&EPA
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Environmental Research
Laboratory
Corvallis OR 97330
EPA-600/3-80-012
January 1980
Research and Development
Probable Effects of
Acid Precipitation on
Pennsylvania Waters
-------
RESEARCH REPORTING SERIES
Research reports of the Office of Research and Development, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, have been grouped into nine series. These nine broad cate-
gories were established to facilitate further development and application of en-
vironmental technology. Elimination of traditional grouping was consciously
planned to foster technology transfer and a maximum interface in related fields.
The nine series are:
1. Environmental Health Effects Research
2. Environmental Protection Technology
3. Ecological Research
4. Environmental Monitoring
5. Socioeconomic Environmental Studies
6. Scientific and Technical Assessment Reports (STAR)
7. Interagency Energy-Environment Research and Development
8. "Special" Reports
9. Miscellaneous Reports
This report has been assigned to the ECOLOGICAL RESEARCH series. This series
describes research on the effects of pollution on humans, plant and animal spe-
cies, and materials. Problems are assessed for their long- and short-term influ-
ences. Investigations include formation, transport, and pathway studies to deter-
mine the fate of pollutants and their effects. This work provides the technical basis
for setting standards to minimize undesirable changes in living organisms in the
aquatic, terrestrial, and atmospheric environments.
This document is available to the public through the National Technical Informa-
tion Service, Springfield, Virginia 22161.
-------
EPA-600/3-80-012
January 1980
PROBABLE EFFECTS OF ACID PRECIPITATION ON PENNSYLVANIA WATERS
by
Dean E. Arnold
Robert W. Light
Valerie J. Dymond
Pennsylvania Cooperative Fishery Research Unit
328 Mueller Laboratory
University Park, Pennsylvania 16802
Contract Number B0835NAEX
Project Officer
Charles F. Powers
Terrestrial Division
Corvallis Environmental Research Laboratory
Corvallis, Oregon 97330
CORVALLIS ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH LABORATORY
~ OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
CORVALLIS, OREGON 97330
-------
DISCLAIMER
One of the principal reasons for the preparation of this report for the
Environmental Protection Agency was to supply scientifically valid information
which could be incorporated into the EPA S02-Particulate Matter criteria
document, presently in the final stages of preparation. A strict requirement
pertaining to'that document is that any scientific information used there must
be published (or at least in press) by January 1, 1980. Because of this
demanding time constraint, it was necessary that the contractor prepare this
report in a shorter time than would ordinarily be attempted, and that it be
published by EPA without undergoing peer review. We feel that early publica-
tion of these results in order to stimulate the broadest scientific discussion
prior to completion of the criteria document justified waiving our normally
more rigorous prepublication review requirements. Publication, however, does
not signify that the contents necessarily reflect the views and policies of
EPA, nor does mention of trade names or commercial products constitute en-
dorsement or recommendation for use.
11
-------
FOREWORD
Effective regulatory and enforcement actions by the Environmental Protec-
tion Agency would be virtually impossible without sound scientific data on
pollutants and their impact on environmental stability and human health.
Responsibility for building this data base has been assigned to EPA's Office
of Research and Development and its 15 major field installations, one of which
is the Corvallis Environmental Research Laboratory.
The primary mission of the Corvallis Laboratory is research on the ef-
fects of environmental pollutants on terrestrial, freshwater, and marine
ecosystems; the behavior, effects and control of pollutants in lakes and
streams and the development of predictive models on the movement of
pollutants in the biosphere.
This report has assembled evidence for increased acidity of a number of
Pennsylvania streams, decreases of fish populations in many, and points to
acid precipitation as a likely cause.
Thomas A. Murphy, Director
Corvallis Environmental Research Laboratory
111
-------
ABSTRACT
The purpose of this project was to search for and identify any trends in
water chemistry and fish communities in Pennsylvania waters which would indi-
cate that acid precipitation was affecting them adversely. No new data col-
lection was to be included.
Five existing data bases, including original data collected by the
authors, were examined for the existence of water analyses from the same or
nearby locations separated by at least one year. (Analyses involving known or
suspected influence of acid mine drainage were omitted.) Of 983 analysis
reports which were usable, there were 314 cases with two or more such points.
Of these 107 or 34% showed a decrease in pH, alkalinity, or both. Average
decrease in pH was 0.4 units with a maximum case of 1.3 units. Average
decrease in alkalinity was 15.1 mg/1 (as CaC03) with a maximum case of 105
mg/1. The average time span between earliest and latest sample was 8.5 years.
When the data were separated by physiographic provinces, it became appar-
ent that although the majority of the decreases occurred in streams on the
relatively insoluble rocks of the Allegheny Plateau, there were also many
cases in the ridge-and-valley province and other regions. Many of these
decreases are to pH levels considered marginal for growth and reproduction of
trout and other fishes.
Seventy-one of the 107 analyses showing decreased pH or alkalinity in-
cluded fish collection data. In 40 of these cases (58%), the number of fish
species present decreased as well.
This report was submitted in fulfillment of Contract Number B0835NAEX
under the sponsorship of the U.S: Environmental Protection Agency. This
report covers a period from May to October, 1979, and work was completed as of
October 1, 1979.
-------
CONTENTS
Foreword iii
Abstract iv
Figures vi
Tables vi
Acknowledgements vii
1. Introduction 1
2. Conclusions 4
3. Recommendations 4
4. Materials and Methods 5
5. Results and Discussion 8
References 19
-------
FIGURES
Number
1. Card form used for recording and analysis of available data 7
2. County map of Pennsylvania showing approximate boundaries of
physiographic provinces and locations of waters showing decrease in
pH or alkalinity or both 12
3. Stream map of Pennsylvania showing major drainage basins and
locations of waters showing decrease in pH or alkalinity or both. . . 15
TABLES
1. Summary of decreases in pH, alkalinity, and number of fish species
found for Pennsylvania as a whole 8
2. pH, alkalinity, and number of fish species for Pennsylvania waters
showing decreases as described in test 9
3. Water chemistry and fish population records summarized by
physiographic province 14
4. Water chemistry and fish population records summarized by major
watershed
5. Selected waters showing serious symptoms of acidification 17
VI
-------
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The authors wish to thank the following for consent and aid in obtaining
data and ideas for this report: Edwin L. Cooper of The Pennsylvania State
University; Delano Graff, Robert Hesser, Fred Johnson, Rickalon Hoopes, Bruce
Hoi lender, and Richard Snyder of the Pennsylvania Fish Commission; and Karl
Shaeffer of the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Resources. Funds for
the study were provided by the Corvallis Environmental Research Laboratory of
the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. The contract was supervised by Dr.
Charles F. Powers, whom we thank for his cooperation. Additional funds and
supplies were provided by the Pennsylvania Fish Commission, the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service, and The Pennsylvania State University, Department of
Biology.
vn
-------
INTRODUCTION
In just a few years, the problem of acid precipitation has grown from a
suspicion held by a few scientists to a matter of international concern char-
acterized by large conferences, a large amount of new research effort (only
part of which is receiving adequate financial support), and large numbers of
review articles in both the popular and scientific press (most recently, see
Likens et a!. , 1979). No one is sure of either its extent or its time of
beginning. Indeed, it undoubtedly has been developing since the dawn of the
industrial age.
The increasing acidity in precipitation has been linked to anthropogenic
sources, i.e. coal combustion, petroleum combustion, and nonferrous metal
production (Kellogg et al., 1972). The major cause of the acidification has
been the addition of S02 (sulfur dioxide) from the combustion of fossil fuels
and the subsequent production of the strong acid H2S04 (sulfuric acid). This
transformation may take several pathways (Kellogg et al., 1972; Brosset,
1973). A second strong acid, HN03 (nitric acid), has also been forming at
increasing rates in the atmosphere. The formation of this acid also stems
from fossil fuel combustion, especially'automobile exhausts. Thus the highest
concentrations of HN03 are evident around metropolitan areas. Both of these
strong acids are now present in such high concentration that the natural
buffering capacity of the atmosphere is no longer able to neutralize their
effects. The pH of pure rainwater saturated with carbon dioxide should be
5.7, but the addition of strong acids to the atmosphere is driving it down
well below this level (Johnson, Reynolds, and Likens, 1972).
Only recently have the effects of increasing acidity been appearing in
the aquatic ecosystem. The problem facing us now is that (due to safety and
other problems with the use of nuclear power and our difficulties in imple-
menting either conservation or alternative energy sources), the use of fossil
fuels is increasing, thus compounding the acid precipitation effect. Man
contributes about one-half as much sulfur to the atmosphere as does nature
now, and it has been predicted that by the year 2000 the amount will be equal
(Kellogg et al_. , 1972). Estimates are that by the year 1995, 350 new coal-
fired plants will be built and that sulfur emissions will increase by 2 mil-
lion tons, corresponding to a threefold increase in coal usage (Carter, 1979).
Increased acidity has been reported primarily in the northern hemisphere.
The river systems on the west coast of Sweden have decreased 1.8 units in pH
since the 1930s (Schofield, 1976). In 18 Norwegian lakes there has been a
doubling of sulfate since the 1950s (Aimer et a^L , 1974). Similar increases
in acidity have been- found in parts of Scandinavia and in numerous lakes west
of Sudbury, Ontario, with increases of 200- and 100-fold respectively (Beamish
and Harvey, 1972; Likens and Bormann, 1974). In the northeastern United
States, the increase in acidity began to be noticed about twenty years ago and
-------
now the pH of the precipitation ranges between 2.1 and 5 (Likens and Bormann,
1974; Newman, 1975).
After analysis of the literature it becomes apparent that the main thrust
of acid precipitation research has been directed at lake ecosystems, not at
streams. This may be because, due to low turnover rates, the effects of
acidification should be more obvious in lakes than in streams. However, we
feel that the effects on streams may prove to be equally as serious as those
on lakes, especially in the susceptible areas of the Appalachians. For a
thorough review of the literature covering studies prior to 1976, consult
Wright (1976).
The Pennsylvania Cooperative Fishery Research Unit has been studying
factors influencing production of native trout in infertile streams of the
Allegheny Plateau for over 5 years. One of the common features of these
streams is their low pH and alkalinity. These are usually between 4.5-5.5 and
0-10 mg/1 (as CaC03) respectively. Although it is recognized that nearly any
source of hydrogen ions will upset the pH of such pure-water streams, acid
precipitation and/or acid from headwater bogs seem the most likely causes of
the low pH. Samples taken early in our studies indicated that (a) the pH is
equally low above and below the headwater bog areas; (b) the water emerging
from springs on the hillsides has a pH as low as that in the streams; and (c)
the pH of rainfall in the area is consistently near 3.8, lower than the
streams (and, in fact, lower than the rainfall values for this area indicated
in various published reviews such as Likens et a^L (1979), which does not even
include the Allegheny Plateau region of Pennsylvania and West Virginia among
those areas "sensitive" to acid precipitation). These factors all seem to
lend support to the assumption that acid precipitation is the primary factor
in the acidification of Pennsylvania's unpolluted streams.
The factors involved in our area seem to be similar to those evaluated by
Seip and Tollan (1978) in concluding that acid precipitation must be the prime
cause of the well-known acidification of rivers and lakes in southern Norway.
The majority of the sensitive streams identified in the present study are
located on forested land, usually in public ownership, and are subject to few
significant human influences. Although there may be occasional exceptions, we
believe that acid precipitation is the most probable cause of acidification in
the streams we have identified; and that there are many more streams in the
state, equally affected, which we were unable to identify simply because of
missing or inadequate data.
The most immediate danger from stream and lake acidification is, of
course, to fish populations and to their food. Although most of the published
reports on this topic involve fish populations in lakes, we believe that
similar cause-effect relationships are likely for stream fish.
Complete losses of fish populations have been reported in several areas
of Europe (Aimer et aJL , 1974), and in Ontario (Beamish and Harvey, 1972),
among other places. In most cases these losses were preceded by symptoms such
as poor recruitment, failure of females to reach spawning condition, heavy
mortality of eggs and/or larvae, deformed fins, shortening of gill covers, and
rising concentrations of toxic elements such as aluminum and mercury. In
-------
Pennsylvania waters, we suspect that the harmful effects to fish populations
will occur through such immediate symptoms (i.e., through reduced growth and
reproduction) and/or through interference with the food supply, rather than
from direct toxicity of acidic water.
Two earlier investigators from our group completed limited studies on the
production of periphyton algae and of insect larvae- in poorly-buffered, acidic
streams. Bender (1978) reported that pH affects species composition of peri-
phyton algae but not species number or diversity, and that total biomass and
productivity were not limited. Certain species become dominant only in acidic
streams. Hale (1978) showed that in an acidic stream, detritus-feeding in-
sects were dominant, while in a similar stream of neutral pH, herbivorous
species dominated. The significance of these findings to fish production is
not known. We are also currently investigating the significance of mineral
nutrition of fish as related to these acidified streams.
-------
CONCLUSIONS
Although the data upon which this report is based are not sufficiently
strong to define statistically valid relationships, it seems clear that there
is a definite overall trend toward increasing acidity in many Pennsylvania
streams, with the loss of components of the fish populations in many. Field
experiments wi-th static limestone beds are being carried out on a number of
streams in which the pH is at or near lethality for trout. Precipitation
chemistry data are lacking, but elimination of streams possibly affected by
acid mine drainage suggests acid precipitation as a likely cause of the ob-
served changes.
RECOMMENDATIONS
A program of investigation should be undertaken to supplement the data
utilized in this report with the information needed to document the current
conditions and trends indicated for Pennsylvania streams, and their causes.
A list is presented illustrating probable worst conditions existing at
present in Pennsylvania surface waters not affected by acid mind drainage.
These waters should be monitored for changes in biological or chemical systems
related to increasing acidity.
-------
MATERIALS AND METHODS -
This study was funded in early May 1979 with a completion date for this
report of September 30. With less than 5 months available for the work, it
was necessary to limit the study to existing data in locations known to us.
Much as we would like to have made field checks of many of the streams re-
ported (and plan to in the near future), the available time did not permit it.
Five data banks were identified and used in the study, as follows:
1. Data collected and compiled by the Pennsylvania Cooperative Fishery
Research Unit in connection with various studies of trout production in
infertile streams over the past five years. These data exist in punch-
card form but in a non-standard local format.
2. Collection station files of The Pennsylvania State University Fish Col-
lection. These include over 1000 locations throughout the state and have
been organized by Dr. Edwin L. Cooper, curator. Most of the collections
which have water quality data were made during the 1960s (for description
see Cooper and Wagner, 1973). Although part of the data is available on
compter tape, it is in a non-standard local format and not in a conven-
ient form for machine retrieval of the data needed for the present study.
3. Stream survey files of the Pennsylvania Fish Commission. These are
mostly in raw format on data sheets or in report letters. They include
data from the 1940s to the present. A statewide fishery survey which
will take several years to complete is now in progress and much of the
data generated has been entered into a computer file. The access program
for this file is not yet operational, and the file does not include
information from earlier surveys.
4. Stream surveys and spot measurements by the Pennsylvania Department of
Environmental Resources and its predecessor agencies. These are primar-
ily from the 1970s and were usually made in response to reports of pollu-
tion problems. However, they complement the Fish Commission data by
being mainly from the lower, more developed parts of watersheds, while
the Fish Commission surveys are primarily of the upper, less developed
sections. These files are all in letter or field data sheet form.
5. Stream monitoring data of the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental
Resources. These data are generated routinely by periodic sampling of
specific stations throughout the state, and cover the last several years.
It is in the standard STORET computer format, but was of limited use to
us because the printout we obtained gave the data in terms of averages,
masking trends of the time span in which we were interested. It is
possible that more intense manipulation of the field would yield data
-------
usable for detecting trends in pH and alkalinity, but shortage of time
and money prevented our attempting this.
Because of the widely-varying formats used in these data bases, and the
necessity to do time-consuming major programming jobs to use them with com-
puter techniques, we decided to forego the advantages of machine data manipu-
lation for the advantages of manual methods. A standard 4 x 6-inch card was
developed (Figure 1) for recording the pertinent data for several samples from
a given location. As we proceeded with examination of each data bank (in the
order given above), each sample location was evaluated to determine whether it
justified starting a new card or if it was sufficiently close (generally
within one mile with no major tributaries or other influences between) to an
already-recorded station to be listed on the same card. The major time con-
sumption of the study was connected with the laborious task of identifying and
matching these station locations, many of which were labeled with place names
not on the USGS topographic maps or other references available. (Note: we
urge other workers to record and report their collection station data with
standard coordinates using place names found on the USGS maps!) If such
geographic matching could not be done the sample was eliminated from further
consideration; this also was done if the sulfate or iron concentrations of the
sample were significant (indicating possible acid mine drainage contamination)
or if the sampling site was located in an area known to have mine drainage
problems.
Data actually recorded included name of water body, county, drainage
basin, location of sampling site, dates, collectors, collector's code for the
site, pH, conductivity, alkalinity, acidity, sulfate, whether or not fish were
collected (or collection attempted), and if so, number of species found. This
process generated a total of 983 cards representing different water bodies or
locations within a stream system. Almost all these were streams, reflecting
the small number of lakes within Pennsylvania and the little attention that
has been given to their study. From these cards, all those were removed that
did not meet the following criteria: there must be at least two samples (data
points) and these must be separated in time by at least one year; either the
pH or the alkalinity or both must show a decrease. Data from the remaining
cards were used to generate the remaining tables and figures of this report.
-------
P.C.F.R.U. - E.P.A. Study of Acid Precipitation Effects, 1979
Water Body County Card of
Drainage Sampling Site
Date
Collector
Coil's Code
PH
Conductivity
Alkalinity
Acidity
Sulfate
Fish Collection
(+ = present) N
( 0 = no try) 0
(- = absent) T
E
S
Figure 1. Card form used for recording and analysis of available data.
-------
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
A total of 983 cards were generated. Of these, 314 had two or more data
points meeting the specified criteria, and were examined for trends. A de-
crease in pH, alkalinity, or both was found in 107 cases (40%). Seventy-one
(66%) of these 107 records also had data from fish collections, and in 41
(58%) of these the number of species of fish present had decreased. A summary
of the data on a statewide basis is presented in Table 1.
TABLE 1. SUMMARY OF DECREASES IN pH, ALKALINITY, AND NUMBER OF FISH SPECIES
FOUND FOR PENNSYLVANIA AS A WHOLE.
Parameter
pH (units)
Alkalinity (ppm CaC03)
Number of fish species
Mean of
Earliest Data
(Range)
7.31
(5.8—8.8)
41.7
(5—200)
10.3
(2—22)
Mean of
Most Recent Data
(Range)
6.94
(4.9—8.3)
26.6
(2—186)
8.7
(1-21)
Mean Net
Change
(Range)
-0.37
(-1.3 — +0.2)
-15.1
(-105 — +18)
-1.53
(-15 - +8)
Average time span between earliest and most recent data =8.5 years (range
1—27).
The data extracted for the 107 stations showing decreases are presented
in Table 2. Since it is difficult to detect overall trends in such a table,
and because the effect is diluted by a number of increases in one parameter or
another, we sought more meaningful methods of presentation. '
Pennsylvania water chemistry is strongly influenced by topography, due to
the very different types of rocks and soils exposed by different landforms.
In many cases, the same stream undergoes a change of one or two hundred ppm in
alkalinity, for example, within a few hundred yards as it leaves an inert
sandstone mountainside and flows into a valley floor of highly reactive lime-
stone. This sort of phenomenon may make it seem meaningless to sort stream
data by major watersheds. We first chose to divide the state's counties into
groups separated by lines denoting the major physiographic provinces, although
in three cases it was necessary to divide a county between two provinces. A
map indicating the location of "decrease" stations and these physiographic
provinces is presented in Figure 2.
8
-------
TABLE 2. pH, ALKALINITY, AND NUMBER OF FISH SPECIES FOR PENNSYLVANIA WATERS SHOWING DECREASES AS DESCRIBED IN TEXT. NA = data not available.
Asterisk indicates that intermediate data exist which, if used, would indicate a decrease in the number of fish species.
Earliest Data
Location Name
Conewago Creek 1
Conewago Creek 2
South Branch Conewago Creek
Opossum Creek
Little Sewickly Creek
Antietam Creek
Northkill Creek
Poplar Run
Sugar Creek
South Branch Towanda Creek
Chest Creek 1
Chest Creek 2
North Creek
Aquashicola Creek
Sand Springs Run
Black Moshannon Creek
Cherry Run
Cold Stream
Elk Creek
Laurel (Whetstone) Run
Little Fishing Creek
Six Mile Run
Pickering Creek
Valley Creek
Canoe Creek
Chest Creek
Gifford Run
Little Clearfield Creek
Mosquito Creek
Panther Run
West Branch Susquehanna River
Cooks Run
Tangascootack Creek
Beaver Run
Armstrong Creek 1
Armstrong Creek 2
Stoney Creek 1
Stoney Creek 2
Belmouth Run
Youghiogheny River
East Standing Stone Creek
Globe Run
Trough Creek
County
Adams
Adams
Adams
Adams
Allegheny
Berks
Berks
Blair
Bradford
Bradford
Cambria
Cambria
Cameron
Carbon
Carbon
Centre
Centre
Centre
Centre
Centre
Centre
Centre
Chester
Chester
Clarion
Clearfield
Clearfield
Clearfield
Clearfield
Clearfield
Clearfield
Clinton
Clinton
Columbia
Dauphin
Dauphin
Dauphin
Dauphin
Elk
Fayette
Huntingdon
Huntingdon
Huntington
Year
69
70
69
70
70
69
72
47
69
69
67
67
47
67
65
66
64
66
65
61
70
76
69
69
67
67
72
66
53
74
67
61
50
49
69
69
69
64
63
71
61
61
60
PH
7.3
7.0
7.5
7.5
7.7
7.7
8.1
7.6
8.7
7.8
7.6
7.7
7.7
7.6
6.6
7.3
6.9
7.0
8.3
7.1
8.1
7.2
7.5
8.2
6.7
7.7
6.3
7.3
6.0
5.8
7.3
6.9
7.5
7.3
7.2
7.0
6.6
6.9
6.7
7.2
7.3
6.9
7.1
Alka-
linity
37
91
123
60
86
122
85
120
85
45
45
79
21
29
20
8
10
15
120
11
65
NA
45
200
18
39
NA
40
NA
NA
17
NA
NA
20
13
7
5
5
5
11
12
6
28
No. Fish
Species
20
17
21
17
6
16
NA
NA
14
16
10
15
NA
18
6
4
4
6
8
11
9
NA
13
3
2
12
1
11
NA
NA
2
5
NA
NA
14
16
10
13
3
8
7
11
8
Year
77
77
77
77
73
76
74
67
78
78
70
69
63
71
76
71
77
72
76
78
78
78
77
76
76
69
79
71
79
79
74
78
66
76
76
76
74
74
78
73
76
76
67
Latest Data
PH
7.1
7.2
7.7
7.2
7.2
7.3
7.6
7.0
7.8
7.1
7.2
7.1
6.8
6.9
6.5
6.5
6.5
6.2
8.3
6.9
7.4
6.5
7.2
8.3
7.0
7.5
5.5
7.1
4.9
5.2
6.9
6.4
6.9
7.0
6.3
6.7
6.0
6.4
6.7
6.8
6.9
6.3
6.9
Alka-
linity
36
37
60
40
60
62
70
15
62
35
41
22
20
26
3
10
2
NA
108
10
46
NA
36
186
12
32
0
38
0
NA
2
NA
NA
14
9
6
10
10
3
8
5
8
18
No. Fish
Species
18
17
6
17
NA
11
NA
7
NA
15
NA
NA
8
NA
3
2
NA
NA
7
5
8
NA
21
8
1
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
5
14
11
14
7
5
2
4
10
8
9
Time
Span
8
7
8
7
3
7
2
20
9
9
3
2
16
4
11
5
13
6
11
17
8
2
8
7
9
2
7
5
26
5
7
17
16
27
7
7
5
10
15
2
15
15
7
PH
-0.2
+0.2
+0.2
-0.3
-0.5
-0.4
-0.5
-0.6
-0.9
-0.7
-0.4
-0.6
-0.9
-0.7
-0.1
-0.8
-0.4
-0.8
0
-0.2
-0.7
-0.7
-0.3
+0.1
+0.3
-0.2
-0.8
-0.2
-1.1 L
-0.6
-0.4
-0.5
-0.6
-0.3
-0.4
-0.3
-0.6
-0.5
0
-0.4
-0.4
-0.6
-0.2
Net Change
Alka-
linity
-1
-54
-63
-20
-@6
-60
-15
-105
-23
-10
-4
-57
-1
-3
-17
+2
-8
NA
-12
-1
-19
NA
-9
-14
-6
-7
NA
-2
NA
NA
-15
NA
NA
-6
-4
-1
+5
+5
-2
-3
-7
+2
-10
No. Fish
Species
-2
0
-15
0
NA
-5
NA
NA
NA
-1
NA
NA
NA
NA
-3
-2
NA
NA
-1
-6
-1
NA
+8
+5
-1
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
-3
-2
-3
-8
-1
-4
+3
-3
+ 1
(continued)
-------
Table 2. (continued)
Earliest Data
Location Name
Five Mile Run
Mill Creek
North Fork Redbank Creek
Tuscarora Creek 1
Tuscarora Creek 2
Little Swatara Creek
Tulpehocken Creek
Jordan Creek
Little Wapwallopen Creek
Neslopeck Creek
North Branch Bowman s Creek
Little Bear Creek
Slate Run
Trout Run
Kinzua Creek
Jacks Creek
Brodhead Creek
Cocolamus Creek
Fowler Hollow Run
McCabes Run
Sherman Creek 1
Sherman Creek 2
Little Bushkill Creek
Middle Branch
Saw Creek
Allegheny River 1
Allegheny River 2
Mill Creek
Reed Run
Swift Run
Blue Hole Run
Clear Shade Creek
Fall Creek
Jones Mill Run
Pole Branch Run
Rock Run
East Branch Tunkhannock Creek
North Branch Wyal using
Salt Lick Creek
Cowanesque River
Four Mile Run
Francis Branch Slate Run
Long Run
Stoney Fork 1
Stoney Fork 2
County
Jefferson
Jefferson
Jefferson
Juniata
Juniata
Lebanon
Lebanon
Lehigh
Luzerne
Luzerne
Luzerne
Lycoming
Lycoming
Lycomi ng
McKean
Miff Tin
Monroe
Perry
Perry
Perry
Perry
Perry
Pike
Pike
Pike
Potter
Potter
Potter
Potter
Snyder
Somerset
Somerset
Somerset
Somerset
Sullivan
Sullivan
Susquehanna
Susquehanna
Susquehanna
Tioga
Tioga
Tioga
Tioga
Tioga
Tioga
Year
55
67
67
69
69
57
68
69
69
66 '
64
64
64
65
63
69
69
53
64
64
69
64
65
65
65
52
52
71
62
64
65
65
65
65
64
54
69
69
69
69
64
64
64
64
71
PH
7.3
7.3
7.3
8.4
8.6
7.6
8.0
8.0
6.9
6.7
6.7
6.8
7.4
6.6
6.9
7.6
8.1
7.6
6.5
7.5
8.2
6.5
7.6
7.3
6.8
8.8
6.9
7.2
7.2
6.5
6.7
7.1
7.3
7.3
6.8
6.9
7.5
7.4
7.5
7.7
7.3
7.5
7.4
8.0
7.4
Alka-
linity
25
39
38
79
72
81
180
93
12
8
10
10
30
15
20
57
22
115
10
35
38
15
20
30
NA
35
33
24
28
10
20
15
15
25
15
9
40
23
30
58
40
25
40
70
63
No. Fish
Species
NA
16
16
15
22
NA
2
14
19
NA
2
3
7
5
15
9
12
NA
5
15
19
10
13
10
7
NA
NA
9
14
3
3
9
3
5
2
NA
13
18
10
12
2
NA
12
6
6
Year
72
78
74
72
72
69
72
72
78
69
77
74
78
70
67
70
78
69
77
75
78
77
78
76
76
70
70
77
76
77
77
76
77
77
76
73
77
78
78
77
73
71
69
76
76
Latest Data
PH
7.0
7.3
7.1
7.8
7.3
7.5
8.0
7.5
6.8
6.4
6.2
6.8
7.2
6.6
6.9
7.3
7.3
7.8
6.0
6.9
7.4
6.4
6.3
6.2
6.2
7.5
7.1
7.1
7.1
6.3
6.5
6.3
6.5
7.0
6.2
6.4
7.0
6.8
7.2
7.4
7.3
7.0
7.2
7.8
7.4
Alka-
linity
12
26
20
40
28
68
160
40
10
6
2
4
15
10
12
46
18
40
2
10
56
4
7
3
8
12
12
12
12
2
4
5
3
15
3
10
20
18
24
32
23
23
20
72
52
No. Fish
Species
4
7
9
11
13
19
NA
NA
18
9
2
4
8
2
NA
NA
8
18
6
6
17
13
8
8
8
18
19
10
9
3
2
5
2
5
3
2
13
11
17
13
4
5
5
7
6
Time
Span
17
11
7
3
3
12
4
3
9
3
13
10
14
5
4
1
9
16
13
11
9
13
13
11
11
18
18
6
14
13
12
11
12
12
12
19
8
9
9
8
9
7
5
12
5
PH
-0.3
0
-0.6
-0.6
-1.3
-0.1
0
-0.5
-0.1
-0.3
-0.5
0
-0.2
0
0
-0.3
-0.8
+0.2
-0.5
-0.6
-0.8
-0.1
-1.3
-1.1
-0.6
-1.3
+0.2
-0.1
-0.1
-0.2
-0.2
-0.8
-0.8
-0.3
-0.6
-0.5
-0.5
-0.6
-0.3
-0.3
0
-0.5
-0.2
-0.2
0
Net Change
Alka-
linity
-13
-13
-18
-39
-44
-13
-20
-53
-2
-2
-8
-6
-15
-5
-8
-11
-4
-75
-8
-25
+18
-11
-13
-27
NA
-23
-21
-12
-16
-8
-16
-10
-12
-10
-12
+1
-20
-5
-6
-26
-17
-2
-20
+2
-11
No. Fish
Species
NA*
-9
-7
-4
-9
NA
NA
NA
-T
NA
0
+ 1
+ 1
-3
NA
NA*
-4
NA
+ 1
-9
-2
+3
-5
-2
+1
NA
NA
+ 1
-5
0
-1
-4
-1
0
+1
NA
0
-7
+7
+1
+2
NA
-7
+ 1
0
(continued;
-------
Table 2. (continued)
Earliest Data
Location Name
Straight Run
Tioga River 1
Tioga River 2
Laurel Run
Weikert Run
Little Sandy Creek
Four Mile Run
Oyberry Creek
Lackawaxen Creek
Shadigee Creek
Wallenpaupack Creek
West Branch Dyberry Creek
Four Mile Run
Bowmans Creek
North Branch Mehoopany Creek
Tunkhannock Creek 1
Tunkhannock Creek 2
Toms Run
West Branch Codorus Creek
County
Tioga
Tioga
Tioga
Union
Union
Venango
Warren
Wayne
Wayne
Wayne
Wayne
Wayne
Westmoreland
Wyomi ng
Wyomi ng
Wyomi ng
Wyomi ng
York
York
Year
64
73
71
64
64
65
54
69
69
69
69
65
67
64
69
66
66
70
70
PH
7.4
7.3
6.4
6.8
6.8
7.7
7.3
7.2
7.6
7.3
7.2
8.2
7.3
6.8
7.9
8.0
8.0
7.1
7.3
Alka-
1 inity
35
8
10
15
15
100
73
30
30
35
17
30
38
15
32
32
30
14
137
No. Fish
Species
6
7
NA
8
9
12
NA
16
11
11
13
11
19
10
8
NA
NA
6
7
Year
76
78
78
77
77
77
75
77
78
76
78
77
77
77
77
69
69
77
78
Latest Data
pH
7.1
6.4
5.3
6.7
6.5
7.8
7.1
7.1
7.1
7.2
6.7
7.1
7.4
6.8
7.2
7.4
7.6
6.9
7.5
Alka-
linity
22
6
3
7
5
42
24
20
17
28
12
22
21
2
24
44
33
11
98
No. Fish
Species
5
8
NA
9
4
5
6
13
17
13
15
10
20
7
8
12
18
10
5
Time
Span
12
5
7
13
13
12
21
8
9
7
9
12
10
13
8
3
3
7
8
PH
-0.3
-0.9
-1.1
-0.1
-0.3
+0.1
-0.2
-0.1
-0.5
-0.1
-0.5
-1.1
+0.1
0
-0.7
-0.6
-0.4
-0.2
+0.2
Net Change
Alka-
linity
-13
-2
-7
-8
-10
-58
-49
-10
-13
-7
-5
-8
-17
-13
-8
+8
+3
-3
-39
No. Fish
Species
-1
+1
NA
+ 1
-5
-7
NA
-3
+6
+2
+2
-1
+1
-3
0
NA
NA
+4
-2
NA = Data not available.
* = Intermediate data indicate a decrease in number of species.
-------
Figure 2. County map of Pennsylvania showing approximate boundaries of physiographic, provinces and
locations of waters showing decrease in pH or alkalinity or both. Key to numbers:
1) Coastal-Piedmont province; 2) Pocono-Anthracite province; 3) Ridge and Valley province; 4)
Allegheny Plateau province (see Table 3). Scale 1:2,500,000.
-------
The four provinces which we have delineated follow both topographic and
geologic features, and for our purposes may be described as follows:
1. Coastal—Piedmont. Flat to rolling hills, Cambrian limestone and dolo-
mite, some areas of Triassi.c shales and sandstones and Ordovician/
Precambrian metamorphic rocks.
2. Pocono-Anthracite. High rolling mountains mostly of Devonian shale and
sandstone; occasional limestone exposures in association with coal seams.
3. Ridge and Valley. Long, high, parallel ridges of Devonian sandstones
giving rise to infertile waters locally called "freestone streams."
Valley floors of Ordovician and Cambrian limestones, dolomites, and
shales with streams becoming relatively fertile and alkaline as they flow
off the ridges into the valleys.
4. Allegheny Plateau. High, rolling mountains in irregular patterns.
Cyclic sequences of Pennsylvania sandstones, limestones, shales, clays,
and coals; but most higher elevations, especially in northern part,
overlain by sandstone and shale beds of low solubility.
The approximate boundaries of our four physiographic provinces are shown
in Figure 2, along with the locations of streams snowing decreases in pH,
alkalinity, or both. A summary of the relevant data is presented in Table 3.
Divided in this way, the available data still show no striking irregularity.
Total number of streams identified is closely related to the size of the
province, and the proportion showing decreases in pH, alkalinity, and/or fish
species number is relatively constant. However, this in itself may be impor-
tant, indicating that either the distribution of susceptible streams, or of
acid precipitation, or both, are statewide. Resolution of this point will
require statistical analysis for which neither time nor funds were available
at this writing. We expect to perform this analysis and publish the results
in the near future.
Although earlier questioned, the obvious alternative method of examining
the data is by major watershed. The major watersheds of Pennsylvania, along
with the locations of the "decrease" streams, are shown in Figure 3. A summary
of the data sorted by watershed is presented in Table 4. This arrangement of
the data does reveal some interesting trends, although their real meaning is
not at all certain. For example, the proportion of the identified streams
showing decreases in pH or alkalinity is quite low in the Allegheny River
drainage, but the proportion of "decrease" streams showing a decrease in fish
species number is quite high. The latter proportion is also quite high in the
Delaware and Susquehanna below Sunbury (main stem) drainages as well as in the
Monongahela-Youghiogheny system, although the data for the latter are very
limited. Since the latter three drainages are not areas which we suspected of
being very susceptible to acid precipitation, we are reluctant to speculate on
the meaning of these trends in the data.
Nevertheless, it seems clear that there is a definite overall trend of
many streams becoming more acidic and/or less alkaline, and losing some fish
populations at the same time. We hope that we or some other agency will be
13
-------
TABLE 3. WATER CHEMISTRY AND FISH POPULATION RECORDS SUMMARIZED BY PHYSIOGRAPHIC PROVINCE.
Total Number*
of Streams
Examined (Percent
1.
2.
3.
4.
Province
Coastal -Piedmont
Pocono- Anthracite
Ridge and Valley
Allegheny Plateau
Totals
of Grand Total)
55
45
62
152
314
(18%)
(14%)
(20%)
(48%)
Number
Decreasing in
pH, Al
or
13
14
23
57
107
kalinity,
Both
(24%)
(31%)
(37%)
(37%)
Number with
Fish Data
9
12
18
32
71
Number with
Decrease in
Fish
4
7
12
18
41
Species
(44%)
(58%)
(67%)
(56%)
Having two or more data points and no evidence of mine drainage.
TABLE 4. WATER CHEMISTRY AND FISH POPULATION RECORDS SUMMARIZED BY MAJOR WATERSHED.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
Watershed
(Numbers as in Figure 3)
Lake Erie
Ohio below Pittsburgh
Monongahel a- Youghi ogheny
Allegheny
West Branch Susquehanna
Susquehanna below Sunbury
Potomac
North Branch Susquehanna
Delaware
Totals
Total Number*
Locations
Examined
7
3
9
48
66
79
3
44
55
314
Number
Decreasing in
pH, Alkalinity,
or Both
0
1
4
14
29
28
0
15
16
107
(33%)
(44%)
(29%)
(44%)
(35%)
(34%)
(29%)
(34%)
Number with
Fish Data
0
0
4
9
13
23
0
10
12
71
Number with
Decrease in
Fish Species
0
0
3
7
6
14
0
4
7
41
(75%)
(78%)
(46%)
(61%)
(40%)
(58%)
(58%)
Having two or more data points and no evidence of mine drainage.
-------
80 Km
Figure 3. Stream map of Pennsylvania showing major drainage basins and locations of waters showing
decrease in pH or alkalinity or both. Key to numbers: 1) Lake Erie; 2) Ohio below
Pittsburgh; 3) Monongahela-Youghiogheny; 4) Allegheny; 5) West Branch Susquehanna;
6) Susquehanna below Sunbury; 7) Potomac; 8) North Branch Susquehanna; 9) Delaware (see Table
4). Scale 1:2,500,000.
-------
able to institute a program of investigation which will supplement the avail-
able data with information needed to document the current condition and trend
of many of these streams. We would be the first to admit that measurements of
pH and alkalinity on a single stream during one day or one year can be highly
variable; that it is very likely many of the data we used were generated in
different ways and with different degrees of accuracy; and that the two meas-
urements available in many of our cases are hardly enough to establish a
statistically valid trend. However, we feel that the weight of the evidence
becomes strong when so many of these cases, however imperfect, point in the
same direction. Many chances for mitigation of ecological "disasters" have
been lost because no one was willing to make a commitment until statistically
unquestionable proof was not only in hand but widely accepted. We hope that
will not be the case with the acid precipitation problem.
As a start in what we hope is the right direction, we have been experi-
menting with static limestone beds and other devices to mitigate the problems
caused by acidification of Pennsylvania's fragile mountain trout streams. In
the process of this work we have documented water quality in a number of
streams which approaches the lower lethal limit of pH for brook trout, one of
the most hardy of the native species. Since our study has been centered in
the Quehanna Wilderness Area of Clearfield County, most of these streams are
located there, but we can not believe that there are not others equally frag-
ile and/or degraded in other areas. Naturally air quality control will be
their best hope.
In Table 5 we present a list of streams identified either in our earlier
work or from the present study which illustrates the probable worst conditions
existing at present in Pennsylvania streams and lakes which are not affected
by acid mine drainage. We suggest that these streams should be watched
closely to document whatever changes in their ecosystems have or will occur.
16
-------
TABLE 5. SELECTED WATERS SHOWING SERIOUS SYMPTOMS OF ACIDIFICATION (data from
1978-1979; N = number of samples).
Name
Gifford Run
Mosquito Creek
Deer Creek
Pebble Run
Panther Run
Tioga River
Tuscarora Creek
*Allegheny River
*West Branch Dyberry Creek
Lower Duck Pond (Tributary
of Mosquito Creek)
Sandy Creek
Meeker Run
County
Clearfield
Clearfield
and Elk
Clearfield
Elk
Clearfield
Tioga
Juniata
Potter
Wayne
Clearfield
Clearfield
Clearfield
and Cameron
Mean pH (N)
(range)
5.26 .(26)
(4.6-5.9)
5.22 (13)
(4.7-5.9)
5.23 (10)
(4.8-5.5)
(4.66 (15)
(4.4-5.0)
5.26 (15)
(4.9-5.7)
6.85 (2)
(6.4-7.3)
8.03 (3)
(7.3-8.6)
8.15 (2)
(7.5-8.8)
7.65 (2)
(8.2-7.1)
5.26 (7)
(4.9-5.4)
5.33 (11)
(4.7-5.6)
4.8 (1)
(4.8)
Mean Alkalinity (N)
(range)
1.5 (12)
(0-9.1)
0.6 (5)
0-2.85)
0 (5)
(0-0)
0 (5)
(0-0)
0 (8)
(0-0)
7 (2)
(6-8)
61(3)
(28-83)
48.5 (2)
(12-85)
76.5 (2)
(66-87)
0 (3)
(0-0)
0.15 (12)
(0-1.81)
4.05 (1)
(4.05)
* These streams, while not exhibiting abnormally low pH or alkalinity, did
exhibit significant changes in these or in fish populations over the time
period examined, and thus will bear watching.
17
-------
REFERENCES
Aimer, B., W. Dickson, C. Eckstrom, E. Hornstrom, and U. Miller. 1974.
Effects of acidification on Swedish lakes. Ambio 3(1):30-36.
Beamish, R. J. , and H. H. Harvey. 1972. Acidification of the LaCloche Moun-
tain lakes, Ontario, and resulting fish mortalities. J. Fish. Res. Bd.
Canada 29(8):1131-1143.
Bender, P. M. 1978. Studies on the periphyton communities of two infertile
mountain streams with differing pH. M.S. Thesis, The Pennsylvania State
University, University Park, 42 pp.
Brosset, C. 1973. Air-borne acid. Ambio 2(l):2-9.
Carter, L. J. 1979. Uncontrolled S02 emissions bring acid rain. Science
204(4398):1179, 1181-1182.
Cooper, E. L. and C. C. Wagner. 1973. The effects of acid mine drainage on
fish populations. Pages 73-124 Ln R. L. Butler, E. L. Cooper, J. K.
Crawford, D. C. Hales, W. G. Kimmel and C. C. Wagner, Fish and food
organisms in acid mind waters of Pennsylvania. U.S. Env. Prot. Agency.
Ecol. Res. Ser., Rep. No. EPA-R3-73-032. U.S. Government Printing
Office, Washington, D.C. 158 pp.
Hale, A. B. 1978. A comparative study of the insect communities in two
woodland streams with differing pH, with notes on the growth and fecun-
dity of two species of Leuctra (Plecoptera). M.S. Thesis, The Pennsyl-
vania State University, University Park. 50 pp.
Johnson, N. M. , R. C. Reynolds and G. E. Likens. 1972. Atmospheric sulfur:
its effect on the chemical weathering of New England. Science 177(4148):
514-516.
Kellogg, W. W. , R. D. Cadle, E. R. Allen, A. L. Lazrus and E. A. Martell.
1972. The sulfur cycle. Science 175(4022):587-596.
Likens, G. E. and F. H. Bormann. 1974. Acid rain: a serious regional en-
vironmental problem. Science 184(4142):1176-1179.
Likens, G. E., R. F. Wright, J. N. Galloway and T. J. Butler. 1979. Acid
rain. Sci. Amer. 241(4):43-51.
Newman, L. 1975. Acidity in rainwater: has an explanation been presented?
Science 958(4191):957-958.
19
-------
Schofield, C. L. 1976. Acid precipitation: effects on fish. Ambio 5(5-6):
228-230.
Schofield, C. L. 1977. Acid precipitation's destructive effects on fish in
the Adirondacks. New York's Food Life Sci. 10(3):12-15.
Seip, H. M. and A. Tollan. 1978. Acid precipitation and other possible
sources for acidification of rivers and lakes. Sci. Total. Env. 10(3):
253-270.
Vermeulen, A. J. 1978. Acid precipitation in The Netherlands. Env. Sci.
Tech. 12(9):1016-1021.
Wright, R. F. 1976. Acid precipitation and its effects on freshwater eco-
systems: an annotated bibliography. Proc. 1st Int. Symp. Acid Precip.
For. Ecos. , U.S.D.A. Forest Serv. Gen Tech. Rep. NE-23:619-678.
20
-------
TECHNICAL REPORT DATA
(Please read Instructions on the reverse before completing}
1. REPORT NO.
EPA-6QO/3-80-012
3. RECIPIENT'S ACCESSION NO.
4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE
Probable Effects of Acid Precipitation on Pennsylvania
Waters
5. REPORT DATE
January 1980 issuing date
6. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE
7. AUTHOR(S)
Dean E. Arnold, Robert W. Light, and Valerie J. Dymond
8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NO.
3. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS
Pennsylvania Cooperative Fishery Research Unit
328 Mueller Laboratory
Jniversity Park, PA 16802
10. PROGRAM ELEMENT NO.
11. CONTRACT/GRANT NO.
B0835NAEX
12. SPONSORING AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS
Environmental Research Laboratory
J.S. Environmental Protection Agency
:orvallis, OR 97330
13. TY.PE OF REPORT^AND PERIOD COVERED
Final, Flay-October T979
14. SPONSORING AGENCY CODE
EPA/600/02
15. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES
the purpose of this project was to search for and identify any trends in water
:hemistry and fish communities in Pennsylvania waters which would indicate that acid
Drecipitation was affecting them adversely. No new data collection was to be included.
Five existing data bases, including original data collected by the authors, were
sxamined for the existence of water analyses from the same or nearby locations separated
ay at least one year. (Analyses involving known or suspected influence of acid mine
drainage were omitted.) Of a total of 983 analysis reports which were usable, there
re 314 cases with two or more such points. Of these 107 or 34% showed a decrease in
pH, alkalinity, or both. Average decrease in pH was 0.4 units with a maximum case of
.3 units. Average decrease in alkalinity was 15.1 mg/1 (as CaC03) with a maximum case
3f 105 mg/1. The average time span between earliest and latest sample was 8.5 years.
When the data were separated by physiographic provinces, it became apparent that
although the majority of the decreases occurred in streams on the relatively insoluble
ocks of the Allegheny Plateau, there were also many cases in the ridge-and-valley
province and other regions. Many of these decreases are to pH levels considered marg-
inal for growth and reproduction of trout and other fishes.
Seventy-one of the 107 analyses showing decreased pH or alkalinity included fish
collection data. In 40 of these cases (58%), the number of fish species present de-
creased as well.
7.
KEY WORDS AND DOCUMENT ANALYSIS
DESCRIPTORS
b.lDENTIFIERS/OPEN ENDED TERMS
COSATI Field/Group
Acidification, Precipitation, Stream
Pollution, Fisheries
Acid precipitation
Acid rain
Atmospheric deposition
08-H
18. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT
Release to Public
19. SECURITY CLASS (ThisReport)
Unclassified
21. NO. OF PAGES
20. SECURITY CLASS (Thispage)
Unclassifipd
_2L
22. PRICE
EPA Form 2220-1 (Rev. 4-77)
21
------- |