Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
Report type: Research Report
Author: Bachelor of Water Management –Year 4
Course: River Basin Management
Date of publicati...
II
System Analysis of the Guadalete River Basin
Ecological system assessment of the river and its environment
What is the ...
III
Preface
The EU IP (intensive programmes) project RAMIP (River Delta System Analysis and
Management in Practice) has br...
IV
Summary
A water system analysis was conducted in the Guadalete River Basin where the
aspects of geomorphology, hydrolog...
V
Table of Abbreviations
EU IP European Intensive Program
IDRIAM Stream hydro-morphological evaluation,
analysis and monit...
VI
List of Authors
Barbara Ansaloni / Francesco Cassari Francesco / Enrico Duo / Tommaso Furlani /
Serena Miazzi / Alessan...
VII
List of Figures
Figure 1: Gaudalete River Basin ______________________________________________________________________...
VIII
List of Graphs
Graph 1: Morphological quality index of the Guadalete river __________________________________________...
9
Table of Contents
Preface..................................................................................................
10
5.1 Materials and methods.................................................................................................
11
8.5 Conflict and Problems.................................................................................................
1
1. Introduction
1.1 Background
The Guadalete River is a river in Spain, located in the region of Andalucía and
originate...
2
1.2 Assignment
More and more pressure is put on water systems, especially in delta areas and
estuarine regions. Estuarie...
3
1.2.2 Research Questions:
Main Question
What is the State of Guadalete River Basin?
This state is defined by the chemica...
4
2. Research Design
2.1 Area
The area of the Guadalete river, see Figure 1, that was investigated for this study
project ...
5
2.2 Organizations:
The Guadalete River is investigated by a team of student engineers from 14 till 20
of September 2013,...
6
Smaller particles should be taken back to the laboratory where they will be sieved
and weighted.
Soil type will be deter...
7
2.3.3 Chemistry
This discipline describes the chemical aspects of the Guadalete river system, taking
into account:
 Oxy...
8
2.3.4 Biology
This discipline describes the biological aspects of the Guadalete River and
surroundings. The emphasis lie...
9
4. Geomorphology
4.1. Aim and research questions
The geomorphology group will investigate the geomorphological quality o...
10
4.3 Methods
4.3.1 IDRIAM evaluation forms
To determine the geomorphological quality of the location an IDRIAM (stream
h...
11
satellite pseudo ranges and actual (internally computed) pseudo ranges, and
receiver stations may correct their pseudo ...
12
4.3.4 Sediments
The composition of sediments was established in the field using three sampling
methods: Transect Line M...
13
Fine sediments were sampled in the field using a grab sampler. The samples were
stored in labeled plastic bags and take...
14
Graph 1: Morphological quality index of the Guadalete river
Measuring point MAI MQI Quality Class
-10 0.06 0.94 Excelle...
15
Measuring
point
Day visited Time
visited
Coordinates Cross-
section
Sediment
sample
SS
sample
-10 17.09.2013 13.20 N 36...
16
Graph 2: Grain size distribution
Underneath, a Hjulstrom diagram is displayed (Figure 8). It shows the relation
between...
17
From point 60 and upstream, the flow velocities are relatively high (93-122 cm/s).
As the Hjulstrom diagram shows, at t...
18
4.4.3 Cross-sections
In this paragraph cross sections in point -10, 20, 30, 60 and 80 are shown. Each
cross section con...
19
Graph 6: Point 30 – Cross Section
Graph 7: Point 60 – Cross Section
96.5
97
97.5
98
98.5
99
-70 -60 -50 -40 -30 -20 -10...
20
Graph 8: Point 80 – Cross Section
Discussion
It can be seen that cross section are less than point measurement because ...
21
Graph 9: Banfull Discharge of the Guadalete river
4.4.6 Slope
The general slope, local slope and elevation are shown in...
22
Graph 11: Elevation of the Guadalete river
Graph 12: Local slope of the Guadalete river basin
4.4.7 General discussion
...
23
measurements points (mostly downstream), restricting the cross section area of
bank full discharge. The natural river b...
24
4.5 Conclusion
The sample locations were selected trough discussion with all the groups and they
were pointed out on a ...
25
5. Hydrology
The aim of the hydrological assessment and analysis is to determine the character
of the river flow and id...
26
5.1 Materials and methods
The target stretch of the river was divided in two parts - upstream and
downstream of point 6...
27
Figure 11: Illutration of the Qliner method measurement
After the first measurement, the device is then moved (see Figu...
28
5.2 Results and discussion
The final product of field work is the calculated volumetric flow rate in the cross
section ...
29
Measuring
point
Location Coordinates
Flow rate
m^3/s
Velocity
m/s
(centre of
the
stream)
0
Outflow of
Zahara
Reservoir
...
30
The flow rate values for River Guadalete show a gradual increase in flow towards
the mouth of the river. In comparison ...
31
Figure 13: Side view of the SOBEK model
Figure 13 depicts the side view of the model - at the upstream boundary of the
...
32
In Figure 15: Velocity at point 110 you see that the velocity fluctuates between 0,15
m/s and 0,41 m/s due to the tidal...
33
Figure 16: Velocity at point 120
As a result we have built a basic model of the current situation, which can be used
to...
34
5.2.1 Groundwater
The stream of the Guadalete River is made up of overflow of groundwater in the
mountains, which is ma...
35
Aquifer Type
Input*
(
)
Output**
(
)
Salinity Alkalinity
El Puerto
Del Santa
Maria
Detrital*** 7.6 4 C4 S1
Jerez de la
...
36
Those aquifers and the Guadalete River are in constant interaction, although the
exchange of water varies over the seas...
37
The method introduced various weak points in measurement at once – the time
and the distance measurements as well as de...
38
5.3 Conclusion
Measurement results have led to the conclusion that the hydrology of the
Guadalete River is entirely con...
39
6. Chemistry
6.1. Methods and Material
The examined area is in between the inlet of the Guadalete into the Zahara
reser...
40
point
name
distan
ce
from
point
0 [km]
Meas
ured
yes/n
o
Location Reason
-10 -10,232
Yes Base point before Zahara
reser...
41
The samples taken in the field were done by dropping a sampling bucket from a
bridge or by throwing the bucket from the...
42
6.2 Results & Discussion
6.2.1 Oxygen
Oxygen concentration in Guadalete River was fairly good in all 26 sampling points...
43
6.2.2 pH
As seen in the Graph 15, the pH over the river’s course is fairly stable with
difference of 0.97 between the l...
44
6.2.3 Conductivity
Graph 16: Conductivity of the Guadalete river
As seen in graph 16 the conductivity along the river’s...
45
6.2.4 Nitrogen
Graph 17: Nitrogen levels in the Guadalete river
The main finding was that nitrogen levels after the wat...
46
6.2.5 Phosphorus
Total phosphorus values exceeded EU standard for surface water (<0.15 mg/L) in
several places: after V...
47
6.2.6 Lake stratification in Bornos reservoir
Samples were taken from Bornos reservoir at a point where the reservoir w...
48
The pH values showed the same, layered behavior. As seen in Graph 21, there was
a clear chemocline around 10 to 12 mete...
49
6.3 Conclusion
The waste water treatment plant in Jerez is the main pollution source in Guadalete
River, at the time wh...
50
6.4.3 Nitrate
The concentration of nitrate in 2012 and 2013 was similar in the above mentioned
sampling points. After t...
51
7. Biology
7.1 Materials & Methods
The Aim of this chapter is to have a detailed study of the relation between human
ac...
Guadalete river 2013 final report week 1
Guadalete river 2013 final report week 1
Guadalete river 2013 final report week 1
Guadalete river 2013 final report week 1
Guadalete river 2013 final report week 1
Guadalete river 2013 final report week 1
Guadalete river 2013 final report week 1
Guadalete river 2013 final report week 1
Guadalete river 2013 final report week 1
Guadalete river 2013 final report week 1
Guadalete river 2013 final report week 1
Guadalete river 2013 final report week 1
Guadalete river 2013 final report week 1
Guadalete river 2013 final report week 1
Guadalete river 2013 final report week 1
Guadalete river 2013 final report week 1
Guadalete river 2013 final report week 1
Guadalete river 2013 final report week 1
Guadalete river 2013 final report week 1
Guadalete river 2013 final report week 1
Guadalete river 2013 final report week 1
Guadalete river 2013 final report week 1
Guadalete river 2013 final report week 1
Guadalete river 2013 final report week 1
Guadalete river 2013 final report week 1
Guadalete river 2013 final report week 1
Guadalete river 2013 final report week 1
Guadalete river 2013 final report week 1
Guadalete river 2013 final report week 1
Guadalete river 2013 final report week 1
Guadalete river 2013 final report week 1
Guadalete river 2013 final report week 1
Guadalete river 2013 final report week 1
Guadalete river 2013 final report week 1
Guadalete river 2013 final report week 1
Guadalete river 2013 final report week 1
Guadalete river 2013 final report week 1
Guadalete river 2013 final report week 1
Guadalete river 2013 final report week 1
Guadalete river 2013 final report week 1
Guadalete river 2013 final report week 1
Guadalete river 2013 final report week 1
Guadalete river 2013 final report week 1
Guadalete river 2013 final report week 1
Guadalete river 2013 final report week 1
Guadalete river 2013 final report week 1
Guadalete river 2013 final report week 1
Guadalete river 2013 final report week 1
Guadalete river 2013 final report week 1
Guadalete river 2013 final report week 1
Guadalete river 2013 final report week 1
Guadalete river 2013 final report week 1
Guadalete river 2013 final report week 1
Guadalete river 2013 final report week 1
Guadalete river 2013 final report week 1
Guadalete river 2013 final report week 1
Guadalete river 2013 final report week 1
Guadalete river 2013 final report week 1
Guadalete river 2013 final report week 1
Guadalete river 2013 final report week 1
Guadalete river 2013 final report week 1
Guadalete river 2013 final report week 1
Guadalete river 2013 final report week 1
Guadalete river 2013 final report week 1
Guadalete river 2013 final report week 1
Guadalete river 2013 final report week 1
Guadalete river 2013 final report week 1
Guadalete river 2013 final report week 1
Guadalete river 2013 final report week 1
Guadalete river 2013 final report week 1
Guadalete river 2013 final report week 1
Guadalete river 2013 final report week 1
Guadalete river 2013 final report week 1
Guadalete river 2013 final report week 1
Guadalete river 2013 final report week 1
Guadalete river 2013 final report week 1
Guadalete river 2013 final report week 1
Guadalete river 2013 final report week 1
Guadalete river 2013 final report week 1
Guadalete river 2013 final report week 1
Guadalete river 2013 final report week 1
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Guadalete river 2013 final report week 1

1,369

Published on

Published in: Education, Technology
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
1,369
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
2
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
11
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Transcript of "Guadalete river 2013 final report week 1"

  1. 1. Report type: Research Report Author: Bachelor of Water Management –Year 4 Course: River Basin Management Date of publication: September 2013 Location: Cadiz, Spain Version number: 2.0 System Analysis of the Guadalete River Basin Ecological system assessment of the river and its environment
  2. 2. II System Analysis of the Guadalete River Basin Ecological system assessment of the river and its environment What is the State of Guadalete River Basin? This state is defined by the chemical, biological, hydrological and geomorphological properties of the river basin, as well as the involvement and influence of stakeholders Report type: Research Report Author: Bachelor of Water Management –Year 4 Course: River Basin Management Date of publication: September 2013 Location: Region of Cadiz, Spain Version number: 2.0
  3. 3. III Preface The EU IP (intensive programmes) project RAMIP (River Delta System Analysis and Management in Practice) has brought 48 students and 15 staffs together from 4 different universities to learn from each other various environment and risk disciplines aiming to integrate them in a specific field case study and apply these techniques and concepts for the river system analysis and management plans. The studies are done from biological, chemical, hydrological, geomorphological aspects that assess, discuss and analyze the situation of Guadalete River. The stakeholders from the river basin are interviewed for further information. The field week and analysis was conducted from Saturday 14/9 – Friday 20/9. In this report the results of the first week are presented and analyzed. In the second week the focus lies on vision and scenario building and measures to improve the actual state of the Guadalete River basin. The students and staff of four different Universities are responsible for the project: HZ University of Applied Sciences (The Netherlands), Helsinki Metropolia University of Applied Sciences (Finland), Ferrara University (Italy) and Cadiz University (Spain). The project is made possible by the financial contribution of the EU Lifelong Learning Programs
  4. 4. IV Summary A water system analysis was conducted in the Guadalete River Basin where the aspects of geomorphology, hydrology, chemistry and biology are taken into consideration. The geomorphological state of the river basin was assessed using IDRIAM system where the MQI is determined for each sampling spot. 50% of the MQI values were excellent. The geomorphologic state of the entire river basin is good with only poor areas where manmade structures are situated. The global slope of the river basin is 0.0056 for the upper river basin, 0.0019 for the middle and 0.0006 for the lower river basin. The hydrological assessment was conducted using two method; the OTT Qliner ultrasonic current profiler downstream and measuring line, pole and "flipper" upstream. The flow rate gradually increases from 5.3 m3/L at the Zahara outflow to 6 m3/L at the Bornos reservoir inflow. The dams regulate the water flow. After the Arcos dam the flow rate was 5.9 m3/L and gradually increases again to 11.3 m3/L at El Torno. A Sobek model was built. The hydrology of the Guadalete is entirely controlled through human engineering and is therefore an anthropologic system. The chemical assessment was conducting along the river course with in field measurements and laboratory analysis. The Hach-Lange spectrophotometer was used for the chemical analysis. The oxygen concentrations, pH levels were stable. The total nitrogen level only exceeded the EU standard for surface water (2.2 mg/L) after the WWTP of Jerez with a value of 8.29 mg/L. The total phosphorus level exceeded the EU standard for surface water (0.15 mg/L) at several sampling points. The highest being Villamartín with 0.486 mg/L and 0.345 mg/L after the WWTP of Jerez. The effluent water of the WWTP also exceeded the EU standards for effluent water for total phosphorus (1.0 mg/L) and total nitrogen (10 mg/L) with total phosphorus concentration of 1.5 mg/L and total nitrogen level of 46.60 mg/L. The Bornos Lake was stratified with no Oxygen at the bottom at the sampling point. The overall chemical state of the river is good with only point pollutions at Villamartín and especially after the WWTP of Jerez. The biological assessment was conducted using the saprobic index and biotic index. The biological state progressively decreases heading downstream, particularly after the WWTP of Jerez. Macrophytes indicate that the river is a nutrient and carbon rich environment. Certain macrophytes species discovered at three different locations indicate a nutrient poor environment. In addition, the stakeholders of the river basin were interviewed. Communication between stakeholders is poor and conflicts are common. Lack of community awareness increases pollution and illegal landfills were found. The attitude towards the river is negative and law enforcement is low.
  5. 5. V Table of Abbreviations EU IP European Intensive Program IDRIAM Stream hydro-morphological evaluation, analysis and monitoring system DGPS Differential Global Positioning System GPS Global Positioning System SW South West MQI Morphological Quality Index MAI d50,85 Discharge at 50%, 84% v Steady flow velocity Q Flow rate Qbd Flow rate of bank full discharge A Surface area Abd Area of bank full discharge SOBEK Software program for hydraulic modelling OTT Qliner Instrument for hydraulic measurments WWTP Waste water treatment plant
  6. 6. VI List of Authors Barbara Ansaloni / Francesco Cassari Francesco / Enrico Duo / Tommaso Furlani / Serena Miazzi / Alessandra Casari / Dorella Maruccia Anna Vasileva / Olga Gerasimenko / Eila Jenny Anneli Mylllylä / Bhawani Regmi / Sanchit Bista / Bipin Dulal María Rocio Ramos / Maria Aranda Garcia / Alexandre Martinez Schonemann / Laura Cadiz Berrera / Pablo Matin Binder / Gozalbes Carlos Garcia Lieke Beezemer / Eric Martinus Bisslik / Rebecca Naomi ter Borg / René Bouwmeester / Dirk Theodoor Henricus Bremmers / Rita Sofia Cardoso Vaina de Lemos / Tianyi Hu / Maarten Fritz / Godfried Gijsbert franciscus Kersten / Niek Wouter Koelen / Jevgenijs Kuzmins / Iris van der Laan / Joshi Lenferink / Arthur Ricardo van Pampus / Jelle Pieters / Gerardus Cornelis Nicolaas van der Pluijm / Laura Schneegans / Johannes Schoordijk / Martin Stefan Skaznik / Maria Orhideea Tatar / Forrest Tyler van Uchelen / Artis Vansovics / David Verschoor / Mengxiao Wang / Rudolf Wilhelmus Johannes Weterings / Marco Wiemer / Jerre Binne Doeke Wiersma / Nadine Maria Willems / Tianwen Xia
  7. 7. VII List of Figures Figure 1: Gaudalete River Basin ______________________________________________________________________________ 4 Figure 2: Elevation Measurements __________________________________________________________________________11 Figure 5: Metal gran size determinator _____________________________________________________________________12 Figure 6: Different grain sizes sorted by phi ________________________________________________________________13 Figure 7: Sieves in different grain sizes______________________________________________________________________13 Figure 8: Hjulstrom graph (http://dlgb.files.wordpress.com/2008/09/hjulstrom_curve_task.jpg )_____16 Figure 9: Layout of the sampling points aong the Guadalete river ________________________________________25 Figure 10: OTT QLiner method.______________________________________________________________________________26 Figure 11: Illutration of the Qliner method measurement _________________________________________________27 Figure 12: Example cross-section including wet and dry section. Of point 20_____________________________28 Figure 13: Side view of the SOBEK model ___________________________________________________________________31 Figure 14: Influence of the tidal weir________________________________________________________________________31 Figure 15: Velocity at point 110 _____________________________________________________________________________32 Figure 16: Velocity at point 120 _____________________________________________________________________________33 Figure 17: Precipitation map Rio Guadalete River Basin (Source: Presentation Javier Gracia). _________34 Figure 18: Main aquifers in the Guadalete River Basin (Source: Presentation Javier Gracia). ___________35 Figure 19: Map of the sampling points from the inlet of Zahara till Puerto de Santa Maria._____________39 Figure 20: Biological assessments provide information on the cumulative effects on aquatic communities from multiple stressors. (USEPA, 2003).______________________________________________________51 Figure 21: Main feedback relations within the ecosystem structure. (Adapted from Scheffer et al, 1993) ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________52 Figure 22: Map showing the location of sampling points. __________________________________________________54 Figure 23: Identification of the Sampling area in each of the sampling points. ___________________________57 Figure 24: Graphical representation of the Saprobic Index results along the River Guadalete. Color Legend: Green: β-mesosaprobic; Yellow: α-mesosaprobic. __________________________________________________________60 Figure 25: Example of two poor nutrient environment indicators found during the fieldwork. Right panel: Lithospermum officinale. Left panel: Montia fontana_______________________________________________61 Figure 26: Result map after applying the Biotic Index in sampling points.________________________________67 Figure 27: Macroinvertebrates found in the Guadalete basin. a) Ecdyonurus; b) Physella acuta; c) Hydropsychidae; d) Procambarus clarki. ___________________________________________________________________68 Figure 28: Land use of the Guadalete river basin region with the river highlighted in blue______________75 Figure 29: Cause and effect diagram ________________________________________________________________________85 Figure 30: DPSIR Analysis____________________________________________________________________________________87
  8. 8. VIII List of Graphs Graph 1: Morphological quality index of the Guadalete river ______________________________________________14 Graph 2: Grain size distribution _____________________________________________________________________________16 Graph 3: Velocity and grain size comparaison______________________________________________________________17 Graph 4: Point 10 – Cross Section ___________________________________________________________________________18 Graph 5: Point 20 – Cross Section ___________________________________________________________________________18 Graph 6: Point 30 – Cross Section ___________________________________________________________________________19 Graph 7: Point 60 – Cross Section ___________________________________________________________________________19 Graph 8: Point 80 – Cross Section ___________________________________________________________________________20 Graph 9: Banfull Discharge of the Guadalete river _________________________________________________________21 Graph 10: Global Slope of the Guadalete river ______________________________________________________________21 Graph 11: Elevation of the Guadalete river _________________________________________________________________22 Graph 12: Local slope of the Guadalete river basin_________________________________________________________22 Graph 13: measured velocities and calculated flow rates __________________________________________________30 Graph 14: Oxygen Concentration ____________________________________________________________________________42 Graph 15: pH of the Guadalete river_________________________________________________________________________43 Graph 16: Conductivity of the Guadalete river______________________________________________________________44 Graph 17: Nitrogen levels in the Guadalete river ___________________________________________________________45 Graph 19: Stratification of the temperature in Bornos reservoir __________________________________________47 Graph 20: Stratification of the oxygen in Bornos reservoir ________________________________________________47 Graph 21: Stratification of the pH in Bornos reservoir _____________________________________________________48 List of Tables Table 1: Morphological Quality Index classes_______________________________________________________________10 Table 2: Overview of the quality class appointed, by using the IDRIAM form _____________________________14 Table 3: Overview of the measurement points ______________________________________________________________15 Table 4: Measured velocities and calculated flow rates ____________________________________________________29 Table 5: Main aquifers in the Guadalete River Basin (Source: Lopez Geta, 2005)_________________________35 Table 6: table of the sampling points from the inlet of Zahara till Puerto de Santa Maria. ______________40 Table 7: Codification of sampling points and a short description__________________________________________54 Table 8: Grades assigned to different taxa according to its presence-absence in the water-body. (Extracted from De Pauw and Vannevel, 1991) ____________________________________________________________56 Table 9: Biochemical values used to classify the systems. Derived from Hamm (1969), Lange-Bertalot (1978, 1979) and Krammer and Lange-Bertalot (1986-1991) ____________________________________________59 Table 10: Macrophyte species found on each sampling point. First two rows shows geographic coordinates and sample point code respectively. ___________________________________________________________62 Table 11: Environmental needs for different macrophyte found in the sampling points._________________64 Table 12: Detail of the taxa found on sampling point 20. __________________________________________________66 Table 13: Detail of the taxa found on sampling point 90. __________________________________________________67 Table 14: Family list of macroinvertebrates found in the river Guadalete ________________________________69 Table 15: Comparison between Ebro occurring species and the ones found in the Guadalete River autochthonous and invasive species. (Extracted from Oscoz, 2009) _______________________________________70 Table 16: Stakeholders and their water use ________________________________________________________________77 Table 17: Influence of individual stakeholders, - 1 = very low / 2 = low / 3 = medium / 4 = high / 5 = very high ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________80 Table 18: Ecological issues concerning the Guadalete river basin _________________________________________89
  9. 9. 9 Table of Contents Preface........................................................................................................................................III Summary.................................................................................................................................... IV Table of Abbreviations ...........................................................................................................V List of Authors.......................................................................................................................... VI List of Figures..........................................................................................................................VII List of Graphs ........................................................................................................................VIII List of Tables .........................................................................................................................VIII 1. Introduction...........................................................................................................................1 1.1 Background................................................................................................................................1 1.2 Assignment.................................................................................................................................2 1.2.1 Aim & Goals ...........................................................................................................................................2 1.2.2 Research Questions:...........................................................................................................................3 2. Research Design ...................................................................................................................4 2.1 Area ..................................................................................................................................................4 2.2 Organizations:...............................................................................................................................5 2.3 Fields of Interest..........................................................................................................................5 2.3.1 Geomorphology ...................................................................................................................................5 2.3.2 Hydrology...............................................................................................................................................6 2.3.3 Chemistry...............................................................................................................................................7 2.3.4 Biology.....................................................................................................................................................8 2.3.5 Stakeholders..........................................................................................................................................8 4. Geomorphology ....................................................................................................................9 4.1. Aim and research questions...................................................................................................9 4.2 Materials.........................................................................................................................................9 4.3 Methods........................................................................................................................................ 10 4.3.1 IDRIAM evaluation forms .............................................................................................................10 4.3.2 Cross sections....................................................................................................................................10 4.3.3 Slopes....................................................................................................................................................11 4.3.4 Sediments............................................................................................................................................12 4.4 Results and Discussions......................................................................................................... 13 4.4.1 IDRIAM evaluation forms .............................................................................................................13 4.4.2 Sediment samples............................................................................................................................14 4.4.3 Cross-sections....................................................................................................................................18 4.4.5 Bank full discharge..........................................................................................................................20 4.4.6 Slope......................................................................................................................................................21 4.4.7 General discussion...........................................................................................................................22 4.5 Conclusion................................................................................................................................... 24 5. Hydrology ............................................................................................................................ 25
  10. 10. 10 5.1 Materials and methods........................................................................................................... 26 5.2 Results and discussion ........................................................................................................... 28 5.2.1 Groundwater......................................................................................................................................34 5.2.2 Measurement accuracy issues....................................................................................................36 5.2.3 Other discussion points.................................................................................................................37 5.2.4 Tidal influence...................................................................................................................................37 5.2.5 Weather................................................................................................................................................37 5.3 Conclusion................................................................................................................................... 38 6. Chemistry............................................................................................................................. 39 6.1. Methods and Material............................................................................................................ 39 6.2 Results & Discussion ............................................................................................................... 42 6.2.1 Oxygen..................................................................................................................................................42 6.2.2 pH ...........................................................................................................................................................43 6.2.3 Conductivity.......................................................................................................................................44 6.2.4 Nitrogen...............................................................................................................................................45 6.2.5 Phosphorus.........................................................................................................................................46 6.2.6 Lake stratification in Bornos reservoir...................................................................................47 6.3 Conclusion................................................................................................................................... 49 6.4 Comparison................................................................................................................................. 49 6.4.1 Conductivity.......................................................................................................................................49 6.4.2 Ammonium.........................................................................................................................................49 6.4.3 Nitrate...................................................................................................................................................50 6.4.4 Nitrite....................................................................................................................................................50 6.4.5 Orthophosphate................................................................................................................................50 7. Biology .................................................................................................................................. 51 7.1 Materials & Methods ............................................................................................................... 51 7.1.1 State of the Art...................................................................................................................................52 7.1.2 Object....................................................................................................................................................53 7.1.3 Justification sampling points.......................................................................................................53 7.1.4 Biotic index methodology.............................................................................................................55 7.1.5 Macrophytes.......................................................................................................................................56 7.1.6 Phytoplankton...................................................................................................................................57 7.1.7 Saprobic index...................................................................................................................................58 7.2 Results.......................................................................................................................................... 60 7.2.1 Saprobix Index ..................................................................................................................................60 7.2.2 Macrophytes.......................................................................................................................................61 7.2.3 Macro invertebrates........................................................................................................................65 7.3 Discussion ................................................................................................................................... 73 7.4 Conclusion................................................................................................................................... 73 8. Stakeholders....................................................................................................................... 74 8.1 Methods........................................................................................................................................ 74 8.1.1 DPSIR-framework............................................................................................................................76 8.2 Result & Discussion ................................................................................................................. 77 8.2.1 Water Use............................................................................................................................................77 8.2.2 Evaluation of Stakeholders ..........................................................................................................80 8.2.3 Main Stakeholders...........................................................................................................................82 8.3 Interviews and interpretation............................................................................................. 85 8.4 DPSIR analysis ........................................................................................................................... 87
  11. 11. 11 8.5 Conflict and Problems............................................................................................................. 89 8.6 Conclusion................................................................................................................................... 93 9. Discussion............................................................................................................................ 94 10. Conclusion......................................................................................................................... 99 11. Reference list .................................................................................................................100 12. Appendix..........................................................................................................................103 Appendix I: IDRIAM form............................................................................................................103 Appendix II: Grain size distribution .......................................................................................110 Appendix III: Slope values..........................................................................................................112 Appendix IV: Grain size classificatio.......................................................................................113 Appendix V: Materials Chemistry ............................................................................................114 Appendix VI:Complete lists of macroinvetebrate found on each sampling point..115 Appendix VII: Interview water purification plant .............................................................122 Appendix VIII: Waste Water Treatment Plant ....................................................................123 Appendix IX: Interview about tourism and coastal management................................125 Appendix X: Interview Ecology action group.......................................................................127 Appendix XI: Interview................................................................................................................129 1st Speaker Environmental Department......................................................................................... 129 2nd Speaker Surface and Ground water Quality Department................................................. 130 3rd Speaker Regional Government Department of Land Use ................................................. 132
  12. 12. 1 1. Introduction 1.1 Background The Guadalete River is a river in Spain, located in the region of Andalucía and originates from the ‘Sierra de la Grazalema’ at the height of 1000 meters above the sea level and highest peak of 1600 meters above sea level. The river has a total length of 172 km and flows into the Atlantic Ocean at the bay of Cadiz on the Puerto de Santa Maria where it discharges about 600 hm3 per year. Along the course of the river there are three reservoirs; Zahara reservoir, Bornos reservoir and Arcos de la Frontera reservoir. The last 16 kilometres of the river is an estuary influenced by oceanic tides which are obstructed by a weir at El Portal. Agriculture is practiced in the majority of the mid-lower river basin and there are also natural protected areas around the Grazalema mountain range where the Zahara reservoir is located and at the estuary near the coast close to Puerto de Santa Maria (Javier Garcia presentation). The climate is moderately subtropical with dry summers and mild winters. The influence of the sea affects the area’s weather, avoiding extreme temperatures and with soft oscillations between winter and summer. However, the summer has a relatively high temperature and low precipitation in the summer causes the area to suffer droughts, which results in high uptake of the water for multiple purposes (www.juntadeandalucia.es 1 ). The majority of the precipitation falls on the mountainous area around Grazalema where clouds are forced upwards and the water vapour condenses allowing precipitation to take place with an annual precipitation of about 2000 to 2500 millimetres per year. On the lower part of the river basin there is significantly lower precipitation with an annual precipitation of about 500 to 700 millimetres a year (Javier Garcia presentation). During short periods of heavy rainfall, the dry soil can be easily flushed away with runoff water into the surface water, which might result in an increase in sediments and higher concentrations of nitrogen from soil fertilizers and the presence of toxins from pesticides (Deputacion de Granada). During the summer months the population of the area nearly triples when tourists show up to enjoy their summer vacation. This sometimes creates water shortages for those two months. In addition, the increase of the population also creates more wastewater of such capacity that the waste water treatment plants cannot handle the amount. 1 http://www.juntadeandalucia.es/temas/medio-ambiente/clima/clima-andalucia.html
  13. 13. 2 1.2 Assignment More and more pressure is put on water systems, especially in delta areas and estuarine regions. Estuaries are often heavily used by sometimes competing functions; such as agriculture, navigation, tourism, nature and industry. The European Water Framework Directive (EWFD) has been set up to make European Union member states to achieve good qualitative and quantitative status of all water bodies by 2015. River Delta System Analysis and Management in Practice (RAMIP) focuses on multidisciplinary and integrated field survey and workshops and on practical and theoretical application of the principle of river basin management according to the EWFD applied in the Spanish Guadalete river delta. RAMIP’s objective is to facilitate an international, real life and stimulating learning environment for students. Students and staff of different universities on the one hand and stakeholders and river basin authorities on the other hand will exchange experience and knowledge and share ideas leading to a better understanding of the physical and socio-economic relationships relevant for river basin management. 1.2.1 Aim & Goals This project was put together for water system analysis of the Guadalete River Basin. For all communities water is the most valuable resource and managing the problems takes integration of many different aspects. The state of the Guadalete River Basin is based on analyzing geomorphology, hydrology, chemistry, biology and the stakeholders those have impact and are independent on the river. The current state of the river needs to be analyzed for the problems and also compare with previous studies. There are also more goals that are not orientated at methodological problem solving. The students themselves have to solve problems concerning their responsibilities, ideas and interest. This goal is to gain experience in working together in ax social construct towards a solution. The program is described as IP (intensive project) in two-week time-span. The students collect and analyze data and create an idea for a future vision of Guadalete River Basin. Students can apply their theoretical knowledge for actual problem solving and adding up in experience.
  14. 14. 3 1.2.2 Research Questions: Main Question What is the State of Guadalete River Basin? This state is defined by the chemical, biological, hydrological and geomorphological properties of the river basin, as well as the involvement and influence of stakeholders Sub questions 1. What is the geomorphological quality of the Guadalete River basin from Zahara to Fabrica de Abonos? 2. What is the hydrological situation of the Guadalete River between Zahara reservoir and El Puerto de Santa Maria? 3. What is the chemical water quality of the Guadalete River between Zahara reservoir and Puerto de Santa Maria? 4. What is the biological state of the Guadalete River concerning macro- invertebrates and vegetation and what human activities have an influence? 5. What is the role of each stakeholder and how do they influence the Guadalete River basin
  15. 15. 4 2. Research Design 2.1 Area The area of the Guadalete river, see Figure 1, that was investigated for this study project stretches from the inlet of the Embalse de Zahara-el Gastor to the mouth of the river at the city of El Puerto de Santa Maria, were after running for about 172 km it enters de Bay of Cádiz. Figure 1: Gaudalete River Basin The upstream area of the river lies in an area, which is characterized by hills and steep slopes, combined with small urban areas and some agricultural land were they cultivate mainly olives. Downstream the land gradually changes into flatter areas; hills with agricultural parcels and small cities and villages near the river. At the end of the river, when it passes Jerez de la Frontera, the land turns even flatter and here you can find large planes that are mainly used for agriculture and cities. Finally, the Guadalete river basin enters the Bay of Cádiz were it flows into the North Atlantic Ocean.
  16. 16. 5 2.2 Organizations: The Guadalete River is investigated by a team of student engineers from 14 till 20 of September 2013, including a field visit of the Guadalete River on 15/9 as well as a discussion of measurement plan and also analysis and interpretation of the task on 16/9. During this period of time standardized research methods were used to extract data. In total there are 48 students of four different universities. 7 students from Ferrara University in Italy, 6 students of Metropolian Helsinki in Finland, 6 students of Cadiz University in Spain and 29 students of Hz University of Applied Sciences in the Netherlands. For this investigation it would be logical to use the European Water Framework Directive (EWFD) as a guideline, it has only partly been adopted here. Moreover, instead of Spanish assessment methods, Dutch assessment methods have been applied except for determining the geomorphological quality of the Guadalete River, which is an Italian method. Moreover, due to a limited period of filed study time (3 days) and preference for a maximized number of sampling points it would be more beneficial to investigate only the basic characteristics of the river system instead of a wide arrange of parameters. 2.3 Fields of Interest The Guadalete River is investigated according to five different aspects, namely: stakeholders, geomorphology, hydrology, chemistry and biology. The following paragraphs introduce the disciplines in terms of aim and motivation. Methods, results, discussion and conclusion of each discipline can be found in the subsequent chapters 3, 4, 5 and 6. 2.3.1 Geomorphology The discipline of geomorphology can be described by the geomorphological quality of the river. This includes several important factors such as:  Grain size;  Soil type;  Elevation;  Cross sections;  Suspended solids;  GIS maps including data from other groups on the right measurement locations. These measurements will be obtained in the field and in the laboratory. Depending on the location the grain size can be determined in the field or in the laboratory. Grains (gravel, rocks) bigger than -3.0 phi (8 mm) can be counted and determined in the field by executing a surface transect, were you take at least 100 samples.
  17. 17. 6 Smaller particles should be taken back to the laboratory where they will be sieved and weighted. Soil type will be determined based on size (gravel, sand, silt, clay etc.) and geological maps. The elevation will be measured with a DGPS and by hand; using jalons (poles), normal GPS and measuring tape. Local slope will be determined in the field with the help of GIS. The global slope of the river can be calculated in GIS and with several calculations. Sediments play an important role in the elemental cycling in aquatic environments. Most sediment in surface water originates from surface erosion. For the purpose of aquatic monitoring, sediments can be classified as deposited or suspended. Deposited sediment can be found on the river bed, suspended sediment can be found in the water column where it is being transported by water movements. Many suspended sediments means there is a low visibility and a low visibility will influence the algae growth and biological activity in and around the river. Therefore measurements to determine the total suspended solids (TSS) were conducted. All data will be put into GIS on the right locations, including some data from the other disciplines. 2.3.2 Hydrology This discipline describes the hydraulic and hydrological elements of the river system in terms of quantitative and qualitative aspect. Important aspects to this area of research are: flow rate (discharge), flow velocity, flow direction, tidal influence and the underwater cross sections of the river. Basic information about flow rate is collected for the Guadalete River and its tributaries. Such information can be important to resolve question not only related to hydrology but also geomorphology. The Guadalete River ends in the bay of Cadiz; therefore we assume there is at least a part of the river, which is influenced by the tide. It is important to know how far this tidal influence reaches upstream. Probably this will be till the weir south of El Portal. To test this hypothesis a measurement of the water lever right after the weir downstream is performed. The water level is measured every thirty minutes for a couple of hours. In this way, if there is indeed tidal influence, the water level will rise or decline. The hypothetical water level rise or decline will be connected to a rise or decline of the tide in the Bay of Cadiz.
  18. 18. 7 2.3.3 Chemistry This discipline describes the chemical aspects of the Guadalete river system, taking into account:  Oxygen concentration;  pH;  Conductivity;  Temperature;  N-total;  P-total;  Ammonium;  Nitrate;  Nitrite. All these factors together present the water quality and the transport of different substances in the Guadalete River. They will be obtained by field measurements and laboratory analysis. Adequate dissolved oxygen is necessary for good water quality. Oxygen is a necessary element to all forms of life. Natural stream purification processes require adequate oxygen levels in order to provide for aerobic life forms. As dissolved oxygen levels in water drop below 5.0 mg/l, aquatic life is put under stress. Oxygen levels that remain below 1-2 mg/l for a few hours can result in large fish kills. The pH is a very important indicator for the condition of the water system. The pH also indicates the presence of carbon dioxide in the water as in most water systems carbon dioxide and carbonates have a large impact on the pH. The conductivity is important because this can provide information on the tidal influence and reach into the river. Some species cannot tolerate high conductivities and will not live near the estuary region of the river. Ammonium (NH4+-N), nitrite (NO2—N) and nitrate (NO3—N) can be taken together as dissolved inorganic nitrogen (DIN) and are important nutrients in the nitrogen cycle. The nitrogen cycle consists of different important processes like nitrogen fixation, mineralization, nitrification and denitrification. The measured parameters are key elements in these processes so they can give a good insight about the nitrogen conversion into various chemical forms in the aquatic system of the Guadalete River. Ortho-phosphate (PO43—P) is an important nutrient because it is often responsible for eutrophication in ecosystems. Eutrophication means that there are too many nutrients in the water system; for example through fertilizers, irrigation or WWTP. This could lead to algae bloom and eventually to oxygen deficit. Because it is often a key element in fertilizers it can define the relationship between human activity in the region and ortho-phosphate concentrations found in the Guadalete River.
  19. 19. 8 2.3.4 Biology This discipline describes the biological aspects of the Guadalete River and surroundings. The emphasis lies on the identification of macro fauna and macrophyte species living in and around the water. Those species were chosen because they are sensitive to changes in the aquatic ecosystem and can only live under certain conditions. Based on the species that were found estimations could be made about the biological quality of the river. The data that was gathered can be connected to the other disciplines; such as chemical-, hydrological- or geological water quality. In order to perform a multi-habitat measurement sampling of the macro fauna all the different habitats should be sampled. Furthermore it is very important to take samples in the right (optimal) time of the year; when flowers are abundant; to get a proper representation of the present macro fauna. The ideal conditions for collecting macro fauna samples in a freshwater habitat is once or twice a year. The samples can be collected from March till October (in order to apply the EWFD). Samples should be collected in such a way that they represent the whole water body. Manmade constructions should be avoided, for they might disturb the sampling location and therefore also the results. 2.3.5 Stakeholders The discipline describes the impact of stakeholders along the river, taking into account: policy & legislation, water users (aquaculture, agriculture, industries and recreation), and wastewater treatment. By means of interviews with stakeholders and literature research important information is gathered which can be connected to the other field of interest in this research. It is important to know the activities of human that live near the Guadalete river influence the ecological state of the river in terms of hydrology, biology, chemistry and geomorphology. Straight forward we could say that there is some kind of influence anyway since humans are part of the ecosystem for thousands of years. However, the population of the Cadiz region has not always been as high as it is today, while the Guadalete River and its catchment area and water regime did not change in such a high rate. Most likely this results in a growing pressure on the ecological functioning of the river system. Under the discipline of stakeholders as a part of this study, we aim on identifying the human activities that are expected to have a major influence on the ecological stat of the Guadalete River.
  20. 20. 9 4. Geomorphology 4.1. Aim and research questions The geomorphology group will investigate the geomorphological quality of the Guadalete river basin. To determine the geomorphological quality IDRIAM forms were used. These forms were developed in Italy, where climate, legislation and river basins are comparable to the ones in South West Spain. In order to complete on the IDRIAM form several factors should be measured in the field or the laboratory:  Grain size;  Soil type;  Elevation;  Cross sections;  Bank-full discharge After all these measurements are carried out the results can be combined with the results from hydrology, and the hydro-geomorphological state of the Guadalete river basin can be determined. The main question that will be answered during this investigation is: What is the geomorphological situation of the Guadalete river bed from the dam at Fabrica De Abonos up to Zahara? 4.2 Materials  DGPS device  Total station + tripod  Prism  Carbon pole  Identification poles  Rope  Measuring tape  Grab sampler  Grain size identification  Plastic bags to store sediment samples  Plastic bottle to store water samples  Labels + Pens  Geomorphological survey forms
  21. 21. 10 4.3 Methods 4.3.1 IDRIAM evaluation forms To determine the geomorphological quality of the location an IDRIAM (stream hydro morphological evaluation, analysis and monitoring system) form was filled in on each location. This is a questionnaire developed in Italy that gives you a value in relation to the naturalness of the river. Because Italy and SW Spain have similar climate, river systems and policies this form can be used. Questions in different categories have to be answered; namely generality, functionality, artificiality and channel adjustments. For each question points can be earned, the more points a river scores the more it is influences by human construction, industry etc. (so not a natural river). The quality class is being calculated by subtracting the total points from 1 which leaves a score from 0 till 1. A quality class explains how much alterations have been applied to the natural geomorphological state of the river. For example, having a river in the “poor” quality class means that there were significant changes to the geomorphological state of the river. To be able to answer all the questions it was necessary to find out the grain size, length and diameter of the river cross section, d50 and discharge for example. Therefore, several other measurements need to be taken in the field. MQI Quality class 0.0 – 0.3 Very bad 0.3 – 0.5 Poor 0.5 – 0.7 Moderate or sufficient 0.7 – 0.85 Good 0.85 – 1.0 Excellent Table 1: Morphological Quality Index classes There are also questions that require historical data or aerial photographs but since these were not available in such a short period, estimations were made for these questions. For the form see Appendix I. Based on the results of the questionnaire, Morphological Quality Index (MQI) was calculated (Error! Reference source not found.). 4.3.2 Cross sections Cross sections were measured with either a DGPS or with a total station. Differential Global Positioning System (DGPS) is an enhancement to Global Positioning System that provides improved location accuracy, from the 15-meter nominal GPS accuracy to about 10 cm in case of the best implementations (M.Braina,2013, C.Kee, 1991). DGPS uses a network of fixed, ground-based reference stations to broadcast the difference between the positions indicated by the satellite systems and the known fixed positions. These stations broadcast the difference between the measured
  22. 22. 11 satellite pseudo ranges and actual (internally computed) pseudo ranges, and receiver stations may correct their pseudo ranges by the same amount. The digital correction signal is typically broadcast locally over ground-based transmitters of shorter range. If possible the transect that was used by the hydrology measurements was identified. Then the edge of the riverbed was located on both sides and marked with a pole to make a transect extending upon the hydrology transect (if possible) to integrate the results later. Along the established transect, elevation measurements (Figure 2) were taken at points where the vertical angle of the surface changes. Small features like minor holes or piles were not taken into account, as they occurred randomly. As a principle, the geomorphology group only measured the dry part of the riverbed. Figure 2: Elevation Measurements When the DGPS was not able to connect with at least five satellites it needs to correct the signal to within 0.5m accuracy, a total station was used. The measuring method was the same; only with a total station a clear line of sight without trees or bushes is necessary from edge to edge so this is not possible on all locations. The coordinate system used during DGPS survey was UTM ED50 Zone 30N while for total station a local system has been set (X, Y, Z: 1000m, 1000m, 100m) 4.3.3 Slopes The local slope at the sampling points was measured with either a DGPS or a total station. Along the edge of the water, from roughly 50m upstream of the transect to 50m downstream of the transect, the elevation was measured. For the global slope, the terrain elevation was measured with the DGPS at sampling point -10 and 20. Other elevation measurements were taken during the surveys. Figure 3: Sediment sampling
  23. 23. 12 4.3.4 Sediments The composition of sediments was established in the field using three sampling methods: Transect Line Method, Areal Sampling and Grab Sampling. The composition of coarse sediments (> 2.5 phi, see appendix II) was established in the field. Using a measuring tape stretched along the river bed, the particle right underneath to the tape was measured every 0.5 m. Using a metal plate with cut outs (Figure 2) for the rocks in different phi sizes the grain size was determined. This was repeated several times until at least 100 grain sizes were measured along the transects, this to obtain a representative sample for the location. The results were filled out on a form, which can be used to calculate the mean grain size, d50 and soil type (sand, silt, clay or gravel) at the location. When it was not possible to make a transect line, due to obstructions like trees or water, a bulk sample was taken. A random squire was chosen, laid out with measurement tape, and all the surface substrate was taken by hand the taken to the laboratory. At point 60 the areal sampling method was used to assess the grain size distribution of coarse surface material sampled in the dry zone of the river’s cross section in a square surface of 40cmx40cm.This is also representative of the area. In the laboratory the grain size was determined with the sample plates (see Figure 4 and Figure 5) and weighted accordingly. Figure 5: Metal gran size determinator Figure 4: Grain size determinator for small sand
  24. 24. 13 Fine sediments were sampled in the field using a grab sampler. The samples were stored in labeled plastic bags and taken to the field lab. There, the factions were divided manually using sieves and weighed to establish the d50, mean grain size and soil type. Figure 6: Different grain sizes sorted by phi Figure 7: Sieves in different grain sizes 4.4 Results and Discussions 4.4.1 IDRIAM evaluation forms Results By using the IDRIAM evaluation form (see Appendix I: IDRIAM form) each sampling point could be analyzed and put into a quality class for their current geomorphological state. Each sampling point could be classed as very bad, poor, moderate, good or excellent. The results of the research can be found in Table 2.
  25. 25. 14 Graph 1: Morphological quality index of the Guadalete river Measuring point MAI MQI Quality Class -10 0.06 0.94 Excellent 0 0.03 0.97 Excellent 20 0.40 0.60 Moderate 30 0.22 0.78 Good 40 0.54 0.46 Poor 60 0.52 0.48 Poor 80 0.06 0.94 Excellent 90 0.11 0.89 Excellent 100 0.08 0.92 Excellent 110 0.54 0.46 Poor Table 2: Overview of the quality class appointed, by using the IDRIAM form Discussion As can be seen in the IDRIAM form (see Appendix I: IDRIAM from), there are some questions that require some historical information of the area. These questions are related to any alterations of the channel pattern and width since the 1950’s, but also if there is any sediment, wood or vegetation removal during the last 20 years. Since this information was not acquired, the grading of these questions has been done on the assumptions and experience of the supervisor. 4.4.2 Sediment samples Samples were taken on different locations along the Guadalete river. Because all locations were different not all measurements could be carried out on each location. Table 3 Overview of the measurements shows exactly what measurements were carried in each location. 0.00 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 -20.00 0.00 20.00 40.00 60.00 80.00 100.00 120.00 km downstream Morphological Quality Index
  26. 26. 15 Measuring point Day visited Time visited Coordinates Cross- section Sediment sample SS sample -10 17.09.2013 13.20 N 36.48.504 W 005.19.729 YES Transect line NO 0 20.09.2013 11.30 Not available NO Bulk sample YES 20 17.09.2013 17.00 N 36.55.271 W 005.33.259 YES Bulk sample YES 30 18.09.2013 10.15 N 36.52.192 W 005.39.025 YES Bulk sample YES 40 19.09.2013 14.20 N 36.47.400 W 005.45.758 HALF NO YES 60 18.09.2013 13.20 N 36.44.657 W 005.48.087 YES Areal sampling YES 80 18.09.2013 15.00 N 36.41.608 W 005.51.487 YES Bulk sample YES 90 18.09.2013 16.20 N 36.38.851 W 005.55.823 NO NO YES 100 19.09.2013 12.00 N 36.37.786 W 005.59.208 NO Bulk sample YES 110 19.09.2013 9.45 N 36.37.730 W 006.08.182 NO Bulk sample YES 120 19.09.2013 11.15 N 36.35.947 W 006.13.258 NO Bulk sample NO Table 3: Overview of the measurement points Results After all, the sample were collected they were analyzed in the lab to calculate the grain size composition, D10, 50, 84 and 90 and a general description of the samples. The results of this can be found in Appendix II: Grain size distribution. With these results we can set up a graph, which depicts the D50 and D84 in µm against measurement points (Graph 2).
  27. 27. 16 Graph 2: Grain size distribution Underneath, a Hjulstrom diagram is displayed (Figure 8). It shows the relation between flow velocity and sediments deposition, transport or erosion. This diagram can be used to relate the flow velocities and grain sizes, taken form the center of the river, to each other and determine which geomorphological process is occurring at the given location. The exact values for velocities can be found in the chapter of hydrology. Figure 8: Hjulstrom graph (http://dlgb.files.wordpress.com/2008/09/hjulstrom_curve_task.jpg ) 0.000 20.000 40.000 60.000 80.000 100.000 120.000 140.000 160.000 -50.00 0.00 50.00 100.00 150.00 Grainsize(micrometer) Km downstream Grain size d50 (mm) d84 (mm)
  28. 28. 17 From point 60 and upstream, the flow velocities are relatively high (93-122 cm/s). As the Hjulstrom diagram shows, at these speeds only coarse materials remain deposited. This corresponds with the data shown in the diagram below, were grain sizes that have a d50 of 50 mm and higher. Downstream of point 80, the velocities drop, and so do the grain sizes. The velocities related to the grain size (0.07-0.08 mm d50) show that transportation of these sediment sizes can occur, but no erosion takes place. Point 80 is the odd one out; the velocity of 90 cm/s related to a d50 of only 0.08 mm indicates erosion is taking place here. This might be the explanation for the turbidity that was observed downstream from point 80, which should not occur at this time of the year (due to no rainfall and lowering river discharge). At point 80 two artificial structures were discharging a great amount of water through a pipe connected to the Guadalcacin reservoir (Perscomm, J. Benavente, 2013). This raised discharge Q at this point significantly, causing the described conditions. Graph 3: Velocity and grain size comparaison Discussion Because every measuring point was different, multiple gathering methods have been applied for the gathering of the samples. This might lead to the discussion about the accuracy of the results. However, it has been proven that the methods that were used to gather the samples will yield the same results (L.B. Leopold (1970)). Also, for some locations it was impossible to gather a soil samples due to the lack of required materials or the situation at the location. For example, it was impossible to gather a soil sample from point 40 since the sediment consisted only of boulders, which were impossible to gather with the available equipment. Point 90 failed as well due to a concrete paving and big water velocities below the bridge. 0.000 10.000 20.000 30.000 40.000 50.000 60.000 70.000 80.000 90.000 100.000 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 -20.00 0.00 20.00 40.00 60.00 80.00 100.00 120.00 mm cm/s km downstream Velocity & Grain size V (cm/s) d50 (mm) d84 (mm)
  29. 29. 18 4.4.3 Cross-sections In this paragraph cross sections in point -10, 20, 30, 60 and 80 are shown. Each cross section consist of dry section measured by Geomorphology group and wet section by Hydrology group. Coordinates are given in local system for each section. In order to extrapolate a clear cross section point in XYZ coordinates has been rotated and translated to a plane system (XZ) using both Math lab and Excel. Results In this following graphs you can find all the cross sections that were measured during this field week. The coordinates on land were taken by different methods by the geomorphology group and the hydrology group took the coordinates in the water. Graph 4: Point 10 – Cross Section Graph 5: Point 20 – Cross Section 316.2 316.4 316.6 316.8 317 317.2 317.4 317.6 -70 -60 -50 -40 -30 -20 -10 0 z[m] x [m] Cross Section - Point -10 (local system) 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 -70 -60 -50 -40 -30 -20 -10 0 z[m] x [m] Cross Section - Point 20 (local system)
  30. 30. 19 Graph 6: Point 30 – Cross Section Graph 7: Point 60 – Cross Section 96.5 97 97.5 98 98.5 99 -70 -60 -50 -40 -30 -20 -10 0 z[m] x [m] Cross Section - Point 30 (local system) 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 -140 -120 -100 -80 -60 -40 -20 0 z[m] x[m] Cross Section - Point 60 (local system)
  31. 31. 20 Graph 8: Point 80 – Cross Section Discussion It can be seen that cross section are less than point measurement because of technology problem: lack of GPS satellite covering or heavy presence of trees for a clear total station collimation. In some cases DGPS survey has been done with a higher than 0.5 m precision. Local system can be changed in a global one only knowing at least the GPS coordinates of two points: in many cases these was not possible to measure. However, thanks to the elevation of the river bank assessed during post-analysis, it is possible to estimate the elevation of the cross section. 4.4.5 Bank full discharge As bankfull discharge is defined as the discharge that shaped the river bed, geomorphological features are strictly related to this particular discharge. Bankfull discharge is also statistically assessed as the discharge with return period of between 1.58 and 2.33 years. It is possible to assess the level of the bankfull discharge (ybd) observing geomorphological features and vegetation. For examples the change in the lateral slope of a cross section and the border between older vegetation and plants or bushes younger than 2-3 years are natural indicators of that level. That level defines the related wet area of the section (Abd). In order to assess the discharge the steady flow velocity (V) can be calculated. The approximation of steady flow velocity simplifies the method. The Manning’s coefficient can be assessed with Limerinos (1970) that relates roughness with D84. That formula is the best assessment for natural channels like Guadalete river. The Bankfull discharge (Qbd) can be calculated as Qbd=V*Abd (G.H. Dury (1961)). 96.5 97 97.5 98 98.5 99 99.5 100 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 z[m] x[m] Cross Section - Point 80 (local system)
  32. 32. 21 Graph 9: Banfull Discharge of the Guadalete river 4.4.6 Slope The general slope, local slope and elevation are shown in the following graphs. Graph 10: Global Slope of the Guadalete river -5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 -20 0 20 40 60 80 100 BankfullQ(m3/s) km downstream Bankfull discharge 0 0.001 0.002 0.003 0.004 0.005 0.006 -20.00 0.00 20.00 40.00 60.00 80.00 100.00 120.00 km downstream Global slope
  33. 33. 22 Graph 11: Elevation of the Guadalete river Graph 12: Local slope of the Guadalete river basin 4.4.7 General discussion During the surveys many observation related to the morphology of the area, in terms of vegetation and morphological features, were taken. These will be very important in order to assess the Hydro morphological quality of the river and for post-analysis deductions Sediment transport and the natural fluvial cycle of the Guadalete river has been disturbed by artificial, human created structures, such as dams, weirs and water catchment basins. The water discharge itself is not heavily constricted, but weirs and dams cause sedimentation in water basins upstream of them. It was observed in the field, that the river-bed downstream of these structures is covered with rocks and had a lack of fine sediment. In addition, levees were observed in several 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 -20.00 0.00 20.00 40.00 60.00 80.00 100.00 120.00 mabovesealevel km downstream Elevation 0.0000 0.0010 0.0020 0.0030 0.0040 0.0050 0.0060 -20.00 0.00 20.00 40.00 60.00 80.00 100.00 120.00 km downstream Local slope
  34. 34. 23 measurements points (mostly downstream), restricting the cross section area of bank full discharge. The natural river bed geomorphological structure does not seem to be heavily changed by human influence (besides the reservoirs), only the delta area is canalized and has artificial banks surrounded by industrial areas. One liter samples of suspended solids were taken, but not analyzed due to Guadalete’s morphological qualities. The substrate situated next to river banks is soft and bare; there is no low vegetation that could cover and hold in place soil particles with its roots. Guadalete’s catchment area is prone to rainwater and wind induced erosion, but the region of Andalusia sees significant amount of rainfall only during the winter season. Therefore, the water column should not contain any suspended soil particles, as the samples were taken at the end of summer (during the dry season) and wind erosion is negligible. It can be concluded that suspended solids found in water column are of biological nature, a pollution of human and agricultural waste. Many settlements either do not have any wastewater treatment plants or their plants are too old to meet European water quality standards. Due to this, large amount of untreated sewage is discharged in the Guadalete river. Also various pesticides and fertilizers are discharged into the river from agricultural lands. One of the most common cultures in the lowlands of the river basin is cotton, which requires large amounts of irrigation.
  35. 35. 24 4.5 Conclusion The sample locations were selected trough discussion with all the groups and they were pointed out on a map. The smallest measured cross section had a size of approx. 57 meters; the biggest measured cross section had a size of approx. 125 meters. The compositions of the sediments across the cross sections were different depending on the length the river already travelled. In the Zahara area there was coarse gravel sediments, further downstream the sediment would change into sand, mud and silt. On some measuring points it was impossible to take sediment samples due to human impact, structures would increase the velocity of the water. Some locations were located after basins, which resulted in sediment samples only consisting of boulders. Upstream the global slope of the river is 0.0056, in the middle stretch of the river the global slope is 0.0019 and the global slope at the downstream part of the river is 0.0006. This shows the global slope flattens towards the end of the river. After filling in the IDRIAM forms each measurement point gained a value for the morphological quality index (MQI). The higher the MQI value, the better the natural state of the river basin is. Lower MQI values mean that human impact is high (like engineering constructions such as dikes, weirs, substrate, agriculture, industry etc.). 50% of the MQI values were excellent. The only bad conditions were created by human impact, and not through geological processes; so in general we can conclude that the geomorphological condition of the river basin is good.
  36. 36. 25 5. Hydrology The aim of the hydrological assessment and analysis is to determine the character of the river flow and identify possible problems in the river basin. It is important to determine to what degree the flow is regulated by existing artificial structures, if or how the interaction with tidal forces is important, and the general properties and dynamics of the river throughout its course in terms of flow rate, velocities and dimensions. The acquired data can be used to develop a hydrologic model (using SOBEK) to simulate the hydrologic dynamics of the river and provide better insight. Such model will also provide the opportunity to estimate the effects of changes in the current water system. Additionally, an estimation of the amount of water diverted for irrigation is relevant. The geo-morphological and biological analyses are also conducted. This happens in collaboration with other research groups. Responsibilities are divided according to competencies, respectfully. All obtained data can be compared to findings of previous studies, implementing data on precipitation and groundwater. Figure 9: Layout of the sampling points aong the Guadalete river
  37. 37. 26 5.1 Materials and methods The target stretch of the river was divided in two parts - upstream and downstream of point 60, which is located immediately downstream of the Boros reservoir outlet. The downstream section was surveyed with the OTT Qliner ultrasonic current profiler. The sensor of the device is attached to a watertight miniature boat and is equipped with a Bluetooth transmitter. The data is transmitted to a handheld computer that plots the cross section and calculates the volumetric flow rate in real time. On site a cable has been stretched across the river, acting as a line of the cross section. (figure 2) The Qliner has been then attached to the cable and transported from one bank of the river to the other by means of a rope. The rope is then stretched from both sides to stabilise the boat and released from one side to move the boat to the next measurement vertical. Figure 10: OTT QLiner method. After installing the structure on site, velocity and depth are measured with the Qliner for each section, depending on the width of the river (usually with 1 meter distance, more for wider parts). The device starts at the point of 1.25 meters away from the river bank and then measures the depth of the water and respective velocity, saving the results into a handheld computer.
  38. 38. 27 Figure 11: Illutration of the Qliner method measurement After the first measurement, the device is then moved (see Figure 11) with a step of 1 to 4 metres (depending on location) with the thinner rope and the next measurement is then performed in the same way. This is repeated as many times as it is needed to measure the cross-section. The upstream section of the river was surveyed using less advanced techniques. The depth of this part of the river was too low to measure using the Qliner. The width of the cross-section was determined by stretching a measuring tape above the water surface. Then a levelling pole was used to determine the water depth at each step of the cross-section. Afterwards, the electromagnetic velocity meter, the “flipper” was used to measure the velocity in 3 different locations of the total width – in the middle and closer to the margins of the stream width. The values are documented on paper and the surveying continues at the next location. Alternative method of measuring velocity without the electromagnetic flipper: Using the measuring tape, a 10 meter distance is designated along the flow of the river. Then a floating object is placed onto the surface of the water and the travel time along that distance is measured to calculate velocity. A minimum of 4 said tests is conducted in order to obtain more accurate data. This method only measures the velocity of the surface of the stream, which can be converted to cross section velocity. In order to determine the flow rate Q (m3/s), two different parameters are measured on the field, velocity (v) (either indicated by the electromagnetic flipper or the alternative method) in m/s and the surface area (A) in m2 of each cross section of the river. The following calculation is applied: Q = v * A
  39. 39. 28 5.2 Results and discussion The final product of field work is the calculated volumetric flow rate in the cross section of each sample point along the river (see example in Figure 4). The values are calculated from measured values for velocity and wetted area. Below, the values for velocity and flow rate are presented in table 1. Figure 12: Example cross-section including wet and dry section. Of point 20
  40. 40. 29 Measuring point Location Coordinates Flow rate m^3/s Velocity m/s (centre of the stream) 0 Outflow of Zahara Reservoir - 5,3 1,22 10 Between Zahara and Puerto Serrano - 5,7 0,73 20 Puerto Serrano N 36.55.271 W 005.33.259 5,7 1,10 30 Inflow of Bornos Reservoir N 36.52.192 W 005.39.025 6 0,93 40 Outflow of Bornos Reservoir N 36.47.400 W 005.45.758 7 1,19 60 Outflow of Arcos Reservoir N 36.44.657 W 005.48.087 5,9 1,08 80 Juction with Majacete N 36.41.608 W 005.51.487 7,3 0,90 90 La Barca de la Florida N 36.38.851 W 005.55.823 9,5 0,41 95 PDA error (data lost) 100 El Torno N 36.37.786 W 005.59.208 11,3 0,45 105 Landfill in river - 10,5 0,17 110 Downstream tidal weir N 36.37.730 W 006.08.182 (13,3) 0,13 120 El Puerto de Santa Maria N 36.35.947 W 006.13.258 (290) Table 4: Measured velocities and calculated flow rates
  41. 41. 30 The flow rate values for River Guadalete show a gradual increase in flow towards the mouth of the river. In comparison to the findings of a group of students from the HZ University of Applied Sciences in September 2012, the flow rate has drastically increased. The most probable cause is the excessive amount of precipitation received during winter 2012/2013 in the area of the source of River Guadalete. Graph 13 displays the calculated flow rates of the River along it’s course (distance starting from first measuring point!). Graph 13: measured velocities and calculated flow rates SOBEK results A hydrologic model has been constructed using the SOBEK software package. The boundaries of the model are from point 0 to 120 inclusive. The stretch of the river that is modelled is 95 km long and has a global slope of 50 meters across that distance.
  42. 42. 31 Figure 13: Side view of the SOBEK model Figure 13 depicts the side view of the model - at the upstream boundary of the model at Arcos de la Frontera (point 0) the flow rate is set to 6 m3/s, which is consistent with the measurements taken in the field. Twenty kilometres upstream of the other boundary there is a weir that gates the influence of the tide. At the downstream boundary (point 120) a tidal cycle was simulated using data acquired from the internet. The dataset contains values of the water depth for every 10 minutes for the simulated period, which is from 17-09-2013 midnight till 21-09- 2013 midnight. Figure 14 depicts the simulation results of the tidal influence. The model shows that the hydrological impact of high tide would reach only about 5 kilometres upstream if the weir was not present. That leads us to the conclusion that the purpose of the weir is to improve water quality rather than regulating quantity, namely prevention of salt-water intrusion into the stream. Figure 14: Influence of the tidal weir
  43. 43. 32 In Figure 15: Velocity at point 110 you see that the velocity fluctuates between 0,15 m/s and 0,41 m/s due to the tidal influence. This point is situated directly downstream of the tidal weir. Figure 15: Velocity at point 110 In Figure 15: Velocity at point 120 you see that the velocity fluctuates between 0,48 m/s and -0,51 m/s due to the tidal influence. This point is situated downstream of the tidal weir at the blue bridge in Puerto Santa Maria. Every tidal cycle there enters seawater with a velocity 0,48 m/s the river basin of the Guadalete. Every tidal cycle there is an outflow of water with a velocity of 0,51 m/s. 0_s41, Velocity (m/s) TeeChart 21-09-201320-09-201319-09-201318-09-201317-09-2013 -0,14 -0,16 -0,18 -0,2 -0,22 -0,24 -0,26 -0,28 -0,3 -0,32 -0,34 -0,36 -0,38 -0,4 -0,42
  44. 44. 33 Figure 16: Velocity at point 120 As a result we have built a basic model of the current situation, which can be used to calculate different scenario’s like the input of higher discharges from the Guadalete River and the influence of taking out the tidal weir. Some kind of calibration is done by comparing the measured data at the cross sections with the data of the model at the cross sections. 0_s2, Velocity (m/s) TeeChart 21-09-201320-09-201320-09-201320-09-201320-09-201319-09-201319-09-201319-09-201319-09-201318-09-201318-09-201318-09-201318-09-201317-09-201317-09-201317-09-201317-09-2013 0,5 0,4 0,3 0,2 0,1 0 -0,1 -0,2 -0,3 -0,4 -0,5
  45. 45. 34 5.2.1 Groundwater The stream of the Guadalete River is made up of overflow of groundwater in the mountains, which is mainly recharged by precipitation during wintertime. See figure 5 below for the yearly distribution of precipitation. Figure 17: Precipitation map Rio Guadalete River Basin (Source: Presentation Javier Gracia). The river courses through 7 major aquifers in the investigated area. Because of the geographical positioning rain occurs mainly in the mountain. There are seven major aquifers feeding the Guadalete River and its tributaries. Groundwater quality is strongly related to the type of substrate, human activity and saltwater intrusion in the coastal areas. Variety in the groundwater quality brings about a classification of the aquifers. The table below shows a classification of the aquifers in terms of two most relevant characteristics for human consumption: salinity and alkalinity. Groundwater salinity in the Guadalete River Basin varies from low salinity water, suitable for any tipe of crop (C1- <750 µS/cm) to extremely high salinity, suitable only for very permeable soils and crops with high tolerance (C4 - >3000 µS/cm). In terms of alkalinity groundwater has been cathegorized as low alkalinity (S1- <10 µS/cm, suitable for any soil type and crop type, to extremely high (S4 - >29), generally inadequetfor irrigation except when salinity is low and the soils are rich in carbonates ( J.A. Lopez Geta…et al, 2005).
  46. 46. 35 Aquifer Type Input* ( ) Output** ( ) Salinity Alkalinity El Puerto Del Santa Maria Detrital*** 7.6 4 C4 S1 Jerez de la Frontera Detrital 15 2 C4 - Aluvial del Guadalete Detrital 24 9 C3 - Arcos- Bornos- Espera Detrital 7.6 4 C1 S1 Llanos de Villamartin Detrital 11.6 7.3 C1-C3 S1 Aquifer de la Sierra de Grazalema Carbonate 63.1 2.4 C1 S1 Sierras de las Cabras Carbonate 9.5 1.45 C1 S1 Table 5: Main aquifers in the Guadalete River Basin (Source: Lopez Geta, 2005) *input= rain infiltration and ground water (lateral) input **output= exploitation by pumping and springs ***detrital=in direct communication with the river Figure 18: Main aquifers in the Guadalete River Basin (Source: Presentation Javier Gracia).
  47. 47. 36 Those aquifers and the Guadalete River are in constant interaction, although the exchange of water varies over the seasons. The detrital aquifers connect directly to the river, meaning that the water is seeping in and out through pores in the substrate. Carbonate aquifers interact with the River through other (small) streams. Next to water from surface water, also groundwater is being pumped to be used as either drinking or irrigation water, whereas most irrigation water is derived from surface water. Drinking water is partly supplied by groundwater in the east (upstream) part of the River Basin and by surface water in the coastal, western part (downstream). Groundwater quality is strongly related to the type of substrate, human activity and salt water intrusion in the coastal areas. (Lopez Geta, 2005). The obtained data on volumetric flow rate in the Guadalete River does not suggest any major recharge of the aquifers by the river downstream of the reservoirs. The flow rate increases gradually with the distance from the source. Reasons for that are tributaries entering the river and also a shift towards more porous soil in the western part of the river basin, allowing more groundwater flow (lecture Javier Garcia). Dam management always has an impact on the flow rate in the river. 5.2.2 Measurement accuracy issues Due to the high depth range in some cross sections the Qliner has had difficulties plotting the correct cross section and thus determining the flow rate accurately was difficult. Some verticals had to be verified using traditional methods such as a rope with a heavy object and measuring tape. Other verticals were simply interpolated with the adjacent ones (only in shallow parts). Given that the methodology of surveying requires personnel to be present on both sides of the stream most cross sections were measured immediately downstream of a bridge. Turbulence caused by the pillars of a bridge could have slightly interfered with the measurement results. Additionally for the same reason of complexity of the measurement setup some cross sections had to be relocated from the originally agreed coordinates or cancelled altogether. Another aspect that had an effect on measurement accuracy was the arching of the cable holding the Qliner. Also the method of measuring the distance in between the cross section verticals had an accuracy range of up to 10% depending on the velocity of the current. It was impossible to measure the correct flow rate at the estuary (point 120) due to the constant strong tidal influence. Also at low tide the water was too shallow to measure with the Qliner. However, the cross section was plotted during high tide. The suspiciously high flow rate value at that point can be explained by the tidal inflow of seawater at the time of measurement. The flipper was mainly used for upstream, but although it is also a very accurate device, its extreme sensitivity resulted in error results in most of the locations. In the end, only one point could be accurately measured using the device and the following ones were measured with the least accurate method, the alternative one.
  48. 48. 37 The method introduced various weak points in measurement at once – the time and the distance measurements as well as depth measurement have approximately 10% error margin each. 5.2.3 Other discussion points Regarding the timeline of the measurements, it was conducted during 3 days (17, 18 and 19 of September), from the time period between 9 to 17 hours and the main river points were mostly measured at the first 2 days (17 and 18). The last day was left to concentrate on some of the most problematic points and measure some side sources of inflow. Initially it was decided that the hydrology assessment of the river would be made in 13 points of the river (from point 0 which is the inlet of the Zahara reservoir to point 120 which is the outlet of the river), however, some points were standing in private properties which the students had no authorization to enter, and so they were discarded. 5.2.4 Tidal influence The last point of the tidal influence is situated in El Portal, 16 km from the river mouth. Downstream from El Portal there is a weir that does not allow tidal water to advance. During those days measurements were carried out, the tidal range at Cadiz was about 3 metres. The inflowing and outflowing seawater highly affects the measured velocity and depth of the river, and therefore the flow rate. At all points influenced by the tide it is therefore difficult to determine the actual flow rate of the river. A measurement carried out during high tide (inflowing) at Point 120 yielded a flow rate of 290 m³/s, which indicates the vast influence the tide has on the water system of the river (until the weir at El Portal) (see table for results). 5.2.5 Weather According to the weather reports (weather.com) there has been 31 mm of rain starting from July, but there is still no water shortage, as the precipitation amount was enough previously during the winter and spring. Also the flow rate is greater than the flow rate according to the research of the year 2012 probably for the same reason.
  49. 49. 38 5.3 Conclusion Measurement results have led to the conclusion that the hydrology of the Guadalete River is entirely controlled through engineering at the time of the assessment, although the situation could be different during the high-rain season. River Guadalete is a rather small river not suitable for any kind of shipping. The tidal area is influencing the river Guadalete up until the weir outside of El Portal which is approx. 20 km upstream of the estuary. This part is also artificial because the ditch is kept at a depth of 5 meter so the ships can enter Puerto Santa Maria. After El Portal it looks like the river is still meandering. The flow rate in the river is not controlled by natural processes but is by the flow rate of the water reservoirs Archos, Bornos and Zahara and the height of the weir at El Portal. This state is human engineered therefore it is anthropologic.
  50. 50. 39 6. Chemistry 6.1. Methods and Material The examined area is in between the inlet of the Guadalete into the Zahara reservoir and the mouth of the river at El Puerto de Santa Maria. 26 samples were taken in the river. The stratification of the Bornos reservoir was also examined. For the chemical analysis of the Guadalete River basin two types of analysis were used: field analysis and laboratory analysis. The samples were taken at the following points: Figure 19: Map of the sampling points from the inlet of Zahara till Puerto de Santa Maria.
  51. 51. 40 point name distan ce from point 0 [km] Meas ured yes/n o Location Reason -10 -10,232 Yes Base point before Zahara reservoir Basepoint 0 0 Yes After Zahara reservoir Basepoint 15 26,522 Yes Before Puerto Serrano No WWTP at Puerto Serrano 20 28,647 Yes After Puerto Serrano No WWTP at Puerto Serrano 30 42,28 Yes Before Bornos reservoir Inflow reservoir 35 53,775 Yes At Bornos in the reservoir (also measured stratification here) No WWTP at Bornos 40 56,695 Yes After Bornos reservoir Outflow reservoir 60 64,075 Yes After Archos reservoir Outflow reservoir 70 80,167 No River from Espera coming together with Guadalete No WWTP at Espera 80 81,739 Yes Majaceite River joining Guadalete River 2 big rivers joining together 90 93,914 No La barca de la Florida Was same water as at point 95 95 101,37 2 Yes Before Tornos No WWTP at Tornos 100 107,23 9 Yes After Tornos No WWTP at Tornos 105 110,98 9 Yes Arroyo de las Cruces joining Guadalete river Large river joining 107 125,01 5 Yes Before WWTP Before WWTP 109 yes Effluent WWTP Effluent WWTP 110 129,80 5 Yes After WWTP After WWTP 111 131,88 4 yes Intertidal area Intertidal area 112 134,46 yes Intertidal area Intertidal area 113 136,07 8 yes Intertidal area Intertidal area 114 137,30 2 yes Intertidal area Intertidal area 115 137,90 9 yes Intertidal area Intertidal area 116 140,67 4 yes Intertidal area Intertidal area 120 145,00 6 yes Foot bridge el Puerto de Santa Maria Intertidal area 130 147,85 7 yes Mouth of the river Intertidal area Table 6: table of the sampling points from the inlet of Zahara till Puerto de Santa Maria.
  52. 52. 41 The samples taken in the field were done by dropping a sampling bucket from a bridge or by throwing the bucket from the riverbank and pulling it back with a rope. The field measurements were taken from within the bucket and a sample bottle was filled each time, so that it could be taken to the laboratory for further analysis. In the estuary, a boat was used and the field measurements (points 111 to 120) were taken directly from the estuary. The sample bottle was filled with no air inside to prevent any other chemical reactions during transit. When the reservoir sampling was done, the field measurements were done in the water in the water sampler, to prevent oxygen entering the water during measurements. The analysis taken in the field were:  Conductivity (in μS/cm)  Temperature (in oC)  pH  Oxygen concentration (in mg/L)  Oxygen Saturation (in %) Hach-Lange spectrophotometer was used for the chemical analysis in the laboratory. The parameters analyzed with the Hach-Lange spectrophotometer were:  Ammonium (NH4+-N)  Nitrite (NO2--N)  Nitrate (NO3--N)  Total Nitrogen (N-total)  Phosphate (PO43-)  Total Phosphorus (P-total) The materials we used in the field and lab are listed in the appendix The methods for analyzing the various chemical contents in the sample water are attached in the appendix.
  53. 53. 42 6.2 Results & Discussion 6.2.1 Oxygen Oxygen concentration in Guadalete River was fairly good in all 26 sampling points. It was clearly above the EU standard for surface water, which is minimum 5 mg/L, see Graph 14. Compared to measurements made in 2012 downstream Arcos dam (point 60), the situation has improved. In 2012, there was not enough oxygen downstream the dam (Bachelor students of Water Management in HZ, 2012). There have been more rain in the winter of 2012-13 than in previous winters, and the water level in the river is higher in 2013. This might contribute to the better oxygen situation, since water from Arcos reservoir might be released over the dam this year. Graph 14: Oxygen Concentration
  54. 54. 43 6.2.2 pH As seen in the Graph 15, the pH over the river’s course is fairly stable with difference of 0.97 between the lowest value at the point 110 and the highest value (8.67) at the point 60. In addition, in 2012, pH values were lower than this year (the minimum in 2012 was around 7, and in 2013 it was more than 7.6), as were the oxygen concentrations. As expected, pH values were following closely the O2 values: pH is lowered by high CO2 concentrations in the water, and when there is plenty of oxygen in the water, it can mean that it is not consumed by CO2 producing organisms. Graph 15: pH of the Guadalete river
  55. 55. 44 6.2.3 Conductivity Graph 16: Conductivity of the Guadalete river As seen in graph 16 the conductivity along the river’s course slowly increases, starting from 1043 μS/cm at point -10 at Zahara inlet and reaches 1326 μS/cm at point 80A. At this point, Guadalete River mixes with Majaceite River (point 80B), which has a conductivity of 729 μS/cm. Downstream of the river junction, the water dilutes to 1139 μS/cm at point 80C. The conductivity then slowly increases again, until it reaches its highest point right after the water treatment plant at point 110. After this the water flows over the tidal weir and into the estuary. At the estuary during the time of sampling, the current was still flowing downstream. At point 115 the current changed as the tide started to push back up the estuary where the conductivity increased to above 20 000 μS/cm. 2 At point 116/116B two measurements were taken, because the tide seemed to be rising on the Western side of the river more: the water was greenish, compared to gray water on the Eastern side. On the Western side the conductivity was 20 400 μS/cm and on the Eastern side 18 41 μS/cm. Also in Puerto de Santa Maria two measurements were made, with two hours’ interval. At the first measurement, conductivity was 20 100 μS/cm, while at the second time it was 34 100 μS/cm. The differences where expected, since salinity is closely related to conductivity. 2 On the sampling day, low tide was at 08:55 and the high tide at 15:09, and the measurements were made between 10 and 12:30.
  56. 56. 45 6.2.4 Nitrogen Graph 17: Nitrogen levels in the Guadalete river The main finding was that nitrogen levels after the water treatment plant in Jerez peaked, and the total nitrogen concentration exceeded the EU standard, 8.29 mg/L, when standard is maximum 2.2 mg/L. High total nitrogen concentrations were found everywhere downstream from the water treatment plant (point 110) until the river water started to change to saline due to rising tide at the time of sampling, see Graph 17 There was a sudden drop, from 8.29 mg/L to 3.16 mg/L in the concentration of total nitrogen after the tidal weir (point 111). It seems that the tide reaches all the way to the weir and dilutes the nitrogen concentrations. Especially ammonium concentrations peaked after the water treatment plant. In addition, the effluent water of the waste water treatment plant, with a total nitrogen level of 46.60 mg/L, exceeded the EU standard of effluent water for WWTP of 10 mg/L. No clear effect of agriculture or other industry than waste water treatment plant on the nitrogen concentrations was observed in this study. -10 0 15 20 30 3540 60 80A 80B 80C 95 100 105 107 115 116 120 120B -10 0 1520 30 35 40 60 80A 95 100 105 107 110 112 0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25 0.30 0.35 0.40 0.45 0.50 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 -10 10 30 50 70 90 110 130 150 NO2 −(mgN/l) NH4 +,NO3 -,Ntot(mgN/l) Distance (km) Ammonium Nitrate Total nitrogen Standard Nitrite WWTP effluent, Ntot = 46.6 mg/l
  57. 57. 46 6.2.5 Phosphorus Total phosphorus values exceeded EU standard for surface water (<0.15 mg/L) in several places: after Villamartín (point 30), at the Bornos reservoir (35), upstream of Junta de los Rios (the junction of the rivers Guadalete and Majaceite, point 80A), and just before the water treatment plant and especially after it (107, 110). (See Graph 18) Graph 17: Nitrogen concentration of the Guadalete river. Just after the waste water treatment plant the total phosphorus concentration was more than two times the EU standard, or 0.345 mg/L. In addition the effluent water of the waste water treatment plant, with a total phosphorus concentration of 1.5 mg/L, exceeded the EU standard of effluent water for WWTP of 1.0 mg/L. The concentration dropped after the tidal weir (111), and continued to decrease downstream, where the river water was diluted by the rising sea water (at the time of sampling). Upstream of Junta de los Rios, a small stream of soapy water was observed at the time of sampling, which might explain the phosphorus concentration. It is not clear why increased phosphorus levels were not measured after Puerto Serrano (point 20) that does not have a water treatment plant, but at the next sampling point in Villamartín (point 30) the concentration of total phosphorus was 0.486 mg/l, which is more than three times the EU standard maximum. It is possible that the elevated phosphorus concentrations where temporary, but without new measurements it cannot be sure. No clear effect of agriculture or other industry than wastewater treatment plant on the phosphorus concentrations was observed in this study. -10 0 15 20 30 35 40 60 80A 80B 80C 95 100 105 107 110 111 112 113 0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25 0.30 0.35 0.40 0.45 0.50 -10 40 90 140 Ptot(mg/l) Distance (km) WWTP effluent, 1.5 mg/l Graph 18: Phosphorus concentration of the Guadalete river
  58. 58. 47 6.2.6 Lake stratification in Bornos reservoir Samples were taken from Bornos reservoir at a point where the reservoir was 15.5 meter deep. The samples were taken at every meter of the water column. Very clear stratification was observed. As seen in Graph 19, thermocline (a layer of sudden change in the water temperature) is somewhere between 14 and 13 meter deep. Graph 19: Stratification of the temperature in Bornos reservoir Because of the stratification, the bottom of the reservoir was completely oxygen deprived. O2 values were 0.05 mg/L or less at 12 meter’s depth and below. At 11 meter’s depth the oxygen level was already 4.37 mg/L and rose quickly to over 6 mg/L, after which the increase of O2 concentration was slower. (see Graph 20) Graph 20: Stratification of the oxygen in Bornos reservoir -16 -14 -12 -10 -8 -6 -4 -2 0 20 21 22 23 24 25 Depth(m) T (°C) -16 -14 -12 -10 -8 -6 -4 -2 0 0 2 4 6 8 Depth(m) O2 (mg/L)
  59. 59. 48 The pH values showed the same, layered behavior. As seen in Graph 21, there was a clear chemocline around 10 to 12 meter’s depth. Graph 21: Stratification of the pH in Bornos reservoir -16 -14 -12 -10 -8 -6 -4 -2 0 7.20 7.40 7.60 7.80 8.00 Depth(m) pH
  60. 60. 49 6.3 Conclusion The waste water treatment plant in Jerez is the main pollution source in Guadalete River, at the time when the nutrients concentrations are measured. The effluent water of the WWTP exceeded the EU standards for effluent water of WWTP in both total Nitrogen and total Phosphate. The water quality was fairly good before the treatment plant, except for some peaks in total phosphorus concentration, which might be temporary. No clear effect of agriculture or other industry than the wastewater treatment plant on the nutrient concentrations was observed. Based on the measurements and comparisons with the earlier study, it seems that oxygen levels are better when there is more water in the river. Bornos reservoir was stratified. Based on that observation, it is possible to assume that Arcos reservoir would also be stratified, since it is a similar reservoir according to measurements taken. It might be that in dryer years, no water from the epilimnion is released but some water from the hypolimnion, which is oxygen deficient. This could contribute to low oxygen levels in 2012, but not in 2013, when some water was released from the epilimnion of the reservoir. 6.4 Comparison 6.4.1 Conductivity Conductivity was similar in most of the sampling points in 2012 and 2013. But in the estuary of Puerto de Santa Maria the conductivity in 2013 is almost double and this can be due to the tidal influence. 6.4.2 Ammonium There were nine similar sampling points in 2012 and 2013. The names of the similar points are Arcos Dam, Majaceite river, before Torno, after Torno, before Jerez, after Jerez, Jerez waste water treatment plant, Puerto de Santa María and WWTP effluent. The conditions that were different this year were: 1. 2013 experienced more rainfall than 2012. 2. Flow of the water in the river was much higher in 2013 than in 2012. Ammonium concentration in the Arcos Dam was very high last year as compared to this year result. The value can be seen in the appendix. The flow was lower and suspended solids had more time to digest and release ammonia. Ammonium concentration in the estuary in Puerto de Santa María was much higher in 2012 than in 2013. While taking samples in 2013, we had incoming tides that diluted the water, whereas it is likely that in 2012 they sampled during the outgoing tide. The ammonium concentration in other sampling points did not differ much.
  61. 61. 50 6.4.3 Nitrate The concentration of nitrate in 2012 and 2013 was similar in the above mentioned sampling points. After the Jerez WWTP the nitrate concentration is quite higher in 2013 and this could be just a fluctuation. 6.4.4 Nitrite Nitrite concentration in all sampling points in 2013 was lower than in 2012. This could be because of more flow and more aeration in the river. 6.4.5 Orthophosphate Orthophosphate concentration in Arcos Dam was significantly higher in 2012
  62. 62. 51 7. Biology 7.1 Materials & Methods The Aim of this chapter is to have a detailed study of the relation between human activity and the biology in the river Guadalete located in south of Spain. Biological assessment will be addressed by determining the occurrence of bio-indicators at several locations in order to find causal relationships between the human factors and the biological state of the river. Biology is the study of living organisms. These living organisms live in relation of their environment; all organisms demand certain aspects of their environment. Also organisms may alter their environment to make it more suitable for themselves or other organisms. Biological assessments can be used to directly measure the overall biological integrity of an aquatic community and the synergistic effects of stressors on the aquatic biota residing in a water-body where there are well-developed biological assessment programs (Figure 20, USEPA 2003). Resident biota functions as continual monitors of environmental quality, increasing the sensitivity of the assessments by providing a continuous measure of exposure to stressors and access to responses from species that cannot be reared in the laboratory. This increases the likelihood of detecting the effects of episodic events (e.g. spills, dumping, treatment plant malfunctions), toxic nonpoint source (NPS) pollution (e.g. agricultural pesticides), cumulative pollution (i.e. multiple impacts over time or continuous low-level stress), nontoxic mechanisms of impact (e.g. trophic structure changes due to nutrient enrichment), or other impacts that periodic chemical sampling might not detect. Biotic response to Impacts on the physical habitat such as sedimentation from storm water runoff and physical habitat alterations from dredging, filling, and channelization can also be detected using biological assessments. Figure 20: Biological assessments provide information on the cumulative effects on aquatic communities from multiple stressors. (USEPA, 2003).

×