Upload
uta
View
47
Download
1
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
NC Division of Water Quality Water Quality Assessments and Local Watershed Plans. DWQ Tasks. Compile and review existing data What is known about the watershed What needs to be known to help develop management strategies to improve water quality Develop a monitoring plan - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Citation preview
NC Division of Water Quality
Water Quality Assessments
and
Local Watershed Plans
DWQ Tasks
1. Compile and review existing data – What is known about the watershed
– What needs to be known to help develop management strategies to improve water quality
2. Develop a monitoring plan– Conduct appropriate assessments, e.g. chemical,
biological, etc.
3. Report on results integrating results of all assessments
Types of Water Quality Assessments Conducted by DWQ
• Chemical Monitoring (includes field measurements)
• Biological Monitoring – benthos and/or fish
• Habitat Assessments
• Wetland Functional Assessments (new in 2008)
• Quantitative
• Can pinpoint locations of problems
• Identify the specific nature of problems
• Expensive
• Requires many samples to characterize pollutant effects in a watershed
• A sample represents only a single point in time
Why Use Chemical Monitoring?
Benefits Limitations
Types of Measurements
• Field – Dissolved Oxygen, pH, specific conductance, water temperature
• Nutrients – Nitrogen and phosphorous
• Solids (e.g. total suspended solids)
• Turbidity
• Metals
Example of Results - ChemistryAmmonia nitrogen at Q8360000 -- Goose Cr. @ SR 1524 nr. Mint Hill
Year
1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
NH
3 as
N (
mg/
L)
0.001
0.01
0.1
1
10
100
Note reduction in NH3concentrations, beginning in August 2006
• Aquatic organisms found in all habitats
• Easily and inexpensively collected
• Integrates the effect of mixtures of pollutants over the life cycle of the organism
• Semi-quantitative
• Does not identify the source of pollution or the specific pollutants
• Seasonality & taxonomic inconsistencies
Why Conduct Biological Monitoring?
Benefits Limitations
Benthic Macroinvertebrates
• Benthic - The community of organisms living in or on the bottom or other substrate in an aquatic environment
• Macro - Large enough to be seen by the unaided eye and which can be retained by a U.S. standard no. 30 seive (0.6 mm openings)
• Invertebrate - animals without backbones
Benthic Macroinvertebrates Include
• Ephemeroptera - Mayflies• Plecoptera - Stoneflies• Trichoptera - Caddisflies• Odonata - Damsel and Dragonflies• Coleoptera - Beetles• Megaloptera - Dobson and Alderflies• Diptera - True Flies• Oligochaeta - Aquatic Worms• Crustacea - Crayfish, Amphipods,
Isopods• Mollusca - Snails and Clams
Mayfly
Stonefly
Caddisfly
P
E
T
P
E
T
Unimpacted Site- greater diversity and number of individuals
Assigning BioclassificationsUsing Macroinvertebrates
• Taxa Richness (number of species)– Total number of species– Total number of EPT species
• Biotic Index (uses a species’ tolerance to pollution and measures of species abundances)– Species are assigned a “tolerance value” (range 0 to 10)– A Biotic Index (BI; range 0 to 10) is a weighted
average of the “abundance” and “tolerance value”– Higher BI values indicate poorer conditions (i.e., more
tolerant species present)
Benthos Data for Goose/Crooked CreeksNumber of
Species
25
50
75
10
0
(1996) Goose Cr - US 601
(1998) Goose Cr - US 601
(2001) Goose Cr - US 601
(2006) Goose Cr - US 601
(1998) Goose Cr - Glamorgan Rd.
(1998) Goose Cr - near Lake Dr.
(1998) Goose Cr - SR 1004
(1998) Goose Cr - SR 1524
(1998) Goose Cr - SR 1525
(1998) Goose Cr - SR 1533
(1998) Goose Cr - SR 1547
(1998) Duck Cr - US 601
(1996) Crooked Cr - SR 1547
(2001) Crooked Cr - SR 1547
(2006) Crooked Cr - SR 1547
(1995) N Fk Crooked Cr - SR 1004
(1995) N Fk Crooked Cr - SR 1514
(2000) N Fk Crooked Cr - SR 1514
(1995) N Fk Crooked Cr - SR 1520
(2000) N Fk Crooked Cr - SR 1520
(1995) S Fk Crooked Cr - SR 1367
(1995) S Fk Crooked Cr - SR 1515
(1995) S Fk Crooked Cr - upstream of SR 1515
(1998) Stevens Cr - Maple Hollow Rd.
(1998) Ut Stevens Cr - Thompson Rd.
EPT species NonEPT
2 4 6 8 10 2 4 6 8 10
SampleMethodLocation
Full Scale
Full Scale
Full Scale
Full Scale
Full Scale
Full Scale
EPT
Full Scale
EPT
EPT
Full ScaleFull Scale
Full Scale
Full Scale
Full Scale
Full Scale
Full Scale
Full ScaleFull Scale
EPTEPTFull ScaleEPTFull Scale
EPT
Good
Good-Fair
BioClassification
Not Impaired
Poor
FairFair
FairFairFair
FairGood-Fair
Good-FairFairFairFair
FairPoorGood-Fair
Good-Fair
FairGoodFairPoor
Poor
Poor
Biotic IndexEPT
Biotic Index
Lower BI scores =
better water quality
Go
os
e C
ree
kC
roo
ke
d C
ree
k
Contact Information:
NC Division of Water Quality
Tom Yocum (336) 771-4953
Steven Kroeger (919) 733-9726