Prepared in cooperation with th

UPPER DESCHUTES WATERSHE

Framework for Regional, Coordinated Monitoring 

Middle and Upper Deschutes River Basin, Orego

U.S. Department of the Interior

U.S. Geological Survey

Open-File Report 00-386
PHOTOGRAPHS

Front Cover:

Top, Oregon Water Resources Department stream-gaging station on the Deschutes River a

Benham Falls.

Middle, Mount Jefferson, Deschutes County, Oregon.

Bottom, Diversion dam, North Unit Canal, Bend, Oregon.

Back Cover:

Top, Snow Creek.

Bottom, Steelhead Falls on middle Deschutes River upstream from Lake Billy Chinook.

Photographs courtesy of Kyle Gorman, Oregon Water Resources Department, Bend, Oregon.
U.S. Department of the Interior

U.S. Geological Survey

Framework for Regional, Coordinated Monitorin

in the Middle and Upper Deschutes River Basin,

Oregon

By CHAUNCEY W. ANDERSON

Open-File Report 00-386

Prepared in cooperation with the

UPPER DESCHUTES WATERSHED COUNCIL

Portland, Oregon: 2000
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

BRUCE BABBITT, Secretary

U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY

Charles G. Groat, Director

The use of trade, product, or firm names in this publication is

for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement

by the U.S. Government.

For additional information contact: Copies of this report can be

purchased from:

District Chief

U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Geological Survey

10615 S.E. Cherry Blossom Drive Branch of Information Servi

Portland, OR 97216-3159 Box 25286, Federal Center

E-mail: info-or@usgs.gov Denver, CO 80225-0046

Internet: http://oregon.usgs.gov

Suggested citation:

Anderson, C.W., 2000, Framework for regional, coordinated monitoring in the middle and upper Deschutes 

Basin, Oregon: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 00-386, 81 p.
iii

CONTENTS

1.0 Summary ..................................................................................................................................................................

1.1. Monitoring Goals ..............................................................................................................................................

1.2. Suggested Monitoring Plan ...............................................................................................................................

2.0 Introduction ..............................................................................................................................................................

2.1. Purpose and Scope ............................................................................................................................................

2.2. Study Area ........................................................................................................................................................

2.3. Water Management in the Upper Deschutes Basin ..........................................................................................

2.4. Water-Quality Issues ........................................................................................................................................

2.5. Recent and Current Monitoring ........................................................................................................................

2.6. Previous Management Plans .............................................................................................................................

2.7. Principles of Long-Term Monitoring ...............................................................................................................

3.0 Coordinated, Regional Monitoring Plan ..................................................................................................................

3.1. Monitoring Program Management ...................................................................................................................

3.1.1 Objectives and Associated Actions .........................................................................................................

3.1.1.1 Integration, Coordination, and Efficiency .....................................................................................

3.1.1.2 Data Gaps ......................................................................................................................................

3.2. Streamflow ........................................................................................................................................................

3.2.1 Monitoring Objectives and Associated Actions ......................................................................................

3.2.1.1 Data Utility and Availability .........................................................................................................

3.2.1.2 Status and Trends Monitoring .......................................................................................................

3.3. Water Temperature ...........................................................................................................................................

3.3.1 Monitoring Objectives and Associated Actions ......................................................................................

3.3.1.1 Data Utility and Availability .........................................................................................................

3.3.1.2 Status, Trends, and Compliance Monitoring .................................................................................

3.3.1.3 Evaluation Monitoring ...................................................................................................................

3.4. Turbidity/Sediment Transport ..........................................................................................................................

3.4.1 Monitoring Objectives and Associated Actions ......................................................................................

3.4.1.1 Status, Trends, and Compliance Monitoring .................................................................................

3.4.1.2 Evaluation Monitoring ...................................................................................................................

3.5. Physical Channel Morphology/Aquatic Habitat ...............................................................................................

3.5.1 Monitoring Objectives and Associated Actions ......................................................................................

3.5.1.1 Status and Trends Monitoring .......................................................................................................

3.5.1.2 Evaluation Monitoring ...................................................................................................................

3.6. Nutrients ...........................................................................................................................................................

3.6.1 Monitoring Objectives and Associated Actions ......................................................................................

3.6.1.1 Status, Trends, and Compliance Monitoring .................................................................................

3.6.1.2 Evaluation Monitoring ...................................................................................................................

3.7. Dissolved Oxygen and pH ................................................................................................................................

3.7.1 Monitoring Objectives and Associated Actions ......................................................................................

3.7.1.1 Status, Trends, and Compliance Monitoring .................................................................................

3.7.1.2 Evaluation Monitoring ...................................................................................................................

3.8. Esherichia coli Bacteria ....................................................................................................................................

3.8.1 Monitoring Objectives and Associated Actions ......................................................................................

3.8.1.1 Status, Trends, and Compliance Monitoring .................................................................................

3.8.1.2 Evaluation Monitoring ...................................................................................................................

3.9. Additional Monitoring ......................................................................................................................................

3.9.1 Nonindigenous Species ...........................................................................................................................

3.9.1.1 Monitoring Objectives and Associated Actions ............................................................................

3.9.2 Invertebrates ............................................................................................................................................

3.9.2.1 Monitoring Objectives and Associated Actions ............................................................................

3.9.3 Toxics ......................................................................................................................................................

3.9.3.1 Monitoring Objectives and Associated Actions ............................................................................
iv

4.0 Implementation ........................................................................................................................................................

4.1. Summary of Proposed Monitoring Actions by Organization ...........................................................................

4.2. Phased Implementation of Monitoring Actions ................................................................................................

5.0 References ................................................................................................................................................................

6.0 Glossary ...................................................................................................................................................................

Appendixes:

A. Summary of water-quality objectives and recommendations from previous management

plans ......................................................................................................................................................................

B. Quality-assurance terms .........................................................................................................................................

FIGURES

1. –5. Maps showing:

1. Middle and upper Deschutes River Basin, Oregon...............................................................................................

2. Designated reaches for regional monitoring in the upper and middle Deschutes River Basins, Oregon .............

3. Location of active stream-gaging stations in the middle and upper Deschutes River Basin, Oregon, 1999 ........

4. Location of temperature monitoring stations in the middle and upper Deschutes River Basin, Oregon .............

5. Turbidity, total suspended solids, and sediment monitoring stations in the middle and upper

Deschutes River Basin, Oregon ............................................................................................................................

6. Nutrient, dissolved oxygen, and pH monitoring stations in the middle and upper

Deschutes River Basin, Oregon ...........................................................................................................................

TABLES

1. Matrix showing proposed implementation schedule for suggested long-term monitoring

actions in the middle and upper Deschutes River Basin, Oregon ...............................................................................

2. Definition of reaches of the middle and upper Deschutes River Basin and selected tributaries,

including estimated ground-water gains and losses and water-quality issues identified

by the State of Oregon .................................................................................................................................................

3. Summary of relevant monitoring activities in the middle and upper Deschutes River Basin......................................

4. Historical and current fish and amphibian species in the waters of the middle and upper Deschutes River Basin ....

5. Laboratory and field methods for sampling, preservation, and analysis of nutrients in water samples used

by the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality in the Ambient Monitoring Program .....................................

6. Summary of objectives and suggested monitoring actions for coordinated, regional water-quality monitoring

in the middle and upper Deschutes River Basin .........................................................................................................

CONVERSION FACTORS

Temperature in degrees Celsius (°C) may be converted to degrees Fahrenheit (°F) as follows: °F=1.8(temperature, in °C)+32

MAP SOURCES:

Base map modified from U.S. Geological Survey 1:500,000 State base map, 1982,

with digital data from U.S. Bureau of the Census, TIGER/Line (R), 1990, and

U.S. Geological Survey Digital Line Graphs published at 1:100,000.

Publication projection is Lambert Conformal Conic.

Standard parallels 43°00’ and 45°30’, central meridian-120°30’.

Multiply By To obtain

foot (ft) 0.3048 meter (m)

mile (mi) 1.609 kilometer (km)

cubic foot per second (ft3

/s) 0.02832 cubic meter per second (m3/s)

feet per second (ft/s) 0.3048 meter per second (m/s)

milligrams per liter (mg/L) 1 parts per million (ppm)
v

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

Funding for this cooperative project was provided to the Upper Deschutes Watershed Counci

grant from the Oregon Watershed Enhancement Board. A committee was convened on several occa

from 1998-2000 to help develop the plan for interagency monitoring in the upper Deschutes River 

This group was instrumental in identifying issues, providing information on previous and current

monitoring programs, developing and agreeing on monitoring actions, and providing valuable revie

the monitoring plan as it was written. The committee was organized and convened by Barbara Lee,

Coordinator for the Upper Deschutes Watershed Council. Mollie Chaudet, Wild and Scenic Rivers

Coordinator, and the Bend/Ft. Rock District of the Deschutes National Forest provided meeting spa

logistics for committee meetings. Facilitation was provided by Gery Ferguson of the Deschutes Na

Forest. Bonnie Lamb, Oregon Department of Environmental Quality, spent many hours gathering

information, creating Geographic Informatin Systems (GIS) coverages, and generating preliminary 

showing current monitoring programs and 303(d) listed segments for streamflow, temperature, sedi

and turbidity, and nutrients. The Confederated Tribes of the Warm Springs Reservation also provid

early input to this process. The following is a list of committee members.

Name Organization

Bonnie Lamb Oregon Department of Environmental Quality

Steve Marx Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife

Kyle Gorman Oregon Water Resources Department

Robert Main Oregon Water Resources Department

Barbara Lee Upper Deschutes Watershed Council

John Mason Deschutes County

Beverly Sunderlind City of Bend

Roger Prowell City of Bend

Scott Lewis Portland General Electric

Michelle McSwain U.S. Bureau of Land Management

Larry Zakrajsek U.S. Bureau of Reclamation

Jerry Cordova U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

Mollie Chaudet U.S. Forest Service, Bend/Ft. Rock Ranger District

Tom Walker U.S. Forest Service, Bend/Ft. Rock Ranger District

Beth Sanchez U.S. Forest Service, Crescent Ranger District

Randy Gould U.S. Forest Service, Deschutes Ranger District

Mark Wilcox U.S. Forest Service, Deschutes Ranger District

Robert Rock U.S. Forest Service, Ochoco Ranger District

Jim Seymour U.S. Forest Service, Ochoco Ranger District

Richard Vacirca U.S. Forest Service, Ochoco Ranger District

Brad Houslet U.S. Forest Service, Sisters Ranger District

Mike Riehle U.S. Forest Service, Sisters Ranger District

Chauncey Anderson U.S. Geological Survey
1

Framework for Regional, Coordinated Monitoring in the Middle

and Upper Deschutes River Basin, Oregon

By Chauncey W. Anderson

1.0 Summary

This report presents a framework for

regional water-quality monitoring in the middle

and upper Deschutes River Basin, Oregon, that

would be coordinated among organizations

doing related monitoring. The emphasis is

on maximizing the value of existing programs

and resources by minimizing overlapping sampling

efforts, filling key data gaps, increasing communication about results, and facilitating coordination

and cooperation among organizations. The report

was developed in conjunction with the Upper

Deschutes Watershed Council and a committee

of representatives from each of the organizations

listed in the Acknowledgments (hereafter referred

to as the Upper Deschutes Water Quality

Monitoring Committee, or “the Committee”). This

group helped to (1) determine the water-quality

issues to be addressed, (2) provide information on

current programs in the basin, (3) develop the

overall monitoring objectives, and (4) reach

agreement on the general monitoring framework.

1.1 Monitoring Goals

The principal goals for this monitoring

program are, in order of importance, to (1)

understand the condition of a resource or changes

in the status of critical parameters over time

(“Status and Trends” monitoring), (2) determine

whether conditions meet established criteria,

reference levels, or standards (“Compliance

monitoring”), and (3) assess the affects of land

use or effectiveness of changes in resource

management (“Evaluation monitoring”). For this

plan, the primary goal is to provide data that can

be used to evaluate the status and trends of waterquality related resources in the basin. Compliance

monitoring needs will be met in part by data

collected under this plan, but for some constituent

groups or issues, such monitoring will require

additional data collection targeted to answer

specific questions. Evaluation monitoring will

primarily be addressed through the use of short

term, targeted studies with specific, narrowly

defined objectives.

1.2 Suggested Monitoring Plan

The monitoring plan is organized by waterquality topic, with subsections addressing

monitoring objectives and suggestions for

monitoring actions to provide data for Status and

Trends, Compliance, and (or) Evaluation

monitoring. These objectives and actions were

developed in conjunction with the Upper

Deschutes Water Quality Monitoring Committee.

The plan also suggests ways to increase the

efficiency and usefulness of data collected to date,

which in many cases have not been analyzed or

communicated. Some suggested monitoring

actions would provide data necessary for other

actions to be carried out, whereas others would

likely require data from a previous action in order

to be completed. Other monitoring actions,

especially special studies to answer questions

about specific land-use or water-management

practices, could be most effectively addressed by

pooling of efforts among organizations, due to

expense or limited resources within individual

organizations. Some agencies might be unable to

make major changes in their monitoring programs

without internal deliberations, and possibly until

new funding cycles are completed.

One way to account for the above

considerations would be to implement the

monitoring program in phases (table 1). Each

phase would build upon the previous one, although

some programs, especially the larger special

studies, might extend into the next phase. The

timing of the phases may correspond to funding

cycles or possibly to time frames set by the

agencies in conjunction with upcoming programs.
2

.

Table 1. Matrix showing proposed implementation schedule for suggested long-term monitoring actions in the

[Numbers correspond to the order the actions are presented in the text; EPA, Environmental Protection Agency; ODEQ, Oregon Department of

DO, dissolved oxygen]

Phase of

implementation

Monitoring

coordination and

management Discharge Water temperature

Turbidity/sediment

transport

Channelmorp

and habi

Phase 1

(1) Establish coordinating mechanism

(3) Establish common

protocols

(4) Develop qualityassurance plans

(5) Establish data management strategy

(7) Analyze and communicate existing information

(9) Continue current network(12) Compile existing

data and evaluate

QA/QC data

(19) Compile existing

data and evaluate

QA/QC data

(25) Compile ex

data and evalu

metadata

Phase 2

(1) Continue oversight,

and implement Phase 2

monitoring components

(2) Conduct periodic

reviews of monitoring

program

(7) Continue to analyze

and communicate

existing information

(8) Update streamflow

records and publish

data

(10) Work with ODEQ

to collocate streamgaging and waterquality stations

(13) Analyze existing

data

(14) Use continuous

monitors in place of

grab samples where

possible, and time grab

sampling to account

for diel variations

(15) Begin to remove

redundant stations and

add new stations to fill

data gaps

(18) Promote TSS as

preferred sampling

protocol

(20) Analyze existing

data

(21) Establish new stations below Wickiup

Reservoir and near La

Pine

(22) Begin continuous

turbidity monitoring

at selected locations

(especially downstream of Wickiup

Reservoir)

 (23) Study relations

between sediment

concentrations, TSS,

and turbidity

(26) Analyze ex

data

(27) Begin moni

subbasin and i

reach scales

(28) Consider st

establish basel

critical reache

surveyed

(29) Consider st

evaluate chang

channel geome

below reservoi

tive to historic

tions

Phase 3

(1) Continue oversight,

implement Phase 2

monitoring components, and conduct

periodic reviews as

warranted

(11) Develop models to

increase predictability

of snowmelt and

ground water to reservoirs and key river

reaches

(16) Develop temperature model for 303(d)

listed reaches for

TMDL development

and to investigate

effects of resourcemanagement scenarios

(17) Consider studies to

determine effects on

temperature from different resourcemanagement scenarios

(24) Consider study to

determine relations

between bedload transport and flow changes,

and determine sediment sources below

Wickiup Reservoir

(30) Consider st

selected reach

evaluate effect

changes in flow 

stream physica

ronments, wat

ity, and stream 

Phase 4

(1) Continue oversight,

implement Phase 2

monitoring components, and conduct

periodic reviews as

warranted
3

upper Deschutes River Basin, Oregon

Environmental Quality; QA/QC, quality assurance/quality control; TMDLS, total maximum daily loads, TSS, total suspended sediment;

Nutrients

Dissolved oxygen

and pH Bacteria

Nonindigenous

species Macroinvertebrates Toxic constit

(31) Compile existing

data and evaluate QA/

QC data

(35) Follow EPA process

to develop nutrient criteria for rivers and

lakes

(38) Compile existing

data and evaluate QA/

QC data

(43) Compile existing

data and evaluate QA/

QC data

(51) Compile existing

data and evaluate

metadata

(32) Analyze existing

data

(33) Promote use of

ODEQ field and laboratory protocols as preferred methods among

monitoring agencies

(39) Analyze existing

data

(40) Establish continuous monitors for DO,

pH, specific conductance, and turbidity, at

selected ODEQ ambient monitoring or

ODFW stream-gaging

locations

(41) Modify field protocols for grab samples

to sample at times that

will best document

diel extremes in DO

and pH.

(48) Establish contact

person in basin for

Aquatic Nuisance

Species (ANS)

(47) Participate in

statewide plan for

control of ANS, and

develop list of invasive aquatic species

of concern, in conjunction with Western Regional Panel

of Aquatic Nuisance

Species Task Force

(52) Use existing data

to assess current conditions in macroinvertebrate

assemblages and

indicated water and

habitat quality

(54) Assemble 

mation on per

point-source d

charges to riv

existing data o

compounds in 

sediments, or 

biota

(55) Compile ex

environmenta

on toxics and 

ate QA/QC d

(57) Change pr

used for samp

mercury to us

tissues and se

rather than wa

sampling med

(34) Increase frequency

of sampling in Wickiup Reservoir and Crescent Lake

(36) Consider studies to

evaluate various nutrient and eutrophication

issues in basin (provides support to

TMDLs)

(42) Consider special

studies to evaluate various DO/pH and

eutrophication issues

in basin (provides support to TMDLs)

(44) Analyze existing

data

(45) Maintain current

ODEQ sampling network, and add stations

as indicated by analysis of existing data or

special studies

(49) Conduct campaigns to educate

the public about

invasive species

(53) Use information

from analysis of

existing data to refine

future monitoring for

macroinvertebrates,

water quality, and

habitat, if warranted

(56) Conduct re

naissance sam

for trace meta

water and in s

ments, dissolv

ticides in wat

or polycyclic 

matic hydroca

(PAHs) in wa

sediments

(37) Consider study to

determine historical

water quality in lakes

and reservoirs, and possible downstream water

quality, by using lakesediment geochemistry

and diatom records

(46) Consider special

studies to determine

degree of bacterial

problems at popular

recreational areas

(50) Conduct periodic surveys to estimate coverage or

populations of invasive species

(58) Communic

results of reco

sance samplin

(59) Decide on 

for additional 

toring or spec

studies based 

reconnaissanc

results
4

Descriptions of the proposed phases are as

follows:

Phase 1 would focus primarily on program

management and implementation, including the

creation of institutional agreements. It might

involve actions to be done principally within the

auspices of the individual organizations and with

existing resources. No changes to current

monitoring programs would be made, but

compilation of datasets among agencies and

analysis of quality assurance data in preparation

for data analysis in Phase 2 could be initiated.

Phase 2 would include minor modifications to

existing monitoring programs and the analysis of

data compiled in the previous phase. Other actions,

upon which future monitoring will depend, would

be initiated. Critical special studies to fill data

gaps, or to provide data in support of important

programs (such as allocation of Total Maximum

Daily Loads [TMDLs]), would also be initiated.

Phase 3 would mark the beginning of more

substantial modifications to existing programs,

such as addition or relocation of monitoring sites.

It would also include special studies to evaluate

important land use or resource management issues.

By the end of this phase much of the monitoring

plan would have been implemented.

Phase 4 would include the largest changes to

existing programs, along with actions on issues

deemed less important regionally or that would

be relatively expensive to evaluate.

The final decisions on phasing of

monitoring actions, the order of implementation

or priority, and the responsibilities of individual

organizations, are beyond the scope of this report.

Furthermore, the implementations of items in

each phase could change as the plan is reevaluated

periodically and local issues change in importance.

This is particularly true for the later phases

because the results from earlier phases could

cause shifts in the understanding and priority of

different issues

2.0 Introduction

The Deschutes River Basin, in central

Oregon (fig.1), is an area known for its spectacular

beauty. The terrain ranges from high mountains to

deep river valleys, and the climate is dry and

relatively mild. The combination of climate,

abundant recreational opportunities, and

outstanding natural resources, has resulted

in increasing population growth, which in

turn has increased pressures on those natural

resources. Chief among these is water: Most

of the surface water in the basin has been

allocated; there are numerous threatened or

endangered aquatic species, including

salmonid fishes; and water use, land managment, and development have affected the

hydrology, water-quality, channel configuration,

and aquatic and riparian habitats in most major

streams or rivers.

Natural-resource management agencies

in the basin confronted with these problems

are charged with balancing the needs of the

resources with the needs of the growing human

population, often in the face of shrinking budgets.

Monitoring of water quantity and quality is one

of the tools used by agencies to assess the effects

of management decisions on resources and to make

decisions about future land uses in the basin. Yet

many natural resource agencies have overlapping

or sometimes contradictory geographical and

topical areas of interest, responsibility, and (or)

missions. In the absence of a coordinated strategy

and long-term, open communication between

agencies, individual agency monitoring programs

may be redundant, leave important data gaps,

provide incomparable data because of differences

in objectives and methods, provide data that are not

used because of lack of awareness, or have other

inefficiencies.

2.1 Purpose and Scope

This report presents a framework for coordinated, integrated, long-term monitoring by local, State,

Tribal, and Federal agencies in the middle

and upper Deschutes River Basin and selected tributaries. It includes a review of current, ongoing monitoring

activities, suggestions for monitoring actions to be

done on a regular basis or as special studies to fill

important data gaps, and suggestions for reducing

redundancies between agencies. There are also suggestions for establishing a mechanism to ensure the continued, coordinated implementation of this plan and
5

123o00'

HIGH LAVA PLAINS

R

ANG

E

44o00'

43o30'

44o30'

122o00'

CROOK

 COUNTY

WHEELER

COUNTY

JEFFERSON COUNTY

CLACKAMAS

COUNTY

LINN

COUNTY

LANE

COUNTY

DESCHUTES COUNTY

KLAMATH

COUNTY

LAKE

COUNTY

Study area boundary

Sisters

Madras

Prineville

Redmond

Bend

Gilchrist

La

Pine

Sunriver

Wickiup

Reservoir

Davis

Lake

East Lake

Lava Lake

Sparks Lake

Lake Billy Chinook

Suttle Lake

Lake Simtustus

Elk Lake

Hosmer

Lake

Cultus Lake

Quinn River

Crescent Lake

Summit Lake

Odell Lake

Paulina Lake

Crane Prairie Reservoir

Prineville Reservoir

Ochoco Reservoir River

Moore Creek

Browns

Spring

River

Bridge

D

Dry

ry

Creek

Creek

Fly

River

Cr

Indian

Jefferson

River

Mud Springs Cr

Willow Cr

Ford

Crooked

River

Squaw

Metolius

McKay Cr

Lytle Cr

River

Creek

Odell

Fall

River

Cr

Crescent

Creek

Creek

Creek

Cr

Tumalo

Creek

Big

Marsh

Little

Deschutes

DESCHUTES

RIVER

River

Cr

Paulina

Ochoco

Lake

Creek

First Cr

Jack Cr

Canyon Cr

Candle Cr

Abbot Cr

Cul

River

tus

Cultus

Cr Deer Cr

Davis Cr

Steelhead Falls

42

97

97

20

26

26

20

58

126

126

126

31

Study area

Deschutes Basin

O R E G O N

0 5 10 MILES

0 5 10 KILOMETERS

Arnold

Canal

Tumalo Feed Canal

Central Oregon

Canal

North Unit Main Canal

Squaw Creek

Canal

Mt

Jefferson

Mt

Washington

Middle

Sister

North

Sister

South

Sister Broken Top

Maiden

Peak

Willamette

Pass

Paulina

Peak

Paul ina Mounta ins

Santiam Pass

McKenzie

Pass

Newberry Volcano

 Figure 1. Middle and upper Deschutes River Basin, Oregon.
6

to reevaluate the plan after a period of time

following implementation. These suggestions were

developed in conjunction with the Upper

Deschutes Water Quality Monitoring Committee.

A summary of objectives and suggested

monitoring actions for each monitoring topic is

provided at the beginning of each topical section,

with subsequent explanation of individual actions.

A glossary (p. 83) provides definitions of terms

and acronyms used in this report.

For this plan, the primary goal is to provide

data that can be used, at a regional level, to

determine the status and trends of water-quality

related resources in the basin. Compliance

monitoring needs will be met in part by data

collected under this plan, but for some constituent

groups or issues additional data collection,

targeted to answer specific questions, will likely be

required. Evaluation of resource-management

changes or land-use practices will typically be

most effectively addressed through the use of

short-term, targeted studies that have specific,

narrowly defined objectives.

A first step in meeting the plan’s goals is to

make more effective use of existing data-collection

programs through inventory, compilation review,

assessment, and communication of those data,

tasks that are generally beyond the scope of this

document. Modifications to ongoing sampling

programs are generally considered to be a second

step, because in most cases decisions on changes

to base programs will be most effective if they are

founded on analysis of existing data. Furthermore,

increasing or decreasing the number of monitoring

locations, the frequency of sampling, or the

number of constituents sampled will, in all

likelihood, require changes in priorities of

resource allocation or funding levels for most

organizations. These types of changes will take

time to implement because they often require, at

best, a full funding cycle for most public agencies,

in addition to decision making at various levels

within those agencies and agreements among

multiple organizations. In some cases

reconnaissance data collection or other special

studies are suggested as interim steps in order to

provide data needed to make further monitoring

decisions.

No attempt has been made to place pri

on the individual monitoring actions, in part

because the priorities will vary by organizat

However, a possible approach using a phase

implementation of the monitoring program i

outlined in the Summary section and in table 

The phases described are not based on priori

issues or monitoring actions, but rather on a

sequence of logical steps that might be used 

create a coordinated, regional program witho

causing rapid, undue disruption to current

programs.

The monitoring plan does not, and can

accommodate all aspects of data collection a

management in the study area. Many of the

priorities, responsibilities, and data requirem

of the individual land- and water-manageme

agencies are unique to those agencies and ar

properly carried out within their own progra

Rather, the monitoring plan is intended to pr

a base-level structure to supply data at a reg

level, for use or augmentation by any organiz

or researchers for a variety of purposes. The 

collected might not be sufficient to answer a

questions about the effect of management ac

or the combined effect of multiple managem

actions, on water quality. It would, however

provide indications of changing conditions o

time, allowing additional investigations to be 

to determine causes or define the extent of th

changes.

Funding is an obvious constraint for m

organizations. This plan does not take costs 

account in providing a framework for coordi

monitoring. By working with this plan, and

agreeing to strive for enhanced coordination 

water-related monitoring in the study area,

organizations are not necessarily expected to

expend their finite resources except of their 

volition. It will be the task of the combined

organizations involved in coordinated monit

to agree on a funding strategy for monitorin

supplement current programs.

2.2 Study Area

The water bodies under consideration 

this monitoring plan (fig. 1) include the Des

River upstream of Lake Billy Chinook to Wi

Reservoir and its major tributaries (Little
7

Deschutes River from the mouth to the headwaters

and to Crescent Lake, Squaw Creek, Tumalo

Creek, and Paulina Creek). Some additional

tributaries such as Fall River and Spring River are

included where there are existing data collection

activities and those activities contribute to the

supply of data for the upper Deschutes River;

however, the monitoring plan does not address

these smaller systems explicitly. For selected

topics, additional considerations are given to the

Wickiup and Crane Prairie Reservoirs themselves,

areas and tributaries upstream of the reservoirs,

and the extensive irrigation canal system. The

Crooked River and Metolius River systems are

excluded from this monitoring plan in order to

keep the tasks of assessing current monitoring, and

designing future monitoring, to a manageable

level. However, this plan could provide a basis for

additional integrated monitoring in those basins if

there is sufficient interest.

The study area includes several urban areas,

most notably the communities of Bend, Redmond,

Sisters, and La Pine, within Deschutes, Jefferson,

and Klamath Counties. The headwaters of most of

the area’s streams predominantly drain forested

and mountainous terrain, with the lowlands being

composed of broad, high lava plains containing a

mixture of land uses including irrigated agriculture, livestock pastureland and dairies, urban/

residential/industrial land, and recreational areas

associated with the region’s abundant natural

resources. A generalized description of regional

geology and hydrogeologic flow patterns is given

by Caldwell (1998).

For the purposes of stratification and to

focus monitoring resources, the study area was

divided into 10 major stream reaches (table 2;

fig. 2) according to flow volumes and independent

geographic areas. This division is the same as that

used by the Oregon Department of Environmental

Quality for listing stream reaches as water-quality

limited according to the Clean Water Act. Some of

the reaches have been divided into subreaches for

management purposes by individual agencies (for

example, see U.S. Department of Agriculture

Forest Service, 1996, for subreaches of the upper

Deschutes River) but this monitoring plan is

primarily targeted at a more regional scale.

Hereinafter, the term “upper Deschutes River

Basin” refers to the entire watershed upstream of

Bend (that is, reaches 2–5 and 10 in table 2 

figure 2). The reach between the dam at Wic

Reservoir and the mouth of the Little Desch

River is sometimes referred to herein as the “

Deschutes River below Wickiup Reservoir.” 

“middle Deschutes River” refers to the reach 

the North Unit Main Canal to Lake Billy Ch

(reaches 6 and 8) and associated tributaries.

Several of the study reaches or subrea

have special management designations, and 

such have been the subject of specific manag

plans (U.S. Department of Agriculture, Fore

Service, 1996a; U.S. Department of the Inte

Bureau of Land Management and U.S. Depar

Study area boundary 

Wickiup

Reservoir

Lake Billy

Chinook

Crescent Lake

Paulina Lake

Creek

Squaw

Crescent

Creek

Creek

Tumalo

Little

Deschutes

DESCHUTES

RIVER

River

Cr Paulina

Steelhead Falls

10

1

1

3

5

4

7

9

6

8

2

Reach —Number located 

 between bars 

 indicates the reach 

 defined in Table 2

EXPLANATION

Figure 2. Designated reaches for regional monito

in the upper and middle Deschutes River Basin, Or
8

Table 2. Definition of reaches of the Upper Deschutes River Basin and selected tributaries, including estimated ground-water gainsand losses and water-quality issues identified by the State of Oregon[Reaches are indicated in figure 2. Data on status of reach ground-water inputs or losses from Gannett and others (in press); Data on Water Quality issues from OregoQuality; “303(d) list”—reach is designated water-quality limited by the State under the Clean Water Act; “needs data”—there are indications that the reach couldbe designated as water-quality limited by the State but insufficient data exist to make a final designation; COID Central Oregon Irrigation Diversion]

Reach

number Monitoring reach River miles

Flow status

(fluctuating, gaining,

losing, or stable reach) Water-qu

1 Crescent Creek, from Crescent Lake to mouth (Little

Deschutes river mile 57.3)

30.0–0 Gaining Temperature—303(d) list

Flow modification—needs data

2 Little Deschutes River, from headwaters to mouth

(Upper Deschutes river mile 192.5)

63.3–0 Slightly Gaining Temperature—303(d) list (mouth t

Bacteria—needs data (mouth to CrFlow modification—needs dataHabitat modification—needs dataNutrients—needs dataSedimentation—needs data

3 Upper Deschutes River, from Wickiup Reservoir to

Little Deschutes River

226.8–192.5 Stable Dissolved Oxygen—303(d) list

Flow modification—303(d) listHabitat modification—303(d) listSedimentation—303(d) listTurbidity—303(d) list

4 Upper Deschutes River, from Little Deschutes to

COID

192.5–169.9 Gaining (to Harper’s Bridge),

Losing (Harper’s Bridge toCOID)

Dissolved Oxygen—303(d) list (LiHabitat modification—303(d) listSedimentation—303(d) listTurbidity—303(d) listpH—303(d) list

5 Upper Deschutes River, from COID to North Unit

Main Canal

169.9–164.8 Losing pH—303(d) list

Flow modification—303(d) list (COHabitat modification—needs dataSedimentation—needs dataTurbidity—needs dataNutrients—needs data

6 Middle Deschutes River, from North Unit Main Canal

to Steelhead Falls

164.8–127.8 Steady Flow modification—303(d) list

pH—303(d) listSedimentation—needs dataTemperature—303(d) list

7 Tumalo Creek, from Headwaters to mouth (Middle

Deschutes river mile 160.2)

All Gaining Flow modification—303(d) list (m

Habitat modification—needs data (

8 Middle Deschutes River, from Steelhead Falls to Lake

Billy Chinook

127.8–120.0 Gaining Flow modification—needs data

pH—303(d) listSedimentation—needs data

9 Squaw Creek, from headwaters to mouth (Deschutes

river mile 123.1)

All Stable (to Alder Springs),

Gaining (Alder Springs tomouth)

Flow modification—303(d) list (AHabitat modification—needs data (Temperature—303(d) list (Alder S

10 Paulina Creek from Paulina Lake to mouth All Losing Temperature—303(d) list
9

of Agriculture, Forest Service, 1992). The upper

Deschutes River, from Wickiup Reservoir to

upstream of the Central Oregon Irrigation District

(COID) canal on the southern side of Bend (reach

3 and part of reach 4), is designated as Federal

Wild and Scenic, and several segments are also

designated as a State Scenic Waterway (U.S.

Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, 1996a).

The middle Deschutes River has four subreaches

designated as State Scenic Waterways, either

solely or in combination with Federal Wild and

Scenic designation (U.S. Department of

Agriculture, Forest Service, 1996a). A portion of

Squaw Creek (reach 9) also is designated as

Federal Wild and Scenic, with a management plan

pending (U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest

Service, 1998).

2.3 Water Management in the Upper

Deschutes Basin

Many agencies are involved in the various

aspects of water management in the middle and

upper Deschutes River Basin, including the

Oregon Water Resources Department (OWRD);

the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality

(ODEQ); the Oregon Department of Fish and

Wildlife (ODFW); the Oregon State Parks and

Recreation Department; Deschutes, Jefferson, and

Klamath Counties; the cities of Bend, Redmond,

and Sisters; the U.S. Forest Service (USFS)

through the Bend/Fort Rock, Crescent, and Sisters

Ranger Districts of the Deschutes National Forest;

the Prineville office of the Bureau of Land

Management (BLM); the U.S. Fish and Wildlife

Service (USFWS); The U.S. Bureau of

Reclamation (BOR); the Confederated Tribes of

the Warm Springs Reservation; and several local

irrigation districts. A private entity, Portland

General Electric (PGE), which operates the

hydroelectric facility at Lake Billy Chinook, also

collects data in the basin, and management of the

lake could become an issue farther upstream

because water-quality standards for temperature,

dissolved oxygen, and pH are sometimes violated

during summer in the lake (E&S Environmental

Chemistry, 1997).

2.4 Water-Quality Issues

Representatives of the agencies partici

in the development of this monitoring plan

identified the principal issues to be addresse

review of known issues (table 2), recommen

tions from existing plans (Appendix A, table 

and their own agency programs (table 3) and

overall priorities (Appendix A). The primary

issues related to or indicative of water qualit

the basin are water quantity (and its tempora

pattern), stream temperature, turbidity and

sediment transport, eutrophication (effects o

nutrient and other inputs on dissolved oxyge

and indicator bacteria), macroinvertebrates, 

physical status of channel configuration and

habitat for aquatic biota. Flooding is not gen

a problem for most of the study reaches beca

flow regulation from reservoirs, irrigation

withdrawals, and the overall stable flows res

from ground water inputs to the system. How

some runoff is likely during snowmelt or

rainstorms, and the smaller streams may swe

times. These events, which can be critical fo

transport of contaminants, are typically not

monitored for water quality.

Table 2 indicates reaches included eith

on the State of Oregon’s 303(d) list of water

quality limited streams (Oregon Department

of Environmental Quality, 1999a), or its dec

matrix for possible 303(d) listing where lim

data exist. TMDLs will eventually be requir

for issues that are formally included on the

303(d) list by the State (Oregon Department 

Environmental Quality, 1999a) and are plann

for completion by the end of 2002 for the up

and Little Deschutes River Basin. There are 

permit holders for pollution discharges with

the study area, of which only 5 are National

Point-Discharge Elimination System (NPDE

permits for direct or indirect discharge to th

upper Deschutes River. The remainder are

Water Pollution Control Facility (WPCF) or

other general permits for domestic or indust

discharges of effluent to ground water or lan

(Oregon Department of Environmental Qual

1999b). Nonpoint-source impacts qualitative

identified in a 1988 report by the State (Oreg
10

Table 3. Summary of relevant monitoring activities in the Upper Deschutes River Basin[D.R., Deschutes River; L.D.R., Little Deschutes River; C.R., Crooked River; Field, field parameter, including temperature, DO, pH, Specific Conductance; Alk, alkali(evaporated); TDS, Total Dissolved Solids; SS, Suspended Sediment; Nut., Nutrients; Majors, major ions (cations +anions); Bac-T, Bacteria; Benth, benthic invertebratbiological oxygen demand; COD, chemical oxygen demand; CBOD, carbonaceous biological oxygen demand; TOC, Total Organic Carbon; Alk, alkalinity; Note: TSSbecause of methods differences]

Issue Monitoring program objectives

Time frame Spatial coverage in upper

Deschutes River Basin Constituents 

Period Frequency

Oregon Water Resources Department (OWRD)—Contact: Kyle Gorman 541-388-6669

•Flow volume

(esp. at low flow)

• Data for allocation of water rights Ongoing every 15 min Approximately 31 sites in Upper Deschutes River Basin •Streamflow 

•Temperature •Stream temperatures Ongoing every 15 min Various •Temperature 

Oregon Department of Environmental Quality (ODEQ)—Contact: Bonnie Lamb 541-388-6146 x239

•Ambient Water

Quality Monitoring

•Trend monitoring, Compliance Ongoing

(varies)

Bi-monthly •5 sites: Desch. Riv. @ Pringle Falls;

L.Desch. Riv. @ Hwy 42;Desch. Riv. @ Harper Br. (Sunriver);Desch. Riv. @ Mirror Pond;Desch. Riv. @ Lower Br

•Field, TSS, Alk

Major ions, Bchlorophyll, Tturbidity,

•Upper Deschutes

Water Quality Survey

•Reconnaissance/Evaluation of impacts

from development, temperatureproblems, water withdrawals

•1995–96

(one time study)

•2–4 visits per

site, somecontinuous

•23 sites, mostly on Deschutes R., Little

Deschutes R., Crescent Cr., Fall R.,Squaw Cr.

•Water chemistr

temperature, o

•REMAP •Status and Trends •1997–98

(one time study)

•1 visit per

site, pluscontinuoustemperature

•15 sites, plus some in Crooked &

Metolius. Sites were randomly selected.

•Water chemistr

continuous tembiological (invriparian habita

US Environmental Protection Agency—Contact: Scott Augustine, Region 10 (Seattle) 206 553-1795

•Temperature •Analysis of QA for existing network • •NA •All known sites •Water temperat

City of Bend—Contact: Roger Prowell, 541-317-3017

•Drinking water quality •Compliance •Many Years •Continous •Bridge Creek above Tumalo Creek •Turbidity, temp

•1990–present 16–40 x/mo •Bridge Creek above Tumalo Falls •Fecal coliform,

inorganics / or

•Many Years •Continous Bridge Cr. @ Skyliner Rd (in pipe) •pH 

Portland General Electric (PGE)—Contact: Scott Lewis 541-475-1302

•Relicensing at

Pelton Round Butte

•Background Conditions 1994–Present various Lake Billy Chinook, Squaw Creek,

Fisheries Study

•Field parameter

•Temperature •Status and trends, Compliance ContinuousMonthly Deschutes R. inflow to Billy Chinook, Deschutes R @ Lower Bridge •Temperature
11

•

U.S. Bureau of Land Management (BLM)—Contact: Michelle McSwain 541-416-6474, Brent Falston

•Temperature/

IrrigationWithdrawals

•Temperature standards compliance •1993–96

•7/96-9/98•7/96–10/96,

2/98–9/98

1996–present1995– present

•2-hour•2-hour•2-hour

•D.R. near Cline Falls State Park•L.D.R. @Hwy 97•Crescent Cr @Hwy 97•D.R. at Steelhead Falls•D.R. at Geneva

•Temperature 

U.S.D.A. - Forest Service, Deschutes National Forest—Contact: Mollie Chaudet 541-383-4769; Tom Walker 541-383-4787; Robert Rock 

•Temperature •Baseline, status and trends, compliance •1991–present •Continuous •D.R. from Bend to headwaters, including

tributaries

•L.D.R., Crescent Cr., Squaw Cr.,

•Temperature fr

thermographs

•Eutrophication

(pH / DO)

•Baseline, status and trends, compliance •1998–99 •Monthly

(Apr-Oct)

•Squaw Creek •pH / DO 

•Stream Surveys

•Baseline, status and trends•Biological - Invertebrates

•1991–present •1x every 2 yrs

at each site

•D.R. from Bend to headwaters, including

tributaries

•L.D.R., Crescent Cr., Squaw Cr.,

•Benthic macroi

•Baseline, status and trends, compliance•Fine sediment, Habitat

•1991–present •1x every 2 yrs

at each site

•D.R. from Bend to headwaters, including

tributaries

•L.D.R., Crescent Cr., Squaw Cr.,

•Fine sediments 

•Turbidity •Compliance, Cause and Effect •1992–98

(March-June/July)

•> 4x per day,

based onflow changes

•Primarily 2 stations: D.R. below

Wickiup, D.R. @ Sheep Mtn Bridge

•Some data at other locations

•Turbidity from 

samplers

•Instream flow •Evaluate fish habitat at different flows •1991 (SpringSummer) •One time study •Deschutes R. from Sunriver to Wickiup •Flow 

U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, Pacific Northwest Region—Contact Larry “Zak” Zakrajsek, 541-389-6541

•Lake quality •Baseline, status, and trends, compliance •1984–present •1x, every 3

years

•Wickiup Reservoir (1 station, 3–4 depths)•Crescent Lake (1 station, 3–4 depths)

•temperature/pH•Inorganic chem

U.S. Geological Survey, Water Resources Division (USGS, WRD)—Contact: Chauncey Anderson 503-251-3206, Dave Morga

•Streamflow •Basic data collection 1952–present Continuous •D.R. near Culver •Streamflow •Ground water in

La Pine

•Evaluation of land use contributions to

nitrate in GW, model development

1999–present One time

study

•La Pine area, including Upper Deschutes

(above Bend) and Little Deschutes

•Ground-water l

flow patterns, 

•Regional ground-water

flow patterns

•Status and trends,

Model development

1994–98 One time

study

• Above and including L. Billy Chinook,

including Metolius, Crooked, UpperDeschutes, & Little Deschutes

•Ground-water l

alk, nut, majorIsotopes of H 

Table 3. Summary of relevant monitoring activities in the Upper Deschutes River Basin—Continued[D.R., Deschutes River; L.D.R., Little Deschutes River; C.R., Crooked River; Field, field parameter, including temperature, DO, pH, Specific Conductance; Alk, alkali(evaporated); TDS, Total Dissolved Solids; SS, Suspended Sediment; Nut., Nutrients; Majors, major ions (cations +anions); Bac-T, Bacteria; Benth, benthic invertebratbiological oxygen demand; COD, chemical oxygen demand; CBOD, carbonaceous biological oxygen demand; TOC, Total Organic Carbon; Alk, alkalinity; Note: TSSbecause of methods differences]

Issue Monitoring program objectives

Time frame Spatial coverage in upper

Deschutes River Basin Constituents 

Period Frequency
12

Department of Environmental Quality, 1988)

included severe effects on beneficial uses in

various reaches from flow alterations, turbidity,

low dissolved-oxygen concentrations,

sedimentation, and toxic chemicals; however,

specific causes and the exact magnitudes of these

problems were not identified. Rapid growth in the

towns of Bend and Redmond and in the southern

part of Deschutes County threaten to compound

these issues in the future.

Bull trout are federally listed as “threatened”

species and redband trout are federally listed as

“sensitive” in the middle and upper Deschutes

River Basin (Steven Marx, Oregon Department of

Fish and Wildlife, written commun., 2000).

Although these listings are not necessarily due to

water-quality problems, their management is often

intricately linked with management of waterquality issues in the basin. Aquatic species

included in management considerations are

indicated in table 4. These species are not resident

in all water bodies, but are locally concentrated.

Also indicated in table 4 are certain introduced fish

species and an amphibian (bullfrog) which, in

some cases, may be problematic because of

competition with native fish.

2.5 Recent and Current Monitoring

Current monitoring activity in the middle

and upper Deschutes River Basin (table 3) is

determined by the priorities and missions of the

individual agencies, but monitoring activities

generally are not coordinated among agencies. The

largest amount of data is collected for streamflow,

primarily measured by OWRD, and for

temperature, which is measured by several entities.

Aside from flow and temperature, the ODEQ’s

Ambient Monitoring Program, a statewide

program with five stations in the Deschutes River

Basin upstream of Lake Billy Chinook is the most

stable ongoing water-quality monitoring program

in the basin. It is therefore a logical foundation

around which more comprehensive, integrated

water-quality monitoring can be structured. Data

from the Ambient Monitoring Program have

periodically been analyzed and made available

through the Oregon Water Quality Index (OWQI),

which provides a measure of trends in water

quality at each location (Oregon Department of

Environmental Quality, 1999d). Ambient

Monitoring Program data are used in conjun

with data from other sources for regulatory

purposes, including decisions about listing sp

water bodies on the State’s 303(d) list and fo

setting TMDLs. However, the OWQI alone i

used for regulatory purposes because it is no

rigorously designed for those purposes. Rath

OWQI can provide a general overview of wa

quality at a site, including trends over time a

identification of noteworthy features.

Localized but relatively complete and 

term data have been collected by the City of 

for its drinking water intake from Tumalo C

including the only continuous monitoring of 

the study area (table 3). Since 1994, Portlan

General Electric has collected and continues 

collect a variety of basic water-quality data, 

locations near the lower end of the study are

support of their management of Lake Billy

Chinook and the lower Deschutes River. Stre

inventories to document habitat features and

physical measures of stream channels are reg

conducted by the Forest Service and the Bur

Land Management, for Federal lands along m

the stream reaches included in this plan. For

Wickiup Reservoir and Crescent Lake, the B

of Reclamation takes summertime samples f

inorganic water chemistry and chlorophyll a 

multiple depths, at intervals intended to be ro

3 years.

In addition to the above ongoing progr

there is a wide variety of project-oriented da

collection to address specific issues or evalu

the effects on streams from resource manage

ment changes. Typically, these have been

short-term studies, lasting at most about

3 years. Many such studies have been orient

towards stream temperature; the Bureau of L

Management, Forest Service, Oregon Depar

of Environmental Quality, Oregon Water

Resources Department, Oregon Department

of Fish and Wildlife, and U.S. Geological

Survey have all collected temperature data

for various purposes at some time within

the last 10 years. The Oregon Department of

Environmental Quality conducted a 1995-96

water-quality survey of the upper Deschutes 

Basin, including water chemistry from over 
13

Table 4. Historical and current fish and amphibian species in the waters of the upper Deschutes River Basin

[Source: Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, 1996]

Common name Scientific name Origin Status Abundance

Pacific lamprey Entosphenus tridentatus indigenous extinct Not applicable

Summer steelhead Oncorhynchus mykiss indigenous extinct Not applicable

Chinook salmon Oncorhynchus tshawytscha indigenous extinct Not applicable

Redband trout Oncorhynchus mykiss indigenous present moderatea

Bull trout Salvelinus confluentis indigenous present very rareb

Mountain whitefish Prosopium williamsoni indigenous present very abundant

Shorthead sculpin Cottus confusus indigenous present locally abundant

Reticulate sculpin Cottus perplexus indigenous present unknown

Longnose dace Rhinichthys cataractae indigenous present low

Chiselmouth Acrocheilus alutaceus indigenous present moderate

Largescale sucker Catostomus macrocheilus indigenous present locally abundant

Bridgelip sucker Catostomus columbianus indigenous present moderate

Northern pikeminnow Ptychocheitus oregonensis indigenous present moderate

Crayfish Pacifastacus leniusculus indigenous present abundant

Coho salmon Oncorhynchus kisutch introduced present locally abundant

Kokanee Oncorhynchus nerka introduced present abundant

Atlantic salmon Salmo salar introduced present rare

Rainbow trout Oncorhynchus mykiss introduced present abundant

Brown trout Salmo trutta introduced present abundant

Brook trout Salvelinus fontinalis introduced present abundant

Cutthroat trout Oncorhynchus clarki lewisi introduced present moderate

Lake trout Salvelinus namaycush introduced present low

Largemouth bass Micropterus salmoides introduced present moderate

Smallmouth bass Micropterus dolomieui introduced present low

White crappie Pomoxis annularis introduced present low

Black crappie Pomoxis nigromaculatus introduced present low

Brown bullhead catfish Ictalurus nebulosus introduced present locally abundant

Bluegill Lepomis Macrochirus introduced present moderate

Three-spine stickleback Gasterosteus aculeatus introduced present very abundant

Tui chub Gila (Siphateles) bicolor introduced present very abundant

Blue chub Gila (Gila) coerulea introduced present locally abundant

Bullfrog Rana catesbeiana introduced present unknown

a

Federally listed as “sensitive.”

b

Federally listed as “threatened.”

locations, and a 1998 study as part of R-EMAP

(Regional Environmental Monitoring and

Assessment Program) for water chemistry, aquatic

biota, and habitat features. Although the data are

available, only the water-chemistry findings from

the R-EMAP study have been published (Oregon

Department of Environmental Quality, 1999e). The

Forest Service has performed studies to assess

eutrophication, turbidity, flow regulation, and

instream flows, as well as numerous smaller 

studies to evaluate the effects of specific for

management projects in the basin. The U.S.

Geological Survey has done studies in the ba

investigate sediment erosion and transport b

Wickiup Dam, geothermal and water quality

aspects of Newberry Crater (Morgan and oth

1997), and regional ground-water chemistry 

flow patterns, but has no long-term data-coll
14

program in the basin other than one stream-gaging

station on the middle Deschutes River near Culver,

upstream of Lake Billy Chinook. Finally, the

Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife has done

various short-term studies to evaluate its habitat

enhancement program or to measure temperature

in important reaches, but does not regularly collect

water-quality or physical stream geometry data at

any locations in the basin (S. Marx, Oregon

Department of Fish and Wildlife, oral commun.,

November 1999).

Despite the relatively large amount of data

collection done in the basin over the last decade

and continuing to this day, there is a lack of

published or otherwise available information on

most of these studies. In fact, data from many of

the studies have not been analyzed and are not

likely to be disseminated to other agencies or the

public without specific requests. In some cases,

individual agencies do not have a good inventory

of the data they themselves have collected, for

disparate programs and for various objectives

among scattered offices, so it is not surprising that

data analysis efforts are often incomplete. This

lack of communication of study data is a

fundamental area in which current monitoring and

data-collection programs in the basin can be

substantially improved.

2.6 Previous Management Plans

This regional monitoring plan has been

developed with consideration of monitoring

recommendations from previous management

plans that apply to the same study area. These

plans range from general, overarching plans, such

as the President’s Northwest Forest Plan (U.S. Fish

and Wildlife Service, 1992) and the Oregon Plan

for Salmon and Watersheds (State of Oregon,

2000), to more locally derived and specific plans

such as the Forest Service’s Comprehensive

Management Plan for the Upper Deschutes Wild

and Scenic River and State Scenic Waterway (U.S.

Forest Service, 1996a). These plans were

examined for recommendations relevant to

monitoring in the middle and upper Deschutes

River Basin, and their recommendations are

compiled in Appendix A-1. For the most part,

those recommendations were general in nature, so

the monitoring actions crafted for this regional

plan do not contradict those in the previous plans.

2.7 Principles of Long-Term

Monitoring

For a monitoring program to be succes

must be both focused and relevant to regiona

issues. Because of limitations of funding and 

resources, monitoring cannot be all things to 

people, but rather must adhere to an agreed 

set of principles. The following principles fo

monitoring in the middle and upper Deschut

River Basin are modified from those establish

the Lower Columbia River Estuary Program

(1999) and the San Francisco Estuary Projec

(1993):

1. Monitoring is focused on the developmen

data that will provide information on sta

and trends in the study area.

To understand the need for changes in

management of resources in the study area a

effect of such changes, it is important to be 

define current conditions in the river, includ

their natural variability in space and time, a

recognize any long-term changes in these

conditions. This monitoring plan was devel

with the two-fold intent of helping to define 

the current state of selected environmental

variables and their rate of change, if any. Th

variables represent important aspects of the 

to monitor over time in order to assess the

integrity of the river’s ecological system.

2. A variety of special studies will be neede

both in the short term and over the long 

to fill key data gaps.

There is a need for short and long-term

investigations of specific issues in the midd

upper Deschutes River Basin, especially fo

on the mechanisms by which certain

environmental processes occur. In many ca

results of these investigations may be critic

understanding or implementing certain aspe

the monitoring plan itself, and this docume

includes recommendations for several such

investigations. However, regional monitorin

alone cannot be expected to determine caus

effect relationships among human actions a

responses in rivers and streams. Rather, res

monitoring will most likely provide an indi

of change (or conversely, no change) in som
15

constituent of interest over a specified area and

period of time, with the cause of that change being

uncertain. Likewise, the monitoring plan cannot

encompass all possible known or unknown

contaminant sources, and the plan is therefore

designed to highlight general areas of concern

rather than specific sources. Thus, many useful

studies will be beyond the scope of this plan, and

it will be incumbent on those implementing and

coordinating the plan to recognize efforts more

appropriately left to a research or targeted

approach. Such studies ideally will provide

information for management purposes and to

improve or modify the monitoring plan. A

commitment from key organizations and agencies

to seek funding for special studies will therefore

be critical.

3. Commitment to development of an integrated

plan utilizing ongoing programs will be

necessary.

One of the key roles of the monitoring plan is

to bring together diverse monitoring data from the

middle and upper Deschutes River Basin to

enhance the overall understanding of the system.

Numerous entities have collected and continue to

collect data along the river, but no institutional

framework exists to provide a linkage for these

various data-collection and assessment efforts.

The monitoring plan provides an opportunity to

connect these disparate efforts under the umbrella

of one organization.

With this in mind, the monitoring plan has

been developed with the intent of utilizing existing

and planned monitoring programs as its

cornerstone. In this way, duplication of effort will

be minimized and available resources maximized.

Existing programs that have been reviewed and

considered are listed in table 3 and explained in

greater detail in the topical sections. Compliance

monitoring and National Pollution Discharge

Elimination System (NPDES) programs are data

sources that can augment information collected by

the monitoring plan. Additional monitoring

beyond the scope of this plan will likely be needed

by most agencies to meet their specific

organization’s objectives. Data collected under

this plan will therefore provide a basis for longterm data analysis and provide a regional context

for evaluation of more detailed, agency-spe

data.

In some cases, standardized approaches 

sampling and analysis are specified in the p

and their use by the respective agencies is h

encouraged; however, some agencies may b

reluctant to change methods because such ch

would make it difficult to compare newly co

data with historic data collected by differen

methods. In these cases, it is critical to colle

adequate quality-control data in order to eva

the comparability of data among agencies.

Furthermore, it is equally critical to report a

review quality-control data on a regular bas

ensure that data being collected are of know

quality and can be interpreted in conjunctio

other monitoring data.

4. Establishment of a mechanism for

coordinating regional monitoring will be

necessary.

This monitoring plan provides a framew

for coordinated monitoring in the middle an

upper Deschutes River Basin; however, suc

monitoring is not likely to be fully impleme

without a dedicated mechanism to help to pr

it. This mechanism may take the form of a

separate oversight entity or a well develope

supported series of agreements among

organizations, but in either case it will requ

diligence. There will be needs for securing

funding, developing interagency agreement

contracting for special studies, developing o

reviewing quality-assurance plans, verifyin

agreed upon monitoring takes place,

communicating and discussing study findin

determining new studies or adjustments to

monitoring. All of these activities, and mor

require a substantial commitment of time an

resources in order to accomplish them.

5. A strategy for management of data is nec

to ensure access to essential information

A common problem in comparing or

analyzing data among different agencies an

investigators is lack of compatibility of the 

management systems themselves. In the ca

the middle and upper Deschutes River Basi

historical data are located in diverse paper r
16

or computer systems, and in most cases metadata

(information defining the type, objectives, and

quality of data themselves) are not readily

available. Although all these historical data may

not be available from a common electronic source

in the short term, it is important that newly

collected data be maintained by the agency

collecting them in a format that is accessible by

other participating agencies. It is also advisable to

summarize the data and make it available to the

public.

6. A periodic assessment of monitoring data and

reevaluation of the monitoring plan will be

required to ensure success of the plan.

As a mechanism to ensure continued attention

and commitment to monitoring in the study area

and to keep the monitoring plan appropriately

focused, regular reviews of progress and findings

of the plan will be essential. While it is widely

recognized that monitoring is necessary to

understand the effects of changes in systems, there

is often a lack of followup to monitoring efforts,

and hence funding for monitoring programs has

been reduced or eliminated because their potential

benefits have not been realized. Periodic

reassessments will provide a continued emphasis

on monitoring and opportunities to educate

agencies as well as the public about the benefits of

the monitoring program.

The various aspects of the monitoring plan

will not necessarily require the same intervals of

time between periodic assessments. An annual

meeting or workshop is suggested for review of

monitoring data and progress, including review

and assessment of quality-control data.

Participants in the meeting would include the

Watershed Council and agencies participating in

monitoring or otherwise collecting data in the

study area. At a longer interval, the overall

efficacy and design of the plan would be assessed,

in addition to more thorough analysis of

monitoring data to evaluate status, trends, and

compliance with standards for specific

constituents. At least 5 years of data could be

required to detect trends in most response

variables, though this time may vary from as little

as 3 years to longer than 10 years. The time

required to detect changes ultimately will depend

on the degree of change desired, sampling

frequency, and natural variability, including

occurrence of extreme or episodic climatic 

such as floods or droughts. In general, a per

5 years has been accepted as the logical

reassessment interval for the monitoring pla

itself. As the plan is initially phased in, som

operational changes will likely be required 

response to emerging logistical or funding

constraints.

7. Successful monitoring will require active

participation of key entities and individu

There are many agencies and organizat

involved in jurisdiction or influence of one 

more aspects of river management. Each ha

specific purposes for its involvement with t

river, and sometimes these purposes conflic

among different organizations. Although no

these organizations have been directly invo

the watershed council or the development o

monitoring plan, the number of organizatio

involved remains large, and avenues for inp

from other organizations must remain open. 

setting, a monitoring program can be most

successful if it has the involvement and sup

the many agencies charged with its

implementation or affected by its findings.

Training in the use of common methodolog

among monitoring organizations may at tim

necessary. Managers and scientists represen

affected agencies and other organizations w

need to periodically review the goals, techn

merits, and findings of the monitoring plan

incorporating input from the public wherev

possible.

3.0 Coordinated, Regional

Monitoring Plan

Many of the suggested monitoring act

contained in this plan are concerned with ba

aspects of monitoring, namely quality assura

analysis, and communication of existing dat

fact, the existing monitoring programs being

conducted by individual organizations appea

relatively sound, providing a good structure

around which to base more comprehensive a

coordinated monitoring, without large data g

overly unnecessary overlap between agencie
17

However, for almost all issues considered herein,

there is an apparent need to inventory existing data

within and across agencies and to assess the

suitability of available data for analysis at a

regional scale, to complete data analysis, and (or)

to communicate the results of those analyses. The

processes of completing these steps will help to

clarify where the monitoring network is adequate

and where there are data gaps.

In general, it is not advisable to initiate new

monitoring without doing some preliminary analysis

of existing data. This analysis could enhance

understanding of system processes and help to

determine the frequency and spatial coverage of

sampling necessary to achieve a desired resolution in

the acquired data; conversely, it could also help define

the ability of a practical level of monitoring to provide

acceptable resolution for a given issue. In the case of

the middle and upper Deschutes River Basin, ongoing

monitoring programs and previously conducted

studies might provide a good basis for making these

determinations. It is not suggested that all monitoring

cease until the networks have been optimized. Rather,

it is suggested that ongoing monitoring continue,

largely in its current form, with several modifications

and selected special studies indicated in subsequent

sections. Data on variability of different properties of

water would then be available for a statistical network

design when such an effort can be commissioned.

In the following sections water-quality

issues in the study area are described, and

monitoring objectives and associated actions are

listed with brief explanations. The objectives and

their actions are organized according to the type of

monitoring addressed, such as Status and Trends,

Compliance, or Evaluation monitoring. In many

cases, a more basic set of objectives and actions

has also been added; these are primarily oriented

towards increasing the utility of data that have

already been or are currently being collected.

Following the listing of objectives and suggested

monitoring actions associated with them, the

rationales for each action are explained.

3.1 Monitoring Program Management

Certain steps can be taken to enhance the

likelihood of success in meeting the goals for

regional monitoring. These steps fall generally

into the categories of increasing integration and

efficiency of current monitoring efforts among

agencies, filling data gaps, and communicating

available information.

3.1.1 Objectives and Associated Actions

3.1.1.1 Integration, Coordination, and Efficiency

There are several general actions that can be

taken to improve the foundation and increase the

efficiency of monitoring in the study area. Some

follow directly from the principles listed in section

2.7.

Objective: Integrate existing monitoring

efforts among participating

organizations to increase

efficiency, minimize redundancy,

and improve data quality and

comparability, to the extent

possible, by:

Action 1: Establishing a mechanism for

coordinating and supporting the

long-term execution of the middle

and upper Deschutes River Basin

monitoring plan, and tracking major

changes in management or land use

in the basin in relation to

monitoring;

Action 2: Periodically reviewing progress for

the regional monitoring plan, with

suggested annual and 5-year

intervals, to determine if monitoring

elements are being carried out,

evaluate monitoring data and

results, and modify the design and

priorities of the monitoring as

needed;

Action 3: Establishing common protocols that

enable data comparison among

agencies and that are consistent

with objectives for data collection;

Action 4: Developing quality-assurance plans

for each major monitoring element;
18

Action 5: Establishing a data management

strategy that allows data and

databases developed under this plan

to be shared among agencies and

other interested parties, provides

information regarding the type and

quantity of data collected, and is

easily used; and

Action 6: Working to increase availability of

information, reports, and other

products to other agencies and the

public.

3.1.1.1.1 Rationale and Explanation

Action 1: Establish coordinating

mechanism—As mentioned previously, a

process for coordination and discussion of

monitoring issues is critical to the long-term

success of any regional, integrated monitoring

effort among agencies. If coordination is to be

done by one organization, the most likely

candidates, for example, are the Bend office of the

Oregon Department of Environmental Quality, the

Bend/Fort Rock Ranger District of the Forest

Service, or the Upper Deschutes Watershed

Council. A watershed council might be the most

appropriate because it provides a forum for public

deliberation that is not associated with the

mandates of any particular agency but rather with

the broad participation of private citizens,

businesses, nonprofit organizations, and public

agencies. A watershed council can also be

instrumental in securing additional funding from

grants or other sources, helping to ensure that

member agencies participate actively in various

aspects of the monitoring plan, and in general act

as a strong advocate for the basin as a whole.

A possible drawback to a watershed council as

a coordinating entity is that they are a relatively

new component in water management in Oregon.

The long-term existence and role of these councils

is not yet certain, whereas the roles and mandates

of State or Federal agencies are likely to be more

stable for many years. Ultimately, the decision of

which organization will manage regional

monitoring according to this plan, and how such

management will be done, is beyond the scope of

this plan. However, due to the importance of this

task in moving forward with coordinated

monitoring in the region, it is already being

addressed by the monitoring committee.

Action 2: Conduct periodic progre

reviews—If monitoring is to remain viable

must be flexible enough to adapt to changes 

regional priorities or other aspects of water-q

management. There is no way to anticipate 

the issues and other questions that monitorin

be asked to help answer in coming years.

However, most changes to monitoring will n

be made on the basis of information gleane

previous data-collection efforts. Periodic, p

reevaluation of the monitoring program is

therefore suggested, at two different time sc

(1) Annual reviews would be used to assess 

communicate the progress of monitoring, th

quality of data collected, and any immediat

findings such as violations of water-quality

standards or emergence of new issues. A wo

for the following year, with priorities and a

responsibilities for upcoming monitoring ac

would also be determined. (2) Every fifth y

reassessment would include a more substan

analysis of data by the participating organiz

Topics for analysis would include, in additi

the annually examined aspects of the plan, 

evaluation of trends in the data, effects of re

management, synthesis of data from multip

monitoring tasks (for example the relation o

sediment transport to nutrient loading), and

recommendations for modifications to the

monitoring program. Changes in regional w

management priorities, such as monitoring 

allocations resulting from TMDLs, could b

reflected in changes in the long-term monit

program. This larger reassessment will also

provide an opportunity to communicate to

managers and to the public the findings and

benefits of the area’s monitoring efforts. Fo

water-quality measurements, such as those

collected continuously (temperature, turbid

others), 5-year intervals might be long enou

observe trends or make other conclusions a

river processes or relations of management a

to water quality. For other issues, such as ch

geometry, for which sampling is much less

frequent or natural variability is high, real t

may take decades or more to observe.
19

Action 3: Establish common protocols—

The use of common, clearly defined protocols for

sample collection, processing, and laboratory

analysis is important wherever possible to ensure

the comparability of data collected by different

organizations or over time within an individual

organization. Data for water-quality constituents

with the same or similar names often represent

different measurements of water quality because

of small but important operational differences in

their collection, such as sample filtration and

preservation techniques, and instrument

calibration procedures.

Action 4: Develop quality assurance

plans—Quality assurance (QA) plans

will be critical to the success of monitoring. Good

quality-control (QC) data, and assessments of

those data, can allow the comparison of data

among agencies and over time, whereas poor

quality-control data can prevent such

comparisons. As part of the implementation of the

monitoring plan, an important task for each

component of the plan, based on the principles

outlined previously, would be the development of

a detailed QA plan—an example is given by

ODEQ at http://waterquality.deq.state.or.us/wq/

303dlist/QAPPExample.htm. It is the goal of all

QA programs to provide environmental data,

using multiple sampling crews and analytical

laboratories, with quantifiable bias, variability, and

representativeness, along with appropriate

detection levels, that will allow all data to be

comparable within a single dataset and of a

sufficient quality to meet the objectives of the

monitoring plan. The three important components

of quality assurance in any monitoring plan are

quality-assurance elements, quality-control data,

and quality assessment. These are the planned and

systematic procedures necessary to provide

adequate confidence about monitoring data to

satisfy data-quality objectives. Quality

assessment, or the actual inspection of qualitycontrol and environmental data after its collection,

is an important aspect and is often overlooked.

Without assessments, simple details can be

missed. For example, if continuous monitors are

not logging the proper time (including a.m. or

p.m.), subsequent data will be of marginal value.

More detailed definitions of QA/QC elements and

their components are provided in Appendix B.

The development and utilization of goo

quality-assurance plans will be particularly

important where protocols are not complete

agreement among different entities involved 

data collection. Such situations could arise 

organization has an interest in using a parti

protocol, because of historical or geographi

widespread databases of data collected with 

specific protocol, or because of legal or age

specific mandates. In these cases it will be

especially important to verify that data coll

by multiple organizations using differing

protocols are comparable. A good qualityassurance plan can help quantify precision,

accuracy, representativeness, and biases am

the different methods to understand the limi

of data comparisons. Examples would inclu

protocols on calibration, acceptable toleran

and data management for the use of meters 

measure turbidity, DO, pH, and temperature

documentation of the laboratory techniques

precision, and bias for nutrient analysis.

Action 5: Establish a data manage

strategy—In order for monitoring data to b

to assess status and trends, compliance,

management effectiveness, and the monitor

plan itself, those data will need to be availab

agreed-upon strategy for data management 

enhance the ability of different organization

have access to monitoring data. Issues requ

discussion will include both programmatic 

institutional issues as well as technical issu

Programmatic and institutional issues inclu

funding and staffing, and agreement on data

sharing and data standards. Technical issue

include system location, operation and

maintenance, system compatibility, databas

design (for example, centralized or disperse

data accessibility. These issues are discusse

more detail by the Lower Columbia River E

Program (Lower Columbia River Estuary

Program, 1998) in regards to similar data

management needs.

Action 6: Increase data availabilit

One of the measures of success of the moni

program will be the degree to which the dat

collected, and the findings resulting from

them, are used. Users of data can include th

data-collection agencies themselves, other
20

organizations involved in the monitoring plan,

water managers in the region, and the public.

Water managers and the public are most likely to

use interpretations resulting from the monitoring

plan rather than raw data, produced by the

collecting agencies as data analyses, written

reports, and other products. Including these end

users as part of the data-collection and interpretive

process increases the relevance of the monitoring

program and the likelihood of its continued

support by the involved organizations and public

alike. This suggestion is differentiated from

Action 5 by its emphasis on results and analysis in

order to provide information to the public. Action

5 is more oriented towards the mechanics of

making monitoring data available among agencies

or other researchers for the purposes of analysis.

3.1.1.2 Data Gaps

Objective: Identify large gaps in data from

existing monitoring efforts that

can be filled with minor

modifications to existing

programs, and

Objective: Identify data gaps or other

research deficiencies that limit

or prevent success of additional

monitoring efforts, by:

Action 7: Analyzing and communicating data

from previously completed studies

in the Deschutes River Basin to

help formulate baselines and refine

issues.

3.1.1.2.1 Rationale and Explanation

Action 7: Analyze existing data—As is

commonly the case, much of the data collected in

the study area either have not been analyzed at all

or have been analyzed only sparingly. Analysis of

these data in a series of more comprehensive

undertakings would provide many benefits to

future monitoring as well as to water managers in

the basin. Results from these studies could be used

individually and collectively to (1) help answer the

questions they originally were intended to address,

(2) formulate hypotheses regarding water-quality

processes or sources of contaminants in the basin,

(3) evaluate the value of those data as components

of future monitoring, (4) evaluate the qualit

assurance practices of the collecting organi

and the reliability of the data, (5) provide d

determination of the status of a resource or 

baseline for future determinations of trends

(6) identify important data gaps in the curre

monitoring programs in order to make appr

modifications for future monitoring. Amon

potentially available datasets are studies by 

in 1995 and 1996 of water quality in the up

Deschutes River Basin and in 1997 and 199

(Oregon Department of Environmental Qua

1999e), as part of the R-EMAP program, da

from ODEQ’s ongoing Ambient Monitorin

program, data from the many temperature

monitoring studies conducted previously in 

basin (see section 3.3), and data from stream

surveys conducted by the Forest Service, B

and ODFW for both long-term monitoring

purposes and for specific management proj

3.2 Streamflow

Stream discharge is one of the most

fundamental components of all water-related

investigations. Uses of streamflow data inclu

decision-making for water allocation, irrigat

reservoir storage, and instream-flows; flood

forecasting; evaluation of habitat availability 

channel change; recreation; determination o

constituent loads (streamflow multiplied by

concentration); and others. Although streamf

not generally considered a water-quality

constituent itself, it is intricately tied to all o

water data, so evaluation of the stream-gagin

network in the middle and upper Deschutes 

Basin as it applies to water-quality monitori

included in this plan.

Streamflow in the study area is primar

measured by OWRD, which operates 36 gag

stations upstream of lake Billy Chinook (fig

including those on tributaries and irrigation

canals; one stream-gaging station, on the

middle Deschutes River near Culver, is main

tained by the USGS. More than half of these

stations have over 50 years of record. This

network of streamflow data makes the flow

regime in the basin one of the most complet

monitored in the State, which is indicative o

many demands on water in the basin. The m

Deschutes River is the only substantial lengt
21

123o00'

HIGH LAVA PLAINS

R

ANG

E

44o00'

43o30'

44o30'

122o00'

CROOK

COUNTY

WHEELER

COUNTY

JEFFERSON COUNTY

CLACKAMAS 

COUNTY

LINN

COUNTY

LANE

COUNTY

DESCHUTES COUNTY

KLAMATH

COUNTY

LAKE

COUNTY

Study area boundary

Sisters

Madras

Prineville

Redmond

Bend

Gilchrist

La

Pine

Sunriver

Wickiup

Reservoir

Davis

Lake

East Lake

Lava Lake

Sparks Lake

Lake Billy Chinook

Suttle Lake

Lake Simtustus

Elk Lake

Hosmer

Lake

Cultus Lake

Quinn River

Crescent Lake

Summit Lake

Odell Lake

Paulina Lake

Crane Prairie Reservoir

Prineville Reservoir

Ochoco Reservoir River

Moore Creek

Browns

Spring

River

Bridge

D

Dry

ry

Creek

Creek

Fly

River

Cr

Indian

Jefferson

River

Mud Springs Cr

Willow Cr

Ford

Crooked

River

Squaw

Metolius

McKay Cr

Lytle Cr

River

Creek

Odell

Fall

River

Cr

Crescent

Creek

Creek

Creek

Cr

Tumalo

Creek

Big

Marsh

Little

Deschutes

DESCHUTES

RIVER

River

Cr

Paulina

Ochoco

42

97

97

20

26

26

20

58

126

126

126

31

0 5 10 MILES

0 5 10 KILOMETERS

Arnold

Canal

Tumalo Feed Canal

Central Oregon

Canal

North Unit Main Canal

Squaw Creek

Canal

Mt

Jefferson

Mt

Washington

Middle

Sister

North Sister

South

Sister Broken

Top

Maiden

Peak

Willamette

Pass

Paulina Peak

Paul ina Mounta ins

Santiam

Pass

McKenzie

Pass

Newberry Volcano

EXPLANATION

Included on Oregon 303d list 

due to flow modification

Flow monitoring site—Continuous

U.S. Geological Survey

Oregon Water Resources 

 Department

Periodic measurement site—

Oregon Water Resources 

 Department

 Figure 3. Active stream-gaging stations in the middle and upper Deschutes River Basin, Oregon, 1999.

(Stations on canals are not shown.)
22

stream in the basin that is ungaged. In the reach

from Bend to Lower Bridge there is little groundwater inflow (Gannett and others, in press) so the

major addition of water is from Tumalo Creek.

Because a gage was reinstalled on Tumalo Creek

in 1999, streamflow at Lower Bridge can now be

estimated by summing flows from Tumalo Creek

and the Deschutes River below Bend. Several

reaches, including the Deschutes River from

Wickiup Reservoir to Bend, from Bend to

Steelhead Falls, Squaw Creek, and Tumalo Creek,

are listed on the State’s 303(d) list as water-quality

limited because of flow modification.

Several stream reaches, most notably the

upper Deschutes River from Wickiup Reservoir to

the Little Deschutes River (reach 3 in table 2),

have higher and fluctuating flows during summer

resulting from irrigation water released from

reservoirs, and lower flows during fall and winter

as water is stored for the irrigation season. These

flow modifications cause the timing of stream

hydrographic patterns to be shifted seasonally

from their natural flow patterns (Cameron and

Major, 1987; U.S. Department of Agriculture

Forest Service, 1996). Crescent Creek (reach 1) is

a 30 mile reach from Crescent Lake to the Little

Deschutes River that also is regulated for irrigation

purposes, with peak flows occurring in summer

(Moffat and others, 1990); however, the Little

Deschutes River (reach 2) is unregulated. The

Deschutes River at Benham Falls (reach 4),

representing the combined flow of the Little

Deschutes River (with Crescent Creek) and the

upper Deschutes River below Wickiup Reservoir,

therefore has peak flows that are only partially

shifted in timing from their preimpoundment

patterns (U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest

Service, 1996). However, the magnitude of the

flow changes remain substantial compared with

preimpoundment flows, because most of the water

originates from Wickiup Reservoir. These release

patterns are propagated downstream with only

minor attenuation, until withdrawals from the

irrigation canals dominate the streamflow cycles.

A small hydroelectric dam in Bend, which

forms Mirror Pond in the city center, is operated

by a private power company. Essentially a run-ofthe-river facility (that is, a minor amount of water

is stored behind the dam), it does not regulate flow

in the middle Deschutes River downstream save

for a short bypass reach between the dam an

powerhouse, where flows can be as low as 1

ft3/s (cubic feet per second). Rather, the mai

issues associated with the dam are fish passa

protection (there is no passage for upstream

migration or screening for protecting fish fro

turbines), sedimentation, and temperature (S

Marx, Oregon Department of Fish and Wildl

oral commun., 2000). Additional water-qual

concerns associated with Mirror Pond are

discussed elsewhere in this report.

Irrigation withdrawals are also respon

for downstream changes in streamflows. The

changes are most significant below the Nort

Main Canal. Although irrigation water right

would allow complete diversion of the midd

Deschutes River below the canal (more than 

ft3/s), summer streamflow there is maintained 

ft3/s through a nonbinding agreement. Groun

water inflows, mostly in the final reach from

Steelhead Falls to Lake Billy Chinook (reac

rapidly add more than 400 ft3/s (Gannett and

others, in press). Squaw Creek, Tumalo Cree

Paulina Creek also are subject to significant

diversions to irrigation canals. Discharge in S

Creek often drops from about 90 ft3/s upstre

the Squaw Creek Irrigation Canal to only a f

cubic feet per second through the town of Si

with subsequent inflows from Indian Ford C

Camp Polk Springs, and Alder Springs (Hou

1998). Discharge in Tumalo Creek drops from 

120 ft3/s upstream to around 2.5 ft3/s near th

mouth during irrigation season, and flows in

Paulina Creek rarely (if ever) reach the Littl

Deschutes River.

3.2.1 Monitoring Objectives and

Associated Actions

With an extensive flow monitoring net

covering most of the basin already in place, 

monitoring objectives for this plan are large

oriented toward increasing the utility of the 

currently being collected. Flow data are used 

many people for myriad purposes, so action

increasing their accuracy and availability wo

be well received. Near-real-time data for ma

of the stations are already available online th

the Bureau of Reclamation’s Hydromet Syst

(http://www.wrd.state.or.us/surface_water/

realtime). The largest sources of uncertainty 
23

measurement and prediction of discharge are

associated with the variability of streamflow that

enters the upper Deschutes River as snowmelt

(including flood waters) or as ground water, and

the large inputs of ground water in the lower

portions of the basin. Objectives for monitoring

streamflow in the basin are as follows:

3.2.1.1 Data Utility and Availability

Objective: Increase availability of current

and historical data to other

agencies and the public, by:

Action 8: Updating streamflow records for all

stations and publish data (as paper

reports or electronically) to

maximize utility of data to other

agencies and to the public.

3.2.1.1.1 Rationale and Explanation

Action 8: Update streamflow records—

Despite the extensive stream-gaging network in

the basin, there is a backlog of uncompleted

records at many stations that generally dates to

1992, although relations between discharge and

stage are up to date for most stations (Kyle

Gorman, Oregon Water Resources Department,

written commun., 1999). As a result of this

backlog, flow data are obtained primarily by

calling the OWRD offices in Bend. In addition to

placing a burden on OWRD personnel, this is a

time-consuming and potentially expensive step for

users of streamflow information and could be a

limitation to hydrologic analysis for streams in the

basin. Furthermore, streamflow records, including

computation of hourly discharge at all flow levels

on the basis of stage, are up to date for some highpriority stations but are not completed for all

stations in the basin. For the purposes of

increasing the completeness and availability of

streamflow data in the basin, it is suggested that a

concentrated effort be given to bringing these

records up to date, publishing the backlogged

data, and publishing future records on an annual

basis. Streamflow data could be published

electronically, including on the World Wide Web,

or in paper reports. There undoubtedly will be

costs associated with updating streamflow records

from previous years, but making these basic 

available will help maintain the quality of da

collected previously and in the future, as we

provide a valuable service to the public.

3.2.1.2 Status and Trends Monitoring

Objective: Provide flow data, over th

range of flow conditions, f

in combination with water

quality data for load

calculations, to support

evaluation of sources and

transport of water-quality

constituents, and

Objective: Improve predictive capabi

for flow entering reservoir

upper Deschutes River in o

to more adequately alloca

water resources downstrea

by:

Action 9: Continuing to measure flows 

major streams, tributaries, an

irrigation canals in the middl

upper Deschutes River Basin

Action 10: Collocating OWRD stream-g

locations with ODEQ Ambie

Monitoring Stations in order 

better combine streamflow an

water-quality data; and

Action 11: Developing process-based or

statistical hydrologic models 

•Increase predictability of sno

and ground-water systems t

reservoirs.

•Increase predictability of gr

water discharge to Fall Rive

Spring River, and to the mid

Deschutes River, by explori

relationships between water 

in select wells and ground-w

discharges to rivers.
24

3.2.1.2.1 Rationale and Explanation

Action 9: Continue current streamflow

network—This action is an acknowledgement

that the current streamflow network is both

comprehensive and useful. With appropriate

dissemination of data, it can provide critical

information at important locations for many

different users, including irrigators, water

resource managers, planners, scientists, and

recreationists. With the exception of a few

suggested relocations of flow or sampling

locations (see Action 10), the current discharge

network is highly effective and is not in need

of physical changes.

Action 10: Collocate streamflow and

water-quality stations—In addition to

providing data for water allocation and flood

forecasting, streamflow data are used in

conjunction with water-quality data to determine

transport, sources, and loading of many different

constituents of interest. Constituent loads, defined

as a mass of material passing a location in a

specified time, are determined as the product of

streamflow (volume per unit time) and

concentration (mass per unit volume). They can be

calculated for various purposes using flows

averaged on annual, monthly, or daily time steps,

or are sometimes determined on an instantaneous

basis, especially for peak flows and contaminant

transport. In order to provide the greatest utility

for the most users, it is desirable to have

streamflow gaging stations at the same locations

where water-chemistry data are collected.

Alternatively, streamflow data from known

upstream sources can be summed for use in

estimating constituent loads, but this approach

increases uncertainties for shorter time period

loadings (for example, peak instantaneous, hourly,

or daily loads) because of uncertainties in time-oftravel of flow and from ungaged inflows.

Action 11: Develop hydrologic models—

There is a need to know how much water in the

basin can be used for irrigation in an upcoming

growing season while maintaining the required

instream flows for fish and other biota. The major

sources of water in the basin are snowmelt, which

feeds the reservoirs located on the eastern flanks

of the Cascades, and ground water. Ground water

enters the river system in large amounts through

spring-dominated streams feeding the reser

the Fall and Spring rivers, the middle Desch

River below Steelhead Falls, and the lower

Crooked River (outside the study area). Sno

also recharges the ground-water system, so 

two systems are intrinsically linked. Althou

ground-water discharges are relatively stabl

compared to snowmelt, there is nonetheless 

annual variability, mostly responding to ma

variations in precipitation and evapotranspi

in the Cascades from previous years. The

variability in both systems increases the

uncertainty over the quantities of water ava

in a given year for various water uses, and m

management of reservoirs more difficult.

Two different types of modeling potent

could be done to increase the predictability 

water entering the reservoir system and thro

ground-water discharges to the rivers. A

physically based model linking snowmelt a

ground-water hydrology in the Cascades co

developed to improve predictions of inputs 

reservoirs, particularly Crane Prairie and W

Reservoirs. The dynamics of ground-water

discharge from the Cascades, including link

with snowmelt, have already been explored 

Manga (1996, 1999); the primary tasks for 

modeling effort would therefore be to devel

good network for collecting snowpack data

modify the general models by Manga (1996

specific to streams entering the upper Desch

River reservoirs, and include a component o

direct surface runoff from snowmelt based 

precipitation and climate data (Gannett and 

in press).

For ground-water discharges to the Fall 

Spring Rivers and to the middle Deschutes 

below Steelhead Falls, simple statistical

regressions between stage in select wells an

streamflow could possibly be developed. G

water elevations in wells along the margins 

Cascades are known to be highly correlated 

discharge in the Fall River, and levels in som

wells near Terrebone and Redmond are like

be highly correlated with discharge to the m

Deschutes River (Gannett and others, in pre

Such models might help resolve variability 

approximately 100 ft3/s in the Fall and Spr

Rivers, and another 100 ft3/s in the Deschu
25

River below Steelhead Falls, amounts that could be

important in helping to allocate flows during

critical periods.

3.3 Water Temperature

Maintenance of cold or cool water

temperature is critical for most native fishes in the

middle and upper Deschutes River Basin, and in

particular for salmonids. Accordingly, temperature

is the most commonly measured water-quality

constituent in the basin, with over 60 locations

currently monitored by private and local

organizations (City of Bend, Portland General

Electric), State agencies (OWRD, ODFW, ODEQ),

and Federal Agencies (BLM, Forest Service).

About two-thirds of these stations have some form

of continuous monitoring, and the remainder are

sampled by spot measurements during periodic

station visits (fig. 4). The quality of data for these

sites is as yet undetermined, however, so their

utility in meeting the objectives of the monitoring

plan is not fully known. Many additional locations

have been used in the past for short-term purposes

associated with specific needs (Bonnie Lamb,

Oregon Department of Environmental Quality,

written commun., 1999).

Across Oregon many streams do not meet

State standards for temperature. Within the study

area for this monitoring plan, several of the major

stream reaches are listed as water-quality limited

for temperature (table 2) on the State’s 303(d) list,

including portions of the Little Deschutes River,

Crescent Creek, Paulina Creek, the middle

Deschutes River, and Squaw Creek. Where

streamflow is high and riparian coverage is good in

the basin, temperatures tend to be cooler, whereas

streams that have relatively low flow or reduced

riparian cover tend to exceed the State maximum

temperature standard. The upper Deschutes River

from Wickiup Dam down to the Central Oregon

Irrigation Canal does meet the temperature

standard, most likely as a result of releases of large

amounts of cool water from Wickiup Reservoir

during summer. Water withdrawals downstream

apparently reduce flow below Bend to the point

that the river is unable to withstand the effects of

solar warming and other heat inputs such as

tributary inflows, and the temperature standard is

not met. In the final reach below Steelhead Falls,

where ground-water inputs increase discharge

several-fold, the cool temperature of the add

ground water helps to reduce stream temper

again to within State standards.

3.3.1 Monitoring Objectives and

Associated Actions

3.3.1.1 Data Utility and Availability

Objective: Increase availability of exi

and future temperature da

analysis for the public and 

agencies, by:

Action 12: Compiling data bases of exis

data and evaluating temperat

QA/QC data to determine if e

QA data are being collected, 

are of high quality, and if dat

comparable between sites an

agencies; and

Action 13: Analyzing existing data to

determine baseline condition

look for changes over time, a

communicate the results of th

analysis to interested agencie

public.

3.3.1.1.1 Rationale and Explanation

Action 12: Compile existing data a

evaluate QA/QC data—As with most da

on water-quality, stream-temperature data

have been collected by a wide variety of

organizations, using many different method

Although analysis of existing temperature d

as in Action 13 (see below), is suggested as 

basis for any major redesign of the tempera

monitoring network, the first step is to inve

available data and determine whether those 

are amenable to analysis in the first place. T

task could involve creating a database to ha

the disparate data, and ensuring that there a

adequate quality-assurance data to allow

comparison of datasets among agencies and

different locations. Quality assurance and o

data that may be used to determine the qual
26

123o00'

HIGH LAVA PLAINS

R

ANG

E

44o00'

43o30'

44o30'

122o00'

CROOK

 COUNTY

WHEELER

COUNTY

JEFFERSON COUNTY

CLACKAMAS

COUNTY

LINN

COUNTY

LANE

COUNTY

DESCHUTES COUNTY

KLAMATH

COUNTY

LAKE

COUNTY

Study area boundary

Sisters

Madras

Prineville

Redmond

Bend

Gilchrist

La

Pine

Sunriver

Wickiup

Reservoir

Davis

Lake

East Lake

Lava Lake

Sparks Lake

Lake Billy Chinook

Suttle Lake

Lake Simtustus

Elk Lake

Hosmer

Lake

Cultus Lake

Quinn River

Crescent Lake

Summit Lake

Odell Lake

Paulina Lake

Crane Prairie Reservoir

Prineville Reservoir

Ochoco Reservoir River

Moore Creek

Browns

Spring

River

Bridge

D

Dry

ry

Creek

Creek

Fly

River

Cr

Indian

Jefferson

River

Mud Springs Cr

Willow Cr

Ford

Crooked

River

Squaw

Metolius

McKay Cr

Lytle Cr

River

Creek

Odell

Fall

River

Cr

Crescent

Creek

Creek

Creek

Cr

Tumalo

Creek

Big

Marsh

Little

Deschutes

DESCHUTES

RIVER

River

Cr

Paulina

Ochoco

42

97

97

20

26

26

20

58

126

126

126

31

0 5 10 MILES

0 5 10 KILOMETERS

Arnold

Canal

Tumalo Feed Canal

Central Oregon

Canal

North Unit Main Canal

Squaw Creek

Canal

Mt

Jefferson

Mt

Washington

Middle

Sister

North

Sister

South Sister Broken

Top

Maiden

Peak

Willamette

Pass

Paulina Peak

Paul ina Mounta ins

Santiam Pass

McKenzie

Pass

Newberry Volcano

Included on Oregon 303d list due 

 to temperature concern

Continuous monitoring site 

Bureau of Land Management(BLM)

City of Bend

National Grasslands

Portland General Electric (PGE)

U.S. Forest Service

Oregon Water Resources 

 Department (OWRD)

Grab sample

Oregon Department of 

 Environmental Quality (ODEQ)

Portland General Electric (PGE)

Oregon Water Resources 

 Department (OWRD)

EXPLANATION

BLM and 

Deschutes

National 

Forest

ODEQ and 

Deschutes

National Forest

OWRD and 

Deschutes

National Forest

OWRD and 

Deschutes

National Forest

National Grasslands

and Deschutes

National Forest

ODEQ

and 

PGE

OWRD 

and 

Deschutes

National 

Forest

Figure 4. Location of temperature monitoring stations in the middle and upper Deschutes River Basin, Oregon.

(Circles indicate redundant monitoring stations by indicated organizations.)
27

the temperature data will include (1) instrument

type, age, and specifications, (2) calibration

frequency, tolerances, and records, to evaluate

precision and accuracy, (3) miscellaneous check

measurements or other applicable spot

measurements from other organizations for

comparison, (4) information on the completeness

of records, including the amount of missing data,

and (5) observations on the location of recording

devices or sites for grab samplings, including

riparian shading, depth of deployment, and date

and time of station visits. The USEPA has already

initiated part of this action with a contract for

some of the above work (Stuart McKenzie, U.S.

Geological Survey [retired], written commun.,

1999).

Action 13: Analyze existing data—Once

the quality of available temperature data has been

documented, an analysis of existing data would

prove invaluable for several purposes. In addition

to determining whether there have been detectable

changes in temperature over time, or changes that

can be linked to management actions in the basin,

this analysis will help highlight strengths and

weaknesses in the current temperature monitoring

network. Sites that are redundant or that otherwise

provide little useful data, and sites that are critical

and that provide highly useful data, will be more

evident after this type of analysis.

3.3.1.2 Status, Trends, and

Compliance Monitoring

Objective: Determine the spatial

(longitudinal) variability, diel

and seasonal variability, and

long-term trends of water

temperature, and

Objective: Provide data to determine if

water temperatures exceed State

standards and to support

development of TMDLs for the

basin, by:

Action 14: Collecting data for temperature

using continuous monitors rather

than individual field measurements,

where possible, to capture diel and

seasonal variations. For temperature

field measurements, schedule

sampling times to account fo

variations;

Action 15: Modifying the existing tempe

network to increase efficienc

removing redundant monitor

installing new monitors to fil

gaps for support of TMDL

development; and

Action 16: Developing temperature mod

the 303(d) listed reaches, esp

Squaw Creek, Little Deschut

River from Crescent Creek to

Deschutes River, and Deschu

River from Bend to Lake Bil

Chinook, to support developm

TMDLs and to determine eff

flow variations from reservoi

irrigation withdrawals, and o

management alternatives on 

temperatures.

3.3.1.2.1 Rationale and Explanation

Action 14: Use continuous monitor

modify timing of field sampling—Strea

temperature, like DO and pH, typically exh

predictable diel pattern, with increasing

temperature during the day and decreasing 

night, particularly during summer. Maximu

minimum temperatures occur during late ev

and early morning, respectively, with tempe

during midday generally representing an av

temperature. Exceptions are usually limited 

situations where the measurement location i

to a large water source that remains at a rel

constant temperature, such as the outflow of 

or spring, or where regional ground-water i

important, so that the magnitude of diel cyc

less. The State water-quality standard for

temperature reflects this pattern, requiring

calculation of a 7-day average of daily max

temperatures. For long-term, routine sampl

programs that do not specifically target dail

maximum temperatures, data are accepted f

evaluation relative to standards if they are

collected during representative seasons (typ

summer) and times of day (mid- to late afte

(Oregon Department of Environmental Qua
28

1999c). However, for routine monitoring of water

quality, when there are often several constituents

being measured, or where work is scheduled so as

to maximize the number of locations that can be

sampled in a day, spot measurements for

temperature are often taken without regard to the

time of day. Thus, stream temperatures in many

existing water-quality datasets are not adequate to

assess adherence to temperature standards or

trends over time. Wherever possible, temperature

sampling under this monitoring plan is best done

with calibrated, continuous monitors. Spot

measurements for temperatures taken in

association with this plan would be best made in

the late afternoon or early evening in order to be

most applicable to water-quality standards or for

trend analysis.

Action 15: Modify existing network—

With over 60 sites, coverage of temperature

monitors in the middle and upper Deschutes River

Basin is extensive, perhaps more so than would be

warranted solely from the perspective of this

regional plan. However, many of these sites, for

example those that are located near the headwaters

of smaller tributaries or the inflows to reservoirs,

are monitored for purposes such as project-level

evaluations specific to the individual management

organizations. Nonetheless, there are a few

locations where temperature is monitored by more

than one organization, whereas other relatively

long segments of major stream reaches that are on

the 303(d) list for temperature have no monitors

(fig. 4). Because TMDL development may

ultimately depend on temperature data from the

303(d) listed reaches, additional data from these

reaches are likely to be useful. Redundant

continuous monitors are located in the following

two locations:

• Little Deschutes River near Gilchrist

(upstream of Crescent Creek). Monitors are

operated by the BLM and the Forest Service.

One of these could be moved to the Little

Deschutes River below the mouth of Crescent Creek so as to provide data on temperatures resulting from the mixing of the two

streams.

• Squaw Creek near the mouth. Monitors are

operated by the Crooked River National

Grasslands and the Forest Service. Mo

already exists on the Deschutes River 

stream of Squaw Creek.

There are also cases where one agency 

collecting continuous temperature data and

another is making spot measurements for

temperature at the same or nearby sites (fig

These include several inflow streams to Cra

Prairie and Wickiup Reservoirs, the outflow 

Crescent Lake, the Deschutes River at Pring

Falls, Squaw Creek upstream of the Squaw 

Canal, and others. However, the spot

measurements could provide additional che

the continuous records collected at these sta

and are therefore valuable components of a 

assurance program. Furthermore, the spot

measurements for temperature are often con

with other work at the same locations, so th

not in most cases represent substantial addi

work. For these reasons it is not suggested 

these apparent redundancies be eliminated.

Instead it will be important to maintain awa

about these overlaps and to share field and 

assurance data for measurements among ag

This will allow continuous temperature rec

be accurately analyzed.

Some important locations in the basin a

monitored using only spot measurements. I

particular these include the ODEQ Ambien

Monitoring locations on the Little Deschute

River at Highway 42, the Deschutes River a

Harper’s Bridge, and the Deschutes River a

Lower Bridge. Because these reaches are li

be the subject of TMDLs for temperature, it 

be advantageous to install temperature mon

one or all of them. As an alternative to, or i

addition to, the ODEQ site at Lower Bridge

temperature monitor could be located upstr

the vicinity of Cline Falls to provide tempe

data closer to Tumalo Creek in the low-flow

section of the river.

Action 16: Develop temperature

models—A reach-based temperature mode

developed for Squaw Creek by Houslet (19

indicates that maintaining the natural averag

in the creek would allow temperature stand

be met. However, the model also indicates t

minimum flow determined by Oregon Depa

of Fish and Wildlife (10 ft3/s), and the curr
29

flow regime whereby the stream is dry for several

miles during summer, prevent Squaw Creek from

meeting the temperature standard. The model also

indicates that other factors, such as riparian

shading, also will help to maintain low

temperatures in the upper reaches of the river and

that additional flow will increase available trout

habitat. For TMDL purposes, higher resolution

modeling of stream networks will be needed in

Squaw Creek. Temperature modeling in the

Deschutes River below Bend or in the Little

Deschutes River and Crescent Creek could

provide information on the effects of water

releases, withdrawals, riparian restoration, and

other management actions on stream temperature

in the Deschutes River. The modeling effort would

also help identify strengths and weaknesses in the

current temperature monitoring network in the

basin. More intensive efforts, such as Forward

Looking Infrared Radiometer (FLIR) data

collection, will also be important components to

future temperature modeling. Temperature

modeling in portions of the middle and upper

Deschutes River Basin is projected to occur in

2001 associated with TMDL development

(Bonnie Lamb, Oregon Department of

Environmental Quality, written commun., 2000).

3.3.1.3 Evaluation Monitoring

Objective: Determine the effects of current

management activities on water

temperature by:

Action 17: Considering special studies to

evaluate effects on water

temperature from surface or ground

water withdrawals, floodplain, and

riparian development, and

restoration projects on stream

temperatures.

3.3.1.3.1 Rationale and Explanation

Action 17: Consider special studies to

evaluate management effects—Water and land

use practices in the basin may contribute

cumulatively to increased water temperatures, and

these effects are therefore likely to be interrelated

and difficult to determine individually.

Nonetheless, there are opportunities to inve

individual effects in relative isolation so as 

better determine their specific contributions 

temperature changes. In some cases existin

might be sufficient to address these questio

whereas in others new data might need to b

collected. Examples include:

• By explicitly examining existing temp

ture records before, during, and after p

of streamflow manipulations, or colle

new temperature data, the effects of fl

manipulations on temperature in the u

Deschutes River and the middle Desc

River could be examined.

• A series of overhead flights using rem

sensing FLIR technology would provi

spatially continuous snapshot of temp

conditions in selected reaches. These d

combination with existing temperatur

recorders and ground truthing in key a

tional locations, could provide valuab

information on spatial changes in wat

peratures corresponding to riparian or

instream habitat, urbanization and dev

ment, agricultural runoff, and water w

drawals and inputs. It could also help

identify areas with lower water tempe

that act as critical habitat areas or refu

salmonids.

3.4 Turbidity/Sediment Transport

The concentration and transport of

suspended material in streams is an importan

issue in much of the upper Deschutes River 

Several reaches are included on the State’s 3

list for turbidity, sedimentation, or habitat

modification (possibly related to erosion), o

listed as potential concerns for which data a

needed to resolve the severity of the problem 

5, table 2). In reaches downstream from Wic

Reservoir, erosion of streambanks resulting 

flow fluctuations has been identified as a ma

contributor to sedimentation and turbidity in 

rivers as well as to degradation of riparian h

(USDA Forest Service, 1996b). Few data are

available on the erosional status of Crescent C

but there is a potential for processes similar 

those below Wickiup Dam because the hydr
30

patterns are altered due to irrigation withdrawals

from the lake, and the stream is an alluvial, gravel

banked system similar to the upper Deschutes

River. Algae in water released from reservoirs

during summer can also increase turbidity in the

receiving waters. Turbidities that do not meet State

standards can be harmful to native fish. Excessive

sedimentation or erosion is also known to

accelerate channel migration and degrade fish

spawning habitat. In general, extremely high flows

(flooding) are not a problem in the study area

because of flow regulation by the reservoirs and

because the large amount ground water input

locally stabilizes the hydrograph. However, during

low elevation storms, there is potential for

increased sediment loading resulting from urban

and nonpoint runoff, or inflows from small,

ungaged tributaries that are often otherwise dry.

These events may contribute disproportionately to

elevation of turbidities.

Despite its importance in the basin, previous

monitoring for sediment transport has been highly

variable among agencies (fig. 5). Many small scale

monitoring projects of short durations have been

done to estimate effects from individual land

management or restoration practices; data from

these types of studies are typically difficult to

obtain and are of uncertain quality. Among the

different organizations monitoring turbidity and

sediment, there are several different methods that

are being and have been used (principally the use

of meters to measure turbidity, or collection of

samples for analysis of total suspended solids

[TSS] and suspended sediment concentrations).

Regional monitoring for suspended material, as

suggested in this plan, is oriented to actions that

increase the comparability of data and efficiency

of collection among agencies, initially fill some

apparent data gaps, and address the most pressing

resource-management issues related to suspended

material.

3.4.1 Monitoring Objectives and

Associated Actions

In the following sections several interrelated

monitoring actions (Actions 20–24) are proposed.

For the purposes of this report, the actions are

listed separately so that they may be budgeted and

scoped separately, however if there are sufficient

resources or need they could be undertaken

simultaneously for one relatively substantial

sediment monitoring project.

3.4.1.1 Status, Trends, and Compliance

Monitoring

Objective: Determine spatial (longitu

variability, diel and season

variability, and long-term 

in suspended sediment

concentrations, and

Objective: Determine if suspended sed

(TSS/turbidity) values mee

and Federal water-quality

criteria (including TMDL)

Action 18: Using TSS as the preferred d

collection protocol, with cont

turbidity monitoring at select

locations;

Action 19: Compiling data bases of exis

data and evaluating QA/QC d

determine if enough QA data 

being collected, and if data a

comparable between sites an

agencies;

Action 20: Analyzing existing, usable da

(1) statistically determine op

sampling frequency and spat

coverage needed to observe c

at a rate specified by manage

agencies, (2) determine refer

(historical) and baseline (cur

conditions, (3) look for histo

changes over time prior to ini

of new monitoring, and (4)

determine relations between 

and turbidity for existing site

Action 21: Establishing periodic samplin

TSS at new locations, such a

OWRD gaging stations on

Deschutes River below Wick

Reservoir and Little Deschut

River at La Pine; and

Action 22: Establishing continuous turb

monitoring locations, with pr

stations in reaches downstrea

Wickiup Reservoir. Monitors 
31

123o00'

HIGH LAVA PLAINS

R

ANG

E

44o00'

43o30'

44o30'

122o00'

CROOK

 COUNTY

WHEELER

COUNTY

JEFFERSON COUNTY

CLACKAMAS

COUNTY

LINN

COUNTY

LANE

COUNTY

DESCHUTES COUNTY

KLAMATH

COUNTY

LAKE

COUNTY

Study area boundary

Sisters

Madras

Prineville

Redmond

Bend

Gilchrist

La

Pine

Sunriver

Wickiup

Reservoir

Davis

Lake

East Lake

Lava Lake

Sparks Lake

Lake Billy Chinook

Suttle Lake

Lake Simtustus

Elk Lake

Hosmer

Lake

Cultus Lake

Quinn River

Crescent Lake

Summit Lake

Odell Lake

Paulina Lake

Crane Prairie Reservoir

Prineville Reservoir

Ochoco Reservoir River

Moore Creek

Browns

Spring

River

Bridge

D

Dry

ry

Creek

Creek

Fly

River

Cr

Indian

Jefferson

River

Mud Springs Cr

Willow Cr

Ford

Crooked

River

Squaw

Metolius

McKay Cr

Lytle Cr

River

Creek

Odell

Fall

River

Cr

Crescent

Creek

Creek

Creek

Cr

Tumalo

Creek

Big

Marsh

Little

Deschutes

DESCHUTES

RIVER

River

Cr

Paulina

Ochoco

42

97

97

20

26

26

20

58

126

126

126

31

0 5 10 MILES

0 5 10 KILOMETERS

Arnold

Canal

Tumalo Feed Canal

Central Oregon

Canal

North Unit Main Canal

Squaw Creek

Canal

Mt

Jefferson

Mt

Washington

Middle

Sister

North Sister

South

Sister Broken

Top

Maiden

Peak

Willamette

Pass

Paulina Peak

Paul ina Mounta ins

Santiam Pass

McKenzie

Pass

Newberry Volcano

Included on Oregon 303d list due 

 to turbidity, sedimentation, 

 and habitat modification

Sediment sample

Oregon Department of Environmental Quality—TSS grab sample U.S. Forest Service—Bed sediment studies

Turbidity sample—Continuous monitoring

City of Bend

U.S. Forest Service

Turbidity sample—Grab sample Oregon Department of Environmental Quality

Portland General Electric U.S. Forest Service

EXPLANATION

 Figure 5. Turbidity, Total Suspended Solids (TSS), and sediment monitoring stations in the middle and uppe

Deschutes River Basin, Oregon, 1999.
32

be located at OWRD gages or at

ODEQ ambient monitoring sites.

3.4.1.1.1 Rationale and Explanation

Action 18: Establish preferred

protocol—The three most common analyses of

the amount of particulates in a river sample are

suspended-sediment concentration, TSS

concentrations, and turbidity. Sampling techniques

for each of these are different and measure

somewhat different aspects of sediment in water.

Suspended sediment is usually collected using

techniques that integrate across the depth and

width of the stream (Edwards and Glysson, 1999)

and the entire sample is analyzed for the mass of

sediment; for TSS a simple grab sample is often

taken from the stream, with an aliquot from that

sample being used to determine the mass of

suspended solids; turbidity is an optical

measurement of the amount of light scattered

caused by particulates in a sample and can be

measured with probes either instantaneously or

using continuous monitors. Of the three,

suspended-sediment concentrations are the most

representative and also the most time consuming

and expensive measurements, TSS is perhaps the

most widely used for sampling water, and

turbidity is commonly used for in-place

monitoring. TSS has a potential for bias from

undersampling of coarse sediment fractions that

are likely to be missed in grab samples and in

subsequent aliquots (Gray and others, 2000).

However, because most agencies that regularly

sample in the middle and upper Deschutes River

Basin have used TSS in the past and are likely to

continue to do so in the future, TSS is suggested as

the determination of choice for agencies

participating in this plan. Suspended-sediment

sampling will likely be warranted in some cases to

develop rating curves or for correlations with TSS

or turbidity data (see Action 23). Comparison of

concurrent samples for suspended sediment and

TSS at selected sites, over a range of flow

conditions, would also provide valuable quality

assurance for interpreting the results of TSS

sampling in the basin.

Turbidity is important, in part because it is the

only measurement of the three for which there is a

State standard, but it also is good for continuous

monitoring as a relative indicator of changi

sediment transport resulting from changing

hydrologic or other conditions. Field

measurements of turbidity are relatively

inexpensive and can provide an effective ea

screening mechanism on which to base add

sampling or management decisions. The OD

provides recommendations to watershed co

on equipment purchasing, calibration, and u

including for field turbidimeters that can be

reliable for grab sampling. Relations betwe

turbidity and suspended sediment or TSS c

and have been, established but they tend to 

unique to the specific water bodies or proce

being monitored. Establishing strategic loca

(Actions 22 and 23) for continuous or spot

measurements of turbidity, to be used in

conjunction with TSS or suspended-sedime

sampling and streamflow data, will help pro

long-term data for trend analysis and for

developing relationships between turbidity 

sediment transport.

Action 19: Compile data base and

evaluate QA/QC data—This task is sugg

for turbidity, TSS, and suspended sediment

measurements for the same reasons that it h

been suggested previously for temperature

monitoring (Action 12). These data are coll

by a variety of methods, and their comparab

among organizations is not necessarily

guaranteed. Turbidity, in particular, is subje

bias because of differences in historical instr

design among manufacturers and calibratio

constraints. Although recent technological

changes have improved the reliability of ma

newer turbidity monitors, as with all monito

instruments their calibration may drift over 

and calibration standards have until recently 

unstable. Turbidity also does not actually m

suspended-solids concentrations but rather 

scattering of light. Because so many organiz

are collecting turbidity information in the s

area (fig. 5), there is a substantial need for a

understanding of the reliability and the

comparability of these data. An inventory a

assessment of quality-assurance data for tur

monitoring, and for any TSS or suspended

sediment monitoring, would provide a basi

knowing which data could reliably be used 

analyzed together and which should not. A
33

temperature, it will likely be necessary to gather

quality-assurance data for (1) instrument type,

age, and specifications, (2) calibration frequency,

tolerances, and field records, to evaluate precision

and accuracy, (3) miscellaneous check

measurements or other applicable grab samples

from other organizations that can be used for

comparison, and (4) information on the

completeness of records, including the amount of

missing data. Furthermore, comparisons between

TSS, turbidity, and suspended sediment

concentrations are warranted to provide a basis for

interpretation of turbidity and TSS data. If data are

not currently available to make this comparison, it

may be necessary to specifically collect samples

using two or all three of the methods in order to

establish relations between these variables.

Finally, the initial task of gathering the turbidity,

TSS, and sediment data among organizations is

itself likely to be formidable.

Action 20: Analyze existing data—As

with temperature, much data has been collected

for sediment-related issues in the study area

(fig. 5), not all of which has been analyzed.

Analysis of existing data as an initial exercise

would help (1) answer the questions the original

studies were intended to address, (2) formulate

hypotheses regarding water-quality processes,

relations between TSS, suspended sediment, and

turbidity, and sources of contaminants in the basin,

(3) evaluate the value of these data for future

monitoring, (4) provide additional evaluation of

the quality-assurance practices of collecting

organizations, (5) provide data for determination

of the status of the resource and baselines for

future determinations of trends, and (6) identify

data gaps, such as extreme events, in the current

monitoring programs in order to make appropriate

modifications for future monitoring.

This task could be done without interruption

of present routine data-collection programs

(mostly by ODEQ but also by the Forest Service).

Some relatively straightforward modifications to

those programs (for example, Action 21) could be

initiated without this more comprehensive

analysis of existing data, but decisions about

future monitoring will be greatly augmented by

the information gleaned from the data analysis

process. For instance, some comparison of TSS

and turbidity data was done in 1998 for the upper

Deschutes River below Wickiup Reservoir a

the Little Deschutes River (Thomas Walker

USDA Forest Service, Deschutes National 

written commun., March 2000). If sound re

for TSS and turbidity can be determined fro

these comparisons and other existing data (s

ODEQ Ambient Monitoring data) then perh

additional investigations into this question a

unwarranted and monitoring for turbidity an

can be redesigned without additional data

collection.

Action 21: Establish new TSS

monitoring locations—The ODEQ Amb

Monitoring Network, with five sites in the

middle and upper Deschutes River Basin,

provides good spatial coverage for routine

water sampling and is relatively complete

given the patterns of the river network. The

a few important gaps, however, for TSS and

turbidity sampling, based on areas of know

sediment transport and erosion issues. For

example, the ODEQ station on the Deschut

River at Pringle Falls is a useful location fo

quantifying sediment transport in the upper

Deschutes River. However, one of the sedim

related issues in this reach is fluctuating tur

resulting from reservoir operations at Wick

Reservoir, and proposed sources of turbidit

include turbidity released from the reservoi

bank erosion, and bed sediment resuspensio

in the stream caused by flow fluctuations

(USDA Forest Service, 1996b). Routine sam

of TSS at the OWRD gaging station immed

below the reservoir, together with continuo

turbidity monitoring, could help establish w

reservoir turbidity itself contributes signific

to sediment transport in the upper Deschute

River. This would be particularly useful in

conjunction with increased water sampling 

the reservoir (see Action 34). It would also

help quantify any additional sediment loads

that originate in the reach from Wickiup

Reservoir downstream. Additional TSS loc

tions may be identified elsewhere in the bas

such as the Little Deschutes River near

La Pine, on the basis of known sedimentation issues or resulting from analysis of
34

existing data, or in support of management needs

(for example, TMDLs).

Action 22: Establish new continuous

turbidity monitors—Although the maintenance

and calibration needs of continuous monitors,

including those for turbidity, can be substantial,

these types of monitors also can provide a

tremendous amount of data for relatively little

cost. Data can be useful for long-term trend

analysis, for evaluating the short-term effects of

specific events on water quality, for documenting

compliance with standards, to support

management needs such as TMDLs, and for

understanding the causes of short- and long-term

variations in sediment and chemical data. Within

the study area, ODEQ’s ambient monitoring

stations would be useful locations to add

continuous monitors for turbidity as well as for

temperature, DO, pH, and specific conductance

(see Action 40), because these sites represent most

of the major reaches of interest. Establishing

continuous monitors, in this case for turbidity, at

sites in ODEQ’s network (fig. 5) would help

increase the consistency of data collection in the

region. Alternatively, stream-gaging stations

maintained by OWRD would be reasonable

locations for continuous monitors because data

from these monitors can be related to streamflow

and because of the need to house instrumentation,

though comparison with ODEQ water-quality data

would be less straightforward. As a cost saving

measure, monitors could be installed seasonally to

account for the most sensitive conditions during

which turbidity information are of greatest

interest. These conditions could be based on

hydrology, during peak flow releases from

Wickiup Reservoir in May through July, or on

aquatic ecology, during important periods of fish

migration or spawning. The highest priority sites

would likely be those targeted at turbidity and

sediment issues related to releases of water for

irrigation from Wickiup Reservoir, specifically (1)

Deschutes River at Pringle Falls, (2) Deschutes

River at Harper Bridge, and (3) Little Deschutes

River at Highway 42. An additional station could

be added in other sites such as the Deschutes

River at Lower Bridge (ODEQ Ambient

Monitoring Network) or Culver (USGS gaging

station) if analysis of existing data indicates that

data are needed from those locations. Finally,

turbidity data from monitors would need to 

checked against turbidities or suspended se

concentrations in entire cross sections of th

to determine the representativeness of mon

data.

3.4.1.2 Evaluation Monitoring

Objective: Determine effects of variat

in streamflow from reservo

operations and irrigation

withdrawals on downstrea

sediment concentrations,

including daily and season

effects, and

Objective: Provide data to develop

sediment-discharge rating

curves below Wickiup Rese

by:

Action 23: Conducting a special study to 

relations between suspended

sediment, TSS, and turbidity 

upper Deschutes River down

to Bend and Little Deschutes 

and

Action 24: Conducting a special study to

evaluate the relationship betw

bedload transport and change

flow and determine sediment

sources (reservoir releases,

resuspension of bed material

erosion) below Wickiup Rese

to Bend. Include effects of L

Deschutes River on the uppe

Deschutes River above Bend

3.4.1.2.1 Rationale and Explanation

Action 23: Conduct special study o

suspended sediment, TSS, and turbidi

relations—From a management standpoin

would be a great advantage to be able to us

relatively low-cost, continuously monitored

constituent such as turbidity as a surrogate 

TSS or suspended sediment. Examples of th

uses of these data include estimating effect

management practices on sediment concent

(see Action 24), estimating the load of sedi

being transported in a given time period, or

quantifying the variability of sediment trans
35

the rivers. Although in principle there are relations

between the transport of sediment in the water

column and both TSS and turbidity, in practice

these relations tend to be specific to individual

water bodies and their unique sediment or

particulate sources and local hydrological,

physical, and biological characteristics. In the

upper Deschutes River, releases of water from

Wickiup Reservoir have been identified as a cause

of bank erosion (USDA Forest Service, 1996),

which results in increased sediment transport

downstream and sedimentation in the streambed,

in addition to destruction of riparian habitat.

Fluctuating streamflows also may resuspend

streambed sediments, and reservoir releases may

contain particulates in the form of phytoplankton

algae, especially during summer. All of these

source types can produce different types of

particulate matter in the water, with the result that

the relations between turbidity and suspended

sediment or TSS are likely to be different at

different times of the year or at different parts of

the hydrologic cycle.

In order to decrease the long-term cost of

monitoring and increase the value of data

collected, it is suggested that a special study be

conducted that would determine relations between

turbidity and concentrations of suspended

sediment and TSS in the upper Deschutes River,

over a range of flow conditions. The Forest

Service, which is charged with management of the

upper Deschutes River, is interested in the use of

turbidity monitors and might be willing to take the

lead in such an investigation (Randall Gould, U.S.

Forest Service, Bend, Oregon, oral commun.,

1999). The Little Deschutes River is mentioned

for inclusion in this study because it is an

important contributor to the flow and sediment

regime after it joins the Deschutes River and

downstream to the Central Oregon Canal. This

action is differentiated from Actions 21 and 22 by

its probable short-term duration, and because it

would provide data to support the long-term needs

of those actions, as well as possible benefits for

evaluation monitoring (see Action 24).

Action 24: Special study of sediment

sources and transport—In the upper Deschutes

River between Wickiup Reservoir and Bend the

amount and specific sources of sediment are an

important management issue and remain

undefined. In order to best care for the health of

the river and its biota while maintaining the ability

to supply water for irrigation, it is important to

understand the relationship between flow, flow

changes, seasonality of flow releases (including

extreme events), and bedload or sediment

transport. It would also be helpful to determine the

relative importance of sediment sources, such as

water from the reservoir, bank erosion below the

reservoir, recreation and other activities along the

river and tributaries, and resuspension of bed

material, from Wickiup Reservoir to Bend. Such a

study would most likely rely, in part, on

implementation of other aspects of the monitoring

plan, including analysis of previously collected

data (Action 20), TSS/turbidity monitoring

(Actions 21 and 22), information on the relations

between turbidity, TSS, and suspended sediment

(Action 23), and studies of channel morphology in

the same reaches (Actions 27– 30). Hence it

would be best attempted after those actions have

been initiated. Actions 23 and 24 could both be

important in the development of TMDLs for

sedimentation and turbidity.

3.5 Physical Channel Morphology/

Aquatic Habitat

There are many issues associated with the

adequacy of, and changes in, the physical structure

and functioning of streams (morphology) and the

quality of aquatic habitat in the study area. These

issues are often related to questions of suspended

material in streams (section 3.4). The State has

included several river reaches on the 303(d) list for

habitat modification (table 2), the criteria for

which include (1) low multimetric or multivariate

biological ratings for macroinvertebrate communities, (2) low ratings for indices of biological

integrity, or (3) a combination of poor or declining

fish populations and habitat conditions that limit

fish production (Oregon Department of Environmental Quality, 1999c). Reservoir operations and

their downstream effects are considered to be

causes of much of the changes in stream morphology (Cameron and Major, 1987; USDA Forest

Service, 1996b), but other potential causes include

extreme flooding (infrequent, but potentially

important in some locations), forest-management

practices such as timber harvesting and road

building, recreational uses of stream and riparian

areas, agricultural practices (generally irrigation
36

withdrawals or livestock grazing) and commercial

or private development along riparian areas.

Perhaps more than any other “water-quality”

related issue included in this plan, past projects to

measure the status of channel morphology and

habitat have been done by many different

organizations with a wide variety of methods,

some more quantitative and (or) objective than

others (Roper and Scarnecchia, 1995; Bauer and

Ralph, 1999). Agencies involved in these

measurements have included the Forest Service,

the BLM, the USGS, the Oregon Department of

Fish and Wildlife, the Oregon Department of

Environmental Quality, and Portland General

Electric, with the Forest Service being the most

active recently (fig. 5). The State of Oregon also is

monitoring and restoring salmon habitat on a

statewide basis through the Oregon Plan for

Salmon and Watersheds (State of Oregon, 1997).

Most of these organizations have had their own

protocols in use, or have had different protocols

among individual offices, during different time

frames, or for specific project purposes. Therefore,

as with other aspects of the monitoring plan, many

of the monitoring actions suggested herein are

directed towards bridging the differences in

monitoring efforts among organizations in order to

increase the overall efficiency of those efforts and

provide a common basis for comparison.

Additional actions to help establish baseline

conditions, to evaluate changes over time, and to

evaluate effects of specific land and watermanagement practices are suggested. Note that,

because there are no standards or criteria for

stream habitat and channel morphology, there are

no objectives or actions targeted towards

compliance monitoring.

3.5.1 Monitoring Objectives and

Associated Actions

3.5.1.1 Status and Trends Monitoring

Objective: Establish baseline conditions

and evaluate changes over space

and time, by:

Action 25: Compiling a database of existing

data among agencies, including

metadata, to evaluate usability of

data currently available and t

determine what locations hav

have not been studied;

Action 26: Analyzing existing, usable da

(1) determine optimum samp

frequency and spatial covera

observe a rate of change that 

agreed upon by water manag

agencies in the basin (2) dete

reference [historical] and [or

baseline [current] conditions

(3) look for changes over tim

to initiation of new monitorin

Action 27: Conducting monitoring at su

and “indicator” reach scales, 

follows:

•At the subbasin scale, use re

sensing (aerial photography

GIS to document sinuosity,

riparian vegetation, areal ex

wetlands, and amount of

development within the

floodplain, repeated every 5

years.

•At the “indicator” reach sca

selected attributes from IRI

protocols (IRICC Fish

Hydrography Strike Team, 

and methods by Harrellson 

others (1996) to document c

geometry and habitat

characteristics, repeated eve

years (or following major fl

events) at each site.

Action 28: Consider special studies to es

baselines for areas that have 

been surveyed, especially an

critical stream segments of th

upper Deschutes River, Little

Deschutes River, Squaw Cree

Tumalo Creek.

3.5.1.1.1 Rationale and Explanation

Action 25: Establish database of

existing data—Many studies of stream

morphology and aquatic habitat have been d

reaches of the upper Deschutes River and it
37

tributaries, yet little of those data are readily

available. A preliminary analysis of bed-sediment

distribution, erosion, and transport was done in

late 1980’s (Cameron and Major, 1987), and an

analysis of historical channel changes was

initiated as part of an Instream Flow Assessment

done in 1994 (USDA Forest Service, 1994);

however, for most of the major reaches addressed

by this monitoring plan, there is no consensus on

historical reference conditions or even current

(baseline) conditions. As for many of the other

issues addressed in this plan, an important first

step in the assessment of current and past

conditions will be to assemble data from the

various sources and make a determination of their

use for analysis in conjunction with other datasets.

Metadata refers to information about the dataset

itself, including protocols used, dates and

locations sampled, objectives of study, and other

information that can be used to determine the

applicability and content of existing data. For

geomorphic and habitat studies, QA/QC data may

be less applicable or available, so metadata could

be the only information to use to determine

whether a study’s data will be usable in

conjunction with other datasets. Pertinent

questions that could be asked about the data

include: What were the objectives of the study?

What is the database structure and accessibility of

the data? Were the protocols used published and

commonly used by other agencies in the region?

Are the measured parameters objectively defined

and repeatable? Do the datasets include basic

information such as dates, locations, and estimates

of discharge?

The Forest Service is currently in the process

of compiling data from most of its previous stream

studies, including stream habitat and morphology

data, into a common, national database, termed

NRIS (National Resource Inventory System). This

process is expected to greatly simplify tasks such

as Action 25. The NRIS database will not,

however, include data collected by agencies other

than the Forest Service. Likewise, the BLM is

creating a database called ARIMS (Aquatic

Resources Information Management System),

although this system is still several years from

being operational. The task of assembling an

overall dataset for geomorphic and habitat data in

the basin is itself likely to be substantial; the

it is included here as a separate action from 

analysis.

Action 26: Analyze existing data—

reliable dataset has been assembled as indic

above, an analysis of those data is suggeste

the objectives being to (1) define baseline

conditions where possible and (2) use the re

to modify future sampling strategies, includ

defining which data are the most useful and 

critical to collect, and obtaining estimates o

variability to use in determining statistical p

and sampling frequencies. Additionally, suc

analysis would help refine current conceptu

understandings of the important channel pro

in the reaches of interest. The reaches of hi

priority for this analysis would be those mo

affected by flow changes or where biologic

considerations are the most pressing. In par

these reaches would likely include the uppe

Deschutes River from Wickiup Reservoir to 

Little Deschutes River, the Little Deschutes 

itself, the upper Deschutes River from the L

Deschutes River to Bend, which are all affec

reservoir releases. Also, the middle Deschu

River from Bend to Lake Billy Chinook, th

of which is severely altered by irrigation

withdrawals, would be included. Squaw Cr

which is included on the 303(d) list for hab

modification, would also be a candidate for

analysis.

Action 27: Conduct monitoring at

multiple scales—At a relatively large sca

example, subbasin scale), it is possible to m

a number of important stream parameters u

aerial photography or other remote method

These measurements could be made at relat

little expense, probably through the use of a 

system, and would serve to classify changes 

the length of selected study reaches. At sma

scales, measurements can be taken with tea

the field, using previously defined indicator

reaches, to document more intensively the l

stream physical structure and habitat condit

relatively short sections of river. Because h

measurements tend to be highly subjective 

and Scarnecchia, 1995), this plan focuses m

the most repeatable, physical measurement

stream geometry. The indicator reach moni
38

would be done more frequently, on the order of

once every 2–5 years or more for each study reach,

and, if possible, immediately following flood

events with recurrence intervals of 25 or more

years.

Specific determinations made from remotely

sensed data at the subbasin scale would include

sinuosity (the channel length divided by the river

valley length); the number and length of oxbows

and side channels; amount, type, and extent of

wetlands and riparian vegetation (trees, shrubs,

and herbaceous plants); and possibly the extent of

floodplain development. Estimates of floodplain

development, which could include measurements

of road densities, impervious area, numbers of

structures, and population within the floodplain,

might be best undertaken initially with leadership

from State programs or academia. Part of a

relatively complex model for this type of analysis

was recently published for the Willamette River

Basin by a consortium of researchers from the

University of Oregon, Oregon State University, the

USEPA, the Forest Service, and others (Pacific

Northwest Ecosystem Research Consortium,

1998); however, that report contains much more

land-use information for the Willamette Basin

than is proposed here for the Deschutes, and it is

not oriented specifically towards the river’s

floodplain but rather the entire river basin.

Nonetheless, it provides an example of the types

of information that could be useful in describing

and tracking development along river corridors in

the middle and upper Deschutes River Basin.

Useful information might also be available

through the National Wetlands Inventory database,

the Oregon Division of State Lands, or county and

city planning departments.

Specific determinations for the indicator

reaches would be done in the field using published

methods acceptable to the respective agencies,

such as the Forest Service, the BLM, and the

Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife. These

would primarily be measures of physical stream

attributes; however, some of the more repeatable

and widely used habitat measurements would be

included as well. The stream attributes listed

under the IRICC protocols (IRICC Fish

Hydrography Strike Team, 1999), which are being

adopted by the BLM and the Forest Service, are

appropriate for this type of analysis. They include

determinations of cross-sectional area, widt

depth ratio, wetted perimeter, longitudinal p

(gradient), bankfull width and depth, and a

measure of overall streambed material such 

pebble counts. Specific locations (cross sec

pools, and riffles) within reaches would be

selected and flagged for repeat measuremen

the physical attributes over time with exact

coordinates recorded by a global positionin

system (GPS). Also included would be

measurements of stream patterns (meander 

belt width, and radius of curvature) that are 

determined from aerial photography but wh

most properly applicable to the smaller sca

the indicator reaches as described here. Fie

methods for measurement of most of these

attributes are well described in a commonly 

manual by Harrelson and others (1994).

Additional habitat measurements at each in

reach would include the abundance of large 

debris (LWD) and pool frequency. Streamfl

measurements would also be made as part o

site visit to the indicator reaches.

Stream systems can be highly variable i

and measurements of stream indicator reach

likely to reflect this variability. Many repea

measurements, over decadal time frames an

broad range of hydrologic conditions, may 

necessary to detect statistically and

environmentally significant changes. This t

may be shortened somewhat if analysis of e

data allows baseline conditions to be establ

in some locations for previous years (that is

“hindcasting”) or if selected critical reache

measured more frequently.

The indicator reach measurements outl

above are not intended to replace the regula

Stream Surveys conducted by the Forest Se

Those surveys, which use protocols establis

Hankin and Reeves (1988), remain importa

the Forest Service and it is assumed that the

continue to be done in the basin. Data colle

for the indicator reaches as outlined here wo

done in addition to the stream surveys, or p

at the same time if at all possible because m

the same data are used for both protocols.

Likewise, the approaches suggested for this 

are intended to be compatible with the

recommendations contained in the Oregon 
39

(State of Oregon, 1997), which are fairly general

in nature.

Owing to the importance of flow releases from

Wickiup Reservoir and Crescent Lake, and their

roles as sources of irrigation water, causes of

geomorphic channel changes, and management

issues, the primary river reaches to be addressed

with the above techniques would be (1) upper

Deschutes River from Wickiup to Little Deschutes

River, (2) upper Deschutes River from Little

Deschutes River to Bend, and, possibly, (3) the

Little Deschutes River including Crescent Creek.

Specific study subreaches would be selected from

these larger reaches, representing not only

federally owned but State and private lands as

well. Additional study will be important in the

other reaches specified in the study area, and

could include the middle Deschutes River between

Bend and Lake Billy Chinook, Squaw Creek, and

Tumalo Creek, as resources allow. Final decisions

on specific study subreaches would be made by

agency scientists in consultation with those

coordinating the regional monitoring plan.

Action 28: Establish baselines for

undocumented reaches—Some of the reaches

that may be chosen for monitoring at the subbasin

or indicator reach scales, as indicated above, may

not have been studied in the past. In these cases,

baselines will be established the first time that they

are surveyed. However, it may be possible,

through a qualitative analysis of historical records

or specific field surveys, to develop a conceptual

understanding of probable baselines or physical

processes prior to current conditions. The types of

historical information that could prove useful

would include accounts of explorers, early maps,

or surveys conducted during railroad expansion.

Quantitative habitat assessments or fisheries

surveys prior to dam construction are unlikely to

be found but nonetheless may exist for certain

locations. Locally specific field investigations,

including evaluation of flood deposits,

stratigraphic records, or streambed morphology

could be undertaken to estimate the relative

importance of various processes (for example

floods, landslides, volcanic eruptions, or woody

debris) in channel formation and migration. In

selected reaches that are important from a

scientific or management standpoint, such studies

might provide a perspective from which to

understand the river systems, extrapolate th

potential effects of flow manipulations, or g

insights about the extent to which the system

realistically be restored.

3.5.1.2 Evaluation Monitoring

As indicated, maintaining channel integ

and habitat quality is one of the most comm

water-management goals in the upper Desc

River Basin. These aspects have been and w

continue to be affected by land and water-u

practices. Making decisions on future land 

water use will be facilitated if agreement ca

reached on fundamental questions such as w

the current processes are that affect the rive

geomorphological and habitat structure, and

whether those processes are substantially di

from the dominant processes prior to constr

tion of the reservoirs. Several monitoring ac

are oriented towards tracking changes in th

system resulting from these processes (Actio

21, 22, 24, 26, 27, and 28); however, an und

standing of the processes involved, and of t

degree to which the rivers have already bee

changed, will likely require more detailed

geomorphic analysis of the system than

monitoring alone is likely to provide. The

following special studies are suggested in o

help answer pervasive questions about (1) c

that have taken place since the reservoirs be

operational and significant amounts of wate

diverted for irrigation and (2) current effect

those management practices on the rivers. T

studies would ultimately allow managers to 

completely evaluate potential changes in

management practices for their effects on s

morphology and habitat.

Objective: Evaluate effects of reservo

operations, flow managem

and other land uses on cha

morphology, habitat, and

riparian vegetation, by:

Action 29: Considering special studies t

evaluate changes in historica

streambed morphology after

construction of reservoirs; an

Action 30: Considering special studies i

selected reaches (for example
40

upper Deschutes River below

Wickiup Reservoir, Deschutes

River from Bend to Lake Billy

Chinook) to evaluate the effects of

short-term fluctuations and seasonal

flow modifications on:

•Stream physical environments

(channel morphology, bank

stability, etc.),

•Water quality, including turbidity,

stream temperature, and water

chemistry; and

•Stream ecology, including

invertebrate populations, fish

habitat, fish populations,

macrophyte or other aquatic plant

growth.

3.5.1.2.1 Rationale and Explanation

Action 29: Evaluate historical changes—

A study to reconstruct historical geomorphic

change, prior to and after construction of dams,

would help improve the understanding of the

relative effects of Wickiup Reservoir and Crescent

Lake operations on the upper Deschutes River and

the Crescent Creek/Little Deschutes River

systems, respectively. Of particular interest would

be the degree of natural variability historically,

possibly resulting from periodic flooding or other

extreme events, in comparison to the variability in

stream geometry under current conditions. Some

work has already been done along these lines by

Cameron and Major (1987) and during various

instream flow assessments (USDA Forest

Service, 1994; USDA Forest Service, 1996b),

although these have not been comprehensive

assessments. One finding was that the river below

Wickiup Reservoir is still adjusting to the new

flow regime imposed on it by reservoir releases

after construction of Wickiup Dam from 1939–49.

For example, during the 1994 study, the river was

found to be 20 percent wider and to have formed a

disproportionately high number of cutoff

meanders since 1943 in response to reservoir

releases, with higher peak flows and shifted

hydrologic patterns, and to removal of large

woody debris (USDA Forest Service, 1994). It is

likely that additional changes have occurred since

the 1994 study as the river continues to adjust. It

would be useful to know if the river’s morp

still is truly in transition or has reached som

of equilibrium set of channel processes. It w

also be advantageous to understand the caus

consequences of bank erosion problems, an

possible to get an idea of the expected rate 

magnitude of change, or the expected habit

conditions, that would result from different 

release options and other management scen

This study of the upper Deschutes Rive

involve (1) the use of historical and current 

to define the expected variability in stream

channels, (2) field measurements of current

channel configurations and searches for phy

evidence of previous channel migration, an

evaluations of the relative importance of res

operations, or (3) evaluation of tributary inp

and large hydrologic events in determining

historical channel morphology.

A similar study could be proposed for t

middle Deschutes River, from Bend to Stee

Falls or further, where irrigation withdrawa

reduce spring and summer streamflow to a f

of its historical flows. However, this reach i

largely constrained by its bedrock channel i

canyon, so habitat problems in the reach m

more related to low flow, temperature increa

nonnative species than to physical channel

changes.

Action 30: Evaluate current effects 

flow modifications—This study is propos

followup to the above evaluation of historic

geomorphic processes in the upper Deschut

River (Action 29). In this phase of the study

current effects of management practices, inc

reservoir operations and water withdrawals, 

be evaluated with respect to their effects on

channel morphology, sediment transport (se

Action 24), and aquatic habitat. The princip

study reaches would be, as indicated earlier

upper Deschutes River from Wickiup Reser

the Little Deschutes River and downstream 

Bend, and Crescent Creek and the Little

Deschutes River. The middle Deschutes Riv

from Bend to Steelhead Falls could also be

evaluated, either separately or in conjunctio

the upstream reaches, for its effects from w

withdrawals.
41

3.6 Nutrients

The OWQI, updated by the Oregon

Department of Environmental Quality through

1999 for Ambient Monitoring sites in the study

area, indicates generally good to excellent water

quality in the basin. There was an overall

increasing (improving) trend at the Harper Bridge

(Sunriver) and Mirror Pond (Bend) sites, and no

trend at the Lower Bridge site (Curtis Cude,

Oregon Department of Environmental Quality,

written commun., 1999). Despite these positive

signs, there is evidence that several of the major

reaches included in the study area have seasonal

problems with eutrophication. The middle

Deschutes River from the North Unit Canal to

Lake Billy Chinook and the Little Deschutes River

are included on the 303(d) list for parameters such

as low dissolved-oxygen concentration or high pH

(table 2), which are commonly associated with

algal blooms resulting from excessive nutrient

loading. Such results might not be represented by

the OWQI if Ambient Monitoring data are

collected at these sites without regard to diel

variation. The Little Deschutes River is also a

candidate for the 303(d) list because of concerns

with nutrients (Oregon Department of

Environmental Quality, 1999a). There are

occasional high spikes in phosphorus

concentrations, and generally high biochemical

oxygen demand (BOD), at the Harper Bridge

site—the reasons for these excursions are not

known. High phosphorus and BOD concentrations

are also noted at Mirror Pond, and increasingly

higher phosphorus concentrations, with high pH,

are observed farther downstream at the Lower

Bridge site (Oregon Department of Environmental

Quality, 1999d).

There are potential nutrient sources in the

basin about which little is known. These include

lakes and reservoirs managed by the Bureau of

Reclamation, high nitrate-nitrogen concentrations

in shallow ground water in the La Pine area that

could act as a nutrient source to the alluvial Little

Deschutes River, urban runoff in Bend or

Redmond, and a variety of agricultural activities.

Although there are few permitted point sources

contributing waste directly to the rivers, septic

systems or landscape fertilization associated with

the numerous private homes along the rivers could

act as nonpoint sources of nutrients. Investig

of some or all of these sources would provid

valuable information for management of wa

quality problems associated with eutrophica

There is a small amount of ongoing nu

monitoring in the basin, but it is not currentl

coordinated among agencies or oriented tow

any common objectives. Nutrient data have b

collected as part of the ODEQ’s Ambient

Monitoring Program for many years, but are 

otherwise routinely collected in the basin’s

streams by any other organizations (fig. 6, ta

The Bureau of Reclamation intends to collec

water samples, including those for nutrients, 

or two sites in each reservoir once every 3–5 

although recent sampling has been less frequ

Monitoring objectives and actions listed her

similar to those for other topics, and are prim

intended to help improve coordination and u

of current activities. Additional suggestions 

made to increase the frequency of sample

collection in some instances in order to help 

the magnitude and variability of nutrient loa

from individual sources, and special studies 

suggested to help determine the importance 

several possible nutrient sources.

3.6.1 Monitoring Objectives and Assoc

Actions

3.6.1.1 Status, Trends, and Compliance

Monitoring

Objective: Determine spatial (longitu

and seasonal variability, a

long-term trends, in nutrie

concentrations in streams, 

Objective: Determine if nutrient

concentrations meet State 

Federal water-quality crite

(including TMDLs), by:

Action 31: Compiling existing data and

evaluating QA/QC data to

determine if enough QA data 

being collected and if data ar

comparable between sites an

agencies;
42

123o00'

HIGH LAVA PLAINS

R

ANG

E

44o00'

43o30'

44o30'

122o00'

CROOK

 COUNTY

WHEELER

COUNTY

JEFFERSON COUNTY

CLACKAMAS

COUNTY

LINN

COUNTY

LANE

COUNTY

DESCHUTES COUNTY

KLAMATH

COUNTY

LAKE

COUNTY

Study area boundary

Sisters

Madras

Prineville

Redmond

Bend

Gilchrist

La

Pine

Sunriver

Wickiup

Reservoir

Davis

Lake

East Lake

Lava Lake

Sparks Lake

Lake Billy Chinook

Suttle Lake

Lake Simtustus

Elk Lake

Hosmer

Lake

Cultus Lake

Quinn River

Crescent Lake

Summit Lake

Odell Lake

Paulina Lake

Crane Prairie Reservoir

Prineville Reservoir

Ochoco Reservoir River

Moore Creek

Browns

Spring

River

Bridge

D

Dry

ry

Creek

Creek

Fly

River

Cr

Indian

Jefferson

River

Mud Springs Cr

Willow Cr

Ford

Crooked

River

Squaw

Metolius

McKay Cr

Lytle Cr

River

Creek

Odell

Fall

River

Cr

Crescent

Creek

Creek

Creek

Cr

Tumalo

Creek

Big

Marsh

Little

Deschutes

DESCHUTES

RIVER

River

Cr

Paulina

Ochoco

42

97

97

20

26

26

20

58

126

126

126

31

0 5 10 MILES

0 5 10 KILOMETERS

Arnold

Canal

Tumalo Feed Canal

Central Oregon

Canal

North Unit Main Canal

Squaw Creek

Canal

Mt

Jefferson

Mt

Washington

Middle Sister

North

Sister

South Sister Broken

Top

Maiden

Peak

Willamette

Pass

Paulina

Peak

Paul ina Mounta ins

Santiam

Pass

McKenzie

Pass

Newberry Volcano

Water body or stream reach 

 included on Oregon 303d list for 

 constituent noted

pH and chlorophyll-a

pH

Dissolved oxygen

Grab samples—Analysis for constituent

City of Bend—Nutrients

Oregon Department of 

 Environmental Quality (ODEQ)— Nutrients, dissolved oxygen,and pH

Portland General Electric (PGE)— 

 Dissolved oxygen and pH

EXPLANATION

ODEQ 

and 

PGE

 Figure 6. Nutrient, DO, and pH monitoring stations in the middle and upper Deschutes River Basin, Oregon,

1999.
43

Action 32: Analyzing existing data to

determine baseline conditions and

look for changes over time;

Action 33: Using ODEQ’s sample collection,

preservation, and analytical

protocols as preferred nutrient

protocols for monitoring;

Action 34: Increasing frequency of sampling in

Wickiup Reservoir and Crescent

Lake to provide additional

information on nutrient transport

and loading to the upper Deschutes

River; and

Action 35: Follow USEPA Region 10’s effort

to determine regional nutrient

criteria for streams.

3.6.1.1.1 Rationale and Explanation

Action 31: Compile existing data and

evaluate QA/QC data—As with temperature

and other water-quality constituents in this plan,

an analysis of existing data would be an important

step in the final design of a new monitoring

network for the basin. The first phase of that

process would be to gather and analyze

information on the quality of the existing data.

Important data quality elements to look for would

include those mentioned previously and listed in

Appendix B (such as bias, variability, and

accuracy), as well as any evidence of sample

contamination, and a listing of the field and

analytical methods used and the detection levels

achieved. Although nutrients are commonly

analyzed by many laboratories, there are

numerous methods that may not be directly

comparable and terminologies that can be easily

confused. Where multiple detection levels have

been used among different data sources for the

same constituents, this exercise could indicate

what subsets of data can be analyzed together and

what subsets might need to be ignored.

Comparison of analytical methods would include

consideration of sample filtration and preservation

techniques.

Action 32: Analyze existing data—After

completion of data gathering and analysis of

quality-assurance information as indicated above,

the environmental nutrient data themselves 

be analyzed. Specifically, the types of analy

suggested include:

• Statistical refinement of the sampling 

work to more accurately determine th

ber of samples needed at each location

order to detect desired changes over ti

using information on analytical, season

spatial variability of nutrient concentr

• Adequacy of current detection levels 

nutrients: lower detection levels may 

essary to detect trends for some consti

if nondetections are prevalent in datas

• Investigation of sources and processe

evaluating relations of nutrient concen

trations with streamflow, TSS concent

(or turbidity), indicators of stream pro

ity (algal biomass, diel pH or dissolve

gen cycles), or other constituents, and 

evaluating concentrations and speciati

nutrients at given locations, times of y

flow conditions.

• Definition of baseline concentrations. 

mation on variability could be used to 

define a range of concentrations typic

baseline conditions.

• Compliance with State or Federal Sta

or evaluation of trophic state.

Action 33: Establish preferred

protocols—In order for water-quality data

collected by multiple organizations to be

comparable and usable in combined dataset

important that the methods used be as simil

possible. In the case of nutrients, the prima

opportunities for differences have to do wit

processing, preservation and handling, labo

analysis, and nomenclature. Because the

organization collecting most nutrient data i

basin is the Oregon Department of Environ

Quality, through the Ambient Monitoring Pr

and miscellaneous studies, their protocols a

suggested as the preferred protocols (table 5

only other routine nutrient collection that o

in the basin is the infrequent (once every 3–

years) reservoir sampling done by the Bure

Reclamation. With respect to nutrients, met

for field processing and analysis used by th
44

Bureau of Reclamation are essentially identical to

those in table 5. Additional nutrient species that

could prove valuable in understanding system

processing, including transport of nutrients from

the reservoir systems to downstream reaches, are

the dissolved, organic forms of phosphorus and

nitrogen. These nutrients have been shown to

represent not only a large portion of nutrient

budgets in northwest streams (Triska and others,

1984) but also an additional pool of bioavailable

nutrients (Paerl and Downs, 1978; Tuchman,

1996), especially below reservoirs (for example,

see Anderson and Carpenter, 1988). Thus, if

sufficient funds are available, addition of

dissolved-organic nitrogen (that is, filtered,

Kjeldahl nitrogen) and total-dissolved phosphorus

(filtered, digested phosphorus) would be useful

additions to the suite of nutrients sampled.

Action 34: Increase reservoir sampling

frequency—Management of water quality in the

lakes and reservoirs of the upper Deschutes River

Basin is integral to management of water quality

in the rivers themselves. Despite substantial

ground water inputs from the Fall River and

Spring River, and other locations, most of the

water that enters the upper Deschutes and Little

Deschutes Rivers passes through either the

Wickiup/Crane Prairie Reservoir complex or

Crescent Lake. Water quality in these large water

bodies, therefore, strongly influences waterquality conditions entering the rivers, and to a

large extent these conditions will be propagated

downstream before being modified by other inputs

or instream processes. If the lakes and reservoirs

become progressively more eutrophic over time,

export of nutrients or algae-caused turbidity is

likely to increase, resulting in negative effects on

water quality in the downstream reaches. Many of

the possible management strategies for the upper

Deschutes River revolve around different options

for releasing water from Wickiup Reservoir, and it

is important that water-quality conditions and

processes in the reservoir be understood in order

to anticipate potential in-lake and downstream

effects of different flow-release options.

The ODEQ collected data on the reservoirs in

the mid-1980’s but has not revisited them since

that time. The Forest Service collected water

samples for a standard suite of analyses (nutrients,

major ions, algae and zooplankton, and mad

measurements) from Wickiup Reservoir in 

and 1997. Routine monitoring is planned by 

BOR on Wickiup and Crane Prairie Reserv

Crescent Lake, and Haystack Reservoir, bu

very low measurement frequency. The curre

program plans for sampling approximately 

every 3–5 years, although Wickiup Reservo

last sampled in 1995 and Crescent Lake in 

(unpublished STORET data; Norbert Canno

Bureau of Reclamation, oral commun., 2000

next samplings are scheduled for the summ

2001. This is typically not frequent enough 

able to document the status or trends for sy

as dynamic as lakes, especially if periodic a

blooms occur in those lakes between sampl

Nor does it provide enough information to

determine nutrient loading to downstream r

from the reservoirs or meet most of the othe

needs identified above.

As an example, Crescent Lake was

characterized in 1985 as having excellent w

quality and as being “distinctly oligotrophic

with the possibility of adverse effects from 

activities, on the basis of three summertime

samplings between 1981 and 1982 (Johnso

others, 1985). Yet in a sampling from Augu

1991, pH in the lake’s hypolimnion ranged 

8.9 to 9.5, well in excess of the State’s uppe

allowable pH limit of 8.5. Hypolimnetic DO

readings exceeding 120 percent of saturatio

support the inference that a strong algal bloo

occurred, indicating possible degradation o

quality in this previously oligotrophic lake. 

other data have been collected since 1991 s

current trophic status of Crescent Lake is u

It is entirely possible that other blooms may 

occurred that were not sampled. Likewise

Wickiup Reservoir, a shallow lake that was

classified as mesotrophic but with abnorma

high phosphorus concentrations in 1982 (Jo

and others, 1985), is susceptible to increase

eutrophication, particularly with eutrophic 

Prairie Reservoir upstream. Algal blooms in 

reservoir are known to supply part of the tu

to the upper Deschutes River downstream. 

with the most recent sampling having occur

there as long ago as 1995, there is little know

of the recent water quality in the reservoir.
45

Table 5. Laboratory and field methods for sampling, preservation, and analysis of nutrients in water samples

used by the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality in the Ambient Monitoring Program

[Method numbers are U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Method Numbers except for total phosphorus, which is a method included

in Standard Methods (American Public Health Association, 1985). Source: Oregon Department of Environmental Quality, 1994; μm,

micrometer; mg/L, milligrams per liter]

Constituent STORET

code Method number Field filtration(0.45 μm) Preservation Detection limit(mg/L)

Nitrite, Dissolved,

mg/L as N 00613 353.2 Noa

a

Filtered in-line during laboratory analysis.

Chill at

4 degrees

Celsius

0.02

Nitrate + Nitrite,

Dissolved, mg/L as N 00631 353.2 Noa H2SO4 .02

Ammonium, Dissolved,

mg/L as N 00610 350.1 Noa H2SO4 .02

Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen,

mg/L as N 00625 351.2 No H2SO4 .2

Orthophosphorus,

Dissolved, mg/L as P 00671 365.2 Yes

Chill at

4 degrees

Celsius

.005

Phosphorus, Total,

mg/L as P 00665 424F No H2SO4 .01

Without more current information, it is unknown

what threat Crescent Lake and Wickiup Reservoir

pose to water quality in Crescent Creek, the Little

Deschutes River, or the upper Deschutes River.

The suggested frequency of sampling is

once each winter and monthly during the springsummer season (May-October), although a

minimum frequency would be twice each summer

and once in the winter. Sampling for field

parameters (temperature, dissolved oxygen, pH,

and specific conductance) would include a vertical

water column profile from at least five depths

(surface, mid-epilimnion, metalimnion, upper

hypolimnion, and bottom) in the stratified lakes

and two to three depths in the shallow lakes.

Sampling for water chemistry would include

the same general suite of parameters sampled

currently, from at least three depths (midepilimnion, metalimnion, and mid-hypolimnion)

plus an additional sample from the lake’s

withdrawal depth if different from the other

three depths sampled. In-lake locations sampled

would be the same as historically (near the dams)

to estimate concentrations entering streams

although additional sampling at up-reservoi

would help determine the variability of nutr

concentrations or the extent of algal bloom

Action 35: Follow USEPA Regiona

Nutrient Criteria development—Curre

there are few or no nutrient criteria for fresh

There is a drinking water standard for nitra

nitrogen (10 mg/L [milligrams per liter]) th

intended for protection of human health, an

are standards to protect against toxicity from

un-ionized ammonia in water; however, nei

of these standards is oriented towards preve

ecological degradation. Environmentally re

concentrations for nitrogen and phosphorus

are much lower than these, typically less th

0.7 mg/L for total nitrogen and 0.05 mg/L fo

phosphorus in streams (Bothwell, 1992; Do

and others, 1997; U.S. Environmental Prote

Agency, 2000). The USEPA has developed

guidelines to help States set nutrient criteria 

streams and lakes, on an ecoregion basis, to 

eutrophication and minimize nuisance-alga
46

conditions. Provisions are made for waterbodyspecific criteria to be set where sufficient data

exist. Although the process of setting criteria by

States may ultimately take several more years, the

resulting nutrient concentrations could be

considerably lower than are currently allowed in

some locations. Such an outcome could affect

TMDL development, regulation of certain

discharges, listings of individual streams as waterquality limited, and land use along river corridors

or in some watersheds. There is little that can or

should be done to make operational changes in

water management in anticipation of these criteria.

However, development of a sound database on

nutrients and eutrophication, including reasonable

estimates of reference conditions, would help

make a case for criteria that are specifically

tailored to the geology, hydrology, and ecology of

the basin. Development of these criteria nationally

can be followed on the Environmental Protection

Agency’s web page at http://www.epa.gov/

ostwater/standards/nutrient.html.

3.6.1.2 Evaluation Monitoring

Nutrient concentrations in streams are

related to many different physical, biological, and

land-management aspects of the watersheds, and

indeed many of the water-quality management

issues in the middle and upper Deschutes River

Basin are related at least indirectly to nutrients.

Evaluation of several of these issues could include

consideration of their effects on nutrients, and

subsequently on aquatic ecosystems, and would be

applicable to such tasks as developing TMDLs or

nutrient criteria. Several special studies are briefly

outlined below that could be used to determine the

effects of some of the more prominent waterquality management issues in the basin. As with

evaluation monitoring in other portions of this

report, these studies would require more thorough

scoping if they are to be undertaken.

Objective: Determine sources of elevated

nutrient concentrations, and

their effects on trophic status

in selected reaches where

eutrophication is indicated, and

Objective: Determine effects of select

management activities on

nutrient concentrations in

streams, by:

Action 36: Conducting special studies to

evaluate:

•Status of nutrient limitation, 

by nitrogen or phosphorus i

stream reaches and during k

seasons;

•Relation of nutrients to disc

high pH, low dissolved-oxy

concentration, algal abunda

and nutrient sources in the m

Deschutes River, to support

TMDL development;

•Effects of urban and riparian

development, and high flow

events, on nutrient concentr

and water quality;

•Effects of different managem

alternatives on reservoir and

downstream water quality;

•Quantity and quality of irrig

return flow to Deschutes Ri

between Bend and Lake Bil

Chinook;

•Ground-water inputs in area 

Pine and other suspected ga

reaches, and their effects on 

quality; and

Action 37: Determining historical chang

reservoir water quality since

construction by examination 

algal records and geochemist

lake sediments.

3.6.1.2.1 Rationale and Explanation

Action 36: Conduct special studies

Most of the special studies suggested here a

related and could be conducted with somew

similar approaches. Nutrient concentrations 

ancillary information (discharge, temperatu

specific conductance, pH, dissolved oxygen

and alkalinity) would be analyzed above, be

and including suspected sources (including 

tributaries, and possibly including high and 
47

flows). In some cases there could be great

advantage to the use of naturally occurring stable

isotopes of nitrogen, carbon, or oxygen in

determining sources or pathways of nutrients.

Several of the suggested studies are described in

more detail below.

Nutrients in the middle Deschutes—The

ODEQ Water Quality Index indicates that water

quality in the reach from Bend to Lake Billy

Chinook is the poorest in the study area. The

303(d) listing for pH and temperature in this reach

is an indication that algal abundance could be

approaching nuisance levels in the middle

Deschutes River. The metabolic cycles

(photosynthesis and respiration) of benthic algal

growth can cause diel variations in DO and pH.

Under natural conditions these cycles are

moderate, and DO may respond more to physical

processes such as reaeration and temperature

cycling than to biological processes (for example,

see Anderson and Carpenter, 1998, or Guasch and

others, 1998). However, when algal growth

becomes excessive these cycles are unusually

strong, with maximum concentrations occurring in

the evening and minimum concentrations in the

morning, often causing conditions that do not

meet State water-quality standards. Extreme

examples of this phenomenon have been observed

in many other Oregon streams with disturbances

of the natural nutrient and flow regimes, including

the Grande Rhonde River (Oregon Department of

Environmental Quality, 2000a), South Umpqua

River Basin, (Tanner and Anderson, 1996), Coast

Fork Willamette River (Oregon Department of

Environmental Quality, 1995), and to a lesser

extent the North Umpqua and Clackamas River

Basins (Anderson and Carpenter, 1998; K.D.,

Carpenter, unpub. data, 2000). Aside from not

meeting water-quality standards, large fluctuations

in DO and pH indicate possible ecological shifts

away from the natural production and food webs

of streams to systems that are disturbed. Such

streams may become dominated by nuisance

species and may not provide adequate food and

habitat resources to support native species.

This study would involve at least one

summertime longitudinal survey of nutrient

concentrations, along with measurements of the

minimums and maximums of dissolved-oxygen

concentrations and pH, and samplings of

periphytic-algal biomass and speciation. Al

species data can be a useful tool in assessing 

quality because they integrate long-term

conditions that sometimes are not evident a

time of sampling (Lowe and Pan, 1996). Th

would also make use of monitoring data fro

Ambient Monitoring Program location at L

Bridge to assess variability of nutrient

concentrations over time, and would utilize 

from any continuous monitors in the reach, 

described elsewhere in this plan, to evaluate 

timing and extent of pH and dissolved oxyg

cycling. The findings would be used to dete

the severity of pH and algal problems in the 

the presence of point- or nonpoint- nutrient

sources, and the possible effects from differ

land- or water-management practices, as we

provide data to support development of TM

for the river. Similar studies could also be u

for other reaches experiencing problems wi

dissolved oxygen, and (or) algae.

Urban and riparian development—

is evidence that the Bend reach of the Desc

River receives nonpoint urban runoff that is

leading to deterioration of water quality. OW

results for the upper Deschutes River at Mi

Pond in Bend indicate generally good wate

quality, but that eutrophication in the pond 

evidenced by elevated pH, phosphorus

concentrations, and biochemical oxygen de

during summer (Oregon Department of

Environmental Quality, 1999d). With

Deschutes County being one of the faste

growing counties in the State, considerab

future urban development is anticipated 

Bend, Redmond, Terrebone, La Pine, an

elsewhere in the basin. Additionally, near

all of the private lands in the riparian corrid

along the upper Deschutes River, constituti

roughly one-third of the land within the Wi

Scenic River and Scenic State Waterways, i

subject to development (U.S. Forest Service

1996b), and additional development is expe

along the Little Deschutes River in the La P

area and elsewhere. Recreational sites are l

throughout the public lands along these cor

Much of the existing public and private

development uses septic systems for waste

disposal, which can be an important source 
48

nutrients to nearby streams, a potential problem

that is of concern to resource management

agencies in the basin (USDA Forest Service,

1996b; Deschutes County Development

Department, 2000; Oregon Department of

Environmental Quality, 2000b). Thus, though

much of the management of the region’s water

resources is focussed on reservoirs, irrigation

withdrawals, and public lands management,

eutrophication from nonpoint sources generated

by population growth or agriculture is also a

noteworthy future threat to water quality. It is not

known, however, what the relative effect is of

development compared with the more thoroughly

explored effects of reservoir operations and

irrigation withdrawals.

Several types of studies could be done to

assess the importance of urban runoff and other

development to eutrophication in the study area.

These could involve collection of nutrient samples

above, within, and below urban areas such as

Bend and examination of benthic communities

(both algae and macroinvertebrates) as indicators

of water-quality conditions in those locations.

Additionally, naturally occurring stable isotopes

of nitrogen or oxygen can be used as tracers of

nutrient sources in a river, and caffeine can be

analyzed in water to trace human sources of

nonpoint pollutants (Seiler and others, 1999). A

small reconnaissance study near Bend and (or) La

Pine could provide additional direction for future

investigations, management, and monitoring in the

basin.

Action 37: Reconstruct historical water

quality in reservoirs—Often it is desirable to

gauge the effects of land uses on water quality by

estimating water-quality conditions prior to the

influence of settlers. If “hindcasting” water-quality

conditions can be done successfully, reference

conditions may be established that can help

managers decide on appropriate goals for

restoration or that can provide additional longterm data to identify trends. Typically this kind

of reconstruction is problematic because of the

lack of long-term records, but in lakes and

reservoirs the record of water-quality change is

often stored in bottom sediments as geochemical

data and as the non-reactive, silicon based remains

of diatom algae. Diatom species often have

specific water-quality tolerances or optimum

conditions, which have been characterized 

catalogued, so it is possible in many lakes t

infer past water-quality conditions on the b

of the species of diatoms found in different 

of sediments in combination with age-datin

methods. This technique, often referred to a

“paleolimnology,” is coming into increasing 

(Stager and others, 1997; Dixit and others, 

as a cost effective method of determining th

influence of past land uses, including forest

clearing, lake manipulations, urbanization, 

agriculture, on water quality in lakes and

reservoirs.

A paleolimnological study could be

undertaken in water bodies such as Crescen

or Davis Lake to infer historical conditions 

trends, and to extend the trajectory of chang

predictions about current trends. Crane Prai

Wickiup Reservoirs might be less amenable 

type of study because they are shallow lake

were historically wetlands and have had mo

recent construction of dams, so the sedimen

dynamics and amount of organic material m

preclude collection of adequate samples.

Nonetheless shallow lakes have been succe

studied using sediment diatom records (Sus

Dixit, Queens University, Canada, written

commun., 2000). These aspects would bear 

consideration during scoping for such a pro

To the extent that deterioration of water qua

the reservoirs is reflected as deterioration of 

quality in downstream reaches, this type of 

would help managers decide on the priority 

responses to different water-quality problem

the basin, and could help define historical w

quality in rivers prior to flow manipulations 

reservoirs.

3.7 Dissolved Oxygen and pH

As with nutrients, dissolved oxygen (D

and pH data can be used as indicators of the

trophic status of streams and lakes. Where d

cycles of DO and pH are exaggerated, or Sta

standards are not met, it is likely that algal g

and metabolism exceeds that which would h

occurred in the absence of effects from hum

Biochemical oxygen demand, from heterotro

(bacterial) consumption of organic pollutant
49

also contribute to lowered DO levels. Inclusion of

the middle Deschutes River and the Little

Deschutes River on the 303(d) list for DO or pH

problems suggests that eutrophication of those and

possibly other water bodies is a process that merits

watching.

Fortunately, DO and pH are basic

constituents in programs such as the ODEQ

Ambient Monitoring Program, and the ODEQ data

have been successfully used to provide indications

of the status of DO and pH in the basin. However,

data collection in the Ambient Monitoring

Program is not timed to capture the extremes of

diel DO and pH cycling. As for other constituents

in this plan, suggested monitoring for DO and pH

is largely aimed at increasing the availability,

efficiency, and utility of collected data; additional

suggestions are made for special studies to

evaluate the role of management practices on DO

and pH. Although temperature monitoring was

outlined previously (section 3.3), temperature is

included below simply because it is usually

measured in conjunction with DO and pH. No

additional temperature monitoring is proposed

beyond the suggestions listed in section 3.3.

3.7.1 Monitoring Objectives and

Associated Actions

3.7.1.1 Status, Trends, and Compliance

Monitoring

Objective: Determine the spatial

(longitudinal) variability, diel

and seasonal variability, and

long-term trends of DO and pH

in the middle and upper

Deschutes River Basin, and

Objective: Determine if DO and pH meet

State standards, including

TMDL loads, by:

Action 38: Compiling a data base of existing

data and evaluating QA/QC data to

determine if enough QA data are

being properly collected and if data

are comparable between sites and

agencies;

Action 39: Analyzing existing data to es

baseline conditions and look 

changes over time;

Action 40: Establishing continuous mon

including temperature, DO, p

specific conductance, and tur

at selected ODEQ ambient

monitoring locations; and

Action 41: Using data from continuous

monitors to account for diel

variations when grab samplin

temperature, DO and pH. Wh

reaches are included on the 3

list for high pH, do grab sam

the late afternoon to test for p

pH. If reaches are included o

303(d) list for low DO, do gr

samples in the early morning 

for low DO concentrations.

3.7.1.1.1 Rationale and Explanation

Actions 38 and 39: Compile existing 

evaluate QA/QC, and analyze data—Th

two suggested monitoring actions are essen

identical to the initial actions suggested for

temperature and nutrients. As with those

constituents, existing data from different

organizations would be gathered (fig. 6) an

evaluated for its quality and utility for analy

Analysis would include evaluation of histor

conditions, establishment of current baselin

development of conceptual understanding o

and pH conditions in the basin that can be u

refine the monitoring network, and where

possible, statistically based optimization of 

monitoring network.

Action 40: Establish continuous

monitors—There is considerable tempora

variability in stream DO and pH as well as

temperature because of seasonal changes in

climate as well as biologically mediated

processes. These patterns reduce the value 

individual grab samples, especially those ta

during midday when conditions do not refle

extremes possible at a given location. The S

standards are written to include an accounti

these diel patterns, including measurements 

as a 7-day minimum where data are from a 
50

(morning and evening) monitoring program

(Oregon Department of Environmental Quality,

1999c).

Monitors that log DO, pH, and temperature on

an hourly basis provide data to more fully evaluate

the status, trends, and compliance of these

constituents with standards, and the processes

controlling water quality in streams. Status and

compliance are easily determined by querying the

resulting databases for the statistics of interest—

for instance, maximums, minimums and daily

averages—and comparing them with reference

concentrations or standards. The status and trends

of DO and pH can be further evaluated by

determining the magnitude of daily fluctuation;

the period of lowest (or highest) values during the

year; comparisons of daily variability during key

seasonal periods from year to year; trends in

averages, maximums, or minimums from year to

year; and other metrics. Biological and physical

processes, including the factors controlling DO

and pH in a stream, also can be investigated by

exploring relations of DO and pH patterns with

such physical factors as temperature, streamflow,

and weather; providing a record of unexpected

spikes or drops that could be caused by upstream

disturbances or sources; or by calculating stream

primary production (Odum, 1956; Marzolf and

others, 1994, 1998). Continuous data would also

be useful for calibration of water-quality models,

perhaps in conjunction with TMDL development.

It stands to reason to combine recording monitors

for pH and DO with other recording monitors

suggested previously for temperature and turbidity

(Actions 14 and 22), which can easily be done

with currently available multiparameter recording

instruments.

Proper operation of recording monitors for

DO, pH, and other parameters can require a

substantial commitment of resources (time and

personnel), because most monitors generally need

maintenance on a 2- to 4-week basis during the

summer, as well as systems for quality assuring,

adjusting, and storing recorded data. For instance,

ODEQ protocols require daily site visits, and

rigorous calibration procedures for DO using

Winkler titrations, and USGS protocols require

calibrations on a minimum biweekly basis.

This commitment could be lessened by deploying recording monitors during select periods of

the year, such as the spring and summer, wh

problems with DO and pH are typically the

most pronounced.Reaches where such mon

would provide the greatest benefit are those 

are known or suspected to have problems w

DO and pH, or are undergoing progressive

eutrophication. This includes all of the maj

reaches of the Deschutes River itself from

Wickiup Reservoir to Lake Billy Chinook, a

Little Deschutes River, with the reaches up

of Bend being the most important. It would 

ideal to locate monitors at some or all of th

ODEQ Ambient Monitoring stations in the 

so that these parameters can be used in

conjunction with other water-quality data;

however these stations do not include housi

equipment such as recorders, so vandalism 

theft are potential problems. If Action 10 is

enacted, the collocated ODEQ/OWRD loca

would the logical places for these monitors

otherwise the OWRD stream-gaging locatio

could be used to house recording monitors.

3.7.1.2 Evaluation Monitoring

The inclusion of several reaches of the 

Deschutes River on the State’s 303(d) list f

problems with DO and pH implies that TM

will be required in coming years to control

nutrient transport and eutrophication. This p

will likely spark a need to define not just w

and when water-quality standards are not b

met, but also to refine the understanding of

processes controlling eutrophication and be

define the timing of nonattainment of water

quality standards. Such an understanding o

processes will also necessitate an understan

the effects that different management practi

having on eutrophication in the basin. This 

basis for the special study suggested below

Objective: Determine the effects that

current management activ

are having on DO and pH, 

Action 42: Conducting special studies to

evaluate effects of streamflow 

nutrient inputs on algal or

macrophyte growth, and thei

effects on DO and pH, partic

in reaches included on the 30

list for DO and pH, and inclu
51

the effects of reservoirs on

downstream reaches.

3.7.1.2.1 Rationale and Explanation

Action 42: Evaluate effects of streamflow

and nutrient inputs—The proposed study is

very similar to Action 36, and could be

accomplished along with the study proposed in

that Action. A relatively simple assessment of DO

and pH conditions and nutrient concentrations

would provide important insights into the extent of

problems with those constituents and their likely

causes. The study would focus primarily on

reaches included on the 303(d) list for DO, pH,

and nutrients (table 2), but also would include

other streams for reference purposes. Such a study

would include evaluation of diel cycles in DO, pH,

and temperature, as well as characterization of

potential nutrient sources such as water released

from reservoirs, tributary and ground-water

inputs, and urban runoff. It would also include at

least a qualitative description of the extent of algal

and (or) macrophyte coverage near the study

locations. Sampling would be done with a

downstream longitudinal approach, beginning at

locations immediately downstream from

reservoirs, and including the ODEQ ambient

monitoring locations as well as selected tributaries

(for instance Fall and Spring Rivers, Crescent

Creek, Tumalo Creek, Squaw Creek) and other

important Deschutes River locations (such as

below North Unit Canal and upstream from Lake

Billy Chinook). This approach would provide a

snapshot of conditions along the length of the

Deschutes River and would help refine the

understanding of which reaches are most affected

by nutrient inputs and DO and pH problems,

which are less affected, and where some of the

possible sources could be. It would also provide

data to support the development of TMDLs.

3.8 Esherichia coli Bacteria

Contamination of water in the middle and

upper Deschutes River Basin with bacteria has

not been perceived to be a large problem.

Currently, only one reach in the basin (the

Little Deschutes River) has been identified on

the 303(d) list as possibly having problems with

bacterial contamination, but more data are needed

to verify the extent of the problem, if one exists.

With one exception, all municipal and domestic

sewage in the basin is either treated by wetla

application, ground-water injection, applicat

land as irrigation water with essentially no r

flows, or in septic systems. Sewage is discha

directly to water (Indian Ford Creek) only fr

one guest ranch near Sisters, according to OD

online permit records (Oregon Department o

Environmental Quality, 1999b). This lack of 

waste discharges, together with sparse rainfa

most likely contributes greatly to the lack of

historical bacterial problems in the river.

Nonetheless the occasional deaths elsewhere 

swimmers from Esherichia coli (E. coli)

contamination contracted at recreational lak

reason enough to keep bacterial monitoring a

of any long-term monitoring program. In the

Deschutes River Basin, there are potential so

of pathogenic bacteria which are worth

consideration for future monitoring. These so

include increased development in riparian an

floodplain areas, increased recreation in the 

and in riparian areas, livestock grazing, and

urbanization. Additionally, there has been ve

little bacterial data collected except by the O

Ambient Monitoring Program and one site th

City of Bend monitors on upper Tumalo Cre

near the municipal drinking-water intake, so 

possible that there are additional problem ar

that have not yet been investigated. Suggeste

long-term monitoring for bacteria in this pla

targeted towards maintenance of the current

monitoring regime, with minor additions to

include data analysis and interpretation of ex

data, inclusion of a few strategic locations th

have not been sampled in the past, and some

reconnaissance sampling to verify that bacte

contamination remains a relatively minor pr

in the basin.

3.8.1 Monitoring Objectives and

Associated Actions

3.8.1.1 Status, Trends, and Compliance

Monitoring

Objective: Determine the spatial

(longitudinal) and seasona

variability, and long-term 

of E. coli bacteria in the m
52

and upper Deschutes River

Basin, and

Objective: Determine if E. coli exceeds

State standards in the middle

and upper Deschutes River

Basin, by:

Action 43: Compiling data base of existing

data and evaluating QA/QC data to

determine if enough QA data are

being properly collected and if data

are comparable between sites and

agencies;

Action 44: Analyzing existing data to establish

baseline conditions, look for

changes over time, and determine

adherence to State standards; and

Action 45: Maintaining current ODEQ

monitoring program, with

modifications to include stations on

Squaw Creek, Tumalo Creek, or

other locations as indicated by

analysis of existing data, data gaps,

or special studies.

3.8.1.1.1 Rationale and Explanation

Action 43: Compile existing data and

evaluate QA/QC data—As for other

monitoring constituents, an understanding of the

status of bacterial contamination in the basin

could benefit from a comprehensive analysis of

existing data. The first step in this analysis would

be to ensure the quality and comparability of those

data. For example, in 1996 the State standard for

bacterial contamination changed from one based

on fecal streptococci to one based on E. coli

bacteria, so it would be useful to verify that those

sampling for bacteria in the basin are sampling for

the same strains of bacteria and using comparable

methods. Bacterial samples are also particularly

susceptible to contamination or mishandling that

can bias the results, so it will be important to

examine available datasets for blank sample

results.

Action 44: Analyze existing data—Once

the quality of available bacteria data has been

determined, the data themselves can be analyzed.

Although ODEQ data from the ambient

monitoring program are published online (O

Department of Environmental Quality, 1

data specifically on bacteria are not present

Issues that would be useful to address inclu

whether any trends in bacteria alone are evid

there are particular times of the year that ba

problems are more severe than others; if the

popular swimming locations, including lake

are notably unrepresented in historical data

collection and that merit addition to the

monitoring network; if urban runoff is incre

bacterial contamination in places such as M

Pond in Bend; if agricultural activities are

contributing significant bacterial contamina

the river system; and if there are other facto

as streamflow, nutrients, or TSS that can be 

to bacterial counts at some sampling locatio

Action 45: Maintain current monit

network—The ODEQ Ambient Monitorin

network in the study area, with additional

monitoring on upper Tumalo Creek by the C

Bend, provides relatively good coverage of 

major reaches considered in this plan. The m

significant data gaps are the tributaries to th

middle Deschutes River that are also consid

herein—Tumalo Creek near the mouth and 

Creek. With the exception of the Bureau of

Reclamation’s samplings at its Deschutes R

Basin sites, lakes are not regularly sampled 

basin either. These could be monitored at th

general frequency as the ODEQ Ambient

Monitoring sites, although a shifting of the

bacterial monitoring schedule to be weighte

during summer, low-flow months when recr

is the most prevalent is suggested.

3.8.1.2 Evaluation Monitoring

Objective: Determine the risks to hum

health from exposure to

pathogenic bacteria at pop

recreation areas in the mid

and upper Deschutes Rive

Basin, by:

Action 46: Conducting special studies o

popular recreation areas to

determine bacterial counts or

incidents of illness due to bac

exposure.
53

3.8.1.2.1 Rationale and Explanation

Action 46: Evaluate recreational areas—

The intent of this special study is to determine if

there is a need for additional investigation into

bacterial contamination. This study could be

accomplished either by sampling for pathogenic

bacteria at commonly used recreation sites or by

conducting surveys at recreation sites to

investigate any problems with rashes or other

sicknesses that could be related to bacterial

contamination. Because the river typically has

steady velocities, with few stagnant or nonflowing

areas, and there are no known sewage inputs to the

river, it is unlikely that bacterial contamination in

the upper Deschutes River or its major tributaries

is a problem. However, with septic systems being

prevalent in some areas, or in any areas that have

low velocities and high amounts of recreation or

animal-waste inputs (such as Mirror Pond in

Bend, the Little Deschutes River along Burgess

Road, the Deschutes River at Harper’s Bridge, and

the La Pine State Recreational area, or some

locations where people swim in irrigation canals),

there may be cause for localized concern.

Additionally, Haystack Reservoir, though

technically outside of the study area for this

monitoring plan, receives most of its water

directly from the upper Deschutes River irrigation

system and could be a location of bacterial

contamination in swimming areas. Followup

investigations could be done if any areas are

indicated to have especially high risks of bacterial

contamination.

3.9 Additional monitoring

Several potentially important water-quality

topics are not included above, either because

they are not typically handled in a classical

“monitoring” sense, with scheduled, repeated

sampling over a long term, or because there is little

information to suggest that they represent

significant issues in the study area. Nonetheless,

these topics may warrant consideration for

inclusion into various parts of this monitoring plan

or for reconnaissance studies, in order to ensure

that they do not become significant problems

without warning. These topics include monitoring

for nonindigenous (introduced) species, aquatic

macroinvertebrates, and potentially-toxic

constituents such as trace elements or synthe

organic compounds. For each of these, poten

monitoring objectives are given below along 

several suggested, preliminary monitoring ac

in order to serve as a basis for future

consideration; however discussion is limited 

brief introduction. If the importance of one 

these topics is elevated in the future such tha

warrants being incorporated more formally i

regional monitoring network, designing a

monitoring approach for it will most likely r

an assessment and scoping exercise at least s

to those above, if not more intensive. It woul

be premature to propose in-depth monitoring

programs for these items in the absence of

additional information.

3.9.1 Nonindigenous species

Nonindigenous, or introduced, species 

have devastating effects on aquatic ecosyste

disrupting food chains, competing for food a

habitat resources, and preying excessively o

native species. As a result of the 1990 Aqua

Nuisance Prevention and Control Act and 19

National Invasive Species Act, Congress

established an Aquatic Nuisance Species Ta

Force, which has a Western Regional Panel 

www.wrp-ans.org/index.htm). Information o

aquatic nonindigenous species can also be

obtained for the State of Oregon through Dr. 

Sytsma at Portland State University. In the m

and upper Deschutes River Basin there are k

concerns with the threespine stickleback

(Gasterosteus aculeatus), which is spreading

throughout the basin and can disrupt product

trout, and which is already included in fish s

monitoring by the ODFW (table 4). Other fi

also causing localized management problem

Lake, Paulina Lake, Big Lava and Little Lav

Lakes, Davis Lake, and Crane Prairie and W

Reservoirs are all experiencing problems wi

chub (Gila bicolor). Crane Prairie Reservoir 

having problems with largemouth bass

(Micropterus salmoides), brown bullhead (Ict

nebulosus), and potentially crappie (Pomoxis 

and bluegill (Lepomis macrochirus). Largemo

bass are also found in Davis Lake, and probl

with some of these fish also exist in the Och

and Prineville reservoirs (Steve Marx, Orego

Department of Fish and Wildlife, written
54

commun., October 1999). Some invasive species

such as rainbow trout, kokanee salmon, and bass

are popular gamefish and they are often managed

to maintain their populations. Invasive aquatic

plants such as hydrilla can dramatically alter

habitat for fish and other biota. In many cases

preventing the spread of invasive species can be

dependent on education and the input from the

public, and several of the suggested actions below

are intended to make use of this fact by making the

public an integral part of the monitoring process.

3.9.1.1 Monitoring Objectives and

Associated Actions

Objective: Keep track of the extent and

distribution of nonindigenous

species in the upper Deschutes

River and major tributaries,

Objective: Determine changes over time in

nonindigenous species

populations, and

Objective: Provide an early warning system

for the invasion of new

nonindigenous species, by:

Action 47: Working with the Western Regional

Panel of the Aquatic Nuisance

Species Task Force to maintain a

list of invasive species of concern in

the middle and upper Deschutes

River Basin, and participating in the

development of a statewide plan for

control and prevention of invasive

species introductions;

Action 48: Establishing a person or position in

the basin for resource professionals

and members of the public to

contact with questions about

invasive species or to report

sightings;

Action 49: Working to educate the public on

issues associated with invasive

species through school curriculums,

interpretive signs at recreational

areas and river access points, fliers

accompanying fishing licenses, and

other mechanisms; and

Action 50: Conducting periodic surveys 

areas of high risk and sensitiv

known invasion of nonindige

species, to estimate coverage 

populations.

3.9.2 Invertebrates

Aquatic macroinvertebrates can be a u

tool for evaluating water-quality and stream

ecosystem integrity because many species h

well defined tolerances. These species are,

therefore, indicative of the types of water-qu

and habitat conditions a stream experiences,

integrated over the duration of the invertebra

community’s existence at a location. For thi

reason, in addition to the general importance 

macroinvertebrates as food resources for fish

macroinvertebrate monitoring has been used

increasingly in recent years as a supplement 

water-quality monitoring. As with habitat an

geomorphology monitoring, there have appa

been numerous past individual studies of

macroinvertebrates in streams, done for man

individual reasons and with differing objecti

and methods, by varying organizations. One 

more comprehensive recent studies was don

the ODEQ as part of R-EMAP in 1997–98. W

chemistry data from that study have been rep

(Oregon Department of Environmental Qual

1999e), but macroinvertebrate and habitat da

have not.

3.9.2.1 Monitoring Objectives and

Associated Actions

Objective: Use macroinvertebrate

community data to augmen

evaluation of water-quality 

habitat conditions, and to

evaluate adequacy of food

resources for fish in the m

and upper Deschutes Rive

Basin and major tributarie

Action 51: Compiling existing

macroinvertebrate communit

data for the basin, including

information on objectives, da

study, study area and location

field and laboratory protocol

level of taxonomic identifica
55

used, quality-assurance data

available, and data storage format;

Action 52: Using existing macroinvertebrate

data, if possible, to assess current

conditions and changes over time in

macroinvertebrate assemblages and

indicated water and habitat quality;

and

Action 53: Using information from

macroinvertebrate analysis to refine

monitoring for macroinvertebrates,

habitat, and water quality if

warranted.

3.9.3 Toxics

Two water samples from Wickiup Reservoir

collected by the Bureau of Reclamation (Larry

Zakrajsek, Bureau of Reclamation, written

commun., December 1999) indicated that mercury

was detected, at levels close to the analytical

detection limit used, during 1984 and 1991.

However, mercury is known to be difficult to

sample accurately without special, clean

techniques (Krabbenhoft and Rickert, 1995), and it

is likely that these detected concentration were

incidences of sample contamination. Followup

sampling for mercury in fish tissues from Wickiup

Reservoir revealed tissue concentrations that are

similar to those in other lakes with no known

mercury problems, and were well below USEPA

health advisory levels (Doug Drake, Oregon

Department of Environmental Quality, written

commun., 2000). Because of historical problems

with sample contamination, most current mercury

sampling is done using fish tissue or bed sediment

rather than water. Although other lakes in the

Cascades, including the nearby East Lake in

Newberry Crater, are known to have mercury

problems originating from a variety of sources

(Oregon Department of Environmental Quality,

1996), there are no known mercury deposits near

Wickiup Reservoir or other upper Deschutes River

Basin impoundments (Ronald Geitgy, Department

of Geology and Mineral Industries, oral commun.,

2000).

Currently, there is no evidence to indicate

that toxic constituents in the waters of the middle

and upper Deschutes River Basin are negatively

effecting fish or other aquatic biota. Aside fr

mercury samples taken in water from East L

(Morgan and others, 1997) and by the Burea

Reclamation in their impoundments, no othe

investigations of toxic constituents are know

have been done in the basin. There are, how

several possible sources of different classes 

toxic compounds to the streams, including u

runoff of metals, greases, solvents, and pesti

from Bend, Redmond, and other municipalit

vector control; and pesticide applications ne

homes, along rights-of-ways, golf courses, i

irrigation canals, and to agricultural lands. T

is only a small number of industrial permits 

discharges to streams in the basin, including 

wood products manufacturer near La Pine on 

Little Deschutes River. Suggested monitorin

actions in this section are principally

reconnaissance in nature; additional monitor

beyond a reconnaissance survey would requ

consideration of the results of that survey be

reasonable scope of study could be decided 

3.9.3.1 Monitoring Objectives and Associa

Actions

Objective: Determine if toxic constitu

are present in the water, b

sediment, or biota of the m

and upper Deschutes Rive

Basin at concentrations th

could potentially affect the

health of aquatic biota or

humans, or that warrant

additional investigation, b

Action 54: Assembling information on a

permitted point-source disch

to rivers in the basin, includi

constituents discharged, estim

load, and location of discharg

information on pesticides use

historically and currently in t

basin, and including irrigatio

canals;

Action 55: Assembling information on a

previous investigations of tox

constituents done in the basin
56

Action 56: Using the information collected

above, and knowledge of basin

hydrology, to conduct

reconnaissance samplings for trace

elements in water and in sediments,

dissolved pesticides in water,

dissolved pharmaceuticals in water,

and (or) polycyclic aromatic

hydrocarbons (PAHs) in water and

sediments, using the lowest

practicable analytical detection

limits;

Action 57: Changing the protocols used for

sampling mercury in water bodies,

including reservoirs, to the use of

fish tissues and sediment, rather

than water, as sampling media;

Action 58: Communicating the results of the

above reconnaissance sampling to

those charged with coordination of

the regional long-term monitoring

plan, the public, and other agencies

in the basin; and

Action 59: Deciding on the need for additional

monitoring or studies of toxic

constituents on the basis of

reconnaissance study results.

4.0 Implementation

Objectives and actions for coordinated,

regional monitoring from the previous section are

summarized by topic in table 6. Implementation of

the monitoring plan and allocation of the

monitoring actions among organizations will be a

major task for the Upper Deschutes Water Quality

Monitoring Committee and its members. Possible

steps to implementation include the determination

of logical responsibilities based on agency

missions and expertise, and organization of the

actions into phases that can be implemented

sequentially. These steps are elaborated below.

4.1 Summary of Proposed Monitoring

Actions by Organization

For the most part, monitoring actions were

presented in this report without regard to

responsibilities of individual organizations, and

decisions on responsibilities will best be ma

those coordinating the monitoring. There are 

suggested monitoring actions, however, that 

logically be done by specific organizations w

jurisdiction over particular geographical are

authority over particular water uses. A brief

summary is given here to indicate the action

might be allocated to each organization as a l

part of this monitoring program. It is empha

that this in no way represents decisions on

organizational responsibilities, but rather pro

an alternative way to organize some of the

suggested monitoring actions, so that involv

organizations can anticipate the ways in whi

they can contribute to coordinated, regional

monitoring. Many other suggested monitorin

actions, including evaluation monitoring or s

studies, would possibly be let out by contrac

administered through agreements among age

or performed in cooperative arrangements am

multiple organizations.

All involved organizations—Several

generalized actions apply to most if not all o

organizations involved in monitoring. Most

importantly, the organizations can work toge

develop a process for coordinating and mana

monitoring at a regional scale. These includ

primarily Actions 1–7. Additional actions ha

to do with assembly of existing data could b

requested of most of the agencies in the basi

assembling their own data, although analysi

these datasets might be put out for contracts

of the organizations involved or potentially

affected by this plan also have additional da

activities they are involved in. Their awaren

this plan’s elements, and any efforts they can 

to help those activities work in conjunction 

the plan, will help broaden the relevance of 

activities and of this plan.

Oregon Water Resources Departmen

the principal agency monitoring streamflow 

study area, most of the monitoring actions re

to streamflow are likely to be the domain of

OWRD. These include Actions 8–10. In add

it is suggested that OWRD and ODEQ jointl

consider ways to collocate the stream-gagin

ambient monitoring stations in order to mak
57

Table 6. Summary of objectives and suggested monitoring actions for coordinated, regional water-quality monitoring in theupper Deschutes River Basin[Suggested monitoring actions are described in more complete detail in section 3.0. Suggested phases refer to the general sequence in which actions would be initiateOregon Water Resources Department; EPA, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency; ODEQ, Oregon Department of Environmental Quality; QA/QC, Quality AssurMaximum Daily Loads; TSS, Total Suspended Solids]

Monitoring type Objective

Related monitoring actions

Number Suggested action (short description)

Overall Monitoring Program Management

Integration,

Coordination,& Efficiency

Integrate existing monitoring efforts among

participating organizations to increase efficiency,minimize redundancy, and improve data qualityand comparability

1. Establish a mechanism for coordination and support of regio

program

2. Conduct periodic reviews of monitoring program (1 and 5 y3. Establish common protocols to enable data comparison 4. Develop Quality Assurance Plans for data collection elemen5. Create a data management strategy to allow data sharing am6. Work to increase availability of information, reports, and oth

agencies and the public 

Data Gaps

Identify crucial data gaps in existing monitoring

efforts that can be filled with minormodifications of existing programs 7. Analyze and communicate data from previously completed 

Deschutes Basin to help formulate baseline(s) and refine iss

Identify data gaps or other research questions

which limit or prevent success of additionalmonitoring efforts

Discharge

Data Utility &Availability

Increase availability of current and historical data

to other agencies and the public

8. Update streamflow records for all stations and publish data (

electronically) 

Status &

TrendsMonitoring

Provide flow data that can be used in combination

with water-quality data for load calculations, tosupport evaluation of sources and transport ofwater-quality constituents

Improve predictive capabilities for flow entering

reservoirs and upper Deschutes River in order tomore adequately allocate water resourcesdownstream

9. Continue current network to measure flows in all major stre

irrigation canals 

10. Collocate OWRD stream-gaging locations with ODEQ Amb

Stations in order to better combine streamflow and water-qu

11. Develop process-based or statistical hydrologic models to in

snowmelt and ground-water systems to reservoirs and to key 
58

Water Temperature

Data Utility &

Availability

Increase availability of existing and future

temperature data and analysis

12. Compile databases of existing data among agencies and eva13. Analyze existing data 

Status, Trends,

andComplianceMonitoring

Determine the spatial variability, diel and seasonal

variability, and long-term trends, and

14. Collect data for temperature using continuous monitors rath

sampling, where possible, to account for diel and seasonal v

Provide data to determine if water temperatures

exceed State standards and to supportdevelopment of TMDLs for the basin

15. Modify existing temperature network by removing redundan

installing new monitors to fill data gaps for support of TMD

16. Develop a temperature model for 303(d) listed reaches to su

TMDLs and to determine effects of flow variations from reswithdrawals, and other management actions

EvaluationMonitoring Determine the effects that current management activities are having on water temperature 17. Consider special studies to evaluate effects on water temper

ground water withdrawals, floodplain and riparian developmprojects on stream temperatures 

Turbidity / Sediment Transport

Status, Trends,

andComplianceMonitoring

Determine spatial (longitudinal) variability, diel

and seasonal variability, and long-term trends insuspended sediment concentrations

Determine if suspended sediment (TSS/turbidity)

meets State and Federal water-quality criteria(including TMDL loads)

18. Use TSS as preferred data-collection protocol, with continu

monitoring at selected locations 

19. Compile databases of existing data among agencies and eva20. Analyze existing data 21. Establish periodic sampling for TSS at OWRD gaging statio

below Wickiup Reservoir, and Little Deschutes River at La P

22. Establish continuous turbidity monitoring locations, with pr

reaches downstream of Wickiup Reservoir. 

Evaluation

Monitoring

Determine effects of variations in streamflow

from reservoir operations and irrigationwithdrawals on downstream sedimentconcentrations, including daily and seasonaleffects

Provide data to develop sediment— discharge

rating curves below Wickiup Reservoir

23. Conduct a pilot study to refine relations between suspended 

turbidity in upper Deschutes down to Bend, and including L

24. Conduct a special study to evaluate the relationship between 

changes in flow, and determine sediment sources below Wic

Table 6. Summary of objectives and suggested monitoring actions for coordinated, regional water-quality monitoring in theupper Deschutes River Basin—Continued[Suggested monitoring actions are described in more complete detail in section 3.0. Suggested phases refer to the general sequence in which actions would be initiateOregon Water Resources Department; EPA, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency; ODEQ, Oregon Department of Environmental Quality; QA/QC, Quality AssurMaximum Daily Loads; TSS, Total Suspended Solids]

Monitoring type Objective

Related monitoring actions

Number Suggested action (short description)
59

Physical Channel Morphology/Aquatic Habitat

Status &

TrendsMonitoring

Establish baseline conditions and evaluate

changes over space and time

25. Compile databases of existing data among agencies and eval

agencies 

26. Analyze existing data 27. Conduct monitoring at subbasin and ‘indicator’ reach scales 28. Consider special studies to establish baselines for areas that 

surveyed, especially any critical stream segments of the uppDeschutes, Squaw Creek, and Tumalo Creek

Evaluation

Monitoring

Evaluate effects of reservoir operations, flow

management, and other land uses on channelmorphology, habitat, and riparian vegetation

29. Conduct special studies to evaluate changes in historical stre

after construction of reservoirs 

30. Consider special studies in selected reaches to evaluate the e

fluctuations and seasonal flow modifications on stream physwater quality, and stream ecology

Nutrients

Status, Trends,

&ComplianceMonitoring

Determine spatial (longitudinal) and seasonal

variability, and long-term trends, in nutrientconcentrations in streams

Determine if nutrient concentrations meet State

and Federal water-quality criteria (includingTMDLs)

31. Compile databases of existing data among agencies and eval32. Analyze existing data 33. Use ODEQ’s sample collection, preservation, and analytical 

nutrient protocols for monitoring 

34. Increase frequency of sampling in Wickiup Reservoir and C35. Maintain awareness of EPA Region 10’s effort to determine 

criteria for streams 

Evaluation

Monitoring

Determine effects of elevated nutrient

concentrations on trophic status in selectedreaches where eutrophication is indicated

Determine effects of selected management

activities on nutrient concentrations in streams

36. Conduct special studies to evaluate various aspects of nutrie

resource management in the study area. 

37. Determine historical changes in reservoir water quality since 

examination of algal record in lake sediments 

Table 6. Summary of objectives and suggested monitoring actions for coordinated, regional water-quality monitoring in theupper Deschutes River Basin—Continued[Suggested monitoring actions are described in more complete detail in section 3.0. Suggested phases refer to the general sequence in which actions would be initiateOregon Water Resources Department; EPA, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency; ODEQ, Oregon Department of Environmental Quality; QA/QC, Quality AssuraMaximum Daily Loads; TSS, Total Suspended Solids]

Monitoring type Objective

Related monitoring actions

Number Suggested action (short description)
60

Dissolved Oxygen and pH

Status, Trends,

&ComplianceMonitoring

Determine the spatial (longitudinal) variability,

diel and seasonal variability, and long-termtrends of DO and pH

Determine if DO and pH meet State standards,

including TMDL loads

38. Compile databases of existing data across agencies and evalu39. Analyze existing data 40. Establish continuous monitors for DO, pH, specific conduct

selected DEQ ambient monitoring or ODFW stream-gaging 

41. Use data from continuous monitors to account for diel variat

sampling for DO and pH. Where reaches are included on 30do grab samples at times that will best document extremes in 

Evaluation

Monitoring

Determine the effects that current management

activities are having on DO and pH

42. Conduct special studies to evaluate effects of streamflow and 

algal or macrophyte growth, and their effects on DO and pH, included on the 303(d) list for DO and pH, and including the on downstream reaches (see action 36)

E. coli Bacteria

Status, Trends,

&ComplianceMonitoring

Determine the spatial (longitudinal) and seasonal

variability, and long-term trends of E. coli

bacteria

Determine if E. coli exceeds State standards

43. Compile databases of existing data across agencies and evalu44. Analyze existing data 45. Maintain current ODEQ monitoring program, with modifica

stations on Squaw Creek, Tumalo Creek, or other locations aof existing data, data gaps, or special studies

Evaluation

Monitoring

Determine the risks to human health from

exposure to pathogenic bacteria at popularrecreation areas

46. Conduct special studies of popular recreation areas to determ

incidents of illness due to bacterial exposure 

Table 6. Summary of objectives and suggested monitoring actions for coordinated, regional water-quality monitoring in theupper Deschutes River Basin—Continued[Suggested monitoring actions are described in more complete detail in section 3.0. Suggested phases refer to the general sequence in which actions would be initiateOregon Water Resources Department; EPA, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency; ODEQ, Oregon Department of Environmental Quality; QA/QC, Quality AssuraMaximum Daily Loads; TSS, Total Suspended Solids]

Monitoring type Objective

Related monitoring actions

Number Suggested action (short description)
61

Table 6. Summary of objectives and suggested monitoring actions for coordinated, regional water-quality monitoring in theupper Deschutes River Basin[Suggested monitoring actions are described in more complete detail in section 3.0. Suggested phases refer to the general sequence in which actions would be initOregon Water Resources Department; EPA, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency; ODEQ, Oregon Department of Environmental Quality; QA/QC, Quality AssMaximum Daily Loads; TSS, Total Suspended Solids]

Topic Objective Suggested actions (short description)

Additional Monitoring

Nonindigenous

species

Track the extent and distribution of nonindigenous

species in the upper Deschutes River and majortributaries

Determine changes over time in nonindigenous

species populations

Provide an early warning system for the invasion

of new nonindigenous species

47. Work with the Western Regional Panel of the Aquatic Nui

to maintain a list of invasive species of concern, and particof a statewide plan for control and prevention of invasive 

48. Establish a person or position in the basin for resource pro

of the public to contact with questions about invasive spec

49. Work to educate the public on issues associated with inva50. Conduct periodic surveys to estimate coverage or populat

Invertebrates

Use macroinvertebrate community data to

augment evaluation of water-quality and habitatconditions, and to evaluate adequacy of foodresources for fish

51. Compile existing macroinvertebrate community data for t52. Use existing macroinvertebrate data, if possible, to assess 

changes over time in macroinvertebrate assemblages and habitat quality

53. Use information from macroinvertebrate analysis to refine 

macroinvertebrates, habitat, and water quality if warranted 

Toxics

Determine if toxic constituents are present in

water, sediments, or biota at concentrations thatcould potentially impact the health of aquaticbiota or humans, or that warrant additionalinvestigation

54. Assemble information on all permitted point source disch

existing information on toxics in water, sediment, or biota 

55. Assemble information on any previous investigations of to56. Use existing information and knowledge of basin hydrolo

reconnaissance samplings for trace metals in water and in pesticides in water, and/or polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbosediments

57. Change the protocols used for sampling mercury in water 

reservoirs, to the use of fish tissues and sediment, rather thmedia

58. Communicate the results of the reconnaissance samplings 59. Decide on the need for additional monitoring or studies of 

basis of reconnaissance study results 
62

best use of both streamflow and water-quality data

(Action 10). If continuous water-quality and (or)

turbidity monitors are installed (Actions 22 and

40), it would be useful to locate these monitors at

OWRD gaging stations (although the monitors

need not necessarily be serviced by OWRD

personnel) where possible.

Oregon Department of Environmental

Quality—Most of the routine water-quality data

collection in the basin is conducted by ODEQ at its

Ambient Monitoring stations, so a variety of

suggested actions relating to water-quality

sampling could logically be carried out by ODEQ.

These include decisions about collocating ambient

monitoring stations and stream-gaging stations

where possible (Action 10), participating in

USEPA efforts to establish regional nutrient

criteria (Action 35), and modifying sampling

programs to better account for diel cycling of

temperatures, dissolved oxygen, and pH (Action

41). If continuous water-quality and (or) turbidity

monitors are installed anywhere, such as at ODEQ

ambient monitoring locations or OWRD gaging

stations, ODEQ might be well positioned to

operate those monitors. At the least, they would be

appropriate to provide training and to oversee the

installation and operation of the monitors.

Oregon Department of Fish and

Wildlife—The parts of this monitoring plan that

overlap with ODFW missions include collecting

aquatic habitat data (Actions 27–29), particularly

on State lands, and several aspects involving

endangered or nonindigenous species (Actions 47–

50). Habitat and geomorphology monitoring might

also be performed by the Forest Service or the

BLM, especially in lands that are under Federal

jurisdiction, so it is likely that agreements among

these agencies would be employed to provide

coordinated monitoring of habitat.

U.S. Forest Service and Bureau of Land

Management—The Forest Service and the BLM

collect data on temperature, turbidity and sediment, and stream habitat /channel geometry at a

variety of locations within the study area. As

indicated above, habitat and channel geometry

monitoring under this plan, including creating an

inventory and database of existing information,

would likely be conducted jointly between ODFW,

the Forest Service, and the BLM (Actions 25–28).

Because the reaches immediately downstream of

Wickiup Reservoir are predominantly managed by

the Forest Service, that agency might also

administer special studies to evaluate the effects of

reservoir management on turbidity (Actions 23 and

24), channel morphology and sedimentation

(Actions 29 and 30), nutrients (Action 36), and DO

and pH (Action 42). There are some temperature

monitoring stations maintained by the Forest

Service and BLM that are redundant with those of

other organizations, and which could provide more

information if they were moved to different

locations to help fill data gaps (Action 15).

Bureau of Reclamation—The major

impoundments of the upper Deschutes River

Basin, Wickiup and Crane Prairie Reservoirs and

Crescent Lake, are managed by the BOR, and any

in-reservoir monitoring actions suggested in this

plan would likely be administered by the BOR.

Although most of the focus of this plan is on the

reaches downstream of the reservoirs, information

on reservoir water quality is important because of

their large influence on streamflow, water quality,

and transport processes in the upper Deschutes

River. More frequent reservoir monitoring (Action

34) would most likely be undertaken by or in

cooperation with the BOR, as would a possible

study using sediment diatom records to reconstruct

the water-quality history of the reservoirs (Action

37). The BOR could also be an important partner

in studies of the downstream effects of reservoir

management (Actions 23 and 24, 29 and 30, 36,

and 42).

U.S. Geological Survey—At present, the

primary involvement of the USGS in routine

monitoring in the study area is the operation of one

gaging station at the Deschutes River near Culver

(fig. 3). Most other gages are operated by OWRD.

The USGS could most effectively contribute to

water-quality monitoring in the Deschutes River

Basin by providing input on protocol development

or quality assurance, or designing and conducting

selected special studies in cooperation with local

agencies and (or) the monitoring committee.

4.2 Phased Implementation of

Monitoring Actions

A phased approach to initiate the suggested

monitoring actions is proposed below. Allocation

of these monitoring actions into individual phases
63

would be dependent on a combination of funding,

agency priorities or mandates, and the importance

of the individual issue regionally. Each phase

would build upon the previous one, although some

programs, especially the larger special studies,

might extend into subsequent phases. Descriptions

of the possible phases are as follows:

Phase 1 would focus primarily on program

management and implementation, including the

creation of institutional agreements. It might

involve actions that could be done principally

within the auspices of the individual organizations

and with existing resources. No changes to current

monitoring programs would be made, but

compilation of datasets among agencies and

analysis of quality- assurance data in preparation

of data analysis in Phase 2 could be initiated.

Phase 2 would include minor modifications to

existing monitoring programs and the analysis of

data compiled in the previous phase. Other actions

would be initiated on which future monitoring will

depend. Critical special studies to fill data gaps, or

those that would provide data to support important

programs (such as allocation of TMDL), would

also be initiated.

Phase 3 would mark the beginning of more

substantial modifications to existing programs,

such as addition or relocation of monitoring sites.

It would also include special studies to evaluate

land use or resource management or that target

important resource issues. By the end of this phase

much of the monitoring plan would have been

implemented.

Phase 4 would include the largest changes to

existing programs, along with actions on issues

deemed less important regionally or that are

relatively expensive.

An example of the phased approach for the

suggested monitoring actions is shown in table 1.

The final decisions on phasing of monitoring

actions and the priority or order of implementation

are beyond the scope of this report. Furthermore,

the items scheduled to be initiated in each phase

could change as the plan is reevaluated

periodically and local issues change in importance.

This is particularly true for the latter phases

because the results from earlier phases could cause

shifts in the understanding and priority of different

issues.

5.0 References

1. American Public Health Association, 1985,

Standard methods for the examination of 

and wastewater, 16th Edition: Washington

American Public Health Association.

2. Anderson, C.W., and Carpenter, K.D., 1998, 

quality and algal conditions in the North U

River Basin, Oregon, 1992–95, and implic

for resource management: U.S. Geologica

Survey Water-Resources Investigations Re

98–4125, 78 p., 1 pl.

3. Bauer, S.B., and Ralph, S.C., 1999, Aquatic 

indicators and their application to water q

objectives within the Clean Water Act—

Executive Summary: Seattle, Washington, 

Environmental Protection Agency, Region 

EPA 910-R-99-014, 8 p.

4. Bothwell, M.L., 1992, Eutrophication of rive

nutrients in treated kraft pulp mill effluen

Canadian Journal of Water Pollution Resea

27, no. 3, p. 447–472.

5. Caldwell, R.R., 1998, Chemical study of reg

ground-water flow and ground-water/surfa

water interaction in the upper Deschutes R

Basin, Oregon: U.S. Geological Survey W

Resources Investigations Report 97–4233

1 pl.

6. Cameron, K.A., and Major, J.J., 1987,

Reconnaissance investigation of sediment

distribution, erosion, and transport in the 

Deschutes River, Deschutes County, Oreg

November 1986: Water-Resources Investi

Report 87–4114, 24 p.

7. Columbia River Inter-Tribal Fish Commissio

1996, Wy-kan-us-mi Wa-kish-wit: The Co

River anadromous fish restoration plan of t

Perce, Umatilla, Warm Springs, and Yakim

tribes—Volume I: Portland, Oregon, Colu

River Inter-Tribal Fish Commission, vario

paged.

8. Deschutes County Development Department

La Pine National On-site Demonstration P

Environmental Health Division web page, 

<http://newberry.deschutes.org/cddweb/

envhealth/envhealth.htm>, accessed April 

9. Dixit, S.S., Smol, J.P., Charles, D.F., Hughes

Paulsen, S.G., and Collins, G.B., 1999, As

water quality changes in the lakes of the

northeastern United States using sediment
64

diatoms: Canadian Journal of Fisheries and

Aquatic Sciences, v. 56, p. 131–152.

10. Dodds, W.K., Smith, V.H., and Zander, B., 1997,

Developing nutrient targets to control benthic

chlorophyll levels in streams: Water Research, v.

31, no. 7, p. 1738–1750.

11. E&S Environmental Chemistry, 1997, Limnology of

Lake Billy Chinook and Lake Simtustus, Oregon:

Corvallis, E&S Environmental Chemistry, Pelton

Round Butte Limnology Study Project Number

2030, Final Report, variously paged.

12. Edwards, T.K., and Glysson, D.G., 1999, Field

methods for measurement of fluvial sediment:

Techniques of Water-Resources Investigations of

the U.S. Geological Survey, Book 3, Chapter C2,

89 p.

13. Gannett, M.W. , Lite, K.E. , Morgan, D.S. , and

Collins, C.A., in press, Ground-Water Hydrology

of the Upper Deschutes Basin, Oregon: U.S.

Geological Survey Water-Resources

Investigations Report 00–4162.

14. Gray, J.R., Glysson, G.D., Turcios, L.M., and

Schwarz, G.E., 2000, Comparability of

suspended-sediment concentration and total

suspended solids data: U.S. Geological Survey

Water-Resources Investigations Report 00–4191,

20 p.

15. Guasch, H., Armengol, J., Marti, E., and Sabater, S.,

1998, Diurnal variation in dissolved oxygen and

carbon dioxide in two low-order streams: Water

Research, v. 32, no. 4, p. 1067–1074.

16. Hankin, D.G., and Reeves, G.H., 1988, Estimating

total fish abundance and total habitat area in small

streams based on visual estimation methods:

Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic

Sciences, v. 45, p. 834–844.

17. Harrelson, C.C., Rawlins, C.L., and Potyondy, J.P.,

1994, Stream channel reference sites—An

illustrated guide to field technique: Fort Collins,

Colorado, U.S. Department of Agriculture. Forest

Service, General Technical Report RM–245, 61 p.

18. Horowitz, A.J., Demas, C.R., Fitzgerald, K.K.,

Miller, T.M., and Rickert, D.A., 1994, U.S.

Geological Survey protocol for the collection and

processing of surface-water samples for the

subsequent determination of inorganic substances

in filtered water: U.S. Geological Survey OpenFile Report 94–539, 57 p.

19. Houslet, B., 1998, Temperature modeling of Squaw

Creek from the Squaw Creek Irrigation District

dam to the Crooked River Grasslands: Sisters,

Oregon, U.S. Department of Agriculture, 

Service, Sisters Ranger District, 9 p.

20. Interorganizational Resource Information

Coordinating Council, 1999, Clarification 

update to Phase I common data standards 

aquatic inventory and stream identificatio

Report of the Interorganizational Resourc

Information Coordinating Council Fish

Hydrography Strike Team, Revised May 1

Accessed on Bureau of Land Managemen

Intranet at http://web.or.blm.gov/or930/ o

December 1, 1999, 51 p.

21. Johnson, D. M., Petersen, R.P., Lycan, D.R. 

J.W., Neuhaus, M.E., and Schaedel, A.L., 

Atlas of Oregon lakes: Corvallis, Oregon 

University Press, 317 p.

22. Joy, J., and Patterson, B., 1997, A suspended

sediment and DDT total maximum daily l

evaluation report for the Yakima River:

Washington Department of Ecology, Publ

No. 97–321, 105 p.

23. Krabbenhoft, D.P., and Rickert, D.A., 1995,

Mercury contamination of aquatic ecosyst

U.S. Geological Survey Fact Sheet FS-21

4 p.

24. Lowe, R.L., and Pan, Y., 1996, Benthic algal

communities as biological monitors, in

Stevenson, J.R., Bothwell, M.L., and Lowe

eds., Algal ecology, freshwater benthic

ecosystems: San Diego, California, Acade

Press, Inc., p. 705–739.

25. Lower Columbia River Estuary Program, 19

Lower Columbia River Estuary Plan—Vol

2—Aquatic ecosystem monitoring strateg

the lower Columbia River, and Informatio

Management Strategy: Portland, Oregon, 

Columbia River Program, p. B1–B22, avai

<http://www.lcrep.org/reports.htm>.

26. Lower Columbia River Estuary Program, 19

Interagency long term monitoring plan to 

water quality, sediment quality, aquatic he

and biological integrity in the lower Colum

River: Portland, Oregon, Lower Columbia 

Estuary Program, Interagency Subcommit

Report, 161 p.

27. Manga, M., 1996, Hydrology of spring domi

streams in the Oregon Cascades: Water Res

Research, v. 32, no. 8, p. 2435–2439.

28. Manga, M., 1997, A model for discharge in 

dominated streams and implications for th

transmissivity and recharges of quaternary
65

volcanics in the Oregon Cascades: Water

Resources Research, v. 33, no. 8, p. 1813–1822.

29. Marzolf, E.R., Mulholland, P.J., and Steinman,

A.D., 1994, Improvements to the diurnal

upstream-downstream dissolved oxygen change

technique for determining whole-stream

metabolism in small streams: Canadian Journal of

Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences, v. 51, no. 1591–

1599.

30. Marzolf, E.R., Mulholland, P.J., and Steinman,

A.D., 1998, Reply: Improvements to the diurnal

upstream-downstream dissolved oxygen change

technique for determining whole-stream

metabolism in small streams: Canadian Journal of

Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences, v. 55, p. 1786–

1787.

31. Moffat, R.L., Wellman, R.E., and Gordon, J.M.,

1990, Statistical summaries of streamflow data in

Oregon: Volume 1—Monthly and annual

streamflow, and flow-duration values: U.S.

Geological Survey Open-File Report 90–118,

413 p.

32. Morgan, D.S., Tanner, D.Q., and Crumrine, M. D.,

1997, Hydrologic and water-quality conditions at

Newberry Volcano, Deschutes County, Oregon,

1991–95: U.S. Geological Survey WaterResources Investigations Report 97–4088, 66 p.

33. Odum, H.T., 1956, Primary production in flowing

waters: Limnology and Oceano-graphy, v. 1., no

2., p. 102–117

34. Oregon Department of Environmental Quality,

1988, 1988 Oregon assessment of nonpoint

source water pollution: Portland, Oregon

Department of Environmental Quality, 182 p.,

appendixes.

35. Oregon Department of Environmental Quality,

1994, DEQ laboratory field sampling reference

guide, revision 4.0: Portland, Oregon Department

of Environmental Quality Laboratory, 76 p.

36. Oregon Department of Environmental Quality,

1995, Coast Fork TMDL Development: Portland,

Oregon Department of Environmental Quality,

variously paged.

37. Oregon Department of Environmental Quality,

1996, Mercury in Oregon Lakes, 1993-1994:

Portland, Oregon Depart-ment of Environmental

Quality, variously paged.

38. Oregon Department of Environmental Quality,

1999a, Water Quality Limited Streams

303(d) List Web page: <http://

waterquality.deq.state.or.us/wq/303dlist/

303dpage.htm>, accessed November 1999

39. Oregon Department of Environmental Qualit

1999b, WQ Facility Information System W

page: <http://waterquality.deq.state.or.us/

SISData/FacilityHome.asp>, accessed Nov

1999.

40. Oregon Department of Environmental Qualit

1999c, Listing criteria for Oregon’s 1998 

list of water quality limited water bodies: 

waterquality.deq.state.or.us/WQLData/

ListingCriteria.htm>, accessed December 

41. Oregon Department of Environmental Qualit

1999d, Oregon Water Quality Index for th

Deschutes River Basin Web page: <http://

www.deq.state.or.us/lab/WQM/WQI/desc

deshood3.htm>, accessed December 1999

42. Oregon Department of Environmental Qualit

1999e, Upper Deschutes River Basin R-EM

1997-1998 Water Chemistry Summary: Po

Oregon Department of Environmental Qu

Laboratory Division, Technical Report BI

04, 29 p.

43. Oregon Department of Environmental Qualit

2000a, Upper Grande Ronde River Sub-ba

Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) and 

Quality Management Plan (WQMP): Port

Oregon Department of Environmental Qu

available online at url <http://

waterquality.deq.state.or.us/wq/TMDLs/

TMDLs.htm>, 65 p. plus appendixes.

44. Oregon Department of Environmental Qualit

2000b, La Pine National Demonstration P

Web page: <http://waterquality.deq.state.o

wq/OnSite/LaPine.htm>, accessed April, 

45. Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, 19

Upper Deschutes River Fish Management 

Portland, Oregon Department of Fish and

Wildlife, 1996, 385 p.

46. Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife,199

Oregon Wildlife Diversity Plan: Salem, O

Department of Fish and Wildlife, variousl

paged.

47. Pacific Northwest Ecosystem Research Conso

1998, Willamette River Basin—A plannin

version 1.0: Corvallis, Oregon State Unive

Institute for Sustainable Development, 72 

48. Paerl, H.W.,and Downs, M. T., 1978, Biolog

availability of low versus high molecular 

reactive phosphorus: Journal of the Fisher

Research Board of Canada, v. 35, p. 1639
66

49. Pogue, T.R., and Anderson, C.W., 1995, Processes

controlling dissolved oxygen and pH in the Upper

Willamette River Basin, Oregon, 1994: U.S.

Geological Survey Water-Resources

Investigations Report 95–4205, 71 p.

50. Roper, B.B., and Scarnecchia, D.L., 1995, Observer

variability in classifying habitat types in stream

surveys: American Journal of Fisheries

Management, v. 15, p. 49–53.

51. San Francisco Estuary Project, 1993, Regional

Monitoring Strategy: Oakland, California, 44 p.,

3 appendixes.

52. Seiler, R.L., Zaugg, S.D., Thomas, J.M., and

Howcroft, D.L., 1999, Caffeine and

pharmaceuticals as indicators of waste water

contamination in wells: Ground Water, v. 37,

no. 3, p. 405–410.

53. Stager, J.C., Leavitt, P.R., and Dixit, S.S., 1997,

Assessing impacts of past human activity on the

water quality of Upper Saranac Lake, New York:

Journal of Lake and Reservoir Management, v.

13, no. 2, p. 175–184.

54. State of Oregon, 1997, Coastal Salmon Restoration

Initiative—The Oregon Plan: Salem, Oregon

Department of Fish and Wildlife, also available

online at <http://www.oregon-plan.org/>,

variously paged.

55. Tanner, D.Q., and Anderson, C.W., 1996,

Assessment of water quality, nutrients, algal

productivity, and management alternatives for

low-flow conditions, South Umpqua River Basin,

Oregon, 1990–92: U.S. Geological Survey WaterResources Investigations Report 96–4082, 71 p.

56. Triska, F.J., Sedell, J.R., Cromack, K.J., Gregory,

S.V., and McCorison, F.M., 1984, Nitrogen

budget for a small coniferous forest stream:

Ecological Monographs, v. 54, no. 1, p. 119–140.

57. Tuchman, N., 1996, The roll of heterotrophy in

algae, in Stevenson, J.R., Bothwell, M.L., and

Lowe, R.L., eds., Algal ecology, freshwater

benthic ecosystems: San Diego, California,

Academic Press, Inc., p. 299–319.

58. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service,

1990, Land and resource management plan,

Deschutes National Forest, Chapter 5—

Implementation of the Forest Plan: Bend, Oregon,

USDA Forest Service, variously paged.

59. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service,

1991, Land and resource management plan—Part

1—Ochoco National Forest: Prineville, Oregon,

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service,

Pacific Northwest Region, variously paged.

60. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Serv

1994, Upper Deschutes Basin instream flo

assessment: Bend, U.S. Department of

Agriculture Forest Service, Deschutes Na

Forest, 45 p.

61. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Serv

1995, Inland native fish strategy, Environm

Assessment—Decision notice and finding 

significant impact. Intermountain, Northe

Pacific Northwest Regions: Coeur d’Alen

Idaho, U..S. Department of Agriculture Fo

Service, variously paged.

62. U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Servi

1996a, Upper Deschutes Wild and Scenic 

and State Scenic Waterway—Comprehens

Management Plan: Bend, Oregon, U.S.

Department of Agriculture Forest Service

Deschutes National Forest, variously page

63. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Serv

1996b, Upper Deschutes Wild and Scenic 

and State Scenic Waterway—Record of D

and Final Environmental Impact Statemen

Bend, Oregon, U.S. Department of Agricu

Forest Service, Deschutes National Forest

variously paged.

64. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Serv

1998, Sisters/Why-chus Watershed Analy

Sisters, Oregon, U.S. Department of Agric

Forest Service, Deschutes National Forest, 

Ranger District, variously paged.

65. U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of L

Management and U.S. Depart-ment of

Agriculture Forest Service, 1992, Middle

Deschutes/Lower Crooked Wild and Scen

Rivers' Management Plan: Prineville, Ore

U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of 

Management, 57 p.

66. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2000

Nutrient criteria technical guidance manu

rivers and streams: U.S. Environmental

Protection Agency EPA–822–D-99–003

67. Wilde, F.D., Schertz, T.L., and Radtke, D.B.

Quality control samples, in National field m

for the collection of water-quality data, W

F.D., Radtke, D.B., Gibs, J., and Iwatsubo

(eds.), National field manual for the collec

water-quality data, Chapter A4—Collectio

water samples, U.S. Geological Survey

Techniques of Water Resources Investigat

Book 9, Handbooks for Water-Resources

Investigations, variously paged.
67

6.0 Glossary

303(d) List A statewide list of streams or stream reaches that do not meet w

quality standards for specified constituents, and for which load

allocations must be set. The list is mandated under section 303

the Clean Water Act.

alluvial Describes rivers with beds and channels composed largely of c

and detrital materials that can be transported or deposited

baseline conditions Conditions at some point in time from which changes can be

documented. This is considered different from “Reference

Conditions”, which are more related to conditions in the absen

human influence.

benthic Of, relating to, or occurring at the bottom of a body of water

BLM U.S. Department of Interior, Bureau of Land Management

BOR U.S. Department of Interior, Bureau of Reclamation

EPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

f

3/s cubic feet per second, a measure of streamflow

GIS Geographical Information System

indicator reach A reach of river that is visited periodically in order to take sam

or make measurements and for which conditions are expected t

reflect those in reaches with similar structure and functioning

IRICC Interorganizational Resource Information Coordinating Counc

LWD Large Woody Debris

mg/L milligrams per liter (parts per million)

nonindigenous species Species that are not native to a specified area and which often 

no natural predators in that area. They can often disrupt local f

chains, habitat, or resource availability.

NPDES National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System

NRIS Natural Resource Inventory System, a computer database deve

by the U.S. Forest Service

ODFW Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife

ODEQ Oregon Department of Environmental Quality

OWRD Oregon Water Resources Department

OWQI Oregon’s Water Quality Index, calculated from data collected b

ODEQ Ambient Monitoring Program

PGE Portland General Electric

QA Quality Assurance

QC Quality Control

reference conditions Conditions found in a given stream prior to alteration by huma

run-of-the-river Having low hydraulic retention time or pool volume

TMDLs Total Maximum Daily Loads, a load allocation determined for 

given constituent and stream for which water quality standards 

not met. TMDLs are mandated as part of the Clean Water Act 

303(d) list).

μm micrometer (10-6 meters)

USEPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

USFS U.S. Forest Service

USGS U.S. Geological Survey

69

APPENDIXES

71

APPENDIX A. SUMMARY OF WATER-QUALITY OBJECTIVES AND RECOMMENDATIONS FROM PREVIOUS MAN

Table A–1. Water-quality monitoring objectives and recommendations from previous management plans, by topic, and their propose

term monitoring in the upper and middle Deschutes River Basin

[Note that proposed priorities only apply to interagency, coordinated monitoring and do not reflect the importance of a specific issue locally, or the needs of specific aIntertribalIntertribal Fish Commission; ODFW, Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife; OWRD, Oregon Water Resources Department; BLM, Bureau of Land ManWQ, water quality; temp., temperature; TSS, total suspended solids; turb., turbidity; LDR, Little Deschutes River; ab, above; Br, Bridge; DR, Deschutes River; blw, bft3/s, cubic feet per second; IGDO, Intergravel Dissolved Oxygen; NG, None given; FREQUENCY DEFINITIONS: C, continuous; W, Weekly; Q, quarterly; A, ann

effort; E, Evaluate frequency after testing effectiveness; V, Varies according to project specific details; MONITORING TYPE DEFINITIONS: ST, Status & Trends, CReconnaissance; <, less than; >, greater than; ≥, greater than or equal to; Reference number, numbered citations in Reference section]

Proposed priority for

long term monitoring Water issue Entity Monitoring objective Recommended monitoring

Water-Quantity Related Monitoring

H Streamflow Forest Service, 1996, UDR

Comprehensive ManagementPlan

Correlate flows with trends inresource condition

OWRD add (?) stations belowreservoirs, at Benham Falls, beloBend

H

Instream Flow—Wickiup Dam to Fall River

Flow Team, 1994, UDR InstreamFlow Assessment

Water Quality (turbidity) Storage Season—500 ft3/s

Irrigation Season—< 1,200 ft3/s

Enhanced Flow—600–900 ft3/s

H Brown Trout and other fish Storage Season—300 ft3/s

Irrigation Season—< 1,200 ft3/s

Enhanced Flow - 600–900 ft3/s

H Riparian vegetation Storage Season—500 ft3/s

Irrigation Season—< 1,200 ft3/s

Enhanced Flow—600–900 ft3/s

H Wildlife Storage Season—500 ft3/s

Irrigation Season—< 1,200 ft3/s

Enhanced Flow—600–900 ft3/s

H Scenic Value Storage Season—500 ft3/s

Irrigation Season—< 1,200 ft3/s

Enhanced Flow—600–900 ft3/s

H Recreation Storage Season—250 ft3/s

Irrigation Season—< 1,150 ft3/s

Enhanced Flow

canoeing—600–800 ft3/s

rafting—100–1,300 ft3/s

General Water-Quality Issues

H Critical WQ Parameters

(Temp., DO, pH, TSS, turbidity)

Forest Service, 1996, UDRComprehensive ManagementPlan

Determine trends resultingfrom management actions andother changes within the rivercorridor

DEQ monitor WQ at ambientmonitoring sites, including 2 new (LDR ab. Harper Br. & DR blw.Wickiup)
72

General Water-Quality Issues—Continued

Ld Water Temperature Forest Service, 1990, Land &

Resource Management Plan,Deschutes National Forest

Increases from managementkept within desired range of abenefiting resource (fish, watersupply)

Monitor for specific projects, for least 1 year before and 3 years afproject completion.

H Fecal Coliforma

BLM and Forest Service, 1992,Middle Deschutes/LowerCrooked Management Plan

Maintain State water-quality

standards b,c

Take grab samples during springsummer, and fall

H Temperaturea Monitor temperature continuousH Turbidity Monitor with autosamplers durin

flushing flows in fall, winter, andspring, + during June-August

H pH Monitor with autosampler, use sa

frequency as for turbidity

H Dissolved Oxygen Monitor with autosampler

(during summer)

H Water Quality—

Water Temperature

CRITFC, 1996, ColumbiaRiver anadromous fishrestoration plan

Maintain maximum daily watertemperature > 60 deg.Fahrenheit.a

NG 

H Water Quality—

Miscellaneous Pollutants CRITFC, 1996, Columbia

River anadromous fishrestoration plan

Maintain WQ to meet currentWQ standards. Review andrevise current state and federalWQ standards to adequatelyprotect salmon.

Monitor WQ parameters for whithere are standards (temperature, pH, turbidity, bacteria), where thpotential for pollution.

H Water Quality—

Riparian Reserves CRITFC, 1996, Columbia R. anadromous fish restoration

plan

Maintain riparian reserves ≥300 ft slope distance fromfloodplains or to topographicdivide (whichever is less)

Monitor water temperature 

Table A–1. Water-quality monitoring objectives and recommendations from previous management plans, by topic, and their proposeterm monitoring in the upper and middle Deschutes River Basin—Continued

[Note that proposed priorities only apply to interagency, coordinated monitoring and do not reflect the importance of a specific issue locally, or the needs of specific IntertribalIntertribal Fish Commission; ODFW, Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife; OWRD, Oregon Water Resources Department; BLM, Bureau of Land ManWQ, water quality; temp., temperature; TSS, total suspended solids; turb., turbidity; LDR, Little Deschutes River; ab, above; Br, Bridge; DR, Deschutes River; blw, ft3/s, cubic feet per second; IGDO, Intergravel Dissolved Oxygen; NG, None given; FREQUENCY DEFINITIONS: C, continuous; W, Weekly; Q, quarterly; A, ann

effort; E, Evaluate frequency after testing effectiveness; V, Varies according to project specific details; MONITORING TYPE DEFINITIONS: ST, Status & Trends, Reconnaissance; <, less than; >, greater than; ≥, greater than or equal to; Reference number, numbered citations in Reference section]

Proposed priority for

long term monitoring Water issue Entity Monitoring objective Recommended monitorin
73

General Water-Quality Issues—Continued

Ld TMDLs, 303(d) planning

in Squaw Creek

Forest Service, 1998, SistersWhy-chus Watershed Analysis

Improve fish & aquatic habitatand riparian vegetation byincreasing summer flows

Monitor temperature, DO, anddischarge

Ld Rehabilitation of specific

locations in Squaw CreekBasin (Pole Creek, Trout Creek,Three Creeks, Indian Ford Creek)

Forest Service, 1998, SistersWhy-chus Watershed Analysis

Improve soil moisture, reduceerosion, increase riparianvegetation, and increase habitatby increasing discharge

Monitor temperature and flows inSquaw Creek, conduct erosion suusing photography

Turbidity-related Monitoring

H Turbidity, Fish Stranding

associated with ramping

Forest Service, 1996, UDRComprehensive ManagementPlan

Determine effect ofexperimental ramping ratechanges

ODFW & USFS measure turbidireleases below Wickiup from spruntil flows reach 1,800 ft3/s. Eva

usefulness

Channel Morphology and Habitat Related Monitoring

M Channel Morphology Forest Service, 1996, UDR

Comprehensive ManagementPlan

Determine long term trends inmorphology and instream flowlevels

ODFW & USFS do cross sectionprofiles at ITFM sites; use aerial for large-scale changes

M Changes in Channel

Morphology andHydrologic Condition

Forest Service, 1996, UDRComprehensive ManagementPlan

Determine effectiveness of fishhabitat projects

USFS, ODFW measure cross secprofiles at 2 sites within each proarea (?)

Ld Channel Morphology

and Low Flows Forest Service, 1990, Land & Res. Management Plan,

Deschutes National Forest

Maintain no changes inchannel structure or reductionsin low flows resulting frommanagement actions

Measure channel profiles and low on indicator streams and river se

M Channel Morphology—

Large Woody Debris (LWD)

CRITFC, 1996, Columbia R.anadromous fish restorationplan

Maintain according to landmanagement standards (nonumeric standard)

Monitor LWD 

Table A–1. Water-quality monitoring objectives and recommendations from previous management plans, by topic, and their proposeterm monitoring in the upper and middle Deschutes River Basin—Continued

[Note that proposed priorities only apply to interagency, coordinated monitoring and do not reflect the importance of a specific issue locally, or the needs of specific IntertribalIntertribal Fish Commission; ODFW, Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife; OWRD, Oregon Water Resources Department; BLM, Bureau of Land ManWQ, water quality; temp., temperature; TSS, total suspended solids; turb., turbidity; LDR, Little Deschutes River; ab, above; Br, Bridge; DR, Deschutes River; blw, ft3/s, cubic feet per second; IGDO, Intergravel Dissolved Oxygen; NG, None given; FREQUENCY DEFINITIONS: C, continuous; W, Weekly; Q, quarterly; A, ann

effort; E, Evaluate frequency after testing effectiveness; V, Varies according to project specific details; MONITORING TYPE DEFINITIONS: ST, Status & Trends, Reconnaissance; <, less than; >, greater than; ≥, greater than or equal to; Reference number, numbered citations in Reference section]

Proposed priority for

long term monitoring Water issue Entity Monitoring objective Recommended monitorin
74

Channel Morphology and Habitat Related Monitoring—Continued

M Channel Morphology—

Pool frequency and volume

CRITFC, 1996, Columbia R.anadromous fish restorationplan

Maintain according to landmanagement standards (nonumeric standard)

NG 

M Channel Morphology—

Residual Pool Volume

CRITFC, 1996, Columbia R.anadromous fish restorationplan

Achieve increasing trend inresidual pool volume (nonumeric standard)

NG 

M Channel Morphology—

Bank Stability CRITFC, 1996, Columbia R.

anadromous fish restorationplan

Maintain ≥ 90 percent stability,

no decrease in bank stabilitywhen > 90 percent. Do notmechanically stabilize banks(e.g. riprap).

NG 

Ld Stream Morphology—

Bank Stability, Squaw Creek

Forest Service, 1998, SistersWhy-chus Watershed Analysis

Maintain stream bank stability,limit down cutting, andincrease scouring of historicfloodplains for regeneration ofnative vegetation by allowingmore flooding

Survey streams for percent of staand unstable banks

M Channel Substrate—

Fine sediment in spawning gravel

CRITFC, 1996, Columbia R.anadromous fish restorationplan

Monitor to depth of eggdeposition. No numericalstandard.

NG 

M

Channel Substrate—Fine surface sediment

CRITFC, 1996, Columbia R.anadromous fish restorationplan

Maintain surface area ofsediment covered by finesediment ≤ 20 percent in

spawning habitat; no increasewhere already ≥20 percenτ

NG 

H Maintain fine sediment

delivery ≤ 20 percent overnatural

NG 

Table A–1. Water-quality monitoring objectives and recommendations from previous management plans, by topic, and their proposeterm monitoring in the upper and middle Deschutes River Basin—Continued

[Note that proposed priorities only apply to interagency, coordinated monitoring and do not reflect the importance of a specific issue locally, or the needs of specific IntertribalIntertribal Fish Commission; ODFW, Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife; OWRD, Oregon Water Resources Department; BLM, Bureau of Land ManWQ, water quality; temp., temperature; TSS, total suspended solids; turb., turbidity; LDR, Little Deschutes River; ab, above; Br, Bridge; DR, Deschutes River; blw, ft3/s, cubic feet per second; IGDO, Intergravel Dissolved Oxygen; NG, None given; FREQUENCY DEFINITIONS: C, continuous; W, Weekly; Q, quarterly; A, ann

effort; E, Evaluate frequency after testing effectiveness; V, Varies according to project specific details; MONITORING TYPE DEFINITIONS: ST, Status & Trends, Reconnaissance; <, less than; >, greater than; ≥, greater than or equal to; Reference number, numbered citations in Reference section]

Proposed priority for

long term monitoring Water issue Entity Monitoring objective Recommended monitorin
75

Channel Morphology and Habitat Related Monitoring—Continued

M Fish Habitat—

Sedimentation

Forest Service, 1990, Land &Resource Management Plan,Deschutes National Forest

Maintain indicator segments ofstreams having spawning andrearing habitate

Conduct assessments of sediment emergence success

M Spawning Gravel

condition and use

Forest Service, 1996, UDRComprehensive ManagementPlan

Determine effectiveness ofartificially introducing graveland effects of managementactions on those gravels

ODFW & USFS conduct fine sedsampling and IGDO readings whnew gravel has been introduced

M

Fish Habitat Conditions

Forest Service, 1996, UDRComprehensive ManagementPlan

Determine changes in fishhabitat and hydrologicalfeatures

ODFW & USFS conduct stream sof entire UDB using USFS and Oprotocols

M Determine suitability of

existing gravel formacroinvertebrates and asspawning habitat for fish

ODFW & USFS sample fine sediat 3 stations (Bull Bend, Besson,Meadow), & measure IGDO

M Determine spawning and

incubation gravel quality

ODFW & USFS measure IGDO aspawning areas near Wickiup, for year initially

H Fish Populations Forest Service, 1996, UDR

Comprehensive ManagementPlan

Determine effectiveness of fishhabitat projects

ODFW do redd counts, habitatcharacterization, electroshocking

M

Fish Habitat

BLM and Forest Service, 1992,Middle Deschutes/LowerCrooked Management Plan

Spawning Gravel—Maintain

quality and quantity. Use 1993data as baseline

Measure substrate embeddedness pebble counts

M Rearing Habitat —Maintain

pool and habitat quality andquantity. Use 1993 data asbaseline

Survey habitat 

M Fish Species—Maintain

species composition using datafrom ODFW as baseline

Count fish species, coordinate wiODFW

Table A–1. Water-quality monitoring objectives and recommendations from previous management plans, by topic, and their proposeterm monitoring in the upper and middle Deschutes River Basin—Continued

[Note that proposed priorities only apply to interagency, coordinated monitoring and do not reflect the importance of a specific issue locally, or the needs of specific aIntertribalIntertribal Fish Commission; ODFW, Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife; OWRD, Oregon Water Resources Department; BLM, Bureau of Land ManaWQ, water quality; temp., temperature; TSS, total suspended solids; turb., turbidity; LDR, Little Deschutes River; ab, above; Br, Bridge; DR, Deschutes River; blw, bft3/s, cubic feet per second; IGDO, Intergravel Dissolved Oxygen; NG, None given; FREQUENCY DEFINITIONS: C, continuous; W, Weekly; Q, quarterly; A, ann

effort; E, Evaluate frequency after testing effectiveness; V, Varies according to project specific details; MONITORING TYPE DEFINITIONS: ST, Status & Trends, CReconnaissance; <, less than; >, greater than; ≥, greater than or equal to; Reference number, numbered citations in Reference section]

Proposed priority for

long term monitoring Water issue Entity Monitoring objective Recommended monitoring
76

Channel Morphology and Habitat Related Monitoring—Continued

L Fish Resource and Habitat

— Type of Fishery andCapacity

Forest Service, 1990, Land &Resource Management Plan,Deschutes National Forest

Objectives defined variously instream, lake, and riverinventories and evaluations

Conduct habitat surveys, analysrecreational fisheries goad evalufor projects on important fish stlakesg. Use ODFW Creel survey

M Fish Habitat—

Improvement Target

Forest Service, 1990, Land &Resource Management Plan,Deschutes National Forest

Maintain 3-year average within25 percent of target

Compile annual accomplishmenreports

M

Habitat Inventory andMonitoring

ODFW, 1999, Oregon WildlifeDiversity Plan

Identify and monitor habitatsneeded to maintain Oregon’swildlife diversity

Determine quantity, distributioncondition of dominant plantcommunities and major habitatelements

M Monitor changes and trends in hM

Stream morphology

Forest Service, 1991, Land &Resource Management Plan,Ochoco National Forest

Maintain or show improvementin stream conditions.

Survey stream morphology usinestablished survey points on selstreams

M

Vegetation Condition

Forest Service, 1996, UDRComprehensive ManagementPlan

Determine changes in amountand condition of aquatic

vegetation

USFS complete as part of fish hmonitoring, also correlate with levels.

M Determine changes in amount

and condition of riparian

vegetation

USFS, ODFW complete compausing aerial photos during monifor channel morphology and fishabitat

M

Riparian Vegetation

BLM and Forest Service, 1992,Middle Deschutes/LowerCrooked Management Plan

RiparianVegetation—Maintain

or enhance functioning andecological condition.Determine baseline level first

Conduct inventories (includinginfra-red photos).

Table A–1. Water-quality monitoring objectives and recommendations from previous management plans, by topic, and their propos

term monitoring in the upper and middle Deschutes River Basin—Continued

[Note that proposed priorities only apply to interagency, coordinated monitoring and do not reflect the importance of a specific issue locally, or the needs of specific IntertribalIntertribal Fish Commission; ODFW, Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife; OWRD, Oregon Water Resources Department; BLM, Bureau of Land MaWQ, water quality; temp., temperature; TSS, total suspended solids; turb., turbidity; LDR, Little Deschutes River; ab, above; Br, Bridge; DR, Deschutes River; blwft3/s, cubic feet per second; IGDO, Intergravel Dissolved Oxygen; NG, None given; FREQUENCY DEFINITIONS: C, continuous; W, Weekly; Q, quarterly; A, an

effort; E, Evaluate frequency after testing effectiveness; V, Varies according to project specific details; MONITORING TYPE DEFINITIONS: ST, Status & TrendsReconnaissance; <, less than; >, greater than; ≥, greater than or equal to; Reference number, numbered citations in Reference section]

Proposed priority for

long term monitoring Water issue Entity Monitoring objective Recommended monitorin
77

Channel Morphology and Habitat Related Monitoring—Continued

M

Riparian Habitat—Interim Riparian ManagementObjectives (RMO’s)

Forest Service, 1995, InlandNative Fish StrategyEnvironmental Assessment

Pool Frequencies —Maintain

according to channel widths, asdefined in EnvironmentalAssessment (EA)

NGh 

H Water Temperature—Maintain

to standards as specified in EA

NGh 

M Large Woody Debris (forested

systems) —Maintain asspecified in EA

NGh 

M Bank stability (nonforested

systems)—Maintain 80 percentstable

NGh 

M Lower Bank Angle

(nonforested systems)—Maintain 75 percent of bankswith < 90 degree angle(undercut)

NGh 

M Width/Depth Ratio—Maintain

< 10

NGh 

M Riparian Habitat Conservation

Areas (RHCA’s) —Maintainwidths and manage accordingto stream types as specified inEA

NGh 

M Water Quality—

Stream shading

CRITFC, 1996, ColumbiaRiver anadromous fishrestoration plan

Maintain according to landmanagement standards (nonumeric standard)

NG 

Table A–1. Water-quality monitoring objectives and recommendations from previous management plans, by topic, and their proposeterm monitoring in the upper and middle Deschutes River Basin—Continued

[Note that proposed priorities only apply to interagency, coordinated monitoring and do not reflect the importance of a specific issue locally, or the needs of specific IntertribalIntertribal Fish Commission; ODFW, Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife; OWRD, Oregon Water Resources Department; BLM, Bureau of Land ManWQ, water quality; temp., temperature; TSS, total suspended solids; turb., turbidity; LDR, Little Deschutes River; ab, above; Br, Bridge; DR, Deschutes River; blw, ft3/s, cubic feet per second; IGDO, Intergravel Dissolved Oxygen; NG, None given; FREQUENCY DEFINITIONS: C, continuous; W, Weekly; Q, quarterly; A, ann

effort; E, Evaluate frequency after testing effectiveness; V, Varies according to project specific details; MONITORING TYPE DEFINITIONS: ST, Status & Trends, Reconnaissance; <, less than; >, greater than; ≥, greater than or equal to; Reference number, numbered citations in Reference section]

Proposed priority for

long term monitoring Water issue Entity Monitoring objective Recommended monitorin
78

Aquatic Biota

L Fish Populations Forest Service, 1996, UDR

Comprehensive ManagementPlan

Determine fish populationtrends

ODFW measure spawner abundaredd counts

M Aquatic Sediment—

Macroinvertebrates Forest Service, 1990, Land & Resource Management Plan,

Deschutes National Forest

Maintain <20 percent negativechange in abundance of goodwater-quality indicator species(mayflies, stoneflies)e

Perform macroinvertebrate poputrend analysis (no specific methogiven) at indicator streams and risegments

L

Species Populations ODFW, 1999, Oregon Wildlife Diversity Plan

Assess, conserve, andenhance populations of nativespecies at self-sustaininglevels throughout theirnatural geographic range

Monitor populations of threateneendangered, and other species reqspecial management attention

L Monitor populations of common

species

L Macroinvertebrate

Community Structure

Forest Service, 1996, UDRComprehensive ManagementPlan

Determine short-term changesin water-quality and long-termtrends in fish food supply

Sample macroinvertebrates at 3 s(Bull Bend, Besson, Meadow)

aState water-quality standards for this constituent have changed since the cited document was prepared, so original document and (or) monito

be updated.

bSee ODEQ for relevant standards.cNo sampling or monitoring locations specified.dAlthough issue may be of high priority, the monitoring indicated is short term, limited in space, and is project oriented. It therefore may fall o

monitoring. Agencies conduct project specific monitoring.

eSpecific water bodies and locations defined in Appendix 11 of Forest Plan.fMeasure annually for first 5 years, then every 3 years thereafter.gImportant water bodies defined in Appendix 13 of Forest Plan.hMonitoring of activities affecting Riparian Habitat Conservation Areas (RHCA’s) are determined on a case-by-case basis after completion of 

PACFISH, section 7 for baseline values.

Table A–1. Water-quality monitoring objectives and recommendations from previous management plans, by topic, and their propose

term monitoring in the upper and middle Deschutes River Basin—Continued

[Note that proposed priorities only apply to interagency, coordinated monitoring and do not reflect the importance of a specific issue locally, or the needs of specific IntertribalIntertribal Fish Commission; ODFW, Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife; OWRD, Oregon Water Resources Department; BLM, Bureau of Land ManWQ, water quality; temp., temperature; TSS, total suspended solids; turb., turbidity; LDR, Little Deschutes River; ab, above; Br, Bridge; DR, Deschutes River; blw, ft3/s, cubic feet per second; IGDO, Intergravel Dissolved Oxygen; NG, None given; FREQUENCY DEFINITIONS: C, continuous; W, Weekly; Q, quarterly; A, ann

effort; E, Evaluate frequency after testing effectiveness; V, Varies according to project specific details; MONITORING TYPE DEFINITIONS: ST, Status & Trends, Reconnaissance; <, less than; >, greater than; ≥, greater than or equal to; Reference number, numbered citations in Reference section]

Proposed priority for

long term monitoring Water issue Entity Monitoring objective Recommended monitorin
79

 APPENDIX B. QUALITY-ASSURANCE TERMS

Quality-assurance (QA) programs will be critical to the success of monitoring. Good quality- c

(QC) data, and assessments of those data, can allow the comparison of data among agencies and ov

time, whereas poor quality-control data can prevent such comparisons. Final development of QA p

will not be possible until additional monitoring decisions have been made. As part of the implemen

of the Monitoring Plan, detailed QA plans will need to be developed and put into practice as appro

for each component of the plan, based on the principles outlined previously. It is the goal of all QA

programs to provide environmental data, using multiple sampling crews and analytical laboratories

have quantifiable bias, variability, and representativeness, along with detection levels that will allo

data to be comparable within a single dataset and a quality to meet the objectives of the monitoring

plan.The following presents a generalized description of important elements and aspects of quality

assurance.

There are three facets to any quality-assurance program of a monitoring plan. They are (1) qual

assurance elements, (2) quality-control data, and (3) quality assessment. These are the planned and

systematic procedures necessary to provide adequate confidence that monitoring data will satisfy

established requirements for quality.

Quality-Assurance elements are the procedures used to control those unmeasurable componen

monitoring program, such as sampling the wrong site or area, sampling at the wrong time, using th

wrong sampling equipment or materials, applying an inappropriate method or sequence of procedur

sample processing or sample analysis, and sample switching or incorrectly identifying samples. Exa

of QA elements include work plans identifying sampling locations and times, and protocols specify

equipment, sample processing and analytical methods, and supplies. Protocols may become standar

operating procedures to establish adequate data quality. Examples of the types of activities that cou

included in these elements are: ensuring that maintenance logs and calibration records are available 

every scientific instrument, specifying the type of materials acceptable for equipment and supplies

ensuring that the monitoring protocols are followed. Although not measurable, many monitoring

decisions and processes can be controlled through application of QA elements.

Quality-Control data are the data generated to estimate the magnitude of bias, variability and

representativeness in processes for obtaining environmental data. These processes include field pro

of sample collection, field processing, shipping, storage, and laboratory analysis.

Quality Assessment is the overall process of assessing the quality of the environmental data by

reviewing (1) the application of the QA elements and (2) the analysis of the QC data. Quality asses

encompasses both the measurable and unmeasurable factors affecting the quality of the environmen

data. Assessment of these factors may indicate limitations that require modifications to protocols o

standard operating procedures for sample collection and analysis or affect the desired interpretation 

use of the environmental data.

Definitions of terms used in this Monitoring Plan are provided below. It is suggested that assess

and reports for the plan use these same terms when discussing QA/QC procedures.

Bias—A systematic error inherent in a method or caused by some artifact or idiosyncrasy of th

measurement system. Bias may be either positive or negative.

Variability—The degree of variation in independent measurements as the result of repeated

application of the process under specific conditions.

Accuracy—The degree of agreement of a measured value with the true or expected value of th

quality concern.

Precision—The degree of mutual agreement characteristic of independent measurements as a re

repeated application of the process under specified conditions.
80

Representativeness—A measure of how well a point of measurement is representative of a cro

sectional average normalized for discharge or velocity.

Completeness—A measure of the data collected, compared to the data identified for collection 

monitoring plan.

Detection limits—A minimum concentration or value for which a constituent can be measured 

known reliability.

Precision is inversely related to variability (the greater the variability, the smaller the precision

Accuracy is a measure that incorporates both bias and variability.

The Monitoring Plan is designed to answer specific questions that have been established by the 

objectives. QC data are used to estimate the bias and (or) variability of environmental data. The QC

sampling program should, therefore, help to (1) qualify the interpretation of the environmental data 

(2) to identify the sources and magnitude of bias or variability in the environmental data. Examples 

samples are listed below:

Field blanks measure contamination in the sampling, field processing, shipping, holding area, 

analytical method. Contamination biases sample results.

Laboratory blanks measure sources of contamination in the laboratory.

Field blind standards/reference material measure bias due to field processing, shipping, hold

area, and analytical method. Standards are best used to measure bias between different

laboratories because the quantity of chemical in the sample is known (avoids the finger poi

exercise). Multiple uses of a standard can be used to measure variability.

Laboratory standards/reference material verify rating curves of analytical methods.

Field spikes determine if field spiking, shipping, storing, or analytical methods used can recov

quantity of spike added. To use this sample, the concentration in the environmental sample 

be known. This QC sample detects matrix interferences, breakdown of chemicals between t

spiking and analysis, and other processes that can result in gains or losses of contaminants. 

standards are not in the concentration range of interest, this may be used to supplement stan

Differences between laboratory spikes and field spikes can identify chemicals that are break

down between the times of spiking in the field and spiking in the laboratory. Multiple field 

sometimes can be more useful when measuring variability if most of the contaminants of in

are at concentrations less than the detection limit.

Field splits determine variability due to the field processing, shipping, holding, and analysis af

splitting or if there is a bias between laboratories. It should be recognized that if two labora

have differing answers, the true answer is not known, only the difference between the two r

(See field blind standards above).

Laboratory splits measure variability in the laboratory.

Field concurrent replicates measure variability due to sampling, field processing, shipping, st

and analysis.

Cross-section sampling and point sampling determine how representative a single sample is 

whole river. A depth and width integrated isokinetic (velocity weighted) sampling of the cr

section (Wilde and others., 1999) is the preferred sampling field procedure for suspended

material. When the concentration of suspended material is small or the constituents of intere

not affected by suspended material, depth and width integrated sampling is less important. 

there is a long reach (25- to 100-foot widths, depending on the depth of stream and roughne

channel) with no significant input of new waters or contaminants, a single sample at the cen
81

of the stream may be representative. For long-term monitoring of a fixed station over many 

it may be cost efficient to determine if a stream is mixed during various hydrologic conditio

as to allow single point sampling rather than the more expensive cross-section composite sam

each time. For example, the Washington Department of Ecology determined for total suspe

solids that the error in the Yakima River was minimal and that single-point depth-integrated

sampling data were comparable with data from cross-sectional composited samples (Joy an

Patterson, 1997).

For more information on QC samples and their use, see Wilde and others (1999) and Horowitz 

others (1994).
83

Printed onrecycledpaper