The following charts indicate the accepted standards for most of the parameters we researched. They were used to determine the health of the rivers (excellent, good, low, poor).
The following chart includes the 90% confidence intervals based on the individual stream's data, excluding outliers as calculated by a modified box plot.
Conclusion
Of the physical parameters, only four were found statistically significant at the .05 level using Monte Carlo simulations : conductivity, pH, Turbidity, and Ammonium. The rest( DO, BOD,Temperature, E.Coli, phosphate, and flow rate) were not. Using a Chi-square test of homogeneity, we found that there was a statistically significant difference between the benthic organism data of both watersheds. The Mechums had more sensitive and less tolerant organisms than the Moormans.
While there were differences between four of the the physical parameters, the ranges of those parameters still fell within the same health standard indicator range. PH and Ammonium levels were both rated excellent, conductivity ranges were both rated low, and turbidity did not have a health standard. Likewise, the benthic organism distributions were different, but we did not have a health standard to compare them to.
Therefore, we conclude that while both are healthy rivers, we don't have enough evidence to show that one is more healthier than the other. Further research and data are needed.
Of the physical parameters, only four were found statistically significant at the .05 level using Monte Carlo simulations : conductivity, pH, Turbidity, and Ammonium. The rest( DO, BOD,Temperature, E.Coli, phosphate, and flow rate) were not. Using a Chi-square test of homogeneity, we found that there was a statistically significant difference between the benthic organism data of both watersheds. The Mechums had more sensitive and less tolerant organisms than the Moormans.
While there were differences between four of the the physical parameters, the ranges of those parameters still fell within the same health standard indicator range. PH and Ammonium levels were both rated excellent, conductivity ranges were both rated low, and turbidity did not have a health standard. Likewise, the benthic organism distributions were different, but we did not have a health standard to compare them to.
Therefore, we conclude that while both are healthy rivers, we don't have enough evidence to show that one is more healthier than the other. Further research and data are needed.