The Influence of Riparian Vegetation on Water Quality in a Mixed Land Use River Basin
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Chua Evan (Orcid ID: 0000-0003-4220-7985) The influence of riparian vegetation on water quality in a mixed land use river basin Running Head: Riparian Damage Affects Water Quality Evan M. ChuaA,D, Scott P. Wilson, Sue VinkC and Nicole FlintA ASchool of Health, Medical and Applied Sciences, Central Queensland University, North Rockhampton, QLD 4702, Australia BCentre for Energy and Environmental Contaminants, Department of Environmental Sciences, Macquarie University, North Ryde, NSW 2113, Australia CCentre for Water in the Minerals Industry, Sustainable Minerals Institute, University of Queensland, St Lucia, QLD 4072, Australia DCorresponding author. Email: [email protected] This is the author manuscript accepted for publication and has undergone full peer review but has not been through the copyediting, typesetting, pagination and proofreading process, which may lead to differences between this version and the Version of Record. Please cite this article as doi: 10.1002/rra.3410 This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved. Abstract (250 words) Worldwide, agricultural activities are associated with environmental impacts including riparian degradation and increased waterway pollution. The Fitzroy Basin of Central Queensland lies within the Brigalow Belt Bioregion (BBB), which is currently experiencing the highest rates of tree- clearing in Australia driven by grazing activities, and this is likely to increase riparian degradation. Local riparian condition however, has not been consistently monitored within the Fitzroy Basin, and its relationship with water quality has not been well-established. This study assessed riparian condition of waterways in the Fitzroy Basin using two established scoring methods (the Rapid Appraisal of Riparian Condition and the Australian Rivers Assessment System Habitat Assessment), and statistically investigated the relationship between stream water quality and local riparian condition. Twelve sites in six waterways were sampled four times over two years, during ambient (non-flood) conditions. Upstream creeks with poorer riparian condition had elevated dissolved organic carbon (DOC), dissolved manganese, sulfate and total nitrogen (TN) concentrations. High concentrations of these water quality variables were associated with poor local riparian scores in principal components analysis. Dissolved manganese and sulfate were included in the multiple regression model for riparian scores (r-values: 0.83 to 0.86; p < 0.001), and DOC and TN were very significantly negatively correlated with riparian scores (r-values: -0.55 to -0.69; p < 0.001). Overall, the results suggest that protecting riparian vegetation in the Fitzroy Basin and restoring degraded riparian zones, could aid in improving water quality in waterways within this region. Keywords: Fitzroy Basin, Brigalow Belt Bioregion, Pollution, Metals, Nutrients, Queensland, Agriculture, Mining 2 This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved. 1 Introduction Degradation of riparian zones increases riverbank erosion and sediment transport into waterways, and reduces its ability to filter out pollutants from overland run-off (Carroll, Merton, & Burger, 2000; Naiman & Decamps, 1997; Talmage, Perry, & Goldstein, 2002). Worldwide, tree- clearing has been associated with large-scale ecosystem impacts including increased soil erosion (Kaiser, 2004; Lal, 1996), loss of soil fertility, and increased transport of pollutants into receiving waterways (Mainville et al., 2006). Clearing of riparian zones, including for livestock grazing activities, especially pose a threat to waterway condition (Jones, Helfman, Harper, & Bolstad, 1999). Grazing activities also result in increased riparian damage through processes such as trampling and grazing on native vegetation (Derlet, Goldman, & Connor, 2010; Malan, Flint, Jackson, Irving, & Swain, 2018). In Australia, the Brigalow Belt Bioregion (BBB) is a major area of historical and current land- clearing for agricultural activities such as cattle grazing and cropping (Neldner et al., 2017; Yu, Joo, & Carroll, 2013). The loss of woody vegetation and conversion of land for agriculture has been associated with increased transport of pollutants into Queensland waterways (McKergow, Prosser, Hughes, & Brodie, 2005; Packett, Dougall, Rohde, & Noble, 2009). Grazing, cropping and riparian degradation in Queensland catchments are also identified as major contributors to sediment pollution in the Great Barrier Reef (McKergow, Prosser, Hughes, & Brodie, 2005; Bartley et al., 2014). Besides agricultural activities, coal mining activities also occur in the northern BBB, many of which are large open-cut mining operations which have also contributed to disturbances to natural vegetation in the region (Arnold, Audet, Doley, & Baumgartl, 2013). The Fitzroy Basin in Central Queensland is Australia’s largest east-draining basin, and lies almost completely within the BBB (Verwey & Wearing, 2007). Beef cattle grazing is an important economic activity in the Fitzroy Basin, constituting nearly 80% of the land use (QDSITIA, 2012). Cropping is also important, constituting about 6% of the land use, while coal mining, another major economic activity in the basin, constitutes <1% of the land use (QDSITIA, 2012). Similar to other major agricultural regions, the Fitzroy Basin is impacted by extensive soil erosion (Dougall et al., 2009; Murphy, Dougall, Burger, & Carroll, 2013), along with riparian degradation from grazing and other agricultural activities (Alam, Rolfe, & Windle, 2004). Soil erosion in the Fitzroy Basin is also a 3 This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved. major contributor to sediment entering the Great Barrier Reef lagoon, with five out of eight priority management units for controlling sediment export identified in the Fitzroy Basin (Wilkinson et al., 2015). Rain events over agricultural areas are linked with increased total suspended sediment and nutrient loads (Packett, Dougall, Rohde, & Noble, 2009), and poor riparian vegetation coverage has been linked with increased electrical conductivity (EC) in Fitzroy Basin waterways (Carroll et al., 2000). Metal pollution is a problem in the basin, with dissolved Al, Cd, Co, Cu, Mn and Zn frequently exceeding local water quality guidelines. The Fitzroy Partnership for River Health (FPRH) report card has given these same metals a grade of ‘C’, ‘D’ or ‘E’ for several catchments of the Fitzroy Basin from 2010-16 (FPRH, 2018). Whilst natural sources (e.g. geological weathering) can be a contributor to metals in waterways (Förstner & Wittmann, 2012), human activities including coal mining and coal seam gas extraction (Ali, Strezov, Davies, & Wright, 2018) and agriculture-associated riparian degradation and soil erosion have been implicated in waterway metal pollution (Quinton & Catt, 2007; Zhang & Shan, 2008). Whilst the associations between land uses and some pollutants in Fitzroy Basin waterways have been previously demonstrated (Carroll et al., 2000; Packett et al., 2009; Murphy, Dougall, Burger, & Carroll, 2013), the association between local riparian condition and adjacent water quality has not been as well studied. Furthermore, with the lack of consistent riparian monitoring in the Fitzroy Basin (Flint et al., 2017), comparisons between sites is difficult. Thus this study aims to: (i) record riparian condition in the Fitzroy Basin using two established methods; and (ii) assess the association between riparian condition and water quality during ambient flow conditions. 4 This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved. 2 Methods 2.1 Sampling Sites Only sites with permanent water were sampled. Two sampling sites were identified at each of six waterways: Comet River (CR), Isaac River (IR), Mackenzie River (MR), German Creek (GC), Scott Creek (SC) and Stockyard Creek (SY) making up 12 sites in total (Figure 1). At each waterway, the two selected sites were situated about 1km apart, with the upstream site name affixed with ’U’, and downstream site affixed with ‘D’. All sites were sampled four times over consecutive post-wet season (April) and pre-wet season (October) surveys in 2015-16. Thus surveys 1-4 were conducted in April 2015, October 2015, April 2016 and October 2016 respectively. Sites CR, IR and MR were located within the main river channels of their respective catchments, whilst sites GC, SC and SY were located on creeks upstream from the main river channels. Sites MRU and CRU were both located upstream of an impoundment. Cattle grazing occurred adjacent to the waterway at all of the creek sites, and at sites CRD, CRU and MRU. 2.2 Water Quality and Habitat Assessment Water quality variables analysed included: dissolved metals – Al, Cd, Co, Cu, Mn, and Zn; nutrients – oxides of nitrogen (NOX), ammonia (NH3), total nitrogen (TN), and total phosphorus (TP); and water physicochemical parameters – temperature, dissolved organic carbon (DOC), electrical conductivity (EC), pH, sulfate (SO4) and turbidity. Two replicates of water samples were collected from each sampling site, with sampling conducted in accordance with the Queensland Monitoring and Sampling Manual 2009 (Queensland Department of Environment and Heritage Protection, 2009). Water was collected in sterile sampling bottles/jars provided by a commercial laboratory (ALS Environmental, https://www.alsglobal.com/au), with samples for dissolved metals and DOC field- filtered through a sterile 0.45µm cellulose-acetate filter, and a 0.9 µm pre-filter if required. Samples were refrigerated