Creek Scientific Paper

So we can conclude that the creek is not polluted based on this evidence. The creek creature are mostly from group 1 and 2. Also, the creek water contains little to no nitrates and phosphates. The creek also contains a high amount of dissolved oxygen (9.8ppm to be exact) Lastly, the creek limestone neutralize acid rain. The pH of the water is also a healthy 7. After all this evidence we can conclude that the creek is not

The health of the Susquehanna River and Chesapeake Bay was found based on Biological (macroinvertebrates and wildlife) and Chemicals characteristics (pH, dissolved oxygen, phosphates, nitrates, etc.) as well as physical observations (amount of forested buffers, wetlands, etc.) Overall it was concluded that the health of the water was good to excellent. What was found was that many of the macroinvertebrates found in the water were sensitive or facultative, meaning the water quality was good enough for them to live in. Also, the level of ph, temperature, dissolved oxygen, phosphates, nitrates, and turbidity showed that the water quality was good. Finally, while we were canoeing down the Susquehanna River, observations were made on the land

Each person got to test either the phosphates, nitrates, dissolved oxygen, or the ph in the creek. Phosphates and nitrates are nutrients found in water due to fertilizers, decaying plants and bacteria. Dissolved oxygen is the amount of gaseous oxygen dissolved in the water. As we recorded our results, we discovered that the dissolved oxygen levels were very high, which is good because the higher amount of dissolved oxygen in the water, the healthier the creek is. The phosphates levels in the creek were all perfect zeros, which is great because having nutrients in the creek is not healthy. The nitrate levels were slightly higher, at 0.9. That is not bad at all, but it isn’t perfect, showing signs of pollution. The ph levels in the rocks were neutral, right at seven. If they were lower than 7, that would mean they have acids in them, and if they were higher than 7, they would have alkaline in them. Alkaline, or bases, neutralizes acids. The number of rocks that we found that neutralized acid was 65, and the number of rocks that did not neutralize acids were 29. This shows that about one-third of the rocks in the creek do not neutralize acids.

Either or both of those two things could have runoff from the land and drained into the creek. They are negative to the creek. Our results showed that the creek was containing little to no phosphate. The average number after 15 tests was just 0.3- zero being the best. Similarly, nitrate is a salt or ester, but it is made of nitric acid, containing the anion NO3. It is found in runoff from fertilized farms and treatment plants. The same process was used for testing nitrate levels. The average level out of eight tests was 0.8, which is a higher than phosphate but still relatively low. Both of those test results were very positive. It showed that the creek was low in eutrophication. Another chemical test is testing for dissolved oxygen. Dissolved oxygen is microscopic bubbles of oxygen (O2) that are in the water and there for aquatic organisms to breathe in, which is necessary for almost all organisms. The testing process was similar to that of nitrate and phosphate tests. After testing the water, we got an average level of 11.4. More dissolved oxygen allows for more gaseous bubbles for organisms to breathe in. Therefore, a higher number is better. Twelve is the highest level of dissolved oxygen possible. Thus, since 11.4 is very close to 12, the dissolved oxygen level was very good. Dissolved oxygen can be changed in a number of ways. First, stagnant, or not moving, water has a much lower level of dissolved oxygen. Also, hotter water has less dissolved water. Lastly, chemicals like phosphate and nitrate can cause the growth of algae (which will be discussed in more detail in paragraph three), taking away oxygen. Additionally, the students tested for acid rain pollution. The tests falling under the acid rain category would test for acidity or alkalinity in water. We took a pH test, which is a level expressing the

The Silver Bow Creek watershed in southwest Montana encompasses approximately 474 square miles and forms a portion of the headwaters of the Clark Fork River and ultimately, the Columbia River (Montana Natural Resource Damage Program, 2009). The site covers about 26 miles of stream and stream side habitat. Silver Bow Creek was used as a conduit for mining, smelting, industrial and municipal wastes for more than a hundred years (Weitz, Luxenberg). Rather large amounts of mine tailings deposits are found along the creek. These deposits contain elevated levels of metals and have been dispersed over the entire flood plain (Weitz, Luxenberg).

At this station, we tested the creek water for phosphates, nitrates, and dissolved oxygen. What we found for phosphates was an average of 0.3 phosphates. For nitrates, we found an average of 0.8 nitrates. For the dissolved oxygen, we got an average of 11.4. This shows that the Conodoguinet Creek is pretty healthy. We also tested for acidity and alkalinity. To do this, we needed to use a pH scale. A pH scale goes from 0 (acidic) to 14 (alkaline). A good place for the water to be is 7, this means that the water is not acidic, nor has alkaline in it, but it is neutral. The water in the Conodoguinet Creek was at 7, so it was

Located near Cowan, Pennsylvania, Conley Run is a tributary of Buffalo Creek that has experienced severe degradation due to agricultural activity. Specifically, the deposition of large amounts of animal wastes, pesticides, and fertilizers has resulted in significant eutrophication throughout the stream. Furthermore, bank degradation associated with the movement of livestock has caused the displacement of foreign sediments into stream habitats. These factors, among many others, have caused the lake to be considered “impaired” by PA-DEP. In response, the Buffalo Creek Watershed Alliance, the the Union County Conservation District, and the Department of Environmental Protection and Fish and Boat Commision have partnered in an effort to restore stream habitat and create a riparian buffer to protect the stream.

The aim of this essay is to investigate the overall health of the Credit River located in Southern Ontario, Canada through data collected for phosphates, nitrates, dissolved oxygen and pH levels over many years. The Credit River originates around the city of Orangeville and then travels downstream for about 65 kilometers into Lake Ontario, near the Greater Toronto Area (Orphanos, 2004). It is essential to discover the health of this major river as it is one of the few which makes it way through the large urbanized zone including the city of Mississauga. There is a diverse wildlife that is supported by the water source, and it must be considered a priority to sustainably manage and investigate the concentrations of contaminants and water quality

“The watershed is bordered by the Palmer Divide to the north, Pikes Peak and the Pike National Forest to the west, and a minor divide 20 miles east of Colorado Springs”(Fountain Creek Watershed, 2015). The watershed area is described as an area with extremes temperature and precipitation, large elevation changes, steep gradients, diverse ecosystems, and a multitude of water uses. The elevation of this watershed area can vary from 14,100 feet to 5,000 feet of elevation. The Fountain Creek is the main creek in this watershed. This watershed supplies resources to more than 1,434,000 residents within the watershed. This is an increase of over 156% of population increase since1960. This watershed also provides irrigation to more than 100 farms and ranches in this area. “The rate of residential and commercial development is increasing in the watershed.” (Fountain Creek Watershed, 2015) The creek in this area does not provide public recreation due to some contamination issues in the past and recent events such as the E. coli case. People in the surrounding communities, do enjoy spending time next to the creek for recreation in many public parks.

Qualitative Observations: Comparatively Cedar Creek had much more trash than James A. Reed, so because there was more trash at Cedar Creek we can assume that is why the water quality was poorer than James A. Reed water quality. Arriving at the site we first went right towards where most of the other groups were heading. The first site we tested were clear shallow riffles. We did rock kicking and and and did little to rub the rocks. It was surprising how much black fly larvae we found compared to the other organisms. The second was harder to find because most over the overhanging sites because lots of the areas were much deeper so we were not able to test the areas, but we eventually found an area that we were able to get a sample from. The

The day the experiment was conducted was on April 18th 2016 at Spring Lake creek. Spring Lake Creek is located on county road E about less than a quarter mile from Williams road. In order for the fresh water ecology class to conduct

Often, toxic substances are being drained into the air, waterways, and undergrounds wells. According to the report by Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), over 60 million pounds of deadly chemicals are produced by industries in Florida. Notably, Florida’s water has been suffering mercury contamination until the state’s department of migration issues a circular regularly for regulations of eating freshwater fish in the region (Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission). In fact, such metals emanate from coal combustion’s emissions which run into water bodies. Not to mention, pesticides and herbicides utilized by government and homeowners pollute the environment (Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission). Indeed, all chemicals released into the atmosphere find themselves in rivers.

A group of future biologists and I ventured through Beaver Creek and wrote down observations. We had found that the bank of the creek was eroded. We found invasive species such as Persicaria Longiseta and the English Ivy. We observed a lack of animal activity besides numerous mosquitoes and one salamander. In a section of the water there was a large amount of oil changing that section orange. The runoff system seemed obsolete and all the storm water from the parking lots would drain directly into Beaver Creek. We took a water sample two weeks later. Our water sample was slightly biased because we had taken it in a different location then where the obsolete design occurred. Water temperature was 16 C⁰. We did not find a significant threat or dangerous chemical levels of Nitrate, Nitrite, pH, Alkalinity, and chlorine. We did find our water hardness to be high. The area did test positive for having bacteria like Ecoli, Salmonella, Shigella, Enterobacter, Kliebsiella, other Coliform and non-coliform bacteria. The area also tested positive for pesticides atrazine and simazine.

Abstract As the human population grows to unprecedented levels reducing our impact on water resources is of utmost importance. The significance of our effect on freshwater becomes much greater as more people are relying more on safe, sustainable water therefore; we must try to understand every component of our ecosystems. With increases in human population nutrient loading has increased in our waterways through fertilizer runoff of agricultural lands and through waste water treatment facility stream enrichment. Nutrient enrichment has been studied more with excessive loading from agriculture and also untreated waste water, but the effects of nutrient loading from modern waste treatment facilities is lack luster. Our designed experiment tested the effect of external nutrient input into a stream on rate of leaf litter decomposition in two water systems. The study consisted of a single species of leaf, Populus balsamifera, we determined leaf breakdown rates using percent leaf mass remaining over the eight week study. Also measured was the biomass of macroinvertebrates relative to the mass of the cottonwood leaves at three weeks. Our results showed a 2x greater leaf litter decomposition rate on Bozeman creek than the East Gallatin below the water reclamation facility and 4x greater rate than the East Gallatin above the water reclamation facility. Macroinvertebrate shredder numbers were the highest at the

    During this semester I traveled with the North Carolina State University’s Environmental Technology and Management program ET 201 class, under the direction of Dr. Teresa Litzenberger, to Little Rock Creek in Raleigh North Carolina. Little Rock Creek is a small stream located in southeast raleigh near the Walnut Creek Wetland Center. Located in a watershed of approximately 705.879 acres, the creek looks like an upside down uppercase “L” from a map perspective. The creek floor is sandy with a few small rocks (cobblestone) in areas. The stream has plenty of tree cover to provide shade. However, the lack of large trees encourages the curves in the creek to widen which allows the water to slow down and create pools throughout the creek. According to Title 15A of the North Carolina Administrative Code, Rule .0302 contains the classifications for waters located within the Neuse River Basin (15A NCAC 02L .0312). Little Rock Creek, however, is not classified and therefore follows Rule .0301 which simply states that it should carry the classification of the stream to which it is a tributary (.