Water Quality Snapshot 2001–2002 Historical Baseline Data for the Mount Lofty Ranges Watershed

ENVIRONMENT PROTECTION AUTHORITY

Water Quality Snapshot 2001–2002 Historical baseline data for the Mount Lofty Ranges Watershed

February 2007

Water Quality Snapshot 2001−2002 Historic baseline data for the Mount Lofty Ranges Watershed Water Quality Snapshot 2001−2002 Historic baseline data for the Mount Lofty Ranges Watershed

Authors: Jane Bradley, Brian Holmes and Shaun Thomas Acknowledgments: Karla Billington, Steven Kotz and staff members from EPA’s Watershed Protection Office

For further information please contact: Information Officer Environment Protection Authority GPO Box 2607 Adelaide SA 5001 Telephone: (08) 8204 2004 Facsimile: (08) 8124 4670 Free call (country): 1800 623 445 Web site: E-mail:

ISBN 1 921125 30 6 February 2007

This document may be reproduced in whole or part for the purpose of study or training, subject to the inclusion of an acknowledgment of the source and to its not being used for commercial purposes or sale. Reproduction for purposes other than those given above requires the prior written permission of the Environment Protection Authority.

Printed on recycled paper CONTENTS

SUMMARY...... 1 1 BACKGROUND ...... 3 Report format ...... 4 2 METHOD ...... 5 Sampling strategy ...... 5 Analytes of importance ...... 5 Water quality data analysis...... 6 Classification of data...... 7 Data constraints ...... 10 Land use and the potential threat it poses to the water supply...... 10 3 DISCUSSION OF RESULTS ...... 12 Water quality analytes...... 12 Data patterns...... 18 4 NORTHERN ADELAIDE AND BAROSSA CATCHMENT ...... 19 Catchment characteristics ...... 19 Land use characteristics...... 20 Overview of water quality results for 2001 and 2002...... 21 Overview of sub-catchment issues...... 23 5 TORRENS CATCHMENT ...... 30 Catchment characteristics ...... 30 Land use characteristics...... 30 Overview of water quality results for 2001 and 2002...... 31 Overview of sub-catchment issues...... 33 6 ONKAPARINGA CATCHMENT ...... 43 Catchment characteristics ...... 43 Land use characteristics...... 43 Overview of water quality results for 2001 and 2002...... 44 Overview of sub-catchment issues...... 46 7 MYPONGA RIVER CATCHMENT ...... 58 Catchment characteristics ...... 58 Land use characteristics...... 58 Overview of water quality results for 2001 and 2002...... 59 Overview of sub-catchment issues...... 60 8 CONCLUSIONS...... 64 Assessment of risk...... 64 Exceedence of threshold and regulatory water quality values...... 64

1 9 RECOMMENDATIONS ...... 67 10 REFERENCES...... 68 APPENDIX 1 LAND USE CLASSIFICATION CATEGORIES ...... 71 APPENDIX 2 CLASSIFIED WATER QUALITY DATA ...... 72

LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1 Analytes considered critical to water treatment and catchment management .. 6 Figure 2 Sub-catchment categories across the watershed...... 9 Figure 3 Turbidity results for the watershed during 2001 and 2002 ...... 12 Figure 5 Colour results for the watershed during 2001 and 2002 ...... 13 Figure 6 E. coli results for the watershed during 2001 and 2002 ...... 13 Figure 7 Enterococcus results for the watershed during 2001 and 2002 ...... 14 Figure 8 Filtered reactive phosphorous results for the watershed during 2001 and 2002...... 15 Figure 9 Nitrate and nitrite (as N) results for the watershed during 2001 and 2002 ...... 15 Figure 10 Total organic carbon results for the watershed during 2001 and 2002 ...... 16 Figure 11 Total phosphorous results for the watershed during 2001 and 2002 ...... 17 Figure 12 Soluble aluminium results for the watershed during 2001 and 2002 ...... 17 Figure 13 Total dissolved solids results for the watershed during 2001 and 2002...... 18

LIST OF TABLES Table 1 Raw water hazard threshold values ...... 7 Table 2 Summary of sub-catchment categories for the watershed ...... 8 Table 3 Land use types and associated pollutants ...... 11 Table 4 Land use percentages for the NAB catchment...... 21 Table 5 Water quality results for the NAB catchment ...... 22 Table 6 Land use percentages for the Torrens catchment ...... 31 Table 7 Water quality results for the Torrens catchment ...... 32 Table 8 Land use percentages for the Onkaparinga catchment ...... 44 Table 9 Water quality results for the Onkaparinga catchment ...... 45 Table 10 Land use percentages for the Myponga catchment ...... 59 Table 11 Water quality results for the Myponga catchment ...... 60 Table 12 Recommendations to improve water quality in the MLR watershed ...... 66 SUMMARY

The Mount Lofty Ranges Watershed is a significant source of drinking water for Adelaide. It is also an important area for broadscale and intensive agriculture, urban and rural living, and industry, with close proximity to Adelaide. The strategic objective of the Environment Protection Authority’s Watershed Protection Office (EPA WPO) is to ‘protect and improve the water resources in the Mount Lofty Ranges Watershed’ (EPA 2003b). In order to assess the degree of progress made in achieving this aim it was determined that an assessment of the state of water resources in the watershed was necessary. Such an assessment would enable, where possible, the identification of impacts on the water resource and assist with setting priorities for water quality improvement programs. Suitable benchmark data was necessary to achieve these outcomes. Gaps in the availability of data were identified and it was considered necessary to undertake sub-catchment scale water quality monitoring. The focus of monitoring was on significant runoff events, in order to establish an understanding of areas contributing elevated levels of pollutants to the raw water supply. The Water Quality Snapshot project was carried out in 2001 and 2002 to collect data on sub-catchment pollutant contributions during significant runoff events in the watershed. This report summarises the data collected for each catchment area with a focus on the specific analytes measured: turbidity, colour, Cryptosporidium, Giardia, Escheridia coli (E. coli), Enterococcus, filtered reactive phosphorus (FRP), nitrate and nitrite (as N), total organic carbon, total phosphorus, soluble aluminium, lead and total dissolved solids. The major outcomes from this work are: • priority sub-catchments have been identified in each of the catchment areas (see ‘Classification of data’ for Category A sub-catchments): − Northern Adelaide and Barossa Catchment areas: Forestry Headquarters, Portuguese Creek and Tungali Creek sub-catchments − Torrens Catchment: Angas Creek, Cudlee Creek, Footes Creek, Kenton Valley, McCormick Creek, Mount Pleasant and Torrens Main Channel sub-catchments − Onkaparinga Catchment: Aldgate Creek, Biggs Flat, Cox Creek, Hahndorf, Inverbrackie Creek and Mitchell Creek sub-catchments − Myponga Catchment: Blockers Road and Myponga Tiers sub-catchments. • major sources of water pollutants in the Mount Lofty Ranges Watershed have been confirmed (eg failing or overflowing septic tanks, stock access to watercourses) • several of the priority sub-catchments highlighted above were subsequently included in the Trace Sampling Program (Holmes 2002) that further examined the sources of a range of pollutants and instigated remedial actions to minimise their effect on water quality • a range of recommendations have been made from this project to improve knowledge on the pollutant sources in each sub-catchment in addition to outlining possible remediation activities.

1 2 Water Quality Snapshot 2001−2002

1 BACKGROUND

The Mount Lofty Ranges Watershed (the watershed) is a significant source of drinking water for Adelaide, and on average contributes about 60% of raw water supplies to Adelaide’s reservoirs. Unlike water supply catchments in other states, the watershed is also an important area for broadscale and intensive agriculture and animal keeping, urban and rural living, industry, recreation and development. The multiple-use nature of this region and increasing intensification of such use of land has led to a decline in water quality (Wood 1986). The Environment Protection Authority’s Watershed Protection Office (EPA WPO) was established to ‘protect and improve the water resources in the Mount Lofty Ranges Watershed’ (EPA 2003b). In order to meet the aim of the office, monitoring and assessment was required to provide information on the condition of raw water quality and assist in setting priorities for improvement programs. This information was also required to support other investigation and mitigation initiatives within the EPA WPO. The following list outlines work required to ensure that suitable benchmark data was available to the EPA WPO for the various projects being carried out by the office: • undertake land cover and land use mapping • undertake a survey of land management practices • collate and characterise current water quality and quantity data • undertake sub-catchment water quality monitoring during significant runoff events • provide information on the consequence of pollutants to the water supply system. Existing water quality monitoring programs did not adequately address issues related to significant runoff events and the movement of pollutants during these events. Consequently, the Water Quality Snapshot project was developed in 2001 to provide information on pollutants from the 34 sub-catchments in the watershed during significant runoff events. Significant runoff events are characterised by a substantial increase in stream flow, above the seasonal baseflow, occurring shortly after a rainfall event. Information on the types of pollutants and prioritisation of sub-catchments, achieved through this project, are to be used as input into a catchment risk assessment. The importance of rainfall events in mobilising pollutants in the watershed has been shown through a number of studies, including those carried out by Eatyech Partners (1989), Ebsary (1987), Wood (1986) and Clark and Crawley (1987); and monitoring reports such as Monitoring River Health by the Australian Water Quality Centre (2000). Significant drinking water quality incidents are correlated to large runoff events (Rose et al. 2000; Curriero et al. 2001). High pollutant loads during significant runoff events are related to: • mobilisation of soil sediment via the erosive action of surface water runoff • mobilisation of dissolved pollutants in surface water runoff • likelihood of wastewater system overflows • overflows from farm dams.

3 Water Quality Snapshot 2001−2002

Report format Data derived from the monitoring program is discussed as a whole for the watershed and then reported in four discrete sections that correspond to the boundaries of the following catchment areas: Northern Adelaide and Barossa (NAB), Torrens, Onkaparinga and Myponga. Each catchment area section contains a discussion on ‘Catchment characteristics’, ‘Land use characteristics’ and an ‘Overview of water quality results for 2001 and 2002’. Significant issues observed in each catchment area are described in the relevant section followed by a discussion of the pollutants of interest for each sub-catchment. Pollutants in the sub-catchments are considered significant when their concentration (and hence transport) is high compared with water quality guidelines and other samples within the watershed. For each sub-catchment, the potential impacts of land use on water quality have been described. These were derived by comparing the result obtained for particular analytes against land status information held by the EPA (see Appendix 1 for land use classification definitions). It is purely subjective and based on our knowledge of land use and its potential impact on water quality. It is possible that there are pollutant sources that have not been identified, or that have been overlooked in the analysis and description provided. Recommendations to improve water quality have been compiled and these are proposed as possible options that could be implemented by stakeholders to improve water quality. These options are based on our understanding of mitigation options related to improving water quality and current on-ground actions being implemented by stakeholders in the watershed. There may, however, be other strategies available. Consideration has not been given to possible funding implications, logistics and other consequences associated with implementing these options. The agencies responsible for implementing these options have also been indicated.

4 Water Quality Snapshot 2001–2002

2 METHOD

Sampling strategy Introduction Catchment runoff events are dependant on, and driven by, the nature of each sub- catchment (soil wetness, slope, impermeable surfaces and vegetation cover), and the intensity and duration of rainfall. These characteristics influence the time delay between rainfall and catchment runoff occurring. Some sub-catchments have short lag periods between rainfall and a stream flow response to runoff, with event duration being typically less than four hours. Others have longer lag periods and event duration can extend to greater than eight hours. This information contributed to establishing the order in which sub-catchments were sampled. Period of sampling Hydrological patterns in the watershed are driven by warm, dry summers and cool, wet winters. The majority of annual rainfall occurs between May and October, with the corresponding catchment runoff and increases in stream flow occurring between June and November. In order to capture data from significant events, sampling occurred during the period when runoff occurred, ie between June and November. Order of sampling The order of sampling was also dependent, in part, on logistics and travel time. As such, sub-catchments that have close proximity and similar hydrological characteristics were grouped. Based on historic rainfall and stream flow pattern records, the likely stream flow response was determined using specific rainfall events for indicator sub-catchments. This generated an understanding of the hydrological relationship between these indicator sub-catchments and enabled similar relationships for other such sub-catchments to be established. Identifying significant runoff events Threshold values were determined to distinguish significant runoff events from baseflows. These values were critical in establishing if the event was classed as ‘significant’ and were used extensively to make decisions on whether sampling occurred. Each sampling site had a height indicator installed to allow change from baseflow to be established. Sampling was initiated when the water level exceeded a certain predetermined height. Velocity was measured at each site and this value, along with cross-sectional area, was used to determine instantaneous flow. Additional tools To aid decision making about which sub-catchments to sample and when, a number of additional tools were employed. Rainfall forecasts including the Bureau of Meteorology radar system and meteorologist advice were critical, along with stream flow and rainfall station data obtained from a base station. Mobile phone text messages were used to flag heavy falls of rain occurring in the catchments.

Analytes of importance The primary focus of this work was on the drinking water supply to reservoirs. SA Water, South Australia’s drinking water supplier, was consulted to establish which parameters

5 Water Quality Snapshot 2001–2002 should be considered critical in relation to reservoir management, water treatment and hence drinking water supply. The resultant list of analytes (see Figure 1) provides a target suite on which to concentrate efforts. It should be understood, however, that all water quality analytes are considered important.

WATER TREATMENT CATCHMENT MANAGEMENT PLANT FOR WATER SUPPLY Cryptosporidium Nutrients/ Algae Cryptosporidium (and other DOC (Alkalinity) pathogens) MIB / Geosmin Turbidity Iron Manganese Pesticides Turbidity DOC Cyano-bacteria Colour Pesticides Heavy Metals Salinity / TDS (River Murray inputs)

Figure 1 Analytes considered critical to water treatment and catchment management

Water quality data analysis The water quality results from the 2001 and 2002 sampling were compared with a set of raw water hazard threshold values (see Table 1). The raw water hazard threshold values were developed by an expert panel to establish criteria for raw water supply and use a combination of water quality guidelines. Any water quality parameter that returned a result above a raw water hazard threshold value was considered significant. In some instances stakeholders may wish to relate these results to their specific interests, as some results may be above other water quality classification criteria. The focus of interest or concern will be dependent on the responsibility and/or the business needs of the stakeholder/s.

6 Water Quality Snapshot 2001–2002

Table 1 Raw water hazard threshold values

Parameter Threshold Source Value colour—true (456nm) 100 HU SA Water trigger value CLARITY turbidity 100 NTU SA Water trigger value

HEAVY aluminium—soluble 0.2 mg/L ADWG Aesthetic guidelines* METALS lead—total 0.01 mg/L ADWG Health guidelines confirmed 10/10 L Type 1 water quality incident Cryptosporidium MICROBIAL/ confirmed Giardia 10/10 L Type 1 water quality incident PATHOGENS Escherichia coli (E. coli) 1000/100mL† Primary contact recreation ANZECC Enterococcus spp. 1000/100mL Primary contact recreation ANZECC filtered reactive 0.1 mg/L WQEPP phosphorus

NUTRIENTS total phosphorus 0.5 mg/L WQEPP nitrate + nitrite (as N) 0.5 mg/L WQEPP total organic carbon 15 mg/L WQEPP SALINITY total dissolved solids 500 mg/L ADWG Aesthetic guidelines

* The aesthetic and health guidelines are defined in the NHMRC Drinking Water Guidelines 2000 † Since this project was carried out, threshold values for Primary contact have changed to 150/100mL and the value for Secondary contact, irrigation and livestock has been set at 1000/100mL, for both E. coli and Enterococcus

In the laboratory analyses obtained from the Australian Water Quality Centre (AWQC) pathogen results are sometimes reported as a ‘less than’ value, for example <3.0. To allow analysis of the results these were changed to zero. This was due to the analysis being less than the detectable limit.

Classification of data A total of 34 sub-catchments were sampled a maximum of three times during local storm events. Water quality parameters showing results that exceeded the raw water hazard threshold values, and are therefore of critical concern to water quality, were classified using percentiles. The data was classified into 0−40th percentile (coded blue), >40−80th percentile (coded green) and >80th percentile (coded orange). Results for each sub-catchment were considered and the sub-catchment categorised based on the following criteria: • where every sample in a sub-catchment, for a particular analyte considered to be of critical concern to raw water quality, returned a result above the 80th percentile, the analyte was classified as Category A

7 Water Quality Snapshot 2001–2002

• where at least one sample in a sub-catchment, taken for a particular analyte considered of critical concern to raw water quality, returned a result above the 80th percentile the analyte was classified as Category B • where no samples in a sub-catchment, taken for a particular analyte considered of critical concern to raw water quality, returned a result above the 80th percentile the analyte was classified as Category C.

Table 2 depicts the spread of sub-catchments for each category, while Figure 2 provides a visual indication of the spread of categories across the watershed. For example, in the Onkaparinga catchment six sub-catchments were classified as Category A. None of the sub- catchments tested fell within Category C. That is, every sub-catchment contained at least one analyte of concern above the 80th percentile.

Table 2 Summary of sub-catchment categories for the watershed

CATCHMENT/ BOARD AREA CATEGORY A CATEGORY B

Onkaparinga 6 7 Torrens 7 4 N orthern Adelaide & Barossa 3 4 Myponga 2 1 Total 18 16

It is recognised that analysing the data in this way has a number of significant limitations not the least being a lack of statistical rigour. Nevertheless, the analysis does provide a useful qualitative evaluation of the sub-catchments from a water quality perspective and some, albeit fairly crude, ranking of priority.

8 Water Quality Snapshot 2001–2002

Figure 2 Sub-catchment categories across the watershed

9 Water Quality Snapshot 2001–2002

Data constraints The level of information that can be derived from this project is constrained by the absence of flow data. The current data depicts the water quality at each site at the instant the sample was taken. The concentration of pollutants would be expected to vary across the hydrograph and the grab sample result is unlikely to be representative of pollutant concentrations throughout the runoff event. The lack of flow data precludes the comparison of water quality results across different events and between sub-catchments. The data shows that sample results collected at the same site over three sampling events, were in some instances, markedly different. As only three samples were taken per site (as a best case scenario) it was not possible to identify which, if any of the sample results, are outliers. Assessment of the data is therefore largely descriptive. Some sites returned results above the 80th percentile on all three occasions. This is not, however, an indication that those samples that returned one result above the 80th percentile are not of critical concern. If such a site was sampled at different times, under different conditions or using a different technique, the three samples may return results above the 80th percentile or alternatively below it. For these reasons, assessment of the results is at best indicative with the assignment of categories being subjective. The relative importance of each category in relation to interpretative usefulness will be dependent on the specific interests and responsibilities of the stakeholder.

Land use and the potential threat it poses to the water supply The watershed is a multi-use catchment that supplies Adelaide’s reservoirs. The catchment is used extensively for broadscale and intensive grazing, horticultural activities, residential and recreation purposes. Only about 10% of the catchment is allocated to water reserves, which is considerably less than the land set aside for water protection purposes in the eastern states. As a result, the water resources of the watershed have been affected by the level of development in the catchment (Wood 1986). Previous studies in parts of the watershed have suggested that particular land use types have a greater affect on water quality than others. A study by Wood (1986) in the Onkaparinga catchment indicated that intensive horticulture and urban land uses contribute higher pollutant loads per unit area than other land uses. Particular land uses are also known to contribute specific types of pollutants to catchment streams. For example, Cryptosporidium, which poses a significant threat to raw water supplies, is known to come from animal and human faecal material (NHMRC 1996). If Cryptosporidium is found in a water sample, this information can be used to identify potential pollutant sources within a sub-catchment or catchment. Table 3 contains a list of different land use types and some of the pollutants they can contribute to water supplies. The pollutants listed are those sampled for during the Water Quality Snapshot project and should by no means be seen as an exhaustive list of pollutants associated with the various land use types. While water quality results will be linked (where possible) to potential pollutant sources within the sub-catchments, there is the likelihood that results will occur where there is no discernible link with land use. Where land use pollutant contributions to water quality cannot be determined, this will be identified in the relevant sub-catchment section.

10 Water Quality Snapshot 2001–2002

Table 3 Land use types and associated pollutants

Broad land use type Pollutants* urban/rural living Cryptosporidium, Giardia, Escherichia coli, faecal coliforms, nitrates, nitrites, phosphorous, turbidity, suspended solids, pesticides recreation areas nitrates, nitrites, phosphorous, turbidity, suspended solids, total dissolved solids, pesticides manufacturing/commercial/industrial heavy metals, turbidity, TOC, suspended solids transport (road and rail) turbidity, suspended solids, pesticides, heavy metals

mining/extraction heavy metals, turbidity, suspended solids, total dissolved solids

forestry (exotic vegetation) turbidity, suspended solids, total dissolved solids, pesticides, colour, total organic carbon native vegetation colour, total organic carbon

floriculture nitrates, nitrites, phosphorous, turbidity, suspended solids, total dissolved solids, pesticides

row-berries nitrates, nitrites, phosphorous, turbidity, suspended solids, total dissolved solids, pesticides

vegetables nitrates, nitrites, phosphorous, turbidity, suspended solids, total dissolved solids, pesticides

vines nitrates, nitrites, phosphorous, turbidity, suspended solids, total dissolved solids, pesticides

orchards nitrates, nitrites, phosphorous, turbidity, suspended solids, total dissolved solids, pesticides,

grazing enterprises (broadscale/ Cryptosporidium, Giardia, E. coli, faecal coliforms, intensive and housed/confined) nitrates, nitrites, phosphorous, heavy metals, turbidity, suspended solids, total dissolved solids, pesticides * Pollutants identified from United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) and National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) publications

11 Water Quality Snapshot 2001–2002

3 DISCUSSION OF RESULTS

Water quality analytes Figures 3−12 show the range of results returned for particular parameters within each catchment in the watershed. The results reported for each analyte are presented as simple descriptive statistics using box plots. Data have been organised into maxima and minima, median values and a predetermined data range (ie quartiles). The 1st quartile (equivalent to the 25th percentile) and 3rd quartile (equivalent to the 75th percentile) have been adopted for reporting the inter- quartile range for each parameter to indicate the 50% of data centrally located in any set of data. The median is located within the inter-quartile range, and its relative position in that range will indicate the skew, if any, in a dataset. Please note that the results are reported as the concentrations of a specified analyte only, ie data have not been analysed in relation to flow data. Median values are represented in the box plots as filled triangles; maximum values with an ‘x’ symbol; minima as filled squares; and the inter-quartile range as the upper and lower horizontal lines of the box plots ie 3rd and 1st quartiles, respectively. All water quality data for each parameter collected at each site has been classified into percentiles and is presented in Appendix 2. Turbidity As seen in the box plots in Figure 3, turbidity concentrations varied considerably in ranges of values within the catchments. When compared against the raw water hazard threshold, only data within the inter-quartile range (ie between the 1st and 3rd quartiles) for the Torrens catchment exceeded the threshold (100 NTU). When compared against the Environment Protection (Water Quality) Policy 20031 (EPP) values for freshwater ecosystem, primary contact and potable water, it is noticeable that data within the inter- quartile range for every catchment consistently exceeded these thresholds.

450.00 EPP: 20 NTU( freshwat er ecosyst em & pri mary cont act ) 400.00 5 NTU ( pot ab l e wat er ) 350.00

300.00

250.00 ( ) 200.00

Turbidity NTU 150.00

100.00

50.00

0.00 NAB Turbidity Torrens Turbidity Onkaparngai Turbidity Myponga Turbidity

Figure 3 Turbidity results for the watershed during 2001 and 2002

1 The Environment Protection (Water Quality) Policy 2003 became operative on 1 October 2003

12 Water Quality Snapshot 2001–2002

Colour

Figure 5 depicts the spread of values for colour within the watershed catchments. Values within the inter-quartile range (ie between the 1st and 3rd quartiles) for every catchment exceeded the raw water hazard threshold (100 HU). Comparison against the EPP value indicates that even the minimum values for the NAB and Myponga catchments were above this threshold (30 HU).

300.00 EPP: 30 HU( freshwater ecosyst em)

250.00

200.00 q1 Mi n

our ( HU) 150.00 Medi an ol Max

Tru e C 100.00 q3

50.00

0.00 NAB colour Torrens colour Onkaparinga Myponga colour colour

Figure 5 Colour results for the watershed during 2001 and 2002

Escherichia coli The box plots presented in Figure 6 indicate that E. coli results varied in ranges of values for each catchment in the watershed. The raw water hazard threshold and EPP value for secondary contact, irrigation and livestock are the same for this parameter (1000 cfu/100 mL). Values within the inter-quartile range (ie between the 1st and 3rd quartiles) for every catchment exceeded this threshold. Additionally, the minimum values for the NAB and Torrens catchments exceeded the EPP value for primary contact (150 cfu/100 mL).

1000000

100000

10000 q1 Min 1000 Medi an Max

. comL 100 cfu/ 100 q3 E li ( ) EPP: 150 cfu per 100mL( pr i mary contact ) 10 1000 cfu per 100mL( secondary contact; irrgati i on & livestock) 1 NAB E. coli Torrens E. coli Onkapari nga E . Myponga E. coli coli

Figure 6 E. coli results for the watershed during 2001 and 2002

13 Water Quality Snapshot 2001–2002

Enterococcus Figure 7 depicts the spread of values for Enterococcus in the watershed catchments. Results within the inter-quartile range (ie between the 1st and 3rd quartiles) for every catchment exceeded the raw water hazard threshold (1000 cfu/100 mL) and the EPP value for primary contact (33 cfu/ 100mL). The minimum values for the NAB, Torrens and Myponga catchments were above the EPP value for primary contact.

100000

10000

q1 1000 Mi n ( ) Medi an 100 Max q3

Ent erococcus100 mL cfu/ Ent 10 EPP: 33 cfu per 100mL (pr i mary contact ) 1 NAB Ent erococcus Torrens Onkaparinga Myponga En t er o c o c c u s En t er o c o c c u s En t er o c o c c u s

Figure 7 Enterococcus results for the watershed during 2001 and 2002

Filtered reactive phosphorous Figure 8 depicts the spread of values for colour filtered reactive phosphorous in the watershed catchments. When compared with the raw water hazard threshold, only the data within the inter-quartile range (ie between the 1st and 3rd quartiles) for the Myponga catchment exceeded the threshold (0.1 mg/L). Values above the 3rd quartile for the Torrens and Onkaparinga catchments did, however, exceed the threshold. There is no value for soluble phosphorous within the EPP.

14 Water Quality Snapshot 2001–2002

0.70

0.60 ) -1

0.50 ( q1 0.40 Mi n Medi an 0.30 Max q3 0.20 t ered react ve phosporous react ve L ered mg t

Fil0.10 i

0.00 NAB FRP Torrens FRP Onkapari nga FRP Myponga FRP

Figure 8 Filtered reactive phosphorous results for the watershed during 2001 and 2002

Nitrate and nitrite (as N) Nitrate and nitrite (as N) values for the watershed catchments varied considerably in the range of values. Figure 9 depicts the spread of values for this parameter within the watershed catchments. For this analyte, the raw water hazard threshold and EPP value for freshwater ecosystems are the same. Only the data within the inter-quartile range (ie between the 1st and 3rd quartiles) for the Onkaparinga catchment exceeded the threshold and EPP value (0.5 mg/L). Values above the 3rd quartile for the Torrens catchment exceeded the threshold value.

2.00 EPP: oxidised nit rogen 0.5 mg L-1 1.80 (freshwater ecosystem) 1.60 ) -1 1.40 q1 1.20 ( L Mi n 1.00 Medi an

0.80 Max q3 0.60 i x nitrogen dised N mg O 0.40

0.20

0.00 NAB nit rat e-nitri t e Torrens nitrate- Onkaparinga Myponga nitrate nitri t e nit rat e-nitri t e nitri t e

Figure 9 Nitrate and nitrite (as N) results for the watershed during 2001 and 2002

15 Water Quality Snapshot 2001–2002

Total organic carbon

The range of values for total organic carbon varied across each of the watershed catchments. For total organic carbon, the raw water hazard threshold and EPP value for freshwater ecosystems are the same (15 mg/L). As can be seen in Figure 10, values within the inter-quartile range (ie between the 1st and 3rd quartiles) for every catchment in the watershed exceeded the threshold values.

40.00 EPP: 15 mg L-1 (freshwater ecosystem) 35.00 )

-1 30.00

q1 25.00 Mi n 20.00 Medi an Max 15.00 q3 l

Tot a organic carbon (mg L (mg a carbon organic Tot 10.00

5.00

0.00 NAB TOC Torrens TOC Onkapari nga TOC Myponga TOC

Figure 10 Total organic carbon results for the watershed during 2001 and 2002

Total phosphorous

Figure 11 depicts the range of values for total phosphorous concentrations in the samples collected in each of the watershed catchments. For this analyte, the raw water hazard threshold and EPP value for freshwater ecosystems are the same (0.5 mg/L). None of the values within the inter-quartile range for the catchments exceeded the raw water hazard threshold.

16 Water Quality Snapshot 2001–2002

1.20 EPP: 1.10 Phosphorous( tot a l P) 0.5 mg L-1 1.00 (freshwater ecosystem) 0.90 0.80 ) -1 0.70 q1

mg L 0.60 Mi n

TP ( 0.50 Medi an 0.40 Max 0.30 q3 0.20 0.10 0.00 NAB TP Torrens TP Onkapari nga TP Myponga TP

Figure 11 Total phosphorous results for the watershed during 2001 and 2002

Soluble aluminium

Figure 12 depicts the spread of values for soluble aluminium within each of the watershed catchments. None of the values contained within the inter-quartile range (ie between the 1st and 3rd quartiles) for the catchments exceeded the raw water hazard threshold (0.2 mg/L), although results in the top 25% did exceed this value. When compared against the EPP value for freshwater ecosystems (0.1 mg/L), results within the inter-quartile range for the NAB and Myponga catchments consistently exceeded this value. Results in the upper 25% of values for the Torrens and Onkaparinga catchments exceeded the EPP value for freshwater ecosystems.

0.30 EPP: 0.1 mg L -1( freshwat er ecosyst em)

0.25 ) -1 0.20 q1 Mi n 0.15 Medi an Max

l l 0.10 q3 Solub e Auminium (mg L (mg Auminium e Solub 0.05

0.00 NAB Sol uble A l Torrenw Sol uble A l Onkaparinga Myponga Sol uble A l Sol uble A l

Figure 12 Soluble aluminium results for the watershed during 2001 and 2002

17 Water Quality Snapshot 2001–2002

Total dissolved solids

Figure 13 shows the spread of values for total dissolved solids within the watershed catchments. When compared against the raw water hazard threshold, only the values contained within the inter-quartile range (ie between the 1st and 3rd quartiles) for the Torrens and Onkaparinga catchments exceeded the threshold (500 mg/L). Results in the top 25% of values for the NAB and Myponga catchments also exceeded the threshold. There is no value for total dissolved solids within the EPP.

1800.00

1600.00

) 1400.00 -1

1200.00 q1

li ( Mi n 1000.00 Medi an 800.00 Max 600.00 q3 l

Tota dissolved soTota dissolved ds L mg 400.00

200.00

0.00 NAB TDS Torrens TDS Onkapari nga TDS Myponga TDS

Figure 13 Total dissolved solids results for the watershed during 2001 and 2002

Data patterns There was considerable variability in the results generated through this project, which in part reflects the myriad of dynamic conditions at work throughout the watershed. The lack of complementary data (ie flow rate and volume) for each sample event and the low number of sampling events completed prevent a more rigorous analysis of these results. There was, however, one conspicuous sampling date, where consistently high concentrations of a number of analytes were recorded across the catchments. High concentration values were returned in many of the sub-catchments when sampling occurred on 24 September 2001. The period of significant flow during mid–September 2001 combined with the high pollutant concentrations resulted in much higher overall pollutant loads. In some cases these extreme events can contribute the majority of the annual pollutant load over a period of one or two weeks. An example of this is Lenswood Creek in September 2001 where 27% of the total annual volume of water and 95% of the total annual load of suspended solids flowed down the creek in one week.

18 Water Quality Snapshot 2001–2002

4 NORTHERN ADELAIDE AND BAROSSA CATCHMENT

Catchment characteristics Location and area The Northern Adelaide and Barossa (NAB) Catchment area is located in the northern region of the Southern Mount Lofty Ranges. The southern part of the area takes in part of the Mount Lofty Ranges watershed. This area encompasses the South Para, Little Para and Warren catchments. The portion of the catchment area within the watershed has an area of approximately 31,600 ha. The South Para catchment is approximately 11,993 ha, the Little Para catchment is approximately 8350 ha and the Warren catchment is approximately 11,856 ha. Four reservoirs exist in the NAB catchment area within the watershed, one in the Little Para catchment, one in the Warren catchment and two in the South Para catchment. Topography The headwaters of the Warren catchment are characterised by a landscape of low relief related to the high summit plain as described by Twidale (1976). Towards the middle of the catchment the topography grades to an undulating landscape. The South Para catchment is bounded on the east and west by steep terrain, with rolling hills towards the middle of the catchment. The landscape of the Little Para River catchment is characterised by steep hills in the east and west, and rolling hills in the north and south. Soils Soils are an important component of the management of water quality. The specific conditions and interactions within terrestrial soil systems can affect the mechanisms associated with inputs into aquatic ecosystems eg pathways between systems and degree of in-situ treatment. A broad understanding of these matters in relation to catchment conditions can contribute to interpretations of results of water quality analyses eg those carried out by Stevens, Cox and Chittleborough (1999) and Chittleborough (2002). The soils in the catchments of the NAB area are characterised by a complex mosiac of textural and structural soil conditions that are representative of processes in palaeo environments and of historical land uses. Soil texture is indicative of the drainage characteristics of soils and, by extension, the in-situ treatment and mitigation of some contaminants. More information about this can be found in papers by Gupta and Larson (1979), Williams et al. (1983) and Saxton et al. (1986). The predominant soil texture is sandy loam (of 10–20% clay content). This textural class comprises 60% of the NAB catchment area (Soil & Land Information 2001). Secondary, but major, textural classes are loamy sand and loam. Loam is the predominant surface texture of the latter two textural classes (proportional extents of approximately 20% and 10% respectively). Loamy sand and loam have, respectively, a clay content of between 5−10% and approximately 25% (Soil & Land Information 2001). The clay content in soils can indicate, amongst other factors, the degree of retention of nutrients such as phosphorus. More information about this can be found in papers by Frossard et al. (1995) and Bridgham et al. (2001). The nature of the surface soil structure in the catchments can be an indicator of the capacity for the establishment of vegetation. In other words, the capacity of soil to hard set and seal because of unstable aggregates of clay with significant sodicity influences

19 Water Quality Snapshot 2001–2002 whether vegetation is able to become established. Approximately 60% of the NAB catchment area is covered by soils that are susceptible to hard setting and sealing. Generally, the soil mantle of the NAB catchment area is made up of shallow stony soils that overlay basement rock (Soil & Land Information 2001). Drainage can be impeded, or the water table can be elevated, generating waterlogged areas in approximately 28% of the total area of soil cover. A proportion of these soils (≈ 2% or 0.5% of the total soil cover) has the capacity to be sufficiently waterlogged so that water can be above local ground level for up to three months in any 12-month period. The geomorphology of the landscape is, in the main (approximately 70% of the extent of the combined catchments), characterised by rolling, hilly landforms and some rock outcrops (Soil & Land Information 2001). Salinity induced by water table variability is not a significant issue in the catchments as a whole (≈ 97% of the total area is represented as being minimally affected by saline seepage). However, an area of approximately 160 hectares in the Tungali Creek sub- catchment has been identified as having the potential to be affected by highly saline seepage (Soil & Land Information 2001). Strongly acidic and poorly buffered soils comprise approximately 35% of the total area of the catchments. However, the extent of these soils is localised. The western area of the combined catchments is characterised by a preponderance of acidic soils. The Tungali and Portuguese creeks sub-catchments contain extensive areas of low pH soils (approximately 60% and 80% of sub-catchment area, respectively). In contrast, soils with minimal levels of exchangeable sodium (thereby having little potential for structural breakdown) comprise over 98% of the total area of the catchments. Whilst qualitative terms such as ‘predominant’ have been applied to the textural classifications, this use should be understood in terms of descriptive simplification of complex environments for this report. The querying of relevant databases, and associated documents, will outline the specific structural details of classifications (Soil and Land Information 2001 and 2001a). Reservoirs The Little Para catchment has one reservoir: Little Para Reservoir. The Little Para River feeds this reservoir. However, water from the River Murray can be transferred to the reservoir via the Mannum−Adelaide pipeline (Engineering and Water Supply Department [E&WS] 1992). The South Para catchment has two reservoirs: South Para and Barossa reservoirs. The Barossa Reservoir is an off-stream storage and water is fed into it from the South Para Reservoir, via the diversion weir. The South Para Reservoir is on-stream and generally only requires natural intake to reach full capacity (E&WS 1992). The Warren catchment has one reservoir: Warren Reservoir. Reservoir inflows from the Warren catchment are supplemented by River Murray transfers, which can come from either a branch main of the Mannum−Adelaide pipeline or water from the Swan Reach- Stockwell pipeline. Warren Reservoir is offline and no longer used to supply drinking water to Adelaide (E&WS 1992).

Land use characteristics Broadscale grazing is the largest land use in the NAB area, comprising approximately 53% of the area (see Table 4). This land use occurs predominantly in the Little Para River

20 Water Quality Snapshot 2001–2002 catchment, South Para catchment and, to a lesser extent, in the Warren catchment where exotic vegetation (mainly pine plantations) dominate the landscape. Exotic and native vegetation are the second and third largest land uses⎯approximately 16% and 13% respectively. Recreation/protected areas comprising conservation parks and water reserves surrounding the reservoirs account for 11% of land use. Horticultural activities (around 1% of land use) occur mainly in the headwaters of the Little Para River catchment and, to a lesser extent, in the South Para catchment. Viticulture (approximately 2% of land use) occurs across the NAB area of the watershed, with the largest vineyards occurring around the settlement of Williamstown and in the northern headwaters of the Warren catchment. Overall land use percentages within the NAB area are given in Table 4.

Table 4 Land use percentages for the NAB catchment Class Area Ha Crop % Berries 0.66 0.00 Broadscale grazing 16826.94 53.29 Citrus 0.18 0.00 Cultural 10.66 0.03 Dam 226.40 0.72 Exotic flowers 13.75 0.04 Exotic vegetation 5067.52 16.05 Housed/confined 0.17 0.00 Industry/commercial 33.16 0.10 Intensive grazing 37.57 0.12 Lake 0.18 0.00 Mining/extraction 47.61 0.15 Native vegetation 4090.94 12.95 Nuts 13.75 0.04 Orchards/miscellaneous 61.53 0.19 Pomefruit 197.19 0.62 Recreation 98.18 0.31 Recreation/protected area 3542.08 11.22 Reservoir 693.27 2.20 Residential 75.28 0.24 Sewage pond 4.73 0.01 Stonefruit 10.86 0.03 Utilities/other 2.58 0.01 Vacant allotment 2.91 0.01 Vines 520.52 1.65 31578.61 100.00

Overview of water quality results for 2001 and 2002 A range of water quality parameters for the NAB area returned results above the 80th percentile (see Table 5) and this suggests that a variety of environmental management issues may exist here. Generally the results were variable in terms of data classification, with the exception of colour, total organic carbon and soluble aluminium, which on many occasions returned results above the 80th percentile. These results are consistent with the greater percentage of forested areas and acid soils in the catchments.

21 Water Quality Snapshot 2001–2002

Turbidity results exceeded the raw water hazard threshold on four occasions, with three of those samples occurring on 24 September 2001. True colour concentrations were consistently above the 80th percentile for the Warren sub-catchments. Across all NAB catchments, 81% of true colour samples returned results above the raw water hazard threshold. Colour is an aesthetic issue when considering drinking water supplies.

Table 5 Water quality results for the NAB catchment

Clarity Microbial / Pathogens Nutrients Heavy Metals Salinity nfirmed Cryptosporidium Site No Catchment Sub-Catchment Sample Date NTU Turbidity HU Colour /10L Co /10L Confirmed Giardia /100mL E-Coli /100mL Enterococcus spp mg/L FRP mg/L Nitrate + Nitrite as N mg/L Total Organic Carbon mg/L Phosporous - Total as P mg/L Aluminium - Soluble mg/L Lead - Total mg/L Total Dissolved Solids - by EC W01 Warren Forestry HQ 20-Aug-01 30.0 203.0 550 680 0.000 0.008 6.5 0.056 0.179 0.0022 220 W01 Warren Forestry HQ 24-Sep-01 54.0 160.0 15 9 65000 46000 0.009 0.034 27.0 0.194 0.071 0.0033 350 LP1 Little Para Gould Creek 21-Aug-01 27.0 126.0 0 12 490 380 0.009 0.114 17.0 0.054 0.042 0.0021 410 LP1 Little Para Gould Creek 24-Sep-01 140.0 125.0 180 0 58000 29000 0.009 0.303 23.3 0.242 0.037 0.0062 350 LP2 Little Para Little Para River 21-Aug-01 17.0 94.0 4 0 350 270 0.006 0.328 11.9 0.042 0.041 0.0030 330 LP2 Little Para Little Para River 25-Oct-01 17.0 48.0 0 1500 910 0.022 0.108 9.2 0.073 0.154 0.0014 410 SP2 South Para Malcolm Creek 20-Aug-01 18.0 170.0 0 0 920 400 0.011 0.223 20.8 0.062 0.090 0.0048 410 SP2 South Para Malcolm Creek 24-Sep-01 120.0 172.0 26 0 160000 100000 0.015 0.132 24.7 0.161 0.148 0.0055 210 SP2 South Para Malcolm Creek 3-Aug-02 74.0 115.0 220 110 6000 17000 0.000 0.174 21.1 0.133 0.074 0.0025 640 W02 Warren Portuguese 20-Aug-01 9.4 191.0 0 690 440 0.010 0.031 29.6 0.078 0.123 0.0011 230 W02 Warren Portuguese 28-Aug-01 150.0 153.0 29 0 9900 5700 0.006 0.042 27.9 0.360 0.089 0.0031 95 W03 Warren Tungali 20-Aug-01 18.0 252.0 0 0 920 620 0.015 0.018 37.6 0.086 0.146 0.0010 370 W03 Warren Tungali 28-Aug-01 28.0 238.0 240 290 0.008 0.039 35.0 0.075 0.102 0.0006 530 SP1 South Para Victoria Creek 20-Aug-01 18.0 101.0 980 160 0.008 0.179 3.6 0.051 0.052 0.0014 400 SP1 South Para Victoria Creek 24-Sep-01 170.0 150.0 35 65000 29000 0.069 0.276 30.8 0.280 0.097 0.0058 200 SP1 South Para Victoria Creek 3-Aug-02 24.0 60.7 74 390 2400 1000 0.024 0.164 12.0 0.069 0.051 0.0011 450

0 - 40th percentile >40 - 80th percentile >80th percentile

In the NAB catchments, pathogenic organism concentrations were, in some instances, an order of magnitude greater than the raw water hazard threshold values. These results exceeded the threshold values for 44% of samples taken. Interestingly, every sub- catchment that was sampled on 24 September 2001 returned elevated pathogen readings. Given the time of year and the size of the event/rainfall, it could be inferred that septic tank soakage trenches in the sub-catchments had reached capacity and the extreme event caused overflows to occur (B Routley 2003, pers comm). Pathogen concentrations at these levels are an issue, particularly as a number of the sub-catchments feed straight into the reservoirs. Results relating to nutrients within the NAB catchments, with the exception of total organic carbon, were generally below the 40th percentile. Total organic carbon concentrations were consistently above the 80th percentile for the Warren sub- catchments. Across all NAB catchments, 60% of samples for total organic carbon returned results above the raw water hazard threshold. The degree of presence of total organic carbon has implications for water treatment and its by-products. Soluble aluminium concentrations were also relatively high in the Warren sub-catchments, although results were variable across all NAB catchments. The raw water hazard threshold value for this parameter was not exceeded, despite several results exceeding the 80th percentile. The majority of results relating to lead in the NAB catchments were below the 80th percentile.

22 Water Quality Snapshot 2001–2002

All results for total dissolved solids were below the 80th percentile. However, the raw water hazard threshold was exceeded on two occasions. Samples taken on 24 September 2001 across a range of sub-catchments returned the highest results for turbidity and pathogens. It is noteworthy that on this day rainfall in the order of 30 mm was recorded across the NAB catchments. A more comprehensive analysis of other related data could aid interpretation of these results. A discussion of the general results for the sub-catchments within the NAB catchment is provided in the following section. Based on these results the following sub-catchments were categorised as (also refer to ‘Classification of data’): • Category A sub-catchments: Forestry Headquarters, Portuguese Creek and Tungali Creek • Category B sub-catchments: Gould Creek, Little Para River, Malcolm Creek and Victoria Creek.

Overview of sub-catchment issues

CATEGORY A SUB-CATCHMENTS Forestry Headquarters sub-catchment The Forestry Headquarters sub-catchment is located in the southern headwaters of the South Para River catchment and has an area of approximately 2746 ha. The sub-catchment is characterised by rolling hills in the south and east, rising to steeper hills on the western boundary. Blackwood Flat is located in the middle of the sub-catchment. Exotic vegetation (mainly pine plantations) is the most extensive land use, comprising approximately 55% of the total land area and occurs throughout the sub-catchment. Broadscale grazing comprises approximately 28% of land use in the Forestry Headquarters sub-catchment and occurs mainly in the southeastern headwaters and at the bottom of the sub-catchment. Native vegetation and protected areas comprise approximately 14% and 2% of land use respectively. Mount Crawford Forestry Headquarters is located at the bottom of the sub- catchment. In this sub-catchment a range of water quality parameters returned results above the 80th percentile. This suggests that a variety of environmental management issues may exist in the sub-catchment (see Table 5). Generally the results were variable, with only one parameter⎯colour⎯having all sample results above the 80th percentile. This high value is of concern as it exceeded the raw water threshold value on every occasion. Although on one occasion total organic carbon was above the 80th percentile, the results suggest this parameter could be of concern. The large percentage of vegetation cover in the sub- catchment could be a reason for high results for colour and total organic carbon (Naidu et al. 1993). There were variable results for total organic carbon, pathogens and soluble aluminium with only one result above the 80th percentile. Like many of the sub-catchments in the NAB area the Forest Headquarters sub-catchment has areas of acidic soils. There is, therefore, the potential for aluminium to be transported in solution and in these instances the aluminium level in the receiving water body may become elevated (Baird 1999)—see result for 20 August 2001 in Appendix 2. The sample taken on 24 September 2001 returned results above the 80th percentile for Giardia, Enterococcus and E. coli. A moderate result was also returned for

23 Water Quality Snapshot 2001–2002

Cryptosporidium. The results for Enterococcus, E. coli and Cryptosporidium analyses relating to >80th percentile and >40−80th percentile results were all above the raw water threshold values. This indicates a problem with pathogen sources and warrants further consideration. There are a number of rural living blocks in the sub-catchment, and the condition and working order of their septic tanks is unknown. Septic tanks can be a potential source of nutrients and pathogens and the levels of E. coli and Enterococcus recorded on 24 September 2001 are suggestive of sources of faecal contamination in relatively close proximity to the sampling location. The EPA played a significant role in a domestic waste control systems audit that was a joint venture between several local and state government bodies (EPA 2003b). More than 1449 properties in the watershed were audited over one year, and this showed that 44% of the waste control systems were failing in urban areas. As a result of the audit, in the following 12 months the Adelaide Hills Council followed up on failing systems with 178 already being upgraded or awaiting upgrade. Portuguese Creek sub-catchment Portuguese Creek is located in the northeastern headwaters of the South Para River catchment and has an area of approximately 2994 ha. The sub-catchment is characterised by rolling hills in the east rising to steeper hills and Mount Crawford along the western boundary. Broadscale grazing comprises approximately 78% of land use and occurs throughout the sub-catchment. Exotic vegetation (pine forests) is the second largest land use (approximately 10%) and occurs in the lower part of the sub-catchment. Vines and native vegetation comprise approximately 6% and 4% of the total land use respectively. A large vineyard is situated in the northeastern headwaters of the Portuguese Creek sub- catchment and two other areas of vines occur on the western boundary. Native vegetation occurs in isolated patches across the sub-catchment. Several water quality parameters for Portuguese Creek returned results above the 80th percentile (see Table 5) and this suggests that a variety of issues relating to natural and anthropogenic causes may exist in this sub-catchment. Generally the results were consistent, with all sample results above the 80th percentile for colour and total organic carbon. Values for these analytes also exceeded the raw water hazard thresholds. Native vegetation and plantations such as pine trees, produce large quantities of organic matter that are known to be sources of organic carbon and colouring compounds (Naidu et al. 1993). Native and exotic vegetation combined only accounts for approximately 13% of the sub-catchment land use. This suggests that another source may be responsible for the high results returned, although this is dependant on forestry practices in relation to waterway management. More information about the effects of forestry on water quality can be found in reports by Croke et al. (1999) and Croke and Lane (1999). However, relationships between terrestrial ecosystem characteristics (ie soil and vegetation) and water quality parameters can be expected (Chittleborough 2002). For instance, DOC exports to waterways can be expected in the presence of coarser soil and sediment textures. Similarly, the proportions of particulate-P and dissolved-P in water bodies are related to textural characteristics of parent soils at any given site. Chittleborough (2002) indicates that throughflow is a significant pathway for export from terrestrial to aquatic systems. Two other parameters—turbidity and aluminium—also returned results greater than the 80th percentile on one occasion, with the turbidity result also exceeding the raw water hazard threshold value. Elevated levels of aluminium are not surprising given the extent of

24 Water Quality Snapshot 2001–2002 acidic soils in the sub-catchment. Other parameters showed some variability in sampling results. While being in the >40-80th percentile class, the results for Cryptosporidium, E. coli and Enterococcus exceeded the raw water hazard threshold values on 28 August 2001. Broadscale grazing makes up approximately 78% of the sub-catchment land use and is a potential source of high turbidity. The sampling data showed only one result above the 80th percentile. Unrestricted stock access to streams and situations where stocking rates exceed the carrying capacity of the land have the potential to contribute sediment to the watercourse and thus increase turbidity levels. A high result for soluble aluminium was also returned for Portuguese Creek. Like many of the sub-catchments in the NAB area the sub-catchment has areas of acidic soils. If the soil acidity is very high (ie the pH is low), aluminium will be mobilised from the soil into solution. In these instances the aluminium level in the receiving water body becomes elevated (Baird 1999). This is a likely explanation for the high aluminium result obtained in this sub-catchment. Tungali Creek sub-catchment Tungali Creek is located in the southern headwaters of the South Para River catchment and has an area of approximately 4016 ha. The topography is characterised by rolling hills in the southeastern headwaters grading to undulating land in the lower reaches of the sub- catchment. Broadscale grazing and exotic vegetation (pine plantations) are the largest land uses in the Tungali Creek sub-catchment, accounting for approximately 43% and 42% respectively. These uses occur throughout the sub-catchment. Native vegetation also occurs throughout the sub-catchment, and accounts for only about 13% of land use. Several water quality parameters for Tungali Creek returned results above the 80th percentile (see Table 5) and this suggests environmental management issues exist in this sub-catchment in relation to these parameters. Generally the results were consistent, with all sample results above the 80th percentile for colour, total organic carbon and soluble aluminium. The results returned for colour and total organic carbon were the highest for the watershed, and exceeded the raw water hazard thresholds. The large percentage of vegetation in the sub-catchment is a possible reason for high results for colour and total organic carbon. Native vegetation and plantations such as pine trees produce large quantities of organic matter that are known to be sources of organic carbon and colouring compounds (Naidu et al. 1993). Tungali Creek has areas of acidic soils. There is, therefore, the potential for aluminium to be transported in solution and in these instances the aluminium level in the receiving water body may become elevated (Baird 1999). In relation to the other analytes, the results returned were mostly below the 40th percentile, with the exception of total dissolved solids, which may suggest few other issues exist in Tungali Creek in relation to water quality.

CATEGORY B SUB-CATCHMENTS Gould Creek sub-catchment Gould Creek is located in the northern headwaters of the South Para River catchment and has an area of approximately 2300 ha. The topography is characterised by steep to rolling hills. Broadscale grazing is the largest use of land within the sub-catchment, comprising approximately 67% and occurs throughout the sub-catchment. Native vegetation is the second largest land use (approximately 25%) and the main patches occur on the eastern border of the sub-catchment. The water reserve around the Little Para Reservoir

25 Water Quality Snapshot 2001–2002 comprises the protected areas within the sub-catchment, and accounts for approximately 6% of total land use. A range of water quality parameters for Gould Creek returned results above the 80th percentile (see Table 5) and this suggests that a variety of environmental management issues may exist in this sub-catchment. Of particular concern are the Cryptosporidium and Giardia results, both of which exceeded the raw water hazard threshold value on one occasion. Of note was the lack of association of Cryptosporidium with the presence of Giardia. This was not commonly observed in other snapshot sampling, particularly in relation to Giardia which was generally associated with Cryptosporidium in the analyses of samples. On 24 September 2001, results greater than the 80th percentile, and exceeding the raw water hazard threshold values, were returned for turbidity, E. coli and Enterococcus. Broadscale grazing makes up 67% of the sub-catchment land use and is a known source of Cryptosporidium and turbidity. Results above the 80th percentile were recorded for both these analytes. In situations where animals have direct access to streams and where stocking rates exceed the carrying capacity of the land a situation may exist where runoff is increased bringing to the stream sediment and pathogens. Based on the land status dataset, there were three new horticulture developments in the sub-catchment between 1999 and 2002. Two of these developments are relatively close to the sampling site and these may also have contributed to an elevated turbidity result if they were established or managed inappropriately. Little Para River sub-catchment The Little Para River sub-catchment is located in the southern headwaters of the Little Para River catchment and has an area of approximately 4200 ha. Topography in the Little Para River sub-catchment is characterised by steep hills. Broadscale grazing comprises approximately 79% of the total land use. Protected areas account for approximately 7% of the total land use and are related to the water reserve around the Little Para Reservoir and an area of scrub under Heritage Agreement. The towns of Inglewood and Houghton are located in the southern part of the sub-catchment. Orchards of various types occur mainly in the southern headwaters and account for approximately 5% of land use. Only one water quality parameter for Little Para River returned a result above the 80th percentile, which was soluble aluminium (see Table 5). The result returned for soluble aluminium is high when compared with other sub-catchments in the NAB area, but below the raw water hazard threshold value. Despite its level of development, the Little Para River sub-catchment returned results that indicate that the water quality in the sub- catchment is higher than elsewhere in the watershed. Further work to establish the in- stream processes occurring in this sub-catchment should be considered. Compared with other sub-catchments in the watershed section of the NAB area, the Little Para River sub-catchment contains a wide range of land uses. This has not been reflected in the water quality data which, given the land use, could reasonably be expected to return some results above the 80th percentile. The most significant land use is broadscale grazing which makes up almost 80% of the sub-catchment. The generally expected impacts arising from this land use (eg increased pathogen loads, sediment and nutrient transport) have not been reflected in the results. Relatively undeveloped areas (classified as recreation/protected areas) buffer a large component of the main channel upstream of the sampling site. This may be contributing to the relatively low results by reducing the amount of pollutants entering the waterway. Pollutants from the upper catchment may be

26 Water Quality Snapshot 2001–2002 removed from the water by a range of natural processes before reaching the sample site. Field investigations, undertaken in the sampling program, indicate that a proportion of the stream network has a significant presence of in-stream vegetation, which could contribute to the removal of pollutants. While being below the 40th percentile, the result returned for E. coli on 25 October 2001 was above the raw water hazard threshold value, and as such is of concern. In relation to the other analytes, the results returned were mostly below the 40th percentile. The townships of Houghton and Inglewood are located at the top of the catchment. It is well documented that this area has a septic system failure rate of greater than 50% and these failures are partly due to shallow soils and steep slopes (Arnold & Gallasch 2001). This is a priority area for upgrade to a Septic Tank Effluent Disposal System (STEDS). Pathogen and nutrient levels were not found to be high in this sub-catchment, except for the one instance where E. coli exceeded the raw water hazard threshold. This may reflect the ability of the aquatic system to remove these pathogens. The results may also be due to event peak travel times down the stream network, or the attenuation of pathogens as they move through the system. Malcolm Creek sub-catchment Malcolm Creek is located in the southwestern headwaters of the South Para River catchment and has an area of approximately 5057 ha. The topography is characterised by rolling hills through the middle of the sub-catchment, grading to steep hills on the southern, eastern and western boundaries. Broadscale grazing is the largest use of land in the sub-catchment, comprising approximately 66% and occurs throughout the sub- catchment. Native vegetation is the second largest land use (approximately 20%) and the main patches occur on the western and eastern borders of the sub-catchment. Exotic vegetation and protected areas comprise approximately 9% and 2% of the total land use respectively. Vines, stonefruit, pomefruit and orchards/miscellaneous (including olives) occur through the central part of the sub-catchment. A range of water quality parameters for Malcolm Creek returned results above the 80th percentile (see Table 5) and this suggests that a variety of environmental management issues may exist in this sub-catchment. Generally the results were variable, with no more than two sample results above the 80th percentile for any particular analyte. This may highlight a need to perform more sampling in this sub-catchment to establish if the results returned through this project are representative. Of particular concern is colour, which was relatively high on two of the three sample occasions and exceeded the raw water hazard threshold value on every occasion. Total organic carbon, although not above the 80th percentile, also returned consistent results. Native vegetation makes up 20% of the sub-catchment land use, with the majority of this occurring on the western side of the sub-catchment, close to the sampling site. This is a likely explanation for the high results for colour and the consistent results for total organic carbon (Naidu et al. 1993). Variable results were returned for turbidity and pathogens between the sampling dates. However, the raw water hazard threshold values were exceeded on a number of occasions. The sample taken on 3 August 2002 returned results for Cryptosporidium and Giardia that were orders of magnitude above the raw water hazard threshold. The EPA investigated a property immediately upstream of the sampling site in June 2002 in response to a report of a number of dead sheep. Upon inspection, there were approximately 50 dead sheep on the property and about 15 carcasses in the watercourse. There were lambs present and some

27 Water Quality Snapshot 2001–2002 of these made up the dead count. It was some time before all the bodies were removed from the property by the landowner. Given that up to 70% of lambs can become infected with Cryptosporidium parvum during the first two weeks of life (Ortega-Mora et al. 1999), this may provide an explanation for the elevated pathogen results found during sampling in 2002. Results for E. coli and Enterococcus were also considerably higher than the raw water hazard threshold on this date, and this highlights a possible pollution problem. Results for E. coli and Enterococcus on 24 September 2001 sample were also an order of magnitude higher than the raw water hazard threshold and were the highest for the watershed. There are a number of rural living blocks in the sub-catchment, and the condition and working order of their septic tanks is unknown. Septic tanks can be a potential source of nutrients and pathogens and the results returned for E. coli and Enterococcus on 24 September 2001 are suggestive of septic tank failure. Most nutrient results were below the 40th percentile. While results for total organic carbon fell within the >40−80th percentile range, the raw water hazard threshold value for this parameter was exceeded on all occasions. This may highlight a water quality issue and could warrant further investigation to confirm the results. A high result for soluble aluminium was also returned for Malcolm Creek. Like many of the sub-catchments in the NAB area Malcolm Creek sub-catchment has areas of acidic soils. If soil acidity is sufficiently low, aluminium can move from the soil into solution. In these instances aluminium concentrations in the receiving water body become elevated (Baird 1999). This is the likely explanation for the high aluminium result obtained on 24 September 2001. Victoria Creek sub-catchment Victoria Creek is located in the northern headwaters of the South Para River catchment and has an area of approximately 2500 ha. The sub-catchment is dominated by rolling hills, with a small area of undulating land around the town of Williamstown, which is located at the bottom of the sub-catchment. Broadscale grazing is the largest land use in the Victoria Creek sub-catchment (approximately 72%) and occurs throughout the sub-catchment. Native vegetation also occurs throughout the sub-catchment and is the second largest land use, whilst exotic vegetation and vines account for approximately 10% and 6% of land use respectively. A range of water quality parameters for Victoria Creek returned results above the 80th percentile (see Table 5) and this suggests that a variety of environmental management issues may exist in this sub-catchment. Generally the results were variable, with no more than one sample result above the 80th percentile for any particular analyte. This highlights a need to perform more sampling in this sub-catchment to establish if the results recorded in this project are representative. Of particular concern is Giardia, which on one occasion, 3 August 2002, returned the highest result in the watershed—390 per 10 litres—an order of magnitude greater than the raw water hazard threshold value. Cryptosporidium were identified in samples collected at this time. Although the Cryptosporidium result was below the 80th percentile, it was still above the raw water hazard threshold. The sampling site is located in the township of Williamstown. The town’s sewage is reticulated via a Septic Tank Effluent Disposal Scheme (STEDS), which generally has pump stations at low points in the landscape. From time to time, these pump stations overflow and effluent can move to streams. This may explain the high Giardia result obtained during sampling in 2002. Broadscale grazing makes up 71%

28 Water Quality Snapshot 2001–2002 of the sub-catchment land use and may be a potential source of Giardia and Cryptosporidium. In situations where animals have direct access to streams and where stocking rates exceed the carrying capacity of the land a situation may exist where runoff is increased bringing to the stream sediment, pathogens and nutrients. E. coli and Enterococcus results returned on 24 September 2001 were an order of magnitude greater than the raw water hazard threshold, while the results returned on 3 August 2002 were also above the threshold value. This suggests that results in relation to these parameters are an issue. Septic tanks can be a potential source of nutrients and pathogens and the results returned for E. coli and Enterococcus on 24 September 2001 are suggestive of septic tank or pump station failure. Turbidity, colour and total organic carbon results all exceeded the raw water hazard thresholds on at least one occasion.

29 Water Quality Snapshot 2001–2002

5 TORRENS CATCHMENT

Catchment characteristics Location and area The Torrens Catchment Water Management area is located in the central region of the Southern Mount Lofty Ranges. The portion of the Torrens catchment area within the watershed is approximately 33,100 ha. Topography The headwaters of the Torrens catchment are characterised by a landscape of low relief related to the high summit plain as described in a publication edited by Twidale, Tyler and Web (1976). Towards the middle of the catchment the landscape grades to rolling hills, whilst in the west the topography is dominated by the steep-sided, rocky valley of the Torrens Gorge (South Central Regional Network [SCRN] 2000). Soils One-quarter of the catchment is acid, loamy sand to sandy loam over friable, brown, sandy clay to clay, grading to sandstone or schist basement rock within 100 cm. These soils have moderate to low fertility and water-holding capacity, and are highly erodible. Waterlogging is sometimes a problem. They are mostly used for grazing. Another 20% of the catchment is acid loam to clay loam over red to brown, well-structured clay, grading to siltstone or shale within 100 cm. These soils are fertile and have moderately high water-holding capacities and, when they occur other than on steep hillsides, are often used for annual and perennial horticulture and for high production pastures. A further 15% of the catchment is a shallow, acid, stony loam directly overlaying siltstone, shale or slate. These soils are common on steeper slopes where fine-grained basement rocks are predominant. Although these soils are moderately fertile, their steepness and shallowness limits their uses. Much of the land is uncleared and, where developed, is used for grazing (SCRN 2000). Reservoirs The Torrens catchment contains two reservoirs⎯Millbrook and Kangaroo Creek reservoirs. Water can be diverted from the main channel to Millbrook Reservoir via the Gumeracha diversion weir, or let through to Kangaroo Creek Reservoir, directly downstream of the weir. The catchment also receives River Murray transfers via the Mannum–Adelaide pipeline. These transfers can be introduced to the system downstream of Mount Pleasant or Birdwood (SCRN 2000).

Land use characteristics Broadscale grazing is the largest land use in the Torrens catchment, comprising approximately 65% of the area. This land use occurs throughout the catchment, although to a lesser extent on the western margin of the watershed for this catchment. Native vegetation accounts for approximately 12% of land use. In the west, native vegetation cover is extensive, while being more scattered in the rest of the catchment. Recreation/protected areas comprising conservation parks and water reserves surrounding the reservoirs account for approximately 7%, while exotic vegetation (mainly pine

30 Water Quality Snapshot 2001–2002 plantations) account for approximately 4% of land use in the catchment. The overall land use percentages within the Torrens catchment are given in Table 6.

Table 6 Land use percentages for the Torrens catchment Cl a ss Area Ha Cr op % Orchard s/ berries 0.15 0.00 Aliu m s 1.43 0.00 Sew age p ond 4.26 0.01 Vegetables/ m iscellaneou s 5.20 0.02 Leafy greens 8.99 0.03 Perennials 9.25 0.03 Vacant allotm ent 10.61 0.03 N u ts 11.53 0.03 Brassicas 21.60 0.07 Exotic flow ers 22.57 0.07 Citru s 27.03 0.08 Cu ltu ral 33.41 0.10 Berries 43.29 0.13 Utilities/ other 48.96 0.15 Ind u stry/ com m ercial 59.41 0.18 Orchard s/ m iscellaneou s 71.41 0.22 Mining/ extraction 82.58 0.25 Recreation 104.48 0.32 Resid ential 198.79 0.60 Reservoir 239.96 0.73 Stonefru it 295.39 0.89 Dam 321.37 0.97 Pom efru it 511.29 1.55 Intensive grazing 844.41 2.55 Vines 920.86 2.78 Exotic vegetation 1168.68 3.53 Recreation/ p rotected area 2371.05 7.17 N ative vegetation 4070.61 12.31 Broad scale grazing 21567.73 65.21 33076.30 100.00

Overview of water quality results for 2001 and 2002 A range of water quality parameters for the Torrens catchment area returned results above the 80th percentile (see Table 7) and this suggests that a variety of environmental management issues may exist here. Generally the results were variable, although all parameters returned results above the 80th percentile on a number of occasions. Turbidity results exceeded the raw water hazard threshold for 39% of samples. Results for colour, while being above the 80th percentile on only four occasions, exceeded the raw water hazard threshold for 43% of samples taken. In the Torrens sub-catchments, pathogenic organism concentrations were, in some instances, an order of magnitude greater than the raw water hazard threshold values. Results for Cryptosporidium exceeded the raw water hazard threshold for 77% of the

31 Water Quality Snapshot 2001–2002 samples, while E. coli and Enterococcus results were above the raw water hazard threshold for 86% and 75% of samples respectively. Interestingly, every sub-catchment that was sampled on 24 September 2001 returned elevated readings for E. coli and Enterococcus. Results for Giardia and Cryptosporidium were variable. It is noteworthy that on this day rainfall in the order of 30 mm occurred across the Torrens catchment. Given the time of year and the cumulative effects of soil moisture conditions in the sub-catchments, it is likely that septic tank soakage trenches, and receiving sediments, were (over)saturated. The depth and intensity of the rainfall event probably caused failures in drainage and, as such, in situ treatment would have been minimal (B Routley 2003 pers comm). Pathogen concentrations at the magnitudes reported from the sampling are an issue, particularly as a number of the sub-catchments are directly connected to the reservoirs (ie the process of interception and expression in surface waterways have relatively short travel times).

Table 7 Water quality results for the Torrens catchment

Clarity Microbial / Pathogens Nutrients Heavy Metals Salinity E-Coli Enterococcus spp Enterococcus Catchment Sub-Catchment Sample Date Site No NTU Turbidity /10L Confirmed Giardia /100mL mg/L FRP HU Colour /10L Confirmed Cryptosporidium /100mL mg/L Nitrate + Nitrite as N mg/L Total Organic Carbon mg/L Phosporous - Total as P mg/L Aluminium - Soluble mg/L Lead - Total mg/L Total Dissolved Solids - by EC T06 Torrens Angas Creek 16-Aug-01 370.0 54.0 0 230 910 0.259 1.390 16.3 0.746 0.000 0.0087 790 T06 Torrens Angas Creek 24-Sep-01 160.0 159.0 200 0 140000 41000 0.520 1.280 33.9 0.734 0.057 0.0051 500 T10 Torrens Cudlee Creek 7-Aug-01 71.0 36.0 0 0 2200 2500 0.000 0.445 5.0 0.117 0.028 0.0086 370 T10 Torrens Cudlee Creek 25-Oct-01 97.0 51.0 2 0 13000 6600 0.010 0.432 13.2 0.176 0.000 0.0079 280 T08 Torrens Footes Creek 16-Aug-01 110.0 135.0 1800 0 82000 12000 0.079 0.394 20.1 0.394 0.037 0.0021 400 T08 Torrens Footes Creek 24-Sep-01 85.0 128.0 130 100000 27000 0.067 0.300 21.2 0.310 0.054 0.0034 220 T08 Torrens Footes Creek 14-Jun-02 140.0 85.0 100 2 52000 6700 0.043 0.456 18.6 0.282 0.037 0.0044 810 T03 Torrens Hannaford 16-Aug-01 6.9 66.0 0 520 360 0.081 1.470 13.8 0.129 0.021 0.0019 700 T03 Torrens Hannaford 24-Sep-01 48.0 202.0 23 140000 43000 0.436 0.251 31.0 0.778 0.087 0.0014 230 T09 Torrens Kenton Creek 16-Aug-01 170.0 63.0 45 0 9300 4400 0.026 0.281 12.4 0.342 0.000 0.0114 510 T09 Torrens Kenton Creek 24-Sep-01 210.0 134.0 62 0 77000 46000 0.068 0.424 28.2 0.476 0.125 0.0114 220 T09 Torrens Kenton Creek 14-Jun-02 400.0 97.7 130 10 35000 27000 0.104 0.806 16.3 0.804 0.054 0.0300 520 T01 Torrens Kersbrook Creek 7-Aug-01 88.0 137.0 10 120 23000 25000 0.017 0.306 18.5 0.235 0.049 0.0126 280 T01 Torrens Kersbrook Creek 25-Oct-01 110.0 147.0 53 10 92000 61000 0.018 0.186 23.9 0.284 0.120 0.0118 180 T01 Torrens Kersbrook Creek 3-Aug-02 51.0 91.5 220 5 8000 6000 0.008 0.551 19.1 0.089 0.071 0.0022 670 T07 Torrens McCormick Creek 16-Aug-01 150.0 94.0 0 0 10000 2700 0.042 0.234 16.8 0.256 0.000 0.0043 640 T07 Torrens McCormick Creek 24-Sep-01 180.0 146.0 850 100000 70000 0.040 0.179 27.6 0.380 0.058 0.0060 260 T02 Torrens Millers Creek 16-Aug-01 84.0 74.0 43 7 7000 4200 0.030 0.274 2.9 0.180 0.000 0.0057 470 T02 Torrens Millers Creek 24-Sep-01 190.0 140.0 160 0 82000 44000 0.089 0.478 26.4 0.575 0.041 0.0057 350 T02 Torrens Millers Creek 14-Jun-02 84.0 72.6 35 51 20000 3700 0.063 0.142 16.5 0.252 0.000 0.0039 440 T04 Torrens Mt Pleasant 16-Aug-01 6.8 88.0 11 0 1900 4900 0.017 0.089 20.7 0.065 0.000 0.0014 1700 T04 Torrens Mt Pleasant 24-Sep-01 32.0 172.0 74 0 69000 32000 0.075 0.172 30.8 0.309 0.122 0.0030 850 T04 Torrens Mt Pleasant 3-Aug-02 8.8 80.6 110 34 2400 600 0.038 0.070 17.7 0.094 0.023 0.0005 1600 T11 Torrens Sixth Creek 7-Aug-01 15.0 33.0 2 1200 560 0.006 0.521 4.1 0.037 0.032 0.0036 230 T11 Torrens Sixth Creek 26-Oct-01 30.0 37.0 15 3 1700 680 0.014 0.536 8.8 0.095 0.064 0.0052 180 T11 Torrens Sixth Creek 3-Aug-02 9.1 24.2 46 0 460 140 0.000 0.493 4.9 0.029 0.022 0.0010 270 T05 Torrens Torrens Main Channel 20-Aug-01 13.0 137.0 0 0 610 480 0.014 0.058 25.6 0.084 0.028 0.0028 880 T05 Torrens Torrens Main Channel 25-Oct-01 22.0 107.0 13 0 30000 3900 0.030 0.060 22.1 0.157 0.049 0.0020 820

0 - 40th percentile >40 - 80th percentile >80th percentile

In the Torrens catchment, nutrients were generally below the 80th percentile, although results were recorded above the 80th percentile in a number of sub-catchments, and in Angas Creek nutrient results were consistently above the 80th percentile. Results for total organic carbon across the catchment, while above the 80th percentile on only seven occasions, exceeded the raw water hazard threshold for 71% of samples. Of the seven results above the 80th percentile, six of these were captured during events on 24 September 2001.

32 Water Quality Snapshot 2001–2002

Soluble aluminium concentrations were variable and did not exceed the raw water hazard threshold. Results for lead, while being above the 80th percentile in a number of sub- catchments, only exceeded the raw water hazard threshold for 18% of samples. Results for total dissolved solids exceeded the raw water hazard threshold for 46% of samples taken. In the upper catchment (ie Mount Pleasant and Torrens Main Channel) results were consistently above the 80th percentile for this parameter, while further downstream they were variable. A discussion of the general results for the sub-catchments within the Torrens catchment is provided in the following section. Based on these results the sub-catchments were categorised as (also refer to ‘Classification of data’): • Category A sub-catchments: Angas Creek, Cudlee Creek, Footes Creek, Kenton Valley, McCormick Creek, Mount Pleasant and Torrens Main Channel • Category B sub-catchments: Hannaford Creek, Kersbrook Creek, Millers Creek and Sixth Creek.

Overview of sub-catchment issues

CATEGORY A SUB-CATCHMENTS Angas Creek sub-catchment Angas Creek is located in the southeastern headwaters of the Torrens River catchment and has an area of approximately 2700 ha. Topography in the sub-catchment is characterised by a landscape of low relief between Birdwood and Mount Torrens, grading to rolling hills in the eastern and southern parts of the sub-catchment. Broadscale grazing comprises approximately 76% of land use in the Angas Creek sub-catchment and occurs throughout the sub-catchment. Intensive grazing accounts for approximately 15% of land use and occurs in the headwaters and at the bottom of the sub-catchment. The township of Mount Torrens is located in the headwaters of the sub-catchment. All but two parameters returned at least one result above the 80th percentile in Angas Creek (see Table 7) and this suggests that numerous environmental management issues exist in this sub-catchment. Generally the results were variable in terms of data ranking. However, for four parameters—turbidity, filtered reactive phosphorous, nitrate and nitrite (as N) and total P—all sample results were above the 80th percentile. These parameters, along with total organic carbon, also returned all results above the raw water hazard threshold values. Other parameters showed no clear pattern in results suggesting a multitude of influences at work. In Angas Creek, the event sampled on 16 August 2001 recorded the second highest turbidity results in the Torrens catchment, and some of the highest results for nitrate and nitrite (as N), filtered reactive phosphorous, total phosphorous and E. coli. During this event, the results returned for turbidity and nitrate and nitrite (as N) were the second highest in the watershed. The event sampled on 24 September 2001 returned the second highest results in the watershed for E. coli and filtered reactive phosphorous. All parameters sampled for during this event returned results above the raw water hazard thresholds, with the exception of Giardia, soluble aluminium and total lead. Nutrient and turbidity results all returned elevated levels in the Angas Creek sub- catchment. There are large areas of broadscale and intensive grazing in the sub-catchment

33 Water Quality Snapshot 2001–2002 that comprise approximately 91% of the total land use. These types of enterprises have the potential to contribute sediment, pathogens and nutrients to streams, particularly if overstocking or unrestricted stock access to watercourses occurs. There are several other potential nutrient sources in the Angas Creek sub-catchment—the Birdwood STEDS lagoons, a sewer pump station located on the northern edge of the Mount Torrens township, farmhouses reliant on septic tanks for wastewater disposal and dairy effluent lagoons. All these sources are capable of contributing high nutrient loads to the watercourse if systems fail or holding capacities are exceeded. The E. coli and Enterococcus results recorded on 24 September 2001 are suggestive of human faecal contamination. Cudlee Creek sub-catchment Cudlee Creek is located in the central headwaters of the Torrens River catchment and has an area of approximately 1948 ha. The sub-catchment is characterised by steep, hilly country. Broadscale grazing comprises approximately 66% of land use and occurs throughout the sub-catchment. Native vegetation is the second largest land use (approximately 30%) while exotic vegetation (pine forests) accounts for approximately 12% of land use in the sub-catchment. Vines comprise approximately 1% of the total land use. Intensive grazing (deer) occurs in the middle of the sub-catchment while small areas of pomefruit occur near the bottom of the sub-catchment. The south-western corner of the sub-catchment (Fox Creek) is covered by exotic and native vegetation. Only one parameter—soluble lead—returned at least one result above the 80th percentile in Cudlee Creek (see Table 7). Generally the results were consistent, with only three parameters returning results not in the same classification. The majority of parameters returned results below the 40th percentile, which could indicate that there are few water quality problems in this sub-catchment. The lead results that were above the 80th percentile were at the lower end of that particular percentile class. The raw water hazard threshold value was not exceeded for this particular parameter. Road and rail transport corridors are known sources of heavy metals. Given the current knowledge of the sub-catchment, the most likely source of lead is from stormwater coming from roads and is likely to be diffuse in nature. This is not to say the lead may not be coming from other anthropogenic sources or the geology of the area. At this stage, there is insufficient data to accurately pinpoint the source of this contaminant. Whilst returning results in the >40-80th percentile class, E. coli and Enterococcus results were all above the raw water hazard threshold. These parameters are of concern given their potential affect on human health. Footes Creek sub-catchment Footes Creek is located in the central headwaters of the Torrens River catchment and has an area of approximately 916 ha. The sub-catchment is characterised by rolling hills. Broadscale grazing comprises approximately 60% of land use and occurs throughout the sub-catchment. Native vegetation is the second largest land use (approximately 17%) and occurs in the south-western headwaters of the sub-catchment. Vines and orchards (pomefruit) comprise approximately 11% and 5% of the total land use respectively. A range of water quality parameters for Footes Creek returned results above the 80th percentile (see Table 7) and this suggests that a variety of issues may exist in this sub- catchment in terms of environmental management. Generally the results were consistent,

34 Water Quality Snapshot 2001–2002 with most parameters returning results within the same percentile class on at least two occasions. Cryptosporidium results were consistently in the highest percentile class, with the result returned on 16 August 2001 being the highest recorded for the Torrens catchment and also the watershed. Cryptosporidium at the levels detected during this sampling round are of high concern, particularly with regard to risk to raw water supplies. E. coli results were also consistent and amongst the highest recorded in the Torrens catchment. Both Cryptosporidium and E. coli results were all above the raw water threshold values. The raw water hazard threshold value was also exceeded on every occasion for Enterococcus. There are a number of rural living blocks upstream of the sampling site, and the condition and working order of their septic tanks is unknown. Septic tanks can be a potential source of pathogens and nutrients. The results recorded for Enterococcus and E. coli on 24 September 2001 are suggestive of septic tank failure or other sources of faecal contamination. Results greater than the 80th percentile were also returned for turbidity, Enterococcus, total phosphorous and total dissolved solids on one occasion. Turbidity results exceeded the raw water hazard threshold on two occasions, as did results for colour despite all results for this parameter being in the >40th-80th percentile class. The total dissolved solids results above the 80th percentile also exceeded the raw water hazard threshold for this parameter. Both intensive and broadscale grazing occur in this sub-catchment and have the potential to contribute sediment and pathogens to streams, particularly if overstocking or unrestricted stock access to watercourses occurs. There are also significant areas of vines and pomefruit in the sub-catchment. Where inter-row cover crops are not present and the soil is left bare, there is the potential for erosion to occur during runoff events, thus contributing sediment to watercourses. In the main, nutrient levels were less than the 80th percentile. Despite this, results returned for total organic carbon were all above the raw water hazard threshold. Kenton Valley sub-catchment Kenton Valley is located in the central headwaters of the Torrens River catchment and has an area of approximately 1242 ha. Sub-catchment topography is characterised by steep, hilly country. Broadscale grazing comprises approximately 79% of land use in Kenton Valley and occurs throughout the sub-catchment. Vines and intensive grazing account for approximately 4% and 3% of land use respectively. Vines occur throughout Kenton Valley. A large area of vines has recently been established in the lower reaches of the sub- catchment. Strawberries are grown on the western slopes in the central part of the sub- catchment and account for 2% of land use. The township of Gumeracha is located at the bottom of the sub-catchment. A range of water quality parameters for Kenton Valley returned levels above the 80th percentile (see Table 7). This suggests that a variety of environmental management issues may exist in this sub-catchment. Of particular concern are turbidity and Cryptosporidium, which are issues for SA Water in relation to reservoir management and water treatment processes.

35 Water Quality Snapshot 2001–2002

Turbidity and total lead results returned on 14 June 2002 were the highest in the watershed. These two parameters were above the 80th percentile for every sample, and exceeded the raw water hazard threshold values on all occasions. Pathogen results were varied, with results being returned in the >40−80th percentile class and the >80th percentile class. It is noteworthy, however, that all results for this set of parameters exceeded the raw water hazard threshold values. These levels are of concern due to the potential affect on human health. The only analyte that did not return a result above the raw water hazard threshold was soluble aluminium. Kenton Valley had the greatest number of parameters exceeding the raw water hazard threshold values for the Torrens catchment. This indicates that Kenton Valley may be a sub-catchment that warrants further consideration for investigations by appropriate agencies. Kenton Valley was included in the trace sampling program during 2002 (Holmes 2002). A large area of the sub-catchment adjacent to Coleman Road has changed from broadscale grazing to vines. The vines were established during the winter period of 2002 leaving bare soil exposed to the erosive action of rain and surface water runoff. It was believed that this development had a direct influence on the high turbidity result returned during 2002. This hypothesis was supported by the trace sampling program (Holmes 2002) that isolated the stream that runs along Coleman Road and through the new vineyard. The result obtained for turbidity at this site was 1100 NTU. The main channel of Kenton Creek upstream of Coleman Road returned a result of 250 NTU. A similar pattern was seen for nutrients where main channel results upstream of Coleman Road were approximately double that found at the Coleman Road site. See Holmes (2002) for further details on this program. Broadscale grazing makes up 79% of sub-catchment land use and may be a potential source of nutrients and sediment. In situations where animals have direct access to streams and where stocking rates exceed the carrying capacity of the land a situation may exist where runoff is increased bringing to the stream sediment and nutrients. Further to this the potential for bacteria and pathogens to enter the stream is increased by overland runoff of faeces or direct deposition by stock. There are a number of farmhouses upstream of the snapshot site. The condition and working order of their septic tanks is unknown. Septic tanks can be a source of nutrients, bacteria and pathogens, and the E. coli and Enterococcus results are suggestive of septic tank failure or other sources of faecal contamination. Areas of intensive grazing that are managed incorrectly are potential sources of nutrients, turbidity and pathogens. In the Kenton Valley sub-catchment there are two properties classed as intensive grazing. Current management practices on these properties are unknown. The lead results were above the 80th percentile and exceeded the raw water hazard threshold value for this parameter. The most probable source would be from stormwater coming from the township of Gumeracha and is most likely diffuse in nature. McCormick Creek sub-catchment McCormick Creek is located in the mid-Torrens region and has an area of approximately 916 ha. Mount Torrens dominates the topography in the south of the sub-catchment. The terrain grades to rolling hills in the north. Broadscale grazing comprises approximately 81%

36 Water Quality Snapshot 2001–2002 of land use and occurs throughout the sub-catchment. Vines account for approximately 11% of land use and are located predominantly on the western slopes of the sub-catchment. A large area of vines was newly established at the bottom of the sub-catchment during 2001 and 2002. Native vegetation occurs throughout the sub-catchment. A range of water quality parameters for McCormick Creek returned levels above the 80th percentile (see Table 7). Results were generally variable, with only one parameter— turbidity—returning all results in the >80th percentile. This suggests that a variety of issues may exist in this sub-catchment in terms of environmental management. Of particular concern are turbidity and Cryptosporidium. It is noteworthy that the sampling results returned on 24 September 2001 had some of the highest returns for Cryptosporidium, E. coli and Enterococcus in the Torrens catchment. The Enterococcus result was the second highest in the watershed. E. coli and Enterococcus results exceeded the raw water hazard threshold on every sampling occasion, while Cryptosporidium exceeded it once. Turbidity results exceeded the raw water hazard threshold without exception. Total organic carbon also exceeded the raw water hazard threshold on every occasion, despite returning varied results in classification. There is a significant area of vines in the sub-catchment. Where inter-row cover crops are not present and the soil is left bare, there is the potential for erosion to occur during runoff events, thus contributing sediment to the watercourse. Several new areas of vines and pomefruit have also been established in McCormick Creek during the past two years. Given the amount of bare soil present during the establishment phase of these activities, there is potential for sediment to be mobilised in runoff. Broadscale and intensive grazing make up a significant proportion of the sub-catchment land use and may be a potential source of Cryptosporidium. In situations where animals have direct access to streams and where stocking rates exceed the carrying capacity of the land a situation may exist where runoff is increased bringing to the stream sediment, pathogens and nutrients. Septic tanks can be a source of nutrients, bacteria and pathogens if not designed, maintained and managed correctly. Given the number of farmhouses in the sub-catchment, it is possible that they are contributing pollutants to the watercourse. E. coli and Enterococcus results for this sub-catchment are suggestive of septic tank failure. Mount Pleasant sub-catchment The Mount Pleasant sub-catchment is located in the northeastern headwaters of the Torrens River catchment and has an area of approximately 2450 ha. The sub-catchment topography is dominated by the high summit peneplain (Twidale et al. 1976) which consists of a landscape of low relief. Broadscale grazing comprises approximately 85% of land use and occurs throughout the sub-catchment. The town of Mount Pleasant is located at the bottom of the sub-catchment. Vines account for about 5% of land use and occur in the upper areas of the sub-catchment and olives account for approximately 1% of land use and occur in the lower areas. The Mount Pleasant Golf Course is located in the upper reaches of the sub-catchment. A range of water quality parameters returned concentrations above the 80th percentile (see Table 7). This suggests that a variety of environmental management issues may exist in this sub-catchment. Results were generally variable, with only two parameters—nitrate and nitrite (as N) and total dissolved solids—returning all results in the same classification.

37 Water Quality Snapshot 2001–2002

Total dissolved solids results were consistently high. They were the highest for the Torrens catchment and in fact for the whole of the watershed. This parameter also exceeded the raw water hazard threshold on each occasion sampling was undertaken. Pathogen results were variable. Cryptosporidium and Giardia results were above the 80th percentile on one occasion, while E. coli and Enterococcus returned high results during the 24 September 2001 sampling event. Cryptosporidium and E. coli results exceeded the raw water hazard thresholds for every sample, while Enterococcus results were above the threshold on two out of three occasions. Results returned for colour, total organic carbon and soluble aluminium during sampling on 24 September 2001 were some of the highest in the Torrens catchment. Further sampling or a more comprehensive analysis of other related data could be performed to aid interpretation of these results. Total organic carbon results consistently exceeded the raw water hazard threshold. Broadscale grazing comprises approximately 85% of the sub-catchment land use. This type of enterprise has the potential to contribute sediment, pathogens and nutrients to streams, particularly if overstocking or unrestricted stock access to watercourses occurs. There are a number of farmhouses in the Mount Pleasant sub-catchment and the condition and working order of their septic tanks is unknown. There is also a sewer pump station located upstream of the sampling site. Septic tanks and pumps stations can be sources of nutrients and pathogens if they fail. E. coli and Enterococcus results are suggestive of faecal contamination. The Mount Pleasant Golf Course is situated on an effluent re-use scheme, with effluent supplied from the Mount Pleasant STEDS, located adjacent to the facility. If irrigation rates are more than that required by the grass, runoff could be contributing nutrients to the watercourse. Torrens Main Channel sub-catchment (above Cromer Road, Birdwood) The Torrens Main Channel above Cromer Road at Birdwood contains the main stem of the Torrens River and a number of small tributaries. It has an area of approximately 4500 ha. The topography is dominated by rolling hills surrounding alluvial flats. Broadscale grazing comprises approximately 92% of land use and occurs throughout the sub-catchment. Small areas of intensive grazing (horse-keeping) occur throughout the sub-catchment and account for approximately 3% of land use. Native vegetation and exotic vegetation (pine forests) each comprise approximately 2% of land use. The town of Birdwood is located at the bottom of the sub-catchment. In the Torrens Main Channel sub-catchment, a range of water quality parameters returned levels above the 80th percentile (see Table 7). This suggests that a variety of issues exist in this sub-catchment in terms of environmental management. Results were generally variable, with only three water quality parameters—Giardia, nitrate and nitrite (as N) and total dissolved solids—returning results within the same classification on more than one occasion. All results for total dissolved solids were above the 80th percentile, while the majority of the other results were less than the 40th percentile. Three parameters—colour, E. coli and total organic carbon—all returned results above the 80th percentile on one occasion.

38 Water Quality Snapshot 2001–2002

Colour, total organic carbon and total dissolved solids returned all results above the raw water hazard thresholds, while results for Cryptosporidium, E. coli and Enterococcus exceeded the thresholds on one occasion. River Murray water is introduced to the River Torrens system at Mount Pleasant via the Mannum–Adelaide pipeline. This has the potential to impact on total dissolved solids results downstream in the main channel. Geology could also play a role in the result for total dissolved solids, with the Kanmantoo group of rocks occurring throughout the area. Broadscale grazing comprises approximately 92% of the sub-catchment land use. This type of enterprise has the potential to contribute sediment, pathogens and nutrients to streams, particularly if overstocking or unrestricted stock access to watercourses occurs. There are a number of farmhouses in the sub-catchment and the condition and working order of their septic tanks is unknown. Septic tanks can be sources of nutrients and pathogens and the results for E. coli and Enterococcus are suggestive of septic tank failure.

CATEGORY B SUB-CATCHMENTS Hannaford Creek sub-catchment Hannaford Creek is located in the northern headwaters of the Torrens River catchment and has an area of approximately 1528 ha. The topography of the sub-catchment is characterised by rolling hills. Broadscale grazing comprises approximately 74% of land use in the Hannaford Creek sub-catchment and occurs throughout the sub-catchment. Intensive grazing (dairy and deer) occurs throughout the middle of the sub-catchment and in the lower reaches. This land use accounts for approximately 15% of the area of the sub- catchment. The Cromer Conservation Park is located in the headwaters of the Hannaford Creek sub-catchment and native vegetation and protected areas account for approximately 6% of land use. Mining and extraction, and olives occur on the eastern boundary of the sub- catchment. Vines occur in the north (approximately 1% of land use) while a stonefruit (cherry) orchard is located at the bottom of the sub-catchment (approximately 2% of land use). A range of water quality parameters for Hannaford Creek returned results above the 80th percentile (see Table 7) and this suggests that a variety of environmental management issues may exist in this sub-catchment. Generally the results were variable, with no parameter returning results within the same percentile class. The sampling results returned on 24 September 2001 were the highest in the Torrens catchment for colour and E. coli, and the second highest results for filtered reactive phosphorous, total organic carbon and total phosphorous. The E. coli result was also the highest for the watershed. Furthermore, every parameter that returned a result above the 80th percentile during this event also exceeded the raw water hazard threshold. Cryptosporidium, whilst returning a result below the 80th percentile, also exceeded the raw water hazard threshold during the event on 24 September 2001. Approximately 30 mm of rainfall was received across the Torrens catchment on 24 September 2001, which indicates that large amounts of water were moving through the system during this event. Conversely, while returning relatively low results during the 24 September 2001 event, nitrate and nitrite (as N) and total dissolved solids results were above the 80th percentile during the event on 16 August 2001. Both these parameters exceeded the raw water hazard thresholds on this date. Broadscale and intensive grazing make up 87% of the sub-catchment land use and are known sources of pathogens and nutrients. In situations where animals have unrestricted

39 Water Quality Snapshot 2001–2002 access to streams or where stocking rates exceed the carrying capacity of the land, a situation may exist where runoff contributes pathogens and nutrients to the stream. Several areas of intensive grazing border the watercourses and stock have unrestricted access to parts of Hannaford Creek. This may have contributed to the elevated pathogen and nutrient levels recorded. There are a number of rural living blocks upstream of the sampling site, and the condition and working order of their septic tanks is unknown. Septic tanks can be a potential source of pathogens and nutrients. The results recorded for Enterococcus and E. coli on 24 September 2001 are suggestive of septic tank failure or other sources of faecal contamination. Kersbrook Creek sub-catchment Kersbrook Creek is located in the northwestern headwaters of the Torrens River catchment and has an area of approximately 3600 ha. The sub-catchment topography ranges from steep hills in the north, west and southeastern corner, to rolling hills in the east and around Millbrook Reservoir. Mount Gawler is located on the northwestern flank of the sub- catchment. Broadscale grazing and protected areas comprise approximately 43% and 19% of land use in the Kersbrook sub-catchment respectively. The protected areas are associated with the water reserves around the Millbrook Reservoir, which is located at the bottom of the sub-catchment. Native and exotic vegetation (pine forests) accounts for 17% and 10% of land use respectively and is mainly associated with the Mount Crawford forests. Pomefruit and stonefruit orchards occur throughout the sub-catchment and account for approximately 2% and 0.5% of land use respectively. The town of Kersbrook is located in the north of the sub-catchment. A range of water quality parameters for Kersbrook Creek returned levels above the 80th percentile (see Table 7). This suggests that a variety of issues may exist in this sub- catchment in terms of environmental management. Results were generally variable, with only three parameters—turbidity, filtered reactive phosphorous and total organic carbon— returning all results in the same classification. Although Giardia, Enterococcus and E. coli results were variable, a number of significantly high results were recorded. Giardia and Enterococcus results were both above the 80th percentile on at least one occasion, and were the highest recorded in the Torrens catchment. The Giardia result on 7 August 2001 was the second highest in the watershed. Kersbrook Creek also had the highest E. coli reading in the Torrens catchment. These three parameters also exceeded the raw water hazard thresholds on at least two occasions. A high classification for Cryptosporidium was returned on one occasion and this parameter also exceeded the raw water hazard threshold on two occasions. Given the level detected during this sampling round, Cryptosporidium is of high concern, particularly with regard to human health. These pathogens are endemic and are associated with urban and rural living, and grazing enterprises. There are a number of farmhouses upstream of the snapshot site, and the condition and working order of their septic tanks is unknown. Septic tanks can be a potential source of nutrients, bacteria and pathogens and the results obtained from the snapshot are suggestive of septic tank failure. Broadscale grazing makes up 43% of the sub- catchment land use and may be a potential source of Cryptosporidium. In situations where animals have direct access to streams and where stocking rates exceed the carrying capacity of the land a situation may exist where runoff is increased bringing to the stream sediment, pathogens and nutrients.

40 Water Quality Snapshot 2001–2002

Parameters that exceeded the raw water hazard thresholds, but not the 80th percentile, included turbidity, colour and total organic carbon. Total organic carbon exceeded the threshold on every occasion sampling was undertaken. Lead results were variable, but above the 80th percentile on two occasions. Results returned for this parameter were amongst the highest for the Torrens catchment, as was the result returned for soluble aluminium on 25 October 2001. Only lead concentrations exceeded the raw water hazard threshold. Manufacturing, transport corridors and grazing enterprises, all of which occur in the Kersbrook Creek sub-catchment, are sources of heavy metals. Further monitoring may need to occur in order to identify potential sources of these pollutants. Given that Millbrook Reservoir is located within the Kersbrook Creek sub-catchment, water quality in this sub- catchment should be of high concern. Millers Creek sub-catchment Millers Creek is located in the mid-Torrens region and has an area of approximately 2227 ha. The sub-catchment is characterised by rolling hills in the northeast grading to steep hills on the western boundary. Broadscale grazing comprises approximately 81% of land use and occurs throughout the sub-catchment. Vines and native vegetation account for approximately 8% and 7% of land use respectively and occur throughout the sub-catchment. Stonefruit (approximately 2% of land use) are grown in the lower part of the sub-catchment while brassicas (approximately 0.5% of land use) are grown in the upper reaches. The town of Forreston is located in the lower part of the sub-catchment. Exotic flowers (approximately 0.2% of land use) are grown on the outskirts of the town. A range of water quality parameters for Millers Creek returned levels above the 80th percentile (see Table 7) and this suggests that a variety of environmental management issues exist in this sub-catchment. Results were generally variable, with four parameters— filtered reactive phosphorous, soluble aluminium, total lead and total dissolved solids— returning all results in the same classification. These results were all below the 80th percentile. Results for pathogens were variable. However, Cryptosporidium, E. coli and Enterococcus results exceeded the raw water hazard thresholds on every occasion. Turbidity, colour, Giardia, total organic carbon and total phosphorous all exceeded the raw water hazard thresholds on at least one occasion. Land uses such as broadscale and intensive grazing, horticultural activities and urban and rural living are all potential sources of turbidity. Given the large percentage of the sub- catchment under broadscale and intensive grazing, it is possible that these areas are contributing turbidity and pathogens to the stream, particularly if overstocking or unrestricted stock access to watercourses is occurring. Millers Creek has significant areas of vines, stonefruit, pomefruit, strawberries and brasiccas. These horticultural pursuits are all potential sources of turbidity, particularly if inter-row crop cover is not maintained. New areas of vines and brasiccas were developed during 2001, and given the amount of bare soil present during the establishment phase of these activities, there is potential for sediment and nutrients to be mobilised in runoff. Forreston is located mid-way down the Millers Creek sub-catchment. Town wastewater is disposed of via septic tanks. Septic tanks can be a source of nutrients, bacteria and pathogens if not designed, maintained and managed correctly. Forreston has previously

41 Water Quality Snapshot 2001–2002 been identified as an area where septic tanks are failing (Arnold & Gallasch 2001) and this will have contributed to the elevated pathogen and nutrient levels in the watercourse. The E. coli and Enterococcus results for this sub-catchment are suggestive of tank failure. Sixth Creek sub-catchment Sixth Creek is located in the southwestern flank of the Torrens River catchment and has an area of approximately 4220 ha. The sub-catchment is characterised by steep, rocky terrain. Native vegetation accounts for approximately 43% of land use and occurs throughout the sub-catchment. Broadscale grazing is the next largest land use and accounts for approximately 32% of the sub-catchment. Pomefruit, stone fruit and vines account for approximately 6%, 3% and 2% of land use respectively. The majority of orchards and vines in the Sixth Creek sub-catchment are located in the upper reaches. Small areas of Summertown and Uraidla are located at the top of the sub-catchment. Only one water quality parameter—nitrate and nitrite (as N)—returned a result above the 80th percentile (see Table 7) and this may suggest few issues exist in relation to water quality. The results returned for nitrate and nitrite (as N) were above the 80th percentile on two occasions, which also exceeded the raw water hazard threshold. This parameter is of concern with regard to human health. While relatively low compared with other results in the watershed, E. coli results in Sixth Creek exceeded the raw water hazard threshold levels on two occasions. Results for Cryptosporidium also exceeded the raw water hazard threshold twice. In relation to the other analytes, the results returned were mostly below the 40th percentile. It may be useful to perform more sampling in this sub-catchment to improve confidence in the results, and also to establish what practices are being implemented in this sub-catchment that contribute to the relatively low results. Given the level of development in the upper reaches of the Sixth Creek sub-catchment, it could reasonably be expected that higher results would be returned for various parameters. Broadscale grazing is a significant land use in the Sixth Creek sub-catchment. The general impacts of this land use have not been reflected in the results, particularly with regard to turbidity, pathogens and some nutrients. The townships of Summertown and Uraidla are located at the top of the catchment. Both townships have failing septic tank rates of around 35–40% (Arnold & Gallasch 2001) and it could be expected that elevated pathogen and nutrient levels would be found during sampling. High results were detected for some nutrients, but not for pathogens. This may reflect the ability of the riparian environment to take up these analytes, or the environmental robustness of pathogens. Sixth Creek has significant areas of pomefruit, vines and stonefruit. Intensive horticultural activity can be a potential source of turbidity and nutrients, particularly if inter-row crop cover is not maintained, or fertiliser applications are not consistent with crop needs. Again, the potential impacts of this land use have not been reflected in the results. Sixth Creek sub-catchment is the only sub-catchment sampled in this project with native vegetation as its largest land use, which accounts for approximately 43%. Its second highest land use, accounting for about 32%, is broadscale grazing. Broadscale grazing, exotic vegetation and residential areas feature as the highest land use category in other sub- catchments studied, with broadscale grazing being the dominant major land use. Further investigations are recommended to ascertain the significance of native vegetation in the Sixth Creek sub-catchment as a possible reason for the unexpected low results.

42 Water Quality Snapshot 2001–2002

6 ONKAPARINGA CATCHMENT

Catchment characteristics Location and area The Onkaparinga Catchment area is located in the central region of the Southern Mount Lofty Ranges. The portion of the Onkaparinga Catchment area within the watershed is approximately 43,000 ha. Topography The headwaters of the Onkaparinga catchment rise in the rolling foothills of the Mount Torrens Range. Towards the middle of the catchment, the western boundary is characterised by steep hills around Mount Bold Reservoir, grading to rolling hills of the Bull Creek Range in the east. An undulating landscape exists downstream of the reservoir before the river passes out of the watershed (SCRN 2000). Soils More than 30% of the catchment is an acid loam to clay loam over well-structured red, brown or orange clay, grading to siltstone or shale within 100 cm. These soils are fertile and have moderately high water-holding capacities. They are not on steep hillsides and are often used for annual and perennial horticulture and for high production pastures. Another 15% of the catchment is an acid loamy sand to sandy loam over friable brown sandy clay to clay, grading to sandstone or schist basement rock within 100 cm. These soils have moderate to low fertility and water-holding capacity, and are highly erodible. Waterlogging is sometimes a problem. They are mostly used for grazing. A further 15% of the catchment is a deep, acid, sandy loam to clay loam with a strongly bleached A2 layer, over a mottled brown, grey and red clay continuing below 100 cm of alluvium. These soils occur extensively on lower slopes and valley flats. They are moderately fertile, imperfectly drained and used for dairying and beef cattle grazing. Horticultural activities are restricted by soils that are susceptible to waterlogging (SCRN 2000). Reservoirs The Onkaparinga catchment contains one reservoir⎯Mount Bold. Water releases from the reservoir flow into Clarendon diversion weir, where is it transferred to the Happy Valley Reservoir. The catchment can also receive River Murray water via the Murray Bridge−Onkaparinga River or Mannum−Adelaide pipeline (SCRN 2000).

Land use characteristics Broadscale grazing comprises approximately 53% of land use and is the largest land use in the Onkaparinga catchment. It occurs throughout the catchment, although to a lesser extent in the southwest, where the landscape is dominated by recreation/protected areas, which accounts for approximately 17% of land use. Intensive grazing, which occurs mainly in the northeast and southeast of the catchment, accounts for nearly 7% of land use. Dense urban and industrial areas are found on the western margin of the catchment around Stirling, Aldgate and Bridgewater and account for approximately 5% of land use. The overall land use percentages within the Onkaparinga catchment are given in Table 8.

43 Water Quality Snapshot 2001–2002

Table 8 Land use percentages for the Onkaparinga catchment Cl a ss Area Ha Cr op % Vegetables/ legumes 0.64 0.00 Cu rcu bits 0.90 0.00 Orchard s/ berries 1.28 0.00 Sewage p ond 1.42 0.00 Trop ical fru it 2.21 0.01 Native flowers 3.49 0.01 Vegetables/ m iscellaneou s 6.76 0.02 Citru s 7.63 0.02 Aliu ms 22.26 0.05 Housed / confined 23.46 0.06 Exotic flow ers 30.94 0.07 Nuts 43.29 0.10 Mining/ extraction 45.66 0.11 Leafy greens 46.75 0.11 Orchard s/ miscellaneous 75.81 0.18 Berries 80.68 0.19 Solanu ms 81.86 0.19 Vacant allotment 87.73 0.21 Brassicas 102.22 0.24 Stonefru it 111.90 0.26 Cu ltu ral 177.95 0.42 Ind ustry/ commercial 210.98 0.49 Reservoir 286.85 0.67 Utilities/ other 288.49 0.68 Recreation 465.83 1.09 Dam 590.65 1.39 Exotic vegetation 605.23 1.42 Pomefruit 1025.67 2.41 Vines 1432.67 3.36 Resid ential 1778.18 4.17 Native vegetation 2193.02 5.14 Intensive grazing 2775.43 6.51 Recreation/ protected area 7323.02 17.18 Broad scale grazing 22699.38 53.25 42630.25 100.00

Overview of water quality results for 2001 and 2002 A number of parameters used for water quality assessments for the Onkaparinga Catchment area were above the 80th percentile (see Table 9) which suggests that a variety of environmental management issues may exist within the catchment. Generally the results were variable in terms of the percentile data classification, although all parameters returned results above the 80th percentile on at least one occasion. Turbidity results exceeded the raw water hazard threshold in 13% of samples. Results for colour, while being above the 80th percentile on only two occasions, exceeded the raw water hazard threshold for 45% of samples taken.

44 Water Quality Snapshot 2001–2002

In the Onkaparinga sub-catchments, pathogenic organism concentrations were, in some instances, an order of magnitude greater than the raw water hazard threshold values. Results for Cryptosporidium were above the 80th percentile on only three occasions, but

Table 9 Water quality results for the Onkaparinga catchment

Clarity Microbial / Pathogens Nutrients Heavy Metals Salinity Site No Sub-Catchment NTU Turbidity HU Colour Catchment Date Sample /10L Confirmed Cryptosporidium Confirmed /10L Giardia Confirmed /10L /100mL E-Coli /100mL Enterococcus spp mg/L FRP mg/L N Nitrite as + Nitrate mg/L Carbon Organic Total mg/L P as - Total Phosporous mg/L Aluminium - Soluble mg/L - Total Lead mg/L EC - by Solids Dissolved Total O10 Onkaparinga Aldgate Creek 20-Aug-01 19.0 140.0 0 0 2000 640 0.020 0.356 15.0 0.065 0.236 0.0038 130 O10 Onkaparinga Aldgate Creek 24-Sep-01 12.0 114.0 120000 1100 0.024 0.055 14.8 0.068 0.156 0.0021 180 O10 Onkaparinga Aldgate Creek 5-Jul-02 92.0 95.7 79 0 2400 6000 0.021 0.381 18.5 0.256 0.247 0.0206 120 O06 Onkaparinga Balhannah 16-Aug-01 19.0 42.0 0 0 1100 2200 0.035 0.332 9.3 0.101 0.000 0.0046 260 O06 Onkaparinga Balhannah 24-Sep-01 37.0 102.0 61 92000 11000 0.135 0.445 20.1 0.350 0.085 0.0035 440 O06 Onkaparinga Balhannah 5-Jul-02 32.0 89.5 20 0 3900 9300 0.061 0.686 17.6 0.265 0.088 0.0070 490 O11 Onkaparinga Biggs Flat 20-Aug-01 12.0 110.0 56 980 470 0.036 0.186 18.5 0.104 0.020 0.0024 1000 O11 Onkaparinga Biggs Flat 25-Aug-01 14.0 110.0 6 280 140 0.018 0.070 20.5 0.110 0.000 0.0000 900 O11 Onkaparinga Biggs Flat 5-Jul-02 8.9 50.1 22 0 1100 1300 0.031 0.232 13.9 0.072 0.028 0.0009 1600 O01 Onkaparinga Charleston 16-Aug-01 33.0 89.0 1 0 1400 1700 0.091 0.576 16.0 0.246 0.021 0.0021 800 O01 Onkaparinga Charleston 24-Sep-01 68.0 95.0 6 0 19000 16000 0.153 0.378 20.0 0.510 0.047 0.0035 550 O01 Onkaparinga Charleston 5-Jul-02 81.0 73.4 16 0 7300 4600 0.080 1.830 18.2 0.326 0.000 0.0032 650 O09 Onkaparinga Cox Creek 16-Aug-01 150.0 76.0 0 2300 7800 0.030 1.150 11.3 0.674 0.055 0.0070 150 O09 Onkaparinga Cox Creek 24-Sep-01 34.0 94.0 58 0 11000 8700 0.024 0.662 13.4 0.138 0.118 0.0050 150 O09 Onkaparinga Cox Creek 3-Jul-02 220.0 67.9 22 0 1900 2800 0.032 0.808 25.9 1.140 0.064 0.0265 150 O13 Onkaparinga Echunga Creek 20-Aug-01 19.0 198.0 13 0 4600 350 0.054 0.192 24.8 0.155 0.049 0.0023 560 O13 Onkaparinga Echunga Creek 25-Aug-01 7.0 160.0 1 41 23 0.027 0.178 18.8 0.068 0.028 0.0010 790 O13 Onkaparinga Echunga Creek 5-Jul-02 11.0 55.4 8 3 250 300 0.007 0.031 13.4 0.036 0.000 0.0018 1300 O08 Onkaparinga Hahndorf 20-Aug-01 24.0 109.0 77 0 390 310 0.059 0.572 16.0 0.150 0.032 0.0046 520 O08 Onkaparinga Hahndorf 24-Sep-01 30.0 38.0 3 6 4100 3300 0.060 1.310 14.2 0.205 0.083 0.0043 810 O08 Onkaparinga Hahndorf 3-Jul-02 10.0 24.8 8 0 320 1000 0.064 0.560 9.2 0.137 0.000 0.0013 920 O02 Onkaparinga Inverbrackie Creek 21-Aug-01 36.0 127.0 0 91 980 2300 0.137 0.209 20.7 0.282 0.000 0.0031 630 O02 Onkaparinga Inverbrackie Creek 24-Sep-01 110.0 102.0 22000 32000 0.102 0.267 22.3 0.489 0.053 0.0042 550 O02 Onkaparinga Inverbrackie Creek 5-Jul-02 120.0 66.2 40 0 2600 7400 0.288 0.570 13.3 0.502 0.066 0.0044 500 O05 Onkaparinga Lenswood Creek 7-Aug-01 75.0 131.0 45 0 12000 27000 0.029 0.372 14.8 0.240 0.063 0.0080 220 O05 Onkaparinga Lenswood Creek 26-Oct-01 28.0 77.0 0 5400 3100 0.008 0.258 13.2 0.073 0.071 0.0099 220 O05 Onkaparinga Lenswood Creek 3-Jul-02 26.0 59.6 120 8 7700 4200 0.041 0.404 10.4 0.234 0.027 0.0023 360 O03 Onkaparinga Mitchell 21-Aug-01 15.0 115.0 0 4 980 1100 0.284 0.923 18.0 0.464 0.037 0.0024 480 O03 Onkaparinga Mitchell 24-Sep-01 44.0 153.0 5 0 1600 5800 0.218 0.276 23.8 0.446 0.062 0.0044 270 O12 Onkaparinga Scott Creek 16-Aug-01 5.9 87.0 730 330 0.014 0.039 12.1 0.046 0.042 0.0015 420 O12 Onkaparinga Scott Creek 25-Aug-01 17.0 146.0 1 0 40 690 0.018 0.070 17.4 0.051 0.109 0.0015 260 O12 Onkaparinga Scott Creek 3-Jul-02 15.0 72.5 8 0 480 290 0.017 0.085 10.7 0.057 0.000 0.0017 510 O07 Onkaparinga Sphoer 7-Aug-01 99.0 116.0 1 0 15000 15000 0.021 0.351 15.1 0.188 0.093 0.0083 160 O07 Onkaparinga Sphoer 24-Sep-01 36.0 98.0 47 1 11000 15000 0.025 0.264 16.5 0.138 0.049 0.0019 180 O07 Onkaparinga Sphoer 3-Jul-02 100.0 61.9 7 5 2600 2400 0.008 0.489 14.8 0.224 0.020 0.0048 200 O04 Onkaparinga Western Branch 7-Aug-01 81.0 142.0 3 0 12000 19000 0.054 0.387 20.0 0.266 0.064 0.0063 270 O04 Onkaparinga Western Branch 26-Oct-01 33.0 133.0 2 6700 2600 0.048 0.162 23.1 0.194 0.081 0.0065 280 O04 Onkaparinga Western Branch 3-Jul-02 23.0 70.1 29 2 4900 2500 0.162 0.417 13.2 0.305 0.082 0.0010 470

0 - 40th percentile >40 - 80th percentile >80th percentile exceeded the raw water hazard threshold 44% of the time. E. coli and Enterococcus results were above the raw water hazard threshold for 71% and 74% of samples respectively. E. coli results were above the 80th percentile on only two occasions, while Enterococcus results were above the 80th percentile on three occasions. In the Onkaparinga catchment, nutrients were generally below the 80th percentile, although results were recorded above the 80th percentile in a number of sub-catchments. Phosphorous results were consistently above the 80th percentile in Mitchell and Inverbrackie creeks, as were nitrate and nitrite (as N) results for Cox and Hahndorf creeks. Across the Onkaparinga catchment, approximately 15% of results for phosphorous were above the raw water hazard threshold. For nitrate and nitrite (as N), 29% of the results

45 Water Quality Snapshot 2001–2002 were above the raw water hazard threshold. Results for total organic carbon across the catchment were consistently below the 80th percentile with only Echunga and Cox Creek returning one result each above the 80th percentile. As for total organic carbon 61% of the results were above the raw water hazard threshold.

Soluble aluminium concentrations were variable and the raw water hazard threshold for this parameter was exceeded on two occasions. Lead results also exceeded the raw water hazard threshold on two occasions. Total dissolved solids results were also variable. Forty-two per cent of samples taken exceeded the raw water hazard threshold and interestingly, these results occurred in the sub-catchments on the eastern side of the Onkaparinga catchment. The Kanmantoo group of rocks dominates the geology of the eastern margins of the Onkaparinga catchment. A discussion of the general results for the sub-catchments within the Onkaparinga catchment is provided in the following section. Based on these results the sub-catchments were categorised as (also refer to ‘Classification of data’): • Category A sub-catchments—Aldgate Creek, Biggs Flat, Cox Creek, Hahndorf, Inverbrackie Creek and Mitchell Creek • Category B sub-catchments—Balhannah, Charleston, Echunga Creek, Lenswood Creek, Scott Creek, Sphoer Creek and Western Branch.

Overview of sub-catchment issues

CATEGORY A SUB-CATCHMENTS Aldgate Creek sub-catchment Aldgate Creek is located on the western edge of the Onkaparinga catchment and has an area of approximately 1700 ha. The topography is characterised by rolling hills. Residential areas comprise approximately 41% of land use and occur throughout the sub-catchment. Broadscale grazing occurs mainly at the bottom of the sub-catchment and accounts for approximately 23% of land use. The town of Stirling is located in the headwaters of the sub-catchment, while Aldgate is located in the middle of the sub-catchment. Four parameters returned at least one result above the 80th percentile in Aldgate Creek (see Table 9) and this suggests that issues exist in this sub-catchment in terms of environmental management. Generally the results were variable. However, only four parameters—colour, filtered reactive phosphorous, soluble aluminium and total dissolved solids—returned all results in the same percentile classification. Of these, soluble aluminium was the only parameter to return all results above the 80th percentile. Other parameters showed marked variability in results, and this may highlight a need to perform more sampling in this sub-catchment to determine if the results returned through this project are representative. High Cryptosporidium and E. coli results were returned on separate sampling rounds, and these are a concern from a human health perspective. The E. coli result on 24 September 2001 was the highest recorded in the Onkaparinga catchment. Cryptosporidium results exceeded the raw water hazard threshold on one occasion, while Enterococcus and E. coli exceeded the threshold value on two and three occasions respectively.

46 Water Quality Snapshot 2001–2002

Soluble aluminium returned consistently high results in the sub-catchment, with the result on 5 July 2002 being the second highest result in the watershed, and the highest in the Onkaparinga catchment. This parameter exceeded the raw water hazard threshold value on two occasions. Other parameters that exceeded raw water hazard thresholds were colour, total organic carbon (which exceeded the threshold on every occasion sampling occurred) and total lead. Aldgate Creek is a highly urbanised sub-catchment with residential, rural living, recreation, commercial and industrial areas. These land use types are known to have the potential for contributing pollutants such as pathogens, heavy metals and nutrients to watercourses. A significant percentage of houses in the Aldgate sub-catchment dispose of wastewater via septic tanks. The septic tank audit undertaken in 2001 has shown that approximately 44% of septic tanks surveyed in the Aldgate area are failing (Arnold & Gallasch 2001). Septic tanks can be a potential source of nutrients and pathogens if not designed, maintained and managed correctly. There are also eight sewer pump stations in the Aldgate sub- catchment. If these stations are not maintained then they can also be a source of pathogen and nutrient contaminants in waterways. Biggs Flat sub-catchment Biggs Flat sub-catchment is located on the eastern flank of the Onkaparinga catchment and has an area of approximately 2300 ha. The topography ranges from rolling hills in the Bull Creek Range to gently undulating slopes towards the bottom of the sub-catchment. Broadscale grazing comprises approximately 87% and intensive grazing accounts for approximately 6% of land use in the Biggs Flat sub-catchment and both occur throughout the sub-catchment. Vines are scattered throughout the sub-catchment and account for approximately 1% of land use. The Echunga STEDS is located at the top of the sub- catchment. Only one parameter returned at least one result greater than the 80th percentile in Biggs Flat (see Table 9). Generally the results were consistent, with six parameters returning all results within the same classification.

Three results for total dissolved solids were above the 80th percentile, with the result on 5 July 2002 being the highest result for this parameter in the Onkaparinga catchment and was the second highest for the watershed. These results were all above the raw water hazard threshold. Geology could play a role in the result for total dissolved solids, with the Kanmantoo group of rocks occurring throughout the area. Of the remaining parameters, five returned all results in the 0−40th percentile class. Despite this, several parameters exceeded raw water hazard thresholds⎯colour, Cryptosporidium and total organic carbon on two occasions, and E. coli and Enterococcus on one occasion. There are a variety of land uses in the sub-catchment, such as broadscale and intensive grazing, viticulture, horticulture and urban areas. It could be reasonably expected that these land uses would have an affect on water quality in the sub-catchment. The results returned during this project are not indicative of this. The Biggs Flat sampling site was on the spillway of a large dam. The retention times of water in the dam may have contributed, through pollutant settling processes, to the relatively low results for most parameters.

47 Water Quality Snapshot 2001–2002

Cox Creek sub-catchment

Cox Creek is located in the northwestern central headwaters of the Onkaparinga catchment and has an area of approximately 2600 ha. Sub-catchment topography is characterised by steep hills in the headwaters surrounding Piccadilly Valley, to floodplains on the valley floor. South of the valley, the landscape is one of rolling hills. Broadscale grazing comprises approximately 38% of land use in Cox Creek and occurs throughout the sub- catchment. Urban areas cover a significant part of the sub-catchment and account for approximately 24% of land use. Vegetables are the predominant crop in Piccadilly Valley, which is located in the headwaters of the sub-catchment. They account for approximately 4% of land use. Vines occur in the upper part of Cox Creek sub-catchment and make up approximately 7% of land use. Protected areas comprise approximately 10% of land use and are associated with the Mount Lofty Botanic Gardens and conservation parks. Six parameters returned at least one result above the 80th percentile in Cox Creek (see Table 9) and this suggests that numerous environmental management issues exist in this sub-catchment. Generally the results were variable, although five parameters returned all results in the same classification. Of these, four parameters returned all results less than the 40th percentile. Results returned on 3 July 2002 for turbidity, total organic carbon, total phosphorous and total lead were the highest recorded in the Onkaparinga catchment. The total phosphorous result for this event was the highest in the watershed, whilst the total lead result was the second highest for the watershed. Nitrate and nitrite (as N) was the only parameter to return all results above the 80th percentile. This parameter also exceeded the raw water hazard threshold on every occasion. Seven other parameters recorded results above the raw water hazard thresholds, with E. coli and Enterococcus consistently exceeding the threshold, despite being below the 80th percentile. Cox Creek had the greatest number of parameters to return results above the 80th percentile, the greatest number of results over the 80th percentile and the greatest number of highest results in a catchment. Previous work by Wood (1986) has shown that intensive horticulture contributes higher pollutant loads per unit area than other land uses, and the water quality results returned during this project tends to confirm this broad conclusion. Further sampling, or a more comprehensive analysis of other relevant data (eg composite sampler data), may help to aid further interpretation of these results in relation to other environmental factors. The Piccadilly Valley in upper Cox Creek is dominated by market gardens. This land use has the potential to contribute large amounts of sediment and nutrients to the watercourse, particularly as large areas of ground are bare throughout the year as crops are harvested and the ground is prepared for new plantings. In Piccadilly Valley, there are minimal buffers between watercourses and crops, and in some cases there is less than half a metre between crops and the top of the bank. This means any overland flow enters the watercourse without passing through buffers. Therefore, the tops of the banks are subject to soil disturbance and the potential for tunnelling and bank collapse is increased. Vineyards, to a certain extent, have replaced broadscale grazing in the past few years. Vineyards have the potential to contribute turbidity and nutrients to the stream. Where inter-row cover crops are not present and the soil is left bare, there is the potential for

48 Water Quality Snapshot 2001–2002 erosion to occur during runoff events, thus contributing pollutant loads to the watercourse. Intensive horticulture generally entails fertiliser applications. If fertiliser applications exceed the requirements of a particular crop, there is the potential for excess nutrients to be mobilised during runoff events. Hahndorf sub-catchment The Hahndorf sub-catchment is located on the eastern flank of the Onkaparinga catchment and has an area of approximately 1400 ha. The rolling hills of the Bull Creek Range form the headwaters of the sub-catchment. From this range, the topography slopes away to a gently undulating landscape down to the floodplains of the river. Broadscale grazing comprises approximately 70% of land use in the Hahndorf sub-catchment and occurs throughout the sub-catchment. The town of Hahndorf is located at the bottom of the sub- catchment and urban areas account for approximately 11% of the total land use. Vegetables are grown on land located at the lower end of the sub-catchment on the river flats and this activity accounts for approximately 1% of land use. Vines, berries and stonefruit account for approximately 4%, 0.5% and 0.3% of land use respectively and occur throughout the sub-catchment. In Hahndorf Creek four parameters returned results above the 80th percentile, including nitrate and nitrite (as N) which returned all three results in that percentile classification. The result for nitrate and nitrite (as N) on 24 September 2001 was the second highest in the Onkaparinga catchment. This parameter also exceeded the raw water hazard threshold on all occasions (see Table 9). While total dissolved solids returned only two results above the 80th percentile, all results exceeded the raw water hazard threshold value for this parameter. Pathogen results were varied, with Cryptosporidium, E. coli and Enterococcus all being above the raw water hazard thresholds on at least one occasion. Cryptosporidium and Giardia results returned were above the 80th percentile on different occasions, and this is a concern from a raw water perspective. The Hahndorf sewage treatment plant is also located at the lower end of the sub- catchment. Treated water from the plant is discharged downstream, where it collects in a large on-stream dam. This water is then used for irrigation by a vegetable farmer. Any overflow from the dam continues downstream to the Mount Bold Reservoir. The treated water from the sewage treatment plant is contributing nutrients to the watercourse. Vegetables are grown on land at the lower end of the sub-catchment, not far from the sampling site. Throughout the year the soil is bare when crops are being harvested or the soil is being rested before the next round of planting. Vegetable growing has the potential to be a source of nutrients, turbidity, suspended solids and total dissolved solids. If soil is bare at the time of a runoff event, sediment will be mobilised and has the potential to enter the watercourse. Similarly, if fertilisers are being applied that are in excess of the requirements of the crop, then excess nutrients may be mobilised during a runoff event and affect the water quality of the stream. Given the level of development and the range of land uses in the Hahndorf sub-catchment, it could be reasonably expected that the water quality results returned during this project would have indicated a greater impact caused by land use factors. It is possible that the samples were collected before runoff from the upper sub-catchment reached the sampling point, or that good land management practices are in place.

49 Water Quality Snapshot 2001–2002

Inverbrackie Creek sub-catchment

Inverbrackie Creek is located in the northern headwaters of the Onkaparinga River catchment and has an area of approximately 2500 ha. Sub-catchment topography ranges from steep, hilly country in the north through to creek floodplains and rolling hills in the south. Land use in Inverbrackie Creek is dominated by broadscale and intensive grazing, which account for approximately 61% and 23% respectively. Vines account for approximately 5% of land use and occur throughout the sub-catchment. There has been a significant increase in the establishment of vines in the sub-catchment in the last two years. A corresponding decrease has been seen in intensive grazing (dairy) and solanums (potatoes). The Woodside Army Base is located at the lower end of the sub-catchment. Six analytes in Inverbrackie Creek returned at least one result above the 80th percentile (see Table 9) and this suggests that numerous environmental management issues exist in this sub-catchment. Of these parameters, only one⎯filtered reactive phosphorous⎯returned all results in this classification. The sample collected on 5 July 2002 returned the highest result for the Onkaparinga catchment. Filtered reactive phosphorous exceeded the raw water hazard threshold on three occasions while total phosphorous exceeded the threshold on one occasion. Inverbrackie Creek also returned the highest results in the Onkaparinga catchment for Giardia and Enterococcus. Pathogen results were varied. However, every parameter in this group returned at least one result above the raw water hazard thresholds, with Enterococcus exceeding the threshold on every occasion. Colour and total organic carbon both exceeded the raw water hazard thresholds during 2001 sampling, despite results being in the >40th−80th percentile class. Turbidity exceeded the raw water hazard threshold on two occasions, with only one result being above the 80th percentile. Total dissolved solids exceeded the raw water hazard threshold on every occasion. Inverbrackie Creek contains large areas of intensive and broadscale grazing. These enterprises are potential sources of turbidity, pathogens and nutrients. It is possible that the results of analyses for these parameters are linked to these land uses. There are a number of farmhouses in the valley of the Inverbrackie Creek, and these are reliant on septics for their wastewater disposal. Septic tanks can be a source of nutrients and pathogens if they are not correctly designed and maintained on a regular basis. Giardia is usually an indicator that pathogens are coming from a human source, and the result returned in August 2001 indicates that septic tanks may be contributing pollutants to the watercourse. There are a number of vineyards in the sub-catchment and these have the potential to contribute sediment and nutrients to the watercourse. If fertiliser applications exceed the requirements of the vines, there is the potential for excess nutrients to be mobilised during runoff events. Also of interest is the fact that during late 2001 and early 2002, an extensive area of the sub-catchment was changed from intensive grazing to vineyards. As such, large areas of ground were bare of any cover and this may explain the high turbidity reading returned during July 2002. Mitchell Creek sub-catchment Mitchell Creek is located on the eastern flank of the Onkaparinga River catchment and has an area of approximately 1400 ha. The sub-catchment topography is dominated by rolling

50 Water Quality Snapshot 2001–2002 hills. Broadscale grazing comprises approximately 76% of land use in Mitchell Creek and occurs throughout the sub-catchment. The Woodside Army Base (approximately 9%) is located near the top of the sub-catchment. Adjacent is a pomefruit orchard that accounts for approximately 2% of land use and is located at the lower end of the sub-catchment. Brassicas (approximately 2%) are grown in the headwaters of the sub-catchment and intensive grazing (horses), which accounts for approximately 7% of land use, occurs mostly at the bottom of the sub-catchment. Three parameters in the Mitchell Creek sub-catchment returned at least one result above the 80th percentile (see Table 9) and this suggests that issues may exist in this sub- catchment in terms of environmental management. Results were reasonably consistent, with seven parameters returning all results in the same classification. For two of these parameters⎯filtered reactive phosphorous and total P⎯all sample results were above the 80th percentile. The filtered reactive phosphorous result returned on 21 August 2001 was the second highest for the Onkaparinga catchment. This parameter also returned all results above the raw water hazard threshold. Colour and total organic carbon, while returning all results in the >40−80th percentile class, exceeded the raw water hazard thresholds on every occasion. Enterococcus and E. coli results were above the raw water hazard threshold on at least one occasion. Rural living occurs throughout the Mitchell Creek sub-catchment. In most instances, these dwellings are reliant on septic tanks for wastewater disposal. Septic tanks can be a source of nutrients, bacteria and pathogens if not designed, maintained and managed correctly. It is possible that one or more of these tanks is the source of nutrients detected during sampling. Horticultural activities such as orchards, vines and vegetables are all potential sources of nutrients and turbidity. Significant areas of these enterprises occur throughout the sub- catchment and may be contributing nutrients to the watercourse. A wholesale nursery exists just upstream of the sampling site. Runoff from nurseries can contain high levels of nutrients from fertilisers (G Thompson 2003, pers comm) and this is another potential source of the nutrients detected during sampling.

CATEGORY B SUB-CATCHMENTS Balhannah sub-catchment The Balhannah sub-catchment is located on the eastern flank of the Onkaparinga catchment and has an area of approximately 1000 ha. The sub-catchment is characterised by rolling hills. Broadscale and intensive grazing are the most significant land uses in the Balhannah sub-catchment and account for approximately 63% and 16% of land use respectively. Broadscale grazing occurs throughout the sub-catchment while intensive grazing occurs mostly in the headwaters. Vines account for approximately 6% of land use, and new vineyards have been established in several areas over the last two years. The town of Balhannah is located at the bottom of the sub-catchment. An SA Water filtration plant is situated at the top of the sub-catchment and accounts for the protected area (approximately 7%). In the Balhannah sub-catchment, four parameters returned one result each that was above the 80th percentile (see Table 9). This may suggest that some water quality issues exist in

51 Water Quality Snapshot 2001–2002 the sub-catchment. In terms of percentile ranking, the results were markedly variable, with no parameter returning more than two results in the same classification. E. coli results were variable in terms of the range of concentrations, with the sample taken on 24 September 2001 being the second highest in the Onkaparinga catchment. Both E. coli and Enterococcus results exceeded the raw water hazard threshold on all occasions sampling occurred. Cryptosporidium results also exceeded the threshold on two occasions, despite being below the 80th percentile. Filtered reactive phosphorous, nitrate and nitrite (as N) and lead results showed more consistency, with one result above the 80th percentile, and two results in the >40th−80th percentile range. The Balhannah sub-catchment has large areas of broadscale and intensive grazing and this land use is a known source of pathogens and nutrients, particularly if farm stock have direct access to watercourses. There are a number of farmhouses in the sub-catchment and most of these rely on septic tanks for wastewater disposal. The condition and working order of these tanks is unknown. Septic tanks can be a source of nutrients and pathogens if not designed, maintained and managed correctly. Some of the E. coli and Enterococcus results are suggestive of septic tank failure. Several vineyards are located in the sub-catchment, with further areas being developed during 2001 and 2002. Vineyards have the potential to contribute turbidity and nutrients to the stream. Where inter-row cover crops are not present and the soil is left bare, there is the potential for erosion to occur and nutrients to be mobilised during runoff events, thus contributing pollutant loads to the watercourse. Charleston sub-catchment The Charleston sub-catchment is located in the northern headwaters of the Onkaparinga catchment and has an area of approximately 5000 ha. The topography ranges from rolling hills in the north and east through to the floodplains of the Onkaparinga River in the middle and lower sub-catchment. Broadscale grazing comprises approximately 61% of land use and occurs throughout the sub-catchment. The towns of Woodside and Charleston are located adjacent to the main stem of the Onkaparinga River. Urban areas account for approximately 5% of land use in the Charleston sub-catchment. Intensive grazing and vines account for approximately 19% and 7% of land use respectively. Vines occur throughout the sub-catchment, while intensive grazing is located predominantly in the upper part of the sub-catchment. Generally the water quality results in the Charleston sub-catchment were variable, with only two parameters returning all results in the same percentile classification (see Table 9). Four parameters returned at least one result above the 80th percentile and this suggests that environmental management issues may exist in this sub-catchment. Nutrients were the main parameters to return results above the 80th percentile. Nitrate and nitrite (as N) returned two results in this classification, with the result returned on 5 July 2002 being the highest for the Onkaparinga catchment and the watershed. Filtered reactive phosphorous and total phosphorous both returned one result above the 80th percentile. All nutrients returned at least one result above the raw water hazard threshold, with total organic carbon consistently exceeding the threshold for all samples

52 Water Quality Snapshot 2001–2002 collected. Total dissolved solids returned two results above the 80th percentile and were consistently above the raw water hazard threshold for this parameter. Pathogen percentile class results were varied. However, E. coli and Enterococcus results consistently exceeded the raw water hazard threshold. Other parameters showed variability in results, and this may highlight a need to perform more sampling in this sub- catchment to determine if the results returned through this project are representative. Large areas of the Charleston sub-catchment are devoted to broadscale and intensive grazing. These land uses are known sources of nutrients and total dissolved solids, particularly if the stocking rates exceed the carrying capacity of the land or stock have unrestricted access to the watercourse. Within the sub-catchment, there are a number of farmhouses reliant on septic tanks for wastewater disposal. Septic tanks can be a source of nutrients and pathogens if not designed, maintained and managed correctly. The condition and working order of septic tanks outside the township are unknown. Results for E. coli and nitrate and nitrite (as N) are suggestive of septic tank failure. A number of vineyards are located in the sub-catchment, with further areas being developed during 2001 and 2002. Vineyards have the potential to contribute turbidity and nutrients to the stream. Where inter-row cover crops are not present and the soil is left bare, there is the potential for erosion to occur during runoff events, thus contributing pollutant loads to the watercourse. If fertiliser applications exceed the requirements of the vines, there is the potential for excess nutrients to be mobilised during runoff events. Echunga Creek sub-catchment Echunga Creek is located on the eastern flank of the Onkaparinga catchment and has an area of approximately 3700 ha. The headwaters of Echunga Creek are situated in the Bull Creek Range, where steep, hilly terrain occurs. The landscape grades to rolling hills across the sub-catchment, once more becoming steep and hilly on the shores of Mount Bold Reservoir. Protected areas comprise approximately 17% of land use in Echunga Creek and are associated with the water reserve around the Mount Bold Reservoir. Broadscale grazing accounts for approximately 57% of land use and occurs throughout the sub-catchment. Exotic vegetation (pine forests) occurs at the bottom of the sub-catchment and accounts for approximately 9% of land use. The town of Echunga is located in the upper sub- catchment and the sewer pump station is located adjacent to the Meadows Road intersection. Water quality results in the Echunga Creek sub-catchment were variable. However, three analytes returned at least one result above the 80th percentile (see Table 9). This suggests there may be issues in terms of environmental management in this sub-catchment. Four parameters returned all results within the same classification, but these were all below the 40th percentile. Two results for colour were above the 80th percentile, which were the highest in the Onkaparinga catchment. They were, in fact, the only colour results for the catchment above the 80th percentile and exceeded the raw water hazard threshold on both occasions. Total dissolved solids also returned two results above the 80th percentile, with the result returned on 3 July 2002 being the second highest in the Onkaparinga catchment. Moreover, all results in terms of total dissolved solids samples exceeded the raw water hazard threshold. Results for total organic carbon were variable, with one result above the 80th

53 Water Quality Snapshot 2001–2002 percentile. This parameter also exceeded the raw water hazard threshold on two occasions. There are a variety of land uses in Echunga Creek such as broadscale and intensive grazing, viticulture, horticulture, mining and urban areas. It could be reasonably expected that such intensive land uses would have an affect on water quality in the sub-catchment. However, the results returned during this project are not indicative of this. It is possible that the samples were collected before runoff from the upper sub-catchment reached the sampling point. Exotic vegetation (mainly pine plantations) makes up approximately 9% of the sub- catchment land use with native vegetation and recreation/protected areas (water reserve) making up almost 18%. The large areas of native and exotic vegetation immediately upstream of the sampling site are a potential source of colour and total organic carbon, and may be responsible for the results returned for these parameters. Native vegetation and plantations such as pine trees produce large quantities of organic matter that are known to be sources of organic carbon and colouring compounds (Baird 1999). Broadscale and intensive grazing are known sources of total dissolved solids and these may account for the results returned for this parameter. Lenswood Creek sub-catchment Lenswood Creek is located in the northern headwaters of the Onkaparinga River catchment and has an area of approximately 2700 ha. The Lenswood Creek topography is dominated by the steep, hilly country of the Forest Range in the headwaters, grading to rolling hills nearer the bottom of the sub-catchment. The Lenswood valley is predominantly planted with orchards. Pomefruit and stonefruit occur throughout the sub-catchment and account for approximately 26% and 3% of land use respectively. Vines (approximately 6%) occur in the headwaters and at the bottom of the sub-catchment. Broadscale and intensive grazing comprises approximately 41% and 2% of land use respectively and occurs throughout the sub-catchment. Native vegetation and exotic vegetation occurs in isolated patches throughout the Lenswood sub-catchment. Water quality results for Lenswood Creek were generally variable, with only three parameters returning all results in the same classification, which were below the 80th percentile (see Table 9). Four parameters returned at least one result above the 80th percentile, which suggests that environmental management issues exist in this sub- catchment. The Cryptosporidium result returned on 3 July 2002 was the highest for the Onkaparinga catchment. This result is more than an order of magnitude above the raw water hazard threshold value. The Enterococcus result returned on 7 August 2001 was the second highest relative to Enterococcus results for the whole catchment. Both E. coli and Enterococcus returned results above the raw water hazard threshold on all occasions. There are a number of farmhouses upstream of the sampling site. Septic tanks can be a source of nutrients, bacteria and pathogens if not designed, maintained and managed correctly. In response to the high result returned during the 2002 sampling, the Watershed Protection Office investigated the situation. During the investigation 18 properties within a 2-km radius of the sampling site were visited. Of these, five were reported as having significant failures that would be likely to contribute wastewater to Lenswood Creek. Another four required further investigation and some possible improvement (Holmes 2002).

54 Water Quality Snapshot 2001–2002

It became apparent that it is necessary to either perform more sampling in this sub- catchment, or undertake a more comprehensive analysis of other related data to aid interpretation of these results. Scott Creek sub-catchment Scott Creek is located on the western edge of the Onkaparinga River catchment and has an area of approximately 2700 ha. Topography in Scott Creek ranges from steep to rolling hills in the west and east to undulating slopes around Scott Creek. Protected areas account for approximately 43% of land use in Scott Creek. These areas are associated with the water reserve around Mount Bold Reservoir, heritage areas and conservation parks. Broadscale grazing and native vegetation occur in the upper half of the sub-catchment and account for approximately 40% and 14% of land use respectively. Small urban areas occur in the headwaters of the sub-catchment and account for approximately 1% of land use in Scott Creek. The majority of results returned for Scott Creek were below the 40th percentile (see Table 9), the one exception being soluble aluminium, which returned a result above the 80th percentile on 25 August 2001. These results suggest that few environmental management issues exist in the sub-catchment. The results were consistent in terms of percentile classes, with only four parameters⎯colour, total organic carbon, soluble aluminium and total dissolved solids⎯returning results in different percentile classes. Results returned for total organic carbon and colour were both in the >40th-80th percentile class for the event on 25 August 2001. On this date, results for both these parameters also exceeded the raw water hazard thresholds. Native vegetation and recreation/protected areas (water reserve) make up approximately 57% of the sub-catchment’s land use. These areas are a potential source of colour and total organic carbon, and may be responsible for the results returned for these parameters. Native vegetation produces large quantities of organic matter and is known to be a source of organic carbon and colouring compounds (Naidu et al. 1993). Despite the areas of development in Scott Creek, and the increasing number of rural living allotments, the sub-catchment returned some of the lowest water quality results for the Onkaparinga catchment. The sub-catchment appears to be in reasonable condition when compared with the other sub-catchments sampled. Sphoer Creek sub-catchment Sphoer Creek is located in the central area of the Onkaparinga catchment. The sub- catchment contains not only Sphoer Creek but a section of the main stem of the Onkaparinga River. The sub-catchment has an area of approximately 4500 ha. The headwaters of Sphoer Creek rise in the Forest Range in the north-western region, and the topography grades through rolling hills to the gently sloping floodplain of the Onkaparinga River in the lower part of the sub-catchment. Rolling hills characterise the topography in the south. Broadscale grazing is the dominant land use (approximately 70%) in Sphoer Creek and occurs throughout the sub-catchment. The towns of Oakbank, Balhannah, Verdun and Bridgewater are situated through the middle of the sub-catchment. Urban areas account for approximately 5% of the total land use. Protected areas and intensive grazing account for approximately 6% and 5% of land use respectively. All but one parameter returned all results below the 80th percentile in Sphoer Creek (see Table 9). Generally the results were variable. However, most parameters returned at least two results in the same percentile class. The exception to this was total lead, where all results were in different percentile classes.

55 Water Quality Snapshot 2001–2002

Pathogen results were varied, with E. coli and Enterococcus returning all results in the >40 80th percentile class. These parameters exceeded the raw water hazard threshold for every sample. Cryptosporidium results exceeded the raw water hazard threshold on one occasion. The clarity parameters⎯turbidity and colour⎯each exceeded the raw water hazard threshold on one occasion, while total organic carbon exceeded the threshold on two occasions. A result above the 80th percentile was returned for total lead during sampling on 7 August 2001, and this was the third highest result for lead in the Onkaparinga catchment. Nevertheless, the value was below the raw water hazard threshold for this parameter. Despite urban and other areas of development in Sphoer Creek, sampling in the sub- catchment obtained some of the lowest concentrations relative to water quality results obtained for other sub-catchments in the Onkaparinga catchment. Further work to improve confidence in the sampling results and to establish the in-stream processes or management practices in this sub-catchment should be considered. Compared with other sub- catchments in the watershed section of the Onkaparinga catchment, the Sphoer Creek sub- catchment contains a range of land uses. This has not been reflected in the water quality data which, given the land use, could be expected to exhibit elevated concentrations of analytes. In Sphoer Creek sub-catchment there are urban, rural living, recreation, commercial and industrial areas. These land use types are known to have the potential for contributing pollutants such as heavy metals to watercourses and this may explain to some degree the elevated lead reading. Rural living occurs throughout the Sphoer Creek sub-catchment. In most instances, these dwellings are reliant on septic tanks for wastewater disposal. Septic tanks can be a source of nutrients, bacteria and pathogens if not designed, maintained and managed correctly. It is possible that one or more of these wastewater treatment systems is the source of pathogens detected during sampling. Western Branch sub-catchment The Western Branch sub-catchment is located in the northern region of the Onkaparinga catchment and has an area of approximately 3200 ha. The headwaters of the Western Branch sub-catchment are dominated by steep to rolling hills in the Forest Range, grading to flat on the Onkaparinga River floodplain in the south. Broadscale grazing is the major land use, accounting for approximately 71% and occurs throughout the sub-catchment. Vines are the next largest land use and account for approximately 6% of the sub- catchment. Vines occur throughout the sub-catchment. The town of Lobethal is located in the headwaters of the sub-catchment. Pomefruit and berries occur throughout the lower part of the sub-catchment and account for approximately 3% and 1% of land use in the sub- catchment respectively. Three parameters—Enterococcus, filtered reactive phosphorous and total lead⎯returned at least one result above the 80th percentile in the Western Branch sub-catchment (see Table 9) and this suggests that some water quality issues may exist in this sub-catchment. Generally the results were variable, although most parameters returned at least two results in the same percentile class.

56 Water Quality Snapshot 2001–2002

Pathogen results were varied. However, results for Enterococcus were relatively high on one occasion, the third highest result for the Onkaparinga catchment. Both Enterococcus and E. coli exceeded the raw water hazard threshold on every sampling occasion. Cryptosporidium exceeded the raw water hazard threshold on one occasion. Filtered reactive phosphorous returned a result above the 80th percentile on 3 July 2002. This result also exceeded the raw water hazard threshold for this parameter. Both colour and total organic carbon returned results in the >40−80th percentile class, and these results also exceeded the raw water hazard threshold values. Western Branch sub-catchment contains large areas of intensive and broadscale grazing. These activities can be sources of pathogens and nutrients. It is possible that the results returned for these parameters are linked to these land uses. There are a number of farmhouses in the valley of the Western Branch sub-catchment, and these are reliant on on-site wastewater disposal. Wastewater treatment systems can be sources of nutrients and pathogens if they are not correctly designed and regularly maintained. Concentrations of E. coli and Enterococcus detected in this sub-catchment are suggestive of septic tank failure or other sources of faecal contamination. Orchards and vineyards occur in the sub-catchment and these have the potential to contribute nutrients to the watercourse, particularly if fertiliser applications exceed the nutrient requirements of crops. The township of Lobethal is situated in the upper reaches of the sub-catchment. Urban, commercial and industrial areas have the potential to contribute pollutants such as heavy metals to watercourses and this may explain the elevated lead results recorded on two separate occasions.

57 Water Quality Snapshot 2001–2002

7 MYPONGA RIVER CATCHMENT

Catchment characteristics Location and area The Myponga catchment is located on the Fleurieu Peninsula. The area of the catchment within the watershed is approximately 12,000 ha. Topography The headwaters of the Myponga catchment rise in the steep hills of the Sellicks Hill Range on the western boundary of the catchment. Rolling hills dominate the northeastern area of the catchment. Towards the middle of the catchment, an undulating landscape exists around the Myponga Reservoir (SCRN 2000). Soils A total of 40% of the catchment is a thick, acid, grey sand with a strongly bleached A2 layer over a brown and yellow sandy clay to heavy clay grading to Permian glacial sediments. These soils are deep but are imperfectly drained, infertile, and prone to acidification and erosion by both water and wind. They are widely used for grazing. Another 15% of the catchment is an acid, sandy loam over a brown, mottled, poorly structured, dispersive clay grading to quartzitic basement rock within 100 cm, or associated stony loam grading directly to rock within 50 cm. These soils are moderately fertile but are prone to waterlogging and are highly erodible and subject to landslip. They are mainly used for grazing. A further 15% of the catchment is a thick, acid, sandy loam with a strongly bleached A2 layer, over a mottled brown, grey and red clay, continuing below 100 cm of alluvium. These soils occur on low lying land. They are poorly drained, moderately fertile and used mainly for cattle grazing (SCRN 2000). Reservoirs The Myponga catchment contains one reservoir, which has the capacity to divert water to augment the Hindmarsh Valley Reservoir (SCRN 2000).

Land use characteristics Broadscale grazing is the largest land use in the Myponga catchment, comprising approximately 55% of the area. This land use occurs throughout the catchment, although to a lesser extent in the southern areas, where intensive grazing (approximately 28% of land use) dominates. Recreation/protected areas comprising conservation parks and water reserves surrounding the reservoir account for approximately 7%, while native vegetation and exotic vegetation account for approximately 4% and 1% of land use respectively. The overall land use percentages within the Myponga Catchment are given in Table 10.

58 Water Quality Snapshot 2001–2002

Table 10 Land use percentages for the Myponga catchment Cl a ss Area Ha Crop % Utilities/ other 0.38 0.00 Vacant allotment 0.71 0.01 Sew age pond 0.95 0.01 Orchard s/ berries 1.35 0.01 Berries 1.42 0.01 Stonefruit 1.86 0.02 Cultural 1.93 0.02 Exotic flow ers 3.14 0.03 Recreation 4.70 0.04 Ind ustry/ commercial 7.88 0.07 Resid ential 8.63 0.07 Orchard s/ miscellaneous 14.66 0.12 Leafy greens 15.59 0.13 Pomefruit 18.21 0.15 Root vegetables 21.97 0.19 Vines 47.31 0.40 Dam 76.52 0.65 Exotic vegetation 113.08 0.96 Reservoir 203.68 1.72 N ative vegetation 429.16 3.63 Recreation/ protected area 998.44 8.45 Intensive grazing 3321.49 28.11 Broad scale grazing 6521.79 55.20 11814.85 100.00

Overview of water quality results for 2001 and 2002 A range of water quality parameters for the Myponga catchment area returned results above the 80th percentile (see Table 11) and this suggests that a variety of environmental management issues may exist here. Generally the results were variable, although colour, Cryptosporidium, filtered reactive phosphorous, total organic carbon, total phosphorous and soluble aluminium all returned results above the 80th percentile on a number of occasions. Turbidity results were below the 80th percentile and did not exceed the raw water hazard threshold. Results for colour were consistently high in the Blockers Road sub-catchment, and across the Myponga sub-catchments the raw water hazard threshold for this parameter was exceeded in 75% of samples. Colour is an aesthetic issue when considering drinking water supplies. In the Myponga sub-catchments, pathogenic organism concentrations were generally below the 80th percentile although Pages Flat returned high results for Cryptosporidium on two occasions. Despite this, the raw water hazard thresholds were exceeded for 57% of samples for Cryptosporidium, 88% of samples for E. coli and 75% of samples for Enterococcus. In the Myponga catchment, nutrient results were variable. Nitrate and nitrite (as N) results were all below the 80th percentile and the raw water hazard threshold was not exceeded. Results for filtered reactive phosphorous were generally high and the raw water hazard threshold was exceeded in 75% of samples. Results for total phosphorous were above the 80th percentile on three occasions and the raw water hazard threshold was exceeded

59 Water Quality Snapshot 2001–2002

Table 11 Water quality results for the Myponga Catchment

Clarity Microbial / Pathogens Nutrients Heavy Metals Salinity Sub-Catchment HU Colour /10L Confirmed Cryptosporidium /10L Confirmed Giardia /100mL E-Coli /100mL spp Enterococcus Site No Catchment Sample Date NTU Turbidity mg/L FRP mg/L Nitrate + Nitrite as N mg/L Total Organic Carbon mg/L Phosporous - Total as P mg/L Aluminium - Soluble mg/L Lead - Total mg/L Total Dissolved Solids - by EC M01 Myponga Myponga - Blockers Rd 16-Aug-01 19.0 153.0 3000 790 0.028 0.156 18.3 0.097 0.094 0.0012 220 M01 Myponga Myponga - Blockers Rd 25-Aug-01 37.0 214.0 9 15000 3400 0.104 0.122 32.6 0.294 0.117 0.0017 220 M01 Myponga Myponga - Blockers Rd 28-Jul-02 43.0 181.0 6 0 17000 11000 0.125 0.223 25.3 0.321 0.253 0.0023 330 M02 Myponga Myponga - Pages Flat 16-Aug-01 40.0 91.0 59 1 7300 3000 0.019 0.227 21.4 0.156 0.043 0.0034 630 M02 Myponga Myponga - Pages Flat 25-Aug-01 50.0 170.0 1500 23000 3800 0.664 0.133 28.5 1.020 0.058 0.0017 300 M02 Myponga Myponga - Pages Flat 28-Jul-02 93.0 132.0 110 5 29000 13000 0.221 0.317 22.6 0.495 0.240 0.0012 350 M03 Myponga Myponga River Tributary 16-Aug-01 3.9 79.0 0 50 53 0.115 0.033 15.5 0.234 0.026 0.0013 410 M03 Myponga Myponga River Tributary 28-Jul-02 30.0 108.0 14 0 20000 5000 0.199 0.406 23.0 0.400 0.130 0.0008 380

0 - 40th percentile >40 - 80th percentile >80th percentile once. Total organic carbon results were above the 80th percentile on three occasions. However, the raw water hazard threshold was exceeded for every sample taken. Soluble aluminium concentrations were variable and the raw water hazard threshold for this parameter was exceeded on two occasions. Lead results were below the 40th percentile on all but one occasion. Total dissolved solids results were generally consistent and below the 80th percentile. Only one result exceeded the raw water hazard threshold and this was recorded for a sample taken in the Pages Flat sub-catchment. A discussion of the general results for the sub-catchments within the Myponga catchment is provided in the following section. Based on these results the sub-catchments were categorised as (also refer to ‘Classification of data’): • Category A sub-catchments: Blockers Road and Myponga Tiers • Category B sub-catchment: Pages Flat.

Overview of sub-catchment issues

CATEGORY A SUB-CATCHMENTS Blockers Road sub-catchment The Blockers Road sub-catchment is located in the southeastern headwaters of the Myponga River catchment and has an area of approximately 3000 ha. The topography is dominated in the south by the slopes of Mount Compass, while the north of the sub- catchment is characterised by rolling hills. Broadscale grazing is the largest land use, comprising approximately 80% and occurs throughout the sub-catchment. Intensive grazing is also a major land use in the Blockers Road sub-catchment and accounts for approximately 16% and occurs mainly on the alluvial flats towards the bottom of the sub- catchment. Exotic vegetation is the next largest land use and account for approximately 3%.

60 Water Quality Snapshot 2001–2002

A range of water quality parameters returned results above the 80th percentile in the Blockers Road sub-catchment (see Table 11) and this suggests that several environmental management issues exist in this sub-catchment. Generally the results were variable, with only one parameter⎯colour⎯having all sample results above the 80th percentile, and on one occasion, the highest result in the Myponga catchment. This parameter also exceeded the raw water hazard threshold on every sampling occasion. Other parameters showed inconsistency in percentile rankings. However, four parameters⎯E. coli, nitrate and nitrite (as N), total lead and total dissolved solids⎯returned all results within the same classification. Of these results, most were in the 0−<40th percentile classification. E. coli results were consistently above the raw water hazard threshold, while Enterococcus returned results above the threshold on two occasions. The soluble aluminium result returned on 28 July 2002 was the highest in the watershed and exceeded the raw water hazard threshold. The total organic carbon result returned on 25 August 2001 was the highest in the Myponga catchment. This parameter consistently exceeded the raw water hazard threshold. On two occasions, filtered reactive phosphorous also exceeded the raw water hazard threshold. Broadscale grazing and intensive grazing make up the majority of land use in the Pages Flat sub-catchment. These enterprises have the potential to contribute turbidity, pathogens and nutrients to the stream, particularly if overstocking occurs, or stock have direct access to watercourses. It is possible that broadscale and intensive grazing are contributing to the nutrient and pathogen levels detected in the sub-catchment. Plantations such as pine trees produce large quantities of organic matter that are known to be sources of organic carbon and colouring compounds (Naidu et al. 1993). Exotic vegetation accounts for only 3% of the sub-catchment land use and as such, it is probable that another source is responsible for the results returned. There are a number of farmhouses upstream of the sampling location on Blockers Road and these are reliant on on-site wastewater disposal. Septic systems can be a source of nutrients and pathogens if they are not correctly designed and regularly maintained. Concentrations of E. coli and Enterococcus detected in this sub-catchment are suggestive of septic tank failure or other sources of faecal contamination such as dairy or beef production. Myponga Tiers sub-catchment The Myponga Tiers sub-catchment is located in the southern headwaters of the Myponga River catchment and has an area of approximately 2000 ha. The topography is characterised by steep hills on the southern margin and alluvial river flats near the reservoir. Intensive grazing is the largest use of land within the sub-catchment and accounts for approximately 68% of the total land use. Broadscale grazing accounts for approximately 17% of land use, while protected areas, representing the water reserve around the Myponga Reservoir and heritage areas, account for approximately 3% of land use in the sub-catchment. Native vegetation comprises approximately 11% of the total land use and occurs mainly on the hills in the south of the sub-catchment. Only three parameters returned at least one result above the 80th percentile in the Myponga Tiers sub-catchment (see Table 11). Generally the results were variable, with only three parameters⎯filtered reactive phosphorous, total lead and total dissolved

61 Water Quality Snapshot 2001–2002 solids⎯having sample results in the same percentile classification. Filtered reactive phosphorous was the only parameter to return all results above the 80th percentile. This parameter also exceeded the raw water hazard threshold on every occasion sampling was undertaken. Total phosphorous and soluble aluminium both returned results above the 80th percentile for the event sampled on 28 July 2002. Total organic carbon results exceeded the raw water hazard threshold on every occasion, despite being below the 80th percentile. Results for E. coli, Enterococcus, Cryptosporidium and colour exceeded the raw water hazard thresholds for the event on 28 July 2002. Intensive grazing makes up the majority of land use in the Myponga Tiers sub-catchment. This enterprise has the potential to contribute nutrients to the stream, particularly if overstocking occurs, or stock have direct access to watercourses. Viticulture also occurs in the sub-catchment, on a small scale. If fertiliser applications exceed the requirements of the crop, there is the potential for excess nutrients such as phosphorous to be mobilised via runoff. Excess fertiliser applications are a potential source of the relatively high phosphorous results in the sub-catchment. There are a number of farmhouses in the Myponga Tiers sub-catchment, and these are reliant on septic tanks for their wastewater disposal. On-site wastewater disposal systems can be a source of nutrients and pathogens if they are not regularly maintained. Concentrations of E. coli and Enterococcus detected in this sub-catchment are suggestive of septic tank failure or other sources of faecal contamination such as dairy or beef production.

CATEGORY B SUB-CATCHMENT Pages Flat sub-catchment Pages Flat sub-catchment is located in the northern headwaters of the Myponga River catchment and has an area of approximately 4600 ha. The topography is characterised by the steep terrain of the Sellicks Hill Ranges on the northern margin and undulating flats through the middle of the sub-catchment. Broadscale grazing is the largest land use, comprising approximately 5% and occurs throughout the sub-catchment. Intensive grazing is the second largest land use in the Pages Flat sub-catchment, accounting for approximately 16% and occurs mainly on the alluvial flats in the middle of the sub- catchment. Native vegetation is the next largest land use and accounts for approximately 3%. Protected areas representing the water reserve around the Myponga Reservoir account for approximately 2% of land use. Some of the parameters sampled in the Pages Flat sub-catchment returned results above the 80th percentile (see Table 11). This suggests there may be some environmental management issues in this sub-catchment. Generally the results were variable, with no parameters returning results consistently above the 80th percentile. Three parameters⎯turbidity, E. coli and Enterococcus⎯all had sample results in the same percentile classification. Results for other parameters were mostly within the >40th-80th percentile classification. The Pages Flat sub-catchment was the only sub-catchment in Myponga which recorded results above the 80th percentile for Cryptosporidium, and the result returned on 25 August 2001 was the second highest in the watershed. This parameter exceeded the raw water hazard threshold on every occasion. Enterococcus and E. coli results also exceeded

62 Water Quality Snapshot 2001–2002 the raw water hazard threshold on all sampling occasions, despite returning all results in the >40−80th percentile class. The filtered reactive phosphorous result returned during the event on 25 August 2001 was the highest for the watershed. This parameter exceeded the raw water hazard threshold on two occasions, while total phosphorous exceeded the raw water hazard threshold on one occasion. Total phosphorous results were above the 80th percentile on two occasions. Results returned for these two parameters on 25 August 2001 were the highest in the Myponga catchment. Colour and total organic carbon exceeded the raw water hazard thresholds on two and three occasions respectively. The results returned for these two parameters on 25 August 2001 were the second highest for the Myponga catchment. Broadscale grazing and intensive grazing make up the majority of land use in the Pages Flat sub-catchment. These enterprises have the potential to contribute turbidity, pathogens and nutrients to the stream, particularly if overstocking occurs, or stock have direct access to watercourses. It is possible that broadscale and intensive grazing are contributing to the nutrient and pathogen levels detected in the sub-catchment. Intensive horticulture (vegetable growing) also occurs in the Pages Flat sub-catchment. If irrigation or fertilisation occurs at levels greater than required by the crops, there is the potential for runoff to occur and carry excess nutrients to the watercourse. The valley floor of the Pages Flat sub-catchment has been carved up into rural living allotments. These allotments are not connected to sewer or STEDS and are reliant on septic tanks for wastewater disposal. Septic tanks can be a source of pathogens and nutrients, and it is possible that some may be failing and contributing nutrients to the watercourse, particularly once the soil is saturated and subsoil water movement occurs. E. coli and Enterococcus concentrations recorded during 2001 and 2002 are suggestive of septic tank failure or other sources of faecal contamination.

63 Water Quality Snapshot 2001–2002

8 CONCLUSIONS

Assessment of risk The results from this project can be used to provide a broad indication of areas that pose risks to the raw water supply in the watershed, rather than definitive answers on the exact origin of water quality problems. Given the nature of the pollutants and their likely sources a modelling approach to assessing risks and scenario testing would be useful. It is likely that pollutants are from diffuse sources such as animals, agricultural land, stream bank erosion, septic tanks and other sources. Possible point sources include STEDS and sewerage treatment works.

Exceedence of threshold and regulatory water quality values The data can show where water quality results have exceeded the raw water hazard threshold for particular parameters. Exceedence of the threshold values indicates issues in terms of water quality and environmental management. Northern Adelaide and Barossa Catchment Turbidity results exceeded the raw water hazard threshold on four occasions, with three of those samples occurring on 24 September 2001. Across the NAB catchment, 81% of true colour samples returned results above the raw water hazard threshold. In the NAB catchment, pathogenic organism concentrations were, in some instances, an order of magnitude greater than the raw water hazard threshold values. These results exceeded the threshold values for an average of 44% of samples taken. Every sub- catchment that was sampled on 24 September 2001 returned elevated pathogen readings. Pathogen concentrations at these levels are an issue, particularly as several of the sub- catchments feed straight into the reservoirs. Across the NAB catchment, 60% of samples for total organic carbon returned results above the raw water hazard threshold. The degree of presence of total organic carbon has implications for water treatment and its by-products. Total dissolved solids results exceeded the raw water hazard threshold on two occasions. The Category A sub-catchments identified in this snapshot were Forestry Headquarters, Portuguese Creek and Tungali Creek. The Category B sub-catchments identified in this snapshot were Gould Creek, Little Para River, Malcolm Creek and Victoria Creek. Torrens Catchment Turbidity results exceeded the raw water hazard threshold for 39% of samples. Results for colour exceeded the raw water hazard threshold for 43% of samples taken. In the Torrens sub-catchments, pathogenic organism concentrations were, in some instances, an order of magnitude greater than the raw water hazard threshold values. Results for Cryptosporidium exceeded the threshold for 77% of the sample results, while for E. coli and Enterococcus, results were above the raw water hazard threshold for 86% and 75% of samples respectively. Every sub-catchment that was sampled on 24 September 2001 returned elevated readings for E. coli and Enterococcus. Pathogen concentrations at these levels are an issue, particularly as a number of the sub-catchments feed straight into the reservoirs.

64 Water Quality Snapshot 2001–2002

Results for total organic carbon across the catchment exceeded the raw water hazard threshold for 71% of samples. Lead results exceeded the raw water hazard threshold for 18% of samples. Results for total dissolved solids exceeded the raw water hazard threshold for 46% of samples taken. The Category A sub-catchments identified in this snapshot were Angas Creek, Cudlee Creek, Footes Creek, Kenton Valley, McCormick Creek, Mount Pleasant and Torrens Main Channel. The Category B sub-catchments identified in this snapshot were Hannaford Creek, Kersbrook Creek, Millers Creek and Sixth Creek. Onkaparinga Catchment Turbidity results exceeded the raw water hazard threshold in 13% of samples. Results for colour exceeded the raw water hazard threshold for 45% of samples taken. In the Onkaparinga sub-catchments, pathogenic organism concentrations were, in some instances, an order of magnitude greater than the raw water hazard threshold values. Results for Cryptosporidium exceeded the raw water hazard threshold 44% of the time. For E. coli and Enterococcus, results were above the threshold for 71% and 74% of samples respectively. Across the Onkaparinga catchment approximately 15% of results for phosphorous were above the raw water hazard threshold. Twenty-nine per cent of results for nitrate and nitrite (as N) were above the raw water hazard threshold. Sixty-one per cent of total organic carbon results were above the raw water hazard threshold. Soluble aluminium concentrations exceeded the raw water hazard threshold for this parameter on two occasions. Lead results also exceeded the raw water hazard threshold on two occasions. Total dissolved solids results were also variable, with 42% of samples taken exceeding the raw water hazard threshold. The Category A sub-catchments identified in this snapshot were Aldgate Creek, Biggs Flat, Cox Creek, Hahndorf, Inverbrackie Creek and Mitchell Creek. The Category B sub-catchments identified in this snapshot were Balhannah, Charleston, Echunga Creek, Lenswood Creek, Scott Creek, Sphoer Creek and Western Branch. Myponga Catchment Turbidity results did not exceed the raw water hazard threshold. Results for colour were consistently high across the Myponga sub-catchments, with the highest result in Blockers Road sub-catchment. The raw water hazard threshold for this parameter was exceeded in 75% of samples. In the Myponga sub-catchments the raw water hazard thresholds were exceeded for 57% of samples for Cryptosporidium, 88% of samples for E. coli and 75% of samples for Enterococcus. Nutrient results were variable with results for filtered reactive phosphorous generally high. The raw water hazard threshold was exceeded in 75% of samples. Results for total phosphorus exceeded the raw water hazard threshold once. Total organic carbon exceeded the raw water hazard threshold for every sample taken.

65 Water Quality Snapshot 2001–2002

Soluble aluminium concentrations exceeded the raw water hazard threshold on two occasions. Total dissolved solids results exceeded the raw water hazard threshold once and this was recorded for a sample taken in the Pages Flat sub-catchment. The Category A sub-catchments identified in this snapshot were Blockers Road and Myponga Tiers. The Category B sub-catchment identified in this snapshot was Pages Flat.

66 Water Quality Snapshot 2001–2002

9 RECOMMENDATIONS

This study has indicated that there are a number of problem catchments that exist throughout the length and breadth of the Mount Lofty Ranges Watershed. Results for several sub-catchments were orders of magnitude greater than the raw water hazard thresholds for SA Water’s water treatment purposes. Other problems identified within this study should be acted upon promptly to improve the water quality in the Mount Lofty Ranges watershed. This would include such activities as septic tank audits for small towns or any farmhouse within a certain distance from a watercourse. A modelling approach to the assessment of risks and scenario testing should be examined further as tools for catchment area management. These and other action recommendations are presented in the Table 12.

Table 12 Recommendations to improve water quality in the MLR watershed

# Strategy Responsible agencies

1 Further develop and test a framework to improve water EPA, EPA WPO, Adelaide and quality outcomes in priority sub-catchments, including: Mount Lofty Ranges NRM Board, (1) catchment risk assessment SA Water (2) mitigation scenario modelling and target setting (3) selection of effective policy instruments (4) monitoring and evaluation to track progress

2 Undertake a septic tank audit outside towns in the Local councils, DHS, EPA, EPA watershed WPO

3 Promote the need for improvement of the STEDS pump SA Water, local councils stations (eg via installations of dial-out alarms on STEDS pump stations to alert management of failures and potential overflows, or the installation of devices to capture the overflow)

4 Promote the development and adoption of voluntary Adelaide and Mount Lofty Ranges environmental performance tools (eg industry-specific NRM Board, EPA, EPA WPO, environmental best practice guidelines, self audits, etc) PIRSA, industry groups

5 Promote the installation and best management of buffer Adelaide and Mount Lofty Ranges strips to filter runoff (remove nutrients, sediment and NRM Board, EPA, EPA WPO, pathogens) and reduce the energy of water entering PIRSA streams and eroding soil

67 Water Quality Snapshot 2001–2002

REFERENCES

Arnold, K & T Gallasch, T 2001, Mount Lofty Ranges Waste Control Project, Adelaide Hills Council, Stirling, South Australia. Australian Water Quality Centre 2000, Monitoring river health, Torrens Catchment Water Management Board, Adelaide, South Australia. Baird, C 1999, Environmental chemistry, 2nd edition, WH Freeman and Company, New York. Bridgham, SD, Johnston, CA, Schubauer-Berigan, JP & Weishampel, P 2001, ‘Phosphorus adsorption dynamics in soils and coupling with surface and pore water in riverine wetlands’, Soil Science Society of America Journal, vol. 65, pp. 577−588. Chittleborough, D 2002, ‘Reducing the carbon, phosphorus and colloid movement from soils into streams and water storages of the Mount Lofty Ranges’, presentation at the Diffuse Source Pollution of Agrochemical and Contaminants in the Mount Lofty Ranges and its Impacts on Water Quality Communications Workshop, Waite Campus, Urrbrae, South Australia, pp. 21−2. Clark, R & Crawley, P 1987, Development of a methodology for the calculation of daily loads and concentration of nitrogen, phosphorus and turbidity transported in rivers in the Mt Lofty Ranges of South Australia, EWS 87/16, Engineering and Water Supply Department, Adelaide, South Australia.

Coughlin, BR & Stone, AT 1995, ‘Nonreversible adsorption of divalent metal-ions (Mn-II, Co- II, Ni-II, Cu-II and Pb-II) onto goethite—effects of acidification, fe-ii addition, and picolinic acid addition’, Environmental Science and Technology, vol. 29, pp. 2445−2455. Croke, J, Wallbrink, P, Fogarty, P, Hairsine, P, Mockler, S, MacCormack, B & Broply, J 1999, Managing sediment sources and movement in forests: The forestry industry and water quality industry report, 99/11. Croke, J & Lane, P (eds) 1999, ‘Forest management for the protection of water quality and quantity’, Proceedings of the Second Erosion in Forests Workshop, Warburton, May 1999, CRC for Catchment Hydrology Report, 99/6. Curriero, FC, Patz, JA, Rose, JB & Lele, S 2001, ‘The association between extreme precipitation and waterborne disease outbreaks in the United States, 1948-1994’, American Journal of Public Health, vol. 91, pp. 1194−99. Eatyech Partners 1989, Draft interim stream an ‘edge of field’: water quality objectives for the Mount Lofty Ranges, Environmental and Agricultural Technologies. Ebsary, R 1987, Nutrient budget of Mt Bold Reservoir 1973−1986, EWS 87/55, Engineering and Water Supply Department, Adelaide, South Australia. Engineering and Water Supply Department 1992, Adelaide’s water supply—summary of the system (Information Bulletin No. 7), E&WS, Adelaide, South Australia. Frossard, E, Brossard, M, Hedley, MJ & Metherell, A 1995, ‘Reactions controlling the cycling of P in soils’, in H Tiessen (ed), SCOPE 54⎯Phosphorus in the global environment: transfers, cycles and management, The Scientific Committee On Problems of the Environment, John Wiley & Sons Ltd, New York, USA, pp. 107−138. Gupta, SC & Larson, WE 1979, ‘Estimating soil water retention characteristics from particle size distribution, organic matter content, and bulk density’, Water Resources Research, vol. 15, pp. 1633−1635.

68 Water Quality Snapshot 2001–2002

Holmes, B 2002, The pollutant trace sampling, source detection and remediation program—status report 2002, Mount Lofty Ranges Watershed Protection Office, Environmental Protection Authority, Stirling, South Australia. Naidu, R, Williamson, DR, Fitzpatrick, RW & Hollingsworth, IO 1993, ‘Effect of land use on the composition of through flow water immediately above clayey B horizons in the Warren catchment, South Australia’, Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture, vol. 33, pp. 239−244. National Health and Medical Council 1996, Australian drinking water guidelines, Commonwealth of Australia. Ortega-Mora, LM, Requejo-Fernandez, JA, Pilar-Izuierdo, MP & Pereira-Bueno, J 1999, ‘Role of adult sheep in transmission of infection by Cryptosporidium parvum to lambs: confirmation of periparturient rise’, International Journal of Parasitology, vol. 29, pp. 1261−1268. Rose, JB, Daeschner, S, Easterling, DR, Curriero, FC, Lele, S & Patz, JA 2000, ‘Climate and waterborne disease outbreaks’, Journal of the American Water Works Association, vol. 92(9), pp. 77−87. Saxton, KE, Rawls, WJ, Romberger, JS & Papendick, RI 1986, ‘Estimating generalized soil- water characteristics from texture’, Soil Science Society of America Journal, vol. 50(4), pp. 1031−1036. Soil and Land Information 2001a, Land resource information: Central Districts; Eyre Peninsula; Murraylands; Northern Agricultural Districts; South East (5 CD-ROMs), Department of Water, Land and Biodiversity Conservation, Adelaide, South Australia. Soil and Land Information 2001b, Analysing and mapping soil and landscape attribute data: A description of the methods used to assess the spatial distribution of a range of agriculturally significant soil and landscape attributes in South Australia, Department of Water, Land and Biodiversity Conservation, Adelaide, South Australia. South Australian Environment Protection Authority 2003a, Environment Protection (Water Quality) Policy and Explanatory Report, EPA, Adelaide, South Australia. ––2003b, Mount Lofty Watershed Protection Office status report, EPA, Adelaide, South Australia. South Central Regional Network Incorporated 2000, Towards sustainable water resource management for the Adelaide Hills and Fleurieu, South Central Regional Network (SCRN) Incorporated, Adelaide, South Australia. Stevens, DP, Cox, JW & Chittleborough, DJ 1999, ‘Pathways of phosphorus, nitrogen and carbon movement over and through texturally differentiated soils, South Australia’, Australian Journal of Soil Research, vol. 37(4), pp. 679−693. Twidale, CR, Tyler, MJ & Web, BP (eds) 1976, Natural history of the Adelaide region, Royal Society of South Australia (Inc), Graphic Services Pty Ltd, South Australia. United States Environmental Protection Agency 1992, Environmental Impacts of stormwater discharges, United States Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water, Washington DC. United States Environmental Protection Agency 1997, Urbanization and streams: Studies of hydrologic impacts, EPA841−R−97−009, United States Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water, Washington DC.

69 Water Quality Snapshot 2001–2002

United States Environmental Protection Agency 1998, National water quality inventory: 1996 report to Congress, EPA841−R−97−008, United States Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Wetlands, Oceans and Watersheds, Washington DC. Williams, J, Prebble, RE, Williams, WT & Hignett, CT 1983, ‘The influence of texture, structure, and clay mineralogy on the soil moisture characteristic’, Australian Journal of Soil Research, vol. 21, pp. 15−32. Wood, G 1986, The Mount Lofty Ranges watershed⎯Impact of land use on water quality and implications for reservoir water quality management, Engineering and Water Supply Department, Adelaide, South Australia.

70 Water Quality Snapshot 2001–2002

APPENDIX 1 LAND USE CLASSIFICATION CATEGORIES

Land use Category Class Horticulture—trees Orchards Citrus Stonefruit Pomefruit Nuts Tropical fruit Orchards/miscellaneous Orchards/berries Horticulture—row crops Vines Vines Horticulture—row crops Row—berries Berries Horticulture—row crops Vegetables Root vegetables Vegetables/legumes Brassicas Leafy greens Curcubits Aliums Solanums Perennials Vegetables/miscellaneous Horticulture—row crops Floriculture Native flowers Exotic flowers Herbs Field crops Cropping Cropping/legumes Cereals Oil seeds Cropping/miscellaneous Forestry Exotic vegetation Exotic vegetation Forestry/protected areas Native vegetation Native vegetation Manufacturing/commerce Manufacturing/urban Industry/commercial Accommodation Accommodation/urban Residential Services Services/urban Cultural Transport/storage/utilities and Transport/urban Utilities/other communication Mining and extractive industries Mining/extraction Mining/extraction Water bodies Water bodies Dams Reservoirs Sewage ponds Wetlands Lakes Livestock Animal husbandry Broadscale grazing Intensive grazing Housed/confined Cultural and recreation services Recreation Golf courses Football/soccer/cricket ovals Protected areas/recreation areas Recreation/protected areas Recreation/protected areas

71 Water Quality Snapshot 2001–2002

APPENDIX 2 CLASSIFIED WATER QUALITY DATA Key: 0−40th percentile >40−80th percentile >80th percentile

Turbidity Raw water hazard threshold value = 100 NTU

Site no Catchment Sub-catchment Sample date Turbidity (NTU) T09 Torrens Kenton Creek 14-Jun-02 400.0 T06 Torrens Angas Creek 16-Aug-01 370.0 O09 Onkaparinga Cox Creek 3-Jul-02 220.0 T09 Torrens Kenton Creek 24-Sep-01 210.0 T02 Torrens Millers Creek 24-Sep-01 190.0 T07 Torrens McCormick Creek 24-Sep-01 180.0 SP1 South Para Victoria Creek 24-Sep-01 170.0 T09 Torrens Kenton Creek 16-Aug-01 170.0 T06 Torrens Angas Creek 24-Sep-01 160.0 W02 Warren Portuguese 28-Aug-01 150.0 T07 Torrens McCormick Creek 16-Aug-01 150.0 O09 Onkaparinga Cox Creek 16-Aug-01 150.0 LP1 Little Para Gould Creek 24-Sep-01 140.0 T08 Torrens Footes Creek 14-Jun-02 140.0 SP2 South Para Malcolm Creek 24-Sep-01 120.0 O02 Onkaparinga Inverbrackie Creek 5-Jul-02 120.0 T08 Torrens Footes Creek 16-Aug-01 110.0 T01 Torrens Kersbrook Creek 25-Oct-01 110.0 O02 Onkaparinga Inverbrackie Creek 24-Sep-01 110.0 O07 Onkaparinga Sphoer 3-Jul-02 100.0 O07 Onkaparinga Sphoer 7-Aug-01 99.0 T10 Torrens Cudlee Creek 25-Oct-01 97.0 M02 Myponga Myponga - Pages Flat 28-Jul-02 93.0 O10 Onkaparinga Aldgate Creek 5-Jul-02 92.0 T01 Torrens Kersbrook Creek 7-Aug-01 88.0 T08 Torrens Footes Creek 24-Sep-01 85.0 T02 Torrens Millers Creek 16-Aug-01 84.0 T02 Torrens Millers Creek 14-Jun-02 84.0 O01 Onkaparinga Charleston 5-Jul-02 81.0 O04 Onkaparinga Western Branch 7-Aug-01 81.0 O05 Onkaparinga Lenswood Creek 7-Aug-01 75.0 SP2 South Para Malcolm Creek 3-Aug-02 74.0 T10 Torrens Cudlee Creek 7-Aug-01 71.0 O01 Onkaparinga Charleston 24-Sep-01 68.0 W01 Warren Forestry HQ 24-Sep-01 54.0

72 Water Quality Snapshot 2001–2002

Site no Catchment Sub-catchment Sample date Turbidity (NTU) T01 Torrens Kersbrook Creek 3-Aug-02 51.0 M02 Myponga Myponga–Pages Flat 25-Aug-01 50.0 T03 Torrens Hannaford 24-Sep-01 48.0 O03 Onkaparinga Mitchell 24-Sep-01 44.0 M01 Myponga Myponga–Blockers Rd 28-Jul-02 43.0 M02 Myponga Myponga–Pages Flat 16-Aug-01 40.0 O06 Onkaparinga Balhannah 24-Sep-01 37.0 M01 Myponga Myponga–Blockers Rd 25-Aug-01 37.0 O02 Onkaparinga Inverbrackie Creek 21-Aug-01 36.0 O07 Onkaparinga Sphoer 24-Sep-01 36.0 O09 Onkaparinga Cox Creek 24-Sep-01 34.0 O01 Onkaparinga Charleston 16-Aug-01 33.0 O04 Onkaparinga Western Branch 26-Oct-01 33.0 T04 Torrens Mt Pleasant 24-Sep-01 32.0 O06 Onkaparinga Balhannah 5-Jul-02 32.0 W01 Warren Forestry HQ 20-Aug-01 30.0 T11 Torrens Sixth Creek 26-Oct-01 30.0 O08 Onkaparinga Hahndorf 24-Sep-01 30.0 M03 Myponga Myponga River Tributary 28-Jul-02 30.0 W03 Warren Tungali 28-Aug-01 28.0 O05 Onkaparinga Lenswood Creek 26-Oct-01 28.0 LP1 Little Para Gould Creek 21-Aug-01 27.0 O05 Onkaparinga Lenswood Creek 3-Jul-02 26.0 SP1 South Para Victoria Creek 3-Aug-02 24.0 O08 Onkaparinga Hahndorf 20-Aug-01 24.0 O04 Onkaparinga Western Branch 3-Jul-02 23.0 T05 Torrens Torrens Main Channel 25-Oct-01 22.0 O10 Onkaparinga Aldgate Creek 20-Aug-01 19.0 O06 Onkaparinga Balhannah 16-Aug-01 19.0 O13 Onkaparinga Echunga Creek 20-Aug-01 19.0 M01 Myponga Myponga–Blockers Rd 16-Aug-01 19.0 SP2 South Para Malcolm Creek 20-Aug-01 18.0 W03 Warren Tungali 20-Aug-01 18.0 SP1 South Para Victoria Creek 20-Aug-01 18.0 LP2 Little Para Little Para River 21-Aug-01 17.0 LP2 Little Para Little Para River 25-Oct-01 17.0 O12 Onkaparinga Scott Creek 25-Aug-01 17.0 T11 Torrens Sixth Creek 7-Aug-01 15.0 O03 Onkaparinga Mitchell 21-Aug-01 15.0 O12 Onkaparinga Scott Creek 3-Jul-02 15.0 O11 Onkaparinga Biggs Flat 25-Aug-01 14.0 T05 Torrens Torrens Main Channel 20-Aug-01 13.0 O10 Onkaparinga Aldgate Creek 24-Sep-01 12.0

73 Water Quality Snapshot 2001–2002

Site no Catchment Sub-catchment Sample date Turbidity (NTU) O11 Onkaparinga Biggs Flat 20-Aug-01 12.0 O13 Onkaparinga Echunga Creek 5-Jul-02 11.0 O08 Onkaparinga Hahndorf 3-Jul-02 10.0 W02 Warren Portuguese 20-Aug-01 9.4 T11 Torrens Sixth Creek 3-Aug-02 9.1 O11 Onkaparinga Biggs Flat 5-Jul-02 8.9 T04 Torrens Mt Pleasant 3-Aug-02 8.8 O13 Onkaparinga Echunga Creek 25-Aug-01 7.0 T03 Torrens Hannaford 16-Aug-01 6.9 T04 Torrens Mt Pleasant 16-Aug-01 6.8 O12 Onkaparinga Scott Creek 16-Aug-01 5.9 M03 Myponga Myponga River Tributary 16-Aug-01 3.9

Colour Raw water hazard threshold value = 100 HU

Site no Catchment Sub-catchment Sample date Colour (HU)

W03 Warren Tungali 20-Aug-01 252.0 W03 Warren Tungali 28-Aug-01 238.0 M01 Myponga Myponga−Blockers Rd 25-Aug-01 214.0 W01 Warren Forestry HQ 20-Aug-01 203.0 T03 Torrens Hannaford 24-Sep-01 202.0 O13 Onkaparinga Echunga Creek 20-Aug-01 198.0 W02 Warren Portuguese 20-Aug-01 191.0 M01 Myponga Myponga−Blockers Rd 28-Jul-02 181.0 SP2 South Para Malcolm Creek 24-Sep-01 172.0 T04 Torrens Mt Pleasant 24-Sep-01 172.0 SP2 South Para Malcolm Creek 20-Aug-01 170.0 M02 Myponga Myponga−Pages Flat 25-Aug-01 170.0 W01 Warren Forestry HQ 24-Sep-01 160.0 O13 Onkaparinga Echunga Creek 25-Aug-01 160.0 T06 Torrens Angas Creek 24-Sep-01 159.0 W02 Warren Portuguese 28-Aug-01 153.0 M01 Myponga Myponga−Blockers Rd 16-Aug-01 153.0 O03 Onkaparinga Mitchell 24-Sep-01 153.0 SP1 South Para Victoria Creek 24-Sep-01 150.0 T01 Torrens Kersbrook Creek 25-Oct-01 147.0 T07 Torrens McCormick Creek 24-Sep-01 146.0 O12 Onkaparinga Scott Creek 25-Aug-01 146.0 O04 Onkaparinga Western Branch 7-Aug-01 142.0 T02 Torrens Millers Creek 24-Sep-01 140.0 O10 Onkaparinga Aldgate Creek 20-Aug-01 140.0

74 Water Quality Snapshot 2001–2002

Site no Catchment Sub-catchment Sample date Colour (HU) T01 Torrens Kersbrook Creek 7-Aug-01 137.0 T05 Torrens Torrens Main Channel 20-Aug-01 137.0 T08 Torrens Footes Creek 16-Aug-01 135.0 T09 Torrens Kenton Creek 24-Sep-01 134.0 O04 Onkaparinga Western Branch 26-Oct-01 133.0 M02 Myponga Myponga−Pages Flat 28-Jul-02 132.0 O05 Onkaparinga Lenswood Creek 7-Aug-01 131.0 T08 Torrens Footes Creek 24-Sep-01 128.0 O02 Onkaparinga Inverbrackie Creek 21-Aug-01 127.0 LP1 Little Para Gould Creek 21-Aug-01 126.0 LP1 Little Para Gould Creek 24-Sep-01 125.0 O07 Onkaparinga Sphoer 7-Aug-01 116.0 SP2 South Para Malcolm Creek 3-Aug-02 115.0 O03 Onkaparinga Mitchell 21-Aug-01 115.0 O10 Onkaparinga Aldgate Creek 24-Sep-01 114.0 O11 Onkaparinga Biggs Flat 20-Aug-01 110.0 O11 Onkaparinga Biggs Flat 25-Aug-01 110.0 O08 Onkaparinga Hahndorf 20-Aug-01 109.0 M03 Myponga Myponga River Tributary 28-Jul-02 108.0 T05 Torrens Torrens Main Channel 25-Oct-01 107.0 O06 Onkaparinga Balhannah 24-Sep-01 102.0 O02 Onkaparinga Inverbrackie Creek 24-Sep-01 102.0 SP1 South Para Victoria Creek 20-Aug-01 101.0 O07 Onkaparinga Sphoer 24-Sep-01 98.0 T09 Torrens Kenton Creek 14-Jun-02 97.7 O10 Onkaparinga Aldgate Creek 5-Jul-02 95.7 O01 Onkaparinga Charleston 24-Sep-01 95.0 LP2 Little Para Little Para River 21-Aug-01 94.0 T07 Torrens McCormick Creek 16-Aug-01 94.0 O09 Onkaparinga Cox Creek 24-Sep-01 94.0 T01 Torrens Kersbrook Creek 3-Aug-02 91.5 M02 Myponga Myponga−Pages Flat 16-Aug-01 91.0 O06 Onkaparinga Balhannah 5-Jul-02 89.5 O01 Onkaparinga Charleston 16-Aug-01 89.0 T04 Torrens Mt Pleasant 16-Aug-01 88.0 O12 Onkaparinga Scott Creek 16-Aug-01 87.0 T08 Torrens Footes Creek 14-Jun-02 85.0 T04 Torrens Mt Pleasant 3-Aug-02 80.6 M03 Myponga Myponga River Tributary 16-Aug-01 79.0 O05 Onkaparinga Lenswood Creek 26-Oct-01 77.0 O09 Onkaparinga Cox Creek 16-Aug-01 76.0 T02 Torrens Millers Creek 16-Aug-01 74.0 O01 Onkaparinga Charleston 5-Jul-02 73.4

75 Water Quality Snapshot 2001–2002

Site no Catchment Sub-catchment Sample date Colour (HU) T02 Torrens Millers Creek 14-Jun-02 72.6 O12 Onkaparinga Scott Creek 3-Jul-02 72.5 O04 Onkaparinga Western Branch 3-Jul-02 70.1 O09 Onkaparinga Cox Creek 3-Jul-02 67.9 O02 Onkaparinga Inverbrackie Creek 5-Jul-02 66.2 T03 Torrens Hannaford 16-Aug-01 66.0 T09 Torrens Kenton Creek 16-Aug-01 63.0 O07 Onkaparinga Sphoer 3-Jul-02 61.9 SP1 South Para Victoria Creek 3-Aug-02 60.7 O05 Onkaparinga Lenswood Creek 3-Jul-02 59.6 O13 Onkaparinga Echunga Creek 5-Jul-02 55.4 T06 Torrens Angas Creek 16-Aug-01 54.0 T10 Torrens Cudlee Creek 25-Oct-01 51.0 O11 Onkaparinga Biggs Flat 5-Jul-02 50.1 LP2 Little Para Little Para River 25-Oct-01 48.0 O06 Onkaparinga Balhannah 16-Aug-01 42.0 O08 Onkaparinga Hahndorf 24-Sep-01 38.0 T11 Torrens Sixth Creek 26-Oct-01 37.0 T10 Torrens Cudlee Creek 7-Aug-01 36.0 T11 Torrens Sixth Creek 7-Aug-01 33.0 O08 Onkaparinga Hahndorf 3-Jul-02 24.8 T11 Torrens Sixth Creek 3-Aug-02 24.2

Cryptosporidium Raw water hazard threshold value = 10/10L

Confirmed Cryptosporidium Site no Catchment Sub-catchment Sample date (/10L) T08 Torrens Footes Creek 16-Aug-01 1800 M02 Myponga Myponga−Pages Flat 25-Aug-01 1500 T07 Torrens McCormick Creek 24-Sep-01 850 SP2 South Para Malcolm Creek 3-Aug-02 220 T01 Torrens Kersbrook Creek 3-Aug-02 220 T06 Torrens Angas Creek 24-Sep-01 200 LP1 Little Para Gould Creek 24-Sep-01 180 T02 Torrens Millers Creek 24-Sep-01 160 T08 Torrens Footes Creek 24-Sep-01 130 T09 Torrens Kenton Creek 14-Jun-02 130 O05 Onkaparinga Lenswood Creek 3-Jul-02 120 T04 Torrens Mt Pleasant 3-Aug-02 110 M02 Myponga Myponga−Pages Flat 28-Jul-02 110 T08 Torrens Footes Creek 14-Jun-02 100 O10 Onkaparinga Aldgate Creek 5-Jul-02 79 O08 Onkaparinga Hahndorf 20-Aug-01 77

76 Water Quality Snapshot 2001–2002

Confirmed Cryptosporidium Site no Catchment Sub-catchment Sample date (/10L) SP1 South Para Victoria Creek 3-Aug-02 74 T04 Torrens Mt Pleasant 24-Sep-01 74 T09 Torrens Kenton Creek 24-Sep-01 62 O06 Onkaparinga Balhannah 24-Sep-01 61 M02 Myponga Myponga−Pages Flat 16-Aug-01 59 O09 Onkaparinga Cox Creek 24-Sep-01 58 O11 Onkaparinga Biggs Flat 20-Aug-01 56 T01 Torrens Kersbrook Creek 25-Oct-01 53 O07 Onkaparinga Sphoer 24-Sep-01 47 T11 Torrens Sixth Creek 3-Aug-02 46 T09 Torrens Kenton Creek 16-Aug-01 45 O05 Onkaparinga Lenswood Creek 7-Aug-01 45 T02 Torrens Millers Creek 16-Aug-01 43 O02 Onkaparinga Inverbrackie Creek 5-Jul-02 40 SP1 South Para Victoria Creek 24-Sep-01 35 T02 Torrens Millers Creek 14-Jun-02 35 W02 Warren Portuguese 28-Aug-01 29 O04 Onkaparinga Western Branch 3-Jul-02 29 SP2 South Para Malcolm Creek 24-Sep-01 26 T03 Torrens Hannaford 24-Sep-01 23 O11 Onkaparinga Biggs Flat 5-Jul-02 22 O09 Onkaparinga Cox Creek 3-Jul-02 22 O06 Onkaparinga Balhannah 5-Jul-02 20 O01 Onkaparinga Charleston 5-Jul-02 16 W01 Warren Forestry HQ 24-Sep-01 15 T11 Torrens Sixth Creek 26-Oct-01 15 M03 Myponga Myponga River Tributary 28-Jul-02 14 T05 Torrens Torrens Main Channel 25-Oct-01 13 O13 Onkaparinga Echunga Creek 20-Aug-01 13 T04 Torrens Mt Pleasant 16-Aug-01 11 T01 Torrens Kersbrook Creek 7-Aug-01 10 M01 Myponga Myponga−Blockers Rd 25-Aug-01 9 O13 Onkaparinga Echunga Creek 5-Jul-02 8 O08 Onkaparinga Hahndorf 3-Jul-02 8 O12 Onkaparinga Scott Creek 3-Jul-02 8 O07 Onkaparinga Sphoer 3-Jul-02 7 O11 Onkaparinga Biggs Flat 25-Aug-01 6 O01 Onkaparinga Charleston 24-Sep-01 6 M01 Myponga Myponga−Blockers Rd 28-Jul-02 6 O03 Onkaparinga Mitchell 24-Sep-01 5 LP2 Little Para Little Para River 21-Aug-01 4

77 Water Quality Snapshot 2001–2002

Confirmed Cryptosporidium Site no Catchment Sub-catchment Sample date (/10L) O08 Onkaparinga Hahndorf 24-Sep-01 3 O04 Onkaparinga Western Branch 7-Aug-01 3 T10 Torrens Cudlee Creek 25-Oct-01 2 T11 Torrens Sixth Creek 7-Aug-01 2 O04 Onkaparinga Western Branch 26-Oct-01 2 O01 Onkaparinga Charleston 16-Aug-01 1 O13 Onkaparinga Echunga Creek 25-Aug-01 1 O12 Onkaparinga Scott Creek 25-Aug-01 1 O07 Onkaparinga Sphoer 7-Aug-01 1 LP1 Little Para Gould Creek 21-Aug-01 0 LP2 Little Para Little Para River 25-Oct-01 0 SP2 South Para Malcolm Creek 20-Aug-01 0 W02 Warren Portuguese 20-Aug-01 0 W03 Warren Tungali 20-Aug-01 0 T06 Torrens Angas Creek 16-Aug-01 0 T10 Torrens Cudlee Creek 7-Aug-01 0 T07 Torrens McCormick Creek 16-Aug-01 0 T05 Torrens Torrens Main Channel 20-Aug-01 0 O10 Onkaparinga Aldgate Creek 20-Aug-01 0 O06 Onkaparinga Balhannah 16-Aug-01 0 O02 Onkaparinga Inverbrackie Creek 21-Aug-01 0 O05 Onkaparinga Lenswood Creek 26-Oct-01 0 O03 Onkaparinga Mitchell 21-Aug-01 0 M03 Myponga Myponga River Tributary 16-Aug-01 0 W01 Warren Forestry HQ 20-Aug-01 W03 Warren Tungali 28-Aug-01 SP1 South Para Victoria Creek 20-Aug-01 T03 Torrens Hannaford 16-Aug-01 O10 Onkaparinga Aldgate Creek 24-Sep-01 O09 Onkaparinga Cox Creek 16-Aug-01 O02 Onkaparinga Inverbrackie Creek 24-Sep-01 O12 Onkaparinga Scott Creek 16-Aug-01 M01 Myponga Myponga−Blockers Rd 16-Aug-01

Giardia Raw water hazard threshold value = 10/10L

Site no Catchment Sub-catchment Sample date Confirmed Giardia (/10L)

SP1 South Para Victoria Creek 3-Aug-02 390 T01 Torrens Kersbrook Creek 7-Aug-01 120 SP2 South Para Malcolm Creek 3-Aug-02 110 O02 Onkaparinga Inverbrackie Creek 21-Aug-01 91

78 Water Quality Snapshot 2001–2002

Site no Catchment Sub-catchment Sample date Confirmed Giardia (/10L) T02 Torrens Millers Creek 14-Jun-02 51 T04 Torrens Mt Pleasant 3-Aug-02 34 LP1 Little Para Gould Creek 21-Aug-01 12 T09 Torrens Kenton Creek 14-Jun-02 10 T01 Torrens Kersbrook Creek 25-Oct-01 10 W01 Warren Forestry HQ 24-Sep-01 9 O05 Onkaparinga Lenswood Creek 3-Jul-02 8 T02 Torrens Millers Creek 16-Aug-01 7 O08 Onkaparinga Hahndorf 24-Sep-01 6 T01 Torrens Kersbrook Creek 3-Aug-02 5 O07 Onkaparinga Sphoer 3-Jul-02 5 M02 Myponga Myponga−Pages Flat 28-Jul-02 5 O03 Onkaparinga Mitchell 21-Aug-01 4 T11 Torrens Sixth Creek 26-Oct-01 3 O13 Onkaparinga Echunga Creek 5-Jul-02 3 T08 Torrens Footes Creek 14-Jun-02 2 O04 Onkaparinga Western Branch 3-Jul-02 2 O07 Onkaparinga Sphoer 24-Sep-01 1 M02 Myponga Myponga−Pages Flat 16-Aug-01 1 LP1 Little Para Gould Creek 24-Sep-01 0 LP2 Little Para Little Para River 21-Aug-01 0 SP2 South Para Malcolm Creek 20-Aug-01 0 SP2 South Para Malcolm Creek 24-Sep-01 0 W02 Warren Portuguese 28-Aug-01 0 W03 Warren Tungali 20-Aug-01 0 T06 Torrens Angas Creek 24-Sep-01 0 T10 Torrens Cudlee Creek 7-Aug-01 0 T10 Torrens Cudlee Creek 25-Oct-01 0 T08 Torrens Footes Creek 16-Aug-01 0 T03 Torrens Hannaford 16-Aug-01 0 T09 Torrens Kenton Creek 16-Aug-01 0 T09 Torrens Kenton Creek 24-Sep-01 0 T07 Torrens McCormick Creek 16-Aug-01 0 T02 Torrens Millers Creek 24-Sep-01 0 T04 Torrens Mt Pleasant 16-Aug-01 0 T04 Torrens Mt Pleasant 24-Sep-01 0 T11 Torrens Sixth Creek 3-Aug-02 0 T05 Torrens Torrens Main Channel 20-Aug-01 0 T05 Torrens Torrens Main Channel 25-Oct-01 0 O10 Onkaparinga Aldgate Creek 20-Aug-01 0 O10 Onkaparinga Aldgate Creek 5-Jul-02 0 O06 Onkaparinga Balhannah 16-Aug-01 0 O06 Onkaparinga Balhannah 5-Jul-02 0

79 Water Quality Snapshot 2001–2002

Site no Catchment Sub-catchment Sample date Confirmed Giardia (/10L) O11 Onkaparinga Biggs Flat 5-Jul-02 0 O01 Onkaparinga Charleston 16-Aug-01 0 O01 Onkaparinga Charleston 24-Sep-01 0 O01 Onkaparinga Charleston 5-Jul-02 0 O09 Onkaparinga Cox Creek 16-Aug-01 0 O09 Onkaparinga Cox Creek 24-Sep-01 0 O09 Onkaparinga Cox Creek 3-Jul-02 0 O13 Onkaparinga Echunga Creek 20-Aug-01 0 O08 Onkaparinga Hahndorf 20-Aug-01 0 O08 Onkaparinga Hahndorf 3-Jul-02 0 O02 Onkaparinga Inverbrackie Creek 5-Jul-02 0 O05 Onkaparinga Lenswood Creek 7-Aug-01 0 O03 Onkaparinga Mitchell 24-Sep-01 0 O12 Onkaparinga Scott Creek 25-Aug-01 0 O12 Onkaparinga Scott Creek 3-Jul-02 0 O07 Onkaparinga Sphoer 7-Aug-01 0 O04 Onkaparinga Western Branch 7-Aug-01 0 M01 Myponga Myponga - Blockers Rd 28-Jul-02 0 M03 Myponga Myponga River Tributary 28-Jul-02 0 W01 Warren Forestry HQ 20-Aug-01 LP2 Little Para Little Para River 25-Oct-01 W02 Warren Portuguese 20-Aug-01 W03 Warren Tungali 28-Aug-01 SP1 South Para Victoria Creek 20-Aug-01 SP1 South Para Victoria Creek 24-Sep-01 T06 Torrens Angas Creek 16-Aug-01 T08 Torrens Footes Creek 24-Sep-01 T03 Torrens Hannaford 24-Sep-01 T07 Torrens McCormick Creek 24-Sep-01 T11 Torrens Sixth Creek 7-Aug-01 O10 Onkaparinga Aldgate Creek 24-Sep-01 O06 Onkaparinga Balhannah 24-Sep-01 O11 Onkaparinga Biggs Flat 20-Aug-01 O11 Onkaparinga Biggs Flat 25-Aug-01 O13 Onkaparinga Echunga Creek 25-Aug-01 O02 Onkaparinga Inverbrackie Creek 24-Sep-01 O05 Onkaparinga Lenswood Creek 26-Oct-01 O12 Onkaparinga Scott Creek 16-Aug-01 O04 Onkaparinga Western Branch 26-Oct-01 M01 Myponga Myponga - Blockers Rd 16-Aug-01 M01 Myponga Myponga - Blockers Rd 25-Aug-01 M02 Myponga Myponga - Pages Flat 25-Aug-01 M03 Myponga Myponga River Tributary 16-Aug-01

80 Water Quality Snapshot 2001–2002 E. coli Raw water hazard threshold value = 1000/100mL

Site no Catchment Sub-catchment Sample date E-Coli (cells/100mL) SP2 South Para Malcolm Creek 24-Sep-01 160000 T06 Torrens Angas Creek 24-Sep-01 140000 T03 Torrens Hannaford 24-Sep-01 140000 O10 Onkaparinga Aldgate Creek 24-Sep-01 120000 T08 Torrens Footes Creek 24-Sep-01 100000 T07 Torrens McCormick Creek 24-Sep-01 100000 T01 Torrens Kersbrook Creek 25-Oct-01 92000 O06 Onkaparinga Balhannah 24-Sep-01 92000 T08 Torrens Footes Creek 16-Aug-01 82000 T02 Torrens Millers Creek 24-Sep-01 82000 T09 Torrens Kenton Creek 24-Sep-01 77000 T04 Torrens Mt Pleasant 24-Sep-01 69000 W01 Warren Forestry HQ 24-Sep-01 65000 SP1 South Para Victoria Creek 24-Sep-01 65000 LP1 Little Para Gould Creek 24-Sep-01 58000 T08 Torrens Footes Creek 14-Jun-02 52000 T09 Torrens Kenton Creek 14-Jun-02 35000 T05 Torrens Torrens Main Channel 25-Oct-01 30000 M02 Myponga Myponga–Pages Flat 28-Jul-02 29000 T01 Torrens Kersbrook Creek 7-Aug-01 23000 M02 Myponga Myponga−Pages Flat 25-Aug-01 23000 O02 Onkaparinga Inverbrackie Creek 24-Sep-01 22000 T02 Torrens Millers Creek 14-Jun-02 20000 M03 Myponga Myponga River Tributary 28-Jul-02 20000 O01 Onkaparinga Charleston 24-Sep-01 19000 M01 Myponga Myponga - Blockers Rd 28-Jul-02 17000 O07 Onkaparinga Sphoer 7-Aug-01 15000 M01 Myponga Myponga−Blockers Rd 25-Aug-01 15000 T10 Torrens Cudlee Creek 25-Oct-01 13000 O05 Onkaparinga Lenswood Creek 7-Aug-01 12000 O04 Onkaparinga Western Branch 7-Aug-01 12000 O09 Onkaparinga Cox Creek 24-Sep-01 11000 O07 Onkaparinga Sphoer 24-Sep-01 11000 T07 Torrens McCormick Creek 16-Aug-01 10000 W02 Warren Portuguese 28-Aug-01 9900 T09 Torrens Kenton Creek 16-Aug-01 9300 T01 Torrens Kersbrook Creek 3-Aug-02 8000 O05 Onkaparinga Lenswood Creek 3-Jul-02 7700 O01 Onkaparinga Charleston 5-Jul-02 7300

81 Water Quality Snapshot 2001–2002

Site no Catchment Sub-catchment Sample date E-Coli (cells/100mL)

M02 Myponga Myponga−Pages Flat 16-Aug-01 7300 T02 Torrens Millers Creek 16-Aug-01 7000 O04 Onkaparinga Western Branch 26-Oct-01 6700 SP2 South Para Malcolm Creek 3-Aug-02 6000 O05 Onkaparinga Lenswood Creek 26-Oct-01 5400 O04 Onkaparinga Western Branch 3-Jul-02 4900 O13 Onkaparinga Echunga Creek 20-Aug-01 4600 O08 Onkaparinga Hahndorf 24-Sep-01 4100 O06 Onkaparinga Balhannah 5-Jul-02 3900 M01 Myponga Myponga−Blockers Rd 16-Aug-01 3000 O02 Onkaparinga Inverbrackie Creek 5-Jul-02 2600 O07 Onkaparinga Sphoer 3-Jul-02 2600 SP1 South Para Victoria Creek 3-Aug-02 2400 T04 Torrens Mt Pleasant 3-Aug-02 2400 O10 Onkaparinga Aldgate Creek 5-Jul-02 2400 O09 Onkaparinga Cox Creek 16-Aug-01 2300 T10 Torrens Cudlee Creek 7-Aug-01 2200 O10 Onkaparinga Aldgate Creek 20-Aug-01 2000 T04 Torrens Mt Pleasant 16-Aug-01 1900 O09 Onkaparinga Cox Creek 3-Jul-02 1900 T11 Torrens Sixth Creek 26-Oct-01 1700 O03 Onkaparinga Mitchell 24-Sep-01 1600 LP2 Little Para Little Para River 25-Oct-01 1500 O01 Onkaparinga Charleston 16-Aug-01 1400 T11 Torrens Sixth Creek 7-Aug-01 1200 O06 Onkaparinga Balhannah 16-Aug-01 1100 O11 Onkaparinga Biggs Flat 5-Jul-02 1100 SP1 South Para Victoria Creek 20-Aug-01 980 O11 Onkaparinga Biggs Flat 20-Aug-01 980 O02 Onkaparinga Inverbrackie Creek 21-Aug-01 980 O03 Onkaparinga Mitchell 21-Aug-01 980 SP2 South Para Malcolm Creek 20-Aug-01 920 W03 Warren Tungali 20-Aug-01 920 O12 Onkaparinga Scott Creek 16-Aug-01 730 W02 Warren Portuguese 20-Aug-01 690 T05 Torrens Torrens Main Channel 20-Aug-01 610 W01 Warren Forestry HQ 20-Aug-01 550 T03 Torrens Hannaford 16-Aug-01 520 LP1 Little Para Gould Creek 21-Aug-01 490 O12 Onkaparinga Scott Creek 3-Jul-02 480 T11 Torrens Sixth Creek 3-Aug-02 460 O08 Onkaparinga Hahndorf 20-Aug-01 390 LP2 Little Para Little Para River 21-Aug-01 350

82 Water Quality Snapshot 2001–2002

Site no Catchment Sub-catchment Sample date E-Coli (cells/100mL) O08 Onkaparinga Hahndorf 3-Jul-02 320 O11 Onkaparinga Biggs Flat 25-Aug-01 280 O13 Onkaparinga Echunga Creek 5-Jul-02 250 W03 Warren Tungali 28-Aug-01 240 T06 Torrens Angas Creek 16-Aug-01 230 M03 Myponga Myponga River Tributary 16-Aug-01 50 O13 Onkaparinga Echunga Creek 25-Aug-01 41 O12 Onkaparinga Scott Creek 25-Aug-01 40

Enterococcus Raw water hazard threshold value = 1000/100mL

Enterococcus spp Site no Catchment Sub-catchment Sample date (cells/100mL) SP2 South Para Malcolm Creek 24-Sep-01 100000 T07 Torrens McCormick Creek 24-Sep-01 70000 T01 Torrens Kersbrook Creek 25-Oct-01 61000 W01 Warren Forestry HQ 24-Sep-01 46000 T09 Torrens Kenton Creek 24-Sep-01 46000 T02 Torrens Millers Creek 24-Sep-01 44000 T03 Torrens Hannaford 24-Sep-01 43000 T06 Torrens Angas Creek 24-Sep-01 41000 T04 Torrens Mt Pleasant 24-Sep-01 32000 O02 Onkaparinga Inverbrackie Creek 24-Sep-01 32000 LP1 Little Para Gould Creek 24-Sep-01 29000 SP1 South Para Victoria Creek 24-Sep-01 29000 T08 Torrens Footes Creek 24-Sep-01 27000 T09 Torrens Kenton Creek 14-Jun-02 27000 O05 Onkaparinga Lenswood Creek 7-Aug-01 27000 T01 Torrens Kersbrook Creek 7-Aug-01 25000 O04 Onkaparinga Western Branch 7-Aug-01 19000 SP2 South Para Malcolm Creek 3-Aug-02 17000 O01 Onkaparinga Charleston 24-Sep-01 16000 O07 Onkaparinga Sphoer 7-Aug-01 15000 O07 Onkaparinga Sphoer 24-Sep-01 15000 M02 Myponga Myponga−Pages Flat 28-Jul-02 13000 T08 Torrens Footes Creek 16-Aug-01 12000 O06 Onkaparinga Balhannah 24-Sep-01 11000 M01 Myponga Myponga−Blockers Rd 28-Jul-02 11000 O06 Onkaparinga Balhannah 5-Jul-02 9300 O09 Onkaparinga Cox Creek 24-Sep-01 8700 O09 Onkaparinga Cox Creek 16-Aug-01 7800

83 Water Quality Snapshot 2001–2002

Enterococcus spp Site no Catchment Sub-catchment Sample date (cells/100mL) O02 Onkaparinga Inverbrackie Creek 5-Jul-02 7400 T08 Torrens Footes Creek 14-Jun-02 6700 T10 Torrens Cudlee Creek 25-Oct-01 6600 T01 Torrens Kersbrook Creek 3-Aug-02 6000 O10 Onkaparinga Aldgate Creek 5-Jul-02 6000 O03 Onkaparinga Mitchell 24-Sep-01 5800 W02 Warren Portuguese 28-Aug-01 5700 M03 Myponga Myponga River Tributary 28-Jul-02 5000 T04 Torrens Mt Pleasant 16-Aug-01 4900 O01 Onkaparinga Charleston 5-Jul-02 4600 T09 Torrens Kenton Creek 16-Aug-01 4400 T02 Torrens Millers Creek 16-Aug-01 4200 O05 Onkaparinga Lenswood Creek 3-Jul-02 4200 T05 Torrens Torrens Main Channel 25-Oct-01 3900 M02 Myponga Myponga−Pages Flat 25-Aug-01 3800 T02 Torrens Millers Creek 14-Jun-02 3700 M01 Myponga Myponga - Blockers Rd 25-Aug-01 3400 O08 Onkaparinga Hahndorf 24-Sep-01 3300 O05 Onkaparinga Lenswood Creek 26-Oct-01 3100 M02 Myponga Myponga−Pages Flat 16-Aug-01 3000 O09 Onkaparinga Cox Creek 3-Jul-02 2800 T07 Torrens McCormick Creek 16-Aug-01 2700 O04 Onkaparinga Western Branch 26-Oct-01 2600 T10 Torrens Cudlee Creek 7-Aug-01 2500 O04 Onkaparinga Western Branch 3-Jul-02 2500 O07 Onkaparinga Sphoer 3-Jul-02 2400 O02 Onkaparinga Inverbrackie Creek 21-Aug-01 2300 O06 Onkaparinga Balhannah 16-Aug-01 2200 O01 Onkaparinga Charleston 16-Aug-01 1700 O11 Onkaparinga Biggs Flat 5-Jul-02 1300 O10 Onkaparinga Aldgate Creek 24-Sep-01 1100 O03 Onkaparinga Mitchell 21-Aug-01 1100 SP1 South Para Victoria Creek 3-Aug-02 1000 O08 Onkaparinga Hahndorf 3-Jul-02 1000 LP2 Little Para Little Para River 25-Oct-01 910 T06 Torrens Angas Creek 16-Aug-01 910 M01 Myponga Myponga−Blockers Rd 16-Aug-01 790 O12 Onkaparinga Scott Creek 25-Aug-01 690 W01 Warren Forestry HQ 20-Aug-01 680 T11 Torrens Sixth Creek 26-Oct-01 680 O10 Onkaparinga Aldgate Creek 20-Aug-01 640 W03 Warren Tungali 20-Aug-01 620

84 Water Quality Snapshot 2001–2002

Enterococcus spp Site no Catchment Sub-catchment Sample date (cells/100mL) T04 Torrens Mt Pleasant 3-Aug-02 600 T11 Torrens Sixth Creek 7-Aug-01 560 T05 Torrens Torrens Main Channel 20-Aug-01 480 O11 Onkaparinga Biggs Flat 20-Aug-01 470 W02 Warren Portuguese 20-Aug-01 440 SP2 South Para Malcolm Creek 20-Aug-01 400 LP1 Little Para Gould Creek 21-Aug-01 380 T03 Torrens Hannaford 16-Aug-01 360 O13 Onkaparinga Echunga Creek 20-Aug-01 350 O12 Onkaparinga Scott Creek 16-Aug-01 330 O08 Onkaparinga Hahndorf 20-Aug-01 310 O13 Onkaparinga Echunga Creek 5-Jul-02 300 W03 Warren Tungali 28-Aug-01 290 O12 Onkaparinga Scott Creek 3-Jul-02 290 LP2 Little Para Little Para River 21-Aug-01 270 SP1 South Para Victoria Creek 20-Aug-01 160 T11 Torrens Sixth Creek 3-Aug-02 140 O11 Onkaparinga Biggs Flat 25-Aug-01 140 M03 Myponga Myponga River Tributary 16-Aug-01 53 O13 Onkaparinga Echunga Creek 25-Aug-01 23

Filtered reactive phosphorous (FRP) Raw water hazard threshold value = 0.1 mg/L

Site no Catchment Sub-catchment Sample date FRP (mg/L) M02 Myponga Myponga−Pages Flat 25-Aug-01 0.664 T06 Torrens Angas Creek 24-Sep-01 0.520 T03 Torrens Hannaford 24-Sep-01 0.436 O02 Onkaparinga Inverbrackie Creek 5-Jul-02 0.288 O03 Onkaparinga Mitchell 21-Aug-01 0.284 T06 Torrens Angas Creek 16-Aug-01 0.259 M02 Myponga Myponga−Pages Flat 28-Jul-02 0.221 O03 Onkaparinga Mitchell 24-Sep-01 0.218 M03 Myponga Myponga River Tributary 28-Jul-02 0.199 O04 Onkaparinga Western Branch 3-Jul-02 0.162 O01 Onkaparinga Charleston 24-Sep-01 0.153 O02 Onkaparinga Inverbrackie Creek 21-Aug-01 0.137 O06 Onkaparinga Balhannah 24-Sep-01 0.135 M01 Myponga Myponga−Blockers Rd 28-Jul-02 0.125 M03 Myponga Myponga River Tributary 16-Aug-01 0.115 T09 Torrens Kenton Creek 14-Jun-02 0.104

85 Water Quality Snapshot 2001–2002

Site no Catchment Sub-catchment Sample date FRP (mg/L) M01 Myponga Myponga−Blockers Rd 25-Aug-01 0.104 O02 Onkaparinga Inverbrackie Creek 24-Sep-01 0.102 O01 Onkaparinga Charleston 16-Aug-01 0.091 T02 Torrens Millers Creek 24-Sep-01 0.089 T03 Torrens Hannaford 16-Aug-01 0.081 O01 Onkaparinga Charleston 5-Jul-02 0.080 T08 Torrens Footes Creek 16-Aug-01 0.079 T04 Torrens Mt Pleasant 24-Sep-01 0.075 SP1 South Para Victoria Creek 24-Sep-01 0.069 T09 Torrens Kenton Creek 24-Sep-01 0.068 T08 Torrens Footes Creek 24-Sep-01 0.067 O08 Onkaparinga Hahndorf 3-Jul-02 0.064 T02 Torrens Millers Creek 14-Jun-02 0.063 O06 Onkaparinga Balhannah 5-Jul-02 0.061 O08 Onkaparinga Hahndorf 24-Sep-01 0.060 O08 Onkaparinga Hahndorf 20-Aug-01 0.059 O13 Onkaparinga Echunga Creek 20-Aug-01 0.054 O04 Onkaparinga Western Branch 7-Aug-01 0.054 O04 Onkaparinga Western Branch 26-Oct-01 0.048 T08 Torrens Footes Creek 14-Jun-02 0.043 T07 Torrens McCormick Creek 16-Aug-01 0.042 O05 Onkaparinga Lenswood Creek 3-Jul-02 0.041 T07 Torrens McCormick Creek 24-Sep-01 0.040 T04 Torrens Mt Pleasant 3-Aug-02 0.038 O11 Onkaparinga Biggs Flat 20-Aug-01 0.036 O06 Onkaparinga Balhannah 16-Aug-01 0.035 O09 Onkaparinga Cox Creek 3-Jul-02 0.032 O11 Onkaparinga Biggs Flat 5-Jul-02 0.031 T02 Torrens Millers Creek 16-Aug-01 0.030 T05 Torrens Torrens Main Channel 25-Oct-01 0.030 O09 Onkaparinga Cox Creek 16-Aug-01 0.030 O05 Onkaparinga Lenswood Creek 7-Aug-01 0.029 M01 Myponga Myponga−Blockers Rd 16-Aug-01 0.028 O13 Onkaparinga Echunga Creek 25-Aug-01 0.027 T09 Torrens Kenton Creek 16-Aug-01 0.026 O07 Onkaparinga Sphoer 24-Sep-01 0.025 SP1 South Para Victoria Creek 3-Aug-02 0.024 O10 Onkaparinga Aldgate Creek 24-Sep-01 0.024 O09 Onkaparinga Cox Creek 24-Sep-01 0.024 LP2 Little Para Little Para River 25-Oct-01 0.022 O10 Onkaparinga Aldgate Creek 5-Jul-02 0.021 O07 Onkaparinga Sphoer 7-Aug-01 0.021 O10 Onkaparinga Aldgate Creek 20-Aug-01 0.020

86 Water Quality Snapshot 2001–2002

Site no Catchment Sub-catchment Sample date FRP (mg/L) M02 Myponga Myponga−Pages Flat 16-Aug-01 0.019 T01 Torrens Kersbrook Creek 25-Oct-01 0.018 O11 Onkaparinga Biggs Flat 25-Aug-01 0.018 O12 Onkaparinga Scott Creek 25-Aug-01 0.018 T01 Torrens Kersbrook Creek 7-Aug-01 0.017 T04 Torrens Mt Pleasant 16-Aug-01 0.017 O12 Onkaparinga Scott Creek 3-Jul-02 0.017 SP2 South Para Malcolm Creek 24-Sep-01 0.015 W03 Warren Tungali 20-Aug-01 0.015 T11 Torrens Sixth Creek 26-Oct-01 0.014 T05 Torrens Torrens Main Channel 20-Aug-01 0.014 O12 Onkaparinga Scott Creek 16-Aug-01 0.014 SP2 South Para Malcolm Creek 20-Aug-01 0.011 W02 Warren Portuguese 20-Aug-01 0.010 T10 Torrens Cudlee Creek 25-Oct-01 0.010 W01 Warren Forestry HQ 24-Sep-01 0.009 LP1 Little Para Gould Creek 21-Aug-01 0.009 LP1 Little Para Gould Creek 24-Sep-01 0.009 W03 Warren Tungali 28-Aug-01 0.008 SP1 South Para Victoria Creek 20-Aug-01 0.008 T01 Torrens Kersbrook Creek 3-Aug-02 0.008 O05 Onkaparinga Lenswood Creek 26-Oct-01 0.008 O07 Onkaparinga Sphoer 3-Jul-02 0.008 O13 Onkaparinga Echunga Creek 5-Jul-02 0.007 LP2 Little Para Little Para River 21-Aug-01 0.006 W02 Warren Portuguese 28-Aug-01 0.006 T11 Torrens Sixth Creek 7-Aug-01 0.006 W01 Warren Forestry HQ 20-Aug-01 0.000 SP2 South Para Malcolm Creek 3-Aug-02 0.000 T10 Torrens Cudlee Creek 7-Aug-01 0.000 T11 Torrens Sixth Creek 3-Aug-02 0.000

Nitrate and nitrite (as N) Raw water hazard threshold value = 0.5 mg/L

Nitrate and nitrite (as N) Site no Catchment Sub-catchment Sample date (mg/L) O01 Onkaparinga Charleston 5-Jul-02 1.830 T03 Torrens Hannaford 16-Aug-01 1.470 T06 Torrens Angas Creek 16-Aug-01 1.390 O08 Onkaparinga Hahndorf 24-Sep-01 1.310 T06 Torrens Angas Creek 24-Sep-01 1.280

87 Water Quality Snapshot 2001–2002

Nitrate and nitrite (as N) Site no Catchment Sub-catchment Sample date (mg/L) O09 Onkaparinga Cox Creek 16-Aug-01 1.150 O03 Onkaparinga Mitchell 21-Aug-01 0.923 O09 Onkaparinga Cox Creek 3-Jul-02 0.808 T09 Torrens Kenton Creek 14-Jun-02 0.806 O06 Onkaparinga Balhannah 5-Jul-02 0.686 O09 Onkaparinga Cox Creek 24-Sep-01 0.662 O01 Onkaparinga Charleston 16-Aug-01 0.576 O08 Onkaparinga Hahndorf 20-Aug-01 0.572 O02 Onkaparinga Inverbrackie Creek 5-Jul-02 0.570 O08 Onkaparinga Hahndorf 3-Jul-02 0.560 T01 Torrens Kersbrook Creek 3-Aug-02 0.551 T11 Torrens Sixth Creek 26-Oct-01 0.536 T11 Torrens Sixth Creek 7-Aug-01 0.521 T11 Torrens Sixth Creek 3-Aug-02 0.493 O07 Onkaparinga Sphoer 3-Jul-02 0.489 T02 Torrens Millers Creek 24-Sep-01 0.478 T08 Torrens Footes Creek 14-Jun-02 0.456 T10 Torrens Cudlee Creek 7-Aug-01 0.445 O06 Onkaparinga Balhannah 24-Sep-01 0.445 T10 Torrens Cudlee Creek 25-Oct-01 0.432 T09 Torrens Kenton Creek 24-Sep-01 0.424 O04 Onkaparinga Western Branch 3-Jul-02 0.417 M03 Myponga Myponga River Tributary 28-Jul-02 0.406 O05 Onkaparinga Lenswood Creek 3-Jul-02 0.404 T08 Torrens Footes Creek 16-Aug-01 0.394 O04 Onkaparinga Western Branch 7-Aug-01 0.387 O10 Onkaparinga Aldgate Creek 5-Jul-02 0.381 O01 Onkaparinga Charleston 24-Sep-01 0.378 O05 Onkaparinga Lenswood Creek 7-Aug-01 0.372 O10 Onkaparinga Aldgate Creek 20-Aug-01 0.356 O07 Onkaparinga Sphoer 7-Aug-01 0.351 O06 Onkaparinga Balhannah 16-Aug-01 0.332 LP2 Little Para Little Para River 21-Aug-01 0.328 M02 Myponga Myponga−Pages Flat 28-Jul-02 0.317 T01 Torrens Kersbrook Creek 7-Aug-01 0.306 LP1 Little Para Gould Creek 24-Sep-01 0.303 T08 Torrens Footes Creek 24-Sep-01 0.300 T09 Torrens Kenton Creek 16-Aug-01 0.281 SP1 South Para Victoria Creek 24-Sep-01 0.276 O03 Onkaparinga Mitchell 24-Sep-01 0.276 T02 Torrens Millers Creek 16-Aug-01 0.274 O02 Onkaparinga Inverbrackie Creek 24-Sep-01 0.267

88 Water Quality Snapshot 2001–2002

Nitrate and nitrite (as N) Site no Catchment Sub-catchment Sample date (mg/L) O07 Onkaparinga Sphoer 24-Sep-01 0.264 O05 Onkaparinga Lenswood Creek 26-Oct-01 0.258 T03 Torrens Hannaford 24-Sep-01 0.251 T07 Torrens McCormick Creek 16-Aug-01 0.234 O11 Onkaparinga Biggs Flat 5-Jul-02 0.232 M02 Myponga Myponga−Pages Flat 16-Aug-01 0.227 SP2 South Para Malcolm Creek 20-Aug-01 0.223 M01 Myponga Myponga−Blockers Rd 28-Jul-02 0.223 O02 Onkaparinga Inverbrackie Creek 21-Aug-01 0.209 O13 Onkaparinga Echunga Creek 20-Aug-01 0.192 T01 Torrens Kersbrook Creek 25-Oct-01 0.186 O11 Onkaparinga Biggs Flat 20-Aug-01 0.186 SP1 South Para Victoria Creek 20-Aug-01 0.179 T07 Torrens McCormick Creek 24-Sep-01 0.179 O13 Onkaparinga Echunga Creek 25-Aug-01 0.178 SP2 South Para Malcolm Creek 3-Aug-02 0.174 T04 Torrens Mt Pleasant 24-Sep-01 0.172 SP1 South Para Victoria Creek 3-Aug-02 0.164 O04 Onkaparinga Western Branch 26-Oct-01 0.162 M01 Myponga Myponga−Blockers Rd 16-Aug-01 0.156 T02 Torrens Millers Creek 14-Jun-02 0.142 M02 Myponga Myponga−Pages Flat 25-Aug-01 0.133 SP2 South Para Malcolm Creek 24-Sep-01 0.132 M01 Myponga Myponga−Blockers Rd 25-Aug-01 0.122 LP1 Little Para Gould Creek 21-Aug-01 0.114 LP2 Little Para Little Para River 25-Oct-01 0.108 T04 Torrens Mt Pleasant 16-Aug-01 0.089 O12 Onkaparinga Scott Creek 3-Jul-02 0.085 T04 Torrens Mt Pleasant 3-Aug-02 0.070 O11 Onkaparinga Biggs Flat 25-Aug-01 0.070 O12 Onkaparinga Scott Creek 25-Aug-01 0.070 T05 Torrens Torrens Main Channel 25-Oct-01 0.060 T05 Torrens Torrens Main Channel 20-Aug-01 0.058 O10 Onkaparinga Aldgate Creek 24-Sep-01 0.055 W02 Warren Portuguese 28-Aug-01 0.042 W03 Warren Tungali 28-Aug-01 0.039 O12 Onkaparinga Scott Creek 16-Aug-01 0.039 W01 Warren Forestry HQ 24-Sep-01 0.034 M03 Myponga Myponga River Tributary 16-Aug-01 0.033 W02 Warren Portuguese 20-Aug-01 0.031 O13 Onkaparinga Echunga Creek 5-Jul-02 0.031 W03 Warren Tungali 20-Aug-01 0.018 W01 Warren Forestry HQ 20-Aug-01 0.008

89 Water Quality Snapshot 2001–2002 Total organic carbon Raw water hazard threshold value = 15 mg/L

Site no Catchment Sub-catchment Sample date Total organic carbon (mg/L) W03 Warren Tungali 20-Aug-01 37.6 W03 Warren Tungali 28-Aug-01 35.0 T06 Torrens Angas Creek 24-Sep-01 33.9 M01 Myponga Myponga–Blockers Rd 25-Aug-01 32.6 T03 Torrens Hannaford 24-Sep-01 31.0 SP1 South Para Victoria Creek 24-Sep-01 30.8 T04 Torrens Mt Pleasant 24-Sep-01 30.8 W02 Warren Portuguese 20-Aug-01 29.6 M02 Myponga Myponga–Pages Flat 25-Aug-01 28.5 T09 Torrens Kenton Creek 24-Sep-01 28.2 W02 Warren Portuguese 28-Aug-01 27.9 T07 Torrens McCormick Creek 24-Sep-01 27.6 W01 Warren Forestry HQ 24-Sep-01 27.0 T02 Torrens Millers Creek 24-Sep-01 26.4 O09 Onkaparinga Cox Creek 3-Jul-02 25.9 T05 Torrens Torrens Main Channel 20-Aug-01 25.6 M01 Myponga Myponga–Blockers Rd 28-Jul-02 25.3 O13 Onkaparinga Echunga Creek 20-Aug-01 24.8 SP2 South Para Malcolm Creek 24-Sep-01 24.7 T01 Torrens Kersbrook Creek 25-Oct-01 23.9 O03 Onkaparinga Mitchell 24-Sep-01 23.8 LP1 Little Para Gould Creek 24-Sep-01 23.3 O04 Onkaparinga Western Branch 26-Oct-01 23.1 M03 Myponga Myponga River Tributary 28-Jul-02 23.0 M02 Myponga Myponga–Pages Flat 28-Jul-02 22.6 O02 Onkaparinga Inverbrackie Creek 24-Sep-01 22.3 T05 Torrens Torrens Main Channel 25-Oct-01 22.1 M02 Myponga Myponga–Pages Flat 16-Aug-01 21.4 T08 Torrens Footes Creek 24-Sep-01 21.2 SP2 South Para Malcolm Creek 3-Aug-02 21.1 SP2 South Para Malcolm Creek 20-Aug-01 20.8 T04 Torrens Mt Pleasant 16-Aug-01 20.7 O02 Onkaparinga Inverbrackie Creek 21-Aug-01 20.7 O11 Onkaparinga Biggs Flat 25-Aug-01 20.5 T08 Torrens Footes Creek 16-Aug-01 20.1 O06 Onkaparinga Balhannah 24-Sep-01 20.1 O01 Onkaparinga Charleston 24-Sep-01 20.0 O04 Onkaparinga Western Branch 7-Aug-01 20.0 T01 Torrens Kersbrook Creek 3-Aug-02 19.1 O13 Onkaparinga Echunga Creek 25-Aug-01 18.8 T08 Torrens Footes Creek 14-Jun-02 18.6

90 Water Quality Snapshot 2001–2002

Site no Catchment Sub-catchment Sample date Total organic carbon (mg/L) T01 Torrens Kersbrook Creek 7-Aug-01 18.5 O10 Onkaparinga Aldgate Creek 5-Jul-02 18.5 O11 Onkaparinga Biggs Flat 20-Aug-01 18.5 M01 Myponga Myponga–Blockers Rd 16-Aug-01 18.3 O01 Onkaparinga Charleston 5-Jul-02 18.2 O03 Onkaparinga Mitchell 21-Aug-01 18.0 T04 Torrens Mt Pleasant 3-Aug-02 17.7 O06 Onkaparinga Balhannah 5-Jul-02 17.6 O12 Onkaparinga Scott Creek 25-Aug-01 17.4 LP1 Little Para Gould Creek 21-Aug-01 17.0 T07 Torrens McCormick Creek 16-Aug-01 16.8 T02 Torrens Millers Creek 14-Jun-02 16.5 O07 Onkaparinga Sphoer 24-Sep-01 16.5 T06 Torrens Angas Creek 16-Aug-01 16.3 T09 Torrens Kenton Creek 14-Jun-02 16.3 O01 Onkaparinga Charleston 16-Aug-01 16.0 O08 Onkaparinga Hahndorf 20-Aug-01 16.0 M03 Myponga Myponga River Tributary 16-Aug-01 15.5 O07 Onkaparinga Sphoer 7-Aug-01 15.1 O10 Onkaparinga Aldgate Creek 20-Aug-01 15.0 O10 Onkaparinga Aldgate Creek 24-Sep-01 14.8 O05 Onkaparinga Lenswood Creek 7-Aug-01 14.8 O07 Onkaparinga Sphoer 3-Jul-02 14.8 O08 Onkaparinga Hahndorf 24-Sep-01 14.2 O11 Onkaparinga Biggs Flat 5-Jul-02 13.9 T03 Torrens Hannaford 16-Aug-01 13.8 O09 Onkaparinga Cox Creek 24-Sep-01 13.4 O13 Onkaparinga Echunga Creek 5-Jul-02 13.4 O02 Onkaparinga Inverbrackie Creek 5-Jul-02 13.3 T10 Torrens Cudlee Creek 25-Oct-01 13.2 O05 Onkaparinga Lenswood Creek 26-Oct-01 13.2 O04 Onkaparinga Western Branch 3-Jul-02 13.2 T09 Torrens Kenton Creek 16-Aug-01 12.4 O12 Onkaparinga Scott Creek 16-Aug-01 12.1 SP1 South Para Victoria Creek 3-Aug-02 12.0 LP2 Little Para Little Para River 21-Aug-01 11.9 O09 Onkaparinga Cox Creek 16-Aug-01 11.3 O12 Onkaparinga Scott Creek 3-Jul-02 10.7 O05 Onkaparinga Lenswood Creek 3-Jul-02 10.4 O06 Onkaparinga Balhannah 16-Aug-01 9.3 LP2 Little Para Little Para River 25-Oct-01 9.2 O08 Onkaparinga Hahndorf 3-Jul-02 9.2

91 Water Quality Snapshot 2001–2002

Site no Catchment Sub-catchment Sample date Total organic carbon (mg/L) T11 Torrens Sixth Creek 26-Oct-01 8.8 W01 Warren Forestry HQ 20-Aug-01 6.5 T10 Torrens Cudlee Creek 7-Aug-01 5.0 T11 Torrens Sixth Creek 3-Aug-02 4.9 T11 Torrens Sixth Creek 7-Aug-01 4.1 SP1 South Para Victoria Creek 20-Aug-01 3.6 T02 Torrens Millers Creek 16-Aug-01 2.9

Total phosphorous Raw water hazard threshold value = 0.5 mg/L

Phosphorous—total as P Site no Catchment Sub-catchment Sample date (mg/L) O09 Onkaparinga Cox Creek 3-Jul-02 1.140 M02 Myponga Myponga–Pages Flat 25-Aug-01 1.020 T09 Torrens Kenton Creek 14-Jun-02 0.804 T03 Torrens Hannaford 24-Sep-01 0.778 T06 Torrens Angas Creek 16-Aug-01 0.746 T06 Torrens Angas Creek 24-Sep-01 0.734 O09 Onkaparinga Cox Creek 16-Aug-01 0.674 T02 Torrens Millers Creek 24-Sep-01 0.575 O01 Onkaparinga Charleston 24-Sep-01 0.510 O02 Onkaparinga Inverbrackie Creek 5-Jul-02 0.502 M02 Myponga Myponga–Pages Flat 28-Jul-02 0.495 O02 Onkaparinga Inverbrackie Creek 24-Sep-01 0.489 T09 Torrens Kenton Creek 24-Sep-01 0.476 O03 Onkaparinga Mitchell 21-Aug-01 0.464 O03 Onkaparinga Mitchell 24-Sep-01 0.446 M03 Myponga Myponga River Tributary 28-Jul-02 0.400 T08 Torrens Footes Creek 16-Aug-01 0.394 T07 Torrens McCormick Creek 24-Sep-01 0.380 W02 Warren Portuguese 28-Aug-01 0.360 O06 Onkaparinga Balhannah 24-Sep-01 0.350 T09 Torrens Kenton Creek 16-Aug-01 0.342 O01 Onkaparinga Charleston 5-Jul-02 0.326 M01 Myponga Myponga–Blockers Rd 28-Jul-02 0.321 T08 Torrens Footes Creek 24-Sep-01 0.310 T04 Torrens Mt Pleasant 24-Sep-01 0.309 O04 Onkaparinga Western Branch 3-Jul-02 0.305 M01 Myponga Myponga–Blockers Rd 25-Aug-01 0.294 T01 Torrens Kersbrook Creek 25-Oct-01 0.284

92 Water Quality Snapshot 2001–2002

Phosphorous—total as P Site no Catchment Sub-catchment Sample date (mg/L) T08 Torrens Footes Creek 14-Jun-02 0.282 O02 Onkaparinga Inverbrackie Creek 21-Aug-01 0.282 SP1 South Para Victoria Creek 24-Sep-01 0.280 O04 Onkaparinga Western Branch 7-Aug-01 0.266 O06 Onkaparinga Balhannah 5-Jul-02 0.265 T07 Torrens McCormick Creek 16-Aug-01 0.256 O10 Onkaparinga Aldgate Creek 5-Jul-02 0.256 T02 Torrens Millers Creek 14-Jun-02 0.252 O01 Onkaparinga Charleston 16-Aug-01 0.246 LP1 Little Para Gould Creek 24-Sep-01 0.242 O05 Onkaparinga Lenswood Creek 7-Aug-01 0.240 T01 Torrens Kersbrook Creek 7-Aug-01 0.235 O05 Onkaparinga Lenswood Creek 3-Jul-02 0.234 M03 Myponga Myponga River Tributary 16-Aug-01 0.234 O07 Onkaparinga Sphoer 3-Jul-02 0.224 O08 Onkaparinga Hahndorf 24-Sep-01 0.205 W01 Warren Forestry HQ 24-Sep-01 0.194 O04 Onkaparinga Western Branch 26-Oct-01 0.194 O07 Onkaparinga Sphoer 7-Aug-01 0.188 T02 Torrens Millers Creek 16-Aug-01 0.180 T10 Torrens Cudlee Creek 25-Oct-01 0.176 SP2 South Para Malcolm Creek 24-Sep-01 0.161 T05 Torrens Torrens Main Channel 25-Oct-01 0.157 M02 Myponga Myponga–Pages Flat 16-Aug-01 0.156 O13 Onkaparinga Echunga Creek 20-Aug-01 0.155 O08 Onkaparinga Hahndorf 20-Aug-01 0.150 O09 Onkaparinga Cox Creek 24-Sep-01 0.138 O07 Onkaparinga Sphoer 24-Sep-01 0.138 O08 Onkaparinga Hahndorf 3-Jul-02 0.137 SP2 South Para Malcolm Creek 3-Aug-02 0.133 T03 Torrens Hannaford 16-Aug-01 0.129 T10 Torrens Cudlee Creek 7-Aug-01 0.117 O11 Onkaparinga Biggs Flat 25-Aug-01 0.110 O11 Onkaparinga Biggs Flat 20-Aug-01 0.104 O06 Onkaparinga Balhannah 16-Aug-01 0.101 M01 Myponga Myponga–Blockers Rd 16-Aug-01 0.097 T11 Torrens Sixth Creek 26-Oct-01 0.095 T04 Torrens Mt Pleasant 3-Aug-02 0.094 T01 Torrens Kersbrook Creek 3-Aug-02 0.089 W03 Warren Tungali 20-Aug-01 0.086 T05 Torrens Torrens Main Channel 20-Aug-01 0.084 W02 Warren Portuguese 20-Aug-01 0.078 W03 Warren Tungali 28-Aug-01 0.075

93 Water Quality Snapshot 2001–2002

Phosphorous—total as P Site no Catchment Sub-catchment Sample date (mg/L) LP2 Little Para Little Para River 25-Oct-01 0.073 O05 Onkaparinga Lenswood Creek 26-Oct-01 0.073 O11 Onkaparinga Biggs Flat 5-Jul-02 0.072 SP1 South Para Victoria Creek 3-Aug-02 0.069 O10 Onkaparinga Aldgate Creek 24-Sep-01 0.068 O13 Onkaparinga Echunga Creek 25-Aug-01 0.068 T04 Torrens Mt Pleasant 16-Aug-01 0.065 O10 Onkaparinga Aldgate Creek 20-Aug-01 0.065 SP2 South Para Malcolm Creek 20-Aug-01 0.062 O12 Onkaparinga Scott Creek 3-Jul-02 0.057 W01 Warren Forestry HQ 20-Aug-01 0.056 LP1 Little Para Gould Creek 21-Aug-01 0.054 SP1 South Para Victoria Creek 20-Aug-01 0.051 O12 Onkaparinga Scott Creek 25-Aug-01 0.051 O12 Onkaparinga Scott Creek 16-Aug-01 0.046 LP2 Little Para Little Para River 21-Aug-01 0.042 T11 Torrens Sixth Creek 7-Aug-01 0.037 O13 Onkaparinga Echunga Creek 5-Jul-02 0.036 T11 Torrens Sixth Creek 3-Aug-02 0.029

Soluble aluminium Raw water hazard threshold value = 0.2 mg/L

Site no Catchment Sub-catchment Sample date Aluminium- soluble (mg/L) M01 Myponga Myponga–Blockers Rd 28-Jul-02 0.253 O10 Onkaparinga Aldgate Creek 5-Jul-02 0.247 M02 Myponga Myponga - Pages Flat 28-Jul-02 0.240 O10 Onkaparinga Aldgate Creek 20-Aug-01 0.236 W01 Warren Forestry HQ 20-Aug-01 0.179 O10 Onkaparinga Aldgate Creek 24-Sep-01 0.156 LP2 Little Para Little Para River 25-Oct-01 0.154 SP2 South Para Malcolm Creek 24-Sep-01 0.148 W03 Warren Tungali 20-Aug-01 0.146 M03 Myponga Myponga River Tributary 28-Jul-02 0.130 T09 Torrens Kenton Creek 24-Sep-01 0.125 W02 Warren Portuguese 20-Aug-01 0.123 T04 Torrens Mt Pleasant 24-Sep-01 0.122 T01 Torrens Kersbrook Creek 25-Oct-01 0.120 O09 Onkaparinga Cox Creek 24-Sep-01 0.118 M01 Myponga Myponga–Blockers Rd 25-Aug-01 0.117 O12 Onkaparinga Scott Creek 25-Aug-01 0.109

94 Water Quality Snapshot 2001–2002

Site no Catchment Sub-catchment Sample date Aluminium- soluble (mg/L) W03 Warren Tungali 28-Aug-01 0.102 SP1 South Para Victoria Creek 24-Sep-01 0.097 M01 Myponga Myponga–Blockers Rd 16-Aug-01 0.094 O07 Onkaparinga Sphoer 7-Aug-01 0.093 SP2 South Para Malcolm Creek 20-Aug-01 0.090 W02 Warren Portuguese 28-Aug-01 0.089 O06 Onkaparinga Balhannah 5-Jul-02 0.088 T03 Torrens Hannaford 24-Sep-01 0.087 O06 Onkaparinga Balhannah 24-Sep-01 0.085 O08 Onkaparinga Hahndorf 24-Sep-01 0.083 O04 Onkaparinga Western Branch 3-Jul-02 0.082 O04 Onkaparinga Western Branch 26-Oct-01 0.081 SP2 South Para Malcolm Creek 3-Aug-02 0.074 W01 Warren Forestry HQ 24-Sep-01 0.071 T01 Torrens Kersbrook Creek 3-Aug-02 0.071 O05 Onkaparinga Lenswood Creek 26-Oct-01 0.071 O02 Onkaparinga Inverbrackie Creek 5-Jul-02 0.066 T11 Torrens Sixth Creek 26-Oct-01 0.064 O09 Onkaparinga Cox Creek 3-Jul-02 0.064 O04 Onkaparinga Western Branch 7-Aug-01 0.064 O05 Onkaparinga Lenswood Creek 7-Aug-01 0.063 O03 Onkaparinga Mitchell 24-Sep-01 0.062 T07 Torrens McCormick Creek 24-Sep-01 0.058 M02 Myponga Myponga–Pages Flat 25-Aug-01 0.058 T06 Torrens Angas Creek 24-Sep-01 0.057 O09 Onkaparinga Cox Creek 16-Aug-01 0.055 T08 Torrens Footes Creek 24-Sep-01 0.054 T09 Torrens Kenton Creek 14-Jun-02 0.054 O02 Onkaparinga Inverbrackie Creek 24-Sep-01 0.053 SP1 South Para Victoria Creek 20-Aug-01 0.052 SP1 South Para Victoria Creek 3-Aug-02 0.051 T01 Torrens Kersbrook Creek 7-Aug-01 0.049 T05 Torrens Torrens Main Channel 25-Oct-01 0.049 O13 Onkaparinga Echunga Creek 20-Aug-01 0.049 O07 Onkaparinga Sphoer 24-Sep-01 0.049 O01 Onkaparinga Charleston 24-Sep-01 0.047 M02 Myponga Myponga–Pages Flat 16-Aug-01 0.043 LP1 Little Para Gould Creek 21-Aug-01 0.042 O12 Onkaparinga Scott Creek 16-Aug-01 0.042 LP2 Little Para Little Para River 21-Aug-01 0.041 T02 Torrens Millers Creek 24-Sep-01 0.041 LP1 Little Para Gould Creek 24-Sep-01 0.037 T08 Torrens Footes Creek 16-Aug-01 0.037

95 Water Quality Snapshot 2001–2002

Site no Catchment Sub-catchment Sample date Aluminium- soluble (mg/L) T08 Torrens Footes Creek 14-Jun-02 0.037 O03 Onkaparinga Mitchell 21-Aug-01 0.037 T11 Torrens Sixth Creek 7-Aug-01 0.032 O08 Onkaparinga Hahndorf 20-Aug-01 0.032 T10 Torrens Cudlee Creek 7-Aug-01 0.028 T05 Torrens Torrens Main Channel 20-Aug-01 0.028 O11 Onkaparinga Biggs Flat 5-Jul-02 0.028 O13 Onkaparinga Echunga Creek 25-Aug-01 0.028 O05 Onkaparinga Lenswood Creek 3-Jul-02 0.027 M03 Myponga Myponga River Tributary 16-Aug-01 0.026 T04 Torrens Mt Pleasant 3-Aug-02 0.023 T11 Torrens Sixth Creek 3-Aug-02 0.022 T03 Torrens Hannaford 16-Aug-01 0.021 O01 Onkaparinga Charleston 16-Aug-01 0.021 O11 Onkaparinga Biggs Flat 20-Aug-01 0.020 O07 Onkaparinga Sphoer 3-Jul-02 0.020 T06 Torrens Angas Creek 16-Aug-01 0.000 T10 Torrens Cudlee Creek 25-Oct-01 0.000 T09 Torrens Kenton Creek 16-Aug-01 0.000 T07 Torrens McCormick Creek 16-Aug-01 0.000 T02 Torrens Millers Creek 16-Aug-01 0.000 T02 Torrens Millers Creek 14-Jun-02 0.000 T04 Torrens Mt Pleasant 16-Aug-01 0.000 O06 Onkaparinga Balhannah 16-Aug-01 0.000 O11 Onkaparinga Biggs Flat 25-Aug-01 0.000 O01 Onkaparinga Charleston 5-Jul-02 0.000 O13 Onkaparinga Echunga Creek 5-Jul-02 0.000 O08 Onkaparinga Hahndorf 3-Jul-02 0.000 O02 Onkaparinga Inverbrackie Creek 21-Aug-01 0.000 O12 Onkaparinga Scott Creek 3-Jul-02 0.000

Lead Raw water hazard threshold value = 0.01 mg/L

Site no Catchment Sub-catchment Sample date Lead—total (mg/L) T09 Torrens Kenton Creek 14-Jun-02 0.0300 O09 Onkaparinga Cox Creek 3-Jul-02 0.0265 O10 Onkaparinga Aldgate Creek 5-Jul-02 0.0206 T01 Torrens Kersbrook Creek 7-Aug-01 0.0126 T01 Torrens Kersbrook Creek 25-Oct-01 0.0118 T09 Torrens Kenton Creek 16-Aug-01 0.0114 T09 Torrens Kenton Creek 24-Sep-01 0.0114 O05 Onkaparinga Lenswood Creek 26-Oct-01 0.0099

96 Water Quality Snapshot 2001–2002

Site no Catchment Sub-catchment Sample date Lead—total (mg/L) T06 Torrens Angas Creek 16-Aug-01 0.0087 T10 Torrens Cudlee Creek 7-Aug-01 0.0086 O07 Onkaparinga Sphoer 7-Aug-01 0.0083 O05 Onkaparinga Lenswood Creek 7-Aug-01 0.0080 T10 Torrens Cudlee Creek 25-Oct-01 0.0079 O06 Onkaparinga Balhannah 5-Jul-02 0.0070 O09 Onkaparinga Cox Creek 16-Aug-01 0.0070 O04 Onkaparinga Western Branch 26-Oct-01 0.0065 O04 Onkaparinga Western Branch 7-Aug-01 0.0063 LP1 Little Para Gould Creek 24-Sep-01 0.0062 T07 Torrens McCormick Creek 24-Sep-01 0.0060 SP1 South Para Victoria Creek 24-Sep-01 0.0058 T02 Torrens Millers Creek 16-Aug-01 0.0057 T02 Torrens Millers Creek 24-Sep-01 0.0057 SP2 South Para Malcolm Creek 24-Sep-01 0.0055 T11 Torrens Sixth Creek 26-Oct-01 0.0052 T06 Torrens Angas Creek 24-Sep-01 0.0051 O09 Onkaparinga Cox Creek 24-Sep-01 0.0050 SP2 South Para Malcolm Creek 20-Aug-01 0.0048 O07 Onkaparinga Sphoer 3-Jul-02 0.0048 O06 Onkaparinga Balhannah 16-Aug-01 0.0046 O08 Onkaparinga Hahndorf 20-Aug-01 0.0046 T08 Torrens Footes Creek 14-Jun-02 0.0044 O02 Onkaparinga Inverbrackie Creek 5-Jul-02 0.0044 O03 Onkaparinga Mitchell 24-Sep-01 0.0044 T07 Torrens McCormick Creek 16-Aug-01 0.0043 O08 Onkaparinga Hahndorf 24-Sep-01 0.0043 O02 Onkaparinga Inverbrackie Creek 24-Sep-01 0.0042 T02 Torrens Millers Creek 14-Jun-02 0.0039 O10 Onkaparinga Aldgate Creek 20-Aug-01 0.0038 T11 Torrens Sixth Creek 7-Aug-01 0.0036 O06 Onkaparinga Balhannah 24-Sep-01 0.0035 O01 Onkaparinga Charleston 24-Sep-01 0.0035 T08 Torrens Footes Creek 24-Sep-01 0.0034 M02 Myponga Myponga–Pages Flat 16-Aug-01 0.0034 W01 Warren Forestry HQ 24-Sep-01 0.0033 O01 Onkaparinga Charleston 5-Jul-02 0.0032 W02 Warren Portuguese 28-Aug-01 0.0031 O02 Onkaparinga Inverbrackie Creek 21-Aug-01 0.0031 LP2 Little Para Little Para River 21-Aug-01 0.0030 T04 Torrens Mt Pleasant 24-Sep-01 0.0030 T05 Torrens Torrens Main Channel 20-Aug-01 0.0028

97 Water Quality Snapshot 2001–2002

Site no Catchment Sub-catchment Sample date Lead—total (mg/L) SP2 South Para Malcolm Creek 3-Aug-02 0.0025 O11 Onkaparinga Biggs Flat 20-Aug-01 0.0024 O03 Onkaparinga Mitchell 21-Aug-01 0.0024 O13 Onkaparinga Echunga Creek 20-Aug-01 0.0023 O05 Onkaparinga Lenswood Creek 3-Jul-02 0.0023 M01 Myponga Myponga–Blockers Rd 28-Jul-02 0.0023 W01 Warren Forestry HQ 20-Aug-01 0.0022 T01 Torrens Kersbrook Creek 3-Aug-02 0.0022 LP1 Little Para Gould Creek 21-Aug-01 0.0021 T08 Torrens Footes Creek 16-Aug-01 0.0021 O10 Onkaparinga Aldgate Creek 24-Sep-01 0.0021 O01 Onkaparinga Charleston 16-Aug-01 0.0021 T05 Torrens Torrens Main Channel 25-Oct-01 0.0020 T03 Torrens Hannaford 16-Aug-01 0.0019 O07 Onkaparinga Sphoer 24-Sep-01 0.0019 O13 Onkaparinga Echunga Creek 5-Jul-02 0.0018 O12 Onkaparinga Scott Creek 3-Jul-02 0.0017 M01 Myponga Myponga–Blockers Rd 25-Aug-01 0.0017 M02 Myponga Myponga–Pages Flat 25-Aug-01 0.0017 O12 Onkaparinga Scott Creek 16-Aug-01 0.0015 O12 Onkaparinga Scott Creek 25-Aug-01 0.0015 LP2 Little Para Little Para River 25-Oct-01 0.0014 SP1 South Para Victoria Creek 20-Aug-01 0.0014 T03 Torrens Hannaford 24-Sep-01 0.0014 T04 Torrens Mt Pleasant 16-Aug-01 0.0014 O08 Onkaparinga Hahndorf 3-Jul-02 0.0013 M03 Myponga Myponga River Tributary 16-Aug-01 0.0013 M01 Myponga Myponga–Blockers Rd 16-Aug-01 0.0012 M02 Myponga Myponga–Pages Flat 28-Jul-02 0.0012 W02 Warren Portuguese 20-Aug-01 0.0011 SP1 South Para Victoria Creek 3-Aug-02 0.0011 W03 Warren Tungali 20-Aug-01 0.0010 T11 Torrens Sixth Creek 3-Aug-02 0.0010 O13 Onkaparinga Echunga Creek 25-Aug-01 0.0010 O04 Onkaparinga Western Branch 3-Jul-02 0.0010 O11 Onkaparinga Biggs Flat 5-Jul-02 0.0009 M03 Myponga Myponga River Tributary 28-Jul-02 0.0008 W03 Warren Tungali 28-Aug-01 0.0006 T04 Torrens Mt Pleasant 3-Aug-02 0.0005 O11 Onkaparinga Biggs Flat 25-Aug-01 0.0000

98 Water Quality Snapshot 2001–2002 Total dissolved solids Raw water hazard threshold value = 500 mg/L

Total dissolved solids Site no Catchment Sub-catchment Sample date (mg/L) T04 Torrens Mt Pleasant 16-Aug-01 1700 T04 Torrens Mt Pleasant 3-Aug-02 1600 O11 Onkaparinga Biggs Flat 5-Jul-02 1600 O13 Onkaparinga Echunga Creek 5-Jul-02 1300 O11 Onkaparinga Biggs Flat 20-Aug-01 1000 O08 Onkaparinga Hahndorf 3-Jul-02 920 O11 Onkaparinga Biggs Flat 25-Aug-01 900 T05 Torrens Torrens Main Channel 20-Aug-01 880 T04 Torrens Mt Pleasant 24-Sep-01 850 T05 Torrens Torrens Main Channel 25-Oct-01 820 T08 Torrens Footes Creek 14-Jun-02 810 O08 Onkaparinga Hahndorf 24-Sep-01 810 O01 Onkaparinga Charleston 16-Aug-01 800 T06 Torrens Angas Creek 16-Aug-01 790 O13 Onkaparinga Echunga Creek 25-Aug-01 790 T03 Torrens Hannaford 16-Aug-01 700 T01 Torrens Kersbrook Creek 3-Aug-02 670 O01 Onkaparinga Charleston 5-Jul-02 650 SP2 South Para Malcolm Creek 3-Aug-02 640 T07 Torrens McCormick Creek 16-Aug-01 640 O02 Onkaparinga Inverbrackie Creek 21-Aug-01 630 M02 Myponga Myponga–Pages Flat 16-Aug-01 630 O13 Onkaparinga Echunga Creek 20-Aug-01 560 O01 Onkaparinga Charleston 24-Sep-01 550 O02 Onkaparinga Inverbrackie Creek 24-Sep-01 550 W03 Warren Tungali 28-Aug-01 530 T09 Torrens Kenton Creek 14-Jun-02 520 O08 Onkaparinga Hahndorf 20-Aug-01 520 T09 Torrens Kenton Creek 16-Aug-01 510 O12 Onkaparinga Scott Creek 3-Jul-02 510 T06 Torrens Angas Creek 24-Sep-01 500 O02 Onkaparinga Inverbrackie Creek 5-Jul-02 500 O06 Onkaparinga Balhannah 5-Jul-02 490 O03 Onkaparinga Mitchell 21-Aug-01 480 T02 Torrens Millers Creek 16-Aug-01 470 O04 Onkaparinga Western Branch 3-Jul-02 470 SP1 South Para Victoria Creek 3-Aug-02 450 T02 Torrens Millers Creek 14-Jun-02 440

99 Water Quality Snapshot 2001–2002

Total dissolved solids Site no Catchment Sub-catchment Sample date (mg/L) O06 Onkaparinga Balhannah 24-Sep-01 440 O12 Onkaparinga Scott Creek 16-Aug-01 420 LP1 Little Para Gould Creek 21-Aug-01 410 LP2 Little Para Little Para River 25-Oct-01 410 SP2 South Para Malcolm Creek 20-Aug-01 410 M03 Myponga Myponga River Tributary 16-Aug-01 410 SP1 South Para Victoria Creek 20-Aug-01 400 T08 Torrens Footes Creek 16-Aug-01 400 M03 Myponga Myponga River Tributary 28-Jul-02 380 W03 Warren Tungali 20-Aug-01 370 T10 Torrens Cudlee Creek 7-Aug-01 370 O05 Onkaparinga Lenswood Creek 3-Jul-02 360 W01 Warren Forestry HQ 24-Sep-01 350 LP1 Little Para Gould Creek 24-Sep-01 350 T02 Torrens Millers Creek 24-Sep-01 350 M02 Myponga Myponga–Pages Flat 28-Jul-02 350 LP2 Little Para Little Para River 21-Aug-01 330 M01 Myponga Myponga–Blockers Rd 28-Jul-02 330 M02 Myponga Myponga–Pages Flat 25-Aug-01 300 T10 Torrens Cudlee Creek 25-Oct-01 280 T01 Torrens Kersbrook Creek 7-Aug-01 280 O04 Onkaparinga Western Branch 26-Oct-01 280 T11 Torrens Sixth Creek 3-Aug-02 270 O03 Onkaparinga Mitchell 24-Sep-01 270 O04 Onkaparinga Western Branch 7-Aug-01 270 T07 Torrens McCormick Creek 24-Sep-01 260 O06 Onkaparinga Balhannah 16-Aug-01 260 O12 Onkaparinga Scott Creek 25-Aug-01 260 W02 Warren Portuguese 20-Aug-01 230 T03 Torrens Hannaford 24-Sep-01 230 T11 Torrens Sixth Creek 7-Aug-01 230 W01 Warren Forestry HQ 20-Aug-01 220 T08 Torrens Footes Creek 24-Sep-01 220 T09 Torrens Kenton Creek 24-Sep-01 220 O05 Onkaparinga Lenswood Creek 7-Aug-01 220 O05 Onkaparinga Lenswood Creek 26-Oct-01 220 M01 Myponga Myponga–Blockers Rd 16-Aug-01 220 M01 Myponga Myponga–Blockers Rd 25-Aug-01 220 SP2 South Para Malcolm Creek 24-Sep-01 210 SP1 South Para Victoria Creek 24-Sep-01 200 O07 Onkaparinga Sphoer 3-Jul-02 200

100 Water Quality Snapshot 2001–2002

Total dissolved solids Site no Catchment Sub-catchment Sample date (mg/L) T01 Torrens Kersbrook Creek 25-Oct-01 180 T11 Torrens Sixth Creek 26-Oct-01 180 O10 Onkaparinga Aldgate Creek 24-Sep-01 180 O07 Onkaparinga Sphoer 24-Sep-01 180 O07 Onkaparinga Sphoer 7-Aug-01 160 O09 Onkaparinga Cox Creek 16-Aug-01 150 O09 Onkaparinga Cox Creek 24-Sep-01 150 O09 Onkaparinga Cox Creek 3-Jul-02 150 O10 Onkaparinga Aldgate Creek 20-Aug-01 130 O10 Onkaparinga Aldgate Creek 5-Jul-02 120 W02 Warren Portuguese 28-Aug-01 95

101