The Bacterial and Chemical Inputs to Zion National Park

J. Da in Maddox George E. Hart

Department of Forestry and Outdoor Recreation Utah State University Logan, Utah 84322

December, 1977

The Bacterial and Chemical Inputs to Zion National Park

J. Da in Maddox George E. Hart

Department of Forestry and Outdoor Recreation Utah State University Logan, Utah 84322

December, 1977

The Bacterial and Chemical Inputs to Zion National Park

J. Dain Maddox George E. Hart

Department of Forestry and Outdoor Recreation Utah State University Logan, Utah 84322

December, 1977

Digitized by the Internet Archive

in 2012 with funding from

LYRASIS Members and Sloan Foundation

http://archive.org/details/bacterialchemicaOOmadd

Table of Contents

List of Tables iii

List of Figures v

Abstract vi

Introduction 1

Previous Investigations 2

Sampling Methods 4

Study Area 4

North Fork Watershed 6

East Fork Watershed 7

LaVerkin Watershed 9

Sampling Sites 9

Parameters Measured 9

Equipment Used 11

Analysis of Data 11

Results and Discussion 12

Bacterial Results 12

Bacterial Discussion 18

Chemical Results ..... 20

Conclusions and Recommendations 28

Appendix 31

Ill

List of Tables

Page

Table 1. Drainage basin areas to the North Fork of the

Virgin River and East Fork of the Virgin River and

LaVerkin Creek 4

Table 2. Land ownership of the North Fork of the Virgin River above the Zion National Park Headquarters (BLM, 1975) 7

Table 3a. Total col i form concentrations for the upstream,

boundary, and headquarter sampling stations (3 repli- cates of one sample were analyzed for each date) ... 13

Table 3b. Fecal col i form concentrations for the upstream,

boundary, and headquarter sampling stations (3 repli- cates of one sample were analyzed for each date) ... 14

Table 3c. Fecal streptococcus concentrations for the upstream, boundary and headquarter sampling stations (3 repli- cates of one sample were analyzed for each date) ... 15

Table 4. Mean bacteria concentrations with percent increases

for the upstream and boundary sampling stations ... 16

Table 5. Group comparison of means and associated confidence levels for the upstream and boundary sampling stations 16

Table 6. Bacteria concentrations for the East Fork of the Virgin River as measured near the North Fork confluence 17

Table 7. Bacteria concentrations for LaVerkin Creek as

measured at Lee's Pass Trail 17

Table 8. Water quality standards for swimming water, Utah

State Division of Health (1975) 19

Table 9. Water quality data for the North Fork of the Virgin

River near the Park Headquarters 21

Table 10. Recommended upper limits of chemical concentrations for swimming and fishery waters (McKee and Wolfe, 1963) 22

IV

Page

Table 11. Water quality data for LaVerkin Creek near LaVerkin,

Utah and at Lee's Pass Trail 23

Table 12. Water quality data for the East Fork of the Virgin River near the confluence with the North Fork of the Virgin River 25

Table 13. Water chemistry data for the North Fork of the Virgin rtiver as measured at the headquarters and Chamberlain's Ranch, July 23, 1976 26

List of Figures

Page

Figure 1. The three major drainage basins of Zion National Park: North Fork of the Virgin River, East Fork of the Virgin River, and LaVerkin Creek .... 5

Figure 2. The location of the upstream and boundary sampling sites on the North Fork of the Virgin River 8

Figure 3. The chemical and bacterial sampling sites for the

North Fork, East Fork, and LaVerking Creek .... 10

VI

Abstract

Three major streams flow through Zion National Park: the North Fork of the Virgin River, the East Fork of the Virgin River, and LaVerkin Creek. The water quality of these three streams was studied during the summer of 1977. Bacterial indicators and the background water chem- istry were measured.

Given the location and frequency of the recreational use of the Park, emphasis was placed on the bacterial concentrations of the North Fork. Water samples were taken both inside and outside the Park to determine bacterial inputs of surrounding areas. It is shown that some upstream uses on private land do have an impact on water quality in the North Fork.

Introduction

Zion National Park is drained by three major streams, the North and East Fork (of the Virgin River) and LaVerkin Creek. The headwaters of all three streams are located outside the Park. Because the water quality of these streams has been determined in part by land use outside the Park, this study was designed to monitor the water quality entering the Park, and, when possible, to study key areas of water quality degra- dation outside the Park. The study includes the analysis of both the water chemistry and bacteriology of the three major streams. Emphasis was given to the North Fork because of its heavier recreational use.

Study objectives

1) To determine the bacterial water quality of the North Fork as it enters Zion National Park.

2) To evaluate land use practices outside the Park as they may influence the water quality of the North Fork.

3) To establish water chemistry baseline data for the North Fork, East Fork and LaVerkin Creek during summer low flows.

4) To present conclusions and recommendations.

Previous Investigations

Nonpoint sources of pollution are receiving increased attention in wildland water quality management. One of the primary sources of non- point bacterial pollution comes from domestic animal grazing. Cattle and sheep grazing contribute to increases in bacterial concentrations of mountain streams; however, the magnitude of this increase varies greatly.

One of the primary factors affecting bacterial inputs is the prox- imity of the grazing animal to the live stream channel. Kunkle (1970) found that increases in bacterial levels of mountain streams were directly related to the accessability of cattle to the stream. Similar results were found in studies by Morrison and Fair (1966) and Kunkle and Me i man (1967).

In addition to the accessability factor, the simple presence of grazing animals influences wildland water quality. Darling and Coltharp (1973) found significant increases in bacteria concentration in streams directly downstream from cattle and sheep grazing. Skinner et al. (1972) showed a strong correlation between grazing periods and increased bacterial numbers within high mountain watersheds.

There seems little question that grazing does have an impact on wildland water quality; however, there are other factors to be considered, First, Watler and Bottman (1967), and Stuart et al. (1971) have shown that wildlife can also cause increases in stream bacteria levels.

Second, Mack (1974) has demonstrated that bacteria can survive and even multiply in natural waters. This factor complicates the accurate measurement of bacterial inputs—regardless of the nonpoint source. Third, Buckhouse (1975) showed that bacterial life spans can be greatly influenced by the conditions of cattle feces. If the feces are allowed to dry quickly, the associated bacteria become encased within a protective media and may survive there for several years. These all add to the complexity of evaluating the impact of grazing on wildland water quality.

In addition to the above considerations, some bacterial indicators are better than others for monitoring the impact of domestic animal wastes on water quality. Kunkle (1977) used total coliform (TC), fecal streptococci (FS), enterococci and fecal coliform (FC) as the primary indicator organisms. Using a controlled environment, Kunkle found the fecal col i forms to be the most responsive and accurate measurement of cattle feces contamination of wildland waters.

Sampling Methods

During the summer of 1977 three streams were sampled. Each has headwaters outside Zion National Park and each represents a major surface water resource for the Park. This section discusses the study areas and reasons for their selection, the parameters measured, the sampling sites, the equipment used, and the analysis of data.

Study area

Figure 1 shows the location of Zion National Park with respect to the three drainage basins. The area of each of these watersheds is given in Table 1.

Table 1. Drainage basin areas for the North Fork and East Fork of the Virgin River and LaVerkin Creek.

Drainage basin Area (miles )

North Fork 364

East Fork 328

LaVerkin Creek 41

The southwestern section of the Park shows no drainage network. This section has not yet been studied for water quality. The area consists primarily of ephemeral streams with their headwaters located totally within the Park boundaries.

Scale i:2so,ooo q 5

10

Statute miles

Figure 1. The three major drainage basins of Zion National Park: the North Fork of the Virgin River, the East Fork of the Virgin River, and LaVerkin Creek.

North Fork Watershed

The North Fork watershed receives the heaviest visitor use of the three drainages. This visitor use is restricted to the narrow canyon bottom and consists primarily of sightseeing, camping, and stream channel hiking. Flash flood threats and low water temperatures often restrict recreational water use to mid and late summer periods. These periods usually coincide with the periods of grazing use upstream of the park boundary.

This watershed represents a mosaic of land ownerships (Table 2). Private lands total 65 percent of the watershed, all of which lie upstream from Zion National Park. The most frequent land uses include cattle grazing, summer homes, and private hunting clubs.

This study measured the impact of cattle grazing on the water quality of the North Fork. Two sampling sites were located on the North Fork, one at the park boundary and another 2.5 miles upstream (Figure 2). The cattle grazing within this 2.5 mile reach is confined to narrow pas- ture lands adjacent to the North Fork. The cattle have free access to the stream.

Table 2. Land ownership of the North Fork of the Virgin River above the Zion National Park Headquarters (BLM, 1975).

	Percent of total area	Mi2
Private Land	65		236
State Land	3		10
Federal Land
National Park Service	21		78
Bureau of Land Management	9		32
U.S. Forest Service	2		8
TOTAL	100		364

East Fork Watershed

From a water quality perspective, the East Fork is the most complex of the three drainages. As can be seen from Figure 1, the drainage basin encompasses several small communities. These communities and their associated agricultural and livestock holdings are adjacent to the East Fork of the Virgin River. After passing through these com- munities, the East Fork flows through the most primitive and inaccessable section of the Park, Parunuweap Canyon. Thus, the drainage basin receives heavier use outside the Park than within the Park.

Q« 31V1S

<s

a

i

A£NnOOJNV>«

A1NH00 N019NIHSVM

• MM

E

O CO CO

I"

CO

5-

o

o

CD 4->

CO CD -P •r- </>

Q.

E

CO

CD

"O

c

13

o

.a

-o

c

CD

s-

■M CO

Q.

.c <d

4J >

4- £ o

c

C T-

o a>

•l- c_

•«-> -r- (T3 >

a

O O) i— .c

+■>

.c 4- h- o

LaVerkin Watershed

Like the North Fork, LaVerkin Creek drains private lands before entering National Park Service land. Here the private land use consists of cattle and sheep grazing. Grazing occurs between April and October and as many as 300 head of cattle and 600 head of sheep may be grazing per season within the basin headwaters (Greely 1977).

This area of the Park is referred to as the Kolob Section. Visitor use is light, compared to the North Fork section of the Park. Also, unlike the North Fork, visitors are not restricted to the active stream channel; they have much greater flexibility in selecting areas of use.

Sampling sites

Five sites were sampled: three on the North Fork and one each on

the East Fork and LaVerkin Creek. The East Fork, LaVerkin Creek, and

one of the North Fork sampling sites were located within Zion National

Park. These sites were designed to measure the water chemistry and

bacteria levels of the water resources within the Park. The remaining

two sites on the North Fork were located outside the Park and were chosen

to measure the bacterial inputs into the Park from upstream use. These

two sites were located above and below specific land uses, as shown in Figure 3.

The parameters measured

Three bacterial indicators were measured: total col i forms (TC), fecal coliforms (FC), and fecal streptococci (FS). The physical parameters

10

x Chemical Sampling

O Bacterial Sampling

C Chemical and Bacterial Sampling

Scale 1:250,000 o 5

10

Statute miles

Figure 3. The chemical and bacterial samplings sites for the North Fork, East Fork, and LaVerkin Creek.

11

included turbidity and total dissolved solids. A broad spectrum of chemical elements were analyzed in addition to conductivity, alkalinity and total hardness.

Equipment used

The membrane filter technique was used for all bacterial analysis. Incubators, sample bags, filter holders, filter papers and procedures were used in accordance with Standard Methods 14th Edition (1976). M-FC and M-Endo growth mediums were taken from prepared ampules and used for the FC and TC incubations, respectively. M-enterococcus agar was used in the incubation of the FS.

Analysis of data

The bacterial samples were collected between 9:00 a.m. and 12:00 noon and were processed at the Park headquarters within 12 hours after collection. Colony identification and plate count methods were followed as outlined in Standard Methods (1976). Standard blanks were taken of the buffer water, filter holders, filter pads, and petri dishes.

One sample was taken at each site. From this sample, three replicates were taken for each of the bacterial indicators. This was done to determine the proper sample volume necessary to achieve the optimum plate count (Standard Methods 1976).

The chemical analyses, including conductivity and turbidity, were' performed at Ford Chemical Laboratory in Salt Lake City. These samples were iced during transport and were delivered to Ford Laboratory within 24 hours after their collection.

12

Results and Discussion

Bacterial results

The results of the analysis for the three stations on the North Fork are given in Tables 3a, b, and c. For all three tables, bacterial concentrations are given for the boundary, the upstream and the head- quarter locations. The total and fecal coliform concentrations measured at the upstream station were greater than the concentrations measured at the headquarters station (Table 3a and 3b). Table 3c shows a similar trend for the fecal strep concentrations.

Table 4 gives the mean concentration of the three bacterial indicators for the upstream and boundary stations. The percent increase in bacterial concentrations was then calculated using these means. The TC increase was the largest, 526 percent, and the FS increase was the lowest, 216 percent.

A group comparison of the mean bacterial concentrations was cal- culated for the upstream and boundary stations. This analysis indicates that the bacterial concentrations at the boundary station were greater than the bacterial concentrations at the upstream station. The con- centration means for the two stations were found to be significantly different at the 95 percent or higher confidence level (Table 5).

13

Table 3a. Total coliform concentrations for the upstream, boundary,

and headquarter sampling stations (3 replicates of one sample were analyzed for each date).

	Bacteria	concentrations (col	onies/100 ml)
Date	Upstream	Boundary	Headquarters
July 27, 1977	1,200	12,000	no sample taken
28	1,600	14,600	10,700
29	120	5,300	no sample taken
30	300	11,300	4,800
31	1,160	5,450	no sample taken
Aug. 1, 1977	2,300	5,400	3,600
2	3,700	4,600	1,800
3	1,800	11,000	3,500
4	2,000	12,800	4,200
Sept. 2, 1977	1,320	10,700	3,800
3	1,100	7,600	3,200
4	1,200	10,300	2,800

14

Table 3b. Fecal coliform concentrations for the upstream, boundary

and headquarter sampling stations (3 replicates of one sample were analyzed for each date).

	Bacteria	concentrations (col	onies/100 ml )
Date	Upstream	Boundary	Headquarters
July 27, 1977	0*	400	no sample	taken
28	0*	600	0*
29	0*	220	no sample	taken
30	100*	200	0*
31	35	1,300	no sample	taken
Aug. 1, 1977	90	200	60
2	80	100*	80
3	320	420	120
4	360	460	140
Sept. 2, 1977	20*	1,600	20*
3	80*	1,200	72
4	60	620	63

The colony count was below the optimum range recommended by the Millipore Company and is thus less reliable than other values.

15

Table 3c. Fecal streptococcus concentrations for the upstream,

boundary and headquarter sampling stations (3 replicates of one sample were analyzed for each date).

	Bacteria	concentrations (col	onies/100 ml)
Date	Upstream	Boundary	Headquarters
July 27, 1977	60	500	no sample taken
28	100*	1,000	160
29	80	700	no sample taken
30	100*	400	600
31	120	500	no sample taken
Aug. 1, 1977	520	800	no
2	400	600	200
3	240	700	180
4	280	760	230
Sept. 2, 1977	80*	560	40
3	140	700	160
4	120	720	90*

The colony count was below the optimum range recommended by the Mi Hi pore Company and is thus less reliable than other values.

16

Table 4. Mean bacteria concentrations with percent increases for the upstream and boundary sampling stations.

	Bacteria concentration (colonies/100 ml)
Bacteria	Upstream	Boundary
TC	1,480	9,270
FC1	127	680
FS	190	600

Percent increase

526% 435% 216%

The sampling dates having "0" bacteria concentrations were not included in the mean calculations for either of the sampling locations.

Table 5. Group comparison of means and associated confidence levels for the upstream and boundary sampling stations.

Bacterial parameter	Degrees of freedom	Computed t	Table t2 value at	percent confidence level
Total Col i form	11	7.242	3.106	99%
Fecal Col i form	8	2.707	2.306	95%
Fecal Strep.	11	8.861	3.106	99%

Dixon, Wilfrid J. and Massey, Frank J. 1969, Analysis. McGraw Hill, New York. p. 116.

Dixon and Massey, p. 464.

Introduction to Statistical

17

The East Fork and LaVerkin Creek were also sampled for bacterial concentrations. Tables 6 and 7 give the bacterial results for these two streams. Samples were taken at three dates at each of the locations. These results are presented as summer baseline data and are not intended to represent trends or absolute concentrations.

Table 6. Bacteria concentrations for the East Fork of the Virgin River as measured near South Park boundary.

Date

Bacteria Concentration (colonies/lOOml) TC FC FS

July 26, 1977 2,700 620 270

August 2, 1977 2,500 640 400

September 2, 1977 2,300 580 360

Table 7. Bacteria concentrations for LaVerkin Creek, as measured at Lee Pass Trail, 1977.

Date

Bacteria Concentration (colonies/ 100ml)

TC FC FS

July 27, 1977 2,120 60 240

August 2, 1977 1,400 360 200

September 3, 1977 1,600 420 280

18

Bacteria discussion

The large increases in bacterial concentrations over the 2.5 mile reach of the North Fork indicate that the current land use does have an impact on the water quality. The statistical analysis of this report indicates that the two sampling points represent different populations. From bacterial analysis and field observations, the cattle grazing between the upstream and boundary sampling points have the greatest single impact on the water quality of the North Fork as it enters Zion National Park.

Once within the park, the North Fork bacterial concentration becomes diluted by tributary inflows. Previous studies (Maddox, 1977) have shown the bacterial concentrations of Deep Creek and Kolob Creek to be substantially lower than the bacterial concentrations of the North Fork for any given sampling day. This dilution effect accounts for the lower bacterial concentrations for the headquarter station when compared to the boundary concentration.

In 1975, the Utah State Division of Health published its suggested water quality criteria for swimming waters (Table 8). The upstream and boundary bacteria concentrations for both TC and FC exceed these sug- gested upper limits. The headquarters bacterial concentrations exceed the upper limits for TC, but not for FC. LaVerkin Creek and East Fork also exceed the upper limits for both TC and FC.

19

Table 8. Water quality standards for swimming waters, Utah State Division of Health (1975).

Standard definition

Standard Number

Col i form Density (colony/ 100ml)

Fecal Col i form Density (colony/ 100ml)

Monthly mean may not exceed

1000

200

No more than 20% of samples collected in one month may exceed

1000

No more than 10% of samples collected in one month may exceed

4000

400

No more than 5% of samples collected in one month may exceed

4000

20

Chemical results

Table 9 gives the chemical analysis for the North Fork. The three samples were taken during the summer months over a three year period. The sampling dates ranged from late spring runoff (May) to early fall. These concentrations suggest that many of the chemical parameters remain relatively constant throughout the sampling periods. This indicates that as flows increase the chemical inputs increase proportionately, thus the concentrations remain relatively constant throughout the sampling periods. This indicates that as flows increase the chemical inputs increase proportionately, thus the concentrations remain relatively constant.

Table 10 gives the recommended upper limits for swimming and fishery waters for several chemical elements. Sodium (as Na) in the only chemical parameter exceeding these limits. This exceedence is true for the three sampling dates. Sodium is common in most wildland waters with concen- trations varying both locally and regionally. The human intake limits for sodium vary greatly, but unless the intake exceeds 1000 mg/1 (Water Quality Crtieria, 1972), there is little concern.

However, fisheries are more susceptable to high sodium concentrations. McKee and Wolfe (1963) have found 10 mg/1 concentration to be an acceptable upper limit for most fresh water fish.

Table 11 gives the water chemistry analysis for LaVerkin Creek. Three samples were taken during a single summer season. One sample was taken near the city of LaVerkin, the other two samples were taken within Zion National Park. Between the two sampling locations there are numerous agricultural lands, row crops, pasture lands, fruit trees, and

21

Table 9. Water quality data for the North Fork of the Virgin River near the Park headquarters.

		Sample dates
water qua I ity
parameter Sept> 17> lg?5	July 23, 1976	May 16, 1977
Turbidity (JTU)	4.2	20.0	2.00
Conductivity (ymhos/cm)	793.0	820.0	900.0
PH	7.14	7.56	7.81
Total dissolved solids
at 180°C. (mg/1)	516.0	53r.	600.0
Alkalinity as CaC03 (mg/1)	158.0	234.0	168.0
Aluminum as Al (mg/1)	<0.01	0.0/	0.071
Arsenic as As (mg/1)	<0.01	0.008	<0.001
Bicarbonate as HCO3 (mg/1)	191.49	202.5	204.9
Barium as Ba (mg/1)	<0.01	^0.144	0.091
Boron as B (mg/1)	<0.01	<0.001	0.22
Cadmium as Cd (mg/1 )	0.002	<0.001	<0.001
Calcium as Ca (mq/1)	55.2	51.2	21.6
Carbonate as CO3 (mg/1) Chloride as CI (mg/1)	<0.01	<0.01	<0.01
88.0	90.0	130.0
Chromium as Cr (Hex) (mg/1)	<0.01	<0.001	<0.001
Cyanide as Cn (mg/1)	<0.01	<0.01	<0.01
Copper as Cu (mg/1)	0.02	0.006	0.007
Fluoride as F (mg/1)	0.13	0.32	0.28
Total Hardness as CaC03
(mg/1)	250.0	234.0	230.0
Iron (Total) as Fe (mg/1)	0.15	0.120	0.086
Iron (Filtered) as Fe (mg/1)	0.02	0.100	0.050
Lead as Pb (mg/1)	<0.01	0.005	<0.001
Magnesium as Mg (mg/1)	26.88	25.4	42.24
Manganese as Mn (mg/1)	0.01	0.035	0.034
Mercury as Hg (mg/1)	<0.001	<0.0002	<0.0002
Nitrate as NO3-N (mg/1)	0.04	0.02	0.10
Phosphate as PO* (mg/1) Potassium as K (mg/1)	0.100	0.065	0.035
3.69	3.32	3.14
Selenium as Se (mg/1)	<0.01	0.077	<0.001
Silica as Si02 (mg/1)	4.15	9.9	21.5
Silver as Ag (mg/1)	0.007	<0.001	<0.001
Sulfate as SOa (mg/1) Sodium as Na (mg/1)	85.50	92.0	82.0
57.00	73.0	122.50
Zinc as Zn (mg/1)	0.01	0.007	0.042

22

Table 10. Recommended upper limits of chemical concentrations for swimming and fishery waters (McKee and Wolfe, 1963).

Chemical parameter

Recommended upper limit

Aluminum as Al (mg/1) Arsenic as As (mg/1 ) Barium as Ba (mg/1) Boron as B (mg/1 ) Cadmium as Cd (mg/1) Calcium as Ca (mg/1) Chloride as CI (mg/1) Chromium as Cr (Hex) (mg/1) Cyanide as Cn (mg/1) Copper as Cu (mg/1) Fluoride as F (mg/1) Iron (Total) as Fe (mg/1) Iron (Filtered) as Fe (mg/1) Lead as Pb (mg/1) Magnesium as Mg (mg/1) Manganese as Mn (mg/1) Mercury as Hg (mg/1) Nitrate as NO3-N (mg/1) Phosphate as P0*-P fmg/l ) Potassium as K (mg/1 ) Selenium as Se (mg/1) Silica as SiOo (mg/1) Silver as Ag tmg/1) Sulfate as SOa (mg/1) Sodium as Na (mg/1) Zinc as Zn (mg/1)

0.50 0.10 5.00

1000.00 1500.00 5.00 0.05 0.10 5.0 0.20

0.10 100.0 40.0

0.004

4.20 15.00 50.00

2.0 50.0

0.033 500.00 10.06

0.10

Conductivity (ymhos/cm at 25°C)

2000.00

23

Table n. Water quality data for La Verkin Creek near La Verkin, Utah and at Lee's Pass Trail.

	Sampl	e location and	date
Water quality parameter M	LaVerkin	Lee's Pi	iss Trail
ay 16, 1977	Aug. 5, 1977	Sept. 4, 1977
Turbidity (JTU)	3.0	1.5	2.0
Conductivity (^mhos/cm)	1,670.0	677.0	655.0
PH	7.62	7.97	7.80
Total dissolved solids
at 180°C. (mg/1)	1,105.0	432.0	422.0
Alkalinity as
CaC03 (mg/1) Aluminum as Al (mg/1)	180.0	148,0	152.0
0.043	0.063	0.149
Arsenic as As (mg/1)	<0.001	<0.001	<0.001
Bicarbonate as HCO, (mg/1) Barium as Ba (mg/1 J	219.6	180.6	185.4
0.048	0.063	0.184
Boron as B (mg/1)	0.22	0.15	0.04
Cadmium as Cd (mg/1)	<0.001	<0.001	<0.001
Calcium as Ca (mg/1)	86.4	84.8	80.8
Carbonate as CO3 (mg/1) Chloride as CI (mg/1)	<0.01	<0.01	<0.01
16.0	8.0	10.0
Chromium as Cr (Hex) (mg/1)	<0.001	<0.001	<0.001
Cyanide as Cn (mg/1)	<0.01	<0.01	<0.01
Copper as Cu (mg/1)	0.005	0.002	0.004
Fluoride as F (mg/1)	0.40	0.20	0.15
Total Hardness as CaC03
(mg/1)	486.0	330.0	336.0
Iron (Total) as Fe (mg/1)	0.096	0.069	0.133
Iron (Filtered) as Fe (mg/1)	0.044	0.040	0.100
Lead as Pb (mg/1)	<0.001	<0.001	<0.001
Magnesium as Mg (mg/1)	64.8	2.3293	32.16
Manganese as Mn (mg/1)	0.027	0.004	0.007
Mercury as Hg (mg/1)	<0.0002	<0.0002	<0.0002
Nitrate as NO3-N (mg/1)	0.36	0.010	<0.01
Phosphate as POa (mg/1) Potassium as K (mg/1)	0.045	0.010	0.01
2.93	2.653	3.70
Selenium as Se (mg/1)	<0.001	<0.001	<0.001
Silica as SiOo (mg/1) Silver as Ag (mg/1)	26.0	7.0	8.0
0.005	0.014	<0.001
Sulfate as SO4 (mg/1)	580.0	202.0	194.0
Sodium as Na (mg/1)	143.0	17.10	11.93
Zinc as Zn (mg/1 )	0.025	0.006	0.033

24

grain crops. Conductivity, total dissolved solids, total hardness, magnesium, sulfate and sodium all show marked increases. However, these increases cannot be totally attributed to agricultural use. The dif- ferent dates of sampling and subsequent flow volumes may have an impact on these water chemistry variations.

With the exception of sodium, the water samples taken within the Park (Lee's Pass Trail) are within the recommended limits shown in Table 10. Sodium again exceeds this limit, but, as stated above, this becomes of concern only to fresh water fisheries. In this case, the LaVerkin Creek samples are only slightly above the recommended limit and would probably have little, if any, impact on the fisheries.

Table 12 gives the water chemistry for the East Fork. The two samples were taken in the summer of 1977 just upstream from the confluence of the East Fork and the North Fork. These results represent the upstream water use of the East Fork by the municipal and agricultural users in Glendale, Orderville, Mt. Carmel and Mt. Carmel Junction. In comparing these data with the recommended limits of Table 10, the sodium concen- tration once again exceeds the recommended limit.

The water chemistry of the North Fork changes as it flows through the Park. Table 13 illustrates the magnitude of the downstream change for one sampling day. On this particular day, 21 of the 34 chemical parameters increased, 8 remained unchanged, and 5 decreased in concen- tration. There are numerous variables that may account for these changes, not the least of which is the tributary inflow. The concentrations

25

Table 12. Water quality data for the East Fork of the Virgin River near the confluence with the North Fork of the Virgin

River.

Water quality	Sampling	dates
parameter	May 13, 1977	Aug. 5, 1977
Turbidity (JTU)	2.50	1.6
Conductivity (ymhos/cm)	600.0	490.0
PH	7.73	8.10
Total Dissolved Solids at
180° C. (mg/1)	400.0	316.0
Alkalinity as CaCOq (mg/1) Aluminum as Al (mg/1)	150.0	148.0
0.025	0.113
Arsenic as As (mg/1)	<0.001	<0.001
Bicarbonate as HCO? (mg/1) Barium as Ba (mg/lj	183.0	180.6
0.038	0.040
Boron as B (mg/1)	0.14	0.17
Cadmium as Cd (mg/1)	<0.001	<0.001
Calcium as Ca (mg/1)	28.0	55.2
Carbonate as CO3 (mg/1) Chloride as CI (mg/1)	<0.01	<0.01
24.0	24.0
Chromium as Cr (Hex) (mg/1)	<0.001	<0.001
Cyanide as Cn (mg/1)	<0.01	<0.01
Copper as Cu (mg/1)	0.003	0.002
Fluoride as F (mg/1)	0.35	0.17
Total Hardness as CaC(h (mg/1) Iron (Total) as Fe (mg/1)	220.0	230.0
01079	0.125
Iron (Filtered) as Fe (mg/1)	0.050	0.100
Lead as Pb (mg/1)	<0.001	<0.001
Magnesium as Mg (mg/1)	36.0	22.08
Manganese as Mn (mg/1 )	0.009	0.007
Mercury as Hg (mg/1)	<0.0002	<0.0002
Nitrate as NO3-N (mg/1) Phosphate as P0* (mg/1) Potassium as K (mg/1)	0.70	0.70
0.045	0.010
2.97	3.57
Selenium as Se (mg/1)	<0.001	0.003
Silica as SiO? (mg/1) Silver as Ag (mg/1)	22.0	8.0
<0.001	<0.001
Sulfate as SOa (mg/1) Sodium as Na (mg/1)	97.0	98.0
30.30	24.38
Zinc as Zn (mg/1)	0.020	0.008

26

Table 13. Water chemistry data for the North Fork of the Virgin River as mea- sured at the headquarters and Chamberlain's Ranch, July 23, 1976.

	Sampling lo	cation
Parameter	Chamberlain's Ranch	Gage
Turbidity (JTU)	15.0	20.0
Conductivity (ymhos/cm)	570.0	820.0
PH	7.60	7.56
Total dissolved solids at
180°C. (mg/1)	370.0	535.0
Alkalinity as CaC03 (mg/1)	206.0	234.0
Aluminum as Al (mg/1)	0.065	0.070
Arsenic as As (mg/1)	<0.001	0.008
Bicarbonate as HCOq (mg/1) Barium as Ba (mg/l)	251.3	202.5
0.089	0.144
Boron as B (mg/l)	<0.001	<0.001
Cadmium as Cd (mg/l )	<0.001	<0.001
Calcium as Ca (mg/l )	47.2	51.2
Carbonate as CO3 (mg/l) Chloride as CI (mg/l)	<0.01	<0.01
4.0	90.0
Chromium as Cr (Hex) (mg/l)	<0.001	<0.001
Cyanide as Cn (mg/l)	<0.01	<0.01
Copper as Cu (mg/l)	0.005	0.006
Fluoride as F (mg/l)	0.30	0.32
Total Hardness as CaC03 (mg/l)	208.0	234.0
Iron (Total) as Fe (mg/l)	0.110	0.120
Iron (Filtered) as Fe (mg/l)	0.100	0.100
Lead as Pb (mg/l)	<0.001	0.005
Magnesium as Mg (mg/l)	21.6	25.4
Manganese as Mn (mg/l)	0.025	0.035
Mercury as Hg (mg/l)	<0.0002	<0.0002
Nitrate as NO3-N (mg/l) Phosphate as PCM (mg/l) Potassium as K (mg/l)	0.05	0.02
0.035	0.065
1.62	3.32
Selenium as Se (mg/l J Silica as SiO? (mg/l) Silver as Ag (mg/l )	0.007 15.0	0.077 9.9
<0.001	<0.001
Sulfate as SO* (mg/l) Sodium as Na (mg/l)	18.7	92.0
18.7	73.0
Zinc as Zn (mg/l)	0.012	0.007

27

given in Table 13 serve to indicate possible directions of water chem- istry changes with respect to time and location. These concentrations offer baseline water chemistry data.

28

Conclusion and Recommendations

The following conclusions are the result of analyses of samples collected during the summers of 1976 and 1977.

1) The total col i form and fecal col i form concentrations of the North Fork of the Virgin River, the East Fork of the Virgin River, and LaVerkin Creek all exceed the Utah State Division of Health recommended limits for swimming waters.

2) The bacterial concentrations within Zion National Park are influenced more by the uses outside the Park than the uses within the Park.

3) Cattle grazing, adjacent and upstream from the Park, does have an impact on the bacterial concentrations of the North Fork of the Virgin River.

4) Over a 2.5 mile reach of the North Fork of the Virgin River total col i form, fecal coliform and fecal streptococcus increased

526, 435 and 216 percent, respectively. These increases are attributed primarily to cattle grazing within the 2.5 mile reach outside the park.

5) With the exception of sodium, all of the measured chemical element concentrations were within the recommended limits for fresh water fisheries.

6) Because of the bacterial concentrations, recreationists should be made aware of the potential health hazards of human injestion of the waters of the North Fork, East Fork, and LaVerkin Creek.

29

Literature Cited

American Public Health Association. 1976. Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater. 14th ed. American Public Health Association, Inc., New York.

Buckhouse, John C. 1975. Water quality impact of burning and grazing on a chained pinyon-juniper site in southeastern Utah. Ph.D. dissertation, Utah State University, Logan, Utah.

Darling, L. A., and G. B. Coltharp. 1973. Effects of livestock grazing on the water quality of mountain streams. J_n: Proc. Symposium Water-Animal Relationships. Southern Idaho State College, Twin Falls, Idaho. June 1973:1-8.

Dixon, Wilfrid J., and Frank J. Massey, Jr. Introduction to Statistical Analysis. 3rd ed. McGraw Hill, New York, New York.

Environmental Protection Agency. 1972. Water quality criteria. Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C.

Greely, Hal. District Ranger, Zion National Park, Sprincjdale, Utah. Personal Communication, August 1, 1977.

Kunkle, S. H. 1970. Sources and transport of bacterial indicators

in rural streams. Presented at a symposium on the Interdisciplinary Aspects of Watershed Management, Montana State University, Bozeman, Montana. 3-6 August.

Kunkle, S. H. 1977. Using bacteria to monitor the influence of cattle wastes on water quality. (Unpublished).

Kunkle, S. H., and J. R. Meiman. 1967. Water quality of mountain water- sheds. Hydrology Paper No. 21, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, Colorado.

McKee, J. E., and H. W. Wolf. 1963. Water Quality Criteria. California State Water Resources Control Board. California.

Mack, W. N. 1974. Investigations into occurrence of coliform organisms from pristine streams. Dept. of Microbiology and Public Health, Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan. (Unpublished data).

Maddox, J. D. 1977. Water Resource Inventory of Zion National Park. M.F. paper, Utah State University, Logan, Utah

30

Morrison, S. M. , and J. F. Fair. 1966. Influence on environment on stream microbial dynamics, Hydrology Paper No. 13, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, Colorado.

Stuart, D. G. , G. K. Bissonnette, T. D. Goodrich, and W. G. Walter. 1971. Effects of multiple use on water quality of high mountain watersheds: Bacteriological investigations of mountain streams. Journal of Applied Microbiology 22:1048-1054.

U.S. Department of Interior, Bureau of Land Management. 1976. State of Utah, Land Ownership and Public Management Map, Dixie-S.

Utah State Division of Health. 1976. Standards of quality for waters of the state. Utah.

Walter, W. G. , and R. P. Bottman. 1967. Microbiological and chemical studies of an open and a closed watershed. Journal of Environmental Health 30:157-163.

31

Appendix A

Chemical analysis of Zion National Park water resources as analyzed by Ford Chemical Laboratory, Inc. Salt Lake City, Utah

32

Name

LABORATORY, INC.

Bacteriological and Chemical Analysis 40 WEST LOUISE AVENUE SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 841 15 PHONE 485-5761

Mr. George; Hart

Address _ Forestry & Outdoor Recreation Utah State University Logan, UT 84321

Date: October 6, 1975

CERTIFICATE OF ANALYSIS

75-4199

jamp|e Water from North Fork of Virgin River at Highway 89 received on September 17 , 1975.

"urbidity

Conductivity

>H

"otal Dissolved Solids it 180° C.

alkalinity as CaCOs

Aluminum as Al

Arsenic as As

bicarbonate as HC03

barium as Ba

boron as B

admium as Cd

alcium as Ca

arbonate as CCX

hloride as CI

hromium as Cr (Hex)

yanide as Cn

opper as Cu

4.2

793.0

7.14

516.0

158.0

<0.01

0.02

it

JTU

.umhos/cm

_mg/ _mg/ <Q.Q1 mg/

<0.01 mg/

191.49

-mg/ -mg/

<^± mg/

°-002 mg/

55-2 mg/

<\0j_9J___mg/ 88. 0 mg/

<0-01 mg/

<0.01

mg/ mg/

Fluoride as F

Total Hardness as CaCOs

Iron (Total) as Fe

Iron (Filtered) as Fe

Lead as Pb

Magnesium as Mg

Manganese as Mn

Mercury as Hg

Nitrate as NO, — N

Phosphate as PO4

Potassium as K

Selenium as Se

Silica as Si02

Silver as Ag

Sulfate as SO*

Sodium as Na

Zinc as Zn

0.13

250.0

0.15

0.02

<0.01

26.88

0.01

— mg/1

— mg/' — mg/' — mg/' — mg/'

_mg/l

—mg/l <0.001 mg/i

0-04' mg/1

0.100 mg/1

3.69 mg/1

<0.01 mg/1

4-15 mg/]

O-OO"7 mg/1

9 5.50 mg/1

57.00 mg/1

0.01

-mg/1

r

^0^^%/^

Ford Chemical Laboratory, Inc.

33

LABORATORY, INC.

Bacteriological and Chemical Analysis 40 WEST LOUISE AVENUE SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84115 PHONE 485-5761

re:

August 17, 197 6

Jame

ample

Utah State University

ATTN: George Hart address Forestry Science Laboratory

CERTIFICATE OF ANALYSIS

76-5008

Logan, UT 84321

Water at North Fork-Virgin River, Chamberlin Ranch Received on July 23, 1976 - Zion Park Research:

urbidity

Conductivity

H

otal Dissolved Solids t 180° C.

Jkalinity as CaCOi

Juminum as Al

Tsenic as As

icarbonate as HCOs

arium as Ba

oron as B

admium as Cd

alcium as Ca

arbonate as COs

hloride as CI

hromium as Cr (Hex)

yanide as Cn

opper as Cu

15.0

JTU

0.30

570..Q umhos/cm

7.60

370.0

206.0

_mg/

_mg/ 0.065 mg/

CO. 001 mg/

2 51.3 mg/ 0-089 mg/

^0.001 mg/

Ao.003 mg/

4 7.2 mg/

<0.01 mg/

4_^0 mg/

cJKQQl mg/

<C0.01 mg/

0-005 mg/

208.0

0.100

Fluoride as F

Total Hardness as CaCOs

Iron (Total) as Fe

Iron (Filtered) as Fe

Lead as Pb v

Magnesium as Mg

Manganese as Mn

Mercury as Hg

Nitrate as NO, -N

Phosphate as PO<

Potassium as K

Selenium as Se

Silica as Si02

Silver as Ag

Sulfate as SOj

Sodium as Na

Zinc as Zn 0.012

_ mg/ — mg/

0.110 mg/

— mg/

0.001 mg/

21 . 6 mg/

0.025 mg/

<Q.Q0Q2 mg/

0.05 mg/

0. 035 mg/

1 . 62 mg/

0.007 mg/

15.0 mg/

^0.001 mg/

34.0 mg/

18.7 mg/

-mg/

r^^_

Ford Chemical Laboratory, Inc.

34

LABORATORY, INC.

Bacteriological and Chemical Analysis 40 WEST LOUISE AVENUE SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84115 PHONE 485-5761

Date:

August 17, 1976

pnwfl Utah State University

ATTN: George Hart Address Forestry Science Laboratory

Logan, UT 84321

CERTIFICATE OF ANALYSIS

76-5010

iample Water labeled Deep Creek Received on July 23 , 1976, Zion Park Research:

urbidity

Conductivity

>H

otal Dissolved Solids it 180° C.

alkalinity as CaCOs

Uuminum as Al

arsenic as As

bicarbonate as HCOs

•arium as Ba

toron as B

admium as Cd

alcium as Ca

arbonate as COs

hloride as CI

hromium as Cr (Hex)

yanide as Cn

opper as Cu

7.5

JTU

630.0 umhos/cm

7.58

410.0

138.0

-mg/1

mg/1

0-130 mg/1

^°'001 mg/1

168.4 mg/1

0-089 mg/i

<0.001 mg/1

0.002 mg/1

45.6 mg/i

^sO.01 mg/1

4 • 0 mg/1

^.Q.QQJ mg/1

j.0.01 mg/1

0.005 mg/i

Fluoride as F

Total Hardness as CaCOs

Iron (Total) as Fe

Iron (Filtered) as Fe

Lead as Pb

Magnesium as Mg

Manganese as Mn

Mercury as Hg

Nitrate as NO.-N

Phosphate as PCX

Potassium as K

Selenium as Se

Silica as Si02

Silver as Ag

Sulfate as SCX

Sodium as Na

Zinc as Zn

0.27

— mg/

180-0 mg/

&110 mg/

0-lOQ mg/

^0-001 mg/

15'84 mg/

Q-038 mg/

< 0.0002 mg/

< 0.01 mg/

0.035 mg/

— mg/

1.58

0.006

-mg/

Q.9Q mg/

<0.001 mg/

130.0 mg/

45.0 mg/

0-008 mg/

£ ^

Ford Chemical Laboratory, Inc.

35

LABORATORY, INC.

Bacteriological and Chemical Analysis 40 WEST LOUISE AVENUE SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84115 PHONE 485-5761

Date:

August 17, 1976

Utah State University

same

ATTN: George Hart

address Forestry Science Laboratory Logan, UT 84321

CERTIFICATE OF ANALYSIS

76-5009

ample Water Labeled Kolob Creek Received on July 23, 1976-Zion Park Research;

urbidity

Conductivity

iH

otal Dissolved Solids t 180° C.

Jkalinity as CaCOs

Jurninum as Al

trsenic as As

icarbonate as HCOs

arium as Ba

oron as B

admium as Cd

alcium as Ca

arbonate as CO3

hloride as CI

hromium as Cr (Hex)

yanide as Cn

opper as Cu

8.0

480.0

7.70

315.0

158.0

0.060

^.0.001

X92.8

0.099

<0.001

<0.001

50.4

<0.01

A^Q_

40.QQ1

^0.01

Q.Q11

JTU -umhos/cm

_mg/ _mg/ -mg/ -mg/ .mg/ .mg/ .mg/ -mg/ -mg/ .mg/ -mg/ .mg/ -mg/ .mg/

Fluoride as F

Total Hardness as CaCOs

Iron (Total) as Fe

Iron (Filtered) as Fe

Lead as Pb

Magnesium as Mg

Manganese as Mn

Mercury as Hg

Nitrate as NO, — N

Phosphate as PO«

Potassium as K

Selenium as Se

Silica as Si02

Silver as Ag

Sulfate as SO*

Sodium as Na

Zinc as Zn

0.30

190.0

0.080

0.050

0.030

-mg/ -mg/ -mg/ -mg/

< 0.001 mg/ 15.36 mg/ -mg/

<v 0.0002 mg/ 0.04 mg/ 0.035 mg/ ^ » 72 mg/

< 0.001 mg/ 0-40 mg/

< 0.001 mg/ 4 5.0 mg/ 10.0 mg/ 0.003 mg/

Ford Chemical Laboratory, Inc.

36

LABORATORY. INC.

Bacteriological and Chemical Analysis 40 WEST LOUISE AVENUE SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84115 PHONE 485-5761

Date:

August 17, 1976

Onmo Utah State University

ATTN: George Hart address Forestry Science Laboratory

CERTIFICATE OF ANALYSIS

76-5007

Logan, Utah 84 321

Iample Water Labeled Gage Received on July 23, 1976, Zion Park Research

urbidity

Conductivity

>H

otal Dissolved Solids it 180° C.

alkalinity as CaCOs

aluminum as Al

trsenic as As

icarbonate as HCOs

arium as Ba

oron as B

ladmium as Cd

!alcium as Ca

arbonate as CO3

hloride as CI

ihromium as Cr (Hex)

yanide as Cn

opper as Cu

20.0

JTU

820.0 umhos/cm

7.56

535.0

234.0

-mg/ _mg/

0.070 mg/

0.008 mg/

2 02.5 mg/

0.144 mg/

<0.001 mg/

CO. 001 mg/

51. 2 mg/

^0.01

90.0

mg/

mg/

^0.001 mg/

<Q.Q1 mg/

0-006 mg/

Fluoride as F

Total Hardness as CaCOs

Iron (Total) as Fe

Iron (Filtered) as Fe

Lead as Pb

Magnesium as Mg

Manganese as Mn

Mercury as Hg

Nitrate as NO,-N

Phosphate as PO4

Potassium as K

Selenium as Se

Silica as SiCX

Silver as Ag

Sulfate as SO*

Sodium as Na

Zinc as Zn

0.32 mg/

234.0 mg/

0.120 mg/

0.100 mg/

O-005 mg/

25.4 mg/

0-035 mg/

^0.0002 mg/

0.02

-m9/ 0.065 mg/ 3.32 mg /

0-077 mg/

9.9

— mg/

<C 0.001 mg/

92.0 mg/

73.0 mg/

0.007

-mg/

Ford Chemical Laboratory, Inc.

37

LABORATORY, INC.

Bacteriological and Chemical Analysis 40 WEST LOUISE AVENUE SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84115 PHONE 485-5761

Date:

June 6, 1977

Name Utah State University Forest Department

Address ATTN : Mr ♦ George Hart 860 North 12th East

Logan, UT 84321

CERTIFICATE OF ANALYSIS

77-2632

c , Water Labeled NFl/R at Gage Received on May 16 , 1977: oample _

Turbidity Conductivity

PH

Total Dissolved Solids at 180° C.

Alkalinity as CaCOs

Aluminum as Al

Arsenic as As

Bicarbonate as HCO3

Barium as Ba

Boron as B

Cadmium as Cd

Calcium as Ca

Carbonate as CO3

Chloride as CI

Chromium as Cr (Hex)

Cyanide as Cn

Copper as Cu

2.00

900.0

7.81

600.0

168.0

0.071

< 0.001

204.9 0.091

0.22

130.0

< 0.001

<. 0.01

0.007

JTU

-umhos/cm

_mg/ _mg/ _mg/ _mg/ _mg/ __ mg/ mg/

< 0.001 mg/

21» 6 mg/

<0-01 mg/

_ mg/

-mg/ .mg/

-mg/

Fluoride as F

Total Hardness as CaCOs

Iron (Total) as Fe

Iron (Filtered) as Fe

Lead as Pb

Magnesium as Mg

Manganese as Mn

Mercury as Hg

Nitrate as NO,— N

Phosphate as PO«

Potassium as K

Selenium as Se

Silica as SiCX

Silver as Ag

Sulfate as SO*

Sodium as Na

Zinc as Zn

0.28

230.0

0.086

0.050

-C 0.001

42.24

0.034

< 0.0002

0.10

0.035

A 0.001

82.0

0.042

-mg/

-mg/1

-mg/1

-mg/1

-mg/1

-mg/1

-mg/1

-mg/1

-mg/1 -mg/1

3.14

mg/

< 0.001 mri/1

^ mg/i

21.5 „ mg/1

-mg/1

-mg/'

-mg/1 -mg/1

122.50

Ford Chemical Laboratory, Inc.

38

LABORATORY, INC.

Bacteriological and Chemical Analysis 40 WEST LOUISE AVENUE SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84115 PHONE 485-5761

Date:

June 6, 1977

Name

Utah State University Forest Department

»,, ATTN: Mr. George Hart

s 86U North 12th East

Logan, UT 84321

CERTIFICATE OF ANALYSIS

77-2633

Sample Water Labeled East Fork Virgin River at Confluence w/VR Dated May 13, 1977 Received on May 16, 1977:

Turbidity Conductivity

PH

Total Dissolved Solids at 180° C.

Alkalinity as CaCOs

Aluminum as Al

Arsenic as As

Bicarbonate as HCO3

Barium as Ba

Boron as B

Cadmium as Cd

Calcium as Ca

Carbonate as COs

Chloride as CI

Chromium as Cr (Hex)

Cyanide as Cn

Copper as Cu

2.50

600.0

7.73

150.0

0.025

< 0.001

< 0.001

28.0

<

0.003

JTU

.umhos/cm

400.0

_ mg/

_mg/

— mg/ __ mg/ 18 3.0 mg/

0-038 mg/

°'14 _mg/

_ mg/ — mg/

< Q.Q1 mg/

24.0 mg/

0.001 mg/

< 0-01 mg/

-mg/

Fluoride as F

Total Hardness as CaCOs

Iron (Total) as Fe

Iron (Filtered) as Fe

Lead as Pb

Magnesium as Mg

Manganese as Mn

Mercury as Hg

Nitrate as NO.-N

Phosphate as PO<

Potassium as K

Selenium as Se

Silica as Si02

Silver as Ag

Sulfate as SO<

Sodium as Na

Zinc as Zn

0.35

< 0.001

36.0

0.009

< 0.0002

0.70

0.045

< 0.001

22.0

< 0.001

97.0

-mg/

2 2 0.0 mg/

0-079 mg/

°'050 mg/

.mg/

-mg/ -mg/ -mg/

-mg/

-mg/ 2-9? mg/

-mg/ -mg/ -mg/ -mg/

30.30 mg/

0.02 0 mg/

Ford Chemical Laboratory, Inc.

39

LABORATORY, INC.

Bacteriological and Chemical Analysis 40 WEST LOUISE AVENUE SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84115 PHONE 485-5761

Date:

June 6, 1977

Name Utah State University

\6d

Forest Department ress ATTN: Mr. George Hart 860 North 12th East Logan, UT 84321

>ample

CERTIFICATE OF ANALYSIS

77-2634

Water Labeled LaVerkin Creek at Hurricane Received on May 16, 1977

'urbidity

lonductivity

>H

"otal Dissolved Solids it 180° C.

Alkalinity as CaCOs

Aluminum as Al

Arsenic as As

licarbonate as HCO3

barium as Ba

boron as B

admium as Cd

alcium as Ca

arbonate as CO3

hloride as CI

hromium as Cr (Hex)

yanide as Cn

opper as Cu

3.00

7.62

180.0

0.043

<0.001

219.6

0.048

0.22

< 0.001

86.4

< 0.01

16.0

< 0.001

< 0.01

0.005

JTU

1/670.0 umhoS/cm

1,105.0

_mg/

-mg/ _mg/ -mg/ -mg/ -mg/ -mg/ -mg/

-mg/ -mg/ -mg/ -mg/ -mg/ -mg/

Fluoride as F

Total Hardness as CaCOa

Iron (Total) as Fe

Iron (Filtered) as Fe

Lead as Pb

Magnesium as Mg

Manganese as Mn

Mercury as Hg

Nitrate as NO ~N

Phosphate as PO4

Potassium as K

Selenium as Se

Silica as Si02

Silver as Ag

Sulfate as SO*

Sodium as Na

Zinc as Zn

<^

0.40

486.0

0.096

0.044

< 0.001

64.8

0.027

-mg/ -mg7 -mg/1

-mg/1 -mg/1

-mg, -mg/1

<, 0.0002 mg/1

_._9^.3 6 mg

0-045 mq/1

2.93 mg/1

<_oJLooi__mg/1

26 . 0 mg/l

0.005 mg/1

58 0.0 mg/1

14 3.0 mg/1

0.025 mg/1

£.

Ford Chemical Laboratory, Inc.

40

LABORATORY, INC.

Hacteriotngical and Chemical Analysis 40 WEST LOUISE AVENUE SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84115 PHONE 485 5761

Date:

August 23, 1977

\AQme Utah State University Department ot Forestry

i , . UMC 52

S ATTN: Mr. George Hart Logan, UT 84321

CERTIFICATE OF ANALYSIS 77-4237

ample

Wa

ter Labeled East Fork Virgin River at North Fork Conf.; Received on

August 5, 1977:

urbidity

Conductivity

iH

otal Dissolved Solids t 180° C.

Jkalinity as CaCOs

Juminum as Al

.rsenic as As

icarbonate as HCOs

arium as Ba

oron as B

admium as Cd

alcium as Ca

arbonate as CO3

hloride as CI

hromium as Cr (Hex)

yanide as Cn

opper as Cu

1.6

JTU

490.0

.umhos/cm

8.10

316.0

148.0 0.113

_mg/l

mg/1

mg/1

^°-001 mg/1

180-6 mg/1

0.04 0 mg/1

°'17 _mg/l

_mg/l

55. 2 mg/1

< 0.001

<y 0.01

-mg/1

24.0 mg/1

^0.001 mg/i

•^ n.01 mg/1

0.002

Fluoride as F

Total Hardness as CaCOs

Iron (Total) as Fe

Iron (Filtered) as Fe

Lead as Pb

Magnesium as Mg

Manganese as Mn

Mercury as Hg

Nitrate as NCX-N

Phosphate as PO4

Potassium as K

Selenium as Se

Silica as Si02

Silver as Ag

Sulfate as SO*

Sodium as Na

Zinc as Zn

0.17

-mg/

.mg/ _mg/ -mg/

<_qJLooi_ _mg/

22 -08 mg/

-mg/ -mg/

230.0

0.125 0.100

< 0.0002

0.70

0.010

3.57

0.003

8.0

< 0.001

98.0

24.38

0.008

-mg/1

-mg/ -mg/ -mg/ -mg/ -mg/ -mg/ -mg/ -mg/ -mg/

uports on- submitted Oi th<- confidential property ot dienl Aullun/ution t^< puLI >ur written approval 01 o mutual protection to clients, ttie public und ourselves.

/ .

Ford Chemical Laboratory, Inc.

I our reports, conclusions, or i-xtruets Irani uf regarding iln-ni, is rubc-rved pend /

vt&lsJum/xwl

LABORATORY, INC.

Bacteriological and Chemical Analysis 40 WEST LOUISE AVENUE SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84115 PHONE 485 5761

41

Date:

August 23, 1977

MnrnA Utah State University Department of Forestry

Mdress °£"

ATTN: Mr. George Hart

Logan, UT 84321

CERTIFICATE OF ANALYSIS 77-4238

>ample Water Labeled Laverkin Creek at Lees Pas3 Trail Bacaisaad nn August 5, 1977:

"urbidity

Conductivity

to

'otal Dissolved Solids it 180° C.

alkalinity as CaCOs

aluminum as Al

Arsenic as As

bicarbonate as HCOs

iarium as Ba

•oron as B

admium as Cd

alcium as Ca

arbonate as COs

hloride as CI

hromium as Cr (Hex)

yanide as Cn

opper as Cu

1.5

7.97

432.0

148.0

0.063

•< 0.001

180.6

0.063

0.15

< 0.001

84.8

-C

8.0

n.noi

o.oi

0.002

JTU

677 f,0 u m h os/c m

_mg/

_mg/ _mg/ _mg/ _mg/ _mg/ _mg/ _mg/ _mg/ * °-°l __mg/ _mg/

-mg/ .mg/

-mg/

Fluoride as F

Total Hardness as CaCOs

Iron (Total) as Fe

Iron (Filtered) as Fe

Lead as Pb

Magnesium as Mg

Manganese as Mn

Mercury as Hg

Nitrate as N03-N

Phosphate as P04

Potassium as K

Selenium as Se

Silica as SiOz

Silver as Ag

Sulfate as SO<

Sodium as Na

Zinc as Zn

0.20

330.0

0.069

0.040

-^ 0.001

2.3293

.mg/ -mg/ -mg/ -mg/ -mg/ -mg/ -mg/ <. 0.0002 mg/

0-010 mg/

0-010 mg/

2.653

, mg/

< 0.001

0.004

7.0

0.014

— mg/ — mg/ — mg/ — mg/ 17.10 mg/

— mg/

202.0

0.006

/

L-poru an.- submitted oi ihw confidential properly i ilii-nl Author i/olion lor pulili >ur written uppr.i.al a> a mutual protection ro client*, Ihu public und ourselves,

Ford Chemical Laboratory, Inc.

i our r. purls, conclusion., cr. iv trocls Irani or regarding them, is reserved pend ,

/ /

42

LABORATORY, INC.

Bacteriological and Chemical Analysts 40 WEST LOUISE AVENUE SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84115 PHONE 485 5761

Date:

September 26, 1977

NJnmg Utah State University Department of Forestry

\ddress ATTN; Mr. George Hart UMC 52 Logan, UT 84321

CERTIFICATE OF ANALYSIS

77-5017

Sample Water Labeled "La Verkin Creek at Lee Pass Trail" Dated September 4, 1977; Received on September 6, 1977:

'urbidity

Conductivity

>H

otal Dissolved Solids it 180° C.

alkalinity as CaCOs

aluminum as Al

Arsenic as As

•icarbonate as HCOs

iarium as Ba

>oron as B

adrnium as Cd

alcium as Ca

arbonate as COs

hloride as CI

hromium as Cr (Hex)

yanide as Cn

opper as Cu

2.0

655.0

7.80

422.0

152.0

0.149

<0.001

185.4

0.184

0.04

-<0.001

80.8

^0.01

10.0

<0.001

-0.01

0.004

JTU

.umhos/cm

_mg/ _mg/ _mg/ -mg/ -mg/ .mg/ _mg/ -mg/

-mg/

.mg/ -mg/ -mg/ -mg/ -mg/

Fluoride as F

Total Hardness as CaCOs

Iron (Total) as Fe

Iron (Filtered) as Fe

Lead as Pb

Magnesium as Mg

Manganese as Mn

Mercury as Hg

Nitrate as NO,— N

Phosphate as PO<

Potassium as K

Selenium as Se

Silica as Si02

Silver as Ag

Sulfate as SO*

Sodium as Na

Zinc as Zn

0.15

336.0

0.133

0.100

0.001

32.16

0.007

A 0.0002

<0.01

0.01

3.70

0.001

8.0

S 0.001

194.0

11.93

0.033

Ford Chemical Laboratory, Inc.

-mg/ -mg/ -mg/ -mg/ _mg/ -mg/ -mg/ -mg/ -mg/ -mg/ -mg/ -mg/ -mg/ -mg/ -mg/ .mg/ .mg/

eporis ore submitted as the confidential property of clients Authorization for publ cjtioii of our reports, conclusions, or, extracts from or regarding them, is reserved pend- )ur written approval as a mutual protection to clients, the public and ourselves.