, its actually really comfortable
Thursday, May 31, 2007
Physical Survey #1: Westhampton Lake
The past two days I have been working very hard to accomplish my first physical survey. A physical survey is a means of judging the general welfare of a water system without any equipment other than a pen, paper, and in my case a camera. My physical survey will be broken into components set forth by the Chesapeake Bay Program's (CBP) assessment process.
For my first assignment I wanted to look at a feature that is central to the University of Richmond campus, Westhampton Lake. I would like to preface my discussion with a common perception of students of the UR campus that the lake is either radioactive or a bio hazard. One always hears rumors of individuals who cross the lake who, are within hours, sick with serious infections. Speaking to a Bio student yesterday, who has done field tests on the lake, has found that it meets all standards for a recreational/healthy lake. However, she cautioned me not to drink the water, since it may have E. Coli and other potentially harmful bacterium in it.
With these thoughts in mind, I began my physical survey...
__________________________________________________________
Name of Body of Water: Westhampton Lake Date: May 30th, 2007
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Riparian Zone & Erosion: A riparian zone is an important feature to most watersheds. The RP Zone is the interface between land and a flowing water body. The word Riparian, includes the Latin prefix ripa, meaning riverbank. This site often has numerous types of flora which can sustain numerous species of animals. The plants that compose the RP play a central role in filtering nitrates and runoff before it enters the water. The CBP feels there should be a minimum 35 feet to a RP Zone which slowly terraform from the water's edge to forest line.
^--- In this photo we are looking at one of the many streams that feeds into the Westhampton Lake near the Greek Row on River Road. The RP Zone is so thick that is almost impossible to get near the stream due to vegetation. This particular stream meets all of the CBP's criteria for a successful and healthy RP.
^--This RP (near DHall and the Tyler Haynes Commons on the Westhampton side of the lake) has numerous types of plants before reaching a paved path and then large trees and shrubs. While not the natural progression seen in the first shot, it still qualifies as a good RP.
^-- The Richmond side of the lake has the weakest, and at some points, nonexistent RP Zones. This photo shows the construction of Lakeview which slopes directly into the lake (to the left of the photo). Because of the lack of an RP zone, runoff has killed much of the grass near the lake. To prevent erosion this side of the lake has a man made approach... (see next photo)
^--The Richmond side of the lake uses large rocks along with netting below the soil to prevent erosion. This strategy is noticeable by the sharp drop of the land towards the water and the lack of a smooth transition to the water's edge evident elsewhere on the lake.
Birds: Great Blue Heron, Goose (Canadian & Domesticated), Ducks (Mallard), Robin, Crow, Dunking Water Bird (needs id & photo).......three sets of hatching's: Duck, Canadian Goose, Canadian Goose
Mammals: Squirrel
Reptiles: Snapping Turtle
Amphibians: Frog, Tadpoles
Fish: Sunnies, Minnows
Insects: Snails, Mosquito, Butterfly (yellow and dark with blue spots), Gnats, Ants
Trees: (MANY) at least 4 types of pine, lots of deciduous (beech & maple among others)
Plants: Far too many to count or quantify with my knowledge, much more than originally anticipated
***Species Observed Overall Impression***
Diversity is much more sophisticated than I originally thought. Also, bird flocks appear to have grown substantially since last year (especially seemingly non-migratory ducks). Fish appear all around lake, not just by gazebo as suggested by some.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lake Water:
Algae
^-- This is one example of algae in the lake. Yet this is restricted to the banks of the lake and appears to be simply a sign that the lake is alive and healthy.
^-- This photo was taken of the lake in the Fall of 2005. During this fall the lake was covered in a thick film of algae which created a malodorous smell and changed to very bright shades of green, blue, yello, and orange. The lake has not had a similar experience in the past two years.
Professor Chris Stevenson stated at that time, "The plain fact is that the lake is eutrophic (ie, highly productive). This is partly natural – lakes tend to become progressively more eutrophic as they age, and shallow lakes do so fairly quickly – but the process is accelerated by nutrient pollution. The source of the pollution is somewhat debatable. University Facilities claims that it is due to sources further up the watershed (eg, residences, Ukrops, etc) and not due to fertilizer used on University grounds. That’s perhaps debatable; I suspect both sources are important, though I can’t say for sure.So the only long term solution is to reduce nutrient pollution into the lake, and possibly treat the sediment (or dredge it) to get rid of the nutrients there (which can be re-released into the water). Anything else – including the aerators – is only treating the symptoms rather than the disease".
Muddy: Only at one point, where the streams enter the lake near where River Road and Richmond meet.
Odorous: 'Orange Stink' stream
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Well that sums it up! My first physical survey *whew* it took 3 hours to make this post. I learned where the lake needs improvement and also where it excels. Overall, I was very impressed with the state of the lake.
For my first assignment I wanted to look at a feature that is central to the University of Richmond campus, Westhampton Lake. I would like to preface my discussion with a common perception of students of the UR campus that the lake is either radioactive or a bio hazard. One always hears rumors of individuals who cross the lake who, are within hours, sick with serious infections. Speaking to a Bio student yesterday, who has done field tests on the lake, has found that it meets all standards for a recreational/healthy lake. However, she cautioned me not to drink the water, since it may have E. Coli and other potentially harmful bacterium in it.
With these thoughts in mind, I began my physical survey...
__________________________________________________________
Name of Body of Water: Westhampton Lake Date: May 30th, 2007
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Riparian Zone & Erosion: A riparian zone is an important feature to most watersheds. The RP Zone is the interface between land and a flowing water body. The word Riparian, includes the Latin prefix ripa, meaning riverbank. This site often has numerous types of flora which can sustain numerous species of animals. The plants that compose the RP play a central role in filtering nitrates and runoff before it enters the water. The CBP feels there should be a minimum 35 feet to a RP Zone which slowly terraform from the water's edge to forest line.
^--- In this photo we are looking at one of the many streams that feeds into the Westhampton Lake near the Greek Row on River Road. The RP Zone is so thick that is almost impossible to get near the stream due to vegetation. This particular stream meets all of the CBP's criteria for a successful and healthy RP.
^--This RP (near DHall and the Tyler Haynes Commons on the Westhampton side of the lake) has numerous types of plants before reaching a paved path and then large trees and shrubs. While not the natural progression seen in the first shot, it still qualifies as a good RP.^-- The Richmond side of the lake has the weakest, and at some points, nonexistent RP Zones. This photo shows the construction of Lakeview which slopes directly into the lake (to the left of the photo). Because of the lack of an RP zone, runoff has killed much of the grass near the lake. To prevent erosion this side of the lake has a man made approach... (see next photo)
^--The Richmond side of the lake uses large rocks along with netting below the soil to prevent erosion. This strategy is noticeable by the sharp drop of the land towards the water and the lack of a smooth transition to the water's edge evident elsewhere on the lake.
******RP overall analysis******
I was impressed with the RPs at the Westhampton Lake. The streams that deposit water into the lake all have fairly strong RPs. The Westhampton side of the lake, especially near the forested areas, is superb as well. However, the Richmond side of the lake's RP Zones should be the focus of repair and rejuvenation in order to create a more natural and effective natural barrier to prevent runoff and erosion to the lake.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Litter: Litter was less of a problem then previously assumed. The objects that appeared most frequently at the observable water's edge were glass bottles, cans, baseballs, and tennis balls. The streams that feed the lake were noticeably cleaner, however a tire and Disney style hat were found at two separate points.
<- In this photo a plastic cup can be observed in the lake. While trash is presumable further and deeper in the lake, the water's edge was surprisingly not in bad condition.
***Trash Overall Analysis***
Trash does not appear to be a serious problem. As would be presumably suggested, regular cleanups of the water's edge would take care of a small portion of the problem. Also, more trash receptacles would provide a means to stop some of the littering along the lakeside.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Point Source Pollution: PSP observes a direct point of pollutants entering a body of water. This is often characterised by pipes dumping a substance or pollutant into a body of water. Surprisingly, there are two point source pollution locations on campus.
^--While I have no field test to confirm, it goes without saying that any sort of power plant will generate pollution. Our campus's coal plant is only used at certain hours, but does contribute to air pollution. Also, the copious amount of coal near the water may have an effect, primarily due to a small RP Zone separating the coal from the stream. Runoff would be the main area of concern here. It is interesting to note that this PSP affects the water leaving the lake, so no effects are truly felt in the Westhampton Lake.
^-- This stream I have temporarily dubbed 'Orange Stink'. If you're wondering why, the title sums it up. It is both a strange orange color and has a pungent odor. This stream enters right near the coal plant from what appears to be a suburban area near the golf course (which is adjoining campus). If I get the means I really want to run field tests on this site to see if the cause is pollution, chemicals, or a strange biological feature.
***PSP Overall Analysis***
While I cannot come to any confirmed conclusions, I strongly feel investigation of these two sites is of high importance to my study. If these sites do prove to be contributing substansial amounts of pollution to the water it would mean problems for many other points down the stream/river exiting the Westhampton Lake.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Species Observed & Forests:
Birds: Great Blue Heron, Goose (Canadian & Domesticated), Ducks (Mallard), Robin, Crow, Dunking Water Bird (needs id & photo).......three sets of hatching's: Duck, Canadian Goose, Canadian Goose
Mammals: Squirrel
Reptiles: Snapping Turtle
Amphibians: Frog, Tadpoles
Fish: Sunnies, Minnows
Insects: Snails, Mosquito, Butterfly (yellow and dark with blue spots), Gnats, Ants
Trees: (MANY) at least 4 types of pine, lots of deciduous (beech & maple among others)
Plants: Far too many to count or quantify with my knowledge, much more than originally anticipated
***Species Observed Overall Impression***
Diversity is much more sophisticated than I originally thought. Also, bird flocks appear to have grown substantially since last year (especially seemingly non-migratory ducks). Fish appear all around lake, not just by gazebo as suggested by some.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lake Water:
Algae
^-- This is one example of algae in the lake. Yet this is restricted to the banks of the lake and appears to be simply a sign that the lake is alive and healthy.
^-- This photo was taken of the lake in the Fall of 2005. During this fall the lake was covered in a thick film of algae which created a malodorous smell and changed to very bright shades of green, blue, yello, and orange. The lake has not had a similar experience in the past two years.
Professor Chris Stevenson stated at that time, "The plain fact is that the lake is eutrophic (ie, highly productive). This is partly natural – lakes tend to become progressively more eutrophic as they age, and shallow lakes do so fairly quickly – but the process is accelerated by nutrient pollution. The source of the pollution is somewhat debatable. University Facilities claims that it is due to sources further up the watershed (eg, residences, Ukrops, etc) and not due to fertilizer used on University grounds. That’s perhaps debatable; I suspect both sources are important, though I can’t say for sure.So the only long term solution is to reduce nutrient pollution into the lake, and possibly treat the sediment (or dredge it) to get rid of the nutrients there (which can be re-released into the water). Anything else – including the aerators – is only treating the symptoms rather than the disease".
Muddy: Only at one point, where the streams enter the lake near where River Road and Richmond meet.
Odorous: 'Orange Stink' stream
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Well that sums it up! My first physical survey *whew* it took 3 hours to make this post. I learned where the lake needs improvement and also where it excels. Overall, I was very impressed with the state of the lake.
Wednesday, May 30, 2007
Rain Barrels!?
Ok I know this is a little off topic but I can't get over the idea of Rain Barrels! As stated in my previous post, runoff is a major cause of unnecessary sediment/fertilizers entering the JRW (James River Watershed). Here's a guide to rain barrels which describes how to take water that would normally spill off your roof/drainpipes and put it to good use. It's a simple and easy way to help the environment and also create successful gardens, etc. This would be a good idea for the University of Richmond, as well as any homeowner who wants to conserve water and protect our waterways!
The PDF is here: http://www.cbf.org/site/DocServer/rain_barrel_guide-web.pdf?docID=2868
The PDF is here: http://www.cbf.org/site/DocServer/rain_barrel_guide-web.pdf?docID=2868
James River Website and Data
The JRA (James River Association http://www.jamesriverassociation.org/home.html) is another organization who work to promote the environmental preservation and restoration of the JRW (James River Watershed). Did you know that 25% of Virginia is part of the James River Watershed and home to 1/3 of all Virginians? Here are some interesting data regarding the leading cause of pollution in the watershed and what individuals can do:
What can you do?
One of the most difficult things the river has to face is runoff pollution from lawns, farms, parking lots and development. The best thing that we can do to protect the James is to start at home. Here are some ways to minimize your impact on the River.
1. Lawn Fertilizer – minimize or eliminate lawn fertilizer. Some sources estimate that 40% of commercial fertilizer sold goes to non-agricultural uses. Mulching lawn clippings can retain nutrients on the lawn rather than removing them.
2. Roof runoff – direct down spouts to unpaved areas so rainwater can infiltrate into the ground rather than running off into a nearby stormdrain. Rain barrels and rain gardens can help hold initial runoff and use it productively for plants in your yard. In some developed areas, as much as 60% of the sediment pollution damaging streams results from increased runoff.
3. Conserve energy – There are many ways to save energy. As much as one-third of the damaging nitrogen entering Virginia’s rivers and the Chesapeake Bay comes from air pollution, of which power plants are a major source. Coal fired power plants also produce mercury that is the cause of widespread fish advisories.
4. Drive less – Combine errands into a single trip or use alternative transportation. Auto emissions is the other major source of air pollution that threatens Virginia’s rivers and the Chesapeake Bay
5. Talk to your elected officials – tell your state delegates and senators that clean water is important to you and that you want a dedicated funding source for clean water in the 2006 General Assembly. Citizens can play an important role to make sure Virginia’s rivers and Chesapeake Bay get the resources they need to be healthy.
(http://www.jamesriverassociation.org/getinvolved_whatcanyoudo.html)
Another Pic of the JRW (in green)
What can you do?
One of the most difficult things the river has to face is runoff pollution from lawns, farms, parking lots and development. The best thing that we can do to protect the James is to start at home. Here are some ways to minimize your impact on the River.
1. Lawn Fertilizer – minimize or eliminate lawn fertilizer. Some sources estimate that 40% of commercial fertilizer sold goes to non-agricultural uses. Mulching lawn clippings can retain nutrients on the lawn rather than removing them.
2. Roof runoff – direct down spouts to unpaved areas so rainwater can infiltrate into the ground rather than running off into a nearby stormdrain. Rain barrels and rain gardens can help hold initial runoff and use it productively for plants in your yard. In some developed areas, as much as 60% of the sediment pollution damaging streams results from increased runoff.
3. Conserve energy – There are many ways to save energy. As much as one-third of the damaging nitrogen entering Virginia’s rivers and the Chesapeake Bay comes from air pollution, of which power plants are a major source. Coal fired power plants also produce mercury that is the cause of widespread fish advisories.
4. Drive less – Combine errands into a single trip or use alternative transportation. Auto emissions is the other major source of air pollution that threatens Virginia’s rivers and the Chesapeake Bay
5. Talk to your elected officials – tell your state delegates and senators that clean water is important to you and that you want a dedicated funding source for clean water in the 2006 General Assembly. Citizens can play an important role to make sure Virginia’s rivers and Chesapeake Bay get the resources they need to be healthy.
(http://www.jamesriverassociation.org/getinvolved_whatcanyoudo.html)
Does 'Fun' Impact our Environmental Behavior?
Why is it that protecting the environment is rarely our first priority, or for that matter our second or third? How is it we can drive to work and see polluted rivers and streets and continue our daily routine without a moments hesitation? There are actually numerous possible reasons for these phenomena, which are both surprising and understandable:
1. Which Came 1st, the Recycling or the 'Fun'?: Today I read a very interesting article titled 'Motivations and Behaviors That Support Recycling' by Carol M. Werner and Eeva Makela of the University of Utah, in which the two did survey work looking into individuals' perceptions and habits in relation to recycling. In particular, the two looked to see if those who made recycling more 'fun' were more environmentally conscious. Their results were surprising, they found that, "people who had strong personal attitudes favoring recycling or a strong social orientation towards recycling were most likely to describe ways in which they made it more interesting"(Werner & Makela 382). Thus, because we see recycling as a chore, we are less likely to embrace it, and likewise if we make recycling more fun a correlation exists showcasing more tendencies of being environmentally conscious.
2. Diffusion of Responsibility: Let's face it, the world is a BIG place. In fact, there are so many people around us, we sometimes feel our individual actions are insufficient or unnecessary. It appears to be a human tendency to feel that someone will do the right thing, often times for us. This process is called diffusion of responsibility. A classic example of distribution of responsibility is if an individual is hurt in a car accident near a little league baseball game. The study of group dynamics suggests that if one person is near the crash they will be obliged to aid the individual (call 911, provide first aid, etc.) whereas a group of individuals will be less likely to do the same. Some make the argument that others are more able to handle the situation while others assume someone else will help. The challenge of environmental action is that the environment affects everyone and individuals appear more likely to put the responsibility to clean or preserve the environment on their communities, states, nations, and leaders. My research in regards to the James River Watershed will examine which process is more feasible or practical to individuals (individual action, community action, or regional action). This insight may provide a key means to evaluate where environmental action should be targeted.
3. Danger Zone!: What is the most recent example of an environmental disaster you have seen on the news? Was it an oil liner which accidentally spilled tons of oil on a nature preserve? Or a quick moving forest fire threatening homes? How about a hurricane which causes water from sanitation sites and other chemically or biologically threatening sources to flood into a major metropolitan city? Of course you have! Our media picks up environmental stories that are of the most sensational or perilous immediate concern. After all who would want to hear a news story of how soil erosion is slowly killing rivers and streams over a ten to fifty year period? It's not that these issues aren't important...it's just they aren't important NOW. Paul Story and Donelson Forsyth examined this process in relation to watersheds in their article 'Watershed Conservation and Preservation: Environmental Engagement as a Prosocial Behavior'. They suggest that because awareness about the health of watersheds is not of direct concern to individuals, they are less likely to be environmentally prosocial in protecting these water systems. Since immediate results cannot be found in these large environmental systems Weick suggests a system of small wins, which builds individuals confidence and support for a environmental system. However, the flaw of this approach is not that it doesn't work, but that it provides what it states, a small win. I hope to see if individuals relate to their region or community more than individual environmental processes. If this is so, these larger entities can engage in larger win situation which will still provide the confidence and support of the small win system with larger effect.
1. Which Came 1st, the Recycling or the 'Fun'?: Today I read a very interesting article titled 'Motivations and Behaviors That Support Recycling' by Carol M. Werner and Eeva Makela of the University of Utah, in which the two did survey work looking into individuals' perceptions and habits in relation to recycling. In particular, the two looked to see if those who made recycling more 'fun' were more environmentally conscious. Their results were surprising, they found that, "people who had strong personal attitudes favoring recycling or a strong social orientation towards recycling were most likely to describe ways in which they made it more interesting"(Werner & Makela 382). Thus, because we see recycling as a chore, we are less likely to embrace it, and likewise if we make recycling more fun a correlation exists showcasing more tendencies of being environmentally conscious.
2. Diffusion of Responsibility: Let's face it, the world is a BIG place. In fact, there are so many people around us, we sometimes feel our individual actions are insufficient or unnecessary. It appears to be a human tendency to feel that someone will do the right thing, often times for us. This process is called diffusion of responsibility. A classic example of distribution of responsibility is if an individual is hurt in a car accident near a little league baseball game. The study of group dynamics suggests that if one person is near the crash they will be obliged to aid the individual (call 911, provide first aid, etc.) whereas a group of individuals will be less likely to do the same. Some make the argument that others are more able to handle the situation while others assume someone else will help. The challenge of environmental action is that the environment affects everyone and individuals appear more likely to put the responsibility to clean or preserve the environment on their communities, states, nations, and leaders. My research in regards to the James River Watershed will examine which process is more feasible or practical to individuals (individual action, community action, or regional action). This insight may provide a key means to evaluate where environmental action should be targeted.
3. Danger Zone!: What is the most recent example of an environmental disaster you have seen on the news? Was it an oil liner which accidentally spilled tons of oil on a nature preserve? Or a quick moving forest fire threatening homes? How about a hurricane which causes water from sanitation sites and other chemically or biologically threatening sources to flood into a major metropolitan city? Of course you have! Our media picks up environmental stories that are of the most sensational or perilous immediate concern. After all who would want to hear a news story of how soil erosion is slowly killing rivers and streams over a ten to fifty year period? It's not that these issues aren't important...it's just they aren't important NOW. Paul Story and Donelson Forsyth examined this process in relation to watersheds in their article 'Watershed Conservation and Preservation: Environmental Engagement as a Prosocial Behavior'. They suggest that because awareness about the health of watersheds is not of direct concern to individuals, they are less likely to be environmentally prosocial in protecting these water systems. Since immediate results cannot be found in these large environmental systems Weick suggests a system of small wins, which builds individuals confidence and support for a environmental system. However, the flaw of this approach is not that it doesn't work, but that it provides what it states, a small win. I hope to see if individuals relate to their region or community more than individual environmental processes. If this is so, these larger entities can engage in larger win situation which will still provide the confidence and support of the small win system with larger effect.
Draft Survey #1
Here's my preliminary questionaire to be utilized in my studies:
Individual and Collective Environmentalism:
An Emphasis on the James River Watershed
___________________________________________________
Please tell us what you think about the waterways, creeks, drainage ditches, rivers and so on in the JRW (James River Watershed) by circling the letters to indicate your agreement or disagreement with each statement. If you wish to answer ‘Don’t Know’, then mark an X through the item
___________________________________________________________
Sd = Strongly Disagree SA=Strongly Agree
D=Disagree N=Neutral A=Agree
___________________________________________________________
#1: I am satisfied with the quality of the water in the (UBW) James River Watershed
Sd D N A Sa
#7: Protecting the (UBW) James River Watershed will make my community (region) a better place to live
Sd D N A Sa
#18: I would be proud to get involved in cleaning the (UBW) James River Watershed
Sd D N A Sa
#30: Most of the people in my community (region) feel the same way I do on (UBW) JRW issues
Sd D N A Sa
#39: It isn’t my responsibility to protect the (UBW) JRW
Sd D N A Sa
#57: City and county (regional) are responsible for protecting the (UBW) JRW
Sd D N A Sa
#61: Much of the pollution in the (UBW) JRW is being done by people who live in communities (regions) other than mine
Sd D N A Sa
#70: I would feel that I let down my community (region) if I polluted the (UBW) JRW
Sd D N A Sa
#83: Other members of the community (region) are NOT doing their fair share in protecting the (UBW) JRW
Sd D N A Sa
#84: I would be willing to get involved in preserving the (UBW) JRW
Sd D N A Sa
Individual and Collective Environmentalism:
An Emphasis on the James River Watershed
___________________________________________________
Please tell us what you think about the waterways, creeks, drainage ditches, rivers and so on in the JRW (James River Watershed) by circling the letters to indicate your agreement or disagreement with each statement. If you wish to answer ‘Don’t Know’, then mark an X through the item
___________________________________________________________
Sd = Strongly Disagree SA=Strongly Agree
D=Disagree N=Neutral A=Agree
___________________________________________________________
#1: I am satisfied with the quality of the water in the (UBW) James River Watershed
Sd D N A Sa
#7: Protecting the (UBW) James River Watershed will make my community (region) a better place to live
Sd D N A Sa
#18: I would be proud to get involved in cleaning the (UBW) James River Watershed
Sd D N A Sa
#30: Most of the people in my community (region) feel the same way I do on (UBW) JRW issues
Sd D N A Sa
#39: It isn’t my responsibility to protect the (UBW) JRW
Sd D N A Sa
#57: City and county (regional) are responsible for protecting the (UBW) JRW
Sd D N A Sa
#61: Much of the pollution in the (UBW) JRW is being done by people who live in communities (regions) other than mine
Sd D N A Sa
#70: I would feel that I let down my community (region) if I polluted the (UBW) JRW
Sd D N A Sa
#83: Other members of the community (region) are NOT doing their fair share in protecting the (UBW) JRW
Sd D N A Sa
#84: I would be willing to get involved in preserving the (UBW) JRW
Sd D N A Sa
Tuesday, May 29, 2007
Background on Richmond's Water Supply
City of Richmond Department of Public Utilities
Here's the DPU's 2005 assessment of the drinking water in the Richmond area:
http://www.ci.richmond.va.us/Departments/publicutilities/docs/WaterQuality2005.pdf
Interestingly to note is that the amount of water being pumped has increased since 1999 (based on a brochure Dr. Forsyth has given me) and that Richmond's water supply is 100% up to US water standards. The DPU's website is; http://www.ci.richmond.va.us/DPU/
-The PDF is 4 pages long-
CBP (Chesapeake Bay Program)
http://www.chesapeakebay.net/
The CBP provides a wealth of knowledge about watersheds. A watershed is essentially a group of rivers, streams, etc. which feed into a larger body of water. My study observes the James River Watershed (near the bottom of the map) which eventually feeds into the Chesapeake Bay. As you can see the large extent of the watershed means large regions as well as local communities have a responsibility to preserve this natural feature.
Lets zoom into the James....
Richmond is in the Middle, so lets get closer
Zoom into Richmond..
Just to give you an idea of how this map relates to my current location, The University of Richmond is on the border of Henrico County and Richmond (upper portion of this map). Besides these maps, the CBP also provides valuable data regarding the James River Watershed.
Here are two charts, the one on the left is in reference to toxic releases from 1989-1999 while the right discusses the mode of pollutants affecting the James River Watershed in 1999. The actual amount of pollutants is near 3,000,000 lbs.
Toxic Releases 1989-1999
Here's the DPU's 2005 assessment of the drinking water in the Richmond area:
http://www.ci.richmond.va.us/Departments/publicutilities/docs/WaterQuality2005.pdf
Interestingly to note is that the amount of water being pumped has increased since 1999 (based on a brochure Dr. Forsyth has given me) and that Richmond's water supply is 100% up to US water standards. The DPU's website is; http://www.ci.richmond.va.us/DPU/
-The PDF is 4 pages long-
CBP (Chesapeake Bay Program)
http://www.chesapeakebay.net/
The CBP provides a wealth of knowledge about watersheds. A watershed is essentially a group of rivers, streams, etc. which feed into a larger body of water. My study observes the James River Watershed (near the bottom of the map) which eventually feeds into the Chesapeake Bay. As you can see the large extent of the watershed means large regions as well as local communities have a responsibility to preserve this natural feature.
Lets zoom into the James....
Richmond is in the Middle, so lets get closer
Zoom into Richmond..
Just to give you an idea of how this map relates to my current location, The University of Richmond is on the border of Henrico County and Richmond (upper portion of this map). Besides these maps, the CBP also provides valuable data regarding the James River Watershed.
Here are two charts, the one on the left is in reference to toxic releases from 1989-1999 while the right discusses the mode of pollutants affecting the James River Watershed in 1999. The actual amount of pollutants is near 3,000,000 lbs.
Toxic Releases 1989-1999
Goals and 1st Day Update
Ok, here is my first post regarding my research. Today I met with my faculty advisor/mentor Dr.Forsyth about our research project. While we have been meeting for numerous weeks before the closure of the Spring Term 06, today was our first day of the project itself. Needless to say, I am both excited and motivated to make this project a success.
The first thing we did today was to get a whiteboard and essentially plot out our goals and expectations for the project. As we speak I am in the Jepson lab room getting acquainted with my new lab for the summer. Below is the basic layout of our goals;
____________________________________________________
Immediate Goals:
- Generate Questions for Survey
- 1st Day Discussion with Professor Forsyth *
- More Accurate Timetable
Goals:
- Published Paper
- Observe Phenomena
- Report for CCE / Presentation (Jepson and CCE)
- Observe the Watershed (James River, streams, lakes, brooks, etc.)
- Gain Information from the CBF (Chesapeake Bay Foundation), CBP (Chesapeake Bay Program), DPU Richmond (Department of Public Utilities), Adopt a Stream
Action:
- Survey (phone and door to door)
- Physical Surveys
- Blog *
- Photo Journal
- Water Testing
- Contact Environmental Organizations
- Data Analysis
- Review of Literature
* Indicates Completed
________________________________________________________
My next course of action is to generate the survey questions. Of particular interest is an experimental condition, which will be revealed upon completion of the project, which will provide insight into the concept of social identification and individuals and communities commitment to environmental policies and action.
Communication with environmental organizations will be accomplished during the next few days. Hopefully this will provide with with additional data about the watershed as well as means to assess water quality. Through the nonprofit CBP, or Chesapeake Bay Program, I have obtained a thirty page report on how to conduct a successful physical survey. A physical survey is a interesting approach to gauging the water quality of the watershed. The main objective of this type of survey is being able to judge the quality of a body of water without any testing equipment. While I will not go into specifics now, it's a long yet surprisingly simple process for ordinary citizens to do, I will at a later date.
Also, I will be working to make this blog a easy way to keep up to date with my research and provide significant insight not only to the project, but to research experience here at UR (University of Richmond). Check back later to find a link regarding the social and living experience here.
I may have another update later today so stay posted!
The first thing we did today was to get a whiteboard and essentially plot out our goals and expectations for the project. As we speak I am in the Jepson lab room getting acquainted with my new lab for the summer. Below is the basic layout of our goals;
____________________________________________________
Immediate Goals:
- Generate Questions for Survey
- 1st Day Discussion with Professor Forsyth *
- More Accurate Timetable
Goals:
- Published Paper
- Observe Phenomena
- Report for CCE / Presentation (Jepson and CCE)
- Observe the Watershed (James River, streams, lakes, brooks, etc.)
- Gain Information from the CBF (Chesapeake Bay Foundation), CBP (Chesapeake Bay Program), DPU Richmond (Department of Public Utilities), Adopt a Stream
Action:
- Survey (phone and door to door)
- Physical Surveys
- Blog *
- Photo Journal
- Water Testing
- Contact Environmental Organizations
- Data Analysis
- Review of Literature
* Indicates Completed
________________________________________________________
My next course of action is to generate the survey questions. Of particular interest is an experimental condition, which will be revealed upon completion of the project, which will provide insight into the concept of social identification and individuals and communities commitment to environmental policies and action.
Communication with environmental organizations will be accomplished during the next few days. Hopefully this will provide with with additional data about the watershed as well as means to assess water quality. Through the nonprofit CBP, or Chesapeake Bay Program, I have obtained a thirty page report on how to conduct a successful physical survey. A physical survey is a interesting approach to gauging the water quality of the watershed. The main objective of this type of survey is being able to judge the quality of a body of water without any testing equipment. While I will not go into specifics now, it's a long yet surprisingly simple process for ordinary citizens to do, I will at a later date.
Also, I will be working to make this blog a easy way to keep up to date with my research and provide significant insight not only to the project, but to research experience here at UR (University of Richmond). Check back later to find a link regarding the social and living experience here.
I may have another update later today so stay posted!
Greetings!
Hey everyone, my name is Garrett Schlein and I'm currently a rising junior at the University of Richmond. This summer I am working in conjunction with the Center for Civic Engagement and the Jepson School to research how individuals and collectives perceive and implement environmental policy. In particular, my studies will focus on the James River Watershed and the greater metropolitan Richmond vicinity.
The purpose of this blog is to give you insight into my studies, progress, and findings. I hope to create a photo journal as well to give you a first hand glimpse at my studies and the watershed. I will be updating over the course of the summer so check back frequently.
The purpose of this blog is to give you insight into my studies, progress, and findings. I hope to create a photo journal as well to give you a first hand glimpse at my studies and the watershed. I will be updating over the course of the summer so check back frequently.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
