Ruffner used two measurement sites -- one at river mile 23 and one at Eagle Rock. Measurements came from mid-depth about 20 feet from shore, where instruments recorded the turbidity every 15 minutes from mid-May through September.
The river already has natural turbidity caused by everything from glacial sediment to muddy tributaries.
One of the factors Ruffner's study focused on was turbidity along the banks of the river.
Ruffner said the data he presented was still raw.
Using a line graph that compared the turbidity recordings at the two sites, Ruffner noted that through the month of June the two lines tracked nearly identically as natural rain and snowmelt caused turbidity in the river to rise and fall.
Starting in July, however, Ruffner said turbidity events began to spike at Eagle Rock every day of the week except Monday, when powerboats aren't allowed to fish the river.
"What we don't see on Mondays is these spikes, and you can pick out every Monday," Ruffner said.
Ruffner noted that the spikes consistently went up at specific times of the day.
"You can see there's a time period when the turbidity starts to elevate and then comes down," he said.
Many of the spikes went up starting around 6 a.m. in the morning and then again later in the evening. In August, the spikes leveled off and the two instruments began to again track similar trends without the almost daily spikes at Eagle Rock.
These results have serious implications for future management decisions concerning power boats, guide days, and hours for future king seasons.
Additionally important was water quality standards where met.
Hydrocarbons
Stevens presented the DEC's 2008 Petroleum Assessment of the Kenai River.
He said that study showed a marked drop-off in hydrocarbon contamination in the river.
"The good news from the report is all the water quality samples that were sampled, I think there were 190, all met water quality standards for petroleum hydrocarbons," he said.
By meeting with water quality standards, Stevens said that legislative action passed by DNR and the Department of Fish and Game to reduce contamination appeared to be successful.
"I congratulate those agencies for doing that work, it has solved the problem for us," Stevens said.
Stevens said plans were being made to continue to collect data on hydrocarbons at river mile 1.5 to prove that hydrocarbon levels are continuing to stay within the accepted standards. "If we can show we're clean there, we think we can demonstrate to the (Environmental Protection Agency) that we've solved our hydrocarbon issue on the river at this time," Stevens said.
Lastly, and the worste new of all Forest Service is considering regulations to not allow carcasses to be disposed in the Russian R.
Salmon carcasses
A smelly issue may soon work its way downstream in the coming months for board members.
Bobbie Jo Skibo, Russian River interagency coordinator for the United States Forest Service said USFS is considering changing its policy on carcass disposal on the Russian River.
Current policy is that carcasses are to be filleted, chopped into small bits, and discarded in the river, in the hope that they won't attract bears to the area.
This year, however, Skibo said USFS is considering asking anglers not to throw fish carcasses back into the river. "It sounds to me that we're going to be encouraging voluntary compliance with taking them out whole or gut and gill," Skibo said.
Implications for user activity in tidewater are certainly up in the air.
It's in the tidewater reaches that the river current slows and water backs up in cyclical fashion. It's the natural place for the river's suspended sediment loads to settle out.
It also means that it's the area most vulnerable to re-suspending those sediment loads if the water gets sloshed around to any degree. And there's no doubt that there's a whole lot of sloshin' goin' on as powerboats travel up and down this stretch of the river. Even the wake of a solitary boat traversing this reach will cause enough turbulence and bank slap to visibly muddy the nearshore water out 8-10 feet.
Unless there's been a fresh slide or a fresh raw cut of open earth on a high bank, reaches further upriver are generally armored in gravel and much less prone to re-suspension of large sediment loads.
The question is where do you draw the line in the sand. How much turbidity are we willing to tolerate, because ANY amount of use will cause some measurable amount.
The standard is somewhat vague as it does not say where the turbidity should be measured to count... how far upriver? how close to the bank?
For how long must the elevated turbidity persist to count... 2 hours a day, 12 hours a day, 24 hours a day? How many days per week? How many months per year?
We can all intuitively agree that NOT artificially elevating turbidity is going to be better for the river than creating excessive man-caused turbidity. While the turbidity itself is readily measurable, the true impact is NOT. It would be just as difficult to prove harm as it would be to prove no harm.
It's clear that a standard should be set and enforced. The devil is in the details of defining the standard and how/where the specific samples are to be measured.
________________
Implications for user activity in tidewater are certainly up in the air.
It's in the tidewater reaches that the river current slows and water backs up in cyclical fashion. It's the natural place for the river's suspended sediment loads to settle out.
It also means that it's the area most vulnerable to re-suspending those sediment loads if the water gets sloshed around to any degree. And there's no doubt that there's a whole lot of sloshin' goin' on as powerboats travel up and down this stretch of the river. Even the wake of a solitary boat traversing this reach will cause enough turbulence and bank slap to visibly muddy the nearshore water out 8-10 feet.
Unless there's been a fresh slide or a fresh raw cut of open earth on a high bank, reaches further upriver are generally armored in gravel and much less prone to re-suspension of large sediment loads.
The question is where do you draw the line in the sand. How much turbidity are we willing to tolerate, because ANY amount of use will cause some measurable amount.
The standard is somewhat vague as it does not say where the turbidity should be measured to count... how far upriver? how close to the bank?
For how long must the elevated turbidity persist to count... 2 hours a day, 12 hours a day, 24 hours a day? How many days per week? How many months per year?
We can all intuitively agree that NOT artificially elevating turbidity is going to be better for the river than creating excessive man-caused turbidity. While the turbidity itself is readily measurable, the true impact is NOT. It would be just as difficult to prove harm as it would be to prove no harm.
It's clear that a standard should be set and enforced. The devil is in the details of defining the standard and how/where the specific samples are to be measured.
________________
If you read the article Francis... It quotes Jack Sinclair saying that he thinks the KRSMA board should take care of it.... Now this inplies action and may not be for another year... But, this could lead to more drift days, changes in guide hours, lmits on number of guides, ect.
The real issue here is that the science is goind to show "REAL" data of direct impacts on the lower river from power boat use from 6 am to 6 pm.... The target, guide power boats! These impact are certainly real and considering that the entire lower river is a juvenile nursery for coho and chinook salmon.... This could mean big changes in future management stratagies. Another case of a great river being loved to death.
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Related Threads
?
?
?
?
?
Ask a question
Ask a question
IFish Fishing Forum
6.9M posts
80.4K members
Since 2000
A forum community dedicated to anglers and fishing enthusiasts. Come join the discussion about safety, gear, tackle, tips, tricks, reviews, reports, accessories, classifieds, and more!