A PRELIMINARY ANALYSIS OF
WATER POLLUTION SURVEILLANCE
       SYSTEM PLANKTON DATA
      for the NORTHWEST REGION

                  T]]LEAi
             FEDERAL WATER
             POLLUTION CONTROL
             ADMINISTRATION
             NORTHWEST REGION
             PORTLAND,OREGON

-------
                   A PRELIMINARY ANALYSIS OF

     WATER POLLUTION SURVEILLANCE SYSTEM PLANKTON DATA FOR

                      THE NORTHWEST REGION
                          Prepared by

                 Pollution Surveil.lance Branch

                  Office of Technical Programs
                      Working Paper No. 63
            United States Department of the Interior
Federal Water Pollution Control Administration,  Northwest Region
                       501 Pittock Block
                     Portland, Oregon 97205

                         February 1969

-------
Conclusions or recommendations
made or inferred in this working
paper are tentative and subject
to reconsideration as research
proceeds on this subject.

-------
                             CONTENTS


Chapter    .              .                                      Pa%e

   I.    INTRODUCTION 	  1

  II.    CONCLUSION	3

 III.    DESCRIPTION AND EVALUATION 	  4

         Study Area and Stations	4
         Collection and Analyses of Samples 	  8
         Evaluation of Data	9
         Results	11

  IV.    DISCUSSION 	 ............... 13

APPENDIX A.  Yearly Maximum and Minimum Values from Seasonal
             Live Algae Data at each Columbia Basin Sampling
             Station	15 •

-------
                         .  INTRODUCTION







     The Water Pollution Surveillance System (WPSS) was established




in 1957 to collect, evaluate and disseminate water quality data for




application to programs for the prevention, control and abatement




of water pollution.




     Consultations with water quality management and resource de-




velopment agencies revealed that plankton measurements were a




necessity in meeting the biological objectives of the program.




It was hoped that variations in water quality would be evidenced




by monthly and yearly differences in population cycles and com-




munity structure.




     Nationally 50 sampling locations were initially authorized,




with plans for future establishment of approximately 400.   Sam-




pling stations were selected on the basis of the following cri-




teria:   (a) major waterways, (b) interstate, coastal and inter-




national boundary waters, and (c) waters on which water manage-




ment activities may have an impact.  Fourteen of these stations




were established in the Pacific Northwest.




     Passage of the Water Quality Act of 1965 gave increased em-




phasis to certain water uses and called for the establishment, of




water quality standards for the maintenance and improvement of




interstate and coastal waters.  Pollution surveillance, in addi-




tion to obtaining basic data, dealt with the more comprehensive

-------
                                                                  2




task of evaluating water quality with regard to water quality




standards and specific pollution problems.






                             Purpose




     The purpose of this paper is to present a preliminary'




evaluation of plankton data collected in the Pacific Northwest




Region and to make recommendations regarding the advisability




of continuing this data collection for pollution surveillance




purposes.

-------
                            CONCLUSION







     Under the proper conditions, plankton data can be a useful




parameter in itself; however, its present role is to lend support




to chemical and physical data.   These plankton data have provided




almost ten years of "baseline" data at certain points in the




Northwest Region.   At a later date, if needed, these data could




prove to be of historic value if and when a comparison needed to




be made between two periods of time to determine water quality




changes.




     However, it is recommended that routine plankton sampling be




discontinued as a Pollution Surveillance Branch function until a




biological sampling program can be designed which will best meet




the immediate needs of the Branch.

-------
                    DESCRIPTION AND EVALUATION







                     Study Area and Stations




     The Columbia River drains an area of approximately 259,000




square miles, of which 3,000 square miles are lakes, reservoirs




and channels.  Water use varies greatly, depending on the area




of the basin.  Generally, the industrial use is concentrated in




the lower river, while agricultural activities predominate in the




upper river.  Hydroelectric interests, both public and private,




have constructed many dams along the river.  Figure 1 shows the




location of dams and WPSS plankton sampling stations within the .




basin.  Table 1 presents the dates .of initiation and termination




of plankton sampling at these stations along with their "river.




mile" location, and Table 2 shows the total storage and year of




construction of each hydroelectric facility on the Columbia




River.




     Because of limitations imposed on the establishment of sta-




tions, only six were initiated along the 745 miles of Columbia




River flowing within the United States.  Since the start of this




program, plankton sampling at Bonneville Dam, McNary Dam and




Wenatchee, Washington has been terminated.  Elimination of these




stations increased the distance between the remaining stations on




the Columbia River main stem as follows:  Clatskanie to Pasco,




275.2 river miles, and Pasco to Northport, 416.0 river miles.

-------
    	J           I.
              Figure 1




Water Pollution Surveillance System




    Plankton Sampling Stations




       Columbia River Basin

-------
                                  TABLE 1




          PLANKTON SAMPLING STATIONS IN THE COLUMBIA RIVER BASIN
MAP
STATION
NUMBER
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
*14
STATION
NAME
Clatskanie.
Bonneville
McNary
Pasco
Wenatchee
Northport
Portland
Ice Harbor
Payette
Lewiston
Richland
Post Falls Dam
Albeni Falls Dam
Wawawai
RIVER
Columbia
Columbia
Columbia
Columbia
Columbia
Columbia
Willamette
Snake
Snake
Clearwater
Yakima
Spokane
Pend Orielle
Snake
RIVER
MILE
53.8
146.1
292.0
329.0
458.2
745.0
8.5
9.7
365.6
2.0
3.0
102.1
90.1
110.7
TRIBUTARY
TO
Pacific Ocean
Pacific Ocean
Pacific Ocean
Pacific Ocean
Pacific Ocean
Pacific Ocean
Columbia
Columbia
Columbia
Snake
Columbia
Columbia
Columbia
Columbia
DATE
BEGAN .
4/58
3/57
4/61
1/58
9/58
5/62
8/62
5/62
11/61
10/61
4/61
5/62
5/62

DATE
ENDED
9/67
7/65
7/65
9/67
7/65
9/67
9/67
9/67
8/67
9/67
9/67
9/67
8/67

* Plankton Data not available for this station

-------
         TABLE 2




DAMS ON THE COLUMBIA RIVER
FACILITY
Bonneville
The Dalles
John Day
McNary
Priest Rapids
Wanapum
Rock Island
Rocky Reach
Wells
Chief Joseph
Grand Coulee
RIVER
MILE
146.1
191.5
215.6
292.0
397.1
415.0
453.4
474.5
516.6
545.1
596.6
STORAGE (Acre Feet)
719,000
332,500
2,100,000
1,350,000
198,700
669,700
8,600
101,400
330,000
518,000
9,562.000
DATE COMPLETED
1938
1957
1968
1957
1960
1963
1953
1961
1967
1955
1941

-------
                                                                  8




Noting the dates of dam construction and the date of station ini-




ation (Table 1), it can be seen that the addition of more sampling




points might have improved the adequacy of the data.  For example,




the Pasco station initially monitored the discharge from Rock Is-




land Dam and the Hanford Reservation along an uninterrupted stretch.




of river.  By 1963 Wanapum and Priest Rapids Dams had been completed




and had converted a large portion of the river into a lentic envi-




ronment still monitored only by the Pasco station.  Under these




and other circumstances, the relocation or addition of stations




would have been desirable.




     Other sampling stations with the exception of the one at




Lewisto.n, Idaho on the Clearwater River, were located on major




tributaries to the Columbia.







                Collection and Analyses of Samples




     Sample bottles, each containing a proper volume of Merthiolate




preservative, were shipped in mailing containers  to the stations.




After filling the sample bottle and completing the  sample identi-




fication tag, the local cooperator promptly shipped the package to




the Water Laboratory at Cincinnati, Ohio.




     Plankton samples were collected directly from  reservoirs,




rivers or water plant intakes at a depth between  2  and 15 feet.




Depending on the type of analysis to be performed the sample




volume varied from one  to three liters, but for most purposes

-------
                                                                  9




one liter was sufficient.




     immediately prior to analysis the plankton sample was mixed




by inverting the sample bottle at least seven times and a 50 to




100 ml aliquot was poured into a beaker.  The contents of the




beaker were again mixed, a one ml subsample was placed in a




Sedgwick-Rafter plankton counting cell and allowed to settle for




15 minutes.  If the sample was too dense or a large amount of silt




present, the sample was diluted 5 to 10 times to facilitate count-




ing.




     Two "strip counts" across the chamber were made and the or-




ganisms identified to genus, or to species if possible, and re-




corded on a standardized bench sheet.  With the exception of no-




tations made of the number of empty diatom frustules only live




cells were counted.  For those samples which contained organisms




too small to identify under the conventional magnification, a "wet




mount" was made of.the material and the count was completed.




     From a centrifuged aliquot of the sample a permanent slide




was prepared for the diatom species proportional count.  Data




from these counts were also tabulated on bench sheets and stored




for reference.







                        Evaluation of Data




     To facilitate preliminary data analysis, summaries of the




bench sheets were made on the basis of major algal groupings.




The summary pages were columned as to date of sample, coccoid

-------
                                                                 10

green, filamentous green, coccoid blue-green, filamentous blue-

green, "other algae", centric diatoms, pennate diatoms and the

total number of live cells in the sample..  No .further taxonomic

breakdown was considered on these sheets.

     The number of total live algae, coccoid green algae, centric

diatoms and pennate diatoms were used in all of the preliminary

analyses.  The other groups did not appear as frequently or as

abundantly.

     The aquatic environment undergoes seasonal changes and with

these changes the floral and faunal communities change in indi-

vidual numbers and types.  For this reason, these data have been

grouped by seasons of the year.  "Seasons" were defined as:

           Winter:  November, December, January
           Spring:  March, April
           Summer:  June, July
           Fall:    September, October

     Seasons in which the months of February, May and August were

included depended strictly upon the weather.  As an example, Feb-

ruary was included with January where winter months are severe,

but was included with March when winter conditions are moderate.

A seasonal average was arrived at by dividing the total number of

cells in a particular group for a given season by the number or

samples collected during the season.

     The plankton data for all stations were plotted on the basis

of:  (a) total live algae by dates, (b) live algae by season,

(c) coccoid green algae by season, (d) centric diatoms by season,

-------
                                                                 11




and, (e) pennate diatoms by season.






                             Results




     Plankton data for the period of record, using the figures pre-




pared according to total numbers and major groups, indicated a gen-




eral increase in plankton numbers at most of the stations.  This




trend was verified by plotting both maximum and minimum seasonal




values from the total live algae data (Appendix A).




     The figures in Appendix A point out other features of the data.




For example, the figure prepared for Clatskanie indicates a rapid




increase in plankton numbers during 1962 vhich declined in 1963.




This peak shows the influence of one sample, collected in the fall,




which contained a large number of coccoid blue-green algae,




Cocco chip r_i_s sp.  This alga appeared at an abundance of 108,032




cells/ml., on September 4, 1962.  No other mass occurrence of this




alga was observed in the data.  The Snake River station at Payette,




Idaho also exhibited a peak in plankton numbers during 1962.  How-




ever, this station exhibits consistently high counts of centric




diatoms and the 1962 peak is not the result of one sample or of




high production during a particular season, but rather the produc-




tion of centric diatoms through the entire year.




     Also, from Appendix A, a sharp rise in plankton numbers was




noted at the Columbia River stations of Clatskanie, Pasco and




Northport, in 1965.  Plankton summary sheets showed that this




increase occurred at Northport during the spring and summer seasons,

-------
                                                                 12




At Pasco and Clatskanie the increase extended from summer into




the fall season.  There was no specific algal form found to be




responsible for the increase, but rather an increase in total




production was noted for the year.




     Chemical and physical data have been compiled and stored




with the plankton data.  Most of the data are in the form of the




Public Health Service WPSS Annual Compilation of Data booklets,




through 1963, and the remainder available through the STORET




system of data handling.  Preliminary analyses using the param-




eters of pH, temperature, flow, alkalinity and total dissolved




solids indicated no correlations with fluctuations in plankton




numbers.  Due to insufficient data on nitrogen and phosphorus




no conclusions could be drawn.

-------
                            DISCUSSION







     Irregularities in sampling frequency, questions concerning




the use of sufficient preservative and practices employed for




sample dilution tend to suggest false trends in the data.  As




previously mentioned, the collection of plankton samples was based




on a local cooperator's assistance and in several instances diffi-




culty in obtaining routine samples was encountered.  For example,




an examination of the seasonal data indicated a sharp increase in




plankton numbers during 1967, but as few as three samples were col-




lected at some stations, making the value of the data questionable




for that year.  A "defined" sampling program conducted by FWPCA




personnel would provide more desirable data.  Sampling programs




must be tailored to meet the objectives of the study with due con-




sideration being given to any factors which might modify the initial




conditions.  Periodic evaluations of data to note changes in species




composition and population structures would be in order.  Also, up-




dating of information on changes in water use, such as dam construc-




tion or establishment of new irrigation programs, would be in order.




By following this plan, alterations in sampling and, if needed, new




sampling stations could be added to properly assess the situation.




     It is difficult to use plankton data in a Pollution Surveil-




lance program which emphasizes the compliance (or lack of compli-




ance) with water quality standards.  This is primarily true because

-------
                                                                 14




there is no written water quality standard for plankton levels.




With the development of a written standard, plankton data could




assume a more influential role in Pollution Surveillance programs.




     Plankton organisms can be defined as microscopic, weak swim-




ming or passively floating plant or animal life which are subject .




to the action of waves or currents.  As such, the unattached nature




of these organisms reflect upstream water quality conditions at




downstream locales.   Plankton samples are, however, easy to collect




but require highly skilled personnel for accurate analysis.  Other




methods of biological water quality evaluation, such as periphyton




or benthic invertebrate analyses, would require as much or more




effort but would better illustrate water quality at a given sampling




point.

-------
               APPENDIX A









       YEARLY MAXIMUM AND MINIMUM




  VALUES FROM SEASONAL LIVE ALGAE DATA




AT EACH COLUMBIA BASIN SAMPLING STATION

-------
     22
8
H
fi
CO

o
21-


20.


19-
     17-
     13-
 9_


 8_


 7_


 6_


 5_


 4-


 3_


 2-
                                                              CLATSKANIE
                                                              0 •—OEaximura value


                                                             A—£sinini!nuni \-alue
            to
                   I

                  O
                        1

                       r-l
                       vO
                       0
                       H
                                 (V
                                 M3
                                 O
                                 •H
 i
vO
                                YEARS

-------
     22-




     21-




     20_





     19-
                                                       BONNEVILLE DAM
                                                                  vjRi value
                                                                          value
     13-
a
o
10_




 9_




 8_




 7_
       Vf\
            to
                                CVJ
                                      I     I
                                     i-l   r-i
                                                I      I




                                               sO    vO
                               YEARS

-------
22-


21-


20_



19-
                                                           McNARY DAM
                                                              -G maximum value
                                                                       •n value
     15-
     13-
     11_
(0,
>-
8
 9_





 7_


 6_


 5_





 3_


 2-
             \\\\\\\\\\
            O^   O^   0s    0s    CT»    0s
            HiHMHHrH
                               Y5AR3

-------
     22




     21




     20




     19
                                                       PASCO



                                                       O—-o-a.xi^-um valus



                                                       &—^minimum, value
     17-
CO
o
     13-
9_



8_



7_



6_



5_




4-



3_




2-
             r
            to
 1     I

O^   O
irv   NO
 I

CN»
                                                I


                                               NO
                                                          NO
                                YEARS

-------
     22-


     21-


     20-


     19-
     17-

     16-


     15-





     13-
                                                      WENATCHEE

                                                      Q—omaxisnuni value

                                                               j^ra value
e.
CO

o
11-

10-

 9_


 8_


 7_

 6_


 5_
      3_


      2-
             1
            to
             I
            o^
 I     I    I     I
D    |-<   
-------
     22-

     21-

     20.

     19-
                                                     NORTHPORT

                                                     O—0 maximum value

                                                                  value
     17-
     15-
     13-
     11_
PS

si
s
3
o
9_

8_

7_

6_

5_



3_

2-
       i     i     i    r   I     1     I     I

      HiHHHHH??H

                        YEARS
                                                   1    1

-------
     22-


     21-


     20_


     19-
     17-
     15-
     13-
     11-
                                                      PORTLAND
                                                                       in value
fi-
a
8
9_


8_


7_

6_


5_


4-

3_


2-
             I
            to
                      o
                      vO
                     r-l
                     %O
                     0s
                           I
                          cv
                                I
 I
3
 I
\
                          «H    H


                         YEARS
                                              NO
                                              o
                                              rH
o    c*-
\o    \o
^v    ^>

-------
     22-


     21-


     20_


     19-





     17-





     15-





     13-





  .   n_
                                                      ICE HARBOR DAM
                                                                    VctlxiS
                                                      £s—&mininiuni value
3
•-4
8
9_


8_


7-


6_


5_


4-


3_


2-
             1     1     1     1     1     !     1     1
                                               1     1
                 i-JH
                     0s   ^^
                     r-e   H
                               YEARS

-------
a
     22-



     21-



     20_



     19-
15-



H_



13-


12_



11-



10-



 9_



 8_



 7_



 6_



 5_



 4-


 3_



 2-
               40,000
                                                      PAYETTE


                                                         G maximum valua


                                                         £jminimum \raluo
            
                                                  1-1
                                                   Ox

                                                   H
                              YEARS

-------







1-1
si
PJ
e
1
a






22-
21-
20_
19-
17-
15-
13-
10
9_
8_
7_
6_
5_
4-
3_
2-




LEWISTON
© — 0maxijnu
A — ^minimxi.











^t^=:
1 1 1 1 I i 1 1 1 I
YEAES
value

-------
£

§
22-



21-


20-



19,-
17-
15-
13-
 9_


 8_


 7_


 6_


 5_
                                                            HIGHLAND


                                                            O—o^axi-1*-111 value


                                                            £>—& minimum -value
 3_


 2-
         r
       to
                 O
                 «o
                 &>
                 H
                            i
                           H
                                                    NO
                                                    vO
                                                         vO
                          YEARS

-------
     22-


     21-


     20_


     19-
     17-
     15-
     13-
                                                       POST FALLS DAM


                                                       O—G™-"^3"1'-1*11 value


                                                      . £s—£>nininiuni valuo
o
9_


8_


7_


6_


5_


A-


3_


2-
            to
                  VTN
                      H
                      vQ
                      O^
                      H
                                                      \

                                                     •O
 I-
r-
NO
                                YEARS

-------
     22-

     21-

     20-

     19-
     17-
     15-
     13-
                                                       ALBENI FALLS DAM

                                                               scunum value

                                                          t^miniroun value
CJ
fi
CO
o
9_

8_

7_

6-

5_

4-

3_

2-
              II    1     1     1     1     1     1     1     1
                 r-l   i-f
                                     H    r-«H    H    i-l
                                YEARS

-------