Michelle L. Taylor | Geology Reports

USGS2013

Pesticides in Wyoming Groundwater, 2008-10

Groundwater samples were collected from 296 wells during 1995-2006 as part of a baseline study of pesticides in Wyoming groundwater. In 2009, a previous report summarized the results of the baseline sampling and the statistical evaluation of the occurrence of pesticides in relation to selected natural and anthropogenic (human-related) characteristics. During 2008-10, the U.S. Geological Survey, in cooperation with the Wyoming Department of Agriculture, resampled a subset (52) of the 296 wells sampled during 1995-2006 baseline study in order to compare detected compounds and respective concentrations between the two sampling periods and to evaluate the detections of new compounds. The 52 wells were distributed similarly to sites used in the 1995-2006 baseline study with respect to geographic area and land use within the geographic area of interest. Because of the use of different types of reporting levels and variability in reporting-level values during both the 1995-2006 baseline study and the 2008-10 resampling study, analytical results received from the laboratory were recensored. Two levels of recensoring were used to compare pesticides—a compound-specific assessment level (CSAL) that differed by compound and a common assessment level (CAL) of 0.07 microgram per liter. The recensoring techniques and values used for both studies, with the exception of the pesticide 2,4-D methyl ester, were the same. Twenty-eight different pesticides were detected in samples from the 52 wells during the 2008-10 resampling study. Pesticide concentrations were compared with several U.S. Environmental Protection Agency drinking-water standards or health advisories for finished (treated) water established under the Safe Drinking Water Act. All detected pesticides were measured at concentrations smaller than U.S. Environmental Protection Agency drinking-water standards or health advisories where applicable (many pesticides did not have standards or advisories). One or more pesticides were detected at concentrations greater than the CAL in water from 16 of 52 wells sampled (about 31 percent) during the resampling study. Detected pesticides were classified into one of six types: herbicides, herbicide degradates, insecticides, insecticide degradates, fungicides, or fungicide degradates. At least 95 percent of detected pesticides were classified as herbicides or herbicide degradates. The number of different pesticides detected in samples from the 52 wells was similar between the 1995-2006 baseline study (30 different pesticides) and 2008-2010 resampling study (28 different pesticides). Thirteen pesticides were detected during both studies. The change in the number of pesticides detected (without regard to which pesticide was detected) in groundwater samples from each of the 52 wells was evaluated and the number of pesticides detected in groundwater did not change for most of the wells (32). Of those that did have a difference between the two studies, 17 wells had more pesticide detections in groundwater during the 1995-2006 baseline study, whereas only 3 wells had more detections during the 2008-2010 resampling study. The difference in pesticide concentrations in groundwater samples from each of the 52 wells was determined. Few changes in concentration between the 1995-2006 baseline study and the 2008-2010 resampling study were seen for most detected pesticides. Seven pesticides had a greater concentration detected in the groundwater from the same well during the baseline sampling compared to the resampling study. Concentrations of prometon, which was detected in 17 wells, were greater in the baseline study sample compared to the resampling study sample from the same well 100 percent of the time. The change in the number of pesticides detected (without regard to which pesticide was detected) in groundwater samples from each of the 52 wells with respect to land use and geographic area was calculated. All wells with land use classified as agricultural had the same or a smaller number of pesticides detected in the resampling study compared to the baseline study. All wells in the Bighorn Basin geographic area also had the same or a smaller number of pesticides detected in the resampling study compared to the baseline study.

Wyoming↗

USGS2013

Characterization of water quality and biological communities, Fish Creek, Teton County, Wyoming, 2007-2011

Fish Creek, an approximately 25-kilometer-long tributary to Snake River, is located in Teton County in western Wyoming near the town of Wilson. Fish Creek is an important water body because it is used for irrigation, fishing, and recreation and adds scenic value to the Jackson Hole properties it runs through. Public concern about nuisance growths of aquatic plants in Fish Creek has been increasing since the early 2000s. To address these concerns, the U.S. Geological Survey conducted a study in cooperation with the Teton Conservation District to characterize the hydrology, water quality, and biologic communities of Fish Creek during 2007–11. The hydrology of Fish Creek is strongly affected by groundwater contributions from the area known as the Snake River west bank, which lies east of Fish Creek and west of Snake River. Because of this continuous groundwater discharge to the creek, land-use activities in the west bank area can affect the groundwater quality. Evaluation of nitrate isotopes and dissolved-nitrate concentrations in groundwater during the study indicated that nitrate was entering Fish Creek from groundwater, and that the source of nitrate was commonly a septic/sewage effluent or manure source, or multiple sources, potentially including artificial nitrogen fertilizers, natural soil organic matter, and mixtures of sources. Concentrations of dissolved nitrate and orthophosphate, which are key nutrients for growth of aquatic plants, generally were low in Fish Creek and occasionally were less than reporting levels (not detected). One potential reason for the low nutrient concentrations is that nutrients were being consumed by aquatic plant life that increases during the summer growing season, as a result of the seasonal increase in temperature and larger number of daylight hours. Several aspects of Fish Creek’s hydrology contribute to higher productivity and biovolume of aquatic plants in Fish Creek than typically observed in streams of its size in Wyoming. Especially in the winter, the proportionately large, continuous gain of groundwater into Fish Creek in the perennial section keeps most of the creek free of ice. Because sunlight can still reach the streambed in Fish Creek and the water is still flowing, aquatic plants continue to photosynthesize in the winter, albeit at a lower level of productivity. Additionally, the cobble and large gravel substrate in Fish Creek provides excellent attachment points for aquatic plants, and when combined with Fish Creek’s channel stability allows rapid growth of aquatic plants once conditions allow during the spring. The aquatic plant community of Fish Creek was different than most streams in Wyoming in that it contains many different macrophytes—including macroalgae such as long streamers of Cladophora , aquatic vascular plants, and moss; most other streams in the state contain predominantly algae. From the banks of Fish Creek, the bottom of the stream sometimes appeared to be a solid green carpet. A shift was observed from higher amounts of microalgae in April/May to higher amounts macrophytes in August and October, and differences in the relative abundance of microalgae and macrophytes were statistically significant between seasons. Differences in dissolved-nitrate concentrations and in the nitrogen-to-phosphorus ratio were significantly different between seasons, as concentrations of dissolved nitrate decreased from April/May to August and October. It is likely that dissolved-nitrate concentrations in Fish Creek were lower in August and October because macrophytes were quickly utilizing the nutrient, and a negative correlation between macro-phytes and nitrate was found. Macroinvertebrates also were sampled because of their role as indicators of water quality and their documented responses to perturbation such as degradation of water quality and habitat. Statistically significant seasonal differences were noted in the macroinvertebrate community. Taxa richness and relative abundance of Ephemeroptera, Plecoptera, and Trichoptera, which tend to be intolerant of water-quality degradation, decreased from April/May to August; the same time period saw a corresponding increase in Diptera and noninsects, particularly Oligochaeta (worms) that are more tolerant. Seasonal changes in macroinvertebrate functional feeding groups were significantly different. The relative abundance of gatherer-collector and scraper feeding groups decreased from April/May to August, accompanied by an increase in filterer-collector and shredders feeding groups. Seasonal changes in feeding groups might be due to the seasonal shift in aquatic plant communities, as indicated by comparison with other streams in the area that had fewer aquatic macrophytes than Fish Creek. Statistical tests of macroinvertebrate metrics indicated few differences between years or biological sampling sites on Fish Creek, although the site farthest upstream sometimes was different not only in terms of macroinvertebrates but also in streamflow, water quality, and aquatic plants. Potential effects of contributions of additional nutrients to the Fish Creek ecosystem beyond the conditions sampled during the study period are not known. However, because virtually all of the detectable dissolved nitrate commonly was consumed by aquatic plants in August (leaving dissolved nitrate less than the reporting level in water samples), it is possible that increased nutrient contributions could cause increased growth of aquatic plants. Additional long-term monitoring of the stream, with concurrent data analysis and interpretation would be needed to determine the effects of additional nutrients on the aquatic plant community and on higher levels of the food chain.

Wyoming↗