Top Banner
Dry Run Creek: Urban vs. Rural Surficial Water Quality Variability Nick Bosshart and Austin Cox
29

Dry Run Creek: Urban vs. Rural Surficial Water Quality Variability

Feb 25, 2016

Download

Documents

Trudy

Dry Run Creek: Urban vs. Rural Surficial Water Quality Variability. Nick Bosshart and Austin Cox. Urban vs. Rural Surficial Water Quality Variability of Dry Run Creek. The difference in water characteristics during transit through Cedar Falls: Urban runoff, A djacent construction - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Welcome message from author
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
Page 1: Dry Run Creek: Urban  vs. Rural Surficial Water Quality  Variability

Dry Run Creek: Urban vs. Rural Surficial Water Quality Variability

Nick Bosshart and Austin Cox

Page 2: Dry Run Creek: Urban  vs. Rural Surficial Water Quality  Variability

Urban vs. Rural Surficial Water Quality Variability of Dry Run Creek

• The difference in water characteristics during transit through Cedar Falls:– Urban runoff, – Adjacent construction – Artificial banks– Storm drains– Sump drainage– Commercial pollution

Page 3: Dry Run Creek: Urban  vs. Rural Surficial Water Quality  Variability

Study Sub-Set:Site 4: Water Quality Trends,

Stagnant Pool vs. Downstream

• Differences in traits?– T– pH– TDS– D.O.– B.O.D.

Page 4: Dry Run Creek: Urban  vs. Rural Surficial Water Quality  Variability

Water Quality Influence

Page 5: Dry Run Creek: Urban  vs. Rural Surficial Water Quality  Variability

Non-point source, turned point source

Page 6: Dry Run Creek: Urban  vs. Rural Surficial Water Quality  Variability
Page 7: Dry Run Creek: Urban  vs. Rural Surficial Water Quality  Variability

Rural-Site #4

Page 8: Dry Run Creek: Urban  vs. Rural Surficial Water Quality  Variability
Page 9: Dry Run Creek: Urban  vs. Rural Surficial Water Quality  Variability
Page 10: Dry Run Creek: Urban  vs. Rural Surficial Water Quality  Variability
Page 11: Dry Run Creek: Urban  vs. Rural Surficial Water Quality  Variability
Page 12: Dry Run Creek: Urban  vs. Rural Surficial Water Quality  Variability
Page 13: Dry Run Creek: Urban  vs. Rural Surficial Water Quality  Variability

Urban- Site #8

Page 14: Dry Run Creek: Urban  vs. Rural Surficial Water Quality  Variability
Page 15: Dry Run Creek: Urban  vs. Rural Surficial Water Quality  Variability
Page 16: Dry Run Creek: Urban  vs. Rural Surficial Water Quality  Variability

Field Methods• Temp

• Total Dissolved Solids

• Dissolved Oxygen

• pH

Page 17: Dry Run Creek: Urban  vs. Rural Surficial Water Quality  Variability

Lab Methods

• 5th day D.O.

• Biochemical Oxygen Demand

Page 18: Dry Run Creek: Urban  vs. Rural Surficial Water Quality  Variability

Results: Temperature

Page 19: Dry Run Creek: Urban  vs. Rural Surficial Water Quality  Variability

Discussion: Temperature Results

• Site 8: consistently higher in temp

• Site 4: no notable difference in temp from stagnant pool to downstream

• Significant drop in temperature following rain event (both sites 4 & 8)

• Temp. trend: increasing temperature during transit through urban environment

Page 20: Dry Run Creek: Urban  vs. Rural Surficial Water Quality  Variability

Results: Dissolved oxygen

Page 21: Dry Run Creek: Urban  vs. Rural Surficial Water Quality  Variability

Discussion: D.O. Results• Dissolved oxygen content consistently higher at

site 8 (with the exception of our last data set)

• Site 4: No notable differences in D.O. between stagnant pool and downstream

• Significant drop in D.O. content at both Sites 4 & 8 after rain event

• D.O. trend of increasing content during transit through urban environment

Page 22: Dry Run Creek: Urban  vs. Rural Surficial Water Quality  Variability

Results: pH

Page 23: Dry Run Creek: Urban  vs. Rural Surficial Water Quality  Variability

Discussion: pH Results

• Site 4: No notable difference in pH between stagnant pool and downstream, with the exception of our last data set

• Site 8: Consistently higher pH, with the exception of our last data set

• pH lowered with rain event

• pH trend of increasing alkalinity during transit through urban environment

Page 24: Dry Run Creek: Urban  vs. Rural Surficial Water Quality  Variability

Results: Total Dissolved Solids

Page 25: Dry Run Creek: Urban  vs. Rural Surficial Water Quality  Variability

Discussion: TDS Results• Site 4: No notable difference between

stagnant pool and downstream

• Site 8: Consistently higher TDS content than Site 4

• TDS content slightly lowered after rain event

• TDS trend of increasing content during transit through urban environment

Page 26: Dry Run Creek: Urban  vs. Rural Surficial Water Quality  Variability

Results: Biochemical Oxygen Demand

Page 27: Dry Run Creek: Urban  vs. Rural Surficial Water Quality  Variability

Discussion: B.O.D. Results

• Site 4: First 3 data sets showing difference between stagnant pool and downstream

• Site 8: Consistently higher B.O.D.

• B.O.D. lowered slightly in conjunction with rain event

• B.O.D. trend of increasing oxygen consumption during transit through urban environment

Page 28: Dry Run Creek: Urban  vs. Rural Surficial Water Quality  Variability

Discussion: Possible Future Investigation

• Dissolved Solids: Ion Chromatograpy? XRF? (Element specific changes during transit through urban environment)

• Phosphate, Nitrate, Chlorine, other compounds…

• Concentration correlations with biodiversity?(what differences in organisms are observed,

and are these differences related to change in water quality characteristics?)

Page 29: Dry Run Creek: Urban  vs. Rural Surficial Water Quality  Variability

Conclusion: Urban vs. Rural Surficial Water Quality Variability of Dry Run Creek

• Urban areas have a strong ability to alter water quality characteristics

• Observed differences in T, pH, TDS, D.O., B.O.D.

• Future study: TDS increase-> What exactly is being added during urban transit?