NIWA Client Report No: 2018199HN Report Date: June 2018 NIWA Project: BRL18202
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Chronic sensitivity of juvenile Canterbury mudfish (Neochanna burrowsius) and periphyton (Rhizoclonium sp.) to boron Prepared for Bathurst Resources Ltd June 2018 Authors/Contributors: Hickey, C.W. Thompson, K.J. Bell, S. Arnold, J. For any information regarding this report please contact: Dr C.W. Hickey Principal Scientist +64-7-856 1713 [email protected] National Institute of Water & Atmospheric Research Ltd PO Box 11115 Hamilton 3251 Phone +64 7 856 7026 NIWA Client Report No: 2018199HN Report date: June 2018 NIWA Project: BRL18202 © All rights reserved. This publication may not be reproduced or copied in any form without the permission of the copyright owner(s). Such permission is only to be given in accordance with the terms of the client’s contract with NIWA. This copyright extends to all forms of copying and any storage of material in any kind of information retrieval system. Whilst NIWA has used all reasonable endeavours to ensure that the information contained in this document is accurate, NIWA does not give any express or implied warranty as to the completeness of the information contained herein, or that it will be suitable for any purpose(s) other than those specifically contemplated during the Project or agreed by NIWA and the Client. Contents Executive summary ............................................................................................................. 6 1 Introduction .............................................................................................................. 8 1.1 Background ............................................................................................................... 8 1.2 Brief ........................................................................................................................... 8 2 Methods .................................................................................................................. 10 2.1 Canterbury mudfish ................................................................................................ 10 2.2 Chemicals and analyses .......................................................................................... 14 3 Results .................................................................................................................... 15 3.1 Chronic sensitivity of Canterbury mudfish to boron .............................................. 15 3.2 Chronic sensitivity of periphyton to boron ............................................................. 17 4 Discussion ............................................................................................................... 19 4.1 Site-specific guideline derivation ............................................................................ 20 5 Acknowledgements ................................................................................................. 27 6 Glossary of abbreviations and terms ........................................................................ 28 7 References ............................................................................................................... 29 Appendix A Measured water quality data for chronic fish test ............................. 32 Appendix B Chronic Canterbury mudfish survival, growth and condition data ...... 35 Appendix C Summary statistics for chronic juvenile Canterbury Mudfish test ....... 41 Survival .............................................................................................................................. 41 Condition ........................................................................................................................... 43 Length................................................................................................................................ 45 Weight ............................................................................................................................... 47 Appendix D Chronic periphyton growth inhibition data ....................................... 49 Appendix E Chronic chlorophyll a data for test with periphyton .......................... 50 Appendix F Summary statistics for chronic periphyton test ................................. 51 Appendix G Updated ANZECC guideline for boron ................................................ 55 Chronic sensitivity of Canterbury mudfish and periphyton to boron Tables Table 2-1: Summary of test conditions: chronic tests using juvenile Canterbury mudfish (Neochanna burrowsius). 11 Table 2-2: Summary of test conditions: chronic tests using periphyton (Rhizoclonium sp.). 13 Table 3-1: Summary means for boron concentrations and water quality over the 40 d chronic fish test. 16 Table 3-2: Summary means for chronic fish growth and condition data. 16 Table 3-3: Results of chronic Canterbury mudfish (Neochanna burrowsius) test. 17 Table 3-4: Summary of chemical analyses for periphyton test. 17 Table 3-5: Summary means for chronic periphyton inhibition data. 18 Table 3-6: Results of chronic periphyton (Rhizoclonium sp.) test. 18 Table 4-1: Aquatic macrophyte sensitivity data for chronic (long-term) boron exposure. 23 Table 4-2: Summary of single chronic toxicity value for each species used to derive the default guideline values for dissolved boron in freshwater and for site-specific guideline derivation. 25 Table 4-3: Site-specific guideline values for boron for application to CCM receiving waters. 26 Table A-1: Water quality measurements for chronic fish test. 32 Table A-2: Chemical monitoring data for water hardness. 33 Table A-3: Chemical monitoring data for boron. 33 Table A-4: Chemical monitoring data for ammoniacal-N. 34 Table A-5: Chemical monitoring data for nitrate-N. 34 Table B-1: Survival data for chronic test with Canterbury mudfish. 35 Table B-2: Chronic fish survival summary. 35 Table B-3: Chronic fish growth and condition data. 36 Table B-4: Summary endpoint and physico-chemical data for test with Canterbury mudfish. 40 Table D-1: Chronic periphyton growth inhibition data. 49 Table E-1: Chronic growth inhibition periphyton using chlorophyll a. 50 Figures Figure 2-1: Canterbury mudfish. 10 Figure 2-2: Apparatus used for chronic testing of Canterbury mudfish. A: Flow-through testing system used for chronic fish test. B: Internal view of fish habitat. 12 Figure 2-3: Rhizoclonium sp. (Chlorophyta) filamentous algae. 13 Figure 2-4: Apparatus used for chronic testing of periphyton. 14 Figure 4-1: Boron species sensitivity distribution for site-specific guideline derivation: taxa data. 26 Figure G-1: Boron species sensitivity distribution for site-specific guideline derivation: species data. 56 Chronic sensitivity of Canterbury mudfish and periphyton to boron Figure G-2: Boron species sensitivity distribution for site-specific guideline derivation: taxonomic group and calculated protection levels. 57 Reviewed and Approved for release by: David Roper Formatting checked by A.Wadhwa Chronic sensitivity of Canterbury mudfish and periphyton to boron 5 Executive summary Bathurst Coal Ltd operates the Canterbury Coal Mine (CCM) which is located in the Malvern Hills which are situated along the foothills of the Southern Alps at the western edge of the Canterbury Plains. It is an opencast coal mine which has been developed over previous underground workings that were worked until 2003 when opencast mining commenced. Coal mining has been virtually continuous in the Malvern Hills coalfield since the underground Homebush mine opened in 1872, with at least 87 separate opencast and underground coal mines in the area. Bathurst commissioned NIWA to develop site-specific water quality guidelines for boron which are applicable to the CCM receiving waters. Chronic toxicity testing was undertaken with two locally- relevant species, a fish and an alga, to supplement the boron toxicity database. A site-specific guideline was then undertaken to derive boron values considered suitable for application to the CCM site. This report documents the results of chronic toxicity measurements for boron the Canterbury mudfish (Neochanna burrowsius) and a filamentous alga (Rhizoclonium sp.). The chronic tests were of 40 days duration for the mudfish, measuring toxicity endpoints of survival, growth (length and weight) and condition. The threshold toxicity for the mudfish was 10.2 g boron m-3. The 7-day chronic test for the alga measured biomass (as chlorophyll a). The threshold toxicity for the alga was 1.7 g boron m-3. Approaches for site-species guideline derivation commonly use multiple components, including: (i) using local reference water quality data, (2) using biological effects data from laboratory-based toxicity testing, and (3) using biological effects data from field surveys. This assessment used a site- specific modification to the toxicity database as informed by the local habitats and biological monitoring data. Based on the nature of the receiving water environments, being low energy stream and wetland habitats downstream of the CCM discharge, the site-specific guideline derivation excluded the microalgae which would not be considered critical for threshold sensitivity protection in this type of receiving water. Filamentous algae and rooted macrophytes are the predominant plant species in these habitats. The site-specific database comprised 20 species which included the Canterbury mudfish data and filamentous alga, together with data for five macrophyte species. The threshold sensitivity for the filamentous algae was at the 8th percentile of the species sensitivity distribution (SSD)