ORDES
PENNSYLVANIA BASELINE
Part 2 - Impact Assessment Data Base
Chapter 1 - Characteristics and Human Utilization
of Natural Ecosystems
Section 7 - Aquatic Ecology
PHASE II
OHIO RIVER DASIK ENERGY STUDY
-------
June 1979
PENNSYLVANIA BASELINE
Part 2 - Impact Assessment Data Base
Chapter 1 - Characteristics and Human Utilization
of Natural Ecosystems
Section 7 - Aquatic Ecology
by
George P. Kay
Jan L. Sykora
Maurice A. Shapiro
University of Pittsburgh
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15261
Prepared for
Ohio River Basin Energy Study (ORBES)
Grant Number R805608-01-3
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
2.1.7. AQUATIC ECOLOGY PAGE
2.1.7.1 GENERAL OVERVIEW ................ ..................... 1
A. Historical Background ------------------------------- 1
B. Past Imoacts ---------------------------------------- j
C. Current Status -------------------------------------- 2
2.1.7.2 THE MONONGAHELA RIVER ................................. 3
A. Phytoplankton - ------------------------------------ 3
B. Periphyton ------ - --- - ------ ------------------- j,
C. Zooplankton --------------- - ------ - - - ------------ L
D. Aquatic Macrophytes ------ - ---- - --------------------- 5 .
E. Macrobenthos ---------------------------------------- 5
F. Fish ............................................ - 6
G. Ecologically Important Basin Streams ---------------- ^
"2.1.7.3 THE ALLEGHENY RIVER ..................................... 7
A. Phytoplankton --------------------------------------- 7
B. Periphyton ----- - ------------------------ - ----------- 7
C. Zooplankton ----------------------------------------- 8
D. Aquatic Macrophytes --------------------------------- 8
E. Macrobenthos -------- - ----------------------------- 8
F. Fish ................................................ 8
G. Ecologically Important Basin Streams ---------------- ?
2.1.7.^4 THE UPPER OHIO RIVER (PA)
A. Phytoplankton --------------------------------------- 9
B. Periphyton ---------------------- ..... --------------- ?
C. Zooplankton ----------------------------------------- 10
0. Aquatic Macrophytes --------------------------------- '.0
E. Macrobenthos ---------------------------------------- '0
F. Fish ............ - .................... ----- ....... 11
G. Ecologically Important Sub-basin Streams ------------ 11
2.1.7.5 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .................... - .................. 11
REFERENCES ..... -------------- ..... ----- ..... - ........ --------- 32
APPENDIX - Habitat Preferences of the Fishes of Western ---------- A-l
Pennsylvania
-------
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure No. Title
2.1.7.-I Monongahela River Total Phytoplankton 25
2.1.7."2 Composition of Monongahela River Phyto- 26
plankton Community - July 1975
2.1.7.~3 Numbers and Composition of Attached 27
Growths, Upper Ohio River System,
May - June 1970
2.1.7.-^ Number of Periphyton Genera in the 28
Attached Growth Communities of the Upper
Ohio River System, May - June 1970
2.1.7.-5 Quantity of Chlorophyll in the Attached 29
Growth Communities of the Upper Ohio
River System, May - June 1970
2.1.7.-6 Benthic Fauna Collected in Rock Basket 30
Samplers, Upper Ohio River Basin, May-
June 1970
2.1.7.~7 Relative Diversity of Aquatic Fauna in 31
the Pennsylvania ORBES Counties
ii
-------
LIST OF TABLES
Table No. Title Page
2.1.7--1 Impacted Fish Species of the Upper 13
Ohio River Basin
2.1.7.~2 Pennsylvania Fish Commission List of 1A
Endangered, Threatened, or Status
Indeterminate Fishes
2.1.7.-3 Major Phytoplankton Genera of the 15-16
Monongahela, Lower Allegheny, and Upper
Ohio Rivers
2.1.7.-^ Zooplankton Taxa of the Monongahela 17
River - April 1975
2.1.7.-5 Aquatic Macrophytes of the Monongahela 18
River - Summer 1975
2.1.7--6 Density of Benthic Macro!nvertebrates 19
Collected at Monongahela River Stations
During April 1975
2.1.7--7 Summary of Fish Sampling Data from the 20
Monongahela River 1967 - 1973
2.1.7.-8 Fishery Survey Results for Reaches of 21-22
the Monongahela and Ohio Rivers in PA
2.1.7.-9 Aquatic Macrophytes of the Allegheny 23
River - 1977
2.1.7.-10 Species'of Fish Collected from Pools 2k
3, 5, and 7 of the Allegheny River,
1975-1977
i i
-------
2.1.7. AQUATIC ECOLOGY
2.1.7.1. GENERAL OVERVIEW
A. Historical Background
Any retrospective characterization of the aquatic ecology of the Pennsyl-
vania ORBES region to colonial times must rely heavily upon scattered histor-
ical documents that make reference to fish fauna. A review of such documents
has led Lachner (1) to conclude that "...the fish heritage in the Upper Ohio
Basin was extremely rich. Dense schools of fish existed in these waters.
Early explorers and pioneers traversing the Alleghenies found the streams
teeming with life and these provided them with a ready source of excellent
food." The seventeen species listed by Lachner (Table 2.1.7.-1), although
not all suitable as table fare, were reported as occurring in the Upper Ohio
Basin prior to 1900. Many of these species probably never were exceedingly
numerous in the basin. Others were reported as being common to abundant in
colonial times. About one-third of these seventeen species still inhabit
that portion of the basin in Pennsylvania. Nonetheless, Lachner notes of
this list that "...the general data warrant the thesis that there has been a
great reduction in numbers and the extirpation of many forms." Indeed, many
of the species currently categorized by the Pennsylvania Fish Commission as
"endangered," "threatened," or "status indeterminate" (see Table 2.T.7.-2)
were once inhabitants of the Ohio River Basin. Habitat preferences for most
basin fishes are outlined in Appendix A.
B. Past Impacts
Relatively little eighteen and nineteenth century information exists that
would help characterize the plankton, periphyton, and macrobenthos of western
Pennsylvania waterways. It has been reported (4, 5) that several mussel beds
containing various species occurred in the Allegheny, Monongahela, and Ohio
Rivers in 1805. However, such interesting tidbits of historical information
are too scarce to provide a complete description of past conditions. A more
broadly based historical characterization can be arrived at by considering
the probable ecological impacts of channelization, the first major man-induced
alteration of the river system. Prior to the construction of locks and dams,
the "Three Rivers" consisted of alternating reaches of sluggish, deep pools
and extremely shallow riffles (see Section 2.1.5.-Surface Hydrology). It can
be hypothesized that the aquatic biota of that time was essentially composed
of species typical of free-flowing, temperate zone rivers. Conversely, due
to the present navigation system, the Ohio, Monongahela, and lower Allegheny
Rivers ecologically behave much as a series of narrow connected impoundments.
The navigable rivers are currently inhabited by lentic (lake-like) biota;
moreover, they are essentially devoid of forms adapted exclusively to riffles.
The following trends are at least partially due to the consequences of lock
-1-
-------
and dam construction, dredging, and snag-cleaning:
a.) Increased plankton biomass
b.) Increased zooplankton diversity
c.) Decreased aquatic macrophyte abundance
d.) Decreased benthos diversity
e.) Decreased fish diversity
Diversity decreased in benthos and fish are largely due to the fact that
the aforementioned activities create rather uniform physical conditions
throughout the rivers, thereby eliminating habitats such as riffles and shoals.
The many categories of water pollutants in the Pennsylvania ORBES region
have further reduced the species diversity of aquatic organisms inhabiting
the major rivers. Many pollution sensitive, lentic species which could con-
ceivably exist with the constraints of the navigation system are nonetheless
absent from the degraded reaches of the navigable rivers. Many free-flowing
polluted tributary streams are likewise inhabited exclusively by pollution-
tolerant organisms. The original aquatic biota of the basin were adapted to
clear streams with gravel or sand substrates (1). However, in the late 1800's
and early 1900's intensive lumbering resulted in dramatically increased ero-
sion rates with an accompanying siltation of many streams (see Section 2.1.4.-
Terrestrial Ecology). During the twentieth century acid mine drainage has
been the big problem, rendering receiving waters acidic and blanketing their
benthic communities with iron hydroxide precipitate (see Section 2.1.6.-Water
Quality). Oxygen-demanding domestic wastewaters, toxic industrial wastewaters,
and thermal effluents from power plants have also contributed to past impacts
on the aquatic life of the Pennsylvania ORBES region.
Various miscellaneous factors have also altered the ecology of western
Pennsylvania waterways. An often overlooked factor is the introduction of
non-indigenous fish species. Thousands of hatchery reared rainbow trout
(Salmo ga'irdneri) (a species native to the Pacific Coast), and brown trout
(Salmo tfutta) (a species native to Europe) are released in the Pennsylvania
ORBES region every year. Competition and predation by such stocked trout
doubtlessly alters the ecology of many small, cold water tributaries of the
major rivers. Such streams are often stocked in numbers which are orders of
magnitude beyond their natural carrying capacity. Moreover, preordained
times and locations for trout stocking are published events in area newspapers,
thereby producing a large crowd of fishermen which often cause additional
adverse impacts (6). Carp (Cyprinus carpio), goldfish (Carassius auratus),
eastern banded killifish (Fundulus d. diaphanus) and mummichog (f_. hetero-
clitus macro]epidotus) were all introduced into the basin in the pasTI C~arp
are especially significant in that they are often the dominant fish species
in polluted reaches of western Pennsylvania waterways, out-competing native
benthophages.
C. Present Status
Biologists currently responsible for assessing the water quality of west-
ern Pennsylvania's rivers are acutely aware of the paucity of detailed inform-
ation regarding the composition, diversity, and productivity of aquatic
-2-
-------
communities in the Upper Ohio River System. Furthermore, short-term studies
which are undertaken often produce raw data that defies extensive interpreta-
tion due to the poor quality of the historical data base. Nonetheless, one
trend seems obvious-the major rivers of the Pennsylvania ORBES region are
currently undergoing a biotic recovery from the pollutional insults incurred
during the past century. Only-a few technical reports (7, 8, 9), mention or
allude to this recovery. (More extensive documentation of this phenomenon
can be witnessed in the bait shops and taverns of southwestern Pennsylvania,
where the conversation often concerns catches of warm water game fishes from
river reaches that were formerly devoid of fish or inhabited chiefly by poll-
ution-tolerant rough species.) Indeed, as far as the general public is con-
cerned, fish species composition and abundance are perhaps the most frequently
used criteria for gauging the water quality of a river (10). The Youghiogheny,
lower Allegheny, and upper Monongahela Rivers are good examples of recovery
areas.
The reasons for -the return of desirable aquatic life forms to the region
are manifold. Past mine drainage abatement projects of the Pennsylvania
Department of Environmental Resources have reclaimed a significant number of
streams. The Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments (PL 92-500) have
had profound ramifications in improving the quality of municipal and industrial
effluents. Furthermore, several Corps of Engineers reservoirs are now oper-
ated with water quality considerations incorporated into their release schedules.
2.1.7.2. THE MONONGAHELA RIVER
A. Phytoplankton
Two water quality surveys of the Monongahela River were conducted by the
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (8) in the summer of 1975. The initial survey
was performed in June during an intermediate flow regime (5,000-12,000 cfs*)
at which time the phytoplankton concentrations of the various reaches were
found to'range between 64 and 1,439 cells/ml at a depth of one meter. The
mean concentration at all of the sampling stations was calculated to be 515
cells/ml. A follow-up survey initiated in July during low flow conditions
(650-1,800 cfs*) measured total phytoplankton concentrations ranging between
31 and 6,571 cells/ml along the length of the river with an average of 2,173
cells/ml for all stations (see Fig. 2.1.7.-1).
Microscopic examination of the samples collected during both 1975 water
quality surveys disclosed the presence of 108 different phytoplankton taxa
in the Monongahela River. This figure undoubtedly represents a somewhat
conservative estimate of all Monongahela River algae species since several
individuals were only keyed to the generic level and additional species pro-
bably went undetected because of their bionomy (e.g. deep water forms and
species atypical of the summer community) or simply because of sampling error,
The observed phytoplankton community was found to contain representative
species from each of the five major taxonomic divisions; however, the euglen-
ophytes and pyrrophytes were few in numbers of individuals and species. The
green algae Ankistrodesmus falcatus and Ankistrodesmus convolutus and the
blue-green alga Schizothrix calcicola were found to be numerically dominant
*extremes of mean daily flow along the entire length of the river.
-3-
-------
in most reaches of the river. During the low flow survey diatom populations
peaked at the headwaters and mouth of the Monongahela. The headwater peak
was dominated by pennate forms such as Synedra acus and Nitzschia acicularis.
The diatom peak observed at the river's mouth consisted largely of centric
forms such as Melosira granulata and Cyclotella menenghiniana.
Other numerically important phytoplankters of the Monongahela River are
Actinastrum hantzschii, Scenedesmus quadricauda, and Merismopedia glauca.
A list of phytoplankton genera recently identified from the "Three Rivers"
is provided in Table 2.1.7.-3.
Algological analyses performed during the low flow survey are deemed to
be especially valuable since the "biological zones" of the Monongahela River
tend to manifest themselves during the critical water quality situation
attendant to such flows. Williams (11) has noted that algological field
studies performed during low flow are more meaningful, since phytoplankton
populations can develop without the devastating influence of high velocity.
During the 1975 Corps of Engineers (8) low flow survey abrupt decreases in
total phytoplankton concentration were noted between river miles 35 and 24
(see Fig. 2.1.7.-1), a reach in which the Monongahela River water is used
and warmed by the Mitchell and Elrama fossil fueled power plants.
The chemical analyses performed concurrently with the phytoplankton
studies of the July low flow survey revealed the presence of acid mine drain-
age in the reach between river mile 90 and.60. The chemistry of this reach
at low flow is governed largely by acid contributions from the Cheat River
(see Section 2.1.6.-Water Quality). The reach was characterized by low total
phytoplankton concentrations (see Fig. 2.1.7.-1) with a community dominated
by Ankistrodesmus (see Fig. 2.1.7.-2). Populations of acid sensitive blue-
green algae were noticeably small in this reach.
B. Periphyton
Attached growths were collected by the U.S. EPA from a station 0.8 miles
upstream of the Monongahela's mouth in the spring of 1970 (12). This reach
of the river receives substantial industrial wastewater discharges from the
steel industry and such effluents influence the water quality of the reach
(see Section 2.1.7.6-Water Quality). The periphyton of this reach was found
to consist primarily of pollution tolerant species of blue-green algae. Re-
lative to other concurrently sampled stations in the Upper Ohio River Basin,
the periphyton of the lower Monongahela River station appeared to have an
average cellular density, a low generic diversity and a low biomass (see
Figs. 2.1.7.-3, 4, and 5).
C. Zooplankton
Limited zooplankton sampling was conducted by the Army Corps of Engineers
(13) at three Monongahela River stations 1n April of 1975. Nine different
zooplankton taxa were identified, five of these were rotifers (see Table
2.1.7.-4). These grab samples probably represent a conservative estimate of
total zooplankton species since copepod nauplii and calanoid copepodites were
not even keyed to the generic level. Moreover, the cool water temperatures
-4-
-------
and high turbidities typical of April undoubtedly serve to limit rotifer
populations, which are generally the principal component of river zooplankton
(14, 15).
D. Aquatic Macrophytes
Clarkson and Moore (16) identified twelve species of aquatic macrophytes
in the Tygart Valley River, West Fork River, and West Virginia portion of the
Monongahela River during the summers of 1965 and 1966. Their statistical
correlations of physico-chemical and biological data demonstrated that the
distribution of aquatic macrophytes within the upper basin was regulated by
substrate type, phosphate content of the substrate, and the degree of water-
level fluctuation. Moreover, the environmental perturbations caused by acid
mine drainage did not exhibit any statistically significant effect on the
distribution of these plants.
A superficial survey of aquatic macrophytes along the entire length of
the Monongahela River was conducted by the Corps of Engineers in the summer
of 1975 (8). Eleven of Clarkson and Moore's original twelve species were
observed; furthermore, eight additional species were detected at this time
(see Table 2.1.7.-5). Burweed (Soarganium sp.). arrowhead (Sagittaria lati-
folia). great bulrush (Scirpus validus). soft rush (Juncus effusus). and
spikerushes (Eleocharis sp.) were the most commonly observed species. Emer-
gent macrophyte communities were found to be abundant on the exposed mud
flats of the L/D 3 and L/D 7 Pools. Both of these pools are impounded by
fixed crest dams which permit fluctuation of the pool elevations. In pools
behind gated dams the water levels are better controlled; consequently, sub-
mersed and floating leaved macrophytes are more common than emergent forms
which under such conditions are essentially restricted to the mouths of tri-
butary streams. The 1975 survey disclosed that submersed macrophytes were
most common in the Maxwell Pool, a relatively transparent pool impounded by
a gated dam.
E. Macrobenthos
Relative to the other benthic communities of the Upper Ohio River System,
the macrobenthos of the lower Monongahela River may be characterized by a low
species diversity (see Fig. 2.1.7.-6). Several field studies (12, 17, 18, 19)
performed between 1960 and 1970 inclusive have noted this situation and have
described a community that is generally dominated by pollution-tolerant
midges such as Cricotopus bicinctus gr., C_. exilis gr., C_. trifasciatus gr.,
C_. junus, Polypedilum ophiodes and Chironomus riparius have also been reported
as typical benthos of lower Monongahela River. Benthological samples collect-
ed in 1975 at three stations along the entire length of the Monongahela River
were likewise numerically dominated by pollution-tolerant oligochaetes and
chironomids (13). The samples revealed a downstream trend of decreasing
species diversity and organism density (see Table 2.1.7.-6).
The substrate of the lower Monongahela consists of soft mud and sand with
certain areas downstream of McKeesport blanketed by oily sludges originating
from steel mills. This situation is not deemed to be conducive to the develop-
ment of a diverse benthic fauna.
-5-
-------
F. Fish
The Monongahela River was originally inhabited by a diverse assemblage
of freshwater fishes, including many pollution-sensitive species. Fish sampl-
ing performed in 1886 by Evermann and Bellman (20) near Pennsylvania-West
Virginia border detected some forty different species. However, water pollu-
tion derived from intensive coal mining during the first half of the twentieth
century contributed heavily to the ruination of this fishery (1). Moreover,
industrial wastewater effluents in the lower Monongahela have further intens-
ified the trend toward a decreased biotic diversity. Many reaches of the
river, therefore, became either devoid of fish life or populated exclusively
by pollution-tolerant species.
The fish populations of the upper Monongahela River are still subjected
to environmental stress from acid mine drainage. Since 1967, the EPA and its
predecessor agencies have conducted five fish population surveys at the Maxwell
Locks and Dams (river mile 61.2), using rotenone in the lock chambers. Inter-
pretation of this data is tenuous due to the few collections made and the
questionable representativeness of the sampling technique. Nonetheless, the
data do suggest a biotic recovery in this reach of the river. In 1967"no fish
were captured and in 1968 only one small bluegill sunfish (Lepomis macrochirus)
was taken. In 1969 and 1970 the standing crop increased slightly. However,
pollution-tolerant species such as brown bullhead (Ictalurus nebulosus) and
sunfishes (Lepomis sp.) were dominant. The sampling program at Maxwell Lock
and Dam in 1973 produced results that Preston (7) believes are indicative of
such biotic recovery. Total number of fishes, their standing crop, and species
diversity were all found to have increased substantially. More importantly,
many of the fishes captured at this time were pollution-sensitive species such
as largemouth bass (Micropterus salmoides). channel catfish (Ictalurus punctatus),
and emerald shiners (Notropis a'therinoides). Table 2.1.7.-7 presents the
changes in abundance and diversity detected during each of the five surveys.
Table 2.1.7.-8 lists the various fish species captured. -
The favorable results of the 1973 Maxwell fish sampling, in addition to
existing physico-chemical water quality data, prompted the Pennsylvania Fish
Commission to implement a warm water fish stocking program in the upper por-
tion of the Monongahela River. At the present time, a respectable warm water
fishery exists between the Pennsylvania-West Virginia border and the town of
Monongahela in Washington County, Pennsylvania (21),
Pollutional loads added to the lower Monongahela River consist of indus-
trial wastewaters, domestic wastewaters, and urban runoff. Acid mine drainage
does enter the river in this reach, but not with the same severity as in the
upper reaches. Fish surveys comparable to those conducted at Maxwell Lock
and Dam were also performed at Lock No. 2 in the lower Monongahela River Criver
mile 11.2). The results of the surveys (1967-1973) at this station, although
exhibiting an increase in standing crop, demonstrated very little improvement
in the quality of the fishery (see Table 2.1.7.-7). Collections were dominated
by pollution-tolerant species such as carp and brown bullhead (see Table 2.1,7.-
8).
-6-
-------
G. Ecologically Important Basin Streams
The Tenmile Creek Basin, Dunkard Creek Basin, and the lower Youghiogheny
River support significant populations of warm water game and pan fishes (21).
Smallmouth bass (Micropterus dolomieu) constitute the main warm water angling
attraction in these streams. The most important cold water fisheries are
located in the Youghiogheny River Basin in Fayette County, Somerset County,
and a small corner of Westmoreland County. Big Sandy Creek, Little Sandy
Creek, White's Creek, Laurel Hill Creek, Indian Creek, Dunbar Creek and the
Upper Youghiogheny main stem are among the most significant cold water streams
(22).
2.1.7.3. THE ALLEGHENY RIVER
A. Phytoplankton
Algological surveys were performed by the Corps of Engineers (23) in the
navigable reach* of the Allegheny River during an intermediate flow regime in
August 1976, an intermediate flow regime in June 1977, and a high flow regime
in July 1977. The average total phytoplankton concentration for the entire
navigable reach was determined to be in excess of 6,500 cells/ml.
The Allegheny River phytoplankton community is considerably more diverse
than that of the Monongahela River. A total of 217 algal taxa were identified
in the navigable reach of the Allegheny during 1976 and 1977. The greatest
algal diversity (118 taxa) for any single navigation pool was detected at
the L/D 9 Pool. Centric diatoms and chlorophytes were found to dominate the
Allegheny River phytoplankton community. The most common genera were Cyclo-
tella. Melosira. Asterionella. Scenedesmus. Dictyosphaerium. and a small
unidentified coccoid chlorophyte resembling Palmella.
The significant biological zonation noted by the Corps of Engineers (8)
in the Monongahela River was not observed in the Allegheny River (23). How-
ever, a trend toward decreased chlorophytes in relation to centric diatoms
was observed near the middle of the navigable reach. Moreover, acid-sensitive,
blue-green algae were observed to paradoxically increase in a reach polluted
by acid mine drainage derived from the Kiskiminetas River; it was hypothesized
that this phenomenon may be a response to increased nutrient levels.
B. Periphyton
Studies conducted between 1975 and 1977 revealed that the lower Allegheny
River periphyton community at New Kensington, Clinton, and Kittanning is com-
prised almost entirely of diatoms; however, a few chlorophytes (Oedogonium,
Scenedesmus, and Pediastrum) were also noted as occurring at these locales
(24)! In contrast, a study conducted by EPA (12) in 1970 near the mouth of the
Allegheny described the periphyton community as consisting primarily of blue-
green algae with several chlorophytes and very few diatoms (see Figs. 2.1.7.-
3, 4, and 5).
*lower 72 miles
-7-
-------
C. Zooplankton
Zooplankton collected in September of 1975 near New Kensington, Clinton,
and Kittanning consisted of eight taxa of Cladocera, three taxa of copepods,
twelve taxa of rotifers, and two taxa of protozoans (24). The total zoo-
plankton concentrations at these three stations ranged between 409 and 1,190
individuals/M3. The most common cladocerons were Pleuroxus sp. and Bosmina
longirostris. Most of the copepods detected were in the larval stage of
development (nauplii). Kellicottia bostom'ensis and Kellicottia sp. accounted
for a high numerical percentage of the rotifers.
D. Aquatic Macrophytes
In 1977 twelve taxa of vascular aquatic plants were identified in the
L/D 3 and L/D 6 Pools of the Allegheny River (25) (see Table 2.1.7.-9).
Sagittaria-EIeocharis communities were found to be common in backwater areas
with silt and soft mud bottoms. An especially extensive Sagi ttaria-Eleochari s
community was noted in the L/D 3 Pool near Tarentum. Justicia was cited as
the most common aquatic vascular in the lower Allegheny; it was typically
found growing on lightly silted, gravel shoals and around islands. Justicia
was noted as being abundant in areas where the river channel was braided,
especially in the L/D 6 Pool near Ford City. Koryak (25) notes that Justicia
is absent from the Monongahela River; he speculates that this situation is
due to the fact that the Monongahela, unlike the Allegheny, "has a generally
undiversified ditch-like channel and no islands."
E. Macrobenthos
The Federal Water Pollution Control Administration sampled the Allegheny
River for benthic macroinvertebrates in 1966 and 1967 (18, 26). Samples
collected upstream of the confluence of the main stem with the Kiskiminetas
River generally contained numerous benthic organisms from many invertebrate
taxa, a.situation indicative of a relatively unpolluted waterway. Hydropsychid
caddisflies were numerically dominant 1n many of the samples. In contrast,
samples collected downstream of the confluence with the acid mine drainage-
degraded Kiskiminetas River (see Section 2.1.6.-Water Quality) contained few
organisms and were dominated by pollution-tolerant chironomids and oligo-
chaetes. Samples collected near Pittsburgh in the spring of 1970 (12) like-
wise revealed a sparse, undiversified benthic community (see Fig. 2.1.7.-6).
Recent studies conducted by the Corps of Engineers (24) 1n 1975 and 1977
between river miles 18 and 51 revealed that chironomids are the most prevalent
group of Allegheny River macrofaenthos, with Procladius sp. being the most
abundant individual. However, tubificid worms generally constituted the
majority of the biomass. The mayflies Stenonema interpunctatum, S.. nepotellum,
and Hexagenia limbata were also often detected, as were the caddisflies
Hydropsyche betteni. Neurecllpsis sp., and Nyctlophylax sp.
F. Fish
Fish sampling conducted from 1975 to 1977 at six stations between river
miles eighteen and fifty-one revealed the presence of thirty-two species of
-8-
-------
fish in the Allegheny River (24). Various species of game fish including
largemouth bass, smallmouth bass, walleye, northern pike, and channel catfish
were captured during this survey (see Table 2.1.7.-10). Over the past several
years there has been a surge of angling interest along this reach. The authors
are aware of significant catches of walleye and smallmouth bass from "fishing
holes" near Kittanning (r.m. 45.5), Acmetonia (r.m. 14.5), and even as far
downstream as Sharpsburg (r.m. 6.6).
G. Ecologically Important Basin Streams
The majority of ecologically important Allegheny River tributaries drain
the northern-most Pennsylvania ORBES counties. Tionesta, Sugar, and East
Hickory Creeks in Forest County, Oennison Run in Venango County, Mill Creek,
School house Run, and the North Fork in Jefferson County are just a few of the
streams supporting populations of native brook trout. In the southern portion
of the basin (Westmoreland County) Powder-mill Run and Loyalhanna Creek are
cold water streams of special importance. The ecology of Powdermill Run has
been extensively studied by the staff and associates of the Carnegie Museum
of Natural History, consequently, this stream represents a "natural laboratory"
for which there already exists a large data base. Loyalhanna Creek is"of
particular importance because, as noted in Section 2.1.4.-Terrestrial Ecology,
it contains one of the few remaining hellbender populations in southwestern
Pennsylvania.
Valuable warm water fisheries of the Allegheny River Basin occur in
French Creek, Buffalo Creek, and the Allegheny main stem. French Creek is
biologically unique in that it harbors the most diverse assemblage of fresh-
water mussels in the Pennsylvania ORBES region.
2.1.7,4 THE UPPER OHIO RIVER (.PA)
Ecological conditions in the first forty miles of the Ohio River will be
dealt wtth briefly herein, since the "ORBES Preliminary Technology Assessment
Report" (27) includes a biological overview of the entire river.
A. Phytoplankton
Field studies of the Upper Ohio River (28, 29) have described a phyto-
plankton community dominated by Melosira. Scenedesmus, Ankistrodesmus, Chlamy-
domonas, Cyclotella, and Dictyosphaerium. Surveys conducted by the Corps of
Engineers (.29) in the summer and fall of 1974 indicate that during inter-
mediate flow regimes the total phytoplankton concentration ranges between two
and four thousand cells per milliliter. During high flows the community may
be reduced and/or diluted to a few hundred cells per milliliter or less. The
available data indicate that phytoplankton concentrations tend to be greatest
in the lower sections of navigation pools where velocities are low.
B. Periphyton
Attached growths collected fay the EPA in the spring of 1970 (12) were
dominated by blue-green algae which comprised 50-86% of the cell count at all
-9-
-------
but one of the sampling stations (see Fig. 2.1.7.-3). Diatoms were also sign-
ificant community members, comprising 8-32% of the cell count at, likewise,
all but one station. The station deviating from the normal blue-green algae/
diatom phycoperiphyton assemblage is located immediately downstream of the
Allegheny County Sanitary Authority's (ALCOSAN's) wastewater effluent. At
this station green algae comprised fifty percent of the cell count, a chloro-
phyte density greater than those observed at all other stations. More impor-
tantly, the conspicuous presence of protozoans* downstream of ALCOSAN (13%
of the cell count) suggests that this waste source induces observable changes
in the composition of the periphyton community. Increases in cellular density
and chlorophyll content further downstream of ALCOSAN (see Figs. 2.1.7.-3 and
2.1.7.-5) were attributed to nutrient enrichment from this point source.
Approximately fifteen miles downstream of the outfall these effects begin to
reverse themselves. It should be noted however, that these observations are
somewhat dated and that ALCOSAN's conversion to secondary treatment in 1974
may have eliminated or lessened spatial differences in the composition of
attached communities.
C. Zooplankton
The Beaver Valley Power Station's pre-operational environmental impact
studies characterized the zooplankton community of the Upper Ohio River (river
miles 31-40) as being dominated by rotifers. Although cladocerans and cope-
pods were frequently detected, rotifers always comprised at least 33% (by
numbers) of the zooplankton and usually constituted over 50% (30). Aperiodic
plankton analyses performed by the authors over the past nine years confirms
this rotifer dominance for the entire Upper Ohio River in Pennsylvania. Common
rotifers include species of Brachionus, Keratella, Polyarthra, and Synchaeta.
Cladocerans consist mainly of Bosmina. Diaphanosoma, Ceriodaphnia, and Moina
while copepods are represented by Cyclops, Tropocyclops, Mesocyclops, and
Diaptomus.
0. Aquatic Macrophytes
Heavy industrialization along the banks of the Upper Ohio River has
greatly reduced the availability of sites for the growth of aquatic vasculars.
Consequently, emergent macrophytes are relatively scarce. A survey conducted
by the Corps of Engineers in 1975 identified only ten narrow bands of signi-
ficant growth on the reach within the Pittsburgh Corps' District (31). These
bands were generally located at sites on the back channel sides of islands.
Sagittaria and Eleocharis were identified as the most common genera although
Sparganium was frequently detected in deeper water.
E. Macrobenthos
The most recent studies (12, 30) indicate that the benthic fauna of the
Upper Ohio River is composed primarily of oligochaetes with lesser numbers of
the midges Psectrocladius sp., Cricotopus gr. bicinctus, and C_. trifasciatus.
Minor components include the amphipod Crangonyx sp., the crayfish Qrconectes
sanborni, the damselfly Enallagma exulans, and several other miscellaneous
invertebrates. The EPA field study of 1970 (12) noted that oligochaetes
were most abundant at three stations (see Fig. 2.1.7.-6) immediately downstream
*Protozoans thrive on bacteria and minute sewage particles.
-10-
-------
of significant sources of iron-bearing wastewater; it was hypothesized that
iron precipitates and filamentous iron-bacteria provide a more suitable sub-
strate for these burrowing organisms than bare rocks.
F. Fish
Lock chamber studies conducted annually 1968-1970 and 1975-1976 at
Dashields Lock and Dam (river mile 13.3) have disclosed the presence of thirty-
four species of fish (see Table 2.1.7.-8} for the entire period of examination;
however, only sixteen to nineteen species have been captured in any given year.
Data from each survey year reveals that the Dashields sampling station typically
exhibits a lower fish species diversity than downstream stations. Along the
entire length of the Ohio River, eighty-two species of fish have been captured
during the history of these surveys. Several individual downstream stations
have yielded more than forty species for the period of examination and in
excess of thirty species for individual years (32). Moreover, fish biomass
estimates for the period of record at Dashields shows that 76% of the biomass
is composed of rough species, whereas at most downstream stations these
pollution-tolerant species constituted less than 50% of the biomass.
G. Ecologically Important Sub-basin Streams
Most streams in the Upper Ohio River Basin would be incapable of support-
ing a naturally reproducing cold water fishery and much of its associated
biota even if all pollutional insults were removed tomorrow (33). This seem-
ing pecularity is due to the hydrologic, topographic, and geologic character-
istics of the land area which favor low gradient, warm water streams. The
notable exception to this generalization is the portion of Slippery Rock
Creek and its tributaries located in McConnells Mill State Park (Lawrence
County). Several warm water streams are, however, significant in that they
support natural populations of small mouth bass and stocked populations of
walleye and tiger muskellunge. Areas of particular importance are:
a).- Connoquenessing Creek in Butler, Lawrence, and Beaver Counties
b). The lower reaches of Slippery Rock Creek in Lawrence County
c). The Wheeling and Buffalo Creek Watersheds in Greene and Washington
Counties
d). Portions of the Shenango River in Mercer and Lawrence Counties
2.1.7.4 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The "mishmash" of taxonomic names so typical of environmental impact
statements, ecological baseline documents, and natural resource inventories
provides lengthy lists of species, which generally defy analysis and therefore
prove to be nonutilitarian. Conversely, detailed statistical analysis of
aquatic ecological data for the entire Pennsylvania ORBES region is not only
impractical, but dangerous, since field studies are aperiodic and often cursory.
Perhaps the most logical method of simplifying this portion of the baseline
document is to rank areas as to their relative diversity of aquatic life. For
example, most western Pennsylvania fishermen are aware of the following trend:
-11-
-------
QUALITY OF SPORT FISHERY
Upper Allegheny River > Lower Allegheny River > Upper
Monongahela River > Ohio River in Pa. > Lower Monongahela
River
Relative rankings become more difficult to assign as one considers other forms
of aquatic biota and tributary streams. Nonetheless, in Figure 2.1.7.-7 we
attempt to make some generalizations for entire counties based upon the diver-
sity of fish, other fully aquatic vertebrates, freshwater mollusks, and
aquatic insects in the flowing waters of western Pennsylvania. These relative
rankings are based upon our field collections, and the field experience of
friends and colleagues in the region, as well as species information provided
in recent reports of state and federal environmental agencies.
As can be seen in Figure 2.1.7.-7, the most diverse aquatic communities
are located in sparsely populated areas to the north and east of Pittsburgh.
-12-
-------
TABLE 2.1.7.-1
IMPACTED* FISH SPECIES OF THE UPPER OHIO RIVER BASIN
paddlefish (Polyodon spathula) bowfin (Amia calva)
lake sturgeon (Acipenser fulvescens) goldeye (Hiodon alosoides)
shovelnose sturgeon (Scaphirhynchus smallmouth buffalo (Ictiobus bubalus)
platorhynchus)
river shiner (Notropis blennius)
shortnose gar (Lepisosteus platostomus)
silvery minnow (Hybognathus nuchans)
highfin sucker (Carpiodes velifer)
blue catfish (Ictalurus furcatus)
river carpsucker (Carpiodes carpio)
American eel (Anquilla rostrata)
Blue sucker (Cycle'ptus elongatus)
freshwater drum (Aplodinotus grunniens)
sturgeon sucker (Catostomus catostomus)
sauger (Stizostedion canadense)
*Hostorical evidence suggests that these species have undergone population
reductions or extirpations since colonial times.
SOURCE: Adapted from Lachner (1).
13
-------
TABLE 2.1.7.-2
PENNSYLVANIA FISH COMMISSION
LIST OF ENDANGERED (1), THREATENED (2),
OR STATUS INDETERMINATE (3) FISHES
Common Name
*Shortnose sturgeon
Lake sturgeon
Threespine stickleback
*Blue pike
Eastern sand darter
Northern brook lamprey
Silver lamprey
Sea lamprey
Atlantic sturgeon
Spotted gar
Cisco
Lake whitefish
Southern redbelly dace
Gravel chub
Hornyhead chub
Silver chub
River shiner
Blackchin shiner
Blacknose shiner
Redfin shiner
Spotted sucker
Black bullhead
Mountain madtorn
Tadpole madtom
Brindled madtom
Northern madtom
Burbot
Warmouth .
Orangespotted sunfish
Longear sunfish
Spotted bass
Bluebreast darter
Spotted darter
Tippecanoe darter
Channel darter
Longhead darter
Sauger
Scientific Name
Acipenser brevirostrum
Acipenser fulvescens
Gasterosteus aculeatus
Stizostedion vitreum glaucum
Ammocrypta pellucida
Ichthyomyzon fosser
Ichthyomyzon um'cuspis
Petromyzon marinus
Acipenser oxyrhynchus
Lepisosteus oculatus
Coregonus artedii
Coregonus clupeaformis
Phoxinus erythrogaster
Hybopsis x-punctata
Nocomis biguttatus
Hybopsis storeriana
Notropis blennius
Notropis heterodon
Notropis heterolepis
Notropis umbrati 1 iT"
Minytrema melanops
Ictalurus melas
Noturus eleutherus
Noturus gyrinus
Noturus miurus
Noturus stigmosus
Lota Iota
Lepomls gulosus
Lepomis humilis
Lepomls megalotis
Micropterus punctulatus
Etheostoma camurum
Etheostoma maculatum
Etheostoma tippecanoe
Percina cope!andi
Percina macrocephala
Stizostedion canadense
Status
1
1
1
1
2
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
Status categories are defined as follows:
1. Endangered: Actively threatened with extinction in the state. Continued
survival unlikely without special protective measures.
2. Threatened : Not under immediate threat of extinction in the state, but
occurring in such small numbers and/or in such restricted habitat that it
could quickly cease to be a part of the state fauna.
3. Indeterminate: Apparently threatened or uncommon to rare, but insufficient
data currently available on which to base a reliable assessment of status.
*Also classified as U.S. endangered.
SOURCE: Adapted from Pa. Fish Commission (2), U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (3),
-------
TABLE 2.1.7.-3
MAJOR PHYTOPLANKTON GENERA OF
THE MONONGAHELA, LOWER* ALLEGHENY
AND UPPER** OHIO RIVERS
Anabaena
Anacystis
Aphanizomenon
Aphanocapsa
Chroococcus
Coelosphaerium
Gomphosphaeria
+Actinastrum
+Ankistrodesmus
Carteria
Characiopsis
+Chlamydomonas
Closterium
Closteriopsis
Coelastrum
Cosmarium
Crucigenia
+0ictyosphaerium
Echinosphaerella
Elakatothrix
Eremosphaera
Franceia
Golenkim'a
Gonium
Haematococcus
Achnanthes
Amphiprora
+Asterionella
Cocconeis
Coscinodiscus
+Cyclotella
Cymatopleura
Cymbella
Diatoma
Oinobryon
Diploneis
Epithemia
Eunotla
+Fragilaria
Frustulia
Gomphonema
I. CYANOPHYTA (Blue-Green Algae)
Lyngbya
Merismopedia
+Microcystis
+0scillatoria
+Schizothrix
Cyanophyta g. sp.
II. CHLOROPHYTA
Kirchneriella
Lagerheimia
Micractinium
Mougeotia
Oocystis
Pandorina
Pediastrum
Phacotus
Planktosphaeria
Quadrigula
+Scenedesmus
Schroederia
Selenastrum
Sphaerocystis
Staurastrum
Tetraedron
Treubaria
+Chlorophyta g. sp.
III. CHRYSOPHYTA
Gyrosigma
Hantzschia
Mallomonas
Mastogloia
+Melosira
Meridion
Navicula
+Nitzschia
Pinnularia
PI eurosigma
Rhoicosphenia
Stauroneis
+Stephanodiscus
Surirella
Synedra
Tabellaria
Chrysophyta g. sp.
15
-------
Ceratium
Glenodinium
Chroomonas
Kryptomonas
Euglena
IV. PYRROPHYTA
Peridiniurn
V. EUGLENOPHYTA
Lepocinclis
Phacus
Rhodomonas
Trachelomonas
*Navigable Reach
**Within the State of Pennsylvania
. +Indicates that species of this genera are often numerically dominant
16
-------
TABLE 2.1.7 - 4
ZOOPLANKTON TAXA OF THE MONONGAHELA RIVER
APRIL 1975
River Mileage of
Sampling Stations
Name of Organism
Rotifera
Braghiomis sp.
Euchlanis sp.
Filinia longiseta
Keratella cochlearls
Rotaria sp.
Cladocera
Bosmina sp.
Chydorus sp.
7.0 63.0
X
X
X X
X
X X
89.0
X
X
Copepoda
Nauplius X X X
Calanoid copepodite X
SOURCE: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (13).
17
-------
TABLE 2.1.7. - 5
AQUATIC MACROPHYTES OF THE MONOHGAHELA RIVER
SUMMER 1975
Scientific Name
Equisetum f 1 uviati le L_.
Typha latifolia L.*
Spargan ium sp.*
Potamogeton pusi1lus L.
Potamogeton ephydrus Raf.*
Potamogeton nodosus Poi r.*
Alisma subcordatum Raf.
Sagi ttaria graminea Michx.*
Sagittaria latifolia Willd.*
El odea canadensis Michx.
Cyperus ferruginescens Boeckl.
Eleocharis acicularis L. R+S*
Eleocharis obtusa (Willd.) Schuttes
Scirpus validus Vahl.*
Juncus effusus L.*
Iris pseudacorus L.
Polygonum lapathifolium L.
Callitriche palustris L.
Ludwegia palustris (L.) Ell.*
MyriophylIum heterophylIum M i chx.*
Common Name
Water Horseta i1
Common Cattai1
Bur Weed
Slender pondweed
Floating pondweed
Long leaf pondweed
Broadleaf water plantain
Slender arrowhead
Broadleaf arrowhead
Waterweed
An umbrella sedge
Slender spikerush
Blunt soikerush
Great bulrush
Soft rush
Ye 11ow iris
Nodding smartweed
Water starwort
Water purslane
Variable watermilfoil
* Also collected by Clarkson and Moore (16) on the upper Monongahela, West
and-Tygart Valley Rivers. Additionally, they collected Potamogeton diversi
fohius, not listed above
SOURCE: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (8).
13
-------
TABLE 2.1.7 - 6
DENSITY OF BENTHIC MACROINVERTEBRATES COLLECTED
AT MONONGAHELA RIVER STATIONS DURING
APRIL, 1975
Organisms River Mileage 7.0 63.0 _ 89.0
Oligochaeta
Tubificidae
Limnodrilus claparedeanus 19.0
Limnodrllus hoffmeisceri 76.2
Limnodrilus (immature) 28.6 57.1 142.9
Dipcera
Chironomidae
Cricocopus sp. (unidentified) Q-1?
Chaetocladius sp. 19.0
Endochironomus dimorphus 409 . 5
Polypedilum sp. 47.6
Procladius (Procladius) sp. 152.4
Procladius (Psilotanypus) adumbratus 19.0 38.1
Tipulidae
Tipula sp. 9.5
Collembola
Lsotomurus palustris 19.0
Pelecypoda
Sphaeriidae
Pisidium (Cyclocalyx) adamsi 9.5
Total Density 4776 95.1 923.8
SOURCE: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (13).
-------
TABLE 2.1.7.-7
SUMMARY OF FISH SAMPLING DATA
FROM THE MONONGAHELA RIVER
1967-1973
MAXWELL LOCK
(1 .4 surface acres)
LOCK MO. 2
(0.5 surface acres)
1967
Total number fish 0
Total weight fish 0
(Ibs.)
Standing crop 0
(Ibs. /acre)
Number of species 0
Percentage sensitive
species (by total
weight)
Total number fish 20
Total weight fish 2.58
(Ibs.)
Standing crop 5.16
(Ibs. /acre)
Number of species 4
Percentage sensitive 26
species (by total
weight)
1968
1
0.04
0.03
1
_
207
27.33
54.66
8
9
1969
204
6.43
4.59
8
18
1,626
58.33
116.66
12
6
1970
54
6.76
4.83
6
23
261
45.70
91.40
12
12
1973
8,071
91.50
65.36
16
65
869
74.48
148.96
16
31
SOURCE: Adapted from Preston (7). 20
-------
TABLE 2.1.7.-8
FISHERY SURVEY RESULTS FOR REACHES
OF THE MONONGAHELA AND OHIO RIVERS IN PENNSYLVANIA
Upper Ohio River (Pa.)
Family Species
Clupeidae
Dorosoma cepedianum
Cyprinldae
Carassius auratus
Cyprinus carp 10
Notemigonus crysoleucas
Notropis atherinoides
Notropis spilopterus
Notropis stramineus
Notropis volucellus
Notropis boops
Notrois blennius
p
n
Pimepnales notatus
Pimephales promelas
Catostomidae
Catostomus commersoni
Moxostoma erythrurum
Moxostoma duquesnel
Ictaluridae
Ictalurus catus
Ictalurus natalis
Ictalusus nebulosus
Ictalurus me las
Ictalurus puiictatus
Pylodictus divarius
Cyprinodontidae
Fundulus diaphanus
Percichthyidae
Morone chrysops
Common Name
Gizzard shad
Goldfish
Carp
Golden shiner
Emerald shiner
Spotfin shiner
Sand shiner
Mimic shiner
Bigeye shiner
River shiner
Bluntnose minnow
Fathead minnow
White sucker
Golden redhorse
Black redhorse
White catfish
Yellow bullhead
Brown bullhead
Black bullhead
Channel catfish
Flathead catfish
Banded ki Hi fish
White bass
Dashields
Lock3
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Montgomery
Lockb
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Monongahela River (Pa.)
Max we
Lock1
fi
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Lock
No. 2C
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
-------
ro
N>
Family Species
Centrarchidae
Ambloplltes rupestrls
Lepoinis cyanel 1 us
Lepomis glbbosus"
Lepomis hunnlis
Lepomi s macrochirus
Lepomis microloptiu?
Micropterus dolomieu
Mlcropterus salmoides
Micropterus punctulatus
PornoxIs annularIs
Pomoxls nigromaculatus
Percidae
Perclna caprodes
Perca flavescens
Stizostedlon vitreum
Stizostedlon canadense
Angulllldae
Angullla rostrata
Sclaenldae
Aplodlnotus grunnlens
Esocidae
Esox masquinongy
Common Name
Rock bass
Green sunfish
Pumpkinseed
Orangespotted sunfish
Bluegill
Redear sunfish
Smallmouth bass
Largemouth bass
Spotted bass
White crapple
Black crapple
Logperch
Yellow perch
Walleye
Sauger
American eel
Freshwater drum
Muskellunge
Upper Ohio River (Pa.)
Dashlelds Montgomery
a b
Lock Lock
X X
X
X X
X X
X
X X
X
X
X X
X
X
X
X
Monongahela River (Pa.)
Maxwell Lock
c c
Lock No. 2
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
a. Lock chamber sampling conducted In 1968-1970; 1975-1976
b. Lock chamber sampling conducted In 1968-1970
c. Lock chamber sampling conducted in 1967-1973
Adapted from Preston (7) and Preston and White (32).
-------
TABLE 2.1.7.-9
AQUATIC MACROPHYTES OF THE
ALLEGHENY RIVER
1977
Scientific Name
Sparganium americanum Nutt.
Potamogeton crispus L.
Potamogeton nodosus Poir.
Potamogeton sp.
Sagittaria latifolia Willd.
Sagittan'a graminea Michx.
Eleocharis acicularis (L.) R + S
Scirpus validus Vahl
Scirpus americanus Pars.
Polygoniuin coccineum Muhl.
Myriophyllum sp.
Justicia americana (L.) Vahl
Common Name
Burr Weed
Curly pondweed
Longleaf pondweed
Pondweed
Broadleaf - arrowhead
Slender arrowhead
Slender Spikerush
Great bulrush
Three-sauare rush
Smartweed
Watermilfoil
Water willow
SOURCE: Koryak (25).
23
-------
TABLE 2.1.7.-10
SPECIES OF FISH COLLECTED*
FROM POOLS 3, 5, and 7 OF THE ALLEGHENY RIVER
1975 - 1977
Family Cyprinidae
Carp (3, 5, 7)
Goldfish (3, 7)
Streamline Chub (7)
Creek Chub (3, 7}
Golden Shiner (5, 7)
Stoneroller (5)
Emerald Shiner (3, 5, 7)
Spotfin Shiner (3, 5, 7)
Mimic Shiner (3, 5, 7)
Rosy face Shiner (3, 5, 7)
Sand Shiner (3)
River Shiner (3, 5, 7)
Common Shiner (7)
Silver Shiner (7)
Striped Shiner (7)
Bluntnose Minnow (3, 5, 7)
Family Catostomidae
Northern Hogsucker (3, 5, 7)
White Sucker (3, 7)
Smallmouth Buffalo (3)
Quill back (3, 7)
Golden Redhorse (3, 5, 7)
Silver Redhorse (3, 7)
Black Redhorse (3, 7)
Shorthead Redhorse (3, 5, 7)
River Redhorse (5)
Family Centrarchidae
Rock Bass (3, 5, 7)
Bluegill (5, 7)
Pumpkinseed (3, 7)
Largemouth Bass (3, 7)
Smallmouth Bass (3, 5, 7)
White Crappie (5, 7)
Collections made by electrofishing, experimental gill netting, bag seining, and
towing half-meter larval fish nets. Numbers in parentheses indicate Navigation
Pools where that particular species was detected.
Family Percidae
Logperch (3, 5, 7)
Yellow Perch (3, 5, 7)
Walleye (3, 5, 7)
Fantail Darter (7)
Banded Darter (3,5)
Johnny Darter (3, 5, 7)
Family Percopsidae
Trout - Perch (3, 5, 7)
Family Cyprinodontidae
Banded Killifish (5)
Family Ictaluridae
Channel Catfish (3, 5, 7)
Flathead Catfish (3, 7)
Brown Bullhead (3, 5)
Family Esocidae
Northern Pike (3, 7)
Family Clupeidae
Gizzard Shad (3, 5)
Family Cottidae
Mottled Sculpin (7)
SOURCE: Adapted from U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (24).
-------
FIGURE 2.1.7-1
MONONGAHELA RIVER TOTAL PHYTOPLANKTON
(midstream at one meter depth)
z
o
7000 g
a
4
_J
O
4
O
z
<
o
a
oe
m
o
_j
I
v:
U)
a.
O
JUNE 1975* INTERMEDIATE FLOW
5000-12000 CFS
JULY I97S LOW FLOW
650-1800 CFS
in
RIVER MILES
SOURCE: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (8)
-------
FIGURE 2.1.7-2
u)
J 80-
40-
20-
0-
100-
2 < BO-
-------
FIGURE 2.1.7-3
NUMBERS AND COMPOSITION OF ATTACHED GROWTHS
JJPPER OHIO RIVER SYSTEM, MAY - JUNE 1970
30
E
E
to
o 20
3
cr
in
L.
0)
Q-
!3
UJ
o
10
0
in
D
O
X
H
0
.
-
-
.
-
-
s
Q:
1
<3
Uj
-j
$
fX
^J
^
^
g
0
T?
»0
1
1
0
j
^
\
2
^
Z
v
-j J_
JC
il
i
1
i
«7
»
r?5
J,
1
i
i:
jj
J
j
;;
i
i
:
*
ji
j;
BLUE-
\
DIATOMS
GREEN ALGAE
GREEN ALGAE
PROTOZdA
~T
B
wv
\
\
\ TOTAL
/
/
/
1. NEVILLE ISLAND BACK CHANNEL
2.NAVIGATION CHANNEL
3
^T'
i
i
0 20
S
I'r
1
r |
^?
30
-
-
^e
; :
i
ill
-
-
jjf -
1
4O
OHIO RIVER MILE
SOURCE: U.S. EPA (12) .
-------
FIGURE 2.1.7-4
NUMBER OF PERIPHYTON GENERA TN THE ATTACHED GROWTH COMMUNITIES
IN THE UPPER OHIO RIVER SYSTEM, MAY - JUNE 1970.
T
T
30
20
ID
Z
UJ
o
u.
o
n:
UJ
GO
10
T
0
I. NEVILLE ISLAND BACK CHANNEL
2. NAVIGATION CHANNEL
10
OHIO
20
RIVER MILE
40
SOURCE: U.S. EPA (12)
-------
FIGURE 2.1.7 - 5
QUANTITY OF CHLOROPHYLL IN THE ATTACHED GROWTH COMMUNITIES
OF THE UPPER OHIO RIVER SYSTEM, MAY - JUNE 1970
0)
o
u
o
cr
V)
E
o
E
i
a.
o
o:
o
_i
x
o
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
5
0
-r | ~T~
I NEVILLE ISLAND BACK CHANNEL
2 NAVIGATION CHANNEL
o,
10
20 30
OHIO RIVER MILE
40
SOURCE: U.S. EPA (12).
-------
FIGURE 2.1.7 - 6
BENTHIC FAUNA COLLECTED IN ROCK BASKET SAMPLERS, UPPER OHIO RIVER BASIN
MAY - JUNE 1970
15
* 10
ft
o r
5 5
IOO
200
0300
K
tu
5
z
I
S.
I
u,
^
5
I
1
T
T
T
T
JU-DJ
709
1104
JL
10 15 20 25
OHIO RIVER MILE
30
35
40
-------
FIGURE 2. 1.7. -7
RELATIVE DIVERSITY OF AQUATIC FAUNA
IN THE
PENNSYLVflNIR ORBES COUNTIES
-------
REFERENCES
1. E.A. Lachner. "The Changing Fish Fauna of the Upper Ohio Basin".
In: Man and the Haters of the Upper Ohio Basin. C.A. Tryon,
and M.A. Shapiro (eds).Spec. Publ. No. 1, Pymatuning Laboratory
of Field Biology, University of Pittsburgh, Linesville, Pa., 1956.
2. Pennsylvania Fish Commission. "A New List of Endangered Threatened
or Status Indeterminate Fishes, Amphibians and Reptiles." Bellefonte,
Pa., 1977.
3. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. "A Checklist of the Fishes of
Pennsylvania." State College, Pa., 1977.
4. F.A. Michaux. "Travels to the West of the Allegheny Mountains."
In: Early Western Travels 1748-1846, Vol. 3, R.G. Thwaites (ed.)
A.M. Clar Publishing Co., 1805.
5. Ohio River Sanitation Commission. "Aquatic-life Resources of
the Ohio River". Cincinnati, Ohio 1962.
6. Pennsylvania Game Commission and the National Audubon Society. (l
"Proceedings of the Symposium on Nongame Species, October 1, 1977.
T. Williams (ed.), Harrisburg, Pa. 1978.
7. H.R. Preston. "Monongahela River Basin Aquatic Biology - Part I
Fish Populations." U.S. EPA Region III, Wheeling, West Virginia,
1974.
8. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Pittsburgh District. "Monongahela
River Navigation Projects Annual Water Quality Report 1976".
Pittsburgh, 1976.
9. Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Resources, Bureau of
Water Quality Management. "Pennsylvania 1976 Water Quality
Inventory". Publ. No. 42, Harrisburg, Pa., 1976.
10. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Develop-
ment. "Biological Field and Laboratory Methods for Measuring the
Quality of Surface Waters and Effluents". C.I. Weber (ed.) EPA
670/4-73-001, Cincinnati, Ohio 1973.
11. L.G. Williams, "Possible relationships between plankton-diatom
species numbers and water quality estimates". ££pJLQfly_ 45:809-823
1964.
12. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region III. "A Report on
Pollution of the Ohio River and its Tributaries in the Pittsburgh
Pennsylvania Area." Philadelphia, P , 1971.
13. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Pittsburgh District. Monongahela
River - Draft Environmental Statement on the Operation and Main-
tenance of the Navigation System." Pittsburgh, PA,1975.
32
-------
14. L.G. Williams. "Dominant planktonic rotifers of major waterways
of the United States." Limnol. Oceanogr. 11 (1) (1966): 83-91.
15. H.B.N. Hynes. The Ecology of Running Haters. Toronto: University
of Tononto Press, 1972.
16. R.B. Clarkson and J.A. Moore. "Vascular Aquatic Plants in Acid
Mine Water of the Monongahela River, West Virginia." Bulletin No.2
Water Research Institute, West Virginia University. Morgantown,
West Virginia, 1971.
17. University of Pittsburgh, Graduate School of Public Health and
Department of Biology. "A Limnological Study of the Upper Ohio
River." Progress Report AT (30-1) 2411 to the Atomic Energy Commission
for Period of June 1, 1960 - February 28, 1961. Pittsburgh, PA,
1961.
18. W.T. Mason Jr., P.A. Lewis, and J.B. Anderson. "Macroinvertebrate
Collections and Water Quality Monitoring in the Ohio River Basin
1963-67." Analytical Quality Control Laboratory, U.S. EPA,
Cincinnati, Ohio, 1971.
19. Federal Water Pollution Control Administration. "Benthic Biology
of the Monongahela River Basin - Pennsylvania, West Virginia,
Maryland". Work Document No. 16. Ohio River Basin Project,
Wheeling, West VA, 1968.
20. B.W. Everman and C.H. Bellman. "Notes on a Collection of Fishes
from the Monongahela River." .Ann. HJ. Acad. Sci.. 3:335-350, 1886.
21. Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Resources. "State
Water Plan -Sub-basin #19 (draft copy)." Harrisburg, PA, 1977.
22. Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Resources, Bureau of
Water Quality Management. "Proposals for Recommended Revisions
to Water Quality Criteria Wastewater Treatment Regulations, and
Industrial Wastes." Pennsylvania Bulletin. 8(9), Harrisburg, PA,
1978.
23. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Pittsburgh District. "Allegheny
River Navigation Projects Water Quality Report - 1978" (draft
material). Pittsburgh, 1978.
24. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Pittsburgh District. "Commercial Sand
and Gravel Dreding in the Allegheny River (mile 0 to Mile 72)
Final Environmental Statement". Pittsburgh, PA,,1977.
25. M. Koryak, "Emergent Aquatic Plants in the Upper Ohio River and
Major Navigable Tributaries, West Virginia and Pennsylvania"
Castanea (in print), 1978.
26. Federal Water Pollution Control Administration. "Benthic Biology
Allegheny River Basin. New York, Pennsylvania." Work Document
No. 27, Aquatic Biology Unit, Wheeling, West Virginia, 1969.
27. Indiana University, Ohio State University, and Purdue University
"Preliminary Technology Assessment Report for the Ohio River
Basin Energy Study" Vol. II-A Part I. Prepared for US EPA Office
33
-------
Energy, Minerals and Industry, Washington, O.C., 1977.
28. R.T. Hartman. "Composition and Distribution of Phytoplankton Communities
in the Upper Ohio River." In: Studies on the Aquatic Ecology of the
Upper River System. C.A. Tryon Jr., R.T. Hartman, and K.W. Cummins
(eds.), Spec. Publ. No. 3, Pymatuning Laboratory of Ecology,Linesville
PA, 1965.
29. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Pittsburgh District. "An Evaluation of the
Effects of Mainstem Navigation Dams on the Water Quality of the Upper
Ohio River". Pittsburgh, PA, 1975.
30. Duquesne Light Company, Ohio Edison Company, and Pennsylvania Power and
Light Company. "Final Environmental Statement Related to the Beaver
Valley Power Station Unit 1." U.S. Atomic Energy Commission, Directorate
of Licensing. Docket No. 50-334. Washington, D.C. 1973.
31. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Pittsburgh District Office, Private
Communication, October 18, 1978.
32. H.R. Preston and G.E. White. "Summary of Ohio River Fishery Surveys,
1960-76." EPA 903/9-78-009. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Region III, Philadelphia, PA, 1978.
33. Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Resources. "State Water Plan
Sub-Basin #20 (draft copy}". Harrisburg, PA, 1977.
34. Green International Inc. "Comprehensive Uater Duality Management Plan,
Study Area #9, Chapter IV, Appendix A" (Prelim, draft copy). Report
prepared for Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, Dept. Environ. Resources.
Sewickley, Pa., 1976.
35. Green international, Inc. "Comprehensive Water Quality Management Plan,
Study Area #8, Chapter IV, Appendix A" (Prelim, draft copy). Report
prepared for Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, Dept. Environ. Resources.
Sewickley, Pa., 1976.
-------
APPENDIX
Habitat Preferences of the Fishes of Western
Pennsylvania
-------
Species Low Gradient
Common Name to Ponded. Turbid
Goldfish X
Coldenshiner
River Chub
Silver Chub
Northern Bigeye Chub
Western Blackmore Dace
Longnose Dace
> Northern Creek Chub X
1
I i
Eastern Tongue tied Chub
Southern Redbelly Dace
Bedside Dace
Common Emerald Shiner X
Silver Slilner
Rosyface Shiner
Central Common Shiner
Northern Common Shiner
Spot fin Shiner X
Low Gradient
Clear
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Moderate High Gradient
Gradient Clear Clear and Cold Comments
X
X
X
X
X X
X X
X X
X Local Distribution
Upper Allegheny River
X
X
X X
X X
X
Tolerates curbidUy
llortlitnscern Sand Shiner
Tolerates ulna wnt>te.
-------
Species Low Gradient
Common Name to Ponded, Turbid
Northern Mimic Shiner
Silverjaw Minnow
Northern Flathead Minnow X
Bluntnose Minnow X
Ohio Sconeroller Minnow
Channel Catfish X
Yellow Bullhead
Brown Bullhead
Black Bullhead X
Flathead Catfish
Stonecat Mad torn
Brindled Mad too X
Eastern Banded Killiflsh
Troutperch
Brook Sllvcraide
White Coppil X
Black Crappie X
Northern Rockbass
Low Gradient
Clear
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Moderate
Gradient Clear
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
High Gradient
Clear and Cold Comments
X Tolerates mine waste.
X
X
May be extinct because
of turbidity and pollution
Requires clean wacc.r with
_ i i _
Much of former habitat
destroyed.
-------
Species
Common Name
Low Gradient
to Ponded. Turbid
Low Gradient
Clear
Moderate
Gradient Clear
High Gradient
Clear and Cold
Comments
OJ
Northern Snallmouch
Blackbass
Northern Largeoouth
Blackbass
Green Sunfish
Northern Bluegrass
Sunfish
Central Longear Sunfish
Puiapkinsced Sunfish
Yellow Walleye
Yellow Perch
Blackslde Darter
Longhead Darter
Gilt Darter
Ohio Logperch Darter
Crecnside Darter
Cistern Banded Darter
X
X
X
X
X
TC
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Originally abundant,
much habitat destroyed
by siltatlon.
Intolerant to high
turbidity.
Intolerant to turbidity
and silt bottoms.
Sensitive to pollution.
Original habitat
destroyed by mine
drainage.
Intolerant to pollution.
-------
Species
Common Name
Low Gradient Low Gradient Moderate High Gradient
to Ponded. Turbid Clear Gradient Clear Clear and Cold Comments
>
4="
Ohio Lamprey
Allegheny Brook Lamprey
Ohio Brook Lamprey
Longnose Gar
Eastern Glzzardshad
Brown Trout
Rainbow Trout
Brook Trout
Central Mudminnou
Central Redfln Pickerel
Ohio Huskellunge
Central Qulllback
Carpsucker
Silver Rcdhorse
Golden Redhorse
Olvio Redliorse
Hog Sucker
Conunon Uhice Sucker
Carp
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Cold Water less than
65° F.
Coldest headwater trlbs.
-------
I
01
Species
Common Name
Variegated Darter
Spotted Darter
Ulucbrcast Darter
Halnbow Darter
Barred ran tall Darter
Freshwater Drum
Lou Gradient Lou Gradient
co Ponded, Turbid Clear
X
X
X
X
X
X X
Moderate
Gradient Clcjr
X
X
X
X
High Gradient
Clear and Cold Comment a
X Intolerant co pollution
Rare or absent because
Central Redfln Sculpln
Brook Stickleback
BigmoulU Buffalo *
Black Redharso
Diver Kcdhoruo
of commercial fishing.
SOURCE: Green International, Inc. (34,35).
------- |