overview
(
nullable: true, editable: true, defaultValue: null, length: 255, alias: Overview
The Kimana River Freshwater Ecosystem Health Assessment (EHA) is generated yearly from the data and information collected from trained citizen scientists (WRUAs) across the Basin. The score combines the results from monitoring within three categories: (1) community perception on flow and catchment health, (2) water quality health, and (3)biota health . Monitoring is conducted quarterly by citizen scientists in 10 sites. Surveys on all the sites are conducted within the same period or as near as possible. During the inception phase (2020-2022), surveys will be overseen by WWF-Kenya, Water Resource Authority (WRA), and Kenya Marine and Fisheries Research Institute (KMFRI). Post 2022 monitoring will be led by the local communities championed by Water Resources Users association (WRUAs) and Beach Management Units (BMUs). Through the GIS Centre of excellence (CoE), WWF has developed a digital data system to ensure timely and efficient data collection, analysis and reporting.
WRUA representatives have been trained on the RHA methodology to work closely with WRA and WWF to oversee the programme. Each survey is led by a Team Leader whose responsibility is to:
• Ensure all equipment is serviced, in full working condition and is calibrated prior to each survey (WRA and WWF will support in the maintenance of monitoring kits).
• Check and validate data after each survey
• Interpret data and long-term trends with support from WRA and WWF
• Conduct site and activity-based risk assessments and provide a health and safety briefing to data collectors prior to each survey.
After each survey, a score of Good, Moderate or poor will be used to rate each of the RHA component. An aggregated score for each of the sites will be generated from the scores of the three components. - Red Poor health
- Amber Moderate health
- Green Good health
The data for each monitoring site will be submitted to the Kimana River citizen-led RHA database., type: esriFieldTypeString
)
compercepnotes1
(
nullable: true, editable: true, defaultValue: null, length: 255, alias: Community perception of catchment and flow health will be based upon the answers of at least five community members (WRUA members) to a questionnaire designed to identify issues that are indicator of both catchment health and flow health., type: esriFieldTypeString
)
compercepnotes2
(
nullable: true, editable: true, defaultValue: null, length: 255, alias: 1. On a scale 1-3 (1 being no or less impact, 2 being moderate impact and 3 being highest impact) score the following questions:During the dry season and low flows:, type: esriFieldTypeString
)
rbags
(
nullable: true, editable: true, defaultValue: null, length: 255, alias: i) Are sand bags used in the river?, type: esriFieldTypeString
, Coded Values:
[1: No (Less Impact)]
, [2: Moderate Impact]
, [3: Yes (Highest Impact)]
)
bdryseason
(
nullable: true, editable: true, defaultValue: null, length: 255, alias: ii)Is this a particularly bad dry season?, type: esriFieldTypeString
, Coded Values:
[1: No (Less Impact)]
, [2: Moderate Impact]
, [3: Yes (Highest Impact)]
)
waterdivert
(
nullable: true, editable: true, defaultValue: null, length: 255, alias: iii)Are there any water diversions for agriculture leading to decreasing flows in the river?, type: esriFieldTypeString
, Coded Values:
[1: No (Less Impact)]
, [2: Moderate Impact]
, [3: Yes (Highest Impact)]
)
rivhigh
(
nullable: true, editable: true, defaultValue: null, length: 255, alias: iv) During raining and high flow season is the river very dangerously high?, type: esriFieldTypeString
, Coded Values:
[1: No (Less Impact)]
, [2: Moderate Impact]
, [3: Yes (Highest Impact)]
)
humanhlthprb
(
nullable: true, editable: true, defaultValue: null, length: 255, alias: 2)Are there Human health related problems (eg Cholera, typhoid, skin rashes) you believe to be associated with the use of the river?, type: esriFieldTypeString
, Coded Values:
[1: No (Less Impact)]
, [2: Moderate Impact]
, [3: Yes (Highest Impact)]
)
compercepnotes3
(
nullable: true, editable: true, defaultValue: null, length: 255, alias: 3) Which of these issues affect the river? (NB: Consider issues happening within a stretch of 500m from the sampling site), type: esriFieldTypeString
)
notesh2oquality
(
nullable: true, editable: true, defaultValue: null, length: 255, alias: Water Quality Health Water quality is an important component of river health. The RHA citizen scientists will monitor four water quality parameters. Acidity/basicity (pH)
Water may be acidic, basic or neutral based on minerals within it. This can be measured using pH scale. Citizen scientists (WRUAs) will measure pH using a pool tester.
Water temperature
Water temperature is important for ecological health. Whilst natural changes in temperature occur with seasonal change, temperature can be influenced by habitat (shading), pollution and water quantity/volume. Water temperature will be measured using a water quality probe.
Dissolved Oxygen (mg/l) Dissolved oxygen (DO) is an indicator of water quality and is important to ecological health, in particular for invertebrates and fish. Changes in DO, especially low levels of DO can indicate that there is organic pollution in a water body, or they can result from low water flows and increasing water temperatures. Low levels of oxygen can have very negative effects within an ecosystem, in particular for fish and aquatic invertebrates. DO will be measured by citizen scientists(WRUAs) using a DO meter.
Water clarity Water clarity can be impacted by suspended solids (from both biological and mineral sources) and can be an indicator of health conditions within the catchment. The RHA will measure water clarity (turbidity) using water clarity tubes. We will generate scores for each water quality parameter: As there are no in-river water quality standards for Kimana River or East Africa, Water quality thresholds have been adapted from other river health scorecards* to suit the Kimana River context. Score Good, Moderate Bad
Water clarity/Turbidity
(NTU) Good, 0 – 15 Moderate 16 - 50 Bad>50 Acidity or basicity
(pH) Good 6.5 – 8.5 Moderate 5.5 – 6.4 Or 8.6 - 9.5 Bad 9.5 Water temperature (Celsius) Good 10 – 26 Moderate 7 - 10 Or 27 – 29 Bad29 Dissolved Oxygen (mg/l) Good > 6 Moderate 5- 4 Bad< 4, type: esriFieldTypeString
)
biotanotes
(
nullable: true, editable: true, defaultValue: null, length: 255, alias: Biota health is assessed based upon two parameters: 1) populations of aquatic macro-invertebrates and 2) vegetation cover. Q1.The MiniSASS survey form will be used and all variables recorded as required by the method. Macro-invertebrates Aquatic macro-invertebrates are an important indicator of good biota health and the presence and absence of different macroinvertebrate species can be used to monitor a river. The Kimana RHA adopted the MiniSASS macro-invertebrate monitoring tool that generates a score of health for a rocky and sandy bottom rivers based upon whether the species present are sensitive or tolerant to pollution (http://www.minisass.org). Vegetation along riverbanks is an important habitat and corridor for wildlife, and it also acts as a buffer, preventing pollutants and eroded soil from entering the river, and provides floodplain habitat during high flows. The Kimana RHA records the percentage of natural or semi-natural vegetation along the banks of each site. Citizen scientists walk over a stretch of 500 metres on both sides of the river at site and make visual estimates of the percentage of the river bank with intact natural or semi-natural vegetation from the bank edge to 10 metres from the bank., type: esriFieldTypeString
)
note2riverveg
(
nullable: true, editable: true, defaultValue: null, length: 255, alias: Vegetation along riverbanks is an important habitat and corridor for wildlife, and it also acts as a buffer, preventing pollutants and eroded soil from entering the river, and provides floodplain habitat during high flows. The Kimana RHA records the percentage of natural or semi-natural vegetation along the banks of each site. Citizen scientists walk over a stretch of 500 metres on both sides of the river at site and make visual estimates of the percentage of the river bank with intact natural or semi-natural vegetation from the bank edge to 10 metres from the bank. Natural and semi-natural vegetation excludes invasive or non-native species such as Eucalyptus trees, as well as agricultural crops or forestry, type: esriFieldTypeString
)
rivervegcover
(
nullable: true, editable: true, defaultValue: null, length: 255, alias: Q2. What is the estimated Natural and/or Semi-natural vegetation cover along the river bank?, type: esriFieldTypeString
, Coded Values:
[1: < 50%]
, [2: 51% – 74%]
, [3: > 75%]
)