Upload
gervase-thornton
View
236
Download
7
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Watersheds
• What is a watershed?
• 93 watersheds in Ohio.
Riparian Zone• Riparian Zone- type of wetland between the stream and upland habitat, 90 meters on each side of the river.
Bad Riparian Zone•Good Riparian Zone
Important Terms
• Nutrient Enrichment: The presence of too many nutrients (primarily nitrogen and phosphorus) in the water. Usually causes eutrophication.
• Eutrophication: Addition of excessive nutrients (nitrates and phosphates) to a body of water, leading to overgrowth of aquatic plants (such as algae).The overgrowth usually kills the animal life in the water.
Water Quality Evaluation Terms
• IBI- The diversity of fish species
• ICI- The diversity of macroinvertebrates
• QHEI- The quality of the habitat
Description of Our Watershed
Counties: Hardin, Logan, Union, Marion.
Watershed Land Use
• Mostly row crops, some pasture/hay and deciduous forests
• Three main urban areas
Kenton
Bucyrus
Marion
Causes of Impairment
Hypothesis 1Best management practices leads to
increased biodiversity.
Average IBI & ICI vs. Percent of Forest Area
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
1977 1984 1987 1992 1995 1998 1999
Years
IBI a
nd IC
I
0.00%
2.00%
4.00%
6.00%
8.00%
10.00%
12.00%
14.00%
16.00%
IBI
ICI
Forest
Average IBI vs. Percent of Urban Area
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
1977 1984 1987 1992 1995 1998 1999
Years
IBI
0.00%
0.50%
1.00%
1.50%
2.00%
2.50%
3.00%
3.50%
4.00%
4.50%
5.00%
IBI
Urban
Hypothesis 2
Increased eutrophication leads to decreased biodiversity.
IBI vs.Nitrate
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
1977 1984 1987 1992 1995 1998 1999
Year
Av
. IB
I
0
0.05
0.1
0.15
0.2
0.25
0.3
0.35
0.4
Nit
rate IBI
nitrate
ICI vs. Nitrate
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
1977 1984 1987 1992 1995 1998 1999
Year
ICI
0
0.05
0.1
0.15
0.2
0.25
0.3
0.35
0.4
Nitr
ate ICI
nitrate
Hypothesis 3
As the amount of forested riparian zone is decreased, the quality of the habitat is decreased.
As the amount of urban riparian zone is increased, the quality of the habitat is decreased.
Riparian forest land vs. QHEI
40
42
44
46
48
50
52
1977 1984 1987 1992 1995 1998 1999
Year
QH
EI
0.00%
2.00%
4.00%
6.00%
8.00%
10.00%
12.00%
14.00%
16.00%
Pe
rce
nta
ge
Av_QHEI
Forest
Urban Riparian Zones vs. QHEI
40
42
44
46
48
50
52
1977 1984 1987 1992 1995 1998 1999
Year
QH
EI
0.00%
0.50%
1.00%
1.50%
2.00%
2.50%
3.00%
3.50%
4.00%
4.50%
5.00%
Per
cent
age
Av_QHEI
Urban
Conclusions
• All hypotheses were supported by the data
• Area needs better land use management– Stop cutting down forest riparian zones– Farmers need to be educated about runoff and
how to prevent fertilizer from entering waterways
– Urbanization needs regulation to control water quality problems