Marais des Cygnes Basin

Transcription

Volume III
Volume III
Melvern Reservoir
Page 143
Volume III
Following is the third chapter of the third volume of
the Reservoir Roadmap. Volume III provides a basin
approach to reservoir sustainability including restoration, water conservation and operational activities targeted in the watershed to secure, protect and restore
future water supply availability for the basin. A basin
approach has been described in previous chapters for
the Neosho and Verdigris River basins. The following
chapter addresses reservoir sustainability in the Marais
des Cygnes River basin.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Mean Annual Sediment Yield. Describes an assessment of the sediment yield in the Marais des Cygnes
River basin.
Identification of Streambank Erosion, Extent and
Status of Riparian Areas and Estimates of Restoration Needed. This chapter describes and quantifies the
condition of riparian areas, streambanks and gullies
above water supply reservoirs in the Marais des Cygnes River basin and the Marmaton River watershed,
and the potential for their restoration and protection.
Volume III, Chapter 3 is organized by the following Estimates of length and cost of riparian areas, gullies
and streambank restoration and protection projects are
sections:
provided.
Marais des Cygnes River Basin Description. Provides background information on the water resource Inventory of Watershed Structures and Sediment
Yield Reductions. This chapter provides an inventory
conditions of the basin including water use.
of the watershed structures above three public water
Marais des Cygnes River Basin Water Supply and supply reservoirs in the Marais des Cygnes River baDemand. Describes results in the Marais des Cygnes sin. Data in the inventory of structures that currently
River basin from the OASIS (Operational Analysis exist in the basin include construction date, drainage
and Simulation of Integrated Systems) model to ana- area and amount of storage at the time of construction.
lyze water supply and demand in greater detail. A Also included is the number and relative size of strucbrief description of alternatives for improving water tures that are planned, but to date have not been consupply reliability in the basin, as well as ongoing and structed. Included is a review of the relation between
recently completed studies that address these alterna- drainage areas and sediment yields for all or portions
of seven watershed districts in the Marais des Cygnes
tives is also included.
River basin above Melvern, Pomona and Hillsdale
Inventory of Restoration Approaches. Reviews po- Reservoirs.
tential restoration alternatives that could be applicable
for each reservoir in the Marais des Cygnes River ba- Identification of Reservoirs Not Built. One method
sin, depending on the type and severity of problems at of reducing the potential vulnerability to drought in
the reservoir. Includes an evaluation of several alterna- the Marais des Cygnes River basin is to evaluate ways
tives using the OASIS model. Alternatives include to enhance supplies. This can be performed by reviewsediment removal, reallocation and structural restora- ing past information about previously determined restion (dams, diversion structures, treatment facilities). ervoir sites that were never built or using existing topographic information, more accessible by today’s
Opportunities for Water Conservation. Maintaining standards, to locate entirely new potential reservoir
or increasing a reservoir’s storage is important in en- sites.
suring its reliability as a water supply source, however, restoration approaches can be quite expensive Recommendations for Reservoir Sustainability Apand are more likely to be long term solutions. Water proach in the Marais des Cygnes River basin.
conservation is useful for both long term water use Based on the information provided in each of the preefficiency and short term drought and emergency re- vious chapters, a summary of the approaches to resersponse. This section will identify opportunities for wa- voir sustainability that should be evaluated in greater
detail or implemented are provided.
ter conservation to improve water supply reliability.
Operational and Management Changes to Improve
Supply. Discusses potential operation or management
changes for each drinking water reservoir in the
Marais des Cygnes River basin.
Page 144
MARAIS DES CYGNES BASIN DESCRIPTION MARAIS DES CYGNES BASIN DESCRIPTION
Background
The Marais des Cygnes River basin covers 4,304
square miles of east central and southeast Kansas and
includes all or parts of 13 counties. The three major
federal reservoirs in the basin are Melvern, Pomona
and Hillsdale Reservoirs. Other significant lakes include the La Cygne Power Station Lake and impoundments within the Marais des Cygnes Wildlife Management Area and Refuge. There are also seven other
lakes in the basin used for local water supply.
Volume III
while U.S. 54 and 56 cross from east to west. The
Marais des Cygnes River basin also contains the largest percentage of riparian acreage of the 12 major river
basins in Kansas. Within the 100-foot corridor along
each bank of streams in the basin, 40% of the land is
forested, followed by cropland (17%) and pasture/
grassland (15%).
Marais des Cygnes Basin
2006 Reported Water Use by Type
Irrigation, 11%
Industrial, 52%
Municipal, 27%
Figure 2.
Domestic, 0%
Figure 1.
Other, <1%
Stock, <1%
Recreation, 9%
Each of the federal reservoirs supply the basin’s municipalities and industries with water through the Water Marketing Program or Water Assurance District.
Currently there are 40 public water suppliers and one
industrial user in the basin that use surface water. Surface water use makes up over 97% of the water used
in the basin. The ability to store water in the reservoirs
is critical to maintain future supply. The primary industrial water user in the basin is the La Cygne Electrical Generating Station, where Kansas City Power
and Light maintains a 2,600 acre cooling lake.
Land Use/Land Cover
The predominant land features in the basin are grasslands (55%), followed by cropland (23%) and woodlands (16%). In 2006, there were 10,780 farms comprised of 4.1 million acres reported in the 13 counties
that lie in the Marais des Cygnes River basin. The average farm size is 383 acres.
The Marias des Cygnes River basin contains many
important highways. Interstates 35 and 135 cross the
basin from northeast to southwest. U.S. Highways 75,
59, 169 and 69 cross the basin from north to south
Hydrology
The Marais des Cygnes River rises near Eskridge in
Wabaunsee County, Kansas and flows east and south
to join the Little Osage River in Bates County, Missouri. Dragoon Creek, Bull Creek, Pottawatomie
Creek and Sugar Creek are major tributaries in Kansas. The Marmaton and Little Osage Rivers originate
in Kansas and join in Missouri just above their confluence with the Marais des Cygnes River to become the
Osage River. The Marmaton and Little Osage Rivers
will be described as part of Volume III, Chapter 3
(Marais des Cygnes) of the Reservoir Roadmap as
they do contribute sediment and the subbasin is heavily populated with Watershed District structures.
The Marais des Cygnes River basin contains 8,821
miles of intermittent streams and 2,011 miles of perennial streams, for a total of 10,832 stream miles. The
density of two and one half stream miles per square
mile is typical among basins located in the eastern
third of the state.
Reservoirs
Melvern, Pomona and Hillsdale Reservoirs are the
three federal reservoirs in the Marais des Cygnes
River basin. All three were constructed by the U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) and are authorized
Page 145
MARAIS DES CYGNES BASIN DESCRIPTION
Volume III for water supply purposes. The State of Kansas,
through the Kansas Water Office (KWO), has purchased storage in each of the reservoirs from the
Corps, which is then available to contract with users in
the basin.
Figure 3. Melvern Reservoir.
Melvern Reservoir is a 6,423 acre reservoir used as a
source of water supply for the Public Wholesale Water
District (PWWSD) No. 12, Osage City, Burlingame,
Harveyville; and the Marias des Cygnes River Basin
Water Assurance District No. 2 (MRWAD 2).
Melvern Reservoir has an approximate capacity of
151,171 acre-feet and is losing capacity at an average
rate of 86 acre-feet per year due to sedimentation. In
June, 2011 the Kansas Department of Wildlife, Parks
and Tourism (KDWP&T) confirmed the presence of
Zebra mussels in Melvern Reservoir. This is the first
reservoir in the Marais des Cygnes River basin to be
infested.
Pomona Reservoir is a 3,621 acre reservoir used as a
source of water supply for Osage County RWD No. 3
and the MRWAD 2. Pomona Reservoir has an approximate capacity of 55,340 acre-feet and is losing
capacity at an average rate of 330 acre-feet per year
due to sedimentation.
Hillsdale Reservoir is a 4,355 acre reservoir located on
Bull Creek, a tributary of the Marais des Cygnes
River. Hillsdale Reservoir has an approximate capacity of 77,665 acre-feet and is losing capacity at an average rate of 166 acre-feet per year due to sedimentation.
Hillsdale Reservoir is currently used as a water supply
source for the Edgerton, Franklin County RWD No. 1;
Gardner, Johnson County RWD No. 7; Miami County
RWD No. 1; Miami County RWD No. 2; Miami
County RWD No. 3; and Spring Hill. In March, 2011
the Hillsdale Area Water Users Cooperation (HAWC)
was formed and includes Edgerton, Franklin County
RWD No. 1; Gardner, Johnson County RWD No. 7;
Miami County RWD No. 1; Miami County RWD No.
2; Miami County RWD No. 4; Wellsville and Spring
Hill. The HAWC was formed by the above mentioned
entities entering into an Interlocal Cooperation Agreement to obtain a raw water supply from Hillsdale Reservoir. The HAWC requested to negotiate with the
KWO for a Water Marketing contract and was approved by the Kansas Water Authority in May 2011.
Those entities forming the HAWC, with the exception
of Miami County RWD No. 2, will relinquish their
individual Water Marketing contracts.
There are several additional lakes in the Marais des
Cygnes River basin that have been or are currently
being used as a water supply source. Those include
Cedar Valley Lake, Fort Scott City Lake, LouisburgMiddle Creek Lake, Lake Miola, Osage City Lake,
Rock Creek Lake, Blue Mound City Lake, Bone
Creek Lake, Bronson City Lake, Cedar Creek Lake,
Crystal Lake, Garnett City Lake, Harveyville City
Lake, Linn Valley Lake, Little Sugar Creek Lake,
Louisburg City Lake, Lyndon City Lake, Mound City
Lake, Parker City Lake, Pleasanton City Lake, Richmond City Lake, Spring Hill City Lake and Xenia
Lake. These lakes do not have the storage capacity to
serve multiple users but are important as a more localized water supply.
Melvern
Top of
Conservation
Pool
(Feet)
1036
Original
Storage
Capacity
(Acre-feet)
154,370
Capacity at
most recent
survey
(Acre-feet)
151,256
Estimated
Current
Capacity
(Acre-feet)
151,171
Design
Sedimentation
Rate
(Acre-feet/Year)
170
86
Loss of
Capacity
to Date
%
2.07
Pomona
974
70,603
55,670
55,340
294
330
21.62
Hillsdale
917
82,207
77,665
77,499
83
166
5.73
Reservoir
Table 1. Sedimentation estimates for federal reservoirs in the Marais des Cygnes Basin
Page 146
Calculated Sedimentation Rate
(Acre-feet/Year)
Volume III
La Cygne Power Station Lake supplies cooling water
for the La Cygne Power Station. The lake is approximately 2,600 acres and has an approximate capacity of
40,000 acre-feet. La Cygne Power Station is a member
of the MRWAD No. 2. However, within the storage
set aside for the MRWAD No. 2, the Power Station
maintains a portion of that storage for industrial use.
The water released from the reservoirs is pumped from
the Marais des Cygnes River into their cooling lake.
basin were originally submitted to the Environmental
Protection Agency for approval on June 30, 2001 by
the Kansas Department of Health and Environment
(KDHE). An additional round of TMDL development
was completed in 2007, 2008 and 2010. High priority
TMDL watersheds are used to target technical and financial assistance for implementation of nonpoint
source pollution management practices to address designated pollutants.
Bathymetric Surveys
Bathymetric surveys have been completed by the Kansas Biological Survey (KBS) for Hillsdale Reservoir,
Melvern Reservoir, Pomona Reservoir, Cedar Valley
Lake, Fort Scott City Lake, Louisburg-Middle Creek
Lake, Lake Miola, Osage City Lake and Rock Creek
Lake. Each survey was performed using an acoustic
echo-sounding apparatus linked to a global positioning
system. The bathymetric surveys were geo-referenced
and compared with original pre-impoundment maps to
estimate sediment accumulation. In addition, sediment
samples were extracted and analyzed at each reservoir.
The full bathymetric reports for the three federal reservoirs and for the remaining water supply lakes can be
found at the following link. http://www.kwo.org/
reservoirs/Reservoirs.htm. The La Cygne Power Station Lake has not had a bathymetric survey completed.
The Watershed Restoration and Protection Strategy
(WRAPS) are stakeholder-driven watershed management plans designed to address multiple water resource issues within a specific watershed. The
WRAPS process provides a means to integrate objectives from multiple local, state and federal programs
into a comprehensive, coordinated strategy for a specific watershed.
Watersheds above the three federal reservoirs in the
basin that serve public water supply needs have been
identified as watersheds of significant state interest for
WRAPS development and implementation. Below is a
map of all the WRAPS projects within the basin,
along with their status in developing their 9-Element
Plan.
Figure 4. Bathymetric Survey of Hillsdale Reservoir
Watershed Restoration and Protection Strategy
Surface waters not meeting water quality standards in
the basin are included on the 2006 303d list. High priority Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs) for impaired surface waters in the Marais des Cygnes River
Figure 5. Watershed Groups
Page 147
Volume III
Status of the EPA 9 Element Plan for each group:
Melvern Lake WRAPS–working on a draft plan
Pomona Lake WRAPS–draft plan submitted to KDHE
Middle Marais des Cygnes Basin WRAPS–none
Marmaton River WRAPS–final draft submitted to
Work Group
Basin Priority Issues
There are three priority issues in the Marais des Cygnes River basin contained in the Kansas Water Plan
(KWP):
•
•
•
Water Supply Management & Conservation
Watershed Restoration and Protection
Comprehensive Flood Management
These basin priority issues (BPI) are all in some stage
of implementation. Data in this section of the Reservoir Roadmap (RRM) will add to information needed
to implement several recommendations in the Water
Supply Management & Conservation, Watershed Restoration and Protection, Comprehensive Flood Management BPIs. Table 2 shows the relationship between
the RRM and the BPIs.
For detailed information about these BPIs, and more
descriptive information about the Marais des Cygnes
River basin, please see the Kansas Water Plan Verdigris basin Chapter:
http://www.kwo.org/Kansas_Water_Plan/
KWP_VolumeIII.htm
Page 148
Issue and Description
Water Supply Management
Conservation:
and
Evaluation of surface water supply,
demand, management and conservation, is needed to improve reservoir
sustainability and provide adequate
public water supply to meet long-term
needs in the basin.
Comprehensive Flood Assessment:
Flooding damage in the Marais des
Cygnes River basin indicates the need
for a comprehensive evaluation of existing flood control infrastructure and
storage to determine current status,
mapping funding needs, and opportunities for flood management actions and
flood damage reduction in the future.
Coordination with DWR-Structures
Unit has been ongoing and will need to
continue.
Recommendation
1. Work with stakeholders to identify options for supply and demand
management including: reservoir pool raise, pool reallocation, dredging,
new supplies, modification of reservoir operations, operation of Water
Marketing and Water Assurance Programs and conservation measures.
2. Encourage incorporation of water demand management into utility
operating plans. Demand management should include education and
interaction with the development community and existing local authorities.
Volume III
Addressed
by RRM
X
X
3. Compare annual Corps visitation figures to pool conditions during
primary recreation seasons. Determine when high and low pool levels
create impacts on recreational use.
X
1. Assess the effectiveness of existing flood control infrastructure and
develop plans to address necessary improvements.
X
2. Address repair of damaged flood control structures and deferred maintenance.
3. Determine the current floodplain status and promote model ordinances
and BMPs to local units of government. Promote limiting development
in the 100-year floodplain using FIRMs to delineate prohibited areas.
4. Engage basin WRAPS groups, watershed districts and federal agencies to integrate flood management with existing floodplain and riparian
programs. Assess and inventory watersheds to identify potential locations for nonstructural flood control measures.
X
5. Examine basin application of nonstructural flood controls.
6. Purchase properties having repetitive flood damage and prevent redevelopment of these areas.
7. Develop emergency action plans for high hazard dams still needing
them.
8. Complete breach inundation zone mapping.
9. Coordinate with DWR-Water Structures Program to determine if increased hydrologic and hydraulic evaluation of stream obstructions
should be considered in the MdC basin in areas particularly prone to
flooding. Identify and evaluate areas where flooding may be attributed to
permitted stream obstructions. Consider the costs to repair flood damages against the costs to implement watershed based permitting.
Watershed Restoration and Protection:
Watershed Restoration and Protection
efforts are needed to address a variety
of water quality and water resource
concerns such as achieving Total Maximum Daily Loads, Nutrient Reduction
goals, development of Source Water
Protection Plans, reduction of sedimentation in reservoirs and lakes, and protection or restoration of wetland and
riparian habitats. Approved Jan. 2008.
10. Coordinate with county emergency management agencies on development of county-wide All Hazard Mitigation Plans.
1. Work with stakeholder groups to incorporate TMDL implementation,
nutrient and sediment reduction and urban storm water management
goals to applicable WRAPS projects.
X
2. Target technical and financial assistance programs for water quality
protection and restoration to implement TMDLs and WRAPS action
plans.
X
Table 2. BPIs addressed by RRM
Page 149
Volume III
Water Supply and Demand
WATER SUPPLY AND DEMAND
needed to further refine projections and situations
where projected demand may exceed supply on a more
local scale, temporally and spatially, within each subbasin. This conclusion was supported by the Kansas
Water Plan which identifies Water Supply Management and Conservation as a high priority issue for the
Marais des Cygnes River basin. Three recommended
actions for further study to address this issue are identified in this basin priority issue.
Background
The KWO initiated a review of surface water supply
and demand in five basins in eastern Kansas in 2006.
The intent of the analysis was to identify future potential surface water supply vulnerabilities along mainstem river corridors in select eastern Kansas river basins. The analysis of the Marais des Cygnes River basin focused on Anderson, Franklin, Linn, Miami and
Osage Counties, counties primarily served by the 1. Work with stakeholders to identify options for
supply and demand management including: reserMarais des Cygnes River and supported by federal
voir pool raise, pool reallocation, dredging, new
reservoirs, but did not include that portion of the basin
supplies, modification of reservoir operations, opsupplied by Marmaton and Little Osage Rivers or
eration of Water Marketing and Water Assurance
other areas not served by the mainstem of the Marais
Programs and conservation measures.
des Cygnes River. For the severe drought scenario rea. Test various options through the OASIS
viewed in the initial assessment of the Maris des Cyg(Operational Analysis and Simulation of Intenes River basin, demand was predicted to exceed the
grated Systems) model.
total existing supply during a two percent probability
b. Share information with stakeholders from the
drought in the year 2109. This estimate includes the
basin model including supply and demand incurrent state-owned supply along with the purchase of
formation for specific stream segments.
water supply storage in Hillsdale Reservoir reserved
c. Implement the most beneficial and costfor future state use. If the storage in Hillsdale Resereffective options.
voir is not purchased, demand could exceed supply
during a two percent probability drought in the year
2. Encourage incorporation of water demand man2017.
agement into utility operating plans. Demand management should include education and interaction
The 2010 census projections were reviewed in May
with the development community and existing lo2011 to determine if revisions to the demand trend
cal authorities.
from the 2006 study, which were based on 2000 census projections, were necessary. The May 2011 review
found that although the 2010 population and projected 3. Compare annual Corps visitation figures to pool
conditions during the primary recreation seasons.
growth to Anderson, Franklin and Linn Counties were
Determine when high and low pool levels create
greater than that projected in 2006, the potential gain
impacts on recreational use.
in demand within the basin was offset by a lower
population and projected growth in Miami and Osage
Counties. Even with the adjustment to Miami County To address the recommended actions, the KWO sefrom the 2010 census, it continues to trend as the lected the OASIS model. The OASIS model is a basin
county with the greatest growth in population for the model of the hydrologic system that has the ability to
simulate the interaction of multiple reservoirs and rivbasin.
ers in a system, simulate system management issues,
At the basin level, the net result is one tenth of a per- identify areas of concern in a system and evaluate alcent change in the population from the 2006 study’s ternative improvements to the system.
projection to the new 2010 projection, through the
year 2100. The difference was not considered signifi- Model Results
cant enough to warrant a revision to the demand side The KWO analysis of the results from the OASIS
of the 2006 Marais des Cygnes River mainstem sur- model focuses on reservoir storage and surface elevation, stream flows at gages with target flows and
face water supply/demand study.
shortages water users may experience during the
The 2006 assessment in the Maris des Cygnes River model run. The KWO is using the OASIS model to
basin also concluded that a more complex model was simulate the Maris des Cygnes River basin under resPage 150
Volume III
ervoir conditions in 2010 and 2050, after 40 years of
sedimentation.
Reservoir Storage
Reservoir storage is a general indication of the availability of water supply and water quality for downstream water users, although accounting for reservoir
releases from each of the pools must be done to determine the exact quantities remaining. Each water marketing customer and member of the MRWAD 2 must
have a conservation plan that recommends action depending upon meeting certain criteria. Typically those
criteria can be based on reservoir elevation or storage
remaining. The MRWAD 2 operations agreement
states that, “Discussions between the Office and the Figure 7. Melvern Reservoir Storage Frequency.
Assurance District regarding the need to implement
drought contingency plans will be triggered when the
assurance storage capacity in Melvern and Pomona
Reservoirs falls below 75% of total assurance storage
capacity.” For purposes of comparing reservoir storage in the Marais des Cygnes River basin reservoirs, a
water watch is implemented when the conservation
pool reaches 75% of maximum storage; a water warning is implemented when the conservation pool
reaches 50% of maximum storage; and a water emergency is implemented when the conservation pool
reaches 33% of maximum storage. The following figures illustrate the percentage of time during the OASIS model drought simulation each reservoir exceeds
a given storage, and compares that storage with the Figure 8. Pomona Reservoir Storage Frequency.
storage remaining when a watch, warning or emergency is triggered.
Reservoir Elevation
Reservoir surface elevation can also be used to determine the availability of water supply and water quality
for downstream water users. Additionally, reservoir
elevations are an important indicator for in-reservoir
recreation. As the reservoir elevation decreases, boat
ramps become unusable, structures normally covered
with water become boat hazards and access to the water’s edge is limited. The following figures illustrate
the percentage of time during the OASIS model
drought simulation each reservoir exceeds a given elevation.
Figure 6. Hillsdale Reservoir Storage Frequency.
Page 151
Volume III
Figure 9. Hillsdale Reservoir Elevation Frequency.
Figure 11. Pomona Reservoir Elevation Frequency.
The upper limit of each reservoir’s elevation corresponds to the conservation pool elevation or the highest elevation reached in the lake level management
plan (LLMP). The OASIS model does not store inflows above the LLMP because the KWO’s interest is
the effect of drought conditions on water supply. The
stair-stepped elevation at each of the reservoirs corresponds to the LLMP at each reservoir.
Figure 10. Melvern Reservoir Elevation Frequency.
Public Water
Supplier
OASIS Demand
(af/yr)
2009
Water Use
(af/yr)
Hillsdale Reservoir Water
Marketing Customers
6,969
4,603
1,734
797
171
0
LaCygne
691
118
MdC PUA
5,367
262
Franklin RWD 6
470
370
Osawatomie
1,507
806
Ottawa
Osage City (Water Right)
2,842
1,175
1,737
634
Melvern Reservoir Water
Marketing Customers
Pomona Reservoir Water
Marketing Customers
Osage RWD 3
(Contract w/ Corps)
136
92
Table 3. OASIS Demands for Public Water Suppliers
* Year 2045 Projections provided by MRWAD 2
** See Table 3 for Water Marketing Contract Maximum
Page 152
Demands
Demands in specific areas of the Maris des Cygnes
River basin is expected to significantly increase over
the next 40 years. Miami County will likely see the
greatest increase in demand because of its proximity to
the Kansas City metropolitan area. Demands used in
the OASIS model
Projected 2050
Water Right
are typically higher
Water Use
Authorized
(af/yr)
Quantities (af/yr) than recent water
use; however, they
do not usually ac8,861
8,861**
count for the total
authorized quantity
2,263
2,263**
for the water rights
171
171**
in the basin. Table
3 summarizes the
691*
801
municipal
de5,367*
3,065
mands used in the
470*
414
OASIS model as
3,899*
2,034
well as 2009 water
use,
projected
2,842*
2,753
2050 water use and
1,175
1,175
the total quantity
authorized by the
136
136
municipalities’ water rights.
Volume III
Demands from water marketing customers are based
on current contracts only. It may be useful to determine how the system responds if demands are set assuming the total authorized quantity of water rights is
used and all of the future use storage in Hillsdale Reservoir and all of the reserve capacity storage in
Melvern and Pomona Reservoirs is contracted to new
or existing customers. Table 4 shows the maximum
water marketing contract quantities for the current water marketing customers at Hillsdale, Melvern and
Pomona Reservoirs as well as the 2050 yield of potential water marketing storage from each of the reservoirs.
Marketing Customer
Contract Max
(af/yr)
Edgerton
614
Franklin RWD 1
101
Gardner
3,545
Johnson RWD 7
1,332
Miami RWD 1
31
Miami RWD 2
2,179
Miami RWD 3
46
Spring Hill
1,013
Hillsdale Reservoir
8,861
Burlingame
199
Harveyville
77
Osage City
307
PWWSD 12
1,680
Melvern Reservoir
2,263
Osage RWD 3
171
Pomona Reservoir
171
Potential
Marketing
(af/yr)
Figure 12. Hillsdale Reservoir Storage Frequency (2050 vs. Fully Commit-
16,800
Figure 13. Melvern Reservoir Storage Frequency (2050 vs. Fully Commit-
6,300
5,400
Table 4. Maximum Contract Quantity of Current Water Marketing
Customers and Potential Water Marketing Yield (acre-feet/year).
The following figures compare the percentage of time
during the OASIS model drought simulation each reservoir exceeds a given storage for two demand scenarios: one using projected 2050 marketing and water
right demands and one using fully committed marketing and water right demands.
Figure 14. Pomona Reservoir Storage Frequency (2050 vs. Fully Committed).
Evaluation of Alternatives
Water supply reliability can be improved by increasing the water supply, reducing the demand for water or
a combination of the two. Alternatives being evaluated
for improving water supply reliability include sediment removal, reallocation, structural restoration, demand management, reservoir operational changes,
new reservoirs, off-stream storage and watershed management. Most of these alternatives have been evaluated by the KWO and are discussed in greater detail in
the “Inventory of Restoration Approaches” section.
Page 153
Volume III
Background
The Marais des Cygnes River basin includes several
reservoirs used for public water supply purposes,
shown in Figure 15 and listed in Table 5.
INVENTORY OF RESTORATION APPROACHES
Sediment Removal
Sediment is typically removed from a reservoir by
dredging. Dredging is the process of excavating sediment from the bottom of the reservoir and disposing of
the sediment at a different location. There are several
different types of dredges that are typically mounted
on a boat or barge for operation in the reservoir. The
collected sediment is usually pumped into a sediment
basin where it precipitates out of suspension allowing
much of the water in the dredge slurry to return to the
system. Benefits of dredging include significant removal of sediment to maintain an existing reservoir
site. Potential drawbacks include cost, time required to
restore reservoir storage capacity and environmental
concerns with sediment disposal. Dredging is a potential option in all of the reservoirs in the Marais des
Cygnes River basin; however, the benefit per cost may
be greatest in reservoirs that have a lower sedimentation rate.
Figure 15. Marais des Cygnes River Basin Water Supply Reservoirs
Although the reservoirs vary in many aspects, they are
all important due to their water supply capabilities.
Sedimentation and poor water quality are affecting
these reservoirs and have the potential to reduce their
reliability as a source of water supply. One option to
ensure water supply storage capacity in the basin is to
construct new reservoirs as the existing reservoirs continue to fill with sediment and decline in water quality;
however, most of the best sites for reservoirs have already been utilized. Therefore, restoration of the existing reservoirs may provide the best value to restore
water supply reliability. This section will identify potential restoration approaches appropriate for each of
the water supply reservoirs in the Marais des Cygnes
River basin and strategies for prioritizing the restoration activities.
Figure 16. Pumping sediment from Mission Lake into settling basin.
Another method of removing sediment from a reservoir is flushing. Flushing is the process of drawing
down the reservoir to create river-like flow conditions
in the reservoir, re-suspending sediment that has deposited on the reservoir bottom and transporting it
through the gates in the dam to the river downstream.
There are several potential problems with using flushing to remove sediment from the reservoir, including a
lack of inflow refilling the evacuated storage in a
timely manner and what happens with the rePotential Restoration Approaches
There are numerous potential restoration alternatives suspended sediment as it travels downstream.
that could be applicable for each reservoir, depending
on the type and severity of problems at the reservoir. Reallocation
Alternatives include sediment removal, reallocation, Reallocation of storage is only a potential restoration
structural restoration (dams, diversion structures, treat- option in the three federal reservoirs in the Marais des
Cygnes River basin. Reallocation of storage is a procment facilities) and increasing the dam height.
Page 154
Volume III
ess by which the Corps changes the designation for a
specified portion of storage in a federal reservoir. In
the interest of restoring or increasing water supply
storage, storage could be reallocated from water quality storage, flood pool storage or another storage
owned by the Corps. If storage is reallocated from
flood pool to water supply, a permanent increase in the
conservation pool elevation typically results. Reallocation of storage requires a study by the Corps which
compares the benefits of increased water supply storage to the potential detriments caused by lost flood or
water quality storage capacity, shoreline effects
caused by the higher permanent pool and environmental effects due to increased backwater upstream of
the reservoir.
Reservoir
Structural Restoration
Structural restoration is applicable for any structure
associated with the reservoir or any structure required
to provide water supply from the reservoir, including
the dam, water supply diversion structures and water
treatment facilities.
The structural restoration most likely to occur at the
federal reservoirs is restoration of the gates, valves
and other associated mechanical equipment that will
reduce the amount of water lost downstream due to
leakage. Structural restoration may also include placement of riprap at the dam or along shoreline or other
shoreline restoration.
Public Water Supplier
Blue Mound City Lake
Bone Creek Lake
Bronson City Lake
Miami RWD 2, Franklin RWD 1, Gardner, Johnson
RWD 7, Miami RWD 1, Spring Hill, Edgerton
Osage City, Burlingame, PWWSD 12, Harveyville,
Franklin RWD 6, LaCygne, MdC PUA, Melvern,
Osawatomie, Ottawa, Paola, KCP&L
Osage RWD 3, Franklin RWD 6, LaCygne, MdC
PUA, Melvern, Osawatomie, Ottawa, Paola,
KCP&L
Blue Mound
PWWSD 11
Bronson
Cedar Creek Lake
Cedar Valley Lake
Crystal Lake
Bourbon RWD 2C
Garnett
Garnett
Fort Scott City Lake
Garnett City Lake
Harveyville City Lake
Fort Scott
Garnett
Harveyville
Lake Miola
Linn Valley Lake
Little Sugar Creek Lake
Paola
Linn Valley Lakes
PWWSD 13
Louisburg City Lake
Lyndon City Lake
Louisburg
Lyndon
Middle Creek Lake
Mound City Lake
Osage City Lake
Parker City Lake
Pleasanton City Lake
Richmond City Lake
Louisburg
Mound City
Osage City
Parker
Pleasanton
Richmond
Rock Creek Lake
Spring Hill City Lake
Xenia Lake
Fort Scott
Spring Hill
Bourbon RWD 4
Hillsdale Reservoir
Melvern Reservoir
Pomona Reservoir
Other Source
Multiple Other Sources
PWWSD 13
Bourbon RWD 4
Bourbon RWD 4, Fort Scott,
PWWSD 5, PWWSD 13
Crystal Lake, Garnett City Lake
Cedar Valley Lake, Garnett City Lake
Marmaton River, Rock Creek Lake,
Bourbon RWD 2C
Cedar Valley Lake, Crystal Lake
Burlingame
Bull Creek, Marais des Cygnes PUA,
Miami RWD 2
Linn RWD 1
Middle Creek Lake, Marais des Cygnes
PUA, Miami RWD 2
Salt Creek, PWWSD 12
Louisburg City Lake, Marais des Cygnes PUA, Miami RWD 2
PWWSD 13
Marais des Cygnes River, Melvern Lake
PWWSD 13, Linn RWD 3
Marmaton River, Fort Scott City Lake,
Bourbon RWD 2C
Hillsdale Lake via Miami RWD 2
Table 5. Public Water Suppliers Using Water Supply Reservoirs.
Page 155
Volume III
Increasing the dam height at a federal reservoir is Table 6 summarizes the percentage of volume lost for
unlikely for several reasons. An increase in dam each of the water supply reservoirs in the Marais des
height will require the Corps to obtain additional land Cygnes River basin.
to compensate for the inRate of
% Original
Year
Original
Recent Survey
Capacity Lost Capacity
crease in potential flood
Reservoir
Constructed Capacity (AF) Capacity (AF)
(AF/yr)
Lost
storage. The costs associHillsdale Reservoir
1981
82,207
77,665
170
6
ated with land purchase,
Melvern
Reservoir
1970
154,370
151,256
90
2
permits and construction
Pomona Reservoir
1962
70,603
55,670
330
21
could be quite significant.
Bone Creek Lake
Bronson City Lake
Cedar Creek Lake
Cedar Valley Lake
Crystal Lake
Garnett City Lake
Lake Miola
Linn Valley Lake
Increasing dam height may
be the only way to increase
the pool elevation at city
lakes with no flood pool.
The condition of the dam is
an important consideration
in these lakes because they
may be older than the federal dams or not as well
constructed. Some of the
same factors must also be Little Sugar Creek Lake
considered before increas- Louisburg City Lake
ing the dam height of a city
Lyndon City Lake
lake, especially if the new
Middle Creek Lake
lake elevation will enMound City Lake
croach on private property
Osage City Lake
near the lake.
Parker City Lake
Richmond City Lake
Rock Creek Lake
Xenia Lake
1957
1996
165
9,950
2001
3,066
1879
1959
229
4,456
104
6,372
1
55
1960
1957
235
2,960
222
2,724
<1
5
6
8
1966
948
<1
<1
1979
1,773
930
3,087
1,525
267
12
14
1968
1,180
Strategies for Prioritizing
1955
200
Restoration Alternatives
1920
388
The effectiveness of restoration approaches will vary
1997
1,353
depending on the needs of
Table
6.
Impact
of
Sedimentation
on
Marais
des
Cygnes
Basin Water Supply Reservoirs.
each reservoir. Factors affecting the prioritization of restoration alternatives in- Reservoir capacity data are not widely available exclude alternative sources of water supply (Table 5), cept for the three federal reservoirs in the basin. The
rate of water supply lost due to sedimentation (Table sedimentation rate is highest at Pomona Reservoir,
6), projected growth of demands (Table 7), feasibility followed by Hillsdale and Melvern Reservoirs. None
and benefits of the restoration approach and cost of of the smaller public water supply lakes in which data
are available have a high sedimentation rate. The perrestoration.
centage of capacity lost to sedimentation is highest at
Several public water suppliers do not have a source of Crystal Lake, which was built in 1879 and is not the
water other than their water supply reservoir, includ- primary source of supply for Garnett. The next highest
ing Osage RWD 3, PWWSD 11, PWWSD 13, Plea- percentage of capacity lost is at Pomona Reservoir,
santon, Richmond and Bourbon RWD 4. Of those which appears to be the lake in which sedimentation is
listed, only Osage RWD 3 does not have a connection having the greatest impact on reservoir capacity in the
with another public water supplier. Because the water Marais des Cygnes River basin. The effects of sediuse by Osage RWD 3 is low relative to the size of mentation in the three federal reservoirs were evaluPomona Reservoir, water supply should not be a prob- ated using the OASIS model. The following figures
compare the percentage of time during the OASIS
lem for Osage RWD 3 in the foreseeable future.
model drought simulation each federal reservoir exPage 156
ceeds a given storage for two scenarios: one using
estimated 2010 reservoir capacities and one using estimated reservoir capacities after 40 years of sedimentation.
Figure 17. Hillsdale Reservoir Storage Frequency (2010 vs. 2050).
Volume III
Public Water
Supplier
2009
Water Use
(AF)
Projected 2040
Water Use (AF)
Blue Mound*
20
18
Bourbon RWD 2C*
1,056
874
Bourbon RWD 4
162
89
Bronson
28
42
Burlingame
123
165
Edgerton
117
147
Fort Scott
2,199
1,906
Franklin RWD 1
65
335
Franklin RWD 6
370
470***
Gardner
2,358
3,455
Garnett
536
456
Harveyville
23
30
Johnson RWD 7
518
1,172
LaCygne
118
691***
Louisburg
524
420
Lyndon**
94
202
MdC PUA
262
5,367***
Melvern
26
38
Miami RWD 1
146
168
Miami RWD 2
2,260
2,052
Mound City*
74
124
Osage City
662
395
Osage RWD 3
92
288
Osawatomie
806
3,899***
Ottawa
1,737
2,842***
Paola
640
754
Parker*
18
27
Pleasanton
175
234
PWWSD 11
823
2,502
PWWSD 12
626
1,317
PWWSD 13
915
1,796
Richmond
73
77
Spring Hill
408
566
Linn Valley Lakes*
Figure 18. Melvern Reservoir Storage Frequency (2010 vs 2050).
Table 7. Water Use Demands for Public Water Suppliers Using Water
Supply Reservoirs .
* Member of PWWSD 13
** Member of PWWSD 12
*** Year 2045 Projections provided by MdC River WAD. 2
Figure 19. Pomona Reservoir Storage Frequency (2010 vs 2050).
Page 157
Volume III
The highest projected growth in water use in the
Marais des Cygnes River basin is for public water suppliers with water marketing contracts from Hillsdale
Reservoir and members of the MRWAD 2. The primary water source for members of the MRWAD 2 is
the Marais des Cygnes River; however, when natural
river flows are too low, the river is supplemented with
releases from Melvern and/or Pomona Reservoir.
A reallocation of conservation pool storage is possible
at all three federal reservoirs in the Marais des Cygnes
River basin. At Melvern Reservoir, water quality storage or other Corps owned storage could be reallocated
to water supply storage. At Pomona and Hillsdale Reservoirs, only water quality storage could be reallocated
to water supply storage. Both Melvern and Pomona
Reservoirs have reserve capacity storage within water
supply storage that could be allocated to either waSediment Pool
Structural
Reservoir
Reallocation
ter marketing or water assurance district storage.
Removal Rise
Restoration
Hillsdale Reservoir has a significant amount of
Hillsdale Reservoir
X
X
water supply storage that is contracted to the State
Melvern Reservoir
X
X
X
of Kansas; however, the state has not begun paying
Pomona Reservoir
X
X
X
X
for this storage yet. Purchasing this storage does
not require a reallocation.
X
Bone Creek Lake
X
Bronson City Lake
X
Cedar Creek Lake
X
Cedar Valley Lake
X
Crystal Lake
X
X
Garnett City Lake
X
X
Lake Miola
X
Linn Valley Lake
X
Little Sugar Creek Lake
X
Louisburg City Lake
X
Lyndon City Lake
X
Middle Creek Lake
X
Mound City Lake
X
Osage City Lake
X
Parker City Lake
X
X
Richmond City Lake
X
Rock Creek Lake
X
X
Xenia Lake
X
Structural restoration at the three federal reservoirs
will be required in the future to prolong the life of
the dam, minimize leakage and protect the shoreline; however, no work is currently scheduled.
Restoration may be required at the other reservoirs
as well, but it is difficult to know to what extent
without knowing the condition of their dams.
Recommendations
• Determine cause of relatively high rate of sedimentation at Pomona Reservoir and target areas where best management practices may reduce the sedimentation rate. Coordinate with
the Pomona Lake Watershed Restoration and
Protection Strategy (WRAPS) Stakeholder
Leadership Team (SLT) to incorporate the
findings of the Reservoir Roadmap in the 9Element Watershed Plan.
•
Survey LaCygne Lake in cooperation with
Kansas City Power & Light to determine the
effect of sedimentation on the lake’s capacity.
Maintaining or increasing a reservoir’s storage is
important in ensuring its reliability as a water supTable 8. Summary of Potential Restoration Approaches at Water Supply Reservoirs.
ply source; however, restoration approaches can be
quite expensive and are more likely to be long
Sediment removal is most likely to be an option at res- term solutions. Conservation methods may be used
ervoirs that have lost a relatively high percentage of when the availability of water supply needs to increase
storage. Crystal Lake was not marked because Garnett quickly, inexpensively or temporarily. This section
has several other sources of water supply.
will identify opportunities for water conservation to
improve water supply reliability.
A pool rise is most likely to be an option at a federal
reservoir in which a flood pool exists. As previously
mentioned, a pool rise is a reallocation of flood pool
storage to water supply storage.
Page 158
OPPORTUNITIES FOR WATER CONSERVATION
Volume III
Municipal water conservation goals are based on a
system’s size, water consumption in gallons per capita
per day (GPCD) and the average GPCD for the region.
GPCD calculations are based on amounts of water
sold for residential and commercial uses, free uses and
unaccounted for water. For this analysis, large utilities
are those serving 10,000 people or more, medium
utilities are those serving 500 to 9,999 people and
small utilities are those serving fewer than 500 people.
The Marais des Cygnes River basin OASIS model includes municipal users that either have a water right
on the Marais des Cygnes River, One Hundred and
Ten Mile Creek or Bull Creek downstream of the fed• The prevention of the waste of the water supplies eral reservoirs, or have a marketing contract with the
of the state, and;
State of Kansas for water from a federal reservoir. A
summary of water use for municipal users in the OA• The protection and conservation of the water reSIS model is included in Table 9.
sources of the state in a technologically and economically feasible manner.
Municipalities with a high water use relative to the
regional average may improve water supply reliability
Kansas Water Plan Objectives
by implementing conservation practices. Municipali• Reduce the number of public water suppliers with ties with a high percentage of unaccounted for water
excessive unaccounted for water by first targeting will likely reduce their water use by reducing the
those with 30% or more unaccounted for water.
amount of unaccounted for water.
Water Conservation
Water conservation is a management tool that can provide multiple benefits. Water conservation is the most
cost-effective and environmentally sound way to reduce demand for water. Conservation has been a priority for the State of Kansas for a number of years. The
Kansas Water Resources Planning Act provides statutory authorization for addressing water quantity management in the Kansas Water Plan. This Act established long-range goals for the management, conservation and development of the waters of the state, including:
•
Reduce the number of irrigation points of diverTechnical Assistance
sion for which the amount of water applied in acreThe Kansas Rural Water Association (KRWA) under
feet per acre (AF/A) exceeds an amount considcontract with the KWO provides technical assistance
ered reasonable for the area.
to public water supply operators, managers and local
• All non-domestic points of diversion meeting pre- administrators on issues critical to public water sysdetermined criteria will be metered, gaged or oth- tems. The program includes on-site technical assistance for rural water districts and municipal water syserwise measured.
tems. The KRWA provides bookkeeping assistance,
• Conservation plans will be required for water water rate structuring, water conservation plan develrights meeting priority criteria under K.S.A. 82a- opment, distribution system and treatment plant re733 if it is determined that such a plan would reviews/analyses, leak detection, meter testing, well and
sult in significant water management improve- distribution line cleaning and emergency assistance.
ment.
Drought Triggers
Municipal and Other Public Water Suppliers
Public water supply conservation plans include locally
determined response to drought triggers. Triggers are
Conservation Plans
developed by and for the local water system. The 2007
Conservation plans, as currently prepared and imple- Kansas Municipal Water Conservation Plan Guidemented, provide a management tool for the public wa- lines provide suggestions for this planning. The
ter supplier that improves efficiency but may or may Guidelines also include triggers for water marketing
not reduce the quantity used. To be most effective the reservoirs.
plans must be implemented and maintained. Of the 80
public water suppliers in the Marais des Cygnes River Municipal drought stage triggers indicate certain levbasin, 65 have developed a water conservation plan.
els of water shortage or other drought conditions have
been reached. Triggers may be storage or distribution
system capacity, peak demand or some other utility
Page 159
Volume III
Municipal User
Edgerton
Franklin RWD 1
Gardner
Johnson RWD 7
Miami RWD 1
Miami RWD 2
Spring Hill
Burlingame
Harveyville
Osage City
PWWSD 122
Osage RWD 3
LaCygne
MdC PUA3
Franklin RWD 6
Osawatomie
Ottawa
2009 Regional
2009 Percent
2009 Percent
2009 GPCD
Avg. GPCD
Difference
Unaccounted For
Hillsdale Reservoir Water Marketing Customers
52
89
-42
3
89
-13
71
771
94
122
-23
14
94
89
6
-8
75
89
-16
15
95
89
7
9
74
89
-17
12
Melvern Reservoir Water Marketing Customers
82
94
-13
-4
80
88
-9
7
90
94
-4
11
70
90
-22
11
Pomona Reservoir Water Marketing Customers
83
94
-12
7
Marais des Cygnes River Water Assurance District No. 2 Members
68
89
-24
1
100
89
12
12
112
89
26
18
114
89
28
9
85
122
-30
17
5 Year Avg
GPCD
54
73
101
103
75
96
79
83
97
92
76
96
92
115
99
131
87
Table 9. Summary of Water Use for Municipal Users in the Marais des Cygnes Basin OASIS Model.
1
2009 water use data were not available; 2007 data were used instead.
One member did not report water use data in 2009; 2008 data were used instead.
3
The MdC PUA was not operational for all of 2009; Louisburg and Paola 2009 water use data were used instead.
2
determined condition. Each trigger acts as a signal to the OASIS model. Results of the model runs for Hillsbegin implementation of appropriate actions for that dale Reservoir in the year 2050 are shown in Figure
stage and specific goals are identified as the desired 20.
outcome for each stage. Appropriate conservation
practices in the areas of education, management and
regulation are developed and set under each stage. A
public water supplier should enact the appropriate
stage whenever a trigger is reached. Delay in action
may lead to a major disruption of the water supply
system at a later time.
Three to four stages are considered appropriate in response to drought to trigger practices or actions. The
first three stages, water watch, water warning and water emergency, are appropriate for all public water
suppliers. A fourth stage, water rationing, is for possible use by public water suppliers in an extreme emergency. Goals for a water warning and a water emer- Figure 20. Hillsdale Reservoir Capacity Frequency Comparison.
gency should be quantifiable, specifically describing
the water status and targeting water user awareness, The model ran with municipal demands reduced by
reducing overall demand and reducing peak demand. 25% based on estimates of potential conservation capabilities provided in the conservation plans of muEvaluation of Conservation
nicipalities in the Marais des Cygnes River basin.
The effects of demand management through conserva- Hillsdale Reservoir responded the most to conservation practices by municipalities were evaluated using tion practices due to the relatively large use of water
Page 160
Volume III
marketing storage from the reservoir. Melvern and References
Pomona Reservoirs responded less because of the 1. State Water Resource Planning Act. K.S.A. 82a901a.
lower municipal use from each of those reservoirs.
2. Kansas Water Office. 1986. Kansas Industrial WaIndustrial Water Use
ter Conservation Plan Guidelines.
The 1986 Kansas Industrial Water Conservation Plan
Guidelines were prepared for use by industrial water
users to assist them in developing a water conserva- 3. Kansas Water Office. 2007. Kansas Municipal
Water Conservation Plan Guidelines.
tion plan. As members of the MRWAD 2, Kansas City
Power & Light (KCP&L) is required to have a water
conservation plan, which was approved in 1993. This
plan describes how the KCP&L cooling lake is managed to continuously operate the generating station.
The plan is somewhat limited in total conservation
because KCP&L typically cannot reduce the amount
of process water used without reducing production or
shutting down.
Irrigation Water Use
Irrigators make up about 10% of the water use in the
Marais des Cygnes River basin and may influence water availability in the system during specific months of
the year. Irrigation Water Conservation Plan Guidelines were revised in 2006. Conservation plans are
generally only required by the Kansas Department of
Agriculture-Division of Water Resources (DWR) for
irrigators who are not in compliance with the terms of
their water right; however, continued improvements to
irrigation technology may reduce their water use.
Recreation Water Use
Recreational water users account for less than one percent of the water use in the Marais des Cygnes River
basin, but still may influence water availability in the
system during specific months of the year. Most recreational users in the Marais des Cygnes River basin
pump water from the river to create habitat for water
fowl. These users coordinate with the DWR to ensure
there is sufficient water available for them to pump;
conservation measures are not typically required. Water conservation plan guidelines have not been developed for recreational water use.
Recommendations
• Continue aid to public water suppliers in developing and maintaining water conservation plans.
• Continue technical assistance to public water suppliers in determining the source of unaccounted for
water.
Page 161
Volume III
OPERATIONAL AND MANAGEMENT CHANGES TO IMPROVE SUPPLY
This section discusses potential operational or man- wastewater treatment technologies. Improved treatagement changes for each drinking water reservoir in ment of wastewater may allow for lower instream flow
requirements. New release schedules for federal reserthe Marais des Cygnes River basin.
voirs based on either the probability of meeting a
downstream target or using continuous monitoring and
Reservoir Operational Changes
Operational decisions and management practices of adjustment of releases to meet the target could be
the three federal reservoirs in the Marais des Cygnes more efficient methods to manage the reservoir’s storRiver basin can be evaluated for the purpose of im- age than a set minimum release schedule.
proving water supply. The difficulty lies with making
changes to these operations because of their potential In addition to the minimum releases scheduled from
effects on flood control and environmental issues. each reservoir, there are Minimum Desirable StreamThe U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) requires flow (MDS) requirements established to maintain insignificant study before an operational change can be stream benefits. These requirements are typically established at U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) gaging
made to a federal reservoir.
stations so that streamflow conditions can be easily
Operational changes that improve water supply can be monitored. If the average daily streamflow at the MDS
made by increasing the amount of water stored in the gaging station falls below the MDS for a period of
reservoir or by reducing the amount of sediment that seven consecutive days, the Chief Engineer has the
settles in the reservoir. The amount of water stored in ability to administer water rights with a priority after
the reservoir can be increased by changing the mini- April 12, 1984. The Marais des Cygnes River has
mum release schedule and the lake level management MDS requirements at the Ottawa and LaCygne gages,
shown in Figure 21.
plan (LLMP).
Reservoir Minimum Releases
The minimum release schedules for federal reservoirs
were historically developed based on instream flow
requirements determined by studies completed by the
U.S. Public Health Service. The flow requirements
were for wastewater discharge assimilation and fish
and wildlife support. Table 10 below shows the minimum release schedules for federal reservoirs in the
Marais des Cygnes River basin.
Minimum releases are typically met by inflows that
are bypassed through the reservoirs; however, if these
inflows are not sufficient to meet the required minimum releases, stored water is released. In each of the
reservoirs, minimum releases are made from water
quality storage. Minimum release schedules for many
of the federal reservoirs in Kansas were created over
50 years ago, usually for dilution of a city’s wastewater downstream of the reservoir. While wastewater
treatment requirements have increased, so have the
Figure 21. Marais des Cygnes Basin MDS Gage Locations.
Month
Reservoir
J
F
M
A
M
J
J
A
S
O
N
D
Hillsdale
3
3
8
8
24
24
24
24
24
8
3
3
Melvern
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
Pomona
15
15
15
15
15
15
15
15
15
15
15
15
Table 10. Marais des Cygnes Basin Reservoir Minimum Release Schedules.
Page 162
Volume III
Month
Gage
J
F
M
A
M
J
J
A
S
O
N
D
Ottawa
15
15
15
15
20
25
25
25
20
15
15
15
LaCygne
20
20
20
20
20
25
25
25
20
20
20
20
Table 11. Marais des Cygnes Basin Reservoir Minimum Desirable Streamflows.
Minimum releases from the federal reservoirs help to
maintain MDS requirements as shown in Figure 22.
Figure 23. Hillsdale Reservoir Lake Level Management Plan.
Figure 22. Ottawa Streamflow Comparison.
Prior to construction of Pomona Reservoir
(10/27/1918 to 10/17/1963), 35% of average daily
streamflows at the Ottawa gage were less than 25 cfs.
After construction of Pomona Reservoir, but prior to
construction of Melvern Reservoir (10/18/1963 to
7/31/1972), 17% of average daily streamflows at the
Ottawa gage were less than 25 cfs. With Pomona and
Melvern Reservoirs in operation, only about four percent of average daily streamflows at the Ottawa gage
were less than 25 cfs. While this suggests the minimum releases greatly improve the ability to meet this
instream flow, there could also be times when these
releases are too high and not necessary to meet the instream flow requirements.
Figure 24. Melvern Reservoir Lake Level Management Plan.
Lake Level Management Plans
Lake Level Management Plans (LLMPs) are seasonal
fluctuations in the reservoir surface elevation with the
goal of increasing the beneficial use of the reservoir.
LLMPs are developed through a coordinated effort
between the KWO, the Corps and the KDWP&T, each
receiving input from stakeholders with an interest in
the reservoirs. Hillsdale, Melvern and Pomona Reservoirs each have a LLMP, which are shown in the following figures.
Figure 25. Pomona Reservoir Lake Level Management Plan.
Page 163
Volume III
In each of these reservoirs, storage is evacuated below Marais des Cygnes River basin system of reservoirs
the normal conservation pool for a period of time dur- and rivers are governed by the operations agreement
between the MRWAD 2, KWO, and the DWR. The
ing the year.
operations agreement is an agreement regarding the
Review of plans for potential modifications to con- coordination, operation, management and protection
of releases from the reservoirs in the basin. Protection
sider:
of releases refers to ensuring that the water is available
The LLMPs for Hillsdale, Melvern and Pomona Res- for the intended downstream use and is not diverted
ervoirs are balanced plans with water above and below before reaching the intended place of use. Originally
normal conservation pool. The winter drawdowns adopted in 1995, the operations agreement has been
have relatively low risk because the lakes are allowed amended several times to reflect storage purchases by
to fill in the spring, when there is a high probability of the MRWAD 2. Releases from storage in the reserrefill. The summer months allow for some additional voirs are made to meet downstream municipal and instorage above conservation pool. There does not ap- dustrial MRWAD 2 member demands. It is unlikely
that revising the operations agreement will improve
pear to be any need for modification.
water supply reliability in the Marais des Cygnes
River basin.
Reservoir Sedimentation Management
Reservoir sedimentation management strategies can
include one or more of the following techniques:
Recommendations
• Coordinate with the Corps to study the use of
• Reducing sediment inflows;
reservoir operational techniques to reduce sedi• Managing sediment in the reservoir;
mentation in the reservoirs.
• Removing sediment from the reservoir;
• Replacing lost storage; and
References
• De-commissioning the reservoir.
1. State Water Resource Planning Act. K.S.A. 82a901a.
The focus of this section of the Reservoir Roadmap is
reservoir operational changes, which is limited to 2. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Hillsdale Water
managing sediment in the reservoir using reservoir
Control Manual.
operations. Operational techniques for preventing
sediment from settling when sediment laden water en- 3. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Melvern Reservoir
ters the reservoir or removing accumulated sediment
Water Control Manual.
include multilevel selective withdrawal, changes in
lake level management plans, inflow routing, sluicing, 4. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Pomona Reservoir
density current venting and flushing. Each of these
Water Control Manual.
techniques is described in detail by Baker & deNoyelles. Most of the techniques involve reducing the 5. Kansas Water Office. Lake Level Management
residence time of sediment laden water in the reserPlans WY 2010 Report.
voir, thereby reducing sedimentation. A problematic
issue is that the greatest amount of sediment entering 6. Baker, Debra & deNoyelles, Frank. Can Reservoir
Management Reduce Sediment Deposition?
the reservoir is during high flow (flood) events, typically the time when reservoir operators want to store
the water to avoid downstream flooding. Implementation of these methods of sediment management will
require significant study and changes to the Corps reservoir water control manuals.
Operations Agreement
The operations of each Marais des Cygnes River basin
reservoir are governed by the Corps water control
manual for each reservoir. The operations of the
Page 164
Volume III
SEDIMENT YIELD AND MODELING
In 2011 the KWO, in response to requests to update
previous mean annual sediment yield estimates in the
state and following the basin schedule set in the Reservoir Sustainability Initiative, reevaluated the Marais
des Cygnes River basin suspended sediment yields.
The primary data sources used in the 2011 reevaluation for the Marais des Cygnes River basin were
KDHE stream chemistry sampling network’s total suspended solids (TSS) data (1990-2010), the unique
contributing areas (watersheds) formed by the ambient
surface water quality monitoring network and USGS
stream flow data and stream statistics for the registered surface waters of Kansas. However, unlike the
2009 evaluation of the Neosho River basin mean annual sediment yield, no instantaneous USGS suspended sediment concentration (SSC) data were available in the basin to calibrate the KDHE TSS derived
mean annual sediment yields. Kansas Biological Survey (KBS) performed bathymetric surveys of all three
federal reservoirs (Melvern, Pomona and Hillsdale
Reservoirs) in the Marias des Cygnes River basin in
2009. By using those hydrographic surveys, the mean
annual sedimentation rate was calculated from the date
of dam closure to the survey date. That sedimentation
rate was compared to the mean annual sediment yields
derived from the KDHE TSS data, when available,
above those federal reservoirs as verification of the
yield estimates. Mean annual sediment yields in the
Marais des Cygnes River basin were created based
upon the method described in Sedimentation Engineering (Vanoni, 2006) for estimating long-term sediment yields by flow duration-sediment rating curves.
Due to a number of factors outlined within this 2011
yield assessment report, the uncertainty and potential
sources for error in many of the updated mean annual
sediment yield estimates remain high. The estimated
yields should only be used at the planning level.
In general, the KWO mean annual sediment yield assessment found that sediment yields increased on the
main stem of the Marais des Cygnes River with increasing drainage area. The rate of the yield increase
was also related to the increased drainage area.
The results of the assessment found that the sediment
yield above Melvern Reservoir was greater than the
expected rate of similar sized drainages in the Marais
des Cygnes River basin, although the difference was
not statistically significant. The Pomona and Hillsdale
Reservoirs sediment yields were just over six and
Figure 26. Hillsdale Reservoir
eight times greater, respectively, than that of other
similar sized drainages in the Marais des Cygnes
River basin and both of those difference were statistically significant (a = 0.05). The mean annual sediment
yields calculated for monitored watersheds above
Melvern and Pomona Reservoirs were similar to estimated sedimentation rates based upon the 2009 KBS
hydrographic surveys of those reservoirs (KWO, Reservoir ‘Fact’ Sheets). No KDHE water quality monitoring sites are located above Hillsdale Reservoir;
therefore, the sediment yield for the stream system
was based solely on the sedimentation rate calculated
from the 2009 KBS survey (KWO, Reservoir ‘Fact’
Sheets). The KDHE stream chemistry site 577
(SC577) on Dragoon Creek above Pomona Reservoir
had the largest sediment yield by unit drainage area,
while the site on Ottawa Creek in Franklin County had
the second largest sediment yield of all watersheds
contributing to the Marais des Cygnes River; assessed
by the KDHE sediment monitoring data. Although
stream monitoring data above Hillsdale Reservoir are
not collected by the KDHE, the KBS hydrographic
survey derived estimate of mean annual sediment
yield for the Hillsdale drainage area, indicates that it
has an even larger yield per unit area than SC577 on
Dragoon Creek above Pomona Reservoir. In October
2010, the KWO entered into a joint funding agreement
with the USGS to monitor suspended sediment concentration at flow gaging sites above and below Hillsdale Reservoir to confirm this conclusion. Results of
that monitoring could be available as early as 2013.
To determine the significance of stream banks as a
source of sediment contribution to the three federal
reservoirs in the Marais des Cygnes River, the KWO
performed a historic aerial photo review of streambank stability and gullies above those federal reserPage 165
Volume III
voirs through a comparison of 1991 aerial photography to 2008 aerial photography. Comparison of those
photos identified areas of actively eroded stream
banks and an average annual soil loss from those
sources was calculated. Melvern Reservoir has the
lowest mean annual sedimentation rate of the three
federal reservoirs in the Marais des Cygnes River basin; however, actively eroding stream banks comprise
almost 36% of the average annual sediment deposited
in Melvern Reservoir. Stabilizing all actively eroding
streambanks and restoring their riparian areas could
reduce the mean annual sedimentation rate of Melvern
Reservoir by 26 AF/yr or about 30% of the current
mean annual sedimentation rate (86 AF/yr), assuming
a practice efficiency of 85%. In contrast to Melvern
Reservoir, the KWO assessment of actively eroding
stream banks in the Pomona and Hillsdale Reservoir
drainages accounted for less than one percent of their
mean annual sedimentation rates, implying that another sediment source (land surface erosion) dominates the mean annual sediment load to those reservoirs. Both Pomona and Hillsdale Reservoirs have significantly higher mean annual sedimentation rates, 330
and 166 AF/yr respectively, than Melvern Reservoir.
Methodology
The Marais des Cygnes River basin does not have
nearly the density of the KDHE water quality monitoring sites (WQMS) that was observed for the Neosho
River basin sediment yield evaluation (KWO, 2009).
As the KWO defines the Marais des Cygnes River basin, the basin covers 4,255 square miles and has 22
WQMS with enough monitoring data, as of the May
2011, to estimate a sediment yield from a contributing
area. Stream chemistry monitoring site 743 on the
Marais des Cygnes River in Miami County did not
have enough monitoring data at the time of this report
to estimate the sediment yield at that location. The
Neosho basin has 44 WQMS and an area of 6,243
square miles. That is one site for every 203 square
miles in the Marais des Cygnes River basin and one
site for every 142 square miles in the Neosho River
basin. This substantial reduction in WQMS density
makes it harder to draw conclusions from the estimated mean annual sediment yield results and increases the uncertainty of those conclusions. In addition, as previously noted, Hillsdale Reservoir has no
WQMS located with its drainage. However, the
Marais des Cygnes River basin WQMS density is
similar to those densities reported for the Verdigris
River basin (KWO, 2010).
Page 166
The KWO has previously described the methodology
used in creating the mean annual sediment yield estimates (KWO, 2009). The KDHE has the most comprehensive (temporally and spatially) water quality
monitoring network within the state. Ambient surface
water samples are collected every other month at fixed
sites in the Marais des Cygnes River basin and every
other month, every fourth year at rotational sampling
sites. The location of the sampling sites used to estimate mean annual sediment yields for contributing
streams within Kansas in the Marais des Cygnes River
basin is shown in Figure 27. The TSS data from the
sites were provided by the KDHE on April 22, 2009
and included all TSS data from 1990 through 2010.
Figure 27. Sampling site locations of KDHE ambient stream water quality network in the Marais des Cygnes River basin.
When data were available at USGS flow gaging stations (see Figure 28 for locations), USGS instantaneous flows were used to create a mean annual flow duration curve for stream segments.
When necessary, USGS gage data or a reasonable surrogate for that data, such as paired adjoining watersheds, were used to create an estimated flow duration
curve for each stream segment with a coincident
KDHE sampling site. Coupling the KDHE TSS loads
with the estimated flow duration curves created the
basis for most of the mean annual sediment yields in
the Marais des Cygnes River basin.
Unlike the Neosho River basin sediment yield assessment, no USGS suspended sediment concentration
data were available at USGS flow gaging stations to
create sediment yield estimates for stream segments
and calibrate the KDHE TSS derived mean annual
sediment yield estimates. Bathymetric surveys of
Melvern, Pomona and Hillsdale Reservoirs were performed by KBS in SFY2009. The resulting sedimentation rates estimated from those surveys were compared to the sediment yield estimates above each of
the reservoirs. The calculated sediment rates were in
agreement with the sedimentation yields estimated in
this report for Melvern and Pomona Reservoirs. No
KDHE TSS sample data is available above Hillsdale
Reservoir to compute a sediment yield from its drainage area. The sedimentation rate calculated from the
2009 KBS hydrographic survey was used as the sole
source of information at Hillsdale Reservoir to estimate the sediment yield from its contributing area.
Volume III
1) The average daily flow duration curves derived
from the 1990 – 2010 period were in general
slightly greater for higher flows than the instantaneous flow mean annual flow duration
curves, derived from averaging the 1991 –
2009 instantaneous annual flows duration
curves.
Initially, sediment yields were calculated at all 21
KDHE water quality monitoring locations in the
Marais des Cygnes River basin using flow duration
curves created, in order of preference, from:
1) average daily flows for the 1990-2010 study
period at a gage located on the sample stream
near or at the water quality sampling location;
2) a rescaled flow duration curved from USGS
station located on a watershed adjoining the
stream of interest for average daily flows for
1990 – 2010
Next, sediment yields were recalculated at nine of the
21 KDHE monitoring sites where USGS instantaneous
flows were available either near or at the water quality
monitoring sites (Figure 29). The flow duration curve
derived from the instantaneous flows was built by calculating 19 annual flow exceedence curves (1991 –
20101), transforming each of the annual curves to
natural log units and then averaging the results by percent exceedence to create the average annual flow exceedence of the 19 annual curves. Years with missing
instantaneous flow data were excluded from these calculations. When necessary, the proportional drainage
Figure 28. USGS instantaneous flow gaging station locations in
area at the KDHE monitoring site was used to adjust
the Marais des Cygnes River basin.
the recorded instantaneous flows at a paired USGS
This report assumes the mean annual sediment yields gage.
derived by averaging the annual flow duration curves
The results of the nine instantaneous flow, average
from the USGS gaged instantaneous flows, from water
annual flow duration/KDHE WQMS mean annual
years 1991 through 2009, have the least amount of
sediment yields are plotted against the initial mean
error and are closest to the true mean annual sediment
annual sediment yields calculated from the duration
yields. Consequently, the mean annual sediment yields
curved created from average daily flows for 1990 –
derived from these flow data have been used to adjust
2010 and the same KDHE monitoring data at those
the KDHE TSS data/USGS average daily data flow
sites (Figure 30). With the exception of the Little
derived mean annual sediment yields. The results of
Osage River mean annual sediment yield estimate
that comparison and the subsequent adjustments made
(SC207 in Figure 30), a strong relation was found beto the estimated mean annual sediment yields are detween the two methods of estimating mean annual
tailed below; however, a summary of that comparison
sediment yield. The regression relation in Figure 30
is:
was used to adjust the initial estimated mean annual
Page 167
Volume III
sediment yield estimates at the remaining 12 KDHE greatest yield per unit area of all sites assessed in the
monitoring sites in the Marais des Cygnes River basin. Marais des Cygnes River basin. They are in descending order of yield per unit area, SC577 on Dragoon
From Figure 27, notice that not all the streams in the Creek above Pomona Reservoir, SC616 on Ottawa
Marais des Cygnes River basin were monitored by the Creek in east-central Franklin County and SC207 on
KDHE sampling network. A method of estimating the Little Osage River in northeast Bourbon County.
sediment yields from unmonitored stream segments
was developed based upon the sediments yields derived from the monitoring sites in the previous step.
The result of this operation created estimates for annual sediment yields for every stream segment on the
Kansas Surface Water Register in the Marais des Cygnes River basin with direct contribution to a KDHE
monitoring site in the state.
Figure 29. Locations of the WQ monitoring sites, and USGS instantaneous flow gages paired with them, to calculate mean annual
sediment yields.
A regression model was first created to relate sediment
yield from the monitoring stations on or along the
Marais des Cygnes River (primarily tributary sites)
using the contributing area to those monitoring sites as
a predictor (Figure 31, blue line and blue data points).
This regression was used to establish the intercept for
the basin model regression which adds SC206 and
SC745, the KDHE monitoring sites further downstream on the Marais des Cygnes River. Both sites
have much larger drainage area than all the other
monitoring sites from the previous regression step. A
second degree polynomial was selected as the best fit
for the whole basin regression model (Figure 31, red
line and blue and red data points).
Figure 30. Relation between mean annual sediment yields calculated from average daily flow derived duration curves for 1990-2010
and mean annual instantaneous flow derived duration curves.
Figure 31. Bivariate Fit of Best Estimate Mean Annual
Sediment Yield (T/Yr) By Drainage Area (Sq Mi)
Three data points were excluded from these regressions due to high estimated yield given the size of
The whole basin regression model established the
their drainages. These three monitoring sites have the
method of estimating sediment yields for stream segPage 168
Volume III
Linear Fit: Mean Annual Sediment Yield by Drainage Area
< 1,500 Sq Miles (Blue Line and Blue Data Points)
Best Est Sed Ld (T/Yr) = 844.6803 + 162.78295*Drainage Area
Summary of Fit
RSquare
RSquare Adj
Root Mean Square Error
Mean of Response
Observations (or Sum Wgts)
0.868708
0.85933
24112.29
57696.63
16
Summary of Fit
RSquare
RSquare Adj
Root Mean Square Error
Mean of Response
Observations (or Sum Wgts)
F Ratio
92.6325
Prob > F
<.0001*
Analysis of Variance
Source
DF
Sum of
Squares
Model
2
1.3309e+12
Error
16
1.0729e+10
C. Total
18
1.3416e+12
Analysis of Variance
Source DF
Model
1
Error 14
C. Total 15
Sum of
Squares
5.3857e+10
8139635866
6.1996e+10
Mean
Square
5.386e+10
581402562
Polynomial Fit Degree=2: Whole Basin Model - Mean Annual Sediment Yield by Drainage Area (Red Line and Blue
and Red Data Points). Intercept Forced to 884.68 T/Yr by
Linear Fit (Left Column; Blue Data)
Best Est Sed Ld (T/Yr) = 844.68 + 115.20907*Drainage Area +
0.0442856*Drainage Area^2
.
.
25895.15
137599.4
18
Mean
Square
6.655e+11
670558720
F Ratio
992.3891
Prob > F
<.0001*
Tested against reduced model: Y=0
Parameter Estimates
Term
Estimate
Intercept
844.6803
Drainage Area 162.78295
Std Error t Ratio
8439.773
0.10
16.91325
9.62
Prob>|t|
0.9217
<.0001*
Parameter Estimates
Term
Estimate Std Error t Ratio Prob>|t|
Intercept (Zeroed)
844.68
0
.
.
Drainage Area
115.2091 18.45215
6.24 <.0001*
Drainage Area^2
0.044286 0.006429
6.89 <.0001*
Figure 32. Regressions to relate yields to drainage areas Marais des Cygnes River basin.
ment that did not have monitoring sites located directly on them within the KDHE stream chemistry
network of the Marais des Cygnes River basin. The
adjusted sediment yield for the stream segment upon
which the KDHE monitoring site was located was
compared to the drainage area derived whole basin
regression estimate. The drainage area to each stream
segment in the system above a KDHE monitoring site
is input into the whole basin regression equation to
estimate yield and then adjusted by the ratio of the two
yields at the monitored segment to create as a rescaling factor. This process is repeated for all the
streams segments within the unique contributing area
of each monitoring site and then repeated for each
monitoring site in the Marais des Cygnes River basin.
Marais des Cygnes River all the way to the state line.
The increase appears to be predominately related to
the increase in the flow rate from upstream to downstream on the mainstem.
Yields calculated for the watersheds above Pomona
and Hillsdale Reservoirs are significantly greater,
given similar drainage areas, than the yields for the
rest of the Marais des Cygnes River basin watersheds.
The largest per unit area sediment yield calculated at a
KDHE water quality monitoring site is on Dragoon
Creek above Pomona Reservoir (SC577). Although
monitoring data are not available above Hillsdale Reservoir, the 2009 KBS hydrographic survey indicates
the Hillsdale Reservoir drainage has an even greater
sediment yield per unit area than yield per unit area for
Pomona Reservoir. Ottawa Creek in Franklin County
Results
The procedure described above was followed for all (SC616) and the Little Osage River, whose drainage
monitored watersheds in the Marais des Cygnes River starts at the state line in Bourbon County (SC207),
basin. The result is the mean annual sediment yield also had substantially larger sediment yields per unit
area than the balance of monitoring sites in the Marais
map shown in Figure 33.
des Cygnes River basin.
Within the Marais des Cygnes River basin, mean annual sediment yields (tons/year) typically increase Also of note were yields calculated for the Marmaton
with increasing drainage areas (Figure 32). Below fed- River in Bourbon County. A substantial increase in the
eral reservoirs in the basin, the rate of sediment yield rate of sediment yield gain between SC559 and SC208
increase is fairly constant on the mainstem of the was noted (Figure 34). Although the yield at SC208 is
Page 169
SEDIMENT YIELD AND MODELING Volume III
not excessive given its drainage area in comparison to
other sites with similar drainage areas in the Marais
des Cygnes River basin, the jump in rate of sediment
yield increase at SC208 is large when compared to
upstream site SC559, indicating a significant increase
in loading between site 559 and 208, possibly from
stream banks sources along the main stem of the Marmaton River. The City of Fort Scott is located along
the mainstem segment of interest and may be contributing to the increased sediment load in the unique
drainage to SC208, either directly as a storm water
source or indirectly from enhanced runoff flows, from
impervious surfaces in the city which would factor
into the mainstem streambanks as a source issue.
Although every effort has been made to minimize the
potential sources of error during the estimation of
sediment yields in the Marais des Cygnes River basin,
the spatial coverage, frequency of sampling of sediment concentrations and the flow information associated with those samples has introduced many potential
sources of error into the estimated yields. In the 2009
mean annual sediment yield assessment of the Neosho
River basin, the KWO found the KDHE TSS data
tended to under estimate sediment concentrations un-
Figure 34. Marais des Cygnes River basin mean annual sediment
yields with KDHE monitoring sites as overlay.
der higher flows when compared to USGS SSC concentrations (KWO, 2009). Adding to the yield estimate uncertainty, unlike the 2009 evaluation of the
Neosho River basin mean annual sediment yield, no
USGS SSC data were available in the Marais des Cygnes River basin to calibrate the KDHE TSS derived
mean annual sediment yields. Relatively few high flow samples have
been collected at KDHE rotational
monitoring locations. Variation exists
in the relation between sediment load
and flows for each watershed. Since
most of the mean annual sediment
yield is generated under higher flow
conditions, all of the above sources of
potential error could substantially impact the estimate for sediment yields
in any watershed.
Figure 33. Mean annual sediment yield estimates for the Marais des Cygnes River basin
(1990 - 2010)
Page 170
The unmonitored tributaries in the
Marais des Cygnes River basin were
assigned sediment yields based upon
a relation between monitored tributaries and their drainage areas. However, there were certain tributaries
with very high sediment yields that
did not fit the generalized trend between yield and drainage area. There
is no evidence on the unmonitored
tributaries to show that individual
segments within the stream network
contributing to a monitored segment
SEDIMENT YIELD AND MODELING Volume III
could not also have very large sediment yields (like
those excluded from the generalized fits, Figure 32).
The estimated sediment yields in this report are suspended sediment estimates. The sediment yield from
bed sources given the soil types (low in sand) in the
Marais des Cygnes River basin could be between five
and 12% of the suspended sediment yield (Das, 2009).
References
1. Das, G., 2009, Hydrology and Soil Conservation
Engineering: Including Watershed Management,
2nd ed., PHI Learning Private Unlimited, New
Delhi, p. 278-280.
2. Kansas Water Office, 2009, Mean Annual Sediment Yield Estimation for the Neosho Basin,
available online, http://www.kwo.org/
reports_publications/Reports_Publications.htm;
accessed June 18, 2010.
3. Kansas Water Office, 2010, Reservoir Road Map
Vol. III, Verdigris Basin available online, http://
www.kwo.org/reservoirs/Reservoirs.htm pg 125,
accessed May 3, 2011.
4. Kansas Water Office, Reservoir ‘Fact’ Sheets,
available online, Melvern Reservoir: http://
www.kwo.org/reservoirs/ReservoirFactSheets/
Rpt_Melvern_2010.pdf
5. Pomona Reservoir: http://www.kwo.org/
reservoirs/ReservoirFactSheets/
Rpt_Pomona_2010.pdf
6. Hillsdale Reservoir: http://www.kwo.org/
ReservoirInformation/ReservoirFactSheets/2010/
Rpt_Hillsdale_2010.pdf, accessed May 3, 2011.
7. Perry, C.A., Wolock, D.M., and Artman, J.C.,
2004, Estimates of flow duration, mean flow, and
peak-discharge frequency values for Kansas
stream locations: U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2004–5033, pages vary
by county for Marais des Cygnes Basin, Kansas.
8. Vanoni, V.I., editor, 2006, Sedimentation Engineering, American Society of Civil Engineers,
p.277-288.
Page 171
Volume III
Identification of Streambank Erosion and Status of
Riparian Areas and Estimates of Restoration Needed
This chapter describes and quantifies the condition of
riparian areas and streambanks above three federal
water supply reservoirs in the Maris des Cygnes River
basin and the potential for their restoration and protection. Estimates of length and streambank restoration
and protection projects costs are provided for Melvern,
Pomona and Hillsdale Reservoirs and the Marmaton
River watershed that includes the Marmaton River and
its tributaries upstream of the Kansas border to the
confluence of the Marmaton River with Paint Creek in
central Bourbon County.
IDENTIFICATION, STATUS AND ESTIMATES ing and re-stabilizing of the stream. Most streams in
Kansas are in some stage of this process (SCC, 1999).
Streambank erosion is often a symptom of a larger
more complex problem requiring solutions that frequently involve more than just streambank stabilization (EPA, 2008). It is important to analyze watershed
conditions and understand the evolutionary tendencies
of a stream when considering stream stabilization
measures. Efforts to restore and re-stabilize streams
should allow the stream to speed up the process of regaining natural stability along the evolutionary sequence (Rosgen, 1997). A watershed-based approach
to developing stream stabilization plans can accommoWetland and riparian areas are vital components of date the comprehensive review and implementation.
proper watershed function that, when wisely managed
in context of a watershed system, can moderate and
reduce sediment input into reservoirs. There is growing evidence that a substantial source of sediment in
streams in many areas of the country is generated from
stream channels and edge of field gullies (Balch,
2007). This chapter evaluates streambank erosion contribution to sedimentation in the three Maris des Cygnes River basin federal reservoirs.
Streambank erosion is a natural process that contributes a large portion of annual sediment yield, but acceleration of this natural process leads to a disproportionate sediment supply, stream channel instability,
land loss, habitat loss and other adverse effects. Many
land use activities can affect and lead to accelerated
bank erosion (EPA, 2008). In most Kansas watersheds, this natural process has been accelerated due to
changes in land cover and the modification of stream
channels to accommodate agricultural, urban and other
land uses.
A USGS study in the Perry Reservoir watershed in
northeast Kansas showed that stream channels and
banks are a significant contributor of reservoir sedimentation in addition to land surface erosion (Juracek,
2007). A naturally stable stream has the ability, over
time, to transport the water and sediment of its watershed in such a manner that the stream maintains its
dimension, pattern, and profile without either aggrading or degrading (Rosgen, 1997). Streams that have
been significantly impacted by land use changes in
their watersheds or by modifications to stream beds
and banks go through an evolutionary process to regain a more stable condition. This process generally
involves a sequence of incision (downcutting), widenPage 172
Figure 35. Streambank measurements.
Other research in Kansas documents the effectiveness
of forested riparian areas on bank stabilization and
sediment trapping (Geyer, 2003; Brinson, 1981; Freeman, 1996; Huggins, 1994). Vegetative cover based
on rooting characteristics can mitigate erosion by protecting banks from fluvial entrainment and collapse by
providing internal bank strength. Riparian vegetative
type is an important tool that provides indicators of
erosion occurrence from land use practices. The riparian area is the interface between land and a river or
stream. Riparian areas are significant in soil ecology,
environmental management and because of their role
in soil conservation, habitat biodiversity and the influence they have on aquatic ecosystems overall health.
Forested riparian areas are superior to grassland in
holding bank stabilization during high flows, when
most sediment is transported. When riparian vegetation is changed from woody species to annual grasses
and/or forbs, sub-surface internal strength is weak-
IDENTIFICATION, STATUS AND ESTIMATES Volume III
and down cuts forming deep widening channels. The
potential for surface erosion is associated in part with
the amount of bare, compacted soil exposed to rainfall
and runoff. Increased risk of erosion and sediment delivery is associated with high soil erodability; little
ground cover; steep, long, continuous slopes; high inReservoir sedimentation is a major water quantity con- tensity storms; high drainage density of the slope; and
cern, particularly in reservoirs where the state owns close proximity to streams.
water supply storage. Reservoirs are a vital source of
water supply, provide recreational opportunities, sup- Gully erosion can contribute a tremendous amount of
port diverse aquatic habitat, and provide flood protec- sediment at the watershed scale and can occur in both
tion throughout Kansas. Excessive sediment can alter cropland and grassland. The amount of sediment input
the aesthetic qualities of reservoirs and affect their wa- is based on rainfall/runoff and gully frequency within
ter quality and useful life (Christensen, 2000). Sedi- a given watershed. In each case, the gullies observed
ment deposition in reservoirs can be attributed to are unstable and will continue to be unless BMPs are
many factors, including precipitation, topography, implemented. A common BMP for gully erosion is the
contributing-drainage area of the watershed and differ- rock chute. Rock chute designs require bank shaping
ing soil types. Decreases in reservoir storage capacity and the placement of erosion control fabric and sorted
from sediment deposition can affect reservoir alloca- rock. Rock chutes are designed to direct flow down
tions used for flood control, drinking-water supplies, through the chute center. The rock creates flow resisrecreation and wildlife habitat. Land use has consider- tance slowing down water velocities.
able effect on sediment loading in a reservoir. Intense
Streambank Erosion Hotspot Identification
agricultural use in the watershed, with limited or inefStreambank erosion assessments were performed usfective erosion prevention methods, can contribute
ing desktop ArcGIS® ArcMap® 10 software and onlarge loads of sediment along with constituents (such
the-ground field data verification and collection. The
as phosphorus) to downstream reservoirs (Mau, 2001). purpose of these assessments are to identify locations
ened, causing acceleration of mass wasting processes
(extensive sedimentation due to sub-surface instability) (EPA, 2008). The primary threats to wetlands and
forested riparian areas are agricultural production and
suburban/urban development.
of streambank instability and estimate erosion rates to
prioritize restoration needs along streambanks to slow
sedimentation rates in Melvern, Pomona and Hillsdale
Reservoirs and into the Marmaton River. ArcMap®
10, an ArcGIS® geospatial processing program, was
utilized to assess color aerial photography from 2008,
provided by National Agriculture Imagery Program
(NAIP), and compare it with 1991 black and white
aerial provided by Data Access & Support Center
(DASC). These assessments did not include rangeland
gullies, salt scars or other landscape level sources of
sediment.
Watershed Restoration and Protection Strategy
(WRAPS) plans are currently in the development
stages at Melvern and Pomona Reservoirs, including
the Marmaton River watershed. WRAPS are stakeholder-driven watershed management plans designed
to address multiple water resource issues within a specific watershed. The WRAPS process provides a
means to integrate objectives from multiple local, state
and federal programs into a comprehensive, coordinated strategy for a specific watershed. Included in
the plans are comprehensive recommendations for
Best Management Practices (BMPs) that address the
nonpoint source pollution concerns from many land
use practices in their watersheds. TMDLs have been
developed by the KDHE for Pomona and Hillsdale
Reservoirs, which provide guidance for nonpoint
source pollution reduction.
The streambank gully erosion assessment was performed with similar techniques as the streambank erosion assessment. However, calculating tons of soil erosion was not part of this assessment.
Another form of erosion contributing to sedimentation
in many watersheds in Kansas is the development of
gullies alongside streams. Streambank gullies develop
from the wearing away of the surface soil along drainage channels by surface water runoff. These gullies
are associated with the loss of vegetation on the soil
Data Collection Methodology
Streambank erosion assessments were performed by
overlaying 2008 NAIP county aerial imagery onto
1991 DASC county aerial imagery. Using ArcMap®
tools, “aggressive movement” of the streambank between 1991 DASC and 2008 NAIP aerial photos, were
Page 173
Volume III
identified at a 1:6,000 scale, as a site of streambank
erosion. “Aggressive movement” represents areas of
1,500 sq. feet or more of streambank movement between 1991 and 2008 aerial photos. Note that the identified streambank erosion sites are only a portion of all
streambank erosion occurrences. Erosion sites identified in these assessments are limited to locations of
streambank erosion and covering an area of streambank movement roughly equal to or greater than 1,500
sq. feet. Any erosion that covers an area smaller than
roughly 1,500 sq. feet incurs a high margin of error,
making calculations unreliable and is not included.
This error can be attributed to some distortions between years when aerial photos are taken and then
digitally georepherencing. Error can also be attributed
to shading interference from leafing of trees in aerial
photos when photos are taken in spring, summer and
early fall months. Leafing can affect the ability to locate streambanks.
Streambank erosion sites were denoted by geographic
polygons features “drawn” into the ArcGIS® software
program using ArcMap® editor tools. The polygon
features were created by sketching vertices following
the 2008 streambank and closing the sketch by following the 1991 streambank, at a 1:2,500 scale. Data provided, based on geographic polygon sites include: watershed location, unique ID, stream name, type of
stream and type of riparian vegetation.
IDENTIFICATION, STATUS AND ESTIMATES The intercept of the model was forced to zero.
Average volume of soil loss was estimated by first calculating the volume of sediment loss and applying a
bulk density estimate to that volume for the typical
soil type of the eroding area. The volume of sediment
was found by multiplying bank height, surface area
lost over the 17 year period between the 1991 and
2008 and soil bulk density. This calculated volume is
then divided by the 17 year period to get the average
rate of soil loss in mass/year:
Average Soil Loss Rate (Tons/yr) = [Area_SqFt]*[BankHgtFt]
*SoilDensity(lbs/ft3)/2000(lbs/ton)/
([NAIP_ComparisonPhotoYear]-[BaseAerialPhotoYear])
Soil bulk density, used in the average soil loss rate
equation, was calculated by first determining the moist
bulk density of the predominant soil in the study area,
using the USDA Web Soil Survey website. The predominant soil type found at all erosion locations in the
three reservoirs within the Maris des Cygnes River
basin was Ivan silt loam in the Melvern Reservoir watershed and Verdigris silt/silty loam in the Pomona
and Hillsdale Reservoir watersheds.
Streambank height measurements, also used in the average soil loss rate equation, were obtained through on
the ground field verification in several locations
throughout the watersheds in each reservoir. These
field verified streambank height measurements were
The streambank erosion assessment data also includes the basis for extrapolating streambank height measureestimates of the average volume of soil loss, in tons
per year, from streambank erosion sites. Estimation of
average soil loss is performed utilizing the identified
erosion site polygon features and calculating perimeter, area and streambank length into a regression equation. Perimeter and area were calculated through the
field calculator application within the ArcGIS® software. Streambank length of identified erosion sites
were computed through the application of a regression
equation, formulated by the KWO. This equation was
developed by taking data from the Enhanced Riparian
Area/Stream Channel Assessment for John Redmond
Feasibility Study, a report prepared by The Watershed
Institute (TWI) and Gulf South Research Corporation
(GSCR), and relating the erosion area (in sq. feet) and
perimeter length of that erosion area (in feet) to the
unstable stream bank length (in feet). The multiple
regression formula of that fit (R-square = 0.999) is:
Estimated SB Length=([Area_SqFt]*-.00067)+([Perimtr_ft]*.5089609)
Page 174
Figure 36. Streambank Height Measurement at Melvern Reservoir
on Elm Creek.
ments for identified streambank erosion sites (Figure sas River Basin Regional Sediment Management Section 204 Stream and River Channel Assessment; at
36).
$71.50 per linear foot (Figure 37). Streambank stabiliThe streambank gully erosion assessment was per- zation costs vary based on soil type and materials used
formed with similar techniques as the streambank ero- for streambank stabilization BMPs and may differ
sion assessment. Using ArcMap® tools, streambank from the estimates developed for the Kansas River
gully erosion was indicated by point features in the Basin Regional Sediment Management Section 204
ArcGIS® software program. Gully data was compiled Stream and River Channel Assessment BMP estiand categorized by high, medium or low priority as mates. Due to the lack of sufficient information to acanother effort in rehabilitation prioritization. The iden- curately develop streambank stabilization average
tification of a low priority gully indicates that sheet costs in the Maris des Cygnes River basin, TWI estierosion has been identified and a gully could form in mates were used. To accommodate streambank rehathe area that is perpendicular to the stream. A low pri- bilitation project focus, study areas were delineated
ority gully does not indicate visible channel cutting or into stream reaches and Hydrologic Unit Codes.
any visible streambank riparian erosion. A medium
priority gully identifies visible channel cutting perpenCost estimate per
BMP Cost Description
dicular to the streambank but no visible erosion of the
linear foot
riparian area of the streambank. High priority gullies
identify a deeply incised channel cutting perpendicular 1. Survey and design
Rock delivery and placement
to the stream, including a significant portion of the
$50 - $75
As-built certification design
riparian area eroded from the streambank. In some inBank Shaping
stances, gullies were increased to a medium or high
priority, even if they exhibit “low priority” gully iden- 2. Vegetation (material and planting)
Cover Crop
tifiers, if there was a visibly identified sizeable amount
Mulch
$5
of land erosion or gullies present in the same vicinity.
Willow Stakes
As was found with the streambank erosion assessment, limiting factors were also found when performing the streambank gully erosion visual assessment.
These limiting factors can be attributed to shading interference from leafing of trees in aerial photos when
photos are taken in spring, summer and early fall
months. Leafing can affect the ability to locate streambank gully erosions. In the case of Hillsdale Reservoir,
riparian areas for a large portion of the watershed exhibited dense woodlands, making it difficult to locate
gullies visually.
Bare root seedlings
Grass filter strip
3.
Contingencies
Unexpected site conditions requiring
extra materials and construction time
TOTAL
$3 - $5.5
$58 - $85.5
Figure 37. TWI Estimated Costs to Implement Streambank Stabilization BMPs
Streambank gullies were assessed based on the proportion of high, medium and low priority identifications and can be used as supporting data for streambank erosion or streambank gully erosion rehabilitaAnalysis
tion prioritization. Explanation of prioritization is
Streambank erosion sites were analyzed for: streamfound in the data collection and methodology above.
bank length (in feet) of the eroded bank; annual soil
No further assessment was performed.
loss (in tons/year); percent of streambank length with
poor riparian condition (riparian area identified as be- Results
ing cropland, grassland or a grassed buffer for cropland for riparian vegetation); estimated sediment re- Melvern Reservoir
duction through the implementation of streambank Melvern Reservoir was constructed on the Upper
stabilization BMPs at an 85% efficiency rate; and Marais des Cygnes River in Osage County at river
streambank stabilization cost estimates for eroded mile 175.4. The watershed drains about 349 square
streambank sites. Streambank stabilization costs were miles and includes portions of Coffey, Lyon, Osage
derived from an average cost to implement stream- and Wabaunsee counties, with the majority in Osage
bank stabilization BMPs, as reported in the TWI Kan- County. The Corps began construction of the reservoir
Page 175
Volume III
in 1967 for flood control, water supply, recreation,
fish and wildlife and water quality control. Gates were
closed in October of 1970 and the conservation pool
filled in April of 1975. The original conservation pool
and maximum storage capacities of the reservoir were
154,370 acre-feet and 362,814 acre-feet, respectively.
Melvern Reservoir is situated on the eastern edge of
Kansas' Flint Hills Region. Major tributaries in the
watershed include Mud Creek, Hill Creek, Duck
Creek, 142 Mile Creek, Elm Creek and Chicken
Creek. The most recent survey bathymetric survey
performed by KBS in 2009 reports the conservation
storage capacity at 151,171 acre-feet and yields a
mean annual sedimentation rate of 86 acre-feet per
year.
IDENTIFICATION, STATUS AND ESTIMATES from the streambank erosion sites annually. Assuming
a bulk density of 40 lbs/cubic foot sediment in
Melvern Reservoir; streambank sources account for 31
of the 86 acre-feet (36%) of sediment annually deposited in Melvern Reservoir. Based on estimated stabilization costs of $71.50 per linear foot from an assessment conducted by TWI, streambank stabilization for
the entire watershed from the 2011 assessment would
cost approximately $2.2 million. Of these 68 sites
identified, 10 sites were selected, spread throughout
the watershed, for field verification and streambank
height measurements. Measurements were used to estimate the amount of sediment originating from
streambank sites.
The watershed above Melvern Reservoir is dominated
by deep upland soils and nearly level to moderate
slopes, with the lowland terraces and floodplains
dominated by deep soils with nearly level slopes.
Soils in the watershed vary between well to poorly
drained and in general are subject to water erosion
during high flow events due to moderate to slow permeability and moderate slopes in the majority of the
“prime farmland” cultivated areas (Ingle, 2001). Land
use in the watershed is dominated by grasslands,
roughly 80%, and is primarily used for grazing purposes, while the remaining 20% is broken into cropland and urban land uses. Precipitation in the watershed averages 35 inches per year, with average annual
runoff ranging from seven to eight inches.
Melvern Reservoir currently has no water quality impairments. This is most likely attributed to the predominant land use in the watershed being comprised
of grasslands. However, some streams upstream of the
reservoir have water quality impairments for dissolved
oxygen and fecal coliform bacteria, and TMDLs have
been developed for the One Hundred and Forty Two
Mile Creek/Upper Maris des Cygnes River (KDHE,
2001).
In 2011, the KWO performed a GIS based analysis of
streambank erosion and riparian condition in the
Melvern Reservoir watershed. A total of 68 streambank erosion sites, covering 30,419 feet of unstable
streambank were identified through the assessment,
with only 46% of the unstable streambanks identified
as having poor riparian condition (Figure 38). The assessment also identified estimates totaling approximately 26,671 tons of sediment being transported
Page 176
Figure 38. Melvern Reservoir Watershed Streambank Erosion
Assessment Map.
The majority of the 26,671 tons of sediment is transported each year from the mainstem Marais des Cygnes River; 142 Mile Creek and certain reaches on Elm
Creek (Figure 39); contributing approximately 5,110;
4,340; 4,340 and 4,097 tons of sedimentation annually, respectively. The Marais des Cygnes mainstem
accounts for an estimated 26% of the total stabilization
cost needs in the watershed totaling $572,900. Costs
and percentages for 142 Mile Creek are $277,800
(13%); for certain reaches on Elm Creek $240,260 servation pool filled in June of 1965. The original conservation pool and designed sedimentation rate of the
(11%) and $282,200 (13%), respectively.
reservoir were 70,603 acre-feet and 294 acre-feet per
Several streambank gully erosion problems in areas year, respectively. Major tributaries in the watershed
adjacent to the stream reaches were identified through include Dragoon Creek, Valley Brook and Soldier
the streambank erosion assessment. The assessment of Creek. The most recent survey bathymetric survey
streambank gullies identified certain reaches of 142 performed by KBS in 2009 reports the conservation
Mile Creek as contributing the highest amount of total storage capacity at 55,340 acre-feet and yields a mean
streambank gullies (six), while certain reaches of the annual sedimentation rate of 330 acre-feet per year.
Maris des Cygnes River contributed a total of five gulThe watershed above Pomona Reservoir is dominated
lies.
by gently rolling uplands, with hilly areas along the
streams, average annual rainfalls at 36 inches with the
majority of the precipitation falling in late spring and
early summer. Soils in the watershed along the flood
plains are generally associated with the VerdigrisOsage association with deep, nearly level, well
drained and poorly drained soils that have silty or
clayey subsoil. Land use in the watershed is comprised
of 42% grassland, 41% cropland and the remaining
16% divided into woodland and urban development.
The KDHE has developed two TMDLs for Pomona
Reservoir; eutrophication and siltation. Excess nutrient loading from the watershed creates conditions favorable for algae blooms and aquatic plant growth resulting in low dissolved oxygen rates and an unfavorable habitat for aquatic life. Eutrophication from nitrogen and phosphorous is mostly due to runoff from agricultural lands, animal waste runoff from confined
animal feeding operations and septic systems situated
near the lake. A majority of the nutrient load has been
found to come from the Dragoon Creek subwatershed,
based on the KBS data collected in 1999 and 2000 at
Pomona Reservoir. Agricultural producers in the watershed implement best management practices (known
as BMPs) to prevent nutrient runoff. Some common
Figure 39. Elm Creek Streambank Erosion Site; Estimated SediBMPs include: the use of conservation tillage and
mentation Rate at 766 tons/yr.
cover crops, maintaining buffer strips along field
edges, and proper timing of fertilizer application
Pomona Reservoir
Pomona Reservoir was constructed on the One Hun- (Nejadheshemi, 2009).
dred and Ten Mile Creek, 8.3 miles above the confluence with the Marais des Cygnes River north of the Pomona Reservoir is also impaired by siltation. Silt or
town of Pomona in Osage County. The watershed sediment accumulation in lakes and wetlands reduces
drains about 322 square miles and includes portions of reservoir volume and limits recreational access to the
Franklin, Lyon, Osage and Wabaunsee Counties, with lake. The reservoir is also light limited, with an averthe majority in Osage County. The Corps began con- age transparency (Secchi Disc depth) of 44.0 cm, an
struction of the reservoir in 1959 for flood control, average turbidity of 38.2 formazin turbidity units and
low flow supplementation, water quality, recreation, the average total suspended solid concentration is 30.5
domestic water supply and fish and wildlife enhance- mg/L. Siltation impairment is most likely due to cropment. Gates were closed in July of 1962 and the con- land sediment runoff from exposed soils, increasing
Page 177
Volume III
sedimentation during high flow events and causing an
increase in the turbidity and concentration of total suspended solids and decreasing the water column transparency. Reducing erosion is necessary for a reduction
in sediment. Agricultural best management practices
similar to the practices for nutrient reduction, such as
conservation tillage, grass buffer strips around cropland and reducing activities within the riparian areas
will reduce erosion and improve water quality
(Nejadheshemi, 2009).
IDENTIFICATION, STATUS AND ESTIMATES The majority of the 2,869 tons of sediment is transported each year from One Hundred and One Mile
Creek and certain reaches of Dragoon Creek; contributing approximately 901 and 800 tons of sedimentation annually, respectively. One Hundred and One
Mile Creek accounts for an estimated 25% of the total
stabilization cost needs in the watershed totaling
$110,000, while selected reaches of Dragoon Creek
accounts for 19% of the total stabilization cost needs
in the watershed totaling $83,000.
streambank erosion and riparian condition in the
Pomona Reservoir watershed. A total of 23 streambank erosion sites, covering 6,043 feet of unstable
streambank were identified through the assessment,
with 96% of the unstable streambanks identified as
having poor riparian condition (Figure 40). The assessment also identified estimates totaling approximately 2,869 tons of sediment being transported from
the streambank erosion sites annually. Assuming a
bulk density of 40 lbs/cubic foot sediment in Pomona
Reservoir; streambank sources account for only 3.3 of
the 330 acre feet (1%) of sediment annually deposited
in Pomona Reservoir. Based on estimated stabilization
costs of $71.50 per linear foot from an assessment
conducted by TWI, streambank stabilization for the
entire watershed from the 2011 assessment would cost
approximately $432,060. Of these 23 sites identified,
seven sites were selected, spread throughout the watershed, for field verification and streambank height
measurements. Measurements were used to estimate Figure 41. Gully Erosion on Dragoon Creek.
the amount of sediment originating from streambank
sites.
Several streambank gully erosion problems in areas
adjacent to the stream reaches were
identified through the streambank erosion assessment. The streambank
gully assessment concluded 82 identified streambank gullies, of which all
but six were found to be from adjoining, cultivated fields. From the 82
streambank gullies identified, Dragoon Creek (Figure 41) and One Hundred and Ten Mile Creek were found
to be contributing the highest number
streambank gullies. Dragoon Creek
was identified as having 31 gullies,
four of which were high priority, 25
were medium priority and two were
low priority; while the One Hundred
Figure 40. Pomona Reservoir Watershed Streambank Erosion Assessment Map.
and Ten Mile Creek contributed a toPage 178
Volume III
IDENTIFICATION, STATUS AND ESTIMATES tal of 21 gullies, two of which were high priority, 12
were medium priority and seven were low priority gullies. The other 26 gullies are distributed throughout
the watersheds tributaries with 10 high priority, 14
medium priority and six low priority gullies.
Hillsdale Reservoir
Hillsdale Reservoir was constructed on Big Bull
Creek, at river mile 18.2, west of Hillsdale, Kansas
and northwest of Paola, Kansas. The watershed drains
about 144 square miles and includes portions of Douglas, Franklin, Johnson and Miami Counties. The Corps
began construction of the reservoir in 1976 for flood
control, navigation, water supply, water quality, recreation and fish and wildlife; navigation is not currently an operating purpose. Gates were closed in September 1981 and the conservation pool filled in February of 1985. The original conservation pool and designed sedimentation rate of the reservoir were 82,207
acre-feet and 83 acre-feet per year, respectively. Major
tributaries in the watershed include Rock Creek, Smith
Branch, Spring Creek, Little Bull Creek and Spring
Creek. The most recent survey bathymetric survey
performed by KBS in 2009 reports the conservation
storage capacity at 77,499 acre-feet and calculated
sedimentation rate at 166 acre-feet per year.
Land use in the Hillsdale Reservoir watershed consists
of 50% grassland, 35% cropland, with the remaining
15% used for feedlots and urban and residential development. Gently rolling uplands, with hilly areas along
the streams, characterize the topography with average
annual rainfalls at 39 inches. The majority of
the precipitation falls in late spring and early
summer.
There is one TMDL developed by KDHE for
Hillsdale Reservoir, eutrophication. Excess
nutrient loading from the watershed creates
conditions favorable for algae blooms and
aquatic plant growth resulting in low dissolved oxygen rates and an unfavorable habitat for aquatic life. Eutrophication from nitrogen and phosphorous is mostly due to runoff
from agricultural lands, animal waste runoff
from confined animal feeding operations and
septic systems situated near the lake. According to modeling done by Kansas State University and the Hillsdale Water Quality Project, Big Bull Creek contributes 40 - 50% of
the nonpoint source pollutants while Little
Bull Creek contributes only 25% of the nonpoint
source pollutants (KDHE, 2001). Agricultural producers in the watershed implement BMPs to prevent nutrient runoff. Some common BMPs include: the use of
conservation tillage and cover crops, maintaining
buffer strips along field edges and proper timing of
fertilizer application (Nejadheshemi, 2009). In order to
improve the trophic condition of the lake from its current fully eutrophic status, the desired endpoint will be
summer chlorophyll a concentrations at or below 12
ug/l (KDHE, 2001).
streambank erosion and riparian condition in the Hillsdale Reservoir watershed. A total of 11 streambank
erosion sites, covering 6,965 feet of unstable streambank were identified through the assessment, with
73% of the unstable streambanks identified as having
poor riparian condition (Figure 42). The assessment
also identified estimates totaling approximately 1,073
tons of sediment being transported from the streambank erosion sites annually. Assuming a bulk density
of 40 lbs/cubic foot sediment in Hillsdale Reservoir;
streambank sources account for only 1.2 of the 166
acre feet (1%) of sediment annually deposited in Hillsdale Reservoir. Based on estimated stabilization costs
of $71.50 per linear foot from an assessment conducted by TWI, streambank stabilization for the entire
watershed from the 2011 assessment would cost approximately $498,000. Of these 11 sites identified, six
sites were selected, spread throughout the watershed,
for field verification and streambank height measure-
Figure 42. Hillsdale Reservoir Watershed Streambank Erosion Assessment Map.
Page 179
Volume III
IDENTIFICATION, STATUS AND ESTIMATES ments. Measurements were used to estimate the in the early stages of biomass growth or has residual
amount of sediment originating from streambank sites. biomass from harvest.
The KDHE currently has two TMDLs developed for
the Marmaton River, dissolved oxygen (DO) and nutrients and oxygen demand impact on aquatic life.
The KDHE has set a required load reduction goal for
Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD) concentrations
to remain below 2.9 mg/l. This desired endpoint
should improve DO concentrations. The KDHE has
also set a required load reduction goal for phosphorus
at 4,380 lbs, nitrogen at 18,980 lbs and sediment at
Several streambank gully erosion problems in areas 840 tons for the Marmaton River Nutrient and Oxygen
adjacent to the stream reaches were identified through Demand TMDL originating from nonpoint sources.
the streambank erosion assessment. The assessment of
streambank gullies in the Hillsdale Reservoir water- In 2011, the KWO performed a GIS based analysis of
shed concluded seven total gullies alongside stream- streambank erosion and riparian condition in the Marbanks, four in croplands and three in grasslands; all maton watershed upstream of the Kansas border to the
demonstrated identifications of high priority gullies confluence of the Marmaton River with Paint Creek in
but were still in the beginning stages of headcutting. central Bourbon County. A total of seven streambank
Locations of gullies included one in the upper headwa- erosion sites, covering 3,445 feet of unstable streamters of Bull Creek, three located on Wade Creek and bank were identified through the assessment, with
three located on Scott Creek. Both Wade and Scott 57% of the unstable streambanks identified as having
Creek are located in the southwestern portion of Hills- poor riparian condition. The assessment also identified
estimates totaling approximately 1,239 tons of sedidale Reservoir watershed.
ment being transported from the streambank erosion
sites annually. Based on estimated stabilization costs
Marmaton River
The Marmaton Watershed is located in the Marais des of $71.50 per linear foot from an assessment conCygnes River basin. In Missouri, the Marmaton River ducted by TWI, streambank stabilization for the entire
flows into the Little Osage River and the Little Osage watershed from the 2011 assessment would cost apRiver joins the Marais des Cygnes River to create the proximately $246,300. Of these seven sites identified,
Osage River. This river eventually flows into the Mis- three sites were selected, spread throughout the watersouri River in eastern Missouri. The entire Marmaton shed, for field verification and streambank height
Watershed drains the Marmaton River and its tributar- measurements. Measurements were used to estimate
ies in Kansas and Missouri. However, this assessment the amount of sediment originating from streambank
only focused on the portion of the Marmaton Water- sites.
shed that includes the Marmaton River and its tributaries upstream of the Kansas border to the confluence of
the Marmaton River with Paint Creek in central Bourbon County.
The majority of the 1,073 tons of sediment is transported each year from Bull Creek and Rock Creek;
contributing approximately 395 and 382 tons of sedimentation annually, respectively. Bull Creek accounts
for an estimated 37% of the total stabilization cost
needs in the watershed totaling $231,739, while Rock
Creek accounts for 36% of the total stabilization cost
needs in the watershed totaling $172,650.
Land use in the Marmaton Watershed consists mainly
of grasslands at 49%, with croplands at 40%, woodlands at 9% and the rest of the land use in urban development at 1%. Surface water use in the watershed is
generally used for aquatic life support, domestic water
supply, recreation, groundwater recharge, industrial
water supply, irrigation and livestock watering. Rainfall in the watershed averages 42 inches annually with
the high intensity rainfall events occurring in late
spring and early summer when cropland is either bare,
Page 180
Figure 43. KAWS Level 1 Assessment of the Marmaton River Photo of an unstable streambank on the Marmaton River.
Of the 1,239 tons of sediment is transported each year
to instream communities: feasibility study in the
Delaware River Basin, Kansas. 1994.
from the Marmaton River (Figure 43) and Mill Creek;
each contributes approximately 729 and 510 tons of 7. Ingle, Paul. Water Quality Project Phase II, Water
Quality Protection Plan. 2001.
sedimentation annually, respectively. The Marmaton
River accounts for an estimated 52% of the total stabi- 8. Juracek, K.E. and Ziegler, A. Estimation of Sedilization cost needs in the watershed totaling $126,900,
ment Sources Using Selected Chemical Tracers in
while Mill Creek accounts for 48% of the total stabilithe Perry Lake and Lake Wabaunsee Basins,
Northeast Kansas. 2007.
zation cost needs in the watershed totaling $119,400.
9. Kansas Department of Health and Environment.
TMDLs for the Maris des Cygnes Basin. 2001
A streambank gully assessment found no clear indication of streambank gullies within the assessment area. 10. Kansas Water Plan. Reservoir Sustainability Initiative. (2009).
Conclusions/Recommendations
11. Mau, D.P. Sediment depositional trends and transFor the Marais des Cygnes River basin watersheds
port of phosphorus and other chemical constituabove Melvern, Pomona and Hillsdale Reservoirs,
ents, Cheney Reser-voir watershed, south-central
along with a portion of the Marmaton Watershed,
Kansas: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources
KWO continues to recommend streambank stabilizaInvestigations Report 01–4085, 40 p. 2001.
tion/riparian restoration projects as an effective 12. Nejadhashemi, A.P. Gali, R.K. Smith, C.M.
method of reducing sediment delivery to these reserMaknin, K.R. Wilson, R.M. Brown, S.P. Leathervoirs from streambank sources. Continued land treatman, J.C. Pmona Lake Watershed Assessment:
ment as described in WRAPS plans and streambank
Preliminary Report. 2009
protection with buffers is recommended for all three 13. Rosgen, D. L. (1997). A Geomorphological Apreservoirs and the Marmaton River watershed. Addiproach to Restoration of Incised Rivers. Proceedtional evaluations of gullies are needed to determine
ings of the Conference on Management of Landthe magnitude of sediment contribution from these
scapes Disturbed by Channel Incision, 1997.
sources.
14. TWI. Kansas River Basin Regional Sediment management Section 204 Stream and River AssessReferences
ment. 2010.
1. Balch, P. (2007). Streambank and Streambed Ero- 15. US Environmental Protection Agency. (2008).
sion: Sources of Sedimentation in Kansas ReserWatershed Assessment of River Stability & Sedivoirs. Unpublished White Paper.
ment Supply (WARSSS) website: www.epa.gov/
2. Brinsen, M. M., B. L. Swift, R. C. Plantico, and
warsss/sedsource/streamero.htm
J.S. Barclay. 1981. Riparian Ecosystems: Their
Ecology and Status. U.S.D.I., Fish and Wildlife
Service. FWS/OBS-80/17, Washington, D.C., 91
pp.
3. Christensen, V. Mau, D. Comparison of Sediment
Deposition in Reservoirs of Four Kansas Watersheds. August, 2000.
4. Freeman, Craig, Kansas Biological Survey. Importance of Kansas Forests and Woodlands, KS
Walnut Council Annual Meeting, Topeka. 1996.
5. Geyer, W., Brooks, K., Neppl, T. 2003. Streambank Stability of Two Kansas River Systems During the 1993 Flood in Kansas, Transactions of the
Kansas Academy of Science, Volume 106, no.1/2,
p.48-53. (http://www.oznet.ksu.edu/library/forst2/
srl122.pdf)
6. Huggins, D. G., Bandi, D. and Higgins, K. KBS
Report # 60, Identifying riparian buffers that function to control nonpoint source pollution impacts
Page 181
Volume III
INVENTORY OF WATERSHED STRUCTURES AND SEDIMENT YIELD REDUCTIONS This chapter provides an inventory of the watershed
structures above two public water supply reservoirs in
the Marais des Cygnes River basin. Data in the inventory of structures that currently exist in the basin include construction date, drainage area and amount of
storage at the time of construction. Also included is
the number and relative size of structures that are
planned but to date have not been constructed.
Background
Most small watershed impoundments and flood control structures in Kansas were authorized by the Flood
Control Act of 1944 (PL78–534) and the Watershed
Protection and Flood Prevention Act of 1953 (PL83–
566). There are over 1,500 flood control and grade
stabilization structures in Kansas; at least 830 were
constructed with financial assistance from the U.S.
Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS). Most of the structures in the
NRCS database are small watershed dams; however,
the database also includes small stock ponds and other
flood control structures such as bank stabilization
structures.
The Kansas Department of Agriculture, Division of
Conservation (DC) administers a watershed dam construction program and since 1974 has provided financial assistance for construction of small watershed impoundments in Kansas. The DC receives funding from
the State Water Plan Fund for construction and maintenance of small watershed impoundments and other
conservation projects. There are currently 543 small
watershed impoundments in Kansas constructed with
DC funds.
Some small watershed impoundments provide a
source of water for small towns and rural water districts and have recreational uses; however, none of the
impoundments in the Marais des Cygnes River basin
are used for water supply. Watershed impoundments
help control flooding and improve water quality in the
watershed immediately downstream of the structure
because they are designed to trap sediment and contaminants. It is this latter benefit that can be a predominant factor in reducing sediment transport in a
watershed, especially if a large number of small impoundments are located within the watershed. There
are 83 watershed districts in Kansas that plan and administer the construction and maintenance of small
watershed impoundments in the state.
Page 182
The relationship between the percentage of the watershed affected by impoundments and suspended sediment concentration indicates that as the number of impoundments in the watershed increases, suspended
sediment concentration decreases (USGS, 2003).
Inventory of Watershed District Structures in the
Marais des Cygnes River Basin
There are 25 public water supply lakes in the Marais
des Cygnes River basin. Three are federal reservoirs:
Hillsdale, Melvern and Pomona. Melvern and Pomona
Reservoirs have watershed districts within their drainage basins. None of the 25 small public water supply
lakes have existing watershed structures in their drainage basin and only two of the lakes have planned watershed structures. Cedar Valley Lake, in Anderson
County has 14 planned structures and one structure is
planned above Osage City Lake, in Osage County.
Cedar Creek Lake in Bourbon County was constructed
by the Upper Marmaton Watershed District No. 102
and serves as public water supply for Bourbon County
Rural Water District No. 2, Prescott and Uniontown.
This inventory is limited to the two watershed districts
above Melvern and Pomona Reservoirs. The first
structure was built in 1955 in the Switzler Creek Watershed District No. 63; the newest structure, in the
Upper Marais des Cygnes Watershed Joint District
No. 101, was finished in 2005.
Figure 44.
INVENTORY OF WATERSHED STRUCTURES AND SEDIMENT YIELD REDUCTIONS Volume III
Structures Built
Melvern Reservoir
There is one watershed district above Melvern Reservoir, Upper Marais des Cygnes No. 101. Twelve structures have been built starting in the early 1980s, with
the last structure built in 2005. Eleven of the structures
were built with cost-share funding from the DC.
Figure 46.
Summary Statistics for Existing Watershed Structures
Above Pomona Lake
Description (4 Structures)
Age of Structure in Years
Total
Avg.
Min.
Max.
--
53
49
56
Top of Dam Storage in AF
Principal Spillway Storage in AF
(Sediment Volume)
Principal Spillway Area in Acres
(Sediment Pool)
6,923
1,731
175
4,537
369
92
10
175
78
20
4
34
Drainage Acres
6,492
1,623
471
3,130
Table 13.
Structures Planned
Figure 45.
Summary Statistics for Existing Watershed Structures
Above Melvern Lake
Age of Structure in Years
(Sediment Volume)
(Sediment Pool)
Drainage Acres
Total
Avg.
Min.
Max.
--
17
6
29
4,515
411
124
709
494
45
21
80
116
6,445
11
716
4
15
292
1,780
Table 12.
Pomona Reservoir
There is one watershed district above Pomona Reservoir, Switzler Creek No. 63. It has four structures that
were completed between 1955 and 1962 with costshare funding from the NRCS.
Melvern Reservoir
A total of 44 watershed structures were originally
planned for Upper Marais des Cygnes Watershed District No. 101 above Melvern Reservoir. If all of the
planned structures were built, 18% of the drainage
area for Melvern Reservoir would be regulated by watershed impoundments.
Summary Statistics for Planned Watershed Structures
Above Melvern Lake
Total
Avg.
Min.
Max.
11,915
372
91
1,291
(Sediment Volume)
2,178
68
16
228
(Sediment Pool)
368
12
2
28
34,605
1081
256
3642
Drainage Acres
Table 14.
Page 183
Volume III
INVENTORY OF WATERSHED STRUCTURES AND SEDIMENT YIELD REDUCTIONS Pomona Reservoir
A total of five watershed structures were originally
planned for the Switzler Creek Watershed District No.
63 above Pomona Reservoir. If all of the planned
structures were built, less than six percent of the drainage area for Pomona Reservoir would be regulated by
watershed impoundments.
structures. That estimated reduction totaled 53,105
tons per year.
The estimate for the cost of building the pending
structures was created by comparing the total cost of
the 30 newest structures that were partially funded by
state cost-share and built in watershed districts in eastern Kansas, to their drainage areas. The regression reSummary Statistics for Planned Watershed Structures
lation is shown in Figure 47. Three structures and their
Above Pomona Lake
cost were excluded from the relation (marked with
Description (1 Structure)
Total
Top of Dam Storage in Acre Feet
1,680 ‘X’s’ in the figure below). Two of those excluded
structures were in the same watershed district and their
Principal Spillway Storage in AF (Sediment Volume)
122
construction cost appeared unusually high compared
Principal Spillway Area in Acres (Sediment Pool)
33
to most of the rest of the structures in cost, given their
4,896
Drainage Acres
drainage area size. The other excluded structure had a
Table 15.
large negative regression model residual; meaning the
cost to build the structure was unusually low, given its
Sediment Yield Reductions
Seven different watershed districts are located within drainage area size, relative to the other 27 structures in
the drainage areas to six ambient stream water quality the model.
monitoring sites operated by the KDHE in the Marais
des Cygnes River basin. The KWO reviewed the rela- For each of the pending watershed structures in the
tion between the sediment yields calculated at the six studied watershed districts, the total construction cost
monitoring sites to the total, controlled and uncon- was estimated and then summed by the drainages that
trolled, drainage areas as formed by the watershed coincide with the KDHE sampling locations and sedistructures of the seven watershed districts. The esti- ment yield estimates that were created there. The total
mated sediment yields derived from six of the KDHE construction costs to build pending structures by the
ambient water quality sampling sites were first com- watersheds formed by the KDHE sampling sites are
pared to the total drainage area at the water quality shown in the final column in Table 16 ($53,434,403).
sampling location and then to the total drainage area The predicted sediment reduction to the Marais des
not controlled by watershed structures (the uncon- Cygnes River basin by installing all pending structures
trolled drainage). The uncontrolled drainages area ex- is shown to the left of the cost in the same table below
plained slightly more of the variation in the estimated (53,105 tons/year).
sediment yields of the six watersheds (covered by the
seven watershed districts) than did the total drainage The cost associated with two sediment abatement oparea by itself. The regression model developed to re- tions; stream bank stabilization/riparian restoration
late sediment yield to uncontrolled drainage area is and watershed structures were compared to the option
of reservoir dredging. The comparisons were restricted
shown in the left column of the figure below.
to the drainages of Melvern and Pomona Reservoirs.
A large number of watershed structures within the This comparison was not made at Hillsdale Reservoir
seven watershed districts reviewed in this analysis are because no watershed district exists in the reservoir’s
still pending construction. The drainage area con- drainage area.
trolled by the pending structures is known. Using the
relation between predicted sediment yield and uncon- The estimated sediment reduction from the KWO
trolled drainage previously developed, a prediction for stream bank sources assessment (see section 3.7, Identhe sediment yields in each of the six monitoring site tification of Streambank Erosion Sites, as reference)
watersheds was created by subtracting the drainages of above Pomona and Melvern Reservoirs using bank
the pending structures from the uncontrolled drain- stabilization and riparian restoration (assuming an
ages. The change from the predicted current sediment 85% efficiency of that practice) was just over 2,439
yield to the potential sediment yield, if all pending and 22,670 tons/year (2.8 and 26 acre-feet/year reserstructures were built, formed the estimate for the sedi- voir sediment assuming a sediment bulk density of 40
ment yield reduction from the pending watershed lbs per cubic foot), respectively, with an estimated
Page 184
INVENTORY OF WATERSHED STRUCTURES AND SEDIMENT YIELD REDUCTIONS Volume III
complete installation costs of $432,059 and References
$2,174,966, respectively. Assuming a relatively low 1. Kansas Water Resources Institute, 2008. Sedimentation in Our Reservoirs: Causes and Solutions.
dredging cost at federal reservoirs of $10 per cubic
http://www.kwo.org/Reports%20%26%
yard (or $18.51 per ton using a bulk density of sediment of 40 lbs per cubic foot), the streambank stabili20Publications/KWRI_Book.pdf
zation/riparian restoration practice above Pomona and
Melvern Reservoirs would pay for itself in dredging 2. U.S. Geological Survey, 2003. Trends in Suscosts in just over nine and five years, respectively.
pended-Sediment Concentration at Selected
The estimated reduction in sediment loads by conStream Sites in Kansas, 1970-2002. http://
structing the pending structures from the watershed
ks.water.usgs.gov/pubs/reports/wrir.03-4150.pdf
structure management practice above Pomona and
Melvern Reservoirs is 8,665 and 8,188 tons per year
(10 and 9.4 acre-feet/year sediment assuming a bulk
density of 40 lbs per cubic foot), respectively. The respective current projected cost to build all pending
structures above each reservoir is $855,531 and
$5,826,222. Assuming the same $10 per cubic yard
dredge cost, the watershed structure practice above
Pomona and Melvern Reservoirs would pay for itself
in dredging costs in just over five and 38 years, respectively.
Figure 47.
Figure 48.
Page 185
Volume III
INVENTORY OF WATERSHED STRUCTURES AND SEDIMENT YIELD REDUCTIONS Watershed Name
Total
Pending
Est.
Water- Controlled Controlled Current
KDHE
shed
Drainage Drainage Sed Yld
SC Site Area (ac)
(ac)
(ac)
(T/Yr)
Federal
Reservoir
Drainage
Pred Sed Ld Pred Sed Ld
by Current by Potential Sed Yld
Pred Total
Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Reduction New Structure
DA (T/Yr)
DA (T/Yr)
(T/Yr)
Const Cost
Lower Marmaton River
SC208
65,920
9,137
19,296
39,388
None
43,918
32,711
-11,206
$5,852,013
Pottawatomie Creek
SC556
353,280
23,397
105,382
92,220
None
91,402
81,016
-10,387
$30,058,513
Ottawa Creek
SC616
88,960
4,516
12,352
78,961
None
54,628
50,360
-4,268
$3,782,105
Salt Creek (Lyndon)
SC578
91,520
3,282
23,936
45,270
None
55,814
47,274
-8,540
$7,060,019
Switzler Creek
SC687
24,320
6,492
4,896
11,789 Pomona Res
12,653
3,988
-8,665
$855,531
Marais des Cygnes R. (Reading)
SC742
136,320
8,877
33,350
36,478 Melvern Res
65,735
57,547
-8,188
$5,826,222
324,150
272,896
-51,254
$53,434,403
Cost/T
$1,042.55
Table 16.
Page 186
IDENTIFICATION OF RESERVOIRS NOT BUILT The topography of Kansas makes viable reservoir sites
extremely rare. Although the need for enhanced reservoir storage supply is not an immediate issue in the
Marais des Cygnes River basin, the process of identifying potential sites now is critical to the KWO directive of managing water supply storage to meet future
water supply needs. A host of criteria will ultimately
be considered during the siting phases of any new reservoir under consideration; however, to minimize future reservoir construction costs these rare sites should
be protected from future projects that would substantially increase those construction costs. That list of
future projects of concern would include restrictions
on major road, railroad and utility line construction
within any pool inundation area at the identified reservoir sites.
Previously Identified Sites Review
All known, previously identified reservoir site locations are summarized on a 1973 map developed by the
Bureau of Reclamation, Department of the Interior.
The eastern half of Kansas is replicated in Figure 49
from the 1973 map. Each dam location within the
Marais des Cygnes River basin on the map in Figure
49 was evaluated as a potential reservoir site using the
process described in the next section.
New Reservoir Sites Review – 3 Phase Development
Process
Kansas Applied Remote Sensing (KARS) personnel
developed stage-based floodplain maps for all stream
reaches in 40 counties in eastern
Kansas with catchments of at
least 70 sq. mi. The 10-m (1/3
arc second) National Elevation
Database (NED) was used for
these projects and a maximum
“depth to flood” (DTF; analogous to river stage) value of 15
m was applied. To help visualize the project results, the reachspecific DTF databases were
merged into a single map, and a
web mapping application was
developed
(http://
www.kars.ku.edu/maps/
depthtoflood/).
Use of the web mapping application described above demon-
Volume III
strated that it had considerable utility for helping with
quick visual assessment of topographic suitability of
candidate reservoir site locations in the Marais des
Cygnes River basin specifically and throughout eastern Kansas in general. Multiple enhancements to the
original work were required to optimize the utility of
the database for KWO’s reservoir site evaluation purposes.
It was subsequently determined that production of an
eastern Kansas floodplain (DTF) database, with the
following modified specifications, would provide a
sufficiently comprehensive coverage for visual topographic reservoir site assessment with minimal exclusion of potentially significant sites:
(i) Include all stream reaches with catchments>
20 sq. mi.
• sufficient for inclusions of most potential sites including major off-stream
storage reservoirs
(ii) Use stream segments with length < 5 km (~3.1
mi)
• sufficient for rapid, approximate visualization of most potential upstream
lake extents
(iii) Use a maximum DTF value of 20 m wherever possible (most locations)
• sufficient for full-depth lake representation in many cases
Figure 49. Previously identified reservoir sites in Eastern Kansas (includes the Marais des Cygnes River basin).
Page 187
IDENTIFICATION OF RESERVOIRS NOT BUILT Volume III
An eastern Kansas DTF database was created according to these specifications. That database, which for
the Marais des Cygnes River basin included over 400
images, was used to visually assess all potential dam
site locations in the basin, including the previously
identified sites from the 1973 Bureau of Reclamation
map displayed in Figure 49.
Phase I
The KWO initially used certain basic criteria to identify potential sites in the Marais des Cygnes River basin for further Geographic Information System (GIS)
work and review. The first basic criterion was to consider sites only where anticipated future demand may
exist, either because of loss of existing supply or future growth to existing demand. The second basic criterion was a goal of minimizing the top of pool surface area while maximizing storage volume. Minimizing surface area serves to minimize ecological, cultural and evaporative losses, while maximizing storage
volume improves water supply considerations. These
guidelines were used to locate twelve potential future
reservoir sites in the Marais des Cygnes River basin.
Eight of those sites indentified in the Phase I evaluation were sites originally identified from the 1973 map
in Figure 49. The remaining four sites are relatively
small reservoirs whose supply could be used to satisfy
future local demand, rather than the basin-wide demand. General multipurpose pool elevations and water
supply yield estimates were created empirically from a
regression analysis, which related certain physical
characteristics of existing reservoirs and their modeled
yields to anticipated water supply yields for each of
the twelve sites. The future growth to existing demand
in the basin is assumed to be primarily associated with
modest population increases and anticipated additional
demand from power generation in the northeast portion of the basin. The 12 potential reservoir sites in the
basin are broken into three groups in Table 17; (1)
those sites that could reasonably supply the northeast
Total Max
Storage
(af)
Total Max
Surface
Area (ac)
Stor
Vol/SA
(af/ac)
Avg Max
Depth (ft)
U-S (1)
951,676
31,609
30
63
Large D-S (2)
540,133
12,084
45
98
Local (3)
165,128
5,240
32
56
Site Group
Table 17.
Multipurpose pool
2
Water Supply
1
Page 188
portion of the basin either directly or through reservoir
releases (U-S), (2) those larger yielding sites that
would need a pipeline to supply the northeast portion
of the basin (Large D-S) and (3) those smaller yielding
sites that could be used to offset existing local demand
(Local).
Phase II
Of the original twelve sites identified in Phase I, a
subset will be selected for Phase II evaluation. Rather
than the general empirical models used in Phase I,
mechanistic computer models will be used in Phase II
to establish elevations for the multipurpose, and flood
pools if necessary, at the candidate Phase II sites.
Mechanistic modeling will be used to calculate water
supply yields for each site based on the established
elevations. Where information is available, sites will
be assessed against an extensive list of other criteria,
further reviewing their potential as future sites (Table
18). The assessment criteria include:
Site storage volume
Railroads
Site surface area
Gas/oil fields/wells
Volume/surface area ratio
Geologic concerns
Annual sedimentation rate
Geology - Dam Site
Dam volume (using basic 3:1 Area demand
slope)
Towns
Distance from demand
Highways and roads
Homesteads
Exceptional state waters
Land use inundated
Critical state habitats
Stream miles inundated
Major gas, petroleum and
Cultural, archeological and
optical lines
historic interest
Major electrical transmission Water quality considerations
lines
(e.g. SO4, Cl)
Inflow to site or main stem
Other criteria identified
flow for offstream storage
through public input
sites
Table 18. Phase II reservoir site assessment criteria
Site rankings will be created based upon water supply
yields and the criteria in Table 17
In November 2010, the Kansas Water Authority
(KWA) directed the KWO to conTarget
Total Max
Target
vene a Reservoir Advisory ComWater Supply MP1 Vol WS2 Yield
mittee comprised of state agen(af)
(MGD)
Yield (MGD)
cies and other stakeholders to
150
506,031
80
evaluate options and develop a
85
200,794
32
plan for the protection of future
26
95,448
15
reservoir sites. This advisory
group provided feedback to the
KWO on important site criteria,
and where necessary, provided
the data to evaluate the criteria.
IDENTIFICATION OF RESERVOIRS NOT BUILT Volume III
Recommendations provided by the committee will be
used to assess the potential water supply locations in
the Marais des Cygnes River basin. The Marais des
Cygnes Basin Advisory Committee (BAC) members
will be consulted for their input on sites, including site
additions, and results of the review criteria. The Reservoir Advisory Committee and BAC recommendations will be incorporated into the Phase II siting process.
Phase III
Finally, the best potential sites, given all considerations provided previously, will be taken to the KWA
for approval, prior to creating and introducing legislation, to protect the final sites from development activities that could substantially increase future construction costs. A similar approach has been taken by the
Texas Water Development Board (TWDB). The Texas
Water Code, Section 16.051(g), provides that unique
reservoir sites identified by the TWDB or other planning groups can be protected from development by a
state agency or political subdivision of the state. Examples of projects affected by the legislation could
include major road, railroad and utility line construction within any pool inundation area at the identified
reservoir sites. Current land use and private property
rights of a protected site would be unaffected by the
designation.
References
1. 2010 Kansas Applied Remote Sensing web mapping application (accessed October 05, 2010.
http://www.kars.ku.edu/maps/depthtoflood/)
Page 189
Volume III
RECOMMENDATIONS FOR RESERVOIR SUSTAINABILITY APPROACH Volume III, Chapter 3, provides an overview of the
current and projected condition of the Marais des Cygnes River basin and its reservoirs. Also contained in
this volume is a comprehensive discussion of many
alternatives for ensuring reservoir sustainability in the
basin. Alternatives for improving water supply reliability in the basin that were evaluated include sediment removal, reallocation, structural restoration, demand management, reservoir operational changes,
new reservoirs, off-stream storage and watershed management. Details about the feasibility of each alternative are described within the previous sections of this
chapter. A combination of many of these actions is
necessary for securing, protecting and restoring a sustainable water supply in the Marais des Cygnes River
basin. Below is a summary of the recommended approach to reservoir sustainability in the Marais des
Cygnes River basin.
Opportunities for Water Conservation and Demand
Management
Water conservation, or demand management, is a tool
that can provide multiple benefits. Water conservation
is the most cost-effective and environmentally sound
way to reduce our demand for water.
The effects of demand management through conservation practices by municipalities were evaluated using
the OASIS model. Hillsdale Reservoir has the highest
potential to respond to water conservation due to the
relatively large use of water marketing storage from
the reservoir (RRM Vol. III 3.4). To enhance and continue opportunities for demand management throughout the basin, the following items should be implemented.
• Continue aid to public water suppliers in developing and maintaining water conservation
plans.
Inventory of Restoration Approaches
• Continue technical assistance to public water
There are numerous potential restoration alternatives
suppliers in determining the source of unacthat could be applicable for each reservoir, depending
counted for water.
on the type and severity of problems at the reservoir.
Alternatives include sediment removal, reallocation Reservoir Operational and Management Changes to
and structural restoration (dams, diversion structures, Improve Supply
treatment facilities).
Operational decisions and management practices of
three of the federal reservoirs in the Marais des CygDredging is a potential option in all three federal res- nes River basin were evaluated for the purpose of imervoirs in the basin; however the benefit may be great- proving supply (RRM Vol. III 3.5). The following acest in Pomona reservoir due to the relatively high per- tions related the changes in reservoir operations are
centage of storage loss (RRM Vol. III 3.3). A pool rise recommended for the Marais des Cygnes River basin.
is a potential option at Hillsdale, Melvern and
• Determine cause of relatively high rate of sediPomona. Reallocation of storage is also an option at
mentation at Pomona Reservoir and target areach of these federal reservoirs; however, with the
eas where best management practices may requantity of water at Hillsdale that is contracted to the
duce the sedimentation rate. Coordinate with
State, but for which the State has not begun paying, a
the Pomona Lake Watershed Restoration and
reallocation of additional storage is not currently a recProtection Strategy (WRAPS) Stakeholder
ommended alternative.
Leadership Team (SLT) to incorporate the
findings of the Reservoir Roadmap in the 9Structural Restoration
Element Watershed Plan.
Structural restoration is applicable for any structure
• Survey LaCygne Lake in cooperation with
associated with the reservoir or required to provide
Kansas City Power & Light to determine the
water supply from the reservoir, including the dam,
effect of sedimentation on the lake’s capacity.
water supply diversion structures and water treatment
facilities. Structural restoration at Hillsdale, Melvern Potential New Reservoir Sites
and Pomona Reservoirs, while not currently sched- Several potential new reservoir sites were identified
uled, will be required in the future to prolong the life using a Phase I evaluation (RRM Vol. III 3.9). At the
of the dam, minimize leakage and protect the shoreline direction of the KWA, the KWO convened an inter(RRM Vol. III 3.3).
agency stakeholder group comprised of the KDHE, the
KDWP&T, the Kansas Department of Transportation
Page 190
Volume III
RECOMMENDATIONS FOR RESERVOIR SUSTAINABILITY APPROACH (KDOT), the Kansas Corporation Commission (KCC)
and others to discuss the methodology and criteria for
identifying and evaluating future reservoir sites and
how best to protect the most feasible sites.
Sediment Source Reduction
Pomona Reservoir:
The watershed sediment analyses within the Marais
des Cygnes River basin volume of the KWO reservoir
road map point to the land surface as the primary
source of sediment delivered to the reservoir. This
conclusion is supported by the relative lack of actively
eroding stream banks within the Pomona Reservoir
watershed (RRM Vol. III 3.7). The sediment yield in
the Pomona Reservoir watershed is among the largest
of any monitored watershed in the Marais des Cygnes
River basin (RRM Vol. III 3.6) and the mean annual
sedimentation rate of Pomona Reservoir is the highest
of the three federal reservoirs in the Marais des Cygnes River basin. Sediment reduction practices from
land surface sources should be directed toward reducing the sediment loads delivered to the reservoir. Of
the three federal reservoirs in the Marais des Cygnes
River basin, Pomona should currently be highest priority for sediment reduction practice implementation.
Although few actively eroding streambanks were located within the Pomona Reservoir watershed, a number of gullies were found (RRM Vol. III 3.7). The volume of soil lost from this source is not currently quantifiable, but their contribution to the sediment load to
Pomona Reservoir could be much greater than the actively eroding streambank sources. The KWO recommends reducing the sediment source from gullies in
the basin through treatment of these potential sources
and their cause by targeting priority sites identified as
contributing sediment (RRM Vol. III 3.7). Implementation priority within subwatersheds is established by
the sediment yield from each creek making the Dragoon Creek gullies highest priority, followed by One
Hundred and Ten Mile Creek, then Switzler Creek
(RRM Vol. III 3.6).
The KWO notes that the Pomona Watershed Restoration and Protection Strategy (WRAPS) nine element
plan is nearly complete. Contained within the plan are
a number of recommended land surface sediment (and
nutrient) reduction practices. That WRAPS plan also
identifies targeted locations, generally those subwater-
sheds closest to the reservoir or the lower two-thirds
of the Pomona Reservoir drainage area, within the
Pomona Reservoir watershed where practices will be
directed. Examples of implementation activities directed toward cropland surface sediment reduction
contained within the Pomona WRAPS plan include:
no-till cultivation, nutrient management plans, terraces, grade stabilization, permanent vegetation on
cropland, vegetative buffers and grassed waterways.
The KWO recommends adoption and implementation
of those WRAPS-identified land surface practices to
reduce the current sediment and nutrient loads to
Pomona Reservoir.
Due to the cost effectiveness of watershed structures,
relative to the option of federal reservoir dredging, in
projected sediment reductions (RRM Vol. III 3.8)
within the Pomona Reservoir drainage and the relative
lack of discernable stream bank issues in the same
area (RRM Vol. III 3.6), the installation of watershed
structures should be explored. No watershed district
exists in the largest watershed above Pomona Reservoir, the Dragoon Creek watershed, yet the sediment
yield from that watershed is even larger than that from
the Switzler Creek watershed, where a single pending
watershed structure has been planned by Switzler
Creek Watershed District No. 63 (RRM Vol. III 3.8).
Given comparable structure drainage areas, the anticipated sediment reductions by installing watershed
structures in the Dragoon Creek watershed should be
even greater than similar structures installed in the
Switzler Creek watershed. The option of installing watershed structures in the Dragoon Creek watershed
would be a priority over other watersheds above
Pomona Reservoir.
Hillsdale Reservoir:
Watershed analyses of the Marais des Cygnes River
basin above Hillsdale Reservoir indicate that the primary source of sediment delivered to the reservoir is
from land surface sources. This conclusion is supported by a lack of identifiable actively eroding stream
bank sources in the watershed (RRM Vol. III 3.6). The
mean annual sediment yield, calculated from a 2009
hydrographic survey of Hillsdale Reservoir because no
KDHE water quality monitoring sites existing with the
Hillsdale Reservoir watershed, is among the highest
per unit area of any reservoir in eastern Kansas (RRM
Vol. III 3.6). In July 2010, the KWO entered into a
joint agreement with USGS to monitor sediment loads
to Hillsdale Reservoir to confirm this high sedimentaPage 191
Volume III
RECOMMENDATIONS FOR RESERVOIR SUSTAINABILITY APPROACH tion rate. Sediment reduction practices should be directed toward reducing sediment loads from land surface sources in the watershed. Of the three federal
reservoirs in the Marais des Cygnes River basin, Hillsdale Reservoir should currently be a high priority for
practice implementation. If USGS monitoring confirms the extraordinarily high sedimentation rate, then
the Hillsdale Reservoir watershed should be elevated
to the highest priority for Marais des Cygnes River
basin due to its importance as a public water supply
source now and into the future.
A small number of gullies were found in the Hillsdale
Reservoir drainage area (RRM Vol. III 3.7). The volume of soil lost from this source is not currently quantifiable, but their contribution to the sediment load to
Pomona Reservoir could be greater than the actively
eroding streambank sources in the watershed. The
KWO recommends reducing the sediment source from
gullies in the basin through treatment of these potential sources and their causes by targeting all priority
gully sites (RRM Vol. III 3.7).
The Hillsdale Water Quality Project has no WRAPS
plan to reduce sediment loading to Hillsdale Reservoir; therefore, unlike the Pomona Reservoir Watershed WRAPS plan, the KWO cannot support the implementation efforts of the Project toward the joint
goal of reducing sediment and nutrient loading to the
reservoir. The KWO recommends that a WRAPS plan,
including identification of targeted areas and land surface treatment practices for implementation, be developed.
No watershed district exists within the Hillsdale Reservoir drainage area; therefore the potential impact to
sediment yields of building new structures in the watershed could not be directly assessed.
Melvern Reservoir:
The Marais des Cygnes River basin watershed analysis indicates stream banks are a large contributor of
sediment for the reservoir. This conclusion is supported by the stream bank assessment (RRM Vol. III
3.7) relative to the mean annual sedimentation rate of
Melvern Reservoir. The sediment yield in the Melvern
Reservoir watershed is only marginally higher than
other monitored watersheds in the Marais des Cygnes
River basin (RRM Vol. III 3.6) and the reservoir has
one of the lowest mean annual sedimentation rates of
all eastern Kansas reservoirs. Although stream bank
Page 192
restoration/bank stabilization practices could reduce
the already low sedimentation rate by nearly 30%
(RRM Vol. III 3.7), given the magnitude of the sediment issues in the Pomona and Melvern Reservoir watersheds, the Melvern Reservoir watershed should be
low priority for sediment reduction practice implementation. Rather, the KWO recommends that protection of the existing relatively low sediment yielding
condition should be the current goal in the watershed.

Marais des Cygnes Basin

Transcription

Similar documents

ContourGlobal acquires Fibrominn litter

Watershed Committee of the Ozarks

GWD1000W GWD1000BLS Water Dispenser

GWD860W-4 GWD860BLS-4 Water Dispenser

Quabbin Reservoir Watershed Trails

GWD9500BLS GWD9500WS Water Dispensers

GWD5440BLS GWD5440W Water Dispenser

Place des Arts

Farmington River Watershed Reservoir Map

EnAble Datasheet