# Presentation: 242700

## Headwater Stream Restoration in Mined Watersheds of the MAH

**Todd Petty, Mike Strager **
**WVU Division of Forestry and Natural Resources  **
**Paul Ziemkiewicz **
**WV Water Research Institute**

**USEPA Eastern Regional Scientist Meeting**
**June 20-21, 2006**

## Slide 2

## Observations 

- We have lost entire watersheds throughout much of the MAH mining districts as a result of AMLs.
- MTM/VF is occurring on top of historic impacts.
- If we ignore AML impacts we will not:
- 	- understand present day impacts of MTM / VF
- 	- effectively manage new mine development
- 	- successfully restore impacted watersheds
- Current stream-by-stream approach to restoration and protection is inefficient  and ineffective at the watershed scale.
- Progress will not be made until we shift to an approach that integrates AML restoration and new mine permitting at the watershed scale.

## Important Questions 

- Are there watershed scale consequences that emerge from extensive mining related impacts (“neighborhood” effects)?
- eutrophication of downstream waterbodies because of reduced nutrient uptake capacity of mined headwater watersheds
- reduced diversity of fishes that depend on watershed scale connectivity of stream reaches
- If so, what are the _mechanisms_, are there _indicators_, and can we find _thresholds_ of impairment below which watershed scale losses can be avoided?

## Watershed Scale Impacts

**# Streams Impacted by AMD**

**Cumulative Biological Impact**

**1:1**

**Protection**

**Restoration**

- Neighborhood Effect

## Important Questions 

- To what extent can restoration be used to recover reach _and_ watershed scale conditions?
- all restoration projects are not successful, but improvements can be made by coupling projects together; some will be more effective than others
- importance of restoration technology _and_ strategic design
- value of stream restoration depends on the quality of the “neighborhood.”
- What modeling, assessment, and administrative frameworks are needed to manage for watershed scale conditions (move to a “neighborhood planning” approach)?

## Specific Research in our lab 

- Landscape models in mined Appalachian watersheds (*quantifying reach and watershed scale conditions, identifying restoration priorities*).
- Watershed scale effects of extensive mining impacts on Appalachian stream fish assemblages (*quantifying “neighborhood” effects, identifying indicators of watershed condition*).
- Measuring the effectiveness of acid stream restoration on the Allegheny Plateau (*what does and doesn’t work?, what is and isn’t restored?)*.

## Mining and Coal Geology

- Saltlick

- Muddy

- Little Sandy

- Big Sandy

- Cheat Lake

**Coal Outcrops**
**Outcrop length**
**Coal type**
**Dip direction**
**Mine information**
**Surface vs Undergr**
**Permitted vs AML**
**Known area**

- Calculating Reachshed MI:

## Slide 9

## Effects of Mining Intensity, Mine Position, and Coal Geology on Bug Condition in the Cheat River 

**Effects of Mining Intensity, Mine Position, and Coal Geology on Bug Condition in the Cheat River **

## Slide 11

## Aquatic Neighborhoods

## Watershed Scale Impacts

**Good Stream / Good Watershed**

**Good Stream / Bad Watershed**

**Bad Stream / Bad Watershed**

**Watershed Scale Impacts**

***f *****(basin area ****(80%),**** spatial position ****(8%)****)**

## Watershed Indicators: Fishes lost from good streams in bad neighborhoods

## Slide 15

## Partial Recovery of Biological Assemblages in Restored Acid Streams / Poor Technology or Good Streams in Bad Neighborhoods?

- Log Basin Area (km2)

**Partial Recovery of Biological Assemblages in Restored Acid Streams / Poor Technology or Good Streams in Bad Neighborhoods?**

- Benthic Invertebrates

- Fishes

## Conclusions 

- It is possible to predict instream conditions (chemical and biological) continuously on the basis of geology, mining intensity, and mine placement.
*Can we predict the consequences of a given mining activity?*
- Extensive mining impairment produces watershed scale impacts to fish assemblages.
*Can we identify thresholds of mining intensity below which watershed scale losses are avoided?*
*Can fishes be used as indicators of watershed conditions? *

## Conclusions 

- Acid stream restoration is effective in recovering local physical and chemical conditions, but biological recovery is incomplete.
*Can restoration effectiveness be improved through “watershed design” (systems vs. chemical engineers)?*
- Full recovery and sustainable development in mined watersheds of the MAH will require watershed approaches that integrate restoration, land conservation, and permitting *(specific needs may vary from watershed to watershed).*