The Adirondack Effects Assessment Program Program Update & New - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

▶
the adirondack effects assessment program
SMART_READER_LITE
LIVE PREVIEW

The Adirondack Effects Assessment Program Program Update & New - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Apr 26, 2023 274 likes •627 views

The Adirondack Effects Assessment Program Program Update & New Research Directions Charles W. Boylen James W. Sutherland Jay A. Bloomfield & Sandra A. Nierzwicki-Bauer Darrin Fresh Water Institute, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute

slide-1
SLIDE 1

The Adirondack Effects Assessment Program

Program Update & New Research Directions Charles W. Boylen James W. Sutherland Jay A. Bloomfield & Sandra A. Nierzwicki-Bauer

Darrin Fresh Water Institute, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute & Bureau of Watershed Assessment and Management, NYS DEC

slide-2
SLIDE 2

Presentation Outline

  • AEAP Background
  • Current Data
  • Brooktrout Lake

Biotic Trends Fish Restoration Project

slide-3
SLIDE 3

The Adirondack Effects Assessment Program

Since 1994 a study of water quality trends in acidified lakes and ponds in the Adirondack Mountain Region of New York State with a concomitant effect on biota funded by the US EPA

slide-4
SLIDE 4

AEAP Scientific Collaborations representing state, federal and university investigators

  • Darrin Fresh Water Institute, RPI
  • State University of NY at Oswego & Syracuse
  • NYS DEC
  • Academy of Natural Sciences in Philadelphia
  • Marist College
  • NYS Museum
  • US Geological Survey
  • University of Maryland
slide-5
SLIDE 5

Acknowledgments

Lawrence Eichler, James Harrison, Sascha Percent, David Winkler

Darrin Fresh Water Institute

Robert Bombard

NYS Department of Environmental Conservation

Gregory Lawrence

U.S. Geological Survey

Robert Daniels

NYS Museum

William Shaw

Marist College

Don Charles and Frank Acker

Academy of Natural Sciences

Bahram Momen

University of Maryland

Myron J. Mitchell

SUNY-ESF

Alfred Stamm

SUNY Oswego

slide-6
SLIDE 6

Study Sites

  • Southwest quadrant of

Adirondack Park

  • 30 lakes and ponds initially selected
  • Sites are different hydrologic types
  • A subset of ALTM Program waters
slide-7
SLIDE 7

Sampling Strategy

  • Mid-summer during thermal

stratification

  • most stable part of growing season
  • ability to detect temporal changes in

chemistry and biota

  • Vertical profiles – temp, DO, light
  • 20 chemical analytes including pH, ANC,

NO3, SO4, TP, PO4, Al

slide-8
SLIDE 8

Net Trend in pH since 1994

4.00 4.50 5.00 5.50 6.00 6.50 7.00 7.50 CON IND LON WES SQU LIM CAS MOS WIL GRA RAQ WHE SAG CAR ROU pH (su) 4.00 4.50 5.00 5.50 6.00 6.50 7.00 7.50 LOO WLS SET BTR JOC NOR MOO SOU QUE GLA DAR SQW BRA RON WIN pH (su)

The blue bar is the mean 1994 pH for each lake; the maroon bar is the net increase in pH through the 2004 sampling season

slide-9
SLIDE 9

Net Trend in NO3 since 1994

  • 20
  • 15
  • 10
  • 5

5 10 15 20 25 30 35 CON IND LON WES SQU LIM CAS MOS WIL GRA RAQ WHE SAG CAR ROU NO3 (uEq/L)

  • 20
  • 15
  • 10
  • 5

5 10 15 20 25 30 35 LOO WLS SET BTR JOC NOR MOO SOU QUE GLA DAR SQW BRA RON WIN NO3 (uEq/L)

The blue bar is the mean 1994 NO3 concentration for each lake; the maroon bar is the net increase (above x-axis) or decrease (below x-axis) in NO3 through the 2004 sampling season

slide-10
SLIDE 10

Net Trend in SO4 since 1994

The blue bar is the mean 1994 SO4 concentration for each lake; the maroon bar is the net increase (above x-axis) or decrease (below x-axis) in SO4 through the 2004 sampling season

  • 40
  • 20

20 40 60 80 100 CON IND LON WES SQU LIM CAS MOS WIL GRA RAQ WHE SAG CAR ROU SO4 (uEq/L)

  • 40
  • 20

20 40 60 80 100 LOO WLS SET BTR JOC NOR MOO SOU QUE GLA DAR SQW BRA RON WIN SO4 (uEq/L)

slide-11
SLIDE 11

Phytoplankton Species vs pH

slide-12
SLIDE 12

5 Year Average Number of Zooplankton Species vs pH

5 Year Average Number of Zooplankton Species vs. pH

slide-13
SLIDE 13

Aquatic Plant Species vs pH

y = 7.7844x - 31.346 R2 = 0.6107

10 20 30 40

4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 8.0

drainage seepage

pH

Species per Lake

slide-14
SLIDE 14

Summary of Biotic Trends of the 30 Study Lakes

As pH and ANC gradually increase in some of the study lakes, documented shifts are beginning to occur in the major trophic levels of these lakes towards more circum-neutral species with the disappearance of strictly acid tolerant species.

slide-15
SLIDE 15

Case Study: Brooktrout Lake

slide-16
SLIDE 16

Brooktrout Lake

  • Watershed Area: 176.9 ha
  • Lake Volume: 2.41 X 106 m3
  • Lake Area: 28.7 ha
  • Thyd: 1.4 yr
  • Annual Runoff: 89 cm
  • Mean Depth: 8.4 m
slide-17
SLIDE 17

Brooktrout Lake pH & ANC Trends

y = 1.3944x - 8.2007 R2 = 0.7827 y = 0.0502x + 5.2853 R2 = 0.3034

4.0 4.5 5.0 5.5 6.0 6.5 7.0 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004

pH (SU)

  • 20.0
  • 15.0
  • 10.0
  • 5.0

0.0 5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0

ANC (ueq)

pH (su) ANC (ueq/L)

slide-18
SLIDE 18

Brooktrout Lake SO4 Trend

y = -1.6591x + 65.964 R2 = 0.4298

20 40 60 80 100 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 S O 4 (ueq/L)

slide-19
SLIDE 19

Brooktrout Lake NO3 Trend

y = -0.947x + 11.626 R2 = 0.3935

5 10 15 20 25 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 NO3 (ueq/L)

slide-20
SLIDE 20

Brooktrout Lake Trophic State Trends

1 10 100

1 9 9 4 1 9 9 5 1 9 9 6 1 9 9 7 1 9 9 8 1 9 9 9 2 2 1 2 2 2 3 2 4 2 5

Date

Chl a Total P (µg/L) .

1 10 100

Zsd (m ) .

Total P (µg/L) Chla (µg/L) Secchi

slide-21
SLIDE 21

Brooktrout Light Extinction Profiles

Zsd = -0.0016t + 64.82 R2 = 0.61 Ke = -8E-05t + 2.5764 R2 = 0.56

0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 Ke (m-1) 0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 12.0 14.0 Zsd (m) cum Ke (m-1) Zsd (m)

slide-22
SLIDE 22
  • 25
  • 20
  • 15
  • 10
  • 5

5 10 15 20 25 30 Temperature Depth (m)

8/22/94 9/5/95 8/13/96 8/11/97 8/12/98 8/16/99 8/14/00 9/5/01 9/12/02 8/5/03 8/1/2004 8/8/2005

Brooktrout Lake Temperature Profiles

slide-23
SLIDE 23

Brooktrout Lake Phytoplankton Trends

4 8 12 16 20 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 1 10 100 1000 10000 100000 Chl a # Taxa Cells/mL 4 8 12 16 20 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 1 10 100 1000 10000 100000 Chl a # Taxa Cells/mL

slide-24
SLIDE 24

Brooktrout Zooplankton Densities & Community Parameters

Brooktrout Lake - Zooplankton Density vs pH - 1994-2003 20000 40000 60000 80000 100000 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003

# individuals/m3

4.00 4.50 5.00 5.50 6.00 6.50 7.00 7.50

pH (su) Crustaceans Rotifers Avg mid-summer column pH

Brooktrout Lake - Zoopkankton Community Parameters - 1994-2003 3 6 9 12 15 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003

# of species & ug/L chl a Crustacean Sp Richness Chl a Rotifer Sp Richness

slide-25
SLIDE 25

Crustacean & Rotifer Community Composition

Brooktrout Lake - Crustacean Community Composition - 1994-2003

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 Proportion of total density

Total Cyclopoids Total Calanoids Total Cladocerans

Brooktrout Lake - Rotifer Community Composition - 1994-2003 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 % of total community 4.00 4.50 5.00 5.50 6.00 6.50 7.00 7.50 pH (su)

  • K. taurocephala
  • P. vulgaris

All others Avg mid-summer column pH

slide-26
SLIDE 26

Brooktrout Lake Conclusions

  • As SO4 deposition has declined, starting around 1996, BTL has

experienced an increase in pH from around 5.00 to 6.00. Transparency, Al species, NO3 and reactive Si have also declined. Chl a and Total P have also increased.

  • Although 13 other AEAP lakes have shown slight declines in NO3

during the same time period (confirmed by the more-detailed ALSC LTM dataset), only BTL has shown a substantial NO3 decline during the summer months, coincident with increases in trophic state parameters.

  • Preliminary evidence from the 2003 BTL macrophyte survey also

indicates an increase in macrophyte densities.

  • Both phytoplankton & zooplankton community composition have also

changed.

  • Although piscivorous birds (for example, loons) have been observed

at BTL in recent years, no evidence of fish has been noted.

slide-27
SLIDE 27

Fish Restoration Project

Collaborating Institutions

  • Darrin Fresh Water Institute
  • NYS Department of Environmental Conservation
  • NYS Museum
  • Cornell University
slide-28
SLIDE 28

Project Description

In November 2005 the DEC will stock Horn Lake strain brook trout: 1,500 fall fingerlings (3-4” average size) each year 2005, 2007, 2008, 2011, 2012 Consideration given to stocking 20-40 older fish of different age classes this fall depending on Region 6 staff netting success from Horn Lake Fish will be stocked by aircraft and fin clipped Chemistry, phytoplankton, zooplankton & macroinvertebrates (both water column & benthic) sampled through growing season

slide-29
SLIDE 29

BioSonics Advanced Digital Hydroacoustics Technology

slide-30
SLIDE 30

Use of Hydroacoustic Use of Hydroacoustic Technology Technology

slide-31
SLIDE 31

Hydroacoustics will be used to provide:

  • Lake bathymetry
  • Habitat zones
  • Diurnal Chaoborus gradients
  • Fish movements within the lake
  • nce they are introduced
slide-32
SLIDE 32

Night Hydroacoustic Profiling

Jeremy Farrell & James Harrison on Brooktrout Lake - DFWI

slide-33
SLIDE 33

Night Chaoborus Gradient

slide-34
SLIDE 34

Anticipated Project Results

  • Use of hydroacoustic will be first ‘state-of-the-art’

investigation of fish population recovery in the Adirondack Park

  • Documentation of the population of the population dynamics
  • f the introduced species
  • Allow evaluation of survival following introduction and the in-

lake reproduction by the older introduced individuals

  • Demonstrate the effect of the introduced fish on the

Chaoborus population as well as other water column macroinvertebrates

  • Observe the interaction between the introduced fish and the

resident loons on the lake