[From the U.S. Government Printing Office, www.gpo.gov]
NA88AA-D-CZ088 TASK I.A.2. Sediment Contamination in Wisconsin's Great Lakes Harbors Survey Data and Findings By Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources Bureau of Water Regulation and Zoning With support from Wisconsin Department of Administration Coastal Management Program QE September 1989 571 .T52 1989 U.S. DEFSATVMENT sF COUMERCE NOAA COASTAL SEV'IC'F5 :'FN'T7RF 2234 SOUTH HO&, rSON AVENlUE CHARLESTON, SC 29405-2d13 Sediment Contamination in Wisconsin's Great Lakes Harbors: Survey Data and Findings Prop-.:'::'t c Cth La...y Nick Theisen Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources Bureau of Water Regulation and Zoning With Support From Wisconsin Department of Administration Coastal Management Program September, 1989 0-~ 7�� ABSTRACT In order to estimate ambient levels of a select number of inorganic (e.g., Cd, Fe, Mn, vol. solids) and organic (e.g., TOC, PCBs, toxaphene, and 2,3,7,8 TCDD/TCDF) toxic compounds in Great Lakes harbor sediment, composite sediment cores were collected at 31 stations in 9 Wisconsin Great Lakes estuaries. Sampling stations were selected according to two main criteria: Depositional areas subject to dredging and at maximum distances from point source pollution. The sediment samples collected spanned a wide variety of depositional and composition types with silt being the commonest material. Spatial patchiness within harbors was evident. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This project was made possible by a grant from the Wisconsin Coastal Management Program (WCMP). The program was established in 1978 to direct attention to the state's 820 miles of Lakes Michigan and Superior coastline. The WCMP analyzes and develops state policy on a wide range of Great Lakes issues, coordinates the many governmental programs that affect the coast and provides grants to stimulate better state and local coastal management. Its overall goal is to preserve, protect and develop the resources of Wisconsin's coastal areas for this and succeeding generations. The following people were virtually indispensable in the sample collection phase of this project: Mary Ellen Vollbrecht, Ken Johnson, Dick Rost, and Stan Nogalski of Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (DNR) and Dave Bolgrien and Bob Paddock of the Center for Great Lakes Studies (UW-Milwaukee). Special thanks for much appreciated help and advice also go to Scott Hausmann, Dorothy LaMar, Eleanor Lawry, Linda Talbot, Pat Schraufnagel, Jeffrey Steuer, Patricia Parsons, Carol Tiegs, Mary Ellen Ley, Russell Dunst, Lee Liebenstein, Jim Amrhein, Judy Ott, Gary Nelson, Bob Wakeman, Bill Wawrzyn, Ron Fassbender, Dennis Weisensel, Jeff Bode, Mike Coshun, Fred Hagstrom, and Bob Spencer of the Wisconsin DNR; Joseph Rathbun of EPA's Large Lakes Research Station; Marc Tuchman of the EPA, Region 5; Larry Boyer of the Center for Great Lakes Studies, UW-Milwaukee; Anders Andren of UW-Madison; Mary Balcer of UW-Superior; Dave Degenhardt, Bob ii Schuknecht, and Phil Bowman of the Wisconsin State Lab of Hygiene (SLOH); Sue Sommers and John Parsen of the Soils and Plant Analysis Lab, UW Extension; Christine Soderberg of the EPA Lab, Duluth; and Wyatt Repavich of the Aquatic Life Toxicity Testing Laboratory, Wis. Occupational Health Lab. TABLE OF CONTENTS Paqe ABSTRACT. .............� ........i ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ...................ii INTRODUCTION ....................! Purpose of Project .............. 1 Selection of Variables for Analysis ...... 3 Sampling Site Criteria ............5 METHODS AND MATERIALS ................6 Sediment Sampling Equipment .......... 6 Sediment Sampling and Handling ........ 7 Sediment Analyses and Data Storage ...... 8 RESULTS OF SEDIMENT SAMPLING AND ANALYSES ...... 10 Field Results and Observation ..........10 Results of Laboratory Analyses ........11 DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS ...........14 Physical Characteristics of Sediment . ....14 Chemical Characteristics of Sediment .... 15 Interpretation of Data ..............15 Recommendations ................16 LITERATURE CITED ..................19 APPENDIX A: MAPS OF HARBORS SAMPLED ........Al APPENDIX B: LOCATIONS OF HARBORS SAMPLED ..1....B APPENDIX C: LIST OF REVIEWERS ...........C1 APPENDIX D: FIELD OBSERVATIONS OF SEDIMENT .....DI INTRODUCTION PurDose of Project The Bureau of Water Regulation and Zoning of the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, under a grant from the state's Coastal Management Program, sampled sediments from estuaries and harbors along the Wisconsin coasts of Lakes Michigan and Superior in the summer of 1989. Sampling sites and water quality variables were selected with four purposes in mind: 1) to provide baseline data (a "snapshot") for certain toxic substances at specific locations where no previous data existed; 2) to refine the protocol for sediment sampling at dredging sites, including the possible reduction in the number of costly analyses (such as those for dioxins and furans) required by the DNR for individual dredging permits; and 3) to identify areas for fish and benthos sampling, for pollution control efforts, and for direction of wildlife and human health studies. Sampling sites were selected in order to help fulfill the continuing need for the type of ambient sediment data mentioned above, particularly due to a lack of data for certain contaminants at locations believed to have ambient levels. Recent studies confirm the persistence of some in-place pollutants in the aquatic environment and the importance of focusing on the sediments as the source of significant environmental impacts such as biomagnification (Servos and Muir 1989). Further, bottom foragers (e.g., fathead minnow) bioaccumulate toxins at a much greater rate than surface feeders (Heber and Haffner 1989). Bioassays with marine harbor sediments (dredged material) containing substantial amounts of both organic and inorganic contaminants have resulted in bioaccumulation of PCBs and cadmium, among others. Acute toxicity tests with the same sediments also illustrate the hydrophobic nature of many contaminants and indicate sensitivity by several infaunal species (including a lethal test) but no sensitivity by epibenthic or water column species (Rogerson et al. 1985). The Department of Natural Resources has rewritten the Wisconsin Administrative Code pertaining to the regulation of the removal of materials from the beds of waterways. Chapter NR 347, Wis. Adm. Code, clarifies the dredging permit application process and incorporates all pertinent provisions of NR 345, which was repealed. The Wisconsin DNR now makes an initial evaluation of a preliminary application dealing with the proposed dredging activities. Specific sediment sampling and testing are then required by the DNR based on existing data and applying Wisconsin' s policy of no significant degradation of the environment beyond that which has already occurred. In order to aid in adhering to the current policy and due to the lack of workable criteria on the biological effects of toxic sediments, the DNR developed interim criteria for evaluating the potential environmental effects of such sediments. A DNR technical subcommittee decided that the most useful approach currently available to develop such criteria was that of determining background (ambient) levels of contaminants in sediments. Interim criteria were established through comparative analysis of pollutant concentrations found in Lakes Michigan and Supe rior (Sullivan et al. 1985). Such an approach is necessarily a -2 - compromise between criteria based on sediment samples from a pristine environment or pre-industrial strata, which might be too restrictive, and samples from pollution "hotspots" which might not be restrictive enough. Selection of Parameters for Analysis Sediment samples taken June-August, 1989 will be analyzed for these water quality parameters: Inorganic constituents- Cadmiurn Iron Manganese Total Volatile Solids Organic Constituents- PCBs, total Toxaphene Dioxin Furan Total Organic Carbon Physical characteri stics- Particle Size (percent sand, silt. clay) These parameters were selected because: Volatile solids concentration is a good indicator of relative degree of water pollution. Cadmium is a toxic heavy metal of concern which has been found at levels above EPA limits at a wide variety of locations on Lakes Michigan and Superior, including ares with no obvious sources of pollution. Iron and manganese have been shown, in marine studies, to have some correlation to the bioavailability of other metals but little freshwater data is available to support the theory (J.E. Rathbun, AScl Corp., Grosse - 3- Ile, MI, personal communication). These two metals are chemically similar, but dissolved manganese was shown to markedly increase in dredged disposal water while dissolved iron decreased as the water moved downstream (Great River Environmental Action Team 1978). The difference could be due to the greater tendency of manganese to dissolve at lower concentration of oxygen 'Hem 1959). Both metals are effective scavengers of trace metals and may inhibit dissolution of other metals (Khalid et al. 1977). Total oreanic carbon is an important environmental measurement which is highly correlated with bioavailability of various compounds, especially metals. Many new methods for determining bioavailability use a carbon constant. Toxaphene is a persistent, widely used pesticide which could be expected to be found in a wide variety of depositional locations. PCBs (polychlorinated biphenyls) are a family of persistent, organic compounds which demonstrate a high biomagnification tendency, are mainly input to the Great Lakes through the air, and could be expected to be found in a wide variety of depositional locations. Dioxin and furan are persistent organic compounds which biomagnify. Dioxins are extremely toxic and dioxin-contaminated compounds are widely used. They are input to the Great Lakes mainly through the air and can be expected to be found almost anywhere in the environment. Samolina Site Criteria Sampling sites were selected according to the following two main criteria: minimum number of obvious sources of pollution and likelihood - 4 - of (or need for) dredging in the future. And because priorities must also be considered in dredging protocol, extra sampling effort was given to a harbor which has both a minimum amount of toxic pollution and a relatively high need for dredging (i.e., Marinette, which, other than concern about arsenic contamination, has relatively little pollution). Although the stations selected for sediment sampling for the project have the relatively high levels of nutrients in their sediments typical of urban harbors (with the exception of Port Wing, Ashland, and Two Rivers), past data shows that they have relatively low (under consistent limits of the EPA as well as other guidelines) or nondetectable levels of the contaminants of interest in this study, with the following exceptions: Cadmium is of concern particularly at Two Rivers and Port Wing where it has exceeded the limits at several sampling stations, but also at Marinette, where the limit was exceeded only in the turning basin. PCBs are of concern in the lower sections of the Root (Racine) and Manitowoc Rivers (although the levels of concern on the Manitowoc River were only slightly over the EPA limit). Total volatile solids has been shown to be relatively high in one area of the lower Root River (Racine) and slightly above the EPA limit in an area of the lower Manitowoc River. However, relatively little data exists on dioxin and chlorinated organic compounds for the harbor sediments of Marinette-Menominee, Two Rivers, and Racine. Metals data for Racine Harbor are also lacking, even though this harbor is considered to be highly polluted based on other data. Specific, individual sediment sampling stations (See Appendix A and Appendix B) were selected based on literature research (particularly U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources studies, 1981-83), conversations with other researchers (particularly those involved in work at the proposed study harbors), and on-site sampling. A 1984 Corps of Engineers sediment study of the Fox River in NE Wis. revealed significantly higher PCB levels in sediments near shore than in sediments in or near the channel. There is also a well known tendency of contaminants to concentrate in backwater sediments as opposed to those more exposed to currents. The basic sampling station selection strategy used in this study was to devise a sampling grid, spread out over known or predicted depositional areas in each harbor or estuary, which maximized distances from known point sources of pollution and emphasized sampling near shore. Control sites were located at upriver and channel locations. A control sample was also collected at a likely pristine site in Rowley Bay. METHODS AND MATERIALS Sediment Samolina Eauioment Sampling equipment selection was based on personal experience, conversations with other researchers, literature research, equipment availability, project budget, and project goals. Sediment cores were collected where possible with a gravity coring device constructed by the Center for Great Lakes Studies (University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee) and fitted with valves and sleeves made specially for sediment coring by Benthos, Inc. of North Falmouth, MA. The coring devise was selected in part because of its capability of taking 4 ft. sediment cores. A 1984 sediment sampling project by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers on the Fox - 6- River yielded several sediment samples with significant PCB levels at 4- 6 ft. depths. Where bottom conditions (e.g., coarse sand, gravel, rocks, wood chips) thwarted the gravity corer, a Petite Ponar dredge was used. Sediment SamDlina and Handlina Composite sediment samples were made of 1-4 gravity cores or 1-4 Ponar grabs (at 2 stations where water was wading depth, composite samples were collected with a large spoon to a sediment depth of approximately 5 inches). Each core or dredged grab was measured and visually inspected with appropriate observations on sediment and benthos characteristics logged in a field notebook. Composite samples were mixed in an aluminum pan with a large stainless steel spoon and subsampled as follows: sample for inorganic analyses in 150 ml plastic "metals" bottle; sample for organic analyses in a glass quart wide-mouthed jar with teflon-lined lid; sample for particle size analysis in pint-size ziplock plastic bag; sample for dioxin-furan analysis (at appropriate stations) in glass quart wide- mouthed jar with teflon-lined lid. Subsamples were taken for dioxin-furan analysis at 9 of the 31 sampling stations. Samples were packed in ice and stored in insulated coolers for up to several hours before being delivered to a walk-in cooler facility prior to being analyzed. At the time of sampling, most stations were triangulated using a compass, in addition to being located by landmarks, in order to arrive at latitude/longitude readings for STORET system identification. This information will be available in the final report. - 7 - Sediment Analyses and Data Storaae Organic analyses were conducted in the Organic Laboratory of the Wisconsin State Laboratory of (SLOH); inorganic analyses were conducted in the Inorganic Laboratory of SLOH; particle size analyses were conducted at the Soils and Plant Laboratory of the University of Wisconsin- Extension; dioxin-furan analyses were conducted at the EPA Laboratory, Duluth. Analyses conducted at the Wisconsin SLOH are total (i.e., bulk) sediment analyses. Those conducted at EPA Lab, Duluth are screening tests to determine the presence of 2,3,7,8 TCDD/TCDF. As sediment data are generated by the Wisconsin SLOH, they are entered, along with the primary station numbers of the sampling stations, into the computerized national water quality database, STORET (See Table 1, next page). STORET is regularly used by all state and federal agencies and researchers. All sediment contaminant levels (See Tables 2, page 12 and 3, page 13) are included in this report which has been sent to many environmental researchers (See Appendix C). - 8- Table 1 STORET (Primary Station) Numbers CorresDondinci to Samolina Station Numbers Harbor or Sampling STORET No. Estuary Station No. (Primary Station) Latitude/Lonnitude Racine 01 523125 42 44 12/87 46 31 ~" 02 523126 42 44 00/87 46 59 ~~" ~ 03 523127 42 43 46/87 47 22 ~~" ~ 04 523128 42 43 38/87 47 45 ~~" ~ 05 523129 42 43 57/87 48 52 Ashland 06 023051 46 35 40/90 53 47 " 07 023052 46 36 14/90 53 13 Port Wing 08 043062 46 47 28/91 23 00 Marinette 11 383129 45 05 43/87 35 46 " 12 383130 45 05 46/87 35 45 " 13 383131 45 05 45/87 35 55 " 14 383132 45 05 48/87 36 03 " 16 383134 45 05 55/87 36 32 " 22. 383140 45 06 32/87 39 39 Manitowoc 23 363250 44 05 36/87 38 55 ~~" ~ 24 363251 44 05 32/87 39 14 ~~" ~ 25 363252 44 05 52/87 39 45 ~~" ~ 26 363253 44 06 07/87 40 50 Two Rivers 27 363254 44 08 47/87 33 57 ~~" ~ 28 363255 44 08 48/87 33 51 ~~" ~ 29 363256 44 09 11/87 33 50 ~~" ~ 30 363257 44 09 10/87 33 48 ~~" ~ 31 363258 44 09 22/87 33 53 Algoma 32 313050 44 36 29/87 25 55 " 33 313051 44 36 30/87 25 53 ~~" ~ 34 313052 44 36 35/87 26 04 ~~" ~ 35 313053 44 36 32/87 25 56 ~~" ~ 36 313054 44 37 02/87 26 47 Sturgeon Bay 37 153133 44 49 33/87 22 13 " 38 153134 44 48 46/87 20 30 Rowley Bay 39 153135 45 13 50/87 01 50 -9- RESULTS OF SEDIMENT SAMPLING AND ANALYSES Field Results and Observations (See also Appendix D) The sediment samples in this study were predominated by silts and organic matter, particularly near the surface, which includes the bioturbated top layer of 6-10 cm (2.5 - 4 in.). However, there were some exceptions to this trend. Clay predominated in the 3 samples furthest downriver on the Manitowoc River. The sample from the outer harbor in Racine had a thick clayey layer of approximately I in. on top. Sand predominated in a couple of samples from the Root River (Racine) above the Soo Line RR bridge. Fine sand predominated in sample no. 03 and coarse sand predominated in sample no. 04 (further upriver). Harbors with no breakwalls and subject to wave scouring (e.g., Port Wing, Marinette, Two Rivers, Algoma) near the river mouths either yielded samples in those areas which were predominated by sand or were impossible to sample in those areas (in many cases due to coarse sand or rocks) with available equipment. The exception to this was Algoma, where sediment samples collected near the mouth of the Ahnapee River yielded mostly silt, while a sample collected just below the 2nd St. bridge, right descending bank (RDB), was predominantly coarse sand in the top 4 in. Further, unsuccessful attempts were made to collect samples from the 2nd St. bridge down to the marina, left descending bank (LDB). - 10 - The East Twin River (Two Rivers) below the turning basin was too scoured to yield sediment with the means available. A similar case existed near the mouth of the Flag River (Port Wing). The Marinette samples consisted predominantly of fine sand along with wood chips, bark, and rocks. Unsuccessful attempts were made to collect samples along the right descending bank (ROB) from the turning basin to a point approximately 300 ft. above the Ogden St. Bridge. Results of Laboratory Analyses Results of inorganic analyses, along with particle size data, are in Table 2, page 12. Results of organic analyses are in Table 3, page 13. [NARRATIVE SUMMARY TO BE ADDED] Table 2 Results of Inorcanic and Particle Size Analvses of Sediments Inorganic Variables and Particle Size Cadmium Iron Manganese Tot. Vol. (Cd) (Fe) (Mn) Particle Size Distribution Solids Tot Dis Tot Dis Tot Dis Sand Silt Clay % mq/Kg mq/Kg mg/Kg % % % Sampling Station Numbers 01 (Racine) 02 i 03 04 05 " 06 (Ashland) 07 " 08 (Port Wing) 11 (Marinette) 12 13 " 14 " 16 " 22 23 (Manitowoc) 24 25 " 26 27 (Two Rivers) 28 29 " 30 " 31 " 32 (Algoma) 33 " 34 " 35 " 36 37 (Sturgeon Bay) 38 " 39 (Rowley Bay) 12 - Table 3 Results of Oraanic Analyses of Sediment Oraanic Variables 2,3,7,8 TOC PCBs Toxaphene TCDD/TCDF mq/Ka nq/Kg nq/Kg nq/Kq Sampling Station Numbers 01 (Racine) 02 03* " 04 05 06 (Ashland) 07* " 08 (Port Wing) 11*(Marinette) 12 13* " 14* " i6 22 23 (Manitowoc) 24 25* " 26 27 (Two Rivers) 28* 29 30 31 32 (Algoma) 33 " 34 35* 36 37*(Sturgeon Bay) 38 " 39 (Rowley Bay) * Samples for dioxin-furan analyses collected at these stations only - 13 - DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS Physical Characteristics of Sediment Although the estuary sediments sampled in this study were composed of a wide variety of materials (e.g., rocks, coarse sand, fine sand, silt, clay, organic matter, humus, vegetative matter, and wood fibers) and many of the samples were homogeneous mixtures of several types of material, silt predominated. Estuary sediments tend to grade from the larger and heavier materials (e.g., rocks and coarse sand) to the lighter ones (e.g., silt and clay) from the upper end of an estuary to the lower end; however, it is hard to predict what type of material might be found at any given point along the course of a given river. The rivers in this study exhibited a range of different depositional patterns. For example, the Marinette harbor estuary sediment was predominantly composed of fine sand, that of Sturgeon Bay, Algoma, and TwoRivers was predominantly silt, and that of Manitowoc was predominantly clay. Sampling effort was not suf f ici entl y concentrated, i n most of the study area, to determi ne degree of patchiness with respect to sediment type. However, at Algoma, core no. I of sample no. 34 was significantly different, with 4 in. of coarse sand on top, from core no. 2 and cares of samples 32, 33, and 35 app. 500-1,000 ft. downstream, which were fairly homogeneous mixtures composed mainly of silt or silt and organic matter. - 14 - Chemical Characteristics of Sediment Due to the possible patchiness of sediment toxicity levels, the results of the chemical analyses for this study should be interpreted with caution, even though an effort was made to collect sediment samples representative of ambient conditions. Interoretation of Data As mentioned earlier, toxic compounds are closely associated with sediments of a particular type which tend to become deposited in somewhat predictable ways. Past studies have shown that many contaminants are hydrophobic, concentrate in the sediment, and typically do not enter the water column upon resuspension but remain adsorbed to sediment particles, the amount of adsorption depending on sediment size, type, and amount of organic matter (Fulk et al. 1975). Thus, environmental effects of resuspension tend to be localized and temporary and most significantly due to suspended solids (e.g., oxygen depletion resulting from increased turbidity) and heavy metals. Heavy metals distribution in Lake Michigan sediments appear to be controlled by their incorporation into the organic matter and clay mineral in finer grained sediments (Cahill 1981) and river pollution tends to reach maximum levels at some point in the downriver section above the river mouth. Several benthic variables (e.g., tubificid worm density and redox potential discontinuity) were found to follow gradients from the central Milwaukee Harbor channel outward (Boyer and Chen 1988; Hausmann 1974). However, sediment samples can suggest extreme patchiness such as that found in Eagle Harbor, WA, sediments used in lab toxicity tests with an infaunal amphipod (i.e., sediment from one station was acutely toxic -15 - while that from stations within 150 m was not) (Swartz et al. 1989). Some patchiness of sediment contaminant levels may be due to spatial deposi- t ional differences resulting from streamflow and lake current scouring effects. There is typically more variation in levels of contaminants in a cross- section of a river than in the direction of stream flow. All of the above considerations illustrate the unique character of any individual estuary, which is due to the unique interplay of physical and biological processes as well as human activities. The need for more accurate and extensive sediment maps is also apparent. The dynamics of the interaction between polluted sediments and the biota are extremely complex, with effects varying by chemical compound and species of organism, and include the possibility that contaminants not only biomagnify as they shift very rapidly to the food chain but that they become transformed on the way up, possibly to more toxic forms (Ludwig 1989). Recommendations The best ambient data will probably come from the silty sediment samples. Silty sediment predominates in the harbor estuarine environment and adsorbs toxic compounds more readily than other sediment types. The basic strategy of using a gravity corer with a backup Ponar dredge to sample depositional areas relatively remote from point source pollution seems to have been a sound one for this study. A future study may improve on it by making an accurate sedi ment map of an i deal estuary for a p ilIot study (e. g. , Two Ri vers, Algoma, or Marinette) and concentrate sampling in the areas of silt deposition. Ideally, stations should be sampled at least twice during the year duri ng the year i n order to study the ef fects of bi olog ical , phys ical, -16 - and chemical changes over time. The above estuaries also have good silt depositional areas above the urban, industrial areas. The data generated by this study should fill some holes in the data base for certain contaminants at certain locations and bolster some existing data related to ambient sediment conditions. However, due to the limited number of samples and the possible patchiness of sediment toxicity, data from this study should be interpreted with caution and with other chemical, physical, and biological data. For example, if a piece of data indicates a relatively high level of contamination, it could be an indication of a contaminant lens and, conversely, a piece of data indicating a relatively low level of contamination could reflect an isolated area of nondeposition of pollutants due to a unique condition such as scouring or bioturbation. The main uses of the data from this study will probably be in formulating future guidelines for specifying predredge sampling protocol and to shape further studies. For example, if toxics such as dioxins and furans are found only at low or nondetectable levels in a given area, such data would support the precluding of predredge sampling there for dioxins and furans. If toxic substances, such as dioxins or PCBs, which bioaccumulate, are found at significant levels in sediment which is also known to make such compounds bioavailable, such sediment would be a good candidate for studies of food chain pathways of such compounds. Also,significant levels of toxic compounds upriver from known point sources of such compounds would indicate an area for further investigation of possible nonpoint pollution sources and abatement efforts. Because sediment is likely the main source of toxic materials to the aquatic biota and food chain and since bioavailability of these contaminants depends on the unique characteristics of any particular sediment, - 17 - bloassays appear to be the best means available for evaluating the environmental impact of sediment. Further, since toxic compounds are known to become transformed as they work their way up the food chain, further study is needed in tracking particular toxic compounds from benthos to fish and birds. -18 - LITERATURE CITED 1. Sullivan, J., et al., "Report of the Technical Subcommittee on Determination of Dredge Material Suitability for In-Water Disposal," 1989, Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Madison, WI. 2. Servos, M.R., and Muir, D.C.G., "Use of Lake Mesocosms to Study Bioaccumulation of OCDD and 1,3,6,8-TCDD from Sediments," 1989, Environment Canada, N.W.R.I., Burlington, Ontario, and Department of Fisheries and Oceans, Freshwater Institute, Winnipeg, Manitoba. 3. Herbert, C.E., and Haffner, G.D., "Feeding Strategies and Contaminant Distribution in Forage Fish Communities, "1989, Great Lakes Institute, University of Windsor, Windsor, Ontario. 4. Rogerson, P.F. et al., "Chemical and Biological Characteristics of Black Rock Harbor Dredged Material ," 1985, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Environmental Research Laboratory, Narragansett, Rhode Island. 5. Fulk R. et al., "Laboratory Study of the Release of Pesticide and PCB Materials to the Water Column During Dredging and Disposal Operations," 1975, Envirex, Inc., Milwaukee for U.S. Department of Commerce, Washington, D.C. 6. Ludwig M.E. and Ludwig, J.P., "Food Habits of Double-Crested Cormorants in Lakes Huron, Michigan and Superior: Implications for Toxic Chemical Contaminant Transfer from Fish to Cormorants," 1989, Ecological Research Services, Inc., Bay City, Michigan. 7. Rathbun, J., AScI Corporation, Grosse Ile, Michigan. 8. Teppen, T., et al., "A Pilot Study on Effects of Hydraulic Dredging and Disposal on Water Quality of the Upper Mississippi River," 1978, Water Quality Work Group, Great River Environmental Action Team I, Coordinated by U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 9. Hem, J.D., "Study and Interpretation of the Chemical Characteristics of Natural Water," U.S. Geological Survey Water Supply Paper 1473, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. 10. Khalid, P.A., et al., "Transformation of Heavy Metals and Plant Nutrients in Dredged Sediments as Affected by Oxidation-Reduction Potential and pH," Vol. I: Literature Review of Dredged Material Research Progress, Contract Report D-77-4, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, Mississippi. 11. Cahill, R.A., Geochemistrv of Recent Lake Michican Sediments, Illinois State Geological Survey, 1981. 12. Swartz, R.C. et al., "Acute Toxicity of Sediment from Eagle Harbor, Washington, to the Infaunal Amphipod Rhepoxvnius Ambronius," 1989, Environ. Toxicol. Chem., 8: 215-222. - 19 - 13. Boyer, L.F., and Chen, E.J., "Sediment-Profile Camera Study of Milwaukee Harbor Sediments," 1988, J. Great Lakes Res., 14: 444-465. 14. Hausmann, P.So, MSC. Dissertation, 1974, University of Wisconsin- Milwaukee. - 20 - APPENDIX A MAPS OF HARBORS SAMPLED AT L39 Date~~~ 38 *&"* "T I i '36 pea 27~~~~~~~~ *S;,- ~ ~~~~~~ 23 tsH F30.Ra... *IU~~~~~~ad~~~~ttVE j .a . _1 38~ ~~~~~~~~~~ I G t0 I~~~~I 'I ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~~~~~~CL o f "okcsI0 so* C OOS 01- 1111NE Lake Michigan~~05 SeietSmligSain A2 -~ MINNESOTA 67 Lake Superior Sediment Sampling Stations I-~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~sd :34 ~ ~~~~~~ -j~ on~~g '4~~~~~~~~~~~~O 1~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~1 --~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~A - . d'~~ I. J~~ /~~J~e!CI ~~~~~~~~~~~A" . C ~~~~~~~~~~ L ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ' l.A t E~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~1 3 g ~ * ~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ..A ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ .- I - - 0~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~A F Wdl ~ ~ ~~~~~ -J *-' I - ~~~~~~~~19 liii A3 aoi;1 �~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~M -V65pr r hol~ KPFrv iS IC~t 8 ee~~�r~ IP �'e: ''~,,a * 4tljd II 0~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~0 O0~~~~.00*,l "** -..L,,. ~~~~~ ~~ .~ .",~.. isi .... .0.L=i. C C. �a I / , ?.~~~~~~~~~~~~, L---L T~ \AHE 001T CUEBC "m- -.: ,.d. L . - 0, _.. 11-,9,T;: // Li os a _._! - *CP~~~~~~~~N~ NI3 Af? 4M?~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~&Af eM C~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~irl .- I A M A ob'... ! ~ ~. / d* " _'~*u:~~ (*'I __;' .M....': I, I'gCI CHIC I.A' 1u� ~ L ._ U:V, .T AEO. ,ff . I.~~~~~~~~3 JUNE 127 /In H i III I -- WWJLJ LLt L. ~_;:,/I IU\7� UUc a~ �H~~~s ' '-'CI ICIL K _~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ I00000~ r ,r ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~eiW , flDGi 'L[~' ~ Z W ] D ] E L j ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~g~~ Iaa I VICI ' 11 T J iA ,y~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~UGI CA iPl~ III 1111111~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~1 JUN !eiul?2 Racine Harbor SediemtC HApiO R Rain Harbor Seimn Srfmplingwt Stations.LD.(14 C600% OF ENGINEES V s Ut RMY WMT 1. ton . U. C. -0. ftn mm..dU M-6..~W� :441. P. I*#., M II.4 A41, A 4,.M ol *WAS -:0. 14 .4. ,mus a. amI L r i a~ aml.. 1.1S&S ft-..5 @4. 010.. I.. IL : I'N.~~~./~~ VlIftTY MAP 4.~~ L~~m Dam ~. AU - a wC~~~~~VfQ u~~~~~~aaoSa, a '~~~~~~~~~~~It Jr.~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~. /~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~0 6 -~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Ita D~~~~~~~ie. ~~~\.PE LAEB0 -PODCTEAE %GOWNa T H U S G MLATESUERIA CAGORY1-8 ASHLAND HARB3OR t ..a.. WISCONSIN ' C&.m Ga ~~~~~~a. .44 ..esil~m K Ashland Harbor Sediment Sampling Stations CORPS cor ENGIN~EER 9 "WI. of #r:;: Pa. * -O4GLD 041(81fsea Pv*at I-Gt md,~ s WefIf4itoL 060.fe 'a la. I' ~~~(T~~ : ~VICINITY MAP aI aS 0 .0 is s 4~~~~~~~~~.1 I-ATE ETICtE / D.~~~N UNCLASSIFE /l ~~~~~~~POR WING, Lie.RBOR P~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~si ZZF Gro. i1:Z~~~Zz~~iii1:2 UPAN UN CONFINE z~~~~a~. ___ IN-W S.ATR1 TOTALL CONFINED? 0Th4 Port~~~~~~~~~~ i UPANDo SedimenY COplNgFtaIoNED - - *.. . u' S. - - A6 U. S. ARMY M I MI . i 3- (~~~~~~~~~~aA. I"E C ? I M, Af I l~dIC HI A I S~~~~~~uQG~~~EON - ae *'~~~~~~~~~~I SU&M.C VICIINITY MAP I!II~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ I ~~~~~~~~~~~SALGaSC.E OF MILES 'p~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~' toO OD 20 is~~~~~~~~~~i~ C. s O-Jr ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~GDT 3 FT,-~A1 f I~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~I L r c~~~~~A l amC o~~~~l ,*adT PROJECT DEPTHS AND SOUNDINGS ARE REERRED TO LOW WATER DATUM 576f EETABVEMEAN WATER LEVEL ATFATHERPOINT,DUEICI.S 6LLD. (19555 1INERIIATONA GRATLAKES DATUM)I c~~~~~~~~ ~~~WORK REMAINING TO, BE DONE SHIOWN THUS! wri-ovd to ME NOMINEE HARBOR B RIVE oix"O-o f#14 I ~~~~MICHIGAN a WISCONSIN IN 2 SHE5SEETS~ 30 JUNE 1973 -tT rk, k --ts cp La 4A W W ci ak La AD 4P dD Jr am 1% Imp to CD W s, 40 'Pk. IP Rk Nk ab 4w cb C. la W M I'M lob 44 IWO > to g) z la 11.0 40 40 z z OM, SUOT~IS u-r-dmPS quamipaS aoqael OOAO2Tu~w if~ ~~L XiLZLI [In =EEE~~~ _ 4�LIZD Ii:T.~~ 07 *~F q \7= * i i z~~ w f l J 4 B 8 H MH *~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ pI Ca 7Ja elf~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~1I _ _ _ x4U t:! ; -. X. X. A9 3 CORPS OF ENCINEERS U.S. A R MY TM MOM I I ~ 0 -aram RI B~gtAWS 30 d D6 4 '4 3C3~II~ ~ACU ACT50112 3cc TS .~~ 3. 1573MORAL PAPT. LA?,. P. L2.3 14, .4r hIa ? MyZP 1 I,~~~~~~~~~~~~AC SiIS. MS? DWM ,.,s.70 ~ . *LSL JUS. aa~~~~~~~~~c LD a L AKE ~'VICH/qA N lw~xT 3. 11123 am&*h Me ~~ 35Ef1, I S~~~~Grw ILT )a.-- S6 BII. 361 4. . #k W=.. / �cUDRGh AIA DIS FS AL CATEGORIES l no AL UNRESTRICTED ~~ I ~~~~~ ~~~TWO RIVERS HARBOR mOmf WAS"Iftsyc WISCT0ONSCIN? VICIPAITY M A I lI NmSET"I 04.1 Cor pacy SCAE ~w M A E S A M a m ad Two~~~~~~~~ aier I C 3 c m 40 U. S. ARNIT ENGINEER 013TRICT. DETROIT TwoRivrsHarbor Sediment Samplinz Stations A1O CORPS OF ENGINEERS .SAY N~~ia 2. 1671 P~~~~~~~IU ~~~ I UV%$ as "MR &hit~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~~~~* *Iva* bi~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~i~m U'. -' ')~66 SCftc or MAPE 3~~~~~~~~~~~~~AUO nI ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Si A. AIDe awesowte AT ""Tm Ej, POW, aOUCUEC 1.LO- 0955) tINwT 91ATICKA4 GREAT LAKES DATUM I D)REDGED MATERIAL CATEGORY: 10-77 ALGOMA HARBOR L'NCONFINED UPiLA6 WISCONSIN UNCLASSIFIED RON U.S AtYNi~mEER OISTRMCT. DETROIT All a 1 1 a~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~3 S ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ 3 ~~~~~~~~~~~~ iij..~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~L %.K V~~~~~I K~~~~~ 4 f~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ A12 SISTER BAY QUADRANGLE N WISCONSIN-DOOR CO. 7.5 MINUTE SERIES (TOPOGRAPHIC) )RY SURVEY NFJ SISTER BAY IS' QUADRANGLE 96 2'30" 497 F t 28 E R29E '98 499 2 770 000 FEET 87*CO' 45'15' V_ ;I rfravW17 - -sn i,: 530 000 'K FEET - = -7 - \~~ ~~7-~i~' NEWPOAr D RIVE *mon - *nvE 13 � I. ..~~~~~~~~~~~~~. - Ulk\ '.L........- ...... ,,~ ~~~ - -�-----~-- 20I \~~ ~~ /: -24 - - -u 610J"09 r I E ' '~~~~~~~wes \* y -~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~9 norm~~~~~~~ - ~ ~ ~ Ts �593 �T 2 -- - "-'302NEWP RT.- -I ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ AI ~~~~~~'fRowleys Bay(MnRie)SdmnSapigttos - - - d $. �P~~~~~~~~~~- t/' NO~~M - ) RoRowley Bay (Mn Rvr)Sdiet SapigSain 'i. Pa ~ 4 ~ '1B,~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ -r -.l APPENDIX B HARBOR LOCATIONS SAMPLED Racine (Root River) Station 01: Outer harbor, app. 25 ft. in from north breakwall. Station 02: App. 300 ft. below Hwy. 32 bridge and 75 ft. off right descending bank (RDB). Station 03: App. 600 ft. above Soo Line RR bridge (i.e., at Azarian and Sons Co.) and 20 ft. off RDB (i.e., at corner of retaining wall). Station 04: App. 200 ft. below C&NW RR bridge and 15 ft. off left descending bank (LDB). Station 05: Off middle of Lincoln Park's riverside parking lot and app. 2 ft. off LDB (Station not in map coverage). Ashland (Lake SuDerior) Station 06: West channel, app. 1,000 ft. off west dock, C. Reiss Coal Co. Station is in Lake Superior nearshore depositional area subject to dredging. Station 07: East basin, app. 800 ft. off Soo Line ore dock and between 2 rad buoys. Station similar to Station 06 but in a separate area subject to dredging. Port Wina (Flaa River) Station 08: Midway along length of turning basin and app. 30 ft. off north wall. Station representative of harbor limited depositional area. Marinette (Menominee River) Station 11: App. 500 ft. below Ogden Street bridge and 10 ft. off RDB. Station 12: App. 500 ft. below Ogden Street bridge and 75 ft. off LDB. Station 13: App. 200 ft. above Ogden Street bridge and 75 ft. off RDB. Station 14: App. 1,000 ft. above Ogden Street bridge and 50 ft. off LDB (Just below retaining wall). Station 16: App. 2,500 ft. above Ogden Street bridge and 30 ft. off LDB (Lower end of boat slip). Marinette (Menominee River) B1 Station 22: Above upper Scott flowage, app. 15 ft. off Indian Mound pt. (LDB). Sturgeon Bay Station 37: App. midway between the two bridges in Sturgeon Bay (i.e., midway between the two sets of channel buoys) and app. in mid-channel. Station 38: App. midway between the two inlets to Sturgeon Bay east of the Bascule bridge and on south edge of navigational channel. Rowlev Bay (Mink River) Station 39: At mouth of river off LDB and out as far as emergent vegetation. B2 APPENDIX C LIST OF REVIEWERS Mr. William Lehman Mr. Stan Nogalski Mr. Dave Jones Mr. Richard Rost Coastal Management Program Mr. Neal Kutchery Dept. of Administration Wis. Dept. of Natural Resources P.O. Box 16 Mr. Scott Hausmann, WZ/6 Marinette, WI 54143 Ms. Mary Ellen Vollbrecht, WZ/6 Ms. Linda Talbot, WR/2 Mr. Duane Lahti Mr. John Sullivan, WR/2 DNR, Brule Area Mr. Russell Dunst, TS/2 Box 125 Mr. Jeffrey Steuer, WR/2 Brule, WI 54820 Mr. Ronald Martin, WR/2 Mr. Terence Lohr, WR/2 Mr. Ted Smith Mr. Kenneth Johnson, WZ/6 Wis. DNR, Northwest Dist. Department of Natural Resources Hwy. 70 W, Box 309 GEF 2 Spooner, WI 54801 P.O. Box 7921 Madison, WI 53707 Mr. Michael Coshun Wis. Dept. of Natural Resources Mr. William Sonzogni Great Lakes Research Facility Wisconsin State Laboratory of 600 E. Greenfield Ave. Hygiene Milwaukee, WI 53204 465 Henry Mall Madison, WI 53706 Dr. Arthur Brooks Dr. David Petering Ms. Ellen Fischer Dr. Tony Remsen Dept. of Transportation Mr. Fred Binkowski Harbor Assistance Program, R. Dr. Larry Boyer 701 Mr. Robert Paddock 4802 Sheboygan Ave. Dr. Val J. Klump Madison, WI 53705 Mr. David Bolgrien Dr. John Krezoski Mr. Ronald Fassbender Center for Great Lakes Studies Mr. Dennis Weisensel 600 E. Greenfield Ave. Mr. Tim Rasman Milwaukee, WI 53204 DNR, Lake Michigan Dist. 1125 N. Military Ave. Box 10448 Green Bay, WI 54307 Mr. Gary L. Nelson Mr. Jeff Bode Mr. Robert Wakeman Mr. Steve Mace DNR, Southeast Dist. 2300 N. Dr. M. L. King, Jr. Dr. P.O. Box 12436 Milwaukee, WI 53212 C1 Dr. Anders Andren Mr. Joseph E. Rathbun University of Wisconsin Large Lakes Research Station Hydraulics Laboratory 9311 Groh Road 660 N. Park Street Grosse Ile, MI 48138 Madison, WI 53706 Mr. Marc Tuchman Dr. David W. Armstrong EPA, Region 5 Water Chemistry Laboratory 5WQS University of Wisconsin 230 S. Dearborn Street Madison, WI 53706 Chicago, IL 60604 Dr. John Magnuson Mr. David Cowgill Center for Limnology U.S. EPA University of Wisconsin GLNPO, 5GL Madison, WI 53706 230 S. Dearborn Street Chicago, IL 60604 Dr. Richard Peterson Dept. of Pharmacy Mr. Glenn Warren University of Wisconsin U.S. EPA Madison, WI 53706 GLNPO, 5GL 230 S. Dearborn Street Dr. Paul Sager Chicago, IL 60604 Dr. Hallett Harris Dr. James Wiersma Dr. John P. Giesy College of Environmental Sciences Dept. of Fisheries and Wildlife University of Wisconsin-Green Bay Pesticide Research Center and Center Green Bay, WI 54302 for Environmental Toxicology Michigan State University Dr. Erik Christensen East Lansing, MI 48824 University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee Milwaukee, WI 53201 Ms. Beth Morgan Dr. C. Frank Shaw III Illinois State Geological Survey Dept. of Chemistry 615 E. Peabody Dr. University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee Champaign, IL 61820 Milwaukee, WI 54201 Ms. Janet Keough Ms. Mary Balcer U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service CLSES National Wetland Research Center University of Wisconsin-Superior 1010 Gause Blvd. Superior, WI 54880 Slidell, LA 70401 Dr. Donald Bahnik Mr. Cliff Kraft University of Wisconsin-Superior U.W. Sea Grant Program Superior, WI 54880 ES-105, Sea Grant, U.W. University of Wisconsin-Green Bay Green Bay, WI 54311 C2 Ms. Janet Smith Mr. Eric Waldmer U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Milwaukee Metro Sewerage Dist. Room 480 Wood Hall, U.W. Green Bay 250 W. Seeboth Str. Green Bay, WI 54311 Milwaukee, WI 53201-3049 Mr. William J. Brah Mr. Craig E. Herbert Center for the Great Lakes University of Windsor 435 N. Michigan Ave. Great Lakes Institute/MNR Suite 1408 Windsor N9B 3P4 Chicago, IL 60611 Ontario, Canada Mr. Matthew E. Ludwig Mr. Trefor B. Reynoldson Ecological Research Services Environment Canada 612 N. Lincoln 867 Lakeshore Rd. Bay City, MI 48718 Burlington, L7R 4A6 Ontario, Canada Dr. Dominic M. Di Toro Manhattan College Mr. Mark Servos Environmental Engineering Environment Canada Bronx, N.Y. 10471 867 Lakeshore Rd. Burlington, L7R 4A6 Mr. David A. Gruber Ontario, Canada Milwaukee Metro Sewerage Dist. 250 W. Seeboth Street Milwaukee, WI 53201-3049 Mr. Christopher Magruder Milwaukee Metro Sewerage Dist. 250 W. Seeboth St. Milwaukee, WI 53201-3049 C3 APPENDIX D FIELD OBSERVATIONS OF SEDIMENT HARBOR: RACINE 16 JUN 89 Station 01 Time: 1100 Sampling equipment:gravity corer and Petite Ponar Number of cores collected:2 Number of grabs collected:3 Core no. i - Extrusion length: 8.5 in. Sediment characteristics: homogeneous mixture of sand and silt with mostly silt in upper half and grading down to mostly fine sand in lower portion of core. Several oligochaetes in upper half of core. Core no. 2 Extrusion length: 3 in. Sediment characteristics: thick clayey layer on top grading to mixture of silt and fine sand on bottom. Station 02 Time: 1200 Sampling equipment:gravity corer Number of cores collected:2 Core no. 1 Extrusion length: 16.5 in. Sediment characteristics: fairly homogeneous mixture of mostly silt and organic matter with some sand. Thin layer of gravel at lower end. Dark color and septic odor. Core no. 2 Extrusion length: no measured Sediment characteristics: dark mixture of mostly silt and clay with some organic matter in top portion of core. Grades to mostly fine sand in bottom third of core. Septic odor. Di Station 03 Time: 1300 Sampling equipment:gravity corer Number of cores collected:2 Core no. 1 Extrusion length: 3.5 in. Sediment characteristics: homogeneous mixture of mostly fine sand with some silt. Core no. 2 Extrusion length: 3 in. Sediment characteristics: same as core no. 1 Station 04 Time: 1430 Sampling equipment:gravity corer Number of cores collected:1 Core no. 1 Extrusion length: 9 in. Sediment characteristics: over 90% coarse sand with some silt. Dark color speckled with lighter- colored coarse sand. Slight septic odor. Station 05 1800 Sampling equipment: sample collected by wading into shallow water and scooping sediment to depth of app. 5 in. with large spoon. Sediment characteristics: dark brown mixture of mostly silt and sand with some organic mater. HARBOR: ASHLAND 29 JUN 89 Station 06 Time: 1300 Sampling equipment:gravity corer Number of cores collected:4 D2 HARBOR: ASHLAND 29 JUN 89 Station 06 Time: 1300 Core no. I Extrusion length: 6 in. Sediment characteristics: homogeneous mixture of silt and medium to fine grained sand. Equal amounts of sand and silt. Tan color. Core no. 2 Extrusion length: 7.5 in. Sediment characteristics: similar to core no.1. Core no. 3 Extrusion length: 4 in. Sediment characteristics: similar to core no. i except to 2.5 in. is siltier. Core no. 4 Extrusion length: 1 in. Sediment characteristics: top 5 in. grades from mixture of sand and silt which is mostly sand to one which is mostly silt. Layer from 5-7.5 in. is mostly silt. Bottom 3.5 in. is all sand. Station 07 Time: 1400 Sampling equipment:gravity corer Number of cores collected:4 Core no. 1 Extrusion length: 9.5 in. Sediment characteristics: top 5 in. is tan- colored and mostly silt. Layer from 5-7 in. is lighter in color and sandier. Bottom 2.5 in. is darker (coffee color) mixture of mostly silt with some clay and organic matter. D3 HARBOR: ASHLAND 29 JUN 89 Station 06 Time: 1300 Core no. 2 Extrusion length: 9.5 in. Sediment characteristics: similar to core no. 1 but is tan-colored and appears more homogeneous. Core no. 3 Extrusion length: 11 in. Sediment characteristics: upper half of core grades form mostly silt (with some clay and organic matter and a slight amount of bark and vegetative matter) to mostly sand. Bottom half is mostly fine sand. Core no. 4 Extrusion length: 12 in. Sediment characteristics: similar to core no. 3 except that there is less vegetative and organic matter. HARBOR: PORT WING 30 JUN 89 Station 08 Time: 0845 Sampling equipment:gravity corer Number of cores collected:4 Core no. 1 Extrusion length: 10 in. Sediment characteristics: fairly homogeneous mixture of sand and silt; some organic matter in upper third of core; tan color. Core no. 2 Extrusion length: 9 in. Sediment characteristics: upper half: mixture of sand, silt, and organic matter. Lower half: fine sand and silt; increase in organic matter. HARBOR: PORT WING 30 JUN 89 D4 Station 08 Time: 0845 Core no. 3 Extrusion length: 10 in. Sediment characteristics: homogeneous mixture of fine and medium grain sand, silt, and organic matter. Middle 3 in. layer of fine sand. Core no. 4 Extrusion length: 12 in. Sediment characteristics: similar to core no. 1. HARBOR: MARINETTE 1 AUG 89 Station 11 Time: 1900 Sampling equipment:Petite Ponar Number of grab samples:3 Sediment characteristics: all 3 grabs are mixture of sand, wood chips, and bark. Station 12 Time: 1800 Sampling equipment:gravity corer Number of cores collected:2 Core no. 1 Extrusion length: 7 in. Sediment characteristics: homogeneous mixture of mostly sand and some silt, but top 4 in. is dark in color and bottom 3 in. is brown. Core no. 2 Extrusion length: 9 in. Sediment characteristics: mostly finesand with a 1-2 in. oily layer on bottom. D5 HARBOR: MARINETTE 1 AUG 89 Station 13 Time:X Sampling equipment:Petite Ponar Number of grab samples:3 Sediment characteristics: all 3 grab samples mostly fine sand with a lot of wood chips and bark. Station 14 Time: 1300 Sampling equipment:Petite Ponar Number of grab samples:4 Sediment characteristics: all 4 grab samples mostly fine sand with rocks, wood chips, and some organic matter. Station 16 Time: 1145 Sampling equipment:Petite Ponar Number of grab samples:4 Grab no. 1 Sediment characteristics: dark, homogeneous mixture of 50% sand and 50% silt; some organic matter and oligochaetes present. Grab nos. 2-4 Sediment characteristics: similar to grab no. 1 plus rocks, bark, wood chips. Station 22 Time: 1200 Sampling equipment:gravity corer Number of cores collected:4 Core no. 1 Extrusion length: 3 in. Sediment characteristics: fine sand and unconsolidated silt with wood chips and a slight amount of pea gravel. D6 HARBOR: MARINETTE I AUG 89 Station 22 Time: 1200 Core no. 2 Extrusion length: 6 in. Sediment characteristics: 2 in. silt and fine sand overlying 4 in. fine sand; stonefly larvae near top of core. Core no. 3 Extrusion length: 2 in. Sediment characteristics: 1 in. silt overlying i in. sand; stonefly larvae on top of core. Core no. 4: not examined. HARBOR: MANITOWOC 8 AUG 89 Station 23 Time: 1400 Sampling equipment:gravity corer Number of cores collected:2 Core no. 1 Extrusion length: 14.5 in. Sediment characteristics: fairly homogeneous mixture of mostly clay with some sand and vegetative matter. Core no. 2 Extrusion length: 16 in. Sediment characteristics: same as core no. 1 except for a bottom layer of 3 in. composed or more vegetative matter. Station 24 Time: 1415 Sampling equipment:gravity corer Number of cores collected:2 D7 HARBOR: MANITOWOC 8 AUG 89 Station 24 Time: 1415 Core no. 1 Extrusion length: 10 in. Sediment characteristics: top half of core mostly clay with some sand and organic matter. Bottom half grades to mostly sand with some clay and an increase in organic matter. Core no. 2 Extrusion length: 15.5 in. Sediment characteristics: same as core no. 1. Station 25 Time: 1445 Sampling equipment:gravity corer Number of cores collected:2 Core no. 1 Extrusion length: 20 in. Sediment characteristics: top 9 in. is dark, loose, silty organic material and clay. Bottom 11 in. is similar except that it is more consolidated and clayey. Core is very homogeneous and mostly clay. Core no. 2 Extrusion length: 19 in. Sediment characteristics: same as core no. 1. Station 26 Time: 1645 Sampling equipment:gravity corer Number of cores collected:2 Core no. 1 Extrusion length: 10.5 in. Sediment characteristics: mostly silt with some clay, sand, and organic matter in top half of core grading to a greater % clay and sand toward bottom. D8 HARBOR: MANITOWOC 8 AUG 89 Station 26 Time: 1645 Core no. 2 Extrusion length: 12 in. Sediment characteristics: similar to core no. I plus some pea gravel in top half of core and a few snail and clam shells at app. 4 in. level in core. HARBOR: TWO RIVERS 9 AUG 89 Station 27 Time: 0915 Sampling equipment:gravity corer Number of cores collected:2 Core no. 1 Extrusion length: 8 in. Sediment characteristics: upper two-thirds of core is dark mixture of mostly silt with some sand an da little organic matter. Lower third of core consists of more clay and organic matter. Slight septic odor. Core no. 2 Extrusion length: 8 in. Sediment characteristics: similar to coreno.1. Station 28 Sampling equipment:gravity corer Number of cores collected2 Core no. 1 Extrusion length: 11.5 in. Sediment characteristics: upper half of core consists of mostly silt and clay with some sand. Lower half is similar, but with an increase in % sand and presence of some organic matter. Core is a dark color and has a slight septic odor. D9 HARBOR: TWO RIVERS 9 AUG 89 Station 28 Core no. 2 Extrusion length: 18 in. Sediment characteristics: core not examined. Station 29 Time: 1000 Sampling equipment:gravity corer Number of cores collected:2 Core no. 1 Extrusion length: 8 in. Sediment characteristics: dark mixture of sand, silt, and clay with % clay increasing greatly in bottom 2 in. Core also contains some organic matter and a few small clam shells, pieces of tree branches, and wood chips. Core no. 2 Extrusion length: 18 in. Sediment characteristics: similar to core no. I except that clay lay er begins 2-3 in. from top of core and no clam shells are evident. Station 30 Time: 1015 Sampling equipment:gravity corer Number of cores collected:2 Core no. 1 Extrusion length: 14 in. Sediment characteristics: mixture of sand, silt, clay, and organic matter, with the organic matter increasing greatly in bottom few inches. Wood chips also present in bottom few inches. Core no. 2 Extrusion length: 17.5 in. Sediment characteristics: similar to core no. 1 except for small amount of oil or grease and parts of crayfish at mid-core with strong odor of decay. D10 HARBOR: TWO RIVERS 9 AUG 89 Station 31 Time: 1130 Sampling equipment:gravity corer Number of cores collected:3 Core no. 1 Extrusion length: 3.5 in. Sediment characteristics: mostly silt, clay, and organic matter with a little sand. Core no. 2 Extrusion length: 6.5 in. Sediment characteristics: similar to core no. 1 except for greater % clay (and presence of wood chips) deeper in core. Core no. 3 Extrusion length: 11 in. Sediment characteristics: similar to core no. 2 except consistency is more consolidated and hardpacked (humus-like). HARBOR: ALGOMA 9 AUG 89 Station 32 Time: 1345 Sampling equipment:gravity corer Number of cores collected:2 Core no. 1 Extrusion length: 12 in. Sediment characteristics: top layer of 7.5 in. consists of mostly dark silt with some sand and organic matter. Middle 3 in. layer of very light- colored, fine sand. Bottom 1.5 in. layer of mostly gray-colored sand and some organic matter. HARBOR: ALGOMA 9 AUG 89 Station 32 Time: 1345 Core no. 2 Extrusion length: 10.5 in. Sedimentcharacteristics: similar to coreno.1. Station 33 Time: 1400 Sampling equipment:gravity corer Number of cores collected:2 Core no. 1 Extrusion length: 13 in. Sediment characteristics: consists mostly of dark mixture of silt and organic matter with some sand. Percent sand increases with depth. Thin layer of light-colored, fine sand at mid- core and stone near bottom of core. Core no. 2 Extrusion length: 16 in. Sediment characteristics: similar to core no. 1. Station 34 Sampling equipment:gravity corer Number of cores collected:2 Core no. I Extrusion length: 8.5 in. Sediment characteristics: upper half of core mostly coarse sand with some silt. Lower half of core becomes like humus with a lot of organic matter and silt and a little sand. A few pieces of twigs at mid-core. Core no. 2 Extrusion length: 3.5 in. Sediment characteristics: top inch consists of dark mixture of mostly silt with some sand. Bottom 2.5 in. is mostly gray, fine sand. D12 HARBOR: ALGOMA 9 AUG 89 Station 35 Sampling equipment:gravity corer Number of cores collected:3 Core no. 1 Extrusion length: 9 in. Sediment characteristics: top 7 in. consists of dark mixture of silt, sand, and organic matter. Bottom 2 in. consists of greater percentage of sand. Core no. 2 Extrusion length: 13 in. Sediment characteristics: top 9 in. consists of dark mixture of silt, sand, and organic matter. Bottom 4 in. consists of a greater % of sand. Top and bottom layers separated by thin band of light, very fine sand. Core no. 3 Extrusion length: 11.5 in. Sediment characteristics: top 6 in. consists of dark mixture of silt, sand, and organic matter. Bottom 5.5 in. is dark mixture of silt and organic matter with a humus-like consistency. Station 36 Time: 1615 Sampling equipment:gravity corer Number of cores collected:2 Core no. 1 Extrusion length: 19 in. Sediment characteristics: very homogeneous, dark mixture of mostly silt and organic matter with percent organic matter increasing with depth and giving sediment a humus-like consistency. D13 HARBOR: ALGOMA 9 AUG 89 Station 36 Time: 1615 Core no. 2 Extrusion length: 23 in. Sediment characteristics: similar to core no. 1. Bottom 2-3 in. have reddish-brown color. HARBOR: STURGEON BAY 10 AUG 89 Station 37 Time: 1530 Sampling equipment:gravity corer Number of cores collected:3 Core no. 1 Extrusion length: 14 in. Sediment characteristics: very homogeneous, dark mixture of mostly silt with some sand, clay, and organic matter. Amount of clay increases in bottom few inches of core. Small rock at bottom of core. Core no. 2 Extrusion length: 15 in. Sediment characteristics: similar to core no. 1, but more clay present and almost no organic matter apparent. Thin streaks of light-colored sand at mid-core. Core no. 3 Extrusion length: 14 in. Sediment characteristics: similar to cores 1 and 2. A very small clam and snail shells in lower half or core. Small rock at bottom of core. Station 38 Time: 1745 Sampling equipment:gravity corer Number of cores collected:2 D14 HARBOR: STURGEON BAY 10 AUG 89 Station 38 Time: 1745 Core no. 1 Extrusion length: 13 in. Sediment characteristics: consists mostly of dark gray mixture of silt and clay with some sand and organic matter. Core is fairly homogeneous but percent clay increases greatly with depth. rnav nh , DATE DUE in. similar to core no.1. HARBOR: ROWLEY B7 14 Aug 89 Station 39 Time: 1815 ple was collected by r mouth and scooping in. with large spoon. homogeneous, gray th some fine sand and GAYLORD No. 2333 PR N1EC S A 3 6668 14108 2828