Trends in Water Quality of Tributaries Entering Cootes Paradise Marsh,

Hamilton

Stacey Van Opstal &

Christopher Polap

Background

The Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement of 1978 marked a commitment by the Canadian and United States Governments to protect and enhance the quality of the waters of the Great Lakes.

Each government made a commitment to restore and maintain the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of the Great Lakes Ecosystem

As a part of the Agreement, Areas of Concern (AOC) were listed

Hamilton Harbour is one of these AOC’s, with concerns since 1974

Areas of Concern

In 1987 the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement was amended to incorporate new commitments to reduce toxic pollutants through the development and implementation of Lake-wide Management Plans

Resulted in Remedial Action Plans These plans emphasized the engagement of citizens

and local governments to restore water quality and rapidly reduce the levels of toxic pollutants in the lake ecosystem.

Remedial Action Plans Should Include: Identification of Beneficial Use Impairments (BUIs) and

causes Criteria for the restoration of beneficial uses that take

into account local conditions and are established in consultation with the local community

Remedial measures to be taken including identification of entities responsible for implementing these measures

A summary of the implementation of remedial measures taken and the status of the beneficial use

A description of surveillance and monitoring processes to track the effectiveness of remedial measures and confirm restoration of beneficial uses

The Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement The Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement has been amended multiple times over the years with

the last amendment in 2012

The objectives of the 2012 agreement state the Great Lakes should:

Be a source of safe, high-quality drinking water

Allow for swimming and other recreational use, unrestricted by environmental quality concerns

Allow for human consumption of fish and wildlife unrestricted by concerns due to harmful pollutants

Be free from pollutants in quantities or concentrations that could be harmful to human health, wildlife, or organisms, through direct or indirect exposure through the food chain

Support healthy and productive wetlands and other habitats to sustain resilient populations of native species

Be free from nutrients that directly or indirectly enter the water as a result of human activity in amounts that promote the growth of algae and cyanobacteria that interfere with aquatic ecosystem health or human use of the ecosystem

Be free from the introduction and spread of aquatic invasive species and free from the introduction and spread of terrestrial invasive species that adversely impact the quality of the waters of the Great Lakes

Be free from the harmful impacts of contaminated groundwater

Be free from other substances, materials or conditions that may negatively impact the chemical, physical, or biological integrity of the waters of the Great Lakes

BUIs For Hamilton Harbour

Restrictions on fish and wildlife consumption Degradation of fish and wildlife populations Degradation of benthos Eutrophication or undesirable algae Beach closings and water contact sports Degradation of aesthetics Loss of fish and wildlife habitat Fish tumours and other deformities (requires further assessment) Bird or animal deformities or reproduction problems (requires further

assessment) Degradation of phytoplankton and zooplankton populations

(requires further assessment)

What we do

Water quality monitoring program in partnership with the Hamilton Harbour Remedial Action Plan (HHRAP), Ministry of Environment, Conservation and Parks, the City of Hamilton, and the Royal Botanical Gardens

The Hamilton Conservation Authority has been involved since spring of 2014. 2018 was the fifth year of monitoring by HCA

The monitoring program has been adapted from a previous sampling program undertaken by the Royal Botanical Gardens (RBG) prior to 2014

Program historically managed by RBG (prior to 2014)

Monitoring Program

Designed to help establish inputs of nutrient, sediments, and E. coli from the main watercourses in the HCA watershed to Cootes Paradise Marsh

Expanded sampling period from April - November in 2015 to year-round in 2016 with 2017 being the second period of year-round sampling

Target heavy rain events using automated composite samplers

Monitoring Sites

CP 11 Chedoke Creek CP 18 Borers Creek CP 7 Spencer Creek AC 1 Ancaster Creek (downstream) AC 2 Sulphur Creek AC 3 Ancaster Creek (upstream) AC 4 Ancaster Creek Tributary

Monitoring Sites

CP 7 Spencer Creek CP 11 Chedoke Creek CP 18 Borers Creek AC 1 Ancaster Creek (downstream) AC 2 Sulphur Creek AC 3 Ancaster Creek (upstream) AC 5 Ancaster Creek (upstream) CC 3 Chedoke Creek Tributary (downstream of CSO) CC 5 Chedoke Creek Tributary (upstream of CSO) CC 7 Chedoke Creek Tributary (near headwaters) CC 9 Chedoke Creek Tributary (upstream of CSO)

Monitoring Program - ISCOs Heavy rain events are targeted using automated

composite samplers Ancaster Creek (AC-1) 2015 Lower Spencer Creek (Dundas, Market St.) 2016 Middle Spencer Creek (Hwy 5) 2017 Ancaster Creek (AC-5 at Wilson St.) late 2017

By expanding storm event sampling a further

understanding of how land uses , conditions, and run-off affect water quality during heavy wet events

Objectives and Goals

HCA analyzes results based on exceedances of preliminary targets, average overall concentration; both seasonal and annual, average wet event and dry event concentrations, and long-term trends

The data collected for this program provides long-term information about water quality conditions and trends at the mouths of key watercourses

The program also helps to establish water quality targets for watercourses draining into Cootes Paradise

The ultimate goal of the HHRAP is to identify sources of inputs and to delist the harbour as an Area of Concern

Parameters Parameter Units Target/Objective Reference

Unionized Ammonia mg/L 0.02 mg/L HHRAP/PWQO

Nitrate as N mg/L 3 mg/L CWQG

Nitrite as N mg/L 0.06 mg/L CWQG

o-Phosphate as P mg/L n/a

Total Phosphorous mg/L 0.03 mg/L PWQO

Total Suspended Solids mg/L 25 mg/L HHRAP

Volatile Suspended Solids

mg/L n/a

Escherichia coli CFU/100mL 100 CFU/100mL PWQO

Site Data Timelines

Sites CP-7, CP-11 and CP-18 established by the RBG have initial data for the year 1974. After this time routine sampling at each site started during different years

CP-7 → 1989-2018 CP-11 → 1999-2018 CP-18 → 2000-2018 AC-1 to AC-4 → 2014-2018 AC- 5 → 2018 CC-3, CC-5, CC-7, CC-9 → 2018

CP-7 Spencer Creek

Date TSS TP e.coli Nitrate1975 35 0.083 0.621989 36.33 0.132 1.1891990 45.30 0.154 2.8681991 35.42 0.198 1.3131992 29.14 0.135 0.8361993 33.25 0.1281994 53.82 0.0651995 45.60 0.061 0.8651996 26.13 0.080 0.8351997 12.23 0.052 0.5411998 16.64 0.102 0.6371999 10.69 0.183 0.3512000 17.88 0.056 289.8 0.5752001 22.68 0.064 643.7 0.8792002 15.98 0.056 1122.3 0.7832003 18.51 0.060 620.0 0.8672004 44.73 0.161 936.5 0.9982005 30.86 0.084 643.6 0.8962006 99.73 0.146 937.5 0.7152007 21.20 0.104 902.0 0.7212008 28.79 0.077 549.3 0.7132009 33.09 0.064 518.6 0.7312010 16.78 0.056 754.2 0.5882011 17.93 0.069 740.8 0.5582012 18.66 0.051 602.2 0.4952013 19.84 0.054 412.4 0.4652014 36.07 0.068 352.0 0.4212015 31.38 0.067 393.5 0.5772016 17.82 0.049 228.3 0.7622017 9.69 0.048 180.3 0.6842018 16.5 0.065 389.7 0.625

CP-7 Wet vs Dry

Year TSS TP E.coli Nitrate TSS TP E.coli Nitrate1975 35.0 0.083 0.621989 36.2 0.157 1.45 41.8 0.115 0.991990 48.9 0.157 3.03 13.0 0.130 1.371991 35.4 0.198 1.311992 26.6 0.092 0.87 40.5 0.331 0.711993 23.1 0.118 93.9 0.2001994 55.9 0.067 37.3 0.0501995 43.7 0.072 0.42 48.5 0.046 1.541996 17.8 0.074 0.75 51.0 0.097 1.091997 12.4 0.048 0.47 12.0 0.057 0.651998 13.9 0.106 0.64 29.0 0.084 0.641999 10.1 0.182 0.39 14.0 0.190 0.152000 14.3 0.056 289.8 0.57 46.3 0.058 0.602001 20.5 0.061 538.2 0.63 26.5 0.070 880.7 1.322002 13.9 0.054 990.5 0.79 24.2 0.067 1850.1 0.772003 15.3 0.056 448.5 0.87 31.3 0.073 2262.7 0.862004 29.6 0.200 537.9 0.98 80.0 0.071 3415.4 1.042005 25.8 0.077 686.5 0.89 44.4 0.104 541.7 0.932006 16.9 0.051 467.4 0.72 199.1 0.260 2161.3 0.712007 21.6 0.121 1016.4 0.73 20.1 0.059 656.0 0.712008 9.3 0.040 729.0 0.78 53.9 0.119 433.8 0.632009 17.9 0.038 223.9 0.74 51.7 0.095 1201.0 0.722010 17.8 0.060 772.2 0.61 8.0 0.020 610.0 0.422011 17.5 0.042 670.8 0.56 22.0 0.342 2000.0 0.572012 16.4 0.046 555.0 0.50 28.7 0.070 869.5 0.482013 22.0 0.058 415.8 0.43 16.1 0.046 406.6 0.522014 13.5 0.042 218.2 0.42 63.1 0.100 624.9 0.422015 9.5 0.035 215.9 0.50 84.0 0.143 1662.7 0.752016 7.5 0.029 204.4 0.68 42.8 0.104 308.4 0.982017 9.1 0.049 139.0 0.75 12.1 0.044 436.6 0.632018 13.2 0.066 373.6 0.63 34.9 0.056 502.0 0.63

Average 21.2 0.082 495.9 0.79 43.8 0.110 1156.8 0.77

Dry Wet

CP-11 Chedoke Creek

Date TSS TP e.coli Nitrate1975 53.0 0.295 18399.7 1.671999 39.4 0.321 1.722000 26.7 0.197 436.9 1.392001 17.6 0.247 836.6 1.782002 37.2 0.278 785.9 1.102003 33.5 0.237 448.6 1.642004 51.8 0.266 2027.0 1.712005 30.1 0.238 469.3 1.812006 45.4 0.268 2652.8 1.692007 40.1 0.333 404.1 1.412008 32.0 0.229 604.9 1.462009 19.0 0.154 4873.4 1.672010 16.0 0.194 570.2 1.742011 31.1 0.248 762.3 1.232012 24.4 0.262 745.9 1.4220132014 30.1 0.475 61077.8 1.022015 23.5 0.468 15734.8 1.362016 25.3 0.437 5324.5 1.472017 17.1 0.478 17258.7 1.622018 27.5 0.903 73652.8 1.46

CP-11 Wet vs Dry

Year TSS TP E.coli Nitrate TSS TP E.coli Nitrate1975 53.0 0.295 18399.7 1.671994 48.6 0.3521999 43.4 0.303 1.77 15.0 0.430 1.402000 19.9 0.188 436.9 1.56 80.8 0.268 0.022001 18.6 0.251 218.7 1.75 16.0 0.241 8756.8 1.822002 35.0 0.293 718.6 1.28 45.6 0.218 1124.5 0.422003 35.2 0.242 371.9 1.81 26.8 0.217 949.2 0.952004 26.2 0.197 916.0 1.95 111.5 0.428 12933.0 1.122005 27.2 0.229 2165.0 2.09 37.9 0.262 992.2 1.092006 41.7 0.305 581.4 2.00 49.9 0.224 16398.8 1.322007 42.0 0.320 228.6 1.29 35.0 0.367 1846.9 1.722008 24.7 0.231 349.3 1.85 41.2 0.228 955.9 0.972009 13.3 0.140 1201.5 1.68 26.6 0.172 19766.7 1.652010 15.9 0.189 565.5 1.64 16.8 0.245 620.0 2.802011 26.3 0.207 394.0 1.23 79.3 0.660 560000.0 1.172012 18.5 0.247 288.4 1.49 50.9 0.333 53665.6 1.1120132014 22.4 0.445 36365.7 1.04 39.3 0.512 113792.3 1.002015 17.2 0.317 3092.6 1.34 37.3 0.829 780797.4 1.412016 26.0 0.450 3436.1 1.72 19.9 0.361 14587.2 2.112017 19.0 0.475 11836.4 1.60 13.2 0.490 109350.9 0.742018 28.6 0.967 71990.7 1.45 20.4 0.521 84463.0 1.50

Average 28.7 0.316 8081.9 1.61 40.2 0.369 104764.7 1.28

Dry Wet

CP-18 Borers Creek

Date TSS TP e.coli Nitrate 1975 66.5 0.241 3589.7 0.352000 30.3 0.131 597.8 1.932001 15.6 0.110 59.0 2.072002 17.3 0.128 395.5 3.012003 12.4 0.075 203.8 1.322004 26.2 0.093 474.8 2.402005 15.3 0.099 417.7 1.212006 43.3 0.113 521.5 1.122007 36.9 0.137 215.6 1.142008 11.7 0.072 875.7 0.912009 13.5 0.060 957.3 1.162010 12.9 0.057 158.5 0.992011 31.7 0.124 497.6 0.962012 11.4 0.025 129.9 0.462013 4.6 0.037 201.3 0.422014 14.9 0.060 246.2 0.332015 17.9 0.059 118.1 0.662016 35.0 0.149 124.1 0.832017 6.7 0.042 70.0 0.682018 8.6 0.055 251.1 0.47

CP-18 Wet vs Dry

Year TSS TP E.coli Nitrate TSS TP E.coli Nitrate2000 30.3 0.13 597.8 1.932001 18.3 0.13 41.5 0.90 1.8 0.04 340.0 0.422002 13.7 0.13 327.2 3.29 45.6 0.13 1800.0 0.792003 10.4 0.07 171.7 1.16 20.6 0.11 404.0 1.992004 24.2 0.08 280.1 2.66 30.9 0.12 1627.6 1.792005 9.5 0.09 410.3 1.47 28.8 0.11 435.7 0.622006 18.5 0.09 344.0 1.57 73.1 0.14 859.3 0.572007 49.5 0.17 294.4 1.24 3.3 0.05 94.0 0.872008 5.7 0.05 927.0 1.06 19.4 0.09 835.0 0.732009 5.7 0.04 522.0 1.39 23.9 0.09 1755.5 0.872010 14.2 0.06 190.7 1.09 1.5 0.02 30.0 0.132011 23.7 0.10 377.4 0.94 112.0 0.36 7900.0 1.092012 5.2 0.06 182.4 0.41 22.0 0.05 299.3 0.612013 3.3 0.04 181.7 0.41 6.9 0.04 240.9 0.442014 5.2 0.05 168.1 0.35 26.6 0.08 360.7 0.312015 4.1 0.03 60.6 0.44 40.1 0.12 511.1 1.042016 12.6 0.04 88.3 0.56 79.7 0.41 273.9 1.312017 7.7 0.04 50.9 0.76 4.4 0.05 220.7 0.532018 6.8 0.05 218.3 0.43 16.1 0.07 581.4 0.70

Average 14.1 0.08 286.0 1.16 30.9 0.11 1031.6 0.82

Dry Wet

Summary: Total Phosphorus

Spencer Creek (CP-7) and Borers Creek (CP-18) trending down towards meeting target of 0.03 mg/L

Chedoke Creek (CP-11) began trending down while RBG sampled, current trend is upwards

For all site peaks of average TP generally occur during wet events

Summary: Total Suspended Solids

All three sites show a downwards trend in total suspended solids concentrations

TSS concentrations are higher during wet events Sites CP-7 and CP-18 have average concentrations

below the target level for couple years At CP-18 trend is less clear when looking at the wet vs

dry events split up

Summary E.Coli Spencer Creek and Borers Creek trending downwards Peaks can be seen during wet events possibly due to

runoff Chedoke creek has seen a dramatic increase in e.coli

levels in the past five years When looking at wet vs dry, wet events appear to be

causing the high overall geomean at this site Even during dry periods the trend is still increasing at CP-

11

Summary: Nitrates

Spencer Creek and Borers Creek trending down, well below the target of 3 mg/L

Chedoke Creek was trending downwards while RBG took samples, since 2014 there has been an increasing trend of nitrate concentration, however, still below target

Ancaster Creek Short–term Trends

Almost 5 years of data from 2014-present One site discontinued due to small flow input and

typically below target results Results broken up into dry vs wet days Results broken up seasonally, including the CP sites from

when HCA took over monitoring Note that more monitoring needs to be completed to

develop higher certainty in trends

Total Phosphorus

Total Phosphorus

E.coli

E.coli

E.coli

E.coli

Total Suspended Solids

Total Suspended Solids

Nitrate

Nitrate

Summary of Trends

Improvements have been made in water quality across the watershed

Nitrate levels are consistently below the target of 3 mg/L Wet events typically result in higher concentrations of

nutrients and bacteria CP-11 has been problematic in 2018 Total Phosphorus still has averages above the target of

0.03 mg/L at all sites Total Suspended Solids is trending downward at most

sites

Future of the Program

Expanded monitoring in 2018 to 5 new sites, 4 on Chedoke and 1 on Ancaster Creek will lead to new avenues for analysis

Conduct further analysis of data to parse out high flow events and snow melt

Continue the long-term monitoring of the sites Install flow monitoring gauges along Chedoke and Spencer

Creek to better quantify loadings into Cootes Paradise. Work with partners on ways to meet targets, and alert

partners when results indicate pressing concern

Thank you Contact:

svanopst@conservationhamilton.ca chris.polap@conservationhamilton.ca