land use impact on water quality 

64
Land Use Impact on Water Quality ENV 4800 Group 4: Aimee Aquino, Brian Dedeian, Matt Heye, Brian Johnson, Joe Miller

Upload: mathew-heye

Post on 15-Jan-2017

143 views

Category:

Documents


1 download

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: Land Use Impact on Water Quality 

Land Use Impact on Water Quality

 

 

 

ENV 4800 

Group 4: Aimee Aquino, Brian Dedeian, Matt Heye, Brian Johnson, Joe Miller 

Page 2: Land Use Impact on Water Quality 

Abstract: 

  This 4-lake water quality study was conducted to test how land use factors altered

the water quality of lakes. Each lake had different levels of human involvement from

recreation to natural buffer zones. A multi-parameter and temporal study was done to give

clear indication on how land use affects water quality. In the results, there seems to be a

correlation between different amounts of human use and the declination of water quality.

The study displayed higher levels of phosphates, nitrates, and trace metals (except for

chromium) in sample sites categorized as urban residential areas compared to buffer

zones. The lakes with the highest levels of potential pollutants also saw the most human

altered land use factors. These levels indicate that anthropogenic changes between lakes

have a negative impact on the water quality in these lakes.

Key Words: Trace Metals, Eutrophication, Land Use Factors, Nitrates, Phosphates

 

1. Introduction: 

Land use factors can play a major role in the overall health of a body of water. These

factors include residential/urban zoning, vegetative buffer zones, and recreational areas

for human use. The area of this study includes 4 separate lakes with different land use

factors. The categories that were tested were open water locations, vegetative buffer

locations, and urban/residential locations. From these sample locations, multiple

parameters were tested to give a general distinction on the effects of human land use

delegations on water quality. The four lakes tested are located in Northern New Jersey in

Passaic County. The sample sites are within 5 miles of each other, which gives them the

same climate. Surprise Lake is a glacial lake on top of a mountain between Greenwood Lake

and Upper Greenwood Lake. It is in a remote location, which gets very little human use

besides day hikers/campers. Greenwood Lake and Upper Greenwood Lake have similar

rules and regulations for recreation such as boating speed limits and boat size limitations.

These two lakes have the most residential land percentage out of the sample sites. The

New York State Department of Environmental Conservation classifies Greenwood Lake as a

303d site meaning it fails to meet Clean Water Act standards in some way; in this case

Greenwood Lake fails to meet the standards set for phosphorus levels. (New York State

Page 3: Land Use Impact on Water Quality 

Department of Environmental Conservation, 2005).  Wawayanda Lake is Northwest of

Upper Greenwood Lake and is part of the National Park Service. It has strict rules and

regulations, including no swimming zones and electric motor/human power only

limitations for boaters. 

Improper land use and anthropogenic pollution can have many effects on a lake

ecosystem. The presence of pharmaceuticals in a lake can be caused by an influx of

wastewater from the surrounding houses. Estrogenic steroids can alter the reproductive

ability of fish, and can throw off the hormonal balance of fish. Multi-sex organisms can be a

consequence of this type of pollution (Burkinaa, 2015). It was also found that land use can

directly impact the concentration of metals such as iron, magnesium, and copper in a lake.

Lakes associated with mining, urban, and agricultural areas generally have more dissolved

metals than forested and arctic lakes. Lakes with a lot of dissolved organic matter are likely

to have less dissolved metals due to the metal-organic matter complex that could form;

lower pH will affect this complex (Das, 2009). Additionally, studies have shown that lakes

respond more to external forcings than internal forcings, especially in shallower, deeper

lakes (Diebel et. al.,2008). It has been shown that lakes are a function of land use in a

watershed, and proximity of a stream to a non-point pollutant source has an effect on

stream nutrient loads (Sen et al., 2014). Studies also show that specific metals are affected

by land use, and other from natural resources. A study in Beijing showed that metals like

cadmium, lead, copper and zinc were different throughout the city. Metals that are from

natural sources are chromium and nickel. Roadside metal concentration was the greatest,

and the concentration was correlated with urbanization (Xia, 2011). Metals that end up in

water will also end up in the soil in any given watershed. Metal in soils can affect plants,

and a soil's cation exchange capacity (CEC) can measure how much metal is able to be

taken in by plants (Gerrard, ). Plants can be put in to oxidative stress if the concentration of

metal ions is too high. They depend on chelation to reduce the amount of metal ions

circulating (Yadav, 2010). Heavy metals will also persist in soils, and they are non-mobile,

possibly leading to their accumulation. Figure one shows the multiple effects that metals

can have on human health.  

Phosphates in water are an important factor in determining water quality. 

Phosphorus can enter the water form urban and agricultural settings as run off from

Page 4: Land Use Impact on Water Quality 

fertilized fields/areas.  It attaches to soil particles and moves into surface waters as via

runoff.  Phosphorus can also migrate with groundwater flows, as shown by the study done

on Cape Cod, Massachusetts (USGS 2015).  In Atlanta, phosphorus entering the water from

point sources is mainly due to wastewater treatment plants.  The sign of this problem is an

increase in algal blooms in the water.  State laws implemented to reduce phosphorus from

the wastewater of these treatment plants have shown to be a large agent in the drastic

reduction.  The laws prohibited the use of phosphorus detergents.  The reduction has been

substantial from the Chattahoochee River, south of Atlanta. 

 

(USGS 2015) 

Phosphorus is important for plant life, however, if there is too much, it could speed

up eutrophication of rivers and lakes.  Eutrophication is a problem on Greenwood Lake in

West Milford, NJ.  Weed control methods have been under great debate as the Greenwood

Lake Commission weighs the possible treatment options for this growing problem. 

Regardless of this debate on the best option for removing weeds, all agree that the water

quality health depends on pollution prevention.  Officials are educating the public on septic

system maintenance and the use of phosphorus free fertilizers and cleaning supplies. 

Accumulation of metals can be tested using the flame emission spectrophotometer.

Testing of chromium, iron and magnesium will be performed. Metal content can also be

analyzed by looking at dissolved cations and anions, which will be measured in the Dionex.

Concentration of those ions will show how land use affects heavy metal concentration. It is

hypothesized that metal concentration will be greatest in Greenwood Lake, where there is

the most urban activity. Surprise Lake is the most pristine lake, and is expected to have the

Page 5: Land Use Impact on Water Quality 

lowest concentration of heavy metals.   The data collected from all four sites will show the

overall effects, if any, of human land use factors on the water quality of lakes. 

(Singh, 2011) 

2. Methods:

2.1 Field Sampling: 

Field Sampling was conducted during the course of about a month. At each sample

site, the water was tested using the YSI-55 for dissolved oxygen, the YSI-556 for pH,

temperature, and specific conductivity, and the LaMotte 2020 for turbidity. A water sample

was placed into a bottle and brought back to the lab for further testing.  A sterile bottle was

also used to obtain a bacterial analysis of chosen locations from each sample site. 

2.2 NJDEP 

The New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection has taken measurements

from multiple sample locations on each of the lakes in the study.  These measurements

include temperature, pH, conductivity, turbidity, dissolved oxygen, nitrate content, and

phosphorus content.  For the purpose of this study, only Upper Greenwood Lake,

Greenwood Lake, and Wawayanda NJDEP data was used due to multiple sampling sites to

Page 6: Land Use Impact on Water Quality 

represent temporal trends of the mentioned parameters. 

2.3 Hach: 

Phosphorus (P) was measured in all sample sites for each water body. The Standard

Ascorbic Acid method was used to detect intensity of colored molybdenum-blue complexes.

A Hach DR 4000 spectrophotometer was used to measure intensity at 880nm in 1cm path

cuvettes. A Phosphorus standard was created using known concentrations of P producing

an r2 value of 0.9998. All samples where tested five minutes after being exposed to

reagent. 

 

 

2.4 Flame Emission:  

5 multi-elemental standards were made using Iron, Magnesium and Chromium. The

standard concentrations were set to 1ppm, 3ppm, 5ppm, 15ppm, and 30ppm. On

11/17/15, the sequence was set up using the Wizard AA software. All samples were

filtered using vacuum filtration and placed into 15mL sampling tubes. The sampling rack

was filled with samples in a specific order and placed into the fridge. On 11/18/15, the

samples were tested on the Shimadzu Atomic Absorption Spectrophotometer to analyze for

trace metals. 

Page 7: Land Use Impact on Water Quality 

 

2.5 Dionex: 

The Dionex was used to test for dissolved anions in all water samples. The Dionex

tests water for anions by running the water through a tube, and testing the retention time

and amount of ions. The retention time must be matched to specific ions manually, and

standards must be created to find out which retention times correspond to which anions.

On 11/16/2015, each sample of water was loaded into the sampling rack. It was stored in

the Environmental Science Lab fridge. On 11/18/2015, the standards were placed in the

sampling rack and the racks were set up in the Dionex. Then, the Dionex ran the samples

one after another. It took fifteen minutes to test each sample, and another five minutes to

switch between samples. This time interval was a good medium between accuracy of

measurements and realistic runtime. The longer Dionex runs each sample, the more

accurate the results.  

 

2.6 Biologic: 

To complete biological testing of the sites, water samples were obtained at each of

the lakes in a sterile container and directly transported in a cooler to the lab. Easy gel ECA

Check and Easy gel Coliscan solutions were used for biological testing. 10 mL of each

sample was mixed with each of the solutions and poured into a labeled petri dish. The petri

dishes were put into an oven at 37 degrees Celsius. All of the samples were removed after 1

day in the oven except for the Surprise Lake samples due to no growth. These samples

were left in the oven for an additional day. Upon removal of each sample, a digital picture

was taken for a later count of bacterial species. 

 

2.7 GIS 

Data and map sets were collected from the NJDEP database system. A base map was

created for both lakes and a 100-meter buffer was created surrounding the two lakes. Then

land use data was intersected with the base maps to show acres of land use within the 100-

meter buffer zone. Land use types were then condensed into three categories: open water,

residential and vegetative. Total acreage was then used to create a percent land use for

both lakes and their respective buffer type.    

Page 8: Land Use Impact on Water Quality 

3. Results:

3.1 Field Measurements: 

Each measurement from the 4 lakes in this study were broken down and

categorized into one of three land use factors. These categories were urban residential,

buffer zones, and open water locations respectively. Each lake had different sample

locations that fit in the above categories; some lakes did not contain all three categories.

Surprise Lake had 3 sample sites that were all classified as buffer zones. Wawayanda Lake

had 3 sample sites; 2 categorized as buffer zones and 1 urban residential. Upper

Greenwood Lake had a total of 6 sampling sites; 4 urban residential, 1 open water, and 1

buffer zone.  

Figures 1-4 show dissolved oxygen levels from each of the 4 lakes in this study.

Surprise Lake had only buffer zone categories and a measured average value was 90.3%

saturation. Wawayanda Lake had urban residential and buffer zone categories. The

average dissolved oxygen measurements for the urban residential areas were 89.5%

saturation while the buffer zone measurements were 81.2% saturation. Upper Greenwood

Lake had all 3 land use categories. The urban residential areas had an average dissolved

oxygen level of 94.5% saturation. The buffer zones from Upper Greenwood Lake had an

average value of 90.8% saturation. The open water location had a value of 93.4%

saturation. 

Figures 5-8 display the observed measurements of specific conductivity for each

lake. The measurements for Surprise Lake had a specific conductivity of 0.017us/cm.

Wawayanda Lake had an average value of 0.288us/cm for urban residential sites and

0.2895us/cm for buffer zone sites. The urban residential areas of Upper Greenwood Lake

gave a mean value of 0.342us/cm. The buffer zones on this lake had an average value

of .313us/cm and the open water category had a conductivity of .318us/cm. On Greenwood

Lake, the urban residential sites had a measurement of 0.274us/cm. The buffer zones

measured 0.269us/cm and the open water sites measured 0.2685us/cm. 

Figures 9-12 display observed pH from each lake in the study.  The buffer zones on

Surprise Lake had an observed pH of 5.46.  The urban residential locations on Wawayanda

Page 9: Land Use Impact on Water Quality 

Lake measured a pH value of 6.56 and the buffer zones measured 5.75.  The urban

residential sites from Upper Greenwood Lake measured an average pH of 6.74, the buffer

zones at 6.5 pH, and the open water at 6.62.  The urban residential sites on Greenwood

Lake measured pH to be 6.66, the buffer zones to be 6.75, and the open water sites to be

6.87 pH. 

Figures 13-16 display turbidity measurements from each lake in the study.  The

turbidity measurements from Surprise lake buffer zones recorded values of 1.037 NTU. 

The urban residential locations from Wawayanda Lake had a turbidity of 0.77 NTU.  The

buffer zones had a measurement of .235 NTU.  The urban residential areas from Upper

Greenwood Lake had a turbidity of 1.34 NTU, the buffer zones had a value of 1.43 NTU, and

open water sites had a value of 1.12 NTU.  The urban residential areas from Greenwood

Lake had a value of 2.69 NTU, the buffer zones had a turbidity of 1.62 NTU, and the open

water sites had a value of 3.05 NTU. 

 

Figure 1: Dissolved Oxygen from Surprise Lake categorized into land use factor zones. 

Page 10: Land Use Impact on Water Quality 

 

Figure 2: Dissolved Oxygen from Wawayanda Lake categorized into land use factor zones. 

 

Figure 3: Dissolved Oxygen from Upper Greenwood Lake categorized into land use factor

Page 11: Land Use Impact on Water Quality 

zones. 

 

Figure 4: Dissolved Oxygen from Greenwood Lake categorized into land use factor zones. 

 

Figure 5: Specific Conductivity from Surprise Lake categorized into land use factor zones. 

Page 12: Land Use Impact on Water Quality 

 

Figure 6: Specific Conductivity from Wawayanda Lake categorized into land use factor

zones. 

 

Figure 7: Specific Conductivity from Upper Greenwood Lake categorized into land use

factor zones. 

Page 13: Land Use Impact on Water Quality 

 

Figure 8: Specific Conductivity from Greenwood Lake categorized into land use factor

zones. 

 

Figure 9: pH from Surprise Lake categorized into land use factor zones. 

Page 14: Land Use Impact on Water Quality 

 

Figure 10: pH from Wawayanda Lake categorized into land use factor zones. 

 

Figure 11: pH from Upper Greenwood Lake categorized into land use factor zones. 

Page 15: Land Use Impact on Water Quality 

 

Figure 12: pH from Greenwood Lake categorized into land use factor zones. 

 

Figure 13: Turbidity from Surprise Lake categorized into land use factor zones. 

Page 16: Land Use Impact on Water Quality 

 

Figure 14: Turbidity from Wawayanda Lake categorized into land use factor zones. 

 

Figure 15: Turbidity from Upper Greenwood Lake categorized into land use factor zones. 

Page 17: Land Use Impact on Water Quality 

 

Figure 16: Turbidity from Greenwood Lake categorized into land use factor zones. 

 

3.2 NJDEP Data: 

Data from each lake in different seasons was received from a representative from

the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection. The use of this NJDEP data

represents temporal analysis for the lakes in this study. For the study, only data from

Upper Greenwood Lake, Greenwood Lake, and Wawayanda were represented. Figures 17-

19 represent dissolved oxygen data from the NJDEP sampling locations over different

seasons. Figures 20-22 display the conductivity data from the NJDEP sample sites. Figures

23-25 displays observed pH values for each NJDEP sample location in different seasons.

Figures 26-28 represents turbidity data from each NJDEP sample location. Figures 29-31

displays Inorganic Nitrogen content from the NJDEP sites. Figures 32-34 shows

Phosphorus content from each NJDEP site. 

Page 18: Land Use Impact on Water Quality 

 

Figure 17: Dissolved Oxygen from Upper Greenwood Lake NJDEP locations in different

seasons. 

 

Figure 18: Dissolved Oxygen from Greenwood Lake NJDEP locations in different seasons. 

 

Page 19: Land Use Impact on Water Quality 

 

Figure 19: Dissolved Oxygen from Wawayanda Lake NJDEP locations in different seasons. 

 

Figure 20: Conductivity from Upper Greenwood Lake NJDEP locations in different seasons. 

 

Page 20: Land Use Impact on Water Quality 

 

Figure 21: Conductivity from Greenwood Lake NJDEP locations in different seasons. 

 

Figure 22: Conductivity from Wawayanda Lake NJDEP locations in different seasons. 

 

Page 21: Land Use Impact on Water Quality 

 

Figure 23: pH from Upper Greenwood Lake NJDEP locations in different seasons. 

 

Figure 24: pH from Greenwood Lake NJDEP locations in different seasons. 

 

Page 22: Land Use Impact on Water Quality 

 

Figure 25: pH from Wawayanda Lake NJDEP locations in different seasons. 

 

Figure 26: Turbidity from Upper Greenwood Lake NJDEP locations in different seasons. 

 

Page 23: Land Use Impact on Water Quality 

 

Figure 27: Turbidity from Greenwood Lake NJDEP locations in different seasons. 

 

Figure 28: Turbidity from Wawayanda Lake NJDEP locations in different seasons. 

Page 24: Land Use Impact on Water Quality 

 

Figure 29: Phosphate concentration from UGL NJDEP locations in different seasons. 

 

Figure 30: Phosphate concentration from Greenwood Lake NJDEP locations in different

seasons. 

Page 25: Land Use Impact on Water Quality 

 

Figure 31: Phosphate concentration from Wawayanda Lake NJDEP locations in different

seasons. 

3.3 Hach: 

Phosphorus concentration for all sample sites was analyzed for each buffer type.

Measurements were averaged for buffer type for all lakes and shown in ppm.   Surprise

Lake, comprised of only vegetative buffer type had 0.001 ppm, Wawayanda Lake was

below detection limit for vegetative and open water, while residential buffers had

0.025ppm. Lastly, Upper Greenwood Lake showed 0.003ppm for vegetative buffers,

0.006ppm for open water, and 0.004ppm for residential buffers. Upper Greenwood Lake

showed the highest values in all categories. Greenwood Lake was below detection limit for

all sample sites. An average of all lake buffer types show vegetative buffers had an average

of 0.002ppm, residential had 0.0145ppm and open water had 0.006ppm.

Page 26: Land Use Impact on Water Quality 

 

Figure 32: Phosphorus concentration from all sample sites. (sites with values below

detection levels are not shown)

3.4 Flame Emission: 

  The magnesium concentration in urban residential locations had a higher

measurement than the other land use factor zones. The open water locations gave slightly

lower values and buffer zones gave the least concentrations. The measurements from

Surprise Lake are minimal compared to the other lakes. Wawayanda Lake had the highest

concentration of magnesium in all the samples with values of 5ppm. Greenwood Lake had

magnesium concentrations of 4.48ppm in urban residential areas, 4.44ppm in open water

locations, and 4.41ppm in buffer zones. Upper Greenwood Lake had magnesium

concentrations of 4.86ppm in urban residential areas, 4.78 in open water locations, and

4.82 in buffer zones.

The chromium levels in open water locations were highest with a concentration of

1.54ppm. The urban residential areas had the lowest concentrations at 1.49ppm. Surprise

Lake had the highest levels of chromium in the samples with a concentration of 1.64ppm.

Page 27: Land Use Impact on Water Quality 

Wawayanda Lake had a chromium concentration of 1.55ppm in urban residential areas and

1.54 in buffer zones. Greenwood Lake had a chromium concentration of 1.53ppm in urban

residential areas, 1.535ppm in open water locations, and 1.555ppm in buffer zones. Upper

Greenwood Lake had a chromium concentration of 1.38ppm in urban residential areas,

1.55ppm in open water locations, and 1.44ppm in buffer zones.

The iron concentrations in urban residential areas on the lakes had a measurement

at 1.29ppm, open water locations had 1.28ppm, and buffer zones had 1.23ppm. Surprise

Lake had iron levels of 1.10ppm. The iron levels for urban residential areas and buffer

zones both had a concentration of 1.25ppm. Greenwood Lake had iron levels of 1.28ppm in

urban residential areas, 1.24ppm in open water locations, and 1.23ppm in buffer zones.

Upper Greenwood Lake had iron concentrations of 1.30ppm in urban residential areas,

1.32ppm in open water locations, and 1.33ppm in buffer zones.

 

Figure 33: Magnesium concentrations from Surprise Lake categorized into land use

factors. 

Page 28: Land Use Impact on Water Quality 

 

Figure 34: Magnesium concentrations from Wawayanda Lake categorized into land use

factors. 

 

 

Figure 35: Magnesium concentrations from Upper Greenwood Lake categorized into land

use factors. 

Page 29: Land Use Impact on Water Quality 

 

Figure 36: Magnesium concentrations from Greenwood Lake categorized into land use

factors. 

 

Figure 37: Chromium concentrations from Surprise Lake categorized into land use factors. 

Page 30: Land Use Impact on Water Quality 

 

Figure 38: Chromium concentrations from Wawayanda Lake categorized into land use

factors. 

 

Figure 39: Chromium concentrations from Upper Greenwood Lake categorized into land

use factors. 

Page 31: Land Use Impact on Water Quality 

 

Figure 40: Chromium concentrations from Greenwood Lake categorized into land use

factors. 

 

Figure 41: Iron concentrations from Surprise Lake categorized into land use factors. 

Page 32: Land Use Impact on Water Quality 

 

Figure 42: Iron concentrations from Wawayanda Lake categorized into land use factors. 

 

Figure 43: Iron concentrations from Upper Greenwood Lake categorized into land use

factors. 

Page 33: Land Use Impact on Water Quality 

 

Figure 44: Iron concentrations from Greenwood Lake categorized into land use factors. 

 

3.5 Dionex: 

Figures 45-50 shows a comparison of all sample sites and their receptive levels of

phosphates, nitrates, chlorides, fluorides, and sulfates. It can be seen that UGL DEP site 1

had the largest values of chlorine and sulfate. It also had the largest values of nitrates and

phosphates. Because the ion concentration values for this site were much larger than all the

other concentration values, the site was taken out of the averages and all site comparisons

for nitrate and phosphate concentrations. This large difference in concentration values

skews the averages seen in figures 48-50, so it was determined that it would be best if the

data was removed from the averages. 

Figure 45 shows that fluorine ion concentrations were greatest the Upper

Greenwood Lake boat ramp and the Surprise Lake MSL. Figure 4 shows that concentration

of chlorine was the greatest at site UGL DEP1 by roughly 75 parts per million. Figure 46

shows that nitrates are greatest at sites UGL DEP2 and GL DEP2. The values were lowest at

the Wawayanda buffer site. Phosphate levels were so low in most of the sites that the

Dionex did not detect any values. Figure 47 shows that only six concentrations were

obtained, the greatest of which was from the UGL DEP2 and SL NE sites. Figure 48 shows

the sulfate ion concentrations. The sulfate concentrations for sites UGL DEP1, GL DEP4 and

GL SSM were much greater than all other sites.  

Page 34: Land Use Impact on Water Quality 

Figures 49-50 show the phosphate and nitrate concentrations averaged across the

different site classifications for all sites. Figures 49-50 showed that the concentrations of

nitrogen and phosphate ions were greater in the open water sites than in the urban and

buffer based sites. 

 

 

 

Figure 45: Fluorine ion concentration from all sample locations. 

 

Page 35: Land Use Impact on Water Quality 

 

Figure 46: Nitrate ion concentration from all sample locations. 

 

 

Figure 47: Phosphate ion concentration from all sample locations. 

 

Page 36: Land Use Impact on Water Quality 

Figure 48: Sulfate ion concentration from all sample locations. 

 

Figure 49: Phosphorus Content Averaged and Compared Based On Location Types 

Page 37: Land Use Impact on Water Quality 

 

Figure 50: Nitrogen Content Averaged and Compared Based On Location Type 

 

3.6 Biologic: 

The results from the biological testing (Figure 51) showed that both locations of

sampling at Upper Greenwood Lake had extensive colony growth of all tested species. The

samples taken at Upper Greenwood Lake contained the most cultures, the sample taken at

Wawayanda Lake contained the second highest amount of colony growth, the samples from

Greenwood Lake had the third highest amount of colony growth, and the sample taken at

Surprise Lake contained the least amount of colony growth. The sample from Surprise Lake

produced only one general coliform.  

 

Location Coliscan ECA Check

Upper Greenwood Lake

MC

45 Non-Fecal Coliform

3 E. Coli

17 Teal CFU

23 General Coliform

548 E. Coli

15 Aeromonas

Upper Greenwood Lake BL 17 Non-fecal Coliform

1 E. Coli

4 General Coliform

3 E. Coli

Page 38: Land Use Impact on Water Quality 

0 Teal CFU 40 Aeromonas

Greenwood Lake SSM 8 Non-fecal Coliform

0 E. Coli

0 Teal CFU

4 General Coliform

4 E. Coli

15 Aeromonas

Greenwood Lake BP 18 Non-fecal Coliform

1 E. Coli

0 Teal CFU

4 General Coliform

2 E. Coli

6 Aeromonas

Surprise Lake 0 cultures 1 General Coliform

Wawayanda Lake 45 Non-fecal Coliform

1 E. Coli

2 Teal CFU

5 General Coliform

1 E. Coli

38 Aeromonas

 

Figure 51: Biological testing colony counts for Upper Greenwood Lake, Greenwood Lake,

Surprise Lake, and Wawayanda Lake. 

 

3.7 GIS 

A visual analysis of buffer type was done on Upper Greenwood Lake and Greenwood

Lake. Two mapping programs were used; ArcGIS and GEOweb using public NJDEP data.

Results show that Greenwood lake is comprised of 3.44% open water 18.69% residential

buffer and 77.87% vegetative buffer. Upper Greenwood lake is comprised of 21.50%

vegetative buffer, 5.32% open water, and 73.18% residential buffer.

Page 39: Land Use Impact on Water Quality 

Figure 52: Geoweb analysis of Upper Greenwood Lake

Page 40: Land Use Impact on Water Quality 

 

Figure 53: GIS analysis of Greenwood Lake

Page 41: Land Use Impact on Water Quality 

4. Discussion: 

4.1 Field Measurements 

The urban residential locations averaged from all 4 lakes collectively had a higher

dissolved oxygen measurement at approximately 87.9% saturation.  The buffer zones had a

lower value at approximately 83.4% saturation.  The open water locations had a dissolved

oxygen reading of about 85.5% saturation.  The differences in dissolved oxygen could be

attributable to the lack of moving water at the buffer zone locations.  The urban locations

were in the main channel of the lake that was prone to wind currents moving the water and

increasing the dissolved oxygen values.  The open water locations tested didn’t have as

much current influence yet had dissolved oxygen values slightly below those from urban

residential sites.  This concludes that wind and current patterns play a major role in the

dissolved oxygen measurements observed on each lake. 

The specific conductivity of the lakes was highest in urban residential sites with

open water locations just below them.  The buffer zones were lower than both by about

0.8ug/L.  The urban residential sites were near many areas that had outside influence on

water quality.  These included the sites where heavy septic use was present.  The urban

residential locations from Upper Greenwood Lake and Greenwood Lake contributed to the

high values for the 4-lake average.  The locations on Wawayanda Lake and Surprise Lake

contributed mostly to the buffer zone category.  The specific conductivity from the open

water locations were close to the urban residential which would account for the similarly

high observed readings.  It seems that all the categories affect each other in some way, but

each site has its own characteristics. 

The pH of the buffer zones in the 4-lake average was significantly lower than urban

residential and open water sites at a value of 6.1.  The urban residential and open water

sites were closest to a neutral pH with values of 6.61-6.78.  The observed measurements

could be attributable to the chemical components in the water, which would alter the pH

values significantly and explain the results.  Depending on the chemicals that are

introduced into the water by runoff, it could shift the pH to more neutral values if basic

pollutants are added to the water.  In the case of Surprise Lake, the water was stagnant and

the weathering of the granite bedrock would give a lower, acidic pH value, which altered

Page 42: Land Use Impact on Water Quality 

the overall average results for buffer zone locations.  

4.2 NJDEP 

The New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection conducted onsite

monitoring of the 4 lakes in this study over different seasons. The dissolved oxygen levels

from the field measurements represented the fall season for Upper Greenwood Lake. These

measurements were higher at each location than both spring and summer. The greatest

variance between seasons was at Location 3. The most similar location was at Location 4.

Wawayanda Lake had only two sampling sites. The spring and fall data was almost

identical with an increasing trend of dissolved oxygen. The summer data showed a

decreasing trend in dissolved oxygen. On Greenwood Lake, the spring data showed the

greatest level of variance between sample locations while the summer, fall, and field

measurements remained fairly identical with an increasing trend. 

The conductivity measurements from Upper Greenwood Lake locations showed an

increasing trend between locations. Spring and fall data was fairly similar with higher

values than the summer data. The Wawayanda Lake conductivity data increased from

location in each season. Summer conductivity was higher than all other seasons with

spring being the lowest. The conductivity measurements from Greenwood Lake remained

fairly steady at each location yet fluctuated at different seasons. The highest values were

seen in the field data. The seasonal data showed higher values in the spring and lowest in

the fall. 

Upper Greenwood Lake pH values remained fairly stable between locations, but the

seasonal differences were variable. The spring data had the highest pH values at all

locations while the fall data had more acidic pH levels. The summer data from Upper

Greenwood Lake seemed to have the most neutral levels of pH. The pH of the sample sites

on Wawayanda Lake showed an increasing trend of pH in the spring and summer data, but

a very stable pH in the fall. The spring data showed a higher pH compared to both summer

and fall. Greenwood Lake had the most variable pH levels of all the lakes in the study. The

spring season showed the greatest seasonal variability compared to the rest. The summer,

fall, and field measurements of pH gave all fairly neutral readings to slightly basic levels.

The spring season data had highly basic pH values. 

Page 43: Land Use Impact on Water Quality 

Phosphorus content on Upper Greenwood Lake had the highest values in the

summer and the lowest in the fall. This could be due to the amount of human traffic on the

lake during the summer months. In this season, most boaters are out and there is a higher

potential for phosphorus leaching into the water from fuel leaks and agricultural means.

The fall had the least levels of phosphorus. On Wawayanda Lake, the fall had the highest

levels of phosphorus and the summer had the least. The spring levels remained the same

for both sample sites while in the summer and fall, there was an increase in phosphorus

content between the two sites. Wawayanda is a controlled lake where only electric motor

boats are allowed. The area has farms and agricultural fertilizers and they harvest most of

the fields in the late summer, early fall (apples and assorted berries), which would support

the higher phosphorus data observed on this lake in that season. On Greenwood Lake, the

highest phosphorus data was observed in the summer season. The spring data started out

higher than the other seasons but then dropped and increased once again, showing higher

variability between locations. The summer months having higher phosphorus content

could show a similar cause as seen in Upper Greenwood Lake; the more boat traffic on the

lake, the higher levels of phosphorus in the water. Also, during the summer months, many

people run hoses to water the lawn and various other activities that put strain on septic

systems. These septic systems could have leaks or overflows that would explain higher

phosphorous content in the water samples obtained in the urban residential sample sites. 

 

4.3 Hach 

Phosphorus (P) analysis for all sample sites show on average residential buffers test

at higher concentrations than the control sites. Greenwood Lake (one of the two high

residential use areas) was below detection limit, which is most likely caused by the lakes

higher volume of water compared to all other lakes. A second possible reason could be the

mitigation efforts associated with Greenwood Lake have lowered P levels enough to offset

the high residential use. This reason is less likely due to the Nitrate analysis showing still

high levels, which have a high correlation with each other due to their use as nutrients in

fertilizers. The highest levels were seen in Wawayanda residential buffer. This can be from

a combination of multiple sources including the nearby parking lot, heavy beach use in the

summer, and the composition of the lake bottom. The impermeable surface from the

Page 44: Land Use Impact on Water Quality 

parking lot will cause increased runoff bringing contaminants such as phosphorus from the

lot to the lake. The composition of the beach sediment is mainly sand, making phosphorus

stay in the water column instead of settling into the soil. The capacity and affinity of iron

and aluminum oxides, organic matter and clay minerals for P absorption comes about

because of the high surface area and charged surface. Phosphorus in sands and sand-over-

clay soils is severely limited because the amount of constituents that contribute to both

capacity and affinity is also limited (Ritchie,1993). This is the most likely cause of the

higher levels shown for this area. Upper Greenwood Lake was the only lake to show

significant P levels in all buffer types. The open water had the highest average of the three

followed by residential and vegetative buffers showing the lowest values (Figure 32). This

is most likely due to a combination of the high residential use and the partial draining of

the lake. The high residential use can be a source of P from fertilizers and older septic

systems. The decrease in water volume most likely caused a higher concentration of P in

the lake as well. Upper Greenwood Lake also had the highest overall residential land use.

4.4 Flame Emission 

Data from the Flame Emission tests are represented in figures 33-44. The levels of

iron in the water samples from all lakes were highest in urban residential zones. However,

the urban residential zones from Greenwood Lake had relatively lower iron concentrations.

This could be due to organic material from the water bonding to the metals and not being

able to be recorded by the instruments. The chromium levels on the lakes were recorded to

be lower in urban residential areas compared to buffer zones and open water locations.

This could be attributable to chemical properties of chromium and precipitates that form

at high temperatures. The levels of chromium in the water might not be truly represented

by the data observed due to levels of precipitates. Magnesium content in the water samples

averaged from all lakes was highest in urban residential areas and lowest in buffer zones.

Most of the magnesium content was contributed from Upper Greenwood Lake, Greenwood

Lake, and Wawayanda Lake. The levels from Surprise Lake were very low compared to the

other values. The levels on Wawayanda Lake were highest of all lakes with Upper

Greenwood Lake only slightly lower. The data extrapolated from the flame emission

procedure is does not seem to be indicative of how land use factors affect the water quality

Page 45: Land Use Impact on Water Quality 

of lakes. The data does not show a clear relationship of how human activity disrupts the

natural processes determining lake water quality. Surprise Lake had the highest levels of

chromium (an arguably human involved pollutant) and iron, yet almost undetectable

amounts of magnesium. This questions the validity of using Surprise Lake as a control for

this experiment. 

 

4.5 Dionex 

The levels of nitrates and phosphates compared through all lakes in figures 50 and

51 shows that Greenwood Lake and Upper Greenwood Lake had, in general, a greater

amount of dissolved ions compared to the two control lakes, Wawayanda Lake and

Surprise Lake. For phosphates, only one of the control lake sites had a concentration high

enough to achieve a reading. That site was SL NE, and although it had a high concentration,

it is most likely due to a natural source because of Surprise Lake distance from any kind of

anthropogenic structures. Greenwood Lake, the lake that was listed as a 303(d) site, had

only one site that had a high enough concentration of phosphorus to register on the Dionex.

This could imply that remediation efforts have paid off, and leakage from septic tanks could

have been reduced. Four out of the six Upper Greenwood Lake sites had levels of

phosphorus that registered on the Dionex, and the largest phosphorus concentration

occurred at site UGL DEP2.  This means that efforts may need to be taken to reduce septic

tank leakage and phosphorus leaching from soils in the area surrounding the lake.  

For nitrates, multiple control lake sites registered values on the Dionex. All of the

Wawayanda Lake Sites had traceable nitrate levels, meaning Wawayanda could be more

affected by nitrate soil leaching than Surprise Lake. Most of the higher concentrations were

seen at Upper Greenwood Lake and Greenwood Lake sites, which mean that anthropogenic

sources of loading, such as farms, lawns, and impermeable surfaces, could affect these two

lakes. It makes sense then that Wawayanda and Surprise Lake have lower values of

nitrates; as anthropogenic affects less affect their surrounding land. The lakes with more

urban land use are more prone to nitrate loading due to fertilizer application and other

land use factors. 

The values for dissolved anions in the Dionex imply that the largest amount of

dissolved nitrates and phosphates is in open water parts of a lake. Figures 53 and 54

Page 46: Land Use Impact on Water Quality 

illustrate this. The buffer part of a lake usually has the least amount of dissolved nitrates

and phosphates. The buffer part of a lake likely has a lot of plant development happening,

due to the nature of buffer zones near lakes. Plants require nitrates and phosphates for

development, so in areas where there is a lot of shrubbery, it is expected that there will be

lower values in ambient nitrates and phosphates in the water. In the open water, these

nitrates and phosphates can accumulate, because there is no shrubby and aquatic plant life

to take the ions up. An excess of phosphates and nitrates is bad, and it can lead to algal

blooms, which can lower the dissolved oxygen levels in lakes and lower the overall lake

health. 

For sulfate and fluoride ion concentrations, values were recorded at all almost all

sites across all lakes. Fluoride is usually a by-product of parent material and bedrock the

lake is based on, but it can also be affected by acid rain (Skjelkvåle, 1994). Because there

are peaks of fluoride concentration in both control lakes and anthropogenic lakes, it can be

concluded that fluoride isn`t affected much by anthropogenic land use. Lakes can see an

increase of sulfate concentration from acid rain, surface runoff, or mine drainage (Orem,

2011). Because three different peaks of sulfate were recorded, all three at Greenwood Lake

or Upper Greenwood Lake, it can be concluded that anthropogenic effects, such as land use,

could cause this increase. Values of sulfate concentration at all other locations were low

compared to the three peaks.  

 

4.6 Biologic 

The high level of E. Coil at Upper Greenwood Lake implies that there is a lot of

microbiological activity at the lake. Large amounts of E. Coil present in a water sample can

be indicative of sewage being drained into the lake. Large amounts of E. Coil also make the

water undrinkable, and even non-swimmable. In swimmable beaches, levels of E. Coil

should not exceed eighty-eight colonies in a one hundred milliliter sample of water (EAI

Labs, 2011). This indicates that Upper Greenwood Lake could be unsafe to swim in, and

especially to drink from. This also indicates that sewage and wastewater may be dumped

into the lake, leading to an excess of bacteria colonies. If sewage is dumped into the lake,

disease-cause bacteria could be present. The high level of E. Coil found at Greenwood Lake

can be correlated to its land use. Because most of the area is urban, a possible cause of the

Page 47: Land Use Impact on Water Quality 

increased bacteria concentrations could be wastewater from anthropogenic sources. The

type of medium used to grow the bacteria could have an affect on the colonies seen. ECA

Check and Coliscan was used as a growth medium, and different mediums could provide

different amounts of bacteria.  

 

4.7 GIS

GIS and GEOWEB analysis showed a much larger percentage of land is used as

residential buffers in Upper Greenwood Lake compared to Greenwood Lake. This is most

likely a difference in the overall land use of the two lakes, in that Upper Greenwood Lake is

used primarily for residential property while Greenwood Lake has more commercial

property that is separated by vegetative buffers. Also, Upper Greenwood Lake’s buffer

percentage mostly came from wetland areas which are much more delicate than forested

buffers that are seen on Greenwood lake. Only the section of Greenwood Lake on the New

Jersey side was analyzed due to the size of the lake and separate data sets. Also, Surprise

Lake and Wawayanda were assumed to be close to 100% vegetative buffer due to time

constraints of the research. Further analysis should be done to distinguish optimal buffer

size to maximize land use in the area to balance buffer capacity.

4.8 Future Improvements

Due to certain availability constraints, timing of outside factors, and human error

different areas of the project could be improved to yield stronger results. An improvement

considered would be to conduct all measurements and sampling on one day. Sampling and

measurements took place over multiple days with varying conditions thus potentially

altering the results. Another aspect for future improvement would be sampling and

measuring Upper Greenwood Lake at its normal level. During the sample period, Upper

Greenwood lake was lowered approximately 3 feet.

Group Delegations:

All group members were responsible for field sampling, report writing, and

presentation generation.  Throughout the course of the project, different members broke

Page 48: Land Use Impact on Water Quality 

into smaller teams to perform data analysis.  Matt Heye and Brian Johnson were

responsible in data prep/analysis using the Flame Emission Spectrophotometer.  Brian

Dedeian was responsible for the data prep/analysis using the Hach for phosphorus content

from the water samples.  Aimee Aquino and Joe Miller were responsible for data

prep/analysis of the water samples using the Dionex for cations and anions. Once all data

analysis was completed, all members got together to build the report and presentation. 

Page 49: Land Use Impact on Water Quality 

References:

Yadav SK. “Heavy metals toxicity in plants: An overview on the role of glutathione and

phytochelatins in heavy metal stress tolerance of plants.” S Afr J Bot. 2010;76:16–179. 

USGS. “Phosphorus and Water.” The USGS Water Science School. Nov. 6, 2015. 

(New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, 2005) 

Skjelkvåle, Brit Lisa. “Factors influencing fluoride concentrations in Norwegian lakes.”

Water, Air, and Soil Pollution. September 1994. Springer.  

Orem et al. Sulfate as a Contaminant in Freshwater Ecosystems: Sources, Impacts, and

Mitigation. USGS, 2001.  

EAI Analytic Labs. “Bacteria in Surface Waters” 2011.

(http://www.eai-labs.com/services/recreational_water.html) 

Burkinaa, Viktoriia et al.  “Effects of pharmaceuticals present in aquatic environment on

Phase I metabolism in fish” Environmental Toxicology and Pharmacology. September 2015.

Sciencedirect. 

Das, Biplop et al.  “Watershed Land Use as a Determinant of Metal Concentrations in

Freshwater Systems.” Environmental Geochemistry and Health. December 2009. Springer

ResearchGate. 

Diebel, Matthew W., Jeffrey T. Maxted, Dale M. Robertson, Seungbong Han, and M. Jake

Vander Zanden. "Landscape Planning for Agricultural Nonpoint Source Pollution Reduction

III: Assessing Phosphorus and Sediment Reduction Potential." Environmental Management

(2008): 69-83. 

Sen, Ranen et al. “Measuring the Impacts of Land Use on Water Quality Influenced by Non-

Point Sources.” Current Science. 25 November 2014.  

Page 50: Land Use Impact on Water Quality 

Gerrard, John. Fundamentals of Soils. London: Routledge, 2000. Print. 

Xia et al. (2010) “Heavy metals in urban soils with various types of land use in Beijing,

China” ScienceDirect.  

Singh. R et al. (2011) “Heavy metals and living systems: An overview” Indian Journal of

Pharmacology.  

  

Page 51: Land Use Impact on Water Quality 

Acknowledgments:

Dr. DaSilva for cooperation with the lab equipment and insight into testing parameters. 

Johannus Franken of the NJDEP for supplying field data on all four lakes in our study area. 

Dr. Davi and Dr. Griffiths for feedback on testing sites and methods.