&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

-------