U.S. Department of the Interior

U.S. Geological Survey

Scientific Investigations Report 2007–5084

In cooperation with the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District

Water-Quality Characteristics for Selected Sites within 

the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning 

Area, Wisconsin,February 2004–September 2005

Water-Quality Characteristics for 

Selected Sites within the Milwaukee 

Metropolitan Sewerage District 

Planning Area, Wisconsin,

February 2004–September 2005

By Judith C. Thomas, Michelle A. Lutz, Jennifer L. Bruce, David J. Graczyk, 

Kevin D. Richards, David P. Krabbenhoft, Stephen M. Westenbroek,

Barbara C. Scudder, Daniel J. Sullivan, and Amanda H. Bell 

In cooperation with the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District

Scientifi c Investigations Report 2007–5084

U.S. Department of the Interior

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

DIRK KEMPTHORNE, Secretary

U.S. Geological Survey

Mark D. Myers, Director

U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia: 2007

For product and ordering information:

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

Telephone: 1-888-ASK-USGS

For more information on the USGS—the Federal source for science about the Earth, its natural and living 

resources, natural hazards, and the environment:

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

Telephone: 1-888-ASK-USGS

Any use of trade, product, or firm names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the 

U.S. Government.

Although this report is in the public domain, permission must be secured from the individual copyright owners to 

reproduce any copyrighted materials contained within this report.

Suggested citation:

Thomas, J.C., Lutz, M.A., and others, 2007, Water-quality characteristics for selected sites within the 

Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, Wisconsin, February 2004–September 2005: 

U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2007–5084, 187 p.
iii

Contents

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

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

Purpose and Scope ..................................................................................................................... 4

Study Design, Sample Collection, and Results of Quality Assurance .......................................... 5

Land Use and Phase II Sites ...................................................................................................... 5

Collection of Stage and Discharge Data .................................................................................. 7

Manual Water-Quality Sampling ............................................................................................... 7

Mercury Sampling ............................................................................................................ 11

Microbiological Sampling ............................................................................................... 13

Bed-Sediment Sampling .................................................................................................. 13

Water-Column-Toxicity Sampling ................................................................................... 14

Biological, Habitat Assessment, and Fish-Tissue Toxicity Sampling ....................... 14

Semipermeable Membrane Device Sampling from the National 

Water-Quality Assessment Program................................................................ 14

Automated Water-Quality Sampling ....................................................................................... 15

Quality Assurance and Quality Control ................................................................................. 15

Special Cases of Quality Control for Selected Constituents .................................... 19

Microbiological ....................................................................................................... 19

Bed Sediment .......................................................................................................... 23

Water-Column Toxicity ............................................................................................ 23

Evaluation of Data Collected During Phase II ................................................................................ 25

Hydrologic Conditions During the Study Period ................................................................... 27

Precipitation....................................................................................................................... 27

Discharge and Runoff ...................................................................................................... 27

Results from Manually and Automatically Collected Samples ......................................... 29

Chloride............................................................................................................................... 29

Loads, Yields, and Volumetrically Weighted Concentrations of Chloride ...... 33

Nutrients and Chlorophyll a ............................................................................................ 35

Total Nitrogen ........................................................................................................... 36

Nitrate ....................................................................................................................... 40

Total Phosphorus ..................................................................................................... 44

Loads, Yields, and Volumetrically Weighted Concentrations of 

Total Phosphorus ............................................................................... 48

Chlorophyll a ............................................................................................................. 48

Suspended Sediment ....................................................................................................... 52

Loads, Yields, and Volumetrically Weighted Concentrations of 

Suspended Sediment ................................................................................. 54

Mercury .............................................................................................................................. 57

Total Mercury ........................................................................................................... 57

Methylmercury ......................................................................................................... 59
iv

Indicator Organisms ......................................................................................................... 60

Fecal Coliforms ......................................................................................................... 60

Escherichia coli ........................................................................................................ 64

Coliphage .................................................................................................................. 67

Groups II and III .............................................................................................. 70

Pathogenic Organisms ..................................................................................................... 73

 Escherichia coli O157:H7 ....................................................................................... 73

Salmonella ................................................................................................................ 73

Detection Frequencies ................................................................................... 74

Concentrations ................................................................................................ 76

Giardia ....................................................................................................................... 76

Detection Frequencies ................................................................................... 76

Concentrations ................................................................................................ 79

Cryptosporidium ...................................................................................................... 79

Detection Frequencies ................................................................................... 80

Concentrations ................................................................................................ 80

Pesticides ........................................................................................................................... 82

Wastewater Compounds ................................................................................................. 83

Detection Frequencies ............................................................................................ 83

Response to Flow and Seasonality ....................................................................... 94

Dominant Constituents in Wastewater Compound Classes ........................... 100

Endocrine-Disrupting Chemicals ........................................................................ 102

Semipermeable Membrane Devices and Wastewater Compounds ...................... 104

Bed Sediment .................................................................................................................. 106

Physical Characteristics of Sediment-Trap Contents ...................................... 106

Comparison of Sites by Use of Average Effect Concentrations..................... 107

Comparison of Sites by Use of Individual Contaminant Effects 

Concentrations ......................................................................................... 108

Comparison of Sites by Use of Total Phosphorus Enrichment ....................... 111

Water-Column Toxicity ................................................................................................... 112

Fish Tissues ...................................................................................................................... 112

Bioassessment ............................................................................................................... 115

Fish Results ............................................................................................................. 115

Macroinvertebrate Results .................................................................................. 117

Algae Results .......................................................................................................... 122

Relations among Habitat Variables and Biotic Communities ......................... 124

Relations between Stream Biological Metrics, Site Characteristics, and 

Water-Quality Data............................................................................................ 128

Potential Areas for Data Collection in Phase III .......................................................................... 133

Summary ............................................................................................................................................ 133

Summary of Relations between Biological Metrics, Site Characteristics, and 

Water-Quality Data..................................................................................................... 133

Findings for Harbor Sites and the Milwaukee River at Mouth at Milwaukee Site ....... 134

Phase I–Phase II Comparisons ............................................................................................. 134

References ........................................................................................................................................ 136

Appendixes ........................................................................................................................................ 141
v

Appendixes

Appendix 1. Land-use classes from Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning 

Commission and Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources WISCLAND 

land-cover data sets ........................................................................................................... 142

Appendix 2a–b. Descriptions of methods for harbor-site sampling and mercury 

sampling. ............................................................................................................................... 143

Appendix 3. Water-quality properties and constituents, reporting levels,

and analyzing laboratories ................................................................................................ 145

Appendix 4. Assignment of season and flow conditions, by site and by sampling

event, for Phase II sampling in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage

District planning area, Wisconsin, 2004–05 .................................................................... 158

Appendix 5. Comparison of median constituent concentrations and detections 

between Phase I and Phase II of the MMSD Corridor Study ...................................... 160

Appendix 6. Hydrologic conditions during Phase II of the Milwaukee 

Metropolitan Sewerage District Corridor Study ............................................................ 169
vi

Figures

1–2. Maps showing:

 1. Locations of sites sampled during Phase II in the Milwaukee

Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, Wis. ........................................... 3 

 2. Land use/land cover and stream-site drainage-area boundaries for

stream sites sampled during Phase II of the Milwaukee Metropolitan 

Sewerage District Corridor Study. ........................................................................... 8 

 3. Graph showing land use for Phase II sites of the Milwaukee Metropolitan 

Sewerage District Corridor Study ..................................................................................... 9 

 4. Map showing locations and characteristics of Phase II sampling sites,

and locations of National Weather Service precipitation gages in the

Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, Wis. ............................. 10 

 5. Chart showing timeline of data-collection activities for Phase II of the

Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Corridor Study ...................................... 12 

 6. Photograph showing sediment traps used for collection of bed-sediment

samples during Phase II of the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage Dis trict 

Corridor Study .................................................................................................................... 13 

7–12. Graphs showing:

 7. Inter-laboratory correlation between Phase II results for A, fecal coliform 

concentrations, and B, Escherichia coli concentra tions from samples 

analyzed at the Wisconsin State Laboratory of Hygiene and Milwaukee 

Metropolitan Sewerage District ............................................................................. 22

 8. Distribution of chloride concentrations, by site, in the Milwaukee 

Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, Wis. ......................................... 30

 9. Median chloride concentrations plotted against percent urban land use

in drainage basins for 15 stream sites in the Milwau kee Metropolitan 

Sewerage District planning area, Wis. ................................................................. 31

 10. Distributions of chloride concentrations for stream and harbor samples, 

Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District plan ning area, Wis ..................... 32

 11. Distribution of total nitrogen concentrations, by site, in the Milwaukee 

Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, Wis. ......................................... 37

 12. Distributions of total nitrogen concentrations for stream and harbor 

samples, Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning 

area, Wis. ................................................................................................................... 38

 13. Map showing Phase I and Phase II comparison of medi an total nitrogen 

concentrations in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning 

area, Wis. ............................................................................................................................ 39 

14–15. Graphs showing:

 14. Distribution of nitrate concentrations, by site, in the Milwaukee

Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, Wis. ......................................... 41 

 15. Distributions of nitrate concentrations for stream and harbor samples, 

Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, Wis ..................... 42

 16. Map showing Phase I and Phase II comparison of median nitrate

concentrations in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning 

area, Wis. ............................................................................................................................ 43
vii

17–18. Graphs showing:

 17. Distribution of total phosphorus concentrations, by site, in the

Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, Wis ..................... 45 

 18. Distributions of total phosphorus concentrations for stream and

harbor samples, Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning

area, Wis. ................................................................................................................... 46

 19. Map showing Phase I and Phase II comparison of median total phosphorus 

concentrations in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage Dis trict planning 

area, Wis. ............................................................................................................................ 47

20–52. Graphs showing:

 20. Distribution of chlorophyll a concentrations, by site, in the Milwaukee 

Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, Wis. ......................................... 50

 21. Distributions of chlorophyll a concentrations for stream and harbor 

samples, Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning 

area, Wis. ................................................................................................................... 51

 22. Distribution of suspended-sediment concentrations, by site, in the 

Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, Wis. .................... 52

 23. Distributions of suspended-sediment concentrations for stream and

harbor samples, Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning

area, Wis. ................................................................................................................... 53

 24. Median dissolved total mercury concentrations plotted against percent 

urban land use in site drainage basins for 15 stream sites in the

Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, Wis. .................... 57

 25. Median concentrations of total mercury, by site, in the Milwaukee 

Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, Wis. ......................................... 58

 26. Median concentrations of methylmercury, by site, in the Milwaukee 

Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, Wis. ......................................... 59 

 27. Median concentrations of fecal coliform plotted against percent urban 

land use in site drainage basins for 15 stream sites in the Milwaukee 

Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, Wis. ......................................... 61

 28. Distribution of fecal coliform concentrations, by site, in the Milwaukee 

Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, Wis. ......................................... 62

 29. Distributions of fecal coliform concentrations for stream and harbor

sites, Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District plan ning area, Wis. ......... 63

 30. Median concentrations of E. coli plotted against percent urban land 

use in site drainage basins for 15 stream sites in the Milwaukee 

Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, Wis. ......................................... 64

 31. Distribution of E. coli concentrations, by site, in the Milwaukee

Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, Wis. ......................................... 65

 32. Distributions of E. coli concentrations for stream and harbor sites, 

Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, Wis ..................... 66

 33. Median concentrations of coliphage plotted against percent urban 

land use in site drainage basins for 15 stream sites in the Milwaukee 

Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, Wis. ......................................... 67

 34. Distribution of coliphage concentrations, by site, in the Milwaukee 

Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, Wis. ......................................... 68

 35. Distributions of coliphage concentrations for stream and harbor sites, 

Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, Wis. .................... 69
viii

Figures (cont.)

 36. Detection frequency of coliphage groups II and (or) III in samples,

by site, in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage Dis trict planning

area, Wis. ................................................................................................................... 71 

 37. Detection frequencies of coliphage groups II and (or) III detections for 

stream and harbor sites, Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District 

planning area, Wis. ................................................................................................... 72

 38. Detection frequencies and concentrations of Salmonella in samples,

by site, in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning

area, Wis. ................................................................................................................... 74

 39. Detection frequencies and concentrations of Salmonella for stream

sites, Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District plan ning area, Wis. ......... 75

 40. Detection frequencies and concentrations of Giardia in samples by site

in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, Wis. ......... 77

 41. Detection frequencies and concentrations of Giardia for stream and

harbor sites, Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning

area, Wis. ................................................................................................................... 78

 42. Detection frequencies and concentrations of Cryptosporidium in

samples, by site, in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District

planning area, Wis. ................................................................................................... 80

 43. Detection frequencies and concentrations of Cryptosporidium for stream

and harbor sites, Milwaukee Metropolitan Sew erage District planning

area, Wis. ................................................................................................................... 81

 44. Detection frequencies of selected classes of Group 1 wastewater 

compounds (polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, antioxidants, 

plasticizers, dyes and pigments, and fire retardants), by site, in the 

Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, Wis ..................... 90

 45. Detection frequencies of Group 2 solvent and fuel wastewatercompound classes, by site, in the Milwaukee Metro politan

Sewerage District planning area, Wis. ................................................................. 91 

 46. Detection frequencies of Group 3 insecticide and herbicide 

wastewater-compound classes, by site, in the Milwau kee Metropolitan

Sewerage District planning area, Wis. ................................................................. 92

 47. Detection frequencies of selected classes of Group 4 wastewater 

compounds (flavors and fragrances, nonpre scription human

drugs, antimicrobial disinfectants, detergent metabolites, and sterols),

by site, in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning

area, Wis. ................................................................................................................... 93

 48. Detection frequency of stream samples with wastewater-compound

detections during high-and low-flow periods, by WWC class, in the 

Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, Wis. .................... 96

 49. Detection frequency of stream samples with wastewater-compound

detections, by season and WWC class, in the Milwaukee Metropolitan 

Sewerage District planning area, Wis. ................................................................. 97

 50. Detection frequency of stream samples with wastewater-compound

detections during low-flow periods, by season and WWC class, in the 

Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, Wis. .................... 98
ix

 51. Detection frequency of stream samples with wastewater-compound

detections during high-flow periods, by sea son and WWC class, in the 

Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, Wis. .................... 99

 52. Detection frequency of harbor samples with wastewater-compound 

detections, by season and WWC class, in the Milwaukee Metropolitan 

Sewerage District planning area, Wis. ............................................................... 101 

 53. Map showing distribution and frequency of known and suspected 

endocrine-disrupting compounds in the Milwaukee Metropoli tan Sewerage 

District planning area, Wis ............................................................................................. 103

54–59. Graphs showing:

 54. Mass and particle-size distribution of sediment captured in Phase II 

sediment traps in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewer age District

planning area, Wis .................................................................................................. 106

 55. Particle-size distribution in sediment-trap samples, by Phase II

sampling location, in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewer age District 

planning area, Wis .................................................................................................. 107

 56. Number of consensus-based threshold effect concentration 

exceedences and the mean consensus-based probable effects 

concentration quotients for contaminants in sediments from the 

Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, Wis ................... 108

 57. Consensus-based probable effects concentration quotients for

nine contaminants in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District 

planning area, Wis .................................................................................................. 109 

 58. Total phosphorus enrichment factor relative to background upland 

soil concentrations in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sew erage District

planning area, Wis .................................................................................................. 111

 59. Fish Index of Biotic Integrity scores plotted against percent urban

land use in site drainage basins for 15 stream sites in the Milwaukee 

Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, Wis. ....................................... 116

 60. Map showing sites sampled for macroinvertebrates with percent

Ephemeroptera, Plecoptera, and Trichoptera taxa in the Milwau kee 

Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, Wis. ................................................ 119

 61. Graph showing percent Ephemeroptera, Plecoptera, and Trichoptera 

taxa plotted against percent urban land use in site drainage basins for 

15 stream sites in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District 

planning area, Wis. .......................................................................................................... 120 

 62. Map showing sites sampled for macroinvertebrates with Hilsenhoff 

Biotic Index in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning 

area, Wis. .......................................................................................................................... 121

63–65. Graphs showing: 

 63. A modified Hilsenhoff Biotic Index (HBI-10) plotted against percent

urban land use in site drainage basins for 15 stream sites in the 

Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, Wis. .................. 122 

 64. Percentage of diatoms in pollution-tolerance classes in the 

Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, Wis. .................. 125 

 65. Percent pollution-sensitive diatoms plotted against percent urban 

land use in site drainage basins for 15 stream sites in the Milwaukee 

Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, Wis. ....................................... 125 
x

 Tables 

 1A. Basin characteristics and streamflow statistics for stream sites sampled 

during Phase II of the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District 

Corridor Study ...................................................................................................................... 6 

 1B. Harbor sites sampled during Phase II of the Milwaukee Metropolitan 

Sewerage District Corridor Study ..................................................................................... 7 

 2. List of properties and constituents analyzed during Phase II of the 

Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Corridor Study ...................................... 11 

 3. Results of constituent detections in field blanks during Phase II of the 

Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Corridor Study ...................................... 16 

 4. Results of replicated sample issues during Phase II of the Milwaukee 

Metropolitan Sewerage District Corridor Study ........................................................... 18 

 5. Replicate results for indicator organisms analyzed by Wisconsin State 

Laboratory of Hygiene during Phase II of the Milwau kee Metropolitan 

Sewerage District Corridor Study ................................................................................... 20

 6. Replicate results for pathogenic organisms during Phase II of the 

Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Corridor Study. ..................................... 21

 7. Relative percent differences in sediment-trap results for six sites in Phase II 

of the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage Dis trict Corridor Study .......................... 24 

 8. Comparison of the Phase I subwatersheds to Phase II sites of the 

Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Cor ridor Study ...................................... 26 

 9. Monthly and water-year totals for rain gages in the Milwaukee Metropolitan 

Sewerage District planning area, Wis. .......................................................................... 28

 10. Median results for field measurements, major inorganics, and alkalinity 

that did not indicate any unusual water-quality pat terns ........................................... 29

 11. Annual chloride load and yield, average daily chloride yield, total water 

flow, and volumetric total chloride concentrations for four Phase II sites in 

the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, Wis. ...................... 33

 12. Monthly and annual chloride loads for four Phase II sites in the Milwaukee 

Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, Wis., for water years 2004 

and 2005 ............................................................................................................................... 34

 13. Estimated nutrient concentrations in reference streams for the area 

encompassing the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning

area, Wis. ............................................................................................................................ 35

 14. Annual total phosphorus load and yield, average daily phosphorus yield, 

total water flow, and volumetric total phosphorus concentrations for four 

Phase II sites in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning 

area, Wis. ............................................................................................................................ 48

 15. Monthly and annual total phosphorus loads for four Phase II sites in

the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District plan ning area, Wis., for

water years 2004 and 2005 ............................................................................................... 49 

 16. Annual suspended-sediment load and yield, average daily sediment yield, 

total water flow, and volumetrically weighted sediment concentrations for 

four Phase II sites in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District

planning area, Wis. ............................................................................................................ 55 

 17. Monthly and annual suspended-sediment loads for four Phase II sites in 

the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, Wis., for

water years 2004 and 2005 ............................................................................................... 56 
xi

 18. Summary of detections and nondetections of wastewater compounds at

all Phase II sites in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning

area, Wis. ............................................................................................................................ 83 

 19. Grouping of wastewater-compound classes for Phase II of the Milwaukee 

Metropolitan Sewerage District Corridor Study ........................................................... 84

 20. Summary of analtyical results of stream and harbor sites sampled for 

wastewater compounds during Phase II of the Milwaukee Metropolitan 

Sewerage District Corridor Study ................................................................................... 85

 21. Detection frequencies for Phase II wastewater compounds analysis 

in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, Wis. .................. 95 

 22. Results for toxicity tests and selected chemical analyses of semipermeable membrane device extracts and detection frequencies for 

Phase II wastewater-compounds analysis at seven sites in the Milwaukee 

Metropolitan Sewer age District .................................................................................... 105

 23. Maximum total polychlorinated biphenyl concentrations in sediment-trap 

samples for 15 Phase II stream sites col lected during two surveys of the 

Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Corridor Study .................................... 110

 24. Percent effects in samples with readings at or above 20 percent for all 

Phase II sites in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewer age District planning 

area, Wis. .......................................................................................................................... 112

 25. Summary of chemical analysis of whole fish at three Phase II stream sites 

of the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Corridor Study, during 

one-time surveys conducted in October, 2004 ............................................................ 113

 26. Biotic integrity ratings for Index of Biotic Integrity score ........................................ 115

 27. Fish-community information from one-time surveys conducted during July, 

August, and October 2004, for 14 Phase II stream sites in the Milwaukee 

Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, Wis. ................................................ 116

 28. Water-quality ratings for Hilsenhoff Biotic Index and HBI-10 values ..................... 117 

 29. Macroinvertebrate community information from one-time surveys 

conducted during August and September 2004, for 14 Phase II stream 

sites in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, Wis. ...... 118 

 30. Algal-community results from one-time surveys conducted in August and 

September 2004, for 14 Phase II stream sites in the Milwaukee Metropolitan 

Sewerage District planning area, Wis ......................................................................... 123 

 31. Correlations among metrics of aquatic biology and selected habitat 

metrics for Phase II of the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District 

Corridor Study .................................................................................................................. 126

 32. Average trophic-level rankings and aggregate bioassessment rankings 

for Phase II stream sites in the Milwaukee Metro politan Sewerage 

District planning area, Wis ............................................................................................. 129

 33. Summarized results of Phase II constituents, grouped by aggregate 

bioassessment ranking in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage 

District planning area, Wis ............................................................................................. 130
xii

Conversion Factors and Abbreviations

Multiply By To obtain

Length

inch (in.) 2.54 centimeter (cm)

foot (ft) 0.3048 meter (m)

mile (mi) 1.609 kilometer (km)

Area

square mile (mi2

) 2.590 square kilometer (km2) 

Volume

milliliter (mL) 0.03381 ounce, fluid (fl. oz)

liter (L) 0.2642 gallon (gal) 

Flow rate

cubic foot per second (ft3

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

Mass

gram (g) 0.03527 ounce, avoirdupois (oz) 

pound, avoirdupois (lb) 0.4536 kilogram (kg) 

ton, short (2,000 lb) 0.9072 megagram (Mg) 

pound per square mile (lb/mi2

) 0.1751 kilogram per square kilometer 

(kg/km2

)

ton per square mile (ton/mi2

) 0.3503 megagram per square kilometer 

(Mg/km2

)

ton per day per square mile 

[(ton/d)/mi2

]

 0.3503 megagram per day per square

kilometer [(Mg/d)/km2]

Temperature in degrees Celsius (°C) may be converted to degrees Fahrenheit (°F) as 

follows:

 °F=(1.8×°C)+32

Specific conductance is given in microsiemens per centimeter at 25 degrees Celsius 

(μS/cm at 25°C).

Concentrations of chemical constituents in water are given either in milligrams per 

liter (mg/L), micrograms per liter (μg/L), or nanograms per liter (ng/L). Concentrations of 

chemical constituents in sediment are given in milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg) and in fish 

tissue are given in micrograms per gram (μg/g).

Concentrations of microbiological constituents in water are given in the following units: 

fecal coliform bacteria, colonies per 100 milliliters (col/100 mL); Escherichia coli and 

Salmonella, most probable number per 100 milliliters (MPN/100 mL); coliphage, plaques per 

100 milliliters (plaques/100 mL); Giardia, cysts per 100 liters (cysts/100 L); Cryptosporidium, 

oocysts per 100 liters (oocysts/100 L).

Reporting level refers to the minimum concentrations reported by laboratories for analytical 

results. In this report, reporting level is used as a general term encompassing more 

specific reporting standards (for example, minimum reporting level, interim reporting level, 

method detection limit, detection level, etc.). For detailed information regarding specific 

constituents, please consult with the analyzing laboratory listed in appendix 3.
xiii

Other Abbreviations

DF Detection frequency

EDC Endocrine-disrupting compound

EPT Ephemeroptera-Plecoptera-Trichoptera taxa

HBI Hilsenhoff Biotic Index

IBI Index of Biotic Integrity

LOD Level of detection

MPN Most probable number

PAH Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon

PCB Polychlorinated biphenyl

PEC Probable effects concentration

RPD Relative percent difference

SPMD Semipermeable membrane device

TEC Threshold effect concentration

VOC Volatile organic compound

VW Volumetrically weighted

WWC Wastewater compound
xiv

Acknowledgments

Technical Reviewers

Dale M. Robertson, Research Hydrologist (Chemistry), U.S. Geological Survey, 

Middleton, Wis.

Herbert S. Garn, Assistant Center Director, U.S. Geological Survey, Middleton, Wis.

Eric Waldmer, Water Resources/Aquatic Biology Supervisor,

Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District, Milwaukee, Wis.

Chris Magruder, Community and Environmental Liaison,

Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District, Milwaukee, Wis.

Editorial and Graphics

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

S. Bridgett Marsh, Hydrologist, U.S. Geological Survey, Middleton, Wis.

Michelle Greenwood, Geographer, U.S. Geological Survey, Middleton, Wis.

Data Collection

Troy D. Rutter, Hydrologic Technician, U.S. Geological Survey, Middleton, Wis.

Krista A. Stensvold, Hydrologist, U.S. Geological Survey, Middleton, Wis.

Timothy L. Hanson, Hydrologic Technician, U.S. Geological Survey, Middleton, Wis.

U.S. Geological Survey and Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District field and 

laboratory personnel

Approving Official

Dorothy H. Tepper, Northeast Region Reports Improvement Advisor, U.S. Geological 

Survey, Reston, Va. 
Water-Quality Characteristics for Selected 

Sites within the Milwau kee Metropolitan 

Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin, 

February 2004–September 2005

By Judith C. Thomas, Michelle A. Lutz, Jennifer L. Bruce, David J. Graczyk, Kevin D. Richards, 

David P. Krabbenhoft, Stephen M. Westenbroek, Barbara C. Scudder, Daniel J. Sullivan, 

and Amanda H. Bell

Abstract

The Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage Dis trict 

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

to improve the understanding of water resources in the 

MMSD planning area to assist managers and policy makers in their decisions. Phase I of the Study involved the 

compilation of existing data from multiple agencies into 

a single database. These data were analyzed to identify 

spatial, temporal, and technological gaps in the planning 

area, and were used to develop Phase II of the Study. Phase 

II, the subject of this report, involved an intensive data-collection effort by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) in 

cooperation with MMSD (from February, 2004, through 

September, 2005). This phase addressed the data gaps 

identified in Phase I and completed a baseline assessment 

of water quality for selected stream and harbor sites in the 

MMSD planning area. This baseline assessment included 

evaluations of surface-water chemistry and microbial 

concentrations in the streams and harbor sites; additionally, stream sites were evaluated for discharge, sediment 

chemistry, fish-tissue chemistry, habitat, and the quality 

of biological communities (including fish, macroinvertebrates, and algae). In all, data were collected at 15 stream 

and 6 harbor sites within the MMSD planning area, 

including manual sampling and analysis for more than 220 

water-quality properties and constituents at all 21 sites, 

stream-discharge data for 14 stream sites, and automated 

water-quality sampling at 4 stream sites. A bioassessment 

during autumn 2004 included collection of biologic-community data and stream-habitat data at wadeable streams. 

Quartiles of Phase II aggregate bioassessment rankings were used to divide the 14 wadeable stream sites into 

four groups to investigate relations between bioassessment 

data and site characteristic and water-quality data. Quartile 

numbers reflect relative water quality: quartile 1 contained 

sites where the bioassessment data indicated the leastdegraded water quality among those sampled, and quartile 

4 contained sites that indicated the most-degraded water 

quality. Quartiles contained the following stream sites:

Quartile 1: Milwaukee River near Cedarburg, 

Milwaukee River at Milwaukee, Jewel Creek, 

and Menomonee River at Menomonee Falls;

Quartile 2: Willow Creek, Root River near 

Franklin, and Root River at Grange Avenue;

Quartile 3: Menomonee River at Wauwatosa, 

Oak Creek, and Little Menomonee River; and

Quartile 4: Honey Creek, Underwood Creek, 

Lincoln Creek, and Kinnickinnic River.

Site characteristics (in this case, drainage area and land 

use) and selected water-quality data were summarized 

based on the four bioassessment quartiles to determine 

if there were relations with the aggregate bioassessment 

rankings. In general, sites having the largest drainage 

basins with the lowest proportion of urban land use were in 

quartile 1, and the smallest drainage basins with the highest proportion of urban land use were in quartile 4. Major 

ions, indicator organisms, and wastewater compounds 

generally had the lowest overall results in quartile 1 and 

highest overall results in quartile 4, with intermediate 

results in quartiles 2 and 3. Results for other constituent 

types (nutrients, mercury, pathogenic organisms, and bed 

sediment) were mixed, with results for some constituents 

decreasing from quartile 1 to quartile 4. 

•

•

•

•
Where sufficient Phase I data were available, summary statistics (including medians) for chemical and 

biological data were calculated, allowing some comparisons to be made between Phase I and Phase II data. Comparisons between Phase I and Phase II results indicated a 

variety of changes with respect to water quality. Concentrations of chloride, nitrate, chlorophyll a, total phosphorus 

in water; arsenic in bed sediment; and fish Index of Biotic 

Integrity ratings generally indicated declines in water quality. However, concentrations of total nitrogen, suspended 

sediment, and fecal coliform in water; some trace elements 

(cadmium, chromium, copper, lead, mercury, nickel, and 

zinc) in bed sediment; Ephemeroptera-Plecoptera-Trichoptera taxa and Hilsenhoff Biotic Index ratings indicated 

improvements in water quality between Phase I and 

Phase II. 

Polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) were measured in 

bed sediment (15 sites) and fish tissue (3 sites) to determine if there were changes in concentrations between 

Phase I and Phase II. PCB contamination of bed sediment 

and fish tissue was found during both Phase I and Phase II 

for the Milwaukee River at Milwaukee sampling site. PCB 

contamination of the Menomonee River at Wauwatosa 

site was limited to bed sediment during Phase I, but was 

found in both bed sediment and fish tissue during Phase II. 

Samples collected at Root River near Franklin contained 

no detectable concentrations of PCBs in fish tissue or bed 

sediment (data available for Phase II only). 

Historically used pesticides were measured in fish 

tissue at three sites to determine if there were changes in 

concentrations between Phase I and Phase II. Historically 

used pesticides were detected in fish tissue at the Milwaukee River at Milwaukee site during Phase I; however Phase 

II concentrations were less than the Phase I reporting level. 

Historically used pesticides were also detected in fish-tissue samples at the Menomonee River at Wauwatosa site 

during Phase II, while none were detected in Phase I. Root 

River near Franklin had no pesticide detections in fish tissue in Phase I or Phase II. 

Introduction 

Stream ecosystems are impacted by anthropogenic 

changes on the land surface. Stream-water quality and the 

quality of biological communities in urban-stream corridors are complex issues that drive research, regu lation, 

and the use of rivers and streams. Personnel from Federal, 

state, and local agencies and universities involved with 

such issues in south eastern Wisconsin have worked cooperatively to assess the recent history of urban streams and 

to use that knowledge to evaluate future stream-improvement projects. This collaboration will help the various 

parties to determine the likely success of proposed projects 

prior to implementation and will allow projects with 

greatest potential to receive priority. With the expertise of 

professionals from the planning, regu latory, and nonregulatory fields, as well as academicians and engineers, the 

Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage Dis trict (MMSD) Corridor Study has taken a broad-based approach to promote 

sound, resource-based management decisions (Schneider 

and others, 2004).

The MMSD Corridor Study is a three-phase project 

designed to improve the understanding of water resources 

in the MMSD planning area (fig. 1). This study is a collaborative effort by MMSD, the Wisconsin Department of 

Natural Resources (WDNR), the Southeastern Wisconsin 

Regional Planning Commission (SEWRPC), the U.S. 

Geological Survey (USGS), the University of WisconsinMilwaukee, Marquette University, and Wisconsin Lutheran 

College. The Corridor Study is designed to evaluate the 

quality of water resources and biological communities of 

stream corridors within the MMSD planning area and to 

provide information to assess the potential success of current and future projects.

An MMSD stream corridor is defined as the land 

between a natural or artificial channel and either (1) the 

SEWRPC primary or secondary environmental-corridor1

boundary, (2) the 100-year regulatory floodplain boundary, 

(3) the edge of an adjoining wetland, or (4) a distance of 

75 feet, whichever is the greatest distance from the stream 

channel or shoreline.

1 Areas of concentrated natural resources (for example, lakes, streams, 

undeveloped shorelands, and floodplains) delineated by SEWRPC and 

used to make development recommendations to local governments (University of Wisconsin—Extension and Southeastern Wisconsin Regional 

Planning Commission, 2004).

2 Water-Quality Characteristics for Selected Sites within the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin
EXPLANATION

Water

Area within the MMSD

planning area

Area outside of the 

MMSD planning area

Watershed boundary

Subwatershed boundary

Stream

Phase II streamsampling site

Phase II harborsampling site

North Mid-Harbor Milwaukee 

Outer Harbor Site (OH-04)

Southern Outside Harbor 

Breakwall Lake Site (OH-13)

Northern Outside Harbor 

Breakwall Lake Site (OH-12)

Middle Outside Harbor

Breakwall Lake Site (OH-14)

Middle Mid-Harbor Milwaukee

Outer Harbor Site (OH-03)

Oak Creek

at South Milwaukee

(OCSM)

Jewel Creek

at Muskego

(JCM)

Honey Creek at Wauwatosa (HCW)

Willow Creek at Maple Road

near Germantown

(WCG)

Lincoln Creek

at 47th Street

at Milwaukee

(LCM)

Underwood Creek

at Wauwatosa

(UCW)

South Mid-Harbor Milwaukee Outer Harbor Site (OH-11)

Kinnickinnic River

at S. 11th Street at Milwaukee

(KRM)

Little Menomonee River

at Milwaukee

(LMM)

Root River

near Franklin

(RRF)

Root River

at Grange Avenue

at Greenfield

(RRG)

Milwaukee River at Mouht at Milwaukee (MRJ)

Menomonee River

at Wauwatosa

(MRW)

Milwaukee River

at Milwaukee

(MRM

Milwaukee River

near Cedarburg

(MRC)

Menomonee River

at Menomonee Falls

(MRMF)

Oak Creek

at South Milwaukee

(OCSM)

Jewel Creek

at Muskego

(JCM)

Honey Creek at Wauwatosa (HCW)

Willow Creek at Maple Road

near Germantown

(WCG)

Lincoln Creek

at 47th Street

at Milwaukee

(LCM)

Underwood Creek

at Wauwatosa

(UCW)

South Mid-Harbor Milwaukee Outer Harbor Site (OH-11)

Kinnickinnic River

at S. 11th Street at Milwaukee

(KRM)

Little Menomonee River

at Milwaukee

(LMM)

Root River

near Franklin

(RRF)

Root River

at Grange Avenue

at Greenfield

(RRG)

Milwaukee River at Mouth at Milwaukee (MRJ)

Menomonee River

at Wauwatosa

(MRW)

Milwaukee River

at Milwaukee

(MRM)

Milwaukee River

near Cedarburg

(MRC)

Menomonee River

at Menomonee Falls

(MRMF)

FOX RIVE FOX RIVER

ROOT RIVE ROOT RIVER

MILWAUKEE RIVE MILWAUKEE RIVER

MENOMONEE

RIVER

ROCK RIVE ROCK RIVER

OAK CREE OAK CREEK

KINNICKINNIC

RIVER

DIRECT

TRIBUTAR TRIBUTARY

DIRECT

TRIBUTAR TRIBUTARY

LAKE

MICHIGAN

DIRECT

88°10' 87°50'

42°50' 43°10'

Lake Michigan

0 4 2 Miles

0 4 2 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, 1989; 

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.

WISCONSIN

MICHIGAN

ILLINOIS

IOWA

MINNESOTA

MMSD

planning area

Figure 1. Locations of sites sampled during Phase II in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District (MMSD) planning area, 

Wis. Site abbreviations listed in table 1.

Introduction 3
The objectives of the MMSD Corridor Study are the 

following:

 Evaluate historical results and assess potential 

effects of planned MMSD projects. Types of 

projects to be evaluated include, but are not limited 

to, historical and planned flood-control projects 

that involve the modifi cation of stream channels 

and (or) their corridors 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-pollutionabatement projects.

 Create a comprehensive inventory of corridor conditions. Develop an improved understanding of the 

interrelationship of stream physiographic, hydrologic, hydraulic, biologic, water-quality, sedi mentquality, habitat, and land-use variables.

 Establish a baseline assessment of existing stream 

and corridor conditions. Detect impair ments for 

each reach.

 Determine the existing and potential water-use 

objectives for stream reaches.

 Evaluate the success of flood-control, habitat, and 

water-quality improvement or protection projects; 

evaluate current technologies; and identify adjustments for future projects.

 Implement long-term surveillance of stream and 

corridor conditions to quantify project results, track 

changes in impaired and unimpaired reaches, provide additional inventory information, and facili tate 

early detection of newly impaired reaches. (Schneider and others, 2004)

The Study was designed to be completed in three 

phases. Phase I was a data compilation, review, and summary effort that involved the development of a database to 

store data collected in the stream corridors of the MMSD 

planning area from 1970 through 2002. No additional 

data were collected as part of Phase I. The MMSD Corridor Study database contains data from MMSD, USGS, 

WDNR, and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

(USEPA). A report prepared as part of Phase I summarized 

data in the database by subwatershed and identified data 

gaps in the planning area (Schneider and others, 2004; 

Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission, 

2002b). 

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

Phase II consisted of an intensive data-collection 

effort intended to fill in the data gaps identified in Phase 

I, including the prevalence of emerging contaminants not 

previously investigated (Schneider and others, 2004), to 

create a baseline assessment of stream corridor conditions 

in the MMSD planning area. Data collected during Phase 

II has been incorported into the MMSD Corridor Study 

database. Additional data sets, including some supplied 

by local uni versities and volunteer groups, continue to be 

incorporated into the database as they become available. 

The MMSD corridor database is available to those within 

the cooperating agencies to assist in informal decisionmaking pro cesses.

Phase III will involve data-collection efforts at a subset of the Phase II sites, focusing on specific investigations 

related to selected constituents. In addition, Phase III will 

continue to monitor the quality of biological communities 

to document changes in overall stream corridor condition. 

Purpose and Scope

This report summarizes the data collected as part of 

Phase II of the MMSD Corridor Study at 15 stream sites 

and 6 harbor sites in the MMSD planning area from February 2004 through September 2005. The objectives of Phase 

II were:

1. Identification of stream and harbor sites for data 

collection; 

2. Collection of discharge data for selected streams 

within the MMSD planning area; 

3. Collection of additional water-quality data; 

4. Computation of chloride, total phosphorus, and 

suspended sediment loads at four streams in the 

MMSD planning area; and 

5. Collection of biological-community and habitat data 

at wadeable stream sites.

Descriptions of Phase II study design, field and 

analytical methods, patterns of response to hydrology and 

seasons, and general comparisons to Phase I data summaries are also provided in this report.

Water-chemistry data were collected at all stream and 

harbor sites, and included measurements of chloride, nutrients, chlorphyll a, suspended sediment, mercury, indicator and pathogenic organisms, pesticides, and wastewater 

compounds. Sediment chemistry data were collected at all 

15 stream sites, and included total polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), total phosphorus, particle-grain size, arsenic, 

cadmium, chromium, copper, lead, mercury, nickel, and 

zinc. Biological data (fish-, macroinvertebrate-, and algalcommunity surveys; and habitat measures) and physical 

4 Water-Quality Characteristics for Selected Sites within the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin
data (discharge) were collected at the 14 wadeable stream 

sites. In addition to data collected in conjunction with the 

Phase II sampling effort, data for semi-permeable membrane devices (SPMDs) were collected in 2004 at or near 7 

of the Phase II sites by the USGS National Water-Quality 

Assessment Program Effects of Urbanization on Stream 

Ecosystem study.

Study Design, Sample Collection, 

and Results of Quality Assurance

Data collection during Phase II of the MMSD Corridor Study was a collaborative effort between USGS and 

MMSD field personnel. A total of 15 stream sites and 

6 harbor sites were sampled (fig. 1, tables 1A–B) during water years 2004 and 20052

. All stream sites were 

within the MMSD planning area. The site at the mouth 

of the Milwaukee River (Milwaukee River at Mouth at 

Milwaukee, 04087170) receives water from the Milwaukee, Menomonee, and Kinnickinnic River watersheds in 

addition to water from Lake Michigan (by way of reverse 

flow). Oak Creek and Root River both discharge directly 

into Lake Michigan south of the Milwaukee Harbor. Jewel 

Creek discharges into the Mississippi River by way of the 

Fox and Illinois Rivers. Of the six harbor sites sampled, 

three sites were inside the breakwall (inner harbor sites) 

and three sites were outside the breakwall (outer harbor 

sites). Samples were collected manually at all sites, and 

additional samples were collected automatically at four of 

the stream sites.

Land Use and Phase II Sites

Land use for Phase II stream-site drainage basins 

was determined by means of a Geographic Information 

System (GIS). Drainage-basin boundaries were primarily 

derived from the Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission (SEWRPC) Subbasin layer (2002a). For 

sites not on SEWRPC Subbasin boundaries (Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission, 2002a), 

USGS 1:24,000 topographic maps were used to delineate 

the most downstream boundary. Resulting polygons were 

intersected with land-use layers. Land-use information was 

derived primarily from the SEWRPC digital land-use layer 

(2000). This layer did not incorporate the most upstream 

parts of the Milwaukee River drainage basin; therefore, 

upstream parts of this drainage basin were obtained from 

the WISCLAND land-cover layer (Wisconsin Department 

of Natural Resources, 1998); resultant data were combined 

with data obtained from the SEWRPC digital land-use 

layer to yield land-use information for these sites (Milwaukee River near Cedarburg, Milwaukee River at Milwaukee, 

and Milwaukee River at Mouth). Data for each drainage 

basin were summarized into basic categories (appendix 1).

The 15 stream sites were selected to fill spatial, 

temporal, and technological data gaps identified in Phase I 

analysis. Sites spanned a wide range of drainage areas and 

land uses (table 1A, fig. 2). Drainage areas ranged from 

6.33 to 872 mi2

, while land use ranged from predominantly 

urban to predominantly agricultural and natural areas 

(fig. 3). Land-use types were highly correlated with one 

another; therefore it was not possible to observe the direct 

effects of individual land-use types (especially the types 

of urban land use). Urban land-use types were grouped 

together into a single total urban land-use category which 

was made up of transportation, residential, commercial, 

industrial, and other urban land uses. Because land-use 

types were highly correlated with one another, including 

natural area and agricultural land uses, all comparisons 

were made to total urban land use. Two Superfund sites in 

the Milwaukee area are discussed in this report in conjunction with Phase II site results: 

 Moss-American Co., Inc. (Kerr-McGee Oil 

Co.)(U.S. Environmental Protection Agency ID: 

WID039052626), Milwaukee. The types of contaminants at this site are polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) and volatile organic compounds 

(VOCs) in bed sediment. (U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, 2006c). This site is upstream 

of the Little Menomonee River site sampled during 

Phase II.

 Cedar Creek (U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency ID: WID988590261) at Cedarburg. This 

is a Superfund alternative site; primary contaminants at this site are PCBs in bed sediment (U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 2006b). Cedar 

Creek is a tributary to the Milwaukee River and is 

upstream from the Phase II Milwaukee River sites. 

There are three wastewater treatment plants 

(WWTPs) in the planning area: the Jones Island Wastewater Treatment Plant, the South Shore Wastewater Treatment Plant, and the City of South Milwaukee Wastewater 

Treatment Facility. None of these WWTPs discharge into 

streams sampled in Phase II. 

1.

2.

2 Water year is a 12-month period from October 1 through September 30, 

and is designated by the calendar year in which it ends (for example, the 

2004 water year occurred October 1, 2003 through September 30, 2004).

Study Design, Sample Collection, and Results of Quality Assurance 5
Table 1A. Basin characteristics and streamflow statistics for stream sites sampled during Phase II of the Milwaukee 

Metropolitan Sewerage District Corridor Study. 

[mi2, square mile; ft3/s, cubic foot per second; Q, discharge; WQ, water quality; --, not available; site locations shown in fig. 1]

Stream site name Site 

abbreviation Site number Drainage area (mi2

)

Period of 

discharge record

Percent exceedencec

(ft3

/s)

10 50 90

Milwaukee River near 

Cedarburga

MRC 04086600 607 1981–2005 965 276 113

Lincoln Creek at 47th Street at 

Milwaukee

LCM 040869416 (Q)

040869415 (WQ)

9.56 1993–95, 1997, 

2002–2004

28 3.9 1.5

Milwaukee River at 

Milwaukeea

MRM 04087000 690 1914–2005 985 231 73d

Willow Creek at Maple Road 

near Germantown

WCG 040870195 6.33 Miscellaneous 

measurements

-- -- --

Menomonee River at 

Menomonee Falls

MRMF 04087030 34.7 1974–1977, 

1979–2005

65 14 4.0

Little Menomonee River 

at Milwaukee

LMM 04087070 19.7 1975–77, 

2004–2005

37 4.3 0.54

Underwood Creek at 

Wauwatosa

UCW 04087088 18.2 1974–1979, 

1980–2005

30 6.9 3.0

Honey Creek at Wauwatosa HCW 04087119 10.3 1975–81, 

2004–2005

20 2.5 1.1

Menomonee River at 

Wauwatosaa

MRW 04087120 123 1961–2005 235 44 14d

Kinnickinnic River at 

S. 11th Street at Milwaukeea

KRM 04087159 18.8 1982–2005 48 9.2 5.3

Milwaukee River at Mouth 

at Milwaukeeb

MRJ 04087170 872 1994–96, 

2001–2002

-- -- --

Oak Creek at South Milwaukee OCSM 04087204 25.0 1963–2005 49 7.8 1.9

Root River at Grange Avenue 

at Greenfield

RRG 04087214 14.7 2004–2005 31 3.8 .81

Root River near Franklin RRF 04087220 49.2 1963–2005 92 16 4.3d

Jewel Creek at Muskego JCM 05544371 8.16 1999–2003 12 3.8 1.5

aAutomated sample collection at this site.

b Integrator site. This site receives water from the Milwaukee, Menomonee, and Kinnickinnic River watersheds in addition to water from Lake 

Michigan (by way of reverse flow).

c (Waschbusch and others, 2006)

d Instantaneous discharges were compared to the 10-percent-exceedence discharges at this site to identify high-flow event conditions for the MMSD 

Planning Area.

6 Water-Quality Characteristics for Selected Sites within the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin
Collection of Stage and Discharge Data

Stage and discharge data were collected continuously 

(every 5, 15, or 60 minutes, depending on gage) at 10 of 

the 15 stream sites at the beginning of Phase II sampling 

through the USGS stream-gage network (table 1A). One 

site (Jewel Creek at Muskego) was dropped from the 

network shortly thereafter. Records from water year 2005 

were not published for the Lincoln Creek site; however, 

the gage remained operational (Waschbusch and others, 

2006); data provided for this time period are considered 

provisional and have been subjected to all quality-control 

checks and adjustments except those necessary for iceaffected records. Gages at three additional sites were added 

in April 2004: Honey Creek at Wauwatosa (04087119), 

Little Menomonee River at Milwaukee (04087070), and 

Root River at Grange Avenue at Greenfield (04087214). 

Standard USGS stream-gaging techniques were used to 

determine discharge at all of the stream gages (Rantz and 

others, 1982). Current-meter measurements of discharge at 

the three new sites were made every 4 to 6 weeks and more 

frequently during high flows to define the stage-discharge 

relation for each site. Current-meter discharge measurements at the remaining two sites (Willow Creek at Maple 

Road near Germantown and Jewel Creek at Muskego) 

were made during water-quality sampling.

Manual Water-Quality Sampling

 Water-quality samples were collected manually at 

all 15 stream sites and 6 harbor sites (table 1A–B). USGS 

personnel collected samples at the 14 wadeable stream 

sites. MMSD personnel collected samples by boat at 

Milwaukee River at Mouth and the six harbor sites. Waterquality sample-collection protocols differed by the manner 

of collection. USGS field personnel used standard USGS 

depth-width-integrated collection methods for wadeable 

streams; samples were collected from nearby bridges 

when streams could not be waded because of high flows 

(U.S. Geological Survey, variously dated). MMSD field 

personnel collected composite samples from a boat using 

a Kemmerer sampler deployed at three depths; sampling 

techniques were modified from standard USGS sampling 

methods (appendix 2A)(U.S. Geological Survey, variously 

dated). 

Sample collection was designed to encompass a range 

of flows. From February 2004 through September 2005, 

personnel from both agencies simultaneously sampled all 

21 sites over a few days in an effort to obtain a snapshot 

of water quality. Samples were collected quarterly over 

a 2-year period, resulting in eight fixed-interval samples 

per site. Additionally, personnel collected samples during 

four targeted high-flow events over the 2-year period: one 

spring snowmelt event and one summer-storm event per 

year. Targeted high-flow events for sampling were generally defined as events in which the instantaneous discharge 

was greater than the 10-percent-flow-duration discharge 

at gages representing the major basins draining to the 

harbor (Milwaukee River at Milwaukee, Menomonee 

River at Wauwatosa, Kinnickinnic River at S. 11th Street 

at Milwaukee, and Root River near Franklin). Because 

MMSD sampling boats were not operated during winter 

months, no samples were collected from the harbor sites 

during those times; however, samples were collected at 

Milwaukee River at Mouth (as grab samples) so that all 15 

stream sites could be sampled during winter months. Site 

locations are shown in figure 4.

Table 1B. Harbor sites sampled during Phase II of the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Corridor Study. 

[site locations shown in fig.1]

Harbor site name Site 

abbreviation Site number

North Mid-Harbor Milwaukee Outer Harbor Site OH-04 430216087532400

Middle Mid-Harbor Milwaukee Outer Harbor Site OH-03 430134087532900

South Mid-Harbor Milwaukee Outer Harbor Site OH-11 430052087531400

Northern Outside Harbor Breakwall Lake Site OH-12 430240087520300

Middle Outside Harbor Breakwall Lake Site OH-14 430138087514800

Southern Outside Harbor Breakwall Lake Site OH-13 430031087511000

Study Design, Sample Collection, and Results of Quality Assurance 7
88°30' 87°50'

42°50'0" 43°40'

Base composited from Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission digital land use inventory, 1:4,800, 2000; Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources 

WISCLAND land cover, 1:40,000, 1998; 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 10 5 Miles

0 10 5 Kilometers

OH-11

OH-13

OH-12

OH-14

JCM OCSM

HCW

WCG

LCM

UCW OH-04

KRM

LMM

RRF

RRG

MRJ

MRW

MRM

MRC

OH-03

MRMF

JCM OCSM

HCW

WCG

LCM

UCW OH-04

KRM

LMM

RRF

RRG

MRJ

MRW

MRM

MRC

OH-03

MRMF

FOND DU LAC

SHEBOYGAN

DODGE

WAUKESHA

MILWAUKEE

WASHINGTON

OZAUKEE

FOND DU LAC

SHEBOYGAN

DODGE

WAUKESHA

MILWAUKEE

WASHINGTON

OZAUKEE

Lake Michigan

EXPLANATION

MMSD planning area

County boundary

Open water

Agriculture

Natural areas

Industrial

Residential

Commercial

Other urban areas

Transportation

Watershed boundary

Land use/land cover

Stream-site drainagearea boundary

Phase II streamsampling site

Phase II harborsampling site

Figure 2. Land use/land cover and stream-site drainage-area boundaries for stream sites sampled during Phase II of the 

Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District (MMSD) Corridor Study. Site abbreviations listed in table 1.

8 Water-Quality Characteristics for Selected Sites within the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin
LAND USE, IN PERCENT

MRC

LCM

MRM

WCG

MRMF

LMM

UCWHCW

MRW

KRM

MRJ

OCSM

RRG

RRF

JCM

STREAM SITES,

ARRANGED IN DOWNSTREAM ORDER

0

20

40

60

80

100

Natural areas

Agriculture

Urban

Figure 3. Land use for Phase II sites of the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Corridor Study. Urban land use consists 

of residential, transportation, industrial, commercial, and other urban land use. Site abbreviations listed in table 1.

Study Design, Sample Collection, and Results of Quality Assurance 9
0 4 2 Miles

0 4 2 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, 1989; Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources version 2 hydrography, 1:24,000, 2002;

sewershed boundaries from Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District 2020 Facilities Plan Sewershed Mapping digital database, 

1:2,000, 2005. Wisconsin Transverse Mercator Projection, referenced to North American Datum of 1983, 1991 adjustment.

EXPLANATION

Water

Area within the MMSD

planning area

Area outside of the 

MMSD planning area

Watershed boundary

MMSD combined sewer

service area

Subwatershed boundary

Stream

National Weather Service

precipitation site

Manual sampling location

Stream gage

Automatic water-quality

sampler

Germantown Dept.

of Public Works

Mount Mary College

General Mitchell

International Airport

OCSM JCM

HCW

WCG

LCM

UCW

OH-04

OH-11

KRM

LMM

OH-13

OH-12

OH-14

RRF

RRG

MRJ

MRW

MRM

MRC

OH-03

MRMF

88°10' 87°50'

42°50' 43°10'

Lake Michigan

Figure 4. Locations and characteristics of Phase II sampling sites, and locations of National Weather Service precipitation 

gages in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District (MMSD) planning area, Wis. Site abbreviations listed in table 1.

10 Water-Quality Characteristics for Selected Sites within the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin
Ambient water temperature, pH, specific conductance, and dissolved oxygen were measured at all sites 

during sampling using a calibrated multiparameter meter. 

All water samples were brought back to a central processing area (vehicle or laboratory) where samples were 

processed (split, filtered, and preserved). All water-quality 

samples were delivered to the appropriate laboratory for 

analysis. All manually collected water-quality samples 

were analyzed for a variety of water-quality constituent 

groups: nutrients, major inorganics, carbon, wastewater 

compounds (WWCs) and microbes (table 2 and appendix 

3). The laboratories used for analyses were: USGS laboratories (National Water-Quality Laboratory (NWQL) in 

Denver, Colo.; Wisconsin Water Science Center Mercury 

Research Laboratory in Middleton, Wis.; Iowa Water 

Science Center Sediment Laboratory in Iowa City, Iowa; 

Kentucky Water Science Center Sediment Laboratory in 

Louisville, Ky.) and the Wisconsin State Lab of Hygiene 

(WSLH) in Madison, Wis.

The general timeline for hydrologic, water-quality, 

and biologic data collection is given in figure 5. Samples 

were analyzed for most constituents during each sampling 

event, however, a few constituents were investigated less 

frequently during selected target conditions. Samples were 

collected for pesticide and water-column-toxicity analysis from all 21 sites during the spring-quarterly sampling 

(before pesticides were being actively applied) and during 

the summer-storm events (fig. 5). Samples for mercury 

analysis were collected at all sites during the summerquarterly and event sampling.

Mercury Sampling

Because of the generally low mercury concentrations 

in natural waters, extra care is required when sampling. To 

accurately quantify the concentration of total mercury (Hg) 

and methylmercury (MeHg) in water samples, trace-metal 

clean techniques were used to minimize sample contamination during collection, handling, and analysis. Analytical methods used for constituent detection were highly 

sensitive and operated with a reporting level of 0.04 ng/L 

for both Hg and MeHg. A brief description of sampling 

procedures is in appendix 2B; a more complete description 

can be found in Olson and DeWild (1999). 

Table 2. List of properties and constituents analyzed during Phase II of the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District 

Corridor Study.

[BOD, biochemical oxygen demand; COD, chemical oxygen demand; PCBs, polychlorinated biphenyls]

Property or constituent Sample frequency Constituents listed in:

Automatically collected samples (chloride, 

total phosphorus, and suspended sediment)

Quarterly, events, automated samples Appendix 3, table 3-1

Field parameters (alkalinity, dissolved oxygen, pH, 

specific conductance, temperature)

Quarterly, events Appendix 3, table 3-2

Carbon (dissolved and particulate) and particulate nitrogen Quarterly, events Appendix 3, table 3-3

Miscellaneous water-quality measurements (chlorophyll a, 

BOD, COD, pH, specific conductance, suspended 

sediment

Quarterly, events Appendix 3, table 3-4

Water-column toxicity testing Summer 2004 and 2005 Appendix 3, table 3-4

Major inorganics Quarterly, events Appendix 3, table 3-5

Nutrients Quarterly, events Appendix 3, table 3-6

Total mercury and methylmercury 1 quarterly, 1 summer event Appendix 3, table 3-7

Indicator and pathogenic microorganisms Quarterly, events Appendix 3, table 3-8

Pesticides and degradates 1 quarterly, 1 summer event Appendix 3, table 3-9

Wastewater compounds Quarterly, events Appendix 3, table 3-10

SPMD extracts analyses Single 1-month sample in 2004 Appendix 3, table 3-11

Total PCBs, metals, and organic carbon in sediment Summer 2004 and 2005 Appendix 3, table 3-12

Fish tissue analyses (including pesticides and PCBs) October 2004 Appendix 3, table 3-13

Bioassessment (fish, macroinvertebrates, algae, and habitat) Summer and autumn, 2004 Appendix 3, table 3-14

Study Design, Sample Collection, and Results of Quality Assurance 11
Sampling activities

2004 water year 2005 water year

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

Automated WQ

Spring high-flow WQ

Summer high-flow WQ X X

Quarterly WQ X X

Bed sediment

Fish

Fish tissue

Macroinvertebrates

Algae

Habitat

Figure 5. Timeline of data-collection activities for Phase II of the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Corridor Study. [WQ, water quality; 

X indicates a pesticide sample 

was collected during this event]

12 Water-Quality Characteristics for Selected Sites within the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin
Microbiological Sampling

Samples for microbiological analysis were collected 

at each of the 21 sites during every sample visit and were 

analyzed by WSLH. WSLH holding times (for monitoring 

purposes) for fecal coliform and Escherichia coli (E. coli) 

were 24 hours; the microbiological samples (14 L) were 

transported to the WSLH on the day they were collected 

in order to adhere to this holding time. For 10 of the 12 

sampling events, samples were also collected for analysis by MMSD. These samples (500 mL) were collected 

and delivered to MMSD in compliance with Wisconsin 

Administrative Code NR 219, which specifies that analyses for fecal coliform and E. coli must be analyzed within 

6 hours of sample collection. Sample results from the two 

laboratories were compared to determine the degree of 

variability and the absolute difference between concentrations reported. 

The WSLH data set was used for analyses of fecal 

coliform and E. coli in this report since all sampling events 

were represented and all other microbiological constituents 

were analyzed by this laboratory. 

Bed-Sediment Sampling

Streambed-sediment traps were used in Phase II as 

a means to qualitatively assess the current transport rates 

of metals and polychlorinated biphenyl (PCBs) in specific 

stream segments. Bed-sediment analyses for metals and 

PCBs were less expensive than equivalent tests on watercolumn samples; moreover, because many metals and 

organic chemicals sorb onto fine sediment particles, bedsediment analyses were an effective means of integrating 

contamination episodes in stream segments over extended 

time periods. Sediment-trap samples were analyzed for 

total PCBs, total phosphorus, particle grain size, arsenic, 

cadmium, chromium, copper, lead, mercury, nickel, and 

zinc. Sediment traps were deployed at each of the 15 

stream-sampling locations. Two traps were deployed at 

each site during the 2004 and 2005 field seasons (approximately June–October 2004 and approximately April–

August 2005). During each field season, sediment traps 

were deployed for periods ranging from 1 to 4 months. 

These sediment traps were based on designs used by 

WDNR at Lincoln Creek (Baird and Associates, 1997). 

The traps were made from concrete blocks, plywood, PVC 

pipe, and acrylic plastic sheet stock (fig. 6). The traps primarily served to anchor and protect the glass jars used to 

collect the sediment samples. The jars used in the sediment 

traps were rinsed with acetone before deployment at the 

sample sites. 

If an insufficient sediment volume was collected at 

a site by the time of the midseason sample collection, the 

sediment that was collected was bottled and stored at 4°C, 

and the sediment trap was cleaned and redeployed. At the 

end of the season, the stored sample and the end-of-season 

sample were combined and submitted for analysis.

Figure 6. Sediment traps used for collection of bed-sediment samples during Phase II of the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage 

District Corridor Study.

Study Design, Sample Collection, and Results of Quality Assurance 13
Water-Column-Toxicity Sampling

Acute toxicity of water-column samples was analyzed by WSLH using the Microtox Acute Toxicity Test 

(Strategic Diagnostics Inc., Newark, Del.). This analysis 

quantifies differences (expressed in percent effect) in the 

fluorescence values of bioluminescent marine bacteria 

exposed to sample water when compared to a laboratory control. Decreases in fluorescence (positive percent 

effect values) are attributed to the toxic effects of sample 

water on the viability of test bacteria; the magnitude of the 

change in luminescence relates positively to the toxicity of 

the sample water. Changes in luminescence were reported 

after 5 minutes and 15 minutes of exposure to environmental sample water (AZUR Environmental, 1998). Samples 

submitted for toxicity analysis were collected from all 21 

Phase II sampling sites during summer-quarterly and event 

sampling. 

Biological, Habitat Assessment, and FishTissue Toxicity Sampling

One-time surveys were conducted in late summer 

and early autumn 2004 for fish-, macroinvertebrate-, and 

algal-community data, as well as habitat data at the 14 

wadeable stream sites that were sampled as part of Phase 

II (table 1A). Fish, macroinvertebrates, and algae samples 

were collected according to the methods documented in 

Moulton and others (2002): fish—fish sampling protocols; algae—qualitative multi-habitat sampling protocols; 

macroinvertebrates—semi-quantitative targeted habitatsampling protocols. Fish were collected, identified, and 

enumerated in the field. Fish-tissue samples were collected 

during fish-community surveys and analyzed for accumulated toxics (metals and PCBs) at three sites (Milwaukee 

River at Milwaukee, Menomonee River at Wauwatosa, and 

Root River near Franklin). Identification and enumeration 

of macroinvertebrate samples was done by the University 

of Wisconsin–Stevens Point Aquatic Entomology Laboratory, except for samples from the Little Menomonee River 

and Honey Creek sites, which were done by the USGS 

National Water-Quality Laboratory. Algae samples were 

identified and enumerated by the Academy of Natural Sciences in Philadelphia, Pa. Habitat assessments were performed using methods employed by the NAWQA program, 

as documented in Fitzpatrick and others (1998). 

Semipermeable Membrane Device Sampling 

from the National Water-Quality Assessment 

Program

Semipermeable membrane devices (SPMDs) mimic 

biological membranes, such as the gills of fish, and can be 

used to predict contaminant exposure and accumulation 

in fish. These devices contain a synthetic lipid solution 

similar to that found in fish. SPMDs are used to gather 

time-integrated information on the presence of dissolved 

(biologically available) hydrophobic organic contaminants 

in water. Toxicity tests followed by chemical analyses 

were done on extracts from the triolein in the SPMDs. The 

Cytochrome P450RGS test assessed toxicity from PAHs, 

planar PCBs, dioxins, and furans in the water. The Fluoroscan test estimated the concentration of PAH compounds 

and was expressed in pyrene equivalents, and the Microtox 

test screened for acute toxicity from synthetic organic 

compounds.

As part of the USGS NAWQA Effects of Urbanization on Stream Ecosystems Topical Study in 2004, 

SPMDs were deployed at 30 sites in the Western Lake 

Michigan Drainages study unit. SPMDs were placed for 

one month at 15 Milwaukee-area sites, 7 of which were 

at or within a few miles of MMSD sample sites on these 

streams. Four NAWQA sites were at the same location as 

Phase II sites (Lincoln Creek, Oak Creek, Menomonee 

River at Menomonee Falls, and Little Menomonee River), 

and three NAWQA sites were near MMSD sites: Honey 

Creek near Portland Avenue at Wauwatosa (04087118, 

about 1 mi upstream from the Honey Creek at Wauwatosa 

Phase II site), Root River at Layton Avenue at Greenfield 

(04087213, about 2 mi upstream from the Root River at 

Grange Avenue Phase II site), and Underwood Creek at 

Watertown Plank Road at Elm Grove (040870856, about 

3 mi upstream of the Underwood Creek at Wauwatosa 

Phase II site). 

Toxicity tests were done by the U.S. Army Corps 

of Engineers in Vicksburg, Miss. (P450RGS test) and 

the USGS Columbia Environmental Research Center in 

Columbia, Mo. (Fluoroscan and Microtox tests). Chemical analyses of the SPMD extracts were done at the USGS 

National Water-Quality Laboratory in Denver, Colo.

14 Water-Quality Characteristics for Selected Sites within the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin
Automated Water-Quality Sampling

Automated samplers were installed and maintained by 

USGS personnel and used to collect water-quality samples 

so that loads of suspended sediment, total phosphorus, 

and chloride could be computed. The four sites where 

the samplers were installed were Milwaukee River near 

Cedarburg (04086600), Milwaukee River at Milwaukee 

(04087000), Kinnickinnic River at South 11th Street at 

Milwaukee (04087159), and Menomonee River at Wauwatosa (04087120). 

Approximately 8 to 10 samples were collected per 

storm. More samples were collected during times of 

increasing discharge, when the constituent concentrations 

were expected to have the greatest variation. Samples were 

analyzed for suspended sediment, total phosphorus, and 

chloride by the Wisconsin State Laboratory of Hygiene 

(WSLH). Storm, daily, and annual loads were computed 

for each site. Constituent loads were determined by multiplying constituent concentration by stream discharge and 

a conversion factor (Porterfield, 1972). Daily loads were 

determined by use of the integration method described by 

Porterfield (1972). Daily and annual loads were compared 

to historical data at these sites. 

Quality Assurance and Quality Control 

Quality-assurance and quality-control (QA/QC) 

samples collected during Phase II of the MMSD Corridor Study made up about 15 percent of the water-quality 

samples. QA/QC samples included both field blanks and 

replicates. Field-blank results were evaluated to estimate 

how analytical results might be biased by contamination 

of the sample from the sampling equipment, equipment 

cleaning, and sample processing. Replicate samples were 

evaluated to estimate the degree of variability in sample 

results. Results from the blanks are summarized in table 3, 

and replicate results are summarized in table 4. 

Field blanks were collected by passing certified, 

analyte-free blank water through the cleaned sampling 

apparatus. Field-blank results where constituent concentrations were less than 25 percent of the minimum environmental sample concentration were determined to be within 

data-quality limits, and were considered insignificant with 

respect to result interpretation (MacCoy, 2004). Fieldblank results where constituent concentrations exceeded 25 

percent of the minimum environmental sample concentration were examined further to determine how contamination affected data interpretation. Some constituents were 

detected but not quantified in field blanks; detections of 

this type also are noted in table 3. 

For most constituents, blank detections were found to 

be within data-quality limits (table 3). However, concentrations in blanks exceeded 25 percent of the minimum 

environmental sample concentration for silica (15 of 17 

field blanks), biochemical oxygen demand (BOD) (10 of 

17 field blanks), chlorophyll a (3 of 17 field blanks), and 

chemical oxygen demand (COD) (13 of 17 field blanks). 

Equipment-cleaning solutions may have been responsible 

for the high number of detections of BOD and COD in 

field blanks. Laboratory variability may have been responsible for the blank detections in chlorophyll a (a point that 

will be further illustrated in the sample-replicate result 

discussion). 

Analysis of wastewater compounds (WWCs) involved 

new techniques whose methods for detection are challenged by issues of contamination and low reporting 

levels. Due to the small number of samples with concentrations above the reporting level, percent detections were 

used to discuss their occurrence. Phenol was detected in 

9 of 17 field blanks as well as NWQL laboratory blanks; 

therefore, it was dropped entirely from analysis. N,Ndiethyl-meta-toluamide (DEET) was not detected in 

NWQL laboratory blanks but was detected in field blanks. 

The majority of DEET field-blank contamination was at 

a level that could only be qualitatively detected; since this 

type of sample data were considered nondetections for the 

purposes of analyses, the impact of the contamination on 

the results discussed in this report was felt to be negligible (table 18, page 83). Any constituent result that was 

detected but not quantified was counted as a non-detect for 

the purposes of data analysis. DEET field-blank contamination was not fully understood, but may have been due to 

an atmospheric source, a proximity to field gear/sampling 

equipment containing residual insect repellent, or some 

other undetermined source (Kingsbury and others, 2006). 

NWQL laboratory blank results also indicated contamination of naphthalene and 1-methylnapthalene. With respect 

to field blanks, it is likely that phenol, naphthalene and 

1-methylnapthalene contamination were also affected by 

the proximity of sample processing in or near gasolinepowered vehicles. 

Study Design, Sample Collection, and Results of Quality Assurance 15
Table 3. Results of constituent detections in field blanks during Phase II of the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District 

(MMSD) Corridor Study.

[mg/L, milligram per liter; μg/L, microgram per liter; e, estimated; M, detected but not quantified]

Constituent Reporting 

level

Total 

number of 

samples

Number

of 

blanks

Percent total 

quality-control 

samples

Number of 

detections in 

field blanks

Range of 

detections in 

field blanks

Within 

data-quality 

limits1

Miscellaneous constituents

Carbon (inorganic plus 

organic), suspended 

sediment, total

0.12 mg/L 235 15 6 1 0.1 Yes

Organic carbon, water, filtered .33 mg/L 235 15 6 11 e0.2–0.7 Yes

Particulate nitrogen, suspended 

in water

.022 mg/L 235 15 6 2 0.02–0.03 Yes

Calcium, water, filtered .010 mg/L 235 17 7 17 0.01–0.24 Yes

Silica, water, filtered .04 mg/L 235 17 7 15 e0.03–3.04 No

Sodium, water, filtered .10 mg/L 235 17 7 12 e0.05 - 0.49 Yes

Chloride, water, filtered .20 mg/L 235 17 7 6 e0.15–1.23 Yes

Magnesium, water, filtered .008 mg/L 235 17 7 10 e0.004–0.011 Yes

Iron, water, filtered 6.4 μg/L 235 17 7 1 e5 Yes

Total nitrogen (nitrate + 

nitrite + ammonia + organic 

nitrogen), water, unfiltered, 

analytically determined

.03 mg/L 235 17 7 1 0.03 Yes

Biochemical oxygen demand, 

water, unfiltered, 5 days at 

20 degrees Celsius

2 mg/L 235 17 7 10 2.1– >22.5 No

Chlorophyll a, water, 

unfiltered, trichromatic 

method, uncorrected

.26 μg/L 235 17 7 3 6.59–9.07 No

Chemical oxygen demand, 

low level, water, unfiltered

9 mg/L 235 17 7 13 11–260 No

16 Water-Quality Characteristics for Selected Sites within the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin
Table 3. Results of constituent detections in field blanks during Phase II of the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District 

(MMSD) Corridor Study —Continued.

[mg/L, milligram per liter; μg/L, microgram per liter; e, estimated; M, detected but not quantified]

Constituent Reporting 

level

Total 

number of 

samples

Number

of 

blanks

Percent total 

quality-control 

samples

Number of 

detections in 

field blanks

Range of 

detections in 

field blanks

Within 

data-quality 

limits1

Wastewater compounds

Menthol 0.5 μg/L 235 17 7 1 M Yes

Methyl salicylate .5 μg/L 235 17 7 1 M Yes

Tributyl phosphate .5 ug/L 235 17 7 1 M Yes

Triphenyl phosphate .5 μg/L 235 17 7 1 M Yes

1,4-Dichlorobenzene .5 μg/L 235 17 7 1 0.2 Yes

d-Limonene, water, filtered, 

recoverable, μg/L

.5 μg/L 235 17 7 1 0.1 Yes

Tris(2-chloroethyl) phosphate .5 μg/L 235 17 7 1 0.1 Yes

Isophorone .5 μg/L 235 17 7 2 M–0.1 Yes

Acetophenone .5 μg/L 235 17 7 2 0.1–0.2 Yes

Tetrachloroethylene .5 μg/L 235 17 7 3 M Yes

Camphor .5 μg/L 235 17 7 3 M Yes

Fluoranthene .5 μg/L 235 17 7 5 M Yes

Pyrene .5 μg/L 235 17 7 5 M–0.1 Yes

1-Methylnaphthalene .5 μg/L 235 17 7 5 M–0.1 Yes

Phenanthrene .5 μg/L 235 17 7 6 M Yes

Benzophenone .5 μg/L 235 17 7 6 M–0.1 Yes

2-Methylnaphthalene .5 μg/L 235 17 7 7 M–0.3 Yes

N,N-diethyl-meta-toluamide 

(DEET)

.5 μg/L 235 17 7 9 M–0.1 Yes

Naphthalene .5 μg/L 235 16 7 10 M–0.1 Yes

Phenol .5 μg/L 235 14 6 11 0.2–0.5 No

1

 Field-blank results where constituent concentrations were less than 25 percent of the minimum environmental sample concentration were determined 

to be within data-quality limits, and were considered insignificant with respect to result interpretation (MacCoy, 2004).

Study Design, Sample Collection, and Results of Quality Assurance 17
Table 4. Results of replicated sample issues during Phase II of the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Corridor Study. The following analytes did not meet one of the 

three levels used for replicate-pair analysis based on parameter concentration (MacCoy, 2004). Each 

X represents a single replicate pair.

[mg/L, milligram per liter, μg/L, microgram per liter; °C, degrees Celsius; --, not applicable]

Constituent Reporting level

Level 1 Level 2 Level 3

For analyte concentrations 

between 0 and 5 times the 

reporting level, a difference of 

1 reporting level was allowed. 

For analyte concentrations between 5 and 20 times 

the reporting level, a maximum difference of the 

greater of 2 times the reporting level or 20 percent 

relative percent difference was acceptable. 

Analyte concentrations more than 

20 times the reporting level should 

not exceed a relative percent 

difference of 10 percent. 

Carbon (inorganic plus organic), suspended sediment, 

total

0.12 mg/L XX

Inorganic carbon, suspended sediment, total .12 mg/L

X

Organic carbon, suspended sediment, total .12 mg/L XXXTotal nitrogen (nitrate + nitrite + ammonia + organic 

nitrogen), water, unfiltered, analytically determined

.03 mg/L

X

Nitrite, water, filtered .04 mg/L

X

Particulate nitrogen, suspended in water .022 mg/L

X

Phosphorus, water, unfiltered .004 mg/L X XBiochemical oxygen demand, water, unfiltered, 

5 days at 20°C

2 mg/L X X

Chemical oxygen demand, low level, water, unfiltered 9 mg/L XXChlorophyll a, water, unfiltered, trichromatic method, 

uncorrected

.26 μg/L X XXX X

pH, water, unfiltered, laboratory --

X

Atrazine, water, filtered, recoverable .05 μg/L

X

2-Chloro-4-isopropylamino-6-amino-s-triazine, water, 

filtered, recoverable

.014 μg/L

X

3,4-Dichloroaniline, water, filtered, recoverable .0045 μg/L XXTebuthiuron, water, filtered (0.7 micron glass fiber 

filter), recoverable

.016 μg/L

X

Phenol, water, filtered, recoverable .5 μg/L

X

18 Water-Quality Characteristics for Selected Sites within the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin
Of the constituents analyzed during Phase II, the 

majority of replicate-constituent results were within the 

quality-control limits. As a mathematical rule, relative 

percent differences (RPDs) between 2 small numbers are 

higher than the RPD between 2 larger numbers with the 

same value difference; in order to adjust for that phenomenon, replicate samples were evaluated at 3 levels based 

on the concentration of the analyte above the reporting 

level (MacCoy, 2004). Level 1 evaluation was defined for 

constituents whose concentration was between 0 and 5 

times the reporting level, in which case a difference of 1 

reporting level was allowed between replicate pairs. Level 

2 evaluation was defined for constituents with detection 

between 5 and 20 times the reporting level. In this case, a 

maximum difference of the greater of 2 times the reporting 

level or 20 percent RPD was allowed. Level 3 evaluation 

was defined for constituents with concentrations more than 

20 times the reporting level. Constituents at this level were 

not to exceed an RPD of 10 percent. Replicate pairs where 

1 result was above and 1 result was below the reporting 

level were not considered where the higher result was 

within a reporting level difference of the reporting level; 

BOD and particulate inorganic carbon each contained a 

single replicate pair showing a difference greater than one 

reporting level. Very few replicate-pair results failed to 

meet quality-control limits (table 4). More than 1 sample 

pair for each of the following constituents exceeded 

quality-control limits: chlorophyll a (5 sample pairs), 

particulate organic carbon (3 sample pairs), particulate 

total carbon (2 sample pairs), phosphorus (2 sample pairs), 

BOD (2 sample pairs), COD (2 sample pairs), and 3,4 

Dichloroaniline (2 sample pairs). One sample pair for each 

of the following constituents exceeded quality-control limits: particulate inorganic carbon, total nitrogen, particulate 

nitrogen, nitrate, pH, atrazine, 2-Cholor-4-isopropylamino6-amino-s-triazine, tebuthiuron, and phenol. 

Special Cases of Quality Control for Selected 

Constituents 

Due to the unique nature of the data, quality-control 

analyses of microbiological, bed sediment, and watercolumn toxicity were not subject to the same types of 

analyses as other water chemistry constituents. 

Microbiological 

Quality-control (QC) results for microbiological 

samples are known to have higher levels of variability than 

those for chemical-quality constituents. Analytical methods used for quantification of indicator and pathogenic 

microorganisms differed in strategy. Methods for indicator organisms generally analyzed sample volumes similar 

to what was reported for the result and generated data 

sets of continuous values. Methods for pathogenic organisms generally analyzed sample volumes that were quite 

different from the reported volume, and when the number of organisms detected were adjusted to the reported 

volume, it generated data sets of discrete values with many 

concentrations in partial organisms (for example, 33.3 

oocysts/100 L). As a result of the difference in these data 

sets, QC analyses for indicator organisms and pathogenic 

organisms were evaluated separately. 

Replicate-pair comparisons for indicator organisms were analyzed in much the same manner as other 

water-quality constituents; results were divided into three 

levels based on the concentration of the analyte above the 

reporting level (MacCoy, 2004). Replicate-pair analyses 

performed by WSLH are summarized in table 5, along 

with the criteria used for water-quality replicate-pair 

evaluation. However, given that microbiological samples 

are known to have higher variability than most water-quality constituents, data were not evaluated for violations of 

replicate criteria associated with each level. Variability was 

generally low to moderate for indicator organisms, with a 

few exceptions in the data sets for each indicator organism. 

The most notable difference was a non-matching replicate pair in the fecal coliform data set, where members of 

the replicate pair had concentrations of less than 10 and 

200 col/100 mL. In addition, one of the replicate pairs in 

Level 3 of this data set differed by an RPD of 125 percent. 

Replicate pairs with the highest RPDs in the E. coli and 

coliphage data sets represented relatively small differences 

in actual concentrations. 

Study Design, Sample Collection, and Results of Quality Assurance 19
Table 5. Replicate results for indicator organisms analyzed by Wisconsin State Laboratory of Hygiene during Phase II of the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District 

Corridor Study. Replicate pairs were grouped into levels based on concentration above the reporting level (MacCoy, 2004). Criteria used for most water-quality constituents at each level are provided for general comparison; microbiological samples are known to show greater variation, however, and were not analyzed on the basis of these criteria. Difference in concentrations between replicate pairs is expressed as the difference and (or) relative percent difference, depending on the recommended criteria; these values are expressed as ranges.

[RL, reporting level; RPD, relative percent difference; col/100 mL, colonies per 100 milliliters; MPN/100 mL, most probable number per 100 milliliters; plaques/100mL, plaques per 100 milliliters, --, not applicable]

Constituent

Reporting 

level Unit

Total 

number of 

replicate 

pairs

Non-matching pairs

Level 1 Level 2 Level 3

Recommended criteria: 

For analyte concentrations between 0 and 5 

times the RL, a difference 

of 1 RL was allowed.

Recommended criteria: 

For analyte concentrations between 

5 and 20 times the RL, a difference 

of the greater of 2 times the RL or 20 

percent RPD was acceptable.

Recommended criteria: 

For analyte concentrations more than 20 times 

the RL should not exceed 

a RPD of 10 percent.

Number 

of 

replicate 

pairs

Difference 

between 

value and 

RL

Number of 

replicate 

pairs

Difference

Number of 

replicate 

pairs

Difference RPD

Number of 

replicate 

pairs

RPD

Fecal coliform Criteria -- -- -- -- -- -- 0–10 -- 0–20 0–20 -- 0–10 Observed values 10 col/100 mL 16 2 0, 190 3 0–20 3 30–80 24–62 8 10–125 Observed medians -- col/100 mL -- -- -- -- 0 -- 70 42 -- 29Escherichia coli Criteria -- -- -- -- -- -- 0–1 -- 0–2 0–20 -- 0–10 Observed values 1 MPN/100 mL 16 1 0 1 0 1 6 98 13 0–50 Observed medians -- MPN/100 mL -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 17Coliphage Criteria -- -- -- -- -- -- 0–1 -- 0–2 0–20 -- 0 –10 Observed values 1 plaques/100 mL 16 2 1, 1 5 0–2 7 0–12 0–120 2 2–43 Observed medians -- plaques/100 mL -- -- -- -- 0 -- 3 29 -- 23

20 Water-Quality Characteristics for Selected Sites within the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin
Fecal coliform and E. coli analyses were also 

performed by MMSD and replicate analyses for these 

samples generally indicated slightly less variability when 

compared to the WSLH data sets. All replicate pairs for 

MMSD fecal coliform and E. coli analyses (9 and 10, 

respectively) grouped into Level 3 and indicated RPDs of 

9 to 59 col/100 mL (median of 30 col/100 mL) and 0 to 

32 most probable number per 100 milliliters (MPN/100 

mL)(median of 11 MPN/100 mL). 

In addition to QC analysis of traditional replicate-pairs analyzed by each laboratory, analyses were 

performed on results for all (regular and QC) samples 

analyzed by both laboratories to determine the degree of 

variability and the absolute difference between results 

reported. Comparison of fecal coliform and E. coli results 

from WSLH and MMSD are illustrated in figure 7. 

Slightly more variability was observed among fecal coliform results (R2

 value of 0.71), than among E. coli results 

(R2 value of 0.91). With relation to absolute difference, a 

line of one-to-one correspondence on these graphs would 

indicate that results reported by these laboratories were 

identical for concurrently-collected samples. The distribution of fecal coliform results for this comparison indicates 

that the body of data lies below the line of one-to-one 

correspondence, indicating that WSLH concentrations 

were, on average, lower than MMSD concentrations. The 

differences in concentrations may have been due to the 

variation in holding times between the two laboratories. 

More specifically, the longer holding times at the WSLH 

may have caused a loss of viability of the microorganisms, 

thereby causing these concentrations to be consistently 

lower than MMSD concentrations for fecal coliform. The 

distribution of E. coli results indicated that, on average, 

the two laboratories found very similar concentrations. In 

order to maintain consistency within the rest of the microbiological data set, analyses for fecal coliform and E. coli

are limited to analytical results from WSLH.

The discrete nature of the results in the pathogen data 

set required a different approach for replicate analyses; 

replicate pairs were compared in a manner reflective of 

analytical and reporting methods. E. coli O157:H7 data 

were reported as presence/absence; of the 16 replicate 

pairs analyzed, 1 replicate pair had mismatched results. 

Results reported for Salmonella were an interpretation of 

the minimum volume of sample that indicated the presence of the bacterium. Data were limited to values of 0.1, 

0.2, 1, and 10 MPN/100 mL, and are reflective of positive 

results at analytical volumes of 10, 20, 100, and 1,000 

mL, respectively. Of the 16 replicate pairs analyzed, 12 

replicate pairs had identical results. In 3 of the remaining 

pairs, 1 member was not detected and the other member 

was detected in volumes ranging from 10 to 100 mL. Volumes of detection for the final pair were 10 mL and 100 

mL. Giardia and Cryptosporidium replicate analyses were 

performed using 1.5 to 3.3 L of sample water; volumes 

were similar within each replicate pair. The numbers of 

detections in the analytical volume were extrapolated 

to the reporting volume of 100 L, and yielded discrete 

numbers of organisms based on the original sample 

volume. Replicate comparisons were performed based on 

differences in individual organism counts in the analytical 

volume (table 6). Differences were lower for Giardia than 

Table 6. Replicate results for pathogenic organisms during Phase II of the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Corridor 

Study. Differences between replicate pairs are expressed as the difference between the actual numbers of organisms counted in 

the analyzed sample volume.

[RL, reporting level; MPN/100 mL, most probable number per 100 milliliters; cysts/100 mL, cysts per 100 milliliters; oocysts/100 mL, oocysts per 100 

milliliters; --, not applicable]

Constituent

Volumes 

analyzed for 

replicate pairs

RLs for 

replicate 

pairs

Reporting 

level unit

Total 

number of 

replicate 

pairs

Number of replicate pairs

Difference 

of zero

organisms

Difference 

of one

organism

Difference 

of two

organisms

Difference 

of three 

organisms

Giardia

 Observed values 1.5–3.3 L 30.3–66.7 cysts/100 L 16 15 1 0 0

 Observed medians 3 L 33.3 cysts/100 L -- -- -- -- --

Cryptosporidium

 Observed values 1.5–3.3 L 30.3–66.7 oocysts/100 L 16 8 5 2 1

 Observed medians 3 L 33.3 oocysts/100 L -- -- -- -- --

Study Design, Sample Collection, and Results of Quality Assurance 21
0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

0246 8 10 12 14

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

0246 8 10 12 14

LOG TRANSFORMED (NATURAL LOG) FECAL COLIFORM

CONCENTRATION IN WSLH SAMPLES, 

IN COLONIES PER 100 MILLILITERS 

LOG TRANSFORMED (NATURAL LOG) FECAL COLIFORM CONCENTRATION 

IN MMSD SAMPLES, IN COLONIES PER 100 MILLILITERS

LOG TRANSFORMED (NATURAL LOG) E. COLI 

CONCENTRATION IN WSLH SAMPLES,

IN COLONIES PER 100 MILLILITERS 

LOG TRANSFORMED (NATURAL LOG) E. COLI CONCENTRATION

IN MMSD SAMPLES, IN COLONIES PER 100 MILLILITERS

A

B

y = 0.80x + 0.82

R2 = 0.71

y = 0.97x + 0.054

R2 = 0.91

Observed regression line

Line of one-to-one correspondence

Figure 7. Inter-laboratory correlation between Phase II results for A, fecal coliform concentrations, and B, Escherichia coli

concentrations from samples analyzed at the Wisconsin State Laboratory of Hygiene (WSLH) and Milwaukee Metropolitan 

Sewerage District (MMSD).

22 Water-Quality Characteristics for Selected Sites within the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin
Cryptosporidium, but were low for both. The maximum 

difference observed was three organisms (for Cryptosporidium), but the majority of differences ranged from 0 to 1 

organism. 

Variability in the replicate analyses for indicator and 

pathogen data sets may have stemmed from sample-collection techniques (replicates were collected as sequential 

grab samples), or analytical subsampling techniques. 

Attempts should be made to limit variability in future studies; however, for the purposes of this study the affect of 

sample variability for both indicator and pathogenic organisms were thought to be negligible. 

All blank QC results for microbiological constituents 

were within data-quality limits.

Bed Sediment 

Seven duplicate bed-sediment samples were collected 

from six sites during the study. In 2004, duplicate samples 

were collected from the Milwaukee River near Cedarburg, 

Milwaukee River at Milwaukee, Menomonee River at 

Wauwatosa, and Oak Creek sites. In 2005, duplicate samples were collected from the Willow Creek, Honey Creek, 

and Oak Creek sites. The duplicate samples were obtained 

by collecting a completely separate field sample from a 

second sediment trap deployed near the primary sediment 

trap. This approach was a way to qualitatively assess the 

combined effects of in-stream, sample-processing, and 

laboratory variability. The range of the RPDs between 

duplicate samples ranged from near 0 to 130 percent. Table 

7 lists the variability in sediment trap results for duplicate 

samplers. 

The largest source of variability associated with the 

sediment-trap samples appears to have been related to the 

variability of sediment-deposition patterns in the stream 

and the capture efficiency of the traps themselves. For 

example, duplicate samples at the Milwaukee River at Milwaukee site yielded two samples with recovered masses of 

217 g and 1,714 g. Such a difference between recovered 

sample masses suggested that the traps were placed within 

differing sediment-deposition zones. Alternatively, one 

trap at this location may have been covered by debris for 

part of the deployment time. For the Milwaukee River at 

Milwaukee site, RPDs between analytical results for the 

duplicate samples ranged from 10 to 62 percent. Duplicate samples at Willow Creek yielded recovered sediment 

masses of 903 g and 921 g, suggesting that the traps were 

placed within very similar deposition zones. Correspondingly, the RPD between duplicates ranged from 4 to 14 

percent.

Generally, the RPDs decreased for analytes as the 

mean concentration of the analyte increased relative to the 

reporting level. For the Milwaukee River at Milwaukee 

site, the RPD for mercury was 62 percent, with the mean 

concentration only about two times the reporting level. By 

contrast, the RPD for total PCBs at Milwaukee River at 

Milwaukee was about 10 percent, with the mean concentration of total PCBs greater than 40 times the reporting 

level.

For all sites, the pattern of contaminant concentrations was similar between duplicates for a given site; 

therefore, the relative site comparisons presented later in 

this report most likely reflect environmental conditions and 

are not the result of a single, irreproducible sample result.

Water-Column Toxicity

Six blanks and five replicate pairs were analyzed 

using the Microtox Acute Toxicity Test. Microtox results 

were reported as a percent difference in luminescence 

(compared to a laboratory control), therefore, members of 

replicate pairs could not be compared in the same manner 

as the majority of water-quality constituents. 

For replicate-pair comparisons, percent effects were 

converted into percentages of laboratory-control fluorescence (that is, 100 percent minus the observed percent 

effect); variability in fluorescence percentages between 

members of replicate pairs was considered negligible, with 

RPDs ranging from 2 to 8 percent at the 5-minute reading 

and 3 to 8 percent at the 15-minute reading.

Results for blanks ranged from -3.98 to 29.50 percent 

effect. Although one blank had higher percent effects than 

many environmental samples (at 26.99 and 29.50 percent 

effect at 5- and 15-minutes, respectively), overall, the percent effects observed in blanks were generally higher than 

those in environmental samples. Given the consistency of 

the results and the general lack of water-chemistry analytes 

found in blank water used for this study, these higher 

values were not thought to be indicative of contamination 

with toxic compounds, and may instead be indicative of 

low osmotic strength in the water (which could potentially 

decrease the viability of the marine bacterial species used 

in this analysis). 

Study Design, Sample Collection, and Results of Quality Assurance 23
Table 7. Relative percent differences in sediment-trap results for six sites in Phase II of the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District (MMSD) Corridor Study.

[all values given in percent; --, not detected]

Site name Arsenic Cadmium Chromium Copper Lead Mercury Nickel Total phosphorus Zinc Total PCBs Total organic carbon

Milwaukee River near Cedarburg -- -- 68.8 65.4 42.4 27.0 44.4 9.1 73.2 60.9 50.0Milwaukee River at Milwaukee -- 40.0 41.5 51.1 17.0 62.1 57.1 54.5 45.3 9.5 48.4Willow Creek at Maple Road 

near Germantown

13.3 -- 9.4 4.0 8.0 5.4 0.0 3.1 2.7 -- 1.6

Honey Creek at Wauwatosa 0.0 -- 2.0 0.9 23.7 13.3 9.5 14.0 18.3 29.3 56.0Menomonee River at Wauwatosa -- -- 20.4 14.3 130.1 -- 0.0 3.2 2.6 -- 14.3Oak Creek at South Milwaukee -- -- 13.6 9.0 27.7 10.5 13.3 7.5 29.7 18.2 16.2

24 Water-Quality Characteristics for Selected Sites within the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin
Evaluation of Data Collected During 

Phase II

This section summarizes data collected during Phase 

II. Each subsection highlights and describes only those 

constituents that either (1) require description because 

they were identified as data needs during Phase I of the 

MMSD Corridor Study or (2) demonstrate a statistical 

relationship, data distribution, or other consistent response 

that enhances the understanding of water quality as part of 

Phase II. Stream and harbor data are both discussed within 

each section: harbor sites are compared to other harbor 

sites, stream sites are compared to other stream sites, and 

general comparisons are made between stream and harbor 

sites. 

Manually collected sampling events were assigned 

a category with respect to flow and season. Although 

personnel targeted high-flow events by selecting events 

in which the instantaneous discharge was greater than the 

10-percent-flow-duration discharge at gages representing 

the major basins draining to the harbor, temporal variations in precipitation as well as the relative flashiness of 

smaller urban streams occasionally meant that a fraction 

of the streams were not at high flow at the time of targeted 

high-flow-event sampling. In addition, quarterly sampling 

was scheduled without regard for flow conditions, and 

therefore occasionally entailed the collection of samples 

during high-flow events. Therefore, flow condition at 

the time of sampling was assigned by examining 10-day 

hydrographs bracketing the sampling date (5 days before 

and after)(appendix 4). For stream sites without streamdischarge data, flow-condition estimates were based on 

comparisons to records from nearby streams. Seasonality 

was roughly based on the original sample purpose: quarterly samples were assigned to their season (spring, summer, autumn, and winter), snowmelt events were assigned 

to spring season, and summer storm events were assigned 

to summer. Specific seasonality assignments are listed in 

appendix 4. Overall, seasonal responses were explored 

for both stream and harbor sites. Only stream sites were 

considered with respect to flow. 

Automatically collected samples were used for load 

determinations of chloride, total phosphorus, and suspended sediment at 4 of the 12 gaging stations that were 

continuously monitored for stream discharge. Samples 

were collected from June through September 2004 and for 

water year 2005. Daily loads of constituents at the four 

automatic-sampling sites were summed to monthly and 

annual totals. Loads are described with respect to total 

load, yield, yield per day, and volumetrically weighted 

(VW) concentration. Yield data (load data normalized to 

drainage area) were computed to allow for comparisons 

among the sites, whose drainage basins differ greatly in 

area: Milwaukee River near Cedarburg, 607 mi2

; Milwaukee River at Milwaukee, 690 mi2

; Menomonee River at 

Wauwatosa, 123 mi2; and Kinnickinnic River, 18.8 mi2. 

VW concentration was determined by dividing the total 

load by the total flow then multiplying by a conversion 

factor; this computation allowed for comparison of loads 

among various flow conditions. 

General comparisons between Phase I and Phase 

II median concentrations were made where data were 

available for both phases and were sufficient to discern 

an overall pattern. Phase I median concentrations were 

calculated from available data; depending on the constituent, the amount of data ranged from a small dataset with 

only a few results to a large dataset with numerous results. 

Comparisons could not be made for a number of Phase II 

constituents (for example, the WWCs) as technology to 

analyze for many of these compounds has only recently 

been developed. The heterogeneity of the Phase I historical 

data set prohibited strict statistical comparisons (Schneider 

and others, 2004). The Phase I report (p. 11–23) describes 

how the Phase I data set was compiled and how the data 

can be used. Phase II sampling sites within subwatersheds 

were not necessarily located at the most downstream 

point of the subwatershed (fig. 1), and therefore, all data 

collected from the sites did not integrate water and sediment from the entire subwatershed. Additionally, the three 

Phase II sites in the Lower Milwaukee River subwatershed 

(Milwaukee River near Cedarburg, Milwaukee River at 

Milwaukee, and Milwaukee River at Mouth at Milwaukee) were not considered adequately representative of 

their subwatershed due to their location and the size and 

complexity of the Lower Milwaukee River subwatershed 

(table 8). Although all data are summarized in appendix 5, 

comparison of these sites to the subwatershed was omitted 

Evaluation of Data Collected During Phase II 25
in the discussion of general comparisons between Phase I 

and Phase II data; however, contamination of this subwatershed with synthetic organic contaminants (especially 

PCBs) is well documented and is discussed in this report 

in general terms using the data from the Milwaukee River 

at Milwaukee site. Correlation between Phase I subwatersheds and Phase II sites is described in table 8. 

Where possible, percent differences in median concentrations were used to help quantify changes between 

Phase I and Phase II. Otherwise, comparisons were in 

terms of general increases or decreases in median concentrations. For this discussion, percent differences of 20 

percent or greater were considered noteworthy. Quartile 

ranges used in maps were based on Phase I data (Schneider 

and others, 2004). 

In addition, water- and bed-sediment-quality results 

were compared to USEPA criteria and (or) observed results 

(Robertson and others, 2006; Corsi and others, 1997; and 

MacDonald and others, 2000) where possible. 

Table 8. Comparison of the Phase I subwatersheds to Phase II sites of the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District (MMSD) 

Corridor Study. 

Phase I subwatershed Phase II site Phase II

site abbreviation

Phase II

site number

Honey Creek Honey Creek at Wauwatosa HCW 04087119

Muskego Lake Jewel Creek at Muskego JCM 05544371

Kinnickinnic River Kinnickinnic River at S. 11th Street at Milwaukee KRM 04087159

Lincoln Creek Lincoln Creek at 47th Street at Milwaukee LCM 040869415

Little Menomonee River Little Menomonee River at Milwaukee LMM 04087070

Upper Menomonee River Menomonee River at Menomonee Falls MRMF 04087030

Lower Menomonee River Menomonee River at Wauwatosa MRW 04087120

Lower Milwaukee River1 Milwaukee River near Cedarburg1 MRC 04086600

Milwaukee River at Milwaukee1 MRM 04087000

Milwaukee River at Mouth at Milwaukee1 MRJ 04087170

Lower Oak Creek Oak Creek at South Milwaukee OCSM 04087204

Upper Root River Root River at Grange Avenue at Greenfield RRG 04087214

Middle Root River Root River near Franklin RRF 04087220

Underwood Creek Underwood Creek at Wauwatosa UCW 04087088

Willow Creek Willow Creek at Maple Road near Germantown WCG 040870195

1Three of the Phase II sites sampled were in the Lower Milwaukee River Subwatershed. Comparisons are drawn individually between each site and 

the Phase I subwatershed.

26 Water-Quality Characteristics for Selected Sites within the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin
Hydrologic Conditions During the Study 

Period

Data for precipitation, stream discharge, and runoff at 

selected sites in the MMSD planning area are described in 

the following sections. 

Precipitation

Precipitation data from the U.S. Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, 

and National Climatic Data Center (2003, 2004, 2005) 

were available at three sites within the MMSD planning 

area: Germantown Department of Public Works, Mount 

Mary College, and General Mitchell International Airport. 

Data collected at these sites during water years 2004 and 

2005 were compared to monthly and yearly normals for 

1971–2000 (table 9).

Total precipitation in water year 2004 was above 

normal at all sites: 7.64 in. above normal at Germantown, 

1.32 in. above normal at Mount Mary College, and 0.23 in. 

above normal at General Mitchell Airport. At all three sites, 

the monthly precipitation totals in May 2004 were the highest recorded during the study period, and had the greatest 

departures from normal (ranging from 5.12 to 9.80 in.).

Total precipitation in water year 2005 was below 

normal at all sites: -9.29 in. at General Mitchell Airport, 

-6.64 in. at Mount Mary College, and -1.93 in. at Germantown. Monthly precipitation totals in March and April were 

among the lowest observed at all sites during water year 

2005. The greatest departures from normal were in August 

(-2.74 in. at General Mitchell Airport and -2.42 in. at 

Mount Mary College) and April (-2.21 in. at Germantown). 

Discharge and Runoff

Discharge is defined as the volume of water passing 

by a location over a given period of time. Runoff is defined 

as the depth to which the entire drainage area would be 

covered in water if the discharge for a given time period 

were evenly distributed across the area. Continuous stage 

measurements (that is, water-surface elevation above the 

datum of the stream gage) were collected and used to 

determine discharge and runoff during the study period 

at 12 of the 15 stream sites. At 8 of these sites, discharge 

records spanned more than 20 years, enabling comparisons of water year 2004–05 data with the long-term means 

for both discharge (appendixes 6A and 6C) and monthly 

runoff (appendixes 6B and 6C)(Waschbusch and others, 

2005, 2006). At the remaining four sites, discharge records 

spanned shorter time periods, and are therefore provided 

without period of record comparisons (appendix 6A). 

Annual mean discharges in water year 2004 were 

greater than long-term annual mean discharges for all eight 

long-term stream-gaging stations (appendix 6C). Percent 

differences from long-term annual means for water year 

2004 ranged from 1 percent at Underwood Creek to 84 

percent at the Milwaukee River at Milwaukee (appendix 

6C). Sites with drainage basins in the southern portion of 

the MMSD planning area had the lowest percent differences: Underwood Creek (1 percent), Kinnickinnic River 

(6 percent), Oak Creek (7 percent), and Root River near 

Franklin (8 percent)(appendix 6C). Sites with drainage 

basins in the northern portion of the MMSD planning area 

had the highest percent differences: Milwaukee River at 

Milwaukee (84 percent), Milwaukee River near Cedarburg (56 percent), Menomonee River at Menomonee Falls 

(47 percent), and Menomonee River at Wauwatosa (44 

percent)(appendix 6C). Runoff during May, June, and July, 

2004, was greater than respective long-term at all eight 

long-term stream-gaging stations, with percent differences 

ranging from 16 in July at Kinnickinnic River to 538 percent in June at Milwaukee River at Milwaukee (appendixes 

6B and 6C). 

Annual mean discharges in water year 2005 were 

less than long-term annual mean discharges for all eight 

long-term stream-gaging stations (appendix 6c). Percent 

differences from long-term annual means for water year 

2005 ranged from -50 percent at Menomonee River at 

Menomonee Falls to -16 percent at Milwaukee River at 

Milwaukee (appendix 6C). No spatial patterns in discharge 

data were observed in water year 2005. Runoff from 

March through August, 2005, was less than respective 

long-term means at all eight long-term stream-gaging stations, with percent differences ranging from -86 in June at 

Menomonee River at Menomonee Falls to -11 percent in 

March at Menomonee River at Menomonee Falls (appendixes 6B and 6C). 

Evaluation of Data Collected During Phase II 27
Table 9. Monthly and water-year totals for rain gages in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, Wis. 

(U.S. Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, and National Climatic Data Center, 2003, 2004, 

2005).

[All data in inches; M, total precipitation computed with 1–9 daily values missing]

Month

Germantown Dept. of Public Works Mount Mary College General Mitchell International Airport

Total 

precipitation

Normal 

(1971–2000)

Departure 

from normal

Total 

precipitation

Normal 

(1971–2000)

Departure 

from normal

Total 

precipitation

Normal 

(1971–2000)

Departure 

from normal

2004 water year

October M 1.78 2.47 -0.69 1.58 2.28 -0.70 1.51 2.49 -0.98

November 5.67 2.59 3.08 2.98 2.35 .63 3.94 2.70 1.24

December 1.92 1.79 .13 1.40 1.81 -.41 2.03 2.22 -.19

January M 0.89 1.35 -.46 M 1.25 1.60 -.35 1.43 1.85 -.42

February .98 1.20 -.22 M 0.77 1.31 -.54 1.10 1.65 -.55

March 4.27 2.04 2.23 M 3.31 1.95 1.36 3.99 2.59 1.40

April 2.91 3.30 -.39 2.44 3.41 -.97 1.87 3.78 -1.91

May 12.83 3.03 9.80 9.74 2.85 6.89 8.18 3.06 5.12

June 5.41 3.82 1.59 3.51 3.71 -.2 4.07 3.56 .51

July 1.88 4.05 -2.17 3.62 3.46 0.16 3.25 3.58 -.33

August 2.46 4.28 -1.82 2.62 3.98 -1.36 3.43 4.03 -.6

September .09 3.53 -3.44 .19 3.38 -3.19 .24 3.30 -3.06

Total 41.09 33.45 7.64 33.41 32.09 1.32 35.04 34.81 0.23

2005 water year

October 3.13 2.47 0.66 1.72 2.28 -0.56 1.47 2.49 -1.02

November 2.25 2.59 -.34 2.37 2.35 .02 2.38 2.70 -.32

December 1.57 1.79 -.22 M 1.40 1.81 -.41 1.53 2.22 -.69

January 3.48 1.35 2.13 3.67 1.60 2.07 3.31 1.85 1.46

February 2.14 1.20 .94 M 1.26 1.31 -.05 1.79 1.65 .14

March 1.22 2.04 -.82 1.18 1.95 -.77 .72 2.59 -1.87

April 1.09 3.3 -2.21 1.30 3.41 -2.11 1.41 3.78 -2.37

May 3.31 3.03 .28 2.90 2.85 .05 2.62 3.06 -.44

June 1.91 3.82 -1.91 2.14 3.71 -1.57 2.23 3.56 -1.33

July 3.27 4.05 -.78 2.32 3.46 -1.14 2.60 3.58 -.98

August 3.56 4.28 -.72 1.56 3.98 -2.42 1.29 4.03 -2.74

September 4.59 3.53 1.06 3.63 3.38 .25 4.17 3.30 .87

Total 31.52 33.45 -1.93 25.45 32.09 -6.64 25.52 34.81 -9.29

28 Water-Quality Characteristics for Selected Sites within the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin
Results from Manually and Automatically 

Collected Samples 

Data for more than 220 properties and constituents 

were collected during Phase II of the MMSD Corridor 

Study (appendix 3)(Waschbusch and others, 2005, 2006). 

Results from field measurements (pH, specific 

conductance, dissolved oxygen, and temperature), major 

inorganics, and alkalinity gave a general description of 

area water quality, but did not indicate any unusual waterquality patterns that required further discussion or interpretation; a summary of results for these properties and 

constituents is given in table 10. Constituents of interest 

are detailed in the following discussions.

Chloride

Chloride naturally occurs in freshwater streams at low 

concentrations. Concentrations of chloride in rainwater 

are 0 to 2 mg/L and average concentrations of chloride in 

freshwater lakes and streams are 0 to 100 mg/L (Goldman 

and Horne 1983); concentrations in unpolluted streams 

generally contain less than 20 mg/L. Salts containing 

chloride are often used for deicing roads in winter; roadsalt use in the United States amounts to between 8 and 12 

million tons annually (Kunze and Sroka, 2004). 

Chloride concentrations measured in Phase II stream 

sites ranged from 30.2 to 971 mg/L, with a median 

concentration of 146 mg/L. Highest median concentrations were observed in streams whose drainage areas are 

small (less than 19 mi2) and highly urban (greater than 80 

percent), such as Underwood Creek (295 mg/L), Honey 

Creek (260 mg/L), Lincoln Creek (246 mg/L), and Root 

River at Grange Avenue (246 mg/L)(table 1A, fig.2, fig. 8). 

Chloride concentrations indicated a positive relation with 

increasing urban land use (fig. 9). Lowest median concentrations were observed in streams whose drainage areas 

Table 10. Median results for field measurements, major inorganics, and alkalinity that did not indicate any unusual water-quality 

patterns. Results are summarized for 15 stream sites and 6 harbor Phase II sites in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District 

planning area, Wis.

[mg/L, milligram per liter; μg/L, microgram per liter; μS/cm, microsiemen per centimeter]

Property or constituent name Unit Stream 

median value

Harbor

median value

Alkalinity, water, filtered, fixed endpoint (pH 4.5) titration, 

laboratory

mg/L as calcium carbonate 176 114

Alkalinity, water, filtered, incremental titration, field mg/L as calcium carbonate 169 110

Calcium, water, filtered mg/L 61.6 36.1

Dissolved oxygen, water, unfiltered mg/L 9.9 10.7

Fluoride, water, filtered mg/L 0.20 0.20

Iron, water, filtered μg/L 34.5 6

Magnesium, water, filtered mg/L 28.2 12.5

Manganese, water, filtered μg/L 20 0.8

pH, water, unfiltered, field standard units 7.9 8.0

pH, water, unfiltered, laboratory standard units 7.9 8.0

Potassium, water, filtered mg/L 3.35 1.78

Silica, water, filtered mg/L 6.10 1.28

Sodium, water, filtered mg/L 75.8 11.4

Specific conductance, water, unfiltered, laboratory μS/cm 875 308

Specific conductance, water, unfiltered, field μS/cm 952 310

Sulfate, water, filtered mg/L 42.8 24.1

Evaluation of Data Collected During Phase II 29
230 mg/L (USEPA, chronic)

860 mg/L (USEPA, acute)

o ox

12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 10 12 12 12 12 10 10 10 9 9 9

0

400

200

600

1,000

800

1,200

CHLORIDE CONCENTRATION, IN MILLIGRAMS PER LITER

30 Number of values 

EXPLANATION 

Upper adjacent

75th percentile

Median

25th percentile

Lower adjacent

Lower outside

Lower detached

Water-quality

criterion

Upper detached

Upper outside

MRC

LCM

MRM

WCG

MRMF

LMM

UCWHCW

MRW

KRM

MRJ

OCSM

RRG

RRF

JCM

OH-04OH-03OH-11OH-12OH-14OH-13

Stream sites,

arranged in downstream order

Innerharbor sitesOuterharbor sites

Figure 8. Distribution of chloride concentrations, by site, in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, 

Wis. Water-quality criteria lines represent the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency national chronic and acute freshwaterquality criteria for non-priority pollutants for chloride in surface water (230 mg/L and 860 mg/L, respectively) (U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, 2006e). Site abbreviations listed in table 1.

30 Water-Quality Characteristics for Selected Sites within the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin
are large (greater than 600 mi2

) and more heterogeneous in 

land use: Milwaukee River at Mouth (54.9 mg/L), Milwaukee River at Milwaukee (91.9 mg/L), and Milwaukee River 

near Cedarburg (75.9 mg/L). Forty-three samples (from 12 

stream sites) had concentrations above the USEPA national 

chronic freshwater-quality criterion of 230 mg/L for nonpriority pollutants (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 

2006d). One sample collected from Root River at Grange 

Avenue in February, 2004, had a concentration above the 

USEPA national acute freshwater-quality criterion of 860 

mg/L for non-priority pollutants (U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, 2006d).

Stream sites indicated no consistent response in chloride concentration with respect to flow (fig. 10A). With 

respect to seasonal response, median chloride concentrations were highest during the winter (482 mg/L); median 

concentrations ranged from 115 to 175 mg/L for remaining 

seasons (fig. 10B). 

Data were available for Phase I and Phase II chloride concentration comparisons at eight sites (appendix 

5). At seven of those sites, median chloride concentrations measured in Phase II were notably higher than those 

measured in Phase I, with percent differences ranging 

from 29 percent at Root River at Grange Avenue to 289 

percent at Kinnickinnic River. This increase likely was due 

to the lack of Phase I data collected during winter months, 

whereas winter and snowmelt sample collection was part 

of Phase II. Only the Root River near Franklin site indicated no notable difference. 

Median chloride concentrations measured in harbor 

samples ranged from 10.6 to 98.9 mg/L. Harbor samples 

had notably lower median concentrations (19.3 mg/L) than 

stream sites (146 mg/L). Inner-harbor sites (26.1–35.4 

mg/L) had higher median concentrations than outer-harbor 

sites (11.4–11.9 mg/L)(fig. 8). Harbor samples collected in 

spring had the highest median concentration (36.2 mg/L) 

and the highest degree of variability (fig. 10d). Samples 

collected during summer and autumn had lower median 

concentrations (14.6 and 17.7 mg/L, respectively) than 

those collected during spring (36.2 mg/L). No winter 

samples were collected at harbor sites. 

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

TOTAL URBAN LAND USE, IN PERCENT

MEDIAN CHLORIDE CONCENTRATION, IN MILLIGRAMS PER LITER

R2 = 0.8208

MRC

MRM

MRMF

LMM

UCW

HCW

MRW

KRM

MRJ

OCSM

RRG

RRF

JCM

LCM

WCG

Figure 9. Median chloride concentrations plotted against percent urban land use in drainage basins for 15 stream sites in the 

Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, Wis. Site abbreviations listed in table 1.

Evaluation of Data Collected During Phase II 31
230 mg/L

(USEPA, chronic)

860 mg/L

(USEPA, acute)

230 mg/L

(USEPA, chronic)

860 mg/L

(USEPA, acute)

230 mg/L

(USEPA,

chronic)

860 mg/L

(USEPA, acute)

16

CHLORIDE CONCENTRATION, 

IN MILLIGRAMS PER LITER

CHLORIDE CONCENTRATION, 

IN MILLIGRAMS PER LITER

CHLORIDE CONCENTRATION, 

IN MILLIGRAMS PER LITER

CHLORIDE CONCENTRATION, 

IN MILLIGRAMS PER LITER

Spring

Summer

Autumn

Low flow High flow

Winter

Spring

Summer

Autumn

Winter

Spring Summer Autumn Winter

Spring Summer Autumn

Low flow High flow

Lower outsideLower detached

30 Number of values 

EXPLANATION 

Upper detachedUpper outsideUpper adjacent75th percentileMedian25th percentileLower adjacent

Water-qualitycriteria

A. Chloride at 15 stream sites, by flow B. Chloride at 15 stream sites, by seasonC. Chloride at 15 stream sites, by flow and season D. Chloride at 6 harbor sites, by season

0

8600400

200

00

1,200

1,000

105 73

0

8600

400

200

00

1,2001,000

60 58 30 30

27 20 44 14 3 40 14

0

8600

400

200

00

1,2001,000 100

80604020

0

120

21 24 12

Figure 10. Distributions of chloride concentrations for stream and harbor samples, Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, Wis. Stream-sample distributions 

are grouped by flow (

A), season (

B), and flow and season combined (C). Harbor-sample distributions are grouped by season only (

D) (no harbor samples were collected in winter). 

Water-quality criteria lines represent the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency national chronic and acute freshwater-quality criteria for non-priority pollutants for chloride in surface water (230 mg/L and 860 mg/L, respectively) (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2006e).

32 Water-Quality Characteristics for Selected Sites within the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin
Loads, Yields, and Volumetrically Weighted 

Concentrations of Chloride

Chloride loads for June through September 2004 

ranged from 858 tons at Kinnickinnic River to 12,900 tons 

at Milwaukee River at Milwaukee (table 11). VW concentrations ranged from 41 mg/L at Milwaukee River near 

Cedarburg to 101 mg/L at Menomonee River at Wauwatosa. The average daily chloride yield ranged from 0.15 

tons/mi2/d at the Milwaukee River near Cedarburg and 

Milwaukee River at Milwaukee sites to 0.37 tons/mi2/d 

at the Kinnickinnic River site. In water year 2005, chloride loads ranged from 5,940 tons at Kinnickinnic River 

to 32,700 tons at Milwaukee River at Milwaukee. VW 

concentrations ranged from 69 mg/L at Milwaukee River 

near Cedarburg to 349 mg/L at Kinnickinnic River. VW 

chloride concentrations of 245 mg/L at Menomonee River 

at Wauwatosa and 349 mg/L at Kinnickinnic River were 

above the USEPA national chronic freshwater-quality criterion of 230 mg/L for non-priority pollutants, but below 

the USEPA national acute freshwater-quality criterion of 

860 mg/L for non-priority pollutants (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2006d). The average daily yields 

ranged from 0.10 tons/mi2

/d at Milwaukee River near 

Cedarburg to 0.87 tons/mi2/d at Kinnickinnic River. 

There was a seasonal pattern in chloride loads 

in water year 2005 with generally higher loads being 

recorded in January through March (table 12). The greatest 

monthly loads of chloride for data collected in 2004 were 

in June, likely a result of the high stream discharge that 

month (Milwaukee River near Cedarburg had 357 percent 

greater runoff than normal). 

Table 11. Annual chloride load and yield, average daily chloride yield, total water flow, and volumetric total chloride 

concentrations for four Phase II sites in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, Wis.

[tons/mi2, tons per square mile; tons/mi2/d, tons per square mile per day; ft3/s, cubic foot per second; mg/L, milligram per liter; values in bold are for 

complete water years]

Water 

year

Months 

sampled

Chloride load 

(tons)

Chloride yield 

(tons/mi2

)

Average daily 

chloride yield 

(tons/mi2

/d)

Total water flow 

(ft3

/s)

Volumetric chloride 

concentration

(mg/L)

Milwaukee River near Cedarburg

2004 June–Sept. 10,900 18.0 0.15 98,100 41

2005 Oct.–Sept. 21,200 34.9 .10 114,000 69

Milwaukee River at Milwaukee

2004 June–Sept. 12,900 18.5 .15 114,000 42

2005 Oct.–Sept. 32,700 47.0 .13 132,000 92

Menomonee River at Wauwatosa

2004 June–Sept. 3,640 29.5 .24 13,300 101

2005 Oct.–Sept. 17,600 143 .39 26,600 245

Kinnickinnic River at S. 11th Street at Milwaukee

2004 June–Sept. 858 45.6 .37 3,370 94

2005 Oct.–Sept. 5,940 316 .87 6,320 349

Evaluation of Data Collected During Phase II 33
Table 12. Monthly and annual chloride loads for four Phase II sites in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning 

area, Wis., for water years 2004 and 2005.

[WY, water year]

Month

Chloride (tons)

Milwaukee River 

near Cedarburg

Milwaukee River 

at Milwaukee

Menomonee River 

at Wauwatosa

Kinnickinnic River 

at S. 11th Street 

at Milwaukee

Water year 2004

June 5,620 6,750 1,970 348

July 2,410 2,920 1,000 231

August 1,680 2,100 454 177

September 1,150 1,170 211 102

WY total 10,900 12,900 3,640 858

Water year 2005

October 1,180 1,410 272 97

November 1,500 1,620 374 138

December 2,180 2,430 838 271

January 2,270 4,290 2,530 1,260

February 2,440 5,040 5,100 1,930

March 3,450 5,080 3,750 963

April 2,540 3,560 1,900 371

May 1,980 4,710 1,280 299

June 968 1,370 513 184

July 1,050 1,270 336 152

August 614 852 271 102

September 988 1,070 455 177

WY total 21,200 32,700 17,600 5,940

34 Water-Quality Characteristics for Selected Sites within the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin
Nutrients and Chlorophyll a

Concentrations of total nitrogen, nitrate, total phosphorus, and chlorophyll a are primary indicators of nutrient enrichment in streams (U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, 2000), and samples for these constituents were 

collected at all Phase II sites during each site visit. The 

USEPA has established proposed nutrient criteria for the 

continental U.S.; these criteria are specific to regional 

areas, or ecoregions. Ecoregions are defined as areas of 

similar natural geographic characteristics and land-use 

patterns, and include geology, physiography, vegetation, 

climate, soils, wildlife, and hydrology. Ecoregions can be 

defined at multiple scales. For example, there are 14 Nutrient ecoregions and 84 Level III ecoregions in the conterminous United States; Nutrient ecoregions are aggregations 

of Level III ecoregions where the characteristics affecting 

nutrient levels are expected to be similar. Nutrient ecoregions can form the basis for initial development of nutrient 

criteria, however small-scale variability and accuracy may 

be lost during the aggregation of data for these large areas. 

Level III ecoregions are smaller and more homogenous; 

therefore Level III criteria can provide more accurate reference conditions for smaller-scale studies. Additionally, the 

USEPA encourages states and authorized tribes to further 

subdivide these regions and establish more refined criteria 

where possible.

The MMSD planning area is located in Nutrient 

ecoregion VII and Level III Ecoregion 53; the USEPA 

criteria for these ecoregions are defined in table 13 (U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 2000). These criteria 

are the USEPA’s recommendations to states and authorized 

tribes for use in establishing their water-quality standards 

consistent with section 303(c) of the Clean Water Act 

(U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2000), and reflect 

estimated nutrient concentrations in reference streams 

from these areas. Nutrient Ecoregion VII is the “mostly 

glaciated dairy region” that includes the southern twothirds of Wisconsin and Michigan and parts of Minnesota, 

Illinois, Indiana, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and New York (U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 2000). Level III Ecoregion 53, the “Southeastern Wisconsin Till Plains,” includes 

the area northward from the Wisconsin-Illinois border to 

Green Bay, Wis., and stretches eastward from central Wisconsin to Lake Michigan. Additional reference concentrations for total nitrogen, total phosphorus, and chlorophyll 

a have been defined for wadeable Wisconsin streams by 

Robertson and others (2006), and are included to provide 

another benchmark for assessing water-quality.

Whereas concentrations of nutrients and chlorophyll 

a at stream sites could be compared against the USEPA 

criteria, concentrations of total phosphorus and chlorophyll a at harbor sites can be compared against ranges for 

trophic classes; trophic classes are a traditional system for 

describing the water quality of lakes as oligotrophic (low 

nutrient concentrations, low algal populations), mesotrophic (moderate nutrient concentrations, prone to moderate 

algal blooms), and eutrophic (high nutrient concentrations, 

prone to frequent seasonal algal blooms). The trophic state 

index (TSI) was developed to allow for lake classification 

according to concentrations of total phosphorus, chlorophyll a, and Secchi depth (Carlson, 1977). TSI values of 

40 and 50 bound the range of concentrations indicating 

mesotrophic conditions. Corresponding concentrations of 

total phosphorus (0.012–0.024 mg/L) and chlorophyll a

(2.60–7.20 μg/L) were used to classify observed sample 

concentrations from harbor sites. 

Table 13. Estimated nutrient concentrations in reference streams for the area encompassing the Milwaukee Metropolitan 

Sewerage District planning area, Wis.

[mg/L, milligram per liter; μg/L, microgram per liter; --, not determined]

Nutrient indicator 

constituent Unit

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

proposed nutrient criteria (2000)

Reference concentration

(Robertson and others, 

Nutrient Ecoregion VII Level III Ecoregion 53 2006)

Total nitrogen (nitrate + nitrite + 

ammonia + organic nitrogen), water, 

unfiltered, analytically determined

mg/L 0.54 1.59 0.40

Nitrite plus nitrate, water, filtered mg/L .30 .94 --

Phosphorus, water, unfiltered mg/L .033 .08 0.03–0.04

Chlorophyll a, water, unfiltered, 

trichromatic method, uncorrected

μg/L 5.8 -- 1.0

Evaluation of Data Collected During Phase II 35
Total Nitrogen

Total nitrogen concentrations in streams sampled in 

Phase II ranged from 0.30 to 4.44 mg/L with a median 

concentration of 1.33 mg/L. The median concentration 

was less than the USEPA proposed criterion of 1.59 mg/L 

for total nitrogen in Level III Ecoregion 53 (table 13)(U.

S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2000). At Milwaukee River near Cedarburg (2.14 mg/L) and Milwaukee 

River at Milwaukee (1.89 mg/L), median concentrations 

were greater than the USEPA criterion. For the remaining 

streams, median concentrations ranged from 0.98 to 1.43 

mg/L, all of which were greater than the reference concentration of 0.4 mg/L proposed by Robertson and others 

(2006). The maximum total nitrogen concentration, 4.44 

mg/L, was measured at Honey Creek during the snowmelt 

sampling event in March 2004 (fig. 11). Land use did not 

correlate appreciably with total nitrogen throughout the 

MMSD planning area. 

Median concentrations of total nitrogen at all stream 

samples were notably higher during high flow (2.02 mg/L) 

than during low flow (1.13 mg/L)(fig. 12A). Notable seasonality also was evident in total nitrogen concentrations. 

Highest median and greatest variability occurred during 

spring (1.98 mg/L) and winter (2.05 mg/L)(figure 12B). 

Median total nitrogen concentrations measured during 

spring high flow (2.12 mg/L) were higher than those measured during spring low flow (1.47 mg/L). Winter median 

concentrations measured during high flow (2.16 mg/L) 

were also higher than those measured during winter low 

flow (1.29 mg/L)(fig. 12C). 

Data were available for Phase I and Phase II nitrogen concentration comparisons at 11 sites (appendix 5). 

Median total nitrogen concentrations at five of those sites 

decreased from Phase I to Phase II; among these sites, percent differences ranged from -21 percent at Lincoln Creek 

to -57 percent at Little Menomonee River. Honey Creek 

was the only site with a notable increase from Phase I to 

Phase II (288 percent difference). At the remaining five 

sites, no notable differences were observed from Phase I to 

Phase II (fig. 13).

Total nitrogen concentration in harbor samples 

ranged from 0.35 to 2.71 mg/L. Harbor samples had a 

notably lower overall median concentration (0.63 mg/L) 

than stream samples did (1.33 mg/L). Inner-harbor sites 

had higher median concentrations (0.79–1.08 mg/L) than 

outer-harbor sites (0.44–0.48 mg/L). Harbor samples collected in spring had the highest median concentration (0.91 

mg/L) and were the most variable (fig. 12D).

36 Water-Quality Characteristics for Selected Sites within the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin
1.59 mg/L

(USEPA)

x

12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 11 12 10 12 12 12 12 10 10 9 9 9 8

0

1

2

3

4

5

TOTAL NITROGEN CONCENTRATION, IN MILLIGRAMS PER LITER

30 Number of values 

EXPLANATION 

Upper adjacent

75th percentile

Median

25th percentile

Lower adjacent

Lower outside

Lower detached

Water-quality

criterion

Upper detached

Upper outside

MRC

LCM

MRM

WCG

MRMF

LMM

UCWHCW

MRW

KRM

MRJ

OCSM

RRG

RRF

JCM

OH-04OH-03OH-11OH-12OH-14OH-13

Stream sites,

arranged in downstream order

Innerharbor sitesOuterharbor sites

0.4 mg/L (Robertson

and others)

Figure 11. Distribution of total nitrogen concentrations, by site, in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, 

Wis. Water-quality criteria lines represent the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency proposed nutrient criterion for total nitrogen 

in Level III Ecoregion 53 streams (1.59 mg/L)(U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2000) and the reference concentration for 

wadeable Wisconsin streams (0.4 mg/L), as defined by Robertson and others (2006). Site abbreviations listed in table 1.

Evaluation of Data Collected During Phase II 37
1.59 mg/L

(USEPA)

0.4 mg/L (Robertson and others)

0.4 mg/L (Robertson and others)

0.4 mg/L (Robertson and others)

3.0

2.5

2.01.51.0

0.5

0.0

20 24 12

3.0

2.5

2.01.51.0

0.5

0.0

20 24 27 20 44 14 3 39 14 16

105 5

43210

543210

543210

72 59 58 30 30

TOTAL NITROGEN CONCENTRATION, 

IN MILLIGRAMS PER LITER

TOTAL NITROGEN CONCENTRATION, 

IN MILLIGRAMS PER LITER

TOTAL NITROGEN CONCENTRATION, 

IN MILLIGRAMS PER LITER

TOTAL NITROGEN CONCENTRATION, 

IN MILLIGRAMS PER LITER

Spring

Summer

Autumn

Low flow High flow

Winter

Spring

Summer

Autumn

Winter

Spring Summer Autumn Winter

Spring Summer Autumn

Low flow High flow

Lower outsideLower detached

30 Number of values 

EXPLANATION 

Upper detachedUpper outsideUpper adjacent75th percentileMedian25th percentileLower adjacent

Water-qualitycriteria

A. Total nitrogen at 15 stream sites, by flow B. Total nitrogen at 15 stream sites, by seasonC. Total nitrogen at 15 stream sites, by flow and season D. Total nitrogen at 6 harbor sites, by season

1.59 mg/L

(USEPA)

1.59 mg/L

(USEPA)

Figure 12. Distributions of total nitrogen concentrations for stream and harbor samples, Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, Wis. Stream sample 

distributions are grouped by flow (

A), season (

B), and flow and season combined (C). Harbor-sample distributions are grouped by season only (

D) (no harbor samples were 

collected in winter). Water-quality criteria lines represent the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency proposed nutrient criterion for total nitrogen in Level III Ecoregion 53 streams (1.59 mg/L) (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2000), and the reference concentration for Wisconsin wadeable streams (0.4 mg/L), as defined by Robertson and others (2006).

38 Water-Quality Characteristics for Selected Sites within the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin
EXPLANATION

Water

Area within the MMSD

planning area

Area outside of the 

MMSD planning area

Watershed boundary

Subwatershed boundary

Stream

Total nitrogen concentration, 

in milligrams/liter, at Phase II sites

0.10 – 1.17

1.18 – 1.51

1.52 – 1.85

1.86 – 53.70

Total nitrogen concentration, 

in milligrams/liter, in Phase I 

watersheds

0.10 – 1.17

1.18 – 1.51

1.52 – 1.85

1.86 – 53.70

OCSM JCM

HCW

WCG

LCM

UCW

OH-04

OH-11

KRM

LMM

OH-13

OH-12

OH-14

RRF

RRG

MRJ

MRW

MRM

MRC

OH-03

MRMF

88°10' 87°50'

42°50' 43°10'

Lake Michigan

0 4 2 Miles

0 4 2 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, 1989; 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 13. Phase I and Phase II comparison of median total nitrogen concentrations in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage 

District (MMSD) planning area, Wis. Phase I values are shown by subwatershed values and quartiles, Phase II values are shown 

by site using the same quartile. Site abbreviations listed in table 1. 

Evaluation of Data Collected During Phase II 39
Nitrate

Nitrate3 concentrations in streams sampled in Phase 

II ranged from 0.060 to 3.48 mg/L, with an overall median 

of 0.560 mg/L. At the Milwaukee River sites, median 

concentrations were greater than the USEPA proposed 

criterion of 0.94 mg/L for nitrate in Level III Ecoregion 53 

(table 13)(U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2000): 

Milwaukee River near Cedarburg (1.40 mg/L) and Milwaukee River at Milwaukee (1.17 mg/L). The remaining 

medians ranged from 0.270 to 0.860 mg/L. The maximum 

nitrate concentration, 3.48 mg/L, was measured at Honey 

Creek during the snowmelt sampling in March 2004 (fig. 

14). Land use did not correlate appreciably with nitrate 

concentrations.

The median concentration of nitrate in stream 

samples was notably higher during high flow (0.950 mg/L) 

than during low flow (0.480 mg/L)(fig. 15A–C). Median 

concentrations in spring (0.870 mg/L) and winter (1.10 

mg/L) were higher than those in summer and autumn and 

also were more variable. The spring high-flow median 

(1.03 mg/L) was higher than the spring low-flow median 

(0.700 mg/L); however, concentrations were highly 

variable at both extremes of flow. The winter high-flow 

median (1.14 mg/L) was higher than the winter low-flow 

median (0.930 mg/L); however, the variability in winter 

low-flow was greater than in winter high-flow. 

Data were available for Phase I and Phase II nitrate 

concentration comparisons at 12 sites (appendix 5). At 

five sites, median nitrate concentrations increased from 

Phase I to Phase II; the most notable differences were at 

Underwood Creek (which had no concentrations above 

the reporting level (0.02 mg/L as N) in the five samples 

summarized for Phase I and a median concentration of 

0.410 mg/L in samples collected for Phase II) and Little 

Menomonee River (5,350 percent difference). Percent 

differences among the remaining three sites that indicated 

notable increases ranged from 256 percent at Honey Creek 

to 735 percent at Jewel Creek. Only two sites had notable 

decreases in nitrate concentrations: Menomonee River at 

Menomonee Falls (-42 percent) and Lincoln Creek (-41 

percent)(fig. 16). The remaining five sites indicated no 

notable change.

Nitrate concentrations in harbor samples ranged 

from 0.180 to 1.95 mg/L. The overall median concentration for harbor samples (0.360 mg/L) was lower than that 

for stream samples (0.560 mg/L). Inner-harbor sites had 

higher median concentrations (0.400–0.490 mg/L) than 

outer-harbor sites did (0.240–0.260 mg/L). Spring harbor 

samples had the highest median concentration (0.490 mg/

L) and the most variability (fig. 15D). 

3

 Because nitrite generally makes up a negligible proportion of nitrite 

plus nitrate in stream water, this combined constituent is referred to simply as “nitrate” in this report. Concentrations are reported as nitrogen (N).

40 Water-Quality Characteristics for Selected Sites within the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin
0.94 mg/L

12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 10 12 12 12 12 10 10 9 999

0

1

2

3

4

NITRITE PLUS NITRATE CONCENTRATION,

IN MILLIGRAMS PER LITER AS NITROGEN

30 Number of values 

EXPLANATION 

Upper adjacent

75th percentile

Median

25th percentile

Lower adjacent

Lower outside

Lower detached

Water-quality

criterion

Upper detached

Upper outside

MRC

LCM

MRM

WCG

MRMF

LMM

UCWHCW

MRW

KRM

MRJ

OCSM

RRG

RRF

JCM

OH-04OH-03OH-11OH-12OH-14OH-13

Stream sites,

arranged in downstream order

Innerharbor sitesOuterharbor sites

Figure 14. Distribution of nitrate concentrations, by site, in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, Wis. 

Water-quality criterion line represents the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency proposed nutrient criterion for nitrate in Level III 

Ecoregion 53 streams (0.94 mg/L) (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2000). Site abbreviations listed in table 1. 

Evaluation of Data Collected During Phase II 41
0.94 mg/L

2.52.01.51.00.5

0.0

21 24 12

x

27 20 44 14 16 3 40 14

105 73 60 58 30 30

Lower outsideLower detached

30 Number of values 

EXPLANATION 

Upper detachedUpper outsideUpper adjacent75th percentileMedian25th percentileLower adjacent

Water-qualitycriteria

A. Nitrate in 15 stream sites, by flow B. Nitrate in 15 stream sites, by seasonC. Nitrate in 15 stream sites, by flow and season D. Nitrate in 6 harbor sites, by season

NITRITE PLUE NITRATE CONCENTRATION,

IN MILLIGRAMS PER LITER AS NITROGEN

NITRITE PLUE NITRATE CONCENTRATION,

IN MILLIGRAMS PER LITER AS NITROGEN

NITRITE PLUE NITRATE CONCENTRATION,

IN MILLIGRAMS PER LITER AS NITROGEN

NITRITE PLUE NITRATE CONCENTRATION,

IN MILLIGRAMS PER LITER AS NITROGEN

Spring

Summer

Autumn

Low flow High flow

Winter

Spring

Summer

Autumn

Winter

Spring Summer Autumn Winter

Spring Summer Autumn

Low flow High flow

4321043210

43210

0.94 mg/L

0.94 mg/L

Figure 15. Distributions of nitrate concentrations for stream and harbor samples, Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, Wis. Stream sample distributions 

are grouped by flow (

A), season (

B), and flow and season combined (C). Harbor-sample distributions are grouped by season only (

D) (no harbor samples were collected in 

winter). Water-quality criterion line represents the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency proposed nutrient criterion for nitrate in Level III Ecoregion 53 streams (0.94 mg/L) (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2000).

42 Water-Quality Characteristics for Selected Sites within the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin
EXPLANATION

Water

Area within the MMSD

planning area

Area outside of the 

MMSD planning area

Watershed boundary

Subwatershed boundary

Stream

Median nitrate concentration,

in milligrams/liter, at Phase II sites

0.00 – 0.01

0.02 – 0.43

0.44 – 0.59

0.60 – 2.49

Median nitrate concentration,

in milligrams/liter, in Phase I 

watersheds

0.00 – 0.01

0.02 – 0.43

0.44 – 0.59

0.60 – 2.49

OCSM JCM

HCW

WCG

LCM

UCW

OH-04

OH-11

KRM

LMM

OH-13

OH-12

OH-14

RRF

RRG

MRJ

MRW

MRM

MRC

OH-03

MRMF

88°10' 87°50'

42°50' 43°10'

Lake Michigan

0 4 2 Miles

0 4 2 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, 1989; 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 16. Phase I and Phase II comparison of median nitrate concentrations in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District 

(MMSD) planning area, Wis. Phase I values are shown by subwatershed values and quartiles, Phase II values are shown by site 

using same quartile. Site abbreviations listed in table 1. 

Evaluation of Data Collected During Phase II 43
Total Phosphorus

Total phosphorus concentrations in Phase II streams 

ranged from 0.009 to 0.500 mg/L; the overall median was 

0.111 mg/L, which is above the USEPA proposed criterion 

of 0.08 mg/L for total phosphorus in Level III Ecoregion 

53 (table 13)(U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 

2000). Of the 15 stream sites, 11 had median concentrations greater than the USEPA criterion: Lincoln Creek 

(0.163 mg/L), Little Menomonee River (0.152 mg/L), 

Honey Creek (0.150 mg/L), Kinnickinnic River (0.148 

mg/L), Milwaukee River at Milwaukee (0.133 mg/L), Milwaukee River near Cedarburg (0.120 mg/L), Menomonee 

River at Wauwatosa (0.113 mg/L), Root River at Grange 

Avenue (0.113 mg/L), Menomonee River at Menomonee 

Falls (0.100 mg/L), Root River near Franklin (0.092 

mg/L), and Underwood Creek (0.085 mg/L). Medians for 

the remaining four sites ranged from 0.062 to 0.079 mg/L, 

all of which were above the reference concentration of 

0.03 –0.04 mg/L proposed by Robertson and others (2006). 

The maximum total phosphorus concentration, 0.500 mg/

L, was measured in Lincoln Creek (fig. 17). Land use did 

not correlate appreciably with total phosphorus. 

The median total phosphorus concentration during 

high flow (0.136 mg/L) was higher than that during low 

flow (0.098 mg/L)(fig. 18A–C). Variability with respect 

to season was not observed. When flow and season were 

looked at together, no further patterns were observed. 

Data were available for Phase I and Phase II total 

phosphorus concentration comparisons at 11 sites (appendix 5). At six sites, median total phosphorus concentrations 

increased from Phase I to Phase II. Percent differences 

ranged from 32 percent at Oak Creek to 1,420 percent at 

Little Menomonee River (fig. 19). The remaining five sites 

indicated no notable differences. 

Total phosphorus concentrations at harbor sites 

ranged from 0.002 to 0.095 mg/L. The overall median 

concentration for harbor samples (0.021 mg/L) was lower 

than that for stream samples (0.111 mg/L), and is within 

the range of concentrations indicative of mesotrophic lake 

conditions (0.012–0.024 mg/L)(Carlson, 1977). Concentrations at inner-harbor sites were indicative of eutrophic 

conditions and had higher median concentrations (0.032–

0.048 mg/L) than did outer-harbor sites, where median 

concentrations were close to the reporting level for total 

phosphorus (0.004 mg/L), and were indicative of oligotrophic conditions (fig. 17). Spring harbor samples had the 

highest median concentration (0.028 mg/L) and indicated 

the greatest variability (fig. 18D).

44 Water-Quality Characteristics for Selected Sites within the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin
0.08 mg/L (USEPA 0.08 mg/L (USEPA)

Oligotrophic*

0.012 mg/L*

0.024 mg/L*

Mesotrophic*

Eutrophic*

12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 11 12 10 12 12 12 12 10 10 9 999

0.0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.6

0.4

0.5

PHOSPHORUS, IN MILLIGRAMS PER LITER

30 Number of values 

EXPLANATION 

Upper adjacent

75th percentile

Median

25th percentile

Lower adjacent

Lower outside

Lower detached

Water-quality

criterion

Upper detached

Upper outside

Water-quality

criterion range

MRC

LCM

MRM

WCG

MRMF

LMM

UCWHCW

MRW

KRM

MRJ

OCSM

RRG

RRF

JCM

OH-04OH-03OH-11OH-12OH-14OH-13

Stream sites,

arranged in downstream order

Innerharbor sitesOuterharbor sites

0.03– 0.04 mg/L

(Robertson

and others)

Figure 17. Distribution of total phosphorus concentrations, by site, in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning 

area, Wis. Stream water-quality criterion lines represent the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency proposed nutrient criterion 

for total phosphorus in Level III Ecoregion 53 streams (0.08 mg/L)(U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2000) and the reference 

concentrations for wadeable Wisconsin streams (0.03–0.04 mg/L) as defined by Robertson and others (2006). Labels for harbor 

trophic class boundaries (0.012 mg/L and 0.024 mg/L) are marked with an asterisk (*); boundaries delineate trophic classes 

(oligotrophic, mesotropic, eutrophic) for lakes as defined by Carlson (1977). Site abbreviations listed in table 1. 

Evaluation of Data Collected During Phase II 45
0.08 mg/L

(USEPA)

0.0

0.00.060.04

0.02

8

0.120.10

21 24 12 27 20 44 14 3 39 14 16

0.60.50.4

0.3

0.2

0.10.0

0.60.50.4

0.3

0.2

0.10.0

0.60.50.4

0.3

0.20.1

0.0

105 72 59 58 30 30

Lower outsideLower detached

30 Number of values 

EXPLANATION 

Upper detachedUpper outsideUpper adjacent75th percentileMedian25th percentileLower adjacent

Water-qualitycriteria

A. Total phosphorus in 15 stream sites, by flow B. Total phosphorus in 15 stream sites, by seasonC. Total phosphorus in 15 stream sites, by flow and season D. Total phosphorus in 6 harbor sites, by season

TOTAL PHOSPHORUS CONCENTRATION,

IN MILLIGRAMS PER LITER AS NITROGEN

TOTAL PHOSPHORUS CONCENTRATION,

IN MILLIGRAMS PER LITER AS NITROGEN

TOTAL PHOSPHORUS CONCENTRATION,

IN MILLIGRAMS PER LITER AS NITROGEN

TOTAL PHOSPHORUS CONCENTRATION,

IN MILLIGRAMS PER LITER AS NITROGEN

Spring

Summer

Autumn

Low flow High flow

Winter

Spring

Summer

Autumn

Winter

Spring Summer Autumn Winter

Spring Summer Autumn

Low flow High flow

0.08 mg/L

(USEPA)

0.08 mg/L

(USEPA)

0.03–0.04 mg/L

(Robertson

and others)

0.03–0.04 mg/L

(Robertson

and others)

0.03–0.04 mg/L

(Robertson

and others)

Oligotrophic*0.012 mg/L*0.024 mg/L*

Mesotrophic*

0.012 mg/L*0.024 mg/L*

Mesotrophic*

Eutrophic*

Figure 18. Distributions of total phosphorus concentrations for stream and harbor samples, Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, Wis. Stream sample distributions are 

grouped by flow (

A), season (B), and flow and season combined (C). Harbor-sample distributions are grouped by season only (

D) (no harbor samples were collected in winter). Stream waterquality criterion lines represent the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency proposed nutrient criterion for total phosphorus in Level III Ecoregion 53 streams (0.08 mg/L)(U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, 2000) and the reference concentrations for wadeable Wisconsin streams (0.03–0.04 mg/L) as defined by Robertson and others (2006). Labels for harbor trophic class boundaries (0.012 mg/L and 0.024 mg/L) are marked with an asterisk (*); boundaries delineate trophic classes (oligotrophic, mesotropic, eutrophic) for lakes as defined by Carlson (1977).

46 Water-Quality Characteristics for Selected Sites within the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin
EXPLANATION

Water

Area within the MMSD

planning area

Area outside of the 

MMSD planning area

Watershed boundary

Subwatershed boundary

Stream

Total phosphorus concentration,

in milligrams/liter, at Phase II sites

0.004 – 0.039

0.040 – 0.072

0.073 – 0.111

0.112 – 2.500

Total phosphorus concentration,

in milligrams/liter, in Phase I 

watersheds

0.004 – 0.039

0.040 – 0.072

0.073 – 0.111

0.112 – 2.500

OCSM JCM

HCW

WCG

LCM

UCW

OH-04

OH-11

KRM

LMM

OH-13

OH-12

OH-14

RRF

RRG

MRJ

MRW

MRM

MRC

OH-03

MRMF

88°10' 87°50'

42°50' 43°10'

Lake Michigan

0 4 2 Miles

0 4 2 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, 1989; 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 19. Phase I and Phase II comparison of median total phosphorus concentrations in the Milwaukee Metropolitan 

Sewerage District (MMSD) planning area, Wis. Phase I values are shown by subwatershed values and quartiles, Phase II values 

are shown by site using same quartile. Site abbreviations listed in table 1. 

Evaluation of Data Collected During Phase II 47
Loads, Yields, and Volumetrically Weighted Concentrations 

of Total Phosphorus

Total phosphorus loads for June through September 

2004 ranged from 4,980 lb at the Kinnickinnic River site 

to 98,200 lb at the Milwaukee River at Milwaukee site 

(table 14). VW concentrations ranged from 0.15 mg/L at 

Milwaukee River near Cedarburg and Menomonee River at 

Wauwatosa to 0.27 mg/L at Kinnickinnic River at Milwaukee. In water year 2005, the total phosphorus load ranged 

from 8,840 lb at Kinnickinnic River to 113,000 lb at Milwaukee River at Milwaukee. VW concentrations ranged 

from 0.13 mg/L at Menomonee River at Wauwatosa to 

0.26 mg/L at Kinnickinnic River. 

Total phosphorus yields for the complete water year 

2005 ranged from 144 lb/mi2 at Milwaukee River near 

Cedarburg to 470 lb/mi2 at Kinnickinnic River at (table 

14). The median total phosphorus yield for rural watersheds in the Southeastern Wisconsin Till Plains Ecoregion 

was 283 lb/mi2, and the range was 40.7 to 1,800 lb/mi2

(Corsi and others, 1997). Within the two predominantly 

rural drainage basins, the Milwaukee River near Cedarburg and the Milwaukee River at Milwaukee sites had 

total phosphorus yields of 144 lb/mi2 and 162 lb/mi2, 

respectively. These yields were less than the median, but 

within the range of total phosphorus yields measured in 

the Ecoregion (Corsi and others, 1997). The median total 

phosphorus yield for urban watersheds in the Southeast 

Wisconsin Till Plains Ecoregion was 318 lb/mi2, and the 

range was 133 to 1,210 lb/mi2

 (Corsi and others, 1997). 

The Kinnickinnic River drainage basin had a yield of 470 

lb/mi2, which was greater than the median yield in the 

Ecoregion. The total phosphorus yield for the Menomonee 

River drainage basin was less than yields at similar urban 

sites but within the range of monitored yields.

Total phosphorus loads indicated a seasonal pattern at 

Milwaukee River near Cedarburg and Milwaukee River at 

Milwaukee in water year 2005, with higher loads generally being recorded February through May (table 15). No 

seasonal response in loads was observed at Menomonee 

River at Wauwatosa and Kinnickinnic River during water 

year 2005. The greatest monthly loads of total phosphorus 

for data collected in 2004 were recorded in June at all sites 

except Kinnickinnic River, where greatest monthly loads 

were recorded in August.

Chlorophyll a

Chlorophyll a concentrations in Phase II streams 

ranged from 0.260 to 170 μg/L; the median was 5.79 μg/L, 

which is at the USEPA proposed criterion for cholorophyll 

a in Nutrient Ecoregion VII (table 13)(U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, 2000). Median concentrations were 

greater than the USEPA criterion at the following seven 

sites: Milwaukee River near Cedarburg (13.4 μg/L), Jewel 

Creek (10.3 μg/L), Milwaukee River at Milwaukee (10.2 

μg/L), Menomonee River at Menomonee Falls (8.45 

μg/L), Menomonee River at Wauwatosa (7.80 μg/L), 

Table 14. Annual total phosphorus load and yield, average daily phosphorus yield, total water flow, and volumetric total 

phosphorus concentrations for four Phase II sites in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, Wis.

[lbs, pounds; lb/mi2, pound per square mile; lb/mi2/d, pound per square mile per day; ft3/s, cubic foot per second; mg/L, milligram per liter; values in bold

are for complete water years]

Water 

year

Months 

sampled

Total 

phosphorus load

(lbs)

Total 

phosphorus yield

(lb/mi2

)

Average daily 

phosphorus yield 

(lb/mi2/d)

Total 

water flow

(ft3/s)

Volumetric total 

phosphorus concentration 

(mg/L)

Milwaukee River near Cedarburg

2004 June–Sept. 81,800 135 1.10 98,100 0.15

2005 Oct.–Sept. 87,500 144 .40 114,000 .14

Milwaukee River at Milwaukee

2004 June–Sept. 98,200 141 1.16 114,000 .16

2005 Oct.–Sept. 113,000 162 .44 132,000 .16

Menomonee River at Wauwatosa

2004 June–Sept. 11,000 89.4 .73 13,300 .15

2005 Oct.–Sept. 18,700 152 .42 26,600 .13

Kinnickinnic River at S. 11th Street at Milwaukee

2004 June–Sept. 4,980 264 2.17 3,370 .27

2005 Oct.–Sept. 8,840 470 1.29 6,320 .26

48 Water-Quality Characteristics for Selected Sites within the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin
Honey Creek (6.76 μg/L), and Little Menomonee River 

(5.96 μg/L). At the remaining sites, median concentrations 

ranged from 1.34 to 5.34 μg/L, all of which were above the 

reference condition of 1.0 μg/L proposed by Robertson and 

others (2006). The maximum chlorophyll a concentration, 

170 μg/L, was measured in Underwood Creek (fig. 20). 

Land use did not correlate appreciably with chlorophyll a. 

The median concentration of chlorophyll a in stream 

samples during high flow (7.98 μg/L) was higher than 

during low flow (4.96 μg/L). The highest median concentration (10.7 μg/L) was observed in spring samples; these 

samples also indicated the greatest variability in concentrations. The summer high-flow median (7.50 μg/L) was 

higher than the summer low-flow median (4.62 μg/L), 

whereas spring high- and low-flow medians were similar 

(11.6 and 9.98 μg/L, respectively)(fig. 21A–C).

Data were available for Phase I and Phase II chlorophyll a concentration comparisons at seven sites (appendix 

5). Two notable increases were observed at Menomonee 

River at Menomonee Falls (49 percent difference) and 

Menomonee River at Wauwatosa (30 percent difference), 

whereas one notable decrease was observed at Root River 

near Franklin (-34 percent difference). The remaining four 

sites indicated no notable differences.

Chlorophyll a concentrations in harbor samples 

ranged from 0.260 to 31.5 μg/L. The overall median for 

harbor samples (1.82 μg/L) was lower than that for stream 

samples (5.79 μg/L); in addition, it was less than the range 

of concentrations indicative of mesotrophic lake conditions 

(2.60–7.20 μg/L) and were therefore indicative of oligotrophic conditions (Carlson, 1977). Concentrations at innerharbor sites were indicative of mesotrophic conditions 

and had higher median concentrations (4.38–5.70 μg/L) 

than outer-harbor sites (0.830–1.09 μg/L), where median 

concentrations were indicative of oligotrophic conditions. 

Summer harbor samples had the highest median concentration (3.35 μg/L) and indicated the most variability (fig. 

21D). 

Table 15. Monthly and annual total phosphorus loads for four Phase II sites in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District 

planning area, Wis., for water years 2004 and 2005.

[WY, water year]

Month

Total phosphorus (pounds)

Milwaukee River 

near Cedarburg

Milwaukee River 

at Milwaukee

Menomonee River 

at Wauwatosa

Kinnickinnic River 

at S. 11th Street 

at Milwaukee

Water year 2004

June 60,800 73,100 5,190 1,440

July 13,700 13,500 3,690 1,700

August 5,600 8,420 1,840 1,730

September 1,690 3,170 239 102

WY total 81,800 98,200 11,000 4,980

Water year 2005

October 1,010 2,620 523 357

November 1,980 3,160 672 464

December 11,100 8,110 587 384

January 3,890 7,430 2,270 1,250

February 17,700 26,600 2,540 956

March 23,300 24,800 2,400 739

April 10,000 13,400 1,460 714

May 6,130 12,300 2,200 818

June 3,270 4,530 1,440 497

July 3,840 4,720 1,580 772

August 2,940 2,460 822 389

September 2,370 2,640 2,190 1,500

WY total 87,500 113,000 18,700 8,840

Evaluation of Data Collected During Phase II 49
5.8 μg/L

(USEPA)

1.0 μg/L

(Robertson and others)

Water-quality

criterion range

Oligotrophic*

2.6 μg/L*

7.2 μg/L*

Mesotrophic*

Eutrophic*

12 10 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 10 10 9 5 999

0.26

1.00

10.00

100.00

500.00

CHLOROPHYLL

A, IN MICROGRAMS PER LITER

Reporting level = 0.26

30 Number of values 

EXPLANATION 

Upper adjacent

75th percentile

Median

25th percentile

Lower adjacent

Lower outside

Lower detached

Water-quality

criterion

Upper detached

Upper outside

MRC

LCM

MRM

WCG

MRMF

LMM

UCWHCW

MRW

KRM

MRJ

OCSM

RRG

RRF

JCM

OH-04OH-03OH-11OH-12OH-14OH-13

Stream sites,

arranged in downstream order

Innerharbor sitesOuterharbor sites

Figure 20. Distribution of chlorophyll a concentrations, by site, in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, 

Wis. Stream water-quality criterion lines represent the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency proposed nutrient criterion for 

chlorophyll a in Nutrient Ecoregion VII (5.8 μg/L)(U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2000) and the reference concentration for 

wadeable Wisconsin streams (1.0 μg/L) as defined by Robertson and others (2006). Labels for harbor trophic class boundaries (2.6 

μg/L and 7.2 μg/L) are marked with an asterisk (*); boundaries delineate trophic classes (oligotrophic, mesotropic, eutrophic) for 

lakes as defined by Carlson (1977). Site abbreviations listed in table 1.

50 Water-Quality Characteristics for Selected Sites within the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin
5.8 μg/L

(USEPA)

1.0 μg/L

(Robertson

and others)

1.0 μg/L

(Robertson

and others)

5.8 μg/L

(USEPA)

5.01.00.50.1

50.010.0

100.0

21 23 12 27 20 44 14 3 40 14 16

1.000.26

10.00

500.00100.00

1.000.26

10.00

500.00100.00

1.00

0.26

10.00

500.00100.00

105 73 60 58 30 30

5.8 μg/L

(USEPA)

1.0 μg/L

(Robertson

and others)

Oligotrophic*

2.6 μg/L*

7.2 μg/L*

Mesotrophic*

Eutrophic* Lower outside

Lower detached

30 Number of values 

EXPLANATION 

Upper detachedUpper outsideUpper adjacent75th percentileMedian25th percentileLower adjacent

Water-qualitycriteriaWater-qualitycriterion range

A. Chlorophyll a in 15 stream sites, by flow B. Chlorophyll a in 15 stream sites, by season

C. Chlorophyll a in 15 stream sites, by flow and season D. Chlorophyll a in 6 harbor sites, by season

 CONCENTRATION, A CHLOROPHYLL

IN MICROGRAMS PER LITER

 CONCENTRATION, A CHLOROPHYLL

IN MICROGRAMS PER LITER

 CONCENTRATION, A CHLOROPHYLL

IN MICROGRAMS PER LITER

 CONCENTRATION, A CHLOROPHYLL

IN MICROGRAMS PER LITER

Spring

Summer

Autumn

Low flow High flow

Winter

Spring

Summer

Autumn

Winter

Spring Summer Autumn Winter

Spring Summer Autumn

Low flow High flow

REPORTING

LEVEL = 0.26

REPORTING

LEVEL = 0.26

REPORTING

LEVEL = 0.26

REPORTING

LEVEL = 0.26

Figure 21. Distributions of chlorophyll a concentrations for stream and harbor samples, Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, Wis. Stream sample distributions 

are grouped by flow (

A), season (B), and flow and season combined (C). Harbor-sample distributions are grouped by season only (

D) (no harbor samples were collected in winter). Stream 

water-quality criterion lines represent the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency proposed nutrient criterion for chlorophyll a in Nutrient Ecoregion VII (5.8 μg/L)(U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2000) and the reference concentration for wadeable Wisconsin streams (1.0 μg/L) as defined by Robertson and others (2006). Labels for harbor trophic class boundaries (2.6 μg/L and 7.2 μg/L) are marked with an asterisk (*); boundaries delineate trophic classes (oligotrophic, mesotropic, eutrophic) for lakes as defined by Carlson (1977).

Evaluation of Data Collected During Phase II 51
Suspended Sediment

Suspended-sediment concentrations at Phase II 

stream sites ranged from 1 to 273 mg/L, with a median of 

15 mg/L. Jewel Creek had the highest median concentration (28 mg/L); at the remaining sites, the median ranged 

from 4.0 to 25.5 mg/L. The maximum suspended-sediment 

concentration, 273 mg/L, was measured in Oak Creek (fig. 

22). Variations in land use did not correlate appreciably 

with differences in suspended-sediment concentrations. 

The median suspended-sediment concentration during 

high flow (26 mg/L) was higher than that during low flow 

(9 mg/L). Spring had the highest median concentration 

(20.5 mg/L); variability was similar among all seasons. 

The highest median concentration (39 mg/L) was observed 

during spring high flow (fig. 23A–C). 

Data were available for Phase I and Phase II suspended-sediment concentration comparisons at 11 

sites (appendix 5). Suspended-sediment concentrations 

decreased from Phase I to Phase II at all sites, with percent 

differences ranging from -28 to -97 percent. The greatest 

decreases were observed at Kinnickinnic River (-97 percent), Underwood Creek (-97 percent), Honey Creek (-95 

percent), and Root River at Grange Avenue (-93 percent).

 Median suspended-sediment concentrations for harbor samples ranged from 1 to 45 mg/L. The overall median 

for harbor samples (2 mg/L) was lower than that for stream 

samples (15 mg/L). Inner-harbor sites had higher median 

concentrations (2–6.5 mg/L) than outer-harbor sites (1–2 

mg/L). Harbor samples had the highest median concentration and greatest variability during spring (3.5 mg/L)(fig. 

23D).

12 12 12 12 10 10 12 12 11 11 12 10 12 9 88 8 12 12 9 9

1

5

10

50

100

300

SUSPENDED-SEDIMENT CONCENTRATION, IN MILLIGRAMS PER LITER

30 Number of values 

EXPLANATION 

Upper adjacent

75th percentile

Median

25th percentile

Lower adjacent

Lower outside

Lower detached

Upper detached

Upper outside

MRC

LCM

MRM

WCG

MRMF

LMM

UCWHCW

MRW

KRM

MRJ

OCSM

RRG

RRF

JCM

OH-04OH-03OH-11OH-12OH-14OH-13

Stream sites,

arranged in downstream order

Innerharbor sitesOuterharbor sites

Reporting level = 1

Figure 22. Distribution of suspended-sediment concentrations, by site, in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District 

planning area, Wis. Site abbreviations listed in table 1.

52 Water-Quality Characteristics for Selected Sites within the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin
50

100

543

2

1

4030

2010

20 22 11 26 20 42 13 2 40 13 15

REPORTING

LEVEL = 1

REPORTING

LEVEL = 1

REPORTING

LEVEL = 1

REPORTING

LEVEL = 1

10

51

50

300100

10

51

50

300100

10

5

1

50

300100

101 70 60 55 28 28

Lower outsideLower detached

30 Number of values 

EXPLANATION 

Upper detachedUpper outsideUpper adjacent75th percentileMedian25th percentileLower adjacent

A. Suspended sediment in 15 stream sites, by flow B. Suspended sediment in 15 stream sites, by seasonC. Suspended sediment in 15 stream sites, by flow and season D. Suspended sediment in 6 harbor sites, by season

SUSPENDED-SEDIMENT CONCENTRATION,

IN MILLIGRAMS PER LITER

SUSPENDED-SEDIMENT CONCENTRATION,

IN MILLIGRAMS PER LITER

SUSPENDED-SEDIMENT CONCENTRATION,

IN MILLIGRAMS PER LITER

SUSPENDED-SEDIMENT CONCENTRATION,

IN MILLIGRAMS PER LITER

Spring

Summer

Autumn

Low flow High flow

Winter

Spring

Summer

Autumn

Winter

Spring Summer Autumn Winter

Spring Summer Autumn

Low flow High flow

Figure 23. Distributions of suspended-sediment concentrations for stream and harbor samples, Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, Wis. Stream sample 

distributions are grouped by flow (

A), season (B), and flow and season combined (C). Harbor-sample distributions are grouped by season only (

D) (no harbor samples were collected in 

winter).

Evaluation of Data Collected During Phase II 53
Loads, Yields, and Volumetrically Weighted 

Concentrations of Suspended Sediment

Suspended-sediment loads for June through September 2004 ranged from 2,060 tons at Kinnickinnic River to 

9,380 tons at Milwaukee River at Milwaukee (table 16). 

VW suspended-sediment concentrations ranged from 28 

mg/L at Milwaukee River near Cedarburg to 227 mg/L at 

Kinnickinnic River. In water year 2005, the suspendedsediment load ranged from 2,380 tons at Kinnickinnic 

River to 8,340 tons at Milwaukee River near Cedarburg. 

VW suspended-sediment concentrations ranged from 23 

mg/L at Milwaukee River at Milwaukee to 140 mg/L at 

Kinnickinnic River. 

Combined averages of average daily sediment yields 

from June through September 2004 and water year 2005 

were compared to combined average yields from available 

historical data. Menomonee River at Wauwatosa indicated 

the largest decrease, with average yields decreasing 50 

percent. Milwaukee River at Milwaukee and Kinnickinnic 

River indicated comparatively moderate decreases (36 and 

29 percent, respectively). Milwaukee River near Cedarburg 

indicated no change in average daily sediment yields. 

Yields from water year 2005 ranged from 11.9 

tons/mi2 at Milwaukee River at Milwaukee to 127 tons/mi2

at Kinnickinnic River (table 16). The median yield for the 

Southern Wisconsin Till Plains Ecoregion for rural sites 

was 32.4 tons/mi2, and the range was 4.4 to 1,710 tons/mi2

(Corsi and others, 1997). Yields from the two predominantly rural drainage basins (Milwaukee River near Cedarburg and Milwaukee River at Milwaukee) are within this 

range but near the minimum yield. The median yield for 

urban sites in the Southern Wisconsin Till Plains Ecoregion ranged from 17 to 451 tons/mi2

, and the median was 

130 tons/mi2 (Corsi and others, 1997). Yields from the two 

predominantly urban drainage basins (Menomonee River 

at Wauwatosa and Kinnickinnic River) were 29.7 tons/mi2

and 127 tons/mi2, respectively (table 13). These yields 

were within the Ecoregion range for urban sites, with the 

Kinnickinnic River site close to the median. 

VW sediment concentrations for averages of water 

years 2004 and 2005 ranged from 27 mg/L at Milwaukee 

River at Milwaukee to 184 mg/L at Kinnickinnic River 

(table 16). The sediment concentrations were within the 

range of sediment concentrations previously found at sites 

within the MMSD planning area (Schneider and others, 

2004). When compared to combined averages of available 

historical data, Menomonee River at Wauwatosa had the 

greatest decrease in VW sediment concentration with a 55-

percent decrease. The next greatest decrease was observed 

at Milwaukee River at Milwaukee, with a 52-percent 

decrease. Decreases at Kinnickinnic River and Milwaukee 

River near Cedarburg were more moderate, with decreases 

of 25 and 26 percent, respectively. 

Suspended-sediment loads indicated a seasonal 

pattern at Milwaukee River near Cedarburg and Milwaukee River at Milwaukee in water year 2005, with higher 

loads generally being recorded from February through 

May (table 17). A seasonal pattern was also observed at 

Menomonee River at Wauwatosa with generally elevated 

levels during these same months, and highest loads were 

recorded in January. No seasonal response in suspended 

sediment loads was observed at Kinnickinnic River during 

water year 2005. The greatest monthly loads of suspended 

sediment for data collected in 2004 were recorded in June 

at Milwaukee River near Cedarburg and Milwaukee River 

at Milwaukee, in July at Menomonee River at Wauwatosa, 

and in August at Kinnickinnic River.

54 Water-Quality Characteristics for Selected Sites within the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin
Table 16. Annual suspended-sediment load and yield, average daily sediment yield, total water flow, and volumetrically 

weighted sediment concentrations for four Phase II sites in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, Wis.

[tons/mi2, tons per square mile; tons/mi2/d, tons per square mile per day; ft3/s, cubic foot per second; mg/L, milligram per liter; VW, volumetrically 

weighted; --, no data; values in bold are for complete water years]

Water 

year

Months 

sampled

Suspended 

sediment load 

(tons)

Suspended 

sediment yield

(tons/mi2

)

Average daily 

sediment yield 

(tons/mi2/d)

Total water 

flow

(ft3/s)

VW sediment 

concentration

(mg/L)

Milwaukee River near Cedarburg

1975 -- -- -- -- -- --

1976 -- -- -- -- -- --

1977 -- -- -- -- -- --

1982 July–Sept. 2,090 3.44 0.04 16,700 46

1983 Oct.–Sept. 14,700 24.2 .07 204,000 27

1984 Oct.–Sept. 20,400 33.6 .09 196,000 39

2004 June–Sept. 7,290 12.0 .10 98,100 28

2005 Oct.–Sept. 8,340 13.8 .04 113,635 27

Milwaukee River at Milwaukee

1975 -- -- -- -- -- --

1976 -- -- -- -- -- --

1977 -- -- -- -- -- --

1982 July–Sept. 2,850 4.09 0.04 20,300 52

1983 Oct.–Sept. 27,600 39.7 .11 233,000 44

1984 Oct.–Sept. 44,600 64.1 .18 227,000 73

2004 June–Sept. 9,380 13.5 .11 114,000 31

2005 Oct.–Sept. 8,300 11.9 .03 132,000 23

Menomonee River at Wauwatosa

1975 Jan.–Sept. 15,300 124 0.46 34,800 163

1976 Oct.–Sept. 10,400 84.6 .23 36,400 106

1977 Oct.–Sept. 6,840 55.6 .15 15,800 161

1982 June–Sept. 2,570 20.9 .17 5,390 177

1983 Oct.–Sept. 10,500 85.4 .23 45,400 86

1984 Oct.–Sept. 9,140 74.3 .20 43,300 78

2004 June–Sept. 2,300 18.8 .15 13,300 64

2005 Oct.–Sept. 3,650 29.7 .08 26,600 51

Kinnickinnic River at S. 11th Street at Milwaukee

1975 -- -- -- -- -- --

1976 -- -- -- -- -- --

1977 -- -- -- -- -- --

1982 -- -- -- -- -- --

1983 Oct.–Sept. 5,380 286 0.78 9,810 203

1984 Oct.–Sept. 6,720 357 .98 8,740 285

2004 June–Sept. 2,060 110 .90 3,370 227

2005 Oct.–Sept. 2,380 127 .35 6,320 140

Evaluation of Data Collected During Phase II 55
Table 17. Monthly and annual suspended-sediment loads for four Phase II sites in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage 

District planning area, Wis., for water years 2004 and 2005.

[WY, water year]

Month

Suspended sediment (tons)

Milwaukee River 

near Cedarburg

Milwaukee River 

at Milwaukee

Menomonee River 

at Wauwatosa

Kinnickinnic River 

at S. 11th Street 

at Milwaukee

Water year 2004

June 6,000 6,960 862 370

July 1,020 1,320 1,020 794

August 214 850 419 887

September 60 250 12 5

WY total 7,290 9,380 2,300 2,060

Water year 2005

October 50 528 50 14

November 67 537 50 31

December 1,470 985 72 58

January 206 429 678 560

February 1,720 1,280 649 214

March 2,200 1,580 513 39

April 793 1,630 282 265

May 830 460 332 202

June 149 295 198 73

July 292 233 200 156

August 309 94 72 25

September 256 250 551 745

WY total 8,340 8,300 3,650 2,380

56 Water-Quality Characteristics for Selected Sites within the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin
Mercury

Mercury (Hg) is a natural element, but human activity 

has greatly increased its abundance in the environment 

(Mason and others, 1994). The principal source of mercury to the environment is atmospheric emissions from 

fossil-fuel combustion and waste incineration. However, 

in some settings other potential mercury sources can be 

important, such as mining and industrial effluents. Unlike 

most contaminants, natural processes in the environment 

actually increase mercury toxicity by converting some of 

the mercury to methylmercury (MeHg), the most toxic 

and bioaccumulative form of mercury (Wiener and others, 

2003). Methylmercury constitutes nearly all the mercury 

found in the top levels of aquatic food webs, yet it rarely 

exceeds 10 percent of the total mass of mercury in sediment or water. Gaps in our understanding of the processes 

and factors controlling exposure to methylmercury (for 

example, methylation, demethylation and biotic uptake) 

are key challenges facing scientists investigating the 

mercury problem; therefore, much attention is placed on 

understanding the sources, transport, and fate of methylmercury in the environment. 

In order to assess current levels of mercury contamination in the MMSD planning area, samples of water, bed 

sediment, and fish tissue were analyzed for mercury concentrations. This section of the report discusses concentrations in water samples, which were collected at stream and 

harbor sites in 2004 and 2005 during summer (July and 

August) low- and high-flow events, (resulting in a total of 

4 mercury samples collected at each of the 21 sites over 

the study period). Concentrations in bed sediment and fish 

tissues are discussed in later sections of this report. 

Total Mercury

The overall median concentrations of dissolved and 

particulate total mercury in stream samples were 1.06 and 

1.42 ng/L, respectively. These concentrations are similar 

to those observed in stream water from other urban areas 

across the nation (Krabbenhoft and others, 1999). Median 

dissolved total mercury concentrations indicated a positive 

TOTAL URBAN LAND USE, IN PERCENT

0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

MEDIAN CONCENTRATION OF DISSOLVED TOTAL MERCURY,

IN NANOGRAMS PER LITER

R2 = 0.4803

MRC

MRM

MRMF

LMM

UCW HCW

MRW

KRM

MRJ

OCSM

RRG

RRF

JCM

LCM

WCG

Figure 24. Median dissolved total mercury concentrations plotted against percent urban land use in site drainage basins for 

15 stream sites in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, Wis. Site abbreviations listed in table 1.

Evaluation of Data Collected During Phase II 57
relation with increasing urban land use (fig. 24). Highest median dissolved total mercury concentrations were 

found in samples from the Kinnickinnic River (2.26 ng/L), 

Underwood Creek (2.00 ng/L), and Honey Creek (1.98 

ng/L) sites (fig. 25). The lowest median dissolved total 

mercury concentration was at Milwaukee River at Mouth 

(0.49 ng/L). Medians at the remaining sites ranged 

from 0.80 to 1.68 ng/L. Highest median particulate total 

mercury concentrations were found in samples from 

Menomonee River at Wauwatosa (4.34 ng/L), Oak Creek 

(3.25 ng/L), and Little Menomonee River (2.84 ng/L). 

Medians at the remaining sites ranged from 0.68 to 2.16 

ng/L. Median particulate total mercury concentrations 

indicated no consistent response in relation to land use. 

The overall medians of dissolved and particulate 

total mercury concentrations in harbor samples (0.42, 

0.18 ng/L, respectively) were notably lower than those in 

stream samples. Highest dissolved and particulate median 

concentrations in the harbor sites were found at the Middle 

Mid-Harbor Milwaukee Outer Harbor site (OH-03)(0.60 

and 1.05 ng/L, respectively)(fig. 25). Median dissolved 

total mercury concentrations at the remaining harbor 

sites ranged from 0.14 to 0.51 ng/L. Median particulate 

total mercury concentrations at the remaining harbor sites 

ranged from 0.08 to 0.31 ng/L. 

MEDIAN TOTAL MERCURY CONCENTRATION,

IN NANOGRAMS PER LITER

Dissolved total mercury

Particulate total mercury

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

4.5

5

MRC

LCM

MRM

WCG

MRMF

LMM

UCWHCW

MRW

KRM

MRJ

OCSM

RRG

RRF

JCM

OH-04OH-03OH-11OH-12OH-14OH-13

Stream sites,

arranged in downstream order

Innerharbor sitesOuterharbor sites

Figure 25. Median concentrations of total mercury, by site, in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, 

Wis. Site abbreviations listed in table 1. 

58 Water-Quality Characteristics for Selected Sites within the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin
Methylmercury

Median dissolved and particulate methylmercury 

concentrations for all stream samples were 0.08, and 0.04 

ng/L, respectively. These concentrations were much higher 

(156 percent difference) than methylmercury concentrations in streamwater from urban areas across the Nation 

(Krabbenhoft and others, 1999). Highest median dissolved 

methylmercury concentrations were observed in samples 

from the Menomonee River at Menomonee Falls (0.17 

ng/L) and Milwaukee River near Cedarburg (0.12 ng/L) 

sites (fig. 26). Median concentrations at the remaining sites 

ranged from less than 0.04 to 0.10 ng/L. Highest median 

particulate methylmercury concentrations were observed 

in samples from Menomonee River at Wauwatosa (0.12 

ng/L). Median concentrations at the remaining sites ranged 

from 0.02 to 0.09 ng/L. Median dissolved and particulate 

methylmercury concentrations indicated no consistent 

response in relation to land use.

Overall, methylmercury concentrations at harbor sites 

were much lower than those at stream sites. Dissolved 

methylmercury concentrations in all but one harbor sample 

were below the reporting level of 0.04 ng/L (fig. 26). 

Similarly, particulate methylmercury concentrations for 

most harbor samples were at or below the reporting level 

of 0.01 ng/L. The highest median particulate methylmercury concentrations were found at the Middle Mid-Harbor 

Milwaukee Outer Harbor site (OH-03)(0.02 ng/L) and the 

North Mid-Harbor Milwaukee Outer Harbor site (OH04)(0.02 ng/L). 

MEDIAN METHYLMERCURY CONCENTRATION,

IN NANOGRAMS PER LITER

Dissolved methylmercury

Particulate methylmercury

MRC

LCM

MRM

WCG

MRMF

LMM

UCWHCW

MRW

KRM

MRJ

OCSM

RRG

RRF

JCM

OH-04OH-03OH-11OH-12OH-14OH-13

Stream sites,

arranged in downstream order

Innerharbor sitesOuterharbor sites

0.00

0.02

0.04

0.06

0.08

0.10

0.12

0.14

0.16

0.18

Figure 26. Median concentrations of methylmercury, by site, in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, 

Wis. Site abbreviations listed in table 1. 

Evaluation of Data Collected During Phase II 59
Indicator Organisms

Indicator organisms are microorganisms whose presence in water indicates probable presence of pathogens 

(disease-causing organisms). Ideally, such microorganisms 

are nonpathogenic, occur consistently in pathogen-contaminated water, do not multiply in waters, are reliably 

detectable even at low concentrations, and are present in 

greater numbers than and have similar survival times to 

pathogens. The waterborne pathogens of interest during 

Phase II were bacterial, viral, and protozoal. Testing was 

limited to bacterial and viral indicators because, to date, no 

adequate indicator protozoa have been defined (Mara and 

Horan, 2003). 

The indicators used during Phase II—fecal coliforms, 

Escherichia coli (E. coli), and coliphage—were chosen 

because of their efficacy at predicting pathogen presence 

and their widespread use in water-quality monitoring in the 

United States. Traditionally, the fecal coliform group has 

been used as an indicator of bacterial pathogen presence 

and general wastewater contamination (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1976). In 1986, the USEPA 

updated its guidance to recommend that a particular fecal 

coliform member, E. coli, be monitored instead because of 

its stronger relation to the occurrence of swimming-associated gastrointestinal illness (Dufour, 1984). Coliphage 

are a class of viruses that infect E. coli. They have higher 

resistance to environmental stresses and disinfection than 

bacteria do and are therefore thought to mirror the survival 

rates of enteric viruses more closely than their bacterial 

counterparts (Mara and Horan, 2003). 

The many detections in indicator data sets from 

the MMSD planning area generally allowed for the use 

of typical statistical descriptors in this report. Wherever 

possible, concentrations are given as medians. Where 

data were insufficient to do this and results were widely 

dispersed, results are compared in terms of ranges and 

maximum concentrations. 

Fecal Coliforms

In 1976, the USEPA established a water-quality 

criterion stating that the acceptable limit for fecal coliform 

concentration in bathing waters was 200 col/100mL (U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 1976). Historical data 

are available for fecal coliforms and were summarized in 

the Phase I report (Schneider and others, 2004). 

Fecal coliform concentrations in stream samples 

ranged from less than 10 to 58,000 col/100 mL, with a 

median concentration of 350 col/100 mL. Median concentrations at the majority of stream sites (73 percent) were 

above the USEPA criterion of 200 col/100 mL. Median 

fecal coliform concentrations indicate a positive relation 

with increasing urban land use (fig. 27). The Honey Creek 

site had the highest median concentration (1,900 col/100 

mL)(fig. 28), and the Milwaukee River at Mouth site had 

the lowest (55 col/100 mL). Median concentrations at 

remaining sites ranged from 130 to 695 col/100 mL. 

Although higher maximum concentrations were 

found in stream samples collected during low-flow events 

(58,000 col/100 mL) than in those from high-flow events 

(6,600 col/100 mL), median concentrations indicated 

no consistent response in relation to flow (fig. 29A). No 

patterns were evident in relation to seasonality (fig. 29B); 

however, when flows were combined with seasonality, 

a consistent response was apparent (fig. 29C). Summer 

low-flow samples had the highest median concentration of 

fecal coliform, and summer high-flow events had the lowest; the opposite was true for winter samples. 

Data were available for Phase I and Phase II fecal 

coliform concentration comparisons at ten sites (appendix 

5). At most sites (7 of 10), median fecal coliform concentrations decreased from Phase I to Phase II, where percent 

differences ranged from -97 percent at Underwood Creek 

to -29 percent at Menomonee River at Menomonee Falls. 

However, there was one site with a notable increase: Jewel 

Creek, which had no concentrations above the reporting 

level (10 col/100 mL) in the two samples summarized 

for Phase I and a median concentration of 165 col/100 

mL in samples collected for Phase II. The remaining two 

sites, Root River near Franklin and Root River at Grange 

Avenue, indicated no notable differences.

The overall median fecal coliform concentration at 

harbor sites (less than 10 col/100 mL) was lower than that 

for stream sites (350 col/100 mL), and may be attributed 

to organism die-off due to environmental stress or dilution 

when mixing with water from Lake Michigan. Median 

concentrations in samples from the inner-harbor sites 

ranged from less than 10 to 20 col/100 mL (fig 28). No 

fecal coliform were detected in samples collected from 

any of the three sites in the outer harbor. Harbor samples 

indicated no seasonal response (fig. 29D).

60 Water-Quality Characteristics for Selected Sites within the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin
TOTAL URBAN LAND USE, IN PERCENT

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

LOG-TRANSFORMED MEDIAN CONCENTRATION OF

FECAL COLIFORM, IN COLONIES PER 100 MILLILITERS

R2 = 0.4925

MRC

MRM

MRMF

LMM

UCW

HCW

MRW

KRM

MRJ

OCSM

RRG

RRF

JCM

LCM

WCG

Figure 27. Median concentrations of fecal coliform (log transformed) plotted against percent urban land use in site drainage 

basins for 15 stream sites in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, Wis. Site abbreviations listed in 

table 1.

Evaluation of Data Collected During Phase II 61
200 col/100 mL

Reporting level = 10

12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 9 10 9 10 9 10

10

100

1,000

10,000

100,000

FECAL COLIFORM, IN COLONIES PER 100 MILLILITERS

30 Number of values 

EXPLANATION 

Upper adjacent

75th percentile

Median

25th percentile

Lower adjacent

Lower outside

Lower detached

Upper detached

Upper outside

Water-quality

criteria

MRC

LCM

MRM

WCG

MRMF

LMM

UCWHCW

MRW

KRM

MRJ

OCSM

RRG

RRF

JCM

OH-04OH-03OH-11OH-12OH-14OH-13

Stream sites,

arranged in downstream order

Innerharbor sitesOuterharbor sites

Figure 28. Distribution of fecal coliform concentrations, by site, in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning 

area, Wis. Water-quality criterion line represents the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency acceptable limit for fecal coliform

concentrations in recreational waters (200 col/100 mL) (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1976). Site abbreviations listed in 

table 1. 

62 Water-Quality Characteristics for Selected Sites within the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin
200 col/

100 mL

200 col/

100 mL

21 24 12 20 45 27 14 40 15 3 16

REPORTING

LEVEL = 10

10

100

1,000

10,000

100,000

REPORTING

LEVEL = 10

REPORTING

LEVEL = 10

10

100

1,000

10,000

100,000

REPORTING

LEVEL = 10

100

10

1,000

10,000

100,000 106 74 60 60 30 30

Lower outsideLower detached

30 Number of values 

EXPLANATION 

Upper detachedUpper outsideUpper adjacent75th percentileMedian25th percentileLower adjacent

Water-qualitycriteria

200 col/

100 mL

200 col/

100 mL

A. Fecal coliform in 15 stream sites, by flow B. Fecal coliform in 15 stream sites, by seasonC. Fecal coliform in 15 stream sites, by flow and season D. Fecal coliform in 6 harbor sites, by season

FECAL COLIFORM CONCENTRATION,

IN COLONIES PER 100 MILLILITERS

FECAL COLIFORM CONCENTRATION,

IN COLONIES PER 100 MILLILITERS

FECAL COLIFORM CONCENTRATION,

IN COLONIES PER 100 MILLILITERS

FECAL COLIFORM CONCENTRATION,

IN COLONIES PER 100 MILLILITERS

Spring

Summer

Autumn

Low flow High flow

Winter

Spring

Summer

Autumn

Winter

Spring Summer Autumn Winter

Spring Summer Autumn

Low flow High flow

504030

20

10

200

100

Figure 29. Distributions of fecal coliform concentrations for stream and harbor sites, Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, Wis. Stream sample distributions are grouped by flow (

A), season (B), and flow and season combined (C). Harbor-sample distributions are grouped by season only (

D) (no harbor samples were collected in winter). Waterquality criterion line represents the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency acceptable limit for fecal coliform concentrations in recreational waters (200 col/100 mL) (U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, 1976).

Evaluation of Data Collected During Phase II 63
Escherichia coli

In its 1986 guidance on E. coli as an indicator of 

contamination in freshwater systems, USEPA established 

a criterion for designated beach areas wherein the single 

sample maximum density allowed is 235 colonies of 

E. coli per 100mL (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 

1986). Historical data are available for E. coli and were 

summarized in the Phase I report (Schneider and others, 

2004). 

E. coli concentrations in stream samples ranged from 

less than 1 to 34,000 MPN/100 mL, with a median of 

420 MPN/100 mL. Median concentrations at the majority of stream sites (67 percent) were above the USEPA 

criterion of 235 col/100 mL4

. Median E. coli concentrations indicated a positive relation with increasing urban 

land use (fig. 30). The Honey Creek site had the highest 

median (2,000 MPN/100 mL)(fig. 31), and Milwaukee 

River near Cedarburg and Milwaukee River at Mouth had 

the lowest (44 and 57 MPN/100 mL, respectively). Median 

concentrations at remaining sites ranged from 180 to 990 

MPN/100 mL. 

Median concentrations indicated no consistent 

response in relation to flow (fig. 32A), but a consistent 

response was evident in relation to seasonality (fig. 32B). 

Median concentrations were generally higher in summer and winter than during other times of the year. A 

consistent response was also observed when flows were 

combined with seasonality (fig. 32C). Summer low-flow 

samples had the highest median concentration of E. coli, 

and summer high-flow samples had the lowest; the opposite was true for winter samples. 

Data were available for Phase I and Phase II E. coli

concentration comparisons at five sites (appendix 5). The 

Kinnickinnic River was the only site with an increase 

from Phase I to Phase II (28 percent difference). Two sites 

indicated a notable decrease: Lincoln Creek (-35 percent 

difference) and Menomonee River at Wauwatosa (-21 

percent difference). The two remaining sites, Honey Creek 

and Menomonee River at Menomonee Falls, indicated no 

notable differences. 

4

 In this report units of col/100 mL were considered equivalent to units 

of MPN/100 mL (Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, [n.d.]).

TOTAL URBAN LAND USE, IN PERCENT

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

LOG-TRANSFORMED MEDIAN CONCENTRATION OF E. COLI,

IN MOST PROBABLE NUMBER PER 100 MILLILITERS

R2 = 0.5547

MRC

MRM

MRMF

LMM UCW

HCW

MRW KRM

MRJ

OCSM

RRG

RRF

JCM

LCM

WCG

Figure 30. Median concentrations of E. coli (log transformed) plotted against percent urban land use in site drainage basins 

for 15 stream sites in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, Wis. Site abbreviations listed in table 1.

64 Water-Quality Characteristics for Selected Sites within the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin
The overall median E. coli concentration at harbor 

sites (2 MPN/100 mL) was lower than that for stream 

sites (420 MPN/100 mL) and may be attributed to organism die-off or dilution when mixing with water from Lake 

Michigan. Median concentrations in samples from the 

inner-harbor sites ranged from 3 to 19 MPN/100 mL (fig. 

31), whereas medians in samples from the outer-harbor 

sites were lower than those from the inner harbor, ranging 

from less than 1 to 1 MPN/100 mL. Harbor samples did 

not indicate a consistent seasonal response (fig. 32D). 

235 col/100 mL

12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12

1

10

100

1,000

10,000

100,000

E. COLI, IN MOST PROBABLE NUMBER PER 100 MILLILITERS

Reporting level = 1

10 10 10 9 9 9

30 Number of values 

EXPLANATION 

Upper adjacent

75th percentile

Median

25th percentile

Lower adjacent

Lower outside

Lower detached

Upper detached

Upper outside

Water-quality

criteria

MRC

LCM

MRM

WCG

MRMF

LMM

UCWHCW

MRW

KRM

MRJ

OCSM

RRG

RRF

JCM

OH-04OH-03OH-11OH-12OH-14OH-13

Stream sites,

arranged in downstream order

Innerharbor sitesOuterharbor sites

Figure 31. Distribution of E. coli concentrations, by site, in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, Wis. 

Water-quality criterion line represents the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency single sample maximum density of E. coli

allowed in designated beach areas (235 col/100 mL) (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1986). Units of col/100 mL were 

considered equivalent to units of MPN/100 mL (Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, 2006a). Site abbreviations listed 

in table 1. 

Evaluation of Data Collected During Phase II 65
235 col/

100 mL

235 col/100 mL

20 45 27 14 40 15 16 3

1

10

100

1,000

10,000

100,000

1

10

100

1,000

10,000

100,000

1

10

100

1,000

10,000

100,000

106 74 60 60 30 30

Lower outsideLower detached

30 Number of values 

EXPLANATION 

Upper detachedUpper outsideUpper adjacent75th percentileMedian25th percentileLower adjacent

Water-qualitycriteria

A. E. coli in 15 stream sites, by flow B. E. coli in 15 stream sites, by season

C. E. coli in 15 stream sites, by flow and season D. E. coli in 6 harbor sites, by season

 CONCENTRATION, IN MOST E. COLI

PROBABLE NUMBER PER 100 MILLILITERS

 CONCENTRATION, IN MOST E. COLI

PROBABLE NUMBER PER 100 MILLILITERS

Spring

Summer

Autumn

Low flow High flow

Winter

Spring

Summer

Autumn

Winter

Spring Summer Autumn Winter

Spring Summer Autumn

Low flow High flow

REPORTING

LEVEL = 1

 CONCENTRATION, IN MOST E. COLI

PROBABLE NUMBER PER 100 MILLILITERS

REPORTING

LEVEL = 1

 CONCENTRATION, IN MOST E. COLI

PROBABLE NUMBER PER 100 MILLILITERS

REPORTING

LEVEL = 1

REPORTING

LEVEL = 1

235 col/

100 mL

235 col/

100 mL

1015

1

50

500100

1,000

21 24 12

Figure 32. Distributions of E. coli concentrations for stream and harbor sites, Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, Wis. Stream sample distributions are grouped by 

flow (

A), season (B), and flow and season combined (C). Harbor-sample distributions are grouped by season only (

D) (no harbor samples were collected in winter).Water-quality criterion 

line represents the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency single sample maximum density of E. coli allowed in designated beach areas (235 col/100 mL) (U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, 1986). Units of col/100 mL were considered equivalent to units of MPN/100 mL (Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, 2006a).

66 Water-Quality Characteristics for Selected Sites within the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin
TOTAL URBAN LAND USE, IN PERCENT

-1.0

-1.5

-0.5

0.0

1.0

0.5

1.5

2.0

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

LOG-TRANSFORMED MEDIAN CONCENTRATION OF COLIPHAGE,

IN PLAQUES PER 100 MILLILITERS

R2 = 0.3716

MRC

MRM

MRMF

LMM

UCW

HCW

MRW

KRM

MRJ

OCSM

RRG

RRF

JCM

LCM

WCG

Figure 33. Median concentrations of coliphage (log transformed) plotted against percent urban land use in site drainage basins 

for 15 stream sites in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, Wis. Site abbreviations listed in table 1.

Coliphage

The group of coliphages tested for during Phase II of 

the MMSD Corridor Study were male-specific and therefore characterized by their infection of E. coli bacteria containing F-pili. Despite their high correlation with enteric 

virus concentrations in contaminated rivers and lakes, and 

their comparable resistance to environmental factors and 

disinfecting agents, coliphage fall short of being an ideal 

indicator of enteric virus presence, and a need for additional field studies of ecology and survival time still exists 

(Mara and Horan, 2003). Coliphage data are not present in 

the Phase I database and were not analyzed in conjunction 

with the Phase I report. 

Coliphage concentrations in stream samples ranged 

from less than 1 to 4,400 plaques/100 mL, with an overall 

median of 4 plaques/100 mL. Median coliphage concentrations indicate a positive relation with increasing urban 

land use (fig. 33). The Menomonee River at Wauwatosa 

site had the highest median concentration (31 plaques/

100 mL)(fig. 34), and the Willow Creek, Milwaukee River 

at Mouth, and Jewel Creek sites had the lowest (less than 

1 plaque/100 mL). Median concentrations at remaining 

sites ranged from 1 to 22 plaques/100 mL.

Median concentrations for stream samples indicated 

no consistent response to flow (fig. 35A), however the 

maximum concentration during low-flow events was much 

higher (4,400 plaques/100 mL) than that for high-flow 

events (990 plaques/100 mL). Median concentrations in 

stream samples indicated a weak seasonal response (fig. 

35B); the highest median was for summer samples (10 

plaques/100 mL), whereas medians for the rest of the year 

ranged from 3 to 4 plaques/100 mL. A consistent response 

became more apparent when flows were combined with 

seasonality (fig. 35C). The summer low-flow events had 

the highest median concentration (12 plaques/100 mL) of 

any season, and summer high-flow events had the lowest 

(1 plaque/100 mL). This pattern of higher median concentrations in the low-flow-event samples (6 plaques/100 mL) 

and lower median concentrations in the high-flow-event 

samples (2 plaques/100 mL) held for samples collected 

in the spring, though the difference between medians was 

less dramatic. Winter concentrations indicated the opposite 

pattern: the lowest median concentrations occurred during low-flow events (2 plaques/100 mL) and the highest 

median concentrations occurred during high-flow events 

(6 plaques/100 mL).

Evaluation of Data Collected During Phase II 67
12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 10 9 9 9

10

100

1,000

10,000

1

COLIPHAGE, IN PLAQUES PER 100 MILLILITERS

Reporting level = 1

10 10

30 Number of values 

EXPLANATION 

Upper adjacent

75th percentile

Median

25th percentile

Lower adjacent

Lower outside

Lower detached

Upper detached

Upper outside

MRC

LCM

MRM

WCG

MRMF

LMM

UCWHCW

MRW

KRM

MRJ

OCSM

RRG

RRF

JCM

OH-04OH-03OH-11OH-12OH-14OH-13

Stream sites,

arranged in downstream order

Innerharbor sitesOuterharbor sites

Figure 34. Distribution of coliphage concentrations, by site, in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, 

Wis. Site abbreviations listed in table 1.

68 Water-Quality Characteristics for Selected Sites within the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin
20 45 27 14 40 15 3 16

10

1

100

1,000

10,000

10

1

100

1,000

10,000

10

1

100

1,000

10,000

106 74 60 60 30 30

Lower outsideLower detached

30 Number of values 

EXPLANATION 

Upper detachedUpper outsideUpper adjacent75th percentileMedian25th percentileLower adjacent

A. Coliphage in 15 stream sites, by flow B. Coliphage in 15 stream sites, by seasonC. Coliphage in 15 stream sites, by flow and season D. Coliphage in 6 harbor sites, by season

COLIPHAGE CONCENTRATION,

IN PLAQUES PER 100 MILLILITERS

COLIPHAGE CONCENTRATION,

IN PLAQUES PER 100 MILLILITERS

Spring

Summer

Autumn

Low flow High flow

Winter

Spring

Summer

Autumn

Winter

Spring Summer Autumn Winter

Spring Summer Autumn

Low flow High flow

REPORTING

LEVEL = 1

COLIPHAGE CONCENTRATION,

IN PLAQUES PER 100 MILLILITERS

REPORTING

LEVEL = 1

COLIPHAGE CONCENTRATION,

IN PLAQUES PER 100 MILLILITERS

REPORTING

LEVEL = 1

REPORTING

LEVEL = 1

100

5040302010

54321

21 24 12

Figure 35. Distributions of coliphage concentrations for stream and harbor sites, Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, Wis. Stream sample distributions are 

grouped by flow (

A), season (

B), and flow and season combined (C). Harbor-sample distributions are grouped by season only (

D) (no harbor samples were collected in winter).

Evaluation of Data Collected During Phase II 69
The overall median coliphage concentration at harbor 

sites (less than 1 plaque/100 mL) was slightly lower than 

that for stream sites (4 plaques/100 mL), and may be 

attributed to dilution from mixing with water from Lake 

Michigan. Median concentrations in samples from the 

inner-harbor sites ranged from less than 1 to 2 plaques/100 

mL (fig. 34). Median concentrations in the outer-harbor 

samples were less than the inner-harbor samples, at less 

than 1 plaque/100 mL at each of the three sites. Harbor samples collected in spring had the highest median 

concentration (2 plaques/100 mL, compared to less than 

1 plaque/100 mL summer and autumn) and the highest 

detection frequency (DF)(67 percent) among all other seasons sampled (average DF of 27 percent)(fig. 35D). 

In addition to its use as an indicator of enteric virus 

levels, coliphage can be used for tracking sources of fecal 

contamination. For Phase II of the MMSD Corridor Study, 

small subsets of detected coliphage were subsequently 

serotyped in an effort to categorize potential contamination sources. More specifically, five plaques isolated from 

each coliphage sample were classified as either deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) or ribonucleic acid (RNA) phages, 

depending on the chemical composition of their genetic 

material. Any RNA coliphages detected were then serotyped into one of four general serogroups: group I, group 

II, group III, or group IV. 

Individual serogroups originate from a limited 

number of sources: group I is found in human and animal 

feces, groups II and III are found predominantly in human 

feces, and group IV is found predominantly in nonhuman 

animal feces (Simpson and others, 2002). Therefore, the 

serotyping of any RNA coliphages present allowed for 

a broad source-tracking signal. For the purposes of this 

report, groups I and IV were not considered for analysis, 

and groups II and III were considered together as a probable indicator of human fecal contamination. 

Because the method was to select only five of the 

coliphage plaques for further analysis, and only a fraction 

of these were serotyped into RNA coliform serogroups, 

data on various serogroup presences in samples were 

scarce by design. In fact, only 49 percent of all the samples 

collected contained a coliphage classified into any of 

the four serogroups. Therefore, in contrast to the general 

indicator data discussed previously in the report, serogroup 

detections were much less frequent. Whereas general indicator data contained ample detections for the description 

of constituent levels by standard statistical methods (for 

example, medians), detections of various serogroups are 

too scarce to be analyzed in this manner. These data are 

reported instead as the frequency with which detections of 

the combined groups were found in samples. 

Groups II and III

When groups II and III were combined, the overall 

DF at stream sites was 14 percent. Detections for coliphage in these groups were found at 11 of the 15 sites 

(fig. 36). At four sites, DF was greater than or equal to 25 

percent: Honey Creek (33 percent), Menomonee River 

at Wauwatosa (33 percent), Lincoln Creek (25 percent), 

and Underwood Creek (25 percent). Sites with no detections were the Milwaukee River at Milwaukee, Little 

Menomonee River, Root River at Grange Avenue, and 

Jewel Creek. DFs at remaining sites ranged from 8 to 17 

percent. DFs indicated no relation to land use. 

Consistent responses in DFs were observed in relation 

to flow and season. Flow-related DFs for stream samples 

were higher during low-flow events (16 percent) than 

during high-flow events (12 percent)(fig. 37A). For stream 

samples, the highest seasonal DF was in the autumn (23 

percent), and the lowest was in the spring (8 percent) (fig. 

37B). DFs for the rest of the year ranged from 13 to 17 

percent. When flows were combined with seasonality, DFs 

were higher during low-flow events than during high-flow 

events for corresponding seasons, with the exception of the 

autumn high-flow-event category (DF of 67 percent) (fig. 

37C). 

The overall DF at harbor sites (16 percent) was 

similar to that of stream sites (14 percent). All harbor sites 

had detections in at least one sample (fig. 36). DFs at all 

inner-harbor sites were 20 percent. DFs at all outer-harbor 

sites were 11 percent. The highest seasonal DF at harbor 

sites was in the autumn (33 percent), and the lowest was in 

the summer (4 percent) (fig. 37D). The DF in spring was 

19 percent. No harbor samples were collected in winter. 

70 Water-Quality Characteristics for Selected Sites within the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin
PERCENTAGE OF SAMPLES WITH DETECTIONS

OF COLIPHAGE GROUPS II AND (OR) III

MRC

LCM

MRM

WCG

MRMF

LMM

UCWHCW

MRW

KRM

MRJ

OCSM

RRG

RRF

JCM

OH-04OH-03OH-11OH-12OH-14OH-13

Stream sites,

arranged in downstream order

Innerharbor sitesOuterharbor sites

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

2

12

3

12

0

12

2

12

1

12

0

12

3

12

4

12

4

12

2

12

2

12

2

12

0

12

1

12

0

12

2

10

2

10

2

10

1

9

1

9

1

9

3

12

Number of values above reporting level

Total number of values

Figure 36. Detection frequency of coliphage groups II and (or) III in samples, by site, in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage 

District planning area, Wis. Site abbreviations listed in table 1.

Evaluation of Data Collected During Phase II 71
5

0

353025201510

10

0

706050403020

86420

1

161412

10

8

50

25201510

A. Coliphage groups II and/or III detections in 15 stream sites, by flow B. Coliphage groups II and/or III detections in 15 stream sites, by seasonC. Coliphage groups II and/or III detections in 15 stream sites, by flow and season

D. Coliphage groups II and/or III detections in 6 harbor sites, by season

PERCENTAGE OF SAMPLES WITH DETECTIONS

OF COLIPHAGE GROUPS II AND (OR) III

PERCENTAGE OF SAMPLES WITH DETECTIONS

 OF COLIPHAGE GROUPS II AND (OR) III

PERCENTAGE OF SAMPLES WITH DETECTIONS

 OF COLIPHAGE GROUPS II AND (OR) III

PERCENTAGE OF SAMPLES WITH DETECTIONS

OF COLIPHAGE GROUPS II AND (OR) III

Spring

Summer

Autumn

Low flow High flow

Winter

Spring

Summer

Autumn

Winter

Spring Summer Autumn Winter

Spring Summer Autumn

17 / 106 9 / 74

Low flow High flow

5 / 60

2 / 20 9 / 45 5 / 27 2 / 14 3 / 40 2 / 15 2 / 3 1 / 16 4 / 21 1 / 24 4 / 12

10 / 60 7 / 30 4 / 30

2 / 14 Number of values above reporting level /

total number of values

Figure 37. Detection frequencies of coliphage groups II and (or) III detections for stream and harbor sites, Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, Wis. Stream samples are grouped by flow (

A), season (B), and flow and season combined (C). Harbor samples are grouped by season only (

D) (no harbor samples were collected in winter).

72 Water-Quality Characteristics for Selected Sites within the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin
Pathogenic Organisms

Although indicator organisms are often used as predictors of pathogen presence, pathogen concentrations can 

also be measured directly. Direct measurement is generally 

not done for routine monitoring efforts because of practical considerations; however, it was included in the Phase II 

design because historical pathogen-level data were lacking 

in the MMSD Corridor Study database. 

The waterborne pathogens of interest during Phase 

II of the MMSD Corridor Study were bacterial, viral, 

and protozoal. Four common waterborne pathogens were 

chosen for direct measurement in Phase II: bacterial pathogens were E. coli O157:H7 and Salmonella and protozoal 

pathogens were Giardia and Cryptosporidium. Viral pathogen concentrations were not measured directly in Phase 

II but will be measured directly during Phase III of the 

MMSD Corridor Study. 

Pathogens are generally present at substantially lower 

concentrations in water than indicator organisms are (Mara 

and Horan, 2003). As a result, detections are less frequent 

and concentrations are much lower than those associated 

with indicator organisms. Therefore, pathogen data are discussed in terms of detection frequencies (DF); if concentrations were reported for pathogens, the medians (where 

possible) and (or) ranges also are given. Because pathogen 

data were not present in the Phase I database, no comparisons of Phase I and Phase II data are possible. 

 Escherichia coli O157:H7

E. coli O157:H7 causes dysentery and hemolytic 

uremic syndrome in infected humans. The infective dose 

for this strain is believed to be fewer than 100 organisms 

(Percival and others, 2004). Reservoirs for this bacterium 

include humans and domestic animals. Because E. coli

O157:H7 has not been shown to replicate in the environment, its presence is thought to be strictly related to fecal 

contamination. E. coli O157:H7 can survive in environmental waters for up to 21 days, but it is sensitive to 

chlorination treatment. Results for E. coli O157:H7 were 

reported as presence-absence and are discussed herein as 

number and frequency of detections. 

E. coli O157:H7 was detected in 6 of the 237 samples 

collected during Phase II. All 6 detections were in samples 

from 5 stream sites (constituting 3 percent of samples). 

The site with two detections (DF of 17 percent) was the 

Menomonee River at Menomonee Falls site. The Underwood Creek, Milwaukee River at Mouth, Root River near 

Franklin, and Jewel Creek sites each had a single detection 

(DF of 8 percent). DFs indicated no appreciable relation to 

urban land use. Five detections occurred during low flow, 

and four of those occurred during summer. 

Salmonella

Salmonella are a genus of common pathogenic bacteria that can cause gastroenteritis, enteric fever, and septicemia in infected humans. Sources of this group of bacteria 

are wild and domestic animals including cattle, swine, 

dogs, cats, birds, and humans. Salmonella have shown the 

ability to survive in environmental waters for prolonged 

periods; during warm months, they may be able to replicate in eutrophic waters. Although evidence suggests that 

Salmonella are less sensitive to disinfection techniques 

than coliforms, chlorination is effective in inactivating this 

group of bacteria. Previous studies have found Salmonella

in 80 percent of activated sludge effluent from wastewatertreatment plants and in 58 percent of contaminated surface 

waters (Percival and others, 2004). 

For Phase II of the MMSD Corridor Study, analysis 

for determination of Salmonella concentrations involved 

concentration enrichment and selective growth techniques, 

followed by serological testing and confirmation using 

polyvalent “O” antisera (U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, 2006a). Detectable concentrations of the bacterium were observed in 22 percent of samples. Given the 

large percentage of concentrations below the reporting 

levels (0.1 and 0.2 MPN/100 mL); detectable concentrations were considered too scarce to be analyzed in terms 

of overall medians. Data are discussed instead as the 

frequency of Salmonella detections in samples and the 

medians (where possible) or ranges in concentrations in 

samples with detectable concentrations.

Evaluation of Data Collected During Phase II 73
Detection Frequencies

All 58 detections of Salmonella during Phase II were 

in stream samples (constituting 29 percent of the stream 

samples collected). No detections were observed in harbor 

samples, and this may be due to organism die-off or dilution when mixing with water from Lake Michigan. At least 

one detection of Salmonella was found at every stream 

site (fig. 38). Nine of the 15 stream sites had DFs greater 

than or equal to 33 percent; highest DFs (50 percent) were 

in samples from the Menomonee River at Menomonee 

Falls, Menomonee River at Wauwatosa, and Root River at 

Grange Avenue sites. DFs at remaining sites ranged from 

8 to 17 percent. DFs indicated no appreciable relation to 

urban land use.

DFs indicated consistent responses in relation to 

flow and season. The DF for low-flow-event samples (23 

percent) was much lower than that for high-flow-event 

samples (39 percent)(fig. 39A). The frequency of detection 

in spring samples (40 percent) was nearly twice as high 

as those throughout the rest of the year (23 to 25 percent) 

(fig. 39B). When flow was combined with seasonality, DFs 

for corresponding seasons were generally higher for highflow events than for low-flow events (fig. 39C). The only 

exception to this general pattern was the frequency for 

autumn high-flow-event samples; this category, consisted 

of only three samples, none of which contained detectable 

concentrations of Salmonella. High-flow-event samples 

collected during spring (48 percent) and summer (40 percent) had the highest overall DFs, and, with the exception 

of the autumn high-flow-event sample, DFs for remaining 

high- and low-flow seasonal events ranged from 20 to 26 

percent. 

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

PERCENTAGE OF SAMPLES WITH

DETECTIONS OF SALMONELLA

SALMONELLA CONCENTRATION,

IN MOST PROBABLE NUMBER PER 100 MILLILITERS

MRC

LCM

MRM

WCG

MRMF

LMM

UCWHCW

MRW

KRM

MRJ

OCSM

RRG

RRF

JCM

OH-04OH-03OH-11OH-12OH-14OH-13

Stream sites,

arranged in downstream order

Innerharbor sitesOuterharbor sites

Harbor site detection frequency

Stream site detection frequency

Minimum concentration

Maximum concentration

3

12

Number of values above reporting level

Total number of values

1

12

2

12

1

12

5

12

6

12

5

12

1

12

4

12

6

12

4

12

1

12

5

12

6

12

5

12

1

12

0

10

0

10

0

10

0

9

0

9

0

9

Figure 38. Detection frequencies and concentrations of Salmonella in samples, by site, in the Milwaukee Metropolitan 

Sewerage District planning area, Wis. Site abbreviations listed in table 1.

74 Water-Quality Characteristics for Selected Sites within the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin
5

0

504540353025201510

86.04.02.00.0

.0

12.010.0

121086420

50

4540353025201510

50

4540353025201510

86.04.02.00.0

.0

12.010.0

50

4540353025201510

86.04.02.00.0

.0

12.010.0

Stream site detection frequencyMaximum concentrationMedian concentrationMinimum concentrationNumber of values above reporting level /total number of values

2 / 11

No detects in harbor samples

A. Salmonella at 15 stream sites, by flow B. Salmonella at 15 stream sites, by seasonC. Salmonella at 15 stream sites, by flow and season

PERCENAGE OF SAMPLES WITH

SALMONELLA DETECTIONS OF 

SALMONELLA CONCENTRATION, 

IN MOST PROBABLE NUMBER PER 100 MILLILITERS

PERCENAGE OF SAMPLES WITH

SALMONELLA DETECTIONS OF 

PERCENAGE OF SAMPLES WITH

SALMONELLA DETECTIONS OF 

SALMONELLA CONCENTRATION, 

IN MOST PROBABLE NUMBER PER 100 MILLILITERS

SALMONELLA CONCENTRATION, 

IN MOST PROBABLE NUMBER PER 100 MILLILITERS

Spring

Summer

Autumn

Low flow High flow

Winter

Spring

Summer

Autumn

Winter

Spring Summer Autumn Winter

D. Salmonella at 6 harbor sites, by season

PERCENAGE OF SAMPLES WITH

SALMONELLA DETECTIONS OF 

SALMONELLA CONCENTRATION, 

IN MOST PROBABLE NUMBER PER 100 MILLILITERS

Spring Summer Autumn

24 / 106 29 / 74

Low flow High flow

24 / 60

5 / 20 9 / 45 7 / 27 3 / 14 19 / 40 6 / 15 0 / 3 4 / 16

15 / 60 7 / 30 7 / 30

0 / 21 0 / 24 0 / 12

Figure 39. Detection frequencies and concentrations of Salmonella for stream sites, Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, Wis. Stream samples are 

grouped by flow (

A), season (

B), and flow and season combined (C). Harbor samples are grouped by season only (

D) (no harbor samples were collected in winter).

Evaluation of Data Collected During Phase II 75
Concentrations

Salmonella concentrations greater than reporting 

levels were found only at stream sites. Concentrations 

ranged from 0.1 to 10 MPN/100 mL (fig. 38), and the 

median concentration was 0.2 MPN/100 mL. Samples 

containing the highest maximum concentration observed, 

10 MPN/100 mL, were collected at eight sites: Willow 

Creek, Menomonee River at Menomonee Falls, Little 

Menomonee River, and Menomonee River at Wauwatosa, 

Milwaukee River at Mouth, Oak Creek, Root River at 

Grange Avenue, and Root River near Franklin. 

There was little relation between the variability in 

Salmonella concentrations and flow or season. Differences 

between median concentrations for two flow-event conditions were very small, with medians of 0.6 MPN/100 mL 

for low-flow samples and 0.2 MPN/100 mL for high-flow 

samples (fig. 39A). The seasonal medians were highest 

in summer samples (10 MPN/100 mL) and the lowest in 

spring and winter samples (both 0.2 MPN/100 mL) (fig. 

39B). When flow was combined with seasonality, highest 

maximum concentrations (10 MPN/100 mL) were found 

in samples collected during summer low- and high-flow 

events and winter high-flow events (fig. 39C). 

Giardia 

Giardia is a genus-level classification that refers to 

multiple types of protozoa. Only one species, Giardia duodenalis, infects humans. This species is a common waterborne protozoal pathogen that can cause severe diarrhea 

and malabsorption. Sources of Giardia include livestock, 

dogs, cats, beavers, guinea pigs, and humans. Giardia is 

released from host animals in the environmentally resistant 

cyst form. These cysts have been shown to maintain viability for up to 3 months in cold environments and to resist 

disinfection techniques that successfully remove bacteria 

and viruses. With the exception of response to ultraviolet 

radiation, Giardia cysts are generally more sensitive than 

Cryptosporidium oocysts. An infecting dose of 10−25 

cysts has been observed in experimental infection studies 

(Percival and others, 2004). 

For Phase II, analysis for Giardia concentrations 

involved filtration, flow cytometry, and fluorescent antibody microscopy (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 

2006a). This method detects Giardia to the genus level 

only (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2005a); 

therefore, reported results do not specifically refer to levels 

of Giardia duodenalis. Reporting levels for data in this 

data set varied greatly, ranging from 30 to 80 cysts/100 L. 

Concentrations above reporting levels were observed in 26 

percent of the samples collected. Given the large percentage of concentrations below the reporting levels, detectable 

concentrations were considered too scarce to be analyzed 

in terms of overall medians. Data were reported instead 

as the frequency of Giardia detections in samples and the 

medians (where possible) or ranges in concentrations in 

samples with detectable concentrations.

Detection Frequencies

Giardia was detected in 27 percent of stream samples 

and in at least two samples (17 percent) from every site 

(fig. 40). The highest DF was in samples from Root River 

near Franklin (42 percent). Lowest DFs (17 percent) 

were in samples from Lincoln Creek, Milwaukee River at 

Milwaukee, Honey Creek, and Kinnickinnic River. DFs at 

remaining sites ranged from 25 to 33 percent. DFs indicated no appreciable relation to urban land use.

DFs were related to flow and season. DFs at stream 

sites were slightly higher in samples collected during 

high-flow events (28 percent) than during low-flow events 

(26 percent)(fig. 41A). The highest DFs in stream samples 

were in winter (50 percent) and spring (32 percent); summer and autumn samples had identical DFs of 17 percent 

(fig. 41B). When flows were combined with seasonality, 

DFs at stream sites were not consistently lower during 

low-flow events when compared to high-flow events for 

corresponding seasons (fig. 41C); however, winter and 

summer samples had higher DFs than samples collected at 

other times of the year during the same flow condition.

DFs at harbor sites (23 percent) were lower than those 

at stream sites (27 percent), and may be due to organism 

die-off or dilution when mixing with water from Lake 

Michigan. Inner-harbor sites had the highest DFs: the 

South Mid-Harbor Milwaukee Outer Harbor (OH-11) (50 

percent), Middle Mid-Harbor Milwaukee Outer Harbor 

(OH-03) (50 percent), and North Mid-Harbor Milwaukee 

Outer Harbor (OH-04) (20 percent) sites (fig. 40). Giardia

was detected in only one sample from among the outerharbor sites (the Northern Outside Harbor Breakwall Lake 

site, OH-12, DF 11 percent). Harbor samples indicated a 

seasonal response. Spring samples had the highest frequency of detection (43 percent), followed by summer 

samples (12 percent), and autumn samples (8 percent) (fig. 

41D). Samples were not collected from harbor sites in 

winter. 

76 Water-Quality Characteristics for Selected Sites within the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin
0

10

20

30

40

50

60

PERCENTAGE OF SAMPLES WITH

DETECTIONS OF GIARDIA

MRC

LCM

MRM

WCG

MRMF

LMM

UCWHCW

MRW

KRM

MRJ

OCSM

RRG

RRF

JCM

OH-04OH-03OH-11OH-12OH-14OH-13

Stream sites,

listed by downstream order number

Innerharbor sitesOuterharbor sites

GIARDIA CONCENTRATION, IN CYSTS PER 100 LITERS

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

500

4

12

2

12

2

12

4

12

4

12

3

12

3

12

2

12

3

12

2

12

4

12

4

12

4

12

5

12

3

12

2

10

5

10

5

10

1

9

0

9

0

9

Harbor site detection frequency

Stream site detection frequency

Minimum concentration

Maximum concentration

3

12

Number of values above reporting level

Total number of values

Figure 40. Detection frequencies and concentrations of Giardia in samples by site in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage 

District planning area, Wis. Site abbreviations listed in table 1.

Evaluation of Data Collected During Phase II 77
5

0

4540353025201510

250200150100500 0

70605040302010

0

605040302010

2272625

8

29

500450400350300250200150100500

500450400350300250200150100500

500450400350300250200150100500

A. Giardia at 15 stream sites, by flow B. Giardia at 15 stream sites, by seasonC. Giardia at 15 stream sites, by flow and season D. Giardia at 6 harbor sites, by season

PERCENTAGE OF SAMPLES WITH 

GIARDIA DETECTIONS OF PERCENTAGE OF SAMPLES WITH 

GIARDIA DETECTIONS OF 

GIARDIA CONCENTRATION, 

IN CYSTS PER 100 LITERS

GIARDIA CONCENTRATION, 

IN CYSTS PER 100 LITERS

GIARDIA CONCENTRATION, 

IN CYSTS PER 100 LITERS

GIARDIA CONCENTRATION, 

IN CYSTS PER 100 LITERS

PERCENTAGE OF SAMPLES WITH 

GIARDIA DETECTIONS OF 

PERCENTAGE OF SAMPLES WITH 

GIARDIA DETECTIONS OF 

Spring

Summer

Autumn

Low flow High flow

Winter

Spring

Summer

Autumn

Winter

Spring Summer Autumn Winter

Spring Summer Autumn

Low flow High flow

Stream site detection frequencyHarbor site detection frequencyMaximum concentrationMedian concentrationMinimum concentrationNumber of values above reporting level /total number of values

2 / 11

28 / 106 21 / 74 19 / 60

6 / 20 8 / 45 5 / 27 9 / 14 13 / 40 2 / 15 0 / 3 6 / 16 9 / 21 3 / 24 1 / 12

10 / 60 5 / 30 15 / 30

Figure 41. Detection frequencies and concentrations of Giardia for stream and harbor sites, Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, Wis. Stream samples are grouped by flow (

A), season (

B), and flow and season combined (C). Harbor samples are grouped by season only (

D) (no harbor samples were collected in winter).

78 Water-Quality Characteristics for Selected Sites within the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin
Concentrations

Giardia concentrations in stream samples ranged 

from 28.6 to 467 cysts/100 L, with a median of 60.6 

cysts/100 L. Sites with the highest maximum concentrations were the Milwaukee River near Cedarburg (467 

cysts/100 L), Milwaukee River at Milwaukee (375 

cysts/100 L), Root River near Franklin (333 cysts/100 L), 

Willow Creek (329 cysts/100 L), and Root River at Grange 

Avenue (300 cysts/100 L) sites (fig. 40). 

Concentrations in stream samples indicated consistent 

responses in relation to flow and season. Stream samples 

had higher median concentrations during high-flow events 

(103 cysts/100 L) than during low-flow events (46.1 

cysts/100 L) (fig. 41A). The highest median concentrations 

were in spring-season samples (121 cysts/100 L), followed 

by summer samples (66.7 cysts/100 L); autumn and winter 

medians were identical (33.3 cysts/100 L) (fig. 41B). 

When flows were combined with seasonality, the highest 

maximum concentration was in a sample collected during 

a spring high-flow event (467 cysts/100 L) (fig. 41C). 

Higher maximum concentrations were also observed in 

low-flow samples collected during autumn (333 cysts/100 

L), summer (329 cysts/100 L) and spring (300 cysts/100 

L), as well as summer high-flow samples (267 cysts/100 

L). 

Median Giardia concentrations at harbor sites (100 

cysts/100 L) were higher than those at stream sites (60.6 

cysts/100 L). Highest maximum concentrations were 

observed in samples from inner-harbor sites: Middle 

Mid-Harbor (OH-03) (200 cysts/100 L), South Mid-Harbor (OH-11) (133 cysts/100 L), and North Mid-Harbor 

(OH-04) (129 cysts/100 L) (fig. 40). The single detection 

in the outer harbor (at Northern Outside Harbor, OH-12) 

had a concentration of 33.3 cysts/100 L. Harbor samples 

indicated a seasonal response (fig. 41D). The maximum 

concentration in spring samples (200 cysts/100 L) was 

twice the maximum concentrations in summer and autumn 

samples (100 cysts/100 L in each).

Cryptosporidium

Cryptosporidium is a genus-level designation that 

refers to many protozoal species, some of which are 

pathogenic to humans. The primary pathogens, however, 

are generally considered to be C. parvum and C. hominis. 

Infection by Cryptosporidium can cause acute effects of 

diarrhea, abdominal pain, and vomiting; chronic effects 

include Reiter’s syndrome, a reactive arthritis. Reservoirs 

include humans and animals. Cryptosporidium species are 

shed in the environmentally resistant oocyst form, which 

has been shown to maintain viability for as long as 176 

days in stream water. Oocysts are resistant to many forms 

of disinfection, including chlorination. The most effective 

means of inactivating Cryptosporidium oocysts is through 

the use of ozone or ultraviolet radiation. An infecting dose 

of 30 oocysts has been observed in experimental infection 

studies (Percival and others, 2004).

The analytical method for the determination of Cryptosporidium concentrations involved filtration, flow cytometry, and fluorescent antibody microscopy (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2006a). This method detects 

Cryptosporidium to the genus level and does not have the 

specificity to distinguish between different pathogenic 

and nonpathogenic species; therefore, reported results 

do not specifically refer to concentrations of pathogenic 

Cryptosporidium (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 

2005a). Reporting levels for data varied greatly, ranging 

from 28.6 to 233 oocysts/100 L; however, the majority of 

censored results (75 percent) were recorded as less than 

33.3 oocysts/100 L. Concentrations above reporting levels 

were observed in 33 percent of the samples collected. 

Given the large percentage of results below the reporting 

levels, concentration data were considered too scarce to be 

analyzed in terms of overall medians. Data were reported 

instead as the frequency of Cryptosporidium detections 

in samples and the medians (where possible) or ranges in 

concentrations found in samples with detectable concentrations. 

Evaluation of Data Collected During Phase II 79
Detection Frequencies

Cryptosporidium was detected in 42 percent of stream 

samples and in at least two samples (17 percent) from 

every site (fig. 42). The highest DFs (both at 58 percent) 

were from Willow Creek and Menomonee River at Wauwatosa. The lowest DF (17 percent) was from Root River 

near Franklin. DFs at remaining sites ranged from 25 to 

50 percent. DFs indicated no appreciable relation to urban 

land use. 

DFs varied by flow and season. DFs were higher in 

samples collected during low-flow events (46 percent) than 

during high-flow events (36 percent)(fig. 43A). The highest frequency of Cryptosporidium detections was in winter 

samples (70 percent) and the lowest in spring samples 

(18 percent) (fig. 43B). DFs ranged from 47 to 50 percent 

throughout the rest of the year. When flows were combined with seasonality, DFs were generally higher during 

low-flow events than during high-flow events for corresponding seasons (except spring) (fig. 43C). Within each 

flow category, the highest DFs were in winter samples and 

the lowest were in spring samples. 

The DF of Cryptosporidium at harbor sites (5 percent) 

was lower than at stream sites (42 percent), and may be 

attributed to organism die-off or dilution from mixing with 

water from Lake Michigan. Detections in harbor samples 

only occurred at the northern sites of the inner and outer 

harbor: North Mid-Harbor (OH-04) (20 percent, 2 samples 

total) and Northern Outside Harbor (OH-12) (11 percent, 

1 sample total) (fig. 42). In relation to seasonality, the 

harbor samples had one detection per season, with DFs 

ranging from 4 to 8 percent (fig. 43D).

Concentrations

Cryptosporidium concentrations in stream samples 

ranged from 29.4 to 782 oocysts/100 L, with a median of 

62.5 oocysts/100 L. The highest maximum concentration 

was at Willow Creek (782 oocysts/100 L)(fig. 42), and the 

lowest maximum concentrations (33.3 oocysts/100 L for 

both) were at Milwaukee River at Mouth and Root River 

near Franklin. Maximum concentrations at the remaining 

sites ranged from 66.7 to 286 oocysts/100 L.

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

4

12

5

12

5

12

7

12

6

12

6

12

5

12

6

12

7

12

4

12

3

12

5

12

6

12

2

12

5

12

2

10

0

10

0

10

1

9

0

9

0

9

PERCENTAGE OF SAMPLES WITH

DETECTIONS OF CRYPTOSPORIDIUM

CRYPTOSPORIDIUM CONCENTRATION, 

IN OOCYSTS PER 100 LITERS

MRC

LCM

MRM

WCG

MRMF

LMM

UCWHCW

MRW

KRM

MRJ

OCSM

RRG

RRF

JCM

OH-04OH-03OH-11OH-12OH-14OH-13

Stream sites,

listed by downstream order number

Innerharbor sitesOuterharbor sites

Harbor site detection frequency

Stream site detection frequency

Minimum concentration

Maximum concentration

3

12

Number of values above reporting level

Total number of values

Figure 42. Detection frequencies and concentrations of Cryptosporidium in samples, by site, in the Milwaukee Metropolitan 

Sewerage District planning area, Wis. Site abbreviations listed in table 1.

80 Water-Quality Characteristics for Selected Sites within the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin
35.0

30.025.020.015.010.05.00.0

0

870605040302010

0

50

50

45

40

35

30

25

201510

87006005004003002001000

00

90087006005004003002001000

00

900

0

870605040302010

0

90 9

876543210

87006005004003002001000

00

900

A. Cryptosporidium at 15 stream sites, by flow B. Cryptosporidium at 16 stream sites, by seasonC. Cryptosporidium at 15 stream sites, by flow and season D. Cryptosporidium at 6 harbor sites, by season

PERCENTAGE OF SAMPLES WITH 

CRYPTOSPORIDIUM DETECTIONS OF 

PERCENTAGE OF SAMPLES WITH 

CRYPTOSPORIDIUM DETECTIONS OF 

PERCENTAGE OF SAMPLES WITH 

CRYPTOSPORIDIUM DETECTIONS OF 

CRYPTOSPORIDIUM CONCENTRATION, 

IN OOCYSTS PER 100 LITERS

CRYPTOSPORIDIUM CONCENTRATION, 

IN OOCYSTS PER 100 LITERS

CRYPTOSPORIDIUM CONCENTRATION, 

IN OOCYSTS PER 100 LITERS

CRYPTOSPORIDIUM CONCENTRATION, 

IN OOCYSTS PER 100 LITERS

PERCENTAGE OF SAMPLES WITH 

CRYPTOSPORIDIUM DETECTIONS OF 

Spring

Summer

Autumn

Low flow High flow

Winter

Spring

Summer

Autumn

Winter

Spring Summer Autumn Winter

Spring Summer Autumn

Low flow High flow

Stream site detection frequencyHarbor site detection frequencyMaximum concentrationMedian concentrationMinimum concentrationNumber of values above reporting level /total number of values

2 / 11

49 / 106 27 / 74 11 / 60

2 / 20 23 / 45 13 / 27 11 / 14 3 / 40 7 / 15 1 / 3 10 / 16 1 / 21 1 / 24 1 / 12

30 / 60 14 / 30 21 / 30

Figure 43. Detection frequencies and concentrations of Cryptosporidium for stream and harbor sites, Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, Wis. Stream 

samples are grouped by flow (

A), season (

B), and flow and season combined (C). Harbor samples are grouped by season only (

D) (no harbor samples were collected in winter).

Evaluation of Data Collected During Phase II 81
Concentrations indicated consistent responses in 

relation to flow and season. Median concentrations during 

low-flow events (64.5 oocysts/100 L) were slightly higher 

than during high-flow events (53.3 oocysts/100 L) (fig. 

43A). The highest median concentrations were measured 

in summer samples (66.7 oocysts/100 L) and winter 

samples (64.5 oocysts/100 L); spring and autumn samples 

had identical medians, 33.3 oocysts/100 L (fig. 43B). 

The maximum concentration for summer samples (782 

oocysts/100 L) was much higher than the maximum concentrations in samples for the rest of the year (133 to 161 

oocysts/100 L). When flows were combined with seasonality, the highest maximum concentration at stream sites 

was in a sample collected during a summer low-flow event 

(782 oocysts/100 L)(fig. 43C). High maximum concentrations were also found in samples collected during highflow events in summer (233 oocysts/100 L), winter (161 

oocysts/100 L) and spring (156 oocysts/100 L), as well as 

autumn low-flow-event samples (133 oocysts/100 L). 

The two harbor sites where Cryptosporidium was 

detected had similar concentrations: North Mid-Harbor 

(OH-04) (32.3 and 33.3 oocysts/100 L) and Northern 

Outside Harbor (OH-12) (33.3 oocysts/100 L), which were 

generally lower than those at stream sites (median concentration of 62.5 oocysts/100 L) (fig. 42). Cryptosporidium

concentrations were similar in spring, summer, and autumn 

(fig. 43D).

Pesticides

Samples collected each year during spring-quarterly 

and summer-event sampling were analyzed for pesticides; 

thereby yielding data for four samples per site. The analytical schedule for pesticides included 41 pesticides and 23 

metabolites, or breakdown products (appendix 3). Of the 

41 pesticides, 21 were detected in at least one sample. Of 

the 23 metabolites, 9 were detected in at least one sample. 

Two pesticides were detected in every sample: atrazine 

(along with its metabolite 2-chloro-4-isopropylamino-6-

amino-s-triazine) and metolachlor. Concentrations of all 

three constituents were generally higher in stream samples 

than harbor samples. Atrazine concentrations at stream 

sites ranged from 0.014 μg/L at Honey Creek to 0.95 μg/L 

at Root River at Grange Avenue, while concentrations at 

harbor sites ranged from 0.039 μg/L at the Northern Outside Harbor Breakwall Lake site to 0.11 μg/L at the Middle 

Mid-Harbor Milwaukee Outer Harbor site. 2-Chloro-4-isopropylamino-6-amino-s-triazine (deethylatrazine) concentrations at stream sites ranged from 0.006 μg/L at Honey 

Creek to 0.128 μg/L at Root River at Grange Avenue, 

while concentrations at harbor sites ranged from 0.013 

μg/L at the Northern Outside Harbor Breakwall Lake site 

to 0.037 μg/L at the Middle Mid-Harbor Milwaukee Outer 

Harbor site. Metolachlor concentrations at stream sites 

ranged from 0.014 μg/L at Honey Creek to 0.488 μg/L at 

Little Menomonee River, while concentrations at harbor 

sites ranged from 0.008 μg/L at the Northern Outside Harbor Breakwall Lake and Middle Outside Harbor Breakwall 

Lake sites to 0.02 μg/L at the Middle Mid-Harbor Milwaukee Outer Harbor site. The presence of atrazine, deethylatrazine, and metalochlor in every sample is typical, as 

these pesticides are among the most heavily used and their 

presence in streams across the Nation has been well-documented (Gilliom and others, 2006). 

Generally, concentrations of pesticides were low. The 

highest concentration observed was in a sample from Little 

Menomonee River (7.86 μg/L of simazine). In that same 

sample, no other pesticides were present in unusually high 

concentrations. Remaining samples ranged in concentration from below detection to 2.9 μg/L (bromacil, also at 

Little Menomonee River). These concentrations were 

typical of samples collected at fixed intervals and during 

normal flow conditions. Modern pesticides have moderate 

to high water solubility and relatively short half-lives. As a 

result, stream pesticides concentrations are generally highest following rainfall events producing notable runoff, with 

an enhanced effect when rainfall events occur shortly after 

pesticide application (Graczyk and others, 1997 and 1999). 

Selected pesticides will be discussed further in the wastewater compound section, where pesticides are divided into 

herbicide and insecticide classes.

82 Water-Quality Characteristics for Selected Sites within the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin
Wastewater Compounds

Wastewater compounds (WWCs) are organic compounds of natural or synthetic origin typically found in 

domestic and industrial wastewaters. WWCs include 

many classes of compounds: surfactants, flame retardants, 

plasticizers, industrial solvents, disinfectants, domestic 

pesticides, pharmaceuticals, and personal-care products 

(Zaugg and others, 2002). These compounds and degradates survive wastewater-treatment processes and are 

expelled into the environment in treated wastewater (Lee 

and others, 2004). Recent studies of WWCs downstream 

from wastewater-treatment facilities in Minnesota indicated 

concentrations twice those observed upstream (Lee and 

others, 2004). Kolpin and others (2002) found WWCs in 80 

percent of U.S. streams sampled, with median concentrations generally less than 1 μg/L. Mixtures of compounds 

were common in the samples collected, with a maximum 

of 38 and a median of 7 compounds detected in samples. 

WWCs have also been detected in drinking water (Lee and 

others, 2004).

A subset of WWCs analyzed for in Phase II consist of 

substances known to or are suspected to disrupt endocrine 

function in vertebrate organisms. Termed endocrine-disrupting chemicals (EDCs), these compounds are defined 

by the USEPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 

1997) as 

“. . . an exogenous agent that interferes with the 

synthesis, secretion, transport, binding, action, 

or elimination of natural hormones in the body 

that are responsible for the maintenance of 

homeostasis, reproduction, development, and 

(or) behavior.” 

Though few causal relations have been conclusively established between EDCs and adverse effects in vertebrates 

under environmental conditions, effects on test organisms 

in controlled laboratory settings have been shown (Taylor 

and Harrison, 1999; Kaiser, 2000). In contrast to most 

toxic chemicals, effects on test organisms have been seen 

at very low EDC concentrations, well below concentrations typically considered “safe” (Kaiser, 2000). To date, 

most studies have focused on the effects of a single compound; toxic effects of chemical mixtures are not known 

(Sullivan and others, 2005). It is thought that long-term, 

continual exposure to EDCs may have subtle effects on 

vertebrate populations over time through adverse effects 

on reproduction (Daughton and Ternes, 1999). 

As part of Phase II, samples were collected and 

analyzed for WWCs, which included pharmaceuticals and 

personal-care products. WWC samples were collected during each sampling event, resulting in 12 samples per site. 

Detection Frequencies

As mentioned in the Quality Assurance and Quality Control section, WWC data contain estimated concentrations, concentrations above the reporting level, 

qualitatively detected results (constituent detected but not 

quantified), and concentrations less than detection (table 

18). Only 3 percent of stream-sample data and 1 percent 

of harbor-sample data reported had concentrations above 

the reporting level, and therefore little quantitative analysis 

could be performed. Results were grouped as detections/

nondetections, where detections of WWCs consisted of 

estimated concentrations and concentrations above the 

reporting level. 

Table 18. Summary of detections and nondetections of wastewater compounds at all Phase II sites in the Milwaukee 

Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, Wis.

[All values in percent]

 Site type

Nondetections Detections

Less than 

detection 

Qualitatively 

detected 

Estimated 

concentrations

Concentrations above 

reporting level

Stream samples 69 14 15 3

Harbor samples 78 14 7 1

Evaluation of Data Collected During Phase II 83
A total of 62 WWCs were sampled for and were 

aggregated into classes for the purpose of analysis (tables 

19 and 20). The 15 classes of WWCs were based on 

aggregations by Sullivan and others (2005), appendix 4-3 

p. 353. WWC classes were organized into four groups 

in an effort to identify sources of WWC contribution to 

stream and harbor sites (table 19). At the site level, these 

groupings aided in the understanding of the persistence of 

WWC classes as they moved from stream sites to harbor 

sites, distribution of WWC classes, and relations between 

WWC classes. The 15 classes aided in the understanding 

of WWC response to flow, seasonality, and the combined 

effects of flow and seasonality. These groups were also 

used to organize information regarding the individual 

constituents driving detections and (or) responses in each 

class.

Of the 62 constituents sampled for during Phase II, 

50 were detected in at least one sample collected from the 

stream or harbor. The 12 constituents not detected in any 

sample vary in WWC class and indicated no particular 

pattern (table 20). Forty-nine constituents were detected 

in at least one stream sample. The only constituent not 

detected in streams that was detected in harbor samples 

was chlorpyrifos, an insecticide. Harbor samples had fewer 

constituent detections overall, with only 34 constituents 

detected in one or more samples. The constituents not 

detected in the harbor samples (table 20) also varied in 

WWC class; in some cases, there were no detections for 

an entire WWC class in harbor samples. The two WWC 

classes not detected in harbor samples were antimicrobial 

disinfectants and antioxidants. Overall, 93 percent (217 of 

234) of both stream and harbor samples contained a minimum of one WWC detection. At stream sites, the number 

of constituents detected in samples ranged from 1 to 29, 

with more than half the samples containing nine or more 

WWCs. In harbor samples, the number of constituents in 

samples ranged from 1 to 22, with over half the samples 

containing two or more WWCs. 

In streams, the most frequently detected class of 

constituents was herbicides (greater than 90 percent DF), 

followed by nonprescription human drugs (greater than 

80 percent DF) (figs. 44–47). In harbor samples, the most 

frequently detected class of constituents was flavors and 

fragrances (greater than 60 percent DF), closely followed 

by insecticides and solvents. 

The sites where several classes of WWCs were 

detected frequently were Lincoln Creek, Milwaukee River 

at Mouth, Little Menomonee River, Underwood Creek, 

and Honey Creek). Of these sites, Kinnickinnic River 

had the highest detection frequency in the most classes 

(5 of the 15 WWC classes). No consistent response was 

observed between any WWC class and land use. 

Table 19. Grouping of wastewater-compound (WWC) 

classes for Phase II of the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage 

District Corridor Study.

[PAH, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon]

Class Number of 

constituents

Group 1

Antioxidants 3

Dyes and pigments 1

Fire retardants 3

PAHs 3

Plasticizers 6

Group 2

Fuels 4

Solvents 3

Group 3

Herbicides 5

Insecticides 6

Group 4

Antimicrobial disinfectants 2

Detergent metabolites 7

Flavors and fragrances 10

Human drugs (nonprescription) 3

Sterols 2

Miscellaneous 4

84 Water-Quality Characteristics for Selected Sites within the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin
Table 20. Summary of analytical results of stream and harbor sites sampled for wastewater compounds (WWCs) during Phase II of the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage 

District Corridor Study.

[CAS, Chemical Abstracts Service; μg/L, microgram per liter; DF, detection frequency; ND, not detected; e, estimated; %, percent; >, greater than; UV, ultraviolet; PAH, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon; bold compound names indicate known or suspected endocrine distruptors]

WWC class Compound name 

CAS 

registry

number 

Number

of 

samples

Reporting 

level

(μg/L)

DF

Maximum1

(μg/L)

Median1

(μg/L)

Detected 

in 

streams

Detected 

in

harbor

Possible compound uses 

or sources2

Group 1

Antimicrobial 

disinfectants

p-Cresol (para-Cresol) 106-44-5 235 1 3 4 3 X Wood preservative 

Antimicrobial 

disinfectants

Triclosan 3380-34-5 235 1 0 ND ND Disinfectant, antimicrobial 

(concern for acquired microbial resistance) 

Antioxidants Bisphenol A 80-05-7 235 1 0 ND ND Manufacturing polycarbonate resins, antioxidant, flame retardant

Antioxidants 3-tert-Butyl-4-

hydroxyanisole (BHA)

25013-16-5 235 5 0 ND ND Antioxidant, general preservative 

Antioxidants 5-Methyl-1H-benzotriazole 136-85-6 235 2 5 12 2 X Antioxidant in antifreeze and 

deicers 

Dyes and pigments 9,10-Anthraquinone 84-65-1 235 .5 57 e1.3 e0.2 X X Manufacturing dyes/textiles, seed 

treatment, bird repellant 

Fire retardants Tributyl phosphate 126-73-8 235 .5 29 e11 e0.1 X X Antifoaming agent, flame retardant Fire retardants Tris(2-butoxyethyl) 

phosphate

78-51-3 235 .5 58 e25 e0.4 X X Flame retardant 

Fire retardants Tris(dichloroisopropyl) 

phosphate (Fyrol FR 2)

13674-87-8 235 .5 30 e0.3 e0.1 X X Flame retardant 

PAHs Anthracene 120-12-7 235 .5 6 e0.2 e0.1 X Wood preservative, component 

of tar, diesel, or crude oil, combustion product 

PAHs Benzo[a]pyrene 50-32-8 235 .5 0 ND ND Regulated PAH, used in cancer 

research, combustion product 

PAHs Fluoranthene 206-44-0 235 .5 46 e0.9 e0.1 X X Component of coal tar and asphalt 

(only traces in gasoline or diesel fuel), combustion product

PAHs Naphthalene 91-20-3 235 .5 14 e0.2 e0.1 X X Fumigant, moth repellent, major 

component (about 10%) of gasoline 

Evaluation of Data Collected During Phase II 85
WWC class Compound name 

CAS 

registry

number 

Number

of 

samples

Reporting 

level

(μg/L)

DF

Maximum1

(μg/L)

Median1

(μg/L)

Detected 

in 

streams

Detected 

in

harbor

Possible compound uses 

or sources2

PAHs Phenanthrene 85-01-8 235 0.5 37 e0.5 e0.1 X X Manufacturing explosives, 

component of tar, diesel fuel, or crude oil, combustion product

PAHs Pyrene 129-00-0 235 .5 37 e0.4 e0.1 X X Component of coal tar and asphalt 

(only traces in gasoline or diesel fuel), combustion product

Plasticizers Triethyl citrate (ethyl citrate) 77-93-0 235 .5 3 .1 e0.1 X X Cosmetics, pharmaceuticals Plasticizers Triphenyl phosphate 115-86-6 235 .5 24 e0.5 e0.1 X X Plasticizer, resin, wax, finish, 

roofing paper, flame retardant

Plasticizers Tris(2-chloroethyl) 

phosphate (Fyrol CEF)

115-96-8 235 .5 39 e0.3 e0.1 X X Plasticizer, flame retardant 

Group 2

Fuels Isopropylbenzene (cumene) 98-82-8 235 .5 0 ND ND Manufacturing phenol/acetone, 

fuels and paint thinner 

Fuels 2,6-Dimethylnaphthalene 581-42-0 235 .5 1 e0.1 e0.1 X Present in diesel/kerosene (trace 

in gasoline) 

Fuels 1-Methylnaphthalene 90-12-0 235 .5 5 e0.1 e0.1 X X 2–5% of gasoline, diesel fuel, or 

crude oil 

Fuels 2-Methylnaphthalene 91-57-6 235 .5 8 e0.2 e0.1 X X 2–5% of gasoline, diesel fuel, or 

crude oil 

Solvents Isophorone 78-59-1 235 .5 7 e0.1 0.1 X X Solvent for lacquer, plastic, oil, 

silicon, resin 

Solvents Tetrachloroethylene (TCE) 127-18-4 235 .5 3 e0.2 0.1 X X Solvent, degreaser, veterinary 

anthelmintic 

Group 3

Herbicides Bromacil 314-40-9 235 .5 6 2.9 .6 X Herbicide (general use pesticide), 

>80% noncrop usage on grass/brush 

Herbicides Metalaxyl 57837-19-1 235 .5 0 ND ND Herbicide, fungicide (general use 

pesticide), mildew, blight, pathogens, golf/turf 

Table 20. Summary of analytical results of stream and harbor sites sampled for wastewater compounds (WWCs) during Phase II of the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage 

District Corridor Study—Continued.

[CAS, Chemical Abstracts Service; μg/L, microgram per liter; DF, detection frequency; ND, not detected; e, estimated; %, percent; >, greater than; UV, ultraviolet; PAH, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon; bold compound names indicate known or suspected endocrine distruptors]

86 Water-Quality Characteristics for Selected Sites within the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin
WWC class Compound name 

CAS 

registry

number 

Number

of 

samples

Reporting 

level

(μg/L)

DF

Maximum1

(μg/L)

Median1

(μg/L)

Detected 

in 

streams

Detected 

in

harbor

Possible compound uses 

or sources2

Herbicides Metolachlor 51218-45-2 235 .5 39 e0.408 0.0175 X X Herbicide (general use pesticide), 

indicator of agricultural drainage 

Herbicides Pentachlorophenol 87-86-5 235 2 4 e2 e1 X Herbicide, fungicide, wood 

preservative, termite control 

Herbicides Prometon 1610-18-0 235 .5 31 e0.11 e0.01 X X Herbicide (noncrop only), applied 

prior to blacktop 

Insecticides Carbaryl 63-25-2 235 1 18 e0.08 e0.017 X X Insecticide, crop and garden uses, 

low persistence 

Insecticides Carbazole 86-74-8 235 .5 29 e0.4 e0.1 X X Insecticide, manufacturing dyes, 

explosives, and lubricants 

Insecticides Chlorpyrifos 2921-88-2 235 .005,

.007,.008,.009,.011,.012,.013,.015,.016,.022,.026,.028,.5

1 .005 e0.004 X Insecticide, domestic pest and 

termite control (domestic use restricted as of 2001) 

Insecticides Diazinon 333-41-5 235 .005,

.012,.017,.5

15 .1 e0.013 X X Insecticide, >40% nonagricultural 

usage, ants, flies 

Insecticides Dichlorvos 62-73-7 235 .01, 

1

0 e0.01 e0.01 X Insecticide, pet collars, flies, also a 

degradate of naled or trichlofon 

Insecticides N,N-diethyl-meta-toluamide 

(DEET)

134-62-3 235 .5 64 e0.5 e0.1 X X Insecticide, urban uses, mosquito 

repellent 

Table 20. Summary of analytical results of stream and harbor sites sampled for wastewater compounds (WWCs) during Phase II of the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage 

District Corridor Study—Continued.

[CAS, Chemical Abstracts Service; μg/L, microgram per liter; DF, detection frequency; ND, not detected; e, estimated; %, percent; >, greater than; UV, ultraviolet; PAH, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon; bold compound names indicate known or suspected endocrine distruptors]

Evaluation of Data Collected During Phase II 87
WWC class Compound name 

CAS 

registry

number 

Number

of 

samples

Reporting 

level

(μg/L)

DF

Maximum1

(μg/L)

Median1

(μg/L)

Detected 

in 

streams

Detected 

in

harbor

Possible compound uses 

or sources2

Group 4

Detergent metabolites 4-Cumylphenol 599-64-4 235 1 0 ND ND Nonionic detergent metabolite 

Detergent metabolites Diethoxynonylphenol

(NPEO2) 

NA 235 5 18 e4 e2 X X Nonionic detergent metabolite 

Detergent metabolites Diethoxyoctylphenol, 

(OPEO2) 

NA 235 1 0 ND ND Nonionic detergent metabolite 

Detergent metabolites Ethoxyoctylphenol 

(OPEO1, monoethoxyoctylphenol)

NA 235 1 1 e2 e1.5 X Nonionic detergent metabolite 

Detergent metabolites 4-Octylphenol 

(4-normal-Octylphenol)

1806-26-4 235 1 0 ND ND Nonionic detergent metabolite 

Detergent metabolites 4-tert-Octylphenol 140-66-9 235 1 0 ND ND Nonionic detergent metabolite 

Detergent metabolites 4-Nonylphenol, total

(para-Nonylphenol, NP)

84852-15-3 235 5 9 e2 e2 X X Nonionic detergent metabolite 

Flavors and fragrances Acetophenone 98-86-2 235 .5 30 .4 e0.1 X X Fragrance in detergent and 

tobacco, flavor in beverages 

Flavors and fragrances Acetyl hexamethyl 

tetrahydro naphthalene (AHTN)

21145-77-7 235 .5 13 .2 e0.1 X X Musk fragrance (widespread usage), 

persistent in ground water 

Flavors and fragrances Benzophenone 119-61-9 235 .5 16 e0.2 e0.1 X X Fixative for perfumes and soaps 

Flavors and fragrances Camphor 76-22-2 235 .5 9 .2 e0.1 X X Flavor, odorant, ointments Flavors and fragrances

d-Limonene 5989-27-5 235 .5 5 e0.2 e0.1 X Fungicide, antimicrobial, antiviral, 

fragrance in aerosols 

Flavors and fragrances Hexahydrohexamethylcyclopentabenzopyran 

(HHCB)

1222-05-5 235 .5 4 .1 e0.1 X X Musk fragrance (widespread usage), 

persistent in ground water 

Flavors and fragrances Indole 120-72-9 235 0.5 3 e0.1 e0.1 X Pesticide inert ingredient, fragrance 

in coffee 

Flavors and fragrances Isoborneol 124-76-5 235 .5 0 ND ND Fragrance in perfumery, fragrance 

in disinfectants 

Table 20. Summary of analytical results of stream and harbor sites sampled for wastewater compounds (WWCs) during Phase II of the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage 

District Corridor Study—Continued.

[CAS, Chemical Abstracts Service; μg/L, microgram per liter; DF, detection frequency; ND, not detected; e, estimated; %, percent; >, greater than; UV, ultraviolet; PAH, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon; bold compound names indicate known or suspected endocrine distruptors]

88 Water-Quality Characteristics for Selected Sites within the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin
Table 20. Summary of analytical results of stream and harbor sites sampled for wastewater compounds (WWCs) during Phase II of the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage 

District Corridor Study—Continued.

[CAS, Chemical Abstracts Service; μg/L, microgram per liter; DF, detection frequency; ND, not detected; e, estimated; %, percent; >, greater than; UV, ultraviolet; PAH, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon; bold compound names indicate known or suspected endocrine distruptors]

WWC class Compound name 

CAS 

registry

number 

Number

of 

samples

Reporting 

level

(μg/L)

DF

Maximum1

(μg/L)

Median1

(μg/L)

Detected 

in 

streams

Detected 

in

harbor

Possible compound uses 

or sources2

Flavors and fragrances Isoquinoline 119-65-3 235 .5 0 e0.1 e0.1 X Flavors and fragrances Flavors and fragrances 3-Methyl-1H-indole (skatol) 83-34-1 235 1 0 ND ND Fragrance, stench in feces and 

coal tar 

Human drugs

(nonprescription)

Caffeine 58-08-2 235 .5 63 e1.7 e0.2 X X Beverages, diuretic, very mobile/

biodegradable 

Human drugs

(nonprescription)

Cotinine 486-56-6 235 1 35 e0.41 e0.0815 X X Primary nicotine metabolite 

Human drugs

(nonprescription)

Menthol 89-78-1 235 .5 26 e0.3 e0.1 X X Cigarettes, cough drops, liniment, 

mouthwash 

Sterols 3-beta-Coprostanol 360-68-9 235 2 1 e1 e1 X Carnivore fecal indicator 

Sterols Cholesterol 57-88-5 235 2 5 e2 e1 X X Often a fecal indicator, also a 

plant sterol 

Sterols beta-Sitosterol 83-46-5 235 2,

20

2 e1 e1 X Plant sterol 

Sterols beta-Stigmastanol 19466-47-8 235 2,

20

3 e2 e1.5 X Plant sterol 

Miscellaneous Tribromomethane 

(bromoform)

75-25-2 235 .5 1 .1 e0.1 X Wastewater ozination byproduct, 

military/explosives 

Miscellaneous 1,4-Dichlorobenzene 106-46-7 235 .5 7 e0.2 e0.2 X X Moth repellant, fumigant, 

deodorant 

Miscellaneous Methyl salicylate 119-36-8 235 .5 3 e0.1 e0.1 X Liniment, food, beverage, 

UV-absorbing lotion 

1Determined from only those samples with detections.2Zaugg and others, 2002; Lee and others, 2004

Evaluation of Data Collected During Phase II 89
0

87060

50

40302010

0

90

100

MRC

LCM

MRM

WCG

MRMF

LMM

UCW

HCW

MRW

KRM

MRJ

OCSM

RRG

RRF

JCM

OH-04

OH-03

OH-11

OH-12

OH-14

OH-13

Stream sites,

arranged in downstream order

Innerharbor sites Outer- harbor sites

PERCENTAGE OF SAMPLES WITH DETECTIONS OF GROUP 1 WWC CLASSES Antioxidants Dyes and pigments Fire retardants PAHs Plasticizers

Figure 44. Detection frequencies of selected classes of Group 1 wastewater compounds (WWCs) (polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), antioxidants, plasticizers, 

dyes and pigments, and fire retardants), by site, in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, Wis. Site abbreviations listed in table 1.

90 Water-Quality Characteristics for Selected Sites within the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin
MRC

LCM

MRM

WCG

MRMF

LMM

UCW

HCW

MRW

KRM

MRJ

OCSM

RRG

RRF

JCM

OH-04

OH-03

OH-11

OH-12

OH-14

OH-13

Stream sites,

arranged in downstream order

Innerharbor sites Outer- harbor sites

PERCENTAGE OF SAMPLES WITH DETECTIONS OF GROUP 2 WWC CLASSES

0

870605040302010

0

90

100

Fuel

Solvents

Figure 45. Detection frequencies of Group 2 solvent and fuel wastewater-compound (WWC) classes, by site, in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning 

area, Wis. Site abbreviations listed in table 1.

Evaluation of Data Collected During Phase II 91
MRC

LCM

MRM

WCG

MRMF

LMM

UCW

HCW

MRW

KRM

MRJ

OCSM

RRG

RRF

JCM

OH-04

OH-03

OH-11

OH-12

OH-14

OH-13

Stream sites,

arranged in downstream order

Innerharbor sites Outer- harbor sites

PERCENTAGE OF SAMPLES WITH DETECTINOS OF GROUP 3 WWC CLASSES

0

87060

50

40302010

0

90

100

Herbicides

Insecticides

Figure 46. Detection frequencies of Group 3 insecticide and herbicide wastewater-compound (WWC) classes, by site, in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District 

planning area, Wis. Site abbreviations listed in table 1.

92 Water-Quality Characteristics for Selected Sites within the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin
MRC

LCM

MRM

WCG

MRMF

LMM

UCW

HCW

MRW

KRM

MRJ

OCSM

RRG

RRF

JCM

OH-04

OH-03

OH-11

OH-12

OH-14

OH-13

Stream sites,

arranged in downstream order

Innerharbor sites Outer- harbor sites

PERCENTAGE OF SAMPLES WITH DETECTIONS OF GROUP 4 WWC CLASSES

0

87060

50

40302010

0

90

100

Antimicrobial disinfectants

Detergent metabolites

Flavors and fragrancesHuman drugs (nonprescription)SterolsMiscellaneous

Figure 47. Detection frequencies of selected classes of Group 4 wastewater compounds (WWCs) (flavors and fragrances, nonprescription human drugs, antimicrobial disinfectants, detergent metabolites, and sterols), by site, in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, Wis. Site abbreviations listed in table 1.

Evaluation of Data Collected During Phase II 93
Response to Flow and Seasonality

At the stream sites, WWC classes did not show a 

consistent response with respect to flow alone (table 21, 

fig. 48). A seasonal response was more apparent (fig. 49); 

when flow and seasonality was considered together (figs. 

50 and 51, table 21), certain groups indicated more consistent responses. In the following discussions of the effects 

of combined flow and seasonality on stream samples, 

autumn samples were not discussed because there was 

a lack of high-flow-event samples collected during that 

season. 

WWC classes from Group 1 indicated a variety of 

responses in DFs at stream sites with relation to flow, 

seasonality, and the combined effects of flow and seasonality. The antioxidant class had a higher DF during low-flow 

events than during high-flow events. The DF observed 

in winter samples was the highest of any season. When 

flows were combined with seasonality, the highest DF (29 

percent) was observed during winter low-flow events while 

no detections occurred during winter high-flow events. The 

dyes and pigments class had a higher DF during high-flow 

events (77 percent) than during low-flow events (67 percent); however the difference was not very pronounced. No 

consistent seasonal response was observed, and no additional response was observed when flows were combined 

with seasonality. The fire-retardant class did not indicate 

consistent responses with respect to flow or season. PAHs 

indicated a moderate response with respect to flow, with 

samples collected during high-flow events having a higher 

DF than those collected during low-flow events (70 percent 

and 59 percent, respectively). Spring and winter had the 

highest DFs (both 77 percent) while autumn had the lowest 

(33 percent). No additional response was observed when 

flows were combined with seasonality. The plasticizer 

class indicated a moderate response with respect to flow, 

with samples collected during low-flow events (59 percent) 

having a higher DF than those collected during high-flow 

events (45 percent). Samples collected during autumn had 

the lowest DF (37 percent) while those collected in spring, 

summer, and winter all had approximately the same DFs 

(around 55 percent). No additional response was observed 

when flows were combined with seasonality. 

WWC classes from Group 2 indicated a variety of 

responses in DFs at stream sites with relation to flow, 

seasonality, and the combined effects of flow and seasonality. The fuel class did not show a consistent response with 

respect to flow. The highest DFs of fuel occurred during 

winter (20 percent) and spring (15 percent). When flows 

were combined with seasonality, the highest DFs occurred 

during winter high-flow events (31 percent) and spring 

low-flow events (25 percent). The solvent class did not 

indicate a consistent response with respect to flow. Samples collected in the spring had the highest DF (23 percent) 

while those collected in autumn had no detections. When 

flows were combined with seasonality, samples collected 

during spring low-flow events had the highest DF (35 

percent). WWC classes from Group 3 indicated a variety 

of responses in DFs at stream sites with relation to flow, 

seasonality, and the combined effects of flow and seasonality. The herbicide class did not demonstrate a consistent 

response with respect to flow. Spring and summer had 

the highest DFs of herbicides (68 and 54 percent, respectively) with no detections occurring during autumn and 

very few occurring during winter (DF of 3 percent). When 

flows were combined with seasonality, spring low-flow 

events had the highest DF (85 percent), followed by spring 

high-flow events (60 percent). All winter detections of 

herbicides occurred during high-flow events. Insecticides 

indicated no consistent response with respect to flow or 

season alone. However, when flows were combined with 

seasonality, winter low-flow events had the highest DF 

(100 percent). This observation was unexpected and was 

thought to be caused by contamination of samples by field 

vehicles or equipment. 

WWC classes from Group 4 indicated a variety of 

responses in DFs at stream sites with relation to flow, 

seasonality, and the combined effects of flow and seasonality. The antimicrobial-disinfectant class had higher DFs 

during high-flow events than during low-flow events. With 

respect to seasonality, samples collected during winter had 

the highest DF (10 percent) of any season (fig. 49, table 

21). The detergent metabolite class did not demonstrate 

a consistent response with respect to flow. With respect 

to seasonality, the highest DFs were observed in spring 

samples (38 percent). When flows were combined with 

seasonality, highest DFs were observed in spring and 

winter low-flow-event samples (50 and 43 percent, respectively). The flavors and fragrances class did not demonstrate a consistent response with respect to flow. With 

respect to seasonality, winter samples had the highest DF 

(80 percent) followed by spring (58 percent, DF); autumn 

had the lowest DF (23 percent). No additional response 

was observed when flows were combined with seasonality. The nonprescription-human-drug class did not indicate 

consistent responses with respect to flow or seasonality 

alone. When flows were combined with seasonality, winter 

high-flow events had the highest DF (94 percent). The 

sterol class did not indicate a consistent response with 

respect to flow. With respect to seasonality, the highest 

94 Water-Quality Characteristics for Selected Sites within the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin
Table 21. Detection frequencies for Phase II wastewater compounds (WWC) analysis in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, Wis.

[All detection frequencies given in percent; PAH, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon]

Class of WWC 

Number of 

constituents 

in class

Detection frequencies at stream sites Detection frequencies at harbor sites

Flow Season

Season and flow

Season

Low flow High flow

Low 

flow

High 

flow Autumn Spring Summer Winter

Spring, 

low 

flow

Summer, 

low

flow

Winter, 

low

 flow

Spring, 

high

flow

Summer, 

high

flow

Winter, 

high

flow

Autumn Spring Summer

Antimicrobial 

disinfectants

2 1 7 3 3 0 10 0 0 0 5 0 19 0 0 0

Antioxidants 3 10 3 7 7 3 13 10 5 29 5 0 0 0 0 0Detergent metabolites 7 29 26 20 38 17 33 50 20 43 32 6 25 17 35 0Dyes and pigments 1 67 77 60 77 69 73 75 68 57 78 65 88 8 25 4Fire retardants 3 71 68 63 72 68 77 75 68 86 70 59 69 50 55 39Flavors and fragrances 10 47 55 23 58 41 80 70 41 79 52 35 81 50 55 30Fuels 4 8 12 0 15 3 20 25 5 7 10 0 31 0 5 0Herbicides 5 38 46 0 68 54 3 85 52 0 60 53 6 0 65 52Human drugs

(nonprescription)

3 78 78 70 78 80 83 80 82 71 78 65 94 17 65 39

Insecticides 6 88 73 80 72 90 87 85 89 100 65 82 75 58 50 22PAHs 6 59 70 33 77 59 77 80 61 71 75 47 81 42 20 0Plasticizers 3 59 45 37 55 59 53 65 64 71 50 41 38 17 20 4Solvents 2 10 14 0 23 7 10 35 9 0 18 0 19 0 5 4Sterols 4 10 9 10 8 5 17 10 11 7 8 0 25 8 0 0Miscellaneous 3 10 11 3 25 3 3 35 5 7 20 0 0 0 30 0

Evaluation of Data Collected During Phase II 95
Antimicrobial

disinfectants (2)

Antioxidants (3)

Detergent

metabolites (7)

Dyes and pigments (1)

Fire retardants (3)

Flavors and

fragrances (10)

Fuels (4)

Herbicides (5)

Human drugs

(nonprescription) (3)

Insecticides (6)

Miscellaneous (4)

PAHs (3)

Plasticizers (6)

Solvents (3)

Sterols (2)

WWC GROUP AND CLASS (NUMBER OF CONSTITUENTS)

GROUP 1

DETECTION FREQUENCY, IN PERCENT

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

GROUP 2 GROUP 3 GROUP 4

High flow

Low flow

Wastewater-compound (WWC) detections at stream sites, by flow

Figure 48. Detection frequency of stream samples with wastewater-compound (WWC) detections during high- and low-flow 

periods, by WWC class (and number of constituents), in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, Wis.

96 Water-Quality Characteristics for Selected Sites within the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin
DETECTION FREQUENCY, IN PERCENT

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

Antimicrobial

disinfectants (2)

Antioxidants (3)

Detergent

metabolites (7)

Dyes and pigments (1)

Fire retardants (3)

Flavors and

fragrances (10)

Fuels (4)

Herbicides (5)

Human drugs

(nonprescription) (3)

Insecticides (6)

Miscellaneous (4)

PAHs (3)

Plasticizers (6)

Solvents (3)

Sterols (2)

Spring

Summer

Autumn

Winter

WWC GROUP AND CLASS (NUMBER OF CONSTITUENTS)

GROUP 1 GROUP 2 GROUP 3 GROUP 4

Wastewater-compound (WWC) detections at stream sites, by season

Figure 49. Detection frequency of stream samples with wastewater-compound (WWC) detections, by season and WWC class 

(and number of constituents), in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, Wis.

Evaluation of Data Collected During Phase II 97
Antimicrobial

disinfectants (2)

Herbicides (5)

Solvents (3)

Antioxidants (3)

Detergent

metabolites (7)

Dyes and pigments (1)

Fire retardants (3)

Flavors and

fragrances (10)

Fuels (4)

Human drugs

(nonprescription) (3)

Insecticides (6)

Miscellaneous (4)

PAHs (3)

Plasticizers (6)

Sterols (2)

Spring, low flow

Summer, low flow

Winter, low flow

DETECTION FREQUENCY, IN PERCENT

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

WWC GROUP AND CLASS (NUMBER OF CONSTITUENTS)

GROUP 1 GROUP 2 GROUP 3 GROUP 4

Wastewater-compound (WWC) detections at stream sites during low-flow periods, by season

Figure 50. Detection frequency of stream samples with wastewater-compound (WWC) detections during low-flow periods, by 

season and WWC class (and number of constituents), in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, Wis.

98 Water-Quality Characteristics for Selected Sites within the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin
Antioxidants (3)

Miscellaneous (4)

Antimicrobial

disinfectants (2)

Detergent

metabolites (7)

Dyes and pigments (1)

Fire retardants (3)

Flavors and

fragrances (10)

Fuels (4)

Herbicides (5)

Human drugs

(nonprescription) (3)

Insecticides (6)

PAHs (3)

Plasticizers (6)

Solvents (3)

Sterols (2)

Spring, high flow

Summer, high flow

Winter, high flow

DETECTION FREQUENCY, IN PERCENT

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

WWC GROUP AND CLASS (NUMBER OF CONSTITUENTS)

GROUP 1 GROUP 2 GROUP 3 GROUP 4

Wastewater-compound (WWC) detections at stream sites during high-flow periods, by season

Figure 51. Detection frequency of stream samples with wastewater-compound (WWC) detections during high-flow periods, 

by season and WWC class (and number of constituents), in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, Wis.

Evaluation of Data Collected During Phase II 99
DFs occurred in winter (17 percent) and autumn samples 

(10 percent). When flows were combined with seasonality, no consistent response was observed with respect to 

seasonality. However, a consistent response was observed 

in relation to flow. Winter high-flow events had the highest 

DF (25 percent), followed by spring high-flow events (DF 

of 8 percent); summer high-flow-event samples had no 

detections for sterols (fig. 48–51, table 21). The miscellaneous class did not demonstrate a consistent response with 

respect to flow. With respect to seasonality, spring samples 

had the highest detection frequency (25 percent). When 

flows were combined with seasonality, spring samples 

collected during low-flow and high-flow events had the 

highest DFs (35 percent and 20 percent, respectively); no 

detections were observed in high-flow-event samples collected during summer or winter. 

Harbor samples could only be examined for seasonal 

responses. Two classes of WWCs were not detected in 

harbor samples: antimicrobial disinfectants and antioxidants (fig. 52, table 21). The herbicide and nonprescription-human-drug classes were detected with the greatest 

frequency in harbor samples, with spring samples showing 

the highest DF at 65 percent. More classes were detected 

and at higher frequencies in samples collected during 

spring. WWCs in the fuel and miscellaneous classes were 

detected only in spring samples. The solvent and herbicide classes were not detected in autumn samples. The 

PAH and detergent metabolite classes were detected only 

in spring and autumn samples. The sterol class was only 

detected during autumn sampling (8 percent) (fig. 52, 

table 21). 

Dominant Constituents in Wastewater Compound 

Classes

Within each class of WWCs, the data were analyzed 

to determine which, if any, constituent was driving detections and (or) responses for each class (table 20). DFs in 

stream samples were higher than those in harbor samples 

for every class of WWCs. Each of the classes comprising 

Group 1 was affected by the prevalence of detections of 

individual constituents within that class. Of the two constituents of the antimicrobial-disinfectant class, p-Cresol 

was the only constituent detected, with an overall DF of 

3 percent; it was detected only in streams. It is commonly 

used as an industrial solvent, an insecticide, and it is an 

ingredient in common household cleaners and disinfectants 

(Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, 2006). 

Of the three constituents in the antioxidant class, only 5-

methyl-1H-benzotriazole was detected, with an overall DF 

of 5 percent. It is commonly used as an antioxidant in antifreeze and deicers, and has been identified as one of the 

constituents found in runoff from airport deicing activities 

(Corsi and others, 2003). Highest DFs for this constituent were observed at the Kinnickinnic River site during a 

winter sampling event. The dyes and pigments class was 

composed of only one constituent: 9,10-anthraquinone. 

It had an overall DF of 57 percent, and, although it was 

found in both stream and harbor samples, DFs were higher 

in stream samples than in harbor samples. Of the three 

constituents in the fire-retardant class, tris(2-butoxyethyl) 

phosphate was the most dominant. Although all three 

were detected in both stream and harbor samples, tris(2-

butoxyethyl) phosphate was detected most frequently, 

with an overall DF of 58 percent; tributyl phosphate and 

tris(dichloroisopropyl) phosphate both had overall DFs 

around 30 percent. Of the 6 constituents in the PAH class, 

5 were detected in at least one sample. Fluoranthene had 

the highest overall DF (46 percent), followed by pyrene 

(37 percent) and phenanthrene (37 percent); the remaining constituents had DFs less than 30 percent in stream 

samples. All but one constituent in this class (anthracene) 

were detected in both stream and harbor samples; constituents in this class had lower DFs in harbor samples than 

in stream samples. Of the 3 constituents in the plasticizer 

class, all were detected in both stream and harbor samples, 

however tris(2-chloroethyl) phosphate was the dominant 

constituent, with an overall DF of 39 percent.

Each of the classes comprising Group 2 was affected 

by the prevalence of detections of individual constituents 

within that class. Of the 4 constituents in the fuel class, 

only 3 were detected in samples. The most dominant constituent was 2-Methylnaphthalene (DF of 8 percent). Both 

constituents in the solvent class were detected in stream 

and harbor samples; however, isophorone was dominant, 

with an overall DF of 7 percent. Isophorone is an industrial 

chemical used as a solvent in some printing inks, paints, 

lacquers, and adhesives. It is also used as an intermediate 

in the production of certain chemicals (Agency for Toxic 

Substances and Disease Registry, 1999). Tetrachloroethlyene had an overall DF of 3 percent. 

Each of the classes comprising Group 3 was affected 

by the prevalence of detections for individual constituents 

within that class. Of the 5 constituents in the herbicide 

class, only 4 were detected in samples. Metolachlor is a 

pre-emergent herbicide and is commonly used to control 

certain broadleaf and annual grassy weeds on agricultural 

land and on highway rights-of-way (Oregon State University, 1996); it had the highest overall DF (39 percent), and was the WWC with the highest DF in harbor 

100 Water-Quality Characteristics for Selected Sites within the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin
Antimicrobial

disinfectants (2)

Antioxidants (3)

Fuels (4)

Miscellaneous (4)

Herbicides (5)

Solvents (3)

Detergent

metabolites (7)

Dyes and pigments (1)

Fire retardants (3)

Flavors and

fragrances (10)

Human drugs

(nonprescription) (3)

Insecticides (6)

PAHs (3)

Plasticizers (6)

Sterols (2)

Spring

Summer

Autumn

DETECTION FREQUENCY, IN PERCENT

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

WWC GROUP AND CLASS (NUMBER OF CONSTITUENTS)

GROUP 1 GROUP 2 GROUP 3 GROUP 4

Wastewater-compound (WWC) detections at harbor sites, by season

Figure 52. Detection frequency of harbor samples with wastewater-compound (WWC) detections, by season and WWC class 

(and number of constituents), in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, Wis. (No harbor samples were 

collected in winter.)

Evaluation of Data Collected During Phase II 101
samples. Prometon is a non-selective herbicide and is 

commonly used for total vegetation control on industrial 

sites, for noncrop areas on farms, and around and under 

asphalt (Capel and others, 1999); it had a slightly lower 

overall DF (31 percent) than metolachlor. Both of these 

herbicides were detected in stream and harbor samples. 

The remaining two constituents detected (bromacil and 

pentachlorophenol) were detected at low frequencies in 

stream samples and were not detected in harbor samples. 

Of the six constituents in the insecticide class, DEET (the 

most common active ingredient in insect repellents) had 

the highest overall DF, at 64 percent (U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, 2005b). Carbazole was the secondmost-frequently detected insecticide (overall DF of 29 

percent), followed by carbaryl (overall DF of 18 percent), 

and diazinon (overall DF of 15 percent). Chlorpyrifos had 

a very low overall DF (1 percent) and was found only in 

harbor samples, whereas dichlorvos was detected only in 

stream samples, at an overall DF of less than 1 percent. 

Each of the classes comprising Group 4 was affected 

by the prevalence of detections of individual constituents within that class. Of the 7 constituents in the detergent metabolite class, only 3 were detected in samples: 

diethoxynonylphenol (overall DF of 18 percent) was the 

most dominant constituent, followed by 4-nonylphenol 

(overall DF of 9 percent), and ethoxyoctylphenol (overall 

DF of 1 percent). Of the 10 constituents in the flavor/fragrance class, only 8 were detected in samples, the most 

dominant constituent being acetophenone (overall DF 

about 30 percent). Of the three constituents in the nonprescription-human-drug class, caffeine was the most 

dominant. Although all three constituents were detected in 

both stream and harbor samples, caffeine was the most frequently detected (overall DF of 63 percent). The remaining 

two constituents of this class (menthol and cotinine) were 

detected less frequently (26 and 35 percent overall DF, 

respectively). Of the four constituents in the sterol class, 

cholesterol was the dominant constituent, with an overall 

DF of 5 percent. Cholesterol is often considered as a fecal 

indicator, but it is also a plant sterol. All four constituents 

in the sterol class were detected in stream samples, but 

cholesterol was the only sterol detected in harbor samples. 

Of the 3 constituents in the miscellaneous WWC class, 

1,4-dichlorobenzene was the dominant constituent, with an 

overall DF of 7 percent; the remaining 2 constituents had 

DFs of 1 and 3 percent. 

Endocrine-Disrupting Chemicals

Of the 62 WWCs, 20 are known or suspected endocrine disrupting chemicals (EDCs) (table 20, constituents 

in bold). Of these 20, 12 were detected and 8 were not 

detected. The dominant EDC constituent in all samples 

was tris(2-chloroethyl) phosphate (DF of 39 percent), 

followed by tris(dichloroisopropyl) phosphate (DF of 30 

percent), diethoxynonylphenol (DF of 18 percent) and 

carbaryl (18 percent). Of the 234 samples collected, 149 

had detections of at least one EDC (DF of 64 percent). The 

number of individual EDCs detected per sample ranged 

from zero to eight. 

Among 179 stream samples, 126 had at least one 

EDC detected (DF of 70 percent). At stream sites, the 

number of individual EDCs detected per sample ranged 

from 0 to 8, with a median of 2 EDCs detected per sample. 

Among 55 harbor samples, 23 had at least one EDC 

detected (DF of 42 percent). The number of individual 

EDCs detected per harbor sample ranged from 0 to 6 (table 

15). 

The distribution and frequency of individual EDCs 

detected in a sample are shown in figure 53. The frequency 

of individual EDC constituents detected and the number 

of samples with EDC detections suggested that several 

different EDCs were present and there was a consistent 

source of EDCs. Sites which had EDC detections in 10 

or more samples and more than 30 individual EDCs 

detected included Lincoln Creek, Honey Creek and Little 

Menomonee River. Other sites that had EDC detections in 

10 or more samples included Root River at Grange Avenue 

(10 of 12 samples) and Milwaukee River at Mouth (10 of 

12 samples). One other site had more than 30 individual 

EDCs detected: Kinnickinnic River, with 36 individual 

EDCs detected.

In stream samples, there were no consistent patterns 

between EDC detections and flow, season, or flow and 

season combined. Harbor samples indicated some seasonal 

variability; summer samples had detection frequencies 

around 25 percent while spring and autumn samples had 

detection frequencies around 50 percent. 

102 Water-Quality Characteristics for Selected Sites within the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin
EXPLANATION

Water

Area within the 

MMSD planning area

Area outside of the 

MMSD planning area

Watershed boundary

Subwatershed

boundary

Stream

1 – 7 individual EDCs detected

KNOWN AND SUSPECTED EDCS

1 – 3 samples

4 – 6 samples

7 – 9 samples

10 – 12 samples

8 – 18 individual EDCs detected

1 – 3 samples

4 – 6 samples

7 – 9 samples

10 – 12 samples

19 – 23 individual EDCs detected

1 – 3 samples

4 – 6 samples

7 – 9 samples

10 – 12 samples

24 – 38 individual EDCs detected

1 – 3 samples

4 – 6 samples

7 – 9 samples

10 – 12 samples

OCSM JCM

HCW

WCG

LCM

UCW

OH-04

OH-11

KRM

LMM

OH-13

OH-12

OH-14

RRF

RRG

MRJ

MRW

MRM

MRC

OH-03

MRMF

88°10' 87°50'

42°50' 43°10'

Lake Michigan

0 4 2 Miles

0 4 2 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, 1989; 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 53. Distribution and frequency of known and suspected endocrine-disrupting compounds (EDCs) in the Milwaukee 

Metropolitan Sewerage District (MMSD) planning area, Wis. Color describes the number of individual EDC constituents detected 

(by quartiles); size of symbol describes the number of sampling events when EDCs were detected. Site abbreviations listed in table 1.

Evaluation of Data Collected During Phase II 103
Semipermeable Membrane Devices and 

Wastewater Compounds

Analytical results from extracts of semipermeable 

membrane devices (SPMDs) from Milwaukee-area streams 

included evidence of potential toxicity to macroinvertebrates and fish due to synthetic organic compounds in 

water (table 22). WWC results can be compared with toxicity results by individual WWC constituent as well as by 

WWC class. In general, the same constituents at the same 

sites appeared in both SPMD results and WWC results; 

WWC results indicated where the constituents were occurring at high frequencies, whereas SPMD results indicated 

that these constituents had the potential to accumulate 

in fish tissue. For the remaining eight sites that were not 

sampled for SPMDs, the WWC data could indicate which 

sites would be of interest for further toxicity testing in 

Phase III. 

Cytochrome P450RGS tests indicated potential 

toxicity from the presence of compounds like dioxins, 

PCBs, and PAHs in streamwater at all seven sites, with the 

highest potential toxicity at the Little Menomonee River, 

Root River at Grange Avenue, Oak Creek, Lincoln Creek, 

and Honey Creek sites (SPMD data for the Root River 

at Grange Avenue, Honey Creek, and Underwood Creek 

Phase II sites actually were sampled at nearby USGS 

NAWQA sites; see page 14 for more details).

Fluoroscan results indicated the presence of PAHs 

at all seven sites. The highest concentrations of PAHs 

found during 2004 were at Little Menomonee River and 

Menomonee River at Menomonee Falls. The concentration for Little Menomonee River was nearly twice that for 

Menomonee River at Menomonee Falls; concentrations 

for Root River at Grange Avenue, Honey Creek, Lincoln 

Creek, and Oak Creek were also high compared to other 

sampled sites. In addition to other sources, high concentrations of PAHs have been found in coal-tar-based sealcoats 

used on parking lots that break down over time and allow 

PAHs to be washed into waterways with runoff (Mahler 

and others, 2005). 

Microtox tests indicated higher potential toxicity at 

the Underwood Creek site than at all other sampled sites in 

the Milwaukee area, suggesting that compounds other than 

those detected in the P450RGS or Fluoroscan tests were 

causing toxicity to the bioluminescent bacteria used in the 

Microtox test. Phase II results were examined for potential 

sources of this toxicity. Of the WWCs, 9,10-anthraquinone, and tris(2-butoxyethyl) phosphate had high DFs at 

Underwood Creek, and elevated concentrations of lead 

were found in bed sediments at this same site. 

Chemical analyses of the SPMD extracts found the 

presence of several PAHs. The PAH phenanthrene was 

highest at the Menomonee River at Menomonee Falls site 

(750 ng/SPMD), but was also relatively high at the Root 

River at Grange Avenue (590 ng/SPMD), Honey Creek 

(380 ng/SPMD), and Little Menomonee River (340 ng/

SPMD) sites; SPMD results for anthracene, another PAH, 

indicated its presence in these four streams as well. Phase 

II results from WWC data analysis in water indicated that 

phenanthrene was present at all the same sites at a DF of 

50 percent or greater. The site with the highest detections 

of phenanthrene was Underwood Creek (100 percent), 

followed by Root River at Grange Avenue (77 percent) and 

Little Menomonee River (75 percent). WWC water analysis indicated anthracene was present at low DFs (33 percent or less) in 5 of the 7 sites, and absent at Menomonee 

River at Menomonee Falls and Oak Creek.

SPMD results for pyrene and fluoranthene had the 

highest concentrations at the Little Menomonee River 

(1,700 and 1,640 ng/SPMD, respectively), Root River at 

Grange Avenue (2,100 and 1,600 ng/SPMD, respectively), 

and Menomonee River at Menomonee Falls (1,900 and 

1,300 ng/SPMD, respectively) sites. Naphthalene was 

found only in the SPMD results for Little Menomonee 

River, whereas methylnaphthalene compounds were 

found at Little Menomonee River and Root River at 

Grange Avenue. WWC results for pyrene indicated the 

highest DFs at Underwood Creek (100 percent), Little 

Menomonee River (83 percent), Root River at Grange 

Avenue (77 percent) and Honey Creek (75 percent). WWC 

results also indicated 100-percent DFs for fluoranthene 

at Little Menomonee River, Underwood Creek, and Root 

River at Grange Avenue. WWC DFs for naphthalene were 

relatively low at all sites (33 percent or less), even though 

it was detected at 5 of the 6 sites; DFs for 1- and 2-methylnaphthalene were even lower than those for naphthalene 

(25 percent or less). 

Overall, results for toxicity tests (performed on 

SPMD extracts) and individual constituent analyses 

(performed on both SPMD extracts and water) from Little 

Menomonee River had moderate to high concentrations 

and DFs, and indicate that PAHs may be an issue of particular concern at this site. Contamination at this site may 

be attributed to the Moss-American Superfund site located 

upstream. 

In summary, the combination of WWC results, in 

concert with toxicity tests and chemical analyses based 

on SPMD results, confirmed that concentrations of some 

synthetic organic compounds were of concern to aquatic 

biota in MMSD-area streams. 

104 Water-Quality Characteristics for Selected Sites within the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin
Table 22. Results for toxicity tests and selected chemical analyses of semi-permeable membrane device (SPMD) extracts and detection frequencies for Phase II wastewatercompounds (WWCs) analysis at seven sites in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, Wis.

[pg TEQ/mL SPMD, picograms of 2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin per milliliter of SPMD extract; μg PAH/mL SPMD, micrograms of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons per milliliter of SPMD extract; mg eq SPMD/mL DSMO, milligram equivalent SPDM extract per milliliter dimethyl sulfoxide; ng/SPMD, nanograms per total SPMD; <, less than; all SPMD values in time-normalized (30 days) concentrations; all WWC values in detection frequencies; units for Microtox EC50 are for the 50-percent-effective concentration]

Consitituent Unit

Lincoln Creek at 

47th Street 

at Milwaukee

Menomonee River 

at Menomonee 

Falls

Little Menomonee 

River 

at Milwaukee

Underwood 

Creek at 

Wauwatosa1

Honey 

Creek at 

Wauwatosa1

Oak Creek 

at South 

Milwaukee

Root River at 

Grange Avenue 

at Greenfield1

SPMD toxicity potential tests (concentrations)

Cytochrome P450RGS pg TEQ/mL SPMD 2,217 1,776 2,889 1,028 2,162 2,392 2,459Fluoroscan μg PAH/mL SPMD 417.5 678.9 1,295 148.6 580.4 362.3 587.2Microtox EC50 mg eq SPMD/mL DSMO 6.15 2.44 2.30 0.37 7.61 3.37 3.20

SPMD chemical analyses (concentrations)

Anthracene ng/SPMD <100 120 108 <100 110 <100 115Fluoranthene ng/SPMD 490 1,300 1,640 330 1,100 800 1,600Fluorene ng/SPMD <1 49 120 <1 <1 24 130Naphthalene ng/SPMD <25 <25 38 <25 <25 <25 <251-Methylnaphthalene ng/SPMD <25 <25 37 <25 <25 <25 512-Methylnaphthalene ng/SPMD <38 <25 67 <38 <25 <38 712,6-Dimethylnaphthalene ng/SPMD <25 <25 66 <25 <25 <25 160Phenanthrene ng/SPMD 190 750 340 160 380 240 590Pyrene ng/SPMD 610 1,900 1,700 460 1,400 880 2,100Methyl pyrene ng/SPMD 28 63 194 <1 55 65 96Benzo[a]pyrene ng/SPMD 102 130 185 120 130 100 200

Phase II WWC constituents (detection frequencies)

Anthracene percent detection 8 0 17 33 8 0 15Fluoranthene percent detection 58 64 100 100 83 45 100Naphthalene percent detection 33 9 25 25 17 0 151-Methylnaphthalene percent detection 17 0 0 8 8 0 82-Methylnaphthalene percent detection 17 0 8 8 25 0 8Phenanthrene percent detection 42 55 75 100 67 27 77Pyrene percent detection 58 27 83 100 75 9 77

1SPMD data was collected as part of the U.S. Geological Survey National Water-Quality Assessment Program (NAWQA) Effects of Urbanization on Stream Ecosystems Topical Study. For these three MMSD 

Phase II sites, three nearby NAWQA sites were sampled: Underwood Creek at Watertown Plank Road at Elm Grove (about 3 miles upstream of Underwood Creek at Wauwatosa), Honey Creek near Portland Avenue at Wauwatosa (about 1 mile upstream from Honey Creek at Wauwatosa), and Root River at Layton Avenue at Greenfield (about 2 miles upstream from the Root River at Grange Avenue at Greenfield).

Evaluation of Data Collected During Phase II 105
Bed Sediment

Bed-sediment analyses are an effective means of 

integrating contamination episodes in stream segments 

over extended time periods since many metals and organic 

chemicals sorb onto fine sediment particles. Sediment 

traps were used collect sediment for the assessment of 

transport rates of trace metals and PCBs at all stream sites.

Physical Characteristics of Sediment-Trap Contents

Sediment traps were deployed at each of the 15 

stream-sampling locations. The mass of sediment recovered from traps deployed at the 15 stream sites is depicted 

in figure 54 (left panel). Particle sizes can be described as 

a percentage of sand, silt, and clay (right panel). Samples 

from traps that yielded the greatest mass of recovered sediments were composed primarily of sand. 

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

PERCENT CLAY

90

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

PERCENT SILT

90

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

PERCENT SAND

Clay

Silty

clay

Silty clay

loam Clay loam

Sandy

clay

Sandy clay

loam

Sandy

loam

Loamy

Sand sand

Loam

Silt loam

Silt

MRC

LCM

MRM

WCG

MRMF

LMM

UCW

HCW

MRW

KRM

MRJ

OCSM

RRG

RRF

JCM

STREAM SITES,

ARRANGED IN DOWNSTREAM ORDER

SAMPLE MASS RECOVERED,

IN GRAMS

0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000

2004 samples

EXPLANATION

2005 samples

Figure 54. Mass and particle-size distribution of sediment captured in Phase II sediment traps in the Milwaukee Metropolitan 

Sewerage District planning area, Wis. Site abbreviations listed in table 1.

Traps deployed in 2005 collected a higher fraction of 

silt- and clay-size particles and a correspondingly lower 

fraction of sand-size particles compared to traps deployed 

in 2004. The differences seen in the particle-size distributions between the 2004 and 2005 field seasons were likely 

related to differences in rainfall, stream discharge, and 

the time period chosen for trap deployment. Area streams 

in 2004 had higher flows than in 2005, and may be the 

reason for the higher fraction of coarse-grained sediments 

in traps. 

Sediment samplers deployed as part of Phase II were 

not designed to provide quantitative estimates of sediment 

transport. Nevertheless, the results shown in figure 55 provide information on the approximate particle-size classes 

that were transported as suspended sediment. Because 

of the design of the samplers, the smallest particle-size 

classes (clay size and smaller) probably were underestimated because the sediment-trap efficiency for those size 

classes is thought to be quite low.

106 Water-Quality Characteristics for Selected Sites within the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin
10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

PERCENT CLAY

90

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

PERCENT SILT

90

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

PERCENT SAND

Clay

Silty

clay

Silty clay

loam Clay loam

Sandy

clay

Sandy clay

loam

Sandy

loam

Loamy Sand sand

Loam

Silt loam

Silt

MRC

LCM

MRM

WCG

MRMF

LMM

UCW

HCW

MRW

KRM

MRJ

OCSM

RRG

RRF

JCM

Stream sites, arranged 

in downstream order

EXPLANATION

Figure 55. Particle-size distribution in sediment-trap samples, by Phase II sampling location, in the Milwaukee Metropolitan 

Sewerage District planning area, Wis. Site abbreviations listed in table 1.

Comparison of Sites by Use of Average Effect 

Concentrations

The material collected in the sediment traps was 

analyzed for arsenic, cadmium, chromium, copper, lead, 

mercury, nickel, zinc, total phosphorus, and total PCBs. In 

some cases, not enough material was collected to allow all 

analyses to be run. The sediment-trap results were summarized by looking at specific chemicals alone and by 

combining the potential effects of all chemicals detected. 

Results from two different methods of describing the 

significance of all chemicals detected in the sediment-trap 

samples are shown in figure 56. The left panel shows the 

total number of constituents that exceed the consensusbased threshold effect concentration (TEC) as listed in 

MacDonald and others (2000). The TEC is a conservative 

indicator of possible problems related to sediment chemistry; exceedence of even several TECs does not necessarily 

indicate toxicity. The right panel shows each sampling 

result divided by a consensus-based probable effects concentration (PEC), which yields a “PEC quotient.” The PEC 

quotient was developed to relate bulk sediment-chemistry 

results to toxicity-test results involving experiments with 

benthic organisms (MacDonald and others, 2000). A mean 

PEC quotient can be computed from all individual PEC 

quotients for each sample. 

Evaluation of Data Collected During Phase II 107
MRC

LCM

MRM

WCG

MRMF

LMM

UCW

HCW

MRW

KRM

MRJ

OCSM

RRG

RRF

JCM

MRC

LCM

MRM

WCG

MRMF

LMM

UCW

HCW

MRW

KRM

MRJ

OCSM

RRG

RRF

JCM

2004 samples

2005 samples

Threshold indicating 

potential toxicity to 

macroinvertebrates

MEAN PEC QUOTIENT

0.2 0.4 0.6

NUMBER OF TEC EXCEEDENCES

246 8

Figure 56. Number of consensus-based threshold effect concentration (TEC) exceedences and the mean consensus-based 

probable effects concentration (PEC) quotients for contaminants in sediments from the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage 

District planning area, Wis. (MacDonald and others, 2000). Site abbreviations listed in table 1.

The developers of the PEC quotient noted that a PEC 

quotient that exceeds 0.5 is associated with increased 

toxicity in test organisms, and a PEC quotient between 

1 and 5 is associated with a test-organism mortality rate 

exceeding 50 percent (MacDonald and others, 2000). Milwaukee River at Mouth was the only site where the mean 

PEC quotient exceeded 0.5, suggesting the possibility of 

increased sediment toxicity. 

The PEC quotients presented here did not account 

for effects of PAHs or chlorinated pesticide compounds, 

since these constituents were not analyzed for in conjunction with Phase II sampling efforts. Both of these classes 

of compounds could potentially change the mean PEC 

quotients relative to those presented above. 

Comparison of Sites by Use of Individual Contaminant 

Effects Concentrations

The PEC quotients for individual contaminants at 

each sample site are summarized in figure 57. For certain 

sites, the mean PEC quotient differed greatly from PEC 

quotients calculated for individual contaminants. For 

example, Kinnickinnic River had the highest individual 

PEC quotient for copper, zinc, or mercury. Milwaukee 

River at Milwaukee and Milwaukee River near Cedarburg had high individual PEC quotients for total PCBs. 

Underwood Creek and Menomonee River at Wauwatosa 

had high individual PEC quotients for lead. By contrast, 

when the overall mean PEC quotient was considered, the 

Milwaukee River at Mouth site had the highest result, 

reflecting the additive effects of contaminants transported 

throughout the watershed.

108 Water-Quality Characteristics for Selected Sites within the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin
Nickel Zinc Total PCB

PEC QUOTIENT PEC QUOTIENT PEC QUOTIENT

Arsenic Cadmium Chromium

Copper Lead Mercury

0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5

MRC

LCM

MRM

WCG

MRMF

LMM

UCW

HCW

MRW

KRM

MRJ

OCSM

RRG

RRF

JCM

MRC

LCM

MRM

WCG

MRMF

LMM

UCW

HCW

MRW

KRM

MRJ

OCSM

RRG

RRF

JCM

MRC

LCM

MRM

WCG

MRMF

LMM

UCW

HCW

MRW

KRM

MRJ

OCSM

RRG

RRF

JCM

0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5

2004 samples

EXPLANATION

2005 samples

No detect

No test

STREAM SITES,

ARRANGED IN DOWNSTREAM ORDER

STREAM SITES,

ARRANGED IN DOWNSTREAM ORDER

STREAM SITES,

ARRANGED IN DOWNSTREAM ORDER

Figure 57. Consensus-based probable effects concentration (PEC) quotients for nine contaminants in the Milwaukee 

Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, Wis. (MacDonald and others, 2000). Site abbreviations listed in table 1.

Evaluation of Data Collected During Phase II 109
Total PCBs were detected at almost all sites, and most 

of the detections were at concentrations near the level of 

detection (LOD). It was useful to compare the results for 

maximum total PCB concentrations to the TEC of 0.060 

mg/kg, as defined by MacDonald and others (2000). Sediments with contaminant concentrations below the TEC 

generally do not cause toxicity. Samples from five of the 

sites met or exceeded the TEC for PCBs: Milwaukee River 

at Mouth (1.2 mg/kg), Milwaukee River at Milwaukee (1.1 

mg/kg), Milwaukee River near Cedarburg (0.3 mg/kg), 

Menomonee River at Wauwatosa (0.22 mg/kg), and Little 

Menomonee River (0.063 mg/kg)(table 23). Results for 

all other sites fell below the TEC. The main stems of the 

Milwaukee River and the Kinnickinnic River both have 

several known areas of PCB contamination, as documented 

in numerous reports, including Southeastern Wisconsin 

Regional Planning Commission (1987) and Steuer and 

others (1999). PCB contamination along the main stem of 

the Milwaukee River may be attributed to the Cedar Creek 

Superfund alternative site located upstream. PCB concentrations exceeding the TEC on the Menomonee River may 

be a result of former industrial land-use practices within 

the Menomonee River watershed (Southeastern Wisconsin 

Regional Planning Commission, 1987).

Concentrations of the nine contaminants shown in figure 57 (Phase II data) were compared separately to Phase 

I results (appendix 5). Comparisons were made with a 

limited number of sites. For almost all sediment trace elements (cadmium, chromium, copper, lead, mercury, nickel, 

and zinc), most sites indicated decreases in concentrations 

from Phase I to Phase II. The one exception was arsenic, 

which increased at most sites. Ever decreasing LOD’s for 

PCB’s may have allowed more detections of low-level 

PCB’s. This greater analytical sensitivity over time is 

important to keep in mind when drawing comparisons 

between current and historical data. Many of the Phase 

I samples may have contained PCBs at concentrations 

undetectable by older laboratory methods (LOD 0.05 mg/

kg), but which might have been detectable using current 

laboratory methods (LOD of 0.024 μg/g). Data for total 

PCB concentrations in sediment were available for Phase 

I and Phase II comparisons at four sites (appendix 5). 

During Phase I, PCBs were detected in samples from three 

of the sites; no PCBs were detected in the single sample 

from Little Menomonee River. During Phase II, two of 

the four sites had concentrations detectable at the previous 

WSLH LOD: Little Menomonee River (0.06 mg/kg) and 

Menomonee River at Wauwatosa (0.12 mg/kg). 

Table 23. Maximum total polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB) concentrations in sediment-trap samples for 15 Phase II stream sites 

collected during two surveys (June 2004 and April 2005) of the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Corridor Study.

[mg/kg, milligram per kilogram; <, less than; --, not available; bold indicates concentrations that met or exceeded the threshold effect concentration 

(TEC) of 0.060 mg/kg (MacDonald and others, 2000]

Site name Maximum total PCB result 

(mg/kg)

Milwaukee River near Cedarburg 0.30 

Lincoln Creek at 47th Street at Milwaukee .03 

Milwaukee River at Milwaukee 1.1 

Willow Creek at Maple Road near Germantown .03 

Menomonee River at Menomonee Falls .02 

Little Menomonee River at Milwaukee .06 

Underwood Creek at Wauwatosa .04 

Honey Creek at Wauwatosa .05 

Menomonee River at Wauwatosa .22 

Kinnickinnic River at S. 11th Street at Milwaukee -- a

Milwaukee River at Mouth at Milwaukee 1.2 

Oak Creek at South Milwaukee .03 

Root River at Grange Avenue at Greenfield .05 

Root River near Franklin < .02

Jewel Creek at Muskego .02 

a

No test performed due to insufficient amount of sediment collected

110 Water-Quality Characteristics for Selected Sites within the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin
ENRICHMENT FACTOR,

 RELATIVE TO BACKGROUND

10 20 30 40 50

MRC

LCM

MRM

WCG

MRMF

LMM

UCW

HCW

MRW

KRM

MRJ

OCSM

RRG

RRF

JCM

STREAM SITES,

ARRANGED IN DOWNSTREAM ORDER

2004 samples

2005 samples

Figure 58. Total phosphorus enrichment factor relative to background upland soil concentrations in the Milwaukee Metropolitan 

Sewerage District planning area, Wis. Site abbreviations listed in table 1.

Comparison of Sites by Use of Total Phosphorus 

Enrichment

Phosphorus concentrations also were measured in 

conjunction with sediment sampling. In order to show 

the level of enrichment above background levels (that is, 

upland soil content), observed concentrations were divided 

by the average soil-sample total-phosphorus result (38.75 

mg/kg) for Waukesha, Milwaukee, Ozaukee, and Washington Counties reported by Combs and Peters at the University of Wisconsin–Madison Soil & Plant Analysis Lab 

between 1995 and 1999 (n.d.). The resulting enrichment 

factors (expressed as a ratio) for samples varied widely 

between sites, ranging from 4.8 at the Menomonee River at 

Wauwatosa site to 55 at the Milwaukee River at Mouth site 

(fig. 58). The total phosphorus concentration in sedimenttrap samples reflected the overlapping influences of urban 

and rural nonpoint-source pollution, and point-source 

inputs from treatment plants, combined and sanitary sewer 

overflows, cooling-water discharges, and phosphorus associated with soil erosion. 

Evaluation of Data Collected During Phase II 111
Water-Column Toxicity

The Microtox Acute Toxicity Test has different 

sensitivities to different pollutants, with generally more 

sensitivity to organic pollutants than metals (Qureshi and 

others, 1998). Microtox analysis quantifies differences (in 

percent effect) of the fluorescence values of bioluminescent bacteria exposed to sample water when compared to 

a laboratory control. Decreases in fluorescence (positive 

percent effect values) are attributed to the toxic effects of 

sample water on the viability of test bacteria, and the magnitude of the change in luminescence relates positively to 

the toxicity of the sample water. Toxicity results are generally reported in one of two ways, depending on the level of 

toxicity in the sample. For samples with low toxicity, values are reported as the percent effect observed on analyses 

run with undiluted sample water (Chang and others, 1981). 

For more highly toxic samples, toxicities are generally 

reported as the EC50 or the concentration of sample water 

necessary to cause a 50-percent decrease in luminescence 

(when compared to laboratory controls) (Chang and others, 

1981). The EC50 is computed by running a series of Microtox tests with different dilutions of sample water; at least 

one of these dilutions should cause less than a 35-percent 

effect, and at least one of the dilutions should cause greater 

than a 65-percent effect (Rand and Petrocelli, 1985). 

Samples submitted for Microtox analysis were collected from all 21 Phase II sites during summer-quarterly 

and event sampling, yielding a total of 4 samples per site 

over the 2-year period. Analyses were first run with undiluted sample water, and values were reported as percent 

effect. Values were consistently below 20-percent effect, 

with a small number of samples exhibiting a greater effect. 

All environmental samples showing greater than 20-percent 

effect were collected from harbor sites (table 24). The 

maximum percent effect observed (40-percent effect) was 

well below the 65-percent effect needed for the determination of an EC50. Overall, results were not indicative of 

highly toxic conditions at any site. 

Microtox analyses were also performed on extracts 

from SPMDs deployed at selected sites and these data 

are discussed elsewhere in this report. Results from those 

analyses reflect toxicities of hydrophobic compounds 

accumulated from the water column over a month. 

Fish Tissues

Chemical concentrations in aquatic organisms are of 

interest not only for learning what may be accumulating 

in their tissues and potentially causing harm but also for 

estimating potential threats to other organisms, including 

birds and humans, who eat the contaminated organisms. 

Tissue analyses also serve as estimates of the chemical 

forms and concentrations that are biologically available for 

uptake. Fish were collected at three sites in early October 2004 for analysis of chemical concentrations. Green 

sunfish were collected at the Root River near Franklin 

and Milwaukee River at Milwaukee sites, and creek chubs 

were collected at the Root River near Franklin and at the 

Menomonee River at Wauwatosa sites. Three to five fish 

of a single species were composited for a site and analyzed 

by the WSLH. 

Concentrations of chromium and lead in whole fish 

were below analytical reporting levels (0.2 and 0.8 μg/g 

wet weight, respectively)(table 25). Copper concentrations 

were at least 10 times higher in whole fish from Milwaukee River at Milwaukee and Menomonee River at Wauwatosa than in whole fish from Root River near Franklin. 

Table 24. Percent effects in samples with readings at or above 20 percent for all Phase II sites in the Milwaukee Metropolitan 

Sewerage District planning area, Wis.

[All values in percent effect]

Harbor site name Site abbreviation 5-minute percent effect 15-minute percent effect

South Mid-Harbor Milwaukee Outer Harbor Site OH-11 8 21

Northern Outside Harbor Breakwall Lake Site OH-12 24 22

Middle Outside Harbor Breakwall Lake Site OH-14 40 28

Southern Outside Harbor Breakwall Lake Site OH-13 35 33

112 Water-Quality Characteristics for Selected Sites within the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin
Table 25. Summary of chemical analysis of whole fish (composites) at three Phase II stream sites of the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Corridor Study, during onetime surveys conducted in October, 2004.

[μg/g, microgram per gram; PCB, polychlorinated biphenyl; all concentrations are in wet weight]

Site name Fish name

Number 

organisms in 

composite

Percent 

water

Chromium 

(μg/g)

Copper

(μg/g)

Lead

(μg/g)

Mercury

(μg/g)

Percent 

fat

P-P'-DDT 

(μg/g)

P-P'-DDEa

(μg/g)

P-P'-DDDa

(μg/g)

Total PCBs 

(μg/g)

Milwaukee River at 

Milwaukee

Green sunfish 3 76 < 0.2 5.9 <0.8 0.09 2 <0.010 0.042 <0.010 1.5b

Menomonee River at 

Wauwatosa

Creek chub 5 79 < .2 7.3 < .8 .03 2 < .010 .056 .018 .92c

Root River near Franklin Green sunfish 5 78 < .2 .6 < .8 .12 1 < .010 < .010 < .010 < .040Root River near Franklin Creek chub 5 81 < .2 .3 < .8 .07 1 < .010 < .010 < .010 < .040

a DDT breakdown productsb Aroclor-1260c Arochor-1248/1254/1260

Evaluation of Data Collected During Phase II 113
Mercury was detected in whole fish from all three sites 

at low total mercury5 concentrations (0.03–0.12 μg/g wet 

weight) and was below the USEPA methylmercury criterion of 0.3 μg/g wet weight in fish (U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, 2001). 

The synthetic organic contaminants chlordane and 

dieldrin were not detected (less than 0.010 micrograms 

per gram wet weight) in whole fish. DDT breakdown 

products p-p’-DDE and p-p’-DDD were detected in whole 

fish from Menomonee River at Wauwatosa, and p-p’-

DDE was detected in whole fish from Milwaukee River at 

Milwaukee; however, concentrations were still less than 

available guidelines for protection of sensitive fish-eating 

wildlife. Although the insecticide DDT has not been used 

in the United States for decades, the breakdown products 

DDE and DDD are known to be persistent in the environment from historical use. PCBs were not detected in fish 

from Root River near Franklin (less than 0.040 μg/g wet 

weight); however, PCBs were found in relatively high 

concentrations in fish from the Menomonee River site 

and the Milwaukee River at Milwaukee site. Although 

manufacture of PCBs ended in 1977, the PCBs found were 

Aroclors or common mixtures of PCB compounds, indicating that high concentrations persist in stream sediment and 

accumulate in fish and wildlife. A concentration of 1.5 

μg/g wet weight of Aroclors 1248/1254/1260 in whole 

green sunfish from Milwaukee River at Milwaukee 

exceeded the New York guideline for the protection of 

fish-eating wildlife of 0.11 μg/g wet weight for total PCBs 

(Newell and others, 1987). This indicates that wildlife eating fish from this site could be at risk. The PCB concentration from Milwaukee River fish is similar to that found 

in whole fish (1.6 μg/g wet weight total PCBs) in 1995 

by Scudder and others (1997) and was high compared to 

concentrations at other sampled sites in the Milwaukee 

area (Scudder and others, 1997; Steuer and others, 1999); 

PCB contamination along the main stem of the Milwaukee 

River may be attributed to the Cedar Creek Superfund 

alternative site located upstream. Toxicity of specific Aroclor mixtures can vary greatly but the Arochlors detected 

are considered to be particularly toxic as immunotoxins 

and carcinogens. Fish consumption is the most common 

reason for high PCB concentrations in humans. A fishconsumption advisory for PCBs has been in affect at the 

Milwaukee River at Milwaukee site since 1980 and at the 

Menomonee River at Wauwatosa site since 1984 (Candy 

S. Schrank, Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, 

written commun., 2006; Wisconsin Department of Natural 

Resources, 2006). 

Comparisons between Phase I and Phase II results 

for pesticides and PCBs were available for three sites: 

Milwaukee River at Milwaukee, Menomonee River at 

Wauwatosa, and Root River near Franklin (appendix 5). 

Improvement in analytical equipment and techniques for 

these constituents have allowed for ever-decreasing reporting levels, thereby allowing more low-level concentrations 

to be detected. This greater analytical sensitivity over time 

is important to keep in mind when drawing comparisons 

between Phase I and Phase II data. Many of the Phase I 

samples below reporting level likely contained pesticides 

and PCBs at concentrations undetectable by older analytical methods (reporting levels of 0.05 and 0.2 μg/g, respectively), but which might have been detectable using current 

analytical methods (reporting levels of 0.01 and 0.04 μg/g, 

respectively). 

During Phase I, pesticides in fish tissues were 

detected only in samples collected from the Lower 

Milwaukee River subwatershed. During Phase II pesticide concentrations in fish tissues were below the Phase 

I reporting level at Milwaukee River at Milwaukee, but 

above the Phase I reporting level at Menomonee River at 

Wauwatosa. No detections were observed during either 

Phase at Root River near Franklin. 

During Phase I, PCBs were detected only in samples 

collected from the Lower Milwaukee River subwatershed. 

During Phase II, PCB concentrations in fish tissues were 

above the Phase I reporting level at both Milwaukee River 

at Milwaukee and Menomonee River at Wauwatosa. No 

detections were observed during either Phase at Root River 

near Franklin.

5

 Between 95 and 99 percent of the mercury in fish tissue is typically 

methylmercury (Wiener and Spry, 1996).

114 Water-Quality Characteristics for Selected Sites within the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin
Bioassessment 

Community structure of the aquatic biota—including 

fish, macroinvertebrates (especially the aquatic larvae of 

many insects), and algae—is a useful indicator of water 

quality. Aquatic-community data often are used to assess 

and monitor environmental quality in an approach termed 

“bioassessment” or “biomonitoring” (Plafkin and others, 

1989). Metrics or numerical indices, based on the distribution and abundance of species, have been used for decades 

by agencies and citizen-monitoring groups to provide a 

time-integrated picture of water quality and the responses 

of aquatic biota. Use of multiple trophic levels and metrics 

in any evaluation is important because no single metric 

can adequately reflect the many possible types of effects 

that can result from changes in water quality. Collection of 

associated habitat information is important to help differentiate effects due to water-chemistry change from effects 

due to habitat degradation.

Fish Results

The use of fish-community data for bioassessment 

and biomonitoring techniques has been shown to be a 

useful way to detect and quantify environmental degradation in aquatic systems (Lyons, 1992). An Index of 

Biotic Integrity (IBI) for warmwater streams in Wisconsin 

(Lyons, 1992) was used for the data collected at the 14 

wadeable streams sites (table 26). The Wisconsin version 

of the IBI was largely derived from the Ohio Environmental Protection Agency “wading sites” version (Ohio 

Environmental Protection Agency, 1988) of the IBI. The 

Ohio version in turn was a modified version of the IBI 

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). 

The IBI consists of a series of fish community attributes, 

or metrics, that reflect basic structural and functional 

characteristics of biotic assemblages: species richness 

and composition, trophic and reproductive function, and 

individual abundance and condition (Lyons, 1992). The 

Wisconsin version of the IBI consists of 10 basic metrics and 2 correction factors. The IBI is predicated on the 

assumption that the number of species in a community 

declines with increasing environmental degradation.

Of the 14 wadeable sites sampled, IBI scores for fish 

could not be reliably computed at 3 sites because only a 

small number of fish were collected (table 27). If fewer 

than 50 fish are collected at a site, the Wisconsin warmwater IBI should not be used in assessing the fish-community 

data (Lyons, 1992). IBI scores were computed for the 

remaining 11 sites: 6 scored very poor; 2 were poor; and 

1 each was fair, good, and excellent (table 27).

The two Milwaukee River main-stem sites had the 

highest IBI scores, with all other sites scoring poor or very 

poor. Two of the individual metrics included in the Wisconsin IBI are “percent of fish tolerant to low dissolvedoxygen levels” and “percent of fish tolerant to disturbed 

habitat.” All but four sites (Milwaukee River at Milwaukee, Milwaukee River near Cedarburg, Willow Creek, and 

Jewel Creek) had more than 50 percent of the fish community in 1 of these 2 metrics, indicating a high percentage of 

fish in the population that are tolerant of degraded stream 

conditions.

Fish IBI scores indicated a negative relation to urban 

land use, where fish IBI scores decreased as urban land use 

increased (fig. 59). Phase I IBI scores were computed on 

data collected from 1990 through 2002. Data were available for Phase I and Phase II fish IBI score comparisons at 

six sites (appendix 5). Of these, four sites remained in the 

same category as was determined by the Phase I data (all 

very poor). However, Kinnickinnic River and Honey Creek 

both went from poor in Phase I to very poor in Phase II. 

Table 26. Biotic integrity ratings for Index of Biotic Integrity 

score (modified from Karr and others, 1986).

IBI score Biotic integrity rating

100–65 Excellent

64–50 Good

49–30 Fair

29–20 Poor

19–0 Very poor

no score Very poor

Evaluation of Data Collected During Phase II 115
Excellent

Good

Fair

Poor

Very poor

TOTAL URBAN LAND USE, IN PERCENT

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

FISH INDEX OF BIOTIC INTEGRITY SCORE

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

R2 = 0.6516

MRC

MRM

MRMF

LMM

UCW HCW

MRW

KRM

OCSM

RRG

RRF

JCM

LCM

WCG

Figure 59. Fish Index of Biotic Integrity (IBI) scores plotted against percent urban land use in site drainage basins for 15 stream 

sites in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, Wis. Site abbreviations listed in table 1.

Table 27. Fish-community information from one-time surveys conducted during July, August, and October 2004, for 14 Phase II 

stream sites in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, Wis.

[*, fewer than 50 individual fish were collected, so the Wisconsin warmwater Index of Biotic Integrity was not used (Lyons, 1992)]

Site name

Total 

number 

of fish

Total 

number of 

fish species

Percent fish 

tolerant of 

low dissolved 

oxygen

Percent fish 

tolerant to 

disturbed 

habitat

Index of

Biotic Integrity

Score Rating

Milwaukee River near Cedarburg 319 22 9 4 70 Excellent

Lincoln Creek at 47th Street at Milwaukee 48 8 84 0 * Very poor

Milwaukee River at Milwaukee 224 18 31 6 60 Good

Willow Creek at Maple Road near Germantown 238 6 36 24 25 Poor

Menomonee River at Menomonee Falls 241 13 40 50 30 Fair

Little Menomonee River at Milwaukee 14 5 69 31 * Very poor

Underwood Creek at Wauwatosa 211 8 8 92 10 Very poor

Honey Creek at Wauwatosa 135 6 16 84 7 Very poor

Menomonee River at Wauwatosa 118 3 11 87 12 Very poor

Kinnickinnic River at S. 11th Street at Milwaukee 11 1 100 0 * Very poor

Oak Creek at South Milwaukee 207 7 17 83 10 Very poor

Root River at Grange Avenue at Greenfield 174 9 28 66 12 Very poor

Root River near Franklin 122 12 3 84 14 Very poor

Jewel Creek at Muskego 514 15 15 46 22 Poor

116 Water-Quality Characteristics for Selected Sites within the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin
Macroinvertebrate Results

Selected metrics were computed based on macroinvertebrates found at each site. These metrics included the 

number of macroinvertebrate species and genera, Shannon 

index of diversity (Odum, 1971), the percentage of macroinvertebrate individuals or genera in the orders Ephemeroptera-Plecoptera-Trichoptera (EPT), and the Hilsenhoff 

Biotic Index (HBI) and 10-Max BI (HBI-10). Taxa (species 

and genera) would be expected to decrease with degrading 

water quality. Shannon index of diversity scores generally 

decrease with degrading water quality; however, pristine 

headwater streams may have low diversity and excellent 

water quality. EPT invertebrates are generally considered to 

be relatively intolerant of water-quality degradation. Intolerant organisms tend to dominate in streams with good water 

quality, whereas tolerant organisms dominate in polluted 

streams; therefore, the percentage of EPT individuals and 

genera tend to decrease with decreasing water quality. The 

HBI was designed to assess oxygen depletion in streams 

resulting from organic-matter pollution (Hilsenhoff, 1987); 

however, the HBI also may be sensitive to other types of 

pollution, such as that from some chemicals. The HBI represents the number of arthropod macroinvertebrates in certain families or species, multiplied by their respective pollution-tolerance score, divided by the number of arthropods 

in the sample. HBI values can range from 0.00 (excellent 

water quality) to 10.00 (very poor water quality) (table 28). 

A modification of the HBI (HBI-10) was used in the Phase 

II analyses because it limits the number of individuals per 

taxa to 10 for computation of the index and is thought to be 

more accurate than the HBI because it is less affected by 

dominance of a single taxon (Hilsenhoff, 1998).

The Milwaukee River near Cedarburg and Milwaukee River at Milwaukee sites had the highest numbers 

of macroinvertebrate species and genera; these sites also 

had the highest Shannon index of diversity scores (greater 

than 3.6), along with Willow Creek, a much smaller 

stream (table 29). The Lincoln Creek, Menomonee River 

at Menomonee Falls, and Menomonee River at Wauwatosa sites had the fewest species and genera. The lowest Shannon index of diversity scores were found at the 

Menomonee River at Menomonee Falls and the Little 

Menomonee River sites. This finding suggested that the 

water quality at these sites was more degraded than at 

other sampled sites.

Sites with the lowest EPT percentages (EPT individuals < 30 percent and EPT taxa <10–20 percent) were 

the Kinnickinnic River (lowest overall), Honey Creek, 

Root River at Grange Avenue, and Lincoln Creek sites 

(table 29). Historically, the Middle and Lower Root River 

Phase I subwatersheds had much higher median EPT 

percentages than the Upper Root River or East Branch 

Root River subwatersheds (fig. 60), suggesting that the 

lower subwatersheds had less-degraded water quality. The 

August 2004 sample for Root River near Franklin (Middle 

Root River subwatershed) had a much lower percentage 

of EPT taxa (28 percent) compared to historical percentages (median of 50 percent EPT taxa). Further investigation of the macroinvertebrate communities in the Middle 

Root River may be warranted to determine whether water 

quality has declined notably. On the other hand, historical 

data indicated that EPT taxa were few or absent from the 

Lincoln Creek Phase I subwatershed, but samples from 

August 2004 indicated a higher percentage of EPT taxa 

(18 percent) possibly indicating improved water quality. 

The Little Menomonee River subwatershed also indicated 

a higher percentage of EPT taxa (23 percent) in the Phase 

II sample; however, this result may be misleading since the 

sample contained a high proportion of a pollution-tolerant 

Ephemeroptera species (Baetis intercalaris). Percent EPT 

taxa indicated a negative relation to urban land use, where 

percent EPT taxa decreased with increasing urban land use 

(fig. 61). 

Table 28. Water-quality ratings for Hilsenhoff Biotic Index 

(HBI) and HBI-10 values (from Hilsenhoff, 1987 and 1998).

[≤, less than or equal to]

HBI/HBI-10 value Water-quality rating

≤3.50 Excellent

3.51–4.50 Very good

4.51–5.50 Good

5.51–6.50 Fair

6.51–7.50 Fairly poor

7.51–8.50 Poor

8.51–10.00 Very poor

Evaluation of Data Collected During Phase II 117
HBI-10 scores for August 2004 samples ranged from 

fairly poor water quality at the Kinnickinnic River site to 

fair or good at other sampled sites (fig. 62). Sites with fair 

HBI-10 scores were Lincoln Creek, Menomonee River 

at Menomonee Falls, Menomonee River at Wauwatosa, 

Underwood Creek, Jewel Creek, Oak Creek, Root River 

at Grange Avenue, and Root River near Franklin. Sites 

with good HBI-10 scores were those in the middle and 

upper part of the planning area, specifically Willow Creek, 

Little Menomonee River, Honey Creek, Milwaukee River 

near Cedarburg and Milwaukee River at Milwaukee. 

Scores for Little Menomonee River and Honey Creek 

were anomalously high when compared with data for 

other biological metrics (table 29). High HBI-10 scores at 

Little Menomonee River are likely the result of the same 

predominant pollution-tolerant Ephemeroptera species 

that affected the EPT percentages; therefore, high HBI10 scores at this site may not be indicative of true water 

quality. Honey Creek’s HBI-10 scores may be misleading, 

as all other macroinvertebrate metrics indicate a decline 

in water quality. HBI-10 scores indicated a positive relation with urban land use, where HBI-10 scores increased 

(indicating decreasing water quality) with increasing urban 

land use (fig. 63). 

Table 29. Macroinvertebrate community information from one-time surveys conducted during August and September 2004, for 

14 Phase II stream sites in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, Wis.

[EPT, Ephemeroptera, Plecoptera, and Trichoptera; HBI-10, modified Hilsenhoff Biotic Index; see table 28 for explanation of HBI-10 water-quality 

ratings]

Site name Number of 

species

Number of 

genera

Shannon 

index of 

diversity 

Percent 

of EPT 

individuals

Percent 

of EPT 

taxa

HBI-10

Value Rating

Milwaukee River near Cedarburg 45 39 3.860 75 51 5.01 Good

Lincoln Creek at 47th Street at Milwaukee 20 17 3.057 31 18 6.30 Fair

Milwaukee River at Milwaukee 46 41 3.698 84 39 5.20 Good

Willow Creek at Maple Road near Germantown 32 29 3.940 40 17 5.45 Good

Menomonee River at Menomonee Falls 18 16 2.290 75 44 5.56 Fair

Little Menomonee River at Milwaukee 23 22 2.275 57 23 5.33 Good

Underwood Creek at Wauwatosa 33 28 2.713 72 18 5.96 Fair

Honey Creek at Wauwatosa 24 24 2.730 29 17 5.28 Good

Menomonee River at Wauwatosa 20 16 2.683 75 31 5.86 Fair

Kinnickinnic River at S. 11th Street at Milwaukee 34 27 3.018 18 7.0 6.52 Fairly poor

Oak Creek at South Milwaukee 28 23 2.856 78 22 5.55 Fair

Root River at Grange Avenue at Greenfield 23 22 2.686 30 18 6.15 Fair

Root River near Franklin 31 25 3.346 63 28 5.92 Fair

Jewel Creek at Muskego 28 24 3.072 45 29 5.58 Fair

118 Water-Quality Characteristics for Selected Sites within the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin
EXPLANATION

Water

Area within the MMSD

planning area

Area outside of the 

MMSD planning area

Watershed boundary

Subwatershed boundary

Stream

Phase I subwatershed median

EPT index values, in percent

0 – 1

2 – 17

18 – 43

44 – 92

Phase II sampling site median

EPT index values, in percent

0 – 1

2 – 17

18 – 43

44 – 92

OCSM JCM

HCW

WCG

LCM

UCW

KRM

LMM

RRF

RRG

MRW

MRM

MRC

MRMF

88°10' 87°50'

42°50' 43°10'

Lake Michigan

0 4 2 Miles

0 4 2 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, 1989; 

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 60. Sites sampled for macroinvertebrates with percent Ephemeroptera, Plecoptera, and Trichoptera (EPT) taxa in the 

Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District (MMSD) planning area, Wis. Site abbreviations listed in table 1.

Evaluation of Data Collected During Phase II 119
TOTAL URBAN LAND USE, IN PERCENT

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

EPT, IN PERCENT

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

R2 = 0.6261

MRC

MRM

MRMF

LMM

UCW

HCW

MRW

KRM

OCSM

RRG

RRF

JCM

LCM WCG

Figure 61. Percent Ephemeroptera, Plecoptera, and Trichoptera (EPT) taxa plotted against percent urban land use in site 

drainage basins for 15 stream sites in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, Wis. Site abbreviations listed 

in table 1.

120 Water-Quality Characteristics for Selected Sites within the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin
EXPLANATION

Water

Area within the MMSD

planning area

Area outside of the 

MMSD planning area

Watershed boundary

Subwatershed boundary

Stream

Phase II sampling site median 

HBI-10 scores and categories

4.51 – 5.50 (good)

5.51 – 6.50 (fair)

6.51 – 7.50 (fairly poor)

7.51 – 8.50 (poor)

Phase I subwatershed median 

HBI scores and categories

4.51 – 5.50 (good)

5.51 – 6.50 (fair)

6.51 – 7.50 (fairly poor)

7.51 – 8.50 (poor)

OCSM JCM

HCW

WCG

LCM

UCW

KRM

LMM

RRF

RRG

MRW

MRM

MRC

MRMF

88°10' 87°50'

42°50' 43°10'

Lake Michigan

0 4 2 Miles

0 4 2 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, 1989; 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 62. Sites sampled for macroinvertebrates with Hilsenhoff Biotic Index (HBI) in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage 

District (MMSD) planning area, Wis. See table 28 for more information on HBI water-quality ratings. Site abbreviations listed in 

table 1.

Evaluation of Data Collected During Phase II 121
Fairly poor

Fair

Good

TOTAL URBAN LAND USE, IN PERCENT

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

5.0

5.2

5.4

5.6

5.8

6.0

6.2

6.4

6.6

HILSENHOFF BIOTIC INDEX

R2 = 0.5604

MRC

MRM

MRMF

LMM

UCW

HCW

MRW

KRM

OCSM

RRG

RRF

JCM

LCM

WCG

Figure 63. A modified Hilsenhoff Biotic Index (HBI-10) plotted against percent urban land use in site drainage basins for 15 

stream sites in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, Wis (Hilsenhoff, 1998). Site abbreviations listed in 

table 1.

Algae Results

Attached benthic algae (periphyton) are often the 

dominant primary carbon producers and energy source 

for food chains in small- to medium-sized streams. The 

term “periphyton” refers to the collection of the attached 

benthic algae and other heterotrophic bacteria or microbes 

that are affixed to the submerged substrata in freshwater 

systems. The abundance and species diversity of periphyton provides valuable information on water quality in a 

particular stream reach. Periphyton can be used to develop 

indicator indices in a manner similar to those for macroinvertebrates and fish. 

The percent relative abundance (PRA) of each algal 

group (blue-green algae, diatoms, green algae, red algae) 

is the number of cells present of the algal group divided by 

the total number of algal cells. Blue-green algae had the 

highest PRA at Menomonee River at Wauwatosa (90.98 

percent) and diatoms were dominant at Willow Creek 

(PRA of 58.74 percent)(table 30). Green algae were found 

at only eight sites, with Lincoln Creek having the highest 

PRA (3.65 percent). Red algae were also found at eight 

sites, with Root River at Greenfield and Root River near 

Franklin having the highest PRA (86.92 percent and 51.72 

percent, respectively). Algal group PRAs indicated no 

appreciable relation to urban land use. 

Percent biovolume of an algal group is determined 

by multiplying the number of algal cells by the volume of 

space each cell occupies, divided by the total biovolume of 

the algal cells. The percent biovolume for a group of algae 

can be drastically different than the PRA because of the 

size of the cells. Blue-green algae may have been the most 

abundant in the count; however those algae occupied very 

small amounts of volume compared to other groups such 

as diatoms or green algae and therefore may not have had 

a high-percent biovolume. The most notable difference in 

biovolume composition from PRA occurred at Milwaukee 

River near Cedarburg, where blue-green algae composed 

83.46 percent of the relative abundance but only 1.76 

percent of the biovolume and green algae composed 0.41 

percent of the relative abundance and 86.46 percent of the 

122 Water-Quality Characteristics for Selected Sites within the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin
Table 30. Algal-community results from one-time surveys conducted in August and September 2004, for 14 Phase II stream sites in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage 

District planning area, Wis.

Site name

Percent relative abundance (PRA) of algae Percent biovolume of algae

BlueGreen Diatom Green Red Unknown phylum Blue- Green Diatom Green Red Unknown phylum

Milwaukee River near Cedarburg 83.46 16.14 0.41 0.00 0.00 1.76 11.78 86.46 0.00 0.00Lincoln Creek at 47th Street at Milwaukee 90.08 6.27 3.65 .00 .00 99.46 .47 .06 .00 .00Milwaukee River at Milwaukee 72.47 26.40 1.14 .00 .00 98.27 1.69 .04 .00 .00Willow Creek at Maple Road near Germantown 39.84 58.74 1.42 .00 .00 2.82 53.47 43.7 .00 .00Menomonee River at Menomonee Falls 26.84 15.27 .00 8.50 49.39 2.08 35.26 .00 36.32 26.34Little Menomonee River at Milwaukee 70.01 22.35 .00 7.64 .00 5.41 55.08 .00 39.51 .00Underwood Creek at Wauwatosa 90.03 8.09 1.88 .00 .00 47.93 47.15 4.93 .00 .00Honey Creek at Wauwatosa 13.32 20.78 .18 12.61 53.11 .67 63.07 .68 23.32 12.26Menomonee River at Wauwatosa 90.98 8.26 .17 .59 .00 47.86 47.46 .10 4.59 .00Kinnickinnic River at S. 11th Street at Milwaukee 87.18 12.20 .62 .00 .00 31.36 67.99 .65 .00 .00Oak Creek at South Milwaukee 53.86 29.96 .00 7.08 9.10 5.59 56.78 .00 32.42 5.21Root River at Grange Avenue at Greenfield 2.88 10.20 .00 86.92 .00 .31 10.80 .00 88.90 .00Root River near Franklin 37.09 11.19 .00 51.72 .00 4.38 17.29 .00 78.33 .00Jewel Creek at Muskego 19.88 38.54 .00 41.58 .00 1.30 63.63 .00 35.07 .00

Evaluation of Data Collected During Phase II 123
biovolume (table 30). Percent biovolumes of algal groups 

indicated no appreciable relation to urban land use. 

Nuisance, bloom-producing algae were found only at 

Milwaukee River near Cedarburg (Cladophora glomerata) 

and Underwood Creek (Stigeoclonium lubricum). Both 

of these taxa are green algae that are common in Great 

Lakes-area streams and lakes with high nutrient loading, 

especially phosphorus (Prescott, 1962; Wehr and Sheath, 

2003). On the basis of occurrence of nuisance algae and 

the pollution classes, these two streams were identified as 

possible areas of high nutrient loading and high concentrations of other pollutants. 

Pollution-tolerance classes for diatoms (“Most pollution tolerant” and “Pollution sensitive” in figure 64) have 

been used as water-quality indicators in streams (LangeBertalot, 1979; Bahls, 1993). The classes are based on 

several variables such as nutrient concentration, saprobic 

conditions (organic rich, oxygen poor), biochemical oxygen demand (BOD), and toxics that each taxon can tolerate 

and are based on the percent relative abundance of each 

taxon in the sampled streams. Fewer pollution-sensitive 

taxa at a site indicate that at least one of the variables that 

make up the pollution-tolerance classes is elevated and not 

suited for pollution-sensitive diatoms (Bahls, 1993). Jewel 

Creek, Willow Creek, Milwaukee River near Cedarburg, 

and Root River near Franklin had the highest percentages 

of diatom-normalized relative abundances of pollutionsensitive diatoms all over 60 percent (fig. 64). Lincoln 

Creek and Kinnickinnic River had the lowest percentages 

of diatom-normalized relative abundances of pollutionsensitive diatoms both below 20 percent.

Streams with low percentages of pollution-sensitive 

diatoms indicate that at least one of the variables used to 

determine pollution sensitivity is elevated and that those 

streams cannot sustain a large community of pollutionsensitive taxa. Streams that have less than 30 percent 

pollution-sensitive diatoms are of concern because these 

streams may contain nutrients, such as phosphorus, that 

lead to high oxygen demand and eutrophication. The 

streams that had less than 30 percent pollution-sensitive 

diatoms were Lincoln Creek, Honey Creek, Menomonee 

River at Wauwatosa, and Kinnickinnic River. Pollutionsensitive diatom percentages indicated a negative relation to urban land use, where percentages decreased with 

increasing urban land use (fig. 65). Percentages of other 

pollution-tolerance classes for diatoms indicated no appreciable relation to urban land use. 

Relations among Habitat Variables and Biotic 

Communities

The streams in the MMSD planning area exhibited 

considerable variation in their physical habitats, mainly 

because of the wide range in size of streams sampled. 

For example, mean wetted width of the sampled reaches 

ranged from less than 3 m at the site with the smallest 

drainage area (Willow Creek, 16.39 km2/6.33 mi2) to 

almost 70 m at the site with the largest drainage area (Milwaukee River at Milwaukee, 1,787 km2

/690 mi2). Mean 

depth ranged from 0.15 m at Willow Creek to 0.56 m at 

Milwaukee River at Milwaukee.

Correlations among biological metrics and habitat 

variables (table 31) were evaluated using Spearman’s rank 

correlation (Iman and Conover, 1983). Results indicated 

that the larger streams had relatively higher-quality fish 

and macroinvertebrate communities than small streams; 

however, algal community metrics did not correlate with 

stream-size characteristics. Fish and macroinvertebrate 

communities were significantly correlated (p < 0.05) with 

the stream-size variables: width-to-depth ratio, low flow 

volume, wetted channel area, bankfull channel area, and 

drainage area. Unexpectedly, streams with a high amount 

of bank erosion and a high percentage of pools had low 

HBI scores, indicating the potential of confounding relations among multiple measured and unmeasured environmental characteristics.

124 Water-Quality Characteristics for Selected Sites within the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin
MRC

LCM

MRM

WCG

MRMF

LMM

UCWHCW

MRW

KRM

OCSM

RRG

RRF

JCM

STREAM SITES,

ARRANGED IN DOWNSTREAM ORDER

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

RELATIVE ABUNDANCE OF DIATOMS

IN EACH POLLUTION-TOLERANCE CLASS, IN PERCENT

Most pollution-tolerant

Less pollution-tolerant

Pollution-sensitive

Unknown

Figure 64. Percentage of diatoms in pollution-tolerance classes in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning 

area, Wis. Site abbreviations listed in table 1.

TOTAL URBAN LAND USE, IN PERCENT

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

PERCENT OF POLLUTION-SENSITIVE DIATOMS

R2 = 0.3589

0.0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

MRC

MRM

MRMF

LMM

UCW

HCW MRW

KRM

OCSM

RRG

RRF

JCM

LCM

WCG

Figure 65. Percent pollution-sensitive diatoms plotted against percent urban land use in site drainage basins for 15 stream sites 

in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, Wis. Site abbreviations listed in table 1.

Evaluation of Data Collected During Phase II 125
Table 31. Correlations among metrics of aquatic biology and selected habitat metrics for Phase II of the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Corridor Study.

[EPT, Ephemeroptera, Plecoptera, and Trichoptera; HBI, Hilsenhoff Biotic Index; IBI, Index of Biotic Integrity; WIHAB, Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources habitat index; m3, cubic meter; m2, square 

meter; %, percent; m, meter; <, less than; r-values in bold indicate significance at the p < 0.05 level]

Habitat metric and 

unit of measurement

Biological metric

Fish Invertebrates Algae

Number 

of 

species

IBI

Number 

of 

species

Number 

of 

genera

Shannon 

index of 

diversity

Percent 

of EPT 

individuals

Percent 

of EPT 

taxa

HBI-10

Percent 

of most 

pollutiontolerant 

diatoms

Percent 

of less 

pollutiontolerant 

diatoms

Percent 

of most 

pollutionsensitive

diatoms

Percent of 

diatoms with 

unknown 

pollution 

sensitivity

Disturbed cover within 

30-meter reach buffer(number of transect)

-0.29 -0.49 -0.10 -0.20 -0.28 -0.12 -0.32 0.23 0.34 0.49 -0.52 -0.39

Mean erosion length (m) -.08 .36 -.13 .05 .06 .10 .14 -.64 -.26 -.13 .28 -.12

Width-to-depth ratio .58 .36 .60 .54 .36 .43 .24 -.05 .14 -.20 .10 .17

Percent fine sediment 

(sand and fines) (%)

-.14 .24 -.09 -.03 .07 .17 .22 -.19 -.05 -.46 .45 .16

Total WIHAB index score1 -.02 -.24 -.31 -.36 -.34 -.29 .00 .33 -.20 .34 -.38 -.05

Number of habitat cover points -.24 -.26 -.47 -.48 -.30 .00 .14 -.15 -.32 .24 -.13 -.06Low flow volume (m3) .18 .39 -.11 -.12 -.01 .54 .70 -.42 -.45 .26 -.18 .00

Wetted channel area (m2) .18 .39 -.11 -.12 -.01 .54 .70 -.42 -.45 .26 -.18 .00

Bankfull channel area (m2) .10 .31 -.09 -.09 -.07 .53 .62 -.47 -.45 .39 -.25 -.13

Pool (%) .13 .04 -.44 -.46 -.12 -.28 .10 .56 .06 -.06 -.02 -.22Riffle (%) .16 .20 -.38 -.37 -.15 .10 .40 -.14 -.46 .14 -.03 -.11Run (%) -.12 -.15 .34 .36 .09 .00 -.38 -.08 .32 -.05 -.03 .14Fine substrate (%) -.09 .11 .20 .25 .36 .084 .07 -.37 -.02 -.48 .55 .24

Sand substrate (%) .24 .25 -.20 -.25 -.09 .34 .44 .16 -.10 -.30 .18 .10Coefficient of variation 

wetted width-to-depth ratio

-.10 .20 -.44 -.42 -.08 .13 .14 .22 .04 .34 -.33 -.28

Average embeddedness 

(riffles only) (%)

.27 .10 .13 .09 .22 0 .27 -.20 -.24 -.48 .42 .53

Bank stability index—

left bank score2

.06 .21 .02 .07 -.04 .49 .47 -.78 -.48 .20 -.04 -.03

Bank stability index—

right bank score2

-.12 .20 -.24 -.24 -.19 .54 .56 -.64 -.50 .22 -.07 -.03

126 Water-Quality Characteristics for Selected Sites within the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin
Table 31. Correlations among metrics of aquatic biology and selected habitat metrics for Phase II of the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Corridor Study—Continued. 

[EPT, Ephemeroptera, Plecoptera, and Trichoptera; HBI, Hilsenhoff Biotic Index; IBI, Index of Biotic Integrity; WIHAB, Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources habitat index; m3, cubic meter; m2, square 

meter; %, percent; m, meter; <, less than; r-values in bold indicate significance at the p < 0.05 level]

Habitat metric and 

unit of measurement

Biological metric

Fish Invertebrates Algae

Number 

of 

species

IBI

Number 

of 

species

Number 

of 

genera

Shannon 

index of 

diversity

Percent 

of EPT 

individuals

Percent 

of EPT 

taxa

HBI-10

Percent 

of most 

pollutiontolerant 

diatoms

Percent 

of less 

pollutiontolerant 

diatoms

Percent 

of most 

pollutionsensitive

diatoms

Percent of 

diatoms with 

unknown 

pollution 

sensitivity

Maximum depth (m) -0.02 0.25 -0.38 -0.37 -0.27 0.42 0.59 -0.29 -0.46 0.41 -0.28 -0.26Average depth (m) .06 .27 -.07 -.08 .02 .44 .62 -.46 -.53 .20 -.08 .10Average bank-stability index 

score

.14 .35 .00 .03 .02 .57 .58 -.78 -.56 .12 .01 .08

Drainage area (mi2) .32 .24 .22 .10 -.05 .74 .71 -.34 -.24 -.02 -.03 .09

1 (modified from Simonson and others, 1994)2 (modified from Simon and Hupp, 1992)

Evaluation of Data Collected During Phase II 127
Relations between Stream Biological Metrics, 

Site Characteristics, and Water-Quality Data

Data for selected biological metrics were used to 

divide the 14 wadeable stream sites into four groups (table 

32) to investigate relations between bioassessment data 

and site characteristic and water-quality data. Metrics from 

each trophic level (algae, benthic invertebrates, and fish) 

were selected based on their known high sensitivities to 

water quality; metrics were selected (either alone or in 

unison with others) to yield the most complete picture of 

water quality at each trophic level. To avoid potential bias 

toward any one metric or trophic level, data were standardized (ranked, lowest number indicating best water quality) 

and summarized at each trophic level, and the average 

of these ranks across trophic levels yielded aggregate 

bioassessment rankings. Sites were then divided into 

four groups based on the quartile ranges of the aggregate 

rankings. For the remainder of this discussion, sites will 

be referred to in terms of their quartile number: quartile 

1 contained sites where bioassessment data indicated the 

least-degraded water quality among those sampled, and 

quartile 4 contained sites that indicated the most-degraded 

water quality. Quartiles contained the following stream 

sites:

Quartile 1: Milwaukee River near Cedarburg, 

Milwaukee River at Milwaukee, Jewel Creek, 

and Menomonee River at Menomonee Falls

Quartile 2: Willow Creek, Root River near 

Franklin, and Root River at Grange Avenue

Quartile 3: Menomonee River at Wauwatosa, 

Oak Creek, and Little Menomonee River

Quartile 4: Honey Creek, Underwood Creek, 

Lincoln Creek, and Kinnickinnic River

Aggregate bioassessment rankings, however, are 

averages of the three trophic-level rankings, and as such, 

results at individual trophic levels may vary. For example, 

although Root River at Grange Avenue had an aggregate 

ranking that placed it into quartile 2, results for macroinvertebrate metrics alone would have placed it into quartile 

4. Site characteristics (in this case, drainage area and land 

use) and selected water- and sediment-quality constituent 

results were summarized based on the four bioassessment 

quartiles (table 33) to determine if there were relations 

with the aggregate bioassessment rankings. 

•

•

•

•

Biological metrics often correlate with site characteristics such as land use and drainage area, with higherquality biological communities and increased diversity 

as urban land use decreases and drainage area increases 

(Vannote and others, 1980; Wang and others, 2001; Paul 

and Meyer, 2001). Sites in quartile 16 had the lowest mean 

percent urban land use and the largest mean drainage area, 

while sites in quartile 4 had the highest mean percent 

urban land use and the smallest mean drainage area (table 

33). Though mean site characteristics for quartiles 2 and 3 

did fall between these two extremes, sites in quartile 2 had 

generally more urban land use and smaller drainage areas 

than those in quartile 3. 

Median chloride concentrations were lowest in 

quartile 1, with increasing concentrations in quartiles 2, 3, 

and 4. Chloride concentrations indicated a positive relation with increasing urban land use (fig. 9); in particular, 

increasing transportation land use across the quartiles may 

be responsible for increases in chloride concentration.

Nutrients, chlorophyll a, and suspended sediment 

results exhibited a wide range of relations to bioassessment 

quartiles. Median concentrations of total nitrogen and 

nitrate generally decreased from quartile 1 to quartile 4, 

and may be attributed to differences in the percent of agricultural land use between the quartiles, as previous studies 

have shown that agricultural sites have higher concentrations of these constituents than do urban sites (Mueller and 

Spahr, 2006). Median concentrations of total phosphorus 

generally increased from quartile 1 to quartile 4, while no 

particular relations were observed for median chlorophyll 

a and suspended sediment concentrations.

Mercury constituents did not exhibit consistent relations to bioassessment quartiles. Median dissolved total 

mercury concentrations generally increased from quartile 

1 to quartile 4, whereas median dissolved methylmercury 

concentrations decreased across the quartiles. Previous 

studies have shown that urban sites have lower methylation 

(conversion of mercury to methylmercury) efficiency when 

compared to agricultural sites (Krabbenhoft and others, 

1999). Median concentrations of particulate total and 

methylmercury varied across the quartiles. 

6

 While the mean drainage area of quartile 1 is much larger than the 

rest of the quartiles, it should be noted that this quartile contains sites 

with drainage areas among the largest (Milwaukee at Milwaukee, 690 

mi2

) and the smallest (Jewel Creek, 8.16 mi2) of those sampled.

128 Water-Quality Characteristics for Selected Sites within the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin
Table 32. Average trophic-level rankings and aggregate bioassessment rankings for Phase II stream sites in the Milwaukee 

Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, Wis.

[IBI, Index of Biotic Integrity; EPT, Ephemeroptera, Plecoptera, and Trichoptera; HBI, Hilsenhoff Biotic Index; fill color indicates quartile of ranking 

(quartile 1, blue; quartile 2, light blue; quartile 3, light orange; quartile 4, orange; each column is considered independently)]

Site

Average trophic-level ranking Aggregate 

bioassesment 

ranking Fish1 Invertebrates2 Algae3

Quartile 1

Milwaukee River near Cedarburg 1.00 1.33 2.00 1.44

Milwaukee River at Milwaukee 2.00 2.67 6.00 3.56

Jewel Creek at Muskego 5.00 6.00 1.50 4.17

Menomonee River at Menomonee Falls 3.00 7.33 4.00 4.78

Quartile 2

Willow Creek at Maple Road near Germantown 4.00 6.17 7.00 5.72

Root River near Franklin 6.00 6.67 8.50 7.06

Root River at Grange Avenue at Greenfield 7.50 11.00 7.00 8.50

Quartile 3

Menomonee River at Wauwatosa 7.50 8.33 10.00 8.61

Oak Creek at South Milwaukee 9.50 7.33 9.50 8.78

Little Menomonee River at Milwaukee 13.00 8.33 6.50 9.28

Quartile 4

Honey Creek at Wauwatosa 11.00 8.17 9.00 9.39

Underwood Creek at Wauwatosa 9.50 10.33 8.50 9.44

Lincoln Creek at 47th Street at Milwaukee 13.00 9.67 12.00 11.56

Kinnickinnic River at S. 11th Street at Milwaukee 13.00 11.67 13.50 12.72

1

 Averaged trophic-level rankings included only fish IBI scores.

2

 Averaged trophic-level rankings included Shannon index of diversity scores, percent of EPT taxa, and HBI-10 scores.

3

 Averaged trophic-level rankings included percent of most-sensitive diatoms and percent of sensitive diatoms.

Evaluation of Data Collected During Phase II 129
Table 33. Summarized results of Phase II constituents, grouped by aggregate bioassessment ranking in the Milwaukee 

Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, Wis.

[mg/L, milligram per liter; μg/L, microgram per liter; col/100 mL, colonies per 100 milliliters; MPN/100 mL, most probable number per 100 milliliters; 

plaques/100mL, plaques per 100 milliliters; DF, detection frequency; mg/kg, milligram per kilogram; μg/g, microgram per gram; PCB, polychlorinated 

biphenyl; PAH, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon; EDC, known or suspected endocrine-disruptor; <, less than. Values in parentheses indicate the range 

of possible median concentrations for constituents where the median is an average calculated from a concentration above and a concentration below the 

reporting level. Fill color indicates relative value of each constituent and increases in value from blue, to light blue, to light orange, to orange; where 

there is only one mid-range value (that is, where there is a single value, or two identical values), fill color is determined by the difference from the minimum and maximum values: light blue if closest to minimum value and light orange if closest to maximum value.]

Constituent Unit

Measure 

of center

Summarized results grouped by 

aggregate bioassessment ranking

Quartile 1 

sites

Quartile 2 

sites

Quartile 3 

sites

Quartile 4 

sites

Site characteristics

Drainage area square miles mean 335 23.4 55.9 14.2

Agricultural percent mean 42 16 23 <1

Natural areas percent mean 31 21 23 10

Urban percent mean 28 63 53 90

 Transportation percent mean 8 18 18 30

 Industrial percent mean 3 1 4 3

 Commercial percent mean 1 2 2 4

 Residental percent mean 14 36 24 42

 Other urban percent mean 2 5 6 11

Major Ions

Chloride, water, filtered mg/L median 116 144 175 232

Nutrients, chlorophyll a, and suspended sediment

Total nitrogen (nitrate + nitrite + 

ammonia + organic nitrogen), water, 

unfiltered, analytically determined

mg/L as nitrogen median 1.54 1.28 1.33 1.16

Nitrite plus nitrate, water, filtered mg/L as nitrogen median 0.780 0.630 0.530 0.515

Phosphorus, water, unfiltered mg/L median 0.105 0.092 0.116 0.141

Chlorophyll a, water, unfiltered, 

trichromatic method, uncorrected

μg/L median 9.99 2.74 6.65 5.54

Suspended sediment concentration mg/L median 16 18 22 7

Mercury

Mercury, water, filtered

(dissolved total mercury)

ng/L median 0.98 0.98 1.48 1.66

Mercury, suspended sediment, total

(particulate total mercury)

ng/L median 1.34 1.28 3.08 1.21

Methylmercury, water, filtered, recoverable 

(dissolved methylmercury)

ng/L median 0.10 0.08 0.07 0.06

Methylmercury, suspended sediment, total 

(particulate methylmercury)

ng/L median 0.056 0.038 0.069 0.044

Indicator organisms

Fecal coliform col/100 mL median 180 420 580 780

Escherichia coli MPN/100 mL median 180 460 690 1,000

Coliphage plaques/100 mL median 1 1 9 16

Coliphage, groups II and III DF median 6 8 17 25

130 Water-Quality Characteristics for Selected Sites within the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin
Constituent Unit

Measure 

of center

Summarized results grouped by 

aggregate bioassessment ranking

Quartile 1 

sites

Quartile 2 

sites

Quartile 3 

sites

Quartile 4 

sites

Pathogenic organisms

Salmonella DF median 19 44 44 23

Cryptosporidium DF median 42 42 50 42

Giardia DF median 27 36 28 19

Escherichia coli O157:H8 DF median 6 3 0 2

Bed sediment

Arsenic in sediment mg/kg median (3.0–3.5) (4.0–4.5) <1.0 5.5

Cadmium in sediment mg/kg median <0.100 (0.45–0.50) <0.100 <0.100

Chromium in sediment mg/kg median 15 12 15 19

Copper in sediment mg/kg median 20 22 16 38

Lead in sediment mg/kg median 26 16 22 39

Mercury in sediment mg/kg median 0.05 0.04 0.03 0.05

Nickel in sediment mg/kg median 11 12 6.5 11

Total phosphorus in sediment mg/kg median 710 690 300 1,100

Zinc in sediment mg/kg median 80 79 66 200

Total PCBs in sediment μg/g median 0.29 <0.02 0.04 0.03

Wastewater compounds

Antimicrobial disinfectants DF median 4 0 3 6

Antioxidants DF median 0 0 0 25

Detergent metabolites DF median 15 19 33 38

Dyes and pigments DF median 38 67 86 96

Fire retardants DF median 34 56 89 96

Flavors and fragrances DF median 30 36 53 77

Fuels DF median 6 8 6 19

Herbicides DF median 38 39 42 46

Human drugs (nonprescription) DF median 53 64 97 96

Insecticides DF median 66 72 92 98

PAHs DF median 32 53 81 83

Plasticizers DF median 34 42 61 79

Sterols DF median 6 11 11 15

Solvents DF median 9 8 14 17

Miscellaneous DF median 11 8 11 15

EDCs DF median 55 64 75 83

Table 33. Summarized results of Phase II constituents, grouped by aggregate bioassessment ranking in the Milwaukee 

Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, Wis.—Continued.

[mg/L, milligram per liter; μg/L, microgram per liter; col/100 mL, colonies per 100 milliliters; MPN/100 mL, most probable number per 100 milliliters; 

plaques/100mL, plaques per 100 milliliters; DF, detection frequency; mg/kg, milligram per kilogram; μg/g, microgram per gram; PCB, polychlorinated 

biphenyl; PAH, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon; EDC, known or suspected endocrine-disruptor; <, less than. Values in parentheses indicate the range 

of possible median concentrations for constituents where the median is an average calculated from a concentration above and a concentration below the 

reporting level. Fill color indicates relative value of each constituent and increases in value from blue, to light blue, to light orange, to orange; where 

there is only one mid-range value (that is, where there is a single value, or two identical values), fill color is determined by the difference from the minimum and maximum values: light blue if closest to minimum value and light orange if closest to maximum value.]

Evaluation of Data Collected During Phase II 131
Median results for all indicator organisms increased 

from quartile 1 to quartile 4. The increasing detection 

frequencies (DFs) of the coliphage serogroups II and III 

across the quartiles indicated probable increases in human 

sources of fecal contamination. Percent urban land also 

generally increased from quartiles 1 to 4. 

In contrast with indicator organisms, DFs for pathogenic organisms did not indicate a particular increase or 

decrease across quartiles. 

DFs of wastewater compound (WWC) constituent 

classes and known or suspected endocrine-disrupting compounds (EDCs) generally increased across the quartiles, 

though there were a few exceptions. For example, the DFs 

for fuels varied across the first three quartiles, but all had 

similar results and were less than half the DF observed for 

quartile 4. DFs for nonprescription human drugs in quartiles 1 and 2 were similar and lower than DFs in quartiles 

3 and 4, which were higher and also similar to each other. 

Although median bed sediment constituent concentrations did not show consistent relations across the quartiles, 

quartile medians observed for three constituents (zinc, total 

polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), and total phosphorus) 

contained one quartile with notably higher concentrations 

than the remaining three quartiles. Two of these constituents (zinc and total phosphorus) had the highest median 

concentrations in quartile 4. Previous studies have shown 

that zinc concentrations in street refuse are highest in areas 

of transportation land use; therefore, the higher concentrations observed in quartile 4 may be attributable to the 

higher proportion of transportation land use in this quartile 

(Novotny and Chesters, 1981). Other studies have found 

that the highest proportion of total phosphorus in urban 

land uses comes from lawns and streets; the higher proportion of residential and transportation land uses in quartile 4 

may be responsible for these higher concentrations (Waschbusch and others, 1999). In contrast, the highest median 

PCB concentration was observed in quartile 1; this may 

be due to contamination from the Cedar Creek Superfund 

alternative site which is upstream of two of the four sites 

(Milwaukee River near Cedarburg and Milwaukee River at 

Milwaukee) included in that quartile. Fish-tissue samples 

collected from the Milwaukee River at Milwaukee also had 

detections of PCBs (fish-tissue samples were not collected 

at Milwaukee River near Cedarburg). PCB contamination 

at these sites has been well-documented in previous studies 

(Scudder and others, 1997; Steuer and others, 1999; Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, 2006).

The imperfect relation of biological metrics to site 

characteristics and water-quality data is likely indicative 

of additional influences on the quality of biological communities. A number of influences on biological communities may assist in explaining these differences: stream 

flashiness (by minimizing macroinvertebrates and algae 

colonization); localized intermittent pollution; and toxicity 

from unidentified constituents. In addition, reach selection 

shows inherent bias toward sites where biota is available 

for sampling, which may not accurately represent the overall quality of the stream. Since neither biological metrics 

nor water-quality data provided a complete description 

of stream quality, the Phase II assessment of streams was 

strengthened by the use of both approaches to establish a 

holistic baseline assessment of stream quality.

132 Water-Quality Characteristics for Selected Sites within the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin
Potential Areas for Data Collection 

in Phase III

Given the emphasis on the spatial and temporal 

distribution of water-quality characteristics in Phase II, 

future efforts could be more hypothesis-driven, seeking 

to answer specific questions that have yet to be addressed 

in the MMSD planning area. For example, what are the 

long-term effects of changing water quality on biotic communities? What is the relative magnitude and contribution 

of waterborne pathogens from major sources on an annual 

basis? Phase II results indicated that bioassessment of 

the streams was a useful tool for assessing overall stream 

conditions, particularly in combination with the water 

quality results. Continued biological data collection would 

enhance understanding of overall water quality and give 

a long-term picture of stream conditions in the MMSD 

planning area. Although microbiological data collection 

during Phase II was, in part, to augment historical datacollection efforts, results suggested the utility of focused 

studies such as direct testing for pathogenic viruses, as 

well as studies to determine sources of Cryptosporidium

and Giardia within the urban landscape. These microbiological investigations could be designed to (1) define the 

relative magnitude and contribution of waterborne human 

pathogenic viruses from major sources on an annual basis, 

and (2) define the relative loading of Cryptosporidium and 

Giardia from different land uses and source areas within 

the urban landscape. Determinations of toxicity levels in 

the water column, sediment, and SPMDs of urban streams 

could be integrated into further studies of the relative 

concentrations and loads of WWCs in the water column, 

bed sediment, biota, and post-treatment wastewater mixed 

with lake water. Performed with an integrated approach, 

these investigations could provide MMSD with a better 

understanding of the changes and challenges in the MMSD 

planning area. 

Summary 

From February 2004 through September 2005, USGS 

personnel, in cooperation with MMSD, were involved in 

an extensive data-collection effort as part of Phase II of the 

MMSD Corridor Study. The purpose of this data-collection 

effort was to address spatial, temporal, and technological gaps identified in the Phase I data analysis. This effort 

included the addition of harbor sites in Phase II, resulting 

in data collection at 15 stream and 6 harbor sites within 

the MMSD planning area. Data gathering included the collection of stream-discharge data for selected streams, the 

sampling and analysis for over 220 water-quality properties and constituents, and collection of additional suspended sediment, total phosphorus, and chloride data for 

computation of loads, yields, and volumetrically weighted 

concentrations at 4 sites. Bioassessment during autumn 

2004 included gathering biologic-community data and 

stream-habitat data at wadeable Phase II stream sites. 

Summary of Relations between Biological 

Metrics, Site Characteristics, and WaterQuality Data

Data for selected biological metrics were used to 

divide the 14 wadeable stream sites into four groups to 

investigate relations between bioassessment data and site 

characteristic and water-quality data. Aggregate bioassessment rankings of Phase II data were used to divide the sites 

into four quartiles reflecting relative water quality. Quartile 

1 contained sites where bioassessment data indicated the 

least-degraded water quality among those sampled, and 

quartile 4 contained sites that indicated the most-degraded 

water quality. Quartiles contained the following stream 

sites:

Quartile 1: Milwaukee River near Cedarburg, 

Milwaukee River at Milwaukee, Jewel Creek, 

and Menomonee River at Menomonee Falls

Quartile 2: Willow Creek, Root River near 

Franklin, and Root River at Grange Avenue

Quartile 3: Menomonee River at Wauwatosa, 

Oak Creek, and Little Menomonee River

Quartile 4: Honey Creek, Underwood Creek, 

Lincoln Creek, and Kinnickinnic River

•

•

•

•

Summary 133
Site characteristics (in this case, drainage area and 

land use) and selected water- and sediment-quality constituent results were summarized based on the four bioassessment quartiles to determine if there were relations with the 

aggregate bioassessment rankings. In general, sites having 

the largest drainage basins with lowest proportion of urban 

land use were in quartile 1, and the smallest drainage 

basins with highest proportion of urban land use were in 

quartile 4. Major ions, indicator organisms, and wastewater compounds generally had the lowest overall results in 

quartile 1, and highest overall results in quartile 4. Results 

for other constituent types (nutrients, mercury, pathogenic 

organisms, and bed sediment) indicated mixed results, with 

results for some constituents decreasing from quartile 1 to 

quartile 4. Since neither biological metrics nor water-quality data provided a complete description of stream quality, 

the Phase II assessment of streams was strengthened by 

the use of both approaches to establish a holistic baseline 

assessment of stream quality.

Findings for Harbor Sites and the Milwaukee 

River at Mouth at Milwaukee Site

Harbor results from Phase II data collection indicated 

that most of the water-quality constituents highlighted in 

this report were also detected in the harbor. In the inner 

harbor, approximately half of the constituents highlighted 

had similar results when compared to results from stream 

sites; remaining constituents had results that were generally lower than those from stream sites. In the outer harbor, 

most constituents highlighted had lower results when compared to results from stream sites and inner-harbor sites. 

Phase II findings indicated that 13 of the 15 wastewater compound (WWC) classes were present in the Milwaukee Harbor. In the inner harbor, results for seven WWC 

classes indicated DFs similar to those in stream samples: 

detergent metabolites, fire retardants, flavors and fragrances, herbicides, human drugs (nonprescription), insecticides, and miscellaneous. The antimicrobial disinfectant 

and antioxidant classes were not detected in the inner 

harbor. In the outer harbor, results for two WWC classes 

indicated DFs similar to those in stream samples: herbicides and miscellaneous. Eight classes were not detected in 

the outer harbor: antimicrobial disinfectants, antioxidants, 

detergent metabolites, dyes and pigments, fuel, plasticizers, solvents, and sterols. 

The Milwaukee River at Mouth site integrates flow 

from multiple streams and is affected by seiches from 

Lake Michigan. Median results for certain water-quality 

constituents at this site were similar to those for innerharbor samples, and median results for other constituents 

were more like those for stream samples. The median chloride concentration at Milwaukee River at Mouth was less 

than half than that observed at most stream sites, and was 

similar to median concentrations observed at harbor sites. 

Median concentrations for nutrients were similar to those 

for stream sites. The Milwaukee River at Mouth site had 

the lowest median concentrations of all stream sites for 

dissolved mercury and dissolved and particulate methylmercury (similar to harbor samples), but median concentrations of particulate mercury were similar to samples 

from the other stream sites. Median concentrations of 

indicator organisms (fecal coliform, E. coli, and coliphage) 

were lower than those observed at stream sites, but were 

higher than those observed in harbor samples. DFs of 

coliphage groups II and III indicated that, of the coliphage 

detected, the proportion of probable human sources was 

more similar to stream sites than harbor sites. With the 

exception of E. coli O157:H7, pathogen DFs were similar 

to those observed in stream samples. DFs of WWCs were 

similar to those observed at stream sites. Concentrations of 

trace elements and PCBs in bed sediment at Milwaukee at 

Mouth were among the highest observed at Phase II stream 

sites. 

Phase I–Phase II Comparisons

General comparisons between Phase I and Phase 

II median concentrations were made where data were 

available for both phases and were sufficient to discern 

an overall pattern. Phase I median concentrations were 

calculated from available data; depending on the constituent, the amount of data ranged from a small dataset with 

only a few results to a large dataset with numerous results. 

Comparisons could not be made for a number of Phase II 

constituents (for example, the WWCs), as technology to 

analyze for many of these compounds has only recently 

been developed. For many of the constituents for which 

comparable data were available for Phase I and Phase II, 

notable differences were evident (appendix 5). All comparisons between Phase I and Phase II were for manually 

collected samples; automatically collected samples used 

for Phase II loads determinations had no Phase I counterparts available for comparison.

134 Water-Quality Characteristics for Selected Sites within the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin
Median chloride concentrations generally increased 

between Phase I and Phase II, likely because winter sampling and event sampling were included as part of Phase II. 

This finding indicated that winter contributions of chloride 

to streams may be substantial. Increased chloride concentrations typically occur in winter when road salts were 

used as deicers on smaller snowfall events (typically 1 to 2 

inches) and road salts are used to clear roads and parking 

lots. Meltwater from deicing activities of this kind produce small volumes of runoff with high concentrations of 

chloride. This type of runoff has the most effect on urban 

streams where the proportion of runoff is high due to the 

concentration of impervious surfaces, and where roads are 

prevalent and frequently deiced. Phase II stream sites with 

median chloride concentrations above the USEPA national 

chronic freshwater-quality criterion all had drainage basins 

with over 80 percent urban land use. 

Nutrients, chlorophyll a, and suspended sediment 

concentrations indicated varying results from Phase I to 

Phase II. Total nitrogen and suspended sediment concentrations decreased or indicated no notable difference. 

Nitrate, total phosphorus, and chlorophyll a concentrations 

increased or indicated no notable difference from Phase I 

to Phase II. 

Indicator organisms, fecal coliform, and E. coli

comparisons also indicated varying results from Phase I 

to Phase II. Fecal coliform concentrations were generally 

decreasing. E. coli concentrations indicated no notable 

difference, but this may be due to the limited data set available for Phase I. 

Although bed-sediment data for Phase I was limited, 

changes were still observed. Median concentrations of 

most trace elements (cadmium, chromium, copper, lead, 

mercury, nickel, and zinc) in bed sediment decreased 

from Phase I to Phase II; however, arsenic concentrations 

increased. PCB concentrations in bed sediment indicated 

no notable difference once the increased analytical sensitivity of Phase II analyses had been considered. 

PCB data in sediment and fish tissue were available 

for comparison at three sites between Phase I and Phase II, 

because Phase II fish tissue samples were only collected 

at Milwaukee River at Milwaukee, Menomonee River at 

Wauwatosa, and Root River near Franklin. Although direct 

comparisons between the Lower Milwaukee River subwatershed and the three Milwaukee River Phase II sites were 

generally avoided, contamination of this subwatershed 

with synthetic organic contaminants (especially PCBs) 

is well documented and was discussed in general terms 

using data from the Milwaukee River at Milwaukee site. 

The Milwaukee River continued to have PCB detections in 

fish tissue, which could be due to contamination from the 

upstream Cedar Creek Superfund alternative site. At the 

Menomonee River at Wauwatosa site, PCBs were detected 

in bed sediment in both Phase I and Phase II; PCBs were 

not detected in fish tissue in Phase I but were detected in 

Phase II, which could imply that PCBs persisting in bed 

sediments are now moving up into biological systems. At 

the Root River near Franklin site, no PCBs were detected 

in bed sediment during Phase II. No data were available for Phase I. There were also no PCB detections in 

fish tissue in either Phase I or Phase II at the Root River 

near Franklin site. Upstream, at the Root River at Grange 

Avenue site, PCBs were detected in bed sediment during 

Phase II. 

Fish-tissue data also were analyzed for historically 

used pesticides. Pesticide detections in fish tissue were 

observed at the Milwaukee River at Milwaukee site during 

Phase I; however concentrations observed during Phase 

II were below the Phase I reporting level. Although not 

detected in fish-tissue samples at Menomonee River at 

Wauwatosa during Phase I, historically used pesticides 

were observed in the samples collected during Phase II 

at concentrations above the Phase I reporting level. Root 

River near Franklin had no pesticide detections in fish tissue in Phase I or Phase II. 

Bioassessments of streams indicated varying results 

when Phase I and Phase II data were compared. EPT taxa 

representation at most sites remained constant or improved 

from Phase I to Phase II; declines in EPT taxa representation were observed at Oak Creek and Root River near 

Franklin. In addition, the majority of Phase II HBI-10 

scores remained constant or improved when compared to 

Phase I water-quality ratings; increases in HBI-10 ratings 

(from fairly poor to fair) were observed at Oak Creek and 

Root River at Grange Avenue. Fish IBI data had fewer 

sites available for comparison; however, where available, 

Phase II biotic integrity ratings at compared sites either 

remained constant or worsened when compared with Phase 

I. Although results for macroinvertebrate assessments were 

generally inconsistent with the fish IBI data, changes in 

water quality are generally reflected at the lower trophic 

levels first; therefore, this inconsistency may be an indication of improving water quality in these urban streams. 

Summary 135
References 

Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, 1999, 

ToxFAQs for isophorone: Atlanta, Ga., U.S. Department 

of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service, 

accessed December 28, 2006, at http://www.atsdr.cdc.

gov/tfacts138.html

Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, 2006, 

ToxFAQs for cresol: Atlanta, Ga., U.S. Department of 

Health and Human Services, Public Health Service, 

accessed December 28, 2006, at http://www.atsdr.cdc.

gov/tfacts34.html

AZUR Environmental, 1998, Microtox acute toxicity test, 

in AZUR Environmental, Microtox test manual: Newark, Del., Strategic Diagnostics Inc., accessed December 

28, 2006, at http://www.azurenv.com/mtox.htm

Baird and Associates, 1997, Milwaukee River PCB mass 

balance project final report: Madison, Wis., Baird and 

Associates, 276 p.

Bahls, L.L., 1993, Periphyton bioassessment methods for 

Montana streams (revised): Helena, Mont., Montana 

Department of Health and Environmental Sciences, 

Water Quality Bureau, 69 p.

Capel, P.D., Spexet, A.H., and Larson, S.J., 1999, Occurrence and behavior of the herbicide Prometon in the 

hydrologic system: Environmental Science and Technology, v. 33, no. 5, p. 674-680.

Carlson, R.E., 1977, A trophic state index for lakes: Limnology and Oceanography, v. 22, no. 2, p. 361–369.

Chang, J.C., Taylor, P.B., and Leach, F.R., 1981, Use of 

the Microtox assay system for environmental samples: 

Bulletin of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology, v. 26, no. 1, p. 150–156.

Combs, S.M., and Peters, J.B., [n.d.], Wisconsin soil test 

summary, 1995–1999, phosphorus map: University of 

Wisconsin–Madison, Department of Soil Science, Soil 

& Plant Analysis Lab, accessed January 18, 2007, at 

http://uwlab.soils.wisc.edu/madison/

Corsi, S. R., Graczyk, D.J., Owens, D.W., and Bannerman, R.T., 1997, Unit-area loads of suspended sediment, suspended solids and total phosphorus from small 

watersheds in Wisconsin: U.S. Geological Survey Fact 

Sheet 1997–195, 4 p.

Corsi, S.R., Zitomer, D.H., Field, J.A., and Cancilla, D.A., 

2003, Nonylphenol ethoxylates and other additives in 

aircraft deicers, antiicers, and waters receiving airport 

runoff: Environmental Science & Technology, v. 37, 

no. 18, p. 4031–4037

Daughton, C.G., and Ternes, T.A., 1999, Pharmaceuticals 

and personal care products in the environment: agents 

of subtle change?: Human Health Perspectives, v. 107, 

supl. 6, p. 907–938.

Dufour, A.P., 1984, Health effects criteria for fresh recreational waters: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 

Office of Research and Development, EPA-600/1-84-

004, 33 p.

Fitzpatrick, F.A., White, I.R., D’Arconte, P.J., Meador, 

M.R., Maupin, M.A., and Gurtz, M.E., 1998, Revised 

methods for characterizing stream habitat in the 

National Water-Quality Assessment Program: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 

98–4052, 67 p.

Gilliom, R.J., Barbash, J.E., Crawford, C.G., Hamilton, 

P.A., Martin, J.D., Nakagaki, N., Nowell, L.H., Scott, 

J.C., Stackelberg, P.E., Theilin, G.P., and Wolock, D.M., 

2006, The quality of our Nation’s waters—pesticides in 

the Nation’s streams and ground water, 1992–2001: U.S. 

Geological Survey Circular 1291, 172 p.

Goldman, C.R., and Horne. A.J., 1983, Limnology: New 

York, McGraw-Hill, 464 p. 

Graczyk, D.J., and Vanden Brook, J.D., 1997, Herbicides 

in the Pecatonica and Yahara River in Southwestern 

Wisconsin, May 1996–July 1996: U.S. Geological Survey Fact Sheet 175–197, 4 p.

Graczyk, D.J., Vanden Brook, J.D., and Rheineck, B.D., 

1999, Herbicides in the Pecatonica, Trempealeau, and 

Yahara River in Wisconsin, May 1997–July 1998: U.S. 

Geological Survey Fact Sheet 167–99, 6 p.

Hilsenhoff, W.L., 1987, An improved biotic index of 

organic stream pollution: Great Lakes Entomologist, 

v. 20, no. 1, p. 31–40.

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, v. 31, no. 1, p. 1–12.

Iman, R.L., and Conover, W.J., 1983, A modern approach 

to statistics: New York, John Wiley, 497 p.

Kaiser, Jocelyn, 2000, Endocrine disrupters: panel cautiously confirms low-dose effects: Science, v. 290, 

no. 5492, p. 695–697.

Karr, J.R., 1981, Assessment of biotic integrity using fish 

community: Fisheries, vol. 6, p. 21–27.

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.

136 Water-Quality Characteristics for Selected Sites within the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin
Kingsbury, J.A., Hopple, J.A., Delzer, G.C., 2006, Review 

of quality-control and environmental data for wastewater effluent compounds collected for the NAWQA 

Source Water-Quality Assessment: U.S. Geological Survey, accessed January 3, 2007 at http://wwwdsd.cr.usgs.

gov/nawqa/vocns/swqa/SWQA_1433_QC_2004.pdf

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.

Krabbenhoft, D.P., Wiener, J.G., Brumbaugh, W.G., 

Olson, M.L., DeWild, J.F., and Sabin, T.J., 1999, A 

national pilot study of mercury contamination of aquatic 

ecosystems along multiple gradients, in Morganwalp, 

D.W., and Buxton, H.T., eds., U.S. Geological Survey 

Toxic Substances Hydrology Program—proceedings of 

the technical meeting, Charleston, S.C., March 8–12, 

1999—volume 2 of 3, Contamination of hydrologic 

systems and related ecosystems: U.S. Geological Survey 

Water-Resources Investigations Report 99–4018B, 

p. 147–160.

Kunze, A.E., and Sroka, B.N., 2004, Effects of highway 

deicing chemicals on shallow unconsolidated aquifers 

in Ohio—final report: U.S. Geological Survey Scientific 

Investigations Report 2004–5150, 187 p.

Lange-Bertalot, H., 1979, Pollution tolerance of diatoms as 

a criterion for water quality estimation: Nova Hedwigia, 

v. 64, p. 285–304.

Lee, K.E., Barber, L.B., Furlong, E.T., Cahill, J.D., Kolpin, 

D.W., Meyer, M.T., and Zaugg, S.D., 2004, Presence 

and distribution of organic wastewater compounds in 

wastewater, surface, ground, and drinking waters, Minnesota, 2000–02: U.S. Geological Survey Scientific 

Investigations Report 2004–5138, 47 p.

Lyons, John, 1992, 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, 48 p.

MacCoy, D.E., 2004, Water-quality and biological conditions in the Lower Boise River, Ada and Canyon 

Counties, Idaho, 1994–2002: U.S. Geological Survey 

Scientific Investigations Report 2004–5128, 80 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, no. 1, p. 20–31.

Mahler, B.J., Van Metre, P.C., Bashara, T.J., Wilson, J.T., 

and Johns, D.A., 2005. Parking lot sealcoat: an unrecognized source of urban polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons: Environmental Science & Technology, v. 39, 

no. 15, p. 5560–5566.

Mara, Duncan, and Horan, N.J., eds., 2003, The handbook 

of water and wastewater microbiology: San Diego, 

Calif., Academic Press, 819 p. 

Mason, R.P., Fitzgerald, W.F., and Morel, F.M.M., 1994, 

The biogeochemical cycling of elemental mercury: 

anthropogenic influences: Geochimica et Cosmochimica 

Acta, v. 58, no. 15, p. 3191–3198.

Moulton, S.R., II, Kennen, J.G., Goldstein, R.M., and 

Hambrook, J.A., 2002, Revised protocols for sampling 

algal, invertebrate, and fish communities as part of the 

National Water-Quality Assessment Program: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 02–150, 75 p.

Mueller, D.K., and Spahr, N.E., 2006, Nutrients in streams 

and rivers across the Nation—1992–2001: U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2006–5107, 

44 p.

Newell, A.J., Johnson, D.W., and Allen, L.K., 1987, Niagara River biota contamination project: fish flesh criteria 

for piscivorous wildlife: New York State Department 

of Environmental Conservation, Division of Fish and 

Wildlife, Bureau of Environmental Protection, Technical 

Report 87–3, 182 p.

Novotny, V., and Chesters, G., 1981, Handbook of nonpoint pollution: New York, Van Nostrand Reinhold 

Company, 555 p.

Odum, E.P., 1971, Fundamentals of Ecology (3d ed.): 

Philadelphia, Pa., W.B. Saunders Company, 574 p.

Ohio Environmental Protection Agency, 1988, Biological criteria for the protection of aquatic life, v. II,: users 

manual for biological field assessment of Ohio surface 

waters: Ohio Environmental Protection Agency, Ecological Assessment Section, Division of Water Quality, 

Planning and Assessment, variously paginated.

Olson, M.L., and DeWild, J.F., 1999, Techniques for the 

collection and species-specific analysis of low levels of 

mercury in water, sediment, and biota, in Morganwalp, 

D.W., and Buxton, H.T., eds., U.S. Geological Survey 

Toxic Substances Hydrology Program—proceedings of 

the technical meeting, Charleston, S.C., March 8–12, 

1999—volume 2 of 3, Contamination of hydrologic 

systems and related ecosystems: U.S. Geological Survey 

Water-Resources Investigations Report 99–4018B, 

p. 191–200.

References 137
Oregon State University, 1996, Metolachlor: Oregon State 

University, EXTOXNET—Extension Toxicology Network pesticide information profiles, accessed January 

18, 2007 at http://extoxnet.orst.edu/pips/metolach.htm

Paul, M.J., and Meyer, J.L., 2001, Streams in the urban 

landscape: Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics, 

v. 32, p. 333–365.

Percival, S., Chalmers, R., Embrey, M., Hunter, P., Sellwood, J., and Wyn-Jones, P., 2004, Microbiology of 

waterborne diseases: Boston, Elsevier Academic Press, 

480 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: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office 

of Water Regulations and Standards, EPA 440–4–89–

001. 

Porterfield, George, 1972, Computation of fluvial-sediment discharge: U.S. Geological Survey Techniques of 

Water-Resources Investigations, book 3, chap. C3, 66 p.

Prescott, G.W., 1962, Algae of the Western Great Lakes 

area (2d ed.): Dubuque, Iowa, W.C. Brown, 977 p.

Qureshi, A.A., Bulich, A.A., and Isenberg, D.L., 1998, 

Microtox toxicity test systems—where they stand today, 

in Wells, P.G., and others, eds., Microscale testing in 

aquatic toxicology: advances, techniques, and practice: 

Boca Raton, Fla., CRC Press, p. 185–200.

Rand, G.M., and Petrocelli, S.R., 1985, Fundamentals 

of aquatic toxicology: methods and applications: New 

York, Hemisphere Publishing Corp., 666 p.

Rantz, S.E., and others, 1982, Measurement and computation of streamflow: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 2175, 2 v., 631 p.

Robertson, D.M., Graczyk, D.J., Garrison, P.J., Wang, L., 

LaLiberte, G., and Bannerman, R., 2006, Nutrient concentrations and their relations to the biotic integrity of 

wadeable streams in Wisconsin: U.S. Geological Survey 

Professional Paper 1722, 139 p. 

Schneider, M.A., Lutz, M.A., and others, 2004, Waterresources-related information for the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District planning area, Wisconsin, 

1970–2002: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources 

Investigations Report 03–4240, 288 p.

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.

Simon, A., and Hupp, C.R., 1992, Geomorphic and vegetative recovery processes along modified stream channels 

of West Tennessee: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File 

Report 91–502, 142 p.

Simonson, T.D., Lyons, J., and Kanehl, P.D., 1994, Guidelines for evaluating fish habitat in Wisconsin streams: 

U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service, North 

Central Forest Experiment Station, General Technical 

Report NC-164, 36 p.

Simpson, J.M, Santo Domingo, J.W., and Reasoner, D.J., 

2002, Microbial source tracking—state of science: Environmental Science & Technology, v. 36, no. 24, 

p. 5279–5288.

Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission, 1987, A water resources management plan for 

the Milwaukee Harbor Estuary—volume 1, Inventory 

findings for ready public review: Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission Planning Report 37, 

514 p.

Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission, 

2000, SEWRPC digital land use inventory, 2000, Wisconsin Transverse Mercator (WTM 83/91) projection: 

Machine-readable files on CD-ROM.

Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission, 

2002a, Subbasins, 2002 (continuous updates), Wisconsin Transverse Mercator (WTM 83/91) projection: 

Machine-readable files on CD-ROM. 

Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission, 

2002b, Subwatersheds, 2002 (continuous updates), Wisconsin Transverse Mercator (WTM 83/91) projection: 

Machine-readable files on CD-ROM.

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, P.J., Agardy, F.J., and Clark, J.J.J., 2005, The 

environmental science of drinking water: Burlington, 

Mass., Elsevier Butterworth-Heinemann, 368 p.

Taylor, M.R., and Harrison, P.T.C., 1999, Ecological 

effects of endocrine disruption: current evidence and 

research priorities: Chemosphere, v. 39, no. 8, 

p. 1237–1248.

U.S. Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration, and National Climatic 

Data Center, 2003, Climatological data—Wisconsin: 

Ashville, N.C., Monthly Summaries, v. 108, nos. 10–12. 

138 Water-Quality Characteristics for Selected Sites within the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin
U.S. Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration, and National Climatic 

Data Center, 2004, Climatological data—Wisconsin: 

Ashville, N.C., Monthly Summaries, v. 109, nos. 1–12. 

U.S. Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration, and National Climatic 

Data Center, 2005, Climatological data—Wisconsin: 

Ashville, N.C., Monthly Summaries, v. 110, nos. 1–9. 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1976, Quality criteria for water: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 

Office of Water Planning and Standards, EPA 440/9-

76/023, 501 p.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1986, Ambient 

water quality criteria for bacteria—1986: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water Planning and 

Standards, EPA 440/5–84–002, 18 p.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1997, Special 

report on environmental endocrine disruption: an effects 

assessment and analysis: U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, Risk Assessment Forum, EPA/630/R–96/012, 

111 p.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2000, Ambient water quality criteria recommendations, rivers and 

streams in Nutrient Ecoregion VII: U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, Office of Water, EPA 822–B–00–

018, 20 p., 3 appendixes.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2001, Water 

quality criterion for the protection of human health: 

methylmercury: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 

Office of Water, Office of Science and Technology, EPA 

823–R–01–001, accessed January 18, 2007 at http://

www.epa.gov/waterscience/criteria/methylmercury/

document.html

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2005a, Method 

1623: Cryptosporidium and Giardia in water by filtration/IMS/FA: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 

Office of Water, EPA 815–R–05–002, 68 p.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2005b, Pesticides: 

topical & chemical fact sheets—the insect repellent 

DEET: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, accessed 

January 18, 2007, at http://www.epa.gov/pesticides/

factsheets/chemicals/deet.htm

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2006a, Data 

collection and modeling of enteric pathogens, fecal 

indicators and real-time environmental data at Madison, Wisconsin recreational beaches for timely public 

access to water quality information: U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, accessed January 18, 2007, at http://

www.cityofmadison.com/hebeachstatic/docs/Final%20E

MPACT%20Project%20Report%206-24-04.pdf

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2006b, Region 5 

cleanup sites—Cedar Creek site: U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, accessed January 18, 2007, at http://

www.epa.gov/Region5/sites/cedarcreek/index.htm

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2006c, Superfund 

information systems—Superfund site progress profile 

Moss-American Co., Inc. (Kerr-McGee Oil Co.): U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, accessed January 

18, 2007, at http://cfpub.epa.gov/supercpad/cursites/

csitinfo.cfm?id=0505024

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2006d, Water 

quality criteria—current national recommended 

water quality criteria: U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, accessed January 18, 2007, at http://epa.gov/

waterscience/criteria/wqcriteria.html

U.S. Geological Survey, variously dated, National field 

manual for the collection of water-quality data: U.S. 

Geological Survey Techniques of Water-Resources 

Investigations, Book 9, Chapters A1–A9, accessed January 18, 2007, at http://water.usgs.gov/owq/FieldManual/

University of Wisconsin–Extension and Southeastern 

Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission, 2004, 

Plan on it—environmental corridors, lifelines of the 

natural resource base: University of Wisconsin–Extension, accessed January 18, 2007, at http://www.sewrpc.

org/publications/brochure/plan_on_it_environmental_

corridors.pdf

Vannote, R.L., Minshall, G.W., Cummins, K.W., Sedell, 

J.R., and Cushing, C.E., 1980, The river continuum 

concept: Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences, v. 37, p. 130–137.

Wang, Lizhu, Lyons, J., and Kanehl, P.D., 2001, Impacts of 

urbanization on stream habitat and fish across multiple 

spatial scales: Environmental Management, v. 28, no. 2, 

p. 255–266.

Waschbusch, R.J., Olson, D.L., Marsh, S.B., and Stark, 

P.A., 2005, Water Resources Data, Wisconsin, water 

year 2004: U.S. Geological Survey Water Data Report 

WI–04–1, 990 p.

Waschbusch, R.J., Olson, D.L., and Marsh, S.B., 2006, 

Water Resources Data, Wisconsin, water year 2005: 

U.S. Geological Survey Water Data Report WI–05–1, 

982 p.

Waschbusch, R.J., Selbig, W.R., and Bannerman, R.T., 

1999, Sources of phosphorus in stormwater and street 

dirt from two urban residential basins in Madison, 

Wisconsin, 1994–95: U.S. Geological Survey Water 

Resources Investigations Report 99–4021, 47 p.

References 139
Wehr, J.D., and Sheath, R.G., 2003, Freshwater algae of 

North America: Ecology and classification: San Diego, 

Calif., Academic Press, 918 p.

Wiener, J.G., Krabbenhoft, D.P., Heinz, G.H., and Scheuhammer, A.M., 2003, Ecotoxicology of mercury, chap. 

16 in Hoffman, D.J., Rattner, B.A., Burton, G.A., Jr., 

and Cairns, J., Jr., eds., Handbook of ecotoxicology (2d 

ed.): Boca Raton, Fla., Lewis Publishers, p. 409–463. 

Wiener, J.G., and Spry, D.J., 1996, Toxicological significance of mercury in freshwater fish, in Beyer, W.N., 

Heinz, G.H., and Redmon-Norwood, A.W., eds., Environmental contaminants in wildlife: interpreting tissue 

concentrations: Boca Raton, FL, Lewis Publishers, 

p. 297–339.

Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, [n.d.], Beach 

monitoring program requirements: Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, accessed December 18, 

2006, at http://www.dnr.state.wi.us/org/water/wm/wqs/

beaches/

Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, 1998, WISCLAND land cover (WLCGW930)—1992, Wisconsin 

Transverse Mercator (WTM 83/91) projection: Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, machine-readable 

files on CD-ROM. 

Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, 2006, 

Choose wisely—a health guide for eating fish in Wisconsin: Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, 

PUB-FH-824 2006, 20 p.

Zaugg, S.D., Smith, S.G., Schroeder, M.P., Barber, L.B., 

and Burkhardt, M.R., 2002, Methods of analysis by the 

U.S. Geological Survey National Water Quality Laboratory—determination of wastewater compounds by 

polystyrene-divinylbenzene solid-phase extraction and 

capillary-column gas chromatography/mass spectrometry: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 01–4186, 37 p.

140 Water-Quality Characteristics for Selected Sites within the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin
Appendixes
142 Water-Quality Characteristics for Selected Sites within the Milwau kee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin

Appendix 1. Land-use classes from Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission (SEWRPC) and 

Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources WISCLAND land-cover data sets. 

MMSD 

Phase II use SEWRPC 2000 classification SEWRPC code WISCLAND classification WISCLAND code

Residential Residential 100s Urban/developed, low intensity 104

Commercial Commercial 200s 

Cultural outdoor 711–712

Industrial Industrial 300s Urban/developed, high intensity 101

Transportation Transportation 400s 

Other urban Communication and utilities 500s Urban/developed, golf course 105

Institutional and governmental services 600s

Land-related outdoor recreation areas 731–732

Water-related outdoor recreation sites 781–782

Outdoor recreation area under 

development

799

Agriculture Agriculture 800s Agriculture 110s, 120s, 

130s, 140s 

Natural areas and 

other lands

Natural areas and other lands 900s Forest 150s, 160–194, 

200, 210–220, 

222–234, 

240s, 250, 

255
Appendix 2A–B. Descriptions of methods for harbor-site sampling and mercury sampling.

Appendix 2A. Modified sampling technique for MMSD harbor sites, 2004–2005

Regular samples

Kemmerer sampler

Fill pickle jar with 9 liters to make composite sample.

Field clean equipment between sampling locations.

Weighted sampler

Fill three baked 1-liter amber glass bottles for:

Dissolved organic carbon (DOC) and total particulate carbon and nitrogen analysis

Pesticides analysis

Wastewater analysis

Field measurements (dissolved oxygen (DO), temperature, pH, and specific conductance)

Three measurements—one measurement at each of three depths

QA/QC samples: These samples are collected in association with regularly collected samples and are also done at a specified 

frequency.

Blanks: A blank is run after a regular sample is collected and equipment has been cleaned.

Samples regularly collected with Kemmerer sampler

Fill sampler with universal blank water then dump into pickle jar, as one would a sample

Samples regularly collected with weighted sampler

Fill 1-L glass bottles with universal blank water, cap

No field measurements are made on universal blank water

Sample time recorded as 1 minute before the regular sample’s time

Replicates:

Kemmerer sampler

Collect replicate samples immediately after the original sample has been collected, in the same manner

Weighted sampler

Collect replicate samples immediately after the regular sample has been collected, in the same manner

No additional field measurements are needed; use the ones from the regular sample

Sample time is recorded as 1 minute after the regular sample’s time

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

Appendix 2 143
144 Water-Quality Characteristics for Selected Sites within the Milwau kee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin

Whole-water samples were collected whenever possible from the centroid of flow by field personnel wearing 

arm-length gloves and submersing a 1-L PETG (glycolmodified polyethylene terephthalate) bottle. The filled 

bottle was hermetically sealed in a re-sealable clear plastic 

bag and immediately placed in a cooler for transport to 

the USGS Wisconsin Mercury Research Laboratory in 

Middleton, Wis. Once at the lab, the water samples were 

filtered to separate the dissolved and particulate associated fractions of methylmercury and total mercury. Sample 

filtration was done by use of an acid-cleaned, plastic 

filtration dome, baked (at 500oC); quartz fiber filters 

(QFFs); a vacuum pump, and a Teflon sample tower. In 

this procedure, the sample is exposed to ambient air for a 

few minutes and only contacts Teflon surfaces that have 

been rigorously cleaned in hot acid, thoroughly rinsed 

with deionized water, and then double-bagged until use. 

Filtered water samples for total mercury and methylmercury analysis were preserved by adding concentrated HCl 

to 1 percent by volume. Particulates retained on the QFFs 

during filtration were immediately placed in Teflon petri 

dishes, sealed in clear plastic bags, and kept frozen until 

analysis.

Appendix 2B. Mercury sampling

A brief description of the analytical procedures for 

total mercury and methylmercury water and suspended 

particulates is given here but a complete description can 

be found in Olson and DeWild (1999), Dewild and others 

(2004), and Olund and others (2004). Total mercury and 

methylmercury determinations were done at the USGS 

Wisconsin Mercury Research Laboratory, a facility 

specifically designed and dedicated for low-level speciation analysis of environmental samples for mercury. Total 

mercury was determined by cold vapor atomic fluorescence spectroscopy (CVAFS) following oxidation with 

BrCl at 50oC, reduction by SnCl2

, and purge and trap of 

the evolved Hg0 onto gold-coated glass bead columns. 

The analytical procedure for methylmercury is a two-step 

process involving distillation of the sample to separate the 

methylmercury from potential matrix-interference effects 

of dissolved organic carbon (DOC), followed by aqueous 

phase ethylation and quantification using gas chromatography and CVAFS. Ancillary chemical data to assist in 

the interpretation of the results were determined by the 

following methods: pH was measured in the field with a 

calibrated probe, sulfate by ion chromatography, and DOC 

by a carbon analyzer that employs acidification and persulfate/UV oxidation.
Appendix 3 145

Appendix 3. Water-quality properties and constituents, reporting levels, and analyzing laboratories.

Table 3-1. Automatically collected samples

Analyzing laboratory: Wisconsin State Lab of Hygiene, Madison, Wis. (WSLH)

[mg/L, milligram per liter]

Constituent Parameter 

code

Reporting 

level Reporting units Analyzing lab

Chloride, water, filtered 00940 0.2 mg/L WSLH

Phosphorus, water, unfiltered 00665 .004 mg/L WSLH

Suspended sediment concentration 80154 1 mg/L WSLH

Table 3-2. Field parameters

[mg/L, milligram per liter; μS/cm, microsiemen per centimeter; °C, degrees Celsius; --, not available]

Constituent Parameter 

code

Reporting 

level Reporting units Analyzing lab

Alkalinity, water, filtered, incremental titration, field 39086 -- mg/L as calcium 

carbonate

None (field)

Dissolved oxygen, water, unfiltered 00300 -- mg/L None (field)

pH, water, unfiltered, field 00400 -- standard units None (field)

Specific conductance, water, unfiltered 00095 -- μS/cm at 25°C None (field)

Temperature, water 00010 -- °C None (field)

Temperature, air 00020 -- °C None (field)

Table 3-3. Dissolved and particulate carbon and particulate nitrogen (Schedule 2631 and Lab Code 2613)

Analyzing laboratory: USGS National Water Quality Laboratory, Denver, Colo. (NWQL)

[mg/L, milligram per liter]

Constituent Parameter 

code

Reporting 

level Reporting units Analyzing lab

Carbon (inorganic plus organic), suspended sediment, 

total

00694 0.12 mg/L NWQL

Inorganic carbon, suspended sediment, total 00688 .12 mg/L NWQL

Organic carbon, suspended sediment, total 00689 .12 mg/L NWQL

Organic carbon, water, filtered 00681 .33 mg/L NWQL

Particulate nitrogen, suspended in water 49570 .022 mg/L NWQL
146 Water-Quality Characteristics for Selected Sites within the Milwau kee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin

Appendix 3. Water-quality properties and constituents, reporting levels, and analyzing laboratories—Continued.

Table 3-4. Miscellaneous water-quality measurements

Analyzing laboratories: Wisconsin State Lab of Hygiene, Madison, Wis. (WSLH); USGS National Water Quality

 Laboratory, Denver, Colo. (NWQL); USGS Iowa Water Science Center Sediment Laboratory in Iowa City, Iowa

 (IWSC–SL); USGS Kentucky Water Science Center Sediment Laboratory in Louisville, Ky. (KWSC–SL)

[μg/L, microgram per liter; °C, degrees Celsius; mg/L, milligram per liter; μS/cm, microsiemen per centimeter; --, not available]

Constituent Parameter 

code

Reporting 

level Reporting units Analyzing lab

Alkalinity, water, filtered, fixed endpoint (pH 4.5) 

titration, laboratory

29801 5 mg/L as calcium 

carbonate

NWQL

Chlorophyll a, water, unfiltered, trichromatic method, 

uncorrected

32210 .26 μg/L WSLH

Biochemical oxygen demand, water, unfiltered, 5 days 

at 20°C

00310 2 mg/L WSLH

Chemical oxygen demand, low level, water, unfiltered 00335 9 mg/L WSLH

Microtox Acute Toxicity Test, water -- -- percent effect WSLH

pH, water, unfiltered, laboratory 00403 .1 standard units NWQL

Specific conductance, water, unfiltered, laboratory 90095 2.6 μS/cm at 25°C NWQL

Suspended sediment concentration 80154 1 mg/L IWSC–SL (2004),

KWSC–SL (2005)

Table 3-5. Major inorganics (Schedule 2701)

Analyzing laboratory: USGS–National Water Quality Laboratory, Denver, Colo. (NWQL)

[mg/L, milligram per liter; μg/L, microgram per liter; μS/cm, microsiemen per centimeter; °C, degrees Celsius]

Constituent Parameter 

code

Reporting 

level Reporting units Analyzing lab

Calcium, water, filtered 00915 0.01 mg/L NWQL

Chloride, water, filtered 00940 .2 mg/L NWQL

Fluoride, water, filtered 00950 .17 mg/L NWQL

Iron, water, filtered 01046 6.4 μg/L NWQL

Magnesium, water, filtered 00925 .008 mg/L NWQL

Manganese, water, filtered 01056 .8 μg/L NWQL

pH, water, unfiltered, laboratory 00403 .1 standard units NWQL

Potassium, water, filtered 00935 .16 mg/L NWQL

Residue on evaporation, dried at 180°C, water, filtered 70300 10 mg/L NWQL

Silica, water, filtered 00955 .04 mg/L NWQL

Sodium, water, filtered 00930 .1 mg/L NWQL

Specific conductance, water, unfiltered, laboratory 90095 2.6 μS/cm at 25°C NWQL

Sulfate, water, filtered 00945 .18 mg/L NWQL
Table 3-6. Nutrients (Schedule 2711)

Analyzing laboratory: USGS–National Water Quality Laboratory, Denver, Colo. (NWQL)

[mg/L, milligram per liter]

Constituent Parameter 

code

Reporting 

level Reporting units Analyzing lab

Ammonia, water, filtered 00608 0.04 mg/L as nitrogen NWQL

Nitrite, water, filtered 00613 .008 mg/L as nitrogen NWQL

Nitrite plus nitrate, water, filtered 00631 .06 mg/L as nitrogen NWQL

Total nitrogen (nitrate + nitrite + ammonia + organic 

nitrogen), water, unfiltered, analytically determined

62855 .03 mg/L as nitrogen NWQL

Orthophosphate, water, filtered 00671 .006 mg/L as phosphorus NWQL

Phosphorus, water, unfiltered 00665 .004 mg/L NWQL

Appendix 3. Water-quality properties and constituents, reporting levels, and analyzing laboratories—Continued.

Table 3-7. Mercury

Analyzing laboratory: USGS–Wisconsin Mercury Research Laboratory, Middleton, Wis. (WMRL)

[ng/L, nanogram per liter]

Constituent Parameter 

code

Reporting 

level Reporting units Analyzing lab

Mercury, suspended sediment, total

(particulate total mercury)

62976 0.062 ng/L WMRL

Mercury, water, filtered

(dissolved total mercury)

50287 .04 ng/L WMRL

Methylmercury, suspended sediment, total

(particulate methylmercury)

62977 .01 ng/L WMRL

Methylmercury, water, filtered, recoverable

(dissolved methylmercury)

50285 .04 ng/L WMRL

Appendix 3 147
148 Water-Quality Characteristics for Selected Sites within the Milwau kee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin

Appendix 3. Water-quality properties and constituents, reporting levels, and analyzing laboratories—Continued.

Table 3-8. Indicator and pathogenic microorganisms

Analyzing laboratories: Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District, Milwaukee, Wis. (MMSD); Wisconsin State Lab

 of Hygiene, Madison, Wis. (WSLH)

[MPN/100 mL, most probable number per 100 milliliters; col/100 mL, colonies per 100 milliliters; plaques/100mL, plaques per 100 milliliters; mL, 

milliliter; cysts/100 mL, cysts per 100 milliliters; oocysts/100 mL, oocysts per 100 milliliters; --, not available]

Constituent Parameter 

code

Reporting 

level Reporting units Analyzing lab

Escherichia coli -- 1 MPN/100 mL MMSD

Fecal coliform -- 3 col/100 mL MMSD

Escherichia coli 50468 1 MPN/100 mL WSLH

Fecal coliform 31625 10 col/100 mL WSLH

Coliphage 90904 1 plaques/100 mL WSLH

Coliphage, groups I and IV -- 1 count WSLH

Coliphage, groups II and III -- 1 count WSLH

Escherichia coli O157:H8 31683 Presence/

absence

presence or absence

per 500 mL

WSLH

Giardia 61229 30.3,

31.3,

32.3,

33.3, 

34.5,

35.7,

37,

38.7,

40,

43.8,

51.6,

53.3,

58.8,

66.7,

72.7,

77.4,

80

cysts/100 L WSLH

Cryptosporidium 61230 233,

28.6,

30.3,

31.3,

32.3,

33.3,

37,

46.7,

51.6,

53.3,

58.8,

64.5,

66.7,

77.4 

oocysts/100 L WSLH

Salmonella 31681 0.1,

0.2 

MPN/100 mL WSLH
Appendix 3. Water-quality properties and constituents, reporting levels, and analyzing laboratories—Continued.

Table 3-9. Pesticides and degradates (Schedule 2003)

Analyzing laboratory: USGS–National Water Quality Laboratory, Denver, Colo. (NWQL)

[μg/L, microgram per liter]

Constituent Parameter 

code

Reporting 

level

Reporting 

units

Analyzing 

lab

Acetochlor, water, filtered, recoverable 49260 0.006 μg/L NWQL

Alachlor, water, filtered, recoverable 46342 .005 μg/L NWQL

Atrazine, water, filtered, recoverable 39632 .007 μg/L NWQL

Azinphos-methyl oxygen analog, water, filtered, recoverable 61635 .042 μg/L NWQL

Azinphos-methyl, water, filtered (0.7 micron glass fiber filter), recoverable 82686 .08 μg/L NWQL

Benfluralin, water, filtered (0.7 micron glass fiber filter), recoverable 82673 .01 μg/L NWQL

Bromacil, water, filtered, recoverable 04029 .5 μg/L NWQL

Carbaryl, water, filtered (0.7 micron glass fiber filter), recoverable 82680 .06 μg/L NWQL

2-Chloro-2’,6’-diethylacetanilide, water, filtered, recoverable 61618 .0065 μg/L NWQL

2-Chloro-4-isopropylamino-6-amino-s-triazine, water, filtered, recoverable 04040 .014 μg/L NWQL

4-Chloro-2-methylphenol, water, filtered, recoverable 61633 .005 μg/L NWQL

Chlorpyrifos oxygen analog, water, filtered, recoverable 61636 .0562 μg/L NWQL

Chlorpyrifos, water, filtered, recoverable 38933 .005 μg/L NWQL

cis-Permethrin, water, filtered (0.7 micron glass fiber filter), recoverable 82687 .01 μg/L NWQL

Cyfluthrin, water, filtered, recoverable 61585 .053 μg/L NWQL

Cypermethrin, water, filtered, recoverable 61586 .046 μg/L NWQL

DCPA, water, filtered (0.7 micron glass fiber filter), recoverable 82682 .003 μg/L NWQL

Desulfinyl fipronil, water, filtered, recoverable 62170 .012 μg/L NWQL

Diazinon oxygen analog, water, filtered, recoverable 61638 .006 μg/L NWQL

Diazinon, water, filtered, recoverable 39572 .005 μg/L NWQL

3,4-Dichloroaniline, water, filtered, recoverable 61625 .0045 μg/L NWQL

Dicrotophos, water, filtered, recoverable 38454 .0843 μg/L NWQL

Dieldrin, water, filtered, recoverable 39381 .009 μg/L NWQL

2,6-Diethylaniline, water, filtered (0.7-micron glass fiber filter), recoverable 82660 .006 μg/L NWQL

Dimethoate, water, filtered (0.7-micron glass fiber filter), recoverable 82662 .0061 μg/L NWQL

Ethion monoxon, water, filtered, recoverable 61644 .021 μg/L NWQL

Ethion, water, filtered, recoverable 82346 .016 μg/L NWQL

2-Ethyl-6-methylaniline, water, filtered, recoverable 61620 .01 μg/L NWQL

Fenamiphos sulfone, water, filtered, recoverable 61645 .053 μg/L NWQL

Fenamiphos sulfoxide, water, filtered, recoverable 61646 .04 μg/L NWQL

Fenamiphos, water, filtered, recoverable 61591 .029 μg/L NWQL

Desulfinylfipronil amide, water, filtered, recoverable 62169 .029 μg/L NWQL

Fipronil sulfide, water, filtered, recoverable 62167 .013 μg/L NWQL

Fipronil sulfone, water, filtered, recoverable 62168 .024 μg/L NWQL

Fipronil, water, filtered, recoverable 62166 .016 μg/L NWQL

Fonofos, water, filtered, recoverable 04095 .006 μg/L NWQL

Appendix 3 149
150 Water-Quality Characteristics for Selected Sites within the Milwau kee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin

Constituent Parameter 

code

Reporting 

level

Reporting 

units

Analyzing 

lab

Hexazinone, water, filtered, recoverable 04025 0.026 μg/L NWQL

Indole, water, filtered, recoverable 62076 .5 μg/L NWQL

Iprodione, water, filtered, recoverable 61593 .026 μg/L NWQL

Isofenphos, water, filtered, recoverable 61594 .011 μg/L NWQL

Malaoxon, water, filtered, recoverable 61652 .039 μg/L NWQL

Malathion, water, filtered, recoverable 39532 .016 μg/L NWQL

Metalaxyl, water, filtered, recoverable 61596 .0069 μg/L NWQL

Methidathion, water, filtered, recoverable 61598 .0087 μg/L NWQL

Methyl paraoxon, water, filtered, recoverable 61664 .019 μg/L NWQL

Methyl parathion, water, filtered (0.7-micron glass fiber filter), recoverable 82667 .008 μg/L NWQL

Metolachlor, water, filtered, recoverable 39415 .01 μg/L NWQL

Metribuzin, water, filtered, recoverable 82630 .012 μg/L NWQL

Myclobutanil, water, filtered, recoverable 61599 .033 μg/L NWQL

1-Naphthol, water, filtered (0.7-micron glass fiber filter), recoverable 49295 .0882 μg/L NWQL

Pendimethalin, water, filtered (0.7-micron glass fiber filter), recoverable 82683 .02 μg/L NWQL

Phorate oxygen analog, water, filtered, recoverable 61666 .027 μg/L NWQL

Phorate, water, filtered (0.7-micron glass fiber filter), recoverable 82664 .02 μg/L NWQL

Phosmet oxygen analog, water, filtered, recoverable 61668 .0511 μg/L NWQL

Phosmet, water, filtered, recoverable 61601 .0079 μg/L NWQL

Prometon, water, filtered, recoverable 04037 .01 μg/L NWQL

Prometryn, water, filtered, recoverable 04036 .0059 μg/L NWQL

Propyzamide, water, filtered (0.7-micron glass fiber filter), recoverable 82676 .004 μg/L NWQL

Simazine, water, filtered, recoverable 04035 .006 μg/L NWQL

Tebuthiuron, water, filtered (0.7-micron glass fiber filter), recoverable 82670 .016 μg/L NWQL

Terbufos oxygen analog sulfone, water, filtered, recoverable 61674 .045 μg/L NWQL

Terbufos, water, filtered (0.7-micron glass fiber filter), recoverable 82675 .012 μg/L NWQL

Terbuthylazine, water, filtered, recoverable 04022 .0083 μg/L NWQL

Dichlorvos, water, filtered, recoverable 38775 .013 μg/L NWQL

Table 3-9. Pesticides and degradates (Schedule 2003)—Continued

Analyzing laboratory: USGS–National Water Quality Laboratory, Denver, Colo. (NWQL)

[μg/L, microgram per liter]

Appendix 3. Water-quality properties and constituents, reporting levels, and analyzing laboratories—Continued.
Appendix 3 151

Appendix 3. Water-quality properties and constituents, reporting levels, and analyzing laboratories—Continued.

Table 3-10. Wastewater method compound names, suspected endocrine disruptors, possible compound uses, and method

 report limit s (Schedule 1433)

Analyzing laboratory: USGS–National Water Quality Laboratory, Denver, Colo. (NWQL)

[μg/L, microgram per liter; %, percent; >, greater than; PAH, polyaromatic hydrocarbon; UV, ultraviolet; bold compound names indicate known or 

suspected endocrine disruptors]

Compound name Parameter 

code

Reporting 

level

(μg/L)

Possible compound uses or sources

Acetophenone 62064 0.5 Fragrance in detergent and tobacco, flavor in beverages, PAH

Acetyl hexamethyl tetrahydro 

naphthalene (AHTN)

62065 .5 Musk fragrance, persistent and widespread in ground water, 

concern for bioaccumulation and toxicity

Anthracene 34221 .5 Wood preservative, component of tar, diesel, or crude oil, 

combustion product, PAH

9,10-Anthraquinone 62066 .5 Manufacturing dye/textiles, seed treatment, bird repellant

Benzo[a]pyrene 34248 .5 Regulated PAH, used in cancer research, combustion product

Benzophenone 62067 .5 Fixative for perfumes and soaps

Bisphenol A 62069 1 Manufacturing polycarbonate resins, antioxidant, flame retardant

Bromacil 04029 .5 Herbicide (general use pesticide), >80% noncrop use on grass/brush

3-tert-Butyl-4-hydroxyanisole (BHA) 62059 5 Antioxidant, general preservative

Caffeine 50305 .5 Beverages, diuretic, very mobile/biodegradable

Camphor 62070 .5 Flavor, odorant, ointments

Carbaryl 82680 1 Insecticide, crop and garden uses, low persistence

Carbazole 62071 .5 Insecticide, manufacturing dyes, explosives, and lubricants

Chlorpyrifos 38933 .005,

.007,

.008,

.009,

.011,

.012,

.013,

.015,

.016,

.022,

.026,

.028,

.5

Insecticide, domestic pest and termite control (domestic use 

restricted as of 2001)

Cholesterol 62072 2 Often a fecal indicator, also a plant sterol

3-beta-Coprostanol 62057 2 Carnivore fecal indicator

Cotinine 62005 1 Primary nicotine metabolite

4-Cumylphenol 62060 1 Nonionic detergent metabolite

Diazinon 39572 .005

.012,

.017,

.5

Insecticide, > 40% nonagricultural use, ants, flies

1,4-Dichlorobenzene 34572 0.5 Moth repellant, fumigant, deodorant

Dichlorvos 38775 .01,

1

Insecticide, pet collars, flies, also a degradate of naled or trichlofon

Diethoxynonylphenol (NPEO2) 62083 5 Nonionic detergent metabolite
152 Water-Quality Characteristics for Selected Sites within the Milwau kee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin

Table 3-10. Wastewater method compound names, suspected endocrine disruptors, possible compound uses, and method

 report limit s (Schedule 1433)—Continued

Analyzing laboratory: USGS–National Water Quality Laboratory, Denver, Colo. (NWQL)

[μg/L, microgram per liter; %, percent; >, greater than; PAH, polyaromatic hydrocarbon; UV, ultraviolet; bold compound names indicate known or 

suspected endocrine disruptors]

Appendix 3. Water-quality properties and constituents, reporting levels, and analyzing laboratories—Continued.

Compound name Parameter 

code

Reporting 

level

(μg/L)

Possible compound uses or sources

Diethoxyoctylphenol (OPEO2) 61705 1 Nonionic detergent metabolite

Ethoxyoctylphenol (OPEO1, 

monoethoxyoctylphenol) 

61706 1 Nonionic detergent metabolite

2,6-Dimethylnaphthalene 62055 0.5 Present in diesel/kerosene (trace in gasoline)

Fluoranthene 34377 .5 Component of coal tar and asphalt (only traces in gasoline or diesel 

fuel), combustion product, PAH

Hexahydrohexamethylcyclopentabenzopyran (HHCB)62075 .5 Musk fragrance, persistent and widespread, in ground water, 

concern for bioaccumulation and toxixity

Indole 62076 .5 Pesticide inert ingredient, fragrance in coffee

Isoborneol 62077 .5 Fragrance in perfumery, in disinfectants

Isophorone 34409 .5 Solvent for lacquer, plastic, oil, silicon, resin

Isopropylbenzene (cumene) 62078 .5 Manufacturing phenol/acetone, fuels and paint thinner

Isoquinoline 62079 .5 Flavors and fragrances

d-Limonene 62073 .5 Fungicide, antimicrobial, antiviral, fragrance in aerosols

Menthol 62080 .5 Cigarettes, cough drops, liniment, mouthwash

Metalaxyl 50359 .5 Herbicide, fungicide (general use pesticide), mildew, blight, 

pathogens, golf courses/turf

5-Methyl-1H-benzotriazole 62063 2 Antioxidant in antifreeze and deicers

3-Methyl-1H-indole (skatol) 62058 1 Fragrance, stench in feces and coal tar

1-Methylnaphthalene 62054 .5 2–5% of gasoline, diesel fuel, or crude oil

2-Methylnaphthalene 62056 .5 2–5% of gasoline, diesel fuel, or crude oil, PAH

Methyl salicylate 62081 .5 Liniment, food, beverage, UV-absorbing lotion

Metolachlor 39415 .5 Herbicide (general use pesticide), indicator of agricultural drainage

N,N-diethyl-meta-toluamide (DEET) 62082 .5 Insecticide, urban uses, mosquito repellent

Naphthalene 34443 .5 Fumigant, moth repellent, major component (about 10%) of 

gasoline, PAH

4-Nonylphenol, total 

(para-Nonylphenol, NP)

62085 5 Nonionic detergent metabolite

4-Octylphenol (4-normal-Octylphenol) 62061 1 Nonionic detergent metabolite

4-tert-Octylphenol 62062 1 Nonionic detergent metabolite

p-Cresol (para-Cresol) 62084 1 Wood preservative

Pentachlorophenol 34459 2 Herbicide, fungicide, wood preservative, termite control

Phenanthrene 34462 .5 Manufacturing explosives, component of tar, diesel fuel, or crude 

oil, combustion product, PAH

Phenol 34466 .5 Disinfectant, manufufacturing several products, leachate
Table 3-10. Wastewater method compound names, suspected endocrine disruptors, possible compound uses, and method

 report limit s (Schedule 1433)—Continued

Analyzing laboratory: USGS–National Water Quality Laboratory, Denver, Colo. (NWQL)

[μg/L, microgram per liter; %, percent; >, greater than; PAH, polyaromatic hydrocarbon; UV, ultraviolet; bold compound names indicate known or 

suspected endocrine disruptors]

Appendix 3 153

Appendix 3. Water-quality properties and constituents, reporting levels, and analyzing laboratories—Continued.

Compound name Parameter 

code

Reporting 

level

(μg/L)

Possible compound uses or sources

Prometon 04037 .5 Herbicide (noncrop only), applied prior to blacktop

Pyrene 34470 .5 Component of coal tar and asphalt (only traces in gasoline or 

diesel fuel), combustion product, PAH

beta-Sitosterol 62068 2,

20

Plant sterol

beta-Stigmastanol 62086 2,

20

Plant sterol

Tetrachloroethylene (TCE) 34476 0.5 Solvent, degreaser, veterinary anthelmintic

Tribromomethane (bromoform) 34288 .5 Wastewater ozination byproduct, military/explosives

Tributyl phosphate 62089 .5 Antifoaming agent, flame retardant

Triclosan 62090 1 Disinfectant, antimicrobial (concern for acquired microbial 

resistance)

Triethyl citrate (ethyl citrate) 62091 .5 Cosmetics, pharmaceuticals

Triphenyl phosphate 62092 .5 Plasticizer, resin, wax, finish, roofing paper, flame retardant

Tris(2-butoxyethyl) phosphate 62093 .5 Flame retardant

Tris(2-chloroethyl) phosphate 

(Fyrol CEF)

62087 .5 Plasticizer, flame retardant

Tris(dichloroisopropyl) phosphate 

(Fyrol FR 2)

62088 .5 Flame retardant
154 Water-Quality Characteristics for Selected Sites within the Milwau kee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin

Appendix 3. Water-quality properties and constituents, reporting levels, and analyzing laboratories—Continued.

Table 3-11. Analyses performed on semipermeable membrane device (SPMD) extracts

Analyzing laboratories: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Vicksburg, Miss.; USGS–Columbia Environmental Research

 Center, Columbia, Mo. (CERC); USGS–National Water Quality Laboratory, Denver, Colo. (NWQL)

[--, not available; pg TEQ/mL SPMD, picograms of 2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin per milliliter of SPMD extract; μg PAH/mL SPMD, micrograms of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons per milliliter of SPMD extract; mg eq SPMD/mL DSMO, milligram equivalent SPDM extract per milliliter 

dimethyl sulfoxide; ng/SPMD, nanograms per total SPMD; units for Microtox EC50 are for the 50-percent effective concentration]

Constituent Parameter 

code

Reporting 

level Reporting units Analyzing lab

Cytochrome P450RGS -- -- pg TEQ/mL SPMD U.S. Army Corps of Engineers

Fluoroscan -- -- ug PAH/mL SPMD CERC

Microtox EC50 -- -- mg eq SPMD/mL DSMO CERC

Anthracene -- 100 ng/SPMD NWQL

Fluoranthene -- 50 ng/SPMD NWQL

Fluorene -- 1 ng/SPMD NWQL

Naphthalene -- 25 ng/SPMD NWQL

1-Methylnaphthalene -- 25 ng/SPMD NWQL

2-Methylnaphthalene -- 38.4 ng/SPMD NWQL

2,6-Dimethylnaphthalene -- 25 ng/SPMD NWQL

Phenanthrene -- 50 ng/SPMD NWQL

Pyrene -- 50 ng/SPMD NWQL

Methyl pyrene -- 1 ng/SPMD NWQL

Benzo[a]pyrene -- 50 ng/SPMD NWQL
Table 3-12. Analyses performed on bed sediment

Analyzing laboratory: Wisconsin State Lab of Hygiene, Madison, Wis. (WSLH); University of Wisconsin Extension

 Soil and Plant Analysis Laborator, Madison, Wis. (UWE-SPAL)

[mg/kg, milligram per kilogram; μg/g, microgram per gram; --, not available]

Constituent Parameter 

code

Reporting 

level Reporting units Analyzing lab

Sand -- -- -- UWE-SPAL

Silt -- -- -- UWE-SPAL

Clay -- -- -- UWE-SPAL

Arsenic in sediment -- 1 mg/kg WSLH

Cadmium in sediment -- .1 mg/kg WSLH

Chromium in sediment -- .5 mg/kg WSLH

Copper in sediment -- .5 mg/kg WSLH

Lead in sediment -- 1 mg/kg WSLH

Mercury in sediment -- .015 mg/kg WSLH

Nickel in sediment -- .5 mg/kg WSLH

Total phosphorus in sediment -- 9.9 mg/kg WSLH

Zinc in sediment -- .5 mg/kg WSLH

Total PCBs in sediment -- .024 μg/g WSLH

Total organic carbon in sediment -- 2,270 μg/g WSLH

Appendix 3. Water-quality properties and constituents, reporting levels, and analyzing laboratories—Continued.

Appendix 3 155
156 Water-Quality Characteristics for Selected Sites within the Milwau kee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin

Table 3-13. Analyses performed on fish tissues

Analyzing laboratory: Wisconsin State Lab of Hygiene, Madison, Wis. (WSLH)

[%, percent; μg/g, microgram per gram; ww, wet weight; --, not available]

Constituent Parameter 

code

Reporting 

level Reporting units Analyzing lab

Water present, biota, tissue, recoverable 49273 -- % of water present WSLH

Chromium, biota, tissue, recoverable 63797 0.2 μg/g ww WSLH

Copper, biota, tissue, recoverable 63799 .06 μg/g ww WSLH

Lead, biota, tissue, recoverable 63800 .8 μg/g ww WSLH

Mercury, biota, tissue, recoverable 63792 .004 μg/g ww WSLH

Lipids, biota, whole organism, recoverable 49289 -- % ww WSLH

p,p’-DDE, biota, whole organism, recoverable 49372 .01 μg/g ww WSLH

p,p’-DDT, biota, whole organism, recoverable 49376 .01 μg/g ww WSLH

p,p’-DDD, biota, whole organism, recoverable 49375 .01 μg/g ww WSLH

PCBs, biota, whole organism, recoverable 49354 .04 μg/g ww WSLH

 Araclor-1261 -- .04 μg/g ww WSLH

 Araclor-1248/1254/1261 -- .04 μg/g ww WSLH

Appendix 3. Water-quality properties and constituents, reporting levels, and analyzing laboratories—Continued.
Appendix 3 157

Table 3-14. Bioassessment

Analyzing laboratories: University of Wisconsin–Stevens Point Aquatic Entomology Laboratory, Stevens Point,

 Wis. (UW–SP); USGS–National Water Quality Laboratory, Denver, Colo. (NWQL); Academy of Natural Sciences,

 Philadelphia, Pa.

[cm2, square centimeter; --, not available]

Constituent Parameter 

code

Reporting 

level Reporting units Analyzing lab

Fish -- -- number of individuals/taxon None (field)

Macroinvertebrates -- -- number of individuals/taxon UW–SP (samples from Little Menomonee 

River at Milwaukee and Honey Creek at 

Wauwatosa analyzed by NWQL)

Algae -- -- number of cells/taxon/cm2 Academy of Natural Sciences

Habitat -- -- various None (field)

Appendix 3. Water-quality properties and constituents, reporting levels, and analyzing laboratories—Continued.
158 Water-Quality Characteristics for Selected Sites within the Milwau kee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin Appendix 4. Assignment of season and flow conditions, by site and by sampling event, for Phase II sampling in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District (MMSD) planning area, Wisconsin, 2004–05. [QT, quarterly sample; mm/dd/yyyy, month/day/year; --, no data; see table 1 in the report for site abbreviations] 2004 Site abbreviation Winter QT Snowmelt Spring QT Summer QT Summer storm Fall QT Date (mm/dd/yyyy) Flow type Date (mm/dd/yyyy) Flow type Date (mm/dd/yyyy) Flow type Date (mm/dd/yyyy) Flow type Date (mm/dd/yyyy) Flow type Date (mm/dd/yyyy) Flow type MRC 02/18/2004 Low 3/6/2004 High 05/10/2004 High 07/27/2004 High 08/05/2004 Low 10/25/2004 High LCM 02/17/2004 High 3/5/2004 High 05/11/2004 Low 07/27/2004 Low 08/04/2004 Low 10/25/2004 Low MRM 02/17/2004 Low 3/6/2004 High 05/11/2004 High 07/27/2004 High 08/05/2004 Low 10/25/2004 High WCG 02/18/2004 Low 3/5/2004 High 05/10/2004 Low 07/26/2004 Low 08/04/2004 High 10/25/2004 Low MRMF 02/19/2004 Low 3/5/2004 High 05/11/2004 High 07/26/2004 Low 08/04/2004 Low 10/25/2004 Low LMM 02/18/2004 Low 3/5/2004 High 05/11/2004 High 07/26/2004 Low 08/04/2004 Low 10/26/2004 Low UCW 02/19/2004 Low 3/5/2004 High 05/10/2004 Low 07/26/2004 Low 08/04/2004 Low 10/26/2004 Low HCW 02/18/2004 High 3/5/2004 High 05/10/2004 Low 07/26/2004 Low 08/04/2004 Low 10/25/2004 Low MRW 02/19/2004 Low 3/5/2004 High 05/10/2004 Low 07/26/2004 Low 08/04/2004 Low 10/26/2004 Low KRM 02/18/2004 Low 3/5/2004 High 05/11/2004 Low 07/27/2004 Low 08/04/2004 Low 10/26/2004 Low MRJ 02/17/2004 Low 3/8/2004 High 05/10/2004 High 07/26/2004 High 08/05/2004 Low 10/25/2004 High OCSM 02/19/2004 Low 3/5/2004 High 05/11/2004 Low 07/26/2004 Low 08/04/2004 High 10/26/2004 Low RRG 02/18/2004 Low 3/5/2004 High 05/11/2004 Low 07/26/2004 Low 08/05/2004 Low 10/26/2004 Low RRF 02/17/2004 High 3/6/2004 High 05/11/2004 High 07/26/2004 Low 08/05/2004 High 10/25/2004 Low JCM 02/17/2004 Low 3/6/2004 Low 05/10/2004 Low 07/26/2004 Low 08/05/2004 Low 10/25/2004 Low OH-04 -- -- 3/8/2004 High 05/10/2004 High 07/26/2004 High 08/05/2004 High 10/25/2004 High OH-03 -- -- 3/8/2004 High 05/10/2004 High 07/26/2004 High 08/05/2004 High 10/25/2004 High OH-11 -- -- 3/8/2004 High 05/10/2004 High 07/26/2004 High 08/05/2004 High 10/25/2004 High OH-12 -- -- 3/9/2004 High 05/10/2004 High 07/26/2004 High 08/09/2004 High 10/25/2004 High OH-14 -- -- 3/9/2004 High 05/10/2004 High 07/26/2004 High 08/09/2004 High 10/25/2004 High OH-13 -- -- 3/9/2004 High 05/10/2004 High 07/26/2004 High 08/09/2004 High 10/25/2004 High
Appendix 4 159

Appendix 4. Assignment of season and flow conditions, by site and by sampling event, for Phase II sampling in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District (MMSD) planning area, Wisconsin, 2004–05—Continued.[QT, quarterly sample; mm/dd/yyyy, month/day/year; --, no data; see table 1 in the report for site abbreviations]

2005

Site 

abbreviation

Winter QT Ice out Spring QT Summer QT Summer storm Fall QT

Date

(mm/dd/yyyy) Flow type Date (mm/dd/yyyy) Flow type Date (mm/dd/yyyy) Flow type Date (mm/dd/yyyy) Flow type Date (mm/dd/yyyy) Flow type Date (mm/dd/yyyy) Flow type

MRC 02/07/2005 High 04/07/2005 High 05/10/2005 Low 7/5/2005 High 07/25/2005 Low 08/29/2005 LowLCM 02/07/2005 High 04/07/2005 Low 05/10/2005 Low 7/5/2005 Low 07/25/2005 Low 08/30/2005 LowMRM 02/07/2005 High 04/07/2005 High 05/10/2005 High 7/5/2005 High 07/25/2005 High 08/30/2005 LowWCG 02/07/2005 High 04/07/2005 High 05/10/2005 High 7/5/2005 Low 07/25/2005 Low 08/29/2005 LowMRMF 02/07/2005 High 04/07/2005 High 05/10/2005 Low 7/5/2005 High 07/25/2005 Low 08/29/2005 LowLMM 02/08/2005 High 04/07/2005 Low 05/10/2005 Low 7/5/2005 Low 07/25/2005 Low 08/29/2005 LowUCW 02/08/2005 Low 04/07/2005 High 05/11/2005 High 7/5/2005 Low 07/26/2005 Low 08/30/2005 LowHCW 02/07/2005 High 04/07/2005 Low 05/11/2005 High 7/5/2005 Low 07/26/2005 Low 08/30/2005 LowMRW 02/08/2005 High 04/07/2005 High 05/11/2005 High 7/5/2005 High 07/26/2005 High 08/30/2005 LowKRM 02/08/2005 Low 04/07/2005 Low 05/11/2005 High 7/5/2005 Low 07/26/2005 Low 08/29/2005 LowMRJ 02/08/2005 High 04/07/2005 High 05/10/2005 High 7/5/2005 High 07/25/2005 High 08/29/2005 LowOCSM 02/08/2005 High 04/07/2005 High 05/11/2005 High 7/5/2005 Low 07/26/2005 Low 08/29/2005 LowRRG 02/07/2005 High 04/07/2005 High 05/10/2005 Low 7/5/2005 Low 07/25/2005 Low 08/29/2005 LowRRF 02/07/2005 High 04/07/2005 High 05/10/2005 High 7/5/2005 High 07/25/2005 Low 08/29/2005 LowJCM 02/07/2005 High 04/07/2005 High 05/10/2005 Low 7/5/2005 Low 07/25/2005 Low 08/29/2005 LowOH-04 -- -- 04/07/2005 High 05/10/2005 Low 7/5/2005 High 07/25/2005 High 08/29/2005 HighOH-03 -- -- 04/07/2005 High 05/10/2005 Low 7/5/2005 High 07/25/2005 High 08/29/2005 HighOH-11 -- -- 04/07/2005 High 05/10/2005 Low 7/5/2005 High 07/25/2005 High 08/29/2005 HighOH-12 -- -- -- -- 05/10/2005 Low 7/5/2005 High 07/25/2005 High 08/29/2005 HighOH-14 -- -- -- -- 05/10/2005 Low 7/5/2005 High 07/25/2005 High 08/29/2005 HighOH-13 -- -- -- -- 05/10/2005 Low 7/5/2005 High 07/25/2005 High 08/29/2005 High
160 Water-Quality Characteristics for Selected Sites within the Milwau kee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin

Appendix 5. Comparison of median constituent concentrations and detections between Phase I and Phase II of 

the MMSD Corridor Study

[mg/L, milligram per liter; mg/m3, milligram per cubic meter; CFU/100ml, colony-forming unit per 100 milliliters; μg/g, microgram per gram; 

mg/kg, milligram per kilogram; PCB, polychlorinated biphenyl; EPT, Ephemeroptera, Plecoptera, and Trichoptera; HBI, Hilsenhoff Biotic Index; 

μg/L, microgram per liter; --, no data; RL, concentrations were below reporting level; *, fewer than 50 individual fish were collected, so the Wisconsin 

warmwater Index of Biotic Integrity should not be used (Lyons, 1992)]

Phase I Phase II

Subwatersheds Site name Site 

number

Site 

abbreviation

Fox River Watershed

 Muskego Lake Jewel Creek at Muskego 05544371 JCM

Kinnickinnic River Watershed

 Kinnickinnic River Kinnickinnic River at S. 11th Street at Milwaukee 04087159 KRM

Menomonee River Watershed

 Honey Creek Honey Creek at Wauwatosa 04087119 HCW

 Little Menomonee River Little Menomonee River at Milwaukee 04087070 LMM

 Lower Menomonee River Menomonee River at Wauwatosa 04087120 MRW

 Upper Menomonee River Menomonee River at Menomonee Falls 04087030 MRMF

 Underwood Creek Underwood Creek at Wauwatosa 04087088 UCW

 Willow Creek Willow Creek at Maple Road near Germantown 040870195 WCG

Milwaukee River Watershed

 Lincoln Creek Lincoln Creek at 47th Street at Milwaukee 040869415 LCM

 Lower Milwaukee River1 Milwaukee River near Cedarburg1 04086600 MRC1

Milwaukee River at Milwaukee1 04087000 MRM1

Milwaukee River at Mouth at Milwaukee1 04087170 MRJ1

Oak Creek Watershed

 Lower Oak Creek Oak Creek at South Milwaukee 04087204 OCSM

Root River Watershed

 Middle Root River Root River near Franklin 04087220 RRF

 Upper Root River Root River at Grange Avenue at Greenfield 04087214 RRG

1Three of the Phase II sites sampled were in the Lower Milwaukee River Subwatershed. Comparisons could be drawn individually between each site 

and the Phase I subwatershed; however, for the discussion in the text, these three sites were not considered adequately representative of that subwatershed 

due to their location and the size and complexity of the subwatershed. Comparisons of these sites to the subwatershed were omitted when discussing 

overall trends between Phase I and Phase II data in the text; however, contamination of this subwatershed with synthetic organic contaminants (especially 

PCBs) was well documented and was discussed in general terms using the data from the Milwaukee River at Milwaukee site.

2Values given as median concentrations.

3Phase I concentrations were originally published in micrograms per gram, which is equivalent to milligrams per kilogram.

4Values given as total number of fish species.

5Phase I values given as median IBI scores for 1990–2002. Phase II IBI scores were determined from a single community survey.

6Phase I values given as median percentages of EPT taxa. Phase II percentages of EPT taxa were determined from a single community survey.

7Phase I values given as median HBI values. Phase II HBI-10 values were determined from a single community survey.
Appendix 5 161

Chloride Total nitrogen Nitrate Total phosphorus

Phase I 2

(mg/L)

Phase II 2

(mg/L)

Percent 

difference

Phase I 2

(mg/L)

Phase II 2

(mg/L)

Percent 

difference

Phase I 2

(mg/L)

Phase II 2

(mg/L)

Percent 

difference

Phase I 2

(mg/L)

Phase II 2

(mg/L)

Percent 

difference

-- 136 -- 1.27 1.26 -1 0.1 0.835 735 0.075 0.062 -17

54 210 289 1.39 1.14 -18 .47 .460 -2 .07 .148 111

-- 260 -- .33 1.28 288 .17 .605 256 .04 .15 275

-- 104 -- 3.32 1.43 -57 .01 .545 5,350 .01 .152 1,420

75 175 133 1.58 1.17 -26 .52 .560 8 .1 .113 13

90 138 53 1.56 1.04 -33 .64 .370 -42 .09 .1 11

-- 295 -- -- 1.17 -- RL .410 -- -- .085 --

50 107 114 1.85 1.38 -25 .78 .860 10 .067 .068 1

104 246 137 1.24 .98 -21 .45 .265 -41 .1 .163 63

42 75.9 81 1.68 2.14 27 .59 1.40 137 .1 .120 20

91.9 119 1.89 13 1.17 98 .133 33

54.9 31 1.22 -27 .610 3 .061 -39

135 208 54 1.2 1.24 3 .47 .500 6 .06 .079 32

135 144 7 1.19 1.28 8 .14 .545 289 .061 .092 51

190 246 29 1.44 1.34 -7 .47 .525 12 .1 .113 13
162 Water-Quality Characteristics for Selected Sites within the Milwau kee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin

Appendix 5. Comparison of median constituent concentrations and detections between Phase I and Phase II of 

the MMSD Corridor Study—Continued.

[mg/L, milligram per liter; mg/m3, milligram per cubic meter; CFU/100ml, colony-forming unit per 100 milliliters; μg/g, microgram per gram; 

mg/kg, milligram per kilogram; PCB, polychlorinated biphenyl; EPT, Ephemeroptera, Plecoptera, and Trichoptera; HBI, Hilsenhoff Biotic Index; 

μg/L, microgram per liter; --, no data; RL, concentrations were below reporting level; *, fewer than 50 individual fish were collected, so the Wisconsin 

warmwater Index of Biotic Integrity should not be used (Lyons, 1992)]

Phase I Phase II Chlorophyll a Suspended sediment

Subwatersheds Site 

abbreviation

Phase I 2

(mg/m3)

Phase II 2

(mg/m3)

Percent 

difference

Phase I 2

(mg/L)

Phase II 2

(mg/L)

Percent 

difference

Fox River Watershed

 Muskego Lake JCM -- 10.3 -- 39 28 -28

Kinnickinnic River Watershed

 Kinnickinnic River KRM 4.62 5.06 10 356 12 -97

Menomonee River Watershed

 Honey Creek HCW -- 6.76 -- 193 10 -95

 Little Menomonee River LMM -- 5.96 -- 178 26 -85

 Lower Menomonee River MRW 5.99 7.80 30 127 14 -89

 Upper Menomonee River MRMF 5.67 8.45 49 40 10 -75

 Underwood Creek UCW -- 5.34 -- 234 6.5 -97

 Willow Creek WCG -- 2.66 -- -- 18 --

Milwaukee River Watershed

 Lincoln Creek LCM 5.07 4.66 -8 25 5.5 -78

 Lower Milwaukee River1 MRC1 11.7 13.4 15 28 11 -61

MRM1 10.2 -13 15 -46

MRJ1 5.77 -51 4 -86

Oak Creek Watershed

 Lower Oak Creek OCSM 3.74 3.52 -6 58 18 -69

Root River Watershed

 Middle Root River RRF 7.17 4.70 -34 62 22 -65

 Upper Root River RRG 1.46 1.34 -8 204 14 -93

1Three of the Phase II sites sampled were in the Lower Milwaukee River Subwatershed. Comparisons could be drawn individually between each site 

and the Phase I subwatershed; however, for the discussion in the text, these three sites were not considered adequately representative of that subwatershed 

due to their location and the size and complexity of the subwatershed. Comparisons of these sites to the subwatershed were omitted when discussing 

overall trends between Phase I and Phase II data in the text; however, contamination of this subwatershed with synthetic organic contaminants (especially 

PCBs) was well documented and was discussed in general terms using the data from the Milwaukee River at Milwaukee site.

2Values given as median concentrations.

3Phase I concentrations were originally published in micrograms per gram, which is equivalent to milligrams per kilogram.

4Values given as total number of fish species.

5Phase I values given as median IBI scores for 1990–2002. Phase II IBI scores were determined from a single community survey.

6Phase I values given as median percentages of EPT taxa. Phase II percentages of EPT taxa were determined from a single community survey.

7Phase I values given as median HBI values. Phase II HBI-10 values were determined from a single community survey.
Appendix 5 163

Fecal coliform Escherichia coli

Arsenic 

in sediment 3

(mg/kg)

Cadmium 

in sediment 3

(mg/kg)

Phase I 2

(CFU/100mL)

Phase II 2

(CFU/100mL)

Percent 

difference

Phase I 2

(CFU/100mL)

Phase II 2

(MPN/100mL)

Percent 

difference Phase I 2 Phase II 2 Phase I 2 Phase II 2

RL 165 -- -- 185 -- -- 10 0.4 RL

930 610 -34 780 995 28 6.1 8.5 4.4 0.6

16,650 1,900 -89 2,400 2,000 -17 -- 5.0 -- .7

-- 620 -- -- 820 -- 6 12.0 4 .9

2,300 575 -75 915 725 -21 7 RL 3.9 1.1

430 305 -29 300 355 18 4 6.0 2 1.0

20,000 660 -97 -- 805 -- -- 6.0 -- RL

-- 695 -- -- 750 -- -- 7.5 -- .9

1,500 575 -62 1,300 840 -35 4 5.0 2 .8

460 130 -72 220 43.5 -80 5.1 6.0 3 1.0

170 -63 215 -2 5.5 .7

55 -88 56.5 -74 12 3.5

750 505 -33 -- 565 -- -- 5.0 -- RL

230 240 4 -- 225 -- 2 9.0 1 1.5

750 610 -19 -- 770 -- -- 8.0 -- 1.4
164 Water-Quality Characteristics for Selected Sites within the Milwau kee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin

Appendix 5. Comparison of median constituent concentrations and detections between Phase I and Phase II of 

the MMSD Corridor Study—Continued.

[mg/L, milligram per liter; mg/m3, milligram per cubic meter; CFU/100ml, colony-forming unit per 100 milliliters; μg/g, microgram per gram; 

mg/kg, milligram per kilogram; PCB, polychlorinated biphenyl; EPT, Ephemeroptera, Plecoptera, and Trichoptera; HBI, Hilsenhoff Biotic Index; 

μg/L, microgram per liter; --, no data; RL, concentrations were below reporting level; *, fewer than 50 individual fish were collected, so the Wisconsin 

warmwater Index of Biotic Integrity should not be used (Lyons, 1992)]

Phase I Phase II

Chromium 

in sediment 3

(mg/kg)

Copper 

in sediment 3

(mg/kg)

Lead 

in sediment 3

(mg/kg)

Subwatersheds Site 

abbreviation Phase I 2 Phase II 2 Phase I 2 Phase II 2 Phase I 2 Phase II 2

Fox River Watershed

 Muskego Lake JCM -- 15 -- 27 6.5 19

Kinnickinnic River Watershed

 Kinnickinnic River KRM 330 23 74.5 82 271 54

Menomonee River Watershed

 Honey Creek HCW -- 29 -- 57 4,100 39

 Little Menomonee River LMM 70 19 140 38 260 38

 Lower Menomonee River MRW 162 8.1 140 9.0 225 44

 Upper Menomonee River MRMF 30 15 37 17 45 32

 Underwood Creek UCW -- 24 -- 29 -- 120

 Willow Creek WCG -- 11 -- 20 -- 13

Milwaukee River Watershed

 Lincoln Creek LCM 20 17 39 36 80 28

 Lower Milwaukee River1 MRC1 117 9.3 69 13 150 13

MRM1 16 17 43

MRJ1 94 73 89

Oak Creek Watershed

 Lower Oak Creek OCSM -- 12 -- 15 -- 12

Root River Watershed

 Middle Root River RRF 8 12 -- 15 30 10

 Upper Root River RRG -- 13 -- 24 -- 25

1Three of the Phase II sites sampled were in the Lower Milwaukee River Subwatershed. Comparisons could be drawn individually between each site 

and the Phase I subwatershed; however, for the discussion in the text, these three sites were not considered adequately representative of that subwatershed 

due to their location and the size and complexity of the subwatershed. Comparisons of these sites to the subwatershed were omitted when discussing 

overall trends between Phase I and Phase II data in the text; however, contamination of this subwatershed with synthetic organic contaminants (especially 

PCBs) was well documented and was discussed in general terms using the data from the Milwaukee River at Milwaukee site.

2Values given as median concentrations.

3Phase I concentrations were originally published in micrograms per gram, which is equivalent to milligrams per kilogram.

4Values given as total number of fish species.

5Phase I values given as median IBI scores for 1990–2002. Phase II IBI scores were determined from a single community survey.

6Phase I values given as median percentages of EPT taxa. Phase II percentages of EPT taxa were determined from a single community survey.

7Phase I values given as median HBI values. Phase II HBI-10 values were determined from a single community survey.
Appendix 5 165

Mercury 

in sediment 3

(mg/kg)

Nickel 

in sediment 3

(mg/kg)

Zinc 

in sediment 3

(mg/kg)

Phase I PCBs in sediment Phase II 

total PCBs 

in sediment 2

Phase I 2 Phase II 2 Phase I 2 Phase II 2 Phase I 2 Phase II 2 (mg/kg)

Total 

number 

of results

Number 

of results 

below RL

Number of 

results at 

or above RL

Percent of 

results at 

or above RL

-- 0.06 -- 18 -- 95 -- -- -- -- 0.02

0.2 .52 30 18 540 430 1,705 77 1,628 95 --

-- .04 -- 10 -- 180 -- -- -- -- .04

.2 .07 40 16 540 190 1 1 0 0 .06

.46 .03 29 6.0 503 39 179 104 75 42 .12

.12 .04 20 10 140 78 6 4 2 33 .02

-- .03 -- 10 -- 150 -- -- -- -- .04

-- .06 -- 11 -- 76 -- -- -- -- .03

.07 .06 30 10 160 150 12 6 6 50 .03

.27 .08 23 7.0 318 53 2,968 204 2,764 93 .28

.04 9.0 92 1.0

.29 20 260 1.1

-- .02 -- 6.0 -- 42 -- -- -- -- .03

.02 .05 -- 14 52 54 -- -- -- -- RL

-- .04 -- 9.0 -- 87 -- -- -- -- .05
166 Water-Quality Characteristics for Selected Sites within the Milwau kee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin

Appendix 5. Comparison of median constituent concentrations and detections between Phase I and Phase II of 

the MMSD Corridor Study—Continued.

[mg/L, milligram per liter; mg/m3, milligram per cubic meter; CFU/100ml, colony-forming unit per 100 milliliters; μg/g, microgram per gram; 

mg/kg, milligram per kilogram; PCB, polychlorinated biphenyl; EPT, Ephemeroptera, Plecoptera, and Trichoptera; HBI, Hilsenhoff Biotic Index; 

μg/L, microgram per liter; --, no data; RL, concentrations were below reporting level; *, fewer than 50 individual fish were collected, so the Wisconsin 

warmwater Index of Biotic Integrity should not be used (Lyons, 1992)]

Phase I Phase II Phase I pesticides in tissues

Phase II pesticides 

detected in tissues

Subwatersheds Site 

abbreviation

Total number 

of results

Number 

of results 

below RL

Number 

of results at 

or above RL

Percent 

of results at 

or above RL

Fox River Watershed

 Muskego Lake JCM -- -- -- -- --

Kinnickinnic River Watershed

 Kinnickinnic River KRM 111 111 0 0 --

Menomonee River Watershed

 Honey Creek HCW 8 8 0 0 --

 Little Menomonee River LMM 7 7 0 0 --

 Lower Menomonee River MRW 32 32 0 0 p-p’-DDE and p-p’-DDD

 Upper Menomonee River MRMF -- -- -- -- --

 Underwood Creek UCW -- -- -- -- --

 Willow Creek WCG -- -- -- -- --

Milwaukee River Watershed

 Lincoln Creek LCM 63 63 0 0 --

 Lower Milwaukee River1 MRC1 296 292 4 1 --

MRM1 p-p’-DDE 

MRJ1 --

Oak Creek Watershed

 Lower Oak Creek OCSM 28 28 0 0 --

Root River Watershed

 Middle Root River RRF 6 6 0 0 no pesticides detected

 Upper Root River RRG -- -- -- -- --

1Three of the Phase II sites sampled were in the Lower Milwaukee River Subwatershed. Comparisons could be drawn individually between each site 

and the Phase I subwatershed; however, for the discussion in the text, these three sites were not considered adequately representative of that subwatershed 

due to their location and the size and complexity of the subwatershed. Comparisons of these sites to the subwatershed were omitted when discussing 

overall trends between Phase I and Phase II data in the text; however, contamination of this subwatershed with synthetic organic contaminants (especially 

PCBs) was well documented and was discussed in general terms using the data from the Milwaukee River at Milwaukee site.

2Values given as median concentrations.

3Phase I concentrations were originally published in micrograms per gram, which is equivalent to milligrams per kilogram.

4Values given as total number of fish species.

5Phase I values given as median IBI scores for 1990–2002. Phase II IBI scores were determined from a single community survey.

6Phase I values given as median percentages of EPT taxa. Phase II percentages of EPT taxa were determined from a single community survey.

7Phase I values given as median HBI values. Phase II HBI-10 values were determined from a single community survey.
Appendix 5 167

Phase I PCBs in tissues

Phase II 

PCB detected 

in tissues

Fish species abundance

Phase I 4 Phase II 4

Total number 

of results

Number of 

results 

below RL

Number of 

results at or 

above RL

Percent of 

results at 

or above RL

1970–1979 1980–1989 1990-2002 2004

-- -- -- -- -- 37 -- -- 15

1 1 0 0 -- 12 6 13 1

-- -- -- -- -- 5 14 13 6

7 7 0 0 -- 8 12 -- 5

5 5 0 0 Aroclor 1260 13 18 26 3

2 2 0 0 -- 19 26 -- 13

-- -- -- -- -- 4 12 11 8

-- -- -- -- -- 12 12 -- 6

4 0 4 100 -- 13 23 8 8

15 1 14 93 -- 40 49 54 22

Aroclor 1248/

1254/1260

18

-- --

1 1 0 0 -- 7 9 10 7

1 1 0 0 no PCBs detected 24 13 5 12

-- -- -- -- -- 6 -- -- 9
168 Water-Quality Characteristics for Selected Sites within the Milwau kee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin

Appendix 5. Comparison of median constituent concentrations and detections between Phase I and Phase II of 

the MMSD Corridor Study—Continued.

[mg/L, milligram per liter; mg/m3, milligram per cubic meter; CFU/100ml, colony-forming unit per 100 milliliters; μg/g, microgram per gram; 

mg/kg, milligram per kilogram; PCB, polychlorinated biphenyl; EPT, Ephemeroptera, Plecoptera, and Trichoptera; HBI, Hilsenhoff Biotic Index; 

μg/L, microgram per liter; --, no data; RL, concentrations were below reporting level; *, fewer than 50 individual fish were collected, so the Wisconsin 

warmwater Index of Biotic Integrity should not be used (Lyons, 1992)]

Phase I Phase II Fish Index of 

Biotic Integrity

Macroinvertebrate EPT 

(percent of EPT taxa)

Macroinvertebrate 

HBI

Subwatersheds Site 

abbreviation Phase I 5 Phase II 5 Phase I 6 Phase II 6 Phase I 7

(HBI score)

Phase II 7

(HBI-10 

score)

Fox River Watershed

 Muskego Lake JCM -- 22 26 29 5.8 5.58

Kinnickinnic River Watershed

 Kinnickinnic River KRM 20 * 0 7 6.11 6.52

Menomonee River Watershed

 Honey Creek HCW 20 7 17 17 6.15 5.28

 Little Menomonee River LMM -- * 0 23 8 5.33

 Lower Menomonee River MRW 15 12 8 31 6.21 5.86

 Upper Menomonee River MRMF -- 30 28 44 5.68 5.56

 Underwood Creek UCW 15 10 2 18 6.1 5.96

 Willow Creek WCG -- 25 12 17 4.87 5.45

Milwaukee River Watershed

 Lincoln Creek LCM 10 * 0 18 6.2 6.3

 Lower Milwaukee River1 MRC1 62 70 19 51 5.72 5.01

MRM1 60 39 5.2

MRJ1 -- -- --

Oak Creek Watershed

 Lower Oak Creek OCSM 17 10 24 22 6.64 5.55

Root River Watershed

 Middle Root River RRF -- 14 50 28 6.29 5.92

 Upper Root River RRG -- 12 3 18 7.13 6.15

1Three of the Phase II sites sampled were in the Lower Milwaukee River Subwatershed. Comparisons could be drawn individually between each site 

and the Phase I subwatershed; however, for the discussion in the text, these three sites were not considered adequately representative of that subwatershed 

due to their location and the size and complexity of the subwatershed. Comparisons of these sites to the subwatershed were omitted when discussing 

overall trends between Phase I and Phase II data in the text; however, contamination of this subwatershed with synthetic organic contaminants (especially 

PCBs) was well documented and was discussed in general terms using the data from the Milwaukee River at Milwaukee site.

2Values given as median concentrations.

3Phase I concentrations were originally published in micrograms per gram, which is equivalent to milligrams per kilogram.

4Values given as total number of fish species.

5Phase I values given as median IBI scores for 1990–2002. Phase II IBI scores were determined from a single community survey.

6Phase I values given as median percentages of EPT taxa. Phase II percentages of EPT taxa were determined from a single community survey.

7Phase I values given as median HBI values. Phase II HBI-10 values were determined from a single community survey.
Appendix 6. Hydrologic conditions during Phase II of the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District (MMSD) 

Corridor Study.

Figure 6-1. Milwaukee River near Cedarburg.

Oct. 1,

2003

Nov. 1,

2003

Dec. 1,

2003

Jan. 1,

2004

Feb. 1,

2004

Mar. 1,

2004

Apr. 1,

2004

May 1,

2004

June 1,

2004

July 1,

2004

Aug. 1,

2004

Sept. 1,

2004

Oct. 1,

2004

Nov. 1,

2004

Dec. 1,

2004

Jan. 1,

2005

Feb. 1,

2005

Mar. 1,

2005

Apr. 1,

2005

May 1,

2005

June 1,

2005

July 1,

2005

Aug. 1,

2005

Sept. 1,

2005

MEAN DAILY DISCHARGE,

IN CUBIC FEET PER SECOND

MEAN DAILY DISCHARGE,

IN CUBIC FEET PER SECOND

Milwaukee River near Cedarburg, water year 2004

Milwaukee River near Cedarburg, water year 2005

1

10

100

1,000

10,000

1

10

100

1,000

10,000 Sample collection day

Water year 2004 annual mean

Period of record annual mean

Sample collection day

Water year 2005 annual mean

Period of record annual mean

Appendix 6A. Water-discharge hydrographs for water years 2004–2005 at the 12 Phase II stream sites with gages in the 

Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District (MMSD) planning area. Period of record annual mean does not include data from the 2004

and 2005 water years.

Appendix 6 169
170 Water-Quality Characteristics for Selected Sites within the Milwau kee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin

Figure 6-2. Lincoln Creek at 47th Street at Milwaukee. A period of record annual mean is not provided for this site because it 

has less than 20 years of hydrologic data. 

Oct. 1,

2003

Nov. 1,

2003

Dec. 1,

2003

Jan. 1,

2004

Feb. 1,

2004

Mar. 1,

2004

Apr. 1,

2004

May 1,

2004

June 1,

2004

July 1,

2004

Aug. 1,

2004

Sept. 1,

2004

Oct. 1,

2004

Nov. 1,

2004

Dec. 1,

2004

Jan. 1,

2005

Feb. 1,

2005

Mar. 1,

2005

Apr. 1,

2005

May 1,

2005

June 1,

2005

July 1,

2005

Aug. 1,

2005

Sept. 1,

2005

MEAN DAILY DISCHARGE,

IN CUBIC FEET PER SECOND

MEAN DAILY DISCHARGE,

IN CUBIC FEET PER SECOND

Lincoln Creek at Sherman Boulevard at Milwaukee, water year 2004

Lincoln Creek at Sherman Boulevard at Milwaukee, water year 20051

0.01

1.00

0.10

10.00

100.00

1,000.00

0.01

1.00

0.10

10.00

100.00

1,000.00

1Data for water year 2005 at this site are provisional. These data have not undergone data-quality checks to correct for ice-affected records. These records 

have been removed from the discharge hydrograph.

Sample collection day

Water year 2004 annual mean

Sample collection day

Water year 2005 annual mean

Appendix 6A. Water-discharge hydrographs for water years 2004–2005 at the 12 Phase II stream sites with gages in the 

Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District (MMSD) planning area—Continued.
Figure 6-3. Milwaukee River at Milwaukee.

Oct. 1,

2003

Nov. 1,

2003

Dec. 1,

2003

Jan. 1,

2004

Feb. 1,

2004

Mar. 1,

2004

Apr. 1,

2004

May 1,

2004

June 1,

2004

July 1,

2004

Aug. 1,

2004

Sept. 1,

2004

Oct. 1,

2004

Nov. 1,

2004

Dec. 1,

2004

Jan. 1,

2005

Feb. 1,

2005

Mar. 1,

2005

Apr. 1,

2005

May 1,

2005

June 1,

2005

July 1,

2005

Aug. 1,

2005

Sept. 1,

2005

MEAN DAILY DISCHARGE,

IN CUBIC FEET PER SECOND

MEAN DAILY DISCHARGE,

IN CUBIC FEET PER SECOND

Milwaukee River at Milwaukee, water year 2004

Milwaukee River at Milwaukee, water year 2005

1

10

100

1,000

10,000

1

10

100

1,000

10,000

Sample collection day

Water year 2004 annual mean

Period of record annual mean

Sample collection day

Water year 2005 annual mean

Period of record annual mean

Appendix 6A. Water-discharge hydrographs for water years 2004–2005 at the 12 Phase II stream sites with gages in the 

Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District (MMSD) planning area—Continued. Period of record annual mean does not include data 

from the 2004 and 2005 water years.

Appendix 6 171
172 Water-Quality Characteristics for Selected Sites within the Milwau kee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin

Figure 6-4. Menomonee River at Menomonee Falls.

Oct. 1,

2003

Nov. 1,

2003

Dec. 1,

2003

Jan. 1,

2004

Feb. 1,

2004

Mar. 1,

2004

Apr. 1,

2004

May 1,

2004

June 1,

2004

July 1,

2004

Aug. 1,

2004

Sept. 1,

2004

Oct. 1,

2004

Nov. 1,

2004

Dec. 1,

2004

Jan. 1,

2005

Feb. 1,

2005

Mar. 1,

2005

Apr. 1,

2005

May 1,

2005

June 1,

2005

July 1,

2005

Aug. 1,

2005

Sept. 1,

2005

MEAN DAILY DISCHARGE,

IN CUBIC FEET PER SECOND

MEAN DAILY DISCHARGE,

IN CUBIC FEET PER SECOND

Menomonee River at Menomonee Falls, water year 2004

Menomonee River at Menomonee Falls, water year 2005

1

10

100

1,000

1

10

100

1,000

Sample collection day

Water year 2004 annual mean

Period of record annual mean

Sample collection day

Water year 2005 annual mean

Period of record annual mean

Appendix 6A. Water-discharge hydrographs for water years 2004–2005 at the 12 Phase II stream sites with gages in the 

Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District (MMSD) planning area—Continued. Period of record annual mean does not include data 

from the 2004 and 2005 water years.
Figure 6-5. Little Menomonee River at Milwaukee. Prior to the addition of a gage at this site in April of 2004, current-meter 

discharge measurements were made during water-quality sampling. A period of record annual mean is not provided for this site 

because it has less than 20 years of hydrologic data.

Oct. 1,

2003

Nov. 1,

2003

Dec. 1,

2003

Jan. 1,

2004

Feb. 1,

2004

Mar. 1,

2004

Apr. 1,

2004

May 1,

2004

June 1,

2004

July 1,

2004

Aug. 1,

2004

Sept. 1,

2004

Oct. 1,

2004

Nov. 1,

2004

Dec. 1,

2004

Jan. 1,

2005

Feb. 1,

2005

Mar. 1,

2005

Apr. 1,

2005

May 1,

2005

June 1,

2005

July 1,

2005

Aug. 1,

2005

Sept. 1,

2005

MEAN DAILY DISCHARGE,

IN CUBIC FEET PER SECOND

MEAN DAILY DISCHARGE,

IN CUBIC FEET PER SECOND

Little Menomonee River at Milwaukee, water year 2004

Little Menomonee River at Milwaukee, water year 2005

0.01

1.00

0.10

10.00

100.00

1,000.00

0.01

1.00

0.10

10.00

100.00

1,000.00

Sample collection day

Water year 2004 annual mean

Sample collection day

Water year 2005 annual mean

Appendix 6A. Water-discharge hydrographs for water years 2004–2005 at the 12 Phase II stream sites with gages in the 

Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District (MMSD) planning area—Continued.

Appendix 6 173
174 Water-Quality Characteristics for Selected Sites within the Milwau kee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin

Figure 6-6. Underwood Creek at Wauwatosa.

Oct. 1,

2003

Nov. 1,

2003

Dec. 1,

2003

Jan. 1,

2004

Feb. 1,

2004

Mar. 1,

2004

Apr. 1,

2004

May 1,

2004

June 1,

2004

July 1,

2004

Aug. 1,

2004

Sept. 1,

2004

Oct. 1,

2004

Nov. 1,

2004

Dec. 1,

2004

Jan. 1,

2005

Feb. 1,

2005

Mar. 1,

2005

Apr. 1,

2005

May 1,

2005

June 1,

2005

July 1,

2005

Aug. 1,

2005

Sept. 1,

2005

MEAN DAILY DISCHARGE,

IN CUBIC FEET PER SECOND

MEAN DAILY DISCHARGE,

IN CUBIC FEET PER SECOND

Underwood Creek at Wauwatosa, water year 2004

Underwood Creek at Wauwatosa, water year 2005

1

10

100

1,000

1

10

100

1,000 Sample collection day

Water year 2004 annual mean

Period of record annual mean

Sample collection day

Water year 2005 annual mean

Period of record annual mean

Appendix 6A. Water-discharge hydrographs for water years 2004–2005 at the 12 Phase II stream sites with gages in the 

Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District (MMSD) planning area—Continued. Period of record annual mean does not include data 

from the 2004 and 2005 water years.
Figure 6-7. Honey Creek at Wauwatosa. Prior to the addition of a gage at this site in April of 2004, current-meter discharge 

measurements were made during water-quality sampling. A period of record annual mean is not provided for this site because it 

has less than 20 years of hydrologic data.

Oct. 1,

2003

Nov. 1,

2003

Dec. 1,

2003

Jan. 1,

2004

Feb. 1,

2004

Mar. 1,

2004

Apr. 1,

2004

May 1,

2004

June 1,

2004

July 1,

2004

Aug. 1,

2004

Sept. 1,

2004

Oct. 1,

2004

Nov. 1,

2004

Dec. 1,

2004

Jan. 1,

2005

Feb. 1,

2005

Mar. 1,

2005

Apr. 1,

2005

May 1,

2005

June 1,

2005

July 1,

2005

Aug. 1,

2005

Sept. 1,

2005

MEAN DAILY DISCHARGE,

IN CUBIC FEET PER SECOND

MEAN DAILY DISCHARGE,

IN CUBIC FEET PER SECOND

Honey Creek at Wauwatosa, water year 2004

Honey Creek at Wauwatosa, water year 2005

1

10

100

1,000

1

10

100

1,000

Sample collection day

Water year 2004 annual mean

Sample collection day

Water year 2005 annual mean

Appendix 6A. Water-discharge hydrographs for water years 2004–2005 at the 12 Phase II stream sites with gages in the 

Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District (MMSD) planning area—Continued.

Appendix 6 175
176 Water-Quality Characteristics for Selected Sites within the Milwau kee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin

Figure 6-8. Menomonee River at Wauwatosa.

Oct. 1,

2003

Nov. 1,

2003

Dec. 1,

2003

Jan. 1,

2004

Feb. 1,

2004

Mar. 1,

2004

Apr. 1,

2004

May 1,

2004

June 1,

2004

July 1,

2004

Aug. 1,

2004

Sept. 1,

2004

Oct. 1,

2004

Nov. 1,

2004

Dec. 1,

2004

Jan. 1,

2005

Feb. 1,

2005

Mar. 1,

2005

Apr. 1,

2005

May 1,

2005

June 1,

2005

July 1,

2005

Aug. 1,

2005

Sept. 1,

2005

MEAN DAILY DISCHARGE,

IN CUBIC FEET PER SECOND

MEAN DAILY DISCHARGE,

IN CUBIC FEET PER SECOND

Menomonee River at Wauwatosa, water year 2004

Menomonee River at Wauwatosa, water year 2005

1

10

100

1,000

10,000

1

10

100

1,000

10,000

Sample collection day

Water year 2004 annual mean

Period of record annual mean

Sample collection day

Water year 2005 annual mean

Period of record annual mean

Appendix 6A. Water-discharge hydrographs for water years 2004–2005 at the 12 Phase II stream sites with gages in the 

Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District (MMSD) planning area—Continued. Period of record annual mean does not include data 

from the 2004 and 2005 water years.
Figure 6-9. Kinnickinnic River at S. 11th Street at Milwaukee.

Oct. 1,

2003

Nov. 1,

2003

Dec. 1,

2003

Jan. 1,

2004

Feb. 1,

2004

Mar. 1,

2004

Apr. 1,

2004

May 1,

2004

June 1,

2004

July 1,

2004

Aug. 1,

2004

Sept. 1,

2004

Oct. 1,

2004

Nov. 1,

2004

Dec. 1,

2004

Jan. 1,

2005

Feb. 1,

2005

Mar. 1,

2005

Apr. 1,

2005

May 1,

2005

June 1,

2005

July 1,

2005

Aug. 1,

2005

Sept. 1,

2005

MEAN DAILY DISCHARGE,

IN CUBIC FEET PER SECOND

MEAN DAILY DISCHARGE,

IN CUBIC FEET PER SECOND

Kinnickinnic River at S. 11th Street at Milwaukee, water year 2004

Kinnickinnic River at S. 11th Street at Milwaukee, water year 2005

1

10

100

1,000

1

10

100

1,000 Sample collection day

Water year 2004 annual mean

Period of record annual mean

Sample collection day

Water year 2005 annual mean

Period of record annual mean

Appendix 6A. Water-discharge hydrographs for water years 2004–2005 at the 12 Phase II stream sites with gages in the 

Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District (MMSD) planning area—Continued. Period of record annual mean does not include data 

from the 2004 and 2005 water years.

Appendix 6 177
178 Water-Quality Characteristics for Selected Sites within the Milwau kee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin

Figure 6-10. Oak Creek at South Milwaukee.

Oct. 1,

2003

Nov. 1,

2003

Dec. 1,

2003

Jan. 1,

2004

Feb. 1,

2004

Mar. 1,

2004

Apr. 1,

2004

May 1,

2004

June 1,

2004

July 1,

2004

Aug. 1,

2004

Sept. 1,

2004

Oct. 1,

2004

Nov. 1,

2004

Dec. 1,

2004

Jan. 1,

2005

Feb. 1,

2005

Mar. 1,

2005

Apr. 1,

2005

May 1,

2005

June 1,

2005

July 1,

2005

Aug. 1,

2005

Sept. 1,

2005

MEAN DAILY DISCHARGE,

IN CUBIC FEET PER SECOND

MEAN DAILY DISCHARGE,

IN CUBIC FEET PER SECOND

Oak Creek at South Milwaukee, water year 2004

Oak Creek at South Milwaukee, water year 2005

0.1

1.0

10.0

100.0

1,000.0

0.1

1.0

10.0

100.0

1,000.0

Sample collection day

Water year 2004 annual mean

Period of record annual mean

Sample collection day

Water year 2005 annual mean

Period of record annual mean

Appendix 6A. Water-discharge hydrographs for water years 2004–2005 at the 12 Phase II stream sites with gages in the 

Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District (MMSD) planning area—Continued. Period of record annual mean does not include data 

from the 2004 and 2005 water years.
Figure 6-11. Root River at Grange Avenue at Greenfield. Prior to the addition of a gage at this site in April of 2004, current-meter 

discharge measurements were made during water-quality sampling. A period of record annual mean is not provided for this site 

because it has less than 20 years of hydrologic data.

Oct. 1,

2003

Nov. 1,

2003

Dec. 1,

2003

Jan. 1,

2004

Feb. 1,

2004

Mar. 1,

2004

Apr. 1,

2004

May 1,

2004

June 1,

2004

July 1,

2004

Aug. 1,

2004

Sept. 1,

2004

Oct. 1,

2004

Nov. 1,

2004

Dec. 1,

2004

Jan. 1,

2005

Feb. 1,

2005

Mar. 1,

2005

Apr. 1,

2005

May 1,

2005

June 1,

2005

July 1,

2005

Aug. 1,

2005

Sept. 1,

2005

MEAN DAILY DISCHARGE,

IN CUBIC FEET PER SECOND

MEAN DAILY DISCHARGE,

IN CUBIC FEET PER SECOND

Root River at Grange Avenue at Greenfield, water year 2004

Root River at Grange Avenue at Greenfield, water year 2005

0.1

1.0

10.0

100.0

1,000.0

0.1

1.0

10.0

100.0

1,000.0

Sample collection day

Water year 2004 annual mean

Sample collection day

Water year 2005 annual mean

Appendix 6A. Water-discharge hydrographs for water years 2004–2005 at the 12 Phase II stream sites with gages in the 

Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District (MMSD) planning area—Continued.

Appendix 6 179
180 Water-Quality Characteristics for Selected Sites within the Milwau kee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin

Figure 6-12. Root River near Franklin.

Oct. 1,

2003

Nov. 1,

2003

Dec. 1,

2003

Jan. 1,

2004

Feb. 1,

2004

Mar. 1,

2004

Apr. 1,

2004

May 1,

2004

June 1,

2004

July 1,

2004

Aug. 1,

2004

Sept. 1,

2004

Oct. 1,

2004

Nov. 1,

2004

Dec. 1,

2004

Jan. 1,

2005

Feb. 1,

2005

Mar. 1,

2005

Apr. 1,

2005

May 1,

2005

June 1,

2005

July 1,

2005

Aug. 1,

2005

Sept. 1,

2005

MEAN DAILY DISCHARGE,

IN CUBIC FEET PER SECOND

MEAN DAILY DISCHARGE,

IN CUBIC FEET PER SECOND

Root River near Franklin, water year 2004

Root River near Franklin, water year 2005

1

10

100

1,000

10,000

1

10

100

1,000

10,000

Sample collection day

Water year 2004 annual mean

Period of record annual mean

Sample collection day

Water year 2005 annual mean

Period of record annual mean

Appendix 6A. Water-discharge hydrographs for water years 2004–2005 at the 12 Phase II stream sites with gages in the 

Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District (MMSD) planning area—Continued. Period of record annual mean does not include data 

from the 2004 and 2005 water years.
Appendix 6B. Monthly runoff spanning more than 20 years for the eight Phase II stream sites with records in the Milwaukee 

Metropolitan Sewerage District (MMSD) planning area, Wis. Long-term means for runoff do not include data from the 2004 and 2005

water years. 

Figure 6-13. Monthly runoff, in inches, for water years 2004 and 2005 and for the period of record.

Oct. Nov. Dec. Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May June July Aug. Sept.

Oct. Nov. Dec. Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May June July Aug. Sept.

RUNOFF, IN INCHES RUNOFF, IN INCHES

Milwaukee River near Cedarburg

Milwaukee River at Milwaukee

0

1

2

3

4

5

0

1

2

3

4

5

Runoff, water year 2005

Long-term mean runoff, 1982–2003

Runoff, water year 2004

Runoff, water year 2005

Long-term mean runoff, 1914–2003

Runoff, water year 2004

Appendix 6 181
182 Water-Quality Characteristics for Selected Sites within the Milwau kee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin

Figure 6-13. Monthly runoff, in inches, for water years 2004 and 2005 and for the period of record—Continued.

Oct. Nov. Dec. Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May June July Aug. Sept.

Oct. Nov. Dec. Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May June July Aug. Sept.

RUNOFF, IN INCHES RUNOFF, IN INCHES

Oct. Nov. Dec. Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May June July Aug. Sept.

RUNOFF, IN INCHES

Runoff, water year 2005

Long-term mean runoff, 1982–2003

Runoff, water year 2004

Runoff, water year 2005

Long-term mean runoff, 1975–2003

Runoff, water year 2004

Runoff, water year 2005

Long-term mean runoff, 1962–2003

Runoff, water year 2004

Menomonee River at Menomonee Falls

Underwood Creek at Wauwatosa

Menomonee River at Wauwatosa

0

1

3

5

7

6

4

2

8

0

1

3

5

7

6

4

2

8

0

1

3

5

7

6

4

2

8

Appendix 6B. Monthly runoff spanning more than 20 years for the eight Phase II stream sites with records in the Milwaukee 

Metropolitan Sewerage District (MMSD) planning area, Wis. —Continued. Long-term means for runoff do not include data from the 

2004 and 2005 water years. 
Figure 6-13. Monthly runoff, in inches, for water years 2004 and 2005 and for the period of record—Continued.

Oct. Nov. Dec. Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May June July Aug. Sept.

Oct. Nov. Dec. Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May June July Aug. Sept.

RUNOFF, IN INCHES RUNOFF, IN INCHES

Oct. Nov. Dec. Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May June July Aug. Sept.

RUNOFF, IN INCHES

Runoff, water year 2005

Long-term mean runoff, 1983–2003

Runoff, water year 2004

Runoff, water year 2005

Long-term mean runoff, 1964–2003

Runoff, water year 2004

Runoff, water year 2005

Long-term mean runoff, 1964–2003

Runoff, water year 2004

Kinnickinnic River at S. 11th Street at Milwaukee

Oak Creek at South Milwakee

Root River near Franklin

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

Appendix 6B. Monthly runoff spanning more than 20 years for the eight Phase II stream sites with records in the Milwaukee 

Metropolitan Sewerage District (MMSD) planning area, Wis. —Continued. Long-term means for runoff do not include data from the 

2004 and 2005 water years. 

Appendix 6 183
184 Water-Quality Characteristics for Selected Sites within the Milwau kee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin Appendix 6C. Monthly discharge and runoff statistics for eight Phase II stream sites in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District (MMSD) planning area, for the period of record and water years 2004 and 2005. Long-term means for discharge and runoff do not include data from the 2004 and 2005 water years. [WY, water year; mi2, square mile] Month Discharge (cubic feet per second) Runoff (inches) Percent difference of discharge and runoff from long-term mean Long-term mean WY 2004 mean WY 2005 mean Long-term mean WY 2004 mean WY 2005 mean WY 2004 WY 2005 Milwaukee River near Cedarburg (drainage area, 607 mi2; period of record, 1982–2003) Oct. 296 73.7 168 0.56 0.14 0.32 -75 -43 Nov. 430 467 254 .79 .86 .47 9 -41 Dec. 350 370 390 .66 .70 .74 6 11 Jan. 249 173 323 .47 .33 .61 -31 30 Feb. 428 170 521 .73 .30 .89 -60 22 March 867 1,129 739 1.65 2.14 1.40 30 -15 April 926 645 647 1.70 1.19 1.19 -30 -30 May 513 1,986 319 .97 3.77 .61 287 -38 June 488 2,229 122 .90 4.10 .22 357 -75 July 259 548 108 .49 1.04 .20 112 -58 Aug. 213 290 68.4 .40 .55 .13 36 -68 Sept. 289 176 92.5 .53 .32 .17 -39 -68 Annual mean discharge and annual runoff 442 689 311 9.89 15.45 6.96 Percent difference from long-term annual mean 56 -30 Miwaukee River at Milwaukee (drainage area, 696 mi2; period of record, 1914–2003) Oct. 279 87.2 184 0.46 0.14 0.30 -69 -34 Nov. 348 454 286 .56 .73 .46 30 -18 Dec. 298 311 435 .49 .52 .72 4 46 Jan. 253 149 359 .42 .25 .59 -41 42 Feb. 393 150 689 .59 .23 1.03 -62 75 March 1,030 1,273 829 1.71 2.11 1.37 24 -20 April 969 757 753 1.55 1.21 1.21 -22 -22 May 518 2,597 368 .86 4.30 .61 401 -29 June 412 2,629 154 .66 4.22 .25 538 -63 July 229 618 126 .38 1.02 .21 170 -45 Aug. 210 341 83 .35 .56 .14 62 -60 Sept. 267 170 116 .43 .27 .19 -36 -57 Annual mean discharge and annual runoff 433 796 363 8.45 15.57 7.08 Percent difference from long-term annual mean 84 -16
Month Discharge (cubic feet per second) Runoff (inches) Percent difference of discharge and runoff from long-term mean

Long-term mean WY 2004 mean WY 2005 mean Long-term mean WY 2004 mean WY 2005 mean WY 2004 WY 2005

Menomonee River at Menomonee Falls (drainage area, 34.7 mi2; period of record, 1975–2003)

Oct. 19.5 2.87 5.55 0.65 0.10 0.18 -85 -72Nov. 26.8 26.5 7.98 .86 .85 .26 -1 -70Dec. 22.6 21.1 13.3 .75 .70 .44 -7 -41Jan. 17.6 10.7 98.1 .58 .35 3.26 -39 457Feb. 33.4 11.3 61.0 1.00 .35 1.83 -66 83March 56.6 80.0 50.3 1.88 2.66 1.67 41 -11April 63.8 50.7 37.1 2.05 1.63 1.19 -21 -42May 34.9 207 19.8 1.16 6.88 .66 493 -43June 32.8 80.1 4.46 1.05 2.58 .14 144 -86July 18.7 23.7 5.15 .62 .79 .17 27 -72Aug. 14.2 7.01 3.40 .47 .23 .11 -51 -76Sept. 18.6 3.34 3.75 .60 .11 .12 -82 -80Annual mean discharge and annual runoff 29.8 43.9 14.8 11.65 17.22 5.79Percent difference from long-term annual mean 47 -14

Underwood Creek at Wauwatosa (drainage area, 18.2 mi2; period of record, 1975–2003)

Oct. 8.99 4.04 3.94 0.57 0.26 0.25 -55 -56Nov. 10.9 12.1 5.64 .67 .74 .35 11 -48Dec. 10.1 7.79 6.15 .64 .49 .39 -23 -39Jan. 8.62 2.29 14.6 .55 .15 .93 -73 69Feb. 13.9 4.54 14.0 .80 .27 .80 -67 1March 22.4 21.7 14.6 1.42 1.38 .92 -3 -35April 27.1 14.1 11.6 1.66 .86 .71 -48 -57May 17.8 59.4 11.6 1.13 3.76 .74 234 -35June 17.3 23.8 6.66 1.06 1.46 .41 38 -62July 13.0 18.0 5.66 .82 1.14 .36 38 -56Aug. 16.3 10.3 3.53 1.03 .65 .22 -37 -78Sept. 12.9 2.94 11.4 .79 .18 .70 -77 -12Annual mean discharge and annual runoff 15.0 15.1 9.08 11.17 11.33 6.77Percent difference from long-term annual mean 1 -39

Appendix 6C. Monthly discharge and runoff statistics for eight Phase II stream sites in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District (MMSD) planning area, for the period of 

record and water years 2004 and 2005—Continued. Long-term means for discharge and runoff do not include data from the 2004 and 2005 water years.

[WY, water year; mi2, square mile]

Appendix 6 185
186 Water-Quality Characteristics for Selected Sites within the Milwau kee Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin Month Discharge (cubic feet per second) Runoff (inches) Percent difference of discharge and runoff from long-term mean Long-term mean WY 2004 mean WY 2005 mean Long-term mean WY 2004 mean WY 2005 mean WY 2004 WY 2005 Menomonee River at Wauwatosa (drainage area, 123 mi2; period of record, 1962–2003) Oct. 64.4 21.4 24.3 0.60 0.20 0.23 -67 -62 Nov. 77.6 113 37.6 .70 1.02 .34 46 -52 Dec. 74.6 75.2 46.1 .70 .70 .43 1 -38 Jan. 57.5 20.5 110 .54 .19 1.03 -64 91 Feb. 98.6 35.4 160 .83 .31 1.36 -64 62 March 196 253 160 1.84 2.37 1.50 29 -18 April 205 149 107 1.86 1.35 .97 -27 -48 May 119 665 80.9 1.12 6.24 .76 459 -32 June 114 240 37.7 1.03 2.18 .34 111 -67 July 77.4 129 36.7 .73 1.21 .34 67 -53 Aug. 76.8 52.5 22.3 .72 .49 .21 -32 -71 Sept. 82.7 15.6 59.3 .75 .14 .54 -81 -28 Annual mean discharge and annual runoff 103 148 72.9 11.43 16.41 8.05 Percent difference from long-term annual mean 44 -29 Kinnickinnic River at S. 11th Street at Milwaukee (drainage area, 18.8 mi2; period of record, 1983–2003) Oct. 19.9 8.99 8.89 1.22 0.55 0.55 -55 -55 Nov. 23.4 27.2 13.0 1.39 1.62 .77 16 -44 Dec. 16.7 16.8 12.5 1.02 1.03 .77 1 -25 Jan. 14.7 4.46 25.9 .90 .27 1.59 -70 76 Feb. 21.3 11.0 28.7 1.18 .63 1.59 -48 35 March 23.9 39.7 16.0 1.47 2.44 .98 66 -33 April 35.1 17.2 14.2 2.08 1.02 .84 -51 -60 May 27.3 80.9 17.5 1.67 4.96 1.07 196 -36 June 30.0 41.1 13.3 1.78 2.44 .79 37 -56 July 28.3 32.8 16.1 1.74 2.01 .99 16 -43 Aug. 34.8 30.5 9.43 2.13 1.87 .58 -12 -73 Sept. 25.8 5.92 33.3 1.53 .35 1.97 -77 29 Annual mean discharge and annual runoff 25.1 26.5 17.3 18.14 19.20 12.5 Percent difference from long-term annual mean 6 -31 Appendix 6C. Monthly discharge and runoff statistics for eight Phase II stream sites in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District (MMSD) planning area, for the period of record and water years 2004 and 2005—Continued. Long-term means for discharge and runoff do not include data from the 2004 and 2005 water years. [WY, water year; mi2, square mile]
Month Discharge (cubic feet per second) Runoff (inches) Percent difference of discharge and runoff from long-term mean

Long-term mean WY 2004 mean WY 2005 mean Long-term mean WY 2004 mean WY 2005 mean WY 2004 WY 2005

Oak Creek at South Milwaukee (drainage area, 25 mi2; period of record, 1964–2003)

Oct. 12 3.22 3.64 0.55 0.15 0.17 -73 -70Nov. 17.1 16.9 7.39 .76 .76 .33 -1 -57Dec. 18.3 12.6 10.8 .84 .58 .50 -31 -41Jan. 14.5 3.71 24.9 .67 .17 1.15 -74 72Feb. 25.4 10.1 36.3 1.06 .44 1.51 -60 43March 46.2 50.7 23.3 2.13 2.34 1.08 10 -50April 48.8 17.1 15.2 2.18 .76 .68 -65 -69May 26.4 103 13.5 1.22 4.77 .62 290 -49June 23.9 34.0 5.55 1.07 1.52 .25 42 -77July 15.5 31.0 7.34 .71 1.43 .34 100 -53Aug. 14.3 12.4 2.95 .66 .57 .14 -13 -79Sept. 17.6 2.53 23.0 .79 .11 1.03 -86 31Annual mean discharge and annual runoff 23.3 25.0 14.3 12.65 13.59 7.78Percent difference from long-term annual mean 7 -39

Root River near Franklin (drainage area, 49.2 mi2; period of record, 1964–2003)

Oct. 23.8 6.80 7.71 0.56 0.16 0.18 -71 -68Nov. 30.4 36.8 13.2 .69 .84 .30 21 -57Dec. 34.3 30.2 20.2 .80 .71 .47 -12 -41Jan. 30.9 5.76 54.2 .72 .14 1.27 -81 75Feb. 48.1 18.0 80.3 1.02 .39 1.70 -63 67March 89.6 98.3 52.7 2.10 2.30 1.24 10 -41April 88.5 34.9 34.0 2.01 .79 .77 -61 -62May 47.6 171 24.9 1.12 4.01 .58 259 -48June 45.8 71.4 12.2 1.04 1.62 .28 56 -73July 27.8 58.0 11.2 .65 1.36 .26 109 -60Aug. 26.2 27.1 4.40 .61 .64 .10 3 -83Sept. 31.5 4.56 31.5 .71 .10 .71 -86 0Annual mean discharge and annual runoff 43.6 47.2 28.5 12.05 13.05 7.07Percent difference from long-term annual mean 8 -35

Appendix 6C. Monthly discharge and runoff statistics for eight Phase II stream sites in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District (MMSD) planning area, for the period of 

record and water years 2004 and 2005—Continued. Long-term means for discharge and runoff do not include data from the 2004 and 2005 water years.

[WY, water year; mi2, square mile]

Appendix 6 187
Printed on recycled paper