Master of Science by Research Thesis
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Durham E-Theses In-stream and hyporheic water quality of the River Esk, North Yorkshire: implications for Freshwater Pearl Mussel habitats BIDDULPH, MATILDA,FRANCESCA How to cite: BIDDULPH, MATILDA,FRANCESCA (2013) In-stream and hyporheic water quality of the River Esk, North Yorkshire: implications for Freshwater Pearl Mussel habitats, Durham theses, Durham University. Available at Durham E-Theses Online: http://etheses.dur.ac.uk/7272/ Use policy The full-text may be used and/or reproduced, and given to third parties in any format or medium, without prior permission or charge, for personal research or study, educational, or not-for-prot purposes provided that: • a full bibliographic reference is made to the original source • a link is made to the metadata record in Durham E-Theses • the full-text is not changed in any way The full-text must not be sold in any format or medium without the formal permission of the copyright holders. Please consult the full Durham E-Theses policy for further details. Academic Support Oce, Durham University, University Oce, Old Elvet, Durham DH1 3HP e-mail: [email protected] Tel: +44 0191 334 6107 http://etheses.dur.ac.uk 2 In-stream and hyporheic water quality of the River Esk, North Yorkshire: implications for Freshwater Pearl Mussel habitats Matilda Biddulph Masters by Research (MSc) Department of Geography Durham University October 2012 Declaration This thesis is the result of my own work and has not been submitted for consideration in any other examination. Material from the work of other authors, which is referred to in the thesis, is acknowledged in the text. Statement of copyright The copyright of thesis rests with the author. No quotation from it should be published without his prior written consent and information derived from it should be acknowledged. Acknowledgements There are a large number of people that I want to thank for their help this year. I would like to begin with my supervisors Doctor Louise Bracken and Professor Tim Burt, for always having faith in me. Ultimately, without these two, I’m sure there would be no words on a page. I would also like to thank the North York Moors National Park Authority, who have been extremely kind in sponsoring this Masters degree. Simon Hirst, as the face of the Esk pearl mussel and salmon recovery project, has been invaluable with his enthusiasm for informing me on any developments and ideas. I would also like to thank the Environment Agency, for the use of their stage and rainfall data from the Esk catchment. It is imperative that recognition and thanks must go to my incredibly reliable, all-weather field assistant, Stuart Crow. Without his assistance, fieldwork would have been near impossible and a lot more stressful; I am eternally grateful. Mention must also go to anyone else who helped me in the field: Becky, Maddy, Emma, Andy, Will, Louise, Chris, Laura, Harry, Mum and Pat. Of course fieldwork was only a part of it, without help from the lab technicians I would have got nowhere at all. So thank you especially to: Mervyn Brown, Paul West, Kathryn Melvin, Amanda Hayton and Frank Davies (also to Martin, Neil, Chris, Jean and Allison). In my opinion they deserve a medal. I would like to thank my parents, who have provided the funding for me to live far away up North for another year. My boyfriend Harry, who always got the rainy fieldwork days, but never once complained. And finally, I would like to thank the friends I have made in the Durham University Geography Department this year: Chris M, Ben, Bertie, Laura, Louise, Martin, Will, Ed, Chris D, Tim, Rachel and Aurora. Your appetite for geographical conversation, albeit rather quaternary orientated, helped me to keep my enthusiasm up for the entire year. You also provided some much-needed relief on days when that Friday feeling got too much. You’ve made my year, thank you. Abstract River systems and their catchments are important for ecological, social and economic reasons. However, the increased and changing usage of these natural environments and resources for anthropogenic benefit have led to degradation in water quality, which has led to severe declines in aquatic species populations and their suitable habitats, as well as presenting health concerns with regards to drinking water standards. As a result of this, the Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC) has been introduced, which is an EU legislation that requires “good ecological status” of freshwaters by 2015, providing a driver for management and conservation for UK river systems. One example of declines in species populations are freshwater pearl mussels (Margaritifera margaritifera), which are under extreme threat of extinction. Combining species revival with water quality improvements provides a method for testing effectiveness of implemented measures. This study analyses water quality, hydrological characteristics and hyporheic zone chemistry of the River Esk, North Yorkshire, through a variety of spatial and temporal scales. Changing water quality through storm events showed that general water quality of the Esk is of little concern, however, higher flows bring acidification to the upper part of the network, which presents a serious threat to freshwater pearl mussel survival. The hyporheic zone displayed interesting results in that chemical concentrations were far higher, whilst dissolved oxygen levels and redox potential were lower. Nitrate values were also lower, suggesting that reducing conditions were supporting oxygen-demanding chemical reactions such as denitrification, creating undesirable habitats for aquatic invertebrates. This study concludes that there is a lack of vertical connectivity between the channel and zones of interaction. Contents List of Figures .......................................................................................................................... i List of Tables ........................................................................................................................... v 1. Introduction ...................................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Context ........................................................................................................................ 1 1.2 Aims & Objectives ....................................................................................................... 2 1.3 Thesis Structure ........................................................................................................... 2 2. Background Research ....................................................................................................... 4 2.1 Water Quality .............................................................................................................. 4 2.1.1 Degradation of Water Quality .............................................................................. 5 2.1.2 Water Quality Management ................................................................................ 6 2.1.3 Nitrate .................................................................................................................. 7 2.1.4 Phosphate ............................................................................................................ 8 2.1.5 Other Water Quality Parameters ......................................................................... 9 2.2 Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC) ............................................................... 10 2.3 Connectivity .............................................................................................................. 11 2.4 Hyporheic Zone ......................................................................................................... 12 2.5 Freshwater Pearl Mussels ......................................................................................... 15 2.5.1 Freshwater Pearl Mussels in the Hyporheic Zone ............................................. 19 2.6 Summary ................................................................................................................... 19 3. Methodology .................................................................................................................. 21 3.1 Study Area ................................................................................................................. 21 3.2 Site Locations ............................................................................................................ 24 3.3 Methods .................................................................................................................... 27 3.3.1 Monthly Spatial Survey ...................................................................................... 27 3.3.2 High-Frequency Sampling .................................................................................. 27 I 3.3.3 Sampling from the Hyporheic Zone ................................................................... 28 3.3.4 Laboratory Analysis ............................................................................................ 31 3.4 Summary ................................................................................................................... 32 4. Changes in water quality during baseflow and stormflow ........................................... 33 4.1 Spatial Maps .............................................................................................................. 33 4.1.1 SSC .....................................................................................................................