Investigation of Poor Stream Function in the Fishing Creek Watershed
Abstract
Water quality in Coon, Jordan, and Fishing Creeks of Granville County, NC was assessed
using geospatial modeling, toxicity testing, community surveys and interviews, and
risk assessment. Field data combined with existing data from the North Carolina Department
of Natural Resources provided the bases for the analyses. Our research suggests that
water quality is not heavily impacted by local industry and infrastructure. However,
conservation priority analysis indicates that downstream Fishing and Coon Creeks are
potential conservation areas. In addition, geospatial analysis with PLOAD model shows
exceedances of total phosphorus and total nitrogen in certain urban and agricultural
areas, which may negatively impact downstream water quality. Preliminary results from
acute toxicity tests indicate that stream water at six out of seven sample locations
in these streams is of sufficient quality to support medaka (Oryzias latipes) fish
hatchlings for 96-hours (p > 0.05). Community surveys revealed great citizen concern,
yet limited knowledge and awareness about local streams. Risk assessment of metal
concentrations in municipal wastewater treatment plant effluent discharging into Fishing
Creek indicated a potential risk to aquatic life from copper and zinc. Given limited
industry, infrastructure, and environmental data in Granville County, our work lays
a foundation for future water quality studies.
Type
Master's projectPermalink
https://hdl.handle.net/10161/9692Citation
Chien-Hale, Miranda; Mendelsohn, Emma; & Ding, Ran (2015). Investigation of Poor Stream Function in the Fishing Creek Watershed. Master's project, Duke University. Retrieved from https://hdl.handle.net/10161/9692.Collections
More Info
Show full item record
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 United States License.
Rights for Collection: Nicholas School of the Environment
Works are deposited here by their authors, and represent their research and opinions, not that of Duke University. Some materials and descriptions may include offensive content. More info