Ecology of Mined WV Watersheds: Monongahela River to Tug Fork

1. Ecology of Mined WV Watersheds: Monongahela River to Tug Fork J. Todd Petty, PhD Division of Forestry & Natural Resources Surface Mine Drainage Task Force – Morgantown, WV March 31, 2010

2. Acknowledgements Paul Ziemkiewicz Jen Fulton Rick Herd Mike Strager George Merovich Roy Martin Eric Merriam Gretchen Gingerich OSM EPA USGS WVDEP Consol Argus

3. Watershed processes in intensively mined landscapes. • Monongahela River • Pigeon Creek WVU / WVWRI Research Areas • Aquatic ecosystem functions on reclaimed surface mines. • Samples • Hobet • Argus • Functional value of habitat enhancement structures as mitigation for mining related impacts • L. Coal River • KEY TOPICS • Dominant stressor identification; • Landscape indicators of instream condition; • Interactions among stressors; • Threshold responses (local and regional scale)

4. Landscape Thresholds A level of activity on the landscape (e.g., mining, development, agriculture) that results in an unacceptable shift from functional to impaired conditions. Non-linear change point thresholds. • Abrupt change in community structure Linear functional thresholds. • Cross-over to “impaired” conditions • Loss of a smallmouth bass fishery • WVSCI < 68

5. Petty, J. T., Fulton, J. B., Merovich, G. T, Jr., Strager, M. P., Stiles, J., and Ziemkiewicz, P. F. IN REVIEW. Landscape indicators and thresholds of ecological impairment in an intensively mined Appalachian watershed. Journal of the North American Benthological Society. • Mining Intensity • Coal Geology (freeport, kittanning, pittsburgh) • AMD Chemistry • Flow • Temperature • Habitat Quality • Invertebrates • Fishes • OM decomposition

6. Mining Thresholds - Northern Coalfields Bayesian Change Point Analysis Kittanning Freeport 5% mining – loss of HQ conditions 18% mining –change to “impaired” conditions.

7. Mon Basin Conclusions • There are identifiable mining thresholds that produce downstream responses. • 5% mining – shift from high quality to good conditions. • 18% mining – shift from fair conditions to impaired. • Thresholds vary depending on coal geology. • Freeport coal geology has lowest “functional” thresholds. • Validated models provide the baseline conditions needed for making management decisions (restoration and permitting). 100 68 40 Validated at an 85-95% correct classification rate.

8. Coal Geology Mining Intensity Residences • Southern WV Coalfields: • Variable coal geology, mining intensity, and population density. • People live in the floodplains and wastewater services are “spotty.” • Need for technical support for permitting decisions (thresholds, stressor interactions, visual decision support technologies).

9. Pigeon Creek Watershed Merriam, E., G. T. Merovich, and J. T. Petty. IN REVIEW. Additive effects of mining and residential development on stream conditions in an intensively mined Appalachian watershed. Journal of the NA Benthological Society • 41 sites • Mining Intensity • Residential Development • Independent and Interactive effects • Effects on wq, hq, and inverts • Mining thresholds • Off-site mitigation opportunities • Directing restoration and mitigation towards dominant limiting stressors

10. Pigeon Creek Design • Site independence • Sampling across mining and development gradient.

11. Correlation with % Mining • Increased WQ PC1, conductivity and associated dissolved parameters • Decreased sensitive taxa (esp. Mayflies) • No effect on habitat quality or complexity

12. Correlation with Development Decreased habitat complexity Increased conductivity and WQ PC1 Decreased sensitive taxa and increased tolerant taxa

13. Additive Effects of Mining and Residential Development Mining only Mining + Development • Mining has a measurable negative impact. • Worst conditions observed when both stressors are present. • The degree of additional impact is proportional to the level of development intensity (i.e., additive).

14. Impairment Thresholds: Pigeon Creek Bayesian Change Point Analysis 5% mining –loss of HQ conditions 28% mining – change to “impaired” conditions 5 parcels / km2 – loss of HQ conditions 15 parcels / km2 – change to “impaired” conditions

15. Impairment Thresholds: Pigeon Creek “Functional” Thresholds Definitely Impaired 93% streams “impaired” Probably Impaired 63% streams “impaired” 0% streams “impaired” The likelihood that mining will produce a downstream impairment depends on the amount of residential development in the watershed.

16. The Pigeon Creek mainstem is a train wreck. How much of the impairment can be attributed to mining? To what extent could the conditions be improved through reduced non-mining stressors? Can the watershed withstand any additional mining?

17. Ideal Future Condition - 100% dev / + 0% mining Pigeon Futures Current Condition Green = Probably not impaired Yellow = Probably impaired Red = Definitely impaired Alt Future Condition 4 - 50% dev / + 10% mining Alt Future Condition 3 - 50% dev / + 0% mining

18. Pigeon Creek Alternative Futures First # = % reduction in development related stress Second # = % increase in mining related stress Functional Stream Length = streams classified as “green” 100,0 Ideal Condition 50,0 100,10 Consensus? 50,10 10,0 10,10 Unacceptable 0,0 0,10 100,50

19. Pigeon Creek Conclusions • Simply avoiding future mining impacts does not help in dealing with existing degradation. • AFA allows us to visualize a range of future conditions and reach consensus on an acceptable future endpoint to manage towards. • AFA and management of multiple stressors is untenable at the stream segment scale. But… • Effective management of actively developing watersheds is possible at the 10-digit HUC scale. Pigeon Creek Mingo County, WV

20. Final Thoughts • The MTM/VF conflict must be resolved (laws demand that mining occur and that water resources be protected). • A resolution does not exist at the stream scale, but does exist at the watershed scale (12-digit and 10-digit HUC). • A resolution will require: • Allowing localized impacts (development of all types produces localized impacts). • Placing limits on the total amount of mining allowed at the 12- or 10-digit HUC scale (needed to meet state narrative standards). • A regulatory process that enables (facilitates) innovative mitigation (channel restoration, wastewater treatment, etc.)

21. Coal Geology Mining Intensity Residences • Need for: • Predictive models linking instream conditions to landscape attributes across the full range of coal geology, mining intensity, and residential development. • Alternative Futures Analysis for the region. • Development of watershed specific management plans for the MTR/VF region.

22. Red watersheds are probably impaired at the outflow. Orange watersheds are highly vulnerable to additional mining impact. Map must be refined and then used to make permitting decisions.