Assessment of Water Quality in the Brokenhead River Watershed

Assessment of Water Quality in the 

Brokenhead River Watershed 

Brian G. Kotak, President 

Miette Environmental Consulting Inc. 

August 2009 

Manitoba Model Forest Project Report 07-2-63 

1 | P age

Table of Contents 

Executive Summary ................................................................................................... 3 

Acknowledgements .................................................................................................. 4 

Introduction .............................................................................................................. 4 

Methods .............................................................................................................. 6 

Results and Discussion ..................................................................................... 10 

Overview of the Brokenhead River Watershed .................................................. 10 

General .............................................................................................................. 10 

Land Cover .............................................................................................................. 13 

General Soil Characteristics ....................................................................................... 17 

Agricultural Activities ....................................................................................... 25 

Historical Water Quality ...................................................................................... 25 

Water Quality in 2007 and the Relationships Between Watershed Attributes and 

Recent Water Quality .................................................................................................. 28 

Training of Youth ................................................................................................. 37 

Involvement of Brokenhead Ojibway Nation Students ...................................... 37 

Involvement of Students from Springfield Collegiate ...................................... 38 

Recommendations .................................................................................................. 41 

Literature Cited .................................................................................................. 41 

Appendix A Water Quality Data for the Brokenhead River, 2007 .......................... 43 

Appendix B Photos of Sampling Stations in the 2007 Study ...................................... 47 

2 | P age

Executive Summary 

A pilot project was initiated by the Manitoba Model Forest in 2007 to examine water quality in 

the Brokenhead River from its headwaters south of the Trans Canada Highway to its terminus at 

Lake Winnipeg. The project was a joint initiative between the Manitoba Model Forest, 

Brokenhead Ojibway Nation and the Brokenhead River Restoration Committee (and its many 

partners, including Manitoba Water Stewardship and Fisheries and Oceans Canada). Water 

quality was studied at 6 sites along the length of the Brokenhead River in the summer and fall of 

2007. Water quality at sites located in the southern 1/3 of the watershed was significantly 

different from those sites located in the northern 1/3 of the watershed. The central part of the 

watershed represented a transition zone. Nutrients such as total phosphorus and forms of 

nitrogen, as well as turbidity were much higher in the northern part of the watershed compared to 

the south. In addition, the proportion of particulate phosphorus (compared to dissolved 

phosphorus) was higher in the north part of the watershed. Water quality parameters such as 

color, conductivity, pH, sulphate and ions such as calcium, magnesium, potassium and sodium 

had similar concentrations throughout the watershed. Levels of E. coli were quite variable 

throughout the entire watershed, but were high at the most southern sampling site (south of the 

Trans Canada Highway), suggesting the influence of beaver populations. 

A Geographic Information System (GIS) analysis was conducted to examine soil characteristics 

and land cover / land use information throughout the watershed. This analysis was used to help 

explain the patterns observed in water quality throughout the watershed. The higher 

concentrations of nutrients (phosphorus and nitrogen) as well as turbidity in the sampling sites 

located in the northern 1/3 of the Brokenhead River watershed was likely related to a 

combination of soil characteristics as well as agricultural land use. The northern 1/3 of the 

watershed has much more fertile soils than the southern part of the watershed (e.g., soil orders of 

black chernozens compared to orgranic and luvisol soils), clayey and loamy texture (compared to 

organic and sand textures) and the soils in the northern 1/3 of the watershed had much higher 

agricultural capability (class I and II soils compared to soils with little to no agricultural 

capability in the southern 1/3 of the watershed). Not surprising, the majority of agricultural 

activities also was located in the northern 1/3 of the watershed. In addition, an extensive surface 

and tile drainage network (over 700 km) in the northern portion of the watershed likely also 

contributed to higher concentrations of phosphorus and nitrogen, higher levels of turbidity and a 

higher proportion of particulate compared to dissolved phosphorus. 

Finally, the project involved the training and participation of youth from Brokenhead Ojibway 

Nation and Grade 12 students from Springfield Collegiate (Oakbank). Six youth from 

Brokenhead Ojibway Nation assisted with the water quality sampling at the various sampling 

sites in July and August. Students from Springfield Collegiate participated in a one-day field trip 

to the Brokenhead River Ecological Reserve, in which they received training in water quality and 

3 | P age

flow data collection. They also learned how to conduct riparian health assessments and 

undertook such an assessment in the Ecological Reserve. 

Acknowledgements 

This study would not have been possible without the involvement and support of many 

organizations and individuals. The idea for the pilot project was developed by Brokenhead 

Ojibway Nation (BON) and we gratefully acknowledge the assistance of Debbie Smith, Carl 

Smith and Paul Chief of BON, as well as the six youth who participated in the water quality 

sampling: Buffy Prince, Britteney Drisdale, Ogimaa Sinclair, Jasmine Benoit, Dyana Chief and 

Emily Ballantyne. Daniel Dupont (Manitoba Model Forest) also assisted with the water quality 

sampling). We also thank Al Tymko and the Brokenhead River Restoration Committee (which 

includes Manitoba Water Stewardship and Fisheries and Oceans Canada) for their involvement 

and guidance on the design of the study. A special thank you to Bob Austman (Manitoba Model 

Forest), Linda McPhearson (teacher at Springfield Collegiate) and the Grade 12 science class for 

their participation in the field trip to the Ecological Reserve. In particular, we thank Marilena 

Kowalchuk (Manitoba Habitat Stewardship Program) for providing the riparian health 

assessment training during the field trip. 

Finally, we gratefully acknowledge the financial support of the Manitoba Water Stewardship 

Fund and the Manitoba Model Forest. 

Introduction 

The Brokenhead River watershed is a large watershed (more than 260,000 hectares or 26,000 

km 2 in size) located in south eastern Manitoba. The river’s headwaters are located 

approximately 40 km south of the Trans Canada Highway, just east of the town of Richer, and 

the river flows north, emptying into the south basin of Lake Winnipeg. Much of the southern 

portion of the watershed is forested, also containing significant wetland complexes. The soils 

and drainage characteristics of this part of the watershed are not conducive for agriculture. In 

contrast, the northern 1/3 of the watershed contains more fertile soils, and as a result, much of the 

original forest and wetlands have been converted to agricultural lands. An extensive drainage 

system has also been developed in the northern part of the watershed, facilitating the rapid 

drainage of water from agricultural land to the Brokenhead River. 

Few published studies have been conducted on the Brokenhead River. Donetz (2002) assessed 

the status of riparian health along the length of the river in order to develop a prioritized list of 

potential riparian restoration projects for fish habitat, domestic use and recreational 

4 | P age

opportunities. Based on this assessment, 150 potential restoration sites were identified. This 

number was reduced to 56, based on criteria such as impacts on water quality, effects on fish 

habitat, effects on fish migration, potential for restoration and landowner participation. 

Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada – Prairie Farm Rehabilitation Administration (AA-F and 

PFRA, 2004) compiled data and information on land use issues related to riparian areas in the 

Brokenhead River watershed. Little information has been published regarding the water quality 

of the Brokenhead River. The riparian assessment conducted by Donetz (2002) collected only 

very basic water quality information (e.g., pH, conductivity, total dissolved solids and dissolved 

oxygen), and the AA-F and PFRA (2004) study did not collect water quality data on the river. 

Water quality has been monitored periodically by Manitoba Water Stewardship at selected sites 

in the Brokenhead River from the early 1970s to 2005, although there are many years during that 

time period where monitoring was not conducted. Significant differences likely exist in water 

quality along the length of the river, from its headwaters to where the river empties into Lake 

Winnipeg. The effects of watershed characteristics (e.g., soils), land cover and land use on water 

quality in the Brokenhead River has received little attention. 

Over the last 17 years, the Manitoba Model Forest (MBMF), a not-for-profit organization located 

in eastern Manitoba, has brought together local communities, First Nations, government 

agencies, and industries to improve our collective understanding of the ecology of forested 

watersheds, and to improve community input and policy development in natural resource 

management, particularly as it relates to sustainable forest management planning. The MBMF 

has significantly advanced the understanding of the ecology of the boreal forest, and used this 

information to assist with the development of management strategies to better accommodate 

values such as wildlife (e.g., woodland caribou, moose) into forest management planning. The 

MBMF has also taken a lead role in conducting research to monitor and understand water quality 

in eastern Manitoba. Since 2004, the MBMF has been collecting baseline water quality data on a 

number of rivers, in order to assess what watershed features (e.g., soils, forest cover type) may 

regulate water quality, and how natural and man-caused watershed disturbances and land use 

practices (forest fires, logging, agriculture, beaver activity) may affect water quality. This 

research will result in the development of watershed planning tools, which will allow forest 

product companies to better integrate water quality into forest management planning. 

In 2006, Brokenhead Ojibway Nation, a member of the MBMF and located along the 

Brokenhead River near Lake Winnipeg, requested that the MBMF initiate a pilot project to 

investigate water quality in the Brokenhead River. The community also indicated a desire to 

have youth involved in the project. In 2007, with the financial assistance of the Sustainable 

Development Innovations Fund (SDIF) and in-kind contributions from Brokenhead Ojibway 

Nation, Manitoba Water Stewardship, Fisheries and Oceans Canada, the Brokenhead River 

Restoration Committee and Sunrise School Division water quality information was collected on 

the river. 

5 | P age

The objectives of this project were: 

 

 

 

 

To document water quality in the Brokenhead River from its headwaters to the 

community of Brokenhead Ojibway Nation, 

To assess the influence of natural watershed features and land use in the Brokenhead 

River watershed on the water quality of the river, 

To provide education and training opportunities for First Nation and non-Aboriginal 

youth in water quality monitoring and riparian health assessment, and 

To provide information to the Brokenhead River Restoration Committee relevant to the 

development of a future watershed management plan 

This study was designed as a pilot project and as such, certain aspects such as water quality 

sampling were quite limited in scope. 

Methods 

Water Quality Sampling and Water Chemistry Analyses 

Water quality samples were collected on three occasions during the summer and fall of 2007. 

On July 17, August 29 and October 16, 2007, water samples were collected at each of 6 sites 

along the Brokenhead River from near its headwaters at the Trans Canada Highway to the 

community of Brokenhead Ojibway Nation (Figure 1). The sampling locations represent water 

quality stations periodically utilized by Manitoba Water Stewardship for their data collection, 

with the addition of one site (Hazel Creek, located along Highway 15, east of Ste. Rita). Some 

of the Manitoba Water Stewardship sites have been monitored periodically since 1973, although 

there are several years which monitoring was not undertaken. Table 1 provides a list of the 

sampling locations. 

6 | P age

Table 1. Water quality sampling locations (in order from furthest south to furthest north). 

MB Water General Description Latitude Longitude 

Stewardship EMS 

Data System # 

MB05SAS033 Brokenhead River at Trans N 49 39.423 W 96 16.471 

Canada Hwy 

- Hazel Creek at Hwy 15, east N 49 52.794 W 96 14.070 

of Ste. Rita 

MB05SAS037 Brokenhead River at Hwy 15, N 49 53.091 W 96 21.990 

east of Vivian 


east of Beausejour 


north of PR 317 

MB05SAS038 Brokenhead River at Hwy 59, 

southeast of Scanterbury 

N 50 22.197 W 96 36.464 

7 | P age

F 

E 

D 

C 

B 

A 

Figure 1. Subwatersheds of the Brokenhead River and water quality sampling locations (green 

circles) in 2007. 

On each sampling date, water samples were collected from the surface of the river using a van 

Dorn water sampler, taking care to avoid areas of dense macrophyte (aquatic plant) growth and 

to avoid stirring up bottom sediments. Samples were usually collected from bridges, at the 

deepest part of the river. Water samples were kept chilled in a cooler and sent to ALS 

Laboratory Group (Winnipeg) for water chemistry analyses within 24 hours of sample collection. 

Water chemistry analyses include: total dissolved phosphorus, total phosphorus, total Kjeldahl 

nitrogen, E. coli, ammonia, dissolved organic carbon, turbidity, pH, total dissolved solids, 

sulphate, nitrate, calcium, potassium, magnesium, sodium, hardness, conductivity, chloride, 

8 | P age

alkalinity, bicarbonate, carbonate and hydroxide. All data is provided in Appendix A. Photos of 

each sampling location is provided in Appendix B. 

GIS Analyses 

In order to examine the various watershed characteristics (e.g., soils, agricultural capability, land 

cover) in the Brokenhead River watershed, the whole watershed was divided into 6 subwatersheds 

based on the water quality sampling locations used in this study (Figure 1). 

Watersheds were delineated in ArcMap 8.3 utilizing topographic features, a digital elevation 

model (DEM) found in AA-F and PFRA (2004) and digital black and white ortho photos. Each 

sub-watershed represents the general area that drains into the location from which each water 

quality sample was taken. Table 2 indicates the size of each sub-watershed. Sub-watershed F, is 

the largest, and represents the area from the headwaters of the Brokenhead River south of the 

Trans Canada Highway to the bridge over the Brokenhead River at Hwy 59 in the community of 

Brokenhead Ojibway Nation. 

Table 2. Sub-watersheds in the Brokenhead River watershed used for GIS analysis 

Sub Watershed Area (hectares) 

A 24,493 

B 37,957 

C 77,936 

D 153,762 

E 240,458 

F 263,219 

To study the occurrence of various watershed features (e.g., soils, land cover) in each sub 

watershed, intersects were made between various GIS data layers and each sub-watershed 

polygon. The GIS data layers included 2001 land cover, soil surface texture, soil drainage and 

agricultural capability. Each is described in more detail in the results and discussion section. 

GIS data sets were graciously provided by Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada. 

9 | P age

Results and Discussion 

Overview of the Brokenhead River Watershed 

General Characteristics 

The Brokenhead River watershed is located in southeast Manitoba, between the Red River 

watershed to the west, and the Winnipeg River basin to the east. The Brokenhead River 

watershed is more than 260,000 hectares (26,000 km 2 ) in size and originates approximately 40 

km south of the Trans Canada highway (Hwy 1) in southern Manitoba. The river flows from 

south to north, emptying into Lake Winnipeg. Close to its origin south of the Trans Canada 

Highway, the river is indistinct (i.e., has no distinct channel), apparently flowing underground 

for several kilometres. There are no primary flow control structures on the river, although there 

are several low head dams, installed primarily for providing recreational opportunities (Donetz, 

2002). The highest points in the watershed occur in the southern portion, at approximately 

373m, sloping down to 216m near its terminus at Lake Winnipeg (AA-F and PFRA, 2004). 

Figure 2 shows a Digital Elevation Model (DEM) of the watershed. The watershed encompasses 

9 Rural Municipalities: Alexander, Brokenhead, Lac du Bonnet, Reynolds, Springfield, Ste. 

Anne, St. Clements, Tache and Whitemouth. The population is mainly rural and farm-based. 

Beausejour is the largest town, with smaller communities including Ste. Rita, Ross, Vivian, 

Ladywood, Brokenhead Ojibway Naiton and Scanterbury. 

The Brokenhead River watershed is located in two Ecozones. The western portion of the 

watershed is found in the Boreal Plains Ecozone while the eastern portion is located in the Boreal 

Shield Ecozone. Ecozones, which are further divided into Ecoregions and Ecodistricts, are a 

terrestrial classification system developed to classify landscapes by integrating vegetation cover, 

underlying geology, physiography, soils and climate (Smith et al., 1998). Ecozones are the 

broadest categories of this classification system. In a similar manner, the western portion of the 

Brokenhead River watershed is located in the Interlake Plain Ecoregion and the eastern portion 

of the watershed is located in the Lake of the Woods Ecoregion (Figure 3). The Interlake Plain 

Ecoregion is characterized by trees including trembling aspen and balsam poplar, with 

understory vegetation including willow and red osier dogwood. Riverside (riparian) areas 

contain Manitoba maple, green ash, elm and cottonwood. Much of the forest cover in this 

Ecoregion has been significantly altered due to agriculture and urbanization. The Lake of the 

Woods Ecoregion is characterized by extensive peatlands and associated organic soils, tree 

10 | P age

Figure 2. Digital elevation model of the Brokenhead River watershed (taken from AA-F and 

PFRA, 2004) 

11 | P age

Figure 3. Ecoregions and Ecodistricts found in the Brokenhead River watershed (from AA-F 

and PFRA, 2004) 

12 | P age

species such as black spruce, tamarack, jack pine, trembling aspen and balsam fir. Much of the 

area surrounding Hazel Creek, a major tributary of the Brokenhead River which originates in the 

Lewis Bog, and which flows through the Stead Ecodistrict (part of the Lake of the Woods 

Ecoregion – Figure 3), remains in an undisturbed condition. This is likely due to the marshy 

characteristics of the area and lack of land suitable for agricultural or settlement purposes. 

However, many of the original peatlands in the northern portion of the Stead Ecodistrict have 

been drained and converted to commercial production of sod (AA-F and PFRA, 2004). 

The Brokenhead River watershed includes a variety of land uses. Much of the southern twothirds 

of the watershed have experienced little development. This is likely due to the extensive 

areas of peatland and marsh. However, the northern one-third of the watershed has experienced 

significant changes over the last 100 years or more. This portion of the watershed contains the 

majority of agricultural activity (including livestock production, cereal and forage crops, sod 

production, etc.), an extensive network of surface and tile agricultural drains (more than 700 km 

– Donetz, 2002) and the existence of towns and small communities and association sewage 

lagoons. Two of the most significant farm drains are the Bachman and U drains, located north of 

Beausejour. 

The climate in the Brokenhead River watershed can be described as continental, although there is 

much variation in temperature and precipitation across the watershed. Lake Winnipeg has an 

influence on both climate and river flow at the lower reach of the river, where it drains into the 

lake. Mean annual precipitation ranges from 510 to 590 mm, and mean annual temperature from 

1.6 to 2.4 o C. The mean annual moisture deficit ranges from 75 to 250 mm (AA-F and PFRA, 

2004). The average number of growing season days ranges from 176 to 184. 

Water flow in the Brokenhead River originates from several sources, including Hazel and Bear 

Creeks, farm drains and the many wetlands (bogs, fens and marshes) found within the watershed. 

Sixty year records (1942-2002) from the hydrometric gauging station near Beausejour indicate 

that flows are lowest in the winter (0.09 to 0.42 m 

3 /s from December to February) and peak 

during spring melt (11.3 to 12.4 m 3 /s in April and May). Spring runoff appears to be occurring 

almost 1 month earlier than it did in the early 1900s, likely due to land use changes and the 

development of extensive farm drain systems (Donetz, 2002). Summer rain storms can quickly 

elevate flows as well. The long-term annual flow is 5.68 m 3 /s (AA-F and PFRA, 2004). 

Land Cover 

The most recent land cover data available for rural municipalities located in the Brokenhead 

River watershed is for the year 2001. The GIS data was based on interpretation from 2001 

LandSat imagery with a 30 m resolution (AA-F and PFRA, 2004). For the purposes of this study, 

the following land cover classes were used: water, grassland, tree, wetland, agriculture, forestry 

cut block and other. The agriculture class included annual and forage crops and land used for 

13 | P age

livestock production. The “other” land cover class included bare rock, burns (forest fire areas), 

urban areas and transportation corridors. The tree class included all deciduous, softwood, 

mixedwood, open deciduous and treed rock areas. The wetland class included peatlands (bogs, 

fens) and marsh areas. 

Figure 4 provides a graphic representation of the land cover classes found in the Brokenhead 

River watershed in 2001. Approximately 70% of the entire watershed area existed in a relatively 

undisturbed state, as treed area (48%), grasslands (8.7%) and wetlands (15.5%) (Sub-watershed 

F in Table 3). The majority of these land cover types were found in the southern one-third of the 

watershed. It was also evident that the majority of agricultural activities occur in the northern 

one-third of the watershed (Figure 4). 

Figure 5 shows the percentage of land area in each sub-watershed according to the land cover 

classes and Table 3 provides a breakdown of the area and percentage of area of each land cover 

category in each subwatershed. There was a higher percentage of land area in tree and wetland 

classes, and very little to no area in grasslands and agriculture in the southern sub-watersheds 

(sub watersheds A&B). Forestry cut blocks were more common in the southern sub-watersheds. 

In contrast, the majority of grassland and agriculture was found in the northern sub-watersheds 

(in particular, in the northern part of sub-watershed E&F). There was less area in tree and 

wetland classes in sub-watersheds E&F, reflecting the lower amount of area in these land cover 

classes in the north portions of the sub-watersheds. Note that the land area found in some 

watersheds is cumulative. For example, the land area in sub-watershed D includes all of A, B 

and C as well as land that is only found in sub-watershed D. Similarly, the land area in subwatershed 

E includes all of sub-watershed D (which also includes A, B and C) (Figure 1). 

14 | P age

Figure 4. Land cover in the Brokenhead River watershed in 2001. 

15 | P age

Figure 5. Percentage of land area in each land cover class in the 6 sub-watersheds of the 

Brokenhead River watershed. 

The GIS assessment conducted by AA-F and PFRA (2004) found that between 1994 and 2001, 

tree cover in the entire Brokenhead River watershed increased by 10%, grasslands increased by 

9% and annual cropland decreased by 6%. This may suggest a small shift towards allowing 

some agricultural lands to return to former forested or grassland habitat. 

16 | P age

Table 3. Land cover classes in the 6 Brokenhead River subwatersheds (values are area in 

hectares and expressed as a percentage of the area of each subwatershed). 

Land Use 

Sub Watershed 

Category 

A B C D E F 

Treed 15,855 

(64.7%) 

28,132 

(74.1%) 

46,355 

(59.5%) 

93,709 

(60.9) 

120,997 

(50.3%) 

126,360 

(48.0%) 

Grassland 210 

(0.9%) 

614 

(1.6%) 

4,540 

(5.8%) 

19,541 

(6.7%) 

19,536 

(8.1%) 

22,859 

(8.7%) 

Wetland 5,898 

(24.1%) 

6,906 

(18.2) 

21,982 

(28.2%) 

33,594 

(21.8%) 

39,180 

(16.3%) 

40,878 

(15.5%) 

Agriculture 0 

(0.1%) 

188 

(0.5) 

871 

(1.1%) 

7,318 

(4.8%) 

46,813 

(19.5%) 

58,078 

(22.1%) 

Forestry 

Cut Block 

2,159 

(8.8%) 

1,678 

(4.4%) 

2,487 

(3.2%) 

5,609 

(3.6%) 

7,084 

(2.9%) 

7,396 

(2.8%) 

Water 99 

(0.4%) 

122 

(0.3%) 

420 

(0.5%) 

888 

(0/6%) 

1,182 

(0.5%) 

1,287 

(0.5%) 

Other 271 

(1.1%) 

318 

(0.8%) 

1,280 

(1.6%) 

2,359 

(1.5%) 

5,666 

(2.4%) 

6,360 

(2.4%) 

Total 24,493 

(9.3%) 

37,957 

(14.4%) 

77,936 

(29.6%) 

153,762 

(58.4%) 

240,458 

(91.4%) 

263,219 

(100.0%) 

General Soil Characteristics 

The majority of the soils in the Brokenhead River watershed were deposited by glacial Lake 

Agassiz. The soils in the south and southeast portion of the watershed (e.g., subwatersheds 

A,B&C) are organic, and interspersed with till deposits. In contrast, the north and northwest part 

of the watershed contains much more lacustrine deposits. Soil orders such as black chernozens 

are found in the northwest, and contribute to more grassland habitat and are more agriculturallyfertile. 

Soil orders in the southern part of the watershed include more organic and luvisols. 

Surface soil texture, a variable that strongly influences a soils ability to retain moisture, as well 

as general level of fertility and ease/difficulty of cultivation, varies considerably across the entire 

Brokenhead River watershed. In general, the southern 1/3 of the Brokenhead River watershed is 

dominated by poorly-drained organic soils, interspersed with sand (Figure 6). The northern 

portion of the watershed contains coarse and fine loams, as well as clayey soils, which are either 

absent or found in much lower percentages in the southern part of the watershed (Table 4). 

17 | P age

Figure 6. Surface soil texture in the Brokenhead River watershed (taken from AA-F and PFRA, 

2004). 

18 | P age

Table 4. Soil surface texture in the 6 Brokenhead River subwatersheds (values are area in 


Soil 


Surface 

Texture 

A B C D E F 

Clayey 0 

(0.0) 

16 

(

drainage class areas are in agriculturally-dominated soils, where both surface and tile drainage is 

used to manage excess soil moisture on fields. Table 5 shows the breakdown of soil drainage 

classes in each subwatershed. 

20 | P age

Figure 7. Soil drainage class in the Brokenhead River watershed (from AA-F and PFRA, 2004). 

21 | P age

Table 5. Soil drainage class in the 6 Brokenhead River subwatersheds (values are area in 


Drainage 


Class 

A B C D E F 

Rapid 4,813 

(19.6) 

1,413 

(3.8) 

8,063 

(10.8) 

11,328 

(7.4) 

16,171 

(6.7) 

16,452 

(6.3) 

Well 1,773 

(7.2) 

3,660 

(9.8) 

6,675 

(8.9) 

14,490 

(9.4) 

20,473 

(8.5) 

23,532 

(8.9) 

Imperfect 1,289 

(5.3) 

6,217 

(16.6) 

9,787 

(13.1) 

30,014 

(19.6) 

62,664 

(26.1) 

68,737 

(26.2) 

Poor 0 

(0.0) 

0 

(0.0) 

0 

(0.0) 

4,996 

(3.3) 

5,898 

(2.5) 

6,078 

(2.3) 

Very Poor 16,525 

(67.6) 

26,116 

(69.7) 

49,992 

(66.8) 

89,126 

(58.1) 

109,193 

(45.5) 

114,402 

(43.6) 

Other 41 

(0.2) 

49 

(0.1) 

308 

(0.4) 

3,417 

(2.2) 

25,402 

(10.6) 

33,136 

(12.6) 

Other includes: water, marsh, urban, rock and unknown 

All of the above-mentioned soil characteristics (and others) have a significant influence on the 

capability for agricultural activity, as well as the nature of agricultural activity. The term 

Agricultural Capability is a method of classifying land based the ability for land to sustain 

agriculture. It is a system of classification that is based on the Canada Land Inventory System 

and provides a basis for land use decision making (AA-F and PFRA, 2004). The system has 7 

capability classes, with Class 1 having the highest capability for agriculture (and the fewest 

limitations) and Class 7, the lowest capability. Sub-class descriptors can also be used to identify 

what the limiting factors (e.g., excess moisture, low fertility, salinity, stoniness, etc.). Figure 8 

provides a graphical representation of Agricultural Capability across the Brokenhead River 

watershed. 

22 | P age

Figure 8. Agricultural capability in the Brokenhead River watershed (taken from AA-F and 

PFRA, 2004). 

23 | P age

Figure 8 clearly demonstrates that the most capable soils for agriculture (Classes 1&2) are found 

in the northwest portion of the watershed. Table 6 indicates that the southern 1/3 of the 

Brokenhead River watershed (subwatersheds A, B & C) contain no Class 1 soils, and very little 

Class 2 and 3 soils. Soils in these watersheds are made up predominantly of Classes 4, 5 and 6, 

meaning that the soils have severe limitations that either restrict the range of crops that can be 

grown, require special conservation practices, or represent areas where improvement practices 

are not feasible. In the Brokenhead River watershed, the most important limitation to agriculture 

is excess water, soil structure, and in some areas, moisture limitations (AA-F and PFRA, 2004). 

Table 6. Agricultural capability in the 6 Brokenhead River subwatersheds (values are area in 


Agricultural 


Capability 

A B C D E F 

Water 41 

(0.2) 

13 

(0.0) 

250 

(0.3) 

506 

(0.3) 

616 

(0.3) 

685 

(0.3) 

Urban 0 

(0.0) 

0 

(0.0) 

54 

(

Agricultural Activities 

AA-F and PFRA (2004) compiled agricultural activity data from the 2001 Census of Agriculture. 

Their statistics represented agricultural activities occurring in the whole watershed. It was not 

possible to use this data to look at agricultural practices in each of our subwatersheds. In 

addition, the census data may not represent a true picture of activities, as the data is reported 

based on where a farm “headquarter” is located. A farm headquarters, or operator’s residence 

may be located in a separate watershed than the one where the actual farming operations occurs. 

However, the Census data provides the most comprehensive source of agricultural information. 

Based on the land cover data (Figure 4), it is evident that the majority of agricultural activities 

occur in the northern part of the watershed, as influenced by soil characteristics. According to 

the 2001 Census, there were 350 farms utilizing approximately 86,000 hectares (around 33%) of 

the land area in the entire Brokenhead River watershed (AA-F and PFRA, 2004). Approximately 

70% of the farmed area was used for cropland. According to AA-F and PFRA (2004), 40% was 

used for cereal crops, 17% for forages, 14% for oil seeds and 2% for pulse crops. Cropland 

represented approximately 24% of the total Brokenhead River watershed. Livestock production 

was also common in the watershed, with beef production being the most common – roughly 35% 

of farms had cow/calf operations (AA-F and PFRA, 2004). Livestock production intensity 

(expressed as animal units per hectare) was on the low end compared to other watersheds in 

southern and western Manitoba. Provincially, livestock product intensity in 2001 was highest in 

parts of the Upper Red River, Rat-Marsh River and Seine River watersheds (AA-F and PFRA, 

2004), and livestock production intensity in the Brokenhead River watershed was only about 

25% of the intensity of areas such as Steinbach (which had the highest intensity in the province 

in 2001). Commercial fertilizer use in the Brokenhead River watershed was generally lower than 

many watersheds in Manitoba’s agricultural areas. Highest commercial fertilizer use was in the 

Whitemud River watershed, northeast of Brandon (AA-F and PFRA, 2004). Commercial 

fertilizer use in the Brokenhead River watershed in 2001 was about one-half of that of the 

Whitemud River watershed. 

Historic Water Quality 

Water quality data in the Brokenhead River has been collected by the Province of Manitoba 

since 1973. Water quality sampling locations with the longest data records include sites at the 

Trans Canada Highway, on Highway 15 east of Vivian, on Highway 44 east of Beausejour, at 

Highway 12 north of the junction with Highway 317, and at Scanterbury (Highway 59). While 

data has been collected continuously at the Scanterbury location since 1973, there are large gaps 

in the data for other sites where sampling was not conducted for several years, or where 

sampling was stopped completely in the 1990s. Historically, water quality data was collected 2- 

25 | P age

4 times per year at sites, however, more intensive sampling occurred (at selected sites only) in 

1995 and 1998. 

While it is not possible to provide a comprehensive overview of the changes in water quality 

parameters throughout the Brokenhead River watershed since data collection began in 1973, it is 

illustrative to summarize some of the changes (or lack-thereof) that have been observed. Figure 

9 provides data from Manitoba Water Stewardship that shows annual averages for total 

phosphorus (TP), total Kjeldahl nitrogen (TKN – a form of nitrogen) and total suspended solids 

(TSS) at three locations (Vivian, Beausejour and Scanterbury). The graphs are illustrative of the 

differences that exist between sites for some of the water quality parameters and changes over 

time in some of the parameters. 

The top panel of Figure 9 (total phosphorus) shows clear differences between sites with respect 

to this important plant nutrient. The graph demonstrates that as the river passes near Vivian, it 

has a slightly lower phosphorus concentration than does the river near Beausejour (although the 

difference is not likely ecologically significant). However, both sites have much lower 

phosphorus concentrations than the site at Scanterbury, which is located further downstream and 

which the river passes through more fertile soil and substantially more agricultural areas than the 

2 more southern sites. The Scanterbury site would also be the recipient of any runoff from the 

more than 700 km of farm drains located south of the sampling site. For this graph, it also 

appears that there has been no appreciable change in phosphorus concentration in the river at 

both the Vivian and Beausejour sites (at least up until the mid to late 1990s, when sampling at 

these stations was discontinued). In contrast, phosphorus concentration in the river at the 

Scanterbury site appears to have increased substantially (roughly tripling) since 1973. Jones and 

Armstrong (2001) did a statistical assessment of changes in both total phosphorus and total 

nitrogen from 1973 to 1999 and concluded that there were no substantial changes or trends once 

differences in flow were taken into account. However, their analysis did not include data from 

2000 to 2005, years which show significant increases in total phosphorus concentration (Figure 

9). As can be seen in the total phosphorus graph in Figure 9, phosphorus increased and then 

decreased during the period from 1973 to 1999, with a net statistical result of no net change over 

the period. However, there is a clear trend of increasing total phosphorus after this period. This 

increase could be related to changes in land use practices, but could also represent increased 

phosphorus due to a period of higher precipitation and river flow (or both). 

26 | P age

Figure 9. Concentration of total phosphorus (TP), total Kjeldahl nitrogen (TKN) and total 

suspended solids (TSS) at three locations in the Brokenhead River watershed from 1973-2005. 

27 | P age

In contrast to differences observed between the two southern sites (Vivian and Beausejour) and 

the Scanterbury site for total phosphorus, no substantial differences were observed between the 3 

sites with respect to total Kjeldahl nitrogen (Figure 9 middle panel). In addition, the clear trend 

of increasing phosphorus over time at the Scanterbury site is not as easily seen in the nitrogen 

data, particularly because of the large decrease in nitrogen during the summer of 2002 (Figure 9 

middle panel). 

Finally, total suspended solids (TSS), a measure of the amount of sediments in suspension in the 

water (and a surrogate measurement for the amount of turbidity) showed a trend more similar to 

that observed for phosphorus (Figure 9 bottom panel). TSS was much higher (up to 13 times 

higher depending on the year) at the Scanterbury site compared to the Vivian and Beausejour 

sites. This demonstrates that the water is much more turbid (contains more suspended solids) at 

Scanterbury compared to upstream sites. An increase in TSS over time at the Scanterbury site is 

evident, although there is a substantial amount of variation between years. The high value in 

1974 likely represents the influence of a spring flood event. 

Water Quality in 2007 and the Relationships Between Watershed Attributes and Recent Water 

Quality 

As mentioned previously, water quality samples for this project were collected in July, August 

and October at 6 sites in the watershed in 2007 (see Figure 1). Due to the limited sampling 

effort, it is not possible to examine seasonal trends in the data for 2007. However, seasonal 

averages for each water quality parameter were calculated and comparisons can be made 

between the various sampling locations studied. 

To put the water quality of the Brokenhead River into perspective, Figure 10 provides a 

comparison of open water season (roughly May to October) total phosphorus concentrations of 

three rivers (Red River, Assiniboine River, Bloodvein River) to the Brokenhead River. It is 

evident from the figure that there are substantial differences in total phosphorus (as well as many 

other water quality parameters not shown here) between the Brokenhead and the three other 

rivers. Part of these differences can be explained by a combination of soils/bedrock geology and 

land use. For example, nutrient concentrations (such as phosphorus) are much lower in the 

Bloodvein River (located on the east side of Lake Winnipeg) due to an underlying geology of 

Precambrian shield bedrock and thin, nutrient-poor soils. There is also a lack of human 

development and land use in the Bloodvein River watershed. In contrast, soils in the Assiniboine 

River and Red River watersheds are fertile, and extensive human development (including 

agriculture, cities, and other industrial activities) are found throughout the watersheds. The 

naturally fertile soils contribute to higher nutrient levels in both rivers, and human development 

and land use changes since the settlement of the prairies has undoubtedly impacted water quality 

28 | P age

in the rivers. Phosphorus concentration in the Brokenhead River falls between those of the 

Red/Assiniboine and the Bloodvein. While the years shown below are not the same between the 

rivers (2001 was the last year of water quality data available for the Bloodvein River), the 

differences between the rivers likely reflect differences in soils and land use than differences 

between years. 

Figure 10. Total phosphorus (TP) concentration in the Bloodvein (average for 1991-2001), 

Brokenhead (at Scanterbury in 2007 – this study), Red and Assiniboine (at Winnipeg in 2004) 

rivers. Data for the Bloodvein, Red and Assiniboine rivers are from Manitoba Water 

Stewardship. 

29 | P age

Figure 11. Total phosphorus (TP- upper panel) and the percentage of TP in dissolved form 

(lower panel) in the 6 subwatersheds of the Brokenhead River in 2007 (vertical bars are the 

standard deviation of the mean of three sampling periods). 

In 2007, there was a general trend of increasing total phosphorus concentration from the site 

located close to the headwaters of the Brokenhead River (i.e., at the Trans Canada Highway) to 

the sampling site downstream at Scanterbury (Figure 11 top panel). The largest step-wise 

increase in phosphorus concentration occurred in the northern 1/3 third of the watershed. This is 

also represents a significant area of transition in the watershed to more fertile clayey and loamy 

soils (Figure 6), better agricultural capability (Figure 8), much more agricultural land use (Figure 

5) and an extensive system of agricultural drains. The phosphorus data can also be viewed in 

terms of the proportion of phosphorus that is in a dissolved versus particulate form (Figure 11 

30 | Page

ottom panel). There is a higher percentage of the phosphorus in a particulate form (i.e., a lower 

percentage in a dissolved form) in subwatersheds E and F, which suggests the influence of farm 

drains on phosphorus export from agricultural areas. Farm drains facilitate the rapid movement 

of excess water from fields, which while providing clear benefits to farmers, can also increase 

hydraulic loading to the Brokenhead River, transport sediments (former field soils) through fastflowing, 

channelized flow and cause bank destabilization (Donetz, 2002). Donetz (2002) 

suggests that movement of water from farm drains during spring runoff and summer rain storm 

events may keep the Brokenhead River at a near-flood stage level, further contributing to bank 

erosion and increased sediment input. This can increase erosion and thus, particulate forms of 

phosphorus in the river. 

The potential influence of farm drains can also be seen in Figure 12. Concentrations of total 

phosphorus from late March to late September in 1995 were consistently higher upstream of the 

Bachman drain, compared to just downstream of the drain. 

Figure 12. Comparison of total phosphorus (TP) concentration upstream and downstream of 

the Bachman drain in the Brokenhead River in 1995 (data from Manitoba Water Stewardship). 

Nitrogen data collected in 2007 from the 6 subwatersheds in the Brokenhead River show a 

similar (although not identical) trend to the phosphorus data (Figure 13). Highest concentrations 

of nitrate, ammonia and total nitrogen were found in subwatersheds E and F. The trend is most 

evident in the nitrate (NO 3 ) data, in which concentrations are low in the subwatersheds A to D, 

and much higher is subwatersheds E and F. As with the phosphorus data, the nitrate 

concentrations may be reflecting the fact that subwatersheds E and F represent the parts of the 

31 | P age

entire Brokenhead River watershed where agriculture is a dominant land use feature. While TN 

concentration is also highest in subwatersheds E and F, it is also fairly high in subwatershed B. 

This subwatershed represents Hazel Creek, which originates in Lewis Bog, and which may 

contribute to the higher total nitrogen concentrations. Kotak et al. (2005) studied 22 rivers, 

streams and creeks in eastern Manitoba and found that the concentration of total nitrogen, total 

phosphorus and color (measured as dissolved organic carbon) in the water bodies were highly 

correlated to the proportion of peatland (including bogs and fens) area in the watersheds. It 

appears that organic soils found in bog areas can be significant sources of nutrients to water 

bodies. Dontez (2002) also indicates that this reach of the Brokenhead River has experienced 

severe channelization and drainage in the past, as well as a large loss of riparian vegetation along 

the banks due to unrestricted cattle grazing. This may also help explain higher total nitrogen 

concentrations observed in subwatershed B. 

32 | P age

Figure 13. Nitrate (NO 3 - upper panel), ammonia (NH4 – middle panel) and total nitrogen (TN - 

lower panel) in the 6 subwatersheds of the Brokenhead River in 2007 (vertical bars are the 


33 | P age

Figure 14. Color (top panel – measured as dissolved organic carbon –DOC) and conductivity in 

the 6 subwatersheds of the Brokenhead River in 2007 (vertical bars are the standard deviation of 

the mean of three sampling periods). 

In contrast to the differences noted above for phosphorus and nitrogen among the six 

subwatersheds, there did not appear to be any appreciable differences in water color or 

conductivity between the sites in 2007 (Figure 14). Subwatershed A had slightly less color than 

the other subwatersheds, and B had slightly more color and less conductivity than the other 

watersheds. There were also no large differences between the six subwatersheds with respect to 

dominant ions (calcium, potassium, sodium, magnesium), sulphate and pH (data not shown). 

34 | P age

Figure 15. Turbidity in the 6 subwatersheds of the Brokenhead River in 2007 (vertical bars are 

the standard deviation of the mean of three sampling periods). 

There were marked diffenence in turbidity between the three southern subwatersheds (A, B and 

C) and the 3 more northern subwatersheds (Figure 15). In particular, there was a marked 

stepwise increase in turbidity between subwatersheds D and E. Both subwatersheds E and F had 

much higher levels of turbidity that the other subwatersheds. As with the phosphorus data, this 

may be due to the presence of agricultural land uses in the latter two subwatersheds, and to the 

presence of an extensive network of farm drains. The higher turbidity levels in subwatersheds E 

and F are consistent with an increase in the proportion of particulate phosphorus observered, and 

suggests increased rates of erosion in these watersheds compared to the more forested and 

undeveloped subwatersheds to the south (e.g., subwatersheds A, B and C). 

Finally, samples were collected for E. coli in at each sampling site. E.coli is a pathogen that is 

found in animal waste (feces) and is commonly an indicator of contaminaton from sewage or 

runoff from livestock operations. It is important to note however, that naturally high levels of E. 

coli can also occur as a result of, for example, high beaver populations. 

35 | P age

Figure 16. E. coli in the 6 subwatersheds of the Brokenhead River in 2007 (vertical bars are the 


There was no clear pattern of E. coli levels among the six subwatersheds. Subwatersheds A and 

D contained the highest levels, although there was a great deal of variation (particularly in 

subwatershed A), and the differences in E. coli levels among the six subwatersheds was not very 

large. As there is almost no human development in subwatershed A, one could assume that the 

E. coli levels measured were a result of natural factors such as beaver. The land cover in this 

subwatershed is mainly trees and wetlands, containing a high proportion of organic soils. It is 

possible that the E. coli originates from beaver activity. 

In conclusion, the data collected in 2007 indicates that there are significant differences water 

quality differences between the subwatersheds in the southern 1/3 of the Brokenhead River 

watershed compared to the northern 1/3 of the watershed. The mid portion of the Brokenhead 

River watershed appears to be a transition zone. The marked differences in water quality likely 

reflect two important factors. Firstly, the more fertile soils in the northern portion of the 

watershed naturally contribute to higher concentrations of nutrients such as phosphorus and 

nitrogen. Secondly, the majority of the agricultural practices occur in the northern part of the 

watershed. These activities likely elevate nutrient concentrations. In addition, the existence of 

an extensive network of farm drains also likely contributes to increased hydraulic loading to the 

Brokenhead River, as well as increased nutrient loading and turbidity. 

36 | P age

Training of Youth 

An important component of this study was the involvement of high school students. This 

involvement took two forms. Youth from Brokenhead Ojibway Nation participated in the water 

quality sampling on the Brokenhead River, learning the skills necessary to take proper samples 

and how to avoid contamination of the samples (from the river sediments for example). 

Secondly, students from Springfield Collegiate (and one student from Ecole Powerview) 

participated in a field trip to the Brokenhead River Ecological Reserve, where they participated 

in sampling a farm drain and conducted a riprarian forest health assessment. These activities are 

described in more detail below. 

Involvement of Brokenhead Ojibway Nation 

A total of 6 students from Brokenhead Ojibway Nation assisted with the water quality sampling 

on the Brokenhead River in July and August, 2007. They were Buffy Prince, Britteney Drisdale, 

Ogimaa Sinclair, Jasmine Benoit, Dyana Chief and Emily Ballantyne. On each sampling date, 

the students visited all six site, were taught proper water quality sampling methods and helped 

collect the samples. The objectives of the study were also discussed with the students. The 

students greatly appreciated the opportunity to learn about the project, learn new skills and about 

career opportunities in environmental sciences. Figure 16 provides photos of the sampling days 

with the students. 

37 | P age

Figure 16. Involvement of Brokenhead Ojibway Nation students in collecting water samples 

from the Brokenhead River, 2007. (Note: in the bottom picture, Daniel Dupont, MBMF research 

assistant is shown on the right). 

Involvement of Students from Springfield Collegiate 

The Grade 12 class of teacher Linda McPhearson participated on a one-day field trip to the 

Brokenhead River Ecological Reserve. Prior to the field trip, project leader, Dr. Brian Kotak, 

MBMF Education Coordinator, Bob Austman and Marilena Kowalchuk (Manitoba Habitat 

Stewardship Program), met with the class and teacher. Presentations were made on the research 

projects of the MBMF, the Brokenhead River water quality project, the importance of healthy 

riparian areas, and how to conduct a riparian health assessment using the guide “Managing the 

Water’s Edge – Riparian Health Assessment for Streams and Small Rivers. 

38 | P age

A field trip was held on May 28, 2007 to the Brokenhead River Ecological Reserve, located 

north of Beausejour. Approximately 20 students participated on the field trip. Prior to the field 

trip, a document describing an overview of water quality concepts, sampling protocols, historic 

water quality data for the Brokenhead River, and a list of questions to answer was developed and 

provided to the students. During the field trip, students were shown how to use various water 

quality sampling equipment (e.g., van Dorn water sampler, velocity meter, temperature/dissolved 

oxygen meter, Secchi disk). They then made their own measurements and collected water 

samples from a farm drain that flowed into the Brokenhead River in the Ecological Reserve. As 

part of the field trip, the students also conducted forest health assessments of the riparian forest 

along the banks of the Brokenhead River in the ecological reserve. The students received handson 

training from Marilena Kowalchuk on riparian forest health assessment using a standardized 

protocol. The one day field trip was very successful. Follow up discussions with the teacher 

indicated that the students enjoyed the day in the field and appreciated a chance to become 

involved in a research project that will contribute to the management and protection of the 

Brokenhead River. Figure 17 provides photos of the field trip to the Brokenhead River 

Ecological Reserve. 

Figure 17. Water quality sampling and riparian health assessments with Springfield Collegiate 

Grade 12 class on May 28, 2007. 

39 | P age

Figure 17. Continued. 

40 | P age

Recommendations 

This pilot study provided some insight into the differences in water quality along the length of 

the Brokenhead River from close to its origin in southeast Manitoba to near its terminus at Lake 

Winnipeg. The data suggest that land cover type, soils and agriculture have an influence on 

water quality and helped to explain the patterns in water quality observed. However, this study 

was limited in its scope (number of sites) and duration (number of samples in one year, number 

of years). Several recommendations from this study are as follows: 

1. There is a lack of recent water quality data for the Brokenhead River. The long-term sites 

utilized in the past by Manitoba Water Stewardship, and perhaps new sites, should be 

monitored on a consistent basis (at least monthly) and for an extended period of time (5- 

10 years). A more recent baseline of water quality information is needed. 

2. There is a lack of hydrometric (flow) stations on the Brokenhead River. In order to 

understand the contribution of various land use practices and climate to the overall 

hydrology of the river, additional stations are required. 

3. A more detailed, hypothesis-driven research and monitoring program should be designed 

and implemented to examine more closely the relationships between soils, agriculture 

(and other land uses) and water quality in the Brokenhead River watershed. 

4. The above information will be invaluable in the development of a watershed management 

plan for the Brokenhead River. A watershed management plan needs to be developed for 

the Brokenhead River watershed. 

5. The involvement of students (both Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal) should continue. The 

study provided a good opportunity for students to learn about environmental sciences in a 

very “hands-on” way. Direct involvement of students in environmental monitoring will 

produce the next generation of informed decision-makers. 

Literature Cited 

Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada and Prairie Farm Rehabilitation Administration (AA-F and 

PFRA). 2004 Summary of resources and land use issues related to riparian areas in the 

Brokenhead River watershed study area. Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada – Prairie Farm 

Rehabilitation Administration, Winnipeg. 64 pp. 

Dontez, J. 2002. Brokenhead River watershed study. Aquatic and Environmental Consultants 

Ltd. 43 pp plus appendices. 

41 | P age

Kotak, B.G., A. Selinger and B. Johnston. 2005. Influence of watershed features and disturbance 

history on water quality in Boreal Shield streams and rivers of eastern Manitoba. Manitoba 

Model Forest Report 04-2-63. 161 pp. 

Smith, R.E., G.F. Veldhuis, G.F. Mills, R.G. Eilers, W.R. Fraser and G.W. Lelyk. 1998. 

Terrestrial ecozones, ecoregions and ecodistricts: An ecological stratification of Manitoba’s 

natural landscapes. Technical Bulletin 98-9E. Land Resource Unit, Brandon Research Centre, 

Research Branch, Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, Winnipeg, Manitoba. 

42 | P age

Appendix A. Water Quality Data in the Brokenhead River in 2007. 

43 | P age

MB05 SAS 033 

2007 Seasonal Variation 

Date E coli Ca Mg K Na SO4 TP TDP NO3 

CFU/100 mL mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L ug/L ug/L ug/L 

17-Jul-07 63 65.1 14.2 1.1 1.9 12.0 29 19 22 

29-Aug-07 30 66.5 18.3 1.9 2.5 0.0 18 8 0 

16-Oct-07 6 55.2 13.0 1.9 2.2 10.0 10 8 0 

Date NH3 TKN DOC pH Alkalinity Conductivity TDS Turbidity 

ug/L mg/L mg/L mg/L uS/cm mg/L NTU 

17-Jul-07 22 0.6 13 8.51 233 417 235 2.5 

29-Aug-07 3 0.5 11 8.44 242 432 234 2.3 

16-Oct-07 5 0.0 13 8.24 197 363 201 0.9 

MB05 SAS 034 



CFU/100 mL mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L ug/L ug/L ug/L ug/L 

17-Jul-07 21 51.4 16.1 1.0 3.1 15.0 48 29 40 

29-Aug-07 41 60.0 22.3 2.2 8.3 0.0 43 30 0 

16-Oct-07 34 42.6 15.3 2.6 4.8 14.0 42 34 89 



17-Jul-07 39 1.0 24 8.45 193 360 203 19.0 

29-Aug-07 13 1.1 18 8.57 226 445 228 4.7 

16-Oct-07 23 0.8 22 8.26 157 335 174 12.0 

44 | P age

MB05 SAS 037 




17-Jul-07 19 58.8 17.6 0.3 2.8 13.0 19 10 20 

29-Aug-07 15 69.2 23.1 0.9 4.3 0.0 24 20 0 

16-Oct-07 24 54.4 17.0 2.5 4.3 12.0 14 11 6 



17-Jul-07 24 0.9 23 8.38 226 410 228 2.0 

29-Aug-07 7 1.1 23 8.54 250 447 248 2.4 

16-Oct-07 33 0.0 18 8.24 198 394 209 2.4 

MB05 SAS 038 




17-Jul-07 22 51.2 16.6 1.1 3.4 15.0 59 40 59 

29-Aug-07 54 60.9 21.5 2.0 6.7 9.0 34 24 0 

16-Oct-07 52 45.4 17.0 3.3 5.9 15.0 64 17 315 



17-Jul-07 38 0.9 24 8.45 196 364 205 16.0 

29-Aug-07 11 1.0 21 8.52 222 434 233 7.1 

16-Oct-07 25 0.9 21 8.26 164 364 406 16.0 

45 | P age

MB05 SAS 041 




17-Jul-07 58 48.8 15.1 0.8 2.7 14.0 29 22 25 

29-Aug-07 52 55.2 19.8 1.7 5.8 0.0 24 18 0 

16-Oct-07 54 42.7 14.3 2.3 3.4 32.0 18 14 0 



17-Jul-07 32 0.9 23 8.49 187 344 194 4.3 

29-Aug-07 7 1.1 22 8.55 213 395 210 1.6 

16-Oct-07 10 0.8 23 8.30 157 315 189 3.5 

Hazel 

Creek 



CFU/100 

mL mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L ug/L ug/L ug/L ug/L 

17-Jul-07 10 45.4 13.1 1.1 2.1 16.0 29 27 17 

29-Aug-07 4 51.8 17.5 2.2 3.3 10.0 36 24 0 

16-Oct-07 6 44.5 13.4 1.7 2.5 14.0 15 11 7 



17-Jul-07 32 1.0 29 8.36 167 311 178 1.2 

29-Aug-07 11 1.1 27 8.27 187 346 197 1.0 

16-Oct-07 9 0.6 26 8.16 160 317 172 1.6 

46 | P age

Appendix B. Photos of Water Quality Sampling Sites in August 2007 

MB05SAS033 (Trans Canada Highway) Looking Upstream 

MB05SAS033 (Trans Canada Highway) Looking Downstream 

47 | P age

Hazel Creek Looking Upstream 

Hazel Creek Looking Downstream 

48 | P age

MB05SAS037 (Highway 15 near Vivian) Looking Upstream 

MB05SAS037 (Highway 15 near Vivian) Looking Downstream 

49 | P age

MB05SAS041 (Highway 44 east of Beausejour) 

Looking Upstream 

MB05SAS041 (Highway 44 east of Beausejour) 

Looking Downstream 

50 | P age

MB05SAS0034 (Highway 12 north of Highway 317) MB05SAS034 (Highway 12 north of Highway 317 

Looking Upstream 

Looking Downstream 

51 | P age

MB05SAS038 (Highway 59) Looking Upstream 

MB05SAS038 (Highway 59) Looking Downstream 

52 | P age

Assessment of Water Quality in the Brokenhead River Watershed

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?