22.01.2014 Views

Download as a PDF - CiteSeerX

Download as a PDF - CiteSeerX

Download as a PDF - CiteSeerX

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

to land managers and agency staff the issues involved. The range of environmental<br />

improvement me<strong>as</strong>ures suggested centred on the provision of off stream waterings<br />

for cattle, fencing off streams to provide a buffer strips, the creation of wetland are<strong>as</strong><br />

and soft engineering to improve the diversity of the stream morphology and habitat.<br />

In order to meet the objectives of an inclusive approach to catchment management,<br />

efforts aimed at incre<strong>as</strong>ing awareness and building capacity have been undertaken<br />

at the same time <strong>as</strong> the monitoring and used to guide intervention. This h<strong>as</strong> been<br />

approached by providing a number of different forums for both presenting and<br />

gathering relevant information. A commentary on this process is provided in the<br />

discussion.<br />

RESULTS<br />

The results are presented in terms of water quality; stakeholder involvement and<br />

outcomes from a trial intervention.<br />

Water Quality<br />

Table 1 shows the range and mean concentrations of the major water quality<br />

determinands from the sites across the catchment. Each site represents a sampling<br />

point at the bottom of each tributary of the Tarland Burn. Table 1 also gives the<br />

BMWP score for each site. The data suggests major differences in water quality<br />

across the catchment. In the absence of any single large discharge source within<br />

the catchment, this variation is the result of the combined inputs of a number of<br />

smaller point and non-point sources of pollution. In overall terms, site 13 h<strong>as</strong> the<br />

poorest water quality <strong>as</strong> noted in the high concentrations of FIOs and elevated<br />

concentrations of ammonia, nitrate and phosphate, relative to the other sites. The<br />

invertebrate analysis reflects this poor water quality.<br />

Table 1:<br />

Variation in concentrations from monthly samples for water quality<br />

for selected chemical determinands and quarterly invertebrate<br />

samples in the Tarland catchment tributaries 2000 to 2002<br />

Site<br />

Number<br />

226<br />

PO 4<br />

-P<br />

mg/L<br />

NO 3<br />

-N<br />

mg/L<br />

NH 4<br />

-N<br />

mg/L<br />

Faecal coliforms<br />

/100 mL<br />

BMWP<br />

score<br />

1 0.02 3.49 0.03 7031 96<br />

0.008–0.05 1.34–4.75 < 0.003–0.11 420–35000<br />

10 0.01 3.42 0.03 586 103<br />

< 0.005–0.04 1.14–6.22 0.003–0.10 100–2600<br />

13 0.11 4.72 0.11 127207 83<br />

0.022–0.27 2.28–6.63 < 0.003–0.36 320–640000<br />

14 0.06 2.61 0.04 1043 97<br />

0.013–0.29 1.21–3.73 0.003–0.14 300–2800<br />

15 0.01 3.20 0.03 297 96<br />

0.005–0.02 2.33–4.25 0.004–0.08 20–600<br />

16 0.01 5.06 0.03 1885 92<br />

< 0.005–0.03 3.51–6.51 < 0.003–0.08 600–2800<br />

20 0.01 3.97 0.02 253 104<br />

< 0.005–0.03 2.33–5.04 0.003–0.05 200–340

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!