u.s. Department of the Interior 

U.S. Geological Survey 

RELATION OF WATER QUALITY TO LAND USE 

IN THE DRAINAGE BASINS OF FOUR TRIBUTARIES 

TO THE TOMS RIVER, NEW JERSEY, 1994-95 

Water-Resources Investigations Report 99-4001 

Prepared in cooperation with the 

NEW JERSEY DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 
Cover shows view of Long Swamp Creek. 
RELATION OF WATER QUALITY TO LAND USE IN 

THE DRAINAGE BASINS OF FOUR TRIBUTARIES TO 

THE TOMS RIVER, NEW JERSEY, 1994 ... 95 

By Kathryn Hunchak ... Kariouk 

U.s. Geological Survey 

Wnt~r_R~SOllr ........ ~ • • ~ ..... ..... ....,.,.", ~e ... Inv~st'lgat'lnn~ '.I"'~ • ,..., •• ,.... R~port ,~ 90 IT .. -r,..,..., Ann 1 I 

Prepared in cooperation with the 

NEW JERSEY DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

West Trenton, New Jersey 

1999 

_USGS 

science for II changing world 
u.s. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

BRUCE BABBln, Secretary 

u.s. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY 

Charles G. Groat, Acting Director 

F or additional information Copies of this report can be 

write to: purchased from: 

District Chief U.S. Geological Survey 

U.S Geological Survey Branch of Information Services 

Mountain View Office Park Box 25286 

810 Bear Tavern Road, Suite 206 Denver, CO 80225-0286 

West Trenton, NJ 08628 
CONTENTS 

Page 

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

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

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

Previous studies ................................................................................................................... 4 

Acknowledgments ................................................................................................................ 5 

Land use in the study area ................................................................................................................ 5 

Long Swamp Creek Basin ................................................................................................... 5 

Wrangel Brook Basin ........................................................................................................... 8 

Davenport Branch Basin ...................................................................................................... 8 

Jakes Branch Basin .............................................................................................................. 8 

Methods of study .............................................................................................................................. 9 

Data collection ..................................................................................................................... 9 

Selection of measurement sites ................................................................................ 9 

Sampling methods and criteria ............................................................................... 11 

Determination of instantaneous streamflows ......................................................... 12 

Collection and analysis of water samples .............................................................. 15 

Data analysis ...................................................................................................................... 18 

D(l.l~t~An AfnT~t(l.r 1l11~11h, tA l~nrll1l;!p 1 Q ..I."'-vJ.u .... .I.Vl..J. \..1.1. VY u,.""",.1. '1. u.u..LJ."'J LV .1.".1...1'\..1. y.uv ................................................................................................. ..A.., 

Nitrogen ............................................................................................................................. 21 

Total nitrogen ......................................................................................................... 21 

Ammonia ................................................................................................................ 31 

Nitrite ..................................................................................................................... 35 

Nitrate ............................................................................. : ...................................... 35 

Organic nitrogen .................................................................................................... 39 

Phosphorus ......................................................................................................................... 42 

Hydrolyzable phosphorus plus orthophosphorus ................................................... 43 

Orthophosphorus .................................................................................................... 46 

Total suspended solids ....................................................................................................... 50 

Bacteria .............................................................................................................................. 55 

Specific conductance, pH, temperature, and dissolved oxygen ......................................... 59 

Summary ........................................................................................................................................ 66 

References cited ............................................................................................................................. 71 

Appendix 1: Estimated streamflow, and measured and calculated concentrations of 

water-quality constituents in samples collected at measurement sites in the 

Toms River drainage basin, New Jersey, May 1994 to October 1995 .............. 1 00 

Appendix 2: Area-normalized loads (yields) of selected water-quality constituents calculated 

for samples collected at measurement sites in the Toms River drainage basin, 

New Jersey, May 1994 to October 1995 ........................................................... 114 

iii 
ILLUSTRATIONS 

Page 

Figure 1. Map showing location of measurement sites in the Toms River drainage basin, 

New Jersey ........................................................................................................ 3 

2. Map showing land use in the Toms River drainage basin, 1986 ............................. 6 

Figures 3-25. Graphs showing: 

3. Distributions of total-nitrogen concentrations in unfiltered-water 

samples collected during base flow and stormflow in the growing 

and nongrowing seasons at measureluent sites in the Toms River 

drainage basin, May 1994 to October 1995 ...................................... 24 

4. Concentrations of total nitrogen, ammonia, nitrite, nitrate, 

and organic nitrogen and stormflow at Long Swamp Creek 

at Toms River (LSC2), March 7-9, 1995 ......................................... .28 

5. Distributions of area-normalized loads of total nitrogen calculated 

for unfiltered water samples collected during base flow and 

stormflow in the growing and nongrowing seasons at 

measurement sites in the Toms River drainage basin, May 1994 

to October 1995 ................................................................................. 30 

6. Distributions of ammonia concentrations in filtered water samples 

collected during base flow and stolmflow in the growing and 

nongrowing seasons at measurement sites in the Toms River 

drainage basin, May 1994 to October 1995 ...................................... 32 

7. Distributions of area-nolmalized loads of ammonia calculated 

for filtered water samples collected dUling base flow and 

stormflow in the growing and nongrowing seasons at 

measurement sites in the Toms River drainage basin, May 1994 

to October 1995 ................................................................................. 33 

8. Distributions of nitrate concentrations in filtered water samples 

collected during base flow and stormflow in the growing and 

nongrowing seasons at measurement sites in the Toms River 

drainage basin, New Jersey, May 1994 to October 1995 ................. .36 

9. Distributions of area-normalized loads of nitrate calculated for filtered 

water samples collected during base flow and stormflow in the 

growing and nongrowing seasons at measurement sites in the 

Toms River drainage basin, May 1994 to October 1995 .................. 37 -

10. Distributions of organic-nitrogen concentrations in samples collected 

during base flow and stormflow in the growing and nongrowing 

seasons at measurement sites in the Toms River drainage basin, 

New Jersey, May 1994 to October 1995 .......................................... .40 

11. Distributions of area-normalized loads of organic nitrogen calculated 

for samples collected during base flow and stormflow in the 

growing and nongrowing seasons at measurement sites in the 

Toms River drainage basin, May 1994 to October 1995 ................. .41 

iv 
ILLUSTRATIONS--Continued 

Page 

Figures 3-25. Graphs showing:--Continued 

12. Distributions of hydrolyzable phosphorus plus orthophosphorus 

concentrations in unfiltered water samples collected during base 

flow and stormflow in the growing and nongrowing seasons at 

measurement sites in the Toms River drainage basin, May 1994 

to October 1995 ................................................................................. 44 

13. Distributions of area-normalized loads of hydrolyzable phosphorus 

plus orthophosphorus calculated for unfiltered water samples 

collected during base flow and storrnflow in the growing and 

nongrowing seasons at measurement sites in the Toms River 

drainage basin, May 1994 to October 1995 ..................................... .45 

14. Distributions of concentrations of orthophosphorus concentrations 

in filtered water samples collected during base flow and 

stormflow in the growing and nongrowing seasons at 

measurement sites in the Toms River drainage basin, May 1994 

to October 1995 ................................................................................. 48 

15. Distributions of area-normalized loads of orthophosphorus calculated 

for filtered water samples collected during base flow and 

stormflow in the growing and nongrowing seasons at 

measurement sites in the Toms River drainage basin, May 1994 

to October 1995 ................................................................................. 49 

16. Distributions of total suspended solids concentrations in unfiltered 

water samples collected during base flow and stormflow in the 

growing and nongrowing seasons at measurement sites in the 

Toms River drainage basin, May 1994 to October 1995 .................. 52 

17. Concentration of total suspended solids and streamflow at Wrangel 

Brook near Toms River (WBI), October 5, 1995 ............................. 53 

18. Distributions of area-normalized loads of total suspended solids 

calculated for samples collected during base flow and stormflow 

in the growing and nongrowing seasons at measurement sites in 

the Toms River drainage basin, May 1994 to October 1995 ............ 54 

19. Distributions of fecal-coliform-bacteria concentrations in samples 

collected during base flow and stormflow in the growing and 

nongrowing seasons at measurement sites in the Toms River 

drainage basin, May 1994 to October 1995 ...................................... 56 

20. Distributions of area-notmalized loads of fecal-coliform bacteria 

calculated for samples collected during base flow and stormflow 

in the growing and nongrowing seasons at measurement sites in 

the Toms River drainage basin, May 1994 to October 1995 ............ 57 

v 
ILLUSTRATIONS--Continued 

Page 

Figures 3-25. Graphs showing:--Continued 

21. Specific conductance, pH, temperature, and dissolved oxygen and 

streamflow measured at (A) Long Swamp Creek at Toms River 

(LSC2), September 1994, and (B) Wrangel Brook near Toms 

River (WB1), March 1995 ................................................................ 60 

22. Specific conductance at measurement sites in the Toms River 

drainage basin, May 1994 to October, 1995, by month .................... 62 

23. pH at measurement sites in the Toms River drainage basin, May 1994 

to October 1995, by month ................................................................ 64 

24. Temperature at measurement sites in the Toms River drainage basin, 

May 1994 to October 1995, by month .............................................. 65 

25. Dissolved oxygen at measurement sites in the Toms River drainage 

basin, May 1994 to October 1995, by month .................................... 67 

TABLES 

Table 1. Land-use distributions in the Toms River drainage basin and selected subbasins, 

New Jersey, 1986 ..................................................................................................... 7 

2. Types of data collected at measurement sites in the Toms River drainage basin, 

May 1994 to October 1995 .................................................................................... 10 

3. Sampling dates and types of data collected at measurement sites in the Toms 

River drainage basin, May 1994 to October 1995 ................................................. 13 

4. Estimated flow-duration values for measurement sites in the Toms River drainage 

basin, May 1994 to October 1995 .......................................................................... 16 

5. Numbers of water-quality analyses of samples collected during each sampling at 

measurement sites in the Toms River drainage basin, May 1994 

to October 1995 ...................................................................................................... 74 

6. Statistical summary of concentrations of selected water-quality constituents 

measured in samples collected at measurement sites in the Toms River 

drainage basin, May 1994 to October 1995 ........................................................... 80 

7. Measured streamflows at measurement sites in the Toms River drainage basin, 

May 1994 to October 1995 .................................................................................... 22 

8. Statistical summary of area-normalized loads (yields) of selected water-quality 

constituents measured in samples collected at measurement sites in the 

Toms River drainage basin, May 1994 to-October 1995 ....................................... 89 

vi 
TABLES--Continued 

Page 

Table 9. Results of the Kruskal-Wallis test to determine whether a difference exists in 

concentrations and yields in samples collected during base flow in the 

growing season, stormflow in the growing season, and stormflow in the 

nongrowing season at measurement sites in the Toms River drainage basin, 

May 1994 to October 1995 ................................................................................... .25 

10. Summary of results of the Tukey test to determine at which measurement 

sites in the Toms River drainage basin, the concentrations and yields are 

greater than or the same as those in samples collected during base flow in 

the growing season, stormflow in the growing season, and stormflow in the 

nongrowing season, tv1ay 1994 to October 1995 ................................................... 26 

11. Results of the Wilcoxon rank-sum test to determine whether a seasonal 

difference exists in concentrations and yields in samples collected during 

storm-flow at measurement sites in the Toms River drainage basin, New 

Jersey, May 1994 to October 1995 ........................................................................ 27 

12. Results of the Wilcoxon rank-sum test to determine whether a flow difference 

exists in concentrations and yields in samples collected in the growing season 

at measurement sites in the Toms River drainage basin, New Jersey, 

May 1994 to October 1995 .................................................................................... 29 

13. Summary of specific conductance, pH, temperature, and dissolved oxygen 

measured during base flow and stormflow at measurement sites in the 

Toms River drainage basin, New Jersey, May 1994 to October 1995 ................... 95 

vii 
CONVERSION FACTORS, VERTICAL DATUM, 

WATER-QUALITY UNITS 

AND ABBREVIATED 

Multiply To obtain 

Length 

inch (in.) 

mile (mi) 

25.4 

1.609 

millimeter 

kilometer 

acre 

'1 ( ... ')\. square m1 e IDl-} 

square mile (mi2) 

0.4047 

259.0 

2.590 

hectare 

hectare 

square kilometer 

Volume 

gallon (gal) 

gallon (gal) 

cubic foot (ft3

) 

3.785 

0.003785 

0.02832 

liter 

cubic meter 

cubic meter 

cubic foot per se

cubic foot per se

[(ft3/s )/mi2] 

cond (ft3/s) 

cond per square mile 

0.02832 

0.01093 

cubic meter per second 

cubic meter per second per 

square kilometer 

pound, avoirdupois (lb) 0.4536 kilogram 

Vertical Dat

1929-- a geo

United State

um: In this report "sea level" refers to the National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 

detic datum derived from a general adjustment of the first-order level nets of the 

s and Canada, formerly called Sea Level Datum of 1929. 

Temperature ~iv

Celsius (OC) 

en in de~rees Farenheit (OF) and Celsius (OC) may be converted to de~rees 

and Kelvin (OK) by the followin~ equations: 

Water-quality abbreviations 

°C = 5/9 x COF-32) 

°K=273.15+oC 

mglL 

MPNIlOOmL 

~S/cm 

(lb/d)/mi2 

(MPN/d)lmi2 

- milligrams per liter 

- most probable number of bacteria per 100 milliliters 

- microsiemens per centimeter at 25 degrees Celsius 

- pounds per day per square mile 

-most probable number per day per square mile 

viii 
Relation of Water Quality to Land Use in the Drainage Basins of Four 

Tributaries to the Toms River, New Jersey, 1994 ... 95 

By Kathryn Hunchak-Kariouk 

ABSTRACT 

The influence of land use on the water quality of four tributaries to the Toms River, which 

drains nearly one-half of the Barnegat Bay watershed, was studied during the initial phase of a 

multiyear investigation. Water samples were conected from and streamfiows were measured in 

Long Swamp Creek, Wrangel Brook, Davenport Branch, and Jakes Creek during periods of base 

flow and stormflow in the growing and nongrowing seasons during May 1994 to October 1995. 

The drainage areas upstream from the seven measurement sites were characterized as highly 

developed, moderately developed, slightly developed, or undeveloped. Concentrations were 

determined and area-normalized instantaneous loads (yields) were estimated for total nitrogen, 

ammonia, nitrate, organic nitrogen, hydrolyzable phosphorus plus orthophosphorus, 

orthophosphorus, total suspended solids, and fecal-coliform bacteria in the water samples. 

Specific conductance, pH, temperature, and dissolved oxygen were measured. 

Yields of total nitrogen, nitrate, and organic nitrogen at sites on Wrangel Brook, which 

drains moderately developed areas, were either larger than or similar to yields at the site on Long 

Swamp Creek, vv'hich drains a highly developed area. The magnitude of these yields probably was 

not related directly to the intensity of land development, but more likely was influenced by the 

type of development, the amount of base flow, and historical land use in the basin. The large 

concentrations of total nitrogen and nitrate in base flow in Wrangel Brook could have resulted 

from fertilizers that were applied to high-maintenance lawns and from agricultural runoff that has 

remained in the ground water since the 1950's and eventually was discharged to streams. 

Yields of ammonia appear to be partly related to the intensity of land development and 

storm runoff. Yields of ammonia at the site on Long Swamp Creek (a highly developed area) 

were either larger than or similar to yields at sites on Wrangel Brook (moderately developed 

areas). Yields were smallest at the site on Davenport Branch, which drains a slightly developed 

area. 

Yields of hydrolyzable phosphorus plus orthophosphorus and yields of orthophosphorus 

appear to be related to the intensity of development. Concentrations of hydrolyzable phosphorus 

plus orthophosphorus were greater in Long Swamp Creek (highly developed areas) than in 

Wrangel Brook (moderately developed areas). Concentrations of orthophosphorus were largest in 

Wrangel Brook (moderately developed) and Long Swamp Creek (highly developed). 

Total suspended solids· and bacteria were somewhat related to intensity of development. 

Yields of total suspended solids were greater at sites downstream from highly and moderately 

developed areas than from slightly developed areas. Yields of bacteria were strongly related to 

streamflow and season. 

1 
Specific conductance appears to be related to streamflow. pH probably was related to 

intensity of land development~ pH was greater (more basic) in streams draining highly developed 

areas than in those draining other areas. Concentrations of dissolved oxygen were affected more 

by water temperature than by intensity of development or streamflow. 

INTRODUCTION 

The Toms River in southern New Jersey (fig. 1) drains nearly one-half of the 450-mi2 

2 Barnegat Bay watershed. Barnegat Bay is a 75-mi , environmentally sensitive estuary in Ocean 

County, N.J., that is valued for its aesthetic, recreational, and commercial qualities. Since the 

1970's, the Toms River drainage basin has experienced rapid growth in population and urban .J __ ._1 __ ~ __ 4- /no~-rs r-< ~1...J_"", ~~...J Ut;;Ve;;lUpIlle;;Ul~.I\.. ge;; ,VUIUCl1, dllU Hal-ern T~C 1 ~"""'''''on'''~ ""'~u,.,.+~r..""n ~n ""~"'+ ill., 9{){)\ D,.,.np~+'" Ip Ii, I 7V). e;;:) He; UUp ;:)e;u le;u ~llVll;:) 1 ..... PUllH.-

source discharges of wastewater to the basin since the early 1980's, concentrations of nutrients, 

sediment, and bacteria in the bay have increased (New Jersey Depm1ment of Environmental 

Protection and Energy, 1993a). Because there are no major point-source discharges to the Toms 

River, nonpoint sources (NPS's) in the basin, such as overland runoff from commercial and 

residential areas and leachate from septic systems and underground storage tanks, probably are 

partly responsible for altering water quality in the bay (New Jersey Department of Environmental 

Protection and Energy, 1993b). Constituents from NPS 's are transported to a stream by ground 

water and by storm runoff from diffuse areas or from areas where sources of constituents are not 

easily identified and quantified. 

NPS constituent loads in a sUlface-water body are greatly affected by land use in a drainage 

basin. The amount of storm runoff is influenced by the amount of impervious surface in the 

drainage basin, which in tum is proportional to the amount of development. Only 33 percent of 

2 the Toms River drainage basin (192 mi ) is developed (that is, contains residential, commercial, 2 and industrial land use). The lower third of the basin (69 mi ), 43 percent of which is developed, 

contains 54 percent of the development in the entire basin, however, and has the greatest 

potential for contributing NPS constituent loads to the Toms River, the Toms River embayment, 

and Barnegat Bay. Water-quality and streamflow measurements made since 1963 at the U.S. 

Geological Survey (USGS) water-quality and streamflow-gaging station on the Toms River near 

2 Toms River, N.J., describe the water quality in just the upper two-thirds of the basin (123 mi ), 

which is 28 percent developed. Until the current study (1994-95), the lower third of the Toms 

River drainage basin was unmonitored, and NPS constituent loadings to the Toms River from the 

basin downstream from this station were unknown. 

As part ofNPS- and stormwater-management strategies for the Barnegat Bay drainage 

basin, the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection (NJDEP) plans to implement best 

management practices (BMP's) within the Toms River drainage basin. BMP's are practices or a 

combination of practices that are determined by the State to be practical and effective in 

preventing or reducing NPS loads to levels compatible with water-quality goals (Lynch and 

Corbett, 1990). During May 1994 to October 1995, no BMP's were implemented by NJDEP in 

the study area. Several BMP's were implemented by the Ocean County Soil Conservation 

District in 1996. 

2 
40° 

10' 

40° 

05' 

40° 

00' 

/ 

/ / 

)'-'; 

" 

\ 

75" 74" 

MONMOUTH COUNTY 

/ --~- - OCEAN COUNTY - --'( 

4~ L~ 

) 

/ 

/ 

J 

r I 

~ 

~ \. 

2 3 4 MILES 

3 4 KILOMETERS 

39° \ 55' 

Base from U.S. Geological Survey digital data, 

1: 1 00,000, 1983, Universal Transverse Mercator 

projection, Zone 18 

U.S. Geological 

Survey station 

number 

01408725 

01408728 

01408600 

01408640 

01408620 

01408630 

01408705 

01408500 

Station name (identifier) 

Long Swamp Creek near Toms River, N.J. (LSC1) 

Long Swamp Creek at Toms River, N.J. (LSC2) 

Wrangel Brook near Toms River, N.J. (WBi) 

Wrangel Brook near South Toms River, N.J. (WB2) 

Davenport Branch near Dover Forge, N.J. (DB) 

Davenport Branch near Toms River, N.J. 

Jakes Branch near South Toms River, N.J. (JB) 

Toms River at Toms River, N.J. 

EXPLANATION 

- • • - Basin boundary 

.. - .. - Subbasin boundary 

AI\. Gaging station 

" Water-quality site 

• Gaging station and water-quality site 

Figure 1. Location of monitoring sites in the Toms River drainage basin, New Jersey. 

3 
The USGS, in cooperation with the NJDEP, is conducting a multiyear surface-water-quality 

investigation to estimate the NPS yields of nutrients, suspended solids, and bacteria from various 

land-use areas in the Toms River drainage basin. The objectives of the multiyear investigation are 

to (1) document water quality before NPS- and stormwater-management strategies are initiated, 

(2) establish automatic-sampler protocols for measuring instream water quality during stormflow, 

and (3) develop a water-quality model to estimate NPS yields for selected constituents from 

basins draining areas with different land uses. For this initial study, the specific objectives are to 

(1) compare concentrations and yields among basins draining areas with different land uses, (2) 

determine whether concentrations and yields differ significantly at each site during base flow and 

stormfiow in the growing season, and (3) determine whether concentrations and yields differ 

significantly at each site during stormflow in the growing and nongrowing seasons. 

Purpose and Scope 

This report describes the results of a study to determine the relation between land use and 

the water quality of four tributaries to the Toms River--Long Swamp Creek, Wrangel Brook, 

Davenport Branch, and Jakes Branch. The constituent concentrations and yield values presented 

in this report are based on water-quality and streamflow data collected at seven sites during baseflow and stormflow conditions during May 1994 to October 1995. Concentrations and yields 

(area-normalized instantaneous load values) during periods of base flow and stormflow in the 

growing and nongrowing seasons are presented for sites on Long Swamp Creek, Wrangel Brook, 

and Davenport Branch. Only concentrations during base flow are presented for the site on Jakes 

Branch. Water-quality constituents for which concentrations and yield values are reported 

include total nitrogen, ammonia, nitrate, organic nitrogen, hydrolyzable phosphorus plus 

orthophosphorus, orthophosphorus, total suspended solids, and fecal-coliform bacteria. 

Concentrations of nitrite and Escherichia coliform bacteria also are listed. Distributions of 

constituent concentrations and yields during base flow and stormflow in the growing and 

nongrowing seasons are shown in boxplots. Specific conductance, pH, temperature, and 

dissolved oxygen in the four tributaries also are discussed, and their values are listed. 

Previous studies 

The USGS, in cooperation with State and local agencies, has been conducting 

comprehensive water-quality studies in New Jersey since the early 1960's. Many of these studies 

have investigated NPS contributions to ground water from agricultural areas, but few have 

investigated NPS contributions from urban areas to surface water in the Coastal Plain. Two 

USGS NPS studies were conducted in the Coastal Plain of New Jersey, one in the Mill Creek 

Basin in Willingboro, Burlington County (Schornick and Fishel, 1980), and one in the Great Egg 

Harbor River Basin in Winslow Township, Camden County (Fusillo, 1981). Several studies 

investigated NPS contributions in the Coastal Plain outside New Jersey, but these focused 

primarily on contributions to ground water from agricultural areas. 

Schornick and Fishel (1980) reported that runoff from the nonresidential part of the study 

area in the upstream part of the drainage basin had a more significant effect on the surface-water 

quality than did runoff from the residential area; the nonresidential area contributed more 

nutrients than the residential area. Fusillo (1981) reported that sites in urban areas had higher 

4 
values of specific conductance and pH than did sites in less developed areas. One USGS NPS 

study was conducted in the Musconetcong, Rockaway, and Whippany River Basin in northern 

New Jersey (Price and Schaefer, 1995). This study compared the estimated loads of selected 

constituents from permitted and nonpelTIlitted (NPS and overland runoff) sources. 

No surface-water-quality investigations have been conducted in the Toms River drainage 

basin, but water quality in nearby streams has been investigated. Water-quality in the Upper 

Oyster Creek (Fusillo and others, 1980) and McDonalds Branch (Johnsson and Barringer, 1993, 

and Lord and others, 1990), both located south of the Toms River drainage basin in Ocean and 

Burlington Counties, respectively, has been investigated. Zampella (1994) compared the surfacewater quality of 14 Pinelands streams, along a watershed disturbance gradient, that were 

monitored by the USGS and reported that pH, specific conductance, and nutrient concentrations 

increased with increasing intensity of land use. 

Acknowledl:ments 

The author thanks Daniel Van Abs, NJDEP, Office of Environmental Planning, and Robert 

Connell, NJDEP, Bureau of Marine Water Classification and Analysis, for their continued support 

and cooperation during this project. The author gratefully acknowledges the efforts of all the 

members of the NJDEP and USGS field-sampling crews who were often asked, with very short 

notice, to work for long hours under adverse conditions. 

LAND USE IN THE STUDY AREA 

The study area includes the drainage basins of four tributaries to the Toms River--Long 

Swamp Creek, Wrangel Brook, Davenport Branch, and Jakes Branch--in the lower third of the 

Toms River drainage basin (fig. 1). The study area lies entirely within the Atlantic Coastal Plain. 

The area to the south and west of the main stem of the Toms River is within the New Jersey 

Pinelands Preserve. Many cranberry bogs, impoundments, and swamps are located throughout the 

study area; the predominant land use is forest plus wetlands (fig. 2; table 1). Available data 

indicate that residential and commercial plus industrial land uses account for less than 25 percent 

of the development in the study area (U.S. Geological Survey, 1986); however, conversion of 

forested land into residential and commercial areas has increased since the early 1970's and is 

expected to increase even more in the future (New Jersey Department of Environmental 

Protection and Energy, 1993a). In this study, miscellaneous land use describes a combination of 

agricultural land, water bodies (river channels, lakes, ponds, reservoirs, bays, estuaries, cranberry 

bogs), and barren land. Land use in each stream basin was classified by evaluating the percentage 

of each land-use category and the physical characteristics of the residential and commercial plus 

industrial land uses (table 1). 

Lonl: Swamp Creek Basin 

2 The Long Swamp Creek drains an area of 6.71 mi in Ocean County and flows 7.02 mi 

before entering the Toms River embayment (fig. 1) The entire basin has some development; the 

greatest amount of residential and commercial development is in the lower half of the basin (fig. 

2). Two water-quality measurement sites are located on Long Swamp Creek, LSC 1 near Toms 

5 
40° 

10' 

40° 

5' 

2 3 4 MILES 

1---r-'lr-'-r--rL-1 --.---L-I _I 

I 

3 4 KILOMETERS 

EXPLANATION 

_ Residential 

Commercial plus industrial 

c=J Miscellaneous (agricultural land, water bodies, 

and barren land) 

c:=J Forest plus wetlands 

--•• -- Basin boundary 

.. - .. - Subbasin boundary 

Figure 2. Land use in the Toms River drainage basin, New Jersey, 1986. 

6 
.......

Table 1. Land-use distributions in the Toms River drainage basin and selected subbasins, New Jersey, 1986 

[-- no station number or identifier] 

l Land use, in percentage of drainage area

Developed Undeveloped 

U.S. 

Geological Drainage 

Survey Station- area, in Commercial Forests 

station name square plus plus 

number Station name identifier miles Residential industria12 Miscellaneous3 4 Tota1 wetlands 

01408500 Toms River near Toms River, N.J. 123 9.6 7.2 11.4 28.2 71.8 

01408600 Wrangel Brook near Toms River, N.J. WB1 19.5 22.2 5.6 6.7 34.5 65.5 

01408620 Davenport Branch near Dover Forge, N.J. DB 7.45 18.6 2.3 1.9 22.8 77.2 

01408640 Wrangel Brook near South Toms River, N.J. WB2 34.0 21.4 5.4 4.9 31.7 68.3 

01408705 lakes Branch near South Toms River, N.J. JB 1.45 .0 .0 .0 .0 100.0 

01408725 Long Swamp Creek near Toms River, N.J. LSC1 3.46 26.3 18.2 12.4 56.9 43.1 

01408728 Long Swamp Creek at Toms River, N.J. LSC2 6.57 32.5 23.3 8.4 64.2 35.8 

Toms River drainage basin at mouth 192 13.8 8.3 11.1 33.2 66.8 

Toms River drainage basin below 01408500 69.0 22.3 10.3 10.7 43.3 56.7 

lCalculated from U.S. Geological Survey digital data (U.S. Geological Survey, 1986). 

2Includes commercial and services, transportation, communications, utilities, and recreational land uses. 

3Includes agricultural land, barren land, and water bodies (river channels, lakes, ponds, reservoirs, bays, estuaries, and cranberry bogs). 

4Sum of residential , commercial plus industrial, and miscellaneous land-use percentages. 
River, N.J., a~d LSC2 at TOI?s River, N.J., 2.82 an~ OJO mi, respectively, upstream from the 

confluence wIth the Toms RIver embayment. Land tn the basins upstream from sites LSC 1 and 

LSC2 is classified as highly developed (greater than 50 percent of the land in the contributing 

drainage area is developed). (See Methods section for an expanded description of land-use 

classification.) Surface runoff probably is significant at sites LSC 1 and LSC2 because the large 

amount of imperious surfaces in the basin reduces the infiltration rate of rainfall. The land-use 

distributions in the basins upstream from the measurement sites are summarized in table 1. 

Wran2el Brook Basin 

2 The Wrangel Brook drains an area of 34.4 mi in Ocean County and flows 10J mi to its 

confluence with the Torns River, 3.72 miles downstream from the USGS gaging station on the 

Toms River near Toms River, N.J. (fig. 1). Most development is in the lower third of the basin 

(fig. 2); U.S. Fish and Wildlife Management area occupies almost half of the undeveloped area in 

the upper third of the basin. Two water-quality measurement sites are located on Wrangel 

Brook--WB 1 near Toms River, N.J., 0.57 mi upstream from the confluence with the Davenport 

Branch, and WB2 near South Toms River, N.J., 0.59 mi upstream from the confluence with the 

Toms River. The land in the basins upstream from sites WB 1 and WB2 is moderately developed 

(from 25 to 50 percent of the land is developed). Most of this development consists of large-scale 

housing communities of 1,000 to 2,500 single-family units, with approximately one-eighth acre 

lots. The methods of construction of these communities resulted in extensive soil compaction and 

high-maintenance lawns (David Friedman, Ocean County Soil Conservation District, oral comm. 

1997). Soil compaction can decrease soil permeability, thereby affecting ground-water flow and 

stonn runoff. Before the residential development of the early 1970's, several poultry fanns were 

located within the Wrangel Brook basin. The land-use distributions in the basins upstream from 

the measurement sites WB 1 and WB2 are similar and are summarized in table 1. 

Dayenport Branch Basin 

The Davenport Branch drains an area of 14.2 mi2 in Ocean County and flows 12.04 mi to 

its confluence with the Wrangel Brook (fig. 1). Most development is in the lower third of the 

basin (fig. 2), but development is increasing near the headwaters. The residential development in 

the lower part of the basin is similar to that in the Wrangel Brook basin. One water-quality 

measurement site is located on the Davenport Branch (DB) near Dover Forge, N.J., 5.49 mi 

upstream from the confluence with the Wrangel Brook. Land in the basin upstream from this site 

is classified as slightly developed (from 10 to 25 percent of the land in the contributing drainage 

area is developed). The presence of large ponds in the basin (former cranberry bogs) can reduce 

the variability of streamflow due to storm runoff by retaining the runoff. The land-use 

distribution in the basin upstream from the measurement site is summarized in table 1. 

Jakes Branch Basin 

The Jakes Branch drains an area of 9.54 mi2 in Ocean County and flows 6.29 mi to the 

Toms River embayment (fig. 1). The basin is slightly developed; the greatest amount of 

residential and commercial development is in the lower third (fig. 2). One water-quality 

measurement site is located on Jakes Branch (JB) near SQuth Toms River, N.J., 3.98 mi upstream 

8 
from the confluence with the Toms River embayment. Land in the basin upstream from the site is 

classified as undeveloped because it is all forest plus wetlands. The land-use distribution in the 

basin upstream from the measurement site is summarized in table 1. 

METHODS OF STUDY 

The following section describes the methods used in the collection and analysis of data on 

surface-water quality and streamflow. Constituents carried to a stream by storm runoff were 

quantified in samples collected during stormflow, and constituents carried to a stream by ground 

water were quantified in samples collected during base flow. The determination of instantaneous 

streamflows and the calculation of area-normalized instantaneous load values (referred to as 

yields) are described. 

Data Collection 

Surface-water-quality and streamflow data were collected during periods of base flow and 

stormflow at seven sites during May 1994 to October 1995. At four sites, samples were collected 

for chemical analysis, and water stage and streamflow were measured. At two sites, samples were 

collected for chemical analysis only. At one site, only water stage and streamflow were measured. 

NJDEP personnel from the Bureau of Marine Water Classification and Analysis measured water 

stage, collected water samples, and performed all laboratory and quality-assurance analyses. 

USGS personnel measured water stage and streamflow and developed stage-to-streamflow 

relations. The types of data collected at each measurement site are listed in table 2. 

Selection of Measurement Sites 

The sites were selected on the basis of (l) land-use distribution in the basin, (2) ability to 

establish an acceptable water stage-to-streamflow relation, and (3) suitability of the site for the 

use of automatic samplers and sensors. The locations of the seven measurement sites are shown in 

figure 1. Prior to this study, the only measurement site in the Barnegat Bay drainage basin with a 

long-term record of water-quality and streamflow data was the USGS water-quality and 

streamflow-gaging station on the Toms River near Toms River, N.J. Water-quality and streamflow 

measurements have been made at this site since 1963. No additional data were collected at this 

gaging station as part of this study; however, historical water-quality and streamflow data were 

used in interpreting the data collected for this study. 

To select the water-quality measurement sites, land-use-distribution data (U.S. Geological 

Survey, 1986), recent (1992) aerial photographs, county street maps, soil surveys (Hole and 

Smith, 1989), "and field observations were used in conjunction with a geographic information 

system to evaluate land use in the contributing drainage areas. For this investigation, the 26 level 

II land-use categories identified (Anderson and others, 1976) were grouped into four categories: 

(l) residential; (2) commercial plus industrial, including commercial and services, transportation, 

communications, utilities, recreational, and industrial; (3) miscellaneous, including agricultural, 

waterbodies (river channels, lakes, ponds, reservoirs, bays, estuaries, and cranberry bogs), and 

barren lands; and (4) forest plus wetlands. The amount of agricultural land was not large enough 

9 
...i. 

o 

Table 2. Types of data collected at measurement sites in the Toms River drainage basin, N"ew Jersey, May 1994 to October 1995 

[.", data were collected;--, data were not collected] 

Type of data collected 

U.S. Geological Survey Stream Water 

station number Site name (Identifier) stage Streamflow quality 

01408600 Wrangel Brook near Toms River, N.J. (WBl) ." ." V 

101408620 Davenport Branch near Dover Forge, N.J. (DB) ." V V 

01408630 Davenport Branch near Toms River, N.J. V V 

01408640 Wrangel Brook near South Toms River, N.J. (WB2) --2 2 ." 

01408705 Jakes Branch near South Toms River, N.J. (JB) .,,3 

401408725 Long Swamp Creek near Toms River, N.J. (LSCl) V V V 

01408728 Long Swamp Creek at Toms River, N.J. (LSC2) V V V 

INo data were collected prior to September 22, 1994. 

2Streamftow and stage were measured once (at different times) to verify streamflow estimates. 

3Data were collected only once during base flow in spring. 

4No data were collected after August 1994 because the stream dried up. 
to constitute a separate category; only about 5 percent of the land in the entire basin was identified 

as agricultural with most of it in the far headwaters, north and northwest regions, of the basin. 

Few subbasins could be identified that had a single, predominant land use other than forest 

plus wetlands, the predominant land use in the Toms River drainage basin. Therefore, waterquality measurement sites were selected in areas with two or more predominant land uses, one of 

which was forest plus wetlands. For this study, basin development was classified as highly, 

moderately, slightly, or undeveloped. In a highly developed area, more than 50 percent of the land 

in the drainage area is developed. Residential is the predominant land use and forest plus wetlands 

is the secondary land use. The developed areas include residential, single-family units with curbs 

and sidewalks, and many commercial and industrial areas. In a moderately developed area, 

25 to 50 percent of the land in the drainage area is developed. Forest plus wetlands is the 

predominant land use and residential is the secondary land use. The developed areas are mostly 

residential, single-family units with curbs and sidewalks, and some commercial areas with 

shopping centers and parking lots. In a slightly developed area, 10 to less than 25 percent of the 

land in the drainage area is developed. Forest plus wetlands is the predominant land use and 

residential is the secondary land use. The developed areas are mostly residential, single-family 

units with few curbs and sidewalks, and a few commercial areas. In an undeveloped area, less 

than 10 percent of the land in the drainage area is developed. 

Other criteria for site selection were (1) measurements could be made at all water stages so 

that a relation could be developed between water stage and streamflow (a rating curve) and (2) 

automatic samplers and sensors could be used during storms. Davenport Branch near Toms River 

was selected as a measurement site for water stage and streamflow measurements only to provide 

data for streamflow estimates for the site at Wrangel Brook near South Toms River, N.J., (WB2) 

because streamflow at site WB2 could not be measured directly at all water stages. Site WB2 was 

selected for water-quality sampling as a verification site because land use in the drainage area 

upstream from site WB2 is similar to land use in the drainage area upstream from the USGS 

water-quality and gaging station on the Toms River near Toms River, N.J. 

Sampling Methods and Criteria 

Initial plans were to collect water samples and make water-stage measurements once during 

base flow and several times throughout two storms in winter (January 1 to March 31), spring 

(April 1 to June 30), summer (July 1 to September 30), and fall (October 1 to December 31). As a 

result of equipment, scheduling, and weather conditions, all planned water samples were not 

collected, and water stage measurements were not made at all of the sites during base flow and 

stormflow of each season during the initial 12-month period. In addition, the sampling period was 

extended six months. 

For base-flow sampling, a maximum-rainfall criterion of less than 0.1 in. of rainfall during 

the 7 days prior to sampling was used. The minimum-rainfall criteria for stormflow sampling 

during the growing season (April 1 to October 31) and nongrowing season (November 1 to March 

31), 1 in. and 0.5 in., respectively, were based on an analysis of precipitation data collected at 

Toms River, N.J., (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, 1991 and 1992) and 

streamflow data from nearby USGS gaging stations collected during 1991-92. Larger total11 
rainfall amounts were required during the growing season than the nongrowing season because of 

greater water loss by evapotranspiration, lower stream and ground-water levels, and longer dry 

spells between storms. The dates for the growing and nongrowing seasons were based on the 

average times of the first and final frosts in New Jersey (Ruffner and Bair, 1977). 

The types of measurements made and samples collected at the measurement sites during 

the 15 samplings are listed in table 3. During most base-flow samplings, water samples were 

collected and specific conductance, pH, temperature, and dissolved oxygen measurements were 

made manually (discrete measurements). To ensure that critical times, relating to the rise, peak, 

and fall on hydrographs, were analyzed for each storm, water samples were collected manually 

and with automatic samplers at 1- or 2-hour intervals throughout each storm. Stage-sensors of the 

automatic samplers recorded \-vater stages \-vith an internal microprocessor. Automatic sensors 

measured and recorded specific conductance, pH, temperature, and dissolved oxygen every 15 

minutes throughout the storms (continuous measurements). After analyzing the hydrographs for 

each site, field personnel selected 1 to 12 samples for analysis. Automatic samplers and sensors 

were not used at all sites during all storms. 

Determination of Instantaneous Streamflows 

Water stage and streamflow were measured at five sites over a range of flow conditions 

(table 2). Measurements at site LSCI were discontinued in August 1994 because the stream dried 

up. Measurement did not begin at site DB until mid-September 1994 because of equipment 

shortages. Relations between stage and streamflow (rating curves) developed from these data 

were used to convert the water-stage value at the time of each water-sample collection and 

measurement of specific conductance, pH, temperature, and dissolved oxygen to an 

instantaneous streamflow value. Rating curves were developed by using standard USGS stream 

gaging procedures as described by Rantz and others (1982). 

During base flow, water stages were measured manually from staff plates and reference 

marks at the time of water-sample collection and every time streamflow, specific conductance, 

pH, temperature, and dissolved oxygen were measured at sites LSC1, LSC2, WB1, and DB. 

During stormflow at these sites, water stages were measured manually from staff plates and 

reference marks at the start, middle, and end of most storms (to calibrate the stage-sensor 

readings) and at the time of streamflow measurement. In addition, during most storms, water 

stages at sites LSC2, WB 1, and DB were recorded every 10 minutes by the stage sensor of the 

automatic samplers. These measurements were sometimes retained by the microprocessor of the 

stage sensor as hourly averages or hourly maximums and minimums. Water stages were 

measured manually at Davenport Branch near Toms River about the time of water-sample 

collection and measurement of specific conductance, pH, temperature, and dissolved oxygen at 

site WB2. 

At site WB 1, water stages measured manually were in close agreement with those recorded 

by the stage sensor because the bed slope between the staff plate and sensor was slight. At site 

LSC 1, water stages measured manually were not always in close agreement with those recorded 

by the stage sensor because standing waves formed duringstormflow. During the study at site 

DB, beavers built a large dam in the culvert just upstream from the water-stage reference mark. 

12 
...A. 

W 

Table 3. Sampling dates and types of data collected at measurement sites in the Toms River drainage basin, New Jersey, May 1994 to October 1995 

[Sites are listed in order of decreasing intensity of land development in the contributing drainage area. LSCl, Long Swamp Creek near Toms River; LSC2, Long Swamp 

Creek at Toms River; WBl, Wrangel Brook near Toms River; WB2, Wrangel Brook near South Toms River; DB, Davenport Branch; JB, Jakes Branch; WQ, water quality; 

W, winter season (January through March); Sp, spring season (April through June); Su, summer season (July through September); F, fall season (October through 

December); G, growing season (~pril through October); NG, non-growing season (November through March); S, samples were collected for water-quality analysis; --, no 

sample(s) were collected for water-quality analysis or no streamflow or stream-stage measurement(s) were made; M, manually measured stream stage; A, stream stage 

measured by stage sensor of automatic sampler.] 

Measurement types 

Condition S I' LSCI LSC2 WBI 'WB2 DB JB 

ampmg of streamflow d Event ate Season WQ Stage WQ Stage WQ Stage WQ Stage WQ Stage WQ 

Base 05124/94 Sp G Sl,2 M Sl,2 M Sl,2 M Sl,2 

2 Base 06/02/94 Sp G S2,3 M S2,3 M S2,3 M S2,3 

3 Storm 07115194 Su G S4 M S4 M S4 M S4 

4 Base 09/08/94 Su G Sl,3,4 M Sl,3,4 M Sl,3,4 Sl,3,4 M 

5 Storm 09122/94 Su G S A,M S5 M S5,6 S A,M 

6 Storm 11109/94 F NG A A A 

7 Storm 11/27/94 F NG S7 A,M S7 A,M S5,7 S7 A 

8 Storm 01106/95 W NG Sl,2,5,8 A,M S A,M S S5,6 A,M 

9 Base 03/07/95 W NG S M S M S S M 

10 Storm 03/08/95 W NG Sl,5 A,M S A,M S A S A,M 

11 Base 04/20/95 Sp G S9 M S9 M S9 S9 M S9 

12 Base 08/30/95 Su G S M S M S S M 

13 Storm 09/27/95 Su G S A,M S A,M S S A,M 

14 Base 10/04/95 F G S A,M S A,M S S A,M 

15 Storm 10/05/95 F G S A,M S A,M S S A,M 

INo measurement of pH. 

2No measurement oftemperature. 

3No sample collected for analysis of total suspended solids. 

4No sample collected for analysis of total hydrolyzable plus orthophosphorus. 

5No measurement of specific conductance. 

6No sample collected for analysis of total or dissolved ammonia. 

7No sample collected for analysis of dissolved ammonia, nitrite, and nitrite plus nitrite. 

8No measurement of dissolved oxygen concentration. 

~o sample collected for analysis of bacteria. 
The water-stage reference mark used for the rating curve was transferred to a new location 

downstream from the dam. Streamflow was still seriously affected by the dam, and the rating 

curve developed for site DB was poor. 

Instantaneous streamflows, which were used to determine yields, were determined from 

rating curves by using measured water stages. Water stages during base-flow and the first 

stormflow samplings were measured manually for use in determining instantaneous streamflows. 

Water stages during all other stormfiow samplings were estimated by linearly interpolating 

values between hourly averages of water stages recorded by the stage sensor prior to and after the 

actual sampling or measurement time. At site DB, stage-sensor readings were retained by the 

microprocessor of the sensor as hourly averages or as hourly maximum and minimum waterstage measurements; no manual \vater-stage measurements were made to calibrate the stagesensor readings during the November 1994 storm (event 7, table 3). At sites WBI and LSC2, 

stage-sensor readings were retained by the microprocessor as hourly averages or as hourly 

maximum and minimum water-stage measurements except dUling the March 1995 storm (~vent 

10, table 3) when 10-minute-interval discrete measurements were retained. Ten-minute-interval 

discrete measurements were also retained during event 10 at site WB2. Streamflows determined 

from estimated water stages should be used with caution, especially when only hourly averaged 

stage values are available, because the estimated and actual streamflows might be different for 

these relatively fast rising streams. 

Streamflows could not be directly measured at site WB2 during most stages. An equation 

was developed to estimate the streamflows at site WB2 by using (1) streamflow measurements at 

sites WB 1 and Davenport Branch near Toms River, (2) average times of travel, and (3) estimated 

unmonitored-area streamflows. The times of travel, estimated from stages measured dwing event 

10, were 1 hour 30 minutes between sites WB 1 and WB2 and 2 hours 45 minutes between sites 

Davenport Branch near Toms River and WB2. Streamflows at site WB 1, which were estimated 

from hourly averages of stages recorded by a stage sensor during event 10 and a ratio of adjusted 

areas, were used to construct a hydrograph for site WB2. This hydrograph closely follows the 

shape of the 10-minute-interval stage hydrograph recorded at WB2 by the stage sensor during the 

storm. Streamflow values for site WB2 were estimated by using the following equation: 

(1) 

where 

Q8640 is the streamflow estimated at site WB2, 

Q8600 is the streamflow estimated at site WB 1, 

A8640* is the adjusted drainage area for site WB2, 

2 A8600 is the drainage area for site WB 1 (19.5 mi ), and 

n is a constant (for Coastal Plain drainage, n = 0.93). 

The adjusted drainage area for site WB2 was determined as follows: 

A8640* = A * + A8600 + Awn, (2) 8630

14 
where 

A8640* is the adjusted drainage area for site WB2, 

A8630* is the adjusted drainage area for site DB, 

2 A8600 is the drainage area for site WB 1 (19.5 mi ), and 

Aum is the unmonitored drainage area for site WB2 (2.5 mi2). 

The adjusted drainage area for site DB was determined as follows: 

A8630* = 2/3 [A8630], (3) 

where 

A8630* is the adjusted drainage area for site DB _and 

A8630 is the drainage area for site DB (12.1 mi2). 

3 A streamflow value of 80.2 ft /s, calculated by using equations 1, 2, and 3, compares favorably to 

a measured streamflow of 87.4 ft3/s at site WB2. All estimated streamflow values for site WB2 

were calculated by using equation 1. 

Flow-duration values during base flow for sites WB 1, DB, and LSC2 were estimated by 

using streamflow measurements for these sites and for the USGS streamflow-gaging station on 

the Toms River near Toms River, N.J. (table 4). Flow-duration values were determined from flowduration curves, which give the percentage of time that a particular streamflow value would be 

equaled or exceeded at that site (Searcy, 1959). Flow-duration curves were computed by using 

MOVE.1 (Maintenance of Variance Extension, Type 1) (Hirsch, 1982). Long-term streamflow 

records for the USGS streamflow-gaging station on the Toms River near Toms River, N.J., were 

retrieved from the National Water Information System data base (Hutchison, 1975). Flowduration values for these sites indicate differences in streamflow among streams; these values 

were used to determine which measurements would be collected during base flow and stormflow 

at each site. 

Collection and Analysis of Water Samples 

Water samples were collected at six sites (table 2). Sample collection at site LSC1 was 

discontinued in August 1994 because the stream dried up and was initiated at site DB in midSeptember 1994. Water samples were collected only once during base flow at site JB. The 

sampling site WB2 was moved 1,000 feet upstream from the original site because of vandalism to 

equipment. During most base-flow sampling, one set of water samples was collected and specific 

conductance, pH, temperature, and dissolved oxygen were measured manually. During most 

stormflow sampling, water samples were collected with automatic samplers every 1 to 2 hours, 

and specific conductance, pH, temperature, and dissolved oxygen were measured and recorded by 

automatic sensors every 15 minutes. 

Water samples were collected 14 times during May 1994 to October 1995 (table 3). Samples 

were collected seven times during base flow, three times in the spring, twice in the summer, and 

once each in fall and winter. Of these, six were in the growing season and one was in the non15 
Table 4. Estimated flow-duration values for measurement sites in the Toms River drainage basin, New 

Jersey, May 1994 to October 1995 

Estimated daily streamflow 

Flow- [cubic feet per second] 

duration Wrangel Brook Davenport Branch Long Swamp Creek 

limits Toms River 

near near at 

(in percent) near Toms River, Dover Forge, Toms River, Toms River WBI DB LSC2 

97.5 . 07 O .

95 83.8 20.4 1.37 .18 

90 97.6 22.7 1.92 .26 

85 110 24.7 2.49 .36 

80 121 26.3 3.07 .46 

75 131 27.9 3.67 .57 

70 141 29.4 4.35 .69 

65 152 30.9 5.08 .83 

60 163 32.4 5.90 1.00 

55 174 33.9 6.84 1.18 

50 186 35.5 7.90 1.40 

45 197 37.0 9.07 1.65 

40 211 38.8 10.5 1.96 

35 221 40.6 12.1 2.32 

30 241 42.6 14.1 2.79 

25 261 44.9 16.7 3.40 

20 283 47.6 20.1 4.23 

15 315 51.2 25.3 5.56 

10 357 55.8 33.4 7.73 

5 438 64.4 52.5 13.2 

2.5 532 73.7 80.6 21.9 

16 
growing season. Stormflow also was sampled seven times, three times in the summer and twice 

each in fall and winter. Of these, four were in the growing season and three were in the 

nongrowing season. Storrnflows during spring were not monitored during May 1994 to October 

1995. All samples for bacteria analysis were collected manually. Surface-water sampling 

methods, sample-analysis methods and results, and quality-assurance results for all water-quality 

constituents analyzed for in samples collected between May 1994 and October 1995 are reported 

separately (Connell and Schuster, 1996). 

During four base-flow samplings, one set of water-quality measurements--specific 

conductance, pH, temperature, and dissolved oxygen--was made, and water samples were 

collected. On the afternoon of October 4, 1995, field personnel anticipated a storm and deployed 

the automatic samplers and sensors. Streamflow at the time of measurement and sample 

collection, prior to the storm (event 15), was considered to be base flow (event 14) because the 

storm did not begin until the morning of October 5. 

Duplicate samples were collected once at sites WB 1 and WB2 during base-flow conditions 

(event 9) to evaluate sampling effectiveness. Samples were collected once at site WB2 during 

base flow (event 12) to verify that water quality at that site and at a location 1,000 feet upstream 

from the site were similar. At the beginning of the September 1995 storm (event 13), one set of 

composite samples at sites WB 1, WB2, and DB and one set of grab samples at site LSC2 were 

collected manually for comparison with samples collected with automatic samplers. Grab samples 

were collected at site LSC2 because the stream is narrow and well mixed at the sampling location. 

Unfiltered water samples, indicated by (U), were analyzed for total nitrogen, ammonia, 

nitrate plus nitrite, nitrite, total phosphorus, hydrolyzable phosphorus plus orthophosphorus, 

orthophosphorus, total suspended solids, and bacteria (Escherichia coliform (E. coli) and fecal 

coliform) (table 5). Filtered water samples, indicated by (F), were analyzed for total nitrogen, 

ammonia, nitrate plus nitrite, nitrite, total phosphorus, hydrolyzable phosphorus plus 

orthophosphorus, and orthophosphorus. Some constituent concentrations were calculated from 

concentrations measured in unfiltered water, indicated by (CU), and some constituent 

concentrations were calculated from concentrations measured in filtered water, indicated by (CF). 

Hydrolyzable phosphorus (CU) was calculated as the difference between hydrolyzable 

phospborus plus orthophosphorus (U) and orthophosphorus (U). Nitrate (CF) was calculated as 

the difference between nitrate plus nitrite (F) and nitrite (F). When nitrite (F) was less than 0.003, 

nitrate (CF) was assumed to be equal to nitrate plus nitrite (F). Calculated concentrations (C) of 

organic nitrogen were calculated as the difference between total nitrogen (U) and the sum of 

ammonia (U) and nitrate plus nitrite (F). The sum of ammonia (U) and nitrate plus nitrite (U) was 

used to calculate organic nitrogen (C) in samples collected during the November 1994 storm 

because no filtered water samples were collected. 

As a result of equipment and weather conditions, the number of water samples collected for 

analysis of all constituents is different at each site. The number and type of analyses for samples 

collected at the six water-quality measurement sites during May 1994 to October 1995 are listed 

in table 5. No samples were collected at any site for analysis of total suspended solids during two 

base-flow samplings, for total hydrolyzable phosphorus plus orthophosphorus (U) during one 

base-flow and one stormflow sampling, or for bacterial analysis during one base-flow sampling. 

17 
At sites WB2 and DB, no samples were collected for ammonia analysis during one storm 

sampling. No filtered samples were collected at any site during one storm sampling. At several 

sites during early base-flow and stormfiow samplings, measurement of specific conductance, pH, 

temperature, and dissolved oxygen was omitted. Analysis for total nitrogen (F), nitrite plus 

nitrate (U), nitrite (U), total phosphorus (U), hydrolyzable phosphorus plus orthophosphorus (F), 

orthophosphorus (U), and total phosphorus (F) was discontinued during the study. As a result, 

nitrate (CF), hydrolyzable phosphorus (CU), and organic nitrogen (C) could not be calculated for 

all samples (table 5). 

In this report, concentrations of all nitrogen species are expressed as nitrogen in milligrams 

per liter (mglL). During the study, the effective method-detection limit (MDL) was evaluated 

periodically and changed for some constituents according to laboratory procedures. The tvIDL for 

total nitrogen was 0.028 mg/L during May 1994 to February 1995 and 0.023 mg/L during 

March 1995 to October 1995; for ammonia, 0.007 mg/L and 0.009 mg/L, respectively; and for 

nitrate plus nitrite, 0.015 mg/L and 0.022 mg/L, respectively. The MDL for nitrite was 

0.003 mg/L. Concentrations of all phosphorus species are expressed as phosphorus in milligrams 

per liter. For hydrolyzable phosphorus plus orthophosphorus, the MDL was 0.009 mgIL during 

May 1994 to February 1995 and 0.013 mg/L during March 1995 to October 1995 and for 

orthophosphorus, 0.013 mg/L and 0.002 mg/L, respectively. Concentrations of total suspended 

solids are expressed as milligrams per liter and the MDL was 2.00 mg/L. Concentrations of 

bacteria are expressed as the most probable number of bacteria per 100 milliliters of sample 

(MPNIlOO mL). 

Data Analysis 

Of the 21 water-quality constituents analyzed for during the study, sufficient data were 

available to determine concentrations for only 11 constituents and to determine yields for only 8 

constituents because the types of analyses changed during the sampling period. Area-normalized 

instantaneous load values (yields) for total nitrogen (U), ammonia (F), nitrate (CF), organic 

nitrogen (C), hydrolyzable phosphorus plus orthophosphorus (U), orthophosphorus (F), total 

suspended solids, and fecal-coliform bacteria for sites LSC2, WB 1, WB2, and DB were 

computed by using the following equation: 

y= (C x Q x f)/ A, (4) 

where 

Y is the yield in pounds per day per square mile ((lb/d)/mi2) or most probable 

number per day per square mile ((MPN/d)/mi2); 

C is the measured concentration in milligrams per liter or most probable number 

per 100 milliliters; 

Q is the instantaneous streamflow in cubic feet per second; 

f is a conversion factor equal to 5.3936 pounds per milligram, seconds per day, 

liters per cubic feet ((lb/mg)(s/d)(L/ft3)) if the concentration is in milligrams per 

liter or 2.45 x 107 seconds per day, milliliters per cubic feet ((s/d)(mL/ft3)) if the 

concentration is in most probable number per 1 00 milliliters; and 

A is the drainage area in square miles. 

18 
Median concentrations and yields are weighted toward values calculated for samples 

collected during those storms in which a large number of samples was collected. Only one set of 

samples was collected at most sites during each base-flow sampling. For most constituents, 

concentrations in replicate base-flow samples did not differ appreciably, and therefore, the 

medians were not greatly affected. One to 12 sets of samples were collected at each site during 

each storm; 25th and 75th percentiles were computed for sites where at least five samples were 

analyzed. 

The Kruskal-Wallis nonparametric statistical test was used to determine whether 

concentrations and yields of each constituent differed among sites LSC2, WB 1, WB2, and DB at 

the 0.05 significance level in (1) base flow during the growing season, (2) stormflow during the 

growing season, and (3) stormflow in the nongrowing season. This procedure evaluates whether 

three or more populations are identical by testing the hypothesis that there is no significant 

difference between group medians; the test is applicable to data sets that are not normally 

distributed (Helsel and Hirsch, 1992). Concentrations and yields during base flow could not be 

compared to those during stormflow in each season because samples were not collected during 

spring storms; concentrations and yields during base flow could not be compared to those during 

stormflow in the nongrowing season because samples were collected during only one base flow. 

The nonparametric Tukey multiple comparison test was used to detect differences in 

concentrations and yields between the sites by determining at which site(s) the means of the 

concentration or yield ranks differed (Helsel and Hirsch, 1992). 

The Wilcoxon rank-sum nonparametric statistical test was used to determine whether 

concentrations and yields of each constituent at each site differed at the 0.05 significance level in 

(1) stormflow during the growing and nongrowing seasons (a seasonal difference) and (2) base 

flow and stormflow in the growing season (a flow difference). This procedure tests whether two 

populations are identical and is applicable to data sets that are not normally distributed (Helsel 

and Hirsch, 1992). These test results are difficult to interpret because the number of observations 

during each season and streamflow were different at each site. Samples were collected during 

base flow only once in the nongrowing season. More stormflows were sampled in the growing 

season than the nongrowing season. Fewer base flows and stormflows were sampled at site DB 

than at sites LSC2, WB1, and WB2. 

RELATION OF WATER QUALITY TO LAND USE 

The main contributors of water-quality constituents to the Toms River are nonpoint sources 

in the basin because there are no major point-source discharges to the river. Constituents from 

diffuse, nonpoint sources are transported to the river by (1) ground water that contains infiltrated 

water and effluent from leaking septic systems, underground-storage tanks, and landfills and (2) 

storm runoff from developed and undeveloped areas and impervious surfaces (road surfaces, 

parking lots, and roofs). Instream concentrations in the Toms River are the result of ground-water 

and storm-runoff contributions that are modified by instream biological and chemical processes. 

19 
NPS contributions to a surface-water body are greatly affected by the type and intensity of 

development and historical land use in the contributing drainage area. Concentrations of some 

constituents are typically associated with certain human activities, such as sediment from 

construction sites, and nutrients from agricultural runoff and intensive lawn maintenance. 

Increased amounts of impervious surfaces reduce the infiltration rate of rainfall and increase 

storm runoff. Soil compaction during building construction also can reduce infiltration. Forest 

plus wetlands land use has greater water retention and less storm runoff than other land uses as a 

result of ponding and dense vegetation. The presence of some constituents in ground water can 

be attributed to historical land uses. Before the residential development of the early 1970 's, 

several poultry farms were located within the Wrangel Brook basin; nutrients from agricultural 

runoff, which infiltrated to ground water, could still be present in ground water. Because of the 

sio\v movement of ground "vater, the concentrations of these constituents in receiving streams 

can remain high for many years. 

Ground-water contributions to a stream are relatively constant, varying only slightly with 

season. Concentrations of constituents carried to a stream by ground water were quantified in 

samples collected during base flow. Storm runoff, composed of overland runoff (water that flows 

overland when rainfall exceeds the infiltration rate) and interflow (infiltrated water that moves in 

a horizontal direction in the lower-permeable subsoil), contributes to a stream intennittently, 

depending on storm intensity and frequency, and only during high flows. Storm runoff dilutes the 

ground-water contributions to a stream. Constituents intennittentiy carried to a stream by storm 

runoff along with the constant contributions from ground water were quantified in samples 

collected during stonnflow. 

Instream concentrations are influenced by streamflow because the contributions from storm 

runoff are flow dependent. The use of loads (mass per time) instead of concentration (mass per 

volume) removes the influence of changing streamflow (volume per time) on instream 

constituent amounts. The constituent load in a stream is detennined as the product of the 

concentration and the streamflow. Yields (loads normalized to the basin area) determined for 

different sites are directly comparable. The magnitudes of the loads and yields are dependent on 

(l) the type of land use (such as residential, commercial plus industrial, agricultural, and forest 

plus wetlands), (2) the intensity of development (highly, moderately, slightly, or undeveloped), 

(3) the historical land use in the basin, (4) the mode of constituent transport to a stream (mainly 

ground water or stonn runoff), and (5) the percentage of time streamflow is base flow or 

storrnflow. 

The magnitude of annual yields is dependent on both the loading during base flow and 

storrnflow and the percentage of time the streamflow is base flow or stormflow. For Wrangel 

Brook and Davenport Branch, base flow probably is a larger component of total annual flow than 

is stormfiow. The base-flow component as a percentage of total annual streamflow was estimated 

to range from 80 to 89 percent at the USGS streamflow-gaging station, Toms River near Toms 

River, N.J. (Watt and others, 1994). For Long Swamp Creek, stonnflow probably is a larger 

component of total annual flow than is base flow because of the large amount of impervious 

surface area in the basin. 

20 
Statistical summaries of the concentrations of 11 water-quality constituents nleasured at 

sites LSC 1, LSC2, WB 1, WB2, DB, and JB are listed in table 6. Concentrations of constituents 

from which the statistical summaries were determined are listed in appendix 1. Streamflows and 

water stages measured during May 1994 to October 1995 are listed in table 7; estimated 

streamflows are listed in appendix 1. Statistical summaries of the yields of eight water-quality 

constituents at sites LSC2, WB 1, WB2, and DB are listed in table 8; yield values are reported to 

two significant figures when units are (lb/d)/mi2 and to one significant figure when units are . 2 (MPN/d)/mi . All calculated yields are listed in appendix 2. 

In this section, for each water-quality constituent, concentrations in samples collected 

during base flow and stormflow are presented, followed by a discussion of the pattern of 

constituent concentrations during storms, differences in concentrations among the sites, and 

seasonal and flow differences relating to the intensity of land development in the drainage areas 

upstream from the measurement sites. Yields are then presented followed by a discussion of 

differences among the sites and seasonal and flow differences. Generalized observations on 

specific conductance, pH, temperature, and dissolved oxygen in the four tributaries also are 

presented. 

Nitrogen is an essential element for plant and animal growth; however, sufficiently large 

concentrations of certain nitrogen species can adversely affect the quality of surface water by 

causing excess algal growth (eutrophication) or toxicity to aquatic and terrestrial animals. 

Important forms of nitrogen in surface water are, in order of decreasing oxidation state, nitrate, 

nitrite, ammonia, and organic nitrogen. The cycling of nitrogen is controlled primarily by 

biological processes. Nitrogen enters aquatic environments from fertilizers, agricultural wastes, 

decomposition of organic matter, atmospheric deposition, biotic fixation, and soils and rocks. 

Ground water and storm runoff are important sources of nitrate and ammonia in surface water. 

High concentrations of nitrite and nitrate can reduce the oxygen-carrying capacity of hemoglobin 

in warm-blooded animals. Un-ionized ammonia can be toxic to aquatic organisms. 

Total nitrogen 

During base flow, concentrations of total nitrogen (U) at sites LSC 1, LSC2, WB 1, WB2, 

DB, and JB ranged from 0.238 to 1.471 mglL. Median concentrations ranged from 0.463 mgIL at 

site DB (downstream from a slightly developed area) to 0.879 mglL at site WB 1 (downstream 

from a moderately developed area) (table 6). During stormfiow, concentrations at all sites, except 

site JB where no stormfiow samples were collected, ranged from 0.271 to 1.483 mg/L; median 

concentrations ranged from 0.496 mglL at site DB to 0.863 mgIL at site WB 1 (downstream from 

a moderately developed area) (table 6). 

Concentrations of total nitrogen (U) in the replicate samples collected during base flow were 

slightly different at sites WB 1 (1.071 and 0.824 mglL) and WB2 (0.765 and 0.977 mgIL). At site 

LSC2, the concentration was greater in the sample collected with an automatic sampler (A-S) 

(1.191 mg/L) than in the grab sample (0.530 mgIL); likewise at site WBl, the concentration was 

greater in the A-S sample (1.072 mg/L) than in the composite sample (0.715 mgIL). 

21 
Table 7. Measured streamfiows at measurement sites in the Toms River drainage basin, New Jersey, May 1994 to October 1995 

[Sites are arranged in order of decreasing intensity of land development in the contributing drainage areas. ft, feet; ft3/s, cubic feet per second; --, not measured] 

Date Time Stage Streamflow Date Time Stage Streamflow 

Station (month-clay-year) (hours: minute s ) (ft) 3 3 (ft /s) Station (month-clay-year) (hours: minute s ) (ft) (ft /S) 

Long Swam~ Creek near Toms River. LSC 1 Daven~ort Branch near Toms River 

5-26-94 11:45 8.49 0.07 6-15-94 14:25 0.56 15.3 

6-15-94 15:30 8.77 .00 7-15-94 15:05 0.53 13.2 

7-15-94 11:35 .004 8-18-94 12:47 0.60 19.6 

8-18-94 15:20 8.47 .04 9-23-94 12:45 0.68 26.0 

11-28-94 14:20 0.60 17.1 

Long Swamp Creek at Toms River. LSC2 3-1-95 13:26 0.56 15.2 

5-26-94 14:30 3.01 2.42 3-9-95 12:21 0.57 15.7 

6-8-94 13:10 2.89 1.88 4-21-95 9:30 0.48 9.01 

6-15-94 11:28 2.86 1.29 6-12-95 16:48 0.43 7.30 

7-15-94 9:40 3.08 3.93 

8-18-94 II :15 2.92 1.55 Davennort Branch near Dover Forge. DB 

9-22-94 14:57 2.99 1.96 5-26-94 16:50 9.03 10.0 

9-23-94 9:05 3.25 8.89 6-15-94 9:50 8.74 7.48 

11-28-94 1l:50 3.00 9.17 8-18-94 9:50 8.96 9.60 

3-1-95 10:37 2.89 1.62 9-23-94 11:07 9.23 13.90 

3-8-95 21:56 3.08 6.54 11-28-94 15:20 8.86 7.79 

3-9-95 l:24 3.37 13.9 3-1-95 12:20 8.99 7.10 

3-9-95 11:17 3.07 4.11 3-9-95 15:43 8.96 6.17 

4-21-95 8:37 2.71 .23 4-21-95 11:40 8.54 3.04 

6-12-95 19:20 2.74 .27 6-12-95 15:16 8.39 1.22 

8-31-95 8:15 2.52 .02 9-6-95 15:00 8.20 0.25 

10-5-95 9:15 3.45 18.2 10-05-95 13:45 8.70 1.09 

Wrangel Brook near Toms River. WB 1 

6-15-94 15:48 2.91 26.0 

8-18-94 13:40 3.55 44.8 

9-23-94 13:41 4.16 81.0 

11-28-94 13:25 3.65 54.3 

3-1-95 14:09 3.37 45.8 

3-8-95 23:39 3.75 66.5 

3-9-95 13:21 3.48 49.1 

4-21-95 10:23 2.87 24.2 

6-12-95 17:56 2.65 18.7 

8-31-95 9:35 2.41 12.4 

10-5-95 10:40 3.30 41.9 

N

N 
Concentrations were similar in the composite and A-S samples at site DB and in the composite 

and grab samples at site WB2. 

The distributions of total-nitrogen (U) concentrations in samples collected during base flow 

and stormflow are shown in figure 3; sites are arranged from left to right in order of decreasing 

intensity of land development in the contributing drainage areas. Concentrations were different 

among sites LSC2, WB 1, WB2, and DB during base flow in the growing season and stormflow in 

the nongrowing season, but similar in samples collected during stormflow in the growing season 

when analyzed by using the Kruskal-Wallis test (table 9). During base flow in the growing season 

and stormflow in the nongrowing season, concentrations were greater at site WB 1 (downstream 

from a moderately developed area) than at site DB (downstream from a slightly developed area) 

when analyzed by using the Tukey test (table 10). Concentrations during stormflow were greater 

during the nongrowing season than during the growing season at sites WB 1 and WB2 

(downstream from moderately developed areas) when analyzed by using the Wilcoxon rank-sum 

test (table 11). 

Samples were collected throughout each storm to determine how the concentrations of each 

water-quality constituent changed during the storms. The concentrations of total nitrogen (U) in 

samples collected at site LSC2 during March 1995 are shown in figure 4. For most storms, 

concentrations were greatest during increasing streamflow, shown by the rise of the hydrograph. 

Concentrations always decreased near the end of the rising limb of the hydrograph. 

Concentrations were smallest in samples collected just plior to or at the streamflow peak and 

typically increased as the flow decreased, shown by the falling limb of the hydrograph. The 

pattern of concentration change during the March 1995 storm at site LSC2 is similar to those 

observed at the other sites during other storms. Because total nitrogen (U) is a measure of several 

nitrogen species that can be dissolved or bound to particles, the concentration of total nitrogen (U) 

differed from storm to storm at each site, depending on which nitrogen species was predominant. 

Although the total-nitrogen (U) concentrations were different in each sample collected at a site 

during all storms, concentrations were larger in the growing season during base flow than during 

stormflow only at site WB2 when analyzed by using the Wilcoxon rank-sum test (table 12); 

concentrations during base flow were not significantly different from concentrations during 

stormflow at all other sites. 

The distributions of yields of total nitrogen (U) calculated for samples collected during base 

flow and stormflow are shown in figure 5; sites are arranged from left to right in order of 

decreasing intensity of land development in the contributing drainage areas. Yields during base 

flow at sites LSC2, WBl, WB2, and DB ranged from 0.01 to 9.9 (lb/d)/mi2

; median yields ranged 

from 0.17 (lb/d)/mi2 at site DB to 7.6 (lb/d)/mi2 at site WB 1 (table 8). Yields during stormflow at 

these sites ran3

ed from 0.23 to 24 (lb/d)/mi2

; median yields ranged from 2.4 (lb/d)/mi2 at site DB 

to 13 (lb/d)/mi at site WB 1 (table 8). 

Yields of total nitrogen (U) differed among sites LSC2, WB 1, WB2, and DB during base 

flow in the growing season, stormflow in the growing season, and stormflow in the nongrowing 

season when analyzed by using the Kruskal-Wallis test (table 9). In general, yields were larger at 

sites WB 1 and WB2 (downstream from moderately developed areas) than at site LSC2 

(downstream from a highly developed area) when analyzed by using the Tukey test (table 10). At 

23 
BASE FLOW STORMFLOW 

(6) (6) (7) (7) (16) (20) (11) (11) 10r-------------------------------~ 10.-------------------------------~ 

AB A AB B A A A A 

- 1 - /j. -

GROWING SEASON GROWING SEASON 0.1 L-____________________ 

0.1 '---LS=-C=-1----LS-C-2-----W-B-1----W-S-2---D- LSC1 LSC2 WB1 WB2 DB JB S----l 

(11 ) (15) (10) (11) 10.----------------------~ 10.----------------------~ 

AB A AS S 

1 I- - 1 - -

NONGROWING SEASON NONGROWING SEASON 0.1 '--________________ ----.J 

0.1L--L~S::-C-2----W-B1-------W-B-2----D-B-~ LSC2 WB1 WS2 DS 

SITE SITE 

EXPLANATION 

SITE DESCRIPTIONS 

Measured concentrations for A, B, AB -- Differing letters indicate 

five or more observations significant differences in Highly developed median concentrations, LSC1, Long Swamp Creek near Toms River (6) Number of observations according to the Tukey test LSC2, Long Swamp Creek at Toms River Maximum value 

75th percentile Moderately developed 

WB1, Wrangel Brook near Toms River Median WB2, Wrangel Srook near South Toms River 

25th percentile 

Slightly developed Minimum value DB, Davenport Branch near Dover Forge 

/::,. Measured concentrations for Undeveloped less than five observations JB, Jakes Branch near South Toms River 

Figure 3. Distributions of total-nitrogen concentrations in unfiltered-water samples 

collected during base flow and stormflow in the growing and nongrowing seasons 

at measurement sites in the Toms River drainage basin, New Jersey, May 1994 to 

October 1995. 

24 
~ 

Table 9. Results of the Kruskal-Wallis test to determine whether a difference exists in concentrations and yields in samples collected during base flow in the 

growing season, stormflow in the growing season, and stormftow in the nongrowing season at measurement sites in the Toms River drainage basin, New Jersey, 

May 1994 to October 1995 

[U, concentration measured in an unfiltered-water sample; F, concentration measured in a filtered-water sample; C, calculated concentration; CF, concentration 

calculated from concentrations measured in filtered-water samples; X indicates the distributions ofthe concentrations or yields for at least one site was different 

at the 0.05 significance level; -- indicates the distributions of the concentrations or yields among the sites did not differ at the 0.05 significance level] 

Base flow Stomlflow 

Constituent Growing season Growing season Nongrowing season 

Concentrations 

Total nitrogen (U) X X 

Ammonia (F) X X X 

Nitrate (CF) X X X 

Organic nitrogen (C) 

Hydrolyzable phosphorus plus orthophosphorus (U) X X X 

Orthophosphorus(F) X X 

Total suspended solids X 

Fecal coliform bacteria X X X 

Yields 

Total nitrogen (U) X X X 

Ammonia (F) X X X 

Nitrate (CF) X X X 

Organic nitrogen (C) X X X 

Hydrolyzable phosphorus plus orthophosphorus (U) X X X 

Orthophosphorus(F) X X X 

Total suspended solids X X X 

Fecal coliform bacteria X X 
Table 10. Summary of results of the Tukey test to detennine at which measurement sites in the Toms River drainage basin, New Jersey, the concentrations and yields are greater 

than or the same as those in samples collected during base flow in the growing season, stormfiow in the growing season, and stormf1ow in the nongrowing season, May 1994 to 

October 1995 

[U, concentration measured in an unfiltered-water sample; F, concentration measured in a filtered-water sample; C, calculated concentration; CF, concentration calculated from 

concentrations measured in filtered -water samples; LSC2, Long Swamp Creek at Toms River (highly developed); WB I, Wrangel Brook near Toms River (moderately 

developed); WB2, Wrangel Brook near South Toms River (moderately developed); DB, Davenport Branch near Dover Forge (slightly developed); >, greater than; =, the same 

as; -- indicates distributions of the concentrations or yields among the sites did not differ at the 0.05 significance level; shaded areas indicate concentrations or yields are greater 

at the sites with moderate development (WBI and WB2) than at the site with high development (LSC2), or concentrations or yeilds are greater at the site with slight 

development (DB) than at the sites with moderate development] 

Base flow Stormflow 

Constituent Growing season Growing season Nongrowing season 

Concentrations 

Total nitrogen (U) WBI > DB WBI >DB 

Ammonia (F) LSC2 > WBI LSC2 > WBI = WB2 = DB 

Nitrate (CF) LSC2 = WBI = WB2 > DB 

Organic nitrogen (C) 

HydrolY7B.ble phosphorus plus orthophosphorus (U) LSC2 > WBI = WB2 LSC2 > WBI = WB2 > DB LSC2 > WBI = WB2 > DB 

-Orthophosphorus(F) LSC2 > WBI = WB2 = DB 

Total suspended solids LSC2 = WBI = WB2 > DB 

Fecal coliform bacteria LSC2 > WBI = WB2 LSC2 = WBI = WB2 > DB LSC2 > WBI = WB2 > DB 

Yields 

Total nitrogen (U) LSC2 = WBI = WB2 > DB 

Ammonia (F) WBI =WB2 > DB LSC2 > WBI > DB LSC2 = WBI = WB2 >DB 

Nitrate (CF) LSC2 = WBI = WB2 >DB 

Organic nitrogen (C) LSC2 = WBI = WB2 >DB 

Hydrolyzable phosphorus orthophosphorus (U) LSC2 = WBI = WB2 >DB LSC2 = WBI = WB2 >DB 

Orthophosphorus(F) 

Total suspended solids WB2 >DB 

Fecal coliform bacteria LSC2 = WBI = WB2 > DB LSC2 = WBI = WB2 >DB 

N 

en 
~ 

Table 11. Results of the Wilcoxon rank-sum test to determine whether a seasonal difference exists in concentrations and yields in samples collected during 

stormftow at measurement sites in the Toms River drainage basin, New Jersey, May 1994 to October 1995 

[U, concentration measured in an unfiltered-water sample; F, concentration measured in a filtered-water sample; C, calculated concentration; CF, concentration 

calculated from concentrations measured in filtered-water samples; -- indicates the distributions of the concentrations or yields during the growing season and 

nongrowing season at the site did not differ at the 0.05 significance level; G indicates the distributions of the concentrations or yields during the growing season 

and non growing season at the site differed at the 0.05 significance level and concentrations or yields are larger during the growing season; NG indicates the 

distributions of the concentrations or yields during the growing season and nongrowing season at the site differed at the 0.05 significance level and concentrations 

or yields are larger during the nongrowing season.] 

Long Swamp Creek Wrangel Brook Wrangel Brook Davenport Branch 

at Toms River near Toms River near South Toms River near Dover Forge 

(LSC2), (WB1), (WB2), (DB), 

Constituent highly developed moderately developed moderately developed slightly developed 

Concentrations 

Total nitrogen (U) NG NG 

Ammonia (F) G G G 

Nitrate (CF) NG NG NG 

Organic nitrogen (C) NG 

Hydrolyzable phosphorus plus orthophosphorus (U) G G G 

Orthophosphorus(F) G 

Total suspended solids NG G 

Fecal coliform bacteria G G G G 

Yields 

Total nitrogen (U) NG NG 

Ammonia (F) G G 

Nitrate (CF) G NG NG NG 

Organic nitrogen (C) NG NG 

Hydrolyzable phosphorus plus orthophosphorus (U) G G NG 

Orthophosphorus(F) G 

Total suspended solids 

Fecal coliform bacteria G G G G 
1.6 

Z 

W 

CJ 

0 1.4 

a: 

..-

z 

en a: 1.2 

~~ 

Z::J 

o (( 1.0 

-w !;;co.. ((en 

..- ~ 0.8 Z~ w(( 

OCJ 8 ::J 0.6 

O:::! 

I-~ 

Z Z w- 04 . :::J 

II- 0.2 U) 

Z 

0 

() 0 

2400 

o 

o 

• 

D 

10 

o 

z 

o 

() 

8 ~ 

(( 

w 

a... 

..-

w 

6 W 

u.. 

() 

CO 

::::> 

() 

4 Z 

~~ 

...J 

u.. 

2 ~ 

~ 

w 

a: 

..-

en 

l:Jl -M~ • ! 10 

0600 1200 

789 

1800 2400 0600 1200 1800 2400 06010 1200 1800 2400 

-e- Total nitrogen, during stormflow 

-II- Ammonia, during stormflow 

-.6t- Nitrite, during stormflow 

-+- Nitrate, during stormflow 

~ Organic nitrogen, during stormflow 

March 7-9, 1995 

EXPLANATION 

o Total nitrogen, during base flow 

D Ammonia, during base flow 

D,. Nitrite, during base flow 

o Nitrate, during base flow 

• Organic nitrogen, during base flow 

-- Streamflow 

N 

Q) 

Figure 4. Concentrations of total nitrogen, ammonia, nitrite, nitrate, and organic nitrogen and streamflow at the measurement 

site Long Swamp Creek at Toms River (LSC2), New Jersey, March 7-9, 1995. 
N 

CD 

Table 12. Results of the Wilcoxon rank-sum test to determine whether a flow difference exists in concentrations and yields in samples collected in the growing 

season at measurement sites in the Toms River drainage basin, New Jersey, May 1994 to October 1995 

[U, concentration measured in an unfiltered-water sample; F, concentration measured in a filtered-water sample; C, calculated concentration; CF, concentration 

calculated from concentrations measured in filtered-water samples; -- indicates the distributions of the concentrations or yields during base flow in the growing 

season and stormflow in the growing season at the site did not differ at the 0.05 significance level; B indicates the distributions of the concentrations or yields 

during base flow and stormflow at the site differed at the 0.05 significance level and concentrations or yields during base flow are larger; S indicates the 

distributions of the concentrations or yields during base flow and storm flow at the site differed at the 0.05 significance level and concentrations or yields during 

stormflow are larger; ID, insufficient data for analysis] 

Long Swamp Creek at Wrangel Brook near Wrangel Brook near Davenport Branch near 

Toms River Toms River South Toms River Dover Forge 

(LSC2), (WBl), (WB2), (DB), 

Consti tuent highly developed moderately developed moderately developed slightly developed 

Concentrations 

Total nitrogen (U) B 

Ammonia (F) S S 

Nitrate (CF) B B S 

Organic nitrogen (C) S 

Hydrolyzable phosphorus plus orthophosphorus (D) S S S 

Orthophosphorus(F) S 

Total suspended solids ID ID S 

Fecal coliform bacteria S S S ID 

Yields 

Total nitrogen (U) S S S 

Ammonia (F) S S S S 

Nitrate (CF) S S S 

Organic nitrogen (C) S S S S 

Hydrolyzable phosphorus plus orthophosphorus (D) S S S S 

cnthophosphorus(F) S S S 

Total suspended solids ID ID S S 

Fecal coliform bacteria S S S ID 
BASE FLOW STORM FLOW 

(6) (6) (7) (6) (16) (20) (11) (11) 

100 .".--------------------= 100 c:-----------------~ 

A A A B: 

B A A B 

10 10 r 

B 

1 :: 

0.1 0.1 :: 

0.01 0.01 =-

GROWING SEASON GROWING SEASON 

0.001 '---L-S-C-2---W-B-1----W-B-2----D-B----I 0.001 '----:L-::S:-::C-2---W-B-1----W-B-2----=-D-=-B-~ 

(11 ) (15) (10) 

100 ~-----------------~: 

(8) 

100.".----------------------~ 

C A B C 

10 =- 10 

1 =-

0.1 f 0.1 

0.01 =- 0.01 

NONGROWING SEASON NONGROWING SEASON 

0.001 '---L-S-C-2---W-B-1 ---W-B-2-----D-B----l 0.001 '---L-S-C-2-----W-B1----W-B-2----D-B----I 

SITE 

Calculated area-normalized loads for 

five or more observations 

(6) Number of observations 

Maximum value 

75th percentile 

Median 

25th percentile 

Minimum value 

t:,. Calculated area-normalized loads for 

less than five observations 

EXPLANATION 

SITE DESCRIPTION 

Highly developed 

LSC2, Long Swamp Creek at Toms River 

Moderately developed 

WB1. Wrangel Brook near Toms River 

WB2. Wrangel Brook near South Toms River 

Slightly developed 

DB, Davenport Branch near Dover Forge 

SITE 

A, B, C -- Differing letters indicate 

significant differences in 

median concentrations, 

according to the Tukey test 

Figure 5. Distributions of area-normalized loads of total nitrogen calculated for unfiltered 

water samples collected during base flow and stormflow in the growing and nongrowing 

seasons at measurement sites in the Toms River drainage basin, New Jersey, May 1994 

to October 1995. 

30 
sites WB 1 and DB, yields during stormflow were greater in the nongrowing season than the 

growing season when analyzed by using the Wilcoxon rank-sum test (table 11). Yields were 

greater in the growing season during stormfiow than during base flow at sites LSC2, WB2, and 

DB when analyzed by using the Wilcoxon rank-sum test (table 12). 

Yields of total nitrogen (U) at sites downstream from moderately developed areas (WB 1 and 

WB2) were either larger than or similar to yields at the site downstream from a highly developed 

area (LSC2). The yields are similar because (1) concentrations at sites WB 1, WB2, and LSC2 

were similar and (2) base flow is a much larger component of streamflow in Wrangel Brook than 

in Long Swamp Creek (although stormfiow is greater than base flow in all streams). Total 

nitrogen (U) is a measure of several nitrogen species that can be dissolved or bound to particles, 

and therefore, the concentration and load of total nitrogen (U) at a site depend on which nitrogen 

species is predominant; the dominant nitrogen species in Long Swamp Creek is most likely 

different from that at Wrangel Brook during base flow and stormflow in the growing and 

nongrowing seasons. 

Yields of total nitrogen (U) do not appear to be only related to the intensity of land 

development, but in addition are influenced by the type of development, the amount of base flow, 

and perhaps, historical land use in the basin. The Long Swamp Creek basin has more impervious 

surfaces from parking lots and sidewalks than other basins, and the Wrangel Brook basin has 

more single-family units with high-maintenance lawns. Nitrogen from agricultural runoff from 

poultry farms located within the Wrangel Brook basin almost fifty years ago (1950's) could be 

present in ground water as a result of the slow movement of ground water. 

NPS storm runoff most likely is a major contributor of total nitrogen to Long Swamp Creek, 

and contributions of total nitrogen to Toms River from Long Swamp Creek during stormflow are 

probably significant because stormflow constitutes a larger percentage of the total annual 

streamflow in Long Swamp Creek than base flow. Ground water is most likely a major NPS 

contributor to Wrangel Brook because base-flow and stormflow yields were similar, and a larger 

percentage of the total annual streamflow in Wrangel Brook is base flow. 

Ammonia 

During base flow, concentrations of ammonia (F) at sites LSC 1, LSC2, WB 1, WB2, DB, 

and JB ranged from less than 0.009 to 0.682 mgIL (concentrations of ammonia (U) and ammonia 

(F) were similar at each site); median concentrations of ammonia (F) ranged from 0.013 mgIL at 

site WBI (downstream from a moderately developed area) to 0.109 mg/L at site LSC2 

(downstream from a highly developed area) (table 6). During stormfiow, concentrations of 

ammonia (F) ranged from 0.007 to 0.371 mg/L (concentrations of ammonia (U) and ammonia (F) 

were similar at each site); median concentrations ranged from 0.017 mg/L at site DB (downstream 

from a slightly developed area) to 0.072 mg/L at site LSC2 (table 6). 

Concentrations of ammonia (U) and ammonia (F) in the replicate samples collected during 

base flow at each site were similar. During stormflow, concentrations of ammonia (U) and 

ammonia (F) were slightly larger in A-S samples than in grab samples at sites WB 1 and LSC2, in 

the grab samples than in the composite samples at site WB2, and in the manually collected 

31 
Z 0: 0 UJ 

~ t:: 

....I 

0: - 0: I-ZUJ 

m~CL OO(f) 

ZO:~ 

01-« 

ozO: 

«U)~ 

z«:J 

o -

~ ~ 

~ ~ « 

Z 0: 0 UJ 

~ I-

:::::i a: - 0: I-ZUJ 

m~CL OO(f) 

Za:~ 

01-« 

OzO: 

::;(f)~ 

z«....1 

o ::! ~ ~ 

~ ~ « 

BASE FLOW 

(6) (6) (7) 

~ ~ 0.1 I0.01 - EJ e 

A B B 

GROWING SEASON 

0.001 

LSC1 LSC2 WB1 WB2 

0.1 -

0.01 -

0.001 

!:::,. 

NONGROWING SEASON 

LSC2 WB1 

SITE 

Measured concentration for 

five or more observations 

(6) Number of observations 

Maximum value 

75th percentile 

Median 

25th percentile 

Minimum value 

/:;;. Measured concentrations for 

less than five observations 

WB2 

STORM FLOW 

(7) (16) (16) (8) (11 ) 

~ ~ 

~ - 0.1 f- -

!:::,. - 0.01 t:'" -

A A B AB AB 

GROWING SEASON 

DB JB 0.001 

LSC1 LSC2 WB1 WB2 DB 

(17) (23) (13) (20) 

~ 0.1 :- -

t 9 + 

!:::,. 

- 0.01 -

A B B B 

NONGROWING SEASON 

DB 

EXPLANATION 

SITE DESCRIPTION 

Highly developed 

0.001 

LSC2 

LSC 1, Long Swamp Creek near Toms River 

LSC2, Long Swamp Creek at Toms River 

Moderately developed 

WB1, Wrangel Brook near Toms River 

WB2, Wrangel Brook near South Toms River 

Slightly developed 

DB, Davenport Branch near Dover Forge 

Undeveloped 

JB, Jakes Branch near South Toms River 

WB1 WB2 DB 

SITE 

A, B, AB -- Differing letters indicate 

significant differences in 

median concentrations, 

according to the Tukey test 

-: 

-

Figure 6. Distributions of ammonia concentrations in filtered water samples collected 

during base flow and stormflow in the growing and nongrowing seasons at measurement 

sites in the Toms River drainage basin, New Jersey, May 1994 to October 1995. 

32 
BASE FLOW STORM FLOW 

(6) (6) (7) (6) (16) (16) (8) (11 ) 10 != 10 w ...J 

~ A B AB C 

-w AB A A B 

~ oZa: 

B «w« 1 :- -: O<!J::> 1 :- ...JOO 

~ oa:U) 

wea: NZw 

~ g :::iU)o.. ««)- 0.1 :- -:: 0.11: y ::2«« 

a:-o OZa: zOw ..;:::20.. $ w::2U) 

a:«o 0.01 I: -:: 

«u..z 0.01 =- 0::> 0 

a.. 

~ GROWING SEASON GROWING SEASON 

0.001 LSC2 WB1 WB2 DB 0.001 

LSC2 WBi WB2 DB 

(17) (23) (13) (17) 

10 t= 10 

w A A A B ...J 

~ 

-w oza: 

«w« 1 =- -:: O<!J::> ..JOO a:U) Of-a: 

~zw -U)o.. 0.1 ;;!«>: 0.1 =- 1::. -: 

::2«« 

a:- o OZa: zOw .::20.. W::2(J) 

a:«o 0.01 1::. 0.01 i::- «u..z 0::> 0 

a.. 

~ NONGROWING SEASON NONGROWING SEASON 

0.001 LSC2 WB1 WB2 DB 

0.001 

LSC2 WB1 WB2 DB 

SITE SITE 

EXPLANATION 

SITE DESCRIPTION 

Calculated area-normalized loads for A, B, AB -- Differing letters indicate 

five or more observations Highly developed significant differences in 

Number of observations LSC2, Long Swamp Creek at Toms River median concentrations, 

(6) according to the Tukey test 

~ Maximum value Moderately developed 

75th percentile WBi, Wrangel Brook near Toms River 

Median WB2, Wrangel Brook near South Toms River 

25th percentile Slightly developed 

Minimum value DB, Davenport Branch near Dover Forge 

1::. Calculated area-normalized loads for 

les&than five observations 

-:: 

-:: 

-:: 

Figure 7. Distributions of area-normalized loads of ammonia calculated for 

filtered water samples collected during base flow and stormflow in the growing 

and nongrowing seasons at measurement sites in the Toms River drainage basin, 

New Jersey, May 1994 to October 1995. 

33 
samples than in the A-S samples at site DB. The differences between the replicates were always 

larger for the ammonia (0) than for the ammonia (F). 

The distributions of ammonia (F) concentrations in samples collected during base flow and 

stonnfloware shown in figure 6; sites are arranged from left to right in order of decreasing 

intensity of land development in the contributing drainage areas. Concentrations differed among 

sites LSC2, WB 1, WB2, and DB during base flow in the growing season and stormflow in the 

growing and nongrowing seasons when analyzed by using the Kruskal-Wallis test (table 9). 

During base flow in the growing season, concentrations were largest and similar at sites LSC2 

and DB (downstream from highly and slightly developed areas, respectively) when analyzed by 

using the Tukey test (table 10); during stormflow, concentrations were largest at site LSC2. 

Concentrations during stormiiow were greater during the growing season than during the 

nongrowing season at sites WB 1, WB2, and DB when analyzed by using the Wilcoxon rank-sum 

test (table 11). 

The concentrations of ammonia (F) in samples collected at site LSC2 during March 1995 

are shown in figure 4. During storms, concentrations at all sites changed in a similar manner; the 

pattern can best be described as a dilution effect. Concentrations at first increased slightly, then 

decreased during rising streamflow; were smallest at the peak of streamflow; and increased 

slightly during decreasing streamflow. Concentrations were larger in the growing season during 

stonnflow than during base flow at sites WB2 and WB 1 when analyzed by using the Wilcoxon 

rank-sum test (tableI2). These results might not indicate a real difference between ammonia (F) 

concentrations during base flow and stormflow at all sites, however, because all ammonia 

concentrations were small (median concentrations were 0.2 mg/L or less). 

The distributions of yields of ammonia (F) calculated for samples collected during base 

flow and stormflow are shown in figure 7; sites are arranged from left to right in order of 

decreasing intensity of land development in the contributing drainage areas. Only yields of 

ammonia (F) were calculated. Yields during base flow at sites LSC2, WB 1, WB2, and DB ranged 2 2 from 0.01 to 0.24 (lb/d)/mi ; median yields ranged from 0.02 (lb/d)/mi at site DB to 

0.09 (lb/d)/mi2 at site WB 1 (table 8). Yields during stormflow at these sites ranged from 

2 2 0.01 to 3.0 (lb/d)/mi ; median yields ranged from 0.08 (lb/d)/mi2 at site DB to 0.48 (lb/d)/mi at 

site LSC2 (table 8). 

Yields of ammonia (F) differed among sites LSC2, WB 1, WB2, and DB during base flow in 

the growing season, stormflow in the growing season, and stormflow in the nongrowing season 

when analyzed by using the Kruskal-Wallis test (table 9). During base flow in the growing season 

and stormflow in the nongrowing season, yields were similar at sites WB 1 and WB2 and larger 

than at site DB when analyzed by using the Tukey test (table 10). During stormflow in the 

growing season, yields were largest at site LSC2 (downstream from a highly developed area) and 

smallest at site DB (downstream from a slightly developed area) (table 10). At sites LSC2 and 

WB2, yields were greater during the growing season than in the nongrowing season when 

analyzed by using the Wilcoxon rank-sum test (table 11). Yields during the growing season were 

greater during stormflow than during base flow at all sites when analyzed by using the Wilcoxonrank-sum test (table 12). 

34 
Yields of ammonia (F) appear to be somewhat related to the intensity of land development 

and storm runoff. Yields at the site downstream from a highly developed area (LSC2) were either 

larger than or similar to yields at the sites downstream from moderately developed areas (WB 1 

and WB2); yields were smallest at the site downstream from a slightly developed area (DB). 

Although concentrations were larger during stormflow than base flow only at sites WB 1 and 

WB2, yields at all sites were larger during stormflow than base flow. 

NPS storm runoff is most likely an important contributor of ammonia to Wrangel Brook and 

Davenport Branch, and especially to Long Swamp Creek where the stormflow is a significant 

component of annual streamflow. Contributions of ammonia to the Toms River from Long 

Swamp Creek and Wrangel Brook during stormfiow, however, might not be a significant 

component of the annual total nitrogen load because ammonia yields during stormflow were 

small, only about one-tenth of the total nitrogen yields. 

Nitrite 

During base flow, concentrations of nitrite (F) at sites LSC 1, LSC2, WB 1, WB2, DB, and 

JB were small; all values were less than 0.013 mglL (20 of the 35 values were less than 

0.003 mglL), with the exception of that at site LSC2 (0.037 mglL). Median concentrations at all 

the sites ranged from less than 0.003 to 0.005 mg/L (table 6). Concentrations during stormflow at 

these sites were also small at all sites. All values were less than 0.027 mgIL (54 of the 109 values 

were less than 0.003 mg/L); median concentrations ranged from less than 0.003 to 0.006 mg/L 

(table 6). Concentrations in the replicate samples during base flow and stormflow were similar at 

each site. 

Differences in nitrite (F) concentrations among sites and seasonal and flow differences were 

not determined because the concentrations were small. Concentrations in 50 of the 57 samples 

collected during stormflow in the nongrowing season at all sites, except site LSC2, were less than 

0.003 mglL. Changes in nitrite (F) concentrations during storms were insignificant (fig. 4). 

Nitrite yields were not calculated. The annual contributions of nitrite to the Toms River 

from Long Swamp Creek and Wrangel Brook during base flow and stormflow were a minor 

fraction of the annual total nitrogen loading to the Toms River because nitrite concentrations 

during base flow and stormflow were small. 

Nitrate 

During base flow, concentrations of nitrate (CF) at sites LSC1, LSC2, WB1, WB2, DB, and 

JB ranged from less than 0.015 to 0.810 mglL. Median concentrations ranged from 0.024 mgIL at 

site DB (downstream from a slightly developed area) to 0.719 mglL at site WB1 (downstream 

from a moderately developed area) (table 6). During stormflow, concentrations at all these sites 

ranged from 0.026 to 0.976 mg/L; median concentrations ranged from 0.159 mg/L at site DB to 

0.450 mg/L at site WB 1 (table 6). 

Concentrations of nitrate (CF) in the replicate samples collected during base flow were 

similar at each site. During stormfiow, the concentration was slightly larger in the A-S sample 

35 
BASE FLOW STORM FLOW 

(6) (6) (7) (7) (16) (19) (11 ) (11) 10~-----------------------------~ 10~----------------------~ 

GROWING SEASON GROWING SEASON 

B A A C 

A A A B 

1 f- 1 c:- -

0.1 f- - 0.1 -

t:. 

0.01 I-L

-

SC1 --LS-C-2--W-B-1--W-B2---DB---J-B---' 0.01 L--LS-C-i---LS-C-2---W-B-1----W-B-2---D-B----' 

(20) (26) (i0) (24) 

10r----------------------~ 10 NONGROWING SEASON 

NONGROWING SEASON 

B A A C 

1 I- 1 f- -

0.1 f- - 0.1 c:- 0-

0.01 1-_________________ -' 

LSC2 WBi WB2 DB 0.Q1 L--L-S-C-2---W--B-1 ---W-B-2----D-B---I 

SITE 

Measured concentrations for 

five or more observations 

(6) Number of observations 

Maximum value 

75th percentile 

Median 

25th percentile 

Minimum value 

t:. Measured concentrations for 

less than five observations 

EXPLANATION 

SITE DESCRIPTION 

Highly developed 

LSC1, Long Swamp Creek near Toms River 

LSC2, Long Swamp Creek at Toms River 

Moderately developed 

WB1, Wrangel Brook near Toms River 

WB2, Wrangel Brook near South Toms River 

Slightly developed 

DB, Davenport Branch near Dover Forge 

Undeveloped 

JB, Jakes Branch near South Toms River 

SITE 

A, B, C -- Differing letters indicate 

significant differences in 

median concentrations, 

according to the Tukey test 

Figure 8. Distributions of nitrate concentrations in filtered water samples collected during 

base flow and stormflow in the growing and nongrowing seasons at measurement sites 

in the Toms River drainage basin, New Jersey, May 1994 to October 1995. 

36 
BASE FLOW STORM FLOW 

(6) (6) (7) (6) (16) (19) (11 ) (11 ) 

100 100 UJ ...J 

B A A B A A A B ~ 

w .::g 10 10 f-

~ oZ« «UJ:::J 8 Q ~ ~ o<!)a 

...J@w 1 f0l-a: UJ-UJ 

B ~za.. 

;i~~ 0.1 0.1 -

:2UJo 

~~a: zo:UJ 0.01 0.01 - .f-a.. i1izgs 

a:u. z «O:::J 0.001 0.001 i- 0 

a.. 

Z GROWING SEASON GROWING SEASON - 0.0001 

LSC2 WB1 

UJ ...J 

~ 

w -~ oZ« «UJ:::J o<!)a 

...J@w 

0l-a: UJ-UJ 

~za.. 

;i~~ :2UJo 

a: I-: a: O«UJ 

;;;;:~a.. 

i1izgs 

a:u. z «0:::J 

0 

a.. 

~ 

100 

10 f1 -

0.1 - f:::" 

0.01 -

0.001 -

NONGROWING SEASON 

0.0001 

LSC2 WB1 

SITE 

Calculated area-normalized loads for 

five or more observations 

(6) Number of observations 

~ Maximum value 

75th percentile 

Median 

25th percentile 

Minimum value 

f:::" Calculated area-normalized loads for 

less than five observations 

WB2 

WB2 

DB 0.0001 

LSC2 WB1 WB2 DB 

(20) (26) (10) (17) 

100 

C A B 0 

10 - - ~ ~ 

9 1 - Q f:::" -

- 0.1 -

- 0.01 -

- 0.001 -

NONGROWING SEASON 

0.0001 

DB 

EXPLANATION 

SITE DESCRIPTION 

Highly developed 

LSC2, Long Swamp Creek at Toms River 

Moderately developed 

WB1, Wrangel Brook near Toms River 

WB2, Wrangel Brook near South Toms River 

Slightly developed 

DB, Davenport Branch near Dover Forge 

LSC2 WB1 WB2 DB 

SITE 

A, B, C -- Differing letters indicate 

significant differences in 

median concentrations, 

according to the Tukey test 

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

Figure 9. Distributions of area-normalized loads of nitrate calculated for filtered water 

samples collected during base flow and stormflow in the growing and nongrowing 

seasons at measurement sites in the Toms River drainage basin, New Jersey, 

May 1994 to October 1995. 

37 
(0.449 mgIL) than in the grab sample (0.439 mg/L) at site LSC2, in the A-S sample 

(0.348 mg/L) than in the composite sample (0.337 mg/L) at site WBl, and in the grab sample 

(0.360 mg/L) than in the composite sample (0.243 mg/L) at site WB2. 

The distributions of nitrate (CF) concentrations in samples collected during base flow and 

stormflow are shown in figure 8; sites are arranged from left to right in order of decreasing 

intensity of land development in the contributing drainage areas. Concentrations were different 

among sites LSC2, WB 1, WB2, and DB during base flow in the growing season and stormflow in 

the growing and nongrowing seasons when analyzed by using the Kruskal-Wallis test (table 9). 

During base flow in the growing season and stormfiow in the nongrowing season, concentrations 

were similar at sites WB 1 and WB2 (downstream from moderately developed areas) and larger 

than at site LSC2 (do\vnstream from a highly developed area) \vhen analyzed by using the Tukey 

test (table 10); during stormflow in the nongrowing season, concentrations were similar and 

largest at sites LSC2, WB 1, and WB2. During stormflow, concentrations were greater during the 

nongrowing season than during the growing season at sites WB 1, WB2, and DB when analyzed 

by using the Wilcoxon test (table 11). 

Concentrations of nitrate (CF) in samples collected at site LSC2 during March 1995 are 

shown in figure 4. Concentrations increased slightly during rising streamfiow, were smallest at 

peak streamflow, and increased slightly during decreasing streamflow. A similar dilution pattern 

was observed at all sites. The extent of dilution followed the same pattern as that observed for 

total nitrogen in unfiltered samples collected during stormfiow, but the dilution was greater for 

nitrate than for total nitrogen. During the growing season, concentrations were greater during 

base flow than stormflow at sites WB 1 and WB2, but were greater during stormflow than base 

flow at site DB when analyzed by using the Wilcoxon rank-sum test (table 11). 

The distributions of yields of nitrate (CF) calculated for samples collected during base flow 

and stormflow are shown in figure 9; sites are arranged from left to right in order of decreasing 

intensity of land development in the contributing drainage areas. Yields during base flow at sites 

LSC2, WBl, WB2, and DB ranged from less than 0.01 to 6.9 (lb/d)/mi2

; median yields ranged 

from 0.01 (lb/d)/mi2 at site DB to 5.2 (lb/d)/mi2 at site WB 1 (table 8). Yields during stormflow at 

these sites ranged from 0.02 to 10 (lb/d)/mi2

; median yields ranged from 0.69 (lb/d)/mi 2 at 

site DB to 7.3 (lb/d)/mi2 at site WBI (table 8). 

Yields of nitrate (CF) differed among sites LSC2, WB 1, WB2, and DB during base flow in 

the growing season, stormflow in the growing season, and stormflow in the nongrowing season 

when analyzed by using the Kruskal-Wallis test (table 9). Yields at sites WB 1 and WB2 

(downstream from moderately developed areas) were either larger than or similar to yields at site 

LSC2 (downstream from a highly developed area) during base flow and stormflow when 

analyzed by using the Tukey test (table 10). Yields were smallest for samples collected during 

base flow at site DB (downstream from a slightly developed area). During stormfiow, yields were 

greater during the growing season than the nongrowing season at site LSC2, but greater during 

the nongrowing season than the growing season at sites WB 1, WB2, and DB when analyzed by 

using the Wilcoxon test (table 11). During the growing season, yields were greater during 

stormflow than base flow at sites LSC2, WB 1, and DB when analyzed by using the Wilcoxonrank-sum test (table 12). 

38 
The pattern of nitrate (CF) yields among sites is similar to that of total nitrogen (U) yields 

because a large part of the total nitrogen is nitrate, especially in the Wrangel Brook basin. Yields 

at sites downstream from moderately developed areas (WB 1 and WB2) were either larger than or 

similar to yields at the site downstream from a highly developed area (LSC2). Yields of nitrate, 

like yields of total nitrogen, are not only related to intensity of land development, but in addition 

are related to the type of development, the amount of base flow, and perhaps, the historical land 

use in the basin. Yields are largest in Wrangel Brook, especially during base flow because nitrate 

concentrations and base flow are much larger in Wrangel Brook than at Long Swamp Creek. 

Larger nitrate concentrations during base flow in Wrangel Brook can result from larger nitrate 

concentrations in ground water from fertilizers used for high-maintenance lawns and from 

agricultural runoff from poultry farms, previously located within the Wrangel Brook basin, which 

infiltrated to ground water and eventually is discharged to streams. 

NPS storm runoff most likely is a major contributor of nitrate to Long Swamp Creek. 

Contributions of nitrate to the Toms River from Long Swamp Creek during stormflow probably 

are significant because stormfiow constitutes a larger percentage of the total annual streamflow in 

Long Swamp Creek than base flow. Ground water is a major NPS contributor of nitrate to 

Wrangel Brook. Contributions of nitrate from Wrangel Brook to the Toms River during base flow 

could be a significant component of the annual total nitrogen load because the base-flow 

component of the total annual flow ofWrangel Brook is greater than the stormfiow component 

and the nitrate yields during base flow were large. 

Organic nitrogen 

During base flow, concentrations of organic nitrogen (C) at sites LSC 1, LSC2, WB 1, WB2, 

DB, and JB ranged from 0.071 to 1.179 mg/L; median concentrations ranged from 

0.l76 mg/L at site WB 1 (a moderately developed area) to 0.374 mglL at site DB (a slightly 

developed area) (table 6). During stormfiow, concentrations ranged from 0.082 to 1.015 mgIL; 

median concentrations ranged from 0.268 mg/L at site WB2 to 0.396 mg/L at site DB (table 6). 

The distributions of organic-nitrogen (C) concentrations in samples collected during base 

flow and stormflow are shown in figure 10; sites are arranged from left to right in order of 

decreasing intensity of land development in the contributing drainage areas. Concentrations 

during base flow in the growing season and stormflow in the growing and nongrowing seasons 

were not different among sites LSC2, WB 1, WB2, and DB when analyzed by using the KruskalWallis test (table 9). Concentrations during stormflow were greater during the nongrowing season 

than during the growing season at site WB 1 when analyzed by using the Wilcoxon rank-sum test 

(table 11) 

Concentrations of organic nitrogen (C) in samples collected at site LSC2 during the March 

1995 storm are shown in figure 4. The change of concentrations during storms was difficult to 

interpret because the number of samples and their time of collection during the storms varied 

from site to site and storm to storm. Concentrations were larger in the growing season during 

stormflow than during base flow only at site WB 1 when analyzed by using the Wilcoxon ranksum test (tableI2). 

39 
BASE FLOW STORMFLOW 

(6) (6) (7) (7) (15) (16) (8) (11) 

10 10 

Z A A A A A A A A LUa: C!J w zOf-

~~~ 1 f-

¢ - 1 f- OZw tl a:Cf)Cl... 

!::::<{w 

~ g e zz~ 1::::. 0 0 -< t::. 

Z~§ -<0::- 0.1 :- - 2E~;j 0.1 -

OLU~ 

Oz 

z0 0 

GROWING SEASON GROWING SEASON 0.01 0.01 LSC1 LSC2 WB1 WB2 DB JB LSC1 LSC2 WB1 WB2 DB 

(10) (14) (10) (11) 

10 10 

Z A A A A LUa: C!J w zOf-

~~~ 1 - - 1 :-

8 OZLU 9 0::Cf)Cl... !::::<{Cf) 

zz~ t::. 0 0 -< t::. 

z~§ -<0::- t::. 

2E~;j 0.1 :- t::. - 0.1 :-

OLU~ 

Oz 

z0 0 

NONGROWING SEASON NONGROWING SEASON 

0.01 0.01 

LSC2 WB1 WB2 DB LSC2 WB1 WB2 DB 

SITE SITE 

EXPLANATION 

SITE DESCRIPTION 

Measured concentration for A, B -- Differing letters indicate 

five or more observations Highly developed significant differences in 

LSC1, Long Swamp Creek near Toms River median concentrations, 

(6) Number of observations LSC2, Long Swamp Creek at Toms River according to the Tukey test 

~ Maximum value 

75th percentile 

Moderately developed 

WB1, Wrangel Brook near Toms River 

Median WB2, Wrangel Brook near South Toms River 

25th percentile Slightly developed 

Minimum value DB, Davenport Branch near Dover Forge 

t::. Measured concentrations for Undeveloped 

less than five observations JB, Jakes Branch near South Toms River 

-: 

-

-

-

Figure 10. Distributions of organic-nitrogen concentrations in samples collected during 

base flow and stormflow in the growing and nongrowing seasons at measu rement sites 

in the Toms River drainage basin, New Jersey, May 1994 to October 1995. 

40 
BASE FLOW STORM FLOW 

(6) (6) (7) (6) (15) (16) (8) (11 ) 

100~------------------------------~ 100~------------------------------~ 

S A A S A A A S 

10 

$ 

0.1 

GROWING SEASON GROWING SEASON 

0.001 L--L-S-C-2---W-S-1----W-S-2----0-S---' 0.001 L---L-S-C-2----W--S-1 ---W-S-2----D-S----l 

(9) (14) (10) (8) 

100~------------------------------~: 

S A S S 

10 f" 

0.1 f" 0.11::-

0.01 0.01 =-

NONGROWING SEASON NONGROWING SEASON 

0.001 L--L-S-C-2------W--S-1 ------W-S-2-------0-S-----' 0.001 L--L-S-C-2-----W--S1-----W-S-2----D-S----' 

SITE 

Calculated area-normalized loads for 

five or more observations 

(6) Number of observations 

Maximum value 

75th percentile 

Median 

25th percentile 

Minimum value 

/:::,. Calculated area-normalized loads for 

less than five observations 

EXPLANATION 

SITE DESCRIPTION 

Highly developed 

LSC2, Long Swamp Creek at Toms River 

Moderately developed 

WS1, Wrangel Srook near Toms River 

WS2, Wrangel Srook near South Toms River 

Slightly developed 

OS, Davenport Sranch near Dover Forge 

SITE 

A, S -- Differing letters indicate 

significant differences in 

median concentrations, 

according to the Tukey test 

Figure 11. Distributions of area-normalized loads of organic nitrogen calculated for 

samples collected during base flow and stormflow in the growing and nongrowing 

seasons at measurement sites in the Toms River drainage basin, New Jersey, 

May 1994 to October 1995. 

41 
The distributions of yields of organic nitrogen (C) calculated for samples collected during 

base flow and stormflow are shown in figure 11; sites are arranged from left to right in order of 

decreasing intensity of land development in the contributing drainage areas. Yields during base 

2 flow at sites LSC2, WBI, WB2, and DB ranged from less than 0.01 to 4.7 (lb/d)/mi ; median 

2 yields ranged from 0.04 (lb/d)/mi at site LSC2 (a highly developed area) to 1.2 (lb/d)/mi2 at 

site WB 1 (a moderately developed area) (table 8). Yields durin~ stormflow ranged from 

2 0.18 to 15 (lb/d)/mi ; median yields ranged from 0.88 (lb/d)/mi at site DB (downstream from 

2 a slightly developed area) to 4.9 (lb/d)/mi at site WB 1 (table 8). 

Yields of organic nitrogen (C) differed among sites LSC2, WB 1, WB2, and DB during base 

flow in the growing season, stormflow in the growing season, and stormflow in the nongrowing 

season 'when analyzed by using the Kruskal-Wallis test (table 9). Yields at sites WBI and WB2 

(moderately developed areas) were either larger than or similar to yields at site LSC2 (a highly 

developed area) during base flow and stormflow when analyzed by using the Tukey test (table 

10). During stormfiow, yields were greater during the nongrowing season than the growing 

season at sites WB 1 and WB2 when analyzed by using the Wilcoxon test (table 11). During the 

growing season, yields were greater during stormflow than base flow at sites LSC2, WB 1, and 

DB when analyzed by using the Wilcoxon-rank-sum test (table 12). 

Yields of organic nitrogen, like yields of total nitrogen and nitrate, are not only related to 

intensity of land development, but in addition are related to the type of development, the amount 

of base flow, and perhaps, the historical land use in the basin. The pattern among sites of organic 

nitrogen yields is similar to that of total nitrogen and nitrate yields because organic nitrogen is 

second to nitrate in predominance of total nitrogen in these streams. Concentrations of organic 

nitrogen are similar in Long Swamp Creek, Wrangel Brook, and Davenport Branch, but yields 

are greater in Long Swamp Creek and Wrangel Brook because stormflow is greater in these 

streams than in Davenport Branch. NPS storm runoff is most likely an important contributor of 

organic nitrogen to Long Swamp Creek, Wrangel Brook, and Davenport Branch. Contributions 

of organic nitrogen to the Toms River from Long Swamp Creek during stormflow could be a 

significant part of the annual total nitrogen yield because stormflow is a larger percentage of the 

total annual streamflow than base flow in Long Swamp Creek, and the yields of organic nitrogen 

are greater during stormflow. 

Phosphorus 

Phosphorus, like nitrogen, is an essential nutrient for plant and animal growth; sufficiently 

large concentrations can cause eutrophication in surface water. Some phosphorus is present in 

surface water as organic phosphorus, but typically it is present as inorganic phosphates 

(orthophosphates, condensed phosphates, and organically bound phosphates), which are 

dissolved, associated with colloids, or adsorbed onto particles. Phosphorus enters aquatic 

environments from fertilizers, agricultural wastes, decomposition of organic matter, biotic 

fixation, and ambient soils and rocks. Storm runoff is an important source of phosphorus to 

surface waters. Total phosphorus is a measure of inorganic and organic phosphorus. 

Hydrolyzable phosphorus plus orthophosphorus is a measure of inorganic phosphorus. 

Hydrolyzable phosphorus is a measure of condensed phosphates. 

42 
Hydrolyzable Phosphorus Plus Orthophosphorus 

During base flow, concentrations of hydrolyzable phosphorus plus orthophosphorus (U) at 

sites LSCl, LSC2, WBl, WB2, DB, and JB ranged from less than 0.013 to 0.195 mgIL. Median 

concentrations ranged from less than 0.013 mg/L at sites WB 1 and WB2 (moderately developed 

areas) to 0.019 mg/L at site DB (a slightly developed area) (table 6). Concentrations in some baseflow samples were small (less than 0.013 mgIL in 14 of the 31 samples). During stormfiow, 

concentrations at these sites ranged from less than 0.013 to 0.155 mg/L; median concentrations 

ranged from less than 0.013 mg/L at site DB to 0.080 mg/L at site LSCI (a highly developed area) 

(table 6). 

During base flow, concentrations in the replicate samples were similar at sites WB2 and 

WBI, but different at site DB (0.016 and 0.028 tnglL). During stonl1fiow, the concentration was 

greater in the A-S sample (0.155 mg/L) than in the composite sample (0.052 mg/L) at site WBl, 

in the A-S sample (0.115 mgIL) than in the grab sample (0.107 mgIL) at site LSC2, and in the 

composite sample (0.053 mglL) than in the grab sample mg/L (0.036 mgIL) at site WB2. 

Concentrations were similar in the composite and A-S samples at site DB. Differences in the 

samples at site WB 1 could be the result of incomplete flushing of the A-S intake line. (A large 

concentration of total suspended solids was measured in the first sample collected with the 

automatic sampler during the storm sampling.) 

The distributions of concentrations of hydrolyzable phosphorus plus orthophosphorus (U) in 

samples collected during base flow and stormflow are shown in figure 12; sites are arranged from 

left to right in order of decreasing intensity of land development in the contributing drainage 

areas. Concentrations were different among sites LSC2, WB 1, WB2, and DB during base flow in 

the growing season and stormflow in the growing and nongrowing seasons when analyzed by 

using the Kruskal-Wallis test (table 9). Concentrations were largest at site LSC2 (a highly 

developed area) and smallest during stormflow at site DB (a slightly developed area) when 

analyzed by using the Tukey test (table 10). Concentrations during stormflow were larger during 

the growing season than the nongrowing season at sites WB 1, WB2, and DB when analyzed by 

using the Wilcoxon rank-sum test (table 11). 

The pattern of hydrolyzable phosphorus plus orthophosphorus (U) concentrations was 

somewhat different during each storm at each site; evaluation of the pattern is difficult because the 

changes in concentrations during the storms are not large. During some storms, concentrations 

increased slightly with increasing streamflow, were smallest during peak streamflow, and 

increased slightly during decreasing streamflow. During other storms, the concentration increase 

was largest during increasing streamflow or just before the peak streamflow. Concentrations in the 

growing season were greater during stormfiow than during base flow at sites LSC2, WB 1, and 

WB2 when analyzed by using the Wilcoxon rank-sum test (table 11). 

The distributions of yields of hydrolyzable phosphorus plus orthophosphorus (U) calculated 

for samples collected during base flow and stormflow are shown in figure 13; sites are arranged 

from left to right in order of decreasing intensity of land development in the contributing drainage 

areas. Yields during base flow at sites LSC2, WB I, WB2, and DB ranged from less than 0.0 I to 

2 0.14 (lb/d)/mi ; median yields ranged from 0.01 (lb/d)/mi2 at sites LSC2 and DB (downstream 

43 
BASE FLOW STORMFLOW 

a: 

w z!::: OOO...J 

3~ffi CLa:CL 

OOf-oo 

::>Z~ a:w<{ 

OOa: 

IZCJ CLO_ 

OOO...J 

Ooo::l 

I::>~ 

CLa:Z 

~~-. 

COCLOO <{Cf):::> 

NOa: 

~IO 

OCL I 

a:ofu 

OIO >-f-I Ia:CL 0 00 <{ 

a: 

w ZfooO::i 

3~a: 

CLa:~ 

oof-oo 

::>z~ 

a:~<{ 

°za: 

~OQ OOO...J 

Ooo::l 

I:::>~ CLa: Z wO- ...JI . COCLOO <{Cf):::> 

NOa: 

~IO 

OCL I 

a:O CL 

OICf) 

>-f- 0 

Ia: I 

OCL Cf) <{ 

(5) 

(5) (5) 

GROWING SEASON 

A B 

/:::,. 

/:::,. 

0.1 f-

~ g 

0.01 

LSC1 LSC2 WB1 

NONGROWING SEASON 

0.1 I-

/:::,. /:::,. 

0.01 

LSC2 WB1 

SITE 

Measured concentrations for 

five or more observations 

Number of observations 

Maximum value 

75th percentile 

Median 

25th percentile 

Minimum value 

/:::,. Measured concentrations for 

less than five observations 

(6) (6) (13) (16) (7) (11) 

GROWING SEASON 

B AB 

- 0.1 ..... 

Q S /:::,. 

WB2 DB JB 

0.01 

- 0.1 -

/:::,. /:::,. 

WB2 DB 

EXPLANATION 

SITE DESCRIPTION 

Highly developed 

0.01 

LSC1, Long Swamp Creek near Toms River 

LSC2, Long Swamp Creek at Toms River 

Moderately developed 

WB 1, Wrangel Brook near Toms River 

WB2, Wrangel Brook near South Toms River 

Slightly developed 

DB, Davenport Branch near Dover Forge 

Undeveloped 

JB, Jakes Branch near South Toms River 

A B B C 

y 

LSC1 LSC2 WB1 WB2 DB 

(20) (27) (10) (24) 

NONGROWING SEASON 

A 

~ LSC2 

B B C 

~ g 1 

WB1 WB2 DB 

SITE 

A, B, AB, C, --Differing letters indicate 

significant differences in 

median concentrations, 

according to the Tukey test 

-

-

Figure 12. Distributions of hydrolyzable phosphorus plus orthophosphorus concentrations 

in unfiltered water samples collected during base flow and stormflow in the growing and 

nongrowing seasons at measurement sites in the Toms River drainage basin, New Jersey, 

May 1994 to October 1995. 

44 
BASE FLOW STORMFLOW 

(5) (5) (6) (6) (13) (16) (7) (11) 

10 10 § 

uj'w A A A B 

Cf):::J::::! :::Ja:::::;;: I 9 8 l.I..ct~w 1 =- OCf)o..~ B A A B Cl:::JCf):::J «a:OO 

Q 

OOICf) ...JI a.. a: 0.1 8 Clo..Cf)w 0.1 ~ 

wCf)«o.. 

N°Cf) 

::iI:::J~ «o..a:Cl 

::::;;:~Oa: 0.01 0.01 r a:coIw O«o..a.. 

;;;;:N8Cf) 

w~ICl 

a: ° o.. z 0.001 0.001 E- «a:O:::J 

ClIO >-f-o.. GROWING SEASON Ia:z GROWING SEASON 0- 0.0001 0.0001 LSC2 WB1 WB2 DB LSC2 WB1 WB2 DB 

(20) (27) (10) (17) 

10 ~ 10 

Cf)uj'~ A A A B 

:::Jft~ l.I..ct°w 1=- $ OCf)Ia: 8 Cl:::JB5« «a:0:::J 

OOI O 

...JIo..Cf) 

Clo..Cf)a: 0.1 =- -: 0.1 

~8«~ 6. 

~it~?i ::::;;:wa:Cl 

0.01 f 0.01 a:...J0a: OcoIw "1 z«o..o.. ,NCf)Cf) 6. «~OCl WOI z 0.001 f ~ 0.001 a:a:o..:::J 

«ClOO 

>-Fo.. 

Ia:Z NONGROWING SEASON NONGROWING SEASON 0- 0.0001 0.0001 

LSC2 WB1 WB2 DB LSC2 WB1 WB2 DB 

SITE SITE 

EXPLANATION 

SITE DESCRIPTION 

Calculated area-normalized loads for 

A, B -- Differing letters indicate five or more observations Highly developed 

LSC2, Long Swamp Creek at Toms River significant differences in 

(5) Number of observations median concentrations, 

~ Maximum value Moderately developed according to the Tukey test 

75th percentile WB1, Wrangel Brook near Toms River 

WB2, Wrangel Brook near South Toms River 

Median 

25th percentile Slightly developed 

DB, Davenport Branch near Dover Forge 

Minimum value 

6. Calculated area-normalized loads for 

less than five observations 

-: 

~ 

-:: 

Figure 13. Distributions of area-normalized loads of hydrolyzable phosphorus plus 

orthophosphorus calculated for unfiltered water samples collected during base flow 

and stormflow in the growing and nongrowing seasons at measurement sites in the 

Toms River drainage basin, New Jersey, May 1994 to October 1995. 

45 
from highly and slightly developed areas, respectively) to 0.12 (lb/d)/mi2 at site WB 1 (a 

moderately developed area) (table 8). Yields during stormfiow at these sites ranged from 

2 0.01 to 2.3 (lb/d)/mi ; median yields ranged from 0.07 (lb/d)/mi2 at site DB to 0.69 (lb/d)/mi2 

at site LSC2 (table 8). 

Yields of hydrolyzable phosphorus plus orthophosphorus (U) differed among sites LSC2, 

WB 1, WB2, and DB during base flow in the growing season and stormflow in the growing and 

nongrowing seasons when analyzed by using the Kruskal-Wallis test (table 9). During base flow 

in the growing season, yields were similar at sites WB 1 and WB2 and larger than the yields at 

sites LSC2 and DB, which were similar to each other, when analyzed by using the Tukey test 

(table 10); during stormflow in the growing and nongrowing seasons, yields were similar at sites 

LSC2, \VB 1, and \VB2 and larger than the yields at site DB. Yields were smallest for sanlples 

collected during base flow at sites LSC2 and DB. Yields during stormflow were greater in the 

growing season than in the nongrowing season at sites LSC2 and WB 1, but greater during the 

nongrowing season than the growing season at site DB when analyzed by using the Wilcoxon 

rank-sum test (table 11). Yields during the growing season at all sites were greater during 

stormflow than during base flow when analyzed by using the Wilcoxon-rank-sum test (table 12). 

The magnitude of concentrations of hydrolyzable phosphorus plus orthophosphorus 

appears to be related to the intensity of development in the contributing drainage area. 

Concentrations during base flow and stormflow decreased in magnitude with a decrease in the 

intensity of development in the contributing drainage area. Measured concentrations were 

generally smaller and streamfiows, especially base flow, were much larger in Wrangel Brook 

(moderately developed) than in Long Swamp Creek (highly developed), however. Therefore, the 

yields of hydrolyzable phosphorus plus orthophosphorus in Wrangel Brook during stormfiow are 

similar to, and during base flow are greater than, those in Long Swamp Creek. NPS storm runoff, 

especially during the growing season, is most likely an important contributor of hydrolyzable 

phosphorus plus orthophosphorus to Long Swamp Creek, Wrangel Brook, and Davenport 

Branch. Contributions of hydrolyzable phosphorus plus orthophosphorus to the Toms River from 

Long Swamp Creek during stormflow might be a significant component of the annual yields of 

phosphorus because yields during stormflow were an order of magnitude greater than yields 

during base flow, and stormflow is a greater component of the total annual flow at Long Swamp 

Creek. 

Orthophosphorus 

During base flows, concentrations of orthophosphorus (F) at sites LSC 1, LSC2, WB 1, 

WB2, DB, and JB ranged from 0.003 to 0.099 mg/L. Median concentrations ranged from less 

than 0.013 mglL at site LSC2 (a highly developed area) to 0.015 mg/L at site DB (a slightly 

developed area) (table 6). Most concentrations during base flow were small (less than 

0.013 mgIL in 27 of the 35 samples). During stormfiows, concentrations at these sites ranged 

from less than 0.013 to 0.076 mg/L; median concentrations ranged from less than 0.013 mgIL at 

sites WBl, WB2 and DB to 0.029 mg/L at site LSC2 (table 6). Most concentrations during 

stormflow were small (less than 0.013 mg/L in 73 of the 109 samples). During base flow, 

concentrations in the replicate samples were similar at sites WB 1 and WB2, but differed slightly 

at site DB (0.013 and 0.019 mgIL). Concentrations were.similar in the replicate samples during 

stormflow at each site. ' 

46 
The distributions of concentrations of orthophosphorus (F) in samples collected during base 

flow and stormflow are shown in figure 14; sites are arranged from left to right in order of 

decreasing intensity of land development in the contributing drainage areas. Concentrations did 

not differ among sites LSC2, WBl, WB2, and DB during base flow in the growing season, but did 

differ during stormflow in the growing and nongrowing seasons when analyzed by using the 

Kruskal-Wallis test (table 9). During stormflow, concentrations were largest at site LSCI (a highly 

developed area) and smallest at sites WB 1 and WB2 (moderately developed areas) when analyzed 

by using the Tukey test (table 10). Seasonal and flow differences among the sites might not be 

accurate because the effective method-detection limit for orthophosphorus was changed from 

0.013 to 0.002 mg/L during the study. Concentrations were greater during stormflow than during 

base flow only at site DB when analyzed by using the Wilcoxon rank-sum test (table 11). The 

concentrations at site DB during the stormflow in the nongrowing season might actually be lower 

than reported. (AU values at site DB were reported as less than 0.013 mglL, the method-detection 

limit at the time of analysis.) 

Because the changes are not large and most concentrations during storms were small, 

evaluation of variations in orthophosphorus (F) concentrations during the storms was difficult. 

During some storms, concentrations increased during increasing streamflow, were smallest during 

peak streamflow, and increased slightly during decreasing streamflow; during other stOtmS, the 

concentration decreased during increasing streamflow. Concentrations during the growing season 

were greater during stormflow than during base flow only at site LSC2 when analyzed by using 

the Wilcoxon rank-sum test (table 12). 

The distributions of yields of orthophosphorus (F) calculated for samples collected during 

base flow and stormflow are shown in figure 15; sites are arranged from left to right in order of 

decreasing intensity of land development in the contributing drainage areas. Yields during base 

2 flow at sites LSC2, WBl, WB2, and DB ranged from less than 0.01 to 0.14 (lb/d)/mi ; median 

2 2 yields ranged from less than 0.01 (lb/d)/mi at sites LSC2 and DB to 0.04 (lb/d)/mi at site WBI 

2 (table 8). Yields during stormflow at these sites ranged from less than 0.01 to 1.4 (lb/d)/mi ; 

median yields ranged from 0.08 (lb/d)/mi2 at site DB to 0.23 (lb/d)/mi2 at site LSC2 (table 8). 

Yields of orthophosphorus (F) were smaller than yields of hydrolyzable phosphorus plus 

orthophosphorus (U) at all sites during base flow and stormflow. 

Yields of orthophosphorus (F) were different among sites LSC2, WB 1, WB2, and DB 

during base flow in the growing season and stormflow in the growing and nongrowing seasons 

when analyzed by using the Kruskal-Wallis test (table 9). During base flow in the growing season, 

yields were similar at sites WB 1 and WB2 (moderately developed areas), similar at sites LSC2 

and DB (highly and slightly developed areas, respectively), and larger at sites WBI and WB2 than 

at sites LSC2 and DB when analyzed by using the Tukey test (table 10). During stormflow, yields 

were similar at sites LSC2, WB 1, and WB2 and larger than at site DB in the growing season, 

whereas in the nongrowing season, yields in samples collected at sites LSC2 and DB were similar, 

but smaller than those at site WB 1. Yields during stormflow were greater in the growing season 

than in the nongrowing season at site LSC2 when analyzed by using the Wilcoxon rank-sum test 

(table 11). Yields during the growing season were greater during stormflow than during base flow 

at sites LSC2, WB2, and DB when analyzed by using the Wilcoxon-rank-sum test (table 12). 

47 
OC 

w 

(6) 

BASE FLOW 

(6) (7) 

z!:: 

O..J GROWING SEASON 

fiffi 

oca.. 

I-C/) 

z~ 

w« 

o OC 0.1 t:- /::::,. 

~Q 

~;1 ~~ 

gj~ 

& ~ 0.01-

OOC 

I O a.. I 

O~ 

~~ OCa.. 

A A A 

8 

STORMFLOW 

(7) (16) (19) (11 ) (11) 

GROWING SEASON 

A A C C B 

0.1 :- -

0.01 :- -:: 

o ~ 0.001 '--L-S-C-1--L-SC-2--W-=B-1--W--=-B-2----D-=-B--J-B---' 

0.001 L--_______________ ----l 

LSC1 LSC2 WB1 WB2 DB 

(11 ) (18) (7) (14) 

NONGROWING SEASON 

NONGROWING SEASON 

A B B B 

- 0.1 :- -:: 

- 0.01 :- T 

0.001 '--_______________ ----l 

(6) 

Measured concentrations for 

five or more observations 

Number of observations 

Maximum value 

75th percentile 

Median 

25th percentile 

Minimum value 

t:::.. Measured concentrations for 

less than five observations 

SITE 

EXPLANATION 

SITE DESCRIPTION 

Highly developed 

LSC1, Long Swamp Creek near Toms River 

LSC2, Long Swamp Creek at Toms River 

Moderately developed 

WB1, Wrangel Brook near Toms River 

WB2, Wrangel Brook near South Toms River 

Slightly developed 

DB, Davenport Branch near Dover Forge 

Undeveloped 

JB, Jakes Branch near South Toms River 

LSC2 WB1 WB2 DB 

SITE 

A, B, C -- Differing letters indicate 

significant differences in 

median concentrations, 

according to the Tukey test 

Figure 14. Distributions of orthophosphorus concentrations in filtered water samples 

collected during base flow and stormflow in the growing and nongrowing seasons at 

measurement sites in the Toms River drainage basin, New Jersey, May 1994 to 

October 1995. 

48 
u)~ ::J_ 

o::~ 

u..oUJ OIo:: 

ofu« «0::J OIO ...Jc..(J) 

0(J)0:: 

~«~ 

:J3~ «0::0 

~oo:: OIUJ 

zo.c.. 

, (J)(J) «0UJI 0 

z 0::c..::J 

«00 

iEo. 

O::z 0-

BASE FLOW 

(6) (6) (7) (6) 10 :: 

B A A B 

1 r 

0.1 r 

0.Q1 :-

0.001 r 

GROWING SEASON 

LSC2 WB1 WB2 DB 0.0001 

10 ~ 

10 E 

b ~ 1 :-

0.1 E "1 0.1 f 

6. 0.01 ::- "1 0.01 E 

6. 0.001 ::- "1 0.001 r 

NONGROWING SEASON 

0.0001 LSC2 WB1 

SITE 

Calculated area-normalized loads for 

five or more observations 

(6) Number of observations 

Maximum value 

WB2 DB 0.0001 

EXPLANATION 

SITE DESCRIPTION 

Highly developed 

LSC2, Long Swamp Creek at Toms River 

Moderately developed 

WB1, Wrangel Brook near Toms River 

STORMFLOW 

(16) (19) (11) (11 ) 

A A A B 

~ $ C 

GROWING SEASON 

LSC2 WB1 WB2 DB 

(11 ) (18) (7) (14) 

B A AB B 

~ T 

NONGROWING SEASON 

LSC2 WB1 WB2 DB 

SITE 

A, B, AB Differing letters indicate 

significant differences in 

median concentrations, 

according to the Tukey test 

~ 75th percentile WB2, Wrangel Brook near South Toms River 

Median 

25th percentile 

Minimum value 

6. Calculated area-normalized loads for 

less than five observations 

Slightly developed 

DB, Davenport Branch near Dover Forge 

§ 

~ 

-.: 

-.:: 

: 

, 

-.:: 

~ 

Figure 15. Distribution of area-normalized loads of orthophosphorus calculated for filtered 

water samples collected during base flow and stormflow in the growing and nongrowing 

seasons at measurement sites in the Toms River drainage basin, New Jersey, May 1994 to 

October 1995. 

49 
The magnitude of concentrations of orthophosphorus appears to be somewhat related to the 

intensity of development in the contributing drainage area, although not to the degree that 

hydrolyzable phosphorus plus orthophosphorus is because concentrations and yields of 

orthophosphorus were small. Concentrations of phosphorus probably are related to 

concentrations of total suspended solids. Much of the phospholus in these streams is associated 

with particles because orthophosphorus concentrations in filtered samples are smaller than 

concentrations of hydrolyzable phosphorus plus orthophosphorus in unfiltered samples at all 

sites. 

During stormfiow, concentrations of orthophosphorus were largest in Wrangel Brook and 

Long Swamp Creek (moderately and highly developed areas, respectively) and smallest during 

stolTr1fiow in Davenport Branch (a slightly developed area). Orthophosphorus yields in Wrangel 

Brook, however, are similar during storrnflow and greater during base flow than those in Long 

Swamp Creek because the concentrations in these streams were small and streamflow, especially 

base flow, in Wrangel Brook is much greater than in Long Swamp Creek. NPS storm runoff, 

especially during the growing season, might be an important contributor of phosphorus to Long 

Swamp Creek, Wrangel Brook, and Davenport Branch; however, contributions of 

orthophosphorus to the Toms River from these streams might not be a significant component of 

the total annual yields of phosphorus because orthophosphorus yields were small. 

Total Suspended Solids 

Suspended solids can affect water quality in several ways. Large concentrations of 

suspended solids in surface water can adversely affect the biological community in streams, for 

example, by inhibiting light penetration to bottom-dwelling macrophytes and creating 

aesthetically unsatisfactory conditions for swimming and other recreation. Suspended solids are 

effective in sorbing and transporting some nutrients, metals, pesticides, and other organic 

compounds in streams. Suspended solids are removed from the water column in embayments as 

the water velocity decreases and salinity increases. 

During base flow, concentrations of total suspended solids were similar at sites LSC1, 

LSC2, WB1, WB2, DB, and JB, ranging from less than 2.00 to 9.00 mg/L, with one exception; a 

concentration of 47 mg/L was measured at site DB, most likely because sampling apparatus 

disturbed the stream bottom. Median concentrations ranged from less than 2.00 mg/L at site WB2 

(a moderately developed area) to 6.00 mg/L at site DB (a slightly developed area) (table 6). 

During stormfiow, concentrations ranged from less than 2.00 mg/L to 178.67 mg/L with one 

exception; a concentration of 709.50 mgIL was measured in the first sample collected at site 

WB 1 when the sampler line of the automatic sampler most likely was not flushed thoroughly. 

The value of 178.67 mglL also could be the result of sample contamination. Median 

concentrations ranged from 7.33 at site DB to 16.00 mg/L at site WB 1 (table 6). 

During base flow, concentrations of total suspended solids in the replicate samples were 

similar at all the sites. During stormfiow, concentrations were greater in A-S samples than in 

composite samples at sites WB 1 (709.50 and 8.33mg/L, respectively) and DB 

(27.00 and 23.00 mg/L, respectively), slightly greater in the grab sample (8.00 mglL) than in the 

50 
A-S sample (4.00 mglL) at site LSC2, and greater in the composite sample (15.33 mglL) than in 

the grab sample (8.00 mgIL) at site WB2. 

The distributions of concentrations of total suspended solids in samples collected during 

base flow and stormflow are shown in figure 16; sites are arranged from left to right in order of 

decreasing intensity of land development in the contributing drainage areas. Concentrations 

during base flow only were compared for sites WB2 and DB because too few samples were 

collected at the other sites. Concentrations during stonnflow differed among sites LSC2, WB 1, 

WB2, and DB in the non growing season when analyzed by using the Kruskal-Wallis test (table 9). 

Concentrations during stormflow in the nongrowing season were similar at sites LSC2, WB 1, and 

WB2 and larger than at site DB when analyzed by using the Tukey test (table 10). During 

stormflow, concentrations were largest in the nongrowing season at site LSC2 and in the growing 

season at site DB when analyzed by using the Wilcoxon rank-sun1 test (table 11). 

Concentrations of total suspended solids in samples collected at WB 1 during the storm of 

October 5, 1995, are shown in figure 17. The pattern of concentration change during the storm is 

similar to what was observed at the other sites during other storms. Generally, the change in total 

suspended solids concentration during the storm was similar to the change in streamflow; 

concentrations increased during increasing streamflow, were greatest just prior to peak 

streamflow, and decreased during decreasing streamflow. Concentrations in the growing season 

were larger during storrnflow than during base flow at site WB2 when analyzed by the Wilcoxon 

rank-sum test (table 11). 

The distributions of yields of total suspended solids calculated for samples collected during 

base flo",' and stormflow are shown in figure 18; sites are arranged from left to right in order of 

decreasing intensity of land development in the contributing drainage areas. Yields during base 

2 flow ranged from 0.04 to 30 (lb/d)/mi ; median yields ranged from 0.39 (lb/d)/mi2 at site LSC2 to 

2 23 (lb/d)/mi2 at site WB 1 (table 8). Yields during stonnflow ranged from 3.1 to 2,500 (lb/d)/mi ; 

median yields ranged from 18 (lb/d)/mi2 at site DB to 250 (lb/d)/mi2 at site WB 1 (table 8). 

Yields of total suspended solids differed among sites LSC2, WB 1, WB2, and DB during 

base flow in the growing season and stormflow in the growing and nongrowing seasons when 

analyzed by using the Kruskal-Wallis test (table 9). Yields during base flow in the growing season 

were larger at site WB2 (a moderately developed area) than at site DB (a slightly developed area) 

when analyzed by using the Tukey test (table 10). Yields during stormflow in the growing season 

were larger at site WB 1 than at site LSC2 and smallest at site DB. Yields during stormflow in the 

nongrowing season were similar at sites LSC2, WB 1, and WB2 and larger than at site DB. The 

variance of the distribution of yields at all sites during all flows and seasons was large. At all sites, 

yields during stormflow did not differ during the growing and non growing seasons when analyzed 

by using the Wilcoxon rank-sum test (table 11). During the growing season, yields were larger 

during stormflow than during base flow at sites WB2 and DB when analyzed by using the 

Wilcoxon-rank-sum test (table 12). 

Yields of total suspended solids are somewhat related to the intensity of land development. 

During base flow and stormfiow, yields are greater at sites downstream from highly and 

moderately developed areas than at sites downstream from slightly developed areas. NPS storm 

51 
BASE FLOW STORMFLOW 

(5) (6) (17) (18) (11) (12) 

1,000,..---------------------, 1,000 ,-----------------~ 

GROWING SEASON GROWING SEASON 

A A A A A A 

100 I- - 100 

10 - - 10 -

-

LSC1 LSC2 WB1 WB2 DB JB LSC1 LSC2 WB1 WB2 DB 

(15) (14) (10) (13) 

1 ,000 r::------------------~ 1,000,.--------------------, 

NONGROWING SEASON 

100 c:-

10 ::-

NONGROWING SEASON 

LSC2 WB1 WB2 

(5) 

SITE 

Measured concentrations for 

five or more observations 

Number of observations 

Maximum value 

75th percentile 

Median 

25th percentile 

Minimum value 

b. Measured concentrations for 

less than five observations 

A 

100 

- 10 

DB LSC2 

EXPLANATION 

SITE DESCRIPTION 

Highly developed 

LSC1, Long Swamp Creek near Toms River 

LSC2, Long Swamp Creek at Toms River 

Moderately developed 

WB1, Wrangel Brook near Toms River 

WB2, Wrangel Brook near South Toms River 

Slightly developed 

DB, Davenport Branch near Dover Forge 

Undeveloped 

JB, Jakes Branch near South Toms River 

A A B 

WB1 WB2 DB 

SITE 

A, B -- Differing letters indicate 

significant differences in 

median concentrations, 

according to the Tukey test 

Figure 16. Distributions of total suspended solids concentrations in unfiltered water 

samples collected during base flow and stormflow in the growing and nongrowing 

seasons at measurement sites in the Toms River drainage basin, New Jersey, 

May 1994 to October 1995. 

52 
80 45 

a.: 0 w A Total suspended solids during storm Z ..- 0 ...J 

~ 400 a: Streamflow during storm W 

W (f) 

a.. 60 • I Total suspended solids during base flow a: 

(f) w ~ 35 o. <l:: It Streamflow during base flow ..- a.: w 

<!J w 

::.i u... 

...J 

- 40 30 0 ~ CO 

Z ::> 

0 

z 

~ z 

0 25 3:"' ~ 0 

a: 20 -' ..- u... 

z ~ W 20 <l:: 0 w 

z a: 

0 I--

0 • (j) 

0 • 15 

2400 0200 0400 0600 0800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 

October 5,1995 

c.n 

~ 

Figure 17. Concentration of total suspended solids and streamflow at Wrangel Brook near Toms River (WB1), 

New Jersey, October 5, 1995. 
BASE FLOW STORMFLOW 

(5) (6) (17) (18) (11) (12) 

100~--------------------A---------B--~ 10,000 r:------------------------=:) 

B A AB C 

o 1,000 

1: 6. 100 

0.1 =- 10 

6. 

GROWING SEASON GROWING SEASON 

0.01 '-----L-S-=C-2---W--S-1---W--B-2----D-B---' LSC2 WB1 WB2 DB 

(15) (14) (10) (6) 

100~----------------~ 10,000 c--------------------=:) 

A A A B 

1,000 

100 

10 

NONGROWING SEASON 

0.01 '-----L-S-C-2----W-B-1----W-B-2----D-B----' LSC2 

SITE 

Calculated area-normalized loads for 

five or more observations 

(5) Number of observations 

Maximum value 

75th percentile 

Median 

25th percentile 

Minimum value 

6. Calculated area-normalized loads for 

less than five observations 

EXPLANATION 

SITE DESCRIPTION 

Highly developed 

LSC2, Long Swamp Creek at Toms River 

Moderately developed 

WB1, Wrangel Brook near Toms River 

WB2, Wrangel Brook near South Toms River 

Slightly developed 

DB, Davenport Branch near Dover Forge 

WB1 WB2 DB 

SITE 

A, B, AB -- Differing letters indicate 

significant differences in 

median concentrations, 

according to the Tukey test 

Figure 18. Distributions of area-normalized loads of total suspended solids calculated for 

samples collected during base flow and stormflow in the growing and nongrowing seasons at 

measurement sites in the Toms River drainage basin, New Jersey, May 1994 to October 1995. 

54 
runoff is most likely an important contributor of total suspended solids to Long Swamp Creek, 

Wrangel Brook, and Davenport Branch. Yields during stormflow were about 10 times greater than 

yields during base flow at sites LSC2, WB 1, WB2, and DB. Contributions of total suspended 

solids to the Toms River from Long Swamp Creek and Wrangel Brook during stormflow could be 

a significant component of the total annual suspended-solids yield because yields during 

stormflow were large. 

Bacteria 

Bacterial contamination of water is commonly assessed by measuring fecal-coliform 

bacteria and E. coli, a type of fecal-coliform bacteria, which are present in the intestine and feces 

of warm-blooded animals. The presence of high numbers of fecal-coliform bacteria and E. coli in 

surface water can indicate the presence of untreated dOlllestic sewage, animal wastes, or 

pathogens that are harmful to humans. Certain strains of E. coli are pathogenic to humans. The 

current State surface-water-quality standard for fecal-coliform bacteria for the entire length of 

Wrangel Brook and Toms River and Davenport Branch downstream from site DB is 200 

organisms per 100 milliliters (New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection, 1998). These 

stretches of streams are designated as FW2 streams. 

The designation FW2 is the general surface-water classification applied to those freshwater 

bodies that are not designated as FWI (those freshwater bodies that originate in and lie wholly 

within Federal or State parks, forests, fish and wildlife lands, and other special holdings, and that 

are to be maintained in their natural state of quality and not subjected to any man-made 

wastewater discharges) or PL (all freshwater bodies that lie within the boundaries of the New 

Jersey Pinelands Preserve). In all FW2 freshwater bodies, the designated uses are (1) 

maintenance, migration, and propagation of the natural and established biota; (2) primary and 

secondary contact recreation; (3) industrial and agricultural water supply; (4) public potable water 

supply after such treatment as required by law or regulation; and (5) any other reasonable uses. 

The entire length of Jakes Branch and the Davenport Branch upstream of site DB are 

designated as PL streams (New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection, 1998). The 

surface-water-quality criteria for PL waters are that these waters shall be maintained at the quality 

of their existing state or that quality necessary to attain or protect the designated uses, whichever 

is more stringent. 

During base flows, concentrations of fecal-coliform and E. coli bacteria at sites LSC1, 

LSC2, WB 1, WB2, and DB were similar and ranged from 9 to 3,300 MPNII 00 mL. Median 

concentrations of fecal-coliform bacteria ranged from 130 MPNIIOO mL at site WB2 (a 

moderately developed area) to 1,100 MPNIIOO mL at site LSC2 (a highly developed area). 

During stormflows, concentrations of fecal-coliform and E. coli bacteria were similar at these 

sites and ranged from 2 to 16,000 MPNIIOO mL. Median concentrations of fecal-coliform 

bacteria ranged from 130 MPNIlOO mL at site DB (a slightly developed area) to 

5,000 MPNII 00 mL at site WB2. Replicate samples for bacterial analysis were collected only 

once, during base flow in the growing season at site WB2, and the concentrations differed 

somewhat (130 and 430 MPNIlOO mL). 

55 
~ 

a: 

OUJ(/) 

~...Ja: ...JcoUJ O«f- ()CO-

~~5 ~o..::! UJf-~ u..(/)O 

u..O o O~,... 

ZZa: o-j: 

~~a: a:a:UJ f-UJco 

zf-~ UJ():::> ()«Z ZCO 

0 

() 

::z: 

a: 

~~a: ...JCOUJ 

O«f- (,)CO::i 

~~:3 (,)0..-

UJf-::2 

u..(/)8 

u..0 .... O~a: 

ZZUJ 

0-.0.. 

i=;«a: 

C2a:~ 

f-~::2 zo:::> UJ«z 

~CO 

0 

() 

BASE FLOW 

(5) (5) (6) 

100,000 E 

10,000 =- A B B 

1,000 :-

!:::,. 

~ 100 f !:::,. 

10 EGROWING SEASON 

LSC1 LSC2 WB1 WB2 

100,000 

10,000 f 

1,000 f 

100 r 

!:::,. 

10 :- !:::,. 

NONGROWING SEASON 

LSC2 WB1 WB2 

SITE 

(5) 

Measured concentrations for 

five or more observations 

Number of observations 

Maximum value 

75th percentile 

Median 

25th percentile 

Minimum value 

I;:.. Measured concentrations for 

less than five observations 

I;:.. 

I;:.. 

DB 

STORMFLOW 

(7) (10) (12) (5) 

~ 100,000 

A A A B 

Y $ r 1 10,000 E 

!:::,. 

~ '""§ 1,000 §-

'1 100 f" 

~ 10 ~ 

GROWING SEASON 

JB LSC1 LSC2 WB1 WB2 DB 

(5) (8) (9) (8) 

100,000 

~ 

10,000 A B B C 

~ 

g 

~ 1 1,000 

100 -: 

!:::,. 

-: 

NONGROWING SEASON 

DB LSC2 

EXPLANATION 

SITE DESCRIPTION 

Highly developed 

LSC 1, Long Swamp Creek near Toms River 

LSC2, Long Swamp Creek at Toms River 

Moderately developed 

WB1, Wrangel Brook near Toms River 

WB2, Wrangel Brook near South Toms River 

Slightly developed 

DB, Davenport Branch near Dover Forge 

Undeveloped 

JB, Jakes Branch near South Toms River 

WB1 WB2 DB 

SITE 

A, B, C _. Differing letters indicate 

significant differences in 

median concentrations, 

according to the Tukey test 

..., 

~ 

~ 

... 

Figure 19. Distributions of fecal-coliform-bacteria concentrations in samples collected 

during base flow and stormflow in the growing and nongrowing seasons at measurement 

sites in the Toms River drainage basin, New Jersey, May 1994 to October 1995. 

56 
BASE FLOW STORM FLOW 

1013 (5) (5) (6) 1013 (7) (10) (12) (5) 

A A A B 

GROWING SEASON 

9 u.. <-a: W 1012 1012 

~ 9 O-W...J 

offi~~ 

1011 A A A 10 <I-:::>w 11 

g~Za: 

occw< 

W::!Ea55 

1010 8 1010 !:::!a:<(J) ...Jocca: <u..Ow ::!E:::ia:a. a:Oa. 

109 109 O<':>I-~ :O;:~(J)o 

«Oa: w<':>::!Ew D. 

108 108 a:wza. <u.._ 

D. 

107 107 GROWING SEASON 

LSC2 WB1 WB2 DB LSC2 WB1 WB2 DB 

1013 (5) (8) (9) (5) 

1013 

~ 

NONGROWING SEASON 

1012 r 

A A A B 

u.. <-a: w 1012 ,.... - O-w...J 

offi~~ 

1011 I- 1011 

~ <I-:::>w 

g~Za: - r g Occw< 

W::!Ea55 

1010 I- 1010 !:::!a:<(J) =- - ...JOCCa: 

<u..ow ::!E:::ia:a. 0:0 a. 109 109 O<':>I-~ - - :O;:~(J)o D. f 

«00: 

e w<':>::!Ew 

108 108 ~~~a. - - r 

107 D. 

107 NONGROWING SEASON 

LSC2 WB1 WB2 DB . LSC2 WB1 WB2 DB 

SITE SITE 

EXPLANATION 

SITE DESCRIPTION 

A, B -- Differing letters indicate 

Calculated area-normalized loads for Highly developed significant differences in 

five or more observations LSC2, Long Swamp Creek at Toms River median concentrations, 

(5) Number of observations 

according to the Tukey test 

Moderately developed 

~ Maximum value WB1, Wrangel Brook near Toms River 

75th percentile WB2, Wrangel Brook near South Toms River 

Median Slightly developed 

25th percentile DB, Davenport Branch near Dover Forge 

Minimum value 

D. Calculated area-normalized loads for 

less than five observations 

~ 

~ 

~ 

1 

--: 

, 

Figure 20. Distributions of area-normalized loads of fecal-coliform bacteria calculated for 

samples collected during base flow and stormflow in the growing and nongrowing seasons 

at measurement sites in the Toms River drainage basin, New Jersey, May 1994 to 

October 1995. 

57 
The distributions of fecal-coliform bacteria concentrations in samples collected during base 

flow and stormfiow are shown in figure 19; sites are arranged from left to right in order of 

decreasing intensity of land development in the contributing drainage areas. Concentrations 

differed among sites LSC2, WB 1, WB2, and DB during base flow in the growing season and 

stormfiow in the growing and nongrowing seasons when analyzed by using the Kruskal-Wallis 

test (table 9). During base flow in the growing season, concentrations were largest at site LSC2 (a 

highly developed area) and smallest at sites WB 1 and WB2 (moderately developed areas) when 

analyzed by using the Tukey test (table 10). During stormfiow, concentrations in the growing 

season are similar at sites LSC2, WB 1, and WB2 and greater than at site DB. During the 

nongrowing season, concentrations were largest at site LSC2 and smallest at site DB~ 

concentrations were similar at sites WB 1 and WB2. At sites LSC2, WB 1, WB2, and DB, 

concentrations were greater in the growing season than in the nongrowing season when analyzed 

by using the Wilcoxon rank-sum test (table 11). 

Because only one or two samples were collected during many storms, evaluation of 

changes in bacteria concentrations during the storms was difficult. For storms during which three 

or more samples were collected, concentrations were greatest in those collected just before or at 

peak streamflow. Concentrations during the growing season were larger during stormflow than 

during base flow at sites LSC2, WB 1, and WB2 when analyzed by using the Wilcoxon rank-sum 

test (table 12). 

The distributions of yields of fecal-coliform bacteria calculated for samples collected 

during base flow and stormflow are shown in figure 20; sites are arranged from left to right in 

order of decreasing intensity of land development in the contributing drainage areas. Yields 

during base flow at sites LSC2, WBI, WB2, and DB ranged from 

1 x 107 to 2 x 1010 (MPN/d)/mi2 9 2 

; median yields ranged from 2 x 10 (MPN/d)/mi at sites LSC2 

9 and WB2 to 3 x 10 (MPN/d)/mi2 at site WB 1. Yields during stormflow at these sites ranged 

7 12 2 from 3 x 10 to 1 x 10 (MPN/d)/mi 8 2 

; median yields ranged from 7 x 10 (MPN/d)/mi at site 

11 DB to 3 x 10 (MPN/d)/mi2 at site WB2 (table 8). 

Among sites LSC2, WB 1, and WB2, yields of fecal-coliform bacteria during base flow in 

the growing season were not different, but yields during stormflow in the growing and 

nongrowing seasons were different when analyzed by using the Kruskal-Wallis test (table 9). 

During stormfiow in the growing and nongrowing seasons, yields were similar at sites LSC2, 

WB 1, and WB2 and larger than at site DB when analyzed by using the Tukey test (table 10). 

During stormfiow, yields were larger in the growing season than in the nongrowing season at 

sites LSCI, WBI, WB2, and DB when analyzed by using the Wilcoxon rank-sum test (table 11). 

During the growing season, yields were larger during stormflow than during base flow at sites 

LSC2, WBI, and WB2 when analyzed by using the Wilcoxon-rank-sum test (table 12). 

Yields of bacteria were somewhat related to intensity of land development and strongly 

related to streamflow and season. During base flow and stormfiow, yields were greater at sites 

downstream from highly and moderately developed areas than at sites downstream from slightly 

developed areas. Yields during stormflow were about 100 times greater than yields during base 

flow in Long Swamp Creek and Wrangel Brook; yields were greater during the growing season 

than the nongrowing season in these streams and Davenport Branch. NPS storm runoff is most 

58 
likely an important contributor of bacteria to Long Swamp Creek, Wrangel Brook, and Davenport 

Branch. Contributions ofbacteria to the Toms River from Long Swamp Creek and Wrangel Brook 

during stormfiow probably are a significant component of the total annual load. 

Specific Conductance. pH. Temperature. and Dissolved OXY'len 

Typical patterns of the change in specific conductance, pH, temperature, and dissolved 

oxygen at sites LSC2 and WB1 are shown in figure 21A and B. Data were grouped by month to 

detetmine seasonal variability. Discrete and continuous measurements of specific conductance, 

pH, temperature, and dissolved oxygen are summarized in table 13 and figures 22 to 25. In this 

section, differences in specific conductance, pH, temperature, and dissolved oxygen among the 

sites are presented, followed by a discussion of each. 

Specific conductance and pH differ among the sites. During base flow, specific conductance 

and pH were greatest at sites LSC1 and LSC2 (highly developed areas) and smallest at sites DB 

and JB (slightly developed and undeveloped areas, respectively). At all the sites, specific 

conductance and pH changed with streamflow; however, insufficient data were available to 

accurately describe these variations. Temperature and dissolved oxygen at each site varied 

according to the season and time of day of measurement. Interpretation of specific conductance, 

pH, temperature, and dissolved oxygen data is ambiguous because the seven storms monitored 

had varying intensity and occurred during different times of the day and year. During the day, 

photosynthesis depletes the concentration of dissolved carbon dioxide in the water and causes an 

increase in dissolved oxygen and pH and a slight decrease in specific conductance. During the 

night, increased respiration increases the concentration of dissolved carbon dioxide in the water 

and causes a decrease in dissolved oxygen and pH and a slight increase in specific conductance. 

High temperatures will intensify these general trends by decreasing dissolved carbon dioxide and 

oxygen concentrations. 

Specific conductance is related to the type and concentration of ions in solution and is 

generally inversely related to streamflow. During base flow, specific conductance was greatest at 

sites LSC1 (134-143 /-lS/cm) and LSC2 (117-218 /-lS/cm) and similar at sites WB1 

(45-65 /-lS/cm), WB2 (39-61 /-lS/cm), DB (37-56 /-lS/cm), and JB (54 /-lS/cm) (table 13; fig. 22). 

Sites LSC1 and LSC2 are downstream from highly developed areas; Zampella (1994) and Fusillo 

(1981) reported greater specific conductance in streams downstream from highly developed areas 

than in streams draining slightly or moderately developed areas. Sites LSC 1 and LSC2 are closest 

to the Toms River embayment, however, and the greater specific conductance could be the result 

of saltwater mixing from Barnegat Bay and the Toms River embayment. Specific conductance in 

Long Swamp Creek, Wrangel Brook, Davenport Branch, and Jakes Branch does not appear to be 

related to nutrient concentrations. Specific conductance appears to increase slightly at all sites 

during the growing season, probably because base flow is generally lower (fig. 22). 

During stormfiow, the specific conductance of the stream generally decreased at all sites to 

30 /-lS/cm or less as a result of the addition of freshwater from rainfall (table 13; fig. 22). 

Exceptions occurred when the specific conductance increased during the early parts of the March 

1995 storm at site WB 1 and the November 1994 storm at site DB; at site DB pH, temperature, and 

dissolved oxygen also increased. These increases in specific conductance could result from 

59 
160 30 ~ 8 30 ~ 0 0 a: 0 0 

UJ UJ UJ 

zf- 140 CJ) C/) 

-UJ a: a: <~ UJ ~ 7 UJ_ UJ 

Of- a.. Z a.. 

ZZ 120 20 tu 20 tu ~~ ::> UJ Cl UJ 

0a: u.. a: u.. 

::>UJ 0 (36 0 Cla.. 100 05 05 ZC/) ::> z 

Oz ::> 

Ow 0 ~ 0 

10 ~ C/) g::?E 80 z 10 ~ u..w 

(300 ~ ~ 0 :r:h 

5 0 UJO ....J a.. ....J a.. a: 60 u.. u.. C/)O ::?E ::?E ~ « « UJ UJ 

40 0 a: a: 

f- 4 0 f1200 1800 2400 0600 1200 00 1200 1800 2400 0600 1200 00 

22 23 22 23 

September 1994 September 1994 

a: 

20 25 Cl UJ 12 30 Cl f- Z ::J z C/) 0 0 ::> 0 a: 0 

00 UJ UJ W ....J C/) a.. 10 C/) 

w 20 a: 00 a: 0 UJ ~ W 

C/) a.. « a.. w 15 f- a: w UJ 8 20 tu <!:l a: 15 ~ ::i UJ 

<!:l ....J u.. W 0 ~ 0 Cl 05 6 05 ~ ::::> ~ ::::> 

w- 10 0 Z 0 

a: 10 z w 4 10 ~ ::> <!:l 

~ ~ >- 3;:-

0 ~ 0 a: 5 ....J ....J W u.. Cl 2 u.. a.. ::?E ::?E ::?E UJ « ~ « UJ UJ W 

f- a: 0 a: 5 0 f- 00 0 0 f1200 1800 2400 0600 1200 00 00 1200 1800 2400 0600 1200 C/) 

0 

22 23 22 23 

September 1994 September 1994 

EXPLANATION 

-A- Continuous specific conductance measurement Streamflow 

-V- Continuous dissolved oxygen measurement ... Discrete specific conductance measurement 

-B- Continuous temperature measurement • Discrete dissolved oxygen measurement 

-e- Continuous pH measurement 

Figure 21 A. Specific conductance, pH, temperature, and dissolved oxygen and streamflow 

measured at Long Swamp Creek at Toms River (LSC2), New Jersey, September 1994. 

60 
160 70 ~ 8 70 ~ 0 0 a: 0 0 w w W 

zl- 140 00 00 

-w a: ~ 7 

a: ~::?! w_ 60 ~ 60 ~ 01- Z zZ 120 I- :::J I-

~~ W W 

W 0 w 

0a: u.. a: u.. :::J w 50 52 « 

00... 50 g 100 0 6 

Zoo co Z co 

:::J ~ :::J Oz 0 0 Ow ~ 00 

g::?! 80 ~ z u..w 

40 ~ • • 000 I5 40 ~- wO -l 0... -' 0... a: 60 u.. u.. 000 ::?! ::?! ~ « « w w 

40 30 g: 4 30 g: 1200 1800 2400 0600 1200 00 1200 1800 2400 0600 1200 00 

8 9 8 9 

March 1995 March 1995 

a: 

70 ~ w 20 I- 12 70 ~ 00 0 ~ 0 :::J 0 a: 

00 w w • ° W -l 00 0... 10 00 w a: 00 a: ° 60 ~ ::?! 

00 « 60 ~ 

w 15 I- a: 8 I- W W CJ w a: w ~ w (!) u.. -l LL W • 50 52 ~ 0 co 6 50 ~ ~ :::J ~ :::J 

w- 0 z- () 

a: 10 ~ w 4 ~ :::J 

40 ~ (!) 

t;c 40 ~ >- x 

a: -l 0 

W -' u.. 0 2 LL 0... ::?! ::;?; ::;?; w « ::i « w w W I- a: 0 a: 5 30 I- 00 0 30 I1200 1800 2400 0600 1200 00 00 1200 1800 2400 0600 1200 (j) 0 

8 9 8 9 

March 1995 March 1995 

EXPLANATION 

--8- Continuous specific conductance measurement Streamflow 

Continuous dissolved oxygen measurement • Discrete temperature measurement 

-a- Contil1uous temperature measurement • Discrete pH measurement 

-e- Continuous pH measurement • Discrete dissolved oxygen measurement 

Figure 21 B. Specific conductance, pH, temperature, and dissolved oxygen and streamflow 

measured at Wrangel Brook near Toms River (WB 1), New Jersey, March 1995. 

61 
Long Swamp Creek at Toms River, LSC2 (highly developed) a: 250 I I I I I UJ I I I I I I 

I-UJ 0 I .~ 

~ i= 200 c- o zz ~ ~UJ f::, uU 

::;,a: 150 t- f::, 0 I oUJ zCl.. 

oC/) 0 0 UZ 

uUJ 100 -

lJ..UJ -~ 

I Ow 

UJo 50 -

t t Cl..a: C/)u 

~ 

~ 0 I I I I I I I I I I I 

Wrangel Brook near Toms River, WB1 (moderately developed) 

~ 250 r I I I I I I I I I I 

UJ·~ 200 UIZZ 

~UJ 

UU 

::;,a: 150 oUJ zCl.. 

oC/) A 

UZ 

uUJ 100 

lJ..UJ -~ A 

ow ~ 0 0 ~ 0 l t UJo 50 Cl..a: ~ 0 is C/)u 

~ 

~ 0 

Wrangel Brook near South Toms River, WB2 (moderately developed) ffi 250 I I I I I I I I \ \ \ 

I-UJ 

UJ·~ 200 f- UIZZ 

~UJ 

UU 

::;, a: 150-

~~ oC/) 

UZ 

S:2 ~ 100-

lJ..UJ 

000 

~~ 50-

C/)u 

~ 

D 

o o o I o 

-

-

-

-

j 

-

-

-

-

~ O~--_~I--_~I--_~I--_~I--_~I--~I----~I----~I----~I----~I----~I----~ 

Davenport Branch near Dover Forge, DB (slightly developed) a: 250.----r----.----r----.----.----,----.----.----.----.----.--~ 

UJ 

I-UJ 

ui~ 200 UIZZ 

~UJ 

UU 

25 ffi 150 

zCl.. 

OC/) 

UZ 

S:2 ~ 100 

lJ..UJ 

ow 

g: ~ 50 (/)u 

~ 

o 

J F M 

o 

A M J 

MONTH 

J 

o 

A s o N 

EXPLANATION 

f::, Discrete measurements 

during stormflow 

A Continuous measurements 

during stormflow 

o Discrete measurements 

during base flow 

@) Continuous measurements 

during base flow 

Figure 22. Specific conductance at measurement sites in the Toms River drainage 

basin, New Jersey, May 1994 to October 1995, by'month. 

62 
changes in the water quality of stream water mixing with storm runoff and rain or interference of 

the probe from the turbulent stormfiow; debris on the probe can cause erroneous readings. Typical 

patterns of the change in specific conductance during stonns at sites LSC2 and WB are shown in 

figure 21. 

The pH of a solution is defined as the negative base-1 0 logarithm of the hydrogen-ion 

activity. Values of pH less than 7 indicate acidic conditions and those greater than 7 indicate 

alkaline solutions. Long Swamp Creek, Wrangel Brook, Davenport Branch, and Jakes Branch all 

had acidic pH. During base flow, the pH was greatest at sites downstream from highly developed 

areas, LSC1 (6.7) and LSC2 (5.19-6.6); similar at sites downstream from moderately developed 

areas, WB1 (4.90-5.66) and WB2 (4.87-5.63); and smallest at sites downstream from moderately 

developed and undeveloped areas, DB (4.54-5.70) and JB (4.16), respectively (table 13; fig. 23). 

The difference in pH among sites could result from the intensity of land development in the 

contributing drainage areas. Zampella (1994) and Fusillo (1981) reported greater pH in streams 

draining highly developed areas than in streams draining areas with less development. Wrangel 

Brook, Davenport Branch, and lakes Branch drain areas within the New Jersey Pinelands 

Preserve, which is an area characterized by poorly buffered waters and acidic soils (Fusillo and 

others, 1980); sites LSC 1 and LSC2 are not located within the Pinelands area. The greater pH in 

Long Swamp Creek could be the result of the stream's proximity to the Toms River embayment, 

higher specific conductance, possibly higher buffering capacity, or different geological setting 

than at Wrangel Brook, Davenport Branch, and Jakes Branch. 

The maximum pH during stormfiow was similar at all sites, but the direction of change 

during the stonn was different. The pH decreased during storms at site LSC2 (6.48-5.19) and 

increased at sites WB1 (4.16-6.34), WB2 (4.39-6.83), and DB (4.36-6.14) (table 13; fig. 23). 

Typical patterns of the change in pH during storms at sites LSC2 and WB 1 are shown in figure 21. 

Any acidity in rainfall will be neutralized by the alkalinity (a measure of the ability of a water to 

neutralize acids) in the stream. Alkalinity is expected to be low in Long Swamp Creek, Wrangel 

Brook, and Davenport Branch because alkalinity measured at the USGS water-quality station 

Toms River near Toms River, N.J., is generally less than 2 mg/L as calcium carbonate. Therefore, 

if storm runoff sufficiently increases the streamflow, pH in streams during stormflow could be 

expected to increase or decrease to the approximate pH of the rainfall. Fusillo and others (1980) 

reported that the pH of rainfall at the Oyster Creek rain gage near Brookville, N.J., ranged from 

4.2 to 7.0. Lord and others (1990) reported that the pH of rainfall at McDonalds Branch in 

Lebanon State Park, N.J., ranged from 4.0 to 5.2. The pH of rainfall over the ocean is generally 

greater than the pH of rainfall over land; all the measurement sites are within 10 miles of the 

Atlantic Ocean. 

Temperature influences many of the physical, chemical, and biological properties of water 

and has a direct effect on the quality of water for domestic supplies, fish and wildlife habitat, 

assimilation of wastes, and industrial and agricultural uses. Natural factors affecting stream 

temperature include solar radiation, shade, snowmelt contributions, streamflow, air temperature, 

and ground-water contributions. At all sites, water temperatures followed a seasonal pattern and 

were greater during the growing season than during the nongrowing season (table 13 and fig. 24). 

63 
Long Swamp Creek at Toms River, LSC2 (highly developed) 

8 I I I I I I I I I I I 

00 7 -

I -

fz a a A a :J l:::. 

I "0 J:a:6r- - 0..« 0 

z I ~ a 00 5 I- -

4 I I I I I I I L 1 I 1 

8 

Wrangel Brook near Toms River, WB1 (moderately developed) 

00 7 

fZ A :J 

I 

J:" 0 6 

l:::. I o..~ l:::. 0 l:::. a z 

~ l:::. ~ 0 00 5 

4 

Wrangel Brook near South Toms River, WB2 (moderately developed) 

8 I I I I I I I I I I I 

D 

7 - l:::. - 00 

fZ 

:J 6- "0 J:a:6- ~ l:::. - 0..« 

~ 0 0 • ~ z 

~ fi 005.-- l:::. a a l:::. - 0 

l:::. 

4 I I I I I I I L 1 J I 

Davenport Branch near Dover Forge, DB (slightly developed) 

8 I I I I I I I I I I I 

EXPLANATION 

00 7 'r- - l:::. Discrete measurements fZ during stormflow 

:J ... Continuous measurements 

61- I - during stormflow 

0 0 Discrete measurements 

t during base flow 

5'r- a 

, - @) Continuous measurements l:::. 

0 during base flow 

4 I I I I I I I I I I 

J F M A M J J A S 0 N 

MONTH 

Figure 23. pH at measurement sites in the Toms River drainage basin, New Jersey, 

May 1994 to October 1995, by month. 

64 
Long Swamp Creek at Toms River, LSC2 (highly developed) 

30 I I I I I I T T I 

(j) 

::J ~ 

~~ 20 f- • ::JLU 

t-::() 0 e «(j) 

a:LU 

LULU 6. 0 (La: 

rof:3 10f- 1-0 0 ~ 

0 I I I I I I I I I I 

Wrangel Brook near Toms River, WB 1 (moderately developed) 

30 

(j) 

::> 

uiw 20 

~u1 

~~ a:LU 

LULU (La: 

ro f:3 10 1-0 

~ 

o 

o 

I 

I 

, 

I 

Wrangel Brook near South Toms River, WB2 (moderately developed) 

30 I I I I I I I I I I I 

D 

(j) 

~ ::J 

~~ 20 l- I ::JLU § t-::() i «(j) 

a:LU 

LULU 0 

(La: 6. ~C!J 

LULU 10 - 0 1-0 6. ~ ~ ~ 

0 I I I I I I I I I I I 

Davenport Branch near Dover Forge, DB (slightly developed) 

30 I I I I I I I I T I I 

(j) 

::J 

~~ 20- 0 0 ::>LU 

t-::() , i «(j) 0 a:LU 

LULU 

(La: 

~C!J 

LULU 10 ;- 8 1-0 

~ 

6. 

0 I I I I I I I I I I I 

J F M A M J J A S 0 N 

MONTH 

-

-

-

-

EXPLANATION 

6. Discrete measurements 

- during stormflow 

• Continuous measurements 

during stormflow 

0 Discrete measurements 

- during base flow 

~ Continuous measurements 

during base flow 

Figure 24. Temperature at measurement sites in the Toms River drainage basin, 

New Jersey, May 1994 to October 1995, by month. 

65 
During base flow, the range of temperatures was similar at each site, from 7.9 to 19.7 °C at 

site LSC2, 10.2 to 20.2 °C at site WBl, 9.7 to 20.8 °C at site WB2, and 9.0 to 19.7 °C at site DB 

(table 13 and fig. 24). The lowest temperature during base flow was measured at site LSC2, 

where the stream is shallow. 

During stormflow, the range of temperatures was similar at sites WBI (5.5-23.9 DC) and 

WB2 (5.6-22.7 DC). Water temperatures were slightly warmer at site LSC2 (7.5-23.9 DC) and 

were lowest at site DB (2.5-18.4 DC). At site DB, beaver dams impounded the water, making the 

stream depth greater than 5 feet. During storms in the early stages of the study, the automatic 

samplers were placed several feet below the water surface, where the water was stagnant and 

cold. The changes in temperature during selected storms at sites LSC2 and WB 1 are shown in 

figure 21 A and B. Patterns of change in water temperature other than those for season and time of 

day are difficult to detect because, in general, all the streams are small (draining less than 

2 35 mi ), and the water temperature quickly equilibrates with the air temperature. Also, samples 

were collected during only seven storms. 

The concentration of dissolved oxygen in surface water depends on the physical, chemical, 

and biological activities in the surface-water body and is a function of water temperature, 

atmospheric pressure, and concentrations of other solutes. Dissolved oxygen concentrations in 

streams are typically lower during summer than during winter; water saturated with oxygen 

contains about 11.3 mg/L of dissolved oxygen at 10°C and about 7.6 mg/L at 30°C. 

Photosynthesis and water turbulence are important mechanisms that replenish dissolved oxygen 

removed by organic-matter consuming processes. Oxygen supersaturation can occur during the 

nongrowing season in slow moving systems and during the growing season when 

photosynthesizing biota are abundant. Oxygen depletion can occur in the growing season when 

the water becomes stagnant, deep, and cold. 

The range of dissolved oxygen concentrations during base flow was similar at sites WB 1 

(7.83-1l.03 mg/L) and WB2 (7.80-10.77 mg/L) (table 13; fig. 25). Wider ranges and lower 

concentrations of dissolved oxygen were measured during base flow at site LSC2 

(1.15-12.39 mg/L), where the stream is shallow, and at site DB (2.53-9.67 mg/L), where the 

stream is deep, than at other sites. Streamflows were smaller and caused more stagnant conditions 

during the growing season at sites LSC2 and DB than at sites on Wrangel Branch. The pattern of 

dissolved oxygen concentrations during stormflow was similar at all sites. The changes in 

dissolved oxygen during selected storms at sites LSC2 and WB 1 are shown in figure 22. The 

range of dissolved oxygen concentrations during stormflow was similar at sites WB 1 

(5.l4-12.40 mglL) and WB2 (7.25-12.00 mg/L). Wider ranges and lower values of dissolved 

oxygen concentrations were measured during stormflow at sites LSC2 (2.36-16.08 mg/L) and 

DB (l.00-1l.57 mg/L) than at other sites. Dissolved oxygen concentrations during storms were 

affected more by temperature (as influenced by the time of day and year) than streamflow. 

SUMMARY 

The Toms River in southern New Jersey drains nearly one-half of the 450-mi2 Barnegat 

Bay watershed. The main contributors to water quality in the Toms River are nonpoint sources in 

the basin because no major point sources discharge to the~river. Chemical constituents from 

66 
Long Swamp Creek at Toms River, LSC2 (highly developed) 

20 I I I I I I I I I J I 

a: I W 

"I- z- 15 - - W.....J <!Ja: 

>-W 

xc.. 

OC/) G I i 0:2 10 I- - we:( I ~a: oS2 0 

C/).....J 

C/):! 0 0 0:2 5- , -

~ 

0 I I I I I I I Y I I I 

Wrangel Brook near Toms River, WB 1 (moderately developed) 

20 I I I I I I I I I I I 

a: 

W ;;it:: 151- - w.....J <!Ja: 

B >-w 

~~ 10 l- I 0 t::,. 0:2 ~ -

i we:( 0 0 I ~a: 0 

~ oS2 C/).....J 

C/):! 5f- - 0:2 

~ 

0 I I I I I I I I I I I 

Wrangel Brook near South Toms River, WB2 (moderately developed) 

20 I I I I I I I I I I I 

a: D W 

;;it:: 15 f- - w.....J 

<!Ja: 

S;(W 

o~ ~ ~ t::,. 0:2 10- 0 e i I - We:( 

~a: e 0 0 oS2 

C/):! 

C/).....J ~ 0:2 5- -

~ 

0 I I I I I I I I I I I 

Davenport Branch near Dover Forge, DB (slightly developed) 

20 I I I I I I I I I I I 

a: EXPLANATION W z" t:: 15 I- - w.....J t::,. Discrete measurements 

<!Ja: during stormflow 

~~ t::,. "- Continuous measurements 

0:2 10 f- @ I - during stormflow 

We:( 

~a: 0 Discrete measurements 

oS2 0 

- I during base flow C/).....J 

C/):! "-

@) Continuous measurements 0:2 Sf- -

~ during base flow 

0 

0 I I I I I I I 1 I I 

J F M A M J J A S 0 N 

MONTH 

Figure 25. Dissolved oxygen at measurement sites in the Toms River drainage basin, 

New Jersey, May 1994 to October 1995, by month. 

67 
diffuse, nonpoint sources are transported to the river by ground water and storm runoff. Nonpoint 

source (NPS) contributions to the Toms River are greatly affected by the type and intensity of 

development and historical land use in the contributing drainage area and are the result of 

ground-water and storm-runoff contributions, modified by instream biological and chemical 

processes. Constituents carried to a stream by relatively constant ground-water flow were 

quantified in samples collected during base flow. Constituents carried to a stream by storm 

runoff, along with the constant contributions from ground water, were quantified in samples 

collected during stormflow. 

Concentrations of water-quality constituents are influenced by streamflow because the 

contributions from storm runoff are flow dependent. The use of loads (mass per time) removes thP lnRllPnf'P nf f'h'lno-1nrr C'trp'ltnRnuT ("nll1tnA nAr t~1"nA \ nn ~nC'troo1"n ,...nnC't~tllont I"\nnnontrnt;""nn LU'-' LU.UU-'-'U...,..., V'L ""L~U.J. ESLUES tJU'-'U.~L~LV'VV \ vV' u.L.u."'" P""'J. l,lJ.J.J.""', vu J.U'::HlvCUlJ. vVUi:)l,lLUvUL vVl1vvuuauv i:) 

(mass per volume). The magnitudes of the loads and yields (loads normalized to the basin area) 

are dependent on (1) the type of land use, such as residential, commercial plus industrial, forest 

plus wetlands, and miscellaneous (including agricultural land, barren land, and water bodies); (2) 

the intensity of development (highly, moderately, slightly, or undeveloped); (3) the historical land 

use in the contributing drainage area; (4) the mode of constituent transport to a stream (mainly 

ground water or storm runoff); and (5) the percentage of time the streamflow is base flow or 

stonnflow. 

Surface-water samples were collected and streamflow and water-stage measurements were 

made at seven sites on four tributaries to the Toms River (Long Swamp Creek, Wrangel Brook, 

Davenport Branch, and Jakes Branch) during May 1994 to October 1995. All sites are located in 

the lower third of the Toms River drainage basin, which contains 54 percent of the development 

in the basin and has the greatest potential for contributing NPS constituent yields to the Toms 

River, the Toms River embayment, and Barnegat Bay. Two water-quality measurement sites are 

located on Long Swamp Creek, which drains a highly developed area; two sites on Wrangel 

Brook, which drains a moderately developed area; one site on Davenport Branch, which drains a 

slightly developed area; and one site on Jakes Branch, which drains an undeveloped area. Base 

flow probably is the larger component of total annual streamflow for Wrangel Brook and 

Davenport Branch, and stormflow probably is the larger component for Long Swamp,Creek. 

Concentrations were determined for total nitrogen, ammonia, nitrite, nitrate plus nitrite, 

nitrate, organic nitrogen, total phosphorus, hydrolyzable phosphorus plus orthophosphorus, 

orthophosphorus, hydrolyzable phosphorus, suspended solids, and bacteria (Escherichia coliform 

and fecal coliform) in water samples collected during base flow and stormflow in the growing 

and nongrowing seasons. Specific conductance, pH, temperature, and dissolved oxygen were 

measured during each base-flow sampling and throughout each of the monitored storms. Of the 

21 water-quality constituents studied, sufficient data were available on 11 constituents for 

analysis of concentrations and on 8 constituents for analysis of yields because the types of 

analyses were changed during the sampling period. 

Yields of total nitrogen, nitrate, and organic nitrogen at the sites on Wrangel Brook, which 

drains moderately developed areas, were either larger than or similar to yields at the site on Long 

Swamp Creek, which drains a highly developed area. The similarity in yields resulted from 

several factors: (1) concentrations were similar at these sites; (2) the dominant nitrogen species [ 

68 
are nitrate (especially in Wrangel Brook) and organic nitrogen; and (3) although stormflow is 

greater than base flow in all these streams, base flow is a much larger component in Wrangel 

Brook than in the other streams. Total nitrogen is a measure of several nitrogen species that can be 

dissolved or bound to particles, and therefore, the concentration and load of total nitrogen at a site 

depend on which nitrogen species is predominant. The dominant nitrogen species are nitrate and 

organic nitrogen in Wrangel Brook, organic nitrogen and ammonia in Long Swamp Creek, and 

organic nitrogen in Davenport Branch. 

Yields of total nitrogen, nitrate, and organic nitrogen do not appear to be directly related'to 

intensity of land development, but probably are influenced by the type of development, the 

amount of base flow, and perhaps the historical land use in the basin. Long Swamp Creek basin 

has the greatest amount of impervious surfaces and the Wrangel Brook basin has the most singlefamily units with high-maintenance lawns. Concentrations of tot a! nitrogen and nitrate in Wrangei 

Brook, which are larger during base flow than during stormfiow, could result from large 

concentrations of nitrate in ground water from fertilizers used for high-maintenance lawns and 

from agricultural runoff from poultry farms, located within the basin almost fifty years ago 

(1950's), that is still present in ground water. Agricultural runoff infiltrates to ground water and 

eventually is discharged to streams. Yields of ammonia appear to be partly related to the intensity 

of land development and storm runoff. Yields at the site on Long Swamp Creek, which drains a 

highly developed area, were either larger than or similar to yields at sites on Wrangel Brook, 

which drains a moderately developed area. Yields were smallest at the site on Davenport Branch, 

which drains a slightly developed area. Concentrations were larger during stormflow than base 

flow only at the sites on Wrangel Brook. Yields at all sites were larger during stonnflow than base 

flow. 

NPS storm runoff most likely is a major contributor of nitrate, organic nitrogen, and 

ammonia to Long Swamp Creek. Contributions of nitrogen to the Toms River from Long Swamp 

Creek during stormfiow probably are significant because stormflow is a larger percentage of the 

total annual streamflow in Long Swamp Creek than is base flow. NPS storm runoff is most likely 

a major contributor of organic nitrogen and ammonia to Wrangel Brook and Davenport Branch. 

Contributions of ammonia to all these streams during stormfiow probably is not a significant 

component of the annual total nitrogen load because ammonia yields during stormflow were 

small, only about one-tenth of the total nitrogen yields. Ground water is a major NPS contributor 

of nitrate and organic nitrogen in Wrangel Brook. Contributions of nitrate from Wrangel Brook to 

the Toms River during base flow could be a significant component of the annual total nitrogen 

load because the base-flow component of the total annual streamflow ofWrangel Brook is greater 

than the stormflow component, and nitrate yields during base flow were large. 

Concentrations of hydrolyzable phosphorus plus orthophosphorus, and to a lesser degree 

orthophosphorus, appear to berelated to the intensity of development in the contributing drainage 

area. Concentrations during base flow and stormflow decreased in magnitude with a decrease in 

the intensity of development in the contributing drainage area; however, because concentrations, 

in general, were small and streamflow (especially base flow) in Wrangel Brook is much larger 

than in Long Swamp Creek, yields of these compounds in Wrangel Brook during stormflow were 

similar to and during base flow greater than those in Long Swamp Creek. Concentrations of 

phosphorus probably are related to concentrations of total suspended solids. Much of the 

69 
phosphorus in these streams is associated with suspended particulate matter because 

concentrations of orthophosphorus in filtered samples were smaller than concentrations of 

hydrolyzable phosphorus plus orthophosphorus in unfiltered samples at all sites. 

NPS storm runoff, especially during the growing season, is most likely an important 

contributor of phosphorus to Long Swamp Creek, Wrangel Brook, and Davenport Branch. 

Contributions of hydrolyzable phosphorus plus orthophosphorus to the Toms River from Long 

Swamp Creek during stormflow could be a significant component of the annual yields of 

phosphorus because yields during stormfiow were an order of magnitude greater than yields 

during base flow, and storrnflow is the greater component of the total annual flow at Long Swamp 

Creek. Contributions of orthophosphorus to the Toms River from these streams probably are not 

a significant component of the total annual yields of phosphortts, however, because 

orthophosphorus yields were small. 

Yields of total suspended solids and bacteria are related to intensity of land development, 

streamflow, and season. During base flow and stormflow, yields were greater at sites downstream 

from highly and moderately developed areas than at sites downstream from slightly developed 

areas. Yields of total suspended solids during stormflow were about 10 times the base flow yields 

in Long Swamp Creek, Wrangel Brook, and Davenport Branch. Yields of bacteria during 

stonnflow were about 100 times the yields during base flow in Long Swamp Creek and Wrangel 

Brook and were greater during the growing season than the nongrowing season in these streams 

and in Davenport Branch. NPS storm runoff is most likely an important contributor of total 

suspended solids and bacteria to Long Swamp Creek, Wrangel Brook, and Davenport Branch. 

Contributions of bacteria to the Toms River from Long Swamp Creek and Wrangel Brook during 

stormflow probably are a significant component of the total annual load because yields during 

stormflow were large. 

At the site on Long Swamp Creek with a highly developed drainage area, yields of 

ammonia, hydrolyzable phosphorus plus orthophosphorus, and orthophosphorus were largest 

during stormfiow, and yields of ammonia, nitrate, hydrolyzable phosphorus plus 

orthophosphorus, orthophosphorus, and fecal-coliform bacteria were smaller in the nongrowing 

season than in the growing season. At sites on Wrangel Branch with moderately developed 

drainage areas, yields of total nitrogen, nitrate, total suspended solids, and fecal-coliform bacteria 

were largest during stormflow, and yields of ammonia, nitrate, and fecal-coliform bacteria were 

smaller in the nongrowing season than in the growing season. At the site on the Davenport 

Branch with a slightly developed drainage area, yields of all the constituents were smallest 

during stormflow, and yields of total nitrogen, nitrate, organic nitrogen, and hydrolyzable 

phosphorus plus orthophosphorus were smaller in the nongrowing season than in the growing 

season. 

During base flow, specific conductance and pH were greatest at the sites on Long Swamp 

Creek, highly developed areas, and were smallest at the sites on the Davenport Branch, a slightly 

developed area, and on Jacobs Branch, an undeveloped area. Temperature and concentrations of 

dissolved oxygen at each site varied according to the season and time of day of measurement. 

Changes in water temperature during storms were more likely the result of the time of day and 

changes in the weather than increasing streamflow. 

70 
REFERENCES CITED 

Anderson, lR., Hardy, E.E., Roach, IT., and Witmer, R.E., 1976, A land use and land cover 

classification system for use with remote sensor data: U.S. Geological Survey Professional 

Paper 964, 28 p. 

Connell, Robert, Jr., and Schuster, Robert, 1996, Toms River nonpoint source pollution study, 

water quality monitoring: Trenton, N.l, New Jersey Department of Environmental 

Protection, 8 p., 4 app. 

Fusillo, T.V., 1981, Impact of suburban residential development on water resources in the area of 

Winslow Township, Camden County, New Jersey: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources 

Investigations Report 81-27, 38 p. 

Fusillo, T.V., Schomick, lC., Jr., Koester, H.E., and Harriman, D.A., 1980, Investigation of 

acidity and other water-quality characteristics of Upper Oyster Creek, Ocean County, New 

Jersey: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations 80-10, 30 p. 

Helsel, D.R., and Hirsch, R.M., 1992, Statistical methods in water resources: New York, Elsevier 

Science Publishing Company, 522 p. 

Hirsch, R.M., 1982, A comparison of four streamflow record extension techniques: Water 

Resources Research, v. 18, no. 18, p. 1081-1088. 

Hole, TJ.F., and Smith, H.C., 1989, Soil survey of Ocean County, New Jersey: U.S. Department 

of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service, 102 p. 

Huchison, N.E., 1975, WATSTORE: National Water Data Storage and Retrieval System: user's 

guide: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 75-426, 791 p. 

Johnsson, P.A., and Barringer, lL., 1993, Water quality and hydrogeochemical processes in 

McDonalds Branch Basin, New Jersey Pinelands, 1984-88: U.S. Geological Survey WaterResources Investigations Report 91-4081, III p. 

Lord, D.G, Barringer, lL., Johnsson, P.A., Schuster, P.F., Walker, R.L., Fairchild, lE., Sroka, 

B.N., and Jacobsen, Eric, 1990, Hydrogeochemical data from an acidic deposition study at 

McDonalds Branch basin in the New Jersey Pinelands, 1983-86: U.S. Geological Survey 

Open-File Report 88-500, 132 p. 

Lynch, lA, and Corbett, E.S., 1990, Evaluation of best management practices for controlling 

nonpoint pollution from silvicultural operations: Water Resources Bulletin, vol. 26, no. 1, p. 

41-52. 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, 1991, Climatological data annual summary, 

New Jersey 1991: v. 96, no. 13, p. 2-3. 

71 
REFERENCES CITED--Continued 

---1992, Climatological data annual summary, New Jersey 1992: v. 97, no. 13, p. 2-3. 

New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection and Energy, 1993a, A watershed 

management plan for Barnegat Bay: Trenton, N.J., New Jersey Department of 

Environmental Protection and Energy, 257 p. 

---1993b, New Jersey 1992 State water quality inventory report: Trenton, N.J., New Jersey 

Department of Environmental Protection, Division of Water Resources, Bureau of Water 

Quality Planning, 5 chap. 

---1994, Surface water quality standards N.J.A.C. 7:9B: Trenton, N.J., New Jersey 

Department of Environmental Protection and Energy, Office of Land and Water Planning, 

122 p. 

Price, C. V., and Schaefer, F.L., 1995, Estimated loads of selected constituents from permitted and 

nonpermitted sources at selected surface-water-quality stations in the Musconetcong, 

Rockaway, and Whippany River Basins, New Jersey, 1985-90: U.S. Geological Survey 

Water-Resources Investigations 95-4040, 28 p. 

Rantz, S.E., and others, 1982, Measurement and computation of streamflow: Volume 2. 

Computation of discharge: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 2175, 346 p. 

Rogers, Golden, and Halpern, Inc., 1990, Profile of the Barnegat Bay: Philadelphia, Pa., Report 

prepared for the Barnegat Bay Study Group by Rogers, Golden, and Halpern, Inc., in 

association with Expert Information Systems, Inc., 6 chap., 2 app. 

Ruffner, lA., and Bair, F.E., eds, 1977, The weather almanac (2d ed.): New York, Avon Books, 

p.35. 

Schornick, lC., Jr., and Fishel, D.K., 1980, Effects of storm runoff on water quality in the Mill 

Creek drainage basin, Willingboro, New Jersey: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources 

Investigations Report 80-98, III p. 

Searcy, lK., 1959, Flow-duration curves: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 

1542-A, 33 p. 

U.S. Geological Survey, 1986, Land use and land cover digital data from 1 :250,000- and 

1: 1 OO,OOO-scale maps: National Mapping Program Technical Instructions: Data users guide 

4,36p. 

72 
REFERENCES CITED--Continued 

Watt, M.K., Johnson, M.L., and Lacombe, PJ., 1994, Hydrology of the unconfined aquifer 

system, Toms River, Metedeconk River, and Kettle Creek Basins, New Jersey, 1987-90: U.S. 

Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 93-4110, 5 pl. 

Zampella, R.A., 1994, Characterization of surface water quality along a watershed disturbance 

gradient: Water Resources Bulletin, v. 30, no. 4, p. 605-611. 

73 
....... 

.,&::a. 

Table 5. Numbers of chemical of water samples collected during each sampling at measurement sites in the Toms River drainage basin, New Jersey, May 1994 to October 1995 

[Sites are listed in order of decreasing intensity of land development in the contributing drainage areas. OS, growing season (April 1 through October 31); NOS, nongrowing season (November 1 

through March 31); Sp, spring season (April through June); Su, summer season (July through September); F, fall season (October through December); W, winter season (January through March); -

-, no sample(s) collected for analysis, no measurement(s) made, or no concentration calculated; U, concentration measured in an unfiltered water sample; F, concentration measured in a filtered 

water sample; C, calculated concentration; CU, concentration calculated from concentrations measured in unfiltered water samples; CF, concentration calculated from concentrations measured in 

filtered water samples] 

Number of samples analyzed 

Base flow Stormflow 

OS NOS OS NOS 

Sp Su F W Sp Su F W 

Water-quality characteristic 2 11 4 12 14 9 3 5 13 15 7 8 10 

Long Swamp Creek near Toms River (LSCl) 

Total nitrogen (U) 2 

Total nitrogen (F) 2 

Ammonia(U) 2 

Ammonia (F) 2 

Nitrate plus nitrite (U) 2 

Nitrate plus mtrite (F) 2 

Nitrite (U) 2 

Nitrite (F) 2 

Nitrate 1 2 (CU) 

Nitrate (CF)l 2 

Organic nitrogen (C)2 2 

Hydrolyzable phosphorus plus 

orthophosphorus (U) 2 

Hydrolyzable phosphorus plus 

orthophosphorus (F) 2 

Orthophosphorus (U) 2 

Orthophosphorus(F) 2 

Hydrolyzable 2 phosphorus (CU)3 

Total phosphorus (U) 

Total phosphorus (F) 

Total suspended solids 

Escherichia coliform 

Fecal coliform 

Specific conductance 2 

Dissolved oxygen 2 

pH 2 

Temperature 2 

Footnotes at enaof table 
Table 5. Numbers of chemical analyses of water samples collected during each sampling at measurement sites in the Toms River drainage basin, New Jersey, May 1994 to October 1995--Continued 

Sampling event 

Base flow Stormflow 

OS NGS OS NGS 

Sp Su F W Sp Su F W 

Water-quality characteristic 2 11 4 12 14 9 3 5 13 15 7 8 10 

Long Swamn Creek at Toms River (LSC2) 

Total nitrogen (U) 1 1 1 4 2 4 6 4 3 4 

Total nitrogen (F) 4 

Ammonia{U) 4 2 4 6 3 7 7 

Ammonia (F) 4 2 4 6 7 7 

Nitrate plus nitrite (U) 4 9 

Nitrate plus nitrite (F) 4 2 4 6 7 7 

Nitrite (U) 4 9 

Nitrite (F) 4 2 4 6 7 4 

4 9 Nitrate (CU)l 

Nitrate (CF)l 4 2 4 6 7 4 

Organic nitrogen (Cp 4 2 3 6 3 3 3 

Hydrolyzable phosphorus plus 

orthophosphorus (U) 3 4 6 9 7 4 

Hydrolyzable phosphorus plus 

orthophosphorus (F) 

Orthophosphorus (U) 4 9 

CArthophosphorus(F) 4 2 4 6 7 4 

Hydrolyzable phosphorus (CU)3 9 

Total phosphorus (U) 

Total phosphorus (F) 

Total suspended solids 4 3 4 6 9 3 3 

Escherichia coliform 3 2 2 2 

Fecal coliform 3 2 2 2 

Specific conductance 65 4 59 23 35 41 

Dissolved oxygen 2 65 4 56 23 35 44 

pH 1 65 4 54 23 35 45 

Temperature 2 65 3 54 23 35 45 

...... 

en 
Table 5. Numbers of chemical analyses of water samples collected during each sampling at measurement sites in the Toms River drainage basin, New Jersey, May 1994 to October 1995--Continued 

Sampling event 

Base flow Stormfiow 

GS NGS GS NGS 

Sp Su F W Sp Su F W 

Water-quality characteristic 2 11 4 12 14 9 3 -> 

~. 13 15 7 8 10 

Wrangel Brook near Toms River (WEI) 

Total nitrogen (U) 1 1 2 4 4 4 8 5 3 7 

Total nitrogen (F) 

Ammonia (U) 2 4 4 7 5 12 8 

Ammonia (F) 2 4 4 7 12 6 

Nitrate plus nitrite (U) 4 8 

Nitrate plus nitrite (F) 2 4 4 4 7 12 6 

Nitrite (U) 4 8 

Nitrite (F) 2 4 4 4 7 12 6 

Nitrate 4 (CU)l 8 

Nitrate (CF)l 2 4 4 4 7 12 6 

Organic nitrogen (C)2 2 4 4 7 5 3 6 

Hydrolyzable phosphorus plus 

orthophosphorus (U) 2 4- 4 8 8 12 7 

Hydrolyzable phosphorus plus 

orthophosphorus (F) 

Orthophosphorus(U) 4 8 

Orthophosphorus(F) 2 4 4 4 7 12 6 

Hydrolyzable phosphorus (CD)3 2 8 

Total phosphorus (U) 

Total phosphorus (F) 

Total suspended solids 2 4 4 4 7 8 3 3 

Escherichia coliform 1 4 4 1 3 2 3 

Fecal coliform I 4 4 1 3 2 3 

Specific conductance 62 4 22 44 5 3 86 

Dissolved oxygen 2 62 4 6 22 45 5 2 88 

pH 62 4 6 22 45 5 2 88 

Temperature 62 4 4 22 45 5 2 88 

~ 

C» 
Table 5. Numbers of chemical analyses ofwater samples collected during each sampling at measurement sites in the Toms River drainage basin, New Jersey, May 1994 to October 1995--Continued 

Sampling event 

Base flow Stormflow 

GS NGS GS NGS 

Sp Su F W Sp Su F W 

Water-quality characteristic ,1 2 11 4 12 14 9 3 5 13 15 7 8 10 

Wrangel Brook near South Toms River (WB2) 

Total nitrogen (U) 2 1 2 4 3 3 3 3 4 

Total nitrogen (F) 4 

Ammonia (U) 2 2 4 3 3 3 7 

Ammonia (F) 2 2 4 3 3 7 

Nitrate plus nitrite (U) 4 3 

Nitrate plus nitrite (F) 2 2 4 3 3 3 7 

Nitrite (U) 4 3 

Nitrite (F) 2 2 4 3 3 3 4 

Nitrate (CU)l 4 3 

Nitrate (CF)l 2 2 4 3 3 3 4 

Organic nitrogen (C)2 2 2 4 3 3 3 4 

Hydrolyzable phosphorus plus 

orthophosphorus (U) 2 3 3 3 3 4 

Hydrolyzable phosphorus plus 

orthophosphorus (F) 

Orthophosphorus (U) 4 3 

Orthophosphorus (F) 2 2 4 3 3 3 4 

Hydrolyzable phosphorus (CU)3 3 

Total phosphorus (U) 

Total phosphorus (F) 

Total suspended solids 2 2 4 3 3 3 3 4 

Escherichia coliform 2 1 4 4 3 3 3 3 

Fecal coliform 2 4 4 3 3 3 3 

Specific conductance 2 30 4 11 41 3 4 

Dissolved oxygen 4 30 4 7 8 42 3 3 2 

pH 2 30 4 7 8 42 3 3 1 

Temperature 2 30 4 4 8 42 3 3 2 

......

......
Table 5. Numbers of chemical analyses ofwater samples collected during each sampling at measurement sites in the Toms River drainage basin, New Jersey, May 1994 to October 1995--Continued 

Sampling event 

Base flow Stormflow 

GS NGS GS NGS 

Sp Su F W Sp Su F W 

Water-quality characteristic 2 11 4 12 14 9 3 5 13 15 7 8 10 

Davenll0rt Branch near Dover Forge (DB) 

Total nitrogen (U) 1 4 1 3 5 3 3 3 5 

Total nitrogen (F) 

Ammonia (U) 4- 3 5 3 3 12 5 

Ammonia (F) 4 3 5 3 12 2 

Nitrate plus nitrite (U) 7 3 

Nitrate plus nitrite (F) 4- 3 5 3 12 2 

Nitrite (U) 7 3 

Nitrite (F) 4- 3 5 3 12 5 

Nitrate (CU)l 7 3 

Nitrate (CF)l 4 3 5 3 12 2 

Organic nitrogen (C)2 4 3 5 3 3 3 5 

Hydrolyzable phosphorus plus 

orthophosphorus (U) 5 3 5 3 7 12 5 

Hydrolyzable phosphorus plus 

orthophosphorus(F) 

Orthophosphorus(U) 7 3 

Orthophosphorus(F) 4 3 5 3 12 2 

Hydrolyzable phosphorus (CU)3 7 3 

Total phosphorus (U) 

Total phosphorus (F) 

Total suspended solids 4 3 6 3 7 3 3 

Escherichia coliform 3 3 2 3 

Fecal coliform 1 1 3 1 3 2 3 

Specific conductance 1 48 1 39 136 46 53 89 

Dissolved oxygen 2 48 2 41 134 47 53 90 

pH 48 1 40 134 47 53 89 

Temperature 2 48 2 40 134 47 53 90 

..... 

CD 
Table S. Numbers of chemical analyses ofwater samples collected during each sampling at measurement sites in the Toms River drainage basin, New Jersey, May 1994 to October 1995--Continued 

Sampling event 

Base flow Stormflow 

GS NGS GS NGS 

Sp Su F W Sp Su F W 

Water-quality characteristic 2 11 4 12 14 9 3 5 13 15 7 8 10 

Jakes Branch near South Toms River (JB) 

Total nitrogen (U) 

Total nitrogen (F) 

Ammonia(U) 

Ammonia (F) 

Nitrate plus nitrite (U) 

Nitrate plus nitrite (F) 

Nitrite (U) 

Nitrite (F) 

Nitrate (CU)l 

Nitrate (CF)i 

Organic nitrogen (C)2 

Hydrolyzable phosphorus plus 

orthophosphorus (U) 

Hydrolyzable phosphorus plus 

orthophosphorus (F) 

Orthophosphorus(U) 

Orthophosphorus(F) 

Hydrolyzable phosphorus (CU)3 

Total phosphorus (U) 

Total phosphorus (F) 

Total suspended solids 

Escherichia coliform 

Fecal coliform 

Specific conductance 

Dissolved oxygen 

pH 

Temperature 

lConcentration calculated as the difference between the concentrations of nitrate plus nitrite and nitrite. 

2Concentration calculated as the difference between the concentrations of total nitrogen in an unfiltered water sample and the sum of ammonia, nitrate, and nitrite in filtered water samples. 

3Concentration calculated as the difference between the concentrations of hydrolyzable phosphorus plus orthophosphorus and orthophosphorus in unfiltered water samples. 

~ 
Table 6. Statistical summary of concentrations of selected water-quality constituents measured in samples collected at measurement sites 

in the Toms River drainage basin, New Jersey, May 1994 to October 1995 

[Sites are listed in order of decreasing intensity ofland development in the contributing drainage areas. U, concentration measured in an 

unfiltered water sample; F, concentration measured in a filtered water sample; C, calculated concentration; CF, concentration calculated 

from concentrations measured in filtered water samples; median is calculated only when there are five or more observations; LSC1, Long 

Swamp Creek near Toms River; LSC2, Long Swamp Creek at Toms River; WB 1, Wrangel Brook near Toms River; WB2, Wrangel 

Brook near South Toms River; DB, Davenport Branch near Dover Forge; JB; Jakes Branch near South Toms River;--, no data; <, less 

than; >, greater than; ~, equal to or greater than; E, estimated value. Growing season is April 1 through October 31; nongrowing season 

is November 1 through March 31.] 

Concentration Number of Total Total number 

sampling number of of censored 50 percentile 

Site name events observations values Minimum 25 percentile (median) 75 percentile Maximum 

All samnles collected during base flow 

Totai nitrogen (ill as nitrogen. in miiligrams ner liter1 

LSC1 2 2 0 0.813 0.933 

LSC2 7 7 0 .420 0.719 0.863 1.022 1.111 

WBI 7 8 0 .787 .828 .879 1.000 1.092 

WB2 7 9 0 .642 .756 .771 .977 1.054 

DB 5 9 0 .250 .338 .463 .518 1.471 

JB 0 .238 

Ammonia (ill as nitrogen. in milligrams ner lite~ 

LSC1 2 2 0 .145 .166 

LSC2 7 7 0 .065 .065 E .121 .497 .688 

WBI 7 8 1 <.009 .011 .015 .031 .090 

WB2 7 9 2 <.009 .010 .017 .020 .029 

DB 5 8 0 .024 .026 .053 .063 .270 

JB 1 <.009 

Ammonia (El as nitrogen. in milligrams ner lite~ 

LSC1 2 2 0 .136 .150 .161 

LSC2 7 7 0 .047 .054 E .109 .492 .682 

WBI 7 8 1 <.009 .011 .013 .021 E.021 

WB2 7 9 3 ~.008 <.009 .014 .018 .027 

DB 5 8 0 .021 .024 .053 .061 .258 

JB 1 <.009 

Nitrite (F) as nitroge!!, in milligrams ner liter 

LSCI 2 2 <.003 .007 

LSC2 7 7 2 <.003 <.003 .005 .013 .037 

WBI 7 8 7 <.003 <.003 <.003 <.003 .004 

WB2 7 9 7 <.003 < .003 < .003 < .003 .004 

DB 5 8 2 <.003 .004 .005 .006 .010 

JB 1 1 <.003 

Nitrate (CF) as nitrogen. in milligrams ner lite? 

LSCI 2 2 2 <.015 <.015 

LSC2 7 7 1 <.022 .032 .381 .511 .576 

WBI 7 8 0 .299 .609 .719 .756 .810 

WB2 7 9 0 .330 .611 .661 .692 .751 

DB 5 8 4 <.022 <.022 .024 .035 .176 

JB <.022 

Organic nitrogen (C) as nitrogen. in milligrams ner liter 

LSCI 2 2 0 .662 .757 

LSC2 7 7 0 .072 .205 .273 .400 .410 

WBl 7 8 0 .071 .109 .176 .323 .521 

WB2 7 9 0 .082 .132 .179 .281 .398 

DB 5 8 0 .138 .184 .374 .434 1.179 

JB 0 .210 

Footnotes at end of table 

80 
Table 6. Statistical summary of concentrations of selected water-quality constituents measured in samples collected at measurement sites 

in the Toms River drainage basin, New Jersey. May 1994 to October 1995--Continued 

Concentration Number of Total Total number 

sampling number of of censored 50 percentile 

Site name events observations values Minimum 25 percentile (median) 75 percentile Maximum 

All sam121es collected during base flow--continued 

H:;tdrol:;tzable 12ho~horus 12lus ortho12ho~horus (1D as 12hos12horus. in milligrams 12er liter4 

LSCI 2 2 0 .117 .195 

LSC2 (; 6 <.013 .014 .033 .057 .084 

WBI 6 7 3 S .011 s.012 < .013 .016 .018 

WB2 6 7 2 E s .011 s.012 < .013 .024 .024 

DB 4 7 2 <.013 .015 .019 .024 .032 

JB 1 <.013 

Ortho12ho~horus eE) as 12ho~horus. 5 in milligrams 12er liter

LSCI 2 2 0 .062 .099 

LSC2 7 7 3 s.007 s.012 < .013 .018 .026 

WBI 7 8 3 s.003 s.005 s.008 < .013 <.013 

WB2 7 9 3 s.003 s.004 s.008 < .013 <.013 

DB 5 8 1 .004 .010 .015 .018 .019 

JB 1 1 0 .006 

Total sus12ended solids. in milligrams 12er liter 

LSCI 1 1 <2.00 

LSC2 5 5 1 <2.00 2.00 2.33 4.33 5.33 

WBI 5 6 3 <2.00 <2.00 2.33 3.00 4.33 

WB2 5 7 4 < 2.00 <2.00 <2.00 2.33 5.00 

DB 4 7 2 <2.00 <2.00 6.00 9.00 47.00 

JB 1 1 <2.00 

Escherichia coliform. in most 12robable number 12er 100 milliliters 

LSCI 2 2 0 93 230 

LSC2 6 6 1 23 170 1.025 > 2,400 3,300 

WBI 6 6 0 9 23 150 230 460 

WB2 6 7 0 23 43 130 170 430 

DB 4 4 0 36 130 

JB 0 0 0 

Fecal coliform. in most 12robable number 12er 100 milliliters 

LSCI 2 2 0 93 230 

LSC2 6 6 23 350 1,100 > 2,400 3.300 

WBI 6 6 0 9 23 150 230 460 

WB2 6 7 0 23 43 130 170 430 

DB 4 4 0 36 130 

JB 0 0 0 

Sam12les collected during base flow in the growing season 

Total nitrogen (ill as nitrogen. in milligrams 12er liter! 

LSCI 2 2 0 .813 .933 

LSC2 6 6 0 .420 .719 .832 1.022 1.111 

WBI 6 6 0 .787 .828 .879 .929 1.092 

WB2 6 7 0 .642 .749 .771 .990 1.054 

DB 4 7 0 .250 .383 .468 .534 1.471 

JB I 1 .240 

Ammonia (ill as nitrogen. in milligrams 12er lite~ 

LSCI 2 2 0 .145 .166 

LSC2 6 6 0 .065 .065 .128 .497 .688 

WEI 6 6 0 .011 .015 .023 .031 .090 

WB2 6 7 0 .010 .011 .018 .021 .029 

DB 4 7 0 .025 .027 .056 .066 .270 

JB 1 1 1 <.009 

81 
Table 6. Statistical summary of concentrations of selected water-quality constituents measured in samples collected at measurement sites 

in the Toms River drainage basin, New Jersey, May 1994 to October 1995--Continued 

Concentration Number of Total Total number 

sampling number of of censored 50 percentile 

Site name events observations values Minimum 25 percentile (median) 75 percentile Maximum 

Samnles collected during base flow in the growing season--continued 

Ammonia (£) as nitrogen, in milligrams ner liter2 

LSCI 2 2 0 .136 .161 

LSC2 6 6 0 .047 .065 .137 .492 .682 

WBl 6 6 0 .011 .011 .018 .021 .021 

WB2 6 7 s.008 <.009 .014 .018 .027 

DB 4 7 0 .023 .025 .055 .066 .258 

JB 1 1 <.009 

Nitrite (F) as nitrogen, in milligrams ner liter 

LSCI 2 ... 

') <.003 .007 

LSC2 6 6 2 <.003 < .003 .008 .013 .037 

WBl 6 6 5 <.003 < .003 <.003 <.003 .004 

WB2 6 7 5 <.003 <.003 < .003 .004 .004 

DB 4 7 <.003 .004 .005 .007 .010 

JB 1 <.003 

Nitrate (CF) as nitrogen, in milligrams ner lite~ 

LSCI 2 2 2 <.015 < .015 

LSC2 6 6 <.022 .035 .320 .416 .511 

WBI 6 6 0 .299 .533 .692 .767 .810 

WB2 6 7 0 -.330 .434 .627 .751 .751 

DB 4 7 4 <.022 <.022 <.022 .032 .041 

JB 1 <.022 

Organic nitrogen (C) as nitrogen, in millig;!1!ms ner liter 

LSCI 2 2 0 .653 E .752 

LSC2 6 6 0 .072 .205 .296 .400 .410 

WBI 6 6 0 .109 .136 .176 .263 .521 

WB2 6 7 0 .118 .132 .179 .281 .398 

DB 4 7 0 .184 .255 .386 .434 1.179 

ill 0 .207 

Hydrolyzable nhosnhorus n1us orthonhosnhorus (ill as nho~horus, 4 in milligrams ner liter

LSCI 2 2 0 .Il7 .195 

LSC2 5 5 0 .014 .023 .043 .057 .084 

WBI 5 5 S .011 ::;.012 < .013 .016 .018 

WB2 5 6 E.Oll .012 .014 .024 .024 

DB 3 6 <.013 .016 .019 .028 .032 

JB < .013 

Orthonhosnhorus (£) as nhosnhorus, in milligrams ner literS 

LSCI 2 2 0 .062 .099 

LSC2 6 6 3 s.012 ::; .013 < .013 .018 .026 

WBI 6 6 3 ::;.007 ::;.007 ::; .011 < .013 <.013 

WB2 6 7 3 ::;.004 s .006 ::;.009 < .013 <.013 

DB 4 7 ::;.007 < .013 .016 .019 .019 

JB 0 .006 

Total susnended solids, in milligrams ner liter 

LSCI 1 1 < 2.00 

LSC2 4 4 <2.00 3.33 5.33 

WBI 4 4 3 <2.00 <2.00 4.33 

WB2 4 5 4 <2.00 <2.00 <2.00 < 2.00 5.00 

DB 3 6 < 2.00 2.00 7.40 9.00 47.00 

ill <2.00 

82 
Table 6. Statistical summary of concentrations of selected water-quality constituents measured in samples collected at measurement sites 

in the Toms River drainage basin, New Jersey. May 1994 to October 1995--Continued 

Concentration Number of Total Total number 

sampling number of of censored 50 percentile 

Site name events observations values Minimum 25 percentile (median) 75 percentile Maximum 

Sam~les collected during base flow in the growing season--continued 

Escherichia coliform2 in most ~robable number ~er 100 milliliters 

LSCI 2 2 0 93 230 

LSC2 5 5 170 350 1,700 > 2.400 3,300 

WBI 5 5 0 23 130 170 230 460 

WB2 5 6 0 43 70 130 170 430 

DB 3 3 0 70 130 

ill 0 0 0 

Fecal coliform. in most ~robable number ~er 100 milliliters 

LSCI 2 2 0 93 230 

LSC2 5 5 350 500 1,700 > 2.400 3,300 

WBI 5 5 0 23 130 170 230 460 

WB2 5 6 0 43 110 130 170 430 

DB 3 3 0 70 130 

ill 0 0 0 

Sam~les collected during base flow in the nongrowing season 

Total nitrogen as nitrogen. in milligrams per literl (U) 

LSC2 1 1 0 .883 

WBI 2 o .824 1.071 

WB2 2 o .765 .977 

DB o .338 

Ammonia (U) as nitrogen, in milligrams per lite? 

LSC2 1 I 0 .070 

WBI 1 2 1 <.009 .010 

WB2 2 2 <.009 <.009 

DB o .024 

Ammonia (F) as nitrogen. in milligrams ~er lite? 

LSC2 1 I 0 .054 

WBt 2 1 <.009 .010 

WB2 2 2 <.009 <.009 

DB o .021 

Nitrite (F) as nitrogen. in milligrams ~er liter 

LSC2 1 1 o .004 

WBI 1 2 2 <.003 <.003 

WB2 2 2 <.003 <.003 

DB <.003 

Nitrate (CF) as nitrogen. in milligrams ~er lite? 

LSC2 1 1 o .576 

WBI 2 o .738 .744 

WB2 2 o .661 .661 

DB o .176 

Organic nitrogen (C) as nitrogen, in milligrams per liter 

LSC2 1 1 0 .233 

WBI 1 2 0 .071 .323 

WB2 2 o .095 .307 

DB o .138 

83 
Table 6. Statistical summary of concentrations of selected water-quality constituents measured in samples collected at measurement sites 

in the Toms River drainage basin. New Jersey. May 1994 to October 1995--Continued 

Concentration Number of Total Total number 

sampling number of of censored 50 percentile 

Site name events observations values Minimum 25 percentile (median) 75 percentile Maximum 

Samples collected during base flow in the non growing season--continued 

Hydrolyzable phos.phorus plus orthophos.phorus (U) as phosphorus, in milligrams per liter4 

LSC2 1 1 1 < .013 

WBI 2 2 < .013 <.013 

WB2 1 < .013 

DB < .013 

Orthonhos.phorus (E) as nhos.phorus, in milligrams ,Per literS 

LSC2 1 1 0 .007 

WBI 2 0 .003 .003 

w'B2 2 0 .003 .003 

DB 0 .004 

Total suspended solids, in milligrnms ,Per liter 

LSC2 1 1 0 2.00 

WBI 1 2 0 2.67 3.00 

WB2 2 0 2.00 2.33 

DB 1 2.00 

Escherichia coliform. in most probable number per lOO milliliters 

LSC2 1 1 0 23 

WBI o 9 

WB2 o 23 

DB o 36 

Fecal coliform. in most probable number per 100 milliliters 

LSC2 1 1 0 23 

WBI 0 9 

WB2 0 23 

DB o 36 

All sam,Ples collected during stormflow 

Total nitrogen (ill as nitrogen, in milligrams ,Per liter 1 

LSCI 1 2 0 1.034 1.069 

LSC2 7 27 0 .394 .593 .669 .986 1.483 

WBI 7 35 0 .340 .715 .863 1.130 1.438 

WB2 7 21 0 .397 .605 .715 .849 1.001 

DB 6 22 0 E .271 .357 .496 .812 1.200 

Ammonia em as nitrogen. in milligrams per lite~ 

LSCI 1 2 0 .174 .223 

LSC2 7 33 0 .024 .056 .078 .119 .398 

WBI 7 41 1 <.007 .015 .028 .043 .073 

WB2 6 21 1 <.009 .015 .024 .036 .094 

DB 6 31 0 .008 .015 .017 .063 .204 

Ammonia (F) as nitrogen. in milligrams per liter2 

LSCI 1 2 0 .185 .216 

LSC2 7 633 0 .024 .056 .072 .119 .371 

WBI 7 6 0 .007 .021 .026 .039 .071 39 

WB2 6 6 .008 .024 .030 21 .013 .094 

DB 6 6 0 .0lO .015 .017 .058 .204 31 

84 
Table 6. Statistical swnmary of concentrations of selected water-quality constituents measured in samples collected at measurement sites 

in the Toms River drainage basin, New Jersey, May 1994 to October 1995--Continued 

Concentration Number of Total Total number 

sampling number of of censored 50 percentile 

Site name events observations values Minimum 25 percentile (median) 75 percentile Maximum 

All samnles collected during stormfiow--continued 

Nitrite (F) as nitrogen~ in millierams ner liter 

LSCI 1 2 0 .015 .027 

LSC2 7 636 5 <.003 .004 .006 .010 .020 

WBI 7 6

45 28 <.003 <.003 < .003 .004 .006 

WB2 7 621 14 <.003 <.003 < .003 .004 .007 

DB 6 6 21 <.003 <.003 < .003 .004 .011 32 

Nitrate (CF) as nitrogen~ in milligrams ner lite? 

LSCI 1 2 0 .508 .514 

LSC2 7 636 0 .059 .207 .305 0439 .954 

WBI 7 6 0 .111 .354 .548 .976 45 0450 

WB2 7 6 0 .120 .360 0417 0450 .798 21 

DB 6 635 0 .026 .056 .159 .176 .210 

Organic nitrogen (C) as nitrogen. in milligrnms ner liter 

LSCI 1 2 0 .318 .325 

LSC2 7 25 0 .172 .251 .352 .516 .686 

WBI 7 30 0 .164 .285 .386 .638 .802 

WB2 7 18 0 .082 .171 .268 0414 .487 

DB 6 22 0 .160 .232 .396 .546 1.015 

H~drolxzable 4 nhosnhorus n1us orthonho§I!horus @ as nhosnhorus. in milligrnms ner liter

LSCI 0 0 0 

LSC2 6 33 0 .023 .065 .080 .101 .155 

WBI 6 43 1 < .013 .025 .036 .058 .155 

WB2 6 17 2 < .013 .016 .030 .036 .070 

DB 6 35 22 < .013 < .013 < .013 .020 .056 

5 Orthonho§I!horus (I) as nho§I!horus. in milligrams ner liter

LSCI 1 2 0 .031 .037 

LSC2 6 27 5 < .013 .017 .029 .039 .076 

WBI 6 37 16 .005 .009 < .013 <.013 .022 

WB2 6 18 10 .003 .008 <.013 <.013 <.013 

DB 5 25 15 .004 < .013 <.013 .015 .019 

Total susnended solids. in milligrams ner liter 

LSCI 1 2 0 2.33 2.67 

LSC2 7 32 2 <2.00 5.17 11.84 50.34 79.67 

WBI 7 732 < 2.00 8.50 16.00 30.16 178.67 

WB2 7 21 0 2.33 7.33 9.33 15.33 31.67 

DB 6 25 5 <2.00 3.00 7.33 11.20 28.33 

Escherichia coliform. in most nrobable number ner 100 milliliters 

LSCI I" 1 0 

LSC2 7 12 0 800 1,300 2,900 9,000 16,000 

WBI 7 18 80 280 2,000 7,900 16,000 

WB2 7 21 0 13 280 3,500 7,000 16,000 

DB 6 13 0 2 8 130 300 2,200 

Fecal coliform. in most nrobable number ner 100 milliliters 

LSCI 1 1 0 

LSC2 7 12 0 800 1,450 2,900 9,000 16,000 

WBI 7 18 I 80 280 2,000 7,900 16,000 

WB2 7 21 0 13 300 5,000 9,000 16,000 

DB 6 13 0 2 13 130 300 2,200 

85 
Table 6. Statistical summary of concentrations of selected water-quality constituents measured in samples collected at measurement sites 

in the Toms River drainage basin, New Jersey. May 1994 to October 1995--Continued 

Concentration Number of Total Total number 

sampling number of of censored 50 percentile 

Site name events observations values Minimum 25 percentile (median) 75 percentile Maximum 

Samnles collected during stormflow in the growing season 

Total nitrogen (ill as nitrogen, in milligrams ner liter1 

LSCI 1 2 0 1.034 1.069 

LSC2 4 16 0 .474 .539 .667 .979 1.191 

WBI 4 20 0 .340 .644 .764 .933 1.438 

WB2 4 11 0 .397 .531 .657 .715 .928 

DB 3 11 0 .271 .290 .499 .804 .941 

Ammonia (ill as nitrogen, in milligrams ner lite~ 

LSCI 1 2 0 .174 .223 

LSC2 4 16 0 .050 .065 .096 .134 .398 

WBI 4 16 0 .018 .037 .048 .053 .073 

WB2 3 8 0 .024 .034 .050 .062 .094 

DB 3 11 0 .010 .013 .066 .154 .204 

Ammonia 0:) as nitrogen, in milligrams ner lite~ 

LSCI 1 2 0 .185 .216 

LSC2 4 16 0 .055 .063 .081 .136 .371 

WBI 4 16 0 .017 .034 .041 .045 .071 

WB2 3 8 0 .024 .030 .047 .055 .094 

DB 3 11 0 .010 .013 .066 .152 .204 

Nitrite (F) as nitrogen. in milligrams ner liter 

LSCI 1 2 0 .015 .027 

LSC2 4 16 1 <.003 .006 .010 .015 .020 

WBl 4 19 5 <.003 <.003 .004 .004 .006 

WB2 4 11 6 <.003 <.003 <.003 .005 .007 

DB 3 11 2 <.003 .004 .005 .009 .011 

Nitrate (CF) as nitrogen. in milligrams ner litef 

LSCI 1 2 0 .508 .514 

LSC2 4 16 0 .127 .241 .299 .439 .514 

WBI 4 19 0 .111 .310 .361 .474 .650 

WB2 4 11 0 .120 .243 .360 .435 .525 

DB 3 11 0 .026 .030 .032 .156 .182 

Organic nitrogen (C) as nitrogen, in milligrams ner liter 

LSCI 1 2 0 .318 .325 

LSC2 4 15 0 .172 .248 .315 .500 .555 

WBI 4 16 0 .164 .266 .335 .404 .749 

WB2 4 8 0 .082 .187 .223 .302 .487 

DB 3 11 0 E .231 .247 .396 .477 .546 

Hydrolyzable nhosnhorus n1us orthonhosnhorus (W 4 as nho§l2horus. in milligrams ner liter

LSCI 0 0 0 

LSC2 3 13 0 .064 .074 .100 .102 .116 

WBI 3 16 0 .035 .042 .055 .070 .155 

WB2 3 7 0 .028 .030 .036 .053 .070 

DB 3 11 0 .013 .019 .026 .029 .032 

Orthonhosnhorus 0:) as nhosnhorus, in milli!m!ms ner literS 

LSCI 1 2 0 .031 .037 

LSC2 4 16 2 <.013 .021 .031 .054 .076 

WBI 4 19 4 :::;.008 :::;.009 <.013 .014 .022 

WB2 4 11 7 :::;.008 :::;.009 < .013 < .013 <.013 

DB 3 11 3 :::;.012 < .013 .016 .017 .019 

86 
Table 6. Statistical summary of concentrations of selected water-quality constituents measured in samples collected at measurement sites 

in the Toms River drainage basin, New Jersey, May 1994 to October 1995--Continued 

Concentration Number of Total Total number 

sampling number of of censored 50 percentile 

Site name events observations values Minimum 25 percentile (median) 75 percentile Maximum 

Samnles collected during stormfl.ow in the growing season--continued 

Total susnended solids, in milligrams 12er liter 

LSCI 1 2 0 2.33 2.67 

LSC2 4 17 2 <2.00 2.80 7.00 16.00 63.33 

WBI 4 718 <2.00 8.00 23.84 39.33 72.00 

WB2 4 11 0 2.33 5.33 8.00 15.33 31.67 

DB 3 12 0 4.33 8.75 10.67 18.67 27.00 

Escherichia coliform, in most 12robable number 12er 100 milliliters 

LSCI 1 1 0 2,400 

LSC2 4 7 0 1,600 3,000 9,000 13,000 16,000 

WBI 4 10 1 > 1,600 3,000 6,500 9,000 16,000 

WB2 4 12 0 2,400 5,000 6,000 9,000 16,000 

DB 3 5 0 130 300 330 1,300 2,200 

Fecal coliform. in most 12robable number 12er 100 milliliters 

LSCI 1 1 0 2,400 

LSC2 4 7 0 1,600 3,000 9,000 13,000 16,000 

WBI 4 10 1,600 3,000 6,500 9,000 16,000 

WB2 4 12 0 1,600 6,000 9,000 13,000 16,000 

DB 3 5 0 130 300 330 1,300 2,200 

Sam12les collected during stormfl.ow in the nongrowing season 

Total nitrogen (ill 1 as nitrogen, in milligrams 12er liter

LSC2 3 11 0 .394 .625 .859 1.295 1.483 

WBI 3 15 0 .723 .847 1.098 1.177 1.413 

WB2 3 10 0 .583 .737 .848 .975 1.001 

DB 3 11 0 .331 .464 .768 .836 1.200 

Ammonia (ill as nitrogen. in milligrams 12er lite~ 

LSC2 3 17 0 .024 .048 .074 .095 .344 

WBI 3 25 <.007 .021 .024 .030 .050 

WB2 3 13 < .009 .013 .020 .023 .032 

DB 3 20 0 .008 .013 .016 .021 .037 

Ammonia eE) as nitrogen. in milligrams 12er lite~ 

LSC2 3 617 0 .024 .045 .063 .087 .344 

WBI 3 623 0 .007 .020 .022 .027 .043 

WB2 3 613 .008 .013 .015 .024 .030 

DB 3 620 0 .010 .015 .016 .017 .036 

Nitrite (F) as nitrogen. in milligrams 12er liter 

LSC2 3 620 4 < .003 .004 .004 .008 .013 

WBI 3 626 23 <.003 <.003 <.003 <.003 .004 

WB2 3 6 8 10 < .003 <.003 <.003 <.003 .005 

DB 3 621 19 < .003 <.003 <.003 < .003 .004 

Nitrate (CF) as nitrogen, in milligrams 12er liter' 

LSC2 3 6 0 20 .059 .192 .305 .464 .954 

WBI 3 6 0 26 .314 .409 .464 .656 .976 

WB2 3 610 0 .379 .407 .440 .588 .798 

DB 3 621 0 .055 .056 .164 .180 .220 

87 
Table 6. Statistical summary of concentrations of selected water-quality constituents measured in samples collected at measurement sites 

in the Toms River drainage basin, New Jersey, May 1994 to October 1995--Continued 

Concentration Number of Total Total number 

sampling number of of censored 50 percentile 

Site name events observations values Minimum 25 percentile (median) 75 percentile Maximum 

Samples collected during stormfiow in the nongrowing season--continued 

Organic nitrogen (C) as nitrogen, in milligrams per liter 

LSC2 3 9 0 .201 .352 .446 .578 .686 

WBI 3 14 0 .178 .386 .508 .678 .802 

WB2 3 10 0 .131 .171 .308 .414 .452 

DB 3 11 0 .160 .203 .386 .676 1.015 

4 Hydrolyzable phosphorus plus orthophosphorus (D) as phos.phorus, in milligrams per liter

LSC2 3 20 0 .023 .047 .076 .091 .155 

WBl 3 27 < .013 .020 .030 .036 .060 

WB2 3 10 2 <.013 .016 .020 .031 .051 

DB 3 24 22 < .013 < .013 <.013 <.013 .056 

Orthophosphorus (t) as phosphorus, in milligrams per literS 

LSC2 2 11 3 <.013 <.013 .021 .030 .048 

WBI 2 18 12 ::;.005 ~ .006 < .013 < .013 < .013 

WB2 2 7 3 ::;.003 ~.004 ~.005 < .013 < .013 

DB 2 14 12 ~.005 <.013 < .013 < .013 <.013 

Total suspended solids in milligrams per liter 

LSC2 3 15 0 4.33 6.33 37.67 59.67 79.67 

WBl 3 14 0 2.33 9.00 12.17 19.00 178.67 

WB2 3 10 0 3.33 7.33 13.67 18.00 21.33 

DB 3 13 5 <2.00 <2.00 3.00 4.67 28.33 

Escherichia coliform. in most probable number per 100 milliliters 

LSC2 3 5 0 800 800 1,300 1,300 2,800 

WBI 3 8 0 80 110 250 650 800 

WB2 3 9 0 13 130 230 300 1,300 

DB 3 8 0 2 6 11 74 170 

Fecal coliform, in most probable number per 100 milliliters 

LSC2 3 5 0 800 800 1,300 2,400 2,800 

WB1 3 8 o 80 140 250 800 1,300 

WB2 3 9 o 13 230 280 800 1,300 

DB 2 5 o 2 6 13 74 300 

IThe effective method detection limit was 0.028 mg/L during May 1994 to February 1995 and 0.023 mg/L during March 1995 to 

October 1995. 

2The effective method detection limit was 0.007 mg/L during May 1994 to February 1995 and 0.009 mgIL during March 1995 to 

October 1995. 

3The effective method detection limit was 0.015 mg/L during May 1994 to February 1995 and 0.022 mg/L during March 1995 to 

October 1995. 

4The effective method detection limit was 0.009 mg/L during May 1994 to February 1995 and 0.013 mg/L during March 1995 to 

October 1995. 

sThe effective method detection limit was 0.013 mg/L during May 1994 to February 1995 and 0.002 mg/L during March 1995 to 

October 1995. 

6Includes unfiltered water samples collected during stormfiow on November 27, 1994, and March 8, 1995. 

70ne value not included because of probable sample contamination during collection with the automatic sampler. 

88 
Table 8. Statistical summary of area-normalized loads (yields) of selected water-quality constituents estimated for samples collected at 

measurement sites in the Toms River drainage basin, New Jersey, May 1994 to October 1995 

[Sites are listed in order of decreasing intensity ofland development in the contributing drainage areas. Yield values are reported to two 

significant figures when units are pounds per day per square mile and to one significant figure when units are most probable number per 

day per square mile. D, concentration measured in an unfiltered water sample; F, concentration measured in a filtered water sample; C, 

calculated concentration; CF, concentration calculated from concentrations measured in filtered water samples; median is calculated only 

when there are five or more observations; LSCl, Long Swamp Creek near Toms River; LSC2, Long Swamp Creek at Toms River; WEI, 

Wrangel Brook near Toms River; WB2. Wrangel Brook near South Toms River; DB, Davenport Branch near Dover Forge; JB, Jakes 

Branch near South Toms River;--, no data; <, less than. Growing season is April 1 through October 31; nongrowing season is November 1 

through March 31.] 

Total number Yield 

Number of Total of censored 

50 percentile sampling number of concentration 

Minimum 25 percentile (median) 75 percentile name events observations values Maximum Site 

All samI!les collected during base flow 

Total nitrogen fill as nitrogen, in I!0unds I!er day I!er sQuare mile 

LSC2 7 7 0 0.01 0.06 0.18 0.74 1.1 

WBI 7 8 0 4.2 5.0 7.6 8.6 9.9 

WB2 7 9 0 3.2 3.4 5.8 6.1 7.8 

DB 5 7 0 .11 .15 .17 .20 1.3 

Ammonia (F) as nitrogen, in I!0unds I!er day I!er sQuare mile 

LSC2 7 7 0 .01 .01 .05 .10 .20 

WBI 7 8 1 .06 .08 .09 .15 .22 

WB2 7 9 3 .05 .05 .07 .07 .24 

DB 5 7 0 .02 .02 .02 .02 .08 

Nitrate (CF) as nitrof,!en, in I!ounds I!er day I!er sQuare mile 

LSC2 7 7 0 <.01 <.01 .11 .38 .64 

WBI 7 8 0 2.7 3.6 5.2 6.8 6.9 

WB2 7 9 0 2.4 2.5 3.7 5.3 5.3 

DB 5 7 0 <.01 .01 .01 .02 .68 

Organic nitrogen (C) as nitrogen, in I!ounds I!er day I!er sQuare mile 

LSC2 7 7 0 <.01 .03 .04 .26 .38 

WBI 7 8 0 .50 .66 1.2 3.0 4.7 

WB2 7 9 0 .53 .73 .92 2.0 3.2 

DB 5 7 0 .08 .12 .14 .16 .53 

Hydrolyzable I!ho§l;1horus I!lus orthoI!ho§l;1horus CU) as I!hosI!horus, in I!0unds I!er day I!er sQuare mile 

LSC2 6 6 0 <.01 <.01 .01 .01 .07 

WBI 6 7 .06 .07 .12 .12 .14 

WB2 6 7 3 .06 .08 .08 .10 .11 

DB 4 7 2 < .01 .01 .01 .01 .05 

OrthoI!ho~horus (f) as I!ho§l;1horus, in I!ounds I!er day I!er sQuare mile 

LSC2 7 7 3 <.01 <.01 <.01 .01 .02 

WBl 7 8 3 .03 .03 .04 .12 .14 

WB2 7 9 3 .02 .02 .03 .10 .12 

DB 5 7 <.01 < .01 <.01 .01 .02 

Total susI!ended solids, in I!0unds I!er day I!er sQuare mile 

LSC2 5 5 1 .04 .31 .39 .92 2.5 

WBI 5 6 3 7.6 9.3 23 28 30 

WB2 5 7 4 6.5 6.5 16 18 30 

DB 4 7 2 .75 1.2 3.3 3.4 7.6 

Fecal coliform, in most I!robable number I!er day I!er sQuare mile 

LSC2 6 6 1 1 7 X 10 2 X 107 2 x 109 7 x 109 1 X 1010 

WBI 6 6 0 4 X 108 1 X 109 3 x 109 9 x 109 2 x 1010 

WE2 6 7 0 8 x 108 2 x 109 2 x 109 6 x 109 6 x 109 

DB 4 3 0 4 X 107 6 X 108 

89 
Table 8. Statistical summary of area-normalized loads (yields) of selected water-quality constituents estimated for samples collected at 

measurement sites in the Toms River drainage basin. New Jersey, May 1994 to October 1995--Continued 

Total number Yield 

Number of Total of censored 

50 percentile sampling number of concentraion 

Minimum 25 percentile (median) 75 percentile Maximum Site name events observations values 

Samnles collected during base flow in the growing season 

Total nitrogen em as nitrogen. in 120unds 12er dal:: 12er sguare mile 

LSC2 6 6 0 .01 .05 .44 .74 1.1 

WBI 6 6 0 4.2 4.2 6.8 8.3 9.0 

WB2 6 7 0 3.2 3.4 4.7 5.9 6.3 

DB 4 6 0 .11 .15 .17 .18 .20 

Ammonia (E) as nitrogen,. in nounds 12er dal:: ner sguare mile 

LSC2 6 6 0 .01 .01 .06 .10 .2 

WBI 6 6 0 .06 .08 .10 .19 .22 

WB2 6 7 .04 .04 .07 .14 .24 

DB 4 6 0 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 

Nitrate (CF) as nitrogen. in Qounds Qer da~ ner sQuare mile 

LSC2 6 6 0 <.01 <.01 .15 .38 .64 

WBI 6 6 0 2.7 3.1 4.2 5.6 6.8 

WB2 6 7 0 2.4 2.4 2.7 3.9 5.2 

DB 4 6 0 <.01 < .01 .01 .01 .02 

Organic nitrogen (C) as nitrogen. in ~ounds Qer da~ 12er sQuare mile 

LSC2 6 6 0 <.01 .01 .15 .27 .38 

WBI 6 6 0 .50 .96 1.2 2.1 4.7 

WB2 6 7 0 .53 .71 .92 1.6 3.2 

DB 4 6 0 .08 .11 .14 .15 .16 

H~drolyzable Qhosnhorus n1us orthonhosnhorus em as 12hos12horus, in 120unds 12er da~ 12er sQuare mile 

LSC2 5 5 0 <.01 < .01 .01 .01 .07 

WBI 5 5 .06 .07 .09 .12 .14 

WB2 5 6 .06 .08 .08 .09 .11 

DB 3 6 <.01 .01 .01 .01 .01 

Orthonhos12horus (E) as 12hos12horus. in 120unds ner da~ 12er ~uare mile 

LSC2 6 6 3 <.01 < .01 .01 .01 .02 

WBI 6 6 3 .03 .04 .08 .13 .14 

WB2 6 7 3 .02 .02 .03 .11 .12 

DB 4 6 <.01 < .01 .01 .01 .01 

Total sus:nended solids, in nounds 12er da~ ner sQuare mile 

LSC2 4 4 1 .04 2.5 

WBI 4 4 3 7.6 31 

WB2 4 5 4 6.5 6.5 8.0 18 30 

DB 3 6 .75 1.2 2.8 3.4 3.4 

Fecal coliform. in most 12robable number 12er dal:: ner sQuare mile 

LSC2 5 5 1 1 X 107 2 X 109 2x 109 7 X 109 1 X 1010 

WBI 10 5 5 0 1 x 109 2 x 109 4 x 109 9 x 109 2 x 10

WB2 5 6 0 2 x 109 9 2 x 109 3 x 10 6 x 109 6 x 109 

DB 3 3 0 8 4 X 107 2 X 10

90 
Table 8. Statistical summary of area-normalized loads (yields) of selected water-quality constituents estimated for samples collected at 

measurement sites in the Toms River drainage basin, New Jersey, May 1994 to October 1995--Continued 

Total number Yield 

Number of Total of censored 

sampling number of concentraion 50 percentile 

Site name events observations values Minimum 25 percentile (median) 75 percentile Maximum 

Samples collected during base flow in the non growing season 

Total nitrogen (ill as nitrogen, in pounds per day per square mile 

LSC2 1 1 0 .17 

WBI 2 0 7.6 9.9 

WB2 2 o 6.1 7.8 

DB o 1.3 

Ammonia (F) as nitrogen. in pounds per day per square mile 

LSC2 1 1 0 .01 

WBI 2 1 .08 .09 

WB2 2 2 .07 .07 

DB o .08 

Nitrate (CF) as nitrogen, in pounds per day per square mile 

LSC2 1 1 0 .11 

WBI 2 2 6.8 6.8 

WB2 2 2 5.3 5.3 

DB .68 

Organic nitrogen (C) as nitrogen. in pounds per day per square mile 

LSC2 1 1 0 .04 

WBI 2 o .66 3.0 

WB2 2 o .76 2.4 

DB o .53 

Hydrolyzable phosphorus plus orthophosphorus (D) as phosphorus. in pounds per day per square mile 

LSC2 1 1 1 < .01 

WB1 1 2 2 .12 .12 

WB2 .10 

DB .05 

Orthophosphorus <F) as phosphorus. in pounds per day per square mile 

LSC2 1 1 0 < .01 

WBl 2 0 .02 .03 

WB2 2 0 .02 .02 

DB 1 0 .02 

Total suspended solids. in pounds per day per square mile 

LSC2 1 1 0 .39 

WBl 1 2 0 26 28 

WB2 2 0 16 18 

DB 1 7.6 

Fecal coliform, in most probable number per day per square mile 

LSC2 1 1 0 2 x 107 

WBI o 

WB2 o 

DB o 

91 
Table 8. Statistical summary of area-normalized loads (yields) of selected water-quality constituents estimated for samples collected at 

measurement sites in the Toms River drainage basin, New Jersey, May 1994 to October 1995--Continued 

Total number Yield 

Number of Total of censored 

sampling number of concentraion 50 percentile 

Site name events observations values Minimum 25 percentile (median) 75 percentile Maximum 

All samI!les collected during stormfiow 

Total nitrogen (U) as nitrogen, in Qounds Qer day Qer ~uare mile 

LSC2 7 27 0 .53 3.0 7.2 9.8 23 

WBI 7 35 0 5.6 8.1 13 16 24 

WB2 7 21 0 4.9 8.0 10 13 15 

DB 5 19 0 .23 .45 2.4 2.8 5.3 

Ammonia (E) as nitroge;!1 in QOunds Qer day Qer sguare mile 

LSC2 7 133 0 .01 .31 .48 1.3 3.0 

WBI 7 139 0 .05 .28 .41 .52 .90 

WB2 6 121 .06 .23 .28 .40 1.5 

DB 5 128 0 .03 .07 .08 .10 .14 

Nitrate (CF) as nitrogen, in Qounds Qer day Qer ~uare mile 

LSC2 7 136 0 .30 1.2 2.1 4.0 9.0 

WBI 7 145 0 3.1 4.5 7.3 8.2 10 

WB2 7 121 0 2.6 4.2 5.6 6.6 8.6 

DB 5 128 0 .02 .12 .69 1.0 1.2 

Organic nitrogen (C) as nitrogen. in Qounds I!er day I!er sguare mile 

LSC2 7 24 0 .18 1.5 3.1 5.2 11 

WBI 7 30 0 1.9 3.1 4.9 8.7 15 

WB2 6 18 0 .79 1.9 3.2 4.9 7.8 

DB 5 19 0 .19 .28 .88 2.3 4.5 

Hydrolyzable I!hosI!horus 121us ortho12hos12horus (ill as 12ho§I!horus. in 120unds ner day ner sguare mile 

LSC2 6 33 0 .01 .41 .69 1.3 2.3 

WBI 6 43 1 .15 .35 .55 .71 2.0 

WB2 6 17 2 .13 .25 .34 .58 2.2 

DB 5 28 22 .01 .02 .07 .09 .28 

OrthoQhosQhorus (f) as QhosI!horus. in nounds Qer day ner ~uare mile 

LSC2 6 27 5 <.01 .06 .23 .48 1.4 

WBI 6 37 16 .04 .10 .14 .23 .56 

WB2 6 18 10 .03 .08 .12 .21 .45 

DB 5 25 15 .01 .01 .08 .09 .13 

Total susQended solids. in nounds Qer day Qer sguare mile 

LSC2 7 32 2 3.1 33 160 290 1.400 

WBI 7 232 1 21 140 250 410 2,500 

WB2 7 21 0 28 .67 130 270 1,000 

DB 5 18 5 4.4 6.9 18 33 190 

Fecal coliform, in most nrobable number Qer day Qer sguare mile 

LSC2 7 12 0 1 x 109 10 2 X 10 1 X 12 1011 5 x 1011 1 x 10

WBI 7 18 1 5 x 109 2 x 1010 2 X 1011 12 5 x 1011 1 x 10

WB2 7 21 0 8 10 12 6x 10 2 x 10 3 x 1011 7 x 1011 1 X 10

DB 5 10 0 7 8 8 3 x 10 1 x 10 7 x 10 4 x 109 4 x 1010 

92 
Table 8. Statistical summary of area-normalized loads (yields) of selected water-quality constituents estimated for samples collected at 

measurement sites in the Toms River drainage basin, New Jersey, May 1994 to October 1995--Continued 

Total number Yield 

Number of Total of censored 

sampling number of concentraion 50 percentile 

Minimum percentile name events observations values 25 (median) Site 75 percentile Maximum 

SamJ2les collected during stormflow in the growing season 

Total nitrogen CD) as nitrogen2 in J20unds 12er day 12er sguare mile 

LSC2 4 16 0 1.5 4.4 8.1 12 23 

WBI 4 20 0 5.6 7.4 8.5 12 15 

WB2 4 11 0 5.0 6.0 8.6 13 15 

DB 3 11 0 .23 .36 .52 2.6 2.7 

Ammonia (F) as nitrogen2 in 120unds 12er day 12er sguare mile 

LSC2 4 16 0 .20 .59 .99 1.6 3.1 

WBI 4 16 0 .17 .30 .41 .63 .90 

WB2 3 8 0 .23 .26 .50 .74 1.5 

DB 3 11 0 .03 .05 1/\ 

.lV .13 .14 

Nitrate (CF) as nitrogen2 in 120unds 12er day 12er sguare mile 

LSC2 4 16 0 .30 1.9 3.1 6.0 9.0 

WBI 4 19 0 3.1 3.7 4.4 5.3 7.6 

WB2 4 11 0 2.6 3.7 4.2 5.5 8.6 

DB 3 11 0 .02 .02 .10 .26 .30 

Organic nitrogen (Cl as nitrogen, in J20unds J2er day J2er sguare mile 

LSC2 4 15 0 .63 1.9 3.2 6.0 11 

WBI 4 16 0 1.9 2.7 3.6 4.4 8.2 

WB2 4 8 0 .79 1.8 2.6 4.9 5.3 

DB 3 11 0 .18 .28 .31 2.2 2.3 

Hydrolyzable 12hos12horus J2lus ortho12hos12horus @ as 12hos12horus, in J20unds 12er day 12er sguare mile 

LSC2 3 13 0 .14 .85 1.1 1.6 2.2 

WBI 3 16 0 .19 .53 .66 1.1 2.0 

WB2 3 7 0 .26 .26 .58 1.2 2.2 

DB 3 11 0 .01 .01 .02 .13 .23 

Ortho12ho~horus tEl as 12hos12horus, in 120unds J2er day J2er sguare mile 

LSC2 4 16 2 .02 .14 .42 .76 1.4 

WBI 4 19 4 .04 .08 .14 .23 .56 

WB2 4 11 7 .08 .09 .16 .22 .45 

DB 3 II 3 .01 .01 .01 .12 .13 

Total susJ2ended solids, in J20unds J2er day J2er sguare mile 

LSC2 4 17 2 8.6 27 58 200 1,400 

WBI 4 2 21 18 130 260 430 1,600 

WB2 4 11 0 28 60 84 320 1,000 

DB 3 12 0 4.4 6.8 7.5 31 190 

Fecal coliform, in most Qrobable number Qer day Qer sguare mile 

LSC2 4 7 0 3 X lO lD 1 X 1011 4x 1011 8 12 X 1011 1 x 10

WBI 4 10 1 X 1011 4x 1011 5 X 1011 7 X 1011 I X 1012 

WB2 4 12 0 10 7 x 10 3 X 1011 6 X 1011 8 X 1011 2 x 1012 

DB 3 5 0 9 1 X 10 3 9 9 X 10 4x 9 10 6 X 10 4 X 1010 

93 
Table 8. Statistical summary of area-normalized loads (yields) of selected water-quality constituents estimated for samples collected at 

measurement sites in the Toms River drainage basin, New Jersey, May 1994 to October 1995--Continued 

Total number Yield 

Number of Total of censored 

50 percentile sampling number of concentraion 

Minimum 25 percentile (median) 75 percentile Maximum Site name events observations values 

Samnles collected during stormfiow in the nongrowing season 

Total nitrogen (D) as nitrogen, in nounds ner day ner ~uare mile 

LSC2 3 II 0 .53 3.0 4.7 7.6 8.1 

WBI 3 15 0 9.4 15 18 21 24 

WB2 3 10 0 7.0 9.3 11 13 15 

DB 2 8 0 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 5.3 

Ammonia (El as nitroge!!" in nounds ner day ner sQuare mile 

LSC2 3 117 0 .01 .29 .34 .48 1.3 

WBI 3 1 0 .06 .27 23 Al .51 .81 

\VB2 "'l 

,;) 113 .06 .17 .24 .33 Al 

DB 2 117 0 .06 .07 .08 .09 .11 

Nitrate (CF) as nitrogen, in nounds ner day ner sQuare mile 

LSC2 3 1 0 .31 1.1 1.5 3.5 5.4 20 

WBI 3 1 0 6.9 7.3 8.1 9.5 26 10 

WB2 3 110 0 5.6 604 6.5 7.2 7.9 

DB 2 117 0 .61 .71 .99 1.1 1.2 

Organic nitrogen (C) as nitrogen, in nounds ner day ner sQuare mile 

LSC2 3 9 0 .18 1.6 2.6 4.3 5.2 

WBI 3 14 0 2.1 7.1 8.7 12 15 

WB2 3 10 0 1.2 2.7 4.7 6.0 7.8 

DB 2 8 0 .89 1.2 2.2 2.8 4.5 

Hydrolyzable nhosnhorus Qlus orthonhosnhot"IJ's (D) as nho~horus, in nounds };!cr day ner sguare mile 

LSC2 3 20 0 .01 .28 .56 .72 2.1 

WBI 3 27 1 .15 .31 048 .65 1.3 

WB2 3 10 2 .13 .15 .26 .51 .88 

DB 2 17 22 .09 .07 .07 .09 .29 

Orthonhosnhorus (E) as nhosnhorus. in nOlUlds ner day ner gJ,uare mile 

LSC2 2 11 3 .04 .02 .09 .14 .36 

WBI 2 18 12 .08 .10 .13 .25 .28 

WB2 2 7 3 .03 .05 .07 .21 .24 

DB 2 14 12 .02 .07 .07 .09 .09 

Total susnended solids, in nolUlds ner day ner sQuare mile 

LSC2 3 15 0 4.1 64 200 480 1,100 

WBI 3 14 0 47 160 200 360 2,500 

WB2 3 10 0 53 68 200 270 340 

DB 2 6 5 15 19 24 33 120 

Fecal coliform, in most nrobable number ner day ncr sQuare mile 

LSC2 3 5 0 1 x 109 6 x 109 1 X 1010 7 x 1010 1 x 1011 

WBI 3 8 0 5 x 109 8 X 109 1 x 1010 6 X 1010 7 X 1010 

WB2 3 9 0 6 x 108 1 x 1010 1 X 1010 5 x 1010 9 x 1010 

DB 2 5 0 7 7 8 8 8 3 X 10 7 X 10 2 X 10 2 X 10 4 10

1 Includes unfiltered water samples collected during stonnfiow on November 27, 1994, and March 8, 1995. 

20ne value not included because of probable sample contamination during collection with the automatic sampler. 

94 
Table 13. Summary of specific conductance, pH, temperature, and dissolved oxygen measured during base flow and stormfiow at measurement sites in the Toms River drainage basi~ New Jersey, May 

1994 to October 1995 

[Sites are listed in order of decreasing intensity ofland development in the contributing drainage areas. Sampling collection dates are listed by month. ~S/cm, microsiemens per centimeter at 25 degrees 

Celsius; mg/L, milligrams per liter; No., number of observations; Mx, maximum; Md, mediau; Mn, minimum; BF, base flow; SF, stormfiow; NG, nongrowing season (November through March); G, 

growing season (April through October); W, winter season (January through March); Sp, spring season (April through June); Su, summer season (July through September); F, fall season (October 

through December); M, discrete measurement made manually; S,continuous measurement made with a data sonde; e, estimated; <, less than; median is calculated only when there are five or more 

observations; --, no data collected or not applicable] 

Specific conductance, pH, Temperature, Dissolved oxygen, 

in ~S/cm in standard units in degrees Celsius inmgIL Sample collection dates Flow condition Measurement 

and times and season type No. Mx Md Mn No. Mx Md Mn No. Mx Md Mn No. Mx Md Mn 

Long SwamI! Creek near Toms River (LSC 1) 

5125/94 13:50 BF,G, Sp M 143 0 0 <1.00 

612194 10:45 BF,G, Sp M 134 6.7 0 3.00 

SF,G,Su 7/14/94 23:30 to 711519403:20 M 2 29 25 2 7.43 7.30 2 24.5 23.5 2 7.40 5.62 

Long SwamI! Creek at Toms River (LSC2) 

3/7/95 11 :30 BF,NG,W M 117 5.19 7.9 10.64 

3/8/95 13:00 S,NG,W M 0 0 13.0 10.80 

4120/95 10:00 BF,G,Sp M 124 6.48 13.5 7.73 

5125/94 11 :30 BF,G, Sp M 218 0 19.7 5.9Oe 

6/2194 09:45 BF,G, Sp M 200 6.6 0 5.00 

S,G,Su 7/15/94 01:35 to 09:00 M 4 189 140 4 6.54 6.30 3 23.9 23.0 4 4.36 3.91 

8/30/95 10: 10 BF,G, Su M 145 6.42 18.0 2 1.15 1.00 

9/8/94 13:50 BF,G, Su M 145 0 2 19.3 19.1 6.36 

S,G,Su 9/17/9509:50 to 13:20 S 22 120 105 30 22 6.36 6.17 6.10 22 19.2 19.0 18.7 22 8.46 6.35 5.92 

S,G,Su 9/17/95 10:22 M 113 6.17 19.0 7.20 

S,G,Su 9/22/94 15:05 to 9123/94 04:20 S 133 150 125 70 54 5.96 5.53 5.23 54 18.8 18.3 18.1 54 6.21 4.26 2.36 

S,G,Su 9122/94 20:00 to 9/23/94 02:30 M 5 140 110 70 0 0 2 5.80 4.18 

BF,G,F 10/4/9521:25 to 10/5/9507:55 S 65 210 200 170 65 6.26 6.19 6.11 65 18.7 18.2 17.9 65 12.39 8.76 8.09 

S,G,F 10/5/9508:05 to 13:55 S 35 180 30 20 35 6.84 6.68 6.26 35 20.4 20.1 18.2 35 16.08 14.74 9.28 

S,NG,F 11127/94 22:00 to 11/28/94 08:00 S 41 50 40 30 41 5.46 5.14 4.79 41 8.7 8.1 7.9 41 10.16 10.00 9.58 

S,NG,F 11127/9423:30 to 11128/94 09:08 M 0 4 6.35 5.84 4 9.3 7.5 3 lO.80 8.10 

Footnote at end of table 

CO 

U1 
Table 13. Summary of specific conductance, pH, temperature, and dissolved oxygen measured during base flow and stormflow at measurement sites in the Toms River drainage basin, New Jersey, May 

1994 to October 1995--Continued 

Specific conductance, pH, Temperature, Dissolved oxygen, 

/lS/cm in standard units in degrees Celsius inmgIL Sample collection dates Flow condition Measurement 

and times and season type No. Mx Md Mn No. Mx Md Mn No. Mx Md Mn No. Mx Md Mn 

Wrangel Brook near Toms River (W]31) 

1/7/9501:05 to 06:30 S,NG,W M 23 50 40 2 5.81 5.55 2 5.9 5.5 2 12.40 11.84 

3/7/95 14:30 BF,NG,W M 45 4.90 10.2 11.03 

3/8/95 14:00 to 3/9/95 15:15 S,NG,W S 86 120 50 50 86 4.92 4.40 4.16 86 12.2 9.6 8.4 86 10.66 9.84 9.20 

3/8/95 14:00 to 22:25 S,NG,W M 0 2 5.26 5.26 2 12.8 11.1 2 11.00 10.05 

4/20/95 11:45 BF,G,Sp M 49 5.13 16.3 10.03 

5/25/94 16: 10 BF,G,Sp M 65 0 19.6 8.25 

6/2/94 13 :30 BF,G,Sp M 61 5.00 0 8.90 

7/15/94 02:30 to 10:30 S,G,Su M 4 64 55 4 5.88 5.29 4 23.9 21.0 4 7.37 6.14 

8/30/95 03: 10 BF,G,Su M 58 5.66 20.2 2 9.16 8.90 

9/8/94 rS:30 BF,G,Su M 51 0 18.5 9.73 

9/17/95 11:20to 14:40 S,G,Su S 21 60 40 30 21 6.34 5.81 5.65 21 17.7 17.4 17.3 21 8.43 8.12 8.02 

9/17/95 11:12 to 14:30 S,G,Su M 34 5.42 17.8 7.98 

9/22/94 16:42 to 9/23/94 03:05 S,G,Su M 0 6 6.28 5.94 5.49 4 18.3 17.1 6 8.65 8.21 8.05 

10/4/9521:40 to 10/5/9507:50 BF,G,F S 62 60 60 60 62 5.26 5.17 5.09 62 17.1 17.0 16.9 62 8.46 8.00 7.83 

10/5/9508:00 to 15:00 S,G,F S 44 60 40 30 44 6.15 6.01 5.27 44 19.0 18.6 17.0 44 8.15 8.05 7.96 

10/5/95 15:00 S,G,F M 0 6.26 19.2 10.50 

11127/9423:43 to 11128/94 06:43 S,NG,F M 5 40 40 30 5 5.44 5.14 5.01 5 8.4 8.1 8.0 5 10.12 9.96 5.14 

CD 

m
Table 13. Summary of specific conductance, pH, temperature, and dissolved oxygen measured during base flow and stormfiow at measurement sites in the Toms River drainage basin, New Jersey, May 

1994 to October 1995--Continued 

Specific conductance, pH, Temperature, Dissolved oxygen, 

J,lS/cm in standard units in degrees Celsius inmg/L Sample collection dates Flow condition Measurement 

and times and season type No. Mx Md Mn No. Mx Md Mn No. Mx Md Mn No. Mx Md Mn 

Wrangel Branch near South Toms River (WB2) 

1/7/9500:00 to 06: 12 S,NG,W M 3 55 38 3 5.71 5.11 3 6.2 5.6 3 12.00 11.00 

3/7/95 13:00 BF,NG,W M 39 4.87 9.7 10.77 

3/8/95 12:35 to 03:20 S,NG,W M 4 59 34 4.39 2 12.2 8.0 2 10.97 10.10 

4/20/95 10:45 BF,G,Sp M 42 5.07 14.0 9.97 

5/25/94 18:30 BF, G, Sp M 61 0 20.8 7.85 

6/2/94 11: 15 BF,G,Sp M 56 5.00 0 7.80 

7/15/94 01 :30 to 09:30 S,G,Su M 4 58 45 4 5.40 5.26 4 22.7 20.8 4 6.46 5.95 

8/30/95 11:00 BF,G,Su M 2 54 53 2 5.65 5.62 2 18.1 17.7 4 9.00 8.67 

9/8/94 14:45 BF,G,Su M 46 0 18.7 9.54 

9/17/95 13:00 to 14:10 S,G,Su S 8 40 40 40 8 5.63 5.63 5.62 8 17.6 17.5 17.5 8 8.12 8.09 8.05 

9/17/95 12:55 to 14:25 S,G,Su M 3 47 43 0 0 0 

9/22/94 15:30 to 9123/94 06:38 S,G,Su M 0 7 6.83 6.04 5.69 4 18.1 17.1 7 8.68 8.26 7.25 

10/5/9503:00 to 07:55 BF,G,F S 120 50 45 40 8.25 8.12 7.39 30 20.1 17.0 16.8 30 9.39 8.24 7.97 230 

10/5/9508:00 to 14:40 S,G,F S 41 40 30 30 241 8.70 8.64 8.20 41 18.7 18.0 16.9 41 8.10 7.96 7.80 

10/5/95 14:45 S,G,F M 0 5.88 18.9 10.50 

11128/94 00:45 to 08:20 S,NG,F M 0 3 5.54 5.01 3 8.9 8.3 3 10.52 9.82 

CD 

...... 
Table 13. Summary of specific conductance, pH. temperature, and dissolved oxygen measured during base flow and stormflowat measurement sites in the Toms River drainage basin. New Jersey, May 

1994 to October 1995--Continued 

Specific conductance, pH. Temperature, Dissolved oxygen, 

JlSlcm in standard units in degrees Celsius inmgIL Sample collection dates Flow condition Measurement 

and times and season type No. Mx Md Mn No. Mx Md Mn No .. Mx Md Mn No. Mx Md Mn 

Daven~ort Branch near Dover Forge (DB) 

1/7/9507: 15 S,NG,W M 0 4.81 2.5 11.57 

3/7/95 l5: 15 BF,NG,W M 40 4.54 2 13.0 9.0 2 9.85 9.50 

3/8/95 18:00 to 3/9/95 16:00 S,NG,W S 162 230 40 30 289 6.80 3.98 3.19 89 13.2 8.9 6.2 89 7.77 2.80 1.00 

3/8/95 21 :30 S,NG,W M 0 0 11.0 9.30 

4/20/95 13:30 BF,G,Sp M 56 4.87 18.8 6.92 

8/30/95 13:45 BF,G,Su M 48 5.70 15.5 2 2.53 2.00 

9/8/94 16:08 BF,G,Su M 37 0 2 20.0 19.4 5.91 

9/17/94 12:20 to 9/18/95 10:20 S,G,Su S 133 40 30 30 133 4.86 4.71 4.49 133 17.7 17.1 16.5 133 6.66 5.82 5.07 

9/17/94 12:04 to 9/18/95 10:46 S,G,Su M 3 45 38 4.47 16.9 5.85 

9/22/94 ) 7:30 to 9123/94 03:30 S,G,Su S 39 40 40 40 39 4.34 4.26 4.49 39 16.9 16.4 16.3 39 6.97 6.81 6.00 

9/22/94 17:30 to 9/23/94 03:55 S,G,Su M 0 4.36 16.9 2 6.79 5.87 

10/5/95 00:05 to 7:55 BF,G,F S 48 40 40 40 48 5.20 5.09 4.94 48 17.5 17.1 16.9 48 7.08 3.89 2.98 

10/5/9508:05 to 15:35 S,G,F S 46 40 40 40 46 5.19 5.14 5.08 46 17.9 17.6 17.3 46 6.08 5.80 3.62 

1O/~/95 16:00 S,G,F M 0 4.74 18.4 7.30 

11127/94 18:30 to 11128/94 07:30 S,NG,F S 53 160 110 20 53 6.14 5.87 5.64 53 9.3 7.6 6.3 53 9.95 8.21 5.86 

Jakes Branch near South Toms River (JB) 

4/20/95 14:30 BF,G,Sp M 54 4.16 11.6 2.60 

IProbe interference suspected; values equal to or greater than 250 JlS/cm and equal to 0 JlS/cm were deleted. 

2Improper probe calibration suspected. 

CD 

CD 
APPENDIXES 

99 
Appendix 1. Estimated streamflow, and measured and calculated concentrations of water-quality constituents in samples collected at measurement 

sites in the Toms River drainage basin, New Jersey, May 1994 to October 1995 

[Sites are listed in order of decreasing intensity of land development in the contributing drainage areas. Nitrate concentrations were calculated as 

the difference between nitrate plus nitrite and nitrite (nitrate and nitrate plus nitrite were assumed equal when nitrite was less than 0.003. Organic 

nitrogen concentrations were calculated as the difference between total nitrogen (U) and the sum of ammonia (U) and nitrate plus nitrite (F). ft3/s; 

cubic feet per second; U, concentration measured in an unfiltered water sample; F, concentration measured in a filtered water sample; C, calculated 

concentration; CU, concentration calculated from concentrations measured in unfiltered water samples; CF, concentration calculated from 

concentrations measured in filtered water samples; N, nitrogen; mg/L, milligrams per liter; P, phosphorus; MPN/IOOmL, most probable number 

per 100 milliliters; --, no data; <, less than; >, greater than; E, estimated. Growing season is April 1 through October 31; nongrowing season is 

November 1 through March 31.] 

Esti- Total Total Ammo- Ammo- plus plus Organic 

mated nitrogen nitrogen nia nia nitrite nitrite Nitrite Nitrite Nitrate Nitrate nitrogen 

Date and time stream- 1 (U)l, (F) , (U)2, (F)2, (U)3, (F)3, (D). (F), (CU)3, (CF)3, (C). 

of sample flow asN asN asN asN asN asN asN asN asN asN asN 

Event collection (W/s) (mg/L) (mg/L) (mg/L) (mglL) (mg/L) (mg/L) (mg/L) (mg/L) (mg/L) (mg/L) (mg/L) 

All samples collected during base flow in the growing season 

Long Swamp Creek near Toms River (LSel) 

1 5/25/94 13:50 0.813 0.756 0.145 0.136 < 0.015 < 0.015 < 0.003 < 0.003 < 0.015 < 0.015 0.653 

2 6/2/94 10:45 E .933 E .901 E.166 E.161 <.015 <.015 .008 .007 <.015 <.015 E.752 

Long Swamp Creek zt Toms River (LSC2) 

1 5/25/94 11 :30 1.5 .863 .831 .134 .164 .524 .524 .013 .013 .511 .511 .205 

2 6/2/94 9:45 1.1 E .800 E .800 E .121 E .109 E .318 E .269 .010 .010 E .308 E .259 E .410 

4 9/8/94 13:50 1.2 .719 .596 .065 .047 .420 .381 < .003 < .003 .420 .381 .273 

11 4/20/95 10:00 .16 .420 .065 .065 .035 < .003 .035 .320 

12 8/30/95 10: 10 .01 1.111 .688 .682 .023 .005 <.022 .400 

14 10/5/95 4:40 .21 1.022 .497 .492 .453 .037 .416 .072 

Wrangel Brook near Toms River (WB 1) 

1 5/25/94 16: 10 38 .787 .787 .090 .021 .518 .533 <.003 <.003 .518 .533 .164 

2 6/2/94 13:30 33 E .850 E .825 E.030 E .021 E .482 E .299 <.003 < .003 E .482 E.299 E .521 

4 9/8/94 15:30 35 .929 .015 .011 .706 .700 <.003 <.003 .706 .700 .214 

11 4/20/95 11 :45 25 .832 .Oll .011 .684 <.003 .684 .137 

12 8/30/95 13: 10 14 1.092 .015 .015 .814 .004 .810 .263 

14 10/5/95 4:07 17 .907 .031 .020 .767 <.003 .767 .109 

Wrangel Brook near South Toms River (WB2) 

1 5/25/94 18:00 57 .642 .616 .029 .027 .440 .434 <.003 <.003 .440 .434 .179 

2 6/2/94 11 :15 50 E .749 E .705 E.021 E.018 E .348 E .330 <.003 <.003 E .348 E .330 E.398 

4 9/8/94 14:45 53 .756 .Oll .008 .638 .627 <.003 < .003 .638 .627 .118 

11 4/20/95 10:45 38 .771 .010 < .009 .611 <.003 .611 .150 

612 8/30/95 II :00 21 1.054 .018 .014 .755 .004 .751 .281 

612 8/30/95 11 :30 21 .990 .017 .014 .755 .004 .751 .218 

14 10/5/95 4: 14 25 .844 .020 .018 .692 < .003 .692 .132 

Davenport Branch near Dover Forge <DB) 

4 9/8/94 16:08 .318 .293 .027 .023 .036 .036 .007 .004 .029 .032 .255 

11 4/20/95 13:30 .85 .250 .025 .025 .041 <.003 .041 .184 

12 8/30/95 13:45 .10 1.471 .270 .258 < .022 .010 <.022 1.179 

14 10/5/95 0:00 .52 .518 .059 .055 .025 .004 <.022 .434 

14 10/5/95 0:00 .52 .549 

14 10/5/95 3:00 .52 .462 .050 .050 <.022 .005 <.022 .390 

14 10/5/95 4:41 .52 .474 .066 .066 e < .022 .007 <.022 .386 

14 10/5/95 6:00 .52 .449 .056 .056 .031 .005 .026 .362 

Footnotes at end of table 

100 
Appendix 1. Estimated streamflow, and measured and calculated concentrations of water-quality constituents in samples 'collected at 

measurement sites in the Toms River drainage basin, New Jersey, May 1994 to October 1995--Continued 

Hydrolyz- Hydrolyz- HydroTotal Total able able Ortho- Ortho- lyzable 

phos- phos- phosphorus phosphorus phos- phos- phos- Eschericia Fecal 

phoros phoros plus ortho- plus ortho- phorus phoros phoros Total coliform coliform Manual 

Date and time (u), (F), phosphorus phosphrus (U)S, (F)S, (U). sus- bacteria bacteria sample 

of sample asP as P (U)4, as P (F)4, as P asP asP asP pended (MPNI (MPNI collecEvent collection (mglL) (mglL) (mglL) (mglL) (mglL) (mglL) (mglL) solids 100mL) loomL) tion 

All sam12les collected during base flow in the growing season 

Long Swam12 Creek near Toms River (LSC 1) 

1 5/25/94 13:50 0.197 0.199 0.195 0.201 0.065 0.062 0.130 <2.00 93 63 Yes 

2 6/2/94 10:45 E .146 E .105 E .117 E .084 E.084 E .099 E.033 230 230 Yes 

Long Swam12 Creek at Toms River (LSC2) 

1 5/25194 11:30 .027 .016 .057 .039 < .013 < .013 .057 < 2.00 > 2,400 > 2,400 Yes 

2 6/2/94 9:45 E .025 E.016 E.014 <.009 < .013 <.013 <.009 1,700 1,700 Yes 

4 9/8/94 13:50 < .013 < .013 170 500 Yes 

11 4/20195 10:00 .023 .012 2.33 Yes 

12 8/30195 10:10 .043 .018 4.33 350 350 Yes 

14 10/5195 4:40 .084 .026 5.33 3,300 3,300 Yes 

Wrangel Brook near Toms River (WB 1) 

1 5/25194 16:10 .012 .007 .011 .010 < .013 < .013 <.009 <2.00 460 460 Yes 

2 6/2/94 13:30 .012 <.007 E .016 .016 < .013 < .013 <.009 230 230 Yes 

4 9/8/94 15:30 < .013 < .013 23 23 Yes 

11 4/20195 11:45 < .013 .007 4.33 Yes 

12 8/30/95 13:10 .018 .007 <2.00 130 130 Yes 

14 10/5/95 4:07 .012 .008 < 2.00 170 170 Yes 

Wrangel Brook near South Toms River (WB2) 

1 5/25/94 18:00 .010 <.007 .012 <.009 < .013 < .013 < .009 <2.00 43 43 Yes 

2 6/2/94 11: 15 E.014 <.007 E .011 <.009 < .013 < .013 <.009 170 170 Yes 

4 9/8/94 14:45 <.013 < .013 70 110 Yes 

11 4/20/95 10:45 <.013 .004 5.00 Yes 

6 8/30/95 11:00 .024 .009 < 2.00 430 12 430 Yes 

612 8/30/95 11:30 .024 .006 <2.00 130 130 Yes 

14 10/5/95 4:14 .014 .008 < 2.00 130 130 Yes 

Daven120rt Branch near Dover Forge (DB) 

4 9/8/94 16:08 <.013 < .013 70 70 Yes 

11 4/20/95 13:30 < .013 .007 < 2.00 Yes 

12 8/30195 13:45 .032 .019 47.00 130 130 Yes 

14 10/5/95 0:00 .019 .013 9.00 No 

14 10/5195 0:00 .028 No 

14 10/5/95 3:00 .020 .017 8.80 No 

14 10/5195 4:41 .019 .019 2.00 130 130 Yes 

14 10/5195 6:00 .016 .016 6.00 No 

101 
Appendix 1. Estimated streamflow, and measured and calculated concentrations of water-quality constituents in samples collected at measurement 

sites in the Toms River drainage basin. New Jersey, May 1994 to October 1995--Continued 

Nitrate Nitrate 

Esti- Total Total Ammo- Ammo- plus plus Organic 

mated nitrogen nitrogen nia nia nitrite Nitrite Nitrite Nitrate nitrogen 

Date and time stream- 1 (U)I, (F) , (U/, (F)3, (U), (F). (CF)3. (C), 

of sample flow uN uN uN uN uN uN uN uN uN asN asN 

Event collection (W/s) (mglL) (mglL) (mglL) (mglL) (mglL) (mgIL) (mgIL) (mglL) (mglL) (mglL) (mglL) 

All samples collected durin~ base flow in the growin~ season--continued 

Jakes Branch near South Toms River (JB) 

11 4/20/95 14:30 .238 <.009 <.009 <.022 < .003 <.022 .207 

All samples collected during bue flow in the non growing seuon 

Lon~ Swamp Creek near Toms River (LSC2) 

9 3/7/95 11 :30 .24 .883 .070 .054 .580 .004 .576 .233 

Wran~el Brook at Toms River CWB 1) 

79 3/7/95 14:30 33 1.071 .010 .010 .738 <.003 .738 .323 

79 3/7/95 14:30 33 .824 <.009 <.009 .744 <.003 .744 .071 

Wrangel Brook near South Toms River (02) 

79 3/7/95 13:00 51 .765 <.009 <.009 .661 < .003 .661 .095 

79 3/7/95 13:00 51 .977 <.009 <.009 .661 <.003 .661 .307 

Davenport Branch near Dover Forge (DB) 

9 3/7/95 15: 15 5.3 .338 .024 .021 .176 <.003 .176 .138 

All samples collected durin~ stormflow in the growing season 

Long Swamp Creek near Toms River (LSC 1) 

3 7114/94 23:30 1.070 1.025 .223 .216 .520 .529 .017 .015 .503 .514 .318 

3 7/15/94 3:20 1.034 .947 .174 .185 .476 .535 .027 .027 .449 .508 .325 

Long Swamp Creek at Toms River (LSC2) 

3 7/15/941:35 11. .986 1.038 .118 .116 .488 .530 .016 .016 .472 .514 .338 

3 7/15/94 3:40 5.5 .664 .618 .066 .066 .426 .426 .007 .007 .419 .419 .172 

3 7/15/94 6:15 6.0 .612 .605 .062 .059 .294 .294 .005 .005 .289 .289 .256 

3 7/15/94 9:00 4.5 .547 .496 .055 .055 .232 .241 < .003 < .003 .229 .238 .251 

5 9/22/94 20:00 5.2 

5 9/22/94 23:00 20 

5 9/22/94 23:00 20 .972 .113 .102 .468 .010 .458 .391 

5 9/23/94 1 :00 15 E .593 .073 .070 E .314 .006 E .308 .206 

5 9/23/94 2:15 12 

813 9/17/95 10:22 25 .530 .156 .148 .453 .015 .438 

13 9117/95 10:50 23 1.191 .171 .155 .465 .016 .449 .555 

13 9/17/95 11:50 17 1.120 .137 .140 .453 .014 .439 .530 

13 9/17/95 12:50 15 

13 9/17/95 13:50 12 .965 .131 .131 .334 .010 .324 .500 

15 10/5/95 8:31 1.5 1.174 .398 .371 .264 .020 .244 .512 

15 10/5/95 9:31 16 .474 .050 .056 .176 .005 .175 .248 

15 10/5/95 10:31 14 .493 .092 .079 .182 .007 .175 .219 

15 10/5/95 11 :31 27 .518 .071 .058 .132 .005 .127 .315 

15 10/5/95 12:31 22 .669 .100 .083 .264 .011 .253 .305 

15 10/5/95 13:31 13 .669 .063 .066 .276 .011 .265 .330 

15 10/5/95 13:55 14 

102 
Appendix 1. Estimated streamflow, and measured and calculated concentrations of water-quality constituents in samples collected at 

measurement sites in the Toms River drainage basin, New Jersey, May 1994 to October 1995--Continued 

Hydrolyz- Hydrolyz- HydroTotal Total able able Ortho- Ortho- lyzable 

phos- phos- phosphorus phosphorus phos- phos- phos- Eschericia Fecal 

phorus phoros plus ortho- plus ortho- phoros phoros phorus Total coliform coliform Manual 

Date and time (u), (F), phosphorus phosphrus (U)5, (F)5, (u), sus- bacteria bacteria sample 

of sample asP asP (U)4, as P (F)4, as P asP pended (MPN/ (MPN/ asP asP coHecEvent collection (mglL) (mglL) (mglL) solids 100mL) l00mL) (mg/L) (mgIL) (mglL) (mglL) tion 

All samnles collected during base flow in the ~owing season--continued 

Jakes Branch near South Toms River (JB) 

11 4/20/95 14:30 < .013 .006 <2.00 No 

All samnles collected during base flow in the non growing season 

Long Swamn Creek at Toms River (LSC2) 

9 3/7/95 11 :30 < .013 .007 < .013 2.00 23 23 Yes 

Wrangel Brook near Toms River (WBl) 

79 3/7/95 14:30 <.013 .003 < .013 2.67 9 9 Yes 

79 3/7/95 14:30 < .013 .003 <.013 3.00 Yes 

Wrangel Brook near South Toms River (WB2) 

79 3/7/95 13:00 .013 .003 < .013 2.33 23 23 Yes 

3/7/95 13:00 .003 < .013 2.00 Yes 79 

Davennort Branch near Dover Forge (DB) 

9 3/7/95 15:15 < .013 .004 <.013 <2.00 36 36 Yes 

All samnles collected during stormflow in the ~owing season 

Long Swamn Creek near Toms River {LSC l} 

3 7114/94 23:30 .042 .037 2.67 Yes 

3 7/15/94 3:20 .033 .031 2.33 2,400 2,400 Yes 

Long Swamn Creek atToms River (LSC2) 

3 7115/94 1:35 .023 .025 < 2.00 9,000 9,000 Yes 

3 7/15/94 3:40 .015 .014 5.67 5,000 5,000 Yes 

3 7115194 6:15 < .013 < .013 < 2.00 Yes 

3 7/15/94 9:00 < .013 < .013 2.33 1,600 1,600 Yes 

5 9/22/94 20:00 .065 7.00 No 

5 9/22/94 23:00 16,000 16,000 Yes 

5 9/22/94 23:00 .100 .029 21.33 No 

5 9/23/94 1:00 E.074 .031 50.00 No 

5 9/23/94 2:15 3,000 3,000 Yes 

8 9/17/95 10:22 .107 .069 8.00 9,000 9,000 Yes 13 

13 9117/95 10:50 .115 .070 4.00 No 

13 9/17/95 11 :50 .102 .055 2.40 No 

13 9/17/95 12:50 2.80 No 

13 9/17/95 13:50 .082 .031 No 

15 10/5/95 8:31 .116 .017 22.00 No 

15 10/5/95 9:31 .070 .030 15.33 No 

15 10/5/95 10:31 .073 .039 16.00 No 

15 10/5/95 11 :31 .101 .035 63.33 No 

15 10/5195 12:31 .079 .076 11.67 No 

10/5195 No 15 13:31 .102 .052 5.33 

15 10/5/95 13:55 13,000 13,000 Yes 

103 
Appendix 1. Estimated streamflow, and measured and calculated concentrations of water-quality constituents in samples collected at measurement 

sites in the Toms River drainage basin, New Jersey, May 1994 to October 1995--Continued 

Nitrate Nitrate 

Esti- Total Total Ammo- Ammo- plus plus Organic 

mated nitrogen nitrogen nia nia nitrite nitrite Nitrite Nitrite Nitrate Nitrate nitrogen 

Date and time stream- (U)1. (F)1. (U)2, (F)2, (U)3. (F)3, (D), (F), (CU)3, (CF)3, (C), 

of sample flow asN uN uN uN uN uN uN uN uN asN asN 

Event collection (W/s) (mgIL) (mgIL) (mg/L) (mg/L) (mg/L) (mglL) (mg/L) (mglL) (mg/L) (mgIL) (mglL) 

All samples collected during stormflow in the growing seasonucontinued 

Wrangel Brook near Toms River (WB 1) 

3 7/15/94 2:30 60 .767 .702 .045 .045 .458 .456 <.003 <.003 .458 .456 .266 

3 7/15/94 4:30 54 .844 .754 .052 .052 .435 .435 .004 < .003 .431 .435 .357 

3 7/15/94 7:30 42 .664 .605 .027 .024 .473 .473 < .003 < .003 .473 .473 .164 

3 7/15/94 10:30 38 .761 .745 .018 .017 .482 .488 <.003 < .003 .482 .488 .255 

5 9/22/94 20:53 74 .561 .262 .004 .258 

5 9/22/94 22:50 140 .340 .146 <.003 .146 

5 9/23/94 0:50 140 "IDA 

• .:>o"t .iii .006 .1 ii 

5 9/23/94 3 :05 78 E .517 .022 .017 E .175 .004 E.171 E.320 

913 9/17/9511:12 49 .715 .066 .062 .340 .003 .337 .309 

13 9/17/95 11 :30 46 1.072 .073 .071 .353 .005 .348 .646 

13 9/17/95 12:30 37 .870 .051 .044 .415 .005 .410 .404 

13 9/17/95 13:30 33 .983 .043 .039 .552 .005 .547 .388 

15 10/5/95 8:00 17 1.171 

15 10/5/95 8:00 17 1.438 .035 .035 .654 .004 .650 .749 

15 10/5/95 9:00 24 1.001 .038 .032 .553 .004 .549 .410 

15 10/5/95 10:00 31 .882 .054 .038 .478 .004 .474 .350 

15 10/5/95 11 :00 38 .782 .058 .042 .352 .004 .348 .372 

15 10/5/95 12:00 42 .694 .052 .042 .339 .004 .335 .303 

15 10/5/95 13:00 42 .631 .050 .044 .314 .004 .310 .267 

15 10/5/95 14:00 39 .656 .042 .036 .365 .004 .361 .249 

15 10/5/95 15:00 36 

Wrangel Brook near South Toms River (WB2) 

3 7/15/94 1:30 100 .928 .857 .094 .094 .532 .532 .007 .007 .525 .525 .302 

3 7/15/94 3:30 92 .657 .725 .066 .062 .370 .376 <.003 < .003 .370 .376 .215 

3 7/15/94 6:30 77 .664 .612 .048 .048 .394 .417 <.003 <.003 .394 .417 .199 

3 7/15/94 9:30 61 .541 .496 .024 .024 .435 .435 <.003 <.003 .435 .435 .082 

5 9/22/94 21:57 100 .605 .338 <.003 .338 

5 9/23/94 0:00 200 .397 .169 <.003 .169 

5 9/23/94 1 :50 220 E .397 E .120 < .003 E .120 

5 9/23/94 6:38 120 

913 9117195 12:55 69 .786 .052 .046 .247 .004 .243 .487 

13 9/17/95 13:12 66 .691 .057 .048 .365 .005 .360 .269 

13 9/17/95 14:25 52 .715 .031 .029 .453 .005 .448 .231 

15 10/5/95 14:45 59 .531 .036 .030 .308 .004 .304 .187 

Davenport Branch near Dover Forge (DB) 

5 9/22/94 17:30 6.3 

5 9/22/94 18:00 6.3 

5 9122/94 19:00 6.4 

5 9/22/94 22:30 12 .290 .013 .013 .030 <.003 .030 .247 

5 9/23/94 2:30 14 E .271 .010 .010 E.030 .004 E .026 E .231 

5 9/23/94 3 :30 14 E .275 .010 .013 "E .030 < .003 E .030 E .235 

104 
Appendix 1. Estimated streamflow, and measured and calculated concentrations of water-quality constituents in samples collected at 

measurement sites in the Toms River drainage basin, New Jersey, May 1994 to October 1995--Continued 

Hydrolyz- Hydrolyz- HydroTotal Total able able Ortho- Ortho- lyzable 

phos- phos- phosphorus phosphorus phos- phos- phos- Eschericia Fecal 

phorus phorus plus ortho- plus ortho- phorus phorus phorus Total coliform coliform Manual 

Date and time (u), (F), phosphorus phosphms (U)5, (F)5, (U), sus- bacteria bacteria sample 

of sample asP asP (U)4, as P (F)4, as P asP asP asP pended (MPN/ (MPN/ collecEvent collection (mglL) (mglL) (mglL) (mglL) (mglL) (mglL) (mglL) solids 100mL) lOOmL) tion 

All samples collected during stormflow in the growing season--continued 

Wrangel Brook near Toms River (WB 1) 

3 7115/94 2:30 < .013 < .013 16.00 9,000 9,000 Yes 

3 7/15/94 4:30 .016 < .013 4.67 > 1,600 > 1,600 Yes 

3 7/15/94 7:30 < .013 < .013 3.67 9,000 9,000 Yes 

3 7/15/94 10:30 < .013 < .013 < 2.00 5,000 5,000 Yes 

5 9/22/94 20:53 .065 .022 25.00 E 5,000 E 5,000 Yes 

5 9/22/94 22: 50 .042 .013 39.33 3,000 3,000 Yes 

5 9/23/94 0:50 .035 .014 8.00 2AOO 2AOO Yes 

5 9/23/94 3:05 E.039 .015 6.00 9,000 9,000 Yes 

913 9/17/9511:12 .052 .017 8.33 16,000 16,000 Yes 

13 9117/95 11 :30 .155 .014 709.50 No 

13 9/17/95 12:30 .063 .008 42.33 No 

13 9/17/95 13:30 .047 .008 28.00 No 

15 10/5/95 8:00 .040 No 

15 10/5/95 8:00 .122 .008 32.33 No 

15 10/5/95 9:00 .088 .010 64.00 No 

15 10/5/95 10:00 .064 .009 72.00 No 

15 10/5/95 11 :00 .075 .009 45.67 No 

15 10/5/95 12:00 .058 .009 34.67 No 

15 10/5/95 13:00 .044 .010 22.67 No 

15 10/5/95 14:00 .041 .011 16.00 No 

15 10/5/95 15:00 7,900 7,900 Yes 

Wrangel Brook near South Toms River (WB2) 

3 7/15/94 1:30 < .013 < .013 3.67 5,000 9,000 Yes 

3 7/15/94 3:30 < .013 < .013 7.33 5,000 9,000 Yes 

3 7/15/94 6:30 < .013 < .013 2.33 5,000 5,000 Yes 

3 7/15/94 9:30 < .013 < .013 5.33 2,400 1,600 Yes 

5 9/22/94 21 :57 .049 < .013 25.67 E 5,000 E 5,000 Yes 

5 9/23/94 0:00 .070 < .013 31.67 13,500 16,000 Yes 

5 9/23/94 1 :50 E.030 < .013 9.33 9,000 9,000 Yes 

5 9/23/94 6:38 9,000 9,000 Yes 

913 9/17/95 12:55 .053 .008 15.33 16,000 16,000 Yes 

13 9/17/95 13: 12 .036 .011 8.00 16,000 16,000 Yes 

13 9/17/95 14:25 .036 .009 8.00 9,000 9,000 Yes 

15 10/5/95 14:45 .028 .009 7.33 7,000 7,000 Yes 

Davenport Branch near Dover Forge (DB) 

5 9/22/94 17:30 130 130 Yes 

5 9/22/94 18:00 2,200 2,200 Yes 

5 9/22/94 19: 00 300 300 Yes 

5 9/22/94 22:30 .030 <.013 21.33 No 

5 9/23/94 2:30 E.025 < .013 7.33 No 

5 9/23/94 3:30 E .013 <.013 4.33 No 

105 
Appendix 1. Estimated streamflow, and measured and calculated concentrations of water-quality constituents in samples collected at measurement 

sites in the Toms River drainage basin. New Jersey, May 1994 to October 1995--Continued 

Nitrate Nitrate 

Esti- Total Total Ammo- Ammo- plus plus Organic 

mated nitrogen nitrogen nia nia nitrite nitrite Nitrite Nitrite Nitrate Nitrate nitrogen 

Date and time stream- 1 (0)1, (F) , (0)2, (F)2, (0)3, (F)3, (u), (F), (CU)3, (CF)3, (C), 

of sample flow uN uN uN uN uN uN uN uN uN asN asN 

Event collection (ft3/s) (mglL) (mglL) (mglL) (mglL) (mglL) (mglL) (mglL) (mglL) (mglL) (mglL) (mglL) 

All samples collected during stormflow in the growing season--continued 

Davenport Branch near Dover Forge <DB)--continued 

913 9/17/95 12:04 .97 .941 .204 .204 .191 .009 .182 .546 

13 9/17/95 12:35 .97 .834 .179 .193 .178 .011 .167 .477 

13 9/17/95 15:09 .89 .804 .154 .152 .166 .010 .156 .484 

13 9/17/95 15:35 .85 .739 .137 .137 .141 .007 .134 .461 

13 9/17/95 18:35 .77 .643 .101 .101 .097 .007 .090 .445 

13 9/18/95 10:46 .64 

15 10/5195 9:00 .71 .455 .059 .058 .037 .005 .032 .359 

15 10/5195 12:00 .97 .493 .066 .066 .031 .004 .027 .396 

15 10/5/95 15:00 1.0 .499 .066 .060 .037 .005 .032 .396 

15 10/5195 16:00 1.0 

All samples collected during stormflow in the nongrowing season 

Long Swamp Creek at Toms River (LSC2) 

7 11/27/94 22:30 108 .891 .158 .217 .010 .207 

7 11128/94 0:30 24 .065 .006 .059 

7 11128/94 1 :30 25 .394 .062 .131 .006 .125 

7 11/28/94 2:30 22 .302 .005 .297 

7 11/28/94 3:30 17 .347 .005 .342 

7 11128/94 4: 15 15 .639 .332 .005 .327 

7 11128/94 4:30 15 .625 .024 .332 <.003 .332 10.269 

7 11/28/94 5:30 14 .317 .005 .312 

7 11128/94 6:30 12 .308 .005 .303 

7 11/28/94 9:08 8.1 

8 116/95 20:47 .40 

8 1/6/95 20:47 .40 .045 .045 .947 .013 .934 

8 1/6/95 21 :47 .60 1.378 .038 .039 .964 .010 .954 .376 

8 1/6/95 22:47 1.9 

8 1/6/95 22:47 1.9 .344 .344 .515 .004 .511 

8 1/6/95 23:47 4.3 .847 .119 .119 .287 .008 .279 .441 

8 1/7/95 0:47 6.8 .086 .079 .216 < .003 .216 

8 1/7/95 1 :47 9.2 .618 .074 .063 .192 < .003 .192 .352 

8 1/7/95 2:47 9.2 .048 .041 .186 <.003 .186 

10 3/8/95 22:14 .50 1.295 .030 .037 .626 .639 

10 3/8/95 23:14 3.4 

10 3/8/95 23: 14 3.4 1.483 .210 .187 .695 .011 .684 .578 

10 3/9/95 0:14 4.5 .859 .095 .087 .314 .007 .307 .450 

10 3/9/95 1: 14 9.2 .918 .056 .047 .176 .004 .172 .686 

10 3/9/95 2:14 8.1 .050 .046 .187 

10 3/9/95 3: 14 5.7 .078 .072 .326 

10 3/9/95 4: 14 4.0 .083 .076 .470 .008 .462 

106 
Appendix 1. Estimated streamflow, and measured and calculated concentrations of water-quality constituents in samples collected at 

measurement sites in the Toms River drainage basin, New Jersey, May 1994 to October 1995--Continued 

Hydrolyz- Hydrolyz- HydroTotal Total able able Ortho- Ortho- lyzable 

phos- phos- phosphorus phosphorus phos- phos- phos- Eschericia Fecal 

phorus phorus plus ortho- plus ortho- phorus phorus phorus Total coliform coliform Manual 

Date and time (U). (F). phosphorus phosphrus (U)S, (F)S, (U), sus- bacteria bacteria sample 

of sample asP asP (U)4, as P (F)4, as P as P pended (MPN/ (MPN/ collec- asP asP 

Event collection (mglL) (mglL) (mglL) 100mL) (mglL) (mglL) (mglL) solids (mglL) lOOmL) tion 

All sam12les collected during stormflow in the growing season--continued 

Daven120rt Branch near Dover Forge <DB)--continued 

9/17/95 12:04 .032 .016 23.00 1,300 1,300 Yes 913 

13 9/17/95 12:35 .026 .017 27.00 No 

13 9/17/95 15:09 .029 .019 10.50 Yes 

13 9/17/95 15:35 .028 .017 11.20 No 

13 9/17/95 18:35 .028 .017 12.00 No 

13 9/18/95 10:46 16.00 Yes 

15 10/5/95 9:00 .019 .017 8.50 No 

15 10/5/95 12:00 .018 .012 9.00 No 

15 10/5/95 15:00 .020 .015 10.50 No 

15 10/5/95 16:00 330 330 Yes 

All sam121es collected during stormflow in the nongrowing season 

Long Swam12 Creek at Toms River (LSC2) 

7 11/27/94 22:30 .155 .076 .079 50.67 No 

7 11/28/94 0:30 .069 .047 .021 59.67 No 

7 11128/94 1 :30 .103 .097 <.009 37.67 No 

7 11128/94 2:30 .076 .062 .014 12.67 No 

7 11128/94 3:30 .054 .038 .016 7.00 No 

7 11128/94 4: 15 .049 .030 .019 12.00 2,800 2,800 Yes 

7 11128/94 4:30 .046 .029 .018 5.33 No 

7 11128/94 5:30 .046 .029 .018 5.00 No 

7 11/28/94 6:30 .047 .027 .020 4.33 No 

7 11128/94 9:08 1,300 2,400 Yes 

8 116/95 20:47 800 800 Yes 

8 116/95 20:47 .075 <.013 No 

8 116/95 21:47 .033 <.013 6.33 No 

8 1/6/95 22:47 800 800 Yes 

8 1/6/95 22:47 .039 < .013 No 

8 116/95 23:47 .117 .030 58.00 No 

8 1/7/95 0:47 .099 .021 No 

8 1/7/95 1:47 .092 .033 64.00 No 

8 1/7/95 2:47 .080 .048 No 

10 3/8/95 22:14 .023 No 

10 3/8/95 23:14 1,300 1,300 Yes 

10 3/8/95 23:14 .088 .025 65.00 No 

10 3/9/95 0:14 .085 .024 59.00 No 

10 3/9/95 1: 14 .089 .018 79.67 No 

10 3/9/95 2:14 No 

10 3/9/95 3:14 No 

10 3/9/95 4:14 .021 No 

107 
Appendix 1. Estimated streamflow. and measured and calculated concentrations of water-quality constituents in samples collected at measurement 

sites in the Toms River drainage basin. New Jersey, May 1994 to October 1995--Continued 

Esti- Total Total Ammo- Ammo- plus plus Organic 

mated nitrogen nitrogen nia nia nitrite nitrite Nitrite Nitrite Nitrate Nitrate nitrogen 

Date and time stream- (0)1, (F)1, (0)2, (F)2, (U)3, (F)3, (u), (F), (CU)3, (CF)3, (C). 

of sample flow asN uN uN uN uN uN uN uN uN asN asN 

Event collection (tP/s) (mg/L) (mg/L) (mg/L) (mg/L) (mg/L) (mg/L) (mg/L) (mg/L) (mg/L) (mg/L) (mg/L) 

All samples collected during stormflow in the nongrowing season--continued 

Wrangel Brook near Toms River (WBl) 

7 11127/94 23:43 42 

7 11/27/94 23:43 42 .807 .030 .599 .005 .594 .178 

7 11/28/94 0:43 55 

7 11128/94 0:43 55 .996 .030 0483 .005 0478 1

°0483 

7 11128/94 1 :43 71 

7 11/28/94 1 :43 71 1.157 .026 .374 .005 .369 10.757 

7 11128/94 2:43 80 .329 <.003 .329 

7 11/28/94 3:43 81 .723 .023 .314 <.003 .314 

7 11128/94 4:43 77 .362 <.003 .362 

7 11128/94 5 :43 72 0405 <.003 0405 

7 11128/94 6:43 68 .863 .043 All <.003 All 1

°0409 

8 1/6/95 20:23 30 

8 116/95 20:23 30 .007 .007 .976 <.003 .976 

8 1/6/95 21:23 31 <.007 .007 .947 <.003 .947 

8 1/6/95 22:23 34 

8 1/6/95 22:23 34 .012 .012 .899 <.003 .899 

8 1/6/95 23:23 39 .015 .015 .846 <.003 .846 

8 117/95 0:23 46 1.182 .021 .021 .810 <.003 .810 .351 

8 117/95 1 :23 54 .022 .022 .656 <.003 .656 

8 117/95 2:23 64 .021 .022 .527 <.003 .527 

8 117/95 3:23 73 .026 .020 0470 <.003 0470 

8 117/95 4:23 78 1.098 .024 .021 0444 <.003 0444 .630 

8 117195 5:23 77 .024 .021 .450 <.003 .450 

8 117/95 6:23 74 .025 .022 0458 < .003 0458 

8 117195 7:23 70 .847 .020 .012 0479 <.003 .479 .348 

10 3/8/95 22:25 50 

10 3/8/95 22:25 50 10413 .022 .021 .649 <.003 .649 .742 

10 3/8/95 23:25 59 

10 3/8/95 23:25 59 1.177 .040 .038 .603 < .003 .603 .534 

10 3/9/95 0:25 63 

10 3/9/95 0:25 63 1.060 .050 .037 0453 <.003 0453 .557 

10 3/9/95 1 :25 67 1.130 .028 .028 0424 <.003 .424 .678 

10 3/9/95 2:25 66 .824 .021 .024 0413 < .003 0413 .390 

10 3/9/95 3 :25 62 1.248 .033 .024 0413 <.003 0413 .802 

10 3/9/95 4:25 58 1.142 .037 

10 3/9/95 5 :25 55 .017 

108 
Appendix 1. Estimated streamflow, and measured and calculated concentrations of water-quality constituents in samples collected at 

measurement sites in the Toms River drainage basin. New Jersey. May 1994 to October 1995--Continued 

Total Total able able Ortho- Ortho- lyzable 

phos- phos- phosphorus phosphorus phos- phos- phos- Eschericia Fecal 

phoros phoros plus ortho- plus ortho- phoros phoros phoros Total coliform coliform Manual 

Date and time (U), (F), phosphorus phosphrus (U)S. (F)5. (U), sus- bacteria bacteria sample 

of sample asP as P (U)4, as P (F)4, as P as P asP asP pended (MPN/ (MPN/ collecEvent collection (mglL) (mglL) (mg/L) (mg/L) (mglL) solids (mglL) (mglL) 100mL) lOOmL) tion 

All sam121es collected during stormflow in the nongrowing season--continued 

Wrangel Brook near Toms River (WB 1) 

7 11/27/94 23:43 800 1300 Yes 

7 11127/94 23:43 .025 .016 .010 9.00 No 

7 11/28/94 0:43 500 800 Yes 

7 11128/94 0:43 .032 .018 .015 13.33 No 

7 11128/94 1 :43 800 800 Yes 

7 11128/94 1 :43 .035 .018 .017 19.33 No 

7 11128/94 2:43 .032 .018 .015 16.33 No 

7 11/28/94 3:43 .023 .018 <.009 11.00 No 

7 11/28/94 4:43 .020 .015 <.009 8.67 No 

7 11128/94 5:43 .017 .015 <.009 2.33 No 

7 11128/94 6:43 .018 .015 <.009 6.33 No 

8 1/6/95 20:23 220 220 Yes 

8 1/6/95 20:23 .060 < .013 No 

8 1/6/95 21:23 .029 < .013 No 

8 1/6/95 22:23 170 170 Yes 

8 1/6/95 22:23 .016 < .013 No 

8 1/6/95 23:23 .025 < .013 No 

8 1/7/95 0:23 .030 <.013 15.67 No 

8 1/7/95 1:23 .023 <.013 No 

8 1/7/95 2:23 .048 < .013 No 

8 1/7/95 3:23 .059 <.013 No 

8 1/7/95 4:23 .059 <.013 19.00 No 

8 1/7/95 5:23 .039 < .013 No 

8 1/7/95 6:23 .032 < .013 No 

8 1/7/95 7:23 .032 < .013 10.00 No 

10 3/8/95 22:25 80 80 Yes 

10 3/8/95 22:25 .042 .007 178.67 No 

10 3/8/95 23:25 280 280 Yes 

10 3/8/95 23:25 .033 .005 No 

10 3/9/95 0:25 110 110 Yes 

10 3/9/95 0:25 <.013 .006 No 

10 3/9/95 1:25 .024 .005 19.00 No 

10 3/9/95 2:25 .036 .006 No 

10 3/9/95 3:25 .018 .005 No 

10 3/9/95 4:25 .015 10.00 No 

10 3/9/95 5:25 No 

109 
Appendix 1. Estimated streamflow. and measured and calculated concentrations of water-quality constituents in samples collected at measurement 

sites in the Toms River drainage basin, New Jersey, May 1994 to October 1995--Continued 

Esti- Total Total Ammo- Ammo- plus plus Organic 

mated nitrogen nitrogen nia nia nitrite nitrite Nitrite Nitrite Nitrate Nitrate nitrogen 

Date and time stream- 1 (0)1, (F) , (0)3, (F)3, (U). (F), (CU)3, (CF)3, (C), 

of sample flow asN asN asN asN asN asN asN asN asN asN asN 

Event collection (ft3/s) (mgIL) (mglL) (mglL) (mglL) (mglL) (mglL) (mglL) (mg/L) (mg/L) (mglL) (mglL) 

All samples collected during stormflow in the nongrowing season--continued 

Wrangel Brook near South Toms River (WB2) 

7 11/28/94 0:45 60 .737 .013 .593 .005 .588 10.131 

7 11/28/94 3:20 110 .849 .013 .384 .005 .379 10.452 

7 11/28/94 8 :20 100 .583 .013 .399 <.003 .399 10.171 

8 117/95 0:00 52 .975 .010 .008 .798 < .003 .798 .167 

8 117/95 4: 10 100 .847 .020 .016 .450 <.003 .450 .377 

8 117/95 6:12 120 .711 .015 .013 .429 <.003 .429 .267 

10 3/8/95 21 :35 67 

10 3/8/95 21 :35 67 1.001 <.009 <.009 .684 <.003 .684 .308 

10 3/8/95 22:35 71 

10 3/8/95 22:35 71 .021 .015 .603 

10 3/8/95 23:35 74 

10 3/8/95 23:35 74 .989 .030 .030 .545 <.003 .545 .414 

10 3/9/95 0:35 84 .032 .030 .430 

10 3/9/95 1 :35 93 .744 .028 .024 .407 <.003 .407 .309 

10 3/9/95 2:35 98 .021 .021 .424 

10 3/9/95 3:35 99 .883 .023 .021 .418 <.003 .418 .442 

Davenport Branch near Dover Forge roB) 

7 11128/94 1 :30 

7 11128/94 1 :30 .055 <.003 .055 

7 11/28/94 2:30 

7 11/28/94 2 :30 .464 .023 .055 <.003 .055 10.386 

7 11/28/94 3 :30 

7 11/28/94 3:30 .056 < .003 .056 

7 11128194 4:30 .352 .026 .056 < .003 .056 10.270 

7 11128/94 5 :30 .056 <.003 .056 

7 11/28/94 6 :30 .056 <.003 .056 

7 11128/94 7:30 .331 .037 .056 < .003 .056 10.238 

8 1/6195 19:42 6.9 

8 116/95 19:42 6.9 .016 .015 .183 <.003 .183 

8 1/6/95 20:42 7.0 .015 .015 .180 < .003 .180 

8 116/95 21:42 7.2 

8 116/95 21:42 7.2 .015 .015 .177 <.003 .177 

8 1/6/95 22:42 7.3 .017 .016 .192 <.003 .192 

8 1/6/95 23:42 7.6 .357 .017 .017 .180 <.003 .180 .160 

8 117/95 0:42 8.1 .017 .017 .210 <.003 .210 

8 117/95 1:42 8.7 .379 .012 .015 .180 <.003 .180 .187 

8 117/95 2:42 9.1 .013 .017 .180 .004 .176 

8 117/95 3:42 9.4 .379 .008 .010 .168 .004 .164 .203 

8 117/95 4:42 9.4 .011 .012 .168 <.003 .168 

8 117/95 5:42 9.4 .012 .010 .168 <.003 .168 

8 117195 6:42 9.6 .012 .016 .174 < .003 .174 

110 
Appendix 1. Estimated streamflow, and measured and calculated concentrations of water-quality constituents in samples collected at 

measurement sites in the Toms River drainage basin, New Jersey, May 1994 to October 1995--Continued 

Hydro1yz- Hydro1yz- HYdroTotal Total able able Ortho- Ortho- lyzable 

phos- phos- phosphorus phosphorus phos- phos- phos- Eschericia Fecal 

phorus phorus plus ortho- plus ortho- phorus phorus phorus Total coliform coliform Manual 

Date and time (u), (F), phosphorus phosphrus (U)5, (F)5, (U), sus- bacteria bacteria sample 

of sample asP as P (U)4, as P (F)4, as P asP as P asP pended (MPN/ (MPN/ coUecEvent collection (mglL) (mglL) (mgIL) (mgIL) (mglL) (mglL) (mglL) solids 100mL) lOOmL) tion 

All sam121es collected during stormflow in the nongrowing season--continued 

Wrangel Brook near South Toms River (WB2) 

7 11/28/94 0:45 .016 < .013 <.009 14.00 1,300 1,300 Yes 

7 11128/94 3:20 .051 .018 .033 13.33 1,200 1,200 Yes 

7 11/28/94 8:20 < .013 <.013 <.009 3.33 90 800 Yes 

8 117/95 0:00 .016 < .013 7.33 300 300 Yes 

8 117/95 4:10 .032 < .013 21.33 230 230 Yes 

8 117/95 6:12 .028 <.013 14.67 130 130 Yes 

10 3/8/95 21:35 13 13 Yes 

10 3/8/95 21:35 < .013 .003 6.33 No 

10 3/8/95 22:35 280 280 Yes 

10 3/8/95 22:35 No 

10 3/8/95 23:35 230 230 Yes 

10 3/8/95 23:35 .023 .004 18.00 No 

10 3/9/95 0:35 No 

10 3/9/95 1:35 .031 .005 21.00 No 

10 3/9/95 2:35 No 

10 3/9/95 3:35 .016 .004 11.67 No 

Daven120rt Branch near Dover Forge (DB) 

7 11/28/94 1 :30 170 300 Yes 

7 11/28/94 1 :30 < .013 <.013 <.009 9.67 No 

7 11/28/94 2:30 130 130 Yes 

7 11128/94 2:30 < .013 < .013 <.009 3.00 No 

7 11/28/94 3 :30 8 13 Yes 

7 11128/94 3:30 < .013 <.009 <2.00 No 

7 11128/94 4:30 < .013 < .013 <.009 <2.00 No 

7 11128/94 5 :30 < .013 <.009 <2.00 No 

7 11128/94 6:30 < .013 < .013 <.009 <2.00 No 

7 11128/94 7:30 < .013 < .013 <.009 <2.00 No 

8 1/6/95 19:42 7 7 Yes 

8 1/6/95 19:42 .056 < .013 No 

8 116/95 20:42 < .013 < .013 No 

8 1/6/95 21:42 11 17 Yes 

8 1/6/95 21:42 < .013 < .013 No 

8 116/95 22:42 < .013 <.013 No 

8 1/6/95 23:42 < .013 < .013 2.67 No 

8 117195 0:42 < .013 < .013 No 

8 117/95 1:42 < .013 < .013 5.33 No 

8 117/95 2:42 < .013 < .013 No 

8 117/95 3:42 <.013 <.013 4.00 No 

8 117/95 4:42 <.013 < .013 No 

8 117/95 5:42 < .013 < .013 No 

8 117/95 6:42 <.013 < .013 No 

111 
Appendix 1. Estimated streamflow, and measured and calculated concentrations of water-quality constituents in samples collected at measurement 

sites in the Toms River drainage basin, New Jersey, May 1994 to October 1995--Continued 

Esti- Total Total Ammo- Ammo- plus plus Organic 

mated nitrogen nitrogen nia nia nitrite nitrite Nitrite Nitrite Nitrate Nitrate nitrogen 

Date and time stream- (U)1, (F) I , (0)2, (FP, (0)3, (F)3, (U), (F), (CU)3, (CF)3, (C), 

of sample flow asN asN asN asN asN asN asN asN asN asN asN 

Event collection (ft3/s) (mglL) (mglL) (mglL) (mglL) (mglL) (mglL) (mglL) (mglL) (mglL) (mglL) (mglL) 

All sam,Qles collected during stormflow in the nongrowing season--continued 

Daven,Qort Branch near Dover Forge ffiB}--continued 

10 3/8/95 21:30 5.3 

10 3/8/95 21:30 5.3 .871 .021 .016 .159 <.003 .159 .691 

10 3/9/95 1:30 5.5 

10 3/9/95 1:30 5.5 .812 .030 .017 .153 < .003 .153 .629 

10 3/9/95 4:00 5.5 

10 3/9/95 5:30 5.8 .859 .024 .159 <.003 .159 10.676 

10 3/9/95 9:30 6.0 .641 .019 .164 <.003 .164 1°.458 

10 3/9/95 13:30 6.1 1.200 .015 .170 <.003 .170 1°1.015 

IThe effective method detection limit was 0.028 mglL during May 1994 to February 1995 and 0.023 mglL during March 1995 to October 1995. 

2The effective method detection limit was 0.007 mg/L during May 1994 to February 1995 and 0.009 mglL during March 1995 to October 1995. 

3The effective method detection limit was 0.015 mglL during May 1994 to February 1995 and 0.022 mglL during March 1995 to October 1995. 

4The effective method detection limit was 0.009 mg/L during May 1994 to February 1995 and 0.013 mg/L during March 1995 to October 1995. 

5The effective method detection limit was 0.013 mglL during May 1994 to February 1995 and 0.002 mglL during March 1995 to October 1995. 

6Samples collected to verify that water quality at site WB2 and at a location 1,000 feet upstream from the site were similar. 

7Duplicate sample collected to evaluate sampling effectiveness. 

8Grab samples collected manually for comparison with samples collected with the automatic samplers. 

9Composite samples collected manually for comparison with samples collected with the automatic samplers. 

l~itrate plus nitrite (U) used to calculate organic nitrogen (C). 

112 
Appendix 1. Estimated streamflow, and measured and calculated concentrations of water-quality constituents in samples collected at 

measurement sites in the Toms River drainage basin, New Jersey, May 1994 to October 1995--Continued 

Total Total able able Ortho- Ortho- lyzable 

phos- phos- phosphorus phosphorus phos- phos- phos- Eschericia Fecal 

phorus phorus plus ortho- plus ortho- phorus phorus phorus Total coliform coliform Manual 

Date and time (U). (F), phosphorus phosphrus (U)5, (F)5, (U). sus- bacteria bacteria sample 

of sample asP asP (U)4, as P (F)4, as P asP asP asP pended (MPN/ (MPN/ collecEvent collection (mg/L) (mg/L) (mg/L) (mglL) (mglL) (mg/L) (mg/L) solids 100mL) lOOmL) tion 

All samIlles collected during stormflow in the nongrowing season--continued 

DavenIl0rt Branch near Dover Forge illB)--continued 

10 3/8/95 21:30 2 2 Yes 

10 3/8/95 21:30 < .013 .005 No 

10 3/9/95 1:30 13 13 Yes 

10 3/9/95 1:30 < .013 .004 No 

10 3/9/95 4:00 4 4 Yes 

10 3/9/95 5:30 < .013 .003 .010 4.67 No 

10 3/9/95 9:30 < .013 .003 .009 4.67 No 

10 3/9/95 13:30 .016 .004 .011 28.33 No 

113 
Appendix 2. Area-normalized loads (yields) of selected water-quality constituents calculated for samples collected at measurement sites in the Toms 

River drainage basin, New Jersey, May 1994 to October 1995 

[Sites are listed in order of decreasing intensity of land development in the contributing drainage areas. U, concentration measured in an Wlfiltered 

water sample; F, concentration measured in a filtered water sample; C, calculated concentration; CF, concentration calculated from concentrations 

2 measured in filtered water samples; N, nitrogen; P, phosphorus; (lb/d)/mi , pounds per day per square mile; (MPN/d)/mi2, most probable number per 

day per square mile; --, no data; <, less than; >, greater than; E, estimated. Growing season is April 1 through October 31; nongrowing season is 

November 1 through March 31.] 

Hydrolyzable 

phosphorus 

plus 

Total Ammonia Organic orthophos- Orthophos- Total 

Date and time of nitrogen (U), (F), Nitrate (CF), nitrogen (C), phorus (D), phorus, suspended 

asN asN asN asN asP asP solids sample Fecal coliform 

2 2 2 Event collection «lb/d)/mi ) «(lb/ d)/mi2) «lb/d)/mi ) «(lb/d)/mi2) ((1b/d)/mi2) ((lb/d)/mi2) «lb/d)/mi ) «MPN/d)mi2) 

All samples collected durine base flow in the !!Towing season 

Long SwamI! Creek at Toms River (LSC2) 

I 5/25/94 11 :30 1.1 0.20 0.64 0.26 0.071 < 0.016 < 2.5 l.4xlOlO 

2 6/2/94 9:45 E .74 E .10 E .24 E.38 .013 < .012 7.1 x 109 

4 9/8/94 13:50 .71 .047 .38 .27 < .013 2.3 x 109 

11 4/20/95 10:00 .055 .0085 .0042 .042 .0030 .0016 .31 

12 8/30/95 10:10 .0091 .0056 <.0002 .0033 .0004 .0001 .036 7 1.3 x 10

14 10/5/95 4:40 .18 .085 .072 .012 .014 .0045 .92 2.6 x 109 

Wrangel Brook near Toms River (WB 1) 

1 5/25/94 16:10 8.3 .22 5.6 2.4 .12 < .14 <21 2.2 x 1010 

2 6/2/94 13:30 7.7 E .19 E2.7 E4.8 .14 < .12 9.4 x 109 

4 9/8/94 15:30 9.0 .11 6.8 2.1 < .13 1.0 x 109 

11 4/20/95 11:45 5.9 .078 4.9 .92 .092 .049 30 

12 8/30/95 13:10 4.2 .057 3.1 1.0 .068 .027 7.6 2.2 x 109 

14 10/5/95 4:07 4.2 .093 3.5 .57 .056 .037 9.3 3.6 x 109 

Wrangel Brook near South Toms River (WB2) 

1 5/25/94 18:00 5.8 .24 3.9 1.6 .11 < .12 18 1.7 x 109 

2 6/2/94 11: 15 5.9 E .14 E2.6 E3.2 E.087 < .10 6.1 x 109 

4 9/8/94 14:45 6.3 .067 5.2 1.0 <.11 4.1 x 109 

11 4/20/95 10:45 4.7 < .054 3.7 .93 <.079 .024 30 

112 8/30/95 11:00 3.4 .046 2.4 .94 .078 .029 6.5 6.4 x 109 

112 8/30/95 11:30 3.2 .046 2.4 .73 .078 .020 6.5 1.9 x 109 

14 10/5/95 4:14 3.4 .072 2.7 .54 .056 .032 8.0 2.4 x 109 

DavenI!ort Branch near Dover Forge mB) 

11 4/20/95 13:30 .15 .015 .023 .12 <.0080 .0043 1.2 

12 8/30/95 13:45 .11 .019 < .0016 .086 .0023 .0014 3.4 7 4.3 x 10

14 10/5/95 0:00 .20 .021 <.0083 .17 .0090 .0049 3.4 

14 10/5/95 3:00 .17 .019 <.0083 .15 .0075 .0064 3.3 

14 10/5/95 4:41 .18 .025 <.0083 .14 .0072 .0072 .75 2.2 x 108 

14 10/5/95 6:00 .17 .021 .0098 .14 .0060 .0060 2.2 

Footnotes at end of table 

114 
Appendix 2. Area-normalized loads (yields) of selected water-quality constituents calculated for samples collected at measurement sites in the 

Toms River drainage basin, New Jersey, May 1994 to October 1995--Continued 

Hydrolyzable 

phosphorus 

plus 

Total Ammonia Organic orthophos- Orthophos- Total 

Date and time of nitrogen (U), (F), Nitrate (CF), nitrogen (C), phorus (U), phorus, suspended 

sample asN asN asN asN asP as P solids Fecal coliform 

Event collection ((lb/d)/mi2) ((lb/ d)/mi2) «lb/d)/mi2) «lb/ d)/mi2) ((lb/d)/mi2) ((lb/d)/mi2) ((lb/d)/mi2) «MPN/ d)mi 2) 

All samnles collected during base flow in the non growing season 

Long Swamn Creek near Toms River (1SC2) 

9 3/7/95 11 :30 .17 .011 .11 .046 <.0026 .0014 .39 2.1 x 107 

Wrangel Brook at Toms River (lYB 1) 

29 3/7/95 14:30 9.9 .092 6.8 3.0 < .12 .028 25 3.8 x 108 

29 3/7/95 14:30 7.6 <.083 6.9 .66 < .12 .028 28 

Wrangel Brook near South Toms River (WB2) 

29 3/7/95 13:00 6.1 <.072 5.3 .76 < .10 .024 19 8 8.4 x 10

29 3/7/95 13:00 7.8 .072 5.3 2.5 .024 16 

Davennort Branch near Dover Forge (DB) 

9 3/7/95 15: 15 1.3 .081 .68 .53 <.050 .015 < 7.7 8 6.3 x 10

All samnles collected during stormflow in the growing season 

Long Swamn Creek at Toms River (LSC2) 

3 7/15/94 1:35 8.9 1.0 4.6 3. .23 < 18 3.7 x 1011 

3 7/15/94 3:40 3.0 .30 1.9 .77 .063 25 1.0 x 1011 

3 7/15/94 6:15 3.0 .29 1.4 1.2 <.064 <9.8 

3 7/15/94 9:00 2.0 .20 .89 .93 <.048 8.6 2.7 x 1010 

5 9/22/94 20:00 .28 30 

12 5 9/22/94 23:00 1.2 x 10

5 9/22/94 23:00 16 1.7 7.5 6.4 1.6 .48 350 

5 9/23/94 1:00 E 7.2 .85 3.7 . 2.5 .90 .38 600 

5 9/23/94 2:15 1.3 x 1011 

313 9/17/95 10:22 11 3.0 9.0 2.2 1.4 160 8.4 x 1011 

13 9117/95 10:50 23 3.0 8.6 11 2.2 1.3 76 

13 9117/95 11:50 15 1.9 6.0 7.2 1.4 .75 32 

13 9/17/95 12:50 34 

13 9/17/95 13:50 9.8 1.3 3.3 5.1 .82 .32 

15 10/5/95 8:31 1.5 .46 .30 .64 .14 .021 27 

15 10/5/95 9:31 6.1 .72 2.2 3.2 .90 .39 200 

15 10/5/95 10:31 5.8 .93 2.0 2.6 .86 .46 190 

15 10/5/95 11 :31 11 1.3 2.8 6.9 2.2 .77 1,400 

15 10/5/95 12:31 12 1.5 4.6 5.5 1.4 1.4 210 

15 10/5/95 13:31 7.3 .72 2.9 3.6 1.12 .57 58 

15 10/5/95 13:55 6.9 x 1011 

115 
Appendix 2. Area-normalized loads (yields) of selected water-quality constituents calculated for samples collected at measurement sites in the 

Toms River drainage basin, New Jersey, May 1994 to October 1995--Continued 

Hydrolyzable 

phosphorus 

plus 

Total Ammonia Organic orthophos- Orthophos- Total 

Date and time of nitrogen (U). (F). Nitrate (CF), nitrogen (C), phorus (U), phorus, suspended 

sample as N as N as N as N asP asP solids Fecal coliform 

Event 2 2 2 2 2 collection «lb/d)/mi ) ((lb/d)/mi2) «lb/d)/mi ) «lb/d)/mi ) «lb/d)/mi ) «(lb/ d)/mi2) «lb/d)/mi ) «MPN/d)mi2) 

All samples collected during stormflow in the growing season--continued 

Wrangel Brook near Toms River (WBI) 

3 7/15/94 2:30 13 .75 7.6 4.4 <.22 270 6.8 x 1011 

3 7/15/94 4:30 13 .78 6.5 5.3 < .19 69 > 1.1 x 1011 

3 7/15/94 7:30 7.7 .28 5.5 1.9 < .15 42 4.8 x 1011 

3 7/15/94 10:30 8.1 .18 5.2 2.7 < .14 < 21 2.4 X 1011 

5 9/22/94 20:53 12 5.3 1.3 .45 510 E 4.7 X 1011 

5 9/22/94 22:50 14 5.8 1.7 .52 1,500 5.5 X 1011 

5 9/23/94 0:50 15 4.4 1.4 .56 320 4.4 X lOll 

5 9/23/94 3:05 E 11 .37 3.7 6.9 .84 .32 130 8.8 X lOll 

413 9/17/95 11:12 9.6 .83 4.5 4.2 .70 .23 110 9.8 X 1011 

13 9/17/95 11:30 14 .90 4.4 8.2 2.0 .18 

13 9/17/95 12:30 8.8 .44 4.2 4.1 .64 .08 430 

13 9/17/95 13:30 8.9 .35 5.0 3.5 .42 .072 250 

15 10/5/95 8:00 5.6 .19 

15 10/5/95 8:00 6.9 .17 3.1 3.6 .58 .038 150 

15 10/5/95 9:00 6.7 .21 3.7 2.7 .59 .067 430 

15 10/5/95 10:00 7.5 .32 4.0 3.0 .55 .077 610 

IS 10/5/95 11 :00 8.2 .44 3.6 3.9 .78 .094 480 

15 10/5/95 12:00 8.1 .49 3.9 3.5 .67 .10 400 

15 10/5/95 13:00 7.3 .51 3.6 3.1 .51 .12 260 

15 10/5/95 14:00 7.1 .39 3.9 2.7 .44 .12 170 

15 10/5/95 15:00 3.5 X 1011 

Wrangel Brook near South Toms River (WB2) 

3 7/15/94 1:30 15 1.5 8.6 4.9 < .21 59 6.7 X 1011 

3 7/15/94 3:30 9.6 .90 5.5 3.1 < .19 110 6.0 X 1011 

3 7/15/94 6:30 8.1 .57 5.1 2.4 < .16 28 2.8 x 1011 

3 7/15/94 9:30 5.2 .23 4.2 .89 < .12 52 7.0 x 1010 

5 9/22/94 21:57 10 5.6 .82 <.22 430 E 3.8 X 1011 

5 9/23/94 0:00 12 5.3 2.2 < .41 1,000 12 2.3 X 10

5 9/23/94 1 :50 E 14 4.1 E 1.2 < .45 320 12 1.4x10

5 9/23/94 6:38 7.6 X 1011 

413 9/17/95 12:55 8.6 .50 2.6 5.3 .58 .087 170 7.9 x 1011 

13 9/17/95 13:12 7.2 .50 3.8 2.8 .38 .11 84 7.6 x 1011 

13 9/17/95 14:25 6.0 .24 3.7 1.9 .30 .075 67 3.4 X 1011 

15 10/5/95 14:45 5.0 .28 2.8 1.8 .Z6 .084 69 3.0 X 1011 

116 
Appendix 2. Area-normalized loads (yields) of selected water-quality constituents calculated for samples collected at measurement sites in the 

Toms River drainage basin, New Jersey, May 1994 to October 1995--Continued 

Hydrolyzable 

phosphorus 

plus 

Total Ammonia Organic orthophos- Orthophos- Total 

Date and time of nitrogen (U), (F), Nitrate (CF). nitrogen (C), phorus (U), phorus, suspended 

sample asN asN asN asN asP as P solids Fecal coliform 

2 Event collection «lb/d)/mi ) «lb/ d)/mi2) ((lb/d)/mi2) ((1b/d)/mi2) ((lb/d)/mi2) ((1 b/ d)/ mi 2) ((1b/d)/mi2) «MPN/ d)mi 2) 

All samn1es collected during stormflow in the growing season--continued 

Davennort Branch near Dover Forge mB} 

5 9/22/94 17:30 2.7 x 109 

5 9/22/94 18:00 4.6 x 1010 

5 9/22/94 19:00 604 x 109 

5 9/22/94 22:30 2.6 .12 .27 2.2 .27 < .12 190 

5 9/23/94 2:30 E2.7 .099 .26 2.3 E .25 < .13 73 

5 9/23/94 3:30 E 2.7 .13 .30 2.3 E .13 < .13 43 

413 9/17/95 12:04 .66 .14 .13 .38 .022 .011 16 4.2 x 109 

13 9117/95 12:35 .58 .14 .12 .34 .018 .012 19 

13 9117/95 15:09 .52 .098 .10 .31 .019 .012 6.8 

13 9117/95 15:35 045 .084 .082 .28 .017 .010 6.9 

13 9/17/95 18:35 .36 .056 .050 .25 .016 .0095 6.7 

13 9/18/95 10:46 704 

15 10/5/95 9:00 .23 .030 .016 .18 .0098 .0087 404 

15 10/5/95 12:00 .35 .046 .019 .28 .013 .0084 6.3 

15 10/5/95 15:00 .36 .043 .023 .29 .014 .011 7.6 

15 10/5/95 16:00 1.1 x 109 

All samnles collected during stormflow in the nongrowing season 

Long Swamn Creek at Toms River (1SC2) 

7 11/27/94 22:30 7.5 1.3 1.7 404 1.3 430 

7 11/28/94 0:30 1.1 1.3 1,100 

7 11/28/94 1:30 8.1 1.3 2.6 4.1 2.1 780 

7 11/28/94 2:30 504 104 230 

7 11/28/94 3:30 4.7 .74 95 

7 11/28/94 4:15 7.7 4.0 .59 140 1.5 x 1011 

7 11/28/94 4:30 7.6 .29 4.0 3.2 .56 64 

7 11128194 5:30 3.5 .52 57 

7 11128/94 6:30 3.1 048 44 

7 11/28/94 9:08 lD 7.3 x lO

8 116/95 20:47 9 1.2 x 10

8 1/6/95 20:47 .015 .31 .025 < .0043 

8 116/95 21:47 .68 .019 047 .18 .016 <.0064 3.1 

8 II 6/95 22:47 9 5.6 x 10

8 116/95 22:47 .53 .79 .060 <.020 

8 1/6/95 23:47 .68 042 .98 1.5 Al .10 200 

8 1/7/95 0:47 044 1.2 .56 .12 

8 1/7/95 1:47 4.7 048 104 2.6 .69 .25 480 

8 1/7/95 2:47 .31 104 .60 .36 

111 
Appendix 2. Area-normalized loads (yields) of selected water-quality constituents calculated for samples collected at measurement sites in the 

Toms River drainage basin, New Jersey, May 1994 to October 1995--Continued 

Hydrolyzable 

phosphorus 

plus 

Total Ammonia Organic orthophos- Orthophos- Total 

Date and time 0 f nitrogen (U), (F), Nitrate (CF), nitrogen (C), phorus (U). phorus, suspended 

sample asN asN asN asN asP asP solids Fecal coliform 

Event 2 2 collection 2 2 «lb/d)/me) «lb/d)/mi ) «lb/d)/mi ) ((lb/d)/mi2) «lb/d)/mi ) «lb/d)/mi ) ((lb/d)/mi2) «MPN/d)mi2) 

All samnles collected during stormfiow in the nongrowing season--continued 

Long Swamn Creek at Toms River (LSC2}--continued 

10 3/8/95 22: 14 .53 .015 .0094 

10 3/8/95 23: 14 1.7 x 1010 

10 3/8/95 23: 14 4.2 .53 1.9 1.6 .25 .070 180 

10 3/9/95 0:14 3.2 .32 1.1 1.7 .31 .089 220 

iO 3/9/95 i :14 7.0 .36 i.3 5.2 .67 .i4 600 

10 3/9/95 2:14 .31 

10 3/9/95 3:14 .34 

10 3/9/95 4:14 .25 1.5 .070 

Wrangel Brook near Toms River (WB 1) 

7 11/27/94 23:43 6.9 x 1010 

7 11/27/94 23:43 9.4 .35 6.9 2.1 .29 100 

7 11128/94 0:43 5.5 x 1010 

7 11128/94 0:43 15.1 .45 7.2 7.3 .48 200 

7 11128/94 1:43 7.2 x 1010 

7 11/28/94 1:43 23 .51 7.3 15 .69 380 

7 11/28/94 2:43 7.3 .71 360 

7 11128/94 3:43 16 .52 7.0 8.6 .52 250 

7 11128/94 4:43 7.7 .43 180 

7 11128/94 5:43 8.1 .34 47 

7 11128/94 6:43 16 .81 7.7 7.7 .34 120 

8 1/6/95 20:23 9 8.2 x 10

8 1/6/95 20:23 .058 8.0 .49 < .11 

8 1/6/95 21:23 .059 8.0 .24 < .11 

8 1/6/95 22:23 7.2 x 109 

8 116/95 22:23 .11 8.4 .15 < .12 

8 116/95 23:23 .16 9.1 .27 < .14 

8 1/7/95 0:23 15 .27 10 4.5 .38 < .17 200 

8 1/7/95 1:23 .33 9.9 .35 < .20 

8 1/7/95 2:23 .39 9.4 .86 <.23 

8 1/7/95 3:23 .40 9.5 1.2 <.26 

8 1/7/95 4:23 24 .45 9.5 13 1.3 <.28 410 

8 1/7/95 5:23 .45 9.6 .83 <.28 

8 1/7/95 6:23 .45 9.4 .65 <.27 

8 1/7/95 7:23 16 .23 9.2 6.7 .62 < .25 190 

118 
Appendix 2. Area-normalized loads (yields) of selected water-quality constituents calculated for samples collected at measurement sites in the 

Toms River drainage basin, New Jersey, May 1994 to October 1995--Continued 

Hydro lyzab Ie 

phosphorus 

plus 

Total Ammonia Organic orthophos- Orthophos- Total 

Date and time of nitrogen (U), (F). Nitrate (CF). nitrogen (C), phorus (U), phorus, suspended 

sample asN asN asN asN asP asP solids Fecal coliform 

2 2 2 Event collection ((lb/d)/mi2) ((lb/d)/mi2) «lb/d)/mi ) ((lb/d)/mi2) ( (lb/d)/mi ) «lb/d)/mi ) ((lb/d)/mi2) «MPN/d)mi2) 

All samnles collected during stormflow in the nongrowing season--continued 

Wrangel Brook near Toms River (WB 1 }--continued 

10 3/8/95 22:25 5.0 x 109 

10 3/8/95 22:25 20 .29 9.0 10 .58 .097 2,500 

10 3/8/95 23:25 2.1 x 1010 

10 3/8/95 23:25 19 .62 9.8 8.7 .54 .082 

10 3/9/95 0:25 8.8x 109 

10 3/9/95 0:25 18 .65 7.9 9.8 .23 .10 

10 3/9/95 1:25 21 .52 7.8 12 .44 .092 350 

10 3/9/95 2:25 15 .44 7.5 7.1 .65 .11 

10 3/9/95 3:25 21 .41 7.0 13 .31 .085 

10 3/9/95 4:25 18 .24 160 

Wrangel Brook near South Toms River (WB2) 

7 11/28/94 0:45 7.0 .12 5.6 1.2 .15 130 5.6 x 1010 

7 11128/94 3:20 15 .22 6.6 7.8 .88 230 9.4 x 1010 

7 11/28/94 8:20 9.3 .21 6.4 2.7 < .21 53 lD 5.8 x lO

8 1/7/95 0:00 8.0 .065 6.5 1.4 .13 < .11 60 1.1 x 1010 

8 1/7/95 4:10 13 .25 7.2 6.0 .51 <.21 340 1.7 x 1010 

8 1/7/95 6:12 13 .24 7.9 4.9 .52 <.24 270 1.1 x 1010 

10 3/8/95 21:35 6.3 x 108 

10 3/8/95 21:35 11 <.096 7.3 3.3 < .14 .032 68 

10 3/8/95 22:35 1.4 x 1010 

10 3/8/95 22:35 .17 

10 3/8/95 23:35 1.2 x 1010 

10 3/8/95 23:35 12 .35 6.4 4.8 .27 .047 210 

10 3/9/95 0:35 .40 

10 3/9/95 1:35 11 .35 6.0 4.5 .46 .074 310 

10 3/9/95 2:35 .33 

10 3/9/95 3:35 14 .33 6.6 6.9 .25 .063 180 

119 
Appendix 2. Area-normalized loads (yields) of selected water-quality constituents calculated for samples collected at measurement sites in the 

Toms River drainage basin. New Jersey, May 1994 to October 1995--Continued 

Hydrolyzable 

phosphorus 

plus 

Total Ammonia Organic orthophos- Orthophos- Total 

Date and time 0 f nitrogen (U). (F). Nitrate (CF), nitrogen (C). phoros (U). phorus, suspended 

sample asN asN asN asN asP asP solids Fecal coliform 

Event collection 2 2 ((lb/d)/mi2) ((lb/d)/mi2) ((lb/d)/mi ) «(lb/d)/mP) ( (lb/d)/mi2) ((lb/d)/mi2) ((lb/d)/mi ) «MPN/d)mi2) 

All samn1es collected during stormfiow in the nongrowing season--continued 

Daven120rt Branch near Dover Forge fiB) 

8 1/6/95 19:42 1.6 x 108 

8 1/6/95 19:42 .075 .91 .28 .065 

8 1/6/95 20:42 .076 .91 <.066 .066 

8 1/6/95 21:42 8 4.0 x 10

8 1/6/95 21:42 .078 .92 <.067 .067 

8 1/6/95 22:42 .085 1.0 <.069 .069 

8 1/6/95 23:42 2.0 .094 .99 .88 <.072 .072 15 

8 1/7/95 0:42 .099 1.2 <.076 .076 

8 1/7/95 1:42 2.4 .094 1.1 1.2 <.082 .082 33 

8 1/7/95 2:42 .11 1.2 <.086 .086 

8 1/7/95 3:42 2.6 .068 1.11 1.4 <.089 .089 27 

8 1/7/95 4:42 .082 1.1 < .089 .089 

8 1/7/95 5:42 .06 1.1 <.089 .089 

8 1/7/95 6:42 .11 1.2 <.090 .090 

10 3/8/95 21:30 7 3.5 x 10

10 3/8/95 21:30 3.3 .061 .61 2.6 <.050 .019 

10 3/9/95 1:30 8 2.4 x 10

10 3/9/95 1:30 3.2 .068 .61 2.5 <.052 .016 

10 3/9/95 4:00 7 7.3 x 10

10 3/9/95 5:30 3.6 .10 .66 2.8 <.054 19 

10 3/9/95 9:30 2.8 .082 .71 2.0 <.056 20 

10 3/9/95 13:30 5.3 .067 .75 4.5 .071 120 

1 Samples collected to verifY that water quality at site WB2 and at a location 1,000 feet upstream from the site were similar. 

2Duplicate sample collected to evaluate sampling effectiveness. 

3Grab samples collected rrianually for comparison with samples collected with the automatic samplers. 

4 Composite samples collected manually for comparison with samples collected with the automatic samplers. 

SNitrate plus nitrite (U) used to calculate organic nitrogen (C). 

120