Search results
- Much of the physical and chemical data from the monitoring program are stored in the Water Data System (WDS), a module of the Environmental Management System (EMS). The EMS supplies data to the Environmental Data Warehouse (EDW), which is the source of the online surface water quality data.
www.alberta.ca/system/files/custom_downloaded_images/ep-guide-surface-water-quality-data-online-tools.pdfGuide to Surface Water Quality Data and Online Tools - Alberta.ca
People also ask
Where is surface water quality data stored?
Where can I find surface water quality data?
Where can I find surface water quality monitoring stations in Alberta?
How does Alberta monitor water quality?
What are surface water quality and aquatic ecosystem guidelines?
What are the basic tools for surface water quality assessment?
Overview. The Alberta government, and its partners, collect surface water quality samples in water bodies across the province. The Water Quality Data Portal (WQD Portal) is a map-based tool for searching, viewing and downloading data for surface water quality monitoring stations.
Long-term freshwater quality data from federal and federal-provincial sampling sites throughout Canada's aquatic ecosystems are included in this dataset. Measurements regularly include physical-chemical parameters such as temperature, pH, alkalinity, major ions, nutrients and metals.
- Overview
- Key resultsFootnote 1 Footnote
- Trends in water quality in Canadian rivers
- Regional water quality in Canadian rivers
- Key results
- About the indicators
- Data sources and methods
- Resources
- Annex B. Water quality guidelines used by each province and territory
- Detailed data
(4.16 MB)
Healthy river ecosystems rely on clean water. The quality of water and the health of rivers depend on how people develop and use the surrounding land. These indicators classify the water quality of rivers into 5 categories to give an indication of the ability of a river to support the plants and animals that live in or use the water.
•For the 2018 to 2020 period, water quality in rivers in Canada was rated fair to excellent at 83% of the monitored sites
•Land development through agriculture, mining, forestry, high population density or a combination of these (mixed pressures) tends to have a negative impact on water quality
Water quality in Canadian rivers, national and by land use category, 2018 to 2020 period
Data table for the long description
Note: Percentages may not add up to 100 due to rounding.
Download data file (Excel/CSV; 1.5 kB)
Key results
Water quality has not changed between 2002 and 2020 at over half of the sites (60%) across southern Canada Where it has changed, it has deteriorated (30%) more often than it has improved (10%) Trends in water quality, Canada, 2002 to 2020 Data table for the long description Note: Percentages may not add up to 100 due to rounding. Download data file (Excel/CSV; 1.1 kB) Navigate data using the interactive map How this indicator was calculated Note: The trend in water quality between the first year that data were reported for each site and 2020 was calculated at 142Footnote 4 sites across southern Canada. A Mann-Kendall test was used to assess whether there was a statistically-significant increasing or decreasing trend in the annual guideline deviation ratios at a site. The trend was calculated at each site using parameters specific to the site. Therefore, an improving or a deteriorating water quality does not necessarily imply a change in water quality category. For more information on the trend method used, consult the Data sources and methods and the Caveats and limitations sections. Source: Data assembled by Environment and Climate Change Canada from federal, provincial and joint water quality monitoring programs. The average water quality in a river tends to change slowly. Natural factors, such as snow and rainfall, affect water quality by washing pollution that builds up on the surface of roads and fields into the river. A dry year could mean better water quality, because less pollution is washed into the river. On the other hand, a drought could lead to worse quality as there is less water to dilute pollution from point sources like urban sewage outflows. A changing climate that results in longer or more frequent wet or dry periods will affect water quality in each river differently depending on its regional characteristics. How the landscape is developed also impacts how quickly water quality changes. Altered landscapes, industrial and sewage effluents, and atmospheric depositionFootnote 5 can all affect water quality. Water quality in a river can be improved by modernizing wastewater treatment plants and factories, adopting environmental farming practices, protecting wetlands, or planting native vegetation along river banks, among other actions.
Key results
The Atlantic Ocean, Mackenzie River and Hudson Bay regions had the highest proportion of sites with good or excellent water quality (62%, 59%, and 52%, respectively) The Great Lakes and St. Lawrence River, Pacific Ocean and Atlantic Ocean regions had the highest proportion of sites with marginal or poor water quality (29%, 15% and 11%, respectively) Regional water quality, Canada, 2018 to 2020 period Data table for the long description Water quality category Atlantic Ocean (percentage of sites) Great Lakes and St. Lawrence River (percentage of sites) Hudson Bay (percentage of sites) Mackenzie River (percentage of sites) Pacific Ocean (percentage of sites) Excellent 9 5 16 18 14 Good 53 26 36 41 29 Fair 27 40 41 41 43 Marginal 9 26 7 0 10 Poor 2 3 0 0 5 Total 100 100 100 100 100 Note: Percentages may not add up to 100 due to rounding. Download data file (Excel/CSV; 1.4 kB) Navigate data using the interactive map How is this indicator calculated Note: For the Regional water quality in Canadian rivers indicator, water quality was assessed at 185 sites across Canada using the Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment's water quality index. Compared to the national indicator, the Regional water quality in Canadian rivers indicator uses 13 additional monitoring sites and includes more sites in the northern portions of the Mackenzie River. Source: Data assembled by Environment and Climate Change Canada from federal, provincial, territorial and joint water quality monitoring programs. Water quality varies widely across Canada. For the 2018 to 2020 period: The highest proportion of sites rated good or excellent was found in areas where there was very little human development upstream or in the least populated areas The highest proportion of sites rated marginal or poor was found in the most populated areas, in particular where agriculture, or a combination of agriculture and forestry was also present blank space
Key results
Most sites in the Atlantic Ocean region are in areas with forestry or in undeveloped areas have fair to excellent water quality Monitoring sites in high population density areas and with agriculture or forestry (mixed pressures) usually have worse water quality Water quality by land use category, Atlantic Ocean region, 2018 to 2020 period Data table for the long description Land use category Excellent (percentage of sites) Good (percentage of sites) Fair (percentage of sites) Marginal (percentage of sites) Poor (percentage of sites) Agriculture 0 9 0 0 0 Forestry 7 11 13 0 0 Mining 0 2 2 0 0 Populated 0 0 0 7 0 Mixed pressures 0 7 7 2 2 Undeveloped 2 24 4 0 0 Total 9 53 27 9 2 Note: Percentages may not add up to 100 due to rounding. Download data file (Excel/CSV; 1.5 KB) Navigate data using the interactive map How is this indicator calculated Note: Water quality was assessed at 45 sites on rivers draining into the Atlantic Ocean using the Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment's water quality index. For more information on land use classification, consult the Data sources and methods section. Source: Water quality data were assembled by Environment and Climate Change Canada from existing federal, provincial and joint water quality monitoring programs. Population, forestry, mining and land cover statistics for each site's drainage area were provided by Statistics Canada, Natural Resources Canada, Environment and Climate Change Canada, Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, the Government of Alberta and the University of Maryland. More information This region is home to approximately 2.3 million people, or 7% of Canada's population. The majority live in Nova Scotia, New Brunswick and on the island of Newfoundland. Agriculture is mainly found in Prince Edward Island, Nova Scotia's Annapolis Valley and New Brunswick where the soil and climate are suitable. Mining and forestry are 2 of the region's largest industries. In Newfoundland and Labrador, iron ore, nickel, copper, cobalt and gold are mined. New Brunswick and Nova Scotia have many active aggregate, limestone, gypsum, coal and gold mines. Forestry, the largest industry in New Brunswick, is composed of solid wood and pulp production. Water pollution from mining and pulp and paper industries effluent is regulated, but limited releases to rivers and leaching from tailings and waste rock enclosures can have a local impact on water quality. Closed or abandoned metal mines may still be releasing harmful substances to the water. Also, mines are often located in areas where mineral content in the soil and in water may be naturally high. For the 2018 to 2020 period, water quality for 45 sites on rivers draining into the Atlantic Ocean was rated: excellent or good at 62% of monitoring sites fair at 27% of sites marginal at 9% of sites poor at 2% of sites Water quality tends to be good to excellent in this region of Canada because large areas are undeveloped, and therefore not subject to impact from human activity, particularly in Labrador. Calculated trends using data from 2002 to 2020Footnote 6Footnote 7 show that water quality has improved at 8 sites: on the Humber River and the Gander River in Newfoundland and Labrador, on the Tusket River, the Roseway River, the Mersey River, the Lahave River and the Cheticamp River in Nova Scotia and on the Wilmot River in Prince Edward Island. These sites are in areas where there is either forestry or very little development around them, except for Gander River, where mining activity is present, and Wilmot river, where there is extensive agriculture. Water quality has deteriorated at 13 sites: on the Main River and the Lloyds River in Newfoundland and Labrador, on the Annapolis River and the Cornwallis River in Nova Scotia and at 3 sites on the Saint John River (Saint John River below St. Basile, Saint John River below Upper Queensbury, Saint John River at Evandale), the Aroostook River, the Big Presque Isle Stream, the Nashwaak River, the Lepreau River, the Southwest Miramichi River and the Petitcodiac River in New Brunswick. There was no change in water quality at the remaining 24 sites.
Key results
Water quality in rivers in the Great Lakes and St. Lawrence River region is generally fair to poor in southwestern Ontario and along the St. Lawrence River between Montreal and Quebec City excellent or good in eastern Ontario Monitoring sites in areas where there are mixed pressures tend to have worse water quality Water quality by land use category, Great Lakes and St. Lawrence River region, 2018 to 2020 period Data table for the long description Land use category Excellent (percentage of sites) Good (percentage of sites) Fair (percentage of sites) Marginal (percentage of sites) Poor (percentage of sites) Agriculture 3 3 5 0 0 Forestry 0 2 0 0 0 Mining 0 3 3 2 0 Populated 0 0 2 0 0 Mixed pressures 0 12 28 24 3 Undeveloped 2 5 2 0 0 Total 5 26 40 26 3 Note: Percentages may not add up to 100 due to rounding. Download data file (Excel/CSV; 1.5 kB) Navigate data using the interactive map How is this indicator calculated Note: Water quality was assessed at 58 sites on rivers draining into the Great Lakes or St. Lawrence River using the Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment's water quality index. For more information on land use classification, consult the Data sources and methods section. Source: Water quality data were assembled by Environment and Climate Change Canada from existing federal, provincial and joint water quality monitoring programs. Population, forestry, mining and land cover statistics for each site's drainage area were provided by Statistics Canada, Natural Resources Canada, Environment and Climate Change Canada, Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, the Government of Alberta and the University of Maryland. More information Home to almost 60% of Canadians, close to 20 million people, the Great Lakes and St. Lawrence River region contains 6 of the country's 10 largest cities: Toronto, Montreal, Ottawa, Mississauga, Brampton and Hamilton. Most human activity in this area is associated with urbanization. The impact of increasing population density can be seen in the diminished water quality at sites on rivers. Fertile soils and a relatively mild climate combine to create productive agricultural land in the Great Lakes and St. Lawrence River region. Agricultural land is steadily being covered by cities changing the stresses on water quality in the region. Mining in the region is dominated by feldspar and quartz mines. Forestry is an important industry in Quebec and Ontario. Pulp and paper mills are mainly located near the Great Lakes and the St. Lawrence River or near their tributaries. Water pollution from mining and pulp and paper industries effluent is regulated, but limited releases to rivers and leaching from tailings and waste rock enclosures can have a local impact on water quality. Closed or abandoned metal mines may still be releasing harmful substances to the water. For the 2018 to 2020 period, water quality for 58 sites on rivers in the Great Lakes and St. Lawrence River region was rated: excellent or good at 31% of monitoring sites fair at 40% of sites marginal at 26% of sites poor at 3% of sites Calculated trends using data from 2002 to 2020Footnote 6Footnote 8 show no site with improved water quality. During that same period, water quality has deteriorated at 24 sites. Twenty (20) of these sites are located in Ontario, on the Skootamata River, the Nottawasaga River, the Thames River, the Sydenham River, the Oakville Creek, the Credit River, the Humber River, the Don River, the Ausable River, the Saugeen River, the South Raisin River, the North Raisin River, the Bayfield River, the Maitland River, the Gananoque River, the Delisle River, the Kemptville Creek, the Rideau River, the Jock River, and the Fall River. Four (4) sites are located in Québec, on the Châteauguay River, the La Chaloupe River, the de la Petite Nation River and the Jacques-Carier River. Land use at a majority of these sites is either agriculture or a mix of agriculture and high population density. There was no change in water quality at the remaining 25 sites.
•Water quality in rivers close to the Rocky Mountains, in Saskatchewan, and north of Lake Winnipeg in the Hudson Bay region tends to be good or excellent. There is very little development in these areas
•Water quality tends to be worse in areas where there is agriculture, or a mixture of agriculture and mining
Water quality by land use category, Hudson Bay region, 2018 to 2020 period
Data table for the long description
Note: Percentages may not add up to 100 due to rounding.
Download data file (Excel/CSV; 1.4 kB)
What the indicators measure
These indicators provide a measure of the ability of river water across Canada to support plants and animals. At each monitoring site, specific water quality data are compared to water quality guidelines to create a rating for the site. If measured water quality remains within the guidelines, we assume that it can maintain a healthy ecosystem. Water quality at a monitoring site is considered excellent when parameters in a river almost always meet their guidelines. Conversely, water quality is rated poor when parameters usually do not meet their guidelines, sometimes by a wide margin.
Why these indicators are important
Clean freshwater is an essential resource. It protects aquatic plant and animal biodiversity. We use it for manufacturing, energy production, irrigation, swimming, boating, fishing and for domestic use (for example, drinking and washing). Degraded water quality damages the health of all freshwater ecosystems, such as rivers, lakes, reservoirs and wetlands. It can also disrupt fisheries, tourism and agriculture and make it more expensive to treat to drinking water standards. These indicators provide information about the state of surface water quality and its change through time, to support water resource management. They are used to provide information about the status and trends in water quality for the Canada Water Act report and Environment and Climate Change Canada's annual departmental performance reports.
Related initiatives
These indicators support the measurement of progress towards the following 2022 to 2026 Federal Sustainable Development Strategy Goal 6: Clean water and sanitation – ensure clean and safe water for all Canadians. In addition, the indicators contribute to the Sustainable Development Goals of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. They are linked to Goal 6, Clean water and sanitation and Target 6.3: "By 2030, improve water quality by reducing pollution, eliminating dumping and minimizing release of hazardous chemicals and materials, halving the proportion of untreated wastewater and substantially increasing recycling and safe reuse globally". The indicators also contribute towards reporting on Target 10 of the 2020 Biodiversity target for Canada: "By 2020, pollution levels in Canadian waters, including pollution from excess nutrients, are reduced or maintained at levels that support healthy aquatic ecosystems."
Data sources
Water quality data are collected by federal, provincial and territorial monitoring programs from across Canada. The complete list of data sources from Federal and Provincial monitoring networks can be found in Annex A. Water quality guidelines for the protection of aquatic life are used to calculate the indicators. They come from the Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment, the United States Environmental Protection Agency, and provincial and territorial government sources. Where these guidelines do not exist, other guidelines, such as irrigation guidelines, are used. A complete list of water quality guidelines used by each jurisdiction can be found in Annex B. Additional information from Statistics Canada, Natural Resources Canada, Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, and Environment and Climate Change Canada are used to assess land use. More information For the 2018 to 2020 period, water quality data from 172 sites were used to compile the national indicator. These data were drawn from monitoring sites in Canada's 16 southernmost drainage regions. The 16 regions were selected based on population and land use to create the water quality indicator core network for national water quality reporting. Geographic extent of the 16 drainage regions selected for the national water quality indicator Long description The partial map of Canada shows the drainage regions included in the national water quality indicator. Of Canada's 25 drainage regions, 16 are used to report on water quality nationally. The regional indicator groups these 16 drainage regions to 5 larger drainage regions, based on the water body in which rivers ultimately drain into: Atlantic Ocean region (22, 23, 24, 25) Great Lakes and St. Lawrence River region (19, 20, 21) Hudson Bay region (10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15) Mackenzie River region (6, 7) Pacific Ocean region (1, 2, 3, 4, 5) Parts of the Mackenzie River region fall outside of the 16 drainage regions (Figure 9). In order to ensure proper coverage of this region in the regional indicator, 13 additional sites were considered: 4 sites in Alberta, 1 site in Saskatchewan and 8 sites in the Northwest Territories. These additional 13 sites were not included in the national indicator nor the trend analysis. In the Atlantic Ocean region, the North Shore-Gaspé drainage region is not included in the Freshwater Quality Monitoring and Surveillance program. Water quality is evaluated at an additional 140 monitoring sites across Canada. Although these additional sites were not used to calculate the indicators, water quality results for all 325 sites can be explored using the interactive water quality map. These additional sites are not included in the calculations because they do not meet the minimum data requirements detailed in the section below, or because including them would over represent the region. Data used to calculate the indicator includes a selection from a total of around 40 water quality parameters, such as major ions, physical parameters, trace metals, nutrients and pesticides, as well as pH, temperature and hardness, required to calculate certain guidelines. Sample timing and frequency are set by monitoring programs and vary among sites. Each data record is tagged with the site name, the date the sample was collected, the name and the chemical form of the parameter. Land use and ecological information are also collected for each site. Water quality data, along with water quality indicator scores and site information from the monitoring programs, are stored in a central water quality indicator dictionary housed within a larger database at Environment and Climate Change Canada. Land use characterization for all monitoring sites was updated in 2019. Land use at each site was determined using: population density from Statistics Canada, Population 2016 by dissemination block level mine locations using Natural Resources Canada's 2018 Map 900A: Principal Mineral Areas, Producing Mines, and Oil and Gas fields in Canada, Sixty-Eight Edition advanced mineral projects locations using Natural Resources Canada’s Advances mineral projects inventory released in February 2019 oil sands locations using data provided by Alberta Energy, Government of Alberta 2011 pulp and paper locations using the Environment and Climate Change Canada's National Pollutant Release Inventory (NPRI): Geographic Distribution of NPRI-Reporting Facilities forest loss estimated by time-series analysis of 654 178 Landsat 7 ETM+ images in characterizing global forest extent and change from Global Forest Change 2000 to 2012 agricultural activity locations using Natural Resources Canada's Land Cover 2010, Cropland class estimation of livestock using the "Agri-Environmental Indicator (AEI): Livestock Emissions from Agriculture" dataset estimating net emissions produced by livestock from Soil Landscapes of Canada agricultural areas for census years from 1981 to 2011 land cover using Natural Resources Canada's Land Cover 2010 Data quality assurance and quality control Data quality assurance/quality control is performed by the monitoring program providing data for the water quality indicators. Each monitoring program follows standardized methods for sample collection in the field. Chemical analyses are performed in Canadian laboratories accredited by the Canadian Association for Laboratory Accreditation or the Standards Council of Canada. Environment and Climate Change Canada performs further quality assurance/quality control to ensure datasets meet minimum data requirements for the analysis and that calculation standards are respected. This process verifies the number of samples, sample timing, location of monitoring sites and calculations. It can lead to the removal of water quality data due to low sampling frequencies, erroneous measurements or where analytical detection limits are higher than the guidelines used in the calculation. Unusually high or low values in the monitoring datasets are double-checked and confirmed through consultation with the data provider. Minimum data requirements Calculating the water quality status for most sites requires a minimum of 4 samples per year collected over 3 years. A minimum of 3 samples per year is permitted for northern and remote sites, as access during winter months can be difficult, dangerous and costly. A sensitivity analysis found that there was no significant difference in the water quality index score when mid-winter samples were excluded.Footnote 10 COVID-19 impact on the calculation of the indicators Due to health measures related to the COVID-19 pandemic, some sampling activities and laboratory analysis were cancelled in 2020. The method for calculating the water quality status for the 2018-2020 period was adjusted to account for this lack of available data at some sites in 2020. Therefore, the scores reported were calculated using 2018 and 2019 data, as well as 2020 data when they were available (totally or partially). Where 2020 data were unavailable, the scores were calculated using 2018 and 2019 data only. Because of this, the comparison of results, between years and stations, should be interpreted as indicative. Atlantic Ocean: In Nova Scotia, all 11 sites had fewer number of samples in 2020 compared to previous years. One (1) site in Newfoundland and Labrador had no data for the period index and was therefore excluded. Great Lakes and St Lawrence: In Ontario, 2 sites had no data for 2020. The remaining Ontario sites had fewer number of samples in 2020 compared to previous years. In Quebec, 7 sites on the St. Lawrence River had no data in 2020. For these sites, the 2002 to 2019 trend was used. There was a deterioration for 2 of these sites (St. Lawrence River at Levis and Richelieu River) for this period. These sites (2 in Ontario and 7 in Quebec) were not included in the National trend. Hudson Bay: In Alberta, Saskatchewan and Manitoba, 12 sites had fewer number of samples in 2020 compared to previous years. Mackenzie River: In the Northwest Territories, 2 sites had an insufficient number of samples in 2020 and were therefore excluded. Pacific Ocean: All 21 sites from this region had fewer number of samples compared to previous years. The trends for these 21 sites could not be calculated due to this lack of data in 2020. Therefore, for the 2018-2020 index period, the 2002-2019 trend was used for each station. These sites were not included in the National trend. Decision tree related to the calculation of the Water quality indicator 2018-2020 An analysis was done to determine the best way to mitigate the impact of the missing 2020 data. The analysis included a comparison of 4 scenarios using different periods: The default 3-year period (2018-2020) A 4-year period (2017-2020) A 2-year period (2018-2019) The previous period (2017-2019) The comparison between the 2018-2019 and the 2018-2020 (when data was available) highlighted the impact of the year 2020 on the 2018-2020 score, for full and partial data sets. The 2018-2019 period was therefore determined to be the best alternative when data was missing for 2020. The decision tree below illustrates the process explained above. Decision tree related to the calculation of the Water quality indicator 2018-2020 Data timeliness The indicators were calculated using data from 2018 to 2020, the most recent data available from all monitoring programs. Where 2020 data was not available, the indicators were calculated using data from 2018 to 2019.
Methods
Water quality is reported in these indicators by measuring a number of chemical and physical properties (parameters) in water. The results for each parameter are compared to its water quality guideline.Footnote 11 These indicators are calculated using the water quality index as endorsed by the Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment.Footnote 12 For each site, 5 to 15 water quality parameters are compared to their guideline value using the index calculation. An index score between 1 and 100 is calculated based on these selected parameters. Sites are assigned a water quality category based on the score. The frequency and amplitude by which a parameter does not meet its guideline negatively impacts the water quality score for a given site. The results are grouped into 5 geographical regions for presentation in the Regional water quality in Canadian rivers indicator. Trends in water quality at each site are evaluated using a guideline deviation ratio. This ratio is calculated by dividing each water quality parameter result by its guideline. Ratios from all parameters are summed, and then averaged annually from 2002 to 2020. The ratios are then multiplied by -1, so that improving water quality will show a positive slope. A Mann-Kendall test is used to assess whether there is a statistically significant increasing (improving water quality) or decreasing (deteriorating water quality) trend in the annual guideline deviation ratios at a site. Annex B contains a complete list of parameters and guidelines used in each jurisdiction. Information on water quality parameters and guidelines used at individual sites can be found in the interactive water quality map.
Classification of sites
Land use was assessed in the drainage area of core sites and classified according to the criteria presented in Table 1 using the drainage area of each monitoring site.Footnote 16 Even if a site’s land use classification is Agriculture, Forestry, Mining or Populated, it does not mean that these are the only activities taking place at that site. These land use classifications were determined to be the most representative of the environmental pressures on each site's drainage area based on the data available at the time the analysis was done. Note: [A]Either criteria must be met. [B]Livestock intensity was calculated by dividing the total estimated emissions of greenhouse gas by the basin area. The lower value was attributed an intensity value of 0 and the highest value, an intensity value of 1. [C]Mines includes metal mines and mills, non-metal mines, quarries, coal mines, and oil sands mines. Calculating water quality status The water quality indicators are calculated using the water quality index, as endorsed by the Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment. The water quality index calculation considers 3 factors to summarize water quality at a site: scope, frequency and amplitude (Equation 1). Scope (F1) is the percentage of parameters for which the water quality guidelines are not met. Frequency (F2) is the percentage of samples for which the water quality guidelines are not met. Amplitude (F3) refers to the amount by which the water quality guidelines are not met. The score is normalized to yield a score between 1 and 100. The full set of equations for the water quality index is described in the Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment (2017) CCME Water Quality Index 2.0 User’s Manual (PDF; 1.61 MB). Equation 1. Water quality scores are grouped into 5 categories following the Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment's water quality index (Table 2). Except where 2020 date was not available, 3 years of data is used to calculate the indicator. This is to dampen temporal variability in the results caused by annual fluctuations in weather and hydrology, to make the water quality indicators more representative of how humans are impacting water quality in rivers.Footnote 14 Calculation of trends in the water quality The water quality index formulation can only detect change once parameter values exceed their guidelines, making it a metric that is much less sensitive to change over time. In order to increase trend detection sensitivity, a separate set of calculations and metrics were carried out. This trend analysis allows for the detection of improving or deteriorating trends in water quality status at a site, whether they occur above or below guideline values. For each year a guideline deviation ratio was calculated by dividing each parameter concentration (C) by its guideline value (G) for each sampling date. The logarithm of the ratios was calculated and averaged for each year to produce a mean annual value (Equation 2). The ratios were multiplied by -1 to invert the values so that improving water quality will show a positive slope to match how water quality is portrayed with the water quality index. Equation 2. For each year: where, i = parameters j = samples n = total number of samples p = total number of parameters C = measured concentration G = guideline value T = total number of samples per year As the parameter concentrations get closer to their guidelines, the guideline deviation ratio gets closer to zero. A guideline deviation ratio below zero means the parameter concentrations are above their recommended guidelines. When parameter concentrations are well below the guidelines, the ratio is above 1. 3 parameters were exceptions: Dissolved oxygen and total alkalinity have guidelines for which measurements must be above, rather than below like the majority of parameters. The ratio for dissolved oxygen was calculated by dividing the guideline by the concentration. pH measurements must lie within a range of generally 6.5 and 9. The ratio for pH values less than 6.5 was calculated by dividing the lower guideline (6.5) by the concentration (measured pH). For pH values greater than 9, the ratio was calculated by dividing the concentration by the upper guideline (9). Where temperature was used as a parameter, the absolute value of the ratio was used if temperatures were below zero. Current parameters and guidelines at each site were used through the entire record to avoid mistaking methodological changes in the water quality indicator for water quality change. When historical data were missing for a parameter, the parameter was dropped from the trend analysis. Where there was a change in the analytical form of a parameter, and there was no way of converting to the new form, the old dataset was used. A Mann-Kendall test using the zyp (version 0.10-1.1, 2019) and Kendall packages (version 2.2, 2011) of the statistical software R (version 3.5.2, 2018) was used to detect the presence of statistically-significant trends in the guideline deviation ratios. A count of sites with increasing, declining and no trends in the water quality indicator was compiled for the indicator of change through time. The trend was calculated using different starting years for each site based on data availability. For this year's calculation, the starting year was: 2002 for 64 sites, 2003 for 53 sites, 2004 for 12 sites, 2005 for 7 sites, 2006 for 28 sites, 2007 for 3 sites and 2011 for 3 sites. For 28 sites located in British Columbia and Quebec, there was insufficient data to calculate the trend for 2020; therefore, for these 28 sites, the previous year's trend was reported (2019).
References
Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment (2017) CCME Water Quality Index 2.0 User’s Manual (PDF; 1.61 MB). Retrieved on June 6, 2022. Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment (2006) A Sensitivity Analysis of the Canadian Water Quality Index. Retrieved on June 6, 2022. Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment (2009) Reducing the Sensitivity of the Water Quality Index to Episodic Events. Retreived on June 6, 2022. Government of Canada (2008) Technical Guidance Document for Water Quality Indicator Practitioners Reporting Under the Canadian Environmental Sustainability Indicators (CESI) Initiative 2008. Retrieved on June 6, 2022. Henry M et al. (2009) Canadian Environmental Sustainability Indicators: Water Quality Index Representivity Report, Statistics Canada. Natural Resources Canada (2005) Multi-Temporal Land Cover Maps of Canada Using NOAA AVHRR 1-km Data from 1985-2005, 1st Edition, Canada Centre for Remote Sensing. Retrieved on June 6, 2022. Natural Resources Canada (2007) National Hydro Network. Retrieved on June 6, 2022. Natural Resources Canada (2008) Land Cover Map of Canada 2005, Canada Centre for Remote Sensing. Retrieved on June 6, 2022. Painter S and Waltho J (2004) Canadian Water Quality Index: A Sensitivity Analysis. Environment and Climate Change Canada. Statistics Canada (2007) Behaviour Study on the Water Quality Index of the Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment. Retrieved on June 6, 2022. Statistics Canada (2009) Standard Drainage Area Classification (SDAC) 2003. Retrieved on June 6, 2022.
Abbreviations used in the following tables:
•2,4-dichlorophenoxyacetic acid (2,4-D)
•2-methyl-4-chlorophenoxyacetic acid (MCPA)
•calcium carbonate (CaCO3)
•hexavalent chromium (Cr(VI))
•litre (L)
Federal data files
Table descriptions (CSV; 10.8 kB) Federal raw data (CSV; 9.1 MB) Federal trend data (CSV; 446.4 kB) Federal water quality index scores (CSV; 755.4 kB)
Provincial and territorial data files
Alberta data (CSV; 3.8 MB) Manitoba data (CSV; 2 MB) New Brunswick data (CSV; 4.7 MB) Newfoundland and Labrador data (CSV; 3.4 MB) Northwest Territories data (CSV; 542.7 kB) Nova Scotia data (CSV; 113 kB) Ontario data (CSV; 2.2 MB) Prince Edward Island data (CSV; 1.27 MB) Quebec data (CSV; 2.65 MB) Saskatchewan data (CSV; 2.10 MB) British Columbia and Yukon monitoring sites are managed through federal programs. The data for these sites are available in the Federal data files. Footnote 1 Due to health measures related to COVID-19, some sampling activities and laboratory analysis were cancelled in 2020. As a result, the method related to the calculation of the water quality indicator for the 2018-2020 period was adjusted due to the lack of available data at some sites in 2020. Where 2020 data is unavailable, the indicator was calculated using 2018 and 2019 data only. For this reason, the comparison of results between years and stations should be interpreted as indicative. For more details on the methodology used for the 2018-2020 calculations, please see the Data sources and methods section Return to footnote1 Referrer Footnote 2 Percentages may not add up to 100 due to rounding. Return to footnote2 Referrer Footnote 3 The indicators focus on the regions in Canada where human activity is more prevalent, as this is usually the main factor for water quality deterioration. Monitoring sites were selected based on whether there was data available for a sufficient number of years and whether the sites were representative of the drainage region. Northern Canada is underrepresented; this is due partly to the challenges related to sampling in these remote locations. For more information on site selection, please see the Data sources and methods section. Return to footnote3 Referrer Footnote 4 Of the 172 sites used in the calculation of the National indicator, 1 site was reported for the first time in 2019. This site did not have sufficient historical data to be included in the trend analysis. A further 29 sites did not have data reported in 2020, due to COVID-related measures. These sites were also excluded from the trend analysis. Return to footnote4 Referrer Footnote 5 Atmospheric deposition refers to the phenomenon through which pollutants, including gases and particles are deposited from the atmosphere in the form of dust or precipitation, ultimately entering fresh water systems. Return to footnote5 Referrer Footnote 6 For more information on the trend, consult the Data sources and methods. Return to footnote6 Referrer Footnote 7 In this region, 1 site did not have data for 2020, therefore it is not included in the national trend analysis. For more information, consult the COVID-19 impact on the calculation of the indicators section. Return to footnote7 Referrer Footnote 8 In this region, 9 site did not have data for 2020, therefore it is not included in the national trend analysis. For more information, consult the COVID-19 impact on the calculation of the indicators section. Return to footnote8 Referrer Footnote 9 Only core sites were included in the trends analysis. For more information on the trend, consult the Data sources and methods section. Return to footnote9 Referrer Footnote 10 Statistics Canada (2007) Behaviour Study on the Water Quality Index of the Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment. Retrieved on June 6, 2022. Return to footnote10 Referrer Footnote 11 Water quality guidelines are thresholds designed to indicate when a chemical or physical property may become harmful to plants and animals. Return to footnote11 Referrer Footnote 12 Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment (2017) CCME Water Quality Index 2.0 User’s Manual (PDF; 1.61 MB). Retrieved on June 6, 2022. Return to footnote12 Referrer Footnote 13 Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment (2003) Guidance on the Site-Specific Application of Water Quality Guidelines in Canada: Procedures for Deriving Numerical Water Quality Objectives (PDF; 1.25 MB). Retrieved on June 6, 2022. Return to footnote13 Referrer Footnote 14 Government of Canada (2008) Technical Guidance Document for Water Quality Indicator Practitioners Reporting Under the Canadian Environmental Sustainability Indicators (CESI) Initiative 2008, p.15-16. Retrieved on June 6, 2022. Return to footnote14 Referrer Footnote 15 Henry M et al. (2009) Canadian Environmental Sustainability Indicators: Water Quality Index Representivity Report, Statistics Canada. Return to footnote15 Referrer Footnote 16 For more information about land cover classes, please see Natural Resources Canada (2008) Land Cover Map of Canada 2005, Canada Centre for Remote Sensing. Retrieved on June 6, 2022. Return to footnote16 Referrer Footnote 17 Painter S and Waltho J (2004) Canadian Water Quality Index: A Sensitivity Analysis. Environment and Climate Change Canada. Return to footnote17 Referrer
surface water quality in Alberta, there is increased interest in undertaking water quality monitoring programs at a local level. However, water quality monitoring programs can be extremely time consuming and costly, and they tend to be data-rich and information-poor (Ward et al. 1986).
Dec 7, 2016 · Global data sets documenting surface water location and seasonality have been produced from inventories and national descriptions 7, statistical extrapolation of regional data 8 and...
This document compiles surface water quality and aquatic ecosystem guidelines for Alberta. The guidelines are science-based recommendations that protect water uses and form a cornerstone of aquatic ecosystem management and protection.
