probabilistic monitoring of streams below small impoundments in tennessee

37
Probabilistic Monitoring of Streams Below Small Impoundments in Tennessee Debbie Arnwine Water Pollution Control 615-532-0703 [email protected]

Upload: ross

Post on 24-Feb-2016

42 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

DESCRIPTION

Probabilistic Monitoring of Streams Below Small Impoundments in Tennessee. Debbie Arnwine Water Pollution Control 615-532-0703 [email protected]. 2003 probabilistic study of 75 streams downstream of small impoundments. Macroinvertebrates Nutrients Dissolved Oxygen Temperature pH - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: Probabilistic Monitoring of Streams Below Small Impoundments in Tennessee

Probabilistic Monitoring of Streams Below Small Impoundments in Tennessee

Debbie ArnwineWater Pollution [email protected]

Page 2: Probabilistic Monitoring of Streams Below Small Impoundments in Tennessee

2003 probabilistic study of 75 streams downstream of small impoundments• Macroinvertebrates• Nutrients• Dissolved Oxygen• Temperature• pH• Suspended Solids• Iron and manganese• Habitat• Flow and morphology• Periphyton Density

Page 3: Probabilistic Monitoring of Streams Below Small Impoundments in Tennessee

Over 195,000 small man-made lakes and ponds in Tennessee

1,302 recorded in databases

Potential for public access (safe dams)Built after 1992 (ARAP)

Page 4: Probabilistic Monitoring of Streams Below Small Impoundments in Tennessee

Site Selection

Random Selection

75 impounded streams

< 250 acres

Page 5: Probabilistic Monitoring of Streams Below Small Impoundments in Tennessee

Perennial stream with sufficient flow (during recon) to provide macroinver-tebrate habitat.

Page 6: Probabilistic Monitoring of Streams Below Small Impoundments in Tennessee

Suitable habitat to use TDEC’s semi-quantitative protocols

Rooted Bank Habitat

Riffle Kicks

Page 7: Probabilistic Monitoring of Streams Below Small Impoundments in Tennessee

Comparable bioregion and size to existing reference streams or project-specific

reference

Page 8: Probabilistic Monitoring of Streams Below Small Impoundments in Tennessee

Upstream Reference not Feasible

• Impoundment flooded entire headwaters

• Second impoundment immediately upstream

• Drainage area upstream not 80% within same bioregion.

• Stream size too small upstream of impoundment.

Page 9: Probabilistic Monitoring of Streams Below Small Impoundments in Tennessee

One upstream site was suitable.

Page 10: Probabilistic Monitoring of Streams Below Small Impoundments in Tennessee

Minimum observable impacts not associated with impoundment

Page 11: Probabilistic Monitoring of Streams Below Small Impoundments in Tennessee

Impoundments built for agricultural purposes were included.

Livestock pens built on dam.

Page 12: Probabilistic Monitoring of Streams Below Small Impoundments in Tennessee

Accessible

Page 13: Probabilistic Monitoring of Streams Below Small Impoundments in Tennessee

Site reconnaissance(200 recons to get 75 sites)

Other2%

No impound-ment4%

No comparable reference

1%

Insufficient habitat

6%Intermittent

7%

No access11%

No flow32%

Suitable37%

Page 14: Probabilistic Monitoring of Streams Below Small Impoundments in Tennessee

Site Characterization• Impounded 1960 - 1980 (50%)• Surface Discharge (69%)• Forested Drainage Area (77%)• 2nd Order Stream (53%)• < 50 acres (70%)

Page 15: Probabilistic Monitoring of Streams Below Small Impoundments in Tennessee

Macroinvertebrate SamplesSemi-quantitative Single Habitat Spring and Fall

Tennessee Macroinvertebrate Index (TMI)• Taxa Richness• EPT Richness• %EPT• %OC• NCBI• %Dominant• %Clingers• Ky % Nutrient Tolerant

Page 16: Probabilistic Monitoring of Streams Below Small Impoundments in Tennessee

95% Failed to Meet Biocriteria

Failed Spring and Fall

77%

Passed Spring and Fall

5%

Failed Spring only11%

Failed Fall only4%

Uncertain3%

Page 17: Probabilistic Monitoring of Streams Below Small Impoundments in Tennessee

Individual Biometrics

0102030405060708090

100Pe

rcen

t fai

l

TR EPT

%EP

T

%O

C

NC

BI

%D

OM

%C

LIN

G

%N

UTO

L

Biometric

Page 18: Probabilistic Monitoring of Streams Below Small Impoundments in Tennessee

Dominant taxa indicative of nutrients and/or sluggish flow

Fall: Dominant = Cheumatopsyche and Glyptotendipes spp.

Spring: Dominant = Lirceus, Parametriocnemus and Polypedilum spp.

Page 19: Probabilistic Monitoring of Streams Below Small Impoundments in Tennessee

Example of biological data pre and post impoundment

13

3

9

00

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

Num

ber

of T

axa

EPT Taxa Intolerant Taxa

1997 Pre-impoundment 2003 Post-impoundment

Page 20: Probabilistic Monitoring of Streams Below Small Impoundments in Tennessee

FLOW

52% insufficient flow to sustain aquatic life at least one season (25% dry).

Page 21: Probabilistic Monitoring of Streams Below Small Impoundments in Tennessee

Precipitation generally at or above 25 year averageBristol Airport

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

Month

Inch

es

Avg precip. 1978 - 2002Precip. 2003 - 2004

Page 22: Probabilistic Monitoring of Streams Below Small Impoundments in Tennessee

Headwater reference sites had adequate flow every season.

Page 23: Probabilistic Monitoring of Streams Below Small Impoundments in Tennessee

Comparison of discharge types

Standpipe Spillway Subsurface Multiple0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

% M

aint

ain

flow

Page 24: Probabilistic Monitoring of Streams Below Small Impoundments in Tennessee

Geomorphology

49% relative stable channels typical of ecoregion

24% “G-type” –deeply entrenched, unstable banks, heavy sediment loads

Page 25: Probabilistic Monitoring of Streams Below Small Impoundments in Tennessee

20% E-Type in response to lack of flow. Small channel cut within original stream bed.

Original Channel

00.20.40.60.8

11.21.41.6

0 5 10 15 20 25 30Distance (feet)

Ele

vatio

n (fe

et) C

alcu

late

d

Incised Channel

D50 = Bedrock

Page 26: Probabilistic Monitoring of Streams Below Small Impoundments in Tennessee

Dominant bed material becomes smaller below impoundments

Ecoregion Reference Impounded65 Sand Silt66 ,67,68, 69 Boulder/Cobble Gravel71 Bedrock/Cobble Gravel74 Sand Silt

Page 27: Probabilistic Monitoring of Streams Below Small Impoundments in Tennessee

HABITAT70% of sites failed overall habitat

Sedim

ent

Sinuosit

y

Bank Vegetation

Bank Stabilit

y

Pool Varia

bility

Embeddedness

Epifaunal S

ubstrate

Velocity/D

epth

Riparian

Riffle Fr

equency0

102030405060708090

100

Perc

ent F

ailin

g re

gion

al g

uide

lines

Page 28: Probabilistic Monitoring of Streams Below Small Impoundments in Tennessee

Dissolved Oxygen

Fail 5 mg/L21%

Fail trout streams

3%

Fail Blue Ridge

3%Fail NRTS

1%

Pass DO Criteria

72%Based on instantaneous day time measurement

Page 29: Probabilistic Monitoring of Streams Below Small Impoundments in Tennessee

DO Measurements do not tell the whole story.

• Instantaneous measurement during daylight hours.

• Presence of algae at most sites indicates possible large diurnal swings.

• 17% of sites supersaturated.• Percent saturation at 77% of sites below 10th percentile of reference data.

Page 30: Probabilistic Monitoring of Streams Below Small Impoundments in Tennessee

TEMPERATURE11% of sites exceeded criteria.

72% above fall reference temps.

2468

1012141618202224

65e

66d

66e

66g

67g

67h

68a

68c

71f

71g

71h

74a

74b

TestRefEcoregion

Tem

p (C

)

Page 31: Probabilistic Monitoring of Streams Below Small Impoundments in Tennessee

pH

5% of sites had low pH

Page 32: Probabilistic Monitoring of Streams Below Small Impoundments in Tennessee

Suspended Solids

50% of sites had elevated suspended solids.

Land use associated with small impoundments contributes to the problem.

Page 33: Probabilistic Monitoring of Streams Below Small Impoundments in Tennessee

Iron and Manganese61% of sites above recommended iron criterion of 1000 ug/L

93% of sites above reference levels for manganese

Page 34: Probabilistic Monitoring of Streams Below Small Impoundments in Tennessee

Nutrients

NO2+NO3 TP Both05

101520253035404550

FallWinterSpringSummer

% e

xcee

d cr

iteria

41% exceeded NO2+NO3 criteria at least one season.

75% exceeded total phosphorus criteria at least one season.

Page 35: Probabilistic Monitoring of Streams Below Small Impoundments in Tennessee

Periphyton

Excessive Macroalgae

20%

Dry6%

Excessive Microalgae

31%

Natural Algae Density

43%

Page 36: Probabilistic Monitoring of Streams Below Small Impoundments in Tennessee

Detailed Reporthttp://www.tn.gov/environment/wpc/publications/

(or at the back of the room!)

Probabilistic Monitoring of Streams Below Small Impoundments in Tennessee

Page 37: Probabilistic Monitoring of Streams Below Small Impoundments in Tennessee

QUESTIONS?

Debbie ArnwineWater Pollution [email protected]

www.tn.gov/environment/wpc/publications/