SACE Stage 1 Geography

Fieldwork Report
River Torrens Field Report – Year 11 Geography

Background:
The river Torrens is the largest and most significant river of the Adelaide Plains. It
stretches 80km’s from its origin at Mount Pleasant to its mouth at Henley Beach
South. Its catchment size is 620km2, supplying 20% of urban Adelaide’s water. Also,
the river is used for various recreational activities such as rowing, paddle boating,
hosts the nearby festival theatre and Adelaide Oval, and provides a generally
aesthetically pleasing area for the citizens of Adelaide. Due to this, it is crucial that
the health of the river is kept up to an extremely high standard. But, with urbanisation
increasing rapidly, every square inch of land is used to somehow improve the lives of
the citizens of Adelaide in the short term. The fault in this is that the overall riparian
environment can degrade with this increase in human interaction.

Hypothesis:
The hypothesis is that the overall riparian environment will degrade with an increase
in human interaction.

Method:
Three sites were tested along the river Torrens as each one had different
characteristics and land use. The three sites chosen were as follows:
• Torrens Lake (138° 35’ 53’’E 34° 55’ 3’’S): This was chosen as it is heavily
impacted upon by human development. The banks themselves are artificial,
there is a large stream of people passing by every day, and it is under constant
use by boats of all varieties.
• First Creek Botanic Park (138° 36’ 43.5’’E 34° 54’ 44.5’’S): This was chosen
as it is an area that does not have much human interference at all. The only
prominent human interaction is a foot bridge as well as a footpath next to the
river.
• St. Peters Billabong (138° 37’ 3.5’’E 34° 54’ 18.5’’S): This was chosen as it
has a moderate level of human interference. The billabong has a pontoon
stretching out over part of the water, as well as a decent amount of housing
development on the cliff face bounding the billabong. It is distinguished by the
cliffs large levels of erosion.
• For all, see Figure 1.
At each site alone, a series of water tests were undertaken to test how much of an
impact humans have had on the area. These tests were:
• pH: A measure of acidity or alkalinity of the water. The optimum pH for most
organisms is 6.5 to 8.2. Anything outside of this range can seriously deplete
the diversity of species. Water flowing through limestone will be alkaline and
water flowing through sandstone or basaltic soils will be slightly acidic. This
can tell a lot about the rivers banks and the amount of erosion there is.
• Turbidity: A measure of how clear water is. This is often a good measure of
the overall movement of the water. Generally speaking, the clearer the water,
the more it moves, and vice versa.
• Nitrates: Nitrates do not have any direct effect on a waterway. However, if the
levels are too high, algae can form. This seriously depletes organisms’ chance
 for survival. For a river a nitrate level of 0.10-0.75 mg/L is said to be a
healthy level, and for a lake a nitrate level of 0.10-0.50 mg/L is said to be a
healthy level.
• Phosphates: High levels of phosphates in water can stimulate the growth of
many aquatic plants in which other living organisms feed off. If the
phosphates’ levels are too low then the growth of aquatic plants can be under
stimulated and hence throwing out the equilibrium. For a river a phosphate
level of 0.01-0.100 mg/L is said to be a healthy level, and for a lake a
phosphate level of 0.005-0.050 mg/L is said to be a healthy level.
• Salinity: A measure of conductivity in the water. Too higher levels of salinity
can lead to stress and sometimes death of marine flora and fauna. Erosion,
clearance and irrigation can lead to these higher levels. A healthy salinity
level is said to be 740-2700 µS/cm.
Aside from these quantitative measurements, we also conducted a waterway health
check which was a qualitative measurement. It involved us rating five key areas of a
water way on a scale of one to ten. They were as follows:
• Land use: 0-Lots of industry nearby, most of land cleared, soil bare,
environment disturbed. 2-Some industry, some land cleared. 5-Some
commercial, recreational and residential land use. 10-No human use at all, in
its natural state.
• Litter: 0-Lots of human litter such as car bodies, tyres, plastics and
cans, oily films and/or excessive algae growth. 2-A lot of human litter, cans,
plastics or algae. 5-Some human litter such as garden rubbish and plastics. 8-
One or two pieces of human litter, and local vegetation such as leaves floating
in the water. 10-No human use at all, preserved in its natural state.
• Pipes and drains: 0-A number of pipes from industry and/or sewage
treatment and/or urban stormwater. 2-Some pipes or trenches. 5-No pipes from
industry, but some urban stormwater drainage. 8-No pipes or drains.
• Vegetation:

Figure 1:
Results:
The quantitative results from the three sites are as follows:
Test Site 1 Site 2 Site 3
Name & Location Torrens Lake First Creek Botanic St Peters Billabong
of Site 138° 35’ 53’’E Park 138° 37’ 3.5’’E
34° 55’ 3’’S 138° 36’ 43.5’’E 34° 54’ 18.5’’S
34° 54’ 44.5’’S
Date & Time 10/05/2010 10/05/2010 10/05/2010
9:47am 10:48am 11:33am
pH 7.5 7.5 7.0 7.0 7.0 6.5
7.5 7.5 7.0 7.5 7.0 6.5
7.5 0 7.125 0 6.75 0
Turbidity 40 27 <10 <10 19 15
(NTU) 25 100 <10 <10 15 20
30.67 N/A <10 N/A 17.25 N/A
Nitrate 0.8 0.4 0.6 0.4 0.8 0.4
(mg/L) 0.8 0.4 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8
0.6 +0.1 0.65 0 0.7 0
Phosphate 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07
(mg/L) 0.07 0.07 0.16 0.07 0.07 0.07
0.07 +0.02 0.07 0 0.07 0
Salinity 975 1169 1164
(µS/cm)
975 0 1169 0 1164 0
Note: The results in green are the average results, the underlined results are
outliers and do not contribute to the average, and the red results are the distance
from the healthy level for a river system. The distance from the ideal turbidity
level is not available as there is no ideal level in terms of the health of the system.

The qualitative results from the three sites are as follows:

Category Site 1 Site 2 Site 3
Land Use (/10) 4 7 5
Litter (/10) 1 8 8
Pipes and Drains (/10) 2 8 8
Vegetation (/10) 7 5 3
Extra 1 7 2
Structures/Modifications
(/10)
Total (/50) 15 35 26

Site 1:
The pH level for the Torrens Lake was ideal for what a lake’s pH level should be. It
was slightly basic which means that wildlife can grow at a natural rate.
It is hard to comment on whether the turbidity is ideal or not. But, because the lake’s
water doesn’t move at a very high rate, it can be said that the turbidity wasn’t what it
was due to fast water movement. This could therefore mean that the water is heavily
polluted.
The nitrate level for the lake was slightly above the ideal. Although nothing dramatic
will occur due to it, having this level over an elongated period of time could very well
detriment the health of the lake. These levels could be up due to the boats constantly
driving through producing fossil fuel waist.
The phosphate level for the lake was above the ideal. This means that the organisms
in the waters’ growth are stimulated to some degree. Due to it being an urbanised this
could be due to an excess of fertilisers.
The salinity of the water from the lake was ideal. This means that there will be no
effect on the lake due to salinity.
On a whole, the quantitative results show that the lakes health is at a reasonably high
level but still could be improved.

The qualitative results show that the lake was in extremely poor condition, scoring a
low 15/50. This means that to the human eye, the lake is in extremely poor condition
in terms of the survey.

The comparison of the quantitative results and the qualitative results shows that the
human perception of the lake is extremely different to the actual health of the lake.
The lake is in far better condition then humans perceive it to be.

Site 2:
The pH level for the First Creek Botanic Park was more or less a perfect reading in
terms of river health. This means that by this alone, the health of this segment of the
river was perfect.
The water in this segment of the river was perfectly clear, having a turbidity <10. This
was a surprising result as the water at this point in the river seemed to be moving at a
fair rate meaning that sediment would ideologically be floating in the water.
The nitrate level in this segment of the river was within the bracket of a healthy level
of nitrate. This means that there is extremely limited interference from outside sources
and the water is in its natural form.
The phosphate level in this segment of the river was within the bracket of a healthy
level of phosphate. This means that any imperfections in the river are not due to this
good level of phosphate.
The salinity level in this segment of the river was ideal. This means that the water is
as conductive as it should be which therefore means that no out of the ordinary
transfer of electrons can occur.
The quantitative results show that the river is in perfect condition in this segment, as
every reading was ideal.

The qualitative result from this site was a fair 35/50. This means that the river
segment to the human eye is of reasonable health but with some room to improve.

When comparing the quantitative results and the qualitative results it can be seen that
the river is far healthier then the human eye perceives it to be.

Site 3:
The pH level for St. Peters Billabong was a perfect reading in terms of river health.
This means that by this alone, the health of this segment of the river was perfect.
The water in this segment of the river was reasonably clear, having a turbidity of
17.25. By examining the amount of erosion occurring in the billabong this was a
surprising results as it was expected that the turbidity would be a much larger reading.
The nitrate level in the billabong was within the bracket of a healthy level of nitrate.
This means that there is extremely limited interference from outside sources and the
water is in its natural form.
The phosphate level in the billabong was within the bracket of a healthy level of
phosphate. This means that any imperfections in the billabong are not due to this good
level of phosphate.
The salinity level in the billabong was ideal. This means that the water is as
conductive as it should be which therefore means that no out of the ordinary transfer
of electrons can occur.
The quantitative results show that the billabong is in perfect condition, as every
reading was ideal.

The qualitative results for the billabong show that it is in average condition. The score
of 26/50 could be better and could be worse.

When the quantitative results and the qualitative results are compared it can be seen
that they contradict one another. The quantitative results show that the billabong is in
perfect condition, however the qualitative results show that to the human eye the
billabong is in an average condition.

Recommendations:
Site 1:
To lessen the turbidity in the lake, more bins can be placed upstream and in this area
to stop the amount of pollution entering the river. This has the economic implication
of costing too much.
To lessen the nitrate level in the lake a restriction of how many boats or how often go
through this area could be placed to limit the amount of fossil fuels being dumped into
the river. This would have the social implication of commuters through the Torrens
being displeased over a diminish of services. A regulation on how many fertilisers are
used in the surrounding area could improve these levels. This would have the social
implication of a less aesthetically pleasing area as well as an economic implication of
costing too much to limit these fertilisers.
The same steps could be taken to lessen the level of phosphate in the lake.

The economic implications if these steps are not taken are that the water quality will
diminish and tax payers will have to pay more to keep it at an ‘acceptable’ level, as
well as a loss in revenue from the river due to a lack of tourism and general
movement through that area. The social implication if these steps are not taken is that
simply less people will want to go to this area. The environmental implication if these
steps are not taken is that the water quality will simply diminish meaning that the
surroundings’ quality will also diminish.

Site 2:
Due to the fact that all readings from this segment of the river were ideal, no
recommendations could be made.

Site 3:
The only recommendation that could be made for the billabong would be to place
more bins in the area so that not as much litter gets into the billabong. This has the
economic implication of costing too much.
Conclusion:
Due to a lack in evidence, it can not at this stage be said that the overall riparian
environment will degrade with an increase in human interaction.

Evaluation:
The fieldwork over numerous days in numerous conditions tests over numerous days
in numerous conditions and at numerous sites. This would then give more data over a
more wide spread area, in which a more accurate conclusion could be drawn from.

The method has the limitations of there not being enough tests to be able to comment
on the overall health of the river. A test of water density for example could have been
practiced. Also, only three sites were tested. A higher total of sites could have been
tested to give more accurate readings.

The results could have been duplicated over a series of sites to make them more
representative of the overall health of the river. By doing so the results wouldn’t just
comment on the health of the three sites chosen, and would rather comment on the
entire river.