The Effects of Road Transport on Freshwater and Marine Ecosystems

More documents

Recommendations

Info

66 Freshwater macro-invertebrate metrics 1 Richness Measures Taxonomic richness (number <strong>of</strong> taxa). Number <strong>of</strong> Ephemeroptera, Trichoptera, Plecoptera (EPT’s). Number <strong>of</strong> Chironomidae taxa. 2 Composition Measures Relative abundance <strong>of</strong> major taxa. % dominant species. 3 Tolerance Measures Macroinvertebrate Community Index (MCI) (Stark 1985). Quantitative Macroinvertebrate Community Index (QMCI) (Stark 1993). Semi-Quantitative Macroinvertebrate Community Index (SQMCI) (Stark 1998). Urban Macroinvertebrate Community Index (UMCI) (Suren et al. 1998). Quantitative Macroinvertebrate Community Index (QUMCI) (Suren et al. 1998). 4 Trophic Measures Number <strong>of</strong> predator taxa. Number <strong>of</strong> collector-gather taxa. Number <strong>of</strong> collector-filter taxa. Number <strong>of</strong> scraper taxa. Number <strong>of</strong> shredder taxa. Of these, taxa number, relative abundances and biotic indices such as the MCI are used most widely by Regional Councils as measures <strong>of</strong> the relative condition <strong>of</strong> macro-invertebrate communities in streams (e.g., refer WRC 1998). 5 Multimetric Approach <strong>The</strong> simultaneous use <strong>of</strong> a range <strong>of</strong> indices can provide a summary <strong>of</strong> biological conditions targeted at conditions at a particular site. <strong>The</strong> multimetric approach has not been used widely in New Zealand despite its relevance to the ecosystem health focus <strong>of</strong> the Resource Management Act 1991. 6 Multivariate Statistics Multivariate statistical analysis <strong>of</strong> complex invertebrate, habitat and water quality data is also used in more in-depth investigations <strong>of</strong> cause and effect relationships between environmental conditions and the invertebrate community. Multi-variate statistical techniques are rarely applied in regular Regional Council bio-monitoring programmes. 7 RIVPAC’S River Invertebrate Prediction classification system (RIVPACS) has been developed by the Institute <strong>of</strong> Freshwater Ecology in the U.K. RIVPAC’S is a model that predicts invertebrate communities using a range <strong>of</strong> environmental variables. RIVPAC’S has been modified and implemented in Australia (Ausriva’s) and is currently being trialled for MfE by Environment Waikato. In New Zealand, there appears to be a shift in fish community composition and diversity with increasing urbanisation. Fish data examined as part <strong>of</strong> a study <strong>of</strong> Waitakere City Streams in Auckland (Kingett Mitchell 2000) revealed a decline in the average number <strong>of</strong> native fish species present with land use from native forest through to urban. <strong>The</strong>re is very little published information that relates the effects <strong>of</strong> road run<strong>of</strong>f on fish populations in New Zealand (aside from the effects <strong>of</strong> culverting on fish passage – refer ARC 2000). <strong>The</strong>re are however a number <strong>of</strong> overseas studies that have investigated the effects <strong>of</strong> road run<strong>of</strong>f toxicity on fish (refer section 6.3.4). Kingett Mitchell Ltd Resource & Environmental Consultants
67 General Tools Fish are commonly used to assess and monitor water and habitat quality by freshwater managers overseas. Advantages <strong>of</strong> using fish as biological indicators include: Relatively long-lived and mobile and therefore assimilate a broad range <strong>of</strong> effects and conditions. Integrate effects from lower trophic levels (algae and invertebrates). Assess human contaminate issues. Easily collected and identified with extensive historic databases. Water quality standards are generally based on fish species. High recreational and conservation values. <strong>The</strong> use <strong>of</strong> fish as a biomonitoring tool is more widespread in the United States. This is in part, due to the greater diversity <strong>of</strong> the fish fauna which provides greater opportunity to develop indicators for specific water and habitat quality changes. USEPA (1998) for example lists over 30 potential fish metrics (indicators). Fish however, are not widely used in regional council assessment and monitoring programmes in New Zealand. Jellyman (1987a,b) described a range <strong>of</strong> indicators available for impact assessment using fish populations in New Zealand. Features <strong>of</strong> fish populations and fisheries which can be studied as indicators <strong>of</strong> impact assessment are listed in Table 6.3. Fish population data <strong>of</strong> the type listed in Table 6.3 is <strong>of</strong>ten very difficult to interpret due mainly to very high natural variability. It is therefore very difficult to establish cause and effect relationships (Jellyman 1987b). This limits the value <strong>of</strong> fish as biological monitoring tools when attempting to establish the existence or quantify a known effect (e.g., increased sedimentation from road run<strong>of</strong>f). Feature Community composition Abundance Life history Note: Habitat availability Table 6.3 - Features and indicators <strong>of</strong> fish population health. Modified from Jellyman (1987b). Indicators Presence/absence <strong>of</strong> indicator species and species diversity. Density, biomass and catch per unit effort. Feeding (diet, growth, condition) Reproduction (fecundity, spawning success and recruitment). Behaviour (habitat utilisation, induced movements, aberrant behaviour, mortality rate) Surveys <strong>of</strong> available/potential habitat. MfE (1998b) (Environmental Performance Indicators for the terrestrial and freshwater environment) discusses the use <strong>of</strong> red fin bully and giant kokopu as indicator species for use in monitoring freshwater ecosystem sustainability. <strong>The</strong> utility <strong>of</strong> these species in future monitoring programmes has not yet been developed. Tools with specific relevance to assessing road transport effects <strong>The</strong> following tools have relevance to assessing impacts in freshwater and in particular road transport effects. 1. Assessment <strong>of</strong> community structure. 2. Identification <strong>of</strong> sensitive or indicator species. 3. Assessment <strong>of</strong> individual fish health. Overall, the use <strong>of</strong> fish as biological indicators is poorly developed in New Zealand and there are no tools currently available for assessing road transport effects on fish populations. A review <strong>of</strong> overseas literature indicates that assessment <strong>of</strong> road run<strong>of</strong>f effects on fish has concentrated on the toxicity <strong>of</strong> 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 70 and 71: 60 General Assessment Tools Commonl
Page 72 and 73: 62 3. Increasing sediment inputs. 4
Page 74 and 75: 64 considered that taxa richness wa
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

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

Delete template?

Save as template?