Soil disturbance as a driver of increased stream salinity in a semiarid watershed undergoing energy development

Multiple land use activities drive riverine salinization in a large, semi‐arid river basin in western Canada

“…Importantly, the observed longitudinal and temporal shifts away from background conditions appear to be driven by a number of different anthropogenic stressors. This differs from many other systems where salinization has been attributed primarily to a single driver (Jolly et al 2001;Godwin et al 2003;Kelly et al 2008;Bern et al 2015;Corsi et al 2015;Zipper et al 2016). As such, the SSRB, and systems with comparable climatic and anthropogenic characteristics, face a unique set of pressures and management challenges in terms of riverine salinization.…”

“…Although the extent of change in soil salinity in the SSRB is unclear, it is important to note that the observed trends in Na + and do not necessarily require an expansion of salt affected soils. Bern et al () attributed increased riverine salinity in a semi‐arid watershed to the disturbance of native soils from oil and gas activities. While, a determination of the relative importance of disturbance vs. an increase in the area of salt affected soils is beyond the scope of this study, it is clear that spatial and temporal patterns in Na + and appear to be driven largely by soil processes, and in particular the dissolution and transport of soluble salts.…”

“…In addition to the climate specific drivers of salinization described above, municipal and/or industrial wastewater effluents (Cortecci et al 2002;Parr and Mason 2003;Aitkenhead-Peterson et al 2010;M€ uller and G€ achter 2011), oil and gas activities (Bern et al 2015), and mining (B€ athe and Coring 2011;Zipper et al 2016) are additional sources of salinity to rivers. Finally, changes in precipitation and/or evapotranspiration as a result of climate change may further accelerate riverine salinization (Cañedo-Arg€ uelles et al 2013).…”

Land cover changes associated with recent energy development in the Williston Basin; Northern Great Plains, USA

“…The development of energy infrastructure in such environments is likely similar to increased urbanization which has been shown to reduce carbon storage (Sallustio et al, 2015) and biodiversity (McKinney, 2002) and increase non-native species richness (Whitney, 1985). Development of energy infrastructure in aquatic or catchment areas has been shown to increase the salinity (Bern et al, 2015) and sediment load (Williams et al, 2008) of surface runoff and increase the risk of wastewater spills into adjacent aquatic resources (Preston and ChesleyPreston, 2015). Finally, the development of energy infrastructure in forested areas has been shown to reduce and modify habitat (Moran et al, 2015), create barriers that impede wildlife movement (Dyer et al, 2002) and alter songbird communities (Thomas et al, 2014).…”

Multiple approaches to surface water quality assessment provide insight for small streams experiencing oil and natural gas development

“…We also found support for surface disturbance as a mechanism driving shifts in water quality. Surface disturbance is a well‐known avenue of aquatic degradation (Bern et al ; Baker et al ), and %SD was correlated with greater suspended sediment concentrations and decreases in macroinvertebrate taxon richness and several functional feeding groups’ density and biomass. The source of suspended sediment is likely physical disturbance in the active stream channel and in the adjacent uplands (i.e., streambed and bank incision, digging in the creek, channelizing overland flow, poor culvert placement, and livestock trampling).…”