Correlation Analysis
The following
four tables present simple correlation analysis on the
un-transformed sample data for key parameters: total N, total P, TSS,
BOD5, and flow. The purpose of the four tables is to partition
effects that might be due to different factors, such as point and
non point sources of pollution. The first table offers correlations
on all sites, the second Spring Run only, the third Dumpling Run
only, and the fourth excludes point source impacted sites in Spring
Run. More sophisticated approaches will be used in future reports
when the size of the data set makes them more appropriate.
Table 1. Correlations for key parameters and flow at all stations.
|
|
Total N (mg/L) |
TP (mg/L) |
TSS (mg/L) |
BOD5 (mg/L) |
FLOW (cfs) |
Total
N (mg/L) |
1.0000 |
** |
*** |
* |
*** |
TP
(mg/L) |
0.4216 |
1.0000 |
n.s. |
n.s. |
n.s. |
TSS
(mg/L) |
0.9191 |
0.2813 |
1.0000 |
** |
*** |
BOD5
(mg/L) |
0.3759 |
-0.0505 |
0.4365 |
1.0000 |
n.s. |
FLOW
(cfs) |
0.8365 |
0.2197 |
0.7987 |
0.2874 |
1.0000 |
Table 2. Correlations for key parameters and flow for Spring Run
stations only. |
|
Total N (mg/L) |
TP (mg/L) |
TSS (mg/L) |
BOD5 (mg/L) |
FLOW (cfs) |
Total
N (mg/L) |
1.0000 |
n.s. |
*** |
** |
*** |
TP
(mg/L) |
0.3173 |
1.0000 |
n.s. |
n.s. |
n.s. |
TSS
(mg/L) |
0.9832 |
0.2411 |
1.0000 |
** |
*** |
BOD5
(mg/L) |
0.6300 |
0.0432 |
0.5862 |
1.0000 |
*** |
FLOW
(cfs) |
0.8293 |
-0.0597 |
0.8269 |
0.7771 |
1.0000 |
Table 3. Correlations for key parameters and flow for Dumpling Run
stations only. |
|
Total N (mg/L) |
TP (mg/L) |
TSS (mg/L) |
BOD5 (mg/L) |
FLOW (cfs) |
Total
N (mg/L) |
1.0000 |
n.s. |
*** |
n.s. |
*** |
TP
(mg/L) |
0.2753 |
1.0000 |
n.s. |
* |
n.s. |
TSS
(mg/L) |
0.9217 |
0.2572 |
1.0000 |
n.s. |
*** |
BOD5
(mg/L) |
0.4981 |
0.6347 |
0.4650 |
1.0000 |
n.s. |
FLOW
(cfs) |
0.8873 |
0.0368 |
0.9013 |
0.3905 |
1.0000 |
Table 4. Correlations for key parameters and flow for all stations
except SR Middle and SR Bottom (i.e. NPS stations).
|
|
Total N (mg/L) |
TP (mg/L) |
TSS (mg/L) |
BOD5 (mg/L) |
FLOW (cfs) |
Total
N (mg/L) |
1.0000 |
n.s. |
*** |
n.s. |
*** |
TP
(mg/L) |
0.3636 |
1.0000 |
n.s. |
n.s. |
n.s. |
TSS
(mg/L) |
0.9338 |
0.3814 |
1.0000 |
n.s. |
*** |
BOD5
(mg/L) |
0.1290 |
0.4550 |
0.1904 |
1.0000 |
n.s. |
FLOW
(cfs) |
0.8625 |
0.1273 |
0.7669 |
0.0224 |
1.0000 |
Correlation
Tables Note:
n.s. means not significant; * = significant at p=0.05; ** =
significant at 0.01; *** = significant at 0.001
Certain results
were consistent across all four tables. Total nitrogen and TSS were
strongly and positively correlated with flow, and with each other.
These were also the only significant correlations for the non-point
impacted sites (Table 4). TSS was also positively correlated with
BOD5 in Spring Run (Table 2) and overall (Table 1). BOD5 was
positively correlated with flow in Spring Run (Table 2).
Discussion of
water quality results
The two study
streams are impacted by a variety of potential sources of pollution,
some readily apparent and some not. The Spring Run watershed
contains the trout rearing facility point source, which is a known
source of BOD, TSS and nutrients, as well as a number of non point
sources including poultry houses, residences, and roads. The
Dumpling Run watershed has no point sources, and apparently no
poultry houses, but includes residences and small farms with
livestock. In addition, the source springs in both watersheds both
originate in limestone and sandstone strata and show rapid changes
(turbidity, increase in flow) following heavy precipitation; this is
indicative of solution channel connections through limestone at the
surface of the ground.
Despite the
wealth of confounding variables, some patterns are reasonably clear
from the baseline data. The spring source water for the two streams
has similar pH, conductivity, dissolved oxygen, and phosphorus.
Source water in Dumpling Run tends to have less nitrate, nitrite,
and total N than Spring Run, and higher BOD5 and TSS. Conductivity
and pH tend to increase or not change in a downstream direction in
Dumpling Run, and tend to decrease in a downstream direction in
Spring Run. Nutrients and TSS are generally similar in the two
Dumpling Run sites, and tend to increase in a downstream direction
in Spring Run, often dramatically.
The decision to
collect water samples two days after the scheduled Monday cleanouts
at the hatchery contributed to the apparently anomalous result of
Dumpling Run having somewhat more BOD5 and TSS than Spring Run. It
is quite clear that we are not observing a significant residual
impact in the water column from those cleanouts two days after the
fact.
The purpose
of this report was simply to establish baseline conditions in Spring
Run and Dumpling Run. Future reports will include more
comprehensive analyses of these data in the context of changing
conditions in Spring Run.
Benthic &
Periphyton Analysis
Data for 2005
not yet available. However, an assessment of Spring Run in 2003 by
WVDEP (Tim Craddock, 2003) collected benthic invertebrate samples at
sites near those chosen for the current study. The study found low
diversity at the lower station, where the most abundant family was
the Chironomidae, an indicator of organic pollution. It also found
abundant Gammaridae amphipods at all sites. (See Appendix 3 for
results.)
Observations
during benthic field collections also indicated abundance, often
overwhelming abundance, of amphipods at all sites in both streams
(Craddock and Gillies, personal observations). Amphipods are often
abundant in limestone spring fed streams, and their abundance
renders many standard benthic invertebrate indices unsuitable for
assessing this type of stream. Assessment of benthic communities in
this setting will depend on comparisons between control and
experimental sites, not standard metrics.
Fisherman Survey
Data currently
being analyzed.
Evaluation of
Fisheries Resources in Spring Run, Grant County, West Virginia
The West
Virginia Division of Natural Resources in cooperation with the West
Virginia Conservation Agency conducted a fisheries survey in the fly
fishing managed section of Spring Run on May 23, 2005. Sampling
began at the downstream end of stream section #4 and extended 110
meters upstream. A brief summary of the WVDNR report follows.
The Spring Run
fish survey was conducted by triple pass backpack electro fishing.
Collected specimens were measured, weighed and released downstream
from the survey area. A total of 122 fishes were captured. Rainbow
trout was the most common species and 112 individuals
comprised 91.8% of the relative abundance. Three additional species
were also captured: brook trout, brown trout Salmo trutta and
mottled sculpin Cottus bairdi. The total biomass observed
from the 110-meter stream reach was 8.582 kg; rainbow trout
contributed 7.212 kg to the total. Length frequencies indicated
strong year classes of rainbow trout in the 110 mm and 200 mm size
range and few fish in the larger size groups.
Only one non-game / prey species was observed, which reflects the
domination of predatory fish in Spring Run.
WVDNR found a
high rainbow trout density, with a biomass of rainbow trout under 6
inches greater than 12 kg/ha. A “Class A” wild rainbow trout stream
in Pennsylvania has a total biomass greater than 2.0 kg/ha of
rainbow trout under 6 inches (Graff 1997). Despite the high biomass
of up to 6-inch rainbow trout, the report noted a dramatic
difference in overall fish biomass per acre when compared to a 1978
Spring Run survey (311 lbs./acre in 1978 vs. 133 lbs./acre in 2005,
based on an average stream width of 19 feet). (Note: the 1978
survey (Gerald Lewis, unpublished data, 1978) was performed just
above the confluence with South Mill Creek, which is a distinctly
different stream. WVDNR conducted a second survey in Spring Run in
2005 in the same area; once these results are available, they will
be compared to the 1978 survey.)
Update On
Upgrade Of Rearing Facility
As of this
writing, the engineering study for the plant upgrade is nearing
completion. Working drawings are expected in early 2006, and the
WVDNR anticipates putting the project out for bid in the spring of
2006. If all of the above dates are achieved, construction may
begin as early as June or July of 2006. (Rick Backus, WVDNR,
personal communication)
Benthic Workshop
Press Release
“An educational
day couldn’t get any better than this,” was the statement made by
Arthur Halterman, middle and high school teacher at East Hardy Early
Middle School. Mr. Halterman was referring to the recent
benthic-monitoring workshop held on Spring Run on May 6, 2004.
Friends of Spring Run’s Wild Trout hosted the one-day workshop in
Grant County as a component of the new three-year environmental
study that recently commenced on Spring Run. Over forty individuals
took part in the hands-on program.
Spring Run is
the focus of an intensive water quality research project involving
numerous agencies and non-governmental organizations. West Virginia
Department of Natural Resources owns and operates the Spring Run
Trout Hatchery located immediately above the 2.5-mile stretch of
stream being monitored. The hatchery is preparing to install an
effluent treatment process at the facility to meet their permit
requirements and improve the quality of water leaving the
facility. The research project will gather water chemistry,
benthics, periphyton (attached algae and other organisms that live
on surface of rocks) and fish samples to assess the present water
quality prior to the upgrade of the effluent treatment process. Two
consecutive years of monitoring will follow implementation to
determine the long-term benefits of the upgrade. This research
project is being financed by the West Virginia Conservation Agency
through the Chesapeake Bay Program.
Friends of
Spring Run’s Wild Trout, West Virginia Conservation Agency, Cacapon
Institute, WV Department of Agriculture, WV Division of Natural
Resources and WV Department of Environmental Protection are all
partnering on this project and are striving to raise awareness and
educate the community on the importance of maintaining/improving
water quality. The benthic workshop brought together a diverse
group of individuals ranging from students; fly-fisherman,
environmental professional and community leaders to better
understand freshwater ecology. Friends of Spring Run’s Wild Trout
through a Potomac Valley Conservation District Mini-grant sponsored
the field day. For more information on this project contact Carla
Hardy at 304.538.7581.
Volunteer
Involvement
The Potomac Christian
Educators, a home school group with members located in the North
Mill Creek watershed, Petersburg, Cabins and the surrounding area
will also be contributing to the project. This group has been
trained and certified by WV Save Our Streams and will use the level
one methods to monitor Spring Run at the lower portions of the catch
and release area. The results of their first monitoring from August
of 2005 can be viewed on the Internet through WV Save Our Streams
Volunteer Access Database (VAD)
http://www.wvdep.org/dwwm/wvsos/vad/index.htm.
At the sign-in screen, select “View
stream assessment reports”; you do not have to register to view
reports. You will see a complete list of streams currently in the
database. To locate the Spring Run report, select the South Branch
Potomac basin and click-on [GO].
The stream names and report codes are listed in alphabetical order.
Outreach-
Watershed Celebration Day and Volunteer Monitoring in the
Mid-Atlantic- Displays & awards
Education and outreach
are a key component to this study. A table top display has been
designed and displayed at several conferences including 2005
Watershed Celebration Day and the recent Volunteer Monitoring in the
Mid-Atlantic Conference held in Canaan Valley. The display gives a
comprehensive overview of the study and encourages public interest
and participation.
Plan to use NSR
techniques on eroding channel
Friends of Spring
Run’s Wild Trout are recipients of a 2005 Stream Partners Grant.
Through this funding, FSRWT will join with and support the
multi-agency, multi-year Spring Run Rehabilitation and Monitoring
Project. The objective is to use natural stream restoration
techniques to slow down the excessive amount of sediment entering
Spring Run with each rain event from a drainage channel above the
spring. The original bed of this channel was relocated by road
construction and is now constrained on one side by the road and on
the other side by a steep hillside. The worst erosion is occurring
in a section approximately 300’ in length and 6’deep. While it
would be possible to treat the problem with stone rip-rap, FSRWT has
decided to seek a more natural solution using a series of step pools
to slow down the velocity of water (reducing its erosive force),
center the flow in the channel and away from the banks, and create
benthic habitat in this intermittent stream The West Virginia
Conservation Agency is in the process of project design and will
oversee the installation of the in-stream structures. The end
product will be a demonstration project that WVCA, FSRWT and WVDNR
will be able to use to endorse natural stream restoration techniques
to the public. It is expected that construction will commence
February 2006.
Year Two
expectations
With the actual date
for upgrading effluent treatment at the trout rearing facility
uncertain, we are considering the possibility of extending baseline
data collections until that occurs. A final decision will be made
based on availability of funds to support additional sampling.
Otherwise, the next phase of this project will be put on hold until
the upgrade is complete.
Literature
Craddock, T.
2003. WV Save Our Streams Ecological Assessment of Spring Run.
Unpublished report.
Graff, D. R. 1997. Management of trout fisheries
in Pennsylvania waters. Division of Fisheries Management,
Pennsylvania Fish and Boat Commission. Federal Aid in Fish
Restoration. Project F-57-R. Available at: http://sites.state.pa.us/fish/trman98.htm
Hedrick, Jim. 2005. Evaluation of Fisheries Resources in Spring
Run, Grant County, West Virginia. Unpublished report conducted on
July 08, 2005 by Jim Hedrick, District Fisheries Biologist, WVDNR
and Carla Hardy, Watershed Specialist, WCVA.
SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1Helsel, D. R., & R. M. Hirsh, 1992. Studies in
Environmental Science 49: Statistical Methods in Water Resources.
Elsevier Science Publishers B.V. 522 pp.