Almost 38%, or 131 miles, of waterways within the Buffalo Creek Watershed don’t meet Pennsylvania’s water quality standards, according to Audubon Society of Western Pennsylvania director Sarah Koenig.

Much of the pollution for all those streams, creeks and other tributaries remains a mystery, with unknown sources polluting about 34.6 miles of those waterways, Koenig said during a virtual meeting last week.

Koenig said there also is an increase in pollution from unknown sources in those waterways. Surveys conducted between 2008 and 2019 saw a much lower rate of pollution overall, with only 22.2% of waterways, or 93 miles of tributaries, failing to meet standards in 2008, she said.

Water quality standards serve to assess whether rivers and lakes are clean and pure enough to support aquatic life, recreation, drinking water supplies, agriculture, industry and other uses, according to the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection.

This increase in pollution from 2008 to 2019 is ”something we are looking into,” Koenig said. “It’s surprising and important to figure out what’s going on there, and of course to identify restoration opportunities. Where can we improve these particular ... sources of pollution?”

The Audubon Society also wants to find preservation opportunities, she said. The data the conservation group is gathering could prove invaluable in finding funding for restoration and preservation opportunities, Koenig added.

"What areas are incredibly special that we need to make sure we protect?” she asked.

Koenig noted that 99% of the watershed is privately owned. Koenig also said a 2019 project led by the Audubon Society, the Wildlife Conservation Plan, generated encouraging responses from the region’s residents about the value placed on conservation by the community.

“They told us that the same things that were important for habitat and water quality were important for them as well,” Koenig said.

Acid mine drainage contributes substantially to pollution in the watershed, accounting for 16.3 miles of polluted waterway, she said.

Four sites whose sources of pollution remain unknown likely come from acid mine drainage or gas or oil extraction, based on studies, said environmental scientist Kathleen Wilson at the meeting. These include the headwaters of Buffalo Creek at Chicora Park, Little Buffalo Run, Rough Run and Sarver Run.

But it can be difficult to disentangle what amount of that drainage happened in the past versus what amount reflects ongoing mining operations, Wilson said.

Learning this would require scientists and conservationists to know where such drainage enters the stream and track that exact chemical composition, Wilson said.

“And it’s hard for us to even find where mine drainage is entering streams, much less be able to run a chemical analysis when we find it right away,” she said. “Buffalo Creek and their coal mines have a really interesting history, because most of them are reopened from time to time.”

That reactivation of old mining sites, which often includes the last 10 or 20 years, further complicates efforts at study, she said.

“I’m sure there’s a way to do it,” she said.

She and the conservation group are working to better explore exactly that question, among other questions about the watershed, she said.