Environmental Monitoring and Assessment

, Volume 186, Issue 3, pp 1899–1905 | Cite as

Soil criteria to protect terrestrial wildlife and open-range livestock from metal toxicity at mining sites

Article

Abstract

Thousands of hard rock mines exist in the western USA and in other parts of the world as a result of historic and current gold, silver, lead, and mercury mining. Many of these sites in the USA are on public lands. Typical mine waste associated with these sites are tailings and waste rock dumps that may be used by wildlife and open-range livestock. This report provides wildlife screening criteria levels for metals in soil and mine waste to evaluate risk and to determine the need for site-specific risk assessment, remediation, or a change in management practices. The screening levels are calculated from toxicity reference values based on maximum tolerable levels of metals in feed, on soil and plant ingestion rates, and on soil to plant uptake factors for a variety of receptors. The metals chosen for this report are common toxic metals found at mining sites: arsenic, cadmium, copper, lead, mercury, and zinc. The resulting soil screening values are well above those developed by the US Environmental Protection Agency. The difference in values was mainly a result of using toxicity reference values that were more specific to the receptors addressed rather than the most sensitive receptor.

Keywords

Wildlife Metals Soil criteria Toxicity Mining 

References

  1. Abrahams, P., & Steigmajer, J. (2003). Soil ingestion by sheep grazing the metal enriched floodplain soils of mid-Wales. Environmental Geochemistry and Health, 25(1), 17–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Basta, N., Ryan, J., & Chaney, R. (2005). Trace element chemistry in residual-treated soil. Journal of Environmental Quality, 34(1), 49–63.Google Scholar
  3. Beyer, W., Connnor, E., & Gerould, S. (1994). Estimates of soil ingestion by wildlife. Journal of Wildlife Management, 58(2), 375–382.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Beyer, W., Dalgarn, J., Dudding, S., French, J., Mateo, R., Miesner, J., et al. (2005). Zinc and lead poisoning in wild birds in the Tri-State Mining District (Oklahoma, Kansas, and Missouri). Archives of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology, 48(1), 108–117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. BLM (2013a). Wild horse and burro adoption and sales information. http://www.blm.gov/wo/st/en/prog/wild_horse_and_burro/What_We_Do/sale_authority.html. Accessed 20 March 2013.
  6. BLM (2013b). Wild horse and burro. https://www.blm.gov/adoptahorse/herdareas.php?herd_areas_seq=23&herd_states_seq=1. Accessed 20 March 2013.
  7. Buerger, T. T., Mirarchi, R. E., & Lisano, M. E. (1986). Effects of lead shot ingestion on captive mourning dove survivability and reproduction. Journal of Wildlife Management, 50(1), 1–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Drexler, J., Fisher, N., Henningsen, G., Lanno, R., McGeer, J., Sappington, K., et al. (2003). Issue paper on the bioavailability and bioaccumulation of metals. Washington, DC: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.Google Scholar
  9. Edens, F., Benton, E., Bursian, S., & Morgan, G. (1976). Effect of dietary lead on reproductive performance in Japanese quail, Coturnix coturnix japonica. Toxicology and Applied Pharmacology, 38(2), 307–314.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Efroymson, R., Will, M., & Suter II, G. (1997). Toxicological benchmarks for contaminants of potential concern for effects on soil and litter invertebrates and heterotrophic process: 1997 Revision. Oak Ridge, TN: U.S. Department of Energy.Google Scholar
  11. Efroymson, R. A., Sample, B. E., & Suter, G. W., II. (2001). Uptake of inorganic chemicals from soil by plant leaves: regressions of field data. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, 20(11), 2561–2571.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Eisler, R. (2000a). Handbook of chemical risk assessment, health hazards to humans, plants, and animals (Vol. 1). Boca Raton, FL: Lewis.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Eisler, R. (2000b). Handbook of chemical risk assessment, health hazards to humans, plants, and animals (Vol. 3). Boca Raton, FL: Lewis.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Environment Agency (2007). UK soil and herbage pollutant survey. UKSHS report no. 1.Google Scholar
  15. Finley, M., & Dieter, M. (1978). Influence of laying on lead accumulation in bone of mallard ducks. Journal of Toxicology and Environmental Health, 4(1), 123–129.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Ford, K. (1996). Risk management criteria for BLM mining sites. Technical notes 390. Denver, CO: U.S. Bureau of Land Management National Operations Center.Google Scholar
  17. Ford, K. (2004). Risk Management criteria for metals at BLM mining sites. U.S Bureau of Land Management Papers, Paper 22. http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/usblmpub/22. Accessed 20 March 2013.
  18. Heinz, G. (1999). Toxicity of lead-contaminated sediment to mallards. Archives of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology, 36(3), 323–333.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Holmgren, G., Meyer, M., Chaney, R., & Daniels, R. (1993). Cadmium, lead, zinc, copper, and nickel in agricultural soils of the United States of America. Journal of Environmental Quality, 22(2), 335–348.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Jensen, B. (2000). Estimating big game weights: a crash course for the curious. North Dakota Outdoors, 63(3), 26–27.Google Scholar
  21. Kabata-Pendias, A., & Pendias, H. (1992). Trace metals in soils and plants. Boca Raton, FL: CRC.Google Scholar
  22. Kendall, R. J., & Scanlon, P. F. (1981). Effects of chronic lead ingestion on reproductive characteristics of ringed turtle doves (Streptopelia risoria) and on tissue lead concentrations of adults and their progeny. Environmental Pollution Series A, Ecology and Biology, 26(3), 203–213.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Krieger, R. I. (1990). Toxicity and bioavailability studies of lead and other elements in the lower Coeur d'Alene River. Prepared for the Coeur d’Alene District, Bureau of Land Management, Technical Bulletin, 90–3.Google Scholar
  24. Mayland, H., Shewmaker, G., & Bull, R. (1977). Soil ingestion by cattle grazing crested wheatgrass. Journal of Range Management, 30(4), 264–265.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Mirarchi, R. E. (1993). Growth, maturation and moult. In T. S. Baskett, M. W. Sayre, R. E. Tomlinson, & R. E. Mirarchi (Eds.), Ecology and management of the mourning dove (pp. 129–142). Harrisburg, PA: Stackpole.Google Scholar
  26. NOAA (2012). SQuiRTS, Screening Quick Reference Tables. http://faculty.kfupm.edu.sa/RI/suwailem/Standards/122_squirt_cards.pdf. Accessed 20 March 2013.
  27. NRC. (2005). Mineral tolerance of animals (2nd ed.). Washington, DC: National Academy.Google Scholar
  28. NRCS (2003). National range and pasture handbook. Temple, TX: U.S. Department of Agriculture. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOCUMENTS/stelprdb1043065.pdf Accessed 20 September 2013.
  29. Pattee, O. H. (1984). Eggshell thickness and reproduction in American kestrels exposed to chronic dietary lead. Archives of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology, 13(1), 29–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Rao, P., Jordan, S., & Bhatnagar, M. (1989). Ultrastructure of kidney of ducks exposed to methylmercury, lead and cadmium in combination. Journal of Environmental Pathology, Toxicology, and Oncology, 9(1), 19–44.Google Scholar
  31. Rodriguez-Estival, J., Barasona, J. A., & Mateo, R. (2012). Blood Pb and delta-ALAD inhibition in cattle and sheep from a Pb-polluted mining area. Environmental Pollution, 160, 118–124.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Rodriguez-Estival, J., Martinez-Haro, M., Monsalve-Gonzalez, L., & Mateo, R. (2011). Interactions between endogenous and dietary antioxidants against Pb-induced oxidative stress in wild ungulates from a Pb polluted mining area. Science of the Total Environment, 409, 2725–2733.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Ruby, M., Davis, A., Link, T., Schoof, R., Chaney, R., Freeman, G., et al. (1993). Development of an in vitro screening test to evaluate the in vivo bioaccessibility of ingested mine-waste lead. Environmental Science & Technology, 27(13), 2870–2877.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Sample, B., Opresko, D., & Suter, G. (1996). Toxicological benchmarks for wildlife: 1996 revision. Oak Ridge, TN: U.S. Department of Energy.Google Scholar
  35. Shacklette, H., & Boerngen, J. (1984). Element concentrations in soils and other surficial materials of the conterminous United States. Washington, DC: U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 1270.Google Scholar
  36. Sileo, L., Creekmore, L. H., Audet, D. J., Snyder, M. R., Meteyer, C. U., Franson, J. C., et al. (2001). Lead poisoning of waterfowl by contaminated sediment in the Coeur d'Alene River. Archives of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology, 41(3), 364–368.Google Scholar
  37. Smith, K. S., Ramsey, C. A., & Hageman, P. L. (2000). Sampling strategy for the rapid screening of mine-waste dumps on abandoned mine lands. US Department of the Interior, US Geological Survey. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOCUMENTS/stelprdb1043065.pdf Accessed 20 March 2013
  38. Sneva, F. A., Mayland, H., & Vavra, M. (1983). Soil ingestion by ungulates grazing a sagebrush-bunchgrass range in Eastern Oregon. Oregon Agricultural Experiment Station Special Report 628. Corvallis, OR: Oregon State University.Google Scholar
  39. USEPA (1993). Wildlife exposure factors handbook, volumes I and II. EPA/600/R-93/187 a and b. Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
  40. USEPA (2000). Abandoned mine site characterization and cleanup handbook. http://www.epa.gov/superfund/policy/remedy/pdfs/amscch.pdf. Accessed 20 March 2013.
  41. USEPA (2002). National recommended water quality criteria: 2002. EPA 822-R-02-047. http://water.epa.gov/scitech/swguidance/standards/upload/2008_04_29_criteria_wqctable_nrwqc-2002.pdf. Accessed 20 March 2013.
  42. USEPA (2005a). Ecological soil screening levels for cadmium: interim final. OSWER Directive 9285.7-65. Washington, DC: Environmental Protection Agency.Google Scholar
  43. USEPA (2005b). Ecological soil screening levels for arsenic: interim final. OSWER Directive 9285-7-62. Washington, DC: Environmental Protection Agency.Google Scholar
  44. USEPA (2005c). Ecological soil screening levels for lead: interim final. OSWER Directive 9285.7-70. Washington, DC: Environmental Protection Agency.Google Scholar
  45. USEPA (2007a). Ecological soil screening levels for copper: interim final. OSWER Directive 9285.7-68. Washington, DC: Environmental Protection Agency.Google Scholar
  46. USEPA (2007b). Ecological soil screening levels for zinc: interim final. OSWER 9285.7-73. Washington, DC: Environmental Protection Agency.Google Scholar
  47. USEPA (2007c). Guidance for evaluating the oral bioavailability of metals in soils for use in human health risk assessment. OSWER 9285.7-80. http://www.epa.gov/superfund/bioavailability/bio_guidance.pdf. Accessed 20 March 2013.

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht (outside the USA) 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Bureau of Land ManagementGoldenUSA
  2. 2.U.S. Geological Survey, Patuxent Wildlife Research CenterBeltsvilleUSA

Personalised recommendations