science 

uses

for a changing world

In cooperation with the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District

Water-Resources-Related Information for the 

Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District 

Planning Area, Wisconsin, 1970-2002

Water-Resources Investigations Report 03-4240

U.S. Department of the Interior 

U.S. Geological Survey

Water-Resources-Related Information 

for the Milwaukee Metropolitan 

Sewerage District Planning Area, 

Wisconsin, 1970-2002

By Morgan A. Schneider, Michelle A. Lutz, and Others

In cooperation with the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District

Water-Resources Investigations Report 03-4240

U.S. Department of the Interior 

U.S. Geological Survey
U.S. Department of the Interior

Gale A. Norton, Secretary

U.S. Geological Survey

Charles G. Groat, Director

U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia: 2004

For sale by U.S. Geological Survey, Information Services 

Box 25286, Denver Federal Center 

Denver, CO 80225

For more information about the USGS and its products:

Telephone: 1-888-ASK-USGS

World Wide Web: http://www.usgs.gov/

Any 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.
Ill

Contents

Abstract............................................................................. 1

Introduction ..........................................................................2

Purpose and scope...............................................................4

Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area ............................4

Location and surface-water features...........................................4

Texture of surficial deposits...................................................4

Land use/land cover and population............................................4

Compilation of water-resources-related information......................................10

Surface-water studies...........................................................10

Ecological studies...............................................................11

Geographic Information System data set inventory .................................. 11

Data used in the report ............................................................... 11

Spatial, temporal, and analytical extent of data .....................................11

Legacy data sources ............................................................12

Design of database-management system...........................................12

Limitations of data and their implications for data analyses........................... 12

Screening of data ...............................................................23

Evaluation of historical data ...........................................................24

Physical data, by Daniel J. Sullivan ................................................33

Streamflow, stream stage, and precipitation....................................34

Chemical indicators of water quality...............................................39

Selected field measurements and miscellaneous constituents....................39

pH, by Kevin D. Richards.................................................40

Alkalinity, by Kevin D. Richards...........................................46

Specific conductance, by Kevin D. Richards ...............................52

Hardness, by Kevin D. Richards ..........................................58

Dissolved oxygen, by Sharon A. Fitzgerald .................................64

Biochemical oxygen demand, 5 day, by Sharon A. Fitzgerald .................70

Chloride, by Kevin D. Richards............................................76

Sediment, by Sharon A. Fitzgerald.............................................82

Total suspended solids ..................................................82

Suspended sediment....................................................88

Nutrients, by Sharon A. Fitzgerald.............................................92

Total nitrogen ..........................................................92

Nitrate ................................................................96

Kjeldahl nitrogen ......................................................104

Total phosphorus...................................................... 108

Dissolved phosphorus.................................................. 114

Trace elements, by Kevin D. Richards.........................................119

Cadmium .............................................................120

Mercury............................................................. .126

Copper............................................................... 132
IV

Lead ................................................................. 138

Arsenic .............................................................. 144

Chromium ............................................................ 150

Nickel................................................................ 156

Zinc..................................................................162

Pesticides, by Daniel J. Sullivan ............................................. 167

Historically used pesticides.............................................168

Pesticides still in use................................................... 168

Polychlorinated biphenyls, by Sharon A. Fitzgerald............................. 172

Ecological indicators of water quality............................................. 179

Macroinvertebrates, by Barbara C. Scudder .................................. 180

Fish, by Daniel J. Sullivan ................................................... 188

Chlorophyll a, by Sharon A. Fitzgerald ........................................ 194

Habitat and geomorphic data, by Morgan A. Schneider.........................200

Bacteria, by Michelle A. Lutz................................................203

Fecal coliforms........................................................ 204

Escherichia coli ....................................................... 208

Potential areas for data collection for Phase II..........................................212

Summary and conclusions ...........................................................213

References cited....................................................................218

Figures

1-13. Maps showing:

1. Location of the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning

area, Wis. ............................................................... 3

2. Watersheds near the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District

planning area ............................................................ 5

3. Subwatersheds near the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District

planning area ............................................................ 6

4. Quaternary surficial deposits in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage

District planning area ..................................................... 7

5. Land-use inventory for the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District

planning area for 1995..................................................... 8

6. Population density in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District

planning area ............................................................ 9

7. Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Corridor Study database design.... 13

8. Locations of sites typically examined for seasonality and temporal trends

in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area .............. 28

9. Locations of sites sampled for streamflow, stream stage, or precipitation

since 1998 in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area .... 29

10. Locations of sites sampled for physical properties, nutrients, or inorganic 

constituents since 1998 in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District 

planning area ........................................................... 30

11. Locations of sites sampled for trace elements, pesticides, or organics

since 1998 in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area .... 31
12. Locations of sites sampled for bacterial, biological, or habitat data

since 1998 in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area .... 32

13. Locations of streamflow, stream stage, and precipitation gages in

the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area ................ 35

14-15. Graphs showing:

14. Seasonality of streamflow for selected sites in the Milwaukee

Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, 1970-2002 .................... 36

15. Trends of streamflow for selected sites in the Milwaukee Metropolitan

Sewerage District planning area, 1970-2002 ................................ 37

16. Map showing sites sampled for pH in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage

District planning area ......................................................... 41

17-19. Graphs showing:

17. Statistical distribution of pH measurements in the Milwaukee Metropolitan

Sewerage District planning area, 1970-2002 ................................ 42

18. Seasonality of pH for selected sites in the Milwaukee Metropolitan

Sewerage District planning area, 1970-2002 ................................ 43

19. Trends of pH for selected sites in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage

District planning area, 1970-2002 .......................................... 44

20. Map showing sites sampled for alkalinity in the Milwaukee Metropolitan

Sewerage District planning area ............................................... 47

21-23. Graphs showing:

21. Statistical distribution of alkalinity concentrations in the Milwaukee

Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, 1970-2002 .................... 48

22. Seasonality of alkalinity for selected sites in the Milwaukee Metropolitan

Sewerage District planning area, 1970-2002 ................................ 49

23. Trends of alkalinity for selected sites in the Milwaukee Metropolitan

Sewerage District planning area, 1970-2002 ................................ 50

24. Map showing sites sampled for specific conductance in the Milwaukee

Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area ................................... 53

25-27. Graphs showing:

25. Statistical distribution of specific conductance concentrations in the

Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, 1970-2002.......... 54

26. Seasonality of specific conductance for selected sites in the Milwaukee

Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, 1970-2002 .................... 55

27. Trends of specific conductance for selected sites in the Milwaukee

Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, 1970-2002 .................... 56

28. Map showing sites sampled for hardness in the Milwaukee Metropolitan

Sewerage District planning area ............................................... 59

29-30. Graphs showing:

29. Statistical distribution of hardness concentrations in the Milwaukee

Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, 1970-2002 .................... 60

30. Trends of hardness for selected sites in the Milwaukee Metropolitan

Sewerage District planning area, 1970-2002 ................................ 61

31. Map showing sites sampled for dissolved oxygen in the Milwaukee Metropolitan

Sewerage District planning area ............................................... 65

32-33. Graphs showing:

32. Statistical distribution of dissolved oxygen concentrations in the

Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, 1970-2002.......... 66

33. Seasonality of dissolved oxygen for selected sites in the Milwaukee

Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, 1970-2002 .................... 67
VI

34. Map showing sites sampled for 5-day biochemical oxygen demand in the

Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area......................... 71

35. Graph showing statistical distribution of biochemical oxygen demand, 5 day, 

concentrations in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, 

1970-2002 ................................................................... 74

36. Map showing sites sampled for chloride in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage 

District planning area......................................................... 77

37-39. Graphs showing:

37. Statistical distribution of chloride concentrations in the Milwaukee

Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, 1970-2002 .................... 78

38. Seasonality of chloride for selected sites in the Milwaukee Metropolitan

Sewerage District planning area, 1970-2002 ................................ 79

39. Trends of chloride for selected sites in the Milwaukee Metropolitan

Sewerage District planning area, 1970-2002 ................................ 80

40. Map showing sites sampled for total suspended solids in the Milwaukee

Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area ................................... 83

41-42. Graphs showing:

41. Statistical distribution of total suspended solids concentrations in the

Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, 1970-2002.......... 84

42. Seasonality of total suspended solids for selected sites in the Milwaukee

Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, 1970-2002 .................... 85

43. Map showing sites sampled for suspended sediment in the Milwaukee

Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area ................................... 89

44. Graph showing statistical distribution of suspended-sediment concentrations

in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, 1970-2002......... 90

45. Map showing sites sampled for total nitrogen in the Milwaukee Metropolitan

Sewerage District planning area ............................................... 93

46. Graph showing statistical distribution of total nitrogen concentrations in the

Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, 1970-2002 .............. 94

47. Map showing sites sampled for nitrate in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage

District planning area......................................................... 97

48-50. Graphs showing:

48. Statistical distribution of nitrate concentrations in the Milwaukee

Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, 1970-2002 .................... 98

49. Seasonality of nitrate for selected sites in the Milwaukee Metropolitan

Sewerage District planning area, 1970-2002 ................................ 99

50. Trends of nitrate for selected sites in the Milwaukee Metropolitan

Sewerage District planning area, 1970-2002 ............................... 102

51. Map showing sites sampled for Kjeldahl nitrogen in the Milwaukee Metropolitan

Sewerage District planning area .............................................. 105

52. Graph showing statistical distribution of Kjeldahl nitrogen concentrations in the

Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, 1970-2002 ............. 106

53. Map showing sites sampled for total phosphorus in the Milwaukee Metropolitan

District Sewerage planning area .............................................. 109

54. Graph showing statistical distribution of total phosphorus concentrations

in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, 1970-2002........ 112

55. Map showing sites sampled for dissolved phosphorus in the Milwaukee

Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area .................................. 115

56. Graph showing statistical distribution of dissolved phosphorus concentrations

in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, 1970-2002........ 116
VII

57. Maps showing sites sampled for cadmium in sediment in the Milwaukee

Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area .................................. 121

58. Graphs showing statistical distribution of cadmium concentrations in sediment

in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, 1970-2002........ 125

59. Map showing sites sampled for mercury in sediment in the Milwaukee

Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area .................................. 127

60. Graph showing statistical distribution of mercury concentrations in sediment

in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, 1970-2002........ 130

61. Map showing sites sampled for copper in sediment in the Milwaukee

Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area .................................. 133

62. Graph showing statistical distribution of copper concentrations in sediment

in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, 1970-2002........ 136

63. Map showing sites sampled for lead in sediment in the Milwaukee Metropolitan

Sewerage District planning area .............................................. 139

64. Graph showing statistical distribution of lead concentrations in sediment

in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, 1970-2002........ 142

65. Map showing sites sampled for arsenic in sediment in the Milwaukee

Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area .................................. 145

66. Graph showing statistical distribution of arsenic concentrations in sediment

in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, 1970-2002........ 148

67. Map showing sites sampled for chromium in sediment in the Milwaukee

Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area .................................. 151

68. Graph showing statistical distribution of chromium concentrations in sediment

in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, 1970-2002........ 154

69. Map showing sites sampled for nickel in sediment in the Milwaukee

Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area .................................. 157

70. Graph showing statistical distribution of nickel concentrations in sediment

in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, 1970-2002........ 160

71. Maps showing sites sampled for zinc in sediment in the Milwaukee Metropolitan

Sewerage District planning area .............................................. 163

72. Graph showing statistical distribution of zinc concentrations in sediment

in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, 1970-2002........ 166

73-76. Maps showing:

73. Sites sampled for pesticides in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage

District planning area ................................................... 169

74. Sites sampled for all polychlorinated biphenyls in water, sediment, and

tissue in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area ....... 173

75. Sites sampled for toxic polychlorinated biphenyls in water and sediment

in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area ............. 176

76. Sites sampled for macroinvertebrates with percent Ephemeroptera, 

Plecoptera, and Trichoptera in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage 

District planning area ................................................... 181

77. Graph showing statistical distribution of percent Ephemeroptera, Plecoptera, 

and Trichoptera in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning 

area, 1970-2002............................................................. 182

78. Map showing sites sampled for macroinvertebrates with Hilsenhoff Biotic

Index scores in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area ..... 184

79. Graph showing statistical distribution of Hilsenhoff Biotic Index scores

in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, 1970-2002........ 185
VIII

80-82. Maps showing:

80. Sites sampled for fish in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District

planning area .......................................................... 189

81. Sites sampled for fish with Index of Biotic Integrity scores for data since

1990 in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area......... 192

82. Sites sampled for chlorophyll a in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage

District planning area ................................................... 195

83-85. Graphs showing:

83. Statistical distribution of chlorophyll a concentrations in the Milwaukee

Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, 1970-2002 ................... 196

84. Seasonality of chlorophyll a for selected sites in the Milwaukee

Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, 1970-2002 ................... 197

85. Trends of chlorophyll a for selected sites in the Milwaukee Metropolitan

Sewerage District planning area, 1970-2002 ............................... 198

86-87. Maps showing:

86. Sites sampled for habitat and geomorphic data in the Milwaukee

Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area ............................. 201

87. Sites sampled for fecal coliforms in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage

District planning area ................................................... 205

88. Graph showing statistical distribution of fecal coliform counts in the Milwaukee

Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, 1970-2002........................ 206

89. Map showing sites sampled for Escherichia coli'm the Milwaukee Metropolitan

Sewerage District planning area .............................................. 209

90. Graph showing statistical distribution of Escherichia co//counts in the Milwaukee 

Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, 1970-2002........................ 210

Tables

1. Characteristics and description of studies pertaining to surface-water quality

of the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, by Erin E. Wittig... 232

2. Characteristics and description of studies pertaining to surface-water quantity 

and flow of the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, 

by Erin E. Wittig ............................................................. 253

3. Characteristics and description of studies pertaining to ecology of the

Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, by Erin E. Wittig ........ 267

4. Selected GIS Coverages available for the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage

District planning area........................................................ 283

5. Data sources for the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Corridor

Study database .............................................................. 14

6. Properties and constituents used in calculating statistics for summary-statistics

tables, maps, and boxplots .................................................... 16

7. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Wisconsin Department of Natural

Resources, and Canadian water- and sediment-quality guidelines.................. 26

8-49. Summary statistics for constituents, by category, for the Milwaukee Metropolitan 

Sewerage District planning area, 1970-2002:

8. Streamflow, stream stage, and precipitation ................................ 38

9. pH ..................................................................... 45

10. Alkalinity ............................................................... 51

11. Specific conductance.................................................... 57
IX

12. Hardness............................................................... 62

13. Dissolved oxygen........................................................ 68

14. Biochemical oxygen demand, 5 day........................................72

15. Chloride................................................................ 81

16. Total suspended solids................................................... 86

17. Suspended sediment..................................................... 91

18. Total nitrogen ........................................................... 95

19. Nitrate ................................................................ 100

20. Kjeldahl nitrogen ....................................................... 107

21. Total phosphorus ....................................................... 110

22. Dissolved phosphorus................................................... 117

23. Cadmium in water...................................................... 122

24. Cadmium in sediment ................................................... 124

25. Mercury in water....................................................... 128

26. Mercury in sediment.................................................... 129

27. Copper in water........................................................ 134

28. Copper in sediment..................................................... 135

29. Lead in water .......................................................... 140

30. Lead in sediment ....................................................... 141

31. Arsenic in water........................................................ 146

32. Arsenic in sediment..................................................... 147

33. Chromium in water...................................................... 152

34. Chromium in sediment................................................... 153

35. Nickel in water......................................................... 158

36. Nickel in sediment...................................................... 159

37. Zinc in water........................................................... 164

38. Zinc in sediment........................................................ 165

39. Pesticides in sediment, tissue, and water.................................. 170

40. All polychlorinated biphenyls in water..................................... 174

41. All polychlorinated biphenyls in sediment and tissue........................ 175

42. Toxic polychlorinated biphenyls in water and sediment...................... 177

43. Percent Ephemeroptera, Plecoptera,Trichoptera........................... 183

44. Hilsenhoff Biotic Index scores............................................ 186

45. Fish................................................................... 190

46. Chlorophyll a........................................................... 199

47. Habitat assessment and geomorphic data ................................. 202

48. Fecal coliforms......................................................... 207

49. Escherichia coli ........................................................ 211
Conversion Factors, Datums, and Abbreviated 

Water-Quality Units

Multiply By To obtain

mile (mi) 1.609 kilometer (km)

square mile (mi2) 2.59 square kilometer (km2)

cubic feet per second (ft3/s) 0.02583 cubic meter per second (m3/s) ____

Temperature, in degrees Celsius (°C) can be converted to degrees Fahrenheit (°F) by use of the 

following equation:

°F = [1.8(°C)] + 32.

Vertical datum: In this report, "sea level" refers to the National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929 

(NGVD of 1929)—a geodetic datum derived from a general adjustment of the first-order level nets 

of both the United States and Canada, formerly called Sea Level Datum of 1929.

Abbreviated water- and sediment-quality units: Chemical concentrations and water temperature 

are given in metric units. Chemical concentration is given in milligrams per liter (mg/L), micrograms per liter (|ig/L), micrograms per gram (|ig/g), or milligrams per cubic meter (mg/m3). Milligrams per liter is a unit expressing the concentration of chemical constituents in solution as 

weight (milligrams) of solute per unit volume (liter) of water. One thousand micrograms per liter is 

equivalent to one milligram per liter. For concentrations less than 7,000 mg/L, the numerical value 

is the same as for concentrations in parts per million. One microgram per liter is equivalent to 

one milligram per meter cubed. Micrograms per gram (|ig/g) is a unit expressing the concentration of chemical constituents in solution as weight (micrograms) of solute per unit mass (gram) of 

water.

Specific conductance is expressed in microsiemens per centimeter (|uS/cm), the electrical conductivity of water measured between opposite faces of a centimeter cube of aqueous solution at 

a specified temperature.
List of Abbreviations

XI

AO

as As

BOD

BOD5

asCaC03

CCC

asCd

asCI

CMC

as Cr

as Cu

DO

EPT

GIS

HBI

as Hg

IBI

IMAC

IQR

ISQG

ISS

asK

MAC

MCL

MCLG

MMSD

as N

as Na

as Ni

asN03

asP

PAHs

asPb

PCBs

PEC

PEL

PPCPs

SC

SDWR

SEWRPC

SMCL

SQGs

SRP

STORE!

TEC

TSS

HAL

USEPA

USGS

VOCs

WDNR

asZn

Aesthetic Objective

as quantified as measured arsenic

Biochemical oxygen demand (no duration implied)

Biochemical oxygen demand, 5-day

as quantified as measured calcium carbonate

Criterion Continuous Concentration

as quantified as measured cadmium

as quantified as measured chloride

Criterion Maximum Concentration

as quantified as measured chromium

as quantified as measured copper

dissolved oxygen

Ephemeroptera, Plecoptera, and Trichoptera

Geographic Information Systems

Hilsenhoff Biotic Index

as quantified as measured mercury

Index of Biotic Integrity

Interim Maximum Acceptable Concentration

Interquartile range

Interim Sediment Quality Guideline

Inline Storage System ("the deep tunnel")

as quantified as measured potassium

Maximum Acceptable Concentration

Maximum Contaminant Level

Maximum Contaminant Level Goal

Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District

as quantified as measured nitrogen

as quantified as measured sodium

as quantified as measured nickel

as quantified as measured nitrate

as quantified as measured phosphorus

Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons

as quantified as measured lead

Polychlorinated biphenyls

Probable Effect Concentration

Probable Effect Level

pharmaceutical and personal care products

specific conductance

Secondary Drinking Water Regulation

Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission

Secondary Maximum Contaminant Level

Sediment Quality Guidelines

soluble reactive phosphorus

STOrage and RETrieval System

Threshold Effect Concentration

Total suspended solids

Treatment Techniques Action Level

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

U.S. Geological Survey

Volatile organic compounds

Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources

as quantified as measured zinc
XII

Acknowledgments

Technical Reviewers

Dale M. Robertson, Research Hydrologist, U.S. Geological Survey, Middleton, Wis. 

David Kendziorski, Stormtech, Inc., Milwaukee, Wis.

Technical Support

Charles A. Peters, Chief Supervisory Hydrologist, U.S. Geological Survey, Middleton, Wis. 

Jana S. Stewart, Geographer, U.S. Geological Survey, Middleton, Wis. 

Robert A. Rose, Geographer, U.S. Geological Survey, Middleton, Wis. 

David A. Saad, Hydrologist/Geology, U.S. Geological Survey, Middleton, Wis. 

Faith A. Fitzpatrick, Research Hydrologist, U.S. Geological Survey, Middleton, Wis. 

Rebecca A. Woll, Hydrologic Technician, U.S. Geological Survey, Middleton, Wis. 

Matthew W. Diebel, Hydrologic Technician, U.S. Geological Survey, Middleton, Wis. 

Mark Corsentino, (formerly) Student Trainee (Civil Engineer), U.S. Geological Survey, 

Middleton, Wis.

Editorial and Graphics

Michael Eberle, Lead Technical Editor, U.S. Geological Survey, Columbus, Ohio 

Leah N. Hout, Editor, U.S. Geological Survey, Columbus, Ohio 

Michelle M. Greenwood, Cartographer, U.S. Geological Survey, Middleton, Wis. 

Susan Z. Jones, Editorial Assistant, U.S. Geological Survey, Middleton, Wis.

Approving Official

Dorothy Tepper, Reports Improvement Advisor, U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Va.
Water-Resources-Related Information for the 

Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning 

Area, Wisconsin, 1970-2002

By Morgan A. Schneider, Michelle A. Lutz, and Others

Abstract

The Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District 

(MMSD) Corridor Study is a three-phase project designed to 

improve the understanding of water resources in the stream 

corridors of the MMSD planning area by initially compiling 

existing data and using the compiled information to develop 

3-year baseline and long-term monitoring plans. This report 

is one of the products of Phase I of the Corridor Study.

A literature review of surface-water-quality, surfacewater-quantity, and ecology studies conducted from 1970 

through 2001 was completed and is summarized in this 

report. An inventory of Geographic Information System spatial coverages available for the MMSD planning area has 

been assembled.

A database of water, sediment, and tissue (fish, shellfish, and others) chemistry, macroinvertebrates, fish, algae, 

habitat, geomorphic, and other physical and ecological data 

was compiled from data sets from MMSD, U.S. Geological 

Survey, Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, and 

the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. More than 2.7 

million results are available in the MMSD Corridor Study 

database and the compilation of multiple datasets allows for 

retrieving data from a central database rather than from each 

of the source datasets. Data for 1970 through 2002 were collected for the 420-square-mile planning area by various 

agencies using different field data-collection and laboratoryanalysis methods. Chemical constituents and ecological 

components that are important to an urban setting and well 

represented in the database were selected for further investigation. Each constituent or component is described in this 

report with some or all of the following: a text summary, 

map of sampling locations, and in some cases median concentrations, statistical distributions of concentrations by subwatershed, table of summary statistics by subwatershed, and 

graphs of temporal and (or) seasonal trends.

Physical data presented in the report include streamflow, stream stage, and precipitation data. Chemical indicators of water quality presented in the report include field 

measurements and miscellaneous constituents (pH, alkalinity, specific conductance, hardness, dissolved oxygen, biochemical oxygen demand, and chloride), sediment (total suspended solids and suspended sediment), nutrients (total 

nitrogen, nitrate, Kjeldahl nitrogen, total phosphorus, and 

dissolved phosphorus), trace elements (cadmium, mercury, 

copper, lead, arsenic, chromium, nickel, and zinc), pesticides 

(historically used pesticides and pesticides still in use), and 

polychlorinated biphenyls. Ecological indicators of water 

quality discussed in the report include community surveys of 

macroinvertebrates and fish, chlorophyll a concentrations, 

habitat assessments and channel-measurement data, and 

fecal coliform and E. coli bacterial counts.

In addition to the compilation of the database, a major 

purpose of this investigation was to identify additional sampling that should be conducted under the baseline monitoring 

phase, which will be the second phase of the Corridor Study. 

Additional sampling may include:

• Some subwatersheds, such as those in the 

headwaters.

• Emerging contaminants such as pharmaceuticals 

and personal care products (PPCPs), human 

hormones, organic wastewater contaminants, and 

other constituents that result from human activity.

• E. coli, which can serve as an indicator of health risk 

to swimmers and other recreationl water users.

• Pesticides in all media.

• PCBs.

• Trace elements in water, bed sediment, and tissues 

(fish, shellfish, and others).

• Samples during winter months or during early 

snowmelt episodes to address constituents such as 

chloride and some nutrients that have seasonal variability and that may be affected by factors such as 

road deicing during the winter.

• Samples for macroinvertebrate and fish-community 

data and habitat assessments.

• Physical data such as stream-channel cross-section 

profiles, bridge-scour assessments, flood-plain 

maps, structures, and shoreline conditions.
2 Water-Resources-Related Information for the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin

Introduction

Stream-water quality and the ecological health of urban 

stream corridors are complex issues that drive research, regulation, and use of rivers and streams. Personnel from agencies and universities involved in such pursuits in the southeastern Wisconsin area have worked cooperatively to assess 

the recent history of urban streams and to use that knowledge 

to evaluate future stream-improvement projects to determine 

their likely success before implementation, thus allowing 

projects with greatest potential to receive priority. With the 

expertise of those from the planning, regulatory, and nonregulatory fields, as well as academicians and engineers, the 

Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District (MMSD) Corridor Study has been approached from a broad-based perspective with the intention of promoting sound resource-based 

management decisions.

The MMSD Corridor Study is a collaborative project 

undertaken by MMSD, Wisconsin Department of Natural 

Resources (WDNR), Southeastern Wisconsin Regional 

Planning Commission (SEWRPC), U.S. Geological Survey 

(USGS), University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, Marquette 

University, and Wisconsin Lutheran College. The primary 

purpose of the study is to ascertain the current state of water 

quality and ecological health in the stream "corridors" of the 

MMSD planning area (fig. 1) and provide knowledge and 

tools with which to assess the potential success of future 

projects.

A stream "corridor" is defined as the land within the 

greatest distance from the watercourse marked by:

• the SEWRPC primary or secondary environmental 

corridor boundary

• the 100-year regulatory floodplain boundary

• the edge of an adjoining wetland, or

• 75 feet from the watercourse channel or shoreline. 

The objectives of the MMSD Corridor Study are:

1. Evaluate historic results and forecast potential effects 

of planned MMSD projects. Select analytical tools and 

procedures to assess the outcome of past MMSD 

projects and develop an understanding from which to 

forecast the effects of potential future projects. Types 

of projects to be evaluated include, but are not limited 

to, historical and planned flood control projects that 

involve the modification of watercourse channels 

and/or their corridor by deepening, widening, or 

enclosing; the placement or removal of material or 

structures on the channel or its corridor; habitat 

enhancements; structure removal; land purchases for 

conservation purposes; and water pollution abatement 

projects.

2. Create a comprehensive inventory of corridor

conditions. Develop an improved understanding of the 

interrelationship of stream physiographic, hydrologic,

hydraulic, biologic, water quality, sediment quality, 

habitat, and land-use variables, and develop 

procedures to integrate these variables.

3. Establish a baseline assessment of existing 

watercourse and corridor conditions. Detect 

impairments for each reach.

4. Determine the existing and potential water-use 

objectives for watercourse reaches.

5. Follow-up on flood control, habitat, and water-quality 

improvement or protection projects to verify 

anticipated results, evaluate current technologies, and 

identify adjustments for future projects.

6. Provide long-term surveillance of stream and corridor 

conditions to monitor project results, track changes in 

impaired and unimpaired reaches, provide additional 

inventory information, and facilitate early detection of 

newly impaired reaches.

The study is divided into three phases. Phase I involved 

the development of a database to contain data collected in the 

MMSD planning area since 1970. The MMSD Corridor 

Study database contains data from MMSD, USGS, WDNR, 

and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). 

Additional data sets, including some provided by local universities and volunteer groups, will likely continue to be 

incorporated into the database as the study progresses. The 

database is available for query to those within the cooperating agencies to assist in informal decision-making processes. 

Data in the database can be examined to provide insight into 

the success of past MMSD and other agency projects, and to 

assess future data needs.

Phase II involves a rigorous field effort to fill the data 

needs highlighted during the Phase I review. The baseline 

inventory will include assessments of surface-water chemistry, sediment chemistry, and ecological factors (fish, habitat, 

macroinvertebrates, algae, bacteria) at a number of sites in 

the MMSD planning area. Staff from multiple agencies will 

likely cooperatively collect the data. Data collected during 

the baseline monitoring effort will reveal more information 

regarding the state of the stream corridors not available from 

the database developed in Phase I and will assist waterresources managers in regulatory agencies in decision-making.

Phase III will involve a long-term data collection effort 

at a subset of the baseline monitoring sites. The length of 

time over which sample collection will take place for the 

long-term monitoring effort has not been decided but may be 

indefinite. Long-term monitoring will document changes in 

the health of aquatic ecosystems in the stream corridors of 

the MMSD planning area.
Introduction

88°07'30" 87°52'30"

43M51 -.

Menomoifee 

River

WISCONSIN m

MMSD

Planning

Area

/*~\J Subwatershed boundary 

County boundary 

Streams

tako Michigan 

Oirad

Base composited from Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission regional base 

map, 1:2,000,1995; U.S. Geological Survey digital line graph hydrography, 1:100,000,2001; Wisconsin 

Department of Natural Resources version 2 hydrography, 1:24,000,2002. Wisconsin Transverse 

Mercator Projection, referenced to North American Datum of 1983,1991 adjustment.

Figure 1. Location of the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District (MMSD) planning area, Wis.
4 Water-Resources-Related Information for the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin

Purpose and Scope

This report summarizes the data in the MMSD Corridor 

Study database and other information developed in Phase I 

of the MMSD Corridor Study that began in January 2001 and 

ended in March 2003. The database was compiled from 

agencies maintaining electronically accessible data describing water, sediment, and tissue chemistry, macroinvertebrates, fish, algae, habitat, geomorphic, and other physical 

and ecological measurements. Data were assembled for 1970 

through 2002 for sites within the MMSD planning area. 

Also, 274 studies published from 1970 through 2001 and 

describing an aspect of water quality, water quantity, or ecology from within the MMSD planning area were reviewed. 

Spatial data available from federal, state, and local agencies 

for the MMSD planning area were inventoried.

Physical, chemical, and ecological data from the database are summarized in this report with some or all of the following: a text summary, map of sampling locations, and in 

some cases median concentrations, statistical distributions of 

concentrations by subwatershed, table of summary statistics 

by subwatershed, and graphs of temporal and (or) seasonal 

trends. Physical data presented in the report include streamflow, stream stage, and precipitation data. Chemical indicators of water quality presented in the report include field 

measurements and miscellaneous constituents (pH, alkalinity, specific conductance, hardness, dissolved oxygen, biochemical oxygen demand, and chloride), sediment (total suspended solids and suspended sediment), nutrients (total 

nitrogen, nitrate, Kjeldahl nitrogen, total phosphorus, and 

dissolved phosphorus), trace elements (cadmium, mercury, 

copper, lead, arsenic, chromium, nickel, and zinc), pesticides 

(historically used pesticides and pesticides still in use), and 

polychlorinated biphenyls. Ecological indicators of water 

quality discussed in the report include community surveys of 

macroinvertebrates and fish, chlorophyll a concentrations, 

habitat assessments and channel-measurement data, and 

fecal coliform and E. coli bacterial counts.

Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District 

Planning Area

Within the MMSD planning area, concentrations of 

various constituents in surface water, sediment, and tissues; 

the diversity and populations offish and macroinvertebrates; 

and the state of habitat and stream morphology may be influenced by multiple factors. Selected physical features of the 

planning area that may influence the chemistry and ecology 

are described below.

Location and Surface-Water Features

The MMSD planning area (fig. 1) is a 420-mi2 area 

covering Milwaukee County and parts of Washington, Ozaukee, Waukesha, and Racine Counties. MMSD collects and 

analyzes wastewater from all Milwaukee County municipalities (except South Milwaukee), as well as 10 communities 

in the surrounding 4 counties.

Seven major watersheds (fig. 2) and parts or all of 40 

subwatersheds (fig. 3) make up the planning area (Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission, 2002a; 

Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission, 

2002b). The Milwaukee River watershed accounts for a little 

less than 25 percent of the total planning area. More than 85 

percent of the entire Milwaukee River watershed is outside 

of the planning area. The Menomonee River watershed 

makes up a little more than 30 percent of the planning area 

and is almost entirely within the planning area. The Upper 

Root River watershed accounts for 17 percent of the planning area; a little more than a third of the entire Root River 

watershed area is within the planning area. The Upper Fox 

River watershed makes up approximately 10 percent of the 

planning area and is the only part of the planning area that 

does not drain to Lake Michigan (it drains eventually to the 

Mississippi River). The Kinnickinnic and Oak Creek watersheds are completely within the planning area and constitute 

6 and 7 percent of the total planning area, respectively. The 

remaining 5 percent of the planning area drains directly to 

Lake Michigan.

Texture of Surficial Deposits

Surficial deposits in the MMSD planning area consist 

predominantly of clayey till, ground and end moraine 

(fig. 4). There are some areas of sandy loamy till in the 

northwest corner of the MMSD planning area and "outwash 

sand and gravel" and "lake clay and silt" in various parts of 

the planning area (Lineback and others, 1983).

Land Use/Land Cover and Population

The MMSD planning area is heavily urbanized in the 

center but largely agricultural in the northern and southern 

parts of the study area (fig. 5). Two-thirds of the planning 

area is urban land use, consisting of commercial, industrial, 

and other areas (17 percent); residential areas (26 percent); 

transportation infrastructure and rights-of-way (21 percent); 

and recreational areas (3 percent). Twenty percent of the 

planning area is agricultural. Another 3 percent of the planning area is forested. Wetlands make up 7 percent of the 

planning area, and another 2 percent is open water (generalized from Southeastern Regional Planning Commission, 

1995b).

The population (fig. 6) of the MMSD planning area is 

1,092,624, according to data from the 2000 census, for 

which a population density of 2,618 people per square mile 

was calculated (U.S. Bureau of the Census, 2001). In 1990, 

the planning-area population was slightly less than in 2000, 

at 1,090,046 people (U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1991).
Introduction

EXPLANATION

MMSD planning area 

/~\j Watershed boundary 

County

Milwaukee

River 

Watershed

Direct

Tributary

Watershed

enomon 

River' 

stcrsHsd Dodge Co. [ Washington Co. 

Jefferson Co. I Waukesha Co.

Kinnickinnic 

River Watershed

Lake Michigan 

Direct Watershed

Oak Creek 

Watershed

Root River 

Watershed WalworthCo, i Racine Co, 

O

Direct

Tributary

Watershed

Base composited from Southeastern Wisconsin Regional 

! Planning Commission regional base map, 1:2,000,1995.

Wisconsin Transverse Mercator Projection, referenced to 

I North American Datum of 1983,1991 adjustment.

Figure 2. Watersheds near the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District (MMSD) planning area, Wis.
6 Water-Resources-Related Information for the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin

88°07'30' 87 52'30"

43°15'

43°

North Branch 

Menomonee 

River \

EXPLANATION

Lakes

MMSD planning area 

/*\j Watershed boundary 

S"\J Subwatershed boundary

Streams

Lake

Michigan 

Direct

IA/-II - U PPer 'mr-X-Wav

Willow ' Menomonee -.Channel

Creek J River / 7

Little

Menomonee

River

Milwaukee River 

Non-Contributing

Lower

Menomonee 

S^uth Branch River i 

Underwood i 

Creek Lake Michigan 

Direct

Cherokee Park Creek 

Wilson Park Creek

\

Mitche 

Field Whitnall Park 

Creeks Brainagg Lower 

Ditch Oak 

North Creek 

Branch ~ 

Oak t 

Creek I

f Middle

Upper ' ^ 

Oak Cree

Lake Michigan 

Direct

Base composited from Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission regional base 

map, 1:2,000,1995; U.S. Geological Survey digital line graph hydrography, 1:100,000,2001; Wisconsin 

Department of Natural Resources version 2 hydrography, 1:24,000,2002. Wisconsin Transverse 

Mercator Projection, referenced to North American Datum of 1983,1991 adjustment.

Figures. Subwatersheds near the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District (MMSD) planning area, Wis.
Introduction

87°52'30"

43°15' -

EXPLANATION

Lakes

Quaternary surficial

deposits

Clayey till, ground 

moraine (calcareous)

Sandy loamy till, 

ground moraine

Sandy loamy till, 

end moraine

MMSD planning area 

f\J Watershed boundary 

/~\J Subwatershed boundary

Streams

I Base composited from Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission regional base 

map, 1:2,000,1995; U.S. Geological Survey digital line graph hydrography, 1:100,000,2001; Wiscon 

Department of Natural Resources version 2 hydrography, 1:24,000,2002; Lineback and others 

surficial deposits, 1:1,000,000,1983. Wisconsin Transverse Mercator Projection, referenced to 

North American Datum of 1983,1991 adjustment.

Figure 4. Quaternary surficial deposits in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District (MMSD) planning area 

Wis.
8 Water-Resources-Related Information for the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin

88°07'30" 87°52'30"

43°15'

Land-use categories

Residential: 

^ high density

Residential: 

^ medium density 

-i Residential: 

— -J low density

I I Residential:

I -——— I suburban density

• 

Commercial, 

industrial, 

government, other

Woodland 

Open water 

MMSD planning area

1:4,800,1995. Wisconsin Transverse Mercator Projection, referenced to North American Datum 

of 1983,1991 adjustment.

Figures. Land-use inventory for the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District (MMSD) planning area, Wis., for 

1995.
Introduction 9

88°07'30" 870 52'30"

EXPLANATION

Lakes

Subwatershed, number 

of people per 30 square 

meters

| | 0.01 - 0.50 

0.51 -1.00

HH 1.01-5.00

^11 5.01 - 70.00 

MMSD planning area 

V"\y Watershed boundary

Subwatershed boundary 

Streams

Base composited from Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission regional base 

map, 1:2,000,1995; U.S. Geological Survey digital line graph hydrography, 1:100,000,2001; Wiscon 

Department of Natural Resources version 2 hydrography, 1:24,000,2002; U.S. Bureau of the Census 

census of population and housing, 2000. Wisconsin Transverse Mercator Projection, referenced 

to North American Datum of 1983,1991 adjustment.

Figure 6. Population density in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District (MMSD) planning area, Wis.
10 Water-Resources-Related Information for the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin

Compilation of Water-ResourcesRelated Information

A literature review was completed for surface-water 

(quality and quantity) and aquatic-biology studies in the 

major watersheds in the planning area. The studies compiled 

were those readily available from literature searches through 

university libraries and inquiries to local, State, and Federal 

agencies, and academic institutions. An effort was made to 

find documents from all relevant and available studies, 

although some sources likely were missed.

An inventory of spatial data for the planning area was 

assembled for regional, statewide, and national GIS (Geographic Information Systems) coverages that were relevant 

to the MMSD Corridor Study. Inquiries were made to local, 

State, and Federal agencies to compile a list of pertinent GIS 

information; however, spatial data covering only a small part 

of the MMSD planning area were not included. Additional 

GIS coverages are available from local units of government 

for parts of the MMSD planning area but this list includes 

primarily data for the entire MMSD planning area. Coupling 

sampling-site information as stored in the MMSD Corridor 

Study database with spatial data such as land use, pointsource discharge locations, or census data can provide a 

more complete picture of the state of surface-water resources 

in the MMSD planning area than can the contents of the database alone.

Surface-Water Studies

A total of 195 documents that describe the surfacewater quality of the planning area were found, and a total of 

133 documents regarding surface-water quantity studies 

were located. Results of the surface-water quality and quantity reviews are summarized as to spatial extent (local, 

regional, statewide) and major thrust of the study in tables 1 

and 2 (at back of report).

Each water-quality study document was reviewed to 

determine whether it contained information related to one or 

more of the following categories: lake or stream information, 

field measurements (pH, specific conductance, water temperature, dissolved oxygen), major ions and (or) dissolved 

solids, nutrients, pesticides, dissolved and (or) total organic 

carbon, sediment, bacteria and (or) viruses, trace elements, 

volatile organic compounds (VOCs), polycyclic aromatic 

hydrocarbons (PAHs), polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), 

dioxins, inorganic and organic contaminants, wastewatertreatment plants, urban issues, modeling, or other significant 

water-quality issues.

Of the surface-water quality documents reviewed in 

this report, 45 percent (87) were from studies completed 

since 1990 and the remainder were published between 1970 

and 1989. More studies had a local focus (126) than a statewide or regional scope (69). More than 70 percent (139) of

studies addressed stream issues, the remainder described 

lake or harbor conditions. Many study documents contained 

data or a discussion of analysis for field measurements (98 

studies), major ions or dissolved solids (89), nutrients (112), 

pesticides (29), dissolved or total organic carbon (13), sediment (85), bacteria or viruses (57), trace elements (73), or 

contaminants such as VOCs, PAHs, PCBs, dioxins, inorganic or organic contaminants (57). Several documents referenced wastewater treatment with discussions on the Inline 

Storage System (Ab Razak, 1999), creation of a model to 

determine the effect of combined sewer overflows on dissolved oxygen (Kreutzberger and others, 1980), and plans 

for sanitary service to various communities in the Milwaukee area, including Oak Creek (Southeastern Wisconsin 

Regional Planning Commission, 1994). Studies addressing 

urban issues included topics such as the effect of aircraft and 

runway deicers from General Mitchell International Airport 

on biochemical oxygen demand and dissolved oxygen concentrations in Wilson Park Creek and the Kinnickinnic River 

(Corsi and others, 200la), the effects of spraying methoxychlor to control Dutch elm disease on stream-water quality in 

the Lincoln Creek watershed (Kleinert, 1971), and the control of nonpoint-source pollution in the Milwaukee River 

(Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources and others, 

1990b). Studies that involved models included a calibrated 

Lincoln Creek model designed to evaluate the effect of snow 

removal and deicing practices on the water quality of urban 

waters (Bartosova and Novotny, 1999); a model for the Milwaukee area designed to predict effects of industry on water 

quality (Stanley and Erickson, 1977); and a model created to 

estimate nonpoint-source pollution and its sources based on 

eight watersheds in Milwaukee County (Sung, 1983).

Each water-quantity study document was reviewed to 

determine whether it contained information related to one or 

more of the following categories: lake or stream information, 

streamflow or stream stage, extreme flows (floods or 

drought), hydrologic budget, erosion and (or) sedimentation, 

runoff calculations, modeling, precipitation and (or) climate, 

geomorphology, urban issues, or other significant waterquantity issues.

Slightly less than half of the surface-water-quantity 

study documents (57) had been published since 1990. Twothirds (91) of the studies had a local focus, whereas the rest 

discussed surface-water quantity issues regionally or statewide. About 80 percent (106) of the documents referred to 

streams, and a few focused on the Milwaukee Harbor or 

lakes (primarily Little or Big Muskego Lakes). About 75 

study documents (56 percent) discussed streamflow, and 28 

documents (21 percent) referenced extreme high and (or) 

low flows. Slightly less than 25 percent of the documents 

(31) discussed erosion and sedimentation issues in surface 

water in the MMSD planning area, and another 25 percent 

(39) considered the geomorphology of streams. Urban issues 

such as stormwater pollution (Bannerman and others, 1983a; 

Bannerman and others, 1983b), the effects of urban development on streams (Cherkauer 1975a, Cherkauer 1975b), and
Data Used in the Report 11

the effects of runoff from construction sites and erosion of 

streambanks in the Kinmckinnic River watershed (Taylor, 

1994) were examined. Modeling studies included an examination of the effects of removing the North Avenue Dam on 

the Milwaukee River (Hajda, 1993), the influence of ground 

water on the Menomonee River (Konrad and others, 1979), 

and the effect of snowmelt runoff in urban areas (Novotny, 

1986). Five documents by MMSD described plans for interceptor facilities in various communities around Milwaukee 

that would be used to convey sanitary waste to the sewage 

treatment plant. SEWRPC and the WDNR completed 

numerous studies describing flooding potential, water quality, and nonpoint-source pollution on watersheds in the 

MMSD planning area (15 SEWRPC studies and 11 WDNR 

studies).

Ecological Studies

A total of 136 study documents were found that relate 

to ecology in the planning area. Each document is summarized in table 3 (at back of report) with regard to spatial 

extent (local, regional, statewide) and major thrust of the 

study.

Ecology study documents were reviewed to determine 

whether they contained information for any of the following 

categories: lake or stream information, fish, macroinvertebrates, algae and (or) macrophytes, amphibians and (or) reptiles, birds, mussels, wildlife, toxic bioassays, endangered 

and (or) threatened species, tolerant or intolerant species, 

nonnative or invasive species, habitat, wetlands, human 

effects and (or) urban issues, community surveys, management issues, water-quality interpretations based on ecology, 

biotic index scores, or other significant ecological issues.

The number of documents published before 1990 and 

since were evenly split. A slight majority of the studies (77) 

were of statewide or regional scope, whereas the remainder 

addressed local issues. Study documents described many 

sorts of organisms associated with the stream corridors, 

including fish (58), macroinvertebrates (35), algae and (or) 

macrophytes (29), amphibians and (or) reptiles (14), birds 

(16), mussels (3), and various wildlife (16). Twenty-five percent of the documents (34) discussed habitat conditions, and 

another 10 percent (14) referred to wetlands. Sixteen documents presented biotic index scores or made interpretations 

of water quality based on ecology of the sampling site. Management issues covered included the effects of dredging Little Muskego Lake (Druckenmiller, 1980), effects of removal 

of concrete lining in the Menomonee River, Southbranch 

Creek, and Lincoln Creek on habitat (Harza Engineering 

Company, 2001), methods used for controlling algae and 

macrophyte growth in the Milwaukee River and Little 

Muskego Lake (Lueschow, 1972), and an evaluation of the 

nonpoint-source pollution-abatement program on the Root 

River (Rice, 1992). A handful of documents discussed species-related issues, including endangered or threatened species, nonnative species, and tolerant versus intolerant species.

Geographic Information System Data Set 

Inventory

Spatial data such as land use, infrastructure, geology, 

and hydrography were located for the MMSD planning area. 

Selected GIS coverages available for the MMSD planning 

area that may affect surface-water resources are described in 

table 4 (at back of report).

Coverages available for the MMSD planning area 

include boundary data for counties, municipalities, and the 

MMSD planning area. Digital-elevation-model data at different scales describe the elevation of the land surface. Most 

soils data are part of a national layer; however, there is GIS 

information describing soil associations, permeability, and 

surficial deposits from data originally compiled for Wisconsin. SEWRPC actively maintains coverages of watersheds, 

subwatersheds, and subbasins for southeastern Wisconsin. 

Coverages for various infrastructure like roads, railroads, 

dams, and sewers are available for the state or in greater 

detail in some cases for the southeastern Wisconsin area. 

Various land-use/land-cover data are available for different 

years and at different resolutions. Aerial photography for 

southeastern Wisconsin is available for approximately 

5-year intervals dating back to the 1960s.

Data Used in the Report

Water, sediment, tissue-chemistry, as well as physical 

and ecological assessment data available in electronic form 

were compiled as part of this study. Interpretation of historical data will provide a basis to design a baseline-monitoring 

network for Phase II of the Corridor Study. In fact, the primary reasons for the compilation of the data set for Phase I 

are to identify the trends and seasonal variations in water 

resources and to identify areas where data collection opportunities exist to more completely describe water resources in 

the planning area.

Spatial, Temporal, and Analytical Extent 

of Data

Data compiled for the Corridor Study were constrained 

with regard to time, space, and subject matter. The timespan 

of the compilation includes data collected from 1970 through 

2002. Spatially, the compilation is for the MMSD planning 

area (fig. 1); in particular, data was collected for the stream 

corridors, streams, and areas immediately adjacent to the 

stream. Water-quality data were included for rivers, canals, 

estuaries, lakes, storm sewers, facilities such as private 

industries and municipal wastewater treatment plants, and
12 Water-Resources-Related Information for the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin

precipitation. Other than precipitation samples, 98 percent of 

the samples collected were from rivers, canals or estuaries. 

Slightly more than 1 percent of the samples were from lakes, 

and less than half a percent were from storm sewers and 

facilities. Data for Lake Michigan were not included in this 

study. The types of data collected include surface-water, sediment, tissue-chemistry (including fish, shellfish, and others), fish, habitat, macroinvertebrate, algal, bacterial, meteorological, and streamflow data.

Legacy Data Sources

Data sets of water-resources-related information were 

compiled from many different legacy databases, which are 

defined as databases maintained separately by other agencies 

to store data they either collect themselves (MMSD, USGS) 

or compile from multiple other data-collection agencies 

(USEPA). The majority of data compiled into the MMSD 

Corridor Study database at the time of publication (2003) 

came from MMSD, USGS, USEPA, and WDNR. Major data 

sets included in the Corridor Study are described in table 5. 

Additional data from University and volunteer data sets were 

not incorporated; however, plans are to include as much relevant and accessible data as possible in the future. Updates 

of ongoing data-collection efforts, such as described in 

table 5, will be incorporated in the Corridor Study database.

Design of Database-Management System

The MMSD Corridor Study database resides at the 

USGS District office in Middleton, Wis. on an Oracle platform. The structure of the database is shown in figure 7. 

Water quality, ecology, and hydrology data are all stored 

within one database, allowing for query of various kinds of 

data from multiple different agencies from one location. The 

database is designed to allow for fast query response time. 

The central table, "Results," contains the most detailed information such as a nitrate value. The tables attached to the 

"Results" table provide further descriptive information such 

as on what day the nitrate sample was collected ("Samples"), 

and the lab analysis method used to analyze the sample for 

nitrate ("Lab Analysis Methods"). Likewise, "Sites" 

describes the sampling location where trout were collected 

and "Taxonomy" describes the taxonomic code used by the 

WDNR to identify the fish. Where the information was easily accessible, sample-collection methods, laboratory-analysis methods, and information describing the laboratory that 

performed the analysis were included with the data.

Limitations of Data and Their Implications for 

Data Analyses

Analysis of data within the MMSD database must be 

done with caution and an understanding of the limitations of

data compiled from different sources. Data compiled as part 

of this study were collected over more than 30 years, from 

sampling sites distributed over 400 mi2, by many agencies 

for various purposes using different field and laboratory 

methods. Data-collection and laboratory-analysis methods, 

the purpose for collecting a sample, and reporting limits 

were easily available for only part of the data. Many waterquality constituents were reported with multiple reporting 

limits for the same constituent. Some constituent concentrations were reported as zero when the concentration determined from analysis was below a reporting limit. Laboratory-analysis methods have improved for many constituents, 

resulting in capability to determine concentrations at lower 

limits than was possible previously.

Challenges to combining data sets included varying 

definitions of sampling sites, minimal documentation of constituents, insufficient laboratory-analysis method description, and lack of sampling-purpose information in an easily 

accessible format.

Information describing the locations of sampling sites 

varied among the data sets. Latitude and longitude were 

required for all sampling-site locations. A general site name 

was assigned to all sampling-site locations. Overlapping 

sites were given the same general name to allow for easier 

comparison of data at a location where multiple sites had 

been established by different agencies. Sites were determined to share a sample location through a visual examination of where a site plotted on a map (based on its latitude 

and longitude) and the name and location description given 

to the site.

Trying to compare data between data sets on the basis 

of a short constituent name or abbreviation required scrutiny 

by several professionals familiar with water, sediment, and 

tissue chemistry. Constituents within various data sets were 

combined on the basis of available information for constituents and methods. The properties and constituents described 

in this report including information regarding the original 

name, measurement units, and code from the legacy source 

database are listed in table 6.

Laboratory-analysis methods were not available for all 

data. Comparison of data between data sets should be taken 

on a relative basis because the method of analysis can influence results. Analysis methods from 30 years ago likely differed in some respects from those methods used currently. 

Methods used by one agency may also differ from those of 

other agencies. Reporting levels were available for some but 

not all data, and they changed for constituents within the 

same database source as well as among database sources. In 

addition, the type of reporting limit varied between method 

detection limits, minimum detection limits, laboratory 

reporting limits, etc.

The purpose for collecting a sample (sample purpose) 

was available for some data but not for most. Some samples 

may have been collected as part of a routine sampling schedule that does not take into account the amount of discharge. 

Other samples may have been collected as part of an event-
Data Used in the Report 13

Lab-Analysis Methods Field-Collection Methods

laboratory-analysis

methocimarnes^nd

references

Laboratory

Names and contact 

information for 

laboratories performing 

analyses

Sites

Srte latitude, lotfgitude,, 

riarne, vvateroody name; 

and subwatefshied 

assignment

Samples

Safftple; date/time, 

imediurn, depth,jarftf 

fish, maeroinvertebratey 

habitat c«?ss-$ee&m 

sampling Retails

riames^and references

Results

Taxonomy

Taxonornic olassifitiatiQOi

Wisconsin Department

,of>latural

species

Stevens PointlrofessoT

Szczytko Bug lip

Data Sources

nanie, 

contact information, 

deslcrfption1 olfldata 

sources

Constituent Advisories

|nvirpnmerital 

Frdtectiori Agency arid 

:§tateoiyVisconsin 

giildeUne values 

descripit(bns

Constituents

donstituentnamev un fts^ 

source^ group 

assignment

Figure 7. Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Corridor Study database design.
14 Water-Resources-Related Information for the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin

base

Sewerage PCBs, polychlorinated Metropolitan District; biphenyls; PAHs, poly aromatic RETreival Orage System; WDNR, and Wisconsin ofNatural Department Resources;

TO JJ ^

T3 M f_ >• 3 S

-o > S il >? PH

00 § H

~ on o

t: IS <o

o *3 w

0 f i. <

<-• cm

o ^ .g

0 | 1

0, 0 &• 05 ^ "J3

1 Is

1> 2/ ^

Qj >— i O

c So ">

+B g w

1 I s:

"S .§ 0$

5» as ^

03 £ P , _ ,

^ ^ >-. C

•=5 Q <U -H 3 tfi > O 

TO ^ 3 OH

^C J3 "3 >

•^ ^ .a 1

a? <B ep on

€ ^ •§ i

£ 38-1 ° 1° 1

® O S ^ H h— ' ^*>• r~ u< &•

^ ° c/5 **H ° s££ ro d P -55 •i-1 ••*..(£

TO co to P

*" O e3

» M y or

S 1 I >

|2 B ^p

Description of dataset source 

° w "5.

0) 0) p

S^ S

ill JS CO CO O d> co

*- o> .Aw

E o g

3 0)

i_ O)

$ .E co I "B "3. '"S

3 ° ||

Z CO

i_ (3) 

m r~ 2f .23 fA

to||

3 C CO

z <gcO

5*1 O

ill

< CO

0) 

CO

C

3

CO

w

Water-quality typically data collected Marchthrough November (ice-out conditions) sites at

throughout the planning and iMichigan MMSD Lake(Lake data notrea

included theMMSD Corridor Study base).in data

include fieldData nutrients, major bacteria, ions,and PCBs,AH measurements, mercury, 

others. 

data MMSD Quality available Water thGreat LakesWater Institute Waterbase Webon are

be accessed siteand URLhttp://waterbase.2lwi.uwm.edu/mmsd.html at can

i

<N

Os

< — i

Os

OO

£

. — 1

(N

O

D 

oo

I

S3

1

Q

S

S

Stream-elevation collected hourly for throughout data sitesthe MMSDplanning at area. Precipitation-gage collected intervals locations data5-minute fouraround theMMSD at

Planning area. 

Precipitation data hourly day,in Corridor stored increments, cummulative theatare ovr a

Study base. data 

information MMSDcross-section andpebble/sieve in forsites theMenomonee count many River watershed collected oftheMMSD RiverSediment Transport Menomonee part as 

Study (Inter-Fluve, 2001).

Water-quality collected databy the ofdifferent USGSprojects around thepart as many 

country. 

field include Datamajor pesticides, organics, coliform, ions, nutrients, fecal measurements, 

and others. many 

Water-aualitv accessed databefrom NWISWeb sitehttp://wi.water- the URLatcan 

~

00 0 0

(N (N (N (N

•*3" m o o

os os o r~

Os Os O ON

—— 1 ~H (SI ^

tN r- tN •— '

fN Vj fN OO

S " JQ o

tN f- m oo

CS V) V> •— '

vcT t-T rn" oo~

(N ^

•sf O Os VO 

(N O OS 

(N

DO 0 M

G

_o

> 5 & o> _o .t;

s § | i

IE, g c/

fi '8 1 1 OO OH OO ;>

D D D ^

on oo on g

IS IS S P

Streamflow datacollected 5-minute intervals sitesthe 1around (stored at country many

only dailvalues inStudy MMSD Corridor databse). th mean as

be fromaccessed NWISWeb sitehttp://wi.water- Streamflow data the URLatcan 

g

(N

O

ON

i — '

^.

<N""I

(N

2

»-H

(N

00

O00

1fR

I 

on

on 

O 

on

P

different Water-quality data bysecompiled from datacollected agencies USEPA many 

(mainly Milwaukee theWDNR inThebas contains area). legacydata toup 

1/1/1999, when oftheSTORET baseversion datareleased. anewwas 

field include Datanutrients, major organics, pesticides, ions, and others. measurements, 

STORET behttp://www.epa.gov/storpubl/legacv/gate- Leaacv dataaccessed theURLat can

wav.htm

00

Os 

Os

1 — \

o

Os

• — 1

o

Os

vcT

(N

00 

VO

(N

VO

(N

woo

P

%60

H

W

oo

<J

u

oo

P
Table 5. Data sources for the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Corridor Study database — Continued

[Data sources incorporated into the data base at the time the Phase I Report was written; MMSD, Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District; PCBs, polychlorinated bi

hydrocarbons; USGS, U.S. Geological Survey; USEPA, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency; STORET, STOrage and RETreival System; WDNR, Wisconsin Depar

UWSP, University of Wisconsin-Stevens Point]

Data source name

USEPA STORET Modern

Agency

serving 

data

USEPA

Number

of

sampling

18

Number

of

sampling

visits

515

Number

of 

results

2,120

Date of

earliest 

sample

1999

Date of

latest 

sample

2001

Description of source d

Water-quality data base compiled by the USEPA from 

WDNR Biology Data WDNR

base—Fish

WDNR Biology Data WDNR 

base—Habitat

WDNR Milwaukee Fish WDNR

WDNR Sediment WDNR

WDNR—UW Stevens Point UWSP 

Professor Szczytko 

Macroinvertebrate s

268

44

277

18

167

189

36

2,608 1970

6,345 204,957 1991

8,166 1996

343 15,631 1984

328 5,729 1979

agencies (mainly the WDNR in the Milwaukee area). T

starting 1/1/1999, when a new version of the STORET 

Data include field measurements, nutrients, major ions, 

STORET Modern data can be accessed at the URL http

housemenu

2001 WDNR Biology Data base created in 2001 to hold fish, 

biology related data for the WDNR. 

Community taxonomy, counts, sex, and length included

The WDNR biology data base is online but available on

2001 WDNR Biology Data base created in 2001 to hold fish, 

biology related data for the WDNR.

Various habitat measures including streambank erosion

subtrate are included. 

The WDNR biology data base is online but available on

2001 Microsoft Access data base of fish in the Milwaukee R

Community and count information included.

1995 Microsoft Access data base of water and sediment sam

1999 Macroinvertebrate data analyzed by UW - Stevens Poin

were collected by the WDNR, but some samples are fro

Community, count, and index information available.

Macroinvertebrate data are available online at the UW 

Lab Web site and can be accessed at the URL http://ww

ing/index3.htm
Table 6. Properties and constituents used in calculating statistics for summary-statistics tables, maps, and boxplots

[#/100 mL, number of colonies per 100 milliliters; mg/L, milligrams per liter; mg/m3 , milligrams per cubic meter; °C, degrees Celsius; (0,S/cm, microsiemens per centime

(J-g/L, micrograms per liter; the original constituent description information is taken from the source with minor alterations and may contain abbreviations]

_ ... Units for Generalized ,. . 1:1 x generalized 

constituent " 

constituent 

name 

name

pH Standard units

Alkalinity mg/L as CaCO3

Hardness mg/L as CaCO3

Specific (aS/cm 

conductance

Dissolved mg/L 

oxygen, mg/L

Correction 

factor for Original 

generalized constituent 

constituent name 

name

1 pH 

pH, Dissolved 

pH, Std. Units 

pH, Wh, Field

1 Alkalinity, Carbonate as CaCO3 , 

Total

Alkalinity, Dis, It, F

T Alk CaCO3 mg/L 

Total Alkalinity mg/L

1 Hardness mg/L 

Hardness Total 

Hardness, Carbonate, Total 

Tot Hard CaCO3 mg/L

1 Conductance, Specific 

Specific Conductance

Specific Conductance 

Specific Conductivity (J,mhos/cm

1 Dissolved Oxygen mg/L 

Dissolved Oxygen, Dissolved 

DO mg/L 

Oxygen Dissolved

Original 

constituent 

description

PH 

pH, Dissolved 

pH, Std. Units 

pH, Water, Whole, Field, Standard Units

Alkalinity, Carbonate as CaCO3 , Total

Alkalinity, Water, Dissolved, Total, Incremental Titration, Field, mg/L as CaCO3

Alkalinity, Total (mg/L as CaCO3) 

Total Alkalinity mg/L

Hardness mg/L 

Hardness Total (mg/L as Ca03CaCO3 

Hardness, Carbonate, Total 

Hardness, Total (mg/L as CaCO3)

Specific Conductance

Specific Conductance (Microsiemens/cm at 

25 Deg C)

Specific Conductance Microsiemens/cm at 

25 Deg C

Specific Conductivity (xmhos/cm

Dissolved Oxygen mg/L 

Dissolved Oxygen (DO), Dissolved 

Oxygen, Dissolved mg/L 

Oxygen Dissolved (mg/L)

Original 

units

std. units @ 25° 

std. units @ 25° 

standard units 

standard units

mg/L as CaCO3 

mg/L as CaCO3

mg/L as CaCO3 

mg/L as CaCO3

mg/L as CaCO3 

mg/L as CaCO3 

mg/L 

mg/L as CaCO3

fj,mho/cm @ 25 °C 

US/cm @ 25 °C

US/cm 

(Xmho/cm

mg/L 

mg/L 

mg/L 

mg/L

S

c

USEPA 

USEPA 

MMSD W

USGS Q

USEPA 

USGS Q

USEPA 

MMSD W

MMSD W

USGS Q

USEPA 

USEPA 

USEPA 

USGS Q

USGS Q

MMSD 

MMSD 

USEPA 

USEPA 

USGS Q
Table 6. Properties and constituents used in calculating statistics for summary-statistics tables, maps, and boxplots—Continued

[#/100 mL, number of colonies per 100 milliliters; mg/L, milligrams per liter; mg/m3 , milligrams per cubic meter; °C, degrees Celsius; p,S/cm, microsiemens per centimet

p.g/L, micrograms per liter; the original constituent description information is taken from the source with minor alterations and may contain abbreviations]

_ ... Units for Generalized .. . generalized 

constituent M constituent 

name 

name

Biochemical mg/L 

oxygen 

demand, 5 day

Solids, total mg/L 

suspended

Suspended- mg/L 

sediment

Chloride, total mg/L as Cl

Nitrogen, total mg/L as N

Nitrogen, mg/L as N 

kjeldahl 

(ammonia plus 

total organic 

nitrogen), total

Correction 

factor for Original 

generalized constituent 

constituent name 

name

1 Biochemical Oxygen Demand, 5 

Day mg/L

Bod 5 Day mg/L

Bod 5 -Day At 20 Deg

Bod, Total, 5 Day

1 Solids, Total Suspended

Solids, Total Suspended, Dissolved

Total Solids mg/L

1 Concentration, S, Sed

1 Chloride mg/L

Chloride Total mg/L

Chloride, Total

1 Nitrogen Total

0.2259 Nitrogen, Total -NO3

1 Nitrogen Amm+Org Tot

Nitrogen, Kjeldahl, Total 

Tot Kjel N mg/L 

Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen mg/L

Original 

constituent 

description

Biochemical Oxygen Demand, 5 Day mg/L 

Bod, 5 Day, 20 Deg C mg/L

Biochemical Oxygen Demand, 5-Day At 

20 Degrees Celsius (mg/L)

Bod, Biochemical Oxygen Demand, Total, 

5 Day

Total Suspended Solids (TSS) 

Total Suspended Solids (TSS), Dissolved

Total Solids mg/L

Sediment, Suspended Concentration 

(mg/L)

Chloride mg/L

Chloride, Total In Water mg/L

Chloride, Total

Nitrogen Total (mg/L as N)

Nitrogen, Total (mg/L as NO3 )

Nitrogen Ammonia Plus Organic Total 

(mg/L as N)

Nitrogen, Kjeldahl, Total 

Nitrogen, Kjeldahl, Total, (mg/L as N) 

Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen mg/L

Original 

units

mg/L 

mg/L

mg/L

mg/L

mg/L 

mg/L

mg/L

mg/L

mg/L

mg/L

mg/L

mg/L as N

mg/L as NO3

mg/L as N

mg/L 

mg/L asN 

mg/L asN

S

co

MMSD W

USEPA S

USGS QW

USEPA S

USEPA S

USEPA S

MMSD W

USGS QW

MMSD W

USEPA S

USEPA S

USGS QW

USGS QW

USGS QW

USEPA S

USEPA S

MMSD W
Table 6. Properties and constituents used in calculating statistics for summary-statistics tables, maps, and boxplots—Continued

[ff/H-nj 1111^, I1U111UCI UI CUIUIUCS JJCI 1UU IlllllllllCIS, lllg/l^, lllllllglillllS pci lllCi, lllg/lll , lllllllgiaillS JJCI CUUIC lllCICi, ^,, UCglCCS V_CIS1US, JJ.O/C1H, llllCIUSieilieUS JJCI CCIUllIieiC

[ig/L, micrograms per liter; the original constituent description information is taken from the source with minor alterations and may contain abbreviations]

_ ... Units for Generalized ,. . generalized 

constituent ... . constituent 

name 

name

Nitrogen, mg/L as N

nitrate,

dissolved

Nitrogen, mg/L as N

organic

nitrogen,

totala

Correction

factor for Original 

generalized constituent 

constituent name

name

1 Nitrate Nitrogen

Nitrogen Nitrate D.

Nitrogen Nitrate T.

Nitrogen, Nitrite + Nitrate, Dissolved

NO2 + NO3 Dissolved

NO2 + NO3 Total

NO2&NO3 N-Diss mg/L

NO3-N Diss mg/L

0.2259 N, Nitrate Total

Nitr. NO3 as NO3 Dis

1 Nitrogen Organic T.

Original 

constituent 

description

Nitrate Nitrogen

Nitrogen Nitrate Dissolved (mg/L as N)

Nitrogen Nitrate Total (mg/L as N)

Nitrogen, Nitrite (NO2) + Nitrate (NO3),

Dissolved

Nitrogen Nitrite Plus Nitrate Dissolved

(mg/L as N)

Nitrogen Nitrite Plus Nitrate Total (mg/L as

N)

Nitrite Plus Nitrate, Diss. 1 Det. (mg/L as

N)

Nitrate Nitrogen, Dissolved (mg/L as N)

Nitrogen, Nitrate, Total (mg/L as NO3 )

Nitrogen, Nitrate, Dissolved (mg/L as

N03 )

Nitrogen Organic Total (mg/L as N)

Original 

units

mg/L as N

mg/L as N

mg/L as N

mg/L

mg/L as N

mg/L as N

mg/L as N

mg/L asN

mg/L as NO3

mg/L as NO3

mg/L as N

So

con

MMSD W

USGS QW

USGS QW

USEPA ST

USGS QW

USGS QW

USEPA ST

USEPA ST

USGS QW

USGS QW

USGS QW
Table 6. Properties and constituents used in calculating statistics for summary-statistics tables, maps, and boxplots — Continued

[#/100 mL, number of colonies per 100 milliliters; mg/L, milligrams per liter; mg/m3, milligrams per cubic meter; °C, degrees Celsius; (iS/cm, microsiemens per centimet

, micrograms per liter; the original constituent description information is taken from the source with minor alterations and may contain abbreviations]

_ ... Units for Generalized .. . generalized 

constituent *onstituent

name name

Nitrogen, mg/L as N 

ammonia, 

dissolveda

Phosphorus, mg/L as P 

total

Phosphorus, mg/L as P 

dissolved

Cadmium, mg/g as Cd

Correction 

factor for Original 

generalized constituent 

constituent name 

name

1 Ammonia Nitrogen 

NH3+NH4- N Diss mg/L

NH3+NH4- N Total mg/L

Nitrogen Ammonia D.

Nitrogen Ammonia T.

Nitrogen, Ammonia, Dissolved

Nitrogen, Ammonia, Total

0.7765 Nitr, NH4 as NH4 Dis

Nitrogen, NH4, Total

1 Phos-Tot mg/L P 

Phosphorus as P, Total

Phosphorus Total

Total Phosphorus mg/L

0.001 Phosphor Wtr Tot Rec Ug/L

0.3262 Phosphorus Tot PO4

1 Phosphorus as P, Dissolved

Phosphorus Diss.

Total Soluble Phosphorus mg/L

1 Cadmium Bot. Mat.

Original 

constituent 

description

Ammonia Nitrogen

Nitrogen, Ammonia, Dissolved (mg/L as

N)

Nitrogen, Ammonia, Total (mg/L as N)

Nitrogen Ammonia Dissolved (mg/L as N)

Nitrogen Ammonia Total (mg/L as N)

Nitrogen, Ammonia (NH3), Dissolved

Nitrogen, Ammonia (NH3), Total

Nitrogen, Ammonia, Dissolved (mg/L as

NH4)

Nitrogen, Ammonia, Total (mg/L as NH4)

Phosphorus, Total (mg/L as P) 

Phosphorus as P, Total

Phosphorus Total (mg/L as P)

Total Phosphorus mg/L

Phosphorus (P), Water, Total Recoverable 

Ug/L

Phosphorus Total (mg/L as PO4)

Phosphorus as P, Dissolved

Phosphorus Dissolved (mg/L as P)

Total Soluble Phosphorus mg/L

Cadmium Total In Bottom Material (\lg/g

Original 

units

mg/L asN 

mg/L asN

mg/L asN

mg/L as N

mg/L asN

mg/L

mg/L

mg/L as NH4

mg/L as NH4

mg/L as P 

mg/L as P

mg/L as P

mg/L as P

M*L

mg/L as PO4

nig/Las P

mg/L as P

mg/L asP

Hg/g as Cd

S

co

MMSD W

USEPA S

USEPA S

USGS QW

USGS QW

USEPA S

USEPA S

USGS QW

USGS QW

USEPA S

USEPA S

USGS QW

MMSD W

USEPA S

USGS QW

USEPA S

USGS QW

MMSD W

USGS QW

total, sediment

Cd Mud Dry Wgt mg/kg-Cd

asCd)

Cadmium, Total In Bottom Deposits 

(mg/kg, Dry Wgt)

mg/kg USEPA S
Table 6. Properties and constituents used in calculating statistics for summary-statistics tables, maps, and boxplots—Continued

[#/100 mL, number of colonies per 100 milliliters; mg/L, milligrams per liter; mg/m , milligrams per cubic meter; °C, degrees ; p.S/cm, microsiemens per centimet

p.g/L, micrograms per liter; the origi

_ ... Units for Generalized .. . generalized 

constituent M constituent 

name 

name

Cadmium, Hg/L as Cd

total, water

Mercury, total, mg/g as Hg

sediment

Mercury, total, M£/L as Hg

water

Copper, total, mg/g as Cu

sediment

Copper, total, M£/L as Cu

water

Lead, total, mg/g as Pb

sediment

nal constituent description information is taken from

Correction

factor for Original 

generalized constituent 

constituent name

name

1 Cadmium Cd.Tot ng/L

Cadmium Total

Cadmium, Total

Total Cadmium (Analyzed By

Graphite Furnace Atomic

Absorption) (J.g/L

1 Mercury Btm

Mercury Sed mg/kg Dry Wgt

1 Mercury (Total) AA Cold Vapor

Mercury Hg.Total |J,g/L

Total Mercury

1 Copper Bot. Mat.

Copper Mud Dry Wt

1 Copper Cu.Tot fig/L

Copper Total

Copper, Total

Total Copper |4.g/L

1 Lead Sed mg/kg Dry Wgt

Lead Total Bot. Mat.

the source with minor alterations and may con

Original 

constituent 

description

Cadmium, Total (\ig/L as Cd)

Cadmium Total (|J,g/L as Cd)

Cadmium, Total

Total Cadmium (Analyzed By Graphite

Furnace Atomic Absorption) p,g/L

Mercury, Recoverable From Bottom

Material, p,g/g as Hg

Mercury, Tot. In Bot. Depos. (mg/kg as Hg

Dry Wgt)

Mercury (Total) AA Cold Vapor

Mercury, Total (Hg/L as Hg)

Total Mercury

Copper Total In Bottom Material (p.g/g as

Cu)

Copper Mud Dry Wt

Copper, Total (|ig/L as Cu)

Copper Total (ng/L as Cu)

Copper, Total

Total Copper p,g/L

Lead In Bottom Deposits (mg/kg as Pb Dry

Wgt)

Lead Total In Bottom Material (|4.g/g as Pb)

tain abbreviations]

Original 

units

p.g/L as Cd

p.g/L as Cd

(j,g/L

|j,g/L

Hg/g as Hg

mg/kg as Hg

Hg/L

Hg/L as Hg

Hg/L

Hg/g as Cu

mg/kg

(j,g/L as Cu

Hg/L as Cu

p.g/L

|j,g/L

mg/kg as Pb

\ig/g as Pb

S

co

USEPA S

USGS QW

USEPA S

MMSD W

USGS QW

USEPA S

MMSD W

USEPA S

MMSD W

USGS QW

USEPA S

USEPA S

USGS QW

USEPA S

MMSD W

USEPA S

USGS QW
Table 6. Properties and constituents used in calculating statistics for summary-statistics tables, maps, and boxplots—Continued

[#/100 mL, number of colonies per 100 milliliters; mg/L, milligrams per liter; mg/nr, milligrams per cubic meter; °C, degrees Celsius; p.S/cm, microsiemens per centime

Mg/L, micrograms per liter; the original constituent description information is taken from the source with minor alterations and may contain abbreviations]

_ ... Units for Generalized ,. . generalized 

constituent M constituent 

name 

name

Lead, total, Mg/L as Pb 

water

Arsenic, total, mg/g as As 

sediment

Arsenic, total, Mg/L as As 

water

Nickel, total, mg/g as Ni 

sediment

Nickel, total, Mg/L as Ni 

water

Chromium, mg/g as Cr 

total, sediment

Chromium, Mg/L as Cr 

total, water

Correction 

factor for Original 

generalized constituent 

constituent name 

name

1 Lead Pb.Tot Mg/L 

Lead Total 

Lead. Total

Total Lead (Analyzed By Graphite Furnace Atomic Absorption) 

Mg/L

1 Arsenic Bot. Mat. 

Arsenic Sed mg/kg Dry Wgt

1 Arsenic As.Tot Mg/L 

Arsenic Total

Total Arsenic (Analyzed By 

Graphite Furnace Atomic 

Absorption) Mg/L

1 Nickel Bot. Mat. 

Nickel Sed mg/kg Dry Wgt

1 Nickel Ni.Total Mg/L 

Nickel Total 

Total Nickel Mg/L

1 Chromium Mud Dry Wt 

Chromium Total B.M.

1 Chromium Cr.Tot Mg/L 

Chromium Total 

Total Chromium Mg/L

Original 

constituent 

description

Lead, Total (Mg/L as Pb) 

Lead Total (Mg/L as Pb) 

Lead, Total

Total Lead (Analyzed By Graphite Furnace 

Atomic Absorption) Mg/L

Arsenic Total In Bottom Material (Mg/g as 

As)

Arsenic In Bottom Deposits (mg/kg as As 

Dry Wgt)

Arsenic, Total (Mg/L as As) 

Arsenic Total (Mg/L as As)

Total Arsenic (Analyzed By Graphite Furnace Atomic Absorption) Mg/L

Nickel Total In Bottom Material (Mg/g as

Ni)

Nickel, Total In Bottom Deposits (mg/kg, 

Dry Wgt)

Nickel, Total (Mg/L as Ni) 

Nickel Total (Mg/L as Ni) 

Total Nickel Mg/L

Chromium Mud Dry Wt

Chromium Total In Bottom Material (Mg/g 

asCr)

Chromium, Total (Mg/L as Cr) 

Chromium Total (Mg/L as Cr) 

Total Chromium Mg/L

Original 

units

Mg/L as Pb 

Mg/L as Pb 

Mg/L 

Mg/L

Mg/g as As 

mg/kg as As

Mg/L as As 

Mg/L as As 

Mg/L

Mg/g as Ni 

mg/kg

Mg/L as Ni 

Mg/L as Ni 

Mg/L

mg/kg 

Mg/g as Cr

Mg/L as Cr 

Mg/L as Cr 

Mg/L

S

c

USEPA 

USGS Q

USEPA 

MMSD 

USGS Q

USEPA 

USEPA 

USGS Q

MMSD 

USGS Q

USEPA 

USEPA 

USGS Q

MMSD 

USEPA 

USGS Q

USEPA 

USGS Q

MMSD 
Table 6. Properties and constituents used in calculating statistics for summary-statistics tables, maps, and boxplots — Continued

[#/100 mL, number of colonies per 100 milliliters; mg/L, milligrams per liter; mg/m , milligrams per cubic meter; °C, degrees Celsius; (4.S/cm, microsiemens per centimete

p,g/L, micrograms per liter; the original constituent description information is taken from the source with minor alterations and may contain abbreviations]

_ ... Units for Generalized .. . 

... . generalized 

constituent 

constituent 

name 

name

Zinc, total, mg/g as Zn 

sediment

Zinc, total, p,g/L as Zn 

water

Chlorophyll a, mg/m3 

corrected for 

pheophytin

E. coli #/100 mL

Fecal coliform #/100 mL

Correction 

factor for Original 

generalized constituent 

constituent name 

name

1 Zinc Bottom Material 

Zinc Mud Dry Wgt

1 Total Zinc \igfL 

Zinc Total 

Zinc Zn, Tot (ig/L 

Zinc, Total

1 Chlorophyll "A" mg/m3

1 E. coli

1 Coliform Fecal 0.7 

Fee Coli M-Fcagar /100 ml

Fee Coli Mpnecmed /1 00 ml

Original rt . . .

constituent Ong."ial 

. . .. units 

description

Zinc Total In Bottom Material (|4.g/g as Zn) p,g/g as Zn 

Zinc Mud Dry Wgt mg/kg

Total Zinc p,g/L p.g/L 

Zinc Total (|4.g/L as Zn) |4.g/L as Zn 

Zinc, Total (|Xg/L as Zn) \igfL as Zn 

Zinc, Total Hg/L

Chlorophyll "A" mg/m3 mg/m3

E. coli #/100mL

Fecal Coliform.7 Um-Mf (Col./ 100 mL) colsVlOO mL

Fecal Coliform, Membr Filter, M-Fc #/100 mL 

Agar,44.5c,24hr

Fecal Coliform, Mpn, EC Med,44.5c (Tube MPN

So

co

USGS QW

USEPA S

MMSD W

USGS QW

USEPA S

USEPA S

MMSD W

MMSD W

USGS QW

USEPA S

USEPA S

Fecal Coli.Mfc Mf.W

31614)

Fecal Coliform, Mfc Mf Method, Water, 

Colonies/100 mL

cols./100 mL USGS QW

Fecal Coliform Bacteria Mpn/ Fecal Coliform Bacteria Mpn/100 ml MPN/100 mL 

100 mL

aThis constituent was not analyzed or discussed in the report, however it was used to calculate total nitrogen.

MMSD W
Data Used in the Report 23

driven program, either for high or low flows. Some samples 

may have been collected as part of a monitoring program, 

whereas others may have been targeted to sample in an area 

known to be contaminated.

Screening of Data

Some data for many chemical constituents were 

reported as less than a "reporting limit," which could have 

been a method detection limit, minimum detection limit, laboratory reporting limit, etc. Often, multiple reporting limits 

were reported for each constituent. Reporting limits are indicated in the summary statistics tables and statistical distribution figures. In addition, the number of results with concentrations below a reporting limit are indicated in the 

summary-statistics tables.

Data with concentrations reported as "less than" were 

evaluated according to the following rules when creating the 

summary-statistics tables, statistical-distribution figures, 

maps of locations of constituent sampling and median concentrations, and graphs of seasonally and trends:

1. Where a remark flag indicated the actual concentration 

was less than the reported concentration, concentrations were set to half the original concentration or half 

the reporting-limit concentration where the original 

concentration was reported as zero. Concentrations 

reported as zero without a reporting limit were left as 

zero. These concentrations were then used in the calculation of all summary statistics and in generation of statistical-distribution figures.

2. In graphing statistical-distribution data on a log scale, 

concentrations of zero were set to the next lowest 

concentration of 1x1 Ox. For example, if a 

concentration of total phosphorus was reported as zero 

because the actual concentration was below the 

reporting limit and the minimum concentration above 

zero was 0.02, the concentrations of zero would be set 

to 0.01 for use in the statistical-distribution figures 

because plotting concentrations of zero is not allowed 

on a log scale.

3. Concentrations and other measurements were rounded. 

The number of decimal places to which they have 

been rounded is indicated in the headnote of each 

summary-statistics table. Some data sets indicated 

values with significant figures, others did not. For the 

purposes of this report, the decision was made to 

report rounded values to a certain decimal place rather 

than to a specific number of significant figures.

When comparing similar constituents from different 

legacy sources, concentrations with different units were converted to like units (table 6). This included changes such as 

converting milligrams per liter to micrograms per liter and 

converting milligrams per liter as NO3 to milligrams per liter 

asN.

Outliers for specific conductance (concentrations less 

than 20 fiS/cm) and pH (concentrations less than 4.0 standard units) were not considered when creating the summary 

statistics tables, statistical-distribution figures, maps, or 

graphs.

Most concentrations for total nitrogen are sums of various reported nitrogen species because few legacy data sets 

included much data as total nitrogen. In cases where concentrations for total nitrogen and many other nitrogen species 

were available for the same sample, the total nitrogen value 

was taken. Otherwise, total nitrogen was calculated either as 

the sum of dissolved nitrate and dissolved Kjeldahl nitrogen 

or the sum of dissolved nitrate and total organic nitrogen and 

dissolved ammonia. A brief comparison of actual and calculated total nitrogen concentrations (for samples with total as 

well as nitrogen-species data) showed considerable similarity.

In some cases, there was more than one dissolved 

nitrate species from which to choose. The species of nitrate 

chosen was according to the following order of precedence: 

dissolved nitrite plus nitrate as N, total nitrite plus nitrate as 

N, dissolved nitrate as N, dissolved nitrate as NO3 (converted to "as N" for calculations), total nitrate as N, and total 

nitrate as NO3 (converted to "as N" for calculations). Nitrite 

concentrations are typically very low in comparison to 

nitrate, so nitrite plus nitrate concentrations were considered 

to be comparable to nitrate concentrations. There may also 

have been more than one type of dissolved ammonia from 

which to choose. The species of ammonia chosen was 

according to the following order of precedence: dissolved 

ammonia as N, dissolved ammonia as NH4 (converted to "as 

N" for calculations), total ammonia as N, total ammonia as 

NH4 (converted to "as N" for calculations).

Where one of the nitrogen species involved in the total 

nitrogen calculation was reported as below a reporting limit, 

the concentration was halved according to the rules discussed previously; however, which particular nitrogen species was below a reporting limit is not noted in this report 

because of the complexity of the calculation process.
24 Water-Resources-Related Information for the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin

Evaluation of Historical Data

The water properties and constituents discussed in the 

following sections were selected because of their relevance 

to the study, spatial and temporal distribution of samples, 

and sufficiency of data for interpretation, either spatially or 

temporally.

Descriptions of data for each property and constituent 

in this report generally include a text description, a map 

showing the location of sampling sites, and some further 

information describing the data (median concentrations, 

counts of samples collected at a site). Also included are summary statistics tables, statistical distribution figures for most 

constituents, and, in some cases, graphs showing seasonality 

and (or) trends.

Guidelines used by the USEPA, WDNR, and Canada 

for drinking water and (or) for the protection of aquatic life 

where available are discussed for each property or constituent. Water from rivers is not used as drinking water in the 

Milwaukee area, which gets most of its drinking water from 

Lake Michigan; however, drinking-water guidelines are 

used for a relative comparison to concentrations because of 

a lack of other established criteria. The guidelines referenced 

in this report are summarized in table 7. Where guideline 

concentrations were near or within the range of concentrations measured for a property or constituent, the guideline 

concentration is indicated in the statistical distribution figure, and sites with median concentrations that exceeded the 

lowest guideline concentration are indicated on the maps.

All surface-water, sediment, and tissue-chemistry constituents were analyzed for seasonality and trends by examining data from five sites (fig. 8). The five sites were Kinnickinnic River at 1st Street, Lincoln Creek at 47th Street, 

Menomonee River at 70th Street, Milwaukee River at Wells 

Street, and Oak Creek at Ryan Road. These sites were chosen because they had a relatively large amount of data for 

many constituents and were well distributed over several 

watersheds in the MMSD planning area. In a few cases, sufficient data were not available for the five sites. In some 

cases, data for other sites were examined for trends but data 

for most sites were insufficient for trend analysis. Graphs for 

seasonality and (or) trends are included only where statistically significant seasonality or trends were detected.

Maps generally include sampling-site locations and, 

where appropriate, median concentrations and the number of 

samples collected from 1970 through 2002. Median concentrations are depicted at the sampling-site locations by means 

of color schemes that group the overall median concentrations by quartile ranges. Subwatersheds with data for a constituent are also shaded to indicate overall median concentration for the subwatershed based on the same quartile ranges 

as the sampling site. Some maps indicate the number of samples collected by the size of the site-location symbol (categories are listed in the map explanation and generally include 1 

to 10 samples, 11 to 100 samples, and more than 100 samples). The number of sites in a subwatershed and the total 

number of samples collected for those sites give readers a 

way to visually determine the credibility of assigning a 

median concentration to a subwatershed. The ranges of 

median concentrations at sampling sites are generally larger 

than the median concentrations for sub watersheds; therefore, 

the same range of colors shown for sampling sites may not 

be shown for subwatersheds. Subwatersheds that do not have 

any shading are those where no data were collected in the 

subwatershed for that constituent. In places where sampling 

locations on the main map are numerous and appear very 

close together, an additional blown-up area near downtown 

Milwaukee is shown to allow readers to more easily determine the locations of and median concentrations at those 

sampling sites.

Summary statistics listed for each property and constituent include counts of samples collected, earliest and latest 

sample dates, reporting-limit concentrations, and minimum, 

maximum, mean, and percentiles. In cases where many concentrations were below a reporting limit and reporting limits 

were numerous, statistical-distribution figures were not 

drawn and some summary statistics were left out of the table. 

Subwatersheds in which all or more than half of the samples 

had concentrations below a reporting limit are described in 

the text for each constituent.

Because of constraints on the size of this report, maps 

illustrating concentrations and sampling sites by time period 

were not included. Additional figures were included to show 

locations of sites that have been measured or sampled since 

1998 and may be part of a current monitoring program (especially for water chemistry, streamflow, stream stage, and 

precipitation).

Streamgages where streamflow and stage data were 

collected and meteorological stations where precipitation 

data were collected since 1998 were relatively well distributed over the MMSD planning area (fig. 9). The upper 

reaches of the Menomonee River watershed, middle reaches 

of the Lower Milwaukee River subwatershed, and parts of 

the Root River and Oak Creek watersheds were not as well 

covered by streamgages as other parts of the planning area 

are (fig. 9). Typically the smaller subwatersheds in the headwaters of major rivers have not been gaged (fig. 9). Precipitation gages have been clustered toward the central part of 

the planning area (fig. 9).

Inorganic, nutrient, and physical field-measurement 

data collected since 1998 have been fairly extensive 

(fig. 10). Nevertheless, some of the smaller subwatersheds in 

the headwaters of major streams like the Nor-X-Way Channel, Underwood Creek, Whitnall Park Creeks, and North 

Branch Oak Creek had not been sampled since 1998 for inorganic constituents, nutrients, or physical properties (fig. 10). 

In some other subwatersheds, including the Little Menomonee River and Middle Root River, these properties and constituents were measured or sampled at only one or two sites 

(fig. 10).
Evaluation of Historical Data 25

Pesticide, organics, and trace-elements data were collected since 1998 at sites sparsely distributed across the planning area (fig. 11). Subwatersheds in the headwaters of the 

major rivers generally had not been sampled for any of these 

constituents since 1998 (fig. 11). The number of sites where 

pesticide data had been collected was especially limited in 

the Fox River, Oak Creek, and much of the Menomonee and 

Kinnickinnic watersheds (fig. 11). Sites where organics data 

had been collected were a little more widespread, but the Fox 

River and Menomonee River watersheds were still underrepresented (fig. 11). Distribution of sites where trace-elements 

data were collected was similar to that for organics data; 

however, there were additional sites in the Fox River where 

trace-elements data were collected (fig. 11).

Sites where bacteria (fecal coliform and Escherichia 

coli), biological (fish, macroinvertebrates, algae), and habitat-assessment and channel-measurement data have been 

collected since 1998 were located throughout most of the 

MMSD planning area, with the exception of some headwaters subwatersheds (fig. 12). Sites where bacteria had been 

sampled were limited in the Fox River and Menomonee 

River watersheds and in most headwater subwatersheds. 

Collection of biological data was distributed over most of the 

planning area except parts of the Menomonee River watershed and some headwaters subwatersheds (fig. 12). Locations where habitat assessments or channel measurements 

were made were sparsely distributed throughout the MMSD 

planning area except in the headwaters subwatersheds 

(fig. 12). The Menomonee River was particularly well covered; however, most sites were involved in a one-time sediment transport study (Inter-Fluve, Inc., 2001) for which 

channel measurement information was available but no other 

habitat information had been collected, (fig. 12)
Table 7. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, and Canadian water- and sediment-quality guid

[CWA, Clean Water Act; MMSD, Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District]

Reference Type Abbreviation Definition

U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, 

2002a

Drinking water

U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, 

2000a

Ambient water quality 

for rivers and streams

U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, 1986

U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, 

2002e

Ambient water quality 

for fresh recreational 

water

Guideline values regarding effects on aquatic 

communities

Wisconsin Department of Drinking water 

Natural Resources, 

2003b

Wisconsin Department of Aquatic life 

Natural Resources, 

2001a

MCL Maximum Contaminant Level—"The highest level of a contaminant that is allowed in drink

to the MCLG [see below] as feasible using the best available analytical and treatment techn

sideration. MCLs are enforceable standards."

MCLG Maximum Contaminant Level Goal—"A non-enforceable health goal which is set at a level 

adverse effect on the health of persons occurs and which allows an adequate margin of safe

SDWR Secondary Drinking Water Regulation—"Non-enforceable Federal guidelines regarding co

skin discoloration) or aesthetic effects (such as taste, odor, or color) of drinking water."

Nutrient Nutrient Criteria for Level II Ecoregion VII, Level III Ecoregion 53 — "EPA's ecoregional 

Criteria address cultural eutrophication— the adverse effects of excess nutrient inputs .... These cr

tions to States and authorized Tribes for use in establishing their water quality standards co

CWA .... The Clean Water Act establishes a national goal to achieve, wherever attainable, 

the protection and propagation of fish, shellfish, and wildlife and recreation in and on the w

The value used in the MMSD Corridor Study report for comparison to median concentratio

on all seasons data for the Decade" listed in "Table 3c, Reference conditions for level III ec

These nutrient criteria limits are currently in a "proposed" status and have not been finalize

Ambient water Ambient water quality guideline for bacteria—"... upper limits for densities of indicator ba

quality for with acceptable health risks for swimmers." 

bacteria

CMC Criteria Maximum Concentration—". . . an estimate of the highest concentration of a mat

aquatic community can be exposed briefly without resulting in an unacceptable effect... . B

are national guidance, they are intended to be protective of the vast majority of the aquatic 

CCC Criterion Continuous Concentration—". . . an estimate of the highest concentration of a ma

aquatic community can be exposed indefinitely without resulting in an unacceptable effec

criteria are national guidance, they are intended to be protective of the vast majority of the 

States."

NR 809 MCL NR 809 Maximum Contaminant Level—"Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs) containe

Administrative Code. MCLs are the highest level of a contaminant that is allowed in drinki

Aquatic life Wisconsin State statute NR 102, Water Quality Standards for Wisconsin Surface Waters, in 

criteria fish and aquatic life (NR 102.04 (4)), including criteria for dissolved oxygen for different s
Table 7. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, and Canadian water- and sediment-quality guidelines—Continued

[CWA, Clean Water Act; MMSD, Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District]

Reference Type Abbreviation Definition

Health Canada, 2002Canadian Council of 

Ministers of the 

Environment, 2002b

Canadian Council of 

Ministers of the 

Environment, 2002a

MacDonald and others, 

2000

Drinking water

Aquatic life - water

Aquatic life - sediment

Aquatic life - sediment

MAC Maximum Allowable Concentration—"MACs have been developed for parameters, or substances, which are known or suspected to cause deleterious health effects. This term assumes the parameter would be consumed over a lifetime at that concentration." (Canadian Ground Water Association, 1999)

IMAC Interim Maximum Allowable Concentration—"IMACs are listed for substances for which not enough information is known 

to determine a Maximum Acceptable Concentration." (Canadian Ground Water Association, 1999)

AO Aesthetic Objective—"AOs are for specific parameters which affect water quality based on smell, taste or color. There are 

substances which fall under aesthetic objectives which in high enough quantities may impose a health risk." (Canadian 

Ground Water Association, 1999)

Aquatic life Water quality guideline for the protection of aquatic life in freshwater—"Guideline values are meant to protect all forms of 

criteria aquatic life and all aspects of the aquatic life cycles, including the most sensitive life stage of the most sensitive species over 

the long term" (Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment, 1999)

ISQG Interim Sediment Quality Guideline—"The lower value, referred to as the threshold effect level (TEL), represents the concentration below which adverse biological effects are expected to occur rarely .... The definition of the TEL is consistent with 

the definition of a Canadian sediment quality guideline." An interim guideline is recommended if there is a limited amount of information on methods used to establish guideline values. (Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment, 2001)

PEL Probable Effect Level—"(PEL), defines the level above which adverse effects are expected to occur frequently." (Canadian 

Council of Ministers of the Environment, 2001)

TEC Threshold Effect Concentration—Threshold effect concentration, "... below which adverse effects are not expected to occur 

.... most of the TECs . . . provide an accurate basis for predicting sediment toxicity."

PEC Probable Effect Concentration—Probable effect concentration, "... above which adverse effects are expected to occur more 

often than not.... most of the PECs . .. provide an accurate basis for predicting sediment toxicity."

D 

Q)
28 Water-Resources-Related Information for the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin

88°07'30" 87°52'30"

43°15'

EXPLANATION

EH3 Lakes

MMSD planning area 

Watershed boundary 

Subwatershed boundary 

Streams

Lincoln

at 47th Street

Milwaukee River 

at Wells Street Menomonee River 

at 70th Street

Kinmckmnic River 

at 1st Street

Oak Creek 

at Ryan Road

Base composited from Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission regional base 

map, 1:2,000,1995; U.S. Geological Survey digital line graph hydrography, 1:100,000,2001; Wisconsin 

Department of Natural Resources version 2 hydrography, 1:24,000,2002. Wisconsin Transverse 

Mercator Projection, referenced to North American Datum of 1983,1991 adjustment.

1 I

2 4 KILOMETERS (

Figure 8. Locations of sites typically examined for seasonality and temporal trends in the Milwaukee Metropolitan 

Sewerage District (MMSD) planning area,Wis.
Evaluation of Historical Data 29

WQT3D" 87°52'30"

4315'

EXPLANATION

Lakes

Subwatershed. sampled

for constituent since 1998

I———I Streamflow or 

I——I stream stage

|. ! ! . Precipitation 

MMSD planning area 

Watershed boundary 

/~\J Subwatershed boundary 

Streams

Sampling site, sampled 

for constituent since 1998 

•| Streamflow or 

^* stream stage 

Precipitation

Lake

Michigan

Base composited from Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission regional base 

map, 1:2,000,1995; U.S. Geological Survey digital line graph hydrography, 1:100,000,2001; Wisconsin 

Department of Natural Resources version 2 hydrography, 1:24,000,2002. Wisconsin Transverse 

Mercator Projection, referenced to North American Datum of 1983,1991 adjustment.

0

0

2 4 MILES

1 1

1 1 2 4 KILOMETERS

Figure 9. Locations of sites sampled for streamflow, stream stage, or precipitation since 1998 in the Milwaukee 

Metropolitan Sewerage District (MMSD) planning area, Wis.
30 Water-Resources-Related Information for the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin

88°07'30" 87°52'30"

43°15'

43°

Base composited from Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission regional base 

map, 1:2,000,1995; U.S. Geological Survey digital line graph hydrography, 1:100,000,2001; Wisconsin 

Department of Natural Resources version 2 hydrography, 1:24,000,2002. Wisconsin Transverse 

Mercator Projection, referenced to North American Datum of 1983,1991 adjustment.

EXPLANATION

Lakes

Subwatershed, sampled

for constituent since 1998

| . ] Physical

|___| Nutrients

|ji ! ]| Inorganics

MMSD planning area 

~/~\J Watershed boundary 

/~\J Subwatershed boundary

Streams

Sampling site, sampled

for constituent since 1998 

•_ Physical

Nutrients 

Inorganics

Lake

Michigan

0

0

I 2

2

|

I 

4

4 MILES

I

KILOMETERS

Figure 10. Locations of sites sampled for physical properties, nutrients, or inorganic constituents since 1998 in 

the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District (MMSD) planning area, Wis.
Evaluation of Historical Data 31

88°07'30" 87°52'30"

4315'

43°

EXPLANATION

Lakes

Subwatershed, sampled

for constituent since 1998

[___] Trace elements 

I' ' ' 'J Pesticides 

[ / \ Organics

MMSD planning area 

Watershed boundary 

/~\J Subwatershed boundary 

Streams

Sampling site, sampled 

for constituent since 1998

^B Trace elements

• Pesticides 

Organics

Base composited from Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission regional base 

map, 1:2,000,1995; U.S. Geological Survey digital line graph hydrography, 1:100,000,2001; Wisconsin 

Department of Natural Resources version 2 hydrography, 1:24,000,2002. Wisconsin Transverse 

Mercator Projection, referenced to North American Datum of 1983,1991 adjustment.

Figure 11. Locations of sites sampled for trace elements, pesticides, or organics since 1998 in the Milwaukee 

Metropolitan Sewerage District (MMSD) planning area, Wis.
32 Water-Resources-Related Information for the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin

88°07'30" 87°521 30"

43°15'

43°

EXPLANATION

I Lakes

Subwatershed, sampled 

for constituent since 1998

\ / / \ Biology 

| | Habitat

MMSD planning area 

Watershed boundary 

/~\J Subwatershed boundary 

Streams

Sampling site, sampled 

for constituent since 1998 

• Bacteria 

Biology 

Habitat

Base composited from Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission regional base 

map, 1:2,000,1995; U.S. Geological Survey digital line graph hydrography, 1:100,000,2001; Wisconsin 

Department of Natural Resources version 2 hydrography, 1:24,000,2002. Wisconsin Transverse 

Mercator Projection, referenced to North American Datum of 1983,1991 adjustment.

Lake

Michigan

0h0

1

2

2

I

1 4

4 MILES

1

KILOMETERS

Figure 12. Locations of sites sampled for bacterial, biological, or habitat data since 1998 in the Milwaukee 

Metropolitan Sewerage District (MMSD) planning area, Wis.
Physical Data 33

Physical Data

Rainfall and streamflow strongly affect stream chemistry, geomorphology, and aquatic communities. Water quality 

can vary greatly in response to streamflow. Flooding, erosion, and sedimentation are major issues related not only to 

instream water quality but also to structural damage and 

other negative effects in downstream areas. In addition, a 

great demand has been placed on water resources in Wisconsin by increased multiple uses such as maintenance of fish 

and wildlife habitat, irrigation of crops, dilution and assimilation of wastes, production of hydroelectric power, and 

maintenance of adequate flows for boating.
34 Water-Resources-Related Information for the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin

Streamflow, Stream Stage, and Precipitation

The USGS and MMSD record stream stage (the height 

of the water above an arbitrary reference point) and precipitation in the study area to estimate streamflow and to gain 

information for modeling/predictive purposes. MMSD also 

uses stage data to study the effects of river stage on sewer 

systems. Stage measurements are continuously recorded by 

equipment inside a gagehouse located on the stream bank, 

and they are relayed via telephones or satellites to USGS 

offices. Measurements of the volume of water passing a 

given stream cross section in a given period of time 

("streamflow" or "discharge", reported as cubic feet per second, or ft3/s) are made to develop a mathematical relation 

between river stage and flow. Actual measurements are 

made over the entire stage range to verify and update the 

relation, which may change over time in response to changes 

in channel characteristics.

USGS has estimated streamflow data at 42 sites within 

the MMSD planning area for various periods of record 

beginning in 1970 and continuing until present (fig. 13, 

table 8). "Daily mean discharge" is stored in the MMSD 

Corridor Study database in cubic feet per second.

USGS streamflow data are available in real time on the 

World Wide Web for a broad range of users that include 

flood forecasters, government officials, consultants, industry, and recreational users such as fishermen and kayakers 

(U.S. Geological Survey, 2003).

MMSD collected stream-elevation data at four sites in 

the MMSD planning area beginning in 1993 and continuing 

to the present (fig. 13, table 8). Hourly elevations (in feet referenced to the National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929) 

are stored in the MMSD Corridor Study database. These data 

were not used to estimate stream discharge.

All major watersheds in the MMSD planning area currently have at least one streamgage where streamflow is 

computed (fig. 13). Several of the subwatersheds do not;

however, in most cases, there is a streamgage downstream in 

another watershed so that surface waters are well accounted 

for in the planning area. The upper reaches of the Menomonee River watershed, middle reaches of the Lower Milwaukee River subwatershed, and parts of the Root River and Oak 

Creek watersheds were not as well covered by streamgages 

as are other parts of the planning area. Typically, the smaller 

subwatersheds in the headwaters of major rivers have not 

been gaged.

Daily mean streamflows (fig. 14) at the Milwaukee 

River and Oak Creek stations have a seasonal pattern, with 

higher daily mean flows from March through May. This seasonality of higher daily flows is related to snowmelt and 

spring rains and resultant higher antecedent soil moisture. At 

the other three stations this seasonality is less apparent, perhaps because of a higher proportion of impervious surface at 

these sites. Therefore, high flows may occur at these sites 

even during drier seasons because overland runoff is the primary factor driving streamflow at these urban sites, not soil 

moisture.

Plots of streamflow over time (fig. 15) show little evidence of long-term trends in the planning area. Yearly fluctuations can be seen, however, and the same patterns are not 

observed at all stations, indicating variation across the planning area.

MMSD measured precipitation at 20 gages in the planning area (table 8). Precipitation gages were clustered 

toward the center part of the planning area, leaving the northern and southern parts with less coverage (fig. 13). MMSD 

also uses precipitation data for regulatory reporting (storm 

duration, intensity, and frequency of recurrence) for performance review of the ISS (Inline Storage System, otherwise 

known as "the deep tunnel"). Data are stored as cumulative 

inches per day at an hourly increment. Collection of precipitation data began in 1993 and continues to present.
Physical Data 35

88 07'30" 87°521 30"

43°15'

43°

EXPLANATION

Lakes

Subwatershed, 

containing gage for 

constituent

I___I Streamflow 

\ \ Stream stage 

I- • • • Precipitation 

MMSD planning area 

Watershed boundary 

/~\J Subwatershed boundary 

Streams

Site, gage locations for 

constituent

Streamflow 

Stream stage 

Precipitation

Lake

Michigan

Base composited from Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission regional base 

map, 1:2,000,1995; U.S. Geological Survey digital line graph hydrography, 1:100,000,2001; Wisconsin 

Department of Natural Resources version 2 hydrography, 1:24,000,2002. Wisconsin Transverse 

Mercator Projection, referenced to North American Datum of 1983,1991 adjustment.

0h02

1

1 1 2 4

4 MILES

1

KILOMETERS

Figure 13. Locations of streamflow, stream stage, and precipitation gages in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage 

District (MMSD) planning area, Wis.
36 Water-Resources-Related Information for the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin

Kinnickinnic River at South 11th Street

1,800

1,600

1,400

1,200

1,000

800

600

400

200

0

8,000

Menomonee River at 70th Street Bridge

O 

O 

LJJ 

W

DC 

LJJ 

D_

LJJ 

LJJ 

LJL

O 

CD

=> 

O

Lincoln Creek at 47th Street

2,000

,500

500/1

Milwaukee River at Estabrook Park

LJJ 

DC

10,000

8,000

6,000

4,000

2,000

0

1,000

800

600

400

200

0

Oak Creek at 15th Avenue

JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUNE JULY AUG SEPT OCT NOV DEC

MONTH

Figure 14. Seasonality of streamflow for selected sites in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, 1970-2002.
Physical Data 37

O 

O

LJJ 

(f)

tr LU

D_

ILU 

LU 

LL

O

CO

=>

O

W 

CC

1,800

1,600

1,400

1,200

1,000

800

600

400

200

0

8,000

6,000

4,000

2,000

0

2,500

2,000

1,500

1,000

500

0

10,000

8,000

6,000

4,000

2,000

0

1,000

800

600

400

200

0

Kinnickinnic River at South 11th Street

Menomonee River at 70th Street Bridge

Lincoln Creek at 47th Street

Milwaukee River at Estabrook Park

Oak Creek at 15th Avenue

1970 1972 1974 1976 1978 1980 1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002

YEAR

Figure 15. Trends of streamflow for selected sites in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, 1970-2002.
TableS. Summary statistics for streamflow, stream stage, and precipitation, by category, for the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, 1970-2002

[USGS, U.S. Geological Survey; MMSD, Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District; —, no data available]

USGS MMSD

Streamflow Stream stage Precipitation

Watershed

Fox RiverKinnickinnic RiverLake Michigan Tributary

Menomonee River

Milwaukee River

Oak Creek

Root River

Subwatershed

Muskego LakeKinnickinnic River

West Milwaukee DitchWilson Park CreekLake Michigan Tributary

Honey Creek

Little Menomonee River

Lower Menomonee RiverUpper Menomonee RiverUnderwood Creek

Lower Cedar Creek

Lincoln CreekLower Milwaukee River

Mitchell Field Drainage Ditch

North Branch Oak Creek

Lower Oak CreekMiddle Root River

Upper Root River

Whitnall Park Creeks

2

fii

.a

3 CO&0)

&

55

2

4--5--4

4

6

4

1--3

4

1--1

1

1- £3 CO&^c3 Ou3,532 9,650-- 5,295-- 2,592 5,285 16,608 13,086 9,655-- 1,272 20,481 1,654- 11,633 11,633 1,148-- iT3« _Q) CO LJ 10/01/1987 07/01/1976 -- 11/12/1996 -- 12/01/1974 11/01/1974 01/01/1970 11/01/1974 11/01/1974 -- 03/26/1981 01/01/1970 11/12/1996 -- 01/01/1970 01/01/1970 03/02/1999 -- 2 & 2 a> £ 3 £ a) a> ±i (0 CO CO tg CO 5*855* *- -Q *. «5 *- -Q CO 3 O flj CO 3 aj co £ .2 g tn *3 <5 i « 5 & -1 a. o w a co o co 0} 0} 0) 0) 11/06/2001 11/06/2001 -- 11/06/2001 -- 06/29/1982 09/30/1990 11/06/2001 11/06/2001 11/06/2001 -- 06/30/1997 11/06/2001 11/06/2001 -- 11/06/2001 11/06/2001 09/30/2000 -- --I 41,682 06/02/1994 08/05/2001 ------------------1 60,104 09/06/1994 08/05/2001 2 114,636 06/02/1994 08/05/2001 ---------- -- --11--112311122--2----11 &3 CO&•5| ou- 74,573 74,572-- 73,962 74,572 149,145 223,749 74,658 73,106 35,239 149,146 149,146-- 110,747---- 74,573 74,569 1T3W _Q) CO LJ -- 01/01/1993 01/01/1993 -- 01/01/1993 01/01/1993 01/01/1993 01/01/1993 01/01/1993 01/01/1993 01/01/1997 01/01/1993 01/01/1993 -- 01/01/1993 ---- 01/01/1993 01/01/1993 a>CO T3i3 -- 08/05/2001 08/05/2001 -- 08/05/2001 08/05/2001 08/05/2001 08/05/2001 08/05/2001 08/05/2001 08/05/2001 08/05/2001 08/05/2001 -- 08/05/2001 ---- 08/05/2001 08/05/2001

CD 

VtoiCD 

V)

30

CDICDp»3^ c^

IC/9CDCD 

09 inCD3

09
Selected Field Measurements and Miscellaneous Constituents 39

Chemical Indicators of Water Quality

The chemistry of the water, sediment, and tissues 

collected in surface waters of the MMSD planning area 

reflect naturally occurring conditions as well as the influence 

of the surrounding urban environment.

Selected Field Measurements and 

Miscellaneous Constituents

Aquatic organisms are strongly influenced by certain 

physical properties and chemical constituents of water that 

are commonly measured in the field, such as dissolved 

oxygen, biochemical oxygen demand, and particulate matter 

in the water column. These properties and constituents can 

be influenced by natural environmental factors and the urban 

setting.
40 Water-Resources-Related Information for the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin

pH

The pH of water affects the physiological functions of 

plants and animals and is an important indictor of the overall 

health of water bodies. The measurement of pH indicates 

whether a water is acidic or basic; more precisely, pH is the 

indication of hydrogen ion concentration in water and is 

directly related to the ratio of hydrogen (H+) and hydroxyl 

(OH-) activities at any given temperature (U.S. Geological 

Survey, 1998). pH is reported on a scale of 0 to 14, with a 

measurement of 7 considered neutral. The pH of an aqueous 

solution is controlled by interrelated chemical reactions that 

produce or consume hydrogen (Hem, 1985). If hydrogen 

activity is greater than hydroxyl activity, the solution is considered acidic (pH less than 7.0); if hydroxyl activity is 

greater than hydrogen activity, the solution is considered 

basic, or alkaline (pH greater than 7.0).

Natural and anthropogenic sources can both affect pH. 

Carbon dioxide (CO2) enters waterways through the atmosphere, runoff, release from bacteria, and respiration from 

aquatic plants, and it forms a weak acid when it dissolves in 

the water. River water in areas not influenced by pollution 

generally has a pH in the range of 6.5 to 8.5. Release of 

acidic and alkaline compounds from rocks and soils can 

influence pH. Water draining from marshes and forests is 

often slightly acidic because of acids produced by decaying 

vegetation (Murphy, 2002c). Anthropogenic sources of acidity can include exhaust from cars and powerplant emissions 

which increase the concentrations of nitrogen oxides and sulfur dioxide in the air; these chemicals react in the atmosphere 

to form nitric and sulfuric acid.

Water with a pH that is very high (greater than 9.5) or 

very low (less than 4.5) are unsuitable for most aquatic 

organisms. Young fish and immature aquatic insects are 

extremely sensitive to pH less than 5.0 and may die. Low pH 

can also affect aquatic life by altering stream chemistry. Low 

pH accelerates the release of metals from rock and sediments, and these metals can affect fish metabolism. pH 

above 9.0 can harm fish by denaturing cellular membranes 

(Murphy, 2002c). The USEPA Secondary Drinking Water 

Regulation (SDWR) and Canadian drinking water Aesthetic 

Objective (AO) both recommend a pH between 6.5 and 8.5 

for drinking-water supply. Low pH can impart a bitter metallic taste and be corrosive to plumbing; high pH can result in 

a slippery feel and soda taste and can increase deposits in 

plumbing. The Canadian water-quality guideline for protection of aquatic life specifies a pH of 6.5-9.0.

A site in the Muskego Lake subwatershed on Big 

Muskego Lake was the only site with a median pH measurement above the Canadian aquatic life guideline of 9.0 standard units (fig. 16). The highest median pH measurements 

frequently were measured at lake sites. Sites with the highest 

median measurements were in the Kinnickinnic River, Lincoln Creek, Honey Creek, Muskego Lake, and Butler Ditch 

sub watersheds (fig. 16).

Maximum measurements of pH for the subwatershed 

were above the guideline of 9.0 standard units in the 

Muskego Lake, Kinnickinnic River, Lower Menomonee 

River, Upper Menomonee River, Lincoln Creek, Lower Milwaukee River, and Lower Oak Creek subwatersheds (fig. 17, 

table 9). Minimum measurements of pH for the subwatershed were below the guideline of 6.5 standard units in the 

Kinnickinnic River, Lower Menomonee River, Upper 

Menomonee River, Lower Milwaukee River, Mitchell Field 

Drainage Ditch, Muskego Lake, Upper Root River, and Wilson Park Creek subwatersheds (fig. 17, table 9).

Data to determine seasonality were available at four of 

the five intensive sites; data were unavailable for Oak Creek 

at Ryan Road from early December to mid-March (fig. 18). 

The Milwaukee River and Menomonee River sites had similar variability with increasing pH to early spring (early 

May), decreasing pH to around August, and slightly increasing pH until the end of the year. Oak Creek data had a downward trend to near August and then an upward trend through 

the end of the data (early December). These seasonal variations follow the growing season for aquatic plants and could 

be due to the increased respiration of aquatic plants. There 

was much more variability at Lincoln Creek; pH increased 

from October to early March, but throughout the spring and 

summer it demonstrated no consistent pattern.

Trend analysis at the sites showed similar changes at 

the Kinnickinnic River, Menomonee River, Lincoln Creek 

and the Milwaukee River (fig. 19): a slight upward trend (in 

readings) in the early to mid- 1980s was followed by a slight 

downward trend until the latter 1990s (98-99) and a slight 

upward trend through 2002. Data collection at from Lincoln 

Creek started in 1992; the pH trend was downward to the late 

1990s then slightly upward through 2002. At Oak Creek at 

Ryan Road, the trend was different than at the other four 

sites: slight downward trend from the start of the record 

through 2002.
Selected Field Measurements and Miscellaneous Constituents 41

88°07'30" 87°52'30"

43°15'

43'

Base composited from Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission regional base 

map, 1:2,000.1995: U.S. Geological Survey digital line graph hydrography, 1:100,000,2001; Wisconsin 

Department of Natural Resources version 2 hydrography, 1:24,000,2002. Wisconsin Transverse 

Mercator Projection, referenced to North American Datum of 1983,1991 adjustment.

EXPLANATION

Lakes

Subwatershed, median 

pH in standard units

[_ ' j 7.20 - 7.72 

| | 7.73 - 8.00 

| | 8.01 - 8.39 

^^| 8.40 - 9.20

MMSD planning area 

Watershed boundary 

/~\J Subwatershed boundary 

Streams

Sampling site, median 

pH in standard units 

7.20 7 72

© 1-10 samples 

11 -100 samples

101 - 2,500 samples

7.73-8.00

O 1-10 samples 

11 -100 samples

( J 101-2,500 samples

8.01-8.39

O 1-10 samples 

11 -100 samples

101 - 2,500 samples

8.40 - 9.20

© 1-10 samples 

11 -100 samples

101 - 2,500 samples

Purple outline indicates 

median pH in standard 

units exceeding a 

guideline value 

> 9.00

O 1-10 samples 

11 -100 samples

101 - 2,500 samples

4 MILES

4 KILOMETERS

Figure 16. Sites sampled for pH in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District (MMSD) planning area, Wis.
N)

Fox Kinnickinnic Menomonee

River

11

10

COIZ 9 D 9

QDC

Q

ICOzI 7

Q_

6

5

3,697— —— River River i 4,733 _sr~i_ mm ————————— mm— 1 74 J-, 4 HY _i —— 4 ———————— 

s£~ ^ fS> \O

^ .#? <?

Milwaukee Oak Root

1 i 

1,021

4,675

~

1 O __ n~ ' i—

3

B ...I . n^ g

_ rj L

u^

~ ~

— i —i —i_ 

_ 

i H

— i

5

fjLJ

i i i 1 1

c/ ,<^ c/ </ X

* ^/XX ^ y y

River Creek River

9.659

394 ==

i—

[

i_

— i

] E

i_

_i — _ 

i

i I

t vL v( t .Ci pr or iO

<^ 0^ 0^ <^ 

C^1 \f5^ <5^* ^

^ <;\^

O .^* 

•xw1

1,004

509

15 m

__ 254

T bp D J_

H I I H

5 I

U_i —— ?R 26 r=r-i ryn H^ 111 F~| 0 _ ZL JI p] -- 9.0 standard units, Canadian aquatic-life criteria upper limit 6.5 standard units, Canadian aquatic-life criteria lower limit

EXPLANATION

106 Number of samples

.^ e£" e^~ e^~ ^ ^ ^ outside the box 

<JN Q<? Q<? Q<? ^ ^ ^ r-I— Largest data value within 1.5 times (^ >(.. >(.. NJ.. ($>• c^ _(?• ' I ' the IQR above the box 

^ O O O .^ ^» <?• pi-3,, 75th percentile — i

o^ ^ N^ v^ ^ ^ —— Median (50th percentile [a^^foR6 ^X ^v \^ \^ ^* V/ t '] ! '""lyc ^IWn L-pJ 25th percentile _l

i | | Smallest data value within 1 .5 times the IQR below the box

SUBWATERSHED

C/9CD

<a

CDs

20)

Figure 17. Statistical distribution of pH measurements in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, 1970-2002.
Selected Field Measurements and Miscellaneous Constituents 43

Kinnickinnic River at 1st Street

CO

Z 

=)

Q 

DC

CO

I 

D_

9.0 

8.5 

8.0 

7.5 

7.0 

6.5 

6.0

9.0 

8.5 

8.0 

7.5 

7.0 

6.5

8.8 

8.6 

8.4 

8.2 

8.0 

7.8 

7.6 

7.4 

7.2

9.0 

8.5 

8.0 

7.5 

7.0 

6.5

8.2 

8.0 

7.8 

7.6 

7.4 

7.2 

7.0 

6.8 

6.6 

6.4

Menomonee River at 70th Street Bridge

Lincoln Creek at 47th Street

•

. •«

* *

••* »•

» *

Milwaukee River at Wells Street

• r

Oak Creek at Ryan Road

• :••»*,.••

JAN FEE MAR APR MAY JUNE JULY AUG SEPT OCT NOV DEC

MONTH

Figure 18. Seasonality of pH for selected sites in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, 1970-2002.
44 Water-Resources-Related Information for the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin

CO

=>

Q 

DC

CO

I 

D_

9.5 

9.0 

8.5 

8.0 

7.5 

7.0 

6.5 

6.0

9.5 

9.0 

8.5 

8.0 

7.5 

7.0 

6.5 

6.0

9.5 

9.0 

8.5 

8.0 

7.5 

7.0 

6.5 

6.0

9.5 

9.0 

8.5 

8.0 

7.5 

7.0 

6.5 

6.0

9.5 

9.0 

8.5 

8.0 

7.5 

7.0 

6.5 

6.0

Kinnickinnic River at 1st Street

Menomonee River at 70th Street Bridge

Lincoln Creek at 47th Street

Milwaukee River at Wells Street

Oak Creek at Ryan Road

1980 1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002

YEAR

Figure 19. Trends of pH for selected sites in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, 1970-2002.
Selected Field Measurements and Miscellaneous Constituents 45

o

p03

o

05

to

U.)06

UB8|/\|

U.MH

atep 8|diuBS

atep 8|duies )S3j|jeg

jui!i 6ui)jodaj 

san|BA jo jaqiunN

||e |o junoo

s)|nsaj 13UO1S *o junoo

S)|nsaj SOSI1 1° junoo

stinsaj QSIAIIAI |o junoo

p8i|SJ8^BMqns jad satis

O .-H —i

8 8

O r—I --< _H ,-i -H O

(N ;-H ~

O O O O

-* o o o

i_; UN ^r NLJ

>? O ^ (N

Q u-i rj

3 .S ^

S O

^ u
46 Water-Resources-Related Information for the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin

Alkalinity

Alkalinity is an expression of buffering capacity, or the 

capacities of solutes in water to neutralize a strong acid. 

Alkalinity is not a reflection of pH but instead refers to the 

ability of water to resist changes in pH. Most natural waters 

contain substantial amounts of dissolved carbon dioxide species, which are the principal components of alkalinity.

Natural and anthropogenic factors both affect alkalinity. Rainwater is naturally acidic (pH less than 7.0) because 

of exposure to carbon dioxide in the atmosphere: its alkalinity is generally less than 10.0 mg/L as CaCO3 and can be less 

than 1.0 mg/L as CaCO3 , depending on the pH (Hem, 1985). 

High alkalinity concentrations in ground water are not 

uncommon, and concentrations greater than 1,000 mg/L as 

CaCO3 can occur in ground water that is low in calcium and 

magnesium. As surface water, ground water or rainwater 

percolates through and moves over soils and rock formations 

containing calcite or dolomitic limestones, these formations 

and soils will dissolve (leach) calcium and bicarbonate salts 

to the water, increasing alkalinity (Wurts and Durborow, 

1992). Industrial or sewage effluent can increase alkalinity 

in streams. Many cleaning agents and food residues contain 

carbonate and bicarbonate.

There are no water quality guidelines for alkalinity. 

Concentrations of 20-200 mg/L as CaCO3 are typical of 

freshwater. Alkalinity between 100 and 200 mg/L as CaCO3 

will stabilize stream pH. Concentrations below 10 mg/L as 

CaCO3 indicate the system is poorly buffered and is very 

susceptible to changes in pH from natural and anthropogenic 

sources (Murphy, 2002a).

Sites with the highest median alkalinity concentrations 

were in the Upper Menomonee River, Lower Milwaukee 

River, Upper Root River, Middle Root River, Upper Oak 

Creek, and Lower Oak Creek sub watersheds (fig. 20). Sites 

with the lowest median alkalinity concentrations were in the 

Little Menomonee River, Lower Menomonee River, Lower

Milwaukee River, Lincoln Creek, Honey Creek, Kinnickinnic River, and Muskego Lake sub watersheds (fig. 20).

The Upper Root River, Upper Oak Creek, Upper Menomonee River, Middle Root River, and Lower Oak Creek subwatersheds had the highest median alkalinity concentrations 

(fig. 20). Median concentrations in the Little Menomonee 

River, Honey Creek, Kinnickinnic River, and Muskego Lake 

subwatersheds were the lowest (fig. 20). The highest maximum alkalinity concentrations were measured in the Lower 

Milwaukee River (1,112 mg/L as CaCO3 ) and Kinnickinnic 

River subwatersheds (989 mg/L as CaCO3 ) (fig. 21, 

table 10). The Upper Root River sub watershed had the highest median alkalinity concentration (325 mg/L as CaCO3 ) 

(fig. 21, table 10).

Seasonality analysis indicates that alkalinity was 

slightly lower in midsummer than during winter. The Kinnickinnic River and Menomonee River showed similar seasonal variability (fig. 22): concentrations decreasing starting 

in January, rise slightly near May, decline throughout the 

summer, increase near October, and decline again near 

December. The Milwaukee River site showed similar seasonal variability, but with a much more gradual slope to its 

declines and rises. Both Lincoln Creek and Oak Creek had 

multiple cycles of increasing and decreasing alkalinity 

throughout the year but the fluctuations were much more 

pronounced at Lincoln Creek. There were frequent rises and 

declines from April through November at Lincoln Creek; the 

changes in trends at Oak Creek were more subtle and 

occurred from May/June to October/November.

Temporal trends were not as noticeable as seasonal 

variability was at the five sites (fig. 23). There appeared to 

be a slight downtrend in alkalinity concentrations for the 

period of record at the Kinnickinnic River, Menomonee 

River, and possibly Oak Creek. There was a slight uptrend in 

alkalinity concentrations at Lincoln Creek, and no perceptible change at the Milwaukee River at Wells Street.
Selected Field Measurements and Miscellaneous Constituents 47

87°52'30"

43°15'

EXPLANATION

Lakes

Subwatershed, median 

alkalinity in milligrams 

per liter as CaC03

I^H 0-160 

I I 161-213 

| | 214-260 

^^ 261 - 340

MMSD planning area 

~/~\j Watershed boundary 

/~\J Subwatershed boundary 

Streams

Sampling site, median 

alkalinity in milligrams 

per liter as CaC03

I -10 samples

II -100 samples

101 -1,275 samples

161-213

O 1-10 samples 

11 -100 samples

101 -1,275 samples

214-260

O 1-10 samples 

11-100 samples

Base composited from Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission regional base 

map, 1:2,000,1995; U.S. Geological Survey digital line graph hydrography, 1:100,000,2001; Wisconsin 

Department of Natural Resources version 2 hydrography, 1:24,000,2002. Wisconsin Transverse 

Mercator Projection, referenced to North American Datum of 1983,1991 adjustment.

Figure 20. Sites sampled for alkalinity in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District (MMSD) planning area, 

Wis.
10,000

CO

O O 

< 

OCO 

<ccLUCC LU Q.

CO

CC 

C3

1,000

100

li 10<

Fox Kinnickinnic Menomonee 

River River River

4

4,138

Fi_

jf </

E,

_j

4,0

r

3 r a. h

1 1

/ X / X

69 gg

= =3 E

l_

^=

/

Milwaukee 

River

6

=1 _i

^

7.820

3£

\

i2

l_

c/ 0</

1

_l

\

95

n E

u

^s

^

X

Oak Root 

Creek River

9 4£ ~" n 

3 {

j

^

m U=

'8 243

3 I

_l

106

27 |— p

vL vl < < <

CV CV v© \© v©

jPj jPj xt*** WC* We*

C^ Cr ^ ^ ^

/ o^ </" </* <^

EXPLANATION

106 Number of samples

__ Data value 1.5 to 3.0 times the IQR

outside the box

Largest data value within 1.5 times

the IQR above the box

75th percentile —,I* _i- irn L -i \ Interquartile Median (50th percentile) ranqg (|QR)25th percentile _ISmallest data value within 1.5 times the IQR below the box

Reporting limit for

some analyses was: 10 milligrams per liter as CaCO3

I

30

CD 

V) O

30

z.

01*+

CD

0_S3COCDCD

3 

IQ 

CDI' 

I'

SUBWATERSHED

Figure 21. Statistical distribution of alkalinity concentrations in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, 1970-2002.
Selected Field Measurements and Miscellaneous Constituents 49

Kinnickinnic River at 1st Street

CO

O 

O 

< 

O 

03 

<

DC 

LU

500

400

300

200

100

0

500

400

300

200

100

0

w?

* !•

Menomonee River at 70th Street Bridge

Lincoln Creek at 47th Street

DC 

LU 

Q.

03

DC 

O

<

_l<

400

350

300

250

200

150

100

50

0

1,200

1,000.

400

200

0

•

.

Milwaukee River at Wells Street

Oak Creek at Ryan Road

4UU

350

300

250

200

150

100

50

n

* * 1 - *^* . - *

* <~~ m -** — *• **

* •?

*

^

***** „ e v , 9 --

*

i i i i i i i i i i i i i

JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUNE JULY AUG SEPT OCT NOV DEC

MONTH

Figure 22. Seasonality of alkalinity for selected sites in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, 

1970-2002.
50 Water-Resources-Related Information for the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin

CO 

8

500

400

300

200

100

0

500

400

300

20°

Kinnickinnic River at 1st Street

Menomonee River at 70th Street Bridge

O 100

03

< 0

cr

LLJ h;

_l 1,000

cr

LU 800

Q_

C/3 600

^

< 400

DC

O 200

Lincoln Creek at 47th Street

1,200

1,000

800

600

400

200

0

400

300

200

100

0

Milwaukee River at Wells Street

Oak Creek at Ryan Road

1976 1978 1980 1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002

YEAR

Figure 23. Trends of alkalinity for selected sites in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, 1970-2002.
Selected Field Measurements and Miscellaneous Constituents 51

uinuiixei/v

o

CZ3 

CNI

i 3

00

cz

E 

E

oo

o

UB8|/\|

ueip3|/\|

3|j}U3343d 

3|!}U3343d

U4nu4ju;|/\| 

a;ep a|duies is3}e~|

aiep a|du4Bs isa!|4B3

-= -O OH

6u|}4od34 e 

MO|aq san|BA jo 4aqu4n|g

s;|nsa4 ||e jo IUPOQ 

snns3413UO1S *° lunoo

QSWW *o lunoo

P3ijs43ie/wqns 43d sa^s

en

ON

OO

CM

^O

^o

CM

O

00

rr

vorr

CM

ON

CM

So

o

o

o

CM

00

^o

!

o

nno

o

CM

Muskego Lake

River Fox 

ON 

OO 

ON

5 

CM

ON

O 

CM

o t—

o ^o

o 

en

CM

C!rCM

^

CM

OO

ON

\S

S3o

!

o

oo 

en

rr"

o

o

oo 

en

rr

„

River Kinnickinnic 

>

£

Kinnickinn

CM

oo 

o

CM

O

o<N

CN 

O 

CM

2

00

00

*n

oo

SfN

So

ON

ON

ON

^

CM

ao

1

o

en

en

o

o

CM

Ditch Buler 

S-i

'£>

<o

Menomone

:

1

rON

CM

^O

O 

<rs t—

ON

>?)

CM

NO

O

o

-

-

-

o

o

-

Creek Honey 

:

1

rrON

ON

pi

o 

rt—

ON

ON

pi

O

O

-

-

-

O

o

-

Little Menomonee 

River

o 

vo ^r

CM

00 

CM

^J-

<ri

CM

E 

CM

\O 

O 

CM

O \O

oo

CM

O

o

CM 

r~

CM

^H

SON

O

CM

OO

o

o

-

ON 

^O

O

•*

-

O

oo ^o

o

•^

^o

Menomonee Lower

River

r~-

rr

^o

CM 

rn

o 

o 

m

o ^o

CM

r~

CM

^Ots

r<

o

oo

no

o

CM

r~-

CM

— i

CM

00

ON

•?p

O

S

!

o

$

ON

O

0

^O 

&

f)

Upper Menomonee 

River

o ^o 

rr

o ^o

CM

O 

CM

OO^o

(N

^O

O c^l

ON

^O

O

ri

o

o

C«

o

CM

en

o 

m

ON

ON

vS

^

O

|

O

CM

OO

m

^o

>n

rr

<•<•) 

m

t~-

Lincoln Creek

b

'£>

Milwaukee

CM

O 

ON 

CM

S 

CM

t— 

CM

rr

CM 

CM

OO^o

ro

>n

SO

o

CM

O

CM

O 

CM

OO

ON

NO

CM

•§•

O

!

o

o

CMoo^ 1--'

CM

rro

oo

MD^ t— "

>n

u 

u

1£

o 

J

o ^j-

^o

CM

O

orn

o 

>n 

CM

CM

vo 

CM

CM

O

ON

O

O

1^

oo

ON

^

CM

en

o

!

o

ON

ON

O

O

ON 

ON

rr

Creek Oa Lower 

Oak Creek

CM

OO<•<•)

oo 

m

r~-

oo 

CM

>n 

rn 

r)

^o ^JCM

O 

ON

m

t~-

o

o

C<

ON

"-H

>n

oo

ON

^

CM

m

o

!

o

oo 

oo^Jo

o

oo 

oo 

rr

CM

Middle Creek Oak 

vo 

m

CM

^O 

CM

OOt— 

CM

CM 

m

CM

r~- rr

^o

rn

o

o

CM

ON

-H

<rs

oo

ON

^

CN

m

o

:

o

9

CM

O

o

rr

CM

-

Oak Creek Upper 

o

CM

rn

OO 

ON 

CM

O 

00 

CM

W) ^JfN

O ^O 

fS

<•<•) o 

n

00

00

<•<•)

rri

0

o

ON

ON

ON

>?5

CM

OO

o

!

O

CM

O

O

Vi 

CM

-

Riveroot Lower

River Root 

o ^o 

m

r~-

o

rn

o 

oo 

CM

rn 

CM

O

rCM

5-

CM

gr-~

or~-

o

o

CM

O

' — 1 o

ON

ON

ON

5^

CM

OO

o

:

o

t—

CM

O

o

rCM

-

River Mddle Root 

m rjo

ON 

rn

oo 

>n

S 

CM

>n 

CM

m

^o ^o

cs

o

ri

ON

rr

o

o

CM

O

o

ON

ON

ON

>?i

CM

OO

o

:

o

^o

o

o

o

^o

o

-

Rootiver Upper 
52 Water-Resources-Related Information for the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin

Specific Conductance

Specific conductance (SC) is the measure of the electrical conductivity of water at a certain temperature. Specifically, it is defined as the reciprocal of the resistance, in ohms, 

measured between opposite faces of a centimeter cube of an 

aqueous solution at a specific temperature (Hem, 1985). The 

higher the concentration of dissolved ions, the higher the SC. 

These ions can include dissolved solids such as chloride, 

nitrate, sulfate, phosphate, sodium, magnesium, calcium, 

and iron. Therefore, SC can be an indirect measurement of 

dissolved solids (Murphy, 2002d). Conductance of the same 

water changes greatly with changes in temperature, complicating interpretation of data sets; normalizing the conductance to a temperature eliminates this complication.

Natural factors affecting SC include the release of ions 

from rocks and soils when water moves over them. In particular, rocks containing calcite, calcium, and carbonate tend to 

dissolve in water and increase SC. Anthropogenic sources 

include agricultural runoff containing fertilizer (with phosphate and nitrate) and road runoff containing leaked automobile fluids and chemicals used for deicing roads. Distilled 

water has a SC of at least 1 )jS/cm at 25°C. Rainwater usually 

has a higher SC than distilled water because it dissolves 

gases and other airborne particulates. There are no specific 

regulatory guidelines for SC.

Sites with the highest median SC were concentrated in 

the southern half of the MMSD planning area (fig. 24.). Most 

sites with the lowest median concentrations were clustered in 

the Muskego Lake and Kinnickinnic River subwatersheds, 

with additional scattered sites in six other subwatersheds 

(fig. 24).

Subwatersheds with the highest median SC were also in 

the southern half of the planning area and were the Underwood Creek, Honey Creek, Upper Root River, Middle Root 

River, Upper Oak Creek, Middle Oak Creek, Lower Oak 

Creek, and Wilson Park Creek subwatersheds (fig. 24). Subwatersheds with median SC in the lower quartile were Butler 

Ditch and the Kinnickinnic River (fig. 24). Maximum SC 

greater than 10,000 )jS/cm was measured in the Wilson Park 

Creek and Lincoln Creek subwatersheds (fig. 25, table 11). 

Median SC greater than 1,000 )jS/cm was measured in the 

Wilson Park Creek, Honey Creek, Underwood Creek, Lower 

Oak Creek, Middle Oak Creek, Upper Oak Creek, Middle 

Root River, and Upper Root River subwatersheds (table 11). 

The lowest median SC, less than 650 |o,S/cm, was measured 

in Muskego Lake, Kinnickinnic River, Butler Ditch, and 

Lower Milwaukee River subwatersheds (table 11).

Four of the five sites where seasonality in SC was 

examined (except for Oak Creek at Ryan Road) showed similar seasonal variability with higher concentrations measured 

during winter (fig. 26). This pattern would parallel the use of 

deicing compounds on paved surfaces. Oak Creek was more 

difficult to interpret, because there were no measurements 

from December through March.

Temporal trend analysis for the Milwaukee River and 

Oak Creek sites showed similar trends with year-to-year 

variation, possibly corresponding to changes in road-salt use 

or other factors (fig. 27).
Selected Field Measurements and Miscellaneous Constituents 53

88°07'30" 87°52'30"

43°15'

43°

EXPLANATION

Lakes

Subwatershed, median 

specific conductance in 

microsiemens per 

centimeter

99 - 585

|___| 586 - 783 

[TM»J 784-990 

^^| 991 - 3,405

MMSD planning area 

W/^J Watershed boundary 

/~\J Subwatershed boundary

Streams

Sampling site, median

specific conductance in

microsiemens per

centimeter

99-585

• 1 -10 samples 

11 -100 samples

^B 101 - 2,525 samples

586 - 783

O 1-10 samples 

O 11 -100 samples

101 - 2,525 samples

784-990

O 1 -10 samples 

11 -100 samples

101 - 2,525 samples

991-3.405

• 1-10 samples 

11 -100 samples

101 - 2,525 samples

Base composited from Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission regional base 

map, 1:2,000,1995; U.S. Geological Survey digital line graph hydrography, 1:100,000,2001; Wisconsin 

Department of Natural Resources version 2 hydrography, 1:24,000,2002. Wisconsin Transverse 

Mercator Projection, referenced to North American Datum of 1983,1991 adjustment.

0

0

1

2

2

1

1 4 Kl

4 Ml

1

LOMETE

X

Figure 24. Sites sampled for specific conductance in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District (MMSD) 

planning area, Wis.
rr

LLJ LLJ

LLJ

o

rrLLJ Q_ 

CO

zLLJLLJ 

CO 

Orr 

oLLJ O

O 

O

gLLO 

LLJ Q_ 

CO

100,000

10,000

1,000

100

10

0.1

0.01

0.001

Fox Kinnickinnic 

River River

: '

3,723

. L1 34 4,948 —— = 1 ^ • •p

L

L 

J

J

1

Menomonee Milwaukee 

River River

1 i i !

102

5,057 — 40 - — —— 2

L

— I 1,118 = s !T!

-I pb r£\ ^ | ^

I " m — iL 5 _ j i 

_ 

i

538

L

- 10,50;^1_i

t

7

r

L

I 

_i

Oak Root 

Creek River

i i i

1,142

= 506 252

Pft f^l rq

1 ;

157 :

—— 109

"

EXPLANATION

106 Number of samples

__ Data value 1.5 to 3.0 times the IQR

outside the box

Largest data value within 1 .5 times

the IQR above the box

75th percentile

fiPifSjrj

I

30 

CD30

2.Q3c?a.

I

03o'

So^

0COCDCD

5

IQ 

CD

Median (50th percentile) 25th percentileSmallest data value within 1 .5 times the IQR below the box

SUBWATERSHED

Figure 25. Statistical distribution of specific conductance concentrations in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, 

1970-2002.
Selected Field Measurements and Miscellaneous Constituents 55

DC 

LU

LU

2,500

2,000

1,500

1,000

500

0

7,000

6,000

5,000

4,000

3,000

2,000

1,000

0

Kinnickinnic River at 1st Street

Menomonee River at 70th Street Bridge

LU 

O

cr

LU

o_

C/3

z

LU^

LU 

W 

O 

DC 

O 12,000^

14,000

Lincoln Creek at 47th Street

*

LU 

O

O

D 

Q 

Z 

O 

O

O

LL

O 

LU 

D_ 

C/3

6,000'

4,000

2,000

0

Milwaukee River at Wells Street

2,500

2,000

1,500

1,000

500

0

2,500

2,000

1,500

1,000

500

0

Oak Creek at Ryan Road

» I

JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUNE JULY AUG SEPT OCT NOV DEC

MONTH

Figure 26. Seasonality oi specific conductance for selected sites in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage 

District planning area, 1970-2002.
56 Water-Resources-Related Information for the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin

cr

LU 

LLJ

LU 

O

cr

LU 

D_

03

2 

L1J

^ 

LLJ

03 

O

cr 

o

LJJ 

O

o

D 

Q 

Z 

O

o 

o

LL

O

LJJ 

0_ 

U)

2,500

2,000

1,500

1,000

500

0

7,000

6,000

5,000

4,000

3,000

2,000

1,000

0

14,000

12,000

10,000

8,000

6,000

4,000

2,000

0

2,500

2,000

1,500

1,000

500

0

3,000

2,500

2,000

1,500

1,000

500

0

Kinnickinnic River at 1st Street

Menomonee River at 70th Street Bridge

»*

*

Lincoln Creek at 47th Street

Milwaukee River at Wells Street

Oak Creek at Ryan Road

1976 1978 1980 1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002

YEAR

Figure 27. Trends of specific conductance for selected sites in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning 

area, 1970-2002.
Selected Field Measurements and Miscellaneous Constituents 57

O

03

CD 

00

o

-a

c 

o

II

Q « 

<u ^

60 O

O ra g

'ti 3 D

.— 8 •=!

+-. OH *-

CO O o

II

it

iuniuixe|/\|

uea|/\| 

ueipa|/\|

a|i)uaojad 1093 

ai!)uaojad

eiep aidiues tsaten

ejep aidiues )sa;|jea 

6u|)jodaj e MO|aq

saidiues ||e p junoo

sjinsaj 13HO1S *o junoo

s)|nsaj asi/\ll/\l P junoo 

pai|sja)e>vvqns jed satis

•o

0)

2 

o>

I

O

^J~

1 '

^

00

r-

•*

^sO

oo•sj-

^

O

m

„

04

o 

o

04

Os

CJ

oo

o

^

00

ON

r~-

o

o

04

rn

0,

"vj"

' — ' "^

O

r~-

Muskego Lak

River Fox 

o

00

oo"

04

°,

oor~-

^

^sO

^

in

o

ot

o

m

„

1

01

. — i

in

rON

ini — i

0

0

00

ON

•5J-"

«

^ji — I

-*

00 

04

00•*"

o

Kinnickinnic River

o

S

Kinnickin River

o

o

rt

00

ooo^

<-- o

•*

•*"

O4

00

of

o

04^

, — 1

2-

00r~-

_

00

00

04

o 

o

Oj

^5

O

^

ON

^

O

^

O

o

^j-

{*}

o

m

Park WilsonCreek

04

^3

r~-

ONin

o

in

<--

in

^

in

in

i~-

m

„

m

1

2

o

ON

ON

^3

Ol

^

0

04

0,

o

O

r-H

Butler Ditch

uID

Menomon

o

o

"*

o

00^

oo

•^

1 — 1

m

o

•-1

i_H

o^

, — 1

O)

00

00

m

in

O

o

04

04

00

o

r~-

ON

OS

1 —

Si

o

o

00

04

04

^

Honey Creek

1

o

o

1—1

^04

in

OS

^O

00

O

o

oo

oo

*o

00

m

in

So

§

00

ON

rni — i

0

0

o

in

tr)

O

m

M

>

Little Ri Menomonee 

o

ON

m

^

0,

o

^H

r--

ON

04

00

00"*

„

04

o 

o

04

04

. — 1

m

ON

^

i — i i

o

om"

o

^. — i

04

O •sj00•*'

ON

Menomonee Lower

River

So

04

O

o.

00

04

OO

oo

00

00

00

•sj-

"°

04

04

04

O4

i — (

00r-

^:

, — i

O

O

00

' — I

^H"

O

^

ON

§

^H

m

.&'_>

Upper Menomonee R

0

o

oo

°l

00

o

, — (

•sj-

^

—<

o

oo

^

. — 1

o

04

o

o

O4

1

00

o

r--

ON

ON

i — i <2

o

• — (

o

04

o1—1

o

^

Underwood Creek

04

0

o

1 '

0,

00

ON

ON

^

ON

m

ON

ON

00

00

^

>O

OO

o 

o

04

00

o

^

o

o

•sj04

£

o

o

in

o

^

Willow Creek

o

o

00

04

•*„

O^

, — 1

ON•*

OO

^

C--

•*

O)

^

00

ao 

CJ

o

r?i

o

04

ON

^

f*")

So

O

o

00

in

o

ON

ON

— '

£

kO

Lincoln Creek

u

Milwauke River

o

•?j01

<"-

00

00

in

00

o

04

"*

m

—

>o

04

o

04

O

O4

o

m

ON

in04

o

o

o

o"

^H

-

^r--

>o

S3ON"

r-

^

>

Milwaukee Ri Lower 

o o

^H O

^ m

o o

•*" — "

m o

04 oo

^ °i 04 i-*

•*D —— 1

00 r*

rt ,— 1

*sO 00

ON O4

^ ^

i — i

00 ON

•* ON

O4 *sO

— —

O) -—I

o o 

o o

04 04

^3 ^3

O -H

1^3 1^3

ON ON

^ ON

O O4

^ O

0 0

t— 04

i — i ^H"

0 0

f~- f*") •^-

-*

O ON

-H ^JMitchell Field

Ditch Drainage Lower Oak Creek

^

ID

S 

3

o

?*~1

01

^04

"1

04

. — i

m

04

— '

ON

^

, — i

ON

O4

ON

"°

O

04

04

OS

^

1 — I

in

oo

ON

^

Ol

o

o

o

0

o

o

04

Middle OakCreek

m

f*")

04

o

^

04in

i — i

^

oo

04^

^H

o

^

. — 1

o

-

^

^

04

o 

o 

CJ

^ji — i

m

00

^3

04

S

o

O4

04

O

o

04 

04

i _

Oak Upper Creek

m

04

"

en

oo•~t

Olo^

i — i

o

ON

^

ON

m

oo

00

rr-

„

8 

§

^. — i

ON

ON

ON

in

04

oo 

o

o

04

O

O

04

^

River Lower Root

b

Rive Root 

o

o

"*

00

•*„

^< — i

•sj00o^

^H

o

o_

. — 1

o

00

04

r"

^

O4

^

. — i

^Orin

04

o

o

• — 1

o

ON

04

^H

00 

04

04

River Middle Root

o

04

00^

of

o

of

ooo)f-;

1 — 1

•sj- 'O

^

rt

^H

r*\

* — 1

~"

m

ON

ON

04

O

£5i — i

ON

ON

ON

^

' — t S

o

95oi — i

o

, — ,

00o

in

Upper River Root 

a

c^

o

O4

ID

•aP3

O

Q

~a

ID

ID

S

1

as

;a

u

.£P

IDe

ID

1

"E,

Si>

1

MID

So

ID 

,0

o

•V

HID ."S

io

o

ID

ID

^

ID

O

O

S

O

o

o

iS'o

ID

0,

.a "1

&

a

ao

value below 2mum was

ID
58 Water-Resources-Related Information for the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin

Hardness

Hardness is defined in terms of the presence of calcium 

and magnesium cations in water. Hardness is not attributed 

to a single constituent and is reported in terms of an equivalent concentration of calcium carbonate, "as quantified as 

CaCO3 ." Waters with a total hardness (as CaCO3) in the 

range of 0-60 mg/L are considered soft; 60-120 mg/L moderately hard; 120-180 mg/L hard; and greater than 

180 mg/L, very hard (Murphy, 2002b). When hardness and 

alkalinity are similar, the only cations present in significant 

concentrations in the water are calcium and magnesium. 

When hardness is much greater than alkalinity, the water 

contains considerable amounts of other cations (Murphy, 

2002b). Calcium is an important part of plant cell walls, 

shells, and skeletal structure development of many aquatic 

species. Low calcium concentrations can cause osmotic 

problems and affect shell development or cuticle secretion in 

aquatic invertebrates.

Both natural and anthropogenic factors can effect the 

hardness of water. Hardness concentrations vary greatly 

because of differences in geology. Soft waters are mainly 

from igneous rocks that are resistant to weathering and therefore do not release many cations. Hard water results from 

contact with calcerous (calcite-rich) rocks and sediments. 

Anthropogenic sources include industrial effluent and wastewater-treatment plant effluent, both of which may produce 

significant amounts of calcium and magnesium. There are no 

guideline concentrations for hardness.

The highest median concentrations of hardness were 

measured at sites in the southern part of the MMSD planning 

area (fig. 28). Sites in the Upper Root River, Middle Root 

River, Lower Root River, Upper Oak Creek, Middle Oak 

Creek, Lower Oak Creek, Mitchell Field Drainage Ditch,

and Wilson Park Creek subwatersheds had median concentrations in the upper quartile (fig. 28). Sites with median concentrations in the lower quartile were clustered in the central 

part of the planning area and were primarily in the Little 

Menomonee River, Underwood Creek, Lower Menomonee 

River, Lower Milwaukee River, Kinnickinnic River, and 

Lincoln Creek subwatersheds (fig. 28).

Median hardness concentrations for subwatersheds in 

the upper quartile were also in the southern part of the planning area and included all the subwatersheds listed above 

with median concentrations for sites in the upper quartile 

except the Mitchell Field Drainage Ditch subwatershed 

(fig. 28). Subwatersheds with the median concentrations in 

the lower quartile were the Underwood Creek, Little Menomonee River, and Lincoln Creek subwatersheds (fig. 28). 

The Wilson Park Creek, Lower Milwaukee River, Lower 

Oak Creek, and Upper Oak Creek subwatersheds all had 

maximum hardness concentrations greater than or equal to 

1,000 mg/L as CaCO3 (fig. 29, table 12). The highest median 

concentrations were measured in the Upper Oak Creek 

(450 mg/L as CaCO3) and Upper Root River (430 mg/L as 

CaCO3) subwatersheds (fig. 29, table 12). The median hardness concentrations for the Little Menomonee River 

(63 mg/L as CaCO3) and Underwood Creek (130 mg/L as 

CaCO3) subwatersheds were the lowest compared to median 

concentration at other subwatersheds (fig. 29, table 12).

No consistent seasonal pattern was observed in hardness (data not shown). There appeared to be a slight longterm downtrend in concentrations at all sites (except for Lincoln Creek) through the entire period of their records 

(fig. 30); Lincoln Creek appeared to have a slight uptrend in 

concentration.
Selected Field Measurements and Miscellaneous Constituents 59

88°07'30" 87°521 30"

43°15'

EXPLANATION

[ | Lakes

Subwatershed, median 

hardness in milligrams 

per liter as CaC03

0 - 223

MMSD planning area 

/~\J Watershed boundary 

/~\J Subwatershed boundary

Streams

Sampling site, median 

hardness in milligrams 

per liter as CaC03 

0-223

O 1-10 samples 

11 -100 samples

224-283

O 1 -10 samples 

11 -100 samples

284-360

O 1-10 samples 

11-100 samples

Base composited from Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission regional base 

map, 1:2,000,1995; U.S. Geological Survey digital line graph hydrography, 1:100,000,2001; Wisconsin ' 

Department of Natural Resources version 2 hydrography, 1:24,000,2002. Wisconsin Transverse 

Mercator Projection, referenced to North American Datum of 1983,1991 adjustment.

Figure 28. Sites sampled for hardness in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District (MMSD) planning area, 

Wis.
10,000

CO

Q 1,000

o

(nenLLJ 

h- 100_lDC LLJ Q_

cn^

< 10 QC 

O

_lIz

CO tt) LU

Z 

Q CC

J 0.1 

0.01

Fox Kinnickinnic 

River River

48

ffi

2,439 53

5 I?

i__i

———— ; -^

i

Menomonee Milwaukee 

River River

2,321 567

n

25

T

i

1 I 12 

LJ5J |—i— 1

_l

4,829

411 =

n~ »^^u

y

L

^ 

_l =

J

»

13

T^ __i

Oak 

Creek

Root 

River

542 

279 JL£±

T ""T S

L_ j L

3 LL,

J L _]

23 pi: r^n • ppj ^ E3

= = w

:-- * EXPLANATION 106 Number of samples __ Data value 1.5 to 3.0 times the IQR outside the box Largest data value within 1.5 times the IQR above the box

75th percentileMedian (50th percentile) I lnterqua-rt-ile 25th percentileSmallest data value within 1.5 times the IQR below the box

. Interquartile 

e) range (IQR)

SUBWATERSHED

5•o eCOCD

CD 

099O

Figure 29. Statistical distribution of hardness concentrations in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, 1970-2002.
Selected Field Measurements and Miscellaneous Constituents 61

CO

O 

O

O 

CO

DC 

LLJ

DC 

LU 

D_

CO

^ 

< 

DC 

O

1,000

800

600

400

200

0

800

600

400

200

0

800

600

400

200

0

Kinnickinnic River at 1st Street

Menomonee River at 70th Street Bridge

Lincoln Creek at 47th Street

$ 1,200 

u 1,000

Milwaukee River at Wells Street

o

DC 800

600

400

200

0

1,200

1,000

800

600

400

200

0

4HJr .v

Oak Creek at Rvan Road

£ • » • A

1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002

YEAR

Figure 30. Trends of hardness for selected sites in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, 1970-2002.
Root Middle Rivei Root River Upper 

~ ^ 

to ^o tyi oo 

O O 

O i— 

to ^D 

O O 

O — 

go 5 

to ^ (-ft -j 

^o ^o 

\0 OS 

5 R 

o o 

to to 

o o 

oo 

o o 

tO i— 

(-J OS 

oo o 

UJ UJ 

o to 

LJ ^ 

to o 

LtJ UJ 

ro ro 

to oo 

oo o 

*. cyi 

3 '~^ O 

(yi OS 

-(2- -(2- 

O O 

3 g

o

- <i

-i

Oak Creek UpprLower Root River

H- ~ 

u> to 

0 0 

o o 

<~^> to *o u> 

0 0 

o o 

(-*J OO 

to to 

*o *o 

oo o 

~ 5 

to to 

8

0

o

O ^J 

<~n o 

to LtJ 

£ 2 

UJ UJ 

<-*J O 

-p* OJ tyi os 

o to 

^2. LtJ 

OS (yi 

o (yi 

(-ft -P* 

-J *- 

-J O 

_^

O •t*. 

to O 

Lower OakCreek Middle OakCreek

*. to 

<~n to 

to \o 

0 0 

0 0 

<j\ to 

to \o 

0 0 

0 0 

to to 

^o \o 

oo oo 

=; ~ 

to to 

8

0

o

0

<=> -(2. 

to — 

o cyi 

to to 

^O OS 

OS *O 

UJ UJ 

00 OS 

.— to 

l*> U) 

OS *. 

.p*. to 

o o 

-p" -P» 

00 OS — o 

^

"to oo 

O ~J 

00 -J 

o

sp 3

^"

Mitchell Field 

Ditch Drainage 

to

o

o

w

o

o

~

^o

o

i§to 

to

o 

o

to

LtJ

(jj

O

o

Ul

OS

oo

§

oo-J-P"

-J

o

Lower Milwaukee River

OS

t

. t 

to

oo

OS

to

^

to

o

o

to

^o-J

^

to

o

o

o

_

-J

to

toto

to-J

to

OS

oo

oo

LtJ -(2.

^

0

oo

§I"

fTCD

7?

I

Underwood CreekLincoln Creek

- V. 

to

OS

O OS 

f3 S 

0 0 

K) Ho o 

o o 

tO UJ 

o — 

^o ^o 

O UJ 

O i— 

OS *~ 

to to 

i 1 

0 S 

OO -ti. 

-J OO 

^

OO OJ 

-J OS 

H- tO s ^ 

— to to to -t^ -P" 

(-ft O 

I— LtJ -J -J 

oo o 

to os 

O !-• 

o oo 

Menomonei Upper River

^

OS

o

o

OS-J

o

o

fo

LtJ

^o

oo to

^

to

o

o

to -J

to

to

OJ8

LtJ

&

LtJ

0

oo

_^

o

-J

o

Lower Menomone River

<T>

OO

"to

0

—

0

JO

to

o

o

OS

o

^o

oo to

^

to

o

.y,

_

OS-J

to

to

oo

to-J -J

£

UJ

oo

-J

o

z

o

103

<T3

|

Wilson ParkCree 

Little Menomonee

River

t->j to 

o o 

to 

O (-ft 

<-tJ O 

(-ft tO UJ (-ft 

o o 

2 S 

^ 0 

^o ^o 

o o 

^O OS 

to to 

to \o 

to ^ 

o o 

to — o 

^

.p*. to 

O -P^ 

LM

-J OS 

O '->J 

u> (yi 

OS ^O to

Ln

o oo 

-J ^ 

o >— 

oo o 

_^

O i— 

o to 

° "° 

1 3 S x § 

5 i- < ^ Q 3' 

3o'

^

Lake Muskego Kinnickinnic Rivei

tw OS 

JO

O (yi 

OO O 

O -(2- 

to

ij

oo ^o 

0 0 

o o 

-P* OS 

o o 

^o \o 

oo oo -J to 

1 = 

to to 

o o 

o o 

oc 

os ro 

to ^- 

o *. 

OO -0 

tO co to 

to to Ln to 

OO OS 

to to 

OO OS 

to to 

OS ^D uj to 

tO •ji -J -(2. 

1-tJ OS 

o to 

OS *. 

i

(D

(0

(D 

Q.

C

I 

<0

w

(D

a

subwatershed per Sites 

results MMSD of Count 

results USGS of Count 

results STORET of Count 

results all of Count 

values of Number 

limit reporting a below 

date sample Earliest 

date sample Latest 

Minimum

percentile 10th 

percentile 25th 

Median

Mean

percentile 75th 

percentile 90th 

Maximum

|! s | 

3" oo § ~* - 1 

"^ 4? 

H^ 3 

OO — P 

1 g t* 

^ of M 

Qi O /TM\ 

-3 ^2 

statistics for1 Sewi [etropolitan rou vales 263);

^r co 3 

OJ 2 D. 

a. s.«g 

CD O 0 

5" TT CD 

1 (- 50 c^ 5 c3 QJ OO GO 

CQ 00 - go d o, 

^ oo CD" 

^ Is 

5- o~ Q CD cro - i— 

9 n 

^ oo < e 

^ 3 C CD 

CD

CD 00 

^ O 

s g 

o r3 "O 

?S C/3 

O -i r 

« 3 

3 cro 

GO CD 

CD P 

5 S 

Q3 tn CQ I i— 

CD 3 

__ CD a < 

-a 1 

__ rf 

| | 

QJ P 

""* P 

QJ ^ 

CO P* 

--^i cr 

^ JT 

ro <d 

^3 P 

NJ O 

i

CD

h^

S

CD

O. 5'

3.

cfo'

1

i

o

o

E. FT

pa)e|ay-saojnosay-ja)ey\/v aa>|neM|!|/\| ue)i|odoj)a|/\| a6ejaMa$ IONISJO Bumueu 'eajv 

64 Water-Resources-Related Information for the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin

Dissolved Oxygen

Dissolved oxygen is perhaps the most biologically 

important dissolved gas in natural waters. With a few odd 

exceptions, all multicellular organisms (including plants) 

and many bacterial species rely on oxygen as an electron 

acceptor in respiration.

The two primary sources of dissolved oxygen to surface 

waters are the atmosphere and photosynthesis. The amount 

of dissolved oxygen in freshwater is controlled mainly by 

water temperature, but the actual ambient concentration represents a highly dynamic (on a time scale of seconds to minutes) balance between the atmospheric source and various 

biotic and abiotic sinks. These sinks include uptake by 

aquatic organisms and reaction with common reduced chemical species such as sulfide, methane, and ammonium that 

are formed when organic matter decomposes. In parts of the 

MMSD planning area, anthropogenic loading of decomposable organic matter and other nutrients can cause algal 

blooms, especially in the summer when high temperatures 

and abundant sunshine spur growth. When the algae die and 

decompose, the respiration of the organisms that consume 

the dead algae is a major oxygen-consuming process.

Various water-quality standards for minimum dissolved oxygen concentrations exist, sometimes tailored to 

the specific type of water (lake, stream, fresh, salt, and so 

forth). Of these, the Wisconsin Department of Natural 

Resources has selected a minimum of 5 mg/L as the minimum concentration to prevent fish kills and other deleterious 

effects on stream biotic communities.

Median dissolved oxygen concentrations below the 

minimum guideline concentration of 5 mg/L were observed 

at sites in the Upper Root River, the Lower Menomonee 

River, and the lower reaches of the Kinnickinnic River subwatersheds (fig. 31). Sites with the lowest median concentrations were clustered in several subwatersheds including the

Lower Menomonee River, Kinnickinnic River, Upper Root 

River, and Lower Milwaukee River, with a scattering of sites 

in other subwatersheds (fig. 31). Sites with the highest 

median concentrations of dissolved oxygen were in the 

Lower Milwaukee River, Lincoln Creek, Lower Menomonee River, Kinnickinnic River, Honey Creek, Lower Oak 

Creek, and Muskego Lake subwatersheds (fig. 31).

Subwatersheds with dissolved oxygen concentrations 

in the lower quartile were the Lower Menomonee River, 

Kinnickinnic River, Upper Root River, Lower Root River, 

Upper Oak Creek, and Middle Oak Creek (fig. 31). There 

were no subwatersheds with median concentrations in the 

upper quartile (fig. 31). All subwatersheds except Honey 

Creek, Little Menomonee River, and Lower Root River had 

at least one sample with a dissolved oxygen concentration 

below the 5-mg/L guideline concentration (fig. 32, table 13). 

The Upper Root River (5.13 mg/L) and Lower Menomonee 

River (6.50 mg/L) subwatersheds had the lowest median 

concentrations (fig. 32, table 13). Willow Creek (9.81 mg/L) 

and Honey Creek (9.47 mg/L) subwatersheds had the highest 

median concentrations (fig. 32, table 13). Maximum 

observed concentrations of dissolved oxygen (over 20 mg/L) 

were in the Muskego Lake, Kinnickinnic River, Lower 

Menomonee River, and Lower Milwaukee River subwatersheds (fig. 32, table 13).

Dissolved oxygen concentrations varied with the season at all five highlighted sites, with the lowest concentrations generally observed in warm months (fig. 33). This pattern reflects the direct relation between oxygen use during 

organic matter decomposition and the inverse relation 

between solubility and water temperature.

There were no obvious trends in dissolved oxygen concentrations over time for the five sites (data not shown).
Selected Field Measurements and Miscellaneous Constituents 65

88°07'30" 87°521 30"

43°

EXPLANATION

Lakes

Subwatershed, median 

dissolved oxygen in 

milligrams per liter

J 4.13-7.40 

{ | 7.41 - 8.90 

| | 8.91 - 9.90 

' 9.91 - 20.00

MMSD planning area 

W/^J Watershed boundary 

/~\J Subwatershed boundary 

Streams

Sampling site, median 

dissolved oxygen in 

milligrams per liter 

4.13-7.40

• 1 -10 samples 

11 -100 samples

101 - 2,500 samples

7.41-8.90

O 1-10 samples 

11 -100 samples

101 - 2,500 samples

8.91 - 9.90

O 1-10 samples 

11 -100 samples

101 - 2,500 samples

9.91-20.00

I -10 samples

II -100 samples

101 - 2,500 samples

Purple outline indicates 

median pH in standard 

units exceeding a 

guideline value

<5.00

I -10 samples

II -100 samples

101 - 2,500 samples

Base composited from Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission regional base 

map, 1:2,000,1995; U.S. Geological Survey digital line graph hydrography, 1:100,000,2001; Wisconsin 

Department of Natural Resources version 2 hydrography, 1:24,000,2002. Wisconsin Transverse 

Mercator Projection, referenced to North American Datum of 1983,1991 adjustment.

4 MILES

I

4 KILOMETERS

Figure 31. Sites sampled for dissolved oxygen in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District (MMSD) 

planning area, Wis.
25

CC LUZi 20CC LU Q.V)CC<2 15

LU

> 10 

X

oQ LUO

C/3 5 

Q

Fox Kinnickinnic 

River River

3,095

- ——II

4,815

1

—— ;

Menomonee 

River

i

4,692

13 

— r~

_

—

6

=3

l_

^7 LJ

— T— i 920

—

—i_

5

_ _ l

Milwaukee 

River

9,924

389

\—~

l_

[— ~

_ i

L_

A

_J

991

^^

l_

Oak 

Creek

504

=

P=P

rh 

L

_i 

I _ 251 — ~i •H _i

Root 

River

- 111

28

25 ==

= 

~

r", "" —— I ' 1 1 1 1 , ___ "T"

r / / / / y ^ /" ^ ^ 

^

SUBWATERSHED

5 milligrams per liter, Wisconsin Department of

Natural Resources aquatic-life criteria

EXPLANATION

106 Number of samples

__ Data value 1.5 to 3.0 times the IQR

outside the box

Largest data value within 1.5 times

the IQR above the box75th percentile —,

.. j. ,,-„ L. -i J Interquartile Median (50th percentile) rang^ (|QR)25th percentile 

J

Smallest data value within 1.5 times the IQR below the box

O) O)

a>^*

CD

^

30 

(D CO

oc

o

CD (/)30O ^tft5'CDIa>£0

3COCD(D

CO 

(D

Figure 32. Statistical distribution of dissolved oxygen concentrations in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, 1970-2002.

?S

V)oo
Selected Field Measurements and Miscellaneous Constituents 67

a:

LU

a:

LUD_ 

co

<

a: 

o

LJJ

o

o

Q 

LU

>

O 

CO 

CO

Q

18

16

14

12

10

8

6

4

2

0

25

20

15

10

5

0

20

18

16

14

12

10

8

6

4

2

20

18

16

14

12

10

8

6

4

2

0

16

14

12

10

8

6

4

2

0

Kinnickinnic River at 1st Street

Menomonee River at 70th Street Bridge

Lincoln Creek at 47th Street

* •

IP

. , *

Milwaukee River at Wells Street

Oak Creek at Ryan Road

t •

JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUNE JULY AUG SEPT OCT NOV DEC

MONTH

Figure 33. Seasonality of dissolved oxygen for selected sites in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, 

1970-2002.
sa 2 '

2! 5" Q 

o. si qj & q q & 

3 •a 

si 3 

2 £ 

i_n to 

2 2 

O H- •—— —— 

f" — O 

8 S £ 

— i— O 

8 8 

O"

ffl

(0

a.

subwatershed per Sites 

results MMSD of Count 

results USGS of Count 

results STORET of Count 

results all of Count 

values of Number 

limit reporting a below 

date sample Earliest 

date sample Latest 

Minimum

percentile 10th 

percentile 25th 

Median

Mean

percentile 75th 

90thpercentile

Maximum

00 ^ 

?+ cr 2 

s. l-i 

a |& 

o SJ „ 

CO 03 

C/3 & O m ^ 

Q.

cro 

o> 

P

o o 

X — "< 1 (- CQ —i 1

p S ^ "d 

o oo Q3 ' 

s 5 S

CQ O 

^ & 

^

&0

?+• o- 

" 50 

= M 

00 H 

CD 3- 

5 3 

ue)j|odoj)a|/\| 89

70 Water-Resources-Related Information for the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin

Biochemical Oxygen Demand, 5 day

Five-day biochemical oxygen demand (BODS) is an 

empirical measure of the oxygen-consuming material in a 

water sample. Because the analytical conditions are standardized at 20°C over 5 days, BODS measures the potential 

oxygen demand rather than the true oxygen demand in a 

stream, which may be limited by temperature or some other 

factor.

Sources of oxygen-consuming material include organic 

matter and detritus and reduced chemical species such as sulfide, methane, and ammonia.

There are no water-quality standards for BODS for the 

MMSD planning area, although effluents are sometimes 

monitored for BODS load. A high concentration of BODS 

(for example, greater than 60 mg/L) indicates a high potential for oxygen uptake and hypoxia or anoxia, therefore, 

effluents with high BODS concentrations have potential to 

cause deleterious effects in receiving waters.

Sites with median BODS concentrations in the upper 

quartile were clustered in four subwatersheds in the southeastern part of the planning area (fig. 34). Sites with median 

concentrations in the lower quartile were scattered throughout the planning area (fig. 34).

Subwatersheds with median BODS concentrations in 

the upper quartile were West Milwaukee Ditch, Wilson Park

Creek, Mitchell Field Drainage Ditch, and Lake Michigan 

Direct subwatersheds (fig. 34). Subwatersheds with median 

concentrations in the lower quartile were the Upper Menomonee River, Muskego Lake, Upper Root River, Middle 

Root River, Lower Root River, Upper Oak Creek, Middle 

Oak Creek, and Lower Oak Creek (fig. 34). The subwatersheds with some of the highest maximum and median concentrations were the Mitchell Field Drainage Ditch 

(38,600.0 mg/L; 1,865.0 mg/L) and Wilson Park Creek 

(5,790.0 mg/L; 100.0 mg/L) (fig. 35, table 14), both of which 

receive water draining from the General Mitchell International Airport. The only sample collected in the Lake Michigan Direct subwatershed, at a site that is near the airport, 

also had one of the highest concentrations (130.0 mg/L) 

(table 14). High BODS concentrations during winter may be 

caused by runoff of runway and airplane deicers (Corsi and 

others, 2001a). The Kinnickinnic River subwatershed, which 

is downstream from Wilson Park Creek, also had a relatively 

high maximum concentration (669.0 mg/L) but a relatively 

low median concentration (2.2 mg/L) (table 14). All other 

subwatersheds had median concentrations less than 3.0 mg/L 

(table 14).

There were no significant seasonal or temporal trends 

for the BODS data (data not shown).
Selected Field Measurements and Miscellaneous Constituents 71

WWW 87'521 30"

43-

-b

EXPLANATION

Lakes

Subwatershed, median 

biochemical oxygen 

demand, 5 day, in 

milligrams per liter

0.00 - 2.00 

| | 2.01 - 2.90 

| —"| 2.91-15.30 

HH 15.31-4,890.00

MMSD planning area 

~/~\J Watershed boundary 

/~\J Subwatershed boundary 

Streams

Sampling site, median 

biochemical oxygen 

demand, 5 day, in 

milligrams per liter 

0.00-2.00

© 1-10 samples 

^ 11-100 samples

^A 101 -1,475 samples

2.01 - 2.90

O 1-10 samples 

O 11-100 samples

101 -1,475 samples

^J

Base composited from Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission regional base 

map, 1:2,000,1995; U.S. Geological Survey digital line graph hydrography, 1:100,000,2001; Wisconsin 

Department of Natural Resources version 2 hydrography, 1:24,000,2002. Wisconsin Transverse 

Mercator Projection, referenced to North American Datum of 1983,1991 adjustment.

2.91 -15.30 

O 1-10 samples 

O 11-100 samples

101 -1,475 samples

15.31 - 4.890.00

• 1-10 samples 

11 -100 samples

101 -1,475 samples

4 MILES

I

4 KILOMETERS A:

Figure 34. Sites sampled for 5-day biochemical oxygen demand in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage 

District (MMSD) planning area, Wis.
Table 14. Summary statistics for biochemical oxygen demand, 5 day, by category, forthe Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, 1970-2002

[MMSD, Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District; USGS, U.S. Geological Survey; STORET, STOrage and RETrieval System; --, no data available; RL, reporting-limit value; values are expressed 

in milligrams per liter (mg/L); values rounded to the nearest tenth; for the purpose of statistical calculations, values reported below a reporting limit are set at one-half the reporting-limit value; 

some values below the reporting limit were reported as zero]

Watershed

Fox River

Kinnickinnic

River

Lake Michigan

Direct

Lake Michigan

Tributary

Menomonee

River

Milwaukee

River

Subwatershed

Deer Creek

Muskego LakeKinnickinnic RiverWest Milwaukee Ditch

Wilson Park Creek

Lake Michigan Direct

Lake Michigan

Tributary

Lower Menomonee

River

Upper Menomonee

River

South Branch

Underwood Creek

Lincoln Creek

Lower Milwaukee

River

•o

0

I

0sr subwata

tn

3*

55

i

2

10

1

6

1

2

7

3

1

7

16

tn"5 to

Q

c

3O

O

00

4,429

00

0

0

4,362

982

0

340

7,450

tntn 9

of USGS r

c3O

o

00

122

0

323

0

0

103

00

82

0

tn"510

f STORET

0c3O

o

1

4

12

1

80

1

650

1

29

11

£ 10 I - 

•= a> — .£,

5> = 0) *? 0 re c P

± > r 

=

re o o o> 

•6 j& |

| E " &

o 3 1 0) O ^ o rr

0 4^ « LL

0

.a

1 I 8

4 0 -- 4,563 223 0.2,2,12,

24, 120

1 1 200

403 86 0, 0.2, 2, 3,

4, 6, 12,

15,20,

24, 60,

120,200,

300, 600

1 0 -- 6 6 3, 6, 8

4,470 225 0.2,1,2,3

982 65 0.2, 2

1 1 10

451 60 0.2,1,2

7,461 411 0.2,2,20

£ 

re •o0

a 

re10

«.0

~ill

10/09/1979

04/28/199401/15/197505/10/1977

11/06/1996

11/23/1977

03/10/197607/17/1975

10/04/1982

07/21/198203/11/1993

01/15/1975

re 00 00

^jgc'E- 'E'EE ^.100£ C 00 3

EE^^sl^" E (5 •— Q) Q) li, ^ 0 0 '5 w-ECLQ-sS aa g •sS-c-c ££s (0 ~ *• «-> <-• <-• * i 58 E 

g

5

10/09/1979 -- -- -- - - -- - RL

09/22/1994 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

11/27/2001 .0 1.2 2.0 2.2 4.7 3.5 6.3 669.0

05/10/1977 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- RL01/16/2002 .0 3.0 9.9 100.0 376.1 372.5 959.2 5,790.0

11/23/1977 130.0 130.0 130.0 130.0 130.0 130.0 130.0 130.0

04/23/1981 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- RL

11/27/2001 .0 1.4 2.0 2.4 3.0 3.6 5.5 26.011/27/2001 .1 1.1 2.0 2.0 2.3 2.50 3.4 8.6

07/21/1982 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- RL

11/27/2001 .0 .7 1.2 2.5 4.0 4.5 7.4 73.011/27/2001 .0 1.5 2.0 2.3 2.9 3.6 5.4 23.0

1

V*CD

DO 

CD V)O

i

CD V)30cp_

aCD*a. 5"

o"a5'

3"

CD2i"09CCD CD2

S0"o

ST3COCDCD

3

CO

CD0aa

oT3

CO

3

0380
Selected Field Measurements and Miscellaneous Constituents 73

o 

o

CN 

§

CD 

CD 

TO

O. 

O

Q

CD 

TO

CD 

00

-a

LT3

i >

•E •

o %

& o

05

II

51?

B e

S 6 

2 13

fe Rl

H" ° 

W 13 

05 ."

H %

^ u 

C iu

3| o -3

^ f 5*3

— .. C ej s .g^-s

E I o i

^ Q -S &

~J5 <u o »H

15 11 §

	& s £ O <U [« .13 vi— on <D a

co c 5 a

-S .1 5 op

&?B

J3 W> O<

S ^ <D

<D ^ •£

« = 1 <U rtI

^ S'-o

Q oo IS •^ ^>

a = S 

111

UB!P8|/\|

uinuiiu!|/\|

ejep 3|duies }S3)e~|

3)ep 3|duies )S3j|jeg

siinsaj ||e ^o junoo

sj|ns3J 13UO1S i° lunoo

QSI/\II/\I i° lunoo

p3qsj3)e/v\qns jsd sens

w

•o 

a>

«> 

a>

I

o

o

VOoo~ 

m

O

|

1

o 

o

o

i

«s

£

o

rn

o

g 

o 

CJ

VO

o

VO

OS 

OS

1

-

§1fN ^

°~o

1—1

O

vO

00

VO

OO 

VO

o

-

-oP

si

2P

s

1•a

o

OO

r-^

vq

m

rn

CN

^

O

<N

O

<-J

O

o 

o 

CJ

OS

-

(N

OO 

OS

VO

o

?N

rT

O

o

OS

OS 

OS

-

o

OS 

OS

>o

Oak Creek

3

^

06

^

rn

"

S

o

fN

O

<N

O

O 

O

OS

^

00 

OS

^

8

<N

rT

o

T)-

o >o

o

o

s

r.

Oak Creek : 

is

^

06

fM

"*

"

S

O

<N

O

r-i

o

o 

o 

CJ

OS

^

OO 

OS

CJ

o

<N

r-f

o

S

fN

O

O

>o

(N

-

Oak Creek

S3

&

<N

vd

^

m

CN

"

2

_

o 

o

§

o

OS 

OS 

OS

>o 

CJ

00

o

«N

rT

o

-

(N

O

O

jq

-

Rootiver

S3 

o

J

o

^

vd

OS

"

OS

2

o

"

rt

o 

o 

CJ

o

o

00 

OS

rn 

O

8

<N

rT

O

OO

o 

m

c.

o

OO

r.

Riveroot :

i

is

"0

OS

^

vd

vq

3

fN

^

vq

rt

o 

o

§

o

OS 

OS 

OS

(N

00

o

<N

ri

o

y.

~

o

o

s

-

Riveroot 

oj 1
CC LU

CCLLJ Q_

V)

Z >

Q

LO

Q"

LU 

Q-z.

LU Oo

^LLJI OoCD

100,000

10,000

DC

O

1 ,000

100

10

0.1

0.01

Lake Lake 

Fox Kinnickinnic Michigan Michigan Menomonee Milwaukee Oak Root River River Direct Tributary River River Creek River

: 1 1

r--\ H

4

1 i 1

1 1

403

=

4,563 m

==j H <-

1 :

S

sd

i 1

1

1

1

I

I

6

I

I I !

4,470

^ 982

_i i I I

451

— 7,461

5

5

I!%•

i i i i

84

7i

ni

995 502 251

i I I I

III:-- -— 111

25 30 rn :

; I I ^/ // e/ ^y// <? ^/ / <? J ^// ^ * ^ JJ <? J ^V ^'V * j?" ^ .# # .<? **\^ ^ ^

EXPLANATION

106 Number of samples

__ Data value 1.5 to 3.0 times the IQR

outside the box

Largest data value within 1.5 times

the IQR above the box

75th percentile —,.. _i- /r« u •, , Interquartile Median (50th percentile) rang^ ( |QR)

25th percentile _JSmallest data value within 1.5 times the IQR below the box

Reporting limits for 

some analyses were: 

0,0.2, 1,2,3,4,6,8, 10, 12, 

15,20,24,60, 120,200,300, 

600, 1,200 milligrams per liter

off

I

CO

CD

CD5 

CO 

CD

SUBWATERSHED

Figure 35. Statistical distribution of biochemical oxygen demand, 5 day, concentrations in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District 

planning area, 1970-2002.

09

k

V) n

76 Water-Resources-Related Information for the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin

Chloride

Chlorine is the most abundant of the halogen elements. 

Although chlorine can occur in various oxidation states, the 

chloride form (Cl~) is the only one of major significance in 

water exposed to the atmosphere (Hem, 1985). Chloride is 

widely distributed in nature, generally as sodium chloride 

(NaCl) and potassium chloride (KC1) and it constitutes 

approximately 0.05 percent of the lithosphere (National 

Research Council of Canada, 1977). Chloride is present in 

all natural waters, normally at low concentrations.

Sources of chloride are both natural and anthropogenic. 

Chloride is present in various rock types in lower concentrations than other major constituents. The major anthropogenic 

sources of chloride in surface water are road deicing salts, 

urban and agricultural runoff (including animal waste and 

potash fertilizer), and discharges from wastewater-treatment 

plants, septic systems, and industrial plants. Sodium chloride, and to a lesser extent, calcium chloride are used for 

snow and ice control in Canada and the United States. Chloride ions are conservative, moving with water without being 

retarded or lost. Accordingly, all chloride that enters the soil 

or ground water can ultimately be expected to reach surface 

water (Environment Canada, 2001).

There are no Federal regulatory standards for chloride 

with regard to the protection of aquatic species, nor are there 

U.S. or Canadian primary drinking-water standards for chloride. The USEPA has a Secondary Maximum Contaminant 

Level (SMCL) for chloride of 250 mg/L, related to salty 

taste. The Canadian guideline for drinking-water quality has 

an aesthetic objective of chloride concentrations less than/or 

equal to 250 mg/L. In the USEPA "National Recommended 

Water Quality Criteria", the non priority pollutants section, 

the recommended Criterion Maximum Concentration 

(CMC) for chloride is 860 mg/L and the Criterion Continuous Concentration (CCC) is 230 mg/L for freshwater species. The CMC is an estimate of the highest concentration of 

a material in surface water to which an aquatic community 

can be exposed briefly without resulting in unacceptable 

effect. The CCC is an estimate of the highest concentration 

of a material in surface water to which an aquatic community 

can be exposed indefinitely without resulting in unacceptable effect (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2002e). 

The WDNR in February 2000 adopted a rule to deal with the 

discharge of chlorides in wastewater effluents. All new dischargers must meet a chronic limit of 395 mg/L and an acute 

chloride limit of 757 mg/L (Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, 2003a).

One site in the Upper Root River subwatershed had a 

median chloride concentration in exceedence of the 

230 mg/L USEPA CCC, the highest concentration at which 

continued exposure does not cause undesirable effects in 

aquatic communities. Sites with median chloride concentrations in the upper quartile were clustered in the southern part 

of the planning area and scattered throughout the rest of the

planning area (fig. 36). All the sites in the Upper Root River, 

Middle Root River, Upper Oak Creek, Middle Oak Creek, 

and Lower Oak Creek had median concentrations in the 

upper quartile (fig. 36). Sites with median concentrations in 

the lower quartile were scattered throughout the planning 

area except for the southern part (fig. 36).

Subwatersheds with median chloride concentrations in 

the upper quartile were all located in the southern part of the 

planning area; specifically these were Upper Root River, 

Middle Root River, Upper Oak Creek, Middle Oak Creek, 

and Lower Oak Creek subwatersheds (fig. 36). Subwatersheds with median concentrations in the lower quartile were 

Dousman Ditch, Lower Milwaukee River, Wilson Park 

Creek, and Lake Michigan Direct (fig. 36). At least one sample in all subwatersheds except Dousman Ditch, Lake Michigan Direct, Lower Root River, Willow Creek, and Wilson 

Park Creek, exceeded one or more drinking-water (250 mg/L 

USEPA SDWR and Canadian AO) or aquatic-life guideline 

concentrations (230 mg/L USEPA CCC; 860 mg/L USEPA 

CMC) or a future WDNR discharge limit for chloride 

(395 mg/L chronic discharge limit; 757 mg/L acute discharge limit) (fig. 37, table 15). One or more samples in the 

Kinnickinnic River, Lower Menomonee River, Lower Oak 

Creek, and Middle Oak Creek exceeded 860 mg/L, which is 

the USEPA maximum one-time concentration to which an 

aquatic community can be subject without experiencing an 

undesirable effect (fig. 37, table 15). Maximum concentrations in these subwatersheds, all greater than 900 mg/L, also 

accounted for the highest maximum concentrations 

(table 15). Of the subwatersheds with no exceedences, no 

more than 30 samples were collected in any subwatershed, 

and samples in Dousman Ditch, Wilson Park Creek, and 

Lake Michigan Direct were all below a reporting limit 

(table 15).

Data for chloride were available from all seasons from 

four of the five highlighted sites (Oak Creek being the exception). These data indicate higher concentrations during winter (fig. 38), likely related to the use of deicing salts on 

streets and highways. Lincoln Creek had a large increase in 

concentrations during the winter with lower concentrations 

in other seasons. Data from the Kinnickinnic, Menomonee, 

and Milwaukee Rivers indicated similar patterns but with 

smaller peaks in winter months than Lincoln Creek. The Oak 

Creek site did not have any samples before April and (or) 

May did have a gradual decrease in concentrations from the 

start to the end of the record in November.

Chloride concentrations at most sites demonstrated 

similar long-term temporal trends. Trends began with a 

slight upward trend in concentrations in the early 80s, 

changed to a very gradual downward trend until 1996, 

followed by a very gradual upward trend until 2000, and 

ended with a slight fall through the end of record (fig. 39).
Selected Field Measurements and Miscellaneous Constituents 77

88°07'30" 87°52'30"

43°15'

EXPLANATION

Lakes

Subwatershed, median 

chloride in milligrams 

per liter as chlorine

0-42 

43-71 

72-124 

^B 125-300

MMSD planning area 

~/~\J Watershed boundary 

/~\J Subwatershed boundary 

Streams

Sampling site, median 

chloride in milligrams 

per liter as chlorine

I - 10 samples

II - 100 samples

101 -1,500 samples

43-71

O 1 -10 samples 

11 -100 samples

101 -1,500 samples

72-124

O 1 -10 samples 

11 -100 samples

101 - 1,500 samples

I-10 samples

II-100 samples

101 -1,500 samples

Purple outline indicates 

median chloride in 

milligrams per liter as 

chlorine exceeding a 

guideline value 

>230

O 1 -10 samples 

11-100 samples

101 -1,500 samples

Base composited from Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission regional base 

map, 1:2,000,1995; U.S. Geological Survey digital line graph hydrography, 1:100,000,2001; Wisconsin 

Department of Natural Resources version 2 hydrography, 1:24,000,2002. Wisconsin Transverse 

Mercator Projection, referenced to North American Datum of 1983,1991 adjustment.

4 MILES

4 KILOMETERS

Figure 36. Sites sampled for chloride in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District (MMSD) planning area, Wis.
10,000

Kinnickinnic Lake Michigan Menomonee River Direct River Milwaukee River Oak Creek Root River

ccLUt

CCD_ 

C/D

CC

o

LU QCCgi o

1,000 - — 100 r10

0.1

0.01

860 milligrams per liter,

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency aquatic-life maximum criteria

757 milligrams per liter, Wisconsin Department of

Natural Resources acute discharge limit

395 milligrams per liter, Wisconsin Department of

Natural Resources chronic discharge limit

250 millgrams per liter,

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and Canadian drinking-water guidelines

230 milligrams per liter, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency aquatic-life continuous criteria

EXPLANATION

106 Number of samples

__ Data value 1.5 to 3.0 times the IQR

outside the box

Largest data value within 1.5 timesthe IQR above the box75th percentile —,>< _i- /r^u ..-I \ Interquartile Median (50th percentile) rang^(|QR)25th percentile _ISmallest data value within 1.5 times the IQR below the box

Reporting limits for

some analyses were: 0.1, 1,3 milligrams per liter

SUBWATERSHED

2.QJ p* CDO.

I

a

o

COCDCD3 

CO 

CD

Figure 37. Statistical distribution of chloride concentrations in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, 1970-2002.
Selected Field Measurements and Miscellaneous Constituents 79

Kinnickinnic River at 1 st Street

DC 

LU

DC 

LLJ 

CL

C/D

DC

LJQ

DC

g

I

o

700

600

500

400

300

200

100

0

1,000

800

600

400

200

0

1,000

800

600

400

200

0

200

180

160

140

120

100

80

60

40

20

0

500

400

300

200

100

0

Menomonee River at 70th Street Bridge

Lincoln Creek at 47th Street

Milwaukee River at Wells Street

Oak Creek at Ryan Road

JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUNE JULY A\JG SEPT OCT NOV DEC

MONTH

Figure 38. Seasonality of chloride for selected sites in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, 1970-2002.
80 Water-Resources-Related Information for the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin

cc LU

DC 

LU 

Q_

C/D

DC

LU 

Q

DC

g

I

o

700

600

500

400

300

200

100

0

1,000

800

600

400

200

0

1,800

1,600

1,400

1,200

1,000

800

600

400

200

0

200

180

160

140

120

100

80

60

40

20

0

500

400

300

200

100

0

Kinnickinnic River at 1st Street

*

* *

Menomonee River at 70th Street Bridge

w J

Lincoln Creek at 47th Street

Milwaukee River at Wells Street

*

Oak Creek at Ryan Road

1980 1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002

YEAR

Figure 39. Trends of chloride for selected sites in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, 1970-2002.
Selected Field Measurements and Miscellaneous Constituents 81

uinuijxe|/\|

CM

O 

O

tt

CD

CD 

CO •3 S

^

to

CD

E 

E

co 

iri

_OJ 

(B

"a •

uea|/\|

aniuaojad

uinmiujiAi

aiep aiduies isajen

aiep afduies isai|JB3

||e 40 junoo

siinsaj QSIAIIAI jo lunoo 

pai|SJa)eMqns jad sans

1

CO

52

0)

i

ON 

ON 

ON

OO 

Vl

ON 

OO

tt-

^

m

-

O

o

(N

ON

00

O

-

(N

^

-

^

^f.

**

-

>

2 

2

w

>

2

o'S

_g

.0

Cj

2

i

(

1

1

ON

m

00

o

ON

m

oo O

-

^

-

0

-

Wilson Creek Park 

'

,

'

!

ON

m

S

l—

ON

rn

00O

oo

oo

oo

0

-

u

Lake Michigan Dir

ts

a

S

§60

.2

5

y

J

^

,

!

!

1 

ON

ON

O

NO

ON

ON

ON

O

-

_

-

o

-

Dousman Ditch

>

(2

u

u

§

1

S

S

OO

0 

ON

Vl

Vl

o

-

M

Vl

ON

es

00 

O

-

o

"*

-

00

""!,

^

-

fc

2

Menomonet Lower 

Vl

CO

o

ON

0

O 

P~

-

(N

is

r-»

ON

NO

i

CO

oo

NO

^H

oo

oo

o^

" '

00

>

2

Upper Menomonee

V)

VI

Vl 

Vl

(N 

Vl

0

0 

Vl

oo

oo

So

§

i0

o 

o

o 

C?

fN

O

O

V,

VI

O

-

Willow Creek

ro

m 

m

S

Vl

oo

(N

O

O

o

^

ON

ON

O

00

O

0

m

o

0

o

CO

Vl

Creek Lincoln 

u

S

u

a

&

S

0

vo

Vl

00

tN

CO

m 

(N

-

1

S

ONr-»

ON

^;

vi

o

o

S

ON

OO

•ST

^^

ON

2

S

2

Milwaukee Lower 

m 

5

rVl

V)

m

oo 

r»

(N

o 

o

ON

i;

V)

oo

ON

^5

m

O

o

o

ON

0

O

ON

ON

*

Oak Creek Lower 

u

U

.£

0

(N

mON

m

(N 

(N

ON

CN1

Vl

oo

«

o 

o

ON

i;

Vl

oo

ON

i;

O

o

SVl

0

(N

O

-

Middle OakCreek

Vl 

Vl

o

Vl

o

0

0

oo

*

ON

^

Vl

ON

rt

S

!

o

^

0

Vl

f>I

-

Oak Upper Creek

o

S

0

S

S

ON 

C^

n-

§

C5

ON 

ON

ON

Vl

00

o

o

vo

0

«

-

Riveroot Lower 

fe

2

o

o

oi

o

(N

NO 

VI 

CM

VI

Tf

VI

m

oo ON

ON

ON

O 

O

O

5s

ON

ON

Vl

00

o

o

00

0

oo

~

River Middle Root

o

NO 

Vl

o 

Tj- m

Vl

m

ON 

fN

§

r-»

o

Vl

fN

(N

0

0

ON 

ON

ON

VI Q00 

0

0

_

o

^H

-

Upper River Root 
82 Water-Resources-Related Information for the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin

Sediment

Two types of suspended solid-phase material data, total 

suspended solids (TSS) and suspended sediment (SS), are in 

the MMSD Corridor Study database. Most TSS data were 

from MMSD and USEPA STORET, whereas all of the SS 

data were from USGS. Gray and others (2000) have shown 

conclusively that TSS and SS data are not comparable and 

that SS is a much more reliable and reproducible measure of 

suspended matter in natural waters, especially when sandsized material is present. For this reason, these two data sets 

are discussed separately in this report.

Total Suspended Solids

Total suspended solids (TSS) is a measure of the all 

material, biotic and abiotic, that is retained on a filter. It is 

composed of suspended sediment mainly in the clay and silt 

size range, biomass (mainly live algae and zooplankton), 

and particulate detritus (dead organic matter). Soil and surficial deposit characteristics in the watershed generally control the amount and size range of sediment entering into and 

transported in a stream. Primary production, input of soil 

organic matter, and resuspension of fine-grained organicrich sediments largely determine the amount of organic matter in total suspended solids.

Nonbiological suspended solids ultimately come from 

the watershed, although a significant amount at any particular site may be resuspended from the stream bottom. The 

main source of biological suspended solids is usually stream 

organisms, but detritus may be dominated by allochthonous 

sources such as soil organic matter and leaf fragments.

Total suspended solids in streams is usually dominated 

by nonbiological materials; therefore, its importance is 

mainly as an indicator of erosion and transport of sediments 

from watersheds. Construction sites are often regulated in an 

attempt to limit the sediment runoff into nearby surface 

waters. Also, buffer zones between agricultural sites and 

streams are increasingly used to decrease sediment inputs, 

and their associated nutrients, to surface waters. There is no 

TSS water-quality standard for the streams in MMSD planning area, although lower concentrations, indicative of 

clearer water, are usually more desirable.

Sites with median TSS concentrations in the upper 

quartile were primarily in the southern part of the planning 

area. All sites in the Upper Root River, Middle Root River,

Lower Root River, Upper Oak Creek, Middle Oak Creek, 

and Lower Oak Creek subwatersheds had median concentrations in the upper quartile (fig. 40). Sites with median 

concentrations in the lower quartile were in the Willow 

Creek, Butler Ditch, Lower Milwaukee River, Kinnickinnic 

River, Wilson Park Creek, and Mitchell Field Drainage 

Ditch subwatersheds (fig. 40).

Subwatersheds in the southern part of the planning area 

had median TSS concentrations in the upper quartile 

(fig. 40). Subwatersheds with median concentrations in the 

lower quartile were Willow Creek, Butler Ditch, Wilson 

Park Creek, and the Mitchell Field Drainage Ditch, although 

10 or fewer samples were collected at most sites within the 

subwatersheds (fig. 40). The highest maximum concentrations were found in the Lower Milwaukee River 

(7,800 mg/L) and Kinnickinnic River (7,210 mg/L) subwatersheds (fig. 41, table 16). The Lower, Middle, and Upper 

Oak Creek and Root River subwatersheds had the highest 

median concentrations, with increasing median concentration in the downstream direction for each river (fig. 41, 

table 16). The lowest median concentrations were measured 

in the Willow Creek (7 mg/L), Wilson Park Creek 

(13 mg/L), and Mitchell Field Drainage Ditch (23 mg/L) 

subwatersheds (fig. 41, table 16).

There were some indications of higher TSS concentrations during the late winter through spring months at the 

Menomonee and Milwaukee River sites (fig. 42). The 

higher concentrations may be due to erosion during snowmelt on land with little cover. No obvious long-term trend in 

TSS concentration with sample year was evident at any of 

the five highlighted sites (data not shown).
Sediment 83

88°07'30" 87°52'30"

EXPLANATION

Lakes

Subwatershed, median 

total suspended solids 

in milligrams per liter

^^ 5 - 330 

| | 331 - 469 

| | 470 - 644 

*"•** 645-1.000

MMSD planning area 

Watershed boundary 

/~\J Subwatershed boundary 

Streams

Sampling site, median 

total suspended solids 

in milligrams per liter 

5-330

• 1 -10 samples 

^ 11 -100 samples

101 -1,475 samples

331 - 469

O 1 -10 samples 

O 11-100 samples

Base composited from Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission regional base 

map, 1:2,000,1995; U.S. Geological Survey digital line graph hydrography, 1:100,000,2001; Wisconsin 

Department of Natural Resources version 2 hydrography, 1:24,000,2002. Wisconsin Transverse 

Mercator Projection, referenced to North American Datum of 1983,1991 adjustment.

O 101 -1,475 samples

470-644

O 1-10 samples 

O 11-100 samples

O 101 -1,475 samples

645-1,000

• 1-10 samples 

£ 11-100 samples

101-1,475 samples

0

0

1

2

2 

|

1 4

4 MILES

1

KILOMETERS

Figure 40. Sites sampled for total suspended solids in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District (MMSD) 

planning area,Wis.
Fox Kinnickinnic Menomonee

River River 10,000 ———————————— or

LLJ

HDC LJJ 1 ,000 

Q_

CO

^^^

DC

O^ 100

z 

co"Q_JOCOQ 10LLJQZLJJQ_

CO

DCO

%I1 I ——— I

I

4,&7

=

SES i

[• "t

L~ '-'L__J

0.1 ———————————— ^ <^ <•/>

^ ^ cP° ^ ^

I

36

River

I

_^

#•

1 1 1

4,495 ____~ S iL^Sj 1 1 1

I | ^H __———— 1

XX £ £

^ (2i -O A

5

rjn

,-—__ £

|

^

vC

oP C^ ^ ^ jf

Milwaukee Oak

River Creek

[ 8,312

"

333

1

l_

J*-

cf

V

"^ S

1 LV.'''.7v3 _J L~j ——————————__ 1 |

1 i

Root

River

962 489 245

r~^ P

1

7

[jg| tsu1^1 1 1

<. VN Nj* ^- »Gr *.r> w wr

^ ^ 0^ 0^

<j^ ^ ,s£> tg- 

,s^6 v° ^ v°

11 p

— 1 L

-#•

^°

V

_i

1 1 ;

111

28 ri — I — i

—— —— -- i I i

<£ 0^ (^

<S^ d^ c>^ vv

EXPLANATION

106 Number of samples

__ Data value 1.5 to 3.0 times the IQR

outside the box

Largest data value within 1.5 times

the IQR above the box

75th percentile —,

Median (50th percentile) ^ 

25th percentile _lSmallestdata value within 1.5 times 

the IQR below the box

C/)ICD3

CO 

CD

D

a

SUBWATERSHED

Figure 41. Statistical distribution of total suspended solids concentrations in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, 1970-2002.

0)gV) o

e
Sediment 85

DC

LU

LU 

D_

CO

< 

DC

6,000

5,000

4,000

3,000

2,000

1,000

0

2,500

2,000

1,500

1,000

500

Kinnickinnic River at 1st Street

Menomonee River at 70th Street Bridge

«*!***

Lincoln Creek at 47th Street

CO 

Q

_i 

O 

CO

Q 

LU 

Q

LU 

D_ 

CO

=> 

CO

1,BOO 

1,600

1,400

1,200 

1,000 

800

600

400 

200

r\

*

«*

•••VV.s " '.

z • • ; *'r >. • • '

2,000

1,500

1,000

500

0

Milwaukee River at Wells Street

Oak Creek at Ryan Road

1,600

1,400

1,200 

1,000

800

600

400

200

r\

I I I I

-

.%*

*• t -

f

• *

~

iii

^ft::;, ^kSI H&* * ^

K

"-

k . . _

**~* •• ~ ~~ '---•' ^ '

• *^

1 1 1 i I i i 1

JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUNE JULY AUG SEPT OCT NOV DEC

MONTH

Figure 42. Seasonality of total suspended solids for selected sites in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District 

planning area, 1970-2002.
Middle Rootiver Root River Upper - 4^ 

to — 

CO •-• 0 0 

tO • .— 

CO *- 0 O o o 

OO CO 

s5 to 

so so 

so so 

so so 

o o o o 

o o o o £ £ o o 

SO 0 

OS OS 

os to 

<-n O 

~J OO 

OS O 

-J CO 

OS <J1 

-J "— §

co0

co "to 

CO O 

io "(3i o o o o 

Rootiv 3

Creek OakUpper Lower RootRiver

—— Hto

4*- to 

Ln Os O O 

to

4*- to 

<-n OS O O 

O 0 

U> CO 

to to 

SO SO 

CO SO 

<-n so 

H; O 

S o fo Ks 

O 0 0 O 

— 4^ 

<-n 4*- 

OS O 

Os OS 

OS OS 

so u> 

L/1 L/1 

CO OS 

-J OO 

OO OS 

Ln -j 

tO OS 

-o

tO OJ 

"H- ~J 

~J OS 

4*- -J 

"4*. co 

<~n O O O 

Lower OakCreek Middle OakCreek

4*- to 

so 4*- 

OS CO 

to so o o 

so 4*- 

OS OO 

to so o o o o 

to" to 

so so 

CO OO 

to fj 

o o o o 

to 

so 4*- o — 

SO -J 

-J O 

OS OS o o to to 

-J -J 

OJ 4*. 

so <~n 

-J -J 

OJ 4*. 

U> Ul 

CO OO 

OS CO 0 -J 

so "o 

<~n O 

OS O 

-£ -~ S

OJ o

Oak Cree

*•

Field Drain Mitchell P

eragr+

B*

too^

~~" oo

o 

too0o0

so 

to80

Ln_

u>

to

to

OJ

Hto-J

to

to

OJ

Milwauk 

River

a>

Lincoln Creek

Lower RMilwaukee 

t-. %

<-n Os 

OO

u> O 

U> OS O OS 

OO 

L*J L*J 

OJ ^- oj to 0 O o o 1 1 

so so 

SO CO 

-J O 

to to 

s5 to 8 8 ^

OO OJ 

to to 

4*- CO O HOJ OJ 

so 4^ 

V, 4^ O i— O CO 

u, 4^ o oj 

OS 4^ 

CO OS O CO 

oo Ln 

4=^ 4^ 

~a\ "co 8 8 

] Menomonee Upper

Willow Creek

S

u> - oo _ 

H— O o 
 ooO 0 o o 

Ln OS 

to i— 

4^ N> i-i P3 

so o 

OO O to o 

!-• O 

>— CO 

to o 

^1 CO 

to to 8 8 

i-- 0 

too

to •~n 

U)

so Ln wO Ln 

u>

so0 ^1 

Ul

CO

UJ SO 

OSo u-> 

-Jo • — 

co Ln 

"toO Os 

Menomo 

River

an

Butler DitchLower Menomonee

^o1

tO OS 

SO

o <~n 

to o 

•£

so

to •~n O 0 9 UJ R 4^. ^ d to ^ O so O CO 

i— O 1 5 to to 

4^. ;J 

to to 8 8 

too — 

OJ OJ 

to o 

i— SO 

OJ OJ 

to co 

OJ HOJ 4^ 

to oo 

<-n o 

OJ 4^ 

to so 

<-<> so 

U> Ln 

to co 

CO ~J 

OJ -J 

to o 

SO OJ 

to

U) OS 

U> U) o o 

Kinnicki] River §o

Kinnickinnic RiverWilson ParkCreek

OS U> 

JPCO

u> o 

OJ 

4*- OS 

"i;

OO U) 

-J OS o o O i— oj to 

o3 to ^ ^o 

CO SO o so — o 

— so 

K> to 

;J tO 

s5 to §

o o— o 

to <~n 

to' t— L/l 

to -J

co <-n 

UJ

CO ^^ o oj 

_^

OJ U) 

4^- O o to 

OS

so 4^ O CO 

Io to 

^ OS O U) 

Fox Rive

i^

Lake Muskego —o-"oI

CO

toooo

go 

to

o o£

CO

$i

CO

4^

CO

_^

CO

_^

CO

OO^

CO

_^

CO

i

(D

0)^

(D

a.1

Q) 

(Dw^

(D

a.

subwatershed per Sites 

results MMSD ol Count 

results STORET of Count 

results all at Count 

values at Number 

limit reporting a below 

date sample Earliest 

date sample Latest 

Minimum

percentile 10th 

percentile 25th 

Median

Mean

percentile 75th 

percentile 90th 

Maximum

[MMSD, nui whole g 3 ^ CD ^ • • 

C3

:ee S' Metropolitan 

3E m(DOEn" ao

rvi |

.H

C/3 H

CTQ 

(D3

O.

?o1<

&o "^1,3O

o. Si1JT)

£L

CDp

(D

(D X

*3

(D

CO2ex3' 3

p^ •S" 1

•o^~^3^J

CDOe

P. o>P.

SCD1

i!CD"

O)

OO1T3

foi statistics nary 1 o"

h i— 

0}

CO

CO

T3

O)

QO>

a.

CO 0

^-

CO

-<o

0} h i— 

O) 

(Oo

o"

O) ^

0}c

O)

0)

2- o-a

o_

Q}

OO

O) §

O)

Q}

(O

0)aco'

i-H- "^o' 

-a

Q}=

(0

Q)

CD

Q}

COo

ro

o 

ro

gg

' WSUOOSJM 

88 Water-Resources-Related Information for the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin

Suspended Sediment

The general composition and sources of SS in streams 

and rivers are identical to those for TSS with the exception 

that SS will include any sand-sized (and larger) particles 

whereas TSS may or may not. Therefore, it is not unreasonable to presume that SS concentrations may be significantly 

higher than TSS in watersheds where surficial deposits contain large proportions of sand.

Sites with median SS concentrations in the upper quartile were scattered throughout the planning area and were in 

the Upper Menomonee River, Underwood Creek, Kinnickinnic River, and Upper Root River subwatersheds (fig. 43). 

Sites with median concentrations in the lower quartile were 

also scattered throughout the planning area in the Upper 

Menomonee River, Lower Milwaukee River, Lincoln Creek, 

Kinnickinnic River, and Muskego Lake subwatersheds 

(fig. 43).

The subwatersheds of Underwood Creek, Kinnickinnic 

River, and Upper Root River had median suspended-sediment concentrations in the upper quartile. Subwatersheds

with median concentrations in the lower quartile were Lower 

Milwaukee River and Lincoln Creek, in the northeastern part 

of the planning area (fig. 43). The Upper Menomonee River 

subwatershed had the highest maximum concentration at 

11,700 mg/L (fig. 44, table 17). The Kinnickinnic River 

(356 mg/L), Underwood Creek (234 mg/L), and Upper Root 

River (204 mg/L) subwatersheds had the highest median suspended-sediment concentrations (fig. 44, table 17). Median 

concentrations of the Lincoln Creek (25 mg/L) and the Lower 

Milwaukee River (28 mg/L) subwatersheds were the lowest 

compared to median concentrations in other subwatersheds 

(fig. 44, table 17).

Data were insufficient to indicate seasonal or long-term 

trends in suspended-sediment at the five highlighted sampling sites (data not shown).
Sediment 89

87°521 30"

43°15' -

EXPLANATION 

Lakes

Subwatershed, median 

suspended sediment 

in milligrams per liter

VJ_, 2-28

MMSD planning area 

/~\J Watershed boundary 

/~\J Subwatershed boundary 

Streams

Sampling site, median 

suspended sediment 

in milligrams per liter

© 1 - 10 samples 

11 - 100 samples

29-100

O 1-10 samples 

11 - 100 samples

101 -193

O 1-10 samples 

11-100 samples

194-581

• 1 -10 samples 

11 -100 samples

Base composited from Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission regional base 

map, 1:2,000,1995; U.S. Geological Survey digital line graph hydrography, 1:100,000,2001; Wisconsin 

Department of Natural Resources version 2 hydrography, 1:24,000,2002. Wisconsin Transverse 

Mercator Projection, referenced to North American Datum of 1983,1991 adjustment.

1 I

2 4 KILOMETERS

Figure 43. Sites sampled for suspended sediment in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District (MMSD) 

planning area, Wis.
100,000

DC UJb 10,000 _lDC LLJ Q. 

V)

CDILLJ iQ LLJ 

V)Q 

UJ Q 

Z 

UJ 

Q. 

Cfl D 

Cfl

Fox Kinnickinnic 

River River

Menomonee 

River

Milwaukee 

River

Oak 

Creek

Root 

River

1 ,000

100

10

0.1

491

122

84

20 33

331

22

123

43

y

rT o<^ r^

EXPLANATION

106 Number of samples

__ Data value 1.5 to 3.0 times the IQR

outside the box

Largest data value within 1.5 times

the IQR above the box

75th percentile —,

.„ j- ,m*L. 4.-I \ Interquartile Median (50th percentile) rang^ (|QR)

25th percentile _ISmallest data value within 1.5 times 

the IQR below the box

Reporting limit for 

some analyses was: 1 milligram per liter

01

e ?rCD 

CD

s5•a

o_H.1Q) 

3 CO CDCD

(O CD

SUBWATERSHED

Figure 44. Statistical distribution of suspended-sediment concentrations in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, 1970-2002.

a) kv>

no
Table 17. Summary statistics for suspended sediment, by category, for the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning a

[USGS, U.S. Geological Survey; —, no data available; RL, reporting-limit value; values are expressed in milligrams per liter (mg/L); values rounded to the 

number; for the purpose of statistical calculations, values reported below reporting limit are set at one-half the reporting-limit value; some values below th

were reported as zero]

Watershed

Fox River

Kinnickinnic River

Menomonee River

Milwaukee River

Oak Creek

Root River

Subwatershed

Muskego Lake

Kinnickinnic River

Honey Creek

Little Menomonee River

Lower Menomonee River

Upper Menomonee River

Underwood Creek

Lincoln Creek

Lower Milwaukee River

Lower Oak Creek

Middle Root River

Upper Root River

0) 

CO 

0)

5

1CO

.

£Q.

CO 

0)

.-e

(/>

2

4

1

3

4

5

1

2

3

1

1

2

w

CO

21

O

^J

*;

O

C

3

O

o

491

4

41

84

91

122

20

33

331

22

43

123

9) '— 42-

30) *i

"5 = E

"o 2 o>

i- 8" .E

o Si "^

^ CO O

E > Q.

3 > 0)

2 2. DC

fl)

•°

3 1

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0)

Q.

scO

+rf

$

^TM

CO HI

09/27/1995

04/02/1977

04/04/1973

04/05/1973

04/04/1973

07/18/1973

04/04/1973

04/16/1993

05/11/1971

09/21/1972

03/10/1971

03/10/1999

1

0)

Q. 

CO

CO

0)

0)

CO

^

11/06/2001

07/10/1995

07/10/1995

07/10/1995

04/02/1983

04/02/1983

07/03/1977

08/16/2001

08/16/2001

07/10/1995

03/15/1976

09/14/2000

E

3

'E

•c

^S

0

2

1

4

3

4

5

3

1

5

8

0

.0)

"•p

0)

o

0)

Q.

^Z

o

3

95

8

32

10

14

70

6

11

12

15

53

0)

1

0) 

0)

Q.

£

55

CM

7

234

65

62

48

17

98

10

16

28

35

106

C 

CO 

T3

0)

S

39

356

193

178

127

40

234

25

28

58

62

204

c

CO 

0)

S

79

297

290

348

252

689

308

87

36

210

95

443

.SJ "•J3

0) 

O

0)

Q.

^Z

in

r90

419

389

494

366

261

324

96

44

194

106

413
92 Water-Resources-Related Information for the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin

Nutrients

Nutrients are of concern in surface waters because high 

levels may cause excessive aquatic plant growth, which in 

turn may lead to lowered dissolved oxygen as the plants 

decompose. Excessive aquatic plant growth may cause other 

problems including large "mats" of weeds on the surface of 

waters that can be a nuisance to boaters and swimmers and 

aquatic life, and decomposing vegetation also may cause 

unpleasant odors.

Total Nitrogen

As a major element required for the synthesis of proteins, nucleic acids, and chlorophyll, nitrogen is a biologically essential element to stream communities. With no 

common nitrogen-containing minerals, virtually all nongaseous nitrogen in streams is associated with organic matter 

and detritus, with usually much lesser amounts of dissolved 

or sorbed inorganic species. The nitrogen cycle is particularly complex, having many forms of gaseous, truly dissolved, colloidal, and particulate forms. Particulate organic 

nitrogen is commonly the largest component of total nitrogen, with the remainder accounted for by dissolved and 

sorbed species—including ammonium, amino acids, peptides, proteins, amino sugars, and aliphatic amines-and dissolved nitrate (NO3~) and nitrite (NO2~)-

Allochthonous sources of nitrogen include direct dissolution of nitrogen gas from the atmosphere, dissolved 

nitrogen associated with ground water, inputs of organic 

matter and detritus from watershed, and eroded sediments 

with sorbed nitrogen. Autochthonous sources are dominated by primary production and recycled nitrogen formed 

during organic matter decomposition in the water and 

stream sediments.

USEPA has proposed a criterion of 1 .59 mg/L as N for 

total nitrogen in rivers for Level III Ecoregion 53 (U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 2000a). The total nitrogen criterion for rivers is an attempt to limit the potential for 

nuisance algal blooms directly related to excessive nitrogen 

concentrations.

In most cases, concentrations of total nitrogen were 

derived from adding either dissolved nitrate plus dissolved 

Kjeldahl nitrogen concentrations or dissolved nitrate plus 

total organic nitrogen plus dissolved ammonia nitrogen 

concentrations. (For further discussion, see "Screening of 

data".) Because total nitrogen concentrations were calculated from several constituents, the number of samples with 

one or more components having concentrations below a 

reporting limit was not carried through the calculation.

At many sites scattered throughout the planning area, 

median total nitrogen concentrations exceeded the proposed USEPA nutrient-criterion concentration (for a calculated total nitrogen) of 1.59 mg/L as N (fig. 45). The sites 

with median concentrations in the upper quartile were generally found in the same subwatersheds with exceedences 

of the nutrient criterion (fig. 45). Sites with median concentrations in the lower quartile were also scattered throughout 

the planning area (fig. 45).

Subwatersheds with median concentrations in the 

upper quartile were Willow Creek, Little Menomonee 

River, Wilson Park Creek, Mitchell Field Drainage Ditch, 

and the Lower Root River (fig. 45). Subwatersheds with the 

lowest median concentrations were Honey Creek, North 

Branch Oak Creek, and Middle Oak Creek (fig. 45). All 

subwatersheds except Butler Ditch, Honey Creek and North 

Branch Oak Creek had multiple exceedences of the 1.59 

mg/L as N nutrient criterion (fig. 46). All samples collected 

in the Mitchell Field Drainage Ditch exceeded the nutrient 

criterion (fig. 46, table 18). Those subwatersheds with no 

exceedences of the nutrient criterion each had fewer than 10 

samples (fig. 46, table 18). The highest maximum concentrations were in the Wilson Park Creek (562.00 mg/L as N) 

and Mitchell Field Drainage Ditch (170.01 mg/L as N) subwatersheds (fig. 46, table 18). The highest median concentration, of 53.70 mg/L as N, was measured in the Mitchell 

Field Drainage Ditch subwatershed (table 18). Median concentrations in Wilson Park Creek, Little Menomonee River, 

Willow Creek, Lower Milwaukee River, and the Lower 

Root River also exceeded the nutrient criterion (fig. 46, 

table 18).

No general seasonal variations or long-term trends in 

total nitrogen were evident at the five highlighted sampling 

sites (data not shown).
Nutrients 93

88°07'30" 87°52'30"

43"

EXPLANATION

Lakes

Subwatershed, median 

total nitrogen in 

milligrams per liter as 

nitrogen

| 0.10-1.17 

| | 1.18-1.51 

| | 1.52-1.85 

^B 1-86-53.70

^^A MMSD planning area 

/~\J Watershed boundary 

/~\J Subwatershed boundary

Streams

Sampling site, median

total nitrogen in

milligrams per liter as

nitrogen

0.10-1.17

9 1 -10 samples 

^) 11 -100 samples

fVj 101 -1,500 samples

1.18-1.51

O 1-10 samples 

(_) 11 -100 samples

Base composited from Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission regional base 

map, 1:2,000,1995; U.S. Geological Survey digital line graph hydrography, 1:100,000,2001; Wisconsin | 

Department of Natural Resources version 2 hydrography, 1:24,000,2002. Wisconsin Transverse 

Mercator Projection, referenced to Month American Datum of 1983.1991 adjustment.

O 101 -1,500 samples

1.52-1.85

O 1-10 samples 

O 11-100 samples

O 101 -1,500 samples

1.86-53.70

9 1-10 samples 

^ 11-100 samples

101 -1,500 samples

Purple outline indicates 

median total nitrogen in 

milligrams per liter as 

nitrogen exceeding a 

guideline value 

> 1.59

O

O

I -10 samples

II -100 samples

101 -1,500 samples

4 MILES

1 I

2 4 KILOMETERS

Figure 45. Sites sampled for total nitrogen in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District (MMSD) planning 

area, Wis.
1,000

Fox Kinnickinnic 

River River

Menomonee 

River

Milwaukee 

River

Oak 

Creek

Root 

River

DC LUDC LU Q.DC 

CD

100

10

LU 

CD 

O

DC

0.1

0.01

168

T 4,782

4,576

1,034

9,424

37

T

979

249

494 126

28

1.59 milligrams per liter as N, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency proposed nutrient criteria

V y

EXPLANATION

106 Numberof samples

__ Data value 1.5 to 3.0 times the IQR

outside the box

Largest data value within 1.5 timesthe IQR above the box75th percentile —,

., _r ,rn L. .-i J Interquartile Median (50th percentile) ran ge (|QRJ

25th percentile —ISmallest data value within 1.5 times the IQR below the box

No reporting limits for calculated values of total nitrogen

SUBWATERSHED

Figure 46. Statistical distribution of total nitrogen concentrations in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, 1970-2002.

COa

CO 

CD

3 ai
Table 18. Summary statistics for total nitrogen, by category, for the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, 1970-2002

[MMSD, Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District; USGS, U.S. Geological Survey; STORET, STOrage and RETrieval System; —, no data available; values are expre

nitrogen (mg/L as N); values are rounded to the nearest hundredth; total nitrogen values were available for some data, in most cases total nitrogen was derived by addin

or total nitrate plus ammonia plus total organic nitrogen; for the purpose of statistical calculations, values of total nitrate, Kjeldahl nitrogen, ammonia, or total organic ni

are set at one-half the reporting-limit value; some values below a reporting limit were reported as zero; due to the complexity of the total nitrogen calculations, indicatio

calculation of total nitrogen that were below a reporting limit have not been carried through to the total nitrogen values]

Watershed

Fox River

Kinnickinnic River

Menomonee River

Milwaukee River

Oak Creek

Root River

Subwatershed

Muskego Lake

Kinnickinnic River

Wilson Park Creek

Butler Ditch

Honey Creek

Little Menomonee River

Lower Menomonee River

Upper Menomonee River

Willow Creek

Lincoln Creek

Lower Milwaukee River

Mitchell Field Drainage Ditch

North Branch Oak Creek

Lower Oak Creek

Middle Oak Creek

Upper Oak Creek

Lower Root River

Middle Root River

Upper Root River

1

1 

0)

r subwal

Q.

to

0)

w

8

12

5

2

1

2

7

3

2

8

20

1

1

4

2

1

2

1

6

tf>

"5

<n

0)

Q

i

o

c 

o

o

0

4,681

0

0

0

0

4,574

1,034

0

316

9,115

0

0

979

494

249

25

28

102

~

1

O

"o

O

u

12

1

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

1

0

1

0

0

0

1

0

0

tf> 

tf>

0)

STORET

"o

g

o 

o

64

100

168

7

2

7

2

0

11

48

308

37

0

0

0

0

0

0

24

tf>

tf>

0)

15

c

3

O

u

76

4,782

168

7

2

7

4,576

1,034

11

364

9,424

37

1

979

494

249

26

28

126

o.

•o

0) 

Q.

CO 

tf>

W 

0)

Q

UJ

10/17/1986

06/11/1981

11/06/1996

04/21/1999

07/10/1995

07/10/1995

05/21/1979

05/24/1982

06/12/2000

08/07/1980

01/25/1973

11/06/1996

08/05/1993

03/21/1985

03/21/1985

03/21/1985

09/30/1993

08/25/1999

04/11/1999

.

•o

'o.

i

w

Q

08/29/2001

11/27/2001

01/04/1998

04/24/2001

07/11/1995

10/18/2001

11/27/2001

11/27/2001

10/18/2001

03/13/2002

03/13/2002

04/12/1997

08/05/1993

11/19/2001

11/19/2001

11/19/2001

10/10/2001

10/10/2001

10/10/2001

linimum

^

0.53

.11

.66

.86

.33

1.14

.17

.13

.89

.08

.20

4.24

.10

.15

.11

.10

.10

.31

.39

=

0)

i

0.91

.80

2.30

.87

.33

1.76

.94

.78

1.19

.68

.97

7.36

.10

.62

.62

.67

1.43

.64

.69

=

i percent

KCM

1.06

1.04

3.30

.88

.33

2.31

1.23

1.11

1.32

.89

1.30

25.30

.10

.85

.79

.87

2.12

.78

1.01

CO

1

1.27

1.39

6.37

1.21

.33

3.32

1.58

1.56

1.85

1.24

1.68

53.70

.10

1.20

1.07

1.18

3.10

1.19

1.44

20

3

53
96 Water-Resources-Related Information for the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin

Nitrate

Dissolved nitrate (NO3~) is the dominant form of inorganic dissolved nitrogen in virtually all surface waters of the 

MMSD planning area. As a relatively bioavailable component of the nitrogen cycle, nitrate is readily taken up by 

algae, macrophytes, and other primary producer organisms.

Natural sources of nitrate to surface waters include 

atmospheric deposition and oxidation of reduced nitrogen 

species (including ammonia) in either influent ground water, 

surficial bed sediments, or the water column of streams and 

lakes. Nitrate is also applied as fertilizer in agricultural, 

urban, and suburban settings. In southeastern Wisconsin, 

elevated nitrate concentrations in ground water are often correlated with infiltration from excess fertilizer use in agricultural areas (Saad, 1997). Because of its relatively conservative nature in ground waters, nitrate tends to be physically 

transported rather than chemically altered or sorbed to aquifer matrices.

Nitrate is an important constituent in terms of human 

health in that concentrations in excess of 10 mg/L as N are 

correlated with "blue baby syndrome," a condition where the 

nitrate in ingested water competes with oxygen in infants. 

Nitrite (NO2~), another form of dissolved inorganic nitrogen 

in surface waters, also can cause or contribute to blue baby 

syndrome, but nitrite is usually present in much lower concentrations than nitrate. Hence, nitrate remains the focus of 

water-quality standards to safeguard against blue baby syndrome and is therefore sampled frequently in water-quality 

monitoring studies. The USEPA has set a Maximum Contaminant Level (MCL) for nitrate in drinking-water of 10 

mg/L as N. The USEPA has also proposed a nutrient criterion concentration limit of 0.94 mg/L as N for total nitrate 

plus nitrite in rivers for Level III Ecoregion 53. Concentration limits of 10 mg/L as N have also been set by the WDNR 

for a water-quality MCL and by Canada as a Maximum 

Acceptable Concentration (MAC) in drinking water.

Sites with median nitrate concentrations in the upper 

quartile (including those with concentrations that exceeded 

the proposed USEPA nutrient criteria concentration of 

0.94 mg/L as N) were scattered throughout the MMSD planning area but were generally found in sub watersheds with 

median concentrations in the upper two quartiles (fig. 47).

Likewise, sites with median concentrations in the lower 

quartile were scattered throughout the planning area 

(fig. 47).

Subwatersheds with median nitrate concentrations in 

the upper quartile were Willow Creek, Upper Menomonee 

River, Wilson Park Creek, and the Lower Root River 

(fig. 47). Subwatersheds with median concentrations in the 

lower quartile were the Little Menomonee River, Underwood Creek, Milwaukee River Non-Contributing, and North 

Branch Oak Creek (fig. 47); however, of the four subwatersheds, only the Little Menomonee River subwatershed had 

samples with concentrations above a reporting limit 

(table 19). A few samples from the Wilson Park Creek subwatershed exceeded the USEPA drinking-water guideline 

concentration of 10 mg/L as N. Of the 24 Subwatersheds 

with nitrate data, 17 had one or more samples with concentrations that exceeded the USEPA proposed nutrient-criterion concentration of 0.94 mg/L as N (fig. 48). The highest 

maximum concentrations were measured in Wilson Park 

Creek (10.70 mg/L as N), Little Menomonee River 

(7.94 mg/L as N), and Lower Menomonee River (7.11 mg/L 

as N) Subwatersheds (fig. 48, table 19). The highest median 

concentrations were measured in the Lower Root River 

(1.90 mg/L as N) and Wilson Park Creek (0.98 mg/L as N) 

Subwatersheds. These concentrations exceeded the proposed 

USEPA nutrient-criterion concentration of 0.94 mg/L as N 

(fig. 48, table 19).

There was distinct seasonality in the nitrate concentrations at the five highlighted sites, with concentrations being 

lower in the summer and higher in the winter (fig. 49). This 

pattern likely reflects both a strong input function to surface 

waters during spring in addition to biological uptake in the 

summer.

Nitrate concentrations were minimal in the period from 

the late 1980s to the early 1990s at four of the five highlighted sites (No data were available for Lincoln Creek during this time) (fig. 50). This pattern might be explained by 

relatively low rainfall and runoff during this period (the lowest streamflows were in 1987 and 1988) that decreased direct 

and ground-water inputs of nitrate to surface waters relative 

to periods before and after.
Nutrients 97

88°07'30" 87°52'30"

43°

EXPLANATION

t 1 Lakes

Subwatershed, median 

nitrate in milligrams per 

liter as nitrogen

; _ j 0.00 - 0.01 

I I 0.02 - 0.43 

| | 0.44 - 0.59 

H 0.60 - 2.49

f^J MMSD planning area 

f\J Watershed boundary 

/~\J Subwatershed boundary

Streams

Sampling site, median

nitrate in milligrams per

liter as nitrogen

0.00-0.01

• 1 -10 samples 

£ 11-100 samples

101-1,500 samples

0.02-0.43

O 1-10 samples 

O 11-100 samples

Base composited from Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission regional base 

map, 1:2,000,1995; U.S. Geological Survey digital line graph hydrography, 1:100,000,2001; Wisconsin 

Department of Natural Resources version 2 hydrography, 1:24,000,2002. Wisconsin Transverse 

Mercator Projection, referenced to North American Datum of 1983.1991 adjustment.

O 101 -1,500 samples

0.44-0.59

O 1-10 samples 

\J 11-100 samples

O 101 -1,500 samples

0.60-2.49

• 1 -10 samples 

^ 11-100 samples

101 -1,500 samples

Purple outline indicates 

median nitrate in 

milligrams per liter as 

nitrogen exceeding a 

guideline value 

> 0.94

© 1-10 samples 

^J 11 -100 samples

O

101 -1,500 samples

4 MILES

n i

2 4 KILOMETERS

Figure 47. Sites sampled for nitrate in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District (MMSD) planning area, Wis.
Few K nnirkinnir Lake Lake Riwor rSr M chigan Michigan Mlver Mlver Direct Tributary 100 ————————— ^^ ——— L- Z 10 

CO

DCLLJ DC

S i

CO^DCO_l _l^ 0.1z

^

LLJDCH

2 0.01

n nm

; , I

/

91

2

- H

.-

J, ~""'k

r~

LJ

i

173

1,844 _ ~ S

B

i

n - "7

,1

I

i _I

1

H

I

I

8

I— I 9hr _^

Menomonee Milwaukee Oak Root

River River Creek River

ll 4,765

1.056

16

T

i 

_ _ -U

i fl $T L_

5

H

i

L_U

II '

9,837 __ |1

8

H

T

L_l

'

i i : i

37 25^

— 992 S

—. 501 — I f " ^

— U __ 4

LJ _ L_ __ __ IFi i L. i i Li

I _- 27 ; a 128 44 T T . I r —L,-- i LLJ 10 milligrams per liter as N, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Canadian drinking-water guideline 0.94 milligrams per liter as N, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency proposed nutrient criteria EXPLANATION 106 Number of samples Data value 1 .5 to 3.0 times the IQR outside the box Largest data value within 1 .5 times 1 ' the IQR above the box ---J-i.- 7^th nprrontilo __ '^y/^//^^^///^//^ Smallest data value within 1.5 times the IQR below the box Reporting limits for some analyses were:

0,0.007,0.01,0.02,0.05,

0.1, 0.2 milligrams per liter as N

SUBWATERSHED 

Figure 48. Statistical distribution of nitrate concentrations in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, 1970-2002.

ofr*CO

CD COCD

CO

ca

CD
Nutrients 99

Kinnickinnic River at 1st Street

C/3 

<

CC 

LJJ

CC 

LU 

CL

V)

<

CC

CD

_l _l

LJJ

<

CC

3.0 

2.5 

2.0 

1.5 

1.0 

0.5 

0

3.0 

2.5 

2.0 

1.5 

1.0 

0.5 

0.0

2.5 

2.0 

1.5 

1.0 

0.5 

0

3.5 

3.0 

2.5 

2.0 

1.5 

1.0 

0.5 

0

Menomonee River at 70th Street Bridge

Lincoln Creek at 47th Street

• .•

Milwaukee River at Wells Street

Oak Creek at Ryan Road

•"«§• «

«

JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUNE JULY AUG SEPT OCT NOV DEC

MONTH

Figure 49. Seasonality of nitrate for selected sites in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, 1970-2002.
100 Water-Resources-Related Information for the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin

.•a

•S =1

T3 £0

<D C

P 0

n, a

^ S

c3 "

S3 73

3 -C

73 o

> c

.„ o

r3 rt

> £

"S B t- c3

.S* s

O £

& Is

CM q^ i_

§ b" >

CM ^ #

I -g o

o £ 73

g 1 *

- 03 -t-^

03 S §

£ •§ §.

O3 O *-

__ C U5

C" , o>

C ! 3

1 

CD 

MO y^

"^ £ g

o £'S

i= > "3

CO 0 £

0 £ o

CD W "^

C35 PH O

03 ^3 •&

CD § *3

Q3 S? <^

oo 2 o

c O o

ro fe °

"5 H" 3

r-i pQ &

s g*

i ?.£

CD o* -H

I 11

03 W -0

.1 si

^ '11

CD O 3 rr ra 

-C <U <D

+•• O c 

£ en | S

^ D o N

s. s|| oj cn g w

"co , § S

0 is ^ &

-o || fi

a? Q ^ >

{O (D - - ^j

}~. rt ^ £

'E | rt ^

£ en ^ -I 

co c a1 o 

_o S 3- a

."w "o g £

"co o o -S 

to <u -« &

CO 0 C3 ^

E J^ S «

P 2 •" 3

= g T: 73

oo ^ ° >

°> S- i 1

« en «

2 ^11

uiniuixeiN

aijiuaojad qiQ6

ailiuaajad M19Z

ueairti

ueipa|/\|

ailiuaajad ijjgg

ailiuaajad mot

uiniuiuj|/\|

ajep a|duies isajei

ajep ajduies )sai|jeg

(s)i;uij| Bujuodati

liuii) Buiuodaj e MO|aq

san|BA jo jaquinfM

siinsaj ||e jo IUPOQ

sj|nsaj 13UO1S *° junoo

siinsaj sosn |O junoo

siinsaj QSI/\II/\I jo junoo

paqsjajBMqns jad sans

^

(0

TO

w

"O

fl

to

0)

1

_!

,1

,

i

,

,

!

,

(^

rp 

o

oo

a^

^

oo

o

JN

O

<N

fN

CN

O

O

~~*

% %O

8

Q

X

o

Un

0

S

O

o

I_(

o

o

o

o

o

rt

o 

o

o

o"o 

o

o 

o

,^

o

o

$N

oo

o

rO-.

in 

JN

•0

o

^. —

p o

ftrf o o

o

oo

s

s

s

o

oo

,8ffl 

o

00

OJ

3

s

r-

^

CO

p

m

^

in

•n

^

"*•

O

en

O

o

p

^H

fN

. — i

m

O-.

§

S1; o

o

o

0°

cT

«n

I

•*"

M

S

CO

"*

2

>

ckinnic R

"c 

_c

(D

S

'3 O

c

1

5

OJ _) r-~o-* — m |_JCN,_J

^Dn CH ^ ^. °i " °1 C^^Bn

o ' ^H r-- t~- rs »— ^

t~~ • i r~ m •* —i 0 i _ i

(^ ' ' m o oo CN "^ ' ^ '

_: • ' ^ , _ \ ' '

m [ ! t-- x> CN ^ m ! ^ !

TJ- ' m r-~ r-~ oo p CN

^£J | 1 ^£J , __ , l/^ ^ ^ 1 f-^ 1

CO ' ' . — i "^J" ' — ' ^£) t^~- ' O^ '

_; ^

oo i ' o r- •— < CN •* ! oo '

a^ -~ — < p «n vo ^

t-- ' ! CN m — o "^ ! ^ !

in O O O m co v£)

TJ- [ | ^_ ^- — TJ- o) ' ro '

ro ' ppp — ; — ; VO

— i ' ! o .-H — o — ! •* ! O O p p p p en

oooo . — ^^. — ^ ^-< ^^ r--'— <CN

^-•^^ T— • CNCNCN CN CN \C^\!

^oo ^ ^^Soo f-i f-^ r~ so r~- 

pp TM CJC^^ C^ C^ Q^CJ 

rfin 06 ooooo ^H rf voo —

OO O OO— — — O— 'O

in oo t~~ ^ in in in in *o O • — '

^^O CN ^^^-^^ o — O — O

O^ in in ^ o O o^ t^ oo ^£) in

OO O O — ' — ' O O OOO

rt

o

CN <N CN O CN

O ^H O O (-J O 

O O fNOO ^§o'

-H" of .-; i-T ^- r O O ^ fN CN

o— p °^pp p p p p

o o" o cf o o o o o ! o"

in ' — ' oo CN ro O rn CN in O oo

« m ^H

m— oo o-,vor- ^ jc m — oo 

— "^ ^ ^ ^ ^

TJ- ^-i

in . — • oo ^ cs O ^ cN in *n oo

ooo o ooir- -* o o^oo

OO O Oo)O J^ ^ OOO

TJ- —

r--^^ CN CN-^^ ' — o^ ^-CN —

G § M § 8 u ^

gQ Ill's ^00

o§ § _^g e e 5 .* 3.5

^ .2P .£P^ -S^o 8 2 -55i^-3 «§ ^ ^1 -I (S 1- 1- 1- § £ -^

g § 2l o ^ S^ |gj Sg g g g |

J jg ^F^ ^ S ^2 |2 &2 ^ ^ ^u 

^ 3 3 5 si 3 5 & 5 5 S

i 1 ^

S) 00 u 0=5

IS !S u "

."So ^^ § -S ^ o ^2 O d ^

«.!3 ^ S S E?

^D j^3 e ^

j j s is
Table 19. Summary statistics for nitrate, by category, for the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, 1970-2002—Continued

[MMSD, Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District; USGS, U.S. Geological Survey; STORET, STOrage and RETrieval System; --, no data available; RL, reporting-limit value; values are expressed in 

milligrams per liter as nitrogen (mg/L as N); values rounded to the nearest hundredth; for the purpose of statistical calculations, values reported below a reporting limit are set at one-half the reporting-limit value; some values below the reporting limit were reported as zero]

Watershed Subwatershed

Oak Creek Mitchell Field

Drainage Ditch

North Branch Oak

Creek

Lower Oak CreekMiddle Oak Creek

Upper Oak Creek

Root River Lower Root River

Middle Root RiverUpper Root River

1

r subwaters

Q.

V)

CO

1

3

4

2

1

2

37

£^

F MMSD resi

oc

3

00

990

501

251

2628

103

w"5(02!

CO (5 CO"o

c 

o

u

37

0

1

0

0

00

24

£

ttl

STORET rei

J

c

3O

u

04

1

00

1

16

1

w(0S> 

"n 

•5

cO

u

37

4

992

501

251

2744

128

« 1>er ofvalue: reporting li

E «

z |

5

i

4

53

22

17

7

1 

0)

r

0) DC

0.010.007,0.01.

0.02

0.010.010.01

0.007,0.010.01,0.02,0.1

0.01, 0.02, 0.2

0)

Q T3

"5.

Qw

w.0)

is

11/06/1996

09/15/1975

09/15/1975

03/21/198503/21/198509/30/1993

06/11/1976

08/16/1978

0)

•o

0)

Q.i

50)

5

04/12/1997

....--.,

11/19/200111/19/200111/19/2001

10/10/200110/10/200110/10/2001

linimum2

.01.01

.01.01.00

.01

.01

i percent! le

3T-

.16.15

.07.12

.49.01

.05

0)i

K

CM

.23.27.17.23

1.19

.01.25

c =

13 *1 5

.46 .59.47 .53.33 .42.50 .63

1.90 1.88

.14 .35.47 .51

i percent! le

KN

.76.68.54.80

2.40

.57.71

i percent! le

5o>

1.16

.91

.86

1.39

3.48

.99

1.00

laximum

2

3.08

2.562.10

3.42

3.80

1.30

2.16
102 Water-Resources-Related Information for the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin

3.0 

2.5 

2.0 

1.5 

1.0 

0.5 

0.0

3.0 

2.5 

2.0 

1.5

Z 1.0

V)

< 0.5

0.0

Kinnickinnic River at 1 st Street

Menomonee River at 70th Street Bridge

CC 

LU 

CL

C/3

CC

o

LU

<

CC

2.5 

2.0 

1.5 

1.0 

0.5 

0.0

4

3

2

1

0

Lincoln Creek at 47th Street

Milwaukee River at Wells Street

Oak Creek at Ryan Road

1976 1978 1980 1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002

YEAR

Figure 50. Trends of nitrate for selected sites in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, 1970-2002.

104 Water-Resources-Related Information for the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin

Kjeldahl Nitrogen

Kjeldahl nitrogen is an operationally defined fraction of 

total nitrogen that is composed of organic nitrogen compounds and ammonia. Even the participate forms are decomposed by way of autolytic and microbial pathways on short 

time scales (minutes to hours). Therefore, Kjeldahl nitrogen 

represents a very bioavailable pool of nitrogen for primary 

production.

Allochthonous sources of Kjeldahl nitrogen in streams 

and rivers include direct wet and dry precipitation, inputs of 

organic matter and detritus from the watershed, and ground 

water (probably much smaller amounts). In agricultural and 

urban areas, anthropogenic sources such as manure and sewage-treatment-plant effluents may dominate. Autochthonous 

sources include primary production and recycled nitrogen 

formed during organic-matter decomposition in water and 

sediments.

Sites with median Kjeldahl nitrogen concentrations in 

the upper quartile were concentrated in the southern part of 

the planning area (fig. 51). Sites with median concentrations

in the lower quartile were scattered throughout the planning 

area (fig. 51).

Subwatersheds with median Kjeldahl nitrogen concentrations in the upper quartile were Butler Ditch, Wilson Park 

Creek, Muskego Lake, Lower Root River, and Mitchell 

Field Drainage Ditch (fig. 51). Subwatersheds with the 

median concentrations in the lower quartile were Honey 

Creek, Middle Root River, Upper Oak Creek, and North 

Branch Oak Creek in the southern part of the planning area 

(fig. 51). The highest maximum concentrations were in 

Wilson Park Creek (560.00 mg/L as N) and Mitchell Field 

Drainage Ditch (170.00 mg/L as N) Subwatersheds (fig. 52, 

table 20). Likewise, the highest median concentrations also 

were measured in the Mitchell Field Drainage Ditch 

(18.50 mg/L as N) and Wilson Park Creek (2.58 mg/L as N) 

Subwatersheds (fig. 52, table 20).

There was no common trend or pattern in Kjeldahl 

nitrogen concentration with sample year or with season at 

the five highlighted sites (data not shown).
Nutrients 105

SS'OT'SO" 87°52'30"

43°15'

43*

EXPLANATION

[_J Lakes

Subwatershed, median 

Kjeldahl nitrogen in 

milligrams per liter as 

nitrogen 

__^j 0.10-0.65 

| | 0.66 - 0.86 

|| 0.87-1.07 

H 1.08-29.00

MMSD planning area 

Watershed boundary 

/~\J Subwatershed boundary 

Streams

Sampling site, median 

Kjeldahl nitrogen in 

milligrams per liter as 

nitrogen 

0.10-0.65

• 1 -10 samples 

11 -100 samples

101 -1,525 samples

0.66-0.86

O 1-10 samples 

11 -100 samples

101 -1,525 samples

0.87-1.07

• 1 -10 samples 

11 -100 samples

101 -1,525 samples

1.08-29.00

• 1 -10 samples 

11 -100 samples

101 -1,525 samples

Base composited from Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission regional base 

map, 1:2,000,1995; U.S. Geological Survey digital line graph hydrography, 1:100,000,2001; Wisconsin 

Department of Natural Resources version 2 hydrography, 1:24,000,2002. Wisconsin Transverse 

Mercator Projection, referenced to North American Datum of 1983,1991 adjustment.

0

0

1

2

2

|

1 4

4 MILES

1

KILOMETERS

Figure 51. Sites sampled for Kjeldahl nitrogen in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District (MMSD) 

planning area, Wis.
1,000

Z

C/D

CCLJJ 100tDCLUQ. 

C/D

^IT 10CD

Z

LU 1 

OODC

IZXQ 0.1

LLJ

n m

Fox Kinnickinnic Menomonee 

River River River

I - 81

T

L_L

i

4,906

PJs

^

i

i — i

L _l

375 ——=——^5—| = =r-U

1 1 1 1

4,707 ———— Milwaukee River

= 1,041

s - 5 ^ S I_LJ

2 — l_ L _l _i

9,647

371 M

l_

l_ 

_l

_l

,

86

r n

r—

Oak 

Creek

,

9f niO

Root 

River

499 251

7 =

r j^j r — i_

i = ^ F

3E

_i i_

= = ' i_| L_

?3

_i

; | __ 26

31 __ h~^ f--1

LpJ

L_LJ

,__,

— -:

</y 'sy//'s///s/s*

SUBWATERSHED

EXPLANATION

106 Number of samples 

__ Data value 1.5 to 3.0 times the IQR 

" outside the box

Largest data value within 1.5 times

the IQR above the box

75th percentile —i,, _,• /,-„ L. -i (Interquartile Median (50th percentile) range(|QR)

25th percentile _lSmallest data value within 1.5 times 

the IQR below the box

Reporting limits for

some analyses were: 0,0.081,0.13,0.14,0.2, 0.21 milligrams per liter as N

Figure 52. Statistical distribution of Kjeldahl nitrogen concentrations in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, 1970-2002.

30COCD

CD

3

CO 

CD209

09

g (/> 

OO
Table 20. Summary statistics for Kjeldahl nitrogen, by category, for the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, 1970-2002

[MMSD, Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District; USGS, U.S. Geological Survey; STORET, STOrage and RETrieval System; —, no data available; RL, reporting-limit 

grams per liter as nitrogen (mg/L as N); values rounded to the nearest hundredth; for the purpose of statistical calculations, values reported below a reporting limit are set a

some values below the reporting limit were reported as zero]

Watershed

Fox River

Kinnickinnic

River

Menomonee

River

Milwaukee

River

Oak Creek

Root River

Subwatershed

Muskego Lake

Kinnickinnic River

Wilson Park Creek

Butler Ditch

Dousman Ditch

Honey Creek

Little Menomonee River

Lower Menomonee River

Upper Menomonee River

Willow Creek

Lincoln Creek

Lower Milwaukee River

Mitchell Field Drainage Ditch

North Branch Oak Creek

Lower Oak Creek

Middle Oak Creek

Upper Oak Creek

Lower Root River

Middle Root River

Upper Root River

1

(A 

<u

r subwati

o>

Q.

(A

*•*

55

7

9

6

2

1

1

2

6

3

2

7

17

2

2

4

2

1

2

1

8

(A

a

3

(A

21

Q

S 

S

Q

4—

C 

3

O

o

0

4,800

0

0

0

0

0

4,706

1,041

0

323

9,326

0

0

987

499

251

25

28

110

a

1

<3

3

*; 

O

C 

3

O

o

61

94

298

0

0

2

7

1

0

6

48

308

71

0

1

0

0

0

0

24

w"5

(A

<j>

STORET

»l_

o

£1

3

O

o

20

12

77

7

2

0

0

0

0

5

0

13

15

7

0

0

0

1

3

10

(0

"5

"5 

5

c

3

O

o

81

4,906

375

7

2

2

7

4,707

1,041

11

371

9,647

86

7

988

499

251

26

31

144

(A E

o> =

3 0)

>er orvalreportin

P w

z °

$.Q

0

3

8

0

1

0

0

0

0

0

8

1

1

1

0

0

1

1

0

0

Q

1

0)

o

Q.

0> 

DC

-

0.081,

0.21

0,0.14

..

0.2

-

--

--

-

--

0.081,

0.13

0.13

0

0.2

-

-

0.081

0.2

-

-

0)

(0 •o

o>

Q.

E

OJ 

(A

W0)

«

LJ

10/17/1986

05/21/1979

11/06/1996

04/21/1999

10/13/1993

07/10/1995

07/10/1995

05/21/1979

05/24/1982

06/12/2000

08/07/1980

01/25/1973

11/06/1996

08/05/1993

03/21/1985

03/21/1985

03/21/1985

09/30/1993

07/31/1996

07/31/1996

0>

OJ •o

o>

a

OJ 

(A

Ifl

O

5

08/29/2001

11/27/2001

01/16/2002

04/24/2001

05/24/1994

07/11/1995

10/18/2001

11/27/2001

11/27/2001

10/18/2001

03/13/2002

03/13/2002

01/16/2002

10/30/1996

11/19/2001

11/19/2001

11/19/2001

10/10/2001

10/10/2001

10/10/2001

linimum

2

0.50

.02

.00

.49

.10

20

.57

.02

.06

.52

.04

.06

.00

.10

.05

.04

.04

.10

26

.13

V

"•p

a>

a>

a.

T0.70

.44

.59

.50

27

.20

.64

.52

.46

.55

.33

.53

2.12

.34

.37

.40

.34

.63

.43

.48

JU

1

8.

£

55

CM

0.80

.60

1.14

.51

.54

.20

.69

.72

.63

.62

.50

.74

4.19

.55

.49

.53

.49

.72

.48

.62

OJ

1

1.08

.86

2.58

1.11

.97

.20

.73

.94

.87

.77

.74

.99

18.50

.60

.69

.72

.65

1.10

.65

.79
108 Water-Resources-Related Information for the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin

Total Phosphorus

When scarcity of a nutrient is found to be limiting the 

growth of plants in freshwater, the nutrient is usually phosphorus because of the relatively large biochemical requirement for this element compared to the available supply. 

Therefore, even small increases in phosphorus can lead to 

large increases in biomass (assuming no other limitation). 

Within the stream, phosphorus exists in several organic and 

inorganic forms, ranging in size from filterable particles to 

colloidal phases to truly dissolved monomeric molecules. 

Total phosphorus is usually dominated by particle-associated phosphorus that is assimilated in biomass and detritus or 

sorbed to various mineral phases (iron oxyhydroxides, clays, 

and so on).

Allochthonous sources of phosphorus in streams 

include wet and dry atmospheric deposition, eroded sediment, living organic matter, and detritus (dead organic matter). Autochthonous sources are probably dominated by 

streambed-sediment resuspension. Streambed sediments are 

also a temporary, albeit dynamic, sink for total phosphorus 

in streams.

Total phosphorus (along with nitrogen, chlorophyll a, 

and turbidity) has been selected by the USEPA as a key 

nutrient criterion indicator in streams. Its importance is 

mainly that it can limit algal and plant growth. For rivers in 

the Level III, Ecoregion 53, a concentration of 0.08 mg/L as 

P was proposed as a maximum allowable limit.

Exceedences of the proposed total phosphorus criterion 

concentration occurred at sites throughout the MMSD planning area (fig. 53). Also, sites with median concentrations in

the upper quartile and in the lower quartile were scattered 

throughout the planning area (fig. 53).

Subwatersheds with median concentrations in the upper 

quartile were Whitnall Park Creeks, Mitchell Field Drainage 

Ditch, and Lower Root River (fig. 53). Subwatersheds with 

median concentrations in the lower quartile were the Little 

Menomonee River, Butler Ditch, Dousman Ditch, South 

Branch Underwood Creek, Milwaukee River Non-Contributing, and North Branch Oak Creek (fig. 53). Of those subwatersheds, only samples from Butler Ditch had more than 

half of its concentrations above a reporting limit (table 21). 

All Subwatersheds other than those with median concentrations in the lower quartile had one or more samples with a 

concentration above the USEPA proposed nutrient-criterion 

concentration of 0.08 mg/L as P (fig. 54). The highest maximum concentrations were measured in the Middle Oak 

Creek (4.000 mg/L as P), Kinnickinnic River (3.600 mg/L as 

P), and Lower Menomonee River (3.500 mg/L as P) sub watersheds (fig. 54, table 21). The highest median concentration of 0.350 mg/L as P was measured in the Whitnall Park 

Creeks subwatershed (fig. 54, table 21).

There were no consistent trends or patterns in total 

phosphorus concentrations either by sample year or with season at the five highlighted sites (data not shown). The 

absence of higher concentrations during the typical algal 

bloom periods of spring and fall (data not shown), as can be 

seen for chlorophyll a (fig. 84), suggests that inorganic phosphorus sorbed to suspended sediment is a major component 

of total phosphorus at these sites.
Nutrients 109

88°07'30" 87°521 30"

EXPLANATION

Lakes

Subwatershed, median 

total phosphorus in 

milligrams per liter as 

phosphorus 

jj^H 0.004-0.039 

| | 0.040 - 0.072 

|*^ | 0.073-0.111 

jj^H 0.112-2.500

MMSD planning area 

~/~\J Watershed boundary

Subwatershed boundary

Streams

Sampling site, median

total phosphorus in

milligrams per liter as

phosphorus

0.004-0.039

• 1 -10 samples 

11 -100 samples

101 -1,575 samples

0.040-0.072

O 1-10 samples 

11 -100 samples

( j 101-1,575 samples

0.073-0.111

• 1-10 samples 

11 -100 samples

101 -1,575 samples

0.112-2.500

• 1 -10 samples 

11 -100 samples

101 -1,575 samples

Purple outline indicates 

median total phosphorus 

in milligrams per liter as 

phosphorus exceeding a 

guideline value 

> 0.080

O 1-10 samples 

11 -100 samples

101 -1,575 samples

Base composited from Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission regional base 

map, 1:2,000,1995; U.S. Geological Survey digital line graph hydrography, 1:100,000,2001; Wisconsin 

Department of Natural Resources version 2 hydrography, 1:24,000,2002. Wisconsin Transverse 

Mercator Projection, referenced to North American Datum of 1983,1991 adjustment.

4 MILES

1 I

2 4 KILOMETERS

Figure 53. Sites sampled for total phosphorus in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District (MMSD) planning 

area, Wis.
110 Water-Resources-Related Information for the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin

CM

0

O

2

0)

CD"

CU

CD 

0)

'E

CD

Q.

U

Vr

C/3

Q

CU

0)

CD

g

CU

CO

CD

•^

O

O_

o

•4— i 

CU

^~

CU 

CU

CD

J

^

CU

.c•^

o*^—

>1

o

0)

CU •1— 1 CD

u

£2

V)

=3 

O

O_

(/]

o

_c

a. "CD

o•4— i

O

u

'•4— ' 

C/3

'•«- ' 

CD

tt

^^2"

CD

E

E

CO

N

1

S's

c

1

0

Cu

o

c3

ta 

O

">

I

1

M

1

O

Cu

^

Pi o"

s

>

C3

Ja

13

O

C

[

1 

t«

00

13

O

r ! w Pi

T3

C

0

100

W

Pi

00

0

e3 

00

13'§>o

o

8

o

C/}

D

oo"

O

00

D

"Io

-r*

^*\

O

s?C3

<B

00

C

"o

a, 

o

^

o

o

rt

J5

Q

00

S

,3

C3

•|

^

C

UH

a

IH

O

•S

13

0

2

o

i

i

M

c

I

£H

rt

1o

T3

0

a

aV3

13

c

_o

3

o

13 

o

13

u

•^

-^-

a

"S

o

1

a0

l_

l<—•s"

"e

S

1

o

c

o

•s2 'o'

O N

T3 ta

C cd S "S

c/3 ejr O O

3 O.

rt u-

> <D

&7 ^

«j 'i

W) —

^ .s

o a j= ° Cu *^

co O

2 *S

Cu ^

ea 5

0 43

.^ t/3 ^^ o

S -a

Cu "

C 0

1 1

uinmnceifl

o|i}uoujoa mo6

aiituaojad IJIQ/.

uea|/\|

ueipa|/\|

aiiiuaojad mgg

aniuaojad mo\.

1 1 muni IIIAI LUl 1UJIUI|^|

aiep aiduies isaie~|

atep a|duies tsanjeg

(s)iiuji V /+. .1 Buiuoda .* Q

\\ui\\ 6u;tjodaj e Moiaq

sanieA ^o jaquinN

sunsaj ||e jo IUPOQ

siinsaj 13UO1S *o junoo

siinsaj sosn i° tunoQ

sunsaj QSIAIIAI *° lunoo

paqsjateMqns jad sai;s

"8

1

1

3

CO

"S

2

aj

i

o

-•

^

o

M

o

ON 

O

O

ro 

o

00

o 

o

so

o 

o

mo

o

o

. — 1 o

o

C!

00

s. — 1

so

00

ON

|

O

o

o 

o

M

002~

ON

m

K

1 '

O

SO

fN

u

ta 

o

OB

U

"t/1

3

2

5

X

o tu

o

o

vO^

o

so

o

o

s

erp

o

p

o

p

w>

o

p

. — ,

o

o

. — 1

ir. t-^

o1

o

o 

o

^

o 

o

roo

^r

2

-

r;

T^

r~~

'oi >

o

c 

c '3,

'c

c

2

'c

c *r> ^

|'l

o

ON

SO

^

o

so

so

p

£

p

00

p

o

o

p

o

o

o

M

C2

2: o

^

ON

ON

SO

O

o

so

so

~

s

so

o

•*

<a

0

6

^ s

Co

rr^

^

w>

(N

vO

O

vO

O

-

O

30

0

CNl

p

o

p

ON

O

O

. — , O

o

00

o

ON

oo

i

o

M

o 

o

—

o •<*•

o

o

o

OJ

-s

a

J_

^

3

CQ

u

c

° i> E >

I 2

1

_J

oi

t

1

:

,

i

1

1

r^

ON

ON

O

m

ON

ON

—

O

M

o 

o

_

— '

-

o

o

— .

J3 

g

5

c ea

E

o

D

o

o

(N

00

o

p

o

(N

Co

00

o

S; o

o

p

^.J.

fN

p

o

p

v>

ON

ON

o

^

ON

o

SO

o

«->

_

^

-

r-)

O

—

a

o

^

c

o

K

r- o •* rq

2 §

o —

o o 

o o

o o 

o o

ON ON

S 2

— — — 00

•S <2
^a

all Cr Park X£~oo*

•**• o! o

to

Ul

VO

0-1 o

^oo

0*. b

U> b

U) 0

Luo^

to

•^J

OO

OO

Co

tob

Lrt

C1

Rive: Root ~1 •-o

to

H-

__

U)

toj o

oo

itSO-i o

p 

to0obob

-£>• b

o\ 00^

U)

to

~Jo

to

oo

'~J

o\

U)

2

oi —

e Rootivi

^•t

<-

to

OOo

OO

U)

toobog

too

to

00o1• — 1 bob

U) ob

4^bo-i

•^» — i o

U)

-j

to

OO

OO

?s

"~* nris

Rootive

~* i

to

tooto

-J—ob

toooS

U) oo0obobO-i b

>o

•^o^

(JJ ^

OOo

too

Luoo

d1n^

to

U) oo

to

U) o|o

OJ

!2

OO

<_n ^Soobgb

toob

U) obob

-job

OOo^o

•^

O-i o

z r 2 n o £". a * S- p 0) 0. 

» n 01 3 9 O 1 * * f P n 

IS-?ps

*- -J to 

*o o 

O 4^. U) o H-. O 

H- U) O ^ ^ 

^D O 

f OO U) 

i— 4^- O o o ! b b 

to to o o o 

OO 4^. U) o to to" 

ui o i— 

^O -J OO 

U) ~j <_n O 1—— HOO p- H- O H-. H-. 

^>1 ^O *O 1 i tO tO 

^o o o 

vO O O 

U> H- *- b b , 0 0 ! 4^- oo b b 

tO U) ! o o b b 

<->J 4^ ! o o b b ! o o b b 

oo >o 

1 ^ ^O ~ •- ! o o 

o** o** ! o oo 

sa '^ & 

o* . s0 O 

h o o 

gn3Sn 3 

P= 3' 1

too

to

Ul o

topo

b ol __ ! OS

0-1 O

\o

to 

toooob8b

U)

~j b

to

•^

0\

~J

to

4^-

Lu

u>

Ov

to

1D) ^

(A1 3

(D

Q.

COC

D) 

CD W3"

(P

Q.

subwatershed per Sites 

results MMSD of Count 

results USGS of Count 

results STORET of Count 

results all of Count 

values of Number 

limit reporting a below 

limit(s) Reporting 

date sample Earliest 

date sample Latest 

Minimum

percentile 10th 

percentile 25th 

Median

Mean

percentile 75th 

percentile 90th 

Maximum

e 1 P n 

|1

£7; O 

f* a" 

</3 O 

Sh ^ 

'O 2 

horus (mj

reporting

>i f! ^1 t 3 " f ^ i 

E" ^ 

cn 2 § S- 3 p; 

Q, cn 

CD N 

O. CD 

s- o 0 " 

CD3

CDS

f"£

a.

rT^

'Oc

^3

Q 0

>-h

p:

^.

cn

^*

EL n

fTSo' 3

ET

cn

3 

'Oo

a.

CT1

p:

r&

'o

5'

TO1nScn 

2- So

CD

B" p&SCDO

1' 1^'

c"

S

en p

<*

i"g

rTn

CDS

cn

CD

TO

CD1

Wl

O w

en

CD

o.

<§.

SL3 c

ft

en

O w

C W9^TO

CD

p: 3

a.

n. 2

£L

en

•<!

SCDj 0

ET

PS1

J^

?a

•§oa

TO

B] <

E"• ^ - <

D^ c

Ei n

CD

CD

cn

0.

3'

Es

!ecrccE0Er0rf0EcrTC0TCc

^1c

*<fcc

C£C^c5

4 •:c7C

ei •ec-cc

r-CC0<<Q

C£

a C0rrr

-c i

cEQaQc^ch

c hcccac
Q_

CO 

<

o: 

LU

a: LLI 

o_

CO

a:

CD

Fox Kinnickinnic 

River River

Menomonee 

River

Milwaukee 

River

Oak 

Creek

Root 

River

10

0.1

CO

a: 

o

Q_ 

CO

O

X 0.01

0.001

4,787

1,881

136

4,879

= 1,023

15

1

H

1

H

10,04:

525

1

H

503

998

253

1

H

36

135

0.08 milligram

U.S. Environm

proposed nutr

y c </

< *o^o^W J fSJSif J </

EXPLANATION

106 Number o

__ Data valu

outside th

Largest da

the IQR ab

75th perc

>. j- ,m 

Median (5

25th perc

Smallest d

the IQR b

Reporting lim

some analyse

0, 0,005, 0.00

0.042, 5 millig

SUBWATERSHED

Figure 54. Statistical distribution of total phosphorus concentrations in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning 

114 Water-Resources-Related Information for the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin

Dissolved Phosphorus

In fresh water, absent of a physical limitation (for 

example, light), phosphorus is usually the nutrient that limits 

primary production, owing to the relatively large biochemical requirement for this element coupled with its relatively 

low available supply. Therefore, large increases in primary 

production, often termed "blooms," can result from relatively small increases in phosphorus input (assuming no 

other limitation). Within the stream, dissolved phosphorus 

exists in several organic and inorganic forms and in a range 

of sizes from colloids to truly dissolved species. Algae can 

directly take up only the truly dissolved monomeric phosphate molecule (PO43~).

Allochthonous sources of dissolved phosphorus to 

streams include wet deposition and influent ground water, in 

addition to that derived from sediment and organic-matter 

inputs. Autochthonous sources of dissolved phosphorus are 

dominated by desorption from suspended and bed sediment, 

excretion by organisms, and release during organic-matter 

decomposition. Sinks for dissolved phosphorus include 

uptake by organisms and sorption onto suspended and 

streambed sediments.

There are no ambient water-quality standards for dissolved phosphorus in the MMSD planning area. Low or high

concentrations can exist under low or high primary productivity and so are not particularly instructive in that regard.

Many of the sites with median dissolved phosphorus 

concentrations in the upper quartile were in the Lower Milwaukee River subwatershed (fig. 55). Sites with median concentrations in the lower quartile were mainly in the southeastern part of the planning area (fig. 55).

Subwatersheds with median dissolved phosphorus concentrations in the upper quartile were Willow Creek, Little 

Menomonee River, and Lower Root River (fig. 55). The 

Honey Creek, Kinnickinnic River, Muskego Lake, Middle 

Root River, Upper Oak Creek, and Lower Oak Creek subwatersheds had median concentrations in the lower quartile 

(fig. 55). The highest maximum concentration of 3.000 mg/L 

as P was measured in the Upper Menomonee River subwatershed (fig. 56, table 22). The highest median concentrations were measured in the Little Menomonee River 

(0.059 mg/L as P), Willow Creek (0.057 mg/L as P), and 

Lower Root River (0.055 mg/L as P) subwatersheds (fig. 56, 

table 22).

There were no obvious seasonal patterns or long-term 

trends in dissolved phosphorus concentrations at the five 

highlighted sites (data not shown).
Nutrients 115

88 07'30" 87°52'30"

43°15'

43°

-b

EXPLANATION

Lakes

Subwatershed, median 

dissolved phosphorus in 

milligrams per liter as 

phosphorus 

|. . . j 0.006-0.020 

| | 0.021 - 0.030 

| , 1 0.031 - 0.040 

|^| 0.041 - 0.530

MMSD planning area 

~/*\J Watershed boundary 

/~\J Subwatershed boundary

Streams

Sampling site, median

dissolved phosphorus in

milligrams per liter as

phosphorus

0.006-0.020

O 1-10 samples 

11 -100 samples

101 -1,450 samples

0.021 - 0.030 

O 1-10 samples 

11 -100 samples

101 -1,450 samples

0.031 - 0.040 

O 1-10 samples 

11 -100 samples

101 -1,450 samples

0.041-0.530

O 1 -10 samples 

11 -100 samples

101 -1,450 samples

Base composited from Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission regional base 

map, 1:2,000,1995; U.S. Geological Survey digital line graph hydrography, 1:100,000,2001; Wisconsin 

Department of Natural Resources version 2 hydrography, 1:24,000,2002. Wisconsin Transverse 

Mercator Projection, referenced to North American Datum of 1983,1991 adjustment.

0

0

1

2

2

|

1 4

4 MILES

1

KILOMETERS

Figure 55. Sites sampled for dissolved phosphorus in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District (MMSD) 

planning area, Wis.
Fox Kinnickinnic Menomonee Milwaukee

River River River 10 —————————————————————————————————— CL

CO

^CLLLJ I-_lDCLJJ 1CL

CO

^DC

O

_i _i^Z 0.1

co"

=>DC0XCL

CO

0

XCL "r 0.01QLLJ_lOCO

COQ

0.001 

-: ————

5

— i_ _i

4,463

-? —•f

l_

•

— I

_J

1 i l

986

4.392

6

EIZZ]

2

i'i 5 ••'••^ '••

, ————^^^^ ^^= ^^

r

= n

—. . .•,

i_ _i

i—L_

—

6

1

River

Oak

Creek

8,918 ——__^=

354 

=

==

.;

^====

Ti

u

~

— I

jj~——'— r^

I _ * : 961 —————— 492

Root

River

__ 

—— 238

^= —— i 

P r~~i

.-• j

____ —— __

I

—, — •-.,'.

—— —— r~i_ — i _i

1 39

— 26

—— 27 ———

[

_l

r~

i,

•:.

]_ r~';'

Li_

~n

c

* s^ * * * ^ ^ x ^ s^. ^ < * x

\P ^~ c^ ^~ ^ <^~ c^ c^ <^ r^<^3" c^ r?^ ^~ ^~ ,<j^~

sl®"^ vC^1 O?

^ ^r v?P

^

\

^

'///»* ^ ,/"

\P C^

<^° ^o^ ^ O' *^t^ *c^ \Cr \

yV •v V^/rf ^ /"//

V \s

'-_- EXPLANATION

106 Number of samples

Data value 1 .5 to 3.0 times the IQR

outside the box

^^ Largest data value within 1 .5 times1 1 ' the IQR above the box

—— Median (50th percentile) ^^5 "IQJ

M—^ 25th percentile _li | i Smallest data value within 1 .5 times 

the IQR below the box

Reporting limits for 

some analyses were:

0.004,0.006,0.01,0.011,0.02,0.05 milligrams per liter as P

C/9CDQ> 

CO 

CD

S

2Q)

SUBWATERSHED

Figure 56. Statistical distribution of dissolved phosphorus concentrations in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, 1970-2002.

Q)gV)

O

o
Table 22. Summary statistics for dissolved phosphorus, by category, for the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, 1970-2

[MMSD, Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District; USGS, U.S. Geological Survey; STORET, STOrage and RETrieval System; —, no data available; values are expre

phosphorus (mg/L as P); values rounded to the nearest thousandth; for the purpose of statistical calculations, values reported below a reporting limit are set at one-half t

values below the reporting limit were reported as zero]

Watershed

Fox River

Kinnickinnic River

Menomonee River

Milwaukee River

Oak Creek

Root River

Subwatershed

Muskego Lake

Kinnickinnic River

Honey Creek

Little Menomonee

River

Lower Menomonee

River

Upper Menomonee

River

Willow Creek

Lincoln Creek

Lower Milwaukee

River

Lower Oak Creek

Middle Oak Creek

Upper Oak Creek

Lower Root River

Middle Root River

Upper Root River

0>

0>

1 subwat

i?

Q.

CO 

£

4

5

1

1

6

3

1

5

16

4

2

1

1

1

4

tn

"5

CO

s.

o

S

"o

c

3 

O

O

0

4,463

0

0

4,392

986

0

319

8,706

961

492

238

26

27

109

CO 

CO

Q)

O

D

Q

C

o

o

3

0

2

6

0

0

6

35

212

0

0

0

0

0

0

tn

"5

CO

s.

W 

DC

^^

O

c

3

O

o

2

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

±!

3 

CO

Q)

"co

c

3

o 

o

5

4,463

2

6

4,392

986

6

354

8,918

961

492

238

26

27

109

0> —

3 D)

ier ofvalreportin

CO E >

S.Q

1

46

0

0

14

13

0

30

65

41

10

9

2

8

25

^

*••

E

D)

r

0) 

DC

0.004

0.011,0.02

-

..

0.011,0.02

0.011,0.02

-

0.01,0.011,

0.02

0.006, 0.01,

0.011,

0.02, 0.05

0.011,0.02

0.011,0.02

0.011,0.02

0.02

0.011,0.02

0.011,0.02

1

0>

Q.

CO 

CO

w

.2~

CO 

UJ

12/17/1987

06/04/1980

07/10/1995

05/24/2001

06/04/1980

05/24/1982

05/24/2001

04/16/1993

09/20/1977

03/21/1985

03/21/1985

03/21/1985

08/25/1999

08/25/1999

08/25/1999

i

0>

Q.

E

+-J

0)

•t09/20/2000

11/27/2001

07/11/1995

10/18/2001

11/27/2001

11/27/2001

10/18/2001

11/27/2001

11/27/2001

11/19/2001

11/19/2001

11/19/2001

10/10/2001

10/10/2001

10/10/2001

E

3

E'E

i

0.002

.002

.010

.026

.002

.003

.025

.003

.002

.003

.003

.003

.010

.006

.006

—

percent

£

3"^

0.005

.010

.011

.039

.010

.010

.035

.010

.010

.007

.010

.008

.029

.010

.010

—

§

s.

£

KCM

0.009

.010

.013

.052

.020

.020

.044

.020

.020

.010

.010

.010

.040

.010

.010

c

.CO 

0>

0.010

.020

.015

.059

.030

.030

.057

.040

.030

.020

.030

.020

.055

.020

.030

Trace Elements 119

Trace Elements

Detection of trace elements in surface water, sediment, 

and tissues can be a result of not only inputs from the natural 

landscape but also from anthropogenic processes that contribute these elements to the streams.

Sediment provides habitat and a food source for a wide 

variety of benthic organisms. Exposure to certain substances 

in sediments, such as trace elements, can potentially be a significant hazard to the health of the benthic organisms and 

other species in the food chain above them. The Canadian 

Council of Ministers of the Environment (2002a) have established Sediment Quality Guidelines (SQGs) for the protection of aquatic life that provide a reference point for assessing the likelihood for observing adverse biological effects 

(Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment, 2001). 

The formal protocol used to derive SQGs relies both on a 

modification of Canada's national status and trends program 

and spiked-sediment toxicity tests. Canada's Interim Sediment Quality Guidelines (ISQG) are recommended if information is available to support only one approach (Canadian 

Council of Ministers of the Environment, 2001). Concentrations below the ISQG are not expected to show any significant effects on aquatic life. The Canadian Probable Effect 

Level (PEL) is the concentration above which adverse biological effects are expected to appear frequently. The effects 

on aquatic life when concentrations fall between the ISQG 

and the PEL are unknown. Also referred to in this report is 

the MacDonald scale (MacDonald and others, 2000). MacDonald's thresholds are the Threshold Effect Concentration 

(TEC), below which adverse effects are not expected, and 

Probable Effect Concentration (PEC), at or above which 

adverse effects are expected. When concentrations fall 

between the MacDonald TEC and PEC the potential effects 

on aquatic life are unknown. The implications of the sediment guidelines for the Canadian and MacDonald scales are 

similar although they have different values for the "threshold" and "probable" effect levels. Concentrations below the 

"threshold" level are not expected to effect aquatic life, concentrations between the "threshold" and "probable" levels 

have unknown effects, and effects on aquatic life are 

expected at concentrations above the "probable" level.

Very few data points exist for trace elements in tissue 

(typically fish or macroinvertebrate) in the MMSD Corridor 

database, so tissue contamination will not be discussed in 

this report. Many concentrations for trace elements in water 

were below a specified reporting limit; however, for many 

trace elements, the reporting limit was relatively high. 

Because of the large amount of data below a reporting limit 

and high reporting limits, no maps of trace elements in water 

or statistical distribution figures were created, and summarystatistic tables contain only a subset of the usual information. 

Also, because of the small number of samples, no trends or 

seasonality analysis was done for trace elements in sediment 

or water.
120 Water-Resources-Related Information for the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin

Cadmium

Cadmium is found to some extent in all soils and rocks, 

including coal and mineral fertilizers. Common sources of 

cadmium input to water include dissolution of galvanized 

pipes, erosion of soils and rocks, and point and nonpoint 

sources. During 1987-93, Wisconsin ranked as one the top 

seven states in the release of cadmium to land (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2002b).

Most cadmium used in the United States is extracted 

during the smelting of copper, zinc, and lead. Anthropogenic 

uses of cadmium include electroplating and coating, pigments in paint and plastics, batteries (nickel-cadmium and 

solar), machinery and baking enamels, and fluorescent light 

tubes. Cadmium binds tightly to soil particles and does not 

break down in the environment, but it may change form 

(Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, 1999b).

The Canadian drinking-water MAC guideline, WDNR 

MCL, and USEPA MCL for cadmium in drinking water are 

all the same, 5 (ig/L. The USEPA MCL was based on the 

possibility of kidney, liver, bone, and blood damage from 

long-term exposure to cadmium concentrations above the 

MCL. The Canadian water-quality guideline for the protection of aquatic life is 0.017 (ig/L.

Reporting limits for cadmium in water were well above 

the Canadian aquatic life guideline of 0.017 (ig/L; therefore, 

all results reported above a reporting limit were also above 

the guideline concentration. Subwatersheds with maximum 

concentrations above the USEPA, WDNR, and Canadian 

drinking-water guideline concentration of 5 (ig/L were the 

Lower Milwaukee River (942.00 jig/L), Kinnickinnic River 

(60.00 (ig/L), and Lower Menomonee River (41.00 (ig/L), 

Lower Oak Creek (14.00 (ig/L), Mitchell Field Drainage 

Ditch (12.00 (ig/L), Middle Oak Creek (11.00 (ig/L), Upper

Menomonee River (9.00 (ig/L), Underwood Creek 

(9.00 (ig/L), Upper Oak Creek (8.00 (ig/L), and Wilson Park 

Creek (5.60 (ig/L) (table 23). No subwatersheds had median 

concentrations above the drinking-water guideline 

(table 23).

The ISQG for cadmium in sediment was set at 0.6 (ig/g, 

and the PEL was 3.5 (ig/g. MacDonald recommends a TEC 

of 0.99 (ig/g and PEC of 4.98 (ig/g for cadmium in sediment.

Most sites with exceedences of the PEL for cadmium in 

sediment (3.5 |ig/g) were clustered near the confluence of the 

Milwaukee, Menomonee, and Kinnickinnic Rivers (fig. 57). 

Sites with median concentrations in the upper quartile were 

also clustered near the confluence of the three rivers (fig. 

57). Sites with median concentrations in the lower quartile 

were scattered around the planning area (fig. 57).

No subwatersheds had median cadmium in sediment 

concentrations in the upper quartile (fig. 57). The Upper 

Menomonee River, Little Menomonee Creek, Lilly Creek, 

Lincoln Creek, Muskego Lake, and Middle Root River subwatersheds had median concentrations in the lower quartile 

(fig. 57). One or more samples in the Little Menomonee 

River, Lower Menomonee River, Lower Milwaukee River, 

and Kinnickinnic River subwatersheds exceeded either the 

PEC or the PEL (4.98 (ig/g, 3.5 (ig/g) (fig. 58, table 24). The 

highest median concentrations, all above the PEL, were measured in the Kinnickinnic River (4.4 (ig/g), Little Menomonee River (4.0 (ig/g), Lower Menomonee River (3.9 (ig/g) 

subwatersheds (fig. 58, table 24). At least one concentration 

in the Lower Menomonee River, Upper Menomonee River, 

Lower Milwaukee River, and Muskego Lake subwatersheds 

fell below the ISQG or the TEC (0.6 (ig/g, 0.99 (ig/g) 

(fig. 58, table 24).
Selected Field Measurements and Miscellaneous Constituents 121

87°52'30"

43°15'

43°

EXPLANATION

[ J Lakes

Subwatershed, median 

cadmium concentrations 

in sediment in 

micrograms per gram

, 0.4 - 2.0 

| | 2.1 - 3.5 

| : | 3.6 - 5.2 

Area ~TM~TM 5.3 - 9.5

displayed 

in detail

above MMSD planning area 

/~\J Watershed boundary

Subwatershed boundary

Streams

Sampling site, median

cadmium concentrations

in sediment in

mcrograms per gram

© 0.4 - 2.0

5.3 - 9.5 

Purple outline indicates 

median cadmium 

concentrations in 

sediment in micrograms 

per gram exceeding a 

guideline value

O

Base composited from Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission regional base 

map, 1:2,000,1995; U.S. Geological Survey digital line graph hydrography, 1:100,000,2001; Wisconsin 

Department of Natural Resources version 2 hydrography, 1:24,000,2002. Wisconsin Transverse 

Mercator Projection, referenced to North American Datum of 1983,1991 adjustment.

0

0

1

2

2 4 MILES

1 1

1 4 KILOMETERS

Figure 57. Sites sampled for cadmium in sediment in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District (MMSD) 

planning area,Wis.
Table 23. Summary statistics for cadmium in water, by category, for the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, 1970-2002

[MMSD, Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District; USGS, U.S. Geological Survey; STORET, STOrage and RETrieval System; --, no data available; RL, reporting-limit value; values are expressed 

in micrograms per liter (|lg/L); values rounded to nearest hundredth; for the purpose of statistical calculations, values reported below a reporting limit are set at one-half the reporting-limit value; some values below the reporting limit were reported as zero]

Watershed

Kinnickinnic

River

Lake Michigan

Direct

Menomonee River

Milwaukee River

Subwatershed

Kinnickinnic River

..

Ditch

Wilson Park Creek

Lake Michigan

Direct

Honey Creek

Little Menomonee

River

Lower Menomonee

River

Upper Menomonee

River

Underwood CreekCombined Sewer

Service Area

Lincoln CreekLower Milwaukee

River

tershed

1

COi_

CO

CD E

</>

10

26

11

4

11

5

2

1

7

23

resultsQ</>

oc:

3

O

o

1,382

0

000

0

1,398

408

0

0

262

2,813

results(/) (5D

c

3

O

o

00

000

22

530

13

0021

resultsLIIrr

R0) "o

"c

3O

o

144

2

50

11

18

10

7

1

1

23

205

& co E ^ •5 CD ~ ,«, 

CD 15 m 'P

= •*-'•£ =

CO OQ ^ M- i- a. .EO CD CD ~ 1 is 1 0=0 « 3 z 5 a

1,526 233 0.1,0.2,

0.7, 3,

10,20

2 2 0.2

50 32 0, 0.2

1 1 0.2

1 1 0.2

40 36 0.2. 1

1,461 144 0.1,0.2,1

415 70 0.1,0.2

14 8 0.2, 1

I 1 0.2

285 104 0.1,0.2,

0.3

3,039 491 0.1,0.2,

0.3, 1,

2

I

TJ 

COa

i

1

co Hi

04/30/197509/30/1975

05/27/197506/16/1977

07/01/197709/03/1975

09/03/197509/03/1975

09/03/1975

02/03/1975

05/19/197507/18/1974

Q) CO CD CD

"Q. | 0) 0)

E ESSw •? 2 SJ co ,± DL a.

1o 5 £ £ CD o in3 w

^"

11/14/2001 0.05 0.10 0.1110/02/1975

01/03/2000 .00 .05 .1006/16/1977

07/01/197706/29/1990 .10 .10 .10

11/14/2001 .05 .10 1.00

11/14/2001 .05 .05 .11

06/29/1990 .10 .50 .50

02/03/1975

11/27/2001 .05 .05 .05

11/15/2001 .00 .10 .11

_<j> _a)

c ill fill!

55 o N 0>

3.00 2.08 3.00 3.00 60.00

RT

.10 28 .10 .52 5.60

DT

RI

.50 .42 .50 .55 2.00

3.00 2.21 3.00 3.00 41.00

1.00 1.43 3.00 3.00 9.00

.50 1.47 1.00 3.10 9.00

PT

.10 .15 .11 .20 2.50

3.00 2.29 3.00 3.00 942.00

|CD 30

isources30

ep_CD0.1s5'

33"SCD

S1"

n>c

CDCD2CD

35?

3

C/>

CD§CD

Q> CO

CD

O

a

s203

3

5'

CO

CDn>

o0
o o

£?.

OS

ooo

to2o

"°p

,_, p

-JS

oso

p 

tooo0

Ul oo

Ul o8

H-L — 

OS

"°

Roo Lower Roc Middle 1 1 ^ .— 

to to 

UJ Ul O O 0 O 

to to 

UJ Ul 

•** •** p p 0 0 

OO 00 

to to 

Ul Ui 

SO *O 

SO SO 5 i R R 

to to o o o o o o 

Ui Ul a a o o 

Ul Ul a a S o 

oo

H- •- 

to os 

tO UJ 

to oo 

70o

i.^'

Si

Brand East 

River

t^

708

,_, oo

to_

to

too

too

Ul

to

-J

-J2

KJ

-J!'!1!:!

70r

Oak Upper 03_

tooo

SO

to

-jpoUJ

to

oo

Ul ~

tooooaoo

UJ 8

.—

to

UJ 8

UJ 8

oooo

Oal Middle o

n 1

to

oooo

oo

UJ

oopo

UJ

to

oo

Ul ^

tooog'o

Ulro

UJ 8

^-

4?

UJ

UJ 8'„Q0

o

R- Q

R- 1 ? i 

5S- P§- 1 

I'S: £* 0 

KH P P P 

TM. (TO S %• 

n; ft) O -. 

o^: ** P 1 ? Sto to -&• 

UJ 

O O 4^- O O O 

tO — l 

OO 4i. HUJ

to -J 

OO 4^- Ul 

to oo 

o o o 

to >-> ®pJ

o o o 

H- 4i. Ul > i^ tO 

io ^ 5 

^D Ui Ul 

o . — 1-1 

K- JO J^ o i: ^ 

UJ — i ^D 

to ^ to O O i— o o O Ul o o 

-J Ul 

UJ ' ^ 

10 Ul 

fe ' i 

to ! >-» 

4^ N) 

i— ! u) S

Ul 

oo

os ! uj 8

^0

CTs

to 4^. 

oho

<n

(03"

g.

CO1u

CO 

CD

a.

subwatershed per Sites 

results MMSD of Count 

results USGS of Count 

results STORET of Count 

results all of Count 

values of Number 

limit reporting below 

limit(s) Reporting 

date sample Earliest 

date sample Latest 

Minimum

percentile 10th 

percentile 25th 

Median

Mean

percentile 75th 

percentile 90th 

Maximum

3 C IBo <T 

(w 2L 2 2 3 ^ r EJ* H ft 

tt 'O 

g> 2, 

-p* 5' 

£* ft 

<T ft 3 >§ § R G- Sf 

gl & o co p N 

S o 

ft — 1 

r-f

g"

jl

ft&5„

ff

t3

^3O

ft

y?S55' oo

<T c_£5' 3&^S^0

ft

oft. o

c;

•o0a3' 1s1

CO

"•

p^O

ff

£. «

ft

r5 I^11O

ft

22p

<^

f£K

F?

ftn|S

c; 

era

rt

o' Coc• 5 r

o"8

o'

O5 C

<;

•<

onQ

50H

^3gera

&£&W

t?ft*

B^ ^

ft• 3j l o

P.

PS

PS§11 &J"" ^

*§

s. O

CfQPg"'

1,

ps_

rfSS

rt

Ce5Icc£0Er 0roccacE<cec

-<ca

0 

(£c^c

f~

ei <«ace

ei

< 

ei

r-c-ccEc

ei < ca

(£nCor

r 

i-

•cE

cEa

n a"

CJ

^.:cc^Cc^

E ac
Table 24. Summary statistics for cadmium in sediment, by category, for the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, 1970-20

[USGS, U.S. Geological Survey; STORET, STOrage and RETrieval System; WDNR, Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources; — , no data available; values are expr

(M-g/g); values rounded to nearest tenth; for the purpose of statistical calculations, values reported below a reporting limit are set at one-half the reporting-limit value; som

limit were reported as zero]

Watershed

Fox River

Kinnickinnic River

Menomonee River

Milwaukee River

Root River

Subwatershed

Muskego Lake

Kinnickinnic River

Lilly Creek

Little Menomonee Creek

Little Menomonee River

Lower Menomonee River

Upper Menomonee River

Lincoln Creek

Lower Milwaukee River

Middle Root River

ershed

1CO

CD

Q.

CO

»

(75

i

14

3

1

1

25

6

1

17

1

i

CO

£

</>

(5

=>

"o

4-

C

o

0

0

0

3

1

1

2

6

1

6

1

results

UJ

DC

g

B

c

3

O

o

2

0

0

0

0

1

0

0

1

0

CO

"5

CO Q)

DC

Z 

O

o

"c

3 

O

o

0

14

0

0

0

22

0

0

10

0

<n

CO

I

75

c:

3

O

o

2

14

3

1

1

25

6

1

17

1

f> ~ -£• 

o> — <£,

= 0) 1=

75 .E E

III

(—CO O 

E > Q.

3 > 0)

z o DC «

.Q

1 0.4

0

0

0 -

0 --

1 1

1 1

0 --

1 1

0 -

0)

OB •o

0)

a

E

Q)

CO 

UJ

07/07/1994

04/26/1984

11/01/1989

11/07/1989

11/01/1989

07/29/1980

10/31/1989

11/01/1989

08/15/1973

10/03/1973

i•o

0>

a

CO 

CO

I

3

07/07/1994

08/21/1993

11/01/1989

11/07/1989

11/01/1989

08/20/1993

11/08/1989

11/01/1989

08/21/1993

10/03/1973

E

3

E'E

i

0.2

1.8

1.0

1.0

4.0

.5

.5

2.0

.5

1.0

c

i

ot—

0.2

2.1

1.0

1.0

4.0

2.7

.8

2.0

1.2

1.0

'c

o

a>

a.

U)

CM

0.3

3.2

1.0

1.0

4.0

3.1

1.2

2.0

1.7

1.0

c

CO

1

0.4

4.4

1.0

1.0

4.0

3.9

2.0

2.0

3.0

1.0
Trace Elements 125

-

il

.

i

i!

pi 11

ME pi

mo

8?S§CO§M

0^8 doBt5 <D

irir

Milwaukee 

River

Menomonee 

River

o

C i- 15 <u

"EDC

!£

x <5

U-DC

-

^r

-

CM

-

t

2

-

'I

-

HHHI

-I

||,.. .-^^..^v,^-.

m wl,.,.-

-

»: j

-•

N i "

-

i

-

i

J

i

J

-

-

I ' -:

\

°^6>

*^

l\

/0%

*

\

Q

% LJJ

X X

^, ^ CO 

•V *%• DC

xXI

fc

^ \

^ ^> *>

-\

\

\

\

s

\

05

00

lAIVdO d3d SIAIVdOOdOIIAI Nl 'lAinilAIQVO
126 Water-Resources-Related Information for the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin

Mercury

There are 3 forms of mercury—elemental, methyl, and 

inorganic. Mercury released to the environment is usually in 

elemental, or inorganic forms. Biological processes change 

the chemical form of mercury to the organic form (methylmercury), which is the more toxic form found in aquatic species (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2002d). 

Methyl-mercury bioaccumulates in (builds up in the tissues 

of) fish, birds, and mammals (Agency for Toxic Substances 

and Disease Registry, 2003), and is biomagnified up the food 

chain. Mercury is the leading contaminant-related humanhealth advisory in the United States, accounting for almost 

80 percent of all fish-consumption advisories.

Mercury enters the environment from natural and 

anthropogenic sources. Natural sources include volcanoes, 

natural mercury deposits, and volatilization from the ocean. 

Anthropogenic sources include coal combustion, chlorine 

alkali processing, waste incineration, and metal processing. 

Best estimates to date suggest that human activities have 

doubled or tripled the amount of mercury in the atmosphere 

and that the atmospheric burden is increasing by about 

1.5 percent per year. (U.S. Geological Survey Mercury 

Studies Team, 2003a). Analyses of sediment cores show that 

sediments deposited since the industrial revolution have 

mercury concentrations 3 to 5 times those of the pre-industrial sediments (U.S. Geological Survey Mercury Studies 

Team, 2003a). The highest atmospheric deposition rates in 

the United States occur in the southern Great Lakes, Ohio 

Valley, the Northeast, and parts of the Southeast. Globally, 

the United States contributes about 3 percent to the environment, but approximately two-thirds of this is transported outside our borders. Approximately 60 percent of the mercury 

deposition comes from domestic anthropogenic sources, 

with the remainder coming from foreign anthropogenic 

sources, re-emitted mercury from historic sources, and 

natural sources (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 

2000b).

Many changes have taken place with mercury analysis 

and collection techniques since the late 1980s. Analysis now 

can accurately quantify aqueous mercury samples at the subparts-per-trillion range. Newer generation analytical instrumentation have allowed the development of analytical methods for environmentally relevant forms of mercury, including gaseous elemental mercury and methyl-mercury. New 

cleaning and field methodology have been developed to

address sample contamination at these very low levels of 

detection. (U.S. Geological Survey Mercury Studies Team, 

2003b).

The USEPA MCL for mercury is in response to potential kidney damage at concentrations above the MCL. 

WDNR and USEPA MCL are both 2 jig/L and the Canadian 

guideline for the protection of aquatic species is 0.1 |ig/L.

Many reporting limits for mercury in water were above 

the Canadian aquatic life criterion of 0.1 |ig/L, and therefore 

many concentrations above a reporting limit exceeded the 

guideline concentration (table 25). No samples exceeded the 

USEPA and WDNR drinking-water guideline of 2 |ig/L 

(table 25). The Lower Milwaukee River subwatershed had 

the highest maximum concentration of 1.500 jig/L 

(table 25). The highest median concentrations of 0.100 (ig/L 

were measured in the Lower Menomonee River and Upper 

Menomonee River subwatersheds; however, the majority of 

results for both subwatersheds were below a reporting limit 

(table 25).

Sediment-quality guidelines for mercury are ISQG, 

0.17 (ig/g; TEC, 0.18 (ig/g; PEL, 0.486 (ig/g; and PEC, 

1.06(ig/g.

Most sites with exceedences of the PEL for mercury in 

sediment (0.486 JJ-g/g) were clustered near the confluence of 

the Milwaukee, Menomonee, and Kinnickinnic Rivers 

(fig. 59). Sites with median concentrations in the upper quartile were also clustered near the confluence of the three rivers 

(fig. 59). Sites with median concentrations in the lower quartile were scattered around the planning area (fig. 59).

No subwatersheds had median mercury concentrations 

in sediment in the upper quartile (fig. 59). The Little Menomonee Creek, Lilly Creek, Lincoln Creek, and Middle Root 

River subwatersheds had median concentrations in the lower 

quartile (fig. 59). The highest maximum concentrations, 

which were above either the PEC or PEL (1.06 |Ug/g, 

0.486 (ig/g), were measured in the Lower Menomonee River 

(3.550 |ig/g), Lower Milwaukee River (3.350 |ig/g), and 

Kinnickinnic River (3.150 (ig/g) subwatersheds (fig. 60, 

table 26). The highest median concentration of 0.460 jig/g 

was measured in the Lower Menomonee River (fig. 60, 

table 26). Samples collected in the Lilly Creek, Little Menomonee Creek, Lincoln Creek, and Middle Root River subwatersheds all had concentrations below either the ISQG or 

TEC (0.17 (ig/g, 0.18 |ig/g) (fig. 60, table 26).
Trace Elements 127

87°52'30"

43°15' -

EXPLANATION

Lakes

Subwatershed, median 

mercury concentrations

in sediment in 

micrograms per gram

0.020 - 0.100

Area 

displayed 

in detail

above MMSD planning area 

/*\J Watershed boundary

Subwatershed boundary 

Streams

Sampling site, median 

mercury concentrations 

in sediment in

micrograms per gram 

© 0.020-0.100

O 0.101-0.320 

O 0.321-1.750

1.751-3.550 

Purple outline indicates 

median mercury 

concentrations in 

sediment in micrograms 

per gram exceeding a 

guideline value 

O £ 0.486

Base composited from Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission regional base 

map, 1:2,000,1995; U.S. Geological Survey digital line graph hydrography, 1:100,000,2001; Wisconsin 

Department of Natural Resources version 2 hydrography, 1:24,000,2002. Wisconsin Transverse 

Mercator Projection, referenced to North American Datum of 1983,1991 adjustment.

Figure 59. Sites sampled for mercury in sediment in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District (MMSD) 

planning area, Wis.
2 c 

ddle Rootiver Rootiver iper 

— ON 

to oo 

0 0 

O LJ 

Kl OO 

O L*J 

en S 

0 0 

o c 

0 0 

o c 

c

2

| 0 

O ~J 

^ i» 

NO NO 

NO NO 

NO ON 

, _ ^ 

p p 

o p 

to to 

° £ 

0 0 

to i— 

o (_n 

o o 

to to 

to O 

o c 

to to 

o c 

to to 

UJ W 

I— o 

o oo 

<-n NO 

I— o 

O NO — to 

to to 

oo o 

4^ O 

ON bo 

ON NO 

0 0 

§"

o

70

n>•-(

M r 

» o 

st Branch Rootiwer Rootiver

<

~ ~ 

to

o o 

to O 

K) O 

to O 

O 0 

to O 

o

2

o o 

to to 

~J O 

t^* ^ 

NO O 

<-fi O 

O i— 

4^ p ^ i 

>-^ to 

NO O 

~J O 

ON — 

O

to ! o 

o

, to 

o

, to 

o

o

! ~j 

o

oo 

! oo 

to

, o 

70 Ji. 

r o 

S C 

ddle OakCreek Oak Creek iper 

to — 

4^ K) 

ON tO 

0 0 

4^ to 

ON tO 

to — 

NO t^J 

C O 

9 P 4^ 4^ 

P 9 4^ 4=>- 

OO OO 

fj to 

c o 

o o 

c o 

. L l _ 

— — 

NO NO 

to to 

§

o 

c

o o 

to to 

o o 

to to 

o o 

to to 

o o 

to to 

o o 

=> o 

00 ON 

i— NO 

o oo 

I/) ON 

to O 

o o 

o»^"

?X*

-2> (- 

rth BranchOak Cwer Oak Creek

o>

n>

to 4^ 

0 8 

to •— 

LO tO 

. _ , 

S

to 

w

to ON 

O O 

0 0 

O 

to ?=> 

to

0 0 

4^ LAi 

— to 

~J J — 

^ . _ , 

O NO 

-4 ~J 

_^ L P. " 

O NO 

— to 

ON i— 

O

, to 

o

to

o

, to 

o

: o 

o

oo ! to 

, o ! o 

, NO 

M ON 

r o 

1 r

O

Rwer Milwaukee 

<'

n>

to

o

NO

OO 

ON

L/l

OO

O

ON

O

o2

Kg

4j- to 

wPjo

o

to

oo

^

o

L/l

. , 

^

^

to

o 

o

o

to

o

o

to

o

o

^

o

o

to

o

o

o

§^ TO a <' 

n>

n>

n r 

o c;' 

mbined Sewrei

icoln Creek

<

8

^

S

- . 

O 4^ 

to 

,— to 

. _ , 

NO

— ON 

ON — O 

O O "~ o2 K"l

y

o

kj

0 O 

to (_n 

O ^ 

W NO 

i _ , i _ 1 

NO NO 

LAi LA1 

O — 

tO H-. 

o to 

— to 

NO O 

~J O 

o

to ! o 

o

to ! o 

o

, to 

o

, to 

o

, ON 

. O 

! O 

to

! o 

TO o 

t~ o 

c

a

.derwood Creek

-

o

oo

oo

oo

o

NJ

o

NO

O

, _ , 

NO

LA1

O

o

> — 1 NO

^J

!

!

•

!

1

^

r

C

Menomonee Iper 

S*

<

3

-

to

to

! __ ! 

^J

ON

O

o

Ojfc>

y

o

to

to1

1 _ , 

NO

LA1

_, 

t^

^

to

O

o

o

o

o

o

o 

o

(_n

O

o

In

O

2

3 /O 

§ " 

n>

n>

i 1 r ro s- o 

3 CL ^ 

x " S 

P S- 2 

§ § S 

*• 1 1 

B 0 

n 3 

n> n> 

^ W 

| <• 

- - = 

to 

to 

O O f-J 

— to 4^ 

O t^J LAl 

to

— tO ON 

O LJ ^J 

— tO NO 

O W O 

o o o 

to O O 

O Ojfc" 

0 § M

tO Ji. 

o

jo

s § § 

o to to 

t _ , , _ , . — , 

NO NO NO 

LAi LAi LA1 

o o — 

ON ON ^ 

O O ^ y. y, ^ 

— ~: to 

~J ~J O 

o

to

! ! o 

o

to

o

: : 8 

o

o

.

: : i 

t°

! ! o 

70 70 M 

r — o 

7^

§ 50 

II

3

3^

0

7^ •& •£• 

1 i | 

g r £ rf. to 5?- 

-n ^ n 

~ S 3 

q o SSOO UJ tO 

to

KJ O O 

(_n to 

to

ON to 

to

w to 

OO t^J LAl 

O CO 

o to to 

gl

p

o o o 

-P»- NO Lh 

t^j t^j to 

O O ~J 

, _ I 1 _ , 1 _ 1 NO NO NC 

LAi LAi LA1 

i— i— C 

^ o — 4^. to to 

tO |i — 

O NO NO 

O ~J ~J 

— (-n ON 

O 

O

t°

o ! ! 

o 

o

t°

o ! ! 

o 

o

t° 1 1 

o 

o

y 1 1 

o 

o

°* 1 1 NO ! ! 

p

° i i o ! ! 

p

o ! ! 

p 

£ 70 70 

o r r 

1

Si

CD

3" W

CD 

Q.

Cou

CD 

W3"

CD

Q.

subwatershed per Sites 

results MMSD of Count 

results STORET of Count 

results all of Count 

values of Number 

limit reporting a below 

limit(s) Reporting 

date sample Earliest 

date sample Latest 

Minimum

percentile 10th 

percentile 25th 

Median

Mean

percentile 75th 

percentile 90th 

Maximum

S 1 =1 1 

is» P ^ EL 

^^ ^ T ~c c 

¥ 1 i-^i

3 g o"< 

3 cT SL ^ 

C0_ S o CD 

s» o 3 'o 

!±". *« O. 3 c/3 O^ CD :;• 

^ w 3- 3" 

O CD CD =,• 

3 CD 3 ^ 

CD -E? -1 CD 

o CD »1 -1 

•< i' I" i 

' — 5' O 3- » ro 8. Cig " = £ 

S H 3- N 

CD O ' * Q 

*~* 70 1 O £j 

«~ CD 

m H 'c CQ ^^ Ei 

<° 3 o 

O Ijq co 

_^ CD CD 

"^ p: O -H 3 1 r*

^ ^ B ^ w s- 

^ p. o" 

i I o 

< — ' EL 

—r yi -» j— 

^" C? r^ 

^ 3 o" CD -• 3 

| |i 

O O- CD 

"C3 ^ 1/1 

O &3 « ii. ^ CD 

r*' < o ^ S 

3 ^ S co o- °- 

CD cT S" 

g TM 2. 

I r i 

Q3 - ja 

ta CD ^ 

CD 73 CJ 

0 S ° 

Co' 3" 3. 

o' i i— 

-£ 1. 3" 

oil

~' CD l/i ^ • - CD 

ca < ^ 

po Co 

5 CD 2 

Q3 «" CD 

^ er 

| || 

CO y: Q 

CO CD ^3 

r>o o- o — 3- 

3 era o' ii 

3 3 

erg S' 

3 < i 1- 

CD

8ZI paieiay-saojnosay-jaieM uoueiujojuj JQJ aip aa>|iieM|!|/\| uemodoji8|/\| aGejaywas PUISJQ Bumueu 'ea.iv wsuoosiM 
Table 26. Summary statistics for mercury in sediment, by category, for the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, 1970-2002

[USGS, U.S. Geological Survey; STORET, STOrage and RETrieval System; WDNR, Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources; --, no data available; values are expressed in micrograms per gram (|J.g/g); 

values rounded to the nearest thousandth; for the purpose of statistical calculations, values reported a below detection limit are set at one-half the reporting-limit value; some values below the reporting limit were reported as zero]

Watershed

Kinnickinnic River

Menomonee River

Milwaukee River

Root River

Subwatershed

Kinnickinnic River

Lilly Creek

Little Menomonee Creek

Little Menomonee River

Lower Menomonee

River

Upper Menomonee River

Lincoln CreekLower Milwaukee River

Middle Root River

1

• subwati

8.

I

CO

15

3

11

26

6

1

18

1

3in£

CO 

C5 CO

"5

co

o

03

1

1

2

6

1

6

1

results

STORET

•5

^

c

o 

o

3

00

030020

3in PF WDNR i0^

o

o

13

0

00

22

0

0

10

0

in"5in £

"(5•5

c

o 

o

16

3

11

27

6

1

18

1

8 i

>er ofvalreportinE 2 3 5

z 2

*

9

00

0

10

00

5

0

oTE0

r

oQ. 0) DC

0.1,0.2,

0.4 ----0.09,0.1,0.2,

0.4 ---0.1,0.2,0.4 - &€£ a. ts ini^TM.5 06/21/1973 11/01/1989 11/07/1989 11/01/1989 06/21/1973 10/31/1989 11/01/1989 06/21/1973 10/03/1973 •o0) Q. i0) *sTM 08/21/1993 11/01/1989 11/07/1989 11/01/1989 08/20/1993 11/08/1989 11/01/1989 08/21/1993 10/03/1973 E3E'Ei0.050 .040 .060 .200 .045 .060 .070 .050 .020 <D Q. |0.100 .040 .060 .200 .100 .060 .070 .088 .020 1 0)gzCM 0.100 .040 .060 .200 .100 .065 .070 .115 .020 C.2 10.200 .040 .060 .200 .460 .120 .070 .270 .020 (0 0.689 .040 .060 .200 .971 .125 .070 .957 .020 i percent N10.888 .040 .060 .200 1.710 .183 .070 1.610 .020 £i percent 52.095 .040 .060 .200 2.788 .195 .070 2.944 .020 E3'x(0 s3.150 .040 .060 .200 3.550 .200 .070 3.350 .020

3oCD

m

CD
DC 

O

DC 

LU Q.CO

DC 

O O 

DC

DC D 

O 

DC 

LU

10

Kinnickinnic 

River

Menomonee 

River

Milwaukee 

River

Root 

River

0.1

0.01

16 18

C^

SUBWATERSHED

1.06 micrograms per gram, MacDonald probable effect concentration

0.486 micrograms per gram, Canadian probable effect level0.18 micrograms per gram, MacDonald threshold effect concentration

0.17 micrograms per gram, Canadian interim sediment 

quality guideline

EXPLANATION

106 Number of samples

__ Data value 1.5 to 3.0 times the IQR

outside the box

Largest data value within 1.5 times

the IQR above the box

75th percentile

intile) Interquartile range (IQR) Median (50th perce 

25th percentileSmallest data value within 1.5 times 

the IQR below the box

Reporting limits for 

some analyses were: 0.09,0.1,0.2,0.4 

micrograms per gram

tyj (D (D

ca

(D

Figure 60. Statistical distribution of mercury concentrations in sediment in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, 1970-2002.

132 Water-Resources-Related Information for the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin

Copper

Copper is an essential element in plant and animal 

metabolism. Metallic copper is used for money, electrical 

wiring, and plumbing. Copper is mixed with other metals to 

make brass and bronze. Copper occurs in the Earth's crust as 

a metal. Copper does not break down in the environment. 

Copper salts are used in small amounts in water-supply reservoirs to discourage the excessive growth of algae. Other 

anthropological sources from copper are pesticide sprays, 

combustion of fossil fuels, and as preservatives for wood, 

leather, and fabrics. Because of its widespread use, copper is 

more likely to be in ground and surface water than its low 

average abundance in rocks might imply (Hem, 1985). Concentrations of copper in bed sediment is well correlated with 

population density (Rice, 1999).

The USEPA established an MCL for copper in water 

because of stomach distress (short-term exposure) and possible damage to liver and kidneys from long-term exposure. 

The USEPA MCL and WDNR MCL are both 1,300 |ig/L, 

and the Canadian drinking water AO is 1,000 fig/L. The 

Canadian standard for the protection of aquatic life is 2- 

4|ig/L.

Most reporting limits for copper in water were above 

the Canadian aquatic life guideline of 2-4 |lg/L, and therefore most concentrations with data above a reporting limit 

exceeded the guideline concentration (table 27). No maximum concentrations of copper in water exceeded any drinking-water standard (table 27). The highest maximum concentrations were measured in the Lower Menomonee River 

(600.0 uvg/L) and Lower Milwaukee River (478.0 |ig/L) subwatersheds (table 27). The highest median concentrations

were in the Underwood Creek (19.0 |Ag/L) and Lincoln 

Creek (10.0 (ig/L) subwatersheds (table 27). Median concentrations in all other subwatersheds were below 10.0 |ig/L 

(table 27).

Sediment quality guidelines for copper are TEC, 

31.6 ng/g; ISQG, 35.7 ^g/g; PEC, 149 ^g/g; and PEL, 

197 |ig/g.

Most sites with exceedences of the PEC for copper in 

sediment (149 |ig/g) were clustered near the confluence of 

the Milwaukee, Menomonee, and Kinnickinnic Rivers 

(fig. 61). Sites with median concentrations in the upper quartile also were clustered near the confluence of the three rivers 

(fig. 61). Sites with median concentrations in the lower quartile were in the northern part of the planning area (fig. 61).

The Lower Menomonee River and Little Menomonee 

River subwatersheds had median copper concentrations in 

sediment in the upper quartile (fig. 61). The Upper Menomonee River, Little Menomonee Creek, Lilly Creek, and Lincoln Creek subwatersheds had median concentrations in the 

lower quartile (fig. 61). The highest maximum concentration 

of 254.0 |ig/g in the Lower Menomonee River subwatershed 

exceeded both the PEL and the PEC (197 |ig/g, 149 |ig/g) 

(fig. 62, table 28). The highest median concentration of 

140.0 |ig/g was measured in the Lower Menomonee River 

and Little Menomonee River subwatersheds (fig. 62, 

table 28). The only sample collected in the Little Menomonee Creek subwatershed had a concentration of 29.0 |ig/g, 

which was below the ISQG and the TEC (35.7 |ig/g, 31.6 

|ig/g) (fig. 62, table 28).
Trace Elements 133

88°G7'30" 87°52'30"

43°15'

43T

EXPLANATION

Lakes

Subwatershed, median 

copper concentrations 

in sediment in 

micrograms per gram

jj^B 2-° - 50-°

| | 50.1 - 76.0

^Bfl 76.1 -128.0

Area 

displayed 

in detail

above MMSD planning area 

Watershed boundary 

/~\J Subwatershed boundary 

Streams

Sampling site, median 

copper concentrations 

in sediment in

mcrograms per gram

© 2.0 - 50.0

O 50.1 - 76.0 

© 76.1-128.0

128.1 - 254.0

Purple outline indicates 

median copper 

concentrations in 

sediment in micrograms 

per gram exceeding a 

guideline value

> 149.0

Base composited from Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission regional base 

map, 1:2,000,1995; U.S. Geological Survey digital line graph hydrography, 1:100,000,2001; Wisconsin 

Department of Natural Resources version 2 hydrography, 1:24,000,2002. Wisconsin Transverse 

Mercator Projection, referenced to North American Datum of 1983,1991 adjustment.

0

0

I

2

2

I

I 

4

4 MILES

I

KILOMETERS

Figure 61. Sites sampled for copper in sediment in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District (MMSD) 

planning area, Wis.
Table 27. Summary statistics for copper in water, by category, for the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, 1970-2002

[MMSD, Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District; USGS, U.S. Geological Survey; STORET, STOrage and RETrieval System; --, no data available; RL, reporting-limit value; values are expressed in

-limit value; some values miuiugiams jjci nici VH&/LV' v«utB luunucu iu me utiutsi itmii, lui uic )jui|juj>c ui suuisuuai uaii~uicuiuii», values icpuiiou uoiuw a icpvjiimg mini aic »CL cu uiic-iitiu me itpuiuiig-uimi vtuuc, MJIIIC valuer

below the reporting limit were reported as zero]

Watershed

Fox River

Kinnickinnic

River

Lake Michigan

Direct

Lake Michigan

Tributary

Menomonee

River

Milwaukee

River

Oak Creek

Root River

Subwatershed

Deer Creek

Kinnickinnic River

Wilson Park Creek

Lake Michigan DirectLake Michigan Tributary

Honey Creek

Little Menomonee RiverLower Menomonee RiverUpper Menomonee River

Underwood Creek

Combined Sewer Service

Area

Lincoln Creek

Lower Milwaukee River

Mitchell Field Drainage

Ditch

North Branch Oak Creek

Lower Oak Creek

Middle Oak Creek

Upper Oak Creek

East Branch Root River

Lower Root RiverMiddle Root River

Upper Root River

1 

w0)

r subwat

0) Q.

1

c/5

i

11

7

111

3

18

6

1

2

7

23

2

2

4

2

1

1

1

1

5

<n in8.

QS

oCo

o

0

1,375

00

000

1,365

419

0

0

267

2,759

0

0

477

245

122

0

23

25

98

3in

Pf USGS io

4-1

CO

U

0

6

0

0

00

2263

0

13

00

44

000

0

0

0000

i

3in 

£

STORET•s

4-1

C

3

O

o

i

3261

2

1

44

11

5

02

21

81

1311

70

0

300

1

£

3in

"(5 "5

co 

o

i

1,413

61

2

1

4

26

1,439

424

13

2

288

2,884

13

11

484

245

122

3

23

25

99

. > in ID o> s

= D)

5 ~ > r S 2E«

3 |

Z

H

1

73

14

2

1

44

27

55

0

2

59

266

1

11

6429

16

3

8

14

50

,-,

**

E0

I

0) DC

3

3,10,150,333333,10,20,

50

3,10

..

3,5

0.7, 102,3, 10,

20

03,43,10

1010

3

101010

i

"5-

I

w ,0)

^~

«

03/11/1981

04/30/1975

10/13/1975

08/13/197709/28/198106/30/1977

09/03/1975

09/03/197506/25/197502/01/1990

02/03/1975

10/05/1994

01/25/1973

01/11/1999

04/17/197505/27/197503/21/198503/21/198506/16/1975

08/25/199908/25/1999

10/17/1996

TJ

0) Q.

E 

re in

0) 4-TM

03/11/1981

11/14/2001

09/22/200008/13/1977

09/28/198107/18/197706/29/1990

11/14/200111/14/2001

06/29/1990

02/24/1 982

11/27/200111/15/2001

09/22/2000

09/05/1990

11/19/2001

11/19/2001

11/19/2001

08/05/1975

10/10/2001

10/10/2001

10/10/2001

linimum2

1.5

.0

-1.5

1.5

1.5

12.0

.4

1.0

.0

-1.5

2.02.0

5.0

5.0

4.0

~

i percent

S

3.0

.0

—1.5

3.03.0

15.4

5.03.0

1.0

-3.0

3.03.0

5.0

5.0

5.0

.3)

i percent

fU) CM

3.0

1.5

—6.0

4.0

3.8

18.0

5.03.03.0-- 3.0

3.0

3.0

5.05.05.0

c(0

1

7.03.0

—8.0

9.1

7.0

19.0

10.0

6.0

5.0

-5.4

6.05.87.0

5.05.0

c 

re

0)

10.7

6.4

..

14.514.3

9.5

30.6

9.19.6

8.5-- 8.3

7.8

8.9

7.97.48.2

JB

i percent

f 

K

12.0

9.0

— 15.8

14.010.0

24.0

10.010.012.0-- 10.0

10.0

10.0

10.0

10.010.0

_0>

i percent

Sen

21.0

14.0

— 26.0

25.0

15.7

40.4

14.018.0

23.4

~

16.713.6

16.0

11.6

11.0

13.0

E3

'x

re

5

p ! KL

275.0

59.0

RL

RL

DT KL

99.0

600.0

321.0

140.0

P I KL

32.0

478.0

27.0

RL

97.0

37.0

111.0

TJ 1 KL,

16.016.0

55.0

1CO

7 30 CD

0eoCD30 2.01CDQ. 5"

e?

i

£»5'

3

J* O^3- CDg^0)eCDCD

Ss3-aSF3 

COCDCD

in

CDD1'I'

•oso33_5' 

(O

^^

CDtogV)

ne
Trace Elements 135

CM 

O 

O

CO Q

2 -g

D)

'cC

_cg 

Q.

CO O

b .y

o e

D) c

CO ^

0 o

5 S

<D JJ CO &

c "J

| g

8. I

S 1

o

O)

CD 

Q. 

Q. 

O 

O

CO >,

S I

OT cfl

>. _

CO u

| |

C o

3 CD

CO O

8 S

« s

wnuijxeiAi

U1Q6

UB8|/\|

ueipa|/\|

LunLu;u!|/\|

jep a|diues )sa)e~|

aiep a|duies isanjeg

e MO|aq 

san|BA jo jaqwriN

siinsej UNQM *o lunoo 

siinsaj SOSn *o lunoo 

paijsjaieMqns Jad

rt r-- T-I

00 ~H rt ,—I

O —' -* •—

r-H 10 ——I

——I ~H O

O fN O O

^ fN SO

» « «

2 2

>•» . i .S £2 ti
1000

DC 

O 

DC

LU 

CL

C/)

DC 

O 

O 

DC 

O

DC 

LU 

CL 

CL 

O 

O

100 -

10

Kinnickinnic

River

1

14

-

/

•&

.<$•

N

1

Menomonee

River

I I

Milwaukee

River

I

24

3

1

/

.^

1

1 ' 1

i

___

m

i

i

_ i

1

I ——— |

i i

f

/ /

^P ^ ^^

<§^ <?P

•^ /

V

^

<f

o*

6

—— ' —— '

I

/ 

,</

^e

^>

^

1 1

10

1

J«

r

W

•

•

I

__

•

•

- _ i

J

<f /

^ <£y N/ *'x^

>/

-

-

197 microg

Canadian p

149 microg

MacDonald 

concentrat

35.7 micro

Canadian i

quality guid

31.6 micro

MacDonald 

concentrat

EXPLANATI

106 Numb

Data v

outsid

^_^ Larges

1 1 ' the IQ

m£m 75th p

|«fl „ .. 

IB Media

^ 25th p

1 _ |_j Smalle

the IQ

Reporting 

some analy

0.09,0.1,0

microgram

SUBWATERSHED

Figure 62. Statistical distribution of copper concentrations in sediment in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning 

138 Water-Resources-Related Information for the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin

Lead

Lead is a naturally occurring metal, but most lead found 

in aquatic systems is from anthropogenic sources. Lead was 

historically used in household plumbing and service lines to 

the home and is still present in many older homes. Another 

plumbing source is in some solder used for copper pipes. 

Today, most of the new anthropogenic lead additions to the 

environment are derived from material sources such as 

paper, plastics, and ceramics. Point sources of lead to aquatic 

systems include industrial effluents, municipal wastewater 

effluent, stack emissions, and fossil-fuel combustion. Lead 

concentrations have declined with the removal of leaded gasoline (Callendar and Rice, 2000). Concentrations of lead are 

well correlated with population density (Rice, 1999). From 

1987 to 1993, Wisconsin was in the top 10 states in release 

of lead to land and water (U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, 2002c).

The Treatment Techniques Action Level (TTAL) for 

the WDNR and the USEPA MCL are both 15 jig/L for lead 

in water. If the TTAL concentration is exceeded, water treatments are required (Wisconsin Department of Natural 

Resources, 2003b). The USEPA MCL was established 

because of potential health concerns related to physical and 

mental development in infants and potential kidney problems and high blood pressure in adults. The Canadian drinking-water guideline is 10 jig/L, and the Canadian guideline 

for the protection of aquatic health is 1-7 |ig/L.

Many reporting limits were above the Canadian aquatic 

life guideline concentration of 1-7 |ig/L for lead in water, 

and therefore most concentrations above a reporting limit 

exceeded the guideline (table 29). All maximum concentrations exceeded the USEPA and WDNR drinking-water 

guideline of 15 |lg/L and the Canadian drinking-water guideline concentration of 10 |J.g/L, with the highest maximums 

measured in the Lower Menomonee River (2,200.0 Jig/L)

and Kinnickinnic River (1,400.0 jig/L) subwatersheds 

(table 29). Median concentrations in the Underwood Creek 

(24.5 Jig/L), Lower Menomonee River (19.0 |ig/L), Kinnickinnic River (17.0 jig/L), Middle Oak Creek (16.0 jig/L), 

Upper Oak Creek (16.0 Jig/L), Lower Oak Creek 

(15.0 Jig/L), and Lower Milwaukee River (15.0 Jig/L) subwatersheds met or exceeded water-quality guideline concentrations (table 29).

Sediment-quality guidelines for lead are the ISQG, 

35.0 |ig/g; TEC, 35.8 |ig/g; PEL, 91.3 |ig/g; and PEC, 

128 jig/g.

Most sites with exceedences of the PEL for lead in sediment (91.3 Jig/g) were clustered near the confluence of the 

Milwaukee, Menomonee, and Kinnickinnic Rivers (fig. 63). 

Sites with median concentrations in the upper quartile were 

also clustered near the confluence of the three rivers 

(fig. 63). Sites with median concentrations in the lower quartile were scattered around the planning area (fig. 63).

The Honey Creek sub watershed had a median lead concentration in the upper quartile (fig. 63). The Upper Menomonee River, Little Menomonee Creek, Lilly Creek, Lincoln 

Creek, Muskego Lake, and Middle Root River subwatersheds had median concentrations in the lower quartile 

(fig. 63). The highest maximum concentrations, all above 

the PEC of 128 mg/g, were measured in the Honey Creek 

(4,100.0 mg/g), Lower Menomonee River (610.0 mg/g), 

Kinnickinnic River (530.0 mg/g), Lower Milwaukee River 

(350.0 mg/g), and Little Menomonee River (260.0 mg/g) 

subwatersheds (fig. 64, table 30). The highest median concentrations were found in these subwatersheds as well (fig. 

64, table 30). Concentrations for all samples collected in the 

Muskego Lake, Little Menomonee Creek, and Middle Root 

River subwatersheds were below either the ISQG or TEC 

(35.0 mg/g, 35.8 mg/g) (fig. 64, table 30).
Trace Elements 139

88°07'30" 87°52'30"

4315'

l~v> *,

EXPLANATION

1 | Lakes

Subwatershed, median 

lead concentrations 

in sediment in 

micrograms per gram

1.5-80.0 

| | 80.1 - 204.0

204.1 - 300.0

Area 

displayed 

in detail

above MMSD planning area 

Watershed boundary 

/~\J Subwatershed boundary 

Streams

Sampling site, median 

leed concentrations 

in sediment in 

micrograms per gram 

1.5-80.0

O 80.1 - 204.0

204.1 - 300.0 

• 300.1-4,100.0 

Purple outline indicates 

median lead 

concentrations in 

sediment in micrograms 

per gram exceeding a 

guideline value 

A > 91.3

1 I

2 4 KILOMETERS

Base composited from Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission regional base 

map, 1:2,000,1995; U.S. Geological Survey digital line graph hydrography, 1:100,000,2001; Wisconsin 

Department of Natural Resources version 2 hydrography, 1:24,000,2002. Wisconsin Transverse 

Mercator Projection, referenced to North American Datum of 1983,1991 adjustment.

Figure 63. Sites sampled for lead in sediment in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District (MMSD) planning 

area, Wis.
140 Water-Resources-Related Information for the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin

O

o. 

o

u; (D

K E

P- <?

<u „

•11

II

•£ e

— -o

C3 O

IIH W Dvo! o

T3 ^

H' "rt 

0-1 <->

^ t

fa

oo" o SQ o „

(D " O

Si S

III _, :J <U

8.1

iuniu!XB|/\|

IJJ06

UB3|/\|

UB)pa|/\|

aijjuaojad

iuniuju!i/\|

ajep aidiues )S3)e~|

ajep aidiues jsai|jB3

\\w\\ B MO|aq

||e ^o junoo

sjjnsaj !3dOlS *o junoo 

sunsaj sosn *o junoo 

QSIAIIAI 1° lunoQ

paijsjajBMqns jad

CO

o 

o 

o

p10

o

CN

-3-

O

O

O 

1

T?

VI

Os

O

CO

1

o

^

CO OO

Os"

~

o

CO

CN

Os

"

VO

2

VC

O 

oc

co^

~"

l

Kinnickinnic River

"c

_c

.5 fc .o_>

C rv*

£

*

10

Os

Os

1

10

Os

Os

CN 

1

O

CN

CN

CN

O

O

,

Milwaukee West

Ditch

p

VD

O 

CN

CO

vD 

10

•0

p 

p 

p

o

CN

CN 

CN

Os 

O

10

Os

ro

CO

O

Os

CO

CO

c

o

rWilson ParkCreek

oi 

!

rrOs

CO

Soo

rOs

CO

oo 

o

CO

<N

CN

CN

O

o

_ ,

CJ

Michigan Lake Dir

ca

ilD n

3

Os

O

o

^

Os

^

O

CO

—

„

O

O

_

Honey Creek

ID

ID

C

O 

0

g

5

O

o10

CN 

CN

OO 

CN

10

10

C

OS

CN

O

V}

Os

io

O

CO

CN

CO

^.

CN

CO

CN

CN

O

^.

Little Menomonee 

River

>

S.

o

O 

O 

fN 

CN

O 

0 

CN

O 

0 

10

p

CN

O 

Os

C

p

CN

O

O 

C 

CN

Cl

rOs

10

O

O

CO

Os"

~

CO

oo

—

^

ovO

o•^

~^

^1 '

Lower Menomonee 

River

o 

o10

p 

p

CN

OO 

CN

OO

p

CN

§

10

OS

VI§o

CO

Os'

~"

^

,,-

^

O

oN^

10

Upper Menomonee 

River

o 

o

Os 

10

•0

10

fN 

CN

CN

O 

Os 

Os

Os

VO

Os

VC

CN 

1

ro

i_<

,,-

_

CO"

O

CN

Underwood Creek

j

CN

oo

Os

CN

O

CN

O\

^

CN 

0

CO

J

_

o

o

^-

Combined Sewer Service Aea

a .>

^ oi

is

o 

c

o

CN

O

fN

CN

Os 

CN

ir? 

S

10

Os

O

Q

O

CO

0s"

^--

TT

C5

CN

10

CO

OO-3-

vO

-

CN

Os

Lincoln Creek

o 

o 

o

p 06 

oo

p 

p 

p10

CN

CO

p

o 

o 

CJ

VI

CO

OS

V~l

CN

O

CN"

°^CN

^ ,

CN"

o

l

3O

CN

Oco"

vO

-

^"^

CO

°^

CN

^

CN

Milwaukee Lower 

River

p

CN

vD 

CN

vD 

OO

CN

O 

O

8

CN

CJ

Os 

O

OS

Os

^

O

o

^^

CO

CO

o

o

CN

Field Mtchell 

Drainage Ditch

u

a

O

J 

Oi

oOs 

Os

VI

o 5- 

c

10

Os

rQ

o

^co"

rr-~

^

0

0

CN

North BranchOak 

Creek

p 

p

CN

CN

O 

10

CN

CN

O 

O

Q

Os

10

Os

OO

O 

O

CO

Os"

—

CN

CN

_

vO

O

vD

CO

^.

Oak LowerCreek

p

OS 

CO

CN 

CO

p

o 

p

oo 

p 

o

o 

o

g

10

oo

OS

^

CJ

CO

o

Os

~"

^f

oo

o

o

10

oo

CN

Middle OakCreek

p 

o

CN

Os

CN

O 

CO

o

vD

CO 

CO

p 

p

iCJ

Os

10

oo

OS

^3

CN

O

Os

"•

10

CN

Os

O

O

CN

,

Upper Oak Creek

rOs

CN

C

rp;

CN 

10

o

CO

•0

^

10

o

o

_

East BrnchRoot 

River

'£.

^?

0

oi

p

-3-

oo

oo 

oo

10

CN

CN

O 

C

i 

go 

o

Os

Os 

Os

10

CN

OO

o

Os

—

10

CO 

<N

O

o

CN

|

River Lowe Root

CO 

CN

fN

•0

OO 

CN

O

o

1

CN

OO 

OS

;j

CN 

CN

0

CO

Os"

^^

«0

<N

_

O

CN

CN

Lower Rivoot 

o

CN 

CN

O

Os

CN

CN

CN

O

O

O

CN

O 

O

Os

Os 

Os

^

CJoo 

o

Os

^^

O

CN

OO

o

c

oo

OS

^

Upper River Root 
Table 30. Summary statistics for lead in sediment, by category, for the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, 1970-2002

[USGS, U.S. Geological Survey; STORET, STOrage and RETrieval System; WDNR, Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources; —, no data available; values are expressed in micrograms per gram (|J,g/g); 

values rounded to the nearest tenth; for the purpose of statistical calculations, values reported below a reporting limit are set at one-half the reporting-limit value; some values below the reporting limit were 

reported as zero]

Watershed

Fox River

Kinnickinnic

River

Menomonee

River

Milwaukee

River

Root River

Subwatershed

Muskego LakeKinnickinnic River

Honey Creek

Lilly Creek

Little Menomonee CreekLittle Menomonee River

Lower Menomonee River

Upper Menomonee River

Lincoln Creek

Lower Milwaukee RiverMiddle Root River

0)

1tO1.a 

toIto

55

2

141

3

11

24

6

116

1

to£

wa w

"E

3

o 

o

00

1

3

11

2

6

1

6

1

results\ntt

•5

1

o 

o

2

0

000000

0

i

0

i w

2

tt

Q•5

C 

3

O

o

0

14

00

00

22

0

0

10

0

£

to£

"J5

cl

3

O

o

2

141

3

11

24

6

1171

to '—3 0)

1| •*£ 

1 £

E«

z o

£

00

00000

1

0

1

0

"3T5=-

EO)

c

r

oa. a> 

cc--..

..-------10

..

3-- i•oa>a.i.1«LU 07/07/1994 04/26/1984 05/28/1980 11/01/1989 11/07/1989 11/01/1989 04/25/1984 10/31/1989 11/01/1989 08/15/1973 10/03/1973 QJ (0•oa>a. E(0w"to QJ 07/07/1994 08/21/1993 05/28/1980 11/01/1989 11/07/1989 11/01/1989 08/20/1993 11/08/1989 11/01/1989 08/21/1993 10/03/1973 E1 'Ei6.0 170.0 4,100.0 20.0 20.0 260.0 40.0 5.0 80.0 1.5 30.0 -"Eii*~ 6.1 193.0 4,100.0 22.0 20.0 260.0 122.3 17.5 80.0 60.0 30.0 ,ca>a. .cCM 6.2 220.0 4,100.0 25.0 20.0 260.0 203.0 32.5 80.0 85.0 30.0 c(0'•5 to 6.5 271.0 4,100.0 30.0 20.0 260.0 225.0 45.0 80.0 150.0 30.0 16.5 298.3 4,100.0 33.3 20.0 260.0 277.2 45.8 80.0 151.3 30.0 toa>B &i6.8 372.5 4,100.0 40.0 20.0 260.0 345.0 57.5 80.0 180.0 30.0 0) i§en6.9 420.4 4,100.0 46.0 20.0 260.0 452.0 75.0 80.0 256.2 30.0 EE 17.0 530.0 4,100.0 50.0 20.0 260.0 610.0 90.0 80.0 350.0 30.0 Q> 0CDmCD
10,000

Fox 

River

Kinnickinnic 

River

Menqmonee 

River

Milwaukee 

River

Root 

River

1,000

CC 

CD

CC LUQ_

c/)

CC 

CD O QC 

O

Q < LU

100

10

I______I

rtS* Xv"

^ jr ^

SUBWATERSHED

128 micrograms per gram, 

MacDonala probable effect 

concentration91.3 micrograms per gram, Canadian probable effect level35.8 micrograms per gram, MacDonald threshold effectconcentration35.0 micrograms per gram, Canadian interim sedimentquality guideline

09p» CD

30CD

O CD (/>30s. 5T c?

EXPLANATION

106 Number of samples

__ Data value 1.5 to 3.0 times the IQR

outside the box

Largest data value within 1.5 times

the IQR above the box

75th percentile —,

>< j- im u -i > Interquartile Median (50th percentile) rangg (|QR)

25th percentile _l

Smallest data value within 1.5 times 

the IQR below the box

Reporting limits for

some analyses were:3,10 micrograms per gram

ooCD CDat 

to

CD

q

'

Figure 64. Statistical distribution of lead concentrations in sediment in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, 1970-2002.

B)sV) o

144 Water-Resources-Related Information for the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin

Arsenic

Sources of arsenic in surface water and sediments can 

be both natural and anthropogenic. Geologic sources of 

arsenic include sorbed arsenic in iron oxide coatings on minerals and impurities in pyrite and other metal sulfides, especially rock that contains iron and copper. Anthropogenic 

sources of arsenic include wood preservatives, glass production, poultry and swine feed production, semiconductor 

manufacturing and petroleum refining (U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, 2003b; Welch and others, 2000). Presently about 90 percent of all arsenic produced is used for 

wood preservative as chromated copper arsenate (Agency 

for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, 1999a). Prior to 

being banned in the 1990s, pesticide application of lead 

arsenate (primarily) on fruit orchards was the dominant use 

of inorganic arsenic.

Arsenic is considered a highly undesirable impurity in 

water supplies because in small amounts it can be toxic to 

humans (Hem, 1985). The USEPA MCL for arsenic was 

established because of the possible health effects related to 

exposure above the MCL. These health effects include skin 

damage, circulatory system problems, and an increased risk 

of cancer. The USEPA revised its MCL for arsenic in drinking water from 50 |lg/L to 10 |ig/L in January 2001. Public 

water supplies must comply with the new standard beginning 

January 2006 (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 

2003a). The WDNR maintains a MCL of 50 jig/L. Canada 

has an Interim Maximum Acceptable Concentration (IMAC) 

of 25 jag/L and an aquatic life criterion of 5 |ig/L.

Some reporting limits were above the Canadian aquatic 

life guideline concentration of 5 Jig/L for arsenic in water, 

and therefore any data above a reporting limit may have 

exceeded the guideline concentration (table 31). Subwatersheds with maximum concentrations that exceeded the 

aquatic guideline of 5 |ig/L were the Upper Menomonee 

River (52.0 jig/L), Lincoln Creek (15.2 (ig/L), Lower Milwaukee River (14.0 |lg/L), Kinnickinnic River (9.5 jig/L), 

Lower Oak Creek (9.1 \ig/L), Upper Root River (5.5 (ig/L), 

and Lower Menomonee River (5.4 |ig/L) (table 31). Of these 

subwatersheds, the Upper Menomonee River maximum concentration exceeded the Canadian interim drinking-water 

guideline concentration of 25 jig/L and the current USEPA 

and WDNR drinking water-quality guideline of 50 |ig/L 

(table 31). Also, the maximum concentrations measured in 

Upper Menomonee River, Lincoln Creek, and Lower Milwaukee River exceeded the new USEPA drinking-water 

standard of 10 |ig/L that will take affect in January 2006 

(table 31). Median concentrations were comparatively low 

and affected by reporting-limit concentrations in most cases 

(table 31).

Canada has an ISQG of 5.9 |ig/g and a PEL of 

17.0 jig/g. A TEC of 9.79 jig/g and a PEC of 33.0 ^g/g were 

recommended by MacDonald for arsenic in sediment.

Almost all sites with exceedences of the PEL for 

arsenic in sediment (17.0 |ig/g) were clustered near the confluence of the Milwaukee, Menomonee, and Kinnickinnic 

Rivers (fig. 65). Sites with median concentrations in the 

upper quartile were also clustered near the confluence of the 

three rivers and also located in the Little Menomonee Creek 

and Lilly Creek subwatersheds (fig. 65). Sites with median 

concentrations in the lower quartile were scattered around 

the planning area (fig. 65).

The Little Menomonee Creek and Lilly Creek subwatersheds had median arsenic concentrations in sediment in 

the upper quartile (fig. 65). The Upper Menomonee River, 

Lincoln Creek, and Middle Root River subwatersheds had 

median concentrations in the lower quartile (fig. 65). The 

concentration of arsenic of 38.0 mg/g measured in the Little 

Menomonee Creek subwatershed (the only sample collected 

in the subwatershed) was the highest recorded, exceeding 

both the PEC and the PEL (33.0 mg/g, 17.0 mg/g) (fig. 66, 

table 32). The maximum concentration measured in the 

Lower Menomonee River subwatershed, 25.0 mg/g, 

exceeded the PEL of 17.0 mg/g (fig. 66, table 32). The concentrations of all samples collected in the Lincoln Creek, 

Upper Menomonee River, and Middle Root River subwatersheds were below the ISQG and the TEC (5.9 mg/g, 

9.79 mg/g) (fig. 66, table 32).
Trace Elements 145

88°07'30" 87°52'30"

43°15' -

EXPLANATION

Lakes

Subwatershed, median 

arsenic concentrations 

in sediment in 

micrograms per gram 

[____•] 1.0-4.4 

I 4.5-6.1 

6.2 - 7.8

Area 

displayed 

in detail

above MMSD planning area 

~/~\J Watershed boundary 

/~\J Subwatershed boundary

Streams

Sampling site, median

arsenic concentrations

in sediment in

micrograms per gram 

© 1.0-4.4

V 7.9 - 38.0 

Purple outline indicates 

median arsenic 

concentrations in 

sediment in micrograms 

per gram exceeding a 

guideline value 

O a 17.0

Base composited from Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission regional base 

map, 1:2,000,1995; U.S. Geological Survey digital line graph hydrography, 1:100,000,2001; Wisconsin 

Department of Natural Resources version 2 hydrography, 1:24,000,2002. Wisconsin Transverse 

Mercator Projection, referenced to North American Datum of 1983,1991 adjustment.

Figure 65. Sites sampled for arsenic in sediment in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District (MMSD) 

planning area, Wis.
146 Water-Resources-Related Information for the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin

CNl

C3

C3

Srco

^

cc

O3

CC

O5 f~

'E

c 

cc

o.

o

"co

o

O3 

O5 

CO

03

03

CO

c: 

cc TM

o

0.

o

"as

O3

O3

"^

CC

J

^^—

O3

•t— i

0

5^

o

O5

O3 -1— '

CO

0

,JCD •t— > 

CO

0

'c

03

CO

cc

statistics for r

*^*

CO

E

E

CO

^«

S

(0

•p

•a ^

i 'E

e '•"?

CX CD

g £

B o

D D

73 •£

(D

3 g

"P 73

'3 °

t|

"tn D

O C

D. 0

O <_,

1-^ C3

»-J o

a: «

. ^ fL)

« c3

|ra "3

^ •« > "^

c3 W)

ll

0 &

c Q

.'- ^

c o

o 73

>^ 73

a o

f5 S

w a

a; -2

« ui

<u S

el

0 3

M. s

W "J3

Ci -S

^^ c^

fe I

>> <*-

o o

£ a>

21

o g.

0 J3

"o t^

<u 5

a «

GO "S

a | e1

D « ^

||1

OJ -^ U5P C OJ 2 3 b

Metropolitan Sew (|J.g/L); values 1 rreporting limit v

••^ S ^

D .ti •£ °j ^" ^

= ^0

Cd OH • —— '

§

-^

S

f^ bt, p

Q" 0 13 

OD 0 >

III

lunujixei/u

aijiuaojad ijjoe

3|i)U3OJ3d mg/.

UB3|/\|

uejpa|/\|

amua^jad l.tu •• ou uiC7 H+3O

amuaojad " uinL

luniumii/y

ajep aidiues jsajen

ajep aidiues jsaujeg

(S)IJLUI| 6unjodau

);LUI| 6uj)jodaj e MO|aq

san|BA j.o J3qiun|\j

sunsaj ||e ^o junoo

S}|tiSoj _L3y^)iS J*^ )uno^

sunsaj sosn *o lunoo

sunsaj QSIAIIAI *o lunoo

paqsJajBMqns jad sa^s

•a

0)

2

0)

1

£1 

CO

1

e

0) i

«•> j

OS" *

p ! m

Os j

^

Os |

* :

O '

^

p 1

^H

p i ~~

—| CN §

OO

Os 

CN ~-

~H CN S s

r- —i

r-~ oo

Os Os

10 TjCN CN

^S VO

O O

0

°; o ^-« ^-

ro m 

CN~"

VD 

CO

vD m

CN

O O

m

r- ~

.^

Kinnickinnic Rive Lake Michigan 

Tributary

> 

5 c

' *

i '-5 « S O -t-J

•u ii-^

B -| H

•2 "

i-i <=>

! p

IO

| p

10

! •*

: o

i o

10

: P-H

: vi

f^ g

Os Os 

" CN

O O

10 <0 r- r-~

Os Os

O CN

S

vO

0

O 

CN O

C? ~

^-H ^-

O TT 

CN m

o o

CN <0

O OO

CN CN

' — '

O CN 

CN

0 O

- -

Honey Creek

Little Menomonee 

River

>

ID

O

0

g

^

10

p

IO

p

•0

10

CN

Os

O

O

"H

^

^_

§

"

CN

10

Os

10

CN

SO

O

O

oT

1 '

~"

OO

CN

Os

CN

' — '

OS

r-

-

<u

Lower Menomone 

River

o

CN 

•0

O

10

m

CN

CN

Os

o

rf

p"~~

p

_

o

o

CN

10

Os

CN

O

oC

o'

OO

CN 

CN

CN

O

?

.0

ft

Upper Menomonei 

River

p J

p i

10

O j

10

p :

p i

p i

P : ~-

10 |

O <0

os rOs Os

CN O

SO CN

O O

10 10

r- rOs O10 m CN p

VD CN

O O

o~~1

•"" "~

- -

CN

O —

m O

O O

CN —

Underwood Creek Combined Sewer Service Aea

£

2

<L>

Jxi

J

is

CN O

£ 2

m o

CN •*

Os O

— '• CN

OO O

— • CN

0; OS

O O

O O

^- ^^

O <0

— C3

— „

§

0

o

CN CN

r^ io

CN «

r-~ m

Os Os

So ?5 

— CN

S3 -

o o

o

Os'

Os "^

~~* ^H

r- o

OO Os

CN

CN CN

CN Os

O Os

VD

O Os

CN TjVD 0 

CN 00

IO OO

Lincoln Creek

Lower Milwaukee 

River

„

Os' Tf

p CN

rn CN

OS CN

-• — '

^ •*

p p

p p

p p

^- —

p p

rf -"

^_ ^

O O

o o

CN JN

c> o^

} l Os OS 

Os Os

2 2

10 10

o o

Os Os

^M , —

Os CN

OO O 

OS <0

0 O

o o

OO O 

Os u->

TT CN

Lower OakCreek Middle Oak Creek

^

<u

U

a 

O

Os CN

TT CN

OO O

CN CN

O Os

— ' — '

•* •*

O CN

O O

O O

"-1 "

O O

i— i — i

] ] _

§

O

0 

CN CN

^ O

~- Os

Os Os

^ 10

10 OO

o o

°i °i

^^ — f

OO —

CN CN

O 0

o o

CN CN

- -

Upper Oak Creek Lower Rootiver

<u

2'o

0

0 >0

10 10

<N — ;

CN rn

Os Os

-^ -"

10 VD

O CN

O O

O O

r-, ^H

O O

———

| __ ,

§

0

o

CN CN

O S

O O

CN so

OO Os 

OS Os

CN -*

CN S

O —

O

Os' ~^

1 — ^-

10 CN

VD O 

CN O

— CN

O O

10 OO 

CN Os

CN so

Middle Rootiver Upper Rootiver
JO 003q

Middle Roo 2Q

H-

——O-o

o o

-J

o o

L.J

-J

Ui

too

too

too

too

too

too

too

too

Lower Milv g*r

CD 

ft

l» <

ft*-*

OS

OSo

OSo0§

-J0

oo 

to

^0

u>

too

UJ

Ifc.

J^. o

u. "

un

u.

OS

bo

^j ^

bo

s~1o

s*" 23

Lincoln Cre

8- ~~o-o

H- o

OO• >— o

00>o^o^o^o^o

_^o^o

_^o^o

G

i !oo

3 ft ft5<! ft>-*

OS

OSo

OSoo

oo• >— 

o 

oo

00>o_o

too

LJ

fo^o

LJ^^

bo

Ul oo

Men Lower oo325 qS

to

to 

to£oo

to

ooo

go 

toosLJ

UJ

•^

Ln

>-

u, ^

-jO

00

fo

00

VOp

(jtso

Little Meno 033

51<' q

H-' —— O-o^o

oo

*-o

00>o

OSo

OSo

OSo

OSo

OSo

OSo

OSo

OSo

Little Meno o3

ft 

ftnaCD

?r

^~"o-o

H- 3

oo—

c5

-4

00>o

00o

00o

ooo

ooo

ooo

00c

00o

00o

2Sio3

ft

ft2<! 

0)1 "-

Creek Lilly 

LJWo^o_o

oo

•—o

00^o

too

UJ

OS

OSooo

ooo

£1o

|~!

OS5o

E9 3o'

TV5"3o"»

<' Q

Kinnickinni o2QGowGo0

-t*. 

to

ooo

to

v8

UJw

In^

to

y,

L/1

OS«

-Jo

00

•^o

fo-o

i

<DW

CD

a.

V) cO" i

CD

3"£^

subwatershed per Sites 

results USGS of Count 

results WDNR of Count 

results all of Count 

values of Number 

limit reporting belowa 

date sample Earliest 

date sample Latest 

Minimum

percentile 10th 

percentile 25th 

Median

Mean

percentile 75th 

percentile 90th 

Maximum

ooQC/5 "a

C/5 Q

o.

cT

o' 03

e.

oom§nBCD5'a

-ST35

n>3O

*^7

to1Q0nQ3O

a.

Si.ip.<e. c

CD

n> ^

CD

rn

a. 5'

o' 3

(W1cc 1

(W33I

00

>^Ic

n>

cc3

a.

a. S

rt3

rt

CD I 1 s

oCD

OJ

ro

COc33

ED

^^

rrt

itatistics fo

ED

CO

CD

n'

B"

CO

CD 

Q. 3' 

CD3

Q- n

EDl-f 

CD

CO O

:<K — oh i— 

CDi

ED

CD 

CDsO

T3o

^^'

ED

CO

CD

CD

ED

CO

CDoco'

5". oh i— 

•a

ED

13

CO 

ED

CD

ED "*"

CO

NJ

cz>

cz>

hO
DC 

O

DC LLJ 

0_CO

DC 

O O 

DC 

O

O

Z UJ 

CO 

DC

Kinnickinnic 

River

Menomonee 

River

Milwaukee 

River

Root 

River

100

10

13

24

33.0 micrograms per gram, MacDonald probable effect concentration

17.0 micrograms per gram, Canadian probable effect level

9.79 micrograms per gram, MacDonald threshold effect 

concentration

5.9 micrograms per gram, Canadian interim sediment 

quality guideline

I

0.

• v

EXPLANATION

106 Number of samples

__ Data value 1.5 to 3.0 times the IQR

outside the box

Largest data value within 1.5 timesthe IQR above the box75th percentile —,

,, j. ;m L. -i i Interquartile Median (50th percentile) rang^ (| QR)25th percentile _I

Smallest data value within 1.5 times 

the IQR below the box

Sto

Q>I

CD CD

•o

0_

i

CD5 

CO 

CD

q

SUBWATERSHED

Figure 66. Statistical distribution of arsenic concentrations in sediment in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, 1970-2002.

150 Water-Resources-Related Information for the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin

Chromium

Chromium is present in the environment in several 

forms. The most common forms are chromium 0, chromium 

III (trivalent), and chromium VI (hexavalent) (Agency for 

Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, 1999c). Chromium 

occurs mostly as chrome iron ore and is widely distributed in 

soils and plants, but it is rare in natural waters. Concentrations of chromium in natural waters not affected by waste 

disposal are commonly less than 10 |ig/L (Hem, 1985). 

Anthropogenic sources of chromium include stainless steel, 

protective coatings on metals as a rust inhibitor, wearing 

down of asbestos brake lining on automobiles, pigments for 

paints, cement, paper, rubber, composition flooring, chemical synthesis, industrial water treatment (electroplating, 

leather tanning, and textile industries), astringents and antiseptics, and emissions from cooling towers (treated with rust 

inhibitors). Most chromium in surface water is paniculate, 

very persistent, and ultimately deposited into sediments.

Because of potential for skin irritation, the USEPA and 

WDNR have a MCL of 100 |ig/L for drinking water. The 

Canadian drinking-water guidelines has a lower MCL of 

50 |ig/L, and the Canadian water-quality guidelines for the 

protection of aquatic life has two standards: trivalent chromium, 8.9 (ig/L; and hexavalent chromium, 1.0 jig/L.

Many reporting limits for chromium in water were 

above the Canadian aquatic life criterion of 1.0 |ig/L hexavalent chromium and 8.9 |ig/L trivalent chromium, and therefore concentrations above a reporting limit likely exceeded 

the guideline concentrations (table 33). Maximum concentrations in the Lower Milwaukee River (8,866.4 |ig/L), 

Lower Menomonee River (600.0 |ig/L), and Kinnickinnic 

River (581.0 |ig/L) exceeded the USEPA and WDNR drinking-water guideline of 100 |ig/L (table 33). In addition to

these sites, maximum concentrations in the Upper Menomonee River (90.0 (Ig/L), Upper Root River (84.0 |ig/L), Middle Root River (72.0 (Ig/L), Lower Root River (69.0 (Ig/L), 

Underwood Creek (60.0 |ig/L), and Lincoln Creek 

(51.0 |ig/L) subwatersheds exceeded the Canadian drinkingwater guideline of 50 |ig/L (table 33). No median concentrations exceeded a drinking-water guideline (table 33).

Sediment-quality guidelines for chromium are ISQG, 

37.3 (ig/g; TEC, 43.4 (ig/g; PEL, 90 (ig/g; and PEC, 

lll|ig/g.

All sites with exceedences of the PEL for chromium in 

sediment (90.0 |ig/g) were clustered near the confluence of 

the Milwaukee, Menomonee, and Kinnickinnic Rivers 

(fig. 67). Sites with median concentrations in the upper quartile were also clustered near the confluence of the three rivers 

(fig. 67). Sites with median concentrations in the lower quartile were scattered around the planning area but not located 

near the confluence of the three rivers (fig. 67).

The Kinnickinnic River subwatershed had a median 

chromium in sediment concentration in the upper quartile 

(fig. 67). Upper Menomonee River, Little Menomonee 

Creek, Lilly Creek, Lincoln Creek, and Middle Root River 

subwatersheds had median concentrations in the lower quartile (fig. 67). Maximum exceedences above either the PEC or 

PEL (111 |ig/g, 90.0 (ig/g) were measured in the Lower 

Menomonee River, Lower Milwaukee River, and Kinnickinnic River subwatersheds (fig. 68, table 34). Concentrations 

for all samples in the Lilly Creek, Little Menomonee Creek, 

Lincoln Creek, and Middle Root River subwatersheds were 

below the ISQG and the TEC (37.3 (ig/g, 43.4 (ig/g) (fig. 68, 

table 34).
Trace Elements 151

88°07'30" 87°52'30"

43°15' -

Subwatershed, median 

chromium concentrations 

in sediment in 

micrograms per gram

•• 8.0 - 50.0

MMSD planning area 

/~\J Watershed boundary

Subwatershed boundary 

Streams

Sampling site, median 

chromium concentrations 

in sediment in

O 50.1-140.0 

® 140.1 - 280.0

280.1 -1,320.0 

Purple outline indicates 

median chromium 

concentrations in 

sediment in micrograms 

per gram exceeding a 

guideline value 

O - 90.0

Base composited from Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission regional base 

map, 1:2,000,1995; U.S. Geological Survey digital line graph hydrography, 1:100,000,2001; Wisconsin 

Department of Natural Resources version 2 hydrography, 1:24,000,2002. Wisconsin Transverse 

Mercator Projection, referenced to North American Datum of 1983,1991 adjustment.

Figure 67. Sites sampled for chromium in sediment in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District (MMSD) 

planning area,Wis.
152 Water-Resources-Related Information for the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin

(/:•

C V

_3

05 ^

03 li

(L) C

&* S

(U •-

U 3

TO 'cfl

O3 ** 1:1 > - — •

• _•• ££

3 C

*rt C

> O

•s cx

S O "-T 60 ^+-1 c? .£ tl

1 'i— ' 03

S o •?

CT5 ^" ^

•— ^ o

^> ^ *-j CD t — 1 C3

CD fv, . .

CD a! «>

c1 1 §

'1 '> 'i

03 rt ~

4— 1 "^3 "—

•ri 2 o

1 . ~" p . co r <u

Q .'- ea

D5 S _O

o w ^

§ "TO aj

rC CX

c H co

ca td ^

^ (^ S3

O T3 J2

Q. C cS

0 ^ >

CD TO C

«= So

^ ° "TO CD ^ ' — '

CD M 3

— * F"* 03 — [H O

1 1:1

CD £ B

-E U £

O £3 CO

•-*'• cj B"

o '5b s

D5 .2

CD f*1 ^

« y .s >• ^ tt D •£

CD t/3 li •i—1 O '"

ro t/3 u?

E '£ S

~F C^J -G 'E S i "s"

a <u ^ S

t. M ^3 N

P- C3 .£> „-

statistics forcry Metropolitan Sewei (|j,g/L); values rouniimit repored were a

CD <U i_ —

1 ill

=J £ <U 0

GO rd °- gS? d s ^

sill

|2 S -| J

wnunxei/y

9|llU93J3d l|106

3|!lU93J9d 1|19Z

uea|/\|

ueipeiM

aniiiaiiaH 9|l}U93J3a 11107 IJiSg

eijiuaojed ijioi.

uinuiiu;i/\|

ejep efdiues iseien

aiep 3|duies ise||jeg

(s)iiuiji 6ui}joday

Ijiuji Bujjjodaj e Mojaq

sen|BA jo jaqujnN

sunsaj ||e 10 lunoo

sunsej 13UQ1S lo IUROQ

siinsaj sosn 10 junoo

sunsej asi/\ll/\l 10 lunoo

p3usj3i6A/vqns jod seiis

o

2

o

1

A

CD

CO

o

I

O J

— ^ rSt

00 

10

O j

oo•~

"* ! Os

^ j

^

1—1

O |

10

p j

10

p !

| f

o

, _ , ^-j

o r-.

O 0-

Q C

TM p

i o

r-~ r-~ Os O

o o

o o

•*o

Os —i

ro O ro

CN ri

o o

•^- ro

10 "^

~

00 r^

so O

M °

•^- ro ^^

Kinnickinnic River 

Milwaukee Ditcf West 

>

2

0'c

c

3

0'E 

c

2

3 3

, ,

i i

1 i

, ,

i |

• '

,

r- rr- r-~

O- Os

\ ^^

ro ro

— 00 — o

10 rO- Os

r-~ VD 

CJ " in VD

c o

r*-i c*~

Z -

m

K *

o o

o o

Tj- —— 1

Wilson ParkCreek 

Michigan Direct Lake 

^

op •5 — ^ o

JgQ

-J

j

3 c^

. ,

1 |

i i

, .

, ,

1 '

,

rsj r^

oo r--

Os Os

5? o 

CJ C?

?5 so

o c

r-~ rOs Os

(N O

Os *O

0 0

rf} cf)

ro —

- -

^

O O

o o

r<J ~

Michigan Lake 

Tributary Creek Honey 

u

c "~

$>£, u

•H "3 o

j 2

p p

00 O

<N O

VD

r-; p

TJ OO

10 O

^ o

^~

oo m

r^i ^j~ —

m o

- sD

10 O

— 10

in r--

^

O — OS O 

0- O

C CJ

OS TJJJD -H

O — '

10 10

O- Os

m ro

CJ 5

so Os

O O

fl Os

m' m"

— r — '

ro oc

5 22

—

r-. ^-

<N OO (N m

° 1

•^ r-- 1 '

t~ U

Little Menomonee RivRi Lower Menomonee 

o o

o o

Os so

p 10

rj rTj- OO

OS <N

^~

^-. (SI

oo -^— '

o o

10 rr- oo

•^- •*

r~; in

10 10

— o

O OS 

O Os r<J ~^

TJ- Os

• — ' so

«n so r-~ r-~

m so 

CJ CJ

so •<3-

0 0

^.

Os

r*^ r*^

IN ro

oc

^3- VD

2 ">

O ro

O O

-a-

«n r<J

u 

>

Menomonee RiUppr 

Underwood Creek

J O

Oi ~

\ •*•

Os

j TJOs

| VDso'

I oo

10

| rT3'

t

' s

,

(N —

OO O

^- r<J

M M

<N ^i

O —

10 10

OS Os

ro O 

p (N

O O

rr

Os

•n I0-

m o

<N 10 

(N

ro

r<J r-~

c o

o r-.

VD

(NI O

1

U 

0

Combined Sewererv 

Area

Lincoln Creek

^

;>

2

u

u

3

J

^

•* J

VD K

VD 

00^ oo"

p !

rj

(N

TJ- | Os'

Tj- J

10

o ;

10

p !

10

|

^: '

"2 i

— o

O Os 

O Os

c; c

• — i rsj

m m

r-~ rOs Os

in r^

CJ ^

o o

c"

^f o

ro f^

S "

0 J^

ro

Os tN

-a- o

ro

1 °

VD (N

<N

t- ^

u u

Milwaukee RivLower North BranchOak Cre

~u

U

•%ca

o

o o

O OS TJ- ro

O O

rj .-•

•* •*

Os OS

r-~ TJr-^ r-"

o o

10 m

p p

10 10

•* •*"

m o

~ <N

. _ , 1 _

O O

o o

JN (N

OS Os

• — i . — i

r-~ oo Os Os

O m — O

,.,.

°" •*

f^ o'

0- <N

« 10

OO Tj-

•^- o

o c

r- m 

r- TJTj- (N

Oak Creek LowerMiddle OakCreek

0 -1

•^- K

ro

Os |

rj

TJ- |

Os

Os |

r-"

O j

sD

O j

10

^: '

o i

(N

— VD

o r-.

O Os

CJ ^

Os r<J

' — ' ^3"

oo rOs Os

^ ro

CJ C

m O

O —

^.

Os ro

O VD

<N VD

O so

O O

(NI O 

(N

^~ . —

^

Oak CreekUpper 

Branch Rive East Roo

tH

U 

>

2

o&

pop

Os (N ^3"

so r-~ oo

00 O O

o so" r~-~

<N — —

"3- •* TJCJs Os Os

sD OS 10

(N OS O

r- r- rT3- TJ- TJr^ ^ ^

•^- •* •*

•*" •*" •*

r- 10 p

, _ , _ l _ , o o o 

o o o

(NI (NI (NI

o o o

o o o

Os rsi VD

OS OO Os Os Os Os

OO (N O

O O — i

•* ^3"

^ Os Os"

Os ro^ r-T

10 m Os

— — 10

ro so O

O — (N

O O O

ro m oo (N rsi Os

— <N so

River RootLower Middle Rootiver River Upper Root 
Trace Elements 153

CD "3

Q

O

Lunui;xe|/\|

uea|/\|

LJIQI

aiep aiduies isajen

ejep 3|duies )S3i|jeg

ljuiji Bujijodaj e MO|aq

siinsaj ||e jo junoo 

sj|nsaj UNQM *o junoo 

sunsej sosn *o junoQ 

pausjaieMqns jad sans

TJ

o

CO

o

i

o

o

2-

VO

10

CN

SO

"O

CN

VD

O

CN

Os

O

O

p^

OS

vo

Os

Os

vo

Os

Os

^

CN

OO

O

Os

VO

CJ

§

o

2

^* *

o

2

fe

Kinnickinnic Riv

'S,>

'a

'•% _e

'c

5

o

o

o

06

p

"O

m

r^

CN

O

O

o

o

o

o

o

o

Os

oo

Os

^5

o

, _ , ~

Os

00

Os

^

p

•-'

o

ro

O

«

«

Creek Lilly 

S3

5

<U§

o

g

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

CN

o

o

o

o

CN

o

o

Os

cr!

P;

o

, _ ,

OS

OO

Os

?:

o

~

o

-

o

-

-

^

U

<u

Little Menomone

o

ot—

o

oro

oro

ot—

o

oro

ot—

o

oro

orOS

oo

OS

^

o

, _ ,

OS

00

OS

^

p

"

o

-

o

"

-

u

'1

u

Little Menomone

o

or10

o

00

CN

<=>

10

CN

m

O

Os

o

CN

so

CN

O

CNso"

VO

O

O

S:Os

O

So

o

00

Os

«o

1

o

S

CN

CN

«s

a

1t>

u

Lower Menomon

o

o

o

vS

o

o

m00

CN

o

o

m

"O

CN

CN

O

O

0

o

Os

oc

Os

00

o

, _

Os

00

Os

^5

£J

O

O

VO

O

VO

vo

S3

"I

ni

Upper Menomoni

o

o

o

o

CN

O

o

o

o

CN

O

o

o

o

o

o

CN

o

o

Os

OO

Os

^;

O

, — ,

"

Os

00

Os

^5

O

•^

O

-

O

-

-

Lincoln Creek

>

2

<u

u"1

^

2

o

o

10

o

o

oo

m

oo

Os

vo

CN

mf-^

-

C:

f-^

"

O

o>o

•=>_

t— H

O

O

OS

Os

^5

CN

00

O

Os

"O

o

o

VO

o~

VO

VO

>

2

(U

Lower Milwauke

<=>_

oo

<=>

00

o

00

o

00

<=>

06

o

00

<=>

06

p

oo

rOs

r?)

p

O

rorOs

rn

p

O

O

-

o

-

-

h

Middle Rivfoot 

J_,

*>

2

o

ei
10,000

Kinnickinnic 

River

Menomonee 

River

Milwaukee 

River

Root 

River

g 1,000

DC 

LLJ 

CL

CO

DC 

O O 

DC 

O

D 

O

o

100

14

16

« « *///

111 micrograms per gram, MacDonald probable effect 

concentration90.0 micrograms per gram, Canadian probable effect level 

43.4 micrograms per gram, MacDonald threshold effect 

concentration

37.3 micrograms per gram, Canadian interim sediment quality guideline

EXPLANATION

106 Numberofsamples

__ Data value 1.5 to 3.0 times the IQR

outside the box

Largest data value within 1.5 times

the IQR above the box

75th percentile —iMedian (50th percentile} [grfge OQR 

25th percentile —ISmallest data value within 1.5 times the IQR below the box

I

30

CD C/5O

I&

I

0) £>f 5'

0) CO 

(DI.

o

SUBWATERSHED

Figure 68. Statistical distribution of chromium concentrations in sediment in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, 1970- 2002.

0)§(/> Oo

156 Water-Resources-Related Information for the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin

Nickel

Nickel is a naturally abundant element that is found 

mainly in soils and sediments. Nickel attaches to particles 

that contain iron or manganese, which are commonly present 

in soil (Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, 

1999d). Nickel is used in the production of stainless steel and 

other corrosive-resistant metal, batteries, and color ceramics, 

and as a catalyst in organic chemical manufacturing and 

petroleum refining. Because of its widespread use, nickel 

can be contributed to the environment in significant amounts 

by waste disposal (Hem, 1985). Nickel is one of the most 

mobile of heavy metals in the aquatic system. This mobility 

is controlled by the ability of various sorbents to scavenge it 

from solution. Nickel does not appear to accumulate in the 

tissues of fish, plants, or animals used as food (Agency for 

Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, 1999d).

The USEPA remanded its MCL and Maximum Contaminant Level Goal (MCLG) for nickel in February 1995. 

There currently is no federal legal limit on the amount of 

nickel in drinking water. The USEPA is reconsidering the 

limit on nickel at this time (U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, 2002f). There are currently no Canadian drinkingwater guidelines. The WDNR MCL standard for nickel is 

100 |ig/L. The Canadian guideline for the protection of 

aquatic health lists a standard of 25-150 (ag/L.

Maximum concentrations of nickel in water exceeded 

the WDNR drinking-water guideline of 100 |lg/L and in 

most cases the upper limit of the Canadian aquatic life guideline of 25-150 |ig/L in the Lower Milwaukee River 

(3,810.8 |ig/L), Kinnickinnic River (710.0 (ig/L), Upper Oak

Creek (270.0 |ig/L), Lower Menomonee River (150.0 |0,g/L), 

Upper Menomonee River (116.0 jig/L), and Lincoln Creek 

(110.0 ng/L) subwatersheds (table 35). Nearly all median 

concentrations appeared to be concentrations below a reporting limit (table 35).

Currently, there are no Canadian sediment-quality 

guidelines for nickel. The MacDonald sediment-quality 

guidelines for freshwater ecosystems have set a TEC of 

22.7 |ig/g and a PEC of 48.6 jig/g for nickel.

Only one site in the Lower Menomonee River subwatershed had an exceedence of the PEC for nickel in sediment 

(48.6 Hg/g) (fig. 69). Sites with median concentrations in the 

upper quartile were mainly clustered near the confluence of 

the Milwaukee, Menomonee, and Kinnickinnic Rivers but 

were also scattered throughout several other subwatersheds 

to a lesser extent (fig. 69). Sites with median concentrations 

in the lower quartile were scattered among subwatersheds in 

the northern part of the planning area (fig. 69).

The Little Menomonee River subwatershed had a 

median nickel in sediment concentration in the upper quartile (fig. 69). Median concentrations in the lowest quartile 

were in the Upper Menomonee River, Little Menomonee 

Creek, and Lilly Creek subwatersheds (fig. 69). One sample 

in the Lower Menomonee River subwatershed with a concentration of 49.0 jig/g exceeded the PEC of 48.6 (ig/g 

(fig. 70, table 36). The concentration of the only sample collected in the Little Menomonee Creek subwatershed 

(20.0 ^ig/g) fell below the TEC of 22.7 |ig/g (fig. 70, 

table 36).
Trace Elements 157

88°07'30" 87°52'30"

Michigan

43°

87°54'

EXPLANATION

Lakes

Subwatershed, median 

nickel concentrations 

in sediment in 

micrograms per gram 

^H 5.0-21.0 

| | 21.1-27.2 

\9+1\ 27.3-32.0 

^H 32.1 - 49.0

MMSD planning area 

^\J Watershed boundary

Subwatershed boundary

Streams

Sampling site, median

nickel concentrations

in sediment in

micrograms per gram

• 5.0-21.0

O 21.1-27.2 

O 27.3 - 32.0

• 32.1-49.0 

Purple outline indicates 

median nickel 

concentrations in 

sediment in micrograms 

per gram exceeding a 

guideline value 

A > 48.6

Base composited from Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission regional base 

map, 1:2,000,1995; U.S. Geological Survey digital line graph hydrography, 1:100,000,2001; Wisconsin 

Department of Natural Resources version 2 hydrography, 1:24,000,2002. Wisconsin Transverse 

Mercator Projection, referenced to North American Datum of 1983,1991 adjustment.

0

0

1

2

2

I

1 4

4 MILES

1

KILOMETERS

Figure 69. Sites sampled for nickel in sediment in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District (MMSD) 

planning area,Wis.
Table 35. Summary statistics for nickel in water, by category, for the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, 1970-2002

[MMSD, Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District; USGS, U.S. Geological Survey; STORET, STOrage and RETrieval System; --, no data available; RL, reporting-limit value; values are expressed in 

micrograms per liter (|J.g/L); values rounded to the nearest tenth; for the purpose of statistical calculations, values reported below a reporting limit are set at one-half the reporting-limit value: some values below the reporting limit were reported as zero]

Watershed

Fox RiverKinnickinnic River

Lake Michigan

Direct

Lake Michigan

Tributary

Menomonee River

Milwaukee RiverOak CreekRoot River

Subwatershed

Deer CreekKinnickinnic River

West Milwaukee DitchWilson Park Creek

Lake Michigan DirectLake Michigan Tributary

Honey Creek

Little Menomonee RiverLower Menomonee River

Upper Menomonee River

Underwood Creek

Combined Sewer Service

Area

Lincoln Creek

Lower Milwaukee River

North Branch Oak Creek

Lower Oak Creek

Middle Oak CreekUpper Oak Creek

East Branch Root River

Lower Root River

Middle Root River

Upper Root RiverWhitnall Park Creeks

1f

0) subwatQ.in0)

CO

1

13

4

4

111

4

14

5

2

1

7

23

2

42

11

1

2

6

1

1inQ en•5

c 

o

o

0

701

00

0000

758

307

0

0

267

1,476

0

319

165

82

0

232598

0

in"5in

0)

en 0 enD

oCo

o

00

00

000

22

19

0

13

0

0

21

0

00000000

Win

0)

CC

Ren5

c

3

8

4

86

5

74

8

2

17

113

9725

7

1

24

193

24

12

00

12

0

1

2

1

3in

2J 

15

c

8

4

787

5

74

8

2

17

135

874

332

20

1

291

1,690

24

331

165

82

12

2326

100

I

1

0) = 

= 0)

er ofvalreportinISZ ° 

0)

4

209

5

74

8

2

17

113

224

99

7

j

138

529

24914422

12

15

17

61

1

Q

CT

I

0) cc

20, 100

14.3,20,

30

20,3020

10,20

20,4020

20

1, 14.3,

20

14.3,20

20

20

14.3,2010, 143,

20

20

14.3,20

14.3

14.3

20

14.314.3,20

14.3

20

0) "CD

•o

0) 

Q.

i

1S

04/24/198504/30/1975

04/29/1975

05/27/197506/16/197709/28/198106/25/197506/25/1975

06/25/1975

06/25/197506/25/1975

02/24/1982

05/19/197505/28/197504/17/197505/27/197505/21/199005/21/1990

05/27/197508/25/199902/24/1982

10/17/1996

05/24/1976

0)OB •c0) Q. ECDin

In

0) +•"

05/08/1985

11/14/200112/22/1975

11/23/1977

11/23/1977

02/24/198207/19/1977

06/29/1990

11/14/200111/14/2001

06/29/1990

02/24/1982

11/27/200111/15/2001

04/12/1976

11/19/200111/19/2001

11/19/2001

04/12/1976

10/10/200110/10/200110/10/2001

05/24/1976

inimums-5.0--..

..__-- 2.0.5

5.0

3.0

..

7.2

1.0

..

5.0

5.0

7.0

..

7272

0- 0) 10) 1 -- 7.2~..„..-5.4 7.2 7.2 5.0.. 7.2 7.2-7.2 7.2 7.2.. 7.2 7.2 7.2- =100) Q. £ U) tN " 10.0~......~ 10.0 10.0 7.2 5.8.. 7.2 7.2-7.2 7.2 7.2__ 7.2 7.2 7.2-- C CD 1 " 10.0~......- 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0.. 14.0 10.0- 10.0 10.0 10.0._ 7.2 7.2 7.2-- c -- 12.2~......-9.4 11.2 11.0 9.7.. 11.5 13.0- 10.6 11.0 13.7__ 10.9 10.7 10.6-- 0)11U)- 14.0--......- 10.0 13.0 14.0 10.0„ 14.3 11.0- 14.0 14.0 14.0__ 14.3 14.3 14.3- 0) 0) Ig0- 14.3--......- 10.0 14.3 14.3 11.2.. 14.3 14.3- 14.3 14.3 14.3__ 21.0 18.2 17.4- E3E 'xCD RL 710.0 RLRLRLRLRL 25.0 150.0 116.0 36.0 RL 110.0 3,810.8 RL 32.6 81.0 270.0 RL 24.0 24.0 27.0RL

30 CD WOc"1oCD 

C/5DO2.2*CD*a.e?sko'3O*CD3r^09CCDCD2*"ie

o_033C/JCDCD

(0 CD

D1'£TJ

093 3_5" 

(O

1?09

^55'

oe{/»_ 3"
Table 36. Summary statistics for nickel in sediment, by category, for the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, 1970-2002

[USGS, U.S. Geological Survey; WDNR, Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources; --, no data available; values are expressed in micrograms per gram (ng/g); values rounded to the nearest tenth; 

for the purpose of statistical calculations, values reported below a reporting limit are set at one-half the reporting-limit value; some values below the reporting limit were reported as zero]

Watershed

Kinnickinnic RiverMenomonee River

Milwaukee River

Subwatershed

Kinnickinnic River

Lilly Creek

Little Menomonee Creek

Little Menomonee River

Lower Menomonee River

Upper Menomonee RiverLincoln Creek

Lower Milwaukee River

tes per subwatershed

(0

13

3

1

1

24

6

1

15

ountf USGS results

O

03

1

1

2

6

1

5

ount ofWDNRresults

O

13

00

0

22

00

10

Count ofallresults Number ofvalues elow areporting limit Reporting limit(s)

13

3

1

1

24

6

1

15

10

00

0

0

0

1 10

0

0

Earliest sample date

04/26/1984

11/01/1989

11/07/1989

11/01/1989

04/25/1984

10/31/1989

11/01/1989

04/26/1984

Latest sample date

08/21/1993

11/01/1989

11/07/1989

11/01/1989

08/20/1993

11/08/198911/01/1989

08/21/1993

Minimum

22.0

20.0

20.0

40.0

14.5

5.0

30.0

16.0

0) 

0)

1

24.420.020.0

40.022.4

12.5

30.0

18.7

0) 0)I

.c

U) CM

27.020.020.0

40.026.220.030.0

20.1

Median

30.0

20.0

20.040.0

29.0

20.0

30.023.0

1

29.9

23.3

20.040.0

30.820.8

30.0

24.2

75th percentile

32.0

25.0

20.040.0

34.2

27.5

30.029.5

90th percentile

36.5

28.0

20.040.042.1

30.030.030.0

Maximum

41.5

30.020.040.049.0

30.030.040.0
Kinnickinnic 

River

Menomonee 

River

Milwaukee 

River

100

rr 

o 

rrLLJ Q_

c/)

rr 

o O rr 

o

LLJ 

O

13

24 48.6 micrograms per gram, MacDonald probable effect 

concentration

22.7 micrograms per gram, MacDonald threshold effect concentration

EXPLANATION

106 Number of samples

__ Data value 1.5 to 3.0 times the IQR

outside the box

Largest data value within 1.5 times

the IQR above the box

75th percentileMedian (50th perce 25th percentileSmallest data value within 1.5 times the IQR below the box

—,

ntile) ^^

—I

2* 5o_5f

3 C/3CDCO

(O CD

D I'

55'

SUBWATERSHED

Figure 70. Statistical distribution of nickel concentrations in sediment in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, 1970-2002.

162 Water-Resources-Related Information for the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin

Zinc

Zinc is a common element in rock (about the same 

abundance as copper or nickel), but it is substantially more 

soluble in water than the other two metals. Zinc naturally 

occurs in the air, soils, and water. Zinc is an essential mineral 

to plant and animal metabolism and is found in most foods 

(Hem, 1985). Most zinc in soils stays bound to the soil particles. Zinc accumulates in fish and other aquatic organisms 

but not plants (Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease 

Registry, 1999e). Zinc is a component of brass, bronze, and 

galvanized metals and is used to make paint, rubber, dye, and 

wood preservatives (Callendar and Rice, 2000). Fossil-fuel 

combustion is the main contributor to worldwide anthropogenic emissions of zinc (Callendar, and Rice, 2000). Concentration of zinc in bed sediment is well correlated with 

population density in the United States (Rice, 1999).

The USEPA has established SMCLs for fifteen contaminants that are goals but are not enforceable. These SMCLs 

are established for aesthetic considerations (taste and odor, 

and color) and are not considered to present a risk to human 

health. The USEPA does not have a MCL for zinc but does 

have an SGML of 5,000 jig/L related to odor and taste. The 

Canadian drinking-water guideline also is 5,000 jig/L and is 

an AO. The WDNR does not have a drinking-water standard 

for zinc. The Canadian water-quality guideline for the protection of aquatic life is 30 [ig/L.

Maximum concentrations of zinc in water at all subwatersheds exceeded the Canadian aquatic life criterion of 

30 ^ig/L (table 37). The highest maximum concentration was 

in the Lower Menomonee River subwatershed (1,500 ^ig/L) 

(table 37). Median concentrations in the Underwood Creek 

(90 ^g/L), Mitchell Field Drainage Ditch (80 ^g/L) and Little Menomonee River (30 |Ug/L) matched or exceeded the

Canadian aquatic life guideline (table 37). No exceedences 

of the USEPA or Canadian drinking-water guideline concentrations of 5,000 jig/L were found in any subwatershed 

(table 37).

The Canadian sediment-quality guidelines for the protection of aquatic life for zinc are an ISQG of 123 p,g/g and 

a PEL of 315 M£/g; MacDonald's consensus-based sediment-quality guidelines are a TEC of 121 ^ig/g and a PEC of 

459 jig/g.

Almost all sites with exceedences of the PEL for zinc in 

sediment (315 ^ig/g) were clustered near the confluence of 

the Milwaukee, Menomonee, and Kinnickinnic Rivers 

(fig. 71). Sites with median concentrations in the upper quartile were also mostly clustered near the confluence of the 

three rivers (fig. 71). Sites with median concentrations in the 

lower quartile were scattered around the planning area but 

typically not located near the confluence of the three rivers 

(fig. 71).

No subwatersheds had median zinc concentrations in 

the upper quartile (fig. 71). The Upper Menomonee River, 

Little Menomonee Creek, Lilly Creek, Lincoln Creek, and 

Middle Root River subwatersheds had median concentrations in the lower quartile (fig. 71). The maximum concentrations, above either the PEC or PEL (459 ^g/g, 315 [ig/g), 

were measured in the Lower Menomonee River, Little 

Menomonee River, Lower Milwaukee River, and the Kinnickinnic River subwatersheds (fig. 72, table 38). The concentrations collected for the only samples in the Little Menomonee Creek (93 ^ig/g) and Middle Root River (52 ^ig/g) 

subwatersheds were below the TEC and the ISQG (121 jig/g, 

123 jig/g) (fig. 72, table 38).
Trace Elements 163

88°07'30" 87°52'30"

43°15' -

EXPLANATION

[ " | Lakes

Subwatershed, median 

zinc concentrations 

in sediment in 

micrograms per gram 

IBM 52-250

Area 

displayed 

in detail

above MMSD planning area 

Watershed boundary 

S~\J Subwatershed boundary 

Streams

Sampling site, median 

zinc concentrations 

in sediment in

micrograms per gram 

© 52-250

<D 381 - 550 

• 551 - 850 

Purple outline indicates

median zinc 

concentrations in 

sediment in micrograms 

per gram exceeding a 

guideline value 

O - 315

Base composited from Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission regional base 

map, 1:2,000,1995; U.S. Geological Survey digital line graph hydrography, 1:100.000.2001; Wisconsin 

Department of Natural Resources version 2 hydrography, 1:24,000, 2002. Wisconsin Transverse 

Mercator Projection, referenced to North American Datum of 1983,1991 adjustment.

Figure 71. Sites sampled for zinc in sediment in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District (MMSD) planning 

area, Wis.
Table 37. Summary statistics for zinc in water, by category, for the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, 1970-2002

[MMSD, Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District; USGS, U.S. Geological Survey; STORET, STOrage and RETrieval System; --, no data available; RL, reporting-limit value; values are expressed in

2

micrograms per liter (mg/L); values rounded to the nearest whole number; values below the reporting limit were reported as zeroj

Watershed

Kinnickinnic

River

Lake Michigan

Tributary

Menomonee

River

Milwaukee

River

Oak CreekRoot River

Subwatershed

Kinnickinnic River

West Milwaukee Ditch

Wilson Park Creek

Lake Michigan Tributary

Little Menomonee River

Lower Menomonee River

Upper Menomonee River

Underwood Creek

Combined Sewer Service

Area

Lincoln CreekLower Milwaukee RiverMitchell Field Drainage

Ditch

North Branch Oak Creek

Lower Oak CreekMiddle Oak Creek

Upper Oak Creek

East Branch Root River

Lower Root River

Middle Root River

Upper Root River

•o

0)<n

0) subwat

^(A0)

(75

7

1

6

2495

1

1

10

22

2

2

42

111

1

4

<nin &

Q 

W

c

3

O

o

1,382

00

00

1,429

416

00

267

2,838

00

477245

121

0

232598

w

<n 

£

(0o 

enDB 

c

3

O

o

0

000

22

53

0

13

06

50

0

0

0000000

w

<n

0)

LLJ OC

es

c

30 

O

2

1

54

3

19

4

50

1

58

147

12

8

400

8

000

for the purpose o

£ in E

— <u =

w = o>0) (Q .E > r « o o 

•5 55 S! ! !l 5 z -0) ^

1,384 2

1 1

54 16

3 3

41 19

1,486 9

421 5

13 0

1 1

331 42

3,035 157

12 1

8 8

481 9245 2

121 1

8 8

23 0

25 0

98 1

f statistical

£1

O>

_C

O

rr

20

20

0,20

2020

10,20

20

..

5

8,20

10,20,

30

0

10,20

4.3,20

4.34.3

20..-4.3

calculations, val

0)

•o

0) Q.E

(Qin+*

V) .0)

~

(Q111

07/08/1975

10/02/1975

05/27/197503/10/197606/25/197506/25/197506/25/1975

02/01/199002/03/197506/18/197501/25/1973

01/11/1999

04/17/1975

07/08/197503/21/198503/21/198505/27/1975

08/25/199908/25/199908/25/1999

ues reported below a reporting-limit are set at one-half the reportinga

(C 0)0) 0)

o> P c c _ c

15. 3 °> & m C 0> E i & g 1 § £ co •= <u <u § £ <u W ,± O. Ci «S 2 Q0) S ffi U)3

11/14/2001 4 5 11 19 31 36

10/02/1975

04/07/2000 0 0 0 23 51 66

09/28/1981

06/29/1990 10 10 10 30 57 70

11/14/2001 5 6 10 18 31 30

11/14/2001 3 5 6 11 20 21

06/29/1990 60 62 80 90 155 17002/03/1975

11/27/2001 4 6 13 22 32 40

11/15/2001 2 5 7 12 19 21

02/23/2000 0 21 42 80 75 112

12/11/1990

11/19/2001 2 5 7 13 21 23

11/19/2001 2 5 9 15 21 2611/19/2001 2 5 8 14 20 27

04/12/1976

10/10/2001 8 9 12 17 20 24

10/10/2001 7 8 10 15 18 21

10/10/2001 2 9 12 18 22 28

limit value; some

d)

1 E 

g 1

CO £ s

63 710

RL

137 440

RL

130 450

56 1,50036 350

242 670

RL

75 200

40 330

129 140

RL

49 212

43 12241 110

RL

31 6027 5044 70

09 

C?DO

CD V) O 

So(D t/530CD.

E£ CD*

a.^^o*

i

E£5'3o*

CD

i"09C

CDCD

S

.3

jl

&T3

COCD^CD

a!

(O CD

OV)'

a30933_

(0

CDQ9

sV)Oe
Table 38. Summary statistics for zinc in sediment, by category, for the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, 1970-2002

[USGS, U.S. Geological Survey; WDNR, Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources; --, no data available; values are expressed in micrograms per gram (ng/g); values rounded to the nearest whole 

number]

Watershed

Kinnickinnic River

Menomonee RiverMilwaukee River

Root River

Subwatershed

Kinnickinnic River

Lilly Creek

Little Menomonee CreekLittle Menomonee River

Lower Menomonee River

Upper Menomonee River

Lincoln CreekLower Milwaukee River

Middle Root River

•c

0)

Iflj

per subwati(0a

(75

13

3

11

24

6

1

16

1

i

§

it ofUSGSr

co

o

03

1

1

2

6

1

6

1

w"3(0 0)

t ofWDNR i

co

o

13

0

00

22

00

10

0

enin

jnt ofallre:

o

o

13

3

11

24

6

1

16

1

a

0) = 3 0) mber ofvalv areportin3 g

Z °

•°

0000000

0

0

%•c

0)a(Qin

to 

.SJ ^TM

(Q 

LLJ

04/26/1984

11/01/198911/07/198911/01/1989

04/25/1984

10/31/1989

11/01/1989

08/15/1973

10/03/1973

is

•o .•= =£ E = = e

a = o o .§1 •! <5 <B Tu en .E o. o. •£

1 s i s *i i- CM TO

08/21/1993 340 384 490 540

11/01/1989 77 88 104 13011/07/1989 93 93 93 93

11/01/1989 540 540 540 540

08/20/1993 212 281 392 503

11/08/1989 93 106 125 14011/01/1989 160 160 160 160

08/21/1993 87 138 235 318

10/03/1973 52 52 52 52

J)1

I i

I

528 600

132 160

93 93

540 540

486 580

167 222160 160

294 350

52 52

0)

I 

80)a

O)

628

178

93

540620255

160

400

52

Maximum

677

190

93

540

850

260

160

500

52

09

OCD

mCD3(DST
Kinnickinnic 

River

Menomonee 

River

Milwaukee 

River

Root 

River

1,000

rr

O

rr LU D_

C/3

rrO 100 

O 

cc 

oo

zN

10

13

*——I

<C> <C> -<S ,QPS -ps V

SUBWATERSHED

459 micrograms per gram, MacDonald probable effect 

concentration315 micrograms per gram, Canadian probable effect level

123 micrograms per gram, Canadian interim sediment

quality guideline

121 micrograms per gram, MacDonald threshold effect

concentration

EXPLANATION

106 Number of samples

__ Data value 1.5 to 3.0 times the IQR

outside the box

Largest data value within 1.5 times

the IQR above the box

75th percentile —,Median (50th percentile) ["rfge (IQR 25th percentile _lSmallest data value within 1.5 times

the IQR below the box 

Reporting limits for 

some analyses were: 

0,4.3,5,8, 10,20,30 

micrograms per gram

3=to1CD

09 

(O CD

209

Figure 72. Statistical distribution of zinc concentrations in sediment in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, 1970-2002.
Pesticides 167

Pesticides

For the purposes of this report, discussion of pesticides 

has been broken into sections describing (1) historically used 

and now banned pesticides and (2) pesticides still in use.

Historically used pesticides are low-solubility, hydrophobic compounds that, when transported to aquatic systems, partition into sediment and bioaccumulate in aquatic 

organisms. Because they can cause unintended effects on 

nontarget organisms, they are a long-lived threat to the 

health of streams and the organisms (including humans) that 

utilize the streams. Chlordane, dieldrin, DDT, and DDD are 

insecticides formerly used on crops. All crop uses of these 

compounds were banned between 1972 (DDT) and 1983 

(chlordane). Limited use of dieldrin and chlordane was 

allowed after that time for termite control, but all uses were 

banned in 1987 and 1988, respectively. However, these compounds and others are frequently detected in sediment and 

the tissues of animals exposed to contaminated sediments. 

(The others are breakdown products and (or) related chemicals whose source is from pesticide mixtures containing the 

main compound.) Although the concentrations are usually 

low, these compounds bioaccumulate in fish, birds, and 

mammals (Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, 2003).

Consensus-based TECs have been developed for each 

of the historically used pesticides selected for this report 

(MacDonald and others, 2000); however these values are not 

listed herein.

Pesticides currently in use are generally highly soluble, 

hydrophilic compounds and thus are primarily found dissolved in the water compartment of aquatic systems. These 

modern pesticides have short half-lives and a seasonal periodicity related to application. Agricultural herbicides are 

generally applied in conjunction with planting. Urban use of 

pesticides is generally on an as-needed basis anytime during 

the growing season. Concentrations in surface waters are 

highest during and after rainstorms that occur after planting 

and before significant crop growth slows runoff. In southern 

Wisconsin, this period generally is mid-May through midJune (Sullivan and Richards, 1996).
168 Water-Resources-Related Information for the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin

Historically Used Pesticides

The following pesticides were selected from the 

MMSD Corridor Study database for description in this 

report: chlordane, dieldrin, DOT, DDE, DDD, p,p '-DDT, 

p,p'-DDE, andp,p '-DDD in sediment; and dieldrin, chlordane (cis and trans isomers), nonachlor (cis and trans isomers), p,p '-DDT, p,p '-DDE, and p,p '-DDD in tissue. These 

pesticides were chosen for description because data are relatively plentiful (generally more than 10 samples) and are 

commonly analyzed for in urban areas and areas adjacent to 

agricultural lands. Pesticide data in sediment came from both 

the USGS and USEPA STORET databases. Data on pesticides in tissue was only from the USEPA STORET database, 

although a small amount of additional USGS data is in the 

MMSD Corridor study database. Locations of pesticide sampling sites are shown in figure 73.

Of the selected pesticides in sediment, only dieldrin was 

not found at a concentration above the reporting limit (data 

not shown). Of the selected pesticides in tissue, the following 

were found only at concentrations below the reporting limit:

chlordane (cis and trans isomers), nonachlor (cis isomer), 

p,p'-DDT, and p,p'-DDD (data not shown).

Most sites with data for pesticides in sediment were 

clustered around the confluence of the Milwaukee, Menomonee, and Kinnickinnic Rivers, although other such sites 

were scattered around the planning area (fig. 73). Data for 

pesticides in tissue were available for several sites in the Milwaukee and Kinnickinnic watersheds but not for most other 

watersheds (fig. 73, table 39).

Almost all data for pesticides in sediment were collected in the early 1990s or before (table 39). Results were 

below the reporting limit in at least half the samples in the 

Kinnickinnic River, Lower Menomonee River, Lincoln 

Creek, Lower Milwaukee River, and North Branch Oak 

Creek subwatersheds (table 39). All data for pesticides in tissue also were collected in the early 1990s or before 

(table 39). Of the 11 subwatersheds with data, concentrations were below a reporting limit except for a few samples 

in the Lower Milwaukee River subwatershed (table 39).

Pesticides Still in Use

Pesticides in current use are most likely found in surface water. Atrazine, deethyl atrazine, diazinon, rnetolachlor, prometon, simazine, and 2,4-D can be found in 

urban areas or streams draining agricultural lands; consequently, a significant amount of data was available. Pesticide 

data in water came from the USGS, although data for a few 

samples were also available in the MMSD Corridor Study 

database from USEPA STORET. Locations where surface 

water was analyzed for pesticides are shown in figure 73.

All of the selected pesticides were observed at concentrations above the reporting limit in at least one sample; however, no maximum concentration of any of the selected pesticides was above an MCL or other health advisory level 

(data not shown).

Data selected for analysis in this report were collected 

at two sites: the Milwaukee River at Estabrook Park in Milwaukee (91 samples) and Lincoln Creek at 47th Street in 

Milwaukee (10 samples) during 1993-2002 and 2001-2002, 

respectively (fig. 73, table 39).
Pesticides 169

87°52'30"

EXPLANATION

Lakes

Subwatershed, sampled

for pesticides in medium

Sediment

MMSD planning area 

Watershed boundary 

/~\J Subwatershed boundary 

Streams

Area 

displayed 

in detail

above Sampling site, sampled 

for pesticides in medium

Sediment 

Tissue 

O Water

Base composited from Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission regional base 

map, 1:2,000,1995; U.S. Geological Survey digital line graph hydrography, 1:100,000,2001; Wisconsin 

Department of Natural Resources version 2 hydrography, 1:24,000,2002. Wisconsin Transverse 

Mercator Projection, referenced to North American Datum of 1983,1991 adjustment.

Figure 73. Sites sampled for pesticides in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District (MMSD) planning area, 

Wis.
170 Water-Resources-Related Information for the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin

Q

CD

O 

O. 

O

S,

• s

•- -i—" EH

cT" .y

O

ejep e|duies isaie~|

e;ep e|duies iS3i|jeg 

juiji 6u;)jodaj e MO|eq

||e jo ;unoo 

S9Sn 1° lunoo 

se|duies ^o IUPOQ

a\ep e|duies isa}e~|

e;ep e|duies }S3i|jeg 

ji 6ui}jodaj e MO|eq

sunsaj !3dOlS *o junoo 

S3|diues ^o lunoo

aiep 3|diues )S3ie-|

3}ep 3|diues ise||jB3

e MO|3q 

sen|BA jo jaquiriN

ue jo }unoo

siinsej 13UO1S 1° junoo

S9SR

S8|dlUBS JO )UnOQ

peijsjeiBMqns jed

•

•

,

,

!

05/1988

00

rON

00

o

l

-

ON

CN

VD

ON 

ON

VD

0

ON

1

ON

0

ON

o

o

m 

m

CN

Kinnickinnic River

0

'5

•^

g

3

1

!

,

,

:

05/1988

00

00o10

o

VD

vC

VD

^

-

'

:

,

i

1

1

!

Park Wilson Creek

>

:

:

,

!

!

10/1986

VD

00

ON

0

10

^

"^

-

1

:

,

'

:

:

:

5 

1

IE

0

|S

c

.§>-

"5 oj

3 S3

ca

! ! i

: : :

,

• i i

; : :

CN

ON 

ON

So 

o i !

CN

ON

ON

00

c ! !

00 ' l

00

00 j |

! !

- i :

ON ON 

00 OO

s — ! — —

ON ON 

00 00 

ON ON

: - -

1 !0 ——

' »o »n

! o o

; „ „

• - "

i ^ -

Creek Honey 

Lilly Creek

Little Menomonee 

Creek

OJ

OJ

c

o >-

§ >

§2

S

'

i

,

,

:

03/1987

r-~

ON

J^

O

^

^

rm

-

ON 

00 

ON

^

"

ON 

00 

O*

^

C

0

^

"

-

Little Menomonee 

River

!

!

t

,

:

05/1993

ON

2

p;

C

CNm

CN

CN

ON

CN

ON 

ON

OO

O

00 

ON

O

ro

^

CN

ro

s

X

Menomonee Lower

River

1

:

,

,

:

•

,

,

.

1

1

ON 

ON

^

"~

ON 

00 

ON

O

^.

O

0

c

-

vC

Menom- Upper River onee 

!

:

t

,

:

05/1988

00

00

ON

>0

0

00

00

00

CN

-

•

:

,

,

!

!

I

:

Combined SewerService Area

u

«.>

S

05/2001 02/2002 3 

CN

3

n

o

05/1993

CN

ON

ON

00

0

n

wVD

^

vC

^.

"

-

ON

vC

O

ON 

00 

ON

=

^J.

ON

2

-

2

^

Lincoln Creek

04/1993 02/2002 0 

-

00

m00

"0

ON

08/1993

oorON

OO

O

CNON

CN

vC

ON

^D

CN

^

VC

-

ON 

ON

00

O

CN

00 

ON

10

O

^J.

r3

CN

O

s

CN

CN

Lower Milwaukee 

River

:

'

t

,

:

{

,

,

,

1

!

ON 

ON

^

"

ON 

ON

00

O

10

>0

>0

o

*

-

North Branc Oak

Creek

j*j

j-

.^

O

1

1

,

,

:

05/1993

rON

mo

00

CN

00

CN

00

CN

>0

m

•

:

,

.

:

:

!

:

Oak Lower Creek

!

1

,

,

:

10/1992

CN

ON

ON

O

•~

VD

VD

VD

"

-

rON

0

•~

rON

C

O

C

,0

-

-

Middle Rootiver

OJ

5

o

o

Oi

172 Water-Resources-Related Information for the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin

Polychlorinated Biphenyls

Despite being banned since the 1970s, polychlorinated 

biphenyls (PCBs) are ubiquitous contaminants, present not 

only in industrial areas where they were manufactured and 

used (in cutting oils, sealants, hydraulic fluids and pesticides) but also in remote locales such as the polar regions, 

owing to atmospheric transport and deposition. PCBs are a 

set of 209 related chlorinated organic compounds, some of 

which have demonstrated toxicity (McFarland and Clarke, 

1989). Major present-day sources include streambed sediments and, in some cases, the atmosphere. Being relatively 

hydrophobic and lipophilic, these compounds tend to adsorb 

onto clay surfaces or be associated with lipids and other subcellular components in aquatic organisms. Therefore, major 

loss mechanisms for truly dissolved PCBs in water include 

partitioning to suspended and bottom sediments and passive 

uptake by algae. In addition, because PCBs tend to be refractory in most aquatic environments, it is often possible to 

determine the particular commercial mixtures of PCBs, 

termed Aroclors, that were released to the stream. Under certain conditions, Aroclor mixtures undergo weathering 

wherein selective solubilization, volatilization, and (or) 

microbially mediated decomposition of some congeners 

(compounds belonging to the same chemical family) can significantly change the Aroclor mixture, sometimes beyond 

recognition.

Total PCB concentrations are most often determined by 

summing all measurable congeners from a congener-specific 

analysis of a sample. Aroclors are quantified either from 

older methods that do not include analysis of individual congeners or by matching the suite of measured individual congeners with that of known Aroclor mixtures using computer 

programs.

Sites with PCB data in water were scattered throughout 

the planning area. Sites sampled for PCBs in sediment were 

lightly scattered throughout the northern part of the planning 

area, with a concentration of sites at the confluence of the 

Milwaukee, Menomonee, and Kinnickinnic Rivers (fig. 74). 

Sites with PCB data in tissue were very lightly scattered 

throughout the planning area (fig. 74).

Data collection for PCBs in water in most sub watersheds began in 1975 (table 40). In half of the subwatersheds, 

data collected for PCBs in water were collected through 

2001 (table 40). At least half the results for PCBs in water 

were below reporting limit in all subwatersheds (table 40). 

All results for PCBs in water were below a reporting limit in 

half the subwatersheds (table 40). Data for PCBs in sediment 

in about half of the subwatersheds were collected once in 

1989 (table 41). In most other subwatersheds, data collection 

for PCBs in sediment began in 1980 and ended in the mid1990s (table 41). In about half the subwatersheds, concentrations in sediment were below a reporting limit in more than 

half of the results (table 41). PCB data in tissue were collected primarily in the mid to late 1980s, with a few additional samples in the mid-1990s. Fewer than 20 results are 

available for each subwatershed (table 41). Concentrations 

for most subwatersheds were below a reporting limit for 

PCB data in tissues (table 41).

So-called toxic PCB congeners can be defined as a subset of total PCB congeners that are ranked on a scale that 

considers both intrinsic toxicity and prevalence in environmental samples (McFarland and Clarke, 1989). In terms of 

toxicity, they include PCB congeners that are directly toxic, 

including some of the co-planar congeners, and congeners 

that are indirectly toxic, including those that induce bioactivating enzyme systems. For the purposes of this report, we 

include PCB congener Groups 1A, IB, or 2 as defined in 

MacFarland and Clarke (1989) as toxic congeners. Among 

the most toxic, Group 1A congeners, so-called pure 3-methylcholanthrene-type inducers, were congeners 77, 126, and 

169, non-ortho-substituted coplanar congeners. These congeners are similar in structure to 2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzop-dioxin (TCDD or simply "Dioxin"), a standard of toxicity 

against which all organic compounds are measured. Group 

IB congeners are mixed-type inducers that have been 

observed frequently in environmental samples. These 

include 105,118,128,138,156, and 170. Group 2 congeners 

are phenobarbital-type inducers prevalent in the environment and include 87, 99, 101, 153, 180, 183, and 194.

Data collection of the toxic PCBs took place at a subset 

of the sampling events where sampling for a larger suite of 

PCBs was done. Sampling for toxic PCBs in water occurred 

throughout the planning area but was concentrated in the 

east-central part (fig. 75). Sites where samples were analyzed for toxic PCBs in sediment were clustered near the 

confluence of the Milwaukee, Menomonee, and Kinnickinnic Rivers, just downstream from the confluence of Lincoln 

Creek with the Milwaukee River, and in a few spots on the 

Milwaukee River toward the northern extent of the planning 

area (fig. 75). There were no samples for toxic PCBs in tissues.

Sampling for toxic PCBs in water began as early as 

1990 and continued through 2001 (table 42). At least half of 

the concentrations for PCBs in water in most subwatersheds 

were below a reporting limit (table 42). Sampling for toxic 

PCBs in sediment also began in 1990 and generally ended in 

the mid-1990s (table 42). Results for almost all samples were 

above reporting limits (table 42).
Polychlorinated Biphenyls 173

88°07'30" 87°521 30"

4315' -

EXPLANATION

Lakes

Subwatershed, sampled 

for polychlorinated 

biphenyls in medium

Water 

|___| Sediment

Tissue 

MMSD planning area

Area 

displayed 

in detail

above

f\J Watershed boundary 

/~\J Subwatershed boundary 

Streams

Sampling site, sampled 

for polychlorinated 

biphenyls in medium 

Water 

© 1-10 samples

11 -35 samples 

Sediment

• 1 -10 samples

11-35 samples

Tissue

• 1 -10 samples

Base composited from Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission regional base 

map, 1:2,000,1995; U.S. Geological Survey digital line graph hydrography, 1:100,000,2001; Wisconsin 

Department of Natural Resources version 2 hydrography, 1:24,000,2002. Wisconsin Transverse 

Mercator Projection, referenced to North American Datum of 1983,1991 adjustment.

Figure 74. Sites sampled for all polychlorinated biphenyls in water, sediment, and tissue in the Milwaukee 

Metropolitan Sewerage District (MMSD) planning area, Wis.
174 Water-Resources-Related Information for the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin

O

03

E

3 

00

CN

11

O

ID ID

11

aiep a|diues isaien

aiep a|diues isai|jeg

jiuji 6u|}jodaj e MO|aq

sunsaj dNQM lo tunoo 2

S9Sn 10 junoo

siinsaj QSIAIIAI lo lunoo

sajduies ^o lunoo

sans

c

0

£N°2

?!

o

>0

0\

rCJ

>o

0

00o\

Tl;

"

^1-

<N

°°,

(N

r^

^

0

00(~>i

Kinnickinnic River

(M

OJ>

5

Kinnickinnic

00o\' —

r10

c

•0

0\

rCN

v>

C

o\

0\

o

<*

^

Wilson ParkCreek

>0r~o\

o1; 

o

3-

o

o-

^3

vO

C

<N

(N

o

Creek Honey 

>

5

Menomonee

c

a\ a\

0\

§

o

>/->

o\

-

\D

C

VD 

0]

rfN

^

— '

o

^

^

S3

Little Riv Menomonee 

o

0

C3

00

rc

I/I

O-i

avO

0

O-i

vO

""

<N

^0

<N

f>

(N

•* 

"I

rc

(N

OJ

>

Lower Menomonee Ri

0

o

(N

OO

ro

o.

^

vO

C

o\

OS

vO

(N

O\

0

MO-i

c*

^

S3

Ri' Upper Menomonee 

0

Ov O-i

3-i 

(N

VD

O

O\

-

\D

0

O

(N

0

—

o

ts

<N

Underwood Creek

r-~

Ov

^

C

s

>0

0-

0

(N

0

I/I

o

o

CO

<OJ 

0

Combined Sewererv

IM

.>

Milwaukee F

o 

o

CJ

oo

r-~

0

o\

0\ 

fN

>o

o

o>0o^

CX!

>0

0^

o

0^

m

oo

o

Lincoln Creek

o 

o

(N

OO

r--

o

Ov

00 

(N

>o

o

r00°V

00

(N

0^vc"

m

00

n

0

vC

>X^

vCo\ "1

oo

0\

of

o

o\

m

5

S3

Lower Milwaukee Riv

ON 

ON

^

<N

-

Ov

r-~

(N

>o

o

*~]

o

—

c

o

n

J«!

North Branch OakCre

Oak Creek

n

o\

ON

^r0

o\

r~

(N

10

o

n

n

c

0

-

n

CN

j<

OJ 

(M

6

o

>0t-~

a\

^\D

VD

O

O\

r-

(N

>0

0

<N

(N

C

0

o

(N

IM

>

5 

1

Oij^

c

ca 

W

River Root 

o

0

CJ—

r~

0

o\

o 

CJ

0^

0

•*

oo

•sr

oo

o

0

0

00

\D

River Lower Root

0

c

tN

— ' r0

n r~

n

c

o

>0

oo

VD

00

c

CO

00

n

Middle Rootiver

0 

0

CJ~-

r--

c

o\ a\ a\

0

CJo\

c

VD

n

vC

n

n

0

0

c

m 

n

•*

(N

^.

Upper River Root 
Table 41. Summary statistics for all polychlorinated biphenyls in sediment and tissue, by category, for the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, 

1970-2002

[USGS, U.S. Geological Survey; STORET, STOrage and RETrieval System; WDNR, Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources; --, no data available]

Sediment

Watershed

Kinnickinnic River

Lake Michigan Direct

Menomonee River

Milwaukee River

Oak Creek

Root River

Subwatershed

Kinnickinnic River

Lake Michigan Direct

Lilly Creek

Little Menomonee Creek

Little Menomonee River

Lower Menomonee River

Upper Menomonee River

Combined Sewer Service

Area

Lincoln CreekLower Milwaukee River

Lower Oak Creek

Middle Root River

P

r subwatershe

£(0

& 

CO

39-3

1

1

29

6__6

79-— t ofsamples 3340--311 306.. 12 162-— (0f USGS result o|o oi--31126..28--- aSTORET resu "oci13--00020..0 284-— wF WDNRresull 0c3 Ou1,691--000 1750„10 2,676-— of allresults c3Ou1,705--311 1796„12 2,968-~ _ »er ofvalues reporting lim 1 « il%77--210 1044..6 204-— t sample date CO .2CO UJ 07/29/1980 -- 11/01/1989 11/07/1989 11/01/1989 07/29/1980 10/31/1989 .. 11/01/1989 07/29/1980 -~ •o 1 | "5. § E •§ CO 3 w gj Q) Q. 03 10 CO 06/08/1994 -- 11/01/1989 11/07/1989 11/01/1989 08/20/1993 11/08/1989 „ 10/09/1995 08/12/1997 -— 1111112911 t ofsamples 3Ooii211141011 CO f USGS result oco u0000001200 £STORET resu •5|o uii75210111 (0F WDNRresull 0|o u00000031200

Tissue

of allresults

co 

o

1

1

75

2

1

4

15

1

1

»er ofvalues

j_i E

3 

Z

*->

reporting limi

CO

i

i

i--7

52

1

0

111

t sample date

(0 .0)

B

10/08/1986

10/08/1986 -- 03/24/1987

06/29/1988

04/11/198805/11/1988

09/06/199506/20/198505/19/198806/03/1986

•o

0)Q.CO COw

3

10/08/1986

10/08/1986 -- 11/01/1991

06/29/1988

04/11/198805/11/1988

10/09/1995

08/19/1997

05/19/198806/03/1986

TJ

Oo"

5"

%of

Q.

ro

CD

3

5T
176 Water-Resources-Related Information for the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin

88°07'30" 87°52'30"

_--———\

87°54'

43°15'

EXPLANATION

Lakes

Subwatershed, sampled 

for toxic polychlorinated 

biphenyls in medium 

'.'.'.'.\ Water 

[ | Sediment 

MMSD planning area 

~/~\J Watershed boundary 

/~\J Subwatershed boundary 

Streams

Sampling site, sampled 

for toxic polychlorinated 

biphenyls in medium 

Water 

O 1-10 samples

\j 11 -35 samples

Sediment

© 1 -10 samples

Area 

displayed 

in detail

above

Base composited from Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission regional base 

map, 1:2,000,1995; U.S. Geological Survey digital line graph hydrography, 1:100,000,2001; Wisconsin 

Department of Natural Resources version 2 hydrography, 1:24,000,2002. Wisconsin Transverse 

Mercator Projection, referenced to North American Datum of 1983,1991 adjustment.

0

0

I

2

2

|

I 

4

4 MILES

I

KILOMETERS

Figure 75. Sites sampled for toxic polychlorinated biphenyls in water and sediment in the Milwaukee Metropolitan 

Sewerage District (MMSD) planning area, Wis.
Table 42. Summary statistics for toxic polychlorinated biphenyls in water and sediment, by category, for the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewera

1970-2002

[MMSD, Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District; USGS, U.S. Geological Survey; STORET, STOrage and RETrieval System; WDNR, Wisconsin Department of N

—, no data available]

Water

Watershed

Kinnickinnic River

Menomonee River

M'l k R'

Subwatershed

Kinnickinnic River

Lower Menomonee River

Upper Menomonee River

Lower Milwaukee River

Upper Root River

•o

0)

<D

.Q

W

1_

w

0)

CO

23

9

3

5

25

1

1

4

0)

a

E

o

3

O 

O

127

114

66

75

358

6

6

24

(0

"5

(0

£

0 

CO

s

s

•5

| 

o

o

214

220

132

150

426

12

12

48

OT

2 i

3 OT

<o a> <u *- *- hCO LU 

O DC 

CO O

^. CO

3 C 

O 3

0 8

0 0

0 0

0 0

0 0

1,540 680

0 0

0 0

0 0

(0

(0

£

DC 

0

£•5

c 

o

0

431

12

0

0

211

0

0

0

<o

(0

£

75

•5

c

o

0

645

232

132

150

2,857

12

12

48

•|

o> —

3 0)

||

a> *

1; 3 > 

Z !

214

220

132

150

1,035

12

12

48

£

a

(0

to

0)

<5

LU

09/25/1990

10/02/1990

06/19/1995

06/23/1997

09/25/1990

09/20/1999

09/20/1999

09/20/1999

-0 Q

^ | (0 W

co 2 <u <u 

"o a} H "-

fl) To P

t 1 s g

$ « o to

to flJ C *-

a! a 3 o

« 8 0 = 

~ 3

co o

07/18/2001

07/18/2001

07/18/2001

07/18/2001

07/18/2001

07/11/2001

07/11/2001

07/11/2001

19 20 0

440

24 41 11

£"3

(0

£

DC 

Q

5

•5

C

o

o

723

18

672

Se

<0

"5

(0

£

75

•5

c

o

0

7

6

Ecological Indicators of Water Quality 179

Ecological Indicators of Water Quality

Aquatic organisms of a stream corridor are affected by 

the water and sediment chemistry as well as the flow regime 

of the river. The makeup of the aquatic community can provide indicators as to the chemical quality of streamwater.
180 Water-Resources-Related Information for the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin

Macroinvertebrates

Macroinvertebrates can be used to assess stream-water 

quality through a numerical index that allows quantification 

and evaluation of water quality (Shepard, 2003). Macroinvertebrates are common in most streams, relatively easy to 

collect and identify, and fairly stationary; many have life 

cycles of up to a year or greater and therefore are well suited 

for use in assessing stream-water quality (Shepard, 2003; 

Hilsenhoff 1977). Macroinvertebrates can indicate environmental change because they are subject to instream extremes 

during their life cycles (Shepard, 2003).

Two basic metrics that are based on the invertebrate 

population and can describe water-quality conditions of a 

stream are the percentage of invertebrates in the insect orders 

Ephemeroptera-Plecoptera-Trichoptera (EPT) and the 

Hilsenhoff Biotic Index (HBI). EPT taxa are generally considered to be relatively intolerant of water-quality degradation (Lenat, 1988; Hilsenhoff, 1988 and 1998), so the proportion of EPT individuals and taxa tend to decrease with 

decreasing water quality. The HBI is a rapid screening 

method designed to assess oxygen depletion in streams 

resulting from organic-matter pollution; however, the index 

may also be sensitive to other types of pollution, such as 

from some chemicals. The HBI represents the number of 

arthropod invertebrates in certain species multiplied by their 

pollution-tolerance value, divided by the number of arthropods in the sample. The HBI scale ranges from 0.00 (Excellent) to 10.00 (Very Poor).

Invertebrate data were collected from 1979 through 

1999 for 27 of the 37 subwatersheds in the MMSD planning 

area. Data for macroinvertebrates in the MMSD Corridor 

study database came from a database maintained for the 

WDNR by Stan Szczytko at the University of Wisconsin - 

Stevens Point. The majority of the data was collected by the 

WDNR, but other agencies, universities, and groups also 

contributed samples. Scores for the HBI and percent EPT, 

community-level data, and counts of species were available 

for most samples.

Sites with percent EPT falling in the lower quartile 

(indicating poorer water quality than sites with higher percent EPT) were scattered throughout the planning area but 

dominated certain subwatersheds, such as Lincoln Creek and 

the Little Menomonee River (fig. 76). Sites with percent 

EPT in the upper quartile (indicating better water quality) 

were also scattered throughout the planning area but were 

absent in some of the subwatersheds such as Lincoln Creek, 

Muskego Lake, and Kinnickinnic River (fig. 76).

Subwatersheds with percent EPT in the lower quartile 

were the Little Menomonee River, Nor-X-Way Channel, 

Lincoln Creek, Kinnickinnic River, Wilson Park Creek, 

Deer Creek, East Branch Root River, and North Branch Oak

Creek (fig. 76). These low percentages may be due to inadequate habitat for these taxa in low-gradient streams with predominantly clayey surficial deposits; however, they also 

may indicate degraded water quality. Subwatersheds with 

percent EPT in the upper quartile were the Middle Root 

River and Lower Root River (fig. 76). Maximum percent 

EPT values were calculated for the Lower Root River 

(92 percent), Lower Milwaukee River (82 percent), Lower 

Oak Creek (74 percent), and Middle Oak Creek (71 percent) 

subwatersheds (fig. 77, table 43). The highest median concentrations for subwatersheds were calculated for Lower 

Root River (51 percent), Middle Root River (50 percent), 

Middle Oak Creek (40 percent), and Cedar Creek (40 percent) (fig. 77, table 43). Half of the subwatersheds had 

median percent EPT below 10 percent (fig. 77, table 43).

Sites with HBI scores indicating "poor" or "very poor" 

water quality were scattered throughout the planning area 

(fig. 78). Only one site, in the Whitnall Park Creeks subwatershed had an HBI score indicating "very good" water quality (fig. 78). Sites in seven subwatersheds had a "good" HBI 

water-quality rating (fig. 78).

The Little Menomonee River, East Branch Root River, 

North Branch Oak Creek, and Upper Oak Creek subwatersheds had HBI scores indicating "very poor" water quality 

(fig. 78). The Deer Creek, Upper Root River, Lower Root 

River, Middle Oak Creek, and Lower Oak Creek subwatersheds had HBI scores indicating "poor" water quality 

(fig. 78). The Little Menomonee Creek and Willow Creek 

subwatersheds were the only ones to have a "good" HBI 

water-quality rating (fig. 78). Nearly all subwatersheds had 

at least one HBI score that indicated "poor" or "very poor" 

water quality (fig. 79). Subwatersheds with median HBI 

scores indicating "poor" or "very poor" water quality were 

the Little Menomonee River, Deer Creek, North Branch Oak 

Creek, Upper Oak Creek, Middle Oak Creek, Lower Oak 

Creek, Upper Root River, Lower Root River, and East 

Branch Root River. Only the Whitnall Park Creeks subwatershed had an HBI score indicating "very good" water quality 

(fig. 79, table 44). The Little Menomonee River, Little 

Menomonee Creek, Lower Menomonee River, Upper Menomonee River, West Branch Menomonee River, Willow 

Creek, Cedar Creek, Lower Milwaukee River, Whitnall Park 

Creeks, and Mitchell Field Drainage Ditch subwatersheds 

had at least one sample for which an HBI score indicating a 

"good" water-quality rating was calculated (fig. 79, 

table 44). Only the Little Menomonee Creek and Willow 

Creek subwatersheds had a median HBI score indicating a 

"good" water-quality rating (fig. 79, table 44).
Ecological Indicators of Water Quality 181

88 07'30" 87°52'30"

43°15'

EXPLANATION

Lakes

Subwatershed, median 

Ephemeroptera, 

Plecoptera,

Trichoptera index values 

in percentage 

0-1

I I 2-17

f I 18-43

[ J 44-92

MMSD planning area 

/^\J Watershed boundary 

/~\J Subwatershed boundary

Streams

Sampling site, median

Ephemeroptera,

Plecoptera,

Trichoptera index values

in percentage

• 0-1

2-17 

O 18-43

• 44-92

Base composited from Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission regional base 

map, 1:2,000,1995; U.S. Geological Survey digital line graph hydrography, 1:100,000,2001; Wisconsin 

Department of Natural Resources version 2 hydrography, 1:24,000,2002. Wisconsin Transverse 

Mercator Projection, referenced to North American Datum of 1983,1991 adjustment.

Lake

Michigan

0

0

1

2

2

|

1 4

4 MILES

1

KILOMETERS

Figure 76. Sites sampled for macroinvertebrates with percent Ephemeroptera, Plecoptera, and Trichoptera in 

the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District (MMSD) planning area, Wis.
100

80

l_ 60Q_LLJIZ LLJ

O

DC

LLJ

Q_ 40

20

n

Fox Kinnickinnic Menomonee Milwaukee Oak Root 

River River River River Creek River - 6 - l __ j

1

9

2

n i ,

t i i : i ' i * i

31 r"1

5

r i ' '

43— 1

1 H ~~

H

'• , f\ 1

9~~i

--i —5 5l — |

l i 1 i

r hH H i

1 1

110 n-1

7

1

— ! __ r

17 • si

i ' : <

10 i — 2

£i_

J

r

I

7 ', ~\

\

'' ':\

' 10

r

f, i_

-\

g

J [1

. i. . y

' :

r

5

6-~\

i _ 6L-- 1

,

1 -- 12 7

r

7

'

}

• - ' - -- J? J^jrj

^

&' <rJ*

ySUBWATERSHED

EXPLANATION

106 Number of samples

__ Data value 1.5 to 3.0 times the IQR

outside the box

Largest data value within 1.5 times

the IQR above the box

75th percentile —i

,, j. ,r« L. -i \ Interquartile Median (50th percentile) range!(|QR)

25th percentile _lSmallest data value within 1.5 times 

the IQR below the box

30 

CD V) On CDC/9

33 

CD_o>p»CD

COCD

09 

CO 

CDo

Figure 77. Statistical distribution of percent Ephemeroptera, Plecoptera, and Trichoptera (EPT) in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, 1970-2002.
Table 43. Summary statistics for percent Ephemeroptera, Plecoptera, Trichoptera, by category, for the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, 

1970-2002

[Values are expressed as a percentage; values rounded to the nearest whole number]

Watershed

Fox River

Kinnickinnic RiverMenomonee RiverMilwaukee River

Oak Creek

Root River

Subwatershed

Deer Creek 

Muskego Lake

Kinnickinnic River

Wilson Park CreekHoney Creek

Lilly CreekLittle Menomonee Creek

Little Menomonee RiverLower Menomonee River

Upper Menomonee River

Nor-X-Way Channel

Underwood CreekWest Branch Menomonee River

Willow CreekCedar CreekLincoln CreekLower Milwaukee River

Mitchell Field Drainage Ditch

North Branch Oak Creek

Lower Oak CreekMiddle Oak Creek

Upper Oak Creek

East Branch Root RiverLower Root RiverMiddle Root River

Upper Root RiverWhitnall Park Creeks

ountf samples

o

i

69

2

5

11

43

17

31

11

9

5

7

17

110

27

1010

35

6

6

12

7

Sites per subwatershed

i

63

2

5

11

11

11

15

1

1

5

355

46

2

7

10

93566

12

7

rliest sample date

3

05/01/1990 

10/06/1992

09/29/1987

10/09/1997

05/18/1979

05/01/1997

05/01/1997

05/18/197905/18/197905/18/197905/29/199705/16/1997

05/12/197905/13/1997

04/21/1986

05/11/1992

05/13/1980

11/25/1985

05/17/197905/17/1979

05/17/197905/17/1979

05/21/197905/31/1979

05/31/197905/31/1979

05/31/1979

itest sample date

2

05/01/1990 

10/06/1992

10/08/1997

10/09/199710/08/1997

05/01/1997

05/01/199705/01/199705/16/1997

10/08/1997

05/29/199705/16/1997

09/29/199909/29/1999

09/24/1998

10/08/199712/01/1999

10/08/1996

10/09/199710/08/1996

10/09/199710/08/199610/16/199610/22/199610/16/199610/08/1997

10/11/1996

Minimum

i

6

0005

700

0

1

24

5

70

000

0

5

1

0

6

10

0

0

10th percentile

l 

11

000

5

7000

1

2

56700

50

4

7

1

0

2121

0

7

25th percentile

i

18

00

1

5

7

00

2

1

26

8

20

04

13

1

6

23

20

3836

0

13

Median

i

26

00

17

5

7

0

8

28

1

2

28

12

40

0

19

26

1

24

40

2

1

51

50

3

18

8

1

24

5

0

21

5

73

2024

1

2

27

13

37

1

28

26

9

29

37

3

4

5242

12

23

c 

1

i

i

33

20

31

5

7

2

48

43

1

2

45

13

55

1

5238

12

46

50

4

5

74

54

2336

90th percentile

i

35

16

0

47

5

7

10

52

49

1

2

4721

63

1

64

46

27

60

67

6

10

86

55

28

45

Maximum

1

3530

0

58

5

7

47

5769

1

2

5226

65

3

8251

36

7471

7

14

92

55

47

47

m

oo_o 

eno'

0)

SI e?O

O9
184 Water-Resources-Related Information for the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin

88°07'30" 87°52'30"

43°15'

43°

EXPLANATION

II Lakes

Subwatershed, median 

Hilsenhoff Biotic Index 

scores

[ | 0.00 - 3.50 (excellent)

| | 3.51 - 4.25 

(very good)

f" '" | 4.26 - 5.00(good) 

| | 5.01 - 5.75 (fair)

| | 5.76-6.50 

(fairly poor)

^^| 6.51 - 7.25 (poor)

| | 7.26-10.00 

(very poor)

MMSD planning area 

~/*\J Watershed boundary 

/~\J Subwatershed boundary

Streams

Sampling site, median

Hilsenhoff Biotic Index

scores

• 0.00 - 3.50 (excellent)

• 3.51-4.25 (very good) 

4.26 - 5.00 (good) 

5.01 - 5.75 (fair) 

5.7B-6.50 (fairly poor) 

6.51 - 7.25 (poor) 

7.26-10.00 (very poor)

Lake

Michigan

Base composited from Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission regional base 

map, 1:2,000,1995; U.S. Geological Survey digital line graph hydrography, 1:100,000,2001; Wisconsin 

Department of Natural Resources version 2 hydrography, 1:24,000,2002. Wisconsin Transverse 

Mercator Proiection, referenced to North American Datum of 1983,1991 adjustment.

0

0

2 4 MILES

1 1

1 1 2 4 KILOMETERS

Figure 78. Sites sampled for macroinvertebrates with Hilsenhoff Biotic Index scores in the Milwaukee 

Metropolitan Sewerage District (MMSD) planning area, Wis.
Fox Kinnickinnic

River River 10 i ———————————————————————— 9

87

LJJ 6

CC 

O0C/D 5mI

4

32

1

n

l i

1

i — i - 6\k

J

H(fefl _i_i ---- i i

i i

7

2

R3

H

B—I I

I I

40

1

4

n

A 1

1

i — i

L_

Menomonee Milwaukee

River River

I l i

31

1

I—FT

7

-|., f;

& I

"•!; 

*

1

9

1

! ' ' 1 1,

1 *~* I

1 I1

r

" 1

i _1 5 ? — ~/ FH] i I y _i

i i i i i i

1

7

1

i

f; '.

u

T

UPr

r

i

l_

~ i

!

•p

j

1 1

2

.

• '

H

l w

J

}:•:•:

, ;:')

LJ

Oak

Creek

l

7

f

'•f

:;<;

;'(

:(

f ;

10

10

1_

— *— '

1

j!

_ _i

05T - Root River I 3•i"» :: | iJ 61L

,

1 |

1 1 1

12

5 6 

3 r

:i

_ 6 h

-_»< jE~3 ^

I 1|

II

!

i

F 7 - —— 1

i\\',i

U J --- 1 1 1

0

s.>

$Q. —i£LL•g

O

?^0)

1

EX

c <o <o < << c^ *

EXPLANATION

Number of samples

Data value 1.5 to 3.0 times the IQR

outside the box

Largest data value within 1.5 times

the IQR above the box

75th percentile

Median (50th perce 

25th percentile

Smallest data value within 1.5 times 

the IQR below the box

— ,

ntile, ^ 

J

SUBWATERSHED

m 

n

o

CO

09CDFigure 79. Statistical distribution of Hilsenhoff Biotic Index (HBI) scores in the Milwaukee Metropolitan District planning area, 1970-2002.
186 Water-Resources-Related Information for the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin

o

CN1

ci

o

0)

CD

^O

cz

CD 

CO

iE 

M— o

GO

o 'to

8 >

§1

3 a

3 g.

•— C 03

8 vip 

g vA

•£ O

"O cri

0. I

O 2

M3|!)U33J3d IJ106 

3|!)U33J3d 

UB3|/\|

3|!)U33J3d 

3||)U33J3d LJ10I.

uinui!U!i/\| 

3)ep 3|diues isaien

aiep 3|duies issjijeg

sans 

sa|diues jo IUPOQ

•o

0) 

U)

oj

re

r>

3

CO

— o o -i

NO OO NO OO ON OO ON

^ ^ ^ OO ^O NO

oo CN CN NO

OO ^O IO

ON ON -H

IO IO Tf NO

CN CN 00 «

ON ON ON ON ON ON ON ON 

ON ON ON ON ON ON ON ON

ON ON ON ON ON ON ON ON ON ON ON ON ON ON ON ON ON

ON ON ON ON ON ON ON ON ON ON ON ON ON ON ON ON

00 ON 00 r-f « OO ON **O ON

CN CN fN

IO ON ON

ON ON OO ON ON 00 ON 00

ON ON ON ON ON ON ON ON

ON ON ON ON ON ON ON ON ON ON ON ON ON ON ON ON ON ON ON ON ON ON ON ON

ON NO (N m

CN f> m m

—— 10 ^ ^H

.^ '^J '-J

O C*

E S

P< -

g 6

w -,-.

bO ^ Cey s s *

0) ^ C —

D S 2 ^ ffi

r^ S 5- 1= >, ^ ^i

(L» Kiy

s ^

53 X

o rt

CJ ^-"

o^5

<-) C ^ ^7

^ D £ £

1 1

Si ?!

5 ^

rt PS

« ^ I

I B 1 -S

8 ^

* =3

S. -€

„ a, ig

S D &:

188 Water-Resources-Related Information for the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin

Fish

Fish data are often used to assess and monitor environmental quality in an approach generally termed "bioassessment" or "biomonitoring" (Plafkin and others, 1989). These 

bioassessment and biomonitoring techniques have been 

shown to be a useful way to detect and quantify environmental degradation in aquatic systems (Lyons, 1992b). Of all 

types of biota, fish, along with macroinvertebrates, have 

been shown to be particularly effective for use in bioassessments. Wisconsin began development of an Index of Biotic 

Integrity (IBI) for fish in warmwater streams of the State in 

the mid-1980s and published the resulting "how to" guide in 

1992 (Lyons, 1992b). The IBI was originally developed during the late 1970s and early 1980s to assess biotic integrity 

and environmental quality in small streams in Indiana and 

Illinois (Karr, 1981; Karr and others, 1986). This original IBI 

was modified to fit the physical and biological characteristics of streams throughout North America (Lyons, 1992b). 

Biotic integrity has been defined as "a balanced, integrated, 

adaptive community of organisms having a species composition, diversity, and natural habitat of the region" (Karr and 

Dudley, 1981).

Fish data in the MMSD Corridor Study database came 

from the WDNR Biology database (as maintained by the 

WDNR Bureau of Fisheries Management and Habitat Protection) and a series offish surveys completed by the WDNR 

in and around the Milwaukee River. Counts of species, and 

in some cases length, weight, and sex, were available for fish 

samples. Locations of WDNR Biology database and WDNR

Milwaukee fish survey sampling sites are shown in 

figure 80.

Fish collection has taken place in all but the smallest 

headwater streams in the MMSD planning area at one time 

or another (fig. 80). The Milwaukee River watershed has had 

the most samples collected since 1990 (table 45). Of the 

three decades for which data exist, the 1970s had the most 

extensive fish sampling, with fewer sites sampled in each 

succeeding decade (2000-2002 samples have been grouped 

with samples collected through the 1990s). Twenty-six subwatersheds were sampled in the 1970s, 21 sub watersheds in 

the 1980s, and 12 subwatersheds in the 1990s through 2001 

(table 45). On the basis of data in the MMSD Corridor Study 

database, a total of 73 species of fish have been found in 

water bodies in the MMSD planning area. In addition, various hybrid sunfishes, minnows, and bullheads have been 

documented.

IBI scores indicating "poor" or "very poor" water quality were assigned to sites in all subwatersheds with data collected during 1990-2002 (fig. 81). At several sites in the 

Lower Milwaukee River subwatershed, IBI scores indicated 

"good" or "excellent" water quality (fig 81). There was little 

IBI data for the southern part of the planning area (fig. 81).

The Lincoln Creek subwatershed (10, "very poor") had 

the lowest median IBI score for data collected since 1990 

(table 45). The Lower Milwaukee River subwatershed had 

the highest median IBI score of 62, indicating "good" conditions (table 45).
Ecological Indicators of Water Quality 189

88°07'30" 87°52'30"

43°15'

43°

EXPLANATION

Lakes

Subwatershed, sampled 

for fish during years 

1970 - 2002

MMSD planning area 

/~\J Watershed boundary

Subwatershed boundary

Streams

Sampling site, sampled

for fish during years

O 1970-1979

• 1980-1989

• 1990-2002

Lake

Michigan

Base composited from Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission regional base 

map, 1:2,000,1995; U.S Geological Survey digital line graph hydrography, 1:100,000,2001; Wisconsin 

Department of Natural Resources version 2 hydrography, 1:24,000,2002. Wisconsin Transverse 

Mercator Projection, referenced to North American Datum of 1983,1991 adjustment.

0h0

2 4 MILES

1 1

1 1 2 4 KILOMETERS

Figure 80. Sites sampled for fish in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District (MMSD) planning area, Wis.
190 Water-Resources-Related Information for the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin

1"3

0

X<D

CNJ O

8 2

7 -A C-3 SO

>*- ^

2? o

o

CO M

03 ^'

TM yo CO | » £

'E -t=

c --2

CO

-5. 2 

•I-* 1 

.° °

•1— i ; •

.w o

° a

CD <N

TO 1

»- O

CD (N

OS O

to 2fcJ-i

m CC £> h< _-i— i <D

O

5. os

o t

•t o

CD

^ .s

<D rt

CD >-

^ -0

=3 C

CO rt

> «! = 8

V= o

^ a

CD HH

-c PQ •i— i i—i

0 £>

s~~ "C

O W>

^ B

o c

CD

CD .0

to o

0 m

istics fish, byfor Index of1armwater 

S *

>- B

ro iT

E 1

E ^

3 rt

to ^

10 2

# •§

^> o

S c

CO i' 1— ^

i i i o ' ' ' ' ' O ON sejoos IQI ueipeiAi • • • <N • • • • • <N -

or- m r'l

ON ON ON ON

OS , ON , , , , Os ON

ajep aidiues jsajen | ' | ' 11

OO OO ^O ^D

O O O O

or- — ~

ON ON ON ON

^^ ON i i ON , , , | , ON ON

g ajep aidiues jsanjeg | 1 11

O> So F^ vo vB O> o o o o

uoxei jowjsip jo junoo *° : i 2 : ' : ' ! 2 2

sa|diues jo junoo ~ • '• * \ • •• • : *° ^

saj|S jo junoo - i : <^ : : : : : -N -

_- „ __ __ tt ^f -*f V)

oooooooo oooooooo

J JOSOSOSOS lOsOsOsOs

1 — ' CN| r^ r^ fN O fN ' — '

oooooooo 

oooo 

loor-os o^^oo

—— —— • r— rf M-'S-—— '-*

OOOOOOOO OOOOOOOO

^_ J JOSOSOSOS jOsOsOsOS

"p ajBp ajduies jsaiue^ oooo^Ss ^^S^o

o OO " "dc^rd

oooooooo loOooiri 0.^"

35 ooooo — oo

^~

uoxej JOUJJSJP jo junoo ! s^^ovc ,^^.^0

sajduies jo junoo '• :--<N<N i - - ^ o

sajfs jo junoo ' ----- | — — <N so

OO Os 10 10 rn

r- r~- r- r- r—

ajep ajduies jsajen ^ S S ' S^ § i — i o O O • — '

r- o os os os

o — o c o

*N r- 10 10 rn

r- r- r- r- i~-

^—^ i OS i OS OS i Os i i Os i

^ ajep aiduies jsa;|jeg S S S ^ ^

^ O — OS 3^ 00 In - - o o o

uoxej jouijsip jo junoo : p; : 2 - '• ^ ' • *° !

saiduies jo junoo ' ^ ! ^ - • ~ '• • TM '

sajis jo junoo '< 2 ! ^ ~~ '• ~~ ! • TM '

•o

0)

W iS t3

1 ^ 1 1 ^ 5 ^ g * o g •§ ^3 lag.a^S * i^ IS 3 ^ J ^SS'-S^a Q «-S

1 1 1 I 1 1 s ? I 1 s (L* S2 — r- — y ,C "^ 3 C — , 

(L*^ °--:= ">C''rt °^ 3 O O TM

aSrc^^jEfflaacj

fc>

-0 o |

« fe K £ ^

•g > 5 H §i TM oi, c c 2

£J .s S M «

i b § '-S 1 i

> s s ii I

* '5 u u g

o Os ~-^ TO-^ TO»_-S

u- W j _j 2

1

:

1

:

:

i

!

!

:

:

m

Os

F;

o

OO

c

m

OS

?~

C

oc

o

r-

(N

<N

^

Little Menomonee Cre

!

:

:

'

:

-cr

OO

OS

<N

?~

O

TT

oo

OS

*s

o

<N

TT

-cr

m

Os

FS

o

So

o

m

os

Fi

O

So

o

OO

(N

<N

,_|

Little Riv Menomonee 

"

o

o

o

JN

OO 

<N

r^>

O

_

Os

Os

§

vS

O

vo 

<N

VO

•*

OO

OO

OS

vB 

fN

So

o

, —OO

OS

So—

OO

o

OO

vo

vo

m

Os

O

o^

o

f~l

OS

t-5

O

3O

O

m

rrt

Lower Ri Menomonee 

,

!

!

:

-cr

OO

OS

t-5

<N

t-5

O

-cr

OOON

?~

^

O

vo 

(N

rr—

f~i

Os

F^

o

OO

o

r^>

Os

F~

o

So

o

Os

OO

00

t-, V

^

Ri' Upper Menomonee 

,

1

:

:

MOO

Os

1o

, — , OO

Os

FI

^J

OO

o

<N

en

fN

f~l

Os

O

OS

O

m

Os

o

Os

O

OO

-

—

^

K

U

T3

O

o

South BranchUnderwi

10

-cr

Os

Os

Os 

O

VD

o

^^

Os

Os

3s"

VO

o

-

M-

-

^*

00

ON

|

O

MOO

ON

rn

^

C

fN

•*

f~l

f~l

ON

PS

O

OO

o

m

ON

Pi

C

So

c

TT

-

—

Creek Underwood 

,

!

:

:

i

i

1

:

!

rr>

ON

F^

o

So

o

m

ON

F^

o

o

o

-

—

'£. >

V

c:

Branch WestMenomo

,

!

!

:

-cr

OO

ON

?!

o

-cr

OO

ON

FS

^

O

<N

-

-

f~l

ON

FS

o

OO

o

f>

ON

F;

o

So

o

<N

-1

rf

^

1»aj t-,

_o

,

:

:

:

:

!

|

1

:

:

OO

ON

10

So

o

10

ON

•^

JN

VO

O

s

^

^

Cedarreek

S3>

<2

V

•^

J

1

O <N — SO

•* —

ON C

ON O

— £N

?5 10 

o o

VO ON

O C

<N MON ON

ON ON

m oo 

0 0

vO vo

o o

OO TT 

10

OO 10

m

r- o <-N|

TT vo

OO OO

ON ON

F; 10

£N O

f~ 10

O O

, — . — I OO OO

ON ON

r~ so — ^

OO ON

0 0

rr, ON 

<N TT

10 <N 

<N

M- o

10 ON

ON ON

ON OS

0 0

ON O

o —

10 O

ON ON

ON O

O *— '

o? o

o —

rr, o

—— TT

<N rIN ro3

Lincoln Creek

Milwaukee Riv Lower 
Table 45. Summary statistics for fish, by category, for the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, 1970-2002—Continued

[--, no data available; IBI. Warmwater Index of Biotic Integrity; IBI scores and rating: 0-19, very poor; 20-29 poor; 30-49, fair, 50-64, good; 65-100 excellent]

Watershed Subwatershed

Oak Creek Mitchell Field Drainage Ditch

North Branch Oak Creek

Lower Oak Creek

Middle Oak Creek

Upper Oak Creek

Root River East Branch Root River

Lower Root River

Middle Root River

Upper Root RiverWhitnall Park Creeks

in0) '55

£

c3 

o

o

11

2

1

3

22

9

3

2

(A0) "a.

i

5

c

3

O

O

11

2

1

32

2

10

33

c0X

3 Z

c '•55

'•5

5

c0

o

6677

6

5

19

24

6

19

1970-79

0) i0)

Q. (Q(/)

W 

.0)~

(Q 

LJ

09/08/197509/08/197503/22/197309/08/1975

03/22/197309/08/197509/05/197509/25/1971

07/27/197607/27/1976

c ai ° £ in x

(B -A fl) TO

•o 3 Q. s Q) ±i C 0

Q. » a .E E o « to8 ^ 0 --D

* i 1 ° £* O o ?

5 o §

u

09/08/197509/08/1975

09/08/1975

09/08/1975

09/05/197508/04/197606/06/197905/10/197905/10/197905/10/1979 ---1 2 9 ..-1 2 8 3 5 8 1 2 13 ..1 2 10

1980-89

0)

•o

0)a.i

ts.9J

1 --- 08/18/1981 --- 08/19/1981

08/20/198108/19/1981 - 08/20/1981

£ w

3 8 1

0) ** Ca. w « E -8 »8 E ° i ° 1

f O o

« O

1 1

- 

"

08/31/1981 1 3

..

-- - 08/26/1981

08/31/198108/26/1981 1 1

..

08/27/1981 1 1

1990-02

co a) 3 1 

z &

~ c *- E% %

1 1

O 111

U

3 08/02/2001 -10 06/12/1991

..--..-5 09/04/2001

..

6 07/31/2001

Q) ... m in(Q 0) •o b0) Oa. » 1 iCw ^ (/) C

« |

S Q) 2 s

08/02/2001 - 06/03/1993 17

..-..- 09/04/2001

..

07/31/2001

mo5"o'SLa. o' 

a»g

s,

SiCD

oe a>
192 Water-Resources-Related Information for the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin

88°G7'3G"

43"15'

EXPLANATION

Lakes

Subwatershed, fish with

Index of Biotic Integrity

scores

MMSD planning area 

/~\J Watershed boundary 

/~\J Subwatershed boundary

Streams

Sampling site, fish with

Index of Biotic Integrity

scores

0-19 (very poor) 

20 - 29 (poor) 

30 - 49 (fair) 

50 - 64(good) 

65-100 (excellent)

43°

Lake

Michigan

Base composited from Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission regional base 

map, 1:2,000,1995; U.S. Geological Survey digital line graph hydrography, 1:100,000,2001; Wisconsin 

Department of Natural Resources version 2 hydrography, 1:24,000,2002. Wisconsin Transverse 

Mercator Projection, referenced to North American Datum of 1983,1991 adjustment.

0

0

I

2

2

|

I 

4

4 MILES

I

KILOMETERS

Figure 81. Sites sampled for fish with Index of Biotic Integrity scores for data since 1990 in the Milwaukee 

Metropolitan Sewerage District (MMSD) planning area, Wis.

194 Water-Resources-Related Information for the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin

Chlorophyll a

Chlorophyll a is perhaps the most common algal pigment found in most natural freshwaters. Algae synthesize 

chlorophyll a as a means to harvest energy for sunlight during photosynthesis. Chlorophyll a is generally assumed to be 

a good proxy for algal biomass, although cellular quotas can 

vary with the amount of photosynthetically available radiation at a given time. Chlorophyll a is degraded abiotically or 

microbially either in dead algal cells or in zooplankton guts, 

producing pigment degradates including pheophytin and 

pheophorbide. These compounds are sometimes summed 

with chlorophyll a to get total pigments, a measure that better reflects the total amount of algal biomass as opposed to 

live algae, which only is indicated by chlorophyll a.

Chlorophyll a (along with nitrogen, phosphorus, and 

turbidity) has been selected by the USEPA as a key nutrient 

criterion indicator in streams. Its importance is its biological 

response to the presence of limiting nutrients (mainly phosphorus) in surface waters and as an indicator of potential 

oxygen-consuming material. For the MMSD planning area, 

a concentration of 0.55 mg/m3 is proposed as a maximum 

allowable limit (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 

2000a).

Median concentrations of chlorophyll a at all sites 

exceeded the 0.55 mg/m3 USEPA proposed nutrient criterion (fig. 82). Sites with median concentrations in the upper 

quartile were mainly clustered in the Lower Milwaukee 

River subwatershed (fig. 82). Sites with median concentrations in the lower quartile were found primarily in the Upper

Root River, Upper Oak Creek, Middle Oak Creek, and 

Lower Oak Creek subwatersheds (fig. 82).

The median concentration of chlorophyll a in the Lower 

Milwaukee River subwatershed fell in the upper quartile 

(fig. 82). The Upper Root River, Upper Oak Creek, and Middle Oak Creek had median concentrations in the lower quartile (fig. 82). The majority of samples had concentrations 

above the 0.55 mg/m3 USEPA proposed nutrient criteria 

(fig. 83, table 46). The highest maximum concentrations 

were measured in the Lower Milwaukee River 

(628.41 mg/m3), Kinnickinnic River (358.52 mg/m3), and 

Upper Menomonee River (318.23 mg/m3 ) subwatersheds 

(fig. 83, table 46). The highest median concentration of 

11.70 mg/m3 was measured in the Lower Milwaukee River 

subwatershed (fig. 83, table 46). The lowest median conceno

tration of 1.46 mg/m was measured in the Upper Root River 

subwatershed (fig. 83, table 46).

There was some indication of higher chlorophyll a concentrations during the spring and fall, corresponding to classical algal bloom periods, at the Kinnickinnic River, Menomonee River, and Milwaukee River sites, although the 

pattern was not particularly pronounced (fig. 84). Trends in 

chlorophyll a by sample year indicated an absence of relatively high concentrations at three of the five highlighted 

sites (Kinnickinnic, Menomonee, and Milwaukee Rivers) 

during the period between the late 1980s and early 1990s 

(fig. 85). This might be related to low rainfall and concomitantly low nutrient inputs during this time period.
Ecological Indicators of Water Quality 195

88°G7 1 30" 870 52'30"

43°15'

43"

1 EXPLANATION

Lakes

Subwatershed, median 

chlorophyll a in 

milligrams per cubic 

meter

[|^| 0.92-3.40 

[' - 'I 3.41 -5.17 

^^| 5.18 - 7.53 

H| 7.54 -18.67

MMSD planning area 

_ Watershed boundary 

/~\J Subwatershed boundary 

Streams

Sampling site, median 

chlorophyll a in 

milligrams per cubic 

meter 

0.92-3.40

• 1 -10 samples 

11 -100 samples

101 -1,425 samples

3.41 - 5.17

O 1 -10 samples 

11 -100 samples

Qj 101-1,425 samples

5.18-7.53

I -10 samples

II -100 samples

101 -1,425 samples

7.54 -18.67

• 1-10 samples 

11 -100 samples

101 -1,425 samples

Purple outline indicates 

median chlorophyll a in 

milligrams per cubic 

meter exceeding a 

guideline value 

> 0.55

9 1 -10 samples 

11 -100 samples

fj 101-1,425 samples

Base composited from Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission regional base 

map, 1:2,000,1995; U.S. Geological Survey digital line graph hydrography, 1:100,000,2001; Wisconsin 

Department of Natural Resources version 2 hydrography, 1:24,000,2002. Wisconsin Transverse 

Mercator Projection, referenced to North American Datum of 1983,1991 adjustment.

4 MILES

I

I 

4 KILOMETERS

Figure 82. Sites sampled for chlorophyll a in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District (MMSD) planning 

area, Wis.
196 Water-Resources-Related Information for the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin

,_-<

CD.O 

E ^j

*- 

Q-CC

ill "B §j= Sja § ^ ~ -o_g .•_ gj E

11 i-slis. g s. !§ = >-s5

^ E 2 a S^£ =6 £ ~S^ D)«^

O 3 QO CD 

O >

occc

-£ o> CC CD OA

-is

CC.> 

5CC

enomonee River

c iS CD 

0.> "ECC

H

•cy.

\

\

\

-^

Q

LJJ 

I 

W 

DC 

LJJ

CD

D 

W

S

05

U313IAI OianO d3d SIAIVdOmilAI Nl V TIAHdOdOlHO
Ecological Indicators of Water Quality 197

Kinnickinnic River at 1st Street

140

120

100

80

60

40

20

0

• r? •

DC 

LUILU

O 

CO

=> 

O

DC 

LU 

D_

C/3 

^ 

<

DC

180

160

140

120

100

80

60

40

20

0

Menomonee River at 70th Street Bridge

Lincoln Creek at 47th Street

40

30

20

10

X 

CL 

O 

DC 

O 250

350

300

Milwaukee River at Wells Street

I 

O

200

150

100

50

0

200

180

Oak Creek at Ryan Road

60 A

40

20

0

JAN FEE MAR APR MAY JUNE JULY AUG SEPT OCT NOV DEC

MONTH

Figure 84. Seasonality of chlorophyll a for selected sites in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, 

1970-2002.
198 Water-Resources-Related Information for the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin

DC 

LU

LU

O 

CD

=> 

O

DC 

LU 

CL

DC

I 

CL 

O 

DC

g

I 

O

140

120

100

80

60

40

20

0

180

160

140

120

100

80

60

40

20

0

40

30

20

10

0

350

300

250

200

150

100

50

0

200

180

160

140

120

100

80

60

40

20

0

Kinnickinnic River at 1st Street

*

•

Menomonee River at 70th Street Bridge

% * *

^BWW^M^^^lWl^tb"w -w '9

Lincoln Creek at 47th Street

Milwaukee River at Wells Street

Oak Creek at Ryan Road

1980 1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002

YEAR

Figure 85. Trends of chlorophyll a for selected sites in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, 1970-2002.
Middle Rootiver Rootiver Uppe 

H- 4^ 

to o 

-J -J O O 1 1 0 0 o o 

-J -J i s 5 R § § 

o o o o 

1Q

Lower Rootiver

Htoo!oo-Js5

to8

c

HJP8

H- O0!o

to

t^

OO

t;§

o o

Middle OakCreek

to

£>. O!o

to

t^

OO

c;

t-3

o o

0J*•

Lower OakCreek

4^

00 

000io

UJ

to

c;

OO

tt

to8

Lower 1Milwaukee 

&. SE

OO

00

top^21 — 1 OO

-J

1/27/2001

11«

HP

i'^

Lincoln Creek

w.

u>

U) 0o! 0

K^

00s

1/27/2001

Menomonee Upper 

& 1'

u>

OOo0!o

to

*J

OO

to

1/27/2001

11BS<BS^

Lower Menomonee S

5?o

4^

"ft —o^o

to

t^

-J

1/27/2001

E

gj §o' q

Kinnickinnic River

w. ^6o! S

to

1-1 3

1/27/2001

o *>. 

to

OO (jj 

00 H4^

<-n -J 

00 00 

-^1 H- , _ 1 p. 

-J 0 

-j to 

u> ^o 

&>•> u\ 

i£> tO 

to -j 

*• *• 

OJ Lrt O ^D 

H- 0 

Ch ^0 S £ 

85

to

to

u>o

to

<-ni _ i <~n

OO^

^o

-JI —— | 

01

-JI ___ | 

to

OOo

g

S!

H- 0

OO

toL __ , 

4^. w

^O

t-ft

u>

-J

00

o^

f.

Lrt> — i 

OOo

s

to

H- oU)

to0

to

VO

UJ

^J

*•^o0o

s

VO 

OO

too

00

U) ^

*•

u,

-J

Os

^J

•^

to

[^0! __ , 

5^8

%

to

to0

4^

o^

1-1' 1 

-Jo

to

J^

OO

to

-J

to

to

^o

U-> 0

Ov

to

00

£i

0

Hto

to

L/i

^3

ty. 00^

UJ00

4^

to

U)

OO1 — 1 £>. £

£

H- ^

u>1 — 1 

to

Lrt

O^

-J

OOk — , 

LO

^o

OO

OO

o^

to

u>

00

to

§

^-

o!

to

-J

<-n

^O«^^' — 1 

to1 — 1 

to

to

U->

*•L —— 1 

Jo£

S

H-

-J

to

to

4^

j^

o>

to

OO

j^o

^o

t_/l

U)

^]

o>

*°

U)

OO

to

Iw

Q.

(0 1a

3-

Q.

subwatershed per Sites 

results MMSD of Count 

values of Number 

limit reporting below 

limit Detection 

date sample Earliest 

date sample Latest 

Minimum

percentile 10th 

percentile 25th 

Median

Mean

percentile 75th 

percentile 90th 

Maximum

2 0 - o 

I.SS B ul s rt i-j 

i^ rt m O 

:tropolitan Seweragt a rted belowreporti

» l a O <w 

H^- > —— » 1 1 

o. O r^ 

Q. £ 

ca

S- 0 

(B S ^ &* & S; 2 & n ft 

e. •S 1 s 

cj 5' R (TQ x 3 

'O• E. 

it ^ 

rt < 

Crt C3 

j^ CD- JT) 

a' c/i 3 Qn

jf

r cubic n 

rlow the

S -3 

ff O 

"3" ^' 

^L 1 < ^ 

E, Q S 1 § 0 

s-l

s. g 0 N 

if

ftScI

rta1

g>^

rt

13o

rt01

CD P

OO

c: 33

1 3* —o

3^ O

O 

Q)

r-h 

CD

CQo

OO

CD

CD

CO 

CDO

CO

hOO

o 

ro
200 Water-Resources-Related Information for the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin

Habitat and Geomorphic Data

Habitat and geomorphic data in the MMSD Corridor 

Study database were collected by WDNR and MMSD 

(through a contract with Inter-Fluve, Inc.) (fig. 86, table 47).

Habitat data in the MMSD Corridor Study database 

were collected by the WDNR starting in 1991 and are 

derived from the WDNR Biology database. The types of 

information collected in WDNR habitat surveys include the 

percentage of canopy/shading of the stream channel, type of 

fish cover, stream-bottom cover, percentage macrophyte 

cover, and many other channel characteristics. These data 

can be used to analyze the change in habitat over time, determine aspects of the habitat characteristics that could be limiting aquatic life, and suggest management options designed 

to rehabilitate habitat (Wisconsin Department of Natural 

Resources, 2002).

Sites where habitat assessments were done were lightly 

scattered throughout the MMSD planning area and included 

locations in many subwatersheds except the Fox River and 

Lake Michigan Direct watersheds (fig. 86). Data for habitat 

assessments was available beginning in 1991 and extended 

through the late 1990s or 2001 in most subwatersheds (table 

47). The most assessments were done in the Lincoln Creek 

subwatershed (40) and Underwood Creek subwatershed (20) 

(table 47). Habitat assessments were done in 20 of the subwatersheds with one to nine sites in each subwatershed 

(table 47). Seventeen of the 44 total sites were surveyed 

more than once, some up to eight times. The Lincoln Creek 

subwatershed had a relatively large number of sites (nine)

where habitat assessments were done, with an average of 

four assessments at each site. However, only one or two 

assessments were done in most other subwatersheds. No 

habitat index scores were available for the data in the MMSD 

planning area, and summarizing the extensive amount of 

habitat data was not within the scope of this report.

Additional stream channel morphology and streambed 

measurements were recorded during the MMSD Menomonee River Sediment Transport study. The purpose of the 

MMSD Menomonee River Sediment Transport study was to 

provide a planning tool for the Menomonee River watershed 

that would allow MMSD to plan flood-management and 

channel-stabilization and rehabilitation projects that would 

improve flood conveyance and aquatic habitat (Inter-Fluve, 

Inc, 2001). A subset of the data collected for the study that 

has been compiled in the MMSD Corridor Study database 

includes channel cross-section information, pebble counts, 

and streambed sediment and grain-size analysis.

Sites examined as part of the Menomonee River sediment transport study (Inter-Fluve, Inc., 2001) were exclusively in the subwatersheds of the Menomonee River watershed (fig. 86). Sites were located in 8 of the 14 

subwatersheds of the Menomonee River watershed, with 1 to 

59 sites in each subwatershed. One-time channel measurements made as part of the Menomonee River sediment transport study took place from 2000 through 2001 at many sites 

in subwatersheds of the Menomonee River watershed 

(table 47).
Ecological Indicators of Water Quality 201

88°07'30" 87°52'30"

43°15'

EXPLANATION

Lakes

Subwatershed, sampled 

for habitat and 

geomorphic data by 

agency

Milwaukee 

Metropolitan 

Sewerage District

| Wisconsin 

Department of 

Natural Resources

MMSD planning area

Watershed boundary 

/~\J Subwatershed boundary

Streams

Sampling site, sampled

for habitat and

geomorphic data by

agency

• Milwaukee 

Metropolitan 

Sewerage District

O " ;i"onsin

Department of 

Natural Resources

Lake

Michigan

Base composited from Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission regional base 

map, 1:2,000,1885; U.S. Geological Survey digital line graph hydrography, 1:100,000,2001; Wisconsin 

Department of Natural Resources version 2 hydrography, 1:24,000,2002. Wisconsin Transverse 

Mercator Projection, referenced to North American Datum of 1883,1891 adjustment.

0

0

I 2

2 4 MILES

I I

I 

4 KILOMETERS

Figure 86. Sites sampled for habitat and geomorphic data in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District 

(MMSD) planning area, Wis.
202 Water-Resources-Related Information for the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin

CNI

CD 

CD

CNI

O

CD

'

CD

CD 

CD 

D5

'aa

a

CD 

Q.

O'i—

_co

D

CD 

D5 

CD

CD

§

CD 

03

a

CD

"o

0.

o

03

03

O3

CD

J

^_

03

-G

O 

0

D5 

03

CD 

O

_a

ca"

+- 1

CD -o

o

a. 

o

E

o

CD

D5

CD

+- '

CD

E

CO

CO

03

CO

CO

CD

+- '

CD _-£^

La

CD

-G

,

0

CO

O

"K

CD

CO

^~

CD

E 

E

03

,<

^

La

CO

'aJ

IB

^'as 

%

3"rt

T3

0 

O

D

W)

2

oo

c

1

1

(D

^

rt

rt

^

Q

oo

^H

u

^

of

(U

|

o

C/J

(S

13

a

rt

Z

"o

C

f

d>

o

Q

c 

1

o

1

Di

Q

^

W

c

0)

E

0)

3

w

TO

0)

"5

c

TO

f 

O

O 

(/)

2

w

assessment

TO

15

TO

cc

z

Q

ci) £

M *- ro

S w 2

TO TO c

_| W g

C ^

*. & a CO i- CO 

0) 3 -D

= CO ^

Jo ra c

u E £

,

0) 0)

°- TO "°

w 5 ^

£ ^ CO 

05 ^

N- W

£Si >

o a

W w

Q)

•K J) TO Si W "O <i> 3>

TO <2 c

_l <g <D TO p

Earliest assess- date ment 

Sites per sub watershed

O J) w

*:</>*: 

c CD F 3 co a>

O C/) P

^ TO

•D

0)

CO

QJ

i

^

W

T3

0)

£

0)

I

,

i

;

,

rCh

§

i

o

-

-

t-

>

5

'E

c

2

'c

c

2

>

5

"S 

_c

•^

"c 

c

5

C-l -H ——I

—i oo r- ^^ r~

C2 " " C2 "

?5 S t~ ?5 5-; — rn •— O <N

8 g C-l ^^

r- r- —

^- ^H O

C-l ^ — m —1 —

§ -^

to 1 ^ 3

^= CQ —

^ S
Ecological Indicators of Water Quality 203

Bacteria

Most of human pathogens transmitted by water originate from contamination of those waters by fecal material. It 

is generally assumed that human-pathogen-laden waters 

stem from human wastewater effluent. However, the relative 

contributions that animal and livestock wastes have on 

human pathogen loads is unknown and is a topic of current 

investigation (Madigan and others, 1997).

Although the dangers associated with waters contaminated with fecal material are greatly magnified when such 

water is used for drinking, the recreational use of sufficiently 

contaminated waters also constitutes a human health risk. In 

response to this danger, the USEPA recommends the testing 

of recreational waters for the presence of fecal contamination by means of fecal indicator organisms. These organisms 

provide an indirect indication of the presence of potential 

pathogens in the water. The two fecal indicators commonly 

used in the Milwaukee area are fecal coliforms and Escherichia coli. Elevated concentrations of microorganisms in surface water can indicate contamination by agricultural or 

human sources.
204 Water-Resources-Related Information for the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin

Fecal Coliforms

Fecal coliforms were recommended for the testing of 

recreational waters by the USEPA in 1976. Accompanying 

this recommendation was an acceptable limit guideline of 

200 colonies per 100 mL (U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, 1976). Fecal coliform data for the planning area 

have been collected primarily by MMSD; however, smaller 

data sets have been supplied by the USGS and the USEPA.

Sites with median fecal coliform concentrations that 

exceeded the USEPA recreational water guideline concentration of 200 colonies per 100 mL were scattered throughout the planning area (fig. 87). Sites with median concentrations in the upper quartile were clustered in the central part 

of the planning area (fig. 87). Only one site, in the Kinnickinnic River subwatershed, was in the lower quartile 

(fig. 87).

Subwatersheds with median fecal coliform concentrations in the upper quartile were the Lower Menomonee 

River, Underwood Creek, Honey Creek, and Lincoln Creek 

(fig. 87). However, data collected in the Honey Creek subwatershed were part of a targeted survey, and are likely not

indicative of typical fecal coliform levels. There were no 

subwatersheds with median concentrations in the lower 

quartile (fig. 87). Most samples exceeded the USEPA recreational water fecal coliform guideline of 200 colonies per 

100 mL (fig. 88). The highest maximum concentrations were 

measured in the Lower Menomonee River (2,400,000 colonies per 100 mL), Lower Milwaukee River (1,350,000 colonies per 100 mL), Kinnickinnic River (1,100,000 colonies 

per 100 mL), and Lincoln Creek (1,100,000 colonies per 

100 mL) subwatersheds (fig. 88, table 48). The highest 

median concentrations were measured in the Underwood 

Creek (20,000 colonies per 100 mL) and Honey Creek 

(16,650 colonies per 100 mL) subwatersheds (table 48). The 

lowest median concentration of 230 colonies per 100 mL, 

still above the USEPA recreational limit of 200 colonies per 

100 mL, was measured in the Middle Root River subwatershed (table 48).

The fecal coliform data did not show significant trends 

or seasonality (data not shown).
Ecological Indicators of Water Quality 205

88°07'30"

43°15'

EXPLANATION

Lakes

Subwatershed, median 

fecal coliforms in 

colonies per one hundred 

milliliters

2-10 

| | 11-930

931 - 400,000

MMSD planning area 

/~\J Watershed boundary 

/~\J Subwatershed boundary

Streams

Sampling site, median

fecal coliforms in

colonies per one hundred

milliliters

1

1-10 samples 

11 -100 samples

101 -650 samples

I -10 samples

II -100 samples

101 -650 samples

11-930

O 1-10 samples 

11 -100 samples

C j 101-650 samples

931 - 400,000

I -10 samples

II -100 samples

101 -650 samples

Purple outline indicates 

median fecal coliforms in 

colonies per one hundred 

milliliters exceeding a 

guideline value 

> 200

O 1-10 samples 

11 -100 samples

101 -650 samples

Base composited from Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission regional base 

map, 1:2,000,1995; U.S. Geological Survey digital line graph hydrography, 1:100,000,2001; Wisconsin 

Department of Natural Resources version 2 hydrography, 1:24,000,2002. Wisconsin Transverse 

Mercator Projection, referenced to North American Datum of 1983,1991 adjustment.

4 MILES

4 KILOMETERS

Figure 87. Sites sampled for fecal coliforms in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District (MMSD) planning 

area, Wis.
10,000,000

C/3

LJJ 1,000,000

IO

o

DC LU Q_

C/5 

LU

O 

OC/3

^ CC

OO Oo

LU

100,000

10,000

1,000

100

10

0.1

Fox Kinnickinnic Lake Lake

River

:

.

-

2

H

River Michigan Michigan Direct Tributary

1

2,499

==

^=

^fL

JL

-

1

' I T

H

'

2

H

1

2

H

Menomonee Milwaukee Oak Root

River

I

River Creek River

2538

=: —— 12 TM

—— = 1 ,033

^===

1

^ = 

H

L j

nL

n

j

1

419 5'7U

—^=

— 

s

= 

s

= 

H

T 

m

Ji

i 

_ i

,

992

501

250

= = 

=

rp = rjn

———— .. —— : ——— :^_

3

I I

:- 29 :

111 :

26 ;

— — 

— I 

_ 

I :

0 Pi - l

L J

~-

- - 200 colonies per 100 milliliters, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency ambient water quality criteria EXPLANATION

106 Number of samples

__ Data value 1.5 to 3.0 times the IQR

outside the box

Largest data value within 1.5 times

the IQR above the box

75th percentile

^jf X / ^ K/ /*V* yVe<V6 <f X °*" ^ °*" ^ X X <? 'Xx/xx xxx vvvyvvvv .A® V^ xjP > .<£ 0^ ^J> v^ 

vo^ ^ v° 

^

Q) 

ff

30

CDCD t/>30ep_Q) **CDS

a toCD CD

(O CD

Media25th percentile

Smallest data value within 1.5 times 

the IQR below the box

Reporting limits for 

some analyses were: 

1,2, 10,20, 100, 10,000 

colonies per 100 milliliters

SUBWATERSHED

Q)

g C/Joo

Figure 88. Statistical distribution of fecal coliform counts in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, 1970-2002.
Middle Rootivei Rootiver Upper 

to •£. S 5 0 0 

to o 

tO H^ 

VO H-" 

H- HI— 10 o0 0 

o^ oo o t? 

VO VO 

-J VO 

-J vo 0 0 

to to S oo

0> HOJ VO O OJ 

to

^ o 

to -j 

OJ <J1 o o 

00 O 

oo to 

OJ ~J 

to

vo "*> ^ o o o 

i i— to 

o *> 

"*> o 0 0 

.(*. to o *> o o §

^> " 

^>

8

<r

Middle OakCreek Oak CreekUppr River Lowe Root

tO 1—1 1—1 

t_ft tO o ui to 

H- O ON 

000

000

o> to o ui to 

I— O ON o o o 1 1 1 ' o o o 

UJ UJ go 

S3 S3 S3 

VO VO VO 

oo oo vo 

1-1 H- O 

v^ VO p 

S3 S3 S3 O O O o o o 

to

UJ VO UJ 

-J VO Ul O O VO 

to to O O OJ o o o 

tO OJ tO V o o 0 H- -J 

H- -J OO 

H- JO 

t-rt ^. ON o o o ^ ~^1 OJ O OO t-ft o o o ^ .fc* to O ON *> o o "o o o o 

o K- n1

North BranchOak Creek Lower OakCreek

tO ON 

VO 

VO 

0 0 0 0 

ui to 

VO 

VO 

OJ tO 

OJ tO _, _ H 0 0 0 0 

UJ Ji. 

to S3 

to O 

vo vo 

ON -J 2 z 

tO VO 

Sr to 

VO O 

-J O 

ON *- ! 0) , vo ! UJ 

to

UJ ! o 

-j ! o o ! oo 

JO . o ! o 

"ON ! o 

top

rTM* o 

Milwaukee 

River

Lincoln CreekLower Milwaukee River

to 

~j to 

0.

% 1 

ON Ul 

vo *> £ ~ 

c/1

^ S 

t-ft UJ 

]° „•"* 5 §5 0 0 

vo H-. 

;J g^ 

VO VO 

-J -J 

t^l OJ 

S3 to 

;J ;j O O o o 

H- 1-1 o o 

to to 

OJ 1—1 0 0 -O ON o o 

JO 00 

"oo oi 

-J ^ 

ON tO 

"vo tfi o o 

tO 1—1 

"o o o o 

r- r* 

"h-i OJ o o> o o §

"ooo

Menomone Upper River Underwood Creek a

-J i— 

_- ^ o o o 

ON 1— I — 1 o

l/i O ^ 1 o ' o o 

VO ON o to 

vo vo 

ON <J\ ~ 1 to to S ^ O VO O -J 

to0o

*> o 

to0o

*> o ^ o 

top

0 0 

to

o 

*> o 0 0 

to

jo p 

to O 

*. 0 

to

~ p o o 

to

*> p §

"ONo

i i— tO 0 0 o o o o o o 

Menomonei River n

Creek Honey Menomone Lower River a

uj to 

to

G 3 

OJ

O ON o o> 

JO

K oo O ON | to 

OJ

"op o

o o 

OO ON O ' i— § § O VO 2 ui o i— 

oo t^ 

fo to 

to to 1 — 1 1 — 1 £o 1-1 

trt

oo vo o o o *> 

tO OJ 

<-» o 

ON 10 

"ON UJ 

t-ft O 0 0 

j;. to 

0> "vo 

*> vo 

to oo 

Ji.

OJ VO O "t+l 0 0 o o 

VO ON 

"oj "o o o o o 

to

to V 

*> o o o o "o o o o o 

Michi LakeTributar

OQ ^ 

Lake Michigan Tributary -00

to

to

to_0, t 

S3

VO

ONO

o 

to

VO

OO'!'1'!! 1 t""

Lake Michi

Direct

oq

Wilson ParkCreel Lake Michigan Direct

H- ~ 0 0 o o 

1-1 tO 

*-* to 

i-~ to 1 1— H- O O o o 

to *> ^ S3 

O^ t-rt 

VO VO 

ON VO 

to ^ ^ ^ 

vo vo 

ON 1— ' ' 1 1 ' 1 ' 1 ' ' ! i ! ! 1 r" 1 t"TM

Kinnickinn: 

River

Kinnickinnic RiveWest Milwaukee Ditch

*""

-j - 

toV

ON O 0 0 

to« - 

VO Hto to 

-^ o o° 0 

H- ^ S3 

t-rt VO 

vo vo 

Ul Ul 

S3 S3 

~J VO 

to ir O VO O -J ' '— i 

<>j ! 

too ! 

VOo ! 

0 

00

OO I 

Ji.

OJ o . o ! 

tooo ! 

H- o§"

Fox River

Lake Muskego -00

to

to

to, _ o0

S3

vo

VO

^j O

S3

OJ

VO

-J

VO'i111!! 1 f"

f 11

V)

c o- i

(0 Aa

subwatershed per Sites 

results MMSD of Count 

results USGS of Count 

results STORET of Count 

results all of Count 

values of Number 

limit reporting a below 

limit(s) Reporting 

date sample Earliest 

date sample Latest 

Minimum

percentile 10th 

percentile 25th 

Median

Mean

percentile 75th 

percentile 90th 

Maximum

—\ ±s o t?. 

0) ^ O B 

°" i *'*£, S P 1 c ~ 3 P. 3 c $T £ 1 3 || 1 

-^ rt SJ £•* 

^ £§f | ||| 

CO § ft ft h ~ & ft 

^, 2 O o 

CD 2 3 3. o 553 

O3 q rr „ q Cf 1 - 3 Ili

o" • 3 ^ ^ ^ O < ft 

3 rt a= 3 " ^ ff Z f III ca a 5. o. 

*~^ 'rr\ ft £$ 

CD . O. cn 

tQ _ _ K.I o O o ft t — ft j3 ^ ? <§. I ^ i, ^ 

3" < 

ro 3 c o* 

= J 3 

$ . - C 

Q3 C/3 3 

^" O " 

CD W 1 O

^^ " r-tCD 2 5 S P c 

-a •33 O CTQ S ^ "* S 

n^ &3 

n> Fd ^ m "TM* ^ 

-5 n>" o" 

Q3 •< P 

«g " o 

CD W3 & a v, p 

^. r-f C 

S3. § S s |j a" 3 <s 

-^ ^* S* 

2. I S £ S 3 S T3 ^ & s. 2 £t " 

CD ^d H-< 1 ^ 

*^ o rl ° a T3 

ro 5' ° ^• s 

gt CTQ 

<' §• ^ S 

rt rt ^ S. 

C «-t- S 0 

&3 5 S CP s i- 

** £L ^ " 

S rt S rt 

0. « 

|-- O 3 3 O B' 

jo J8)e/\/\ Ajjieng LQZ 
208 Water-Resources-Related Information for the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin

Escherichia coli

Epidemiological studies indicate that, when compared 

to fecal coliforms, counts of Escherichia coli (E. coli) correlate more strongly with illnesses attributable to swimming in 

fecal-contaminated water (Dufour and Cabelli, 1984). In 

response, the USEPA has modified its guidance to recommend the use of E. coli as a fecal indicator in freshwater, setting the single sample maximum allowable density for a designated beach area to 235 colonies per 100 mL (Dufour and 

Ballentine, 1986).

MMSD is the only agency that has collected E. coli data 

in the planning area. Samples have been recorded for six subwatersheds in the planning area (fig. 89). This was a relatively recent data set, with the range in collection dates spanning only from October 2000 to November 2001. The 

depiction in figure 89 for the Honey Creek subwatershed is 

not likely representative of typical E. coli counts because 

samples were collected as part of a targeted survey.

The median E. coli concentration of the Honey Creek 

subwatershed was in the upper quartile, whereas the median

concentration of the Lower Milwaukee River subwatershed 

was in the lower quartile (fig. 89). Many concentrations 

exceeded the maximum single-sample USEPA recreationalwater guideline of 235 colonies per 100 mL (fig. 90). The 

highest maximum concentrations were measured in the 

Upper Menomonee River (160,000 colonies per 100 mL), 

Kinnickinnic River (160,000 colonies per 100 mL), and 

Honey Creek (140,000 colonies per 100 mL) subwatersheds 

(fig. 90, table 49). The highest median concentrations were 

measured in the Honey Creek (2,400 colonies per 100 mL) 

and Lincoln Creek (1,300 colonies per 100 mL) subwatersheds (fig. 90, table 49). The Lower Milwaukee River (220 

colonies per 100 mL) and Upper Menomonee River (300 

colonies per 100 mL) subwatersheds had the lowest median 

concentrations (fig. 90, table 49).

Given the small number of samples and the short 

timespan of the data set, not enough data were available to 

indicate any trends or seasonality (data not shown).
Ecological Indicators of Water Quality 209

88"07'30" 87°52'30"

43°15' -

EXPLANATION

Lakes

Subwatershed, median 

Escherichia coli'm 

colonies per one hundred

MMSD planning area 

Watershed boundary 

/~\J Subwatershed boundary 

Streams

Sampling site, median 

Escherichia coli'm 

colonies per one hundred 

milliliters

140-290

O 1-10 samples 

11 -50sarr

291 - 520

O 1-10 samples 

11 -50 samples

521 -1.690

O 1-10 samples 

11 -ROsam

1.691-4.850

1 -10 samples

Purple outline indicates 

median Escherichia coli 

in colonies per one 

hundred milliliters 

exceeding a guideline 

value 

> 235 

O 1-10 samples

Base composited from Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission regional base 

map, 1:2,000,1995; U.S. Geological Survey digital line graph hydrography, 1:100,000,2001; Wisconsin 

Department of Natural Resources version 2 hydrography, 1:24,000,2002. Wisconsin Transverse 

Mercator Projection, referenced to North American Datum of 1983,1991 adjustment. 4 KILOMETERS

Figure 89. Sites sampled for Escherichia coli'm the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District (MMSD) 

planning area, Wis.
1,000,000

or

LLJ 100,000

Kinnickinnic 

River

Menomonee 

River

Milwaukee 

River

o oor

LLJ Q_

Cfl 

LLJ

z 

go 

o

5

I

co

LJJ

10,000

1,000

100

10

0.1

72 23

78

138

235 colonies per 100 milliliters,

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency ambient water quality criteria

EXPLANATION

106

cr

Number of samplesData value 1.5 to 3.0 times the IQR

outside the box

Largest data value within 1.5 times

the IQR above the box

75th percentile —i

., _i- /r»wi. .•! \ Interquartile Median (50th percentile) | range (|QR)

25th percentile

/

SUBWATERSHED

Smallest data value within 1.5 times 

the IQR below the box

Reporting limit for

some analyses was:

1 colony per 100 milliliters

Figure 90. Statistical distribution of Escherichia co//counts in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, 1970-2002.

IS)

IF*

n•^3D CD

v>

n CD

V)

30 

cp_01 CD

c/j CD 

CD

s

CD 

CDO
r

i 

Si

2 18^

<; q^

LO

00

-J

H-

__. Oo

too0o

fo

to0o

1—

Lft

-t^-

NO

to

to

too

H-

"oo

ON 

LO

NO

ONO

t/1

NOO

ON 

NOO0o

2§

ft

fti

5' Sr5' o

o_a" p1

to

-t- o! ^oo

to

o oo

fo

tooo

LO

NO

NOO

ON

NOO_0o

*.

"NO

to

NO

LO0oo

NO

oooo

^J "ooo

dn211fti

/&

,- •— 

ft

Hi ^

to

LOO< t _ oo

too0o

fo

fo0o

Lo

-tUl

NO8

LOOo^'bo

NO £oo

JO

ooo

HON O0oo

r13

o ogft

^_

5' ^

^_,

oo

Ji. _

H- oo

too0o

to

to0o

H00

oo

LO

LO

to

NO

*.

'NO

OO 

to£oo

NO

boo

NO

oo "o0o

S1g

ft

ftSnHI

ffi

§ 

ft XO1

LO

H-' — 1 

H-

__> O

ooo

NO

to8• — i 

o 

oo 

to

tooo

i—"

-t- o^NO

toVoo

^j

to

oo 

tooo

to

"o0o

H- o0oo

w5' 3R-'

3' a

rV

X><'

£?Wa' 

a o'

Ri kinnic <

H(

LO

^,

K>

to_

H- oo

to

o oo

to

to0o

>—

oo

oo

to8

ooo

ON

"toooo~o

HONoooo

^

c^

(D

3"

(Da

a>cO"1S3-

(Da

subwatershed per Sites 

results MMSD of Count 

values of Number 

limit reporting a below 

limit Reporting 

date sample Earliest 

date sample Latest 

Minimum

percentile 10th 

percentile 25th 

Median

Mean

percentile 75th 

percentile 90th 

Maximum

Vo

S>P&

o'

H-» O

P- o

c_ 

o' S<

p; E* 

rp

i_j

»s^

a.

CT

o"

ft3

&5 3"S

g. 3'

OQ|I»

r^S§

rt

cr

&-

!-hy

ft

ft

H-l

OQ

H^1<

£Lc"

5^I

ft<%•

—i $

ft

ET^

ftoS

OQ"

ft

ft

ft

>TD O

f?

O. N1

ggO"

C±: ^^

fTft^

o^ 1

C/5 ^pCTQoS-' 2o

^'3O1P1

cT1e5

ft ^3n

a.

3'

o 

o_3

H+, §3" c3

I/I

^a

HI

H^

3.

nT?

f-i* ^X3^Q3

?-

rt3c

!•

rt&.

gSft§ft

Br* O

Sf 3C3

cr 

ft 1 g

a>

eo"

CO

00

c: 33

fa~~i

tn

fa 

^-_

o' w

—* mto

rj

CD

J^-

5-

5' Q

-*^.

a- o

fa

CD 

COo

g.

~t

^~

CD

1^^ ^5

CO

c.

CD

CD

^^

CDi—K O

0_

fa^

00

CD§

CD

ffi

CO

CDaC/j'

—i oi—K

T3

to~

CO

Q3

CD

CO°

C3

ro
212 Water-Resources-Related Information for the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin

Potential Areas for Data Collection 

for Phase II

A major purpose of this report is to describe the historical stream-corridor data for the MMSD planning area. 

Knowledge of historical conditions can then be used in planning for Phase II of the MMSD Corridor Study, base-line 

monitoring. Identification of spatial, temporal, or analytical 

gaps in data may drive decisions in where to locate sampling 

sites and what types of analyses to perform.

The maps of sampling locations in this report illustrate 

subwatersheds that may be appropirate for additional sampling. In addition, subwatersheds with few sites, relatively 

few samples, and (or) samples that date back to the 1970s or 

1980s may receive additional sampling. Consideration also 

has to be given to the significance of the subwatershed 

within the larger system. Subwatersheds containing the 

headwaters of streams with few urban effects may not 

require as frequent sampling as subwatersheds in heavily 

urbanized areas with a larger drainage area. However, monitoring in the less urbanized subwatersheds is also valuable; 

recent studies have shown that nonurbanized systems are 

highly susceptible to increases in urbanization, resulting in 

changes related to streamflow, water chemistry, sedimentation, and ecological communities (loss of aquatic habitat and 

biological integrity). Less frequent sampling in these subwatersheds may be sufficient to monitor any changes in their 

ecosystems.

Tables of summary statistics (tables 8 through 49) indicate the number of samples collected for each subwatershed 

and the latest date a site in the subwatershed was sampled. 

Figures 9 through 12 show sites sampled at least once since 

January 1, 1998, for various types of analyses. Knowing the 

locations of sites currently monitored by MMSD, USGS, 

WDNR or other agencies may facilitate cooperation between 

the MMSD Corridor Study and the monitoring agency for 

data collection into Phase II or suggest locations not to sample to avoid duplication of sampling efforts.

Data for emerging contaminants such as pharmaceuticals and personal care products (PPCPs), human hormones, 

organic wastewater contaminants, and other constituents that 

indicate effects of human activity were not available in the 

MMSD Corridor Study database or any of its sources. There 

are increasing concerns for potential adverse human and ecological health effects resulting from the production, use, and 

disposal of numerous chemicals on the market in recent 

years that improve industry, agriculture, and medical treatment, as well as those used for personal and household 

needs. These chemicals find their way into the environment 

and contribute significantly to the total environmental load 

of anthropogenic chemical stressors (U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, 2003c). Treated wastewater from the 

MMSD planning area is discharged into Lake Michigan; 

however, sewer-overflow events, septic tanks, land application of wastewater-treatment-plant sludge, industrial discharge to water and air, veterinary pharmaceutical runoff 

from animal feed lot operations, and treated and untreated 

wastewater discharged upstream of the planning area may 

contribute emerging contaminants to stream corridors within 

the planning area. Little is known about the extent of environmental occurrence, transport, and fate of many synthetic 

organic compounds after their intended use, particularly hormonally active chemicals, PPCPs, and pharmaceuticals. One 

reason for this lack of data is that until recently low-level 

detection methods were not available (Kolpin and others, 

2002). Researchers at the USGS have done several state-ofthe-art studies of emerging contaminants in the United States 

(Kolpin and others, 2002; U.S. Geological Survey Toxic 

Substances Hydrology Program, 2003). The USGS National 

Water Quality Laboratory has a proven low-level analysis 

schedule established to analyze water samples for emerging 

contaminants (Lindsey and others, 2001).

E. coli is a constituent that may be used as an indicator 

of health risk to swimmers and other recreational water users 

(Great Lakes WATER Institute, 2003). Beaches on Lake 

Michigan may be affected by the water from rivers emptying 

into the lake. Therefore, additional sampling for E. coli 

would supplement the limited knowledge based on the samples collected since 2000.

The amount of data for pesticides in all media is limited. For the selected group of pesticides still in use that were 

examined in this report, the only two sites that had been sampled are the Milwaukee River at Estabrook Park and Lincoln 

Creek at 47th Street.

Data for PCBs are also somewhat limited. MMSD has 

provided the most recent data on PCBs in water at nearly 40 

sites sampled for PCBs since 1995. Nearly all the rest of the 

data are from the mid-1990s, and a few samples are older yet. 

In examination of existing PCB data, or planning for future 

PCB sampling, PCB congeners that are considered to be particularly toxic may be of significant importance.

Data for trace element samples in water, bed sediment, 

and tissues were often collected prior to the 1980s and were 

collected and analyzed using outdated field and laboratory 

analysis methods. In particular, methods have improved significantly for the collection and analysis of mercury at the 

sub-parts-per-trillion level. Resampling for trace elements in 

bed sediment probably does not need to take place in all subwatersheds but perhaps could focus on the lower parts of the 

watersheds where more sediment, and perhaps trace elements, may have accumulated.

The long-term, water-chemistry monitoring program 

run by MMSD has collected thousands of samples over 

many sites in the MMSD planning area, contributing much 

of the water-chemistry data to the MMSD Corridor Study 

database. However, the MMSD monitoring program typically collects data during ice-free conditions, usually March 

through November (although some data have been collected 

in late-winter months). The absence of samples during winter months or during early snowmelt episodes limits the pic-
Summary and Conclusions 213

ture for certain nutrients that have a seasonal signal and for 

chloride, which may be affected by factors such as road deicing during the winter. USGS and USEPA STORET databases contributed some sample information for winter 

months, although these data are still probably too sparse for 

adequate design of future monitoring programs.

There were relatively few recent macroinvertebrate and 

fish-community samples available in the MMSD Corridor 

Study database. In particular, not many samples were collected in the 1990s. Typically, macroinvertebrate sampling 

was only done once or twice at a particular site, which limits 

the ability to show change in the community through time. 

The sampling frequency for macroinvertebrates has been relatively steady over the past 30 years. Fish-sampling efforts 

also involved visiting a site just one or twice in the past 30 

years. Extensive fish sampling took place in the 1970s; however, the number of samples collected since then has 

dropped. Available habitat data are relatively recent, in part 

because of new assessment protocols. (Although data collected prior to the 1990s were available, the data-collection 

approach was subjective; therefore, these data were not 

included in the MMSD Corridor Study database.) The task of 

making habitat-assessment data electronic is onerous, and 

data-entry efforts may lag in comparison to assessments 

completed. For example, some recent WDNR sampling 

efforts produced data that are relevant to the MMSD planning area but were not available at the time for incorporation 

into the MMSD Corridor Study database; these data should 

be considered when choosing sampling sites and effort for 

the Phase II monitoring.

Additional data collection may be useful for physical 

characteristics such as stream-channel cross-section profiles, 

bridge-scour assessments, flood-plain maps, structures, and 

shoreline conditions.

Summary and Conclusions

The Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District 

(MMSD) Corridor Study is a three-phase project designed to 

improve understanding of water resources in the stream corridors of the MMSD planning area and to provide tools by 

which the success of future projects can be predicted. The 

study is being conducted by the following collaborating 

agencies: MMSD, Wisconsin Department of Natural 

Resources (WDNR), Southeastern Wisconsin Regional 

Planning Commission (SEWRPC), U.S. Geological Survey 

(USGS), University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, Marquette 

University, and Wisconsin Lutheran College. The study 

approach is to (1) initially compile existing data and (2) use 

the compiled information to develop a 3-year baseline and 

long-term monitoring plans.

A literature review of surface-water quality, surfacewater quantity, and ecology studies conducted from 1970 

through 2001 was completed, and summaries of each study

are provided in this report. There were 195 documents that 

described surface-water quality issues in the MMSD planning area and 133 documents that addressed surface-water 

quantity questions. Surface-water quality documents 

included information describing nutrients, pesticides, inorganic and organic contaminants, urban issues, and modeling. 

Surface-water quantity documents discussed topics such as 

streamflow or stream stage, extreme flows, runoff calculations, and geomorphology. A total of 136 documents related 

to ecology. These documents presented information regarding fish, macroinvertebrates, habitat, wetlands, and management issues. In addition, an inventory of GIS spatial coverages available for the MMSD planning area was assembled. 

Thematic information included data regarding land use, 

infrastructure, geology, and hydrography.

A database of water, sediment, and tissue (fish, shellfish, and others) chemistry, macroinvertebrates, fish, algae, 

habitat, geomorphic, and other physical and ecological data 

was compiled from datasets from MMSD, USGS, WDNR, 

and USEPA for 1970 through 2002. More than 2.7 million 

results are available in the MMSD Corridor Study database 

and the compilation of multiple datasets allows for retrieving 

data from a central database rather than from each of the 

source datasets.

Analysis of data in the MMSD Corridor Study database 

must be done with caution and an understanding of the limi-

^

tations of data collected for the 420-mi planning area by 

various agencies using different field data-collection and 

laboratory-analysis methods. Challenges to combining data 

sets included varying definitions of sampling sites, minimal 

documentation of constituents, insufficient description of the 

laboratory-analysis method, differences in sample collection 

and laboratory analysis methods over the 30-year period and 

between agencies, and lack of sampling-purpose information 

that was available in an easily accessible format. Some data 

were collected as part of a routine monitoring program 

whereas other data were collected in areas known to be contaminated.

Some data were reported as less than a "reporting 

limit," definitions for which varied. Often, multiple reporting limits for each constituent were reported. Data with concentrations reported as "less than" were set to half their original concentration or half the reporting limit concentration 

(when the original concentration was reported as zero) for 

purposes of data analysis.

Chemical constituents and ecological components that 

are important to an urban setting and well represented in the 

database were selected for further investigation. Each constituent or component is described in this report with some or 

all of the following: a text summary, map of sampling locations, and in some cases median concentrations, statistical 

distribution of concentrations by subwatershed, table of 

summary statistics by subwatershed, and graphs of temporal 

and (or) seasonality trends (examined for five selected sites). 

Measured values and concentrations were compared to
214 Water-Resources-Related Information for the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin

USEPA, WDNR, and Canadian drinking-water and aquaticlife guideline values where available.

Streamgages, stream-stage gages, and meteorological 

stations collecting rainfall data since 1998 were distributed 

throughout the MMSD planning area. Collection of inorganic, nutrient, and physical field-measurement data since 

1998 was also generally well distributed. Collection of pesticide, organic-chemical, and trace-element data since 1998 

was not widespread. Sites where bacterial, biological, or 

habitat and channel-measurement data were collected since 

1998 were widely distributed throughout the MMSD planning area.

Physical Data

Physical data included streamflow, stream stage, and 

precipitation data. Streamflow data were available from the 

USGS for 42 sites with various periods of record since 1970. 

Stream-stage data were available from MMSD for four sites, 

with data collection beginning in 1994. MMSD measured 

precipitation at 20 gages in the planning area since 1993.

Chemical Indicators of Water Quality

Chemical indicators of water quality examined in the 

report included field measurements and miscellaneous constituents (pH, alkalinity, specific conductance, hardness, dissolved oxygen, biochemical oxygen demand, and chloride), 

sediment (total suspended solids and suspended sediment), 

nutrients (total nitrogen, nitrate, Kjeldahl nitrogen, total 

phosphorus, and dissolved phosphorus), trace elements (cadmium, mercury, copper, lead, arsenic, chromium, nickel, and 

zinc), pesticides (historically used pesticides and pesticides 

still in use), and poly chlorinated biphenyls.

Field Measurements and Miscellaneous 

Constituents

Aquatic organisms are strongly influenced by physical 

properties and chemical constituents of water which themselves can be influenced by natural environmental factors 

and the urban setting.

pH. Maximum pH measurements were above the 

guideline of 9.0 standard units in the Muskego Lake, Kinnickinnic River, Lower Menomonee River, Upper Menomonee River, Lincoln Creek, Lower Milwaukee River, and 

Lower Oak Creek subwatersheds. Minimum pH measurements were below the guideline of 6.5 standard units in the 

Kinnickinnic River, Lower Menomonee River, Upper 

Menomonee River, Lower Milwaukee River, Mitchell Field 

Drainage Ditch, Muskego Lake, Upper Root River, and Wilson Park Creek subwatersheds. Seasonal variations in pH 

measurements tended to follow the growing season of 

aquatic plants. Long-term trends in pH measurements for

most sites had a slight upward trend in the early to mid-1980s 

followed by a slight downward trend until the latter 1990s 

and continued with an upward trend through 2002.

Alkalinity. The Upper Root River, Upper Oak Creek, 

Upper Menomonee River, Middle Root River, and Lower 

Oak Creek subwatersheds had the highest median alkalinity 

concentrations (262 to 325 mg/L as CaCO3 ). Median concentrations in the Little Menomonee River, Honey Creek, 

Kinnickinnic River, and Muskego Lake subwatersheds were 

the lowest (below a reporting limit to 160 mg/L as CaCO3). 

Patterns in seasonal and temporal trends were evident in 

alkalinity data, although the long-term trends were less pronounced.

Specific conductance. Median specific conductance 

greater than 1,000 jiS/cm was measured in the Wilson Park 

Creek, Honey Creek, Underwood Creek, Lower Oak Creek, 

Middle Oak Creek, Upper Oak Creek, Middle Root River, 

and Upper Root River subwatersheds. The lowest median 

specific conductance, less than 650 jiS/cm, was measured in 

Muskego Lake, Kinnickinnic River, Butler Ditch, and Lower 

Milwaukee River subwatersheds. Seasonal variability of 

specific conductance, paralleling the use of deicing compounds, was apparent. Temporal trends indicated year-toyear variation in specific conductance.

Hardness. The highest median hardness concentrations 

were measured in the Upper Oak Creek (450 mg/L as 

CaCO3 ) and Upper Root River (430 mg/L as CaCO3 ) subwatersheds. The lowest median concentrations were measured 

in the Little Menomonee River (63 mg/L as CaCO3 ) and 

Underwood Creek (130 mg/L as CaCO3 ) subwatersheds. A 

slight long-term downward trend in hardness concentrations 

was observed for all sites except Lincoln Creek, which had a 

slight upward trend.

Dissolved oxygen. The Upper Root River (5.13 mg/L) 

and Lower Menomonee River (6.50 mg/L) subwatersheds 

had the lowest median dissolved oxygen concentrations. 

Willow Creek (9.81 mg/L) and Honey Creek (9.47 mg/L) 

subwatersheds had the highest median concentrations. Dissolved oxygen concentrations varied with the season, with 

the lowest concentrations generally observed in warm 

months.

Biochemical oxygen demand, 5 day. The subwatersheds with the highest median biochemical oxygen demand 

(5 day) concentrations were Mitchell Field Drainage Ditch 

(1,865.0 mg/L) and Wilson Park Creek (100.0 mg/L), both 

of which receive water draining from the General Mitchell 

International Airport. Nearly all other subwatersheds had 

median concentrations less than 3.0 mg/L.

Chloride. The highest median chloride concentrations 

(135 to 190 mg/L) were measured in the southern part of the 

planning area; specifically, the Upper Root River, Middle 

Root River, Upper Oak Creek, Middle Oak Creek, and 

Lower Oak Creek subwatersheds. Subwatersheds with the 

lowest median concentrations (below a reporting limit to 

42 mg/L) were Dousman Ditch, Lower Milwaukee River, 

Wilson Park Creek, and Lake Michigan Direct. Chloride
Summary and Conclusions 215

concentrations showed a rise during the winter months, 

likely related to road deicing. Long-term trend patterns in 

chloride started with a slight upward trend in the early 80s, 

followed by a very gradual downward trend until 1996, continued with a very gradual upward trend until 2000, and 

ended with a slight fall through 2002.

Sediment

The sediment load of a stream can influence the type of 

organisms able to exist in the stream and indicate the significance of erosion and transportation of sediment from the 

watershed and (or) streambanks.

Total suspended solids. The Lower, Middle, and 

Upper Oak Creek and Root River subwatersheds had the 

highest median total suspended solids concentrations (685 to 

875 mg/L), with increasing median concentrations in the 

downstream direction for each river. The lowest median concentrations (7 to 23 mg/L) were measured in the Wilson Park 

Creek, Willow Creek, and Mitchell Field Drainage Ditch 

subwatersheds. A seasonal pattern was noted at some sites, 

with higher concentrations during late winter to early spring.

Suspended sediment. The Kinnickinnic River, Underwood Creek, and Upper Root River subwatersheds had the 

highest median suspended-sediment concentrations (204 to 

356 mg/L). Median concentrations of the Lincoln Creek and 

the Lower Milwaukee River subwatersheds were the lowest 

(25 to 28 mg/L).

Nutrients

Nutrients in surface waters are a concern because high 

levels can result in excessive plant growth, which in turn 

may lead to lowered dissolved oxygen as the plants decompose.

Total nitrogen. In most cases, concentrations of total 

nitrogen were derived from summing data for either dissolved nitrate and dissolved Kjeldahl nitrogen concentrations or for dissolved nitrate, total organic nitrogen, and dissolved ammonia nitrogen concentrations. The highest 

median concentration (53.70 mg/L as N) was measured in 

the Mitchell Field Drainage Ditch subwatershed. In addition, 

median concentrations in Wilson Park Creek, Little Menomonee River, Willow Creek, Lower Milwaukee River, and the 

Lower Root River subwatersheds exceeded the nutrient criterion of 1.59 mg/L as N. Subwatersheds with the lowest 

median concentrations (0.10 to 1.07 mg/L as N) were Honey 

Creek, North Branch Oak Creek, and Middle Oak Creek.

Nitrate. The highest median nitrate concentrations, 

which were above the proposed USEPA nutrient-criterion 

concentration of 0.94 mg/L as N, were measured in the 

Lower Root River and Wilson Park Creek subwatersheds. 

Subwatersheds with the lowest median concentrations (at or 

below reporting limits) were the Little Menomonee River, 

Underwood Creek, Milwaukee River Non-Contributing, and

North Branch Oak Creek. There was distinct seasonally in 

the nitrate concentrations, with concentrations lower in the 

summer and higher in the winter. Long-term trends in nitrate 

concentrations showed minimal concentrations from the late 

1980s to the early 1990s at most sites.

Kjeldahl nitrogen. The highest median Kjeldahl nitrogen concentrations were measured in the Mitchell Field 

Drainage Ditch (18.50 mg/L as N) and Wilson Park Creek 

(2.58 mg/L as N) subwatersheds. Subwatersheds with the 

lowest median concentrations (0.20 to 0.65 mg/L as N) were 

Honey Creek, Middle Root River, Upper Oak Creek, and 

North Branch Oak Creek in the southern part of the planning 

area.

Total phosphorus. Subwatersheds with the highest 

median total phosphorus concentrations (0.112 to 

0.350 mg/L as P) were Whitnall Park Creeks, Mitchell Field 

Drainage Ditch, and Lower Root River. Subwatersheds with 

the lowest median concentrations (below a reporting limit to 

0.028 mg/L as P) were the Little Menomonee River, Butler 

Ditch, Dousman Ditch, South Branch Underwood Creek, 

Milwaukee River Non-Contributing, and North Branch Oak 

Creek.

Dissolved phosphorus. The highest median dissolved 

phosphorus concentrations (0.055 to 0.059 mg/L as P) were 

measured in the Little Menomonee River, Willow Creek, 

and Lower Root River subwatersheds. The Honey Creek, 

Kinnickinnic River, Muskego Lake, Middle Root River, 

Upper Oak Creek, and Lower Oak Creek subwatersheds had 

the lowest median concentrations (0.010 to 0.020 mg/L as 

P).

Trace Elements

Organisms exposed to trace elements found in surface 

water, sediment, and other organisms lower in the food chain 

can be at risk for detrimental health affects.

Cadmium. No subwatersheds had median cadmium 

concentrations in water above the WDNR (Wisconsin 

Department of Natural Resources) MCL (Maximum Contaminant Level), USEPA (U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency) MCL, and Canadian MAC (Maximum Acceptable 

Concentration) drinking-water guideline of 5 [ig/L. The 

highest median cadmium concentrations in sediment (3.9 to 

4.4 [ig/g), all above the PEL (Probable Effect Level), were 

measured in the Kinnickinnic River, Little Menomonee 

River, and Lower Menomonee River subwatersheds. The 

Upper Menomonee River, Little Menomonee Creek, Lilly 

Creek, Lincoln Creek, Muskego Lake, and Middle Root 

River subwatersheds had the lowest median concentrations 

in sediment (0.4 to 2.0 [ig/g).

Mercury. The highest median mercury concentrations 

in water were measured in the Lower Menomonee River 

(0.100 |ig/L) and Upper Menomonee River (0.100 |ig/L) 

subwatersheds; however, the majority of results for both subwatersheds were below a reporting limit. The highest median
216 Water-Resources-Related Information for the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin

mercury concentration in sediment (0.460 |ig/g) was measured in the Lower Menomonee River subwatershed. The 

Little Menomonee Creek, Lilly Creek, Lincoln Creek, and 

Middle Root River subwatersheds had the lowest median 

concentrations in sediment (0.020 to 0.070 |ig/g).

Copper. The highest median copper concentrations in 

water were in the Underwood Creek (19.0 (ig/L) and Lincoln 

Creek (10.0 jig/L) subwatersheds; median concentrations in 

all other subwatersheds were below 10.0 jig/L. The highest 

median copper concentrations in sediment were measured in 

the Lower Menomonee River (140.0 [ig/g) and Little Menomonee River (140.0 Jig/g) subwatersheds. The Upper Menomonee River, Little Menomonee Creek, Lilly Creek, and 

Lincoln Creek subwatersheds had the lowest median concentrations in sediment (29.0 to 39.0 Jig/g).

Lead. Median lead concentrations in water (15.0 (ig/L 

to 24.5 |lg/L) in the Underwood Creek, Lower Menomonee 

River, Kinnickinnic River, Middle Oak Creek, Upper Oak 

Creek, Lower Oak Creek, and Lower Milwaukee River subwatersheds met or exceeded water-quality guideline concentrations of 15 (ig/L for the WDNR TTAL (Treatment Techniques Action Level) and the USEPA MCL. The highest 

median lead concentration in sediment was found in the 

Honey Creek subwatershed (4,100.00 Jig/g). The Upper 

Menomonee River, Little Menomonee Creek, Lilly Creek, 

Lincoln Creek, Muskego Lake, and Middle Root River 

subwatersheds had the lowest median concentrations in 

sediment (6.5 to 80.0 |ig/g).

Arsenic. Median arsenic concentrations in water were 

low when compared to maximum concentrations and were at 

reporting-limit concentrations in most cases. The Little 

Menomonee Creek (38.0 |ig/g) and Lilly Creek (10.0 |ig/g) 

subwatersheds had the highest median arsenic concentrations in sediment. The Upper Menomonee River, Lincoln 

Creek, and Middle Root River subwatersheds had the lowest 

median concentrations (2.0 to 4.0 |ig/g).

Chromium. No median chromium concentrations in 

water exceeded the WDNR and USEPA MCL drinkingwater guideline concentration of 100 jig/L or the Canadian 

drinking-water guideline concentration of 50 [ig/L. The Kinnickinnic River subwatershed had the highest median chromium concentration in sediment (330.0 |ig/g). The Upper 

Menomonee River, Little Menomonee Creek, Lilly Creek, 

Lincoln Creek, and Middle Root River subwatersheds had 

the lowest median concentrations in sediment (8.0 to 

30.0 jig/g).

Nickel. Nearly all median nickel concentrations in 

water appeared to be below a reporting limit. The Little 

Menomonee River subwatershed had the highest median 

nickel concentration in sediment (40.0 [ig/g). The lowest 

median concentrations in sediment were in the Upper Menomonee River, Little Menomonee Creek, and Lilly Creek subwatersheds (20.0 |ig/g).

Zinc. Median zinc concentrations in water (30 to 

90 mg/L) in the Underwood Creek, Mitchell Field Drainage 

Ditch and Little Menomonee River subwatersheds matched

or exceeded the Canadian aquatic-life guideline concentration of 30 mg/L. The Little Menomonee River, Lower Menomonee River, and Kinnickinnic River subwatersheds had the 

highest median zinc concentrations in sediment (503 to 

540 mg/g). The Upper Menomonee River, Little Menomonee Creek, Lilly Creek, Lincoln Creek, and Middle Root 

River subwatersheds had the lowest median concentrations 

(52 to 160 mg/g).

Pesticides

Historically used pesticides. The following historically used pesticides were selected from the MMSD Corridor Study database for description in this report: chlordane, 

dieldrin, DDT, DDE, DDD,p,p'-DDT,p,p'-DDE, andp,p'- 

DDD in sediment; and dieldrin, chlordane (cis and irons isomers), nonachlor (cis and trans isomers), p,p '-DDT, p,p '- 

DDE, andp,/?'-DDD in tissue (fish, shellfish, and others). Of 

the selected pesticides in sediment, only dieldrin was at a 

concentration below the reporting limit. Of the selected pesticides in tissue, the following were found only at concentrations below the reporting limit: chlordane (cis and trans isomers), nonachlor (cis isomer), p,p'-DDT, andp,/?'-DDD. 

Most sites with data for pesticides in sediment were clustered around the confluence of the Milwaukee, Menomonee, 

and Kinnickinnic Rivers. Data for pesticides in tissue were 

available for several sites in the Milwaukee and Kinnickinnic watersheds. Nearly all data for pesticides in sediment and 

tissue were collected in the early 1990s or before.

Pesticides still in use. Pesticides in current use are most 

likely found in surface water and include atrazine, deethyl 

atrazine, diazinon, metolachlor, prometon, simazine, and 

2,4-D. All of the selected pesticides were observed at concentrations above the reporting limit in at least one sample; 

however, no maximum concentration of any of the selected 

pesticides was above an MCL or other health advisory level. 

Data selected for analysis in this report were collected at two 

sites: the Milwaukee River at Estabrook Park in Milwaukee 

and Lincoln Creek at 47th Street in Milwaukee during 1993- 

2002 and 2001-2002, respectively.

Polychlorinated Biphenyls

Sites with PCB data in water were distributed throughout the planning area. Sites sampled for PCBs in sediment 

were sparse throughout the northern part of the planning 

area, with a concentration of sites at the confluence of the 

Milwaukee, Menomonee, and Kinnickinnic Rivers. Sites 

with PCB data in tissue were sparse. Concentrations of most 

PCB data were below a reporting limit, and the latest collection date was usually during the mid-1990s.

Samples from a subset of the sites where all PCBs were 

analyzed for were also analyzed for toxic PCBs. No data for 

toxic PCBs in tissues were available. Nearly all concentrations of toxic PCBs in water were below a reporting limit,
Summary and Conclusions 217

whereas nearly all concentrations of toxic PCBs in sediment 

were above a reporting limit. All data for toxic PCBs were 

collected in the 1990s.

Ecological Indicators of Water Quality

Ecological indicators of water quality discussed in the 

report include community surveys of macroinvertebrates and 

fish, chlorophyll a concentrations, habitat assessments, 

channel-measurement data, and fecal coliform and E. coli 

bacterial counts.

Macroinvertebrates. Index scores based on macroinvertebrate communities can indicate relative quality of surface water. Subwatersheds with a relatively low median percentage (0 to 1 percent) of invertebrates in the insect orders 

Ephemeroptera Plecoptera Trichoptera (EPT) (indicating 

poor water quality) were the Little Menomonee River, NorX-Way Channel, Lincoln Creek, Kinnickinnic River, Wilson 

Park Creek, Deer Creek, East Branch Root River, and North 

Branch Oak Creek. The highest median percent EPT concentrations (40 to 51 percent) for subwatersheds were calculated 

for Lower Root River, Middle Root River, Middle Oak 

Creek, and Cedar Creek.

The Hilsenhoff Biotic Index (HBI) represents the number of arthropod invertebrates in certain species multiplied 

by their pollution-tolerance value, divided by the number of 

arthropods in the sample. Subwatersheds with median HBI 

scores (6.58 to 8.00) indicating "poor" or "very poor" water 

quality were the Little Menomonee River, Deer Creek, North 

Branch Oak Creek, Upper Oak Creek, Middle Oak Creek, 

Lower Oak Creek, Upper Root River, Lower Root River, and 

East Branch Root River. Only the Little Menomonee Creek 

(4.80) and Willow Creek (4.87) subwatersheds had median 

HBI scores indicating a "good" water-quality rating.

Fish. Fish collection has taken place in all but the smallest headwater streams in the MMSD planning area at one 

time or another; however, the majority offish data collection 

took place in the 1970s. The Index of Biotic Integrity (IBI), 

which assesses biotic integrity and environmental quality of 

small streams, was calculated for fish data collected since 

1990. The Lincoln Creek subwatershed had the lowest 

median IBI score (10), indicating "very poor" conditions. 

The Lower Milwaukee River subwatershed had the highest 

median IBI score (62), indicating "good" conditions.

Chlorophyll a. The highest median chlorophyll a concentration (11.70 mg/m3) was measured in the Lower Milwaukee River subwatershed, and the lowest median concentration 

(1.46 mg/m3) was measured in the Upper Root River subwatershed. A subtle seasonal pattern corresponding to algalbloom periods was displayed by chlorophyll a data. Longterm trends at three sites showed an absence of relatively high 

concentrations during the late 1980s and early 1990s.

Habitat and geomorphic data. Sites where habitat 

assessments were done were sparse throughout the MMSD 

planning area but they were in many subwatersheds except

those of the Fox River watershed. Data for habitat assessments were available beginning in 1991 and extending 

through the late 1990s or 2001 in most subwatersheds. Additional stream-channel morphology and streambed measurements were recorded during the MMSD Menomonee River 

Sediment Transport study (2000-01). Sites examined as part 

of the Menomonee River sediment transport study were 

exclusively in the subwatersheds of the Menomonee River 

watershed and were sampled once (Inter-Fluve, Inc, 2001).

Bacteria. The highest median fecal coliform concentrations were measured in the Underwood Creek (20,000 

CFU/100 mL) and Honey Creek (16,650 CFU/100 mL) subwatersheds. The lowest median concentration (230 CFU/ 

100 mL), which was above the USEPA recreational limit of 

200 colonies per 100 mL, was measured in the Middle Root 

River subwatershed.

E. coli samples were collected in six subwatersheds 

in the planning area beginning in October 2000. The highest 

median concentrations were measured in the Honey Creek 

(2,400 CFU/100 mL) and Lincoln Creek (1,300 CFU/100 mL) 

subwatersheds. The Lower Milwaukee River (220 CFU/100 

mL) and Upper Menomonee River (300 CFU/100 mL) subwatersheds had the lowest median concentrations.

Potential Areas for Data Collection for 

Phase II

A major purpose of this study was to determine where 

additional sampling should be conducted under the second 

phase of the Corridor Study. Additional sampling may 

include:

• Some subwatersheds, such as those in the headwaters.

• Emerging contaminants such as pharmaceuticals 

and personal care products (PPCPs), human hormones, organic wastewater contaminants, and other 

constituents that result from human activity.

• E. coli, which can serve as an indicator of health risk 

to swimmers and other recreationl water users.

• Pesticides in all media.

• PCBs.

• Trace elements in water, bed sediment, and tissues 

(fish, shellfish, and others).

• Samples during winter months or during early 

snowmelt episodes to address constituents such as 

chloride and some nutrients that have seasonal variability and that may be affected by factors such as 

road deicing during the winter.

• Samples for macroinvertebrate and fish-community 

data and habitat assessments.

• Physical data such as stream-channel cross-section 

profiles, bridge-scour assessments, flood-plain 

maps, structures, and shoreline conditions.
218 Water-Resources-Related Information for the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin

References Cited

Ab Razak, I.A., 1995, Sedimentation and PAH sources of the 

Kinnickinnic River between the Becker St. Bridge and the 

Wisconsin Wrecking Company: Milwaukee, University 

of Wisconsin, M.S. thesis, 151 p.

Ab Razak, I.A., 1999, Combined sewer overflows and water 

quality before and after deep tunnels operation in Milwaukee, Wisconsin: Milwaukee, University of Wisconsin, 

Ph.D. dissertation, 313 p.

Ab Razak, I.A., Li, A., and Christensen, E.R., 1996, Association of PAHs, (super 137) Cs, and (super 210) Pb with 

clay, silt, and organic carbon in sediments: Water Science 

and Technology, v. 34, no. 7-8, p. 29-35.

Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, 1999a, 

ToxFAQs for Arsenic, accessed February 26, 2003, at 

URL http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/tfacts2.html

Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, 1999b, 

ToxFAQs for Cadmium, accessed February 26, 2003, at 

URL http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/tfacts5.html

Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, 1999c, 

ToxFAQs for Chromium, accessed February 26, 2003, at 

URL http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/tfacts7.html

Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, 1999d, 

ToxFAQs for Nickel, accessed February 26,2003, at URL 

http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/tfactsl5.html

Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, 1999e, 

ToxFAQs for Zinc, accessed February 26, 2003, at URL 

http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/tfacts60.html

Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, 2003, 

ToxFAQs, accessed February 26, 2003, at URL 

http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/toxfaq.html

Amin, O.M., Balsano, J.S., andPfalzgraf K.A., 1973, Lernea 

cyprinacea Linn. (Copepoda: Crustacea) from Root 

River, Wisconsin, fishes: American Midland Naturalist, 

v. 89, no. 2, p. 484-487.

Anderson, George, 1975, Classification of Wisconsin lakes 

by trophic condition: Wisconsin Department of Natural 

Resources, Bureau of Water Quality, 108 p.

Anderson, R.C., 2001, Southeast Wisconsin's Menomonee 

River and Oak Creek biological evaluation 1999-2000: 

Milwaukee, Wisconsin Lutheran College Biology Department, Technical Bulletin 001, 29 p.

Arteaga, P.M. de, 1989, A relationship between bacterial and 

flagellate abundance in the Menomonee River and Lake 

Michigan: Milwaukee, University of Wisconsin, M.S. 

thesis, 112 p.

Auer, N.A., ed., 1982, Identification of larval fishes of the 

Great Lakes Basin with emphasis on the Lake Michigan 

Drainage: Ann Arbor, Mich., Great Lakes Fishery Commission, 744 p.

Bacon, Bruce, Kilian, Charles, Waskow, Larry, Gatti, Ron, 

Grunewald, Tim, and Lien, Ricky, 1995, Waterfowl 

breeding population survey for Wisconsin, 1973-1995: 

Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, book 4, 

10 p.

Bannerman, R.T., Baun, K., and Bohn, M., 1983a, Evaluation of urban nonpoint source pollution management in 

Milwaukee County, Wisconsin—Volume IV, Executive 

summary: Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, 

8 p.

Bannerman, R.T., Baun, K., Bohn, M., Hughes, P.E., and 

Graczyk, D.A., 1983b, Evaluation of urban nonpoint 

source pollution management in Milwaukee County, Wisconsin—Volume I, Urban stormwater characteristics, pollutant sources, and management by street sweeping: Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, 191 p.

Bannerman, R.T., Konrad, J.G., and Becker, D., 1979a, The 

IJC Menomonee River Watershed Study—Volume X, 

Effects of tributary inputs on Lake Michigan during 

high flows: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 

EPA-905/4-79-029-J, 46 p.

Bannerman, R.T., Konrad, J.G., Becker, D., Simsiman, 

G.V., Chesters, G., Goodrich, M.J., and Abrams, B., 

1979b, The IJC Menomonee River Watershed 

Study—Volume III, Surface water monitoring data: 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 

EPA-905/4-79-029-C.

Bannerman, R.T., Legg, A.D., and Greb, S.R., 1996, Quality 

of Wisconsin stormwater 1989-94: U.S. Geological 

Survey Open-File Report 96-458, 26 p.

Bartosova, A., and Novotny, V., 1999, Model of spring 

runoff quantity and quality for urban watersheds: Water 

Science and Technology, v. 39, no. 12, p. 249-256.

Baumann, J., Domanik, A., and Konrad, J., 1980, Nonpoint 

source pollution in urban areas, in Seminar on water quality management trade-offs—point source vs. diffuse 

source pollution, Chicago, 111., 1980: Chicago, 111., U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, Great Lakes National 

Program Office, Report EPA-905/9-80-009, 393 p.

Baun, Ken, 1982, Alternative methods of estimating pollutant loads in flowing water: Wisconsin Department of 

Natural Resources Technical Bulletin 133, 11 p.

Becker, G.C., 1976, Environmental status of the Lake Michigan Region—Volume 17. Inland fishes of the Lake 

Michigan Drainage Basin: Argonne, 111., Argonne 

National Laboratory, ANL/ES^O v. 17, 237 p.

Becker, G.C., and Johnson, T.R., 1970, Illustrated key to the 

minnows of Wisconsin: Stevens Point, University of 

Wisconsin, 45 p.

Bothwell, M.L., 1977, Studies on the distribution of phytoplankton pigments and nutrients in the Milwaukee 

Harbor Area: Milwaukee, Wis., University of Wisconsin 

Center for Great Lakes Studies Special Report 25, 174 p.

Boyer, L.F., 1988, Sediment-profile camera study of 

Milwaukee Harbor sediments: Journal of Great Lakes 

Research, v. 14, no. 4, p. 444-465.
References Cited 219

Brynildson, Inga, 1980, Wisconsin's endangered reptiles, 

fish, and molluscs: Wisconsin Department of Natural 

Resources, Life Tracks II, supplement to Wisconsin 

Natural Resources, 16 p.

Callendar, Edward, and Rice, K.C., 2000, The urban environment gradient—Anthropogenic influences on the spatial and temporal distributions of lead and zinc in sediments: Environmental Science & Technology, v. 34, 

no. 2, p. 232-236.

Camber, S.L., 1993, The effects of the North Shore Tunnel 

on the Milwaukee River: Milwaukee, University of Wisconsin, M.S. thesis, 237 p.

Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment, 1999, 

Canadian water quality guidelines of the protection of 

aquatic life—Introduction, in Canadian environmental 

quality guidelines, 1999, Canadian Council of Ministers 

of the Environment: Winnipeg, 2 p.

Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment, 2001, 

Canadian sediment guidelines for the protection of aquatic 

life—Introduction, Updated, in Canadian environmental 

quality guidelines, 1999, Canadian Council of Ministers 

of the Environment: Winnepeg, 3 p.

Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment, 2002a, 

Canadian sediment quality guidelines for the protection of 

aquatic life—Summary tables, Updated, in Canadian 

environmental quality guidelines, 1999, Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment: Winnipeg, 7 p.

Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment, 2002b, 

Canadian water quality guidelines for the protection of 

aquatic life—Summary table, in Canadian environmental 

quality guidelines, 1999, Canadian Council of Ministers 

of the Environment: Winnipeg, 9 p.

Canadian Ground Water Association, 1999, Fact Sheet no. 2 

The quality of ground water, accessed 2/21/03 at URL 

http ://www .cgwa.org/fact2_eng .pdf

Casper, G.S., 1996, Geographic distributions of the amphibians and reptiles of Wisconsin: Milwaukee Public 

Museum Inc., 87 p.

CH2M Hill, TN and Associate, and Hey and Associates, 

2000, Storm water pollution prevention plan: Milwaukee, 

Wis., CH2M Hill, 24 v.

Cheetham, R.N., Jr., 1973, Erosion and sedimentation in the 

Southeast Wisconsin Rivers Basin: U.S. Department of 

Agriculture Soil Conservation Service, Reference Report 

No. 9, 109 p.

Cherkauer, D.S., 1975a, The hydrologic response of small 

watersheds to suburban development-observations and 

modeling, in Whipple, William, Jr., 1975, Urbanization 

and water quality control: Minneapolis, Minn., American 

Water Resources Association, p. 110-119.

Cherkauer, D.S., 1975b, Urbanization impact on water quality during a flood in small watersheds: Water Resources 

Bulletin, v. 11, no. 5, p. 987-998.

Cherkauer, D.S., and Ostenso, N.A., 1976, The effect of salt 

on small, artificial lakes: Water Resources Bulletin, v. 12, 

no. 6, p. 1259-1266.

Christensen, E.R., Li, An, Ab Razak, LA., Rachdawong, P., 

and Karls, J.F., 1997a, Sources of polycyclic aromatic 

hydrocarbons in sediments of the Kinnickinnic River, 

Wisconsin: Journal of Great Lakes Research, v. 23, no. 1, 

p. 61-73.

Christensen, E.R., and Lo, C.K., 1986, Polychlorinated 

biphenyls in dated sediments of Milwaukee Harbor, 

Wisconsin, USA: Environmental Pollution, Series B, 

v. 12, p. 217-232.

Christensen, E.R., Phoomiphakdeephan, W., and Ab Razak, 

LA., 1997b, Water quality in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, 

versus intake crib location: Journal of Environmental 

Engineering, v. 123, no. 5, p. 492^98.

Citizens' Advisory Committee, 1981, Problems of the Milwaukee sewer solution: Milwaukee, Wis., 17 p.

City of Milwaukee Wisconsin Department of Public Works 

and Consoer, Townsend, and Associates Consulting Engineers, 1974, City of Milwaukee, Wisconsin Humboldt 

Avenue Pollution Abatement Demonstration Project: 7 v.

City of Milwaukee Wisconsin Department of Public Works 

and Consoer, Townsend, and Associates Consulting Engineers, 1975, Detention tank for combined sewer overflow 

Milwaukee, Wisconsin: Demonstration Project, 

EPA-600/2-75-071, 290 p.

Conger, D.H., 1971, Estimating magnitude and frequency of 

floods in Wisconsin: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File 

Report, 200 p.

Conger, D.H., 1986, Estimating magnitude and frequency of 

floods for Wisconsin urban streams: U.S. Geological 

Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 86^005, 

18 p.

Corsi, S.R., Booth, N.L., and Hall, D.W., 2001a, Aircraft and 

runway deicers at General Mitchell International Airport, 

Milwaukee, Wisconsin, USA, 1. Biochemical oxygen 

demand and dissolved oxygen in receiving streams: Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, v. 20, no. 7, 

p. 1474-1472.

Corsi, S.R., Hall, D.W., and Geis, S.W., 2001b, Aircraft and 

runway deicers at General Mitchell International Airport, 

Milwaukee, Wisconsin, USA, 2. Toxicity of aircraft and 

runway deicers: Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, v. 20, no. 7, p. 1483-1490.

Cumming, K.S., and Mayer, C.A., 1992, Field guide to 

freshwater mussels of the Midwest: Champaign, 111., Illinois Natural History Survey, 194 p.

DeVault, D.S., 1985, Contaminants in fish from Great Lakes 

harbors and tributary mouths: Archives of Environmental 

Contamination and Toxicology, v. 14, no. 5, p. 587-594.

DeVita, W.M., 1994, Use of semipermeable polymeric 

membrane devices to monitor organic contaminants in 

Lincoln Creek, Milwaukee, Wisconsin: Stevens Point, 

University of Wisconsin, M.S. thesis, 73 p.
220 Water-Resources-Related Information for the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin

Dong, A., Chesters, G., and Simsiman, G.V., 1979, The IJC 

Menomonee River Watershed Study, Volume VI, Dispersibility of soils and elemental composition of soils, 

sediments and dust and dirt from the Menomonee River 

Watershed: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 

EPA-905/4-79-029F, 55 p.

Dong, A., Chesters, G., and Simsiman, G.V., 1983a, Soil 

dispersibility: Soil Science, v. 136, no. 4, p. 208-212.

Dong, A., Chesters, G., and Simsiman, G.V., 1984, Metal 

composition of soil sediments, and urban dust and dirt 

samples from the Menomonee River Watershed, Wisconsin: Water, Air and Soil Pollution, v. 22, no. 3, p. 257- 

275.

Dong, A., Simsiman, G.V., and Chesters, G., 1983b, Particle-size distribution and phosphorus levels in soil, sediment, and urban dust and dirt samples from the Menomonee River Watershed, Wisconsin, U.S.A.: Water 

Research, v. 17, no. 5, p. 569-577.

Druckenmiller, H.S., 1980, Environmental impact statement 

on the proposed Little Muskego Lake rehabilitation 

project: Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, 

Bureau of Environmental Impact, 93 p.

Dufour, A.P. and Ballentine, P., 1986, Ambient water quality criteria for bacteria—1986: Washington, D.C., U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water Regulations and Standards Division, EPA-440/5-84-002, 

18 p.

Dufour, A.P., and Cabelli, V.J., 1984, Health effects criteria 

for fresh recreational waters: Cincinnati, Ohio, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA-600/1-84-004, 33 p.

Eggers, S.D., and Reed, D.M., 1988, Wetland plants and 

plant communities of Minnesota & Wisconsin: U.S. Army 

Corps of Engineers, St. Paul District, 201 p.

Emmling, P.J., 1976, Factors affecting the distribution of 

sphaeriidae (Mollusca:Pelecypoda) in the Milwaukee 

Harbor, Lake Michigan: Milwaukee, University of Wisconsin, M.S. thesis, 147 p.

Environment Canada, 2001, Summary of the report on the 

assessment of the substance road salts specific on the 

Priority Substances List: Canada Gazette, part 1, v. 135, 

no. 48, p. 4335-4336.

Fago, D.M., 1984, Distribution and relative abundance of 

fishes in Wisconsin-IV. Root, Milwaukee, Des Plaines, 

and Fox River Basins: Wisconsin Department of Natural 

Resources Technical Bulletin 147, 128 p.

Fetter, Frank, and Feyerherm, Jennifer, 1996, 1996 SARA 

313 data summary—Wisconsin's toxic release inventory: 

Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Division of 

Enforcement and Science, Bureau of Integrated Science 

Services, 48 p.

Fitzgerald, S.A., 1997, Results of quality-control sampling 

of water, bed sediment, and tissue in the Western Lake 

Michigan Drainages Study Unit of the National WaterQuality Assessment Program: U.S. Geological Survey 

Water-Resources Investigations Report 97-4148, 24 p.

Fitzpatrick, F.A., and Giddings, E.M.P., 1997, Stream habitat characteristics of fixed sites in the Western Lake Michigan Drainages, Wisconsin and Michigan, 1993-95: U.S. 

Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations 

Report 95-4211-B, 58 p.

Fox, I.K., 1971, Water resources policy in Wisconsin, 

Volume 1—A summary assessment: Madison, University 

of Wisconsin, Water Resources Center, 164 p.

Gebert, W.A., 1971, Low-flow frequency of Wisconsin 

streams: U.S. Geological Survey Hydrologic Investigations Atlas HA-390, 1 sheet.

Gerber, T.D., 1994, Physiological ecology of seven North 

American myriophyllum species (Haloragaceae): Milwaukee, University of Wisconsin, Ph.D. dissertation, 

188 p.

Gergerich, J.M., 1978, Correlations between bacteriolytic 

organisms and fecal coliform bacteria in two Milwaukee 

Rivers: Milwaukee, University of Wisconsin, Ph.D. 

dissertation, 102 p.

Ghosh, Upal, Gillette, J.S., Luthy, R.G., and Zare, R.N., 

2000, Microscale location, characterization, and association of poly cyclic aromatic hydrocarbons on harbor sediment particles: Environmental Science & Technology, 

v. 34, no. 9, p. 1729-1736.

Gin, M.F., 1992, Sedimentation patterns of the Milwaukee 

Harbor Estuary determined from TOC, Pb-210, and 

Cs-137 measurements: Milwaukee, University of Wisconsin, M.S. thesis, 155 p.

Graczyk, D.J., Walker, J.F., Greb, S.R., Corsi, S.R., and 

Owens, D.W., 1993, Evaluation of nonpoint-source 

contamination, Wisconsin-selected data for 1992 water 

year: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 93-630, 

48 p.

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, 14 p.

Great Lakes Commission, 2000, Assessment of the Lake 

Michigan monitoring inventory, a report on the Lake 

Michigan tributary monitoring project: Ann Arbor, 

Michigan, 140 p.

Great Lakes WATER Institute, 2003, Sources of E. coli in 

Surface Waters, accessed September 11, 2003, at URL 

http://www.uwm.edu/Dept/GL WI/ecoli/sources%20of% 

20ecoli%20in%20water.htmHajda, Pavel, 1993, Eutrophication modeling of the Milwaukee River: Milwaukee, 

Marquette University, M.S. thesis, 186 p.

Hajda, Pavel, 1993, Eutrophication modeling of the Milwaukee River: Milwaukee, Marquette University, Masters 

Thesis.

Hajda, Pavel, and Novotny, Vladimir, 1996, Modelling 

impact of urban and upstream nonpoint sources on 

eutrophication of the Milwaukee River: Water Science 

and Technology, v. 33, no. 4-5, p. 153-158.
References Cited 221

Hansen, J., Sesing, M, Hughes, P.E., and Graczyk, D.J., 

1983, Evaluation of urban nonpoint-source pollution management in Milwaukee County, Wisconsin; Volume III, 

Study site characteristics, experimental methods and quality assurance program: Springfield, Virginia, National 

Technical Information Service, PB84-114180, 165 p.

Harding, J.H., 1997, Amphibians and reptiles of the Great 

Lakes region: Ann Arbor, Mich., University of Michigan, 

378 p.

Harsch, Harold, 1972, Selected biological, chemical and 

physical parameters—lower Menomonee River: 2 v., 

286 p.

Harza Engineering Company, 2001, Channelization study 

completion: Milwaukee, Wisconsin, Harza Engineering 

Company, memorandum W022PE001, 55 p.

Hausmann, P.S., 1974, The benthic macrofauna of Milwaukee Harbor and adjacent Lake Michigan: Milwaukee, University of Wisconsin, M.S. thesis, 67 p.

Health Canada, 2002, Summary of Guidelines for Canadian 

Drinking Water Quality April 2002, accessed January 15, 

2003, at URL http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/ehp/ehd/catalogue/bch_pubs/summary.pdf

Hem, J.D., 1985, Study and interpretation of the chemical 

characteristics of natural water (3d ed.): U.S. Geological 

Survey Water-Supply Paper 2254, 263 p., 3 pis.

Hilsenhoff, W.L., 1977, Use of arthropods to evaluate water 

quality of streams: Wisconsin Department of Natural 

Resources Technical Bulletin 100, 15 p.

Hilsenhoff, W.L., 1988, Rapid field assessment of organic 

pollution with a family-level biotic index: Journal of the 

North American Benthological Society, v. 7, p. 65-68.

Hilsenhoff, W.L., 1998, A modification of the biotic index of 

organic stream pollution to remedy problems and permit 

its use throughout the year: Great Lakes Entomologist, 31, 

p. 1-12.

Hindall, S.M., and Flint, R.F., 1970, Sediment yields of Wisconsin streams: U.S. Geological Survey Hydrologic 

Investigations Atlas HA-376, 1 sheet.

Hine, R.L., Les, B.L., and Hellmich, B.F., 1981, Leopard 

frog populations and mortality in Wisconsin: Wisconsin 

Department of Natural Resources Technical Bulletin 122, 

39 p.

Hobbs, H.H., III, and Jass, J.P., 1988, The crayfishes and 

shrimp of Wisconsin: Milwaukee, Wis., Milwaukee 

Public Museum, 177 p.

Holmstrom, B.K., 1982, Low-flow characteristics of streams 

in the Lake Michigan Basin, Wisconsin: U.S. Geological 

Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 81-1193, 

102 p.

House, L.B., 1987, Simulation of unsteady flow in the Milwaukee Harbor Estuary at Milwaukee, Wisconsin: U.S. 

Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations 

Report 86-4050, 19 p.

Hunt, R.L., 1990, Habitat development techniques used to 

improve brown trout fisheries in Wisconsin, in Borawa, 

J.C., ed., Brown trout workshop—biology and management, Asheville, N.C., 1988, Proceedings: Asheville, 

N.C., Trout Committee, Southern Division, American 

Fisheries Society, p. 12-20.

Hussa, R.O., Hopps, H.B., McCarthy, J.W., and Rinehart, 

T.L., 1973, The creosote problem in the Little Menomonee River: Citizens for Menomonee River Restoration, 

Inc., 67 p.

Inskip, P.D., 1986, Negative associations between abundances of muskellunge and northern pike-evidence and 

possible explanations, in Hall, G.E., ed., Managing muskies, a treatise on the biology and propagation of muskellunge in North America-Proceedings of an international 

symposium, 1984, La Crosse, Wis.: Bethesda, Md., American Fisheries Society, Special Publication 15, p. 135- 

150.

Inter-Fluve, Inc., 1998, Menomonee River drop structure 

removal project pre-design memorandum, Milwaukee, 

WI: Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District, 

[variously paginated].

Inter-Fluve, Inc., 2001, Sediment transport study of the 

Menomonee River Watershed: MMSD Contract Number 

W021PE001, [variously paginated].

Jerger, D.E., Simon, P.B., Davis, M.M., and Schenk, J.E., 

1978, Assessment of the degree of contamination of 

organisms in areas exposed to higher-than-average 

loadings: Ann Arbor, Mich., Environmental Control 

Technology Corp., 40 p.

Jodie, J.B., 1974, Quality of urban freeway storm water: 

Milwaukee, University of Wisconsin, M.S. thesis, 133 p.

Johanson, J.J., 1990, The hydrogeologic interaction between 

the Milwaukee River and the ground-water system at the 

Blue Hole abandoned landfill, Milwaukee, Wisconsin: 

Milwaukee, University of Wisconsin, M.S. thesis, 211 p.

Kaemmerer, Dan, O'Brien, Audrey, Sheffy, Tom, and 

Skavronek, Steve, 1992, The quest for clean water, in 

Hartig, J.H., and Zarull, R.A., eds., Under RAPs: Ann 

Arbor, University of Michigan, p. 139-160.

Kammerer, P.A., Jr., and Krug, W.R., 1993, Wisconsin 

stream water quality, in U.S. Geological Survey, National 

water summary 1990-91—Hydrologic events and stream 

water quality: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply 

Paper 2400, p. 561-568.

Karr, J.R., 1981, Assessment of biotic integrity using fish 

communities: Fisheries, v. 6, p. 21-27.

Karr, J.R., and Dudley, D.R., 1981, Ecological perspectives 

on water quality goal: Environmental Management, v. 5: 

p. 55-68.

Karr, J.R., Fausch, K.D., Angermeier, P.L., Yant, P.R., and 

Schlosser, I.J., 1986, Assessing biological integrity in 

running waters—a method and its rationale: Illinois 

Natural History Survey, Special publication 5, 28 p.
222 Water-Resources-Related Information for the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin

Kasun, J.M., 2001, Ecological risk of contaminated 

sediments in the Menomonee River: Milwaukee, 

University of Wisconsin, M.S. thesis, 115 p.

Kincaid, G.W., 1981, Acidity of urban precipitation and its 

buffering by overland flow: Milwaukee, Marquette 

University, M.S. thesis, 175 p.

Kizlauskas, A.G., 1986, Report on an investigation of sediment contamination; the Milwaukee Estuary, Wisconsin, 

sampled July 29-31,1980: Chicago, U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, Great Lakes National Program Office, 

EPA-905/4-86-001, 54 p.

Kleinert, S.J., 1971, Methoxychlor runoff in Milwaukee's 

Lincoln Creek system following methoxychlor applications to control dutch elm disease: Wisconsin Department 

of Natural Resources, Report 2, 11 p.

Kleinert, S.J., and Degurse, P.E., 1972, Mercury levels in 

Wisconsin fish and wildlife: Wisconsin Department of 

Natural Resources Technical Bulletin 52, 22 p.

Kleinert, S.J., Degurse, P.E., and Ruhland, J., 1974, Concentration of metals in fish, in Surveys of toxic metals in Wisconsin: Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources 

Technical Bulletin 74, 19 p.

Kohler, G.J., 1982, Factors affecting phytoplankton species 

composition, dominance and succession in shallow, 

hypereutrophic Big Muskego Lake: Milwaukee, 

University of Wisconsin, M.S. thesis, 135 p.

Kolpin, D.W., Furlong, E.T., Meyer, M.T., Thurman, E.M., 

Zaugg, S.D., Barber, L.B., and Buxton, H.T., 2002, Pharmaceuticals, hormones, and other organic wastewater 

contaminants in U.S. Streams, 1999-2000—a national 

reconnaissance: Environmental Science & Technology, 

v. 36, no. 6, p. 1202-1211.

Konrad, J.G., Chesters, Gordon, and Bauer, K.W., 1978, 

Menomonee River pilot watershed study—summary pilot 

watershed report: Windsor, Ontario, International Joint 

Commission, 77 p.

Konrad, J.G., Chesters, Gordon, and Bauer, K.W., 1979, The 

IJC Menomonee River Watershed Study, Volume VII 

Groundwater hydrology: U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, EPA-905/4-79-029-G, PB81-203 069, 166 p.

Konrad, J.G., and Kleinert, S.J., 1974, Removal of metals 

from waste waters by municipal sewage treatment plants, 

in Surveys of toxic metals in Wisconsin: Wisconsin 

Department of Natural Resources Technical Bulletin 74, 

15 p.

Korth, P.A., 1978, The affect of algae on sediment oxygen 

demand in the Milwaukee River area influenced by 

combined sewer overflows: Milwaukee, University of 

Wisconsin, M.S. thesis, 40 p.

Kreutzberger, W.A., Race, R.A., Meinholz, T.L., Harper, 

M., and Ibach, J., 1980, Impact of sediments on dissolved 

oxygen concentrations following combined sewer overflows: Journal of the Water Pollution Control Federation, 

v. 52, no. l,p. 192-201.

Krug, W.R., Conger, D.H., and Gebert, W.A., 1992, Floodfrequency characteristics of Wisconsin streams: U.S. 

Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations 

Report 91-4128, 185 p., 2 pis.

Krumbiegel, E.R., and Hulbert, R.H., 1970, Report on the 

operation of the Kinnickinnic River flushing stations and 

its effect on downstream water quality: Milwaukee Health 

Department, 20 p.

Lai, Feizhou, 1995, Monte Carlo modeling of toxic metal 

contaminations in Milwaukee River: Milwaukee, 

Marquette University, M.S. thesis, 222 p.

Lawrence, C.L., and Ellefson, B.R., 1982, Water use in Wisconsin, 1979: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources 

Investigations 82-444, 98 p.

Lee, C.J., 1997, Geophysical investigations of seepage from 

the Milwaukee River, Milwaukee County, Wisconsin: 

Milwaukee, University of Wisconsin, M.S. thesis, 81 p.

Lee, K.K., Brooks, A.S., Resman, C.C., Stack, D.M., and 

Paddock, R.W., 1981, An investigation of the biological 

and chemical water quality and the dispersion of sewage 

effluent in Milwaukee Harbor and adjacent Lake Michigan: Center for Great Lakes Studies, 334 p.

Legler, K., Legler, D., and Westover, D., 1998, Guide to 

common dragonflies of Wisconsin (2d ed.): Published by 

the author [K. Legler, 429 Franklin Street, SaukCity, Wis. 

53583], 1 v.

Lenat, D.R., 1988, Water quality assessment of streams 

using qualitative collection method for benthic macroinvertebrates: Journal of the North American Benthological 

Society, v. 7, p. 222-233.

Lenz, B.N., and Rheaume, S.J., 2000, Benthic invertebrates 

of fixed sites in the Western Lake Michigan Drainages, 

Wisconsin and Michigan, 1993-95: U.S. Geological 

Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 

95-4211-D, 30 p.

Li, A., Ab Razak, I.A., Ni, F., Gin, M.F., and Christensen, 

E.R., 1998, Poly cyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in the 

sediments of the Milwaukee Harbor Estuary, Wisconsin, 

USA: Water, Air, & Soil Pollution, v. 101, no. 1-4, 

p. 417^34.

Lindsey, M.E., Meyer, M.T., and Thurman, E.M., 2001, 

Analysis of trace levels of sulfonamide and tetracycline 

antimicrobials in groundwater and surface water using 

solid-phase extraction and liquid chromatography/mass 

spectrometry: Analytical Chemistry v. 73, p. 4640-4646.

Lineback, J.A., Bleuer, N.K., Mickelson, D.M., Farrand, W.R., and Goldthwait, R.P., 1983, Quaternary geologic map of the Chicago 4 degree by 6 degree Quadrangle, United States, [edited and integrated by Richmond, 

G.M. and Fullerton, D.S.]: U.S. Geological Survey Miscellaneous Investigations Series Map I-1420(NK-16).

Lo, Chi-Keung, 1982, PCBs in dated sediment cores from 

Milwaukee Harbor: Milwaukee, University of Wisconsin, 

M.S. thesis, 117 p.
References Cited 223

Lueschow, L.A., 1972, Biology and control of selected 

aquatic nuisances in recreational waters: Wisconsin 

Department of Natural Resources Technical Bulletin 57, 

36 p.

Lyons, John, 1989, Correspondence between the distribution 

offish assemblages in Wisconsin streams and Omernik's 

ecoregions: American Midland Naturalist, v. 122, p. 163- 

182.

Lyons, John, 1992a, The length of stream to sample with a 

towed electrofishing unit when fish species richness is 

estimated: North American Journal of Fisheries Management, v. 12, p. 198-203.

Lyons, John, 1992b, Using the Index of Biotic Integrity (IBI) 

to measure environmental quality in warmwater streams 

of Wisconsin: St. Paul, Minn., U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, North Central Forest Experiment 

Station, General Technical Report NC-149, 51 p.

Lyons, John, and Kanehl, Paul, 1993, A comparison of four 

electroshocking procedures for assessing the abundance 

of smallmouth bass in Wisconsin streams: St. Paul, Minn., 

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

Central Forest Experiment Station, General Technical 

Report NC-159, 35 p.

MacDonald, D.D., Ingersoll, C.G., and Berger, T.A., 2000, 

Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems: 

Archives of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology, v. 39, p. 20-31.

Mace, S.E., 1984, Impacts of phosphorus on streams: Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Water Resource 

Management, 91 p.

Madigan, M.T., Martinko, J.M., and Parker, Jack, 1997, 

Brock-Biology of microorganisms (8th ed): Upper Saddle 

River, N.J., Simon and Schuster, p. 977-982.

Martin, R.H., Boebel, E.G., Dunst, R.C., Williams, O.D., 

Olsen, M.V., Merideth, R.W., Jr., and Scarpace, F.L., 

1983, Wisconsin's lakes, a trophic assessment using landsat digital data: Wisconsin Department of Natural 

Resources, Inland Lake Renewal Section, 294 p.

Masterson, J.P., and Bannerman, R.T., 1994, Impacts of 

stormwater runoff on urban streams in Milwaukee 

County, Wisconsin, in Pederson, G.L., ed., American 

Water Resources Association National Symposium on 

Water Quality, 1994, Proceedings: Herndon, Virginia, 

American Water Resources Association Technical Publication Series TPS-94-4, p. 123-133.

Mathiak, H.A., 1979, A river survey of the unionid mussels 

of Wisconsin 1973-1977: Horicon, Wis., Sand Shell 

Press, 75 p.

McFarland, V.A. and Clarke, J.U., 1989, Environmental 

occurrence, abundance, and potential toxicity of polychlorinated biphenyl congeners—considerations for a congener-specific analysis: Environmental Health Perspective, 

v. 81, p. 225-239.

Meinholz, T.L., Kreutzberger, W.A., Harper, M.E., and Fay, 

K.J., 1979, Verification of the water quality impacts of 

combined sewer overflow: U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, Office of Research and Development, Municipal 

Environmental Research Laboratory, Environmental Protection Technology Series Report EPA-600/2-79-155, 

188 p.

Metropolitan Sewerage District of the County of Milwaukee 

and Stevens, Thompson, and Runyan, 1975, Combined 

sewer overflow pollution abatement—a step in the rehabilitation of Milwaukee's three rivers: Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District, 3 v.

Mildner, W.F., 1978, Streamband erosion in the U.S. portion 

of the Great Lakes Basin: International Joint Commission, 

International Reference Group on Great Lakes Pollution 

from Land Use Activities, 45 p.

Miller, M., Ball, J., and Kroner, R., 1992, An evaluation of 

water quality in the Root River Priority Watershed: Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Bureau of Water 

Resources Management WR-298-92, 16 p.

Miller, R.B., 1980, Regional inferences based on water quality monitoring data: University of Wisconsin-Madison, 

WIS-WRC-80-05, 102 p.

Miller, R.B., Bell, W., and Wang, R.Y-Y., 1979, Analysis of 

monitoring data for suspended solids, soluble phosphorus 

and adsorbed phosphorus at the Menomonee River: Water 

Resources Center, University of Wisconsin, Partial 

Technical Report OWRT B-103-WIS (1), contract no. 14- 

34-0001-8129,41 p.

Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District, 1976, Facilities 

plan-pollution abatement facilities in the service area of 

the metropolitan sewerage district of the County of 

Milwaukee: Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District, 

324 p.

Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District, 1980a, Combined sewer overflow: Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage 

District, 4 v.

Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District, 1980b, Franklin-Muskego interceptor facility plan element: Milwaukee 

Metropolitan Sewerage District, 2 v.

Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District, 1980c, Franklin-Northeast interceptor facility plan element: Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District, 2 v.

Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District, 1980d, Jones 

Island facility plan element: Milwaukee Metropolitan 

Sewerage District, 2 v.

Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District, 1980e, Mitchell 

Field South interceptor facility plan: Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District, 2 v.

Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District, 1980f, MMSD 

wastewater system plan: Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District, 2 v.

Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District, 1980g, 

Northridge interceptor facility plan element draft: Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District, 2 v.
224 Water-Resources-Related Information for the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin

Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District, 1980h, Oak 

Creek interceptor facility plan element: Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District, 2 v.

Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District, 1980i, Root 

River interceptor facility plan element draft: Milwaukee 

Metropolitan Sewerage District, 1 v.

Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District, 1980J, Underwood Creek interceptor facility plan element: Milwaukee 

Metropolitan Sewerage District, 2 v.

Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District, 1981, Water 

quality: Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District, 24 p.

Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District, 1982, Inline 

storage facilities plan: Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage 

District, 3 v.

Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District, Menomonee 

River Watershed interim executive summary: Milwaukee 

Metropolitan Sewerage District, 15 p.

Milwaukee River Revitalization Council, 1990-95, Annual 

report on the state of the Milwaukee River Basin: 

Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, [variously 

paginated].

Milwaukee River Revitalization Council and Wisconsin 

Department of Natural Resources, 1991, The riverway 

plan: 113 p.

Milwaukee River Technical Task Force, 1975, Milwaukee 

River strategy, 99 p.

Morawski, Maria, 1999, Flood risk estimation in Oak Creek: 

Milwaukee, Marquette University, M.S. thesis, 98 p.

Morrisey, J.F., 2000, Hydrologic and hydraulic study of the 

South Branch of Underwood Creek, Waukesha County: 

Milwaukee, University of Wisconsin, M.A. thesis, 62 p.

Mortimer, C.H., 1981, The Lake Michigan pollution case, a 

review and commentary on the limnological and other 

issues: Sea Grant Institute and the Center for Great Lakes 

Studies University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, WIS-SG81-237, 156 p.

Murphy, Sheila, 2002a, General information on alkalinity: 

Boulder Area Sustainability Information Network, 

accessed on March 4, 2003, at URL http://bcn. 

boulder.co.us/basin/data/NUTRIENTS/info/Alk.html

Murphy, Sheila, 2002b, General information on hardness: 

Boulder Area Sustainability Information Network, 

accessed on March 4, 2003, at URL http://bcn. 

boulder.co.us/basin/data/NUTRIENTS/info/Hard.html

Murphy, Sheila, 2002c, General information on pH: Boulder 

Area Sustainability Information Network, accessed on 

February 26, 2003, at URL http://bcn.boulder.co.us 

/basin/data/COBWQ/ info/pH.html

Murphy, Sheila, 2002d, General information on specific 

conductance: Boulder Area Sustainability Information 

Network, accessed February 26, 2003, at URL 

http://bcn.boulder.co.us/basin/data/COBWQ/info/ 

SC.html

Myers, C.R., Alatalo, L.J., andMyers, J.M., 1994, Microbial 

potential for the anaerobic degradation of simple aromatic 

compounds in sediments of the Milwaukee Harbor, Green 

Bay, and Lake Erie: Environmental Toxicology and 

Chemistry, v. 13, no. 3, p. 461^-71.

Mymudes, M.S., 1991, Morphological and genetic variability in Plantago cordata Lam. (Plantaginaceae), a rare 

aquatic plant: Milwaukee, University of Wisconsin, M.S. 

thesis, 83 p.

National Research Council of Canada, 1977, The effects of 

alkali halides in the Canadian environment: NRCC No. 

15019, Ottawa, Ontario, Associate Committee on Scientific Criteria for Environmental Quality.

Nichols, S.A., 1974, Mechanical and habitat manipulation 

for aquatic plant management: Wisconsin Department of 

Natural Resources Technical Bulletin 77, 34 p.

Nichols, S.A., and Vennie, J.G., 1991, Attributes of Wisconsin lake plants: Madison, Wisconsin Geological and 

Natural History Survey, Educational Information Circular 

73, 19 p.

Novitzki, R.P., 1979, An introduction to Wisconsin wetlands, plants, hydrology, and soils: U.S. Geological 

Survey and University of Wisconsin-Extension 

Geological and Natural History Survey, 19 p.

Novotny, Vladimir, 1986, Effect of pollutants from snow 

and ice on quality of water from drainage basins: Milwaukee, Marquette University, Department of Civil Engineering Technical Report, 95 p.

Novotny, Vladimir, Balsiger, D., Bannerman, R., Konrad, 

J.G., Cherkauer, D.S., Simsiman, G.V., and Chesters, G., 

1979a, The IJC Menomonee River Watershed study— 

volume V, simulation of pollutant loadings and runoff 

quality: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 

EPA-905/4-79-029-E, PB81-203 051, 172 p.

Novotny, Vladimir, and Bendoricchio, G., 1989, Linking 

nonpoint pollution and deterioration: Water Environment 

and Technology, v. 1, no. 3, p. 400-407.

Novotny, Vladimir, Chin, M.A., and Tran, H., 1979b, The 

IJC Menomonee River Watershed Study—volume IV, 

description and calibration of a pollutant loading modelLANDRUN: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 

EPA-905/4-79-029-D, [variously paginated].

Novotny, Vladimir, Feizhou, L., and Wawrzyn, W.G., 1994, 

Monte Carlo modeling of water and sediment contamination by toxic metals at the North Avenue Dam, Milwaukee, WI, USA: Water Science and Technology, v. 30, 

no. 2, p. 109-119.

Novotny, Vladimir, Wawrzyn, W.G., Bachhuber, J., Grant, 

S., Windstrup, K., and Schonter, R., 1993, Sources and 

delivery of sediments contaminated by toxic metals to the 

North Avenue Dam, Milwaukee, WI, USA: Water 

Science and Technology, v. 28, no. 8-9, p. 103-116.

Nowak, P.A., 1995, Conservation vs. development—a case 

study of the Crayfish Creek Subwatershed: Milwaukee, 

University of Wisconsin, M.A. Thesis, 89 p.
References Cited 225

Oberts, G.L., 1977, Water quality effects of potential urban 

best management practices—a literature review: Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Technical Bulletin 

97, 24 p.

Ovaska, J.L., 1995, Milwaukee water quality time series 

analysis: Milwaukee, University of Wisconsin, M.S. 

thesis, 70 p.

Owens, D.W., Corsi, S.R., and Rappold, K.F., 1997, 

Evaluation of nonpoint-source contamination, Wisconsin—selected topics for water year 1995: U.S. Geological 

Survey Open-File Report 96-661A, 41 p.

Pariso, M.E., St. Amant, J.R., and Sheffy, T.B., 1983, Microcontaminants in Wisconsin's coastal zone, in Nriagu, J.O., 

and Simmons, M.S., eds., Toxic contaminants in the Great 

Lakes: Advances in Environmental Science and Technology, v. 14, p. 265-285.

Parker, D.E., Lee, G.B., and Yanggen, D.A., 1970, Using 

soil maps to delineate floodplains in a glaciated low-relief 

landscape: Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, v. 25, 

no. 3, p. 96-99.

Pentecost, E.D., and Vogt, R.C., 1976, Environmental status 

of the Lake Michigan region—volume 16, Amphibians 

and reptiles of the Lake Michigan drainage basin: 

Argonne, 111., Argonne National Laboratory, 

ANL/ES-4Q, v. 16, 69 p.

Peters, C.A., 1995, National Water-Quality Assessment Program, Western Lake Michigan Drainages, [Western Lake 

Michigan Drainages]—Summaries of Liaison Committee 

Meeting, Green Bay, Wisconsin, March 28-29, 1995: 

U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 95-163, 57 p.

Peters, C.A., ed., 1997, Environmental setting and implications for water quality in the Western Lake Michigan 

Drainages: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources 

Investigations Report 97-4196, 79 p.

Peters, C.A., Robertson, D.M., Saad, D.A., Sullivan, DJ., 

Scudder, B.C., Fitzpatrick, F.A., Richards, K.D., Stewart, 

J.S., Fitzgerald S.A., and Lenz, B.N., 1998, Water-quality 

in the Western Lake Michigan Drainages, Wisconsin and 

Michigan, 1992-95: U.S. Geological Survey Circular 

1156, 40 p.

Phoomiphakdeephan, Wasunthara, 1994, The pollution 

plume outside Milwaukee Harbor and its relationship to 

the quality of water taken into the Linnwood and Howard 

Avenue filtration plants: Milwaukee, University of 

Wisconsin, M.S. thesis, 198 p.

Plafkin, J.L., Barbour M.T., Porter K.D., Gross S.K., and 

Hughes R.M., 1989, Rapid bioassessment protocols for 

use in streams and rivers: Benthic macroinvertebrates and 

fish: Washington, D.C., U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, Office of Water Regulations and Standards, 

EPA 440^-89-001, 117 p.

Port of Milwaukee, 1995, River corridor inventory, City of 

Milwaukee—Milwaukee, Menomonee, and Kinnickinnic 

Rivers, South Menomonee and Burnham Canals: 

Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources [variously 

paginated].

R.A. Smith and Associates Inc., Hey and Associates, and 

Hitchcock Design Group Soils Engineering Services, 

1996, Menomonee Valley Conservation Project—Phase 

1, Feasibility study final draft for the City of Milwaukee: 

Project 1931800-100, [variously paginated].

Rachdawong, Pichaya, and Christensen, E.R., 1997, Determination of PCB sources by a principal component 

method with nonnegative constraints: Environmental Science & Technology, v. 31, no. 9, p. 2686-2691.

Read, R.H., 1976, Endangered and threatened vascular 

plants in Wisconsin: Wisconsin Department of Natural 

Resources Technical Bulletin 92, 58 p.

Rice, K.C., 1999, Trace element concentrations in streambed 

sediment across the conterminous United States: Environmental Science & Technology v. 33, no. 15, p. 2499- 

2504.

Rice, S.A., 1992, Root River priority watershed project final 

report nonpoint source water pollution abatement program: Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, 

PUBL-WR-311-92, 24 p.

Richards, K.D., Sullivan, D.J., and Stewart, J.S., 1998, Surface-water quality at fixed sites in the Western Lake Michigan Drainages, Wisconsin and Michigan, and the effects 

of natural and human factors, 1993-95: U.S. 

Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations 

Report 97^208, 40 p.

Richards, R.P., 1990, Measures of flow variability and a new 

flow-based classification of Great Lakes tributaries: Journal of Great Lakes Research, v. 16, no. 1, p. 53-70.

Robertson, D.M., 1997, Regionalized loads of sediment and 

phosphorus to Lakes Michigan and Superior-high flow 

and long-term average: Journal of Great Lakes Research, 

v. 23, no. 4, p. 416^39.

Robertson, D.M., 1998, Evaluation of the surface-water 

sampling design in the Western Lake Michigan Drainages 

in relation to environmental factors affecting water quality 

at base flow: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources 

Investigations Report 98-4072, 53 p.

Robertson, D.M., and Saad, D.A., 1996, Water-quality 

assessment of the Western Lake Michigan Drainagesanalysis of available information on nutrients and suspended sediment, water years 1971-90: U.S. Geological 

Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 

96-4012, 165 p.

Rose, J.P., 1978, The engineering geology of the Eastern 

Menomonee River Valley Area of Milwaukee, Wisconsin: 

Milwaukee, University of Wisconsin, M.S. thesis, 71 p.

Saad, D.A., 1997, Effects of land use and geohydrology on 

the quality of shallow ground water in two agricultural 

areas in the Western Lake Michigan Drainages, Wisconsin: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report, 96-4292, 69 p.
226 Water-Resources-Related Information for the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin

Sawicki, D.S., and Judd, L.B., 1982, Institutional arrangements for controlling nonpoint-source water pollutionWisconsin's Root River Watershed: Milwaukee, University of Wisconsin, Center for Great Lakes Studies, Special 

Report 38, p. 6.

Science Applications International Corporation, 1993, 

Revised Lake Michigan lakewide management plan for 

toxic pollutants draft: Chicago, Illinois, v. 1 [variously 

paginated].

Scudder, B.C., Sullivan, D.J., Fitzpatrick, F.A., and 

Rheaume, S.J., 1997, Trace elements and synthetic 

organic compounds in biota and streambed sediment of 

the Western Lake Michigan Drainages, 1992-1995: U.S. 

Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations 

Report 97-4192, 34 p.

Scudder, B.C., Sullivan, D.J., Rheaume, S.J., Parsons, S.R., 

and Lenz, B.N., 1996, Summary of biological investigations relating to water quality in the Western Lake Michigan Drainages, Wisconsin and Michigan: U.S. Geological 

Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 96-4263, 

89 p.

Shepard, Gerald, 2003, History of the Hilsenhoff Biotic 

Index: Description of a masters thesis project and water 

quality and the use of a biotic index by Gerald Shepard, 

accessed March 31, 2003, at URL 

http://www.uwsp.edu/cnr/research/gshepard/History/History.htm

Singh, A.K., 1992, A source receptor method for determining nonpoint sources of PAHs to Milwaukee Harbor Estuary: Milwaukee, University of Wisconsin, M.S. thesis, 

201 p.

Singh, A.K., Gin, M.F., Ni, F., and Christensen, E.R., 1993, 

A source-receptor method for determining non-point 

sources of PAHs to the Milwaukee Harbor Estuary: Water 

Science and Technology, v. 28, no. 8-9, p. 91-102.

Skinner, E.L., and Borman, R.G., 1973, Water resources of 

Wisconsin—Lake Michigan Basin: U.S. Geological 

Survey Hydrologic Investigations Atlas HA-432, 

4 sheets.

Sonzogni, W.C., Monteith, T.J., Bach, W.N., and Hughes, 

V.G., 1978, United States Great Lakes tributary loadings: 

Windsor, Ontario, International Joint Commission, Great 

Lakes Regional Office, 187 p.

Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission, 

1971, Comprehensive plan for the Milwaukee River 

Watershed 1970-1971: Planning Report 13, 2 v.

Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission, 

1974, Kinnickinnic River Watershed planning program 

prospectus: 57 p.

Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission,

1976. Comprehensive plan for the Menomonee River 

Watershed: Planning Report 26, 2 v. 

Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission,

1977. State of the art of water pollution control in southeastern Wisconsin: Technical Report 18, 145 p.

Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission, 

1978a, A regional water quality management plan for 

southeastern Wisconsin, 2000: Planning Report 30, 3 v.

Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission, 

1978b, Comprehensive plan for the Kinnickinnic River 

Watershed: Planning Report 32, 491 p.

Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission, 

1978c, Lake Michigan Estuary and direct drainage area 

subwatersheds planning program prospectus: 193 p.

Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission, 

1978d, Sources of water pollution in southeastern Wisconsin, 1975: Technical Report 21, 791 p.

Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission, 

1978e, Water quality of lakes and streams in southeastern 

Wisconsin, 1964-1975: Technical Report 17, 593 p.

Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission,

1979. Oak Creek Watershed Planning Program prospectus: 59 p. 

Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission,

1980. A nonpoint source water pollution control plan for 

the Root River Watershed: Planning Report 37, 105 p.

Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission, 

1982a, Flood control plan for Lincoln Creek, Milwaukee 

County, Wisconsin: Planning Report 13 (2d ed.) 207 p.

Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission, 

1982b, Sanitary sewer service area for the City of 

Muskego, Waukesha County, Wisconsin: Report 64,37 p.

Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission, 

1983, Sanitary sewer service area for the Village of Germantown, Washington County, Wisconsin: Report 70, 

34 p.

Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission, 

1984, Sanitary sewer service area for the Village of Butler, Waukesha County, Wisconsin: Report 99, 27 p.

Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission, 

1986a, A stormwater drainage and flood control policy 

plan for the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District: 

Planning Report 130, 66 p.

Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission, 

1986b, A stormwater management plan for the Village of 

Hales Corners: Milwaukee County, Wisconsin: Planning 

Report 121, 224 p.

Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission, 

1986c, Comprehensive plan for the Oak Creek Watershed: 

Planning Report 36, 579 p.

Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission, 

1987a, A water resources management plan for the Milwaukee Harbor Estuary: Planning Report 37, 2 v.

Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission, 

1987b, Sanitary sewer service area for the City of New 

Berlin, Waukesha County, Wisconsin: Report 157,101 p.

Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission, 

1988a, A stormwater management plan for the Crayfish 

Creek Subwatershed, City of Oak Creek, Milwaukee 

County, Wisconsin: Report 35, 126 p.
References Cited 227

Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission, 

1988b, Clean water through land management, in \ 

Fifteenth regional planning conference, Waukesha, Wis.,

1988. Proceedings: Waukesha, Wis.: 246 p. 

Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission,

1989. A flood control plan for a portion of the Menomonee River Estuary Area, City of Milwaukee, Milwaukee 

County, Wisconsin: Report 39, 48 p. 

Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission,

1990. A stormwater drainage and flood control system 

plan for the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District: 

Planning Report 152, 2 v. 

Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission,

1992. A stormwater drainage and flood control system 

plan for Grantosa Creek—Cities of Milwaukee and Wauwatosa, Milwaukee County, Wisconsin: 43 p. 

Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission,

1993. A stormwater management and flood control plan 

for the Lilly Creek Subwatershed, Village of Menomonee 

Falls: Planning Report 190, 351 p. 

Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission,

1994. Sanitary sewer service area for the city of Oak 

Creek, Milwaukee County, Wisconsin: Planning Report 

213, 35 p.

Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission, 

1995 a, A regional water quality management plan for 

Southeastern Wisconsin—an update and status report: 

Memorandum Report 93, 786 p.

Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission, 

1995b, Land use inventory, 1995, Wisconsin Transverse 

Mercator (WTM 83/91) projection.

Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission, 

1996, A lake management plan for Little Muskego Lake, 

Waukesha County, Wisconsin: 165 p.

Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission, 

2002a, Watersheds, 2002 (continuous updates), Wisconsin Transverse Mercator (WTM 83/91) projection.

Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission, 

2002b, Subwatersheds, 2002 (continuous updates), Wisconsin Transverse Mercator (WTM 83/91) projection.

Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission, 

Ruekert and Mielke, Inc., City of Brookfield, Village of 

Elm Grove, and Wisconsin Department of Natural 

Resources, 2000, A stormwater and floodland management plan for the Dousman Ditch and Underwood Creek 

Subwatersheds in the City of Brookfield and the Village of 

Elm Grove, Waukesha County, Wisconsin: Southeastern 

Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission, 319 p.

Stanley, C.E., and Erickson, R.A., 1977, Decision structure 

for assessment of the economic impact of water quality 

strategies in an industrial watershed: Madison, Wisconsin 

Water Resources Center, Technical Report, WIS WRC 

77-07, 167 p.

Steuer, J.S., Fitzgerald, S.A., and Hall, D.W., 1999, Distribution and transport of polychlorinated biphenyls and associated particulates in the Milwaukee River system, Wisconsin, 1993-95: U.S. Geological Survey WaterResources Investigations Report 99-4100, 37 p.

Sullivan, D.J., 1997, Fish communities of fixed sites in the 

Western Lake Michigan drainages, Wisconsin and Michigan, 1993-95: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources 

Investigations Report 95-4211-C, 23 p.

Sullivan, D.J., Peterson, E.M., and Richards, K.D., 1995, 

Environmental setting of fixed sites in the Western Lake 

Michigan Drainages, Michigan and Wisconsin: U.S. 

Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations 

Report 95-4211-A, 30 p.

Sullivan, D.J., and Richards, K.D., 1996, Pesticides in 

streams in the Western Lake Michigan Drainages, Wisconsin and Michigan, 1993-95: U.S. Geological Survey 

Fact Sheet FS-107-96,4 p.

Sullivan, R.A.C., Sanders, P.A., and Sonzogni, W.C., 1980, 

Post-PLUARG evaluation of Great Lakes water quality 

management studies and programs: Chicago, 111., Great 

Lakes National Program Office, 2 v., EPA-905/9-80- 

006-A, 129 p.

Sung, Hung-Ming, 1983, Estimating nonpoint pollution 

loadings from eight watersheds in Milwaukee County: 

Milwaukee, Marquette University, M.S. thesis, 119 p.

Syftestad, E.P., 1985, Public water supply data book 1985: 

Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, 212 p.

Task Force on Pollution from Sources Outside the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District, 1983, Report by the 

Mayor's Task Force on Pollution from Outside the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District: Milwaukee, 

Department of Public Works, 82 p.

Taylor, Kent, 1994, Nonpoint source control plan for the 

Kinnickinnic River Priority Watershed Project, Wisconsin: Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources Publication WR-378-94, [variously paginated].

Thompson, D.R., Peterson, U.C., Churchill, W.S., and 

Rusch, A.J., 1976, Fish and wildlife habitat study, Wisconsin Great Lakes shoreline: Wisconsin Department of 

Natural Resources, 15 p.

Torke, E.G., 1976, A key to the identification of the cyclopoid copepods of Wisconsin with notes on their distribution and ecology: Wisconsin Department of Natural 

Resources Research Report 88, 16 p.

Toyingtrakoon, Petwara, 1996, The role of the In-Line Storage System (Deep Tunnel) in reducing the pollution load 

to Lake Michigan: Milwaukee, University of Wisconsin, 

M.S. thesis, 115 p.

Tseng, D.H., 1978, Heavy metals in water and wastewater 

treatment plant sludges in Milwaukee area: Milwaukee, 

Marquette University, M.S. thesis, 110 p.

U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1991, Census of population and 

housing, 1990: Public Law 94-171 data Wisconsin 

[machine-readable data files]: Prepared by the Bureau of 

Census, Washington, D.C.
228 Water-Resources-Related Information for the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin

U.S. Bureau of the Census, 2001, Census of population and 

housing, 2000: Public Law 94-171 data Wisconsin 

[machine-readable data files]: Prepared by the Bureau of 

Census, Washington, D.C.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1976, Quality criteria for water: Washington, D.C., Office of Water Planning 

and Standards, EPA 440/9-76/023, 537 p.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1980, Final environmental impact statement, Milwaukee Water Pollution 

Abatement Program: EPA-5-WI-MilwaukeeWWTP/INT.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1986, Ambient 

water quality criteria for bacteria—1986: EPA440/5-84- 

002, 18 p.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2000a, Ambient 

water quality criteria recommendations—Information 

supporting the development of state and tribal nutrient criteria for rivers and streams in nutrient Ecoregion VII: 

EPA822-B-00-018,93p.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2000b, Mercury 

white paper: accessed December 15, 2003, at URL 

http://www.epa.gov/ttn/oarpg/t3wp.html

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2002a, 2002 Edition 

of the drinking water standards and health advisories, 

EPA 822-R-02-038, 19 p.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2002b, Consumer 

fact sheet on cadmium: accessed February 26, 2003, at 

URL http://www.epa.gov/safewater/dwh/c-ioc/ 

cadmium.html

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2002c, Consumer 

fact sheet on lead: accessed February 26, 2003, at URL 

www.epa.gov/safewater/dwh/c-ioc/lead.html

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2002d, Mercury 

general information, Frequently Asked Questions: 

accessed on December 15, 2003, at URL 

http://www.epa.gov/mercury/informationl.htm

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2002e, National 

recommended water quality criteria: Office of Water and 

Office of Science Technology, EPA-822-R-02-047, 

36 p.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2002f, Technical 

fact sheet on nickel: accessed February 26, 2003, at URL 

http://www.epa.gov/safewater/dwh/t-ioc/nickel.html

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2003a, Arsenic in 

drinking water: accessed on February 26, 2003, at URL 

http://www.epa.gov/safewater/arsenic.html

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2003b, Drinking 

water priority rulemaking—Arsenic: [U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency,] accessed February 27, 2003, at URL 

http://www.epa.gov/ogwdw/ars/arsenic.html

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2003c, Introduction—Environmental stewardship of pharmaceuticals: 

The Green Pharmacy, accessed March 11, 2003, at URL 

http://www.epa.gov/nerlesdl/chemistry/ppcp/ 

greenpharmacy-intro.htm

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources and EcolSciences Environmental Group, 1980, Draft environmental impact statement Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Water 

Pollution Abatement Program: Chicago, 111., 8 v.

U.S. Geological Survey, 1998, National field manual for the 

collection of water-quality data: U.S. Geological Survey 

Techniques of Water-Resources Investigations: book 9, 

chap. 6.4, 27 p.

U.S. Geological Survey, 2003, Real-time data for the 

Nation: accessed on March 22,2003, at URL http://waterdata.usgs.gov/usa /nwis/rt

U.S. Geological Survey Mercury Studies Team, 2003a, 

Mercury Cycling in the Environment: accessed on 

February 26, 2003, at URL http://orxddwimdn. 

er.usgs.gov/servlet/page?_pageid=363,365,377&_dad= 

portal30&_schema=PORTAL30

U.S. Geological Survey, 2003b, USGS Mercury Research 

Lab: accessed February 26, 2003, at URL http://orxddwimdn.er.usgs.gov/servlet/page?_pageid= 

363,369,393&_dad=portal30&_schema=PORTAL30

U.S. Geological Survey Toxic Substances Hydrology Program, 2003, Emerging water quality issues investigations: 

accessed March 6, 2003, at URL http://toxics.usgs.gov/ 

regional/emc.html

Van Dyke, K.J., Sr., 1977, Ecological investigations of an 

urban mallard population: Milwaukee, University of Wisconsin, M.S. thesis, 50 p.

Veith, G.D., 1970, Environmental chemistry of the chlorobiphenyls in the Milwaukee River: Madison, University of 

Wisconsin, Ph.D. dissertation, 180 p.

Veith, G.D., and Lee, F.G., 1971, Chlorobiphenyls (PCBs) 

in the Milwaukee River: Water Research, v. 5, p. 1107- 

1115.

Villeneuve, D.L., Crunkilton, R.L., and DeVita, W.M., 

1997, Aryl hydrocarbon receptor-mediated toxic potency 

of dissolved lipophilic organic contaminants collected 

from Lincoln Creek, Milwaukee, Wisconsin, USA, to 

PLHC-1 (Poeciliopsis lucida) fish hepatoma cells: Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, v. 16, no. 5, p. 977- 

984.

Walesh, S.G., Scarpace, F., Quirk, B., Meridith, R., Fratoni, 

R., Goodrich-Mahoney, J., Simsiman, G.V., and Bannerman, R., 1979, The IJC Menomonee River Watershed 

Study—volume II, land uses, population and physical 

characteristics of the Menomonee River Watershed: 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA-905/4-79- 

029-B, 124 p.

Walker, J.F., Graczyk, D.J., Corsi, S.R., Owens, D.W., and 

Wierl, J.A., 1995, Evaluation of nonpoint-source contamination, Wisconsin-land-use and best-management-practices inventory, selected streamwater-quality data, urbanwatershed quality assurance and quality control, constituent loads in rural streams, and snowmelt-runoff analysis, 

water year 1994: U.S. Geological Survey, Open-File 

Report 95-320, 21 p.
References Cited 229

Welch, A.M., Westjohn, D.B., Helsel, D.R., and Wanty, 

R.B., 2000, Arsenic in ground water of the United 

States—occurrence and geochemistry: Ground Water, 

v. 38, no. 4, p. 589-604.

Windstrup, K.S., 1993, Sediment-water interaction of heavy 

metals in the Milwaukee River: Milwaukee, Marquette 

University, M.S. thesis, 196 p.

Wisconsin Department of Agriculture, Trade, and Consumer 

Protection Soil and Water Resource Management Program and Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources 

Nonpoint Source Water Pollution Abatement Program, 

1991,1993,1994,1995,1997, Program accomplishments 

[published annually].

Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, 1971, Big 

Muskego Lake, Waukesha County—An inventory with 

planning recommendations: Lake Use Report FX-3, 22 p.

Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, 1975, Southeastern Wisconsin river basins—water quality management plan: 140 p.

Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, 1976, Southeastern Wisconsin river basins—a drainage basin report: 

136 p.

Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, 1979, Wisconsin small stream studies—the Des Plaines, Pike, and Root 

River Basins: Water Quality Evaluation Section, 29 p.

Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, 1980, Environmental impact statement, proposed Little Muskego 

Lake rehabilitation project: Bureau of Environmental 

Impact, 93 p.

Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, 1982, 1984, 

1990,1992,1994, 2000, Water quality report to congress: 

[published annually].

Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, 1983a, Evaluation of urban nonpoint-source pollution management in 

Milwaukee County, Wisconsin—volume II, feasibility 

and application of urban nonpoint source water pollution 

abatement measures: 119 p.

Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, 1983b, 

Limnological characteristics of Wisconsin lakes: 

Technical Bulletin 138, 118 p.

Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, 1986, State of 

Wisconsin surface water quality monitoring data 1986: 

PUBL-WR 222-90, 73 p.

Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, 1989, Milwaukee River remedial action plan, status report and scope of 

study: 59 p.

Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, 1990, Milwaukee River Basin integrated management plan—volume 5, 

Menomonee River Watershed integrated resource management plan: 144 p.

Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, 1991, A nonpoint source control plan for the Milwaukee River South 

Priority Watershed Project: The Wisconsin Nonpoint 

Source Water Pollution Abatement Program WR-245-91, 

2v.

Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, 1992a, A nonpoint source control plan for the Menomonee River Priority Watershed Project: 2 v.

Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, 1992b, Distribution and relative abundance of fishes in Wisconsin: 

Technical Bulletin No. 175, 378 p.

Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, 1992c, Milwaukee River Basin integrated resources management 

plan—volume 4, Milwaukee River South Watershed integrated resource management plan: 241 p.

Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, 1993a, Nonpoint source control plan for the Muskego-Wind Lakes 

priority watershed: WR-375-94, 189 p.

Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, 1993b, 1994, 

1996, 1997, 1998, Evaluation of the Wisconsin Priority 

Watershed Program for improving stream habitat and fish 

communities: Progress Reports.

Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, 1994, Milwaukee Estuary remedial action plan-progress through January 1994—a plan to clean up Milwaukee's rivers and harbors: [variously paginated].

Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, 1995, Purple 

loosestrife - Lythum salicaria, L. virgatum, and their 

hybrids: PUBL-WM-250-95, Brochure, 1 p.

Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, 1999, Milwaukee River basin environmental indicators pilot, Final 

Report of the Indicators Work Group, 70 p.

Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, 2001a, Background Memo on Proposed Revisions to Chapters NR 

102, 104, and 106 as Related to Stream Classifications: 

Memorandum 3200, 44 p.

Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, 2001b, Sewer 

overflows in Wisconsin—a report to the Natural 

Resources Board: 46 p.

Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, 2002, Guidelines for evaluating habitat of wadable streams: Bureau of 

Fisheries Management and Habitat Protection, 27 p.

Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, 2003a, Information for individuals requesting approvals for improvements to community water systems or construction of new 

community water systems—Are there other issues that 

should be considered during the project design?: accessed 

on March 5,2003, at URL http://www.dnr.state.wi.us/org/ 

water/dwg/plrev/planrevlr.htm

Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, 2003b, 

WDNR drinking water and groundwater standards and 

health advisory level table: Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, accessed January 2, 2003, at URL 

http://www.dnr.state.wi.us/org/water/dwg/health/ 

table.html
230 Water-Resources-Related Information for the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin

Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Department of 

Agriculture, Trade, and Consumer Protection, Ozaukee 

County Land Conservation Department, and the Milwaukee River South Advisory Subcommittee, 1990a, A nonpoint source control plan for the Menomonee River Priority Watershed Project: Wisconsin Department of Natural 

Resources PUBL-WR-224 90, 2v.

Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Department of 

Agriculture, Trade, and Consumer Protection, Ozaukee 

County Land Conservation Department, and the Milwaukee River South Advisory Subcommittee, 1990b, A nonpoint source control plan for the Milwaukee River South 

Priority Watershed Project: PUBL-WR-245 90, 215 p.

Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Milwaukee 

River Basin Land and Water Partners Team, and other 

stakeholders, 2001, The state of the Milwaukee River 

Basin: Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources 

PUBL-WT-701-01,96p.

Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources and Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission, 1985, 

Milwaukee River Priority Watersheds Program prospectus: Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, 82 p.

Wisconsin District Lake-Studies Team, 1996, 1997, 1998, 

1999, Water-quality and lake-stage data for Wisconsin 

lakes: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 

[variously paginated].

Witte, J.W., 1996, Evaluation of risks to aquatic biota from 

urban stormwater runoff: Milwaukee, Marquette University, M.S. thesis, 97 p.

Wurts, W.A., andDurborow, R.M., 1992, Interactions of pH, 

carbon dioxide, alkalinity, and hardness in Fish Pond: 

College Station, Texas, Southeast Region Aquaculture 

Center, Kentucky State University, SRAC Publication 

464, 4 p.

Xiao, Lihua, Singh, Ajaib, Limor, Josef, Graczyk, T.K., 

Gradus, Steve, and Lal, Altaf, 2001, Molecular characterization of Crypotosporidium oocy sts in samples of raw 

surface water and wastewater: Applied and Environmental Microbiology, v. 67, no. 3, p. 1097-1101.

Zanoni, A.E., 1970, Eutrophic evaluation of a small multiland use watershed: Madison, University of Wisconsin 

Water Resources Center, Research Project Technical 

Completion Report OWRR A-014-WIS, 77 p.
Tables 1-4
Table 1. Characteristics and description of studies pertaining to surface-water quality of the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District plannin

[DOC, dissolved organic carbon; TOC, total organic carbon; VOCs, volatile organic compounds; PAHs, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons; PCBs, polychlolinated bipheny

demand; DO, dissolved oxygen; MMSD, Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District]

Literature citation

AbRazak(1995)

AbRazak(1999)

Ab Razak and others (1996)

Anderson(1975)

Arteaga (1989)

Bannerman and others

(1979a)

Bannerman and others

(1979b)

Bannerman and others

(1983b)

Characteristics

c

o

CB

i_

£

_c

c

(0

o>

0

i 

£

2

X

c 

o

IS(0

o<f

c

1CO

X

X

X

X

X

X

OT

c

0)

E

£

(0

s

E

•o

0)

E

X

X

X

X

X

X

(0

2"5

(0

•o

§

o

(0 

(0

5

(0

_o 

o'(5"

X

X

X

X

X

2

c

.2

**

z

X

X

X

X

(0

0) •o

'o

K

£

o

g0

o

Q

X

*-

0)

E

1

CO

X

X

X

X

X

X

%w

3

i_

1

1

(0

ffi

X

X

X

X

w

0)

E

0)

0) 

0)

o

(0

1-

X

X

X

X

X

(0 

(0 -r rr

CO £ re O c c

°- §> I

« o S

*; £ £

y- - o

Q. M TO

« .£ .y

O S c O o <o 5 -o E> 

o

X

X

X

2c

(0

a 

**

0)

E**

S,_

s

1

1(0

i

X

(0

0)

3

(0

.—

as

1

0)

_c

"55

s

s

i_

£

6

Description

Local study on the Kinnickinnic River to determine the sources o

Sources of PAHs in the early 1900s were relayed to coking opera

PAHs have been transportation related.

Study on Milwaukee, Menomonee, and Kinnickinnic Rivers befo

Inline Storage System to determine its role in reducing pollution. 

pended solids, fecal coliforms, zinc, chloride, and BOD were exa

Local study on the Kinnickinnic River. Sediment cores were anal

Results were compared with sediment characteristics, clay, silt, a

correlations.

Statewide classification of lakes by trophic condition. Most lakes 

larger. Big Muskego Lake and Little Muskego Lake were include

were lake protection and rehabilitation procedures and classificat

Local study on the relation between bacteria and flagellate popul

River and Lake Michigan. Levels were examined in relation to te

tions.

Local study on the combined loadings of the Menomonee, Milwa

The effects of wind-induced suspension of sediment on water qu

and its vicinity were also discussed.

Study on the Menomonee River watershed. Water monitoring wa

amounts of pollutants from land drainage of mixed and single lan

on suspended solids, phosphorus, and lead but discussed other co

macroinvertebrate surveys were done.

Local study on characteristics, sources, and management of urba

Milwaukee County. Characterization of urban stormwater-runoff 

concentrations, loadings, and water-quality effects on receiving w

discussed were contaminant sources and an examination of the e

frequencies of street sweeping.
_P

^ ^O 

^ o> 

k-j

p

a.

0

n>

X

X

X

Local on lakes insurface r Milwaukee. Theeffects ofsaltfrom studyNorthridge winter were examined. occurred untilthehaw. Slt stratification Salinity spring

lake round. outflow remained highyear 

c o 

3 0 

O 3 

yj o H, n 

the during 

inntration 

9

g-&*-i

Co

-j

cr ^

X

X

X

X

Local on two small inwatersheds theMilwaukee one watershed witharea, study and theFlow urban landuse other use. lo with landand contaminant agricultural 

between thwatersheds rainfall. two after compared 

II

1

9

^i*

($^^

Co

-~j

Ul &>

X

X

X

X

Local t ofnhe effects urban instr determine water study development quality 

in oftohes watersheds different were in examined stages response development 

Total events. solids anicalchloride loadswere examined. dissolved 

5; n> 

Four smallneteorolog03

,O

re

'"r^

00

X

Local on theHarbor at Milwaukee interface. Sediment sediment-water study

were taknosediment Gasvoids andworm tubes graph type. oligochaete map 

"0 3 

3 S 

tfi n> 

e photo- also shown.

03

O

££L

Q

-j

-j

^—^

X

X

X

Local ofMilwaukee Harbor andnearshore Lakea the sudyMichigan, including of AnKinnickinnic oftheMilwaukee Rivers. andconfluence investigation phyt

in tionsrelation nutrients was done andother factors suchto as chlo temperature, 

were considered. ity 

% P-TSL 

83 £3 Og. 3 <D 

O- ^ * 

o 5 

to 3 a, 

rt US CO 

!•§*P~* 3 

03

g

3

^D

oo 

to

X

X

with fromLocal datathe andCreek. Threemeth Menomonee River studyHone 

in contaminant loads waterere discussed: andstrati integration, ingcomposite, for Recommendations were th most effective method sampling. givenchoosing 

o th 

a. n 

v> C. 

X> s 

>r estimat- mdom

03

g

3

P

5

go.

0

cr

%

Q

O

X

X

X

X

X

X

Local ofandto Milwaukee Rivers. ThetheMenomonee aimeddeteri studyudy 

the characteristics and to with urban delof,strategy nonpoint-source pollution 

runoff contaminants witha onsufocus andlead insolids, suspended phosphorus, 

examined.

&

«

* 

5 

$ 

o> mre o fa 

& = 3 

*»l

tc O •TM* 

- ftj ro 

03

S Q 

o \o 

•< ' — ^ 

»"

a.

o

,3,

X

X

X

X

X

X

Localincoln a Creek to calibrate model o thatevaluated theeffects usingstudy and ofurban Datafor wateaters. l chloride, road-deicing practices quality 

flow andwere solids, provided.

1 S 

/ removal spended

03

5 \D 

g CD 

p NW 

§

a.

oS"

3

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

nine Statewide sitesin Milwaukee. were colle study Samples including sampling 

sewer and urbanstreams the ofdetermine stormwater. to pipes quality 

o

re 

a.

rom storm-

^

CD

o

Q)

O

3

information Michigan Lake 

information Stream 

measurements Field 

solids ions/dissolved Major 

Nutrients

Pesticides

DOC/TOC

Sediment

Bacteria/viruses

elements Trace 

PCBs PAHs, VOCs, 

inorganic, dioxins, 

contaminants organic 

plants Wastewater-treatment 

issues Urban 

Modeling

Other

O

JO

o

Description

rj O. 

w 2 

p. aa

« s0. 53' 

? 0 

tra 1 ^j"

S. O0 X 

1 § p. * 

o i 

O on 

« O 

CTQ B! 

§ 3 B-• >o 

<! ° 1"8

- on 

< n> a ^ 

_

CO 1C 

» CT 

o o' 

O iS 

1

c

3

*

aromatic bioch PCBs, BODpolycyclic hydrocarbons; polychlorinated biphenyls; 

o'

CO

o

X•<;

TO

§

=t.

o

CO

ffl

^

Q. 

Q. 

CD

O

COi-h

O. CD'

CO

T3 

CD

ca

r+' 

O

Q) 

O 

CD

Q)

—i

CD

-Q

S

O•a

o_

i^'

QJ

CO

CD

CD

3 

CO 

CD

a

ca

OJ

CD

o

o
Table 1. Characteristics and description of studies pertaining to surface-water quality of the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planni

[DOC, dissolved organic carbon; TOC, total organic carbon; VOCs, volatile organic compounds; PAHs, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons; PCBs, polychlorinated biphen

demand; DO, dissolved oxygen; MMSD, Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District]

Literature citation

Christensen and Lo (1986)

Christensen and others

(1997a)

Christensen and others

(1997b)

Citizens' Advisory Committee (1981)

City of Milwaukee Wisconsin Department of Public

Works and Consoer,

Townsend, and Associates

Consulting Engineers

(1974)

City of Milwaukee Wisconsin Department of Public

Works and Consoer,

Townsend, and Associates

Consulting Engineers

(1975)

Corsi and others (200 la)

Corsi and others (200 Ib)

Characteristics

c

o

to

E

|

c

CO

D)

IE

o

i 

£CO

•""

c

o

nformati

ECO

£ 

w

X

X

X

X

w

c

asureme

0)

E

•o

0)

il

X

X

X

X

CO

TJ

"5

CO

issolved

|

.0

£

i

X

X

X

£ 

1"3

X

X

X

CO 

0)

|o

W«

Q.

o

§O 

Q

0)

d

X

X

CO

ia/viruse

jjj

O 

CO 

CO

X

X

X

0)

0) 

0)

s

£

•o'S

OQ •- co

O c c

^ CO °

O 'g 'c 

O

X

X

CO

c

CO

Q.

reatmem

0>

i

I

X

X

i issues

CO

.£

=5

X

X

D)

"35

o

X

X

X

0)

6

Description

Local study on the Milwaukee Harbor. A sediment core was tak

and analyzed for PCBs. The results were compared with Lake M

tions were shown to link to sales records of PCBs.

Local study on the Kinnickinnic River to determine sources of P

model was developed and used on dated sediment cores.

Local study on Milwaukee Harbor and its pollution plume. Data 

bidity were examined. Results of the study indicated that improv

obtained by extending or relocating the Howard intake pipe.

A report written to educate the public on water-quality issues pe

Pollution Abatement Program. The goal of the report was to show 

in working towards improving water quality.

Local study looking at effectiveness of detention tanks in preven

Five years of data and modeling studies were done on the Milwa

quality was examined in relation to rainfall.

Local evaluation of a combined-sewer overflow detention tank i

studies and data from sewer and river monitoring, detention tank

bined-sewer-overflow contaminants from reaching receiving wa

Local study of the effect of aircraft and runway deicers from Ge

port on Wilson Park Creek and the Kinnickinnic River. The stud

and subsequent responses of BOD and DO with respect to preci

Local study of the effect of aircraft and runway deicers from Ge

Airport regarding toxicity to aquatic life in receiving waters.
•3?

0 ^ 

pr

a.

O

o. &• 3'

X

X

on theLi Western Lakesites Regional studyMichigan Drainages including The habitat. Milwaukee River.sites wer evaluated forstream Channel georm 

and were characteristics examined. ambank, riparian 

8 •3 

B cc 

g-n

n, Pf 

P a 

a. H. 

g. a> 

n>

N 

09

^g

-J

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

Lake oftheThe Western oftheRegional studyMichigan Drainages. purpose of a werefrom describe results collected program. quality-control Samples gn and osurface fortissue, water, nutrients, ions,ment, analyzed major

c c rf 

Q.j ^ •"1 

1^ w- ^3 

^ 1 & 

M 2 & 

O CO 

!£&

a. • 

a.

ft .—. 

a. ^ 

•5

>-i

re

X

X

X

on toxico land andoff-site IncStatewide releases transfers. air,water, report

to released waterbodies. pounds nearby

n>

o.

aCO

B

O

1.

ro

00

c>

X

X

X

X

X

X

Local frLEnvironmental Statement a to Little dredgMuskego Impactplan 

and was to aesthetic uses recreational life,dredging improve aquatic qualities, 

low areasnd controlling growth. macrophyte 

FT aCD ^< 

.j O. 

n 0 

era g 

o 3. 

g.a,

¥•

OQ

1

O

cc

VO

£

X

X

X

on the Menomonee Riverwatershed. levelswer Study compared Phosphorus 

and Anmade bottom was streetediments. soils, dustsuspended attempt 

rus sources by particle-size composition.

3 0 

.

- f 

S f 

S, 9 

Oo

o.

0

ft

oo

UJ

CT

X

X

X

Local on adithe Menomonee Rivertributaries itsto dc watershed study

of andcontents streetbottom sediments. soils, dustsuspended 

ft

s

B

n>

g,

n>

3

ft

O

§

OQ

g

a.

0

cc

3

^-^

X

X

X

X

of thewatershed. inMenomonee RiverMetal sand-,ilt- Studycomposition 

tions ofsoilbottom anddirtus sediments, suspended types, A method forsilwas lyzed. estimating developed. dispersibility 

a S 

3

sf^

j£ Sj N n> a 3 

&3 § 

O I 

O

s

X

X

An Local on Lincoln evaluation ofme Creek. polymeric studysemipermeable of concentrators was mde. Cccontaminants, PAHs, nonpolar organic namely

in were and rirelation to storm events. fathead minnows compared byUptake 

also examined.

a B So 

!• R >£ y o ^ 

o 3 <§ 

g- o' ffl 

<^ B -f 

<J < p3 

CO

§

C,

00

X

X

X

of toheGreat an Multistate Milwaukee tributaries Lakes, studyincluding Fish ers. wereforrom andother contamination samples pesticides analyzed 

PCBs andPAHs. including 

& 3. 

^ 2 

K MS ^ 

g" o 

ll

TO 1 

1-

w

CD

O

S

o

information Michigan Lake 

information Stream 

measurements Field 

solids ions/dissolved Major 

Nutrients

Pesticides

DOC/TOC

Sediment

Bacteria/viruses

elements Trace 

PCBs PAHs, VOCs, 

inorganic, dioxins, 

contaminants organic 

plants Wastewater-treatment 

issues Urban 

Modeling

Other

O3-

0) 

Q>

W

O

Description

a o. 

o O 

O 3 

% a 

a o 

n> a. 

o 1 

eg 5- 

« 0 

o x 

11

H § 

O S 

(~1 on 

o

CTQ ^ 

« ? 

^ Pf 

"1 1 

n 1 

< n> 

° ^ 

§ § 

S £ 

1

g.

£

aromatic bic PCBs, BODhydrocarbons; polycyclic polychlorinated biphenyls; 

8

n>

o'

&

O

X

OQ

n>

CL 

Q. 

CD

T3 

rt- o'

O. CD'

CO 

I—f

o

CDI-HO

T3 

O

CO

CD

CD

Q) 

CO 

CD

O

o

o
Table 1. Characteristics and description of studies pertaining to surface-water quality of the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planni

[DOC, dissolved organic carbon; TOC, total organic carbon; VOCs, volatile organic compounds; PAHs, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons; PCBs, polychlorinated biphen

demand; DO, dissolved oxygen; MMSD, Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District]

Literature citation

Gergerich (1978)

Ghosh and others (2000)

Gin (1992)

Graczyk and others (1993)

Great Lakes Commission

(2000)

Hajda (1993)

Hajda and Novotny (1996)

Hansen and others (1983)

Harsch(1972)

Characteristics

c 

o

5

£

c

O)

!E

i 

£CO

c

CO

E 

fi

ECO

0)

5>

X

X

X

X

X

X

+2

0)

surem

CO 

0)

•o

0)

u.

X

X

X

X

CO

2

o

•o

£

o

CO

1

o

o

CO

s

X

X

«

0)

"3 

z

X

X

X

X

X

X

CO 

0) •o 

'o

w

I

X

X

o

g0

o

Q

X

X

0)

1

X

X

X

X

0>

CO

3

1

aj 

o

co

CO

X

X

X

2

1

0)

0)

s

.1-

X

X

CO -r •£

S c §

<C TM O 

Q. (0 o

co" .E .2

O g c

o

X

X

CO

c

CO "5.

*i

0)

CD 

0)

jjj

CO

(B

§

0)

CO 

CO

1

3

X

D)

"35

o

X

X

0>

6

Description

Local study on the Milwaukee and Menomonee Rivers to show 

organisms with fecally polluted waters. Presence of the organism

sewage-indicator bacteria, and abundance was examined in relat

Local study on the Milwaukee Harbor sediments to determine c

to different types of particles.

Local study of the Milwaukee Harbor Estuary and the rivers that 

examined by dating cores with Pb-210 and Cs-137 methods; cor

TOC.

Statewide study on nonpoint-source pollution. Rainfall, water qu

and dissolved hardness, and quality control were examined. Dat

runoff was given for the Menomonee River.

Multistate review of the Lake Michigan watershed and its subwa

Milwaukee River and the estuary. Ongoing monitoring and reco

were discussed.

Local study on the Milwaukee River to estimate the effects of th

Dam by using a mathematical model. Data was given for levels o

organic phosphorus, chlorophyll a, BOD, DO, organic nitrogen, 

Local study on the Milwaukee River to assess the effect on wate

absence of the North Avenue Dam. A model incorporating phyto

and estimated the effects the removal of the dam would have on 

nutrient levels.

Local study on stormwater pollution in Milwaukee County. This 

used for the field monitoring data in volumes 1 and 2. Also desc

examined in the study.

A collection of papers concerning the Menomonee River. Sectio

tions and research data. Section B examined sociological and ec

examinations of types of abatement.
S

8

b _ ^ 

OO

X

X

X

on Local theLake studyBig Muskego examining phytoplankton p 

included theon effects phytoplankton population byiological 

such as DO,and(or) nitrogen, phosphorus, pH,zooplankton.

0 -. 

The examii pulation. ind physiochemical

g PS' 

^ o 

o o 

*

oO 

n

-j

~~'

X

X

X

of inWisconsin fish\ Statewide concentrations and studymercury 

Milwaukee Riverand theHarbor.

ildlife. Included fish

a>

*

ft

f?Ss

^

X

X

X

Local ofinwater IV surface Lincoln Creek.study methoxychlor 

of theo elm watershed combat Dutch disease. parts 

n

was thoxychlor appl

g

c

t*<

~

OO

ON

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

Local ofsediment intheMilwaukee Sediment studyEstuary. sam] and contaminants, PCBs,inorganic polynuclear hydrocarbons

p^

es were for analyzed 

cro

c

o'

o

0.'

00

X

X

X

X

X

Local on acid ranandits effects insources Milwaukee, study

on the included dataand chemical otherconstituents. report pH 

50

unoff was also evalu

(S

"

1

£

c

K>

§

X

X

X

X

Local on OakCreek andtheMenomonee River.The studyobjectiv the bioavailable ofmetals inconcetrations interstitial heavypore^ 

risk calat benthic macroinvertebrates. by looking 

n < 

of theresearch was and examine the ater 

»n O 

O

fb ' — 1 

i?

P

n

1-1

(S

Scro

•p!

v£>

u>^

X

X

X

X

X

X

of Statewide which forincluded datatsurface-water studyquality, ents discussed included fecaldissolved dissolvec coliform, sulfate, 

solved nitrite andsediment. nitrate, plussuspended 

p- — 

e Milwaukee River, sdissolved chloride, 

n o 

&£

fir

i

5

•3

S

^o

X

X

X

X

X

on Local theBlue Milwaukee Riverand Holeabandoned studydefine thein landfiad contaminant distribution hydrogeology onf water from theHleBlu sitewater of th< ground quality 

« >.w 

The andfill. purpose toh anddetermine River. Milwaukee 

^ h$J 

^ 5^ 

o S 

i <— o 

a.

0)

*p

VO

-J

X

X

X

X

X

Local ofstormwater runoff collected fromtwo urban freewastudy shown t ofwere batr and were to sampor compared quality Treatment theMenomonee otherstormwater data River, Plant, age 

^< T3 "* 

s in Milwaukee. The

les from JonesIslan Wisconsin andstanc

CO *"^ P 

'"O -< 

o>* 2t 

K

3

O

a

s-j

'— s 

*

X

on Local Riverth LittleMenomonee written into reportresponse 

burns fromcreosote in river.of afterth frAnalysis beingsamples 

included offroma letters the compilation report groups examining 

o o " 

that lildren received site donem the were 

problem.

o

^* *~H 

2 3" 

3 ft 

o

£L

r-

(D

£

(D 

O

I

O

3

information Michigan Lake 

information Stream 

measurements Field 

solids ions/dissolved Major 

Nutrients

Pesticides

DOC/TOC

Sediment

Bacteria/viruses

elements Trace 

PCBs PAHs, VOCs, 

inorganic, dioxins, 

contaminants organic 

plants Wastewater-treatment 

issues Urban 

Modeling

Other

3- O

Q)

(D

^

(0

O

Description

o §• 

0 3 

P B 

a Bw O

o 0 

|i.

S o. 

cro <^ 

3. on x 

3- ? 

3 ... 

O 2 

n oo 

o

R ^' 

cro is 

n 0) 

P. K§ 

^ O 

n 1 

< n 

o •% 

o

§ q- 

<^ n' 

O Cj 

"0

c

^

ffi

aromatic PCBs,hydrocarbons; polycyclic polychlorinated biphenyl

Cn

biochemical BOD, 

X

3

O

rr

CD 

CD

2

CD

co'

^>o'

Q. 

Q. 

CD

Q. CD'

CO

•a 

CD

13

CO

CD

CD 

CD 

CO 

CD

a

13

13

13'

ea 

CD 

CD

O 

O

§13 

C 

CD

a.
r

n

Bo0

3

S

OO

1 J--

X

X

X

X

X

r> fc 3 -

0 3 & 

~ H 8 

s % R 

*"** 3. C3 

on and chemical water in Harborthe Milwaukee andLake Michi- biological quality 

and ofeffluent were examined, xing transport wastewater-treatment-plant plumes

cteria andviruses were also investigated.

E•p

X

X

X

X

r 3 3 & 

^ " £, S- 

"Rigp *-** r^t- ft 

to Mnte a TheCarlo create model.odel was used to simulate usingmethodology 

:diment ofa reach thean Milwaukee that included urbanRiver quality impoundic metalcontaminants. Themodl was to behe effct ofabatements usedpredict 

ofvaln the North AvenueDam water quality.

3

3 'O 

»-*• o 

<8

PJ

offi

c.

cr

0)

3

X

X

X

X

X

X

£ !°! 

EL £ „ o* 

g • S" P 

O- o O 

v; g c 

on the Riverto determine ofstation on Kinnickinnic effectwater flushing 

r oneat the one tunnel adtwo donstream sites, ouflet, sampling flushing upstream for tletwere testd used.fecal and DO, BODchlorides, Samples turbidity, pH,

2?

g Q 

*-| \,Q 

N OO 

cr o 

OQ

i-l

3

&

3"

55

X

X

x

X

X

£ | o 

EL a n 

a- 3 o 

^1 a. cro 

on the Rivrto show tatofMilwaukee were the source wet sediments weather oxythe . Amodel was to ofncreated combined-sewer overflows dis-predict impa

en levels.

3

si _ i 

-j

OO' — ^ 

X

X

X

§S

SL g 

g & 

P" ri' 

*-< . 

on theo Milwaukee River determine hadon effect thatsediment algae oxygen 

vas not shwn to bea source. significant 

3

3

MJ

a

o

rf

- — • 

~

-J

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

g_ S 5f 

g Q ° 

. pi c& 3 

*-•< *G n 

on the effects ofMenomonee River. describing ground-water quality Loading uantified andcontaminants identified. Asources model was were major predictive 

asure to oin land-use ground-water response changes -management practices.

3

g

a

o

&

> — - 

to

--j

OO

X

X

X

X

X

X

HH p: H^5 

%-Q « 

EL x •fs ^ §• 

CX § *"! 

*^ o w 

on the Menomonee Riverwatershed. Anofexamination landuse, lead, phosphorus, ed solidsto data usedcreate a modl describe contaminants was thehat enter surTom land after rainfall event. surfaces 

W

3

g.

Hrt

oT

5

S^^

s 

-J

X

X

£ 3 

^ CD 

<§ 5? 

a 3* 

CD H^5 

S' O 

on toxic metalof sources and effectiveness removal treat- vestigation heavydischarge 

mation forarea the Milwaukee was included.

r;

<»

Sr+

5

0>

£»

o

information Michigan Lake 

information Stream 

measurements Field 

solids ions/dissolved Major 

Nutrients

Pesticides

DOC/TOC

Sediment

Bacteria/viruses

elements Trace 

PCBs PAHs, VOCs, 

inorganic, dioxins, 

contaminants organic 

plants Wastewater-treatment 

issues Urban 

Modeling

Other

3- O

o> 

S

1

ft

o

Description

O FD 

O 3 

P B 

o O- 

^ o ^

—• n x 

o;, 

I 5 

2. ^ 

p: n> E- 3 

' ujsuoos!/\/\ 
Table 1. Characteristics and description of studies pertaining to surface-water quality of the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District plann

[DOC, dissolved organic carbon; TOC, total organic carbon; VOCs, volatile organic compounds; PAHs, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons; PCBs, polychlorinatedbiphe

demand; DO, dissolved oxygen; MMSD, Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District]

Literature citation

Lenz and Rheaume (2000)

Li and others (1998)

Lo (1982)

Mace (1984)

Martin and others (1983)

Masterson and Bannerman

(1994)

Meinholz and others (1979)

Metropolitan Sewerage District of the County of Milwaukee and Stevens,

Thompson, & Runyan

(1975)

Characteristics

c

o

<3

E

c

(0

o> 

o

i

(0

X

c

o

iformati

Stream in

X

X

X

X

X

*2

c

sureme

(0 

0)

•o

0)

il

X

X

X

X

X

CO

o

CO

1~0

wtn

jor ions/dii

(0

2

X

X

CO

.2

"3

z

X

X

X

X

CO 

0)

2

1

0

0

o

O

X

X

0)

'•B

0) 

CO

X

X

X

X

CO

§ 

1Bacterie

X

1

0)

Trace e

X

X

at

Q) •— (R

O c c

«T o *S 

I c c

co".E °

§110

X

X

X

CO "c

(0

Q.

0)

15 

fll

stewater-tn

to1

X

X

CO 

0)

CO

_co

c

(0

.a

X

o>

_c

"35

•o 

o

X

1

I

Description

Regional study of the Western Lake Michigan Drainages. Linc

were included in the study. Distribution and community structu

discussed and used as water-quality indicators. Environmental 

ined.

Local study on the Milwaukee Harbor Estuary. Sediment samp

size, porosity, and TOC were also determined. The report discu

in the Milwaukee area.

Local study of the Milwaukee Harbor developing a simple and 

PCBs in sediments using three Aroclors. Pb-210 dating was us

mined.

Regional study on southern Wisconsin streams for the purpose 

goals or standards for amounts of phosphorus. Milwaukee Rive

ent levels were compared to macrophyte and algal growth and 

centrations was examined.

Statewide examination of Wisconsin lakes. The trophic conditi

assessed using Landsat satellite data. Waterbodies from Ozauk

Counties were included in the study.

Local study on rivers in Milwaukee County. Chemical analysis 

fish tissue, and water samples to determine the effects of storm

lation was examined and an index of biotic integrity for macro

Local study on the effects on the Milwaukee River following w

oxygen and fecal coliform concentrations were monitored in re

acteristics were also examined.

Plan formed in response to a study that addressed problems du

The report gives an overview of the project and their objectives
Table 1. Characteristics and description of studies pertaining to surface-water quality of the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District plann

[DOC, dissolved organic carbon; TOC, total organic carbon; VOCs, volatile organic compounds; PAHs, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons; PCBs, polychlorinatedbiphe

demand; DO, dissolved oxygen; MMSD, Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District]

Literature citation

Mildner(1978)

Miller (1980)

Miller and others (1979)

Miller and others (1992)

Milwaukee Metropolitan

Sewerage District (1976)

Milwaukee Metropolitan

Sewerage District (1980a)

Milwaukee Metropolitan

Sewerage District (1980b)

Milwaukee Metropolitan

Sewerage District (1980c)

Milwaukee Metropolitan

Sewerage District (1980d)

Milwaukee Metropolitan

Sewerage District (1980e)

Characteristics

c

E

-S

c 

<n

o>

0

S

<a

0

"E

E

55

X

X

X

X

X

X

0)

b

1CO

E

•o

0)

il

X

X

X

X

X

X

CO

TJ

8•o

>

o

CO 

CO

1

o

0

(0

S

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

CO

c

3

z

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

CO

'o

CO

£

o

o 

a

*-

0)

$

X

X

X

X

8

3

1

1

(0

ffl

X

X

X

X

X

X

CO

d>

E 

o>

8

X

X

X

„«

m .s i 

o c S

21 ~ o

°- CO 0

co" .E o 

O g c

o

X

X

"c

a.

t

r

1

fl>

(BS

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

CO

0)

CO

.2

X

X

X

X

X

X

o>

i

X

1_

o

Description

Multistate study to evaluate the effect of material eroded from r

Great Lakes. Riverbank protection measures and costs were de

and German town watershed were used as study sites.

The goal of this regional study was to determine the feasibility o

water-quality monitoring data. Data for suspended solids, solub

phorus for the Menomonee River were included.

Regional examination of suspended solids, soluble phosphorus

season, year, and event status was included for the Menomonee 

Local study on the Root River. Results were discussed in relatio

Root River Nonpoint Source Water Pollution Plan to determine 

achieved.

Description of the MMSD Master Facilities Plan, which was de

The study included an analysis of alternate solutions and an exp

and their causes.

Report on a plan for combined-sewer overflow abatement. Env

kee, Menomonee, and Kinnickinnic Rivers were examined.

Report on a plan for the Franklin-Muskego Interceptor Facility

assessment with information on Little Muskego Lake, Big Mus

Tess Corners Creek, and the Root River.

Report on the Franklin-Northeast Interceptor Facility plan. An 

Root River and the effects that the proposed plan will have on i

Local plan for Jones Island Facility. Discussed were the existin

effects the plan will have on the Milwaukee Harbor; the report 

the tributaries leading into the harbor.

Report on the Mitchell Field South Interceptor Facility Plan. Th

the Mitchell Field Drainage Ditch and Oak Creek, and the effec

quality in the future were discussed.
^

•^

«

1

Ci

X

X

X

X

on Milwaukee Green Eie.s and LakeHarbor, StudyBay, Sampling 

and Menomonee Riverswer included. AnKinnickinnic, investigat 

found aromatic insediments under anaerobic condition compounds 

of looked roliron- at thend bacteria. manganese-reducing 

» Q *~ 

Q Ml ^ 

3 rt ex 

« 3" O 

3- 0) 3 

° ex f* 

2 H 

fa f^* wi 

C £• C 

?r s a- 

^" 1- 

o

_,

o

a

1

00

^^

X

X

X

of a courtase the ofIllinois versus Overview StateMilw involving 

of issueconcern wasLke sewer overflow pollution Michigan by

H x 

I § 

5-8

II

II

o

p.

i?

^,

&' H 

^ ? 

g S 

s3

""

X

X

the on Task Force Milwaukee River.Theas Mayor's Reportby 

dations forwhat neededto done bewatr includ improve quality, of reduction sewer other andscontinual overflows, agencies' plans, 

*" 3' g 

1 o 09 •S"

£<s

§ 2. 

n> o 

w o 

S S 

2 ex 

1 % 

| P

^,

e; oo 

^ 2 

c ft g- 3 

? ^ 

p» VI 

O D. *o n 

tt s — •^ 

3 00 

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

Local frtheMMSD 1WaterPollution Abatement reports prepared and refined th1980Facilities and Master Planincluded environ

o 3 

OQ 3 

£S £ 

3^ n> IH

n % 

S 3, 

2 S 

a#

o>

<i

aluated

^

p: 00 

^ <T> 

II

2%&! s^g

5° ^ 

e vo 

3 00 

~

>,:

x

X

X

x

Local on theand Roc Kinnickinnic, Milwaukee, Menomonee, study

area wasand dtao loads ofan BOD, givenpollutant phosphorus, 

included.

S. CL 

M 3 

05 8" 

0 CX 

3 TM S o. 

5: a 

SR r5 

& 

n>

^

^ O5 

^ n> 

1 1 

o S i. "o

rv 'i—i 

3 oo 

^^

^

X

X

X

X

X

X

for theLocal MMSD Creek Underwood w planInterceptor Facility 

on ment Underwood Dousman andtheMenomonee RCreek, Ditchof sources and some charact use, pointollution, physical/chemical 

s- <' 3 

^ Pj £. 

3 H "' 

£5 ' §' i 

s a 

3 ^ 

3 & 

S 0) 

0> V 

</3 —— 1 

01 £0 

cx

^

& oo 

3 9 

fc < & " 

ll

3 2. 

s£K ^~~; 

O

X

X

Local frtheRoot an River withenvironm plaInterceptor Facility 

River inNew Wis. Berlin, 

3

F

n> 

1

3

Sn 

73

o

0

^

&• oo 

^ S 

fc < 

c 2 

I*

S o 

er s. 

o 3. 

"o Sf£ ^ 

3 0? 

O

^er

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

on the OakCreek Branch ThNorth Plan.Report Facility Interceptor 

Oak andthewill Creekeffcts haveon it. plan 

0)

S

<Cjn>

X

n>

VI

0^

a

1

a,

^

(H oo 

1 i 

If

& O 

1.1

o S 

J? ^ 

3 OO 

O

°s

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

for theLocal an with environm plaNorthridge Interceptor Facility and River. Milwaukee use Land Creek, Trinity physical/ 

discussed.

3 3" 

fa ' 1 "-

% fc 

ft '— 

% & 

i « 

I i 

o 2 

3 PW p. 

n> o 

fa c/3 

^

3

^

f 05 

^ 2 

fC < 

& s % S 

« •5? 

|o

Ji^

5 P vo 

3 00 

(T5

Z>

X

X

X

X

X

X

for Local abatement facilities. and futplan water-pollution Existing 

the area werein discussed. quality 

*

o

& 

o'

1

cro

1 

1-1

r;

0

0

0>

5'

information Michigan Lake 

information Stream 

measurements Field 

solids ions/dissolved Major 

Nutrients

Pesticides

DOCm)C

Sediment

Bacteria/viruses

elements Trace 

PCBs PAHs, VOCs, 

inorganic, dioxins, 

contaminants organic 

plants Wastewater-treatment 

issues Urban 

Modeling

Other

O

S

w 

5'

Description

O o> 

P § 

% O 

a o 

< "ex 

S o. OQ jr 

LD ^Z =3. a 

° 0 

0 X 

o 2 

O 05 

« 0 

° V 

I ^ 

-H •§ 

•< ° 

I § 

| Q 

r> o' 

O d 

1

3

ffi 

en

aromatic PCBs,hydrocarbons; polycyclic polychlorinated biphenyls

W

o

o

cr

R

r

3. o'

0

•-<

OQ

S

13 

CL

Q_ 

CD

•a

rto'

Q. CD'

CO

•a 

CD

§co

CD 

J3

CO

CD

CD

CO 

CO 

CD

O

13 

^ 13' 

CO

O

o

13 

£j13' 

C 

CD 

CL
0

1

D.

n

^

v£> 

-J

*

X

X

X

X

of Statewide evaluation andcontamination Lincoli nonpoint-source management practices. 

Creek andincluded forMilwaukee Riverwere in the Datawere study. givenprecipitation, 

and metals. solids, suspended phosphorus, 

0

3

0

SO

Co

v£>

X

Local on thefaken inandLinwood water Howad Avenue study quality byplant 

and were examined. wind Turbidity, alkalinity, pH,temperature, velocity 

0

o

3

o0

0)

^-N

s

^

X

X

X

X

X

Local ofNorth urban on theAvenue thewt Milwaukee River. Amodel study impoundment 

to and simulate water sediment inareas contaminated toxicmetals. by quality 

VI

8.

o

o

3

oo.

0)

^-N

s

u>

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

Local oftheNorth on theMilwaukee v Avenue urbanRiver. Sediment studyimpoundment b ofandwere contamination examined. toxicwere mtals foundto Sources characteristics, 

urban runoff.

o_ n> 

3 3 

« 3 

%

o

3

1

0

ft

s — ,. 

-J

z

X

X

X

X

Local a model usedtohe andofestimate runoffLANDRUN, studyusing quality quantity 

and eroded fomwith lands watersheds mixevolatile uses. Runoff, sediment, particulates and datafrom andISchoonmaker theLittle solids, Creekpended phosphate Novey

monee usd theRivr were to calibrate model.

^ C fe, 

S f <* 

r^ D 

|3

g

a

o

!s — - 

-J

&

X

X

X

X

X

on the Milwaukee Riverof andcanals Venice. Theexamined Studystudy nonpoint-sou and looked at their wassociated withexcess and nutrients pollution problems relationship and o demand. Included were data anda level DO,oxygen ductivity nitrogen, chlorophyll 

MMSD.

3 & £, 

^ 3 

? 3 

2 ^ <• i— O V£> 

5 oo 

*3 vo 

g

Ow

Boo

p.

o

s0

X

X

X

X

Local onfwith information theRivr watershed andsome Menomonee theributari studywithin thewatershed. Thmodel usedLANDRUN toheand estimate (aquantity qu 

runoff aderoded fome wateratersheds withfor mixed landwas used uses)particulates sediment various landsoil fromand otherfactors likeand uses characteristics ingloadings 

viousness. were also examined. Phosphorus loadings 

S | £. 3 

^3 1 

%

o

3

O\

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

Local on to aMilwaukee area snowmelt-runoff Themo< model. study metropolitan develop be usedto snw and iTheaccumulation snowmelt urban areas. looks atce predict studytion ofincontaminants flowand use ofchemicals. Amodelwas used rates, snow, deicing 

ulate chloride flow. concentrations and 

& 3 ° 

--co

g £T 3 

i5?

ac

o

&

o

information Michigan Lake 

information Stream 

measurements Field 

solids ions/dissolved Major 

Nutrients

Pesticides

DOC/TOC

Sediment

Bacteria/viruses

elements Trace 

PCBs PAHs, VOCs, 

inorganic, dioxins, 

contaminants organic 

plants Wastewater-treatment 

issues Urban 

Modeling

Other

O

=r

0)

S

o

a

o

Description

0 I 

n g 

a Ba £' 

08

CTQ .--* 

S CT> 

n % 

I" S 

3 P. 

H § 

o & 

n 85 

« 0 

0 ' 

EL !• 

OQ fc 

-• ft 

ll

^ ^ 

(^ 3 

° M 

B 1 

o o 

n d 

1

§

5

£

aromatic oxbiochemical PCBs,BOD polycyclic hydrocarbons; polychlorinated biphenyls; 

OQ

p9)e|9y-s93jnosoy-ja)ey\/\ uojieuijo^ui joj aijj aa>|nB/v\|!|/\| ue)j|odoj)9|/\| oBejamos JOUJSJQ Bumueid 'ea.iv ujsuoos!/\/\ 
73o°

CL

i

^ •". 

;§

X

X

X

X

of surface-water streams in theLake MWisconsin Western Regional studyquality The on sites Riverdincluded andLincoln Creek thMilwaukee studyDrainages. 

used collect fort and water methods techniques samples analysis.

*-• o 

cro 3 

is cr 

1 - 0) 

73

fc « 

o. o> 

f g 

^ n 

o ^ 

n ^ 

n

3^

f

X

X

X

X

on from LocalPCBs theHarbor and Outer Milwaukee InnerMilwauke studyEstuary, and the Kinnickinnic River. were and to Sediment cores datedetermin try analyzed 

PCB concentrations.

s § 

1 a 

^J~S C/3 

73

s- a 

"^ o 

fc" S- 

> i 

8 S 

E \o 

ff 5> 

X

X

X

X

X

X

on River. oftLocalhe Menomonee theTheevaluates studyreurning potential 

natural ofmore state and recreational wei accss. Some theideas improving proposed 

and concrete the wetland, trail,making removing lining.

Q o 

2. 3 

l!o cro 

T3

0

1

"B1

•S3"

S

X

x

X

water the Howardtaken intoLinwood andLocal Fill Avenue studyexamining quality 

A ofinthe location intakewas for Plants. recommended Aver Howard changeobtained thewhich fromharbor. The levelswater examined ofammoni flowing study 

and from Harbor. the turbidity coming temperature, 

1 ONTM

8"

T3

1

£2

CL

0

"

S'O

5?

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

of doneinLak studies theWestrn as ofthe NatiSummary Michigan part Drainages Included fortheMilwaukee andwas Assessment Riverinformation Program. Quality Creek thoftrace el area; nutrient, regarding physical description studypesticide, and valuesfor indexhabi concentrations; macroinvertebrates, fish,organic compound 

algae.

else.

i-l *• 

po p p 

? g. 

5)

n

^

v£>

X

X

*

X

on the Western LakeThe detailed natural Regional studyMichigan Drainages. report features ofn the area tht havean effect These water included pogenic quality. geolo

land andcharacteristics. use, vegetation, hydrologic biological 

TM3 *-< 

II

0 rt 

T3

S

K

v£>

X

X

of a theLake ws Western which Summary meeting concerning Michigan Drainages, 

of theNational Assessment Included are ofsummaries part Water-Quality Program. p 

the at which on made included information inthe Milwaukee Riv<meeting, pesticides 

coin Creek.

&. B % 

2 S S 

Sow

T3

S.

CL

0

n>

~

oo

U)

X

X

x

X

X

of thecoast. Wisconsin and Menomo Milwaukee, Root, Kinnickinnic, Regional study

and Creekin thwere Oak were included andeffluent Fish,sediment, study.samples 

contaminants.

(j> n> TM ff 

g CL 

a H 

i0

5

c

5

o

ST

5"

information Michigan Lake 

information Stream 

measurements Field 

solids ions/dissolved Major 

Nutrients

Pesticides

DOC/TOC

Sediment

Bacteria/viruses

elements Trace 

PCBs PAHs, VOCs, 

inorganic, dioxins, 

contaminants organic 

plants Wastewater-treatment 

issues Urban 

Modeling

Other

O

o> 

5

0

HI

(0

o

Description

a PL 

0 3 

CL B- 

% O 

a p 

CL 55' 

0 n 

** & 

C3 *£ 

3. CL 

n S 

1 1 

H 2 

58« D 

II

i

i2 1 

§ 3 

< a 

O Rn § 

- 05 

° ^ 

n

Pffl

1. a 

<^ o 

o il±j 

1 

'O

§

y

aromatic biochemic PCBs, BOD,hydrocarbons; polycyclic polychlorinated biphenyls; 

(S

£

cro

3

CL 

CL

o

3

o—h

C 

Q. CD'

CO

CD

13 

(O

i-h

O

CDr-f 

O•a 

o

CO

CD

CD

CO 

CQ 

CD

O
Table 1. Characteristics and description of studies pertaining to surface-water quality of the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District plann

[DOC, dissolved organic carbon; TOC, total organic carbon; VOCs, volatile organic compounds; PAHs, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons; PCBs, polychlorinated biphe

demand; DO, dissolved oxygen; MMSD, Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District]

Literature citation

Robertson (1997)

Robertson (1998)

Robertson and Saad (1996)

Sawicki and Judd (1982)

Science Applications International Corporation

(1993)

Scudder and others (1996)

Scudder and others (1997)

Singh (1992)

Singh and others (1993)

Characteristics

r»

an informatk

o> 

o

i

0)

(0

nformation

ia

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

asurements

6 

•o

0)

il

CO •o

issolved soli

f

,o

0

(0

V

z

X

X

X

CO 

0) 

Tj

CO 

0)

X

X

o

o

Q

X

0)

X

X

X

X

X

X

a/viruses

i_

00

elements

0)

o

X

X

AHs, PCB inorganic, ontaminants

DL <£ 0 

(0 •— ._

> -o E> 

o

X

X

X

X

X

CO

c

reatment pla

**

i

mCO

i issues

(0

.a

5

X

X

X

o>

c

"53

O

X

53

O

X

Description

Regional study on tributaries to Lake Michigan and Lake Super

River. Suspended sediment and phosphorus loads were estimate

data from monitored sites. Stream gradient, land use, and soil ty

Regional study of the Western Lake Michigan Drainages. Study 

coln Creek, Little Menomonee River, Honey Creek, Oak Creek

Streamflow, nutrients, and suspended-sediment data were used 

ity by land use, surficial deposits, and bedrock type.

Regional study regarding nutrients and suspended sediment in g

Western Lake Michigan Drainages. A site on the Milwaukee Ri

Case study on the Root River watershed to determine the effect

ized institutional system for managing nonpoint-source water p

land use, educational needs, economic conditions, water quality

authority, and bureaucratic requirements.

Multistate study on the Lake Michigan Basin. The purpose of t

and get their comments on agencies' activities and future action

toxic contaminants in the Great Lakes and their sources was giv

Regional study of the Western Lake Michigan Drainage Basin. T

biological aspects of the region and also had tables of reference

Regional study of the Western Lake Michigan Drainages. Samp

River, Kinnickinnic River, and Lincoln Creek. Trace elements a

were examined in sediment and biota.

Local study on nonpoint sources of PAHs in the Milwaukee Ha

lected from the Milwaukee Harbor and the Milwaukee, Menom

Local study on nonpoint-sources of PAHs in the Milwaukee Ha

were collected from the Milwaukee, Kinnickinnic, and Menom

Outer harbor.
O5

B W D 

B o o 

« "S- 3 

BOW

?? £L 5? 

3 ^- 

" 2 o 

<3 g 3 

S3' 3 Ci 

2. a 

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

of andwater Regional studynonpoint-source point-ollutio data included anfeBOD, sediment, nitrogen, phosphorus, 

rural sources to bodies ofdifferent water.

n in southeastern Wisconsin. Provide caloliform loadsfrom ubanand

o05

B ?° n 

B (ft O Cj OQ a 

fc o 5 

22. g 3 

ft P, 55 

S e = 

O = • -o 

3 011 OO

S. n 

3 ^-^ 

X

X

X

X

X

x

X

on Lake theArea insou Regional Michigan studyDrainage tohe showneed andfor, elements, majororgnizat The on information theRivr hadRoot andthe gram. study 

theastern Wisconsin. Thewa purpose of a ionscomprehensive planning prc Milwaukee HarborEstuary.

TM i 

05

B ?s n 

B (ft O 

S 3<E. 

B g 3 

« £L 65 

<j ~ 1 

55' 3 "^ 

O 3 ij 

3 011 OO

2. CT 

3 ' "— 

j*

X

x

X

X

X

X

X

X

Local on theKinnickinnic Riverwatershed to chose study flood riskand ofwater th a pollution. Physical description 

data. surface-water-monitoring 

that a would assistin decreasin plan

rea wasith an given alongfloding 

oo

B & o 

i«.f

1 S 3 

3 f*7 

3 f § 

^ tro "^ 

. cfi fc 

3 ^-^ 

X

X

X

X

X

to waterin southeastern WiRegional plarevent pollution or usediscussed sources of solids ren pollution, disposal 

ment responsibility.

sconsin the 2000.The studup year

loved fromand wastewaters, manage

^' 

05

B & O 

a n> O 

3

so O 

» 3 ^. 

HH *-"' 

B

""* |V 

^ £2 

55' 3 O 

3'S 3 

3 OQ _i 

jo ' — N 

3

X

X

X

X

that examines Regional studypoint-source pollution, espec A listedwhere plants. Appendix companies, they discharge 

water.

from wastewater- treatment ially 

d andofcharacteristics thto, sewage 

oo

G & O 

B O> O 

fc O 3 

(? EL »> 

3• • 2 • o h— ~^

« pc 3 

55' 3 "^ 

° S' vo 

o 3 Cj 

3 OQ ^. 

J£ ' — 1 

3

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

Local on Menomonee theRiver watershed to sudy provide 

the healthof riverand increase itshabitat problems that was found withthere. Dataforlo wildlife givenalong 

were also given.

that on awillork theplan flooding of thearea was Physical description 

and surface water ading monitoring

oo

§ 70 n 

B (ft O 

5 3<2. 

8? § 3 

& EL 55' 

2 o 

-<j fa ? 

3 OQ i_i 

en ' — - 

3

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

on the Milwaukee River to show needfcRegional studyThe water discussed conditions andexisting studyproblem covered included water and flooding, quality, supply, 

)r comprehensive regional planning. and s solutions. gave possible Topics

recreation.

O5

O

N

O

fc

3

p.

OsH-i

C/3

-^

VO

-J

-25

X

X

X

on loads to Multistate theGreat Lakesfrom theirsummary 

and Rootwere Rivrs included inthe Theonee, study. repo 

solids. and nutrients, chloride, suspended 

The tributaries. Menom- Milwaukee, rt contained data levelsof describing 

05

0)

00

o

fc

3

- — • CD

u>

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

on with that showedstudy Reportregional maps topograph surface-water and water ting, ground-water quality, 

basin withinWisconsin.

and lanset us, ydrainage, physical 

for theLake use Michigan drainage

1

r;

3

o

0

information Michigan Lake 

information Stream 

measurements Field 

solids ions/dissolved Major 

Nutrients

Pesticides

DOC/TOC

Sediment

Bacteria/viruses

elements Trace 

PCBs PAHs, VOCs, 

inorganic, dioxins, 

contaminants organic 

plants Wastewater-treatment 

issues Urban 

Modeling

Other

O

Q)

0

^

(0

o

Description

D 8- 

O 3 

n g 

fi-a

% 0 

o. O 

° 2. 

£= rt 

3. a 

n 0 

0 X 

3. OQ 

0 g 

rf § 

o 2 

O 05 

~ 0 

OQ SO 

°" 1 

< gis- oo 

< 0) 

° ^ 

S 1-1 

o

1 1 

<~> n 

O L^ 

1

'a

B3

5

K

aromatic bi PCBs, hydrocarbons; polycyclic polychlorinated 

biochemical BOD,phenyls; oxygen

ft

13 

Q.

Q.

•a

rto'

o. CD'

CO

-o

CD

CO

CD

§

CD

CO 

CO 

CD

O

CO

co

CD
05

i^-cf

P» o a 

^ [f ^ 

w 3 ho 5' ^ 

§ 2jTO 

^ ^ 

X

x

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

Local theon Milwaukee Harbostudy Kinnickinnic and theMilwau Rivers, that would control mihelppollution, and water fo recreat improve quality 

Jl 8 S'tjq' 

2" S? 2. £ 

n' Sf o § 

3" n cr 5 

1 1 1 B. 

o >T3 en 3 

2 o o &. 

*r o S S 

^ 0* eT rl 

C O-^ K' 

F ! £S 

and e, Menomonee, s to aprepare pln in theharbor, lage 

1.

oo

8 w n 

f" <§. i 

% § 1 

(T3 P^ Cfl 

3 ^ §• 

^ 3 ^ 

55 S p-> 

O g' \£) 

3 c^ 

££ O 

x

x

X

X

X

X

Local on theOak Creek waters study 

increase theofits health riverand 

with a wildlife thatfound was listing 

also provided.

n> 3- er 

o S- P 

2 |T 3 

g" £L o 

t_ r P & 

513 en OQ 

^ £3. ^ 

t± S K a

pT 5 C 

S? e. n 

K « k 

3 s e e 

and oding problems ea wasgiven alonger were monitoring 

oo

8 w n 

% - 1 

£ 3 3 

CD P &n 

<J ~ °' 

£ 3 i-- 

O oo 

3 cro ^ 

en ' ^— 

3

X

for Local service sewer plan sanitary ronmental corridor theMenom alog 

§• s 

w S 

n> < 

S&

^-t n> 

H

o>

•"rt

g

E.

en

o,

1

for an envi- roposals 

03

8 ?s n 

g. n o 

n &s en 

3 HQ g- 

^ § ^ 

en 3 i—" 

o 3' S 

D ^ UJ 

££ f — s 

S

x

for theofLocal Germantow plancity 

lands were discussed. significant 

3

R' 

1

I

n

en

CD

3

n

p

r

& 

cen 

0)

B

id environmentally

oo

nw8

§<R£

§? ° a 

n> &3 en 

° 2 5' 

^ g 3 

5' 5 Q 

O ""^ oo 

3 ^ to 

2. cr 

3 ' •— 

X

X

X

X

Local frtheof fcplancity Muskego 

lands were discussed. significant 

1-1

3 

I

n>

1-1

«

n

p

^H

g

&

C 

(tl

ga. 

n>

nvironmentally

oo

8 & o 

f <§. 1 

e g 3 

n> &S en 

1 3 1 S

en 3 "^ 

8 ^' 0? 

"^ ^ O 

en^ ; — s 

3

X

X

x

x

X

X

X

Local on theRootivr anditsstudy 

both ruralurbn andsources.

a

|

n>'

3

B

O1en

a

0)&

n

8

c?

olf from pollution 

05

8 w o 

f <§. 1 

£ 8 3 

n» &S en 

~| I 

co 3 ho 3 - -o 

3 09 VO

en^ , — ^ 

3

X

X

X

X

X

X

Local on theOak Creekwaters study wateras evaluated Existing quality and otherrelatd pollution, problems

a a 

3 *= 

§• ^3 

^ 1 

3- OQ 

K" 3 

0) 0) 

2:2K- o 

g. e 

$1

S % 

eld Ditch, Drainage water flooding, 

oo

8 » o 

g. n o 

S § 3 

CD ^ en 

3 o' 

oo 3 > i— 

O ~ *-J 

«3 ^ oo 

22. ft 

x

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

of i lakes streams and Regional studyon the Menomone< Milwaukee, Root,

3 i" 

O 3 

C D. 

*cf

i i 

<3 3 

o 50 

S3 5«!* 5- g 

1 & p 

1^a g

a R- 1 S n 

e. 3 

ic were data report 

ek.

r;

<»

fi)

c

SP+

o

3

information Michigan Lake 

information Stream 

measurements Field 

solids ions/dissolved Major 

Nutrients

Pesticides

DOC/TOC

Sediment

Bacteria/viruses

elements Trace 

PCBs PAHs, VOCs, 

inorganic, dioxins, 

contaminants organic 

plants Wastewater-treatment 

issues Urban 

Modeling

Other

0

o

(0 

0

^•5'

o

o

0>

i

a

o

^^ vj *•*• 

a> O n 

a- O 3 

o P 

a & 

=• n x 

S-

„ O 

|R

OQ fc 

tf' 3- 

•a 

o'

o. CD'

13

CO

CD

§

CD

a

54 3- 

uojieuuojui JQJ aip aa>|neM|i|/\| ue)j|odoj)a|/\| IOUISJQ BumuB|d 'eajv UJSUOOSJM 
ooo

£?

00

s — ' 

VO

ooOXXXX

H. §1 1 

to <Q ,— 00 S P ? S 

l&fe*

the GreatLakes Bsinarea.n This was to sudy update

the LandPollution fromUse Activities Reference Grouptohe Greatsour Lakes, especially phosphorus nonpoint and therehe was someinformation on and '.Milwaukee 

co LJ n o S H? f 0 | |f i i 1 1 

|| 1 ?1 88.

oon1

Q* o

CO

' ^ 

^OSXXXX

Local stuc 

total suspe

«< 3 § ft 

'"d oo n o 

in BsCedarreek andtheMilwaukee River.PCB levels

and a lidsconcentrations. chlorophyll 

g

rt

rt oI*

oo 3o1 BSQ

^3^XXXXXX

Local studbyquality 

Is

B" O 

Milwaukee area to amdel thatmetropolitan designpre 

r. The focus ofthewas oncosts and econom major study

& ° S £' 

ft C 

ft§

65s

00c xi n •rj §

ES. (D O 

S 19. 3 g g ^3 

ff &L 5' 

l||

(-. p. 3 3 CD 

00

XXXX

SIcTO g- CD 

B5 CD 

C.- t-^ K ^ §- 2" 

*^ w g =f §" G a. re 

Ditch andusman Underwood Creekof thsubwatershed 

identifies and stormwater idy management flooding proba 5forth afterlternatives. management pla examining 

g n 

to 3 O 65 

3 PB- S 2. . M ^ rj 

P"

oog ?o n 

E±, (D O 

5 19. 3 g g 3 

ft P £* ^ $ ^ o 2. ^ 

3- " XXXXXXXXXX 1 f » T3 O 

Ills

£T 2 ° £ P " P j2. 

£) t|3 HJ " "— 1 § i ^ 

CD f -< en 

3 5T 

t for Littleake. Goals theofinclude planMuskego plan theo and lke, aadingreducing algaquatic macrophyte 

aesthetics anduse for recreation, improving improvil

3 3 tr 

§• ^ cr 

5' y S* ^ o"° & 3 5? 

3 S tr S 3' 85 

oog ?o n 

Ifl

!'£•$

!ff«oo 3 • t— 

^53o3 "^ (51 

2. ^ XXXXXXXXXXXXX

r Regional Wisconsin

£•!& 2. 

the at described a to updates management water-quality f 

icluded was the status of current tl implementation 

£T n 5 T3 

S? § 1

S-

(D

ft3

oog ?o n 

£± (D O 

rf <& 3 8 § g 

f? 85, 00 ^ 2 5' 

^t P 3 S 3 ^ 

en a K^ o 3 ^o 3 do ^ 

1. ^ X

Local planenvironme

«, 3 

gsn oo 

of CreekOak forsewer di service. Thecity saniary plan

lands. gnificant 

c

001ci&

oog ?o n 

g, (D O i g 1 ^ £L «> 

^, 2 5' S 3 ^^ 

oo 3 • t— O 3 ^D a OQ ijj 

|. ^ XXXX

Local plan

alterntd also while 

«, S o 

i'° 1 

s5 S-'H. 

>d andstormwater for Creek subwater management Lilly 

ins with theofcurrent and purpose eliminating problems and riverhabitat. ring nonpoint-source pollution 

B" 65 ' 0. 

ft OS t B C ft 

oog X) n 

e. n o 

5 <E. 3 g g 3 n 65, co .3 i'2 ^ g ^ 

^3-oO 3 M 3 ^jOQ 

|- S X

Local planenvironme

il P 

|°

i" ^ 

of NewBerlin forsewer The service. c citysanitary plan 

lands. gnificant 

B5' S1/1 sBC

ft

r; «

S*§

information Michigan Lake 

information Stream 

measurements Field 

solids ions/dissolved Major 

Nutrients

Pesticides

DOC/TOC

Sediment

Bacteria/viruses

elements Trace 

PCBs PAHs, VOCs, 

inorganic, dioxins, 

contaminants organic 

plants Wastewater-treatment 

issues Urban 

Modeling

Other

O

o>

-tao'

(0

o0

•5' 

o' 3 1 — 1 p. G ro O 3 n § 

D. 5r % G 

2. O 

n Q- & 55' § O 

fr^ 1 ^f S ft ° 0 

cT 1 S i n"^ oo O 

k|

% * CTQ p | c. 

-i •§ < a o »• n 3 - oo < to 

65 ft B 3 O

es 55' 

3. 3. 

0 0 O d 1gaipolycyclic §

ff.

PCBs, BOD, hydrocarbons; polychlorinated biphenyls; 

Sft

o' 

SLoX

•RB i

O 

CO

Q3 

3 

Q. 

Q. 

CDO—h 

If

O. CD' 

co

-o

CD

CD

Q3 CD"

J3s

o 

•a 

o_

?+'

Q3 3

CO

CD

CD

CO 

CDOa

co

Q3 

CD
Table 1. Characteristics and description of studies pertaining to surface-water quality of the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District plannin

[DOC, dissolved organic carbon; TOC, total organic carbon; VOCs, volatile organic compounds; PAHs, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons; PCBs, polychlorinated bipheny

demand; DO, dissolved oxygen; MMSD, Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District]

Literature citation

Sullivan and others (1995)

Sullivan and Richards

(1996)

Sung (1983)

Syftestad (1985)

Task Force on Pollution

from Sources Outside the

Milwaukee Metropolitan

Sewerage District (1983)

Taylor (1994)

Toyingtrakoon (1996)

Tseng (1978)

U.S. Environmental

Protection Agency (1980)

Characteristics

o

an informati

O>

!E

i

CO

-1

nformation

E

B

X

X

X

X

X

X

asurements

0)

•o

0)

E

X

X

X

X

X

X

CO •o

issolved sl

1

i_

0'cF

5

X

X

X

X

1.2

z

X

X

X

X

X

X

1o

CO

X

o

O 

O

0)

w

X

X

X

a/viruses

o>

CO m

X

X

X

elements

8

£*~

X

X

X

X

AHS, PCB inorganic, ontaminants

TM CO "

CO" .«= 0

O * c

31?

o

X

w 

c

reatment pla

a!

75

(i> To

^

X

X

X

i issues

5

D

X

_c

0

X

0)

O

Description

Regional study of the environmental settings of study sites in the 

ages. Lincoln Creek and the Milwaukee River were included in th

use, physical characteristics of the streams, and field measureme

Regional study of pesticides in surface water in the Western Lake 

included for the Milwaukee River.

Eight watersheds in Milwaukee County studied to estimate nonpo

its sources. A model was created to help in the design of urban n

Statewide study that provided data about public water supply fac

Samples were collected for each municipal system from raw surf

ished water distribution samples.

The task force sought to determine if improvements made by MM

cantly improve water quality in the district or if a point- and nonp

program was needed outside of the district.

Local study on the Kinnickinnic River examined nonpoint source

erosion from construction sites and streambanks were the main i

Local study on the Milwaukee, Menomonee, and Kinnickinnic R

water treatment facility to determine the effects of the Inline Stor

included levels of phosphorus, BOD, fecal coliforms, and suspen

Local study on sludges from Milwaukee Jones Island and South 

plants and the Howard and Linwood Avenue purification plants. 

metals, total solids, and volatile solids.

Local study addressing the MMSD Master Facilities Plan. The st

proposed actions and alternatives on the environment and the exi

ammonia, nitrogen, phosphorus, BOD, pH, flow, fecal coliforms
Wisconsin DepNatural Reso

S E 

g o 

3 n 

o \o 

*+> -J 

X

X

X

X

small on streams includec Regional study

The theners. of was major goalprogram for tins streams. discharges Secondly, 

stream health. on plant efficiency 

the inRootiver tributaries NewBerlin andHales Corto data fortheof waste load alloca- provide development it aimedto document theffects ofincreased treatmentWisconsin DepNatural Reso

& *i N « 

o ^ 

O MO 

s> -J 

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

on southeastern Wisconsi Regional report from Dataandwater-quality sampling 

n thate included Rootiver andtributaries inthearea, were evaluation done1973 survey during presented.

Wisconsin DepNatural Reso

& « 

g o 

3 n 

£3 ^-^ 

O M2 

Ul

X

X

X

that summarized industriz Regional study

also discussed andreport permis compli

d into waterssoutheastern Wisconsin. Thedischarges 

ince schedules.

Wisconsin DepNatural Reso

g o 

a a 

fp oo 

E3 s-*\ 

O vO 

>-*> -J 

h-*

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

on Localake. Adesstudy BigMuskego recreational fish, wldlife, aquatic plants, 

of water soils, characteristics, cription drainage quality, 

and the was land use included. use, srrounding 

(199 Windstrup 

U)

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

Local on to Milwaukee Rivercreat study 

Data forzinc, cadmium, chromium, lead,Total vided. total vlatile carbon, organic 

; amodel frconcentrations ofmetals, predicting heavyand isediment mudflat were samples pro- copper 

and were also examined. solids, pH

and oth< Walker 

h-*

^O

Ul

X

X

X

X

X

Statewide to evaluate theeffectiven studycontamination. Lincoln Cretpoint-source The nland-use discussed studypractices, 

ess of for non- best-management practices controlling :k andtheRivr Menomonee were included inthestudy, 

aral stream-water and snowmelt runoff. loads, quality, 

and Villeneuve (1997)

o

rf

X

X

Local t determine toxici study long-term were and Fishcells usedhepatoma expos

effects on stream biota fromurban stormwater runoff, ty 

ed to waterfrom Lincoln Creek.

and LeeVeith (

-j

^^

X

X

X

X

on i Localthe Misudychlorobiphenyls to natural waters mun discharged through 

Iwaukee River. Thewere b contaminants shown t 

and industrial wastes. icipal 

Veith (1970)

X

X

X

X

the ofRivr to Milwaukee determi Studyfound infish. dwere Analysis procedures were detrmined. compounds 

ne the chemical nature of organochlorine compounds and theconcentrations ofthe fate, sources, eveloped 

Environme U.S.

Protection A£others (1980)

3 (D 

^*~ 0 «< 

&3

5

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

of thLocal area MMSD studyaddressing was issue overflows caused thofini bythe water how willaffecnd quality plan

e Master Plan.The Facilities focusof theproposed study

tration ofwater and stormwater. Current ground(1980) 

t it was examined.

r;

<D

o

Kf

O

information Michigan Lake 

information Stream 

measurements Field 

solids ions/dissolved Major 

Nutrients

Pesticides

DOC/TOC

Sediment

Bacteria/viruses

elements Trace 

PCBs PAHs, VOCs, 

inorganic, dioxins, 

contaminants organic 

plants Wastewater-treatment 

issues Urban 

Modeling

Other

O=r

0)

3

<D

a

0

Description

dissolved [DOC,dis demand; DO,

R o 

3. b. 

° 0 

o a 

H % 

O oo 

| 2 

° 1 

a o 

< 2- 

- oo 

3 3 

P CD 

|'l

n o' 

C ^ 

1

c 

o

&

aromatic PCBs, hydrocarbons; polycyclic 

biochemical BOD,polychlorinated biphenyls; oxygen

CD 

CO

o

^•§.'

o

^

o

CD 

CO

-o

CD

s

O•a 

o

CO

CD

CD

a> 

co

CD

a

ft

CO

so

CD

o

o
55' 23 

O 65 

§ ? 

O to s-s

3 CD 

fD Co 

O ^O 

£J

X

X

X

X

X

Local on Milwaukee River Southt determine studynonpoint 

recommend actions. Themost information was management £ 

and sediments.

o 5° 

1 S 

f° 1 o

w S 

«i aT 

f%

Q M 

^ | 

3. 2 

& P* 

55' 23 

O 85 

§ C 

3' £• 

il

§ £ 

3 fB 

fD co 

O ^O 

s

X

X

on River Localthe Menomonee watershed withstudy purp The identified detaile environmental concerns and studymajor 

information was resources subwatershed witinform givenby and solidhazardous use, waste, pollution nonpoint-source 

O O* 65 

CO C/3 ^. 

^ ft O 

<s n' < 

g 05 <. 

3 >| 85 

j2 O Qd M*

1 ~ £ 

^ 5^ '"•' 

^3 ^i 8.5 

SP &

2!l

O 65 

§ £ 

£L|.

£ofP ao 

*O O 

a o 

S X 

o ^o 

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

on thef inMilwaukee Areathe LaksConcern GreatRepor and Milwaukee Rivers theInnr were Harbor 

of theowater-resource and s wasreport present problems ation. Alsowere toxics contan those data,presented including 

03 3 65 gas o 00 5 

2. F o § 

a §* ;f 1/3 

ft S' <: c 

3 s 5 3 

2 & § °* 

y o> O> g' 

fp C »-t ^ 

-^ «5" °"oo 

ffi H | 

o' Tt ^ 

3' >3 a 

O (D D. 

xl

g 65 

3 £ 

g- & 

a ?? ^•s

0 O 

3 (D CD «" 

O ^O 

X

X

X

X

X

X

based on taken report monthly Surface-water-quality samples were sits on theMilwaukee Included andKinickinnic River

f^J CO 

§

£

COw

1

^

g

cf

CO

w

p

025!

D £ \O 

3 £ 23 

g- E. 3 

O rt 

8-S

S C 

3^ CD CD Co 

3

O

X

X

X

X

lakes. Statewide on Wisconsin The informat ofstudy majority 

levels Littlechloride were Lake. for givenMuskego 

§

3

g

3o

2

<-y

^

3 

sSH*

^r

C2il

g 65 \O 

° n 52 

^3 i

a o 

§

s,

X

X

X

X

X

Local on stormwater in Milwaukee Tlstudy County. pollution well as detention andretention Alsoevaluated w basins. ing

the loadremovals. anticipated pollution 

". CD 

< S 

&ac n> 

3 S 

rci O 

S % X cc 

65 O 

2§.

?h CD 

°- CD 

It

M £ 

1||§

g E jt> o 

-^fl

3 CD to 

ft Co J 

C3 ^-^ ^ — i 

O Co ^O 

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

on waterith Statewide some informa reports quality specific The cover aarea.of includi surrounding variety reports topics data some Data on chemical constituents as well. were f( given

Lincoln adNorth Avenue Dam. Creek, Estuary, 

§' m sO fj 01 

a W 2 

| & | 

^ ^ rt 

CD ^ 50 n '-a" 3 

3 ^ g 

§'1 f 

Cu pj 83 

y, w 

« s 

- ^ 23 

a £ 

S" £• 

II

g £ 

R O 

3 (D a co 

3 ^-^ 

O ^O 

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

Lake Localon Little described a thatfor report Muskego plan

of thelak. dredging 

65

a.

"3

o

Irt

rt

^*

g

i

CB

sCO

s

s

o

Q)

St

o

information Michigan Lake 

information Stream 

measurements Field 

solids ions/dissolved Major 

Nutrients

Pesticides

DOC/TOC

Sediment

Bacteria/viruses

elements Trace 

PCBs PAHs, VOCs, 

inorganic, dioxins, 

contaminants organic 

plants Wastewater-treatment 

issues Urban 

Modeling

Other

O

0)

S

i

(0

o

Description

a 8* 

J ^ r* 

E *< 

5. oo 

I 8 

H 5 

O&-oo O 

i. s s i* 

CTQ 6 

li

i S 

Q- CD 

S | 

w" N

g i 

.

092 uo;)eiujoju| jo| ai|) !i/\| 
§ B £? 

CO ^5 CO 

O 7° ^O 

li-s

S3 " 

^ B 

•—n

X

X

X

X

X

a Local on theMenomonee Riverdiscussed forstudy plancontrolling The included on such as seinformation lead,study topicsphosphorus, 

§ 5' 

B B 

T3 (D 2. 3 

!s

3 S 

to o 

2-T3

& § 

- ^

?

V3 ^ Ki 

§t§

H-- & 1 O"

o ^° 

•§ i 

B

o

X

Statewide withan the MMSD area. The extensive lookstudy report sewer for t beake and recommendations actions overflows, systems, 

0 B 

G.

&

65

B: 

O

S

3

O 6) 

h-. B65 — 

8-S

R n 

B (D 

o ^o 

X

X

for theentire watershed. Thofthe r Milwaukee RiverReport purpose 

to determine liemeasurements for usefulprocess describing ecosystem and were indicators education discusar, water, including biodiversity, sented forandland fishuse. ozone, VOCs, advisories, transportation, 

f6 •- co 

s.§-| &• § 

V o' °* 

£3 O 

o 5° 3 

| || 

65 CO « 

g.-T3 T3 

r « ? 

g|

£2. 3 

1 1 

3 8 

f[| CO 

O ^O 

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

and Localof therivers it.Thento Milwaukee draining studyEstuary mental a brief ofanduses overview each,gave problms impaired 

mendations fort waterestore plans quality.

^ ^t*. 

z$

Is

H

ll

a i-i 2 rt 

1

ill!H*. &5 ry 

D n? Co ^ 

3 S Co n »j vo 

B 0\ 

0

X

X

X

Statewide sixwatersheds asreas included theMilw studyusing 

the extent of was tohich determine goalstudy management pr 

tat and communities.

£3 £3 

Sf R' 

n CO 

?0 h-. 

jf 1 

II 

H & 

(D ^5 

T*

Ill

• H— p5 & 

£oCD co 

§ S 

H O 

i s 

fp Co 

B

O

X

X

X

X

X

X

Local on theWind andLakes thdraini tributaries Muskego studyexamined withthe mainfocus on sediment nonpoint-source pollution 

o o 

as & 

S

cf

1

i' i? ^ 

£2. W o 

£aCD co 

R O 

B (D 

S

O

X

X

X

Local on TheMilwaukee River watershed. water- South studyexisting concerns habitat andtreatment such as weredescribed a plants sewagecauses and were outlined. management strategies 

J2 3 

EL •o 

£ 0 

B 2 

CL (D 

CD £ 

aS 

|I

2:3

§ ^ 

ffH- -3 

-25^

2* ^ 1 O"

G f? 

CD t/3 ^o o 

3 S 

ft, CO 

B

O"*

X

X

X

X

the Statewide to a ondistribution andbundar establish database studytheo studies in1900-72 distributions 1974-86. study compares 

(D 

O

EL

B»&•

•o

(D 

O§'

5

(D

|||

££. ^ ^5 

o ^° 

i-s

f[| CO 

o

X

X

X

X

X

Local on thewatershed. ThMenomonee Riverassessed s study and idetified to beThe mainmanagement implemented. practices pol

and lead. sediments, phosphorus, 

Q Hj» 

S 3 

a o- ^ 5- 

% 0 

85 C 

a % 

i ro 

ll

R. CO 

S

rs

1 g

CD

O

sro'

information Michigan Lake 

information Stream 

measurements Field 

solids ions/dissolved Major 

Nutrients

Pesticides

DOC/TOC

Sediment

Bacteria/viruses

elements Trace 

PCBs PAHs, VOCs, 

inorganic, dioxins, 

contaminants organic 

plants Wastewater-treatment 

issues Urban 

Modeling

Other

1 3O

0)

a

0

Description

0 3 

n g 

% o 

s. P 

g & 

O 23 

° 0 

0 1 

n'^ oo p 

rs

a_ ?r 

P. -8 

o sf 

J oo 

1: 3 

§ M 

65 on' 

3- 3. 

° n 

O 1^1 

1

§

5

y

aromatic BPCBs,polycyclic hydrocarbons; polychlorinated biphenyls; 

O

O 

cr

8

to

o

BL 

o

X«•<;

n

B

B)

7

<D

O

Q3

O

erf

CD 

CO

o

•5'

jo'

3 

O

a. CD' 

co

•a 

CD

^

(Q 

l-t

o

CD

Q3 

i-+ 

CD

.a

00

CD

CD

Q) 

CO 

CD

a
Table 1. Characteristics and description of studies pertaining to surface-water quality of the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planni

[DOC, dissolved organic carbon; TOC, total organic carbon; VOCs, volatile organic compounds; PAHs, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons; PCBs, polychlorinated biphen

demand; DO, dissolved oxygen; MMSD, Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District]

Literature citation

Wisconsin Department of

Natural Resources and

others (1990b)

Wisconsin Department of

Natural Resources and

others (2001)

Wisconsin Department of

Natural Resources and

Southeastern Wisconsin

Regional Planning Commission (1985)

Wisconsin District LakeStudies Team (1996,

1997, 1998, 1999)

Witte (1996)

Xiao and others (2001)

Zanoni (1970)

Characteristics

o'•5

E

|

c

CO

.5?

.0

0)

CO

~"

X

c

o

CO

l_

IE

E

8

<n

X

X

X

X

X

co

t

0)

m

•o

0)

il

X

X

v> •o

"5

co

10 

CO

co

1.0

B^^

CO

s

X

CO

0)

3

z

X

X

X

X

CO

0)

"5

1

O

g0 

0 

Q

1

'•5

0)

X

X

X

(0

3

oj 

o

CO m

X

X

X

CO

c

0)

0)

0)

8

£"~

X

X

X

X

£ 

co » "P

m .2 i

° « -i

= 1 1

°- to" ° 

co" .£ .2

O >< c

§•!!>

0

CO

c

CO

a

a>

E

a>

en

i

<3i

i

X

X

CO 

0)

COw

c

CO

.a

z>

X

X

0)

*a> a>

6

Description

Local study on Milwaukee River discussing a plan for controllin

report included information on toxics such as lead, sedimentatio

agricultural regions.

A look at the entire Milwaukee River and the streams in its wate

ual descriptions of areas within the watershed. There was discuss

of pollution, wetlands, and stream and shoreline modifications.

Study of the Milwaukee River watershed including rivers and tri

study examined water quality and other factors in an attempt to 

an effective priority watershed program.

Statewide reports on the physical and chemical characteristics o

included information for Little and Big Muskego Lakes.

Local study on the metals copper, lead, and zinc in Lincoln Cree

risk to aquatic biota from urban stormwater. However, stormwat

cant source of these metals.

Study of the parasite Cryptosporidium and its distribution. Surfa

from locations throughout the United States, including Lake Mi

wastewater samples were also collected from Milwaukee.

Local study of the Menomonee River analyzing total soluble ph

out the year and phosphorus loading. Levels from agricultural la

downstream from municipal treatment plants.
n

CD

cr

1

^ /—. 

^q•-j

^^

X

X

and o erosion sedimentation. Theincludes s Regional reporteport 

River.

Iro

3'

8"

&. 

§

the on Milwaukee

n

ffi

^

a

i—i M

&o

(D

0

o

^

X

for 24inPlans locations Milwaukee to frmstorm prevent pollution were There alsoofcontamin lists implemented given.possible 

<3 ps 

P S 

£ i 

o & 

cj- oo 

o O 

31 «> 

5 for t beplans for eachsite.

n

i

(D

^O

^o

OJ

X

X

Local theMilwaukee on River. Theeffect Shore TunNorth study

and intothe was outf rivermeasured. seeping 

tr 

as

o

cf 

S

of nount water ground 

W

g

00

to

^-^

X

X

Local withdaa fromthe Menomonee Riverand Creek studyHone — inant lodsinwater were discussed and str integration, composite, 

dations were the formost effective method. given choosing 

T £3 

sir Si 

(T) CD 

n> O81

<" l!t» 

for contam- estimating Recommen- impling. 

W

g

1

g

3

pj

&

o

rt

Co

00

cr

X

X

X

Local on andf urban st characteristics, sources, study management Characterization ofurban stormwater-runoff conte volumes, County. effects on watersere discussed. Alsodiscu water-quality receiving examination oftheeffectiveness various swe street frequencies 

O 3 p CD a s. us 

P 3 & 3 

§ ^ ^ 

S 8 % 

V 3 0 

O 0 O Ms

in o Milwaukee 

and ations, loadings, ninant sources and

da

g

3

ft

§

as

o

(Di-i

Co

oo

•&

X

X

Local on andst of urban characteristics, sources, study management This volume was anexecutive theentire ofCounty. study. summary 

o

&

T3

1

O.

on i Milwaukee

da

i

ft

1

3

as

a

o

(D

Co

Co

cr

X

X

X

X

X

on the Menomonee Riverwatershed. Waterwas Study monitoring p 

of fromland mixedand landThe uses. drainage pollutants single

and leadbut discussed wel]other constituents as solids, phosphorus, 

were done.

TM ^ 

g> S da 

lc?a

1 §.3 

and 5S kinds amounts on ainly suspended nvertebrate surveys

W

g

3

ft

as

d.

O

ff

3

Co

-j

as

X

X

X

of Local on thecombined Milwauk Menomonee, study loadings effects ofwind-induced sediment on water in tsuspension quality 

were also discussed.

-J" n 

||

p. 1 

O CD 

inic Rivers. The

arbornd itsvicinity

3>

cr

as

*

-^~^

rr

y§

' — s 

X

X

and o Kinnickinnic Rivers beforeMilwaukee, Menomonee, Studydetermine roleintots Levels o: Storage Systemreducing pollution. 

and BODwere examined. coliforms, zinc,chloride, 

05 O 

£t) v> 

^ 1" 

% 1 

H

ration oftheInline fecal solids, pended

(D

0)

(D

o

S

o

information Michigan Lake 

information Stream 

flow Stream 

drought) (flood, flows Extreme 

g budget Hydrologic 

3 Erosion/sedimentation 

o

•§. calculations Runoff 

o' Modeling 

Precipitation/climate

Geomorphology

issues Urban 

Other

Description

w

ffi

u^<

B*

P,

o'

•$"

£o

cr

S

sdd

JO

s5T

1

cr •5'

1

D3

8

cr

o

0

X

dissolved Milwaukee demand; DO,MMSD, ygen oxyge;Metropolit

as

3

oo

%

%

a

3.

o

0) <• 

O" CO 

<D

ro

3- o

Q3

QJ 

O 

r-h 

CD

Q. 

Q. 

CD

•a 

^o'

CD 

CO

•a 

CD

CO 

l-f

o

Q. 

5"

O

i-f 

CD

CD 

i-f

O•a 

o

CO

CD

CD

Q) 

CO 

CD

a

ca

Q3 

CD
9

(?*i

VO

00 

0\

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

Statewide to sudy develop equation urban Landuse examinee sites.was were used. Milwaukee, 

s to estimate themagni and datafrom s, gaged 

£ r^' 

8*

**a < 

f>g

g 0 

0 D 

k^ t/3 

o B 

li

OS 0 » c" 

c^

TO TO 

65

TO

^

fD

1

^O

X

X

X

X

a Statewide to provide way study Data was collected fromequations. and Little Milwaukee, Menomonee, 

estimate characte floodrive stations forgaging Menomonee ar Rivers, 

£2. °° OB

oo os 

ff- o 

030

oo O B 

££ ^ 

1^1 

5 M & 

ggsS5 ? ^ 

^ icteristics This incluCreeks.

M

52 K; & »> 

' 5 3 

Icf

(D

n

^' O g > W 

§ O *T3 ^ 

^' h K (^ o a 

& 3 s> S- 2 

| g o % ^ 

C^ Q 1 T J ( _^ | 

?T l> ~P H B -J 

^ g, | & ^ 

" rT rt 5' 

££. ^ P 

X

X

X

X

X

a Local evaluation ofcombined-sew and datafrom sewer river moniflowrm recontaminants reaching 

er-overflow tdetention ^ detention tankstoring, 

waters. ceiving 

§ n> 

^ a 

**

§1

S o 

0 f 3 

da g 

85 S 

I o 

Is

& 2 

B < 

TO 2 

B § 

| 9 

n

•:? a a > w 

o ^3 O* oo CJQ 

H g B S £o 

^ B 2 °" ^2, 

^ O vr^ 

S "> H § -j 

J & ^li 

• f « " 5" 

o 3 CTQ 

§ ^ o- 

||1-

X

X

X

X

at Local effectiveness looking study

and c ofdata studies were modeling 

in relation to rainfall.

of detention tanksipr 

one the Milwaukee on 

5 i? 

' g 5'

o ^ 

ff. & 

QJ n 

00 < 

CD p 

° *£ 

^1§ ^ 

ao 65 

1 3 ft 

"" 85 

I!

9P.

(D

g

r

o

Co

00

o\

X

Local on Harb theMilwaukee studyfor PCBs. Theresults were colyzed 

to link records PCBs. sales of

or. A sediment core wawith LakeMic mpared 

$? H 

CD ^ 

II

P.?

f^ o 

fi- P 

ner harbor, Concentra

i'&

fD oo 

^* <3 

& rt 

S &" 

1 i 

n

(D

r>

g

^

VO

-J

X

X

X

Local smalwatershed on two sudy and 1use the othrwith agricultural 

watersheds afterrainfall.

in s theMilwaukee area and Flowuse. contz

o 3 

B 3' 

3 1 

65a- H~ o 

B" gj oo 

n •f 

& < 

9^.

th predomcompared

B <T g ft 

& ^ *< rt <- n 

&*

5 rt 

II

9(D

?v

c

£

-J

65

X

X

X

X

Local theo determine effects studyin different ofsheds stages developi ;Total dissolved andchloride solids

of urbandevelopment nent wre examined in

were oads examined.

B (3 

3 T3 

I § 

^ n 

8^ 

&& 

^« B- § 

streams. F 

tie meteoro

g o 

H OS 

oo O 

3 65 

< to 1 s 1 F 

Sf

(D

3

O

o

information Michigan Lake 

information Stream 

flow Stream 

drought) (flood, flows Extreme 

budget Hydrologic 

Erosion/sedimentation

calculations Runoff 

Modeling

Precipitation/climate

Geomorphology

issues Urban 

Other

o

(D 

(0

q•5' 

o'

o

o

<D

(0

o'

W
oI-J

r?

N 

*<

PT* Bf^

^o5XXXX

total Statewide on water and Rainfall, bedload, metals, DO,study nonpoint-source pollution. quality, were dissolved andcontrol examined. Dataon ad storm waterrunoff was hardness, precipitation quality 

for the Menomonee River. given 

£o>

B.

M3

^j

GOXX

Local on theMilwaukee andtheMenomonee Rivers to show ofstudy bacteriolytic relationship organism 

withaters. Presence ofthewasith levelsfecally organisms sewage-indicator polluted compared 

andbundance was examined into relation andrainfall. bacteria, temperature 

01

9n<y S

/-*,

^^XX

of Statewide andlow-flow streams. Included were Wisconsin several statioi map description frequency 

the on adther rivers inarea. MMSD Milwaukee, Menomonee, planning 

"n

r*N

as.

5. o

P?

O- O

D.

t»1XXX

the on Western Lake siteson Lincoln Creekand the MilwaRegonal studyDrainages including Michigan kee River. Thesites wer for stream evaluated habitat. Channel and substrate, streambank, geometry, 

were examined. characteristics riparian 

c

O3

?To

3.

oT>-!

OOoXXXX

Local Environmental Statement fora t Littleake. Thw ofplan dredgeImpact Muskego goaldredging 

aesthetic to andrecreational uses shallow areasnd control- life, improve qualities, bydeepening aquatic 

ling growth. macrophyte 

a§asy

D. OB- &SooXXX

the on Menomonee Riverwatershed. were levls withsize ofsoils, Study particle Phosphorus compared 

street and bottomAn sediments. was made to bsources dst, suspended identify attempt phosphorus 

particle-size composition.

*<

QQO

aso

QJ O

3- Q

v>

\O 

OO ^X

Local on theMenomonee Riverwatershed. Soilwere taken andto sii studyamples dispersed byshaking 

ulate water erosion andthe were conditions. Afterthat, particle transport samples completely dispersed with ultrasound. Theinformation was used to ease of measure soils basedon gathered dispersibility 

content. sized clay-particle 

y

QQH

asa

ogo>

t»

h-*

VO 

-JXXX

of theRivr watershed. Metalin adMenomonee fractions ofsand-,ilt-, Studycomposition clay-sized 

soil bottom anddustirt were Amthod f(sediments, types, suspended samples analyzed. 

soil was estimating dispersibility developed.

0a^

aT

^-^

h-"

^O

•§' — ' XX

Localincoln Anon Creek. evaluation ofmembrane devices as concenti study semipermeable polymeric 

tors of PAHs was mde. Concentration levelsin were contaminants, organic namelynonpolar compared 

storm fathead relation to events. minnows adwaslso examined. Uptake crayfish byrusty 

as

I-3Sc

CDO

Si O3

information Michigan Lake 

information Stream 

flow Stream 

drought) (flood, flows Extreme 

budget Hydrologic 

Erosion/sedimentation

calculations Runoff 

Modeling

Precipitation/climate

Geomorphology

issues Urban 

Other

Description

i$

(0

o'

(0

Is

r-t- o n2 O. 

CD

8

5»3sda i*§.

o"

ton

D.

cr

*o

to

•§, W§

cr

H^"* 8

3. n'

£LoX3gS* i§.P" ap

D.

an'

s. 1OX

«<mft

?.2

<^

ooOk

sf

(T> 12

(D

ET

^.* Is

oo

(D13

TO

(T> O

PT

n

CO

Q3

^ 

Q.

Q.

CD 

COO

^_

6' ^oac

Q. CD'

CO

•a

CD

Q3

2\

CO

r-h O

CO

c.

ton

CD§

Q3

CD

J2

£=

Q) 3

rt-_

rt-'

Q3

Q.h — O§o

r+

CD 1 ni

Q) C

7T

CD

CD^

CDr-h O•a

0^

rt-'

Q3 3

00

CD§

CD

QJ

CO

CDa

S-+

^_o'

r-h

•a

Q3

3 3
1 t— 

ft

x~,

VO

X

X

Local ofstormwater runoff collected fromtwo urban inMilwaukee. Thewere study freeways samples shown t beofwatr and were from t Jones IslandTreatment poor quality compared samples Sewerage 

the othrMenomonee stormwater and Wisconsin standards. Plant, Riverdata, 

1 g

>fl

(D

0

£

,00

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

Local the on forastructure on the Menomonee River.The ofstudy options removing dropgoal removing the structure tohe was river forenhance andrecreation floodcontrol. use, fisheries, dropimprove promote A was to enhance thenatural channel ofriver andestablish a more stable goal secndary geomorphic 

balance.

ffi

v>

n

oo

^j

X

X

Local on theMilwaukee Harboran model. The model usedstudy usingunsteady-flow channel-geometry 

streamflow at tributaries and data a the mouth determine flow. t upstream stageestuary 

$

•JT

0)

3

oo

^

X

X

X

X

X

to form mathematical lowinestimate flowstreams data fromsta- Regional usingstudy equations gaged

and tions.area index were into base-flow alstaken account. Drainage 

ffi 5'

oSL

§

333°

^

-j

,0

X

X

X

X

of theState sediment ofincluded a Wisconsin streams that siteon th Milwaukee Maps showing yields

River.

ffi

N Lr 

^ O 

a ^ 

m

rt 

rt

5'

OO

n

o

1

•5

X

X

Local withsites on the Menomonee Lincoln ad TheofSouthbranch Creek.the River, Creekstudy goal

was to determine whether removal ofconcrete channel stream habitat. study lining significantly improved 

The dataand to recommended a evaluate stream characteristics. report provided methodology 

W

£

|0

X

X

X

A collection the ofMenomonee Acontained River.Section scientific and concerning papers investigations 

research data.Bexamined andSection of economic examinations sociological problems pollution 

of abatement. types 

ffi 

%

8

g

C/3

00

(£

X

X

X

X

X

X

in Local on storm water Milwaukee Thisthe volumeused forstudy pollution County. presented procedures 

the fieldin 12.data volumes and Also were described the sitesthat examined inthemonitoring study.

&i.

65

VO

' — > 

X

X

X

on the RivrLocal Milwaukee to estimate ofNorth removal Avenue Damstudy impactby 

a mathematical model.Data was for levels ofandammonia, nitrate, usinggiven inorganic organic phosphoand streamflow. rus, a, BOD, DO,chlorophyll organic nitrogen, 

i?

65

J_l

cf

n

g

|.

1

to

X

X

Multistate reviewof thLakewatershed anditsonef which the was Milwaukee subwatersheds, Michigan and theRivr recommendations forurther actions were discussed. Estuary. Ongoing monitoring 

5f

(D

O

s

5

3

information Michigan Lake 

information Stream 

flow Stream 

drought) (flood, flows Extreme 

budget Hydrologic 

mentation i Erosion/sed 

calculations Runoff 

Modeling

Precipitation/climate

Geomorphology

issues Urban 

Other

Description

3

?

(0

8

I

CO

•o

o

X 

*<

3

CL 

(D

§ 

fi.

O 

O

&5'

sl 

I

992 paieiay-saajnosay-jaieyw uojieuuojui JQJ sip aa>|neM|!i/\| ue)j|odoj)3|/\| 36ej3M3$ JOUJSJQ Bumueid 
g

f+ VQ 

3 ^ 

§ ^ 

w

3

CD

§

X

X

on i Localrivers Milwaukee was Chemical doneon fish, sediment, study County. analysis 

to and water determine theeffects ofeach. stormwater runoff o Bioaccumulation samples 

of and index biotic forwas macroinvertebrates calculated. integrity 

<•> ^ 

3 1 

» 2 

a- e 

gf 3' 

S.g

r

O>

53

S

VO

oo

X

X

Local on theMilwaukee Harbor Sediment were for PAHs study Estuary. samples analyzed 

and TOCwere also determined. Thetheeffects ofdiscussed industrializati( porosity, report 

waukee area.

B'|.

05_ 0> 

r"

JT3 

N

§

D.

^0

1

to

s

X

X

of theWestrn LakeCreek Lincoln adMilwaukee Rstudy Regional Michigan Drainages. included intheDistribution andstructure of was benthic invertebrates distudy. community used as indicators. Environmental and habitat were also examined. water-quality setting 

§s

2 I "*- n> g-8

a.

r

n>

VO

O^^

X

X

X

on Local theofRfrom Inline to Milwaukee study quantity seepage Storage System 

was studied theffect on Milwaukee a dolomite oflowFrmation, seepage by hydrauli

CD O 

;! § g-fc 

Is

<_ 

^

r

1

3

ft

pa

w

1o

S 

oo

to

X

X

on i Statewide water uses Wisconsin. Foreach theells howreport county reportmany gawater or surface was used whether anditfor residential, industrial, commercial, stock Thewhich alsorivers were for usedand therm hydroelectric report purposes. explains 

B.° 8 

g oTcrQ 

Us,

OQ 3 " 

's«i

a. Q 

w

CTQ

§

0.

pr

§

S

to

X

X

X

X

on Statewide characteristics ofWisconsin streams. c study flood-frequency Drainage-basin 

were analyzed.

haracteris

ff. 

o05

§

8QBj

a.

o

O>

3

^3

-iS

X

X

X

X

Local on thef Menomonee River.Loac study describing ground-water impacts quality and contaminants sources wereidentified. Awas model tes quantified majorpredictive 

to in land-use or ground-water response changes management practices.

S' of 

o-w

3 o 

nt 3 

"= 8 

3 g 

§ z 

o> o> 

5?

1o.

g.

o

I

X

VO

oo

X

X

X

Local on theAn Menomonee River watershed. ofexamination landuse, study phosphorus, solids dataws aused to create modl describe thecontaminants thatenter su suspended 

from surfaces after rainfall landevent.

oT 3> 

P3 8 

P- 8 

o- ff 

g

*

o

a.

Q

OO

^

X

X

Local on acidn itseffects insources Milwaukee. Runoffwas also evaluat rain, study

data included on adchemical otherconstituents. report pH 

o> a.

a.

a>

%

|f

o

3

* *>— VO

^O

X

X

on the Local Milwaukee andBlue River Holelandfill. Theabandoned w study purpose 

in andcontaminant distribution thelandfill andto determine effects ofhydrogeology gro 

Hole sitethe Blueon water of Milwaukee River. quality 

" § 

o a. 

a ^ 

Q p 

5f

jl

" 3 

ro

^

S

c

O

S

§

information Michigan Lake 

information Stream 

flow Stream 

drought) (flood, flows Extreme 

5 budget Hydrologic 

3 Erosion/sedimentation 

•§. calculations Runoff 

(A

o* Modeling 

(0

Precipitation/climate

Geomorphology

issues Urban 

Other

Description

?

%

T3

S

O

rs'

5

1S

S05

O

ta

£

B5!

fit

a.

CT;

a>

^Ej

W 

O

a

o

o

0

X

dissolved Milwaukee demand; DO,MMSD, District] ygen oxyge;Metropolitan Sewerage 

o 

o § 

3- A 

E? 5' 

STM c S 

rt- QCD

Q. 

Q. 

CD

•5 

O

O. CD'

CD

3.

Q} 

^'

^~

ca 

c?

CD 

Q}

(-HCD

.a

c

Q}

o.

—frl

o

a(-H3-

CD

S

O•a 

o

CO

CD

CD 

Q}

ca

CD

a
B oo 

3 2 

C CD 

If

S O s-S

5-1

o S H^ s _ ^ 

S' to 

3 00 

0

Q

X

X

X

on the Mitchell FieldSouth Report Interceptor Mitchell Ditchand FieldOak Creek, Drainage 

future were discussed.

status Plan. Thecurrent waterof Facility q 

ind thewa effects tha haveon plan may 

PS Q 

~ § 

Q H-. 

SCD

&: Co 

3 2 

c 2 

S 35' 

3 5. 

S S 

3 oo 

o

a,

X

Local frJones IslandDiscussed Facility. planwill Milwaukee havon the reHarbor; plan

into theharbor. leading 

were the envkonmental andstatus existing 

also on included some information the -port 

I!a? 5- 

||

<" v> B"

E oo 

^ S 

p CD 

l|

t* O 

o !?. 

*o 2- 

H^ ^ __ ^ 

is to 

3 OO 

X

X

X

F on theFranklin-Northeast ReportInterceptor and theeffects tha willhave pln proposed 

of Anstatus o examination the acility plan.

on it were included.

f?

|

M

CD

&• oo 

5: CD 

If

S o 

3'o 5. S 

h^ ^ _ ^ 

.

o

^

X

X

X

on afor overflow combined-sewer Report plan and Kinnickinnic Rivers wer examine monee, 

abatement. effects MEnvkonmental on the

d.

1

ftQ 

J*

g

CD 

O

E oo 

^ 3 

3 1 

o S 

H^ ^ _ ^ 

e S 

3 -J 

X

X

of thePlaMMSDaster Facilities Description included an oflternate solutions and analysis 

whichas to reduce water n, designed poll

anof theexplanation problems pollution 

g. a. 

fl

$3

a. y 

§

ciT

and oth

OB

t_J

^O

to

X

X

Local on the Rootiver. were di Results studySource Water Pollution Planto deten Nonpoint 

in scussed 1relation toheofobjectives if minethe were ach of planbeing goals

S ? 

o n 

PO P8

J5

CD

§

CD

and oth

g>

OB

^

VO

VO' — v 

X

X

examination ofsolislids, Regional suspended and status was included event for theMer year, 

ible anddsorbed phosphorus, phosphorus 

lomonee Rivr.

ETO"

CD

§5

O

§

CD

OO

X

X

X

The was ofthiso determin goalregional studydata. Datafor s quality monitoring suspended Menomonee were River included.

e the ofinferen feasibility making regional and soluble adsorbed ids,phosphorus, pho

<T> ^T3 

*~h O 

i 2 3 £, 

PS "* 

7 CD 

vo 

oo

X

X

X

Multistate toheevaluate effect ofmaten study Lakes. Riverbank measures and cost protection 

watershed usedas sites. were study 

al eroded riverbanks on from water quality 

i were adetermined. TheRiver Menomonee 

O B 

=r O 

S? § 

S B 

|"

1

B

0, 

N

1

£

sr

s<C/3

X

X

X

Local on Rthe effects Milwaukee studyfecal andconcentrations coliform were monito 

also examined.

ver weteather Dissfollowing discharges. 

in redelation to flw. Other char chemical 

a s 

CD § 

X O 

X V 

OQ ^ 

B 0! 

r

I

(D

O

Zf

0)

O

information Michigan Lake 

information Stream 

flow Stream 

drought) (flood, flows Extreme 

budget Hydrologic 

Erosion/sedimentation

calculations Runoff 

Modeling

Precipitation/climate

Geomorphology

issues Urban 

Other

Description

S

0

?

(0

o'

(0

ffi

1

1

3

So"

3"

£t

1

g

y

*§• U

aB

1

CT;

**o

3"

CD

«

8

a;

0

n>

o'

EL

o

X

«<

OQ

§

g-

(T>

3

&.

a

p

a. En"

a

<sa.

o

X«<

OQ 

CD

. ** 

2 

2

oo

a

k

p

c

ITCD

2CD

1

£, ^'

S

oo

i

q»OQ

CD

a

n 'l 

3^ rt- ??

9J 5" 

°^ c5 

2- QCD-T

§•!

o

CO

Q}

a.

a.

CD 

CO

o-T

•a'

o'

*> o— 

S3-

Q. 5'

CO

•a

CD

Q}

ca

S

CO

c

Q}

O 

CD

<

Q}

CD

.^^

Q}

3

- ^•

Q}

a.

h — 

0

§

h— 

O

I-HCD

^

Q}

C

*r

CD 

CD

^ 

CD

0•a 

o_

?H-'

Q}

3

CO

CD

§

CD

Q}

ca

CD

as'

o'

(-H-

•a_

Q}

ca

Q} 

CD

89Z paie|ay-saojnosay-jaieM uojieiiuojiii jo| aqj aa>inBM|!|/y ue);|odoj)a|/\| aBeja/was pfJisjQ Buiuueid 'eaJV wsuoasiM 
1

o

ts

X

£5

o.

0

S3

d

o

ta

X

X

X

X

X

on the Milwaukee ofRiver andcanals Venice. Theexamind Study studynonpoint-source p at looked associated and withexcess nutrients theiran with problems relationship productivity 

demand. were data on ada Included from levelsMMSD. DO, nitrogen, chlorophyll 

o a 

o. «< 

O OQ B ft 

g B 

CL

_*

O VO 

^* ^ 

B

CL

Cd

§

o

d.

B"

O

X

X

i Local withinformation on theMenomonee some of Riverwatershed andthetributaries study watershed. Thmodel LANDRUN usedtohe andestimate ofrunofl (aquantity quality 

eroded fomwatersheds withmixed was land useforsediment louses) particulates estimating land othersuch various uses and factors as characteristics andsoil imperviousness. Phosphoru 

were also examined.

NJ* ^ y ^ 

g* 3^B 1 

a 3 

|!

*-<

^ ^ 

VO

C7\

X

X

X

X

Local Milwaukee to on areasnowmelt-runoff Themodel.odel stuy metropolitan develop 

to snw and iurban Theaccumulation snowmelt areas. looks atccumulation o predict study 

in nats use of chemicals. flowand Amodelwas used to rates, simulate chloride snow, deicing 

tions andflow.

0 i-»> " 

3 O O 

§lsr

C § B 

BJ °. f? 

ft ' 3 

0. T 

O

3.

rt *-<

^^ ^

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

Local on Underwood Creekof anrea to were usec study prone flooding. Modeling techniques 

and the assesseffects stormwater basin on detention havehydrographs may discharge.

0

rt

CO

»

ft

O

i

»5E

^

X

X

X

X

X

Local on Creek risk. Oakto calculate floodand Landuse wea study computer using modeling 

tions were takn intoaccount.

o

0

Q.

S

3 * C ft 

P? 2 

8 OQ 

S d 

ft »-• 

"§ a 

H^ * —— ' 

5 oo 

£J

X

X

X

for theMMSD LocalWater Pollution Abatement The evaluat reports prepared study Program. Plan the1980 Masterincluded an refined Facilities and environmental assessment.

a.

BJ 00 

5: ft 

C ft 

8\ CFQ 

" ft 

ft H*« 

%$

5" Q 

£3 vo 

B oo 

X

X

X

X

Local frthe MMSD Creek an Underwood withenvironmental assess plan Interceptor Facility Underwood Dousman andthelan Menomonee River. Thediscusses Creek, Ditch,use, study 

sources of andcharacteristics. pollution, physical/chemical 

3 § 

§ 3 

S ft 

B 0 

B

& oo 

^ rt 

& ft 

KT 3 

ft OQ 

" ft 

n> H*- 

3"8 § a 

5? Q 

B oo 

f

X

X

X

on Creek thOakNorth Branc Plan.The examines thestatu Report Interceptor Facility study

Creek andtheeffects on will haveit. plan 

00

o

£•

Si: co 

$ $ 

C ft S* 2 

S cro 

§ O 

n> H?* 

0 § 

^t3 O O «• 

B OO 

O 

S.

X

X

X

X

Local frthewith an environmental assessment on Beavei pln Northridge Interceptor Facility and Milwaukee River.Land use characteristics were disc Creek, Trinity physical/chemical 

' C 

ft CL 

P? ' 

2

^ 2 

65 ? 

£ ft 

fT 3 

ft OQ 

" ft 

CD jr. 

§"8 § a 

£•• Q 

B oo 

O

X

X

Local frabatement facilities. andfuture conditions wat water-pollution planExisting affecting 

the area were discussed.

rt

fix

B

ac

(0

O

o

3

information Michigan Lake 

information Stream 

flow Stream 

drought) (flood, flows Extreme 

§ budget Hydrologic 

3 Erosion/sedimentation 

o

•§ calculations Runoff 

o' Modeling 

(0

Precipitation/climate

Geomorphology

issues Urban 

Other

Description

1

••a

3

o'

BQ"

1CT

O

B00

S

$

T3

O

8.

s.

a

cr •5'

rt

O

a

R

o

o

X

dissolved Milwaukee demand; DO,MMSD, District] ygen oxyge;Metropolitan Sewerage 

o 2 

rt- QCD

Q. 

Q. 

CD

•a

rt_o'

—h 

o

C

o. CD'

CO

•u

CD

ca

(-HO

CD

SO 

CD 

JO

O.

—H

O

—h o

enCD

S

O•a 

o

CO

CD

CD 

SO

ca

CD

a
?o

> g 

o.

g a 

& Q 

ja 5 

3 > -- 

> 5o 

(« O\ so •cin

65

CD

!_!

3

O

X

X

X

X

Local on theThe st Menomonee River.study natural state andcce recreational improving and theconcrete lin trail, making removing 

the ofa river to more evaluates udypotential returning 

ss. Some aoftheideas were wetland, creating proposed 

ing.

3

^hS,

. — 

§

1

SVO

^

X

X

X

Local on theKinnickinnic Milwaukee, study

Canals. Burnham Thediscussed report probl 

and measures were streambank-protection pr

and Menomonee theSouth Rivers, 

sms dock andland use. Shoreline erosion, walls,concerning 

esented.

3CO

63

a.

0

B

VO

oo

X

X

X

X

X

of donen the Westrn Lastudies Summary Assessment Included informat was Program. of thearea; physical description studypestici 

and indexvalues formacroinvertebrate tions; 

as of theNational ce Michigan Drainages part Water-Quality 

for theandLicoln Creek thion Milwaukee Riverregarding trace and concentra- de, nutrient, element, organic compound 

and s, fish, habitat, algae.

^

Q

S3

Q

io

^J

X

X

X

X

X

on Western Lakethe Regional studyMichiga of thean owafeatures area tht haveeffect and characteri use, hydrologic biological 

n The anddetailed natural Drainages. report anthropogenic 

ter These included landcimate, quality. geology, vegetation, 

sties.

^

£*,

CD

g

a

os-

^

5o

X

X

X

on Local theRootiver Thwatershed. studyand soildetailed inorder to flooding maps pi

e the relation between areas to investigated subject studyedict boundaries inglaciated flood-plain landscapes.

O

B

0

y* — 

CDM

Q

^O

5^^

X

X

X

of Statewide con evaluation nonpoint-source River thMilwaukee were included instudy, 

and metals. phosphorus, 

animation and Licoln Creek management practices. Data forwere flow, solids, given precipitation, suspended 

z

i

^

s\0 

L/l

X

X

X

X

Local lookinto a case the con court regarding 

Wis. Creek, 

was in crete that intoCreek thofOak lining put Crayfish city

v

o

Q

X

g

a.

Q

sf

3

—VO VO

X

X

of a Review courtase the concrete regrading 

Wis. Creek, 

; that was Creek inntothe ofOak put Crayfish citylining 

2

3

c

a.

o

CDM 

cn

^

VO 

O

^

X

X

X

X

X

X

a model Locause LANDRUN, studyusing mi eroded fom watersheds withparticulates and datafrom SchoCreek, Novey phosphate 

to calibrate themodl.

of runoffwater toestimate the andquatity quality 

land uses. red volatile Runoff, sediment, solids, suspended and theonmaker LittieMenomonee were used River Creek,

r;S-'

3

^

(D

O

S

"

o

information Michigan Lake 

information Stream 

flow Stream 

drought) (flood, flows Extreme 

§ budget Hydrologic 

3 Erosion/sedimentation 

o

3 calculations Runoff 

(A

o' Modeling 

(0

Precipitation/climate

Geomorphology

issues Urban 

Other

Description

"j-S

aen

"o

vJJ*

I

O

o'

3"

x

S

o

*

§

S

"0

8-

a.

cr

3"

CD

i^

Cd

8

o 

o

3

o

o

X

dissolved MMSD DO, demand; ygen oxyge;

Milwaukee District] Metropolitan Sewerage 

CL 

o. 

CD

O 

3

a 

ac

Q. CD'

ca

(-HO

Q. 

—h 

O

ar-h

3-

CD

CO

CD

CD 

Q}

ca

CD

a

a

paie|ay-saojnosay-jaie/\/\ uoj)euuo|U| joj am aa>inBM|!|/\| ue)!|odoj)3|/\| 3Bej3AA3$ puisjfj Bumueid 'esjv JM 
co

3l3 n 

•< o 

1*

C/3 H». 

IsB' § 

CD "2 §E, 5\ ~ XXXXXXXX

on the River Localwatershed to a willork theflooc Menomonee thaton study provide planand increase the healthriver anditsof habitat. ofthewas areaPhysical givendescription was Data forwildlife that found andlso there.surface-water were flooding monitoring give

E/ £L • 

CTQ 2 B

>0 OQ 

|.|«

co& ef 

50 C3 

rt- S 

fl) fro 3 n 

"*' 3 §' 55 

|- 5' 

73 ^ 

CD ' i— XX

Local on theRivr n Kinnickinnic watershed. Thofthe was to show study purpose study 

watershed to reduce andprehensive planning program pollution flooding.

CL

2. o1

oo

3l8 1 g OQ 

II o 3 

1's

CD ^ 3 •Z2 

E. XXXXXX

on the Milwaukee Riverto show needfor Regional studycomprehensive regional plannir discussed andwater solutions. covere conditions existing problems, gave possible Topics

water and recreation. flooding, quality, supply, 

&-OQ' Cn* cT 

S|

oo

B' B§0BwXXXXXX

on awith and landse us,Report regional maps showing studytopography drainage, physical water and use for theLake with surface-water basinquality, Michigan drainage 

OQ ^ 1 § 

5'a

73O8XXX

Local oftohesoils Kinnickinnic andMilwaukee, Menomonee, geologic studyadjacent foundation construction. Theincluded some information aboutclimate andreport flooding.

73

<J3

73

8-SgS

a 

oo»

S.

VO

VO

-2XXXX

of andinutrients sediment surface-waters Regional studyregaring suspended ground- Lake siteon the AMilwaukee was inRiver included theMichigan Drainages. analysis.

SCD

C?

00

73

8-

si§^

VO 

VO

ooXXX

of theLake Western locations on included sitesRegional studyMichigan Drainages. StudyOak LittleMenomonee theandKinnickinnic River. Rive,Crek, Streamflow, Honey to sediment datawere used lookat the effects on water land surfici use, suspnded quality by

and bedrock type.

B- E.g C a a. 

2, 3- w B 8 0 

z.?Qn> p c« 

P..**

73

o- 3B^

VO 

VOXXX

on Lake to andtributaries the Milwaukee Regional studyMichigan Superior, including 

sediment andloads were estimated forunmonitored locations datapended phosphorus using

tored sites.land andsoil Streamwere also examined. use, gradient, type 

73 C? 

5;' Q ^ 3 

i-f

73o

s?

tfo

CDS

VO

\o 

ooXXX

of surface-water Wisconsin instreams the Western LakeRegional studyquality Michigan The theMilwaukee included siteson River andLicoln Creekdescribed study technique 

lect andforwate methods samples analysis.

O oo 3 Z g &• y n '

73o'

£t

v>

\O

VOXX

in o tributaries Lakestoh GreatCanada antheUnitd Milwa States, Study including 

Because datawere forlux at rateswere looked rivers, pollutant-concentration lacking many 

on flow. Tributaries were the basisof flow classified and variability responsiveness. • 5' 

ft <-f 

CD CD Q O ^ i-h 

<s

0)§OSo

information Michigan Lake 

information Stream 

flow Stream 

drought) (flood, flows Extreme 

budget Hydrologic 

Erosion/sedimentation

calculations Runoff 

Modeling

Precipitation/climate

Geomorphology

issues Urban 

Other

Description

3o3

in

o' 

v>

i>

ffi i^<§3

o'

B" 1^OS' J 

^3

fj

ta

••a

o_ 1o

5'

f?

a.

cr

'O

n>

_00

CdOa

CT"

5"

SCD

n"

B^ OX

ttj

n>s

8- 3

§ 

a. ap

a.' 00 

2. <"

n>aoXx

•8B

S 2

ooak

t »1n>2CD I

o^

^.* »

ooi

n>3

OQ

CD2COa

to < V CO » '1 o ? 3- 1 i 

CD

co'

o'

rt_

CO

Q}

^ 

Q.

Q.

CD

COO

•5'

(-H- o' 3O

J4

0. CD'

CO

T3

CD

O)

3~ 

3~

CQ

r+^

COc

t ~^

Q} 

O 

CD<

Q}

CD

JOC

Q}

r+rt-'

Q}

0.

o"§O-+i

(-HCDPr

Q}

75- C

CD 

CD^S

O 

T3 

O.

rt-' 

Q} ^

CO

CD

CD

Q}

CQ

CDoa^_o'

I-f

•a

Q} ^3
C/3

n> 3 

t Ba TO 

3 n 

^ ° 

o 3 

3 05 

B' §' 

JQ _ _ _ 

5' oo 

*3 ON E. e 

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

Local on theOak Creekwat study of itsthehealth riverand habitawas found wildlife thathere. Data

rshed to ahat willaddress provide planA oft.hearea wasdescription physical 

for andsurface-water monitori flooding 

o 2. C GO 

| i I 

£.00 03 

2 3 O 

i: < •3 

n |. 3 

3 & 3. 

w » 8" 

G1 - i— pt. 

B B 

CD O 

8

co

f 1 

3 n 

^ 0 

o 3 

3 05 B' §' 

50

OQ so 

0 0° 

3 C> 

E, S 

X

X

X

X

X

Local frstormwate plan manging and on increased urbanization runo

in r Hales Wis.The discCorners, report 

ff.

a.

n

Hh

f?

O

s,

'8

*»•

o;

§

co

B& 

ft 3 

03 B 

g 00 

^ O 

OB" 3 

JQ _ _ _ 

Q OO 

e&L

X

X

X

Examination ofallthe riversthat fl

flood control examined andfloodla

ow the MMSD area. The through report 

nds thestreams. along 

0

a

^

1

§ft

§

1 o

3 O T3 

o> S 

CD (JO 

03

^ ° 

n 3 

3 gi 

3" §' 

50 ^ 

Q OO 

e!

X

X

X

X

X

Local onfLincoln flooding study

final recommendation was to restru

Creek. Thediscussed thevarious report 

cture th creekbed.

"S05

O 

O

§

5

^~

o

a

TO

>_)

ft

oo

f 3 

g OQ 

3 n 

n 3 

g 1. 

JQ _ _ _ 

g- oo 

3 3 

EL

X

X

X

Local on theRootiver and study

urban andrural sources.

05

ft'

g

'H.

a 

o

ft

a

ft

s

B

3

••a

e

?o

o

sQ 3 

5S> B 

a OQ 3 n 

§ 3 

- ^ §' 

^o _ _ _ 

o ^ — 

3 SO E. ~ 

X

X

X

Local on theOak Creekwat study wateras evaluated and quality p 

related problems.

which alsoincluded theMitchell rshed,was to address floodi rogram developed 

21 3 

° 1 

HI CD 

3 "2 

p O_ 

fl) C 

O' S 

ff' B -

S. o 

OQ

00

=r g 

03^B B' 

g TO 

3 n 

^ 0 

o 3 

§ gi 

MX3 ^^ 

<T> i t— 

o *^ 

y OO 

£L e 

X

X

and oflakes streams Regional studyand Ki waukee, Root,Menomonee, 

in southeastern Wisconsin. Included 

nnickinnic OakRivers andCreek.

B3

H

3

a3

Q.

s

R

r

oo

1" 1 

1 3 

^ CFQ o3

^ o 

% 3 

1 % 5' o 

50 ^ 

ft HOQ SO 

S' ~J 

3 g 

X

X

X

X

of andstudy Regional point-nonpo included BO phosphorus, nitrogen, 

different bodies ofwater.

int-source inwater southeastei pollution and fecalrcoliform loads D,sediment, 

* * 

Is

8 e 

B 3 

H-. £* 

s 5. 

2

1-13

n HI 

ft O 

a o 

03 ft 

£T ^ 

o

oo

1 1 

<-^ D 

Q 0^ 

3 o 

^ § 

| 3 

g 1. B' § 

JO _ _ _ 

ft HWQ SO 

O ~""^ 

3 OO 

EL £ 

X

X

on the LakeRegional studyMichig the needelements for,of, majorhad information on theRootivr

an i Wisco Areasoutheastern Drainage and the oforganizations comprehensrv md theMilwaukee HarborEstuary.

| 0 

P f 

ft B 

H-Q CFQ 

T3 O 

g ^ 

^ H 

O ft 

i $ 

co

ft K 

a B 

p^ B* 

Q CTQ n3

^ § 

o 3 o g3 05 

g- S 

50 ^ 

fD HQ ~J 

5:H

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

Local theRron Kinnickinnic studyand water descn pollution. Physical 

data. itoring 

a /erwatershed to choose wulthat plan

was fof thearea with givenptio along 

n- o 

S3 O 

O5 ^. 

£ OQ B- g 

D. 0. 

n 05 

a G 

a ft 

^j ^ 

o 5 

a g 

^ B 

1-

2*

c

Z

o

0)

o

information Michigan Lake 

information Stream 

flow Stream 

drought) (flood, flows Extreme 

budget Hydrologic 

Erosion/sedimentation

calculations Runoff 

Modeling

Precipitation/climate

Geomorphology

issues Urban 

Other

Description

0)

(D

o'

(0

o 2 

<-!• Q. 

CD

Q. 

Q. 

CD

c 

o. CD'

a.

a

p

a.

1

fia.

o

X«<

OQ 

ft

S 

2

oo

a

k%g

fTft

2 

ft

1

£,

£^*

P

C/3

0.

H— 

o

§

ho— 

I-HCD

^

Q}

£=

CD 

CD

^

£

o•a

C3.

rt'

Q}

3

CO

CD

CD

Q}

ca

CD

a

ca 

to 

CD

p9lB|8a-S83JnOS9y-J8lB/\/\ UOjieiUJOJUl JOJ 3l|) 89)jnBM|!|/\| ue)!|OdOJ)3|/\| 8BBJ8M9S PUISJQ BujUUBId '68JV I^/V 
co

E,

»'

B

a

go'

a

Q\o

\o

^^

X

X

X

of inLsurface water the Western Regional studypesticides 

for theMilwaukee River.

1

§o

d

1 1

es. Data were incl

c

a. 

rt

a

oo

c,

i'

§

a.

O

1

X

VO 

VO

^^

X

X

X

of theenvironmental sites inRegional studysettings study

coin andCreek thinMilwaukee Riverwere the stu included 

of characteristics theandfield measurements. streams, 

the Western LakeMic Data were fody. given

higan Drainages, r land use, physic

^1 r pa 

5'

t/5

O. _. _ 

c3 " O 

1 f f of 

ft CTQ tO 

§

^ o 

^3 o 

n 3 

o g5' §' 

?o _. 

n> S 

o' CW o. 

B

X

X

X

on Local Dousman Ditch andUnderwood Creeksubws stdyThe identifies stormwater and studymanagement flooding pr a forth afterlternatives. management pla examining 

itershed ofMenomi the

oblems andtheir cause

onee River waters 

;s. The also study 

^f V 

tt ft 

p. vi 

CO

5. £T 

r^ B 

2 CTQ 3 n 

9. B 2 5' 

§ 2 

l §

?o ^^ 

ft — 

VOOQ.

5 "2 ( B ^2 

E.

X

X

X

X

Local frandlood stormwater Cr planmanagement Lilly tive withthe ofa current plansurpose eliminating problems 

source and riverhabitat. ing nonpoint- pollution 

eek subwatershed. Thend future one: avoiding 

evaluated allplan while alsocons s, 

fj IT* 

3 ft 

(a 7 

co

o

ft 3 % 5' 

Q OQ 

3 n 

<J o 

f 3 § 5' 

I'i'

^o ^ _ ^ 

tt ' i— 

' 5 i§ 

tX

X

Local on Grantosa a toheMenomonei Creek, studytributary 

and floodcontrol were evaluated. cussed, plans

e with River. Problems 

were dis flooding 

i

oo

^ £T 

ft 5 

a B 

it 5' 

fj> OQ 

-gj 0 

° Eo' 

S E2. 

^0 _ 

ft i—" 

\oOQ 0§'

'""'

X

X

X

X

for theofLocal arean MMSD stormwater plan drainage were for each oftheKinni watersheds: plan givenfollowing Oak RootMilwaukee andMeomoi Creek, Riverage, 

d floodcontrol. AlternMi ckinncLake River,

lee River.

andtive propose Directn ichigan 

Ci B. 

B

00

c "d 

Er f 

Q 00 

3 n 

^ ° 

§ 1 

5' §' 

^0 . .— 

n> >— 

tfQ vO 

5' oo 

y ^O 

~~' l

X

X

Local flodon cotrol forthe Menomonee RiverEstua study 

and Anexamination offinal ssolutions anddamage. possible 

The identifie ry.eport 

was lelection ofa plan 

s fl areas to prone 

included.

Q

o.

co

c "d 

S B 

ft OQ 

3 n 

^ ° 

s i 2 »• 

S 2 

' 5 §' 

?^ s X— 

n> * (— 

^ SO 

5' °5 

g OO 

£L -S 

X

X

on conference achiev Regional report proceedings discussing Issues addressed included erosion stormwater control, manag 

ronmental floodand wetlands. corridors, plains, 

water throu ingquality ement, nonpoint-sourc

land ghmanagem e water pollution,

ft rt 

B B 

r* < 

oo

c "d 

of f 

~ 5' 

ft OQ 

3 n 

^ ° 

S 1 B 1' 

C/3 Hi. 

1 S 

?o ^^ 

ft ' i— 

^ vo 

5- oo 

y CC 

l—

X

X

X

of Localand description flooding stormwater-drainage probl(

identified causes of theand evaluat report problems provided 

;ms of theCrfCrayfish ions ofsluti proposed 

;ek subwatershed. 

ons.

rt

oo

c ?0 O 

a ft o 

of S. C 3 

3

S3 O 

s 3 ,-. 

ft ^ 5 c/

3 ^3 5' 

<J 1 fi? B 

5' B Ci 

O B* ^C 

o 3 oo B -jtfQ 

K ^ 

3' ^ 

X

X

X

X

X

Local on theMilwaukee Harbor which involve studyEstuary, nickinnic andthe Milwaukee Harbor. TheofRivers, purpose control floodstnr help pollution, mitigate problems, for recreational uses. data were quality Monitoring provided.

:d theMenMilwaukee, the was to sudy prepa in theharbor, damage 

Kin andlomonee, 

re athat wou plan and wat improve 

« ' H— 

0. ~> 

|-

TSf

(D

3

s.

^

O

ETo'

3

information Michigan Lake 

information Stream 

flow Stream 

drought) (flood, flows Extreme 

§ budget Hydrologic 

0) ———————————————————————————— 

3 Erosion/sedimentation 

o

•§. calculations Runoff 

o Modeling 

(A

Precipitation/climate

Geomorphology

issues Urban 

Other

Description

^

a

"0

o_

*^

n' 1

•Sf

y*

0

n

S^

o

B

W

•a

o_

1

B'

tt

a.

CT;

B"

ft

s?

0

d

a;

1o'

£. 

o

X

dissolved Milwaukee Me demand; DO,MMSD, ygen oxyge;

Di tropolitan Sewerage 

VI

1

Is

O. 

O.

O. CD'

CO

•a

CD

CD

SQ} 

enCD

JO

o.

—frl

o 

o—h 

enCD

CO

CD

CD 

Q}

ca

CD

a
^ 0> . .^Q^ ^, 

Q*3 »a ST ffO^^ (-/|0^ 

M> psS&pB^C! 

BjilwS^ld ^Q 

«^1 2,^3 ^S5'§ 

^ s ffig'?'S&' >"o i— 

O ^ ^- H^ ** f-* ~" l S-T* VO 

S-^^SSOCSS'^" OJ 

a2> a ^^'^ I" s| 

W ft n> ^^ 4-^ 

33

O- ^^ 

X

Statewide on thef Soiupdates progress 

discussed erosion and1high phosphorus 

>— Q 

ind Water GoiResource Management els fromresulting mostlyagricultural

jji. _ 

, ' 3 

i

1

e.

3

3

Sft&w

CL

osft>-t

\o

o

•3

X

X

X

X

Local on the effects oflanduse onstudy cussed methods forland-covet obtaining 

land anderosi use, ogyimperviousness, 

R-* § 

ater in theMenomonee Riverquality was iformation. The watershed descri

were examined. potential 

g. h. 

n> ^ 

s 1 

ft n 

*§ O 

O- H— 

r4- ^ 

O- ft 

53' 0, 

C 

co > 

w « <

3 D 

2. <3 

O 65 

3 D 

g a 

ft O s-s

8L 3 

i i— en 

n3

3 ~ «• ^ 

f^ OO 

5' ^ 

3

X

X

Local ofMMSDarea tl sudyaddressing issue ofverflows caused infiltration byhow thewill affectit was examined pla 

3,?f ' 

Master Facilities Plan. Theproposd water and stormwater. Currel ground 

8 £ 

° 3 

ff g. 

i. * 

£,*"*"

^ **' 

P3 X 

c. e 

•* 5 

ft OC 

oo > 

w <8 

3 3 

3. 3 

a

si

S 00 

ss

E

3o

tt 

n

o'

D

X

Local the MMSDast studyaddressing actions ando the alternatives environm fecal colifo BOD, flow,phosphorus, pH,

Q § 3 

Facilities Plan.The tlsudyanalyzed and thewater Data existing quality. 

and were chloride included. is, 

n S 

g, i. 

3" "— 

n 5. 

3 o 

^3 n> 

en P 

ft

a

5' 1

f-r

S

0

o

VO 

VO

N^

X

X

X

Local on theMeomo Milwaukee, studytreatment todetermine theeffect: facility fecal andsBOD, coliforms, phosphorus, 

3 " C 

n> o c/5 

Kinnickinnic J andthe e, Rivers, 

if theInline Measure Storage System. after solidsipended precipitation.

O 3 

3 5 

ft ft 

^ 3. 

&3 3 

3 &• li"

g CL 

Sj < 

&3 . ft 

ft on 

^ 0 MI

£ «<

i-^

J

1^

X

X

X

X

X

Local on theKinnickinnic River e: study 

from construction sitesand streambanks

g 3 

mined sources of nonpoint pollution, 

ere the mainissues or concern.

C

3-

|

a?

a.

ft

3

5'

en_

3

oo

c

OQ

i _ » VO

CXJ w^

X

X

X

X

in watersheds Milwaukee i Eight County sources. A model was increated to help 

S 5^ 

idied to estimate nonpoint-source pol; of urbanco: design nonpoint-source 

= a 

S ^ 

^5"

B "9 

g 3 

a. ^ 

& § 

I 5/3 

*<

>~i'

on

|-

•"!•

(D

S

(D

O

0)

5'

3

information Michigan Lake 

information Stream 

flow Stream 

drought) (flood, flows Extreme 

5 budget Hydrologic 

0) ———————————————————————————— 

3 Erosion/sedimentation 

o

TM calculations Runoff 

sa

o' Modeling 

Precipitation/climate

Geomorphology

issues Urban 

Other

o 

•5' 

5'

I

y

•5

o

^

§

o'

^

8-

1-

f

o

3

en

n

CO

o.

S5*

3.

S

S.

CT;

3"

3

i^

Cd

O

D

cr

|

1. o'

S.

0

X

dissolved Mh demand; DO,ygen oxyge;

h^* 

oo

Milwaukee D,Sewerag Metropolitan 

ft

a

1.

o

Is

o<-!•2 

Q. nCD

O. 

O. 

CD

o

^

a 

ac 

o. CD' 

co

•u

CD

3

ca

I-HO

CD

Q} 

CD 

JO

Q. 

—»i 

O

O

GO

CD

CD 

Q}

ca

CD

a

a

ca 

so 

CD

pa)e|ay-saojnosay-ja)e^/v uojieiujo^u) jo| am aa>jnBM|!|/\| ue)j|odoj)a|/\| aBejamas IOUISJQ Bumueid 'eaJV wsuoosjM 
^£"* 7 *""* 

Ifly* *— ^~f 

HH ?0 SO « 8 =* 

^0*03 CD ~J 

CD 05 O VO so 

i-h SO OO 

cr

XXX

u Statewide studyto dete was study 

six as watersheds areas the Milwauk included singtudy rmine theo which extent management improve practices s S; 3 sf 

co cr 

P§ 

S- P d B. s 8 

i°

IS

If

^£• 2 O 05 ° B 

3,3.3 ^ 

Departm Resource

CD 05 O S h i— VO P XX

on th Local studynonpoint-source

e Wind and Lakes thi tributaries Muskego draining 

sollution wihthemain focuson sediment loads.

£3 O

SCD

CD&%

3.

CDa

^

EC" 2 Q P 

ES. P 31n 50 

n 0 3 n 3 , — , O SO O XX

IV Local on study asn such habitat strategic agement 

ilwaukee TheRiver South watershed. water existing qua d were described andv sewage-treatment plants possible 

s wereoutlined.

"'' 8- Q B C 

II3 I 

fD C s 1 2 3 

!§2 P 

^

ryi' 'j/ 

o p 1 £ 

£oCD oo 

T3 O 

§|3 CD 

CD 05 O SO h i— SO 

K>

-S^

xXX

on th Localstudy 

fied management and lead.

e Menomonee Riverwatershed. Thassessed soun study 

to The mainbediscus practices implemented. pollutants 

05 ft. O < 

9|Q CD 

1-3a 3 & s 

s ••a 

||2 1 i 3 2£-O M § S 2 — 3 3

Departm Resource

tD 05 B ^ o VO 

^^

XXX

M on Local studymend managemei

ilwaukee to River Southdetermine sources of pnonpoint 

it actions. Themost information was for levelsof given]

ffB I" 1 0 P 

n" S" 

^§- n § w a 

B 05 

G. CD 

3'^o n 3 3 

^

ryi' ^ O &: 

?§

ES. P. 3 ^ 

(-, 50 X S? Q 05 11O VO h i— OO 

^^

XXXX

on st Local studyasnd i detention lution remov load 

armwater in Milwaukee Thisvolume e pollution County. etention basins. Alsom evaluated were costs of thesehe 

als.

P S 3 g n CD 

O. TM 

05 £j 

&?a s- 

$• p 

f* §. CD cr. 

'tS O 

"g'B"

05 CD a "s. ' — 1 ^

oV 2 

o os ° c v § B ~ 

Departm Resource Bx — - O so XXXXX

L on Local report lake the dredging 

ittle Lakethat described a fornd Muskego planprobabl

CD 

CD3

CD

CD

if

a,

^ryi' ^ 1 V O &3 § ^ 

ES. 3 a 50 

CD S 

11 

CT O S X O VO h i— *J 

^^

XX

01 study Regional of themajor goal

to streams. Scon 

health.

i small streams included theRootiver tributaries inNe\was to data fortheof wast program provide development 

it aimed to document theffects ofincreased treatmf dly, 

!L 3 

B' & 1 

S S Si 

a Bg 

HH f». y. 

ST S CD 

£L 3 B 

CD 05 O 

2l?

|ll

is

^ryi' ^ O &3 

?§

ES. 3 3 "^ 

Departm Resource § ^ O so h i— ^J 

^^

XXXX

o report Regional from water-qualit

n that southeastern Wisconsin ai included theRootivr and evaluation wdone1973 y sampling survey during 1 5 6 I E M. f-f TM s 

o? O5'

SCD§PasP

^ryi' ^ O &3 § ? 

s. 3 B ~ 

Departm Resource Q 05 O SO h i— *J ' — * XXXXXX

B on Local studywild! fish, plants, 

A Lake.of characteristi ig Muskego description drainage 

recreational andtheiland use wasif, use, surrounding 

° £• ^ ^ 

P a%p

v?1&

S

(D

1 

(D Oo

information Michigan Lake 

information Stream 

flow Stream 

drought) (flood, flows Extreme 

§ budget Hydrologic 3 Erosion/sedimentation o

§. calculations Runoff 

(A

o* Modeling 

Precipitation/climate

Geomorphology

issues Urban 

OtherD

•5" 

6"

^^1I

Sf oBO

•T3

B- S

s.

cr

3"

CD

Cd 8

cr1nox

DO demand; ygen 

dissolved Milwaukee Se MMSD, oxygen; Metropolitan %QPn

§. o'

O.

o.

CD

o. CD'

V)

•a 

CD

O. 

»i — O

CD

CD

O 

T3 

O_

rt-' 

SO^

CO

CD

CD

CO 

CDas•a

ca

Q} 

CD
2 I o P J^ ^ 

|-s3 8 

CD OB 3 s o a ^ S 

CD

XXX

>^ o* &• 

on>

5- ^ g 

3-1 * 

&l-s

S" =l 3 o * a _ O t/> Q i-h *• 3 P e 

CD S Oh^ C/3 C/5 * ^ ^ 

IE??"

ill

CD Ct 

?0 ^ 3" 

^S' £3 O 2 l| 

a. S. a 

S? [_] O n "y* ^* K Q ftj s < §• 3 S o 

OB OB B 

g- a OB •

l'|

E^* h i— ^ n 

h

i'H

CD PS 

«, 3 ^ M* 

Q. 3 

v< § 

g' T3 

£" 3 

%• C 

B' ("5 

O* Q 

J3' OB a S> ^ **o 

^* 2- 

c"

5' Z 1^ 

|||

SB-1O CD s-sg c 3 CD 

CD OB 

i, °- S

CD

XXX

l£

IB^5 o S § a. 

sf § 

1- 3 

CD «• 

CD O Q K ^ c & g. 1 e 

££. fT 5 PS P-TO

£0 C/3 

If

"^ 2 ° 3 

fi5"' a 

ffQ 2 B B 0 O 

It

1?o C S 8- o S Q » a a 

&. cw 5 a. 

£3 O 

•, • — i g* | ^* 1 

'a 3 3 5' *

g g. VO 

e^|-O CD s-sfs C 

3. 3 o n 3 CD B yi > ^ 3 o a o| XXX

If

PS c" 

g-. Q a ^B' o Q 3 g 

§" g. 

5* S' 

S, B S o O 3 

3 o ° 'H. 

CD 1/1 

?o c 

^' &• 

Bfr

oo fT S P* n 'S. a cT 

H3 KQ ^* 3" u O 

IIO rt E 3 3 y 

|§

§1B £. T 0 

v B 0 • C3

ET1

3"H

CDC^

if

tl11 3 CD 

tD K o \o h~l JP 

^-s

XXXX^ g o 

p?^ C/3 

?/ o ?5 

§'^* ^ o 'Q S 

'can'2 c E. 

t? C/3 "-•• 

1" S ^ 

f»r a 8 <g w < 

s. p w 

i-^

i. 1 o

2- 2 

<i 5 

CD 5. £ CD a * 

2,3.

trao

3 > o ^ 

p,- 0 

Lj 5' 

i~^ ^ Q C 

o, a 

S-l& 53 

r*>' ^TM* 

rt n 3 3 

tf> o a 3 

ct 3 B CD 

%• a 03 S o' 3 B 

CD (« 

3^ i-b 

1—— !-l 3 t 

7" <* 

r;|

(DO

tt

5' 3

information Michigan Lake 

information Stream 

flow Stream 

drought) (flood, flows Extreme 

budget Hydrologic 

Erosion/sedimentation

calculations Runoff 

Modeling

Precipitation/climate

Geomorphology

issues Urban 

Othero

(0o

•5' o

3- O

0)

•^

2. 8

"8

Cd

a 

cr >$'

S"

o3o—h c

ca

(-H- oO•a o

CO

CD

CDaa
Becker andJohnson 

(1970)

X

on identification andStatewide minnows Wisconsin. Contained a forstudy key

dis- illustrations. There were abundance andincluded alsosome notes on minow 

tribution.

Becker (1976)

X

The contained Multistate examination offishin theLake report Michigan region. 

and distribution foreach maps description species.

and othersBannerman 

(197%)

X

X

X

X

X

on the was to Menomonee Riverwatershed. Water performed Studymonitoring kinds anmounts mixed andassess of fromland pollutants singledrainage uses. The onadleadan focused solids, studymainly suspended phosphorus, but discussed otherconstituents as well. Benthic macroinvertebrate were surveys 

done.

Bacon andothers 

(1995)

X

of wetlands avail-on duck andthemount Statewide studypoplations geese 

for habitat. was able Information bygiven region.

Auer(1982)

X

Multistate ofthewith Lakedrain- Lakes on Great studyemphasis Michigan regionThe contained fishes andillustrations information on larval studyages. ecological 

for identification.

Anderson (2001)

X

X

X

X

X

Local oftheMenomonee Riverand Oakto water Crek determine studyqualit. mul- Anofbiotic fshandindex fora biotic index,composition, familyintegrity 

for timeric macroinvertebrates were used. comparison 

Anderson (1975)

X

X

X

classification oflakes examined were Statewide condition. Most trophic by

or weeincluded in100acres Lake andLittle larger. BigMuskego Also discussed were and thelake rehabilitation study.protection procedures 

and classification management programs.

Amin andothers 

(1973)

X

X

X

X

on fish collected fromthe RotivrMilwaukee andLocal sitesin studyThe fishLernaea counties. examined forinfestation Racine were the copepod by

in fishLocation andofinfestation was discussed relation to frequency cyprinacea. 

size andstream conditions. body 

s3 

1

o

I

o

information Michigan Lake 

information Stream 

Fish

Macroinvertebrates

Algae/macrophytes

Amphibians/reptiles

Birds

Mussels

Wildlife

bioassays Toxic 

species Endangered/threatened 

species Tolerant/intolerant 

species Non-native/invader 

Habitat

Wetlands

issues effects/urban Human 

surveys Community 

issues Management 

interpretations Water-quality 

ecology on based 

values index Biotic 

Other

Characteristics

Description

biochemical dissolved Milwaukee aromatic volatile PAHs,CB BODdemand; DO,MMSD, [VOCs, polychlorinated biphenyls; oxygen organic compounds; polyhydrocarbons; oxygen; Metropolitan 

Index ofBiotic District; IBI,Sewerage Integrity]

Q. 

Q. 

CD

—h

O

ac

Q. CD' 

c/>

-a

CD

13 

CO 

i-tO 

CD 

O 

O_ 

O 

CO 

-< 

O

CDr-tO

-a 

o

13

CO

CD

CD

CO 

CO 

CD

O 

ft
Druckenmiller (1980)

X

X

X

X

X

Local Environmental fora t Statement Littleake. planImpact dredgeMuskego The ofwas to aesthetic andrecre- lif, goaldredging improve aquatic qualities, 

ational uses shallow areasnd bydeepening controlling macrophyte growth.

DeVita (1994)

X

X

X

An Local on Lincoln Creek.of evaluation mem- studyemipermeable polymeric brane devices as concentrators of PAHs contaminants, nonpolar organic namely was mde. inConcentration levelswer relation to stormevents. compared Uptake

fathead minnows adwaslso examined. by rusty crayfish 

De Vault(1985)

X

X

Multistate oftributaries toheGreat Milwaukee andLakes, studyincluding Kinnickinnic Rivers. Fishforrom were contamination samples analyzed pesticides andother PCBsAHs. and priority pollutants, including 

and Cumming Mayer

(1992)

X

Multistate on information freshwater mussels. Therewas aof one-page description 

each musselcolored withand distribution picture map.

Corsi andothers 

(200 Ib)

X

X

X

X

Local oftheeffect aircraft anddeicers fromGeneral Mitchell studyrunway International to life inwaters. Airport toxicity regarding aquatic receiving 

(1996) Casper 

X

Statewide on and distribution. Thecontained distri- studyamphibian reptile report 

bution foreach maps species.

(1980) Brynildson 

X

X

X

X

Statewide on and molluscs. Thehadfish, studyendangered reptiles, report descrip14 tionsof andtheir distributions. species 

(1988) Boyer 

X

Local on theHarbor at Milwaukee sediment-water interface. Sediment- studywere takno sediment Gasvoids andprofile photographs map type. oligochaete 

worm tubes were also shown.

Bothwell(1977)

X

Local oftheMilwaukee Harborand nearshore Lakea study Michigan, including station at theconfluence An ofMilwaukee andKinnickinnic Rivers. investigation ofinto relation nutrients was and otherfac- done,phytoplankton populations 

tors such asnd were considered. chloride, temperature, alkalinity 

r~ 

ff

1 

§ 

O 

» 

o'

information Michigan Lake 

information Stream 

Fish

Macroinvertebrates

Algae/macrophytes

Amphibians/reptiles

Birds

Mussels

Wildlife

bioassays Toxic 

species Endangered/threatened 

species Tolerant/intolerant 

species Non-native/invader 

Habitat

Wetlands

issues effects/urban Human 

surveys Community 

issues Management 

interpretations Water-quality 

ecoloqy on based 

values index Biotic 

Other

Characteristics

Description

n 3 

z

y w TM 

a|

<T 3. 

S-'S

CD « 

o

r-t- •3O 

8 M 

05 00 

13 C !-h 

°- a ". 

Q- °! O 

•5

o

O

o

89Z ue)i|odoj)3|/\|
Harsch (1972)

X

X

A collection ofA theMenomonee River.sci- Sectoncontained concerning papers entific and Bresearch data.Secion andexamined eco- investigations sociological nomic ofand examinations abatement. problems pollution types 

ffi

cl

OQ

V£> 

V£> 

^~J

X

and toheofGreat Lakes Habitat, Regional guidereptiles amphibians region. and conservation were discussed. issuesand reproduction, ecology, Descriptions wereith information distribution on andbudance. given alongphotographs 

Great Lakes

Commission (2000)

X

X

X

X

of Multistate review Lakeand thewatershed itonefsubwatersheds, Michigan and whichas the Milwaukee Riverrecom- estuary. Ongoing monitoring 

mendations forurther actions were discussed.

Gerber (1994)

X

X

in Wisconsin andofthe millfoil fam-Study (water Michigan genus Myriophyllum The ofthewere to and characterize habitats see ifthere was arela- studyily). goalstion between andleaf nutrient with thesize habitat. ofSites shapeuptak 

also nutrient were examined. uptake 

Fox (1971)

X

of andStatewide examination issues a involved inmetro- water-resources policies 

The southeastern ofwas Wisconsin, Milwaukee, politan region. regionincluding 

selected fortreatment and were discussed. Wastewater study.flooding 

and Fitzpatrick 

(1997) Giddings 

X

X

X

on the LakeWestern on Lin- sitesRegional studyMichigan including Drainages, coln andCreek thRiver. Thewere Milwaukee sitesevaluated forstream habitat. Channel and were characteristics exam- substrate, streambank, geometry, riparian 

ined.

(1984) Fago 

X

X

X

in southeastern Wisconsin. Theexamined fishRegional studyreport populations and Thecontained distribution alsobout some talkedhat maps. report species 

threatened orn list. were aatch 

(1976) Emmling 

X

X

Local theon Milwaukee Harbor andtributaries. Macroinvertebrate distri- itsstudy 

butions were toh sediment ofcompared type present.

and ReedEggers 

(1988)

X

X

Multistate to wetland communities. Plants were of guide plantgrouped bytype 

were wetland founrom water toflooded basins. in, theyranging seasonally open 

r;

5f

S

3 

O

5? 

5'

information Michigan Lake 

information Stream 

Fish

Macroinvertebrates

Algae/macrophytes

Amphibians/reptiles

Birds

Mussels

Wildlife

bioassays Toxic 

species Endangered/threatened 

species Tolerant/intolerant 

species Non-native/invader 

Habitat

Wetlands

issues effects/urban Human 

surveys Community 

issues Management 

interpretations Water-quality 

ecology on based 

values index Biotic 

Other

Characteristics

Description

volatile aromatic biochemical dissolved Milwaukee [VOCs, PAHsCB, BOD,demand; DO,MMSD, organic compounds; hydrocarbons; polyolychlorinated oxygen biphenyls; oxygen; Metropolitan 

Index ofBiotic District; IBI,Sewerage Integrity]

09

er 

to

CO

3" O

Q5

Q} 

O

CD

!•!

n 

v>

O>

^

Q. 

CL 

CD 

CO

o 

-5' 

o'

3 

O

a. CD' 

GO

•a 

CD

CO

s

CD 

O 

O_

O 

CO

-< 

O

CD 

i-+

3

T3 

O

GO

CD

CD

05 

CO 

CD

O

=33' 

CO

SO

o

o
Inc. Inter-Fluve, (1998)

X

X

X

X

X

a onstructure on the River.Local theforMenomonee studyoptions removing dropThe ofthestructure was tohe riverecreational forgoal removing dropimprove 

A was enhance floodcontrol. to anduse, fishries, secondary promote goal enhance thechannel ofnatural andestablish a morestable rivergeomorphic 

balance.

Inskip(1986)

X

on thef andTheStatewide occurrence northern studymuskellunge report pike. the discusses effects ofthese duetoheir interaction on size population species 

with eacother.

Hunt (1990)

X

X

X

X

the Statewide River. Brown trout and Kinnickinnic sizestudy including populain toionswere examined response techniques. habitat-improvement 

Hobbs Jassand (1988)

X

on the andhis- Statewide ofWisconsin. lifestudy crayfish shrimp Ecological was information eachwit a forbout identification. tory given keyspecies along

were also included. Distribution maps 

Hine andothers (1981)

X

of withas Statewide distributions datafrom 1974—76. Therestudy leopard frogan of Cetralthee forrest East ws theinformation ofWis.; in-depth study

State byregion.

Hausmann (1974)

X

on i theLocal macroinvertebrate Milwaukee Harbor andLake studypoplations included onen the River.which siteMilwaukee Results were Michigan, sample to in were found beto previous findings; populations compared many species 

declining.

Harza Engineering 

(2001) Company 

X

X

X

X

X

the Localwith siteson Lincoln adMenomonee Southbranch River,Creek, studyCreek. ofthewaso of Thedetermine whether removal concrete chan- goalstudy nel The datastream habitat. andrec- lining significantly report provided improved 

a to evaluate stream ommended characteristics. methodology 

rff

1

1

o

S

5

information Michigan Lake 

information Stream 

Fish

Macroinvertebrates

Algae/macrophytes

Amphibians/reptiles

Birds

Mussels

Wildlife

bioassays Toxic 

species Endangered/threatened 

species Tolerant/intolerant 

species Non-native/invader 

Habitat

Wetlands

issues effects/urban Human 

surveys Community 

issues Management 

interpretations Water-quality 

ecology on based 

values index Biotic 

Other

Characteristics

Description

. o 5. 

3 B 

<W hH 

B 53 

§•1

1 = 

S « 

S 3 

QLZ pa)e|ay-saojnosay-ja)e/\A uopeuuojui joj ai|) aa)|neM|!|/\| ue);|odoj)a|/\| aBejamas NISJQ ' UJSUOOSJM 
others andLegler 

(1998)

X

Statewide examination ofThecolor foriden- dragonflies. report provided pictures 

tification ofand theirdistributions. maps 

and Leeothers (1981)

X

on Local inandchemical theHarbor andwater Milwaukee studyquality biological Lake Theandof effluent Michigan. mixing transport wastewater-treatment-plant were examined. Indicator andviruses were also bacteria plumesinvestigated.

Korth(1978)

X

X

Local on theMilwaukee to on River determine thateffect hadsedi- study algae 

ment it was not shwn bea to source. demand; oxygen significant 

Kohler(1982)

X

X

X

Local on Lake theThesudy Muskego examining population. Bigphytoplankton 

included theexamination effects on factors suchphytoplankton population by

asnd DO,(or) nitrogen, phosphorus, pH,zooplankton.

Kleinert others and

(1974)

X

X

X

toxic inMil-fish.rom theStatewide examination ofmetal concentrations Fishincluded inFishwere for waukee Riverwere theested arsenic, cadmium, study.

and zinc. lead, chromium, 

Kleinert and Degurse 

(1972)

X

X

X

X

Statewide ofconcentrations inWisconsin andfish wildlife. studymercury 

Included thefishrom Milwaukee Riverand Harbor.

Kasun (2001)

X

X

Local on OakCreek andtheMenomonee River. Theofthe sudyobjective 

to research was bioavailable theofmetals inntersti- concentrations predict heavy

tial and therisk examine at benthic macroinverte- porewater ecological bylooking 

brates.

and othersKaemmerer 

(1992)

X

X

X

X

Local at theMilwaukee Harborand oftheMeno- Milwaukee, looking studyparts and Kinickinnic Rivers. Thediscussed themonee, report biological problems 

the areandhow various wthto were explained agencies groups trying 

address them.

and others Jerger

(1978)

X

X

X

X

X

on the forcontamination offromnon- Regional studypotential aquatic species and theiGreat Lakes.Included datawere point-oint-source pollution sampled 

at seven onthe stations Menomonee Riverof trace chlorinated elements, pestiand PCBs. cides, 

r~ 

ff 

3

1

o!'

o'

information Michigan Lake 

information Stream 

Fish

Macroinvertebrates

Algae/macrophytes

Amphibians/reptiles

Birds

Mussels

Wildlife

bioassays Toxic 

species Endangered/threatened 

species Tolerant/intolerant 

species Non-native/invader 

Habitat

Wetlands

issues effects/urban Human 

surveys Community 

issues Management 

interpretations Water-quality 

ecology on based 

values index Biotic 

Other

Characteristics

Description

volatile aromatic biochemical dissolved Milwaukee [VOCs, PCBs, DO, PAHs, BODdemand; MMSD,compounds; polyhydrocarbons; organic polychlorinated biphenyls; oxygen oxygen; Metropolitan 

of IndexBiotic District; IBI,Sewerage Integrity]

n 

w

Q. 

Q. 

CD

Q. CD' 

in

-a

o

CD 

O 

O_

O 

CO

-< 

O

CO

CD

CD

Q} 

CO 

CD

O

O

o
Mace (1984)

X

X

on southern Wisconsin streams for theofRegional studypurpose setting approprior ate standards foamounts of Milwaukee Riverwater-quality goalsphosphorus. was included intheNutrint levelswere and tosudy. algalcompared macrophyte 

effect DOtheof nutrients on concentrations was examined. growth; 

and KanehlLyons 

(1993)

X

X

Statewide ofsmallmouth bassthe methods. Siteacross comparison sampling 

the River.fo Statewere Milwaukee Guidelines were studied, including provided 

abundances inshallow wadable streams. estimating 

£ 

§OB

V£> V£> 

K>

^CT;

X

X

X

X

X

Statewide fora version theBiotic forofIndex (BI)study developing Integrity 

The Wisconsin warmwater streams. describes howtheIBI fish beor should report 

and TheIBIvarious contained scores fr rivers, applied interpreted. appendix 

the Milwaukee andMenomonee. including 

•sr

o

V£> V£> 

K>

P

X

X

on nine streams in tosouthern Wisconsin determine theata sam- Study length

station shouldbe forish. TheRiver was Menomonee onefthe pling sampling 

sites. sampling 

^ 

|

H-*

V£> 

OO

-5

X

X

X

to see if Statewide distribution to Omernik's studyfish-assemblage corresponded Characteristics were for eachofthe fourthat cover most ecoregions. regions givenof Wisconsin. andshoreline were substrate, Temperature, gradient, vegetation 

shown t behanetter location. geographic predictors 

Lueschow (1972)

X

X

X

X

Statewide on Theand cotrol. alsexamined con- study algaemacrophyte report A trol ofitch.n swimmers tablelists chemical usedbodies ofwater treatments 

Littleak theandMilwaukee River. including Muskego 

and Rheaume Lnz

(2000)

X

X

X

X

X

of theWestern Lakeincoln Mil-Creek andRegional studyMichigan Drainages. 

in waukee Riverwere included theDistribution andstructure of community study.

benthic aduseds invertebrates was discussed indicators. Environ- water-quality 

and were mntal habitat alsoexamined. setting 

r~ 

ff

1

3 

o

I

o

3

information Michigan Lake 

information Stream 

Fish

Macroinvertebrates

Algae/macrophytes

Amphibians/reptiles

Birds

Mussels

Wildlife

bioassays Toxic 

species Endangered/threatened 

species Tolerant/intolerant 

species Non-native/invader 

Habitat

Wetlands

issues effects/urban Human 

surveys Community 

issues Management 

interpretations Water-quality 

ecology on based 

values index Biotic 

Other

Characteristics

Description

18

o 

& ^ 

TM a 

£3

g 53 

CO

CD << 

7^ rte 

i B 

ZLZ pa)e|ay-saojnosay-ja)e/\A uojieuuojui joj aip ;|/\| aa>|neM| ue);|odoj)a|/\| oBejaMas puisjrj Bumueu 'ea.iv 
Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District (1980e)

X

X

the on Field South Plan.curret statusof Mitchell ThReport Interceptor Facility 

water in theMitchell FieldDitch andOakthe effects Creek,quality Drainage 

the havefutur waterer ondiscussed. plan may qulity 

Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District (1980d)

X

Local frJones IslandDiscussed were the environmental planFacility. existing will status and theeffects haveon Milwaukee alsoHarbor; planreport included some oninto information theributaries harbor. leading 

Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District (1980c)

X

X

X

X

X

the Anon Franklin-Northeast ofexamination theReport Interceptor Facility plan.status of theRoot andthat on itRiver effects willhave were plan proposed 

included.

Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District (1980b)

X

X

X

X

X

on afor was the Included an Report planFranklin-Muskego Facility. Interceptor environmental withon assessment information LittleLake, Muskego Big

Little TessCorners Root andtheRiver. Creek, LakeMuskego 

Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District (1980a)

X

X

X

X

for on averflow combined-sewer Environmental abatement. Report impacts plan

on the was and Kinickinnic Rivers examined. Milwaukee, Menomonee, 

and othersMiller 

(1992)

X

X

X

X

on the LocalRiver.esults were in relation theRoot discussed to sudy objectives Root ifofthe 1980River Wat PlanSource Pollution to determine theNonpoint 

the were of achieved. goals plnbeing 

Mathiak (1979)

X

X

on Statewide founrivers. Thedescribed mussel mussels ineachstudy report type;

color distribution andwere also included. maps photographs 

Masterson andBanner- man (1994)

X

X

X

X

Local on rivers inMilwaukee Chemical was done on sedi- stuyCount. analysis and water tohe ofdetermine stormwa- effects fish,ment, tissue, crayfish samples 

ter IBI runoffo each. was anBioaccumulation examined andfor

macroinvertebrates was calculated.

Martin andothers 

(1983)

X

X

Statewide Theexamination ofWisconsin lakes.about condition of3,000 trophic 

inland lakeswere assessed satellite Waterbodies fromOzau- Landsat data.using 

Waukesha inand Counties were included thekee, Washington, study.

r~

S 

3

1

o

&

o

information Michigan Lake 

information Stream 

Fish

Macroinvertebrates

Algae/macrophytes

Amphibians/reptiles

Birds

Mussels

Wildlife

bioassays Toxic 

species Endangered/threatened 

species Tolerant/intolerant 

species Non-native/invader 

Habitat

Wetlands

issues effects/urban Human 

surveys Community 

issues Management 

interpretations Water-quality 

ecology on based 

values index Biotic 

Other

Characteristics

D

% o

o' i

3

volatile aromatic biochemical dissolved Milwaukee PAHs,CB [VOCs, BOD,demand; DO,MMSD, organic compounds; hydrocarbons; polypolychlorinated biphenyls; oxygenygen; Metropolitan 

Index ofBiotic District; IBI,Integrity] Sewerage 

Q. 

CL

•5 

O

o

a

CO

r-fO 

CD 

O 

O_ 

O 

CO

O

O-a 

o

CO

CD

CD

Q5 

CO 

CD

O

O

o
Nichols andVennie 

(1991)

X

X

X

X

X

X

as well thirlake Habitat were Statewide on study plants. preferences given,and wildlife. was also information on toenvironment There value the propagation 

and herbicide susceptibility.

Nichols (1974)

X

X

X

con- of methods. lookedat conrol TheStatewide examination aquatic report plant 

trol Milwaukee was inthe harvest- and habitat County bymanipulation. harvesting 

table. ing experiences 

Myniudes(1991)

X

Plan- of thecharacteristics Multistate on aquatic plantspecies studyvarying 

its cordata tago throughout range.

Mortimer (1981)

X

X

of case the Illinois versus Milwaukee and court of Overview Stateinvolving sewer issue ofwas Lke over- concern cities. TheMichigan bypollution nearby

flows anddischarges.

Milwaukee Riverevitalization Council and Wisconsin 

of Natu- Department 

ral Resources (1991)

X

X

of intothe Milwaukee Thearea was divided River. examination studyRegional 

but no hard dtatheof eachwere discussed, sections; presented. problems 

Riverevi- Milwaukee talization Council 1992,1 (1990,1994,3 1995)

X

X

The hasdone intheLocal on theMilwaukee River. stated whatbeen report 

to onhe adfwater river informed reader upcom- improve past qualiy year 

ing projects.

Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District (1980J)

X

X

X

X

for MMSDan Local Underwood withenviron- theCreek Interceptor Facility plan 

Underwood andthemental assessment on Dousman Menomonee Creek, Ditch

someources and River. Thediscusses landofuse, study pointollution, physical/chemical characteristics.

Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District (1980h)

X

X

Branch Plan.on the OakTheCreek Northexam- Interceptor Facility studyReport 

Creek inesthe status of Oakandthe effects. plan's 

r 

ff

S

3 

o

s6'

information Michigan Lake 

information Stream 

Fish

nvertebrates Macro! 

Algae/macrophytes

Amphibians/reptiles

Birds

Mussels

Wildlife

bioassays Toxic 

species Endangered/threatened 

species Tolerant/intolerant 

species Non-native/invader 

Habitat

Wetlands

issues effects/urban Human 

surveys Community 

issues Management 

interpretations Water-quality 

ecology on based 

values index Biotic 

Other

Characteristics

D 

<Dw 

o

HI

f

o

frj

00

sr 1J 

|| 

o ri-' 

2. § 

S 3 

HZ pa)e|ay-saojnosay-ja)e/\A aa)|neM|!|/\| ue);|odoj)a|/\| a6ejaMa$ JQ ' wsuoosjM 
Peters (1997)

X

X

X

on the Lakedetailed Western Thenat- study Regional Michigan Drainages. report ural andofthe area tht effecton features havean wter quality. anthropogenic These included andland climate, use, geology, vegetation, hydrologic biological characteristics.

Peters (1995)

X

X

X

X

of thea Lake whichWestern meeting Summary concerning Michigan Drainages, 

studied ofthwas asAssessment Included National part Water-Quality Program. of the are summaries madeat which included information meeting, presentations 

in o theMilwaukee Riverand Licoln Creek. pesticides 

Pentecost andVogt 

(1976)

XI

X

X

examination ofdis-Multistate anddistribution. Thealso amphibian reptile report cussed inth communities foundareand theirassociated plantherptofauna.

Pariso andothers (1983)

X

X

of theWisconsin coast. and Root,Milwaukee, Kinnickinnic, Regional study

and iOakCreek were included theMenomonee Rivers, Fish,sediment, study.

and effluent were tested forcontaminants. samples 

Oberts (1977)

X

X

Discussion ofeffects usedcommonly water-quality management practices to control fromThese urbanactivities. lit-included runoff, construction, pollution and combined-sewer overflows. There some for was information Milwaukee. ter, 

Nowak (1995)

X

X

X

X

of a local courtase the Reviw concrete that was into regarding liningput Crayfish Creek inthOak Wis. of Creek,city 

and Novotny 

Bendoricchio (1989)

X

X

with Localon the Menomonee River andofinformation some the watershed study

within thewatershed. Thmodel usedestimate tributaries LANDRUN to (a

the andofwateratersheds runoff erodedfom quantity particulates quality with mixed landwas used forsediment fromvarious uses) estimating loadings soil landuses and otherfactors suchPhos- as characteristics andimperviousness. 

were also examined. phorus loadings 

Novitzki (1979)

X

Statewide ofwetlands inTheof Wisconsin. description gave descriptions report 

in different ofwetlands thatwere found thestate. types 

r 

f? 

|

3 

o

if

o

3

information Michigan Lake 

information Stream 

Fish

nvertebrates Macro! 

Algae/macrophytes

Amphibians/reptiles

Birds

Mussels

Wildlife

bioassays Toxic 

species Endangered/threatened 

species Tolerant/intolerant 

species Non-native/invader 

Habitat

Wetlands

issues effects/urban Human 

surveys Community 

issues Management 

interpretations Water-quality 

ecology on based 

values index Biotic 

Other

Characteristics

Description

aromatic biochemical dissolved volatile Milwaukee PCBs, BODMMSD, [VOCsPAHs, demand; DO,biphenyls; organic compounds; hydrocarbons; oxygen polyolychlorinated oxygen; Metropolitan 

Index ofBiotic IBI,District; Integrity] Sewerage 

to 

u

3- o

03

05 

Or-tCD

I'

O 

V)

Qi

3 

O_

O. 

CD

-o

rto'

a. CD'

C/J

-a

GO

CD

CD 

Q}

ca

CD

a

ca

Q} 

CD

o

o
Table 3. Characteristics and description of studies pertaining to ecology of the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, Wis

[VOCs, volatile organic compounds; PAHs, poly aromatic hydrocarbons; PCBs, polychlorinated biphenyls; BOD, biochemical oxygen demand; DO, dissolved oxygen; 

Sewerage District; IBI, Index of Biotic Integrity]

Literature Citation

Peters and others

(1998)

R.A. Smith and

Associates Inc. and

others (1996)

Read (1976)

Rice (1992)

Science Applications

International

Corporation (1993)

Scudder and others

(1996)

Scudder and others

(1997)

Characteristics

o

format!

c

a 

_g>

o 

S

§

co

-1

o

ro

o•ff

i

CO

X

X

£

in 

u.

X

X

X

X

X

in

0)

2

£1

?

acroinve

«•

X

X

X

X

in

1

g

Igae/mac

•*

X

X

X

X

X

in 

_g>

Q.

£

«J

c

(0

3

Q.

<

X

X

in

ffl

X

X

X

in

i

itIS

m

£

U)

in

(0

O

!5 

o

X

'5

0)

Q. 

(0

•o

0)

m

ered/thre

D)

(0

c

LU

X

X

in

0)

0

£

CO

(0

ant/intole

0)

o

F

in 

d>

u 

&

(0

•o 

(0

lative/inv

c

o

z

s

A

(0

X

X

X

in•o 

c

(0

i

X

(0 

0)

in 

v>

S€3

n effects/

(0

E

X

X

X

13

in

'E

3

u

X

issues

E

anageme

S

X

w 

o

s > 75 o £ o 

P- o

d> 0

c * — c

"a a> 3 in

%*

£

X

X

(0 

0)

1

X

iotic inde

m

X

X

0)

6

Description

Summary of studies done in the Western Lake M

National Water-Quality Assessment Program. In

Milwaukee River and Lincoln Creek regarding th

study area; pesticide, nutrient, trace element, and 

tions; and index values for macroinvertebrates, fi

Local study on the Menomonee River. The study 

ing the river to a more natural state and improving 

proposed ideas were creating a wetland, making 

lining.

Statewide report on endangered and threatened p

provided lists of plants by region and habitat type

Report on the nonpoint-source water-pollution ab

River. The report evaluated the degree to which t

levels of fecal coliform, dissolved phosphorus, a

Multistate study on the Lake Michigan Basin. Th

lic and get their comments on agencies' activitie

on the effects of toxic contaminants in the Great 

given.

Regional study of the Western Lake Michigan D

tained a summary of biological aspects of the reg

ences on biologic investigations.

Regional study of the Western Lake Michigan D

the Milwaukee River, Kinnickinnic River, and Li

synthetic organic compounds were examined in 
Southeastern 

Wisconsin Regional Commis- Planning 

sion (1982b)

X

X

X

X

X

for the ofLanduse and envi-sewerrvice. Localplan cityMuskego sanitary 

lands were discussed. ronmentally significant 

Southeastern 

Wisconsin Regional Commis- Planning 

sion (1980)

X

X

X

the ofn the Rootiver anditstributaries. Thiscontrol Locadiscussed studyplan 

from bothurban andrural sorces. pollution 

Southeastern 

Wisconsin Regional Commis- Planning 

sion (1979)

X

X

X

on the Crek whichalso included theMitchell FieldLocal Oakwatershed, studyDitch. was adevel- water evaluated andDrainage Existing quality program 

to address water and related otherfloding, pollution, opedproblems.

Southeastern 

Wisconsin Regional Commis- Planning 

sion (1978c)

X

on Wisconsin. theLake Area insoutheastern Michigan Regional studyDrainage was show andTheto need elements thefor, ofmajor organiza- purpose a tions ofTheinformation on thehad comprehensive program. planning study

River andtheHarbor RootMilwaukee Estuary.

Southeastern 

Wisconsin Regional Commis- Planning 

sion (1976)

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

that willork Localon Menomonee Riverwatershed to aheplan studyprovide its on adincrease ofriver andhabitat. thehealth flooding problems Physiof Datathe area wasclildlife thatwas found there.with description givenalong 

and surface-water were also forflooding monitoring given.

Southeastern 

Wisconsin Regional Commis- Planning 

sion (1974)

X

on the Kinnickinnic ofthewaso Local Riverwatershed. Thstudy purpose study 

to reduce theneed a showfor watershed comprehensive pollu-planning program 

and tionflooding.

Southeastern 

Wisconsin Regional Commis- Planning 

sion (1971)

X

X

X

on theo Milwaukee Rivershow needfor comprehensive studyRegional The anddiscussed water conditions problems planning. studyregional existing water and solutions. covered included possible quality, Topics gave flooding, 

and recreation. supply, 

r

5f

s 

i

o

I

o

information Michigan Lake 

information Stream 

Fish

Macroinvertebrates

Algae/macrophytes

Amphibians/reptiles

Birds

Mussels

Wildlife

bioassays Toxic 

species Endangered/threatened 

species Tolerant/intolerant 

species Non-native/invader 

Habitat

Wetlands

issues effects/urban Human 

surveys Community 

issues Management 

interpretations Water-quality 

ecology on based 

values index Biotic 

Other

Characteristics

Description

aromatic dissolved volatile biochemical Milwaukee demand; DO,PAHs,CB BODMMSD, [VOCscompounds; organic polyhydrocarbons; polychlorinated biphenyls; oxygenygen; Metropolitan 

of IndexBiotic District; IBI,Sewerage Integrity]

to

CO

o. 

o.

•§

o

o. CD'

V)

•a

CD 

O

0_

o

(O

o—h

«-+ 

CD

CDi-HO•a 

o_ 

;=!••

CO

CD

CD

QJ 

(O 

CD

a

(O

CD 

O)

i 

00

o

o
Southeastern 

Wisconsin Regional Commis- Planning 

sion (1996)

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

Local frofLittle Goalsthe included Lake.management plan Muskego planand contaminant to macro- sediment thlake, reducing loading reducing aquatic and aesthetics andawareess, growths, phytealgal promoting publicimproving 

use for and habitat other fishwldlife. recreation, improving 

Southeastern 

Wisconsin Regional Commis- Planning 

sion (1995a)

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

to ahat described theforreport Regional updates management water-quality planwas southeastern Wisconsin. Alsoincluded theofstatus current implementaof theionplan.

Southeastern 

Wisconsin Regional Commis- Planning 

sion (1993)

X

X

X

X

X

for andLocal stormwater subwatershed. floodCreek plan management Lilly The alternative ofevaluated current with theplanlans purpose pob- eliminating and lemsfuture whilalso one, avoiding considering nonpoint-source pollution 

river andhabitat.

Southeastern 

Wisconsin Regional Commis- Planning 

sion (1988b)

X

X

on how t achieve conference report water-qual- Regional proceedings discussing 

Issues landerosion addressed included control, itygoals through management. 

stormwater water corri- environmental nonpoint-source management, pollution, 

and wetlands. dors, floodplains, 

Southeastern 

Wisconsin Regional Commis- Planning 

sion (1987a)

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

Local on theMilwaukee Harborinvolved thewhich Milwaukee, studyEstuary, 

Kinnickinnic andtheThe Milwaukee Harbor. ofMenomonee, Rivers, purpose 

the was athato would control floodstudy prepare pln helppollution, mitigate in theforcontrol storm water and recre- harbor, problems, damageimprov quality 

ational uses. aredata provided. Monitoring 

Southeastern 

Wisconsin Regional Commis- Planning 

sion (1986c)

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

Local on the watershed to will OakCreek a thatddress flood- studyprovide plan

of andincrease thehealth riverand itshabitat. Aproblems ingphysical of wasiththe area wildlife thatwas found there.Data fordescription givenalong 

and surface-water were also flooding monitoring provided.

|-

sr 

|

i

o

I

o

information Michigan Lake 

information Stream 

Fish

Macroinvertebrates

Algae/macrophytes

Amphibians/reptiles

Birds

Mussels

Wildlife

bioassays Toxic 

species Endangered/threatened 

species Tolerant/intolerant 

species Non-native/invader 

Habitat

Wetlands

issues effects/urban Human 

surveys Community 

issues Management 

interpretations Water-quality 

ecology on based 

values index Biotic 

Other

Characteristics

o

2. "S 

o'

3

" SP OQ 

< (T> slP. en 

fT . a 

S S 

tf" i i— 

' I § 

3 (T> 

T3 * 

o o C i-h 

^g, a o' 

cL

«Q 3 

ro a. 

2 1 

2LZ uojieuuojui JQJ ai|i aa)|neM|!|/\| ue)j|odoj)a|/\| aBejaMa$ IOLIISJQ Bumueij 'eajv 
and VeithLee (1971)

X

X

X

X

X

in on PCBs fishMilwaukee Riverth andLake Regional studyMichigan. 

in theoffish tisuewher fish PCBs on thewas Changes composition depended 

caught.

Van (1977) Dyke 

X

on duck Localmallard andiMilwau- Juneau Park, studypoplations production kee Theexamined winter sex ratios, weights, County. studpoplations, molting, 

and behavior.

U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agencyand others (1980)

X

X

X

of area The MMSD theMaster Plan.Local Facilities studyproposed addressing 

focus ofwascaued thissuenfiltration water overflows groundstudy byand stormwater. Current andhowwas exam-wter the effect(1980) quality plan's

ined.

Torke(1976)

X

of Statewide Thecontained foridentifica- a study copepods. report key cyclopoid 

tion on andinformation theirand hadistributions ecology.

and others Thompson 

(1976)

X

X

X

of intheshoreline. Wisconsin LakeThe Regional townships alongstudy Michigan at fish andwildlife habitat classified itnothree looked report categories.

Taylor(1994)

X

X

on Local theKinnickinnic examined ofRiver sources nonpoint studypollution. erosion Urbanrunoff adfromconstruction siteswer the main streambanks 

or issues concern.

Sullivan (1997)

X

X

X

X

on the Lincoln Western LakeRegional Michigan studyDrainages, including were Crek. Fishas the communities wereas rivr habitat. thenThey analyzed, 

used as indicators. water-quality 

Southeastern 

Wisconsin Regional Commis- Planning 

sion andothers 

(2000)

X

X

X

X

X

Local on Dousman Ditchand Creekof thUnderwood subwatershed Meno- studyThe monee River watershed. andfloo- identifies stormwater-management study their alsosets and causes. The forthafter ingproblems studymanagement plan 

alternatives. examining 

w3

i

o

i

o

information Michigan Lake 

information Stream 

Fish

Macroinvertebrates

Algae/macrophytes

Amphibians/reptiles

Birds

Mussels

Wildlife

bioassays Toxic 

species Endangered/threatened 

species Tolerant/intolerant 

species Non-native/invader 

Habitat

Wetlands

issues effects/urban Human 

surveys Community 

issues Management 

interpretations Water-quality 

ecology on based 

values index Biotic 

Other

Characteristics

Description

volatile aromatic biochemical dissolved Milwaukee PAHs, PCBs, BODdemand; DO,MMSD, [VOCsorganic compounds; hydrocarbons; polyolychlorinated biphenyls; oxygenygen; Metropolitan 

of IndexBiotic District; IBI,Sewerage Integrity]

CD 

CO

o

o

^

a 

£c 

o. CD' 

v>

•a 

CD

(O

«-+ 

o

CD 

O 

O 

O

<a

-< 

o

CO

CD

CD

QJ 

(O 

CD

a

ZJ

- ^

ca
Wisconsin Depart- of ment Natural Resources (1990)

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

Local on theRivr a Menomonee watershed withofcreating studypurpose 

identified Theenvironmental concerns and detailed management plan. majorstudy 

for Water-resources information was subwater- strategies improvement. givenby 

shed withinformation on wildlife andland solihazardous waste, habitat, use, 

and nonpoint-source pollution.

Wisconsin Depart- of ment Natural Resources (1989)

X

on thef Milwaukee AreaConcern ith Great Lakes Bsin.Menomonee, Report 

Rivers andMilwaukee theInnr Harborwee Kinnickinnic, included intheof was to The water-resource study. purpose reprt present the were at were and remediation. Alsproblems regarding stage they presented 

toxicshose contaminants found infish. data, including 

Wisconsin Depart- of ment Natural Resources (1982, 1990, 198492, 

1994, 2000)

X

X

X

Statewide on with some watr information on Milwaukee reports quality specific and therea. The cover aof reports County surrounding including variety topics

PCBs ino and datasome chemical constituents as werewell. Datafish, pollution, for theMilwaukee Lincoln Northand River, Creek given Estuary, 

Avenue Dam.

Wisconsin Depart- of Natural ment Resources (1976)

X

on Wisconsin thatsoutheastern included the River andtribu- RootRegional report 

taries intharea. Data fromand done evaluation water-quality sampling survey 

1973 were during presented.

Wisconsin Depart- of ment Natural Resources (1975)

X

that summarized industrial to inwaters southeastern Regional discharges studyWisconsin. Thealso discussed and schedules. report permis compliance 

Wisconsin Depart- ment of Natural Resources (1971)

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

Local on Lake. Aofcharacteristics, soils,study BigMuskego description drainage water recreational andthefish, wldlife, use, quality, aquatic surrounding plants, 

land use was included.

Villenueve andothers 

(1997)

X

X

Local t determine effects on stream biota urbanfrom long-term studytoxicity stormwater runoff. cellswre Fish usedand Lin-to frm water hepatoma exposed 

coln Creek.

iff

£ 

§

o

I

o

information Michigan Lake 

information Stream 

Fish

nvertebrates Macro! 

Algae/macrophytes

Amphibians/reptiles

Birds

Mussels

Wildlife

bioassays Toxic 

species Endangered/threatened 

species Tolerant/intolerant 

species Non-native/invader 

Habitat

Wetlands

issues effects/urban Human 

surveys Community 

issues Management 

interpretations Water-quality 

ecology on based 

values index Biotic 

Other

Characteristics

Description

o * 

o ir o 

3- p. 55' 

5J 5* B. 

a> 2 S 

" HP 

CD g CD 

» 5^0 

f-*' O QM .3 S 

=. K S 

-a » o 

S. S 

to a 

CD a. 

2 i 

082 pa)e|ay-sa3jnosay-jaie/\A joj ai|) aa>|neM|!|/\| uei;|odoj)a|/\| ' WSUOOSJM 
Wisconsin Depart- of ment Natural Resources (1999)

X

for theentire Milwaukee RiverTh ofthewatershed. was to Report purpose reprt a to determine measurements for usefuldevlop pubicrocess describing ecosys- tem conditions. indicators and air,water, Many including biodiversity, possible 

education were discussed andsome data fishwas for VOCs, advisories, presented 

and landuse. ozone, transportation, 

Wisconsin Depart- ment of Natural Resources (1995)

X

X

Statewide on loosestrife effect on Theinformation and itswelands. purplereport 

and control information. distribution, identification, gave 

Wisconsin Depart- of ment Natural Resources (1994)

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

Local ofMilwaukee andintot. Thetherivers identi- Estuary studydraining studyfied anenvironmental a brief overview ofuses each. problems impaired gave 

Also forincluded were recommendations restore waterto plans quality.

Wisconsin Depart- of ment Natural Resources (1993b, 1994,67 

1998)

X

X

X

X

X

Statewide as sixwatersheds areas Milwaukee included theRivr usng study

The ofwas to determine extent which South. thegoal studymanagement 

fish habitat andcommunities. practices improved 

Wisconsin Depart- of ment Natural Resources (1993a)

X

X

X

Local on theWind andtheLaks tributaries intostudy Muskego draining 

The them.examined withthe mainfocus on sedi- nonpoint-source pollution study

ment loads.

Wisconsin Depart- of ment Natural Resources (1992c)

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

Local on Milwaukee RiverSouth Thewatershed. andexisting studywater-quality 

such as habitat environmental concerns and were sewage-treatment plants described andwater causes were possible pollution management strategies 

outlined.

Wisconsin Depart- of ment Natural Resources (1992b)

X

Statewide a onto establish database theandbundance ofdistribution allstudy 

fish theThe1900-72 to studies indistributions 1974-species. study compares 

86.

r;

ff 

3

i

o

5T 

o

information Michigan Lake 

information Stream 

Fish

Macroinvertebrates

Algae/macrophytes

Amphibians/reptiles

Birds

Mussels

Wildlife

bioassays Toxic 

species Endangered/threatened 

species Tolerant/intolerant 

species Non-native/invader 

Habitat

Wetlands

issues effects/urban Human 

surveys Community 

issues Management 

interpretations Water-quality 

ecoloqy on based 

values index Biotic 

Other

Characteristics

Description

volatile aromatic biochemical dissolved Milwaukee PAHs,CB BODdemand; DO,[VOCs, MMSD, compounds; organic polyhydrocarbons; polychlorinated biphenyls; oxygen oxygen; Metropolitan 

Index ofBiotic District; IBI,Sewerage Integrity]

09

CTj

to

CO

o

"S.

O

(O

i-c

O 

CD 

O

0_

o 

<a

-< 

o

CO

CD

CD

QJ 

(O 

CD

O

O

O
Wisconsin District 

Team Lake-Studies 1997,8 (1996,

1999)

X

X

the on adfStatewide chemical characteristics Wisconsin lakes.reports physical 

The studisincluded information forandLittleakes. Big Muskego 

Wisconsin Depart- ment of Natural Resources andSoutheastern Wisconsin Regional Commis- Planning 

sion (1985)

X

X

X

X

of theMilwaukee Riverwatershed riversthat flowintot. Theincluding Studyand other inexamined water facos an to discern bestthe quality studyattempt 

to outan effective watershed way carryprogram. priority 

Wisconsin Depart- ment of Natural Resources andothers (2001)

X

X

A lookat the entireMilwaukee Riverand streams ints Thewatershed. studyof included individual areas within thewatershed. There was discus- descriptions sion ofandstreamhore- wetlands, nonpoint-sources point-ollution, 

line modifications.

I 

i

o 

o'

information Michigan Lake 

information Stream 

Fish

Macroinvertebrates

Algae/macrophytes

Amphibians/reptiles

Birds

Mussels

Wildlife

bioassays Toxic 

species Endangered/threatened 

species Tolerant/intolerant 

species Non-native/invader 

Habitat

Wetlands

issues effects/urban Human 

surveys Community 

issues Management 

interpretations Water-quality 

ecology on based 

values index Biotic 

Other

Characteristics

Description

&* __

w

pa)e|ay-sa3Jnosay-ja)e/\/\ uojieuuojui JDJ aqi 33)|neM|!|/\| uei;|odoj)3|/\| 36eJ3M3$ lauisjQ Bumueu 'BSJV u;suo3s;/\/v 
Table 4. Selected GIS Coverages available for the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area

[NA, not available, MMSD, Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District; SEWRPC, Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission; USGS, U.S. Geological Sur

Natural Resources; GMUs, Geographic Management Units; DEM, digital elevation model; LICGF, Land Information and Computer Graphics Facility; SSURGO, Soil Su

State Soil Geographic Survey; USDA, U.S. Department of Agriculture; NRCS, National Resources Conservation Service; WGNHS, Wisconsin Geologic and Natural Histo

Protection Agency; DLGs, digital line graphs; MIS, Metropolitan Interceptor System; ISS, Inline Storage System; NSC, Near Surface Collector System; CSO, combined 

Altitude Photography; WISCLAND, Wisconsin Initiative for Statewide Cooperation on Landscape Analysis and Data; NLCD, National Land Cover Data; GIRAS, Geogr

sis; LUDA, Land Use Data Analysis]

Data set name

Source Data 

year provider

Description 

Boundary

MMSD planning area

County base maps

Civil Division

NA

1985, 1990, 

1995

1985, 1990,

SEWRPC1

SEWRPC

SEWRPC

Boundary of the 42- square-mile MMSD service area, which includes Milwaukee County 

plus parts of Ozaukee, Racine, Washington, and Waukesha counties

County boundaries

Municipality boundaries

Minor Civil Divisions

Landnet locations 

State of Wisconsin

1995

1992 WDNR

Various WDNR3 

1992 WDNR

WDNR Geographic Management Units 1996 WDNR

WDNR Administrative Regions 1998 WDNR

Incorporated and unincorporated cities, civil townships (commonly known as "towns"), 

and villages of Wisconsin as of 1991 as derived from the U.S. Census Bureau 1991 

TIGER/Line files

Public Land Survey System section and townships as derived from USGS 7.5-minute 

topographic quadrangles (source data from various years)

Wisconsin state boundary as derived from the U.S. Census Bureau 1990 TIGER/Line 

files.

Geographic Management Units (GMUs) are administrative units established by the Wis. 

DNR primarily for internal management purposes. Most GMU boundaries are based 

upon water-basin boundaries, though in some areas GMU boundaries have been adjusted 

to coincide with county boundaries. Scales of data vary from 1:24,000 (boundaries 

derived from watersheds coverage) to 1:100,000 (boundaries derived from counties coverage).

WDNR administrative region boundaries generally coincide with county boundaries. 

WDNR administrative regions were established circa 1997 as part of the agency's reorganization.

Elevation

Digital planimetric and Various SEWRPC 

topographic maps (2-foot contours)

1 -Degree Digital Elevation Model NA WDNR

Planimetric features include building footprints, road edges and curblines, sidewalks, and 

trees. Topographic features are those that define elevation information. See Land Infor- 

mation and Computer Graphics Facility (LICGF) Web page for more information: 

http://www.lic.wisc.edu/

A detailed USGS 7.5-minute digital elevation model (DEM) is derived from 1:24,000- 

scale, 7.5-minute topographic maps, and have a 30-meter pixel cell size, or resolution. 

WDNR also has Digital Elevation Model data sets that are available at a detailed and generalized level as derived from l:250,000-scale map data.
Table 4. Selected GIS Coverages available for the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area—Continued

[NA, not available, MMSD, Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District; SEWRPC, Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission; USGS, U.S. Geological Surv

Natural Resources; GMUs, Geographic Management Units; DEM, digital elevation model; LICGF, Land Information and Computer Graphics Facility; SSURGO, Soil Surv

State Soil Geographic Survey; USDA, U.S. Department of Agriculture; NRCS, National Resources Conservation Service; WGNHS, Wisconsin Geologic and Natural Histor

Protection Agency; DLGs, digital line graphs; MIS, Metropolitan Interceptor System; ISS, Inline Storage System; NSC, Near Surface Collector System; CSO, combined se

Altitude Photography; WISCLAND, Wisconsin Initiative for Statewide Cooperation on Landscape Analysis and Data; NLCD, National Land Cover Data; GIRAS, Geogra

sis; LUDA, Land Use Data Analysis]

Data set name

Source 

year

Data 

provider

Description 

Soils

Soil mapping units

NRCS Soil Survey Geographic 

(SSURGO) Data base

NRCS State Soil Geographic 

Survey (STATSGO) Database

Surficial deposits

Soil associations

Soil permeability

NA

Various

1998

1980's

1968

1992

SEWRPC

NRCS

NRCS

WDNR

WDNR

USGS

Soil mapping units data from the USDA and NRCS

SSURGO data include soil survey area boundaries, soil boundaries, water boundaries, 

and conventional and special soil features. Please see the following Web site for more 

information: http://www.ftw.nrcs.usda.gov/ssur data.html

STATSGO data is generalized from detail soil survey data and contains information 

regarding available water capacity, soil reaction, salinity, flooding, water table, bedrock, 

and interpretations for engineering uses. Please see the following Web site for more information: http ://www.ftw.nrcs .usda. gov/stat data.html

Surficial deposits

Soil associations based on the "Regional Soil Map of Wisconsin," by F. D. Hole, 1968

Soil permeability

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

Ground-water resources

Depth to water table

Depth to bedrock

Soil contamination attenuation potential

Groundwater contamination potential

NA

NA

NA

NA

SEWRPC

SEWRPC

SEWRPC

SEWRPC

Depth to water table based on data from the WGNHS and SEWRPC

Depth to bedrock based on data from the WGNHS and SEWRPC

Soil contamination attenuation potential based on data from the WGNHS and SEWRPC

Ground-water contamination potential based on data from the WGNHS and SEWRPC

1

1

1

1

Watershed and hydrography

Floodplain boundaries

Watershed

Subwatershed

Subbasin

NA

Continuous 

updates

Continuous 

updates

Continuous

SEWRPC

SEWRPC

SEWRPC

SEWRPC

Flood-plain boundaries

Watersheds covering the SEWRPC counties

Subwatersheds covering the SEWRPC counties

Subbasins covering the SEWRPC counties

1

1

1

1

1

updates
Table 4. Selected GIS Coverages available for the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area—Continued

[NA, not available, MMSD, Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District; SEWRPC, Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission; USGS, U.S. Geological Surve

Natural Resources; GMUs, Geographic Management Units; DEM, digital elevation model; LICGF, Land Information and Computer Graphics Facility; SSURGO, Soil Surv

State Soil Geographic Survey; USDA, U.S. Department of Agriculture; NRCS, National Resources Conservation Service; WGNHS, Wisconsin Geologic and Natural History 

Protection Agency; DLGs, digital line graphs; MIS, Metropolitan Interceptor System; ISS, Inline Storage System; NSC, Near Surface Collector System; CSO, combined se

Altitude Photography; WISCLAND, Wisconsin Initiative for Statewide Cooperation on Landscape Analysis and Data; NLCD, National Land Cover Data; GIRAS, Geograp

sis; LUDA, Land Use Data Analysis]

Data set name

Source 

year

Data 

provider

Description 

Watershed and hydrography — Continued

Hydrography (version 2)

National Hydrography Dataset (NHD)

Water lines

Water related

WDNR watersheds

2002

2001

1990, 1995

1990, 1995

1990

WDNR

USEPA/ 

USGS

SEWRPC

SEWRPC

WDNR

Hydrography data include information about surface-water features represented on the 1

USGS 1 :24,000-scale topographic map series, such as perennial and intermittent streams, 

lakes, and so on.

The hydrography data layer is derived from the 1 : 1 00,000- scale Digital Line Graphs 1 

(DLGs) of the USGS.

Water-line data include watershed boundaries, rivers, channelized rivers, and breakwa- N

ters. Data for Milwaukee, Ozaukee, and Racine Counties from 1995; data for Washington 

and Waukesha Counties from 1990.

Water related data include waterbody and marsh locations. Data for Milwaukee, Ozaukee, N

and Racine Counties from 1995; data for Washington and Waukesha Counties from 1990.

WDNR watershed delineations generally indicate areas that drain into a common river 1

system or lake but may also be based on WDNR basin-management criteria.

Infrastructure

Sewer service areas

Roads

Roads

Dams

Miscellaneous infrastructure (airports,

NA

1998

2000

1997

1992

SEWRPC

WDNR

US Dept of 

Commerce: 

Bureau of 

Census

WDNR

WDNR

Sewer service areas 1 

Highways, roads, trails, and associated features. The data are derived from a subset of the 1 

Transportation files of the U.S. Geological Survey DLGs.

Roads based on data from U.S. Department of Commerce, the Bureau of Census 1 

Dam locations N

Airports, pipelines, electric transmission lines, and associated infrastructure. This data set 1

pipelines, and so on.) 

State trunk highways

is derived from a subset of the Transportation files of the U.S. Geological Survey DLGs.

1998 WDNR State trunk highway data were derived from a data set developed by the Wisconsin Dept. 

of Transportation, and called the "l:100,000-scale Roadway Chain" database. Data set 

contains spatial object chain representing the centerline of Wisconsin State, U.S. and 

interstate roadways, and selected supporting state-owned roadways such as ramps, connectors, frontage roads.

1
Table 4. Selected GIS Coverages available for the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area—Continued

[NA, not available, MMSD, Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District; SEWRPC, Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission; USGS, U.S. Geological Surve

Natural Resources; GMUs, Geographic Management Units; DEM, digital elevation model; LICGF, Land Information and Computer Graphics Facility; SSURGO, Soil Surv

State Soil Geographic Survey; USDA, U.S. Department of Agriculture; NRCS, National Resources Conservation Service; WGNHS, Wisconsin Geologic and Natural History 

Protection Agency; DLGs, digital line graphs; MIS, Metropolitan Interceptor System; ISS, Inline Storage System; NSC, Near Surface Collector System; CSO, combined se

Altitude Photography; WISCLAND, Wisconsin Initiative for Statewide Cooperation on Landscape Analysis and Data; NLCD, National Land Cover Data; GIRAS, Geograp

sis; LUDA, Land Use Data Analysis]

Data set name

Source 

year

Data 

provider

Description 

Infrastructure — Continued

Railroads

Transportation related features

Stream corridors

Perennial stream lines

Intermittent stream lines

Sewers: Metropolitan Interceptor System

Sewers: Inline Storage System

Sewers: Near Surface Collector System

Sewers: Combined Sewer Overflow

1998

1990, 1995

NA

NA

NA

2003

2003

2003

2003

WDNR

SEWRPC

SEWRPC

SEWRPC

SEWRPC

MMSD

MMSD

MMSD

MMSD

Railroad data were derived from the Wisconsin Department of Transportation 1 : 

"1:1 00,000-scale Rails Chain Database." This data set includes all main track and sidings 

identified in railroad timetables; does not include abandonments.

Transportation related features such as roads, railroads, and airport terminals. Data for NA 

Milwaukee, Ozaukee, and Racine from 1995; data for Washington and Waukesha from 

1990

Stream corridors are defined as the land within the greatest distance from the watercourse NA 

marked by the SEWRPC primary or secondary environmental corridor boundary; the 

100-year regulatory flood-plain boundary; the edge of an adjoining wetland; or 75 feet 

from the watercourse channel or shoreline.

Perennial streams NA

Intermittent streams NA

Sewerline locations that are part of the Metropolitan Interceptor System (MIS) N

Sewerline location that are part of the Inline Storage System (ISS), otherwise known as N

the "Deep Tunnel"

Sewerline locations that are part of the Near Surface Collector System (NSC) NA

Sewerline locations that are part of the Combined Sewer Overflow (CSO) NA

Land use/land cover

Land use

Historical urban growth

Vegetation

Wildlife habitat

1963, 1970, 

1975, 1980, 

1985, 1990, 

1995

1995

1985, 1995

1985, 1995

SEWRPC

SEWRPC

SEWRPC

SEWRPC

Land use 1:

Historical urban growth 1 :

Vegetation 1

Wildlife habitat 1
Table 4. Selected GIS Coverages available for the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area—Continued

[NA, not available, MMSD, Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District; SEWRPC, Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission; USGS, U.S. Geological Surve

Natural Resources; GMUs, Geographic Management Units; DEM, digital elevation model; LICGF, Land Information and Computer Graphics Facility; SSURGO, Soil Surv

State Soil Geographic Survey; USDA, U.S. Department of Agriculture; NRCS, National Resources Conservation Service; WGNHS, Wisconsin Geologic and Natural History 

Protection Agency; DLGs, digital line graphs; MIS, Metropolitan Interceptor System; ISS, Inline Storage System; NSC, Near Surface Collector System; CSO, combined se

Altitude Photography; WISCLAND, Wisconsin Initiative for Statewide Cooperation on Landscape Analysis and Data; NLCD, National Land Cover Data; GIRAS, Geograp

sis; LUDA, Land Use Data Analysis]

Data set name

Source 

year

Data 

provider

Description 

Land use/land cover — Continued

Pre-european settlement vegetation

Regional land-use plan

Parks and open space sites

Public lands

Land use and land cover

1836

2010, 2020

NA

1990, 1995

1970's - 

1980's

SEWRPC

SEWRPC

SEWRPC

SEWRPC

WDNR

Pre-European-settlement vegetation

Regional land-use plan

Parks and open space locations

Public lands by county. Data for Milwaukee, Ozaukee, and Racine from 1995; data for 

Washington and Waukesha from 1990

Land-use land-cover data are derived from the U.S. Geological Survey Land Use and 

Land Cover digital dataset at 1 :250,000 scale. Land surface features were interpreted by

1:

1:

1:

1:

1:

Original vegetation cover 

WISCLAND land cover

mid-1800's WDNR 

1993 WDNR

the USGS using National Aeronautics and Space Administration high-altitude aerial photographs, and National High-Altitude Photography (NHAP) program photographs at 

scales of 1:60,000 or smaller.

Original vegetation cover data was digitized from a 1976 map created from land survey 

notes written in the mid-1800s when Wisconsin was first surveyed

WISCLAND (Wisconsin Initiative for Statewide Cooperation on Landscape Analysis and 

Data) state land-use data was interpreted from land cover from satellite images. More 

information is available at URL http://www.dnr.state.wi.us/org/at/et/geo/data/wlc.htm

1:

30 

National Land Cover Data (NLCD) 1992 USGS National Land Cover Data (NLCD) developed from early to mid-90s Landsat Thematic 30 

Mapper satellite data with 21 classes of land cover. More information is available at URL 

http://landcover.usgs.gov/natllandcover.html

Population

1990 Census

2000 Census

1990

2000

Geolytics

Geolytics

Data describing population statistics from the year 1990 U.S. Census. NA

Data describing population statistics from the year 2000 U.S. Census. NA

Other

Aerial photography

Environmental corridors

Natural areas and critical species habitat

1963, 1967, 

1970, 1975, 

1980, 1985, 

1990, 1995,

2000

1990, 1995

NA

SEWRPC

SEWRPC

SEWRPC

Aerial photography. More information is available at URL http://www.sewrpc.org/aerial- NA 

sandmaps/aerials.shtm

Inventory of environmental corridors 1 :

Natural areas and critical species habitat 1 :
Table 4. Selected GIS Coverages available for the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area—Continued

[NA, not available, MMSD, Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District; SEWRPC, Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission; USGS, U.S. Geological Survey

Natural Resources; GMUs, Geographic Management Units; DEM, digital elevation model; LICGF, Land Information and Computer Graphics Facility; SSURGO, Soil Surve

State Soil Geographic Survey; USDA, U.S. Department of Agriculture; NRCS, National Resources Conservation Service; WGNHS, Wisconsin Geologic and Natural History 

Protection Agency; DLGs, digital line graphs; MIS, Metropolitan Interceptor System; ISS, Inline Storage System; NSC, Near Surface Collector System; CSO, combined sew

Altitude Photography; WISCLAND, Wisconsin Initiative for Statewide Cooperation on Landscape Analysis and Data; NLCD, National Land Cover Data; GIRAS, Geograph

sis; LUDA, Land Use Data Analysis]

Data set name

Source 

year

Data 

provider

Description 

Other—Continued

Water Permit Compliance System (PCS) 2001 USEPA 

Toxic Release Inventory (TRI) 2001 USEPA

Wastewater outfalls 2002 WDNR

Water discharge permits, locations and associated descriptions. More information is Va

available at URL http://www.epa.gov/enviro/html/pcs/pcs query java.html

Locations of and descriptions of toxic chemical releases and other waste-management Va

activities, which are reported annually by certain industry groups and Federal facilities. 

More information is available at URL http://www.epa.gov/tri/

Locations of wastewater-outfall locations in Wisconsin Var

For more information on SEWRPC data, see http://www.sewrpc.org/data publications/default.htm 

2SEWRPC counties include Kenosha, Milwaukee, Ozaukee, Racine, Walworth, Washington, Waukesha.

For more information on WDNR Geographic data, see http://www.dnr.state.wi.us/org/at/et/geo/. Data descriptions of WDNR data taken in part from metadata describi

that Web site.

Printed on recycled paper