Ghost River

1
Ghost River Waiparous Creek in Waiparous
Village on June 21, 2007
2
WATER QUALITY STUDY OF WAIPAROUS CREEK,
FALLENTIMBER CREEKAND GHOST RIVER

• Prepared for Alberta Environment Completed by
  Clearwater Environmental Consultants
• in February 2006

3
Study Objectives set by AENV

• Attempt to determine whether there is a linkage
  between random camping and off-highway vehicles
  (OHV) activities and water quality in these three
  rivers
• Document baseline water quality data prior to
  the implementation of an access management plan
  by the Alberta Government (SRD)

4
Study Activities

• Water quality monitoring by AENV during 2004 and
  2005 (some assistance provided by GWAS)
• Continuous measurements of turbidity (among other
  parameters) as surrogate for total suspended
  solids (TSS) which is a key parameter indicative
  of land disturbance and water quality degradation
• Counts of vehicular movements were taken at three
  sites along Waiparous Creek

5
Key Findings

• Sediment loading coefficients in the lower
  regions of Waiparous Creek and Ghost River were
  much greater than would be expected in rivers
  draining a similarly forested environment in the
  upper foothills of southern Alberta (they were
  even greater than loading coefficients in streams
  draining agricultural lands at lower elevations
  where sediment erosion is a common problem)

6
Key Findings (continued)

• Weight of evidence argument links motorized
  recreational activities with the large increase
  in sediment load between the upstream and
  downstream stations on Waiparous Creek
• Mechanism of sediment release is best explained
  by observations of the erosion caused by vehicles
  on OHVs tracks at fording points, where tracks
  run into the stream, and from tracks along the
  banks
• Note Roger Meyer of SRD is quoted as telling the
  study team Restriction of road usage to the
  winter months in the past limited the release
  of silt by erosion to the creek. Now these roads
  are accessible during the wet summer months when
  they are most susceptible to erosion.

7
(No Transcript)
8
More Conclusions of Analysis

• Increases in nutrients, bacteria and certain
  metals (Al, Fe) are often associated with high
  TSS loads
• High TSS loads may have significant ecological
  effects downstream when sediments are deposited
  in slower flowing reaches of the river
• Although Bow river water quality is not affected
  (because the Ghost Reservoir acts like a settling
  tank, sediment build-up in the reservoir should
  be of concern to Transalta (sediment loading over
  just a 2 months period was 1,265,412kg which is
  about 500 cubic metres or 20,000 cubic feet of
  sediment most of which ends up in the reservoir)

9
More Details

• TSS Loading coefficient increased between the
  upper Waiparous and the DND Camp from 6.34 kg/ha
  to 47.1kg/ha
• For the actual area along Waiparous Creek the
  loading coefficient is even higher, i.e. 57kg/ha
  which is almost ten times higher than upstream
• Comparative values for the Elbow River above and
  below Bragg Creek are 1.74 and 12.04 kg/ha
  respectively.Note Loading coefficients are the
  total mass of TSS in kg carried by a watercourse,
  divided by the area of the drainage basin over a
  period of time, usually calculated on an annual
  basis