Laserfiche WebLink
<br />~, . <br />i;; ':t.1. " <br /> <br />Table 7. Statistical summary of selected major-ion concentrations for stations 09095500 Colorado River near Cameo, <br />09152500 Gunnison River near Grand Junction, and 09163500 Colorado River near the Colorado-Utah State line, water <br />years 1970-93 <br />{Concenltalions in milligrams per liter; range is mimmum and maximum concentrations) <br /> Number Mean Standard Median Range <br />Station Constituent 0' samples deviation <br />09095500 Calcium 254 62.6 15.3 68 29-100 <br /> Magnesium 254 t5.5 4.3 17 6.4-25 <br /> Sodium 253 95.2 43.2 t04 t4-200 <br /> Sulfate 255 t24 44.8 136 32-220 <br /> Chloride 255 t24 60.6 134 11-270 <br /> . "--"-:.- .on 10 n ,., ';;O_IIU'l <br /> . "............ <br />09152500 C..lcium 204 100 44.8 91.5 30-240 <br /> Magnesium 204 34.2 14.4 32 7.8-68 <br /> Sodium 204 60.9 28.6 57 12-130 <br /> Sulfate 204 36t t89 330 62-930 <br /> Chloride 204 9.8 5.6 8.4 2.3-58 <br /> Alkalinily 204 t38 33.3 t37.5 17-22t <br />09163500 Calcium 210 93.4 32.7 88.5 37-200 <br /> Magnesium 210 31.0 11.6 31 9.6-73 <br /> Sodium 210 90.6 36.6 93 18-190 <br /> SuIrate 209 296 t32 270 67-670 <br /> Chloride 210 80.0 35.7 82 11-l70 <br /> Alkalinity 210 144 26.6 150 82-220 <br /> <br />Tests on individual ions generally had similar <br />trend test results as the unadjusted dissolved-solids <br />concentrations (table 2) for the same stations and <br />periods, except for station 09 I 52500 on the Gunnison <br />River for water years] 986-93. There were upward <br />trends in the four major-ion concentrations for <br />station 09152500 for ]986-93 (table 8). Although <br />the magnitude of the slopes might seem large [such as <br />25.] (mgIL)/yr for sulfate], the p values were not sig- <br />nificant or were marginally significant. The cumula- <br />tive effect of the upward trends for individual ions <br />manifests itself in a significant upward trend slope of <br />42.6 (mglL)/yr (table 2) in dissolved-solids concentra- <br />tions for 1986-93 for the Gunnison River. <br /> <br />When flow adjusted (from log-log regressions), <br />many major-ion concentrations had significant or <br />highly significant downward trends for certain time <br />periods. All flow-adjusted major-ion trends were <br />either significant or highly significant for water <br />years 1970-93 for all three stations (table 8). By con- <br />trast, many of the trend slopes for 1980-93 were not <br />significanl. Flow-adjusted sodium concentrations <br />had significant downward trends at both Colorado <br />River stations, and flow-adjusted magnesium concen- <br />trations had a highly significant downward trend at <br />station 09095500 in 1980-93. As with dissolved <br />solids, there were differences in the trend results <br />among time periods. <br /> <br />24 Trend Analysts 01 Setectad Water-Quallty Data Asaoclatad With Sallnlty-Control Projects In the Grand Valley, <br />In the Lower Gunnison River Basin, and at Meeker Dome, Western Colorado <br />