Mapping Water Quality in the Red River Gorge
Waterfall in the Red River Gorge
Jacob VanWinkle
jacob.vanwinkle@yahoo.com
Doug Curl
doug@uky.edu
Esta Day
esta.day@uky.edu
Bethany Overfield
blover2@email.uky.edu
University of Kentucky
Kentucky River Watershed Watch
Table of Contents
Project Summary
3
Needs Assessment Report
4-8
Progress Report
9-11
Data Dictionary
12
Deliverables
13-14
Conclusion
15-17
2
Project Summary
The Kentucky River Watershed Watch (KRWW) is an all-volunteer
organization that monitors water quality in the Kentucky River
watershed. Water quality is tested at specific sites in the watershed. The
organization has water quality data from 1999 but has only begun to
explore the potential for mapping this data. Our team focused on the Red
River Gorge sub-basin, an area comprising Wolfe, Menifee and Powell
counties. After analyzing the data, we discovered that there were not
enough consistent measurements to visualize the data in a way that
would be helpful to the Watershed Watch. So, instead of focusing on the
water quality we focused on the sampling trends. We created two sets of
maps. Each set contained a map that displayed the KRWW sampling
sites along with distances to roads and streams in the area. Additionally,
each set of maps visualized the measurements of a specific substance, in
order to further show sampling trends. One map focused on fecal
coliform levels and the other map focused on conductivity levels. The
sets of maps were compiled into PDFs and will be shared as part of
reports to be given to the area county governments in order to raise
awareness of the importance of consistent water quality sampling.
3
February 9, 2012
Needs Assessment Report
Project Background
The Kentucky River Watershed Watch (KRWW) is a non-profit organization whose goal
is to foster awareness about water quality in the Kentucky River Basin. The organization
manages test sites throughout the 7,000 square miles that encompass the basin. Volunteers
perform water quality tests at pre-determined sites and dates throughout the year, collecting data
which will be used to compile five-year sampling reports. Volunteers are encouraged to select a
stream that has some personal significance to them. In this way, volunteers exhibit personal
responsibility over and serve as “watchdogs” for waterways that have some significance in their
life.
Project Goals and Objectives
Two of the KRWW’s goals are to provide “auxiliary information to assist resource
management agencies” and to “identify specific impacts to water quality through targeted
observations and measurements.” Through the testing efforts of the KRWW, the Kentucky Water
Resources Research Institute and the Kentucky River Authority has indentified six subwatersheds as “Priority Watersheds.” Our team decided to focus on one of these targeted subwatersheds.
4
Our team will focus on the Red River Basin, situated in Powell, Wolfe and Menifee
counties. If time permits we may also investigate the South Elkhorn Watershed. We will create
maps that show the change in water quality over a specific period of time. These maps will be
used to create a report detailing the water quality in the area. The temporal maps and reports will
address the county governments affected, with the ultimate goal of informing county
governments in order to raise awareness about water quality.
Data Acquisition and Preparation Steps
Sources of data for Temporal Thematic Maps:
Data needed
Potential sources
Watershed boundaries
KYGEOnet, KGS server, ARC GIS online
Political boundaries
KYGEOnet, KGS server, ARC GIS online
KRWW test sites
KRWW database
5
KRWW water quality data
KRWW database
Land-use data
KYGEOnet, KGS server, ARC GIS online, UK
Landscape Architecture program
Transportation data
KYGEOnet, KGS server, ARC GIS online
Industry data
KYGEOnet, KGS server, ARC GIS online
Other data may be added as necessary.
The Steps necessary to meet our objectives are as follows;
1. Obtain data on the Red River Watershed and affected counties.
2. Extract data that is relevant to our Temporal Thematic Maps.
3. Layer the data and analyze.
4. Edit data into an easy to read format.
5. Finalize map in presentable form.
List of Maps and Analyses
1. The base map used for all the maps required for this project will be a GIS layer for the
county boundaries of Wolf, Powell, and Menifee Counties. The Coordinate system used
will be NAD 1983. The base map will also include layers of streams in the Red River
Watershed and these layers will be NAD 1983 as well.
2. The data will be water sampling sites visually displaying specific measurements in a
specific year along the Red River Watershed. This will be done in multiple maps in order
to provide a visual on the rate of change of data from one year to another year. The
6
specific measurements and years selected for these maps have not been selected at this
time. The Coordinate system used will be NAD 1983. The data will be extracted from
the excel spreadsheets given to us by the KY River Watershed Watch.
3. Photos will be taken at a few of the test sites and added in the map to give a better
understanding of the area of the Red River Watershed in question.
Plan of Action
1. Preliminary research – currently in progress
o Identify meaning of water quality data (Jake)
o Explore maps and reports already produced by other organizations (Esta)
o Meet/discuss with CPs (community partners) as needed (Both)
2. Preliminary data collection and exploration – currently in progress
o Collect and organize data to assess what is available and potential uses (Both)
3. Identify specific deliverables – finish by February 16th
o Define types of maps we will create (based on importance of water quality
measurable) (Both)
o Meet/Discuss with CPs
4. Data Collection – finish by March 1st
o Collect specific data needed for maps
o Meet/discuss with CPs as needed
5. Data Preparation –
o Regularize, organize, and prepare data for mapping
 Watershed boundaries (Jake)
 Political (county) boundaries (Jake)
 Other data (potential data includes transportation, industry, land-use)
(Both)
 KRWW data (into ARC by March 9)
7


Sites (Esta)
Water quality data
o Powell county (Both)
o Menifee county (Esta)
o Wolfe county (Jake)
6. Produce maps – finish by April 12th
o Create maps
 Red River Watershed displaying measurements for earlier years (Jake)
 Red River Watershed displaying water measurements for later years (Esta)
6a. Assessment o Assess maps for usefulness and appropriateness to project goals (Both)
o Meet with CPs as part of this assessment
o If needed, repeat steps 4-7 until the maps produced accurately reflect project goals
7. Report – finish by April 26th
o Along with CPs, analyze maps to make conclusions about water quality in the
Red River Basin
o Create a brief report for each county (5-10 pages) describing water quality issues
in the county
 Powell county (Both)
 Menifee county (Esta)
 Wolfe county (Jake)
o Meet with CP to discuss and revise reports
o Deliver reports to county governments
8. Present – Wednesday May 2nd , create visuals by April 26th
o Prepare visuals for class presentation (Both)
o Present (Both)
8
March 22, 2012
Progress Report
KRWW Red River Basin Mapping Project Progress
Project Update (completed tasks)
When assigned the Kentucky River Watershed Watch project Esta and Jake established
availability and skills between the two. Then the project team began to explore the KYRWW
website and other websites to gain knowledge on what the community partner wanted to
accomplish and what they represent. Once the project team had an idea about the direction the
project would take, we began to explore and manipulate potential data layers in ArcGIS that
could be useful, for eg. counties, rivers, and watersheds by basin layers. Having discussed and
explored the different options we developed a Needs Assessment Report (NAR) to communicate
with our community partner our ideas and what we would need from them to pursue those ideas.
The project team began to plan the actual needs assessment meeting. This was done by
creating questions the team needed answering after the research done previously. The team
scheduled and had a meeting with Doug and Bethany and discussed: the scope and focus of the
project, KRWW data acquisition and other sources, deliverables, and the need for us to further
research specific water quality information.
After the meeting the team discussed the data needed to reach goals set by the community
partners and project team. Then the team planned the workflow for the next few weeks. The
team acquired the KRWW data from Doug and Bethany and immediately began to look through
the data. The data was streamlined to the geographical area of focus which was the Red River
9
Gorge. The team also took out some of the data based on relevance. The team further organized
the data by regularizing, adding latitude and longitude coordinates into the same data spreadsheet
and preparing it for use in Arc.
Once the data was reorganized into a manageable spread sheet it was then added into
ArcGIS and the team began to create different layers to study the different attributes of the water
quality samples. There were three attributes that seemed significant: the conductivity in the
watershed, the fecal coliform counts, and the pattern of data measurement (the samples were all
taken in exact the same locations but at different times, leading us to question the data collection
methodology). The team discussed creating maps showing fecal coliform and conductivity and
their change over time. We also discussed the potential of creating maps that showed the
KYRWW volunteer activities.
Mid-Project Meeting and Changes to Goals
After developing a good sense of direction to take this project the team set up another
meeting to show our progress and discuss some concerns with the Community Partners. The mid
project meeting was very productive and as a result we now have a new direction to take our
initial goal. The community partner suggested using graphs to depict change over time to save
the number of maps needed to complete this project. Further, we dismissed the idea to map
volunteer activity. We also discussed the potential of mapping data that showed positive water
quality attribute levels in addition to mapping the problematic levels. Finally, we again discussed
the potential for adding land-use data.
10
Current Problems
The project team plans to link pictures and graphs depicting change over time at the
sample points. This is our preferred method of visual representation. However, we aren’t sure
how to do this and therefore will need to learn how in order to complete our project.
Additionally, although we would like to integrate land use data in our map, we have been unable
to locate relevant data. However, this is not absolutely necessary to complete our project.
Another problem we have encountered is trying to find an easy way to remove irrelevant data
from the streams layer in our map. ArcGIS has difficulty interpreting multiple variables in the
queries that we have attempted to use to remove the data.
Preliminary Maps
See file located at
\geo509_wilson\2012SP_projects\KYRIVER\GISMAPs_Analysis\ ProgressReportMap.pdf
(screenshot below)
11
Data Dictionary
(see attached file)
12
Deliverables
(also see attached PDFs)
13
14
Conclusion
Our goal with the Kentucky River Watershed Watch was originally to
map data that could be useful to the KRWW and communities within the
watershed. The data that the KRWW had given us was very extensive
and after exploring the data and their website, we decided to narrow our
focus to a single watershed. The KRWW website had particular
watersheds highlighted as areas of concern. Of those selected
watersheds we picked the Red River Watershed.
After meeting with our community partners we decided to focus on
raising awareness to the Wolf County, Powell County, and Menifee
County Governments and the KRWW.
We then examined the Red River data in Excel and in Arc. There
were many variables that were sampled for: PH, fecal coliform, ecoli,
metals, etc and as a result we needed to research the significance of each
measurable. After examining the data we decided that two variables
were of concern: fecal coliform count and conductivity level.
The next step was deciding how to spatially display the data.
During our mid-term meeting with Bethany and Doug, we decided to
display graphs depicting change over time in each sample site. This was
possible because of the relatively few sample sites in the Red River
Watershed area; however even with the relatively few sites, the graphs
were still cluttered. In order to solve this issue, we created multiple
maps instead of a single map. Each map showed a small range of years
15
and focused on the sample sites with consistent data for those specific
years.
After reformatting the data in Excel and displaying spatially located
graphs in Arc, we saw a pattern regarding a lack of consistency in the
data collected in each location. Therefore, we decided to focus on
visualizing sampling activity in the sub-basin. We created 500 yard
buffers on the streams and roads, then created an intersect with those
buffers to show the accessibility of sample site locations. We then
created a table showing the frequency of sampling and the most recent
sample year for each site. We added this to our map and created
multiple layers using graduated symbols to show frequency of samples
taken at a site and different symbols used to show the year that each site
was most recently sampled.
Our end products were two map packages. Both map packages have a
large map of the Red River Watershed, roads in the area, and the
counties (Powell, Menifee, and Wolfe) that contain the watershed. This
was the base layer for all maps we created. The main map in each
package shows the spatial relationship between the sample sites, the 500
yard accessibility to a main road from a stream and frequency of
sampling. Both map packages also contain three smaller thematic maps
showing graphs at each site for a given number of years. These graphs
depict a change over time at each sample site. One map package depicts
the change in conductivity levels over time while the other depicts the
16
similar temporal changes in fecal coliform count. Each map package
also contains descriptions of acceptable levels for each measurable
appropriate for each thematic map package and lists the highest and
lowest levels for each thematic map, which can be cross referenced to
the map for better comparison.
In conclusion our goal was to raise awareness by visualizing the data to
tell a story about the Red River Watershed. Raising awareness about
conductivity is important; high conductivity levels are indicators of high
levels of dissolved minerals and other solids that can potentially kill off
organisms and create deposit build ups in pipes and other water related
devices. Consuming or coming in contact with water that has high
levels of fecal coliform can lead to illness. Our deliverables are only
part of the end result; this process can be repeated on other watersheds.
Based on the feedback from our community partners, the stream/road
distance intersect was one of the most helpful outputs of this project.
The KRWW could use this mapping process in order to identify
potential sampling sites in other sub-basins.
17