Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Article
  • Published:

Impact of coal mining on stream biodiversity in the US and its regulatory implications

Nature Sustainability volume 1, pages 176–183 (2018)Cite this article

Subjects

Abstract

Coal mining is a major cause of land-use change in the US, and according to the Energy Information Administration it is expected to remain a key part of the national electricity portfolio until at least 2040. It is therefore crucial to understand the environmental impact of coal mining. Although a scientific consensus has emerged that coal mining negatively affects water quality, a quantitative synthesis of biodiversity impacts is currently lacking. Here, we show that mining under current federal statutes—the 1972 Clean Water Act and the 1977 Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act—has negative implications for freshwater biota. Streams affected by coal mining averaged one-third (32%) lower taxonomic richness and one-half (53%) lower total abundance than unmined streams, with these impacts occurring across all taxa investigated thus far (invertebrates, fish, and salamanders). Even after post-mining reclamation, biodiversity impacts persisted. Our investigation demonstrates that current US regulations are insufficient to fully protect stream biodiversity.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on Springer Link
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Fig. 1: Coal mining and impacted stream biodiversity.
Fig. 2: Effects of coal mining on stream biodiversity.
Fig. 3: Watersheds of highest (WCC1) and high (WCC2) conservation concern.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. US Energy Information Administration Annual Energy Outlook 2017 (2017).

  2. Copeland, C. The Office of Surface Mining’s Proposed Stream Protection Rule: an Overview (Congressional Research Service, 2015).

  3. Bernhardt, E. S. & Palmer, M. A. The environmental costs of mountaintop mining valley fill operations for aquatic ecosystems of the Central Appalachians. Ann. NY Acad. Sci. 1223, 39–57 (2011).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Palmer, M. A. et al. Mountaintop mining consequences. Science 327, 148–149 (2010).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. The Effects of Mountaintop Mines and Valley Fills on Aquatic Ecosystems of the Central Appalachian Coalfields EPA/600/R-09/138F (US Environmental Protection Agency, 2011).

  6. Bryant, G. & Childers, H. A Survey of the Water Quality of Streams in the Primary Region of Mountaintop Mining/valley Fill Coal Mining. Mountaintop Mining/Valley Fills in Appalachia Draft Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement, Appendix D EPA 9-03-R-00013B (US Environmental Protection Agency, 2003).

  7. Lemly, A. D. Selenium Assessment in Aquatic Ecosystems: A Guide for Hazard Evaluation and Water Quality Criteria (Springer, New York, 2002).

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  8. Hartman, K. J. et al. How much do valley fills influence headwater streams? Hydrobiologia 532, 91–102 (2005).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Kimmer, W. G. & Argent, D. G. Stream fish community responses to a gradient of specific conductance. Water Air Soil Pollut. 206, 49–56 (2010).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Griffith, M. B., Norton, S. B., Alexander, L. C., Pollard, A. L. & LeDuc, S. D. The effects of mountaintop mines and valley fills on the physicochemical quality of stream ecosystems in the Central Appalachians: a review. Sci. Total Environ. 417–418, 1–12 (2012).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Lindberg, T. T. et al. Cumulative impacts of mountaintop mining on an Appalachian watershed. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 108, 20929–20934 (2011).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Opinion and Order. People of the State of Illinois V. Freeman United Coal Mining Company, Llc, A Delaware Limited Liability Company, and Springfield Coal Company, Llc, A Delaware Limited Liability Company; Environmental Lawand Policy Center V Freeman United Coal Mining Company, Llc, A Delaware Limited Liability Company, and Springfield Coal Company, Llc, A Delaware Limited Liability Company (Consolidated: Pcb 10-61 and 11-2) (Illinois Pollution Control Board, 2012).

  13. Pond, G. J. Biodiversity loss in Appalachian headwater streams (Kentucky, USA): Plecoptera and Trichoptera communities. Hydrobiologia 679, 97–117 (2012).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Pond, G. J. et al. Downstream effects of mountaintop coal mining: comparing biological conditions using family- and genus-level macroinvertebrate bioassessment tools. J. North Am. Benthol. Soc. 27, 717–737 (2008).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Howard, H. S. et al. Kentucky Mountaintop Mining Benthic Macroinvertebrate Survey: Central Appalachian Ecoregion, Kentucky. Mountaintop Mining/Valley Fills in Appalachia Draft Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement, Appendix D EPA 9-03-R-00013B (US Environmental Protection Agency, 2003).

  16. Merricks, T. C. et al. Coal-mine hollow fill and settling pond influences on headwater streams in southern West Virginia, USA. Environ. Monit. Assess. 129, 359–378 (2007).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Armstead, M. Y., Yeager-Seagle, J. L. & Emerson, L. Benthic macroinvertebrate studies conducted in mountaintop mining/valley fill influenced streams in conjunction with the USEPA environmental impact study. Proc. Am. Soc. Min. Reclam. 2004, 87–93 (2004).

    Google Scholar 

  18. Pond, G. J. et al. Long-term impacts on macroinvertebrates downstream of reclaimed mountaintop mining valley fills in Central Appalachia. Environ. Manage. 54, 919–933 (2014).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Muncy, B. L., Price, S. J., Bonner, S. J. & Barton, C. D. Mountaintop removal mining reduces stream salamander occupancy and richness in southeastern Kentucky. Biol. Conserv. 180, 115–121 (2014).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Fritz, K. M. et al. Structural and functional characteristics of natural and constructed channels draining a reclaimed mountaintop removal and valley fill coal mine. J. North Am. Benthol. Soc. 29, 673–689 (2010).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Ferreri, C. P., Stauffer, J. R. & Stecko, T. D. Evaluating impacts of mountain top removal/valley fill coal mining on stream fish populations. Proc. Am. Soc. Min. Reclam. 2004, 576–592 (2004).

    Google Scholar 

  22. Stauffer, J. R. Jr & Ferreri, C. P. Characterization of Stream Fish Assemblages in Selected Regions of Mountain Top Removal/valley Fill Coal Mining. Mountaintop Mining/Valley Fills in Appalachia Draft Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement, Appendix D EPA 9-03-R-00013B (US Environmental Protection Agency, 2003).

  23. Wood, P. B. & Williams, J. M. Impact of valley fills on streamside salamanders in Southern West Virginia. J. Herpetol. 47, 119–125 (2013).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Chao, A. & Jost, L. Coverage-based rarefaction and extrapolation: standardizing samples by completeness rather than size. Ecology 93, 2533–2547 (2012).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Sutton, A. J. in The Handbook of Research Synthesis and Meta-Analysis 2nd edn (eds Cooper H., Hedges, L. V. & Valentine, J. C.) 435–452 (Russel Sage Foundation, New York, 2009).

  26. Annual Production Data from Annual Coal Report 2016 (US Energy Information Administration, 2017).

  27. Digital distribution of native US fishes by watershed v. 3.0. NatureServe http://www.natureserve.org/conservation-tools/data-maps-tools/digital-distribution-native-us-fishes-watershed (2010).

  28. Kier, G. et al. A global assessment of endemism and species richness across island and mainland regions. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 106, 9322–9327 (2009).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Crystallaria cincotta: IUCN Red List of Threatened Species https://doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.UK.2013-1.RLTS.T202435A15362696.en (2013).

  30. Blanton, R. E. & Jenkins, R. E. Three new darter species of the Etheostoma pecnurum species complex (Percidae, subgenus Catonotus) from the Tennessee and Cumberland river drainages. Zootaxa 1963, 1–24 (2008).

    Google Scholar 

  31. Etheostoma spilotum: IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. https://doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.UK.2014-3.RLTS.T18243637A19033189.en (2014).

  32. Chrosomus cumberlandensis: IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. https://doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.UK.2014-3.RLTS.T17064A15364473.en (2014).

  33. Merriam, E. R., Petty, J. T., Strager, M. P., Maxwell, A. E. & Ziemkiewicz, P. F. Complex contaminant mixtures in multistressor Appalachian riverscapes. Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 34, 2603–2610 (2015).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. van der Welle, M. E. W., Roelofs, J. G. M. & Lamers, L. P. M. Multi-level effects of sulphur-iron interactions in freshwater wetlands in the Netherlands. Sci. Tot. Environ. 40, 426–429 (2008).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Armstead, M. Y., Bitzer-Creathers, L. & Wilson, M. The effects of elevated specific conductivity on the chronic toxicity of mining influenced streams using Ceriodaphnia dubia. PLoS ONE 11, e0165683 (2016).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Rose, A. W. & Cravotta, C. A. III Geochemistry of Coal Mine Drainage. Coal Mine Drainage Prediction and Pollution Prevention in Pennsylvania (Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection, Harrisburg, 1998).

  37. Petty, J. T. et al. Landscape indicators and thresholds of stream ecological impairment in an intensively mined Appalachian watershed. J. N. Am. Benthol. Soc. 29, 1292–1309 (2010).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Schorr, M. S. & Backer, J. C. Localized effects of coal mine drainage on fish assemblages in a Cumberland Plateau stream in Tennessee. J. Freshwat. Ecol. 21, 17–24 (2006).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  39. Smucker, N. J. & Vis, M. L. Use of diatoms to assess agricultural and coal mining impacts on streams and a multiassemblage case study. J. N. Am. Benthol. Soc. 28, 659–675 (2009).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Schmidt, T. S., Soucek, D. J. & Cherry, D. S. Integrative assessment of benthic macroinvertebrate community impairment from metal-contaminated waters in tributaries of the Upper Powell River, Virginia, USA. Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 21, 2233–2241 (2002).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  41. MacCausland, A. & McTammany, M. E. The impact of episodic coal mine drainage pollution on benthic macroinvertebrates in streams in the Anthracite region of Pennsylvania. Environ. Pollut. 149, 216–227 (2007).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  42. Bott, T. L. et al. Abandoned coal mine drainage and its remediation: impacts on stream ecosystem structure and function. Ecol. Appl. 22, 2144–2163 (2012).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Palmer, M. A. & Hondula, K. L. Restoration as mitigation: analysis of stream mitigation for coal mining impacts in southern Appalachia. Environ. Sci. Tech. 48, 10552–10560 (2014).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  44. Osenberg, C. W., Shima, J. S., Miller, S. L. & Stier, A. C. in Marine Protected Areas: A Multidisciplinary Approach (ed. Claudet, J.) 143–167 (Cambridge Univ. Press, 2011).

  45. Stream Protection Rule (Dec 20 2016) 81 FR 93066 (US Federal Govt, 2016).

  46. West Virginia to improve oversight of coal-mining pollution. Federal review of West Virginia coal mining reveals chronic failures Center for Biological Diversity https://www.biologicaldiversity.org/news/press_releases/2017/coal-02-07-2017.php (2017).

  47. Bernhardt, E. S. et al. How many mountains can we mine? Assessing the regional degradation of central Appalachian rivers by surface coal mining. Environ. Sci. Tech. 46, 8115–8122 (2012).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  48. Hendryx, M. & Ahern, M. M. Mortality in Appalachian coal mining regions: the value of statistical life lost. Public Health Rep. 124, 541–550 (2010).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. 2012 National Survey of Hunters and Anglers (Chesapeake Beach Consulting, 2012).

  50. Hedges, L. V., Gurevitch, J. & Curtis, P. S. The meta-analysis of response ratios in experimental ecology. Ecology 80, 115–1156 (1999).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Hsieh, T. C., Ma, K. H. & Chao, A. An R package for rarefaction and extrapolation of species diversity (Hill numbers). Methods Ecol. Evol. 7, 1451–1456 (2016).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. R Core Team R: A Language and Environment for Statistic Computing (R Foundation for Statistical Computing, 2017).

  53. Viechtbauer, W. Conducting meta-analyses in R with the metafor package. J Stat. Softw. 36, 1–48 (2010).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  54. Knapp, G. & Hartung, J. Improved tests for a random effects meta-regression with a single covariate. Stat. Med. 22, 2693–2710 (2003).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  55. Jacobsen, D. Low oxygen pressure as a driving factor for the altitudinal decline in taxon richness of stream macroinvertebrates. Oecologia 154, 795–807 (2008).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  56. US Coal Fields https://hifld-geoplatform.opendata.arcgis.com/datasets?q=Coal%20Fields%20of%20the%20United%20States (US Geological Survey, 2001).

  57. Regulatory Impact Analysis of the Stream Protection Rule (Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement, Industrial Economics, 2016).

  58. ArcGIS Desktop 10.5 (ESRI, 2016).

  59. Nagel, D. et al. National Stream Internet Hydrography Network for Spatial-Stream-Network (SSN) Analysis: Rocky Mountain Research Station https://www.fs.fed.us/rm/boise/AWAE/projects/NationalStreamInternet/NSI_network.html (US Forest Service Data Archive, 2017).

  60. Watershed Boundary Dataset and Lines for HUC2–12 (US Geological Survey, 2014).

Download references

Acknowledgements

Our study would not be possible without the original studies that went into our meta-analysis. We thank all authors and researchers who led and participated in the original research. We are particularly grateful to G. Pond, J. Simmons, M. Vis, B. Verb, N. Smucker, T. Schmidt, D. Soucek, M. Yeager-Armstead and K. Fritz for generously sharing information and/or data. We thank M. Palmer, E. Bernhardt and D. Rifkin for insightful discussions and comments on a previous version of this paper. Finally, we thank C. Osenberg for thoughtful comments and suggestions that improved our paper substantially.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, The University of Tennessee, Knoxville, TN, USA

    Xingli Giam & Daniel Simberloff

  2. School of Aquatic and Fishery Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA

    Julian D. Olden

Authors
  1. Xingli Giam
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Julian D. Olden
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Daniel Simberloff
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

X.G. conceived the study, performed the analyses, and led the writing of the paper. J.D.O. and D.S. provided input into data analyses and contributed to writing the paper.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Xingli Giam.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note: Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary information

Supplementary Information

Supplementary Figs. 1–6, Supplementary Tables 1–6

Supplementary Data

Supplementary Data 1 and 2, Supplementary Code 1

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Giam, X., Olden, J.D. & Simberloff, D. Impact of coal mining on stream biodiversity in the US and its regulatory implications. Nat Sustain 1, 176–183 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41893-018-0048-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41893-018-0048-6

This article is cited by

Search

Advanced search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing