U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Annapolis Field Office
Annapolis Science Center
Annapolis, Maryland 21401
WORKING DOCUMENTS
Volume 17
-------
-------
Table of Contents
Volume 17
21 Biological Surveys of the Upper James River Basin -
Covington, Clifton Forge, Big Island, Lynchburg, and
Piney River Areas - January 1968
22 Biological Survey of Antietam Creek and Some of Its
Tributaries from Uaynesboro, Pennsylvania to Antietam,
Maryland - Potomac River Basin - February 1968
23 Biological Survey of the Monocacy River and Tributaries
from Gettysburg, Pa. to Maryland Rt. 28 Bridge -
Potomac River Basin - January 1968
24 Water Quality Survey of Chesapeake Bay in the Vicinity
of Annapolis, Maryland - Summer 1967
25 Mine Drainage Pollution of the North Branch of Potomac
River - Interim Report - August 1968
26 Water Quality Survey in the Shenandoah River of the
Potomac River Basin - June 1967
27 Water Quality Survey in the James and Maury Rivers -
Glasgow, Virginia - September 1967
28 Selected Biological Surveys in the James River Basin,
Gillie Creek in the Richmond Area, Appomattox River in
the Petersburg Area, Bailey Creek from Fort Lee to
Hopewell - April 1968
-------
-------
PUBLICATIONS
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
REGION III
ANNAPOLIS FIELD OFFICE*
VOLUME 1
Technical Reports
5 A Technical Assessment of Current Water Quality
Conditions and Factors Affecting Water Quality in
the Upper Potomac Estuary
6 Sanitary Bacteriology of the Upper Potomac Estuary
7 The Potomac Estuary Mathematical Model
9 Nutrients in the Potomac River Basin
11 Optimal Release Sequences for Water Quality Control
in Multiple Reservoir Systems
VOLUME 2
Technical Reports
13 Mine Drainage in the North Branch Potomac River Basin
15 Nutrients in the Upper Potomac River Basin
17 Upper Potomac River Basin Water Quality Assessment
VOLUME 3
Technical Reports
19 Potomac-Piscataway Dye Release and Wastewater
Assimilation Studies
21 LNEPLT
23 XYPLOT
25 PLOT3D
* Formerly CB-SRBP, U.S. Department of Health, Education,
and Welfare; CFS-FWPCA, and CTSL-FWQA, Middle Atlantic
Region, U.S. Department of the Interior
-------
VOLUME 3 (continued)
Technical Reports
27 Water Quality and Wastewater Loadings - Upper Potomac
Estuary during 1969
VOLUME 4
Technical Reports
29 Step Backward Regression
31 Relative Contributions of Nutrients to the Potomac
River Basin from Various Sources
33 Mathematical Model Studies of Water Quality in the
Potomac Estuary
35 Water Resource - Water Supply Study of the Potomac
Estuary
VOLUME 5
Technical Reports
37 Nutrient Transport and Dissolved Oxygen Budget
Studies in the Potomac Estuary
39 Preliminary Analyses of the Wastewater and Assimilation
Capacities of the Anacostia Tidal River System
41 Current Water Quality Conditions and Investigations
in the Upper Potomac River Tidal System
43 Physical Data of the Potomac River Tidal System
Including Mathematical Model Segmentation
45 Nutrient Management in the Potomac Estuary
VOLUME 6
Technical Reports
47 Chesapeake Bay Nutrient Input Study
49 Heavy Metals Analyses of Bottom Sediment in the
Potomac River Estuary
-------
VOLUME 6 (continued)
Technical Reports
51 A System of Mathematical Models for Water Quality
Management
52 Numerical Method for Groundwater Hydraulics
53 Upper Potomac Estuary Eutrophication Control
Requirements
54 AUT0-QUAL Modelling System
Supplement AUT0-QUAL Modelling System: Modification for
to 54 Non-Point Source Loadings
VOLUME 7
Technical Reports
55 Water Quality Conditions in the Chesapeake Bay System
56 Nutrient Enrichment and Control Requirements in the
Upper Chesapeake Bay
57 The Potomac River Estuary in the Washington
Metropolitan Area - A History of its Water Quality
Problems and their Solution
VOLUME 8
Technical Reports
58 Application of AUT0-QUAL Modelling System to the
Patuxent River Basin
59 Distribution of Metals in Baltimore Harbor Sediments
60 Summary and Conclusions - Nutrient Transport and
Accountability in the Lower Susquehanna River Basin
VOLUME 9
Data Reports
Water Quality Survey, James River and Selected
Tributaries - October 1969
Water Quality Survey in the North Branch Potomac River
between Cumberland and Luke, Maryland - August 1967
-------
VOLUME 9 (continued)
Data Reports
Investigation of Water Quality in Chesapeake Bay and
Tributaries at Aberdeen Proving Ground, Department
of the Army, Aberdeen, Maryland - October-December 1967
Biological Survey of the Upper Potomac River and
Selected Tributaries - 1966-1968
Water Quality Survey of the Eastern Shore Chesapeake
Bay, Wicomico River, Pocomoke River, Nanticoke River,
Marshall Creek, Bunting Branch, and Chincoteague Bay -
Summer 1967
Head of Bay Study - Water Quality Survey of Northeast
River, Elk River, C & D Canal, Bohemia River, Sassafras
River and Upper Chesapeake Bay - Summer 1968 - Head ot
Bay Tributaries
Water Quality Survey of the Potomac Estuary - 1967
Water Quality Survey of the Potomac Estuary - 1968
Wastewater Treatment Plant Nutrient Survey - 1966-1967
Cooperative Bacteriological Study - Upper Chesapeake Bay
Dredging Spoil Disposal - Cruise Report No. 11
VOLUME 10
Data Reports
9 Water Quality Survey of the Potomac Estuary - 1965-1966
10 Water Quality Survey of the Annapolis Metro Area - 1967
11 Nutrient Data on Sediment Samples of the Potomac Estuary
1966-1968
12 1969 Head of the Bay Tributaries
13 Water Quality Survey of the Chesapeake Bay in the
Vicinity of Sandy Point - 1968
14 Water Quality Survey of the Chesapeake Bay in the
Vicinity of Sandy Point - 1969
-------
VOUJMEJO (continued)
Data Reports
15 Water Quality Survey of the Patuxent River - 1967
16 Water Quality Survey of the Patuxent River - 1968
17 Water Quality Survey of the Patuxent River - 1969
18 Water Quality of the Potomac Estuary Transects,
Intensive and Southeast Water Laboratory Cooperative
Study - 1969
19 Water Quality Survey of the Potomac Estuary Phosphate
Tracer Study - 1969
VOLUME 11
Data Reports
20 Water Quality of the Potomac Estuary Transport Study
1969-1970
21 Water Quality Survey of the Piscataway Creek Watershed
1968-1970
22 Water Quality Survey of the Chesapeake Bay in the
Vicinity of Sandy Point - 1970
23 Water Quality Survey of the Head of the Chesapeake Bay
Maryland Tributaries - 1970-1971
24 Water Quality Survey of the Upper Chesapeake Bay
1969-1971
25 Water Quality of the Potomac Estuary Consolidated
Survey - 1970
26 Water Quality of the Potomac Estuary Dissolved Oxygen
Budget Studies - 1970
27 Potomac Estuary Wastewater Treatment Plants Survey
1970
28 Water Quality Survey of the Potomac Estuary Embayments
and Transects - 1970
29 Water Quality of the Upper Potomac Estuary Enforcement
Survey - 1970
-------
30
31
32
33
34
Appendix
to 1
Appendix
to 2
3
4
VOLUME I] (continued)
Data Reports
Water Quality of the Potomac Estuary - Gilbert Swamp
and Allen's Fresh and Gunston Cove - 1970
Survey Results of the Chesapeake Bay Input Study -
1969-1970
Upper Chesapeake Bay Water Quality Studies - Bush River,
Spesutie Narrows and Swan Creek, C & D Canal, Chester
River, Severn River, Gunpowder, Middle and Bird Rivers -
1968-1971
Special Water Quality Surveys of the Potomac River Basin
Anacostia Estuary, Wicomico.River, St. Clement and
Breton Bays, Occoquan Bay - 1970-1971
Water Quality Survey of the Patuxent River - 1970
VOLUME 12
Working Documents
Biological Survey of the Susquehanna River and its
Tributaries between Danville, Pennsylvania and
Conowingo, Maryland
Tabulation of Bottom Organisms Observed at Sampling
Stations during the Biological Survey between Danville,
Pennsylvania and Conowingo, Maryland - November 1966
Biological Survey of the Susquehanna River and its
Tributaries between Cooperstown, New York and
Northumberland, Pennsylvnaia - January 1967
Tabulation of Bottom Organisms Observed at Sampling
Stations during the Biological Survey between Cooperstown,
New York and Northumberland, Pennsylvania - November 1966
VOLUME 13
Working Documents
Water Quality and Pollution Control Study, Mine Drainage
Chesapeake Bay-Delaware River Basins - July 1967
Biological Survey of Rock Creek (from Rockville, Maryland
to the Potomac River) October 1966
-------
VOLUME 13 (continued)
Working Documents
5 Summary of Water Quality and Waste Outfalls, Rock Creek
in Montgomery County, Maryland and the District of
Columbia - December 1966
6 Water Pollution Survey - Back River 1965 - February 1967
7 Efficiency Study of the District of Columbia Water
Pollution Control Plant - February 1967
VOLUME 14
Working Documents
8 Water Quality and Pollution Control Study - Susquehanna
River Basin from Northumberland to West Pittson
(Including the Lackawanna River Basin) March 1967
9 Water Quality and Pollution Control Study, Juniata
River Basin - March 1967
10 Water Quality and Pollution Control Study, Rappahannock
River Basin - March 1967
11 Water Quality and Pollution Control Study, Susquehanna
River Basin from Lake Otsego, New York, to Lake Lackawanna
River Confluence, Pennsylvania - April 1967
VOLUME 15
Working Documents
12 Water Quality and Pollution Control Study, York River
Basin - April 1967
13 Water Quality and Pollution Control Study, West Branch,
Susquehanna River Basin - April 1967
14 Water Quality and Pollution Control Study, James River
Basin - June 1967 .
15 Water Quality and Pollution Control Study, Patuxent River
Basin - May 1967
-------
VOLUME 16
Working Documents
16 Water Quality and Pollution Control Study, Susquehanna
River Basin from Northumberland, Pennsylvania, to
Havre de Grace, Maryland - July 1967
17 Water Quality and Pollution Control Study, Potomac
River Basin - June 1967
18 Immediate Water Pollution Control Needs, Central Western
Shore of Chesapeake Bay Area (Magothy, Severn, South, and
West River Drainage Areas) July 1967
19 Immediate Water Pollution Control Needs, Northwest
Chesapeake Bay Area (Patapsco to Susquehanna Drainage
Basins in Maryland) August 1967
20 Immediate Water Pollution Control Needs - The Eastern
Shore of Delaware, Maryland and Virginia - September 1967
VOLUME 17
Working Documents
21 Biological Surveys of the Upper James River Basin
Covington, Clifton Forge, Big Island, Lynchburg, and
Piney River Areas - January 1968
22 Biological Survey of Antietam Creek and some of its
Tributaries from Waynesboro, Pennsylvania to Antietam,
Maryland - Potomac River Basin - February 1968
23 Biological Survey of the Monocacy River and Tributaries
from Gettysburg, Pennsylvania, to Maryland Rt. 28 Bridge
Potomac River Basin - January 1968
24 Water Quality Survey of Chesapeake Bay in the Vicinity of
Annapolis, Maryland - Summer 1967
25 Mine Drainage Pollution of the North Branch of Potomac
River - Interim Report - August 1968
26 Water Quality Survey in the Shenandoah River of the
Potomac River Basin - June 1967
27 Water Quality Survey in the James and Maury Rivers
Glasgow, Virginia - September 1967
-------
VOLUME 17 (continued)
Working Documents
28 Selected Biological Surveys in the James River Basin,
Gillie Creek in the Richmond Area, Appomattox River
in the Petersburg Area, Bailey Creek from Fort Lee
to Hopewell - April 1968
VOLUME 18
Working Documents
29 Biological Survey of the Upper and Middle Patuxent
River and some of its Tributaries - from Maryland
Route 97 Bridge near Roxbury Mills to the Maryland
Route 4 Bridge near Wayson's Corner, Maryland -
Chesapeake Drainage Basin - June 1968
30 Rock Creek Watershed - A Water Quality Study Report
March 1969
31 The Patuxent River - Water Quality Management -
Technical Evaluation - September 1969
VOLUME 19
Working Documents
Tabulation, Community and Source Facility Water Data
Maryland Portion, Chesapeake Drainage Area - October 1964
Waste Disposal Practices at Federal Installations
Patuxent River Basin - October 1964
Waste Disposal Practices at Federal Installations
Potomac River Basin below Washington, D.C.- November 1964
Waste Disposal Practices at Federal Installations
Chesapeake Bay Area of Maryland Excluding Potomac
and Patuxent River Basins - January 1965
The Potomac Estuary - Statistics and Projections -
February 1968
Patuxent River - Cross Sections and Mass Travel
Velocities - July 1968
-------
VOLUME 19 (continued)
Working Documents
Wastewater Inventory - Potomac River Basin -
December 1968
Wastewater Inventory - Upper Potomac River Basin -
October 1968
VOLUME 20
Technical Papers.
1 A Digital Technique for Calculating and Plotting
Dissolved Oxygen Deficits
2 A River-Mile Indexing System for Computer Application
in Storing and Retrieving Data (unavailable)
3 Oxygen Relationships in Streams, Methodology to be
Applied when Determining the Capacity of a Stream to
Assimilate Organic Wastes - October 1964
4 Estimating Diffusion Characteristics of Tidal Waters -
May 1965
5 Use of Rhodamine B Dye as a Tracer in Streams of the
Susquehanna River Basin - April 1965
6 An In-Situ Benthic Respirometer - December 1965
7 A Study of Tidal Dispersion in the Potomac River
February 1966
8 A Mathematical Model for the Potomac River - what it
has done and what it can do - December 1966
9 A Discussion and Tabulation of Diffusion Coefficients
for Tidal Waters Computed as a Function of Velocity
February 1967
10 Evaluation of Coliform Contribution by Pleasure Boats
July 1966
-------
VOLUME 21
Technical Papers
11 A Steady State Segmented Estuary Model
12 Simulation of Chloride Concentrations in the
Potomac Estuary - March 1968
13 Optimal Release Sequences for Water Quality
Control in Multiple-Reservoir Systems - 1968
VOLUME 22
Technical Papers
Summary Report - Pollution of Back River - January 1964
Summary of Water Quality - Potomac River Basin in
Maryland - October 1965
The Role of Mathematical Models in the Potomac River
Basin Water Quality Management Program - December 1967
Use of Mathematical Models as Aids to Decision Making
in Water Quality Control - February 1968
Piscataway Creek Watershed - A Water Quality Study
Report - August 1968
VOLUME 23
Ocean Dumping Surveys
Environmental Survey of an Interim Ocean Dumpsite,
Middle Atlantic Bight - September 1973
Environmental Survey of Two Interim Dumpsites,
Middle Atlantic Bight - January 1974
Environmental Survey of Two Interim Dumpsites
Middle Atlantic Bight - Supplemental Report -
October 1974
Effects of Ocean Disposal Activities on Mid-
continental Shelf Environment off Delaware
and Maryland - January 1975
-------
VOLUME 24
1976 Annual
Current Nutrient Assessment - Upper Potomac Estuary
Current Assessment Paper No. 1
Evaluation of Western Branch Wastewater Treatment
Plant Expansion - Phases I and II
Situation Report - Potomac River
Sediment Studies in Back River Estuary, Baltimore,
Maryland
Technical Distribution of Metals in Elizabeth River Sediments
Report 61
Technical A Water Quality Modelling Study of the Delaware
Report 62 Estuary
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section Page
I. INTRODUCTION 1
II. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS k
III. DATA EVALUATION AND INTERPRETATION 6
A. General 6
B. Biological Samples 7
1. Jackson River 7
2. James River 11
3. Tye River and Tributaries 18
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure Follows
Page
1 Map of Study Area and Profile of Biological
Conditions 20
-------
I. INTRODUCTION
A water quality pollution control study of the James River
Basin conducted by the Chesapeake Bay-Susquehanna River Basins
Project in 1966-67 included an evaluation of pollution control
action needed to enhance and protect water quality in the Basin.
To supplement chemical and biochemical water quality data used in
the evaluations, the Chesapeake Field Station conducted biological
surveys of the Jackson River in the Covington and Clifton Forge
•4
areas, the James River in the Big Island and Lynchburg areas, and
areas in the Tye River Watershed affected by acid wastes.
For the purpose of the surveys, the community of bottom
(benthic) organisms was selected as the indicator of the biological
condition of the stream. Bottom organisms serve as the preferred
food source for the higher aquatic forms and exhibit similar reactions
to adverse stream conditions. The combination of limited locomotion
and life cycles of one year or more, for most benthic species, provide
a long term picture of the water quality of a stream. Fish and algal
populations were given some consideration, but only to the extent
that obvious conclusions could be drawn based upon casual observations.
In unpolluted streams, a wide variety of sensitive clean-
water associated bottom organisms are normally found. Typical groups
are stoneflies, mayflies, and caddisflies. These sensitive organisms
usually are not individually abundant because of natural predation
and competition for food and space; however, the total count or number
of organisms at a given station may be high because of the number of
different varieties present.
-------
-------
Sensitive genera tend to be eliminated by adverse environ-
mental conditions (e.g., chemical and/or physical) resulting from
wastes reaching the stream. In waters enriched with organic wastes,
comparatively fewer kinds (genera) are normally found, but great
numbers of these genera may be present„ Organic pollution tolerant
forms such as sludgeworms, rattailed maggots, certain species of
bloodworms (red midges), certain leeches., and some species of air
breathing snails may multiply and become abundant because of a
favorable habitat and food supply. These organic pollution-tolerant
bottom organisms may also exist in the natural environment but are
generally found in small numbers. The abundance of these forms, in
streams heavily polluted with organics, is due to their physiological
and morphological abilities to survive environmental conditions more
adverse than conditions that may be tolerated by other organisms,
Under conditions where inert silts or organic sludges blanket the
stream bottom, the natural home of bottom organisms is destroyed,
causing a reduction in the number of kinds of organisms present.
In addition to sensitive and pollution-tolerant forms, some
bottom organisms may be termed intermediates, in that they are capable
of living in fairly heavily polluted areas as well as in clean-water
situationso These organisms occurring in limited numbers, therefore,
cannot serve as effective indicators of water quality,
Streams grossly polluted with toxic wastes such as mine
drainage will support little, if any, biological life and will reduce
the population of both sensitive and pollution-tolerant organisms.
-------
Classification of organisms in this report is considered in
three categories (clean-water associated, intermediate, and pollution-
tolerant) which provide sufficient biological information to supplement
physical and chemical water quality data for the study area. Tentative
identification and counts of specific organisms have been tabulated
for use during intensive investigations of selected areas and are
available upon request.
-------
II. SUMMARY Am) CONCLUSIONS
1. Three biological surveys were made in the Upper James
River Basin in conjunction with a water quality and pollution control
study of the entire Basin.
Samples were taken July 13 - lH, 1966, at eight bio-
logical sampling stations located on the Jackson River between
Clearwater Park and Iron Gate, Virginia, and at one station on
the Cowpasture River,
The James River was sampled September 7-8, 1966, at
13 stations located, between Maury River and Bent Creek.
The Piney, Tye and Buffalo Rivers were sampled in
August 1967.
2. Bottom organisms were selected as the primary indicators
of biological water quality.
3. Results of the Jackson River survey indicated exceptionally
high water quality between Clearwater Park and the Covington Water
Filtration Plant.
Biological samplings indicated that degraded conditions
exist downstream from the West Virginia Pulp and Paper Company
plant at Covington to Iron Gate, Virginia. The absence of clean-water
organisms and the presence of pollution-tolerant forms, coloration,
foaming, and slime-coated rocks were all indicative of poor water
quality.
k. The Cowpasture River contributes water of high quality
to the Jackson River.
-------
*
Based on known biological sampling , the River has recovered
by the time it reaches Salisbury, Virginia, which is a short distance
do-wnstream from Eagle Rock, Virginia.
5- James River survey results indicated mild degradation
downstream from Big Island with recovery conditions existing from
the low level dam at Coleman Falls to Holcomb Rock which is upstream
from Lynchburg, Virginia.
6. Downstream from Lynchburg the water quality becomes
increasingly more degraded to Six Mile where severely polluted con-
ditions exist. Heavy sludge deposits, sludgeworms, turbid water,
and clumps of dead algae were all indicative of poor water quality
in this reach.
7. The River begins to recover at Gaits Mill but mild
pollution was still indicated. Recovery conditions proceed over
the next nine miles with good water quality finally indicated at
Riverville, Virginia.
8. Upstream from Piney River the Tye River was found to
possess high water quality based on the bottom organisms. Down-
stream from the confluence with the Piney River to its mouth at
Norwood, Virginia, the Tye River is apparently degraded by the
operation of the American Cyanamid Company on the Piney River at
the Town of Piney River, Virginia,,
9. Severely degraded biological conditions exist in the
Piney and Tye Rivers, and the Tye River contributes poor quality
water to the James River.
* Biological data, Virginia State Water Control Board.
-------
-------
6
III. DATA EVALUATION AND INTERPRETATION
A. General
The Jackson River, which joins the Cowpasture River down-
stream from Iron Gate, Virginia, to form the James River, was
sampled between Clearwater Park (upstream from Covington, Virginia)
and Iron Gate in order to evaluate the biological conditions of
the stream.
The James River was sampled between the Maury River and
Bent Creek, Virginia. Two paper operations and the industrial
community of Lynchburg, Virginia, are located in this reach.
The mean flow at Bent Creek is k,lhk cfs.
Streams in the Tye River Watershed were sampled in areas
upstream and downstream from the American Cyanamid Company's waste
discharge location.
Sampling stations were located after consideration of the
following conditions:
1. Tributaries
2. Areas having a known waste problem
3. Physical capability for sampling
Bottom organisms are animals that live directly in assoc-
iation with the bottom of a waterway. They may crawl on, burrow in,
or attach themselves to the bottom. Macroorganisms are usually de-
fined as those organisms that will be retained by a No. 30 sieve.
In essence, the organisms retained by the sieve are those that are
visible to the unaided eye.
Each station was sampled once, and the kinds of macro bottom
organisms were observed for the purpose of evaluating water quality.
-------
Quantitative bottom samples were also taken, using a Surber Square
Foot Sampler or a Petersen Dredge (0.6 square foot), and the number
of organisms per square foot were counted or calculated.
Quantitative samples were not taken at some stations because
physical sampling conditions were poor or organisms were very sparse.
B. Biological Samples
1. Jackson River
Station #1 - Jackson River at the riffle immediately upstream from
the Virginia Route 687 Bridge at Clearwater, Virginia.
The water at this station was clear and numerous smallmouth
bass were observed throughout the area. High water quality was
indicated by the k8 kinds (genera) of bottom organisms„ They in-
cluded such clean-water forms as stoneflies (3 genera), mayflies
(h genera), caddisflies (ll genera), fishfly, hellgrammites, two
kinds of riffle beetles, and three kinds of gill-breathing snails.
A total of 288 bottom organisms were collected in the square foot
sample which included 86 mayflies, 2k caddisflies, three stoneflies,
83 gill-breathing snails, ten riffle beetles, and one fishfly. The
clean-water organisms made up 78 per cent of the quantitative sample.
Based on the bottom organisms, excellent water quality was indicated
at this station.
Station #2 - Jackson River at the riffle approximately 100 yards
upstream from the Covington, Virginia, Water Filtration
Plant.
Numerous smallmouth bass and darters were observed in the
clear water at this station. A small group of children was seen
swimming downstream from the water filtration plant. High water
-------
8
quality was again indicated by the 38 kinds (genera) of bottom
organisms which included such clean-water forms as mayflies (8 genera),
caddisflies (8 genera), stoneflies (l genera), riffle beetles (2 genera),
and hellgrammites. A total of 426 bottom organisms were collected
in the square foot sample which included 95 mayflies, 51 caddisflies,
and 9^ riffle beetle larvae. Clean-water organisms made up 56 per
cent of the total in the quantitative sample. High diversification
and numerous clean-water forms indicated excellent water quality.
Station #3 - Jackson River at the Covington, Virginia Playground Park.
This station was located approximately 0.7 miles downstream
from the pulp and paper company and adjacent to the Covington Municipal
Playground. Virtually all of the rocks were coated with a heavy
black slime believed to be Sphaerotilus sp. The water was a dark
coffee color.
The water temperature was elevated and foam was observed. In
addition, a strong odor characteristic of a mill operation was noted,
The air-breathing snail Physa was present in fair numbers, but these
snails were all at the waterline and on the rocks. For this reason
a quantitative sample was not taken. Only a few sludgeworms and
another bristleworm (Nais sp.) were found in addition to the Physa
snails. Severe biological degradation is indicated at this station
when compared with the upstream station. The enormous drop in genera
from 38 (upstream station) to three at this a cation plus the ocir;plete
absence of clean-water forms, indicated heavy industrial pollution.
-------
All three kinds (genera) of bottom organisms found at this station
were pollution-tolerant forms. The low dissolved oxygen and high
water temperatures found by VMI sampling during this period further
substantiate the poor biological conditions.
Station #U - Jackson River at the riffle immediately downstream
from the Durant Road Bridge due south of Covington,
Virginia.
The coffee color, foaming, and elevated temperature noted
upstream persisted at this station. The black slime coated t./
rocks and the strong odor also prevailed. The only bottom organisms
present in fair numbers were the air-breathing Physa snails which
were exposed at the water-line and on the rocks. The only other
bottom organism found was the bristleworm Nais sp. Degraded bio-
logical conditions are still indicated by the presence of these two
pollution-tolerant forms and the absence of clean-water bottom
organisms.
Station #5 - Jackson River at the Drive-in Theatre east of Covington
on Routes 60 and 220.
The water remained coffee colored, the foam persisted and
rocks were still covered with the slime-like growth (already iden-
tified) . The only bottom organisms found were pollution-tolerant
sludgeworms, the air-breathing snail Physa, and an intermediate
midge larva. The quantitative samples consisted of ^-88 sludgeworms.
Heavy biological degradation was still indicated.
-------
-------
10
Station #6 - Jackson River off U. S. 60 and 220, approximately 0.5
miles upstream from the Low-Moor, Virginia, intersection.
The coffee color and foaming prevailed at this station also.
Most of the rocks were still black and covered with the grayish-black
slime. There were good populations of the air-breathing snail Physa
in certain sections of the stream, but their distribution was erratic.
A quantitative sample was not taken because of the spotty distribution
of bottom organisms. Also collected were such pollution-tolerant
forms as leeches, horsefly larvae, and another air-breathing snail.
In addition, a beetle larva was also sampled. Degraded biological
conditions were still indicated. This conclusion was supported by
the low dissolved oxygen readings found in the VMI survey.
Station #7 - Jackson River at the mouth of Smith's Creek in Clifton
Forge, Virginia,
The water continued to appear coffee color and foaming was
present. Smith's Creek was very cloudy and appeared to be contri-
buting a pollutional load from Clifton Forge. The rocks in the area
were still black and coated with slime. Approximately 50 dead fish
were observed in the area and appeared to be mostly suckers and
minnows. Bottom organisms could not be found. Degraded biological
conditions still exist at this point.
Station #8 - Jackson River at the last bridge, crossing downstream
from Iron Gate, Virginia,
The water was tea colored and still showed signs of foam,
Approximately ten dead fish, primarily suckers and minnows were
noted in the area. The rocks were still black and slime was still
-------
11
present. The bottom organisms consisted of ten kinds (genera),
including pollution-tolerant and intermediate forms. The square
good sample contained k6k bottom organisms which consisted of 1?6
sludgeworms, 208 air-breathing snails (2 genera), 8 leeches, and
72 intermediate midge larvae (3 genera). Degraded biological
conditions are still indicated at this station although there is
some improvement. The VMI survey also indicated some improvement.
Station #9 - The Cowpasture River at the Virginia Route 633 Bridge.
This stream was extremely clear, and numerous smallmouth bass
were observed through the area. The surrounding area is farming
country and appears to be primarily pasture land. Twenty-two kindvS
(genera) of bottom organisms were found which included such clean
water forms as stoneflies (2 genera), mayflies (3 genera), caddis-
flies (3 genera) and riffle beetles (2 genera). There was a total
of hkO bottom organisms in the square foot sample. It included
26 stoneflies, 32 mayflies, 230 caddisflies, and 80 riffle beetles.
Based on the great diversification of bottom organisms and the high
percentage of clean-water forms, the Cowpasture River contributes
high quality water to the Jackson River to form the James River
downstream from this station.
2. James River
Station #1 - James River approximately 100 yards downstream from the
first dam downstream from the Maury River near Glasgow,
Virginia.
The water at this station was very clear and numerous fish
were observed throughout the area. Most of these fish were minnows.
-------
12
Good water quality was indicated by the l6 kinds (genera) of bottom
organisms collected which included such clean-water forms as caddis-
flies (h genera), gill-breathing snails (3 genera) and riffle beetles.
Out of a total of 2,025 bottom organisms in the square foot sample,
there were 536 caddisflies and 64 riffle beetles. Good water quality
was indicated at this location.
Station #2 - James River approximately 50 yards upstream from
Battery Creek (West Bank) which is upstream from Big
Island, Virginia.
Numerous minnows were observed at this station. The water
appreared to be a light tea color but was clear in the bottle.
Sampling had to be confined to about four to five feet off the bank
because of the sharp drop-off, and a quantitative sample was not
taken for this reason. Nine kinds (genera) of bottom organisms
were found which included one kind of gill-breathing snail, two
kinds of air-breathing snails, flatworms, leeches, and four kinds
of intermediate midge larvae. Fair to good water quality was
indicated; however, it is believed that a much greater diversification
could have been found if a riffle area had been present. Based on
this limited biological sampling, unpolluted biological conditions
were indicated at this station.
Station #3 - James River immediately upstream from Skimmer Creek
and downstream from Big Island, Virginia,
The water was a dark, tea color and fish could not be observed.
Due to a very sharp drop-off, bottom sampling had to be confined to
the immediate bank. Bottom organisms could not be found in this
-------
13
area. While there appears to be mild degradation, it was difficult
to make a judgement based on bottom organisms because of poor
sampling conditions and the lack of a riffle area.
Station $k - James River upstream from the low level dam at Coleman
Falls, Virginia.
The water continued to be tea color but was clear in the
bottle, The bottom in this area appeared to be coated with a
black, gelatinous material and bottom organisms were sparse. Only
a few bloodworms and bristleworm (Nais sp.) could be found. Again,
sampling had to be confined to the bank area due to the sharp
drop-off. Because of the drop-off and the sparse bottom organism
population, a quantitative sample was not taken. A few minnows
were observed in the sample area. Based on the bottom organisms
and known dissolved oxygen readings, mild degradation is still
indicated at this station.
Station $5 - James River approximately 150 yards downstream from
the low level dam at Coleman Falls, Virginia.
The water still appeared tea color but was clear in the
bottle. Only six kinds (genera) of bottom organisms were present
and they were sparse. They consisted, of a gill-breathing snail,
an air-breathing snail, flatworms, a bristleworm, a dragonfly
nymph, and a few intermediate midge larvae. Sampling still had
to be confined to the banks because of the sharp drop-off. A
quantitative sample was not taken because of the poor sampling
conditions and sparse population. Based on the known water
chemistry at this station, "•" '.'every appears to have occurred
-------
lit
despite the low number of bottom organisms. It is believed the low
number of bottom organisms sampled can be attributed to the poor
sampling conditions created by the impoundments in this area,
Station $6 - James River at Holcomb Rock upstream from Lynchburg,
Virginia„
The water continued tea color but again was clear in the
bottle. Bottom organisms were sparse and only a few sludgeworms
and gill-breathing snails could be found. Due to a sharp drop-off
and impoundment conditionss sampling had to be confined to the
banks. The water chemistry at this station indicates that recovery
has occurred at this station. The poor bottom organism population
is attributed to poor sampling conditions and poor habitat created
by impounded conditions„
Station #7 - James River downstream from a low level dam downstream
from Daniel Island, opposite Lynchburg, Virginia (East
Bank).
The water was dark, tea color but was clear in the bottle.
Foam had built up in sections below the dam similar to detergent
suds, A fisherman was observed in the area and a dead channel
catfish approximately 8 inches long was found. Only a qualitative
sample was taken due to the drop-off and large rocks. Eight kinds
of bottom organisms were sampled which included two kinds of gill
breathing snails, two kinds of air-breathing snails, fingernail
clamsj flatworms, the scud Gammarus sp.s and an intermediate midge
larvae. Mild degradation would appear to be present at this station.
-------
,Statiqn_#8 - James River at Six Mile, downstream from Lynchburg,
Virginia „
The water at this location was very turbid, and clumps of
dead algae were observed floating. Sludge deposits were heavy
along the shore and prevented wading out very far from the bank.
The only bottom organisms found were sludgeworms and mosquito
larvae, both of which are pollution-tolerant, Sludgeworms were
abundant. Moderate to heavy degradation was indicated at this
location based on the bottom organisms and known dissolved oxygen
readings,
Station ffiff - James River at Gaits Mills
The water at this location was tea color but was clear in
the bottle, A total of 15 &sie.ra (kinds) of bottom organisms
were found at this station which included one kind of mayfly and
one kind of gill-breathing snail. Other kinds (genera) sampled
included such intermediate forms as fingernail clams, the scud
Gamma_rus_ sp», tvo kinds of damselflies, and one Kind of dragonfly.
Pollution-tolerant organisms included sludgeworms,, mosquitoes,
two kinds of air-breathing snails, and two kinds of leeches. A
qualtitative sample was not taken because the bottom was pre-
dominately bedrock, The river appears to be recovering at this
station, but recovery had not yet occurred. Mild pollution was
still indicated.
Station #10 - James River at Stapleton, Virginia.
The tea color was still present, but the water was clear
in the bottle. There was a recent moderate to heavy fish-kill
-------
-------
16
of white suckers in the area with the majority of them averaging
one pound in weight. A large school of white suckers had sought
refuge in Partridge Creek and refused to leave the creek and
venture out into the James River despite our disturbing them in
the mouth of the creek. A total of ten kinds (genera) of bottom
organisms were sampled at this station which consisted of two
kinds of gill-breathing snails, two kinds of air-breathing snails,
fingernail clams, two kinds of leeches, flatworms, and two kinds
of intermediate midge larvae. A quantitative sample was not
taken because the riffle area was made up of large bedrock. Mild
pollution was still indicated.
Station #11 - James River immediately upstream from Christian Mill
Creek.
The water at this location still had a tea color but was
clear in the bottle, indicating the color was caused by the
substrate. Aquatic vegetation was heavy and included duckweed,
filamentous algae, moss, and submerged aquatic vegetation. Twelve
kinds of bottom organisms were found versus ten upstream, They
included such clean-water forms as two kinds of caddisfly larvae
and two kinds of gill-breathing snails. It also included one kind
of air-breathing snail, fingernail clams, flatworms, sludgeworms,
damselflies, another bristleworm and two kinds of intermediate
midge larvae. Out of 1,128 bottom organisms in the square foot
sample, there were 776 flatworms, l8U caddisflies, 128 intermediate
midge larvae, 2k sludgeworms, eight br*-'"""rrxs, and elgh4 01A1-
breathing snails. Fair water quality was indicated at this station.
-------
17
Station $12 - James River at Riverville, Virginia.
The water still appeared tea color but was clear in the
bottle. The bottom organism population at this station took a
great upsurge in diversification. Twenty-three kinds (genera)
were found versus twelve at the upstream station. It included
such clean-water bottom organisms as eaddisf'lies (U kinds), mayflies,
riffle beetles (2 kinds), and two kinds of gill-breathing snails.
Out of 706 bottom organisms in the square foot sample, there were
280 caddisflies, 232 flatworms, 152 intermediate larvae, 2k riffle
beetles, niiii ol^-biea thing ^.'.:ils, and one ^aldenti. i^J: . i. 1 title worm.
The river appears to have recovered at this point and good water
quality was indicated,
Station $13 - James River at Allen Creek upstream from Bent Creek,
Virginia,
The water was still tea color but clear in the bottle. The
surrounding land is in farmland and siltation appears heavy, Yhe
drop-off was sharp beyond the silted area, and sampling conditions
for bottom organisms were extremely poor. Only three kinds (genera)
of bottom organisms were found. A quantitative sample was not
taken because sampling had to be confined close to the banKs because
of the soft banks and drop-off. The only clean-water form found
was a gill-breathing snail. In addition, an air-breathing snail
and one kind of damselfly were found. The poor bottom organism
population was attributed to the heavy siltation, absence of a
riffle area, and generally poor sampling habitat. Based on the
known dissolved oxygen readings and other water chemistry at this
station, good water quality still exists at this location.
-------
18
3. Tye River and Tributaries
Station #1 - Tye River at the Virginia County Road 665 Bridge near
Tye River, Virginia.
This station was located upstream from the confluence with
the Piney River. The water was clear and a large minnow population
was observed. Darters, a member of the perch family, were sampled
in the qualitative and quantitative sample. These fish are generally
associated with high quality water.
High water quality was indicated both by the number of kinds
(genera) and the high percentage of clean-water bottom organisms
which were found at this station. The 15 kinds found included such
clean-water forms as mayflies (5 genera)? caddisflies (2 genera),
stoneflies, a gill-breathing snail, and hellgrammites. A total of
121 bottom organisms was taken in the square foot sample which
included 72 caddisflies, 35 mayflies, and one hellgrammite<,
Station $2 - Piney River approximately 80 yards upstream from
Virginia Route 151 Bridge at Piney River, Virginia,
The water at this station was extremely clear and minnows
were abundant throughout the area. A hognose sucker about 12 inches
long was observed and captured while sampling. The riffle area was
extremely large and moss was abundant on the rocks. A total of nine
different kinds (genera) of bottom organisms was found which included
such clean-water forms as mayflies (k genera) and caddisflies
(2 genera), Two intermediate forms and an organic pollution-tolerant
form were also sampled. However, the bottom organism populations
were low and only four bottom organisms were collected in the square
-------
19
foot sample. Based on the qualitative sampling, fair populations
of mayflies and caddisflies were present. Good water quality was
indicated at this station.
Station jfe - Piney River at Virginia County Eoad 6jh downstream
from the American Cyanamid Company at Piney River,
Virginia.
The water color at this station had changed to a bluish-
green, and the underside of the rocks was covered with an orange
precipitate about one-fourth inch thick. Bottom organisms could
not be found at this location. It appears that this water degradation
is the result of the American Cyanamid Company's operation upstream
at Piney River, Virginia.
Station #k - Tye River at U. S. Route 29 Bridge downstream from the
confluence with the Piney River.
The water was clear and all of the rocks were covered with
an orange precipitate. Bottom organisms could not be found. Degraded
biological conditions are the result of polluted water from the
Piney River.
Station #5 - Tye River at Virginia County Road 739 downstream from
Tye River, Virginia.
The water was clear and all of the rocks were covered with
an orange precipitate. Bottom organisms were absent. Poor water
quality is attributed to the Piney River.
Station #6 - Tye River at the Virginia County Road 6^k upstream
from the Buffalo River confluence.
The water was clear and rocks were covered with an orange
precipitate. Bottom organisms were still absent. Degraded water
quality was still indicated.
-------
20
Station #7 - Buffalo River at the Virginia County Road 65? Bridge
upstream from its confluence with the Tye River.
The water was slightly cloudy from recent rains in the
watershed; however, excellent water quality was indicated by the
11 kinds (genera) of bottom organisms which included such clean-
water forms as stoneflies (2 genera), mayflies (3 genera) and
caddisflies (2 genera). Only 32 bottom organisms were collected
in the square foot sample; however, it included two stoneflies,
16 caddisflies, and seven mayflies. The qualitative sample in-
dicated an excellent stonefly population and good mayfly and caddis-
fly population. If lower water conditions had prevailed, it is
believed the quantitative sample would have been much more productive.
High water quality was indicated.
Station #8 - Tye River near the mouth at the Virginia County Road
626 at Norwood, Virginia.
The water remained clear and the orange precipitate still
was present on the rocks. Bottom organisms could not be found.
Degraded biological conditions which were produced by the water
from the Piney River are still evident. Poor water quality was
contributed to the James River by the Tye River, and apparently
James River water quality is adversely affected. How far down-
stream this affected the James River is difficult to say since
water conditions were too high for biological sampling in the
James River. However, the rocks were still covered with the orange
precipitate at the first bridge crossing on the James River down-
stream from the confluence with the Tye River.
-------
1
LJ
o:
CD<
z
JAMES RIVER
ESAPEAKE DRAI
i
o
CO
Ul „
cc §
URVEY
RIBUTA
ORWOOD,
CO h- z
BIOLOGICAL
s RIVER a
:ARWATER PARK -
Lu ~
2E o
-3
15
H •
< UJ
CC-J
a: 5 to
HE INTERIOI
TROL ADMII
;HARLOTTE
t-z
.5 DEPARTMENT OF
WTER POLLUTION CO
.ANTIC REGION
3 K
-j"
gj
go
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section Page
I. INTRODUCTION ....... 1
II. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS ...... k
III. DATA EVALUATION AND INTERPRETATION 5
LIST OF TABLES
Table Page
I Bottom Organism Data of Antietam Creek and
Tributaries ................. 13
II Tabulation of Bottom Organisms by Station on
Antietam Creek and Tributaries—July 1966 . . 15
Figure
1
LIST OF FIGURES
Map of Study Area and Profile of Biological
Conditions on Antietam Creek .......
Follows
Page
27
-------
I. INTRODUCTION
A biological survey of Antietam Creek and some of its tribu-
taries in the reach between Waynesboro, Pennsylvania, and Antietam,
Maryland, was conducted between July 19 and July 21, 1966. The bio-
logical activities were conducted concurrently with stream quality
investigations.
For purposes of the study, the community of bottom (benthic)
organisms was selected as the indicator of the biological condition
of the stream. Bottom organisms serve as the preferred food source
for the higher aquatic forms and exhibit similar reactions to adverse
stream conditions. The combination of limited locomotion and life
cycles of one year or more, for most benthic species, provides a
long-term picture of the water quality of a stream. Fish and algal
populations were given some consideration, but only to the extent
that obvious conclusions could be drawn based upon casual observations,
In unpolluted streams, a wide variety of sensitive clean-
water associated bottom organisms is normally found. Typical groups
are stoneflies, mayflies, and caddisflies„ These sensitive organisms
usually are not individually abundant because of natural predation
and competition for food and space; however, the total count or
number of organisms at a given station may be high because of the
number of different varieties present.
Sensitive genera (kinds) tend to be eliminated by adverse
environmental conditions (chemical, physical, and biological)
-------
resulting from wastes reaching the stream. In waters enriched with
organic wastes, comparatively fewer kinds are normally found, but
great numbers of these genera may be present. Organic pollution-
tolerant forms such as sludgeworms, rattailed maggots, certain
species of bloodworms such as red midges, certain leeches, and
some species of air-breathing snails may multiply and become abun-
dant because of a favorable habitat and food supply. These organic
pollution-tolerant bottom organisms may also exist in the natural
environment but are generally found in small numbers. The abun-
dance of these forms in streams heavily polluted with organics is
due to their physiological and morphological abilities to survive
environmental conditions more adverse than that tolerated by other
bottom organisms. When inert silts or organic sludges blanket the
stream bottom, the natural home of bottom organisms is destroyed,
causing a reduction in the number of kinds of organisms present.
In addition to sensitive and pollution-tolerant forms,
some bottom organisms may be termed intermediates, in that they are
capable of living in fairly heavily polluted areas as well as in
clean-water situations. These organisms occurring in limited num-
bers, therefore, cannot serve as effective indicators of water
quality.
Streams grossly polluted with toxic wastes such as mine
drainage will support little, if any, biological life and will
reduce the population of both sensitive and pollution-tolerant
organisms.
-------
Classification of organisms in this report is considered
in three categories (clean-water associated, intermediate, and
pollution-tolerant) which provide sufficient biological information
to supplement physical and chemical water quality data for a "basin-
wide analysis. Detailed identification and counts of specific
organisms have been tabulated and attached.
-------
-------
II. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
1. A biological survey of Antietam Creek and some of the
tributaries in the reach between Waynesboro, Pennsylvania, and
Antietam, Maryland, was conducted between July 19 and July 21, 1966.
The biological activities were conducted concurrently with stream
quality investigations.
2. Bottom organisms were selected as the primary indicator
of biological water quality.
3. Fair biological conditions were indicated on the West
Branch of Antietam Creek upstream from Waynesboro, Pennsylvania.
k. Mild pollution on Antietam Creek was indicated between
Millers Church Road near Rocky Forge, Maryland, and Antietam Drive
east of Hagerstown, Maryland.
5. Moderately heavy organic pollution on Antietam Creek
was found at the west edge of Funkstown, Maryland (Station 7).
6. Mild organic pollution was indicated in Antietam Creek
from the Poffenberger Road Bridge (Station 8) downstream to Burn-
side Bridge near Sharpsburg, Maryland (Station 12).
7. Good water quality was indicated at Antietam, Maryland,
and unpolluted water was contributed to the Potomac River by
Antietam Creek.
8. Marsh Run, Beaver Creek, and Little Antietam Creek
(Station 11) were found to contribute good water quality to
Antietam Creek.
-------
III. DATA EVALUATION AND INTERPRETATION
Antietam Creek is a small, shallow creek, with the West
Branch of the Creek originating in south-central Pennsylvania north
of Waynesboro. The principal Cities in the drainage area are Waynes-
boro, Pennsylvania, and Haterstown, Maryland.
The main points of degradation were also found downstream
from Waynesboro and Hagerstown.
Control stations were sampled on the tributaries of Marsh
Run, Beaver Creek and Little Antietam Creek at Keedysville, Maryland.
Sampling stations were located after consideration of the
following conditions:
1. Effects of tributaries
2. Areas having a known water quality problem
3o Physical capability for sampling
Bottom organisms are animals that live directly in associa-
tion with the bottom of a waterway. They may crawl on, burrow in,
or attach themselves to the bottom. Macroorganisms are usually de-
fined as those organisms tnat will be retained by a Wo. 30 sieve.
In essence, the organisms retained by the sieve are those that are
visible to the unaided eye.
Each station was sampled once, and the kinds of macro bottom
organisms were observed for the purpose of evaluating water quality.
Quantitative bottom samples were also taken, using a Surber Square
Foot Sampler, and the number of organisms per square foot was counted.
-------
-------
Quantitative samples were not taken at stations in non-
critical areas or where organisms were sparsely distributed.
Discussions of stations proceed downstream unless other-
wise noted.
Station #1 - West Branch Antietam Creek off Pennsylvania Route 3l6
upstream from Waynesboro, Pennsylvania
The water was very clear, and minnows were extremely abundant,
Darters, a small fish related to yellow perch and walleyes, were also
observed. A total of only eight genera of bottom organisms was
found, including such clean-water forms as caddisflies and riffle
beetles. Intermediate organisms included flatworms, sow-bugs, and
midge larvae. Pollution-tolerant forms included leeches and two
genera of air-breathing snails. Soil erosion is heavy to moderate,
and the surrounding land is in intensive agriculture. This limits
the number of kinds of bottom organisms present„ Fair biological
conditions are indicated at this location.
Station #2 - Antietam Creek at Millers Church Road near Rocky Forge,
Maryland
The water was very clear, and submerged aquatic vegetation
was fairly abundant. Silt deposits were heavy in some areas, and a
hydrogen sulfide odor was noted when the bottom was disturbed. Only
11 genera of bottom organisms were found. Clean-water forms con-
sisted of one gill-breathing snail. Pollution-tolerant forms in-
cluded sludgeworms, leeches (3 genera), and air-breathing snails
(2 genera). Intermediate forms such as flatworms, scuds, blackflies,
-------
7
and midges made up the balance. Out of 1,501 bottom organisms in
the square-foot sample, there were 1,368 blackflies, 96 intermediate
midge larvae, 36 air-breathing snails, and one leech. Mild pollu-
tion is suggested at this station.
Station #3 - Antietam Creek at the Old Forge Road Bridge upstream
from Hagerstown, Maryland
Only 1^ genera of bottom organisms were found, but some
biological improvement was indicated by the presence of such clean-
water representatives as caddis flies (2 genera) and riffle beetles.
Intermediate forms such as scuds, sow-bugs, flatworms, blackflies,
and intermediate midge larvae were sampled. Pollution-tolerant
forms such as sludgeworms, bristleworms, air-breathing snails (2
genera), and leeches were also found. The quantitative sample con-
tained 1,102 bottom organisms which consisted of 523 caddisflies,
356 intermediate midge larvae, 86 air-breathing snails, 63 scuds,
21 sludgeworms, 13 riffle beetles, 11 blackflies, ten flatworms,
ten bristleworms, and nine sow-bugs. The water was clear, and heavy
growths of submerged aquatic vegetation and duckweed were present.
Mild biological degradation was indicated at this station.
Station #H - Antietam Creek at Trovinger Road due north of
Bridgeport, Maryland
The water was clear, and there was a heavy growth of sub-
merged aquatic vegetation and duckweed, suggesting an abundance of
nitrogen and phosphorus„ Silt deposits are moderately heavy in
some areas. Only four genera of bottom organisms were found versus
-------
8
1^ at the upstream station. They consisted of the intermediate scuds
(2 genera) and flatworms and a pollution-tolerant air-breathing snail.
Mild pollution was indicated at this station. Something appears to
be restricting the diversification and productivity of the bottom
organisms„
Station #5 - Mouth of Marsh Run (a tributary to Antietam Creek) at
the east edge of Plagerstown at Security, Maryland
The water was clear; and fourteen genera of bottom organisms
were found, including such clean-water representatives as mayflies
(2 genera), caddisflies (2 genera), and riffle beetles. The square-
foot sample consisted of 312 intermediate midge larvae, 2l6 caddis-
fly larvae, 10U riffle beetles, 80 sow-bugs, l6 sludgeworms, seven
crayfish, and eight mayflies„ Clean-water forms made up kk per cent
of the quantitative sample. Good water quality was contributed to
Antietam Creek.
Station #6 - Antietam Creek at Antietam Drive east of Hagerstown,
Maryland
The water was clear; and numerous minnows, goldfish, and
tadpoles were observed, Eleven genera of bottom organisms were
found which included such clean-water organisms as mayflies, caddis-
flies, and riffle beetles. Intermediate organisms consisted of
fingernail clams, scuds, and intermediate midge larvae. Pollution-
tolerant organisms included sludgeworms, air-breathing snails (3
genera), and a fly larvae. Productivity at this station was sur-
prisingly low, and only 36 bottom organisms were found in the
-------
9
square-foot sample. The quantitative sample consisted of 15 inter-
mediate midge larvae, 11 air-breathing snails, seven sludgeworms,
two caddisflies, and one fly larva. Mild pollution was indicated
at this station.
Station #7 - Antietam Creek at the bridge on East Oak Ridge Road
at the west edge of Funkstown, Maryland
The water was slightly cloudy and very foamy, believed to
be caused by discharge of detergents. This station is located down-
stream from the Hagerstown Sewage Treatment Plant. Sewage mold was
present on the rocks. This is believed to be Sphaerotilus sp. Only
six genera of bottom organisms were found at this location. They
consisted of pollution-tolerant sludgeworms, air-breathing snails,
and cranefly larvae. Intermediate organisms were damselflies and
intermediate midge larvae (2 genera). The square-foot sample con-
sisted of 1,82^ sludgeworms, ±,22h intermediate midge larvae, 256
cranefly larvae, and 112 air-breathing snails. Moderately heavy
organic pollution was indicated.
Station #8 - Antietam Creek at Poffenberger Road Bridge downstream
from Funkstown, Maryland
Foam was still present, and the water was slightly cloudy.
A mild sewage odor was evident. A very large goldfish and tadpole
population was observed, and goldfish and tadpoles were easily col-
lected in the qualitative sample. Only seven genera of bottom
organisms were found, consisting of the following pollution-tolerant
forms: leeches, air-breathing snails (2 genera), and a bristleworm;
-------
-------
10
and the "balance was made up of intermediate forms: damselflies,
flatworms, and midge larvae. The 39^* bottom organisms in the
square-foot sample consisted of 2hQ intermediate midge larvae, 88
air-breathing snails, kO leeches, ten bristleworms, and eight flat-
worms. Mild organic pollution was indicated at this station.
Station #9 - Antietam Creek at the Devils Backbone County Park
adjacent to Maryland Route 68
The water was clear, and small black bullheads, minnows,
and a large goldfish population were observed„ A total of 16 genera
of bottom organisms was found versus only seven at the upstream sta-
tion; however, only 56 organisms per square foot were sampled in the
quantitative sample. Clean-water forms consisted of caddisflies and
gill-breathing snails. Intermediate forms consisted of flatworms,
blackflies, midge larvae (3 genera), damselflies, arid fingernail
clams. Pollution-tolerant forms were leeches (2 genera), air-
breathing snails (h genera), and sludgeworms. The quantitative
sample consisted of 30 gill-breathing snails, 19 air-breathing snails,
four caddisflies, one sludgeworm, one leech, arid one intermediate
midge larvae. Recovery was starting to take place but had not yet
occurred.
Station #10 - Beaver Creek (tributary to Antietam Creek) near its
mouth off Maryland Route 68 near Breathedsville,
Maryland
The water was very cloudy due to soil erosion from upstream.
This is believed to be from road construction. However, an excellent
-------
11
bottom organism population consisting of 2k genera was found. It
consisted of such clean-water forms as stoneflies, mayflies (6
genera), caddisflies (k genera), riffle "beetles (2 genera), fish
flies, and gill-breathing snails. There were 32h organisms in the
square-foot sample consisting of 13^ gill-breathing snails, 6j
riffle beetles, 57 intermediate midge larvae, 29 caddisflies, 22
sludgeworms, nine mayflies, four scuds, and two smoky alderfly
larvae. Excellent water quality was contributed to Antietam Creek.
Station #11 - Little Antietam Creek (tributary to Antietam Creek)
at the bridge downstream from Keedysville, Maryland,
and west of Route 3^
Submerged aquatic weeds were very abundant, and the water
was extremely clear. Numerous minnows were observed at this loca-
tion. High water quality was indicated by the 27 genera of bottom
organisms which included such clean-water forms as stoneflies, may-
flies (k genera), caddisflies (3 genera), fishflies, gill-breathing
snails, and riffle beetles (2 genera). A total of 1,^58 bottom
organisms was found in the square-foot sample. It consisted of 968
caddisflies, 26k riffle beetles, 102 intermediate midges, Uo crane-
fly larvae, 32 sow-bugs, 19 small crayfish, 11 mayflies, eight flat-
worms, six scuds, and five fishflies. Excellent water quality was
contributed to Antietam Creek.
-------
12
Station #12 - Antletam Creek at Burnside Bridge near Sharpsburg,
Maryland
The water was slightly cloudy, and there appeared to be
quite a bit of silt coming down from upstream. This was believed
to be from road construction„ Fourteen genera of bottom organisms
were found which included clean-water forms such as caddisflies,
riffle beetles, and gill-breathing snails. Intermediate forms con-
sisted of flatworms, fingernail clams, damselflies, scuds, and
midges. Pollution-tolerant forms included air-breathing snails
(2 genera), sludgeworms, and leeches. However, bottom organisms
were not very abundant and only 15 per square foot were taken in
the quantitative sample. It consisted of 12 midge larvae, one rif-
fle beetle, one scud, and one sludgeworm. Mildly degraded biologi-
cal conditions were still indicated at this station.
Station #13 - Antietam Creek at the bridge at the Village of
Antietam, Maryland
The stream was clear, and numerous bullheads and darters
were observed. Submerged aquatic vegetation and filamentous algae
were heavy. Good biological conditions were indicated by the 22
genera of bottom organisms which included such clean-water forms as
mayflies (3 genera), caddisflies (2 genera), riffle beetles (2 genera),
and gill-breathing snails (2 genera). A total of 713 bottom organ-
isms was collected in the square-foot sample which consisted of hkO
intermediate midge larvae, 200 caddisflies, hO mayflies, 19 gill-
breathing snails, eight riffle beetles, three leeches, one air-
breathing snail, one flatworm, and one bristleworm« High water quality
was contributed to the Potomac River by Antietam Creek.
-------
TABLE I
BOTTOM ORGANISM DATA OF
ANTIETAM CREEK AND TRIBUTARIES
13
Station
Number
1
Location
West Branch of Antietam
Creek off Pennsylvania
Route 3l6 upstream from
Waynesboro, Pennsylvania
Bottom
No. of
Kinds
8
Organisms
No. Per
Sq. Ft.
Not
Taken
Dominant
Forms
Flatworms
Sow-bugs
Mi dge Larvae
Indicated
Water
Quality
Fair
Antietam Creek at Millers 11
Church Road near Rocky
Forge, Maryland
Antietam Creek at the 1^
Old Forge Road Bridge
upstream from Hagerstovri,
Maryland
Antietam Creek at Trov- k
inger Road due north of
Bridgeport, Maryland
Mouth of Marsh Run (a Ik
tributary to Antietam
Creek) at the east edge
of Hagerstown at
Security, Maryland
Antietam Creek at 11
Antietam Drive east of
Hagerstown, Maryland
Antietam Creek at the
bridge on East Oak Ridge
Road at the west edge of
Funkstown, Maryland
Antietam Creek at Poffen-
berger Road Bridge down-
stream from Funkstown,
Maryland
1,501 Blackflies
1,102 Caddisflies
Midge Larvae
Not Scuds
Taken Flatworms
Air-breathing
Snail
Midge Larvae
Caddisflies
Riffle Beetles
Sow-bugs
36 Midge Larvae
Air-breathing
Snails
Sludgeworms
Sludgeworms
Mi dge Larvae
39^ Midge Larvae
Air-breathing
Snails
Leeches
Mild
Pollution
Mild
Pollution
Mild
Pollution
Good
Mild
Pollution
Moderately
Heavy
Pollution
Mild
Pollution
-------
TABLE I (Continued)
Station
Number
Location
Bottom
No. of
Kinds
Organisms
No.
Sq,.
Per
Ft.
Dominant
Forms
Indicated
Water
Quality
9 Antietam Creek at the 16
Devils Backbone County
Park adjacent to
Maryland Route 68
10 Beaver Creek (Tribu- 2U
tary to Antietam Creek)
near its mouth off
Maryland Route 68 near
Breathedsville, Maryland
11 Little Antietam Creek 27
(Tributary to Antietam
Creek) at the bridge
downstream from Keedys-
ville, Maryland, and
west of Route 3^
12 Antietam Creek at ih
Burnside Bridge near
Sharpsburg, Maryland
13 Antietam Creek at the 22
bridge at the Village
of Antietam, Maryland
56
32 !|
1,1*58
Gill-breathing Mild
Snails, Air- Pollution
breathing
Snails
Gill-breathing
Snails, Riffle
Beetles, Midge
Larvae
Caddisflies
Caddisflies
Riffle Beetles
Midge Larvae
Excellent
Excellent
15 Midge Larvae Mildly
Degraded
713 Midge Larvae Excellent
Caddisflies
Mayflies
-------
15
pq
EH
o
VQ
B VO
O O\
H H
EH
<£ >-i
EH >-3
00 D
pq i
00
00 K
H CD
0) Cd -rl H
o ^ -P p
0? cd S
JH -P cd
CD O 00
E -P
pi .a a o
S 0 -H O
cd (x,
w
4J a
a H i oj cu
CD -H > H
CO !>» H -H P
OJ H cd +3 g
^ a P cd cd
PL, O Of +3 00
M
CD
-p
f-l
CD -p
-p a
CD W
> CD
a ^H
H PL,
1
O
0
cd
S
X
•
p.
CO
cd
•H
ra
0)
be
J^J
cd Q
•H
cd TJ
•rt Cd
5-1 H
H -H
CD EH
f~\
MD m
-3" LT\
HO
O
o
OJ CO
OJ
vo
XX
p.
w p • •
to pp.
OJ
P? O, ^c~]
CO CO O
r*)
cd w to
•H 0 P
ra HO
OJ H ^
pS Cd to £H ^
Cd Q 0 < CD IE!'
to w p
o3
H
CD
""CJ
ro
o
p
^(
£3
U3
cd
e
w
o
•H
H
CD
Cd £H
cd
•H
to
03
•H
^
?H
CD
cd
£H
p
o
-p
cd o
•H Cd -P -p CD
cd TJ ?-< cd P cd -P
•rHcd4^>rdO cda P
5-t , — 1 to o _c~| cd 'O O O
H-H UO-H a PH H
, — 1 j-i cd co ^H *H o pJ O
CDEH HH EH T} fn P-, O
^> cd pi -p
^H S 5n CO
P' -H Cd
p.
w
* .
H
O -H
cd T5
n^J d)
•H P
Id >.
CD H
a o
•H P,
p Pj
to en
P w cd
to pi i — 1
H O
cd pi cd o
W Cd -H -H
(-, J>^ o E
cd PH o a ^
*& H-3 cd
cd a cd fn
^H CD cd a ,Q
CD EH 'ni O O
•p o a to
P P H O
•H O PS £H
Q SH PH p^
-p
CO
cd
i-3 O
in
CD
xi b
p -p
£5 cd
O
a o
O : "
00
a
cd
CM
o
O O H
a oo
pq -p -p
CD K
-P -H
to -p
0) a cd
13 < PL,
cd
-p o
cd «
CD U
CD ^
O ^3
O
ra co
-P J-i
0) CD
•H H
-P H
^g
-------
16
-P 1 CO
fi fl !> CO
0) cd -H H
0 p! +J P.
Of cd S
CD H
CO >j H -H ft
CO H cd -P S
rH fl 2 CtJ Cd
PH o cy -p CQ
CO
CO
-p
03
fa
o
CO -P
-P C
f-i 01
CO CO
J>
C! £H
H FN
1
0
o
cd
S
H -H -P
•H ?! H 0
W EH O EH
cd
-P O
cd K
co o
CU h
£-( pi • — *
O jij ii
O CO
B £$
cd co c
-P I* -H
CO CO 4^
••H H a
-P H O
CM
t—
CM
03
ON
O
m
vo
ON
O
a
0
P
•H
CO
00
o
w
CO
H
H
CO
w
<
Pi
w
CQ
0)
cd Q
a
•H
JH O
CO -H
O &
cd B
cd
S
a3
O
O
«
H
n3 'tj
•H cd
S-i H
cd o
H -H
H S-i
CO EH
-------
17
0)
3
S
•H
•P
o
o
-P 1 CD
a a > CD
CD CO -H H
O 3 -P ft
of to E
£H -P CO
CD <*H -H CQ
PM 0 -P
E
CO CD
VH -H 0> H
O C fc ft
cd cd E
^H fctO ^ CO
CD f-i O1 CQ
,0 O CQ
g -P
p ,0 a o
g3 CJ -H O
Ct5 P^
-P G
G H 1 CD CD
CD T-l !> H
W f>> H -rl ft
CD H cd -P S
JH G 3 Cd Cd
OH O G> -p CQ
to
CD
G !H
H CLt
1
0
f-i
O
cfl
S
COOAOO OH OOVO OO
HOAVO o,cj\ o m -3- H
• •« •• ••• •
CXI ^f O HO H CM t~- H
rn _a-
_^-lP\C— HO HVOOO OOCM
OJLPv OJH HtfNCv) HO
on u-\ H
*
H
-p
X 0
o
PH
CD
0<
CQ
ft ^
CO CD
P-I
ft CD ft
w ,c! 10 -to
o ft E
ft ft • ftE^iCDCQ03
co co ft ra3co.G -H
W 2-Hcd
3tOH XT^ 3cdTd-PW 0UC
H.O CD-H •H'dCD cdftHh
ScdcsJO «H H OJH-rHft SO CDO
CdCO'H-H -H 3 033^^ 3f-i G
h >J^! G rQ O T^ECDHcdCDTd CUVi
>3 ^3| OE Cd? -H -H-HftO!-l^l!>iCO-P O Ct
Cd C_5 p [ 1 fi <2, fn EH cd IH i — 1 CQ *rH p i CD O tin £H CQ C
XX X
• *
ft ft
to to ft
to
to cd
3 H cd
SH H -H
cd CD co
g H CD
S cd bC
! cd >j 3
) cd O P3 cd Q
-P Cd O J-lrd 3 Ti -P CD !-< 5 tJ " " -H ' '
cd j-i cdftOScdE G ft -P CD ?-
COG ^i-POft3S-i-HCUO ft ,0-1-
ndO O CD-H Oi-H'CDCQEH.-C; O E a
O Cd ^d
> ft -H cd
•H Sn H
OE tocdrato-p o CD 3o^l cdo
ftH OrGCDOft -rl HSt
O? J-i O H f-l -H f-l O CC
) ft H -H
! E H JH
^,Pn pnOPnpLiQ EH O HH< CDEH
•p bfl cd r
' Q
10 -H -p S ^
cd H 0
C5 O EH
p
EH
•8
o
•H
-p
•P O
fl fn
< EH
-------
18
-P I 0>
d a > 01
0) n5 in
O S -P ft
C? a3 '
I* -p
(U V-i -H
PL. O -P
O
t—
O
H
H CO
ON O
O H
O
O
CO
O
O CO
O O
CO
OJ
e
W
O)
0) H
S-, ft
cd '
< CO
O CO
-P
ft C O
O -H O
bC
O
CO
- CO
CO
CO CO
o
CM
._
P-. o a? -p 02
0)
a
•H
-p
a
o
H
CQ
0)
•P
cd
JLf
i-Q
0) CQ
!> 0)
G *H
H PH
|
O
JLj
O
I!
•
ft
M ft
W
ft CQ
CQ 3 W
JH 3
o3 ni H
CQ £1 H
^3 S 0)
,£4 cd cd CQ
Oj PH O O <
-P oi cd -i
cd ^f *d cd
• •
ft ft
CQ CQ
ft ft
CQ • S
ft 3
d} • CQ r-f
•H ft 0) -H
ra CQ cd cd T3
CQ O> t! 0)
•H cdl cd -H ft
?H CQI S T3 !>s
£H r'a S ^ ^
0) r£j 1 ^ ft O
33 pin PM 1 l-l] -H PH
CQ
3
a
0)
cd
o
r^j
r^
W
CQ •
ft
W CQ
•H
S cd
H -H
0) CQ
a 0)
0) t£
cd -P £l
f-i CO oi Q
-> TJ CU " -H
cd fl -P O T3 cd £ Ssi) ft-Htd
13 O CQ ft O t) (
D O) R O S^ i-t
OS OcdftOS -P 0) oi 6
ft H !-(
Li Q O 0) H
,Q
rj
EH
ft
ft CQ
CQ
ft CU
CQ
• CU
CQ O
C~|
CQ -p
-P h
cd cu o
h H 0
CD CU -H
•p S ^-*
ft "^ EH
CQ X!
0
0)
O
S
CQ
ft
O
03 -d
^t t>3
0) [Tl'
>j
CQ
ft
0
^
3
QJ
^_)
O -p
C!
-POO
C !H O
EH -—
-------
19
CD
fl
•H
-P
a
o
o
-P 1 CD
c a > CD
CD cd -H H
O 3 -P P-
& cd B
£H -P Cd
H
03 f>j H -H ft
CD H CO -P 6
JH fl 3 cd CO
P-. O & -p 01
03
CD
-P
CO
Vi
^Q
tt) -p
•P C
in CD
CD
£ ^
M (X,
1
O
p
O
cd
s
^
CD £
,n o
B -H
P -P
£5 cd
o
a o
o ^
•H
-p ^
o3 fl
-P cd
LTN .3- mca vo
H J- on t— u-\
• • • • •
CM O\ CO CM LA
H
VO OO £— 00 H CM
H -3-
t-
-P
OX X
o
fL,
0)
cd
&
CO
(H
0)
ft
CO • • 03
B ft ft
03 03 03 • ft , 03
XbC CD-H cocd^i 03
4>
^!CD S!ft ftH -^^!H
OH >> OP Jnfto
OCM HO SHp-i EH W O
bCp cd CD -P
•H -p H 03
H O CD cd
O EH On O
-P -P
3 cd
O
S ^4 0)
CU J>
-P CD -H
CO ^~"* ^H ^H
T3 O Q
C CD
PH C cd cd
•H -P -P
£1 -P CD CD
CO S -H -H
&H O -P -P
Cd O fl fl
t— CO J-
vo t— -s-
• • •
H C\J ON
-* H
LA H t— VO
H ro
•p
x x o
o
CD
cd
a1
CO
^
CD
ft
03 03
ft * B
03 B ft • en
3 U3 ft vH
CO H ft 03 CJ
•H CD -H co en cd
S cd T3 3 X bC-
H T^ CD cd ^-t CD ^H
CD -HftCDH Cd ViO
£3 T3 ^ Cd 0 c 'H
CD CDHtip B ,Q *-i
-P ftO-H-HCd cd cdjio
TS P CO t3 O ^
cdC ft J-iO cdft CD
S-iCD -H -pft-po £>
CD EH EH W -H CD -H fi
•p O ,C cd CO 3
ft 0 ft ^| CU ^,
•H Cd E CJ H
Q rj < O P, H
erf bD cd
IS -H -p
H O
0 EH
CQ
VO
-------
20
-d
0)
c
•H
•P
C
o
o
M
-P 1 OJ
a a > o>
H
05 >>r-| -H g
cu H as .p B
5-i C 3 cd to
ex, o cy -p CQ
03
cu
+5
cd
f)
cu -p
-p a
5-t 0)
CU CQ
EH I*
M PL,
1
o
CJ
CO*
s
^
CU G
,£> O
3 -p
o
C 0
o ^
•H
•p *d
cd fl
-p a5
CQ
CO O OO O ON -^~
CM -=r -* j- -^ m
• • • • • •
m ro -cf H c— cvj
in rn CM
CM -^ VO CO \O VO CO
H CM t— -* LT\ H CO
H CO H C\J -=T
ft rt ft
H H ro
-p
X OX
o
1*.
cu
JH
ai
3
CQ
0)
eu
ft
CQ CO
6
ft B CQ ft
03 ft 3 • -H CQ
CQ H ft C!
ft a) CUs nJ
aJPnl CUM f-iEn -HcBp-iHEn «i O!PM CU
+3 -p O 'd-H^Sn -P -P
a! aJftn3ftcd(3Q ft cu n3 aift
cdc-PO-PO Vicu -H rQ a)S -po
•do «5 l»D 0 o5 -p
CQ -H -P CQ
cd o
G .H -H
•H H 5-1
'd
-------
(U Od >H
O 3 -p p.
& d
5-( -P
0 <*-,•!-! CQ
PL, O -P
-3-
LA
C\J
o\
CM
VO
21
C7\
ON
ON LPiCO
oo
ir\
t~-
w CD
j i
CO CD
•H
0) H ccS -P
5-i G 3 03
P-i O C? -P CQ
-P
O
O
0
5n
Cd
X X
-CJ
0 -P
-P G
5-, 0
0 CQ
> 0
G M
M PL,
1
O
j^
O
ni
S
•
ft
CQ
cd *cd
J_) [^
O
•4-^ O
J 5^ 5n
O £U 0 >,
TJ 5-1 -P
o3 G CD cd
5-, 0 o cd G
0 EH g Ti O
•p 3 o e
ft £5 ft H
•H O3
Q n-l 5H PL,
03 -p
-p CQ
O cS
EH O
•
p
CQ
n3
g
0
CQ
O
•H
H
0
CQ
CQ
• ft • ^
ft CQ • ft g
CO ft tfl O
c5
0
ft rG
CQ O
£>.
X w'
cd ft
ed H O
•H ft 5-1
,G 0 05 T3
o -H 5-i |>j
G J 0 r^i
•H
^
O
^
P.
•H
CQ
CO
O
H
O
w * cj
ft g
H
r—}
0
•d
o
ft
5n
S
ft CQ P
CO rH
g 0 -rH
•H -H nrf 0)
CQ 0 H -H ft
0 o3 £3 'd ^>-
bT tD g 0 H
3 -rH -H ft O
cd O H CQ -H P-i
o
5-,
•H
c~*
o
o
-p
ft
t-
O
0
5
•H
cn
0
S
K5 -P *H ^ ^ -H
5-tft cdndcfigG Q
,00 -H cS 5n -H 0
O,G cti 5-iH (U CQ EH
CQ 0 0 o3 0 -p
O -p-H G H -H ft
PL, EH 'd 0 EH O
5-, 5-,
•H 3
S EH
0 G
£> O
g -H
3 -P
o
§ Q
•H
"ed G
CQ
-p
a)
cd 0
O 3
K G
-H
5-, -P
CJ bD O
5^ O
3 ,0
+J G CD
CO 0) bG
•H
-------
22
P I 01
G G > CD
H
W ^ H -H ft
CD H d P 6
o\ on en LA
t— CM CU -d-
• • * •
H H rH 0\
H
H VD -=r -=1- on
tr\ VD
p
x x o x x
o
PH O G" P CO j
^
H 0) P
P G
W £H CD
(-3 CD W
cq > CD
< fi rH
EH M OH
1
O
0
d
S
rH
O G
r£! O
0 »H
Pi P
f^ d
0
G O
O rJ
•H
P ^
d G
p d
GO
£
GO
rH
CD
P-,
W • •
ft S • ft ft
ft W CO ft W W
ft W -H P< W ft
W g (5 !fl W W CO
a3 p> d w p! -H
X rHCD-HbC wpi dGB
CD pidrHrH pirH -HCDH
CJ-H ^J fQ Q) Q r— j d W XI CD
•H x!-Hd Hg 0)p.G
xi da-HXl^ CUB bccDci)
dpi rHW ?Hp.o d w d pidwp
rnH (DM COCO O iO 3 Oftx! do CD
X!CD ODO ft S OO pnrH-HrH
OPnO O Hr-)rH
P rH O d
q d u CD
< S,*-* PQ
VD CVI
on VD
• •
rH 0
^j"
J- CM
on
H
XX X
•
p
CQ
• •
ft ft • en
CQ • W ft 0)
ft w tj
X w d O
d : S d d d
0 -H X! ft rH -H X!
G i-P d P-, i-3 1 CD CO O
dp P
rH d ft
o3 Xi G O
-------
23
G
•H
•P
a
o
H
H
-P 1 o>
CD cd -H H
O 3 -p ft
a= cd e
f-l -P Cu
CD H
to S H -H ft
CD H cd -p g
Lt G P cd cu
AH O & -P 00
CO
CD
-P
cd
fi
CD -p
-P G
?H CD
CD 03
> CD
G f-i
M F_
1
O
JH
O
cd
S
LT\ l!~\ H H H
ON co on on on
• • • • •
03 H O O O
ON VQ H H H
CM
XXX X X X
.
cd ft
•p w
ft ft CD cd
• • to to G -r-t
ft ft -H ,O
CO tQ • CD • • CQ H CD ft
ftfl ft ft CD -H • H 03
cocDtao catotSrQftfl
S fl >a O CQ ft cd
i — 1 o cd co c\3 cd *~j cd O «H
•H t*i -H ft -H E -P -H Cd -p ?H CD
fltOT^O flCD^G^nft P CC
ftftrHO OGin'CUCDCD CD TJ
CDOajOcdi^OObOgH G •!-
G JH g *H J-tGGOcdCDcd O ^
cd g T^. ^ i — i CD O CD *H X fl £H cd ?-< d
?H-H!>,OCD-PM-P$HCDP.Cd£-cO P
CD J f~r; ^ ,T^ pi j — | c/3 ^-( ^-rj ^r"] p j CD , -H ,a
CD rH ^O S(-j g
^ g O cd ^5 O cd 3
cd ji-i ^H EH o o cd
•H o ^H cd cd Ti
Q cd ft -P
cd 3
0) O
a S
cd
-P
0)
•H
-P
CD
H .X
-P CD
-P 0)
•H k
J O
O
H
-------
-P I CU
a a > ,
CU H
^ G
P-i O
>• H
r
-P CQ
X X
•d
0)
3
G
•H
-P
G
O
O
H
H
pq
IS
CQ
cu
-p
cd
£-{
x*
CU -P
-P G
CU CQ
> CU
d £H
H PH
|
O
J^
0
cd
S
•
ft
CQ
x
a
cd H
•H ft
r* O
a -H
cd
^-i
cd X*
tl O
O CQ
ft 0
O SH
fc P-i
-P
CQ
ft
W
•
cu
• fj
ft • CJ
CQ ft £>a
CQ CQ
cd
•H
CQ
CQ
•H
£^
£-4
CU
cd CCH
P
CO ft O
2 CQ .p
H d
cd CQ! p
V-| £>J cd cu
>3 Xll JH X!
O PH CU 0
ft
CQ
•
CU
c*{
0
^3
CQ'
p
0
•d
K*l
w'
ft
CQ
cd
a
0
CQ
CQ
O
H
Cj3
-p -p
cd ft
G 0
O X«
6 o
H -H
^ £-)
P-i H
•
ft
CQ
01
cd -H
Jn -P
CU CU
-p cd
ft ff!
O
JL|
OJ
a
cu
X!
ft
.
ft
CO
• CD
ft cu
CQ *d
o
cd
e
cu
G
0
G
cu
-p
CQ
XI
-p
r*:
£_('
o
o
•H
f-i
*
ft
ft to
CQ ft
cd
CQ a
£3 o£3
-P cd
CU H
H H
cu cd cd
a ^ a
•5 cu a
CQ
ft
CQ cd
r*
cdl xl
•H Cd 0
M !M CQ
?H CU CU
< -p «j;
-P 'ft
cd ft O
-P O CQ
cd bC -H
G >5 G
ON <
O
•
ft
CQ
ft
cd
•H
^
|j
cu
G
O
cd o
^ *^
CQ
g
p
•H
CU H
Cd p!
TJ a
•H -H
H CQ
cu pi
-p cd a
ft V< -H
o cu co
0 -P
0) ft
H -H
P-i Q
•
ft
*
ft
CQ
CU X
cd cu
•d H
•H 3
0 0
•H
H
o
CQ
cd
Q) O
cd o
•H G
H
-------
CD
P
a
•H
-P
a
o
o
H
pq
-P 1 CU
a a > CD
0) CO -H H
O P -P ft
o? cd e
Lt -P CD
CD SH -rl ro
PH O -P
6
CQ H
CQ f>, H -H ft
•p
cd
fn
,0
CD -p
-P a
5n CD
CD CQ
*> 01
C S-i
M PH
1
O
?H
O
cd
S
C,
n
CD C!
£> O
§*H
-p
& cd
o
a o
0 hJ
•H
-P T3
cd c
-p cd
co
LA _d- LAVO t—
LA m MD -=r vo
• • • • •
O O H VO VO
H
CO LA -3- O CO H
oj -3- ir\
C\J -^
r.
rH
-P
O X XXX
O
fe
0)
£H
cd
a1
00
?H
Q)
P-,
•
ft • • CQ •
to ft ft S ft ft
CQ CQ CQ CQ CQ ft
ft CQ -H CQ p
CQQJCQIQC! gCQ • CO
'd P •<-{ Cd p -H ft CQ
cd O A d W. 0 -H 6 CQ P X
•H-H CDr-ISn Cdf-iH H Cd
cQrH^jcDO TJCU CD cd P cd i-(
ai p ftd -Hcd a coed-HP
Kcdcd (DCDV) -H^ CD ^JSn.aO
PMj^cdcQ^ O JnftCd-P ^jl^O-H
cdQCDO5-iP-,CQ CDCQlrHCQ C3 PnlOl G (^
•HnpCD JH cdCD H^> cd
cd'Cift-P CD J3-P Cd SH
•HcdOft ^cdftftcdG J3
JnHHO E'dCQO'OO O
cdcJcOfD PO CDOfi to
H-HtjCH Sft HftH O
rHjHCDO >> OOP JH
CDHSO rHO U^ipH PH
£> cd CD -p
fn -p rH CQ
P o a> cd
H EH PH C5
^— v 13
T) cd
SO) CD
m H *** he
tu ,_* ^ uj^
4^ d CD ti
0) -H O -H
•H -p JH 5n
-PC! o pq
q o
-H G
-P CD -P rH
•H ^ q P
i-3 u <: pq
t- t—
vo vo
VD VO
H H
X X
,
ft
CQ •
ft
cd CQ
ft -H
i CQ c! cd ft
OH w
CQ ,Ci H
P ft CD X
5n -H 'd CD
Cd CQ ^O VJ
E CQ O -rl
SOP ^3
cd cd H SH cd P
O cd O O W fn E-i
cd T3 O
5n O cd ft
•P ft -P O
CQ -H Cd 0) -H
O .cl CD cd CQ
0 ft a d CD
cd E -H OH
H
-------
26
CU
a
•H
-p
a
o
o
M
-p
H
O M
g -P
3 ,d fl 0
a o -H o
a
M 1 (U CU
•H > H
;>> H -H ft
H OS -P g
G pi cd co
O Of -P CO
to
•p
cd
5-H
o
:
bCcd'T! cdocd CUM
3^H^>. SnCOC! ftO
cddcusi CUMW -HP-,
.H -p -P •n
cd tJ ft cd ft cd fl
•rH Cd O -P O ^H CU
J-t , — 1 rCj cd bD CU E~t
cd o o C >j -p
H -H -H O Cxi ft
i — 1 £H ^H ^ *H
j
cd o [
•H
CO
CO
•H
?H
fn
CU
•
ft
03
cd
CO
K**
r}'
p
-P
cd
a
0
0
H
?!
PH
cu a
'i -°
I -P
ZZ cd
o
a o
o
•rt
-P
cd C
-p cd
CQ
cu
A; to
cu tJ
CU -rl
FQ Ti
S
-------
27
0>
p
•H
-P
G
o
o
H
H
pq
-P 1 CD
CD CO -H H
U 3 -P p.
a? cd E
£H -P 3
CD rH
CO >j H -rl P
CD H cd -p B
?n G P cd CO
PL, O <3° -P 03
W
0)
•P
cd
Jn
o
CD -P
-P G
*n CD
CD CO
> CD
G ?H
M PL,
1
O
(H
O
Cd
^
5^,
CD G
rP O
B -H
^3 -p
w a
G 0
O I-H1
•H
-p ti
CO
ITN CM ON H CM -d- _^-
O rH -H- t— -H/ rH H
• • • » • • •
CO H -=)• H O O O
CM VO
OCOCM OOOrHHOO
0 ro -H- H
CM -=f t—
+J
O
CD
cd
a<
ft CD
W • PL,
• Pi p, • •
•PiCDCQ- COPip- M
Pi W • CD P4 CO CD g
co CDftticfl Pi'B • w
6,GMO wp,pcdcd p. -r<
EpO rGo3 WHHH co CDG
PEi^M-P-H B CD-HHrH dcd
CD-H CDCQ pS^^d p wajnd (UCL) cd TJbO
cdjn dft-p^O -H P^CD «T3 *& -H *H^t
til) OO£OCDO>5 CDrHCDG-HP £> £> W MO
•H cd £n rH ?H , — ! O G cd p cd cd Tj ^ O O CD p^
•H^CdOT^CDCD'HO ^J^T^rQCD r—f rH CL b£ U Vi
>HPJHC3>J-PEJHW -H-H-HCdPiO jfHP( -H -HrH^OrH
0 EH W Q ^J CUEHOpLirH
CD p^ ,P bD cd
H ^ in -H -p
CD -H P rH O
PL, M EH 0 EH
•p 3
cd -P
^ -H
CD -P
CD G
JH
-------
MARYLAND
H
A B C 0
2 I
0J
A B C D
V1P"?^Ol \
/ .......2 ;c
r-J ' VL^.-
LOCATION MAP
a
ID
A S C D
QUANTITATIVE SAMPLE TA KE N AND NO '
_J 1_ OF ORGAM'SMG FOJWD PFW S Q (- r '
BOTTOM ORGANISMS
e, c, a o
SO FT SAMPL £
ANTIETAM CREEK SUB-BASIN
POTOMAC RIVER DRAINAGE BASIN :
BIOLOGICAL SURVEY |
ANTIETAM CR. a TRIBUTARIES |
(WAYNESBORO, PA. - ANTIETAM, MD.) \
U. S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR |
FEDERAL WATER POLLUTION CONTROL ADMINISTRATION \
REGIONAL OFFICE CHARLOTTESVILLE, VA !
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section Page
I. INTRODUCTION 1
II. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS 3
III. DATA EVALUATION AND INTERPRETATION 5
LIST OF TABLES
Table
I Bottom Organism Data of the Monocacy River
and Tributaries 1?
II Tabulation of Bottom Organisms - Monocacy River
and Tributaries 21
LIST OF FIGURES
Follows
Figure Page
1 Map of Study Area and Profile of Biological
Conditions - Monocacy River and Tributaries ... v^-
-------
I. INTRODUCTION
A biological survey of the Monocacy River and certain tribu-
taries between Gettysburg, Pennsylvania, and the Maryland Route 28 Bridge
was conducted in July 1966 „ The survey was made to determine the bio-
logical condition of the stream from its headwaters in Pennsylvania to
its mouth downstream from the Maryland Route 28 Bridge near Tuscarora,
Maryland.
For purposes of the study, the community of bottom (benthic)
organisms was selected as the indicator of the biological condition of
the stream. Bottom organisms serve as the preferred food source for
the higher aquatic forms and exhibit similar reactions to adverse stream
conditions. The combination of limited locomotion and life cycles of
one year or more, for most benthic species, provide a long term picture
of the water quality of a stream. Fish and algal populations were given
some consideration, but only to the extent that obvious conclusions
could be drawn based upon casual observations„
In unpolluted streams a wide variety of sensitive clean-water
associated bottom organisms is normally found. Typical groups are stone-
flies, mayflies, and caddisflies. These sensitive organisms usually are
not individually abundant because of natural predation and competition
for food and space; however, the total count or number of organisms at
a given station may be high because of the number of different var-
ieties present.
Sensitive genera (kinds) tend to be eliminated by adverse environ-
mental conditions, chemical, physical, and biological, resulting from
wastes reaching the stream. In waters enriched with organic wastes,
-------
comparatively fewer kinds are normally found, but great numbers of these
genera may be present. Organic pollution-tolerant forms such as sludge-
worms, rattailed maggots, certain species of bloodworms such as red
midges, certain leeches, and sane species of air-breathing snails
may multiply and become abundant because of a favorable habitat and
food supply. These organic pollution-tolerant bottom organisms may
also exist in the natural environment but are generally found in small
numbers„ The abundance of these forms in streams heavily polluted with
organics is due to their physiological and sacrpfeologi&al abilities to
survive environmental conditions more adverse than conditions that may
be tolerated by other organisms,, When inert- silts or organic sludges
blanket the stream bottom, the natural home of bottom organisms is de-
stroyed^ causing a reduction in the number of kinds of organisms present,
In addition to sensitive and pelletion-tolerant forms, some
bottom organisms m&y be termed iaternedi&tesf in that they are capable
of living in fairly heavily polluted areas as well as in clean-water
situations. These organisms oecurririg in limited numbers therefore
cannot serve as effective indicators of water quality„
Streams grossly polluted -with toxic wastes such as mine drain-
age will support little if any biological life, and will reduce the
population of both sensitive and pollution-tolerant organisms.
Classification of organisms in this report is considered in
three categories (clean-water associated, intermediate, and pollution-
tolerant) which provide sufficient biological information to supple-
ment physical and chemical water quality lata for a basin-wide analysis,,
Detailed identification and counts of specific organisms have been
tabulated and are attached0
-------
II. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
1. A biological survey of the Monocacy River and key tribu-
taries from Gettysburg, Pennsylvania, to the Maryland Route 28 Bridge
was conducted in July 1966. Investigations were made at twelve
stations on the Monocacy and at fourteen stations on the tributaries,
2. Bottom organisms were selected as the primary indicator of
biological water quality.
3. Rock Creek which joins Marsh Creek to form the Monocacy
River was found to be polluted downstream from Gettysburg, Pennsylvania,
but quickly recovered.
4. The Monocacy River was found to furnish unpolluted water
quality from Harney, Maryland, to the Gas House Pike Road upstream
from Frederick, Maryland.
5. Organic pollution was found to exist from the Frederick
Sewage Treatment Plant outfall to the Route 40 West Bridge.
6. Good water quality was contributed to the Monocacy River
by Tom's Creek, Double Pipe Creek, and Hunting Greek. These streams
are listed in descending order.
7. Poor quality water was contributed to Tom's Creek by
Flat Run«
8. Poor quality water was contributed to the Monocacy River
by Glade Creek and Carroll Creek.
9. Good quality water was found in the Monocacy River from
the Maryland Route 355 Bridge to the Maryland Route 28 Bridge.
-------
10. Bennett Creek contributed good quality water to the
Monocacy River in this reach.
11. The Monocacy River contributed good quality water to the
Potomac River at River Mile 153.5.
-------
III. DATA EVALUATION AND INTERPRETATION
Rock Creek and Marsh Creek join at River Mile 52.5 at the
Pennsylvania^faryland State Line to form the Monocacy River. Rock
Creek originates in agricultural land north of Gettysburg, Pennsyl-
vania, and flows around Gettysburg, where it picks up a pollutional
load "but quickly recovers.
Numerous tributaries enter the Monocacy River on its journey
to join the Potomac River at River Mile 153.5, Some contribute high
quality water while others contribute a pollutional load. The point
of greatest degradation was found downstream from Frederick, Maryland.
Recovery, however, occurred long before the Monocacy reached the
Potomac River*
Sampling stations were located after consideration of the
following conditions:
1. Effects of tributaries
2. Areas having a known water quality problem
3. Physical capability for sampling
Bottom organisms are animals that lj£f® directly in association
with the bottom of a waterway. They may crawl, or burrow in, or attach
themselves to the bottom. Macroorganisms are usually defined as those
organisms that will be retained by a No. 30 sieve. In essence, the
organisms retained by the sieve are those that are visible to the
unaided eye.
Each station was sampled once, and the kinds of macro bottom
organisms were observed for the purpose of evaluating water quality.
-------
Quantitative bottom samples were also taken, using a Surber Square
Foot Sampler or a Petersen Dredge (0.6 sq. ft.) and the number of organ-
isms per square foot was counted or calculated.
Quantitative samples were not taken at stations in noncritical
areas or where organisms were sparsely distributed.
Discussions of stations proceed downstream unless otherwise
noted,
Station #1 - Rock Creek (joins Marsh Greek to form the Monocaey River)
at the U0 S, 15 Business Route Bridge upstream from
Gettysburg, Pennsylvania
The water was clear and minnows were observed, A total of
fourteen genera of bottom organisms was found which included such clean-
water forms as mayflies (4) and mussels of the family ffnionidae (pearl
button clams) referred to herein as Sndo mussels. Good water quality
was indicated based on the bottom organisms. However, high nitrogen
and phosphorus was indicated by the heavy growth of filamentous algae,
This station was located in an intensive agricultural area.
Station #2 - This station was located on Rock Creek downstream from
Gettysburg^ Pennsylvania, at the lh S. 15 Bypass Bridge
This station was located approximately one and one-half to
two miles downstream from the Gettysburg Sewage- Treatment Plant, The
water was clear and some minnows were observed. However, only nine
kinda of bottom organisms were found versus fourteen at the upstream
station* Six kinds -w^re organic pollution fozms and the other three
were intermediate genera. Out of 2,651 bottom organisms in the square
foot sample 1, 602 were sludge-worms and 762 were bloodworms
-------
(Chironomus sp0), a pollution-tolerant midge larva„ In addition, there
were 42 air-breathing snails (2 genera) and ten leeches (2 genera). All
were organic pollution forms. The balance was made up of 235 scuds,
an intermediate form. Organic pollution was indicated at this station.
Station #3 - The Monocacy River at the Barney Bridge near Harney,
Maryland
Rock Creek joins Marsh Creek in the vicinity of the Maryland
border to form the Monocacy River„ The first station sampled on the
Monocacy was at the Harney Bridge immediately south of the Pennsylvania
State Line, The stream was very clear and minnows and green sunfish
were abundant at this station. Improved biological conditions can
probably be attributed to Marsh Greek. Sixteen genera cf bottom organ-
isms were found which included such clean-water forms as mayflies
(2 kinds), a Unio. mussel,, caddis flies (2 kinds), and riffle beetles,
Out of 392 organisms in the square foot sample there were 101 caddisfly
larvae, 65 riffle beetles (2 genera), and 18 mayflies (2 genera)„
While recovery from the upstream conditions was indicated, heavy
nitrogen and phosphorus was 8'oggested by the heavy growths of fila-
mentous algae and submerged aquatic weeds„
Station #4 - Monocaey River at the Maryland Rout© 97 Bridge at
Bridgeport,, Maryland
Although the water was slightly turbid, a go&d bottom organism
population was present which consisted of thirteen genera„ They in-
cluded such clean-water forms as mayflies,, caddlsflies, riffle beetles,
and Unio mussels (3 genera). Minnows were numerals throughout the
area. Good water quality was indicated at this location.
-------
8
Station #5 - Tom's Creek (tributary to Monocacy River) at the bridge
on Creamery Road one mile south of Emmitsburg, Maryland
The water was very clear and minnows were very numerous.
Eight genera of bottom organisms were found which included such clean-
water organisms as mayflies (2 kinds), caddisflies, and riffle beetles.
Mayflies and caddisflies were abundant. Good quality was indicated
at this location.
Station #6 - Flat Run (tributary to Tom's Creek which is a tributary
to the Mcnocacy River) was sampled at Route 806 north
of Emmitsburgj Maryland
The water was clear and numerous minnows were observed.
Only three genera of bottom organisms were found; however, mayflies
were very numerous» Good water quality was indicated.
Station #7 - Flat Run at U. S, Route 15 Bridge near Emmitsburg,
Maryland
The water had a greenish cast and bottom organisms were very
sparse. Only three genera (kinds) of bottom organisms were found
which consisted of a midge larva, beetle larvae,, and the larva of
the smoky alderfly. Two of these are intermediate forms and the
third is tolerant of pollution» Degraded biological conditions are
indicated at this station.
Station #8 - Tom's CreeK. at the bridge at the junction of Four Points
Road and Keysville Road near Emmitsburg,, Maryland
The stream remained clear and minnows were still numerous.
There were nine different genera of bottom organisms at this station;
however, mayflies and caddisflies jxguld not be jjgund,. The only
clean-water forms found were two kinds of riffle beetles and a gill-
breathing snail. Leeches (2 kinds)s a pollution-tolerant form, were
-------
the dominant bottom organisms present. An air-breathing snail, another
pollution-tolerant form, was present. The balance was made up of three
intermediate forms. A mild organic pollution is suggested at this
station. The sewage treatment plant upstream is the suspected source.
Station #9 - Tom's Creek (tributary to the Monocacy River) at Sixes
Road Bridge near Keysville, Maryland
The bottom was mostly bedrock and the water was extremely
clear. Minnows were numerous throughout the area, A total of twelve
different genera of bottom organisms were found. Clean-water repre-
sentatives included mayflies, caddisflies, riffle beetles, a Unio
mussel, and a gill-breathing snail. Mayflies and fingernail clams
were abundant. Other forms included smoky alderfly larvae, scuds,
flatworms, mosquito larvae, and two genera of air-breathing snails.
In addition, darters, a snail fish related to yellow perch and wall-
eyes, were sampled. Good quality water was contributed by Tom's Creek
to the Monocaey River,
Station #10 - Monocacy River at the Mumma Ford Bridge
The stream was clear and minnows and smallmouth bass were
numerous. A total of fourteen different kinds of bottom organisms
were found which included such clean-water representatives as mayflies,
caddisflies (2 genera) riffle beetles (2 genera), Unjo mussels
(3 genera), and a gill-breathing snail. Good water quality was
indicated.
-------
10
Station #11 - Big Pipe Creek (joins Little Pipe Creek to form Double
Pipe Creek) sampled at Maryland Route 194 Bridge at
Bruceville, Maryland
The water was slightly turbid. Eight different genera of bottom
organisms were found including such clean-water forms as mayflies
(2 genera), caddisflies (3 genera), riffle beetles, and a gill-breathing
snail. The other organism was an air-breathing snail, Mayflies,
caddisflies, and the gill-breathing snail were abundant. Good water
quality was contributed to Double Pipe Creek.
Station #12 - Little Pipe Creek (joins Big Pipe Creek to form Double
Pipe Creek) was sampled at Maryland 194 Bridge near
Keymar, Maryland
The water was somewhat turbid, but minnows and black bullheads
were observed. A total of twelve genera of bottom organisms were
found including such clean-water forms as mayflies (2 genera), caddis-
flies (2 genera), riffle beetles, and a gill-breathing snail. Good
water quality was contributed to Double Pipe Creek„
Station #13 - Monocacy River at the LeGore Bridge Road near Rocky
Eidge, Maryland
The stream was slightly turbid, but minnows were observed
throughout the area0 Twenty-seven genera of bottom organisms were
found. Excellent water quality was indicated by such clean-water
organisms as stoneflies, mayflies (4 genera), caddisflies (3 genera),
riffle beetles (2 genera), hellgrammites, gill-breathing snails
(3 genera), and a Unio mussel. Out of 458 bottom organisms in the
square foot sample there were 145 caddisflies, 63 riffle beetles,
52 mayflies, and 98 gill-breathing snails„ Seventy-eight percent of
the organisms in the square foot sample were clean-water forms.
-------
11
Station #14 - Hunting Creek (tributary to the Monocacy River) at
Hessong Bridge near Jimtown, Maryland
The water was somewhat turbid and a light fish-kill had
occurred in the area about twenty-four hours earlier. A dead rainbow
trout, a smallmouth bass, a rock bass, and a white sucker were found.
In addition, a large white sucker was found which was still alive.
It would appear that a light pollutant slug had passed through the
area recently. This station was downstream from the Thunnont Sewage
Treatment Plant, Ten genera of bottom organisms were found which
included such clean-water forms as mayflies (2 genera), caddisflies
(2 genera), and riffle beetles. Basically good water quality was
present.
Station #15 - Hunting Creek (tributary to the Monocacy River) was
sampled at the Old Frederick Road south of Creagers-
town, Maryland
The water was clear and numerous minnows were observed. Im-
proved biological conditions were indicated by the thirteen genera
of bottom organisms versus ten upstream. They included such clean-
water forms as mayflies (2 genera), caddisflies (2 genera), riffle
beetles, and gill-breathing snails (2 genera). Good water quality was
contributed to the Monocacy River.
Station #16 - Monocacy River at Devilbiss Bridge near Hansonville,
Maryland
The water was extremely clear and minnows were observed through-
out the area. A total of twenty-four genera of bottom organisms were
found indicating excellent water quality. They included such clean-
water representatives as stoneflies, mayflies (5 genera), caddisflies
-------
12
(4 genera), and gill-breathing snails (2 genera). Out of 2,426 bottom
organisms in the square foot sample there were 464. mayflies, 384 riffle
beetles, 176 caddisflies, 8 gill-breathing snails, I hellgrammite, and
1 Uflio mussel. Clean-water organisms made up approximately 43 percent
of the quantitative sample,
Station #17 - Glade Creek (tributary to the Monoeacy River) at Retreat
Road
The water was clear, but silt was heavy in some sections. Sub-
merged aquatic plants were very profuse„ Only two kinds of bottom
organisms were present. They consisted of flatworms and bristleworms.
The former is an intermediate and the latter is a pollution-tolerant
form,, Flatworms were extremely abundant, Poor water quality was
indicated at this location,
Station #18 - Monoeacy River at Ceresville Bridge at Jferyland Route 26
Minnows were abundant and the stream was clear. Excellent
water quality was indicated by twenty-two genera of bottom organisms
which included clean-water mayflies (4 genera), caddisflies (3 genera),
riffle beetles (2 genera), helXgrammites, gill-breathing snails
(2 genera), and Unlo mussels. Of 409 bottom organisms in the square
foot sample, there were 258 caddisflies? 59 mayflies,, 15 riffle beetles,
and 48 gill-breathing snails. Excellent water quality was shown by
the fact that 93 percent of the quantitative sample were clean-water
forms.
-------
Station #19 - Monocacy River at the Gas House Pike Road upstream
from Frederick, Maryland
The water was turbid and deep due to a coffer dam constructed
for a new bridge downstream. Only eleven genera of bottom organisms
were found versus twenty-two upstream. However, they included such
clean-water forms as stoneflies, mayflies (2 genera), riffle beetles,
and gill-breathing snails (2 genera),, The drop in number of kinds
could partially be attributed to impounded conditions and poor
sampling habitat. Good water quality was still indicated although
some degradation from the upstream station would be indicated.
Station #20 - Carroll Creek (tributary to Monocacy Creek) was sampled
at the bridge upstream from the Frederick Sewage
Treatment Plant
The water was clear, but vegetation was sparse. Only five
genera of bottom organisms were found which consisted of bristleworms
(2 genera), bloodworms, and intermediate midge larvae, and an air-
breathing snail. Out of 1,017 bottom organisms in the square foot
sample there were 778 sludgeworms, 1 other bristleworm, 140 bloodworms,
and 98 intermediate midge larvae. Moderately heavy organic pollution
was indicated at this station.
Station #21 - Monocacy River immediately upstream from Linganore
Creek near Hughes Ford
The water was extremely black and the sewage odor was pro-
nounced. Only eleven kinds of bottom organisms were found. They con-
sisted of seven pollution-tolerant and four intermediate forms. There
were 2,109 bottom organisms in the square foot sample which was made
up of 960 sludgeworms, 805 intermediate midges, 123 bloodworms,
-------
14
109 leeches, and 112 bristleworms. All except the intermediate midge
sire very tolerant of organic pollution. In addition, a few carp were
observed in the area. Heavy organic pollution was indicated at
this station.
Station #22 - Monocacy River at the Route 40 West Bridge downstream
from Frederick, Maryland
Aquatic vegetation was heavy and the water was much clearer.
Numerous sunfish and minnows were present. Improved biological condi-
tions were present as indicated by the fifteen different genera of
bottom organisms present versus eleven at the upstream station. The
dominant bottom organisms were leeches, air-breathing snails, sludge-
worms, and bloodworms. However, a few clean-water organisms such as
mayflies (2 genera) were found. These were present in limited numbers.
The stream showed signs of recovery at this station, however recovery
had not yet occurred.
Station #23 - Monocacy River at the Maryland Route 355 Bridge near
Monocaey Park, Jfaryland
The water was very clear and the aquatic vegetation was quite
heavy. Minnows were observed throughout the area. Fifteen genera of
bottom organisms were present including such clean-water forms as
mayflies (2 genera), caddisflies (2 genera), and gill-breathing snails.
Out of 1,552 bottom organisms in the square foot sample, 848 were inter-
mediate midge larvae. The balance was made up of 248 blackfly larvae,
216 caddisfly larvae, 168 leeches, 40 flatworms, 24 mayflies, and 8 air-
breathing snails. Several fishermen and fish were also observed in the
area. Recovery was indicated at this station.
-------
15
Station #2^ - Monocacy River at the Maryland Route 80 Bridge near
Buckeystown, Maryland
The water was very clear and fish and fishermen were observed
at this station. Seventeen genera of bottom organisms were found at
this station. Excellent water quality was indicated by such clean-
water organisms as mayflies (k genera), caddisflies (5 genera), and
riffle beetles. Mayflies and caddisflies were abundant. Other bottom
organisms sampled consisted of damselflies (2 genera), flatworms,
midge larvae, scuds, fingernail clams, and an air-breathing snail.
High water quality was indicated by the dominance of clean-water forms
and the large diversification of bottom organisms.
Station #25 - Bennett Creek (tributary to the Monocacy River) at the
Mt. Ephraim Road Bridge near Park Mills, Maryland
The water was clear but vegetation was relatively sparse at
this station. Fourteen genera of bottom organisms were found here.
Excellent water quality was indicated by such clean-water organisms
as mayflies (2 genera), caddisflies, fishflies, and gill-breathing
snails. Mayflies and caddisflies were abundant. Good quality water
was contributed to the Monocacy River by Bennett Creek.
Station #26 - Monocacy River at the Maryland Route 28 Bridge near
Furnace Ford, Maryland
The water was very clear and aquatic vegetation was sparse.
Excellent water quality was indicated by the twenty genera of bottom
organisms which were found at this station. Clean-water represen-
tatives included stoneflies (2 genera), mayflies (5 genera), caddis-
flies (2 genera), riffle beetles and hellgrammites. Out of 605 bottom
-------
16
organisms in the square foot sample, there were 153 riffle beetles,
1^9 mayflies, ikQ intermediate midge larvae, 9^ caddisfly larvae,
60 flatworms (intermediate), eight fly larvae (pollution-tolerant),
and one bristleworm (pollution-tolerant). Excellent water quality
was contributed to the Potomac River.
-------
TABLE I
17
BOTTOM ORGANISMS DATA OF THE
MDNOCACY RIVER AND TRIBUTARIES
Station
Number
Location
Bottom Organisms
No. of No, Per
Kinds Sq. Ft.
Dominant
Forms
Indicated
Water
Quality
Rock Creek (joins Marsh
Creek to form the Mon-
©eaey River)sampled at
the U.S. 15 Business
Route Bridge -upstream
from Gettysburg, Pa.
Rock Creek downstream
from Gettysburg, Pa.
at the U.S. 15 Bypass
Bridge
Monocacy River at the
Barney Bridge near
Barney, Md0
Monocacy River at the
Md0 Rt. 97 Bridge at
Bridgeport, Md0
Tom's Creek (tributary
to the Monocaey River)
at the bridge on
Creamery Road one mile
south of Emmitsburg, MdD
Flat Run (tributary to
Tom's Creek which is a
tributary to the Monoe-
aey River) was sampled
at Route 806 north of
Emmitsburg, Md0
Flat Run at the U.S.
Route 15 Bridge near
Emmitsburg, Md,
Tom's Creek at the
bridge at the junction
of Four Points Road and
Keysville Road near
Emmitsburg, Md.
Not
taken
Mayflies
Unio mussels
Good
2,651
16
13
392
Not
taken
Not
taken
Not
taken
Sludgeworms
Bloodworms
Caddisflies
Riffle beetles
Mayflies
Mayflies
Caddis flies
Riffle beetles
Mayflies
Caddisflies
Riffle beetles
Mayflies
Polluted
Good
Good
Good
Good
Not
taken
Not
taken
Midge larvae
Beetle larvae
Smoky alderfly
Leeches
Mild
pollution
Mild
pollution
-------
18
TABLE I (Continued)
Station
Number
9
10
11
Bottom
No. of
Location Kinds
Tom's Creek at Sixes 12
Road Bridge near
Keysville, Md,
Monocacy River at the ih
Mumsia Ford Bridge
Big Pipe Creek (joins 8
Little Pipe Creek to
form Double Pipe Creek)
sampled at Md. Eoute 19^
Bridge at Bruce ville, Md.
Organisms
No . Per
Sq. Ft.
Not
taken
Not
taken
Not
taken
Dominant
Forms
Mayflies
Caddisf'lies
Riffle beetles
Mayflies
Caddisflies
Riffle beetles
Mayflies
Caddisflies
Gill-breathing
snails
Indicated
Water
Quality
Good
Good
Good
12 Little Pipe Creek (joins 12 Not
Big Pipe Creek to form taken
Double Pipe Creek) was
sampled at Md. Route
194 Bridge near Keymar, Mda
13 Monoeacy River at the 27
LeGore Bridge Road
near Rocky Kidge, Md.
14 Hunting Creek (tribxtrary 10 Not
to the Monocacy River) taken
at the Hessong Bridge
near Jimtown, Md»
15 Hunting Creek (tributary 13 Not
to the Monocacy River) taken
was sampled at the Old
Frederick Poad south of
Creagerstown, Md,
16 Monocacy River at Devil- 2k 2,426
biss Bridge near Hanson-
ville, Md.
17 Glade Creek (tributary to 2 Not
the Monocacy River) at taken
Retreat Road
Mayflies Good
Caddisflies
Kiffle beetles
Gill-breathing
snails
Caddisflies Excellent
Riffle beetles
Mayflies
Gill-breathing
snails
Mayflies
•'ail-iisflies
Piffle beetles
Mayflies
Cadaisflies
Biffie beetles
Gill-"breathing
snails
Mayflies
Riffle beetles
Caddisflies
Flatworms
Bristleworms
Good
Good
Excellent
Mild
pollution
-------
19
TABLE I (Continued)
Station
Number
Bottom
Location
No. of
Kinds
No.
Sq.
Per
Ft.
Dominant
Forms
Indicated
Water
Quality
18 Monocacy River at 22 409
Ceresville Bridge
at Maryland Route 26
19 Monocacy River at the 11 Not
Gas House Pike Road taken
upstream from Fred-
erick, Md.
20 Carroll Creek (tribu- 5 1,017
tary to Monocacy Creek)
was sampled at the
bridge upstream from
the Frederick Sewage
Treatment Plant
21 Monocacy River immedi-
ately upstream from
Linganore Creek near
Hughes Ford
Caddisflies
Mayflies
Gill-breathing
snails
Mayflies
Riffle beetles
Gill-breathing
snails
Stoneflies
Sludgeworms
Bloodworms
Midge larvae
Excellent
Good
11 2,109
22 Monocacy River at the 15 Not
Route 40 West Bridge taken
downstream from
Frederick, Md.
Sludgeworms
Midge larvae
Bloodworms
Leeches
Bristleworms
Leeches
Air-breathing
snails
Sludgeworms
Moderately
heavy
pollution
Heavy
organic
pollution
Mild
pollution
23 Monocacy River at the 15 1,552
Md. Route 355 Bridge
near Monocacy Park, Md.
24 Monocacy River at the 17 Not
Md. Route 80 Bridge taken
near Buckeystown, Md.
Midge larvae Good
Blackfly larvae
Caddisfly larvae
Leeches
Mayflies Good
Caddisflies
-------
20
Station
Number
25
TABLE I (Continued)
vBofc'tQiB QnsT&niSTO^
Location
Bennett Creek (tribu-
tary to the Monocaey
No. of
Kinds
14
No. Per
So. Ft.
Not
taken
Dominant
Forms
Mayflies
Caddis flies
Indicated
Water
Quality
Good
26
River) at the Mt.
Ephraim Road Bridge
near Park Mills, Md.
Monocaey River at the
Md. Route 28 Bridge
near Furnace Ford, M
20
Fishflies
Gill-breathing
snails
605 Riffle beetles
Mayflies
Midge larvae
Caddis flies
Excellent
-------
21
M
pq
•P 1 01
a a >
CU CO -H CU
O 3 -P r-l
o" co ft
ri -PS
CU M-l -rl CO
PLI 0 -P CO
S
CO CU
CH -rl CU H
O (3 h ft
CO CO S
M taO 3 co
CU f-i CT1 CO
,0 O CQ
S -P
P X! £3 0
ft O -H O
co PH
W
-P C
C M 1 CU , H -rl ft
CU r-l CO -P S
CO CQ fc S3 P CO CO
S w CM o <5 -P CQ
H K
H XI -P
EH O cu d
. q r^ ^j {Q
J3 O CU CU
Mft CC CO XI iH
ftW p CU P^CQ CO'rIS+'CQCU'HCU
WpJ CU-H CO T3 CU-H fn dCPpaP COTfCO
H COrH «H X» COX3 CQ p CUdJH-p -OCUd
C0|0 "OCUCUa O tJCJ -H d MOOCU -Hft.rl
CQICO -HCOCOp CJ -rid H XJcOCOdOrH "OpjtQ
^^| t( *r*\ *-{ 'Q of] CO O CO CO CO CO O £H X CU *rH CU CU r~H CU
xil PS mft-H-ri H -H m h -H fcwcucu-pms ftoe
CO PH |C_5 CU CQ d i~^ CM CO VH Pq CU CO CU H -p |Xj CO t^ "^ *rl CM CO
CO-P COCOO -P-H-P 4^ft -O-H
t3cO "OXl-H CO CUXI ftfflftO COdQ
od oftdcucopo-pom ^cu
ftQ ft CO P dXicHr-l COCtOCU CUEH
O S PS *rl O CO d r*5 € -P
Snr-I O tJO &DOIS3J3 ft
WCMl—l S-rlSOW Q
CO CU -rt H
e> P-I wo
CQ
w
s
^ ir\ -p
O H -P
,M c5
CJ •
O -P «M
« « O
-------
22
§
•H
O
O
H
I
-P 1 O>
d d >
Vl -H 0> r-I
O d ?H ft
CO CO &
ft M 3 «0
O> !H CTCO
43 O CO
3 XI d O
H O -H O
,1 fe
4J d
d M 1 01 (L>
0> -H > r-I
CO j>> rH -H ft
0) r-I CO -P 6
h d 3 co co
PH O a? +> co
CO
-P
CD
M
,0 -P
oi d
-P h
d Pn
M
O
ft
O
iT*
VD r-I t- OO CVJ C- ,3-
CVJ H OO -4- O ITN f-
d CD co d r-I d co
VD Cvj
C- CO U\ CVJ t- IA CVJ
CO O CVJ r-I VD
CVJ vD C—
H
X X X X X X
w
d
• • CO
ft ft • -p
W CO • ft • • (3
ft W ft -ft 0)
CO CO W W ft CQ +5
r-I rH CO CO .
r—liHCO r-HCO COftdlCO
OJCUH 3fn X 3Wcoo>
'O'Or-J r-)3 0> H,T3ft
^3^3 0) r-I e CH 3cO|-H-H
OO r-I COC1J J3 -H COWl'CJrcJ
ft ' — 1 CO rH 43 CO O ft ft ^yt 0) d
ft 0* ^s 0) *H ft CO CO JlJ p^ »d 1 f^i CP
co o coo ftcuft'dca cod
0) ft+JCO O COO Od fnCU
d -H eg -H bo ja -H ft o CD H
•H x!dd>jcjwoa -P
T3 ftO<;N OOJ IH r-H ft
H <;O •r^p^co(£l o
•H H CO
W 0 C5
t~-
VD
CO*
ir\ co
<£>
CM
43
o
o
fa X
OJ
co
3
CO
OJ
ft
CO
a
to
•H ft
d co
co
bO co
O 'co
o>
CM bC
O 3 c
CD CO Q CO !
S £
H d
LTV CO
^
• ft
ft CO
CO
CO
X ft
v 3
SH d
•H X!
rf> CO O
03 ft co
s H O> M
M -H -H 4->O 4^
O> fn T3 OJ ft CO ft
ft CO CO CO O P O
s i— I r- 1 43 T-I co bO
3 rH 0 0 CO d >S
&; 0) -H o o> o isj
ft ft bOrH T(
r-I ft EH -H p^ O
4J tH O
CO
CO
CO 0>
PH bO
I T3
ffH
fTj
1 ^
CO ITV
01
01
O
O
m
cO
0>
d
•H
O ^
CO >J
O 01
o e
CM
CO
-------
23
-P 1 0)
d d t>
0> CO -r-l 01
O P -P H
Of CO ft
!H -PS
0> CH -H CO
p-i O -P CO
CO 0)
CM -H 01 H
o d h ft
co co S
!i tiO p CO
o> h CTCO
JO CO
A d o
O -H O
CO fx,
-P d
d H i o> o>
0) «H > H
M >,H -H ft
d
-P 0>
!-H CO
0) CU
> h
d CM
M
o
t .
o
co
a
VOCOVO ON U"\ CO O C-- ITN -=}•
OlfNt— t^OLTNCOCVJ lf\ CVJ
• •• ••••• • •
COH LA H Lf\ H CVJ CO CVJ CVJ
CM H H H
CVJ VD H C-- O\\O ON CVJ O CO
HO IfN LTN H -d-
H
XXX XXX
ft
W « • •
ft ft -ft
. CO CO CO • • ft W •
ft 0> ft ft to • ft
COTJOICO cow Sft • w
O x! P • co p co ft
cOJSOHftWCOpH W g
Q-p >>'H CQ-HpOJ^J-H CO p
a>?s wja sdcoo-o P x (u-H
SH ftft W HOItS-PO* H CO COf-l
COOO O0> 'H 0>j3-HOft CO COH 'OO)C
fndO ^id H dft'OoS ^3 -Hft -HCOC
0) fl> «H CO "C^ 0COCO O'O'OJ'rHH ra »d O 'H J3 ^
-p.p^i!_i!>3.r|£-iT- w ii-l aico^cocM-HOf^ o di-P oicojj
CVJ
ON
oo
-p
o
o
X fa
f-l
co
p
a1
CO
^
ft
w
a
• CO
ft -H
W d
CO
co bO
u '§ o
5 £•*
3 oQ ^H
H «H O
4 h-1
O -P -P0> T( CO CO «8 CO CO O ' h
SH ft £3^ -P d n3 *O JH 'O /d "H tl)
O) O Oft O> OO,QOftd &
S J3 HO EM ftftO fico H
0> O C00> cOOw|>s
^3-H &OH OfnOO
CltfH 0)O Oi-PinO)
W£H SO QWpnH
CO O>
Cl3 p t
f25
H
CO
-P
O
EH
CO
-------
•P 1
o> co -H r-l
W >9 H -H ft
O> r-H CO P g
5n S3 S CO CO
CM O C? P CO
^»— x
•0
pt
S
•H
P
C
O
U
H W
H
W CO
H-3 ?-*
PQ .0 -P
<5 O1 C!
E~~l *P OJ
?H W
Si 0)
> ^
S3 PLI
M
l
O
$~4
V
OS
S
^^M ^KXXX HXX^sX XX
CO
0» CO
t3 CQ
•H O
O 0
« p °H
ft a1 ?-(
CQ -HP
H £3 - 03
ft CO • ft ft -H 8) ft ft 0
ftftW -rt ft W K!S8t>Wo CQta
CQ CQ rH CQ ft 3
CO S • ftCQ CDgWWCOCQ cC«H|
CQCOS T3ftcO£Qj3 COp-H'HC! 0
3 HcOCP h W^ C *O-rl(l),— IHOOJ (01) <0
M HJnri JOO & CQ CU -H^cO-H-HtsO-H is$3 ^
X> i-i P £S O> O fn "HJJ3 JnHCOft fHCO-HftftSp PS3 CO
3 CO CO ft CU -P ^4 O* &iOl O Q) CO M O* CU _fj ^ Q S CQ oC ft 0^ CO ?3
COCOCOt3>sOP ftOP^jW4J-HCUW OSftOcOCOCO-H O+>5-Hh-5iJ.i-5(-l ^CQp
COCQft^gCO'HClD rHO 'OCOP gft
cDocoxcycsai^ co«.» o d
o
•H
CO
CO
CO
CJ
o
CO
P
CO
fn
O
ft
CD
bO
as
i^
o
co
o
-------
25
O -P CO
-P CJ
C M I O> 0)
H
M >»rH -H ft
0> r-l ffl -P 0
S-t S3 0 CO CO
P« O CS? -P
X
X X
X
X
X X
X
X
X
3
•A
•P
g
O
M
to
01
-p
CO
!H
f> -P
01 S3
-P HI
f-l M
0) 0
> rH
C CM
H
•
O
rH
O
co
Q>
O
CO
-P
CO
e
o
CO
T3
O
ft
co
o
0>
ft
*
j~s
Mi
CO
CO
e
CO
f>
W
o
CO
rH
0)
-p
ft
o
H
CO
00
o>
S
o
ft
CO
w
•H
rH
CO
•rH
CQ
CO
14
dJ
•P
ft
0
+i
ft
•H
«
ft
ca
g
rH
•H
•O
a>
§
o
et,
&
CO
•H
ft ft
CO CO
ft
CO
w
co
•H
r4
CO
H
H
-P
CO
rH
CO
•H
co
o
CO
!-< S3
01 O
•P CD
&M
Jn
0>
co
CQ
tt>
*
fi
•P
ft
O
0
ft
to
OJ
|H
S-t
CO «H
?H x!
&> O
-P
§<
.fl
O
co
co
-P
CO
O S3
a o
p &
CO -p
3 co
n
CO
•O
•H
•rl
fn
0>
CO
J3
ft
ff\
iJJ
ft
W
•H
54
a>
CO
J3
ft
TO
"8
§
-p
a
o
o
lf\
-------
26
-P 1 01
C! C !>
O> CO -H Q>
0 3-P H
G? co ft
^~t -P £5
01 ^H *rt CO
dl O -P CO
s
CO 01
CM -H 01 <-)
O C in ft
CO CO S
rl tfl 3 OS
Jo co
•p
S3 C O
fa; o -ri o
-P C
fl H 1 0> <-\
CO >j H -rl ft
O> H CO -P S
I* a 3 co co
P-i O O? -P CO
•a
3
S
•H
-P
a
o
0
x»^
M CO
M Q>
•P
fJt) 03
PQ & -p
*H w
?H
d D.J
M
1
o
rl
O
CO
S
XXXXX XX XX X XXXX
*
ft
• w
ft * • • • • •
wcoftft • ftft .ftft
• -HtQtQ ft' COCO • ftCOCQ
ft co C to ft ft to
Wr-tocaca tQDgS to coco»
rH rj rj ,jj CO CO 3 3 CO $3 3 ftl
COOiftBs pJX-O-H-rl CO HCSSflta
•rl'O'HCUr--! r—l C3 -H I— 1 rl -H HrlCO>
w^QCQjaoi 3H-H30I W 0>0>O.dX
OWCOftC! COft rlOCO 01 CO H-PflCOft 01
M CO jO ftOriOICU COfnO OiWxl W cacjfl OCOCOftO)^0> r4
O» -H3 5-iHOIW-P -Ppj-H cOpSft O> -H3 cOtSfijO-POlto 3
XlCO'OQ WC5-PfL)CO COOl-3 43SCOI J^CO'dH rlOi!rlCO-PP4COC3
-P-HCO ft COC CSft -P'HCO 4JftO)fth
S3rlr-ICO O -OO 'CJCO CrlHcOtO-HSOOl
•HCOOOI >
O H +» O
•rl 3 CO
CO > -Q O
- M -H O
S r»» S-t S3
O 0) frH O
co
-------
27
-P I 0)
d d >
0) CO -H CU
U 3 +3 H
& CO O
01 H
W >» H >H ft
CO i-l CO -P 0
^ d p CO CO
CM o a? -P CQ
CO
(V
-p
ca
t*
V
o
>,
W
M
CO >H
h H
0) CO
-P -H
ftCO
O
ft
CO O
^1 ^f
0) 13
•P >s
g,S|
*HI
ca "o
(JO -H
CO
&
ca
H
H
0)
r-l
ft
CO
ococo
CO
^i o W ^ co ca
-p ft 0) 4^
co w -H g co
CO
O
CO CO
-P H
co co
O
ft'O
WO
•H
-P
d
o
o
ON
-------
28
•P I 01
c c t»
01 CO -H
O 3 -P
<3? CO
h -p e
0) <+-( -H CO
PH O -P K>
ft
-P C
(3 H I 0> 01
O» -H > i
to !>»H -H p4
0) r_| CO 4J •
M C 3 CO
CM O G? -P CQ
X
X
X X!
XXX
X X
I
•rl
O
o
M
CO
o>
•p
co
;Q 4-J
0> J3
-P Oi
fH tQ
01 01
fi PH
H
0
O
.
ft
w
to
3
si
O
a
o
•H
Ol <"j
CO O
"O O
•rl -P
01 K
ft M
•H O
»
ft
M
X
03
CO H
•H ft
S3 0
O -r)
C t-3
TJ CO CO
CO C "O f-l
M oi o ,a
0) H ft O
-p co O w
ft 0 S* O
.H W +3 J-i
ft 3 W PH
H cd
H C5
*
p^
to
£3
£3
01 -H
CO ^
T3 Oi
•H CO
FH ft
a> 03
co co
T3 J3
O ft
ftCO
CJ
01
1-1
CU
PH
03
W
w
J3
-p
cO
-P
co
•H
O
•H
P
Ol ft
03 -H
t) r-l
•H H
S3 W
O
o
•H
^H
-P
C
J>
to
•H
r-l
•H
CO
ft
CO
h-J
»
ft
• CO
ft
W CO
•H
CO 43
•d °
3 j»^ cS
So cu o
•H -P W
i-3 ftH
O O
C 01
£> S
Ol
J3
p£J
*
ft
CO
C£f
s
s
G
O
3
0)
-p
*
ft
w
to
3
C
J3
ft
01
CO W
Ss P i
Ol
-p
ft
o
CU
rHI
o
o
•
ft
w
a
OJ
xs
o
^5
CO
ft
o
G3
S
3
CO Ol
£H JCJ
Ol O
ft
W •
ft
ft O)
W X!
CJ
co !*»
$H tO
Lj O.
co O
S ^
•H -p
0 ffi
w
Crt
g
O
to
O
•H
i-l
CU
co M
4J CO -P
ft T3 CO
O O C
O O S
•H f-t r— 1
JL| -P 3
EH W PL,
CO
*
ft
w
X
co
H
ft
O
•H
j_I^
-P
co
ng
0)
H
"§ t?
£g
O
O C
U Oi JH >J
H CO 0>
01 rH -P Jo O
ft, Cl>
O
•H
P9
3 &H
S
h
01 O)
ft !>
•H -H
• p | (ij
O
r-l
-------
29
-p i o>
c c s>
to i-t
o P -P 1-1
& CO ft
*H -P
(U <»H •(-) CO
PM o -p co
C\J
VO
c\j
CVJ
1 0>
f~i O* CO
,Q O CO
a
1-858
OJ
H
ro
-P C
CM
01
« >>
(U H
?-i C
(X, O
«H
r-t
CO -P
P CO
a? -P
(1J
•H ft
CO
CO
X
XX
X
X
X X
X
X
•8
g
•H
-p
§
o
H
CO
-p
a
Jj 4J
CU C!
-P 0)
M W
CD > '
M Cl 5
CU O <
-P W 4
CXi H C
o
1)
JC
•S1
Q W
q w
3 pS
s S
2 xs
4 ft
U 0)
3 CO CO
-1 J~t Pi
(I)
43
ft
01
H
O
o
ft
CO •
ft
CU
X5
o
^"9
to
ft
o
p
co cy
fc X!
fl) (">
W
CO
•H
CO
ft
•rl
'o
(U
fn
§
*Z.
* *
a ft
G W
O -H
•H H
co ?-i co co
fn 8) M -H
fh
BOS
a
ft
ta .
. ft
S
cu p
CO H
'O *H
•H 'O
a» ft
ft S
•H H
•T3 O
C3 pi
CO
co
•H
CO
W
It
CU
CO &4
ai co +>
co EH tJ co
M O C
o» ft o
4J OS
ft M H
f^ CO pi
CO
«
ft
• CO
ft
"«5
COJ.H ft
H-* °
J3 O -H
CM I (3 t "1
ca co
fn T3
rQ O
o p<
O 0
!H 01
CU
d
ft
CO
ft
a w
3
•H co
£•( *H
01 10
CO (U
ij co bfl
ft (U p
DQ J£3 CO CO (5
4^> -H -H
•H CO 03
^
>> H H
4"* P
ca IH
H
•
ft
•H
,_q
fl
o
•H
O
8
CO
CO
(1)
C •
0)
•H £
PH S)
J^-'H
o p~]
co
O >s
O if
S3 O
<3 O
CJ
H
CO
-------
•P I 0>
a a t>
a> co
O
a>
PH
3. -P H
cy to g,
o +3 co
CVI
CM
CVJ CVJ H
CV] O r-l
O
OJ
CO
O CO
r-l
t- H t-
O C-00
t- CO O
CVJ
o
OOCO
CVJ CVJ
CVJ
CVJ
-d-
H
CVJ
-p c
(3 H I 01
CO -H > r-l
CO >j r-l -H ft
0) H CO -P fi
to a & co cd
P-l O <3? -P CO
I
•H
13
O
O
r-l
f-t
PP
CO
(U
-p
CO
$•8
-P (U
m CO
(U CO
> in
£4 Ctj
M
1
O
fn
•
ft
CO ft
CO •
CO
H
r-l
CO
r^J
J3
o
g
£
ft
CO
•H
£^
£j
CO
c
o
co a
a>
co !
CO
2 i
-p i
CO CO !
h r-l i
-PS r
O
CO -P to
(U Orl Q^
COS
•H t) 53
*CJ Q^ j/d
? r-l ft
s_l p. Q£]
•H
• •
ft ft
• CO CO
"i. *
/J CO
•H
3 A
3 0
H g)
d o
^ CO
a H
d
CO
-p
CO
ft
ca
CO
•H
r-l
co co
CO CO
-P
ft
o
r-l
CO
bO
£
w
•£
-p
0
H
o
CJ
CO
pj
r-l
CO
T!
&
CO O
to O
(U
,
ft
CO
•
CO
ft ft U
CO CO >,
CO
CO
J^
J3
d)
43
&
CO CO
?H PH
CO
*H
S
r~l
<1)
c
CO
-p
CO
o.
o
-p
a
CO CO
fc J3
CO O
-p
ft
CO
*
ft CO CO
W ft Si
3 o
CO ft >3
M to
m to PI
CO -H O
'ja a t>>
O O |x!
•
ft
CO
co
r£
C-j
Si
CO O
•p c5
ft
-P -P ft CO O
ft ft O -P co
O O JS co -r-l
to QJ O C C
pf i — 1 -H O 0
CD <;
•p
ft
O
C*>
N
•
O
CO
,
CO rH
t3 -rl
•rl t3
T3 OJ
CO ft
ft K
S °"
ft
CO
CO
r^J
p_j
r^J
ca
co tS
CO -P
CO H T3 CO
fn o d
CO ft O
•P tO O S
ft O to r-l
•H to -p d
(•^ p^ w p 1
r-l CO
«
ft
w
O
oo
r-l
-------
31
o
CXJ
CO
CO
bo
Lf\
-=(•
-p fl
(3 H
0»
W >>r-J
<1J r-l CO
!H C 3
PH O
>H > r-l
' Tj 8J
. -P gl
3. CO col
-P CO
X
•P
O
o
X X
co
I
^
(U
ft
w
*
ft
CO
2
aero-Invertebrates
Present
Prosobranchia
Campelom
ft M
W CO
ft o, ca . ^
• CO
ft 0
CO ^
Lioplax
Pleuroce
CQ
-------
32
-P 1 0)
C S3 >
0> CO -H 0»
O 3 -P H
& CO P
M -PS
O> H-i T-( 03
PM O -P CO
S
to o>
rH
O S3 M P
co co S
f-i bO 3 CO
Q) fL) rjl CO
,O CO C/2
€^ 1 "*
p r* J3 o
Si O -rl O
•P £3
S3 H 1 O> CO
O> -H t> H
W >> rH -H ft
cu H co -P 9
CM o o? -P CQ
01
3
S3
+j
S3
o
0
^_x
H CO
H 01
•p
H co
H-t SH
pf> (-> 1 1
fc tQ
01 ^-|
H ^
|
O
JH
O
CO
QJ S3
"§ °
K co
O
S3 Q
O i-I
•H
-P T3
CO S3
-P CO
CO
X XX X X XXX XX XX XX
*
ft
. » • # . • •
ftft ft. CO -ft ftftft
• OTCQ W ft-HCO ftW "W tOCQ
Pi • M CO ft CO ft
MCOCOftCO ft3 COWWSfi
•HE W pj cO'Hft W0 3 PP
COX!® Cl f-l rH 3OXM-H-H
•H OS3 W Q) fnOW H«J COCO H?H
CQCdpjO -H J3 COCLl-rl pOcOHft 30)
O>fcS3$3 H ft SH'O CO-H-Hft-H CJCO
W MO>Ott>COCO OiCO-Hpfd f-irH^3Of> W^J
QJ 3^ -p CO -(-3 ^ »H CO CQ S-4 c^ QJ c5 pj cp O *r\ *r~{ 3 ft
j3ctSCOf5ftHCQ(13CQ5-iCMa)O&iO CO C3IW C i-^ > S CO
-P'H-HO -POI-P CO-P CO CO
flf-ttJM ft-pft tsco $H "iS
3COCOOI OftO OS3 ^3 O
HH0 HOxl ftO O ft
rHCJO) <33d>O COOS CO K
CUOI-rlja CjOrH-H OfHrH O O
JC^ J^} JL| Oj Qj Q c,-j (^( -^ ^ ^, i n)
{>> Js £~i ^ )^I C? EH £J W (5^ p_| , — |
-P b H ca 0>
cO EH r^ O PH
iH O
CM S
CJ
• co
J3 T3 O
•P S 0
P S3
O •» O
^4 0 O
a> -p -P
CD co
0
S3 Jn >
3 'i-t H -rl
P3 O «— ' K
-------
33
-P 1 0)
G e s>
0) CO -H CU
-P
'iH -H
O -P
g
O G fc Pi
co co B
S-i 60 3 co
0) fc O* CO
,Q O CO
I ^
•P C
fl M I 0)
0» -rl >
W >, r-t -H P4
fn
C P-I
H
O
O
o> a
5 o
P5 CO
O
C Q
O M
•rl
43 t3
co G
•P eo
co
lf\
CM
8%S°
co
ro
O
CO OJ
co cr\
OJ O IA
CO
m
CM
CO
co
CM
H
C-
O i
v£) (
CO
tr\
CO
MD
CO
CO OO
CO
Q
CO
cu
G
S
•H 0>
« H
O t>
« G
O O
O M
G G
O co
-------
0>
g
•H
O
o
H
-P 1 Q>
EJ C >
CO CO -H CO
O p -P rH
& co ft
rH -P 6
01 CH -H co
P-i O -P CO
S
CO rH 0*10
43 O CO
a -p
3 J3 C 0
a o H o
CO (x»
-P C
CM 1 CD CD
CU -H > rH
W >j rH -H ft
CD rH CO +5 S
rH C p CO CO
PH O & -P CO
W
0>
-P
CO
ft -p
,«C!gw
O-HrH cOftOcOCO
C! i-^ Ptt J3 CQl-iH f-5 P
CO CO CO ft d
O rO O
ft o ft
co O co >,
0 rH O 0
co -p JH co
3 to PL, rH
r—1 CO CO
rH C5 PL,
O
S
1*O
CVJ
-^}"
c\
OJ
•p
o
o
fe M
01
co
CO
rH
01
ft
CO
&
CO
•H ft
C co
CO
bO co
rH 'rt
O CQ
0)
O CO 3
J3 CO CO P)
fn 4J .H -rH
(y cj t-i rrt
•2 'd * ^
S S i — 1 i i
P rH rH O
¥5 CO CO -H
rH r"> r-f &H
CO -P 3
-P CO S
O rH
EH P-i
N
CO
CO
•rl
O
•H
co "i
1^
o
o
bO
•H
rH
O
vD
OJ
CM
*
O
X
-P
CO
CO
O
U -P
co
0) (0
tJ rH
CO -P
• co
C5
•P
CO
QO l
to
O 'H
COM3 r>
t> CVJ W
O eo
C • rH
O -P CO
S M o
C—
rH
CO
H
-------
35
-P I CU
S3 £3 >
CU CO -H 0)
co
ro
H
OJ
O oo
o\
CM
-d-
CO
ir\
OJ
d
,0 O CO
S -P
p .G C O
S O -H O
in
UA
CM
OO
CO
f
H H H O a
o> si o
£0 W +3 a ft tO
t> <; ft«* wlH
CO
s
w
(3
a
CD
•p
CO
ft
CO
to
3
£0 Q^
M S
CD O
-P U
co O ft
fn CO f4 CO O
-P t) CD -p to
C3 CQ O 6 CO -H
01 O ft 0) C £
o o o jd o -P CU
-P ft -P CO
ft O ft f-<
O H O
(U CO
CO h
fl Js
co g
0> CO -r-i
0 PH Xl
CO 0> 0
P»J
CQ
ex
o
rO
£&
1
s
QJ*
c!
o
o
J
13 -rl -P
C « ft
a> o
0
•H
£^
f_f
O
o
oo
-------
36
•P r 0)
e c :>
01 CO 'H
O 3 -P
. cy co
Is -P
QJ
•rl 0)
fl PH
CO CO
bO 3 to
J3 a o
OHO
-p fl
S3 H i 01 a;
«> -rl > ,-1
W l>jrH .H PJ
f H CO 4^ ET
> C S co co
04 O & ~p CO
•o
O
o
H
H
I
W
tt)
-p
CO
PH
^1 -P
a»
-P
PH W
££
^
o
PH
O
S
-p
o
o
a>
PH
ca
&
CO
co
o
o
S
§
fl
o
CO
H
O
•rl
iH
-a 01
CO T3
-P O 0>
ca K h
tlU
PH 0)
g> -M fi
t> -H O
•H (L, h
K
-------
37
-P t 0>
c d >
CD CO -H H
CO >>rH -H P
rH CO -p &
fn C! P CO CO
P-i o a? -P co
w
01
i> rl
C PL,
H
1
O
r<
CJ
CO
S
O O V£) J- rH
rH Lf\ t^" VO OO
• • • • •
O MD '"* O\ ITS
^~ i ~ •
rH 03 o oo t~- CM
CM
ir\
IfN
O
S- -* ON r-H H v^)
f- H O H ON
r-T
-p
8
XXX XX XX fe XX
(U
03
CO
!H
(U
ft
• CQ p4 CO ft
ft co • S to
CQ « Cd "ft CO
ft o co ft M -H ca
a co ^ ti w • c a/ ^n
S O Pl R ^ •rlC3j3
OCOHr) •OO'H -H-rl-H 03O r-tT3O
•H -H P p -H fl -H 13 t3 W CO p .rl C
HjlOO1 OCOX3 tt>C!cy t'a'H CJUCO
CDCJ^HrH .HfnP ftO)S XJO .H 43 COCJQ ^CO EH ftOSxii-^B
COOBCO o -p coospa
OrlrHO O ft OfnrH^O
C04Jp!4 bfl -H CO-PJ3 (3D
pCOAlpH -H ft ptoftrH-iH
H CO rH rH CO 05 rH
rH O O rH O -P O
0 O O
S S EH
X
•
ft
CO
&
•H
1
-P
co
I
•a
(U
§
•rH
-U
C
0> r) H
cu -p co
in tQ
r_> o. M
P O
rH -H
rH CJ M
O M O!
fs "O 'a
$H -H
-------
0)
§
•H
-P
d
o
o
H
M
rl
-P 1 01
£3 £3 >
O> CO -rl 0)
0 3 -P H
a? 03 ft
rl -P g
O> rH
O £3 f-i O
CO 03 S
f-i M 3 CO
0) JH O^ CO
•9 ° ™
P X! C O
fe CJ M O
$ *
-P C
S3 H 1 O> rH
CO >s H -H ft
0> i-H 05 -P £f
rl C Pi CO CO
fit O O? -P CO
CO
co
-p
CO
rl
0> fl
-P 01
rl CO
01 O>
c oJ
M
1
o
rl
O
co
S
c~ c-
rH H
IA CO
CO
ON IA
O O
H CO
X X X X M
ft
CO
CO
3
• • Ci
ft ft O
W • W S3
ft • O
CO VI ft CO h
r~i CQ £~j «j— {
rH CO CO O> JC!
0> H CQ x! CO O
TJ H P O T3 O
,£> 01 H O -H -P
O CO rH rHoSfl tjft
Oi O CO CO O' ^| *O 0^ 1^3
rl CO ^Cf I-*5 CO Q) ^5 Olj f ii
-P ft TJ ft 54 «d
co ccw-H o o OIE!
0) cuo^4 ft 0? -pcy
d O 0 ft O H ftEH
•r) CO CO & CO O -H
t3 -p r-i < H O P
S Si
•ri rl
W 0
CO
CO
LA
oo
CM
rH
X r*
a
o\
o
rH
«\
CVJ
-O
O
o
JXfe XXX XXX
a>
CO
CO
0)
ft ft
• CO
CO ft
a M co « ft
ft ft W .H ft ft W'
W V
M 0
01 p
ft r-
•H P
"T!? CC
£3 CO f-
Oi -P >
H co C
C
S
CO P
O fli
w
! j
r^
o
s
) -H KS S3 M W
• S3 O) H O CO
IftCO COrH.£3 COCO-H
• w w fa o»ft pco3s3
rl -rl •« -H rl rl -P 0)
calO H ,QW caoiaibo
SW| 3 OW CO g-Pr-HCO
lisjl1^ o fto ocogftCDX
»J3| O «rl f-|rH CO-OSJOaO*
'Pn! c05-i WC5 ?HOC5!H« aides SJCOTH a
rQ cOpO,C 0»
g J3 t-P C OOft X!
P O -H CO CO S ft
H O 'O -p rH -3 W
bO g co to
CO rH -H S *"*
-P O K O
O
•H
0) pq
•rl -P
PH CO
0)
§
CO O -P
o
-H
rl
O -P
S K
CO O>
C3 T3
^ 01
5 rl
H
CJ
CM
OJ
-------
39
-P I
01 CO -H 01
O p -P
rl -P '8
0) CO
•P C
S3 M I 0) 0)
a; .H > H
CO >j rH -H O,
(U H ca -P &
fn C 3 co ca
PM O <3? -P CO
X X
X X
X
X
X
X
X X
•o
O>
g
•H
o
u
PQ
CO
-p
CO
rl
ft -p
Q> £3
-P O>
rl CO
0!
r* r)
S3 P |
H
O
O
CO
^gj
w a
f* O
€ *rH
^ -P
O
£3 0
O t-3
•H
•P t5
co C!
-P CO
CO
ft
•> CO
ft
• CO CO
a 3
• CO CO C! C
ft 3 Jn c
co at M oi t
ri O -P -r
W 0 ft W -X
CO -rl CO C O -H C
r< rH rl .£« CO rl ft £
R CO rC3 *H CO Oi
3 ft O , -H rt -H T3
L> -H CO CO -H O> CO £>
i-O -rlCOriCO 01 O
4C H>da)j3 tiOft
3H casriCLiJdco co coo &q o
O-POft fn(D -p'ft 01. rl CO
r-t CO W) O 0) &
co c S a» +3
bO O N H ft
0> 13 O -r-i
SO 0 O
X— ^
"O
2
rj
•r)
-p
o
o
CM
(M
H co co JB ca T* f-i
C CO -P -H CO -P
O T3 GS-irHcacOCO
S O •rjCflOOIOlO
H ft SH-HCOO
CCJ3 >> r-Hi-H.M-H COCO
ofi o (UoiEH'cJ-Pr-)
co 0) J3 rQ p co CO
r-S i — 1 r*5 rl M 3 2
c-H 0) -P J3 -H M
rH CM co S wo
O rH
2 CM
CO •
0> 13
M f3?4
(U ij
J> ^
•H CO
« PM
S^ >J
0 O
CO CO
o o
0 0
c a
o o
2 2
on
OJ
a *
ft ft
ft CO CO
CO
CO CO
co -H a
H J3 0)
H 0 J3
0> CO £3, O
CO
>s-P W -p
CO W ft M CO
•00
O 5n
ft O>
•H a
•S ^
ft S3
-------
§
•H
o
o
H
-P i 01
d C >
ri O1 CO
J3 O CO
J-P
A C 0
OHO
co fa
-P C
d H i a; rH
CO J^ j — ( .(_{ p
O> rH Cd -P g
r< d 3 03 CO
CM o cy -P co
w
CD
-p
CO
JH
rQ -P
f- CO
> £
C3 pi
M
1
O
rH
O
flj
(U C
•s °
C3 ,_j
g n
P -P
J55 CO
O
fl O
O i-3
•H
-P T3
co C
-P CO
CO
OJ CO OJ OJ OJ
ON ON tr\ rH ir\
• • • • «
ro IA O-* O
rH rH lf\
VO CO CO O CO OJ
rH ^t ^t IT\
OJ OJ CO ITN
•V
H
W bd id *y* *><* *bd **H 'v* S^ ^ V
i"* *» •"( l"l f"* 1^ »%rSrS PS rS
•p
o
0
01
co
3
5.
ft CO
w
03 Ct>
• ft 8 ft ^
ft W O W « • W
w -El ft ft Q
ftOS W • 03CQ .
* £3 .^ w m p p[ >r^ Q,J
ftpO -iHrH CO'W SE! CO
03 a t>> a o* *cj *H *r~{ c^i p co
OJW pcOO'O WCOCOX 'rln3OCi> OT-HCO coin fs -H
ocooo corH-H-pft 'HcoijarH tsaj o w
•rHMrHfH TSPTjftpJ ^CQlOft-HCO QJ
^4 CU O ^C? "H S 0> M rH CO ^H r*» S3 O *rH .TJ ^-{ tQ CO bO
W)-Pffi!>5 -H-HftrHO -PCUXjIro-iH hft O 0) -H3
CO<;ft2;ffiCOrHCO'HOp-i COfaP-iIrHt-^ PrHi — IJn
O&H P OfnCM CL)O !^CD(D&H
w -P a» fi ft
3 W rH rH ^ ^|
rH CO (!) CO -P J3
rH O PH -P CO EH
0 0 rH
S EH CM
CO
c .
Q^
!> en,
'•5' K &
Oi O
P J>> -P
d y w
•H CO >j
•p o 57
d O ^!
o co
o 03
•^ S ft
en ^t
OJ OJ
-------
-P I
fl (3
CO
O
0>
-H 0>
-P H
03 -
h -P
0)
W >»r-l -H g)
a> H co -P S
in d 3: ccs co
PM O a? -P CO
X X
X X
X X X X X
g
•H
-P
C!
O
O
M
M
W
l-q
M
w
cu
•p
CO
{••4
rQ -P
oi d
-P CU
^ to
0) O>
C Oi
M
O
£_j
O
•
f"st
w
CO
H
H
(U
CO rH
0 03 CO
S "o w
•P ft
CO W .H
01 O Si
O 0 ft
co co S
-P <-{ <;
03 eg
pj Is,
j^
o
*
ft
w
w
CO p
O> 0)
•P H
°* J
(P
S
0)
J3
&
* •
ft Pi
W
CO
•rl
J3
O
t*
O
CO
M
to
CO
0
0)
c
o
C!
-p
CO
*
ft
w
w
CD
1
"I"*
PK
H
o
o
•r)
to
*
ft
ft
03
* •
0*
J3
• O
W ft >J
W W
CO
S '
Su !
co ;
CO H !
to i-H J
c8
rj
r*5
CQ
01
o
to
T3
p*3
vC
03
H
*t-4
•P
ft
0
to
*§.
ffi
g
p
§
(U
J3
O
to
o
^2
^
W H
0) p
M CO H
P T3 -H
£2 -r-i *<0
0) t3 0>
jc3 OJ ft
CO ft ft r>3
to V T* r-t
O* W t^ O
-P a, 03 C fii
ca
co
•H
w
w
•H
iH
CO M
4^> H t3 O
0 QJ -P OS
•H r-1 ft ft H
to O -H CO O S
H O O 0 5^ (S
CO -p
pi co
H co
H C5
O
53
01
ptt
w
€
E3
•H
01
CO
H
ft
CO
co
T2
O
ff
Oi
[ — t
(U
di
g
•H
•s
O
O
CM
-------
-p i
a» co -H QJ
O 3 -P r-(
<5" ca
fH -PS
41 "+H -rH CO
PL, O -P 03
0)
s
ra
<(H -H 0)
o a is ft
CO CO S
JH fciD p! CO
Q; ^ a1 to
,Q O CO
S -P
3 J3 C O
3 CJ M O
CO Pu
•p e
C H
I
01
m >, r~l -H
0) iH 05 -P
fc d 3 co co
CM o a? -P to
X
X X
X
X
X X
X X
CU
§
•H
-p
c
o
H
H
pa
IS
W
4)
•P
CO
,0 -P
a< c
-P' 0)
a> at
a PL,
H
t
0
in
O
CO
0
o « J3L4
ft ft M
W 03
ca
03
•H
jc3
O
CO >y
a; o
-P M
ft H
CO
S
a;
a
o
4)
-P
CO
0)
T^
o
CO
CO ,£2
fc O
0
ft
to
W
•H
r-H
03 CO
h -H
01 CO
O 4> -P
*H -P ft
0! ft O
a o ^
a» s-, co
jc 3 £83
ft 0> 0;
piO b?» |g^
•
ft
CO
CO
0
gl
-p O
ft
C3 O
43 CO
CO -H
s3 a
O > a^
tSJ H
O
O
ft
W
ft
a*
o
r*^
to
ft
o
CO T)
a,' M
» ft to
ft to ft
W CO
§-H
W
J3 -H W
O "H 0}
ca
S H
H O
O CO r^
O 5s
4-i O CO
-P C ft
a; o
0) O
PP -p
CO
UN
CM
-------
P I 0>
C fl !>
O 3 P H
a? co ft
fs PS
CD -H > H
W >s rH -H P,
OJ H (0 P S
co co
fn d
O C3? P
*o
fn
M
I
O
O
(U £3
r£2 O
^ co
O
C O
O i-5
•H
P t3
CO £3
•P CO
CO
OJ
ON
ON
VD
»
O
00 CM LT\
O 00 ir\
-4-
tr\
LPi
O\
cy
LTN
CM
o
MD
(A
-
ir\ ON
ON
(TT)
X
X
X X
X X
X
X X
X X
P n3
CO h
O
CD CU
> to
-------
g
•H
P
c
o
o
H
a
pq
P I 4)
C! S3 >
H
CQ >s H °H p<
OJ r-f 03 -P 0
fn 13 S «3 CO
PH O (51 P CO
w
p
a
?H
cu
.p
M
•s
(3
O
CVj
en
CO
OJ
O
•H
0
P^
CO
05
r—f
£3
£*k
•H
E-t
Q.
•H
*rf
c
QJ
H
V
cc
ft CO
w
2
&
a
o
m
•H
JC5
O
O
PN
p^5
?-(
o
ry
a
TO
P( M
W -H
£3
C5 Ctf
r-( tS)
O ?M
CO O O
•H -H
x! g <«
o § o
CO CC J-j
T! ^ Of
O ^D ,O
no s
co o w 3
f i LJ o tp^
W tM , ,' f£^
W I ** c i
pi ra (i, ,H
Oi
ou C
'i -H
p p
* g
C! O
O i-3
•H
P T3
co' C
P C0
CQ
g
•H
P
£3
O
O
-------
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
I. INTRODUCTION 1
II. PROCEDURES .............. 2
III. RESULTS ................. k
IV. DISCUSSION ..................... 7
V. BIBLIOGRAPHY 11
LIST OF TABLES
Table Page
1 Station Locations 12
2 Water Quality Parameters 13
-------
I. INTRODUCTION
In the summer of 1967 water quality reconnaissance surveys
were conducted in the Chesapeake Bay in the vicinity of Annapolis,
Maryland.
Objectives of the surveys were 2
1. Observe oxygen depletion trends during the summer months,
2. Determine horizontal and vertical stratification through
thermoclines and haloclineSo
3. Measure existing water quality in terms of D00., BOD,
temperature, salinity, nutrients, turbidity and phyto-
plankton.
During the surveys three cruises were made, covering five
transects from a north section above Gibson Island to the southern-
most section at Hacketts Point near Annapolis. Locations are shown
on the map, Figure 1; positions are indicated in Table !„ Depth
profiles are presented as Figures 2 through 6»
-------
II. PROCEDURES
Temperature was determined initially by a glass thermometer
wired inside a transparent water sampler. When an electronic
thermometer (integral with the induction salinometer) became avail-
able, in situ measurements were made. Salinity was determined
12 situ by the induction salinometer.
Secchi disc readings were made with a 12-inch (30 cm)
white Secchi disc.
Dissolved oxygen samples were drawn from a Van Dorn water
sampler and fixed aboard the boat prior to being returned to the
laboratory at Annapolis. These samples were analyzed on an (Fisher
"Titralyzer") automatic titrator, employing the azide modification
of the Winkler Method described in Standard Methods (APHA, 1965).
Standard 20°C five-day BOD determinations were made with
single initial DO and duplicate final DO analyses. No dilutions
or seeding were used.
Turbidity was determined in the laboratory with an electr-c
nephelometric turbidimeter, calibrated against a permanent formazin-
acrylic standard.
Total phosphorus (expressed as mg/1 PO ) was determined by
the Menzel and Corwin (1965) persulfate procedure, with phosphate
determination,by the Murphy and Riley (1962) procedure.
Oxidized nitrogen (nitrite-plus-nitrate) expressed as NO -N,
was determined by the cadmium reduction procedure described by
Morris and Riley (1963).
-------
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen (TKN) was determined by the procedure
outlined in Standard Methods for the Analysis of Waters and Waste-
waters (APHA, 1965 <£ This method included HH_-N in the results.
Chlorophyll was determined by the 90 Per cent acetone
extraction scheme outlined by Strickland and Parsons (1965).
-------
Ill„ RESULTS
The data, as given In Table 2, are summarized as follows;
Temperaturei Horizontal and vertical stratification of temperature
were indicated in the study area portion of the Bay. Temperatures
were observed to be a degree or so wanner on the western side of
the Bay than on the eastern. A greater degree of vertical strati-
fication of temperature was evident, with a 6 C difference between
surface and bottom recorded. A rather sharp thermoeline between
15 and 30 feet was suggested, more pronounced in June than in July»
Salinity; Salinity distributions showed horizontal and vertical
stratification, with higher salinities on the western side0 The
rather sharp halocline seemed to be at similar levels as the
thermoeline„
Turbidity; Water in the eastern side of the Bay was substantially
clearer than on the western side as indicated by turbidity readings
(JTU) from the nephelometer as well as by field measurements of
extinction with the Secchi disc,, During the study no excessive
rainfalls or windstorms occurred to provide excessive silts„
Nutrient distributions; Total phosphorus concentrations were
greatest in the northwestern portion of the study area? with a
tendency for greater concentrations above the halocline. Generally,
concentrations were higher on the western side than the eastern
side of the Bay,,
-------
Nitrite-plus-nitrate nitrogens were generally low, with
slightly greater concentrations in the upper layers of the northerly
transects.
Total Kjeldahl nitrogen was similar in horizontal distri-
bution to total phosphorus, with greatest concentrations in the
northwestern portion. The vertical distribution differed, however,
with a tendency for similar concentrations of organic nitrogen
throughout the water column, or in some cases, greater concentrations
of nitrogen at increasing depths.
Chlorophyll, reflecting the phytoplankton standing crop, was
greatest in concentration in surface waters (to 15 feet depth) in
the same areas where phosphorus and nitrogen were high. There was
a marked decrease in concentration with depth, as would be expected.
The trend toward oxygen depletion below concentrations
suitable for aerobic biological forms can be seen in waters from
25 feet to the bottom. In the area of the study, the depth below
25 feet constitutes a considerable portion of the Bay volume. This
oxygen depletion of the bottom waters was obvious even in the channel
(Stations A2, B2 and C2). Tidal currents in the area are relatively
rapid, two to three knots (Pritchard and Carpenter, 196^).
Dissolved oxygen concentrations in surface waters showed
definite discrete patterns which, considered with the chlorophyll
£ data, indicated the influence of phytoplankton distributions,
-------
possibly in bloom proportions. Oxygen production by phytoplankton
was suggested in the northwestern portions of the study area where
chlorophyll was highest.
The distribution of Biochemical Oxygen Demand was similar
to the distribution of chlorophyll and nutrients, i.e., concentrations
were greatest in the northwestern portion of the study area. Surface
waters contained more oxygen-demanding material (BOD) than bottom
waters.
-------
IV. DISCUSSION
Temperature and salinity distributions, showing the laterally
unequal patterns suggested by Pritehard (1952), are due to the
effect of Coriolis forces on Chesapeake Baya Vertically, the
thermocline and halocline that develop in the warmer months were
already present, and because of time and personnel limitations,
the study was too short to determine maximum extent during the
late summer or to detect the fall overturn.
The distribution of nutrients seemed to follow the western
side of the Bay above Sandy Point, probably because of the proximity
to sources as well as the location of the channel on the western
side. Phosphorus and nitrate-nitrite nitrogen seemed to be greatest
in the mixed layer (i.e., above the tl;,ermocline and halocline),
but the distribution of total Kjeldahl nitrogen (TKN) throughout
the water column needs further elucidation. The distribution of
TOT would be expected to parallel total phosphorus., but this was
apparently not the ease., judging from limited data available.
The standing crop of phytoplankton^ as reflected in chloro-
phyll measurements, paralleled the nutrient distribution in surface
waters, with a fairly large bloom indicated just above the study
area on the two days of sampling of ttiis parameter. This distri-
bution suggests that urban pressures on the western shore, from
Annapolis to Baltimore, may be causing accelerated eutrophication
of Bay waters in this area, but more observations are needed to
confirm this possibility„
-------
8
Light extinction, as measured by Secchi disc, did not
reflect the distribution of chlorophyll, and is apparently at
best a gross index with more value over annual cycles than synoptic
differentiation in this area.
Of interest is the relationship developed between Secchi
disc readings and nephelometric turbidity measurements in the
study area (Figure ?)• Analyzed by linear regression, the following
equation was developedi
Turbidity = -0.312 Secchi disc + 18.00
This regression fits at the one per cent level of significance.
Extrapolation of this relationship to conditions other than this
study would not necessarily be valid; seasonal changes and varied
runoff patterns would probably affect the slope of the regression
line, if not the validity of the relationship itself. The regression
fit suggests that a properly related turbidity-extinction relation-
ship could possibly be used in other studies under relatively constant
conditions, and that possibly solids could also be considered from
known relationships of turbidity and solids.
The study period, June-July 19&7, can be considered early
summer of a "typical" year, with no extremes of flow or temperature.
Unfortunately, the more critical late summer (August-September)
period was not evaluated because of other committments of time
and personnel. The dissolved oxygen depletion below approximately
25 feet is evident; however, greater depletion can be expected
later in the summer than this study period.
-------
In this study, BOD of the water only is considered, and
the oxygen demands exerted by bottom deposits are not included.
The greatest concentration of BOD in the waters was found in the
upper layers, and a regression analysis of BOD and chlorophyll
showed a very close relationship, in the range from 1 to 10 mg/1
BOD, viz.,
Chlorophyll a = 10.36 BOD - IK80
This relationship suggests that most of the BOD in the waters
was due to the phytoplankton standing crop, and a lesser contri-
bution from organic loadings, i.e., sewage or other water-borne
effluents. This relationship would not necessarily imply that
all of the oxygen depletion found was due to decomposition of
the phyto-biota because benthic uptake, discharge of oxygen-poor
water into the area, reaeration, and chemical oxidation, among
other factors, must be considered in a total oxygen budget„
The exceptionally good BOD-chlorophyll regression fit
developed above, for an area where organic loadings are small
relative to chlorophyll, suggested a possible method for assessing
relative demands in an area where both organic loading and
accelerated eutrophication are important factors. If a fairly
constant relationship between BOD and chlorophyll could be
established in areas with little or no organic loading from sewage
or other waste effluents, then analysis of variance might be used
to evaluate relative demands in an area with both chlorophyll and
significant organic loadings.
-------
10
It appears that, at the time of this study, the BOD in the
water column was primarily due to phytoplankton. Also, it appears
that, with present oxygen deficits and a relatively large phyto-
plankton standing crop, the Chesapeake Bay in this region should
be carefully evaluated to determine the allowable organic loadings
(from sewage treatment plants) and secondary eutrophication effects
without creating serious oxygen depletions in the mid-Bay region.
-------
11
V. BIBLIOGRAPHY
American Public Health Association, 19&5} Standard Methods for the
Analysis of Water and Waste-water, APHA, New York, 769 pages.
Menzel, D. W. and Corwin, N., 1965, "The Measurement of Total
Phosphorus in Sea Water Based on the Liberation of Organically
Bound Fractions by Persulfate Oxidation," Limnology and Oceanography,
Volume 10, pages 280-282.
Morris, A. W. and Riley, J. P., 1963, "The Determination of Mtrate
in Sea Water," Analytica Chimica Acta, Volume 29, pages 272-279.
Murphy, J. and Riley, J. P., 1962, "A Modified Single Solution Method
For the Determination of Phosphate in Natural Waters," Analytica
Chimica Acta, Volume 27, pages 31-36.
Pritchard, D. W., 1952, "Salinity Distribution and Circulation in
the Chesapeake Bay Estuarine System," Journal of Marine Research,
Volume 11, pages 106-123.
Pritchard, D. W. and Carpenter, J. H., 196^, "A Comparison of the
Physical Processes of Movement and Dispersion of An Introduced
Contaminant in the Severn River, the Magothy River and the Chesa-
peake Bay Off Sandy Point," Chesapeake Bay Institute, Johns Hopkins
University, Special Report #7, 31 pages.
Strickland, J. D. H. and Parsons, T. R., 1965, A Manual of Sea Water
Analysis, Second Edition, Revised, Fisheries Research Board of Canada,
Bulletin 125, Ottawa.
-------
12
TABLE 1
Station Locations in Chesapeake Bay
Summer 1967
Transect
A
B
C
D
E
Station Location
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
l
2
3
1
2
3
39° 05' 30" N 76° 24' 55" W
Off tower at Windmill Point
390 05' 37" N 76° 23' 38" W
Red flasher "loc"
39° 05 ( 43" N 76° 20' 57" W
Black and white buoy "13B"
39° 03' 18" N 76° 25' 43" W
Bed flasher "2" Magothy River
39° 03' 35" N 760 23' 25" W
Red nun "4C"
39° o4' 3U" N 76° 19' 43" W
Black flasher, bell "l"
39° 02' 18" N 76° 2V 03" W
Off house at Tydings-on-the-Bay
39° 02' 55" N 76° 23' 06" ¥
Red flasher, bell "2C"
39° 02' 40" W 76° 20' 38" W
Edge of dumping grounds
39° 00' 32" N 76° 23' 20" W
Off Sandy Point
38° 59' 57" N 76° 22' 42" H
Red flasher, gong "8"
38° 55' 30" W 76° 21' 12" N
South edge of dumping ground
38° 58' 58" N 76° 24' 47" N
Off Hacketts Point
38° 58' 33" N 76° 23' 12" N
Red flasher, gong "4"
38° 57' 30" w 76° 21' 42" N
Off Matapeake ferry slip
Water USC & GS
Depth Chart No.
17 Feet
40 Feet
23 Feet
15 Feet
40 Feet
36 Feet
17 Feet
50 Feet
50 Feet
16 Feet
60 Feet
25 Feet
17 Feet
55 Feet
16 Feet
549
549
549
549
549
549
549
549
549
550
550
550
550
550
550
-------
TABLE 2
Water (Jualitjr Parameters in Mid-Chesapeake, Bay
Sunnier 1967
13.
Secchi Water Sample
Disc Depth Depth
Transect Station Date Time Inches Feet Feet
DST
* 1 6/20/67 1300 18 17 Surface
15'
2 1240 24 40 Surface
(Channel) 15'
25'
3 30 23 Surface
15'
A 1 6/26/67 1300 24 17 Surface
15'
2 1330 28 4o Surface
15'
25'
3 1345 42 ?3 Surface
15'
* 1 7/18/67 1245 28 17 Surface
15'
2 1220 2f< 50 Surface
(ChJnnel) 15'
30'
45'
3 1205 5" 23 Surface
15'
B 1 6/20/67 1015 17 10 Surface
\r: '
2 104;, 34 4C Surface
(Chnnjwl) 15'
30'
3 1145 28 3c -urf-ve
\"
B 1 6/26/67 11?5 26 13 lurfice
13'
2 3230 28 40 Surface
15'
30'
45'
3 1330 42 3b Surface
15'
30'
B 1 7/18/67 1014 42 1? 'Surface
12'
2 1030 42 40 'Surface
15'
")C '
^'
3 1110 4? *t Surl-oe
lk '
'"'
Water
Temp.
°C
22
21
22
21
18
21
20
23
22
23
21
18
22
21
25.6
24.9
26.3
23.8
21.4
20.6
25.7
22.7
21
oo
?l
-<•
-'
•>;.
,,
''''.
;,
^2
1
u
22
22
16
25.4
23 c
2; o
24.?
21 3
T i
>-, i
2 ( ;
10
Salinity mg/1
9.13
8.34
8.65
6.91
3.41
8.34
6.75
10.10
8.46
11.38
5.27
2.59
7.57
5.23
7.1 8 58
7.9 5.H
6.6 11.18
8.9 4.82
13.3 1.45
14.5 0.77
>.; 7 61
11.3 2.41
7.23
6.99
7.62
7.07
I 11
-i.!'
? l{
7.2'
o.L'l
5 4o
t.68
IJ\
0.92
3.37
6.70
1 o?
7 5 7.81
76 3 v<
7 3 ' . 2
9.9 .-I:
13.3 1.9?
34.8 n 53
c.' ."i.2Q
c.l '- 21
14 1 ' 1
BOD Turbidity Total P
mg/1 JTU mg/1 PO^
2.87
3.87
3.97
2.38
8.48
4.22
1.56
1.79
2.90
2.29
2.39
1.25
4. Hi
3 JS'
4. "7
''.25
1 ' 1
1 .00
2.01
2 05
1 ?7
16
11
17
8
12
13
5
0.21
0.35
0.36
0.31
0.22
0.12
0.14
0.14
18
18
8
0
12
7 5
^ _ 5
0 ?7
0.37
0.20
0.15
l.la
0.39
0.20
0.15
0 18
150 +HO -K TUB Chlorophyll Sea
Sg/'i3 «*A »Wl Wind State
0.13
0.10
0.15
0.13
0.06
0.04
0.04
0.09
0.07
0.06
0.18
0.05
o 06
0.06
0.10
0 nc
0.11
0.70
0.82
1.12
0.70
0.78
0.63
0.36
0 59
0.86
0.86
0.52
0.46
0.79
0.80
0 07
0.50
0 67
34.5
31.5
108.0
26.25
11.25
7.50
27-75
11.25
94.00
45 00
50.25
21.00
15.00
21.00
28.50
15-75
12.00
BE 10 Moderate
XW Moderate
5 - 10
Variable Calx
re 5 Moderate
NW 10 Moderate
NW 2-3 Calm
Variable calm
1 6,16/67
2
.7
r-0
SW 5-10 Moderate
1 6, 26-6? HSU 2d lr,
2 1205 32 50
1 7/19/67 1025 34 17
2 1O40 52 50
3 1107 46 50
uiface
1.5'
TO1
3urlace
15'
Suiface
15'
30'
Surface
15'
Surface
15'
30'
45'
Surface
15'
30'
2'
19
22
22
16
16
25.8
24.0
25.4
24.6
21.6
21.1
25.3
22.0
19.9
7.1
9.2
8.3
8.9
12.9
13.7
7.6
12 '.6
15.1
9.63
7.34
8.26
7.39
1.53
0.78
8.97
4.77
9.01
7.81
1.83
0.63
5 3o
2.71
2.69
2.76
1.6li
1.92
2.5U
6.75 2.67
2.27 1.62
0 96 2.37
0.31
0.20
0 18
0.21
0.13
0.20
0.15
0.15
O.U
0.46
0.10
0.09
0.09
0.03
o 06
0.06
o 15
0.07
o.o7
0.07
1.15
0.88
0.83
0.64
0.75
0.77
0.61
0.74
0.70
1.04
27.75
24.00
25.50
9-75
9-75
18.75
17.25
9.75
36.25
28.5
NW 10 Moderate
SV 3
Calm
' Mid-channel
-------
TABLE Z (Continued)
Secci WateY Sample Water
T Time Disc Depth Depth Temp.
Transect Station Sale SSI Inches Feet Feet °C
D 1 6/1U/67 1435 29 16 Surface 22
15' 21
2 ll(05 18 57 Surface 21
15' 20
30' 19
k6; ' i L
4? m
60- m
3 1340 44 23 Surface 21
15 ' 20
D 1 6/2S/67 IS'lS 30 17 Surface 21
15 ' 20
2 1310 30 60 Surface 22
-1C' 01
L~) £.}.
-}Q 1 20
45 ' l8
60 ' 17
3 12l(5 38 25 Surface 22
15' 22
D 1 7/19/67 1230 3l( 16 Surface 25 1
1 c i -)), 7
J-7 iff. f
2 1210 43 60 ^Surface 25-7
i oi
30 ?1 k
45' 20.5
bO ' 30 . 3
3 1135 54 25 Surface 25.6
I1"1 24.0
E 1 6/14/6? 1100 32 17 Surface 22,5
35' 2J
2 1125 36 55 Gvrface '-1!
15' i-'O
3C' IQ
i*5 ' i5
3 1140 4'j ^urf^ce r-i
15 ' ol
E 1 6/22/6? 1015 40 3 7 ?urf 8 ce ?2
15' 51
? 1045 4o 4o Surface ?2
15' 2?
45 ' 15
3 1115 34 16 Surface 22
15' 22
E 1 7/W67 1300 . 17 Surface 26
15' 25
2 -50 Surface ?•>
15' 24
^0' 21
4C ' 20
E 1 7/19/67 1255 38 17 Surface 26.0
15 ' 2? H
2 1315 48 50 Surface 2f - q
lx 24.^
3C>' 21. 6
45 ' PC ^
3 1335 U8 16 Surface ?6.7
15' 2l( 7
DO
Salinity mg/1
10 '(O
9.52
12.96
8.88
6.1(8
0.72
0.72
7.68
7.76
6 08
5.72
10.18
7.52
'(.97
3.02
1.67
3.37
f'.33
8 k
P. 5 6.22
7.9 U
f.i 7 62
13.2 3.£LJ
1U.6 r:.67
ll>. 9 0.67
8 7 7.9"
10.1 H.92
o no
o'n'
10 3:
'~J 9€
7 2Q
6 ">.
7 ^2
p . 1^5
7 9^ 3
7 04
2 Qi.
' t'.i( a
7 f^2
7 71
8 92
b.Ol
9.23
6.1(7
2.35
1 31
6 2 n 15 3.
10 1 )i r<3 L.
8 . ;; ^ . k?' U .
go ^ Q^ 2
12.9 1.93 l-i
15.0 i^\ i.:
3 . a ft ay r . ]
9.<" LA 1.'
BOB
rag/1
6.27
1 33
2.36
2.22
2.61
2.7^
1 17
l.UO
1 29
2.00
3.1-1
31
.03
o3
1 ^4
D^
-jl
"^
^
->2
lit.
r
6
3
7
6
0-18
0-16
°-13
°-1-3
9-25
0.19
0.19
0.07
0.06
o.<*
0.05
0-07
0.05
0.06
0.05
0.05
<0.02
B«/l ugm/1 Wind State
SW 3 Calm
0.60
0.66
0.58
O.V8
0.67
0 61
0.65
0.8b
0 81
0.79
0.58
SE Rough
15 - 20
6.75
6.75
17 25
13.50
SW Moderate
Moderate
S Choppy
10 - 15
TO 75
18 '66
6 75
6^75
18.75
13.75
-------
STATION LOCATIONS
CHESAPEAKE FIELD STATION SURVEY OF
CHESAPEAKE BAY
SUMMER, 1967
FIGURE i
-------
-
00
Q
LU
>
or
LU
V)
CD
o
u
LU
C/>
2
<
o:
h-
u.
o
LU
o
or
QL
h-
o
LU
O
CD
CO
Q
« O
5 °
v O
O ^
<" S
I-
2T
O
N
a:
o
x
o
o
CM
I
O
IO
I
o
I
o
in
133J Nl Hld3Q
FIGURE 2
-------
N-
(0
QC
LU
en
u_'
o
>-
CD
Q
LJ
>
tr
UJ
m
o
o:
Lu
O
UJ
-J
LL
O
o:
CL
O
I-
h-
o
CD
-1.33d Nl Hld3Q
FIGURE 3
-------
N-
(£>
cc
LU
S
5
z>
CO
•t
CO
Lc
CD
Q
LU
>
o:
LU
CO
co
O
u.
o
LU
_J
u.
o
Q:
Q.
h-
o
OD
LU
CO <
2
,1
o
I
IT)
I
o
-------
N-
<£>
CC
UJ
5
u:
o
>-
CD
Q
UJ
>
cc
UJ
cn
i-
o
Uj
<
CC
u.
o
UJ
_J
LL
O
QC
0.
h-
O
CD
o i
IO
(M
o
(D
io
I
o
I
o
CM
O
ro
I
O
in O
* m
o
10
I I
in o
K 00
133J Nl Hld3Q
FIGURE 5
-------
CD
CC
UJ
in
CO
u.'
O
OD
O
UJ
cc
UJ
en
CO
O
to
O
UJ
•
^x*2
i >
o in
!
O
(V
1
O
fO
1
0
t
1
in
<»
I
0
«i
I
O
(0
1
O
N-
1
in
N
1
O
oo
133d Nl HldSQ
FIGURE 6
-------
18
REGRESSION of SECCHI DISC READINGS and TURBIDITIES
MID-CHESAPEAKE, SUMMER 1967
TURBIDITY = -0.312 SECCHI DISC + 1800
t = 4.56**. d.f. = 26
16!
141
121
\n
+-
c
10
o
o
>" 8
|-
5
5
a:
D
h-
6i
2
b = -0.312
10
20 30 40 50
SECCril DISC READINGS in INCHES
60
FIGURE 7
-------
TABLE OP CONTENTS
Page
I. PREFACE 1-1
II. INTRODUCTION II - 1
A. Purpose and Scope II - 1
B. Authority II - h
III. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS Ill - 1
IV. BASIN DESCRIPTION IV - 1
A. Geography . IV - 1
B. Hydrology IV - 2
C. Geology IV - 3
D. Coal Mining Industry IV - 6
V. SURVEY ACTIVITIES V-l
A. CFS Surveys V-l
B. State Surveys V-2
C. Industrial Surveys V - 3
D. 1956 U. S. Public Health Service Survey .... V - 5
VI. WATER QUALITY STANDARDS AND MINE DRAINAGE
CONTROL OBJECTIVES VI - 1
A. State of Maryland VI - 1
B. State of West Virginia VI - 1
C. Mine Drainage Control Objectives VI - 1
VII. RELATIONSHIP OF ACIDITY TO STREAMFLOW VII - 1
VIII. ACIDITY DISTRIBUTION IN THE NORTH BRANCH BASIN . . VIII - 1
A. Headwaters to Beryl, West Virginia VIII - 1
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued)
Page
B. Beryl, West Virginia, to Pinto, Maryland . . . .VIII - 9
1. Effects of Savage River VIII - 9
2. Effects of the Luke Mill VIII - 12
3. Effects of Georges Creek VIII - 13
4. Effects of Upper Potomac River Basin
Waste Treatment Facilities VIII - 15
5. Effects Below the Luke Area VIII - 15
C. Pinto, Maryland, to Wiley Ford, West
Virginia VIII - 15
IX. EFFECTS OF THE PROPOSED BLOOMINGTON
RESERVOIR PROJECT IX - 1
A. Introduction IX - 1
B. Acidity-Alkalinity Balance IX - 3
1. General IX - 3
2. Assumptions Regarding Acid Routine IX - h
3. Assumptions Regarding Sources of
Acidity and Alkalinity Below
Bloomington IX - 7
h. Discussion of Results IX - 9
C. Acidity Production in the Mines at the
Proposed Bloomington Reservoir IX - 15
D. Acidity Regeneration in Waters of the
Proposed Bloomington Reservoir IX - 16
X. BIBLIOGRAPHY X - 1
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued)
APPENDICES
Page
A. SURVEY PROCEDURES AND ANALYTICAL METHODS A - 1
1. Objectives of the Survey A - 1
2. Sampling Procedures A - 3
3. Analytical Procedures A - 3
B. MINE DRAINAGE STATION DESCRIPTIONS AND BASIN
SCHEMATICS B-l
C. DATA TABLES C-l
-------
LIST OF TABLES
Table Page
1 Streamflow of North Branch Potomac River
and Tributaries above Cumberland, Maryland .... IV - k
2 North Branch at Beryl - Probability Distri-
bution of Net Acidity Loadings VIII - 2
3 Net Acidity Balance Above Steyer VIII - 7
k Net Acidity Contributions of Georges Creek .... IX - 10
B-l North Branch Potomac River, Mine Drainage
Station Descriptions B-2
C-l Hardness and Metals Concentrations, Water
Temperature, and Stream Discharge C - 2
C-2 Acidity, Alkalinity, Sulfate, and Solids
Concentrations, pH and Conductivity C - 10
-------
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure
II-l
IV-1
V-l
VI-1
VII-1
VII-2
VII -3
VII -h
North Branch Basin Map
Pa
II
- 3
North Branch at Kitzmiller, Maryland,
Geometric Mean Discharge of All Months of
Record and 1965 Calendar Year Mean Monthly
Discharges
North Branch at Luke, Maryland, pH versus
Time, 1962 - 196?
IV - 5
pH versus Net Alkalinity
V
VI
k
3
North Branch at Beryl, West Virginia,
Acidity Concentration versus River
Discharge ,
North Branch at Beryl, West Virginia,
Acidity Loading versus River Discharge
North Branch at Kitzmiller, Maryland,
Acidity Loading versus River Discharge
North Branch at Steyer, Maryland,
Acidity Loading versus River Discharge
VII - 2
VII -
VII
vii -
5
6
VIII-1 North Branch Net Alkalinity Loading,
P (Corresponding Q equalled or exceeded)
= 80 Percent VIII - 3
VIII-2 North Branch Net Alkalinity Loading,
P (Corresponding Q equalled or exceeded)
= 50 Percent VIII - h
VIII-3 North Branch Net Alkalinity Loading,
P (Corresponding Q equalled or exceeded)
= 20 Percent VIII - 5
VIII-l* Savage River, Net Alkalinity by Season .... VIII - 11
VIII-5 North Branch Below Luke, Maryland,
Net Alkalinity Balance, August 1967 VIII - ih
IX-1 Net Alaklinity Loadings by Month Below
Bloomington Reservoir, Calendar Year
1965 Streamflow Conditions IX - 11
-------
LIST OF FIGURES (Continued)
Figure Page
IX-2 Net Alkalinity Loadings by Month Belov
Bloomington Reservoir, Synthetic Average
Year Streamflow Conditions IX - 12
APPENDICES
B-l Legend for Basin Schematics B - 8
B-2 Schematic Diagram, North Branch, Above
Steyer, Maryland B - 9
B-3 Schematic Diagram, North Branch, Below
Steyer, Maryland, Above Kitzmiller,
Maryland B - 10
B-U Schematic Diagram, North Branch, Below
Kitzmiller, Maryland, Above Beryl, West
Virginia B - 11
B-5 Schematic Diagram, North Branch, Below
Beryl, Above Wiley Forci, West Virginia
(Cumberland, Maryland) B - 12
-------
I - 1
I. PREFACE
The basin of the Potomac River North Branch is a region of
steep, narrow, forested valleys and turbulent mountain streams
draining parts of Maryland and West Virginia on the eastern edge
of the Appalachian Plateau. The watershed's few people are scat-
tered about in hamlets and isolated houses connected by a system
of narrow roads, as often as not unpaved. The upper basin of the
North Branch is, in fact, a part of rural Appalachia.
As in many other parts of the eastern mountains, coal mining
activity which in the past has gone uncontrolled has caused exten-
sive damage to the land and water resources. Although the total
extent of the damage may be apparent to only the careful investiga-
tor, the open surface mines and refuse banks are readily visible to
any visitor, as is the discolored water polluted by mine drainage.
This report describes the present extent of mine drainage
pollution in the North Branch Basin. In the reach upstream from
Luke, Maryland, in which acid conditions are most severe, mine
drainage is the sole significant cause of pollution. Over U5 miles
of the North Branch and over 100 miles of tributaries harbor
virtually no aquatic fauna.
It has been observed, in the course of repeated visits to
the Basin, that areas formerly unmined have now been opened; and
existing surface mines have been expanded. New miles alter the
terrain and will cause additional mine drainage pollution unless
controlled. Mine drainage pollution and the total damage to the
-------
1-2
land and water resources will change over the course of a few years
as mining activity continues. It is recognized, therefore, that
this report is a transitory document whose immediate value is to
serve as a guide in the present situation, and whose longer-term
worth is simply to mark a point on the historical trend.
-------
II - 1
II. INTRODUCTION
A. Purpose and Scope
The mine drainage control program under development by the
Chesapeake Field Station has been divided into the following phases:
1. Determining the extent and severity of mine drainage
pollution.
2. Isolating source tributaries of acidic and alkaline waters
and determining the quantities and temporal distribution of
acid and alkali from tributaries and within segments of the
main river.
3. Determining the degree of control necessary to meet the
applicable water quality standards.
k. Locating specific sources of mine drainage pollution and
determining quantities of the individual contributions.
5. Developing recommendations for control measures at specific
locations.
These activities are being carried out in cooperation with
the appropriate State agencies, the Maryland Department of Water
Resources and the West Virginia Department of Natural Resources,
Division of Water Resources.
The Chesapeake Field Station program is now well into the
second phase which is being carried out to the extent necessary to
obtain precise estimates of acid quantities contributed by the
various sub-basins in order to establish priorities for corrective
-------
II - 2
action. This phase is being partially funded by the Baltimore
District, Corps of Engineers.
The ultimate objective of the mine drainage control program
under development by the Chesapeake Field Station (CFS), Middle
Atlantic Region, Federal Water Pollution Control Administration, is
to eliminate the adverse effects of mine drainage to attain a water
quality commensurate with the designated water uses, rfater quality
standards of the States of Maryland and West Virginia are considered
quantitative objectives of the CFS program. These standards are
described in Chapter IV.
The Maryland standards are applicable to the Maryland tribu-
taries and virtually all of the North Branch proper, since the
Potomac River lies entirely within the State of Maryland, except
for a two-mile reach below its source. The right bank of the river
forms the boundary between Maryland and West Virginia. West Virginia
standards are applicable to the right bank tributaries.
Mine drainage pollution in the CFS study area is limited to
the North Branch Basin of the Potomac River. The geographical
setting of this report is the Potomac Basin upstream from the Cumber-
land, Maryland, area. CFS data from Wills Creek Basin also appear
in the data tables, although mine drainage in that Basin is a local
problem and outside the scope of this report. A Basin map is shown
as Figure II-l. Basin schematics are shown in Appendix B as Figures
B-l through B-5.
-------
z
z<
<
o
00 a:
o
a
UJ
>
-I O
o a.
a.
i
LJ o
o z
cr
Q I
I-
UJ CE
z o
23
Siw
2 5 tu
-
O<
w(zx
II- O
u. O
o
-
tr o uj
< a. a:
-------
II -
This report contains the findings of the work to date.
The purposes of the report are:
1. To provide the following information:
a. A tabulation of data obtained from field surveys.
b. A description of the temporal and spatial distri-
bution of the acidity loading in the North Branch
main river.
c. An estimate of the effects on water quality of the
proposed Bloomington Reservoir Project based on
currently available data and under present loading
conditions.
2. To serve as a framework for the remainder of the study,
leading to a control program in support of the ultimate
objective.
B. Authority
This report was prepared under the provision of the Federal
Water Pollution Control Act, as amended (33 U.S.C. k66 et seqj,
which directed the Secretary of the Interior to develop programs
for eliminating pollution of interstate waters and improving the
condition of surface and underground waters .
-------
-------
Ill - 1
III. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
1. Pollution of the North Branch and its tributaries by
acid mine drainage is more severe and probably more widespread than
at any time in history. The River now carries an acid loading
larger than any previously reported value.
2. The acid loading has increased almost five-fold since
1956, from an average loading of 26,000 Ib/day in 1956 to 120,000
Ib/day in 196?. The concentrations resulting from these loadings
are sufficient to depress the pH belov k.5 at all seasons and below
2.5 at times of maximum concentration. The observed pH values at
Luke, Maryland, have been decreasing steadily over the last five
years.
3. Examination in 1966 of benthic fauna of the North Branch
and many tributaries revealed only specialized, acid-tolerant forms
in the streams carrying mine drainage and a complete absence of
organisms at many locations. The biological productivity, as
measured by the density of organisms, has been reduced greatly in
reaches of streams mildly or intermittently affected.
k. There are indications that active mines are a signifi-
cant, and perhaps the largest, source of acid mine drainage.
5. Because there are no strong, natural alkalinity sources
in the North Branch above Savage River, an extensive mine drainage
control program will be necessary to attain the approved State
water quality standards.
-------
Ill - 2
6. Operation of the proposed Bloomington Reservoir on the
North Branch would have the following affects, assuming a continua-
tion of present loading conditions and subject to the qualifications
expressed in Chapter IX:
a. Acid concentrations reaching the Luke area would be
significantly lower than concentrations under
natural conditions. There would be relatively little
effect on the pH because of the low response of pH
to acidity changes at concentrations of interest.
b. The distribution of the acid loadings reaching the
Luke area would be similar to the distribution
expected to occur under natural conditions. How-
ever, for the two flow conditions analyzed, the
acid loadings during the summer months would be
in excess of those occurring under natural
conditions.
c. The full potential of the proposed Bloomington
Reservoir for local water supply and recreation
will not be realized until water of adequate qual-
ity for these uses can be impounded.
7. Additional stability and partial neutralization of
Bloomington releases could be obtained by operating Savage River
Reservoir in conjunction with Bloomington Reservoir.
-------
-------
Ill - 3
8. Present analyses are limited by the amount of data
available. Action is being or has been initiated to obtain addi-
tional information for the purposes listed below:
a. To provide adequate resolution of sub-basin load-
ings and streamflov distribution from ungaged
tributaries.
b. To add precision to the main river acidity-discharge
relationships indicated by existing data and to
establish seasonal trends within the general
discharge-acidity relationship.
c. To evaluate the effects of industrial operations
on the acidity-alkalinity balance below Luke.
d. To estimate the effects of Bloomington Reservoir
based on data currently being collected.
e. To establish or refute the possibility of signifi-
cant acid production in the waters of the proposed
Bloomington Reservoir or in the coal seams adjacent
to the Reservoir.
f. To determine applicable abatement measures for the
elimination of mine drainage pollution in the North
Branch Basin.
-------
-------
IV - 1
IV. BASIN DESCRIPTION
A. Geography
The North Branch of the Potomac River rises in Tucker County,
West Virginia, and flows alternately northeast and southeast in a
zigzag pattern for about 9$ miles until it joins the South Branch
to form the Potomac River. Two miles downstream from its source,
below Kempton, Maryland, the right bank forms the boundary between
Maryland and West Virginia; on the Maryland side the river is
bounded by Garrett and Allegany Counties, and on the West Virginia
side by Grant, Mineral, and Hampshire Counties.
The Basin's coal-bearing area lies mainly in a trough-shaped
valley about 80 miles long, oriented with its axis in a northeast-
southwest direction. The North Branch flows northeastward along
the valley axis for almost 50 miles, then bends to the southeast
at the three-town area of Luke, Westernport, and Piedmont, and
leaves the coal-bearing area of the valley. The area above Luke
is commonly called the Upper Potomac Coal Field. The northeast
part of the valley is drained by Georges Creek which flows south-
westward to join the North Branch at Westernport.
The coal region of the North Branch Basin actually extends
to the northeast past the upper topographic divide of Georges Creek
Basin into the Wills Creek Basin of Maryland and Pennsylvania.
Local pollution exists in the Maryland tributaries, Braddock Run
and Jennings Run, but the extent and severity is limited. Wills
-------
IV - 2
Creek, which joins the North Branch at Cumberland, exerts no adverse
affect on it.
The farthest upstream industry which exerts a significant
affect on water quality, except for the mining and coal-processing
activities, is the Luke Mill of the West Virginia Pulp and Paper
Company. The discharge from the mill, located downstream from the
confluence of Savage River and the North Branch, exerts the great-
est neutralizing affect in the Basin. The next industry is Alleg-
heny Ballistics Laboratory, West Virginia, which is located 20
miles downstream near Pinto, Maryland, at the upstream boundary of
the Cumberland industrial area.
Both the North Branch and Georges Creek valleys are steep
and narrow. Most of the tributaries are short hillside runs with
less than ten square miles of drainage area draining directly into
the main stem. Exceptions are Stony River and Abram Creek, which
drain much of the North Branch Basin above Luke on the West
Virginia side. These tributaries, both of which lie in the coal-
bearing region, each approach 50 square miles in drainage area at
their mouth.
B. Hydrology
Flow of Stony River is regulated by West Virginia Pulp and
Paper Company's Stony River Reservoir, about 19 miles above the
North Branch and, to a minor extent, by a Virginia Electric and
Power Company dam about nine miles above the North Branch. A
-------
-------
IV - 3
reservoir near the U. S. Route 50 crossing at Mt. Storm, West
Virginia, has been proposed by the Corps of Engineers.
Savage River, which lies for the most part outside the coal
region, joins the North Branch just upstream from Luke, Maryland.
It is regulated by the Corps of Engineers' Savage River Reservoir
about five miles above the North Branch. A reservoir (Savage II)
upstream from the existing reservoir has been proposed by the Corps
of Engineers. The Corps of Engineers has also proposed a large
reservoir, the Bloomington Project, on the Nortn Branch about eight
miles upstream from Luke and Bloomington, Maryland.
Because of the steep and generally impervious terrain,
streams in this region exhibit rapid flow changes in response to
changes in precipitation or snowmelt. The streams tend also to
have a low dry weather flow. Gaging stations in the area of inter-
est, their mean and median discharges, and their drainage areas
are listed in Table 1. Figure IV-1 shows the medians of mean
monthly discharges for all montns of record at the Kitzmiller gage.
The mean monthly discharges exceeded on the average of 95 per cent
of the time and the 1965 monthly discharges are also shown on
Figure IV-1.
C. Geology1 »2,3,»t
The predominant geological formations in the Upper Potomac
coal field of the North Branch Basin are, from top to bottom, the
Conemaugh, Allegheny, and Pottsville formations of the Pennsylvanian
-------
IV - It
TABLE 1
STREAMFLOW OF NORTH BRANCH POTOMAC RIVER AND
TRIBUTARIES ABOVE CUMBERLAND, MARYLAND
Stream
USGS Gaging
Station
Drainage
Area
(sq.mi.)
Streamflow
Mean Median
(cfs) (cfs)
Remarks
North Branch Steyer, Md.
Stony River Mt. Storm, W. Va.
Abram Creek Oakmont, W. Va.
North Branch Kitzmiller, Md.
North Branch Bloomington, Md.
Savage River Bloomington, Md.
North Branch Luke, Md.
Georges Creek Franklin, Md.
North Branch Pinto, Md.
73.0 160
1*8.8
^7.3
225
287
106
UOl*
72.1
596
1*98
162
681
89
82.1
6l.5 238
238
281*
76
356
77-9 36
859 ^58
Median estimated from
relation with Kitz-
miller gage.
Below dam, records
unadjusted
Median from USGS pro-
visional records,
subject to revision.
Adjusted for storage
in Stony River Reser-
voir.
Beryl, W. Va., dis-
continued 1950.
Below Savage River
dam records adjusted
for storage.
Records adjusted for
storage in Stony and
Savage River Reser-
voirs .
Unadjusted.
-------
~O
2
•>
a:
UJ
_J u.
M
tz
^
"o
O
CD
I
cr
p
o:
<
ui
>-
jU-
^°
^X
ofe
So
"Z.
<_
u <
_J
w
UJ
5
y
o:
ui
I
P7 -
0
o
(M
0
O
O
O
O
O
o
o>
J
o
s
?
r
o
o
CO
o
o
m
o
0
1^V\\>S\^S
o o o c
o o o
n IM —
1
3
LD
UJ
-------
iv - 6
Age. Of the beds which outcrop in the Basin, the most central is
the Upper Freeport which forms the uppermost stratum of the Allegheny
formation. The topmost stratum which outcrops regularly is the
Barton coal, which forms the upper stratum of the lower member of
the Conemaugh formation, about 500 fee above the Upper Freeport.
The lowest coals outcropping in the Basin are the Middle and Lower
Kittanning coal groups which lie in the Allegheny formation about
250 feet below the Upper Freeport. Coal beds are interspersed with
marine shales, red beds (shales), and clays. In Georges Creek and
in a few isolated locations in the Upper Potomac field, the Mononga-
hela formation and Pittsburgh coal overlie the Conemaugh formation.
Calcareous rocks, which would provide background alkalinity,
are not characteristic of the Basin. Calcareous shales, called
limestone in early geological investigations, are present in several
locations only as thin, lime-poor strata. A large outcrop of Green-
brier limestone, however, does occur in the Savage River Basin.
This rock unit and the seasonal nature of the drainage (surface
runoff or dry-weather flow) are believed to have the dominant effect
on the alkalinity of Savage Reservoir.
D. Coal Mining Industry in the Potomac River North Branch Basin5'6
Coal has been mined in the North Branch Basin for about
150 years. A mine was operating before I8l6 at Eckhart, Maryland,
in the Georges Creek Coal Field. Good transportation facilities
were probably instrumental in stimulating the early development
of the Georges Creek Field.
-------
-------
IV - 7
Maryland's peak production of coal occurred in 1907, earlier
than any other major coal-producing State. Coal production for both
the Maryland and West Virginia portions of the Worth Branch Basin
for the 1961-1965 period was.
1961 1.0 million tons
1962 1.0 million tons
1963 1.3 million tons
196U 2.2 million tons
1965 3.3 million tons
The 1965 North Branch production amounted to 0.65 per cent of
national production. About 2.2 million tons vere mined in West
Virginia (Upper Potomac Field) and 1.1 million tons in Maryland.
Of the 1965 Maryland production, 62k,000 tons were mined from the
Upper Potomac Field. The Upper Potomac Field accounted for 85 per
cent of the 1965 Worth Branch Basin coal production, and the West
Virginia part of the Upper Potomac Field made up the bulk of the
recent increases. In 196l and 1962, Maryland accounted for about
75 per cent of the coal produced in the North Branch Basin; in 1965
Maryland accounted for only 33 per cent. While production for the
entire North Branch Basin increased 330 per cent from 196l to 1965,
Maryland production increased only 60 per cent. These increases
are probably a result of the general national economic upturn dur-
ing these years, and are not indications of the long-term trend.
However, they are significant in terms of present water quality.
-------
IV - 8
Output per man increased three times as fast in Maryland
during 1961-1965 as in the United States and the adjacent States;
and in 1965 the output per man was much greater in the Maryland
Upper Potomac Field than in the Georges Creek Field. The increased
output, probably a result of new explorations and investment in new
equipment, was also experienced in the West Virginia Upper Potomac
Field.
Because of the increased output per man, mining employment
in the North Branch Basin did not increase in proportion to produc-
tion during 1961-1965- Employment for these years was:
1961 .... 617
1962 .... 567
1963 .... 631
I96h . ... 781*
1965 .... 851
Of the 1965 employment, 373 were employed in Maryland and ^78 in
West Virginia. The figures include not only miners, but all mine-
associated employees.
The average value of Maryland coal sold on the open market
in 1965 was $3.63 per tone at the mine—below the average U. S.
price of $k.kk and the Pennsylvania (including anthracite) and West
Virginia values of $5-07 and $^.87, respectively. Coal values have
been stable since 1950. The average U. S. value at the mine fluc-
tuated within a range of $0.69 per ton from 1950 to 1965. West
-------
IV - 9
Virginia Upper Potomac Field values were probably comparable to the
Maryland coal values. This makes the North Branch Basin 1965 pro-
duction worth about $12 million, or 0.53 per cent of the value of
all U. S. coal mined in 1965.
The West Virginia Upper Potomac 1965 production would have
been worth $8 million, about one per cent of the total value of the
West Virginia coal production. The Maryland 19^5 production of $it
million was about three ten-thousandths of one per cent of the gross
Maryland State product, and about six per cent of the total value of
the mineral industry in Maryland.
-------
V - 1
V. SURVEY ACTIVITIES
A. CFS Surveys
The Chesapeake Field Station (CFS) of the Middle Atlantic
Region, Federal Water Pollution Control Administration, maintains
a mine drainage surveillance program in the North Branch of the
Potomac River and tributaries between Cumberland and the headwaters
near Kempton, Maryland. The purpose of the program is to ascertain
the effects of mine drainage pollution in terms of (l) extent of
area affected; (2) severity of water quality degradation; and (3)
quantity of mine drainage pollution to be abated.
The field surveys were carried out in cooperation with the
Maryland Department of Water Resources and the West Virginia Depart-
ment of Natural Resources, Division of Water Resources. Sampling
was started in August 1966 and has continued at intervals since.
This report contains a summary of survey procedures and analytical
methods, descriptions of sampling stations, and data collected
through March 1968 (Appendices A through C). Sampling stations are
indicated on Basin Map (Figure II-l) and on Basin Schematics
(Figures B-l through B-5).
In August 196?» CFS conducted an intensive water quality
survey of the North Branch from Luke to Cumberland, Maryland. One
objective of this survey was to determine the acidity reduction
afforded by the West Virginia Pulp and Paper Company's Luke Mill,
and the extent of downstream movement of acidity due to a reduc-
tion of the mill's caustic discharges during 1966. Data are
-------
V - 2
published as a separate report.7 An investigation of benthic life
in streams affected by mine drainage was conducted by CFS personnel
in late summer of 1966. Results are to be published as a separate
report.8
In July 196T, a study of mine drainage in the North Branch
Potomac was published as a part of the report on mine drainage in
the Chesapeake Bay-Delaware River Basins.^ Measurements of acidity
and metal concentrations were limited to low flow samples; conse-
quently, the interpretation is of limited applicability.
B. State Surveys
The Maryland Department of Water Resources has an active
surveillance program for the streams in Maryland subjected to mine
drainage pollution. Results of sampling through the end of 1966
* 10
have been published. Like the CFS survey, this is a continuing
project. In addition, the Maryland Department of Water Resources
(MDWR) has a complete survey of Maryland mine locations and areas
and many effluent analyses.11 The MDWR also earlier conducted a
pH survey of Maryland streams and many West Virginia tributaries
to the North Branch.12 A monitoring program is currently being
maintained by the West Virginia Department of Natural Resources,
Division of Water Resources.
*
The use of unpublished data of Maryland Department of Water
Resources is gratefully acknowledged.
-------
V - 3
C. Industrial Surveys
Three industrial organizations maintain stream sampling
programs in the Basin at Cumberland and above. The West Virginia
Pulp and Paper Company's Luke Mill samples the North Branch at Luke
above and below the mill, at McCoole, Maryland (opposite Keyser,
West Virginia); at Dawson, Maryland; and on Georges Creek. West
Virginia Pulp and Paper Company's pH data were used to determine
the trend in water quality. Monthly median pH values from the
sampling point located above the Luke Mill and below Savage River
indicate a steady decline over at least the last five years.
13
(Figure V-l)
The Celanese Corporation plant near Cresaptown, Maryland,
samples the North Branch at points above and below the plant. The
Kelly-Springfield Company samples the North Branch at two locations
in the City of Cumberland.
Analyses performed by these organizations include pH and
alkalinity or acidity, as appropriate. At the more downstream loca-
tions, data have only recently become of interest, because lime dis-
charges at Luke formerly prevented significant downstream acid
movement. West Virginia Pulp and Paper Company acidity and alkalinity
data differ in certain respects from other survey data.
These industrial data are summarized annually by the Inter-
state Commission on the Potomac River Basin.14
-------
V - It
o
U
o
o
«k
cr
LJ
1
to
Ul
2 i"~
— to
H C3)
o
X
U
-------
V - 5
D. 1956 U. S. Public Health Service Survey
The Public Health Service conducted a survey of the North
Branch during September and October of 1956. The survey data indi-
cated that the mean daily loading of acidity in the North Branch
at Bloomington was about 26,000 Ib/day. For 50 per cent of the
year, the loading varied between 15,000 and 1*7»000 Ib/day, with a
yearly range of 3,000 to 200,000 Ib/day.
It was estimated that the pH was between k.l and 5-0 for
50 per cent of the year; the mean annual pH was U.5. The annual
pH range of the North Branch was 3.0 to 6.9- The data indicate
that the pH could fall as low as 2.8 for one week every ten years
at times of extreme low flow.
The Public Health Service report15 contained a summary of
studies conducted through 1956. Comparison of this summary to the
more recent data indicate that the locations of principal sources
of mine drainage have changed considerably. In 1938 it was reported
that (l) 5^ per cent of the mine drainage entering the North Branch
Basin originated in the Georges Creek and Wills Creek Basins, and that
(2) hQ per cent of the drainage was carried by the Hoffman Drainage
Tunnel, which drains mines in Georges Creek Basin, to a tributary
of Wills Creek.
Recent sampling by the MDWR and the CFS indicated that mine
drainage in Wills Creek Basin exerts no adverse effect on the North
Branch, and the mine drainage problem is extremely small when compared
to the problems in other mining areas.
-------
VI - 1
VI. WATER QUALITY STANDARDS AND MINE DRAINAGE CONTROL OBJECTIVES
A. State of Maryland16
The vater quality standards of the State of Maryland, as
approved by the U. S. Department of the Interior on August 7, 1967,
state:
"Normal pH values for the water of the zone must
not be less than 6.0 nor greater than 8.5, except
where ... and to the extent that ... pH values
outside this range occur naturally."
Maryland standards apply to the North Branch proper, since the
entire River lies within Maryland.
B. State of West Virginia
At the present time, water quality standards of the State
of West Virginia have not been approved or adopted. When the West
Virginia standards become effective, they will apply to the West
Virginia tributaries„
C. Mine Drainage Control Objectives
In developing any pollution abatement program commensurate
with the water quality standards, it is necessary to relate the
water quality standards to mine drainage control objectives. The
standard most applicable to mine drainage is pH. To maintain the
pH at the standard value of 6.0, a reduction in acidity will be
required.
To aid in simulating the response of pH to a reduction in
acidity as a result of an abatement effort, the net alkalinity-pH
-------
VI - 2
*
relationship was established from existing stream sampling data.
(Figure VI-l) The graph indicates that an acidity reduction to
attain a net alkalinity of zero or greater will be required in the
North Branch to meet the water quality standard of pH 6.0. Attain-
ing this water quality standard is considered the objective of the
mine drainage control program.
It has been observed that there are active mining operations
in every sub-basin in which significant contributions of acid to the
North Branch have been detected. The significance of active mines
as compared to abandoned mines as acid sources has not been estab-
lished by individual mine effluent sampling; however, stream survey
data provide a strong implication that active mines are responsible
for much of the pollution.
*
This relationship is analogous to an acidity titration curve.
-------
ac.
UJ
CD
S
g
Z
>-
LJ
^
5}
i .
o
CC
$
Q
2
°a
00
ii
o
>-
03
to
Ul
>
o:
CO
cc
1 1 1
UJ
§
O O
O
0
o
-------
VII - 1
VII. RELATIONSHIP OF ACIDITY TO STREAMFLOW
Inspection of data developed by the CFS and the MDWR showed
an inverse relation of acidity concentration to river discharge
which can be expressed mathematically as:
C = aQb
where
C = acid concentration in mg/1
Q = river discharge (cfs)
a = a constant
b = an exponent
In the range above median discharge, concentration exhibits an
inverse linear response of about one to one to changes in dis-
charge and can be expressed mathematically as:
C = aQb
/•>
where |b| > |b|
Plots of the logarithm of the concentration versus the loga-
rithm of the discharge for main river stations (Steyer, Kitzmiller,
and Beryl) revealed that in the range below median discharge the
concentration response to changes in discharge is insensitive almost
to the point of independence. The C versus Q, graph for the Beryl
station is shown in Figure VTI-1. These concentrations result in
pH values from i*-5 to less than 3 over virtually the entire range
of flow.
-------
—, o
CO £
K™ *
* w
^ 5
VII -.
_j
cr
UJ
CL- a
^J 5
•s §
U o:
crj
o
o
o K
2 8
0
o
o
o
O)
oo
•«•»
-------
VII - 3
The basic relationship used in this report is a plot of
the logarithm of the acidity loading versus the logarithm of the
river discharge—a graph whose shape is the reverse of the C
versus Q. In the below-median flow range, the loading is highly
dependent on discharge, since the loading is a product of the dis-
charge and concentrations which vary on the average within narrow
limits. The loading in this flow region is expressed in terms of
flow as given below:
L= cQd
where
L = acid loading (lb/day)
Q = river discharge (cfs)
c = a constant
d = an exponent
In the above-median flow range, the loading becomes constant and
can be mathematically formulated as:
L = K
where
K = a constant
The L versus Q graph, basically a derivation of the C versus
Q relationship, is a better working relationship in that it facili-
tates the comparison of tributary and in-stream loadings. L versus
Q graphs for main river stations are shown in Figures VII-2
through VH-h.
-------
Ixl
O
a:
<
x
u
. o>
E
~ o
> O)
dt
in
d
o..
m
cr
v>
•c
Q
3+
I
^+ DQ
in
CO
CO
o>
o
a:
ui
a.
T3
-8
CD
cr
O
_>N
'5
Oj. Q
c.
O
0)
a
cri
<
CD
O
o I a:
a.
VII - U
oo
(M
O
O
O
00
(D
UJ
* s
o
o
-------
VII - 5
UJ
O
a:
<
i
u
<0
> O)
O
<
3
>-
t
b
-------
VII - 6,
-------
VII - 7
The net alkalinity, which is defined as total alkalinity
minus total acidity, has been used in this report to describe the
acidic or alkaline character of waters. The net alkalinity is used
as a continuous function which can assume either a positive or a
negative sign, depending on whether alkalinity (positive) or acidity
(negative) is in excess of the other. It is zero at the boundary
between acidic and alkaline conditions; that is, at neutrality. A
logarithmic scale, which has no zero, normally cannot be used to
describe such a variable; however, the prevailing pH in the llorth
Branch is less than 4.5 at virtually all flow conditions. At such
conditions the total alkalinity is zero, and the total acidity is
equal to the (minus) net alkalinity.
In the range below median flow, the C versus Q curves indi-
cate (on a basin-wide scale) the oxygen and acidic material are
reacting nearly to the extent possible with the water available.
The small changes in acidity concentration over this flow range
indicate that additional water does not dilute the reaction product
(acid) in proportion to the amount of water added to the system.
In the range above median discharge, the addition of water to the
system causes a corresponding decrease in the concentration, indi-
cating that the effect of additional water in this flow range is
to dilute the acid. Acid loading reaches a maximum near the median
discharge and then remains constant throughout the higher flow range.
At these conditions, reactions are probably proceeding at their
maximum rates in an excess of water.
-------
VII - 8
The acid loading at a given time and location in the North
Branch is the result of a set of tributary sub-basin discharges.
At low-flow conditions, when tributaries and river are discharging
at relatively steady rates, the river loadings would be expected to
equal the sum of the upstream tributary loadings. Also, at low-flow
conditions, the drainage area above the given river location would
have a more uniform probability of discharge among its tributary
sub-basins than at higher flow conditions when the sub-basin dis-
charges would tend to be partially independent. At higher flows,
which are generally unsteady, the river loading depends on the
tributary loadings, their times of origin and time of travel.
At low-flow conditions, loadings derived from load-discharge
relationships at a uniform probability of occurrence for all tribu-
tary sub-basins should add up to the loading indicated for a main
river station at the same probability. At higher flows, this rela-
tive uniformity would be absent, and sub-basins would discharge at
probabilities varying greatly from the overall basin probability
of occurrence. The additive properties of loadings indicated by
L versus Q curves would therefore also be absent. The preceding
discussion, although somewhat speculative, illustrates the nature
of the problem in defining the relationship between tributary and
main river loadings.
The reaction conditions which determine the rate and extent
of the acid-forming reaction among oxygen, water, and acidic mate-
rials are largely functions of climatological factors. This suggests
-------
-------
VII - 9
that loadings may also vary with season. Among the more important
reaction conditions are temperature, extent and time of water con-
tact with acidic material, and the occurrence and intensity of
bacterial action.
Because of the general lack of natural alkalinity in the
Basin, the computational analyses have been made using acidity as
a conservative parameter. It was also assumed that the turbulent
character of the River keeps it well saturated with oxygen. Under
oxidizing conditions, and in the absence of carbonate, iron is
expected to go to the ferric state to release the bulk of the po-
tential acidity, which is then exerted within the sulfuric acid
equilibrium. For this reason, the mobility of ferrous iron as an
acid precursor is believed to be quite limited.17 Channel storage
of reduced iron forms, and subsequent exertion as acidity by resus-
pension of bottom material has been assumed to be zero. The ana-
lytical procedure used measures the entire active and potential
acidity (see Appendix A); therefore, differences in the oxidation
state of acid precursors at different locations do not affect the
use of acidities in a mass balance.
-------
VIII - 1
VIII. ACIDITY DISTRIBUTION IN THE NORTH BRANCH BASIN
A. Headwaters to Beryl, West Virginia
The Basin drained by the reach of river from its headwaters
(River Mile 98) to the sampling station at Beryl (Bloomington, Mary-
land, River Mile 53.6) accounts for the major portion of the acid
loading carried by the North Branch. Mean annual acid loading at
Beryl is roughly six times that of the mean combined contributions
of Savage River (near zero) and Georges Creek, although the ratio
varies widely depending on streamflow conditions. Upstream from
Beryl there are no significant sources of alkalinity; hence, the
acidity loading is cumulative throughout the reach. The probability
distribution of acidity loadings shown in Table 2 indicates that
about two-thirds of the total annual loading at Beryl occurs at
above-median flow conditions.
Net alkalinity profiles at three equivalent flow conditions
were constructed from the logarithmic graphs of loading versus dis-
$fr
charge (L versus Q graphs) and flow-duration curves 18 for the main
river stations (Figures VIII-1 through VIII-3). River discharges
Reference 18 contains duration curves for Kitzmiller and Beryl
(Bloomington, now abandoned). The duration curve for Steyer
was obtained from the Kitzmiller curve on a discharge per square
mile basis after determining the similarity of runoff character-
istics. The high-flow end of the Steyer curve was then adjusted
upward on the basis of regional flood discharge variations with
drainage area published in Bulletin 25. The mean annual discharge
obtained from the duration curve agrees closely with the mean of
record.
-------
viii - •-:
TABLE 2
WORTH BRANCH AT BERYL
PROBABILITY DISTRIBUTION OF NET ACIDITY LOADS
P(Q) ATimc
cfs 11/day
Load % c*" Total
Ib/yr Annual
98 3-5
95 k.O
90 7.5
80 10
70 10
60 10
50 10
1*0 10
30 10
20 10
j. 0 7 ;;
5 !KO
2 3,5
Total Annual
32
1*3
57
»9
139
200
261
380
510
710
1,150
I ,6(30
2,590
Loac;
23,000
29,000
37,000
52,000
73,000
97,000
130,000
160,000
172,000
172,000
172,000
17°, 000
172,000
2914
*23
1,013
2 ,398
2,661*
3,5J(0
^,71*5
5, 8140
6,270
6,27^
1.70F-
2,511
2,197
1*2, '(00
,000 C.v
,000 L.I
,000 2,k
, 000 -, , ?
,000 6.3
,000 C.3
, 000 11 . 2
,000 13. C.
,000 1^.3
,000 lit 8
,00''> i'l,,:
,000 5.9
,roo 5.2
,000
'•-7
~ t v
4,1
6 6
] lj . 9
23,2
3, , ^
3 o /%
HO £;
63.0
7V "
c,'. 9
•;/t ^
120.0
Mean Daily Load
116,000
-------
NOW dWVMS A3Nld i
33yHi
»33«D WVW8V
AN01S
•2 ?
»8
eo e
H n
O 0
_j
cc
LU
CD
"° n "^
^ "" i"
O
g
o
00
1
o
o
1
o
M
1
o
-------
CO
lit
_J
o:
UJ
or
-------
Nfia dWVMS AJNId
NOW SMWOJ 33WH1
wvaav
a3Aia ANCU.S
M33HD O1VJJ08 ZHZZ3
NOW
wia
O <"> O)
CO PJ 00
II II II
O U
o
»n
in
10
(O
o
r-
OL
Ul
>
oe
m
oo
8
o»
-------
VIII - 6
of 80, 50, and 20 percent probability of being equalled or exceeded
were selected as representative of low, median, and high flows,
respectively.
The 80 percent profile represents acid loadings at low flow
discharges which could occur more or less simultaneously at the
three sampling points, The acidity loadings for this condition
are considered to be from a relatively steady flow system. Simul-
taneous occurrence of median (50 percent) and 20 percent discharges,
however, would be relatively rare, since unsteady flow is the rule
at these conditions. The median and high flow profiles, therefore,
indicate loadings which have the same probability of occurrence but
which would not occur simultaneously.
In general, the proportion of acidity loadings from the more
upstream reaches is slightly smaller at the higher river discharges,
although, as indicated by the L versus Q curves, all instream load-
ings are much higher at the greater discharges„
At low-flow conditions (for discharges equalled or exceeded
80 percent of the time) the reach above Steyer receives almost 80
percent of the loading at Beryl<, At average flow conditions, the
loading at Steyer is about ^0 percent of the instream loading at
Beryl, and the loading at Kitzmiller is more than 90 percent of the
Beryl loading,, At discharges equalled or exceeded 20 percent of
the time, the acidity loading at Steyer is about 60 percent and the
loading at Kitzmiller still about 80 percent of the Beryl loading«,
However, the increase from Steyer to Beryl under these high-flow
-------
-------
viii - 7
conditions represents a 70,000 Ib/day influx of acidity in a reach
which receives a relatively minor quantity at low to median flow.
The location of tributaries known to be significant contributors to
the acidity loadings are indicated at the top of the profiles, as
well as the location of Stony River, where overall effect is unknown.
Where influent loadings have been estimated, they are shown by bars
at the tributary locations.
Only in the reach above Steyer has a reasonably satisfactory
balance been obtained between acid inflows and the instream loadings
indicated by L versus Q graphs.
This balance is shown below,
TABLE 3
NET ACIDITY BALANCE ABOVE STEYER
Elk Run
Laurel Run
Buffalo Creek.
P(Q)
(low
Loading
Ib /day
20,000
h,000
1,500
= 80%
flow)
Percent of
Steyer's L
50
10
h
P(Q) = 505?
(median flow)
Loading Percent of
Ib/day Steyer's L
62,000 81+
12,000 16
7,000 9
P(Q)
(high
Load i ng
Ib/day
? 62, 000
25,000
19,000
= 20%
flow )
Percent
Steyer1
>56
23
17
of
s L
Total 25,500 6k 81,000 109 >106,000 >9b
Comparison to
Steyer's
Loading (U0,000) (7^,000) (110,000,'
-------
VIII - 8
The partial balance was obtained by summing the influent
loadings of the tributaries above Steyer at a uniform yield (cfs
per square mile). This procedure should produce the most satis-
factory balance at low-flow conditions , assuming that low flows
represent the steadiest flows and most uniform sub-basin yields.
The inability to obtain a balance between the estimated tributary
loadings and the Steyer loading at the low-flow condition is at-
tributed to inadequate definition of tributary acidity loading and
discharge characteristics. It is unlikely that an undiscovered
acid source of the magnitude indicated exists, since this area has
been surveyed extensively,.
The percentages shown for the three tributaries in Table 3,
when multiplied by the fraction of Steyer's loading to Beryl's,
indicate that Elk Run contributes about 35 percent of the loading
at Beryl; Laurel Run contributes about six to ih percent, and
Buffalo Creek between three and ten percent of the Beryl loading„
In the reaches below Steyer, a balance could not be ap-
proached at higher flows when the differences between Steyer, Kitz-
miller, and Beryl stations were significant„ The influent loadings
which produced these differences are attributed to known tributary
sources still undefined as to quantity, to the possibility that many
tributaries become acidic at high flows, and, possibly, to undetected
acid discharges which enter directly into the River,, Deep mine work-
ings are fairly extensive throughout this reach, and it is possible
that sub-surface discharges occur under hydrostatic pressure„
-------
VIII - 9
B. Beryl, West Virginia, to Pinto, Maryland
In this reach the alkalinity-acidity balance is influenced
significantly by four discharges which occur predominantly in the
Luke area. Savage River, vhich alternates between alkaline and
acidic conditions, joins the North Branch at River Mile 53.5. A
major influence in the reach is the neutralizing effect created by
water withdrawals and waste discharges of the West Virginia Pulp
and Paper Company's Luke Mill, which is located on the North Branch
about one-half mile below the Savage River confluence. Georges
Creek, which joins the North Branch at River Mile 51.1|, is continu-
ously acidic. The Upper Potomac River Commission Waste Treatment
Facility at Westernport (River Mile 50.0) is a large alkaline
influence. The discharges between Luke and Pinto are discussed in
detail below.
The tributaries downstream from Westernport, except for New
Creek, are minor hillside runs. In fact, during periods of low to
moderate flow, water losses in the Luke Mill frequently cause the
river discharge at Pinto, 21 miles downstream at River Mile 32.2,
to be less than the discharge upstream from the mill.
1. Effects of Savage River
Savage River is regulated to maintain a discharge of 93 cfs
at Luke in conjunction with the unregulated flow of North Branch.
The only source of mine drainage in the Basin is Aaron Run, a small
creek between the dam and the confluence with the North Branch. The
-------
VIII - 10
quality of Savage River where it enters North Branch is extremely
variable, depending on both the acidity being discharged by Aaron
Run and the alkalinity of water released from the reservoir.
Because of these conditions, there is no fixed relation of load to
discharge in Savage River.
In 1966 an intensive water quality survey by the Chesapeake
Field Station personnel indicated an average alkalinity at the mouth
of Savage River of 43 mg/1, the highest on record. Year-round
sampling by the Maryland Department of Water Resources indicates
net alkalinities varying from -6k to +38 mg/1. The U, S. Public
Health Service 1956 survey revealed an average alkalinity of 19 mg/1
above the reservoir. These data are presented graphically in
Figure VIII-4.
The higher values have been measured during dry periods; in
particular, the August 1966 survey was conducted at the end of the
drought conditions of that year. A much lower concentration was
observed in October, after the dry conditions were relieved by
rainfall. It appears that the alkalinity content of Savage River
is greater during a period of sustained dry weather than during
wet weather. This is attributed to two influences: (a) Aaron Run
is more likely to contribute a significant acid loading during wet
weather; and (b) Savage River drains a limestone region above the
reservoir, and the proportionately larger groundwater inflow during
sustained dry weather probably carries greater alkalinity concen-
trations into the reservoir and thence into the release flow.
-------
VIII - 11
o
CO
rv
£
>
to
-------
VIII - 12
2. Effects of the Luke Mill
The West Virginia Pulp and Paper Company's mill at Luke
normally withdraws about 108 cfs of water, of which 66 cfs is for
cooling and U2 cfs is for process water. Cooling water is used on
a once-through "basis, without treatment except during low flow
periods when as much as 25 cfs may be recirculated by returning it
to the pond above the mill through spray nozzles.
About 29 cfs of process water is pumped downstream to the
Upper Potomac River Commission Plant where it receives secondary
biological treatment. A volume of approximately 9 cfs of evapora-
tor condensate of a pH ranging from h to 7 is discharged without
treatment. A daily volume of about 2.h cfs of smelter boiler house
waste of pH 7 to 11 is discharged without treatment.15 In addition,
an unknown volume of supernatant from a flyash settling lagoon is
released to the River.
The effect of the process water withdrawal is to reduce the
acidity loading in direct proportion to the acidity concentration
of the water withdrawn:
Wet Acidity Reduction (ib/day) = k2 (process water withdrawn)
x (5.^» a conversion factor) x (acidity concentration of
the river water, mg/l)
This reduction is, in effect, an increase in the net alkalinity,
although the water of the North Branch remains unchanged in quality
until neutralized by the wastewater returned to the River. During
the Chesapeake Field Station's North Branch survey of August 1967,7
-------
VIII - 13
the effect of the mill was to change the net alkalinity loading
from -H,000 to +1,000 Ib/day (see Figure VIII-5). Process water
withdrawal accounted for an acidity reduction of 17,000 Ib/day.
The neutralizing capacity of wastewater returned to the River was
about 28,000 Ib/day net alkalinity, exclusive of wastewater treated
at the Upper Potomac River Commission Waste Treatment Facility.
Mass balances approximated from West Virginia Pulp and Paper Com-
pany data for several other flow conditions support the 28,000
Ib/day estimate for low-flow conditions.
In 1966, the mill eliminated spent lime discharges by
installing a lime recovery process, The effects of this change
have been observed as far downstream as Pinto. It is evident that
because of the size of the mill operation, future changes in waste
treatment policy may exert the deciding effect on the alkalinity-
acidity balance.
3. Effects of Georges Creek
The instream loading for Georges Creek varies from 2,500
Ib/day acidity at 6.8 cfs (which has a 90 percent chance of being
exceeded) to 37,000 Ib/day acidity at a discharge of 188 cfs (which
has a ten percent chance of being exceeded). At median flow, 36
cfs, the instream loading is 20,000 Ib/day net acidity.
Stream loadings for the same probabilities at Beryl are
37,000, 190,000, and 130,000 Ib/day net acidity, respectively.
Although the contribution of Georges Creek is much smaller than
-------
(D
C7>
vi ri -
o
c
O
"5
.
"5
SJO
=0-
CD
o <«
z z
SJD 61) = 0 —
SJD8'8 = OV—
SJO 08 = 0 —
SJD Oil ro-
in
00
— pUDjOd
IHW
0
O O O
(V Tf to
' I I
IT)
m
FIGURE SHE-5
-------
VIII - 15
that of the North Branch above Beryl, it is a significant source
of acid.
h. Effects of Upper Potomac River Basin Waste Treatment
Facilities
The mass balance obtained from the water quality survey of
August 1967 indicates that the Upper Potomac River Basin Commission
(UPRC) facility contributes about 15,000 Ib/day net alkalinity to
North Branch. This loading is believed to be relatively steady.
5. Effects Below the Luke Area
The UPRC facility is the most downstream of the major influ-
ences. As indicated by the profile obtained from the 1967 survey,
there is no substantial change in alkalinity loading between the
Poland sampling station (River Mile Up) and Pinto, Maryland (River
Mile 32). No estimate is currently available of the neutralizing
capacity available downstream from Luke at higher flows. Recent
data taken at Pinto indicate that the pH falls between U.5 and 6
during high-flow periods, but that the acid is largely neutralized.
Acidic conditions would not be expected at Pinto during low-flow
periods. The occurrence of acidic conditions at Pinto is attributed
to the cessation of spent lime discharges in 1966 at the Luke Mill.
C. Pinto, Maryland, to Wiley Ford, West Virginia
The reach of river between Pinto and Wiley Ford flows
through the Cumberland, Maryland, industrial area. The U. S.
Geological Survey Cumberland gage is located at the bridge between
-------
viii - 16
Cumberland and Wiley Ford, near the downstream edge of the indus-
trial area. The Maryland Department of Water Resources samples
regularly at this point.
The principal tributaries in this reach are Wills Creek,
which joins the Worth Branch at River Mile 21.7, and Evitts Creek.
Jennings Run and Braddock Run, tributaries of Wills Creek, receive
mine drainage in their upper reaches. Braddock Run, in particular,
receives drainage from mines in the Georges Creek Basin via the
discharge of the Hoffman Tunnel near Clarysville. Wills Creek,
however, is no longer acidic at its mouth and does not exert a
significant influence on the quality of the North Branch.
As noted in the previous section, acidic conditions have
been observed at Pinto. There is no evidence that they have
extended below Cumberland at any time.
-------
IX - 1
IX. EFFECTS OF THE PROPOSED BLOOMINGTON RESERVOIR PROJECT
A. Introduction
The Bloomington Reservoir Project, located on the North
Branch eight miles upstream from Bloomington, Maryland, is in the
final stages of pre-construction planning, This project, when con-
structed, will be a multi-purpose project with storage provided for
water supply, water quality control, flood control, and recreation.
At the conservation pool level, the dam will impound 9^,700 acre-
feet of water.
Since the proposed reservoir will impound waters which are
currently degraded by mine drainage pollution, it becomes important
to evaluate the effect this pollution will have on the intended uses
of the reservoir. An analysis designed to evaluate the impact this
project will have on the quantity and quality of water in the North
Branch Basin should determine:
lo The effects of stratification within the reservoir.
2. The possibility of acid regeneration in the waters
of the proposed project,,
3. The effect the project will have on downstream water
quality and water supply.
k. The possibility of operating the proposed project in
conjunction with the existing Savage River Project to
achieve the most beneficial use of the water resources
of the area.
-------
IX - 2
Data is not currently available on which an analysis could
be based which would supply a complete answer to all the problems
posed above. In fact, such problems as the effect of stratification
and the possibility of acid regeneration within the reservoir pool
may never be resolved completely until the reservoir project is
actually constructed.
Field and laboratory studies, sponsored in part by the
Baltimore District, Corps of Engineers, are being conducted by the
personnel of the Chesapeake Field Station. These studies will
supply some of the basic data needed to evaluate the effects of
the proposed project.
In order to gain some insight on the possible effect of the
Bloomington Project on downstream water quality, a preliminary anal-
ysis was made based on currently available data. The reliability
and usefulness of this analysis are limited by a scarcity of data
regarding effects in the Luke area; by lack of experience regarding
flow and circulation in deep reservoirs; and by an inadequate
expression of the variability of acid loadings under given flow
conditions.
The lack of data in the Luke Area is a result of recent
changes in industrial waste discharge practices at the West Virginia
Pulp and Paper Company. It is expected that further changes will
occur in the direction of attenuating the quantity of alkalinity
which now reaches the North Branch concurrently with the control
of untreated waste discharges.
-------
IX - 3
It is apparent that the exact analysis of the effect of
the Bloomington Project on the downstream alkaline-acid balance is
dependent on information which is still in the process of being
collected. However, the analysis that follows was based on avail-
able data, and the assumptions that were made seem to be reasonable
in the light of current knowledge of alkaline-acid interactions.
Although the following analysis should provide some insight
into the possible effects of the proposed Bloomington Project, final
conclusions relating to a project of this size should not be made
until all the data from current field and laboratory studies are
available„
B, Acidity-Alkalinity Balance
1. General
The effects of Bloomington Dam on the reasonal distribution
*
of loads and concentrations downstream were estimated by routing
acidity loadings through the reservoir under (,l) low-flow and (2)
average-flow conditions „ Discharges at the tL Su Geological Survey
Kitzmiller gage were used as a basis for the streamflow pattern.
Mean monthly river discharges for the calendar year 1,965 were used
to represent low-flow conditions.
Average flow conditions were represented by the mean monthly
flow exceeded 50 percent of the time. The mean monthly flow values
Routing was done using the River Basin Simulation Program with
the assistance of Federal Water Pollution Control Administration,
Division of Technical Control,
-------
IX - k
comprising the average flow conditions were determined for each
month by plotting mean monthly flows on log-probability paper and
reading the 50 percentile value. Since the logarithmic-probability
plots reduce the influence of the months containing high flows, the
mean annual discharges derived from these plots are somewhat less
than the mean of record. The annual hydrographs used in this
analysis are shown in Figure IV-1.
Acidic and alkaline effects below the Bloomington Dam,
principally in the vicinity of Luke, were added to the release
loadings to estimate the loadings and concentration downstream from
the Luke area.
2. Assumptions Regarding Acid Routine
a. Bloomington Reservoir would be operated to maintain a
minimum discharge of 305 cfs at Luke, in conjunction with Savage
River Reservoir releases. It was assumed for analysis that 210 cfs
would be provided by Bloomington and 95 cfs by Savage; in fact, the
anticipated typical releases are about 270 and 35 cfs for Blooming-
ton and Savage, respectively. The anticipated releases were formu-
lated to reserve the excellent quality Savage River water for
municipal and industrial use. The releases assumed for this anal-
ysis, however, were formulated with the object of using Savage River
water to the maximum extent for dilution and neutralization of the
acidic Bloomington releases.
-------
IX - 5
b. Storage deficiencies "below the conservation (normal
full) pool level would be maintained to provide flood storage
capacity in the conservation pool until mid-April, in accordance
with the proposed operating plan of the Corps of Engineers. The
following equations were used as a generalization of this rule:
Months of the Year Release Rule
May through November D = 210
December through March D = 210 + 0.5Q
April D = 210 + 0.25Q
where
D = minimum release from reservoir in cfs
Q = flow into the reservoir in cfs
c. The flow into the reservoir would be 1.09 times stream-
flow at the Kitzmiller gage. The factor 1.09 was derived from the
ratio of median discharge of the Bloomington (Beryl) gage to the
median discharge of the Kitzmiller gage (Ratio = 1.19) and the dam's
location halfway between the gages.
d. Flood storage would not be used for low flow augmenta-
tion. The operating plan indicates that a flood of more than five-
year recurrence interval is required to occupy a significant portion
of the flood storage capacity.
e. There would be neither neutralization nor generation of
acid in the reservoir. It is conceivable that acid could be pro-
duced within the reservoir; this possibility is discussed subse-
quantly in this chapter.
-------
ix - 6
f. Incoming flows would mix instantly and uniformly with the
reservoir contents. This assumption represents a large departure
from the real physical conditions encountered in deep reservoirs,
The effects of the departure cannot be evaluated quantitatively; how-
ever, the conditions implied in the assumption are discussed below:
(l) Summer stratification would result in summer river
inflows of highly acidic water (concentration about 100 mg/l) float-
ing above colder bottom water of considerably lower acidity (about
kO mg/l), the bottom water concentration being a residual condition
of spring inflows and the spring overturn. The effects of strati-
fication, it was assumed, could be eliminated by simultaneous multi-
level withdrawal or other techniques to obtain a mixture of top and
bottom water which would result in an acidity concentration in the
release water equal to that which would exist in a completely mixed
reservoir. Release of only the less acidic bottom water at the rate
of 210 cfs would result in exhaustion of bottom water during late
summer or fall, after which the reservoir contents could consist of
the more acidic top water until winter flows became available for
dilution. Releasing a large volume of this water would result in
a slug loading well in excess of loadings which would otherwise
occur. It is believed that current knowledge of the operating
characteristics of such systems is not adequate to allow a conclu-
sive statement on the degree of mixing to be expected.
(2) A second implied condition is that winter strati-
fication would not inhibit mixing significantly. If the Bloomington
-------
IX - 7
reservoir is operated as proposed, the fall overturn will occur
near the time when reservoir contents are at a minimum; and the
reservoir would be refilled gradually over the winter, with the
target date for a full reservoir being April 15. Formal winter
stratification, in which a. bottom layer of dense water near k° C
is overlain by a less dense mixture of water and ice, will be modi-
fied by the proposed type of operation. It is to be expected that
the winter inflows will have a greater mixing effect upon a reser-
voir which is, on the average, only partly full than upon one which
is filled as soon as possible. Current predictive capabilities are
not adequate to describe these effects.
(3) The third implied condition is that complete over-
turn of reservoir contents would occur each spring and fall. In
deep reservoirs complete overturns do not always take place, and
some strata or pockets may be trapped and released subsequently.
3. Assumptions regarding Sources of Acidity and Alkalinity
Below Bloomington
a. Acid loadings from the drainage area between Kitzmiller
and Beryl would be divided equally so that half the loading would
enter the reservoir and half would enter the river between the dam
and Beryl. This assumption should be supported by additional data,
although it will exert little effect on the results of the analysis.
b. Savage River would contribute 95 cfs at an alkalinity
of 30 mg/1, which was the case during the summer months of 1965.
Since the contribution is of less importance under winter conditions,
-------
IX - 8
the net alkalinity loading of 15,000 Ib/day was assumed to be
constant for the entire year.
c. Savage River, under synthetic average year flow condi-
tions, would contribute 95 cfs at 10 rag/1 alkalinity, or a loading
of 5,100 Ib/day net alkalinity. Data are not available at this time
to confirm the validity of the 10 mg/1 alkalinity concentration.
d. The Luke Mill discharges 28,000 Ib/day of net alkalinity.
This alkalinity is contained in untreated waste discharges which, it
is assumed, will eventually be diverted to the Upper Potomac River
Basin Commission plant with some attenuation of alkalinity.
e. The ^2 cfs process water withdrawal by the Luke Mill
would reduce the net acidity by 5,500 Ib/day under 19^5 streamflow
conditions and by 6,900 Ib/day under streamflow conditions of the
synthetic average year. The difference in the process water with-
drawal effects for the two years is due to its dependence on the
concentration of net alkalinity at the point of withdrawal in the
North Branch below Savage River. Withdrawal effects were computed
at times of typical summer concentrations, thus near the time of
maximum effect. Since the withdrawal effect is small in comparison
to the high-flow loadings, and since the winter alkalinity decline
in Savage River water causes a change of the opposite sign in the
withdrawal effect, the withdrawal effect has been considered constant,
i
The withdrawal effect was computed as follows:
-------
IX - 9
n (5.10 (L. + L )
L = Q _ b _ s
w x
where :
L = loading of net acidity, Ib/day
Q = flow in cfs
5.^ = conversion factor
and subscripts indicate:
w = process water withdrawal
b = quantities in North Branch at Beryl
s = quantities in Savage River above confluence with
North Branch
Therefore, in 1965:
L = h2 ($5,000 - 15,000) = 50Q
w d 210 + 95 >^
And under Synthetic Average Year flow conditions :
• >*
f. The Upper Potomac River Basin Commission plant would
add 15,000 Ib/day of net alkalinity to the North Branch.
g. Georges Creek would contribute acidity loadings vary-
ing from 1,900 to 1*0,000 Ib/day in 1965, and in a median year from
^,500 to 36,000 Ib/day. Contributions by month are shown in
Table k.
k. Discussion of Results
The results of the routine analysis under low-flow and
average flow conditions are shown in Figures IX-1 and IX-2,
-------
IX - 10
TABLE it
NET ACIDITY CONTRIBUTIONS OF GEORGES CREEK
Contribution (ib/day)
Month
January
February
March
April
May
June
July
August
September
October
November
December
Synthetic Average Year
35,000
30,000
19,000
7,200
7,200
4,500
6,500
14,000
25,000
31,000
32,000
36,000
1965
38,000
28,000
8,500
3,600
3,400
1,900
4,000
6,000
14,000
35,000
37,000
40,000
-------
IX - 11
oe
Q
UJ
01
UJ
QC
O o§
fe 2S
W O Q
Z <( Z
g 38
3 to
CO Z -J
J ^3
I
u
z
O)
cc
00
I
O
I
or
UJ
a
O
cc
SI
? UJ
2 w
U)
3 o
* 3
Z CO
+ X
U
ui
a
O
•z.
u
O
(D
I
m
ui
o
I
o
rvj
o
o
-------
IX - 12
DC
§ 3
i I
ft §
QC 8
i il
5 3£
8 >&
y t u
CD Z O
^ Zi <
5 < a:
— 2 ^
J8 ^
i ^^
u ^S
<
«r
CD
i
o:
O
z
1
5
UJ
>-
UJ
OD
UJ
Q
>
O
o
o
a
UJ
to
o
CD
UJ
o o o o o
5t+- (\J (\J ^4-
+ + 1 1
o
f
COOl
o
?
o
0
1
o
(V
1
y' J
?N
§
i
0
(D
1
O
do
I
o
o
8
C\J
-------
IX - 13
respectively. For the low-flow year (1965) the reservoir releases
in the summer months would contain acidity loadings in the range
of minus 45,000 to minus 60,000 lb/day of net alkalinity, consider-
ably in excess of the natural-flow loadings. For the average-flow
year, the summer release loadings would be in the range of minus
65,000 to minus 80,000 Ib/day net alkalinity; but the difference
between loadings at natural conditions and the release loadings
would be less pronounced than in a low-flow year. The reason for
the greater release loadings under expected (synthetic average
year) summer conditions is found in the loading versus discharge
curves discussed in Chapter VII. The summer water which mixes with
reservoir contents is of a relatively constant concentration; thus
greater flows serve to strengthen the acidity of the mixture.
Winter release loadings would differ as shown from the
natural-condition winter loading, which is constant on the average.
Natural and released winter loadings are all in excess of the
neutralizing capacity downstream.
The acidity concentrations associated with the synthetic
average year summer and fall release loadings (at 210 cfs) vary
from roughly 50 to 75 mg/1. Concentrations associated with 1965
summer and fall releases (210 cfs) vary from roughly 30 to 60 mg/1.
Concentrations under natural flow conditions would be on the order
of 100 mg/1 and at times much greater. The expected concentrations
with the reservoir in operation, however, could still cause pH
values below h in the reach between Bloomington Dam and Beryl
-------
IX - lU
(see Figure VI-l); thus, no significant improvement in the "bio-
logical condition would be expected. Use of reservoir release
water for municipal and industrial water supply in this reach
*
would require that it be neutralized or that other measures be
taken to obviate its acidic effects. For example, at the Luke Mill
stainless steel piping is used so that cooling water can be circu-
lated without treatment.
Acidity concentrations of the release waters under winter
conditions would be on the order of 25 to hO mg/1 which, as with
the summer concentrations, would cause pH values below k.
Figures IX-1 and IX-2 indicate that under low-flow condi-
tions (summer, 1965) the River would be alkaline below the Luke-
Westernport area as a result of neutralization in that area. Under
the expected summer conditions (synthetic average year) the acid
loadings would not be completely neutralized. Acid loadings on the
order of 15,000 to 25,000 Ib/day would pass the area with a flow of
305 cfs, resulting in concentrations of 9 to l6 mg/1 acidity and pH
values of 5 to 6. These conditions do not meet Maryland standards,
although they are not comparable in severity to those above Luke.
Winter release loadings, as noted earlier, are expected to
be in excess of the neutralizing capacity in the Luke area. Based
on recent experience with winter flows, it is believed that discharges
Softening and iron and manganese removal would probably be
necessary for most purposes. Depending on the unit process
chosen for treatment, these may be a part of the same process
as neutralization.
-------
IX - 15
of the magnitude indicated would cause acidic conditions at Pinto
or below. It is probable that the Maryland water quality standards
would not be met consistently for several months of each year in
the reach between Luke and Pinto.
C. Acid Production in the Mines at the Proposed Bloomington
Reservoir
Drawdown for water supply and quality control in the pro-
posed Bloomington Reservoir will cause extreme fluctuations in pool
elevations. Normal drawdown will be about 56 feet. Beyond the
normal drawdown, the elevation will fall much more rapidly with the
release of additional water; thus, the drawdown will be considerably
greater than 56 feet in low-flow years. During the drought years of
1930-1931, the maximum drawdown would have been about 170 feet.
Abandoned mines in the drawdown range will be subject to
recurrent filling and emptying. This condition may be conducive
to the production of acid; since air, water, and acidic material
of the mine will be brought together. At the normal operating pool
level, the reservoir surface will intersect the Upper Freeport,
Upper Kittanning, and the Middle and Lower Kittanning coal seams.
It may also intersect the Bakerstown coal seam. The Upper Freeport
and the Bakerstown coal seams are believed to be associated with
severely acidic conditions in Laurel Run (Kempton), Maryland, and
Elk Eun and Abram Creek in West Virginia.
The generation of any additional acidity in North Branch
above the impoundment would aggravate the adverse effect of acid
-------
IX - 16
mine drainage on water quality and detract from the usefulness of
the reservoir.
D. Acidity Regeneration in Waters of the Proposed Bloomington
Reservoir
Depletion of oxygen in the lower layers of the reservoir
during summer stratification, a usual tendency in deep reservoirs,
would be a major environmental change from the turbulent, well-
oxygenated conditions now characteristic of the North Branch.
Ferric iron present in the reservoir would then tend to be reduced
to the ferrous state. Strongly reducing conditions are not required
for this action to take place. Upon re-exposure to oxidizing condi-
tions, the ferrous iron will be reoxidized to the ferric state, thus
releasing two moles of acidity per mole of iron. The effect of this
regeneration of acidity may become significant as iron sediments
are deposited behind the dam. After a certain amount of mine drain-
age abatement work has been accomplished, the pH of the river may
be expected to rise. As the pH rises, the tendency for iron pre-
cipitation is increased; moreover, the biological action which
causes oxygen depletion may be expected to be more vigorous at
higher pH values. As abatement work proceeds, therefore, the pro-
portion of iron which takes part in the oxidation-reduction cycle
will tend to increase.
-------
X - 1
X. BIBLIOGRAPHY
1. Maryland Geological Survey, Geologic Map of Garrett County, 1953.
2. Maryland Geological Survey, Geologic Map of Allegany County, 1953-
3. West Virginia Geological Survey, Map II, Mineral County showing
General and Economic Geology, 1923.
h. West Virginia Geological Survey, Map IV, Grant County showing
General and Economic Geology, 1923.
5. National Coal Association, "Bituminous Coal Data, 1966."
6. Maryland Geological Survey, Bureau of Mines, "Forty-Third Annual
Report, 1965."
7. Chesapeake Field Station, Middle Atlantic Region, FWPCA, "Investi-
gation of Water Quality in the North Branch Potomac River Between
Cumberland and Luke, Maryland, August 1967."
8. LaBuy, James L., "Investigation of the Benthic Fauna in the North
Branch Potomac River Basin, Chesapeake Field Station, Middle
Atlantic Region, FWPCA, Report in Preparation.
9. Middle Atlantic Region, FWPCA, "Water Quality and Pollution Control
Study, Mine Drainage, Chesapeake Bay-Delaware River Basins," Working
Document No. 3, July 1967-
10. Hopkins, Thomas C., Jr., Maryland Department of Water Resources,
"Physical and Chemical Quality from the Effects of Mine Drainage
in Western Maryland," August 1967-
11. Hopkins, Thomas C., Jr., Maryland Department of Water Resources,
"Western Maryland Mine Drainage Survey, 1962-65," 3 Volumes.
12. Rubelmann, R. J., Maryland Department of Water Resources (then
Water Pollution Control Commission), "Interim Report No. 1 on
the Western Maryland pH Survey," June 10, 1963.
13. West Virginia Pulp and Paper Company, Luke Mill, "Waste Control
Report" (monthly), data obtained through cooperation of Maryland
Department of Water Resources and Interstate Commission on the
Potomac River Basin.
lk. Interstate Commission on the Potomac River Basin, "Potomac River
Water Quality Network, Compilation of Data" (annual).
-------
X - 2
15. Public Health Service, U. S. Department of Health, Education,
and. Welfare, "Investigation of North Branch Potomac River, Report
on Benefits to Pollution Abatement from Low Flow Augmentation on
the North Branch Potomac River," Robert A. Taft Sanitary Engineer-
ing Center, Cincinnati, Ohio, 1957-
l6. Maryland, State of, Water Resources Commission and Department of
Water Resources, "Water Resources Regulation U.Q General Water
Quality Criteria and Specific Water Quality Standards."
17- Morris, J. Carrell, and Stumm, Werner, "Redox Equilibria and
Measurements of Potentials in the Aquatic Environment," Chapter
13 of Equilibrium Concepts in Natural Water Systems, American
Chemical Society, Washington, D. C., 1967-
18. Darling, John M., Maryland Streamflow Characteristics, Maryland
Geological Survey, Bulletin 25, Baltimore, Maryland, 1962.
-------
A - 1
APPENDIX A
SURVEY PROCEDURES AND ANALYTICAL METHODS
1- Objectives of the Survey
a. To measure the severity or intensity of the effects of
mine drainage on the surrounding environment.
These effects are primarily on the biota, on the useful-
ness of the water for municipal, industrial, or recreational pur-
poses, and on structures because of the corrosive effects of acidic
vater. The pH and acidity concentrations are basic parameters for
this purpose.
b. To measure the net requirement or capacity of vaters for
neutralization.
In order to predict the effects of different loading condi-
tions, it is necessary to determine the mass flow rates of both the
acidic and alkaline components around a region in which changes are
occurring. The use of net alkalinity, a single continuous parameter
encompassing both components, has been adopted by the Middle Atlantic
Region, FWPCA. Net alkalinity is defined as the total alkalinity
minus the total acidity. It can assume either a positive or a nega-
tive value, although the term net acidity is sometimes used to
avoid dealing exclusively in negative numbers. Experiments by
personnel of the Susquehanna Field Station, Middle Atlantic Region,
FWPCA, and by Wilkes College under contract by FWPCA have demonstrated
the applicability of the additive properties of net alkalinity to
acidic-alkaline stream interactions.
-------
A - 2
In the CFG work to date, the effect of sources of neutra-
lization was determined by the difference in net alkalinity mass
flow rates above and below the source. It was, therefore, not nec-
essary to predict the effect of mixing but simply to state the
quantity of net alkalinity available in terms of the effect. For
these purposes, alkalinity (where present), acidity, and stream
discharge are basic parameters.
c. To measure the background acidity or alkalinity of areas
which are not major contributors to the pollution.
d. To measure the concentrations of iron and other metals and
hardness.
These components also affect the biota and water use, both
by the physical effects of bottom-blanketing precipitates and by
altering the mineral balance of the water and, therefore, changing
the toxic action of acidity or toxic metals. These components were
measured during reconnaissance work but are considered of secondary
importance because (l) the qualitative effects are generally well
known but quantitative effects are extremely difficult to estimate,
and (2) they have a common source with acidity, i.e., sulfuritic
material.
e. To measure a mass tracer parameter.
Sulfate is the best parameter for this purpose because it
originates as an acidic component and is less subject to change by
neutralization than acidity. The reaction product, hydrated calcium
sulfate, is soluble to over 2,000 mg/1 and more so in acidic solution,
-------
A - 3
2. Sampling Procedures
Samples were obtained by dipping and transferring the water
to a sample container. Plastic containers were generally used
except for samples to be analyzed for iron, for which glass bottles
were used.
On samples collected from the start of the survey through
November 1967, analyses were performed at or near the sampling point
in a mobile camper-laboratory equipped with an AC generator and the
necessary electronic analytical equipment. Analysis was completed
before moving to the next site, with only an occasional exception.
Samples collected during 1968 were returned to the CFS laboratory
at Annapolis for analysis.
3- Analytical Procedures
a. Acidity
(l) General
The "hot" acidity has been used as a basic parameter. In
the hot procedure, heat and peroxide are used to drive off carbonate
buffer salts and to oxidize acidic precursors. Carbonates will be
present either as free CC>2 or as carbonic acid at the pll values
prevalent at most locations in the North Branch Basin. Within a
low-pH system, these components will be either lost to the atmos-
phere or converted to a part of bicarbonate buffer system as the
stream recovers normal pH values during neutralization. In such a
system, carbon dioxide and carbonic acid are not permanent components
-------
-------
A - U
of the acidity and are not measured as such. They are subsequently
measured as alkalinity, provided the initial pH is greater than it. 5.
The total effects of acidic precursors (unhydrolyzed mettalic
salts—principally iron—and the unoxidized ferrous iron) are measured
by the hot procedure, because the entire acidity potential is released
during oxidation.
Results have been reported to conventional pH U.5 and 8.3
end points. During analysis, however, several end points are read
over the titration range and a curve drawn.
The "cold" acidity procedure measures the carbon dioxide-
carbonic acid component as a part of the acidity, provided adequate
precautions are taken in sampling, handling, and titrating. The
cold acidity is not considered to provide adequate assurance that
precursor components have been measured. The cold acidity procedure
has been discarded for routine work by the Chesapeake Field Station.
(2) Acidity, Hot
A water sample of 50 or 100 ml is boiled for two minutes
after adding 0.3 ml of 30 percent II202- The sample is then cooled
to room temperature and titrated with 0.02 N sodium hydroxide to
end points of pH *t. 5 (methyl orange or mineral acidity) if approp-
riate, and pH 8.3 (phenolphthalein or total acidity). Electrometric
titration is preferable to colorimetric because sample color and
colored precipitates frequently obscure color changes. Time series
analysis of acidity indicated that hot acidity is stable for at
least several days.
-------
A - 5
(3) Acidity, Cold
A water sample of 50 or 100 ml is titrated with 0.02 N
sodium hydroxide to pH U.5 and pH 8.3 end points. In mine drainage
work, when it is suspected that free CC>2 or other volatile compo-
nents of the acidity may be present; sampling, sample preservation,
and analysis must be done in a way to avoid losing volatiles to the
atmosphere by temperature change and agitation.
b. Total Alkalinity
Reference: Standard Methods for the Examination of Water
and Wastewater, 12 Edition, 1965.
The total alkalinity was determined by titrating 100 ml,
or suitable aliquot, to pH ^.5 with standardized 0.02 N sulfuric
acid. A Leeds and Northrup laboratory pH meter was used to indicate
pH changes.
c. Sulfate
Reference: Fisher Scientific Company, Technical Data,
TD-178.
The sulfate content of the sample was determined by the
barium chloranilate method. The sample was first passed through
an ion exchange column to remove interfering cations. The efflu-
ent was then allowed to react with the reagent, filtered, and the
color intensity determined on a spectrophotometer.
-------
A - 6
d. Total Iron
Reference: Standard Methods for the Examination of Water
and Wastewater, 12 Edition, 1965.
The total iron was determined spectophotometrically. All
ferric iron was reduced to the ferrous state with hydroxylamine-
hydrochloride as the reducing agent. Orthophenanthroline was added
to form an orange-red complex. The color intensity was determined
using a Bausch and Lomb Spectronic 20.
e. Ferrous Iron
Reference: Standard Methods for the Examination of Water
and Wastewater, 12 Edition, 1965.
The ferrous iron was determined spectrophotometrically.
All ferric iron was maintained in the oxidized state. Orthophenan-
throline was added to form an orange-red complex. The color inten-
sity was determined using a Bausch and Lomb Spectronic 20.
f. Aluminum
Reference: Methods for Collection and Analysis of Water
Samples, Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 1^5^, United States
Government Printing Office, Washington, D. C., I960.
The aluminum content was determined spectrophotometrically.
Ferronorthophenanthroline was used to give a color complex. The
color intensity was determined using a Bausch and Lomb Spectronic 20.
-------
A - 7
&• Total Hardness
Reference: Standard Methods for the Examination of Water
and Waste-water, 12 Edition, 1965.
The total hardness was determined by titrating the sample
with standard EDTA using Eriochrome Black T as an indicator.
The pH measurements were made at the sampling point with
a Beckman Model N Field pH Meter.
i. Specific Conductance
Reference: Standard Methods for the Examination of Water
and Wastewater, 12 Edition, 1965.
The specific conductance was measured directly in micromhos/
cm using an Industrial Instruments, Inc., RB3 Solu Bridge.
j . Filterable Residue
Reference: Standard Methods for the Examination of Water
and Wastewater, 12 Edition, 1965-
The filterable residue was determined by evaporating to
dryness a known volume of sample that has been millipore filtered.
The evaporation was done by using a tared evaporating dish as a
carrier. The drying oven was maintained at 105° C. When the
evaporation of the sample was complete, the dishes were cooled and
weighed. The gain in weight represents filterable residue.
-------
A - 8
k. Nonfilterable Residue
Reference: Standard Methods for the Examination of Water
and Wastewater, 12 Edition, 1965-
The nonfilterable residue was determined by filtering a
known volume of sample. A predried and weighed Gelman Type A glass
fiber filter was used. The filter and its contents were then dried
in an oven at 105° C, cooled, and reweighed. The gain in weight
represents nonfilterable residue.
1. Total Residue
Reference: Standard Methods for the Examination of Water
and Wastewater, 12 Edition, 1965.
The total residue was determined by evaporating to dryness
a known volume of the sample as received. The evaporation was done
by using a tared evaporating dish as a carrier. The drying oven
was maintained at 105° C. When the evaporation of the sample was
complete, the dishes were cooled and weighed. The gain in weight
represents total residue.
m- Aluminum, Calcium, Magnesium, Manganese
These metals were analyzed by atomic absorption techniques
using a Perkin-Elmer model 303 atomic absorption spectrophotometer,
-------
B - 1
APPENDIX B
MINE DRAINAGE STATION DESCRIPTIONS
AND BASIN SCHEMATICS
-------
£t
o
•H
P
a
-. i
c i
o
Ui
fii
U;
•r\
4s
' *< l^j
•• ' , >
r.
t> r
ii O
o
c
c'
-, i '.i ;.(
4 C.' PI
03 ,'•• r-i
en ^ >' x
a>
rrj
c; '..5
• r j J*t ' !
r; 0'
t . •! t C ,
1- . £ -i;
f *
a>
E"
i'3
*•"*
r;
o
-i
-i ^
U\
r*
,_ j
tj;
i:)
*
',--',
F QJ a>
o a ho
43 OL,
q Or)
r-( b Oi CSS
r-t O ••-.
• QJ * M '•*»
(tj ^i"> n r-l CtT »
j>. '"n* v i ?£ P*
" ' t>^ Ctl 2F' <$
• f; rr; tjo a;
ts f ; TI ».i
„.'!•' 0 « X C
us r-i c\i h n
Ki oq * a
o •+-> 4- o y
J. ::-i ri • (H
o o * o sj a) >--s
irt 4.J *•< 4.. fd 4 '
CO : . • « a>
to rs •, i !.•} r .Pi ui O,
;.* • n-; " iv- ;- 'i~< o
'r i 7 ! '-<•- ,:-j ^
4 • Jj C ">
?-f -4 ^ ^( Q> [7^ r~^ 4-*
X) t"i, f. !-> ^H ^! r-l
t: o c, o ..5
4> fl; V. ,0 •4-"' O 43 O
-ij h : o o; <->i o a) o
^
t:
o •
4 -^ tlj 4-^
t/v JL^ ' "*
0.' .''
^ * *
P-, ;-. c !
,-, r- .
• »
VG r-i
O\ Cs
r^
•
rH
* f-'i)
7- t>
"T -
•r i
t-< & *
O •
*-> >5 ifi
flj fj t>
O '('' ^*
I '• . >
* * ' *
'r -""
MI in r
C * r r'
-P 4 J
/! :'; &
ctf
r •! r--' C\J
. . (4 Vj
s, f. -H QJ ^-' •
m . fn ,0 G o> <" fn
• "t.5 « JO WJ T) K I- O
E! JS IK O (0 (>-> In J.'
O f* nj 4! i-J
4"' T5 4^ 0) -H r 1 Q.I 4 M
4-' f5 4^> T! ;> 'u .« !*; :-: -.1
•• ' r) -r-i ( ' 0 ',.> O C. «j
,^ £5 ft' * ,O Q> f ^ )'"-* t/! '^
-. ctt sS ' . (1) - '
i,} * C^ T^ * " •:' 0> »
f > Tf o (i* « • A ' ! i ,s. TI • -
i I «' 1 V J (. ' 1 '~ '^ $* f * * ^'"* '^
n> at n'i -•. i> ('j a> ^
* H i - r^~ > f t £ "3 ^ 1 " '
-- . c ' ^41 c* ' *" i r
~. I ' C -t> !."- _ • • . ' ; ^
-.' ft c ^ -rj m ri) ''x '" '
'". • Oi & i ' « i',. • :, ..--•
0} fctl ££, U) tlC" ' rf ™ '-* ™ ^ ' ! r^
:- o t> 4-^ < • ;}, i ; f, o
(' r: o c r; .<>
rLj t*j C^"* 4-2 C^ • ' ' " '
c^ (u P* ! i ' >
^s nj ;« os ;-.- •'
• 4' H 4 -*•> '-J 1 '
•H Q; 4.3 -H (lv • 0 •:> i : • -j
C 4.'-1 ill 64- rt . f • ' 3 -H - if.
l-i > i;. :.- .,' W i.;
'.SJ T5 r-) • ! > •'• t' <•> A! t< " .
cti 4--"1 n1 * * * o> cj ''? ',-J
--> o rt 4-"* C' <*J ^S '•" <-: '0 < f..> fli tl
if ^ pJ ,H t.- f>- " !«.; r^
O UN O f-M t .:' 'r1 .M
43 C <""i 4D v'3 • <«-i <> u •: 4-' <'.' f+i >3
<5 O r-1 <*! O i.-S T' -ri o ; . •=/: ;» O O
'„;"„;
i'' ^»
0 j.,> < » J> ' . >
•J ' 4-> -J "' V ' t >
vU (D (-i? *t -*'•' '^
&-* JUI ^* t , ,"
^ -I J-« ? 4 t'l ' 1
•,-r oj u (u s f.;
r °^ o O O c'3 ' '
ai c^ -.'f
* * *
a\ c\ M:/
c>:> a^ a.)
-'/
„ -» _-^f ^ - f
« * *
1A f~-:f>
"'(
^ crt .'*
',' "T"^ t^> J" * ' " ^
v C? »
n* o >••• :
'T' *•.
^ "^ J' f 5
o c; i' ~< ">
-P -H o - . c;
p, ,(3 CO _J !.
t') T! .' .,-1 ,'f C)
s: ;: . r ^ : , M
4- C;
•"! C! J ,
if5" :
(' • ' i
r-1 . • (
'-. ,.( »' " • ' :
"i !•< ''•i •';
c,i n'
i _t -it V. i;.
-------
^'
o
'r1
u,
•r i
^ t
i,^
fl>
i"'i
i
; 3
V j
; 1
r :
1 .
v Ai 1: . 0) O 41 rH « <5 ^ • £j U«
rr; > . -P X +J to ..i -H 4> a rt o n
a, -tj .H -p to {i, •. r 4' Tt 4> f1" T* "i •
co jt r;
CD C^ X^*, • tf 4,1* 4— r~4 3- ^' ^ '- '
^ S 0> < 4-1 ^> "i 'r— CO O 4J .O Q> .>
•~* O O nt c, J St < ' '• 1* " -T* r* •<-
i • TI r: t-.v > - • TJ j.; ,u dv o c/i
'.'• c-- « '-i-'-. r i <: • ' • r • F; ,i
« ' < ^*-" ( * M ^' ill i f " ' »» t ! '" > ^4 «
; 1 1 1 ' ») JJ •. • 1 > ,' T< -. 1 1 t > '
r > ' '. , ^ ' ' t-! i. . • » irt ; • 6 j . 5 ;
• • ••; {-; 'i' n 'D r i ; jj — i e f (-
, ! ,1 0) CO -u f. P- r-t 3 PJ -»3 ^ XT'. 4>
«, t (> R r. -1' Q> 'H r ^ CJ ti •--( i<>
d' ,tj o • M o Uj ho • rt *••* o w CD tn PI
:>0 rl .0 -<-' ° '•'• •- TI 4J Ui C -I Jr; ^, f< • ci
r.i nj i • 1 • -H y: o r> o> ^ i
'io ». en ' • ;,o t. a) t) r,* v-i 4-" -ij
!>j » ' i .. t i,; fi *H -i' o O <^ !<
!-j (it MI- • •, J O -H C • 1) !
1> --- • K -i ' * * t'i Ji jg N C1 4 A<
fc^ C^ 4^ «i.' f ' T^ 0^ -t- ' ^ '-1 ^i) fJ "' ^J
i. v< ;v H':-* ''-' :< > f '0 r' ^J '•-" >"•' -0 M -
-' ' O r> 0-J i"1 .<') O O C) <•-( ffl -,H .< VI .,-( 1,'\
r.> -h' ;•: '.,"• 4-> t» 4) fi [s O J-. •'-) K «
,,, _[• (• ^ ,, ;_ • L'3 *•" ,,K, " •£> .p ,r) U' , ., ,j. *k; t1
O ' ') ' ' '< ) • ' • • • ^ "J £ • f • O -H
CO •'! S| ,<• !i •*' -I-1 4' ' -!•- O nj ' 4> 4-> (fl (.1 4- '
t.-> f. (. , "'MI «i ?; «; •=: «< c e>r,1') *-
* *
"i
O O O C'l rt1 O C!5 c"!
• • • * •
rH rH "O rH rH
o~j co r— • r-- f -
',1 (7 • •' x -~f
fi oo % si, \f^
f- . _-t , f rH
• nS Cu • K^" t^> O
, \ »-^. ^ • ^ J^
r-i • t-' ^ »; o
•H >: co
» JTJ • *N 5s= -C .C r 1
**j * -*-' f'- f^5 f«J '"1
r-l t, ., hfl U) f;
f.< O « 4J "t^J -H -H •
a> -H 1 CO fj P-i 0-> © O5
>> <4H t:> E; -(-> t-
H • 41 -H -P 4-1 -£"• •
co a Jg ?j cc; s -E; &; £f
0) p
41 ?H ft
^ O *•! ^ .^;
r] -p > e CD C X
"-< r-H -H ^ SH P ctj
o rB o
O >j
.i": f\ f>J R 6 0) C
-•-> 'M ff a a T< d
!-j <«H O ft 5-1 <1S jS
() -r) *> ,O rO rH O
1~; CJ ro «<
M O ^
,!-.• D.)
« V'3 Q!
. i t«
f * •*" ; *• *'
f; C>
IS'* I
1 J
\ " '
, t ^ . , t
0* / ! ; *
• r ' 0' * <
r-* O
f ? C' ' ' >
' J t ' s ' J
r-f >-' .% r '
' ' t \ '
r . i -
' '
<; t" , *t • t •
*4) ',' 'i
•ri 1 ".'
M ' ' 1
,*-}("./ s ,
1A «1)
* '
*> CO r- 1 1
•U !:••> '••
,-J
'. J .
r,< fi.
' •!
i , te -
"}
r-
. » r i
C* c*
*^ \
,
-H
p>
» »\
^- .'1
, J
*\ T-" i
(1) •? i
r-) ;
^H i''
I* ('•
i ( + '
f'* J-*
H e?
bl P'
.V A:
rt Q5
0; G>
c:>: o
f-. O
& \ "
'--: f'
' ' 1 "1
iH rH
-------
- h
0) pq
> rH
•rj -rl ^
?i
.1; r!
.,•1 ;;
r^ "'
Q'
c*
3
"
c;
o
•H
Pi
VI
rl
flU
.M
+-~'
fO
0.
*£S
A: ~ P x -P
a> at a) -H
Q) rH X> 4' JS
r* rH Cfl
O -H T1 Q)
> ?1 O 0
E W O Vr~s C
Si C *n fl)
X? S rH t> rH
•'"•• -X 'H
H (rt -v q
!> *< (4 C> o/ C1 in
COO ^t r-l ^
X) rr o o1) r-< ff\
• ' co J > -,:
(/3 f-" CM Cl ^*
'^ ' Q 4^ * ;v* 0
^ CM v-^ ,'
r-1
•
rH
*
<"'( <^ O\
vO !-- r~
"^
*
r*
t1*
* •
& n)
•\ *
o ;s
rH
'^ a
r, o
& |
(§ O
*^i V!
1> ' 0
*>i E?
^ ^
O tn
&
xr\ vc
r-l rH
V
S
^_l
g
o
(O
/ )
•8
M
^
T) •
n) x?
o o
«s
•rt
+> O
O
K Xj
P -H
•4 ;
-j •
a*
,• f
01
C">
^)
•
O
rH
l.r\
*
T-i
TI
fi
r-f
-P
•r^
t.-!
j,'
' ' '
C
T)
•H
***
rH
1
rj
0
TJ
•H
S
aT
SP
&D
(•< 0)
OJ M
rH TH
rH -H
•H f-.
K X)
-p e
•H 5
W SM
^H
CQ
CO O
t> a>
P > >
_^^.
* »
TJ CTt
*v* *^-*
-«-^ *
4-J ^
fl; r '
?•••• tl1
SH f-.
CB 0)
C? ^
S3
CN
•
SO
VC
1f\
CM
*
"n
»*
rM
r!
f
•H
a
cd
j£^
en
i-C
•I1
J-t
n
**
CO
rH
•\ •
0) XT'
rH O
a c
co Qt ro
f^j »H S-f
-P ttj
5^5
^ t,
f*-f o
Vl 0) P5
O 0
•<'R -p
T( -rH
SO, *
• a>
"S 2 rH
"fH ^^
fj O
o -a
C
C4 -P 0
0) CO X)
cfl
Q) 0)
P -P -H
JJ ^.->
«J n) rH
*-,'
4"
0)
S-*
f ••*
ft!
j-f,
r~
«
LA
vO
-(
03 CM
* »
N- O-.
T?
sc
^
„*
is
•d
•H
p
W
(T!
1
03
r"
( ;
fr
O
fll
^
r;
1_H
a\
rH
T?
§ ,
Ct
o a»
•P T?
JH
0) O
rH
rH ,\J
OJ rH
(L. jij
n}
^. s
OJ
•O Se
cl) -P
O 0)
J^t »O
f-l^-S .
to ^O C
O ~* -H
nJ -p
a > a)
O JEJ
•P 3: n
ID <»-i 3
t> o
rH *
d x^ n)
o -t-^ r>
-P h »
«• vi :.c
rH
£i
9)
!K
^O
•
r*^
Ml
«
fl)
!^
9
&
^
•S
•p
jg
Jw
p
' \'*
a
o
o
fj
0
cv
E • < i
+> o -P d c;
Ct! f^r tl 0 <">
H C 0
C^ O
S fi CX ».C ,S.C
a; '• o
t? w o t; o c;
RJ Ct! > O TO O CT)
O S: O oj s^ r-^ ti
C'J Ctl t> P
a> " 4; ;•) x!
p W +3 <., .t.J. O -P
S3 p w x! f-< x> J^
01 o pi 05,0 m ,0
o ^. "j ^;T x! v--f .«
O J-. ---t P -P
P fl> -rl » -r<
OJ • <1> en t>
> fl w f-- ai 0)
rH -r( <"' k» O
;1 Ai a> « t: .-- cj
(j X. "J , ' flJ fl)
P *4J O •* ^~H 4 ' *- \
^.^r. *: -H < ^
r -j /• i r !
rd " in
JH v * f-'
d) fu o !
S ci H
•rl ^J •• .]
;K x j>;
\o -^
• •
^*~\ f\
\O ^
, - 7^ — - r
* *
rr> 9 •
•
rt
&> • *
• fl$ tr!
JS £> t-
** * »*
.3 ^ """
^ ,^ ^
-P ttJ ^
a* x: rG
£r cr) co
S
n:I
c*
t^> /" '*
¥•* 1^ '^'
t^ :'
Q) f, ;
rO ( 'I
r? *.^ d>
ni O ,*s
f * Q.' f '
o f-1 :•
CM CM Oi
.1;
CJ
f
n
PC|
J1
o
£•*!
-'•••«
at
o
ci
a)
^.1
r(
rt
C'
c*
•4-'
**
'!'
-------
a
(D fl) i*1 C! »>
i rH ro i • >
C*
a. s'
a* i,< a"-
*" ' f ~ i
•r t *ri »
* * P"* *•"*
'"n
-."( ?J
it* - T*
ti
t j
cy
jfj
K
o
•H
4-'
CJ
t '
i^
Q)
?-*
4-'
CO
/I
r-"
ri j3 t'' -U flt o ;> G (fl ri o ")
3 1 -H fj tj) K* Ii O ft) O r-H O P IV
O ii, W ( - -r( C'J j. ,-•< O ^i 3 tO) fcO
T-) rJ r,o x: • P) r-< ^ t, rH {,• (rt
It! *"•"! jj C. , . J, O ^ CO -'H >
• • r •',". •' • ,:, IT) & v 4> o g rt
•H -H (,) S 0 fi tJ -H .1 > ri O 0 W
F f cti r? o 4' j~ c,> ,• H Q) (a o
C Q> f.| (0 • III f- !* S« r-i JCJ
rH rH 4J f, -~( r.-i ai.V'l ,»: 4 t/ O fl) a, +'
O <,: -,H ^.: » t'j , •> j; •> m ;'J ftj r-l '?' pe
o q ffj T-I c-- s ;?: a> r4
c; oj 4^> • (!)
a! • m 1 1 c ' o f .' ON ri 4 ' uj ffl w u
f( •> •« j>j f • f*.' J, fi o 'f (W i'S < ' i.'
ID ' ', * T1 ' ' ; >i (11 nl fll !>» fi > I J , ^ O O -rl O ,C; <_> D1 <• 1 il» rH
< > • s., « <-> -f> 4^ s -r< o :> ( i "• i
f< ^s: •> T1 ft) r > -P ?4 O rt rH
O tj rH 0) ,'JJ j' O O k O • (rt t-; •>
t^ •» f' i\S 4 • -rl ,H to E5 ,r, & a> n
."E C onf v s •• 3 p! O f . a>
,rt rg t, o o f' +• x: e r-< o cJ nj ";«•«•
4-' J.1 m rH O ,Ci » T-. J -p fij ri X> " -*J f^
•H } I-T1 r— i > • ^ii tl 'H fl) » C> f} J^i &3 4.' O
,'r: ri C. i TJ r—i ^ M ^O o Pi Ci X> >>
g '-* '") •!> i' r ij (C 4.3 _cf r-i « -H 1J
C '.J L; v,i) ti •-• J2 O'1 f! <« .-M C",' •»
o f-i f-i T) i" ^ ' T< C! 'li O t> f-'-i O ''.'• "">
'2 S K d >H f:.' T 0 -H (fl r! "O TJ •!-* K d) 5-1 ,.O >j :.J ^ X-j Ti ^ ( -i '> ^ CD -C "H r*^ ** ^
C f< ?•> tj O T" Pj (^ W • 4J -P • *?•
O ^l ,i '>j +.'! cO m -rl -p O O 3 +-1 4-3 O «H t) -.-' T' fl
c_> w « ,ju «; m do "j •< ft; o •<"> --•: «i o is «j «.; >; o;
f •• S~~* f^"\ s "•
• • • #
"d rt T* nJ
SJ > ^ r^
4-> 4J ^< -p r ( r-J 4-1 !~:*
4.-> 4^> -^ -• 4' r OJ 4-*> ---^
<1> a) r-f i a
co ao ^
• * *
"^ ^^ c1^
XA XA 1A
H
4 • r.
oo
CvJ
a*
t"? ^»
• «\ •
- rt r-i ,^: •
T-f :-: X / Q) ^
•rH O t, 31-
u: *' ^ 03 -H
&* rH • J3 »
f.) :3 41 n 03 w I-H
Cj f-i 4J O " g tl
C13 tli CU JH • fy O
>; PJ w o TS tn DQ
1 1
j-t " x:
t; o fj, a, f
P; c: ; C ;-: •-:
, Vf l? y S''
.y m *5 f/,i ra p!
^>
•' i C? t5^ ' i r*i <^"~'
r-H 4-> i~i
^ JH ' ^ n C ^ '
r-H O Ci 'H -H C>
p*j ^"7 f-f' P< D{ I?;
ifl X"1 O
r^ f^'v r^\ -.-tj X/\ ^r^
CJ C . (M OJ CM CN;
_.,
?;
40 ?"
bfl * -
a) c o
bO -H ,. i
T( e ^
•^ 0
:- . o •
,i. r-H f
P) 7-
4 J t ^
'') »"N .
f-; ^ i •
^ i
UJ '' ' "•
1 , 1 ' >
i ^ ; ,i '
, " > ' i!
'<) , ; *
; ' ( "^
fe ' ' .
O {< < ;
0)
T' '- S,,
{•;•<«
OJ *" fc-
,; ,„ ;-'J
r-4 ^.l)
ij3 IT) ^
,1 >> r ;
J. (fl .1
o ' ;
IJ S. i';
«'-
4-' J' I i
•< O -
J
I'
(f<
t,o
O
rH
r--i
«-^i
a,
r^
T
*• • *
-i '
fl
"&
o
Id
f-?
Q)
f^
"< {
h' ' '
/. • (i,
10
i.' t«
o :*
tj 0.1
C^l 1* ' r
*-Jj V ^
l"1)
-------
o
at
o
', ". 1 '.
n. .-'
i> .r j
n -H n;
,0 e
w (i!
OJ '10
• Hi
W O f
•ft :,o !>1
* ^ t(I C ".
UO
i i
1 ( \ 1 * -^ ^
*"i »
•\ -f ' - f
1 ^ tiD K
'"^ C «
,- -i -H * ?-:
0 r/ rf
" * > £.(
x . <-o 4->
k" r-l PL,
o co rs
f Q *1 ""Hi
' -i co co ; " *
-> ftf^* "rl
„ \ T1 f~
' -4 *H vi"» u.-
£• • t * f I l" 1 *"
r? ,c d c>
*0 dp *•(£•:
C! -^ £.« 4J m
•a- m m a
b+>
1^3 tYJ 4 1
-»J rjfl d)
fi Q> ^
C' '3? O
C
f 1 .
a> ci IA
. . .',", , r-^
f ' fe-| ^ xr\
a-
:p
-i "' ,
vl f, C\i (V
«' ^
a) ^
J o
tiO
^•i pj
r J *r|
•ri R
-> •> o
tl) f>
4J rH
CO ffj
£_i
«.'
•B
r;
i'1 (10
w nj
!. >
V) CO
J CO
;.: CM
T* •r ^ • i
C ^ '
9 n ci ^,
"5 bO U> «
** ^ Ctf r" -O
fe o f\
«t A;
t- a.> n >j •
* Ci r^ T!"
^ ^< • oi trt ^|
f ^> \Q f:i ^ ^
»N \(^! O fM
-f> O, -H '> •' J
C • rH t'- v ) O
O M > A.) t '
^ ",: °jj- 3
uj , i
•r< T;5 XI • £l
ci, SiJ o •-"• !>,
i ' *t~t f ' CO i*1
0. 4-' ' '.• -: o '<•< o
f-, S.
a) o s5 o a &
fiO 5.X r •< i" 1 ''0 .") W)
T5 C! *"3 •; T^ -iH T3
•rl t-, f> «-j -r< ^ TJ
r4 a; C' f-, rJ £.,
X> -P r-J fi A. rH ,0
(.J O rH
4-' C> " r» -I-1* O -*J
-t; JB - 't v< ^ a -3
;.,
Oi
O fJfl O O
T< Oi T1 Tl
'•?!
-^
^
1A
:") \O
a;> '•• \ t- -
o
*
•C __. "'''
^ >' •'" •
^ -(- r? '
-»-•> - cr: >.
r^ n rH
O CD po
o, -H i :
c! jj "p ',•
S-( 4 -* O ^
tt) ri O -H
41 rH 'f ?<
'j> Tt fifl O
0) -rH O (J
St >-. C-i >;
r<_
c?: iJ
, ; '
,c, '.a w '•'
X XJ r< Q/
4J v. a A o
ri> ^ f< Jd
C1 't X< r> flj
., ^ 4J CT..
• > r' tt!
•i i fl O JC Tt
£; '"^ ") 4 ' !
£•*
rH 4-' *~> 1..'
• f'l V~: (.-
.i J ^J pj ( i
;f U -r-s r-> j
'it: c< ^
.ij nj -.
r<1 TH • ' i 1*
„ m ' ' i', -y
d> ^"J • 41
tvO -4-' 1*3 * r * *^
'!) 0 S o , C '^
^" • ^j r^
rt »'iC*-f »O •
•H J3 i' O T3 O T)
H £ •* ^ » f 1) i-H J- f' s.° ' '.'.'
Cfx c) O J! UJ <"' i <0 Oi
CO, rH T-1 '-0 ''' ^'O :'
CQ CD rt f" TI • '.-0 T! c •
o n a> o o •-« T '. ;
CO r-J feO O rO t< ?• , —1 ?-< ">
^ AH rt rH ,O ?i XJ r
CH i^ • ^4 t* J '
•M O (S) -!-•> Cj 4-' * < ® -I-1 V '
^ C) W> ^ di *Tj C ' K":» --'Tt » -
O O ^> 4 ' O
r) 73 TI t: -r<
-"t r-
rH H
1A <\l
-,'•'
—f f- •» L ,' C-
Of_:t r~( -4 '•* '-T*
C-- C-- CCJ rH ' i ' '
r-l
* JJ£,'
» T '
* •£} ^ J ' 1> , c ?
T? SI *• rH 0
T1 »\ fll r"J I'?
(!•• ,--) -rj .,<
r; -H d '•< ! c W
•H rH ;•- J • IT
r-i w pi rH f o .<••;
.!u' (4 r.') a« -f< 4J
|J Q> ti f< ^
d rH • Si J- O
t, rH 4' rl 0 >",
! • • W Jr, P • O
•. 1
,y »">
a> i y, t -,' ; ; -3
•'! "a> tf,' f';-" • a>
J, Jl 01 • I r' 1
c; i.o M) 'n fn
•AS j: r. ; i: t:
^ rH q J: C ';
o rH t; r; G
a> •• ) a) «; c> 4 ••
O >: »-o >"„• •-.> «•
_-t ^A ^0
r^\ r^ f\ fr^ <-"\ >f:
-------
B -
n,j
•r
i
>-•»
+-•
n
f,
w en
>>.0
O 0) p)
*™^
• rH t.
W -H («
T3 > » pi c q
o ^ w '3
O
o e; n 5 ^
Sj n) -^
e & -1
r.>
»I
>l!
VI
a>
r^
-------
B -
Symbol
LEGEND FOR BASIN SCHEMATICS
(Figures B-2 through B-5)
Item
^P CFS Regular Sampling Station
(^J) CFS Reconnaissance Station
\ /
MDWR Sampling Station
1, 1A, 2, ... CFS Stations numbered from most upstream
M-l, M-2, . . . (not sequential) CFS stations numbered from
most downstream. These stations were estab-
lished by MDWR during the Western Maryland pH
survey. The numbers, less the "M," coincide
with the station numbers in the MDWR report
of June 10, 1963.12
(^.5) Drainage area square miles
Example:
Dobbin Road
Laurel Run
7-5)
Trib.
Station No. k, DA = 7-5 sq. mi,
CFS Reconaissance Station
MDWR Station located at Dobbin
Road crossing of Laurel Run
Figure B-l
-------
96.1
91.7
89.9
86.4
LU
81.3
B - 9
DOBBIN ROAD
LAUREL RUN
KEMPTON ROAD
3 \(4J9)
SAND RUN
NYDEGGER RUN
M-9K4.5)
STEYER C73)
USGS GAGE
SCHEMATIC DIAGRAM
NORTH BRANCH
ABOVE STEYER Md.
-------
B - 10
81.8
78.3
t
U)
(X
UJ
E
70.4
6 STEYER (73)
DIFFICULT CREEK
STONY RUN
8 Mi STORM
USGS GAGE (48.8)
ABRAM CREEK
16 OAKMONT
USGS GAGE (47.3)
1
8A
•e-
LOSTLAND RUN
M-66 (9.2)
e-
SHORT RUN
M-63 (3.1)
-e-
WOLFDEN RUN
17 (5.1)
68.9
18 KITZMILLER (225)
USGS GAGE
SCHEMATIC DIAGRAM
NORTH BRANCH
BELOW STEYER.Md. ABOVE KITZMILLER, Md.
-------
B - 11
3.9
.6
18 KITZMLLER (225)
DEEP RUN ^
o
22 (a4)
UNNAMED _
O
M-47KX5)
PINEY SWAMP RUN ^
25 (4.8)
1
^
<*>
1
\-_i p nr»u.l- wrsrs J TAWIM .^
19 (7.8) N.
^^ ELKLICK RUN
O
23 A Q.7}
23 B BARNUM (ca.256)
^ FOLLY RUN
O
23 C (4.7)
26 BERYL (287)
SCHEMATIC DIAGRAM
NORTH BRANCH
BELOW KITZMILLtR, Md. ABOVE BERYL, W.Va.
-------
B - 12
53.6
26 BERYL (287)
52.4
51.4
CO
UJ
ST.
lit
o
10
NEW CREEK
A_*
SAVAGE RIVER
1
E>
WVa
PAP
^
AARON RUN
GEORGES CREEK
o
UPRC WASTE TREATMENT
FACILITY
50 PINTO -USGS GAGE
WILLS CREEK
WILEY FORD -USGS GAGE
SCHEMATIC DIAGRAM
NORTH BRANCH
BELOW BERYL ABOVE WILF.Y FORO.Md. (C'IMBERLANDfM-U
-------
c - i
APPENDIX C
DATA TABLES
-------
0.)
&
a> o
•u>
r-) f
!«•'• o.
f/J t?r
00 ..,
f :
r-l •"
CM .
r,-\ V> '- VA o ir\ o
••X.' •
•
» ' «
( ,
H
o
§
•T>
C'l
U\
rH c
-H
u4
O
r-i
^ '
C.
.
;; •') ;
~ <
-------
1'x-JO
Q)
I
c
o
•H
4-'
m
-P
C)
.
r-J O
H M
I I
lH r-J
I I
QD r-l
r- t
U\ c\J
rH r-J
(M t^-
O! ,- I
Ti ,-|
I-1 - I
C)
f---
*
o
C>
o
V.)
C- O
OJ
r-J O
O CJ U\
co
-_rt_^f-. O
t rl r-i (M r-(
-
' ^ rH O C ~> O
'-V f^- l/\ CN r-i
C J r-l r-l CM r-i
O
O
au
cd
co
s;
O
•H
4J
-
C\i r >
ir\ i-
r-l r
.0
to
Cj
f. )
'-> XI
a -H
c i w
f -ri
1 h-*
0)
?H
O O
pi -!1
41
J. o
.1 0)
c)
en
ctf
-P
r- a}
( i T1
ctf
!-•, C
r-| O
...I .H
c' W
" -H
0>
TA It ,
O C.. '„ .
O H r i
O ON c >
rH O rH
f I I
r-~ c f^
rH C, rH
T'' O -Ct
> i C>-, ^rf
•H r-( C..
cj _;f p»-
O r-l t I
•
4.-.
Ti
a>
,cj
/,0
fl
( '
-------
C - k
to
h-i
*:• ->
f '
f'i
§
C11
?;
;•;
o
o\
O
+ \
* <
CM bO
w
O\ oo
o>
|r-j a
Ictf T->
s
'H
-P
.1
CO
'
O
03
•rl
f H 0
OJ
IrS-g
tH S 'S
^ co -
M j
a a>
-*• -1 f * V
•
r< Q)
I'l
H
JV
g
«
M O)
OJ
r t
Of~r f ,
• •
<"lrH
H rH
•H O O
-^ ©
X>
C\4
fri
VC
»
O
0
0
vO c )
«•'•> ,H
• «
f-J r^
«'
O r-- M c
CV O\ r
I I I I . T ^ v:)
vgciiAJi.1,^^ ci
ri'*•' 7 V '7 ^ ^> ^
CO O _# r I ,-H <-l\— .
~
•~t rH
-H
'' to
•H (( • '
-Ifr
^~, O
c i f!
~.-J (^ ^
H r-1 i,
I «
CT . rj >
r-i r !
I !'
r-) 'O
C-,i i .
(M - *
'"* ; r •
CM C •
C" r-i
VO M>
\O M
ctf
bo
5
4 '
C
ri
0)
0)
-p
!»
T'
-------
tO H
• •
C\j r-t
O O
• •
r-1 rH
V V
O O
r- o-
O
"J W
o t>
IM >v^
r' i o
at
'•( !•::
O, 0)
E v
«) a!
CO E-J
0)
.01 (a,
;.«§
in co t~
F F
ft 0
•-•*
00
3
o
fij
-..-j
:i
,
•
-•• *
c.,
O
q\
C :
1
\r>
-
O
•P
o
-------
-------
M
'
1 •
""
f'
F
F-c
O
A,
XI
i-i i;
nJ 71
•>-> S-,
C! trj
H M-
0
L« 0> O
L-; FH "
££s
f * (>;
^ CO
r-< c:
n< a>
•'• !5 .'rf
t1 16 ((5
flj A.
rl 0>
8-9
o? r?
co r-;
«»
I
o-ao
i - -*j
« ^ Jg;
IS
II,
-3:5
f--j
~rf f K
r ! rg
li-\_t
a i r-i
-*
•
O
'•i
lllsis
II
':
"
§
5
«
O CM
* •
•HM
2
O
§§
C
A;
o
•H
f:i
•-(
r I
r-(
!
o.)
,£,'
O
W '
* -H
M. f/)
t'j
O
to
;
Qi
t,
f:
,c;
t >
•r!
0.1
(-:
T?
a-
a-
(3
Q;
-------
r'i
fr~\
r-l
CM
a
C1 «M
o
09
•H
f ' r.
•u
r~( K
'% 8)
H-S
W
0
r-4 rH
V V
P O
O
s:
o
i
-
gg
f!
7?
OS Vf-
! ' a/
.
CO '
-------
!• '
I'H
J"v '
rn
CO
r "i
t i
, V J
n
fc:
C
, '
f ,
,,
pi
p:
r;'
C"
*-
ji^.
V
^
f-r'
*"' f
c.
O
r-i
\,
££
rH
•x
bi
w e
rH
"13
n! e.
r / •-, „'
*— •-
i
,1
>' ' x
M r-i
-(-? J>0
r. f > 'y
i< "' 6
i ! il, -
;.o
$ W
-Cj ^ -0
r> CJ
w ••— -
r!
S-l
4-3 f^
OJ 0> O
^ E-10
0'
C O, tj
r~> (U
/ _J (^[
g *Pf
w ^
rH
rH rH
V
VA
p
_rt cv -sf O
1A OJ rH OJ
rH
if;
oj VA CM <~"i
-31 0 (J\ -^
H
VA
O O t^
rH
rH
VA
fV-^
•
,-< o fA
v ^
r-|
rv X)1
0 •
O ' K
'JJ)
_:.t M":
~ " * CV — * V/S *^ ( i-A ^S
O r^ ' rH
4' I"? O 0) ® 3) c*\ Qj
f"p "F "§
•v i— >•:! ^'.' .0
r- > f«-H -f ^ *--(
t! rt s. t: f-'
O 0 C O U
•H vO ••< -H T' • -H
•j: iu' ttf «8 frt P!
(,) '.? CO to CO
,H
Q rH VA O XA f ~v
CM rH r-1 1
ON VA O O O O O O
C' — "t CM OJ O r-l <*} Oi
O OO OJ CVI f\ r-f CN C
r-l O rH (H rH rH O r i
•O ^O co ao X5 r>- r r—
II 'if ii l
C.5 a, ~~t f»- Q > rH sC
CA r-i /— t Cj r—; •— * OJ r-j
II III II 1
OO O f*"\ r^-.t <—( f-l rH
H r^ rH r~*
f\f C' CO ',O rj O r< t SO
,H rH C",' O O ol '"^ rH
r"i OJ O r C'J rH . ' '."•' r- '
QO C""" ^' '' f™\ *-'*? /""f ^ ' f ' '
O rH !ffi O O C5 rH r ' -~.!
\O '-O ao oo ao ( — ; f -
^O \O *O *O "-O VO v; ( '^->
> *
•rf
-t-1
r ;
1-A VA C> ' CO
* * * •* cj^ r"^
fH ^. :? ,- f fiO CO
r-1 r f f, ,':n
d
4~; :•»
f '• vJ
VA ~~r VA V'-, -ri ^
_-.? _:t r>^ vr" ''s' -H
OJ r-i <~) f 1 <3V W
*^0 *f~i
n? ,'--
r a)
I.) JH
i A co co VA
. . « » t/J O
r^ 0 O rH O -I-3
CO
J""> p
o
F (L>
o -r^>
.J ' -°
f:
tl:^
'. IJ *^
J • Ll!
.-• (3
-' ' ai
(.j '^
C-,
., ' r-i
r ;",(| " ,qi
& ct ,'i i- ! :4 0
r-i T-)
"•" ifc^ / :', i ^ j 'H CO
f~* ' r,' -H
?, t* )U I. T' >
u< o
f'r '>5: ("' f^
*, ^, iS .'' 5! v"'
-, , j ^ , ,
r-« / •« *~* •*
fl, * 4 i-p
O O O I • "
»H •<"' 'H
C/J CQJ '/O TO
X l , C^ C - ^
* w
rH :-"r -•• r'
v,1 r-1 '. ' C,J
1 1
0 C' C' t.'
VA O r-i <->!
C. r-i - t -:t *
;' , rH r' rH 'T ^
*
r - f-- f;- c^~ t"
'i i t > , ( . l
r ; r-i r . . <
f- ! r*-< r - i - -
r 1 rH r- { r 1 P
>.ro -o ^ 5V ^
-------
<•
JS
\ •
I *
*. .
•i-1
Ci
O,
4.' l-
.t! (li ' )
: F • <••
a>
' -i r
g Q, 0>
•3
IH
V-l( 'U
J-M
w
f-<
^
f\
tA
O%
O
rH
«
f
Q)
•e
<«
•p
CO
•Ut
*
C)
VA
O
rH
O
r-(
.
tt-' ( >
' -
tM C!i
CO t i
rH OJ
i"'-, X)
H
I
H
1
i-l
f-f
CD
-(•5
T '
•t ^
-------
r~i
0
£/}
S
*~.
f-l
' •
f-' 0
•ri r-'
q o
~' f-Q
"' r-l
r • t* 1
r*~i
-
1
c\j
-t
o-
"
r-l
C\>
O
;H R|
fc_, 7- i
o
r-
O O
Q \f\
fl!
r ^
C/) FH
§8
c
r;- |
C) (^ Q)
+; g ;x
ttf d «.
n co r «
5 *
.
§ n
£0 £;
»
-------
C1 - Li
I':1
v
i
I
It!
I*,
r!'
f i
^
i~i
Fl
r'
; ;
\:
*
{
'1
V
E -
I'
*T ;
^ "y
*~~
c E
•- ' C. ! " -'
-'•
rH
" ' ^N
•t < o m
C f * " £;
«T! ^^
u:
T' rH
°) r ! t2)
f i ro^-
••<•' rH~
j, ', •! * '*-^
C'* rH fiw
/,"; r;.| JS
CO --^
r ' T) r-f
C? -rl %--
•r- rH t:)
o o e;
E- CO --
r
.. | f?
t 'U ^CJ
c: O 0
«) o xj
co' :T
a.'
1 Ij (0
"*-' I ^ r^4
'-^J to TO
t< r,0 f-t
a' IH
r ) 0^
ci< ,o
r9 3
CO S3
Xf-,
* * *
^ 'i r- '
O ' vO rH M> CT. Cl' v. "i \J\
CM - * rH r- _H; -^t .:' CM
(H fTi r-f V OJ
vt,) nf>
f rj H P"l Nil -,O rjr. (>H rj ^ ll\
f^. i • rH OJ Is- XA CO Ni rH I'M ._rj,-t -"t C-J
• r- -J C5O > '"A -5f CO rH OS
O r-l rH rH
^-fr
\r; .~f a*,
-,,-, rr^ ^
, « rH
C*- CK
* 1*
co cj
C-. f— i
(
--•* rH CM O rHvO -~f iH -"• CN -Tt C.. lj"\ CM t
^O C-i <'^ f\ ^ CJ CM C — \T XA-"t-Cf-r? ^ <
O
f\
nt
XA vO C-- '*'• or. C"»
t-i ?-• •') ^ i< r^ S-* C3 £» Ci f '
do o o o o
•rf -H O rH -H f-' -H O ft -r! f
4j 43 xr\ 43 43 43+3
f?5 pJ 53 ^^ n> 5?" cfl JS 4^ 4^ 4^ ^ >
CO W CO CO CO CO
c
rH
c*-
XA >j \ o o o XA XA vr XA o XA XA XA XA XA v.
^3 H m f^ CD XA -Tf XA-31 fA CM O CM I/', rH r
~-f CM U\ r-f 0- XA UN rH O HOXAXA.:f _d r
rH rH rH r < rH rH rH rH r-l rH rH H H r- f r-* r
r •<> VO c-- co "C> co \O t^- M."; r- on or/ co t-~ v
s - , N^ ) sO *sO MD N-O NO NO \O ^O "^ ^^O ^"^ vi ^ "*-O v>
1 1 t 1 1 1 1 II 1 ! I 1 ! 1
_rt co 'X5 -rf jrf [>•• O r-- -c* c --.f ~~3 r~ O -cr r-
rH rH r-i rH -H CM rH rH rH rH rH rH CM rH r-f r
1 111*11 II I 1 1 1 1 1
rH 1) C ' r- ( 'A rr\ _Tf CO rH CO r 1 f\ O_-! r-i Cl
r! r-l r'; .H r-l r-l
OX.%r^a^NO tA<.-. -rtm-T-^Vs --f
rH OJ C>' r-f C> O O rH r i r H H O O O rH r
c. oj -"t r • xr\ o\ rH CM r - <. , o- XA o\ f-f r- r
rH CM 'XJ r , r> CM rH CM rH O< r-l 'H Of r -' rH 7
r-f or. o i— 1 f~\rr\_:f en rH i' ,-H ' ") f*"\- - ' r-f J
r-f O iH r-l O O C) C > r—t ,'. ' i H O O C ,- rH C
r-— NO ^O C^- ^C~* CO CO NC f- — Nf^ T - ' CO CO ^ ' r^*- v
VO ^O NO NO MD ^O NO NO NO N1D NI3 ' C N£) Vt, NO V
• *! (1
^ • U ( - h L> \
-i'\ . i r 1 .
C rH
r • i 0-, f-
r <> - v'~> -<
,- ' r 1 r- 1
T- ! r-i
« » #
1 > V ) C -i ' r\ Nt •
H "\r\ -d r * . -i
•M r!
~- u~. r O .
*r* rWi
^
-~!"
-^
^•<
!£•_! ? -
d) *
r; ", \
1
^
-3
: ', f.... lri | "I r ; c\)
O H- ,' ' r -
55 X("i «j fe; ., r-i
•P
CO
C> ''; >'. •
C • ' ( f\
1 i\ 'i\ CV
j \ ( , O O O
H —J O rH CM
H rH O ON C<~\
H rH rH O rH
JO Nf- NO I -
~) • 1 NO M^ NO
1 i ill
f^ r>- c.' rr^.
i ^H --• CM r i
II ill
1 -t "j O ~Ct
rH
1 J E - CM ~'J C
. r-f r\J C-J < -<
r> -"i co O -:t
"J O f.J rH O
5 ^0' $ ^0 H ;
-------
C - 12
r i r i
co
'* nj
W F
' ' JJ
£X/If
S g
>1 ^j
CO
f!
0 0
^
pr
,
"^
*
If
s
"
'
"0
r.
T c?
«>
' t
f-.
-------
o,
'- .0*5.
R
o
•D
'-f a
fi,
r'f
r -
0
M> so r- r*- CM X'
r. .•
CM (
a y
W 525
<-'\
^i
0
cr.)
-o
r-,
i.'" j
Cd
f J
-o
07)
v
cj tr,
rH O^
rH r-t
\4 • \O
NO N.O
I >
~! O
rH
'- > CM
''I -t
CJ r i
O"> O
O M
NO \O
I
•o
r-f
r -
NT'
cv
CN;
'-O
"
r
i ~>
r-
,- <
,-J
r
r !
r
x<
-------
\_l —•
,
(
'-.
O*1
f, .
rn
3
f-J
F!
I-1
;.--
f j
n:
r ;
i
c'»
o
0 i
(7
I,
" :
co
;, '
^- •
n ;
c_>
^.,
H
A! tq
r~i R
^ 1
-- * if.
( ""f ^
{• * V ,-'
, J
T.
., ! t > • ')
c; ,°« ^
r f
<, 1 r-< -'
%!•-'• >^0
, ,' I* V -
'•~ 1
r-l
T i *-^
., j o f;j
0 >J _g
"E
I," s~ -
" ' r- .
«. 7-1 ^1:0
' ' ' r
f ' c; • -
. ^
t V - - ^ ,' f)
* * . •* ^ '
} -'--",.
f " * * r • i
; -H " K.
' i 3 * )
I . '0 O
i >
" t X
% " J f.!
t v^
C ' -„• t »
{*) t-1" *ci
5- s
ai o< oj
;.' f: .X
•H cvj di
; i to f^
c1
' C«
'j ;j, f!)
*.-> f* v
, ! i' tij
r i t/i r- 1
i" ?i
r~ j 0)
( w ^j
t{ F,
co t:
O O xC IA
OJ C1— r ( CO
r-- XA
rH
C,
•O f- C'\a'j O\_SC/\CM CO fN 1Ast_; r-i
CK ~1 XTx rH rH r^
-rr
rH rH O\
T- xr^ o r- - 1 r 4 c i
r , CK c— f'\ ' • (.,.'
r>~\ r-! f 1
:4
* •
.t r-l C> f \-r* cr^
• Q C1^ ^-','* O™^ »^T'J
rH " rH
XJ \ Xi'i
sO >H O r-l C., CJ Cs! SO CK O\ C -P Cr->
-.t ~J f^ f> (1S ^ P\ l ^- fN
a.> p- c-, co
'. J O\
r 1 r 1
^' UN sf) C— CO (,
Ci C-J r\l C\J CM C
!. '• o> j.( cr ;^ f>i ^ « j
*i' i c^ *• fi^ * CP * d) *
-.' ^ti O.' ^ r-' ,O VS, ^3 C'O
i1: Ss; K ^ £", t
K ti C! « Cj
O O C' O O
-H O -H C - (.-I -r! t J O -H i~i ' -H C:l f\
4-' +5 Ol -p CJ +J sc 4-3 1,A -i
pf TT; r5 £J - -" * cd ^! O-1 ctt I-.-: " • . «j ^
4i! -»J r~t 4* +'J r-l •+•'
CO( CO 01 CO Cl r
' ', <-.' O t,1
XA <••» o xa
u\ XA r-- c- '
rH rH
o o XA o c> o o o o o o c'' < o
o O CA o o f\ > Q V4_ v^> -^s
xQ xO sO xt ' xQ xCJ) H * l<^ x^ xf ' \O xQ s0 xC^
> III 1 1 t ! ( 1 f 1 II
sQ xO r") xO C?\ f sO (^ f^,_l«.v ON rH ^^s rH
rH rH C\l r-l rH Cxi r--f —4 t*j rH rH CM <- '• OJ
1 (II till! II i 1
JO CO O rH CTi f;: rH r*\ <^»_r}- CO O '-= - O
r-l H ,- H rH r~i rH
M;> v . r - oj XA T '-i ' '"A c-— r- oj _T -. t i - xo
O < f'J OJ OJ Oi OJ (.'• <" ' O CM C\J C : CM
CM <.-.j _T t-— c-j — f r— x,-'\ f-, rH cxi ~rt '•• ,-~t
CM C'J Cj rH OJ {••/ rH rH ( 1 H O-i C 1 ; , 1
OJ a") O rH CO (. ; rH C'N r"i_CT CO CJ '-'''.•
LJ O r-l rH C r-l rH O O C O rH C ' M
XO xO xO t^~ XO xy r- CO CO CO sA v i xO sO
sO xO XC) xC so XO xO x(j xO xO xu vt .• ^Q H?1
t .1
^ *
;
L j
u-
•
!•-
t-H
'",
' \
v'! P •"'
v,
k >.. • ^
3) U5 y>
j /-j
K i-, "e
3 !.i r
^ J*-^ »B. .
-; j;. .-«
J CJ 6
H -,-< -H n
> { " -i^>
T1 tti o! '".
0 CO o >
r '
f i
V
M~'
5
C %
f~ *
1
CO
01
CJ
C.!
a''
o n
!r~ i-3 vO
0'
O
-------
r — 1
o
CO •
f '
) CO I-
n
XA
CO
t' ^
r-
0
O ir\
XA
•
r--
r-\
-•^
• •
r-
•
~^f
CV U J
r-i CL.
r-1 *-•<
I I
•T) '
r-< r->
r -) ..- f
f'\ C',1
CO t,'
C » r-<
V" vO
V" ./>
CO
iS -M
f-, !-
O O
C«. (x,
<3> ,-
'- o
O r-(
0)
CO
O
- ' <_>
,-> r-i
J CK
-~t
n
r •, c .'
ori O
;j r-t
MJ vO
M) XC>
C >
O\
c.1
c:>
o\
C • r i
v i vx'
MJ XS.,
C .
. , ' r--
?MCO
r- ! O
-'. -D
f.
-------
16
o r-
rH rH
rH
<•<-* __-t r -
« * *
C'.> ON C\i
^- O
r— \f\
, "H ri
1 •• ! \
r ,'• r I ,'J
a;
CO
i (
C
0)
•ri
• « fc:
t. , -f rj
-, r -
f '' C •
u> o v-
"• ^
C/ ! 1
1 >
r ' V*
U-> : i. 0)
f * f ' ,id
i;1 'X IH
i" '.
p-i t;
a> tx c*
4!) C1 V
Ki r"*1
C 1
i ' f- '
r- < i}}
§ §
i 1 2-.
O
O' \
~LP\
I?. !'\
"t
( J ^t ?
,-i f_>
\ Q \^~i
^i1 v{,'
1 1
{ j Cr\
f' \ r t
CO O
rH
i^J O
r-1 rH
rH -_'t
00 C-
O r — f
O vO
O
CM
OJ
rH
CC;
^i -
1
^-
rH
t
CO
O
1A
,ri rH
fe; cj
CO
xO
o
o/
o 1
r-l
no
sQ
|
(V -
Ol
1
CO
O
CK
C\l
r*~\
O
CO
O .' ,'• C • .... (..
<..! r > "\ ( ^ \ < ' r-( '\i
f-\ r - !>> t ' > - 1 - * *.'
rH r-' • ;> r ' >" r-l ,H -(
r- r-- t ' - r r- '
^C) xC ! ^^ < Sj • r ) ''^': I ; '
i it > i i i i
O ^C rH sT v!J l^-i .. , UN
rH rH f\l r ! r 1 r-l r-i /-I
1 It 1 » 1 1 1
- -t rH i i r 1 i i rH rH i H
H ' i r ! rH r-l r-' • i
r-i C 'I VO 1A C - • r-
CM ,; r-l rH '' '• :..
P. • [-- i r>. r i i r-
rH rH i .' rH r-l , ' rH rH
--t r-i r ! rH r-l r{ ,-) ,-l
O •-< r- •( H r ! r-l r-l r -
oo r - r— c — r- r>- f-- ' -
xO VC ^4,J vO xf VO \P v )
*
•r?
Q)
C
»i~ii
WP
(U
4
*?-
11
£'•
I
C".
h- )"
f= •*
-------
-------
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
I. INTRODUCTION 1
II. PROCEDURE 2
A. Sampling 2
B. Chemical Analysis 2
C. Bacteriological Analysis 3
III. STATION DESCRIPTIONS 5
IV. SURVEY RESULTS 7
-------
I. INTRODUCTION
The Chesapeake Field Station of the Middle Atlantic Region,
Federal Water Pollution Control Administration, conducted an inten-
sive survey of the Shenandoah River Basin during June 196?. Separate
surveys were made on (l) the Main Stem of the Shenandoah River,
(2) the South Fork of the Shenandoah River, including the South
River and the Middle River, and (3) the North Fork of the Shenan-
doah River (see Figure l). The report is a summary of the data
collected on these surveys.
The purposes of these surveys were to aid in verifying the
DO and BOD model parameters and to determine general water quality.
The survey should also show the extent of any diurnal quality
fluctuations.
-------
II. PROCEDURE
A. Sampling
1. All samples for chemical analysis were obtained by
dipping a plastic container full of the shallow stream water. A
quart cubitainer was then filled from the dipped sample and iced.
A portion of the dipped sample was siphoned into a DO bottle until
overflowing and fixed. A portion of the dipped sample was also
used to measure the pH and temperature at the time of sampling.
The iced samples were returned to the camper laboratory within
two hours where the analyses were started immediately.
2. All bacteriological samples were obtained by dipping
a sterile sample bottle directly into the stream. The full
bacteriological sample bottle was then capped and iced.
B. Chemical Analysis
1. Dissolved Oxygen
Reference? Standard Methods for the Examination of
Water and Wastewater, 12 ed., 1965.
Dissolved oxygen was determined by the azide modification
of the basic Winkler method with the titration done potentiometrically
with an automatic TITRALYZER.
2. Biochemical Oxygen Demand
Reference: Standard Methods for the Examination of
Water and Wastewater, 12 ed., 19650
-------
The biochemical oxygen demand was determined by the
azide modification of the basic Winkler method with the titration
done potentiometrically with an automatic TITRALYZER. The samples,
as received, were diluted if necessary and transferred to standard
300 ml BOD bottles in triplicate. One initial DO and two final
DO determinations were used throughout. Incubation was started
immediately at 20 C and continued for five days after which they
were titrated.
3. PH
The pH measurements were made with a field pH meter.
**• Bacteriological Analysis
1. Coliform
Reference: Standard Methods for the Examination of
Water and Wastewater, 12 ed., 1965.
The water samples were inoculated into fermentation
tubes containing 10 ml of lauryl sulfate tryptose using decimal
dilutions of one ml. Five fermentation tubes were used for each
dilution and four dilutions were made. The production of gas in
any amount in the inner fermentation tubes after 2k and h8 hours
of incubation at 25 - 0.5 C constituted a positive presumptive
MPN test.
All positive presumptive tubes were submitted to the
confirmatory test using tubes containing 10 ml of brilliant green
lactose bile broth. Incubation was done for a period of 48 hours
-------
at 35° - 0.5°C. The production of gas in any amount in the inner
fermentation tubes constituted a positive confirmed MEW test.
2. Fecal Coliform
Reference: Standard Methods for the Examination of
Water and Wastewater, 12 ed., 1965.
All positive presumptive tubes from the coliform
test were submitted to the confirmatory test for fecal coliform
using tubes containing 10 ml of EC media. Incubation was done
for a period of 2k hours at if5.5° - 0.5°C. The production of
gas in any amount in the inner fermentation tubes constituted
a positive confirmed MPH test.
-------
III., STATION DESCRIPTIONS
Number
M - 0
M - 1
M - 1 A
M - 2
M - 3
M - k
S - 1
S - 3
s - 3 A
S - It
S - k A
s - 6
s - 6 A
s - 8
s - 9
s - 9 B
S - 10
S - 11
S - 12
s - 13
Station
Main Stem
Main Stem
Main Stem
Main Stem
Main Stem
Main Stem
Shenandoah
Shenandoah
Shenandoah
Shenandoah
Shenandoah
Shenandoah
South River
South River
South River
South River
Middle River
Middle River
Middle River
Grassy Creek (Black Run)
North River
North River
South Fork Shenandoah
South Fork Shenandoah
South Fork Shenandoah
South Fork Shenandoah
Location
PEPCO Dam (before spillway)
Rt. 62k Bridge north of Front Royal
Rt. U. S, 50 Bridge
Rt. 7 Bridge east of Berryville
Rt, 9 Bridge east of Bloomery
Rt. U. S. 2^-0 Bridge south of
Harpers Ferry
Chesnut Ave. Bridge in Waynesboro
Etc 6ll Bridge near Coiners Mill
Bridge in Harriston off U. S. 340
Rt. 629 Bridge in Port Republic
Rt. 629 Bridge in Port Republic
Rt. 256 Bridge west of Grottoes
Rt. 668 Bridge west of Grottoes
Rt. 86? Bridge east of Mt. Crawford
Rt. U. S. 11 Bridge south of
Mto Crawford
Rt. U. S. 276 Bridge in Rockland
Mill
Rt. 659 Bridge north of Grottoes
Rt0 649 Bridge east of McGaheysville
Rt. U. S. 33 Bridge west of Elkton
Kt, 602 Bridge west of Shenandoah
-------
Number
Station
Location
S - 19 South Fork Shenandoah
S - 20 South Fork Shenandoah
N - 1 North Fork Shenandoah
N - 1 A North Fork Shenandoah
N - 2 North Fork Shenandoah
N - 2 A Worth Fork Shenandoah
N - 2 B Smith Creek
N - 3 North Fork Shenandoah
N - 3 A Stony River
N - 3 B North Fork Shenandoah
N - k North Fork Shenandoah
N - 5 North Fork Shenandoah
N - 6 North Fork Shenandoah
N - 7 Passage Creek
Luray Ave. Bridge in Front Royal
Rt. U. S, 3kO Bridge in Front Royal
Rt, 259 Bridge near Cootes Store
Bridge off Rt. 259 in Broadway
Rt. k2 Bridge in Timberville
Bridge off Rt. 260 near New Market
Bridge off U0 S, 11 about 0,5 mile
north of R'ades Hill
Rt0 ?6y Bridge east of Quicksburg
Bridge off U. S. 11 in Edinburg
Bridge off U. S. 11 two miles
below Edinburg
Rt. 663 Bridge northeast of Woodstock
Rt0 55 Bridge east of Strasburg
Rt. U. S. 3kO Bridge in Front Royal
Rt. 55 Bridge west of Front Royal
-------
•Jr
o\
rH
1
cr> fcj
,_,') £3
& CO
re a;
F
fc--,- ?T"J
55 ig
8
s
£•* S5
5*
CO
g
o
r-i
6~« r-i
Q,
S
0)
rH
a,
W d
CO 0)
*^*
3_
-O
f~~ CA rH CA sO
XA r~-^O CA rA
vO H CO XAIA
rH
CA CA CO XA CA
f^ CA CM XA r-
OO CA O C*~ ^O
rH
XAIA XAXA
# « • •
vO CA CO ^O ^O
CM CM CM CM CM
O O Q CA t —
f^ CM O CM O
CA XA rH Q XA
O rH CM O O
xO
rH
1
rH CM r^ O rH
rH
-------
c
o
t-1
o
«M 55
a
o
o
o
O
O
03
O
Q,
0} 0
£-.
C
0)
3
w
Q,
CO »
a> a
o o o o o
^'v'v v£
o o o
rH r~ O
rH rH C>
cvioo
OsONXAQOvO
XAO^AOsOOXAOOO
CO
*
0>
bt
T5
rH
I
ss
CO
o
• CO
-
OrHCJOOrHrHCjO
-3
rH
^
\A
fH
I
vO
rH
I
O O O O O
CM CM CM CM CM
V V V V V
8
O O O O Q
^^ J^""0 o
rH
.OrH\OC\,'OJ^-
OrHCMOC5rHrHCMOO
-^
fH
VA
UN
O\OO
IA
rH
-------
g
o
«H <*H as
«» -H a,
O rH JC
O
*n S5
rH X
O
u
rH
SKI
fiP
rH
^^ *S-
O Cu
CD E
O CO
[H Ct<
t*< O
O.
if O
^ o
&H
c
0)
JHJ
id
Jf-t
CD
IH rH
a.
g
CO
a>
C!
0)
r
Q> (H
rH fl)
Ou .^
||
ooooo o o o o
CM ru r\i r\j _jH/ XA '^'^ CO ^O
v V V ^7 '^r\ r/> ^ r^
rH
Q O O Q O
t~,
e
o
o
/•H
m
«M
o
^>
CO
V
tiD
T3
•H
(H
(Q
'
§
-f*'
co
_Cj
(0
JgJ
pr^
r
J3S
s
o
•H
-f-?
-5
CO
P<
C^
1
»-t»
^H
J^ CN CN sO XA jH CO \O 1-A -P
rH ^3
o
co
i
f\ O t*- ^O CM oo -if O -Cf O
(7\ -^OO r?\ rH OO GO f — CM -if
LAC1— O.O\t — GO Ot^XA
-,- J —
n *
co
£3
4)
CXO
•H
LAXA 3
CM CM C
* * 00
o
a>
00
•H
f-,
P3
1
fe
\A -H
• tti
^f XA
CM CM &
-P
O
CO
rH
i
CO
LA ft
CM O C
O OO O
rH O -H
-P
3
CO
LAxO O VQ <**\
O O -if Ox Os
cnoo CM r- 0~
X> O CM -if OO
^™> c^ r*™* ^^ c\j
>- OO _Cf
•£} >£f \O
XAXA
* f
•A '^r\ — 5j CA |
CM CM CM CM
1AXA O XA
1 rH -if r^ rH
O XAXA rH
CM O rH O
-^ XA \O -ifvO rH CM rA
rH rHrH rHi-f CMCMCM
i II II III
\O \o vO Mj M^ ^O MJ ^O
-^t-^XAXAOCNOOOO XAO CNrHCArHCA
j^ CM fAUt^H CM m^rH rH ^^D ^ <^ O ^ O
rH rH rH rH rH
-------
"t
£
jj
o
-^
f-j
ro
f-i
£?
M
§
H
1
c?
0
rH *-) SB
CO -«H ft,
o «H ac
o» o
(x> O
O
•*H £
O
0
rH
SKJ
w
c? bj
fQ Is
0 CO
rH fx«
fr< O
o
o
EH
§
Cw
0) H
•H 0)
O,
§
CO
0)
§*
CO f*
CO O
4> "$
•P f-1
0) V<
rH «)
CO 55
Q O O O Q O
C/\ f\ c1^ .jy so \
r^ rH r^ CM *
G
5
-P
(0
q
7
CO
-------
x~~*.
'O
<1)
•J
*•*
Is
C
O
0
>_ •
T"
K
*" i
co
ft;
w
r- '
§
St
_}
X-'(
3
fl
/i
o
rH 0
T)
•H
f-,
m
i
r
Q)
&
5
3
O
CO
CO
§
•H
3
CO
o o o o o
CX CM sO XA Os
O O O 0 O
Os Ox CM O O
»>- »- r- rH -CJ
rH CM CM
0
•H
j
^
O,
&z
n^cO (HOjCOCT\f^r— ONC^1^ -*^
*O ^N ^-^ CM f^\ f^\ i~H ON X/N -^J .r-*
^ O\ O1^ C*^" "^O C^~ O\ \O \O **O Q^
1
Ox
CM
3O sO C? CD ~f ^* CO C5 sO sO
Q)
*"CS
•*H
IU
•
^i
v
•H
• • a>
MCMCMCMCMCMCMCM CM "O
•o
^rH
ISu
^
CO
rr>O QXAXACMsOOO
rHrHCMOOCMiHOO -H
-5
CO
rH CM (T%
CS1 CM CM
> 1 I
O so sO
-A Os C^— rH XA O\ r*^ rH XA Ox s
OHCM-S'OrHCM-3'OrH
CM
g
O
0 Q 0 0 Q
f\ OO XA CM CX
CM -if
Q O Q p O
CX Ox Ox Ox Ox
t — -*J -^J -^/ ~^J (O
1
4^
o
O
^H
O
-AOCMsO-^rHsO CJO Os
Ox-CJf-rHCMXAfHsOXArH -P
O CO GO ^~- sQ v^ CO ^— sO sO O
J2
1
sO
1A
CMCMXAXAOCOOCMOOOO CM
O CO CX SO Ox sO — ICf XA rH -3
•3 CM rH (*\ CM CM -^ CO rr» CM OJ
>
0)
d£
TJ
•rH
m
i
^i
QJ
>
XA XA XA 5
• • •
^J sQ XA — *J C"'"\ ^\ XA — ~T 1 fr\ Q)
CMCMCMCMCMCMCMCM CM H
T)
T5
•H
3EI
sO
to
sOXAr~-O O p— OxXAXA
IXAQOXACMOOHrH-St C
rr\ CX -^-^ Os CM Ox O XA O
rHrHCMOOCMrHCDO -ri
+>
$
co
rH CM <""V
CM CM CM
sO sQ sO '
«j; -< -a! •< PQ 03
-OOCOCMsQOOOCMsOO
O CM CM -? O CM CM — ^ O CM
sO
CM
8
r—
O
r— • o\ r*S
1—4 f>«. r»"^
O O Q
rr\ CM O
rr\ o«. r/A
rH rH
rH XAXA o c-—
CM OO OO f"\ O
O so XA r^- SQ
CM O f~- CM -31
CM r>-sO r*\ C-—
-^-if t ^ CM
•Cf c^y o^ XA 1
CM CM CM CM
XAXA co XA
1 rH CM rH XA
O sO sO rH
rH O rH O
H CM f>
CM CM CM
1 1 1
O sO so
«3j ^ W
rH c^ rH <*N rH
rH T\ rH CO rH
O
CM
g
r^™ ,
O
11
-------
C
•r-J
•4-
C
o
o
CO
H
3
s
CO
« s:
-H (X,
J» O
6, O
Is
o
Cf
8
5 co
B O
O e
•a
i *"*
•H a>
s
O O O
-P
O
fc.
o
*l
I
COI
0)1
t3
•H
\ rH ON CO
CVJ O OJ
rH CO CO
CNJ
cv
vO NO ,0
IS
OJ
O O
OJ NO
OJ OJ
O r*-NO oj
rH O rH O
OJ
NO
NO
C9
5
0 ** •»
ON
•P
ac
5p
8
CO
I
rH
rH
•
CO
m
1
rj
r-04 ON
» • »
XAOO XA
oj
I
o\
to
g
CO
VA
•
CM CVJ p-\
J
-------
T3
(U
fO -rt
t> H
CM
13
O Q O O
~^
-------
•0
c*
c
•H
-P
c
o
o
^— '
f!_.
F?
£rj
CO
pj
M
«
K
"•^y
O
9
i>
i
o
o
rH
CO
*
0>
txO
__J
*n
03
1
i5
^
5
1^
o
CO
CM
1
CO
c
o
•H
-P
\
\
V
O CN O CNOO
rs^ — ^ — ^y ^*- {**«.
XA CM
88888
~^zf -Juj c\) -^f c5
C\J rH *xCvJ **
—if ,-£}'
XA CM
OCNsOOsr-CM^fnf-r-f
J\OO CO XA fM rH sO -^-=f ON
^\o XAXA XA o MO XA o -cf
rH (H rH
•Cf CM -^JOO \O CM vO CM >O
rH J>— £*- OK P— CMM5t*-O
CMvO OXAXAMvOXAt^-vO
r-t rH rH rH rH
XA XA
!M f"^ MO XA — "^ CM MO - T? 1 f*"\
MCMCMCMCMCMCMCM CM
XAXAXAOXAOOO OXA
1 -CfOf^-^frH f^CMrH-^
CM r*~ CM f^ GO f*\ CO O^V « H/
rHrHCMOOrHiHCMO
rH CM f\
CM CM CM
1 1 1
O MO ^O
•a; «aj «»;
\
\
o o o o o
CO O\OO CO ~=t
(H
O O O Q O
C\j C^\ — *j f^ ^"•"
/"^ ^T
TKHMO <^o O-=fxnr^_=r
rH f*** MO CO MO ^C5 ON SO MO r*—
^-r^O ONt^-MOr-c^-MOMO
rH
OOOMOCMOCMOOOOCM
OCOC^MO-=t-=,T- CXQO^t
XA XA
• *
PA MO XA — ^ **"& — ^t MO XA i f^\
fMCMCMCMCMCMCMCM CM
OO XA O XA O O OO O Q
i XA *"*^ co XA f*\ «? f^ ^o co
rHrHCMOOeHrHCMO
-P
rH CM f^ fl>
CM CM CM TJ
1 1 1 -H
O MO MO O
0
1?
O
-P
o
\J *>O — -? CO OJ %O «-"J ^O CM vO ftf
g rHCM «^AO f-ICM mO rH n4
CM
s
0 3
-------
*^~N.
•O
•H
-P
C
o
o
Xwn'
!>-i
Ixl
t^*
p^
t?
>
H
K
§
§
E
2
z
u
T*
«
rnl
O H
4) O
tx, O
o
^H
•H
O
o
8
Q
PQ
»fc
O
£-(
ML<
e->
0)
•H
<0
o,
CQ
CO
0)
-p
a
o
CO
ON
rH
1
CO
C
o
•H
-P
3
CO
o
£NJ
-^
^
A
O
A
A
^J
M
§
8
— ^J
rH
1
^
rH
8
tv—
vO
O O O O O O
CM CM O ^ CM CM
V V «rH V
"
O O Q O Q O
r*^ (V^ Q Q\ QN fr\
rr^ fr^ f** -^ O CM
rH
i — \
rt
c?
d"
co -^t r*- c^— CNJ co x/\ -^f r^- 4^
r"" i C^ ^** ^rTt ON r™l (^ C^ P1*- C2
rH rH rH £
1
O
3 £233 £8$$ ^
NOO\rHNOr>-ONCMOONO CO
rH rH •
0)
73
•H
rH CA t~,
XA XA
1
"£
XAXA fe
NO CO NO <*"V XA CO O\ C^- XA J3
CMCMCMCMCMCMCMCMCM -P
O
CO
O
CM
1
CO
-=T XA XA XA rH -Cf rH rH XA C
CM f^ CM rA ON fr\ ON O — ^f O
i-HrHCMOOrHrHOO iH
-P
-P
CO
iA rH
O NO
LA O
rH
O CM
0 O
rH
.A
•
-^ GO
CM CM
O XA
O rH
D rH
XA NO -S'
rH rH rH
1 1 1
NO NO NO
NO NO C^~ rH rH O O i — 1 rH OO r^-
XA NO -J^t
rH rH rH
•o
O 0 O
CM O CVI
V CM V
&3%
r-XA CM
— ^ CO NO
CO -it rH
p^
O
CM NO XA CO
rH
NO CM rr\
CO H C—
•H rH OO
rH rH
r*— NO -^
CM CM CM
O O XA
rH rH rH
rH CM O
XA
rH
1
NO
r-co CM
XA
rH
O\
Os
GO
r—
CM
0
CM
O
rH
««,
1-1
rH
XA
O
rH
O
O
o
rH
ON rH
O\ NO
ON
ON
CM
XA
XA
rH
CM
rH
r-t
ON
CM
%
ON
rH
rt
<^
CO ro
rH ON
NO^f
O XA
ON t^-
NO XA
CM CVI
O CM
rH XA
rH XA
0 0
NO
rH
1
NO
CM CM
\O '""'
rH
15
-------
o
rH o
K
o
CM jgj
•H CL,
-H as
o
o
rH
0^0
s %
rH
O \
O &l
CQ e
J3C
O CO
rH P^t
«4 O
fV
E6°
H
c
Q)
•3
OJ £-.
•H 0)
6- rH
a
CO
rH
C
CO Q)
Q) "m
-P e-i
^
0)
a, <»
if
co 3
as
•<
a>
00
T>
•H
^
CQ
A;
0
fe,
rj
•P
,0
rH
1
2S
O
•H
•^
CO
45 XO f^^ (*"l f*^ '^ CO O CM f°\
^ CM -Ct rH IA sQ f^ i — f O IA
3D CNoaQ^-c^-ososcOr--
O-^C^rH-^fO OCMrHOx
-SCO OsOCMCMOSrHrH-3
CMCMf^sOCMCMOsCM-if-Cj
•O C^\ rH
rv CM CM
A XAIA 1A
• • • »
OCMCMrHOOCMrHrHrH
CMCMCMCMCMCMCMCMCMCM
OtTNOtAUNOIAXAO r^\
rH \A O XA CW -Cf C1^ tA _^f O^i
^\ CM CO O c*} CO f*~\ CO rH -^T
OrHrHrHOOrHrHrHO
CO O\ O
CM CM r^>
1 1 1
**Q \Q \O
rH O O> CO f^- vO 1A~^ rn CM
O rH rH CM f">~^ XAsO r— CO
c*^
O
SO
*c o o o p
M CM CM r— Os
CM rH r>~
O O Q O Q
CO CO Q CM CO
— Cf *y Os ^Cj — ^
p^ c*^ c*— IA c*^
>>
J?
V
rt
>-k
g
0-3
l
OS
cv
(It
0)
TJ
•H
^
ff)
1
O
p^
J3
-P
S-*
o
S3
**!
rH
§
•H
COi
^-XAO OsOsOsOs--*^-^?
LA f~- CO CO CM 1A t1^ 3r v£> rH
o Os Os f — r*~ r*- Os Os r — r*—
O ^O -^ O co \O sO CM CO
ON Os rH CM C5 -^CO rH O r-
•Cf CM sO sO CM CM CO f"\ — ^f rO
1A XAXA
• • •
rHCMoaOOO'^»CMrHrH
CMCMCMCMCMCMCMCMCMCM
OXAXAOXAlAf^- CMVArH
CM O--^rH rr\_y-fr,O-^-3
OS r^s c — t — 1 c*"\ CO fA Os rH — ^T
OrHrHrHOOrHrHrHO
CO Os O
CM CM r"~\
1 i i
CM rH O OsCO f*~ sQ iA -Zt f^\
O rH CM CM f^ -^ VAsO f"- CO
c*^
cS
vO
d
tj
*fH
o
o
fr
o
-P
tfl
o
•S
3
d
16
-------
*T3
4>
g
C
•H
-P
C
o
o
ir"*
I
LD
D3
P3
f»
H
w
w
§
g
2J
&j
txi
CO
o
rH Vi 25
C8 -H ft.
O rH 2E
0) O
(*i O
o
i— » ac
Q
o
^
SKA
I1
rH
Q V.
OKA
ui
« e
Is
fct, o
0,
e o
E§°
Q)
y*
c6
Q) £~i
•H 0)
0,
3
CO
rH
C
3
0) «
ft
rH 4)
§"§
w &
n
§
rH
07
J2
6-
1
C\l
^
ctf
>
(D
T3
•rt
P3
l
•g
o
fe
J3
(-,
O
CM
r
s
•H
-P
-3
CO
XA C3 O O O
(v. o c5 o o
O CM OO CO
(V_ f^ .^
rH Os rrj
§OOOO
Q O Q O
OO CM CAV CO
-^ rH -^ O rH
rr^ (^\ \_/^ \Q r^
rH
A
-P
0)
i!
fAOOrHr^o^CAvOO'A X
-^ XA XA rr\ «*> f^\ _^ cv^ (r\ CM S
£
S3
1
Q
O -^T — Z} sO CM O CD CO CO GO vO
5\ \o o\ -j^ r- r- CM
O vQ CM O\ p— vO GO vO MD *O •
rH CD
bO
"O
•H
OQ
1
o
XA XAXA XA xn fr.
SJCMCMCVCMCMCSJCMCMCM -P
Q
s;
CM
1
*y>
OrHrHrHOOrHrHrHO -H
-P
-P
co
3O CN O
CM CM f\
1A
^
O
rH
CO
CM
^
O
o
C?
^
O rH rH
ON O\
O O O O
o p o o
-ij <5\ oo o
/*V1 ""f A »ii
t^ »«vj ^ "
rH -St
O\ CM
f-vXAXA O rH XA C\ fA rH
OOvOOCXC^-rHOt^^O
rHOSSOXAMDrH OvQXA
rH rH rH
CM-CTO O-^O-3O CM
CM CO CO CO rH O -3/ r> ^
CM rH \O ~^-^\O CM CM -^
XA XA
• •
CMCMCMCMrHCMCMCMCM
OOOQOOOr-o-
<*\ cn-rf O O rH CM O O
f'NaO rH -It ON-J Ov Q XA
rHrHiHOOrHrHOO
-P
CA O S
CM r^V **T3
\O vO O
U
o!
fr
O
a)
L,
O
,0
3
17
-------
.^— -s.
f (Continued,
&
i
M
«
w
a
Pecal
Coliform
MPN
Coliform
MPN
H
0 M
rH
f*\ >V%i^
O W
m g
^ S
!"
0)
•a
rt) f-4
jg 0)
c~^ ^H
a.
co
a>
rH
CO 0)
V (0
-P H
c3
0> IH
O,X)
CO P5
8QOQQ O<5QOO
OSCMONO CMfJO^CM
r^\XA rH CM XA
O O Q O O
O XA
XA
rH
rH
CO
0
T)
1
GO \f\ OJ Cvj Xf\ f^ X^\ O\
p*» CO cQ ^^— C1^ ^X3 OO QQ f**™ ^O
CNJ O\ -3T f1^ CN 1_T\ CO rH f11— GO
3O XA^O **%-if CVJ O^-^T C\J -Cf
LAlfN XA
• • *
roC\jCWCVJCMC\tCMCNJC\JC\J
CM'LnO'LACNJ CNJXAO O O
rHiHrHrHOOrHiHOO
-P
oo CA o oo ox o a)
CM CM r^N CM CM f"\ TJ
II 1 I ! 1 -rl
vO \O xO xO xo xO O
0
b
ctf
O
QrHCM r- o""*^ ^
O O
r- r- <<
xO xo i—3
18
-------
•n
V
J
-p
c
o
c_?
^— *"
p*-v
1
to
1
M
£d
53?
\j
g
§
«~4
H
CO
o
f
rH VH «Z
t$ »rH PH
O rH S
0) O
fr« O
e
o
i} j?
*n n*
'o *
0
/H
O tu
OK/
UK
03 g
£0
fr* O
ft
§ o
H
C
CD
• I
| «
O<
co
IP
c
CO 0)
^) (y
a ^
<3
0) (U,
rH <0
CO SB
00
£}
n
(*)
i
r— (
0)
bO
•H
O)
1
0)
3
X
0
^3
CO
^
(V^
a:
d
o
•H
•^
co
%
\
O O O O *£
CM O O 1-A >4
V CM -^
•*x/^
fS^.
iH
O O Q O O
CM c5 o o co
CM OO O -£f
-^?rs-'/-7
1A CM CM
M
1
DNO<"AQOCMlACOrH-=fC'— T3
jNOOxf^r^OOOCAf-f- )t
rH rH O
rH
<0
•°
to
J\ f*^ rH r^^ *"*i"\ CM CM T^t rH ^*- Q)
''A OO r*~ -^f vO M3 *^A MO GO *»O rH
rni-H<^V-CfCMXACMCMCMrH B
CM
O
ttf
£
t
VA XA fc<
17\ rH rH O\ OO OO O O rH Ox X!
IU
o
P3
*^\
1
J^\ O X/A C5 CD UA C? — ^J ^^^ *^r^
HrHrHrHOOrHCMOO -H
Itf
CO
3O O\ O <
CM CM f"\
*O ^O M3 %
3O r^- MD XA -^ f^ CM rH O Os
^5
>*\
8
r-
3&8.3,3
p^» f*\ r— i
r-* iH
«5 O O XA ON
-^MO -^ r'-'o
r^rH CM rH rH
-3-XACMXA-^rHCMOXAr^-
rH O rH O\ O\ XAsO CO Os XA
"*"• Os O r** MD s^5 ON O f^- sO
rH rH
O O rH -31 rO-C^XA fA CM CM
r^rHsOsO CM XACO-3--3-XA
LA-Cf CM sO C^\\O CM CM (*\ XA
JAXA XA XAXAXA
»HCMf»%rHOrHCMCWCMrH
C\IC\ICMCMCMfv)CMCMCMCM
nOXAO OXAOXAXAf^l
LA rH O f^-^t ^XA XA O -Sf
O-^OsCM-^Os-CtOsrHXA
rHrHrHrHOOrHrHOO
3O CTs O
CM CM OA
1 I 1
*O ^O sQ
•~- sQ XA-4f f^ CM rH O Os CO
r*N.
8
0
a
9
n
•H
0
o
-a!
fr
O
(tt
o
3
3
19
-------
__ ^
•g
j2
•H
-P
C
o
o
rn
c5
2*
P
g
^ J
PC
s
g
@
55
s
H
a
E
0
H *n jz;
rt -H PL,
O iH JC
0) O
&« O
L
*tH pu
rH X
o
0
8 CM
fi
rH
SK&
e
Jj
O CO
fc 0
Q,
g U
E-f °
§
.ijj
I*"
H rH
O.
CO
rH
Qj
6^
CD (2
to 5
5 H
3
0) f-!
c-H V
§<'f
CO 95
1
-p
w
*o
Q
.g
CM
O
-P
CO
(«
5
IL,
O
as
i
r^\
^
•&
OS
9)
T?
•H
n
i
iS
Pt4
J3
•p
O
is
_-f
i
c
0
•H
1«
CO
(
>
s
\
^^00^
XA
O O Q Q 0
r"> cy O QO O
rH V rH rH O
•t ty\ (**,
CM bO
CM t-j
XI
0}
bo
T)
•H
•
XA XA o
• • PM
MCMCMCMCMCMCMCMCMCNJ XS
-P
g
35
XA
1
A C^ XA C^ CJ C^ C^ XA CD ON
*"\ -^ <**\ c5 rH C^ CM CM rr\ ^5 Ci
HrHrHOO-HrHCMOO -H
+>
CO
x> o\ o
CM CM f\
O ^O vO ^
O rH CM <*%-^XAvO r— CO ON
0
r^
s
3
o o o o o
CNJ CM CM CX O
v v V^CM
o o o o o
O ^\ oO O O
f^-^t rH O ON
rH O\ »«r>-
-=r
CVJ
3s-it-itC*-CM CMXA-afxA\O
^rHCMr^XACOCMOvO-Ct
rH i-H rH rH
OQOXAXAvOCO-^XAO Is-
A CM CM O CM CM -CT -IT ^O C>\
rnXAvOCO-3'XACO r-vO-^
p- XA o
» f- r-~
H rH rH
A
CMCMCMCNJCMCMCMCMCMCM
Ot^OOO\c^-OQXAOO
r^t fr^ XA XA ^\ f*\ C**\ Cj f*^ £5
**• — Z!f GO f*^ XA O -^ O rH ^O
OrHrHCMOrHrHCMOO
-^ XA VvO
rH H rH
rH ON O O XA-^t-Cf rO XA-^
r^ i-H rr\ ^^rHCMf^OrH
H i-H r-H
8
0
-p
c
-------
O
O
£
El u
A.
G)
CO
CO 0)
Q) "3
3H
a>
(I)
O O O Q O
CM CM CM O CO
V V V CM
Q O O O O
-^ o <""^ o CA
(H t»- CM CM f-
i-<
a
i
o
M
3
m
i
-P
o
CVJ
XA
XA
-AXAXAOXAOXAOXAXA
•HOfHi-ICMOr-lrHiHOO
CO
1
vO
XA
I
XA
O Q O
CM O CM
cX O >S
00-S
O «H
LA CN O O XA
CN
CM CM CM CM CNJ
O O
m cvi /-»
-------
N-7-
S-6A
JO 20
m
SCALE IN MILES
S-4
STUDY AREA
SHENANDOAH RIVER BASIN
FIGURE
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
I. INTRODUCTION 1
II. PROCEDURE 2
A. Sampling 2
B. Chemical Analysis 2
III. STATION DESCRIPTIONS . , 5
IV. SURVEY RESULTS 6
-------
I. INTRODUCTION
The Chesapeake Field Station of the Middle Atlantic Region,
Federal Water Pollution Control Administration, conducted an
intensive survey of the James and Maury Rivers in the vicinity
of Glasgow, Virginia during September 1967 (see Figure l). The
purpose of this survey was to measure the effects of reported high
organic loadings on these two rivers in the vicinity of their
confluence and to determine pesticide levels in an area with a
reported massive fish kill.
-------
II. PROCEDURE
A. Sampling
Top samples for all stations were obtained by dipping a
plastic container full of the stream water. Bottom water samples
for Stations 3 and k were obtained at a depth of five feet above
the bottom of the river using a Van Dorn sampler. For all stations
a gallon cubitainer was filled from the sampling container, .A
portion of the sample was siphoned into a DO bottle until over-
flowing and fixed. A portion of the sample was also used to
measure the pH and temperature at the time of sampling. All
samples were returned to the camper laboratory within two hours
where the analyses were started immediately. A total of six
sampling runs was made. On two of the sampling runs, on different
days, special samples were taken for pesticide analysis„ These
samples were obtained at Stations 1, 2, 3> ^? and 6 by dipping
a one quart glass bottle full. The samples for pesticide were
sealed and sent to the Robert A, Taft Sanitary Engineering Center
for analysis,
B. Chemical Analysis
1. Dissolved Oxygen
Reference; Standard Methods for the Examination of
Water and Wastewater, 12 ed., 1965.
-------
Dissolved oxygen was determined by the azide modification
of the basic Winkler method with the titration done potentiometrically
with an automatic TITRALYZER.
2. Biochemical Oxygen Demand
Reference: Standard Methods for the Examination of
Water and Wastewater, 12 ed.? 1965.
The biochemical oxygen demand was determined by the
azide modification of the basic Winkler method with the titration
done potentiometrically with an automatic TITRALYZER. The samples
as received were diluted if necessary and transferred to standard
300 ml BOD bottles in triplicate. One initial DO and two final
DO determinations were used throughout. Incubation was started
immediately at 20°C and continued for five days after which they
were titrated.
3. pH
The pH measurements were made at the sampling point
with a field pH meter.
4, Color
Reference: Standard Methods for the Examination of
Water and Wastewater, 12 ed., 1965.
The color of the samples was determined by visual
comparison with solutions of known concentrations of potassium
chloroplatinate. The samples as received were centrifuged to
remove all turbidity present. The visual comparison was then made
using equal volumes of sample and standards in nessler tube.
-------
5. Filtrable Residue
Reference: Standard Methods for the Examination of
Water and Wastewater, 12 ed., 1965.
The filtrable residue was determined by evaporating
to dryness a known volume of sample that has been millipore
filtered. The evaporation was done by using a tared evaporating
dish as a carrier. The drying oven was maintained at 105°C.
When the evaporation of the sample was complete, the dishes were
cooled and weighed. The gain in weight represented filtrable
residue.
6. Turbidity
Reference: Standard Methods for the Examination of
Water and Wastewater, 12 ed., 1965.
The turbidity of the sample was determined by using
a turbidimeter. A portion of the sample was transferred to a
curette and inserted in place in the turbidimeter and read
directly in Jackson Turbidity Units.
-------
III. STATION DESCRIPTIONS
Number
Station
Location
1
2
3
k
5
6
7
8
Maury River
Maury River
James River
James River
James River
James River
Maury River
Maury River
One hundred yards upstream from
James Lee outfall
Near public ramp below Va. Rt. 2^9
Bridge
Approximately one-half mile upstream
from Maury River confluence
One hundred yards upstream from
Balcony Falls Dam
Below spillway of Balcony Falls Dam
U. S. Rt. 501 Bridge
South Buena Vista Bridge below STP
Goose Neck Dam
-------
CQ C/D
5 M
Oi M
fe g
^ 5»
PH |S«
CO t!
CO
*a
•?
(0
0)
T)
•H rH
•rf'hi
(0
(X.
+3
TJ
•H O
,0. H
S-l *~S
K>
« TJ
to "H rH
QCO 1
*-. (0
O -P
iH fH
°. £
O £3
O t>0
CQ 6
TJ
rH
vH £C
m Q.
*•••• P*
rH
Sbo
e
rH O.
(P 6
r< S o
ID
rH C
1 cl "c§
-» co e-i
V
rH G
a) a a)
•^ 6 Jld
? 5?
— J CO C~*
a> L,
rH 0)
CX «JO
§ §
CO S5
O Q
S5 13
UNUN UN
» • «
°°^""^^
^f>^^--=t rH rH
rH f^ f^ rH rH -rf
CM CM CM CM CM CM
UN o UN o UN O
rH If^ or\ CM f^\ CM CM
rH
CO
4^
O O UN t — :JNO NO
mvo -cf UN UN 06
^ M CM CM CM CM iH
CO
Q)
§UN
^t oo ao oo
s. r— r«- NO NO NO
3
5
*w
- o
Cu O f^i-^J ON CM f—
O rHOO ON rH OO
1 rH rH i-H
^
3 UN UN UN
X o O NO r— C3 UN
H CM rH rH CM rH
1
_J
n
c
o
•H o UN o UN UN UN
•P LA UN UN rH rH rH
eg H UN co CM r— ON
•P r*l »«J f~) «^ r- 4 f^
^^ r^ r^ v^ r^ r^ \*s
CO
rH rH rH
1 1 1
ON ON ON
rH rH rH rH r-l rH
O rH CM e^\^t\f\
OO
rH
ON
O
N0~
rH UN
rH CO
C3 0
UNUN UNUN
NO UN NO UN NO UN
CM -3 CM -^ CM O
-Sf CM CM CM CM CM
UN o o UN UN UN
C^ &\ f\ f*\ C\& CM
_ o rv_ao
CM
.
+s
ttj LA
r^\ i^\ CO
oj >»vO r— r*-^ r-*-
9^
?
O
rH
- rH ON rH ON CM
MJ
2
+3
CO
fv>_rr\rH ON-CJ-rH-3T~-UNUNOO O
JJOOOrHOUNrHrHCMrHCMUNCM
1 ON oo ON ON ON ON ON OO ON ON CO ON
to
i
1 UN UN UNUNUNUNUN
ONOOOOrHOONOOr>-r>-OONOO
1 HrHrHCMCMrHrHrHrHCMrHrH
(^N
§
•H
-j ^ _f\ ^^ \^\ Xf\ \J^ O Xf\ C5 t-f*\ Vf\ X-f\ C^
{rt p^ C5 l*^ C^ r™H ^^ ^^\ C3 r~H (3 ^H f^%
-P ON-cfo-ctoo o o\_^o-^oo o
CO|O rHrHi-HrHrHOrHrHrHrHrH
rr\ -^ UN rr\ _5 XA
rH rH rH rH rH rH
II III 1
ON ON ON ON ON ON
*sjr****?$$$$J
OrHCM rr\_^tAOrHCM<^5uN
r-4
ON
0
^-
NO
0)
rH
(0
•p
- O
0)
- g T)
UN O
+3 OJ
&o S
£ pq a
a
# $ 53
-------
m
-< CO
O -P
rH -H
0 C
O J2>
r~4
G \
C) dp
T5
rH
IP
E o,
r-1
8 bo
Sj
TJ
E
•ri
•P 6 -X
cfl c3 C&
Q CO f-i
0) f-<
«H 0>
6 el
CO 33
-^t XA
O rH
O O
XA XA XA XA XA XA XA XA XA XA XA
XA f> m C\j CM f^NO -£t t~- F*-^Q t^- rH NO OO -^ ON -Cf
rH r-t rH
CO ONC^XAsO CO^RTNO^f $ £\ f^ S"oN\8r^N^f^
C\IOJC\J(MCMCMCMCMC\(C\)f\(OJ CVCN)CN)CNtf\JCNJ
€
3r
a
0)
r^
rH
fe,
>;,
O
O
3
^i
CO
Qi
1
w
(t*
ctJ
•-3
1
_.y
c
0
•H
-P
«J
•P
O O O XAXA O XA O XAXA O O O O O Q XA O
"^ H/ ^ ^ fj\| ^^J rA CVJ f^A -^J ^^ '^^ "T/ f*A f^A ^ c\j rr^
g
J
•O rH ^O Es^- \O *? C*\/ -*^ _^f r^ aO — ^J CQ
SNf^NOtNjiDONmXAlSrOrHrH rH
^»
o
•*~ &, <*} r-t O
• • • • r-l
ONOi>-t~-c>-r»-iiiiii ctf
rH
^T -Tf XA CNJ r— XA O\ ro NO «> NO <^\ J3
o r>- ao ON o co r^ oo r- r- ON r- i
S
.AXA XAXA XA XAXA 3
• # • • « • • *-?
O CO OO C^ ON ON r**- f^*- o— O^v CO CO
HrHrHCVIrHrHrHrHrHrHrHrH 1
XA
C
0
•H
O CNJ f^\ CM rA __^ ^S r\j r*^ r\j rA — ^ ctf
O -^ O ~=foO O O -^t O -Cfco O -P
BXACO o XA r-~
rH fVi -it ro-if
J> CNJ CM CNJ r«-\ CM
rH rH ON rn
>* r>* ^ r*- NO r**-
•*- l>~ ON CO ON XA
r> -=} m ON o o
O CO r~ CO ON O,
XA
•
•- rH OO ON O\ CO
H CNJ rH rH rH rH
O XA O XA C XA
^r^ £\j ff*\ f**\ __ ^J- Ij^
O -it O -CtfO O
— J _J _J __* _J — J
-* XAC-* ^ rA_^ XA
iHrH rHrHrH rH rHrH rH
II III 1 II 1
ON ON ON ON ON ON ON ON ON
J* £ X
0 rH C\jrn-5XAO rHCM ^^§XA OrHCNT^SxA
CO <»
(H rH
ON ON
0 0
r — C"—
NO NO
XA
rH
-P
1*1
* $
7
-------An error occurred while trying to OCR this image.
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
I, INTRODUCTION ..................... 1
II. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS ............... k
III. DATA EVALUATION AND INTERPRETATION .......... 6
LIST OF TABLES
Table Page
I Bottom Organism Data of Gillie Creek ......... Ik
II Bottom Organism Data of Appomattox River ....... 15
III Bottom Organism Data of Bailey Creek ......... 16
IV Tabulation of Bottom Organisms by Station
on Gillie Creek - August 1967 ........... 17
V Tabulation of Bottom Organisms by Station
on the Appomattox River - August 1967 ....... 19
VI Tabulation of Bottom Organisms by Station
on Bailey Creek - August 1967 . . . . 21
LIST OF FIGURES
Follows
Figure Page
1 Map of Study Area and Profile of Biological
Conditions on Gillie Creek^ Appomattox
River, and Bailey Creek in the James River
Basin ».»*.. .«£.,,..,>.». .„..,><, 21
-------
-------
I. INTRODUCTION
Biological surveys of Gillie Creek in the Richmond area, the
Appomattox River in the Petersburg area, and Bailey Creek between
Fort Lee and Hopewell (all tributaries of the James River in Virginia)
were conducted in August 1967. The surveys were centered on these
areas, as each of them was known to have serious pollution problems,
and additional data were needed.
Gillie Creek was surveyed from Oakley Lane north of Virginia
Heights to its mouth at Dock Street in Richmond. The Appomattox
River was surveyed upstream from Petersburg at the Virginia Route 36
Bridge and downstream from Petersburg at the Virginia Route 10 Bridge.
Bailey Creek was surveyed from its headwaters on the Fort Lee Military
Reservation to its mouth near the Virginia Route 10 Bridge.
For purposes of the study, the community of bottom (benthic)
organisms was selected as indicator of the biological condition of
the stream. Bottom organisms serve as the preferred food source
for higher aquatic forms and exhibit similar reactions to adverse
stream conditions. The combination of limited locomotion and life
cycles of one year or more, for most benthic species, provide a long-
term picture of the water quality of a stream. Fish and algal popu-
lations were given some consideration, but only to the extent that
obrious conclusions could be drawn based upon incidental observations.
In unpolluted streams a wide variety of sensitive clean-water
associated bottom organisms is normally found. Typical groups are
stoneflies, mayflies, and caddisflies. These sensitive organisms
-------
usually are not individually abundant because of natural predation
and competition for food and space; however, the total count of
organisms at a given station may be high because of the number of
different varieties present.
Sensitive genera (kinds) tend to be eliminated by adverse
environmental conditions (chemical,, physical, and biological)
resulting from wastes reaching the stream. In waters enriched with
organic wastes, comparatively fewer kinds are normally found, but
great numbers of these genera may be present. Organic pollution-
tolerant forms such as sludgeworms, rattailed maggots, certain species
of bloodworms such as red midges, certain leeches, and some species
of air-breathing snails may multiply and become abundant because of
a favorable habitat and food supply. These organic pollution-tolerant
bottom organisms may also exist in the natural environment but are
generally found in small numbers. The abundance of these forms in
streams heavily polluted with organics is due to their physiological
and morphological abilities to survive environmental conditions more
adverse than conditions that may be tolerated by other organisms.
When inert silts or organic sludges blanket the stream bottom, the
natural home of bottom organisms is destroyed, causing a reduction
in the number of kinds of organisms present.
In addition to sensitive and pollution-tolerant forms, some
bottom organisms may be termed intermediates, in that they are capable
of living in fairly heavily polluted areas as well as in clean-water
situations. These organisms occurring in limited numbers, therefore,
cannot serve as effective indicators of water quality.
-------
Streams grossly polluted with toxic wastes such as mine drain-
age will support little, if any, biological life and will reduce the
population of both sensitive and pollution-tolerant organisms.
Classification of organisms in this report is considered in
three categories (clean-water associated, intermediate, and pollution-
tolerant) which provide sufficient biological information to supplement
physical and chemical water quality data for a basin-wide analysis.
Detailed identification and counts of specific organisms have been
tabulated and are available upon request.
-------
-------
II. SUMMARY AMD CONCLUSIONS
1. Biological surveys of Gillie Creek in the Richmond area,
the Appomattox River in the Petersburg area, and Bailey Creek between
Fort Lee and Hopewell were conducted in August 1967. All three of
these streams are tributaries to the James River.
2. Bottom organisms were selected as the primary indicator
of biological water quality,
3- Gillie Creek was found to be mildly polluted from its
headwaters near Virginia Heights, which is located east of Richmond,
to Laburnum Road (Virginia Route 672). Fair biological conditions
were found at Jennie Scher Road, indicating some recovery from the
upstream station. Downstream at the Fulton Street Bridge in Richmond,
however, heavy organic pollution was found, and this continued to
the mouth at Dock Street in Richmond. Gillie Creek contributes poor
quality water to the James River.
h. The Appomattox River was sampled upstream from Petersburg
at the Virginia Route 36 Bridge, and high water quality was found.
Downstream from Petersburg at the Virginia Route 10
Bridge, degraded biological conditions were found. The Appomattox
River contributes poor quality water to the James River.
5. Bailey Creek was found to exhibit fair biological conditions
in its headwaters near the Fort Lee Hospital. Downstream from Fort
Lee it becomes polluted, and, as it enters the Hopewell industrial
complex, it is grossly polluted by industrial wastes. Bailey Creek
contributes a high pollutional load to the James River.
-------
6. The James River was inspected off Bailey Creek and the
HopeweU industrial complex. Gravelly Run, which drains part of the
industrial complex, was found to be contributing thermal pollution
to the James River. The River on the Hopewell side appears to be
grossly polluted throughout this reach.
-------
6
III. DATA EVALUATION AND INTERPRETATION
As part of selected biological surveys, Gillie Creek, the
Appomattox River, and Bailey Creek were found to be contributing poor
quality water to the James River.
In addition, Gravelly Run, which drains part of the Hopewell
industrial complex, was found to be contributing thermal pollution
to the James River. Because of the magnitude of the industrial develop-
ment and the tidal action, it was impossible to pinpoint the sources;
but the Hopewell area is without doubt one of the more seriously
polluted areas in the entire James River Basin. A more detailed
study is definitely needed in this area.
Sampling stations were located after consideration of the
following conditions:
1. Effects of tributaries
2. Areas having a known water quality problem
3. Physical capability for sampling
Bottom organisms are animals that live directly in association
with the bottom of a waterway. They may crawl on, or burrow in, or
attach themselves to the bottom. Macro-organisms are usually defined
as those organisms that will be retained by a No. 30 sieve. In
essence, the organisms retained by the sieve are those that are
visible to the unaided eye.
Each station was sampled once, and the kinds of macro bottom
organisms were observed for the purpose of evaluating water quality.
-------
Quantitative bottom samples were also taken, using a Surber Square
Foot Sampler, a Petersen Dredge (0.6 sq. ft.) or an Ekman Dredge
(0.5 sq. ft.), and the number of organisms per square foot was
counted or calculated.
Quantitative samples were not taken at stations in non-
critical areas or where organisms were very sparse.
Discussions of stations proceed downstream unless otherwise
noted.
-------
-------
8
Gillie Creek in the Richmond Area
Station #1 - Gillie Creek at the Oakley Lane Bridge north of the
drive-in theatre at Virginia Heights
The water was clear, and filamentous algae were abundant,
suggesting excessive nitrogen and phosphorus. This station was
located in the headwaters, and the stream was quite small at this
location. Bottom organisms were not abundant, and only seven
genera (kinds) were found. They consisted of pollution-tolerant
bloodworms, sludgeworms, another bristleworm, the intermediate
flatworms, and intermediate midge larvae (three genera). Only
k3 organisms were found in the square foot sample, consisting of
32 sludgeworms, two bristleworms, six bloodworms, and three inter-
mediate midge larvae. Mild organic pollution was indicated and
is probably the result of septic tank failures and seepage from
the surrounding surburban developments.
Station #2 - Gillie Creek at Laburnum Road (Virginia Route 672)
Bridge east of Richmond
Although the stream banks were littered with trash along
Laburnum Road, the water remained clear; however, bottom organisms
were sparse, and a quantitative sample was not taken for this reason.
Six genera of bottom organisms were found, consisting of one clean-
water associated mayfly, two intermediate midge larvae, and three
pollution-tolerant air-breathing snails. Mild organic pollution
was still indicated„
-------
idtation #3 - Giilie Creek at t'*e F< rd at Jennie Sober Head in
Richmond
The stream was clear in spite of the road construction in
the area? and nine genera of bottom organisms were found which
consisted of clean-water associated mayflies (two genera), caddis-
flies,, intermediate midge larva? 'two generaj^, and pcllution-
tolerant sludgewormsc, bloodworms,, and air-breathing snails (two
genera). Out of a total ff ?ij bottom organisms la the square
foot sample,, there were 205 intermediate midge larvae. 11 sludge-
worms, and one bloodworm <, Only fair biological conditions were
indicated at t'ai* location.
Statios #t - Gillie Creek at the F'ulton Street Bridge in Eichmond
The water was turbid., a ad a?» extremely strong raw sewage
odor was present „ The bottoms uf the rocks were blacK, and all
of the rooks were cr.versd wits a sewage mold. Large quantities
of trash and garbage littered th<=» barjt-s-i and drrnestic waste was
observed in the stream, Cutso'-jses were present an the area, A
large sewer pipe was observed under tr-e bridge but «?as not dis-
charging at the time of the inspection.. As preparations were
underway for inspection of the stream, a pickup trwi loaded with,
garbage approached the bridge„ The trackcs occupants were about
to dump the garbage when they became aware of the inspection partye
presence and hastily drove away,,
The only bottom organisms sampled were sludgeworms and
bloodwormso In spite of the large sludgeworm and bloodworm
populations in the sludge banks9 the quantitative sample taken in
-------
10
the gravel in midstream produced only two large bloodworms. Gross
organic pollution was indicated at this station,
Station #5 - Gillie Creek at the Dock Street Bridge at the mouth
in Richmond
The water was turbid, and the quantitative sample had the
odor of oil and decomposing organic matter., Gas storage tanks are
in the vicinity. Outfalls with evidence of previous flow were
observed but were not discharging at the time of inspection* The
only bottom organisms found were sludgeworms., but only 46 were
collected in the square foot sample,, Toxic wastes may be keeping
down the sludgewora population. Gross pollution was indicateds
and poor water quality was contributed to the James River.
The Appomattox River in the Petersburg Area
Station #1 - Appomattox Kiver at the Virginia Route 36 Bridge
upstream from Petersburg
This station was selected after aa abortive attempt to
sample the River at Matoaca,, which is the first bridge crossing
upstream from Petersburg, Due to a dangerously shifting sand
bottom created by the construction work on the new bridge and
poor access on the side opposite Matoaca^ the next bridge crossing
upstream was substituted,,
The water was slightly turbids but a moss was present on
the rockso High water quality was indicated by 19 genera of
bottom organisms? including such clean-water associated forms as
-------
-------
11
stoneflies (two genera), mayflies (four genera), caddisflies (four
genera), hellgrammites, and a gill-breathing snail. Only 14 bottom
organisms were collected in the square foot sample, but this was
due to the extremely large rocks in the stream bottom which prevented
efficient quantitative sampling even with the square foot sampler.
The quantitative sample consisted of 12 mayflies, one caddisfly
larva, and one fingernail clam. The qualitative sample indicated
good populations of stoneflies, mayflies, caddisflies, and gill-
breathing snails. In addition^ good biological conditions were
suggested by the fishermen with pickerel, channel catfish, bluegill,
and a large shiner in their creels„
Station #2 - Appomattox River near its mouth at the Virginia Route
10 Bridge
This station was located downstream from Petersburg and
north of Hopewell. The water was turbid, but a few fish (primarily
shad) were observed in the area. This station was sampled by boat
using an Ekman Dredge due to the river depth. The only bottom
organisms sampled were sludgeworms and midge larvae. The quanti-
tative sample on a square foot basis consisted of 55 sludgeworms
and seven intermediate midge larvae. Mild pollution appears to
be indicated at this station. Poor quality water is contributed
to the James River by the Appomattox River.
-------
12
Bailey Creek between Fort Lee and Hopewell
Station #1 - Bailey Creek in its headwaters at the "A" road crossing
southeast of the Fort Lee Hospital
The water was clear, and minnows were abundant at this
station. Bottom organisms were not too abundant, and only five
genera of bottom organisms were sampled. They consisted of clean-
water associated mayflies, intermediate midge larvae (three genera),
and a pollution-tolerant sludgeworm.
Only fair biological conditions were indicated. Bottom
organism diversification could be limited by the habitat and possible
spraying for mosquitoes. This station is upstream from any known
discharge.
Station #2 - Bailey Creek at the Virginia County Road 630 Bridge
downstream from Fort Lee
The water was turbid and had a whitish-gray color. A
strong sewage odor was present. The underside of the gravel in
the stream bed was black, and sewage mold was present on the rocks.
In spite of an intensive search, bottom organisms could not be
found. Degraded biological conditions are indicated at this location.
Station #3 - Bailey Creek at the Virginia Eoute 156 Bridge at the
south edge of Hopewell
The water remained a very turbid whitish-gray color even
in the sampling bucket. The only bottom organisms which could be
found were sludgeworas, and they were not very abundant. Only 36
-------
-------
13
sludgeworms were collected in the square foot sample. Polluted
conditions are suggested at this location.
Station #4 - Bailey Creek at Virginia Route 10 Bridge at the east
edge of Hopewell
The water was a black color with a great amount of white
floe floating on it. Strong chemical odors were noted. Since
this station is within the range of tidal excursion, part of this
pollution evidence may be carried up from the James Biver in addition
to the pollution coining downstream,, Bottom organisms could not be
found at this location.
Extremely heavy industrial pollution was indicated at this
station.
Station #5 - Mouth of Bailey Creek and the James River off Hopewell
The James River was investigated off Hopewell and the mouth
of Bailey Creek. The water off the industrial complex was dark
and flocculent? with a great deal of dead filamentous algae» The
area along the bank was heavily silted and remained shallow a
considerable distance out from the bank. Gravelly Run,, which drains
part of the industrial complex,, was observed to be contributing a
large volume of thermal pollution,, The mouth of Bailey Creek was
very similar to its upstream station. Bottom organisms could not
be found in either section,, Heavy industrial pollution was indicated.
-------
-------
TABLE I
BOTTOM ORGANISM DATA OF GILLIE CREEK
Station
Number
1
Location
Gillie Creek at the
Oakley Lane Bridge
north of the drive-in
theatre at Virginia
Heights
Bottom
No. of
Kinds
7
Organisms
No.
S
-------
15
TABLE II
BOTTOM ORGANISM DATA OF APPOMATTOX RIVER
Station
Number
Location
Bottom Organisms Indicated
No. of No. Per Dominant Water
Kinds So. Ft. Forms Quality
Appomattox River at 19
the Virginia Route 36
Bridge upstream from
Petersburg
Appomattox River near 2
its mouth at the
Virginia Route 10 Bridge
ik Mayflies Excellent
Caddisflies
Stoneflies
62 Sludgeworms Mild
and pollution
Intermediate
Midge Larvae
-------
16
TABLE III
BOTTOM ORGANISM DATA OP BAILEY CREEK
Bottom Organisms
Station
Number
Location
No. of
Kinds
No. Per
Sq. Ft.
Dominant
Forms
Indicated
Water
Quality
Bailey Creek in its 5
headwaters at the "A"
road crossing southeast
of the Fort Lee Hospital
Bailey Creek at the Va. 0
County Rd. 630 Bridge
downstream from Fort Lee
Bailey Creek at the Va. 1
Rt. 156 Bridge at the
south edge of Hopewell
Bailey Creek at Va. Rt. 0
10 Bridge at the east
edge of Hopewell
Mouth of Bailey Creek 0
and the James River
off Hopewell
Mayflies Fair
Intermediate
Midge Larvae
Sludgeworms
0
0
0
Polluted
Sludgeworms Polluted
Heavy
pollution
Heavy
pollution
-------
-P I CU
e c >
3H «r
H X X
cro-Invertebrates
cy c
-9 °
s >r*
& H
(Li
a
SJ
co
H/ -n
> M
CM
-------
-------
18
•d
CO
•p
A
O
O
W
IS
•P 1 0)
C S3 >
CO CO -H CO
O P -P iH
& co e
^ r •"•> £
CO CH -H «
PH O -P tO
a
03 CO
» H -rl ft
a> H co -P |
h a a co 3
PH O a? -P to
nvertebrates
Present
M
i
o
in
O
v£> t- t-
.3F.-3- o
» ft B
O-H- LTN
ON
H IA rH f-
0 rH H
OJ CM
XXX XXX x X -P
o
o
fe
CO
JH
CO
3
o<
to
JH
0)
ft
0 « ° 09
p< ft ft a
W CQ 03 W
ft ' • -H
w g ft 03 a •> ft $3
XI 03 3 3 ft 03 CO
ft co p S3 H to . bo
MS !>s COCQCO-H fttQ SH
CO CO CQ COCOCOT3 X WS O
SHCQJ3 ft -Oft^DCO CO H
CO -H 0 CO O -H -H O ft tH eOl 3 JJH
OCO-P-P>5 ftCO£»s0-P:3COJ3l>i SH
M w to ft Si «3 .H EH sfilii, «; ft •§ K <§1 a3
CO O SH W CO O ft
8 X! CO S3 J3 ft £3
CO 0 +5 CO 0 O P
^ -H ftEH 0 SH g
^ £ 7$ M +*
W EH Q =H 03 r-j
rH CO CO
O c5 4J
O
O
X
ft
&
co
-P
CO CQ
CO CO
T3 ft
•H -H
•d -d
CO S3
ft CO
•H EH
X
CO
CH
•H
CO fi
-P p
co S
•d co
S3 43
0) O
EH O
bO
•H
C\J
O
EH
-P
o
0
CO
S-l
co
3.
03
•H
C
CO
W
SH
O
^
SH
1)
/3
I
H
CO
-p
O
VD
~^
X
-P
o
0
CO
&
CO
SH
CO S3
1°
3 -p
tz co
0
$3 O
0 hH
•H
-p -d
0 S3
P CO
to
CO
43
•p -d
•P CO
-P CO O
co W
op
M S3 SH
CO °H CO T3
CO 03 43 $3
SH CQ t) O
O O CO g
CO O CO 0
•H H -H
H -d S3 K
H SH $3
•H O O> -P
O Cr< HS CO
0)
P PH
CO
^ "co
a> eo -d
CO in d
SH -P O
OCOJ
CO $3 CJ
•rl O -H
H P M
CO
J3 C
+3 -H
-P CO
CO hD
'd
J4 -H
0) SH
CO «
SH
o « 'd
-P S3
CO CO O
•H I
•H j4 ja
H O O
•H O -rt
O O «
ur\
-------
19
-P I O>
c a f>
QJ CO -H
o 3 -p .
||
0) -rl >
OS >j H -rl ftj
cu H si -P sl
r) S3 3 CO CO
P-> O & -V CO
X X
MX XX X XXXX
CQ
•ertebrate
esent
£ nh
S3 P-i
M
S
O
0
ft
CO
aria
cladia
Dugesia
H -H
H !H
O> EH
ft
h
•
ft
to •
CO ft
ea
ostraca
apoda
Cambarus
emeropter
Baetis s
0 0 O J3
«J CO CD ft
.p H P W
CO J5
p S
CO
-p
• • 3
• ft • ft £3
ft o • CO ft CO ?H
W ft ft • 0} O
w ra ft X
CO
•rl
Heptagen
CO M
CO
Isonychi
CO
Stenonem
w
nata
aisoptera
Hagenius
Tachopte:
CQ
co
r-i
coptera
Perlinel:
>,
0
Pteronari
o
M
aloptera
Corydalui
ft •
CO ft •
• in CL,
ft 0)
CO ^
f)
:hoptera
Chimarra
Hydropsyi
to
3
S3
O
rl
CJ
£
M
Wormaldi*
b 5) °ri
T3 iH O> (H
0 PM S EH
-------
20
-p
a
o>
o
Oi
I 0)
CO -H
I
•H CU r-i
C ft ftj
co a) £T
60 3 co
' 0
>»H -H
H ts -P
h cj a CB
CM O <5"-P
£3
g4
co
W
cu
•1-1
•s
o
o
pq
03
O
•P
to
& -P
SH to
0>
ft
w
0
M
•H
C
CO
X
X
ft
CO
X
JS
co
J3
o
o
bD
•H
ft
cs
0) M
co 3
•d T-I
"H ^
TJ CO
ft o
-P O>
ftEH
•H
OJ
-------
21
•p I
a a
o> co
fH -PS
CD «w -H CO
fg o -p co
I
o»
> H
•P C
C M
co
M !>, H -H ft
W
01
-P
co
0)
•p
C
H
CJ
S
-p
ca
«>
o
M a> co
C X! -P
•H -P -rl
-p 43
^11
: s eo pt.
VO
CO
I
co
o>
ft
I
£
ft
tf
CO
55
-P S
co -p
C
(0 O
o» o
rl bO
o co •«
H HO
•rl rl O
CO f-l OO
pq >U>
5
-p
CO
«
cy -p
a; «
o co
H
•rl
PQ >
00
I
n
0)
ft
-p
§
(U
co
CO
to
•p
«
bO
•o
CD -H
-P PP
+3 O
co H
a> -P «u
01 fij o»
O CO O
H 'So
•rl ^
CO -H
PQ >
-------
AL-
J. 2. 2. j.
™ — — ~
LOCATION MAP
A B C D
A B C D
H 0 P £ W E L
A B C D
O 0 0 0
A B C D
LEGEND
O
A
_A^L_ KINDS (GENERA)
BOTTOM ORGANISMS
EQ FT SAMPLE
SO FT SAMPLE
IN SO FT SAMPL
-O-
n j £
A B C D
A B C 0
JAMES RIVER BASIN
CHESAPEAKE DRAINAGE AREA
BIOLOGICAL SURVEY
JAMES & APPOMATTOX RIVERS
(RICHMOND-PETERSBURG-HOPEWELL AREA)
U. S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
FEDERAL WATER POLLUTION CONTROL ADMINISTRATION
REGIONAL OFFICE CHARLOTTESVILLE, VA.
------- | | |
|