ML20079M983

1987-1988 Annual Environ Monitoring Rept

ML20079M983
Person / Time
Site:	Harris
Issue date:	12/31/1988
From:	Blue R, Harris A, Herlong D CAROLINA POWER & LIGHT CO.
To:
References
RTR-NUREG-1437 NUDOCS 9111110028
Download: ML20079M983 (145)

Text

.

I I .

I I

I SHEARON HARRIS NUCLEAR POWER PLANT g

I I 1987-1988 l ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING REPORT I

I I

I I

.I I

l CP&L Carolina Power & Light Company

. DR I E 1437 C PDR

SHEARON HxRRIS NUCLEAR POWER PLANT 1987-1988 ANNUAL ENVIRONMENTAL MON!TORING REDORT I

Prepared by:

R. J. Blue -

Editor Terrestrial Studies A. 8. Harris -

Statistics D. D. Herlong -

Water Quality, Water Chemistry, Zooplankton, and Benthic Macro-invertebrates R. S. Hobbs Phytoplankton I

D. H. Schiller - Aquatic Vegetation, Compiler J. M. Swing -

Fish B. H. Tracy -

Trace Elements 1 Environmental Assessment Unit Bialogical Assessment Unit Environmental Services Section CAROLINA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY NEW HILL, NORTH CAROLINA May 1990 Reviewed and Approved by:

$h d.

' Manager '~

) (

)finager Envira . ital Assessment Unit Biologic 4Y Assessment Unit I This report was prepared under my supervision and direction, and I accept full responsibility for its content.

sm.a danager '

I Environmental Services Section l

I

_._.. ..___-_.-.__m.. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ . _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ . _ _ . _ _ . _ . . _ . . _ . . _ . _ _ -

I I'

I I.

I' This ecpy of the report is not & Controlled document as fetailed in the Biologiesi Moeitoring Unit, BioloQ eal l Assessment Unit, and (nvironmental Assessment Unit Procedures wanvat and Ovality Alsbrance Manu al. Any changes m003 to the original of this report subsequent to the este of issuance can be obtained from:

Naneger ,

invironmentei services fection Carollda Power & Light Ccapany

$heeron Norris Energy & Environmentet Center Route 1, Son 327 New Hiti, North Carolina 21562 l

E I

E I

i l I I

a,

I Acknowledgments The help of various pecple associated with the Biological and Envi-I ronmental Assessment Units resulted in the preparation of this report.

Appreciation is extended to Mr. Clarence Cofield, Ms. Robin Bryson, and Mr. Rick Smith for sample processing. Mr. Rick Smith and Ms. Betty Carter assisted with the collection of field samples. Ms. Betty Carter mai'..

tained water quality and chemistry field sampling equipment, and Mr. Mack McKinnie maintained the boats used for field sampling. Mr. Larry I Birchfield assisted with the data analyses and figure preparation for this report.

Special thanks are given to members of Carolina Power & Ligh Company's Chemistry Laboratory for conducting the chemical analyses and to members of the Office Services Unit at the Harris Energy & Environmental Center for assistance with the processing and proofing of the final report I and preparation of c.e figures.

I I

I I

I I

I I

I i I

1 I Table of Contents Page Acknowledgments..................................................... i List of Tab 1es...................................................... iv List of Figures..................................................... vi Metric Conversion and Units of Measure Tab 1e........................ viit Executive Summary................................................... ix

1.0 INTRODUCTION

................................................. 1-1 I 2.0 METHODS.... ................................................. 2-1 2.1 Data CC 1ecticn............................................... 2-1 2.2 Statistical Analyses......................................... 2-6 3.0 WATER QUALITY AND CHEMISTRY.................................. 3-1 I 3.1 3.2 Water Quality................................................

tons and Nutrients........ .................................

3-1 3-3 4.0 ELEMENTS...............................................

l 4-1 TRACE 4.1 Water........................................................ 4-1 4.2 Sediment...............'...................................... 4-2 4.3 Aquatic biota................................................ 4-2 5.0 PHYTOPLANKTON................................................ 5-1 6.0 200 PLANKTON....................................... .......... 6-1 7.0 BENTHIC MACR 0!NVERTEBRATES................................... 7-1 I 8.0 8.1 8.2 FISH.........................................................

Species Composition..........................................

Larvai F1sh..................................................

6-1 8-1 8-1 I 8.3 8.4 Juvenile and Adult fish......................................

Largemouth Bass Tournaments..................................

8-2 8-3 9.0 I 9-1 TERRESTRIAL STUDIES..........................................

9.1 Birds........................................................ 9-1 9.2 Quantitative Vegetation Studies.............................. 9-3 I 10.0 10.1 10.2 AQUATIC VEGETATION...........................................

Harris Lake..................................................

Auxiliary Reservoir..........................................

10-1 10 1 10-3 11.0

SUMMARY

...................................................... 11-1

12.0 REFERENCES

................................................... 12-1 4

I li d

I

_ _ ... _. . . - . . _ . . ~ . - ---- - - - - -- - - - - - -- - - - - ^ -

I' TableofContents(continued)  :

Page Appendix A Accuracy and Percent Recovery of Water Chemistry Standards During 1987-1988 and Tiace Element Standards During 1988.................................................. A-1 Appet. dix B j Water Qcality Data from Harrit Lake During 1987 and 1988..... B-1 l l Appendix C l Concentrn tons rf Chemical Variables in the Harris Lake During 1907 .1 1988..... ........... . ..................... C-1 i l l

I I

E I.

5 I

I I

I I

iii

List of Tables Table Page 2.1 Harris Lake environmental monitoring program for 1987........ 2-8 2.2 Harris Lake environmental monitoring program for 1988........ 2-10 3.1 Means and ranges of water cuality variables from Harris Lake during 1987 and 1988........................ 3-6 3.2 Means and ranges of chemical variables in Harris Lake during 1987.................................................. 3-7 l 3.3 Means and ranges of chemical variables in Harris Lake during 1988..................... ............................ 3-8 I 3.4 Annual lake means of selected chemical constituents in Harris Lake surface waters, 1983-1988..................... 3-9 I 4.1 Means and standard errors of trace element concen-trations in the waters of Harris: Lake during 1987............ 4-3 4.2 Means and standard errors of trace element concen-trations in the waters of Harris Lake during 1988............ 4-4 4.3 Means and ranges of trace element concentrations in the surface waters of Harris Lake, 1983-1987................. 4-5 4.4 Means and ranges of trace element concaatrations in the surface waters of Harris Lake, 1983-1988................. 4-6 4.5 Means and standard errors of trace element concen-trations in the sediments, net plankton' and fish

.'um Ha rri s Lak e du r i ng 1988. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-7 5.1 Phytoplankton class densities by month in Harris Lake during 1987.................................................. 5-6 5.2 Phytoplankton class densities by month in Harris Lake during 1989.................................................. 5-7 5.3 Results of analysis of variance and Duncan's multiple range tests to determine spatial and temporal trends of I phytoplankton density and biomass from Harris Lake,

.1983-1988.................................................... 5-8 6.1 Zooplankton taxa collected at Harris Lake during 1987........ 6-4 6.2 Zooplankton taxa collected at Harris Lake during 1988........ 6-5 6.3 Mcan zooplankton density and biomass by station in Harris Lake during 1987 and 1988.......................... 6-6 I ~

I

I list of Tables (continued) Pace 7.1 8enthic macroinvertebrate taxa collected from Harris Lake during 1987 and 1988............................. 7-4 7.2 Annual mean densities of dominant benthic invertebrate taxa by station in Harris Lake during 1987................... 7-6 7.3 Annual mean densities of dominant benthic invertebrate taxa by station in Harris Lake during 1988................... 7-7 7.4 Habit preferences, trophic status, and functional E feeding groups as a percentage of thc mean annual 5 density of benthic nacroinvertebrates in Harris Lake during 1987 and 1988......................................... 7-8 8.1 Fish species collected from Harris Lake, 1985-1988........... 8-5 8.2 Fish collected by electrofishin from Harris Lake during 1987....................g.............................. 8-6 a

g 8.3 Fish collected by electrofishin from Harris Lake during 1988....................g.............................. 8-7 8.4 Annual mean catch rate of fish collected by electro-fishing in Harris Lake, 1983-1988............................ 8-P 8.5 Fish collected in rotenone sartplin1984, during 1986, and 1988.......g at Harris

........................... 8-9 Lake 8.6 Fish collected in rotenone sampling at Harris Lake E during 1988..................................................

. B-10 W 8.7 Condition factor'of selected species of fish collected with rotenone in Harris Lake during 1984, 1986, and 1988..... 8-11 9.1 Birds observed at the She' aron Harris Nuclear Power Plant site 6. ring 1987....................................... 9-4 g 9.2 Birds observed during waterfowl surveys at the Shearon S Harris Nuclear Power Plant site during 1987.................. 9-6 9.3 Box type, clutch size, and percent hatching for wood duck nest boxes on Harris Lake during 1987.............. 9-7 9.4 Total density and total basal area of trees sampled a by point-quarter analyses in the Greentree Reservoir g basin at the Shearon Harris Nuclear Power Plant, 1985-1987.................................................... 9-8 9.5 Importance values for trees sampled by point-quarter analysis in the Greentree Reservoir basin at the Shearon Harris Nuclear Power Plant, 1985-198/................ 9-8 10.1 Aquatic and wetland plants observed in or adjacent to Harris Lake and the auxiliary reservoir during 1987 and 1988................................................ 10-4 I

I

a I

list of Figures Figure Pace 2.1 Harris Lake sempling locations............................... 2-11 3.1 Trends of selected water quality parameters in Harris Lake surface waters, 1987-1988............................... 3-10 3.2 Trends of selected water quality parameters in Hsrris Lake surface waters, 1983-1988............................... 3-11 3.3 Trends of selected water chemistry constituents in Harris Lake surface waters, 1987..................e.......... 3-12 3.4 Trends of selected water chemistry constituents in Harris Lake surface waters, 1988............................. 3-13 3.5 Trends of selected water chemistry constituents in Harris Lake surface waters, 1983-1988........................ 3-14 5.1 Phytoplankton densities from Stations E2, H2, and P2 in Harris Lake, 1983-1988.................................... 5-10 I 5.2 Chlorophyll a concentrations Trom Stations E2, H2, and P2 in Harris Lake, 19?4-1988..................... ....... 5-11 I 6.1 Zooplankton density, biomass, and taxa richness in Harris Lake during 1987 and 1988............................. 6-7 6.2 Zooplankton density, biomass, and taxa richness in Harris Lake, 1983-1988............,.......................... 6-8 7.1 Mean taxa richness and density of benthic macro-invertebrates in Harris Lake during 1987 and 1988............ 7-9 7.2 Hean taxa richness and density of benthic macro-Inve.tebrates in Harris Lake, 1986-19S8...................... 7-10 8.1 Larval fish push net density estimates from Harris take during 1987 and 1988.................................... 8-12 8.2 Larval fish push net density estimates by species from Harris Lake during 1987 and 1988........................ S-13 8.3 Electrofishing catch rates for selected species of fish collected by electrofishing from Harris Lake, 1983-1988.................................................... 3-14 8.4 Biomass estimates for selected species of fish collected in cove rotenone samM es at Harris Lake, l 1982-1988.................................................... 3-15 i <i I

/- Figure Pace I

/ 8.5 Length-frequency distribution of pumpkinseed collected

/ from cove rotenone samples at Harris Lake, 1982-1988......... 8-16 8.6 Length-frequency distribution of redear sunfish collected from cove rotenone samples at Harris Lake, 1982-1988......... 8-17 i

8.7 Length-frequency distribution of gizzard shad collected gi from cove rotenone samples at Harris Lake, 1982-1988......... 8-18 3 i

' 1 8.8 Length-frequency distribution of bluegill collected l from cove rotenone samples at Harris Lake, 1982-1988......... 8-19 8.9 Length-frequency distribution of black crappie collected from cove rotenone samples at Harris Lake, 1982-1988......... 8-20  ;

8.10 Length-frequency distribution of channel catfish collected I from cove rotenone samples at Harris Lake, 1982-1988......... 8-21 8.11 Length-frequency distribution of golden shiner collected from cove rotenone samples at Harris Lake, 1982-1988......... 8-22 8.12 Length-frequency distribution of brown bullhead collected from cove rotenone samples at Harris Lake, 1982-1988.........

I 8-23 8.13 Length-frequency distribution of largemouth bass collected from cove rotenone samples at Harris Lake, 1982-1988......... 8-24 8.14 Length-frequency distribution of largemouth bass collected from a largemouth bass fishing tournament conducted on Harris Lake during March 1987.e.............................. 8-25 8.15 Length-frequency distribution of largemouth bass collected from a largemouth bass fishing tournament conducted on Harris Lake during October 1988..... ....................... 8-25 8 E

9.1 Tree species with the highest importance values in wildlife management compartments 14-20 on Shearon Harris Nuclear Power Plant Game Lands during 1987................... 9-9 I

I I

I

.o l E.

II i

l'; Length Metric Conversion and Units of Measure Table 1 micron (um) = 4.0 x 10-5 inch I 1 millimeter (mm) = 1000 tm = 0.04 inch 1 centimeter (cm) = 10 mm = 0.4 inch 1 meter (m) = 100 cm = 3.28 feet I. 1 kilometer (km) = 1000 m = 0.62 mile f Area 1 square meter (m2 ) = 10.76 square feet I hectare = 10,000 m2 = 2.47 acres Weight 1 microgram (ug) = 10-3 mg' c 6 g = 3.5 x 10-8 ounce 1 milligram (mg) = 3.5 x 10-5 ounce 1 gram (g) = 1000'mg = 0.035 ounce 1 kilogram (kg)=1000g=2.2 pounds 1 metric ton = 1000 kg = 1.1 tons 1 kg/ hectare = 0.89 pound / acre Volume 1 militliter (ml) = 0.034 fluid ounce 1 liter = 1000 ml = 0.26 gallon Temperature I Degrees Celsius ('C) = 5/9 (*F - 32)

I Conductivity Microtiemens/ centimeter = aS/cm = ..mhos/cm

I vidi

I EXECUTIVE

SUMMARY

Harris Lake was impounded in December 1980 and eached full pool in early 1983. Power plant operations began in early 1987. This report focuses on the period of the first two years of plant operations (1987-I 1958) and assesses the water quality, water chemistry, and biota of Harris Lake and surrounding lands.

With the initiation of plant operations, Harris Lake began receiving cooling tower blowdown discharge near the main dam. As a result, phos-phorus concentrations increased in the downstream area of the lake in 1987, especially in the bottom waters. Zinc phosphate was used at the plant as a corrosion inhibitor. Nitrogen concentrations also increased I

during 1987 in this area, probably as a result of discharges from the Harris sewage treatment plant and oxygen-scavenging compounds used in the power plant. During 1988, phosphorus and nitrogen concentrations increased throughout other ar,eas of the lake as a result of mixing and diffusion. This process was exaggerated by the extreme drought conditions that occurred from late 1987 through late 1988. During this period, little or no water flowed over the main dam spillway and there was no flushing of the lake.

The increases in concentrations of rnosphorus and nitrogen resulted I in increased algal biomass throughout much of the lake. The overall result of these changes was that Harris Lake chanced from a lake of low productivity to one of medium productivity within the range (for nutrient and algal concentrations) typical of many southeastern United States reservoirs. The trend of increased nutrients in the lake, while currently an asset to the overall productivity, bears scrutiny to ensure that poten-tial future increases in nutrients do not resdit in the lake becoming too highly productive and prone to excessive algal blooms. Planned modifica-I tions to the circulating water system should reduce the quantities of cooling tower blowdown to the lake.

Other aspects of water quality, water chemistry, and trace elements were essentially unaf fected by Harris Plant operations with the exception ix I

I of slightly elevated (above background) concentrations of zinc in lake g sediments near the cooling tower blowdown pipe discharge. The probable 5 source of zine was the zinc phosphate used at the plant for corrosion control. Even though slightly elevated, the concentrations of Zinc were considered to be low and of no biological concern.

Harris Lake supported homogeneous, diverse populations of phyto-plankton and zooplankton. Phytoplankton populations increased from pre-vious low levels to moderate levels which were similar to other piedmont North Carolins reservoirs. This increase was in response to the increases in nitrogen and phosphorus in the lake. Zeoplankton biomass and taxa richness declined from previsus levels but densities increased. These changes were attributed to increases in larval fish populations and the introduction of threadfin shad into the lake.

Benthic macroinvertebrate populations were similar throughout the I

lake, an indication of the similarity of habitats and env dronmental con-ditions. The most significant change to the benthic community was the increase of the Asiatic clam Corbicula flutninea. Asiatic clams are a bio-fouling organism with the potential to block pipes and tubes in raw water systems. This non-native species was collected in 1988 near tne Hollemans Crossroad boat ramp where it was probably introduced into the lake by boaters. No clams were collected from the intake canal areas of the F.ain lake and auxiliary reservoir, the plant intake structures, or the auxiliary reservoir.

Harris Lake supported a productive and diverse fisn community acmi-nated by gizzard shad, largemouth bass, and bluegill. Based on results of a fishing tournament held curing 1988, the previously documented slow growth rate of largemouth bass may have accelerated. An increase in growth rate was probably the result of the introduction of threadfin shad into the lake and/or the increased abuncance of smaller gizzard shad whicn provided an improved food source. No impacts from power plant operations on the fish community were coserved.

The lake continued to support large areas of submersed aquatic vege-X I

I tation. The dominant species '*ere pendaeed, naiad, watershield, and lotus which were all native to the region. Mcwever, hydrilla Hydrilla verticillata was discovered growing in Harris Lake during 1988 in the White Oak arm.

This introduced species has the ability to outcompete native plant speMes and colonize large areau of the ' eke. Hydrilla is not expected to interfere with power plant cperations. The auxillary reservoir continued I to remain nearly devoid of submersed vegetation.

Harris Lake and surrounding lands provided good habitat for many species of birds, which aere the primary focus of terrestrial wildlife studies. Two federally endangered species, the bald eagle and the red-cockaded woodpecker, were observed on Harris site lands during the study period. The American coot, pied-billed grebe, ring-necked duck, and ruddy duck were the waterfowl species observed most frequently and in greater numbers on Harris Lake. Wood duck usage of nest boxes erected in portions I of Harris Lake continued to increase. Monitoring of bird mortality from collisions with the cooling tower during migration pericos documented an extremely low number of birds killed due to impact with this structure.

I I

I I

I I

I

.I lI

1.0 INTRODUCTION

L' The Shearon Harris Nuclear Power Plant nonradiological environmental monitoring program continued during 1987 and 1988. This program included investigations of the water quality and chemistry, plankton, benthic macro-invertebrates, fish, and vegetation of the 1660-hectare Harris Lake and the surrounding terrestrial vertebrate communities.

Trace element concentrations in lake water were sampled during 1987. During 1988, trace element concentra-tions were determined for lake water, fish, plankton, and Ndiments.

The Harris Plant circulating and cooling tower makeup water systems began testing operations in January 1987, and the plant began commercial cperation ir. May of that year. Thus, the studies conducted in 1987 and 1988 reflected I

conoitions resulting from the first two years of plant operations.

I l -

1 I

1-1

I 2.0 METHODS 2.1 Data Collection Water Quality and Wate- Chemistry I

Water quality variables (i.e., water temperature, dissolved oxygen, pH, and specific conductance) were measured mo'ithly during 1987 and bi-monthly (beginning in January) during 1988 at Stations E2, H2, and P2 at 1-m intervals from surface to bottom (Tables 2.1, 2.2; figure 2.1).

Instruments were calibrated in the laboratory and field-checked prior to use, Secchi disk transparency, a measure of water clarity, was also determined at each station. Surf ace water chemistry samples were col-I lected monthly during 1987 and bimonthly (beginning in January) during 1988 at Stations E2, H2, and P2; and a bottom water sample was also col-lected at Station E2. Samples were collected with a nonmetallic Van Dorn sampler, transferred to prewashed sample containers, and transported on ice to CP&L's Chemistry Leboratory. Samples were collected, preserved, and analyzed according to standard methods (USEPA 1979; APHA 1986). Stan-dards, spikes, and replicate analyses were used to determine the accuracy and precision of the analytical techniques.

I Trace Elements Water samples from Stations E2 (surf ace and bottom) and H2 and P2 (surface only) were analyzed for aluminum <\l), arsenic (As), cadmium (Cd), ccpper (Cu), chrcmium (Ce), iron (Fe), a:ercury (lig),' manganese (Hn),

nickel (Ni), lead (Pb), selenium (Se), and zinc (Zn). Samples were col-lected inonthly in 1987 and bimonthly (beg:nning in January) in 1988.

I Fish (brown bullhead, bluegill, and largemouth bass) were collected I during May 1988; net plankton (> 163 um) and sediment samples aere collected during July 1988. Whole bodies of fish were analyzed following removal of the stomach and intestine. Sediments were sieved.to obtain the j fraction with particle size < 63 t.m. All fish, net plankton, and sediment l samples were homogenized and freeze-dried. Tissues were digested using 2-1

I nitric acid and microwave heating technique (Patterson et al. 1988). All )

tissue values were expressed on a dry-weight basis. Sediments and tissue samples were analyzed for As, Cd, Cu, Hg, Se, and 2n. Standard techniques were employed by the Chemistry Laboratory (CP&L 1980) and by the Nuclear Services Laboratory - (NCSU 1985). Precision and accuracy of the water, tissue, and sediment data was ensured by using analytical standards, cer-tified reference materials, and analytical replications (Appendix A).

Laboratory reporting limits were established as the blank concentration plus three standard deviations of the blank concentration.-

Phytopleakton (Algae)

I Phytoplankton samples were collected monthly during 1987 and I

bimonthly in 1988 (beginning in' January) at Stations E2, H2, and P2 (Tables 2.1 and 2.2; Figure 2.1). Sample collection methods and labora-tory processing procedures were consistent with those previously described (CP&L1984a,1984b).

Data collected in 1987 and 1988 were compared with those of previous years. Contaminated laboratory reagents resulted in inaccurate determiaa-tions of chlorophyll a concentrations from January through April 1986 and required omission of these data from statistical comparisons.

W Zooplankton Wisconsin net tows (bottom or from 12 m to surf ace) were used to collect zooplankton at Stations ci2, H2, and F2 (lables 2.1 and 2.2; Fig- g ure 2.1). Two tows were taken at each station. During the first tow, an E 80-um mesh net was used to collect rotifers, protozoa, and copepod naup-111. During the second tow, a 153-um mesh net was used to collect adult copepods, copepodites, and cladocerans. Samples were collected monthly in 1987 and bimonthly (beginning in Jcnuary) in 1988. Samples were preserved and analyzed according to methods described in previous studies (CP&L 1984a). Nauplii, r/ ifers. and protozoans were identified and counted from a 1-ml subsample in a Sedgewick-Rafter counting cell.

I 2-2 g

I I Benthic Macroinvertebrates I Three replicate petite Ponar grabs from the 2-m depth were taken bimonthly (beginning in January) at Stations El, H1, and P1 (Figure 2.1) during 1987 and 1988. Methods of sample preservation, laboratory proces-sing, and organism enumeration were similar to those used during 1985 (CP&L1986).

Asiatic clam Corbicula fluminea sampling frequency for the main lake (V3) and auxiliary reservoir (21) intake canals was bimonthly (beginning I in January) and coincided with the regular monitoring program during 1987 and 1988. Samples were processed as during 1985 (CP&L 1986). Methods for the 1987 whole lake shoreline survey were the same as in 1985, but during 1988, sampling was carried out at ten predetermined shoreline stations.

Sampling was conducted in October of each year.

Durii 7 and 1988, the etergency service water system intake structui.. ;he main lake and auxiliary reservoir were sampled in April and October for the presence of Asiatic clams. Cooling tower makeup and I fire protection sprinkler systels were also sampled. All samples were collected as in 1985 with the exception of the sprinkler system which was sampled at an inspection pipe leading from the service water building.

Samples collected during 1987 were field-sieved using a 300-um mesh wash bucket, and samples collected in 1988 were returned to the laboratory for processing.

Fish I The sampling effort during 1987 and 1988 consisted of electrofishing during February, May, August, and November at ten stations (El, E3, H1, y _H3, P1, P3, S1, S3, VI, V3) and iarval push net sampling during April-June 5 at five stations (El, H3, P3, 51, V3; Figure 2.1). During 1988, cove rotenone sampling was conducted at Areas E. H, and P. Methods used during both years were the same as in 1985 (CP&L 1987).

I 2-3 I

I All fish collected were identified to the lowest possible taxon, counted, measured for total length to the nearest mil.limeter, and weighed to the nearest gram (juvenile and adult fish only). Group weights were taken for smaller fish (usually < 40 m) where applicable.

Condition f actor (K), which is a measure of the relative well-being of a fish based on a proportional relationship between length (L) and 5

weight (W), (K = h x 10 ), was computed by size group for selected spe-L cies collected during September of each year.

A major largemouth bass fishing tournament was held during March 1987 I

(292 anglers) and a minor one during October 1988 (80 anglers). All largemouth bass brought to the weigh station by the contestants were l

weighed and measured by CP&L biologists. In addition, all healthy large-mouth bass were tagged with F'oy 67-C tags and released (515 fish in 1987 and 220 fish in 1988). g 3

Terrestrial Studies Birds were systematically monitored during 1987 through roadside bird I

surveys, spring and winter bird counts, and waterfowl surveys. Miscel-laneous observations of birds were also recorded. The roadside bird sur-veys were conducted twice each quarter (January, April, July, October) beginning at sunrise using the method described in CP&L (1985). epring and winter bird counts were scheduled once during May and December, respectively. The purpose of these counts was to identify breeding and esen.ir.tering pcpulatioM by lurn)1 rig seeral Moltat typai et ti;e Harris site. Waterfowl surveys were onducted biweekly from January through E 5

March and October thrcgh December at eight points (WS-1 thrcugh WS-3 and WS-5 through WS-9) along the Harris Lake margin, the auxiliary reservoir, and at the Greentree Reservoir (Figure 2.1).

Surveys were conducted during 1987 to monitor the use of artificial nest boxes by wood ducks and bluebirds. Bluebird nest boxes placed in Wildlife Management Area 1 arid the Exclusion Area Refuge were checked l

periodically for nesting activity from March througn August of 1987.

2-4 I

5

I  !

l The red-cockaded woodpecker refuge site was monitored once a week from April through July 1987 for nesting activity. Cavity trees were tapped during each visit to see if an adult flushed. If an adult was present, North Carolina State University biologists were contacted to determine nest contents since they have the appropriate permits required I for handling this endangered species.

A survey to monitor bird casualties from collisions with the 160-m-tall cooling tower at the SHNPP was conducted during 1987 at least once weekly during the months of April-May and October-November (peak periods for spring and fall migration). The area around the cooling tower basin was inspected and any dead birds were counted and identified by species.

I Mammals, reptiles, and amphibians observed while conducting other field activities were recorded as miscellaneous observations.

. ~

Quantitative vegetation surveys were conducted during 1987 in seven compartments located in Wildlife Management Area 2 and the Greentree Reservoir basin. The point-quarter method, as described by Cottam and Curtis (1956), was used to characterize species composition and density of timber stands in these areas. The point-quarter method is a plotless sampling technique used to estimate relative importance of canopy trees.

I Aquatic Vegetation Three qualitative surveys of Harris Lake and tM aur.1?iny rdemir were conducted between June and October in 1987 and 1988. Methods fol-l lowed those utilized since 1984 (CP&L 1985). Portions surveyed of the lake and auxiliary reservoir were in Areas I, E, P, Q, S, V, and Z (Fig-ure 2.1). Special emphasis was placed on public access points, such as l boat ramps and road crossings, where the introduction of potentially i

troublesome species was most likely.

I I

2-5 I

2.2 Statistical Analyses for purposes of statistical analyses, if some concentrations for a specific chemical or trace element value were estimated to be belew the detection level and some concentrations were measured above the detection level, a mean of all values was calculated by us'ng the above detection values plus one-half the detection level for the "less than" values. The resultant reported mean based on such lef t-censored data would then have been less than the laboratory detection level.

Data from all programs, except aquatic vegetation and terrestrial studies, were analyzed with the General Linear biodels procedure of the Statistical Analysis System *. One-way analyses of variance (ANOVA) blocked on month tested the 1987 and 1988 data separately for reservoir spatial differences (Transects / Stations E, H, P) in acueous trace element concentrations, phytoplankton and zooplankton densities and biomass, and benthic invertebrate densities and taxonomic richness. A one-way ANOVA tested the 1988 sediment and biota trace element data and the 1988 water g chemistry data for spatial di ff erences . A paired t-test tested surface ~

vs. bottom water chemistry and trace element data at Station E2 for 1987 and 1988.

The - 1983-1988 data- for phytoplankton and zooplankton densities and biomass, benthic invertebrate densities and taxonomic richness, larval fish catch-per-unit effort, and water chemistry concentrations were tested W with two-way ANOVAs to determine long-term spatial and temporal trends I within the reservoir. The aqueous trace element concentration data base was analyzed with two-way ANOVAs for monthly ~ data from 1983 through 1987. To facilitate comparisons of phytoplankton, fooplankton, and benthis inVsftnbrate udtd, bimchthly V&lU85 wdrd idl6cted froni the dita .

bases to correspond to months sampled in 1988. The two-way ANOVAs tested year and either station or transect as the main effects. The interaction term was either year-by-station or year-by-transect. A month blocking f actor was used for all data except tne larval fish data where sampling trip was used as the blocking factor.

I 2-6 I

E

I To satisfy the normality, homogeneity of variances, and additive effect assumptions of some of the ANOVA mooels, the data were transformed I with either a natural logarithmic 109, (X + 1) or square root procedure (X + 0.9)I/2, When a significant difference was found among the main effects (i.e., station / transect and/or year), a mean separation procedure provided a statistical ranking of the treatment r?ans. The mean separa-tion procedures used were eitt.er the Fisher's protected least significant I difference (LSD) test or the Duncan's multiple range test. A Type I error rate of 5% (a = 0.05) was used to judge the significance of all tests.

I I

I I .

I I

I I

I I

I I

I 27

I Table 2.1 Harris Lake environmental monitoring program for 1987.

Progam Frequency location Water quality Monthly C2, H2, P2 Water chemistry Monthly E2, H2, P2 Trace elements Lake water Monthly E2, H2, P2 Phytoplankton and Monthly E2, H2, P2 Zooplankton Benthic invertebrates Monitoring Bimonthly El, H1, P1 Intake canals Bimonthly V3, 21 Corbicula survey Shoreline Corbicula Annually Stations at 1.6-km survey intervals around shore-line E 3

Corbicula survey of Biannually Emergency service water emergency service and cooling tower makeup water and cooling system intake structures tower make.up systems Fish Electrofishing Ouarterly El, E3, H1, H3, P1, P3, S1, S3, VI. V3 m

Larval push net Alternate weeks (two El, H3, P3, 51, V3 E trip; per month, Apr-Jun)

Troublesome aquatic Spring, summer, fall I,E,P,Q,S,V,Z vegetation survey Terrestrial vertebrates Miscellaneous ter- Variable Throughout site restrial vertebrate 3 observations 3 Roadside bird survey Quarterly Merry Oaks-Buckhorn Dam route ,

I e.B I

E

I l Table 2,1(cont.)

Program Frtesency location Waterfowl survey Once every two 4eek> W51, WS2, WS3, WSS, (Jan-Mar,Oct-Dec) WS6, WS7, WS8, WS9 Spring and Christmas Biannually Harris Lake and bird counts Harris lands Wildlife management ,

Bluebird nest box. March 1-August 31 Wildlife Management program Areas Habitat inventory Once per compartment Wildlife Management (inventories conducted Area 2--Compartments during spring, summer, 14-20 and fall)

Red-cockaded wood- Once weekly April 1- Refuge area I pecker refuge moni-toring July 31; once monthly Janugry 141 arch 31, August 1-December 31 I

I E .

I I

I I

E g

2.e g

Table 2.2 Harris Lake environmental monitoring program for 1988.

I' Program Frequency location. lj water quality Bimonthly E2, H2, P2 I Water chemistry Bimonthly E2, H2, P2 1 Trace elements 4 Lake water Bimonthly E2, H2, P2 .

Sediment Annually E H.P '

Net plankton Annually E,H.P-Fish Annually E. H. P Phytoplankton and Bimonthly E2, H2, P2 Zooplankton 52 (phytoplankton only)

Benthic invertebrates Monitoring Bimonthly El, H1, P1 Intake canal Corbicula survey B1 monthly V3, 21 I Shoreline Cobicula Annually E3, H1, 01, P1, Q1, a survey T3, MI, Al Corbicula survey of Biannual'y Emergency service water emergency service and cooling tower makeup water and cooling system intake structures tower makeup systems Fish Electrofishing Quarterly El, E3, H1, 43, P1, P3, E S1, S3, VI, V3 E Larval push net Alternate weeks (two El, H3, P3, 51, V3 trips per month, Apr-Jun)

Rotenone September EHP Troublesome aquatic Spring, summer, fall I,E,P,Q 5,V,Z vegetation survey I

I 2-10 m

a - _. +- _ _A I

I: / s.in. -O

[' On < ht y5* **k

( m.o.k c, .

,a

)

N s,,,, t #

I ._,.,,_ -

-pse y -

q3 Reservow 7 I

.uery em.,.E .ur a ws.s hm wet,,

ws.y intak. '

3 0

f~ 03 I

RS*b"* Cary Branen wss

+

SRiti2 w S.e 7

Buc h m Cre.k l \ ws.3 -

k g g . ,

L-I k, Darn

~ suc h m c,...

ge, c._,

s

..,.n.,,,.

/ .,

a wo.i.., p..., pi.ni

$ KILOMETER I

I z.u

I 3.0 WATER QUALITY AND WATER CHEMISTRY I 3.1 Water Quality During 1987 and 1988, Harris Lake had thermal characteristics typical of a Piedmont reservoir with maximum surface water temperatures occurring during midsummer (Figure 3.1). The lake was thermally stratified from April through October 1987. During 1988 when only bimonthly data were available, stratification was detected in May, July, and Sectember, while the lake was isothermal the remainder of the year (Appendix B). The power plant circulating water system utilizes a closed-cycle cooling tower for heat removal. There was a discharge of slightly warmed cooling tower blowdown and other plant wastewaters into the lower depths of Harris Lake near Station E2.

In a previous study (CP&L 1988), the coo'ing tower blowdown was found to have had a minimal influen,ce on the water column thermal patterns in the immediate blowdown discharge area from May 1987 to April 1988. There was no thermal influence outside of a maximum area of approximately 10.9 ha. The area of influence was usually less than 2.8 ha. The blow-I down monitoring station was approximately 1.5 kilometers away frem Sta-tionE2(Figure 2.1).

The mean dissolved oxygen (00) concentration of Harris Lake surf ace waters was 7.8 mg/ liter in 1987 and 8.9 mg/ liter in 1988. During 1987, near anoxic conditions (< l.0 mg/ liter 00) generally occurred below 5 m from June through September (Appendix B). A similar pattern was seen during 1988, except that 00 concentrations of < 1.0 mg/ liter occurred below 7 m during September. During 1987 and 1988, as well as during pre-vious years, Harris Lake exhibited a sharply defined depth interval (5-7 m) below which 00 concentrations rapidly declined from > 6.0 to 0.0 mg/ liter (CP&L 1984a, 1985, 1986, 1987).

I >

The mean conductivity (specific conductance) for 1987 was 74 ;S/cm and for 1988 was 91 uS/cm. These values included data from all stations and depths. Conductivity increased during late 1987 and remained high 3-1

I during 1988 (Figure 3.1). This trend may have been due to the cooling tower blowdown discharge increasing ion concentrations in the lake as well as low rainfall during 1988. For both years, Statim E2 exhibited a higher annual mean corductivity than H2 and P2 which were similar to each other (Table 3.1). Also, the minimum conductivity at all stations was higher during 1988 than in 1987 (Table 3.1). During 1986, prior to power plant operations, the conductivity was similar at all three stations (mean

= 62 uS/cm, range = 32-79 uS/cm). Despite these increases, the conductiv-ity was still within the range expected for lakes in the r,egion.

Conductivity values have been increasir.g since 1984, with the great-est increase between 1987 and 1988 (Figure 3.2). Reduced precipitation from 1985 to 1986 and 1988 resulted in a low lake level that allowed only minimal, if any, water releases from the lake. This could have increased the ion concentration in the impoundment resulting in increased conductiv-ity during those years. Initiation of power plant operations during February 1987 may have contrButed to the increased conductivity. The pH did not appear to have been significantly influenced by the drought condi-tions.

During 1987, the pH range (5.6 to 7.6) was slightly lower than the range for 1988 (5.9 to 8.1) (Table 3.1). The highest pH recorded was 8.1 during May 1988. Higher pH values are of ten measured in the surface as waters during the warmer months as a result of the higher photosynthetic rates of algae. The mean Secchi disk transparency (Secchi depth) for 1987 was 1.4 m and for 1988 was 1.3 m. This slight decrease n mean Secchi "

depth may have been due to increased phytoplankton populations.

E Precipitation was below average during three of the six years from 1983 through 1988 (Figure 3.2). Two years with the lowest precipitation on record occurred consecutively, 1985 and 1986. Precipitation during 1988 was similar to 1985 and 1986, while the other years had above normal precipitation, especially 1984 Due to the high retention time of Harris Lake, reduced precipitation could have resulted in changes in certain water quality parameters (i.e., concuttivity) as well as water chemistry parameters.

3-2 I

\

5l e

I I The annual temperature in Harris Lake increased in response to the drought conditions of 1985 and 1986 (Figure 3.2). The water temperature then decreased in 1987 when above average rainf all occurred, The low rainfall in 1988 seemed to result in only a minimal increase in water temperature.

3.2 Ions and Nutrients I During 1987, the surface concentrations of calcium were statistically I higher at E2 and P2 than at H2 (Table 3.2). All other ions were not sig-nificantly different between stations for 1987. Also, most ions, other than calcium, were not higher in concentration at E2 bottom than E2 sur-I face. Hardness was similar at Stations E2 and P2 and was significantly higher at these stations than at H2 (Table 3.2). Alkalinity and turbidity were significantly different at E2 and H2, while P2 was not different from the other stations. Alkalinity, hardness, and turbidity concentrations were higher at E2 bottom than at E2 surface.

During 1988, the calcium concentration at Station E2 was higher than at H2 and P2 (Table 3.3). There were significant differences in sodium concentrations between Stations E2 and H2, while P2 was similar to both E2 I and H2 (Table 3.3). All other ions were not significantly different among stations. Concentrations of most ions at E2 bottom were similar to sur-face values with the exception of calcium and magnesium. Hardness was higher at Station E2 than at H2, with P2 being similar to both stations (Table 3.3). Alkalinity was similar among all stations. Alkalinity and hardness continued to be higher at E2 bottom than E2 surface. Turbidity I was not different among surface stations but was higher at E2 bottom than E2 surface.

I An increase in ion concentrations (e.g., chloride, sodium, and sul-f ate) occurred in Harris Lake from 1987 to 1980 (Table 3.4; Figures 3.3 and 3.4). These ions began increasing during either March, April, or May 1987 and continued into either July or September 1988. Alkalinity end hardness also increased between these two years, i 3-3 I

from 1983 to 1988, several trends in surface water ion concentrations I

occurred. The record low precipitation for 1985, 1986, and 1988 appeared to contribute to the higher levels of alkalinity and calcium during these l

years (Figure 3.4) since both parameters decreased in concentration during 1987, a wetter year. The :ncreases in chloride, sulfate, sodium, and the resulting increase in conductivity (Table 3.4; figure 3.5) appeared to be a result of reduced rainf all and power plant operations, particularly the cooling tower blowdown discharge. Power plant effects were also indicated by the higher concentrations of most of these ions at Station E2 than at P2 and/or H2. It appeared that there was little, if cny, influence from upstream runoff.

During 1987, certain nutrients, especially most of the fractions of phosphorus and total nitrogen, were significantly higher at Station E2 than at H2 and P2 (Tabit 3.2). Concentrations of other nutrients--such as nitrate + nitrite nitrogen, dissolved organic phosphorus, and total organic carbon--showed no differences among stations.

During 1988, only total phosphorus and total dissolved phosphorus were significantly higher at Station E2 than at H2 and P2 (Table 3.3).

Silica was higher at H2 than at E2 and P2 for both years. The concentra-tions of nearly all nutrients were higher at E2 bottom than any surf ace station during both years. The concentration of total nitrogen was over twice as high at E2 bottom during 1988 as in 1987 (Table 3.2). Only total In organic carbon and nitrate + nitrite nitrogen were similar at both depths.

The concentrations of total phosphorus were similar during 1987 and 1988 and were significantly higher than during 1983-1986 (Table 3.4; Fig-ure 3.5). This increase was probably a result of power operations, spe-cifically the discharge of the cooling tower blowdown containing phos-phorus. Zinc phosphate was used at the plant as a corrosion inhibitor.

Total nitrogen concentrations were also similar during 1987 and 1988. The effect of the newly created lake caused higher total nitrogen concentrations during 1983 than any year since (Table 3.4; Figure 3.5).

3-4 E

This high value, considered atypical of conditions since 1983, was elimi-nated from trend statistical analyses resulting in a significant increase I in total nitrogen between 1986 and 1987 (Table 3.4: Figure 3.5). This increase was also probably attributable to blowdown discharges which included wastewater treatment plant effluents and nitrogen containing I oxygen-scavaging compounds used in power plant systems. These increases, while higher than previous years, are within the range expected for Pied-mont reservoirs. ,

Seasonal patterns in nutrient concentrations indicated there aas a buildup of phosphorus and nitrogen in the hypolimnion (lower depths) of I the lake during summer stratification. Surf ace water concentrations of these nutrients typically declined during summer as they were taken up by algae (Figures 3.3 aco 3.4).

I In the fall during destratification and mixing of the lake waters, these nutrients appeared to be dispersed throughout the water column.

During 1983, 1984, 1985, and 1986, the total nitrogen to total phos-phorus ratio (TN:TP) ranged from 21:1 to 41:1 (Table 3.4). During 1984, 1987, and 1988, TN:TP decreased to 18:1-16:1 due to increases in phos-nhorus. This level is considered typical for many southeastern reser-voirs.

Since initiation of power plant operations in early 1987, Harris Lake has shifted fram an oligomesotrophic lake to a mesotrophic/ alpha-eutrophic lake according to the classification of Weiss and Kuenzler (1976). Fac-4 tors indicating this change include increased cnnductivity, increased tota'i phosphorus concentrations, and reduced Secchi disk transparency.

This shif t in trophic status aas also indicated by increased overall pro.

ductivity and algal biomass (chlorophyll a) in the lake (see Sec-tion 5.0).

I I

I 3-5 I

m

I Table 3.1 Means and ranges of water quality variables from Harris Lake during 1987 and 1988. Data include all depths at each station, 1987 Station variable Minir;m l

Mean Maximum a Temperature ('C) 13.9 5.8 23.6 Dissolved oxygen (mg/ liter) 5.8 0 10.3 E2 pH 6.4 5.7 7.6 Conductivity (uS/cm) 80 36 373 Secchi depth (m) 1.5 1.2 2.2 Temperature ('C) 15.6 5.6 28.4 E Dissolved oxygen (mg/ liter) 6.3 0 10.3 E H2 pH 6.3 5.7 7.2 Conductivity (uS/cm) 70 34 .

160 g i Secchi depth (m) 1.3 0.8 1.8 g Temperature ('C) 15.6 5.6 27.9 Dissolved oxygen (mg/ liter) 6.5 0 10.5 P2 pH .

6.2 5.6 7.2 Condut.tivity (uS/cm) 71 39 140 Secchi depth (m) 1.4 1.0 1.8 E g

1988 Station Variable Mean Minimum Maximum Temperature ('C) 14.0 4.8 27.6 Dissolved oxygen (mg/ liter) 5.6 0.0 11.4 E2 pH 6.G 6.0 7.9 Conductivity (uS/cm) 100 70 208 Secchi depth (m) 1.33 1.0 1.5 Temperature ('C)

Dissolvedoxygen(mg/ liter) 14.3 6.6 3.5 0

28.9 10.3 I

6.4 5.9 H2 pH 8.1 Conductivity (uS/cm) 87 68 135 Secchi depth (m) 1.2 1.0 1.4 Temperature ('C) 14.0 3.8 28.5 Dissolved oxygen (mg/ liter) 7.8 0.5 11.1 P2 pH 6.4 5.9 7.9 Conductivity (uS/cm)

Secchi depth (m) 86 1.4 75 1.0 118 1.7 l I

I 3-6 E

=

M m M M M M M M M M M M M M . M Table 3.2 Heal. and ranges (in parentheses) of chemical variables in Harris Lake dpring 1987. Statistical analyses were performed Only On surface data. Variables with the sade superscript were not significantly different (P > 0.05).

Variable E2 suriace H2 suriace P2 surface E2 nottom Total alkalinity (as CACO ) 14 (11-19 )* 12 (8-16)D 13 (10-16)*D 25 (?2-59) 3 Hardness (calculated as CACO3 ) 15 (13-18)* 14 (12-17)D 15 (13-18)a 33 gg4,73, Total solids 62 (49-91) 62 (40-83) 58 (31-82) 80 (47-127)

Total dissolved solids 51 (5-91) 46 (25-77) 43 (5-77) 62 (18-103)

Turbidity (NIU) 3.0 (1.8-5.6)D 4.6 (I.7-12)a 3.5 (0.82-7.5)ab 9.7 (2.1- W Nutrients (mg/ liter)

Total nitrogen 0.48 (0.!2-0.69)a 0.42 (0.27-0.60)D 0.44 (0.31-0.66 )D 1.0 (0.40-3.9)

Ammonia nitrogen 0.07 (< 0.02-0.24)a 0.04 re0.02-0.12)D 0.05 (< 0.02-0.17)*D O.51 (0.08-1.8) )

Nitrate

• nitrite--N 0.06 (< 0.01-0.16) 0.06 (< 0.01-0.?! ) 0.05 (< 0.01-0.14) 0.08 (0.01-0.16) l Total phosph r s 0.037 (0.008-0.072)e 0.027 (0.010-0.061)D O.024 (0.009-0.072)D 0.174 (0.009-1.300) u Total dissolved phosphorus 0.022 (0.005-0.053)* 0.013 (0.004-0.030)b 0.013 (0.002-0.053)U 9.118 (0.003-0.760) b Dissolved molybdate reactive phosphorus 0.081 (< 0.001-0.044)a 0.003 (< 0.001-0.018 )b 0.0C5 (< 0 001-0.039)D 0.113 (0.001-0.790)

Dissolved organic phosphorus 0.026 (0.006-0.038) 0.024 (0.009-0.043) 0.019 (0.008-0.033) 0.061 (0.006-0.510)

Total particulate phosphorus 0.015 (0.003-0.025)e 0.014 (0.006-0.03tl ab 0.O'l (0.001-0.019)D 0.056 (0.000-0.540)

Total organic carbon 6.1 (5.6-6.8) 5.7 (2.5-6.5) 6.0 (4.5-6.9) 6.6(5.78.0)

Silica 1.8 (0.3-3.1)b 2.4 (0.4-5.4)a 1.6 (0.2-2.9)b 3.6 (1.4-8.2 )

Total nitrogen: Total phosphorus 14:1 (40:1-10:1) 16:1 (27:1-10:1) 18:1 (38: 1-10:1) 6:1 (44:1-3:1) lons (mg/ liter)

Calcium 3.7 (3.2-4.3)* 3.4 (2.8-3.9 )D 3.6 (3.2-4.3)* 4.4 (3.4-6.1)

Chloride 4.4 (3.6-5.0) 4.2 ( 3.6-5.0 ) 4.4 (3.7-5.2) 4.3 (3.4-5.0)

Ha4;nesi.m 1.5 (l.3-8.7) 1.5 (I.2-I.7) 1.5 (1.5-1.8) 1.6 (1.4-2.1 )

Po"assium 2.0*(1.6-2.9) 1.9 (1.5-2.7 ) 1.9 (1.4-2.8) 2.0 (1.6-2.7)

So4iium 5.5 (4.2-8.2) 5.0 (3.8-6.5) 5.0 (4.0-6.5) 5.0 (2.2-6.4)

Sustate 6.8 (5.5-8.1) 6.8 (5.7-8.0) 7.1 (5.6-8.8) 5.4 (0.5-8.8) 1

= ,

I

-a 1 eo ve ---8 3 gge*R ,8 R_ _g _ . . - ____ *

, _ * ~

U g *

• J. 9 9 - - dp9e* 0 ,# -

99*"5 of g g$.

,. gr~n . e c. ~ .A i . .

. g ~9 o, a' f -

o. . e, et a

a m

y E

c0-S .

. ooc 3

o. d. e. 5. 8. o* o.

ooo--;

o. no o_f g

"a O '"

• 9 3 5 B e. , n r " '1 -

• .*9 3 neh~ *

.' Q a n d ".Oof.. R. 8. 5. *

• 5 ooo mha M

en n S #.

n - * .

CW

- -- -o ggg -

- 5* a_ 9 3. E C. o. E.

..;# C "-  ; %_ - E

" 9 #

E o h -4

• " =

N ..

y 9o?99 o ,o, o- + -

g 294 m g , 7 L.

94 .

1 o e .

4' ,' o. E o., q*

a my , .-}  :  ;

& & d oe

• . . oRoo A

sn.

J..',.*.*.'~- #

.s n a V *-

• J

'e, 9 m, ". ~. >.a9

0. $. B. n- ,, ,, e a.

m

-x E' 4 n e. -

• e- ~

ha o o o o. oo 9 399 goo R

my -

x e

-c.o a.,, %

.n , n --

am -on- c ge~ .

o- -

g,.g5 55- -

9

• p ~. tqm a<1 * ..

• a_

~b

.o :>

, gs 9 9 c,99 9 9 7

n,

o. o. o. --c o g%_gf,,e. a e

9 + .9 m'1 u ai .. eg. e o .,i s m

> . 3

=c -

- d o o o. o.

-,,oo d o. .A dn ee --

., w -ad

• e ----

..,. q .

a -* . - ~ ' r m= p- c,. S o, ,oe . ., ~

en

-- ,9, c., -

vv . ,,, o o *.

• ddi .

o- gao .

%a oU doo xe v%

L wa e e -

oo . .,,

^ -

- $ E. O 9 5 G*e-A O 9_ --%-

m 8o *%*

~

~.

9~ .y 999. !. ' 9 ~. m**g 9

=w o j n -

81 . , ' ** ,

u n9 *. d e=9 c4 h

A7

~2 4

4 R.coco o. 9 A : 49gdat a. J-' 0 A A, 4 ' .

c8 2 d

,0

~ ~

B rzdd y SE*B- 0 ,,

l g

.c

- *, o . . *. m . o a a a a

• C. 8. 'R

. 4 oN

-o - *da - A * ~. oJ a.

o. o. o.

o o.o o.

c oo u ao col

'" % o

%=**  %%

G) % nh M

U

& e.= 3 V

4 k Wmh -

A e

$$y h e

khaC -

e -

p g 2 n a ka e Li e

• U e 2

" $Zg$ ~

• o. d to e i t j .

A a84 +

O s + *a. w= eg d'*

e ae < p.

pw g e ve c - e n n *-u .e- e

- .e. - 3 9 h

@ m@ e .e v

.. Ce 6 e C C

> .e CJ C == t 3 .a p ap Z sg e *

- 3

== @ 6 .=

-a D e -U H NMt O .= C a -.

• O E O E

$ 6 OW C

..e b i,

- .C

= e Z & *6 C

• e yg .a g 6 m

• e. E M.

m >

L. -. *v -

C 9 4 49 >e

. y e s u .a a O es t - E V e -3 a .e.

d- e .e. - = g o4 0 g pi .3.g 5 e e e - C e -e ih 9 e e a U O .-

.b .e. - e 6

-e e .e . .e. ---e Eo e C) e 6 e

- -- C .u 0- p

,o e m a 6 .O

- 2 -.0- O Q .0 0 -d .O

= - eQQI e Y O e n ~1 - 1 ,

3- S E

=

'M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M Table 3.4 Annual iake (Stations E2,112, and P2 combined) nicans (mg/ liter) of selected chemical constituents in lurris take surface waters, 1983-1988. Means with the same superscript were not sign Ulcantly different (P > 0.05). Analyses were based on bimonthly data for 1983-1987 to coincide with 1988 sampling frequency.

Variable 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 Total alkalinity (as "aLO3) 16a b 8 b 73 15 15a 13 15a tiardnessi 19 8 --

17 D

16 D

15 C D

, 17 Chloride b 5.l 3.9" 4.l d.e 4,gC 4,3C,d 5. 7'2 Sulfate 5.7c 5.0d 5.0 d 5.7c 6.8 b 8.7a Total nitrogen 5 0.70 0.37 C ' O.4Gb .c 0.35 C 0.44d'D 0.41a Total p. ;phorus 0.017 b 0.018 b 0.013 D 0.013 D 0.024 8 0.029 8

$ TN:TPS 41:1 21:1 31:1 30:1 18:1 16:1 Total calcium 4.8 a 3.5C 4.0 D 3.8 b 3.5 C 3.8 D Total sodium 4.6c,d 3.7 C 4.5 d 4.9b .c b 5.l 7.8 a i

I Calculated empirically.

S Statistics not performed on TH:TP.

5 1983 data eliminated from statistical analyses.

i f

e

I' 1987 Temperature 1988 Temportture DJ = )J 16 < tg .

M< M.

p il . 9 96 to < 10 6< g .,

C . , , , , , , % i , , , 0- , , , , , ,

J F u A M J J A t o N D J u u J B N Month Month 1907 Conductivity _

1988 ConductivHy j w

V 5 '* '

ig w.

w.

so .

l 4o . so .

g Do . . .

. So . , .

3 J F M A M J J A 8 0 N D J J 44 J $ N Month Morna 1987 S6cchl 1988 Gecchi depth a 10 to 1.l . 18 1 o. 1.C .

J h W A M J J A 8 hN b J W W J $ N fionth Month 1987 Precipitation 1988 Proc!pitation to n 5 15 it.

f10 f io.

1 .I S. 5

) i 4'A S) A i o 46 J i u 4 u J J A s o N o Month Month Figure 3.1 Trends of selected water quality parameters in liarr:s Lake surface waters,19871988.

3-10 g

l ,

ll Temperatura i

19 18 -

17 is ,..

15 , , ,

1963 1964 iMl 1985 1687 1668 Yew ConductMty 4

l 10 -

6 il 4-w.

l 40 -

}g M2 i i 3 i 1963 1984 1665 i i 1966 i

IW7 19t#

!l N ,, ,,

Sel depth Yew i 1.6 -

11.4- ^

, B -

! [ 12- l 10-

! 08 e i . . . i 1563 1964 1985 1906 1987 isse l lg Yew l5 t

l t

l l Precipitation 1M 1

1983 1964 1985 1966 1987 1968 i Yest '

i Figure 3.2 Trends of selected water quality parameters in liarris Lake surface

! waters, 1983 1988, ii 3-11

!- . , _ _ . . _ , _ _ _ . ~ . . , . - , , , , . . . _ . , .._ ,_ _ . .m._,__.,.._,_._.,__, _ _ _ _ , _ . . . _ _ . - . . . . _ _ . - . _ _ _ . . . . . - _ - , _ - _ _ _ _ , _ _

I OC.

g gy . Phosphorus Chlotldo n y

D CS -

6-

) Ots -

1. 000- 5 t

g- E C C2 4=

0 01 -

0 00 , , , , , , , , , , 1 3

JFMAMJJA5OND , , , , ,

JFMAMJJA$0NO Month 07- Month Nttfogen 10 -

Sulfato 06- 0" 5 g

1. 08- 8- '

s fa

$ Y*

04- $ E 6-03- , , , , , , , , , , , , S J F M A M J J A S ON D JFMAMJJA$0NO y Month Month 19 -

13 Albe!'nlly 4$

57 - Celtlum h

ha r is12--

10 -

E as- l

• - , , , , , , , .>, , , , 30 , , , , , , , , , , , ,

JFMAMJJA$0ND JFMAMJJASOND Month Month 21

3 wetensee 10 -

19 - ,, seosum is -

f. 17 -

f

. 7 g

i ;' .:14 F *: 5 13

• 4" 12

. , , , , , , , , , , i 3' J F MA M J J A S ON O , , , i , , , , , , ,

JFMAMJJASONO 1

N uentn uenth 20 Precipitation S

$llic a is - d' o to - )

7 3-

[ 2- g s-3 g

0- , , , , , , , , , e, , 0- , , , , , , , , , , , ,

JFMAMJJASOND JFMAMJJASONO Month Month Figure 3.3 Trends of selected water chemistry constituents in liariis Lake surface waters,1987.

I

- ;s

I 0 00 e ey , Phosphefue 0 06 -

7 6-chloride I  !- '

_~

N

~

{ !'!.: :

C C2 -

4 l 0 01 -

0 00 Jan Mar May Month Jul 1 i Gep Nov

, 3 Jan uw May Month Jul Sep Nov I Og-Nitrogen 9-gw,9,(, _

$ I 8-I E E

05-04- -  :

7 7" 6,

03 , , , , , , s , , , , , ,

Ull Jan Mar May Jwl Sep Nov Jan Mar May Jul Sep Nov Month M e,n t h I 19 it -

17 -

16 -

Alk alinity 50 d"

Calcium

,5 3 il - ,

33 - 35-10 -

I 0 i Jan Mar May Month Jul Sep Nov

, 30 Jan Mar May Month Jul hp Nov I

• w 21

0 -

19 -

18-Hardness 10

,, Scalum 8"

i 57 - / 2 7-I 5 16 " " 2

$ 6-li 15 - E 14 -

13 - 4-12 i i , , , , 3 i , , , , ,

Jan Mar - May Jul kp Nov Jan Mar May Jul Sep Nov Month Month Precipitation s tllc e I- 3g - 4-3 3-p I

E 10 -

7 2-5' e

0 i , i , , ,

i-0 A, , , , , ,

-I Jan Mar May Jwl Month Sep Nov Jan Mar May Month Jul Sep tev Figure 3.4 Trends of selected water chemistry constituents in IIarris Lake surface waters,1988.

3-13

0 08 7 Phosphorw. Chiertse 0 07 .

0 06 . 8-0 05 }

3 09 g 8 00o. 3 , , , , , ,

1963 19H 1985 1966 1987 1968 1983 16H 1968 19M 1687 1&&8 v..r wr 10 0~7 Nitrog.e1 g, I"N8

06. g' 1

7-

) 05 f.

I

04. ,

,, 4

' ' a 1983 t h64 1$851$$6 1$87 1$68 1683 1664 1[M idM 1[871$80 g v . ., me 19 50

,,, Alk etinity C.letum 17 . 4$.

16 \ .

y .

, ts .

\ g 40 g 14 , s 13 38 12 11 , , , , , , 30 , , , , , ,

1983 1GH 1985 1966 1987 1968 1983 1DH 1985 1986 1987 1968 v.w v,

'9 10

0 n.ren... 9.

I'** E 19 8. 5

+ 10 . g

• j 17 . ,

e is . c. 6 E f ID. $.

14 .

4_

13 12 3 , , i , . i 1983 thM 1d851[66 th871968 1983 1964 1988 1966 m 7 1988 v..e Y +='

140 S Precipitation I***

,g,

,M.

90 -

80 .,. 0 , , , , , ,

g 1983 ISM 1983 1986 1 1588 1983 19H 1965 1986 1987 1688 Ye.r Yee-l Figure 3.5 Trends of selected water chemistry constituents in liarris Lake surface g waters,19831988. Means for 19831987 based on twelve months of g l

data; means for 1988 based on six months of data. ,

l I

3-14 '

g

I 4.0 Trace Elements (including Iron) 4.1 Water Individual aqueous trace element concentrations during 1987 and 1988 were low except for iron (Appendix C). During 1987, 5 of the 36 Individual mercury I values, 1 of the 36 zinc values, and 4 of the 36 iron values were greater than the North Carolina Water Quality Standards or Action Levels. During 1988, 4 -

of the 6 iron values (from the hypolimnion at Station E2) were greater than the Water Quality Action level. All mean concentrations except for iron in 1987 and 1988 were less than the North Carolina Water Quality Standards and Action levels (Tables 4.1 and 4.2).

Iror concentrations in the anoxic hypolimnion at $tation E2 were greater than the North Carolina Water Quality Action Level (1000 ug/ liter) during summer stratification periods (Appendix C). High iron concentrations in the anoxic hypolimnion wert expected as ferric iron was reduced to feritus iron.

This was a natural process expected in the reservoirs with similar soils in the Piedmont o# North Carolina. Anr,ual mean iron concentrations at C2 were 3335 ug/ liter and 7558 ug/ liter in 1987 and 1988, respectively (Tables 4.1 and 4.2).

I There were no significant spatial differences in any of the surface water I concentrations of trace elements during either year except for copper in 1987 (Tables 4.1 and 4.2). Copper concentrations were significantly higher at Station C2 than at either H2 or P2.

At Station E2 during 1987, only manganese concentrations were signifi-cantly greater in the bottom waters than in surface waters (Table 4.1). The difference in manganese concentrations was due to reducing conditions that f avored the dissolution of manganese f rom sedimentary material during summer stratification (Appendix C). There were no significant differences between surface and bottom concentrations of any trace element during 1988 (Table 4.2). Although iron concentrations at Station E2 were greater in the bottom waters than in the surface waters, extreme variability among the monthly or bimonthly data precluded detecting any statistically significant

. differences during 1987 or 1988.

I 1

s1

i Detectable temporal differences (1983-1987 and 1983-1988) ware limited to aluminum, cepper, iron, mcnganese, and nickel concentrations (Tables 4.3 and 4.4). Decreased aluminum, iron, manganese, and nickel concentrations seemed related to natural conditions, cycling, and aging of the reservoir. Copper concentrations in the surface waters have been gradually increasing sin:e 1986.

4.2 Sediunt ,

Sediment concentrations of trace elements during 1988 were generally low (Table 4.5). There was, however, significantly more zinc in the sediments at Transect E than at Transects H or P. The mean zinc concentration measured at Transect E during 1988 was approximately 4.5 times the mean concentration measured during 1986 (170 Lg/g a r. ' 38 ug/g, respectively) (CP&L 1907).

Although the increase in zinc concentration between 1986 ard 1988 was probably related to zinc in the power plant's cooling tower blowdcwn (zinc phosphate was used at the plant as a corrosion inhibitor), the resultant concentra'tions were still within the range of zine concentrations found in unenriched sedi-ments (e.g., Martin and Hartman 1984) and not considered harmful to the lake's biota.

4.3 Aquatic Biota Trace element concentrations in the net plankton and three species of 5 fish remained low (Table 4.5), and as determined in 1986 (CP&L 1987), concen-trations were statistically similar throughout the reservoir. Mercury concen-trations in all fish tissues remained slightly elevated. As in 1986, the mercury concentrations were attributed to the naturally increased availability of mercury in the new lake (Wren et al. 1983; CP&L 1987).

I I

l E

l l 4-2 l

l

M M M M M M M M M M m M M m W M M M Table 4.1 Heangend 1987 . standard errors of trace element concentrations in the waters of Harris Lake during Statistical analyses are given when concentrations were at or above the analytical reporting limits. All concentrations are in ug/ liter and sample size equaled 12.

Laboratory N.C. Water Station Reporting Quality Trace elen:ent E2 (Surface) E2 (Bottom) H2 P2 Limits Standarddi Aluminum 41 1 11 46 1 9 55 1 19 53 19 20 None Arsenic 0.5 1 0.0 1.010.3 < 1.0 0.6 1 0.1 1.0 50 Cadmiucra 0.06 1 0.01 < 0.1 0.06 1 0.01 0.07 1 0.01 0.1 2 4

Chromium 1.1 1. 0.1 < 2.0 < 2.0 < 2.0 2.0 50 Copper 3.b 1 0.4a b D 4.2 1 0.4 3.0 1 0.4 3.41 0.5 1.0 15 Iron 144 1 24 3335 1 1815 160 1 27 152 1 22 50 1000 Lead 0.6 1 0.1 0.9 1 0.2 0.8 1 0'. 2 0.7 1 0.1 1.0 25 Manganese 224 1 88 3048 1 11165 116 1 19 149 2 29 20 None

{ Mercury 0.16 1 0.10 0.26 1 0.16 0.13 1 0.07 < 0.1 0.1 0.2 Nickel < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 2.7 1 0.2 5.0 50 Selenium <1 <1 0.5 1 0.0 <1 1 5 Zinc < 20 1512 11 1 1 15 15 20 50 I

Fisher's protected least significant difference procedare was applied only if the overall F test for the treatnent was significant. Means followed by the same superscript were not significantly different (P > 0.05).

S From NCDEM (1986): Copper, iron, and zinc a.c Action Levels.

S Mean concentrations in the bottom and surface waters were significantly different (P < 0.05).

Table 4.2 Heans and standard errors of trace element concentrations in the waters of Harris Lake during I

1988 . Statistical analyses are given when concentrations were at or above the analytical reporting limits. All concentrations are in ug/ liter and sample size equaled 6.

Laboratory H.C. Water Station Reporting Quality Trace element E2 (Surf ace) E2 (Bottom) H2 P2 Limits StandardsI Aluminun 64 1 12 55 1 13 47 1 7 52 1 10 20 None Arsenic O.7 1 0.1 1.2 1 0.3 < 1.0 < 1.0 1.0 50 Cadmiunn < 0.1 0.06 1 0.01 0.09 1 0.04 0.1 0.06 1 0.01 2 Chromius < 2.0 < 2.0 < 2.0 < 2.0 2.0 50 Copper 4.2 1 0.9 3.7 1 0.7 3.5 1 0.4 3.4 1 0.4 1.0 15 Iron 81 1 28 7558 1 3501 92 1 26 73 1 20 50 1000 Lead < l.0 0.6 1 0.1 < 1.'O < l.0 1.0 25 Manganese 157 + 67 67 + 7 7810 1 3594 87 1 17 20 None Mercury 0.05 1 0.00 < 0.05 < 0.05 < 0.05 0.05 E 0.2 Nickel < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 5.0 50 Selenius <1 <1 <1 <1 1 5 Zinc 12 + 2 1. 4 2 12 + 2 12 + 2 20 50

+ Fisher's protected least significant difference procedure was applied only if the overall F test for the treatment was significant. Means followed by the same superscript were 'not significantly dif ferent (P > 0.05).

S froc: NCDEM (1986): Copper, iron, and zinc are Action Levels.

S Pean concentrations in the bottom and surface waters were significantly dif ferent (P < 0.05).

E Detector sensitivity permitted the lowering of the detection level from 0.1 in 1987 to 0.05 in 1988 by the CP&; Chemistry Laboratory.

gg gg gg a m m W MS M M M M M M M M M M

m M M M M M M M g em mM mM M M M M Table 4.3 Meang and ranges of trace element concentrations in the surf ace waters of liarris Lake, 1983-1987 . Statistical analyses are given when the majority of concentrations were at or above the analytical reporting limits. ATl units are ug/ liter and sample size equaled 36 (January, February. . . .. December) in 1983-1987 un'ess otherwise noted.

~

Year Trace element 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 Aluml;ium 59a __1 __1 3t b 50 a

(< 10-170) (< 20-150) (< 20-220)

Arsenic 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5

(< l.0-1.0) (< l.0-1.0) (< 1.0-1.0) (< l.0-1.0) (< l.0-1.0)

Cadmium 0.7 0.5 0.5 0.18 0.06

(< l.0-6.0) (< 1.0-1.0) (< 0.5-1.0) (< 0.1-0.36) (< 0.1-0.17)

Chroalem < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 1.3 1.0

(< 2.0-9.0) (< 2.0-2.3)

Copper 1.8 D 2.0 b 3,3 4 g,$5 3.4 8

(< l.0-5.0) (< l.0-6.0) (< 1.0-16) (< l.0-7.0) (< l.0-6.4) 3 --T b b Iron 658a 773 173 73 (80-2000) (770-780)5 (< 50-530) (< 50-350)

O. Lead 1.4 1.4 1.2 0.8 0.7

(< 2.0-8.0) (< 2.0-5.0) (< l.0-4.0) (< l.0-2.4) (< l.0-3.1) a __S __5 b b Manganese 323 180 -

163 (40-l*00) (< 20-800) (42-1100)

Mercury 0.1 0.1 < 0.1 0.1 0.1 l (< 0.1-0.4) (< 0.1-0.2) (< 0.1-0.67) (< 0.1.0-1.0.2)

Nickel 7.5 7.2 5.2 2.9 2.6

(< 10-20) (< 10-30) (< 5.0-11) (< 5.0-6.0) {< 5.0-5.1)

Selenium 0.5 <1 0.5 0.5 0.5

(< l-1) (< l-1) (s 1-1) (< l-1) (< l-1)

Zinc 15 10 23 < 20 12

(< 20 '80) (< 20-20) (< 20-270) (< 20-70)

IMedn concentrations of an element with the same superscript were not significantly different among

~srs (P > 0.05).

S No data.

55anple size equaled three.

Table 4.4 Heang and ranges of trace element concentrations in the surf ace waters of liarris Lake. 1983-1988 . Statistical anal ses are given when the majority of concentrations were at or above the

~

analytical reporting lim.ts. All units are ug/ liter and sample size equaled 18 (January. March,

. . .. November) in 1983-1988 unless otherwise noted.

Trace element 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 Aluminum 52a b

-S -S 32 56 8 55 a

(< 10-150) (< 20-150) (< 20-220) (< 20-90)

Arsenic < l.0 0.6 0.6 0.5 < 1.0 0.5

(< l.0-1.0) (< 1.0-1.0) (< I.0-1.0) (< 1.0-1.0)

Cadmium 0.8 0.5 0.5 0.2 0.1 0.1

(< 1.0-6.0) (< l.0-1.0) (< 0.5-1.0) (< 0.5 < 1.0) (< 0.1-0.13) < 0.1-0.30 Chromium ( 5.0 < 5.0 2.3 1.1 < 2.0 < 2.0

(< 2.0-< 5.0) (< 2.0-2.0)

Copper 2.4bc 3,9c 1.8c i,9c 3.Sab 3.7 8

(< 1.0-5.0) (< I.0-6 9) (< 1.0-4:0) (< l.0-7.0) (< l.0-6.4) (1.5-8.1)

Iron 680a 773 8 165 D b

-S 154 - 82D

, (80-2000) (770-780)5 (< 50-470) (< 50-350) (< 50-170)

E Lead < 2.0 1.4 1.3 0.8 0.9 < 1.0

(< 2.0-4.0) (< Z.0-4.0) (< l.0-2.0) (< l.0-3.1)

Mangar.ese 314a 137 b 126D 103 D (40-1500) -S -S (40-340) (42-520) (50-48G)

Mercury 0.1 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 0.2 0.04

(< 0.1-0.3) (< 0.1-0.2) (< 0.1-1.2) (< 0.05-0.05)

Nickel 9.7a 5,g b 4,g b 2.8 C 2.6 C <S C

(< 10-20) (< 10-10) (< 10-10) (< 5.0-5.0) (< 5.0-5.1)

Selenium 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 <1 <1

(< l-1) (< I-1) (< i-1) (< l-1)

Zinc 12

< 20 < 20 < 20

• 20 (< 20-20) (< 20-20)

I years Mean concentrations of an element with the same superscript were not significantly dif ferent among (P > 0.05).

T Ho data.

5 Sample size equaled three.

m_ m q m M M M M M M M M M M M

I I Table 4.5 Means and standard errors of trace element concentrations in the sediments, net plankton, and fish from Harris Lake during 1988.

All concentrations are in ag/g dry weight and sartple si2e equaled I three unless otherwise noted.

I Seeple estris Te nsect 4 Ce Tr ace ele *eetM 09 N Se in I sediment 1.9 : 0.4 <3

• E 16 3 3 < 0.02 < 0.8 170 : 178 H 1.9 3 0.1 <3 12 : 1 < 0.02 < 0.8 74 + 9 D P 1.4 + 0.1 <3 24 : 16 < 0.02 < 0.8 '9 : 26 D I Net plackton E H

1.4 : 0.2 1.7 : 0,t 0.24

• 0.03 0.04 : 0.02 22 : 4 18 : 3

< 0.04 0.03 : 0.r1 3.6 : 0.3 3.2 : 0.1

'03 : 3 G4 : 1 P

0.08 : 0.2 0.01 : 0.00 16 : 1 0.04 : 0 3.0 : 0.2 34 ; 4 Fish (treeles/

tength, mm)

Blueglii I < 0.8 0.02 : 0.01 4.9 : 0.8 0.09 + 0.01 < 0.J 95 : )

E (94 135) H < 0.8 0.02 : 0.01 4.4 : 0.4 0.21 : 0.02 < 0.8 174 : ?)

P < 0.8 0.03 0.01 13 + 6 0.14 + 0.01 < 0.8 49 + S I Bro.n bullbead (2$5-283)

E H

< 0.8

< 0.8

< 0.8 0.01 + 0.01 0.02 + 0.01 3.8 : 0.7 4.1 : 1.3 0.72 : 0.10 0.44 : 0.10 0.8

< 0.8 to 63 : 12 2

P 0.04 : 0.03 5.2 : 1.3 0.48 : 0.12 < 0.8 (2 : 1 i Lor;ee vth E < 0,8 < 0.01 2.1 : 1.* 1.31 : 0.48 < 0.8 73 : 2 eess H < 0.8 0.17 : 0.14 1.7 : 0.4 0.38 : 0.02 < 0.8 I B2 : 6 (244-357) P < 0.8 0.02 : 0.02 4.3 : 1.0 1.32 : 0.30 < 0.8 72 + 5 I Standard error values are given when all replicate concentrations were I greater t'1an the ana'ytical reporting limits. Concertrations of an element for a given sample matrix with the same ;uperscript were not significantly different among transects (P > 0.05).

S Mean and range of dry to fresh weight ratios for conversion to "'*et-4 weight" basis: plankten 0.054 (0.04-0.074); whole fish 0.25 (0.19-0.31);

sediment 0.38 (0.28-0.54).

S Sample si2e equaled 5.

I I

I ,-,

t I

l 5.0 PHYTOPLANKTON I

L Phytoplankton densities in Harris Lake were moderate in 1987 and 1988 e relative to other North Carolina piedmont reservoirs (Weiss and Kuenzler L 1976). Monthly density estimates ranged f rom 2,538 units /ml (P2, March)

, to 12,617 units /ml (H2, December) during 1987. In 1988 densities ranged from 1,659 (E2, November) to 8,848 units /ml (H2, March). Densities were l elevated (relative to other CP&L impoundments) during November and December 1987 and March 1988 at Station H2 (Tables 5.1 and 5.2) (CP&L 1989). Weiss and Francisco (1984) stated that algal densities from 3,000 to 10,000 units /mi indicate that a lake is mildly eutrophic (mesceu-trophic). Mean density estimates during 1987 showed significantly greater I phytoplankton abundance at H2 (6,943 units /ml) than at E2 (5,345 units /ml) and P2 (4,937 units /ml) which were not significantly different. During 1988, yearly mean phytoplankton der.sities were significantly greater at H2 (5,806 units /ml) and E2 (4,407 units /ml) compared to P2 (3,850 units /ml)

(Table 5.3). This spatial pattern of higher phytoplankten densities at H2 than at P2 <as also observed in 1986 (CP&L 1987).

I The greater densities measured at H2 may be a reflection of various environmental factors, possibly including less wind-induced mixing of the I water column and/or shallower water column depth compared to E2. This headwater area of the lake is narrow relative to the E2 and P2 locations and appeared to be better sheltered from wind-induced water column mixing due to the proximity of a gently rolling shoreline terrain, in either case (i.e., less mixing or shallower water column depth) phytoplankton cells would remain for a proportionately longer time in the euphotic zone (upper layers of a body of water into which sufficient light penetrates to permit growth of green plants). Phytoplankton growth in this zone was expected to be greater than in a,eas where extensive water column mixing and/or a relatively deep water column allowed phytoplankton to circulate to depths with restricted light penetration. The time phytopienkton remain in areas with less than adequate light could result in reduced Dhytoplankton ohotosynthesis which micht ha raf betad in 4craased abun-dance.

5-1

I Reservoirwide mean phytoplankton density estimates continued to grad-ually increase from 1983 through 1987-1988 (Figure 5.1). This trend included significantly greater phytoplankton densities in 1987 than in 1985, while significantly greater densities were also present from 1984 to 1900 compared to 1983 (Table 5.3). Reservef rwide mean phytoplankton den-sity estimates were similar during 1987 and 1988 (Table 5.3). The increase in total phytoplankton abundance from the 1984-1985 to 1987-1988 periods appeared to be a reflection of an increase in macronutrient con-centrations (e.g., various forms of nitrogen and phosphorus; see Sec-tion 3.0). The increased macronutrient concentrations in 1987 and 1988 r.ppeared to be related to macronutrients contained in water released from l

the power plant. Another factor possibly influencing macronutrient con-centrations and phytoplankton densities may have been lake retention time. During years with below normal rainf all (e.g.,1986 and 1988; see Section 3.0), lake retention time would be espected to have increased relative to years when rainfall was at or above normal levels. Since 1987 g

lake retention also increased. due to evaporative water 'oss associated 5 with operation of the power plant cooling tower. At various times throughout 1986-88, lake water levels were insufficient for water outflow (personal observation). Weiss and Francisco (1984) reported that nutrient levels and retention times were major factors influencing phytoplankton abundance in nearby 8. Everett Jordan Lake..

During 1987 and 1980, the Chlorophyceae (green algae), the Chrysophy-ceae (chrysophytes; primarily Chrysochromulina spp.), and the Cryptophy-ceae were usually more abundant- than other phytoplankton classes E W

represented in Harris Lake (Tables 5.1 and 5.2). The Chlorophyceae (green algae) were numerically dominant during 1987 at varinus times in the spring, summer, and fall, while in 1988 the green algae were also dominant at times throughout the year. The Chrysophyceae and the Cryptophyceae were seasonally abundant throughout both years. Myxcphyceae (blue-green algae) were on occasion numerically dominant during the spring and summer vith density peakr in July 1987 and 1988. Myxophyceae densities were ilatively low such that water quality was not adversely influenced, g

• ing 1987, representatives of the Chlorophyceae and Myxophyceae were 4 tent in significantly greater densities at H2 than at E2, whila therc I

5-2

.I

I were no significant differences in estimated densities between P2 and H2 or between E2 and P2 (Table 5.3). Densities of Chrysophyceae were sig-nificantly greater at H2 than at either P2 or E2 during 1983-1988. During 1988, Chrysophyceae densities ccntinued to be significantly greater at H2 than at P2, while no difference was detected between densities at E2 and I P2 or between H2 and E2. Reservoirwide densities of the Chlorophyceae, Cryptophyceae, and Myxophyceae bave gradually increased since 1983 with densities significantly higher in 1987 than 1983 (Table 5.3). These sta-tistically sigrificant increases were, in part, a reflection of unexplained, short-te*m (November and December 1987) increases in Chlorophyceae and Cryptophyieae densities at H2.

Seasonal variations in phytoplankton de'sities during 1985 and 1986 were characterized as relatively small (CPt.L 1986, 1987). These fluctu-

<I ations included relatively higher densities in the summer and f all when temperatures and day length were f avorable for algal growth. With the onset of shorter day lengths a,nd cooler water temperatures, phytoplankton densities typically declined (e.g., November 1986 at E2 and P2). During l 1987 and 1988, seasonal variations in phytoplankton became more pronounced and included unexpected density peaks duri g the fill of 1987 and/or the winter of 1988 depending on location. A peak in density occurred during

• November and December 1987 at H2 (Figure 5.1).

Seasonal fluctuations during 1988 in phytoplankton densities included abundance peaks in January (P2) or March (E2 and H2) followed by declines in abundance with only minor summer density increases during July and September at P2 and E2, respectively (Figure 5.1). The density decline in May may be related to phytonlankton grazing by zooplankton or fish, while the f all and winter increases may be related to increased macronutrient availability associated with the lake turnover.

Chlorophyll a concentrations in 1987 were, with a few exceptions I

IB (e.g., February and November at H2 and March at E2), moderate with yearly means of 20.1, 15.7, and 11.5 ug/ liter at H2, E2, and P2, respectively. A peak in chlorophyll a concentrations (37.3 ug/ liter) occurred during

o. November 1987 at H2 (Figure 5.2). The chlorophyll a concentration at this 5-3 I '

I station approached levels (NCDEM water quality standard: values not to exceed 40 pg/ liter) indicative of eutrophic water (Weiss sad francisco 1984). However, this peak in chlorophyll a concentration was only ob-served at one station on one occasion. During 1987, significantly higher yearly mean chlorophyll a concentrations were observed at H2 than at E2, while P2 was not significantly different than either H2 or E2, This spatial difference in chlorophyll a concer.trations partially reflected the elevated chlorophyll a concentration at H2 during November 1987. In 1988, chlorophyll a concentrations at R2 and E2 were significantly higher l

compared to P2 (Table 5.3). The mean annual chlorophyll' a concentration at E2 increased from 1987(15.7.g/ liter)to 1988 (22 ug/ liter).

Reservoirwide mean chlorophyll a concentrations were significantly higher during 1987 than in either 1986 or 1984 A further increase in chlorophyll a concentrations above 1987 levels was nbserved in 1988 with the yearly mean increasing from 15.7 ug/ liter (1987) to 20.3 ug/ liter.

Furthern. ore during 1988, the number of elevated chiarophyll o concentra-tions increased from a single peak in 1987 to two peaks occurring during March and July at E2, a peak at P2 in January, and a peak at H2 in July (Figure 5.2). The 1987 and 1988 increases in chlorophyll a concentrations appeared to be related to increased macronutrient (particularly phos-phorus) availability and/or increased lake rettntion time. E W

a To evaluate the possible influence of macronutrient introductions 5 from upstream sources (e.g., Holly Springs' sewage treatment plant ef-fluent), a chlorophyll e inonitoring station was established in the head-water region (Station 52) of Harrie Lake. Mean annual chlorophyll a concentration at 52 during 1988 was lower than concentrations at other lake stations indicating minimal biologically available macronutrient additions from upstream.

Typically in North Carolina piedmont reservoirs, increased macro-nutrients availability can stimulate phytoplankton growth which, in turn, may result in increased biomass (indicated by chlorophyll a concentra-tions) and/or phytoplankton density, Chlorophyll a concentrations, total phytoplankton densities, and total phosphorus concentrations, when applied 5-4 I

E

I to the Weiss and francisco (1984) tentative trophic classification system, indicated Harris Lake has increased in trophic classification from oligomesotrophic to mesceutrophic during the Last several year $. Such I increases in trophic classification typically reflect the cultural eutrophication (" aging") of a lake or reservoir. This aging process (in-dicated by increased trophic status) may be greatly accelerated by macro-nutrient additions. Ultimately this aging process can result in a reduction in overall water quality. Such reductions in water quality have not been observed at Harris Lake. Increases in the trophic status of Harris Lake appeared to reflect several envircnmental fictors including increased lake retention time (due to low rainfall and/or evaporative loss of cooling tower makeup) and macronutrient availability resulting from I additions associated with plant blowdown.

I I .

I I ~

i I

I g

i I 5-5 I

N Table 5.1 Phytoplankton class densities (units /al) by month in Harris Lake duririg 1987.

S t at ion / class Jan Feb Nec por my Jun Jul A.g Sep Oct how Dec Meen U

Bacitteriophyceae 578 880 1206 653 tot 176 Chlorcwhycese (03 302 176 452 258 528 492 603 1005 855 1860 3:42 4624 2411 Chrysonnyceae 2262 2212 1709 1181 3066 2053 1131 1784 5418 1558 302 377 201 151 0 377 Cryg,tonbytese 126 628 955 1005 8458 ISI 251 808 1860 452 2538 905 1885 9 30 Mymophreeee 126 25 0 1960 1225 357 628 1634 3594 804 553 Total phytoplankton 452 276 226 72 3 2564 4323 6434 5429 5680 8822 6987 6158 3896 4926 2865 6057 5345

!i2 Baciate-lophyceae 327 327 452 955 276 254 553 478 201 276 Chlorophyceae 1050 377 880 4a6 1759 1181 2739 37a5 3468 1910 Chrysophycea- 2312 2362 2086 3393 4650 2555 2463 3217 3016 327 754 '452 258 Cryptophyceae 75 452 1*83 5228 578 1525 352 578 1056 829 1056 1734 553 955 829 1307 2136 4976 Mynophyceae 251 151 25 1363 452 905 1307 3996 1206 704 u, Total phytoplankton 4449 779 tei 930 928 6032 573C 5302 68I1 7238 7364 5127 4725 6082 b 51838 12617 6943 EI Baciteeriophyceae 804 327 276 880 327 176 503 276 150 226 276 Cr.n orophyceae 1382 1232 528 729 413 2438 3418 3745 1835 1206 2262 2664 Chrysephyceae 1307 1056 930 1985 2M9 2111 1508 528 603 402 tot 4 78 Crypicchyceae 251 tot 126 151 608 75 804 804 804 1081 779 377 u pophyceae 663 1910 t181 2790 955 3/12 126 0 352 1081 1206 Total phytoplankton 3242 855 603 855 201 779 800 4046 2815 2538 5932 6283 6912 6786 2865 4197 5831 3795 7*88 i

4937 cluded Su:=::ation of class densities may not equal the total density because minor classes have not been in-in the table.

gg g g g m m M M M M M M M " E

M M M- M M M M M M M M M M M M I M M- M- M Table 5.2 Phytoplankton class densities (units /ml) by month in Harris Lake durlag 1988.

S t a t ion /c l ass Jan Mar May Jwl Sep How see na O

BaciiIarlophyceee 353 277 25 100 151 226 222 ChIorochyceae 2I10 5503 2351 830 8783 803 2223 Chrysophyceae 226 628 II81 352 25 352 46i Cryptophyceae 327 327 1357 351 1458 201 670 Mysophycese 226 25 151 2060 t006 50 586 fotal phytoplankton 3468 7691 5027 3921 4675 1659 4407 Deci eriophyceae 652 378 126 50 226 251 230 Ch loroph yce ae 3292 5982 1530 829 1559 678 7287 Chrysophyceee 1332 1181 4448 ,

377 628 1784 1625 Cryptophyceae 377 3106 377 301 302 1835 717 Mymophyceae 603 tot 402 2187 1361 25 783 e Total phytoplankton 6333 8848 6736 3978 4346 4599 2806 E

Gecilleriophyceae 352 201 226 251 125 251 234 Chiorophyr.ese 3619 3720 729 804 1*31 502 175t Clor ysophyceae 1231 30) 427 553 402 452 561 Cryptophyceae 754 478 955 503 503 779 662 Mraophyceae 151 276 126 2236 377 25 532 total phytoplankton 6858 54-2 2485 4599 2664 20 % 3850 Summation of class de.isities may not equal the total density because minor classes have not betc. in-  !

cluded in the table. -

l l

l l

I Table 5.3 Results of analysis of variance and Duncan's multiple range i densityandbiomassE.romHarrisLake,1983 tests1988. to catermine s atial and tempor S , ort-tem analyses 1987 H2 E2 P2 m Density (units /ml) 6943 5345 4937 g

H2 E2 P2 Biomass (ug/ liter) 20.1 15.7 11.5 Numerically abundant phytoplankton(Units /ml)

Chlorophyceae H2 P2 E2 2555 2111 2053 H2 P2 E2 Hyxophyceae 928 800 723 Short-term analyses 1988 Density (units /ml) H2 E2 P2 E 5806 4407 3850 3

Biomass (ug/ liter) E2 h2 P2 52 22 22 17 10 Numerically abundant phytoplankton (Units /ml)

Chrysophyceae H2 E2 P2 1525 808 608 e

Long-tem analyses 1983-1988 Density (units /ml) g Year 87 88 86 84 85 83 5388 4688 3691 3281 3102 1983 Biomass (vg/ liter) I Yeari 88 87 86 04 17.0 15.2 9.5 9.3 3

3 Year 88 87 84 20.3 15.7 M Station H2 E2 . P2 17.2 14.2 1.? .1 1

t 5-8 I

I

~

1

lI Table 5.3 (continued) long-term analyses 1983. 928 continued Numerically important phytoplankton (units /ml)

Chlorophyceae Year A7 88 86 85 84 83

.I 22-0 2087 1722 1297 1143 885 Cryptophycese Year 87 88 85 86 84 83 1181 683 371 342 544 178 Myxophyceae Year 87 84 88 86 85 83 817 638 634 440 329 216 Cryptophyceae .

Station I

H2 P2 E2 59 517 79 Chrysophyceae Station H2 P2 E2 975 530 471 i

Chlorophyll o concentrations from May-December used for computation.

I I

E I

I g 53

Station E2

, , g, 12d00 -

100002 E $000 .

A ,

E 6000 -

40002 2000A g g' W ' i i - - 5 F A J AOO F A J AOOF A J AOD F AJ AOD F A J AOOF AJ AO D H1980 , 198f- l 1960 l 1986 l 1987' l 198 q Oate 14000 120002 /

100002 E 90002 5 ,,

y 6000 A 4000l 2000E

• i . , ,

F AJ AOO F AJ AO OF AJ AO OF A J AOD F AJ AO OF AJ AOD

' Igge ' ggg7 i ,gg H1960 l 198f l 1985 , ,

Date Station P2 a 3,30, 5 12006.

100002 g 8000 -

y 60002 40002 2000 y

• i i , ,

F AJ AOO F AJ AO OF AJ AO OF A J ACO F AJ AO DF AJ AOD b'802 i 1984 l 1985 l 1980 l 1987 l 1988% g W

Date Figure 5.1 Phytoplankton densities from Stations EL 112, and P2 in Harris Lake, E 1983 1988, 5

I 5-10

I Station E2 I M-I s wa I i

' io -

I &;;. ... .. ... . . . . . . ... . . ... . ... . .....

1968 1664 . 1965  ; 1 ^4 ', 1987 ,

I e.i.

Gtation .42

l

,x.

I i

.w.

I ,,. . .

k -%

V I

cA.',de^ P'^,4^ P ' ^,d; ^ P ' ^,47 ^  ?'^,d.'  ?

l ,,

o...

Otation P2 I _ m-3 l

6

( o-t .

kso-c:.

F A J A 00 F A J AO O F A J A ODF A J A0D F A J A 00

. 1664 , 1965 1966 1967 1968 ,

o==

Figure 5.2 Chlorophyll a concentrations (pg/ liter) from Stations E2,112, and P2 in liarris Lake,19841988. (Chlorophyll a samples for January I through April 1986 were not correctly analyzed and data were omitted from graph.

I g sm

I l l 6.0 ZOOPLANKTON During 1987 there were 43 zooplankton taxa collected from Harris Lake; 28 taxa were collected during 1988 (Tables 6.1 and 6.2). This de-crease in taxa number occurred for all taxa groups (copepods, cledecerans, I rotifers) and was primarily the result of the loss of less abundant taxa probably due to reduced sampling frequency. The number of taxa found at each station was similar among stations within each year.

l Taxa richness varied significantly among months for both 1987 and 198.8 (Figure 6.1). There were spring (March and April) and summer (August) peaks in taxa richness during 1987 with the 10 west taxa richness occurring in May and December. During 1988, bimodal peaks .in taxa rich-ness were not evident. The lowest numbers of taxa occurred in January and I March which represented a continuation of the low numbers observed during December 1987. Taxa richness increased and remained significantly higher from May to November 1988. Ro,tifers accountId for the high number of taxa during the warmer months.

The annual mean density of rooplankton was 82,096/m3 during 1987 and 74,544/m 3 during 1988. During 1987, organism density at H2 was signif-icantly higher than at E2 and P2 which were not significantly different '

from each other (Table 6.3). High organism density at H2 was due to high numbers of copepods and rotifers. Cladocerans were not different in abun-dance among stations. There were no station or taxa group differt es in zooplankton densities during 1988 (Table 5.3).

l Zooplankton densities varied significantly among months for both years. During 1987, organism densities reached peaks in spring (April, May), and f all (September, October and November), with the lowest densi-ties occurring during winter (January, February, March, and December) and

!g summer (June, July) (Figure 6.1). This bimodal pattern was repeated dur-E ing 1988 when organism densities were highest in May and November. In-( creases in ciadocerans (Bosmina longirostris, Daphnia ambigua, Duphnia parvula, Ceriodophnfa lacustris), rotifers (Keratella cochlearls, Polyarthra curyptera, Ke!!icotta bostoniensfs. Pompholyx sulcata), and copepods (nauplii)

I 6-1 l

I

I:

resulted in these increases. Decreases in zooplankton during the summer months might have been due to increased prcdotien by larval and plankti-vorous fish on the larger zooplankters (Da;Anla spp. and copepods).

3 Annual mean zooplankton biomass was 60.3 mg/m in 1987 and 27.9 mg/m 3 I

in 1988. The decrease in annual biomass in 1988 was due to decreases in the density of largzr cladocerans and the copepod DIaptomus pallidus, a l

large zooplankter. Rotifer biomass, on the other hand, increased from 1987 to 1988.

Zooplankton biomass followed a temporal trend similar to organism density with concomitant spring and fall peaks (Figure 6.1). During 1987 there were differences in temporal trends of. density and biomass.

However, during 1988, biomass and density were nearly identical in their monthly trends. Biomass increased more rapidly during February 1988 than l

did density because of an increase in the large zooplankter, Diaptomus pallidus, and the small zooplankter, Bosmina longIrostrfs. During November 1988, biomass decreased as density increased due to an increase in rotifers which have less biomass.than copepods and cladocerans.

There were significant differences among stations for total biomass during 1987 (Stations H2 and E2 were different and P2 was similar to both)

(Table 6.3). There were no dif ferences in ciadoceran biomass among sta-tions, while rotifer biomass was highest at H2 with E2 and P2 being similar and lower. Copepods biomass was highest at H2 and lowest at E2 with biomass at P2 similar to both E2 and H2 (Table 6.3). g During 1988 there were no significant differences among stations for total biomass or for rotifer, copepod, or cladoceran biomass. There were also no differences in copepod or cladocerans blemass among months.

Rotifers, however, exhibited differences among months with bio:nass in January and March being significantly lower than during other months. The increase in. total zooplankton biomass during November 1988 (Figure 6.1) was due mostly to an increase in rotifers (Keratella cochlearls, Kellicottia l

bostoniensis), calanoid copepodites, and the cladoceran Bosmina longirostris.

l 6-2 5

l l

.- _ _ _ . . _ _ _ _ = . _ _ . ._ _ _ _ _

I' l l Since the impoundment reached full pool in 1983, the zooplankton have exhibited some changes in overall trends of density and biomass. There has been a decrease in biomass and an increase in the density of smaller-sized organisms from 1983 through 1988 (Figure 6.2). There has also been a decrease in taxa richness (figure 6.2).

Zooplankton density remained relatively constant from 1983 through 1985. It decreased during the drought year of 1986 but rapidly increased the following year when there was above-average precipjtation. During l 1988, total .tooplankton decreased but remained above the densities of 1983-1985. During these changes in zooplankton density, biomass declined.

'his decline in biomass, despite increases in organism density, was due to decreases in cladocerans and certain copepods. Rotifers have been I increasing in density but since their biomass is so small compared to the larger zooplanktere.. there has been a minimal offsetting effect on the total biomass.

The reduction of larger zooplankters was probably partially due ta increased predation by the introduction of threadfin shad in 1987 (Section8.0). Threadfin shad feed on zooplankton throughout their life, while gizzard shad, which were already in the lake, feed mostly en zooplankton while in the larval and juvenile stages. The size-selective cropping by threadfin shad, along with the increased overall larval fish I populations, was the probable cause of the recent changes in the zooplankton community.

I I

I I-B I

6-3

I Table 6.1 Zooplankton taxa collected at Harris Lake during 1987.i Copepoda (29.1%)

Diaptomus pullidus (2.7%) Rotifera(57.2%)

D. rcighardi (< 0.1%) Keratella americana (0.1%)

Cyclops (0.1%) K. cochlearts (14.6%)

C. vernalis (0.7%) K. crassa (0.41)

Mesocyclops edax (% 5%) Kellicottia bostoniensis (7.E%)

Trepocyclops prosMus (< 0.1%) Platyia.s patulus '(< 0.1%) g Paracyclops fimbriatus (< 0.1%) Trichotria (< 0.11%) E Ergasilus (< 0.1%) Lecane luna (< 0. '.1%)

Copepodites(4.4%)

Nauplii (20.7%)

Monostyla (0.1%)

Trichocerca longissta (0.9%)

l T. multicrints (< 0.1%) g Cladocara(13.6%) 7. similis (0.1%) s Dapnnia ambigua (1.8%) Ascomorpha (0.4%)

D. parvula (1.3%) .

Asplanchna priodonta (0.8%)

Cuiodaphnia lacustris (2.1%) Synchaeta (1.6%)

Basmha longirostris (6.4%) Polyarthra (2.6%)

Alona (< 0.1%) P. euryptera (9.3%)

Alonella ccutirostris (< 0.1%) Filinia longiseta (0.3%)

Leyttigia quadrangularis (< 0.1%) Pompholyx sulcata (8.4%)

Chydorus sphaericus (O V) Hexarthra (0.1%)

Diaphanosoma brac.tyv"vr ~ A%) Conochilus unicornts (9.5%)

• Holopedium cf. gibberum (0.7%) Ptygura (0.2%)

Leptodora kindtil (< 0.1%) Collotheca sp. (0.4%)

Protozoa (0.1%)

I Codonella (0.1%) g ErWylus (< 0.1%) m I

1. F ercent composition of total annual mean density enclosed within parentheses.

l I

I 64

I h

n Table 6.2 Zooplankton taxa collected at Hhrris Lake during 1988.i Copepoda (30.4%)

Diaptomus pallidus (0.8%) Rotifera(61.6%)

Mesocyclops edax (1.2%) Keratella cochlearls (8.1%)

Tropocyclops prasinus (< 0.1%) Kellicottia bostoniensis (16.2%)

I Calanoid copepodites (4.3%)

Cyclopoio copepodites (6.8%)

Lecane(0.7%)

Monostyla (0.1%)

Nauplii(17.4%) Trichocerca multicrints (5%)

Gastropus stylifer (0.9%)

Ascomorpha (1.7%)

I Cladocera(8.0%)

Daphnia ambigua (< 0.1%)

Asplanchna priodonta (0.6%)

Asplanchna (< 0.1%)

D. parvula _(2.7%) Synchaeta (0.4%)

Ceriodaphnia lacustris (1.0%) Polyarthra euryptera (24.2%)

Bosmina longirostris (2.9%) Filinia longiseta (< 0.1%)

I Alona monachantha (< 0.1%)

Chydorus sphaericus (0.2%)

Pomphalyx sulcata {0.3%)

Hexarthra (< 0.1%)

Diophanosoma brachyurum (1.0%) Conochiloides exiguus (4.6%)

Holopedium :f. gibberum (1.0%) Canochilus unicornis (5.3%)

Collotheca (0.5%)

I I

i Percent composition of total annual mean density enclosed within parentheses.

I I

I I

LI 6-5

.I

I Table 6.3 Mean zooplankton density and biomass by station in Harris Lake during 1987 and 1988.T l 1987 g

Taxonomic Density (No./m3) Biomass (mg/m3 ) g group E2 H2 P2 E2 H2 P2 g Copepods 17,289 b 33,322a 21,068 b 25.6 b 49.0a 36.2a,b Cladocerans 8,015 11,121 14.350 17.2 17.6 26.8 I Rotifers 28,652 b 80,303' 31,990 b 2.0 b 4.8a 1.8 b Total 53,972 b 124,904a 67,408 D 44.8 b 71,4a 64.8a,b 1988 Taxonomic Density (No./m3) ~

Biomass (mg/m3 )

group E2 H2 - P2 E2 H2 P2 Copepods 27,128 19,078 21,850 23.8 8.5 9.8 Cladocerans 9,107 4,453 4,338 13.4 6.3 8.8 Rotifers 55,263 45,148 37,267 3.8 5.1 4,5 g

Total 91,498 68,679 63,455 41.0 19.8 23:0 m

E TFisher's protected least significant difference test was applied only if the overall F-test for treetments was signifIcant. Means with different alphabetized superscripts were significantly different (P < 0.05). Protozoans not included due to low densities.

I I

I I

I 6-6 YA

I

g I

I 200000 1987 140 200000 1968 140

. 120 n" 1 N "

- _150000' 100a ~

E e w 100 "E g _E 1w 100000 - 80 i g 80 t I - 100000

) 60 k ~ #'O 50000 - O h!

Q 50000 40 h m

, 20 20 0 , , , , , , , , , , , , 0 0 , , , . , , O I J F M A MJ J A S ON D J M M J S N Month Month

- Density -+- Biomass  : Density --+-- Biomasa I 1987 Taxa Rlchness 1988 Taxa Richness I ,

I 15 - 51[ -

3 2

3 3 3 10 - 3 10 -

5 , , , , , , , , , , , , 5 .- , , , .

J F MA M J J A S O N O J M M J S N Month Month I

Figure 6.1 Zooplankton density, biomass and taxa richness in IIarris Lake during 1987 and 1988.

l l

g 6-7 I

.5

1' I

iJ000o iM

---*-- Derg ey --*l>-- Bemens g ,

- 100

. g3 h 1 ,_

> E

{me.

a

_o 1983 1964 1985 19g 1947 igne m

l Taxa Richmas I

46

44. W 3

• 2 1 d-40 u , , , , , ,

1963 1964 125 19ee 1987 tese v ..,

6:om

- o-- C**ad l

suc.  : e. mon l

.- --o-- noisi -0 swoo.

1 3xw - - 1

\

TfD0.

1:cco . / -

o , , , , , ,

t963 1964 1985 19H6 iM7 1964

v. ., -

so 7o . + ca*od

Canaocers 60 g_ go ,,,,

a' 53 .

!:: NmN I y- . g-

---

c x 3 g

1983 1964 1985 1996 1987 1964 g

Figure 6.2 Zooplankton density, biomass --d taxa rienness in Harris Lake, 1983 1988.

6-8 I

E.

I 7.0 BENTHIC MACR 0 INVERTEBRATES There were 83 benthic macroin<ertebrate taxa collected from Harris Lake during 1987 and 72 collected during 1989 (Table 7.1). Despite fewer I taxa collected during 1988, the distribution among the major taxa groups remained similar. During 1987, there were 35 chironomid, 20 oligochaete, and 28 miscellaneous taxa collected; and during, 1988 there were 35 I _

chironomid, 14 oligochaete, and 23 miscellaneous taxa collected. Few differences in taxa composition were noted among stations for both

. years. Fifty-five taxa were common to cil stations during 1987 and fifty-three taxa were found at all stations during 1988.

I Prior to 1987, no Asiatic clams Corbicula fiuminea were collected from I Harris Lake during the regularly scheduled monitoring, although two indi-viduals had been collected in special Asiatic clam surveys. During 1988, this biofouling organism was collected only at Station P1 near the Holle-I man's Crossroads boat ramp (figure 2.1) in Novemoer. The clams were probably introduced by boaters. The size distribution of individuals indicated the population has been in the lake approximately two years.

Their estimated density at P1 was 847/m2 . Bottom samples collected from the water intake structures of the power plant contained no Asiatic clams during 1967 and 1988.

During both 1981 and 1988, there were no significant differences in taxa richness among Stations El, H1, and Pl. However, there were signif-icant differences in taxa richness among months. Significantly more taxa were collected during January, March, May, and July of 1987 than during September and November (Figure 7.1). During 1988, taxa richness was statistically similar in January and November. Taxa richness in November was also similar to taxa richness in all other months, except May. Taxa richness in May was significantly lower than all other months (Fig-ure 7.1).

g During the 1986-1988 period, there were significant differences in 3 taxa richness among stations, months, and years. Taxa richness has tra-ditionally been lower at Station P1 than El and H1, but during 1987, taxa 7-1

I richness at P1 was similar to taxa richness at Hl. Temporally, there were significant differences among months with the most taxa occurring in January and March. There were significantly fewer taxa during September than during any other month for 1986-1988 (Figure 7.2). The taxa richness in each of the three years was significantly different with a decreasing g trend from 1986 to 1988. W The dominant organisms (> 5% of the mecn annual density) during 1987 were mostly oligochaetes, especially Dero nivea (Table 7 2). This taxon was often nearly twice as abundant as any other taxon at all stations.

The other dominant taxa included mostly oligochaetes and, to a . lesser extent, chironomids.

During 1989, there was less dominance by a single taxon with dif-ferent dominant taxa at each station (Table 7.3). Glyptotendipes was by far the nmst abundant taxon at El, Dero nivea was the most abundant at H1, and Specaria fosince wa* most . abundant at Pl. The annual . dominance of certain taxa usually resulted from high numbers of a taxon collected at.a particular time of the year. This is not unusual for benthic organisms as clumping can result from patchiness reflecting preferred habitats or food l

availability.

There were no significant differences in organism density among sta- a tions for 1987 and 1988. .However, there were differences in density among E months. The highest densities in 1987 were found in March and May, foi-lowed closely by January, July, and November (Figure 7.1). Significantly fewer organisms were present in September. During 1988, there was a dif-ferent pattern of organism density. The highest densities were found in January and November followed by July. September, May, and March (Fig-ure7.1). The main reason for the differences in abundance by months each year was the seasonal abundance of certain taxa. These taxa, primarily the annual dominant taxa, experienced large incr2ases in abundance . one month and were then much lower or absent the next month. These fluctua-tions were not unexpected since benthic organisms, especially oligochaetes, can respond rapidly to environmental conditions.

7-2 I

E

I .

Organism density was similar for 1986 and 1987 but was significantly lower during 1988 (Figure 7.2). There was no obvious reason for this I decrease but it might have been a result of increased predation by fish or a natural cycle in the overall benthic community of the lake.

There have been few changes in the functional feeding groups or the habitat preferences of the benthic organisms in Harris Lake over the last three years. The most common functional feeding group during both years

~

was collector-gatherer (usually > 67%) followed by engulfer-carnivore (usually > 8%) (Table 7.4). Most benthic organisms were burrowers with fewer sprawlers and clingers. Sprawlers and clingers prefer hard sub.-

I strates and aquatic vegetation as habitats. As hard habitats are removed or covered by 311tation, these organisms will decline.

I -

I I

I I

I 7-3

I Table 7.1 Benthic macroinvertebrate taxa collected from Harris Lake during "

1987 and 1988.* l elenterata Arthropoda Hydrozoa Crustacea Hydroida Amphipoda Hydridae Talitridae Hydra Hyallela azteca Platyhelminthes Insecta Turbe11 aria Ephemeroptera Tricladida Baetidae Planariidae E

Callibaetis ('88) 3, Dugesia Ephemeridae Rhynchocoela Hexagenia -

Hoplonemertini Caenidae Prostomidae Caent:.

Prostoma rubrum ('88) Odonata Annelida Anisoptera Clitellata Libe11ulidae

'011gochaeta -

Perithemis ('87)

Naididae Zygoptera Amphichaeta americana Coenagrionidae Bratislavia unidentata { *87) Enallagma ( *87)

Chaetogaster diay.hanus Hegaioptera Dero flabslliger Sia1idae D. nivea Stalls Haemonais waldvogell ('87) Trichoptera ,

Nais variabills Polycentropodidw g Pristina aequiseta ('87) Cernatina P. breviseta Phylocentropus ('87) g P. leidyi Hydropti!idae B Pristinella longisoma Oxyethira Slavina appendiculata Hydroptila ('87)

Spocaria fosir.ae Orthotrichia Stylaria lacustris Leptoceridae Veidovskyella comata Oecetis Ophtocystidae Triaenodes .

l Crustipellis tribranchiata Coleoptera g Tubificidae Haliplidae E Aulodrilus piguett Peltodytes (

• 87)

Ilyodrilus templetoni ('87) Diptera Limnodrilus hofimeisteri ('87) Chaoboridae Hirudinea Chaoborus punctipennis 7-4 l

I

l Table 7.1(continued)

Ceratopogonidae Nilothauma Alluaudomyia Pogasti:lla ostansa

.l Bezzia Parachironomus W Chironomidae Paralauterborniella nigrohalteralis Tanypodinae Polypedilum Ablabesmyia annulata Stenochironomus (

• 88)

A. Janta (*88) Zavrellella varipennis A. peelensis ('88) Pseudochironominii I A. rhamphe gp.

A. sp. ('88)

Clinotanypus ('87)

Pseudochironomus Tanytarsini Cladotanytarsus I Coelotanypus tricolor Labrundinia L sp. 4 RobackS Paratanytarsus Stempellina ('88)

Tanytarsus I L. neopilosella Procladius Tanypus stellatus ('87)

Tabanidae Arachnida Tabanus ('87)

I Orthocladiinae Bryophacr., cladius ('87)

Corynoneu a Acari Mollusca Gastropoda I Cricotopus Nanocladius N. sp. nr. balticus Basommatophora Ancylidae ('87)

Physidae I Parakiefferiella Psectrocladius -('87)

Thienemanniella.

Physa ('87)

Planorbidae Hellsoma I Chironominae Chironomini Chironomus Pelecypoda Eulameliibranchia Unionidae I Cladopelma Cryptochironomus Cryptotendipes Anodonta Heterodonta Sphaeriidae l Dicrotendipes Pisidium ('87) m Endochironomus Sphaerium Glyptotendipes Corbiculidae Corbicula fluminea ('88)

1. Taxa with "('87)" were collected only during 1987 and those with "('88)"

were collected only during 1988. All other taxa were collected in both years.

N Previously reported as Labrundinia becki.

7-5 I

2 Table 7.2 Annual mean densities (organisms /m ) of dominant benthic in- gi vertebrate taxa by station in Harris Lake during 1987.T 5l l

Station El H1 P1 l Taxon Density  % Density  % Density  % l Dero nivea 6,980 28.7 4,949 21.1 3,571 19.0 {

1 Tubificidae immature 1,892 8.9 -- -- -- --

stylaria lacustris 1,438 6.8 1,677 7.2 , 2,009 10.7 Tonytarsus 1,244 5.: 2,098 8.9 1,143 6.1 l

Hydra 1,079 5.1 -- -- -- --

)

Ilyodrilus templetoni -N --

2,684 11.5 -- --

1 Caenis - -- -- -- 1,136 6.1 Specaria Josince -- -- -- -- 1,079 5.7 '

Pristina aequiseta -, -- -- --

966 5.1 Polypedilum -- -- -- --

954 5.1

.0ther taxa 8,467 40.1 9,835 46.5 6,055 37.3 I, Total mean annual g density 21,187 23,433 18,769 f

3 a

T Annual mean density of taxa > 5% of the mean annual density. B ST axon might have been collected but its density was < 6% of the total annual mean density.

I I

I I

7-6 5

1 I

Table 7.3 Annual mean densities (orga7 isms 2/m ) of dominant benthic in-vertebrate taxa by station in Harris Lake during 1988.T

~

Station '

El H1 P1 E sity  % Density  % Density (~

Glyptot endipes 4,863 27.8 -- -- -- --

Specaria josinae 1,572 9.0 1,308 6.9 4,315 24.5 Dero nivea 1,292 7.4 2,266 12.0 I

Cladotanytersus 1,100 6.3 1,257 6.7 -- --

Tanytarsus 1,005 5.7 918 5.0 -- --

Stylaria lacustris -S -- 1,628 8.6 1,507 8.6 Hydra -- -- 1,590 8.4 1,007 5.7 Polypedilum -- -- -- -- 1,050 6.0

. Other taxa 7,638 43.8 9,865 52.4 9,721 52.2 Total mean annual-density 17,474 --

18,832 -- 17,606 --

I

$0cminant taxa > 5% of the mean annual density.

STaxon might have been collected but its density was < 5% of the total annual mean density.

I I

I I

7-7

I Table 7.4 Habit preferences, trophic statur, and functional feeding groups as a percentage of the mean annual density of benthic macroinvertebrates in Harris Lake during 1987 and 1988.

Year g 1987 1988 m El H1 P1 El H1 P1 Habit Preference Burrower 67 63 60 50 47 61 Sprawler 14 13 17 2 5 9 Clingcr 13 15 14 30' 26 20 Climber 5 7 7 4 6 5 Functional Feeding Group Collector-gatherer 74 73 70 55 61 65 Collector-filterer 4 5 4 15 7 6 Piercer-carnivore 6 3 5 5 10 6 Engulfer-carnivore 9 11 10 8 13 13 Scraper-grazer Shedder-herbivore 4

2 4

3 5

4 3

11 3 3 3 4

l m

E I

I I

l I 7-8 E

I I 1987 40000 50 35000 - Taxa - 45 a "

E 30000 - N 2 -40 c I 5 25000 -

N E 20000 -

s 2

0 l- 15000 - -30 10000 i , , , , , 25 1 Jan Mar May Jul Sep Nov Month I .

1988 40000 50 l I _

35000 -

a---

Density Tax 3 -45 j

"c_ 30000 - E o -40 e E 25000 - $

5 -35 6 20000 - 0

• a 15000 - -30 I 10000 , , , , , , 25 Jan Mar May Jul Sep Nov I. Month I

Figure 7.1 Mean taxa richness and density of benthic macroinvertebrates in Harris Lake during 1987 and 1988.

.I 7,

y L

I l I Mean Taxa Richness 6.4 l 6.2 1986 1987 1988 E

~

6.0 -

5.8f '

Q 5.6-

+ 5.4-f 352- ,

y5.0- "

4.8 - . .

4.6 - ,

4.4 -

4.2 i i i i a i i i e i i i i i . . i i 1/86 3/86 5/86 7/86 9/86 11/8" '7 5.'87 7/87 9/87 11/871/88 3/88 5/88 7/88 9'88 11/88 Year

• I Mean Donsity I

10.6 1986 1987 1988 O' 10.4 -

10.2 -

k 10.0 - ,.

\  !

$ 9.8- r hs 9.6-5 f* 9.4 - ,

9.2 - [(

9.0 -

8.8 i , i i i i i i i i i i i , i i i i 1/86 3/86 5!86 7/86 9/86 11/861/87 3/87 5/87 7/87 9/87 11/871/88 3/88 5/88 7/88 9/88 11/88 Year I ,

I Figure 7.2 Mean taxa richness and density of benthic macroinvertebrates in Harris Lake,1986-1988, I

7-10 g

8.0 FISH 8.1 Species Composition I During 1987 and 1988,17 species of fish representing 7 families and 28 species representing 9 families were collected from Harris Lake, re-spectively (Table 8.1). These numbers were similar to those observed in previous years with the differences reflecting sampling effort rather than a shift in species composition. No previously uncollec.ted species were found during 1987. However, two species not previopsly seen in Harris Lake were collected during 1988. A bowfin was collecte41 at Area S in the White Oa4 Creek arm of ihe reservoir; and threadfin shad were collected at Areas E. H, and P during rotenone sampling (Figure 2.1). Bowfin were I probably present in White Oak Creek prior to filling of the reservoir, although none were collected during preimpoundment studies.

~

The North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission (NCWRC) stecked approximately 12,000 threadfin shad into Harris Lake during April 1988 to provide addi-tional prey for largemouth bass and black crappie.

8.2 Larval Fish Estimates of total larval fish densities measured during 1987 and I 1988 showed similar temporal patterns when compared to previous years (Figure 8.1) (CP&L 1987). Larval fish densities continued to be dominated by shad (Dorosoma spp.) during May and Lepomis spp, during June (Fig-I ure 8.2). Densities of Dorosoma spp. were significantly higher during 1986 and 1988 then during 1983 and 1984. Densities during 1987 were sig-nificantly lower than 1986 levels but not different from 1988 densities.

However, due to the introduction of threadfin shad during the spring of 1988, caution should be used when comparing 1988 Dorosoma spp. densities to previous years. Densities of Lepomis spp, showed no significant dif-ferences among years.

I 8-1

F I

8.3 Juvenile and Adult Fish Electrofishing and standing crop data from 1987 and 1988 documented that the fish community continued to be dominated by gizzard shad, large-l niouth bass, and bluegill; similar observations were made in previous years (Tables 8.2-8.6). Annual mean electrcfishing catch rates for bluegill increased in 1988, while catch rates for gizzard shad and largemouth bass remained similar to previous years (Figure 8.3).

Cove rotenone sampling during 1988 showed the second highest total biomass estimate recorded at Harris Lake since 1982 (Table 8.5)

(CP&L 1984a). Increases from previous years in gizzard shad, bluegill, black crappie, channel catfish, and golden shiner biomass accounted for the majority of the increase. Densities of these species also increased with the exception of bluegill (Table 8.5). Largemouth bass biomass decreased to the lowest level since 1982 (Figure 8.4); however, densities increased to the highest levels since 1982 (Table 8.5) (CP&L1984a). -

Biomass and densities of pumpkinseed and redear sunfish were difficult to document due to combining these two species < 65 mm in length into one group during 1984 and 1986. However, it appeared that both density and biomass fcr both species increased during 1989 (Table 8.5). As in 1986, Area H had the highest total biomass followed by Areas E and P (Table 8.6). m 5

Length-frequency distributions for the dominant species collected during cove rotenone sampling indicated good young-of-year recruitment during 1988 (Figures 8.5-8.13). Recruitment of gizzard shad and brown bullhead was particularly high during 1988 (Figures 8.7 and 8.12). Large-mouth bass also showed exceptionally high numbers of young-of-year fish (Figure 8.13). This increase in reproductive success of largemouth bass was also observed at Mayo (CP&L 1989) and Sutton (CP&L in prep.) lakes during 1988. As in past years, few largemouth bass > 355 mm were col-lected. The abundant densities of cquatic macrophytes which occurred in Harris Lake provided abunddnt protective cover for young fish and macro-invertebrates food sources. This factor probably reduced predation resulting in reduction of growth rates of largenouth bass. Length-I 8-2 E

I frequency distriNtions for redear sunfish 3 65 mm remained similar to previous years, while pumkinseeS showed an increase in fish between 75 and I 100 mm (Figures 8.5 and 8,6). Condition factors in 1988 for most species were slightly lower than in 1986 (Table 8.7). Values were only slightly lower than those reported by Carlander (1969,1977) indicating fish were in a relatively healthy condition.

4 The presence of threadfin shad in cove rotenone samples indicated a successful stocking in Harris Lake during 1988. Yhe benefits to the sport fishery (i.e., increased growth rates and more harvestable-sized large-mouth bass and black crappie) may not be realized for several years.

Although threadfin shad have been reported to reduce survival of young 1 rgemouth bass and other sunfishes due to competition for zooplankton i food sources (von Geldern and Mitchell 1975; Davies et al.1979; Ziebell et al. 1986), the increased recruitment of largemouth bass and black crap-pie indicated no short-term detrimental impact from the threadfin shad introduction. The susceptibil,ity of, adult threcdfin shad to temperature-related winter mortality may limit the population size and thus minimize competition for zooplankton with sunfishes. Restocking of threadfin shad may be necessary to sustain the oopulation.

I These data show that Harris Lake supports a good sport fish popula-tion. Increases in density and biomass of many species indicate no nega-I tive impact on the fish community during the first two years of operation of the Harris Plan't. However, because of the unknown effect (positive or negative) of incrused nutrient inputs attributed to Harris Plant dis-charge, future monitoring of the fish population is warranted.

I 8. 4' Largemouth Bass Tournaments I During the two-day largemouth bass tournament held in 1987

-(292 anglers), a total of 765 largemouth bass .was weighed and measured by

,I CP&L biologists. Of this total, 68 fish (8.9%) were greater than 355 mm in length (Figure 8.14). NCWRC regulations require that six of the eight fish limit be 3 14 inches (355 mm). These tournament anglers were select-ing for large fish and only retained the largest largemouth bcss caught.

I 8-3 I

I These results indicated that there were low numbers of largemouth bass of g legal size (> 355 rin) in Harris Lake. This has been attributed to slow growth rates in previous years (Swing 1986). Mean condition factors for largemouth bass 5 355 mm (N- = 696) and > 355 mm (N

• 69) were 1.26 and >

1.32, respectively, indicating fish in relatively good condition.

During the 1988 tournament (80 anglers), 223 largemouth bass were I

weighed and measured by CP&L biologists. Since the anglers could r,7t weigh in fish 5 355 mm, all but two largemouth bass were > 355 mm (Fig-ure 8.15). These data indicated that by the f all of 1988 there was a substantial number of legal size fish in Harris Lake. This increase from 1987 could be attributed to growth over two growing seasons and/or to the addition of threadfin shad to the food base which may have increased growth rates during 1988. Although cove rotenone and electrofisher sam-g pling did not collect many largemouth bass 1355 mm, the tournament data g indicated that largemouth bass of that size were present in the reser-voir. The mean conditiori factor for largerrouth bass t 355 mm was good (K = 1.34) and was similar to values reported by Carlander (1977).

l '

I I

I I

I I

I I

8-4 I

El

=l

i Table 8.1 Fish species collected from Harris Lake, 1985-1988.

Common name 1985 1986 1987 I S_cientific name 1988 Amiidae bowfins A mia ca haa bowfin X I Anguillidae Anguilla rostrata freshwater eels American ee1  ?. ,X X Clupeidae horrings I Dorosoma cepedianum D. pet enense gizzard shad threadfin shad X X X X X

Esocidae pikes I Ecor americanus americanus E. niger redfin pickerel chain pickerel X X

X X X

X I Cyprinidae Clinostomus funculoides Notemigonus crysoleucas carps and minnows rosyside dace golden shiner X X X X

X Notropis spp. unidentified shiner X X X X N. pet ersoni coastal shiner X Catostomidae suckers Erimyzon oblongus creek chubsucker X X Moxostoma anisurum silver redhorse X Ictaluridae ballhead catfishes letalurus spp. unident'fied bullhead X X I l. natalls

l. nebulosus

l. platycephalus yellow bullhead brown bullhead flat bullhead X

X X

X X

X X

X X

X X

X l.punctatus channel catfish X X X l Noturus spp.

N. gyrinus Plyodictis olivaris unidentified madtom tadpole madtom fIathead catfish X

X X

X Poeciliidae livebearers l Cambusia affinis mosquitofish X X X i Centrarchidae suafishes Acantharchus pomotis mud sunfish I Centrvchas macropterus Enceccenthus gloriosus Lepomis spp ,

f1ier bluespotted sunfish unidentified sunfish X

X X

X X

X X

X X

X X

M Lepomis sp. hybrid sunfish X X X g L. auritus redbreast sunfish green sunfish X X X X L. cyanellus X X X X

... L. gthbosus pumpkinseed X X  % X lW L. gulosus warmouth X X X A l 3 L. macrochirus bluegill X X X X L. microlophus redear sunfish X X X X Micropteras salmotdes largemouth bass X X X X

' EE

, Pomoris spp.

P. annulans unidentified crappie white crappie X

X X X P. nigromaculatus black crappie X X X X E Percidae perches E Et.heostoma spp. unidentified darter X X X E. fusiforme swamp darter X X X 8-5

I

/ Table 8.2 Fish (number / hour) collected by electrofishing from Harris Lake E

! during 1987 l

l

/ Species Area E Area H Area P Area S Area V -

Me_an l

American eel 0.5 0.5 0.2 Gizzard shad 5.0 9.5 5.0 - 8.0 16.0 8.7 Chain pickerel 1.5 1.5 0.5 0.5 2.5 1.3 Golden shiner 3.0 6.0 2.5 0.5 2.4 Unicentified shiner 0.5 0.5 0.2 Yellow bullhead 0.5 0.5 1.0 0.4 Brown bullhead Flat bullhead 17.0 21.5 13.5 19.5 0.5 12.0 16.7 0.1 l

Flier 1.5 0.3 Bluespotted sunfish 0.5 0.1 Hybrid sunfish 0.5 0.5 0.2 Redbreast sunfish 2.0 0.5 1.0 0.5 0.8 Green sunfish 0,5 0.5 0.2 Pumpkinseed 3.0 6.5 9.0 7.5 4.0 6.0 Warmouth 6.5 9.0 10.5 11.5 17.5 11.0 Bluegill 16.5 41.5 16.0 23.5 19.0 23.3 Redear su.1 fish 6.0 6.5 10.0 3.0 9.0 6.9 Largemouth bass 33.5 34.5 27.0 15.0 37.5 29.5 8 Black crappie 2.0 1.5 4.5 3.0 2.2 Total 97.0 131.0 102.5 98.0 124.0 110.5 1

I I

E 8-6 E.

I Table 8.3 Fish (number / hour) collected by electrofishing from Harris Lake during 1988.

I Species Area E Area H Area P Area S Area V Mean Bowfin 0.5 0.1 Gizzard shad 9.0 3.0 7.5 17.0 5.5 8.4 Chain pickerel 2.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 4.5 2.3 Rosyside dace 0.5 0.1 l

Golden shiner 6.5 9.0 2.0 0.5 8.5 5.3 Unidentified shiner 1.5 0.5 0.4 Coastal shiner 3.0 0.6 i Creek ch acker 0.5 0.1

. Yellow builhead 0.5 1.5 0.4 Brown bullhead 17.0 15.0 18.0 18.5 10.5 15.8 Flat bullhead , 0.5 0.1 Channel catfish 0.5 0.1 Hybrid sunfish 0.5 0.5 0.2 Flier 0.5 0.1 81uespotted sunfish 0.5 0.1 Redbreast sunfish 2.5 1.5 0.5 0.9 Green sunfish 0.5 1.0 0.3 I Pumpkinseed 18.0 20.5 16.0 8.0 16.0 15.7 9.1 Warmouth 10.0 d.5 8.5 9.5 9.0

,g Bluegill 25.0 116.5 29.0 28.0 233.5 86.4 3

Redear sunfish 9.0 5.5 8.0 6.5 8.0 7.4 l Largemouth bass Black crappie 67.5 4.5 35.0 0.5 20.0 4.0 14.5 2.5 26.0 28.0 32.6 7.9 Unidentified darter 0.5 0.1 Swamp darter 0.5 1.0 0.3 Total 172.5 222.5 116.0 108.5 354.5 194.8 Totals may differ from sums due to rcunding.

I 87

I Table 8.4 Annual mean catch rate (number / hour) of fish collected by elec-trofishing in Harris Lake, 1983-1988.

Species 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 Bowfin American eel 0.8 0.9 0.5 0.2 0.2 0.1 l Gizzard shad 15.6 10.4 5.5 10.8 8.7 8.4 E

Redfin pickerel 0.3 0.1 g Chain pickerel 1.2 2.5 0.8 0.8 1.3 2.3 Rosyside dace 0.1 Golden shiner 2.3 3.9 1.8 1.3 2.4 5.3 _

Unidentified shiner 0.5 2.3 4.5 0.5 0.2 0.4 Coastal shiner 0.6 Creek chubsucker 0.1 0.1 Yellow bullhead 0.7 2.0 2.1 0.8 0.4 0.4 g Brown bullhead 9.9 5.2 12.7 11.3 16.7 15.8 g flat bullhead 0.3 0.1 0.1 Channel catfish 0.3 0.1 ,

Mosquitofish 0.1 '

< 0.1 Hybrid sunfish 1.7 0.8 1.2 0.2 0.2 Flier Bluespotted sunfish 1.1 0.2 0.5 < 0.1 0.3 0.1 0.1 0.1 l Redbreast sunfish 3.0 1.5 0.9 1.4 0.8 0.9 Green sunfish 4.9 2.1 1.2 0.2 0.2 0.3 Pumpkinseed 13.8 11.0 9.3 b.5 6.0 15.7 Warmouth 8.6 9.9 9.9 11.1 11.0 9.1 as _

Bluegill 34.4 33.2 30.6 40.6 23.3 86.4 I Redear sunf,ish 6.0 4.7 3.1 4.6 6.9 7.4 ,

largemouth bass 63.8 44.9 32.7 48.3 29.5 32.6 White crappie 0.1 Black crappie 2.8 2.4 2.0 1.5 2.2 7.9 Unidentified darter 0.1 Swamp darter 0.2 0.3 0.3 Total 171.8 137.3 119.4 140.8 110.5 194.8 Totals may differ from sums due to rounding.

I I

8-8 I

E. ,

E Table 8.5 Fish (number and weight / hectare) collected in rotenone sampling

• at Harris Lake during 1984, 1986, and 1988.

~

1984 1986 1988 Species Neeer weight tug) Numeer weignt (kg) Numter neignt fug)

I American eel Unidentitled shed Ginard shad Threadfin shad 0.5 2.291.4 0.2 264.4 2.0 608.7 0.8 87.9 2.6 3.485.6 274.7

< 0.1 167.8 11.0 Redfin pickerel 5.9 0.2 4.1 0.3 1.3 < 0.1 2.5 32.5 4.8 i Chain pickerel Golden shiner 6.9 266.3 3.2 1.0 30.2 230.9 1.3 795.9 7.8 Creek chubsucker 3.5 0.2 0.4 0.1 2.4 0.3 I silver redborse Unidentitled shiner Unidentified 86.8 157.9 114.2 0.1 75.7 0.1 34.0 297.6 5.2 0.4 bullhead 85.2 < 0.1 90.8 0.3 29.3 0.1 I Yellow bullbead Bro n bulItead Flat builbead 22.1 5.5 9.7 2.0 0.6 0.8 26.5 127.2 11.9 2.0 19.5 1.0 51.5 266.9 105.3 1.4 2.6 2.6 Channel catfish 34.3 7.2 13.5 14.1 I Tacpole medtom Pirate perch Masquitofish 0.9 138.4

< 0.1

< 0.1 228.1 0.1 175.9 0.5 < 0.1 0.1 Hybrid sunfish 3.7 0.3 2.1 0.2 4.3 0.2

'I Unidentifled sunfish Mud sunfish i!2.5 ' O.5 0.8 < 0.1 6.5 < 0.1 2.1 0.1 I Filer Bluespotted suntisn Redbreast sunfish Oreen sunfish 1.6 413.8 529.2 144.4 0.3 0.3 3.4 0.8 517.6 197.3 159.2 0.3 1.5 0.4 2.143.4 778.1 37.3 1.7 5.3 0.3 Pumpki nseed /rede ar I I Pumpkinseed I warmouth 2,237.0 101.4 3,136.5 2.2 6.0 11.7 32.4 3.104.2 144.4 3.392.1 42,288.4 4.1 3.4 18.1 45.5 4.627.9 2.370.7 24.426.9 18.3

.13.9 67.3 Bluegill 15.971.0 1,827.7 I Redear suntIsh I 5.4 88.0 6.4 70.4 ~. 2 . 3 Largemouth bass 239.2 22.6 469.4 28.4 1,026.8 20.5 Black crappie 179.5 0.8 289.3 4.7 1,802.4 15.1 Unidentified I darter Swamp darter Saucheek darter 287.2 4.9

< 0.1

< 0.1 152.5 28.6

< 0.1

< 0.1 133.8 0.1 Total 27,152.9 473.8 58,304.8 235.8 44.781.3 373.6 Totals may differ from sums due to rounding.

I TP umpkinseed and redear sunfish < 65 mm were combined during 1984 and 1986.

I I 8-9 I I . --

I Table 8.6 Fish (number and weight / hectare) collected in rotenone sampling at Harris Lake during 1988.

Area E Area H Area P Hean Number Weight (kg) Number Weight (kg) Number Weight (kg) Number Weight (kg)

Species 7.8 < 0.1 2.6 < 0.1 Unidentified shad 7,896.6 305.7 652.9 64.6 3485.6 167.8 Gizzard shad 1,907.3 133.1 11.0 Threadfin shad 119.1 1.1 703.4 31.9 1.6 < 0.1 274.7 Redfin pickerel 2.4 < 0.1 1.6 < 0.1 1.3 < 0.1 29.2 9.3 7.3 2.5 60.9 2.6 32 'i 4.8 Chain pickerel 1,830.7 16.6 79'. 7.8 Golden shiner 325.6 0.9 231.6 5.8 Unidentified 0.2 413.9 0.5 297.6 0.4 shiner 337.7 0.5 141.3

< 0.1 71.4 0.1 23.8 Coastal shiner 7.3 1.0 2.4 0.3 i Creek chubsucker 34.0 S.2 Silver redhorse 101.9 15.7 29.2 0.1 30.6 0.2 29.1 0.1 29.3 0.1 Unidentified bullhead 55.3 Os6 57.8 2.3 51.5 1.4 Yellow bullhead 41.3 1.3 97.2 0.9 163.1 3.8 540.5 3.0 266.9 2.6 Brown bullhead 53.1 1.0 105.3 2.8 Flat bullhead 172.5 6.2 90.3 0.5 7.3 6.6 17.5 13.1 15.6 22.7 13.5 14.1 m Channel catfish < 0.1 0.5 < 0.1 1 Tadpole madtom 1.5 420.3 0.2 48.1 < 0.1 59.4 < 0.1 175.9 0.1 Mosquitofish 3.1 0.2 4.3 0.2 Hybrid surfish 9.7 0.3 0.1 4.9 < 0.1 1.5 0.3 2.1 Flier 1.7 Bluespotted sunfish 2.4 < 0.1 235.9 0.3 6191.8 4.8 2143.4 l

19.4 < 0.1 6.5 < 0.1 Unidentified sunfish < n.1 5.3

( Redbreast sunfish 850.4 11.6 1,465.1 4.2 18.7 778.1 0.3 Green sunfish 38.9 0.3 46.6 0.4 26.6 0.3 37.3 605.0 7.1 4,781.4 16.6 8,497.4 31.2 4,627.9 18.3 Pumpkinseed 2,370.7 13.9 Warmouth 738.6 13.7 5,208.1 14.6 1,165.3 13.4 5,146.1 71.7 33,356.1 75.0 34,778.3 55.1 24,426.9 67.3 Bluegill 1,827.7 12.3 I Redear sunfish 87.5 11.1 595.7 10.2 4,800.1 15.7 1,020.5 13.2 930.6 18.5 1,129.3 30.8 1,026.8 20.8 Largemouth bass 2,079.0 14.8 1,802.4 15.1 Black crapple 1,771.3 21.5 1,556.9 8.8 Swamp darter 38.9 < 0.1 342.3 0.2 20.3 < 0.1 133.8 0.1 13,822.6 310.8 58,087.3 530.0 62,433.9 279.9 44,781.3 373.6 Total Totals may differ from sums due to rounding.

M M M M M M M M M M M M M M gg m M M M

Table 8.7 Condition factor (K) of selected species of fish collected with rotenone in Harris Lake during 1984, 1986, and 1988.

~

Species Size class (mm) 1984 1986 1988

% 0.9 Gizzard shad 5 200 1.9

> 200 0.8 0.8 0.8 50-100  % 1.4 0.9 Brown bullhead 101-200 _

% 1.1 0.9

> -200  % 1.2 1.1 50-100  % 1.8 1.5 k Redbreast sunfish

~

101-200 1.8 1.8 1.6 g Pumpkinseed 50-100 1.8 1.8 1.7 g 101-200 1.8 1.8 1.7 Warmoeth 50-100 1.8 1.9 1.8 101-200 1.8 1.9 1.8 Bluegill 50-100 1.6 1.6 1.7 101-200 1.7 1.8 1.7 l Redear sunfish

> 200 50-100 1.6 1.6 1.8 1.8 1.7 1.8 101-200 1.5 1.8 1.7

> 200 1.5 1.7 1.7 Largemouth bass 50-100 1.0 1.1 1.2 101-150 1.0 1.2 1.2 1 200-250 1.2 1.3 1.6 251-300 1.1 1.2 1.3

> 300  % 1.2 1.4 Black crappie 50-100 1.3 1.4 1.3 101-200 1.2 1.3 1.2

> 200  % 1.4 1.6 l 9 Threadfin shad 50-100 S 0.8

> 100 9 9 0.9 1 TS ample size too smail for valid estimate.

SSpecies not present in reservoir.

I 8-11

I

- 60000 Area E 0 1987 60000 n'E 50000 -

Area H 1987 l

"E 50000 -

} -- 1988 g o--.1988 g 40000 -

. 5 40000-4 .

5 5 30000 - g 300002 a . . .

g 20000 - 3 20000-o .

10000 - 3 100002 0 . . . . . x 0 0 . . . .  ?

1987- 4/5 4/19 5/3 5/17 5/31 6/14 1987- 4/5i 4/19 5/3 5/17 5/31 6/14 1988- 4/10 4/24 5/8 5/22 6/5 6/19 1988- 4/10 4/24' 5/8 5/22 6/5 6/19 Date Date W 60000 Area P 0 1987 o

_ 60000 Area S 0 1987 l

"E 50000 - E 50000- .

g 0 1988 . - 1988 0 40000- g 40000 -

a a y 30000 - p 30000 -

200002 - , 3 20000 -

a a 100002 10000 -

0_ , , , , ,

0  ; y , ,

l 1987- 4/5 4/19 5/3 5/'75/316/14 "

1987- 4/5 4/19 5/3 5/17 5/31 6/14 1998 - 4/10 4/24 5/8 5/22 6/5 6/19 1988 - 4/10 4/24 5/8 4/22 6/5 6/19 Dats Date Area V All Areas E

- 60000 ^

60000 5 0 1987 0 1987 "E 50000 - "E 50000-o . -C 1988 o . O--- 1988 k 40000 - 8 40000 -

a .

% 30000 - b 30000$

ii #

g 20000 - g 20000 -

10000 - S 100002 A 0  ; . . . .

0 m . . . . g 1987- 4/5 4/19 5/3 5/17 5/31 6/14 1987- 4/5 4/19 5/3 5/17 5/31 6/14 g 1988- 4/10 4/24 5/8 5/22 6/5 6/19 1988 - 4/10 4/24 5/8 5/22 6/5 6/19 Dats Data Figure 8.1 Larval fish push net density estimates from Harris Lake during 1987 and 1988.

8-12 g m

I Gizzard Shad Lepom/s spp.

30000 6000

+ 1987 ---t- - 19 67 I

, - -- 19 88 + 1966 n' g a 6000.

E 20000 - E ~

8 I -

b

10m0 e dow .

g a  ;  ; 20m .

5 3 '

8 .

0 , . , , , c 0 --c  :- , . . .

1987- 4/5 4/19 54 5/17 6/1 6/14 1987 - 4/5 4/19 $/3 5/17 6/1 6/14 W 1988 4/10 4G4 5/8 522 6/5 6/19 1968 4/10 4G4 5/8 5/22 65 6/19 Date Date Golden Shiner Etheostoma spp.

600 500

, ---@--. 19 8 7

1987 500. - -O--- 1968 - --o--- 1988

- . 400 -

n .

n E m. E

. 8 . g 300 -

2 m. e .

4 b .

$ 200 -

i 2* - y .

100 100 -

0 , , , ,

0 . . . . , >

1987 4/5 4/19 5/3 5/17 6/1 6/14 1987 4/5 4/19 5/3 5/17 6/1 6/14

_l 1988 4/10 444 5/8 5C2 6/5 6/19 1968 - 4/10 4/24 5/8 5/2.2 6/5 6/19 Date Date

= Pomoxis spp.

1000

--e--- 1987 600 .

n '

E I

600-1 4x .

N I

a <

C 200 -

8 . .

O  ; , ,- g p 1987- 4/5 4/19 5/3 5/17 6/1 6/14 1988 4/10 4'24 5/8 5/22 6/5 6/19 Date Figure 8.2 Larval fish push net density estimatos by species from Harris Lake during 1987 and 1988. Note that different scales were used for density.

g e- o

I l Bluegill I

100 -

80 -

60 -

[ e-,  ;  ;# ~

=

, to: r/

0 , , , ,- , , -

1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 l Year ,

Largomouth Bas I

100 ,-

d

, 80 h ** b 1 o:

l

23 -

0 , , , , , ,

1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 voar in _

E Gizzard Shad 20 S

\

0 , , , , , ,

l -

1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1788

-\ Year Figure 8.3 Electrofishing catch rates (numberihour) for selected species of fish co!!ected by electro!!shing from IIarris Lake, 1983 1988. Note that E<

ditierent scales were used for catch rate.

E' fh g

~

il lI Gizzald Shed Golden Shiner 200 o ..

200 - 20 k . k '

E .100. E 10 .

I a 0 0 N

, , , , , 7 7 ,

g 1982 1984 1986 1968 1982 1984 19EG 1998

!B Year Year Channel Calfish Bluegill

30 80 m .

60 .

20 -

k '

. k 'O ~

E 10 . E <

20 -

O  ; , , , 0 , , , ,

g 1982 1984 1966 1938 1982 1984 1966 1988 3 Year Year

!I t

Largemouth Bass B!ack Crapple

<g ED 30

~

60 -

ll lm j 40 -

, 20 -

I < -

?

40.

7 ll 20 0-- i . . i 0 , , 1 i 1982 '"84 iGB6 1988 1982 1984 1996 1988 Yea. Year I Figure 8.4 Blomass estimtites Jtg/ha) for selected species of fish collected in cove jg rotenone samples at Harris 12ke,19821988. Note that dilTerent scales lg were used for biomass.

l 8-15 i

- . . . .._- - . - -. - _ . - -.. - .-.. . ._ - . - - - -. - - - - - - - - . - ~. -

I Pumpkinseed 20= -

Ei '

1988 n=662 5 15- -

g

. 10 -

5' _. _

r - -

g, 1986 n=3C8 15' E

_- E 10- -

5" -

I 5

M 0

~~

%!m D !! m g 19e4 r n=154 15' I n l

10- -

5' ~

m-w, r -

5 1982 n=273 15' 10' -

_ l 5- -

1 nr m g'

r 0i i i i i ' ' i 0 25 50 75 100 125 150 175 200 l'-

Length (mm)

Figure 8.5 Length frequency distribution of pumpkinseed collected from cove I

rutenone samples at YIarris 12ke,19821988. Fish < 65 mm were excluded.

g 8-16 g

. . - - - _ _ _ . - _ . _ - . - _ _ . - - . - _ - . . ~ . - . _ - - - - - -

I Redear sunfish 1988 -

n=142 20' 15' 10' 5' _ _

- " H " "-

0 .

19e6 n.ie4 15' 10- _- _

7 5' g __

$ 0

" --

• h' -

$ 1984 I 20' n 90 15'

~

10' - -

l 5'

]

7

__~

~

0 1982 n=42 20' 15' -

l ,

10' I 5-

. .b _

04 -

I l U I U g i , , , 1 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 Length (rnrr.)

Figure 8.6 length frequency distiibution or redrar sunfish collected from cove I rotenone samples at IIarris Imke, 1982 1988. Fish < 65 mm were excluded.

8-17

I l Gizzard shcd 20 3 1988 n=6625 3 15-10' ~

a - I

_] ,,.dE %_ !W.

l 0

1986 n=1160 15- - ~.

g, 10' -

~

5' -

Y S 0 E N ~.

g

~

1984 n = 2 3.3 7 10' _

5- ~~

.- a 1982 - n=1766

~

15- -

~

10- _

l 5' -

0c -

T (4 N m_r 4-h - - >

0 50 100 150 200 Length (mm) 250 300 350 400 l

Figure 8.7 Length frequency distribution of gizzard shad collected from cove rotenone samples at IIarris Lake, 1982 1988.

8-18 I

E.

1 1

! Bluecill I 35 23' 1928 n = 4 7.2 8 6 21*

I _

7' -

~- ~'~

0 1986 n. i 00,;c7 28' ~

I 21'

~

14'

~ l' -

b ^ -

0 1984 n = 2 5,614

{v 28'

~

21 I

14' 7' ~

E L ._

0 1982 n = 25,250 28'

~

21) ~

4'

~

7' 0, " -," -

0 50 100 150 200 250 Length (mm) 11 Figure 8.8 Length. frequency distribution of bluegill collected from cose rotenone samples at llarris Lake, 1982 1988.

I 8-19

I Slack croppie l 35 3933 ,,33;9 g 23' g

21' 3 14' _

\ 7'

_n t - _

, _,,, g 23' 21'

~

14' _ -

_ 7' ~- -

' 5 v I h_,__ _ ,_ _ _ _ _ - , .

0 0 1984 n=289

c. -

23' 21' -

~

14' ,

7* -

a 0

r k_ _ _- - _ E 1982 n=1'3 23'

'1' 14'

=

I 7' -

"l 0

- - - I'I~f[ -}b m ,

1. .I 1 f  ;

0 50 100 150 Length (rnm) 200 250 300 l

\~ i Figure 8.9 Length frequency distribution of black empple collected from core '

rotenone samples at IIarris Lake, 1982 1988.

8-20 EjJ

} w. : ";

I I .

Channel catfish I 4 88 n=25 i

15-I  :

l 10-I ~

l l

E. , . l e 0 E

I 1986 n=57 g 15-I 10-I -

r 5-7 I i I 0.I I 50 r ,-

100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 550 600 550

-r e -r -r , -e -r ,

Length (mm)

Figure 8.10 Length frequency distribution of cl.annel catfish collected from cove I rotenone samples at Ifr.rris Lake, 1982 1988.

8-21 I.

g 4 ewer ,.L 9.w. .y,...,- ---.. .m -

,,,,.,y.9%y,,y,, ,,.,,..w.

,,,_,gyg,,,-,.__

.,_ mp, m,. , , . _ , , , , , , , . __7.. .m, _ y..,m_ ,,

.. _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ . . _ _ . . _ _ _ . _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ . - . __________.__....m_____

I' t

Golden shiner l 25 E 1988 c=1465 5 20' 15' 1

3 5 1 10 I --

3 l g 5- - .

! 0

-~ ~

19es n.4 2 20' _

15' 10' -

l4

.. S' _

i S

g 5

0 1984

m. _ __ .J L. ' _ _

n=404 l

l 20' r

~

I t

1 -

m 15' E

.g.

g >

~

5' ~

~ ' - ~ ~ '--

g 0

1982 n=281 20'

~

15' 10' -

5' -

E n R _n -.D rw- LIL i n_ ,

0i i . i i i > i i +

0 25 50 75 100 125 150 175 200 225 250 l Length (mm)

Figure 8.11 Length frequency distribution of golden shiner collected from cove I rotenone samples at Ilarris I2ke,19821988.

8-22 g

i I

3rown bullheCO l 15

,,33 ,. ,3 10' f~

I l 5- _

4-

, fl L1 _ _ _ _ _ - -

0 1986 -

n= 'S5

<E g 0' ~

~

5 _ 1 1 i

N ., OY h, n ,[~ N 0

y 393,

c. n7 I 10-I 5-I l tt l 193: __ ^=665 l .

10' ~

~

5- 5 I _

0i'  ? '

-e 'F > ~T~ '

O 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 Length (mm)

.I Figure 8.12 Length freq'uency distribution of brown bullhead collected from cove rotenone samples at Ilarris IAke, 1982 1988.

• ~"

i

I Lcreemouth boss 20 1988 e 17s2

'5'

?

10'  ;

• 5' il .

9

-Wk- __ _ ~ ._

1986 m u ;14 5

~

10 -

5' -

0

- r '"* ^^-

$ 1984 n.349 15' l

10' 5' l'~ .'

n

-' T 1' '

~

h-O -

1982 n-Sog 15-10' 5' '

~

r m g

OP- 1-

1. i-i- 1 , ,

0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 550 600 Length (mm) l Figure 8.13 1.cngth frequency distribution oflargemouth bass collected from cove rotenone samples at flarris Lake, 1982 1988.

I 8-24 E

I 2

g I 15-n=765 l II

$10-I l ,

l 0 300

,i3 320

,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,7,,,,

340 360 380 400 420 o ,,,,-,,,,,37,74 , , , , 7 , , , ,-

440 460 480 500 520 540 Length (mm)

Figure 8.iJ Length frequency distribution oflargemouth bass collected from I a largemouth bass fishing tournament conducted on Harris Lake during March'1987.

I 20 na 223 15 -

, s

$10- 3 5 es C.

- *t yg +

q; f

n

. .,w v;

n.

y i .$

^ .

'w.

.Q 5- "I a $ $ $

I y , c M .% $ e tt J 5" W D'

• Y; o 7 5

~~~

~l I 0 i

i i

350 355 360 365 370 375 380 385 390 395 400 405 410 415 420 425 i

i M .#

i i i

i i i i i Length (mm) i Figure 3.15 Length frequency distribution oflargemouth bass collected from a largemouth bass fishing tournament conducted on llarris Lake during October 1988.

8-25 I.

_ _.. --- ~~ ~ ^ '

9.0 TERRESTRIAL STUDIES 9.1 Birds I During 1987, 96 species of birds were observed on and around Harris Lake (Table 9.1). An average of 98 species (range = 84 - 124) has been observed over the 14-year monitoring _ eriod from 1972 through 1987. Dur-ing these 14 years,181 species of birds have been observed. No previ-ously unobserved species were documented during 1987 ,

During the 1987 roadside bird surveys, 20 species were cbserved dur.

ing the winter quarter, 38 species du. ing the spring quarter, 38 species during the summer quarter, and 23 species during the fall quarter. The Shannon-Wiener diversity values for each quarter (winter--3.8, ,pring--

8 4.6, summer--4. 7, f a11--3.9) were similar to those from previous years' surveys and no trends were discernible.

During the 1987 spr ing bird count, 68 species were observed compared to 69 during the 1986 t,urvey. The winter bird count was not completed in 1987 due to inclement weather conditions and a total species number was not tabulated. All birds seen during the winter survey were included in the species list for the year (Teble 9.1).

Futeen species of birds were observed during waterfowl surveys dur-ing 1987 (Table 9.2). Those species observed in the largest coricentra-tions with the highest frequency were the American coot, ring-necked duck, pied-billed grebe, and ruddy duck. These results were similar to previous l years with the exception of the ruddy duck which was observed in higher numbers during 1987 than during past years.

I Twelve species of game birds were observed on the SHNPP site during I 1937.

(Table 9.2).

Eight of these were observed during waterfowl surveys Additional game species observed during other surveys in-cluded the American black duck, blue-winged teal, bobwhite quail, and mourning dove.

lI 9-1

I Nineteen wood duck nests were established during 1987 in the nest boxes at Harris Laka. Nests in 16 boxes were successful; 3 were abandoned before hatching. Nest box utilization increased from 16% in 1986 to 42%

in 1987. Two hundred and fif teen eggs were laid and one hunJred and seventy eggs (83%) were known to have hatched. Fourteen nests were in g

wooden boxes, three nests were in Tom Tubbs dark plastic boxes, and two W ne*% were in plastic bucket boxes (Tabla 9.3). This was the first year since box establishment in 1984 that thi arhly colored Tom Tubbs plastic boxes were used by wood ducks. Nine of the nes+.ing hens were banded with U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service leg bands for the first time during 1987 with three banoed hens returning from previous years. One wood duck has l

now been docuuented as nesting successfully at Harris Lake for three con-secutive years.

During 1987, 14 bluebird boxes were .scated in the Wildlife Refuge Area and Management Area 1. Ten of the boxes were used during the nesting period. There were 21 successful nests (nestlings survived to fledge) established with an average clutch size of 4.6 eggs (range 3-6 eggs).

Three consecutive nests were successfully established in four of the boxes. There was no evidence of predation at any of the boxes during the nesting period. One box placed very near the Harris Energy & Environ-mental Centar rear parking art was repeatedly used by house sparrows.

This box was later removed, a

R Two federall. listed endangered species, the ied-cockaded woodpecker and the bald eagle, were observed at the SHNPP site d" ring 1987. The red-cockaded woodpeckers occupying the SHNPP colony site during 19P6 were not observed after March 1987. The colony site remained unoccupied throughout the remainder of the year. During August 1987, two separate observations were made of an adult bald eagle over Harris Lake. These eagles were l probably part of a large transient population inhabiting nearby Jordan Lake.

Cooling tower casualties documented during the 1987 surveys consisted of three bird sr.ecies (solitary vireo, pine warbler, and American red-start) end one unidentified bird. These casualties, which totaled five 9-2 I

5

i individuals, were all observed in the fall. This was an extremely low mortality when compared to bird kills documented at other tall structures (Marsden et al.1980; Mach et al.1983) and was not considered to have a significant impact on migratory birds moving through the area.

9.2 Quantitative Vegetation Studies l Results of the point-quarter analyses in the seven compartments

~

sampled during 1987 showed estimated total stand densities ranging from I 931 to 2132 trees / hectare and estimated total basal areas from 26.6 to 46.8 m2 / hectare. Basal area is the cross-sectional area of the tree stem g at 1.4 m above the ground. Much of the study area, which lies between the E C&pe Fear River and Harris Lake, was planted in loblolly pine Pinus toeda, the dominant species in four of the seven compartments (Figure 9.1).

Those compartments not planted in pine were dominated by red oak Quercus rubra and white oak Q. alba (Figure 9.1).

Point-quarter analyses ha've been conducted in the Greentree Reservoir basin for 3 consecutive years at 36 fixed sample pcints. The results demonstrated a decrease in total stand density with each successive year from 1985 to 1987 (Table 9.4). From the 1985 to 1986 sampling period, I 4.2% of the trees sampled died, and f-om the 1986 to the 1987 sampling period, 8.3% died. Much of the mortality occurred along tne creek and near the dam and ma. have been related to mechanical injury during impoundment construction. When a tree died, it was replaced in the samp-lir.g process by the next nearest tree to the center point in that quad-rant. This greater distance from the center point resulted in lower I standard density values.

1987 (Table 9.4).

The total basal area estimate was highest during The dominant species in the Greentree Reservoir fer all three years were yellow poplar, sweetgum, and red maple (Table 9.5). These species are considered to be marginal as food producers for waterfowl (USFS 1969). However, scme species present in the reservoir with lowe. or-tance values (willo< oak and black gum) are considered good f 7-ducers. Through selected species management, these species can be enhanced to improve food production in the reservoir.

9-3 I

t Table 9.1 Birds observed at the Shearon Harris Nuclear Power Plant site E during 1987. "

W Common name Common name loons sandpipers common loon spotted sandpiper grebes gulls, tcrns, and skimmers norned grebe ring-billed gull 3 pied-billed grebe laughing gull E cormorants pigeons and dovss a double-crested cormorant rock dove g mourning dove herons -

great blue heron cuckoos great egret yellow-billed cuckoo green-backed heron black-billed cuckoo swans, geese, and ducks nightjars mallard chuck-will's-widow American black duck blue-winged teal ,

swifts .

wood duck chimney swift canvasback lesser ,caup kingfishers ring-necked duck belted kingfisher bufflehead ruddy duck woodpeckers 3 downy woodpecker g hawks and eagles red-cockaded woodpecker northern harrier yellow-bellied sapsucker g red-tailed hawk pileated woodpecker g bald eagle red-bellied woodpecker osprey northern flicker new world vultures tyrant flycatchers turkey vulture eastern kingbird eastern phoebe g falcons ecstern wood pewee g American kestrel acadian flycatcher pheasants, grouse, and quails swallows bobwhite purple martin barn swallow rails northern rough-winged '

American coot swallow plovers jays and crows a killdeer blue jay g American crow 1

l 9-4 5

_.______a.__.___

I Table 9.1(continued)

I Common name Common name titmice new world passerines (cont.)

tufted titmouse prothonotary warbler Carolina chickadee parula warbler yellow warbler wrens yellow-rumped warbler Carolina wren pine warbler I old world warblers and thrushes golden-crowned kinglet prairie warbler ovenbird common yellowthroat I ruby-crowned kinglet blue-gray gnatcatcher wood thrush yellow-breasted chat hocded warbler American redstart American robin finches eastern bluebird evening grosbeak American goldfinch mimic thrushes I mockingbird gray catbird brown thrasher old world sparrows house sparrow starlings starling '

I vireos red-eyed virco s'olitary vireo white-eyed vireo new world passerines brown headed'corbird I red-winged blackbird eastern meadowlark orchard oriole I common grackle wh1te-throated sparrow chipping sparrow field sparrow I dark-eyed junco song sparrow rufous-sided towhee I cardinal blue gros' oeak indigo bunting summer tanager I 9-5 I

I I Table 9.2 Birds observed during waterfowl surveys at the $hearon Harris l Nuclear Power Plant site during 1987, l Horned grebe Ring-necked ducki I!

l Pied-billed grebe Buffleheadi l Common loon Ruddy ducki

, Ring-billed gull Great blue heron Mallardi American cooti Wood ducki Killdeer -

Canvasbacki Belted kingftsher '

Lesser scaup i ,

T Classified as game species.

I' 1

i ,

I t

I 4

I 9-6 gl l

I Table 9.3 Box type, clutch size, Snd percent hatching for wuod duck nest boxes an Harris Lake curing 1997.

I Box Number of Hatching $Uccess nurnber Box type Clutch size eggs hatched (percent) 1 Bucket 12 12 100 t

l 2 3

" Tem Tubbs" Wooden 9

14 0

0 0

0 4 Bucket 12 12 100 5 Wooden 12 12 100 I 6 7

" Tem Tubbs" Wooden 12 12 11 12 92 100 7 Wooden 7 7 100 12 Wooden 20 19 95 13 Wooden 13 10 77 l 14 16

" Tom Tubbs" Wooden 6

12 6

12 100 100 16 Wooden g 2 0 0 19 l'ooden 13 10 77 I 22 22 Wooden Wooden 14 10 13 t

93 i

29 Wooden 12 12 100 36 l>oden 11 10 91 41 Wor 'on 12 12 100 Total g 215 170 839 I I Number of eggs hatched and hatching success could not be determined.

U Total hatching success (170/205) was calculated after deleting nest with 10 eggs from total clutch size (215-10 205) because number hatched was not known for this nest.

I 9-7

I Table 9.4 Total density and total basal area of trees sampled by point-quarter analysis in the Greentree Reservoir basin at the  !

Shearon Harris Nuclear Power Plant, 1985-1987 Total density Total basal area Year 2 (trees /ha) (m /ha) 1985 806 34.1 1986 821 32.8 1987 814 34.4 I

Table 9.5 Importance values (based on relative basal area, relative den-I sity, and relative frequency) for trees sampled by point-quar-ter analyses in the Greentree Reservoir basin at the Shearon Harris Nuclear Power Plant. 1985-1987.

Importanco Value Species 1985 1986 1987 Yellow poplar 64.9 62.7 59.6 Sweetgum 49.5 51.4 53.4 m Red maple 43.1 43.6 44.3 g Hophornbeam 32.9 31.0 30.5 Dogwood 19.8 19.9 16.9 Beech 18.1 18.3 19.2 Ironwood 17.4 13.2 18.4 White oak 16.5 14.0 15.9 Loblolly pine 11.5 11.7 12.2 Red oak 8.0 c1 8.5 i Sweet pignut Sickory 4.2 4.3 4.4 l American ash 4.0 4.0 4.2 m Shortleaf pine 2.7 2.7 2.9 g i Black gum 2.0 3.8 4.2 Sourwood 1.9 1.8 1.9 l Willow oak 1.8 1.8 1.8 Sugar maple 1.7 1.7 1.7 Total 300.0 300.0 300.0 I

9-8 g

1 -

l

I E

I i ,

, , .. s. _ _ _ , , .

ru.

l v w%

'N ),a casm.n 8s ~,

N -

U.-l,.*e *

, c .,

. . r s.w 4_ u

\

__s , .

)

toiwy en.

= .

,x -

Tranannsen I

dycrat Cwwwstrwm 14 l J "',""" ' '

LotM9 Pew j !Ed Cesertners is

=s,

~ ~ . ~~ -

_j.

I

g figure 9,1 Tree spccles with the highest importance values (based on relative basal i

g area, relative density, and relative frequency)in wildlife manngement E compartments 14 20 (Wildlife Management Area 2) on Shearon Harris Nuclear Power Plant Game Lands during 1987.

I e.,

y

I i 10.0 AQUATIC VEGETATION I Af ter major increases in the number of species and overall coverage of a';uatic vegetation from 1983 through 1986, the composition and coverage remained relatively constant in Harris Lake during 1987 and 1988. Fifty-eight species of aquatic or wetland plants were obst.rved in or immediately adjacent to the lake and avriliary reservoir (Table 10.1). The number of species observed during the 1987-1988 period was lower than the total number observed in 1986 (69). This reduction reflected a reduced effort ,

to identify minor emergent shoreline species rather than any detectable change in the overall strur' 9 of aquatic vegetation.

I 10.) Harris Lake In 1987, Harris Lake continued to be dominated by three distinct ccm-munities: emergent, submersed, and floating leaf. The emergent community was essentially unchanged from,1986 and previous years. Dominant species continued to be cat-tail Typha latifolla, bulrushes Scirpus cyperinus and S.

atrovirens, water primrose Ludwigla leptocarpa, rushes Juncus effusus and J.

coriaccus, and increased amounts of burreed Sparganium americanum. Creep-I ing water primrose Ludwigfa uruguayensis, another component of this com-munity, continued to spread into several areas despite previous efforts to remove it by hand. Three small (ca. 5 m dia.) patches were treated with a registered aquatic herbicide ' Rodeo *) during the summer of 1987. Another small patch observed near the main dam in October was not treated because it was too late in the year for the herbicide to be effective. During 1988 several small patches of creeping water primrose were observed grow-ing near the main dam and the Highway 42 boat ramp (Area E) and in other scattered locations in Areas G. F, L, and K (Figure 2.1). This species l can produce long (up to 5 m) stems that float on the water forming thick

! surface mats tnat could potentially impact certain uses of the lake.

The floating-leaf community continued to be dominated by watershield This species has spread into many shallow areas near Brasenia schreberi.

the shoreline, extending out to a maximum depth of about 1.5 m. Although l

I it occurred throughout all major arms, the greatest concentration was in l

u 10-1

the White Oak Creek arm upstream of the SR 1127 bridge (Area S) (fig-ure2.1). Lotus Nelumbo lutea occurred in two stands in Area S in 1987 These expanded in size from 1986 to cover about 1 ha. During 1988 two more stands were observed in Area S. This resulted in the establishment of lotus on both sides of the White Oak Creek channel in Area S with the likelihood that it will ultimately expand its coverage to much of the area above the SR 1127 bridge. Small scattered patches of water-lily Nymphaea odorata also occurred throughout the lake but these have not expanded beyond about 2m in diameter. Most of these patches , occurred within larger stands of watershield and apparently have not been able to compete successfully.

Submersed vegetation in the lake continued to be dominated by pond-weeds Potamogeton bnhtoldll and P. diversifolius, and naiads Nafas minor, N.

l gracillima, and N. quadalupensis. In 1987 and 1988, almost all areas of the lake less than 3 m deep supported populations of these species either in mixed or homogeneous stands. Although the amount of P. berchtoldfl in ,

Harris Lake decreased in 1987 from previous years, it increased during 1988 to approximately the same level as in 1986. The abundance of this species apparently varies from year to year, perhaps in response to environmental factors such as temperature, turbidity, and/or water levels.

The most significant change in the submerged community was the estab-lishment of hydrilla Hydrilla vertlet!!ata. Hydrilla was observed in June 1988 growing in several small stands along the downstream side of the E

SR 1127 causeway. Subsequent surveys during the summer and fall revealed the hydrilla was well established along both sides of the White Oak Creek arm of the lake in Areas P and Q. The greatest concentration occurred l

along the north shore near where the Harris-Harnett 230-kV transmission line crosses the lake. Several stands also occurred near the Hollemans Crossroad boat ramp.

Hydrilla has the potential to spread into all areas of Harris Lake I less than 3 m deep (580 ha or 36 percent of the lake surf ace area). Al-g though it is not likely to impact power plant operations, hydrilla could a significantly impact recreational activities on the lake and alter the biological relationships of organisms in the lake. Because of the poten-tial problems caused by hydrilla, a rtgistered aquatic herbicide ,

10-2 R

I

I (Aquathol K8) was applied to all known areas where hydrilla grew in July and gain in October. Additional herbicide applica.tions will be made in the spring of 1989 and the results of these applications will be used to formulate a long-term management strategy. Possible options to gain con-trol of hydrilla include the introduction of grass carp.

10.2 Auxiliary Reservoir I Vegetation in the auxiliary reservoir during 1987 and 1988 was essen-tially unchanged f rom 1986. The emergent community was ' dominated by the same species that occurred around Harris Lake. Submersed vegetation was sparse, limited to water depths less than 1 m deep, and consisted of pond-I weed P. berchtoldfl, and muskgrass Chara sp. and N. minor. No hydrilla was observed in the auxiliary reservoir and no submersed vegetation grew in the emergency service water intake canal. Floating-leaf vegetation con-tinued to be absent from the auxiliary reservoir and intake canal.

~

I I

I I

I I

I I 10-3

Table 10.1 Aquatic and wetland plants observed in or adjacent to Harris Lake and the auxiliary reservoir during 1987 and 1988.

Family / Species Submersed Vegetation Emergent Vegetation (continued)

Characeae Cyperaceae Chara sp. Carex turida NItella ftexills C. odoratus l Potamogetonaceae C. pseudovegetus a Potamogeton berchtoldit E. microcarpa P. diversifollus E. obtusa '

Najadaceae E. quadrcngulata Na Fimbristylls autuonnalls N, fas gracillima Rhynchospora corniculata N. guadalupensis minor Scirpus atrovirens Hydrocharitaceae S. cyperinus Hydefila vertfellotta Juncaceae Cyperaceae Juncus acuminatus Eleocharts baldwinil J. coriaceus a Haloragaceae J. effusus g

'M lent (yrtophyllum J. marginatus bulariacesebrasiliense J. tenuls Utricularia inflata '

Salicaceae g Floating-Leaf Vegetation Populus deltoides Salix nigro g

Saururacese Ato11aceae saururus cernuus E Atolla carollntana Betulaceae l Nymphaeaccae Betula nigra Nymphaea odcrata Alnus serrulata Nelumbenaceae Polygonacese E Nelumbo lutea Polygonum pensylvanicum E Cabombaceae P. hydropiperoides Brasonia schrebert Piatanacese Onagraceae- Platanus occidentalls l Ludwigia uruguayensis Heisstomataceae E Rhexia mariana Emergent Vegetation Onagraceae Ludwigla leptocarpa Osmundaceae L. palustris Osmunda cinnamomea Cornaceae Typhaceae Cornus amomum Typha lattfotfa Rubiacese Sparganiaceae Cephalanthus occidentalis Sparganium americanum Campanuiaceae Alismataceae Lobella siphilitica a Alisma subcordatum Asteraceae Sagittaria engelmanniana Mikanta scandens l

' Pluchea foetida Poaceae l Echinochloa crusgalli

\ Erlanthus giganteus Leersia oryzoides Panicum dichotomiflorum E P. stipitatum l Zizaniopsis aquatica l

10 4 5

I l l 11.0

SUMMARY

I Harris Lake began filling in December 1960 and reached full pool in early 1983. Harris Plant commercial operations began in early 1987

)

Biological, water quality, and water chemistry menitoring of the lake has I been conducted since the lake began filling. These monitoring studies can be divided intc three periods: (1) while the lake was filling (1981-1982), (2) after the lake reached full pool but prior to power plant oper ations (1983-1986), and (3) af ter power plant operations, were initiate; The 1987-1988 sampling period focused on loke conditions during the first two years after powLr plant operations were initiated.

Water quality changed slightly during 1987 and 1988 from previous years. Conductivity and pH values increased, while Secchi disk trans-parency decreased. These changes were a6tr ibuted to discharges from the cooling tower blowdown and reduced flushing of the lake because of low precipitation. However, they were not of enough magnitude to cause Harris Lake to exhibit conditions outside the range of other piedmont lakes.

I Total nitrogen and most of the fractions of phosphorus were signifi-I cantly higher at Station E2 (near the point where the cooling tower blow-down discharges into the lake) than at other stations in the lake in 1987. During 1988, differences in the concentrations of these constitu-ents between Station E2 and other sample stations (P2 and H2) were re-duced, although all concentrations remained elevated over those measured prior to 1987. This indicated an initial buildup in 1987 at Station E2 after power plant operations were begun followed by the diffusion of these materials into other portions of the lake during 1988. This process was magnified because of reduced precipitation during 1988, resulting in re-l duced lake flushing. Power plant operations also appeared to have caused increases in concentrations of chloride, sulfate, sodium, and conductivity I in lake waters, while reduced precipitation apparently caused increases in alkalinity and calcium.

l Trace element concentrations in Harris Lake water during 1987 and 1983 were generally similar among stations and years. However, Zir.c 11-1 L

l

I concentrations were significantly greater in the sediuent at Station E2 than at other locations and increased over those of 1986, although they were still below state water quality standards. The zinc increase was probably a result of the discharge of zinc compounds used by the Harris Plant to reduce corrosion in the plant's piping system. However, the measured con:entrations remained within the range of unenriched sedi-ments. Trace element concentrations in wat'er and fish remained low.

Phytoplankton densities increased from the moderate levels of 1986 to I

moderate-to-high levels in 1987 and 1988. The Chlorophyceae and Chryse-phyceae were usually the nuncrically important phytoplankton classes, while the Myxophyceae and the Cryptophyceae were only occasionally impor-tart during both 1987 and 1988. A moderate unexplained bloom of Chloro-phyceae Chrysophyceae, and Cryptophyceae occurred at Station H2 durin, November and December of 1987. Except for this relatively minor bloom, seasonal variations in phytoplankton densities were not pronounced.

Chlorophyll a levels were significantly increased in 1987 and 1988 over those in prior years. Chlorophyll a concentrations approached levels indicative of eutrophic water on one occasion in 1987 and two occasions in 1988. The increases in phytoplankton density and chlorophyll a levels appeared to reflect the increases in nitrogen and phosphorus concentra-tions.

M Ouring 1987 ar.d 1988, overall zooplankton biomass and taxa richness  !

continued dowrw e trends that have been documented since 1983. However, total zooplankton density increased over that reported in previour years. The decrease in biomass was attributed to the reduction of larger zooplankters as a result of the increased size-selective planktivory fol.

lowing the introduction of threadfin shad into the lake and to an overall increase in larval fish populations of other species. This has caused a shif t to smaller zooplankters, especially rotifers. The decrease in taxa was the result of the loss of several species of low abundance and did not significantly change the overall taxonomic makeup of zooplankton popula-tions. Differences among stations for organism density and biomass were detected in 1987 but not for 1988.

I!

1-2 1 i

5 m

I ,

Benthic macroinvertebrate populations in Harris Lake during 1987-1988 remained similar to those of previous years. The most significant change in the benthic community was an expansion of the population of Asiatic clams Corbicula fluminea. Small numbers of this biotouling organism were first collt.cted from the lake near the main dam in 1985. Ncne had been I collected again until November 1988 when increased numbers were collected at Station P1 near the Holleman's Crossroad boat ramp. No Asiatic clams were collected from the main or auxiliary intake canals or from the intakt structures.

I for both 1987 and 1988, there were no spatial differences in benthic I macroinvertebrete taxa richness or organism density, although there were seasonal differences. These similarities were in contrast to the period of 1986-1987 when several differences were observed. However, taxa rich-ness and organism density continued to exhibit previously observed down-werd trends during 1987 and 1988. These changes reflected the natural aging and stabilization of the, lake ecosystem.

During 1987 and 1988,17 species representing 7 families ar.d 28 spe-cies representing 9 f amilies of fish were collected f rom Harris Lake, respectively. Two previously undocumented species (bowfin and threadfin shad) were collected. Threadfin shad were introduced into liarris Lake during the spring of 1987 by the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commis-sion. Larval fish catches continued to be dominated by shad and sunfish and in 1988 densities were among the highest ever collected in the lake.

Biomass estimates for gizzard shad, bluegill, black crappie, channel catfish, and golden shiner in 1988 increased over those of previous years. Densities of these species also increased, except for bluegill.

In 1988, largemouth bass biomass decreased to the lowest levels since I 1982, while densities increased to the highest levels. Recruitment for these species was good during 1988. Largemouth bass tournament results I indicated few largemouth bass of harvestable size (> 356 mm) ere caugnt during 1987. However, during 1988, increased numbers of harvestable size fish were caught.

lI 11-3 l

I During i N 1, 96 species of birds were observed around the Harris it- a decrease cf E from the average number of species observed over a

.h ar period from 1972 tc 1987. Diversity indices for each quarter 'in v' ~ also similar to those of previous years. Surveys of Harris m ud ., t.1e auxiliary reservoir, and the Greentree Reservoir indicated simi-

.!I lar wateriowl *.tilized these areas. Wood duck nest box utilization at if , , ~ 's Laka .ncreased during 1987 to 42% from 16% in 1986. Point-qua".er f'M*7" , t.' '7<.as c.n6ucted in the Greentree Rrservoir from 1985 through 1987 docu-Nb , ~ '

ram.eu that v poplar, sweetgum, and red maple were the dominant spe-hN;h pg* < _~ cies during al' .,ree years. These species are considerr>d to be marginal

'd as food producers for waterfew1 There W re a few individuals of species

, ansidered to be goM frod producers stoitered in the reservoir basin

<hich coulo be enhanced through selective managtment.

~

The submersed vegetation of Harris Lake was essentially unchanged in sd' 3 1987 and 1988 from 1986. Dominant species continued to be Potamogeton berchteidil and Nafas minor. H,vdrilla vertic!!!ata, a potentially problematic g'

5 species, was discovered growing in the White Oak Creek arm of the lake in 1988. Although a impacts ta power plent operations are expected from hydrilla, .t .ss the potential to affect othe uses of tne lake. Floating ,

a:af and emergent vegetation was essentially unchanged from previous years {

snd was dominated by Bru .wla schreberi, Nehmba lutea, Typha latifolia, -

Scirpus cyperinus, and S. atrovirens. The auxiliary reservoir suppot ted small 5 .

quantities of submers'ed vegetation but floating-leaf vegetation was absent.

I I

I .

9 I

11 4 3

I,

Appendix A2 (continued)

Mean recovery a Standard + standard Percent RSD* Semple -

Variable (mg/ liter) ' deviation recovers (%) size, ,

, Sodium 1.00 : 0.039 100 3.9 57 2.0 1.98 1 0.068 99 3.5 57 i Nickel 0.010 100 5.3 72 0.0099 1 0.00053 0.030 0.0311 1 0.00121 104 3.9 72 I Iron 0.100 0.102 1 0.006 102 6.3 48 1.000 0.974 1 0.033 97 3.4 36 I Zinc 0 050 0.050 1 0.005 100 10.3 33

.500 0.495 1 0.010 99 2.0 24 I Lead 0.0020 0.0021 1 0.00011 105 5.4 75 0.0050 0.0052 ! 0.00023 105 4.4 78 I Magnesium 1.00 1.00 + 0.059 100 5.9 27 10.00 10.03 1 0.557 100 5.6 27 I Hanganese 0.050 0.051 1 0.004 101 7.1 36 1

0.500 0.496 ; 0.013 99 2.7 12 I Total organic carbon 9.18 8.52 1 0.24 93 2.8 63 E Chromium 0.004 0.0041 1 0.00021 103 5.1 75 0.006 0.0062 1 0.00022 104 3.5 75 I Cadmium 0.00'J25 0.000253 1 0.000009 101 3.7 72 0.00050 0.000510 1 0.000025 102 4.8 72 Aluminum 0.050 0.050 t 0.0026 100 5.2 72 0.075 0.076 3 0.0027 101 3.5 69 I Silica 1.0 0.969 1 0.041 97 4.2 33 10.0 9.843 1 0.171 98 1.7 36 I

I A-5 I

.~

'N Appendix A3 Accuracy and precision of trace element analyses for samples of tissues and seu.-

CP&L Chemistry Laboratory during 1988.

~

95% :ontidence Mean R50 5 interval for RSD of Matrio/ of re m ered of field sample certified value concent.'ation (n)

Esement Reference material tandards replicates (pg/g) (pg/g) (!) (!)

Tissue As Copepod (I AE A MA-A-l) 5.5-7.9 6.2 13 15.8 Fish (I AE A MA-A-2 ) 2,4-2.8 2.6 O-6.7 8 13.9 Albacore tuna (N85-HM50) 2.5-4.1 2.7 17 21.4. --

Cd Copepod (IAEA MA-A-1) 0.69-0.81 Iish (IAEA MA-A-2) 0.69 16 12.2 0-80 0.058-0.074 0.063 14 21.7 Dovine liver (tes-1577a O.38-0.50 0.44 6 26.1 --

Cu Copepod (IALA MA-A-1) 8.4-8.8 Albacore luna (PBS-RM50 )

7.2 6 11.0 0-71 4.2-4.4 4.3 3 36 Hovine liver (t/d5-15 7 7 883-203 179 Albacore tuna (tOS-RM50 ) 3.9-4.1 3 2.2 --

3.5 '1 29 -

1. 69 Copepod (IALA MA-A-1) 0.26-0.30

• O.27 7 39.1 Fish (I AE A MA- A-2) 0.43-0.51 0.55 0-57 5 30.4 -

3" Se Copepod (lAlA MA-A-1) 2.6-3.4 3.03

[ fish (I AL A MA-A-2) 1.1-2.3 1.2 Il 8

12.9 0.6-23 Albaccre luna (POS-i<M50) 2.0-4.* 18.9 -

3.5 8 16.6 --

In fish (; AE A MA-A-2) 32-34 31 14 Hovine siver (NUS-15774) 114-143 14.1 0.5-9.1 127 3 0.5 Copel,ad (l AE

• MA-A-11 154-162 156 12 4.8 -

Sediments As River sed; wnt (NB5-1645) 665 75 9 1.8 0.5-20 Estuarine sediment (t05-1646) 10.3-12.9 il 9 5.3 -

Cd River sediment (tMS- 164 5 ) 8.7-42 13 7 5.4 Estuarine vediment (PBS-1646 0.29-0.43 <3 1.0-8.2 3 0 -

Cu River sediment IMIS- 1645 )90-128 122 5 Estuarine sediment (N05-1646) 15-2i 9.3 0.9-21 20 6 6.9 -

flg Hiver sediment (M35-Ib45 ) 0.a-l.6 1.03 6 Estuarine sediment (M15-Ib46 ) 0.051-6.075 8.2 0.2-6.3 0.058 3 12 --

Se River sediment *NOS-1645) 1.55 1.3 4 14 1.E-16 In River sediment (N05-1645) 1550-1890 1711 10 Estuarine sediment (POS-1646 ) 132-144 4 .< 2.6-99 133 7 7.7 --

I RSD = relative standard deviation = standard deviation + mecn.

S"NOncertified" values provided by the National Bureau of Standards. ~

g g g g g a m 25 M M M W_ M M W E. EE

l 7 Jix A4 Fean, relative standard deviation (RS0), and sample Size of I J 9 certified standards analyzed by neutron activation during 1988.

955 c?niicence interval Mean for known of recovered Male ir concentration concentration n RSDI T- .iement Refereng material (L;/0) (09/9) t!)

As Oyster (NBS-1!66) 12.68-14.12 13.55 1 -S jI Bov;ne liver (NBS-1577aj 0.041-0.053 < 0.10 6 --

j j Tuna (NBS-RM50 ) 2.9-3.'s 3.2 6 2.9

, t I Oyster

7 Cd (NBS-1566 ) 3.1-3.9 3.3 2 3.7 )

Bovine  !

~l <

liver (NBS-1577a) 0.38-0.50 < 0.75 6 --

l i

Cu Oyster (NBS-1566) 59.5-66.5 65.5 1 --

Bovine

liver (NBS-1577a) 151-165 159 17 1.$

Oli (NBS-1084)94-102 , 98 4 1.3 Hg Bovine liver (N85-1577a) 0.002-0.006 < 0.10 6 --

r Tuna (NBS-RM50 ) 0.94-0.96 0.94 6 2.9 Oyster Se (NBS-1566) . 1.6-2.6 2.1 2 7.2

] Bovine Iiver (N85-1577a) 0.64-0.78 0.71 3.6 kna (NBS-RM50) 3.2-4.0 3.7 2.5 In Oyster (NBS-1566) 838-866 833 2 1.5 Bovine I liver (NBS-1577a)

Tuna (NBS-Rv50 )

115-131 12.6-14.6 124 13.9 12 6

2.5 1.4 J

RSD = relative Standard deviation = standard daviation + mean.

9--RSD could .iot be determined.

I

'I

I I

I A-7 J

W '

I I

W I Appendix B Water'0uality Data from o Harris Lake During 1987 and 1988 I .

lI .

9 B-1

i 198/ Snearon Harris water Quality

---

------- ------------ Month = January ----------------------------------~~--------------------- -

Depth (m) Temp (*C) DO (mg/3) pH Cond (p5/cm) Seccht (m)

H2 P2 H2 P2 L2 H2 P2 E2 H2 P2 E2 H2 P2 E2 u_

6.8 6.9 9.1 9.6 9.7 6.7 6.9 6.7 70 66 70 2.2 1.3 f.8 0.2 7..

66 76 7.1 6.8 6.9 9.l 9.7 9.8 6.7 6.9 6.7 70 . . .

1.0 66 69 6.7 6.9 9.1 9.7 9.9 6.8 7.0 6.7 70 . .

2.0 7.1 66 68 3.0 7.1 6.7 6.9 9.1 3.7 10.2 6.8 7.0 6.7 70 . . .

7.1 6.7 6.9 9.2 9.8 10.2 6.8 7.0 6.7 70 65 66 . .

4.0 69 65 68 5.0 7.1 6,7 6.9 9.3 9.8 10.5 6.8 7.0 6.7 . . .

6.6 6.8 9.3 9.8 10.5 6.8 7.0 6.8 69 64 68 . . .

6.9 7.0 6.5 6.8 9.4 9.7 10.5 6.9 7.1 6.8 69 64 68 . .

7.0 7.0 68 8.0 7.0 6.4 6.7 9.4 9.6 10.5 6.9 7.1 6.8 69 64 . . .

7.0 6.3 A 7 9.5 9.6 10.5 6.9 7.1 6.8 69 64 68 . . .

9.0 65 6i 10.0 7.0 6.2 6.7 9.5 9.6 10.4 6.9 7.1 6.8 69 .

11.0 .' . 0 . . 9.6 . . 6.9 . . 69 . . . . .

12.0 7.0 . . 9.6 . . 6.9 . . 69 . . . . .

69 I 13.0 7.0 . . 9.6 . . 6.9 . . . .

14.0 7.0 . . 9.7 . . 7.0 . . 69 . . .

15.0 7.5 . . 9.0 . . 7.0 . . 239 . . .

16.0 8.5 . . 5.9 . . 7.1 e 373 .

---

~~------------------------------------ MonthsFebruary ----------- ---------------------------------------------

1 Depth (m) Temp ('C) DO (mg/l) pH Cond (pS/cm) Secchi (m) ra ...... ...------ ----....-_---- ._.-.-__..-_-_..

P2 E2 H2 P2 E2 H2 P2 E2 H2 P2 E2 H2 P2 E2 H2 5.6 6.4 6.5 10.4 10.3 10.3 6.9 6.6 6.7 67 58 63 1.5 1.0 * .5 0.2 1.0 6.6 6.4 6.5 10.5 10.3 10.3 6.S 6.6 6.7 66 57 63 . . .

6.3 6.4 6.5 10.6 10.3 30.4 6.9 6.5 6.6 66 57 62 . . .

2.0 3.0 6.2 6.3 6.5 10.6 10.3 10.5 6.9 6.5 6.b 66 55 61 . . .

6.0 6.3 10.6 10.3 30.5 6.9 6.5 6.6 65 55 61 . . .

4.0 6.2 5.0 5.9 5.9 5.9 10.7 10.3 10.4 6.9 6.5 6.6 65 55 61 . .

5.9 5.8 5.7 10.7 10.3 10.3 6.9 6.5 6.6 65 55 61 .

6.0 7.0 84 , 9 5.7 5.6 10.7 .0.3 10.3 6.9 6.5 6.6 65 55 61 . . .

8.0  ? 8 5.6 5.6 10.6 10.3 10.4 6.9 6.5 6.6 65 55 68 . . .

5.6 5.6 10, 10.3 10.5 6.9 6.5 6.6 65 55 Et .

9.0 58 10.0 5.3 5.6 10. 10.5. 6.9 6.6 65 . 61 . .

~.

11.0 5.8 . . 10.7 . 6.8 . 65 . . .

5.8 10.7 6.9 6G . . . .

12.0 . . . . . .

13.0 5.8 . . 10.8 . 6.9 . . 67 .

14.0 5.8 . 10.9 . . 6.9 . . 67 . . .

15.0 5.8 . . 10.9 . 6.9 . . 67 16.0 5.8 . . 41.0 . . 6.9 . . 67 . . . .

- gg g, g E E E E Ed E N- M E - ' ^ '

n

~

~

M M .' A -

l  %

1987 Shesron Harris Water Quality

---

~~-----------^--

---

~~-- --- --~~----~~- --~~-------------~~- -------- -- MontnsNarch pH Eond (pE/ce) Seccht (m)

Ospth (m) Temp (*C) DO (mg/1) _____-._-__--- ---__-_---_-----

P2 E2 H2 P2 E2' H2 P2 P2 E2 H2 P2 E2 H2 E2 H2 7.0 61 53 54 1.2 0.8 t.0 8.2 6.0 5.4 5.4 7.5 7.0 0.2 7.8 8.0 7.0 7.1 64 51 54 . .

7.9 8.5 6.0 5.5 5.5 7.4 1.0 '7.9 7.0 7.1 64 53 54 . .

l ' 7.8 7.7 8.1 6.0 5.5 5.5 7.5 I 2.0 5,5 7.5 7.0 7.1 $9 54 55 . .

3.0 7.8 7 7.9 5.9 5.6 54 56 5.6 5.5 7.5 7.0 7.1 56 . . .

4.0 78 7.* 7.8 5.8 56 54 53 . .

5.6 5.6 5.6 7.5 7.0 7.8 .

5.9 7.7 7.6 7.7 56 53 55 .

5.6 5.7 5.6 7.5 7.s 7.2 . .

6.0 7.7 7.6 7.7 56 54 55 . .

7.6 5.5 5.7 5.6 7.5 7.1 7.2 .

7.0 7.7 7.6 7.2 56 56 54 . .

7.5 5.2 5.7 5.6 7.5 7.1 '

8.0 7.7 7.5 7.1 7.2 56 57 54 . . .

7.3 7.5 5.1 5.6 5.6 7.5

,l 9.0 7.7 56 . .

4.8 . 7.5 . . . .

l 10.0 7.7 . . .

56 . . .

4.6 . 7.5 . . . .

I1.0 7.7 . . .

56 . . .

7.7 4.4 . . 7.5 . . . .

12.0 . .

7.6 . 56 . . . . .

13.0 7.7 . 4.0 .

3.7 . 7.5 . . 56 . . . . .

14.0 7.7 . . .

---

- -------- ------------ ------------------ ------ Month = April ---------------- --------------------------- ---------------

ret Cond (95/cm) Secchi (m)

Deper ( Temp (*C) 00 (ev/I) ______._______ ___ -_._________

os ____.__. .._ _.-- _________...____

H2 P2 E2 H2 P2 E2 H2 P2

'd E2 H2 P2 E2 H2 P2 E2 6.3 36 35 39 3.3 1.3 t.8 15.4 15.0 8.8 8.6 8.4 6.7 6.3 0.2 15.8 6.3 6.3 37 34 39 . . .

15.7 15.4 15.0 8.8 3.7 8.4 6.4 1.0 6.4 6.3 6.2 37 34 40 . . .

2.0 15.6 15.3 14.7 8.9 8.8 8.5 6.4 6.3 6.7 38 34 40 . .

3.0 5 34.7 14.7 9.2 8.4 8.6 9.5 8.0 8.6 6.4 6.3 6.2 38 35 39 . .

4.0 12 4 14.0 84.5 39 35 39 .

14.3 9.9 7.2 8.5 e.4 6.3 6.2 .

5.0 15.2 12.2 6.2 39 35 40 . .

9.4 7.2 8.1 6.4 6.2 .

6.0 12.6 12.0 14.0 6.3 6.2 6.1 39 36 40 . .

11.8 11.8 12.4 9.2 7.3 6.8 7.0 6.3 0 . .' 6.1 39 36 40 . .

11.2 ?1.6 12.1 9.1 7.0 6.7 8.0 6.0 6.3 6.9 6.1 39 38 40 . . .

9.0 10.9 1. 3 11.8 9.0 5.4 44 8.9 4.9 6.3 6.0 38 . .

10.0 10.6 . 11.5 .

6.3 30 . . . .

11.0 10.1 8.5 . .

7.3 6.2 .

42 . . . . .

12.0 9.6 . . . .

41 . .

9.4 6.5 . . 6.2 . . . . .

13.0 . .

6.1 At . . . . .

14.0 9.2 6.4 . . . .

i.5 6.1 . 42 .

15.0 9.0 . .

42 . . .

9.0 4.4 . 6.t . .

16.0 .

44 .

9.0 4.2 . . 6.5 .

17.0 . . _

1987 Shearon Harris water Quality .

---

------------------------- konth=May ------------------------------------------------------------

00 (mg/l) pH Cond (p5/ca) Secchi (m)

Depth (m) Temp (*C) .....________. ___.____________

H2 P2 E2 H2 P2 E2 H2 P2 E2 H2 P2 E2 H2 P2 E2 3.6 6.6 6.2 65 63 64 1.5 1.5 S.3 0.2 21.4 22.1 21.4 8.7 8.3 7.8 8.6 8.2 7.6 6.6 C.5 6.2 65 63 64 . .

1.0 21.4 22.0 21.4 28.4 8.6 8.1 7.7 6.5 6.4 6.1 65 63 63 . . .

2.0 21.4 21.9 66 63 21.4 20.2 21.8 8.5 6.5 7.3 6.5 6.0 6.1 65 . . .

3.0 64 67 64 4.0 21.4 18.8 20.2 8.4 5.2 6.8 6.4 5.8 6.0 . . .

16.3 8.3 4.2 5.2 6.4 5.8 5.8 64 67 66 . . . I 5.0 21.2 17.8 17.5 6.4 3.6 4.6 6.0 5.8 5.8 67 67 66 . . i 6.0 19.2 17.2 66 I 16.0 16.2 4.7 1.5 0.7 6.0 5.8 5.7 67 69 . . .

7.0 17.3 68 69 75 8.0 16.5 16.0 15.2 4.3 1.5 0.2 5.8 5.8 5.7 . .

3.8 0.8 5.8 5.8 69 69 . . , .

9.0 14.8 15.8 . . .

13.7 3.5 5.8 . 72 . . . .

10.0 . . . .

72 11.0 12.5 . 3.1 . . 5.8 . . . . . . .

2.8 5.9 . 73 . . . .

12.0 11.6 . . . . .

1.6 6.0 . . 76 . . . .

13.0 10.7 . . . .

6.0 76 . . .

84.0 10.7 . . l.6 . .

_____.__.________...___.__.________._____.___._____.___.-- uonth= June ---~~---------~~~-----~~------- --------------- ----------~~~

Temp ( *C ) pH Cond (pS/cm) Secchi (m)

Oepth (m) DO (r./1) f, g ___._______ ____ _________________ ________________ ___________.__ ___. ._____-____

H2 P2 H2 P2 E2 H2 P2 5. 2 H2 P2 E2 H2 P2 E2 E2 6.4 6.7 6.9 5.7 60 58 59 1.4 1.3 1.4 0.2 26.1 26.6 26.2 6.5 7.0 26.2 6.4 6.9 6.3 6.5 6.8 6.7 62 58 60 . .

1.0 26.1 26.6 60 26.5 26.0 6.2 6.8 6.3 6.3 6.5 6.7 65 55 . . .

2.0 26.0 59 26.2 25.8 5.4 5.6 5.8 6.4 6.4 5.6 69 59 .

3.0 25.5 70 59 62 4.0 ?3.6 24.0 24.6 1.0 3.2 3.1 6.0 6.3 6.2 . .

20.9 21.5 23.0 0.0 0.8 0.8 6.0 6.1 6.0 70 68 62 . . .

5.0 72 69 71 6.0 18.1 19.4 19.8 0.0 0.0 0.3 6.0 6.0 6.0 . .

17.3 0.0 0.0 0. 0- 5.8 6.2 6.2 72 61 83 .

7.0 16.8 17.3 16.1 16.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 5.8 6.3 6.3 69 93 94 . .

8.0 15.6 99 15.2 0.0 0.0 5.8 . 6.3 68 . .

9.0 55.2 . .

32?

14.5 0.0 0.0 5.7 6.5 69 . .

10.0 14.1 . .

12.6 0.0 5.8 . . 72 . . .

11.0 . . .

'77 .

12.0 11.0 . . 0.0 . 5.9 . . . . .

10.2 0.0 59 . . 83 . . . .

13.0 . . . .

102 14.0 9.8 . . 0.0 . . 6.2 . . . .

9.7 0.0 6.5 . 125 . . . . .

15.0 . . . .

126 16.0 9.6 . . 0.0 . . 6.5 . . .

U EE E W. M M m' M M M W: M M l @ M M E E

E O E 1987 Shearon Harris water Quality

---

Month = July ----~~-------------------------------------------------------

Depth (m) Tamp (*C) 00 (ww/1) pH Cond (pS/cm) Secchi (m)

E2 H2 P2 E2 H2 P2 E2 H2 P2 E2 H2 P2 E2 H2 P2 0.2 28.5 28.3 27.7 7.2 7.0 6.3 6.4 6.2 5.9 66 65 66 1.2 1.4 1.2 1.0 28.5 28.3 27.6 7.3 7.0 6.2 6.3 6.2 5.9 66 65 66 . .

2.0 28.5 28.3 27.6 7.3 6.9 6.2 6.0 6.2 5.9 66 64 66 . . .

3.0 28.4 28.2 27.6 7.2 6.5 6.3 6.0 6.1 5.9 66 64 66 . . .

'4.0 28.4 27.5 27.6 7.2 2.8 6.1 6.0 5.9 5.9 67 65 66 5.0 26.9 26.1 26.7 2.2 0.4 2.4 6.0 5.7 5.6 67 7 6? . . .

6.0 20.9 21.7 22.5 0.0 0.0 0.1 6.0 6.0 5.6 91 97 71 . . .

7.0 18.5 19.0 19.8 0.0 0.0 0.1 6.8 6.1 6.0 92 120 101 . .

8.0 37.7 18.0 18.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 6.1 6.2 6.0 94 136 104 . . .

9.0 16.0 . . 0.0 . . 6.0 . . 91 . . . .

10.0 14.8 . 0.0 . . 6.0 . . 89 . .

11.0 13.1 . 3.0 . . 6.2 . 100 . . . .

12.0 12.0 . . 0.0 . . 6.3 . . 109 . . .

13.0 18.4 .. 0.0 . . 6.5 . . 129 . . . . .

14.0 t1.t . . 0.0 . . 6.7 . . 135 . . . .

---

~~----~~--------------------------------------------- Month =Au9ust ------------------------------------------------- ---------

Un i Oepth (m) Temp ('C) DO (m9/I) pH Cond (p 5 / ca) w -. -----.---.... .--....---... ..

Sacchi (m)

E2 H2 P2 E2 H2 P2 E2 H2 P2 E2 H2 P2 E2 H2 P2 0.2 28.6 28.4 27.9 6.8 6.3 6.1 6.4 6.3 6.1 67 65 69 1.5 1.7 t.7 1.0 28.5 2 81 . 4 27.9 6.5 6.3 6.1 6.4 6.3 6.1 67 65 68 .

2.0 28.4 28.* 27.9 6.2 6.2 6.0 6.4 6.3 6.1 67 65 68 3.0 28.4 28.3 27.9 6.2 6.3 6.0 6.* 6.3 6.1 67 66 68 . .

4.0 28 3 28.3 27.9 6.3 6.2 6.0 6.4 6.3 6.0 67 70 69 . . .

5.0 28.2 26.5 26.5 6.2 0.2 1.6 6.2 5.8 5.8 69 78 14 .

6.0 27.1 22.8 23.0 2.8 0.0 0.0 6.0 6.1 6.I 72 107 109 . .

7.0 20.4 20.8 20.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 6.3 6.1 6.1 .I7 128 146 .

8.0 18.6 19.6 . 0.0 0.0 . 6.3 6.s 112 160 .

9.0 16.5 . . 0.0 . . 6.3 . 103 .

10.0 84.8 . 0.0 . 6.3 . . 103 . .

I1.0 13.6 . . 0.0 . 6.5 107 .

82.0 12.3 . 0.9 6.6 . . I16 .

13.0 12.2 . O . (} . 6.7 . 120 . . ,

14.0 12.0 0.0 . 6.8 . 133 . . .

1987 Shenron Harris Water Quality

---

--------------------------- ----------------------- Month = September ---------------

Depth im) T et y (*C) D0 (aq/t) pH Cond (p5/cm) Sec ch t (m)

E2 H2 P2 E2 H2 P2 E2 H2 P2 E2 H2 P2 E2 H2 P2 8.2 76 8.1 6.7 7.2 6.3 76 72 65 1.5 1.8 1.4 0.2 26 - 17.6 27.3 1.0 26 % '?.3 27.3 7.8 7.4 7.8 6.7 7.0 6.4 77 76 71 . . .

26.5 21.2 27.3 7.5 7.4 7.6 6.7 6.8 6.4 77 76 74 . . .

2.0 26.3 46.6 26.9 6.4 4.9 6.1 6.6 6.4 6.2 77 76 75 .

3.0 77 78 4.0 26.1 26.0 25.7 4.0 2.2 4.0 6.4 6.2 5.7 79 . . .

25.2 24.7 2.9 0.6 0.5 6.2 6.1 5.7 80 80 R2 .

5.0 25.5 87 6.0 24.9 24.5 24.0 2.5 0.4 0.3 6.1 6.2 5.7 89 82 . .

23.5 23.6 0.4 0.2 02 6.1 6.3 5.9 100 89 91 . .

7.0 23.6 22.1 21.2 0.3 0.1 3.1 6.2 6.4 6.3 til its 140 . . .

8.0 20.6 f7.9 0.2 6.5 . 119 . . .

9.0 . . . . .

122 10.0 16.2 . . 0.2 . . 6.5 . . . . . .

14.1 O.2 6.6 . 125 . . . ,

11.0 . . . .

12.0 12.8 . . 0.2 . . 6.8 . . 134 . . . . . l O.2 6.9 . 144 . . . . . (

13.0 12.0 . . . .

14.0 11.7 . . 0.1 . . 7.1 . . 166 . . .

---

- --------------- --- Month = October --- ------------------------------------------------------

as Depth (m) Temp (*C) 00 (mg/1) pH Cond (p5/cm) Secchi (m) 1 E2 H2 P2 E2 H2 P2 L2 N2 P2 E2 H2 P2 C' E2 H2 P2 6.6 6.5 7.0 6.7 6.7 6.7 92 81 79 1.2 1.2 1.2 0.2 17 5 17.4 17.3 17.4 17.4 17.3 6.1 6.5 6.9 6.7 6.7 6.7 93 82 80 . . .

3.0 81 2.0 17.4 17.4 17.3 6.1 6.6 6.8 6.7 6.7 6.7 94 83 . . .

3.0 17.3 17.4 17.3 5.9 6.6 6.7 6.7 6.7 6.7 94 83 83 . .

4.0 17.3 17.2 17.2 5.9 6.5 6.8 6.7 6.7 6.7 94 84 85 . .

5.0 l' 3 17.0 17.1 5.9 6.4 6.7 6.7 6.7 6.7 94 84 8, . . .

17.0 17.1 5.9 6.4 6.8 6.7 6.7 6.6 94 84 87 . .

S.O 17.3 7.0 17.3 16.9 17.0 6.0 6.4 6.7 6.7 6.7 6.6 94 84 88 . .

8.C 17.3 16.8 17.4 6.1 6.4 6.6 6.7 6.7 6.L 94 82 88 . .

9.0 17.3 . . 6.1 . . 6.7 . . 94 . . . . .

10.0 17.2 . . 6.0 . . 6.7 . 94 . . .

11.0 17.2 . . 5.9 . . 6.7 . 94 . . . .

12.0 13.1 . . 0.1 . 6.7 . . 129 . . . .

13.0 12.0 . 0.0 . 7.3 . 179 . . .

I>

12.0 REFERENCES

I APHA. 1986. Standard methods for the examination of water and wastawater.

17th ed. American Public Health Association, Washington, DC.

CP&L. 1980. Trace element monitoring 1979. Carolina Power & Light Company, New Hill, NC.

. 1984a. Shearon Harris Nuclear Power Plant 1982 annual environ-mental monitoring report. Carolina Power & Light Company, New Hill, NC.

. 1984b. Shearon Harris Nuclear Powar Plant 1983 annual environ-mental monitoring report. Carolina Power & Light Company, New Hill, NC.

. 1985. Shearon Harris Nuclear Power Plant 1984 annual environ-mental monitoring report. Carolina Power & Light Company, New Hill, NC.

. 1986. Shearon Harris Nuclear Power Plant 1985 annual environ-mental monitoring report. Carolina Power & Light Company, New Hill, NC.

. 1987. Shearon Harris Nuclear Power Plant 1986 annual environ-mental monitoring repont. Carolina Power & Light Company, New Hill, NC.

. 1988- Shearon riarris Nuclear Power Plant NPOES thermal monitor-ing program summary and evaluation of monitoring results. EnrMsure to letter from G. H. Warriner to Steve W. Tedder (N.C. Division of Environ-mental Management), July 15, 1988. Carolina Power & Light Company, New I. Hill, NC.

Cariander, K.D.

I 1969. Handbook of freshwater fishery biology, The Iowa State University Press, Ames, IA.

Volume I.

. 1977. Handbook of freshwater fishery biology. Volumes I and II, The Iowa State University Press, Ames, IA.

Cottam, G., and J. T. Curtis. 1956. The use of distance measures in phyto-sociological sampling. Ecology. 37:451-460.

Davies, W. D., B. W. Smith, and W. L. Shelton. 1979. Predator-prey relation-ships in management of small impoundments. Pages 449-458 h H. Clepper I (ed.). Predator-prey sysccms in fisheries management. Sport Fishing Institute. Washington, DC.

I Maehr, D. S., A. G. Spratt, and D. K. Voigts.

central Florida power plant.

1983.

Fla. Field Nat. 11:45-49.

Bird casualties at a I Marsden, J. E., T. C. Williams, Effect of. nuclear power plant lights on migrants.

51:315-318.

V. Krauthamer, and H. K authamer. 1980.

J. Field Ornitnol.

Martin, D.

8., and W. A. Hartman. 1984 Arsenic, cadmium, lead, mercury, and selenium in sediments of riverine and pothole wetlands of the north c.entral United States. J. Assoc Off. Anal. Chem, 67:1141-1146.

I 12-1 I

I NCDEM. 1986 Administrative code. Classifications and water quality stan-dards applicable to surface waters of North Carolina. North Carolina Division of Environmeni.a1 Management, Dept. of Natural Rasources and Community Development, Raleigh, NC.

NCSU. 1985. Heutron activation analysis. Standard operating procedures. 3 No.'th Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC. 5 Patterson, K. Y., C. Veillon, and H. M. Kingston, 1988. Micrewave digestion of biological samples. Selenium analysis by electrothermal atomic absorption spectrometry. Chapter 7 in Kingston, H. M., and L. B. Jessie (eds.). Introduction to microwave sample preparation. , Theory and prac-tice. American Chemical Society Washington, DC.

Swing, J. M. 1986. Age and growth of largemouth bass in Harris Lake.

Carolina Power & Light Company, New Hill, NC.

USEPA. 1979. Methods for the chemical analysis of water and vastes. U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency, EPA-600/4-79-020, Cincinr i, OH.

USFS. 1969. Wildlife habitat improvement handbook. U.S. Forest Service Handbook 2609.11, January 1969. U.S. Dept. of Agriculture, Washington, DC.

von Geldern, C. and D. F. Mitchell. 1975. Largemouth bass and threadfin shad. Pages 436-449 in R. H. Strcud and H. Clepper eds. Black bass biology and management. Sport Fishing Institute. Washington, DC.

l Weiss, C. M., and D. E. Francisco. 1984. Water quality study--B. Everett Jordan Lake, North Caroline. Year 1, December 1981--November 1982. ESE Pub. 777. Dept. Env. Sci. Eng., University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC. .

M Weiss, C. M., and E. J. Kuenzler, The trophic state of North Carolina 1976.

lakes. UNC-WRRI-76-119. Water Resources Res. Inst., University of North Ej Carolina, Raleigh, NC.

Wren, C. D., H. P. Maccrinnon, and B. R. Loescher. 1983. Examination of

• bioaccumulation and biomagnification of metals in a Precambricn Shield Lake. Water, Air, Soil Pollut. 19:277-291.

Ziebell, C. D. 1983. Benthic feeding behavior of threadfin shad and its implications Pages 24-29 in 0. Bonneau and G. Radonski (eds.). Proceed-ings of small lakes management workshop, " pros and cons of shed." lowa Cons. Comm. Sport iish. Inst. Des Moines, IA.

I I

12-2 I

E

i

'I I

I I

I _

I

~

I -

Appendix A I

Accuracy and Percent Recc<ery of Water Chemistry Standards During 1987-1988 and Trace Element Standards During 1988 s .

I I -

I I

I jI A-1 I

I Appendix Al Mean percent recovery and sample size of water chemistry E standards for the CP&L Analytical Chemistry Laboratory during 5 1987.

Mean recovery Standard + standard Fe cent Sample Variable (mo/ liter) deviation re; very size Total phosphorus 0.01 0.010 f 0.001 100 39 0.02 0.020 1 0.002 100 40 DMRP 0.002 0.0021 1 0.0002 J05 40 0.005 0.0051 1 0.0002 102 38 Total nitrogel 0.10 0.103 1 0.008 103 43 0.20 0.201 1 0.012 101 46 Ammonia nitrogen 0.02 0.023 1 0.004 115 12 0.10 0.104 1 0.004 104 12 Nitrate + nitrite- 0.05 0.050 1 0.003 99 l' nitrogen 0.10 0.102 3 0.005 102 11 Calcium 5.0 4.95 + 0.180 99 16 10.0 9.95 2 0.285 99 16 Sulfate 2.0 2.03 1 0.063 102 32

'0 4.99 1 0.123 99 32 Arsenic 3.005 0.0050 1 0.0004 99 18 0.010 0.0099 1 0.0005 98 18 Copper 0.005 0.0050 1 0.00020 100 26 0.010 0.0098 1 0.00032 98 26 Mercury 0.0005 0.000467 1 0.000051 93 Sc 0.0010 0.000965 t 0.000048 97 44 Selenium 0.005 0.0046 + 0.0004 92 24 0.010 0.009450.0003 94 24 Chloride 1.0 1.05 t 0.034 105 35 2.0 2,02 1 0.056 101 35 g l '

W I

l A-2 I

l E i

I I

Appendix A1 (continued) l Mean recovery I

i Variable Standard (mg/ liter)

+ standard Percent Sample l deviation recovery size Sodium 1.0 1.04 1 0.072 104 26 i 2.0 2.04 1 0.091 102 26 l

Nickel 0.010 0.010 0.000547 101 32 j 0.030 0.031 ! 0.001210 103 32 Iron 0.50 0.484 0.0203 97 23 1.0 0.995 t 0.0499 99 23 Zinc 0.10 0.0968 t 0.0050 97 17 0.50 0.4845 ! 0.010 97 15 I

Lead 0.010 0.01002 ! 0.000468 100 32 0.030 0.n3082 0.001056 103 16 I Magnesium S.0 10.0 5.096 t 0.1519 10.01 0.3157 102 100 16 16 Manganese 0.10 0.0993 ! 0.0046 99 16 0.50 0.4947 t 0.0089 99 16 Potassium 1.0 1.010 ! 0.0341 101 21 2.0 2.002 t 0.0384 100 21 I Chromium 0.004 0.006 0.00405 ! 0.000214 0.00625 t 0.000211 101 104 34 18 Cadmium 0.0005 0.000496 t 0.000020 99 16 0.0010 0.001035 ! 0.000052 104 16 I Aluminum 0.050 0.100 0.0506 1 0.00170 0.1002 t 0.00399 101 100 28 27 I Silica 1.0 10.0 0.994 t 0.0201 10.10 0.1753 99 101 13 9

I E

I A-3 I

I Appendix A2 Mean percent recovery and sample size of water chemistry standards for the CP&L Analytical Chemistry Laboratory during 1988.

Mean recovery .

Standard ~+ standard Percen* RSO+ Sample Variable (mo/l i te:-) deviation recovery (%) size Total phosnhorus 0.010 0.010 1 0.001 101 6.9 54 0.020 0.020 1 0.001 101 4.0 48 Dissolved molybdte 0.002 0.002 1 0 105 7.4 39 reactive phosphorus 0.005 0.005 + 0 99 3.5 54 Total nitrogen 0.100 0.099 1 0.005 99 4.8 42 0.200 0.199 1 0.010 100 5.1 60 Ammonia nitrogen 0.020 0.022 1 0.002 112 8.7 30 0.100 0.101 1 0.005 101 4.7 30 Nitrate + nitrite- 0.050 0.046 1 0.005 93 10.0 36 nitrogen 0.100 0.095 1 0.008 95 7.9 36 Calcium 1.00 0.95 + 0.068 95 7.2 30 10.00 9.87{0.619 99 6.3 24 Sulfate 2.0 2.13 + 0.313 107 14.7 111 5.0 5.07[0.355 101 7.0 108 Arsenic 0.005 0.005 + 0.001 103 11.2 93 0.010 0.009 1 J.000 94 2.6 6 Copper 0.0050 0.0050 1 0.00031 100 6.2 75 0.0100 0.0102 + 0.00043 102 4.2 75 Mercury 0.00010 0.00010 + 0.000010 102 9.8 39 0.00050 0.00049 1 0.000031 98 6.2 78 Selenium 0.005 0.005 + 0

~

101 6.6 114 0.010 0.009 + 0 89 5.5 18 Chloride 1.00 1.05 + 0.037

~

105 - 3.6 W 2.00 1.94 1 C 141 97 7.3 93

• R50 = relative standard deviation = standard deviation + mean.

A-4 I

M

1987 Shearon Harris water Quality

---

'-~~~~~--------*---+'*----~~----------MonthaNovember ---------------------------------------------------------

Temp ( *C) Q1 Tm9/4) pH Cond (p5/cm) Secchi (m)

Depth (m) 12 H2 P2 E2 H2 P2 E2 H2 P2 t2 H2 P2 E2 H2 A2 l

7.4 6.4 6.4 6.7 84 79 81 1.5 1.5 ".1 0.2 13.8 DJ.8 23.7 r3 I 7.3 i

13.8 13.9 13.7 4.1 7.5 7.4 6.4 6.5 6.7 84 79 81 . . .

l 1.0 79 81 2.0 13.8 13.9 13.7 irt 7.3 7.4 6.4 6.5 6.7 84 . .

'B . I 7.3 7.4 6.4 6.5 6.7 84 79 at . . .

I 3.0 13.8 13.8 13.7 6.1 7.3 7.4 6.4 6.5 6.7 84 79 8: . . .

4.0 13.8 13.0 13.7 13.8 13.7 6.1 7.3 7.4 6.4 6.5 6.7 84 79 Pt . . .

5.0 13.8 79 88 11.8 13.8 I?.7 6.1 7.3 7.4 6.4 6.5 6.7 84 . .

6.0 82 79 31 7.0 13.7 13.7 13.7 6.0 7.3 7.4 6.4 6.5 6.7 . . .

13.7 6.0 6.2 7.4 6.4 6.5 6.6 82 78 80 .

8.0 13.7 13.6 13.7 6.0 6.4 . . 82 . . .

9.0 . . . .

82 10.0 13.7 6.0 . . 6.4 . . . . .

( 13.7 6.0 6.4 . 87 . . .

l 11.0 . . .

82 12.0 13.7 . 6.0 . . 6.4 . .

l 6.4 82 . .

13.0 13.7 . . 6.0 . . . . .

13.6 5.6 6.4 ,. 82 14.0 . .

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ~ ~

---

----------------~~------------ Month = December txt Deptn (m) Temp (-C) DO (mg/I) pH Cond (p3/cm) Seccht (m)

-a E2 H2 P2 E2 H2 P2 E2 H2 P2 E2 H2 "2 E2 H2 P2 10.4 10.7 10.8 9.6 10.0 9.5 6.5 6.5 6.2 92 92 88 1.7 1.2 8.6 0.2 92 90 88 1.0 10.4 so.6 10.8 9.6 9.9 9.4 6.5 6.6 6.2 . .

30.5 9.5 9.9 9.5 6.5 6.6 6.2 92 88 88 . . .

2.0 10.3 3.6 10.4 9.2 9.6 9.5 6.5 6 7 6.2 92 88 88 .

3.0 10.8 9.3 10.0 0.7 9.4 9.5 6.5 6.7 6.2 92 88 88 .

4.0 10.0 9.2 8.5 9.3 9.8 6.5 6.7 6.2 92 88 88 .

5.0 10.0 1.8 9.2 88 9.9 8.8 9.0 8.4 9.0 9.1 6.5 6.7 6.2 92 88 .

6.0 92 88 88 l 7.0 9.9 8.7 9.0 8.2 8.6 9.0 6.5 6.7 6.2 .

7.9 9.0 8.2 a.4 9.0 6.6 6.7 6.2 92 90 89 .

l 8.0 9.9 9.8 8.6 6.6 . . 92 l 9.0 . .

92

' 10.0 9.8 . . 8.7 . 6.6 . .

9.8 8.5 6.6 . . 32 . . . . .

1i 0 . .

9.8 8.5 6.6 . . 92 .

12.0 . . .

92 13.0 9.8 . 8.2 . . 6.6 . . . .

9.8 8.0 6.6 . 92 . .

14.0 . . .

9.7 8.0 6.6 . . 92 . . .

15.0 . .

16.6 9.7 . . 6.0 . . 6.7 . . 92 . . .

l _ _ _ _

'3ud $1.e at~ ws lide e i s wa t es 4aalea,

- -- - %n t h = J anuar y --- -

Deples (m) lemp (*C) DO I m9 / 8 7 IW1 ( m ul lpS/tml Sn tee s ( .m l L2 P2 E2 P2 L2 882 P2 El 81 2 P2 El H2 P2 852 tl2 3.8 10.5 9.2 10.5 6.9 6.4 7.0 is 6 80 el I.4 1.3 8.6 0.2 4.9 3.6 3.8 10.5 9 3 10.5 6.9 6.4 7,0 86 80 88 1,0 4.9 3.6 2.0 4.9 3.6 3.8 10.5 9.4 10.5 6.9 6.4 7.0 86 80 80 4.9 3.5 3.8 10.5 9.6 10.7 6.9 6.4 7.0 86 80 88 3.0 4.0 4.9 3.5 3.8 10.6 9.7 80.8 6.9 6.4 7.0 86 80 81

5. 0 , 4.8 3.5 3.9 10.8 9.9 10.9 6.9 6.3 7.0 66 80 81 6.0 4.8 3.5 3.9 10.8 10.0 10.9 6.9 6.3 7.0 06 80 85 7.0 4.8 3.5 3.9 30.9 10.8 10.9 6.9 6.3 7.0 H6 80 el 4.8 3.9 10.9 II.I 6.9 7.0 86 89 6.0 9.0 4.8 18.0 6.9 8 ti 10.0 4.8 11.2 6.9 86 11.0 4.8 . 11.2 6.9 H6 12.0 4.8 88.3 6.9 86 83.0 4.8 . II,3 6.9 80 b1 14.0 4.8 18.4 6.9 8b i

G3

...---- Ison t h e sser th Deptli (m) T eng2 (* C ) Do I a.9il ) pae ro...s 1,.s / t I seech6 1I E2 14 2 P2 [2 s12 P2 E2 8:2 P2 (2 et2 P2 L2 tt2 P2 0.2 9.4 10.5 9.5 40.9 10.2 80.2 7.9 7.2 7.9 88 90 63 t.2 0.1 8.4 1.' 9.4 9.7 9.5 10.9 10.3 10.2 7.9 7.0 7.1 89 98 83 2.0 9.4 9.5 9.5 11.0 10.0 10.2 7.8 7.0 7.1 88 95 83 3.0 9.3 9.4 9.4 18.1 10.0 10.3 7.8 7.0 7.5 88 99 83 4.0 9.3 9.4 9.4 88.8 9.9 10.4 7.7 6.9 7.8 88 99 83 5.0 9.3 9.3 9.4 la.t 10 d 10.4 7.4 6.9 7 8 88 99 83 6.0 9.3 9.3 9.3 59.5 10.0 10.5 7 4 6.8 7.9 88 92 83 l

i 7.0 9.3 9.9 9.3 II.2 9.7 10.5 7.3 6.3 7.1 88 95. 83 8.0 9.3 8.8 9.3 II.2 7.2 10.5 7.3 6.8 7.8 88 95 83 9.0 9.3 . II.3 7.2 88 .

10.0 9.3 . Il.3 . 7.I 88 81.0 9.2 18.3 . 6.9 . P8 82.0 9.2 11.2 6.7 92 13.0 8.5 . 8.s 6.7 92 14.0 8.3 7.4 6.7 92 t

1 l

l M M M M M M M M M . . m m m m e e e m-

lljjIll!Il

- 7 - f7 2 - 2

- - P t - . P 1

- p -

- ) -

- m- - m--

( - - I

- J - - o l

eit l

8

~ t

. _ 2ts 1

t -

~ s -

- t . e .

e.

- e-

- s- - S

- - 5 - .- o

- 2 - 2 l

- L l - L

- - 2 5 122245b2 - 2 44 655658

- l P 999999996 - - V 99999901

- . o- 8 - )m- 1 1

- t - s - *

- /

- s -

- S _

- 5 -

p2 026B9nI - p_2 J33505550

- s e

t H

b89, 7 17 F 7 eS S - 89 9999008 23

. 8 1 1 1 1

- o- f.. -

- n- e -

- o- to.

33447 0542006088 u O. b* 7 s

- L l n3 23345h340t t 3 2 5

- E i1 7 7 7 1 7 7 7 1 1 / / 6 4 t 999991 22122/4

• 1 4 1 1 1 1 l 1 8 a I 1 y -

- 99864428,0 2 99967 321 .

- 2 .

. l. - - P e 666666b6 V 7 7 7 7 6666 u -

t 2 0. fi 8 206544 t

ep- H 2

• 1 2 0.l.

3 I 8 8 l.. -

e p- H s8877 c666 - 7766u6666 w - -

- y -

l -

, y -

s -

. a -

h u -

67 87548 0 8 B.6 h.6 8 - 06301 2344567

. 888.l 8 *

- 2 z - 2 . . . . . .

g

. 4 .

. i - L /7 77777 766Sbht ,

h - L 1666666666666t 666 t t n n u o u M e

w.

- 987 88 88 60 574,06500 s - 2 . . . . - - 2 . . . .

. . P s e 8877553l - - P 00004233 u - - - -

8 1 1 1 u - - -

) -

9 - ) - -

- L -

i -

- / -

L. - / -

J- - J. 98 0550000

- w2 b.3903565l . -

(

m.2 s

. 4 909300000

- t - H 99901 544l 8 . -

t 1

- O .- .

. O-D- - D-

- 2 9375297'6840508. . . .

- ._ 2 465036440000H005 8

.0

. - L 899876543331 1 0 - - L 8s841 0000000H00U0

- - 2 I 96608. . . 4 .

37

- - 2

- P 53961.

881 . 6429 1

. 58

- - P 00996765 -

- 22 e2' 421

- 2224 4 1 1 1 1 -

- ) - - ) . .

- C - - C .

- * - 322022675 - * - 9981 278 33

- ( - 2 . . . - ( . 2 . . . . .

- - H 222098765 - - H 887653209

- p. 22221 1 1 1 1 - p- 222222221

- m- - m-e-

- a- -

- l - - T -

098 . 64775 572632009643

- 2 30734900527. . .

2 . . . . . . .

.765531 9765411

- - E 1 t 009887543200 _ E 7 t 4 t

- 2'i221 1 1 1 4 1 1 3 1 1 - 222,22221 t 1 1 1 3 1 t 1 f

- ) - )

- m . m

- ( - (

- h 2 0 0.O.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 f

i 200000000000.O0000

- t 01 2 ~s 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 0 1 23 . t 01 23456'. 8908 23456

- - p 8 5 3 . p 3 8 4 1 1 9 9

- e . e

- D - D

- o t$

t[l1l ll\iIil l, iI lI l' (li l lI

lut16 Stw.s r o i tid s r i s water Q$ ed I a a y

. ...... .._....._ _._. .. _.. go , g g, $, p g .,,g3,,, . . .

Dep a ri ( es ) Y un.p (*C) Do ( m.s / L ) t u *d t uS / t.* ) Le u ** (**)

s et E2 H2 P2 E2 612 P2 E2 81 2 P2 E2 te2 P2 E2 te2 P2 0.2 26.3 27.7 27.3 0.2 b.0 H.7 7.8 6.9 t. . I 80 11 0 Hs 1.3 1.4 1.4 1.0 25.6 25.* 25.4 8.0 5.9 8.4 7.t 6.9 6.I 83 82 81 2.0 24.5 24.6 24.5 6.5 5.9 8.0 7.t 6,9 6.I 84 84 e4 4 3.0 23.9 24.0 24.0 5.4 4.0 6.$ 7.3 6.8 6.1 85 35 84 i 4.0 >

23.8 23.8 23.7 4.9 4.0 5.= 6.9 6.3 6.t 86 87 84 5.0 23.7 23.7 23.6 4.7 4.2 4.9 6.7 6.0 6.I 88 87 84 6.0 23.6 23.5 23.5 4,3 3.0 4.4 6.3 6.0 5.9 95 89 86 7.0 23.5 23.2 23.s 4.1 2.4 2.0 6.5 5.9 5.9 iOO 92 92 0.0 21.8 22.2 22.7 0.4 1.9 0.5 6.0 5.9 5.9 all e !2 99 9.0 18.7 19.8 0.2 1.3 6.5 6.3 140 435 60.0 16 4 . 0,2 6.5 e40 11.0 15.2 0.1 6.5 142 12.0 t3.8 . O.I 6.5 e10 m 33.0 33.0 0.0 . 6.7 ein

. 84.0 12.4 0.0 6.0 s et e y

15.0 12.2 0.0 6.9 19s 16.0 12.0 0.0 . 198 go ,, g g , _ ,4 o y ,,,,,, ..__

Depth ( en) Temp (*C) DO ( mg / 4. ) get Eond (p5/cm) Seu h i (m) ,

E2 H2 P7 E2 #12 P2 E2 H2 P2 El til P2 E2 D12 P2 L

0.2 15.0 14.6 84.9 5.8 7.6 7.1 6.2 6.3 b.4 t$ 3 77 79 1.2 4.J l.4 t.0 84.6 14.5 14.6 5.6 7.7 7.3 6.2 6.4 6.4 82 76 79 2.0 14.3 14.3 84 5 5.5 7.7 7.2 6.2 6.5 6.4 82 75 78  !

3.0 14.3 14.2 84.4 5.4 7.7 7.2 6.2 6.5 6.4 81 74 17 '

4.0 14.3 14.2 14.4 5.5 7.7 7.3 6.2 6.5 6.4 81 73 .77

• 5.0 14.3 14.4 14.4 5.5 7.2 7.3 6.2 6.4 6.4 88 73 17 6.0 14.2 14.t 34.4 5.6 7.2 7.5 6.2 6.4 6.4 8e 72 16 '

7.0 14.2 14.I 84.4 5.6 6.9 7.5 6.2 6.4 b.4 Hi 71 75 8.0 14.2 13.9 14.4 5.6 4.2 7.4 6.2 6.3 6.4 80 70 75 9.0 14.2 13.6 5.6 2.8 6.3 6.0 79 70 10,0 [

14.2 5.5 es . 3 19 91.0 34.2 5.5 6.3 79 82.0 14.2 5.2 6.3 85 I 13.0 34.2 5.2 6.2 HI i 14.0 13.7 2.0 6.2 92 45.0 12.9 0.4 b.9 372 16,0 12.4 0.3 7.8 208 '

= -

J .

L

[

I _

l Appendix C Concentrations,of Chemical Variables in the Harris Lake During 1987 and 1988 I

I I

I C-1

1 Key to abbreviations used in Appendix C.

Abbreviation Variat,le I

Cl- Chloride 502 - Sulfate Ca2+ Total calcium Mg2+ Total magnesium

. Na+ Total sodium K+ Total' potassium ,

TOTAL N Total nitrogen -

NHz-N Ammonia (as nitrogan)

N0j+h0j-N Nitrate + nitrite nitrogen TOTAL P Total phosphorus TDP Total dissolved phosphorus DMRP Dissolved molybdate reactive phosphorus TOC Total organic carbon TS Total solids TOS Total dissolved solids Trace Elements Al Total aluminum As Total arsenic e l

Cd Total cadmium E

! Cr Total chromium l

Cu Total copper I Fe Total iron Hg Total mercury Mn Total mangan2se Ni Total nickel Pb Total lecd Se Total selenium Zn Total zine c.2 i E

th P

GJ b

w o e n@cQCcn@ C4&4 e "e e e e *

• e N

c kkke kkkkkkkk U v v v v v vv v v v v v U 9 y @v.

g e e e i e e e vcNcw - ? D.

I e e e - -- --

U NNmNOO---N--  %

U e v v v v v v v v v v v v ere m

Qm Nm-wm - - w oOOOO w oe NNw OOOOOOOOCOoO 88 o oooOO ooO p e e e e e ee I G b

e o e e e e e e e e o e OCo3OOOOoooO

+Nn = coOm-mye s -eeeee - - - - -

v v v v v v v v v v v a

m 8

$ - NNNN- --mNe 5ooooeoOOoo0 OOOoOOOOoOOO I

- e e a e e e e e e o e e w -

• e * * * * *

• e e *

• 2 eoeAeeenoeee OOOooooooOCO v v v v v v v v v v v v D

0.

a) c@ % NeNN to e N N e *3 4

o N -r A wmNN QOOCCCOOOCCC

- e er A C

C^OOQQOQ@

eA@ c o m to mAv 5 p* C

%g o

e o OOOOCOOOoOOO e e e e e o e e e e 1 N - - e .3 gg -

c e.n*C ,

i m"A ccc-------en o00-0000 003 I

aN ---oOoooooo- ---N- - - - N ---

Ce Q e.

i e OOOO3ooOOOOO i' * * * * * * * * * * *

• OOOOOOCO-CCC L v v v v v v v v v v v v v v v u ev U

aU *3 R bmNNNNNNN&w-e OOOQCOOOOQOO

.l g q

g 4

m -e Oe O C00000000000 e eOe O o e OeOe Oe eO - N N. .

N N

9 @ e-N

- N 4eeew e v v NN y v v v v v v v M g 4 6

"Lg g

CE D E Q 3

O O o co e N - co m N - %

e e e e o e a e e e o e wsamcAN-nw4w

-' g* L g @ r. @ - e =ecNwc@

2 oen<seemeec4c p *

-9 e e o e e e o e e e o e N

• OOCCOOOoCOQQ c W O

C00m00000000 e e e e e e e e e e

• Z U NNNNNNNNNNNN CJ L C h P'e 4e De e' Do 'O D O

e @e @e m CJ 9

+

t ----e e e e e

---NNNN v v v v v v v v v v v

.O +J q ee 4 ***

. gg ---

E  %%

em

> 1

+

9 Z

NmomNr.7omeec

• * * * * * *

• e * *

• sonwwwwwAD@ 44 o

O e o e e o e e e o e e e OooooOOOOCoO v v v v v v v v v v M

I .u, CJ gL g g

.C N

m 1

- ow.

o -e -e -oe oee e

me,owsoe e

4.

oe e

e v v v v v v v v v s v C

• UU N 9

N3wwNDeeNmo@

e a e e o e o e e e o e by O w+9mmmmmM wwe -

OmOOOOOOOO O3

• Q ""4 N N N N N *'

v v v

@d EM oc de O

~

oe ee ~e oo ene,oe o ,e a

~ ~

e

~

.e .e

'e. GJ A

+J qg E e m *r e C C 6 C++ N- 4O C eoCeAe@ O@ C-Le y e

+a G) 9 C %meCDCCNmw e e e e e e e 0?O I -

gy e e e e e 9 NU O *e w w n a w w w w nee o CC e QNe ON w ++ @ NO

- e en c. Ne n er n e@ er co en OL c t,J +2 y

. . - , 3,

.'. C e * -

e 9 *- O P.

.v.

. NNww@ 46 -

G

,e e. -U - . - .=.= ---

Ne Ome o e": c m co O o c Q g q) .U e e e o e e e e e e e c U w. A U D N m A w A N N N == m m N O

== - s. e-c C ++

ob n c a +- c J3 L L >+ == @ O e. > U e- C aL 6 > C - O'l a +. > U p j wz<z,3 ,3 < m d 2 d-

,9 9 9 & 9 3 4 9 g

C ee a9 3

,9 wz<z 3 $

,3 <mS2y &

l C-3

m . .

Appendix C1. (continued) .

~

STATION E2, BOTTOM Total Alkalinity Month (CaQ3 ) CI Ca M4[ Ns* d Total N tei, N FO}tO}-N Total P TDP OMRP Silic., TOC Jan 15 .'- 6.3 4.4 1.7 5.4 1.6 0.69 0.16 0.15 0.009 0.003 0.001 2.9 6.0 Feb 16 4.4 6.5 3.9 1.6 5.2 1.7 0.51 0.05 0.16 0.022 0.011 0.002 2.7 6.0 Mar 82 4.2 6.8 3.4 1.4 4.5 f.6 0.45 < 0.02 0.85 0.045 0.025 0.009 3.1 6.1 Apr 16 3.9 4.9 3.8 1.5 4.9 1.8 0.40 0.15 0.15 0.023 0.013 0.003 3.4 6.2 May I4 3.4 5.4 3.5 1.4 2.2 1.8 0.52 0.23 0.0v u.003 0.0$6 0.046 3.1 6.4 Jun 41 4.3 3.1 5.2 1.8 4.9 1.9 8.4 1.1 < 0.01 0.054 0.050 0.037 5.3 8.0 Jul 38 4.1 3.5 5.8 2.1 4.7 1.9 1.5 1.1 < 0.01 0.21 J.19 0.20 5.0 7.6 Aug 36 4.2 4.2 4.8 1.7 4.9 2.0 1,2 0.90 < 0.01 0.22 0.22 0.21 4.I 6.8 i 2.0 Sep 59 4.2 < l.0 6.4 4.7 2.1 3.9 1.8 < 0.01 1.3 0.76 0.79 9.2 7.9 Oct 18 5.0 1.0 4.3 1.7 6.3 2.6 0.66 0.19 0.02 0.053 0.034 0.024 2.1 5.5 tw 17 4.9 8.1 3.8 1.6 6.2 2.6 0.67 0.24 0.08 0.042 0.024 0.015 8.9 5.7 Dec 15 5.0 8.0 3.8 1.6 6.4 2.7 0.63' O2 0.14 0.051 0.032 0.024 1.4 6.0 I Month lurbidity 15 TOS Al As Cd Cr Cu fe ibj Mn Ni Pt> Se /n F

Jan 2.1 $4 50 20 <l < 0.1 < 2.0 1.0 210 2.0 120 < 5.0 1.0 < 1 5 20 feb 2.8 84 52 50 <l < 0.1 < 2.0 4.0 190 < 0.10 70 < 5.0 < I.O <t < 20 Mar 5.2 71 60 120 <1 < 0.1 < 2.0 5.0 200 0.10 60 < 5.0 2.7 <1 < 20 i Apr 7.4 89 56 26 < l < 0.1 < 2.0 4.0 640 0.18 920 < 5.0 < 1.0 < l < 20 1 May 2.9 69 36 70 1 < 0.1 < 2.0 6.3 300 < 0.10 970 < 5.0 1.4 <1 20 Jun 8.I 78 60 30 1 < 0.1 < 2.0 5.4 5200 0.18 9200 < 5.0 < t.0 < 1 32 Jul 4.6 8 8 90 1 < 0.1 < 2.0 3.9 6100 < 0.I0 7400 < 5.0 1.5 < 1 30 Aug 8.0 50 1 < 0.1 < 2.0 1.5 4400 < 0.10 6200 < 5.0 < t.0 < 1 20 Sep 66 127 100 40 4 < 0.1 < 2.0 4.8 22000 0.24 9100 < 5.0 < t.0 < 1 < 20 Oct 3.2 100 97 < 20 1 < 0.1 < 2.0 4.4 250 < 0.10 1100 < 5.0 < I.0 <1 < 20 Nov 3.2 47 63 20 <1 < 0.1 < 2.0 5.5 310 0.15 530 < 5.0 < 1,0 <1 < 20 Dec 3.2 78 les 30 < t < 0.1 < 2.0 4.3 120 < 0.10 280 < 5.0 < I.0 < l < 20 I Denotes missing data, gg g g g M M E E E E E E E

y

. y ~ ~.y ~ - , - - -

e . .

M M M M M M

• mm .. M. M k M MM A0pendix C1. (continued)

ST0 %.' H2, SURFACE lotal A:kalinity Month (cac03) ci- sOf ca2+ gg2+ u ,+ g+ ,,,,, u ,,3 , uo;,,93 ro,al P

_ top twe siaica . Tac Jan 13 4.5 5.7 3.9 1.6 5.1 8.8 U.54 3.07 0.44 0.010 0.904 0.003 4.2 6.2 Feb 9 4.2 6.6 3.2 1.3 4.2 1.5 0.52 < 0.02 0.21 0.027 0.018 0.002 5.3 6.1 .

Har 8 3.6 6.4 2.8 1.2 3.8 1.6 0.42 0.02 0.49 0.033 0.087 0 003 5.4 5.8 l Apr 10 3.7 6.7 3.2 1.3 4.3 1.6 0.27 0.04 0.01 0.025 0.015 3.2 5.7 ,

May 13 3.7 6.1 3.2 1.3 4.1 1.6 0.38 0.02 < 0.01 0.038- 0.017 0.002 0.4 5.9 I Jun 12 3.9 7.0 3.4 1.4 4.6 1.8 0.35 < 0.02 < 0.01 0.030 0.016 0.001 3.8 5.7 I Jul il 3.9 6.3 3.3 1.5 5.0 1.7 0.3) < 0.02 < 0.01 0.018 0.007 0.002 1.5 6.0 Aug 13 4.4 7.0 3.3 8.6 5.1 1.8 0.34 < 0.02 < 0.01 0.019 0.009 0.001 1.6 2.5 Sep 13 4.5 6.7 3.2 1.4 5.4 2.1 0.34 < 0.02 < 0.01 0.015 0.008 c.001 1.4 6.5 Oct 14 4.7 6.9 3.7 1.6 5.9 2.3 0.48 0.05 0.01 0.024 0.010 0.001 1.7 6.4 Now IS 4.7 8.0 3.1 1.5 6.2 2.5 0.40, 0.07 0.04 0.0/5 0.010 0.008 1.8 5.9 Dec ab 5.0 1.9 3 .') 5.7 6.5 2.7 0.60 0.82 0.88 0.001 0.030 0.018 1.5 6 ,2 O Montti Iurbidsly IS IOS Al As Cd Cr Cu fe W} 4n Ni Pb Se In a

vi Jdn 3.4 58 43 80 < l < 0.1 < ?.O < l.0 190 < 0.10 60 < 5.0 < l.0 < I < 20 feb 11 67 53 160 1 < 0.1 < 2.0 2.0 270 < 0.19 100 < 5.0 < l.0 <1 5 20 Mar 12 79 53 220 <l < 0.1 < 2.0 2.0 350 < 0.10 100 <

5.0 3.1 < l < 20 Apr 4.2 55 40 48 <1 < 0.8 < 2.0 3.0 220 0.13 130 < 5.0 < !.0 <1 < 20 May 3.3 72 30 40 <I < 0.1 < 2.0 4.6 190 < 0.10 170 < 5.0 < 1.0 <l < 20 Jun 3.ts 40 38 < 20 <1 0,2 < 2.0 4.5 110 < 0.80 110 < 5.0 < i.0 <1 20 Jul 3.0 Sg 64 25 <I < 0.1 < 2.0 2.7 90 < 0.10 70 < 5.0 1.5 <1 < 20 Aug 2.s I < 20 <1 < 0.1 < 2.0 < l.0 60 < 0.10 110 < 5.0 < I.0 < l < 20

~

Sep 1.7 41 42 < 20 <l < 0.1 < ?.0 4.1 TO < 0.10 42 < 5.0 < l.0 <1 < 20 Oct 4.4 83 77 < 20 1 < 0.3 < 2.0 3.3 200 < p.10 300 < 5.0 < I.0 <1 < 20 Nov 3.6 48 =0 >J <1 < 0.1 < 2.0 4.4 90 11.95 100 - < 5.0 < l.0 <1 < 20 Dec 7.8 76 25 20 1 < 0.1 < 2.0 4.2 100 < 0.80 120

• 5.0 < 1.0 1 < 20 I Denotes missing data.

L .} j; A24.p n: - k l.,,w k ]. f.y. ,:f; .?. .' ' j [5' :' f ' .b ^' '..,

u. . g .:;

O N: .. . - .";

~ ..' {' h Y ' ;,. ... . . .. . : e , 2 . ~ ~;;$..

. .'.- f. .- -

. z,

h. :-

<e it j.\ :p

.g; w+, rq .

p .,. m -

v.<w...,

y: y .s..e.

e ,

. . e ,: yi., . . ; ,

c

..s.

. ,.  :, m -.; .

,-  ;;.; . .,,.c.

.g s.y ,. . ..

.~ .

.~ ,(

n ..

+g . , , pp... , t 7 w .. , . - .

s

.y.1. .. . ., ;. ,.

4 ..

. ,h.I .

y *f ' . *.e, ?., ?^} ',Y Yf. W.,* , ' ......

-' . . ,'1

• ~ - '" ~ * *

. ; ~ ** .

' ~. { ~ .7 : A,

..'l',__ j f 'I '..~,.

.~

g

.f..'f- .b

• d. _-

y'. ..

. . y.

?

e e e e

• c

- .e .e . .e .e cw..c. N v v v vv v v v v v v 4

-o ewSw N4Noch em e e e o e e e o e e e e = ====-- ---==

= NNNhoo-~~ee -- L

-e A v v v v v v v v v v v v 555 e e -

8555555$

e e e e e e e e f -e-e- -.99.

- - N - - -e_e

• e e

_e o*

oDo ooooooOo y v v v v v v v v v N N smo coooco-cocco a

8$cowNeoo~o e e e e o e e c o.

- .-8. e s. o. m

- e e o e e e e o c c c c c c .,e e c<ce e e e CocooCooonOo v v v vv v v v v v v 1

ecmNecwm-N

.e SmDe NNa e

o a N - - - N A e *o*oe o o.o.oe o e o o.

C 2

ooooooooNoo n b@N NDNn N-- - c-e w.

w O oooooooooodo

.N A w

-_N=oooooooom =-- - -Ne o' occooooooo e e =e e e e e o e e e e ------------

m o e e e e e e e e e e e 3

im ocoooooooooo i oooooooooooo g

v v v v v v v v v v v v v v v v v v 2 -

=

c N N N N N N N ts c h cocococco== o w ocoeQococo a

e o e e e e e e e e e e a 4 N weh w ~ o -'3 N --w-w N N-w ,

oooooooooooo y v v v v v 6

2 D 2 V 3 oo.N e e e e-eN. A. NwNPN

• NNAMmWN Cwew e e e e w -

cm@

c c e m w

~ @ NnNN-c m m m e c e, g e e e e e e o e e e e N

O occooooooooo L

w L

oooooo.oooooo e e e e e NNNNNNNNNNNN e e e e e Q

Q +

mcw@ @mh eNwwe e e o e e e e e e e e e v v v v v v v v v v v v g n o w w w ee - o NNNN 4

g +

9

~@ e eomo@Ne e * - Neoce e * *

• e

• e e e e e e o e e * *

• e Q Qoooooooouco 2 e=wwwwwceccc v v v v v v v v M

N

=

{ newmmeccecce.

. .e .e .e .e .e .e .e e e e

---

e

< v v v v vv v v v v v v se g McNNNedew&cN e e e e e e e o e o e e g' kkkMhkkkkhkk

, .wc-m. --ee-Nw e e e o e e e e o e e e e o occ@N @m*N mme q c c c Q w o e w &* oN oo y o wchhmMC - k w-O e v C 1 e

- a wceM No-e@ N NO -

"c & $$YNS$ S w $$ $ c w e e n e - ~~ co-N o - enn w @mc w% w e e U C N

-- 1

, ,~ec- om cNc---NcwecD

-e m * -u e - ~~~~~~~~~ ~ n a

• ec~~~m@

e e *

• eneo U O ce *

• e *

• e * *

=4 0 -a Nwh eemNNoMwm

-w w e x < 3 e

• g y C z a e ecob ew ees >a< c-eaym u e

• col L we- ma* > u a

4 2 ,3 3 3 cd.g8

< g eec ae 3 s x<1 ,3 <3 e c da. p8 2

I C-6 E

=-

~

L w A m m@Neme a coceN O

V e e e e e e a e e e e o r* x

• . @@N@vb c C000QO NNNNNN

- @CNONM c

Q C) O O O O N re ce N N ee y N N I v v v v v v v v v L e 9 L -v NNoe e U e e e e * -v Ne oe -eO. c. to.

- 0000-- 00-wen

.a

• = e v ..----- A v - - -.-

- t 4 g @ v v vv v v A v v v v e v Nc-c am m. - em a*

e O d56 0 g e 050m@-

e co m U g e e e o e e e e e e e e L 000000 p 000000 e o e e e e 00Q000 OC0-0O

e o e a e e

[ y y en + f - r D q - ----

vvv vv NOn v v < v .

}

.u

• eN---N y *rNNe c C 000000 u 00060-e e e e e e - e e e e e e D

000000 .

000000 e e e * *

• 0000-O OOOO O e e e e o e C ,

'0

, crerce . 2 eerrer ea v v v . y v v v v v ,

O*

• ewmoew ceN

• CZ -  % eNeNm preo w Ci 9 OC00OO

-9 w 00w-N o== - * * * * * * *

..C .C 0000CO O DO00-O e.

tn e omO

0 " 5 IC mo e Oer-m C.^

l

~3 2

- 4 ~

- @ k Q w =0 $

• w e.

L --

zi

• O4 *"

&N Nc @ m cc -

gV a N --COO- I+ N --OOOO

.. e e o e e e e e e e o e Qg e.

i e C00000 0000e^ 2e 000C00 O. O .O-OC3 cb

-e e --OO u3 +

2 v

2, 000000

• e g v v n e e o e e e m s 1 00000C J g W v v vv v y v v v v , v U

d- .

4 O

'" V L- Z CNNNSC W 2 ONO L g.- 2:

4 e - eC.C OeOe eN s e - eO. *^ e %e Ce I L 9 3

O C00000 v 0 kkhbbb o ";

COONec 3hh$f,9 8

-. a

• v v v

- . .s -

N%- ,5 N

C7

-C h 2 W Z

~ N I

• 0L m -

O 9

o cewe or 000000 er e c o e s

• c-wwe-

=

O o

o* o *

• e o.*

O C O w'e c

-Q gu e- p e o e e e e >~ - 2 ee N.N.o Oe ce G WwWN-C ( U covNe m

.c. s= e I M e

LN . me er ce .= mo + N or e O co qp 9 o e o 9 e e o e e

>a 2 h P'.e Neec OOOOOO

• *

• e

• e Z N

• e.e ccc COOOOO L L *

• e e o e y NNNNNN Q NNNNNN "e v v vv vv v v . e v e I

N mn=@e@ N UW m o * . . e e m e. m @ - N e e e e e o e gL g ------

I ---NNN v4 4

o U

. . e e COOOOO

• y G

e e e e e OOOOOO Q *V N 0-ON-N N O@@NN I Mg O3 O

9 e e e o e e TTTw"w v v vv v v Q

9 wTwA4c e e o e e v v v v v us +

C se * *De*CD * - ~~~-- N@CO * ~~~NN-Nw e e e *

• e w N' w D. e o e e og l O @@@@EN v s v < -

CO@N-~ V V

== U A -

eJ E v v

@Q L-aW O ct a OO cO EM^6No

~

C I

.Ncoom 4 * < 8 = a.@bbO ge e e e e * - N e.we ae as N I

- e y U cretCC v u cccccc 1

Ob

• Ua +- > 5.-

m ,

e

.u. w

-C >* O c O P's Tc a -C M

• O /; w 7-

• e * * * . O g

e

9. - er

- c @. c. @.

. . . O. emNeNN 9

Q .v e .r CD we. ey c .U.

e e e m m N .O.f, & cN V O9 4 0 9 - a

= .aC

-. w eC +

L 3

e-4w w

3 4 .=

X.

C U n r r Q

• C L > = = A>

• C L w- a> - C L A- Q> z.

e C L w a>

9 9 3 C a { ,C xx o .p C

- ,9 x9 x9 ,3 e 0 C C 9 9 x x ,3 e. @ C

^ ,9 9x 9x ,3 e

< 1 i C-7

i il i' '

E 725207 C 765213 W -

667757 000000 T O

667757 000000 I

n 222222

< < < < < I n 222222 E

e a ic 139838 c 266815 i

l i

1 200I 1 l i

00001 8 S

. 5 e

1 l t l l 1 S <

5 e

1 I l l l I E

231 523 322522 000000 000000 '5 000000 000000 W 000O00 -

b 0 0. O. O. 0 0 4P D 000000 b 0 0 0 0.O.0 E

• P t l I I l I << P 1 l l i I 1 14i41 05 l 1 1 1 1 P

1 1 5096 1 1 1 8 01 W 0.O.0 0 0 0 D 000000 000000 i I

000000 5555" 5 I

000000 i 000000 E F

N 555555 P P 1

00769 1 78559 32321 2 31 221 1 te i

000000 000000 la t

o 000000 000000 E

N T n 000000 o 000000 M 67 5660 M 1 7 7 957 1

1 N

[ 1 1 1 1 33 110001 N

- 591 1 23 I.00001 M

}

W 000000 000055  %

p 000000 000055 1110 00 M

H g

000000 O

N g 1111.t.>0 H 000000 E

C A

<<< < < < E C

< < < < -

• M N 222250 A N 223253 F - 000001 F R 3 R

- 000001 U 000000 U t3 000000 S m 000000 S e

< < e 5 2 6 5#> 1 t

e 00 1

8S5*O 0 0,5 0 E

, F 1 1 1

, f 1 1 2 2 1

1 N P N 71 3042 701 01 7 l

454446 544446 N N la O ta 000000 O I

T f

o C

u 655284 325323 I

T T

t o

000000 u

821526 M A A C 443223 T T S

• S 480184

• 462406 a a N 667888 C

r 0000.O.'

2222' <

N 667 898 r

000000 C 222222 667968 2'g 667949 S

[ 1 1 1 1 8 1 M 1 1 1 1 f I M

1 11131 d

C 000000 d 11!.1 11 ba 779229 2 770209 E 000000

<<<< < a < < < < <

C 333433 C 334433 M

948028 s 1 I I t 1 l - 56 01 s t l 1 t 1 t A f A 0 7 88997 <<<<< < 0 780098 < < < < < <

5 5 1 1

)

d e

u M

0 0 3t0,2 400 l

n .

A i

002000 i I 9 4.b. t.4 1 661 -

l 936843 A 77 6624 t C 455566 C 455566 <

n

(

o c t y

y t y

y M

i ) f ) t n 3 i 357920 dn 3 802344 iM i

. 423586 d laa O 326586 d 2 tas 1 1 1 1 1 1 33241 2 g

i t l C 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 2324 1 2 C kC b

r oaa b x

l (

A T u T kCI l

r u

i A l d

n e

p p

h t

n o

n r yl pv aaaueo h

t n

n r yl pv aaaueo h

t n;

nryl pv aaaue l

d h

nryl pv aas uec g

A M JMMJSN I

b JMMJSN H JMMJSO 5 K JMRJ SN g

oeoc g

g l i!' ,ll il (l' ,tl- l f