Research Update: Biodiversity Assessment of a Passive Treatment System for Metals-Contaminated Mine Drainage. Brendan Furneaux

Transcription

1 Research Update: Biodiversity Assessment of a Passive Treatment System for Metals-Contaminated Mine Drainage Brendan Furneaux

2 Outline

3 Background

4 Tar Creek Historic lead-zinc mining area In Grand Lake watershed Significant environmental impacts EPA Superfund site

5 Mine Drainage After abandonment Mines flood Water flows out Fe, Pb, Cd, Zn, As, etc. Sometimes low ph

6 Mayer Ranch Passive Treatment System MRPTS Ecologically engineered system Natural ecosystem processes No external electricity No chemical feeds

7 Ecology of MRPTS Passive treatment systems are ecosystems June 2009 beginning of 1 st growing season

8 Ecology of MRPTS Passive treatment systems are ecosystems Sept 2009 End of 1 st growing season

9 Ecology of MRPTS Passive treatment systems are ecosystems Sept 2011 End of 3 rd growing season

10 Ecology of MRPTS Passive treatment systems are ecosystems One design value water quality improvement Primarily abiotic & microbial processes Plant community also important What is ecosystem structure at MRPTS?

11 Goals

12 Questions What kind of ecosystem has developed at MRPTS? How does it compare to other pond ecosystems in the area?

13 Goals Compare species richness of different cells in a passive treatment system. Compare passive treatment cells to similar ecosystems in same area. Assess impact on landscape biodiversity.

14 Hypotheses Individual cells have biodiversity scores within range found in reference ponds.

15 Hypotheses Individual cells have biodiversity scores within range found in reference ponds. System as a whole has a biodiversity score higher than reference ponds.

16 Hypotheses Individual cells have biodiversity scores within range found in reference ponds. System as a whole has a biodiversity score higher than reference ponds. Some species are found only in treatment system, and thus landscape biodiversity is increased.

17 Sites

18 Study Site Mayer Ranch Passive Treatment System (MRPTS) SE of Commerce, OK Metal contaminated groundwater upwellings 8 pond-like cells ~3 years old

19 Impacted Reference Mine-drainage contaminated references Tar Creek Superfund Site Permanent ponds Red water only sometimes 3 ponds ~30 years old

20 Impacted Reference

21 Impacted Reference

22 Impacted Reference Chat-contaminated references Tar Creek Superfund Site Chat in basin Blue water suspended fines 2 ponds At least 15 years old

23 Impacted Reference

24 Un-impacted Reference Grand River Dam Authority (GRDA) Carbon Sequestration and Ecosystems Research and Restoration Area (CSERRA) 3 ponds Old (50+ years?) Man-made Agricultural influence

25 Reclaimed Reference West Commerce Remediated mining area No current contaminant source Just NW of MRPTS 4 ponds ~4 years old

26 Reclaimed Reference COM9

27 Field Methods

28 Ecological Assessment Modified PLOCH (Plans d eau Suisses) method Species richness of 3 different taxa Variety Trophic levels Phylogenetic groups Dispersal methods Relatively easy to collect and identify

29 Ecological Assessment Group Kingdom / Phylum Trophic Level Dispersal Sample Method Plants Vascular Plants Producer Varies Quadrats Odonata Arthropod Carnivore Flight Visual Survey Amphibians Vertebrate Carnivore Walking Aquatic Traps, Acoustic Monitoring

30 Richness Estimators Exhaustive sampling Time-consuming Costly Indefinite Estimators Find number of unobserved species Find shared species Based on frequency of observed species

31 Richness Estimators

32 Environmental Parameters Other data about ponds Used to calibrate biodiversity score Water quality Size Shape Age Surrounding land use Vegetative cover More

33 Regression Multivariate regression Predict species richness based on environmental parameters Model fit to references

34 Ranking Determine potential richness from regression equation Score: actual richness / potential richness

35 Results

36 Status Field work completed Oct 2011 Water quality analysis finished Odonata ID finished Plant & Amphibian ID underway GIS underway Statistical analysis underway

37 Status Plant species richness over-estimated Non-IDed specimens included by specimen number Non-wetland species included Duplicate specimens included Amphibians not included

38 Plants Preliminary Plant Biodiversity Scores By Pond Group Score a a ab b c 0 Mine Reclaim Farm Treatment System

39 Plants Preliminary Plant Biodiversity Scores Treatment vs. Reference Score a b c 0.0 Reference Cells System

40 Odonata Preliminary Odonata Biodiversity Scores By Pond Group 2 b Score a a a a Mine Reclaim Farm Treatment System

41 Odonata Preliminary Odonata Biodiversity Scores Treatment vs. Reference 2.0 b Score a a Reference Cells System

42 Hypothesis 1 Individual cells have biodiversity scores within range found in reference ponds. Plants: rejected (p<0.05) Odonata: supported

43 Hypothesis 2 System as a whole has a biodiversity score higher than reference ponds. Plants: supported (p<0.05) Odonata: supported (p<0.05)

44 Hypothesis 3 Some species are found only in treatment system, and thus landscape biodiversity is increased. Awaiting complete identification

45 Acknowledgements Funding provided by Grand River Dam Authority, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, and University of Oklahoma Center for the Restoration of Ecosystems and Watersheds, especially Dr. Robert Nairn, Sarah Yepez, Leah Oxenford, Julie Labar, and Kelly Dillow Grand River Dam Authority: Darrell Townsend, Roger Simmons, Jaclyn Jaggers, and Sam Ziara Sam Noble Oklahoma Museum of Natural History: Janalee Caldwell, Jessa Watters, and Katrina Menard Richard Adams, Wayne Brandon, Quapaw Tribe, City of Commerce

46 Questions?