The Effects of Road Transport on Freshwater and Marine Ecosystems

More documents

Recommendations

Info

60 General Assessment Tools Commonly used tools for assessing habitat quality in New Zealand streams include: 1. Rapid Bioassessment Protocols (RBP's) (USEPA 1997). <strong>The</strong> RBP's recommends that a wide range <strong>of</strong> habitat data is collected to help in the interpretation <strong>of</strong> biological data. <strong>The</strong> RBP's habitat element list includes: Stream width. Stream depth. Proportion <strong>of</strong> reach represented by stream morphological types. Velocity. Channelisation. Presence <strong>of</strong> dams. Canopy cover. Substrate size classes. Sediment deposits. Organic substrate components (e.g., woody debris). Sediment odours/oils. 2. Modifications <strong>of</strong> RBP to New Zealand Conditions. Freshwater researchers and regulatory agencies have modified the RBP’s to reflect the unique stream habitat conditions that exist in this country. Included in these changes is the use <strong>of</strong> invertebrate biological indices such as the macroinvertebrate community index (MCI). 3. Riparian Zone Assessment. Riparian zones are crucial to determining the water and habitat quality within streams. Assessing riparian zones is therefore an important part <strong>of</strong> assessing overall stream ecosystem health. Collier et al. (1995) provide a guide to the assessment <strong>of</strong> riparian zones within New Zealand stream catchments. <strong>Road</strong>way run<strong>of</strong>f has little direct affect if any on riparian vegetation (apart from indirect hydrological effects on stream bank stability in particular circumstances). <strong>The</strong>re are only a small number <strong>of</strong> studies that have addressed the question <strong>of</strong> contamination <strong>of</strong> roadside vegetation (which is related to airborne transport <strong>of</strong> particulate matter and gaseous and particulate contaminants) and no existing assessment tools have been identified. 4. Urban Stream Habitat Assessment Method (USHA). USHA (Suren et al. 1998, 1999) is a recent attempt to help freshwater stream managers assess and monitor urban stream habitat quality and benthic invertebrate health. USHA involves the collection <strong>of</strong> a wide range <strong>of</strong> habitat data. Benthic invertebrates have been assigned 'tolerance values'. <strong>The</strong>se scores are analogous to the MCI scores developed by Stark (1985) for benthic invertebrates inhabiting stony bottomed streams in Taranaki and which are widely used by regional councils and freshwater biologists in New Zealand. USHA represents the first effort to provide a methodology for assessing urban stream habitat and benthic invertebrates. Its utility for assessing and monitoring the effects <strong>of</strong> roadway run<strong>of</strong>f is unclear as it has yet to be incorporated into Regional Council monitoring programmes. Tools specific to assessing transport effects Of the biological assessment tools currently available for assessing in-stream habitat none are specifically designed to assess the potential effects <strong>of</strong> run<strong>of</strong>f from roads. Assessing substrate Kingett Mitchell Ltd Resource & Environmental Consultants
61 composition and total suspended sediment are likely to provide the most ecologically relevant information for assessing road transport effects on in-stream habitat quality. Sediment sources within urban environments are varied. Quantifying the proportion <strong>of</strong> suspended and deposited sediment present in urban streams that is derived from roads is therefore complicated. <strong>The</strong> tools that are currently available are, with some modifications, adequate for quantifying the proportion <strong>of</strong> road generated sediment inputs to urban stormwater run<strong>of</strong>f. Modifications to existing sediment assessment tools include: Identifying and quantifying the source <strong>of</strong> sediment using characteristics <strong>of</strong> road generated sediment such as rubber, asphalt and specific contaminants. Identifying and quantifying in-stream sediment size composition and comparing this to road surface sediment. <strong>The</strong> importance <strong>of</strong> macroscale factors (geology, temperature etc.,) in affecting macroinvertebrate communities has been emphasised by Suren et al. (1999). Although the USHA assessment programme did not include stormwater quality/significance as a factor in the assessment <strong>of</strong> variables, it is likely that in some situations, the macroscale factors would have an over-riding effect compared to the potentially toxic effects brought about by short-term stormwater discharges. This requires further evaluation. Overall, the available biological assessment tools for examining habitat quality can be applied to the assessment <strong>of</strong> habitat effects on freshwater streams where stormwater from roads is the only influencing factor (i.e., effects are not confounded by other activities, discharges or other contaminants derived from general urban run<strong>of</strong>f). In those situations where confounding occurs then existing tools do not provide specific information in relation to the effects <strong>of</strong> road run<strong>of</strong>f. USHA does provide a systematic process to identify habitat quality and therefore by inference, the likely quality <strong>of</strong> the biological community that could exist at the site. Overall, motor vehicles themselves do not have any direct effects on stream and waterway habitat. Any effects are indirect and are related to the effect <strong>of</strong> the roading infrastructure the vehicles are associated with. <strong>Road</strong>s form a key component <strong>of</strong> the overall imperviousness <strong>of</strong> urban areas. Impervious area is a key factor controlling the nature and quality <strong>of</strong> aquatic environments within urban areas (Scheuler 2003). <strong>Road</strong>s will along with other impervious areas play a role in changing hydrological environments in waterways within urban catchments (through hydrological pr<strong>of</strong>iles <strong>of</strong> storms and changes in baseflows). <strong>Road</strong>s will also provide particulate materials through wash-<strong>of</strong>f that may result in localised changes in substrate conditions and more diffuse contributions away from the source (e.g., gravel and asphalt particles). 6.2.3 Aquatic algae Periphyton assemblages (primarily algae) are a useful water quality monitoring tool because <strong>of</strong> their rapid response time to exposure and recovery. Despite this, algae have not been incorporated widely into monitoring programmes (USEPA 1997). In New Zealand, bio-monitoring programmes have tended to focus on benthic invertebrates ahead <strong>of</strong> algae. However, Biggs (2000) provides a comprehensive examination <strong>of</strong> periphyton in New Zealand freshwaters and the effects <strong>of</strong> human activities on periphyton growth and composition. <strong>Effects</strong> <strong>of</strong> road run<strong>of</strong>f on aquatic algae <strong>Road</strong>way run<strong>of</strong>f has the potential to affect aquatic algae in a range <strong>of</strong> ways including: 1. Altering flow conditions. 2. Increasing water temperature. Kingett Mitchell Ltd Resource & Environmental Consultants
Page 1:
The Effect
Page 4 and 5:
Intentionally Blank ii
Page 6 and 7:
ii 4.2 Particulates in Urban Run<st
Page 8 and 9:
iv 7. IDENTIFICATION OF ENVIRONMENT
Page 10 and 11:
vi MW Molecular weight N Nitrogen N
Page 12 and 13:
2 1. Moncrieff, I.; Kennedy, P. 200
Page 14 and 15:
4 Table 2.1 - Contaminant Source Cl
Page 16 and 17:
6 mg/kg) and Zn (25-34,500 mg/kg).
Page 18 and 19:
8 Bitumen Bitumen is produced in Ne
Page 20 and 21: 10 differences between petrol and d
Page 22 and 23: 12 on the nature of</strong
Page 24 and 25: 14 As such, available information i
Page 26 and 27: 16 An examination of</stron
Page 28 and 29: 18 Yang et al. (1999) examined the
Page 30 and 31: 20 to elevated concentrations in ty
Page 32 and 33: 22 sample of overs
Page 34 and 35: 24 suspension and that carried as b
Page 36 and 37: 26 Figure 4.1 - Variation in the co
Page 38 and 39: 28 Figure 4.2 - Variation in the co
Page 40 and 41: 30 Metal Cu Cd Pb Zn Table 4.6 - Su
Page 42 and 43: 32 probably reflect lower traffic d
Page 44 and 45: 34 (1995) provide a general review
Page 46 and 47: 36 Further data can be found in the
Page 48 and 49: 38 by ARC (1994) indicated that TPH
Page 50 and 51: 40 Cations/Anions Common ionic cons
Page 52 and 53: 42 Catchpits Between the street sur
Page 54 and 55: 44 5 PATHWAYS & FATE OF CONTAMINANT
Page 56 and 57: 46 The material wh
Page 58 and 59: 48 crystalline species present were
Page 60 and 61: 50 Figure 5.1 - Percentage
Page 62 and 63: 52 short (e.g., < 1 day). In water,
Page 64 and 65: 54 5.4.2 Dispersion Dilution and di
Page 66 and 67: 56 5.6 Summary The
Page 68 and 69: 58 6.2 Freshwater Ecosystems 6.2.1
Page 72 and 73: 62 3. Increasing sediment inputs. 4
Page 74 and 75: 64 considered that taxa richness wa
Page 76 and 77: 66 Freshwater macro-invertebrate me
Page 78 and 79: 68 runoff to fish
Page 80 and 81: 70 deposition, tracking of<
Page 82 and 83: 72 one factor used to classify orga
Page 84 and 85: 74 Zinc Measurement of</str
Page 86 and 87: 76 in stormwater and receiving wate
Page 88 and 89: 78 minute; sub-mitochondrial partic
Page 90 and 91: 80 Toxicity tests have undertaken u
Page 92 and 93: 82 High molecular weight PAHs are t
Page 94 and 95: 84 Note: Sources refer Table 5.2. F
Page 96 and 97: 86 Although a range of</str
Page 98 and 99: 88 Bioaccumulation can be assessed
Page 100 and 101: 90 Figure 6.2 - metal concentration
Page 102 and 103: 92 6.5.3 Bioaccumulation of
Page 104 and 105: 94 Water Stormwater quality data fr
Page 106 and 107: 96 7. IDENTIFICATION OF ENVIRONMENT
Page 108 and 109: 98 3. Echinoderm (Fellaster zelandi
Page 110 and 111: 100 trace metals (probably Cu and Z
Page 112 and 113: 102 concentrations of</stro
Page 114 and 115: 104 that “concentrations
Page 116 and 117: 106 A large amount of</stro
Page 118 and 119: 108 A review of se
Page 120 and 121:
110 Samples of man
Page 122 and 123:
112 grazers such as mud flat snails
Page 124 and 125:
114 8. OVERVIEW 8.1 Vehicles as sou
Page 126 and 127:
116 The quality <s
Page 128 and 129:
118 International studies have show
Page 130 and 131:
120 A number of st
Page 132 and 133:
122 construction. Center for Resear
Page 134 and 135:
124 Carey, J.; Cook, P.; Ciesy, J.;
Page 136 and 137:
126 Ellis, J. B. 1986: Pollutional
Page 138 and 139:
128 Harrop D. O. 1984: Stormwater r
Page 140 and 141:
130 Kennedy, P. C.; Kjellstrom, T.
Page 142 and 143:
132 Maltby, L. A.; Boxall, D. M.; F
Page 144 and 145:
134 Novotny, V.; Muehring, D.; Zito
Page 146 and 147:
136 Ruck, J. 1998: Evaluation <stro
Page 148 and 149:
138 Terracciano, S. A.; O’Brien,
Page 150 and 151:
140 Webster, J. G.; Brown, K. L.; W
Page 152:
142 10. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Thanks to
show all

The Effects of Road Transport on Freshwater and Marine Ecosystems

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?