The College at Brockport: State University of New York Digital Commons @Brockport Environmental Science and Ecology Theses Environmental Science and Ecology 4-12-2013 Watershed Assessment of the Canaseraga Creek Watershed, Including Water Quality Analysis, SWAT Model, and Investigation of the Applicability of a Nutrient Biotic Index Evan Rea The College at Brockport, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.brockport.edu/env_theses Part of the Environmental Monitoring Commons Repository Citation Rea, Evan, "Watershed Assessment of the Canaseraga Creek Watershed, Including Water Quality Analysis, SWAT Model, and Investigation of the Applicability of a Nutrient Biotic Index" (2013). Environmental Science and Ecology Theses. 73. http://digitalcommons.brockport.edu/env_theses/73 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Environmental Science and Ecology at Digital Commons @Brockport. It has been accepted for inclusion in Environmental Science and Ecology Theses by an authorized administrator of Digital Commons @Brockport. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Watershed assessment of the Canaseraga Creek watershed, including water quality analysis, SWAT model, and investigation of the applicability of a nutrient biotic index by Evan Rea A Thesis Presented to the Faculty of the Department of Environmental Science and Biology of the State University of New York College at Brockport In Partial Fulfillment for the Degree of Master of Science 12 April 2013 Abstract Nearshore areas of Lake Ontario are suffering from persistent water quality impairments that were generally not resolved through programs such as the phosphorus abatement program and the Great Lakes water quality agreement. A major nearshore area of concern is the Rochester Embayment, which receives the discharge of the Genesee River. Due to the predominance of agriculture in the Genesee River basin and its largest tributary, Canaseraga Creek, agricultural areas were investigated using the segment analysis sampling technique and Soil and Water Assessment Tool (SWAT) modeling. Individual nonpoint areas were identified as nutrient sources as well as seven wastewater treatment plants. In general, loadings increased moving downstream as more source areas such as concentrated animal feeding operations, wastewater treatment plants, and small agricultural operations contributed to the nutrient load. Two tributaries, Twomile and Buck Run creeks, generally had the highest average annual concentrations and areal loadings of nutrients due to concentrated animal feeding operations (CAFOs) and dominance of agriculture in those areas. Observed loading data was used to calibrate a SWAT model for Canaseraga Creek. The most effective agricultural management practice was grassed waterways, while upgrading wastewater treatment plants to better (tertiary) treatment was also effective. By targeting just the areas that contribute the most P (Buck Run Creek, Twomile Creek, Groveland Flats) with grassed waterways, upgrading WWTPs, and stabilizing erodible main-stem streambanks, total phosphorus (TP) concentration was reduced by 31.4% from 104.3 µg P/L to 71.6 µg P/L. Of the three considered potential TP water quality targets (20, 45, 65 µg P/L), the 65 µg P/L target was attainable, while the 45 µg P/L standard was not achieved but is believed to be possible with more intensive management practices. A nutrient biotic index (NBI) using TP and nitrate concentrations with observed macroinvertebrate communities was also used to evaluate appropriate water quality criteria. When comparing trophic state from the NBI with an external classification scheme based on chemistry, the NBI-P trophic state designations were observed to agree more often than the NBI-N. Several reasons for the discrepancies were determined, namely the use of nitrate instead of TN for the NBI-N, number of chemistry samples used, period of time which chemistry averages were taken, tolerance values that may not completely represent nutrient „optima‟, and lack of scores for many taxa. ii Acknowledgements I would like to sincerely thank the United States Department of Agriculture for funding this project, and Dr. Makarewicz for allowing me to participate in this important endeavor and for all his edits, comments, and suggestions that kept this project on track. My committee members, Dr. Richards and Dr. Zollweg, also gave me valuable feedback that resulted in this finished thesis. Ted Lewis was invaluable in discussing SWAT model theory and calibration, providing analysis help, answering infinite questions, and convincing me to make burritos. Peter Lent and Gary Neuderfer provided critical macroinvertebrate advice and quality control with identifications. The stellar community of graduate students provided much-needed support in (and out of) the field and laboratory, who are listed in no particular order: Mellissa Winslow, Blake Snyder, Dale Pettenski, Lindsay Dressel, Dave Sanderson- Kilchenstein, and Josh LaFountain (undergraduate student extraordinaire). I would also like to thank all of the people who helped me acquire information and samples, without which this project would never have been possible: Gordie Morgan of the USGS, Robert Stryker from the Livingston County SWCD, Terry Fairbrother from the Village of Wayland Public Works and Highway departments, and Larry Geohring from Cornell University. Also, the various WWTP operators who not only allowed me to take samples, but helped me, provided data, and gave extremely informational tours- they truly are a kind bunch. A round of thanks goes out to all of the interested citizens that I encountered when sampling- from curious policemen to helpful ATV riders- who livened my field work and encouraged me to continue my education. Lastly, monumental amounts of gratitude go to my family, friends, and Amanda Curtis for providing the physical and emotional support that I needed to complete this epic journey. Truly, this project was greater than myself, and I sincerely thank everyone that was involved in this project. I apologize to anyone that I omitted, which is entirely due to my own forgetfulness and not from an undue amount of gratitude. iii Table of Contents Abstract .....................................................................................................................ii Acknowledgements ................................................................................................. iii List of Tables ............................................................................................................ vi List of Figures ......................................................................................................... vii List of Appendices .................................................................................................... xi Introduction ............................................................................................................... 1 Genesee River Basin .......................................................................................... 4 Canaseraga Creek Watershed ............................................................................. 7 SWAT Model ................................................................................................... 10 Nutrient Biotic Index ....................................................................................... 12 Segment Analysis............................................................................................. 14 Thesis Questions .............................................................................................. 15 Methods .................................................................................................................. 16 Water Sampling and Study Site ........................................................................ 16 Laboratory Analysis ......................................................................................... 17 Quality Control ................................................................................................ 18 Discharge and Loading .................................................................................... 18 Segment Analysis............................................................................................. 20 Erosion Inventory ............................................................................................ 21 Nutrient Biotic Index ....................................................................................... 22 SWAT Model Setup.......................................................................................... 25 Calibration and Validation ................................................................................ 30 Phosphorus Loading Allocation........................................................................ 33 Model Simulations ........................................................................................... 34 Results ..................................................................................................................... 37 Discharge ......................................................................................................... 37 Average Annual Nutrient Concentration ........................................................... 37 Annual Sediment and Nutrient Loadings .......................................................... 39 Wastewater Treatment Plant Sampling by Location .........................................