Estuarine Studies in 

Upper Grays Harbor 

Washington

GEOLOGICAL SURVEY WATER-SUPPLY PAPER 1873-B

Prepared in cooperation with 

the Washington State Pollution 

Control Commission
Estuarine Studies in 

Upper Grays Harbor 

Washington

By JOSEPH P. BEVERAGE and MILTON N. SWECKER

ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY

GEOLOGICAL SURVEY WATER-SUPPLY PAPER 1873-B

Prepared in cooperation with 

the Washington State Pollution 

Control Commission

UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE, WASHINGTON: 1969
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

WALTER J. HICKEL, Secretary

GEOLOGICAL SURVEY 

William T. Pecora, Director

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office 

Washington, D.C. 20402 - Price 45 cents (paper cover)
CONTENTS

Page

Abstract__________._._.._______._._._._.____..__..._..._ Bl

Introduction. _____________________________________________________ 2

Acknowledgments _____________________________________________ 4

Previous investigations.._______________________________________ 4

Hydrology______________________________________________________ 6

Fresh water_________________________________________________ 6

Tides_____-_____--___-______--____-____---___-_____----__--__ 12

Hydraulics of the estuary._________________________________________ 16

Velocity______________________________________________________ 17

Salinity distribution.___________________________________________ 28

Dye studies_________________________________________________ 41

Summary of estuary hydraulics.________________________________ 53

Bottom materials...-__-__________-_____-____--____-______--____-__ 57

Sample collection..____________________________________________ 58

Particle size and composition___________________________________ 59

Dissolved-oxygen demand._____________________________________ 69

Summary of bottom materials_________________________________ 73

Water quality___________________________________________________ 74

Salinity-___________._______.--___.________ 74

Dissolved oxygen______________________________________________ 78

Pollutants________________________-._____ 83

Summary of water quality..______________----________--____--__ 84

References cited_________________________________________________ 85

Index._-___-.____-_________-___--_________-___-_____-----__.-__ 89

ILLUSTKATIONS

Page 

FIGURE 1. Sketch map of Grays Harbor._______________________ B3

2-9. Graphs showing:

2. Annual mean discharges of Chehalis, Satsop, and 

Wynoochee Rivers, for periods of record1 

through water year 1965.___________________ 7

3. Monthly mean discharges of Chehalis, Satsop, 

and Wynoochee Rivers, and monthly precipitation at Aberdeen, for water year 1965_____ 8

4. Estimated daily discharge of Chehalis River at

Hoquiam during calendar years 1965 and 1966_ 9

5. Flow-duration curves for Chehalis, Satsop, and 

Wynoochee Rivers for period of record through 

water year 1964_________________________ 10

ir
IV CONTENTS

FIGURES 2-9. Graphs showing Continued Page

6. Estimated flow-duration curve for Chehalif River

at Hoquiam for period 1930-65______________ Bll

7. Cumulative-frequency curves for predictei tides

at Port Dock, 1966_________ _. ____ 13

8. Longitudinal variation of cumulative volume of

the upper harbor_________________________ 14

9. Relation between volume of upper harbor and

tidal stage at Port Dock ____________________ 15

10-13. Graphs showing mean velocities and predicted tidal 

stages at:

10. Selected sites during the period May 18-19,

1966_______________________ 18

11. Selected sites during the period Septeml <?r 14-

16, 1966__________________________.______ 19

12. Chehalis River 0.5 mile downstream from the

Wishkah River on October 27-28, 1966_.____ 20

13. Selected sites during the period Novemt ^r 29-

December 3, 1966_______________________ 21

14-16. Graphs showing point velocities at 20 and 80 percent of 

total depth at:

14. Selected sites during the period September 14-

16, 1966________-_____-______-_-___-____- 22

15. Chehalis River 0.5 nautical mil.! downstream

from Wishkah River on Ocxobei 27-28, 1966. 23

16. Selected sites during the period November 29-

December 3, 1966___-__-____-____-____-- 24 

17-21. Graphs showing:

17. Difference between velocities at 20 and 80 

percent of total depth in the Chehali^ River 

0.5 nautical mile downstream from the Wishkah River on October 27-28, 1966_ _ _ ____ 25

18. Relation between rate of change of tidal stage 

and mean velocity in the vertical at mean 

time________--___----_----__-_____- 27

19. Relation between rate of change of tidal stage 

and mean velocity in the vertical at mean 

time plus 30 minutes._____________________ 28

20. Longitudinal variation of harbor cross-s?ctional

area.____________________________________ 29

21. Relation between vertical salinity-increment

ratio at Cow Point and fresh-water discharge. _ 30 

22-24. Graphs showing longitudinal variation of mean salinity 

at high- and low-water slack on:

22. Four days in April, May, and August ^"fl..... 32

23. Three days in August, September, and October

1966_______________________________ 33

24. Three days in October and November lf%___ 34 

25-34, Graphs showing:

25. Predicted longitudinal variation of mean salinity 

at mean high water for various fresh-water 

discharges_______________________________ 35
CONTENTS V

FIGURES 25-34. Graphs showing Continued Page

26. Longitudinal variation of exponents W and W

on August 19, 1966_______________ B36

27. Relation between fresh-water discharge and longitudinal-dispersion coefficients_____________ 38

28. Longitudinal variation of the cumulative mean

age of fresh water at various discharges______ 39

29. Comparison of computed and predicted values 

for cumulative mean age of fresh water at 

various discharges_______________________ 40

30. Longitudinal variation of cumulative traveltime of fresh water, computed at various 

discharges. __ _____________________________ 42

31. Relation between tidal range and average distance of half-cycle salinity excursion_ ______ 43

32. Excursion distances of peak dye concentration

at various fresh-water discharges.___________ 44

33. Farthest excursion distances of peak dye concentration during floodtide for various dyeinjection sites..___________________________ 45

34. Farthest excursion distances of peak dye concentration for various dye-injection sites during ebbtide___-_____-__________-__________ 46

35-39. Graphs showing relation between excursion distance of 

peak dye concentration and time after high tide:

35. At Hoquiam for surface and bottom injection?

under similar conditions__________________ 47

36. At Hoquiam for a surface injection.___________ 48

37. At Hoquiam for a bottom injection.___________ 49

38. At Hoquiam for two surface injections.________ 50

39. At Cosmopolis for a surface injection._-_-___.- 51 

40-47. Graphs showing relation between excursion distance of 

peak dye concentration and time after low tide at 

Hoquiam:

40. For two surface injections in the south channel

0.5 mile downstream from Cow Point _____ 52

41. For a surface injection in the north channel 0.2 

mile upstream from the Hoquiam River on 

June 3, 1966__.___._.--______-..--.._-_-- 53

42. For a bottom injection in the north channel 0.2 

mile upstream from the Hoquiam River on 

July 19, 1966----------------------------- 54

43. For a surface injection in the north channel 0.2 

mile upstream from the Hoquiam River on 

October 12, 1966.____---___--------_. ----- 55

44. For a surface injection in the north channel 7.3 

miles upstream from the harbor entrance on 

October 14, 1966_ _._. __ - 56

45. For a surface injection at Cow Point on November 27, 1966-_---_--_-_-______--_-------- 57
VI CONTENTS

FIGURES 40-47. Graphs showing relation, etc.. Continued Page

46. For surface injections in the mouths of the 

Wishkah and Hoquiam Rivers on August 17, 

1965-_-_-.___._______.__.._.___.___._.__ B58

47. For several surface injections on August 18, 1965- 59 

48. Map showing cross sections and individual midchannel

sites sampled for bottom sediments.________________ 60

49-53. Graphs showing:

49. Longitudinal distribution of carbon content of

bottom materials-______-____----__________ 68

50. Comparison of longitudinal variations of carbon 

content of channel-bottom materials and 

dissolved-oxygen content of harbor water. _ _ 70

51. Relation between chemical oxygen demard and

carbon content of bottom materials________ 71

52. Relation between carbon content and amount 

of fine sediment for main channel bottom 

materials _________________________________ 72

53. Relation between salinity intrusion and freshwater discharge at high tides ranging from 

6.5 to 11.5 feet..___._______._-.__.__._. 75

54-55. Graphs showing fluctuations of specific conductance, 

dissolved oxygen, and tidal stage on July 2, 1966:

54. At the Cosmopolis monitor.._________________ 76

55. At the Hoquiam monitor..___________________ 77

TABLES

Page 

TABLE 1. Drainage areas of streams tributary to Grays Hart or_ __ B7

2. Altitudes of tidal reference planes at Port Dock and

Point Chehalis_____--__---__---___-------__------ 12

3. Tidal separation distances computed from At/-________ 26

4. Particle-size analyses of the coarse fraction of Grays

Harbor bottom-material samples collected in June 1966. 61

5. Particle-size analyses of composited fine fractions of 

Grays Harbor bottom-material samples collected in 

June 1966__----_---------_---____------__.___. 64

6. Carbon content of bottom-material samples, Grays

Harbor_-________--___ _________- _- --_-- 64

7. Mean values and standard deviations of daily marimum 

and minimum automatic-water-quality-monitor data 

for the period May through September 1966.________ 79

8. Correlation matrix for daily maximum and minimum 

automatic-water-quality-monitor data for the period 

May through September 1966-_-__----------------- 80
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY

ESTUARINE STUDIES IN UPPER GRAYS HARBCR 

WASHINGTON

By JOSEPH P. BEVERAGE and MILTON N. SWECKER

ABSTRACT

Improved management of the water resources of Grays Harbor, Wash., requires 

more data on the water quality of the harbor and a better understanding of the 

influences of industrial and domestic wastes on the local fisheries resources. To 

provide a more comprehensive understanding of these influences, the U.S. Geological Survey joined other agencies in a cooperative study of Grays Harbor. 

This report summarizes the Survey's study of circulation patterns, descriDtion of 

water-quality conditions, and characterization of bottom material in the upper 

harbor.

Salt water was found to intrude at least as far as Montesano, 28.4 nautical miles 

from the mouth of the harbor. Longitudinal salinity distributions were used to 

compute dispersion (diffusivity) coefficients ranging from 842 to 3,520 square 

feet per second. These values were corroborated by half-tidal-cycle dye studies. 

The waters of the harbor were found to be well mixed after extended periods of 

low fresh-water flow but stratified at high flows. Salinity data were used to define 

the cumulative "mean age" of the harbor water, which may be used to approximate a mean "flushing time."

Velocity-time curves for the upper harbor are distorted from simple harmonic 

functions owing to channel geometry and frictional effects. Surface and bottom 

velocity data were used to estimate net tidal "separation" distance, neglecting 

vertical mixing. Net separation distances between top and bottom water ranged 

from 1.65 nautical miles when fresh-water inflow was 610 cubic feet per second to 

13.4 miles when inflow was 15,900 cubic feet per second. The cumulative mean age 

from integration of the fresh-water velocity equation was about twice that obtained from the salinity distribution.

Excursion distances obtained with dye over half-tidal cycles exceeded those 

estimated from longitudinal salinity distributions and those obtained by earlier 

investigators who used floats. Net tidal excursions were as much as twice those 

obtained with floats.

The carbon content of bottom materials was related to channel fine material:

C=0.315 + 0.0238 F

where C is in percent by dry weight, and F is percent by weight finer than 0.062 

millimeter. Carbon content was low upstream and downstream of the uppe" harbor

Bl
B2 ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY

area, and high in the Cow Point-Rennie Island reach. The high-carbon-content 

reach coincides with the general area of a dissolved-oxygen sag.

The logarithm of the fresh-water discharge gave a high degree of correlation 

with daily maximum specific conductance at Cosmopolis. The regression equation 

is:

#Cma*=76.4-l7.71ogioQ/

where Kcm** is in millimhos at 25° Celsius (centigrade), and Q/ is the estimated 

daily fresh-water discharge, in cubic feet per second.

Dissolved oxygen is the most critical water-quality parameter in Grays Harbor. 

At Cosmopolis, the daily minimum dissolved oxygen content, DOcmin, correlated 

well with discharge and tidal range, AJEf. The regression equation relating the variables is:

DOCmi n= 6.03 + 0.00096 Q/-0.291A#

in which DOcmin is in milligrams per liter and AJEf is in feet.

The upper harbor was found to contain 250 million cubic feet less water than 

average during the critical low-flow period, on the basis of the frequency distribution of predicted tides. About 78,000 pounds of dissolved oxygen if thus unavailable for oxidation of waste during summer.

INTRODUCTION

Grays Harbor is a large estuary on the Pacific coast of Washington, 

roughly 50 miles north of the Columbia River and about the same 

distance west of Olympia, the State capital. The harbor entrance is 

formed by two long, low sand spits (fig. 1). These spits are the western 

boundaries of the North and South Bays. The upper harbor, which 

is the area described in this report, connects the Chehalh River with 

the lower harbor and the North and South Bays. Most field data were 

collected in the area extending from Montesano on the east to the 

confluence of the North arid South Channels on the wept, a channel 

distance of about 22 nautical miles.

Wood-products industries have dominated the economic activity 

in the harbor area since the late 1800's. The lumber, plywood, and 

pulpmills use harbor waters only for log storage and effluent disposal, 

whereas the fish and shellfish industries require relatively unpolluted 

harbor waters.

Several instances of dead or distressed fish have occurred in the 

upper harbor in the past 40 years. Most kills have beQ,n found to 

coincide with extremely low dissolved oxygen, although low pH 

played a part in early fish kills (Eriksen and Townsend, 1940).

The present investigation developed from a common desire of 

private, State, and Federal groups to investigate more, thoroughly 

the pollution problem in Grays Harbor. The common objective of 

the group was to determine the basic water-quality conditions, the 

factors influencing the water quality, and the effects of this environment on the aquatic organisms.
fHumptuIips River

Hoquiam

Aberdeen 

FIGURE 1. Sketch map of Grays Harbor. Dots are spaced at 1-mile intervals, start

theses indicate navigation-channel distances upstream from mouth. Numbers i

from State Highway 107 bridge south of Montesano. Shaded areas indicate tida

detic Survey Chart 6195, 59th ed., March 21, 1966.
B4 ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY

By cooperative agreement between the U.S. Geological Survey and 

the Washington State Pollution Control Commission, the U.S. Geological Survey led the investigations of the physical and chemical 

water-quality conditions, estuary hydraulics, and bottom material.

The scope of the Survey's investigation was limited to describing 

the general circulation and water-quality conditions of the water 

mass and the influence of bottom materials on the water-quality 

conditions. The description of circulation involved determination of 

the movement and dispersive characteristics of the water mass by 

means of dye, current-meter, and salinity studies. The description of 

the water's quality was primarily an assessment of longitudinal 

salinity distributions and of the record from two automatic waterquality monitors, which recorded water temperature, specific conductivity, and dissolved oxygen. The influence of bottom materials 

on water-quality conditions was to be determined indirectly by relating carbon content of the materials to their chenrical oxygen 

demand.

The Pollution Control Commission led the investigations of fish 

migration and distribution, determined the amount and quality of 

industrial and domestic wastes entering the upper harbor, and determined the relative magnitude of wastes supplied ty tributary 

streams.

Other agencies associated with the study, and their arers of investigation, were the Washington State Department of Fisheries (phytoplankton and productivity studies), the Washington State Department of Game (compilation of fish migration records from prior 

studies), and the Weyerhaeuser Co. (respiration of bottom materials 

and supplemental water-quality data collection).

A composite report will be released informally by the Pollution Control Commission. The Geological Survey's contribution to the investigation is reported here more formally and in greater detail than in the 

composite report.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The U.S. Geological Survey's segment of the investigation was carried on under the supervision of L. B. Laird, Washington district 

chief, Water Resources Division. The writers gratefully acknowledge 

the cooperation of the Pollution Control Commission (R. M. Harris, 

Director) and the assistance given by E. H. Olson and D. R. Fisher of 

the Weyerhaeuser Co., Cosmopolis.

PREVIOUS INVESTIGATIONS

Eriksen and Townsend (1940) reported on studies conducted by the 

Pollution Control Commission during 1938-39. They outlined the
E'STUARINE STUDIES IN UPPER GRAYS HARBOR, WASH. B5

sources of pollution and observed several instances of distressed and 

dead fish, shrimp, and crabs. The only pulp mill on the harbor r,t that 

time, owned by Rayonier, Inc., was found to contribute most of the 

waste effluent to the harbor, in terms of BOD (biochemical oxygen 

demand). Sulfite waste liquor, the principal mill pollutant, was shown 

to be harmful to fish in the laboratory and to cause a large depletion of 

available dissolved oxygen. By utilizing longitudinal chlorinity distributions at low-river flow and upper harbor volumes, they calculated a 

1.2-percent exchange of water each tide (from mean higher high water 

to mean lower low water) in the upper harbor. Minimum diseolvedoxygen concentrations, in percent of saturation, were then related (p. 

45-46) to fresh-water discharges less than 4,000 cfs (cubic feet per 

second). No BOD analyses of harbor inflow were given, although an 

estimated BOD loading of 7,500 pounds per day was given (p. 16), 

based on untreated domestic sewage per capita upstream. The estimate 

of BOD loading contributed by the mill was 260,000 pounds per day. 

Bottom muds were found to have an effect on the dissolved oxygen 

only if the muds were disturbed and became mixed with harbor voters.

The Pollution Control Commission has investigated conditions in 

Grays Harbor several times since 1939. Orlob, Jones, and Peterson 

(1951) studied water conditions and water use relative to the effect of 

domestic and industrial waste effluent. More than 86 percent of the 

organic waste load during low-river flow was attributed to sulfite waste 

material. Reportedly, a dissolved-oxygen level of 5.0 mg/1 (milligrams 

per liter), considered critical to fish, was reached when sulfite waste 

liquor concentration reached 40 mg/1, and water temperature exceeded 18°C (Celsius). For temperatures from 14° to 18°C, the critical 

dissolved-oxygen level was reported to have been reached when sulfite 

waste liquor concentration was about 60 mg/1. To improve dissolvedoxygen conditions in the harbor, they concluded, waste-liquor 

recovery efficiencies would have to be improved and waste-liquor discharge would have to be regulated according to ability of waters to 

assimilate those wastes. Also, the coliform concentration due to domestic sewage wastes had exceeded the recommended Public Health Service water-quality standard a maximum of 1,000 coliforms per 100 

milliliters for the culture of shellfish. Restrictions were subsequently 

placed on the quantities of fish and shellfish that could be taken within 

the harbor.

Later Pollution Control Commission investigations of Grays Harbor 

were those by Peterson (1953) and by Peterson, Wagner, and 

Livingston (1957). The 1953 survey was made to determine any 

improvement in bacteriological quality of harbor waters, and the 1957 

survey was made to determine water-quality conditions prior to
B6 ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY

completion of the harbor's second pulp mill, which wa<* being built 

by the Weyerhaeuser Co. The 1957 report noted that sulfite waste 

liquor affects salmonids by lowering the dissolved oxygen to critical 

levels and by increasing toxicity. Toxic effects were not considered 

critical until sulfite waste liquor concentrations were so high that the 

lowered dissolved-oxygen level already was injurious to the salmonids. 

During the 1956 low-flow period, the area of low dissolved oxygen 

existed from Cosmopolis to the Hoquiam River. The most critical 

area extended from the Wishkah River to Cosmopolis, and the conditions were worst at approximately high tide.

A thorough survey of the literature of Grays Harbor through 1954 

was prepared by Bader, McLellan, and others (1955). Their report 

provides abstracted material for the reader and gives tl e location of 

unpublished material.

A model study of effluent distribution in Grays Harbor was 

described by Bialkowsky and Billington (1957). They found that a 

sevenfold reduction of the waste concentration could be expected by 

locating the proposed Weyerhaeuser Co. effluent outfall in the Cow 

Point reach, as opposed to an outfall at Cosmopolis. They found a 

slight advantage in limiting effluent discharge to ebbing tide.

Pearson and Holt (1960) documented several examples of low 

dissolved-oxygen concentrations at the harbor entrance during summer 

floodtides. The low concentrations were associated with low water 

temperatures, and thus were considered to be the result of occasional 

summertime upwelling of oxygen-poor oceanic water off the coast. 

They estimated a deficiency of 1,700 tons of oxygen (less than saturation) in incoming water during one tidal cycle in 1956. Although not 

all of this deficit would occur in upper harbor waters, they pointed 

out the need for considering the actual dissolved oxygen of the ocean 

water when figuring oxygen balances in estuaries.

HYDROLOGY

This section of the report gives a general background for the more 

specific sections that follow. Spatial and temporal distribution of 

fresh-water discharge are discussed first; then tides, tidal characteristics, and tidal influence are discussed.

FRESH WATER

Fresh water from four rivers passes through Grays Harbor. The 

Chehalis River, the largest, drains about 80 percent of the area 

tributary to the harbor. Tributary drainage areas are given in table 1 

(Richardson, 1962). Only the Chehalis, Wishkah, and Hoiuiam Rivers 

drain directly into the project area. The other streams given in the 

table probably have only a slight effect on upper harbor hydraulic
ESTUARINE STUDIES IN UPPER GRAYS HARBOR, WASH. B7

TABLE 1. Drainage areas of streams tributary to Grays Harbor

Drainage

r .. area Location (sq mi)

Chehalis River above Wishkah River, at Aberdeen._______________ 2, 012

Satsop River at gaging station near mouth.________________ 299

Wynoochee River at U.S. Highway 410 near mouth.____ _ _ 185

Wishkah River at mouth, U.S. Highway 410 at Aberdeen.___________ 102

Hoquiam River at mouth, U.S. Highway 101 at Hoquiam____________ 90. 2

Humptulips River near mouth, at State Highway 9C________________ 245

Johns River near mouth, at State Highway 13A_____________________ 31. 3

Elk River at mouth___----------------_---_---_-_______________ 18. 2

Miscellaneous tributaries_________________________________________ 51. 4

Total____________________________________________________ 2, 550. 1

and water-quality characteristics. The effects of the other streams 

have been ignored in this study.

The Chehalis River is not gaged below Porter. Porter is 14 miles 

upstream from Montesano, which is at the eastern end of the esfriary. 

The Satsop River joins the Chehalis about 6 miles upstream from 

the State Highway 107 bridge at Montesano. The Wynoochee River 

enters the Chehalis about 300 yards downstream from the same 

bridge. The annual mean discharges at Porter and at the farthest 

downstream gaging stations on the Wynoochee and Satsop Bivers 

for the periods of record are given in figure 2. The similarity of runoff 

response is evident.

Wynoochee River

1930 1940 1950 

WATER YEAR

1960

FIGTJEE 2. Annual mean discharges of Chehalis River at Porter, Satsop River 

near Satsop, and Wynoochee River above Save Creek, for periods of record 

through water year 1965.
B8 ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY

The monthly mean discharges for the same three stations for water 

year 1965 are given in figure 3. Note that all three stations record 

minimal flow during July, August, and September. The monthly 

precipitation pattern for water year 1965 is also given in figure 3 

(U.S. Weather Bureau, 1966, p. 231). Surface runoff is obviously 

related to precipitation similarly in the three watersheds. The estiOct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May June July Aug Sept 

1964 1965

FIGURE 3. Monthly mean discharges of Chehalis River at Porter, Satsop River 

near Satsop, and Wynoochee River above Save Creek, and monthly precipitation at Aberdeen, for water year 1965.
ESTUARINE STUDIES IN UPPER GRAYS HARBOR, WASH. B9

Jan Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec

FIGURE 4. Estimated daily discharge of Chehalis River at Hoquiam during 

calendar years 1965 and 1966.

mated composite daily discharges at Hoquiam for calendar years 

1965 and 1966 are shown in figure 4. The discharges of the Chehalis 

River near Grand Mound (about 18 miles upstream from Porter), 

the Satsop River near Satsop, and the Wynoochee River below 

Black Creek near Montesano (about 20 miles downstream from 

Save Creek) were estimated from gage-height readings, usually 

taken once daily at 0800 P.s.t. No effort was made to adjust the 

values for traveltime differences, but a 40-percent increase war made 

to account for the increase in drainage areas of the Wishks,h and 

Hoquiam Rivers, which are not gaged. The discharges are thus an 

estimate of fresh water which flowed into the upper harbor during 

this study. Throughout the study these discharges were taken as the 

fresh-water discharge, usually as daily values but sometimes averaged
BIO ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY

over several days. As noted above, low flow (less than 1,000 cfs) 

typically occurred during July, August, September, and the first 

part of October. This same pattern was followed in both years.

The flow-duration curves for the period of record through 1964 

are given in figure 5 for the same three stations used in figures 2 and 3.

10,000

y 1000 -

100

1 5 10 20 50 80 90 95 99 

PERCENTAGE OF TIME GIVEN DISCHARGE WAS EQUALED OR EXCEEDED

99.9

FIGURE 5. Flow-duration curves for Chehalis River at Porter, Satsop River near 

Satsop, and Wynoochee River above Save Creek, for period of record through 

water year 1964.

Although the curves have not been combined into a composite graph, 

the similar shapes and slopes of the curves add further corroboration 

for similarity of watershed response to precipitation. Moreover, the 

similarity of shape allows use of the Satsop curve with 36 years of 

record for estimating low-flow frequency of the entire basin. For the 

concurrent period of annual mean flow used in figure 2, 1953-65, the 

Satsop River flow was 29.1 percent of total mean flow. The Satsop 

River discharges were obtained from figure 5 for frequencies of 99.7, 

86.3, 72.6, 67.1, 61.6, and 58.9 percent (corresponding to 1, 10, 50, 

100, 120, 140, and 150 days per year, respectively). The^e discharges 

were then converted to an equivalent composite Chehalis River
ESTUARINE STUDIES IN UPPER GRAYS HARBOR, WASH. Bll

discharge by dividing by 0.291. The resulting values are plotted in 

figure 6. This curve is the trend for the period of record only, however,

3000

2500 -

2000 -

1500 -

I 1000 -

AVERAGE NUMBER OF DAYS EACH YEAR DISCHARGE 

LESS THAN INDICATED MEASUREMENT

FIGURE 6. Estimated flow-duration curve for Chehalis River at 

Hoquiam for period 1930-65.

322-777 O «9 3
B12 ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY

and projection of the curve to future periods should be made with 

caution. From the curve, fresh-water flow less than 1,000 cfs occurred 

43 days per year, on the average.

TIDES

The tides along the Washington coast are of the mixed type a 

higher and lower high tide each lunar day as well as a higher and lower 

low tide. The mean and diurnal tidal ranges are 6.9 and 9.0 feet, 

respectively, at the harbor entrance at Point Chehalis (U.S. Coast 

and Geodetic Survey, 1965). These same values increase to 7.8 and 

9.9 feet at Aberdeen, and then decrease to 6.7 and 8.1 fe°it at Montesano. Tidal terms used in this report are as follows: MTL (mean 

tide level), MHW (mean high water), MHHW (mean higher high 

water), MLW (mean low water), and MLLW (mean lower low water). 

The mean range is defined as the difference in stage between MHW 

and MLW, and the diurnal range is defined as the difference between 

MHHW and MLLW. MLLW is the standard datum for the U.S. 

Coast and Geodetic Survey Chart 6195, and for figure 1.

Altitudes of various tidal planes for Point Chehalis and Port Dock 

are given in table 2. Port Dock values were used as reference planes

TABLE 2. Altitudes, in feet above mean lower low water, of tidal 

reference planes at Port Dock and Point Chehalis, Grays Harbor

[Data from U.S. Coast and Geodetic Survey, 1958, 1965]

Tidal plane Port Dock Point C'lehalis

Highest tide.. _______ _____

MHHW __

MHW. ____________________

Mean tide level _

MLW ____ . ___ . ___ _

MLLW. ___________________

Lowest tide- _ _____________

__________ 15.2

9. 90

____________ 9.20

____________ 5.30

_________ _ 1. 40

. 00

_-___-__--._ -2.9

14. 0±0. 5

9. 00

8. 30

4. ?5

1.40

. 00

-3. 0±0. 5

for this study throughout the upper harbor. During the summer 

months, however, these reference planes are not accurate. This is 

shown in figure 7 which gives cumulative-frequency curves computed 

from 1966 predicted tides at Port Dock (U.S. Coast and Geodetic 

Survey, 1965, p. 90-93). Median high- and low-tide stages for the 

full year are about half a foot higher than similar values for the 

3-month low fresh-water flow period, July-September. The median 

values (equaled or exceeded by 50 percent of the tides) are 9.3 and 

8.9 feet for high tide, and 1.6 and 1.1 feet for low tide, respectively. 

A plot of cumulative volume of the upper harbor with distance 

downstream from Montesano is given in figure 8. Tidal reference 

planes (MHW, MTL, and MLW) used in this figure are approximately
ESTUARINE STUDIES IN UPPER GRAYS HARBOR, WASH. B13

14

12

High tides

04-

2 -

0 -

Low tides

-2

10 20 50 80 90 95 99 

PERCENTAGE OF TIDES EQUALING OR EXCEEDING GIVEN STAGE

99.9

FIGURE 7. Cumulative-frequency curves for predicted tides at Port Dock, 

1966. Solid and dashed lines indicate relations for entire year and for July 

through September, respectively.

those for Port Dock. The mean tidal prism, more accurately the 

intertidal volume, is simply the difference between MHW volume 

and MLW volume, rather than the measured volume entering the 

harbor on a mean floodtide (Ippen and Harleman, 1961, p. 46). 

The volumes in figure 8 were computed by Pollution Control Commission personnel from a joint-agency hydrographic survey of the 

upper harbor made in February and March 1966. The steepness of 

the curves downstream from mile 14 reflect the shallow tideflat 

geometry typical of the harbor. As tidal waters move in and out of 

Grays Harbor, large expanses of tidal flats are exposed and re-covered. 

Eriksen and Townsend (1940, p. 29) estimated the water-surface 

area to be between 40 square miles at MLLW and 99 square miles at 

MHW. The intermediate 59 square miles of tidal flats plays an important role in the movement, mixing, and reaeration of harbor 

waters as tides ebb and flood. Much of this area is between 1 and 2 

feet above MLLW. An order-of-magnitude estimate for the total
B14 ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY

7 -

6 

5 -

4 -

3 -

2 -

24 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 

CHANNEL DISTANCE DOWNSTREAM FROM MONTESANO, IN NAUTICA'. MILES

22

FIGURE 8. Longitudinal variation of cumulative volume of the upper harbor.

volume in the upper harbor can be made from figure 9. The half a 

foot difference in median tide stage mentioned earlier represents a 

volume of 250 million cubic feet less water during the summer 

months July, August, and September. Thus, about 3 percent less
ESTUARINE STUDIES IN UPPER GRAYS HARBOR, WASH. B15

12

11

10

-2

-3

T I

Mean higher high water 

Mean high water

Mean tide level

EXPLANATION

Tidal planes 

- Tidal reference plane

_. _ Calendar year 1966 

 July-September 1966

2345678 

HARBOR VOLUME, IN BILLIONS OF CUBIC FEET

10

FIGURE 9. Relation between volume of upper harbor and tidal stage at Port 

Dock. Volumes were computed for reach between 8 and 28.4 miles above the 

mouth (fig. 1).

water would be available for dilution at MHW, and 7 percent less 

at MLW.
B16 ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY

The tidal wave moves slowly up the estuary. The high-tide 

stage requires 29 minutes to reach Aberdeen from the harbor entrance, 

and another 1 hour and 24 minutes to reach Montesano (U.S. Coast 

and Geodetic Survey, 1965, p. 173). The passage of low tide is similar 

but slower.

The upstream boundary of an estuarine investigation is usually 

defined by the objectives of that investigation. In sediment-transport 

studies, for instance, the upstream boundary is the farthest upstream 

point that the tides influence streamflow, causing backwater. For some 

studies, the upstream limit of flow reversal is a more critical factor; 

the limit of flow reversal on the Chehalis River is several miles upstream from Montesano over most of the range of discharge. In this 

study, the limit of tidal influence is defined as the point of the farthest 

upstream intrusion of salt water; most investigators use this limit to 

define an estuary.

In estuarine pollution studies, the pollutants are usually expected 

to mix and disperse with salt water in the same manner as the fresh 

water mixes with the salt water. The farthest salt-water intrusion into 

the Chehalis is only a short distance upstream from the Montesano 

highway bridge at low flow. For fresh-water discharges greater than 

50,000 cfs, this salt-water intrusion extends only to Cosmopolis.

The hydrology of Grays Harbor, then, is largely influenced by 

fresh-water inflow and by the tides. Runoff from the Chehalis River 

basin constitutes the major inflow of fresh water, especially to the 

upper harbor. During the period of this study, the 3-month low-flow 

period coincided with a 3-month low-tidal-stage period; thus, the 

volume available for dilution of municipal and industrial wastes was 

reduced.

HYDRAULICS OF THE ESTUARY

The rate of removal of pollutants from an estuary depends mainly 

upon the degree of mixing taking place within the harbor, the degradation rate of the pollutants, the proportion of the harbor volume 

renewed each tidal cycle, and the net seaward velocity of the fresh 

water. In some instances, deposition and chemical precipitation are 

also important processes for removal of pollutants. The rate of pollutant degradation is determined by the nature of the pollutant and 

the estuary environment. The degree of mixing depends on the location of the effluent outfall, estuary geometry (large-scale circulation 

patterns), and the hydraulic characteristics of the estuary. In this 

section of the report, velocity and salinity data collected during this 

investigation are presented and dye studies are summarized. Also, 

several theoretical and empirical expressions that predict longitudinal 

salinity distributions are evaluated.
ESTUARINE STUDIES IN UPPER GRAYS HARBOR, WASH. B17

VELOCITY

The velocity of water in a well-mixed estuary at any given time 

depends on harbor geometry, tidal amplitude, fresh-water discharge, 

and the influence of bottom sediments. Velocity is usually considered 

to be a harmonic function of time which is modified by frictional 

effects. Fresh-water discharge increases ebb currents and reduces flood 

currents. The time lag between high tide and high slack water (zero 

surface velocity) decreases with increasing discharge. The low-tide 

lag increases with increasing discharge.

Velocity data were obtained over several 13- to 14-hour periods 

and one 25-hour period in 1966. All data were obtained from a boat 

moored at the edge of the navigation channel. Velocities were measured with a Price current meter at six points in the vertical: at either 

0.5 or 1.0 foot from the surface; at 0.2, 0.4, 0.6, and 0.8 of the depth 

(Z>); and either 1.0 or 1.5 feet from the bottom. Vertical traverses 

usually were made 4-10 minutes apart for most of the period. The 

mean velocity was computed for each vertical series by averaging the 

velocities at 0.2, 0.4, 0.6, and 0.8 of the depth. Mean velocities are 

shown in figures 10-13, along with a tidal-stage curve drawn from the 

predicted values (U.S. Coast and Geodetic Survey, 1965, p. 90-93).

Within the upper harbor, maximum mean velocities in the vertical 

vary from about 3 fps (feet per second) on floodtides to about 4.5 fps 

on ebbtides. The magnitude of these velocities is dependent on tidal 

stage, range of tides, fresh-water discharge, and location within 

the estuary.

The mean-velocity curves are distorted from a simple hrrmonic 

function. Similar distortion has been noted on the Delaware River 

(Miller, 1962, p. 5, 11-12) and on the Waccasassa River (Ftelzenmueller, 1965, p. 35). Although these authors make no comment on 

the distortion, the truncation of the cosine curve is most likely attributable to channel geometry and frictional effects. The occurrence of 

the maximum velocity shortly after the change of tide is evidently a 

characteristic of upper Grays Harbor velocity-time curves.

The 0.2 velocity (velocity at 20 percent of total depth, or 0.2Z>) is 

representative of the motion of the upper layer of water, and, likewise, the 0.8 velocity is representative of the motion of the bottom 

layer. Individual measurements of the 0.2 and 0.8 velocities for a 

range of fresh-water discharge are plotted against time in figures 

14-16. Near low tide in most of the examples, the bottom water 

reverses first, followed after an interval by the reversal of the upper 

water. Near high tide the opposite is true. On flooding ticSs, 0.2 

velocities are sometimes larger, sometimes smaller, and oftec about 

the same as 0.8 velocities. On ebbing tides, the 0.2 velocities are always 

greater.
B18 ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY

0

0600

_ Tidal stage

0

0700

 Tidal stageMAY 18, 1966

 North channel 0.2 mile ups*ream _ 

from Hoquiam River

 Cow Point

A South channel about one mile 

downstream from Cow Point

Fresh-water discharge 3000 cfs

0700 0800 0900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 1600 170C 1800 1900

MAY 19, 1966

I I I

 North channel 0.5 mile downs'ream 

from Hoquiam River

 North channel 0.2 mile upstream

from Hoquiam River 

A Hoquiam River 02 mile upstream

from mouth

Fresh-water discharge 2600 cfs 

____ I I I I I

0800 0900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 1600 1700 1800 

PACIFIC STANDARD TIME

1900 2000

FIOUBE 10. Mean velocities and predicted tidal stages at selected sites during 

the period May 18-19, 1966.

The differential movement between upper and lower layers determines the mixing of pollutants. The data upon which f ^ures 14-16 

are based allow computation of a net separation after t, tidal cycle. 

Figure 17 is a typical plot of time and AE7, the difference between the 

0.2 velocity and the 0.8 velocity. Each of the previous observation 

periods was similarly computed and plotted. The curves ^ere planimetered by tidal period, and the areas under the curves were converted 

to "separation distances." The separation distance concent naturally 

has no true validity but is of some use when considering large-scale 

mixing of pollutants. The separation distance is the interval separating 

surface and bottom waters after a tidal cycle of movement in the 

harbor when a frictionless horizontal sheet has been placed at mid-
ESTUARINE STUDIES IN UPPER GRAYS HARBOR, WASH. B19

4 

s 3

S 2

ts. L

I 1

-1 

! -2

I

1 -3

-4

_ "Tidal stage

I I I I 

Fresh-water 

discharge: 670 cfs

' -'Velocity

North channel 0.5 nautical mile 

downstream from Hoquiam 

River, Sept. 14, 1966

1000 1200 1400 1800 2000 2100

Fresh-water 

discharge: 590 cfs

% -Velocity

% 

I I I I

Chehalis River 0.5 nautical 

mile upstream from Elliott 

Slough, Sept. 15, 1966

I I I I I I I I

0900 1300 1500 1700 1900

- Fresh-water

discharge: 570 cfs

**. Tidal stage

-Velocity

Chehalis River 0.5 nautical 

mile downstream from 

Wishkah River, Sept. 16, 1966

I I

1400 1600 1800 

PACIFIC STANDARD TIME

2200 2300

FIGURE 11. Mean velocities and predicted tidal stages at selected sites during

the period September 14-16, 1966. 

322-777 O 6i9 i
gCD 

i

0

cT 

2.

ot> <rtP 

CfQ

DO Q 

v O 0 o" 

£ s 

a to 

oo

p

Cn

B

I

S

2 > *

o

E3

SECOND PER FEET IN VELOCITY, MEAN 

DOWNSTREAM UPSTREAM 

I I co i o H r-o 

I I I I 

i t; oo o> ^ i~o o 

(NO O 

FEET IN STAGE, TIDAL PREDICTED 
ESTUARINE STUDIES IN UPPER GRAYS HARBOR, WASH. B21

1 I I l I i I 

_ Fresh-water discharge: 14,800 cfs /--~

 Tidal stage

-3 

0 

5

4

3

2

1

0

-1

-2

-3

 ^-Velocity

South channel 3.5 nautical 

miles downstream from Cow - 

Point, Nov. 29, 1966

I I I I I I I

1500 1700 1900

Fresh-water discharge: 19,500 cfs

Velocity- -Tidal stage

North channel 0.5 nautical mile 

downstream from Hoquiam 

River, Nov. 30, 1966

0800

4

2200 2310

n i i i i i i r

Fresh-water discharge: 9510 cfs

^^ 

-Tidal stage VelocityI I

Chehalis River 0.5 nautical 

mile downstream from 

Wishkah River,Dec.1-2, 1966

I I I I I I I I

1500 1700 1900 2100 2300

I I I T

Fresh-water discharge 

35,600 cfs

J__L

Chehalis River 0.8 nautical 

mile upstream from Elhott 

Slough, Dec. 2-3, 1966

I I I I I I I I I

1600 1800 2000 2200 

PACIFIC STANDARD TIME

FIGURE 13. Mean velocities and predicted tidal stages at selected sites 

during the period November 29-December 3, 1966.
B22 ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY

= -i >-

- ^/Velocity at 20 percent 

of total depth

elocity at 80 percent 

of total depth

North channel 0.5 nautical mile 

downstream from Hoquiam 

River, Sept. 14, 1966

4

3

2

1

0

-1

-2 

~3

-4

1 I I I I I 

Fresh-water discharge_ 

670 cfs

1400 1600 1800

1 1 1 I I I I 

Fresh-water discharge 

590 cfs

Velocity at 20 percent 

of total depth

_ Velocity at 80 percent 

of total depth

I I I I

Chehalis River 0.5 nautical

mile upstream from Elliott - 

. Slough, Sept. 15, 1966

1400 1600 1800 * 2000

10 

8 

6 

4 

2 

0 -2

6 

4 

2 

0 

-2

2200 2300 

 12

Fresh-water discharge 10 

570 cfs

Velocity at 20 percent 

of total depth

Velocity at 80 percent// 

of total depth

I I I I I

,'xCnehalis River 0.5 nautical 

mile downstream from 

I Wishkah River, Sept. 16,, 1966

0800 1200 1400 1600 1800 

PACIFIC STANDARD TIME

2000 2200 2300

FIGURE 14. Point velocities at 20 and 80 percent of total 

depth at selected sites during the period September 14-16, 

1966. Long dashes indicate missing data.
SECOND PER FEET IN VELOCITY, 

DOWNSTREAM UPSTREAM 

I I I 

3 M 

Iso o 

s- ^ 

CD Cfi 

"g. S 

g: CD 

CD r^-

os* ^ 2 

B* ^ 

g. tr 

< S. CD ST 

i-j p 

P S5 

Cn a> 

g.

JT

a 

o

Ml III 

Irt ^ oo o^ -^ r*o o 

TIDAL PREDICTED 

FEET IN STAGE, 
B24 ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY

n I I r

South channel 3.5 nautical 

miles downstream from Cow 

Point, Nov. 29, 1966

I I I I I I I I I I I I

II I I

I I I I I I

North channel 0.5 nautical mile 

downstream from Hoquiam 

River, Nov. 30, 1966

I I I I I 1 I I

1000 1200 1600 1800 2000

i i r

Chehalis River 0.5 nautical 

mile downstream from 

Wishkah River, Dec. 1, 1966 

I I "1200 1408 1608 1800 2000 2200 2400"

Velocity at 20 pen 

r- of total depth

^Velocity at 80 percent\ 

/ of total depth \ 

'______ Vw

I I I I

' VChehalis River 0.8 nauticar

^ mile upstream from Elliott

, Slough, Dec. 2-3, 1966 . ,

1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000 2200 2400 0200 

PACIFIC STANDARD TIME

FIGURE 16. Point velocities at 20 and 80 percent o* 

total depth at selected sites during the period November 29-December 3, 1966. Gaps shown where datr, 

are missing.
(At/), DIFFERENCE VELOCITY 

SECOND PER FEET IN 

DOWNSTREAM UPSTREAM 

I

I 'I I I I J_______I 

*- I 00 CD J^ K> O 

N> O 

TIDAL PREDICTED 

FEET IN STAGE, 
B26 ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY

depth. The net separation distances, given in table 3, generally 

decrease as the fresh-water discharges decrease.

TABLE 3. Tidal separation distances computed from AU

Date 

(1966)

Sept.

Oct. 

Nov. 

Dec.

14.... 

15.... 

16 

27.....

28

29 

30.... 

1 

2 

3-day 

average 

Site fresh-water 

discharge 

(cfs)

0.5 mile downstream from mouth of 

Hoquiam River.

0.6 mile downstream from mouth of 

Wishkah River.

 .do .

 ..do. 

0.5 mile downstream from mouth of 

Hoquiam River.

0.6 mile downstream from mouth of 

Wishkah River.

700 

670 

610 

6,400 

5,000 

13,000 

15,900 

25,900 

32,900

Tide

Flood. 

Ebb--

Net. ..

Flood.....

Ebb .

Net. ..

Flood.....

Ebb......

Net

Ebb.......

Flood.....

Net.......

Ebb.......

Net

Flood.....

Ebb .

Net.. . Flood. .

Ebb .

TMftt

Flood.. 

Ebb.......

Net...... .

Flood. 

Ebb...... .

Net. .

Tidal 

cycle 

(hr)

... 6.75

 5.50

... 12.25 .

... 7.00

... 5.75

... 12.75 .

... 6.50

... 5.47

... 11.97 .

... 6.25

... 6.50

... 12.75 .

... 8.15

.85

... 9.00 .

... 6.00

... 6.50

... 12.50 .

... 5.67

... 7.50

... 13.17 .

... 4.25

... 8

... 12.25 .

... 4.2

... 9.1

... 13.3 .

Separation 

Tidal distance 

range (nautical 

(ft) miles)

8.5 

9.5

11.7 

10.9

11.5 

11.7

9.2 

8.2

7.2 

8.4

6.9 

11.7

6.6 

11.6

6.1 

11.0

5.6 

10.2

-0.96 

3.72 

2.76 

-.96 

4.32 

3.36 

-2.05 

3.70 

1.65 

4.40 

.17 

4.57 

4.83 

.51 

5.34 

-1.82 

5.30 

3.48 

4.76 

8.67 

13.4 

2.94 

3.62 

6.56 

.36 

3.28 

3.64

The mean velocity in the vertical was related to the time rate of 

change of tidal stage for one 26-hour period, on October 27-28, 1966 

(fig. 18). The relation was improved somewhat by usin^ the mean 

velocity for half an hour after the mean time of the tidal difference, 

as shown in figure 19. None of the other velocity runs were as simply 

related.

The net movement of estuarine waters over a long t'mespan, as 

postulated by the quasi-steady-state model, can be inferred from the 

fresh-water velocity. The mean fresh-water velocity at any cross 

section is dependent on the cross-sectional area, which varSs throughout the estuary. Cross-sectional areas obtained during the 1966 U.S. 

Geological Survey-Pollution Control Commission hydrogrs t>hic survey 

are shown in figure 20 for MTL and MLW. The exponential equation 

representing the line for MTL is:

Ax = (1)

where AXjn is cross-sectional area in square feet, and xm is channel distance in, nautical miles downstream from Montesano. For MLW, the 

equation is:

..wo, (2)
ESTUARINE STUDIES IN UPPER GRAYS HARBOR, WASH. B27 

3

1 2 3 

MEAN VELOCITY AT MEAN TIME (f), IN FEET PER SECOND

FIGURE 18. Relation between rate of change of tidal stage ( AH/ AO and 

mean velocity in the vertical at mean time (?) 0.5 nautical mile downstream from the Wishkah River on October 27-28, 1966.

where Ax is cross-sectional area and x is channel distance from the 

mouth. The reference point for each equation was chosen to be 

suitable for a particular use. For both equations, channel distance 

was taken longitudinally through the tidal flats separating the north 

and south channels. Distance between the mouth and State Highway 

107 bridge south of Montesano is considered to be 27.6 nautical miles, 

rather than 28.4 miles, because cross-sectional area include? both 

north and south channels, when straight-line distance through the 

large tidal flat separating the two channels is used. Channel distances, 

therefore, do not quite agree with those in figure 1. By definition:

Qf=Ax Ux , (3)

where Qf is the fresh-water discharge; Ax is the cross-sectional ?.rea at 

x, the longitudinal distance from an origin; and Ux is the mean cross322-777 O ©9 5
B28 ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY

o Ebb tide 

 Flood tide

0123 

MEAN VELOCITY AT 7 + 30 MINUTES, IN FEET PER SECOND

FIGURE 19. Relation between rate of change of tidal stage (A/// A<) and 

mean velocity in the vertical at mean time (f) plus 30 minutes 0.5 nautical 

mile downstream from the Wishkah River on October 27-28, 1966.

sectional velocity at x due to fresh-water discharge. Therefore, mean 

fresh-water velocity is given by equations 1 and 3:

AXm 3,700

e-0.200im.

(4)

This equation will be used in the next section to derive the age of fresh 

water moving through the estuary.

SALINITY DISTRIBUTION

Salinity is the term given to dissolved salts in estuarine and oceanic 

waters and is usually reported as parts per thousand. These salts are 

transported into an estuary by a combination of diffusion, large-scale 

circulation, and differential transport. Diffusion is the phj'sical process 

by which solutes tend toward uniform concentration. Large-scale 

circulation is a matter of harbor geometry, tides, and fresh-water dis-
ESTUARINE STUDIES IN UPPER GRAYS HARBOR, WASH. B29

1,000,000

CHANNEL DISTANCE DOWNSTREAM FROM MONTESANO, IN NAUTICAL MILES 

26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 64 2

100,000 -

10,000

3000

4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 

CHANNEL DISTANCE UPSTREAM FROM MOUTH, IN NAUTICAL MILES

26 28

FIGURE 20. Longitudinal variation of harbor cross-sectional area. Open circles 

mean low water; solid circles mean tide level.

charge. Differential transport refers to the net separation distance 

discussed earlier, whereby the upper, less salty layer moves a greater 

net distance during a tidal cycle than does the lower layer. Vertical 

diffusion and turbulence tend to equalize the vertical salinity gradient. 

Increased fresh-water discharge accentuates the differential transport 

due to the pumping action of the tides and reduces vertical mixir'?:.

Grays Harbor is reasonably well mixed vertically during low-flow 

periods lasting several weeks or more. Figure 21 indicates the effect of 

fresh-water discharge on the ratio of the top-to-bottom salinity difference to the mean vertical salinity, As/ s, at Cow Point for 1966 data.
B30

i.o

ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY

0.8 -

0.7 -

0.6

0.5 -

0.4

|= 0.3 -

0.2

0.1

0.0

o High-water slack 

 Low-water slack

123456789 10 

FRESH-WATER DISCHARGE, IN THOUSANDS OF CUBIC FEET PER SECOND

FIGUKE 21. Relation between vertical salinity-increment ratio (As/ s) at Cow 

Point and fresh-water discharge. Off-scale ratio (3.36) at 10,400 cfs (low-water 

slack) is not shown.

Despite the scatter of points, the trend toward increasing: As/ s with increasing discharge is apparent. Conversely, small salinity gradients 

occur at low discharges.

Longitudinal distributions of mean salinity obtaired in Grays 

Harbor during 1966 are given in figures 22-24. These plcts are slightly 

distorted because of practical difficulties in obtaining adequate 

definition of the distribution while keeping pace with the tidal wave. 

Usually, salinity runs were begun in the lower harbor about 20 

minutes before tide change and completed at the upper end an hour 

or two after tide change.

Ketchum (195la, b) modified the classical tidal-prism method of 

estimating estuarine flushing. His works gave early insight into 

flushing processes and stimulated much of the interest in the general 

study of estuaries since 1950. Ketchum's predicted salinity distributions (fig. 25) place much greater quantities of salt in the upper
ESTUARINE STUDIES IN UPPER GRAYS HARBOR, WASH. B31

reaches than has been observed (figs, 22-24) . Evidently, the inter^idal 

volume of each segment does not mix completely with its concomitant 

basal volume at high tide as assumed in Ketchum's method. Further 

comparisons are made below under the discussion of mean age.,

Many mathematical models of longitudinal salinity distribution 

(Stommel, 1953; O'Connor, 1961; Ippen and Harleman, 1961) are 

based on the assumption of seaward movement due to the fresh-water 

velocity (the quasi-steady-state model). Calculations show that net 

movement at low flow during one tidal cycle (eq 4) is much smaller 

than the "net separation distance" given in table 3. For mathematical 

simplicity, most models are designed for an artificial estuary which is 

well mixed vertically and has a constant cross-sectional area. Investigators in the field must then determine the degree of similarity between the conditions in the definition model and actual conditions in 

the estuaries which they are studying.

Ippen and Harleman (1961) derived a theoretical model for longitudinal salinity distribution at low tide in a long rectangular fume 

with constant mean fresh-water velocity. For the quasi-steady state, 

they found:

-=e-W(x+B)2> (5) 

s0

where s is the mean salinity in the vertical, s0 is the salinity of the 

nearby ocean, x is the channel distance upstream from the mouth, 

B is the distance seaward from the mouth to the region of constant 

salinity, and where.

in which D'0 is the apparent eddy diffusivity at the estuary entrance. 

W, Ux, B, and S0 are considered to be constant.

For Grays Harbor, B seems to range from 0 to about 5 nautical 

miles depending on the littoral current (Budinger and others, 1964, 

p. 52) and fresh- water discharge. During most of the summer low-flow 

period, B was small. Taking the logarithms of both sides of equation 5,

(7) 

and

The variation of W with channel distance (eq 8) for the Augus4: 19, 

1966, salinity data are given in figure 26. W can be considered constant 

for only a short distance from mile 6 to mile 14 and then it increases almost linearly with channel distance. The dashed line W is
B32 ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY

30

20

10

20

10

I 0 

< 40

30

20

10

\ \ \\ \ \ \ \\ \ 

Fresh-water discharge: 8,000 cfs

10.2 ft

APRIL 5-6, 1966

i r i T 7

Fresh-water discharge: 2,000 cfs

\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \

Fresh-water discharge: 630 cfs

AUGUST 2, 1966

\l\\

024 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26

CHANNEL DISTANCE DOWNSTREAM FROM MONTESANO, 

IN NAUTICAL MILES

FIGURE 22. Longitudinal variation of mean salinity at highand low-water slack on 4 days in April, May, and August 1966. 

Open circles, high-water slack; solid circles, low-wate~ slack.
ESTUARDSTE STUDIES IN UPPER GRAYS HARBOR, WASH. B33

40

30 -

20 -

10

< 0

a 30 

o

20

3 10

20

10

I I I I I I 

Fresh-water discharge: 500 cfs

I I I I I

i i i i \ i i r

Fresh-water discharge: 450 cfs

J__L

SEPTEMBER 9, 1966

I I I I III

i I I I I I I T T 

Fresh-water discharge: 930 cfs

0246 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26

CHANNEL DISTANCE DOWNSTREAM FROM MONTESANO, 

IN NAUTICAL MILES

FIGUBE 23. Longitudinal variation of mean salinity at highand low-water slack on 3 days in August, September, and 

October 1966. Open circles, high-water slack; solid circles lowwater slack.
B34 ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY

30

20

10

30

20

10

20 -

10 -

i i i r I i i

Fresh-water discharge: 7,500 cfs

I I I I I I I I 

Fresh-water discharge: 2,150 cfs

I I I \ \ 1I 

Fresh-water discharge: 10,300 cfs

11.0ft

i r

0.2 ft 

NOVEMBER 26, 1966

I I I I I I

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26

CHANNEL DISTANCE DOWNSTREAM FROM MONTESANO, 

IN NAUTICAL MILES

FIGURE 24. Longitudinal variation of mean salinity at highand low-water slack on 3 days in October and November 1966. 

Open circles, high-water slack; solid circles, low-water slack.
ESTUARINE STUDIES IN UPPER GRAYS HARBOR, WASH. B35

40

2 30

10 -

2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 

CHANNEL DISTANCE DOWNSTREAM FROM MONTESANO, IN NAUTICAL MILES

26

FIGURE 25. Predicted longitudinal variation of mean salinity at mean high 

water for various fresh-water discharges, on the basis of Ketchum's method 

(1951a).

a plot of W, where B Q, divided by channel distance. Where B is not 

equal to zero, similar relations would be obtained. The part of the 

curve for which W is approximately constant, upstream of mile 11 

(airport), is the region of greatest interest in this study, but W is 

no longer dimensionally correct. Whether the dependence of W on x 

in this part of the curve is because of variations of U, or D0', or both 

(eq 6) is not known.

For W to be constant in a natural estuary, the term In s/s0 must be 

proportional to (x-\-B) 2 . Salinity data taken on^August 19, 1966, 

seem to indicate that in upper Grays Harbor, In s/s0 is mor^- nearly 

proportional to x3 . However, the mean velocity varies exponentially 

with x (eq 4), not directly, as W would imply.

For constant mean fresh-water velocity throughout the region of 

an estuary, O'Connor (1961, pp. 564-565) obtained a similar equation 

for the quasi-steady state:

-Ux

s=sne

(9)

where s is the mean salinity at x, s0 is the oceanic salinity, and e is

322-777 O '69 6
B36 ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY

0.007

CHANNEL DISTANCE DOWNSTREAM FROM MONTESANO, IN NAUTICAL MILES 

20 10 0

0.006

0.005

0.004

0.003

0.002

0.001

10 20 

CHANNEL DISTANCE UPSTREAM FROM MOUTH, IN NAUTICAL MILES

30

FIGURE 26. Longitudinal variation of exponents TF(from eq. 8; solid 

lines) and W (dashed line) on August 19, 1966. Numbers indicate 

assumed values for the variable B in equation 8.
ESTUARINE STUDIES IN UPPER GRAYS HARBOR, WASH. B37

the turbulent transport coefficient. 1 If mean fresh-water velocity 

varies in the longitudinal direction, as it does in Grays Harbor, 

O'Connor suggested comparison of an e computed from equation 9, 

assuming a longitudinally averaged mean velocity, with an e computed 

from the finite-difference equation:

where 2Ax is the length of an estuary segment with linearly varying 

salinity, sx is the mean salinity over the segment, U is the mean 

velocity through the segment, and the denominator is the salinity 

difference between downstream and upstream boundaries of the 

segment. The mean velocity was computed for the midpoint of the 

segment at MLW from equations 2 and 3 :

Q/" 160*, (U)

where x is measured in nautical miles upstream from the mouth.

The relation between fresh-water discharge and the longitudinal 

average e computed from equation 10 is given in figure 27. The 

diffusivities were computed directly from low- tide field data following 

extended periods of reasonably constant flow, with 2 Ax taken as the 

distance between sampling stations. High-tide cUffusivity value*' were 

somewhat larger, and diffusivities computed from the slopes of semilogarithmic plots of salinity and channel distance were much greater 

than those computed from the finite-difference equation. The line in 

figure 27 represents the power equation derived from a logarithmic 

plot of the upper three diffusivities computed from equation 10. This 

equation is not strictly correct because the dispersion coefficient is 

not zero at zero fresh-water discharge (J. D. Stoner, written corrmun., 

1967). Diffusion would continue to take place owing to tidal action 

as long as a salinity gradient existed. O'Connor (1961, p. 607) showed 

a logarithmic plot of e with Qf and obtained a reasonably constant 

relation. He also noted (p. 604) the leveling off of diffusivity with 

increasing discharge.

Longitudinal salinity distributions are of some help to the estnarine 

hydrographer in estimating the "flushing rate" of harbors. Ketchum 

(1951a, p. 202-203) presented a method of estimating the mean age of 

harbor waters from his predicted longitudinal salinity. In figure 28,

i In this report no effort has been made to separate diffusion from dispersion. Although eacl author's 

label has been followed, the turbulent-transport coefficient above is considered equivalent to the apparentdiffusion coefficient and dye-dispersion coefficient discussed later. This is because of the equations used 

which lump all effects into a single coefficient. Hereafter, these terms are used interchangeably, except when 

a distinction as to computational method is desired.
B38 ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY

< o

= 300 0

o e , eddy-diffusivity coefficient 

 Dx, dye-dispersion coefficient

a 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 

m FRESH-WATER DISCHARGE, IN THOUSANDS OF CUBIC FEET PER SECOND

FIGURE 27. Relation between fresh-water discharge and longitudinal-dispersion

coefficients.

this method has been reversed. The mean age of fresh water was 

computed from high-water-slack field data for 2-nautical-mile segments. Mean age is taken as the number of tidal cycles at constant 

discharge required to replace the fresh-water fraction of the MHW 

segment volume. Although a single salinity distribution would not 

be necessarily representative of equilibrium condition^, mean age 

computed from an average distribution should be representative. 

Figure 28 also shows a cumulative mean-age curve that was computed 

from the average of 1965 weekly low-flow (less than 80C cfs) salinity 

runs by the Weyerhaeuser Co. (D. R. Fisher, Weyerhaeuser Co., 

written commun., 1966). The average tidal stage for the Y^eyerhaeuser 

salinity runs is more than a foot lower than that for curves computed 

from individual runs. The expected trend with fresh-water discharge 

is shown in the figure cumulative mean age decreases rapidly with 

increasing Qf.

A qualitative "mean flushing time" may be estimated f-om figure 28 

by taking the differences in mean ages between the point of pollutant 

injection and a given point downstream. Also, for a known degradation rate of the pollutant it should be possible to estimate which reach 

would be most affected by the pollutant.
ESTUARINE STUDIES IN UPPER GRAYS HARBOR, WASH. B39

fr 40 -

ii

30 -

20 -

10 -

-2 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 

CHANNEL DISTANCE DOWNSTREAM FROM MONTESANO, IN NAUTICAL MILES

FIGURE 28. Longitudinal variation of the cumulative mean age of fresl water 

at various discharges, based on salinity data for high-water slack. Curve for 

600 cfs represents an average of data from weekly low-flow salinity runs during 

1965 (D. R. Fisher, Weyerhaeuser Co., written commun., 1966); other curves 

are based on single runs.

Ketchum (1951a, p. 204) compared data from Raritan estuary with 

predicted values and found good agreement throughout much of the 

the estuary. In figure 29, cumulative mean-age data from Grays 

Harbor are plotted against cumulative mean age from Ketchum's 

computation for 2-nautical-mile segments downstream from Monte-
B40 ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY

sano. There is an apparent trend toward equality between computed 

and predicted mean ages at higher discharges. However, this trend 

is probably due more to the rapid movement of fresh water out of the 

upper harbor at high discharge than to the more complete mixing 

postulated in Ketchum's method. At the lower end of the curves, 

there is little difference between the 1,000-cfs and 8,000-cfs relations.

20

<-> 15

10

EXPLANATION

Fresh-water discharge, in

cubic feet per second

o 500

 1000

A 2000

A 8000

10 20 30 40

COMPUTED CUMULATIVE MEAN AGE, IN TIDAL CYCLES

50 60

FIGURE 29. Comparison of computed and predicted values for cuirulative mean 

age of fresh water at various discharges. Computed values are from field data 

collected at high-water slack; predicted values are based on Ketchum's method 

(1951a).

Another way of thinking of "mean age" is in terms of time of 

travel. Traveltime can be obtained from the equation for fresh-water 

velocity by integrating equation 4:

TT ^ V* p-0.20Qxm. Ux -dt 3,700 e (12)

Separating variables,

dt =3,700 Q,- 1 e°- 200x dx, (13)
ESTUARESTE STUDIES IN UPPER GRAYS HARBOR, WASH. B41

integrating, and evaluating (at t =0, xm =ty,

*(sec)=112.5X106 Qf-^e0 -*00* 1), (14) 

and converting to time in tidal cycles,

£=2,520 Qj-V200*"-!). (15)

Equation 15 for several discharges is shown in figure 30. The cumulative mean age from longitudinal salinity distributions (fig. 28) is 

about half of the fresh-water traveltime for a given location. Oc course, 

equation 15 is based on longitudinal variation of cross-sectional area 

at MTL, whereas the computations for figure 28 were based on highwater-slack data. Had equation 15 been based on MHW, which would 

have been incorrect for the steady-state condition, the frerh-water 

traveltime would have been still larger. On the other hand, had the 

mean-age curves been based on longitudinal salinity distribution at 

MTL, the use of Ketchum's method would cast serious doubt on the 

curves, because of his definition of exchange ratio intertidal volume 

divided by high-tide volume.

Finally, longitudinal salinity distributions are of use in estimating 

tidal excursion distances. The average distance between the high- and 

low-tidal curves in figures 22-24 can be taken as the estimated halftidal-cycle distance. These excursion values will be somewhat shorter 

than true values, however, because the water is not really "tagged" 

with salts as it would be with dye. Between any two consecutive 

slack tides, dilution of saline water with fresh water produce? a mixture which blurs the reidentification of a given portion of harbcr water. 

The point of maximum dye concentration is assumed always to be 

the small volume of water into which the dye was injected. F'gure 31 

relates tidal range to the average excursion distance. Excursion distance is seen to increase as both tidal range and discharge increase.

DYE STUDIES

The movement of the water in the upper part of Grays Harbor was 

traced with fluorescent dye (rhodamine B) placed in the water by a 

slug-injection technique. The excursion of the dye cloud wae defined 

by continuously sampling with fluorometers from boats. Both longitudinal and vertical definitions of the dye clouds were obtained by 

sampling while the boat moved slowly through the dye cloud and 

then anchoring the boat and sampling as the cloud moved past, 

and by sampling at different depths at various locations along the 

river channel. The method of sampling depended upon whether the 

dye was injected at the surface or near the bottom. The dye was
B42

150

ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY

140 -

130 -

120 

110

100

90

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 

CHANNEL DISTANCE DOWNSTREAM FROM MONTESANO, IN NAUTICAL MILES

22

FIGURE 30. Longitudinal variation of cumulative traveltime of fresh water, 

computed at various discharges from equation 15.

tracked for only half a tidal cycle, on an ebbing or flooding tide, 

because of restrictions on dye quantities allowed per dump. Dye 

concentrations dropped to background readings after 5-8 hours. 

Interfering substances included sulfite waste liquor and phytoplankton. The low and variable fluorescence of sulfite waste liquor precluded 

tracking it in the harbor.
ESTUARINE STUDIES IN UPPER GRAYS HARBOR, WASH. B43

The dye-injection sites, excursion distances of peak concentrations, 

fresh-water discharge, and tidal range of dye studies are presented 

graphically in figure 32. The tidal range is given beside each excursion

14

10

EXPLANATION 

Fresh-water discharge, in 

cubic feet per second 

o <1000

 1000-7500 

A >7500

01234 5678 

EXCURSION DISTANCE, IN NAUTICAL MILES

FIGURE 31. Relation between tidal range and average distance of half-cycle 

salinity excursion (the average distance between high-water-slack ard lowwater-slack salinity curves).

line. The graph shows that wastes in the vicinity of Rennie Island 

travel upstream beyond Cosmopolis on floodtides. Water tagged near 

Cosmopolis travels at least as far as Rennie Island on narrow-range 

ebbtides, and much farther on wide-range tides. The excursion distances shown in figure 32 are also in agreement with those of the 

dissolved-oxygen minimum, the so-called DO sag point (Eriksen and 

Townsend, 1940, p. 38-42; D. R. Fisher, Weyerhaeuser Co., written 

commun., 1966).

Excursion distances obtained from dye studies during low and 

medium fresh-water flows verify, for the most part, those obtained 

from the salinity curves (fig. 31). On average ebbtides, excursions of
B44

25

ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY

Q 20

15

10 11.1 <- 11.2

11.5

10.9 <-

7.4

11.8 <H

12.5

13.4

13.0

5 10 15 

CHANNEL DISTANCE DOWNSTREAM FROM MONTESANO, IN NAUTICAL MILES

20

FIGURE 32. Excursion distances of peak dye concentration at various freshwater discharges. Circle indicates dye-injection site, and arrowhead indicates 

direction and farthest extent of excursion. Tidal range is shown ?,t arrowhead.

7.7-8.6 nautical miles were obtained, whereas excursions- of 5.7-8.8 

miles were obtained on average floodtides. Net tidal excursion, then, 

was as much as 2.0 miles seaward during the dye studies. F-riksen and 

Townsend (1940, p. 35) gave tidal excursion distances obtained with 

floats. The floats traveled from 7.46 to 8.44 miles on ebbtides and 

from 6.32 to 7.85 miles on floodtides. The average net flor,t-excursion 

distance was 0.66 miles seaward per tidal cycle.
ESTUARINE STUDIES IN UPPER GRAYS HARBOR, WASH. B45

The four major factors affecting excursion distance are the direction 

of flow, amount of fresh-water discharge, tidal range, location of dyeinjection site, and estuary geometry. Dye-excursion distances are 

plotted with the locations of the dye-injection sites in figure 33 for 

floodtides, and in figure 34 for ebbtides. For floodtides, the largest 

excursions are associated with low discharge and wide tidal range. 

The dye seems to travel farther when introduced in the lower part of 

the estuary on floodtides than when it is introduced upstream. For 

ebbtides, the largest excursions are associated with high discharge and 

wide tidal range, as well as with upstream injection locationr

Individual excursion distance-time relations are presented in 

figures 35-47.

The movement of bottom water was traced with dye several times 

for conditions of discharge and tidal range similar to those of the surface

10

3 -

2 -

1 -

7.4

+ 7.4

°12.6

Sb11 - 8

°=Lll.l 

31 if 5 

jjlO.9

11.0

68.3 

Xll.3

O 

6.7A

8.9

K:4 08.3

,7-4 ®8.3

8.9

EXPLANATION

Fresh-water discharge, in cubic feet per second 

o<1000

 <1000; bottom injection 

A 1000-10,000 

A > 10,000

0 5 10 15 20

DYE-INJECTION SITE, IN NAUTICAL MILES DOWNSTREAM FROM MONTESANO

FIGURE 33. Farthest excursion distances of peak dye concentrator during 

floodtide for various dye-injection sites. Symbol "X" within circle indicates 

dye injection in main river channel, with resulting excursion up tributaries. 

Symbol "-)-" indicates dye dump at mouth of tributary. Tidal range is given 

beside each symbol. Dye injection was at surface unless otherwise irdicated.
B46

10

9

8

co 7

LU '

^

NAUTICAL INl\

CT>

uj 5

z

CO

Q

z 4 

o

EXCURSI

CO

2

1 

n

ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY

A 12.1

_

1

A12' 5

.13.0

| 0 13.4

c

M 

- op

X

1 _ 0.

I

0 

O

~

1 

13

o4.8

EXPLANATION

Fresh-water discharge, in 

cubic feet per second

o <1000

 <1000; bottom injection

A 1000-10,000

A > 10,000

+ South channe injections

1 1

1

^

J13.6

13.6

Island ennie 

-

o 4- 2

'

c

+

 "

3.6 

3.6

1

5 10 15 

DYE-INJECTION SITE, IN NAUTICAL MILES DOWNSTREAM FROM MONTES4NO

FIGURE 34. Farthest excursion distances of peak dye concentration for various 

dye-injection sites during ebbtide. Tidal range is given beside each symbol. 

Dye injection was at surface unless otherwise indicated.

runs. The bottom ebbtide excursion in figure 35 (dashed curve) is 

shorter than the surface excursion under similar conditions namely, 

low flow and narrow range of tides. For low flow and a wide tide 

range, dye introduced at the bottom of the north channe1 (fig. 37) 

traveled within a third of a mile of the distance traveled by surfacereleased dye (fig. 38). The length of time to travel the distance, however, was about 45 minutes longer for the bottom-released dye than 

for the surface-released dyt. On the only bottom floodtide release 

(fig. 42), the dye traveled farther than the similar surface trace (fig.
ESTTJARINE STUDIES IN TIPPER GRAYS HARBOR, WASH. B47

10

Fresh-water 

discharge 

745 cfs

765 cfs

Tidal 

range 

3.6 ft

3.65 ft

3 -

300 400

TIME AFTER HIGH TIDE, IN MINUTES

FIGURE 35. Relation between excursion distance of peak dye concentration 

and time after high tide at Hoquiam for surface and bottom inject'ons under 

similar conditions. Injection site was 0.2 mile upstream from the Hoquiam 

River. Bottom injection was on July 27, 1966; surface injection was on July 28.

43). At the sharp bend 1 mile upstream from the Wishkah River, 

however, the surface-released dye inverted and continued upstream 

on the bottom. The dye, therefore, moved on the surface only for 

the first half of the excursion and then shifted to the bottom. The 

bottom water reverses first and often exceeds the surface water for 

short periods (fig. 14, bottom graph, at 0900 P.s.t.). Afte~ lagging 

the first half cycle, the surface dye then shifted to the region of 

slower velocities.

The effect of tidal range on low-flow ebbtide surface exci^rsions is 

seen by comparing figures 35, 36, and 37. As the tidal range increases 

from 3.65 to 13.4 feet, the excursion distance increases from 4 3 to
B48

10

ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY

Fresh-water discharge: 790 cfs 

Tidal range: 4.2 ft

100 200

TIME AFTER HIGH TIDE, IN MINUTES

300 400

FIGURE 36. Relation between excursion distance of peak dye concentration 

and time after high tide at Hoquiam for a surface injection. Dye vas injected 

in the north channel at the mouth of the Hoquiam River on Jul;- 29, 1966.

8.1 nautical miles. The increase of excursion due to an increase in 

discharge is seen by comparing figures 38 and 39.

Figure 40 allows the comparison of two floodtide dye traces originating in the south channel near Cow Point. Doubling the discharge 

decreased the excursion distance about 20 percent.

A comparison of figures 41 and 43 would seem to contradict earlier 

statements regarding the effect of discharge on floodtide surface excursions. However, $ye movement in these tests was more complex. 

Peak dye concentrations on June 3, 1966 (fig. 41), were found at 11- 

foot depth after they had traveled only 2.5-3 miles, and near the 

bottom ab@ut 1.5 miles upstream from the Wishkah Eiver. On 

October 12, 1966, however, the peak concentrations were found
ESTUARINE STUDIES IN UPPER GRAYS HARBOR, WASH. B49

10

9 -

7 -

6 -

5 -

3 -

2 -

Fresh-water discharge: 560 cfs 

Tidal range: 13.6 ft

ioa 200

TIME AFTER HIGH TIDE, IN MINUTES

300 400

FIGURE 37. Relation between excursion distance of peak dye concentration and 

time after high tide at Hoquiam for a bottom injection. Dye was injected in 

the north channel 0.2 mile upstream from the Hoquiam River on August 16, 

1966.

similarly on the bottom about a mile upstream from the T^ishkah 

River, but the dye had shifted much later. Whether or not these 

shifts in depth were caused by density effects is not known.

By comparing figure 44 with the October 13 curve in figure 40, the 

effect of estuary geometry becomes apparent. Advancing up the 

estuary, water from the western part of the estuary does not encounter as much of the force of the fresh-water discharge as water 

in the eastern part of the estuary. This increased force due to fresh 

water no doubt accounts for the 12-percent reduction in the excursion 

of upstream water.

Figure 45 shows the only dye trace that lasted much more than 

half a tidal cycle. Some appreciation of water movement is gained by 

observing the trace. Following a 5.5-mile upstream excursion on the
B50

10

ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY

Fresh-water discharge: 560 cfs 

Tidal range: 13.4 ft

T

-S x I

100 200 300 

TIME AFTER HIGH TIDE, IN MINUTES

400

FIGURE 38. Relation between excursion distance of peak dye concentration 

and time after high tide at Hoquiam for two surface injections. Dye was injected in the north channel 0.2 mile upstream from the Hoquiam River (solid 

line and dots) and in the Chehalis River at Cosmopolis (dashed line and squares) 

on August 17, 1966.

floodtide, the tagged water traveled possibly 10 miles downstream. 

The different excursion distances for floodtides and ebbtides are due 

to the effects of discharge and difference in tidal ranges.

Finally, figures 46 and 47 compare tributary and upstream excursiontime relations during floodtides. The flatter slopes of these curves 

clearly show the slower velocities and shorter excursion distances in 

the tributaries. The nearly identical relations for the Hoiuiam and 

Wishkah Rivers (fig. 46) reflect similar effects of discharge and tides. 

The Peels Slough curve (fig. 47) illustrates the much slowe'1 velocities 

and excursion distances in sloughs.
ESTUARINE STUDIES IN UPPER GRAYS HARBOR, WASH. B51

Fresh-water discharge: 13,500 cfs 

Tidal range: 13.4 ft

200 300 

TIME AFTER HIGH TIDE, IN MINUTES

400

FIGURE 39. Relation between excursion distance of peak dye concentration 

and time after high tide at Cosmopolis for a surface injection. Dye was injected in the Chehalis River at Higgins Island on November 28, 1966.

Dye-dispersion coefficients were computed from the one-dimensional diffusion equation, using values of the variance for different 

times computed by the method of moments:

(16) Sc

in which c is the dye concentration, in parts per billion, and x is the 

longitudinal distance, in feet, from a reference point, such as the concentration peak. The dispersion coefficient, Dx , was taken as one-half 

the slope of a line drawn by eye through a plot of <rx2 against the time 

after the dye dump (Diachishin, 1963a, p. 37). However, the line was
B52

10

ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY

~ 4

Fresh-water 

discharge 

820 cfs

1690 cfs

Tidal 

range 

11.5ft

10.8 ft

100 200 300

TIME AFTER LOW TIDE, IN MINUTES

400

FIGURE 40. Relation between excursion distance of peak dye concentration 

and time after low tide at Hoquiam for two surface injections in the south 

channel 0.5 mile downstream from Cow Point. Circles represent October 13, 1966, injection; dots represent June 2 injection.

not forced through the origin; only the computed points wer«, used to 

determine the line. Three values computed in this manner from ebbtide dye data are shown in figure 27. The figure shows reasonable 

agreement between dye-dispersion coefficients and those from LWS 

(low-water slack) salinity data using equation 10. The agreement is 

surprising, considering that Dx represents dispersion over only half 

a tidal cycle. The e values represent dispersion over mr.ny tidal 

cycles and are probably an approximation of equilibrium conditions. 

The dye studies usually were limited to half a cycle because of the 

relatively small amounts of dye that were used. Also, the dye did not 

always disperse throughout the cross section. The dye cloud had a 

tendency to remain stratified especially during the higher freshwater discharges. This would indicate only partial vertical mixing 

during a half-tidal cycle.

When a contaminant is added to an estuary, the rate of dissipation 

(flushing) of the contaminant depends on the proportion of the harbor
ESTUARINE STUDIES IN UPPER GRAYS HARBOR, WASH. B53

10

^ 5

Fresh-water discharge: 1770 cfs 

Tidal range: 11.0 ft

0 100 200 300 400 

TIME AFTER LOW TIDE, IN MINUTES

FIGURE 41. Relation between excursion distance of peak dye concentration 

and time after low tide at Hoquiam for a surface injection in the nortl channel 

0.2 mile upstream from the Hoquiam River on June 3, 1966.

volume replaced each tidal cycle (by saJt and fresh water) and the 

dispersion rate. The dispersion coefficient describes the rate of expansion of the contaminated volume and the rate of decrease of the 

contaminant concentration. The data contained in this report provide 

a basis for estimation of the movement (excursion and circulation 

patterns) of a contaminated water mass and, if the appropriate 

degradation constants are known, the estimation of approximate 

concentrations of industrial or municipal pollutants.

SUMMARY OF ESTUARY HYDRAULICS

Maximum mean tidal velocities approach 3 fps (feet per second) 

upstream and 4.5 fps downstream, depending on tides (extremes and 

range), location, and fresh-water inflow. These velocities are far 

greater than those due to fresh-water discharge computed from 

equation 4. A comparison of velocities for 0.2 and 0.8 of depth shows
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY

Fresh-water discharge: 980 cfs 

Tidal range: 11.1 ft

200 300 

TIME AFTER LOW TIDE, IN MINUTES

400

FIGURE 42. Relation between excursion distance of peak dye concentration 

and time after low tide at Hoquiam for a bottom injection in the north channel 

0.2 mile upstream from the Hoquiam River on July 19, 1966.

that water at the surface (0.2 velocities) moves faster, on the average, 

than water at the bottom (0.8 velocities). The hypothetical separation 

distance between surface and bottom waters after a tidal cycle varied 

from 1.65 to 13.4 nautical miles. An attempt to relate mean velocity 

directly to the rate of change of tidal stage was satisfactory in only 

one instance.

Longitudinal-salinity data were used to estimate eddy diffusivities 

and tidal excursion distances, and to evaluate the long'tudinalsalinity-distribution models of Ketchum (1951a), Ippen and Harleman 

(1961), and O'Connor (1961). The simplest theoretical model, that of 

O'Connor, was assummed correct in regard to diffusivity coefficients 

because the values used appeared to be more reasonable. Diffusivity 

coefficients computed from equation 10 were related to fresh-water 

discharge. The coefficients ranged from 842 to 3,520 square feet per 

second, and discharge ranged from 500 to 8,000 cfs. Although Ketch-
ESTUARINE STUDIES IN UPPER GRAYS HARBOR, WASH. B55

Fresh-water discharge: 740 cfs 

Tidal range: 10.9 ft

= 7

6 -

5 -

100 200 300 400 

TIME AFTER LOW TIDE, IN MINUTES

FIGURE 43. Relation between excursion distance of peak dye corcentration 

and time after low tide at Hoquiam for a surface injection in the north channel 

0.2 mile upstream from the Hoquiam River on October 12, 1966.

urn's method did not describe the field data, his approach was used 

to estimate the mean age of fresh water from field data. Mean age 

computed in this manner was then compared with mean age computed 

from Ketchum's model.

Dye studies were made to follow the movement of water in the 

upper harbor and to obtain dispersion coefficients for comparison with 

those calculated from salinity data. The excursion distances obtained 

from dye studies were greater than those obtained from float studies 

(Eriksen and Townsend, 1940) and those estimated from high- and 

low-slack salinity distributions. For average tides, the excursion 

distance averages about 8 nautical miles during ebb anc1 7 miles 

during flood. Net excursion during a tidal cycle was as much as 2 

miles during the dye studies.

Dye-dispersion coefficients corroborated those computed from 

salinity distributions. Considering the field problems in determining
B56 ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY

10

^ 7

uj- 5

^ 4

Fresh-water discharge: 930 cfs 

Tidal range: 12.6 ft

100 200 

TIME AFTER LOW TIDE, IN MINUTES

300 400

FIGURE 44. Relation between excursion distance of peak dye concentration and time after low tide at Hoquiam for a surface injection in the 

north channel 7.3 miles upstream from the harbor entrance on October 14, 1966.

dye distribution, the salinity-dispersion coefficients are considered 

more valid than dye-dispersion coefficients, especially for calculations 

involving long-term dispersion. This is because dye-dispersion coefficients were obtained from data collected only during half a tidal cycle. 

Dispersion coefficients are necessary for calculations of pollutantdispersion patterns, assimilative capacities, and predicted concentration values. The literature contains papers by several authors who 

make use of diffusivity or dispersion values (O'Connor, 1961, 1965; 

Diachishin, 1963b; Camp, 1965; and Waldichuk, 1966). Dispersion 

values given by these authors support those obtained in Grays 

Harbor. Furthermore, values and relations given in this report 

could be used with some of the approaches described by these other 

investigators to estimate the assimilative capacity or the pollutantdistribution pattern of the harbor. However, such an estimate is 

beyond the scope of this report.
ESTUARINE STUDIES IN UPPER GRAYS HARBOR, WASF!. B57

Fresh-water discharge: 10,800 cfs 

Tidal ranges: 6.7 ft (floodtide) and 

11.1 ft (ebbtide)

200 300 400 500 

TIME AFTER LOW TIDE, IN MINUTES

600

FIGURE 45. Relation between excursion distance of peak dye concentration 

and time after low tide at Hoquiam for a surface injection at Cow Point on 

November 27, 1966.

BOTTOM MATERIALS

Estuarine sediments are deposited in response to three major 

influences: velocity, salinity, and water temperature. Periodic backwater from tides tends to cause deposition of heavier fluvial sediments 

in upstream reaches by greatly reducing, halting, and slowly reversing 

the current. Farther seaward in the estuary, lighter sediments and 

organic matter are deposited when tidal currents become slack, 

especially on neap (narrow range) tides (Gilbert, 1917, p. 25). Noncohesive sediments might be resuspended when tidal flow has reversed 

direction and generated sufficient turbulence. Salinity and temperature 

determine the density and viscosity of the fluid, throughcnt which 

the sediments and organic matter are suspended; the greater the 

salinity and the colder the water, the less is the settling velocity of 

the detritus. Salinity, however, also tends to encourage flo°,culation 

of colloidal clays, and thereby to cause an increase in the effective size 

of the particle and its fall velocity. Sediments deposited within 

the lower reaches of a harbor are often carried back up the harbor 

by flood currents. This is attributable to the predominance of the 

bottom flood current at the mouth over the bottom ebb current. 

The bottom flood current is often supplied with sediment by the 

littoral drift (Gross and Nelson, 1966). A more complete description 

of estuarine sedimentation was given by Schultz and Simmors (1957).
B58

10

ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY

i= 6

- 5

5 4

Fresh-water discharge: 735 cfs 

Tidal range: 8.9 ft

o Wishkah River

A Hoquiam River

D East Fork of Hoquiam River

100 200 300 

TIME AFTER LOW TIDE, IN MINUTES

FIGURE 46. Relation between excursion distance of peak dye concentration and 

time after low tide at Hoquiam for surface injections in the mouths of the 

Wishkah and Hoquiam Rivers on August 17, 1965.

Dredging of harbor sediments normally is not considered as a factor 

influencing water quality. However, Keighton (1966, p. 11), pointed 

out that dredging the navigation channel interferes with the dilution 

or flushing process by increasing the low-tide volume, r,nd by decreasing the intertidal prism if the dredge spoils are used to fill the 

intertidal marshes.

SAMPLE COLLECTION

To define the possible influences of Grays Harbor bottom materials 

on the overlying waters, surface samples of the bottom deposits were 

obtained at 31 cross sections, 30 of which are shown in figure 48. 

Cross section 31, which is not shown in the figure, was at mile 3, near 

the harbor entrance (fig. 1). Samples also were obtained from the
10

ESTUARINE STUDIES IN UPPER GRAYS HARBOR, WASH. B59

^ 7

Q 4

Fresh-water discharge: 690 cfs 

Tidal range: 7.4 ft

Main channel (injection 

0.3 mile upstream from 

Hoquiam River)-

Chehalis River 

(upstream from Peels Slough)

100 200 300 

TIME AFTER LOW TIDE, IN MINUTES

400

FIGURE 47. Relation between excursion distance of peak dye concentration and 

time after low tide at Hoquiam for several surface injections on August 18, 

1965.

first 1% miles of the Wishkah and Hoquiam Rivers (samplir? sites 

W1-W6 and H1-H7, respectively). Most cross sections were sampled 

at five equidistant points with a U.S. BM-54 bed-material sampler 

(Federal Inter-Agency Committee on Water Resources, Subcommittee 

on Sedimentation, 1958, 1963). Bottom samples were collected during 

April and December 1965, and March, June, and September 1966.

PARTICLE SIZE AND COMPOSITION

Particle-size determinations were made on the cross-section simples 

collected in June 1966 by means of sieve and visual-accumulation 

tube (Federal Inter-Agency Committee on Water Resources1 , Subcommittee on Sedimentation, 1957). The results of the determinations 

are listed in table 4.
B60 ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY

a *

3 T3 

«-§

9.3 

. 02

^ ri 

@ g

a 2

-2

o

-O

 

1 *

ISM 0

T3 03 tc®

ft 11 ' oj 

T3 CQ

oj

' rH

Oi 03

£ S

.

00 « 03 

rH O

H "d ^

g S-a

o
ESTUARINE STUDIES IN UPPER GRAYS HARBOR, WASH. B61

TABLE 4. Particle-size analyses of the coarse fraction (greater than 0.062 mm) 

of Grays Harbor bottom-material samples collected in June 1966

[The fraction greater than 1.00 mm was sieved, and that from 0.062 to 1.00mm was analyzed by the visualaccumulation-tube method. The "A" station is near the right bank (facing downstream), and the "E" 

station is near the left bank]

Cross 

section

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11

Station

A 

B 

C 

D 

E

A 

B

C 

D 

E

A 

B 

C 

D

E

A 

B 

C 

D

E

A 

B 

C 

D 

E

A 

B 

C 

D 

E

A 

B 

C 

D

E

A 

B 

C 

D

E

A 

B 

C 

D 

E

A 

B 

C 

D 

E

A

B 

C 

D 

E

Percent, by weight, finer than indicated size, in millimeters

0.062 0.088 0.125 0.175

63 

3 

2 

94 

83

2 

2 

2 

8 

72

67 

3 

2 

29 

36

30 

24 

80 

2 

93

92 

7 

1 

12 

24

3

9 

23 

1

78

63

6 

28 

33

47

98 

96 

80

7 

76

26

22 

62 

23

90 

1 

27 

12 

57

81 

36 

2 

76 

81

75 

3 

2 

%

85

3 

2 

2

8 

82

82 

3 

2 

32 

48

39 

25 

82 

5 

98

95 

7 

1 

13 

26

3 

10 

23 

1 

81

75 

6 

28 

36 

49

99 

98 

84

7 

78

28

22 

66 

26

96 

2 

35 

13 

62

88 

40 

2 

78 

83

87 

8 

2 

98 

89

10 

3 

2 

9 

91

92 

4 

2 

50 

82

56 

27 

85 

11 

100 ..

98 

8 

1 

17

29

4 

10 

24 

1

82

86 

6 

29 

40 

52

99 

99 

91 

8 

82

32

24 

70 

29

98 

6 

44 

16 

69

93

47 

2 

82 

84

95 

20 

3 

99 

93

47 

9 

2 

10 

97

98 

4 

3 

80 

97

70 

32

88 

19

99 

10 

9 

23 

33

4 

12 

26 

1

84

95 

8 

33 

59 

60

99 

100

96 

10 

90

37

30

77 

40

99 

20 

54 

24 

76

96 

66 

4

89

87

0.250

99 

61 

7 

100 ..

%

94 

64 

2 

12 

99

98 

4 

14 

99 

100 ..

80 

69 

92 

28

100 ..

35 

68 

31 

36

4 

14

30 

11 

88

99 

10 

40 

86 

64

100

98 

29 

97

61

52 

83 

79

100 ..

75 

72 

33

89

98 

93 

19 

95 

93

0.350 0.500

100 -

95 

24

98 

100 ..

% 

4 

14 

100 ..

99 

10 

87 

100...

89 

% 

93 

33

78 

93 

46 

39

5 

16 

43 

43

94

100 ..

23 

53 

96 

68

99 

61 

100

81

63

86 

94

97 

81 

37

97

100

98 

29 

97 

07

99 

41

99

100 -

19 

14

99 

60

99

97 

99 

94 

47

86 

98 

72 

42

5 

17 

61 

79 

98

44 

78 

97 

82

100 .

79

93

67 

87 

97

99 

84 

39 

99

99 

32 

97 

98

1.00

100 .

60

100 .

63 

16

100 .

90 

100 .

99 

100 .

95 

50

88 

100. .

88 

43

6 

19 

73 

93 

100 .

63

89 

98 

92

93

98 

72 

68 

87 

99

100 .

85 

41 

100 .

99 

35 

97 

99

2.00

82

95 

22

100 .

100 .

95 

64

91

96 

46

7 

21 

85 

100 .

76 

95 

98 

92

99

99 

78 

73 

88 

100 .

86 

44

41 

98 

100 .

4.00

96

100 .

40

95

84

100 .

100 .

59

9 

28 

96

89 

99 

100 .

100 .

100

100 -

100 .

87 

94

88 

51

54 

100 .

8.00 16.0

100 ......

64 100

95 100 

10C ......

82 100

20 100 

3P 100 

100 ......

100 ......

100 ......

100 ...... 

100 --.._.

100 _..... 

66 100

8' 100
B62 ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY

TABLE 4. Particle-size analyses of the coarse fraction (greater than 0.062 mm) of 

Grays Harbor bottom-material samples collected in June 1966 Continued

Cross 

section

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24

Station

A 

B 

C 

D 

E

A 

B 

C 

D 

E

A 

B 

C 

D 

E

A 

B 

C 

D 

E

A 

B 

C 

D 

E

A 

B 

C 

D 

E

A 

B

C 

D 

E

A 

B 

C 

D 

E

A 

B 

C

D

E

A 

B 

C 

D 

E

A 

B 

C 

D 

E

A 

B 

C 

D 

E

A 

B 

C 

D 

E

Percent, by weight, finer than indicated size, in millimeters

0.062

92 

2 

73 

10 

83

98 

72 

74 

31 

65

96 

82 

12 

52 

75

70 

97 

3 

21 

83

92 

8 

2 

62 

92

66 

65 

67 

51 

98

88 

86 

30 

76 

97

84 

65 

31 

54 

79

19 

4 

3 

67 

73

88 

48 

3 

97 

13

90

82 

70 

24 

84

16 

10 

51 

57

7

1 

0 

2 

1 

3

0.088

96 

2 

78 

10 

94

100 

73 

80 

31 

70

99 

85 

12 

56

82

81 

99 

3 

24 

92

95 

9 

2 

70 

97

75 

71 

71 

60 

99

94 

91 

35 

85 

99

94 

80 

37 

58 

83

28 

4 

3 

70 

82

96 

52 

3 

98 

19

96 

88 

77 

25 

90

18 

11 

56 

66 

8

1 

0 

2 

1 

3

0.125

99 

2 

89 

11 

98

74 

84 

33 

75

100 

88 

14 

62 

90

94 

100 

5 

34

97

97 

14 

2 

85 

99

85 

80 

83 

69 

100

97 

96 

46 

94 

99

98 

91

58 

67 

92

44 

7 

3 

75 

89

99 

66 

3 

98 

46

98 

95 

91 

28 

96

44

24 

64 

88 

21

19 

6 

6 

6 

8

0.175

100 

5 

98 

21 

100 .

84 

94 

46 

81

91 

29 

79 

94

100

11 

80 

99

99 

25 

6 

95 

100

92 

89 

94 

78

98 

98 

54 

99 

100

99 

96 

79 

87 

98

56 

18 

9 

84 

92

100 

83 

10 

99 

70

100 

99 

99 

44 

99

84 

71 

82 

98 

69

82 

72 

65 

6 

64

0.250

56 

100 

70

96 

100 

86 

91

93 

80 

87 

96

51 

97 

100

100 

51 

40 

98

96 

95 

99 

84

100 

99 

64 

100

99 

99 

94 

95 

100

72 

31 

22 

92 

95

94 

34

99 

85

100 

100 

76 

99

97 

95 

94 

100 

92

98 

98 

95 

68 

98

0.350

90

95

99

97 

98

96 

99 

91 

98

88 

100 .

82 

80 

100 .

99 

98 

100 . 

90

100 

93

100 

100 

100 

98

90 

56 

34 

97 

98

99 

76 

100 

94

92 

100

99 

99 

99

99

100 

100 

99 

95 

99

0.500

96

98

100 .

100 .

100 .

99 

99 

92 

99

95

96 

94

100 

99

96

99

99

99 

76 

64 

99 

100

100 

92

99

97

100 

99 

100

100

100 

99 

100 .

1.00 2.00 4.00 8.00 16.0

99 100 ............. .......

99 100 ....................

100 ...........................

100 ...........................

92 93 93 100 ......

100 ...........................

99 100 ....................

100 ...........................

98 100 --.-.-.-...-.....-.-

100 ...........................

100 ...........................

100 ...........................

100 ...........................

100 . .__-..._- ._-..-- -

100 ...........................

100 ......... ..................

100 ...........................

100 _--.__.--.-....-..-----..

100 .----..........-..-........

100 ...........................

100 ..--.-...---. --.-

100 .-....---.... .- ----
ESTUARINE STUDIES IN UPPER GRAYS HARBOR, WASH. B63

TABLE 4. Particle-size analyses of the coarse fraction (greater than 0.062 mm) of 

Grays Harbor bottom-material samples collected in June 1966 Continue'!

Cross 

section

25 

26 

27 

28 

29 

30

31

Wl 

W2 

W3 

W4 

W5 

W6

H3 

H4 

H5 

H6 

H7

Slipl 

Slip 2

Station

A 

B

C 

D 

E

A 

B

C 

D 

E

A 

B

C 

D 

E

A 

B 

C 

D

E

A 

B

C 

D

E

A 

B 

C 

D

E 

F

A 

B

C 

D 

E

C 

C 

C 

C 

C

c

c 

c 

c 

c 

c

A 

B

C 

D

E

A

B 

C 

D 

E

Percent,

0.062

35 

5 

17 

9 

99

51 

1 

54 

4 

90

79 

'0 4 

1 

26

88 

1 

97 

82 

64

62 

49 

99 

86 

39

15 

45 

25 

86 

29 

60

0 

0 

1 

0 

0

21 

12 

3 

35 

65 

92

20 

16 

58 

65

78

99 

99 

98 

98 

98

100 ..

99 

94 

98 

98

0.088

50 

5 

17 

10 

100

57 

1 

58 

4 

94

81 

4 

0 

2 

26

92 

1 

98 

88 

67

75 

61 

100 .

97 

45

29 

56 

29 

93 

56 

75

0 

0 

1 

0 

0

22 

13 

3 

36

72 

97

21 

16 

67 

66 

85

100 .

100 ..

100 ..

100 .

100 ..

100 ..

99

100 ..

99

0.125

87 

24 

21 

11

76 

1 

59 

5 

97

83 

4 

0 

4 

28

94 

1 

98 

95 

69

93

92

100 .

59

87 

88 

61 

98 

90 

95

14 

1 

2 

2 

0

23 

14 

3 

37

77 

98

24 

18 

78 

67 

89

99

100 .

by weight, finer than indicated size, in millimeters

0.175

99 

87 

41 

50

93 

7 

62 

10 

99

88 

8 

0 

10 

32

96 

2 

99 

97 

71

98 

99

88

99 

98 

92 

100 .

99 

100 .

81 

9 

16 

52 

4

27 

17 

22 

41 

85 

98

27 

21 

88 

69 

92

100 _

0.250

100 

99

78 

91

99 

64 

93 

55 

100

95 

62 

27 

38 

42

99 

53 

99 

98 

73

99 

100 .

98 

100 .

100 .

99

100 .

98 

41 

65 

95 

31

75 

46 

93 

54 

93 

99

30 

28 

96 

72

0.350

100

94 

98

100 

96 

99 

86

99 

93 

88 

79 

55

100 

94 

100 

99 

74

100 .

100 .

100 .

100 -

74 

89 

100 -

75

94 

72 

99 

74 

94 

100 .

32 

47 

98 

75 

99

0.500

97 

100

99 

100

97

100 . 98 

99 

97 

68

98

99

77

83 

94

92

99 

80 

100 .

86 

96

34

59 

99 

77 

100 .

1.00

99

100

100

100 .

100 .

100 . 76

99

100

78

88 

95

96

99 

80

88 

100 .

35 

59 

100 .

77

2.00 4.00 8.00 16.0

100 .......... ..........

87 93 100 ------

99 100 . --. 

79 83 89 100

93 97 100 ......

96 100 .............

98 100 .............

100 .--. . . . 

90 94 100 ......

97 97 98 100

39 45 61 100 

90 100 ........-.

83 85 100 ......

Material less than 0.062 mm was composited by reach and analyzed 

by the pipette method. These determinations are given in tr.ble 5.
B64 ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY

TABLE 5. Particle-size analyses of composited fine fractions (finer than 0.06& mm) 

of Grays Harbor bottom-material samples collected in June 1966

[Approximately equal aliquots from all samples at each cross section were composited roughly by areas of

similar characteristics]

Percent finer than indicated siz 1?, 

Composite of sections in millimeters

0.002 0.004 0.008 0.016 0.031

l-4_____.__. ______

5-8.. .. _..__-.. _.

9-13______________

14-18___---_-____-

19-22____ ________

25-28___-_________

29-30__-____-____-

W1-W6.__________

H1-H7____________

Slips 1, 2__________

._ __. 10

_______ 4

_______ 9

_______ 11

-_---__ 8

_______ 6

__--._- 8

_______ 5

-_---__ 8

_______ 25

14

4

12

15

10

9

10

6

10

31

19

7

16

19

14

11

14

8

13

42

28

10

24

27

19

17

20

10

18

60

39

13

32

38

?7

25

34

14

26

81

The composition of the estuarine bottom materials charges radically 

from Montesano to the harbor entrance, a distance of 28.4 nautical 

miles. Near Montesano, the bottom consists of gravel with some sand; 

between Higgins Island (fig. 1) and the Standard Oil Co. dock (river 

miles 24 to 18, respectively, from the harbor entrance), the bottom is 

predominantly sand. From the Standard Oil dock through the Cow 

Point reach (mile 15), the bottom is clay with some sand; downstream 

to the harbor mouth, the bottom is mostly sand. Channel-side deposits 

in the Chehalis River upstream from the confluence of the Wishkah 

River are predominantly clay with some sand and organic material. 

There, coarse material is deposited within the channel. In the harbor 

area, from Cow Point to the entrance, bottom materials consist 

uniformly of sludge beds across the channel. Dredging operations 

however, tend to remove these sludge beds from the navigation channel; this leaves a fairly clean sand for part of the cross section and 

sludge over the remainder that part undisturbed by dredging.

The total carbon content of each sample was determined by using 

an induction-furnace carbon analyzer. The values are given in table 6.

TABLE 6. Carbon content of bottom-material samples, Grays Harbor

Channel 

Cross distance 

sec- from 

tion mouth 

(nautical 

miles)»

1 21.8

Carbon content (percent by weight)

Section description

150 yd downstream from 

light 8, above 

Cosmopolis.

Station 2

A 

B 

C 

D 

E

1965

Apr. Nov.

1.60 .......

.16 .......

.21 .......

.03 .......

1.09 .......

Dec.

1.51 

.28 

.03 

.07 

2.26

Mar.

1.14 

.16 

.09 

.03 

3.71

1966

June

1.58 

.27 

.56 

1.72 

r\47

Sept.

1.66 

.18 

.30 

.19 

5.55

Avg.

1.498 

.210 

.238 

.408 

4.616

See footnotes at end of table.
ESTUARINE STUDIES IN UPPER GRAYS HARBOR, WASH. B65 

TABLE 6. Carbon content of bottom-material samples, Grays Harbor Continued

Channel

sec- from

(nautical

miles)»

2 21.7

3 19.8

4 19.6

5 18.2

6 18.0

7 17.2

8 16.9

9 15.8

10 15. 6

11 15. 5

12 15. 4

13 15. 3

Carbon content (percent by weight)

Section description

300 yd downstream from

light 8.

Under powerline at

Cosmopolis.

At Cosmopolis monitor

site, light 5.

At navigation light at

mouth of Elliott Slough.

200 yd downstream from

Standard Oil Co. dock.

At light 1, mouth of

Wishkah River.

At Anderson-Middleton

incinerator, 300 yd

downstream from

TJPRR bridge below

Wishkah River.

Cow Point reach, south

from light 59.

Cow Point reach, north

from double range

marker.

Cow Point reach, between

cross sections 10 and 12.

Cow Point reach, north

from light 20.

Cow Point reach, south

from light 57.

StaA

B

C

D

E

A

B

C

D

E

A

B

C

D

E

A

B

C

D

E

A

B

C

D

E

A

B

C

D

E

A

B

C

D

E

A

B

C

D

E

A

B

C

D

E

A

B

C

D

E

A

B

C

D

E

A

B

C

D

E

Apr.

2.14 .

1.14

.14

.09 .

10.4 .

1.37 .

.17 .

.15 .

.29 .

1.03 .

4.33 .

.18 .

.33

.20 .

1.66 .

2.93 .

1.80 .

.14 .

.24 .

1.99 .

.56 .

.80 .

.21 .

.18 .

2.44 .

.92 .

.12 .

1.21 .

2.63 .

.17

.87

2.63 .

2.52 .

.21 .

.97 .

.88 .

2.70

.60

.79 .

.20 .

2.00 .

1965

Nov. Dec.

....... 0.17

0.21 .......

1.34 .......

....... .51

....... 2.26

....... 2.30

....... .30

....... .11

....... .50

....... 1.76

....... 1.69

....... .32

....... 1.35

....... 1.04

.----.- 2.16

...... 1.40

._..._. .59 ..

._.---- .37

....... .50 ..

....... .22

....... .14

....... .14..

._..-.. .70

....... .57

....... .90

....... .12

....... 1.64

._.--.. 1.48

3. 45 3. 63

....... 1.22

.17 .58

.70 .36

....... 3.09

....... 2.25

....... 4.00 ..

....... 1.26

....... .72

...... . 3.35

....... 1.35

....... 1.86 .

. .28

..._... 6.01 ..

._..... 1.25 ..

....... 3.17

...... .95

....... .29

....... .32

....... 3.22

....... 1.85

....... .78 ..

....... 1.29

...... .52 ..

.... 2.97

3.86 2.11

. 86 1. 16

.... ... 1.55

 --- 2.66

....... 2.61

Mar.

0.15

.10

.18

.10

1.97

3.91

.12

.18

.16

.98

1.41

.24

.13

.96

1.86

1.79

.25

.15

1.08 .

.08

.10

.19

1.33

4.13

.10

.16

.11

3.84

1.31

1.'03

.46

2.10

2.51

.11

.64

3.31

.51

3.34

2.26

1.21

.23

1.33

3.26

3.21

.16

.68

.13

2.90

.10

1.83

2.93

1966

June

0.26

.19

.20

.19

1.51 .

3.26

.24

.24

1.08

1.71

2.04

.34 .

1.07

.18

1.54

1.56

.20

.18

.38

18.76

.75 .

.21

.22

2.55

1.05

.27

1.69

2.41

2.81

3.16

3.43

1.53

1.42

1.71

1.15

4.40

.66

.65

.65

1.66 .

2.19

.78 .

.95

2.65 .

2.37

1.51 .

.24

.77 .

2.41

2.54 .

.20

1.21 .

.40

2.84 .

2.94

2.51

1.20

1.35

.85

Sept.

0.43

.37

3.25 .a?

.27

. 2

1.81

l.fo

1.P9

.87

1.20

1.83

.35

2.29

.17

.17

4.29

.82

1.09

.22

.54

.28

6.12

.81

2.34

1.23

2.64

.30

.72

1.79

.27

1.85

.47

.98

2.65

.31

1.76

.22

.70

2.71

1.87

.32

2.15

2.04

Avg.

0.680

.414

.465

.252

4.035

2.818

.232

.190

.530

1.458

2.272

.270

.974

.650

1.684

1.902

.735

.646

.373

5.280

.820

.543

.166

.178

2.034

.938

1.60

.450

1.192

1.462

4.040

1.692

.967

.840

2.434

1.552

3.040

.955

.570

2.290

1.173

1.507

1.467

2.647

1.950

2.612

1.223

.268

.807

2.662

2.530

.352

.504

1.842

2.408

1.650

.792

1.638

2.086

See footnotes at end of table.
B66 ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY

TABLE 6. Carbon content of bottom-material samples, Grays Harbor Continued

Channel

sec- from Section description

(nautical

StaCarbon content (percent by weight)

1965 '

Apr. Nov. Dec. Mar.

1966

Jnne

mlles)i

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

14.5

14.3

14.2

14.0

13.9

13.7

13.6

13.4

12.9

11.0

6.8

11.8

North channel, at nun 54.

North channel, at

Rayonler log crane.

North channel, at east

end of Rayonier main

dock.

North channel, 200 yd

upstream from

Hoquiam River.

North channel, at mouth 

of Hoquiam River.

North channel, 200 yd

below Hoquiam River.

North channel, 400 yd

below Hoquiam River.

North channel, 1,000 yd

below Hoquiam River,

between tall stack and

spar 16 (south channel) .

North channel, at Hoquiam monitor site,

light 50.

North channel, at lights

40 and 41.

At light 26 and red spar 6,

near Ocosta.

South channel, at light 13

and red spar 14.

A

B

C

D

E

A

B

C

1)

E

A

B

C

D

E

A

B

C

D

E

A 

B

C

D

E

A

B

C

D

E

A

B

C

D

E

A

B

0

D

E

A

B

C

D

E

A

B

C

D

E

A

B

C

1)

E

A

B

C

D

E

6.09 .......

1.35

1.30 .......

1.00 .......

2.10 -...-..

5. 35 3. 14

2.67 .......

.24 .77

.60 .......

2.15 .......

2.92 .......

.29 .......

.32 .......

1.34 .......

2.34 .......

2.15 .......

.93 .......

1.13 .......

1.24 .......

.51 .......

4.68 ....... 

1.79 .......

1.03 .......

1.00 .......

.98 .......

1.46 .......

2.50 .......

1.91 .......

1.59 .......

2.28 .......

1.76 .......

1.45 .......

.16 .......

1.25 -_..--.

1.45 -..-.-.

1.06 .......

4.02 .......

1.37 .......

2.07 .......

1.40 .......

2.33 .......

2.21 .......

2.86 ........

1.67 .......

1 95 .......

1.26 .......

1.73 .......

.23 .......

1.15 .......

1.75 .......

1.00 .......

.52 .......

2.39 .......

2.54 .......

5.14

4.53

.63

4.50

.62

2.57

1.77

1.56

2.83

2.06

5.25

1.15

.27

2.58

5.82

1.22

1.06

.44

1.45

2.19

2.55 

2.73

.92

3.00

1.72

1.89

1.73 . 1.24

.16 .

3.45

.37

.14 .

.19

1.36 .

1.64

2.41

.23

.28

2.51 .

1.54

2.14

2.85

1.27

1.46

1.03

1.50 .

1.76

.22 .

.13

1.38

.14

.20

.28

.80

.61

.43

3.07

2.43

1.75

.43

2.24

2.30

2.59

.31

.36

2.50

5.43

.35

2.85

5.24

1.07

.80

2.02

2.75

3.11

.50

2.89

6.36

1.63

3.09

.21

.67

3.10

.47

.63

2.73

2.49

3.85

1.59

1.86

1.88

1.43

1.81

.12

.12

.11

.16

.11

1.10

1.14

.19

1.10

3.32

2.16

2.79

.45

1.33

2.27

2.63

3.15

.41

.72

2.47

2.94

3.25

.23

2.33

2.43

3.67

.87

2.09

9.14

3.65

1.82 

2.18

2.00

2.68

2.11

2.05

1.93

4.69

2.54

2.36

1.87

.81

.52

.92

1.55

3.01

2.73

.34

3.16

1.17

2.30

2.11

2.08

1.22

6.58

.87

.83

1.94

1.51

.38

.18 .

.13

.09

.21

.20 .

1.15

.37

1.19

7.25

2.59

Sept.

1.88

.65

.43

.85

2.84

3.87

.30

1.99

3.30

.28

.26

2.56

2.96

2.37

1.81

3.56

1.84

3.10

2.03

.59

20.0

.25

.34

1.06

1.32

3.31

.31

2.02

2.29

2.45

2.18

2.72

1.54

.74

.23

.11

.36

.40

1.15

.49

.58

2.06

1.05

1.41

3.404

2.330

.648

1.920

2.014

3.310

2. 545

.598

1.128

2.234

3.968

1.242

.286

2.202

3.280

3.070

1.260

1.115

3.132

2.275

3.144 

2.233

1.258

2.227

2.160

1.800

2.048

3.550

1.220

2.430

5.418

.662

.284

1.148

1.326

2.578

2.327

.554

2.580

1.352

2.338

2.422

2.742

1.694

2.678

1.156

1.072

1.094

.960

1.10

.143

.498

.185

.430

.197

1.058

.740

.878

2.972

2.458

See footnotes at end of table.
ESTUARINE STUDIES IN UPPER GRAYS HARBOR, WASH. B67 

TABLE 6. Carbon content of bottom-material samples, Grays Harbor Cont'mied

sec26

27

28

29

30

31

Slipl

Slip 2

Wl

W2

W3

W4

W5

W6

HI

H2

H3

H4

H5

H6

H7

Channel

from

(nautical

miles)>

13.8

14.1

14.4

(12.8)

(12.0)

3.1

(14.7)

(14.8)

1.6

1.2

1.0

.6

.3

.1

2.6

2.2

1.8

1.2

.8

.5

.1

Carbon content (percent by weight)

Section description

South channel, at red spar

18.

South channel, at row of

pilings half way between red spar 18 and

Newskah Creek.

South channel, at Newskah Creek.

Upper harbor tidal flats,

extension of cross section

21 (stack and spar 16).

Upper harbor tidal flats,

extension of cross section

22 (Hoquiam monitor).

Within harbor entrance,

in line with light 4 and

buoy A.

Slip No. 1, at Port Dock

(longitudinal samples) .

Slip No. 2, at Port Dock

(longitudinal samples) .

Wishkah River:

At powerline- .........

At water pipe.-------.

50 yd above bridge ....

Hill on left bank... ..

50 yd above Wishkah

St.

Between railroad and

Heron Street bridge.

Hoquiam River:

200 yd below U.S. 101.

100 yd above railroad

bridge.

150 yd above incinerator.

At powerline- .........

At cannery.... .......

200 yd above U.S. 101.

At brick incinerator. . .

StaA

B

C

D

E

A

B

C

D

E

A

B

C

D

E

A

B

C

D

E

A

B

C

D

E

F

A

B

C

D

E

A

B

C

D

E

A

B

C

D

E

C

C

C

C

C

C

C

C

C

C

C

C

C

Apr.

3.02

.43

1.92

1.60

2.34

2.36

.65

.37

2.22

1.09

3.04

3.66

.37

2.08

1.74

1.45

1.27

1.52

.89

.83

.74

.57

.62

1.54

1.95

3.22

3.24

3.26

2.98

1965

Nov.

1.74

.66

2.89

3.01

3.24

2.87

Dec.

. 1.78

. .48

. 1.12

. 1.46

. 1.91

. .91

. 1.09

. 3.37

. 1.50

. 2.05

1.07

1.37

.94

. 2.18

3.13

.85

1.70

2.27

2.02

1.14

1.00

1.21

2.19

1.75

1.09

1.06

.12

.09

.17

.09

3.63

3.70

3.07

3.38

3.71

3.49

3.44

2.56

2.02

.69

1.02

.47

7.91

2.65

3.78

12.49

1.18

2.38

2.21

2.39

Mar.

0.70

.17

2.36

.78

2.16

1.80

2.42

.25

2.83

.89

1.22

2.41

.81

1.08

2.81

1.60

1.06

.96

1.75

.59

3.06

3.62

3.82

3.27

3.27

2.80

.30

.92

.86

9.79

10.77

>45

6.47

>35

1.69

1.63

1.42

1.46

>28

1966

June

1.33

.31

1.49

1.42

2.60

1.73

.28

.20

.40

3.40

1.84

.28

2.04

1.80

4.47

1.30

1.04

.99

.83

.88

2.58

1.52

1.03

1.81

1.60

1.13

.08

.18

.10

.13

.11

2.98

2.92

3.44

3.32

3.49

3.80

3.12

3.27

3.50

2.75

.83

.96

.35

7.23

3.04

1.61

Sept.

2.68

1.34

.00

.96

2.00

1.05

.27

3.84

1.38

1.49

1.29

2.32

.79

.99

1.13

1.86

2.47

1.13

.78

.55

1.38

2.05

1.45

.54

3.45

2.99

3.08

1.902

.640

.940

1.360

2.242

1.366

. .673

1.274

. 1.373

2.436

1.915

1.700

.925

2.095

2.592

1.096

1.272

1.810

1.404

1.012

1.582

1.090

1.256

1.622

1.568

.838

. .080

. .150

. .095

. .150

. .100

. 3. 180

. 2.990

3.552

3.126

3.442

....... 3.755

2.70

2.80

3.19

2.45

1.43

1.32

.30

1.85

2.02

1.05

>15.5 >14.0

8.65

>26.6

1.80

.58

1.56

3.02

11.46

6.80

.74

2.55

1.57

3.180

3.195

3.020

2.505

.812

1.055

.495

6.695

4.620

2.147

12.12

18.37

11.70

1.338

1.732

1.700

25.53 14.74

1 Nautical miles via main navigation channel from 1240 11.0/ W. Distances in parentheses given as references for cross sections not in main navigation channel.

2 "A" refers to north side of channel (right side looking downstream), and "E" refers to south side of 

channel.
B68 ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY

The carbon samples were dried immediately upon their return from 

the field because large losses of carbon result when wet samples are 

stored (L. E. Hofman, U.S. Geol. Survey, written com num., 1966). 

Several duplicate analyses were performed on acidified samples to 

determine, by difference, the approximate amount of calcium carbonate 

(shells) present. Little difference was noted except for samples obtained 

at the mouth of the harbor and except for one sample collected from 

the lower end of the south channel.

The variation in carbon content along the channel is given in 

figure 49. At each cross section, the outer pair of analyses were 

averaged to obtain the "side" value, and the inner three analyses 

have been averaged to obtain the "channel" value. The average 

carbon content of side material tends to decrease in a downstream 

direction. The average carbon content of the channel material increases downstream to the Cow Point-Rennie Island reach, then 

decreases downstream to the mouth of the harbor. Below the mouth 

of the Hoquiam River the samples are quite similar. Samples obtained 

from the sides and center of the tidal flats downstream from Rennie 

Island are indistinguishable from samples obtained in tbe navigation 

channel. There was no obvious trend of carbon content with time.

S5 3

Channel-side material

I I I I 

EXPLANATION

° Channel-side material 

 Average channel material

A Material from edge of 

tidal flats

^Material from middle of 

tidal flats

2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 

CHANNEL DISTANCE DOWNSTREAM FROM MONTESANO, IN NAUTICAL MILES

26

FIGURE 49. Longitudinal distribution of carbon content of bottom materials.
ESTUARINE STUDIES IN UPPER GRAYS HARBOR, WASH. B69 

DISSOLVED OXYGEN DEMAND

The flow of the main channel transports the greatest amounts 

of solutes and organic detritus, materials that contribute tc the 

oxygen depletion of the water. There is a correlation between the 

decrease in dissolved oxygen of the water and the increase in carbon 

content of the bottom materials in the main channel. In figure 50, 

comparison is made between the longitudinal change in cr.rbon 

content of the bottom materials of the main channel (from fig. 49) 

and the 1965 average DO sag curve for low-flow, low-tide conditions 

(D. R. Fisher, Weyerhaeuser Co., written commun., 1966). The 

reach with the highest concentration of carbon in the bottom materials 

(Cow Point) also has the lowest concentration of dissolved oxygen in 

the overlying water. This reach is the primary area for deposition 

of organic detritus, including that transported into the estuary by the 

tributaries and that added by waste effluents.

Camp (1965, p. 10) estimated that half of the oxygen demand of 

the incoming detrital material in the Merrimack River estuary was 

satisfied before the material settled out. Camp's data, applied to 

Grays Harbor, suggest that a part of the total oxygen demand of the 

incoming organic detritus is "stored" in the bottom sediments. These 

deposits exert their demand slowly and therefore represent a potential 

demand. Should these materials be disturbed by dredging or in some 

manner mixed with harbor waters, the potential demand would become 

an immediate demand. An estimate of the potential BOD, taken as 

the COD (chemical oxygen demand), was therefore obtained for 

this investigation.

Several samples of bottom material collected in June and September 

1966 were analyzed for COD by methods of the American Public 

Health Association (1960). The method was modified by allowirg the 

reagents and materials to stand at room temperature for about a week 

with occasional stirring, rather than refluxing. No chloride corrections 

were made, because the data are of a qualitative nature onl^. In 

figure 51, values of COD are plotted against concomitant carbon 

content. The COD generally increases with increasing carbon content, 

and the figure shows that there was evidently more oxidizable matter 

in the September samples than in the June samples. The COD reT ation 

agrees with data published elsewhere (Eriksen and Townsend, 1940; 

Thames Survey Committee and Water Pollution Research Laboratory, 1964).

The relation between carbon content and amount of fine material 

(organic-free material less than 0.062 mm) is shown in figure 52. Only 

average channel data were used to compute the regression line given.
B70 ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY

 I 

£ 7

3 4

o 3

3 2

Low tide

J______I J____I____I

3 0

24 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 

CHANNEL DISTANCE DOWNSTREAM FROM MONTESANO, IN NAUTICAL MILES

22

FIGURE 50. Comparison of longitudinal variations of carbon contert of channelbottom materials and dissolved-oxygen content of harbor water. Carboncontent curve is from figure 49. Dissolved-oxygen curves are based on data for 

1965 (D. R. Fisher, Weyerhaeuser Co., written commun., 196f).

The equation for the regression is:

(7=0.315+0.0238^, (17)
ESTTJARINE STUDIES IN UPPER GRAYS HARBOR, WASH. B71

160

140

E 120

100

80

60

40

20

o June 1966

September 1966

01234 

CARBON CONTENT, IN PERCENT BY WEIGHT

FIGURE 51. Relation between chemical oxygen demand and carbon content of

bottom materials.

where C is the carbon content, in percent by dry weight, and F is 

percent, by weight, finer than 0.062 mm. The standard error c* estimate is 0.463 percent carbon. The plot verifies the natural assumption 

that the fine material and organic material respond similarly to given 

depositional influences.

During the Thames River survey (Thames Survey Committee and 

Water Pollution Research Laboratory, 1964) bottom deposits were 

studied extensively for their physical and chemical composition and 

for the evolution of gas from these materials. The relation of carbon 

to fine material from the Thames River study (1964, p. 293) also is 

shown in figure 52. The upper curve, for the Thames reach above 

Mucking, was derived from data with more variability than those 

from the sea reach, the lower curve. The Grays Harbor regression 

line plots between the two Thames River lines.

As part of the Grays Harbor cooperative study, R. B. Herrmann 

(Weyerhaeuser Co., written commun., 1966) investigated the effect 

of tideflat materials (surficial algae) on the dissolved oxygen of 

overlying waters. Herrmann's studies indicated an apparent contribution of oxygen by tidal flats during the summer. He estimated a 

net oxygen production of about 100 milligrams per square meter
B72 ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY

\

/^-Thames River above Mucking

Main channel 

Grays Harbor

10 20 30 40 50 60 70 

SEDIMENT FINER THAN 0.062 MILLIMETERS, IN PERCENT BY WEIGHT

80

FIGURE 52. Relation between carbon content and amount of fine sediment 

(less than 0.062 mm) for main channel bottom materials. Open circles indicate 

bottom samples obtained from main channel; solid circles indicate samples 

from south channel; and open triangles indicate samples from tidal flats. 

Dashed lines indicate similar relations for the Thames River, Great Britain 

(Thames Survey Committee and Water Pollution Research Laboratory, 1964, 

p. 293).

per hour from samples taken from the periphery of the tidal flats 

during the summer. This production rate must be applied to the 

average volume of overlying waters to compare the productivity 

with that of harbor waters. Westley (1967, p. 6) cit°-d a formula 

given by Westlake (1963): grams of oxygen multiplied by 0.3 equals 

grams of carbon. If this conversion factor is used, Herrmr.nn's estimate 

becomes about 0.07 milligram of oxygen per liter per hour at high 

tide, which is about double the productivity of harbor waters given 

by Westley and Tarr (1965).

Eriksen and Townsend (1940, p. 64-68) studied mud collected 

from the surface of Grays Harbor tidal flats and concluded that the
ESTUARINE STUDIES IN UPPER GRAYS HARBOR, WASH. B73

flats were "not responsible for the low dissolved-oxygen content of 

the water of upper Grays Harbor."

Other benefits from tidal flats might be shown. Langbein and 

Durum (1967), studying natural stream reaeration rates, found 

that:

where K2 is the reaeration coefficient, V is mean stream velocity, 

and H is the mean depth. Harbor waters move across the tidal flats 

during much of the tidal cycle, and thus, by providing a large moving 

surface area at shallow depth, should be credited with a large airount 

of the oxygen contribution. Additional oxygen is derived from the 

ocean winds that generally blow in this area. Air entrainment from 

waves over the shallows can only add to the dissolved oxygen.

Conversely, the potential oxygen demand of upper harbor bottom 

materials is fairly large. Dredging of large areas would stir up Quantities of high-carbon sediment which could exert considerable demand 

at a period critical to harbor biota. An estimate of potential demand 

might be made by analyzing a series of core samples from an area to 

obtain an average carbon content and then converting this value 

to a potential oxygen demand using figure 51. Water running off 

dredge-spoil areas would be depleted of dissolved oxygen. However, 

unless disturbed, these deposits would probably have a relatively 

low oxygen demand.

During most low tides, the surface of Grays Harbor is broken, by 

many bubbles which are believed to have a scrubbing action on dissolved oxygen, removing it from solution as the bubbles rise through 

the water column. However, no evidence was collected to indicate 

this. The Thames Survey Committee and Water Pollution Research 

Laboratory (1964) discussed evolution of gases from bottom deposits. 

They determined 0.4-0.8 percent oxygen by volume in the bubbles of 

Tilbury tidal basin, Great Britain. Thus, presumably some scrubbing 

action also occurs in Grays Harbor.

SUMMARY OF BOTTOM MATERIALS

The influence of Grays Harbor bottom materials on the DC and 

BOD of harbor waters is complex. The segment of the estuary with 

bottom materials containing consistently high concentrations of 

organic carbon is in the vicinity of Cow Point. From the relation 

between carbon content and chemical oxygen demand, the bottom 

materials near Cow Point must exert some oxygen demand on the 

overlying waters. The organic carbon in bottom materials is found with 

fine particles (less than 0.062 mm in diameter), so the writers- con-
B74 ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY

eluded that both are responding similarly to the depositional influences of higher salinity and water temperature, and slower velocity. 

The tidal flats benefit the harbor waters moving across them. 

Herrmann's studies indicate a net oxygen production for the flats, and 

this production possibly offsets any deleterious effects of undisturbed 

channel materials. It is doubtful, however, if during a period of low 

fresh-water inflow, the benefit from the flats could ever offset the 

marked increase in potential oxygen demand caused by disturbing 

(by dredging) large areas of channel-bottom materials.

WATER QUALITY

The fresh, brackish, and oceanic waters in Grays Hsrbor are the 

habitats of many beneficial organisms, mostly shellfish ard salmonids. 

The salinity of the water defines the environment for most of these 

organisms, which are able to adapt to hydrologic and hydraulic 

changes in their environment; but the organisms are not usually able 

to adapt to water-quality changes in their environment. This section 

of the report describes the water-quality conditions r\ the upper 

harbor during the period of this study.

SALINITY

The first chemical characteristic of estuarine waters usually considered is salinity, or saltiness. Longitudinal salinity prof les in Grays 

Harbor (figs. 22-24) were presented earlier, in that part of the report 

dealing with dispersion coefficients. In the quasi-steady-«state model 

of an estuary, the longitudinal salinity distribution is considered to 

be in a dynamic equilibrium between the force of the fresh water on 

the system and the forces moving salts into the estuary. As the fresh 

water increases, water of a given salinity is found farther downstream. 

This is evident in figure 53, which shows the relation between freshwater discharge and the high-tide intrusion position of vT ater with a 

salinity of 1 ppt (part per thousand) for 1966 field data (figs. 22-24). 

The 1-ppt intrusion point progresses farther inland with decreasing 

flow.

Salinity intrusion can also be measured at a fixed point in the 

harbor and related to hydraulic parameters, such as freeh-water discharge and tidal stage. Two automatic water-quality monitors were 

installed in Grays Harbor for this project: one, owned by the Weyerhaeuser Co., was installed on the Weyerhaeuser Co. dock at Cosmopolis, 8.9 miles downstream from Montesano and 19.5 miles upstream 

from the mouth; the second was installed at Hoquiam, 15.5 miles 

downstream from Montesano and 12.9 miles upstream from the 

mouth. These monitors continuously recorded water temperature, 

specific conductance, and dissolved oxygen. Sampling intakes were
ESTUARINE STUDIES IN UPPER GRAYS HARBOR, WASH. B75

10

ir

2 -

1-

300 1000 

5-DAY AVERAGE FRESH-WATER DISCHARGE, IN CUBIC FEET PER SECOND

10,000

FIGURE 53. Relation between salinity intrusion and fresh-water discharge at 

high tides ranging from 6.5 to 11.5 feet. Anomalous point at 714 cfs is based 

on an estimated part of salinity curve (bottom graph of fig. 22).

attached to floats with the intake about 3 feet below the water surface. Tidal stage was obtained with separate recorders.

An example of the information obtained at each monitor site is 

shown in figures 54 and 55. The upstream station, at Cosmopolis (fig. 

54), recorded minimum conductivity and maximum dissolved-oxygen 

concentration at low tide, and the reverse at high tide. The downstream station, at Hoquiam (fig. 55), recorded minimum conductivity 

and minimum dissolved-oxygen content near low tide, and maximums 

near high tide. Minimum conductivities at Hoquiam are greate~ than 

the maximums at Cosrnopolis. Dissolved-oxygen concentrations at 

Hoquiam were less than those at Cosmopolis; peak values we:n only 

slightly greater than minimum values at Cosmopolis.
B76 ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY

18

0400 0800 1200 1600 2000 2400

PACIFIC STANDARD TIME

FIGURE 54. Fluctuations of specific conductance, dissolved oxygen, and tidal 

stage at the Cosmopolis monitor on July 2, 1966. Fresh-wate~ discharge was 

1,280 cfs, and water temperature ranged from 17° to 18°C. Dissolved-oxygen 

values are corrected for salinity.

Daily maximum conductivities at Cosmopolis for 620 days in the 

1965 and 1966 calendar years were correlated with coincident freshwater discharge for this report by Pollution Control Commission 

personnel. The following regression equation was obtained:

#Cmax=76.4-17.7log10Q/, (18)

where KCm&x is the specific conductivity, in millimhos at 25°C, and 

Qf is the fresh-water discharge, in cubic feet per second. The correlation coefficient was 0.917, and the standard error of estimate was 

4.25 millimhos. Evidently, variations in discharge cause most of the 

variations in the daily maximum conductivity at Cosmopolis. If a 

longitudinal salinity distribution function, such as eauation 5 or 

equation 9, is assumed, equation 18 can be used to estimate the 

location of water of a given salinity, or the intrusion point, for an
ESTUARINE STUDIES IN TIPPER GRAYS HARBOR, WASH. B77

32 

30

o 28 

26 

24 

22 

20 

18 

16 

14 

12 

10

0400 0800 1200 1600 

PACIFIC STANDARD TIME

2400

FIGURE 55. Fluctuations of specific conductance, dissolved oxygen, and tidal 

stage at the Hoquiam monitor on July 2, 1966. Fresh-water discharge was 

1,280 cfs, and water temperature ranged from 16° to 17°C. Dissolved-oxygen 

values are corrected for salinity.

assumed discharge. The equation for specific conductance can be 

converted roughly into salinity by using one of the following:

.563 (19)

where s\ is the salinity, in parts per thousand, and K is specific conductivity less than 10.5 millimhos; or

s2 =0.643 #-0.81, (20)

where s2 is salinity for K greater than 10.5 millimhos. The two equations were derived from a conductivity-chloride relation for April 

1965 field data (chloride analyses courtesy of D. R. Fisher, Weyerhaeuser Co.) and substituted into an equation given by Sverdrup, 

Johnson, and Fleming (1942, p. 51):

§=0.03 + 1.805 chlorinity, (21)
B78 ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY

where chlorinity was taken as the chloride concentration, in parts 

per thousand.

The upstream intrusion position of salts in an estuary is thus 

seen to be primarily a function of fresh-water discharge. This is 

because of the averaging of tidal forces over long periods. In the onedimensional steady-state frame of reference, the salts are moved 

upstream by gravitational convection due to density differences and 

dispersion processes. Downstream movement is entirely due to the 

force of fresh-water discharge on the system. For constant Qf over a 

long period, an equilibrium condition should prevail, and intrusion 

should reach a specific point upstream.

DISSOLVED OXYGEN

In Grays Harbor, the characteristic of the water considered most 

important, and most affected by man, is the dissolved oxygen (Eriksen 

and Townsend, 1940, p. 36).

Many natural processes supply oxygen to harbor waters. Large 

amounts of oxygen are brought in by tributary streams and fresh ocean 

waters. The atmosphere supplies additional amounts of oxygen by 

entrainment due to the wind and waves and by reaeratior, Reaeration 

is the renewal of dissolved oxygen which takes place at a rate proportional to the difference between the capacity and the actual content of 

dissolved oxygen of the harbor waters. Phytoplankton and periphyton 

usually have a net daily production of oxygen during critical summer 

months. However, Westley (1967) found a lower photosynthetic rate 

in the upper harbor which he ascribed primarily to turbidity and the 

presence of sulfite waste liquor. By comparing Grays Harbor with 

Willapa Bay, he estimated that upper Grays Harbor failed to receive 

about 0.17 mg/1 per day of dissolved oxygen owing to the lowered 

phytoplankton photosynthesis.

Another source of dissolved oxygen, usually neglected by investigators, is precipitation. The 1931-60 average annual precipitation at 

Aberdeen was 84.5 inches (U.S. Weather Bureau, 1966, p. 231). On the 

order of 10 million pounds of dissolved oxygen would be supplied to 

the 99 square miles (statute) of Grays Harbor by this source annually 

if the DO concentration of the rain were estimated as 8 mg/1. However, for the same 1931-60 period, an average of only 7.01 inches of 

rain fell during July, August, and September, or an average of only 

0.076 inch per day. On the basis of this value and an estimated DO 

content of 8 mg/1, about 9,000 pounds per day might be expected 

from precipitation during the low-flow period. This compares with an 

estimate of 22,000 pounds per day supplied by tributaries. Although 

not very large, the amount of dissolved oxygen carried by precipitation
E3TUARINE STUDIES IN UPPER GRAYS HARBOR, WASH. B79

would be in addition to that from atmospheric reaeration and the other 

sources. Of course, only a third to a half of the amount would serve the 

upper harbor area.

Several deaeration forces exist in any estuary. In addition to the loss 

of oxygen due to industrial and municipal effluents (discussed later 

under "Pollutants"), some dissolved oxygen is lost to respiration by 

biota, although the writers have no knowledge of an estimate of respiration by flora and fauna in Grays Harbor. Other factors were previously discussed under "Bottom Material." Finally, as shorn in 

figure 7, the distribution of tides during the summer months of 1966 

averaged about 0.5 foot less than the average for the year. From figure 

8, it is evident that about 250 million cubic feet of water is involved. 

Thus, 78,000 pounds of dissolved oxygen is unavailable during the 

summer months for oxidation of wastes, assuming a DO concentration 

of 5 mg/1. Much of this dissolved oxygen would have been rerewed 

daily, if the water had been present. Also, the extra volume would 

have helped dilute the harbor wastes.

For the period May through September 1966, daily maximuEi and 

minimum dissolved oxygen and specific conductivity at the Cormopolis and Hoquiam monitors were tabulated with daily composite 

fresh-water discharge, daily maximum and minimum tidal stages, and 

the Cosmopolis water temperature at noon each day. Pollution Control Commission personnel arranged to have an electronic computer 

correlate the data for the 101 days with complete information through 

use of a stepwise regression program. The symbols, units, means, and 

standard deviations of the variables are given in table 7.

TABLE 7. Mean values and standard deviations of daily maximum and minimum 

automatic-water-quality-monitor data for the period May through September 1966

Variable Symbol Units Mean Standard

deviation

Dissolved oxygen, Cosmopolis, maximum. .......

minimum

Specific conductance, Cosmopolis, maximum.

minimum. _.-.

Dissolved oxygen, Hoquiam, maximum.

minimum. ______ ...

Specific conductance, Hoquiam, maximum.... _..

minimum...--..

Predicted tide, Port Dock, highest. .. ............

lowest. --. _ ---.____.

Composite fresh-water discharge- _ .... . ... 

Noon water temperature, Cosmopolis__ __ ... ...

Logarithm of discharge (base 10)_-_-_-_-_. . ... 

Tidal stage difference (Hmn Hm i n)-.. ...........

..... DOcmax

.-._- DOcmin

-Kcmin

.... DOHmw

.---. DOHmin

---- -firHm .x

KHm\n

. _ - - - fi max Hm -

..... Q,

....LogQ,

mg/1.. .-.-.

mg/1-.-.......

Millimhos at

26°C.

.-.-.do ......

mg/1.... . ...

mg/1 ------

Millimhos at . .

25°C.

.....do -----

ft-.......--...

ft-.... ------

CfS- _ . - 

°C---_ . ------

ft.............

7.272

4.536

22.26

5.433

5.713

3.499

34.82

21.98

9.431

-. 1277

1341 

64.34

3.033

9.558

1.246

1.221

7.333

4.551

.9700

1.023

5.702

6.387

.8316

1.193

947.8 

3.890

.2804 

1.722

The correlation matrix that is, the correlation coefficient between 

parameter pairs, r is given in table 8.
B80 ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY

 £

ss -e

^ 

s

53

"8

5

S §1131i S

CO CO O O 

CO «0 00 O

S

o «n

t^ IN

£* OO CO

 ^ OS t-~ OS O

S « S «n S

0 I

8 3

? r

00 B Bt 0 0
ESTUARINE STUDIES IN UPPER GRAYS HARBOR, WASH. B81

For the 101 days, 0.165<r< + 0.165 is significant at the 10- 

percent level.

Daily minimum dissolved oxygen at Cosmopolis (DOCmin, in mg/1) 

was correlated with discharge (Qf), difference in tidal stage (AH), and 

daily minimum dissolved oxygen at Hoquiam (DOHmin) :

DOCmm=3.28+0.00094Q/, (22)

= 6.03+0.00096(2,- 0.291 AH, (23)

=4.28+0.0074Q,-0.212AH+0.369 DOHmin. (24)

From table 7, Qf is found to correlate significantly with DOHmin, which 

tends to negate the usefulness of equation 24. The correlation coefficients, r, and standard error of estimates, se, are:

Equation _ r_ se , in mg/1

22 0. 728 0. 841

23 . 835 . 678

24 . 868 . 616

With the same dependent variable, DOcmin, the correlation with 

daily minimum Hoquiam dissolved oxygen, DOHmin, and high tide, 

ffmax, gave the following:

DOCmin= 1.53+0.860 DOHm,n, (25) 

= 3.06+0.822 DOHm,n-0.149Hmax. (26)

Again, a fairly high correlation was found between the independent 

variables in the second equation. The r and se for these equations are :

Equation _ r_ se , in mg/1

25 0. 720 0. 851

26 . 726 . 847

Similar correlations were made with Hoquiam daily minimum 

dissolved oxygen, DOHmin, as follows :

DOHmin=0.762+0.603DOCmin, (27)

=5.32-0.0826J^Hmin, (28)

= 7.66-0.0887^Hmm-0.232 AH, (29)

where .Kumin is t'he daily minimum specific conductance at Hoquiam. 

Fairly strong interdependence was again found among the inde-
B82 ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY

pendent variables in the last equation. For these equations, r and se 

are:

Equation r se , in mg/1

27 0. 720 0.713

28 . 516 .880

29 . 646 .789

No correlations with waste loading were attempted. The effects 

of daily variations in effluent BOD and volume, however, are lessened 

by the decay properties of the materials. Because the efFuent components require several days to oxidize completely, the longitudinal 

dissolved-oxygen curve represents the natural dissolved-oxygen 

profile with a time-integrated deficit from the wastes superimposed. 

In this report, then, the imposed effluent rate and its dissolvedoxygen demand are considered to be roughly constant as a first 

approximation.

As with salinity intrusion, if a typical longitudinal dissolved-oxygen 

distribution can be defined for Grays Harbor, correlation with pertinent parameters should allow estimation of the location, extent, and 

magnitude of the dissolved-oxygen minimum, or sag point. For 

instance, the average dissolved-oxygen curve shown in figure 50 is 

quite similar in form to the average curve for other years during lowflow periods (D. R. Fisher, Weyerhaeuser Co., written commun., 

1966). Also, a fairly high correlation exists between characteristics of 

water in different areas of the harbor. This is borne out by the correlation between maximum and minimum data at the Hoquiam monitor:

DOHmax=3.55+0.615DOH,nin, (30)

where DOHmax is the daily maximum dissolved oxygen at Hoquiam. 

The values of r and se for this equation are 0.652 and 0.739 mg/1 

respectively. Therefore, given sufficient data related to a common 

time base, say, the equivalent half-tide position (The.mes Survey 

Committee and Water Pollution Research Laboratory, 1964, p. 7), 

the interrelation between water-quality characteristics in different 

areas of the harbor can be determined. Another possible common 

reference parameter might be the salinity or the chlorinity. When 

Elriksen and Townsend (1940, p. 45) plotted minimum dissolved 

oxygen versus chlorinity, they found that the minimum dissolved 

oxygen was almost invariably associated with chlorinities from 9 to 

12. Converted to salinity, the range would be from 16 to 22 ppt.

The high degree of correlation between Cosmopolis and Hoquiam 

daily minimum dissolved oxygen in equations 25 and 27, however, 

only verifies the fact that the excursion of the water often allows
ESTUARINE STUDIES IN UPPER GRAYS HARBOR, WASH. P83

each monitor to sample the same water. Further corroboration of this 

is shown by the correlations between conductivities:

(31)

(32)

(33)

The following tabulation gives the respective r and se for each of the 

above equations:

Equation r se, in millimhos

31 0.847 2.43

32 .847 3.41

33 .870 2.83

POLLUTANTS

The Pollution Control Commission (written commun., 1966) has 

tabulated the major sources of waste loading in Grays Harbor as part 

of their contribution to this cooperative study. The following is a 

summary of their tabulation:

BOD (Ibs Percent of total 

Effluent source per day) BOD load

Industrial:

Rayonier, Inc. (pulp and paper)_______ 408. 000 89. 5

Weyerhaeuser Co. (pulp) ______-. _ _ _ 45, 300 9. 9

6 lumber and plywood mills_________ 1, 240 . 3

Municipal:

Aberdeen, Hoquiam, and Cosmopolis_ 1, 160 . 3

Other:

5 fish companies (estimated) ___-__-___ 50 . 01

Total____-_-----_----._-----_-_-_ 455,750 100.01

Effluents from pulp and paper mills constitute by far the largest 

source of waste loading of the harbor. Of these effluents, the largest 

proportion of BOD is due to the sulfite waste liquor. Both pulpmills 

have continuing programs for reducing the BOD of their effluents, 

however, so that the tabular data applies only to conditions as of 1966.

Gunter and McKee (1960, p. 66) estimated that 90 percent of sulfite 

waste liquor will decompose within 10 days. They also noted that a 

typical 5-day BOD of undiluted sulfite waste liquor was about 30,000 

mg/1 by weight. They also showed (1960, p. 65) an approximate gross 

analysis of sulfite waste liquor solids. Lignin sulfonic acids comprise 

65.0 percent and fermentable sugars 15.0 percent of total solids. 

Analyses vary radically, depending on the process used, tree species, 

raw materials, and in-plant treatment.

Eriksen and Townsend (1940, p. 42-49) discussed the response of 

harbor waters to sulfite waste liquor. They found improvement in 

percent of saturation of dissolved oxygen within 4 days after mill
River

iee_

at Montesano. __

Discharge 

(cfs)

588

183

. _ _ _ 684

.___ 2.230

BOD

(Ibs per day)

4,820

1,540

4,800

13. 200

DO

(Ibs per day)

27, 700

9,350

1. 500, 000

B84 ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY

shutdown. In July 1939, the pulpmill was shut down for about 11 

days, and the minimum DO climbed from 40 percent of saturation 

to 76 percent. Nine days after tjhe mill was restarted, the minimum 

DO was 27 percent of saturation; and a week later it was about 21 

percent of saturation.

The Pollution Control Commission (written commun., 1966) also 

determined the approximate amount of dissolved oxygen brought into 

the upper harbor by tributary streams. The following table summarizes 

tributary contributions at intermediate flow:

Wishkah 

Hoquiam 

Wynoochee

Longitudinal BOD profiles of harbor waters obtained by the 

Weyerhaeuser Co. (D.R. Fisher, written commun., 1966, 1967) 

show that BOD values on the order of 0.5 mg/1 are typical of samples 

taken near Montesano and in the lower harbor. Maximum BOD 

values usually occur in the Cow Point reach at high tide and about 

half way down the south channel at low tide. The average of these 

maximum BOD values may be as high as 2 mg/1 with individual 

values as high as 4 mg/1.

The index of sulfite waste liquor, the Pearl-Benson index (PBI), 

has a similar longitudinal distribution. Values less than 10 mg/1 

are found upstream and downstream in the upper harbor, whereas 

average values of almost 80 mg/1 are found around Cow Point at high 

tide and in the middle of the south channel at low tide. A few samples 

contained more than 100 mg/1 PBI.

The method of allocation of the dissolved-oxygen resources of an 

estuary need not be complicated: a good example was given by 

Waldichuk (1962, p. 29-31) for Alberni Harbor. In this example, 

the available dissolved oxygen of the harbor was related to the freshwater discharge. A second curve, computed from the first, related 

discharge to the dissolved oxygen remaining after satisfying the 

dissolved-oxygen requirement of the fishlife. Knowledge of the amount 

of dissolved oxygen required for stabilization of the pulpmill effluent 

then allowed determination of minimum discharge required or, 

alternatively, the maximum allowable dissolved-oxyger demand from 

the effluent.

SUMMARY OF WATER QUALITY

This section of the report has described some of the physical and 

chemical aspects of water quality of Grays Harbor. The extent of saline
ESTUARINE STUDIES IN UPPER GRAYS HARBOR, WASH. P85

intrusion at high tide was related to fresh-water discharge. With 

decreasing flow, water of a given salinity is found farther and farther 

inland. That this relationship exists is shown by equation 18. Discharge is therefore the most important factor influencing salirity 

intrusion. Tidal forces evidently are averaged over long periods. 

Except for tidal mixing action, these forces are of minor importance 

in substantially influencing the maximum extent of the intrusior.

Dissolved oxygen is the most important water-quality parameter 

in Grays Harbor when consideration is given to the entire biolog; cal 

community man, fowl, fish, and shellfish. The natural fluctuation of 

dissolved oxygen, high in the winter and low in the summer, coincides 

with the fluctuation of fresh-water inflow and of water temperature. 

The supply of dissolved oxygen in harbor waters is renewed only by 

natural processes which are subject to the usual vagaries of nature. 

The supply of dissolved oxygen is lowest during the summer, low-f ow 

months, and it is diminished still further by industrial wastes. Furthermore, a decrease in the tidal volume during this low-flow period reduces the amount of oxygen available for stabilizing these wastes 

and also reduces the amount of water available for diluting them.

The similarity of successive dissolved-oxygen-sag curves obtained 

over a period of years makes possible the monitoring of the dissolved 

oxygen minimum with a single instrument placed between the limits 

of excursion of that minimum. With this instrument, the disposal of 

industrial wastes could be scheduled to minimize the depletior of 

dissolved oxygen.

Essentially then, the problem facing water-resources management 

in Grays Harbor is the selection of a suitable compromise between 

the needs of the entire biological community (from man to the lowest 

plankton) and the wastes discharged into the water environment.

The allocation to various uses of the water-quality resource? of 

Grays Harbor, especially the dissolved oxygen, is the responsibility 

of management. After the allocation of the dissolved-oxygen resources 

to the biota and for stabilization of wastes, a reserve of dissolved 

oxygen would seem essential in the event of natural or accidental 

disasters.

The information in this report should assist management personnel 

in obtaining a greater understanding of the influences on the water 

quality of upper Grays Harbor.

REFERENCES CITED

American Public Health Association, 1960, Standard methods for examination

of water and wastewater [llth ed.]: New York, 626 p. 

Bader, R. G., McLellan, P. M., and others, 1955, Grays Harbor, Washing-ton,

a literature survey: Seattle, Washington Univ. Dept. Oceanography, 142 p.
B86 ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY

Bialkowsky, H. W., and Billington, P. S., 1957, Pilot studies to predict effects

of waste on receiving waters: Sewage and Indus. Wastes, v. 29, no. 5, p. 551-

569. 

Budinger, T. F., Coachman, L. K., and Barnes, C. A., 1964, Columbia River

effluent in the northeast Pacific Ocean, 1961, 1962 Selected aspects of

physical oceanography: Seattle, Washington Univ. Dept. Oceanography

Tech. Kept. 99, 78 p. 

Camp, T. R., 1965, Field estimates of oxygen balance parameters: Am. Soc.

Civil Engineers Proc., Sanitary Eng. Div. Jour., v. 91, no. FA5, p. 1-16. 

Diachishin, A. N., 1963a, Dye dispersion studies: Am. Soc. Civil Engineers

Proc., Sanitary Eng. Div. Jour., v. 89, no. SAl, p. 29-49.

 1963b, Waste disposal in tidal waters: Am. Soc. Civil Engineers Proc., 

Sanitary Eng. Div. Jour., v. 89, no. SA4, p. 23-43.

Eriksen, A., and Townsend, L. D., 1940, The occurrence and cause of pollution 

in Grays Harbor: Olympia, Washington State Pollution Control Comm., 

Pollution Ser., Bull. 2, 100 p.

Federal Inter-Agency Committee on Water Resources, Subcoirmittee on Sedimentation, 1957, The development and calibration of the visual-accumulation tube, rept. 11 in A study of methods used in measurement and analysis 

of sediment loads in streams: U.S. Govt. Printing Office, 1C° p.

 1958, Operation and maintenance of U.S. BM-54 bed-material sampler: 

U.S. Govt. Printing Office, rept. M, 14 p.

1963, Determination of fluvial sediment discharge, rept. 14 in A study

of methods used in measurement and analysis of sediment Hads in streams:

U.S. Govt. Printing Office, 151 p. 

Gilbert, G. K., 1917, Hydraulic-mining debris in the Sierra Nevada: U.S. Geol.

Survey Prof. Paper 105, 154 p. 

Gross, M. G., and Nelson J. L., 1966, Sediment movement on the continental

shelf near Washington and Oregon: Science, v. 154, p. 879-880, 885. 

Gunter, Gordon, and McKee, J. E., 1960, On oysters and sulfHe waste liquor:

Olympia, Wasington State Pollution Control Comm., Spec. Consultants

Rept., 93 p. 

Ippen, A. T., and Harleman, D. R. F., 1961, One-dimensional analysis of salinity

intrusion in estuaries: Vicksburg, Miss., U.S. Army Corps Engineers Comm.

Tidal Hydraulics Tech. Bull. 5, 55 p. 

Keighton, W. B., 1966, Fresh-water discharge-salinity relations in the tidal

Delaware River: U.S. Geol. Survey Water-Supply Paper 15^6-G, 16 p. 

Ketchum, B. H., 1951a, The flushing of tidal estuaries: Sewage and Indus.

Wastes, v. 23, no. 2, p. 198-209.

 195Ib, The exchanges of fresh and salt waters in tidal estuaries: Jour.

Marine Research, v. 10, no. 1, p. 18-38. 

Langbein, W. B., and Durum, W. H., 1967, The aeration capacity of streams:

U.S. Geol. Survey Giro. 542, 6 p. 

Miller, E. G., 1962, Observations of tidal flow in the Delaware River: U.S.

Geol. Survey Water-Supply Paper 1586-C, 26 p. 

O'Connor, D. J., 1961, Oxygen balance of an estuary: Am. Soc. Civil Engineers

Trans., v. 126, pt. 3, p. 556-576, with closure, p. 602-611.

 1965, Estuarine distribution of nonconservative substances: Am. Soc 

Civil Engineers Proc., Sanitary Eng. Div. Jour., v. 91, no. SAl, p. 23-42.

Orlob, G. T., Jones, K. R., and Peterson, D. R., 1951, An investigation of domestic 

and industrial waste pollution in the lower Chehalis River and Grays Harbor: 

Olympia, Washington State Pollution Control Comm. Tech. Bull. 6, 50 p.
ESTUARESTE STUDIES IN UPPER GRAYS HARBOR, WASH. P87

Pearson, E. A., and Holt, G. A., I960, Water quality and upwelling at Grays

Harbor entrance: Limnology and Oceanography, v. 5, no. 1, p. 48-56. 

Peterson, D. R., 1953, Sewage pollution in the estuarial river areas of G~ays

Harbor: Olympia, Washington State Pollution Control Comm. Tech. Pull.

16, 17 p. 

Peterson, D. R., Wagner, R. A., and Livingston, A., 1957, A re-investigation of

pollution in the lower Chehalis River and Grays Harbor (1956-1557):

Olympia, Washington State Pollution Control Comm. Tech. Bull. 21, £2 p. 

Richardson, D., 1962, Drainage-area data for western Washington: U.S. Geol.

Survey open-file report, 244 p. 

Schultz, E. A., and Simmons, H. B., 1957, Fresh water-salt water density currents,

a major cause of siltation in estuaries: Vicksburg, Miss., U.S. Army Corps

Engineers Comm. Tidal Hydraulics Tech. Bull. 2, 28 p. 

Stelzenmuller, W. B., 1965, Tidal characteristics of two estuaries in Florida:

Am. Soc. Civil Engineers Proc,, Waterways and Harbors Div. Jour., v. 91,

no. WW3, p. 25-36. 

Stommel, H., 1953, Computation of pollution in a vertically mixed estuary:

Sewage and Indus. Wastes, v. 25, no. 9, p. 1065-1071. 

Sverdrup, H. U., Johnson, M. W., and Fleming, R. H., 1942, The oceans: Englewood Cliffs, N.J., Prentice Hall, Inc., 1087 p. 

Thames Survey Committee and Water Pollution Research Laboratory, 1964,

Effects of polluting discharges on the Thames Estuary: London, Dept. Sci.

and Indus. Research, Water Poll. Research Tech. Paper 11, 609 p. 

U.S. Coast and Geodetic Survey, 1958, Tidal bench marks, Point Chehalis and

vicinity, Grays Harbor: U.S. Coast and Geod. Survey, Washington 33, 2 p. 

 1965, Tidal bench marks, Aberdeen, Grays Harbor: U.S. Coast and Geod.

Survey, Washington 36, 2 p. 

-1965, Tide tables, high and low water predictions, west coast of North

and South America, 1966: U.S. Govt. Printing Office, published annually.

U.S. Weather Bureau, 1966, Climatological data, Washington, 1965 annual summary: U.S. Weather Bur., v. 69, no. 13, p. 231.

Waldichuk, Michael, 1962, Some water pollution problems connected with disposal of pulp mill wastes: The Canadian Fish Culturist, Issue 31, p. 3-34.

 1966, Effects of sulfite wastes in a partially enclosed marine syste*n in 

British Columbia: Water Pollution Control Federation Jour., v. 38, EO. 9, 

p. 1484-1505.

Westlake, D. F., 1963, Comparisons of plant productivity: Biol. Rev., v. 38, 

p. 385-425.

Westley, R. E., 1967, Phytoplankton photosynthesis and its relationship to 

oxygen in Grays Harbor, Washington: Washington State Dept. Fisheries, 

Research Div., 30 p.

Westley, R. E., and Tarr, M. A., 1965, Physical-chemical and primary prodv^tivity data, Grays Harbor, Hydrographic Trips 8-12, 1964 and 1965, in Hydrographic Data: Washington State Dept. Fisheries, v. 5, no. 1, 25 p.
INDEX

[Italic page numbers indicate major references]

Aberdeen, precipitation....._.............. B8,78

tidal range....-.--.__....___.......

Abstract__._......................_....

Acknowledgments............................

Algae, effect on dissolved oxygen.__._..___.__

Analyses, bottom materials, carbon content..

bottom materials, particle size, coarse

fraction_.......................

particle size, fine fraction._____ _ _____

Bottom materials, carbon content------------

sampling..--.--.-.-.-.-...-.......-----..

sedimentation, _________._______.___._....

size analyses, coarse fraction..............

fine fraction.-------------------------

summary - --------------.._.------_-_-----

Bottom water, movement....................

Bubbles, scrubbing action on dissolved 

oxygen.__________________________

Carbon content, relation to amount of fine 

material, regression equation...............

Carbon content of bottom materials. -...-....

relation to dissolved oxygen content in 

water_.........................

Chehalis River, at Porter, discharge..........

largest tributary to harbor-...............

salt-water intrusion.... ...................

Conductivity of water, regression equation... 

Cosmopolis, water-quality monitor...........

Correlation matrices for water-quality data... 

Cow Point, carbon content of bottom materials--...-.-.-.......---------..-.

7

6

16

76

74

80

73

pollution..----.---._---.----..__--... 84 

Cross-sectional area of estuary, at mean tide

level, equation.._-_.----_-_-._ 26

D ifferential movement of water layers........ 18

Differential transport, defined.-_ -- ._ _._ 29

Diffusion, defined_......................... 28

Diffusivity coefficients, relation to discharge.. 54

Discharge, principal streams ............... 7

relation to excursion distance............. 48

Dispersion coefficients, computation.......... 51

use...------.---...-..--.-.--.-------...-. 56

Dissolved oxygen, critical level............... 5

daily minimum, correlation.____.__._.__ 81

deaeration forces_....................... 79

demand---.-------.---.----..------.-.-.- 69

effect of sulfite waste liquor............... 83

scrubbing action by bubbles.............. 73

sources-..-.................-.------.----. 78

Diurnal tidal range, defined.............__ B12

Dredging, effect on dissolved oxygen demand.. 69,73 

effect on water quality__.-.----...--.-. 58

Dye studies_............................... 41

Equation, cross-sectional area of estuary at 

mean low water--.---..-._.....

cross-sectional area of estuary at mean 

tide level.___._..._.._.. 

fresh-water velocity__--.-.._--.------.-

longitudinal salinity distribution. --------

mean velocity at mean low water-...-....

reaeration rate.--------------....------.--

regression, carbon content and amount 

of fine material in sediment.......

conductivity.........................

specific conductance to salinity conversion. ---.-.---.-.-.----.------.---

traveltime- ...............................

turbulent transport coefficient ............

Estuary geometry, relation to excursion distance......... -_-_ _- ----------

Excursion distances.___.__..__ ....-_ ---

factors affecting.-..-----.------- ------

in tidal cycle..-_ - ..- 

summary...-.--.------------------- ------

26

26

28

31

37

73

70

76

77

41

37

49

41,50

45

43

55

2

10

38

6

38,40

Fish kills................-----------

Flow-duration curves...----------------

Flushing time, mean, estimation. _._... 

Fresh water.____.. .. ---- ---------

mean age ---------------------------

Geographic setting-.-... -------- ----- 2

Harleman, D. R. F., and Ippen, A. T., model 

for longitudinal salinity distribution _.....-.---------.-------- 31

Hoquiam, water-quality monitor............. 74

Industry... ------------------------------- 2

Intertidal volume...------------------------- 31

defined..------- ......- . - ------ 13

Ippen, A. T., and Harleman, D. R. F., model 

for longitudinal salinity distribution..------------------------- 31

Ketchum, B. H., longitudinal salinity distribution.--------------------- 30

Low flow, occurrence... .. -- 10,12

Mean age of fresh water.-...-.--------- ---- 38

in terms of traveltime--..-- ------- -- 40

Mean tidal prism ....... ..- - ---- 31

B89
BOO INDEX

Mean tidal range, defined. 

Montesano, tidal range....

Net movement of estuarine waters.

Page

B12

12

26

Oxygen production, tideflats. 71

Paper mills, pollutants..... 

Pearl-Benson index __. 

Point Chehalis, tidal range.

tidal reference planes... 

Pollutants, dissipation rate.

rate of removal, factors.

sources....-.--...--.....---... _... 

Pollution Control Commission, role in studyPollution problem______________. 

Precipitation, at Aberdeen......---..-__..

Present investigation..._..-....-_--......

Previous investigations..-...------- .......

Pulpmills, pollutants ..._ .

Reaeration rate, natural streamsReferences cited. 

Salinity, computed from specific conductance. 

defined... --.----- -----------------

distribution... ....--..--.-----__...

relation to fresh-water discharge..........

relation to sedimentation...__._. -._____ 

Salt-water intrusion, Chehalis River--.......

relation to discharge. _----------------

Sampling, bottom materials.. _..._-.___ _

dye studies-------__.................

Satsop River, at Satsop, discharge............

Sediments, factors affecting deposition........

Separation distance, concept ..-_........

Sloughs, excursion distances..----.-___..

Page 

Streams, tributary to Grays Farbor, drainage

areas _____________ B7 

Sulflte waste liquor______________ 83

Temperature of water, relation to sedimentation__..........__.___.. 57

Thames River survey...___________ 71

Tidal flats, area.............................. 13

benefit to harbor waters_________ 74

Tidal influence, limit defined. ............. 16

Tidal range, relation to excurs'on distance. _ 47

Tidal reference planes, Point Chehalis........ 12

Tidal separation distances__________ 26

Tideflat materials, effect on dissolved oxygen. 71

Tides. , - -... ...... .....--- It

Traveltime, dye studies...._________ 46

mean age in tidal cycles.-.._.-..__.. 40

Tributaries, excursion distances.-__..__. 50

Turbulent transport coefficient___.____ 37

Upwelling, coastal.

Velocity of water, in estuary_.......

maximum mean, in upper harbor.

maximum mean tidal__...__.

relation to sedimentation. __. _ 

Vertical salinity gradient.............

Volume of upper harbor..._........

Washington State Department of Fisheries, 

role in study-__.__. ._.

Washington State Department of Game, role 

in study..__...___..__

Water quality.....--.-..__.__....__.. 

summary__..._....__..._...._..

Weyerhaeuser Co., role in studv_--------...

Wynoochee River, above Srve Creek, discharge..____..._-...-.......

6

17

17

53

57

29

14

4

74

84

4

U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE : 1969 O-322-777