equa-
tion derived,
= 76.14 - 20.25 X

Estimated percent saturation dissolved oxygen.

N +<> K>
n

Miles downstream from Hagadorn Road,

54

indicates a large decrease in oxygen percent saturation as
the waters flow downstream. A regression analysis, Table 5,
indicated the existence of significant differences between
means at sampling stations. Scheffe's test for significance
of differences between individual means indicated the mean
for Station 5 and the means for Stations 5, 2, and 1 were
significantly different. Also the difference between means
for Stations 1 and 4 was significant.

Oxygen concentrations decreased significantly from one
downstream station to the next, with the average value at
Hagadorn Road being only 75 percent saturation. Values at all
downstream points were below levels considered permissible for
maintaining water quality. Large oxygen deficits are caused
by the increased depth and low turbulance of the impoundment,
by sludge accumulation, by decomposition of leaves and litter,
and to a major extent from the stabilization of large quanti-
ties of sewage entering the river.

Addition of municipal pollution to a stream has a dramatic
effect on dissolved oxygen concentrations, as bacteria consume
oxygen in the process of stabilizing decomposable organic
matter abundant in municipal sewage. Municipal sewage also
has a high nitrogen and phOSphorous concentration resulting
from the breakdown of proteins, amino acids, and household
detergents.

To illustrate quantitatively the relationship existing

between dissolved oxygen and concentrations of components of

55

Table 5. Summary of one-way analysis of variance and test for
linearity for river dissolved oxygen determinations.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Source SS df MS Fexp. F0.95
Treatment. 19746 4 4956.50 18.46 2.58
Regression 18959 1 18959.00 71.61 4.04
Deviation 787 5 262.55 0.99 2.80

from linearity

Error 15501 50 264.72

 

Total 55247 54

 

56

domestic sewage effluents, phosphorous, nitrogen, and BOD, a
multiple linear regression analysis was made. The following
equation was fitted to the data by the method of least

squares (Li, 1964),

§ = 81.50 - 0.47xl - 25.11x2 - 1.78x3
where,
Y = Estimated mg. per liter of dissolved oxygen for
a given set of (X1, X2, X3).
X1 = Mg. per liter Biochemical oxygen demand.
X2 = Mg. per liter total phosPhorous.
X3 = Mg per liter nitrate + ammonia nitrogen.

To test how well this regression equation predicts dissolved
oxygen concentrations given the BOD, total phOSphorous, and
nitrogen values, a correlation analysis was made between values
predicted by this equation and values observed in this study.

A correlation coefficient R, of 0.85 was obtained. This high
value indicates phOSphorous, nitrogen, and BOD concentrations
are highly correlated with decreasing oxygen concentrations.
And it can be concluded sewage entering the river is the factor
most reSponsible for observed oxygen concentrations. This
brings us to another important topic, biochemical oxygen demand

and stream self purification.

Biochemical Oxygen Demand

 

Biochemical oxygen demand, BOD, is defined as the amount

of dissolved oxygen required by bacteria to stabilize

57

decomposable organic matter in a volume of water under aerobic
conditions (Sawyer, 1960). An Englishman, Sir Edward Frankland,
formulated the BOD test in 1870. Since then an impressive
theory has been established describing the kenetics of the
oxidative processes which occur in streams receiving sewage.

Oxidation of organic matter in water takes place in two
stages, requiring about 20 days to complete. The first stage
involves oxidation of carboniferous material. The second stage
is oxidation of nitrogenous material by the bacteria Nitro-

somonas and Nitrobacter as follows,

Nitrosomonas

2NH3+502 2NO2-+2H++2H20

Nitrobacter +

Z‘Nog:+o,2 )2NO2_+2H

To avoid the error which would be introduced by the second
stage of this process, the standard BOD determination is run
for only 5 days, and measures only 70 to 80 percent of the
total BOD which is termed ultimate BOD (Phelps, 1944).

The BOD analysis is essentially a bioassay procedure, and
as such the presence of trace amounts of toxic materials like
chlorine, copper and arsenic lead to underestimation of BOD
values. Chlorine concentrations in the river were high.

If the oxygen concentration is not limiting, decomposition
of organic matter in streams can be considered to be a first
order chemical reaction, with the reaction rate depending only
on concentrations of decomposable organic material. The first

stage of the BOD reaction can be formulated in the differential

58

d(BOD) =
dt

k is the BOD reaction rate constant (Phelps, 1944). Solution

equation for a first order reaction, - k(BOD), where

of this equation gives, BODt = BODO e—kt, where BODt is the

BOD remaining at time t, BODO is the initial BOD, and t is

again time. Engineers often use the retarded exponential,

BODt = L(1 - e'kt

the ultimate BOD. At the present time there is no satisfactory

), but this formula requires evaluation of L,

way to obtain L (Fair and Geyer, 1961). Using the simple
exponential, determination of the BOD reaction rate constant k

allows prediction of the residual BOD at points a known time

t
of flow downstream from the point where BODO was determined.
To estimate the number of persons polluting the river
between Station 1 and Station 5, the BOD reaction rate con-
stant was determined, and an estimate of river velocity was
made. Results are reported in Table 4. For each station two
sets of 5 samples each were started. Two samples were termi-
nated after 1, 2, 5, 4, and 5 days. If the BOD reaction can
be treated as being linear, the regression of ln %§%%§%- on
time should not deviate significantly from linearity. The
data for each station were tested for linearity, and the
linear regression equation was derived. Only at Station 1 did

the data deviate significantly from linearity. The following

equations were derived.

Station 1: § = 0.64 + 0.06 t
Station 2: Y = 0.61 + 0.05 t
Station 5: Y = 0.49 + 0.12 t

Table 4.

Data for determination of BOD reaction rate constant.

Data expressed as ln(BOD).

 

 

 

Station Hours before termination T
12 24 56 48 96 'J

1 1.000 0.587 0.875 0.215 1.197
1.000 1.000 1.000 0.651 1.787

Ti' 2.000 1.578 1.875 0.864 2.984 9.285
2 0.059 0.695 1.001 0.770 0.524
-0.128 0.715 0.565 2.007 1.571

Ti' -0.089 1.206 1.566 2.777 1.895 7.555
5 0.695 0.519 0.859 0.015 1.165
1.058 0.940 1.482 1.517 1.778

Ti' 1.751 1.459 2.541 2.552 2.941 11.024
4 -0.255 0.589 0.806 0.588 1.258
-0.529 0.675 1.151 0.610 1.609

Ti' -0.562 1.262 1.957 1.198 2.847 6.702
5 2.079 2.216 2.407 2.518 2.791
1.717 2.255 2.965 2.515 2.708

5.796 4.469 5.572 4.851 5.499 25.967

T..
1

 

40

Station 4: Y = -1.16 + 0.57 t
Station 5: § = 1.48 + 0.19 t
where, Y = Estimated ln (BOD ) .
(BODO)
t = Time in hours.

The average value of the slopes of these lines was calcu-
lated to be 0.15. This compares favorably with the value of
0.17 given in the literature (Sawyer, 1960). The average
expected BOD value at station 5 was calculated to be 5.57 using

-(0.15)(O.97)

the formula BOD = (5.69) e . The value for

0.97
mg. per liter BOD added between Stations 1 and 5 was determined
to be 7.05.

During the period of this study the U.S.G.S. reports
16.7 cfs as the average flow of the Red Cedar River at the
Farm Lane gauging station. River velocity was estimated as 0.05
feet per second.

It has been shown that the mean BOD of sewage produced
per person per day is 54,000 mg. (Fair and Geyer, 1961).
It must then be concluded from the following calculations,

16.7 cfs = 56,072,000 liters per day.

Mg. per liter

entering Red Cedar
per day.

(56,072,000)(7.05) = 252,504,000

Persons polluting
Red Cedar in
study area.

252,504,000

54,000 = 4'674

that 4,674 persons are polluting the Red Cedar River between

Hagadorn Road and West Kalamazoo Street. Because of the toxic

41

effect of chlorine introduced at the Kalamazoo Street Sewage
Treatment Plant, this value is a minimum.

This method of determining the extent to which a river
reach is polluted is in some ways unsatisfactory. First, the
BOD reaction is not a first order reaction, but rather a mix-
ture of first, second, and third order reactions. Secondly,
the deoxygenation rate constant as determined in a BOD bottle
is probably different from the stream deoxygenation rate
constant. And finally, the time of flow between stations is
difficult if not impossible to determine.

An empirical method can surmount these difficulties.
Analysis of variance, Table 5, indicated data had significant
curvature, and that significant differences existed between
sampling station means. Under any set of environmental con-
ditions BOD is some function of distance downstream from our
first sampling station. By Taylor's theorm, this function can
be approximated by a polynomial.

The following least squares regression equation was calcu-

lated (Li, 1965).

Y=5.8+5.4x-7.8x2+2.5x3
Y = Estimated mg. per liter BOD.
X = Distance downstream from Station 1.

A correlation coefficient R = 0.66 was obtained between ob-
served values and values predicted. This cubic regression

equation can be used to estimate mg. per liter BOD added to

42

Table 5. Summary of onedway analysis of variance and test for
linearity for river BOD determinations.

 

 

 

Source SS df MS Fexp. F0.95
Treatment 251.69 4 62.92 10.81 2.67
Regression 66.99 1 66.99 11.51 4.15
Deviation from 184.70 5 61.56 10.57 2.90
linearity
Error 186.28 52 5.82
Total 457.97 59

 

45

the river in the study section. Differentiating gives the
differential equation,

93:.

= _ 2
dX 5.4 15.0 X + 7.5 X

which expresses instantaneous change of BOD with respect to
distance downstream as a polynomial function. Solving this

equation gives,

0 2.
Y = f 65(5.4 - 15.0 x + 7.5 x2) dX = 7.05

0
which is nearly the same value obtained by the Streeter—Phelps
method. In larger stream reaches, and more heterogeneous
stream reaches the values would probably not be so close.
The method presented here is thought to be superior to the
standard engineering method in that it does not involve de-
termination of the stream deoxygenation constant and time of
flow between sampling stations. This same procedure can be
used for studying other stream parameters, for example,
phOSphorous or nitrogen.

Small increments of organic material added to a stream
are broken down, by bacterial action, into simple inorganic
molecules. Oxygen used by bacteria in stabilizing these
organic materials is replaced through physical and photo-
synthetic reaeration. This process is termed natural stream
purification. Engineers have long sought a means for de-
termining what level of BOD can be loaded into a stream with-

out depressing the oxygen to undesired levels. Streeter and

44

Phelps proposed the following differential equation as a model
for the process of stream reaeration and deoxygenation
(Streeter and Phelps, 1925).

d(DO)

dt = K1 (BOD) - K2 (D0)

Solution of this equation gives,

K1(BODQ) (e-Klt _ e-th K2t

+ _
K2 _ K1 ) DOOe

DO=

which can be used to predict DO deficits which will be in-
curred by a BODO loading a known time of flow downstream.
Application of this equation requires determination of K1, the
deoxygenation constant; and K2, the reaeration constant. Both
of these constants are difficult and in some cases perhaps
impossible to obtain accurately. K1 is the rate of chemical
and biological removal of oxygen from the water. An estimate
of K1 can be obtained from the BOD reaction rate constant, but
this does not take into consideration the oxygen demand of
bottom sludges, or the respiratory needs of stream dwelling
plants and animals. Velz (1958), has shown that bottom sludges
have a considerable oxygen demand. K2, the reaeration co-

efficient is equally difficult to estimate. Streeter and
n

Phelps (1925) have empirically estimated that K2 =-%¥— , where,
C = Surface slope and channel irregularities factor.
V = Velocity of water movement.
n = Factor derived from relationship of river stage
to velocity.
H = Average water depth.

45

O'Conner and Dobbins (1956), have derived theoretically the

equation,
480 D5 S5
H

 

K2:

where,

D = Coefficient of molar diffusion.

S Stream slope.

H Average depth.

From both of these equations it can be deduced that increased
depth and decreased slope have a tremendous effect on stream
oxygen dynamics.

Moore 2; gl. (1950) have presented a method for obtaining
these constants using nomograms. Nemerow (1965) gives the
constants simple formulas which, however, yield results of
questionable accuracy.

But use of this simple linear model is also a question—
able procedure. Dobbins (1964) has found this method fails
to consider the following important factors.

1. Removal of BOD by sedimentation or adsorption.

2. Addition of BOD by scour of bottom deposits or by
diffusion from bottom deposits.

5. Addition of new increments of BOD from other sources.

4. Removal of DO by diffusion to benthal deposits to
satisfy benthal oxygen demand.

5. Addition of oxygen by plants.
6. Removal of DO by respiration of aquatic organisms.
7. Changes in channel configuration.

8. Diurnal fluctuations in BOD, DO, temperature, etc.

46

It must be concluded that although the Streeter—Phelps model
is used in nearly all engineering surveys, it is far too
simple to accurately describe reaeration and deoxygenation
of a natural stream.

Churchill and Buckingham (1956) have presented a statis-
tical method for evaluation of stream loading capacity.

Using the multiple-linear regression equation,

Q = bO + blxl + b2x2 + b3X3
where, Y = D0 in ppm. at sag point in stream DO curve
X1 = 5 Day BOD in ppm.
X2 = Water temperature
X3 = Stream discharge,

it was possible to accurately predict the maximum downstream
DO sag caused by a load of organic pollution. But this method
is not applicable if more than one source of pollution exists
in the stream reach being studied, or if the stream reach is
not homogeneous.

In some cases the natural purification capacity of a
stream may be estimated using the following procedure. BOD
and DO can be estimated as functions of distance downstream
from the first sampling station. This gives two parametric
polynomial equations, the graphs of which are shown in
Figure 6.

BOD = fl (distance)

D0 = f2 (distance)

Figure 6.

47

Means and regression equations for percent
saturation dissolved oxygen and mg. per liter
biochemical oxygen demand. Distances on
abscissia are proportional to distances between
stations. Observations were taken at approxi—
mately 8:00 A.M. Each oxygen value is the mean

of 55 observations. Each BOD value is the mean
of 16 observations.

 

6

 

O BIOCHEMICAL OXYGEN

DEMAND

90

O PERCENT 8 ATURATION

OISSOLVED OXYGEN

oz<2wo zmo>xo 129291005 EMF... «$1.02

 

wmwmnm 9876543
0
..
O
o o o o o o o
8 7 6 5 4 3 2

zwm>x0 om>40wm5 ZO_._.<m:h<w hzmomma

2

0

O

SAMPLING STATION

49

The parameter distance can be eliminated from these equations
giving,
—1
BOD = f1(f2 (00)) = g(Do)
Differentiating this equation gives a differential equation

expressing the rate of change of BOD with respect to DO as a

polynomial function of DO.

d(BOD ,
email = 9 (D0)
Solution of this equation for the Red Cedar River study is as
follows,
75
BOD = f g'(DO) d(DO) = 0
75

Streams do have a capacity to assimilate small increments of
organic material. And it may be possible to determine a
maximum permissible level of BOD loading. But stream purifi-
cation capacity is small as compared to the amount of BOD in
domestic sewage. Furthermore, when sewage is loaded into a
stream so are large amounts of other materials. Presently,
the most objectionable of these are inorganic nitrogens and

phOSphorous.

Phogphorous

Raw sewage before the advent of synthetic detergents
contained approximately 2.5 mg. per liter of phOSphorous.
Now, Sawyer (1962) reports phosphorous content of sewage ef-

fluents are two or three times higher. Other sources of

50

phosphorous in streams are organic metabolism, sediments
brought in by surface run-off, and wearing away of phosphor-
ous containing geologic formations (Reid, 1960). Phosphorous
in streams can be divided into three categories, total-
phosphorous (ortho + poly), ortho—phOSphorous (PO45, HPO4=,
H2GO4-, H3PO4), and polyphosphorous (Na3(P03)8, NasPsolo,
Na4P2O7-) (Sawyer, 1960).

Liebigs "law" of the minimum states that "growth of a
plant is dependent on the amount of foodstuff which is pre-
sented to it in minimum quantity" (Odum, 1960).

PhosPhorous is a scarce mineral nutrient aquatic ecologists
consider to be the factor most frequently limiting to aquatic
production (Hutchinson, 1957). Total phOSphorous concen—
trations of 0.01 mg. per liter and total inorganic nitrogen
concentrations of 0.52 mg. per liter have been shown to be
sufficient to produce blooms of aquatic vegetation (Mackenthun,
1965). These blooms of aquatic vegetation destroy recrea-
tional and esthetic values of lakes and streams. And death
and decay of the masses of vegetation will often cause dis-
solved oxygen levels to fall below minimal requirements of
desirable aquatic inhabitants of lakes and streams.

In this study determinations were made for concentrations
of total and ortho-phOSphorous. Both ortho and total-
phOSphorous data collected at river sampling stations deviated
significantly from linearity. But means between sampling
stations differed significantly when tested using one-way

analysis of variance, Tables 6 and 7. Scheffe's test for

Figure 7.

51

Means of mg. per liter ortho-phosphorous at
river sampling stations. Distances on
abscissia are proportional to distances be—
tween sampling stations. Each value is the
mean of 6 observations.

0
0.

mDOmOIn—ga

 

O 5
2
O O .
ICE. mo mm»... a mad:

SAM PLIN 6 STATION

55

Table 6. Summary of one-way analysis of variance and test for
linearity for river total pho3phorous.

 

Source SS df MS F F

 

 

exp. 0.95
Treatments 15.18 4 5.29 52.90 2.69
Regression 7.57 1 7.57 75.70 4.17
Deviation from 5.81 5 1.95 19.50 2.92
linearity
Error 5.25 50 0.10
Total 16.41 54

 

Table 7. Summary of one—way analysis of variance and test for
linearity for river ortho-phosPhorous determinations.

 

 

 

Source SS df MS Fexp. 0.95
Treatment 9.07 4 2.26 28.25 2.87
Regression 5.21 1 5.21 65.12 4.55
Deviation from 5.86 5 1.28 16.00 5.10
linearity
Error 1.26 20 0.08
Total 10.69 24

 

54

significance of differences between individual means indi-
cated the differences between the mean for Station 5 and
means for Stations 4, 5, 2, and 1 were significant.

Extremely high phOSphorous concentrations were found be-
low the Kalamazoo Street Sewage Treatment Plant. Phosphorous
concentrations in unpolluted rivers average two or more magni-
tudes less than minimum values obtained in this study (Reid,
1960).

These data indicate large quantities of phosphorous were
being loaded into the river at the East Lansing Kalamazoo
Street Sewage Treatment Plant. High phosphorous concentrations
together with other sewage components contribute significantly
to the unsightly growths of aquatic plants abundant in the

study area.

Summary of Nitrogen Determinations

Hutchinson (1957) gives as the sources of nitrogen in
streams, fixation in the stream and its sediments, run-off and
ground water, precipitation, decomposition of aquatic organ-
isms, and sewage effluents. Brehmer (1958) indicated run-off
was the main source of nitrogen in the Red Cedar River and
nitrogen rather than phOSphorous was the nutrient limiting
plant productivity. Results of this study indicate neither
phosPhorous nor nitrogen is limiting, but rather that produc—
tivity is limited by high turbidity and siltation.

In this study concentrations of nitrate nitrogen, nitrite

nitrogen, organic nitrogen, and ammonia nitrogen were

55

determined. Means for nitrate nitrogen concentrations at
river sampling stations were significantly different when
tested using one-way analysis of variance, Table 11. It was
found that nitrate nitrogen data deviated significantly from
linearity. Scheffe's test indicated significant differences
existed between the mean for Station 2, and the means for
Stations 5, and 4. Means for Station 1 and Station 5 also
were significantly different. Nitrate concentrations appear
to be highest in the impoundment.

Traces of nitrite nitrogen were obtained at Stations 5
and 5. Sawyer (1960) states nitrite nitrogen seldom appears
even in sewage treatment plant effluents.

Means for organic nitrogen determinations were not sig—
nificantly different, Table 10. But organic and nitrate
nitrogen concentrations appeared to be higher at Stations 1
and 2.

Means for ammonia nitrogen determinations did not differ

significantly, Table 8. The regression equation,

Y = 2.12 + 0.52 Xi

Y. = Estimated‘ mg. per liter ammonia
' nitrogen.

X. = Miles downstream from Station 1,

indicates a gradual downstream increase of ammonia.
Nitrogen levels at all stations were above levels common-
ly found in unpolluted streams. Reid (1961) states that in

unpolluted streams ammonia concentrations rarely exceed 1

56

Table 8. Summary of one-way analysis of variance and test for
linearity for river ammonia nitrogen determinations.

 

 

 

Source ' ss df MS F F

 

 

exp. 0.95
Treatment 8.75 4 2.18 1.96 2.65
Regression 5.22 1 5.22 2.90 4.12
Deviation from 5.51 5 1.85 1.64 2.87
linearity
Error 55.49 50 1.11
Total 42.22 54

 

Table 9. Summary of randomized block design analysis of
variance for river ammonia nitrogen determinations.

—_—

 

Source SS df MS F F

 

exp. 0.95
Treatment 8.75 4 2.18 2.05 2.65
Blocks 7.77 6 1.29 1.20 2.51
Error 25.72 24 1.07

 

Total 42.22 54

 

57

Table 10. ’Summary of one—way analysis of variance and test for
linearity for river organic nitrogen determinations.

 

 

 

Source SS df MS Fexp. F0.95
Treatment 2.21 4 0.55 0.48 2.69
Regression 0.09 1 0.09 0.07 4.17
Deviation from 2.12 5 0.70 0.61 2.92
linearity
Error 54.42 50 1.14
Total 56.65 54

 

Table 11. Summary of one-way analysis of variance and test for
linearity for river nitrate nitrogen.

 

Source SS df MS F F

 

exp. 0.95
Treatment 28.67 4 7.16 6.45 2.69
Regression 0.50 1 0.50 0.27 4.17
Deviation from 28.57 5 9.45 8.51 2.92
linearity
Error 55.56 50

 

Total 62.05 54

 

58

mg. per liter, and nitrate concentrations in natural waters
average 0.50 mg. per liter. Blank determinations verified
that the methods were sufficiently accurate providing inter-
fering substances not present in blanks were not present in
samples. Sawyer (1960) states the nitrate nitrogen analysis
has serious limitations, and that the reduction method is poor.
High alkalinity may also interfere with nitrogen determina-
tions (Standard Methods, 1960). Hutchinson (1957) quotes work
which indicates binding of ammonia to colloidal particles
significantly decreases values of ammonia determinations in
turbid waters. It must be concluded from this work as from
other work (Phelps, 1944) that nitrogen determinations are

unsatisfactory for routine determinations of water quality.

Results and Discussion of Physical Tests

BE

Data for pH measurements, the negative logarithm of the
hydrogen ion concentration, deviated significantly from
linearity. But a one-way analysis of variance indicated sig-
nificant differences existed among sampling stations, Table 12.
pH values were highest in the impoundment. Increasing pH
values indicate CO2 concentrations are decreasing. This im-
plies, as did the alkalinity data, that primary production is

greater in the impoundment than in other parts of the river.

59

Tempgrature

 

Using a randomized block design analysis of variance,
significant differences were shown to exist between station
means for water temperature. Scheffe's test indicated the
mean water temperature at Station 5 was significantly higher
than the mean water temperature upstream at Station 1.

Figure 9 shows that water temperatures increase to a maximum
at Station 5, located near the East Kalamazoo Street Bridge.

The pool-like area upstream from the dam may be expected
to have a higher temperature than shaded portions of the
stream. A more certain cause of high temperatures at Station
5 was hot power plant effluents which enter the river between
Stations 2 and 5.

Coutant (1962) showed that effluents 200 F. to 250 F.
above normal river temperatures decreased the macroinverte-
brate bottom fauna standing crop biomass from 1.04 gm. per
square foot to 0.09 gm. per square foot for a distance of 1600
feet below the outfall. Heat must be considered a pollutant.
On one occasion effluent temperature of power plant drain 17
was 450 F. higher than the river temperature upstream from

the outfall (the river temperature was 680 F.).
Total Residue

Total residue is a measure of the dissolved and suspended
matter in water. Residues obtained at all stations except

'Station 1 were a greasy black, and emitted a dense white smoke

I

60

on drying. The data deviated significantly from linearity,
and differences between sampling station means were not
statistically significant. The data did, however, indicate

a slight increase in the impoundment.

Turbidity

 

Water turbidity is a measure of the suspended matter
interfering with passage of light through water. High turbid-
ity is detrimental to aquatic ecosystems, as photosynthesis is
inhibited by lack of light, and the abrasive action of sus-
pended particles is an important source of biological stress
(King and Ball, 1964). Ellis (1956) states that silt alters
aquatic communities through screening out light, changing
heat radiation, blanketing stream bottoms, and by retaining
organic materials and other substances which create unfavorable
conditions on the stream bottom.

Means for sampling stations were significantly different,
but data deviated significantly from linearity, Table 15.
Scheffe's test indicated the mean turbidity at Station 1 was
significantly less than the mean turbidity at Stations 2, 5,
and 4. Turbidity at Station 5 was significantly greater than
the turbidity at Stations 4 and 5.

This peak turbidity at Station 5 with lesser values both
upstream and downstream is thought to be caused by construc-
tion on the Michigan State University campus in progress

during this study period.

Figure 8.

61

Mean values for pH measurements at sampling
stations. Distances on abscissia are pro-
portional to distances between stations.
Each value is the mean of 8 observations.

8.00

pH 7.50

 

7.00

SAMPLING STATION

 

 

65

Figure 9. Mean values of temperatures at river sampling

stations. Distances on abscissia are pro—
portional to distances between sampling

stations. Each value is the mean of 26 ob-
servations.

 

II o 7 6
2 2 w m I I

mo<m0_._.zm0 mmwmomo Zowm3m<m2 mmskdmmac‘wk

SA MPLING STA TION

Figure 10.

65

Turbidity measured as Jackson turbidity units

for river
abscissia
stations.
tions.

sampling stations. Distances on
are proportional to distances between
Each value is the mean of 7 observa-

 

_ _

O O 0 0
5 4 3 2

mtz: >._._o_mm3._. zomxos.

SAMPLING STATION

Table 12. Summary of one-way analysis of variance
linearity for river pH determinations.

67

and test for

 

 

 

Source SS df MS Fexp. F0.95
Treatments 0.87 4 0.21 5.00 2.65
Regression 0.04 1 0.04 0.57 4.12
Deviation from 0.85 5 0.27 5.85 2.88
linearity
Error 2.67 55 0.07
Total 5.65 59

 

Table 15. Summary of one-way analysis of variance and test
linearity for river turbidity determinations.

for

 

 

 

Source SS df MS Fexp. F0.95
Treatments 2885.26 4 720.81 17.57 2.69
Regression 426.17 1 426.17 10.59 4.17
Deviation from 457.09 5 152.56 5.71 2.92
linearity
Error 1260.45 50 41.01
Total 4145.69 54

 

f““‘-_f?1

u-‘.-‘4._ -a—. _
)

68

Table 14. Summary of randomized block design analysis of

variance for river temperatures.

 

 

 

Source SS df MS Fexp. F0.95
Treatment 266.25 4 66.55 4.88 2.47
Blocks 2751.85 25 110.07 8.08 1.60
Non-additivity 5.91 1 5.91 0.28 5.95
Remainder 1558.52 99 15.72
Error 1562.25 100
Total 4580.29 129

 

69

 

Conductivity»
Ohm's law for metallic conductors states that I ='%,
where R ='EL , is termed the resistance. p Is the Specific

A

resistance or resistivity of the conducting medium, L the
length of the resistor, and A the cross sectional area of the
resistor. As soon as sufficiently sensitive measuring devices
became available it became apparent that solutions of electro-
lytes as well as metallic conductors followed Ohm's law.
According to the Debye-Huckel theory, ions in solution migrate
towards the pole with electrical charge opposite to their own
when placed into an electric field. This migration creates a
measurable electric current proportional to concentrations of
the dissolved ions. Conductance, conductivity, and molar
equivalents concentration of solute are related by the expres-

sion (Moore, 1962),

Conductivity = the reciprocal of resistivity.
Measured as (ohm-l cm'l).

where, F

-/\-= Conductance = the reciprocal of resistance.
Measured as (ohm-1).

C

eq Molar equivalents solute.

It can be seen from this equation that as concentrations
of solutes increase conductivity of the solution increases.
An approximation of the mg. per liter of cations or anions

—1

in a solution can be obtained by multiplying u-ohms conduct-

ance by 0.01 (Standard Methods, 1960).

70

Analysis of conductivity data for stream sampling sta-
tions indicated significant differences existed between
sampling station means, and that data do not deviate signifi—

cantly from linearity, Table 15. The linear regression

equation,
§= 59.1 + 8.0x
Y = Estimated conductance in ohm"1 x 10‘3
X = Miles downstream from Station 1,

indicates a consistant large increase in conductance at down-
stream sampling stations. Results of Scheffe's test indi-
cated means for conductance measurements at Stations 4 and 5
were significantly different from that at Station 1. The mean
for Station 5 is also significantly different from the mean
for Station 2.

As every box of salt purchased in the East Lansing com—
munity eventually finds its way down the drain, it is not dif-
ficult to account for the pattern of conductivity measurements.
illustrated in Figure 20. Run-off may also account for some
increase in conductivity. But Ellis (1956) states that erosion
silt does not significantly alter the salt complex, or the

amount of electrolytes in river waters.

Bacteriology

 

Water has long been known to be a possible transmitter of
disease. Hippocrates recommended drinking water be filtered

and boiled (Frank, 1955). Typhoid fever, paratyphoid fever,

71

Table 15. Summary of one-way analysis of variance and test for
linearity for river conductance determinations.

 

 

Source SS df MS Fexp. F0.95
Treatment 0.227 4 0.056 8.00 2.69
Regression 0.190 1 0.190 27.14 4.17
Deviation from 0.057 5 0.012 1.71 2.92
linearity
Error 0.215 50 0.007

 

Total 0.442 54

 

72

Figure 11. Conductivity determinations for river sampling

stations expressed as mho's. Distances on
abscissia are proportional to distances between

sampling stations. Each value is the mean of
5 observations.

800

700

wOI

2 600

z.

0 0
0 0
5 4

>._._>_._.ODQ 20

O
O
3
o

200

SAMPLING STATION

74

bacillary dysentery, amebic dysentery, asiatic cholera,
diarrhea, infectious hepatitis, infectious jaundice, polio-
myelitis, and anthrax are some diseases commonly associated
with water.

Unpolluted streams contain an abundant bacterial popu-
lation averaging, for example, 1900 per 100 ml. in a Great
Britain survey of twenty English rivers (Gainy and Lord,
1952). But the number of free living bacteria is usually only
a dozen or so per 100 ml., composed primarily of Species of

Micrococcus, Flavobacterium, Achromobacterium, Bacillus,

 

Proteus, and Leptospira (Frobisher, 1957). Surface run-off
contributes considerable numbers of bacteria to streams,
causing bacteria counts to be significantly higher after heavy
showers (Frobisher, 1957). Cultivated soils contains up to
several billion bacteria per gram.

It has not been possible to devise specific tests for
water-borne disease producing micro-organisms. It is there-
fore common procedure to test for relatively high numbers of
coliform bacteria rather than to attempt tests Specifically
for Salmonella typhi, the typhoid producing bacilli, or other
disease producing organisms.

The coliform group of bacteria includes all aerobic or
facultative anerobic Gram-negative non-Spore forming bacilli
capable of fermenting lactose broth with gas formation (Gainy
and Lord, 1952). Although most coliforms are harmless, high

populations are associated with the presence of pathogenic

75

bacteria and water containing large numbers are regarded as
dangerous (Gainy and Lord, 1952).

The United States Treasury Department prohibits inter-
state common carriers to serve drinking water with more than

one Escherichia coli (a common coliform bacteria) per 100 m1.

 

Sewage plant effluents usually contain between 10,000,000 and

1,000,000,000 Escherichia coli bacteria per 100 ml. prior to

 

dilution (Gainy and Lord, 1952). The most probable number
(MPN) is an index of the number of coliform bacteria which,
more probably than any other number, would give the results

shown by the laboratory examination (Standard Methods, 1960).

 

As can be seen from Figure 12, the most probable number
of coliform bacteria in the Red Cedar River is considerably
higher than is desirable. At one point the bacteria count
exceeds a value commonly found in sewage plant effluents.
Bacteria counts upstream at Hagadorn Road are excessively high,
indicating, as does BOD and dissolved oxygen data, that con—
siderable pollution is entering the river above this point.
The source of these upstream pollutants may be saturated septic
tank leaching fields. As the river flows through the Michigan
State University campus the MPN of coliform bacteria increases
exponentially on logarithmic graph paper, indicating several

sources of domestic sewage enter the river in the study area.

76

Table 16. Most probable number of gram negative bacteria per
100 ml. of river water for five sampling stations.

 

 

 

 

. Dilution
Statlon 10 10'1 10"2 10‘3 10'4 10‘5 10-: 10"7 MPN
8-24-84
1 5/5 2/5 1/5 0/5 0/5 15000
2 5/5 2/5 1/5 0/5 0/5 15000
5 5/5 5/5 2/5 0/5 0/5 15000
4 5/5 5/5 2/5‘ 0/5 0/5 110000
5 5/5' 5/5 5/5 2/5 0/5 1100000
9-15-64
1 2/5 0/5 0/5 0/5 0/5 0/5 9100
1/5 0/5 0/5 0/5 0/5 0/5 5800
5 5/5 1/5 1/5 0/5 0/5 0/5 45000
4 2/5 0/5 0/5 0/5 0/5 0/5 9100
5 5/5 0/5 0/5 0/5 0/5 0/5 25000
11-18-84
1 5/5 5/5 5/5 0/5 0/5 0/5 2400
5/5 5/5 2/5 0/5 0/5 0/5 9500
5 5/5 5/5 5/5 5/5 2/5 0/5 450000
4 5/5 5/5 5/5 0/5 0/5 0/5 24000
5 5/5 5/5 5/5 5/5 5/5 0/5 2400000

 

77

Figure 12. Most probable number (MPN) for coliform
bacteria per 100 ml. of river water at sampling
stations. Distances on abscissia are propor-
tional to distances between sampling stations.

 

0
0
O
2

n

 

0

00 o 432
32 I

I000
300
200

0

O. x 42 00. «in. <_mm._.0<m m>_._.<0wz 2410.05 mmiaz m4m<m0ma PmOs.

SAMPLING STAT ION

79
Bottom Sampling Data

In natural ecosystems the initial source of energy is
solar insolation. Photosynthetic members of ecosystems fix
and store small amounts of solar radiant energy by forming
chemical bonds, producing large molecules from simple com—
ponents. A portion of this stored energy is dissipated by
plant respiration, but some is transferred along the food
chain to herbivores. Herbivores utilize stored plant energy
to build and maintain their bodies, dissipating energy in
the process through work on the environment, through friction
within their bodies, and by resPiration. Some herbivores may
fall prey to carnivores, and the processes of bioenergetics
continue.

Increased energy input into an ecosystem will produce
a comparable increase of biological productivity if other
factors are not limiting (Odum and Hoskin, 1957). Slobodkin
(1962) cites work by Hairston eg‘gl. which indicates the bio-
5phere is energy limited as a whole. If the energy input is
in the form of complex organic molecules, the producer trophic
level should not be noticeably affected by this energy in-
crease. But standing crop biomass of other trophic levels may
increase greatly.

It is also necessary to consider biogeochemical cycles
when discussing physical phenomena that regulate productivity
of aquatic ecosystems. Phosphorous and nitrogen are two

essential plant nutrients, the scarcity of which is commonly

80

limiting to biological productivity (Odum, 1959). Both of
these elements are involved in biogeochemical cycles, being
constantly removed from and added to the biosystem in small
increments. The atmosphere serves as a reservoir for nitro-
gen, and phOSphate rocks are the phOSphorous reservoir.

To summarize, biological productivity in aquatic ecosystems
is limited by the energy input into the system and by the
availability of some mineral nutrients.

Sewage effluents are rich in both energy containing
organic molecules and mineral nutrients. This influx of energy
and nutrients results in a potential for high biological
productivity. But influx of sewage is accompanied by other
factors such as low dissolved oxygen, toxic materials, and high
turbidity. These factors are limiting to most species of fish
and bottom fauna. Sewage effluents, therefore, have the po-
tential to support large populations of aquatic organisms able
to tolerate adverse environmental conditions.

Bottom samples obtained from the Red Cedar River indicate
productivity was high but diversity was extremely low. At
Hagadorn Road most bottom fauna appears to have been destroyed
by heavy siltation. Sewage worms (Tubificidae) and blood

worms (Chironomus) are abundant at all sampling stations.

 

On one occasion numerous Chaoborus larva were obtained at

 

Station 1. Chaoborus, a predatory midge, is usually found in
deep lakes (Pennak, 1955). Samples taken at Station 5 near
the East Kalamazoo Street Bridge indicate this section of the

river has a meager bottom fauna. Coliform counts also were

81

low at this station. Bottom materials were of a black cinder
composition. A large sludge bed rich in Tubificidae and
chironomus larvae is forming at mid-stream immediately up-
stream from Station 5. Drains 58 and 60 appear to be the
source of sludge forming materials.

Animals are not randomly distributed. Deviations between
sample means for a population of clumped organisms is expected
to be large. But deviations in this work are not as large as
would have been the case if the Ekman dredge were not a poor
sampling device. All samples were of necessity taken where
the bottom materials were soft muck, as gravel fouled the
dredge jaws preventing them from closing. Usinger (1956) also

concludes that present bottom sampling techniques are biased.

82

 

 

 

 

 

 

Table 17. Summary oflxnflxxnorganisms expressed as number per
square foot.
Station sample PeriOd Total Mean

8-29-64 9-15—64 9-26-64

Tubificidae
1 81 24 54 159 46
2 151 258 15 594 105
5 56 11 145 186 61
4 64 250 95 107 152
5 458 258 518 1014 559
Chironomus
1 24 106 6 180 45
2 1 6 2 9 5
5 0 0 0 0 0
4 5 0 1 4 1
5 17 87 905 1005 555
In addition to the above mentioned organisms,
the following were obtained.

ORGANISM NUMBER STATION
Margaritanidae 2 4
Vivparidae 1 4
Sphaeriidae 8 2,4,5
Chaoborinae 20 1
Opisthopora 8 1,2,4
Planaria 27 4

 

Figure 15.

85

Number of Tubificidae per square foot at
river sampling stations. Distances on

abscissia are proportional to distances
between stations.

 

 

 

 

 

O O

O 0
5 2

POOH“. mm<30m mun. m<o_0_n=m3._. “.0 mmmEDZ

I00

S AMP LING STATIONS

85

Table 18. Summary of one-way analysis of variance and test for
linearity for river Tubificidae.

 

Source SS df MS F F

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

exp. 0.95
Treatment 104285.6 4 26071.4 1.51 5.11
Regression 57450.5 1 5745.5 0.21 4.60
Deviation from
linearity 66855.1 5 22285.0 1.29 5.54
Error 171562.4 10 17156.2
Total 275848.0 14
Table 19. Summary of one-way analysis of variance for
Chironominae.

Source SS df MS Fexp. F0.95
Treatment 165244 4 40811 1.28 . 5.11
Error 517429 10 51742

 

Total 480675 14

 

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION OF DRAIN
EFFLUENT ANALYSES

Results of drain effluent analyses indicated effluents
of nearly one-third of the 68 or more drains located within
the bounds of the study area contained materials detrimental
to the water quality of the Red Cedar River. Several drain
effluents consisted of untreated domestic sewage. One or
more drain effluents contained a lethal chemical, suSpected
to have contributed to conditions responsible for the fish
kill in the spring of 1964. Several other factors such as
low dissolved oxygen, high turbidity, and pesticides probably
were also responsible for the kill. A brief summary of
results for the more important drains follows. For location

of drain being discussed and complete data refer to Figure 1

and appendices.

Drain 15: Drain 15 is the power plant drain near the library
foot bridge. Effluent temperatures were extremely high.

A temperature of 450 C. was recorded for this drain.

Drain 25: Drain 25 is located behind Jenison Field house.
This drain was found to flow regularly. The effluent appears

to be domestic sewage.

Drain 47: Drain 47 is located below the water surface at the

upstream end of Farm Lane on the north side of the river.

86

87

A BOD value of 17.65 was recorded for the water in front of

this drain. Turbidity measurements were also high.

Drain 48: This drain is located a few yards downstream from
Farm Lane Bridge. Usually this drain flows backwards, but

during rains and late in the afternoon it flows sewage.

Drain 55: The source of drain 55, which is located below the
dam, appears to be a natural stream. BOD and phosphorous

concentrations were extremely high on some occasions.

Drain 40: Drain 40 is the large metal covered drains up-
stream from Bogue Street. Evidence indicates drain 40 flows
large quantities of untreated sewage. The river below this
out-fall often has an effervesent appearance due to emission

of gaseous products escaping from bottom sludges.

Drain 49: Two bioassays were performed on the effluent of
drain 49. In the first bioassay three guppies placed into

a container of 50 ml. drain sample and 150 ml. aquaria water
were killed in 96 hours. Three guppies placed into a con-
tainer of 200 ml. aquaria water were not killed. A second
bioassay was performed as suggested in Standard Methods (1960).
Water for dilution of drain sample and controls was obtained
from the river at the end of the canoe dock. Test organisms
were blackside darters obtained from the Red Cedar River.

Six darters of the group assigned to the 1/20 drain effluent

to river water dilution mixture were dead after 12 days.

88

Four days later another was dead. None of the darters in the
control group died.

Results of this bioassay indicate materials contained in
the effluent from drain 49 can be harmful to higher aquatic

life even after considerable dilution.

Drain 58: This drain regularly flows raw sewage. High BOD
values were obtained. Fecal material and toilet paper were
frequently observed coming from this drain opening. This

drain is the major cause of stream deterioration behind the

Michigan State University Women's gym.

Drain 64: Drain 64 is located under Harrison Street Bridge.
A BOD value of 525 mg. per liter, a phosPhorous value of
7.50 mg. per liter, and a nitrate nitrogen concentration of
5.88 mg. per liter were recorded for this drain. Further
evidence that this drain flows raw sewage are the pieces of

toilet paper and fecal material abundant in the effluent.

Drain 65: Drain 54 is the power plant out-fall above the dam.
Because of the large volume flow of this drain the heated
effluent is thought to have a significant effect on quality

of the Red Cedar River.

Drain 59: This is the large drain, surrounded by broken side-
walk, located behind the women's gym. This drain flows irregu-
larly, but on one occasion had a voluminous effluent with a

BOD of 82.10 mg. per liter. Drain 59 appears to be connected

to the power plant drain located above the dam, as white

89

colored effluents were observed flowing from both drains
simultaneously on several occasions.

In summary, between Hagadorn Road and East Kalamazoo
Street there are several sanitary sewers flowing into the
Red Cedar River. Most of these drains were overflows con—
nected to a main intercepter sewer which is located under the
north bank of the river, and crosses under the river just
upstream from the East Kalamazoo Street Bridge. Effluents
from these numerous sewer outfalls have produced the low
oxygen levels, high BOD values, and high coliform counts re-
ported in this study. It must be noted that the waters of
the Red Cedar are of poor quality even at Hagadorn Road,
indicating considerable quantities of untreated or poorly
treated sewage enter the river above Hagadorn Road.

To remedy the situation on campus requires installation
of a larger intercepter sewer capable of carrying the in—
creased load of sewage produced in the East Lansing, Michigan
State University, and Meridian Township areas.

To reclaim the river for recreational uses will require
a more extensive program, which may first need to include
creation of some form of watershed management district. For
abatement of pollution of the Red Cedar will require co-
operation of all citizens in the watershed who are presently

contributing pollutants.

SUMMARY

At least 68 drains are located between Hagadorn Road
and East Kalamazoo Street at the eastern edge of the

Lansing City Limits.

About 4,674 persons are polluting the river between

Hagadorn Road and East Kalamazoo Street.

Percent oxygen saturation decreases linearly from a mean
value of 75 percent at Hagadorn Road to a mean value of

18 percent at East Kalamazoo Street.

The most probable number (MPN) of coliform bacteria in—
creases from a few thousand at Hagadorn Road to over a

million per 100 ml. at East Kalamazoo Street.

Bottom fauna consists almost entirely of sewage worms
and blood worms. Some sections of the study area appear

to be devoid of even these sewage resistant organisms.

Bottom sediments are composed of coarse gravel, mixed with
larger rocks, covered over in nearly all locations with

either several inches of silt or sludge beds.

The impoundment and power plant drains increase water

temperature significantly.

90

10.

11.

12.

15.

14.

15.

91

Volume flow of the River was extremely low during this
study period, and average yearly discharge is rapidly de-

creasing.

Coliform counts and biochemical oxygen demand appear to
reflect fluctuations in the Michigan State University—

East Lansing population density.

Plant photosynthetic production appears to be low in the
study area, with the main source of oxygen being physical

reaeration.

Turbidity and siltation prevent abundant nitrogen and

phOSphorous from supporting large blooms of aquatic vege—

tation.

Ortho-phOSphorous concentrations increased exponentially
from 0.56 mg. per liter at Hagadorn Road to 1.12 mg.

per liter at East Kalamazoo Street.

BOD values increased from a mean of 5.69 at Hagadorn Road
to a mean of 10.60 at East Kalamazoo Street. Waters with
a BOD of 5 are of poor quality, and those with a BOD of

4 are of bad quality (Hynes, 1960).

Turbidity increases to a maximum of 45 Jackson units at

East Kalamazoo Street.

All nitrogen concentrations were higher than is normal

for a non-polluted river.

16.

17.

18.

92

Sediments appear to be one of the most serious pollutants

from a biological point of view.

Concentrations of dissolved salts increases linearly from

Hagadorn Road to East Kalamazoo Street.

Aquatic biological sampling devices are presently inade-
quate for reliable, and discriminatory test for degree of

municiple pollution.

LITERATURE C ITED

A.P.H.A., A.W.W.A., W.P.C.P., 1960. Standard Methods for the
Examination of Water and Wastewater. Boyd Printing
Company. Albany, New York. 626 pp.

 

Bamforth, Stuart 8., 1962. "Diurnal changes in shallow
aquatic habitates." Limnology and Oceanography. “1:5.

Brehmer, M. L., 1958. "A study of nutrient accrual, uptake,
and regeneration in a warm water stream." Ph. D. thesis,
Michigan State University.

Burroughs, Leland C., 1960. "Effect of water pollution on
industry." Proceedings of the National Conference on
Water Pollution. U. S. Government Printing Office.
Washington D.C. pp. 105-110.

Churchill, M. A., 1958. "Effects of impoundments on oxygen
resources." Oxygen Relationships in Streams. U. S.
Department of Health Education and Welfare Tech. Rept.
W58-2. pp. 107-129.

Churchill, M. A., and R. A. Buckingham, 1956. "Analysis of
a stream's capacity for assimilating pollution."
Sewage and Industrial Wastes. 28. pp. 517—557.

Coutant, Charles C., 1962. "The effect of a heated water
effluent upon the macroinvertebrate riffle fauna of
the Delaware River." Proceedings of the Pennsylvania
Academy of Science. XXXVI. pp. 58-57.

Ellis, M. M., 1956. "Erosion silt as a factor in aquatic
environments." Ecology. 17. pp. 29—42.

Fair and Geyer, 1961. Elements of Water Supply and Waste—
Water Disposal. John Wiley and Sons Inc. New York.
615 pp.

Frobisher, Martin, 1957. Fundamentals of Microbiology.
W. B. Saunders Company. Philadelphia. 617 pp]

Gainey and Lord, 1952. Microbiology of Water and Sewage.

Prentice-Hall Inc., Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey.
420 pp.

95

94

Gameson, A. L. H. and M. J. Barrett, 1958. "Oxidation,
reaeration, and mixing in the Thames Estuary." Oxygen
Relationships in Streams. U. S. Department of Health
Education and Welfare Tech. Rept. W58-2. pp. 65-91.

 

Graham, J. M., 1949. "Some effects of temperature and oxygen
pressure on the metabolism and activity of the Speckled
trout, Salvelinus fontinalis." Canadian Journal of
Research. Dec. 27, pp. 270-280.

 

 

Grzenda, A. R., 1960. Primary production energetics and
nutrient utilization in a warm water stream. Ph. D.
thesis, Michigan State University.

Guenther, William C., 1964. Analysis of Variance. Prentice-
Hall Inc., Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey. 166 pp.

 

Hutchinson, G. E., 1957. A Treatise on Limnology. John Wiley
and Sons, New York. 1015 pp.

 

Hynes, H. B. N., 1960. The Biology of Polluted Waters.
Liverpool University Press, Liverpool, England. 202 pp.

 

King, D. L., 1964. An ecological and pollution—related study
of a warm—water stream. Ph. D. thesis. Michigan State
University.

King, D. L., and R. C. Ball, 1964. "The influence of highway
construction on a stream." Research Report 19, Michigan
State University Agricultural Experiment Station. 4 pp.

Kittrell, F. W., 1959. "Effects of impoundments on dissolved
oxygen resources." Sewage and Industrial Wastes.
pp. 1065-1078.

 

Kolthoff and Sandell, 1952. Textbook of Quantitative Inor—
ganic Analysis. Macmillan Company, New York. 725 pp.

 

Li, Jerome C. R., 1964. Statistical Inference. 2 volumes.
Edwards Brothers Inc., Ann Arbor, Michigan. 658 pp.

Mackenthun, Kenneth, M., 1965. Nitrogen and PhoszorouS in
Water, and annotated selected bibliography of their
biological effects. U. S. Public Health Service. 111 pp.

 

Moore, Walter J., 1962. Physical Chemistry. Prentice-Hall
Inc., Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey. 844 pp.

 

Moore, E. W., H. A. Thomas, and W. B. Snow, 1950. "Simplified
method for analysis of BOD data." Sewage and Industrial
Wastes. 22, 1545.

 

95

Nemerow, Nelson L., 1965. Theories and Practices of Industrial
Waste Treatment. Addison—Wesley Publishing Company,
Reading, Mass. 557 pp.

 

O'Connor, D. J. and W. E. Dobbins, 1956. "The Mechanism of

 

 

reaeration in polluted streams." Journal of Sanitary
Engineering. Div., American Society of Civil Engineers.
82, 1115.

Odum, Eugene P., 1959. Fundamentals of Ecology. W. B.
Saunders and Company, Philadelphia. 546 pp.

 

Odum, Eugene P., 1965. Ecology. Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
New York. 152 pp.

Odum, Howard T., 1956. "Primary production in flowing waters."
Limnology and Oceanography. .1. pp. 102-117.

Odume, H. T., and C. H. Hoskin, 1957. "Metabolism of a labora-
tory stream microcoism." Institute of Marine Science.
4, No. 2:115—155.

 

Pennak, R. W., 1955. Fresh-water Invertebrates of the United
States. Ronald Press. New York. 769 pp.

 

Phelps, Earle Bernard, 1944. Stream Sanitation. John Wiley
and Sons, New York. 276 pp.

 

Reid, George K., 1961. Ecology of Inland Waters and Estuaries.
Reinhold Publishing Company, New York. 575 pp.

Ruch and Fulton, 1960. Medical Physiology and Biophysics.
Saunders Company, Philadelphia. 1252 pp.

 

Sawyer, Clair N., 1960. Chemistry for Sanitary Engineers.
McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc., New York. 567 pp.

 

Slobodkin, L. B., 1962. "Energy in animal ecology."
Advances in Ecological Research. Vol. 1, pp. 69-101.

Streeter, H. W , 1958. "The oxygen sag and dissolved oxygen
relationships in streams." Oxygen Relationships in
Streams. U. S. Department of Health Education and
Welfare Tech. Rept. W58-2. pp. 25—28.

Streeter, H. W., and Earle B. Phelps, 1925. "A study of the
Pollution and natural purification of the Ohio River III."
U. S. Department of Health Education and Welfare Bulle—
tin 146. 75 pp.

Tarzwell, Clarence M., 1957. Watergguality Criteria for
Aquatic Life. U. S. Department of Health Education and
Welfare Report. 26 pp.

 

96

Theriault, Emery J., 1927. The oxygen demand of polluted
waters. Public Health Service Bulletin 175. 25 pp.

Tindall and Mickley, 1964. "An integrated application of
three kinds of sampling techniques to streams."
Limnology and Oceanography. 9:2. pp. 270-272.

 

Udall, Stewart L., 1965. The Quiet Crisis. The Hearst
Corporation, New York. 224 pp.

Unsinger, R. L., (ed.), 1956. Aquatic Insects of California.
University of California Press, Berkeley. 505 pp.

Vannote, R. L., 1961. Chemical and hydrological investi-
gations of the Red Cedar River Watershed. M. S. thesis.
Michigan State University.

Velz, C. J., 1958. "Significance of organic sludge deposits."
Oxygen Relationships in Streams. U. S. Department of
Health Education and Welfare Tech. Rept. W58—2. pp.
47-57.

Wiebe, A. H., and Arno C. Fuller, 1954. "The oxygen consump-
tion of largemouth black bass, Huro floridana, fingeré'
lings." Transactions of the American Fisheries Society.
65. pp. 208-214.

APPENDIX A

DRAIN SAMPLING DATA

97

98

Total alkalinity measurements for drains, as mg./liter CaCOs.

 

 

 

Drain Sample Period
Number 1 2 5 4 5 Total Mean
46 228 228 228
47 286 264 244 190 984 246
48 194 194 194
55 142 60 100 502 100
56 510 552 546 580 590 1758 551
58 224 240 464 252
64 554 406 566 400 592 1918 585
56 274 146 144 220 784 196
1 204 175 512 502 995 248
5 200 490 690 545
52 296 296 500 892 297
54 210 186 278 256 910 227
15 122 166 124 176 220 808 161
25 254 98 148 146 626 156
60 292 288 292 512 268 1452 290
19 104 500 404 202
62 500 500 500
25 408 408 408
49 576 576 576
45 294 500 594 297
65 256 256 256
16
17 274 508 582 291
59 410 410 410
6 196 196 196
42 266 46 512 156

9

 

99

Mg./liter BOD measurements for drains.

W

 

 

Drain Sample Period
Number 1 2 5 4 5 Total Mean
46
47 6.80 17.65 24.45 12.22
48 5.60 5.60 5.60
55 50.50 5.87 5.14 10.15 47.64 11.91
56 60.40 171.00 77.50 77.10 80.60 466.85 95.56
58 59.10 59.10 59.10
64 61.10 588.00 82.00 88.00 525.10 1144.20 228.84
56 7.00 7.00 7.00
1 28.15 11.52 22.10 61.77 20.59
5 14.50 18.25 52.75 16.57
52 10.20 12.42 22.62 11.51
54 11.51 22.10 8.06 41.67 15.89
15 14.12 19.90 54.02 17.01
25 17.47 11.50 8.69 57.66 12.55
60 20.11 11.90 15.45 45.44 15.14
19 40.25 12.10 6.27 58.72 19.57
62 9.99 9.99 9.99
25 125.00 74.60 198.10 99.05
49 14.85 14.85 14.85
45 4.52 4.52 4.52
65 7.12 7.12 7.12
16 1.95 1.95 1.95
17
59 82.10 82.10 82.10
6 15.68 15.68 15.68
42

 

100

-1
Conductance x 10"3 measured as 0 for drains.

 

 

 

Drain Sample Period
Number 1 2 5 4 5 Total Mean
46 0.117 0.117 0.117
47 0.588 15.700 0.648 0.556 15.072 5.768
48 1.100 1.100 1.100
55 0.268 0.588 0.552 0.206 0.111 1.497 0.249
56 0.820 0.770 0.728 0.417 0.185 2.920 0.584
58 0.455 0.572 1.025 0.512
64 0.590 0.720 0.625 0.582 2.517 0.629
56 2.590 0.750 0.680 0.446 4.270 1.067
1 0.282 0.462 0.454 1.178 0.592
5 0.951 0.512 1.465 0.751
52 0.282 0.462 0.454 1.178 0.592
54 0.495 0.558 0.461 1.512 0.457
15 0.594 0.860 0.680 0.624 0.585 5.545 0.668
25 0.840 0.148 0.250 0.250 0.542 1.560 0.590
60 6.550 0.490 0.558 0.262 0.565 2.088 0.417
19 0.289 0.715 1.004 0.502
62 0.424 0.424 0.424
25 1.720 0.154 1.874 0.957
49
45 0.576 0.567 0.481 0.546 1.570 0.592
65 0.417 0.417 0.417
16
17 0.464 0.485 0.949 0.474
59 0.597 0.597 0.597
6
42 0.488 0.488 0.488

 

101

Mg./liter ammonia nitrogen for drains.

 

 

 

Drain Sample Period
Number 1 2 5 4 5 Total Mean
46
47 5.64 2.46 2.00 8.10 2.70
48
55 1.85 5.92 0.00 1.96 1.77 9.50 1.90
56 15.18 0.49 0.00 2.69 18.56 4.59
58 2.45 2.45 2.45
64 11.76 10.78 1.57 5.20 27.51 6.82
56 56.40 2.91 2.61 1.96 45.88 10.97
1 7.27 4.90 5.55 2.16 5.14 21.00 4.20
5 1.96 0.98 2.94 1.47
52 2.46 1.96 0.78 5.20 1.75
54 2.75 2.94 0.47 2.47 8.65 2.15
15 1.85 1.96 11.97 0.98 1.87 18.65 5.72
25 15.68 15.68 15.68
60 5.95 6.86 28.90 1.57 2.45 45.51 8.70
19
62 5.56 5.56 5.56
25 2.45 2.45 2.45
49
45 2.94 1.47 5.66 8.07 2.69
65 1.87 1.87 1.87
16
17 1.47 1.47 1.47
59
6
42 1.72 1.72 1.72

9

 

102

Mg./liter nitrate nitrogen for drains.

 

 

 

Drain Sample Period
Number 1 2 5 4 5 Total Mean
46
47 4.11 1.89 6.00 5.00
48
55 2.55 2.75 1.68 2.55 1.47 10.80 2.16
56 1.68 1.68 1.86 1.28 6.50 1.62
58 2.55 2.55 2.55
64 1.68 5.88 5.14 22:55 55.25 8.51
56 4.70 2.55 5.56 2.84 15.45 5.56
1 5.47 2.75 1.71 7.95 2.64
5 1.68 1.57 5.25 1.62
52 1.87 2.65 1.57 6.07 2.02
54 1.96 7.14 2.20 2.76 14.06 5.51
15 2.16 1.79 5.00 1.96 1.96 10.87 2.17
25 5.75 1.96 2.55 2.20 10.24 2.56
60 1.96 2.75 5.05 2.16 94.00 105.92 20.78
19
62 2.55 2.55 2.55
25 2.94 2.94 2.94
49
45 1.96 1.79 5.28 1.76
65 2.69 2.69 2.69
16
17 5.14 5.14 5.14
59
6
42 5.92 5.92 5.92

 

Drain pH determinations.

1
J

105

 

 

Drain Sample Period
Number 1 2 5 4 5 Total Mean
46 7.65 8.50 15.95 7.97
47 7.80 7.65 8.14 7.90 51.49 7.87
48 7.00 7.00 7.00
55 7.75 6.90 4.00 9.50 6.89 55.04 7.00
56 6.94 7.08 7.50 7.12 7.55 21.90 7.50
58 7.40 7.08 14.48 7.24
64 7.15 7.00 7.54 7.75 29.22 7.50
56 7.80 6.88 6.70 8.57 29.75 7.45
1 7.94 7.70 8.10 7.90 51.64 8.55
5 8.45 7.20 6.90 22.55 7.51
52 8.25 8.60 8.00 8.50 55.55 8.55
54 7.49 7.95 8.59 7.80 51.81 7.95
15 7.70 7.91 8.00 8.10 8.50 40.01 8.00
25 7.45 7.12 7.55 21.90 7.50
60 7.89 8.20 8.80 24.89 8.29
19 8.91 8.91 8.91
62 8.91 8.91 8.91
25 7.65 7.42 14.78 7.95
49 8.55 8.55 8.55
45 8.12 8.12 8.12
65 7.45 7.45 7.45
16
17 8.10 8.10 8.10
59 7.71 7.71 7.71
6 7.60 7.60 7.60
42 7.72 7.72 7.72

 

Mg./liter total phosphorous for drains.

104

 

 

 

Drain ASample Period
Number 1 2 5 4 Total Mean
46
47 0.90 0.59 1.29 0.64
48
55 0.78 0.58 2.50 0.52 4.58 1.09
56 5.10 4.20 7.50 6.00 20.80 5.20
58
64 5.50 5.20 7.50 6.80 25.00 5.75
56 0.18 0.28 0.44 0.90 0.50
1 0.14 0.61 0.44 1.19 0.59
5 0.56 1.65 2.01 1.00
52 1.60 1.10 2.20 4.90 1.65
54 0.40 0.54 2.50 0.52 5.76 0.94
15 2.50 4.60 7.00 5.60 19.70 4.92
25 0.00 0.05 0.70 0.45 1.18 0.29
60 0.71 0.27 2.40 1.70 5.08 1.27
19
62 1.90 1.90 1.90
25 5.52 5.52 5.52
49
45 0.95 1.50 2.25 1.12
65 0.42 0.42 0.42
16
17 0.51 0.51 0.51
59
6
42

 

Drain temperatures in degrees centigrade.

105

 

 

 

 

Drain Sample Period
Number 1 2 5 4 5
46
47 26.0 20.5 19.2
48
55 26.5 50.0 27.0 54.0 55.2
56 20.0 19.9 22.0 21.0
58 56.0
64 26.0 24.0 21.2 25.0
56 25.0 20.0 18.5 21.5
1 16.0 17.7 15.8 15.0
5 24.5
52 19.0 20.0 24.5
54 51.0 29.0 55.0 55.5
15 56.0 45.0 54.5 59.0 59.0
25 16.5 21.2 22.9 24.0
60 18.4 19.0 20.5 22.0
19 19.8 20.0
62 22.0
25 25.5 22.5
49 20.9
45 25.0 25.5 26.0
65 18.5
16
17 19.8
59 22.0
6
42 28.5

 

106

Jackson turbidity units for drains.

 

4

 

 

Drain Sample Period

Number 1 2 5 4 5 Total Mean
46 59 59 59
47 18 20 58 19
48 44 20 64 52
55 94 59 94 52 17 277 55
56 500 17 81 200 157 1055 211
58 50 50 50
64 500 500 180 180 250 1210 242
56 26 24 25 75 25
1 1000 51 250 16 1277 519
5 102 19 121 60
52 16 10 .28 54 18
54 45 59 59 26 149 57
15 16 10 17 25 66 16
25 15 10 25 12
60 17 17 17
19 225 15 220 115.
62 18 18 18
25 171 165 556 168

49
45 19 19 19
65 16 16 16

16
17 19 19 19
59 20 20 20
6 500 500 500

42

 

APPENDIX B

DESCRIPTION OF DRAINS ENTERING RIVER

107

108

DESCRIPTION OF DRAINS
September 1, 1964

Drains on South Side of River

 

 

Approx.
Drain‘ dia. in
Number inches Description

 

1 72 Located 20 feet downstream from Hagadorn
Road. This drain has a large cement re-
taining wall and the opening is covered
with wire gates.

2 24 Located 100 feet upstream from Bogue
Street Bridge. This drain has a large
cement retaining wall.

5 12 Located 180 yards downstream from Bogue
Street. Drain has a cement retaining wall.

4 14 Located 150 yards upstream from Farm Lane.
This drain is one-half submerged, and has
a large cement retaining wall.

5 8 Located 20 yards downstream from above
drain. This drain has a small retaining
wall.

6 24 Located 50 feet upstream from Farm Lane.
This drain has a small retaining wall,
the opening is located three-fourths be-
low the water, and the drain flows only
during rain.

7 6 Located 10 feet upstream from Farm Lane.
This drain is a steel pipe sticking out
from the river bank about one foot above
the water surface.

8 28 Located 50 feet downstream from Farm Lane.
This drain has a cement retaining wall
surrounded by broken brick.

9 12 Located behind bushes behind Michigan
State University canoe shelter. Cement
retaining wall.

 

Continued

109

Drains on South Side of River - Continued

 

Drain
Number

Approx.
die. in
inches Description

 

10

11

12

15

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

10 Located 10 feet downstream from above
drain. This drain appears as a hole in
the river bank.

Located 60 yards downstream from Farm Lane
Bridge. This drain is not visible, it
appears as a cement retaining wall.

12 Located 10 feet upstream from power plant
water intake. This drain has a small
cement retaining wall and is hidden behind
bushes.

6 Located one-half the distance between dam
and first foot bridge. This drain is a
long metal pipe high on the river bank.

12 Located 28 yards downstream from dam.
This drain has no retaining wall and is
high on the river bank.

24 Located 10 feet upstream from second
foot bridge. This drain which is the
power plant drain, has a large retaining
wall.

16 Located 25 yards downstream from second
foot bridge. This drain has a large cement
retaining wall. The opening is partly be-
low water.

8 Located 10 feet downstream from above drain.
This drain has a small retaining wall.

56 Located across from botanical gardens.
This drain has no retaining wall, and the
Opening is hidden behind bushes.

12 Located across from the women's gym. This
drain has a large cement retaining wall.

8 Located across from the women‘s gym. This
drain has no retaining wall and is located
high on the river bank.

 

Continued

 

110

Drains on SOuth Side of River - Continued

 

Approx.
Drain dia.
Number inches Description

21 20 Located 60 yards downstream from third foot"
bridge. This drain appears as a hole in
the river bank. There is no retaining wall.

22 24 Located across from the northeast corner of
Kellogg parking lot. This drain is high on
the bank, has no retaining wall, and is a
cement drain.

25 24 Located one foot downstream from above drain.
The end section of this drain has broken off.

24 12 Located under Harrison Street Bridge. This
a metal pipe high on the river bank. This
drain appears to be a storm drain.

25 72 Located 60 yards downstream from Harrison
Street Bridge. This drain has wire gates
over the opening.

26 24 Located across from Brody parking lot.

This drain has no retaining wall, and is a
metal drain located high on the river bank.

27 24 Located across from Brody parking lot.
This drain has no retaining wall. Drain is
metal, and is located right at the water

'surface.
28 12 Located 50 yards downstream from above

drain. Drain has small dark retaining wall.

 

111

Drains on North Side of River

 

Drain
Number

Approx.
dia. in
inches

Description

 

29

50

51

52

55

54

55

56

57

58

4

12

72

12

12

72

12

12

Located 20 yards downstream from Hagadorn
Road Bridge. This dnain is a small metal
pipe difficult to see, located in a gully
high on the bank. Apparently is a septic
tank drain.

Located downstream from above drain.
A small metal pipe below what appears to
be a hot water tank.

Located 100 yards downstream from Hagadorn
Road Bridge. This drain has no retaining
wall. Source is Cedar View Apartments.

Located 50 feet downstream from above
drain. Pipe extends below water. Appears
to be a septic drain.

Located 75 yards upstream from Riverside
East apartments. This drain has a large
cement retaining wall, and a large tree
has fallen across the opening.

Cement drain, no retaining wall.

Located below parking lot of Riverside
East apartments. This drain is a steel
pipe that protrudes out about four feet
from the river bank.

Located adjacent to west side of Riverside
East apartments. This drain is one-half
submerged, and has a large cement retaining
wall.

Drain from Beta Theta Pi fraternity house
on Grand River Avenue. No retaining wall.

Located downstream from drain 57. This
drain has recently been installed. Drain
has no retaining wall, and soil around the
Opening is eroded.

 

Continued

 

112

Drains on North Side of River - Continued

 

 

Drain
Number

Approx.

dia.

inches

Description

 

59

40

41

42

45

44

45

46

47

48

49

72

12

24

12

12

24

12

Located near east end of Eaton Rock Apart-
ments parking lot. This drain is a steel
pipe with wire covers, located about one
foot above the water.

Located 200 yards upstream from Bogue
Street. Two drains, a small one and a
large one, both covered with steel covers.

Located 50 feet downstream from Bogue
Street Bridge.

Located across from drain 5. This drain
appears as a large cement retaining wall.
Drain opening is not visible.

Located near far east corner of Kresge.
This drain has no retaining wall.

Located behind Kresge. Drain has no retain-
ing wall, is very dark in color, and is
about one foot above the water. Drain is
hidden behind bushes.

Located behind Kresge. Drain appears as
a large cement retaining wall. Hidden be—
hind bushes.

Located behind Kresge. Drain is one-half
submerged, and has a white chalk material
around the opening.

Located 20 feet upstream from Farm Lane
Bridge. Drain is beneath the water.

Located 10 feet downstream from Farm Lane.
Drain is three-fourths below the water.
No retaining wall.

Located a few feet upstream from the Michi-
gan State University canoe shelter. This
drain has a small retaining wall.

 

Continued

115

Drains on North Side of River - Continued

 

Drain
Number

Approx.

dia.

inches

Description

 

50

51

52

55

54

55

56

57

58

59

6O

20

12

12

12

12

24

12

24

24

56

Located 50 yards upstream from the power
plant water intake. This drain has a small
cement retaining wall.

Located 25 feet upstream from power plant
water intake. This is a cement drain sur-
rounded by broken sidewalk.

Located 40 yards downstream from drain 51.
This drain has a small retaining wall, but
the end section of the drain is broken off.

Located 10 yards upstream from the first
foot bridge. This drain has no retaining
wall. Effluent spills out onto a block of
cement.

Located right above dam. Drain is the out-
flow from the power plant.

Located 50 yards below the dam. Effluent
flows from a hole in the ground. This
drain appears to be a natural stream.

Located 5 feet downstream from above drain.
This drain is three-fourths buried in the
mud. Drain is surrounded by sludge banks.

Located 20 yards downstream from the second
foot bridge. Drain is hidden behind trees.
Drain has a small retaining wall.

Located between library and women's gym.
This drain has a large cement retaining
wall.

Located behind women's gym. This drain has
a large cement retaining wall surrounded
with broken sidewalk.

Located 10 feet upstream from the Kalamazoo
Street Bridge. This drain has a large
cement retaining wall.

 

Continued

114

Drains on North Side of River — Continued

 

 

Approx.
Drain dia. in
Number inches Description

61 72 Located across from north-east corner of
the athletic field. Drain has a large
cement retaining wall. Drain Opening is
cover with steel cover.

62 24 Located 10 yards downstream from third foot
bridge. This drain has a small cement re-
taining wall.

65 20 Located across from Kellogg Center parking
lot. Drain has a small cement retaining
wall. '

64 24 Located under Harrison Street Bridge.

This drain has no retaining wall.

65 12 Located across river from drain 22.

Drain has a large cement retaining wall.

66 56 Located across from Kalamazoo Street sewage
treatment plant. This drain has a large
cement retaining wall.

67 12 Located 10 feet downstream from above
drain. Drain has a large cement retaining
wall.

68 12 Located 10 feet downstream from above

drain. This drain has a large cement re-
taining wall.

 

APPENDIX C

RIVER STATION SAMPLING DATA

115

116

 

 

AM A mam mmea omm mam mom omm oem emm mom 5
me A «mm mmea mom emm mew mew omm eem oem 4
mm a new 445a mew mew mew emu mom eom cam 5
mm A com eaee mew mew «mm oem omm one «am m
mm.“ cam 4445 05m «mm emm oem oom mm omm a

ex “.9 .eoueauoa eeuemuo eeumauo 45-5-5 «ouemnm eeueanm «ensue nonpayn

 

cams Hauoe anumm OHQEmm.

 

.mOOmo umuHH\.mE mm .mGOHumum mcflamfimm HO>HH Mom musmEmHsmme huflcflamxam Hmuoa

 

 

 

 

 

N.Nm m.¢m N.mm n.0m >.mm m.mm >.>m m.o> m.om m.m¢ m.mm M
m.HmN m.¢wm o.m¢m m.dmm m.mmm m.>wm m.mmm m.mmm N.mmfi m.¢HN >.Nmfi .H8
7
.1 m.ma m.ma o.fiom m.oa om.m m.am N.mm m.ma m.mm O.mm m.ma m¢.m em.> H>.m m
m.mH m.mm w.¢m¢ m.m¢ m.om H.fim 0.05 ¢.mm N.om b.0m m.mm ¢.mfi m.mfi m.eH e
m.¢a 0.6m m.mmm $.dm m.m> m.>> 0.0m m.¢m n.5m m.wm N.Hm o.mm m.mm H.>N n
#.ma N.wm m.mam >.mm «.mm m.mm w.mm N.¢m o.mm N.o> w.mm O.Nm m.mm w.mm N
¢.Nfi o.me 5.0mm O.Hm o.>m m.mm m.mm «.em N.mm o.ae d.wm ¢.mm o.mm N.wm a
Ho
I . B Side mloa palm efilm mum mmlm mmlm malm Nfilm elm mum GOHHMum
cmoz Houoe Awmmfiv poauwm mamamm

 

.mcoflumum MO>HH um coflumnsumm cmmhxo UO>HOMMHU ucmoumm

118

 

 

 

om.mflom.oa em.¢m O¢.ma om.mH oo.mH ©>.¢ m¢.© em.© Om.Na mm.m m
em.HH¢H.e Ha.mm oo.m m¢.m NN.N ¢¢.N no.m m>.m 00.5 ¢H.N fl
om.NH¢m.e mm.mm mm.m ON.m N®.H N>.H mm.o om.¢ NN.¢ mm.m m
mm.mHmN.m mo.me Hm.¢ mw.m mm.m om.a No.¢ mm.m Ow.m ma.m N
mm.aHmm.m mm.mm hm.m Hm.m mm.a mm.H N©.N ¢O.m «w.m mh.m H
flm fl.B wmlmmlda emlhldfi ecledloa ewlmalm emumum dmlmmlm dwledlm emlelm GOHumum
com: Hmuoa OOHHmm mamfimm

 

.msoaumum mcflamfimm HO>HH Mom meowumsfifiumumt Dom HOuHH\.mE

119

 

 

 

55.0 M 54.4 05.5 04.5 05.4 04.5 04.5 04.5 5
45.0 M 45.0 45.5 55.0 54.0 44.0 55.0 45.0 4
04.0 n 04.0 50.5 55.0 54.0 55.0 55.0 45.0 5
04.0 M 45.0 55.4 44.0 44.0 55.0 55.0 54.0 N
44.0 M 55.0 45.4 50.0 04.0 44.0 85.0 45.0 4
mm 5.5 45-54-04 45-45-5 45-54-5 45-5-5 45-5-5 coaumum
ammz Hmuoe OOHumm mamawm

 

.msoflumum mcflamfimm H0>HH mom msouoammonmlonuuo Hmufla\.m2

120

 

 

 

40.0 H 00.4 4>.m4 04.N 00.4 04.N 04.N 00.4 00.4 00.N 0
00.0 H 04.0 44.0 44.0 Nm.0 N4.0 00.0 00.0 04.0 00.4 4
44.0 4 40.0 00.0 NN.0 40.0 04.0 00.0 40.0 00.0 04.0 m
44.0 H 00.0 m>.N 04.0 44.0 00.0 00.0 04.0 00.0 40.0 N
0N.0 4 40.0 0m.N 00.0 00.0 44.0 04.0 04.0 0N.0 00.0 4
mm 0.8 40104104 40I4NI0 401N410 40l0|0 4010NI0 40144-0 4N10|0 c04u0u0
cmmz 4MuOB UO4H®m GHQEmm

 

 

.mSOHumum 0GHHQEmm Hm>4u How msouonmmonm 40uou umu44\.02

 

121

 

 

 

0N.04 00.44 N0.N4 44.04 04.44 04.04 00.44
00.4 0N.0 05.0N 40.0 N0.4 >>.N 00.N >>.4 00.N 00.0 0
0N.0 0O.N 00.44 04.0 44.N 0N.N 00.N 00.4 40.4 00.0 4
04.0 45.N 04.04 00.N 00.4 SN.N 0N.4 40.N 44.N 00.4 0
0N.O 40.N N0.04 50.0 00.0 40.N 00.N 00.N 04.0 00.0 N
40.0 0N.N N4.04 04.0 04.N 0N.N 50.4 00.N 0e.N ON.4 4
n
m ..e 45-44-04 45-45-5 45-54-5 45-5-5 45-55-5 45-44-5 45-5-5 oo40555
c002 Hmuoa UOHHmm m4mamm

.mSOHumum 0S44QEMm Hm>44 How ammonu4a 04:0550 H0u44\.0z

 

 

 

55.4 05.5 55.05 55.5 54.5 50.5 54.5 55.5 05.4 55.4 5
55.0 45.5 54.54 54.4 55.5 55.4 55.4 55.5 55.4 55.4 4
m 54.0 54.5 50.54 45.5 05.5 55.4 55.4 55.4 05.5 55.4 5
55.0 44.5 55.45 05.4 45.5 55.5 55.5 54.5 45.5 55.5 5
55.0 55.5 54.05 55.4 55.5 50.5 54.5 55.5 55.5 55.5 4
.m 5.5 45-54-04 45-45-5 45-54-5 45-5-5 45-55-5 45-44-5 45-5-5 0045555
:50: 4muoa 004400 04QEmm

 

.mGOHumum 0G44m800 Hw>44 Mom cmmouu4c mumnu4c Hmu44\.02

125

 

 

 

N0.0 4 00.5 04.04 05.N 0O.N 54.4 50.4 04.N 0
05.4 4 45.4 00.0 0N.N 00.0 50.4 00.4 04.0 4
50.0 M 40.4 00.0 00.N 50.5 00.4 00.0 04.4 0
04.4 4 40.4 N5.5 00.0 44.0 00.N 0N.N 00.0 N
N0.4 4 N0.N 00.44 00.0 00.N 05.4 00.4 . 40.0 4

n n

.m ..e 40-N4-0 40-0-0 40-05-0 40-44-0 40-0-0 0040500

0002 40u08 004400 mcHHQEmm

 

.0004umum 0044mfimm H0>4u 400 00004040 0400040 H0044\.0S

124

 

 

 

00.0404.5 00.00 00.5 00.5 N5.5 N5.5 05.5 00.5 04.5 40.5 0
44.0445.5 00.40 00.0 00.5 00.5 00.5 05.5 00.5 05.5 05.5 4
54.0400.5 04.00 00.5 00.5 00.0 00.0 00.5 00.5 44.0 00.5 0
0N.0405.5 00.N0 40.0 00.5 00.5 00.5 40.0 00.5 00.5 00.5 N
00.0404.5 55.00 00.5 N5.5 00.5 04.5 00.5 00.0 0N.0 0N.5 4
mm 5.9 40I54I04 40I4NI0 40IN4I0 40I04I0 40I0I0 40I0NI0 40IN4I0 40l0|0 c04u000
0002 Hmuoa 004400 04Q500

 

.00040004840000 mm :04umum 0:440500 H0>4m

125

 

 

 

 

55.54 55.54 55.05 54.54 55.54 5555555

04.405 05.545 55.545 05.054 05.454 455oe
05.45 0.5 5.4 0.5 5.4 5.5 45-55-44
04.05 0.44 5.54 0.54 5.04 0.04 45-5-44
05.45 5.54 5.44 5.54 5.54 5.54 45-54-04
05.55 5.44 0.54 0.54 5.54 5.54 45-5-04,
05.45 0.54 0.54 0.05 0.54 5.44 45-45-5
00.55 0.05 0.05 0.45 0.54 0.54 45-54-5
00.504 0.05 0.55 0.45 0.55 0.05 45-54-5
05.55 5.05 0.05 0.55 4.54 5.54 45-54-5
05.05 0.54 0.54 0.05 0.54 5.54 45-54-5
05.45 0.54 5.54 5.54 5.54 5.44 45-54-5
05.55 0.05 5.05 0.45 5.54 0.54 45-44-5
05.55 5.54 0.54 0.05 5.54 5.5 45-44-5
05.504 5.54 0.05 0.55 0.05 4.54 45-54-5
05.544 5.45 0.55 0.45 0.55 5.05 45-5-5
04.444 5.55 0.55 0.45 5.55 5.54 45-55-5
05.55 5.54 0.05 4.05 4.54 5.54 45-55-5
05.55 5.05 5.05 5.05 0.54 0.54 45-55-5
00.454 5.45 5.45 0.55 0.55 0.05 45-54-5
05.554 0.55 5.55 5.55 0.45 0.55 45-5-5
00.55 0.54 5.05 0.45 5.54 0.54 45-54-5
00.444 0.45 0.55 0.45 5.45 5.45 45-54-5
00.55 0.05 0.05 0.45 0.05 0.54 45-54-5
04.55 5.54 0.05 0.05 0.54 5.54 45-54-5
05.55 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 5.54 45-44-5
05.504 5.54 0.55 5.45 5.54 0.54 45-54-5
05.554 0.55 0.55 0.55 0.55 5.45 45-5-5
4m5oe 5 4 5 5 4 450

0045555

 

 

 

.0004044000 0004000 :4 00450008 .00044040 0:44QE00 40>44 40 00455040m80u 40403

126

.0SHm> MEESU U0umHSUHmo
*

 

 

 

55.4 4 55.5 55.44 45.5 55.0 55.4 04.5 04.5 5
55.4 4 55.5 54.04 55.5 55.0 *00.5 55.5 04.5 4
45.4 4 45.5 50.44 55.4 55.0 55.5 05.5 04.4 5
50.4 4 55.4 45.5 54.4 54.0 55.4 55.4 00.5 5
45.4 4 55.4 54.5 05.5 55.5 55.4 55.4 05.0 4

4 4

.m ..e 45-45-5 45-54-5 45-5-5 45-55-5 45-54-5 a045555

c002 Hmuoe UOHH0m mcflaafimm

.mGOHumum mcHHmEmw How 050400H Hmuou H0p44\0&0h0

 

127

 

 

00.44 4 mm 454 55 mm mm 45 44 55 54 5
05.5 H mm mom mm 45 mm 45 54 45 54 4
00.45 4 54 055 4m 5m 55 mm 55 55 054 m
00.54 4 45 545 mm mm 45 mm 05 mm 54 m
5m.m, 4 m4 554 45 mm 54 45 54 54 54 4

n m

.m ..5 45-54-04 45-45-5 45-54-5 45-5-5 45-55-5 45-44-5 45-5-5 :045545

G002 40u08 ©0440m 04Qa00

 

.mu4c5 >u4U4QHDu Gomx00b m0 0045000E ~0440400440 0:44mfi0m H0>44 00 MHHU4QHDB

128

 

 

 

44.0 555.0 544.4 555.0 545.0 555.0 505.0 545.0 445.0 545.0 5
50.0 055.0 545.5 045.0 455.0 554.0 554.0 555.0 555.0 545.0 4
50.0 454.0 554.5 054.0 045.0 554.0 544.0 555.0 555.0 544.0 5
50.0 054.0 545.5 544.0 455.0 544.0 044.0 555.0 554.0 455.0 5
50.0 055.0 455.5 544.0 054.0 555.0 555.0 555.0 455.0 555.0 4
.M 5.8 45l54l04 45I45|5 45I54I5 45I5I5 45I45I5 45:4415 45I5I5 c04u0um
:00: 40409 004H05 04QE05

 

.m:04u0um 5:44QE00 H0>4H H05 4 G 00 U0Hdm00E 04 x 0oc0uoswcoo

0'

‘7'1?0007000“