ML20085M502
| ML20085M502 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Robinson  |
| Issue date: | 12/13/1974 |
| From: | CAROLINA POWER & LIGHT CO. |
| To: | |
| References | |
| RTR-NUREG-1437 AR, NUDOCS 9111110065 | |
| Download: ML20085M502 (663) | |
Text
{{#Wiki_filter:s-l h 'S N 'h '
%y; ;. ;fda,m ,
/ , ,
h% ' .' [kV,Q:h$;j
~
f% g* ; y . :;H.JBL : ROBINSON Lw . . . 67, STEAMLELECTRIO PLANT r . f .. k n
.)
I I' jC ,
%c.:.
\I N316LDEMONSTRATIOM Nh. .eh!h. .
? _ .Q?
LQ 3 y "r.,.,, 1 lg:% , - "" y .- , p ' +
' ^ . t ! ', g r p "
4 .'.--
~
leggcp.;$, . . , m . . s u,
- d;;.
s
'e 4,_1
- L L i --
y + j
, ,I' g[.T '
- lk. '
l ,'4W I : P
, iY
- s q.., : - 1 3
' &:0 .n lite g+ ,
w.
~~
p
.' ; p. s . M'i. .W: .j 4 ,
py _ - k(': , t' 3 y f$ W Q cu g ~p 4$pm$
- gaQ Carolina Power & Light Company O 9111110065 741213 PDR NUREC
- g. 1437 C .
PDR
l i l l r I Table of Contents
?.BE2
~
.I List of Tables 11 List of Figures viii I Sections 1.0 In roduction 2.0 Flant Operating Data 1-1 2-1 l
l 3.0 Environmental Data 3-1 , j 4.0 Fisheries 4-1 l l 5.0 Plankton 5-1 ' l 6.0 Benthos t-1 l l 7.0 Aquatic Vegetation 7-1 l 5 8.0 Terrestrial Zoology S-1 l l II l (~
- 4. .
I I I lI l : ,I l
~
B l l l I t
11 I List of Tables Table 2.1.1 Circulating water system, Robinson Plant (Load f actor = 1.0) 2- 4 2.1.2 Robinson Steam 52cetric Plant average =onthly circulatinc 2-5 E water system parameters April 1975 - May 1976 - 3.2.1 Physical parameters of Robinson bpoundment and Black 3-19 Creek 3.3.1 H. 3. Robinson continuous recorders : nor=al fluctuation 3-20 patterns with =axi=um/ minimum recorded daily average tet:peratures 'C ('F) 3.3.2 Ef fects of solar radiation vs plant operation on temperatures 3-21 in Black Creek . 3.3.3 Meteorological data for thermal modeling 3-22 3.4.1 'Jacer quality of Robinson bpoundsent and comparison with 3-23 coastal plain waters 3.4.2 Black Creek annual mean value water quality parameters 3-25 3.4.3 Robinson bpoundment anntal mean values water quality 3-27 parameters 3.4.4 Cocparien of annual means of selected water quality 3-29 parameters at stations I. A, and R 3.4.5 Comparisons of the annua.. means of selected surface water 3-30 W quality parameters: Stat. ions G. E, A, and H compared to E Station ! 3.5.1 1975 H. 3. Robinson dissolved ex7 gen concentrations (=g/1) 3-31 and percent saturation fram representative bpoundment stations 4.2.1 Coc: mon and scientific names of fishes collected from 4-59 H. 3. Robinson bpoundmenc during 1974 and 1975 4.2.2 Fish species composition of H. 3. Robinson !=poundment 4-60 and other similar bodies of water in North and South Carolina 4.2.3 Total catch (all species) per day of fishes with standard 4-61
- experimental gill nets in H. 3. Robinson Impoundment during quarterly sampling frem Su=mer 1974 - Fall 1975 4.2.4 Analysis of variance of gill net catches at H. 3. Robinson 4-62 bpoundment Su==er 1974 through Fall 1975
a N iii Tabir; 4.2.5 Duntan's new =ultiple range test (P=.05) for differences 4-63 I in gill net catch per day between sampling stations at H. B. Robinson l= pound =ent Su==er 1974 through Fall 1975 4.2.6 Catch of fishes per 24-hour set with poultry wire traps 4-64 at H. S. Robinson I= pound =ent Spring 1974 through Fall 5 1975 (Blank values indicate no catch) 4.2.7 Numbers of fishes collectea by seining at H. 3. Robinson 4-65 j Impound =ent from Su=ner '374 through Fall 1975 !
; 4.2.8 Nu=ber of fish per hour of electrofishing in H. 3. 4-66 Robinson I=pouariment b
4.2.9 Analysis of variance in electroshocker (log) catch per hour 4-69 from Robinson I=poundment during 1975 and 1976 with respect to sa=pling conth and sa=pling location 4.2.10 Duncan's new multiple range test (P=.05) for differences I in electrofishing catch per hour between sampling months at H. B. Robinson I=poundment April 1975 through March 4-70 1976 4.2.11 Duncan's new =ultiple range test (P=.05) for differences 4-71 in electrofishing catch per hour between sa=pling locations l "" 1976
" " * "' " '"" ""'" "' ^" ="= "'" **"
4.3.1 Numbers and weights of fishes per hectare collected fro: 4-72 three coves of Robinson Impoundment during August 1974 and August 1975 I 4.3.2 Cc=parison of nu=bers and weights of fishes (per hectare) collected with rotenone fro = several North and South Carolina lakes. When fishes were grouped by family in the 4-73 literature, they are included in the category all others 4.4.1. 1.1s t of sa=pling statistics for selected indicator 4-74 species utiliced in fish food habits analysis at Robinson I I= pound =ent 4.4.2 Taxono:ic list of ite=s in the food of Lepo=1s =acrochirus 4-75 i from various areas of Robinson Impoundment. Seasonal occurrence in the food is indicated for each taxon (1 = winter, 2 = spring, 3 = su==er, 4 = fall) 4.4.3 Su==ary of the food habits of young-of-the-year large=outh 4-77 bass (<94==TL) f rom Robinson Impoundment from April to September of 1975 4.5.1 Sack calculated length (==) of bluegill collected f ro: 4-78 Robinson I=poundment during 1975 and 1976 I
iv I Table Comparison of back calculated lengths of bluegill from 4-79 4.5.2 Robinson Impoundment and from other similar lakes Total length /veight relationship for bluegills from three 4-80 4.5.3 areas of Rob 1nson Impoundment collected by electrofishing l
=
during 1975 and 1976 3ack calculated lengths (=m) of warmouth collected from 4-8 E 4.5.4 Robinson Impoundment during 1975 and 1976 3 Comparison of back calculated lengths of warmouth 4-82 4.5.5 from Robinson hpoundment and from other similar areas Length / weight relationship for warmouth from three 4-83 4.5.6 areas of Robinson Impoundment collected by electro- l fishing during 1975 and 1976 5 Back calculated lengths (mm) of largemouth bass collected 4-84 4.5,7 fro Robinson bpoundment during 1975 and 1976 4-85 4.5.3 Comparison of back calculated lengths of largemouth bass from Robinson bpoundment and other s1=ilar areas 4-86 4.5.9 Length /veight relationship for largemouth bass from three areas of Robinson Spoundment collected by electrofishing during 1975 and 1976 Back calculated lengths (mm) of chain pickerel collected 4-87 4.5.10 from Robinson hpoundment during 1975 and 1976 4-88 4.5.11 Comparison of back calculated lengths of chain pickerel from Robinson Spoundment and other similar areas E 4-89 5 4.7.1 Fishes collected in plexiglass larval fish traps March 1975 through February 1976 from H. 3. Robinson g Impoundment g 4-90 4.7.2 Numbers (per 100= ) of fishes collected in ichthyoplankton surface tous in various areas of Robinson Impcundment l May 1975 through February 1976 5 4-91 4.8.1 Ichthyoplankton entrainment at Robinson Stea= Electric Plant March 1975 through February 1976 4-93 4.9.1 Fishes impinged on H. 3. Robinson Steam Electric Plant Unit 1 intake screens (number and weight per 24 hours) l 5 December 1973 - December 1975 4-95 4.9.2 Fishes impinged on the H. 3. Robinson Steam Electric Plant Unit 2 intake screens (number and weight per 24 hours) December 1973 - December 1975 I E
I v
. Table 4
4.10.1 Estimated total angler use and catch rate for H. B. 4-97 Robinson Impoundment June 1975 - June 1976 4.11.1 Fishes tag;;ed and recaptured in H. E. Robinson Impound- 4-98 ment during 1974, 1975, and 1976 4.13.1 Common and scientific na=es of fishes collected from 4-99 Black Creek during 1974 and 1975 4.13.2 Number of fish per hour of electrofishing in Black Creek 4-100 during 1975 and 1976 4.13.3 Numbers and weights (per hectare) of fish collected fro = 4-103 Black Creek during August 1974 and August 1975 5.3.1 Chlorophyll a_ estimates (tierograms/ liter) as a water 5-28 colu=n average and the coefficient of variation for this average at Robinson Impound =ent from June 1973 to I December 1975 Comparison of Robinson Impoundment average su=mer 5-30 5.3.2 I chlorophyll concentrations with available literature values 5.3.3 seasonal abundance of i=portant phytoplankton species in 5-31 w Robinson 1=poundment 5.3.4 zooplankton intensive data su= mary indicating total 5-32 population numbers as #/m3 and percent co= position by dcminant organisms 5.3.5 Solar radiation (Langleys) for the 24-hour and 3-hour 5-33 1 incubation periods for primary production sampling dates for the Robinson Impoundment 5.3.6 Alkalinity and pH from productivity samples as euphotic 5-34 cone water colu=n averages 5.3.7 Primary product 1vity data su==ary indicating integra'. 5-35 production for the water column (mgC/=2/ day) and P eax (mgC/=3/hr) and the depth of =aximum procuction by sa=cle date for the Robinson lepoundment 5.3.8 Comparison of Robinson Impoundment annual average primary 5-36 productivity with reported literature values I I g' I
vi I; Table _ 5.3.9 Phytoplankton population dyna =1cs infor=ation 5-39 6.3.1 Robinson Impound =ent and Black Creek benthic taxa list 6-22 January 1974 - December 1975 6.3.2 Mean nu=ber of organis=s per =eter 2 collected at Robinson 6-27 I= pound =ent January-Dece=ber 1975 6.3.3 Mean nu=ber of Procladius per =eter2 collected at 6-28 Robinson I=e md:ent January-Dece=ber 1975 6.3.4 Mean number c: Clinotanvous per =eter 2 collected at 6-29 Robinson I=pounc=ent January-Dece=ber 1975 6.3.5 Monthly =ean nu=ber of Oligochaeta per meter 2 collected 6-30 at Robinson Impound =ent 6.3.6 Diversity esti=ates (d) of bentnos collected in the 6-31 Robinson lepoundment JaNory-Dece=ber 1975 6.3.7 Do=1nant banthic ta=a collected on artificial substrates 6-32 in Black Creek January-December 1975 7.1.1 Importance of some genera of aquatic plants in the 7 .6 _ Robinson l= pound =ent for fish, birds, and =a==cis 7.1.2 Robtnson I= pound =ent aquatic vegetation i=portant as 7-17 wildlife food sources 7.2.1 Plant species collected and/er observed in and near 7-19 the Robinsen I= pound ent during 1974 and 1975 m E 7.3.1 Max 1=u= average te=peratures recorded in 1974 and 1975 7-22 8.2.1 A=phibian species collected and/or observed at Robinson 8-35 I= pound =ent and Black Creek August 1974 through May 1976 (nomenclature follows Conant, 1975) 3.2.2 A=phibians collected, observed, or heard calling at 3-36 Robinson != pound =ent and Slack Creek August 1974 through May 1976 3.2.3 Observed water te=perature =eans and ranges for larval S-37 and adult amphibians collected or observed at Robinson
!= pound =ent and Black Creek August 1974 through May.1976 3.2.4 Maxi =um ther-al tolerance values for amphibian species 5-38 collected or observed at Robinson != pound =ent and Black Creek I
I vii I. Table I 8.2.5 Water temperatures recorded at larval amphibian sa=pling 5-39 stations at Robinson l=poundment and Black Creek July 1975 through May 1976 6.2.6 Observed breeding seasons for eight anuran species found 8-40 I at Robinson Impoundment and Black Creek June 1975 through May 1976 (Ereeding calls were considered evidence of breeding season) 8.3.1 Reptiles collected and/or observed at Robinson Impound- 8-41 ment and Black Creek August 1974 through May 1976 (Nomenclature follows Conant 1975) I S.3.2 Nvmber of aquatic reptiles collected and/or observed at Robinson Impoundment and Black Creek August 1974 S-42 through May 1976 S.3.3 Critical thermal maxima (CTM) and maximum voluntary S-43 temperature (MVT) for aquatic reptilian species found )E at Robinson Impoundment and Black Creek S.4.1 Aquatic avif auna species by category observed at 8-44 Robinson Impoundment August 1974 through February 1976 Is' S.4.2 Su==ary of aquatic avifauna quantitative observations S-46 in Robinson Impoundment August 1974 through February 1976 4 8.4.3 Bird species observed at the Robinson Impoundment and 8-47 Black Creek August 1974 through February 1976 _ I 8.4.4 Bird species by month of observation and senry of 8-52 quarterly surveys at Robinson Impoundment August 1974 through February 1976 8.4.5 31rd species by month of observation and surnary of 8-54 I quarterly surveys at Black Creek september 1974 through February 1976 8.5.1 E - =1 species observed at Robinson Impoundment and S-55 I Black Creek August 1974 through February 1976 I I l' I
1 1 I j viii List of Figures Is Firure 2.1.1 Robinson Impoundment 2-6 2.1.2 Intake structure, Unit 2, plan view 2-7 2.1.3 Intake structure, Unit 1, plan view 2-8 2.1.4 Intake structure, Unit 2, vertical section 2-9 2.1.5 Intake structure, Unit 1, vertical section 2-10 2.1.6 Intake screens, Unit 2 2-11 2.1.7 Discharge canal, cross section 2-12 2.1.8 Discharge canal intersection with impoundment 2-13 2.1.9 Circulating water system, time vs temperature profile 2-14 2.1.10 H. 3. Robinson Steam Electric Plant - typical daily delta 2-15 temperature profile of plant discharge 2.1.11 Flow pattern within Bay A. Unit 1 intake structure 2-16 2.1.12 Flev pattern within Bay 3, Unit 1 intake structure 2-17 2.1.13 Flow pattern within 3ay A, Unit 2 intak.e structure 2-18 2.1.14 Flow pattern within Bay 3, Unit 2 intake structure 2-19 , 2.1.15 Flev pattern within 3ay C, Unit 2 intake structure 2-20 2.1.16 Approximate discharge canal cress section at test site 2-2 (looking upstream) E 6 B 2.1.17 View of weir (looking upstream) 2-22 3.2.1 Robinson I= pound =ent and 31ack Creek 3-33 I 3.2.2 Area capacity curves for Robinson != pound:ent 3-34 3.2.3 Black Creek drainage area 3-35 3.3.1 Robinson l=poundment and Black Creek water temperature 3-36 sampling stations 3.3.2 Robinson I=poundment water temperature sampling grid 3-37 3.3.3 Robinson Impound =ent 2*C surface isotheres, vinter on- 3-38 dicians: February 12, 1974 and Februarv 5, 19 5 5
1x I Figure 3.3.4 Robinson Impoundment 2*C vertical isotherms (north o 3-39 south), vinter conditions: February 12,-1974 and February 5, 1,075 (Indicating deepest station at I- transect) 3.3.5 Robinson Impoundment 2'C vertical isotheres (et 3-40
.I west), vinter conditions: February 12, 1974 at.
February 5,1975 I 3.3.6 Rob 4rson hpoundment 2'C surface isotherms, spring and fall mixing conditions: May 22, 1975 and Septe=ber 25, 1975 3-41 3.3.7 Robinson Impoundment 2'C vertical isotherms (north to 3-42 south) spring and fall mixing conditions: May 22, 1975 and September 25, 1975 (Indicating deepest station at each transect) 3.3.8 Robinson Impoundment 2'C vertical isotheres (east to west), 3-43 I spring and f all mixing conditions : May 22, 1975 and September 25, 1975 3.3.9 Robinson Impoundment 2'C surface isother=s, su=mer con- 3-44
% ditions: July 11, 1974 and August 18, 1975 3.3.10 Robinson I=poundment 2'C vertical isotherms (north to 3-45 I south), su=mer conditions: July 11, 1974 and August 18, 1975 (indicating deepest station at each transect) 3.3.11 Robinson Impoundment 2'C vertical isotherms (east to 3-46 I- west), sur:mer conditions: July ll, 1974 and August 18, 1975 3.3.12 Robinson Impoundment 2*C surf ace isotherms, vinter 3-47 and su=mer conditions without the influence of Unit 2: January 9, 1963 and July 31, 1963 I (old discharge point indicated; no data available north of transect D) g 3.3.13 Robinson Impoundment 2'c vertical isotherms (north 3-48 g to south), vinter and summer conditions without the influence of Unit 2: January 9, 1963 and July 31, 1963 l g (Indicat1ng deepest station from each transect; old i discharge point indicated; ne data available north of l
I Transect D) l
- I
- I
I X i w Ficure 3.3.14 Robinson bpoundment 2*C vertical isotheres (east 3-49 to west), vinter and sumner conditions without the l influence of Unit 2: January 9,1963 and Aly 31, = 1963 (No temperature data recorded at Transect E; Unit 1 discharge located between Transects B and C) 3.3.15 Robinson Impoundment predicted 2'C surface isotherms: 3-50 typical vinter and summer conditions 3.3.16 Robinson Impoundment predicted 2*C surf ace isother=s: 3-51 I predicted vinter and summer maxima 4.2.1 Fisheries sampling stations, Robinson Impoundment 4-105 4.2.2 Shannon *Jeaver diversity index of fishes collected 4-106 from Robinson Impoundment during 1975 and 1976 4.4.1 Fercent of totai volume and percent frequency of 4-107 occurrence of the major components in the seasonal food habits of the bluegill (<100=m TL) at Robinson bpoundsent in the i= mediate vicinity of the intake
=
structures during 1974 4.4.2 Percent of total volume and percent frequency of 4-108 occurrence of the major components in the seasonal food habits of the bluegill (>100mm TL) at Robinson I=poundment in the i==ediate vicinity of the intake structures during 1974 m 4.4.3 Percent of total volume and percent frequency of 4-109 l occurrence of the major components in the seasonal food habits of the bluegill (<100=m TL) at Robinson Impound =ent along Transect A during 1975 Percent of total volume and percent frequency ot 4-110 4.4.4 occurrence of the major components in the seasonal food habits of the bluegill (>100mm TL) at Robinson bpoundment along Transect A during 1975 E-Ill 4.4.5 Percent of total volume and percent frequency of occurrence of the major cceponents in the seasonal food habits of the bluegill (<100== TL) at Robinson bpoundment along Transect I during 1975 , I E a
I xi I , Figure 4.4.6 Percent of total volume and percent frequency of 4-112 occurrence of the major components in the seasonal I food habits of the bluegill (>100== TL) at Robinson I=poundment along Transect E during 1975 4.4.7 Percent of total volume and percent frequency of I occurrence of the major components in the seasonal food habits cf the bluegill at Robinson Impoundment 4-113 along Transect G during 1975 4.4.8 Percent of total volume and percent frequency of 4-114 occurrence of the major components in the seasonal food habits of the large=outh bass at Robinson I I=poundment from all transects during 1975 5 4.4.9 Percent of total volume and percent frequency of 4-115 5 occurrence of the major components in the seasonal food habits of the varmouth at Robinson Impoundment from all transects during 1975 4.4.10 Percent of total volume and percent frequency of 4-116 occurrence oa the major components in the seasonal I food habits of the chain pickerel at Robinson Impoundment fro: all transects during 1975 4.5.1 4-117 I Length frequency histograms of bluegill collected from Robinson I=poundment from April 1975 through March 1976 with larval fish traps and electrofishing 4.6.1 Relationship of the number of mature eggs and total 4-122 I length of Lepomis macrochirus in Robinson I=poundment I 4.6.2 Relationship of the number of mature eggs and total length of Leco:is_ gulosus in Robinson Impoundment 4-123 4.9.1 Fish impingenent on Unit 2 intake screens (Log 10 number per day) Dece=ber 1973 - December 1975 Sa=ples coliccted with less than three pu=ps operating are indicated 4.9.2 Fish biccass impinged on Unit 2 intake screens (Logio M Kg per day) Dece=ber 1973 - December 1975. Samples I collected with less than three pu=ps operating are indicated 4.9.3 Size distribution of bluegills i= pinged on H. B . 4-126 Robinson intake screens 1974 and 1975 I I
r I1 xii ) Figure 4.13.1 Map of H. 3. Robinson hpound=ent and Black Creek 4-127 illustrating fisheries sa=pling stations in 31c.cl l Creek during 1974 - 1976 5.3.1 Chlorophyll, biocass , and primary productivity by 5-38 Ii
=enth and quarter: Robinson hpound=ent May 1973 to December 1974 5.3.2 Chlorophyll, biomass, and pri=ary productivity by 5-39 month and quarter: Robinson Spoundment January to a Dece=ber 1975 g 5.3.3 Phytoplankton population percent co= position by nu=ber 5-40 i by sample date 5.3.4 Phytoplankton population percent co= position by biomass 5-41 i by sample date 5.3.5 Average water column (euphotic zone) temperatures 5-42 for A-2, E-3, and G, Robinson hpound=ent April 1973 to April 1976 5.3.6 Total nitrate as N, versus total phosphate as P: 5-43 Robinton l= pound =ent May 1973 to Dece=ber 1974 5.3.7 Total nitrate as N,versus total phosphate P_: Robinson 5-44 hpoundment January to December 1975 6.3.1 Monthly mean number of _CM p nc m / meter 2 tollected at 6-34 I each of the twelve bentbic sampling stations in the Robinson != pound =ent January through. December 1975 8 5
6.3.2 Monthly mean nusber of Poln edile=/ meter 2 collected at 6-35 erch of the twelve benthic sampling stations in the g btnson hpoundment January through Dece=ber 1975 g 6.3.3 honthly =ean number of Ablabes=viameter 2 collected at 6-36 each of the twelve benthic sampling stations in the l Robinson I=poundnent January through Dece=ber 1975 5 6.3.4 Monthly mean number of Claoborus/ meter 2 collected at 6-3/ q each of the twelva benthic sampling stations in the g
- Robinson l= pound =ert January through Dece=ber 1975 i
6.3.5 Monthly mean number cf Hexagenia /=eter2 collected,at 6-38 each of the twelve benthic sampling stations in the Robinson hpoundsent January through December 1975 i l I E a
I xiii Figure .I- 6.3.6 Monthly mean number of Polveentroeus/ meter 2 collected at 6-39 each of the twelve benthic sa=pling stations in the Robinson lepoundnent January through December 1975 6.3.7 Monthly mean number of Decetis/ meter 2 collected at each 6-40 I of the twelve , benthic sampling stations in the Robinson l= pound ent January through December 1975 6.3.8 Monthly mean number of Chaoborus/neter2 collected in the Robinson 6-44 l=poundment January through December 1975 7.1.1 Transect locations. 7-23 7.2.la- Physlographic and man-cade features which influence
~
7~20 7.2.3a the distribution of aquatic vegetation thru I 7.2.1- Vegetational distributions. 7-30 7.2.4 s 7.2.5 Rip-rap along discharge canal above Transect A showing 7-31 scattered red maple along shore. I 7.2.6 Sandy area near Transect A and rip-rap on da: in background 7-31 7.2.7 Cove approximately 2000' north of mouth of discharge 7-32 Ix canal showing flowering Nv=nhaea and Nuohar 7.2.8 Shoreline vegetation illustrating Panicum hesitomon and 7-32 lowland species with sandhills vegetation rising in the background I 7.2.9 Upper impoundnent below Station J showing Scirpus, Nuphar, and Brasenia with other marsh vegetation in background 7-33 7.2.10 Gu=, cypress, and associated swamp hardwoods at Black 7-33 Creek Station K I '7.3.1 Areas of reduced aquatic =acrophyte growth due to the ther=al effluent frc: *he Robinson Plant 7-34 7-35 ~ 7.3.2 Areas of reduced aquatic macrophyte growth due to the thermal effluent from the Robinson Plant Iocations of larval amphibian sa=pling stations (MHS) 6-50 I 8.2.1 and evening frog and toad call survey stations (M11C) 8.4.1 Bird survey sarple stations and boundary of arbitrary 8-57 impoundment sections I
I xiv 4 s Figure 1 8.5.1 Location of ma-mn1 live trapping staticus in Robinson 8-58 Impoundment and Black Creek i 3.5.2 3eaver lodge locations, Robinson Impoundnent 8-59 l August 1974 through February 1976 W S.5.3 Beaver distribution, Robinson Impoundment and Black B-60 Creek August 1974 through February 1976 S.5.4 Muskrat and mink distribution, Robinson Impoundment 3-61 and Black Creek August 1974 through February 1976 S.5.5 Raccoon and otter distribution, Robinson Impoundment 3-62 and Black Creek August 1974 through February 1976 l I I~, I Ei I: . I' Il l I: , I~ sur
1-1 i l t 1.0 Introduc tion i Volume II of the H. B. Robinson Steam Electric Plant 316 demonstration contains the results of extensive environmental studies as well as plant operattag data which support Carolina Power and Light Company's contention stated in Volume 1 that 'a balanced, indigenous population of shellfish, fish, and vildlife" As present in the Robinson j 1mpoundment. l The studies were based on the enclosed study program agreed upon by the Environmental Protection Agency. Additions were made to l the progran as needs for additional information were identified and substitutions were made when necessary to insure a sound study program. l l Additional raw data which were summarized in this volume are j presented in Volume III. i . l I 'I lI I I I I :
I-1-2 I I I I I 4 R. B. Robinson Steam Electric Plant I s 316 Demonstration Study Program (as submitted December 13, 197/+) 5 I I
. g
! I: I. l s
]
1-3 I PLANT OPERATING DATA The following plant operating data are planned for inclusion in the Robinson l=poundment and Black Creek 316 study progran: .I
- 1. Cooling water discharge for each unit and total for all units.
- 2. Time vs. delta te=perature profile for condenser coolir.g water (at load factors of 1.0 and 0.ST from natural ambient through the cooling system to the point of discharge into the receiving water body and return to anbient.
I 3. Daily time vs. delta temperature profile at point of discharge under normal seasonal leads and e.axi=u= load conditions. I 4 Schematic or construction drawings adequate to characterize intakt. configuration from point of intake to and including the screens. I 5. Illustratim and description of screening devices including operation . leaning, nekton return and debris disposal. I
- 6. Profile (to scale) of 1ntake velocity fron point of intake fron source of water to intake screens.
- 7. Schematic drawing and narrative dese 1bing configuration and velocity of discharge.
I 8. Description of condenser and intake cleaning methods to include types, quantitier, effluent concentrations and application of I biocides. I I I
l-4 I, ENVIROW.ESTAL DATA I The following environmental data are planned for inclusion in the Robinson Impoundment and Black l reek 316 stucy program:
- 1. Narrative description and scale drawings showing physical configuration of cooling water source.
- 2. The surface area, voluce, mean depth, retention time I
and stratification of Robinson Impoundment.
- 3. Appropriate pool elevations.
- 4. Stream hydrolcgy characters,
- 5. Scale drsvings and tabulations at 2*C intervals of the ,
thermal plume in three dimensicas under full load conditions for su=n.er and winter conditions. Robinson Impoundment does not exhibit fall c,r spring tu nover.
- 6. Meteorological data used as input to thermal codeling and E solar radiation effects on Robinson Impound ent.
E I I I l I I a
( I BIOLOGICAL DATA I A cap of the Robinson Impoundment showing sampling transects Transects are identified as A, B, I and points is presented in Figure 1. C, CA, D,E,F,G,H, 1. J, and K. Along transects A, B, C, CA, D, and E, three sampling stations, 1, 2, and 3, are identified, with sacpling stations 1 and 3 located approximately one-quarter of the way across the impoundment from their respective shores, and sampling station 2 located at the transect middle. (Iransect E-3 is located at the mouth of the discharge.) I PHYSICAL AND CHEMICAL ANALYSIS OF ROBINSON IMPOUND >C.T I Water te=perature and dissolved exygen concentrations are recorded monthly at three-foot intervals at each station identified in Table 1 with a portable dissolved oxygen and te=perature field unit. Winkler titration (Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater, - 13th ed., 1971, APHA) may be utilized as a backup to the field unit. Te=peratures are recorded in 'C (XX.X) and converted to 'F (XI. ) .
. Temperature data are also plotted to provide te=perature isother=s on the surface and at various depths. Disaolved oxygen is recorded in ppe (XX. X) and correlated with saepled water temperatures to calculate _
percent saturation of oxygen. I Additionally, temperature will be taken monthly in the area of discharge (Figure 2). Transect lines will be run from the mouth of the discharge outward at angles of approxirately 20, 40, 60, and 80 percent of the angle formed by the shoreline. Te=peratures (*F) v111 be recorded on the surface at various points along these transects (dependent upon the location of the l', 2', and 3* isotherms). I pH is sampled conthly at each station identified for water chemistry sampling using a field pH unit. Measurement is recorded to I XX.X pH units. I I
_-e. . . . . . . . _ . . _ 6 I Secchi disk depth is sampled monthly at water chemistry sampling I s stations by lowering a standard shallow water Secchi disk (20 cm.) over the side of the boat and noting the depth at which it disappears and the depth at which it reappears. The average of these two observations is recorded as the Secchi disk depth (in feet. X.X).
'n'ater chemistry sa=ples are collected monthly in the indicated area with a water sampler and transf erred to labeled plastic bottles which are chilled and stored in a dark area prior to their return to the ,
CP&L laboratory for analysis. Analytical methods of chemical parameters performed by the CPLL laboratory as of November 1, 1974, are indicated. I, I E) I. l I: I
. E I
I
.a
M M M M M mM M M M 'M M M M M M M M M d Preservatlen Routine Laboratory Significance In Method of Analysis Technique Reporting Limit Reporting Data Parameter Alkalinity, (as CACO 3) AST11 Standards, pt. 23, 1972, D1067 Analysis as soon 0.5 rag / liter X.rg/ liter Total liethod A (Electrometric Titration) - as possible Standard tiethods for the Examination of of Water and uastewater 13th Ed. ,1971, APIIA, Art 102 (PotentJometrit tiethod for low alkalinity) Freezing or acidiff- 0.1 mg/ liter .Xmg/ liter Aluminum (A1) Total Atomic Absorption Spectrophotometer (Digeetion with flNO3 - IIC1) cation to 0.15% llNO 3 Filtration followed 0.01 og/ liter .XXmg/Ifter l Aluminum, (AI) Standard !!cthods for the Examination - I Dissolved of Wat er and Wactewater 13th Ed. ,1971, by acidification to APilA, Art 103B (Eriochrome Cyanine R 0.15% stNO 3 tie thod ) Freezing or add'n of 0.02 mg/ liter .XXmg/ liter Ammonia, (as N) Standard tiethoda for the Examination of Water and Wastewater 13th Ed., L971, HgC12 and storage at APilA. Art 132-132C (Distillation fol- 4C 8, loved by phenate method or anunonia select-lon electrode) Freezing or acidifi- 0.05 mg/ liter .XXmg/ liter Calcium, (Ca) Total . Atomic Absorption Spectrophotometer (Digestion with lit!O - IICl) cation to 0.15% Ifn0 3 3 Freezing or acidtfi- 0.1 ng/ liter X.ng/ liter Chemical Oxygen Standard tiethods for the Examination of Derr ind , (COD) Water and llastewater 13th Ed., 1971, cation with I!2SO4 APilA, Art 220 0.25 mg/ liter .XXng/ liter Chloride, (C1 ) AS~It! Standards, pt. 23, 1972, D512, Freezing Reference !!cthod A (Mercuric Hitrate Titration) Freezing 0.005 mg/ liter .XXXmg/ liter Chromium, (Cr ) Standard Methods for the Examination of X.Ypg/ liter llexavalent Water and Wastewater 13th Ed., 1971, or5.0gg/ liter APilA, Art 117A (s- diphenylcarbazide method) t ,,
M n e4 I a t r r r r ea cD n i e t i t e r e t i e t i e t M a g J l l i l l c n / g
/
g l / g
/
g i i / f t m m g c m i r n gp o X X. X X. X
- m. X X.
X X. M
!. e SR M
y r t oi t m r r r r e e r e e a r1i. t t e t t o i i i t i l i b g l l l a n / g
/
g l
/
/
g
/
g LI g e r n o t 5 m 5 m m 5 m 5 m M i p 0 0 0 0 0 t e uR 0 0 2 0 0 o R 3 - - 3 M O d o i t O i N ! et f f N l f I w i i l i on d d d% l o i i % n oe e5 a1 l i ot c a c5 a1 M i u . f a t q r0 c r r0 ai o ni 3 o o vn o of O g o gt ii N g gt rh ec s e n i n tdl ai l i n i n n i n M eT z o r c% z z z o r ei t a5 e e ei p et l 1 e e et r a iy r r r a F c Fb0 F F F c
)
M d n d n o f n
- f a i o f a f o e n t o e ossf , s s h . onc n , s h . -
sau l e o yd eo i sl f t pr oa ao pcir o1) i7 d r e sl f t p i ao ps M i rqsvh) s r f l t t t 9 o t s r f
,d) s einrt n ye s o , o px y s r e a1 h e yeso on ynnoueo l ne n ,te m l ne yh o l ihiS mi ai us e5 o - i o aiuset i aMct n eal nc t
A nH iq or n v 4. bsno m .M ad t o A n! !qnvet i or mc M AdT gaoa d niu0 ai xE c h) d nio a s e i cir d eh t S t E i pl d eh t S nr i d v ,t it t nv c a h ca h r oC nv c a ot s nl 1 s gpx al e gl gil et t rI I al e gl i x y ao- eor e oTi aume h3 e t ns o T i. cpat e l sA vl o ns t cooh t 1 m c - t n a ns oi nos -
. i eb os i i1 e gh a
,siit c r
r rr i e p ) os i i1 ego
, si r -
M A i Dh G an t D - vot oet So t D - v os n t C s o c A nl yo f t i N c A nl b o f cr esci er I onb aT ni t er . I oai o eo ,c eit l o . eo t sw o l o e t l f 5 r t ma l f h sGid c d eA ih l f h sG ca d o l osiotv t e uaol o C e Cae ,csawr t ee ot I h sD t t pi o C s C e c sme il M h C eI sSAh r er oi t aE r w e , r eoh - t l e ( c rl op 5 ut t l d eW( o sn rl 5 ut t c op e r p ,Rd oal l M . oaA - H oms - e5 r f aert 8 o f mK s t i o-aB eSFf d n2 d1 1 b o Ai f mist u( r al eS o S s ei - sS t ( s r a2 t sS k 6 d at n3 t d ,I- d rd a 1 c s d ,
- d0 t orc aU8 c or sr e5 eo d r i e or s r e1 c
- h e W e h e eet 8 t h neA mg h ee et - e t t d e . r t t st i - 1 t at l i oi t t st i5 r e anf h pi ea a a n3 1 e t aP t D e a a an0i MWaot pd MWGWU8f m SWA A( MWchU1 d _ d M e _ v ) l 3 l o O _ t a s s C C O l a l a M _ r o i e T D t t t s o o e ) ) a T T _ m u o ( M a C C ) ) r ( ( , e b a t F P s ( ( p , , r r e e e t t p p d n d C p u C p o a r I o r 1 a
- e. M
M M M M M- M M M M M M M M M M M M . M Preservation Routine Laboratory Sfgnificance In Parameter Method of Analysis Technique Reporting Limit Reporting Data Orthophosphate, (as P) Standard Methods for the Examination of Freezing 0.01 mg/ liter .XXmg/ liter Total Water and Wastewater 13th Ed., 1971, APilA, Art 223 (Ascorbic Acid Method) Phosphate. (as P) Standard Methods for the Examination of Freezing 0.01 mg/ liter .XXmg/ liter Total Water and Wastewater 13th Ed., 1971, APIIA, Art 223 (Persulfate Digestion followed by Ascorbic Acid Method) Silica, (as SiO ) Standard Methods for the Examination of Freezing after col- 0.1 mg/ liter .Xmg/ liter 2 ' Wa t e r and Wa s t ewa t e r 13 th Ed . , 1971, lection in a plastic Dissolved APIIA, Art 151B-151C (Ileteropoly Blue container Method) 0.05 mg/ liter .AJng/ liter Sodium, (Na) Total Atomic Absorption Spectrophotometer Freezing or acidifi-(Digestion with litt0 -U ) ca n . HNO 3 3 . l Methods for Chemical Analysis of Water Freezing or analysis 1.0 mg/ liter X.pg/ liter 7 Solids, Total Dis-
- solved (Filterable) and Wastes, 1971, EPA, pp. 275-277 as soon as possible '
(Class Fiber Filtration Method, 180*C) '
- Data reported below 10 mg/ liter for all solids is not really significant, but indicates order of magnitude Methodo for Chemical Analysis of Water Freezing or analysis 1.0 mg/ liter X.mg/ liter Solids, Total Sus-pended (Non-filter- and Wastes, 1971. EPA, pp. 278-279 as soon as possible able) (Class Fiber Filtration Method, 103-105'C)
Preservation Itoutine' Laboratory &lgnificance In Parameter 11ethnd of Analysis Technique Feporting I.linit _ Reporting Data Magnesium, (lig) Total Atomic Absorption Spectrophotometer Freezing or acidift- 0.05 mg/ liter .XXmg/ liter (Digestion with ilNO 3- 11C1) cation to 0.15% ItNO 3 Manganese, (Ha) Total Atomic Absorption Spectrophotometer Freezing or acidifi- 0.05 mg/ liter .XXmg/ liter (Digestion with IINO 3
-W cation to 0. m NNO 3
tie r c u r y . (lig), Tot al Methods for Chemical Analysis of Water Freezing or acidifi- 0.001 mg/ liter .XXXmg/ liter and Waste, 1971 EPA, pp. 121-130 (Cold- cation to 0.15% ilNO 3 or 1.0j d liter X.XfigM te r vapor tect;nique) . Nickel, (Ni) Total Method for Collection and Analysis of Freezing or acidifi- 0.05 mg/ liter .XXmg/ liter Water Samples for eissolved Minerals cation to 0.15% !!NO 3 and Cases, liK.5, Ch. A-1, Techniques of Water-Resources Investigations of the g United States Geological Survey, pp. /, 115-116 (Atomic absorption methods - O direct or chelation - extraction) Nickel (111) Dissolved Method for Collection and Analysis of Filtration followed 0.05 mg/ liter .XXmg/ liter Water Samples for Dissolved Minerals by acidification to and Cases, 15K.5, Ch. A-1, Techniques of 0.15% llNO 3 Water-Resources investigations of the United States Geological Survey, pp. 115-116 (Filtration through 0.45 micron fliter followed by atomic ubsorption methods - direct or chelation - ext raction) li s t s .i t e (as N) Methods for Chemical Analysis of Freezing or add'n of 0.05 mg/l .XX mg/l Water and Uastes 1971, 1:PA , pp. 1/O- ligCl2 anil storage at
,174 (Isruc ine-Sul t a t e tie t hwi) 4 C Hitrogen, (N) Organic Standard Methods for the Examination of Freezing or add'n of 0.02 mg/ liter .XXmg/ liter Water and Wastewater 13th Ed., 1971, ligCl2 and storage at APilA Art 135, 132C - Digestion and 4C distillation followed by phenate a.ethod or auunonia select-ion electrode (Amnonia Hitrogen plus Organic Nitrogen = Total or Kjeldahl Nitrogen)
SM M M M M M M M. M M M M M M M J M
e e m e mm m m .m M .m um Presersation Routine Labr'atory' Significance In Parameter !!cthod of Analysis Technique Reporting Limit Reporting Data Solids, Total Methods for Chemical Analysis of Water Freezing or n'nalysis 1.0 mg/ liter X.mg/ liter Volatile and Wastes, 1971, EPA, pp. 282-283 as soon as possible (Cravimetric Method, 550*C) Solids, Total lie thod s for Chemical Analysis of Water Freezing or analysis 1.0 mg/ liter X.mg/ liter and Wastes, 1971. EPA, pp. 280-281 as soon as possible (Gravimetric flethod,'103-105*C) Sulfate ASTri Standards, pt. 23, 1972, D516, Freezing, Filtration 1.0 mg/ liter .Xmg/ liter Reference Method A (Turbidimetric prior to analysis'
. tiethod) e Turbidity Standard Methods for the Examination "reezing 0 ITU X.X FTU of Water and Wastewater 13th Ed. , 1971, APilA, Art 163A (nethelometric method)
Zinc, (Zn) Dissolved Atomic Absorption Spectrophotometer Filtration followed 0.05 mg/ liter .XXmg/ liter U11tration through 0.45 micron filter) by acidification to 0 . 1 5 % 111: 0 3 Zinc, (Zn) Total Atomic Absorption Spectrophotometer Freezing or acidifi- 0.05 mg/ liter .XXmg/ liter [ (Digestion with lino -HM " 3
I l-12 l I PLANKTON POPULATION MONITORING AT ROBINSON IMPOUNDMENT I Plankton samples will be taken in accordance with the schedule presented in Table 1. Pigment concentration, primary productivity, and standing crop will be determined f rom which species diversity and spacial g and te= poral abundance can be calculated. 5 Picments - Samples for pig =ent analysis are taken monthly at each of the plankton stations with a water sampler. The water sampler is large enough to allow for subsamples to be taken for pigment analysis, primary productivity, and standing crop whenever scheduling requires that more than one analysis be performed. Samples are taken at various depths, depending upon Secchi depth, as follows: surface 1/2 Secchi depth Secchi depth /or bottom 2x Secchi depth /or bottom 4x Secchi depth /or bottom Samples are transf erred f rom the sampler to labeled plastic bottles, preserved with magnesium carbonate, chilled, and stored in a dark area before being returned to the laboratory for immediata filtration and extraction. Analysis includes spectrophotometric and/or fluorametric , determinations from acetone extracts of millipore filter concentrates as described in Strickland and Parsons (1968) and Golterman (1969) . Significance in reporting data is X.X ag=/ liter. I I i,
1-13 Primary productivi g - In situ primary productivity is determined 3 once quarterly by use of the C fixation method at each of the plankton sa :pling stations. Water samples are taken with the Wildeo Beta bottle water sampler from depths as described previously. From each depth, initial,
- ero rime control and light bottle samples are taken. The initial samples are stored on ice in the dark for alkalinity determinations; the zero time control samples are innoculated with C , i==ediately fixed with Lugol's iodine and stored in the dark; and the light bottles are innoculated with C , incubated in situ for three hours and fixed ac the end of the innceulation time with Lugel's iodine.
I CountinE of C samples is by liquid scintillation. Laboratory analysis procedures and calculations follow established methods based on the original work of Nielsen (1952) and revised as described in Vollenweider, ed. (1969). Use of a :ero time control was suggested by Dr. John E. Hobbie of North Carolina State University based on the work of Morris, Yentsch and I Yentsch (1971). Standing crop - Once quarterly, whole water samples are collected fro = the depths described previously at each of the plankton sampling stations. Concentrated net samples are also collected using a #20 mesh Wisconsin type
-plankton net. All sa=ples are fixed in the field with Lugol's iodine, stored in a 1 ark, cool area, and returned to the laboratory for phytoplankton and cooplankton identification, enumeration, and biomass estimates; Identification and enumeration methods include use of a 1 =1. Sedgwick-Rafter cell using a variable number of cells (at 100x) and a variable nu=ber of randoc fields (at 100x and 200x) and/or Uter =ohl sedimentation with an inverted microscope using a variable number of cha bers (at 100x) and a variable number of rando fields (at 100x, 200x, and if necessary, 400x cnd 1000x). All organisms are identified to_the lowest taxon practicable using standard taxonomic references.
Biocass estimates are made using a Whipple grid micrometer to deter =ine l. average volume per cell. Calibration is performed with a stage micrometer at 100x, 200x, 400x, and 1000x. Biomass is reported in XX Lg=/litar. 1I l l
P . . . . 1-14 I I
^
Analysis of standing crop is performed for both number and biomass. These data can then be incorporated into a FL-1 computer pro 3 ram which can be used to calculate the Shannon ***erner index of general species diversity f or both number and biomass (Copeland and Bdrkhaad, 1972). MACROBEN"' HIC MO:11TORING AT P4BINSON IF10UNDMENT AND ELAC)* CREEK Benthos samples will be taken in accordance with the schedule presented in Table '.. Samples will be analyzed for identification of c,rgsnisms from which speci. *iversity and spatial and temporal abundance can be analy:ed. Samples are collected monthly f rom two stations (deep and shallev) on each of nine permanent transects (Table 1) using a petite ponar grab and/or artificial substrate samplers. Three replicate samples 3 are collected from each station. Samples are washed through a U. S. Standard No. 30 sieve and preserved in formalin. Samples are sorted in the laboratory and preserved in 70% alcohol. $1ological stains, rc,e bengal and phyloxine 3, are frequently used as aids to sorting. All organisms are identified to the lowest a taxon practicable using binocular and compound microscopes and standard taxonemic references. Af ter 24 hours of storage in fresh water, representative organisms from all samples are weighed to the nearest 0.001 gm. Data are reported monthly in tabular form, expressing number of organisns/ unit area and fresh weight biomass (gm/ unit area) for each station. g 5 I I E.
1-15 I TISHERIES MON 1TORING AT H. B. ROBINSON IMP 01'NDMENT AND BLACK CPIEK bl
Purpose:
Collection and analysis of representative sa=ples of the fish population of the Impoundment pursuant to the requirement for i a 316(a) Demonstration. Objectives:
- 1. Determine species co= position relative abundance, and standing crop of fishes in various areas of the Impoundment.
- 2. Determine f. I habits, age, growth rate, maturity, and fecundity of repres .' i.ve species in the lepoundment.
I
- 3. Determine the extent of repreJuctive activity in the imediate area of discharge anf. evaluate potential damage to the fishery by entraintient of ichthyoplankton.
Sample Per.iod:
- 1. Annually - cove sa=ple with rotenone I 2. Quarterly - gill nets, wire traps, and seine
- 3. At mipieum bi-weekly
- during the spawning season - entrainment and spawniM octivity.
Sample Design:
- 1. Stations i and 3 on transects A, C, E, and G, (Figure 1) vill be sampled with 100-foot experimental gill nets (equal panels I of 1/2,1,1 1/2, 2-inch bar c.esh) and wire traps (1-inch poultry netting) f or approximately 48 hours. One stream station above and two stream stations below the impoundment I (H, J, and K) will be sa= pled with 50-f oot experimental gili ne,
- s (1/2, 1, 1 1/2, and 2-inch bar mesh) and vire traps.
Nets and traps will be checked at least every 24 hours and i g catchen vill be reported as number and/or weight per unit g time. Shoreline stations on these transects vill be sampled with a small mesh bag seine over a constant area and catches reported as number or weight per haul. All fish collected are identified, counted, weighed, and measured. Live fish in good condition are tagged and released when possible. A reference collection vill be made and maintained, and representative samples of largemouth bass, bluegill, anc white catfish will be retained for age-growth, stomach, and gonad analysis. I I *Bi-weekly is used to indicate monitoring ehich occurs once each two weeks. I
I 1-16 I^
- 2. Selected coves of the i=poundment (upper, mid, and lower area) ar.d three stream stations (H, J, and K) will be blocked of f with small cesh nets and rotenone applied by accepted cethods.
All fish recovered will be identified, counted, weighed, and measured. These data vill be used in estimating the standing g cros of fishes in the l=poundsent and Black Creek. Largemouth 5 b a ., bluegill, and white catfish collected will be used in age-growth, stomach, and gecad analysis.
- 3. Largemouth bass, bluegill, and white catfish will be exasined for food habits, age, growth rate, saturity, and fecundity. Stomach contents will be removed, sorted. l W
identified, and quantified volumetritally. Scales (pectoral ' spines from white catfish) are read in the laboratone to determine annual growth increments. Age-growth relationships g will be computed if sufficient numbers of fish are obtained. Gonad maturity will be determined by gross inspection to E4 w determine spawning periods and fecundity will be estimated using gravi =etric subsampling techniques. . 4 The i==ediate discharge area vill be examined during the spawning seasons to evaluate spawning and nursery armas. 3 Plankton sa=pling techniques will be employed to determine 3 the relative abundance of fish eggs and larvae. Visual obser-vations will be combined with seining and other techniques such as larval fish nets and electrofishing at night in near s shore areas to determine the pre ence or absence of spawning , adults and young-of-the-year. Entrainment of ichthyoplankton in the plant ecoling water system will be monitored bi-weekly
- g during the =ajor spawning period by sampling the f .ake area g with accepted ichthyoplankton sampling techniques. Samples will be collected more frequently if numbers collected indicate g ~
potential da= age to the fishery. Estimates will be made of I the total number of fish eggs and larvan entrained. I I
*Bi-weekly is used to indicate =enitoring which occurs os.ce each two weeks.
I l I E.
l-17 l I TERRESTRIAL MONITORING OF ROBINSON imp 0UNDMENT AND BLACK CREEK I
Purpose:
Imple:ent a saupling program pursuant to the requirements for a 316(a) Demor.stration. Objectives: 1. Identify those vertebrate species (except fish) living adjacent to, on, or in the Robinson impoundment and Black Creek shich are dependent upon the aquatic ecosystem for sore portion of their life cycle. I 2. Detetrint the nature and extent of dependence upon the aquatic ecosyste: by those organisms from above.
- 3. Provide a scale map >hoving major beds of vascular plants
-I and maintain herbariu: t;ecimens of all species collected.
4 Determine the possible effects of ther=al dischat e on those species dependent on the impoundment ecosystem. Sa=ple Period: Quarterly. I
~
Sample Desien - Avifauna I 1. Establish two 10-cile survey routes, one each on the east and the wast shores of the Impoundment. Locate observation points at 1-mile intervals along each survey route. (11 points per route)
- 2. Spend five minutes at each point listening and observing. Record sitings by species and number.
I 3. Travel by boat at approximately 12 mph between points. Observations between stops vill also be recorded.
- l. . Four surveys vill be conducted during each quarterly sample. One morning and me evening survey will be conducted along each route.
I l I
. , ~ _ _
l-18 I Is
- 5. Morning surveys begin at official sunrise, and eveung surseys end at official sunset.
- 6. Stations H and K on Black Creek below the impoundnent sill be sa= pled g W
once daily during each sample period. Sample Desien - Ma=mals
- 1. Set live traps at selected points along the shoreline for a minimum of three nights during each sample period.
- 2. Observe nocturnal activity using boats and spotlights.
- 3. Observe shoreline areas for tracks and other signs.
4 Observations will alsc be made in conjunction with other aspects of the sa ple program. Sample Design - Herptiles
- 1. Observe and identify teptile and a:phibian species during all phases of the study. ,
B
- 2. Special emphasis will oe placed on attempting to determine the extent of amphibian reproductive activity during spring and su:cer near the discharge site. ~n is vill involve cooperation with the aquatic sampling program.
Sample Desien - Vecetation
- 1. Map major areas of aquatic vascular vegetation in the Impoundment and Black Creek (at stations H J, and K). -
- 2. Compile and maintain a species list and herbarium specimens for all plants collected.
E.
W W W W W W W W W M M M TABLE I FIELD SAMPLING SCllEDUIE AND SAMPLING LOCATIONS F A B & CA C D E G II I J K 123 123 123 123 123 Ablotic Water Tempernture (Monthly) Sorface XXX XXX XXX XXX XXX X X X *X X X Every 3 feet bottom XXX XXX XXX XXX XXX X X X X X X Dissolved oxygen (Monthly) Surface XXX XXX XXX XXX XXX X X X X X X Every 3 feet to bottom XXX XXX XXX XXX XXX X X X X X X Water Chemistry (Monthly)" Surface -X- ---
--X X X X
[o X X Bottom -X- --- --- --
--X -
X - - - - 4 Biotic Plankton Pigment (Mcathly) -X- --- --- ---
--X -
X - - - - Primary Productivity -X- --- --- --
--X -
X - - - - (Quarterly) Standing Crop (Ouarterly) -X- --- --- ---
--I -
X - - - - Lenthos (Monthly) b --- b b b b b b - b b Fishery (Quarterly) c --- c --- c - c c - c c "A complete list of water chemistry parameters is provided in Table 2. b Along designated transect at deep and shallow stations. C Along designated transect. i
,I 1-20 i
I ' I TABLE 2 CHEMICAL PA? g TE?.S TO FE "0 NIT 0*ED Total solids Sulphate Total einc
- I Total volatile solids To al alkalinity (CACO ) Dissolved :incet 3
Total suspended solids Hardness Total sodium + Total dissolved solids Dissolved silica Total aluminum A==enia (As N) E Chloride ( C1") Dissolved aluminum + 5 CCD Total chromium (hexavelent) Total mercury Kjeldahl nitrogen Total copper t Total calciumt Nitrate (As N) Dissolved copper *
- Total magnesium ?
Ortho-phosphate (As P) Total iron Total manganeset Total phosphate (As P) Total lead t Total nickel t pH (field analysis) Dissolved nickel *
- Turbidity
- Dissolved copper :inc, aluminum, and nickel vill be neasured only when the total levels of these metals exceed a level of 0.05 ppm.
tParameters to be analyzed twice yearly. I I I il m
I ROBIM101: DTOUCME!C AND BLACE CREEK SAMPLI!10 Ti g u e 1-21 1 .I I TRA!!ST. CTS A!!D SA'TLI!!C POIICS DY
/>
i .- . i s jl t h*
' g s !
i
'n h ,
i O , - - ~ y l -@- 8 , l [ l fl
-, @ .2 f
. D l - f- b i
M V@ r v1. ll. l I I .
,'r 4* * '
\i my v
~/ et si e "
I e m *) f j l f '.# f' k. l . I y/s e i s i
\ 3 l e
[~~? 1, l
#q.
w: . a l {,-=,~4Q i b' ( , o,s:+a=2s ca,e Y s -r-----{@, ('
-I r i 1
( l g
,b <.
a a ::wsx p' y rug ; l g ut.'N ) f O N
- k wsIr g. y-i L A@ DM.i k-<A sca .i
. -- : a t1 c,!*7%.. Q \
I l TED #JML'm 2 Mt. :tvNSTEAM or PAv)
---~--s_.____ ____ _
f 1_ , I E i .' g v.s# ' 5 g f, ~ &g
#(%
d$k ,' [ q ,EP W g _.
; g 2
/ II $
$Y
~ E I y:
Z A I gs ' .-
!=
g., t 5,. 8 l z a
= ,
s e _ _. is 5 g g 3 e to* ,5 s
> g b;e d,h. , ,'
' a
'^:.= w s .- ^ =
1" -,
,$: '9 fll,j'n~>r y' Qf Vs+ ggf5 g
. ~. y vy,,
n g 1 .L f.k M44. ,,1E3a ! J35 :!j i RMM5 , E a
1-23 I References Strickland, J. D. H., and T. R. Parsons. 1966. A Practical Handbook of Seavater Analysis.
- Bulletin 167 Fisheries Research Board of Canada, Ottawa.
Golterman, H. L., (ed.). 1969. Methods for Chemical Analysis of Fresh Waters. IBP Handbook No. 8. Blackve11 Scientific Publications, Oxford ar.d Edinburgh. Vo11envelder, R. A. (ed.) 1969. A Manual on Methods for Measuring Primary P"oduction in Aquatic Environments. IBF Handbook No. 12. Blackwell Scientific Publication. Oxford and Edinburgh. I Morris, I., C. M. Yentsch, and C. S. Yentsch. 1971. Relationship Between Light Carben Dioxide Fixation and Dark Carbon Dioxide Fixation by Marine Algae. Limnolegy and Oceanography 16: 854-858. Pielou, E. C. 1966a. The Use of Information Theory in the Study of the Diversity cf Biological Populations, p. 163-177. Jyn Proceedings of the 5th Berkely s:sposiu.a on Mathematical Statistics and Probability. University California Press Berkely. Copeland, B. J., and W. S. Birkheads 1972. Some Ecological Studies of the Lover Cape Fear River Estuary, Ocean Outfall and Dutchman Creek, 1971. Contribution No. 27, Pamlico Marine Laboratory, N. C. State University. I I I I iI l < 1
N.s,,-as...a aw_e_.+.4 6...e-A_muJ._.a -h.4 _ 4mAhse m,a4- u._4.us_.4m s . aiLD e.,-__-a 4.a h_ ahm--aa.%eCAS_Am-Shah.- M4h.'4+A4 .h-haea mS. A _4m C L.Y_e4 e -E.a.h.w_-J,_mMw_.*m.Jaa6,_wJ l
- l i
i I i l i 1 P l I I i l I I l I I' g. I. I I' I I
2-1 2.0 Plant Operating Data 2.1 Circulating Water System The circulatin'g water system f or the H. B. Robinson plant provides for the condensation of steam from the main turbines of both units. Circulat-ing water is withdrawn f rom the impoundment near the dam, passed th%sh the main condensers for beth units, and returned via the discharge canal to the impoundment approximately 6.7 km (4.2 miles) north of the plant (Figure 2.*.11 I Table 2.1.1 lists the circulating water system flow rates, tempera-ture rise across the condenser, and the average heat rejected for both units. The intake structures for both units are located on the west bank of the impoundment near the dam. Unit I has two pumps, Unit 2 has three pumps, each with a separate intake bay. The entire structure is 13.2 meters (43.4 feet) wide,19.7 meters (64.5 feet) long, and 13.9 meters (45.5 feet) high. Water is withdrawn f rom the impoundment between 5.5 meters (18 feet) and 11.0 meters (36 feet). Plan views and vertical sections for Unite 1 and 2 are shown in Figures 2.1.0 through 2.1.5. Flow velocity magnitudes were measured across selected cross sections of the H. B. Robinson Units 1 and 2 intake structures and the common discharge canal. These measurements were used with other data sources, specifically, design flow rates, geometrical configurations, and observation, to construct expected flow velocity profiles within the intake structures from point of entry to the face of the traveling screens and within the canal from the I origin to the weir. Tha measurements are generally expected to be accurate to within 10*. A detailed presentation of the flow measurements and analysis is included as Exhibit 1.0 (VOL. III). Figures 2.1.11 end 2.1.12 show side views of the Unit 1 in*ake bays with assumed stream 11nes and measured velocity magnitudes included. The velocitics given are simple averages of five measure-ments taken laterally at the elevations shown. Similar results for the three t I
2-2 bays of the Unit 2 intake structure are presented in Figures 2.1.13, 2.1.14, and 2.1.15. In Tables 1.1 through 1.6 of the exhibit, all the individual intake m l velocity measurements are given. Within the Unit 1 intake structure, t.a flevs were generally below 46 m/sec (1.5 ft/sec). The profile is somewhat rkewed away from the bottom because of the 4.70 m (15.5-foot) vertical sec:1on of che bay floor. There appeared to be local high-velocity spots near the edges of the horizontal j i support colr.mns and there was a recirculation re gten near the water surf ace. ) l l Within the U: tit 2 bays, the vertical profiles were f airly flat and ; velocities generally ranged from .31 m/see to .92 m/sec (1.0 to 3.0 f t/sec) j except in the recirculation region near the surface where flows were generally less :han .31 m/sec (1 ft/sec). The design flow per bay of 6.1 x 105 gj=1, 3 (160,700 gpm), or 102 m /sec (358 ft3 /sec), would i= ply an average velocity of
.5 m/sec (1.65 fps) at the smallest physical cross-sectional area within the bay. The measured velocities co= pare reasonably w1:h this result. Again, high velocities near the herizontal support colu=ns were apparent, especially at a depth of 3.89 m (12.75 f:) in Bay A where the only flows above .92 m/sec (3 ft/sec) were recorded. This high velocity channel appeared to be a local-1:ed phenomenon since velocities =easured 1.22 m (4.0 f:) above and below this depth were below .61 m/sec (2 f t/sec) (Figure 2.1.12) . E E
Screening devices for both units are redundant traveling water screens with .95 cm (3/S-inch) mesh (Figure 2.1.6) . The screens travel n vertically at two speeds, 3 meters (10.0 feet) per minute, and .76 meters (2.5 fer.t) per sinuce. All msterial washed from the screens during the daily cleaning is flushed via the stor n drains into Black Creek below the impoundmen:. Each generating unit has its own separate condenser. Unit 1 has a two pass condenser wi:h two water boxes. The t' nit 2 condenser is a once-through type with four water boxes. To cont- ' fouling in the condenser tubes, a 1M sodium hypochlorite solution a fed to the condenser boxes for one-hcif hour once each ' day. Maximu= daily effluent concentration frcs the condenser is .5 mg/l free available chlorine not :c exceed a em
2-3 monthly average of .2 mg/1. Once each month approximately 45 kilograms (100 lbs.) of ferrous sulfate is added to the condenser to help protect I the tubes. The condensers-are periodically cleaned by passing scrapper plugs through tha tubes. Unit 1 is cleane1 by this method two to three times per year; Unit 2 is nermally cleaned during the annual outage. Debris from these operations is washed back to the impoundment via the discharge canal. After passing through the condensers, the circulating water from both units is routed into a co= mon discharge canal by a sealvell structure. The discharge canal runs along the west shore of the impoundment and termi-I nates with a weir located 6.8 km (4.2 miles) north of the plant. Diagrams of the discharge canal and the weir are shown in Figures 2.1.7 and 2.1.8. Flow measurements were made at 20% and 80% depths at various post-tions across the discharge canal at a point approximately .97 km (0.6 miles) from the canal origin. The results of these measurements are shown in Figura 2.1.16. This is expected to be typical of the flow pattern all along the canal since the basic cross section is unchanged. It is seen that the flow over most of the canal varies between .45 m/see and .76 m/sec (1.5 and 2.5 ft/sec). This range of velocities is generally consistent with discharge canal design flows at the weir. Flows over the weir were measured at half-depth .61 m (2 f eet) and found to be nearly constant laterally at around 2.01 m/sec (6.6 ft/see). Figure 2.1.17 gives the five measured velocities and the measurement positions. Table 2.1.2 provides the average monthly circulating vater system parameters from April, 1975 through May, 1976. Comparing Table 2.1.2 with Table 2.1.1 indic.ates that the plant load is rarely equal to the design generating capacity on a monthly average, and that the rise across the condensers seldom approaches the rise with a load factor of 1.0. The average delta te=perature profiles for the plant circulating water system at load factors 1.0 and 0.S are shown in Figure 2.1.9. The daily delta te=perature profile f or the circulating water system is shown in Figure 2.1.10. I I
2-4 Table 2.1.1 Circulating water avstem, Robinson Plant (Load factor = 1.0) 3 Average CWS Flov, Unit 1 5.52 m /sec (37,500 gpm) Average CWS Flow, o .a t 2 30.40 m /sec (432,100 gpm) g Average Service Water Flev, Unit 2 1.51 m /se: (2 t.,000 gpm) 3 3 Average Plant Discharpe 37.45 m /se: (593,600 gpm) Average Condenser Rise - Across Unit 1 13.33*C (24'F) Average Condenser Rise - Unit 2 li.11*C (20'F) k erage Condenser Rise - Both Units 11.28'C (20.3*F) . Average Heat Rejected - Unit 1 3.08 x 10'W (1.05 x 10 BTU /hr) Average Heat Rejected - Unit 2 1.46 x 10 W (5.00 x 10 BTU /hr) Average iles: Rejected - Loth Units 1.77 x 10'W (6.05 x 10' BTU /hr) I I 5 I I I I E
m m m M m m M M M M M M M E W m 3 M. Table 2.1.2 II . B. Robinnon Steam Electric Plant average monthly circulating water system parameters April 1975 - May 1976. Average liourly Robinson ** Gross Average *** Average Average Impoundment Plant CWS Intake Discharr.c Plant Disch_arge Generation Flow Temperatiire Temperature Rise Month m /Sec. (tfWe) m /Sec C "C "C Apr. '75 9.3 364.8 26.7 19.9 24?8 4.4 May '75 7.6 234.3 24.0 23.0 27.3 3.4 June '75 5.2 687.7 34.5 28.6 37.4 8.8
.luly '75 12.7 776.4 36.6 29.0 38.9 9.9 n
Aug. '75 6.2 812.2 37.4 31.2 41.4 10.2 4 Sept. '75 8.1 762.1 36.7 29.0 38.2 9.2 Oct. '75 6.3 735.4 35.5 25.4 34.5 9.1 Nov. '75 6.7 129.6 20.7 18.8 21.6 2.8 Irec . '75 7.4 461.6 31.0 12.6 18.0 5.4 Jan. '76 8.8 669.3 29.2 11.4 21.9 10.5 Feb. '76 8.1 750.5 32.5 15.4 25.7 10.3 Mar. '76 7.4 728.2 33.5 19.6 29.1 9.5 Apr. '76 5.0 685.1 31.9 22.3 31.8 9.5 tray ' 76* 5.8 618.6 32.0 25.2 35.3 10.1
- Preliminary
**Apr-Sept 1975 US.;S water resources data; Oct 75-Apr 76 USGS provisional record
* ** Measured at condensern
1 l 2-6 I U. S. I sL Black Creek I' SR 346 5 I E O Dinn 3 I l l'
./} J I S\m 6
/ -
SR29 g I i Dsenav.eC2,ai( T #^\ 3 , i l il
\ SR 23
- l H B A0b.nsen U$ts i L 2e o Y1 r z k
Scale in Miles , j
.75 Hes l
\ Ciack Creek E Figure 2.1.1 Robinson !=poundment E
. _ _ _ - _ . - - _ - - - _ - - - _ - - _ _ - ~ - - - - - .
l 5 2., I _. I ,
..____, 7 - _ ._ _ _ _, ._______q
; ; i i
I
,i . , ,
I
' I t
i !
' I i i ,
i e i j i t I l l l i l t h b 5 (C sd w I _ ca s - w-
==.26
-wn. - na= < ,
w
/ ;
I i W M C?f
'W
., q Q w%,
~.
> ta C i L; J
9 l ts II) n af G.
* *1 a
I t>
; i ! ;
e'. u
)
u2 u ) J L, J. j io s U 1 I 5 : i e i
@d5 I f I l
t2 D.O!!D D!iQnD: " i g i L _ _ _ __ ._ _L _ ' _ _ _ _ _ _ ._ _ .L _ _. .. _ _ _ J '
, T
' t ! e i O H*-~'!'7' d h -- -m- - " - ~ 1 > 3
. ; u $A -
'} -
! c
; r-w N a-i 1 -
p3cg. g- l i . I w _f.
. 1
, a 5 r--= ,
..:... } ,
3D I 3........' I i j. ......ij f......1' ; t - fl N 1' 'y > l s' i f. l f'~ i I 3 ' l h L _.i .J _.r _ _ _ Il %,2 r, 3 1
- ,3.
y ri _ _ _ _. _ . . _ a . : v I' .L i.q I __. ? y
- 5 t p v
9
!.'.i il..- l p.t ;.g l.
_ _n._ _ ._ w I a M3s l l Il l[ / Mu-
.........3,
-l
. 3 'l
>- j.l i.
i
,'O;,.;i t {,
b e
, I, g......, _
i j L p L--W I i.__._____; __.___a - ___ .a p,.__',-.___ j l e I 1 4 i. I e r-a - , '
; .__. ...__. a -
t l, i i 't r I ~.
- i. , , , ,i .
g I -! Eh I T - E 3 I
E 2-8 I I I u=A mWG N5E ou= - u m *,,:
, W 1 1
O c: c 'i 1i 1 3, 2 ~ F a3G j [
,, I TRASH T'y:GH C *A o -j 5 -4
>w 2 'A a2 o _
U
, - um < -
6 'A G ? *. g a , 4 q e M c,,
$ a
- H y, a. .
---L_. . .
c g OE - L D h9 ~*i
,, F .
O *** g I hs
=_
bi a w6 =. 0=. . . O g u u 3 W
-' ' 3 I
. r '--
n
- ede E
/
I I al
=
A n E ~n _E a g '( u4 2-9 I $!n 9! e e. t i, - o4 eo a ., se t la. t~ c
.i -a e . s_ v #
'J v I
t'
,,i < . y; , g t a _.__----_.
4j -nc e. l T p 'sJ
- p. W t- 4 ,;;;;;;4 g; q ;
r s i m i , v.. f
' i e ?*.-
(I : I
.+..
l i q n . . 3-
" ,.i.-,, ...- -
r ..
+ . c: .:,. - c. m..n>wAu)s .%-_ y:, ' ,. c.
. . . .Q. . m .u s - - - _s j g .m~
.b l
dlY u l
! O ,. N' T..
x hd u r l 1
- ._M' .
C g hk - :h:: 3- k~ .
~, ,_
b [. k t {
~
- f,.x
- : 8 v ,} :)
i gw : p],; : 3 Va. s . .h, n-i ! ,L i M; [??.M ll .y. I i,
, . .w m .
a _ _- : q l l j 1 - - b, ; l wu
, . . . a j,
Q D j I V
*a b o, i
C t.. w
% N w
h l i l [f ~ l-
.. y av a i , i .
r i
\,
I -O
- l 2
.c.
N s , .. T - i**W C w. _ _ . _ _' _._ _-_--.L. __ - - - _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ f;* _
- 1 y QQ l - - - -
q t wo N, . e1 ! 5 fw
- s ~<,
l t l l j N I. tz j l t . . :'$ . . ' $ e Ci $ '
'.'..&:f*5 $d V. 5
=3p.n d. R w, l @
l u g . .; 7 gc.g c ;E g , ~7 7~ 23 . v.: , , .pmm . I x@$ i gr y H ' ,l - l d Q( '! I N E' o
.k_. 4, .,<
l ', ,; ,. -,M
. , -; s~,.-t ,, e . 4 V'-
fi:- -l I l
% \ w
..~3 h -
?
vly 'Nl-- i !, i s ! i g /s I -. l -.
,. g .. --g VAi s -
<.a . .(
, i .
- - e:
I , j i . . i r, A =; q ,t ;
) 1_ _ t . .:'J' * > y ,; -
l>
.I -
y: y
=;
x..n~._: n ,_, v m. 4 : 4 .~~- u. i
. k g g.,4.
--. t :.
- 4. .
1 2
' _________i y. y n' I
- hMe3-3 J.; e
;_.s i p
-O><G + -
s ec
> , f W
/
I
F-I 2-10
. n 0 a ,
.MO 5m
.a h[ '<cc $. oN h.g ^j Da dM3NV O e .
4 m
=- h 9 ,G > !a
-> c .a W H
g H 3d sw D i. __ d P$ f- ar I l i} g JigN
^* . ,
i *5 i i l +-
\ l wz i 8 4',
zuw l MWO d . b l 6. f' D EJ U l .e f g. . e. ,,
\ ,
y, - ,
, <~ ,
.+ g 7 I 4 ,.
- fg
$ n
- = l w
* ~
- j
-- e .s a ..
.. \
- 3 fwaO M
i m a % ,. u U a p e e - v 8 l z x me-UDD ' l z e > wmu 4
- w 0 1 1 f
, h ' [?;
- 3 {g , I
>c 3~
p u IQ b; ..: m s. H' I ' 1 ..' w2$ 0
'J 3 a- .1J I
l "/ -
.e
- d B l
' s Te
's.-{ ( -
! 5
,- g .
. l . g
~
- 2 == .
- g .5 f, I , {
.), ' = ' ~ - - .
=
,, a ! ! :,(
U
...1 .
Y- E I
" > I f
E ,
%r t .k d g
l-j ) .; t.;w j
'f' d
V - 6 50 I I 1 l l I E
2-13 I MOTORd CHA/N l f 02/vt E N h I ( l' D '
, - SP2A Y NCEELES
/ =
,* ~
l A I l V!! I epo// i ll c n , n i y r-s > b}h'A49.2 #rb- ' NorFS e d l TEASH Y I' > > eM0p!L 46A SCREEN,41'-OSHApr ENTE 26, /01 0"aip! TEA 76 TEOUGH ~( ( & eNUMS&A QC L/N/TS - 3 lM ew&lGWT f?2 UNIT- 26,735 LDS. k&$ l o y NJc p l eenAcirr- ware 2 uceen wu WRATE AT Ib2,900 GPA' WITH NORMAL WATER DEPT 7J A . , ' a " AT A q% Q K, a y (y V&l,0 CITY OF 1.82 FPS THEu 100 % E tr) GG l lI CLEAN SCE&&N CLOTH l O$PRA Y WAT&C - 248 SPW ATA P2E65u25 0F-% PSI A? THE SFEAY
, N0ZELES lh, lll OSPEAY NCEELES - 14 SEASS NON-CLOGGING NCEELES
_d. > l , .:
'1 -l > .l !!
y' I i f WATERFLOW l I
=
1l '
!;iii jll fi e l- l %./
; (NO SCALE-)
+ a m m A 9 ::.w i
Figure 2.1.6 Intake screens, Unit 2 E
N -- - _ _ _ - s l A"12 h
=gss s
kg I kf*$$f y ed 2:':- 7q g l y E s f m , (lk],. g Ok .
"5
?s
't-g N
7 '7#. n 3 9 5 u
-e g--
t , O Ge $t's,.p
?__.. ,
E
, .7
~ g h i .5 ,- _
,~
I, m d - me t 5-D e s 4 3 o e we $
- 5 Cg .t u
p.. b l 8 saa a : Q -f E De V l 42
*I
~
a
, C N
E
- - - - - - - - - - - ~ _ _ _ _
I 2-13 I I I :.. :(: Ge. G m) 5.00' ( h,)
- _ f '. ;, l'8 o2 I =
(3 l~) 10 '-O ' [ .::5.J: -) I qqm gc # ,.. __ _ mm. _ . N Ar: E 's a . 5:. ? E O..) f 3ec
. m --- _ g .m . _ ., -=
( 67. l ) I %
~
.a (66. 3 mT E! 2!7.CC I
f .> 9 w 8 -
,-- WE/2 4 1 ?>jf,Q 6 n
I (63 6m) 208.50'
\
EL. \fe" I ~77 sa.z . . ~ , . i,
\\
- n. . , .
J
'?f'
(.c5 m)
*b EL. - t i 11 h
j; W t - r,;,,,,J p- i s j F---- l;;
--i 4; p;
I
; s a r ~, : t... j l ll <-
- c. ,a U
il
;; !! --.- ,roA
- e .---- #MQ y ,,
/.fQ)b \
^ '
!! d 46 ) ll ll t il ll fi !!
Il p tl 11 11 !! U
\\ l ll SHEET P!.H.'G l =CEauS GRAVEL. CONCR&~s FX~s7 "
'l s
(N) SAC) uCER SACH F.'*! .* ~~4N ll , I 11 il li o I y ll C c (F9 5m) I fl il l: II (57-7m) No $dLS l!' ~ 'l Ei . *9 5 0.* ' _ _}EL.199.00' l iI I Figure 2.1.8 Discharge canal intersection with impoundment i
2-14 I' l i, I
.~
l I
/ -c iT ti e l 5y g b% B 5 8 5E
' 8 ..> E E.
9 S 5
~ ".
5
- m u
e1 l
/ '
/ -N 5
- s I I
/ ..
I
- . i
/ g 3o 3anivwamal n.
2- 15 I I ; I
.i I
$db5 l 85EE I -
/
I /
/
/
/ '
u E I I
/
/ ~l siE u-u
~g l \
\
5 585 sto
\ \ 1 !il.!
I N
\
N
\
\
c mem 8 xT 3 : u N'.
's 5E$
s N
., u 43L I \.
\ q .\ .g
~
.RE
=**
^h
- q. O, N -N.
sxT. -j i I N l _-/ f i, a I m h a Do38niv83dW31 v1730 I I
2-16 CENTER LINE STCP-LOG s GUIDE CENTER LINE. TR AVEUNG SCREEN GUIDE ,
-I p- j g *
i A a _ ~ o -- '5_- / g an_ [ I T._/ / g 4.1 -.- .8 .
.22 -.
4
/
/
7.6 -- l
- /
, .30
- ~
/ /
27 l.
//
=
.16 12.3 __ _
_A y a DEPTH (ME T E RS) Note: All velocities in metef t /sec. I Figure 2.1.11. Flow pattern within Bay A, Unit 1 intake structure l I , l I a
l J 2-17 CENTER LINE. STOP LOG l GUIDE CENTER LINE.TR AVELING SCREEN GUIDE
\ 29 2, j_ ) / A 2 '
7
._.d o 1. .16,, /
~ ~~~.~ ' /
E .24- / f
.14 -
p 4.1 - .2 I ..
/I 7.6 --
$t19 -D /
/
- - ~~
I - -
/////w .2, I
~~
/
/
l 1('
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~~
=~ - 12.3 = ::- ==. = = _/ _ _ _
l v OEPTH Note: All velodties in re..ters/sec, (METERS) B Tigure 2.1.12 Flow pattern within Bay B, Unit 1 intake structure B i I I I
I 2-18 I s I CENTER LINE, TR AVELING CENTER LINE, STOP LOG SCREEN HEADSH AFT GUIDE g g-e 2.9 -+
-[-
ll f
-o
- . 2o
/
. 17
-- 4.1
%/~
I N 49 Y 78
- - . - 6.9
/- ) -
~ l
- .64 5
.78 g
/ / 'Oi7A*f l y
S) Note: All velocities in meters pw :acond. (M E I mm. 2.1. m m ..m._ ms1., so . .cm ume. --. I , I I a
2-19 I I CENTER ONE. TRAVELING SCREEN HEADSH AFT CENTER LINE.STOP. LOG !I - - -
+--
- e-2.9 a ,
GUIDE
;l // , ,/
.0 m
-7 &
N 19 I x s
'N
'O
, /
I y
-- - - 4,1 a
k / ' \ h
--h7 l i
~~ 00
. - 6.9 s
/
I ~
--,49
- i. - 77
__ .. ~ A
~~ ~ ~ ~~
g , 7 ,/ ,/ / / DEPTH (METE RS) Note: All velocitLs in meters /sec. I z1 , _ _ .1=,1 m ., s. mi o 1 m x. . _ _ 11s _ 2.1.1. I I . 1
r= I 2-20 l-CENTER L'NE. TR AVELING I SCR EE'1 HEADSH AFT CENTER LINE, STOP LOG
! GulOE
- 2.9 -+
~ ~
~~' ~
y, V /, g
--O L
-* - 2 8 [
\ ki*' \/
/
.. . ie y g 7
__ . ..., gx Nv,. ...,
/
/
g
- l. ' ' '
n J M l
- - ~
% b" -..66 l
. .72 E
. 80 E I <
/// $"'!Tn?
~
, 7//// I
~ _ ,1 _ .., _ .,.,.... I
. I m.. 2.1. m ,1 , _ . m . m . s., C _ m _ x. . _ _ .
i I a
M M M M 'M M M, M .O M M cable, with markers l ' 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1.53 3.7 3.7 , 3.7 3.7 3.7 3.7 3.7 4 .
.25 . 63 . 66 .60 . 68 . 31 ,
. 59
. 55 (3 7m) i . 57 .56 E1.64.Im) 61 S. i I flote: Att velocities In meters /sec. ;
i i 1 Figure 2.1.16 Approximate discharr.e canal cross sect ion at test site (locklug upstream) l I
I 2-22 I I I I Note: All velocities in met. per second. I 68.6m (225' ) - (6 Sag,
** / - - water level (66.3m) 217.4,.
2.08 2.12 1M 132 2m over veir g g (3.9m) (3.7m) (3.7m) 2. 3m) (4. 3m) (4.2m) 12 -3/4' 12' 12 ' 9' la' 13-3/4'
! (22.4m) 2 73' 6" &
I 5 I Figure 2.1.17 View of weir (looking upstream) I l I I a.
3-1 I 3.0 Environmental Data 3.1 Introduction i Physical and chemical characteristics determine both the habitat and type of biological community which can exist in a defined ecosystem. Environmental cata relative to these physical and chemical characteristics j have been defined as hydrology and morphology; temperature; and water chemistry. , I i Hydrological and engineering data have been coepiled to describe i the hydrology and morphology of the Robinson 1=poundment and Black Creek. 1 Both pre-operational (bareline) and operational data have been used. I Te=perature studies include the results of intensive sampling of water temperatures throughout the impoundment and Black Creek during 1973, 1974, 1975, and 1976. In addition, one year of pre-operational data for Black Creek above and below the impoundment (1959 and 1960) and data for I impeundment water temperatures during the su=mer and vinter of 1963 (prior to the operation of Unit 2) are available. Thermal models have also been developed which describe predicted sc=mer =aximum, vinter maxi-mu=, and equilibrium te=peratures in the impoundment. These data have been used to document thermal conditions, to identify cooling patterns, and to determine the effects of warmed discharge waters on natural thermal conditions. Water chemistry studies include data from 1973, 1974, 1975, and I 1976. Results of water chemistry analyses have been evaluated to determine the water quality of the Robinson Impoundment and Black Creek and to deter-eine the effects of plant operation on various chemical variables. Since pre-operational water chemistry data are essentially nonexistent, the quality of water entering the impoundment from Black Creek has been con-sidered an ongoing baseline. I I I
3-2 I L i 3.2 Hydrology and Morphology I 3.2.1 Methods U. S. Geological Survey data for the State of South Carolina and engineering plans and documents were utilized to describe and deduce pertinent physical parameters of the Robinson Impoundment and Black Creek. 3.2.2 Results and Discussion I The circulating water system for the H. B. Robinson Steam Electric Plant includes Robinson impoundment (Figure 3.2.1), a cooling impoundment created in 1959 by the damming of Black Creek. The pertinent physical parameters of the impoundment and Black Creek are shown in Table 3.2.1; Figure 3.2.2 contains the area capacity curves for the impoundment. g 5 At the normal water elevation of 67 m (210 ft) msl, Robinson Impoundment has a surface area of 911 ha (2,250 acres), a volume of 7 5.06 x 10 m 3 (41,000 acre-ft) and an average depth of 5.5 m (18 ft). Theoretical average retention time within the impoundment is 86 days while circulation of impoundment water occurs approximately every 3 16 days. E The major inflow of water into the Robinson Impoundment is from Black Creek, an intrastate stream which rises in the fall :ene near Pageland, South Carolina, and flows through Chesterfield, Darlington, and Florence counties to its confluence with the Pee Dee River east of Darlington, South Carolina (Figure 3.2.3). The creek flows through the Carolina Sandhills, and its drainage area is generally secondary pine growth with some open agricultural land. The soils of this region are generally of lov fertility, and acidic, with a pH value around 5.0. Additional inflow into the impoundment is provided by various small creeks, streams, and flowing groundwater wells near the shore of the impoundment. I
I1 3-3 The drainage area at the Robinson dam is approximately 448 km (173 mi ). Discharge to Black Creek occurs either over the dam or from lov level release valves. Average discharge to Black Creek (1960 - 1974) was 6.8 m /s (240 CFS). I , 3.3 Thermal 3.3.1 Methods I An intensive thermal monitoring program of the Robinson impoundment and Black Creek was initiated in April, 1973, in conjunction with initial environmental studies. Tite transects (A, B, C, D, and E) were established (Figure 3.3.1). Across each transect three sampling stations (1, 2, and 3) I_ were utill:ed, in addition, two stations, consisting of a single point at F and G,were sampled. In August, 1973, two temperature sampling stations on Black Creek were added: one below the impoundment (H) and one above the impoundment (I). An additional impoundment transect (CA) and an additional creek station (K) were added in August, 1974 In April,1975, a grid covering an area of approximately 74 ha
.I (184 acres) and identifying 33 sampling points was established in the area of discharge (Figure 3.3.2). Beginning in August, 1975, at the recommenda-tion of the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency Region IV, the number of sampling points was reduced by one-half; three sampling stations were added in the area where Big Beaverdam Creek enters the impoundment (UBBC, MBBC, and LBBC); and an additional transect, DA, was added.
I Vater temperatures were sampled between April, 1973, and March, 1976, at least once monthly. Between the period May, 1975, and November, 1975, with I the exception of June, 1975, when equipment failure prevented completion cf sampling, water temperatures were sampled twa < monthly. At each sampling station, water temperatures were recorded on the surface and at 3-foot inter-vals. Equipment used for sampling incJuded: Yellow Spring Instrument (YSI) I I
3-4 I 54 0xygen and Temperature Meter. International Biophysics Corporation (ISC) I - Temperature and Dissolved Oxygen Monitoring Unit, and Rydrolab TDO-2. On June 12, 1975, continuous strip chart temperature recorders were placed at the Spillway, at the West Tower (south of C-3), at Station F, in the discharge canal i= mediately south of the discharge canal veir, and on Black Creek at Station K (F4 ure 3.3.1). All temperatures were recorded g 5 continuously at a depth of pproximately 3 feet. Hourly readings were noted throughout each day, from which daily averages were caltulated and daily maximum and mini::nts values determined. The continuous recording units used for this study were Atkins Technical Inc. Model #22346-09 Temperatura data measured in the field speedfically for environmental studies was supplemented by three additional studies: (1) during the years g a 1959, 1960, 1972, 1973, and 1974 on Black Creek above the impoundment (3tation I) and below the impoundment (Station H), water temperatures were sampled approxi-mately once per week, thus providing baseline data comparable to operational data; (2) sampling of impoundment stations along Transects A, 3, C (approxi-mately), and D nas made in 1963; and (3) temperature prediction modeln were developed (USNRC,1975; Edinger and Geyer, 1965; Edinger, et al., 1974; Craves and Geyer, 1973). 3.3.2 Results and Discussion B E Intensive sampling temperature data for 1973, 1974, 1973, and 1976 are presented as CP&L Exhibit 2.1. Continuous recorder data indicating daily averages, =axima and minima temperatures are indicated in CF&L Exhibit 2.2. 31ack Creek water te=perature data for 1959, 1960, 1972, 1973, and 1974 are included in CP&L Exhibit 2.3. _Circula:1ne Patterns
- Data indicated that during all periods of the year discharge waters were well mixed as they flowed into the impoundment. Warmed waters then dis-persed, forming a surface layer over cooler bottom waters which entered the I
E
i 3-5 l discharge area from the upper impoundment and Black Creek drainage area. Normal circulat1on patterns were southward to thn dam and the plant. Warned surface waters occasionally moved northward above the SR 346 bridge, but such movement was limited by the SR 346 road bed and the relatively small span of the bridge ( < 61 m (200 f t)) . Indication of heated surface waters moving as far northward as Station G was not observed. I Thermal Stratification I Seasonal variation of surface and vertical temperature patterns in the impoundment was noted. During early fall, vinter, and late spring waters were vell mixed at Station G and at stations south of Transect DA; generally unifor= temperatures were recorded for each water column, especially at the deeper southernmost transects (A and B) during winter periods (Figures 3.3.3-3.3.5). In spring and fall, overturn occurred (Figures 3.3.6-3.3.8). Between these periods a temperature gradient generally was maintained with variation of surface and bottom temperatures ranging between 4*C-6*C (7'F-11*F); and during su=er temporary stratificatica was noted (Figures 3.3.9-3.3.11). I Throughout the entire year artificial stratification occurred in the area of discharge as warmed discharFe waters layered over cooler bottom waters. An artificial thermocline was generally present in the discharge area where depths were 2.7 m (9 f:) or greater. In this area, during sumer months when discharge temperatures were at maximum, variation between surface and bottom temperaturas was generally 6*C-7*C (ll*F-13*F). I Temperature etability A summary indicating te=perature stability and general thermal trends between hours, within 24-hour periods, and between days is presented in Table 3.3.1. Temperature fluctuation was not great in the lower impoundment, while temperatures in the discharge canal varied directly with the intensity of fluctuation of Unit 2 operation. Areas imediately north of the SR 346 bridge were inter =ittently affected by plant discharges and are described as being in
~
I l l I
3-6 a f t'nge area of the extention of the, th rmal ef fluent. Temperature fluctuation I s in this area occasionly exceeded 7"C (13*F) during a 24-hour period. Maximum and Minimum Thermal Conditions Maximum ther=al conditions were observed during July and August, 1975, when discharge te=peratures generally remained above 40*C (104*F), temperatures g i E , in the upper impoundment were above 23*C (73*F), and temperatures in the lower impoundment remained above 26*C (79'F) . Modeling indicated that the summer of 1975 had higher-than-average impoundment temperatures, based on analysis of the , meteorological conditions which affect impoundment water temperatures. The result was that during late August, 1975, the plant produced the highest recorded ' discharge temperatures since operation of Unit I commenced, l g i g) Under normal operating conditions annual minimum thermal conditions occurred during January and February. In 1976 discharge temperatures fell below 25*C (77'F), water temperatures in the upper impoundment fell to 5'C (41*F), I and minimum temperatures in the lowcr impoundment were 11*C (52'F) . Ambient Thermni Conditions Data collected in 1963, during a period when only Unit I was g in operation and varmed discharge waters were returned to the impoundment E 1.2 mi (1.9 km) north of the plant, indicate that temperatures within the impoundment ranged between 26.6*C and 30*C (80*F- 86*F) during summer (Figures 3.3.12-3.3.14). During winter periods tecueratures dropped to 5.6*C (42*F) in the lower impoundment. Data collected on Black Creek abcve the impoundment (Station I) and below the impoundment (Station H), prior to the commercial operation of the = H. 3. Robinson Plant and during the period when the initial filling of the impoundment occurred, indicate naturally occurring temperatures and the wa ming effects of solar radiation on impoundment waters. From May to November, 1959, the natural increase in temperature across the impoundment due to solar radia-tion averaged 4. l*C (7.4*F), and between December, 1959, r.nd April, 1960, natural rise averaged 1.i'C (2. 6* F) . Comparing these figures with data n
3-7 collected during periods when Robinson Units 1 and 2 vere com=ercially operated 1 (1972, 1973, and 1974) indicates that between May and December the averaFe incuase in temperature in Black Creek below the da which can be attributed to plant operation was 1.8'C (3 2*F). For the period December to April the rise l attributed to plant op'eration was 3.2'C (5.7'F) (Table 3.3.2). I Tercerature Prediction Models Models used to determine impoundsent equilibrium te=peratures without I the influence of plant operation indicated that naturally occurring surface te=peratures within the impoundment under normal meteorological conditions I would be appreximately 29.4'C (85*F) . Under extreme meteorological conditions temperrtures would approach 32*C (90*F). During vinter periods unter normal meteorological conditions, te=peratures vould fall below 10*C (50*F), while
- _ under extreme meteorological conditions temperatures would be slightly above I 10*C (50*F) (USNRC, 1975).
he predicted, typical su==er and vinter surface isotherms fcr the a i=poundment are presented in Figure 3.3.15. Predicted maximum sv=mer conditions indicated a discharge te=perature of approximately 44.5'C (112.1*F) under adverse meteorological conditions and 100* plant load for at least five conse-cutive days (Figure 3.3.16). Predicted caximum vinter conditions indicated a l discharge te=perature of approximately 28'C (82*F). Meteorological data used l for modeling are included in Table 3.3.3. 1 3.4 Water Chemistry ! l 5 3.4.1 Methods 1 Water chemistry samples were collected monthly between April, 1973, I and }ebruary,1976, from the surface and bottom at three stations within the l 1mpound=ent: A-2, E-3, and C, and free Black Creek above the i=poundment (I, surface) and below the impoundment (H, surface). In September, 1974, two additional Black Creek chemistry sanpling stations were added: one below the impoundment (F, surface) and one above the impoundment (J, surface). Sampling at Station J vas discontinued in November, 1974 (Figure 3.3.1). I
3-8 Samples were collected with a beta bottle sampler and transferred to I labeled plastic containers, which were chilled and stored in the dark prior to analyses. All chemical analyses followed standard procedures accepted by the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency. Analytical methods used by the W CP&L Analytical Laboratory as of January 1,1.976, are presented in CPSL Exhibit 2.4 3.4.2 Results and Discussion Results of all 1973, 1974, 1975 and 1976 vater chemistry analyses for Robinson I=poundment and Black Creek are presented in C?&L Exhibit 2.4
'Jater Ouality Selected Robinson Impoundment water chemistry data compared with data from other coastal rivers and lakes, are presented in Table 3.4.1.
The acidic nature of the waters of Robinson I=pcundment was well within the range found for other coastal rivers and drainages of this general area. Am=onia was approximately the sa:e, whereas3 NO -hogen and QeMaWhogen were considerably less than that found in the Cape Fear River, but comparable to the selected acid water bodies. Iron and sodium were also comparable to the a range of values fcund in other waters of this area. l Effects of Plant Operation i Although exrensive pre-1973 data is lacking, the contemporary quality of the inflowing stream, Black Creek, provides the essential informa-I tion as to the nature and magnitude of materials in suspension and solution entering Rcbinson I=poundment. This permits assessment of changes that occur on passage through the i=poundment. The following analyses and cocparisons are bast.d ca the concept that the contemporary quality of. Black Creek, as determined at Station I, is a baseline for assessment of change due to the operation of Robinson Impoundment as a cooling impoundsent. The water quality dsta collected in Rchinson Impoundment for the g three years L973, 197a, and 1975 have been organized in tables which indicate W h
3-9 mean values and describe similar locations: Table 3.4.2 described the water quality of the inflowing water of Black Creek (Stations I and J) iid the quality of the water of Black Creek after discharge from Robinson impoundment (Stations H and K). In Table 3.4.3 the same parameters are used to describe the quality for three impoundment stations (G, E, and A), in downstream sequence. This tabulation includes values for surface as well as bottom samples. The organization of data in this manner per=1ts ready comparison of key locations I and separates stations of flowing water from those of standing water. Within certain clusters of parameters, such as solids, clearly - defined trends of increasing quantity from 1973 to 1975 were evident. In other instances, such as f or NH -N, the trend was a consistent decrease over the 3 three-year period. In still other examples consistent changes in quantity of a specific constituent occurred between the samples taken from the inflowing water and the impoundment stations. Additionally, on other cases the changes were not in any particular direction in a consistent fashion nor do they appear I to change to any significant degree. To define these changes in a more rigorous fashion the statistical t-test for significance of difference of the annual mean values were carried our on year- to-year comparisons as well as station-to-station comparisons (Tables 3.4.4 and 3.4.5). The ant 1 mean values at three stations: I, inflowing water; A, impoundment and cooling water intake location; and H, downstream of Robinson lepoundment, were used to compare the changes between 1973/1974, 1974/1975, and 1973/1975. These yearly comparisons were tested for those para-meters which appeared to be making shif ts of suf ficient magnitude, either increasing or decreasing, to be statistically significant. The t-test for I significant difference of mean values was calculated only for the mean values of surface samples. Those t values with their probability of being at a significant difference at both 95* and 99*. level of probability are identified, as well as the direction of change. I The use of Station I as a station for baseline data places in perspective changes that were occurring in the impoundment as well as down-stream that might have resulted from interactions within the impoundment. I I
I 3-10 I % All values for the t-test of the various parameters compared are shown, but only those with a significant dif ference are of interest and concern. It is clear that the solids content of the water, particularly total, volatile, and dissolved, increased in a consistent manner over the three year period. The magnitude of the change increased to the point where the number ef significant differences was considerably greater in the 1974-1975 comparison than that of 1973-1974. The 1974-1975 comparison shewed that the difference of the mean values for total, volatile and dissolved solids were significantly different g in the surface samples both at Station I, inflowing water, as well as Station H, E outflowing vater, whereas only the volatile solids were at a significant difference at Station A. The comparison between the values for 1973 and 1975 showed that over the two-year period total, volatile and dissolved solids all changed significantly at all three stations and suspended solids only at Station R, This direction of change in solids content was characteristic of all stations and would appear to be a change characteristic of the entire drainage rather than any effect li:nited to Robinson Impcundment. Changes in quantity of COD that were at significant levels in ene 1973-1974 comparison were four4 only at Station I and H and not at A. These changes, which were increases in Con did not persist in the comparison of 1974-1975. NO3 -N had a significant increase in the comparison of 1973 and 1974 data at all three stations, a condition which was no icnger evident in EB the 1974-1975 comparison. However, the difference was of sufficient magnitude E to be statistically significant when 1973 values were compared to 1975 at Station A and H. Although NO ~ *** " E
- 3
"*" 7 *#*"* '
1974-1975 comparison, the decrease in NH -N normally associated with increases 3 in NO -N was at a significantly different level, decreasing at both Stations I 3 and A in the 1974-1975 comparison. Total phosphate-P and total dissolved phosphate-P had significant increases at Station A between 1974-1975 which were not apparent at Stations I l and H. The comparison of 1973 to 1975 found only dissolved phosphate-P = l significantly different, increasing at Stations ! and H but not at A. I I Dissolved silica and chloride, tvc enservative conscituents, were
~
l tested for significance of difference of the annual mean values to establish 1 l B
3-11 the magnitude of the t-test at their minimum levels of difference. None of their differences were at aignificant levele. Alkahnity showed a significant decrease in the 1973-1974 comparisons at Stations I, H, and A.- In the two-year comparison, 1973-1975, all three stations had significant differences, decreasing in quantity. Sulfate increased I significantly in only one instance: at Station I in the comparison of 1974-1975. Of the metals tested for significant difference in these year-to-year comparisons, lead had a consistent pattern of decreasing quantity. These differences were at significant levels at all stations. This implies that the inflowing water of Black Creek had a decreasing quantity each year, and this in turn was reflected in the waters of the impoundment and downstream with little or no change during impoundment retention. Aluminum levels significantly decreased at Station A in the comparison of 1973-1974 quantities but at no I other station or in any of the other year-to-year comparisons. In Table 3.4.5 significance of difference of annual mean values of water quality parameters with each year, using Station I as a baseline station, are compcred. The data in Table 3.4.5 are grouped under nonconservative substances: those nitrogen and phosphorus components which are biologically intereactive; a second group of conservative substances: silica, chloride, and sulfate which are nominally nonbiologically intereactive (althogh silica might be significantly changed by a diatom bloom); and a third group of metals. The metals selected appeared from cursory examination of the data to either be of I.- significant quantity or have indicated moderate to large levels of change. In each instance the t-test for significance of difference was carried out for all of the parameters. Frcm this analysis it is evident that none of the nonconservative or conservative constituents tested had changes at any statistically signi-ficant level whether they were within the impoundment or in downstream location of the impoundment as compared to the baseline Station I. However, of the five !I I
3-12 metals so tested, several trends are apparent in the date. ii.e quantity of copper at the impoundment StationsE and A and downstream at H, vent from nonsignificant differences in 1973 to a significant difference in 1974 (Station A i ce= pared to I) and to very significant differences when Station I was compared to E, A, and H in 1975. It i is noteworthy that the copper content at Station G did not show a significant difference in 1975. This station is upstream of the recirculating discharge point in Robinson Impoundment. , The difference, at a sig:tificznt level, of the quantity of iron between Stations I and H in 1973 was I .
.a lauger discernible in 1974 and just !
below the 95% level of probabil1*y in 1975. i Zine was at no time in either ' of the three years significantly different in any of tha compcrisons between I , and the other four stations. Aluminum, in contrast, started the series of years I with a significant differnnce between Station I and Stations G, E, and H, all increasing in downstraan direction, nin differenc.e disappeared in the 1974 comparison with Station I and appeared once note only in a comparison of Station I and H in 1975 where the difference, an increase at Station H , was just significant at the 95% level. Rob inson_Icooundtent Water Cuality Levels and_ National Water Ouality Criteria _ In the ultimate assessment of the Robinson Impound =ent or any other E g body of water used for industrial purposes, changes within the impoundment due to industrial operation are required to = sat water quality criteria whi ch d o not affect the indigenaus biota. Contemporary water quality criteria might still be considered in a state of flux and discussion as new informationgan asca.mbled to define, describa, and assess impact of change on the indigenous bieta within the characteristics of local waters. For those water quality constituents determined in Robinson Impound =ent, CP&L Exhibit 2.4 includes a description of race == ended 1983 water quality goals for the various water quality constituents in question, Specific applicability of thcae criteria to the highly colored acif.ic waters characteristic of the coastal drainage's of this area =ay not be valid due to the chelating nature of the humic acids in colored waters Mcwever, this comparison will at least establish some perspective as tc the
=eaning of concentrations found, the changes detected and their significance with reference to impact on indigenous aquatic life. I i G
3-13 I. For all of the water quality constituents indicated in the 1983 water quality goals, the saters of Robinson Impoundment would appear to meet all recor= ended water quality goals as defined at this time with one exception.
~
(The impact of temperature is not considered due to the pending decision by EPA on the 316 Demonstration exemption request.) The quantities of copper may be at the moment in excess of water quality goals not only within the impoundment but in the inflowing stream. The effects of these higher concen-trations of copper on the biota are unknown at the present time. I 3.5 Dissolved Oxygen
~
- 3. 5.1 Methods I Monthly dissolved oxygen (DO) sampling was initiated in April, 1973, at Station 2 of each of 5 transects, A, B C, D, and E, and at Stations F and C (Figure 3.3.1). Water samples were taken from surface, mid, and bottom depths and analyzed in the field using the Winkler titratian method.
Beginning in July, 1973, and continuing until March, 1976, portable dissolved oxgen meters were usec to sample DO on the surface and at 3-foot invervals at each sw.pling station established for water temperature sampling (Figure 3.3.1 and Figure 3.3.2). Exceptions co this schedule occurred when equipment malfunctior. precented sampling. Equipment used for sampline included: Yellow Spring instrument (YSI) 54 0xygen and Temperature Meter, International Biophysics Corporation (lBC) Temperature and Dissolved Oxygen Monitoring Unit, and Hydrolab (TDO-2), I 3.5.2 Results and Discussion The 1975 Robinson impoutdment dissolved oxygen concentrations from representative impoundment stations are presented as Table 3.5.3; and 1973,1974, 1975, and 1970 DC profiles are included in CP&L Exhibit 2.5. I I~ I
3-14 I : l Dissolved oxygen concentratioas folicwed seasonal patterns with Il generally uniform DO concentrations from surface to bottom between mid-fall and mid-spring. Dissolved oxygen concentrations below 4 mg/l at or near the j bottom of the deeper impoundment stations occurred during late spring, srmer, , and early fall, with temporary dissolved oxygen stratification occurring in i summer at deeper stations. l 3.6 Summary and Conclusions Fydrolocy and Morphology The Robinson impoundment is a man-made impoundment of a flowing body of water which is designed specifically for the retention, withdrawal, and re-circulation of water for cooling of the H. 3. Robinson Plant. Circulacion of water in the impoundment is similar to other man-made industrial reservoirs and impoundments ('a'underlich , 1971) . Thermal Seasonal variation of thermal patterns occurs in Robinson It/nouadment. In the lower impoundment, stratification occurs during the warmer, summer months although its intensity is most likely limited and influenced by the flows asacciated with the plant circulating water system. During all seasons of the E g year, heated discharge waters form a layer over considerably cooler bottom waters in the mid-impoundment area. Maximum thermal conditions occur during July and August while minimum thurnal condition occur during anuary and February (with normal plant operation). Annual variation in discharge temperatures is in excess of IS*C (27'F). In the event of an outage of Unit 2 during wintar periods seasonal variation of dis-charge temperatures could be in excess of 27'C (47'F). Natural temperatures within the impoundment have been recorded as high as 30*C (36*F) (Figures 3.3.12-3.3.14). Models indicate that equalibrium tem-g peratures, under average meteorological conditions, would be apprcximately 29.4'C E (S5*F), due solely to the affects of solar radiation; under extreme meteorological conditions, temperatures would approach 32'c (90'F). Modeled temperatures as a.
3-15
)
well as observed temperatures during summer indicate that surface temperatures at the dam are warmed by about 2 'c ( 3
- F-4
- F) .
_l; - a Water Chettistry The acid pt! of the water of Robinson Impoundment as well as the inflowing waters of Black Creek is characteristic of the drainages of the coastal areas of this region. The considerable quantities of humic caterials produce both the color as well as the acidic nature of these waters. Historically such waters have always been recognized as being of low biological activity. I The variations in qusntity of chemical constituents in Robinson _g' Impoundment, both of conservative at.d nonconservative nature, over the three B years of observation were statistically significant in only a few isolated instances. It would appear there was no overall pattern of cl from the I quality of the waters of Black Creek flowing into Robinson Impoundment, changes in the quality on passage through the impotndment and changes downstream of the impoundment that could be attributed to the operation of the impoundeent as a source of cooling water for the H. B. Robinson Steam Electric Plant. The exception to the pattern of differences which were nearly all at non-significant levels is an increase in quantity of copper at the stations affected by plant discharge. Other quantity variations appeared to be associated with some overall environmental factor since these changes were l found up- as well as downstream of Robinson Impoundment. All water quality consitituents of Robinson Impoundment, with one exception, appear to meet recommended federal watei quality goals. Data, as analyzed, indicate that copper, both in the inflowing stream as well as within the impoundment, is approaching levels that could exceed federal water quality criteria. Concentrations of copper sulfate (CuSO4 5H 2O) that have been reported as being algastatic are .024 .075 mg/l (as copper .008 .026 mg/1) (Fitzgerald, I_ 1971). This is with the concentration range found in 1975 in Robinson Impound-ment. However, if this reflects primarily an accumulation from natural sources I
3-16 in the drainage. area, the existing algal population is one that has the capability I of growth and survival under these circumstances. The question as to whether the magnitude of increase in temperature over ambient levels, as recorded in Robinson I=poundment at the cooling water discharge stations, significantly affects chemical reactions has been extensive-ly reviewed (Lee and Veith, 1971). Such temperature variations might affect 3 both equilibria conditions, rates of equilibria for acid-base reactions, pre-cipitations, gas transfer, oxidation-reduction, sorption and biochemical reactions. It has been concluded that the thermal effects that might be found ; in the cooling water discharge f om a stream electric generating plant have only minimi eff ects on such chemical quailibria reaction rates and little or l no effect on chemical parameters of water quality. It has also been noted I l that whereas terperature might increase growth rates of algae, it is the nutrient flux rather than temperature which establishes the total biomass that might be found during the maximum growth period. Dissolved Oxveen In deeper areas during war.ner periods, temporary oxygen depletion j occurs in most man-made i=poundments which do not receive thermal discharge. Throughout other parts of the year, generally uniform DO concentra-ions are g noted within each water column due to the natural tendency of an impoundment 5 to mix during these periods (Frey, 1963). Robinson Impoundment DO concentrations generally follow these patterns. Dissolved oxygen stratification is temporarily established during sucecr, but its intensity is most likely limited and influenced by the flows associated with the plant circulating water system. Isolated instances of oxygen depletion at deeper stations is most likely associated with the decomposition of bottom sediments. I l I a
3-17 [ 3.7 Literature Cited Eayless, J. D. 1966. Coastal Lakes I, 1965 surveys. North Carolina I; Water Resources Co ission, Raleigh, K. C. Beck, K. C. 1972. Sediment water interactions in some Georgia I rivers and estuaries. School of Geophysical Sciences and Environmental Resources Center, Georgia Institute of Technology. 1-x, 97 pp.
; Crowell, T. E. 1966. Coastal Lakes II, 1965 surveys. North Carolina Water Resources Co= mission, Raleigh, N. C.
. Davis, J. R. 1966. Lake Waccamav, 1965 survey. North Carolina Water Resources Co _.ission, Raleigh, N. C.
I Edinger, John E. , Derek K. Brady and John C. Geyer 1974 and transport in the environment. Report No. 14 Heat exchange Johns Hopkins Dr.iversity for Electric Power Research Institute, Palo Alto, Calif. Edinger, Jonn E., and John C. Geyer, 1965. Heat exchange in the environment. Repor6 No. 2. Johns Hopkins University f or Edison Electric Institute, New York. Fitzgerald, George P. 1971. Algicides. Eutrophication information program literature review no. 2. The University of Wisconsin Water Resources Center, Madison, Wis. / m-Gerking, Shelby, D., 1963. Central states. Pages 239-268 in David G. Frey,ed. Limnology in North America. University of Wisco . sin Press , Madison, Wis. Graves, Willard L. and John C. Geyer. 1973. Cooling pond temperature I ' models. Report No. 8. Institute, New York. JohnsHopkins University f or Edison Electric I Kcup, L. E., G. D. McKee, E. W. Naabe and R. W. Warner. 1970. Water quality effects of leeching f rom sub.nerged soils. Jcur. Am. Water Works Assoc. 62:391-396. Kuenzler, E. J. 1976. Annual averages from seasonal patterns of dissolved oxygen, nutrients, and metals in natural and channelized 3 swamp streams. A paper presented at workshop on Freshwater Forested I,. Wetland Research, Deparrment of Environmental Engineering Sciences, University of Florida, Gainsville, Fla. 15-16. I Lee, G. F. and G. D. Veith. Effects of thermal discharges on the chemical parameters of water quality and eutrophication. Proc. Int. Symp. Identification and measurement of pollutants in the environment. Ottawa. 287-294. National Academy of Sciences and National Academy of Engineering. 1972. Water quality criteria 1972. The Environme.ntal Protection Agency, I Washington, D. C. 594 pp.
3-18 I I Reid, George K. 1961. Ecology of inland veters and estuaries. Van Nostrand Reinhold Conpany, New York. 375 pp. l 5 Tilly, L. J. 1973a. Comparative productivii.; ' _ . rolina lakes. Am. Mid. Natur1. 90(2):356-065. U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Cor: mission.1975. Final environmental statement, H. 3. Robinson Steam Electric Plant Unit 2. U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Coc=1ssion, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulations. 3-12. Weiss, C. M. and E. J. Kuen:ler 1976. The trophic state of North Carolina lakes. Water Resources Research Institute, Report No.119, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, N. C. Wunderlich, Walter O. 1971. The dynamics of density-stratified reservoirs. Pages 219-231 in Gordon E. Hal., ed. Reservoirs fisheries and li:mology. American Fisheries Society, g Washington, D. C. 3 I I 5 I I I I I
3-19 Table 3.2.1 Physical parameters of Robinson Impoundment and Black Creek Normal Water Level (%1) Elevation 67 m (200 ft) Capacity at El 5.06 x 107 m3 (41,000 acre-ft) Area at W1 . 911 ha (2,250 acres) Average Depth at El 5.5 m (18 ft) Maximum Depth at El 12 m (40 ft) Maximum Length at n1 12 km (7.5 mi) Width at Plant at W1 1,210 m (4,000 ft) Design Low Water Level Elevation 64 m (210 ft) High Water Level Elevation 67.5 m (221.67 ft Design Flood Flow 1,133 m3/s (40,000 ft /s) Crest of Dam Elevation 70 m (230 f t) Maximu= Height of Dam I Low Level Release Intake and 21 m Elevation 54 m Elevation 56.5 m (70 ft) (178 ft) (185.5 ft) Ratention Time of Impoundment: For Average Creek Flow 85 Days For Average Circulating Water Flow 15.C Days Average Discharge to Black Creek (1960-1974) 6.8 m3/s (140 ft3 / s', Maximum Recore.ed Discharge to Black Creek $6.9 m3/ s (2,010 ft3/s) Minimum Recorded Discharge I to Black Creek Drainage Area at Dam 1.4 m3/s 448 km2 (51 ft 3/ s) (173 m12 ) I I I I I I
1 l .I Y~o e a r ut ma ir u r
)
F 5
)
F 5
)
F 0
)
F
\,
l s - ne 5 6 5 e i , 4 ( 4 ( 3 4 r x i p ( C ( ( d d e Mm T e C 7 C 7 0 1 C 3 C 7 uao t t r aa p rd p e py a r n o mbt a i c e r m mu ut e r ) F
)
F
)
F l
)
F
)
F e i d '* et
.cnt s
e s a u ma 1 7 l '9 1 d ec e ed a r m i r 9 9 l 9 9 t if . c i x e ( ( ( ( ( av l e n ap C C C C C ueea d i Mm * * * "
- t h n s e 3 6 4 7 3 c st a r
/ T 3 3 4 3 3 u a c o m l
,sa e u f s m 2 wg e i
x 2 r s a ss t d a a m ed t i eh e r o i nt c r nU os c h i t w s t nui ot r i ae ae upr rP ) F
)
F
)
F
)
F
)
F U f oo o f t l h ni se d i n r e
* * * *
- tu uAt v u t mu 6 6 6 6 8 p e t
t t e a p l ceo uTi F e4 g2 l
- (
3 C ( 3 C 3 ( C ( 3 C ( 1 C pt t u u od o ri n nd f o h W n e l a 2 2 2 2 1 r el e ar n i t + i + ewe n mee
< < < < < woue d o rve opf h e i
oA w p et t t N t er o a f e nh o n u ob et rt t c h e e u wot t r l t l n e . f s aal wd n dl e oar p ) r l o i ne F r a i r ) owe
) t
- u m t u F F eioh 2 c r ao ) ) * )
- pt pt c o l uI s F F 5 F 7 r 7 o n t d * * * . goom (
c4 o 6 4 4 2 2 n pt o Cd u2i ( ( i o r
- a r C
- 3 s
l 5 7 C r rdf 4h F ne ( ( * ( upe r e l h iP C C 5 C '5 d nl oy
* . yr e t l d at 2 3 2 4 1 t l v l r
o mi ro w i< f
+
t 4 pt tu. a ) a c e cer F r e r s u N _ .* d cert xr ei2 o d t t
- e 4 n 5 g
( e
)
F o eeir C e
- u r r n e
- g 6 s r eU t 3 n n u uw a i) n o c sw 1ah 2 1
t F oe s cl a f c ( n* i ng oan ,r o C o( t a n ) ) ) ) ) o e " c at i F F F F F n a5f st 7 C und * * * *
- o c7 na n* t aa 8 8 8 6 8 i 9d oi g o ct e t e1 e i d u ss usR 1 1 1 3 l a g r t e ne l n ( ( ( ( ( u r ,i am d l
i r FI y C C C C C b u l * * * *
- t a2 u i m e ch1 q e ri ot l nr 1 1 1 2 uc e a R a aeu 1< +
1 . c r meo t t 1< l sr r e v , x
,e r wll i i e n ,de e I
I p ot d b. e i
) u r l yr y
.me N e b
F e e e l. r l 1 t " h c w f iu l 1 8 t e f a c a e D s o nc n g 1 f ( onu r 2 oo o 1 a C o o i s e i s
.r r 3 e e e F
- d h t ar a K 1 ud i c u c
. v n y w g 1e e1 n c t c 3 a o a o r n n - t U oar O ey i
w T a o o 1 ec y >'
^ 3 4 t l h i t h el e l l a l t c t t t l e p bi t i n s a a aa S p e l t m i
Td W t t t o a e S D S S ac m t ll ll
a ,. .. . . I 3-21 Table 3.3.2 Effects of solar radiation vs. plant operation on temperatures
-I in Black Creek Baseline Periods May - Novemb er , 19 59 I SC 23 average water temperature US 1 average water temperature average at =
23.4*C 19.3*C 4.l*C (74.1*F) (66.7'F) ( 7.4*F) December, 1959 - April, 1960 SC 23 average water te=perature 10.4*C (50.8'F) I. US 1 average water temperature average at = 9.0*C 1.4*C (4 8. 2
- F)
(2.6*F) At's prior to operation of either Unit.s 1 er 2 4 attributed to the effects of solar radiation. Operational Periods
~ May - November , 1972, 1973, and 1974 SC 23 average water t emod ature 25.4 (77.S*F)
US 1 average water t%pt ature 19.6 (67.2*F) average AT = 5.9C*(10.6*F) December - April, 1C 2, 1973, av 1974 SC 23 average water te=perature 15.7*C (60.3*F) US 1 average ll.1*C (52.0*F) average LT = 4.6*C (8.3*F) LT for 1972, 1973, and 1974 is attributed to the effects of plant operation and solar radiation. Oterational Periods Compared with Baseline Periods May to November average AT 1972, 1973, and 1974 (plant operation I and solar radiation) average at 1959 (solar radiation) 5.9'C*(10.6*F) 4.l*C (7.4*F) effect of plant operation 1.8'C (3.2*F) I- December to April average AT 1972, 1973, and 1974 (planc operation and 4.6*C (8.3*F) I solar radiation average at 1959 and 1960 (solar radiation) effect of plant operation 1.4*C 3.2*C (2.6*F) (5.7*F)
- Actual values were recorded in Fahrenheit. In converting values to centigrade, accuracy to the tenths decimal place was lost. Comuutation of average. LT's *C was derived by conversion fro 'T to *C.
I
Table 3.3.3 Meteorological data for thermal modeling Average Average Dry Bulb Wet Bulb Temperature Tetuperature Wind Speed l'e rc en t Solar Radiation flrunt's thmth UC "F OC "F km/hr ml/hr Sunshine W/m2 BTU / Day /ft 2 Coefficient
.lanuary 8.3 46.9 5.3 41.6 11.3 7.0 59 156 1190 0.71 February 9.1 48.4 5.8 42.5 12.4 7.7 60 202 1540 0.71 tia rc h 12.4- $4.4 8.6 47.5 13.5 8.4 65 290 2210 0.72 April 17.6 63.6 13.0 55.4 13.8 8.6 68 340 2590 0.72 May 22.3 72.2 17.3 63.2 11.3 7.0 67 381 2905 0.73 v i .Inue 26.5 /9.7 21.3 70.3 10.9 6.8 64 387 2950 0.74 July 27.6 81.6 22.6 72.6 10.8 6.7 64 387 2950 0.74 August 26.9 80.5 22.4 72.4 9.8 6.1 67 363 2765 0.73 September 24.1 75.3 19.9 67.8 10.1 6.3 64 313 2385 0.73 October 13.2 64 7 14.3 57.8 9.8 6.1 68 247 1880 0.72 thiv e:nbe r 12.1 53.7 8.9 48.0 10.5 6.5 64 193 1470 0.72 December 8.0 46.4 5.2 41.4 10.6 6.6 63 152 1155 0.71 4
EM M M M M M MR M M M M M M , M
M M M .M M .M M M m .M M M M M ' M M M - i Table 3.4.1 Water quality of Robinson impoutuiment. and comparison wit.h coastal pinin waters Rchinson Impotndment . N.E. Cape Creeping Sat 111gR. Ca. Swa*E, N.C.3 Par S.C. {od Data Average _ 1973-1975 Fear, N.C. j , 1969 1970 1974-1975 1973 f STA. I STA M S n._E STA. A STA. H 197_0 5.3 5.4 5.3 5.9 4.8 5.4 5.5-6.4 7.7 pli 5.1 5.2 - - H.O. Alk. mg/l - -
- 15 Alk. (CaCoj) mg/l 1.9 1.3 1.8 1.3 1.7 8.0 - -
0.6 0.3 0.6 .25 - - .10 - Mt3-N mg/l 0.4 0.3
.22 .22 1.2 - - .04 .035 NOj-N mg/l .20 .21 .2) '
.34 .39 .32 .36 2.0 - - .48 -
Klel-N mg/l .28 .008
.07 08 .05 .06 - - .04 Total Phosphate-P mg/l .09 .'2
- - - 7.1 Dissolved Oxygen eg/l - - - - - -
- - - 2.5 Secchi Depth (meters) 1 1 1 1 1 C.O.D. mg/l 22 25 26 28 24 - - -
Total Solide og/l i41 131 141 135 142 - - -
- Total Dis. Solids ag/l 99 97 101 103 100 - - -
** Total Susp. Solids ag/l 26 23 23 20 26 - - -
Sulfate og/l 2.64 2.61 3.39 3.05 3.63 - .8 1.1 - - Chloride og/l 2.86 2.68 2.45 2.77 2.82 - 5.8 5.4 - - Fe ug/l 639 714 842 830 868 - 750 1250 1700 - 237 332 100 420 700 - Al ug/l 303 287 325 -
- Y 13.0 12.2 12.6 12.6 12.6 - - - -
Cr 4 6 ug/l Cu ug/l 27.7 32.8 57.5 47.9 42.4 - - - - - U 1867 2034 1940 2125 - 4760 2800 4700 - Na ug/l 1925 - - Zn ug/l 60 39 54 128 47 - - - I I Keup et al., 1970 NOTE: For the putpone of statistical evaluation all data reported 2 as "less than" the reporting limit was assigned a finite g 3977 number equal to the mid-point between zero and the reporting 3 limit. It is therefore possible for mean values to fall Kuenzler, 1976 4 below the detection limit and/or contain significant figures
- 9 which are not indicated in the original analysis results.
5 Tilly, 19 6b (*) Total filterable residue and (**) total nonfilterable residue (4/73 - 7/73: 0.75 - 1.25 y filter; 8/73 - 12/75: 1.20 p filter). l
Tal21e 3.4.1 (con t Inued) Alligator Catfish Jones Fond Salters take Wact ww lake, N.C.6 N.C.0 Singletarg take lake, N.C.0 Crest N.C.gake La b N.C.I N.C. N.C.I 1965 1965 1974 1975 1974 1975_ 1974 1957 1958 1_92 1960 1965 pil 4.b 4.7 4.4 3.3 4.4 3.4 4.5 6.6 6.8 4.6 ti.u. Alk. og/l - - - -
- 6. 8 4.6 15.0 24.3 20.0 - -
Alk. (Caco 3) ag/l - - - - - - 0.1 2.4 5.0 10.0 30.5 16.3 NHyN mg/l - -
.01 .07 .04 .04 .03 NO3 -N mg/l - - * - - -
1.1 - Kjel-N m3/1
.39 -
.29 .48 .25 .31 .32 - - - - -
Total P60sphate-P og/l - -
<.005 .007 4.005 .006 <.005 - - -
39 - Dissolved Onygen og/l 7.9 6.1 8.0 8.1 9.2 8.9 9.0 8.1 7.9 8.5 1.9 6.1 Seccht Depth (metere) - C.O.D. mg/l - 1 .6 1 .6 .7 - 1.3 1.2 - - Total Solida ag/l - - - - - - - - - - - -- { s-l e Total Dis. Solids og/l - - - - -- - - - - - - l eaTotal Susp. SoltJe og/l - - - - - - - - - - - - l Sultate eg/l - - - - - - - - - - - - Chloride sig/l - - - - - - - - - - - - Fe ug/l - 345 165 320 - - - - - Al us/l - - - - - - - - - - Cre6'ug/l - - - - - - - - - - Cu ug/l - - - - - - - - - - - - He ug/l - - - - - - - - - - - - Zn ug/l - - - - - - - - - - - - l l 6 NOTE: Crowell 1965 For tiee pur pose of statistical evaluation all dat a regerted 7 Bayless, 1965 as "less than" the reporting Ilmit was assigned a finite d number equal to the mid-point tietween zero and the reporting Weiss and truenzler, 1976 limit. It is theref ore possible f or mean values e fall 9 Davis, 1965 bela.w tiee detection limit and/or contain signif f e - t figures which are not indicated in the orf giual analysis mults. (*) Total filterable reeldue and (.**) total nonfilterallo residue (4/73 - 7/73: 0.75 - 1.25 y filterl 8/73 - 32/75: 1.20 p filter). l 33 m m m M M M M M M M
M M M M M M M M M M # M M M 'M Table 3.4.2. Black Creek annual mean value water quality parametars Inflow (Stations I, J) and Discharge (Stations it, K), Surf ace Samples 1973, 1974, 1975 All Values mg/l T = Total, D - Dissolved K Station 1 J 11 73 74 75 74 75 Year 73 74 75 74 (12) (3) _19)_ ( (11) (12) , (4) (12) (N) (9) (11) 115 92 120 201 112 222 T-Solids P5 118 203 72 60 68 125 7 *. 132 T-Volatile Solids 52 55 121 10 28 35 21 33 10 28 35 17
*T-Suspended Solids 145 54 61 84 145 58 158 Y
- T-Dissolved Sol ids 60 80 31 20 8 16 33 20 19 21 0 Con 14
.282 .140 .793 .205 .185 .162 .335 T-N2 . 178 .209
.296 .140 1.19 .066 . 316 .253 .555 .260 NO 3- .117
.014 .036 .133 038 .018 .0 10 069
.095 .037 N113
.041 .169 .018 .028 .067 .029
.184 .063 .020 T-p'asphate-p
.021 .010 .007 .010 070 .010 .022 TD-Pho ;.' ate-p .011 .033 007
.019 .102 009 .008 414 Y-Ortho "hosphat- n .087 .009 .010
.005 .005 006 .010 005 TD-Ort ho Phosphate-p .005 .006 005 .005 3.52 4.06 3.48 3.65 3.49 2.91 3.14 D-Si 4.14 3.82 2.54 3.19 3.73 2.98 2.85 2.70 3.57 Cl- 3.14 2.43 1.75 3.27 2.48 3.66 1.83 3.00 4.00 4.26 2.77 SO4 MO 69 ! . 17 8, ,
T-Alk 4.30 700 1.42 1.33 4.22
.738 1.27 .997 1.11 .914 1.51 1.72 1 . 18 T- Ca .857 1.88 1.901 2.19 2.12 2.02 2.15 2.61 '.59 T -Na 2.02 .513
.487 443 481 468 .513 .547 7.'> .47 ) 456 N(ITE: For the purpose of statistical evaluation all data reported as " fess than" the reporting litit was assigned a finite number equal to the mid-point between zero and the reporting limit. It is therefore possible for mean values to fall helnw the detection limit and/or contain significant figures which are not Indicated in the original analysis results.
(*) Total(4/73
. filterable total nn r hto residue - 7/73:residue 0.75 - and 1.25(**)
y I llter; R/u/3titNs./
- />!
1.20 p filter)
Yy* M 6
} 484 055494205 5 52 7 1
( 1 4 3 2 2 2 52 9 0 0 0 9 0 0 0 0 2. ".
'3 2 2 6 0082 6 M
_ 453 K
)_ g4 4 552 6 5
01 M 44 o4 - 02 2 4 03 - 7( c, 0 1 000 2 00 998 _ 542 g s 1 d n e e i r t t u . r erl gs s ) 5 ot ol i t e 455 65 57 592055 pi paf l l 52 1 4 2 1 2 2 62 1 7 02 2 enef u p 000900003 0000829 m a 7 1 ( 453 rS r a f one et ar t s M S t ah c a t sis e ) dd ef i c U ) 5 ed uis T 7 054528537 01 0 f a r N ( I I 41 7 ! 04 2 7 2 3 1 21 003 3 0007 000030000431 I ai nnl ny l g a a gl via M u ( . . . . so sn S y _ 853 ns r n a
, i t
i oaeazeil n
)
K d 5 t s aan maa M i b r 39 1y 1 1 2 2 g 4282 44 2 4 2 5 3 5 5 5 )A f 3
- l uwer eoog ni t n I
I Td u 7( o,0 0 8 0 0 0 0 3 0. O. . 0 8 at wf ci vit r s e 5 emeero n o d v nl l l i bl o b/ e M i ao a t idh t 5 s cgnunt ta7 9 ipis t 5 i nisa
) r 3 7 557 5 03 t i oo n S1 D 43 l 2 - 02 2 3 - 1 - st ppt i
(
,tp= J 7( 9000 1 00 25 i r - i O. 0 . . . t ud emd e4 e 35 api ri e g7 cD t emol t r 9 x sr f a a1 E . eenc h l f eh r oi c ,l a )
6 oh t eid s3/ t 455955557 5055 t h t n i7 go 52 1 22 62 2 62 67 02 2 4 e ot ci 03 e D9 1 aT 7 1 ( _ 0.G.0 6 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 2
. spal o "n t
st t d s= _ 453 i e o n e rh a d n a l uT ut ut p qI ee M
) a 5 se h r J V ) 7 55 852 352201 0 es t a 1 4 1 02 2 62 3 52 91 03 3 h er .
, l 7l 00060000300003 06 t l et wh I
s l A ( . 951 r" osuieh bi oc mml i n F anl b w o _ 5 i _ J t ] 961 7 2 3557 2 0 : a 1 3 24 2 462 3 4 0 E S t 3 9 7 ( 00050000200 . 0 3 T O M ( 5 N w ) l o n_r oaN
)
d f l e( e n t Y u I a n S t i t n ' o ( c 2 y 4 s t 3 s i r e d e C n i nP2 Z AAiNNlgi
- uueib nnl l t d b l
b xCCF e - - - - - - - - - - - - n ai ulpT i a T ll TDTTTTDTDTTDh M I
M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M Table 3.4.3 Robinson Impoundment annual inean values water quality parameters 1973. 1974 1975 All valwee og/l T - Total. D - Dissolved ,
~St at ton C E A Year 71 74 15 7) 74 7 5-- il 74 75
_IM) U L__ (11) _._._1121 _._ W ,_ (il7 (121 _ _39) fil) _ ____fl2) _ Surface /Botton S/B 5/B __ 5/_B 5/8 _5 / B 5/5 5/B 5/8 5/B T-Sottds 71/93 125/155 181/197 7R/75 126/134 200/195 69/77 112/125 I PN 200 T-volatile Solida $5/59 65/91 155/122 57/38 74/61 134/122 51/50 67/El 131/142 O ve T-suspended Solide 6.1/22 29/52 )!/37 9/8 26/31 31/32 1/10 22/27 27/34 e T-ptssolved Solide 51/56 84/96 143/131 51/50 90/R9 148/136 56/5) 97/97 144/157 000 19/23 13/34 21/21 22/20 31/40 24/24 20/20 26/26 15/25 T-N2 .511/.))) .249/.700 .292/.275 .420/.329 .520/.237 .272/.22) 455/.437 .267/.29) .279/.292 NO3-N .068/.05) .353/.)l0 .199/.189 .079/.084 .311/.110 .265/.2)* .089/.075 .))2/.265 228/.249 mf 3-N .034/.041 .014/.210 .014/.012 .054/.055 .I25/.0a0 .015/.012 .045/.047 .047/.05) .011/.030 T-rhosphate P .1R3/.174 .019/.071 .019/.026 .221/.237 .015/.065 .028/.028 .IIM/.129 .074/.012 .029/.029 ! itb f'hos pha t e-r .005/.006 .031/.011 .022/.017 .004/.009 .01/.009 .017/.019 .025/.008 .010/.009 .022/.018 T-Ortho rhosphate .095/.069 . 0819 /. 0 1 4 .014/.007 .380/.04) .007/.009 .001/.007 .044/.081 .007/.007 .001/.n08 TD-Orthe rhosphate .005/.005 .005/.005 .007/.006 .005/.006 .005/.006 .005/.006 .00 /.00F, .007/.006 . 00 7.* T0 7 n-51 3.60/3.1) 1.21/3.11 3.22/).45 2.62/2.m4 3.38/).36 3.291).40 2.47/2.62 3.77/).45 3.25/3.50 Cl- / 2.4 ) 2.51/2.86 2.52/2.02 3.03/).10 2.89/).01 2 23/2.14 2.77/2.70 1.02/2.95 2.56/2.24 5"4 3.2p/2.98 3.20 2.94/2.81 1.85/3.68 4.On/2.85 3.$n/).19 2.75/2.37 3.42/3.42 3.01/s.51 2.81/2.27 T-Alk 2.35/).31 900/.700 .78)/.592 4.13/5.07 1.25/1.20 681/I.04 2.37/4.26 1.10/1.05 .750/.692 T-Ca .836/.8%) .697/.687 4.21/3.62 1.08/l.04 1.07/.'867 1.78/1.35 1.09/l.s#4 .988/.96) 1.34/1.25 T-Nm 1.95/1.99 I.82/1.91 1.85/1.67 2.03/2.19 2.102/1.97 1.96/1.92 2.056/2.197 1.926/2.216 3.87/1.84 T-Ng 414/.42) .181/.42) 450/.438 457/.591 472/.442 .483/.486 .451/.513 454/.474 482/.482 f60TE: For the purpose of statistical evaluation all data reported as *'less t hen ** the reporting 11stt was assigned a finite - mmber equal to the ste point between zero and the reporting ifelt. It to there'ere pesetble for seen volwee to fall below the detection Ilott and/or contein significant fiswree which are not indicated in the original analyste results. (*) Total filterable reeldue end (**) total nonfiltetable reefdue (4/73 - T/73: 0.75 - 1.25 > filtert 8/7) - 12/75: 1.20 y filter).
Table 3.4.3 (coutinued) 1973. 1974, 1975 All Values ag/l Encept plE amt Terbiditf (NTU) T - Total. D = Dissolved Statfon C E A Year 73 74 75 i) 14 75 71 74 75 _l!9 l9L_ dllL_ (12). _ (9) (llL_ (12) _R . (II) ( l Q_ surface /sotto. s/s s/n s/a s/s s/n s/s s/n s/s sta ttc a-C a .016/.017 .007/.007 .014/.014 .017/.017 .001/.007 .014/.016 .017/.017 .001/.007 .014/.014 T-Cu .019/.045 .029/.029 .032/.028 .056/.057 .053/.039 .062/.059 .053/.075 .042/.051 .049/.049 tv-Cu .021/.021 .025/.025 .025/.025 .021/.023 .025/.025 .025/.04) .021/.021 .025/.025 .028/.025 T-fe .775/.65) .587/.968 .780/.669 .934/1.02 .727/.918 .669/.842 .867/l.21 .852/.910 .784/l.04 1 - Ma- .022/.022 .025/.025 .025/.025 022/.022 .025/.025 .C25/.025 .022/.022 .025/ 325 .025/.025 y T-Fb .044/.045 .012/.012 .025/.025 .045/.045 .012/.012 .025/.025 .G45/.045 .012/.012 .025/.025 8 T-- Zn .038/.011 .034/.072 .047/.042 .046/.064 .057/.054 .057/.057 .168/.056 .132/.045 062/.042 $ D-2n .025/ 025 .025/.025 .025/.025 .025/.025 .025/.025 .C25/.025 .025/.025 .025/.025 .025/.025 T-Al .312/.}43 .336/.794 .210/.297 .337/.43) 404/.391 .251/.254 .276/.527 .301/.375 .236/.359 th a t .045/.042 00s/.012 .097/.010 .025/.025 . 00'e f . 00 5 .084/.082 .025/.025 .055/.005 .078/.085 T -ils .0005/.0005 .0005/.4005 .0006/.0005 .0005/.0005 .0005/.0005 .0005/.0005 .0005/.0005 .00e*J.0005 .0005/.0007 T-t:1 -/- .037/.0)! .025/.025 -/- .031/.011 .025/.025 -/- .050/.011 .025/.025 D- H i .031/.01) .030/.010 .025/.025 .033/.037 .03/.010 .025/.025 .033/.01) .030/.030 .025/.025 Hasdneem -/- 6.7/7.0 3. 7/1. 6 -/- 6/5/6.4 4.18/4.16 -/- 6.9/7.5 4.9/4.4 pH 5.4/5.3 5.1/5.1 5.3/5.2 6.0/5.7 5.0/5.0 5.3/5.3 5.9/5.8 4.9/5.0 5.5/5.3 Tusbidity -/- 1.3/2.6 5.6/3.4 -/- 3.5/3.0 3.7/3.5 -/- 3.0/3.0 2.8/4.9 I f*0TE: los el.e purpose of statistical evaluation all date reported me "less than" the seporting limit was aselgeed a flatte emeber equal to t he old potut between aero and the reporting limit. It le therefore possible for mean values to is11 teelow the detection limit and/or contain sigaf ficant figures wesich are not indicated in tl.e originst analyste results. O J - . EM M - M M M M "M M M m m ,- M
_ _ _ . . . . . . . ~_ _ _ _ __ unus umn sus uma ums a nas smet num mL2 m m num num uma sum stntions I, A, and II. Table 3.4.4 Comparison of the annual means of selected water quality parameters at t - Test for Significance of Difference of Mean Values of Surface Samples Significant at 95% Probability t>2. l* Significant at 99I Probability t>2.9** Direction of Change; (+) increase. (-) elecrease Years Compared 1973/1974 1974/1975 1973/1975 Station I A II I A II 1 'A II 1 Parameter l Total - Solids 1.5 2.7*(+) 1.1 2.9**(+) 1.8 2.8*(+) 4.2**(+) 4.l**(*) 3.4**(+) Total - Volatile Solids 0.3 0.9 0.4 3.2**(+) 2.9*(+) 2.8*(+) 3.4**(+) 3.9**(+) 2.7**(+)
*
- Tot al - Suspended Solids 1.4 1.2 1.5 0.4 0.3 0.4 1.9 1.7 2.l*(+)
- Total - Dissolved Solids 1.1 2.2*(+) 1.0 2.4*(+) 1.7 2.2*(+) 3.4**(4) 3.4**(4) 2.7*(*)
2.I*(+) 1.0 2.2*(+) 1.3 0.9 1.8 1.2 1.6 0.9 COD 2.0 1.7 1.5 0.9 0.2 0.4 0.9 1.5 1.6 Total-N7 NO -N 2.6*(+) 3.2**(+) 5.3**(+) i.7 1.3 0.9 1.2 4.0**(+) 3.1**(+) 3 1.0 0.1 1.1 3.5**(-) 2.7*(-) 2.3 1.3 2.1 1.4 NH -N 3 Total Phosphate-P 1.0 1.4 1.4 0.5 3.7**(4) 2.0 1.2 !.2 1.3 Total Dissolved Phosphate-IX).8 1.6 1.8 1.8 3.2**(+) 0.2 1.0**(+) 0.) 4.3**(+) Dissolved silica 0.3 1.5 0.2 0.3 0.6 0.2 0.6 1.1 0.01 Chloride 0.2 0.5 0.2 1.4 0.8 0.2 1.7 0.5 0.5 Total Alkclinity 3.l**(-) 2.0 3.0**(-) 1.1 1.4 1.0 2.2*(-) 2.6*(-) 3.3**(-) Sulfate 0.9 0.4 0.2 2.2*(+) 0.4 2.2 0.6 0.6 1.2 Total I.ead 2. l * (-) 2.6*(-) 2.6*(-) 2.4*(-) 2.4*(-) 2.4*(-) 4.3**(-) 4.8**(-) 4.9**(-) Total Aluminum 1.1 3.2**(-) 0.3 0.9 1.1 0.2 0.8 1.7 0.2 NOTE: (*) Total filterable residue and (**) total nonfilterable residue (4/73 - 7/73: 0.75 - 1.25 u filter; 8/73 - 12/75: 1.20 p filter).
=
,! , f ltli!' rhtlffjtlt[! lr(tII! !j;!(it [!1i :F ;! m m a vO n a m . I 1
- 0*
I
/ 303 02 027 4 01 0. l a E
I 1 1 01 0 001 32002 m u C
- A 5
- 0 s
n
/
I 082 92. . 35 8 l 92 09 m i t o 7 5 00000 001 3 0000 u 9 a 1
- t E
- 05 S / 1 32 91 31 7 34504 s I . . . . . . m s
01 001 01 1 61 000 u r 21 2 4 06 e G 1 0010 3 60 5 8000 t / . e I 00000 000 1 01 01 m a r I a I
/ 1 12 04 246 6881 9 p
y I . . 0001 1 000 O0000 m n i l t e e 3
- u w A 047 06 038 2 9914 a t / . .
o es
- 4 I 1 U01 1 000 20001 g B e** 7 r l l 9 9 ep 1 05 e cm22 E 1 43 04 541 952 00 t > / . . .
a n eS a ?( t I 1 01 1 1 000 1 0000 w r yy m e eet t 5601 3 u c a f cii f al l if i i
/
I G 77493 00000 7 1 01 0 8 001 00 n f D rbb r uaa u f Sbb a s o oo
- m d
e f r r eoPP / I I 00414 621 5253
- 8 2 u t
c I . . . . c ns%1 1 1 001 001 021 03 ae59 s e cu99 l i l 4 u e s f at t 1, vaa / A 66834 7 7 0 49035 m i f r I 00001 1 00 1 1 1 0I gnt t 3 o ann 7 s i S eaa M cc 9 E 2 n a 1 n r i i / 48620 61 2 9243 1 a ol f f I . . . e f aii U0001 1 01 1 2 1 03 m unn t ngg l
- a snii 0 s u eASS t 90007 525 31 922 u n T /
I 01 1 01 000 01 1 02 a n - a d t e e r P hI a - t p e n m s t f o o e a oi C c h t n p sa nt s n a s o s m u oS s i o b t s P- 1 h e c n i n t u - n a ri a S ed a c a t n t e t i a m pd av s a me S e e l t
- m v gnnhl r n or C ap i oe epo u S t
b r g gs s S i e pn e1 m i a a t ooos d p on a u m v l r rhi e e e o r i
- e. l 5 o r i tf t l' D v vd e CI ZI A
.c e i l i l i t 4 1 s l 4 1it l l t or a l l l l l a a a aa 1
n a - - a a a s ut 3 o t 3 yt t v s a l s t t t t t d C oOl oo r i h u l o a o o o en - t i l a Tl e DCS a l TTTT l a n t t s t a b a , o n e m TA J t C o M a e
< fI * !
- M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M Table 3.5.1 1975 11. B. Robinson dissolved oxygen concentrations (mg/l) and percent saturatfor from representative impoundment stations D-2 E-2 F G A-2 B-2 C-2 0.0. % Sat. D.O. I Sat- D.O. I Sat. 0.0. I Sat. D.O. I Sat. D.O. I Sat. D.O. I Sat.
January 16, 1975 ! 10.2 98 9.8 94 9.9 97 7.5 100 8.9 100 10.7 107 13.2 107 Surface j 10.0 97 9.7 96 9.7 95 9.7 101 9.0 100 12.8 112 12.8 103 Middle 96 10.0 103 9.4 102 l ~l . 3 112 12.6 102 aottom 10.2 98 9.8 97 9.7 February 5, 1975 85 8.8 86 8.1 79 9.6 83* 11.1 88 Surface 8.9 86 8.8 83 8.7 85 8.6 84 8.4 87 10.8 87 11.0 87 Middle 8.7 84 8.7 83 8.8 8.7 84 8.8 85 8.8 85 8.6 84 8.7 87 10.6 86 14.0 112 Bottom tiarch 5, 1975 8.5 83 8.5 84 8.8 90 7.6 82 7.4 83 6.9 68 10.4 95 Surface 8.3 80 8.5 80 8.7 86 7.9 82 7.4 83 9.2 77 10.4 90 Midd!c 8.0 76 8.4 81 8.5 83 8.5 84 8.0 87 9.0 75 10.2 88 Bottom Y May 12, 1975 '
- M 103 8.4 101 8.0 93 8.4 100 8.8 105 Surface 8.6 101 8.? 98 8.6 8.2 93 8.2 94 7.8 88 8.5 102 8.1 96 8.5 103 7.2 87 i Middle 97 7.9 93 7.0 75 7.0 73 l Bottom 5.2 58 5.4 60 4.8 53 8.3 June 10, 1975 8.1 8.1 102 104 7.5 108 7.8 110 8.0 95 Surface 7.8 98 102 '7 . 7 104 7.4 94 7.5 109 8.1 105 7.9 93 Middle 7.3 91 8.1 102 8.2 28 6.8 S4 5.5 69 7.3 100 6.8 84 7.5 88 Bo t t om 7.9 100 2.3 Jely 1, 1975 7.7 102 7.3 103 7.6 116 7.9 112 7.8 98 Surface 7.7 102 7./ 103 7.5 100 7.3 98 7.4 98 5.0 66 7.9 114 8.0 112 7.8 98 Middle 76 3.0 39 3.9 50 6.0 76 6.1 72 Bottom 0.7 8 1.9 24 5.8 August 5, 1975 6.7 39 7.2 96 7.2 48 6.5 91 5.5 80 f. 3 87 6.1 78 Su-face 5.7 75 6.1 86 5.3 78 04 85 5.3 65 M itid l e 1.8 22 3.4 45 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.4 4 5.7 8?) 4.0 52 4.6 57 5.0 6:
Bottom
i Table 3.5.1 (coutinued) i l l A-2 11 - 2 C-2 D-- 2 E-2 F G
-D.O. % Sat. D.O. % Sat. D.O. I Sat. D.O. I Sat. D.O. % Sat. D.O. I Sat. D.O. I Sat.
J1 September 9, 1975 Suriace 7.3 98 7.5 100 7.0 94 t, . 4 91 5.8 88 7.3 103 7.7 102 j Hiddle 2.9 37 5.5 12 6.1 80 5.1 67 6.1 89 7.3 101 5.0 63 llottom 0.2 2 0.1 2 4.8 63 2.1 27 5.8 83 4.9 59 4.7 55 October 13, 1975
- Surface 7.5 94 7.4 93 7.3 93 7.1 93 6.3 85 7.0 91 5.3 61 i
tilddle 4.6 54 5.2 62 5.1 60 5.7 69 6.2 85 7.3 87 4.9 53 1hittom 0.9 9 0.8 8 1.5 16 4.1 48 6.4 85 5.7 63 5.0 54 N,vember 12, 1975 Surface 8.4 94 8.4 94 86 97 8.1 92 8.1 92 8.0 89 6.4 68 tilddie 8.1 91 8.4 94 8.5 96 8.0 91 7.8 90 7.9 85 6.4 68 Buttom 1.7 18 3.4 37 3.4 37 3.0 91 6.3 68 5.8 62 6.5 68 4.8 necember 9, 1975 1 Surface 8.2 75 9.5 87 8.7 80 9.2 85 9.1 87 9.5 82 10.8 99 Middle 8.0 73 9.4 87 8.6 78 9.2 85 9.0 85 9.4 82 10.8 99 Bottom 9.5 87 9.1 83 8.6 78 9.0 63 8.8 80 9.2 79 10.7 98
- NOTE: Average depths for each station are as follo.rs:
A-2: II.Om (36 ft.) 8-2: 10.lm (33 ft.) C-2: 8.3m (27 ft.) D-2: 3.7m (12 ft.) E-2: 1.8m ( 6 ft.) F : 2.7m ( 9 ft.) G . 2.7m ( 9 ft.) 8 h m m m m W m m m m a e e e e
/
e e I
1
)
I >-n ! I g/ L es Q
.i.
v, I + ~ 1 I I I h # I 6 4 q.Y *
. .,n-I ' -
GTAY UNITS 1 & 2 DISCHARGE
~ *
~
I i;j , g , YL, l . 3, I DISCHARGE CANAL ) 1E R
','~M
_S *l
,a
- -f.- l l_ .
I H, B. ROBINSON J- , UNITS 1 & 2 s 3 I .n , , MLES k, J:
/>"
W LF i I ?'""lI!l?"""l~""~""'~'~
I O
~~ - - - - - - -' 60 I
. . . . i.
.._~..... . . _.
e -Q
. + - e de . e. -.w 9 . $ . @
.ier p & 4 o4 . .4 b
-- -70
* - p y e& M
-@ e e __ . no ese * *- p=
g m.e .
.m
, _\ N- 6 W_ .*$ 6e @w $ 646 '. _ 4 $ m.s *+i.y _ . ei.- >
O 50 7 v U M y2 . _ _ . ... . _ .. _ . . ._ ._.. -
-40 o
b w _
< O L >
_ ._. __ _ . . . _ k,, . . ._ . . _.. ___ . 305E E E 20 g
- 3 ._ ... ...
! E l l l 10 I I 4 0 W I 220 210 200 190 180 170 ELEVATION (FEET MSL) I Figure 3.2.2 Ares capacity curies for Robinsen I:npoundmen: E
I __ _ _ __- 3-35 } ~ - _ _ _ _ __ t,...,,,
% ^
.w s#' s et _ _ _ _o_ _ _ .s m .~c,..s.a.
. 7 T E RA - - %@ .~~~ ~
( s s3
, M.- [ . ..
.4
_1 _m
; ,. . ~ L ,. ' -s. . .... . Y 3 4
,e.,,.J, ,' .-4 'i I ,* ,,,,,, - e
, 4 s
,J' m
/ uAt/}w
,n, 7 6,,.)n , % m 1... ... .
,e.
y en ...,, -f ~" . y7 y,i
. 'e x'"'
. s -
.S
. - ,, ~ - .
%. 2,,....... .q%. .,l,, " 9^.
g< "% ( , s tj p h,h L a ,A ,3N ,
,,,. . . . ,,y '. '
C
,, t- s ,,% i i ,', -, w j
,tc\ < , *n KS Tc E R ~ F I ' E L_D. g, -.i y
... . t
/ %. .e / .- J
,} / .@~d
)
[,,... , so, k ',v.,,,.. N
/ yS r \ '_ , y >, A g ,.an. m . u. .
"*1 -
e.-
,I '^ [ ;p'l g f M ,v i
\,,.'-MA,mL8O:
., y ,
%s4 .-
v}f, X c
'R~ '
Ner. '
S, s
; ..a
] Y, w[.;.a+j A & w &p
. j'E:6sV; q' *. ,,,s._c/
w ~& ,' i e - c . ~ , , . . v. N J / w "* .u m m ; n.vo., e MA e ? ..
- j. ..v,f .,;
( ,, ,u.
~h s.
. . ~ ~W#,.y eL .x u%g% ' i t _
// t ~. 7 - ,f ' '
.. (
cirov,a +
,I * * *'*"" r#
.. sot .Ch.~ +
b.y p p , g. t nos:[G t. ,
- _ . v J
[ Juon,ci.,,,'* _, I,Ehs'HA,yf.~nizy
; ,/
y e
. o n...
s. a s fj ,$$m- jy' [:v.~e,-.:j~1 .% . - . -l - r,, . . ,n.
.". /,yMl ,' f .', %,,,,,. ~ .
e . p , x . v: R W, 2 .t G: - i k si '3 -
. \ D. -
ue O N, (_. ..: .- . i b" M:;6 .a., ( y . T4 , I, j y 1 .%,.3,
*'N tucuno- ,~r
.(
1
<r ,
a>. .
.(
\. a q .a.
( *q-Y@fh t+%, a 1
~. ,
%m4.,ff .- ..
e a 4.'T N' j/ Dw ^'#*' BosJ/p 4a*
- t. ..s,
. ,or l '"
\
s s'~ U * * #* 'pp T
.<,,,, s s
K k r.c ' - d +.;,,~ ( B,5hoovine ,e g. s
- I1 i
/'./ .
s u , g., _ _ a [> a G . / <. p : 4 .?t ~%my_s a I p@~$,W,,,M, , 1
, ~t.~w~ ~ s,,4, 6
;y (
- v. ,x ,
o 'y. -f's'T~J,'s m' % 4 e , r g.p ks,~...., _ t/ .a , - .-. j s g A m
- . + a1 N .
a, sGcn.,in/_ i ' u m < m I ,r.. e,y- p..p em p~y,,,, W ,7 ,g - y "~ ~' ,p;c.,wi M, yc M. c,,,n.n.,,,a 5-r"%g % t- q 3,orei;o w{*g s, _
~~T,,,,,,E. *L Oc N~ 'C\E e i i n, *#
- Ath4M6 c
ag/ + . . . . s 4tp *3 Dg!),ll ' _ s I* ISO g / w. #
-] . [ i,.<' ' ' \ ) N,.%. (cc, \.
'^ .
t '. u , 2 "/ c ' y.. p ji[p[** M' co. ., ob,,,..,[,,f.*," *
, .x. . . . , fp I ' . ..i' /
.,1. .d S ,U h E'.. . ,R A 3
~ s,
. M.r . C-
- c s e 3
, oh .
?"" 'A4 *-
0 W
** - i
' /' ,_ q gggg i X.u w se'.eic ,
s- -Turb.h tli
- 1. {, , 4 .
/ -
--\ a ,
' (4
.,.,,Ny Cit y g
( g
,, .i c ex A
,, m i
. .,~ .,.
y'\,/
. , - $..O *na a ,
3 a s,, ,g f' i. I . 1 .=* 2 Q a
,;7
_. 3 s-N
.n .
p- - i
'm.... ,
~
y'# a
- Figure 3.8) -
- T. g r,'
reek. df61UBEI A
/
a' V
'1)
.~
-<s O
P
% +
I en J h I - i (F.-' E
- / /7 l B
9
/
df
;, M/ - O %
gg
. - 4$.,1 8 !
x %_t l
'JJ l
. l DISCHACSE st , / 3 C. ANAL
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
/ g i
\
P / ES< = l H 6. 2CBiNEN 9/ UNIT-3 117 N E f
\ . l 5- d-h -
TA M 6A * 'E L 2 .,,~
- Er cms, Figure 3.3.1 Robinson Impoundment and Black 4
- Creek vater temperature sampling stations k I' f E N %"" 5
I.A.346 S IM 3 Gric for monitoring samplo points located at 30 conter of grid squarcs 39 g 26 1 i
?b \ \
20 \ underscores identify stations y \ \ gg presentlu samoted I ic \ 2o \ gl
\
a\( ' s\ 1 \ s \ 'L , \ ,, \ vanc I
- w. C I '
I I discharge canal 0 4 I I I O.
'A -
1000' 2000' risure 3.3.2 Rotinson impouncL,nt wat2r ten.perature samp11ng grie
a I me g
- - . +
. .s l
k W , F g i pN
)
_~'4 l R 1 -f
,[ ! ,l lj + h
'"' } m % ,.
- Y \ l1 a n ,, .
il K E 55 y 3; .
** a. 3U N
-i ll ! s A
& .i it -
& ,en bi h, I
+ .d
'l
. : =
*22 o
;f']
0 o o
?
5 to 6 fi
=
3 5
- E t
- , - + +
f U^
-, w s
'y
> % g-A> s
. G: n-lE r
. g
.- .,w ? ai $
-y em li ( f
,Q $h e a _
B
- 4. & f S k = / lkil
.! i e *a
~
R i_m n zz y s
%. I:! TR
*E E ff f t 5 e
. m . g i
x; .- i as - - 2 ' .-; O
?
7
,j:-j s i */ *
)
-; 8 E
' - > En =
u4 g
+ Gi * ."
-l
;3
! M JJ of za l E
3-39 I- @ G@ @ @ @ @ ss 0 /
- 3. 0 to x
g* 40 7 I - W b
- t. . i
\
N d w 5
= \ , 2o g Di$ CHARGE TEMPH RATU8tE
- 24*C +
/
N N/ I 9. 2 F etwue. ? 12.1974 f urist ' # 66 MWet( 97 MWe 54 asy perove) N ' BOTTOM [ r I : 2.2 -- Un't 2 9 730 MWel(724 MWe 14 day werope N 40 I o O
' /8' e l l 10 h x ,0
~
N- co 4 8 g x m J c e I' - g 6.1 Ng 20 s D Y O I DlSHCARGE TEMPU R ATU hf
- 20*C IG8'F)
N Q
- 9. 2 -
30 Fetwverv 6,1975 unit t e 67 MWe ( 91 MWe 14 dev pereve) N Untt 2 9 730 MWe (719 Mwe 14 day herew) 12.2 - - - - - '40
~
l 1 2_ , m Les I Figure 3.3.4 Robinson 1: poundment 2*C vertical isotherms (north to acuth), vinter conditions: February 12, 1974 nd February 5, 1975 (indicating deeper.t station at each transect)
I 3-40 I' g, w.. u l
-:r, e a a I;i
, g
\l l
\ 1 I
l\'h
, .r: 1 2 i
' A-d '. i I i:
\ E
.\' i J[])
- j i 3 lbr"y, - -- >
%, i
.j g , , e m. .
l t
'l \1
,~
l
~
X Y
.- - )f,~i W l i i ;
~
' i 3 >[ i) !
y
. ': l' 'g; ,
I l N } 4 V ! 1 1
~
! I t
/
h l k i / 3 l l[ l a
/
/<
1 I / l//j
.*ill l. .
[ / l l I ! f j i
.h '
!/ A .
g
/ + I !
., I i
~ ! 1 1
- * * ; * ; ; * ; ; * ; ; : 3 -
g
.. .. _ ... . . . . _ .. O
=
E W X 1" s s s i g LN v~ i.W he- l
- ,6
- n a
I' m.. .
- v e
>; a
( ij .
== -
' F* 5
."': 7 , .
t a a Ii
- s l' E g \
n wm
.: T =-
t
\
- 5:i,i j ()
- 2. \
- 5:
3 . r :'. . i
\
l h
'tN i];i . \ ~ s E
g it wi. -.e \ j
!; \ =.$
f j\ j , ,'"'# Y a .I L hU
- I .
4 ,
. ,- ) \;
W * . 0 r a. 21 l 1 il i+s4 / K
- [>
+
ey ll \- l * { - I
, I 1
-1
'J; ~
>i l 19\ -
~
,i. / i e. :
m = L /
/l
- . , i
/
1 t ' 3
.i
\I'/ j iV
} } ! l A0
% - i
'
- I i j vw
-p E - a j !/)o ii U -r<T ! ..,t ! *'sj#
l*:uo
- 1 ; *
.o w.a 4. .u.o .s. coa .6 o was
- : : : a s
t
- s t
s i s i s i = 1 : : : g as
I . F41 I _ _ . . _ _ . . I s . w1 1! i e l A-JJ r7
\.4 Q)
I @wk;rd xe;! x FM%
,... h
/ ; e1 t
3 {a b
.I 1 ..
. , il r* %w t;- -
I
- n a ll 1 g .5 -
5 - f = # '; II : i se-p.{ l g I ,- p, 21 lIl
=
I I
+ ..
l 7* E I I .c : k a I O i k I
-,v, SE c
====s- t = + +
Id I s . we l y
/
E" oU Ni
~
)
M- /%>w? ,1
- 1,"
I r2 m i N. a - a si
%/-
i : t-1 i.;
- '.. ,V g- J g-I #j it 3
ir R rt
-I I
s {e
~~
ix e: I _ k s-I- k 4 5 e k s
=
b
- e. . .
r m-I
. IZ' ! +
l 4 n'g ~r y fi l 58 wu I. I
r-3-42
@ O@ o @ @ @
l1j eJ / f 1
- 3. 0 i0 3
\
8 N E 6.1
-s 20
. l 5
O N DISCHARGE TEMPERAT1JRE = 30*C (66* F )
\
- 9. 2
\ N y N -
May 72,1975 um 1 e 145 MWs (129 MWet14 day uteroge) . UnN 2 9 0MWe( 0 MWe 14 day kverovel BOTTOM 12.2 40 O e se o e r ee 0 I O " 79 Y 10 E O g
, 0 5
4 h $ w G 2.,
- 20 5
0 gI N 5 1 A W w O G DISCHARGE TIMP(RATURE = 34'C f93*F)
-\
- 9. 2 -
\ w g
W hev75,1975 Vms 1 tP Q MWe 4100 MWel14 day tverage) DOTTCM Unst 2 9 708 MWeit640 MWe 14 day everage) 12.2 40 2 : 3 I wites Figure 3.3.7 Rcbinson impoundment 2*C vertical isotheres (north to South), spring and fall mixing condi:1:ns: May 22, 1975 and September 25, station at each transect) 1975(indicatingdeepestl
jl 1 1 s u s YO s 1 u a
, r:'.( ~. .
m - m a . f[ __- ,: . h. a [ ,. m [
,A ,.,.
m y. u _ m 1 [__ i_.e m / __ u g;-[ /__ u /
;g s . .
[ d [e,. _ / _ n a s _~ N u
\N
. I g h
s , , n i yN _ .,p . r s u a
.c m
- x ,
M X s
\
)
p s M N - _ - t _ s e M
" \ _ ,\
s w u 7,
/_ h x - \ \. _
s h t o l, ,k
. t If ,g { ,- [ I IrI I n n . . , a a a . .
c
, c5 m . , ,
e w ( 7 9 i a s1 m r , n e5 a h2 c t or s e i b a l e r m u .. E; h
= .-
at cp i e t S r
- ed vn m
i h[
,E .= ,- a a u . .,-
. = = ..
C
- n. ,. 25
. . 7
=. .
. >- t 9 m ,u .
n1 u / x
.n.
n ._ .
~
J d2 e m ,
' . - .'/
- n2 9
ui u m - ~ / oy u m . g: r, . .
~ T p a mlf g
#w~
- ,. I
- . . =
- 3/L _
- / _ -
n: s u a , mc_ _
=
_ N ii os s n no b t e - my _ - N oi s a ~ ' !1 s
\
Rd n o
=. _
m ___ ~ - c
' _N I
8 3 n
. i g
s .,f - 3 x u s
,s 1 h' _A __
3 m ___ _
< em r
i
...=.
. . . .. *.,,.n . *,.
. .. . ul l
, g ,. gl
- f. ,g .i.gs g;e f* iea (-
m . . . c . ,. i Ff a u , , n . c c c
. . u ,,
e. a m
, v s
a m l ll l1ll' ,tllll
b44
- * - ~ = * +
N./ l! . . . e L~.0 1__m. w g W 7 ' ,y_iu 2 'O ,s \ r u. n -
- 3, 4
/ _ hl N l
9- i+ is ll c , c .. zg
- 5 s t?>
ti 5:; es j E- * { $ l
* 'A G .
in c: (+ - i
= : ,
11 ? s r' I L. N I E
~
w g ie I m _; _ . . ; ~ a o =Z
- v/ , :=
P v s
&s +w t,9 # s 5 .
j f' _ . _._
,} =*
MWf ^ ) q- 'v ( g "; o / - ee p~ >Kb1e Pg i. li i ' I
.3 s"
jj . g i I I &4 ff' $ b }p. AS 11 i j i e c. e 'i
-1a d~
g; ii I ; .. _v. : -;
. e:n
- s . ., w .3 .
E ___________________________________._.____._._________.___.._______._._._.______.___.____.___________A -
3-43 I o
@ O@ @ @ @ @ o g
I Lj - ~ I a
- 3. 0
~Q x
N N N}1' i0 e N I i
" xs s N. "
E E y eo e I h / OtSOHARGE TEMP E RATURE -39'c (102* F)
- 9. 2 3o Jutv 11.1974 8 Unst 1 # 130 Mwe!(155 Mwe fl4 der enregel
~
Unst 2 9 638 Mwe'(618 MWe 14 any peers,el 12.2 \ 4o I 39* 7* 8@l O @ @ @ 'o
/ - ,
l Sw _ / g to
~
e % E I- ,o
? \ NN N /
I $ bI V 2, E I Ot$ CHARGE TEM *HRATURE =41*C t107*F)
~
O I 9. 2 x 30 I August 18,1975 unit 1 + 13a uwe (124 unena der wravel unit 2 e sao Mw. <ss3 Mwe na car pare,el soTTou 12.2 40
. 9 I !
mites I Figure 3.3.10 conditions: transect) Robinson Impound:aent 2*C vertical isotherms (north to south), sutraer July 11, 1974 and August 18, 1073 (indicating deepest station at each I
b46 m IP u. . E ((
. , e a n g
="-- .. _ ii I: i \
" r
. . . , gg ,
3 h
^ g',
s\ if i- i \ b!! \
. "h# u .
s-s a
/
n\ liu !
\L4# f u .. L
-- I : N 3, . . . . .
- h. .I\ .llIl
- /
1 '
~yjjj r
~
s
! %l -
l }; - p/ g I yi \, . B li / sf I
~.* , !
I i y -
! A l r- g>
i
\ / A 1 /1 i s
g_
, l G G G G G a 1 I I: I e E 1 : E
- : : 2 E
; E
.: 3 sc a>
;~
a - I g, ;a a
-l .... ,a E
u - ( -
. = = ' =
- F,<
~
- u. . gj N
" 7"7 g,l:i ; i g
. . gg '
=
\ n
\ ng i i \ e.
.33 s-i ::: ! s. m
'd =
< i
=31 .
i N t: E v x y 1 -
- u...u % !
I e l'
.e N = * - i li \ 8=
ii i ~ ' ~ 3 h ,- im1 l -
! \ ,
\ \J1 I i
' i, i
> 3..
an s s N'I u .m , .
. ,, t . \ -
! l '- ,d.j
-rl.9
- 4-
- i. 1 s 1 .,
< q-r i .
3 v l
,! q)/ j,l !! [,- '
[ c[e
! 'l* j
.l iAl /
!! ! /I:
! It
/
i/ i ai = i/ i / i lI i __ ! > :I! gm-.:
. . . ~ .
_.o
. ~_
5 E 5 E 5 s s A s I
==
5
M tgu M M II* + - e . M .
._t. _
'l u, _
c 7 M 4- -. p N e /r . i _
) '*
4" M E
.\ / ~
. / :.e
'sn .a c
s-c as aa ca a n k ,
- g. e mw e
so
- v. c r
3 r M , e% n 1
, , e
, n
. j_,
/< . u .
y y
~
~ s1 3
M g *. d y n l n
- au M d+ + , -
r J e t d nn i a v
,3 6
s9 m1 M r e , h9 t oy s r i a M en u c a aI f r: u2 M + + n t Ci
. *n 2U M o ( b_'s t f no e
i<~ f 7, me d c nn M
'(; M, , 4 ue ou pl 4
) mf a'
)
' i n
[ ,. c_ r e _- n oe i M 'g* g .. c .
.. = .
, - sh nt s .
m( r o e r i
,o m i b t ou s R o n
u M f". h
. t a 2 i
_ e 1 w "g-w .
* ) ,
n 3 s e $ . , n .M [ 1 . 3 o e i ff L m c.
- et ri 4,
o ud gn
+ , -
i o . M_
. F c
_ ,u
=
M
3-48 I
@ 8@ @ @O@ @ , g
\ go I
- 3. o !
_ l g E E 3 C ! .4 \g a x 6.1 \ 20 5 g is o h OLD 8UNIT 1 Ol5Cl(ARGE TURE TEMPER A
= 17 C (624)
- 9. 2 30 I
x A g 12.2 i
@ 8@ @ OG @@ o I
o x , - I
' E lo lo
[ S g r ,,. B a 11' y v 2e 5 e { I 5 \ I O OLD UNIT 1 OtSCytARGE TDAPE R ATURE
=34*C(23*F) g
- 9. 2 - - - - - 30 Mw 31.1m N unct 1 e 156 ww.
12.2
'N 4o 9 ! !
I mi6ts Figure 3.3.13 Robinson I=poundment 2'C vertical isotherms (north to south), vinter and su=mer conditions without the influence of Unit 2: January 9, 1963 1963 (indic ating deepest station from each transect; old discharge point andJuly31,l indicated; no data avtilable north of Transect D) sur
m m e uma e e e e e e to M M M M M M M M
! * \- f:5 I
- N-.
/ ..E
. ~= n . 1 'N_ /
c, . i " t ~' __ I
~ / 1*
g e ** g
~
r I
, .M N _
g "V N_
/. g
,emsecio 3
^ q /
[g I
,. s.n . ) .. N.
/. t g
[g a., ,
/y.
_ /s. s
.! g.. \
.. n c r - .!-
\_
.. ,,n c i
.I g..
/ g.. .I N -
/ Y
_ - e j' ,
=
+6 %
a.. Q ,g
,.--,.,n m mu n';L.,
- i. w e, , j - - - - -- - - -
C
.g
,.. a _- .g ,. c, , g -- - -
T E _ _ _ . _._. __ w - _ ___;
._ [.. _ s .g . ._.
a scu s m e e, w - -- - ___
.cmeaeu, O, D Usse, , Ofstse.pG, ,f esp, ..,tfer, ,f*C 3Rf"F8
.____.,,,,,,,,,,,,,e,..,,,,,,...,t..ac ., ,,
,h , .
a
.. N
\
~
- [
/[ E '
~'
\ /
.. c.. l' .. \_ // . . ,, c. . [ . . N
~
/
F [8 -h. [ .h . ,E
\ { \ _ _ _ _ _ _
a
. 8 N
.u N/
N/ Flgtste 3.3.14 Robinson impoundrnent 2*C vertice1 Isotherms (east to west), winter and summer conditions without the influence of Unit 2: January 9, 1963 and July 31, 19(,3 (no temperature data recorded at ' Transect E; Unit I discharr,e located between transects B and C)
,%, _ , 4 .__a _.A _a 6 - _ , - - - _
'-._._.a 3--a.
I 3-50 I 1 1
}/
' I 3 /? p
' . ;%/ g!
e
fr N*
b f 'g{ r
-w' ' f' se l C.
~
w a i w M u i Q < L. O a O N e weem . b4 E l i I Iu 5, ,
..s
' / -
w
?w 4 N'\ m.,A N. 'p/uP.q , , res
- J/*j- &
, h
~
' i k. a- ,
- .j ,py"~z N , >
e
, , ., c ' ,
S w), e'~
, 1 j i g .,
h] I
\ 2 C
=
s, ~w 4 ; #
<s% a- L%s ;
\Yf j i 5j ,_
j z m
, v# M fI s E
g .3
\ eP'/
-o
', s s: s B
- V - .
4e '- g w 82 2- .,
}
~-
* .. {
5 b ' C E. l' .,,; mu
- D v-;
3 4
' h
- v =f 4 a5 a 4 '
M ~3
- C
,- s. 5
- 5. .
xx~ . - - - - ~ _ - _ _ _ _ E 3-31 / l I .. , - E ,f E ,
. v
. _%h x) -
vs . f
% ,[ . +le l
.~ n(N%u. c c!! ;
ll= , 8 si E <f' , ll $ a
\ li.s .
l, 8 @ % c 1 . U J E D . + . .t! i e
.=
3 h c U E fa
+
~.m .
B G7hj' W f %fy j . i j gj f,i . . a g ll.. ,. ~. 5 4 f e o a 4 i:f
? f y . 9, g$
f, ;$ e p *s
- xg
. I ~
a E g- ' s., e :n nt
$ 4 +-
^
E 2: a-Cli i
4-1 4.0 Fisheries 4.1 Introduction I heliminary studies of fish populations in Robinson In:poundment were ocgun it. 1972 and 1973 and served to identify the methodology necessa,ry to conduct a cwg :ehensive study of the fishery and 'co begin compilation of a species list. During 1974 the studies were redesigned to meet the Nuclear Regulatory Commission regulations requiring fish population data and in view of the Company's decision to ptoceed with a 316 demonstration for the Envir-onmental Protection Agency. Fc.udies were further revised (added) during 1975 to strengthen weaknesses in the programs as they were identified. O The phyt.ical and che=ical characteristics of Robinson Impoundment have been described in detail in Section 3 of this report. Other factors aff ecting fish populations such as vegetari,n and substrate are also den '. h e d (Sections 6, 7) and should be kept in mind when examining the vario- e . .n - teristics of the fish population. 4.2 Fish Distributions in Robinson Impoundment I 4.2.1 Introductien Distribution of fishes is governed by environmental requirements that may vary with species or size. Certain species or sizes of fish exhibit
.3 preferences for particular water depths, temperatures, substrates, or cover types as well as being limited to certain ranges of these and 7ther envd n-mental parameters.
The ob, tives of the fish distribution study incluced oc a
.in g the species present in the impoundment, examining variations in nu=bers and
- species among locations , and evaluating the numbers end specteu cf fish present in the vicinity of the discharge with respect to other areas of the impoundment.
I I I
I j 4-2 I ' 4.2.2 Methods and Materials Gill netting, wire trapping, seining, and electrofishing were used to I collect fishes from the various areas of the impoundment. The efficiency of these gear types varies with species and site of fish; t,herefore, results will be evaluated separately. In the quarterly sampling programs, quarters were g defined as vinter, January through March; spring, April through June; summer, W July through September; and fall, October through December. An attempt was made to collect samples near the middle of the quarter. Standard 30.5 = (100 ft) experimental gill nets, 2.4 m (8 ft) deep, (equal panels of 25 mm, 51 mm, 76 mm, and 102 mm (1 in, 2 in, 3 in, and 4 in) stretch mesh) were set at stations 1 and 3 of transects A, C, E, and G (Figure 4.2.1) for two consecutive days each quarter f rom su=mer 1974 through f all 1975. Nets were set off-bottom perpendicular to the shoreline at depths varying f rom 2 m (6.5 f t) to approximately 12.2 m (40 f t) . The nets were checked and catch 3 examined after approxtmately 24 and 48 hours. Single funnel poultry aire traps appr efnately 1.2 m (4 ft) in length I and .6 m (2 f t) in diameter were also set at sta ions 1 and 3 of transects A, C, E, and G for two consecutive days each quarter from spring 1974 through f all 1975. Traps were usually set in watec 1 meter deep and were checked after approximately a 24 and 48 hours. Seining was conducted quarterly with a 15.2 m (50 f t) dag seine (6 == (1/4 in) mesh) from summer 1974 through fall 1975. One seine haul was made at stations 1 and 3 of transects A, C, E, and G. Each haul consisted of extending the seine along the shoreline and sweeping an arc of 130* and radius the length of the seine (when possibl9.) . Uater depth or bottom cc ;ditions at ti=es prevented the full extension of the seine. Electrofishing was conducted for 0.5 hour at stati5ns 1 and 3 of transects A, E, and G monthly from April, 1975 through March, 1976. A Smith-bot type VI control unit and 3500 watt generator were used operating at 600 volts (AC). Current was generally within the range of 1-3 amps. Fishes I a.
4-3 that were incapacitated were collected with a dip net and were held in a tub of water until the end of the collection period. The dark color of the water
' , and low conductivity created some difficulty in collecting electrofishing sa=ples. These conditions were generally unifor= throughout the impound ent so comparison of data am,ong stations can be c.ade. Extreme caution should be Is used, however, in comparing these data with electrofishing samples collected in ot'aer bedies of water and different environmental conditions.
Numbers, lengths, and weights were recorded for all fish cellected. Sex and maturity were recorded when possible. Scales, stomachs, and gonads were removed fro: large=outh bass, bluegill, warcouth, and chain pickerel when needed for age-growth, food habit, and fecundity studies. Larger fish which were not sacrificed and were in good physical condition were tagged with Floy anchor tags and released. I Catch rates have been adjusted to numbers and weights per 24-hour set for gill nets and wire traps, to number per haul for seine catches, and to number per hour for electrofishing to facilitate direct comparisons. I 4.2.3 Results and Discussion Species Co position Thirty-one species of fish were collected from Robinson I=poundment during 1974 and 1975 (Table 4.2.1). Thirteen of these were centrarchids, indi-cating the importance of sunfish in the impound =ent. The most co==on species collected were bluegill and warmouth, although speciee abundance varied with area. Three species, flier, white crappie, and black crappie were collected only from the H. B. Robinson Plant intake screens during studies of fish impingement (Section 4.9) or during creel surveys (two black crappie) . Several additional species were collected from Black Creen anc probably occur in the impoundment. All of these are typical of the piedmont-coastal plain region and I many are generally associated with " black water" systems. Table 4.2.2 compares the fish species collected from Robinson Impoundment and Black Creek with other I
I 4-4 I similar bodies of water in North and South Carolina. All of these, with the exception of Far Pond are charactericed by darkly stained water. Par Pond, located in southeastern South Cat, lina, receives heated effluent from a nuclear reactor. The table illustrates that the fish species typically found in this area are well represented in Robinson Impoundment and that the species compos 1-tion of Robinson Impoundment is not unlike that of other similar bodies of water g W in the area. (See Table 3.4.1) Gill Netting Gill ner :atches in Robinson Impoundnent were generall- small and varied both in number and species. Mean total catch per day (T_._a 4.2.3) was cocpared between stations on each transect as a possible basis for combination, using a paired Student's t-Test (Snedecor and Cochran, 1967). Significant differences (P = .05) were found between stations so overall variance in tota 5 catch (number per set.> was evaluated using a 2-way Analysis of Variance and F W Test, with sampling station and sampling date the classes of interest. Differ-ences between sampling dates were not sipificant (P = .05), while differences between stations wera highly significant (P = .01) (Table 4.2.4). Mean total catches by sampling station were then subjected to Duncan's five percent level New Multiple Range Test (Steele and Torrie, 19o0). Three groupings of means were apparent (Table 4.2.5) indicating values which were not significantly different from each other. Catches at station G-3 were sipificantly higher than at the other sampling stations. The catch at the other upper impoundsent sa pling station (G-1) was next in numerical rank; however, no significant dif ference was indicate.1 between the catches at stations G-1, I-3, E-1, A-1, and C-1. The catches at stations 1-3 and C-3 were sipificantly lower than catches at G-1 but were not sipificantly different fres catches at I-3, I-1, A-1, or C-1. These station differences indicate there is no difference in catch rate in the lower and middle reaches of the i= pound:ent (including the discharge area), but these rates are lower than catches in :he upper impound- g ment (G). In addition, catches from the discharge area and the east side of W lower and mid-imprundsent transects were not different from catches from the east side of the upper impoundment. I a.
4-5 An alternative analysis was suggested by Dr. Charles H. Proctor of the North Carolina State University, Department of Statistics as being more appropriate. This analysis is presented in Exhibit 3. Discussion and conclusions were essentially the same following either procedure. In examining species composition of catches at particular stations by season, no differences are readily apparent. There ere, however, notable differences between stations. Gill nets at transects A and C generally caught a higher proportion of bluegills and chain pickerel than were taken on tran-sects E and G. Suckers and golden shiners were generally collected in greater proportions from transects G and E than from transects C and A. Although war-mouth and yellow bullheads were collected from most sampling stations, warmouth were taken in greater proportions from transects E, C, and A than from transect G, j I while yellow bullheads were taken in greater proportions from transects G and E than from transects A and C. Wire Trapping Wire trapping in Robinson Impoundment was generally inef ficient with only centrarchids, primarily bluegill and warmouth, collected. Although the data were not subjected to statistical testing, mean catches by station appear to be grouped (Table 4.2.6). Largest catches were made at Station A-1 (average I 3.2 fish per set), and wer e several times greater than catches at any othar location. Mean total catches f rom Stations C-3, E-1, and G-1 ranged f rom 0.6 to 0.8 fish per set. A tt ird grouping of Stations A-3, C-1, and E-3 (0.2 - 0.3 fish per set) was disc ernible. No fish were collected with wire traps at Station G-3. In evaluating catches by year and season, more fish were taken in wire traps during 1974 than during 1975, and more fish were taken in the spring and sumner than in the fall and winter. This seasonal variation is expected as lower I fall and winter te=peratures generally correspond to reduced activity of fishes and a decrease in trapping efficiency. I I I
I 4-6 Seining Much larger catches were made by seining in Robinson Impoundsent during I the spring and su=mer than in the fall and winter. During the cooler water periods, fish generally cove from the shoreline areas to deeper water and are less suscep-tible to capture by seining. Considering mean catches across all sampling periods, largest catches were taken at stations G-1, C-1, and A-1 (Table 4.2.7), ranginii; f rom 14.2 to 29.5. The low catches at stations A-3 and C-3 (1.1 and 1.2) are probably due primarily to the bottom type and topography. Both of these stations are located on washed sand shorelines which drop off rapidly preventing full extension of the seine and efficient sample collection. Collections at G were often hampered by bettom obstructions; the much larger nean catch at station G-1 due pri=arily to one haul I which took 99 bluegills. Bluegill was the most numerous species collected by seining at all stations and was the only species taken at station E-1. Chain pickerel and large=outh bass were also collected at most stations. The diversity of fishes collected by set ting was higher at transect G than at other sa:pling locations. Seine catches at G included golden shiners, spotted suckers, creek chubsuckers, pirate perch, lined topminnow, black-banded sunfish, bluespotted sunfish, and g dollar sunfish which were not taken at other sa pling locations. Mosquitofish $ and redbreast sunfish vera collected in the lower impoundment, but were not taken in the transect G seine hauls. Much of the observed dif ference can be attributed to habitat and cover type. Low catches and diversity on transect E are probably due to the combination of high su==er te=peratures, cover type (algal sat over soft =ud substrate), and inefficiency in seining due to roots protruding from the bottom. The smaller fishes which are susceptible to seining often are associated with aquati: vege-tation, and seining at transect G included vegetated areas more frequently than g seining at the otner locations (Sectien 7) . I I E
I 4-7 Electrofishing Although there was some difficulty cellecting electrofi-hing samples from Robinson Impoundment due to the low conductivity and visib1_.:y, electro-fishing was the most efficient sampling method employed. A variety of fishes was . collected from each sa=pling location (Table 4.2.8) during most cf the I year and the number of species collected generally increased fro = the lower i=poundment to the upper impoundment. This trend is best illustrated in the plot of the Shannon-Weaver diversity index (Weber,1973) (Figure 4.2.2). The indices calculated for Stations A-1 and A-3 were generally lower than for other etations except during April, May, June, and July when the catch of bluegill declined which raised the proportion'of other species in the catch, j thus raising the indices.- Indices calculated from catches at Stations E-1 and E-3 were generally higher than Transect A but exhibited a decline through the early summer reaching a minimum in July (August data not available), then increasing to levels comparable to early spring. Transect G indicer were high , \ \ and relatively stable with the exception of Station G-1 during May when no fish i were collected. I l Electrofishing catches were also examined by performing analysis of l variance on the log transformacien of bluegill, largemouth bass , warmouth, [ ! chain pickerel, and total catches per hour with sampling month and sampling location the variables of interest. Highly significant differences were , evident in all of the groups considered with respect to sampling location while largemouth bass and total catch exhibited highly significant (P=.01) differ-ences and bluegill and warmouth exhibited significant (P=.05) differences among sa=pling months (Table 4.2.9) . i I When significant differences were indicated, variation was examined further using Duncan's 5 percent level New Multiple Range Test (log transf or-mation of catch per hour). I In this analysis, ranked means which are not significantly different from each other are grouped; any two means not included in a single group are l significantly different from each other. Groups exhibiting significant differ-1 ences in catches by sampling month are presented in Table 4.2.10. Differences
4-8 in sampling location for the various groups examined are presented in Table 4.2.11. Total catches at Transect A were significantly larger than from any other location. No significant dif f erences were f ound between catches from E-1, E-3, G-1, and G-3. The large catches from Transect A were due primarily to the large number of bluegills collected during most sampling periods. The Duncan's test of bluegill electroshocker catches also supports this with Stations A-1 and A-3 exhibiting significantly larger catches than other sampling locations, g No significant dif f erenca was evident between catches f rom Stations E-1, G-1, 5 and G-3 or between catches f rom E-1 and E-3 but catches f rom G-1 and G-3 were significantly smaller than the E-3 catches. The concentration of bluegills on Transcc: A probably results f cm their utilization of the rock rip-rap along the dam for cover. Electroshocker catches of largemouth bass were significantly larger at Stations E-3, E-1, and A-1 than at Stations G-3, A-3, and G-1 with the station nearest the discharge (E-3) exhibiting the largest mean catch. Station A-1 largemouth bass catches, however, were not significantly larger than G-3 catches. Warmouth electrofishing catches from Stations A-1, G-3, and A-3 were not significantly different and were larger than catches at the other staticas. Warmouth catches at stations E-1, G-1, A-3, and G-3 were not significantly different. Station E-3 catches were significantly leur than catches at the other stations. Electro-shocker :atches of chain pickere' were not significantly different between sampling stations. The pattern of larger bluegill and warmouth catches from the loser impoundment is probably a reflection of habitat prefererce, with thesa spe.cies occupying the rock rip-rap areas. g 5 An alternative analysis was suggested by Dr. Charles H. Proctor of the 4 North Carolina State University Department of Statistics as being more appropriate. This analysis is presented in Exhibit 3. Discussion and conclusions were essentially the same following either procedure. These fish distribution data suggest that most species are distributed primarily as a function of habitat type. The area around Transect G contains many stu=ps, legs, and rooted aquatic vegetation. These sources of fish cover were much less abundant in the vicinity of Transect E and sttil less abundant at Transect A. Distributions may change seasonally as a result of environmental variable avoidance such as su==er discharge temperatures (Shannon-Weaver index) but when yearly mean values were considered, the distributions appear to be based primarily on habitat. A depression in the fish population was not evident in the discharge area when mean values were considered. i l E'
I 4--9 I l i i l 4.3 Standing Crop Estimates I g 4.3.1 Introduction l Fish populations are generally assessed in ter=s of standing crop or j weight of fish per unit area. The examination of standing crop incorporates , the various factors affecting a fish population and allowc for comperison among areas and bodies of water. Standing crop estimations of fishes are cocmonly made by introducing a toxicant in an area of known size and examining fish that are killed. This method contains the inherent variability of changing physical and environmental conditions and of varying efficiency of sampling. Cove sa=ples (the poisoning of coves isolated with block nets) have, however, been found to provide an esti-
. mate of fish biomass which is of ten better than other assessment methods , although relative abundance may be misrepresented (Barry, 1967; Hayne et al.,1967; and Sandow, 1970).
4.3.2.1 Methods and Materials Three coves representing the upper, mid, and lower reaches of the impoundment were selected for rotenone sampling at Robinson Impoundment during
; 1974 and 1975 (Figure 4.2.1). The coves were blocked off using 1/4-inch (delta) mesh
',- block nets. The surface area and vcluse of the coves were calculated and Noxfish (5% emulsifible rotenone) applied at a concentration of 2.0 parts per million. Potassium permanganate was applied outside of the block nets to I: nautralize rotenone diffusing out of the coves. Fish were collected inside
. the block net as they appeared after rotenone application and on the following day; Fish were separated by species; length and weight were recorded. When numbers warranted, fish were assigned to length groups and group weights were recorded (1974 - inch groups, 1975 - centimeter groups). Scales .e.d gonads
I 4-10 vere re=oved from f resh wat=cuch, bluegill, chain pickerel, and large=cuch I 'i bass which were collected. Tishes which could not be positively identified in the field were preserved in 10% for=alin and returna? to the laboratory for further examination. 4.3.3 Results and Discussi:,n Standing crop estimates ranged fro 29.3 kg/ha in the upper impound-ment cove duting 1975 to a high of 139.3 kg/ha in the lower i= pound =ent cove during 1975 (Table ' 3.1) . The greatest nu=bers of fishes in both 1974 and 1975 were found ac the mid-1=poundnent transect; however, diversity was lower than at the other sanpling locstions. During both years, diversity was highest in the upper t= pound =ent cove although no species were conspicuous by their presence or absence at any particular sampling location. In the lower impoundment cove, chain pickerel, spotted suckers, bluespotted sunfish, and bluegills were the major species collected during both years. The weight of redbreast sunfish collected decreased from 1974 to 1975 while the weight of war =outh and large=outh bass increased considerably. Swamp darters were second in numerical abundance in the icwer impoundment cove during 1975. = The mid-impoundment cove was numeri .11y do=inated by bluegills during 1974 and 1975. The =can length of these fish was 33 == and 71 == during 1974 and 1975, respectively. Due to the length classes used, the 1974 lengths prob-ably underrepresented the true =ean. Generally, however , =ost bluegill were in the 2-3 inch size range. This s= ail size indicatr.s the abundance of young bluegills in the area. Other young centrarchids were also present in substantial nu=bers as evidenced by the numbers and average sizes of bluespotted sunfish of 26 and 50 n= and large=outh bass of 129 and 94 ==. The major fish species collacted from the =1d-i= pound =ent cove in ter=s of bic= ass were redfin and chain pickerel, bluegill, warmouth, and large=outh bass. The swa=pfish collected from the =1d-impcund=ent cove should be noted since this little known species was not collected fro any other locations during cur sampling program. T = ~ Data records used in calculating mean lengths were midpoints of length classes in cases where length classes wera utilized in :eporting lengths. E
1 4-11 The upper impoundment cove contained the greatest diversity of "ishes although the standing crop was the lowest of the three coves sampled each year. Centrarenids, particularly bluespotted sunfish, warmouth, bluegill, and dollar
. sunfish were the major species collected cumprising 851 and 761 of the total du:ing I 1974 and 1975. Numbers. generally decreased from 1974 to 1975 (particularly bluegill) although the number of pickerel, pirate perch, and black banded v:n-fish increased. During both years of sampling, chain pickerel were major contributors to the total biomass. During 1974 spotted suckers and during 1975 largemouth bass weights also were i=portant.
I During sampling in 1974, biologists present felt that several factors contributed to underesti=ation of the fish populations in the mid-impoundment - and lower impoundment coves. During the sample period, a wind blowing across the impoundment increased suspended material in the water and decreased visi-I. bility, causing a reduction in efficiency of collection. This vind also washed many small dead fish into the vegetation along the edges where recovery was impaired. In the lower impoundment cove, some difficulty was encountered in adequately fixing the block net from bottom to surface. This may have allowed the escape of some fishes and contributed to an underestimate of the population. The mean of the six rotenone samples collected f ro: Robinson impoundment during 1974 and 1975 were calculated and compared to other similar lakes in the southeast (Table 4.3 2). Singletary , Alligator, Great , and Catfish Lakes are I- characterized by low pH and black water. Lake b'accamaw has darkly stained water; however, pH is more nearly neutral and Par Pond, located on the Savannah River Reservation (ERDA), receives heated effluent. Major species were considered individually in Table 4.3.2 with other fishes combined end reported as "all others." b' hen ec= paring Robinson impound-ment to the other lakes included, the standing crop estimate was somewhat less than Par Pond but greater than the others. Species composition and general abundance of fishes was similar in the lakes examined with bluegill, warmouth, chain pickerel, and large=outh bass frequently occurring as do=inant species. I l 5 The standing crop data collected from Robinson impoundment illustrated several points. l 9
I 4-12
- 1. The standing crop of fishes is similar to other coastal plain I
lakes in the Southeast.
- 2. Relative abundance of fish species as estimated with rotenone is similar in Robinson I= pound =ent and other lakes in the South-east which have similar environmental characteristics.
- 3. Fishes are utilizing upper, mid, and lower reaches of Robinson I= pound =ent, although abundance and diversity varies among areas.
- 4. Although surf ace te=peratures in some areas of Robinson Impound =ent g approach thermal =axima for many of the species collected, fish are "
present in good numbers, possibly indicating the utilization of te=perature stratified or refuge areas. There are many springs, I W seeps, and small creeks in the area which are sources of rela-tively cool water. This cool water forms a layer close to the bottom which varies in size with volume of source water, turbu-lence, and bottom topography. Many of these areas are too small to be illustrated from te=perature/D.O. profile sa=pling, but are readily apparent when wading in the area. In addition, much of the i=poundment has sc=e te=perature variation from top to bottom (te=perature - profiles, Section 3) providing large volumes of g water with ce=peratures less than those apparent on the surface. $
- 5. No paucity of gn=e or sport fish expected in a southeastern lake or reservoir with s1=ilar environmental characteristics . ras indicated by the rotenone samples collected from any area of -
Robinson Impoundment. 4.4 Food Habits 4.4.1 Introduction - Fish food habits can provide valuable information on the patterns of energy flow within a ec==unicf and indicate relationships potent 1 ally subject to adverse environmental impact. These data can be useful in the interpretation E
4-13 of fish growth rates, distributions, and reproductive efforts. Tne objectives of the study program were: (1) to procure information on the types and relative abundances of f ood ite=s ; (2) to qualitatively identify the major pathways and sources of energy available for fish production; and (3) to qualitatively assess the feeding conditions of the populations in question by comparison of secconal diets with the availability of resource ite=s in the environment.
'4 4.4.2 Methods and Mater 1als Species of important spert fishes selected for stomach analysis at Robinson 1=poundment incleded the bluegill, largemouth bass, warmouth, and chain pickerelf A preliminary study of the bluegill was conducted from April to December of 1974 from specimens collected fro = the intake screens of the i H. B. Robinson Staa Electric Plant. In January of 1975 a more intensive sampling program was initiated to provide information on the food habits of I fishes from the upper, discharge and lower portions of the i=poundment. Fishes were collected monthly in the littoral areas of transects A, E, and G by use of a Smith-Root Type VI boat mountad electrofisher and assorted other sampling I methods. Electrofishing in the vicinity of each transect f rom January to Dece=bcr accounted for S2% of the yearly sample. The remaining 1S% of the
' samples were obtained from seine, rotenone, gill net, and i=pingement sacples.
Fishes were injected in the field with 40% formaldehyde solution and preserved in 10% formalin for future analysis. Laboratory analysis involved the measurement of total length (TL) to the nearest millimeter and excision of the stomach from the pyloric sphincter to the esophagus. Stomachs were emptied of contents and stored in individual I vials of 70% ethyl alcohol with Rose Bengal biological stain. Contents vert later identified to the lowest taxonomic level practical by use of Pennak (1953), Brooks and Kelton (1967), Parrish (1968), Johannsen (1969), and Deevey and Deevey (1971). Only stomachs with identifiable food organisms were utilized in this study. Food c,rganisms were enumerated by taxa and if more than one item was present in a stomach, the percentage of these itet's was deter =ined by centrifu-5ation in a Wintrobe tube, water displace 2ent, or visual inspection. The percent frequency of occurrence, mean number of organisms per stomach with food, and l either the percent average volume or the percent total volume of food items were 1 LTnite catfish were also included at the initiatior of the study but numbers collected were insufficient for analys.s.
4-14 calculated for all fish on a quarterly basis. The percent average volume is influenced by the frequency of occurrence of a kind of food but not by the si:e of either the atomach nor its fullness. This gives the stonach concents of small fish the same importance as those of a large fish and is applicable in g describing volumetrically the food of bluegill. The percent total volume 5 emphasi:es the importance of large items and is applicable to the diets of large predaceous fish (i.e. , warmouth, largemouth bass, chain pickerel) . Blue-gills from the lower impound =ent and discharge atea were divided into two groups (< 100 == and 1 100 =m T1.) (< 3.9 in and 1 3.9 in) in order to demonstrate any size dif f erences in food selectivity. This was not possible in the upper impoundment due to small sample sizes. 4.4.3 Results and Discussion Bluegill-L1=netic Zone of Lower Impoundment Food analysis of bluegills from the intake screens of tne H. B. I Robinson Steam Electric Plant during 1974 is based en the e:camination of 168 stomachs (Table 4.4.1). These data (Figures 4.4.1 and 4.4.2) illustrate a dom 1 nance of =coplankton in the diet and suggest a seasonal progression in numerical abundance and relative importance of =coplankton as food ite=s. 5 The dominant food item in the diet of small bluegill during the summer was a Cvelops while Euboscina was dominant during the fall. A comparison of food habits 5 date with :coplankton dominance suggests that bluegills grazed upon the dominant forms available. Eubosmina we.s the winter and fall dominant while Cvelops was l dominant during the spring and sua:mer. During the summer Chaoborus constwited 1 j a large portion of the tocci volume and occurred at greater frequencies in stomachs g of large bluegill than in cmall bluegill. During the spring Chaoborus was the B dominant resource for both size groups of bluegill (Figures 4.4.1 and 4.4.2).
-No data were available on the numerical abundances and seasonal distributions of the pelagic instars of Chaoborus.
31ueg111s for stomach analysis largely consisted of fish impinged from I dusk to dawn of the following day. In stomachs containing Chaoborus, 70*. contained
- coplankton (i.e., Cvelops, Eubosmina, and Diaphanosoma), 21' con ~ined only Chaoborus, and only seven percent contained Chaoborus and centhic organisms. All a
4-15 ! 4 instars of Chaoborus are known to f eed on cladocerans and copepods in the epilim-nion at night (Juday, 1921; Melaren, 1963). Two main periods of feeding have been l l described for bluegills. The major period occurs in the late afternoon and the l 1 other a few hours after dusk (Keast and Welsh, 1965). This would correspond to ! I the time when Chaoborus,has vertically migrated into the water column to prey upon i z ooplankt on. Chaoborus generally escapes fish m edatic, during the day by retrea-ting te the hypolimnion (Juday, 19"., stahl. 1966; Pope et s1. 1973). Benthic macroinvertebrates, represented by a total of l' ;;r.cm (Table 4.4.2), contributed little to the total volume of food of limnetic bluegills. The dominant benthic orgar. isms consumed were dipteran larvae (11 genera) and trichop-terans (3 genera). The larvae of Procladius were present at frequencies higher than 10% in both size groups of fish throughout the year. This chironomid repre-sented between 2.7* and 5.3% of the t.otal stomach volume of large bluegill and between 2.2% and 7.2% of small bluegill. Trichopterans (i.e., Oecetis and l Polycentropus) were important benthic resources during the spring (Figures 4.4.1 and 4.4.L). The primary sources of f ood for the bluegill in the area of the plant intake structures were Chaoborus, Eubosmina, Cyclops, and Oecetis . These data depict the food of limnetic bluegill during their feeding period in the evening and stress the role of zooplankton in the diet. It has been reported that all sizes of bluegill participate in diel littoral-limnetic cigrations bue. that as fish length increases a reduction in the frequency of migration occurs. Bauman and Kitchell (1974) suggested that it is energetically adC ntageous for larger fish not to migrate but to remain in the littoral zone. Since the littoral ene habitat available f or bluegill grazing was limited in this area of the impound-ment due to impoundment topography and bluegill densities were high, the advan-tages of littoral feeding may be lost due to high comperitive interactions for a limited food supply. The best feeding strategy under these conditions would be for increased planktivory. This is what has been observed at Robinson impoundment for both size classes of bluegills. Bluegill-Littoral Zone of Lower lepoundment Data for bluegills in the lower i=poundment during 1975 are based on the examination of 302 stomachs (Table 4.4.1) and indicate a major dependence
4-16 upon planktonic cladocerans and copepods during the winter, spring , and f all. Larger bluegills did not consume As large a portion of zooplankton as did smaller fish. This is typical of bluegill feeding behavior (Carlander, 1972). In small bluegills, Eubosmina accounted for 99.4% of the volume and occurred in 100% of the samples during the winter quarter (Figure 4.4.3). The dominant taxa of zooplankton throughout the year were Eubosmina Diaphanosoma, and g Cyclo;s. The dominant organism in the winter was Eubosmina, with Diaphanosoma R , dominant during the spring and suctmer, and Cyclogs present in highest densities during the fall of 1975 (Figures 4.4.3 and 4.4.4). An examination of stomach content data with respect to :ooplankton seasonal abundances indicates similar patterns of dominance (Table 5.3.4). Since bluegills are reported to be keenly responsive tc search and capture time during gra:ing (Werner and Hall, 1974), it is energetically favorable for these fish to conrume the dominant species available in the absence of any size selective feeding behavior (Canfer and Blades, 1975). In the lower impoundment benthic organisms, represented by 29 taxa (Taole 4.4.2), were important components of the diets of both size groups of bluegill. These organisms volumetrically represented 30.8% and 46.3% of the diets of small and large bluegills during 1975. An increased uti'Lization of benthic organisms with increasing fish length is a common feeding behavior of bluegills (Carlander ,1972) . Literature references to the food habits of a the bluegill from a wide variety of habitats indicate that zooplankton and aquatic insects are the dominant f ood items (Calhoun, 1966; Carlander,1972) . Young bluegill f eed on small crustacea and aquatic insects while the- adults prefer the larger aquatic insects, small crayfish and fish (Carlander, 1972). In general, an inverse relationship exists between body size and the percentage of zooplankton in the diet (Turner, 1955). Bluegills generally remain within the same trophic level throughout 11fc but shift from plankton gra:Ing to benthos feeding as size increases (Gerking, 1962). The most ecemonly consumed benthic organisms were -larval chironocids. Small bluegills utilized 17 genera of chironcaids while 14 genera were present in the diet of large bluegill. Chironomids were most abundant during the spring but were noticeably reduced during the winter. procladius was present in the 1 Y'
=:
4 h4..ma_a _ - 4-J7 food of both size groups of bluegills throughout the year. Larger bluegills also consumed Polvpedilum throughout 1975 in addition to Procladius. Procladius is generally found in the sub-littoral and profundal areas of Robinson Impoundment while Polypedilum is typically found in the littoral zone. Another littoral zone chironomid, Ablabesmyia, was an important f ood resource f or both site groups (Figures 4.4.3 and 4.4.4'). Chironomid and cu11c1d pupae were important food items of large bluegills at most times of the year. Utilization of pupae was highest g E during the spring, occurring in 59.2*. of the stou.achs and representing 19.5% of the volume (Figure 4.4.4). Decetis, usually a littoral tricnopteran on sandy, or clay substrates, was a subdominant food item of small bluegills during the f all. and occurred in 15.2% of the stomachs (Figure 4.4.3). During the sur:mer large bluegills utilized Chaoborus and terrestrial Myrinicinae as food resources. These collectively averaged 86.5% of the total volume (Figures 4.4. 3 and 4.4.4) . The major sources of food for bluegills in the lower impoundment were Eubosmina, Diaphanosoma, Cyclops, Chaoborus, Polypedilus, Ablabesmyia, Oecetis, and dipteran pupae (Figures 4.4.3 and 4.4.4). Analysis of the data with respect to cooplankton I' (Section 5.0) and benthic data (Section 6.0) suggests that the dominant items in the diet were also dominant in the impoundment . These data indicate an overall major reliance on zooplankton as the major food resource in the lower impoundment. As indicated previously, dependence upon :ooplankton was probably a function of habitat. Bluecill-Discharge Area In the discharge area zooplankton was an important component of the I diet of both size g oups of bluegills during the vinter, spring, and summer as deterr:ined from analysis of 208 stomachs (Table 4.4.1). Eubosmina was the dominant food f or all bluegills during the vinter and su=mer (Figures 4.4.5 and 4.4.6) while Cyclops was dominant during the spring (Figure 4.4.5) . A comparison , ci zooplankton species composition in the discharge area (Table 5.3.4) with food habits data indicates selection for nondecinant species. During the summer the dominant taxa in the plankton were Cyclops and Diaphanosoma (Table 5.3.4). Exami-nation of fish food habits indicate a high utilization of Eubosmina ranging from 27 to 35% of the volume (Figures 4. 4. 5 and 4.4. 6) . Zooplankton were almost I' eliminated in the area of the discharge during mid-summer (e.g. , August) (Table 5.3.4). Fish utilized nondominant zooplankton species occurring occasionally I
4-18 at relatively low densities. . Benthic organisms averaged 53.9% and 57.5% of the yearly food volume of small and large bluegills, respectively. This utili:ation is higher in comparison with utilization in the lower impoundment. The lower impoundment is deeper with limited littoral areas while the discharge area has large littoral areas available for bluegill grazing. In contrast with the lower impoundment, Procladius was not utilized to any great extent in the discharge area. This area is shallow and not a preferred habitat for Procladius. Procladius (aberrant), which were most abundant in the littoral areas of Station E-1 (Table 6.3.3), were not utilized by bluegills as a food resource. The i=portant chironomid in the diet was Polvpedilum which wa present through-ou: the-year. It was the dominant food item of large bluegill during the spring quarter in ter=s of both volume and frequency of occurrence (Figures 4.4.6). Benchic data indicate that the numbers of Polvoedilum were reduced in the area of the discharge (Figure 6.3.2). Ablabesmyia was an important food of small bluegills during the summer in the discharge area occurring in 29% of the stomachs and representing 12* 0: the total volume (Figure 4.4.5). This chiro-nomid was present in the littoral areas of the discharge area and was not affected by the thermal effluent (Section 6). Chaoborus larvae were utilizad throughout the yect by large bluegills and durina che spring , summer, and f all by small bluegills. This organism wa* a hainant food of s ;11 bluegills during the f all and one of the pea 1nant resources of the larger bluegills E during both su=mer and f all (Figures 4.4.5 and 4.4.6). As indicated in the E benthos data, Chaoborus densities were reduced in the discharge area during the summer (Figure 6. 3.4) . As suggested in Section 6, this reduction in numbers of Chaoborus resulted from elevated water temperatures and current velocities acnociated'with plant operations. Cecetis occurred in 36.7% of the large blue-gills and 50% cf the small bluetills during the f all of 1975. This organism was collected in relatively high numbers at Transect E throughout 1975 (Figure 6.3.8). The food preferences of bluegills indicate utild ation of several items affected by the thermal effluent of Robinson Steam Electric Plant. Diversity (d) estimates of benthic organisms were extremely low in the discharge E area during the summer (Table 6.3.7). Diversity was low at Station E-1 from Augu s t to October of 1975 and a zero diversity was calculated for the benthic coc= unity during September and October. Diversity was also low at Station E-3 I
4-19 from July to October of 1975 (Table 6.3.7). According to Headrich (1975), changes in community stability due to environmental changes are reflected by changes in diversity. The primary sources of f ood for bluegills in the discharge area were Eubosmina, Chaoborus, Cvelops. Diaphanosoma, Ablabeseyia, polypedilum, Oecetis, Oligochaetes, and chironomid pupae and emergents. As indicated by the abundance, I species compositior.. and diversity of the benthos, the quality of feeding condi-tions in the discharge area during the summer was the poorest encountered in the impoundment. During the summer, benthic organisms totaled 51% and 67% volt.me-trically of the food of small and large bluegill yet species diversity and relative abundances of benthos in the habitat were low. This lack of stability of dominant f ood items in the discharge area suggests that a f ood stress exists on those bluegills inhabiting this area. It has been suggested that bluegills are overcrowded in Robinson impoundment. Overcrowding is common in bluegill populations and is one of the persistent problems of fisheries management. It I is not unusual for overcrowded populations to occur in marginal habitats, In terms of available food supply, the discharge araa must be considered a marginal habitat during the summer months and that bluegills inhabiting this area were food stressed. I Bluec_ill-Littoral Zone Upper Impoundment I The food habits of bluegills in the upper impoundment during 1975 as based on the analysis of 114 fish (Table 4.4.1) were essentially dif f erent fron I those of the lower and middle regions. This was indicated by a greater dominance diversity of f ood items (Figure 4.4.7), a greater number of dif f erent taxa (Table 4.4.2), and the presence of 19 taxa of benthos not present in the diet of fish in the lower impoundment and discharge area. In the upper impoundment rooted aquatic macrophytes were more abundant than in other areas of the impound-ment (Figures 7.2.1, 7.2.2, 7.2.3, 7.2.4) and provided suitable habitat for many macroinvertebrates. Of noticeable importance in the diet of bluegills in the upper impoundment was a high percentage of large-bodied benthic organisms (Figure 4.4.7). In the lower impoundment Oecetis and Oxyethira were the only trichopterans utilized by bluegills while in the upper impoundment at least six different taxa were present in the diet (i.e., Agrypnia, leptocella, Decetis, I I l
4-20 Oxvethira, Pharvganea, and Pvenopsyche) . During the winter Pycnopsyche was one of the major components of the diet (Figure 4.4.7). '"he major macroinvertebrate utili:ed by bluegills throughout the year was Hexagenia (Figure 4.4.7). These mayfly nymphs represented more than 20% of the volume during the winter, spring. and fall. These organisms are noticeably absent in the lower and discharge areas of the impoundment (Section 6). In the upper i=poundment four dipteran larvae (i.e., Ablabesmyia, Dicretendipes, Polvvedilum, and Pseudochirenomus) were present 5 in the diet throughout the year. This is in contrast with other areas of the impoundment where Polvoedilug and/or Procladius were present. Zooplankton were not a dominant f ood rescurce f or bluegill in the upper imeoundment except during the f all. Eubosmina was utill:ed to a great extent during the fall quarter. It occurred in 73.3% of the stomachs and totaled 70.4% of the volume (Figure 4.4.7). These organisms were extremely abundant in the uoper impoundment at this time (Table 5.3.4). In the lower and mid portions of the impoundment when :coplankton were utilized to this extent, the number of other taxa in the diet was generally reduced indicating primarily planktivorous feeding behavior. This pattern was not observable in the upper impoundment. This indicates greater stability in the diet. The food habits described for the blue-gill in the upper impoundment are typical of those found in the literature (Carlander, 1972). E Lartemouth Bass l Food habits of 24 fingerling bass (32-94 mm TL) during the spring and su=mer at Robinson I=poundment indicate the importance of cladocerans and large-bodied invertebrates in the diet (Table 4.4.3). Kramer and Smith (1960) reported tLac bass 40-100 =mTL fed on cladocerans, chironomid larvae, and ephemeropteran nymphs. nais feeding pattern has also been well documented in other studies g (Carlander , 1972). At Lake George, Minnesota, fish first appeared in the diet E when bass attained a total length of 20 =m but occurred in no more than 50% of the stomachs (Kramer and Smith, 1960). Murphy (1949) found,that bass greater than 71 mmTL fed almost exclucively on Loh while Turner and Kraat: (1920) stated that insects and fish were the principle foods of bass > 50 mmTL. At Robinson Impoundment fish occurred in 54.6% of the stomachs during the spring and 31.3% in the su=mer. Murph'/ (1949) concluded that htgh production of i W
4-21 l young bacs can be attained only if an ample supply of f orage fish is avail-I- able when the fingerlings reach 63-75 mm total length. Appelt:ste and Mullan (1967) attributed high bass production to the consumption of midge larvae I and cladecerans. The dominant forage fish for fingerling bass was larval and post-larval centrarchids which were most abundant in the uoper impound-I ment (Table 4.7.2) and 'should have pt ?vided an ample f ood supply f or the eatly stages of bass growth. I The major food items of adult largemouth bass (1 100 m= 1) at Robinson Impoundment were fishes , crayfish, and odonate nymphs (Figure 4. 4. 8) . This was determined from the analysis of 51 stomachs (Table 4.4.1). Crayfish and odonate nyt.:phs are usually associated with rooted aquatic vegetation. W There are no estimates available from Robinson impoundment on the distributions or abundances of crayfish and odenates. Fishes represented by Lepotis, Etheostoma, Notropis, and Micropterus were the dominant food items volumetri-ca ly during the winter (90. 8%) , spring (43. 3%) , summer (83.1%), and fall (26.2%) of 1975 (Figure 4.4.8). During the fall, crayfish (Procambarus) contributed 20.1% to the total volume end occurred in 35.7% of the stomachs. The f ood habits of largemouth bass at Robinson 1=poundment were typical of literature descriptions of the het in other lakes. The principle foods of largemouth bass in otner studies were small centrarchids, centrarchids and I crayfish, perch, crayfish and fish, gizzard shad ar.d crayfish, gizzard shad and crappies, gizzard shad and yellow bass, and fish in general (Goodson, 1965; Carlander, 1972). Odonates and mayfly numphs vete the major groups of insects consumed by large bass in Ontario (Carlander, 1972). I At Robinson Impoundment the major sources of food for fingerling bass were hemipterans, chironocid pupae, Chaoborus, Palaemonetes, Lepomis, and Etheostoma. Adult bass foraged to a great extent on fishes, particularly Etheostona, Lepomis, Micropterus, and Notropis. The dominant forage fish I throughout the year f or all sizes of largemouth bass was Lepomis. Small centrarchids, particularly bluegill, were abundant during most times of the year at Robinson Impoundment and provided ample forage for largemouth bass. I I l I- - _
4-22 I I 'Jarmou th Food habits of warmouth from Robinson Impoundment as determined from the analysit< of 65 stomachs (Table 4.4.1), illustrated little seasonal variation in food preference. The maj or food items were trf chopterans, ephemeropterans, odonates, crayfish, and fish (Figure 4.4.9). '4armouth are generally found in areas of danse aquatic vegetation and scft bottoms Crayfish are also inhabitants of this littoral zone (Lari= ore, 1957). g habitat and juveniles typically move about on the bottom during the da'/ light 5 in search of food. Tt.wse crayfish are susceptible to fish predation and were utilized as a food esource throughout the year. Crayfish were the dominant food items de-inc tM spring, su==er, and f all. Since crayfish are detrital feeders, t;.e >rimary sources et energy for warmouch growth was derived from a detrital based food chain. Fish accounted for 21.5T of the volume in the spring and 20.0* in the fall. Lepomis spp. were the d esd.nant forage fish consumed during 1975. Small bodied aquatic invertebrates and tooplankton were consumed throughout the year to some extent but contributed very little to the overall diet. Small warmouth generanf consuma crustaceans and small invertebrates while larger fish prey heavily upon crayfish and fish (Forbes, 1903; Lewis and English, 1949; Larimore, 1937; German et al. , 1973) . Larimore (1957) states based on his studies and a review of the literature that, "it seems very unlikely that there is any strong diet or highly restrictive food preferences for this species." As indicated by the data from Robinson E I=poundment, warmouth principally consume crayfish and fish. This is typical of what has been reportad in the literature. Chain Pickerel Chain pickerel at Robinson impoundment are largelr piscivorous in feeding behavior. Fish were the dominant items by voluse during the winter (7 3. 5") , spring (99. 8*:) , summer (93.l*.) and fall (95.3*;) of 1975 (Figure 4.4.10). I 1 Il l
4-23
, This was determined by the analysis of 67 pickerel stomachs (Table 4. 4.1) .
Forage species included Etheostoma, Lepomis Erimvron, 'iotemigonus , and Fundulus. Foote and Blake (1945) found that fish represented over 90'. of the volume and occurred in 62% of the stomachs of pickerel from Babcock Pond. Raney (1942) found that fishes totaled 47% of the volume and that I species were not consumed in relation to their abund:ince in the pond. In stomachs examined from Robinson impoundment 82% had only one food item. This characteristic of the feeding behavior if pickerel has been reported by Raney (1942). In general, large pickerel feed mostly on fish. frogs, crayfish, or almost anything of proper size (Calander, 1969). Food was not a limiting f ac tor for chain pickerel in Robinson Impoundment. I 4.4.4 Summary and Conclusions Planktivorous feeding was a dominant strategy of bluegills in the lower and discharge areas of the impoundment. This is not an energetical]y favorable feeding strategy of littoral bluegills especially for larger fish (Bauman and Kitchell, 1974). Since the efficinney of protein utilization decreases as fish become larger it is advantageous for larger bluegill to feed on large-bodied benthic invertebrates in order to maximize the net amount of energy available for growth (Gerking, 1962). This feeding strategy was characteristic of bluegilla in the upper impoundment. In this area of the I- impounduent food habits of bluegill were typical of those described in the literature and there was no evidence of food stress from either low produc-tivity or heat load. In the lower impoundment, which has limited littoral areas available for bluegill grazing, the advantages of littoral feeding were probably lost due to competitive interactions. In this area the most energetically efficient feeding stratet, was planktivory. In the discharge area the quality of feeding conditions during the summer was the poorest in the impoundment. Several dominant benthic food items were detrimentally effected by plant effluents. During the summer benthos abundances and species I diversity were very low in the discharge area creating an unstable food supply. This lack of stability of dominant food items in the discharge area during the summer of 1975 indicated a food stress on the bluegill population. This stress occurred on overcrowed bluegills in a marginal habitat with limited and unstable food resources. I
4-24 I Food habits of largemouth bass, warmouth, and chain pickerel were similar to literature descriptions and a co=parison of food selectivity with g availability in the habitat suggest that food was not a limiting factor 5 for growth and reproduction. It should be pointed out, however, that these studies were only descriptive and that no measurements were made of any consumption rates or growth efficiencies. The dominant forage fish for largemouth bass and warmouth was Leposi_s spp. These centrarchids were abun-dant during most times of tne year in the impoundment and should have provided ample forage. Chain pickerel were found to be largely piscivorous. g E Important f orage species included Etheostotta,1.apomis_, Erimyton , Notemigonus. and Fur.dulus. These species are widely distribut ed and conmon in Robinson Impoundment and should have provided an amole food supply f or chain pickerel. The primary source of energy for the warmouth in the impoundment was detrital based. This was indicated by the high rate of consumption of detrital feeding crayfish. No esti=ates were available on the distributions and abundances of crayfish in the impoundment, therefore, no conclusions can be reacned on the stability of a diet based on this dominant f ood resource. 4.5 Age and Gr:vth Studies of Robinson Impoundment Fishes 4.5.1 Intrcduction Growth rate, population structure, and condition of fishes pro- E E vide an indication of the status or " health" of the population present. Growth rate also is indicative of production and is an important factor g E in determining the size of fishes available to fisnermen. Growth rate of fishes is usually related to food supply which in a reservoir ecosystem is generally based primarily on plankton production. When environmental factors such as low pH or dark color reduce the fixation of energy at the lowest trophic level, secondary production is reduced, thus fish growth is usually slowed. We have examined the growth rate of bluegill, 1 " warmouth, largemouth bass, and chain pickerel from Robinson Impoundment and ccmpared these data to the growth rate information available from similar g bodies of water in the area. E Jhite catfish were originally selected f or s:.udy but numbers collected were too small for analysis. E_
4-25
. 4.5.2 Methods and Materials Age and growth of fishes are normally determined by comparison of length-frequency distributitns, recovery of marked fish of know age or by I
interpretation of annual layers laid down in scales or other hard parts. At the Robinson impoundment, scale anaysis was chosen as the primary method for determining age and growth rates. Scaler sere removed from bluegill, war.nouth, largemouth bass, and chain pickerel collected from Robinson l= pound nt during 1975. Scales were removed frou centrarchids posterio. to the tip of the pectoral fin and fro: chain pickerel between the lateral line and the origin of the dorsal fin (Lagler, 1956), impressions of larger scales were made in warmed plastic with a hydraulic press and examined with an Eberbach scale projector. Smaller scales which would not make clear impressions were examined vader a binocular microscope. For each scale examined, the total scale radiur. (focus to anterior scale margin) and length to each annulus (focus ta anterior annulus margin) were recorded. All scales were exa=ined by three individuals independently and were discarded if at least two of the three readings were not in agreement. l l l Back-calculated lengths were decerzined frem the regression of scalo radius en total length. Because of the clumping of data and relatively low nu=bers of smaller fish, the regression was forced through the origin. This line showed a much closer relationship r.) the empirical data than did the. regression with an intercept. Thus, the quation, g in-pt l l whet tn is the calculated length at annulus n, t is the total length of the l fish ac ca-ture, Sn is the scale radius at annulus n, and s is the total l l scale radius, was used for all back calculations. For comparative purposes when numbers warrented, monthly length frequency histograms were computed for bluegill, warmouth, largemouth bass,
- I l
I 4-26 and chain pickerel collected with plexiglass larval tra.'s and electrofishing. , Variations in individual growth rate and general slow growth precluded
'.iscerning year clssses in older fishes. However, the examination of recruitment into the collectable population and =enth-to-=onth changes in the histograns illustrate growth in young of the year and second year fish.
There histograms are not intended to show absolute frequencies, but are for comparison of changes over time corresponding to growth. 4.5.3 ty 'es and Discussion Bluegill Back calculated length of bluegills from the three areas of Robinson I=poundment (Table 4.5.1) generally appear similar, although small differences may exist. Growth was slow in all areas and fish g collected from the upper impoundment exhibited slig,htly slower growth IB during the first year. Larger inc.remental grow-h during the second year increased the mean estimated si:e of upper i= pound =ent secund year bluegills above that from the other i=poundment areas. Bluegill crowth in the discharge area was not consiste- ly lower or higher than growth in the other areas. An examination of the length frequency of bluegills tollected W frc= Robinson I=poundment does not pre Ide a clear growth progression 5 through the year, particularly in ff.sh over 125 == total length. It g is, however, indicative of growth of young of the year and yearling fish 5 if trends in selected months are considered (Figure 4.5.1). The length frequency histogram of bluegills collected in June illustrates young fish as they are recruited into the catchable population and another large peak of 80 - 90 == represents fish in their second year. These groups progress in size through the su=er and fall to Nove=ber anc ! Dece=ber when peaks are evident from 50 - 80 == and 100 - 130 ==. These peaks are generally discernible throughout the winter and art! thought to represent young of the year and yearling fish. If this is the case, the l bluegill growth rate is f aster than is indicated oy the back calculation 1 esti=ates, reachin;; approximately 63 == their first year and 113 =m their second year. I sep i
4-27
, A comparison of bluegill growth rates in Robinson it:poundment and data collected from similar bodies of water is made in Table 4.5.2.
Although there is a shortage of data from comparable areas, bluegill growth in Robinson Impoundment appears similar to other blackwater lakes.
~
The length-we1ght relationship of bluegills (Log g weight = a+ bug Length, a = intercept b = slope) was cociputed for the three 10
. areas by season to compare relative condition (TLele 4.5.3). Regression line slopes vexe lowest for fish collected above the discharge area except during the spring. Regression lines for fish from the discharge area and from the lower impoundment were generally similar except during the f all when the slope at the discharge was ruch larger, indicating a greater weight increase per unit length increase. .
I Warmouth Back calculated lengths of warmouth from Robinson impoundment indicated very slow growth, particularly during the first two years (Table 4.5.4). Within the impoundment there were small differences in growth rates among areas with the most rapid growth occurring at the discharge area and slowest growth occurring in the lower impoundment. I Examination of lengths of fish collected generally support this average growth rate but they also indicate recruitment of small fish during an extended period of time. The recruitment of small fish over a relatively long period and their presence near the end of the growing season would contribute to smaller mean growth and an underestimate of growth rate. Growth rate estimates of warmouth in uke Robinson are within the range of values reported from several North Carolina blackwater lakt.a (Table 4.5.5). I Total length / weight equations for warmouth were calculated by area and season (Table 4.5.6). An examination of regression slopes do not I indicate any consistent differences among areas or seasons. I I I
I 4-23 Lareemoue.h Bass Calculated growth rates of largemouth bass in Robinson Impoundment should be considered as possibly underestimating true rates since some of the, scales examined were suspected of bearing f alse annuli which could not be separated trom true annuli. False annuli interpreted as true year narks would result in greatly reduced calculated growth. As with other species, only fish for which at least two of three independent observers agreed on the annulas location were included. Back calculated lengths of largemouth bass collected from Robinson I Impoundment during 1975 and 1976 are presented in Table 4.5.7. Grewth was g W similar in the discharge area and the lower impoundment, but was considerably greater in the impoundment above the discharge area. Growth in all areas was slow relative to other similar lakes (Table 4.5.3). Observed lengths through the year suggests some apawning over an extended time period which could contribute to smaller mean lengths and an underestimate of growth rate. Observed lengths also suggest a growth rate somewhat greater than that estimated from scale exaninations and back as calculatien. E Total length / weight regression analysis indicated somewhat poorer condition (weight for a giv.n length) in the impoundment below the discharge than f.n the other areas (Table a.5.9). Slopes for regression lines were greatest f or fi.n f rom the upper impoundment during all seasons with the discharge area intermediate between the. upper impoundment and lower impoundment. I Chain Pickerel Small numbers of chain pickerel were collected from Robinson lupoundment and the correlation of total length and scale radius was I E
=
4-29 somewhet variable, e conclusions must be limited. Back calculated lengths (Table 4.b.10) indii. ate similar growth rates betweea the discharge area and the area below the discharge. Growth of fish collected above the discharge appeared somewhat slover. Examination of lengths of chain pickerel I collected from Robinson, Impoundment generally support the growth rate estimated fro = scale examination and back calculation but, as with varmouth, recruitment of small fish over an extended period vf time is indicated. The presence of small fish over en extended period could contribute to reduced mean sizes and urderestimates rf growth rate. Tht. back calculated lengths of Robinson Ic:poundcent chain pickerel are less than back calculated leng*;hs of chain pickerel from Salters Lake, Jones Lake, and Lake Waccamaw (Table 4.5.11). Cmty three, three and *even chain pickerel vere aged from Salters Lake, Jones Lake, and Lake Waccamav, respectively. This, in conjunction with the variability observed in the Robinson I apoundment chain pickerel, could account for the difference. I The number of chain pickerel collec',d f rom Robinson impoundment was insufficient to examine a total lengt' < veight analysis comparing areas. 4.6 Fee:2ndity I 4.6.1 Methods and Materials Fecundity in this study is defined as i N nutber of ripening eggs in the female prior to the spawning season. Bluegii.. largemouth bass, and varmouth were collected at Robinson Impoundment for itcundity estimates using a variety of sampling methods (i.e., gill nets, electiofishing, wire baskets, impingement, rotenone, and creel surveys) . CTaries were removed in the field and preserved in modified Gilson's Fluid to prevent hardening of the tissues and to aid in separation of the eggs from ovarian connective tissues (Ricker, 1968). Paired lengths and weights were recorded in the field. Laboratory analysis involved the separation of ova from the surround-I ing tissue, subsampling by vet weight, and subsequent enumeration of each I
l 4~30 subsample. In most cases eggs were easily separared f rom the ovariaa tissues l')i upon agitation in Cilson's Fluid. Eggs were dried to a constant consistency and wet veights determined to the nearest hundred*h of a gram on a Mettler P 2210 N balance. The entire gonad and each subsample was weighed in this manner. Three subsamples were placed in gridded plastic petri plates and all eggs in that plate counted under a dissecting microscope at 15 X. No attempt was made to distinguish relative dif f erences in egg numbers between the paired ovaries. Analysis of the data inc'uded a plot of f ecundity and total lengta for each species, transformation of the data using loEarithmic functions, and calculation of a best fit regression line. A linear regression equation was fitted to the data using the Statistical Analysis System developed by North Carolina State University.
/. 6. 2 Results and Discussion Bluegill l
Fecundity estimates for the bluegill were based on 46 mature ovaries collected from June to September of 1975. Ovaries obtained from fish 75 to 261 mm total length were subjected to analysis. The smallest mature individual encountered during the study program was a 71 =m female at station A-3. The smallest mature individuals reported by Carlander (1972) were 76-90 mm total length. Fecundity estimates for bluegills is the impoundment ranged from 571 to 27,027 mature eggs per fe= ale. The mean minimum and maximam s$ces of mature eggs counted ranged from 0.50 mm ; 0.11 to 0.79 mm + 0.11 and were smaller than the mean egg diameter of 1.09 0.05 reported by Carlander (1972) f or nature eggs. The ret,ression equation and coefficient of determination (r) of
, I fecundity on total length f or the bluegill at Robinson Impeynd:Lan t were:
~
- log " ~ *33i
- 2' 3913 10 (" }
10 where: F = fecundity g TL (n -.) = tocal length in millime ters 5 I E
4-31 A plot of fecundity and total length in Figure 4.2.1 contains the resulting regression line. Fecundity estimates for bluegills of different size as determined from the above regression are slightly belov average when com-pared to the literature (Carlander, 1072). The causative envircnniental and/ or biological determinants f or these findings were not apparent from the data. I Varmouth I Tecundity estimates f or the varmouth at Robinson impoundment were based on 29 samples collected from April to September of 1975. Ovaries for laboratory analysis were obtained from fish ranging f rom 95 to 212 m total 16.n g th . In the I,uvannee River and Okefenoke Svamp in southern Georgia. Germann (1974) illustrated a bimodal distribution of egg sites in varmouth ovaries. Mature ove diameter in their study averaged 0.97 m f or varmouth over I 200 = TL and 0.85 mm f or smaller mature fish. In Illinois, Lariraore (1957) found seven size classes of ova ranging f rom 0.15 to 1.10 cc. At Robinson 1=poundment varmouth also exhibited a size series of ova. The average per-cent of egg si:es in the ovaries of Robinson impoundment varmouth are listed below. In this study all eggs with diameter >0.5 n= vere considered mature. I Size Range 7. Total Eng 0.01-0.34 4.67 , I- O.35-0.49 11, 55 0.50-0.64 22.48 0.65-0.79 22.39 0.80-0.94 27.77 0.95-1.09 9.67 1.10 and over 1,46 I Fecundity estimates ranged from 798 to 34,257 eggs per mature female. Larimore (1957) found the total number of eggs to range from 4,500 I to 63,200 for vareouth in Illinois. Ge rmann (1974) found the number of mature eggs to range f rom 8,721 to 20,064 in fish from 150 to 239 t= total la7gth. A plot of fecundity on total length for Robinson impoundment var-mouth appears in Figure 4.2.2 along with the appropriate best fit regression I I .
I 4-32 line. The regression equation generated after logarithmic transformation of the data is: log F = -4.673 + 3. S39 TL (m) r = 0.67 0 where: F and TL (mm) are as listed above for the bluegill, g j g! Largemouth Bass I,l Fecundity estimates of the largemouth bass at Pobinson I:.,sundment were based on the analysis of 16 ovaries collected from February to April of 1975 and between March and April of 1976. Ovaries were obtained from b.tss l ranging in mi:e from 215 to 490 =:n total length representing a fecundity range of , 5,281 to 57,140 mature eggs per female. No correlations were evident between I fecundity and either total length or weight. Data variability and a small sample I size precluded any reliable statistical analyses. .9ture ova diameter ranged from
- 0. 8 m 0.12 t o 1. 6 czm + 0. 20 a t Robinson Impoundment.
Kelley (1962) considered largemouth bass eggs with diameters over 0.75 mm to be mature. Carlander (1972) reported mature egg diameters of 1.4-1.3 mm and 1.74 + 0.06 from other localities. In general, the range of fecundities and mature egg diameters for largemouth bass at Robinson Impoundment are within the established ranges su=marized by Carlander (1972). 4.7 Fish Reproduction in Robinson 1= pound ent a 5 4.7.1 Introduction Successful reproduction is the first step in the maintenance of any population of organisms. Without reproduction or when reproduction is insuf-ficient to maintain the population at the carrying capacity, mortality rates rather than life requirements such as suitable habitat and adequate food begin to govern population size. Section 4.6 has addressed the potential for reproduction (fecundity). This section .f the study addresses the observed seasonal and spatial distribution of fish during their early life stages in Robinson Impoundment. 4.7.2 Methods and Materials Larval and juvenile fishes in Robinson Inpoundment were sampled primarily with the use of plexiglass fish traps similar to those described by 5
4-33 Plcker (1968). Traps were set on each side of the impoundment at Transects A. ! E, and G for two nights each week f rom March 1975 through Febn.ary 1976. Samples were collected af ter appronir.ately 24 and 46 hours, preserved, and returned to the laboratory for identification and measurement. Ichthyoplankton samples were also collected by toving a 30 cm. 570v mesh net in upper, mid, and lower impoundment areas monthly during day and night for five-minute periods from April through October and during December and February. Only surface tows in open water areas were made due to the numerous obstructions on the bottom and along the shorelines. I The identification of lanal fish was reported at the lowest taxonomic level of positive 1dentification. The presence of similar species and genera of fishes (during the larval stages), or the presence of species with incom-pletely described larvae which could result in confusion or misidentification often resulted in reporting data at the family level. 4.7.3 Results and Discussion I Plexiglass larval fish traps were effective in capturing fish up to
- approximately 75 mm total length so lengths of individuals were considered in evaluating catch rates. Most spawning activity apparently occurred from mid-April through mid-October although lanal fish were collected during all l months (Table 4.7.1).
Catches f rom December through mid-April were dominated by percids (thought to be primarily swamp darters with some sawcheek darters). From an examination of percid lengths, reproduction appears to occur throughout the year and at all stations, percid numbers appeared to be depressed at Transect E during July and August but more percids were taken at Transect E during January, February, and March than at Transects A or G. This pactern also is generally evident with other species. t I i Centrarchid spawning occurred primarily from May through September with several pulses evident. The majority of these were probably bluegill and warmouth although during the larval stages centrarchids could not be identified to the species level. The centrarchid species catch rates reported I
I 4-34 refer to early juveniles. Catastomids were found primarily at Transect G I during early June indicating May spawning while Esox were f ound in low numbers but videly distributed from November through February. Surface ichthyoplankton tows collected primaril; percids (Table 4.7.2). - Greatest numbers were taken during May and June although some percids vers taken from the discharge area and upper impoundment during February and from the lower and upper impoundment areas during September. Centrarchids were collected from al1 areas during June and f rom the upper impoundment during May. Spotted s' .xers were collected f rom the upper impoundment during May. The greatur relative abundance of percids in the turf ace tow samples is probably due to centrarchid preference for the littoral zone during most g of their larval and early juvenile stages. '"he presence of the non-percid 5 species in the tow samples generally corresponds to their presence in the larval trap samples (seasonally). The species distribution indicated by the sampling of larval and early juvenile fishes generally correspond to the pattern seen in the adult fish sampling. Greatest diversity was found at Transect G while the number of taxa was reduced at Transect A and Station E-3. The data also indicate that reproduction may be somewhat restricted in the vicinity of the discharge g during the summer but additional spawning occurs in this region during the $ spring and f all. 4.3 Ichthyoplank:en Entrainment I 4.3.1 Introduction The removal or processing of large volumes af water can af fect fish reproduction in the body of source water by destroying large numbers of fish eggs or larvac. Entrainment becomes critical when a large percentage. of a population of eggs or larvae occur in water subject to passage through an intake during the period of susceptibility. This situation most often occurs when species vnich spawn in coticentrations do so in the vicinity of an intake structure or in a river upstream frcm an intake structure. Of the fish species inhabiting Robinson Impoundment, none is known to pref er the pelagic h
4-35 habitat such as surrounds the intake structure for spawning. Some fish larvac produced on the bottom or in the shallows may move to open water areas and become subjected to entrainment. This portion of the study was designed to examine numbers of fish eggs or larvae entrained by the H. B. Robir. son Steam I Electric Plant. , 4.8.2 Methods and Materials . Duplicate samples were collected weekly during the day and at night from March, 1975 through February, 1976 with a 30 cm, 570u plankton net. For each sample the net was suspended in the center of the southern intake bay (Figures 2.2 and 2.3) below the skimmer wall for 0.3 hour. A General Oceanic model 2030 flowmeter was fi::ed in the mouth of the net to measure the volume strained. At the end of the collection period, all organisms in the I- net were washed into the collection cup, transferred to a sample container, and preserved in buffered formalin for transport to the laboratory. In the laboratory ichthyoplankton were removed f rom the sample, identified, measured, and catalogued for future reference. I 4.8.3 Results and Discussion I No fish eggs were collected in entrainment samples during the period of the study; however, larval fit.' were taken during all months sampled except I January. All of these were percios except a very small number of catastomids collected during May and some centrarchids collected during June, July, and October (Table 4.8.1). Collection rates were variable between day and night on the same day and between sampling weeks indicating variability in entrain-ment rates. No diel patterns were evident. The percentage of percids collected in entrainment sampling was higher than percid relative abundance in the larval fir,h traps and surf ace ichthyoplankton tows (Section 4.7) although these gear types collected percids (primarily swamp darterc and probably some sawcheek darters) during most months for all areas of the impoundment. This is a f unction both of I gear selectivity and, we suspect, behavior. During the sampling program se noticed that larval traps which either slid'into deeper water or were tampered w1th and set in deeper water collected a larger percentage of darters. During the summer of 1975, we also attempted trawling in the
1 I 4-36 I deeper reaches of the impoundment. The one tow completed in water approximately 10.5 m (35 feet) deep contained 41 swamp darters, 2 bluegills, and I warmouth. These observations indicate a greater abundance of darters in the deeper water areas than has been indicated in the fish sampling program, which relied heavily on sampling the littoral zone. The affinity of most centrarchid larval f orms f or littoral areas has been dr.scumented to some extent in the g The abundance of percids in the ichthyoplankton tows and the 5 lite ra ture. number entrained suggests that percid larval f orms move f rcm the deeper water areas up into the water column. The number of percids entrained apparently does not effect the population drastically since after four years of plant operation darters are widely distributed and very abundant. 4.9 Fish lapingement at H. B. Robinson Steam Electric Plant 4.9.1 Introduction Industries which require large volumes of water usually must screen their intake areas to prevent the introduction of debris into the water systems. These screens also prevent the passage of larger aquatic organisms which are drawn toward the intake with the water. Organisms trapped in this manner are impinged on the screens at a rate proportional to their abundance in the vicinity of the intake snd to the velocity of the intake water. Fish impinged on the g intake screens of H. B. Robinson Steam Electric Plant were examined from 5 December,1973 to December,1975 to evaluate the number and size of fishes impin ged. , 4.9.2 Methods and Materials Monthly impingement sampling (43 hours) was conducted from December, 1973 through July,1975 when the sampling f requency was increased to weekly (24 hours) at the request of the SRC. Sampling consisted of an initial screen washing f ollowed by washings at intervals of approximately ,12 hours. Fishes washed from the intake screens were collected, identified. weighed, and measured. Lengths were generally recorded in 25 mm groups with the e.:ception of the smallest group which included fish 0-50 mm in length. Other groupings . occa-sionally used during the study are noted where appropriate. R.
4-37 4.9.3 Results and Discussions The numbers and weights of fishes impinged on the H. B. Robinson Unit 1 intake screens were low throughout 1974 and 1975 (Table 4.9.1) with daily averages of 37.1 fish weighing 4J8 grams and 32.5 fish weighing 394 grams in the two years respectively. Bluegills were the most abundant fish collected ooth numerically I and gravimetrically making up 91* and 89% of the fish collected in 1974 and 1975 and comprising 6 M and 66% of the biomass. Greatest numbers were collected in November of 1974 and June of 1975. I I: I=pingement at the H. B. Robinson Unit 2 intake was higher than at the Unit 1 intake but numbers and weights were not excessive when the size of the lake and the measured standing crops are considered. Mean numbers and weights of fish per day were 866.3 fish weighing 5807 g during 1974 and 291.4 fish weighing 4775 g during 1975 (Table 4.9.2). Of these, bluegills made up 89* (74f of the biomass) I and 95* (57% of the biomass) of the catch during 1974 and 1975. Chain pickerel were also important in terms of biomass comprising 14% and 28'; in the two years although numbers were sman. Maximum impingement on Unit 2 occurred during late summer of both years (Figure 4.9.1) with the lower rates occuring during the vinter months. Biomass impinged f ollows the same general pattern (Figure 4.9.2); however, increased differences between the two during the late vinter and spring months result f rom the impingement of larger individuals. Figures 4.9.1 and 4.9.2 also illustrate variations in impingement rates which occurred when fewer than the three Unit 2 intake pumps were opera-ting. Samples collected when 1 or 2 pumps were operating indicate reduced impingement rates, but there is insufficient operating time with 1 or 2 pumps to determine the relationship between impingement rate and number of pumps. The length frequency of bluegills impinged at the Robinson Plant (Figure 4.9.3) was examined in evaluating the si=e of fishes impinged. The majority of bluegills collected were fish less than 115 mm in length with larger percentages of smaller fish collected during certain periods. As expected, larger fishes comprised a larger percentage of the catch during I vinter and early spring months although impingement rates were generally , lower. l
4-38 Several points can be su=marized from the above results and I discussion:
- 1. Impin gement rates at the H. B. Robinson SEP Unit 1 intake structure averaged 37.1 fish per day weighing 418 grams and 32.5 fish per day weighing 394 grams in 1974 and 1975 respec-tively.
- 2. Impingetwnc rates at the H. B. Robinson SEP Unit 2 intake structure were larger than from Unit 1 but were relatively low averaging 866.3 fish per day weighing 5807 grams and 291.4 per day weighing 4775 grams during 1974 and 1975 respectively.
- 3. Bluegills were the largest component of the catches.
- 4. Most bluegills impinged were less than 115 ::m in length.
4.10 Creel Survey 4.10.1 Introduction Creel surveys are used extensively in conjunction with other fisheries E sampling to provide data on distribution and relative abundance. 'for areas having E restricted access and/or permit requireme sts, a complete creel census can of ten W be obtained. However, for reservoira with uncontrolled access, and where available g personnel preclude a complete census, a sampling method must be devised to give an unbiased estimate of the angler use (Carlander, 1956). At Robinson Impound-ment, a stratified random design was used where weekdays and weekend days were separated into strata. 4.10.2 Methods I A survey design similar to that of Hansen (1971) was useo to determine angler usage. During the survey one weekday and one weekend day were surveyed each week on half-day basis. The morning survey was conducted from sunrise until 1:00 p.m. and the evening survey from 1:00 p.m. until dark. At least twice during each survey a total count was made of all anglers and other recreational users on the lake. Survey dates and morning or evening periods were all chosen using a g table of random numbers, except that no weekday was sampled again in any month 5 until all other weekdays had been sampled. E.
f 4-39 , Between each count, as many anglers as possible were interviewed. Information recorded included transect and station, date, survey period (weekday a.m. or p.m.), interview and starting time, method (boat or shore), and gear (cane pole, bait casting, artificial casting, or trolling). Each fish caught was identified to species and length and weight recorded. Each party interviewed was given a duplicate postpaid card and asked to note the finishing time and additional fish caught and put the card in one of the creel survey return boxes located at each landing or in the mail. Estimates of total angling pressure and yield were calculated by the f ollowing formulae (Moore et al. 1973): E= k i=1 F (x) i . I where E = estimted pressure (angler hours) in period N = mean number of anglers observed during randomized counts on survey dates in period T = length of fishing day (considred as constant 13 hours) t = mean number of fishing trip
- r. = number of days in period I n = number of surveys in period Y = Ec where Y = estimated total catch E = pressure (hours) c = catch per hour I Catch per hour was computed by su ing total nours for completed trips with hours fished at interview time for incomplete (no survey card I returned) trips and dividing this into total catch sums computed in a like manner. Length of fishing trip was determined from completed trip data
4-40 with two exceptions. If no completed trip data were available, then length of time fished at interview time of incomplete trips was used. If completed trip data showed average trip lengths less than time fished at interview f or incomplete trips, an average of completed and incomplete trips was used. A 15 For comparisons the imp 9undment has been separated into three the discharge sections, the upper impoundnent above SR 346 (Transects F and G), C, and D). Months area (Transect E), and the lower impoundment (Transects A, 3 were ccabined into the following seasons: Spring (March, April, May); summer (June, July. August); f all (September , October, November); and winter (December, January, February). I 4.10.3 Results and Discussion Because the entire years' survey was not completed until June 10, g 1976, complete analysis of the data will be delayed until suf ficient ti;te has B elap'ed to allow for return of all creel cards. The results reported below, however, include all data now available and should change vety little. 5 During the survey year, an estimated 10967 anglers (Table 4.10.1) fished 26993 hours and caught 7952 fish for a success rate o' O.29 fish per angler hour. A complettd trip card return of 34% was obtained. Pressure and catch rates were highly variable, although trends can be seen. Angling pressure was greater in the upper impoundment where 54% of the anglers were counted. This was followed by the lower impoundment with l I I e a1
4-41 24% of the anglers and the discharge area with 22".. Catch per angler hour rates of 0.33 for the upper impoundment. 0.26 for the discharge, and 0.22 for i the lower impoundment showed similar success rates for the discharge and lower impoundnent areas.
~
The angler pref erence f or the upper impoundment appears related to the easier access to this area f or shore fishermen. A boat landing is adjacent to SR 346 and parking for shore anglers is available on both sides of the bridge. The greater use of the lower it:poundment for swimming and boating, because of the developed recreational areas, probably also effects the anglers preference f or the upper impoundment (Figures 7.2.la - 7.2.3a). I Seasonally, pressure is greatest in spring when 35% of anglers were observed, followed by winter (26%), summer (21%) , and f all (18%) . Seasonal I catch per angler hour rates varied f rom 0.37 in su=mer to 0.21 in winter with intermediate values of 0.33 and 0.26 for spring and f all. Comparison of the actual (not expanded) angler catch by species shows centrarchids acccunting f or 90% of the total catch, while pickerel comprise 8%. The remaining 2% includes bowfin, suckers, and bu11 heads. Of the Centrarchidae, 36% are larEemouth bass, 49% are bluegill, and 13% are warmouth, with the remainder 1.u luding redbreast sunfish (2%), pumpkinseed (<1%), black crappie (<1%), and dollar sunfish (<1%). Comparison of the predominant species by location shows the following: Location Bass Bluec111 Warmouth pickerel Discharge 50% 34% 8% 5% Upper Impoundment 26% 48% 12% 8% l Lower Impoundment 46% 33% 8% 10% Seasonal comparisons show the greatest total catch by number occurred in surmer (37%) , followed by spring (31%), f all (18%) and winter (147.) . These rates reflect the same ranking as the seasonal catch par hour rates noted above. 1
l l 3 4-42 f 4.11 Miscellaneous Observations and Activities Hybrid Sunfish A small number of specimens considered to be hybrid sunfish were collected fro 2 Robinson impoundment. Their occurrence seems to be more f re-quent in the lower reaches of the impoundment than in other areas. Most of these fish exhibit bright coloration and are thought to be warmouth-bluegill crosses. This phenomenon is not uncommon when populations of warmouth and bluegill utilize the same spawning areas (Carlander ,1972). Stocking Activities Many residents of the area around Robinson impoundment have requested stockings of largemouth bass. In an attempt to gain insight into the effective-ness of stocking, approximately 1000 largemouth bass fingerlings were marked and released at each of 2 locations in the impoundment during May 1975. Ongoing 3 sampling programs, which sampled the release areas, were expected to collect fingerlings which survived and provide some inf ormation as to the number of stocked fish in the area relative to the number of native fish. Of approximately 110 largemruth bass collected during subsequent months which were within the size range of stocked fish (with estimated growth) . 3 S only 1 marked bass was -ollected. The low number of bass marked and the low
.ver. the low percentage number of bass considered preclude any conclusions. ,
of marked bass recaptured does not indicate a reliance on introduced fish. Fisheries Managsment The fish distribution and abundance data suggest that common manage-ment practices may be beneficial to fish populations in Robinson impoundment. The lack of cover and scarcity of benthic fish food organisms in many ateas of the lovet impoundment appear to be limiting abundance. ~hese factors may 3 be modified through the placement of artificial substrate and cover much as has been employed in several ather southeastern lakes. Other management possibilities such as the ut .11:ation of artificial spawning substrates by largemouth bass and the setting of catch length limits f or certain species should be investigated.
Reported Chances in Crapeie Populations Scveral peopic have expressed their crinion that crappie populations I in Robinson impoundment have detlined drastically due to the operations of HSRSEP (ASLB Hearing, 1975). Tne sampling programs conducted during 1974, 1975, and 1976 indicate that crappie vere present only in very low numbers. No data exist indicating appreciably greater numbers in the past. Assuming that population fluctuations have occurred and have been detected by fisherren, there is no indication of the relationship between popula-tion fluctuation and plant operation. Many f actors can and do cause fluctuations in fish population, and the cyclic nature of crappie abundance is well documented I in the literature (Goodson, Jr., 1966; Swingle and Swingle, 1967). tions may have been entirely due to a natural cycle or to a combination of a The observa-phase of the cycle and f avorable or unf avorable conditions (f ood supply , pesti-cide run of f , competition of other species) . I Fish Tacging I Fish collected from Robinson Impoundment, which were alive and appeared to be in good condition and were not required for food habit or fecundity studies, were tagged with numbered Floy Anchor tags. Each tag was also imprinted with " Reward" and a Raleigh, N. C., post office box number. Three hundred ninety fish were tagged during 1974, 1975, and 1976 and 25 were recaptured (or returned by anglers). The number of recaptures to date (Table 4.11.1) has been insufficient to provide indications of movement between the various areas of the impcundment although some individuals have moved considerable distances and one warmouth moved out of the lake into the creek below the dam. 4.12 Discussion of Thermal Ef f ects Temperature is one of the most important environmental parameters af f ecting fish populations. Reproduction, growth, and behavior are all af f ected by temperatures directly, and in some cases indirectly such as in maturation of gonads and initiation of spawning behaviour with spring Lee-perature increases. Fish generally exhibit temperature preference and avoidance within their tolerance limits. In addition, thermal tolerance I -
I 4-44 limits are a function of acclimation temperature and time of exp sure. I Laboratory experiments serve to indicate these temperatures under controlled conditions but field observations of ten deviate from laboratory based expectations or predictions. In evaluating a field situation, the laboratory determinations should serve as general guidelines while field observations y provide th+. basis for evaluation. The fish population of Robinson Impoundment has been shown to be I similar to other conparable bodies of veter with respect to species composi-tion and standing crop. This indicated that the expected fish species are living in the impoundment and no abnormal species con: position exists. It order for the standing crop and species composition of fishes in Robinson Impoundment to be similar to other similar bodies of wate*, the system must provide adequate energy (food) to support the population, and successful reproduction of fishes must be adequate to balance mortality. In the period since 1971 when H. 3. Robinson Unit 2 introduced significant thermal effluent, if energy production or fish reproduction had been af fected beyond the natural limitations, standing crop estimates and composition would appear dissmilar between Robinson l=poundment and other lakes considered. At the species level, observations have been recorded indicating little average (er overall) effect of the H. 3. Robinson discharga on the fish a population although seasonal, localized adjustments were evident. Examination g of the fish distribution data (Section 4.2) for the discharge area indicates a g.1eral decrease of specias, number, and veis during the varmer months: however, even during periods of max 1=um thermal . fluent, a variety of fish have been documented utilizing the area. Thernal variation in these areas exists both in the forms of stratification and cool water, spring or creek input, 3 An examination of available thermal informat.on on bluegill, warmouth, d largemou;h bass, and chain pickerel provided information both in agreement and in conj 11ct with our observations. A wide variety of thermal tolerance limits j have been published (Kramer and Smith, 1960; Stravn, 1961; Kelly, 1968; NTAC, i 1968, USEPA, 1976; Holland et al., 1973) which apply to various conditions and life stages. Man) of these have been derived from laboratory studies which may l I 1 l E
4-45 l i or may not apply to field situations (Stauf f er,1975). Within this literature there are conflicting ob:ervations. '"here are also published reports of field observations of fishes living in excess of many of the oublished tolerance limits (Clugston, 1973; Siler and Clugston, 1975). In Robinson Icpoundrent , we have observed fish exceeding many of their published limits. We attribute I this to a combination of natural acclimation and the presence of lower tempera-ture water which can be utilized for resting or refuge. There are numerous springs, seeps, and streams in the impoundment providing cool water to Robinson lepoundment. The volumes of water involved are generally small but a layer of cool water forms over the bottom which is readily apparent when wading. Moct
~
of these areas are too small to be illustrated with the resolution available in the temperature profiles. The effect of the high tenperature must be considered seasonal (distribution data) and appeared to be of ednor importance at the species level (compositien and population structure data). I 4.13 Fish Population in Llack Creek I 4.13.' l - Introduction I Studies of fish populations in Black Creek were begun in 1974 in conjunction with sampling in Robinson lepvundment. Soon after sampling was initiated, the program was redesigned in view of regulatory agency " ..elines and the contention that operation of the h. E. Robinson Steam Electric plant had _ destroyed the fish populations present. Studies were further revised (added) in 1975 to strengthen the study program. The physical and chemical characteristics of Black Creek have been described in detail in Section 3 of this report. Other factors effecting fish populations, such as vegetation and substrate, are also described (Sections 6 and 7) and must be kept it. mind when examining the various characteristics of the fish population. I I I
4-46 I Fish Distributions and Standing Crop in Black Creek I 4.13.2 4.13.3 Introduction I Distribution of fishes is governed by envirot: ental requirements that may vary with species or si:e. Certain species or sizes of fish exhibit preferences for particular water depths, temperaturer., suostrates, and/or cover types as well as being limited to certain ranges of environmental pcrameters. The objectives of examining the distributions of fishes in Black Creek include determining the species present, examining variations in numbers and species between locations, and obtaining an estimate of fish standing crop. 4.13.4 Methods and Materials Gill netting, wire trapping, seining, elcetrofishing, and rotenone were used to collect fishes from various areas of the creek. The efficiency of these collection types varies with species and size of fish; theref ore, results will be evaluated separately. In the quarterly campling programs, quarters were defined as vinter - January through March, spring - April through i June, summer - July through September, and fall - October through December. An attempt was made to collect samples near the middle of the quarter. g 5 Standard 15.3 m (50 f t) experimental gill nets,1.2 m (4 f t) deep. (equal panels of 25 mm, 51 =m, 76 =m, and 102 cm (1 in, 2 in, 3 in , and 4 in) stretch mesh) were set at Transects J, H, and K (Figure 4.13.1) for two consec-utive days each quarter from summer 1974 through fall 1975. Nets were set off-bottom at a 45' angle to the stream. Depth varicd from 1 m (3.3 ft) to approximately 3 m (10 ft). The nets were checked and catch examined after approximately 24 and 48 hours. Leaves and debris in the stream of ten caught in the nets and decreased their catching ef ficiency. High stream velocities may also have affected catch rates. . I I
I 4-47 Single funnel poultry wire traps approximately 1.2 m (4. ft) in length {I and .6 m (2 ft) in diameter vere also set at Transects J consecutive days each quarter from spring 1974 through fall 1975. H, and K for two Traps were I usually set in water 1 meter deep and were checked after approximately 24 and 48 hours. I - Electrofishing was conducted for 0.5 hour at Trat. sect s J. H. E, and L monthly f rom April,1975, through March,1976. A Smith-Root type V1 control unit and 2500 watt generator were used operating at 600 volts (AC). Current was generally within the range of 1-3 a=ps. Fishes that were incapacitated were collected with a dip net and were held in a tub of water until the end of the collection period. The dark color of the water, high velocity, fluctuation I of water levels, and low conductivity created sote difficulty in collecting electrofishine sacoles. Generally, there was more difficulty collecting saeples from Stations H and L than free Station J and more difficulty in collecting samples from Station K than from any of the other stations. These limita-tions should be kept in mind when comparing electrofishi.ig samples. Rotenone samples were collected during August of 1974 and 1975 from I stations J. H, and K. An area of stream was blocked off at each station using l 1/4-inch delta mesh block nets. The surface area and volume was calculated and Noxfish (5* emulsifiable rotenone) applied to a rate of 2.0 parts per million-. , Potassium permanganate was applied outside of the downstream block net to neutralize rotenone passing thcough the sample area. Fish were collected inside the block net as they appeared after rotenone application. Mter all aoparent activity ceased, the devnstream block net was pursed to rc:adn any trapped fish and retrieved. I Numbers, lengths, and weights were recorded from all fish collecte.d. Sex and maturity were recorded when possible. Larger fish which appeared to be in good physical condition were tagged with Floy Anchor tags and released. Gill net and wire trap catch rates have been adjusted to number and weights per 24-hour set, electrof1shing to number per hour, and rotenone tsmples to number and weighting per hectare to facilitate direct comparisons. I
1 4-48 I 4.13.5 Results and Discussion 5 Species Composition . Ihirty species of fish were collected from Black Creek during 1974 j l and 1975 (Table 4.13.1). In addition, one shiner was not identified to the specific level and may represent another species and several hybrid sunfish were collected. All of these fishes are typical of the piedmont-coastal plain ( region and many are generally associated with blackwater streams. hI p m Firh Distribution and Standing Crops g n. Gill netting was inef f ective in sampling Black Creek. The com-bination of debris catching in the net and :he high stream velocities apparently allowed :.he fish to avoid the net. Only 3 fish were taken in gill nets during the study; a golden shiner at Station J during November, 1974, a creek chubsucker at Station H during May,1975, and another creek chubsucker at Station H during August, 1975. Wire trapping was also inef f ective in sampling Black Creek. More fish were collected with wire traps than with gill nets but numbers i were too low to provide any distribution information. One American eel a and one chubsucker were collected at Station J during May, 1975 ; and l 12 bluegills and a warmouth during June, 1974, 1 varmouth during June, 1975, and 2 bluegills during August, 1975 at Station H; and 2 creek chubsutkers and one warrouth during November ,1974, and 1 warmouth during August, 1975, at Station K. Electrofishing ef ficiency in Black Creek varied with water level and stream morphology in the sample area. The low conduct.1vity of the water restricted the electrical field so that fish in deep or fast flcwing water could usually avoid the field or escape. Station H contair:ed more area con-ducive to electrofishing than the other areas and was followed by Station J. Station K was the least conducive to electrof1shing. I E e
4-49 The greatest variety of fishes were collected by electrofishing at Station J (Table 4.13.2) refleccing both collection etficiency and the habitat present. Station J contains many shallow areas away from the main streata channel with abundant aquatic vegetation which provide cover and feeding areas. Chain pickerel and creek chubsuckers were the most abundant fishes collected I at Station J and were taken during all sampling months. Dusky shiners, blue-spot ted sunfish, warmouth, and largemouth bass were also abundant and f requently collected. Electrofishing catches at Station K vere generally low, due primarily to collectinF difficulty. Chain pickerel were the most consistently collected species but American eel, redfin pickerel, and hhdgill were also abundant. Station L electrofishing catches frequently wlar'.ed chain pickerel, creek chubsuckers, American eels, bluegills, and it.*p u th bass. Mats of cypress roots along the stream channel at Station L and Nup runs of f the main i channtl yielded the most fireh. Such areas provide cover and feeding areas for f1shes as well as restricting movement thus increasing electrof 1shing efficiency. . Catches in the four stream stations sampled reflect habitat and l i gear efficiency as well as species composition and abundance. Catches were generally similar at all stations and were typical of fishes expected in most blackwater streams. I. Rotenone samples collected f ne Black Creek during 1974 and 1975 l probably produced underestimates of standing crop. The water depth and rapid velocity prevented maintaining block nets in position. Lead lines were pulled off the bottom, nets were ripped, and float lines were pulled l below the water surface during 1974. Samples collected during 1975 were somewhat better but holes still opened in the downstream net. The water depth and velocity also created difficulty in mixing and distributing I rotenone within the sample area and some eddy areas or bank undercuts may not have received a lethal application. The greatest variety and standing crop fishes in both 1974 and 1975 were collected at Station J (Table 4.13.3). The absence of pickerel in the 1974 sample is probably due to the problems associated with the block net since
4-50 i several large pickerel were observed in the sample area but were not recovered. Large portions of the biomass in 1974 censisted of lake chubsuckers, spotted ' suckers, redbre ast sunfish, and warmouth while in 1975 redfin pickerel, chain pickerel, spotted suckers, and tedbreast sunfish were the major components of the biomass. The larger number of small fishes (juveniles) in the 1974 sample probably resulted from using a smaller mesh block net (1/8 in). One-fourth inch mesh was used during 1975 in an atte=pt to maintain :he net in better position. Rotenone sampl.s collected from Station H were smaller and diversity was lower than at Station J. During both years most of the catch consisted of bluegill. Warmouth and yellow bu11 heads were also abundant during both years, while pirate perch, not collected during 1974, were second in numerical abundance during 1975. Little cover or feeding area was available in the section of stream sacpled at Station H and is probably the prime reason for relatively g small collections. W A greater variety of species was collected with rotenone at Station K than at Station H. Maintaining a block net in the stream at Station K was extremely difficult and probably contributed to the small catches. High stream velocities and obstruction (roots and undercuts) probably prevented some areas from receiving a lethal dose of rotenone. During both years bluegill and W chain pickerel were the largest co=ponent of the biomass. 5 4.14 Su==ary and Conclusions Fisheries studies at Robinson I=poundment were initiated in 1972 and 1973. The preliminary work began the compilation of a species list and evaluation of sampling gear suitability. Studies were refined and intensified in 1974 and again in 1975. Thirty-one (31) species have been collected from Robinson Impoundment. l Thirteen (13) of these were centrarchids, indicating the inportance of that group. The species list is similar to other lakes in the region wi.h similar
. environmental characteristics (low pH, dark color).
l I
.B
4-51 Total gill net catches were evaluated using analysis of variance with respect to sampling month and location. Significant differences were further evaluated using Duncan's New Multiple Range Test. No differences were evident in lower and mid-impoundment catches, but catches in these areas were significantly (P=.33) lower than catches in the upper impoundmant. Also, catches f rom the discharge area and the east side of the lower impoundment I were not significantly different from the east side of the upper impoundment. More bluegills and chain pickerel were collected with gill nets on Transects A and C, while more suckers and golden shiners were taken on Transects G and E. Only centrarchids (primarily bluegill and warmouth) were collected with wire traps. Catches at Station A-1 were the largest, indicating the centrarchid abundance in that region. Seine catches were affected by bottom topography and fish habitat with largest catches at G-1. C-1, and A-1. Electrofishing catches generally increased in diversity (Shannon-Weaver index) from the lower impoundment to the upper impoundment. Analysis of variance of total, bluegill, warmouth, largemouth bass, and chain pickerel catches with respect to sampling month and location indicated location dif-ferences for all groups and monthly differences in total, bluegill, largemouth bass and vamouth catches. Duncan's multiple range test of catches by location indicated Transect A total and bluegill catches larger than other areas. No difference was apparent in total catch among Stations E-1, E-3, G-1, and G-3. Largemouth bass catches at Stations E-3, E-1, and A-1 were not significantly different (P=.05) and were larger than catches at G-3, A-3, and G-1 which also were not significantly different. Wamouth catches at A-1, G-3, and A-3 were larger than at the other stations. I Standing crop estimates (cove rotenone samples) ranged from 29.3 kg/ha in the upper impoundment during 1975 to a high of 139.8 kg/ha in the lower impoundment during 1975. During both 1974 and 1975, greatest numbers of fishes were collected from the mid-impoundment, but diversity was greatest in the upper impoundment. No species were conspicuous by their presence or absence. Relative abundance of fishes in the rotenone samples was similar tc
4-52 other lakes in the region with similar environmental characteristics. Some g surface temperatures in Robinson Impoundment appreached thermal maxima for 3 many of the species collected, but standing crop data indicated fish were present in good numbers, possibly indicating utilization of temperature stratified or refuge areas. Food habits analysis for the bluegill have indicated that planktivory is an important feeding strategy of bluegills in the lower impoundment and that this feeding strategy probably reflects optimal feeding conditions under the W habitat conditions present (i.e., limited littoral habitat). In the upper impoundment, the diet of bluegills was more diverse, had a greater evenness in distribution of major food items, and included a greater proportion of large-bodied benthic invertebrates. This feeding behavior is typical to those described in the literature and no stresses were apparent from either low productivity or heat load. In the discharge area, the feeding condition" I W during the su=mer of 1975 were the poorest encountered in the impoundment. Benthic food items were demonstrated to be reduced in abundance in this area and the coccunity unstable. This lack of stability in the food supply was reflected in the food habits and indicated food stress during the su=mer months in the discharge area. Food habits of largemouth bass, warmouth, and chain pickerel were similar to literature descriptions and a comparison of food E selectivity with availability in the habitat suggest that food was not a E limiting factor for growth and reproduction. Bluegill, warmouth, largemouth bass, and chain pickerel growth rates were est1 mated from scale examination. Growth estimates were generally similar from all areas of the impoundment, although small differences may exist. There is some indication that growth was underestimated, but the rates were similar to the low growth rates observed in other blackwater lakes in the region. Length-wei gh t relationships were calculated for bluegill, warmouth, largerouth bass, and chain pickerel for upper, mid, and lower areas of the impoundment by season. Some variations did exist, but definite trends were not evident. Poor condition in the vicinity of the discharge was not evident from the analysis. l
4-53 Fecundity estimates of largemouth bass and warmouth, which are indicators of potentia 4 reprodue;1ve effort, were similar to those reported in the literature. The potential reproductive effort of bluegills (fecundity) was lower than values reported in the literature. Mean nature egg diameters were also considerably lower than reported. The causative environmental and/or biological deterr:inants f or these findings were not apparent from the data. Most spawning activity as evidenced by the presence of fish during their early life stages occurred from mid-April through mid-October, although some larval fish were collected during all months. Most larval fish collected from December thtough mid-April were percids wbich apparently spawn during all months of the year in Robinson lepoundment, and were the most abundant larval fish in the open water areas. Most centrarchid spar.ing occurred from May through September, while most catastomid reproduction .>ccurred during May. Numbers of larval fish in the discharge area were depressec during the summer months but were larger during spring and fall. I Some larval fish were entrained through the H. B. Robinson Steam Electric Plant during all months except January. Tne majority of these were percids which, apparently, occupy the pelagic areas of the impoundment more frequently than the other species present. The effect of darter entrainment seems to be negligible, since darters are one of the most abundant and widely distributed species in the impoundment. Fish impingement on the H. B. Robinson thit 1 intake screens has I been negligible, averaging less than 0.5 kilogram of fish per day during 1974 and 1975. impingement rates were higher on the L%it 2 intake screens, averaging 5.8 kilograms per day in 1974 and 4.8 kilograms per day in 1975. Most of these fish were bluegills less than 115 t:m in length, and their impingement was not considered to be significant when the size of the lake and the measured standing crops were considered. I Fish populations in Black Creek appeared typical of blackwater streams, although many sampling problems were encountered. I
l l 1 4-54 l l 4.15 Literature Cited -l Ap[' % p'.e. R. L. and J. W. Mullan 196 7. Food of young large'nouth bass, Micropterus salmoides, in a new and old reser air. Trans. Amer. l Fish Soc. 94: 74-77. Barry, J. J. 1967. Evaluation of creel census, retenone embayment, gill j net, trap, and electrofishing gear samples, by complete drainage at l Lenape and Sischoff Reservoirs. Indiana Dept. Nat. Res. Baumann , P . C . and J . F . Kit ch ell . 1974 Diel patterns of distribution and feeding of bluegill (Lepemis macrochiris) in Lake Wingra, Wisconsin. Trans. Amer. Fish Soc. 103(2): 255-260. Bayless, J. D. 1966. Coastal Lakes I - 1965 Surveys. North Carolina Wildlffe Resources Commission, Paleigh, North Carolina, June 30, 1966. Brooks. A. R. and L. A. Kelton. 1967. Aquatic and semiaquatic heteroptera of Alberta, Saskatchewan, and Manitoba (Hemiptera). Memoirs Emtomol. Soc. Can. 51: 1-92. Calhoun, A., ed. 1966. Inland fisheries management. State of California Resources Agency, Dept. of Fish ar.d Game, 546 pp. Canfer, J. L. and P. I. Blades. 1975. Omnivorous zooplankton and planktivorous fish. Li=nol, and Oceanogr. 20(4): 571-579. Carlander, K. D., ed. 1956. Symposium on sampling problems in creel census. Iowa State College, Ames, Iowa. 80 pp, Cariander, K. D. 1969. Handbook of f reshwater fishery biology, Vol. I. Iowa State Univ. Press, Ames. 752 pp. E Cariander, K. D. 1972. Manuscript material f rom handbook of f reshwater S fisheries, Vol. 2. Iowa State "niversity. Clugston, J. P. 1973. The effects of heated effluents from a nuclear reactor on species diversity, abundance, reproduction, and movement of fish. Ph.D. Dissertatien, University of Georgia. Crowell, T. E. 1966. Coastal lakes 11 - 1965 surveys. North Carolina Wildlife Besources Commissien, Raleigh, North Carolina, June 30, 1966. 1 vis, J. R. 1966. Lake Waccamaw - 1965 survey - North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission, Raleigh, North Carolina, June 30, 1966. Deevy, E. S. Jr. and G. 3. Deevy. 1971. The American spe.cies of Eubosmina Seligo (Crustacea, Cladocera). Limnol, and Oceanogr. 16(2): 201-218. Dickson, A. W. 1961. Coastal plain lakes of northeastern North Carolina, An inventory of fish populatior.s in lentic waters. L. B. Tebc id. North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission Red. Aid in Fish Rect. Proj. F5R and F6R Job No. 1. im
m I 4-55 Foote, L. E. and B. P. Blake. 1945. Lif history of the east.ern pickerel in Babcock Pond, Connecticut. J. Wildlif e Manag. 9 (2) : 89-96.
)
i Forbes, S. A. 1903. The food of fishes. Ill. Nat. Hist. Bull. 1(3): 19-70. Gerking, S. C. 1962. Production and food utilization in a populatiot. of bluegfil sunfish. Eccl. Monogr. 32: 31-7S. l
~
l Germann, J. F. , McSvain, L. E. , Holder , D. R. , and C. D. Swanson. 1974 j Life history of the warmouth in the Suwanner River and Okefenoke Swamp, ! Georgia. Proc. S. E. Assoc. Ga=e, fish, Com=: 259-278. Goodson, L. F. Jr. 1965. Diets of four var = vater game fishes in a l fluctuating, steep-sided, California reservoir. Calif. Fish Game 5A(4): I 1 259-269. ! Goodson, L. F. 1966. Crappie. Pages 312-331 in A. Calhoun, ed. Inland fisheries managemert. The Resources Agency, Department of Fish and Garie. Hansen, D. J. 1971. Evaluation of stocking cutthroat trout, Salmo clarki, in Munsel Lake, Oregon. Trans. Amer. Fish. Soc.100(1): 55-60. Hayne, D. W., G. E. Hall, and J. M. Nichols. 1967. An evaluation of cove sampling of fish populations in Douglas Reservoir, Tennessee. Am. Fish. I Soc. Pub.: Reservoir Fishery Res: rces Sy=posium, Athens, Ga. Headcich, R. L. 1975. Diversity and overlap as measures of environmental quality. Water Resources, Number 9: 945-952. Holland, W. E., M. H. Smith, J. W. Gibbons, and D. H. Brown. 1973. Ther=al I to2erances of fish froc a reservoir receiving hected effluent from a nuclear reactor. In Thermal Ecology, J. W. Gibbons and R. R. Sharitz (eds.) AEC Symposium Series. Johannsen, O. A. 1969. Aquatic diptera. Entomological Reprint Specialists, Los Angeles. I Juday, C. 1921. Observations on the larvae of Corethra punctipennis Soy. Eiol. Bull. 40: 271-286. Keast, A. and L. Welsh. 1968. Daily feeding periodicities, food uptake rates, and dietary changes with hour of day in some lake fishes. J. Fish Res. Ed. Can. 25(6): 1133-1144 Kelly, J. W. 1962. Sexual maturity and f<.rundity of the largemouth bass, Microoterus salmeides (Lacepede), it. haire. Trans. Amer. Fish. Soc. 91(1): 23-28. Kelly, J. W. 1968. Effects of incubation temperature on survival of largemouth bass eggs. Progr. Fish-Cult. 30(3). Kramer, R. H. and L. L. Smith, Jr. 1960. First year growth of the largemouth bass Mjeronterus s al moi d e s (La epede).
^
Tranc. Amer. Fish. Soc. 89(2). I I
4-56 Kramer, R. H. and L. L. Smith, Jr. 1962. For=ation of year-classes in - largemoutn bass. Trans. Amer. Fish Soc. 91(1): 29-41. Lagler, K. F. 1956. Freshwater fishery biology. Wm. C. Brown Co., Dubuque, Iowa. Larimore, R. W. 1957. Ecological life history of the warmouth (Centrarchidae). , Ill Nat. Hist. Surv. Bull. 27(1): 1-83. Lewis, W. M. and T. S. English. 1949. The war =outh Chaenobrvttus coronarivs l (Bartram), in Red Haw Hill Reservoir, Iowa. Iowa State Coll. J. Sci. W 23(4): 317-322. Louder, D. E. 1961. Coastal plain lakes of southeastern North Carolina. In, inventory of fish population in lentic water. L. B. Tebo ed., North Carolina Wildlife Resources Coc=.ssion, Fed. Aid in Fish Restoration Project F$R and F6R Job No. 1. McLaren, I. A. 1963. Ef fects of temperature on growth of rnplankton and the adaptive value of vertical migration. J. Fish. Res. Bd. Can. 20(3): 683-723. Moore, C. J., G. A. Stevens, A. . McErlean, and H. H. Zion. 1973. A sport fishing survey in the vicinhy of a steam electric Station on the Patuxent Estuary, Maryland. Chesap. Sci. 14(3): 160-170. Murphy, G. I. 1949. The food of young largemouth black bass (Micropterus salmoides) in Clear Lak', California. Calif. Fish. Game 35: 159-163. National Technical Advisory Co _.ittee to the Secretarv of the Interior. 1967. FWPCA, Washington, D. C. Parrish, F. K. ed. 1968. Keys to water quality indicative organisms E (Southeastern United States) . NTIS Serial No. PP-216-476. Pennak, R. W. 1953. Freshwater invertebrates of the United States. The Ronald Press Co., New Ycrk. 769 pp. Pope,' . J. C H. Canter, and G. Fever. 1973. The influence of fish om . e distribution of Chaoborus spp. (Diptera) and the density or larva.e in the Matamek River System, Quebec. Tranc. Amer. Fish. Soc.102(4): $ 707-714 a Raney, E. C. 1942. The su==er food and habits of the chain pickerel (Esox niger) of a small New York pond. J. Wild. Manage. 6(1): 58-66. Ricker, W. E. 1968. Methods for assessment of f:'.sh production in fresh waters. I.B.P. Handbook number 3. Biddles Limited, Guilford Creat Britain. Sandow, J. T. Jr. 1970. A comparison of population sampling results with the . total fish population of a 90-acre Georgia Reservoir, 24th Ann. Conf. l Southeastern Association of Game snd Fish Commissioners, Atlanta, Ga. E Siler, J. R. and J. P. Clugston. 1974. Largemouth bass under conditions of M extreme thermal stress. in, Black Eass 3iology and Management. g R. H. S troud and H. Clepper, eds. , Washington, D. C. In
I 4-57 I Snedecor, G. W. and W. G. Cochran. 1967. Statistical Methods, 6th ed. The Iowa State " adversity P1ess. Stahl, J. B. 1966. The ecology of Chaoborus in Myers Lake, Indiana. Lit:nol. and Oceanogr.11: 177-183. 1975. 'The influence of temperature on the distribution, Stauffer, J. R. community structu:e, and condition of fish of the New River, Glen Lyn, Virginia. Ph.D. dissertatien. Virginia Polytechnic Institute and I State University, Blacksburg, Va. Stael e, R. G. D. and J . H. Torrie. 19o0. Principles and y ocedures of statistics. McGraw-Hill Co., New York. Strawn, K. 1961. Growth of largemouth bass f ry at various temperatures. Trans. Amer. Fish. Soc. 90(3). -I Swingle, H. S. and W. E. Swingle. 1967. Problems in dynamics of fish populations in reservoirs. In Reservoir Fisherv Resources Symposium. I Reservoir Committee of the Southern Divisien, American Fisheries Society, Washington, D. C. I Turner, C. L. and W. C. Kraat:. 1920. Food of young largemouth black bass in scae Ohio waters. Trans. Amer. Fish. Soc. 50: 364-371. I' U. S. Enviroamental Protection Agency. EPn-R3-73-033, Washington, D. C. 1973. Water Quality Criteria, 1972. I Weber, C. I. 1973. Biological field and laboratory methods for measucing tha quality of surface waters and effluents. Environmental Research Center, Cincinnati, Ohio. EPA-670/4-73-01. National Werner, E. E. and D. J. Hall. 1974. Optimal foraging and the si:e selection of prey by the bluegill sunfish (Lepomis macrochirus). Ecology 55(5): 1042-1052. I I I I I , 1 l I - _
4-58 I I I l I I E I THIS PAGE LD7 INTENTIONALLY BLANK I I 5 I
- I I
g. I; I E
=l l
_..__1__
4-59 Table 4.2.1 Common and scientific names of fishes collected from H. B. Robinson impoundment during 1974 and 1975 I Bowfin A:nia calva East ern mudminnow thtbra pyemaea b g Redfin pickerel Esex americanus g Chain pickerel Golden shiner Esex nicer Femie, onus chryseleucas Dusky shiner Notroeis cumminesse I Creek chubsucker lake chubsucker Spotted sucker Erimyzon obloncus Erimvzon sucetta Minvtrema melanops I k'hite catfish Ictalurus catus Yellow bullhe.ad I,ctalurus natalis Flat bullhead Ictalurus plceveephalus Swampfish Cholecaster cornuta Pirate perch Aphredoderus savang Lined topminnow Fundulus lineolatus Mosquitefish Gambusia affinis I Mud sunfish Flier Banded Pigmy sunfish Acantharchus pomotis centrarchus macrooterus Elassoma zonatum Blackbanded sanfish J.nnaecanthus chaetodon I . Bluespotted sunfish Redbr east sunfish Enneacanthus cloriosus Lepomis Lepomis auritus cibbesus Pumpkinseed I k'armou th Bluegill Dollar sunfish Lecomis Lepomis gulosus macrochirus Lecomis marcinatus I Largemouth bass k*hi te Blar pie
'e Micropteriis, salmoides Pomoxis _a_nnularis Pomoxis nicromaculatus Lepomis sp.
I Sur cid Swm I: ;r Etheostoma fusiforme Savenu J ar ter Etheostoma serrif erum I I I I I I
4-60 I Table 4.2.2 Fish apecies composition of H. B. Robinsoa Impoundment and other similar bodies of water in North and South Carolina . Singletary Lake Alligator Creat Catfish Robinson Lake Waccamaw Par Pond Lake Lake Lake Impoundment 572 a 8938 a 3000 a 5600 a 2992 a 921 a 2250 a (Louder. (Louder, (Clugs t on , (Crowell, (Bayless, (Ba yle ss , l Common Name ? resent Studv 1961) 1961) 1973) 1466) 1966) 1966) _ W Longnose gar x x x Bowfin x x x 3 American eel x* x x x g Blueback herring x Gizzard shad x x Iastern mudminnow x x 3 Redfin pickerel x x x x g Chain pickerel x x x x Carp x Golden shiner x x x x x x g Ironcolor shiner x x g Ousky shiner x Coastal shiner x x Creek chubsucker x x x Lake chubsucker x x x x Spotted sucker x x White catfish x x x Yellow bullhead x x x x x x x g Brown bullhead x x g Flat bullhead x x x Channel catfish x Tadpole madcom x* x x x 3 Margined =adcom x* g Svampfish x Pirate perch x x x x Lined topninnow x Waccamaw killifish x Mosquitofish x x x x x ; Brook silverside x Waccamaw silversida x a White perch Mud sunfish x x x 5 Flier x x x x Banded pigmy sunfish x x x Blackbanded sunfish x l x x 5 31uespotted sunfish x Banded sunfish x x Redbreast sunfish x x x Pumpkinsecd x x x- x x x x x Warmouth Bluegill x x x x x Dollar sunfish x x Radear sunfish x x x W Spotted sunfish White crappie x x Slack csappie x x Largecouth bass v x x x . Swa:p darter x x x x Tassellated darter x* Waccamaw darter x Sawcheek darter x Yellow perch x x x x x i ?iedmont darter x*
- Black Creek only Total Collected 36 16 35 26 13 7 5 j
s
I 4-61 I Table 4.2.3 Total catch (all species) per day of fishes with standard experimental gill nets in H. 3. Kobinson lepoundment during quarterly I. sampling from Su=ner 1974 - Fall 1975 I Day A-1 A-3 C-1 C-3 E-1 E-3 G-1 G-3 29 4.09 0.00 1.03 6.08 5.04 8.96 1.03 6.32 l Aucust 1974 30 2.59 0.00 0.00 0.00 4.90 11.14 2.07 5.06 I 13 5.94 0.00 0.00 1.20 1.16 0.00 10.69 22.24 November 1974 14 4.29 0.00 2.74 0.89 0.95 2.86 19.00 13.51 4 0.00 2.36 0.00 2 32 3.67 2.49 3.91 9.33 February 1975 3 1.06 0.00 1.01 1.00 1.03 5.04 1.03 7.06 j 21 2.17 0.00 6.46 0.00 3.13 2.09 5.0S 12.10 3 Mav 1975 22 0.00 3 . .t 4 13.09 0.00 7.38 1.92 4.38 5.45 16 9.15 0.00 3.55 8.09 4.73 2.39 1.01 6.66 Aueust 1975 19 1.01 0.00 1.10 3.19 6.70 0.00 3.62 1.06~ 12 2.65 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 4.09 21.16 29.e5 l November 1975 13 0.77 0.77 0.00 1.61 1.68 0.00 4.49 20.54 i I I l ,I l l 8 l 5 i l I i
I ! 4-62 I Table 4.2.4 Analysis of variance of gill net catches at H. B. Robinson Impoundment Su==er 1974 through Fall 1975 I I Source i DF k Mean Scuare I F_ Sampling daee 11 17.9719 .832S Sampling station 7 143.7222** 6.6595 Residual 76 21.5815 I Highly Significant (? = . 01) I I 5 I I I l I I a.
4-63 u - 1 Table 4.2.5 Duncan's new multiple range test (P=.05) f or dif f erences in I- gill net catch per day between sampling stations at H. B. Robinson impoundment Su=mer 1974 through Fall 1975 I Sampline Station Mean Number - Set 11 + G3 I 6 + G1 E3 3., .il - El 3.36652 Al 2.81150 I C1 C3 2.43885 2.03005 A3 0.54031 r i .
B. Robfuson Irnpoundnent Table 4.2.6 Crcch of fishes per 24-hour set with poultry wire . taps at II. Spring 1974 tfirough Fall 1975 (Blank values indicate no catch) SAMPLING PERIOD tJinter '75 Spring ' 75 Surmne r '75 Fall '75 Spring '74 Sunene r '74 "?all '74 Meart Sainpling 6/25 6/26 8/29 8/30 11/13 11/14 2/4 2/5 5/21 $/22 8/19 8/20 11/12 11/13 Station S pec fg
- 3.1 8.2 5.9 12.2 12.4 3.4 .I A-1 Bluegi]l .6
.3 A-3 Bluegill
.1 1.6 .1 C-1 Redbreast .i ilarmouth
. n
.4 4e Bluegill 4.1 1.0 2.6
.2 C-3 tiarmouth
.6 1.0 1.2 1.0 1.3 2.2 E- 1 Bluegill 1.9 1 11armouth 1.6
.2 1.5 1.2 E-3 Ill ueg i ll 2.4 3.1 .6 Bluegill 3.1 .1 G-1 1.0 tJarmouth 1.0 1 Dollar sunfish 1.0 G-3 None Collected M M M W W W W W m m p m m 3 M M M ,
4-65 is . .e 4.2.7 Numbers of fishea collected by seining at E. B. Robinson Impoundment f rom Su=ner 374 through Fall 1975
- Suz:sner Tall Winter Spring Summer Tall IAplineStation See:tes 8/74 11/74 2/75 6/75 B/75 11/75 Mean number /heul
.2 i-1 besquitofish 1
.3 Chain Pickerel 1 1 Redbreast Sunfish .2 I--
1 Bluegill 14 65 1 3 Largemouth bass 1 15 1 1 0 67 1 e TOTAL Mosquitefish 1 .2 I :-) Chain Pickerel Bluegill 1 1 2 1 .2 7 TOTAL 1 2 0 0 2 1 1.1 tbsquitefish 1 7 1.3
.3 I :-1 Chain Pickerel Warmouth 1 2
.2 Bluetill 21 14 43 35 1 19.0 Largemouth bass 1 1 1 2 .8 TOTAL 23 16 0 51 39 1 21.6 I_ :-3 Bluegill 5 1 1.0
.2 Largemouth bass 1 TOTAL 5 0 0 2 0 0 1.2 5 5 1 2.7 I ;-1 Bicegill TOTAL 5
5 5 5 0 0 1 2.7
;- 3 Blaegill 8 2 2 2.0 largemouth bass 2 1 2 .8 TOTAL 10 3 2 2 0 0 28 1.2 I W1 Chain Pickerel Colden Shiner 1
1 3 2 2 1
.5 Creek Chubsucker 1 .2 I Pirate Perch 1 Blackbanded Sunfish 1 3 1 2 3 1.7 Bluespotted Sunfish 1 3 7 1.8 Warmouth 1 .2 Bluegill 99 1 13 9 20.3 Dollst Sunfish 5 3 2 1.7 Largemouth Bass 5 4 1 1.7 TOTAL 113 7 4 28 12 12 29.5
-3 Chain Pickerel 2 4 2 2 1 1 2.0 Spotted Sucker .2
'I 1 '
Lined Topainnov 1 1 .3 Blackbanded Sunfish 1 4 .8 Bluespotted Sanfish 2 .3 Warmouth .5 I 1 2 Blues 111 4 2 24 16 7.7 Dollar Sunfish 1 7 5 2.2 Largemouth Bass 1 9 6 2.7 T01.s1 10 7 2 46 29 6 16.7 OTAL ALL STATIONS 182 41 14 129 149 22 I I I I -
, t i$
c 400 2 222 60 4 e 1 03 5 1 D 4
/
v 42 224 7 23 2 7 d o 1 7 1 1 i t 0 42 0 22 0 04 1 51 2 1 c 1 1 O 1 p 2222 2 42 0 e 2 5 1 4 1 1 1 S 5 7 9 t 1 n
- e .
m g d u n A u o p m . I l 422 2 24 1 2 n u 4 2 o J s n i h p . K n 2 2 66 2 u 4 42 1 4 I,
. J I
y 46 n a 2 8 2 22 1 i M g i n h . 4 4 0 22 s r 4 26 1 { p 91 { A 1 q r t c , e . H86 2 22 22 s l r 1 6 n e a I 0 1 o M 3 i f t o a r c i u 6 . 2 86 2 l o 7 b 2 802 6 p h 9 e 24 1 F 4 1 m r 1 o e c p g n h . 4 60 i s n 2 2664 3 l i a 1 3 2 p f J m a f c o r o t e h h b s s e m i h u u i h f s d H f s s ni s r d nA l r at sl i e l r a uf h sd e er e S 'n at t er ee S n u sai 1 r r l b 8 r ekh u i l e r s r ekhh i 1
>e a enccdS b ea encl cdSd f n h 'y ki ur e h yt D k i ul r e e t l 2 chS u et t e s sh1 S u ut H r i chS et t t lI r P t shl u ak iS l P t a a 4 iS I ohb v P d oat l ohD e P d oant l neepeuims e 3 newepeinir ms a e 1
- net t sr ogei ph - net ot s rk ogaei p l
Aid t aeb megf mc Aid t l a eb p mel gt m t b al ol r ud mr ul r na o a al or ud r ur na w nh opei1 e ual uw n T nh opil ea1 oCGSPtiRW1 1 1 a, uwa SSS o :( GSYP1 R 1 P Wl i o a. S S D1 a i i t t t a a a t D t
- S S
W W W M M eM M %.0 ' M M NB I Mll M M M M M- . Cable 4.2.8 (o ..t inued) 1976 [5 Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. Hal Jun. (yg.* Sep. Oct. Nov. Dec. StatJon E-l flow f I n 2 2 2 2 Redfin Pickerel 2 2 4 2 2 2 2 2 Chain Pickerel 2 14 Golden Shiner 6 8 Creek Chubsucker 10 4 8 Spotled Sucker 2 2 Pirate Perch 2 2 151ackbanded Sunfish 2 . istuespotted Sunfish 2 22 2 2 2 8 Warmouth 4 8 2 4 30 38 38 32 18 Bluegill 2 4 28 10 2 Dollar Sunfish 16 6 12 16 4 2 8 14 1.argemouth Bass 2 e Station E-1 M Bowfin 2 " 8 2 4 2 n e dfin Pickerel 4 2 8 Chain Pickerel 2 2 Creek Chubsucker 2 1ake Chubsucker 2 ei Spotted Sucker 2 4 2 4 2 2 Pirate Perch 4 nluespotted Sunfish 2 2 2 Warmouth 2 12 4 32 32 40 34 16 ; Bluegill 8 40 104 18 6 20 14 12 2 12 16 16 2 1.argemouth nass Centrarchid flybrid 2 Sawcheek Darter 2 Tessellated Darter 2
- Data not available due to sampilng complications.
Table 4.2.8 (continued) 1975 1976 Nov. Dec. l Jun. Jul. Aug.* Sep. Oct._ Feb. Mar. Ath {tay Jan.. 4 Station G-1 4 2 150w f i n 8 8 6 16 Redfin Pickere1 2 6 12 4' 8 Chain Pickerel 4 6 22 Dusky Shiner 2 10 8 8 24 2 Golden Shiner 16 14 4 2 2 6 16 6 2 2 Creek Chubsucker 48 4 6 4 12 4 I.ake Chubsucker 6 2 44 26 16 Spotted Sucker 2 1.ined Topminnow 4 2 Pirate Perch 12 2 6 4 8 2 tilackban< led Sunf isli 36 2 12 2 liluespotted Sunfish 4 8 2 6 I(edh r eas t Sunfish 6 8 30 8 56 10 2 2 20 2 uarmouth 6 4 4 10 2 2 4 tiluegill 2 4 4 2 2 2 Dollar Sunfish 2 2 1argemouth Hass 2 T Swamp Dater $ Station G-3 2 Isou f in 2 6 24 14 12 llediin Pickerel 12 4 8 4 10 4 6 1 8 58 Chain Pickerel 16 2 6 4 2 2 10 4 Golden Shiner 2 6 12 8 2 6 2 6 Creek Chubsucker 8 2 4 4 8 10 2 4 1.ake Chubsucker 4 2 14 Spotted Socker . 4 6 6 1.ined Topminnow 2 Mosiguitoefish 2 2 2 2 Yellow liullhead 6 2 18 2 Pirate Perch 4 2 2 6 2 6 6 Blackhanded Sunfish 18 8 6 2 Bluespotted Sunfish 12 38 8 2 2 4 Itedb r ea s t Sunfish 20 2 14 4 2 2 8 16 18 Marmouth 14 1 30 26 2 2 2 6 22 Bluegill 28 6 4 4 2 2 Dollar Sunfish 2 6 2 4 1.argeinout h hans 2 Swamp Darter available due to sampling complications. E M M M M g
- Data not E E E E E E ,
l oe i . .
4-69 Table 4.2.9 Analysis of variante in electrez, hocker (log) catch per hour from - Robinson I=poundment during 1975 and 19;'6 with respect te sampling month and sampling location Analysis Variable Mean Scuare Decree of Treedoe Total Satipling Month 2.9671** 10 Sampling location 3.8556** 5 I Residual 4897 50 Bluegill Samp1ing Month 3.1389* 10 Sampling Location 18.3336** 5 Residual 1.2192 50 Largemouth Bass Sampling Month 2.6391** 10 Sampling Location 3.4006** 5 Residual .6214 50 l Warmouth Sampling Month 1.8859* 10 I Sampling Location Residual 5.0152**
.8043 50 5
Chain Pickerel Sampling Month .4923 10 E Sampling Location 6.0183** 5 Residual .5519 50 I
*Significant P = .95
** Highly significant P = .99
I 4-70 Table 4.2.10 Duncan's new multiple range test (P = .05) for differences in electrofishing catches between sampling months at H. B. Robinson Impoundment, g April 1975 through March 1976.1 values represent log transformation of mean g catch per hour Total Catch Mean Month I 4.8336 February 1976 $ 4.6732 March 1976 5 {J; ' t y 4.5534 December 1975 4.4752 January 1976 E 4.3474 October 1975 g 4.2876 September 1975 4.1622 November 1975 4.0500 April 1975 4.0198 July 1975
+ 3.7762 June 1975 2.2222 May 1975 Bluegill --
3.7520 September 1975 3.5927 March 1976 3.4869 October 1975 3.4629 July 1975 3.3486 November 1975 3.3040 June 1975 g 3.2624 February 1976 3 2.8033 April 1975 2.7824 January 1976 t y 2.2014 December 1975
+ 1.3073 May 1975 2.0891 October 1975 E Largemouth Bass -
1.9876 December 19'75 5 1.7381 February 1976 1.7246 September 1975 g 1.4714 November 1975 g
- 1.0648 March 1976 1.0567 July 1975 $
0.8788 January 1976 t 0.5074 June 1975 0.3662 April 1975
+ 0.1831 May 1975 Warmouth a 2.3672 March 1976 2.3578 April 1975 2.1673 . February 1976 l
- Never.her 1975 m 1.8984 1.8766 September 1975 1.6112 October 1975 g 1.4101 June 1975 3 1.2831 January 1976
+ 1.2831 December 1975 0.3176 May 1975
- 0.7937 July 1975 Exc.ept for August when data were not collected due to sampling difficulties
I 4-71 Table 4.2.11 Duncan's new multiple range test (P - .05) for differences in I electrofishing catches between sampling locations at H. B. Robinson l=poundment, April 1975 through March 19761 . Values represent log transfomation of mean catch per hour Total Catch Mean Sampline Location I 3 1 4.9820 4.7333 4.0455 A-1 A-3 G-3 3.7653 G-1 3.6306 E-3 I 1 3.6073 E-1 I Bluegill t A 4 4.6384 4.5528 2.9285 A-1 A-3 E-3
+ 1 2.4804 E-1 5 l 1.8312 1.7345 G-1 4 G-3 Largemouth Bass + 1.8811 T .3 1.7172 E-1 4 1.4326 A-1 I h +-
+
0.7692 0.6822 0.6457 G-3 A-3 G-1 Wamouth 2.4195 A-1 2.0589 G-3 4 1.9921 A-3 1.4115 G-1 1.3302 E-1
+ .5328 E-3 Chain Pickerel 2.0789 G-3 1.4902 G-1 1.0916 E-1 I 0.5458 E-3 0.2996 A-3 0.1998 A-1 I
I I s ce,t <or Amemst hen esta re not c.11ectee eme to sa=,11ne e1ff1c.1t1es. I I
Table 4.3.1 Numbers and weights of fishes per hectare collected from three coves of Robinson Impoundment i during August 1974 and August 1975
' Upper l'apoundment 1.ower Impoundment flid impoundment Number Weight y Number Weight Q)_
Number Weigti g 1975 1974 1975 1975 1974 1975 1974 1975 1974 Species 1974 1975 1974 15 5 22 22 12 25 East er n Mudminnow 1090 2486 7 37 487 79 25 49 544 314 20 49 Redfin Pickerel 4519 77 133 3632 5819 175 11574 43504 86 35 7791 Chain Pickerel 59 79 170 240 388 74 642 376 69 511 57 Golden Shiner 10 10 Dusky Shiner 7 7 Unidentitled Shiner 64 35 371 59 642 398 25 86 20 44 Creek Chuhnucker 5 138 l.ake Chubsucker 40 2918 Spotted sucker 138 126 19108 33618 White Catfish 7 17 89 2051 924 47 81 356 235 37 57 99 Yellow 13nlihead 44 27 SwampfIsh 89 257 40 833 69 729 25 62 180 264 17 72 Pirate perch 106 32 146 109 1.ined Tonminnow 25 42 69 47 96 15 225 25 Mosituitoefish 586 23 17 924 15 22 457 86 Y Mudsunfish 5 5 7$ lianded Pigmy Sunfish 12 2 274 124 319 4(,5 546 573 526 173 37 180 49 30 Blackhanded F mfish 435 271 1092 2231 4806 2301 3067 Bluespotted Sunfish 2298 1144 1688 1584 640 6140 855 10 27 Hedbreast fanfish 423 25 870 15921 9617 29798 860 611 17875 37621 1510 Wa rmout h 1438 213 1964 3400 12046 54834 85316 4322 220 11671 li t ueg i l l 3022 8656 6089 17675 31508 57 2192 988 2308 2431 32 Doilar Sunfish 195 8656 2849 77 22 388 2053 25 62 259 11320 252 I.a r gemout h hass 49 22 Unident 11 led Sunf isti 12 339 12 161 109 69 47 32 Swamp Garier 25 1483 25 657 10 22 7 151 84 17 Sawcheck Darter 14364 93189 1368 % 12058 9051 42481 29259 Total 8369 12269 48241 139831 6677 Surface Water Temperature at Time 35.0 31.0 of Sample 1974 32.0 30.5 1975 32.5 38.0
.245 .129 Area Sampled ha. 1974 .116 .218 1975 .080 .113 i See Figure 4.2. l fur speelfic sample location.
I E E U E E W W W W g g g g g g
.E E E E .E M' E E E E E W E E E E O M .E Table 4.3.2 Comparison of numbers and weights of fishes (per hectare) collected with rotenone f rom several North and " south Ca r oi llia laken. When fishes were grouped by family in the literature, they are inclinfed in the category all others si.siaiar,t. eke 2 tase,u a,e.
,, , , , , , , , ,,, ,,,,6 ,,,,,,,,,,,,5 2266 hectare Creet tabe fatfleh 1abe 211 heetese (8919a) 1284 bectare 372 hectave Robinson impoundment (56cGa) 4*ll hectare (572e) (Adapted free (1000a) til hectare (Adepted free (Adopted from (2992e) (121e)
(4dosted from imeder 1961 end Saylese'l964 8eylese y &( (2250s) paels 1966) ringesyn, J 73) _ Crewell, J 66) _ Freseet Study yojght(1). p,omhet. Ve f ght(q I.ouder 1961) go.lgg M leienhn 6'elghi(gl hamb f1 yelght. fit E*sebel henbu yelght_(g} R A e1 ("""*?d*St pote, I IS 373 Not 4eellebte Tree, Redfin Ficherel 30 013 1)*01 yellow 22 4561 96 673 chain Pickerel 94 12805 4080 15 262 perch wee 222 647 colden Shiner ill 257 collected (seek Chobsocner 86 205 4510J le 18 octo 17 934 2 480 tane (Suhsuc ker 2 22 1150 ft. et meter 52 9274 262 des tag 1960 7 149 Srotted Socber 7 25 2 I. cite Patfish 2 2 350 110 1978 and 1965.
- 60) 25 410 2 Trace 1 11.% B si tt.ead 59 109 262 Tadcale Mo.ler 27 17 30 74 7
w Firate reich 175 264 126 57 32 12 W
!'csg alr ol I,h penJed rigst hnfloh 2 2 3 75 169) 140 4R4 0 226 Sluespotted Sanfleh 1925 49 200 1171 2 pedbeesst %=f t sh 77 15750 57 1346 123 1367 h ai smit h 917 18799 25400 1 262 70 1664 mivegi11 9963 29835 .
2550 pollar twoffsh 536 Sol IA950 4255 30 3427 largev uth Base 106 119 118 22 Trece 149 215 74F 5643,, parter 74 1421 3850 2 161 2992 44 1796 tellow Perrh 521 17401 12120 All othese 176 62) 52 Ill 141300 285 10933 241 1g68 81629 109 6314 !!OO }4911 Total 14974
'?teaa e.f 6 saeples cellected during 1974 and 1975. # Mean of 6 samplee collected dering 1957. 1959, and 1959.
Meam of 9 samples. 6 cellected during 1957.1958.1959, and 3 cellected derleg 1965.
' Mess of 2 eamples, 1969, 1972.
Mesa of 1 esoples. G
Table 4.4.1 List of sampling statistics for selected indicator species utiliEed in fish food habits analysis at Robinson Impoundment Statistic Winter Spring Sunner Fall Year Species Location sample size No Data 15 19 38 92 98 86 1974 Bluegill Intake mean Tima llo Data range Tlma No Data 81-100 77-100 54-100 sample size tio Da t a 21 37 38 124 125 1974 liluegil1 Intake mean TLmm No Data 134 range Timn No Data 101-190 101-147 101-190 sample size 46 71 28 33 78 87 84 1975 lower Impou nd men t mean Tima 75 B1negil1 47-99 42-99 59-98 range T'ma. 49-99 21 27 36 GO sample size 1975 133 119 137 filuegill tower Impoundment mean Tlen 131 range Tima 101-187 103-203 100-179 100-216 e sample size 31 21 48 6 L e 80 79 1975 mean TLne 62 82 Hluegill Discharge 70-90 range Tima 41-99 51-92 57-99 32 18 22 30 sample size 145 110 128 1975 Discharge mean Tima 147 Bluegill 100-130 104-210 iange Tima 101-206 105-208 sample size 17 3 11 14 . 45 108 120 112 1975 Upper Impoundment mean Tlanm 156 Ill uegi l l range Timn 106-236 48-219 71-218 55-253 9 16 12 14 sample size 1975 247 260 156 162 Largem-aut h bas:, Entire 1,ake mean Tlza rance TInn 145-490 165-427 103-220 100-204 6 20 29 10 sample size 153 145 147 1975 Entire Lake mean Timn 180 Warmouth 56-19R 45 ~401 106-180 range Tian 156-207 6 22 19 14 sample size 1975 270 204 148 192 Chain pickerel Entire Lake mean Tlsn range Tlanm 133-320 71-455 66-436 108-362 E E E E E E E E W W W W g g g g g g
M M M M M M M M M M M M M m W M M M M . . - . . . , . ~ - .... su . rsuu= a s s:a a <n A Robinson Im> andmeni. Seasonal occurrence in the food is inds .ited for each taxon (1 winter, 2= spring, 3-summer, 4sf.all) Lower Impoundment Discharge Area Upper _ impoundment Intake Area Cladocera Clnlocera Cladocera Cladocera Acroperus (1,2) Acroperus (1,4) Dia phanocana (2,3,4) Diaphariosoma (2,3) Eubosmina (1,2,3,4) Daphnia (1) Eubosmina (2,3,4) Diaphanosoma (1,2,3,4) Diaphanosoma (2,3,4) Eubosmina (1,2,3,4) Eurycercus (4) Copepoda Eubosmina (2,3,4) Cyclups ( 2,' 3,4 ) Eurycercus (3,4) Copepoda Eurycercus (4) Polyphemus (1) Cyclops (1,2,3,4) Diptera Diaptomus (1) Copepoda Ablabesmyia -(2) Copepoda Cyclops (1,2,3,4) Ostracoda Cyclops (1,2,3,4) Bezzia (2,4) Diaptomus (1,2,3) Cypridae (3) Diptera Chaohorus (2,3,4) Diptera Ahlabesmyia (1,2,3,4) Chironomus (2,3,4) Diptera nezzia ( 1, 2 , 3 )* Ablabes,tyla (2,3,4) Ablabesmyla (1,2,3,4) Cryptochironomus (3,4) Bezzia (1,2,3,4) Bezzia (1,2,3) Chaoborus (2) Ilarnischia '(2,3) Chironomus (1,2) Chaoborus (2,3,4) Chaoborus (1,2,3,4) Vicrotendip,es (3) Chironomus (1,2,3,4) Chironomus (3,4) Conchaplopia (3) entaneura (3,43 Cricotopus (2) Coryneneura (2) Cryptochironomus (1,4) Procladius'(2,3,4) Cricotopus (2) Dicrotendipes (1,2,3) Crypotchironomus (1,2,3,4) Pseudochironomus (2) llarnischia (3) Hie ro t end i pe_s (1) Psectrocladius (2) Cryptochironomus (4) Nanocladius (1,3,4) Dicrotendipes (2,3,4) Nanocladius (3,4) Trichoptera Orthocladius (3) Orthocladinae (1,4) p Oecetis (2,3) .flanociadius (2,4) Orthocladius (2,4) y Or t hotla<ti nae (2,3) Paralauterbornfella (1) Oxyethira (2) Orthocladius (2,3) Poly ped iEm-(f,'2 ,'1,~4 ) Parachironomus (4) Polycentropus (2,3,4) Polypedilum (1,2,3,4) Procladius (3,4) Paralauterbornfella (3) Ilymenoptera Procladius (1,2,3,4) Psectrocladius (1,2,3) Pentaneura (1) Formicidae (3) Psectrocladius (1,2,3,4) Thiemanniella (2) Polypedil_um (1,2,3,4) Coleopt e ra emergents (2,3,4) Procladius (1,2) Elmidae (2,3) Pseudochironomus (1) Psectrocladjus (1,2,4) Stenochironomus (1) pupae (1,2,3,4) llirudinea (2) Tanytarsus (2,3) Ephemeroptera _Pseudochironomus (1,2,3,4) Rheotanytarsus (3) Nematoda (4) Ephemerella (1) Osteichthyes Thienemanniella (2) Stenochironomus (2) emergents (2,3,4) Trichoptera 1.enomis (2,3) pupae (2,3,4) Oecetis (2,3,4) Thienemannicila (1) j Tribelos (4) Trichoptera Odonata Decetis (1,2,3,4) Coenagrimidae (3) pupae (2,3,4) unidentified (3,4) Oxyethira (3) Didymops (2) Enallagma (2) Trichoptera , Odonata Libellulidae (3) A3 rypn_fa (1,4) l Didymops_ (2) J Neurocordulia (1) __ Lept ocel la (4) Dorocordulia (2) Occetis (3,4) llemiptera Tetrogeneuria (1) Oxyethira (1,2,3) Formicidae (3) IIemiptera Pha ryga,ca (4) Hyrinicinae (3,4) Corixidae (4) Pycnopsyche (1) Pseudomyrinicinae (3) 4
Table 4.4.2 (continued) 1.epidoptera llymenoptera Ephemeroptera llexagenia 1,2,3,4 flymphula (4) Formicidae (2) Stenonoma 1,3 Coleoptera Hyrinicinae (3,4) Odonata lie rosus (1) Coleoptera Didyr g (4) flydrophilidae (2) lierosus (1) Enallagma (2,3,4) liydroporus (2) Ilyd roplitlidae (2) liyd raca rina Lepidoptera Lestes (1) llyd rachna (2,3,4) tiymphula (1,2) Libellulidae (3) ltydracarina ilemi pt era Amphipoda Gammarus (3) Ilydrachna (3) Corixidae (3) Amphipoda Palmacorixa (2) Aranea (4) *!!g.3ra (2) tiematoda (4) Cammarus (1) Ilymenoptera Oligochaeta (4) Aranea (2,4) Formicidae (2) egg cases (3) tJematoda (2) Myrinictnae (3,4) Ost e icht hyes Oligocheata (2,3,4) Pseudomyrinicinae (3) Etheostoma (2) Lepidoptera eg g (2) " '" I II'3) fio . Taxa - 40 liyd racar ina I!ydrachna (1,3,4) flo . Taxa 47 Decapoda Procambares (2) Aranea (4) Oligochaeta (l 2,3,/.' flema t od a (1) 4-Ostrichthyes h Euieucanthus (3) Et heostoma (3)
.I.epomi s (2,3) tiot royl s (2) eggs (2) larvae (2) tio . Taxa = 61 M M M M M W g g g g g g g g g
W 4-77 h Table 4.4.3 Summary of the food habits of young-of-the-year largemouth bass ( < 94 mmTL) f ro a Robinson impoundment from April to September of 1975 l - Spring Summer No. Per % % No. Per % % Stomach Freq. Vol. Stomach Free. Vol. Cladocera Aeroperus 1.5 18.2 7.2 i Diaphanosana Eubosmina 0.3 36.4 0.3 10.8 0.1 7.7 7.7 4.5 0.0 Copepoda Cyclops 0.1 9.1 0.1 7.4 7.7 2.1 Diaptomus 0.5 7.7 0.2 Diptera i chironomid pupae ceratopogonid pupae culicid puape 0.3 0.1 0.1 18.2 9.1 9.1 9.9 0.9 0.3 1.8 7.7 6.8 Chaoborus 5.4 30.8 17.1 I Ephemeroptera unidentified 2.0 7./ t.3 Odanata Enallac=a 0.? 7.7 6.7 Hemiptera Myrinicinae 0.8 7.7 6.7 Palmaeorixa 0.6 36.4 27.7 I Amphipoda Hvallela azteca 0.1 9.1 0.2 0.2 7.7 3.8 i Gammarus . Decapoda Palaemonetes 0.1 7.7 7.7 Oligochaete l unidentified 0.1 7.7 0.0 N Osteichthyes Lecomis 1.6 54.6 53.4 0.2 15.4 12.3 Cyprinidae 0.1 7.7 3.1 I Gambusia Etheostoma 0.2 0.2 7.7 15.4 7.1 14.6 Sample Size 11 13 Range (TLem) 48-92 32-94 Mean (TLmm) 61 74
4-78 Table 4.5.1 Back calculated length (mm) of bluegill collected from Robinson Impoundment during 1975 and 1976 DISCRARGE AREA Calculated Total Length at Age (cm) Sample Age Group Size 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 47 65 - - - 2 9 51 95 - - 3 6 50 89 120 - - - 4 16 34 74 109 137 - 5 10 33 65 101 132 158 - 6 5 29 67 92 122 143 170 g < Weighted Stean 52 77 106 133 153 170 g ll No. of Fish - 93 46 37 31 15 5 Siean Inerement
~
52 25 29 27 20 17 LAKE A30VE DISCHARGE AREA 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 14 62 - - - - - g 2 6 63 126 - - - - W 3 7 45 84 133 - - - 4 5 23 75 113 146 - - 3 5 5 30 60 93 137 158 - g, 6 3 27 63 90 120 147 174 Weighted Mean - 48 85 112 137 154 174 8 ' 20 13 3 3 No. of Fish- - 40 26 48 37 27 25 17 20 Mean increment LAKE BELOW DISCHARGE APS.A I 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 69 66 - - - 2 19 53 94 - - - - g 3 10 43 79 115 - - - g 4 31 35 68 106 130 - - 5 11 30 63 99 124 161 - 6 3 27 50 84 117 . 15 6 180 g Weighte" Mean - 52 75 105 130 160 180 m No. of Fish - 143 74 55 45 14 3 Mean Increment 52 23 30 25 30 20 I t l l 1 E \ l.
4-79 % Table 4.5. 2 Comparison of back calculated lengths of bluegill from Robinson lepoundsent and free other similar lakes I . Calculated Total Lencth at A_ce (mm) Location 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 Present Study 51 77 106 132 156 174 n=276 n=147 n=112 n=89 n=37 n=ll Lake Robinson 1968 50 104 124 - - - (Phillips 1969) n=33 n=23 n=4 - - - Kitty Hawk Fresh Pond 56 81 112 135 198 - (Dickson, 1961) - n=8 n=8 n=8 n=1 n=1 - Lake Waccamaw 36 81 127 152 178 188 (Davis, 1966) n=8 - - - - - I Lake Waccamaw (Louder, 1961) 43 n=14 94 134 165 I I B f beightedmeanvaluesfromallareas
I 4-80 I Table 4.5.3 Total length / weight relationship for bluegills from three areas of Robinson Impoundment collecced by electrofishing during 1975 and 1976 Correlation Season Location Number Intercent Slope Coefficient Winter Lake above discharge 8 - 4.603 2.955 .970 Discharge area 27 - 5.077 3.136 .973 Lake below discharge 351 - 5.380 3.237 .963 Spring Lake above discharge 13 - 6.270 3.705 .914 Discharge area 74 - 4.922 3.059 .962 Laka below discharge 251 - 5.179 3.190 .964 Summer Lake above discharge 42 - 4.836 2.980 .926 Discharge area 67 - 5.420 3.301 .937 Lake below discharge 179 - 5.732 3.441 .951 Fe.11 Lake above discharge 48 - 4.537 2.864 .963 I Discharge area 87 - 6.451 3.808 .950 l Lake below discharge 377 - 4.981 3.086 .923 5 5 l I i 1~ I l L.Jinter = Dece=ber, January, February
. B Spring = March, April, May g Su==er = June, July, Augut,u Fall = September, Octooer November I
a
I 4-81 I Table 4.5.4 Back calculated lengths (mm) of warmouth collected from Robinson impouncuent curing 1975 and 1976
. DISCHARGE AREA -
g Calculated Total Length at Age Age Group Size 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 6 43 - - - - - 2 3 31 59 - - - - 3 3 42 91 139 - - - Weighted Mean - 40 75 139 - - - No. of Fish - 12 6 3 - - - Mean increment - 40 35 64 - - - LAKE ABOVE DISCHARGE AREA - , 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 3 53 - - - - - 2 4 41 82 - - - - 3 11 42 78 120 - - - I 4 5 Weighted Mean 5 5 45 38 43 79 68 71 119 100 115 155 137 146 159 159 I No. of Fish Mean increment 43 28 28 25 44 21 31 10 13 5 - LAKE BELOW DISCHARGE AREA - 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 - - - - - - - 2 5 32 70 - - - - 3 4 45 90 135 - - - 4 12 37 76 123 164 - - 5 11 27 59 95 134 162 - I 6 Weighted Mean No. of Fish 4 25 33 36 44 68 36 75 108 31 107 143 27 152 159 15 187 187 4 Mean increment - 33 35 40 35 16 28 I I I
l 4-82 ) Table 4.5.5 Comparison of back calculated lengths of warmouth f rom Robinson Impoundment and from other similar areas j Calculated Tetal length at Age (mm) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Location Present Study 1 38 70 112 143 139 187 - g' n=76 n-67 n=55 n=37 n=20 n=4 - E Lake Robinson 1968 43 S9 132 165 - - - g < (Phillips, 1969) n=25 n=10 n=6 n=1 - - - g' Lake Waccamaw 41 86 116 135 - - - ! (Louder, 1961) n=2 - - - - - - < Salters Lake 33 69- 107 157 193 234 251 (Louder, 1961) n=10 - - - - - - Jones Lake 36 86 122 180 205 - - (Louder, 1961) n=8 - - I Singletary Lake 43 66 122 183 213 231 - (Louder, 1961) n=6 - - - - - - Black Lake 25 48 99 150 - - - (Louder, 1961) n=1 - - - - - - I 5 I I I 1 4eighted mean values from all areas. I
s 4 4-83 I b Table 4.5.6 Length /vcight relationship for varmouth from three areas of
. Robinson impoundment collected by electrofishing during 1975 and 1976 Correlation Number Intercept Slope Coefficient Season Location Winter Lake above discharge 15 - 5.398 3.315 .991 Discharge area 11 -
3.651 2.559 .947 g Lake below discharge 47 - 5.300 3.286 .980 E Lake above discharge 40 - 4.677 3.003 .997 Spring Discharge area 31 - 5.774 3.484 .984 Lake below discharge 64 - 5.591 3.419 .990 Summer Lake above discharge 9 - 4.315 2.859 .926 Discharge area 3 - 5.636 3.435 .999 Lake below discharge 14 - 3.669 2.565 .836 i Fall Lake above discharge 33 - 5.387 3.299 .843 Discharge area 6 - 5.035 3.181 .999 i Lake belov discharge 41 - 4.075 3.079 .954 i 1Wfnter = December, January, February Spring = March, April, May Summer - June, July. August Fall = September, October, November
I 4-84 Table 4.5.7 3ack calculated lengths (mm) of largemouth bass collected from Robinson Impoundment during 1975 and 1976 DISCHa?.J:. 212A - I g, Calcu> : _ed Total Length at Ake g Age Group size 1 2 3 4 5 E 1 3 105 - - - - 3 2 - - - - - - l 3 5 44 83 3 '.0 - - 4 5 43 93 .37 178 - 5 5 33 105 147 209 251 Weighted Mean -
.il 94 138 194 251 No. of Fish -
18 15 15 10 5 Mean Increment 51 43 44 56 57 IMPOUNDMENT A30VE DISCHARGE AREA ,, 1 2 3 4 5 1 3 87 - - - - 2 . _ _ 3 3 31 141 217 - - 4 5 97 189 237 310 - Weighted Mean - 90 171 230 310 - No. of Fish - 11 S S 3 - W , Mean Increment 90 81 59 80 5 IMPOUNDMENT 3ELOW DISCHARGE AREA 4 I 1 2 3 5 Combined - 52 99 161 221 257 No. of Fish - 5 4 4 4 2 Mean Increment 52 47 62 60 36 I l l I I a
I 4-85 Cem 4rison of Sack calculated lengths of largemouth bass I Table 4.5.8 from Robinson Ittpoundment and other similar areas Calculated Total Length at Age (mm) Loce *. ion 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 I Present Study 118 168 220 l 64 252 ~ ~ ~ n=34 n=27 n=27 n=17 n=7 Lake Rebinson 1968 99 210 322 343 - - - - (Phillips, 1969) n=40 n=29 n=9 - - - - - Singlotary Lake , 53 124 228 343 383 445 464 480 (Louder, 1961) n=2 - - - - - - - Lake Waccamaw 116 231 318 385 - - - - (Louder, 1961) n=17 - - - - - - - I. Lake Waccanaw 112 226 235 381 437 483 - - (Davis, 1966) n-13 - - - - - - - 1 Wrighted mean values from all areas , I I II l l l I I I I
I i \ 4-86 l Table 4.5.) Length /veight relationship for largemouth bass from three areas of Rooinson Inpoundment eclietted by electrof1shing during 1975 and 1976 Correl: tion g y Intercept Slope Coefficient 3 Season Location Number _ Lake above discharge 5 - 6.153 3.559 .997
'41nte r Discharge area 30 - 5.102 3.087 .978 Lake below discharge 26 - 3.073 2.252 .341 Lake above discharge * - - - -
I Spring Du charge area 12 - 5.6 15 3.295 .987 Lake below discharge 3 - 5.108 3.1 15 .999 Lake above discharge 6 - 4.935 3.013 .997 Su:::mer
- 5.292 3.166 .993 Discharge area 7 g Lake below discharge 4 - 4.851 3.011 .999 5 Lake above discharge 20 - 5.234 3.148 .994 Fall Discharge area 42 - 4.887 2.994 .961 Lake bel.w discharge 18 - 3.827 2.572 .926 5
I I I
- Insuf ficient data to perform analysis.
l.Jinter = December, January, February Spring = March, April, May Su=mer = June, July, August Fall = September, ractober, November I E
I 4-87 Table 4.5.10 Back calculated lengths (c::t) ef chain pickerel cellected f ror Robinson 1=poundment during 1975 and 1976 DISCHARGE AREA calculated I.,tal Lenrth at Are Sagle Ace Group Size 1 2 3 4 1 - - - - - 2 5 130 224 - - 3 $ 136 248 315 -
*icighted Mean -
133 236 u5 - No. of Fish - 10 10 5 - g Mean increment - 133 103 79 + LAKE ABOVE DISCHARCE AREA 1 2 3 4 1 9 119 - - - 2 17 127 219 - - 3 I 113 6 189 232 - 4 4 159 229 284 334 Weighted Mean - 126 214 253 334 No. of Fish - 36 27 l') 4
.Mean Increment 126 85 39 81 1.AKE BELOW DISCHARGE 1 2 3 4 1 - - - - -
2 5 120 223 - - I 3 8 120 218 312 - Weighted Mean - 120 220 312 - No. of Fish - 13 13 8 - Mean increment 120 100 92 I I I I .
I 4-88 l Table 4.3.11 Comparisen of back c31culated lengtns of chain pickere1 from Robinson 1=poundment and ot5er similar areas Loestion 1 2 3 1 5 Present Study 126 219 237 334 - n=59 n=50 n=23 n=4 - Salters Lake 170 330 447 518 - (Louder , 1961) n=3 - 132 ??9 358 493 - Jones Lake - - (Louder, 1961) n=3 - - Lake 'a'accamaw 132 2B4 368 - (Leuder, 1961) n=7 - - I t,e1 , tee ne.n 1ue. ,r 11 .re.. 3 I 5 I I I g I I a.
. _ - . ~ _ . - . - - ~ . . . . . - . .- .. _ - . . - ~_ - _ . - . . - . . _ - . - - - ,
I 4-89
- p-I' gj; I*t t a .
*l% -
-1: -
1
$2 j: . .I
{ i, , .. . , . .., ,, . . ;, . . j: - ' 1
-l:
l i* , i
+e ,
i
- . *j, *-'{1
*j, * *
- l I . ,, . . j, , -
's
)
ja I i* r
.j ,
.1 :
I: sl,
-i,
.j:
..j, i,
j, .
.I, it
.I i
- s s it ;s *i g)
;.,: f8 - - *
, .. ..j, . .. . , .. . .. . !, y. . . .; a,. . . .t , . . .. . , i,
! j, . . .l, . . .
t f I I*: 1 f
.3 g . . . . g . .
- y j; jt
** ,'I t ,{
- f. g . . I, I . .js **** *
- g 3
,.g i . . . .. . . g j, . . f ,,
.J. . .. ..I l c i's s - - .
s 's - - !' , - -
- c
- -* - - , a, l,
I.ya !.. s .4
.i,
.3 3
s1.! g, .ilg
.l,
. . . . : g ,. .. .
I *l* I E, * *!, ,
- a t , * -
- f: * *
*l
, . . .l , . . . , . .- .l, , ......,;, .. . . . .;
,p . . .
....4,
.. , ,l i
. v = '
=! >
y 6
- u. =
l .. . .'g , , s y 1, -
;3 3
. . d',
~ 1., g, ... . . , . . . , ;; ., . . . , .... ,,
i ", p.; , ... . . ,. . .
.l , ..
3 1 .- - -i, .,..,! u;,
; , , .. . .i, l.g s
, .. . , ... .- , i.. . . .... . ... ,!,.... ...... . ,;
g lt * * ,
- l. * ,. **
*{*
- a ,,,i g.g ., a s .' , - , .-alt * *I, *
- W j,- A I r .i , , . . , . . , .. i, . ... .;, . .. .;
. d.,.. - , . . , , , . , ,. . ... ,1, t .,
j
.e u, . _ ,
I t 3,
..n .. .
to E a *: 9 ! gg
-=y . . . , . . , . .
i
. . . i i l
00 C i 1 i
*M E C'" !- i r -
-lr I l I. M o e.i AC ! .!
, +,
d { i i
' i o :lr t i
, j C cc fa, i I I
g i
.!, .I
*wO 2 .c G C w : .:
, *s i
a *
*!s i
****a l
1' I w Cr.' ! y [.,. . g .. g . ;;
.j,.
, j;
*g p.; , . , . .. . . .
l , l .) y . . g , . .i; . . ; . -!; . .* + UE ....f,
.; j, - g . .. , l, .
*{
gg .; . j, .. . , j, .. . . . I
.l,
- 6. - gl.,- g g !, g . . g . .; . . .};
mu g . I
,k
"* !a3 , ; * -i; - * ,
' s l O g 1 i s
j i fI 3 .- l , ) ,
- l I !
,1,1,!W!. !!i! in ! o 1, j d!i W!,, !..W!
ll-2- - - i :u, i llmp.,p i t., m ia;ipi! ' +Lp!p!;in,11 h.h.w%a!. !!imri i Lit. tpoin,i an!a@p,Lp11! p !91 !!l e,,ilie.r,i ,i os!, ou , iI a Ja i 3:
. .; . i run
, 1 L. .s kag simm mpp;. ih em.it mpo. n n .i.14 i L.Ln
.u
. L .i .<. .: , .i
.I l
I 4-90 Table 4.7.2 Numbers (per 100 m ) of fishes collected in ichthycplankton surf ace tows in various areas of Robinson impoundment >by 1975 through February 1976 I g SAMPLING APIA g Uccer Impoundment Mon th Period Lower Impoundment Discharte Area I 0 0 0 February D N O Percidae 5.25 Percidae 3.34 Percidae 10.24 Percidae 3..' 0 May D N Percidae 30.63 Percidae 14.27 Minytrema melanops 20.16 Centrarchivse 10.08 g
. 3 Percidae 1.80 0 Etheoste.na sp . 1.58 June D Unidentified 3.60 Percidae 3.16 N Centrarchidae 10.80 Percidae 26.84 Centrarchidae 3.83 Centrarchidae 118.11 July D 0 0 0 I
N 3 0 0 0 0 0 August D E 0 0 0 N E September D Percidae 3.02
- Percidae 9.41 N
0 0 0 October D 0 0 0 N 0 0 0 December D O 0 0 N I I
- e. eata a a11a,1e.
I a.
M M M M M M M - M m W W W W W W nie 4.8.1 Ichthyoplankton entrainment at Rob l e. sn St eam Elect ric d'lant , if-a rch 1975 through Febt .ry 1976 Number Number per per Month 3 Week Period Taxon 100_M Month Week Period Taxon 100 M I January 1 D Febror.ry I D Percidae .87 N N l 2 D 2 D Percidae 5.61 N N Percidae 49.37 D
- 3 3 D Percidae 3.91 N
- N Percidae .99 4 D 4 D Pereidae 24.02 N N March 1 D Percidae 1.14 April 1 D l Perci.iae 1.13 N N 2 D
- 2 D PereIdae 1.I7 N
- N 3 D 3 D
- N Percidae 1.48 N
- 4 D
- 4 D Pe r c idae 7.71 4 N N Percidae 24.59 -
May 1 D Percidae 6.91 June 1 D N s N 2 D Percidae .75 2 D Per Idae 1.18 Catostomidar .75 N Percidae 1.03 N Percidae 18.77 3 D Unidentified 4.42 3 D Percidae 10.03 N N
- 4 D Pereldae 3.78 4 D Cen t ra rc h idae 2.52 N N Percidae 5.63 July 1 D Percidae .82 August 1 D N N 2 D 2 D N N 3 D 3 D Percidae 9.32 N Centrarchidae .85 N 4 D I>cromis 2.36 4 D N N 5 D '
N __ ------a - - - -- -------#
Table 4.8.1 (continued) Niunbe r Number per per 3 tionth Veek Period Taxon 100 M Month Week Period Taxon _100 M Sep tembe r 1 D october 1 D Percidae 2.12 N Lepomis 1.06 2 D + Unidentified 1.06 N 4 N Percidae 14.67 3 D 2 D Percidae 29.43 N Unidentified 2.35 4 D N Percidae 7.09 N 3 D N Percidae 5.80 g Unidentified 1.16 4 D N Percidae 5.87 5 D N Percidae 8.08 Decerber 2 D 7 N Percidae j .96 3 3 D i N Percidae 1.84 4 D l N
$ D Percidae .73 N
i
- Sample not collected 9t:an t i ta t ivel y.
NOTE: Plant of f 1ine November 1 -- Decernber 10, 1975 l tNo larvae were collected in the ichthyoplankton net; however, 32-minute zooplankton sairpling (300g 30 cm net) i continue! 14.00 per 100m3 in the day samples and 2700 per 100m in the night samples , i um uma sus mun muu aus em um amm ums amm aus aus sum aus
Jl I I J
\
I l Table 4.9.1 Fishes impinged on II. B. Robinson Steam Electric Finnt Unit 1 intake screens (numlmr and weight per 24 hours). December 1973 - December 1975 Jan. l'eb . Mar. Apr. etay June July A ng. no/ day wt/ day no/ day we/ day no/ day vt/ day no/ Jay vt/ day na/ day we/ day no/ day we/ Jay no/ day u / Jay mo/ day wt/ day Chain Pickerel W = reme t. B laset t !! g Darter (prfearily sweep) '
- OtherI Total 2 T1me Saepted Chain Parkerel .5 61 1.0 310 Warmouth 3.5 444 1.5 3 g Blueglll .5 1 4.5 165 32.5 827 1.0 15 2.0 39 6.0 21 25.0 516 Darter (primarily swamp) .5 1 3 OtherI .5 48 .5 10 3.0 129 Total 2 1.0 49 5.0 175 *
- 40.1 1462 1.0 15 2.0 11 9.5 26 26.0 1026 E "
Time Sempted 48 hrs. 48 hrs. 48 hre. 4R hre. 16 hrs. 48 hre. 48 hre. 1.0 631 4 161 Chain Pleberel Vainouth 1.0 2 .5 2 1.0 ) 1.5 3 1.6 3 1.0 7 .7 101 RIuegill 3.5 21 35.4 216 5.0 36 10.5 92 116.9 981 56.5 529 18.3 196 E Darter (primari?y evawp) 2.5 i T.1 5 3. r. 2 .5 1 1.0 1 1.0 1 O other I .5 4 3.9 18 1.0 9 1.0 24 .6 15 4.0 10 Total 2 *
- 7.5 30 47.4 287 10.n 50 13.0 119 120.0 1618 59.5 712 44.0 508 Time Sampled 48 hre. 49.6 hre. 24 hre. 44 hre. 46 hre. 120.7 hre. 97 hre.
*Date not evallable 1
2 Totals were calculated independently th te rounding descrepencice may have occurred i Includre white catffsh. yellow bullhead, pirate perch, bluespotted sunfish, and boufin l I 1 l l
i l l Table 4.9.1 (continued) l-l Sept. Oct. Nov. Dec. Mean Percent no/ day wt/ day no/ day vt/ day no/ day ut/ day no/ day wt/ day no/ day wt/ day Number Weight
.5
- Chain Pickerel l uarmouth .5 65
.5 4 .
Bluegill
.5 I Darter (primarily swamp) s 1 $ OtherI f' 2.0 70 l Total' l Tinas ':ampled 48 hrs.
r l Chain Pickerel
.1 52 <1% 12%
12./ 22 1.0 2 4.0 262 2.2 67 6% 16% , j l Uaimouth ' ninegill 29.3 91 51.5 38'3 211.3 690 8.4 75 33.8 257 91% 62% rT Darter (primarily swamp) 2.G 1 .6 1 .3 1 1% <1% $ < l 42
$ otherl2 1.3 17 1.3 258 .6 37.1 418 2% 10% l Total 45.3 131 52.5 390 216.7 1210 9.1 76 j l
Time Sampled 36 hrs. 48 his. 36 hrs. 37 hrs. ( i l l Chain Pickerel .3 104 .2 86 .2 89 <!% 23% I uaimouth .7 11 2% 3% , Bluegill 19.0 113 15.2 110 15.0 310 1.5 31 28.8 260 89% 66% l 2 liarter (primarily swamp) 1.3 1 .6 1 .5 1 1.0 1 1.7 2 5% 1%
$ Otherl2 .5 2 1.0 253 1.1 32 3% SI Tota 1 . 21.0 221 16.8 364 15.7 397 2.5 32 32.5 394 Time Sampled 94.8 hrs. 120.2 hrs. 96.1 hrs. 95.2 hrs. ,
i
+
i r 4 t
- i, ,
, r, r < - -
(Number & veight per 24 hre.) Table 4.9.2 Fishes impinged on the II. B. Robinson Steam Electric Plant Unit 2 intake screens December 1973 - December 1975 June Ju17 Aug. Mar. Apr. May Jan. Feb. no/ day wt/ day no/ day vt/ Jay no/ Jay vt/ day no/ day vt/ day no/ day vt/ day no/ day vt/ day solday wt/ day no/ day vt/ day Chain Pfeberet 1.'b l t e Ca t. f I sh Wa r sum t h C Bloegill C Other I e Totall Time Sampled 2.0 1200 4.0 2050 1.0 235 .7 209 1.3 Illi 134 Chain Pickerel 50 .7 SI 1.5 210 2.0 100 2.0 Wuste Catifah 39.5 1436 2.5 2.5 220 5.3 337
.5 22 .5 41 .7 SL 9.5 1636
, Warmouth
ed i 96.7 2596 86.0 1444 240.5 3R47 3392.6 10359 125.5 3991 40.5 1672 39.1 1.3 E Blurgill 43 95 2.0 2 .5 189 3
"" 4.5 169 5.0 409 3.4 8.5 1395.3 12RR2 Otheel 1557 119.7 5649 *1 al AS.O 1446 247.5 '.555 171.0 5852 AM.5 2171 44.6 36 hre.3 w7 Totall 3 48 hre. 35 hrs. 47.9 hr . 12 bra.3 48 hre.
Time Saarled 48 hrs. 6.3 2734 11.7 5347 5.7 2741 444 1.0 954 42 Cheln Pickerel l 1.0 328 4.0 700 5.7 177 1.0 21 5.9 white Catff*h .5 7 10.0 165 6.9 4.7 538 4.4 131 6.7 275 1.0 57 1.0 259 1.0 368 7037 Warmouth 235.3 2494 414.9 2769 fl55. 6 100.5 1037 245.9 2166 136.0 160R O Mluegill I 119.5 1076 33 .5 8 2.4 34 3.4 370 otherI 4.0 67 6.5 546 6.8 5.3 4.0 879.3 10465
$ 125.0 1593 119.0 2976 26J.5 3265 T45.0 2699 *2 *2 252.5 595) 434.5 8701 Total 2 49.2 hre. 24 hra. 46 him. 119.1 bra. 97.2 hre.
Time Sampled 3 48 hre. 48 hre.
*1 Plant offline May 6-30, 1974
*2 riant offitne May 2-27, 1975
*) Flant of fline 18evember I-30, 1975 runfish, pirate perch, filer, largemeth haos, includes golden shiner, creen chub =ucher, labe chubesich pr, spot ted nocher, bluenpot ted nunfish, reoste-est l dollar sunfish, swamp darter, eastern unidelnnow, flat bulliwad, black crapple, white crapple Totale were esiculated independently thus roundina discrepancies may have occurred
' Addit ional sampling vse conducted with fewer than 3 peers operating, see rigore 4.9.1 l l
6
Taole 4.9.2 (continued) Mean Perc ent Nov. De . Sept. Oct. no/ day vt/ day no/ day vt/ day no/ day ut/ day no/ day ut/ day no/ day vt/ day Number Height 7.0 2416 26 chain Pickerel I.0 Warmouth 1.5 152 tiluegill 242.5 5364 R Darter (primarily swamp) 4.0 164 1 256.0 8122
$ 9ther 2 Total Tiine Sampled 14%
2.8 1274 1.8 830 <1% 3.1 1159 2.7 1893 280 1% 5% 7 1.7 102 6.9 Chain Pickerel 3.0 10 .5 5 22.0 979 1.9 279 <lI 5% $ warmouth 4.0 120 1.1 140 399 1.0 97 4280 98% 74% Bluegill 7.0 496.7 2765 176.6 1549 851.2 3586.5 11471 1093.0 6190 138 <1% 2% Z Darter (primarily swamp) 3.3 235 6.1 342 3.5 i 17 1.0 19 2.5 188.1 3407 866.3 5807
$ other l 3602.0 13055 1095.5 6310 528.7 5993 43.5 hrs.
Total 2 48 hrs. 48 hrs. 36 hrs. Time Sampled 28%
.5 312 3.0 1349 1%
1.4 494 2.0 966 4.0 176 1% 4% Chalu Pickerel 4.4 43 1.4 77 240 1% 5% 2.0 Warmouth 13? 57% a 1.7 58.5 1858 278.2 2702 95% Bluegill 1867 6% 487.2 4907 lid.8 788 4.2 308 1% 0 parter (primarily swamp) 4.6 582 5.5 2.0 72 291.4 4775 64.5 2957
$ other l2 496.7 5648 136.8 3493 *3 *3 48 hrs.
Total 120.2 hru. 70.3 brs. Time Sampled M g g g g E E E E E E E IE E E E
m ,-. , m m m r r--r i Table 4.10.1 Estimated tot al cngler use and catch rate for II. B. Robinson Impoundment, June 1975 - June 1976
%T1YTED UEFYCA1 f a t I mat ed E s t l e.s t eet A ver :=r.e Estta.sted Total Average Es t im.et e.t letal H mes Cat e ts/ Total Seasonal Catch / Tor:sl Telp Tntil Trip Total thr a pour Catch Tatal Anglers l engt h Aneters Fl steed Sensen Location Anglers i.engt l. Anglers , Fished 11ourI _ Ca t c h _
112 2M5 i 14 2.70 127 M81 45 AM 11 3.01 151 455 .47 214 84 3179 per I A 860 54 2.29 All 1404 pring FM 61 3.21 II15 4096 .21 8 4.00 52 208 04 8 0 0 AM 9 1.00 195 SR5 2.21 I41 31R . 32 IOR
**"* pH 20 2.66 4R9 1101 .51 664 11 2.00 91 IR2 0 0 R7 252 Of 0 t 279 AM 4 2.987 119 2D9 .06 II 649 41 266 8 f.50 nt 10 2.23* 291 All tw atines 3414 7 2.22 82 182 .29 's )
18 1.0)* 186 1130 . 30* 151 AM 44 2.51 4 04 Il41 .53 66)
'"' "PP" I ' PM 10 2.36 275 649 33 5 19 4 1A 3.20 61 195 .61 12) 1.4)* 45 64 .063 AM i 25 5 4.11 11 123 .24 il
** "' FH 13a 5.00 169 845 0)*
8 0.1)* 610 208 of a 67 194 .69 134 AM 1 2.R9 113 194 06 12 10 2.61* 100 261 04* 10 156 7 e 191 3 1.72 All Ineations 1945 u 26 4.10 Int 677 .2* 144 16 3.68 2M3 1041 .40 416 Upper Late AM 1% 47 1.% 14 ) 122I .11 159 Fall til 10 3.24* 201 651 .24 8 1.74 12" 209 .27 56 2sil i AM 3 2.25 87 196 .65 127 2.W 125 111 .29 91
'# "'"* 41 65 .217 14 12 rM i 1.587 6 1.29f 47 155 .17# 26 2:2 5 3.GJ 10A 324 0 0 AM 1.87F 257 468 44F 206
' 15) 2f 0 0 0 18 191 4 1. .'O All locaticas 1400 0 25 2.19 297 650 .08 52 3 0.487 406 195 0F AM 4.71 177 814 .36 111 tilater Upper labe rH 17 2.00 551 1106 .29 321 12
.24 31 13 1.74 90 3)F .23 78 2 3.40 34 129 AM 130 21 2.50 218 545 .37 93 M = diar ge PH 10 1.41 461 650 .20 48 94 3 2.12* 98 208 .36 ))
3 2.10 93 195 AM 7 2.90* 6) 18) .21 3M PM 9 1.83 320 596 .27 160 All locatinne 116) 08AND TOTAL 7952
- Average of caerleted and partial trip data.
f rartial tr ip data only. Icatch/ hour data are means of completect and port f al trire. ATotal anglere interviewed during period (no englers observed J.oring f netantancave counto).
Fishes t agged and r ecapt ured in it. II . Robinson Impoundment during 1974, 1975, and 1976 Table 4.11.1 Recapture Tagged Comnent Weight Date lucaeion 1.ength Ue igig Ihit e Iscation I.ength DL umber N G-1 190 145 6/25/74 G-1 Id4 120 8/28/74 Warmouth 80 4/2/75 A-1 160 89 A-1 145 45 400 6/25/74 164 88 2/10/76 A-1 163 ft6 2/15/76 11 Angler Return 667 5/20/75 Car;al N. of A-1 185 140 839 2/13/75 A-1 Angler Return 2/6/75 E-1 178 115 4/5/15 146 870 4/2/75 A-3 182 2/13/75 A-3 ISO 873 2/10/76 A-3 180 124 170 110 874 2/13/75 A-3 3/24/76 A-3 182 124 A-3 180 124 8/4 2/10/76 85 5/9/75 Angler Feturn 4/30/75 E-1 163 pugler Herurn 914 120 //5/75 A-1 996 2/13/75 A-1 1 71) Angler lieturn A-1 241 iS8 2/13/76 N. of B-1 1.aine9outh Bass 66) 2/10/16 10/14/75 S. of C-1 Angler Return A-1 240 146 697 9/26/75 11/18/75 F-3 Angler Return F-3 337 565 713 10/16/75 2/25/76 Angler Returu , E-1 200 95 796 2/11/76 2/25/76 Angler Return E-1 224 122 798 2/11/76 Angler Retuin 1/12/76 E-1 446 439 2/29/76 Angler Return Chain Pickerel 644 820 2/29/76 N. of 1- 1 1/il/76 G-3 460 Angler Return 649 2/29/76 E-1 cove E-1 390 290 787 2/11/76 4/2/75 E-3 280 120 ! 264 100 984 ?/20/75 E J 627 2724 3 612 2551) 6/11/75 955 5/11/75 6/18/75 E-3 Angler Return nowtin 604 2040 986 2/20/75 E Angler Return G-3 292 330 11/2/74 N. of G-3 Yellow th.Ilhead 87 6/26/74 4/9/75 F-1 Angler Return 283 355 861 2/i/7$ A-3 G-3 Angler Return G-3 334 638 11/15/74 Flat nullhead 119 2/13/74 A-3 212 180 A-1 213 182 2/10/76 k ed t,r ea s t 641 1/12/76 M M5 W W W m M m M e M m EM M M M M M
I 4-99 I Table 4.13.1 Commen and scientific names of fishes collected from 11ack Creek during 1974 and 1975 Common Scientific Bovfin M calva Accrican eel I Redfin pickerel Cnain pickerel Anruilla rostrata Esex americanus Isex nicer Golden shiner Notemirenus chryseleucas I Dusky shiner Unidentified shiner Creek chubsucker Notteris cu=inrsae Notreois sp. Erieveen obieneus I Lake chubsucker Spotted sucker White catfish Ericyron sucetta Minyttera melanors Ictalurus catus I Yellev bullhead Ictalurus natalis Tadpole madtot Neturus rvrinus Margined madten Noturus insirnis Pirate perch Aphredederus savanus I Lined topminnow Mosquitoefish Mud sunfish Fundulus lineolatus
, Gambusia affinie, Acantharchus pomotis I Eanded pigmy sunfish Black banded sunfish Bluerpotted sur. fish Elasseen zenatur Enneseanthus chaetodon Enneacanthus cleries.us Redbreast sunfish Lepomis auritus I Pumpkinseed Warmouth Leporis .cibbosus Lepemis rulosus Bluegill Lepomis eacted irus I Dollar sunfish Largemouth bass Sunfish hybrid Leperis marcinatus Micrepterus salmeides Lepotis sp.
I Sw.sep darter Tessellated darter Sawcheek darter Etheostoma fusiforme Etheostoma olr.stedl Etheosto g serriferum Piedmont darter Percina crassa I I I I __
.? l ! l[ Iil{F[l[ll!ifi ll , ,I i(!Ii iI! , i . i e i >
eg - e M c 4488 2 4 44 6 4 2 e 1 D v 2 88 2 264 406 2 2 1 o 2 3 N 1 M ~ t 0 06 2 62 48 846 2 c O 2 42 1 M.,- 5 7 S p e 242026 2 23 8 8 6260 1 644422 W 9 6 1 7
- 9 .
2 8 1 g 228 62 u d A n a 5 7 9 l 2 0288 6 4 2 8222 E 1 u 2 J g n E. i r u . 8 280 62 4 d n 420 00 86 4 1 1 u 3 31 k J e e r E_ C y 466 226 2 6222 2 0 2022 k l a 2 42 c f a l B E n . 2 2 22 2 i r 8 446422 p g A n i h s . f _ f r 22206484 424 4 44 a 24 1 o - t r M E c e l e 6 . 6 442 62 4 2 22 f o 7 9 1 b F e 1 2 E r u o h r e s a l. 8428 1 2 22 4 6 E_ p h s i f hh f ssh r o ii s if 1 h e
- r e l el r
er k era mo d e i w o nnf s uu nf ss uf h s s t r r a e E b n s n sa d t m r er ck eeot yd u i h r r u er eruck h t dh n ed a N kcki ene su cl d nb s ul a mr ms gd e acih med sd e f nh t ed i chi ub sum p 'p shhschd u b ee epii nt t e d p ot pat s shl s uaak t n b oant l ut rt odl e E 2 p ei uir m l e nn ii neyk n cewl ne od t ooit d sek s rk ogae p eh _ 3 c eb p mel gms c 1 Jf i i dk eet l pgae l t wd al s ek ol d r r l,udu na al 1ud mr ua ul wer aas w E _ p e ual 4 e i n oeh our a. S Ye TMPt OBR CGDC1 a a iMnI s 1 1 t I pWinLSs TS l t b a a t T S E _Il', ll'IIllll jflf' f ,l ll : l , ,! ' : - =
.. m.__. ' M M M M M M M M M m M m m m m
,,,,,, .o 1975 1976 Oct. Nov. Dec. Jun. Jeel . Aug. Sep. Jan. Feb. 11a r. Apr. Pial Stat ion II 6 10 10 4 6 8 10 4 4 2 4 American cel 2 2 4 2 4 Hedfin pickerel 2 2 4 2 4 2 6 6 2 Chain pickerel 2 2 2 10 14 Colden shiner 2 2 10 6 4 4 26 4 -2 2 2 Creek chubsucker 4 2 2 Lake cimbsucker 2 4 2 Spotted sucker fellow i,ullhead 4 2 4 2 2
,'hste perch ,
Itanded pigmy sunfish 2 2 2
.tla s banded sunfish 4 4 bluesretted sunfish 2 2 4 Redbreast sunfi .e 2 6 6 4 2 2 R 4 2 Warmouth 4 6 22 12 42 24 50 126 92 70 92 Bluegill 18 26 32 2 2
Ik>llar sunf Ish 12 6 8 3 14 12 2 6 1.argemcuth bass 2 o Sunfish hybrid 2 2 h Swimp darter Station I 8 4 6 10 3 2 American eel 24 12 3 2 2 Redfin pickerel 6 6 2 2 4 2 4 14 4 3 Cha'.n pickeret 2 2 CoJJen shiner 2 2 2 Creek chubsucker 2 t> Spotted sucker 3 Yellow bullhead 2 Pirate perch Banded pigmy sunfish 2 2 2 Black banded sunfish Illnespotted sunfish 2 2 Redbreast sunfish 2 2 Warmeuth 2 2 17 6 10 2 ninegill
l Table 4.13.2 (con Inued) i , 1 i 1976 1975 Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. liay Jun. Jul. Aug. Sep. e Oct. 13nv. Dec. 4 Station 1. Bowlin 2 l l American eel 4 10 16 12 10 4 8 6 2 10 itedfin pickerel 2 6 8 f 20 12 Chain pickerel 8 6 4 4 4 22 12 12 12 2 , Golden sliiner 2 Dusky 4:hiner 2 8 4 Creek chubsucker 2 2 8 22 6 2 10 12 2 4 4 1 1.ake chubsucker 2 Spotted sucker 2 2 i Yellow bullhead 2 Pirate perch 2 2 2 l 1.ined topminnow 2 Islack banded sunfish 4 2 Bluespotted sunfish 4 2 2 ! liedb r ea s t sunfish 2 2 Warmouth 4 8 6 2 2 ; l 2 2 6 4 2 2 6 2 2 , Illuegi ll 1.argemouth bass ? 2 2 2 6 y Swamp darter 2 & o PJ [ b i i f i i t t [ t s u i
4-103 l Table 4.13.3 Numbers and weights (per hectare) of fish collected f ron. Elack Creek 1974, and August 1975 I.duringAugust 1974 1975 Species Station No./Hect".a 1;c . / He c t are No./ Hectare rp./Hectate' Redfin pickerel J 119.43 4.3792 Chain pickerel . 457.82 34.2172 Golden shine- 59.72 0.676S ter.ky shiner 2257.3 1. 407 32'.4.56 2.0701 Craek chubsucker 250.8 0.5016 199.05 0.4777 Lake chubsucker 35.8 12.8986 19.91 0.E559 Spotted sucker 35.8 5.2311 19.91 18.9697 Uhite catfish 107.5 0.0717 Yellow bullhead 537.4 0.2508 159.24 0.3981 Tadpole madtom 059.9 0.8957 696.68 0.5175 Margined madtom 3081.3 0.8957 218.96 0.3981 11 rate perch 788.2 1.4690 418.01 0.9156 Lined topainnov 71.7 0.0358 99.53 0.3185 Mosquitofish 19.91 0.0199 Mud sunfish 139.34 1.9905 I Bandad pygmy sunfish Blackbanded sunfish Bluespotted sunfish 107.5 322.5 179.1 0.0717 1.1824 0.6449 39.81 776.31 199.05 0.0199 3.3640 0.6370 I Redbreast sunfish Varmouth Bluegill 394.1 215.0 35.8 2.6514 5.0520 1.4690 199.05 119.43 119.43 9.2360 0.5573 2.1896 g Lollar sunfish 35.8 0.2866
,j Largemouth bass 71.7 0.3225 99.53 0.9754 Swamp darter $37.4 0.2508 218.96 0.1791 , Tosa.alated darter 286.6 0.4658 59.72 0.0995 Sawchaek darter 71.7 0.1433 79.62 0.0398 piedmont darter 250.6 0.2866 Total 10533.9 36.6177 7782.96 83.5026 Redfin pickerel li 17.91 0,0537 Chain pickerel 17.91 3.4934 Yellow bullnead 35.83 0.2687 53.74 3.8875 pirate perch 89.57 0.5016 Lined topminnow 17.91 0.0358 Mud sunfish 17.91 1.0391 I Blackbanded sunfish Varmouth Bluegill 4030.82 35.83 4.8728 22.7338 17.91 53.74 1791.47 0.0179 8.4737 27.3917 Largemouth bass 17.01 0.0350 35.83 1.4511 I Total 4138.31 27.9470 2096.03 46.3096 I
I
Tcble 4.13.3 (continued) 4-104 1974 1975 E Sp cies Station No./ Hectare Kz./ Hectare No./ Hectare Kg / Hectare E Am3rican eel K 35.33 3.6188 , Redfin pickerel 17.91 0.0717 95.97 0.6526 Chain pickerel 35.83 10.1039 76.78 7.7737 E Tellow bullhead 35.83 0.0896 57.58 0.0768 g Pirate perch 17.91 0.0J58 38.39 0.1727 Lined topminnow K 143.32 0.0717 Mosquitofish (cont'd) 17.91 0.0179 l Mud sunfish 19.19 1.2092 m Blackhanded sunfish 35.83 0.0175 115.17 0.3071 31uespotted sunfish 35.83 0.1433 38.39 0.1152 g R:dbreast sunfish 19.10 0.0192 g Warsouth 76.73 1.6699 Bluegill 3117.17 11.5013 652.61 3.4934 Dollar sunfish 35.83 0.0537 19.19 0.4223 Largemouth bass 17.91 4.2637 Swamp darter 53.74 0.0537 19.19 0.03S4 Tessalated darter 35.83 0.1075 19.19 0.0384 3 Sawcheek darter 19.19 0.0192 g Total 3636.69 30.2401 1266.83 16.0081 I 5 I I
~
I I s.
U 5.1 I B\b. Cit 9k Tf PnstC1 ) I Transect G o I. teces. LEGEND
=
T'J 1sf C1 E , g;n g
# Wire Trang g, s I g g .,7,,
or N W Electrofisning
- Rotonone e Lar val Traps o Larvel Tows W h.
I. X Seine l I teas, g e l J
/
l s, I .. 1.2.N T'an e ct C Dis 0*se'9e Cat.e! r f3I12.1 i i i r ar sect D sem l . , . H.s neo;nsoe h1, a 2n -
,h enst H
'" 'et ^
Scale in Miles 4 L s( I B'ack Creek I Ir antect L gue 4.2.1 Ficheries sampling stations, Robinson impoundment
I I i 4-106 E b i
~
.i .
E l E j_ ,
.. i t -
. i
- - i LEGEND t
- A-1 A . s. 3 ---.
E - -
- o-1 ---
o-a - 4 I 4 ~
/ . .
\
,\,
, e-:n
,p**,.
/ /\,i ,
j, \\, j. ' },
. j'
.j \;,,
.\ f
\.,' - .
- a
\r f
%s
\
i' / / /s\ g b a r M.
.l /
/,k I
2
- 1. #s% /\
( s
/,
\\
//
f g N \' j g / \ .
/f f gg t-
\l \ q/
/
f \
/. ' /
/ /
j
- l\
1 *\s /
.\ N -
\g .N
\. ./ N W' -
\
\! ,
\1 Y
i I !
. August data not availaote l
t 1 Figure 4.2.2 Shannon
- weaver diversity index of fishes collected from Robinson
!=poundment during 1975 sad 1976 5
I 4-107 _.i.... .
) ._ .
.__ PERCENT VOLUME _. h . PERCENT FREQUENCY _ __ . . _ . .
0 20 40 60 80 100 0 20 40 60 SD 100
. llll!!!!!!! lllllllll!!
2 _ __ _ . . . . _. APRING __ .. . _ . . _ _ _ _ _ . .. I -tYCLOP1..___ E.L .. ._- ._ - !$ $ INbNs.46.7. CHAQBQRUS . I$@U$$$5IY$5SEl 5J,3 II M SSs M 80 N 5 $ $ N N 80.0. ___ __ _OECETIS . 14J _ _ _ . - . 20,0 . _ _ . .
. u
. . pot.YCENTR.QPUS. b 10.4 Si8 13.3
_ . . _ - .. . . . _ _ . . ._ _ _____ SUMMER __ _ _ . _ _ _ __ DIAPHANOSDMA h 4,1 _ . _ _ . . . . _ _ b 15.8 _ _ . ._ g ; . - . ~ . < . _ [M;WWPA _42.1 _.. . _..EUBOSMINA .. _LD_ ._ .__ . . _ _ . I ._ CYCLOPS .. . bOU$50!$;US$3.52.0.. . _ . IiNO$ - Es5;@E'Il . 80.0
..CHAOBORUS . 20.5 . _ _ . _ _ . . _ _ kUi@iSOYE$d ._S2.6
. _ . . . _ . _ FALL -
.. E U BOSMIN A_
IY ;5NI$$MSOYbb$ 89.2 hi; ;iNIMI' 5$8$$i@ 2 MUN 32.1 ___ .- _. . _ . . _. . _.i._ .. . _ . . . _ .. l I Figure 4.4.1 Percent of total volume and percent frequency of occurrence of the major co=penents in the saasonal food habits of the bluegill (<100 cm T1.) at Robinson lepoundment in the moediate vicinity of the intake structures during 1974 I I I
4-108 I
.____..j.. ._ p'. . . . - -
I PERCENT FREQUENCY. JERCENT_ VOLUME. ! '
. . . . . _ _ . . ..( . 20 40 66... .8 _'.100- ._0 20 40 -60 80.. 100
. .. l . . . - .
. - . h.._ .
_._, . . - _ _ _ . ~ _ . . . _ - d SERINd. i i
... CHAOBORus NE!DNIEN!Ed! 60.1. b5 N b N O "'t .Z_ _
i , i i l .
..+..
}. . . .h$NU'N'hdb$! 4.1.,
4 PROCLAD Us 5.1 E
, .._ ,. __ .__ .J ,.,
t I E
.OECEIR *7.5 .___
- 10.(L. ._ . ._i _ _
i j - -.. . _ . . _ . . . . . . ..
. _ . _ . . . . _ . EUMMEf1 .-.._ _ _ -L. __. -. . _ .
I I !
.v a - . . . ,
.._.7__
.(
N 4 _CY. LOPS . 213 , _._, L_b$N 561 . . . . i
! E ! 75]
CHADRORif t - . . _ . . b! 5
- kh $ _S7 7 ' !! ! !h i i
. OECEIIS_ _. .b7.3 . . . . . . .
_ 8.1.. _- i
.. . .g . _ . _ . . .. . . . .
__a FALL,_.,_., _ . _._ _ _ . 4. . . ._. E i~ '
! ~
~' ~
^l:sMiiii$::iii28.5Ni{k3A:iii52IgSS._ [fiid@5s:s6s@@Siiidi@iis#i%il.es,3__._ -
_ ._ E.uBQSMINA . _. . 3 . _ CHIRONOMUS . . h 2.8. ._ __ b$k $$ $! . 32.1. . _. i_ ,,,
,v.
i
..,._,. ._ P A ne t A n1US. 7 .2 . _ ._ _ _ _
- 0 1Q.7 . _.
' . ... . . . . . . [_ . . . . .
i ! e f..
.. . j . ..
1 Figure 4.4.2 Percent of total volume and percent frequency of occurrence of the major components in the seasonal food habits of the bluegill (> 100 mm TL) at Robinson Impound:ent in the immediate vicinity of the intake structure during 1974 I
I 4-109
-.i . . - .
j 4. ___.. i -a. .j_ _ - ..;..__. .. . . _ . . . . . . . . . . I, 'I PERCENLVOLUME -_ PERCEMI.IREQUENCY . _ . . l
. _ _ . a . __ 0 41 0
- l. 2) .I l .6d _ I) ..I .B1Igo. , (_.l 2f). .l 4) . I .S) .l 8p i l 1C I
i i I . _ _ _ _ _
.: 1. .
i i
-p SVINTER. _ _ _ . . _ _ . -
~~'
EUBO INA -
' ' # - ~ ' ' ~
6 I SPRING i _. _. ._.m._... , ,. _ _ _-QlAP. tiANOSD%L._. _. _ EEMd 361__ ._ D. . M8M8 _ . _ ,8,, d,,, 64.8. _ _. _ I i
- r. .. w.s s EUBOSMINA . _ _
+> 18 2 J _ _. g y' "....c .: :*xo: _AD.E . ___
i
, . \
....i.
I
'QW POLYPEDLLUM JD.B _191_.
I
' PUPAE 7.0 !YiUNiid 26.8
_a- j
._'___7__
. _ L. _ _ 3
.1 SUMMER -
! . I I _c._,__
ntAP
.AELADESMYlA --
ogny 6.4. .__ . i
.IhNNkUl w,.
nx+x-
?8.6. _.
?M n _ _ . _ .
.j-I
..t.._ w. . . _ . . . _ . a..
i _. _ cHAOBQnur _ _ . . S5 _n.g . I n:oxo:.:0>;g.onl nn:0>:+>:+ 46.A _ _ a _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ M RINICINAE _ 20 9 NN5M 25.0 .. _ _. _. g A;t.L. _ . __ ;___ ._ _ . . - _ ;_ _ . . - -_ ._ j _ _ , , _
'EurlYCERCUM . 13.5 i
-. b8E68I8N 33.1_. _. , _ _ _ _
I - - - CYCLof1 _. .E$N$N$Nb 29$ 1 __. 55$505$0$$Ek$!E1.8__ _ _ . . _ _
-- l ABLABEEMYlA_. .11.3 !.W8M' ,,..,_.!.3a.3 --
I
~ g;.m, ~~ -
J ., , ' - - ; pg y , I
- a. ,___.. .; _ _ _ . . .. J . .. ._ .
1 Figure 4.4.3 Percent of total volume and percent frequency of occurrence of the major components in the seasonal food habits of the bluerill (< 100 cm TL) at Robinson Impoundment along Transect A during 1975
4-110 I t
...q........ . . . _ _ . . . , _-- . . .i q L ... . -. - . . _ . - .
g- q -. q . -...-
~ '
.. PEBCENT. VOLUME. PERCENT FREGL1ENCY ' '
40 60 20 40 60 -80 100-~
-...9 20 80.-- .100 - -
t
. !. . . . . _ . . . . . i, - . . . . . . . _ .
I i...._.._. I WLftTER . _ _ _ _ . . _ _ _ _ I _._lEUHQSMINA kNENSib$hiNNUbAN 711 1 hNNbSk5iN5 SOY $$O ! Y5 SLQ .. __. -.
' ! {
pgp3r
~ ~
M 73_ I N g3 ,,, l M l i i _ _ _ - . . . . . _ 1. . . - - - SPRING _._._ _ _ _ . . . _ i ! I 5?E$$$$$$%l 55A j __ QlAPEANOSOMA NNEE5 SIN 5$ 34J ._ , i i i I*wb+:<::*+:++6g:g:dq
- ~~ 4al _ . _ . . _ .._
.._ lYrLOPS_ _ _... 4.7__._.-__.....
! ! i
__POLYf EDILUM ___ B .O . _ . __ . . . . . . _ . . _ _. 18 J1.
! g I . I i g PROCLAD US a.R. _ ES$8i$$i5l 29.6_ $
I I . _ L SSP.? 19,5 ! l$6 IESkEO@.8EOb} 59.2 ' . PVPAE . _. _.. _ __ __ _ J ; __
] .
. . _ _ _ . _ . ._ .. ._ - . _ . _ SUMME R _ . _ . _ . -
._._- 4 IN$NINi85iSIEON 54J _ . __ INMOI$5$5SEO .6[1.j .___. . _ _ _ .
__ CHAOBQBUS. , i i : _ i
' . _ g*::igs.+ m- m:q 33.3 } . ..
_ _ .MYRINICINAE. . . _ _[4:ess++::+<j F+ s 32.2 , _ .
' j g
,i.
._ [ c c .u i t
l
- t. . .
. .EUBOSMINA_ b. 15.4. .. _. . . _ .
I
.. hE808 N 32.5
._. !- _. .t._.. .
bd 30 0 _15.9 _. _ .. ! _.. EURYCERCUS. i. 9.1 issN@S5!5i05$ 47.5
.. ._C.YCLOPS- . - ._ .-- ,
- .- . .. __ _ . . _ _ . t _ .__. .
.. _._ABLABESMY_1A..
b6.2..__... ' I I'INII 8E4l_30 0 i _ __ _QHj_BQN_QhtUS. 88 i N 12.5 g 2'i ~ m
. .. 20LYPEDLLUM_ b 4.6. . . _ _ 15.0._ _ . ,
._ . _.__ L. _
_.2UPAE _. .. _-- b . _1 L9___ . 20 0 _ Figure 4.4.4 Percent of total volus_ and percent frequency of occurrence of the ajor components in the seasonal f ood habits o.i the bluegill (> 100 mm T1.) at Robinson Impoundment along Transect A during 1975 E us
l lg ! W 4-111 I .._. 1_ .._. 2.. PERCENI; VOLUME _ PERCENT _ FREQUENCY. [.- 2 ) 2 I) I 4 6
. C 4 C . 1CO ._. .-
.. I .6 I.80.~l10' _. I (
I '
..I I ).I 81..I
._ . _ . - WINTER _.__
I
, . i 4 i
W . emoxer uascuc.: ::.g _gynnw t y A m.:wNXO:oWEcd:oxoxO:Ovi g, , h:+MX4-:W..o;o;4.+;oxor;8:x u o:z q .:.: w p m j; ^M w;33..! gg,3 _ _ , , , _ _ i . I CYC LDES .__ _PA1
!:",",, ,,OI 25_R '
i
- ~. _, k ,
. _ . . . _ _ . . ! _. _ __ - - __ SPRING __ . _ . . _._ .
UBoaMit ._ ._ bl.a._ . i 23.!L.__ __.
.i . _ .
I
..._.;.. .L .J , ,
cytLOP_S ._ . . b .15J _ _. ,
. . __.L
.__ EN"M'cl 28.6 .
.L..._. ._ .
I CHAOBOBV$___ IpupAt _ O!d_"23 . _ _ _ _ . l$$.!!b2 MEN rai i _ _ _ _ . UmDo:Mx' 52.4 k$bkUSENI.N3 gi,o I ! SUMMER.__ -- EkH10SM __. . ._h050Ui! rs t __. NMNNM 7 .8_._
... .. .,__.m._ . . ,, ... .
.w>;p j
.__DIAPtiANOSOMA . .fL9_ _._ x*w.- 29.2 _ _..
I . .. . _ .
. AB LABESMY1A. .. ._____.
_12;1_ l _ _ _, _ ' . _ _. 4M+;w 2E 1.__ 3:u.w..g
. j__
I
~
rHansonkin __ 11 n I@ES5$d x n ..__ _ . _ _ DIC RDIENDIP_ES _ _. __. .6A _ I _ _ . - _1fL4 ... _ . _ .. __ I 7 ' { JALL _ . _ . _ . _ d _ . _. .. i j I
. i PHAOBORui_._.. . b...'W8 w.:.:. -xe. lN a1.*1 __N.NNY. N. . .:8Mi;i ....! 66.2._._ .
. . _ . _ . .:_- . _ _ . . . . _ _ _ _ . . , _ 1. . 4 _ .
bENN! 22.2 _ . I I __.EMERGENIS_ _ . OllGQCH TA U2 2D.D 16.7 '
}__
_1E.7 4 ug . i
' nECET1R _._ . _ . -
*:0 19 ? ' : ._ bwe.w.w.w.7s..-NM8i-EM 50.0 . .l . . __ - _ . . _...
i i I Figure 4.4.5 Percent of total volume and percent frequency of occurrence of the major components in the seasonal f ood habits of the bluegill (< 100 c:= TL) at Robinson Impoundment along Transect E during 1975 I
F I 4-112 I
. _. .._j . ..) _ .. , _ . ......_q._. _ . . . p_ __ __ ... .! ._ . _. ,_. _ __
_ PERCENT _VOL11ME _ PEflCENT. FREQUENCY _ 4 -
' _ .l 40_. 60 40 60 81 100
.__l21 l l.8L.l10.0__0l l l 20ll l l l] ll
._.._.2_ . .L . _[ ..; .....__ _
f WINTER _ _ __ _.__.
. _ _ . . n . . ._ _ ____ __ L _ . _
- l. l l .i
-. _ . . m exo; 9.:nn: xm, e y:.] BL3 F.w.':ExoxoxoxoxoJ:":1xosq x pg.. _ _ n. . _ . li;txmo.4..o.s;c5.c.w:m.pv.m:o runnsginA _ tenxer.exoxczoxo:
_ . . _ _ . . . i -. . . . t i 1
-SPRIN E
g
. _ . . . i.
i
.. ..DIAPH ANOSOMA
. ._ N 10.4 . _.. ! _. # 11.1_._ __a___.
i pG .. & . mgi::. .gj 27J1. _.. Guma..
*n" - " .m<m. E0'+ j 33.9 .. ___., ._. Poi YPFnH UM --
A. -
,_ EMERGF[L_ .10.4 . _. . . . _ _ - . _ . _
_.1L; _ . __
. ._ DID ntOPs . 1 L7. __ , ._. __ buo.< J S.7_ _ _ .._
. _ _ _ _ . . . _.L . j _. _ . _ _ . ..
. cw=.ssa _ . - _ . _ _
g<a:p"wp.)
+- M- 2S.8 Fceu<g.3 .
_ _ . FuROSMINA. _ - - b M S::<:1-b 40.9
. . . . . . _ . . _ . .._ _ . . . ~ . . . _ . .
__..._ CtLAOBQB U L 22J_ IO45M:35WDd 45.~ . . i i
~
p%**x oxp 'mi ca;. 401 _ _._. _ EMERGENT EEg.p"xm<I
-- + 30.3 __ . _ _ .
I 5
._ _.MYRINICIN AE. . . _ _ . . 7.1 _ __ __ .__ b9.1 . _ _ . . _ _. .. E 6
i F_A L L g
, ! g
.. ,s .,s,
_ _ . . . ABLABESMYJ A - 8.8 . .- _ __ .- NN! _ 30.0___ _ f _ .. 4 . o F;'"o".:l t<<+.w _ _._CHAbdORMS ... _ Fax +: f . ;6A_ . - Ja*+gt . . sx4<+140 0 _ . _ _' _ _ _ o. .. .. . . _ - _._ EMERGENT _.__ <0 10.8_ __ * .162_. . . _ _ _ . _ _ _. I
. _._. QEC ET1S ._ . ISNEl 251_ _ . _IOS50M. 362___ _ _ _ . _ _ . . .
i _ _i_ Figure 4.4.6 Percent of total volume an:! percent frequency of occurrence of the major components in the seasonal food habits of the bluegill (> 100 =m TI.) at Robinson Impoundment along Transec: E during 1975 m
4-113 i ! .
. . f . 1
. _ _ _i__._- ,. _ . . ,l T
. .I
.. ; ..{
. . .q .
t I i PERcFMT YOLUME 4
._EERCENT.EREQUENCJ I ._.
4
.. . - ! ., .0 2( - 4C -. 80 10$ O' _ 20 .. _40 _ 60 80 . 1M
.___.....].. 3. . . .
l
....2. ._;. 3 .__..._ .
L_;_. j
* > i F
. . . .WWIER I
; i '
.1 . . . .
I
! A f'Q np{" R f_ t _, 90 2 , . _ _
I ._ ' i
. . . _ . . _ . . , . . _ . . _ . , . . . . . I .. . . . _ a l
' c-{,ilQ N OMUS 3.B - I bhbb 35 3 i
I 'l . . . . . .
' i
._ _ _ . . .: n.
{_
.RICROIENQ1EE1 _._.. 139 E!NNd 41 .2 _ . ,
h . I_ !. : . _ _
' PYCN OPSYCH E_ __. . . E _17A . ( l b.1L6 . _ . __ _ ._. _
- ! t' i ' I
-i _ . .
I _.!5$5 N KIN. e3 ...
._ ' FIEKAGENIA _ _ . bbbbd ME ._ _
._.._:.. ;._ . . . . . . . l . .
_ .. t
..g
! SPRkNG i. i i '
i EUBOSMINA .. b 6.8 _ p. i _._ f b 13.0 .. 1 ! , PUPAE . b 7.9... _. .__, _q b 16.5 . .. .
._ t i.HEXAGENid _.. bIU!M 22.2..._ .i _. ' ._ bbM$l 25.4 I rL.
, i
__;HYDRACHNA 4.2 ._;_.___.j___ . _ Ibkb'i$d 24.1. 4
'i _ _
I dOLIGOCHANTA . 11.1 . . ;._ _. a . . _.: . .._ _ ; b5NNNNi<5$ E2.8. -- _. i ; 6 , , I . l.
.._. . IEi lBOSMINA._ .
6.7 _.... _ __.a, _ . . _ . SU MME R . l, h 7.1 _ r j.
. joX /ETHIRA_.. 13.E . . H - _ . p. . bbbbb 28.6 _. _ . _ - _ . . . _
NNi32L2;___.i.. . . . _. . HEXAGEN11L ..
. f . _ d _21.4 _ . ._ ._
.. OLIGOCHAETA. .7.4 . . - ! -
I b5bENN! ?ftS. . I
! l i 1
._.ENNEACANTHUS .10.0 . d_.__1, . ___w.. .. .M 14.3 . a. ._ . L t
i ; i i __ a _ ;_. I
. _ . . - . :. L.- . . . _ _ _ _ . _. _ FALL , _ p _. . . f_ . ,_
i _ .. jf')BOSMJNA ._ INkENNNM'N' 70.4__ . ,_ bEOENNNNOsO50$N!7 b.3. . I
>l i 1
.i ]EPHEMEROPTERA - b 5.4 _. g . _ .h._ . .._f ._. M:17 1 _ _ . . . _ _ . . ,.._
l- ! . Figure 4.4.7 Percent of total volume t.nd pereent frequency of occurrence of the major components in the seasonal food habits of tne bluegill at Robinson Impoundment along Transect G during 1975
4-114 a L. .
. ;. ( . [ ---
-. L d .. _.;.___. __ j . . - _ _ '
h.. H .! .._ . _ PEBCENT.NOLUME
- PERCENT FREQUENCY '
..I
--y - . .
i-(
- ?) 40 61)- - Sf) - ifh)- -C
-- 20 - 40 80- - - 100 - - - -
~
.___ _ d i p . . . L_ . . . . _ _ _ -..y.__ _ _. .
_._.f WIN.IEF
* ' ' .l_. . . . . 'LADO N A.._._.. b 6.7 '
I l N 33.3 . a _ J. f $ . _- 'p . - - . . . - . - - . - i renuin I,M8M?xtl n.t n . b m,Od vi i 4 r --
' MICROPIERUS M^X*
'*^'
23.5.._ _. - _.- l t 11.1
- . . - . . .. . . -I -.
.._l, 33.3
! ?
UNIDENIlflED_EISH I:* mom. v.
-:ox+x. .! 32.8._ .. _ . _ _._ _ ! b3s.. x. ao:k-
- ~-
.__ ._i i i ,
.. _ _ . ; .J . . _ . __ .. . ;_. .. . a .
=
! . _ __.. _SPNING .___...__.__l_____
- t. .- . 4,. .
~ ' _ _ DIDYMOPS.-. . M 12.Et . . . . . . _ . . __! biNIN .25.0 I i _ _ . - _ . .p . ... . ,
**: .32.0 . ' M^;
1R R t FTH F ORTOMA _ i l '
. . _- i vX0 4.
_LEPO MIS __ . . .m 15,8 _ .__ l I;~;Q' L Ql _18.!L.._ ' i i 4._ . . . . _ -
-q. . . _
- . _ . _ .j__ b*x+I. 18.2__ ____.. . '
. NQIB0HS_ ._ --_._ N*! 15.5 . '
i i
-- -- t - 'b.3 :.a;u. ~
~
amo:.- 1
*MM 28.1._ ., ! ON 31.3 __. !
. - _ uN1DENnFIED ElRH _
i
;. I. . ,
g SUMMER ___._ m { _ _ __ _ . __._EDtEDSkOMA__ 21.0 18 2 . E
~ i : E
_.tspoMis .. _. B@58s#Esi#a s2i_ f _ls##3sM5ssM s41_1.____ _._ {. ._ .
} ,. _
g 4 1 . F A1.t. . _ . . a ___. _! . ; _. PROCAMBARUS 20.1 I !YN;M4;. .z
5.7 . _ ' >
t ! E HEOSTOMA 7.5 . _ _ . - . . . . bkN$ 29.6 _ .j. _
~ --
b 7.1 --- I y . s.M. .m ,.... ... ... .... .,SMd 57 S.. . ..
. LEPOMIS I
4 UNIDENTIFIED FISH b 11.6 ! M ,141 ! f Figure 4.4.8 Percent of total volume and percent frequency of occurrence of the major cc=ponents in the seasonal food habits of the large=outh bass g at Rcbinson !=poundment free all transects during 1975 5 I
l 4-115
! l :
I '.
- 7. _ , , . . . . _ _ _ . . _ .. ;:
_i. , . _ _ . . . . I PJ.RCENI_VDI. LIME i
. PERCENT FREQUENCY _ .
t
- y. .
0 10 9i lf20.l..O _ _l 6l0 . l8pl100._.. I
.l 20I .l. l 40 l 61..) 80l l0.
l 1 I ;._ .; '
= -
-- .j i - 5
_. . ._ _ } f, - WINTER ._. _ _ _ . _ ' .. _ . _ _ _ . _ - - - j . I . .._. . ;
!AQBYPNlA
;concennoutt A IYNM M5:DN3 49 e,
_ A0A EN5'UN8N2 50.0_. 4. ... EM0iiSDE05M 50.0 I i 2
' PROCAMBARLIS. '1 A A
!iR 7 . -. _ _ . . . _ _
f
.. p _. .. . ... _.
SPRING .. _ . _ . .. . . . _ . . .
- DID.YMOPs 30,3 I
_ _ .. 20.0 ._ __ . . . _ . ._ i t ENA GMA. _. 10.0 . _
.. .b 10.0. _ __.. . . _ _ - _
pancaunAnus._ !5N35$$$ in n _. Ei$ $ E EYS *tn.n. .. .. . __.. _ wyy ,3 I.,y, I ' H EXAGENIA._ . . _ VM% 25.7 +x""^ d 30A.. .. _ . __a ._. _ __ _ _ _ .- . SU MMER .
..2_. . . . _ _ _ .
I .__ PROCN BAR.US. 555NNNON 36 7_. . _. . __ INNNNE 37,9 _ . . _ . . . ETHED TOMA .7J _ __ . _ _ _._ . _ !!Nbb 24.1 _. _ LEP_qMJS . 118 __. INE$50NNNd 40.6 _. ._ __ _ . , . i ._. . E . _ . . . I _. . ___ FA1. L ._ __ . _ . _ - . _ . . _ _ _ . . . .. PROCAMBARUS .. NNNNNN _771. _ NsNNN N N N ) J D.0 . . _ . . LEPOMIS__ . 90 n _ _.__ . __ b 10.0 . . . . .
. a Figure 4.l. 9 Percent of total volume and percent fregrency of occurrence of the major components in the seasonal f ood habits of the warmouth at Robinson Impoundment froc all transects during 1975 I
I I
4-116
!' . J. _ _ .2 . ;_ a _.. _ j. _j. ..__;.._. _ _ _ '._
-j! _.
PERCENT _ VOLUME .PEEEENT FREQUENCY.
.t. g1 l 1- 0 20 80 100 +
0 20 40 60 -.80 100 ! 1
., .g , q-g 4_0 q. 60p . . .p- p p . T ' ' {- ' I ' ' t '-' '~~l ' 1 t ^ l -
t '- l { . l l l l l l l l l ] l l l
)
. .__ : ..___.t. 2 ._ :. .. . . _
- '__. _ L__ - >
i , t I -
. )
._.-..4__-. Wil(TES{___ . --
i < , l a, 6
- . M . ._ ..! _. . . . . . . .
_ d. . . . . . j NECIURUS... _ 1 16.7 _. .1fL7 _ I a 4 i ! I
.. .L . _ . _ j
' ETH EOsTOMA . 58 41.0 0 - 5 N 50 0 I
)
i I
! I f l
.t- ,
8 FPOM18 D- 16_7 ___,. ' 1 1 R 7 ' . _ _. . __. _ 8 e t
, t !
_juNIDEMI1FJED Fl1H b _116_ _ l 16.7 . . . _, I 1
. _. . . . _ . _ - .. a . ._;._ . . . . ..
. . _ __ _ SPRIN G - _ __ . ___ ._ ,_.
. 1 i NI >< n ~ Tl Es.i__.__. gl
_ .Ea m 20 m_. _ _ . _ _ . . . _ J.TN EOSTOM A 9.1 >? 7 _ _ I i ! L. ..;_~_' ' Fy,9.,v. . cwy4 . 4. , , , , , . . -. .. -... ..-. 4 ..
* ,,,4 l
_ ..LEROMis ._ _ r.am*:v>xv1 m _n i xn...,__. __ . l l J .. ..
- l. _.NOTEMIGONUS _b 4.5. . . _. W+ 13L __.L___....._ l t I !
._. } j.
. _ _ . _ . _ _ . _ _ -_. . _ _ _ AUMMER .
-, . . . I i b . ,.
H
~ . . .
Roxmu.;
;EThfEOSTOMA .. M 43 _ ..- t InmM Wp+$3 6.a ._ i
_. _. .I - 3 ,
's rpe'um h@5d .2n Q in 4 EI l l
._.NOTEMJGONUS gem:aaxmwaaza:j KMOM*NON 64.0 i
_g5.3. . _ _ . . . _ . . _ i l
.. _ _ . _ - . _ . . . FALL. - .. -. -
i
...._..t - _ _.I . .
__ ..ETHEOSTOMA__ 1.2_ . _ _ M,, _ 29.6 .. .__ _ d _ _ . FUNQULUS . .7.1. - ___ .4.9 . . _ __ _ _ _ _ - reoxo +:ona;c43.;.:3.;+:.:+;
. ~ - " ~ nxcxmos ~ [~
f FPOWS IMMECSMS:M: M:w . XE ;+M. R7 9 ENXON 7A A -
.14.3__, .
_ _ UNIDENTIE1ED FISH 4.fi ' _ _ . . _ i i Figure 4.4.10 Percent of total volume and percent frecuency of occurrence g of the major cosponents in the seasonal food habits of :he enain pickerel g at Robinson Impoundment f cm all transects during 1975
4-117 Figuro 4.5.1. L:.ngth frequency histograms of blusgill collected from Robinson Icpeundment from April,1975 through March,1976 with larval fish traps and electrofishing 20+ g .e. ... I 3
.u. -
35+ i
.e.
April a I I ... ... ... ... ... U' 1 ... ... ...' ... ...
- 10. ... ... ... ... ...
6 ... ... ... ... ... I g. i t i t ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... i I. q 4
... ... ... ... ... e..
n......................................................................................................: 3 1 t 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 ? 1 1 1 1 2 2 i I 1 2 3 a 5 e 7 e e n 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 1 5 7 3 e 5 6 7 6 9 0 1 2 3 8 5l 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 % 5 5 5 5 5 %1 a m ! D 'U T P.T OF Ina" $!Zt G#UV' i
)
t [ .,* l ... l ... I t ... 35, ... i ... ... I: i ... ... 30 ... ... i ... ... I 45 l i
=w ... ...
o 1 ... ... t ... ...
- 2. , .e. ...
U 20. *** *** Ig 6, , g ... ... 15+ I l ... ... M27 l ... ... ... l ... ... ... 1 ... ... ... I 3g, g g I l 5+ ... ... ... t ... ... ... ... e ... ... ... ... ... I e 1 2 3 4 L t. 7 a e , 1 1 3 1 p 3 1 i g 1 g n...................................................................................................... i S 1 7 1 1 o 2 e 2 3 7 3 7 3 2 g 3 g 5 5 A 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 '. ' 5 5 I 5 5 5
. . . . . . . ..focufwt as gom* SI2L cogue . . . . .- . . . . .
4-118 I Figure 4.5.1 (continued) 25+ I l ... 20e ... 6 ... ... i ... ...
, i ... ... ...
i ... ... ... 15 ... ... ...
, i ... ... ... u, i ... ... ... , a ... ... ...
10, ... ... ... i ... ... ... i ... ... ... ... i ... ... ... ... i ... ... ... ... 5 ... ... ... ... ... ... ... i ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... o..............................................................*................................ .- 1 1 1 i i t di t i 1 2 / 2 2 1 2 3 4. 5 o 7 e 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 18 e 7 e 4 o 1 2 1 4 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 hp 5 % 5 5 5 5 5 L g a!D80!NT OF 10== $12t G#UUP I I
- t ... ... g I i ... ... g l ... ... 3
- 35 ... ... ...
. ... ... ... u, l
s ... ... ... l , l ; i ... ... ... ... 1 l 1a. ... ... ... ... j s ... .. ... ... l , ... ... ... ... ... j : i ... ... ... ... ... i ... ... ... ... ... ... 5 ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... i 1 o ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... i i ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... i ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ....... ... ... ... ... d................................................................................................ . 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 , 1 1 1 2 2 2 ? 2 1 2 3 u 5 n 7 e o o i p i a 5 % 7 $ 0 6 t 2 3 u 5 5 ' s 5 5 S 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5
~
*10001N1 0F 10** SIZE 480UP I
a
Figure 4.5.1.(continusd) 4- n9_ 30,
-l I, g ee.
..e l ...
25e e.e I g l t e.. l ... I dne e l
..e I
e ... ... 15 ... .*. t ... ..e
... ... M E"I i ... ...
... ..e
>I l 10. l
... ee. ee. e..
] ; i ... ... .e. ... 1 ... ... ... ... ... ...
.5 ... ... ee. ... ... ... ...
1 ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... I e ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... .e. ...
..e n.................................. ................................................................
1 1 1 1 1
- I 1 2 3 8 5 e 7 6 9 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 e 1 2 3 a 5 6 7 e
- 5 5 5 5 e 1 2 3 6 5 S S 5 5 % 5 5 5 S 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 s 5
*1D*0!N1 CF lora $12t GROUP
,I 20+ I ! I 15+ *.. **. l .* *** s ... ... ... September i ... ... ... i I sne i
'I 5+
i t I ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... o.i ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 7 2 1 2 3 u 5 % 7 8 9 o 1 2 k 2 1 2 3 & 5 e 7 e 9 E 0 2 4 5-5 5 5 5 5 5 % 1 3 5 5 5 g . . . . . . . . . . 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 9 5 5 5 5 MID'UfNT Of 10"" !I2E G80VP I I I
i 1Figuro 4.5.1 (continued) ... De ... 4 120 s ... 5, ... ... i ... ... october i ... e..
... e.. .e.
t ..e ... ... 6e ee. ... ... ee. 1 ..e ... ... ... e.. i ee. ... ... ... ... ee. t ... ... ... ... ... ... 5 ... ... ... ... ... ... ... t ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... I e.e ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... t ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... i ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... 0,.................................................................................................... I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 t e b 4 7 " 4 0 2 3 4 5 o 7 *
- a t 2 3 a 5 2 3 1 5 5 % 5 5 s S 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 m! CPU 1NT OF 10mm 3;7g gaggp .
3. i t ... Se ... i ... *.* *** November i ... ... .ee ...
. ... ... ..e ...
i ... ... ... ... ... 3, ... ... ... ... ... i ... ... ... ... ... ... i ... ... ... ... ... ... ... 5 ... ... ... ... ... ... .e. ... i ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... i ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... i ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... .e.
... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... g e..................................................................................................... m t 1 i i t t i i t i d 2 2 2 7 ? E 4 a 7 n 4 5 6 7 6 8 2 1 e F 1 2 3 5 3 1 2 3 4 1 i 5 5 5 9 9 5 5 5 5 9 5 % 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 i . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . e . . . . . . . . .
( at0PuthT OP goe sg g Os0UP t
).
l l l I i ... l ) ... l 5 ... l 6 ... ... December
'4 8 ...
n ... ... i ... ... ... ... O, ... ... ... ... ... , t ... ... ... ... ... ... ... , i ... ... ... ... ... ... ... I s ... ee. .ee e.. e.. ... ..e t ... .e. ... ... ... ... ... ... ... 5 ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... g ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... l e ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... .. i ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... 3,.................................................................................................... 1 ? I ! l i 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 c' 3 5 o 7 6 0 9 1 3 1 4 9 4 7 A 4 *
} 2 % a 5 1 2 3 5 5 5 5 % 5 5 4 5 s 5 5 5 5 s s 5 5 5 5 5 9 5 5 5
#[hkUIhI hb lO"" $ [k hNQllO
I. .
. Piaure 4.5.1 (continued) 4-121 20, I i gg,
... ... ... my Ig i
- u. ... ... ...
i y o io. i ... a ... ... ... ... ... ... ..e l t ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... I 5. l i
.+.
..e I
i o...................................................................................................... 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 7 7 P i 7 1 2 3 8 5 o ? 6 9 c t 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 e 1 i ! 6 5 - 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 3 . 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5
*1D'uth7 C7 toa* 317L GROUP I
i ... I i ... 15+ ...
' *** Febrwry
... l ...
s ... ... i ... ... ... I , .A mo to, ... ... o i i ... ... ... ... ... ... ...
*1 A i ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ...
I 5, i i i ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... . t ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... n..................................................................................................... 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 P 7 ? 2 ? 4 5 6 7 6 e e t ? 3 4. 5 6 7 *
- n i P 3 . 5 1 2 3 I 5 5
5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 p.!DPUT>f 0F tom" $17L G#UUP I 15. March I I a w 10, I$ ; w i 3 i f i 5+ *.. ... *.. ... ... ... ... ..* **. _ f .*. ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... i ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... . e ... i o..................................................................................................... I 1 5 2 5 3 5 a 5 5 5 e 5 7 5 e 5 o 5 1 o 5 1 5 1 2 5 1 3 5 1 6 5 1 5 5 o 5 1 7 i 5 t e 5 t 2 0 5 2 1 5 7 2 2 3 2 a 5 2 5 i I MIC*uthf Of to** 317L GROUP
( lbtwo.bubou . f i I A l i I I i 1 1 22000.00000 . I i
- I f4 I A e t t i
- La l ^
y 1soou.uobbo + l A 44 l C i p I g o l A l 4 g A P fi PJ
, A A A i A A A 6000.000b0
- g A A l A AAA A A j AJ A lig A A A
~~~
an A A lA m A A A i t 1
-2t>00,00000
- I ei l
i ,__ . __ . _ _ _ . - -__---. AJs.uouue0bb RSt.booOOuou 182.oOOopuuu 206.0000000u so.ubuo(>Juo tho.uubobbuu Libahus a = 4 uni .D = 4 Uni . til. Total length in millimeters Figure 4.6.1 Relationship of the number of mature eggs and total length of Lepomis macrochirus in Robinson Impoundment E E E E E 5 E W E m e a e e g g
4-123 I-I 4 O h O O 0 I 4
~ m, as w E
- b I g o
o o J w o e a o .c o w
.I e Q
0
, e 0
g d P. I-. e 41 C e I e i I e O o g o* u 4 c C u M CC
<
- u 4 I < g m m
4
.E e.4 u
t. W 3 C
- E E
,I *
. 3 c %
C o k e O s Z 4 4 I
.c I
e i J* a.- 8 O E 7 E
- ._ c e e LA
- c zuZ Y
l C w 0 3 o . C E 4 C J D e C o a * $ I ' g :- w
~%
z w
= e o*
u C L I q C O
- te a 4 =
, ::r. e a0
+ 0 8 - ec a s -
j . o e e i 3 . m L i - EE I e- - --. .. . .- - --- . - ----+-----
=
- ?.
O s 9 m
==
GO
'kn &
S S o o I . 8 e O 8 b o b d 3 h 3~ 3 J Q w 3
- 3 a I
e, - ~ - b *D h)b)UU h ID h D,'
' s ?
l
' }
l . i l i i 4 l i e 1 3 600 - ,
' I
.t j i i
4 l l
' , s s
3 200 - b l O I g 2 t100 - i : J i E , e g .
- 4. ._ _. ,
tu 4 . g l . d m 4- i 2 l d
*~*
3 - t
~. '
s I e Z t T2 l ! f 9 i t , 1 p 2 40(M e i i t 8 i f, p' ,
! t 8 s a n I
f 8L
~%
8 i l 1 1 ; , l .
. g
_a f
! j t i
l f f+ :
.2 i -l
' .. . 4 t .
- l ', .
~ l e2 e 4~ ;
I , i i i . I 1.600 - ,
. i l !
m i l DEC. l APfl JUNE AUG. OCT. OCT DEC. FEB l DEC. FEB. APit . JUNE AUG. 1915 1974 1973
# '" * ~"#"'*# *
(Log1 0 """'" E"' "I
- Figure 4.9.1 Fist. impingement on Unit. 2 laitake screena m> Indicated Samples collected with less than three purnps operatir, M M M m M M m m m m m M M M I.
I 4-125
.n I- s
. . . . Ch I
km Q W
.. ,M- ,. - .e I
/ / o B a% <- u o
2 r __ _____% .. . . . . . _ _ _. .. ..o c. o e, I
- i. . s
. cn
~
N g
. - _ . _. . . . 2 w
<wl I - . . - _...
ak*
"E g
y s . I . - - . u ~-
~_~~~
a x w I C,: c e
..w eg
. m x, P
C M .e I ()
- m. 4 e
cc t ' C ,
.2.
['~
=
I .eg
- =
.n . , . . . . _ . . . . . . _, q, t 4
o . 5 64 t i U LC t N O : es.k
;t n w,;
I 3
, (~ ,
'- .=.
a ee
.s i I
C
- . . .._ .. . _ [ .. .e 7 5"
= :
I' - u
=
w r E=m J~ a. c e s I . _ . .. . _ _ . _ _ n e:
;. E.
L*.
= :.
I' i- E< A e L C I -I 9 N
~' ' ' ~r 8
I
' ' i 8
n r' r ' ' 8 i -~'r 8 n
' ' ' ~'
8 m i s. c r-o e n e c I w-
- e o o o e : c CC t
- c.
AVG USd (6).) 1HOl3M OL 9c3 wv I I
1 !' M th M i i j -
+ } i
- l C
E M D
- 5 D
4 i 7 E 9 P U 1 l , I
~l 1 M O
V O n d R J a G74 - t E 9 4 le b l 1 l EY
- !; _l I
lj ! - l l 7 9 M la WL 1 ia l U T v iJ C , A S - - O sn a t a I FN A
; i -
e e M D mJ l l r o 0 mM i c s N ;9O g' I , l ! P R ;' i
%TE OF E S k e M O a N 1 i t l
-, , I n i
G n U o M A sn l i . l i b Tl o I L R M
, U B J
i i I I n M i i o N U d J e f l i g n M 1 i p s r Y i A i i !
- l s! . M sl M l
I l i I i g e u t i P l M A A b f I o I n M
, I
! 3 o
R it A u M bi s l i t r s M i
, B j ' i i , f i E d F
e i i z M t S kI - iai ri5 J i:i5 f 3 J A rLG J 9 M r e1 -
-(L o $ 4
% % e 0 0 r 0
1 0 1 i u g M wh F j 8 9 l l ! l I l'I ,
I Transect i 4-127 U.S.1 I Blac Creet. I . Trsnsect J Ae* SR 340 Transect G I Transect F , Transect E LEGEND I A Gill Nets Discha / ransect DA
- W6re Traps
,e' 553 Electroftshing
- Rotonone
\
~~
Transect D S 151 ' ' -
, Transect CA
___.. Transect C Discherge Canal 1 if
.p.
I I Transect 8 _- . SR 23 a i ___.. Tr >ect A H. B. Robinson U ts 1 & 7e o Y2 8 i ranse t H Scale in Miles i 1 Transect K I T Black Creek Transect L Figure 4.13.1 Map of 11. B. Robinson Impoundtnent and Black Creek illustrating I fisheries sampling stations in Black Creek during 1974-1976
5-1 5.0 Flankton ( 5.1 Introduction l The Robinson Impoundment ecosystem is unique in two respects. First,
~
it is an impoundment, with " black-water" (swamp-like) characteristics, as opposed to a natural lacustrine (lake) system. Secondly, it receives physical influences from the operation of a power plant. In attempting to assess the thermal effects on the biota of the Robinson impoundment, the effects of " black-water" chemical parameters cannot be eliminated. It becomes the task of this work to monitor selected indicator components of the biotic community and to assess the overall
" health" of this ecosystem.
I The pcytoplankton corcunity is the principal primary producer in lacustrine (lake) environments. This community responds rapidly to changes l in the environment and can serve as a " pulse" to the ecosystem. Stress, ecosystem stability, and initial energy availability are indicated by struc-tural and functional dynamics of the phytoplankton community. Structure of the phytoplankton community can best be estimated by standing crop data. Standing crop describes species composition, abundance, and biomass at the time of sampling. g Function is expressed by primary production rates as carben W fixation for a short period of time under the conditions present at that time. Chlorophyll can of fer rough estimates of the phytoplankton connunity in the absence of standing crop and primary productivity measurements. Chlorophyll, or pigment analysis, estimates the size of the algal community. Moreover, under specific light conditions the chlorophyll within the euphotic zone adapts to nutrients and other limiting factors so that total photosynthesis can also be i derived from :hlorophyll estimates (Odum, 1963). An adequate sampling design must include structural and functional l . l determinations which can be separated for initial analysis and later recombined 1 with appropriate data to evaluate the holocoenotic relationships ,I L I 1 holocoenotic principal - an environment (or ecosystem) acts as a whole unit because of lack of barriers to the interaction of its cc=ponent factors I (Billings, 1965). I
I 5-2 between environmental factors and organisms. The environmental factors of Robinson impoundmenc which are more important to the phytoplankton include the
" black-water" chemical factors: low pH, alkalinity, available nutrients, and particulates and water color as they limit light penetration. Also imoortant are the physical factors which result from plant operations such as temperature and current patterns. Plankton studies of the environmental monitoring pro-E gram concentrated on these environmental factors, as well as the structure and E function of the phytoplankton community. The basic sampling design consisted of monthly chlorophyll profiles in addition to quarterly standing crop and primary productivity studies. The design monitored plankton dynamics in three dimensions: by depth, by location (the upper, discharge, and lower areas of the impoundment), and by season.
5.2 Methods Plankton monitoring began in May, 1973. The initial program was intensified in 1975 by increasing the frequency of productiviry measurements for the spring through fall months. Zooplankton hori:ontal and vertical tows were added to the monthly program in May, 1975. The sampling program extracted whole water samples from Station A-2 I (the lower impoundment), Station E-3 (the discharge), and Point Station G E E (Figure 3.3.1). The " Van Dorn" type beta bottle water sampler was large enough to allow for subsamples to be taken for pigment analyses, prinary productivity, and standing crop whenever scheduling required that more than one analysis be performed. Samples were taken at various depths, decencent upon the Secchi um depth; surface, 1/2 Secchi depth, Secchi depth, 2 x Secchi depth (or botte=), g and 4 x Secchi depth if dopth permitted. There is high correlation between the Secchi disk transparency and transmission of light in a water column (? cole and Atkins, 1929). It has been generally accepted th$t the Secchi disk disappears at about the level of penetration of five percent of solar radiation, g but varies with different environments. Transparency is invernely correlated W wi:h both water color and seston (floating matter) tentent (Vollenweider, 1969). Since the mesn Secchi depth for the impoundment was found to be 1 meter (see a!
~
i 5-3 Section 5.3, Environmental Factors) in May 1975, the sample depens were changed to surface, 1/2 m, 1 m, 2 m, and 4 m to accommodate primary productivity cal-culations, Secchi depth, water temperature, and water chemistry samples were taken in conjunction with plankton sampling. Chlorophyll Analyses I Monthly pigment samples were : ansferred from the beta bottle to 1 labeled plastic bottles and preserved with magnesium carbonate to prevent further conversion of chloroplyll to phaeopigments. Samplea were chilled and l stored in the dark prior to filtration. Filtration within twenty-four hours did not appreciably influence chlorophyll results. I Pigme.: analyses generally followed Strickland and Parsons (1068) and Golterman (1969). Sa=ples were filtered, extracted with acetone, soni-fled, centrifuged, and extractions were read spectrophotometrically. Acid I was added to obtain phaeopigment corrections. Chlorophyll a_ and phaeopigment calculations followed 1BP (Interrational Biological Programme) recommended equations (Golterman,1969) . Chlorophyll a concentrations were plotted with depth and an average concentration for the water column was calculated. Pro-
'cedural experiments indicated that variability within samples (as replicates) was as great as variability between depth samples. Therefore, it was determined I that an average of the depth samples was the best estimate of chlorophyll con-centrations for the water column.
I Primary Productivitz "In situ" primary productivity was determined by use of the C techt 2e. Three subsa=ples, an initial bottle, a zero time control bottle, and a light bottle were taken from the water sampler. The initial bottle was stored on ice in the dark for alkalinity determinations. The zero time control sample was innoculated with 1 wCi (microcurie) 14C - labeled bicarbonate solution and immediately fixed with Lugol's iodine and stored in the dark. I The light bottle was innoculated with 1 pCi of C, suspended at the depth the sample was taken, and incubated for three hours in the middle of the day. I I
I j 5-4 g E Time was recorded to the nearest 15-minute interval. Replicate light bottles were hung at the Secchi depth (1 meter). Light bottles were recovered at the end of incubation time, fixed with Lugol's iodine, and stored in the dark to be returned with the zero time bottles to the laboratory for analyses.
. The procedures for Carbon-14 assimilation estimates followed Vollen-weider (1969) and Taylor (1971). A :ero time control was used instead of a dark bottle control (Morris, Yentsch, and ientsch, 1971). Solar radiation data were obtained from a portable pyrheliograph (Belfort Industries) during the day (24 hours) of sampling. Alkalinity was measured potentiometrically (recommended for low pH, humic waters in Standard Methods, 13th Ed . , APRA) .
Total carbon was estimated from pH-alkalinity relationships with Bachman's tables (Saunders et al. 1962). Oxygen and temperature were measured with equipment previously described (Section 3.2). It. the laboratory samples were vigorously shaken and a 10 ml aliquot filtered on a W en n 25 mm type HA (0.45 u pore) millipore filter. The filters g were immediately picced in a scintillation vial containing scintillizatien grade B dioxane mixed with 0=nifluor (New England Nuclear) . These were counted by liquid scintillization by Dr. Don Stanley at North Carolina State University. Calculations followed those described by Taylor (1971), estimating an integrated mg of carbon fixed /m / day for the water column. MgC/m <3 hrs was also plotted with depth to estimate a production profile and obtain the depth of maximum productivity (Pmax ). Standing Crop. Standing crop samples for nannoplankton were also extracted f rom the beta bottle water sampler, fixed with Lugol's iodine, stored in the dark and returned to the laboratory for analysis. In addition to whole water samples, one hundred liters of surface water were dipped with a ten liter bucket and poured through a standard #20 mesh Uisconsin type plankton net, fixed with Lugol's iodine, and returned for net plankton determinatiens. A supplemental vertical ecu was taken for :coplankton and to check on w .ical distribution I
S-5 of the larger phytoplankton. Both phytoplankton and zooplankton were enumerated from these net samples. Further, in May 1975 a more intensive :ooplanktet pro-gram was initiated to better assess :ooplankton composition for comparicon eith fish stomach contents. Vertical and horizontal tows were taken (30 cm diamet r truncated zooplankton ne: fl0 mesh) in the daytime and at night at the three I- plankton stations. Samples were fixed with buffered formalin and returned for enumeration. . The Sedgwick-Rafter enumeration procedure was used for 1973 and 1974 samples. Utermohl sedimentation was used to process the 1975 samples. Wild M20 and M40 (inverted) phase contrast microscopes were used for identification l and enumeration. A Whipple eyepiece micrometer calibrated by stage micrometer was used to escimate cell dimensions incorporated into biomass estimates. Net 1 sample concentrate volumes were adjusted to 50 ml or 100 ml depending upon I. visible density of the contents. A 10 mi subsample was extracted and settled in a Utermohl sedimentation chamber for at least 24 hours in the dark. Fifty m1 subsamples of the 500 ml whole water samples were settled in the same manner. A nested or stratified sampling design was used for phytoplankton enumeration. Nested counts were made as follows: All organisms were iden*.ified and enumerated in three or five (if variability of three field courts were too high) random microscope fields. I Means ar.d standard deviations were calculated. Larger organisms and those whose distributions were too variable in the random field counts were enumer-ated in strip counts. Three random strips were enumerated and the means anc' standard deviations of counts calculated. The entire Sedgwick-Rafter cell c: a 1 cm x 1 c= square of the Utermohl chamber whole cell count was made. The whole cell count was for colonial or filamentous forms, those larger more rare forms, and zooplankton (especially protozoans and rotifers). A pilot sampling study indicated that different depth whole water samples were good replicates for estimating the water colu=n population. Therefore, replicate sampling at each depth was superceded by depth replicates for the water column to obtain a ,I water column population estimate. This greatly increased efficiency of sample enumeration. The whole water depth samples offered reliable estimates of the nannoplankton within the water column. lI
5-6 The net samples were enumerated in the same manner; however, strip counts and whole cell counts were emphasized. Since the Utermohl chamber sample represented 10 to 20 percent of the original sample volume (100 liters), only one chamber was enumerated for each sample. The number of Sedgwick-Rafter cells
=
enumerated for net samples depended upon the enumeration time. Vertical tow samples were qualitative. I The water column phytoplankton population wr.s indicated by a com- . bination of both of these population estimates. Those organisms whose abundance was best estimated by whole water samples were excluded from esti=ates based on net sample counts and vice versa. As an example, if an organism was enumerated in one whole water sample, the estimate of number per liter may be exaggerated compared to the estimate of number per liter for that organism from the 100 liter net mmple. In this case, the net sample estimate would be used as the best population estimate for that organism. A value judgment based on knowledge of the different organisms was required when numerical data did not indicate an obvious choice. Utermohl sample random fields and .1 cm strips were enumerated at l 200X magnification. Identifications were made at 400X or 1000X oil when necessary. The 1 cm x 1 cm (whole cell) count was made at 100X. Conversen factors based on area / volume were applied to each stratified level 3 average count to elicit the estimated number of organisns per liter for each 3 species. Sedgwick-Rafter counts subsampled 1 m1 and the same magnificatisns were used for the counts. Biomass estimates were calculated from average dimensions of three to ten individuals of each species if at least three were present. Species volumes were multiplied by the number per liter to obtain biomass as ugn/ liter (mg/m ), and from these data a total biomass estimate for the water column was derived. Organisms were identified to the lowest taxa practical using standard taxonomic keys (see Literature Cited, 5.6). On se"eral occasions E live samples were examined to aid identifications. Organisms were illustrated and photomicrographs taken as time allowed. n. u__ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ ___ _ _ _ _ ___ _
5-7 A combined species list was assembled for the three stations for each quarterly sampling date. These data were analyzed using a PL-1 computer program developed by Copeland and Birkhead (1972), to obtain a Shannon-Weaver index of species diversity by number and by biomass. In addition to the diversity index, a measy,re of evenness (E), a dimensionless measure indicating I the relative numbers of individuals in each species, was applied to these data (Knight, 1973). 5.3 Results and Discussion Environmental Factors I Recounting several " black-water" characteristics pointed out in Section 3.4, Robinson Impoundment waters are acidic (pH 5.3), display very low alkalinity (<2 as mg/l CACO3), and are nitrogen and phosphorus poor, but not deplete. In addition, Secchi depth averaged 1 m throughout this study indicating limited light pene' ration due in part to the highly colored water (Secchi depth a t A-2, 1.19 1 0. 28 ; E-3,1. 071 0. 24 ; C, 1. 09 1 0. 31 meters)- Th. , environ-mental factors and their many faceted interactions ultimately affect the biota and could limit primary prodi:ctivity. Identifying a cause-effect relationship of one environmental factor to one biotic component is unlikely. The interacting effects of temperature influences on chemical, physical, and biological processes make it especially difficult to determine cause-effect relationships of temperature alone. A change in water temperature will affect an ecosystem at all levels directly and indirectly. It is the overall magnitude of the effectr that must be observed. Realizing complexities of these interactions in the dynamic system, factors must be evaluated individually. Table 3.4.1 compares key water chemical parameters for Robinson Impoundment with other area water bodir.s. I Chlorophyll Chlorophyll concentrations when plotted with depth revealed no con-sistant trends. The casults of chlorophyll procedural experiments indicated that the best estimate of chlorophyll concentrations for the water colu=n was
5-B an average of the depth sample measurements. Coefficients of variation were calculated for each water column by sampling date and revealed high variability among the depth samples at each station. The highest variabilities were noted at the times of lowest chlorophyll concentration. This would be e xp ec t ed since these were approaching the detection limits for chloropnyll. Average water column concentrations as micrograms of chlorophyll a_ per liter were calculated for comparison among stations and to observe seasonal trends (Table 5.3.1). I The water column mean chlorophyll a_ coefficient of variation data revealed that the same degree of variability was displayed among location means throughout the study. This indicated that variation between depth sample measurements may be due to the problems associated with the chlorophyll pro-cedure (i.e., high particulate load prohibited filtration of larger volumes of water, an interference of phaeopigment determinations was occasionally I W encountered, masking the chlorophyll concentrations, etc), if variation about the means were consistent between locations at one time, this would indicate that elements (whether procedural, environmental, or chemical) producing this variation were constant. Homogeneity of the variances were checked to test whether the water column means could be compared statistically (Sokal and Rohlf, 1969). This revealed that the variances were homogeneous ('a <.05 comparing A-2 to E-3, a .< .01 comparing A-2 to G and E-3 to G) . Frequency distribution of E the monthly means indicated that these were normally distributed. The assumptions for a --test being met, the monthly chlorophyll means were tested to see if these measurements were sample means from the same population, m In comparing locations (Figures 3.3.1 and 5.3.2) it was found that chlorophyll f ollowed the same seasonal patterns at A-2 and E-3, but both were different from G. Concentrations were generally higher in the lower impound-ment than in the upper impoundment. A t-test for comparison of sample means over the 31 sample dates indicated no significant difference between chlorophyll concentrations at A-2 and E-3 (a = .05) (Dixon and Massey, 1957; Sokal and Rohlf, 1969). I a
5-9
,. A-2 E-3 G Average (31 monthly means) 11.81 12.32 5.87 S.D. 8.34 8.90 5.71 t
s
-0.232 3.26 3.40 I
Levels of significance for 31 degrees of freedom (df = 31). (a I (o
=
=
.05) -1.697 <t, > 1.697
.01) -2.46 <t s > 2.46 There were significant differences, however between A-2 and G and between E-3 and G. !!ean chlorophyll concentrations were 49% higher in the lower impoundment and discharge area than in the upper impoundment. There were no significant differences between the annual mean chlorophyll concentrations in the heated discharge area (E-3) and the icwer impoundment (A-2). A correlation coefficient of r = .957 was obtained for 1975 data be: Ween A-2 and E-3 indicating that seasonal distribution of chlorophyll was highly correlated between these i
two stations. These data indicate that chlorophyll cvacentrations were not af fected by the elevations of temperatures observed between these two stations. _g-E Increased temperatures, dependent upon the t.T and the t1me of exposure, may l have an initial inhibitory effect on production followed by an accelerated stimulation so that net results may be negligible (Jensen,1974). Seasonal fluctuations of chlorophyll as demonstrated in Figures 5.3.1 and 5.3.2 in-dicated that chlorophyll concentrations were highest in September-November and l lowest in March-June in the discharge and lower impoundment. Chlorophyll fluctuations at G in the upper impoundment were more erratic, and seasonal trends were not apparent. The observed fluctuations and the absence of a seasonal pattern indicate that this area may support a more fluviatile (of stream origin) population. Robinson Impoundmet.t chlorophyll concentrations were compared with ! available literature values (Table 5.3.2). Robinson summer chlorophyll con-centrations were higher than those reported by Tilly (1973a), for the four other lI \i. /
I 5-10 South Carolina water bodies. Par Fond is a cooling reservoir in the coastal plain, Clark Hill is a reservoir in the piedmont, Clear Pond is a " black-water" Carolina Bay Lake, and Big Snooks is an oxbow lake all in the Savannah River drainage basin. Rooinson Impoundment chlorophyl. concentrations fall within 3 the ranges reported for " black-water" acidic waters in North Carolina by 'Jeiss and Kuentler (1976) . It can be concluded that the same " population" existed in the lower impoundment and at the discharge by (1) comparison of monthly mean chlorophyll concentrations for the respective water columns, and (2) by seasonal patterns. The impoundment concentrations were 49% higher than the upper impoundment (headwaters) concentrations. The net affects of the increase in temperature between A-2 and E-3 were negligible as demonstrated by the chlorophyll concen-trations. I Standiy Crop The species lists by sample date were summarized into one list of important species (Table 5.3.3). An important species was defined as any taxa which comprised at least 10% of any water colu=n population on any sampling date by number or biemass. Seasonal distribution and abundance were indicated by 5 importance number. This was calculated as an average of the percent by number 5 and the percent by biomass of the total population represented by each taxa. ,, As an example, if the small coccoid green alga, Nannochloris sp., represented g 60% of the total population by number, the contribution to the importance number would be 30. If this species represented less than 10% of the total population biomass, the contribution to the importance number would be considered zero, so that the importance number for this organism on this sampling date would be g 30. Population composition data are summarized in yizures 3.3.3 and 5.3.4 The total population number or biomass comparing A-2, E-3, and G are apportioned into the major groups; Cyanophyta, Chlorophyta, Chrysophyta, and other by per-cent composition. I
I 5-11 Analyses of standing crop data indicated that similar populations of l organisms by ecmposition and abundance were observed at A-2 and E-3 on each sampling date. The population at G was generally much smaller by nunber and biomass and contained a different population by composition. However, the same taxa and major groups were primarily important at all three stations. Chlorophyta (green algae) were the dominant group all year (> 90% at A-2 and E-3, 87% at G by number,
> 75% at A-2 and E-3, > 50% at G by biomass). The small coccoid green algae and the desmids were the most abundant organisms throughout the year. k"nitf ord (195S) found in analyzing net plankton samples from several " brown-water" lakes and I pends, that Chrysophyceae were ecemon but never really abundant; the Chlorophyceae were the most abundant and were comprised almost entirely of desmids; that Bacillariophyceae (diatoms) were almost never abundant., and Cyanophyceae were never dominant. Observations of nannoplankton revealed that the coastal plain waters were dominated by small celled species of Chlorococcales and desmids.
The Robinson Impoundment phytoplankton would seem to be typical for black-water type areas in the coastal plain. Diatoms have an upper thermal tolerance of about 30*C (Patrick, 1974) I and would be excluded from the community at greater temperatures. The only diatom which contributed significantly to the lower;tetpoundment population was Asterionella which was abundant in May in 1973 and 1975. There are only a few acidophilic (thriving in lower pH waters) diatoms, e.g. Tabellaria, Eunctia, Navicula, Frustulia, and pinnularia (Patrick, 1974). All of these were observed in low numbers at one time or another in the samples primarily in the upper impoundment. Blue-green algae (Cyanophyta), which are usually selected for by temperatures exceeding 37*C (Patrick, 1974), would never be expected to bloom in low pH water (pH 5-6) where they are uncot: mon (Brock,1973) . I The associations, seasonal distributions, and abundance of organisms found in Robinson impoundment agree with those expected in black-water, low pH, low alkalinity waters (k'hitford, 1958; Whitford and Schu=acher, 1963; Hutchinson. 1967). Seaaonal patterns indicated the greatest number of organisms were present in February and August with the greatest biomass observed in August, I Novem3er, and February. Lowest numbers and biomass were observed in May and I
I 5-12 l Station G populations were always much less than the impoundment except I June. in May and June, when they were the same. Whitford (1958) indicated that a spring peak was absent from the seasonal totals of his " brown-water" pond observations, but that a small rise in March and April was due to spring desmids. He noticed a distinct drop in June, with a rise to an annual peak E This agrees with observations at Robinson 7mpoundment. in August. I Species diversity data indicated that diversity was low for all three stations. The evenness index which compares the diversity index obtained from enumeration data to the maximum diversity possible f or the number of species present is a better comparative index than the actual diversity index. Averaging this measure for all sample dates to compare locations, the following was obtained: Robinson Impoundment Average (9 observations) Evenness index A-2 .50 ; .08 E-3 .52 + .08 G .42 * .13 Campbell and Weiss (in preparation), in a survey of North Carolina lakes and E impoundments, reported an evenness index (30 observations) of .55 + .13 for nine lakes which were acidic in quality. A t-test comparing the evenness indices of A-2, E-3, and G revealed no significant differences (a = .05) among the three stations. Species diversity was low, but not different from other water bodies I of similar water quality. Zooplankton standing crop data are su=marized in Table 5.3.4. These data indicated that a very few taxa were present throughout the sampli g period and were dominatec by the small crustaceans, Cladocerans: Eubosnina 3p . , Diaphanosoma sp., and Copepods: Cvelops spp. (several species), Diaptomus sp., and Nauplii larvae of copepods (unidentified). I n:
- 5-1.3 m Several of the Cyclops were present throughout the year and were usually associated with Eubosmina sp. A Euboscina sp. maximum was observed in the fall with a spring maximum of Diaphanosoma sp. and Diaotomus sp. observed. Occasionally rotifers were present in low numbers, but theee did not contribute greatly to zooplankton, standing crop. The zooplankton population was greatly reduced in August, 1975, at A-2 and E-3. This could have been a result of temperatures exceeding thermal tolerance limits, although no literature on the subject was available. During the July thermal plume monitoring, dead Chaoborus larvae were noted floating in the shallow area north of the discharge. Many dead Chaoborus were also pre-sent in the August samples. These were most likely temperature effects. Primary Productivity I The relationship of primary productivity with depth indicated a decrease in production with depth as would be expected due to the decrease in light penetration. Maximum production (P ) was observed most consistently at the surface, but ranged fro: surface to 1 meter. Tilly (1973b) found that was correlated with temperature at the depth of P
~
P m through the year, and that there was a tendency for the warm station to be more productive than the cooler station in surface waters. These same trends were observed at Robinson Imnoundment for most measurements. Primary production appears limited
.i to the top 1 meter at Point Station G. The euphotic zone ranged from 2 meters to 4 meters a A-2 and included the entire water column at E-3 (2 meters), for most of the year.
Limiting Factors to Primary Production The rate of primary production is dependent upon several important factors including the population of organisms present and their physiological
" health," available solar energy, available carbon and nutrients, and tecnera- 1 ture. The same population of organisms were present at A-2 (the upper impound-ment) and E-3 (the discharge) as indicated by chlorophyll and standing crop data. These same data indicated that a smaller population of different composition existed at G in the upper impoundment. Available solar radiation (24 hours)
5-14 was constant at all stations for r sampling date. The actual Langley per hour of incubation sas slightly different .fue to the different times of incubation (Table 5,3.5). Available carbon may or may not be constant all will vary for each saepling date at each station, and availabic nutrients must be analy:ed on a case by case basis. Temperature is the princ4nal variable which is always different among the three stations (Figure 5. 3. 5) . The relationship of availabic g carbon, available nutrients, and temperature to prtr.?ty ;;oduction will each be E discussed. I Available Carbon Available carbon is dependent upon pH. Alkalinity, pH, and teeperature I can be used to estimate carbon availataility as stable inorganic carben from relationships s e nrized by Saunders et al. (1962). The total available carbon is the sum of .c carbon as dissolved carbon dioxide, carbonic acid, bicarbonate B ions, and carbonate ions. The dissociction of carbon in water as pH increases E from 1 to 12 progresses from dissolved CO2 and carbonic acid (H,CO )3 where CO 2 can b6 liberated to the atmosphere (depending upon the temperature-partial presure relationship), to bicarbonate (HCO 3
) to cadenau M03 D. At pH levels below 6, carbon la in the form of carbonic acid or fr'e CO3 . so that alkalinity as agcaCO3 would be low. The question of carbon as a limiting factor in low alkalinity situations has not yet been resolved. Tilly (1973a) E questioned whether carbon could be limiring in alkslinity concentrations (0.9 as eg/2. CACO ) observed at Clear Pcnd a Carolina Bay 1.ake in South Carolina.
3 However Schindler et al. (1972) f ound that atmospheric carben dioxide may invade waters of low alkalinity in sufficient supply to permit outrophication if encogh phosphorus and nitrogen were available. In Robinson Impoundmer. : this question remains unanswered. Carbon availability was considered as a possible limiting factor to primary productivity. Alkalinity measurements were averaged for the water column. Measurements of alkalinity at very low levels produce variations which are more pronounced. A study of alkalinity measurements within samples and among the depth samples for each location reveal'ed high variability at both levels. It was determined thrt the best estimate of carbon availability for the water column would be an average of the derth samples. These values are presented in Table 5.3.6. I e
v , 1 - 5-15 To test whether the alkalinity measurements observed at the three y stations over the sempling period were homogeneous, a t-test comparing overall ecans was applied to these datc. There were no significant (a = .05) dif: crences in mean alkalinities among the three stations for the sampling period. This indicated that the low alkalt.tries observed were homogeneous within the impound-cent. However, if on one sam .ing date alkalinity was significantly reduced in the water column of one station compared to another station, the primary a productivity could t appreciably reduced as a result. Examination of Table 5.3.5 indicated that alkalinity measurements on several sample dates varrant comparison by location (i.e., March 6, 1975 and September 25, 1975). A t-test comparison of ocans of individuals depth measurements indicated that alkalinities at A-2 and E-3 were significantly different (a = .05) for both of these months. Alkalinity was 39.6% lower at E-3 than at A-2 on March 6, 1975 and 57.7% lower at E-3 than A-2 on September 25, 1975. These differences could produce proportional reductions in primary productivity I independent of any other variables. Primary productivity at E-3 wr.s 55% less than A-2 on March 6, 1975 and 77% less on September 25, 1975. Available Nutrients l Total nitrate (N) was plotted with total phosphate (p) in Figures 5.3.6 and 5.3.7 to indicate ceasonal availability of relative concentrations of these nutrients. The nitrate to phosphate ratio indicates which of these nutrients is most likely limiting to production. This ratio is high (> 30) for I .bir. son impoundment and is extremely variable f rom month to month. In most instances the phosphate levels would limit production if other limiting factors were not influencing production rates. Overall, nutrient levels do not appear deficient. The highest concentrations of nitrates were observed in July and August with a secondary peak in the winter. Lowest concentrations were observed in April and May, phosphates were low and less variable than nitrates. When nitrates were observed in higher concentrations and the phytoplankton data indicated an increase in abundance, the phosphates vero depleted. In these instances phosphates would limit further phytoplankton population increases. Data also indicated that nitrates decreased drastically following a phytoplankton pulse which would be expecte?. The availability of these nutrients definitely i i- iii--iiiim i,ni ii-
___~_- _- - . .- - .. - - _ _ . - -- -- - - . _ _ . . - - _ _ ' 5-16 influence the potential productivity of the Robinson Impoundment. Polisini et al. (1970) found,in studying a pond with low pH and total alkalinity on the Savannah River Plan site,that a nutrient ecmbination limited productivity ., i in this pond and that the concunity was adapted to low concentrations of nutrients. The nutrients which were found to influence primary production I rates were nitrate, phosphate, sulfate, calcium, and potassium. These nutrients would also be expected to influence productivity in Robinson Impoundment. , Temperature l Rate at primary production has been shown to vary according to tem-I i perature and light intensity by a predictable relationship. The exact response l of the endemic community present at any time would vary and should be determined by incubation experiments for each case. Jensen (1974), working on Lake Norman, l l North Carolina, found the relationship graphed below, to hold for incubation experiments. i.:co 7-
/
[ s 8 8" ' Light tevel ( Ly/ min) / ,
= 0. 5 / / y ,
- - - =0,25
/ \, \ '
8'"0'
.~...oa$ \s !
E
/ -- ' l
...... . . 0 0 5 / - 's \
e s > a s:,. - - =0025
/
j
\\ -
1
/ '.' \ '\ i\
t'
/ ,
s 7 o,sco<
,/ ,' \\
x / , ,' \\
/ i'/ l,,' \f a g,3 3, '/ , ' ,,. .. ********** a . . , ih ft O.210d ,
/'g(' '
- ', -- - -. % ,, N \t i
.\9 s
._,./....-
s . 0.:,,{ ..- ; i f i I
\ l
~
24.00 28.03 32.00 la.00 40.00 .d 00 *l1.30 17.00 5'.00 i.33 4.00 '2.30 16.40 20.00 ft*Pgagtyp( (C) l l Relative rate of primary produ;11 art vs. !tmpersture at ddferen: ! gnt ateasittet I (frOm Jenser, 197!.)
5-17 r-- His equation from which this model was derived for the change in { production rate resulting from a temperature elevation from Ty to T, was tested with four months data f or prirary production at the Robinson Impound-ment. His regression analysis results for constants and temperature bounds were borrowed in the absgnee of such data for Robinson. Temperatures and production rates measured at A-2 were used to predict production rates at E-3 (the discharge area) for the measured increases in temperature. Pro-duction rates actually measured at E-3 were compared to those predi :ed: I Temperatures ('C) Production Rates (ecC/r?/ day 1 Solar Radiation Langleys/ Min. I Date
}
(A-2) T, (E-3) P. 1 (A-2) Predicted (P T
)
E-3 (Actually L1 (A-2) L 7G-3) 2 Measured) 11-11-75 22 24 449.68 384.19 262.49 .6278 .7667 12-12-74 13 22 320.00 776.02 444.00 .2151 .2212 8-6-75 29.2 39.6 501.46 332.61 212.35 .7864 .9400 B-7-74 29.5 38.5 3110.63 2875.40 2956.26 1.0075 .9399 I Ty = temperature measured at A-2 T * ***E*#*t"#* ****"#* 2
** ~3 P = pr duction rate actually measured at A-2 T
1 i P Ly T 2
=
" predicted production rate at temperature (T,,)
solar radiation for incubation period at A-2 L = solar radiation for incubation period at E-3 2 g A correlation coefficient of .007 was obtained by comparing predicted W versus actual measurements. Although sample sites were scall, our data appear to fit Jensen's model. This equation could be used as a predictive tool or as a check on temperature effects alone upon primary production. Differences between actual predicted versus measured rates could be due to slight differences in water quality, light, the numbers of kinds or organisms present, and " health" effects of condenser passage upon the phytoplankton organisms, or sample variance. Jensen (1974) indicates "a temperature optimum of about 32*C (90*F)," and that these , curves resemble plots of algal photosynthesis reported in the
- 5-1s From the foregoing discussion, it can be deduced that increases t
i literature. 1 in temperature (with light constant) will produce an increase in production rate until temperatures approach approximately 32*C (this temperature may be higher in a lower latitude lake than Lake Norman, N. C.) where further temperature - increases result in reduction of primary productivity. , 1 Primarv Productivity Comparisons by Location Integrated primary production rates for the water column at each location as milligrams of carbon fixed per square meter per day (mgC/m'/ day) can be found in Table 5.3.7. Productivity data for 1973-1974 were compared by location. These data were then compared with 1975 data. Results indicated that there was no significant difference between the mean of six measurements for the 1973-1974 ! data at A-2 and E-3 using a t-test (a = .05). productivity was 970 lower at C than the rest of the impoundment. In 1975 there was a significant difference i between A-2 and E-3, E-3 productivity was reduced by 56*:. A and G values were significantly different but E and G were not in 19'5. Comparing productivity means for A-2 (1973-74) to A-2 (1975), there was no significant difference (2 = .05) with the t-test. There was, however, a significant difference between E-3 (1973-74) and E-3 (1975) production rates (2 = .01). No significant difference E was indicated comparing G (1973-74) to G (1975) productivity data (Dixon and 5 Massey, 1975; sokal and Rohlf, 1969). These changes, a 56*: reduction com-psring A-2 to E-3 in 1975, and a 1973-74 to 1975 reduction of 77*. in the primary production rate at E-3 could result from differences in the algal population, differences in carbon availability, differences in nutrients, l temperature effects, or some other stress producing agent. Seasonal Patterns I Seasonal patterns at A, .nd E-3 in 1973-74 were the same. The I normal seasonal pattern seemed m ',ndicate a January to February peak, with a , i secondary peak in late summer; the lov occurs in June. !n 1974 there was a I significant peak in August. This appeared to be due to an increase in j . alkalinity in the p.esence of available nutrients. "onthly productivity studies were conducted f rom spring to f all in 1975 to monitor productivity 5
I 5-19
- more closely; however, the 1974 peak was not repeaten. The 1974 August peak appears to be an occasional phenomenon and these data were excluded from the estimation of an annual average for comparison with literature values.
Annual Average Estimated. Primary Production for Robinson impoundment The annual average was computed by using (1) the two 1973 estimates i as a six-month average projected to a yearly average, (2) th= 1974 data excluding August, and (3) the quarterly averages of the 1975 data. These estimates were incorporated into a yearly average for the impoundment: A-2 E-3 G
- 1. 1973 371 342 31 2.a. 1974 1156 1115 27 2.b. 1974 397 473 27 (excluding August)
I-
- 3. 1975 494 230 139
- 4. Averaging 1, 2b, and 3 421 348 66 1 64.8 121.6 63.5
- 5. Averaging A & E from line 4 as the best estimate for the impoundment:
385 mgC/m / day
- 6. An impoundment estimate inc.luding G data would be 278 mgC/m / day.
I 7. An impoundment estimate including all data (1., 2.a., 434 mgC/m / day. and 3.) would be I Estimate S. was compared with reported literature values in Table 5.3.8. Robinson primary productivity compares most closely with par Pond, Aiken, South Carolina (Tilly, 1973a). Uetzel (1969) termed his rates
" moderately low" which are similar to the rates observed at Robinson.
I It can be concluded that in spite of reductions in productivity at E-3 observed in 1975, the yearly estimated average production rate is com-parable with available literature. If increased temperature has a definitive overall effect, it would seem to be increasing phytoplankton primscy pro-duction in the lower impoundment compared with the upper impoundment. I , I
I 5-20 I Population Dynamics Robinson Impoundment phytoplankton population dynamics information l l are su==ari:ed in Table 5.3.9 and illustrated in Figures 5.3.1 and 5.3.2. The interrelationships among the three indicator parameters of structure and function, 1) phytoplankton standing crop (numbers, biomass, and species diversity), 2) chlorophyll, and 3) primary productivity, indicate community stability. Assessment of these data offer an overview of phytoplankton popu-lation dynamics. Quarterly estimates of primary productivity and standing crop were comparable with chlorophyll values. Chlorophyll then offers a good estimate of phytoplankton standing crop and potential productivity. The assimilation ratio (Odum. 1963) which is production per unit chlorophyll, and i production per unit biomass correspond to changes in primary productivity. When envirorcental parameters effect primary productivity the community efficiency and the energy flow for that time and place are affected. If community composition and total abundance are not changed by these effects 1 i the community would be considered stable. The phytoplankton community in the Robinson impoundment appears to I be adapted to the regime of low alkalinity, fluctuations of available nutrients, and the range of temperatures observed over the sampling period. At temperatures exceeding 32*C for long periods of time a stress upon the population was indicated. Since the population composition and total abundance were not altered as a result of this stress, it can be concluded that the population is stable and can g recover from periodic stresses rapidly when conditions return to normal, w l Seasonal distributions indicated the population fluctuations correspond to seasonal patterns observed in other coastal plain black-water areas. Population composition of the phytoplenkton was similar to those ' reported in available literature for low pH, ?ow alkalinity waters. However, the diatom and perhaps othar Chrysophycean components of the population expected to be present in low numbers may be excluded from the impoundment populations at temperatures above 30*C. These organisms were present but not abundant g l at Station C in the upper impoundment. Overall, the phytoplankton population E E
5-21 s, standing crop and primary productivity appears enhanced in the lower impound-a ment compared with the upper impoundment. The production of the Robinson impoundment was moderately low. Primary production of the phytoplankton was compared with available literature. These rates were comparabic with reported production rates for other water bodies in the area. 5.4 Problem Arcas Carbon may be a limiting factor to prinary production in low g I alkalinity - low pH s1*.uations. The var 1 ability of alkalinity measureme.sts at such low levels will ef fect determinations of carbon availability, and 1'C primary production measurements. Since these problems were consistent at all three sampling stations, data are comparable. Our data compare well with r eported values f or water bodies in the same area, so that these estimates would seem reliable. Research into this problsa area is beyond the scope of this report. Copper was reported in algastatic concentrations in the Robinson I impoundment. The toxicity of copper is dependent on several factors (Hutchinson, 1967). Humic substances serve as chelating agents (Patrick and Reimer, 1966). Chelation is a compicx f ormation with metal ione that keeps the elen.ent in solution and nontoxic, as compared with the inorganic salts of the metal (Odum, 1971). The dark color associated with " black-waters" comes f rom the presence . of humic substances. Most of the research which determines the toxicity of metals is done with the more toxic inorganic salts of the metal. Toxicity of a metal for a particular alga varies according to the abundance of the alga, temperature, alkalinity, the amount of organic material in the water, and other F factors (Palmer, 1962). The safe level of copper for a particular water body must be determined from a 96-hour LC 50 using receiving water and the most sensitive important species in the locality as the test organism as recommended in Water Quality Criteria 1972, Committee on Water Quality Criteria. An algr.1 assay should be conducted to determine levels of copper which would adversely affect the indigenous algal repulation. This is beyond the scope of this report. 5.5 Summary and Conclusions Robinson Impoundment phytoplankton population dynamics are indicated by the interrelationships among the three indicator paranieters of -tructure
4 Il 1 5-22 I and function; phytoplankton standing crop (numbers, biomass, and species El diversity), chlorophyll, and primary productivity. Stress, ecosystem j m stability, and initial energy availability can be determined from structural and functional dynamics of the phytoplankton co:munity. Assessment of , community structure determines whether the populations are " indigenous" and i community stability indicates a "bolanced" population. ; j Analysis of standing crop data indicated that similar populations of organisms by abundance and population composition were observed at A-2 in the lower i=poundment and E-3 at the discharge. The population at C in the I upper impoundment was generally tuuch smaller by number and biomass and contained
=
i a different population by composition. The same taxa and mejor groups were primarily important at all three stations. The Chlorophyta (green algae) was ' the dominant group all year and within this group the small coccoid green algae i and the desmids were the most atundant. Species diversity was low at all three stations but not dif ferent from other water bodies of similar water quality. The associations of organisms, seasonal distributions and abundance of organisms found in Robinson Impoundment agree with those expected in black-water, low ph, low alkalinity waters. I, The zooplankton population was dominated by a very fav taxa of the Cladocera and Copepoda (small crustaceans). Eubosmina sp. and Cyclops spp. g do=1nate in the fall while Diaphanosoma sp. and Diaptomus sp. were dominant $ in the spring. The zooplankton population was greatly reduced in August 1975 at the discharge and at A-2 but recovered rapidly in succeeding months. Data I were not extensive enough to make a judgment as to whether this population is I
" balanced and indigenous."
Chlorophyll data were comparabic with quarterly estimates of primary productivity and standing crop. Chlorophyll then offers a good estimate of l phytoplankton standing crop and potential productivity. The same " population" existed in the lower impoundt.ent and at the discharge by comparison of monthly mean chlorophyll concentrations for the respective water columns and by seasonal patterns. The observed erratic fluctuations in chloroplyll concen-trations and other parameters at Point Station G in the t.oper impoundment, and the absence of a seasonal pattern indicate that this area may support a more fluviatile (of stream origin) population. N
5-23 - The phytoplankton cormunity in the Robinson impoundment appears to L be adapted to the regime of lov alkalinity, fluctuations of available nutria.nts, and the range of temperatures observed over the sampling period. At tem-peratures exceeding 32*C for long periods of time a stress upon the population was indicated by tne redottien of primary productivity at E-3 (the discharge). These effects were reflected in community production efficiency and the energy flow for the succaer at the discharge area. Hevever, since the population com-position and total abundance were not altered as a result of this stress, it can be concluded that the population is stable and can recover from periodic stresses when conditions are more favorable. Overall, the phytoplankton population standing crops and primary productivity appears enhanced in the lover impoundmeno compared with the
~
upper impoundment. Phytoplankton primary productivity of the Robinson lepound-ment was moderately low, and mens 2rements were comparable with reported pro-duction rates for other water bodies in the area. I I I I l
I' 5-24 IH 5.6 Literature cited I j Billings, W. D. 1965. Plants and tho ecosystem. Wadsworth I 1 Publishing Company, Inc. , Belmont , California. 154 pp. Brock, T. D. 1973. Lower pH limit for the existence of blue-green l algae: evolutionary and ecological implications. Science 179: 460-483. I Campbell, P. H. and C. h. Weiss. 'In preparation). The ta.onomy and ecology of the phytoplankton of North Carolina waters. Copeland, B. J., and W. S. Birkhead. 1972. Some ecological studies of the lower Cape Fear River Estuary, ocean outfall and Dutchman Creek. 1971. Contribution No. 27, Pamlico Marine Laboratory, N. C. State University. Dixon, V. J. and F. J. Massey, Jr. 1957. Introduction to statistical analysis. McGraw-Hill Book Company. ac., New York. 488 pp. Goldman, C. R., ed. 1969. Primary productivity in aquatic environments. Proceedings of an I.B.P. PF Symposium, Pa11anza, Italy. University of California Press Berkeley. pp. 464 Galterman, H. L., ed. 5 1969. Methods for chemical analysis of g fresh waters. ISP Handbook No. 8. Blackwell Scientific Publica-tions, Oxford and Edinburgh. Hansmann, E. W. 1973. Diatoms of the streams of eastern Connecticut. State Geological and Natural History survty of Connecticut, Dept, g of Enviren= ental Prot. Bulletin 106: 119 pp. = Huber-Pestalo:11, G. 1938/1941/1942/19 0/1955/1961. Das Phytoplankton des Susswassers. v.1,1938, Blaualgen, Bakterien, Hiz, 342 pp.; v. 2 part 1, 1941, Chrysophyceen, Farblose Flagella-ten Heterokonten, 365 pp., part 2, 1942, Diatomeen, 549 pp.;
- v. 3,1950, Cryptophyceen, Chloromonadineen, Peridineen, 310 pp. ;
- v. 4, 1955, Euglenophyceen, 606 pp.; v. 5, 1961, Volvocales, 744 pp. ,I_n,,
n Die Binnengewasser ven A. 31enemann, S tutt gart . Hutchinson, C. E. 1967. A treatise on limnology, Vol. II., l John Wiley and Sons, Inc., Nev York. 396 pp. l I
-___m.__
5-25 Jensen, L. D. 1974. Report No. 11. Environmental responses to therm 1 discharges from Marshall Steam Station, Lake Norman, North Carolina. Electric. Power Research Institute Publication No. 74-049-00-2, Palo Alto, California. 235 pp. ! Kim Y. C. 1967. The Desmidiaceae and !!esotaeniaceae in North . Carolina. Doctoral Thesis. N. C. State Univ., Raleigh, N. C. 126 pp. Knight, R. L. 1973 Entrainment and thermal shock effects on phytoplankton numbers and diversity. Dept. of Environmental
$ciences and Engineering, Univ. of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, N. C. Pub. No. 336. 73 pp.
Morris, I., C. h. Yentsch, and C. S. Yentsch. 1971. Relationship l between light carbon dioxide fixation and dark carbon dioxide fixation by marine algae. Limnology and Oceanography 16: 854-858. Odum, E. P. 1963. Ecology. Holt, Rinehart, and Winston, New
- Ye;k. 152 pp.
Palmer, M. C. 1962. Algae in water supplies. U. S. Dept. of Health, Education, and Welfare, Public Health Service Publication No. 657. U. S. Government Printing office, Washington, D. C. 88 pp. Patrick, R. 1974. Effects of abnormal temperatures on algal communities. Paces 335 - 349. M .1, W. Gibbons and R. R. Sharitz, eds. Thermal ecolcgy. I* Technical Information Center, Office of Information 9ervices, U. S. Atomic Energy Comission, Oak Ridge, Tennessee. Patrick, R. and C. W. Reimer. 1975. The Diatoms cf the United States. Vol. 2. Part 1. Monograph of Acad. Nat. Sci. Ph11a. 13. 213 pp. Polisini, J. M., C. E. Boyd and D. Didgeon. 1970. Nutrient limiting factors in an oligotrohpic South Carolina Pond. Oikos. 21: 344-347. I I 'I I
5-26 Poole, H. H., and W. R. G. Atkins. 1929. Photoelectric :reasure- - ments of submarine illumination throughout the year. J. Mar. Biol. Ass. i' K. 16: 297-324. Prescott, G. W. 1962. Algae of the western Great Lakes area. Revised from 1951. W. C. Brown Co., Dubuque. Iowa. 977 pp. Stunders, G. W., F. B. Trama, and R. W. Bachmann. 1962. Evaluation of a modified C technique for shipboard estimation of photosynthesis in large lakes. Publication L. B, Great Lakes Research Division, Institute of Science and Technology Ann Arbor, Michigan. 61 pp. Schindler, D. W., G. J. Brunskill, S. Emerson, W. S. Broecker, and T. H. Peng. 1972. Atmospheric carben dioxidet its role in maintaining phytoplankton standing crops. Science. 177: 1192-1194. Smith G. M. 1950. The freshwater algae of the United States. McGraw-Hill, New York. 719 pp. Sokal, R. R. and F. J. Rohlf. 1969. Biometry. W. H. Freemen and Company, San Francisco. Strickland, J. D. H., and T. R. Parsons. 1968. A practical handbook of seawater analysis. Bulletin 167. Fisheries tesearch Board of Canada, Ottawa. 311 pp. Taft, C. E. and C. W. Taft. 1971. The algae of western Lake Erie. Bulletin of the Ohio Biological Survey, New Series, Vol. 4, 3 Number 1. Ohio State' University, Columbus, Ohio. 189 pp. I Taylor, M. P. 1971. A TVA technique for using carbon-14 to measure phytoplankton productivit?'. Tennessee Valley Authorfty. Division of Environmental Resaarch and Development. Envir nmental Biolc3y Branch, unpublished report. 34 pp. Tilly, L. J. 1973a. Comparative productivity of four Carolina lakes. Amer. Mid. Nat. 90 (2): 356-365. Tilly, L. J. 1973b. Net productivity of the plankt community of a reactot cooling reservoir. ? ages 462-474 In,J. W. Gibbons Thermal ecology. Technica".
- and R. R. Sharitz, eds. -
Information Center, Office of Information Services, U. S. Atomic Energy Commission, Oak Ridge, Tennessee. I a.
l
$-27 I
Vollenweider, R. A., ed. 1969. A manual on methods for measuring primary production in aquatic environments. 1BP Handbook No. 12. Bl.ackwell Scientific Pcblication, Oxford and Edinburge. 213 pp. Weiss, C. M. and E. J. Kuenzler. 1976. The trophic state of 5 North Carolina lakes. Water Resources Research Institute, Report No. 119 University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, N. C. Wetzel, R. G. 1969. Nutritional aspects of algal productivity in Marl Lakes with particular reference to enrichment bionssays and their interpretation. Pages 137-157. h C. R. Goldman, ed. Primary productivity in aquatic environments. Mem. lat Ital. (see Goldman, 1969). Idrobiol., 18 Suppl., University of California Press, Berkeley. Whitford, L. A. 1958. Phytoplankton in Nerth Carolina lakes and I ponds. Jour. Elisha Mitch. Sci. Soc. 74 (2) : 143-157. Whitford. L. A. 1959. Ecological distribution of fresh-water algae. In Tryon, C. A., Jr., and R. T. Hartman, eds. Se ecology of algae. Special Publ. No. 2, Pymatuning Laboratury of Field Biology, Univ. of Pittsburgh. 37 pp. Whitford, L. A and G. L. Schumacher. 1973. A manual of freshwater algas. Sparks Press Raleigh, N. C. 324 pp. I I I , I I ' I I
I
$-28 Table 5.3.1 Chlorophyll a eetizates (nicrograms/ liter) as a water column average and the coefficient of variation for this average at Robinson I=poundment from June 1973 to December 1975 Mesa water column chlorophyll a_ concentrations C-2 E-3 G_
Date A-2_ June 7, 1973 5 9 6 E July 26, 1973 4 5 5 W August 22, 1973 8 12 4 September 26, 1973 13 12 3 October 24, 1973 36 34 5 November 27, 1973 19 19 1 Decseber 19, 1973 5 5 <1 January 22, 1974 14 25 10 Tobruary 13. 1974 19 18 3 March 18, 1974 6 3 3 <1 April 24, 1974 9 11 11 16 g May 21, 1974 12 14 11 21 3 June 28, 1974 3 3 3 July 11, 1974 8 4 3 August 7, 1974 lb 14 3 September 5, 1974 6 17 10 October 16, 1974 15 5 7 Novot er 13, 1974 13 20 3 December 12, 1974 18 16 14 January 8, 1975 5 6 3 February 5, 1975 4 3 1 g March 6, 1975 2 3 2 g April 2, 1975 6 6 4 May 14, 1975 10 7 4 June 11, 1975 18 7 4 , Juif 2, 1975 8 7 9 Aug:st 6, 1975 6 15 21 September 25, 1975 32 3* 1 E October 14, 1975 26 28 12 m November 11, 1975 14 1B <1 December 9,19 75 3 7 2 I I I a_
5-29 Table 5. 3.1 (continued) C lorophyll cencentration coef ficients of variation with depth by sample date Date A;2 C-2 E-3 G August 22, 1973 27.42 8.79 42.41 g Septed er 26, 1973 Octob er 24, 1973 6.97 5.11 l Noveder 27, 1973 7.57 11.69 12.09 224.11 Deceser 19, 1973 84.12 57.71 0 January 22, 1974 64.12 3.13 41.57 February 13, 1974 23.74 20.66 18.21 March 18, 1974 108.65 99.26 77.57 35.32 70.64 64.38 [p April 24,1974 May 21, 1974 9 4 . '/ 7 20.31 22.77 0 45.52 June 28, 1974 91.39 200.00 115.30 July 11,1974 79.33 126.40 115.66 August 7, 1974 9.22 41.17 115.66 l Septed er 5, 1974 146.10 141.42 70.82 October 16, 1974 (0.08 200.00 173.15 94.33 i Noveder 13, 1974 Deceder 12, 1974 January 8, 1975 48.61 27.75 74.26 21.77 58.93 100.00 82.43 108.02 February 5,19 75 69.21 95.25 121.04 i March 6, 1975 April 2, 1975 146.78 55.41 30.24 62.44 109.43 19.73 May 14, 1975 Normal 21.69 40.89 67.61 Sonified 66.60 78.78 34 .4 3 June 11,19 75 26.62 49.64 70.64 38.16 42.47 [5 July 2,1975 August 6, 1975 30.46 89.64 20.81 6.19 Septeder 25, 1975 20.61 56.22 85.86 g October 14, 1975 12. 34 15.96 68.42 40.87 37.89 200.00 l Noveder 11, 1975 Dece=ber 9, 1975 149.09 93.32 118.83 I I I I I
5-30 4 Table 5.3.2 Comparison of Robinson Impoundment averace su==er chlorophfil concentrations with available literature values Chlorophyll ,a_ I Lake Name ug/l ,ar ( A-2 &E- 3 ) (G'> E Robins {nImpoundment, 7.6 6.2 1973 S.C. 5 Robinson Impoundeent, 9.1 2.8 1974 5 S.C.* Robinson I=poundment , 12.8 6.0 1975 g S.C.1 ,, g Clark Hill, S.C.' 6.3 1967 Par Pond, S.C. ,, 2.1 1967 Clear Pond, S.C. 5.3 1967 BigSnooks,S.C.} 1.2 1967
" Black-water" acidic water bodies in North Carolina Hodgins, Hoke County 7.0 1974 3
Singleta.y. Bladen Cognty 16.1 1975 Jones , Bladen County 6.1 1975 Jones Lake, Scotland 20.1 1974 County 3 3 5 Johns, Scotland County 33.4 1974 Lytches,3 Scotland 3.7 1974 County I Present study Tilly, 1973 Weiss and Kuen:1er, 1976 E E E _ _ __ - __ _ _ , _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ . _ . . _ . . _ ~ - - - . . . - -
Table 5.3.3 Seasonal abundance ot important phytoplankton species in Rohtnson Impoundment
*A. .se 22; mee. 27 Feb . 13. Ja te. A.e.et 7 twee-ber weret 6 ee, 32 An.se 6. l sees.ae, 117) 1973 1974 1974 19?4 12. 1974 1971 197$ 19 t1 'I t . II. '73
& E C A E C A B C A 4 C A E C A E C A E C A B C A F G A E C j i
(T AM*st TA Chr ocee c we op . 6 Arhaneceesa deItceeisetem 25 23 6 Felycystte er. 01CefvMYT A Dire!!w.te op. 12 11 5 14 14 7 n ten + eceae op. 6 3 3 $ $ Chet=yderness pet.ellerte 23 18 Oelev emee pe rt yt 10 tot ersmae op 3 9 21 M 3 6 toccccomes cr>tewlarte CIcearysete etgaa 5 ire anochtarte op. i 9 14 29 34 2e 31 19 13 26 11 11 21 29 15 to 14 17 10 12 t2 11 11 41 Digrera etectateleideo 10 3 9 3 (%3erneocew hval(ele 6 4 5 O lor.11a *lltr*cida 7 Chleret ta virert e 9 7 10 6 S 12 3 Achtstecdesome coneelutue 6 Ank la t r ed.sous f a t r at ee 10 9 60 54 6 1$ re r r est ruen het erme entlessa 23
%2pett l e et- 6 Cose$t tw= op. 34 9 I?
27 19 14 16 16 Coeur!=n t ievneatue
<ee-rt . .. r-t ..r. seere.e.t e
, y Ste=rastrwm opp. 39 60 47 41 31 17 u 47 P*
5t eerser rue c*pitaelnen St aurset rus dejecteas 6 19 12 7 9 St rast re rarake'm esf- Peremtwe 17 16 5 14 16 5;+ eer or eses gs enstat wo Spondyl*= tire ryg*aew. 19 21 16 la Bad ustee beeSisteelt 16 CMatsorwyTA 9 77'ff.*1te.** ta ee+ t yon op. to 20 n rywormpsa rele&ee _ 14 24 10 11 titeester oghanaster 5 6 ba<tflertoyh gese takeIter!a f loc e t ee n 6 aetes tocelle f ormees 14 14 Eur.et t e er. 13 16 Frustw3fe op. 6 Frw*tetta rheenetdee 7 19 Eawtemte op. 9 ' Ffonelsefa sp. 11 OT15f p h ecve ep. 8 11 7 Ferid1ntwo op. 6 IS PertJinton westit 3 Cryr'e*oaad (untdest ified) 6 F g 6 Cecyearceue sp.
*ae t pisa 6ece om!y import ance e.eeer = 2 each+r + 1 blossae1 pere *at ceareettiae of the tetel = ameer of ergenf e*e. et tetel 6teesee 2_
toporteet species = eoy opeetes iAlch ecggrie d 1 101 el eey one6 e date pepaletten by ember et blesees
i l Table 5. 1 4 zooplankton irt ensive data summary imlicating total populat ion numbers as #/m and percent composit ion by dominant otganisms. 5-12-75 6-10-75 7-1-75 8-5-75 A-2 E-3 C A-2 E-3 C A-2 E-3 C A-2t E-3 C 3 Total f/m 5000 6000 10000 16000 3m 11000 60000 35000 26000 1300 900 12000 Eabosmina sp. 12 36 21 31 27 66 =1 2 3 16 18 10 Diaphanosomu ap. 19 18 18 46 45 4 '# 7 82 12 3 3 3 Cyclops spp. 27 13 45 7 14 24 1 8 82 76 66 84 plaptomus sp. 29 20 12 10 11 2 2 7 1 4 10 <1 Nauplit larvae 5 4 4 6 4 4 1 2 3 1 3 1 Gineborus 2 - - - - -
<1 * *1 <1 **1 2 9-9-75 10-13-75 11-11-75 12-9-75 Avc: age totat #/=
A-2 E-3 13000 15000 C 41000 A-2 E-3 C A-2 E-3 C A-2 E-3 C U 10000 43000 53000 13000 19000 J0000 7000 19000 3000
- Eubossina sp. 2 8 26 56 53 48 67 75 78 El 65 89 Diaph nosoma sp. 92 84 61 8 8 17 1 1 1 <1 <1 0 Cyclece opp. 5 6 12 33 34 34 29 21 21 18 12 5 Diaptomus up. *1 -
<1 1 1 1 1 1 <1 <1 23 0 Neup111 larvae I <1 1 33 ') <1 3 3 e1 - 0 2 Chauborus <1 3 s 1 1 2 1 1 <1 <1 -
0 -
<1 observed in sasyle but comprising less than II of the total 3
- not obs, eaved in samples
- Denne floating aggregation of dead disoborus noted above E during thermal plume mapping 7-2-75 tal tows rounded of f to the nearest 10 .
** Qiaoborus in the water colussi in daytime samples at E. 2) Importance W. - average of 4 ea vleet many dead ones present in the sample but not cossit ed I composition of organtoms t A-2, 8-5-75, night horizontal and vertical samples cushined
g 5-u Table 5.3.5 Selar radiation (Langleys) for the 24-nour and 3-hour incubation periods for primary production saepling dates for the Rcbinson Impound:nent Transect A Transect E Point I Date 24 Ers. Station 2 Station 3 Station G 8-22-73 323 111 146 198 11-27-73 171 75 83 85 I 2-13-74 575 188 232 227 6-28-74 499 131 111 101 8-7-74 368 181 169 126 -I- 12-12-74 93 40 39 39 3-6-75 529 221 226 215 5-14-75 639 236 238 226 5 6-11-75 7-2-75 396 566 111 228 126 JJ 129 206 8-6-75 376 142 169 157 8-19-75 500 208 216 197 9-25-75 170 58 52 44 10-14-75 398 165 188 198 11-11-75 273 113 138 154 I I I I I I I I I I
I 5- 34 Table 5.3.6 Alkalinity and pH from productivity samples as euphotic :ene water colu=n averages Alkalinitv (as =g/l CsCO ) pH (units) I 3 Date A E G A E G ; 8-22-73 4.1 2.6 1.6 5.5 5.7 5.4 11-27-73 3.1 3.3 3.2 6.0 5.9 5.7 Yearly Mean 3.6 3.0 2.4 5.8 5.8 5.6 S.D. + .7 + .5 + 1.1 + .3 + .1 + .2 C.V. 19.6 16.5 47.1 5.2 2.2 3.2 E 2-13-74 1.0 0.9 0.3 5.8 5.8 5.1 3 6-28-74 0.9 1.2 0.8 5.9 5.8 5. 7 > 8-7-74 3.9 4.7 2.1 5.8 5.9 4.9 12-12-74 1.0 1.0 1.0 5.5 5.5 4.7 Yearly Mean 1.7 2.0 1.1 5.8 5.8 5.1 S.D. + 1.5 + 1.8 + .8 + .2 A .2 A .4 I C.V. 66.3 91.9 69.0 3.0 3.0 8.5 3-6-75 1.0 0.4 0.9 5.1 5.0 4.9 ' 5-14-75 0.5 0.4 0.3 5.2 5.1 5.1 6-11-75 0.8 0.9 0.8 6.1 6.0 5.8 g' 7-2-75 0.8 0.9 0.8 6.1 6.0 5.8 g 8-6-75 1.5 1.2 0.9 5.6 5.4 5.4 8-19-75 0.4 0.5 0.5 5.7 5.2 4.9 9-25-75 0.5 0.3 0.7 5.1 5.1 4.8 10-14-75 0.3 0.4 0.9 5.7 5.4 5.6 11-11-75 0.9 1.1 0.5 5.3 5.4 5.2 0.7 0.7 ** Yearly Mean 0.7 5.5 5.4 5.3 S.D. + 4 + .4 + .2 + .4 + .4 * .4 $ C.V. 53.0 49.4 31.1 7.2 6.9 7.4 Overall mean A I standard d2via-tion 1.38 1.32 .96 5.6 5.6 5.3 A 1.25 + 1.25 + .30 + .34 * .35 + .385 C.V. 90.58 94.70 83.33 6.07 6.25 7.26 ! I l 8 I l n
=
l
m M M M M W Table 5.3.7 .ary indicating integral production for the water column Primarg/ productivity data (mgC/m day) and P suy/hr) and the depth of maximum production by sample date (agC/m fortheRobinsonIEhEundment A-2 depth E-3 depth C delth P (meters) P (meters) P (meters) fmgC/m / day) P of P (mgC/m / day) P of P Date h gCfm / day 1 Q of P 24 1.5 7 4 1.0 8-22-73 100 22 1.0 77 529 306 sfc 54 38 0.5 11-27-73 642 395 sfc 776 139 1.0 865 316 s fc 1 (.3) 0.5 2-13-74 78 28 src 6-28-74 96 16 sfc 110 27 sfc 2956 1390 sfc 29 9 sfc 8-7-74 3111 1036 sfc 133 sfc 444 290 sfc 1 (.01) sfc 12-12-74 320 6 3 sfc 838 188 sfc 238 125 sfc 3-6-75 59 26 sfc 70 sfc 121 27 sfc 5-14-75 325 46 21 sfc Y' 23 sfc 59 18 sfc 6-11-75 89 123 0.5 242 60 1.0 284 127 sfc g 7-2-75 577 sfc 212 99 sfc 116 74 8-6-75 502 144 sfc 197 62 0.5 224 145 sfc 8-19-75 205 63 sfc 100 37 sfc 8 2 sfc 9-25-75 272 122 sfc 159 276 125 sfc 309 602 src 10-14-75 609 1.0 11-11-75 450 222 sfc 263 1 30 src 7 36 0.5
. _ _ . .__= - - .- _. . - _ -
I 5-36
~
Table 5. 3. 8 Comparison of Robinson I=poundment annual average primary l W productivity with reported literature values Produgtivity I Water body (:ype) egC/m / day Rank Author (s)
- Sylvan, Ind. 1564 1 Wetzel, 1966
*Fredriksburg, Denmark 1030 2 Nygaard, 1955 *Fureso, Denmark 750 3 Jonassen &
Mathiesen, 1959 Little Crooked Lake, Ind. 608 4 Wetzel, 1969
- Clear Lake, Calif. 438 5 Goldman & Wetzel B (1963) 3
*Walters, Ind. 437 6 Vetzel, 1966 Crooked Lake, Ind. 414 7 Wetzel, 1969
- Par Pond, S. C. (reactor- 396 8 Tilly , 1973 cooling reservoir)
Robinson Iepoundment 385 9 Miller (reactor-cooling impound-l W tet
- Clear vnd, S. C. 285 10 Tilly, 1973 (Carolina bay) g
- Clark Hill, S. C. 240 11 Tilly, 1973 g (reservoir)
*Naknek, Alaska 173 12 Golcman, 1960
- Brooks, Alaska 158 13 Coldman, 1960
- Big Snooks, S. C. 102 14 Tilly, 1973 3
5
*from Tilly (1973a)
I k I I I a_
, . ~ . -
, . , - - , . - . . . ~
7 F 1 I l J rable 5.3.9 Thytoplankton population dynamics information Spectee dieu re t t y r s a 2 ,,,c, , b,it e /celle , ,,,,,, , ,,, ,,, me fe g,5,, atet h ee. ==s i ereetes m Ider_ esLa en/a __ r/C PIs flif l _L8 j 99.9 4 12.1 1.656 .51 26 *?. l-22-73 A 8.3 i t 76.5 17.4 95 6.2 1.766 .49 36 **.8 C 12.4 4.2 94 1.2 2.996 .77 50 *4.7 A 641.8 1 F,4 8500 36.9 .076 7.750 .91
- met osectee o.17 11-2F-73 1.05 E $18.5 23.2 7300 24.9 .072 7.H0 33.6 045 874 .73 P f*t C/m,/def t to totestet primary predertion fer the ester cel sen se ellitavees of eer4 C 53.7 1.6 1200 esetet teted per equere meter per day. ,
19.3 $843 40.2 .133 1.6 30 46 35 31.759 5.44 t.33-74 A 776.4 5.18 c to enteroph,It e meeweged ter the eeter eetwas se etttf areee per este metee (er=/13. E 864.6 18.2 7152 47.5 .121 1.508 40 43 37.076 of 2.9 4800 .1 .001 1.33) .32 67 6.194 1.29 C 8 tog et blemeee eetleste for the =eter coleen se et tlt greee per c dete seter 6-28-74 A 95.5 3.4 9 34 28.1 .302 1.2% .% % 8. M 9.50
.tfe eed ge en 45 4.77 F/C p'ed.oction per it r%terephytt to etee cott a the e etestetten E 109.5 2.8 1932 39.1 .057 1.466 . 39 9.210 6.19 f edteet tom of prod ct s ef f te tency for that der eder the cet dtt tene present en C 77.5 2.8 1375 27.7 056 1 . 30 7 .10 74 8.508
,55 that day at peek tecettee 16.0 9310 194.0 .334 2,175 .55 54 24.700 2.65 8-7-74 A 3110.6 3.50 F/8 predertice per ==tt bremese, me,elet fl964) feed thee p/8 .e e.,ne t ty ce,, ele e4 I4. 3 206.7 . 3A t 2.286 .59 47 27.200 E 29%.2 7710 eith erectee die *** tty med r/9 hee been e ed to tedieete emergy flee e, the t 10.4 .041 1 es? 44 42 4.0%0 F.ft C 29.2 2.8 710 of eneva, betag stoted by the celle preeemt fog the dey meneeresent e e e6 ylee ,
;2-12-74 A 320.0 18.2 7407 I F.6 .043 2.203 .57 47 37.154 5.02
_ se e speesee dieeretty tedes es , meed f,em et.edt : e,e, eetteetoe [ ta 5.11 8 t 444.C 16.3 79 39 27 2 .056 2.3 % .57 42 an.549 'J 33.5 61 * .I .002 1.884 48 53 81 1.33 C .I E er se eeeeeeee f edee coweges et enop ted eyee g,e dt,,,etty god,, eith the .teme diee'el'F poselble fee the e. ember of eyectee cece te red, l 5-6-75 A 837.0 1.7 5 35 492.0 1.564 1.572 .42 42 14.100 30.09 e 237.9 3.3 4 '9 72.1 .542 2.118 .56 45 6.450 14.69 8 oueber et erweee eneewateted to counte of etee stes crop e epte. C 5.6 1.6 214 3.5 .076 1.864 47 50 927 4.31 75.5 .216 2.045 .56 41 6.710 4.46 h. to the tot et oder of orpeeteen per etit ttleer cet te=ted fee .% =ater ceteau. fr 6 34-75 A 324.7 4.3 1504 eteadfag crop esortee E 121.2 F.0 1407 17.3 .086 2.127 .54 SI 7.610 5.41 j C 59.3 10.1 1064 5.9 054 1.033 .27 47 6.79) A.33 i No./B to the nWe of ee gentene per u It bloosee ee a eneaerertee tedee. Thte der 6 ffsett bleesee. Thte shoof d eetuelty be sele telted by 10 t o ekt e te t he t r., e t 1- 75 A 89.0 3.8 23.4 todtcetee the ret et tee st eee of the ergentees preeeet for that eeepte dete the E 59.2 6.9 8.6 hi sher the au d>er the eme t t er the se ter it y of enee t eos pee et . C 41.5 38.3 2.5
' 75 A 576.8 8.8 65.6 t 242.3 7. 3 33.2 C 281.6 8.0 35.5 A 501.5 23.7 6995 24.2 .072 1.9 30 .54 49 14.300 2.04 l-4-75 E 212.4 14.6 7139 14.6 .0 30 2.074 .55 39 9.*10 1.29 C 115.8 6.2 35 39 18.7 .033 2. 34 2 .60 51 5.250 1.48 8-25-75 A 272.1 32.4 8.4 E 100.2 33.9 3.0 C 7. 7 1.0 7.7 iO-14-75 A 609.0 25.7 23.7 E 275.0 28.4 9.7 C 30 9. 2 12.0 25.8 32.4 .064 2.041 .54 39 10.4*3 1.47 tl-tt-75 A 449.7 13.9 7078 1.42 17.8 7909 14.8 .033 2.023 .58 33 11.200 E 252.5 C 7.0 .3 2873 23.3 .002 0.749 .19 55 I.0to . 35
5-3S I TRANSECT A STATION 2 ;,, ,_ , _.. . ._ g - 4o ---
- .._ _ . . - _ . _ . - - 8 40
- 7 i i 30 -~- -- - - - - - - - - - - ~.. 6 30 W.
- v. ..
.. s x
;o . - . . . ___ .. .. . . _ . .2 . _ _ . -
4 20 1 Y) i
/ 3 l'
3 to - - 2 to 7 r - m..
, *t f.!
1
/ +:51 ::=..,
t .'
- s s !:n r_ lz;;;
0 O-TR ANSECT E STATION 3 - 8 40 o W 40 l_Z . _
~
m x 7 0 g g .
= 2
.=
9 30 - - - - - - - w -- - - - - - 6 30 g et
- '::Y$
.:: 4 5 e:::d? 5 %v 3 *
- .:v... = -
d *:::Rt 5 ? a .::. 20 -- w- 4 20 s \-
\ s s 3
- .*~I E
1o <
= s
\ :': .+
58 3 - ' J85 -- 2 10
.\
6 3o
? c " 'E s
l i S..s... i. I=!5 l@. t (f i0i3sse! _ !!!i.%. .
'issii!
1 o POINT STATION G do B 40 g 7 5 3e . 6 30 s I
-. . .-. -- . 4 20 20 3
5 10 .- 2 to 0 M J J A S O N O J F M A M J J A $ 0 N O 1973 1974 CHLOROPHYLL A BIOMASS l l g PRODUCTIVITY @ g Figure 5.3.1 chlorophyll, biomass , and primary produc tivity by nonth and quarter : I Robinson Impoundment, May 1973 - December 1974
5-39 TRANSECT A STATION 2 40 8 40 E. . 7 30 - 6 30 5 20 -- - --- - - - -- 4 20 c E. 3 1 10 *-- ~~ - ' - - - - 2 10
* ---E m y ,9 -
E 0 m ~ --f$Asfnn _ ^ ^ ~ -
'0
~
TR ANSECT E STATION 3 N I - 40 . _ _ . . _ _ . _ . _ 8 40 e _ox
$ 7 Oi I %
3 [ 30 - - - - - - - - - 6 30 g
*R
) "E 5D
= b(
20 - - - - - -- - -- k-- - 4 20 I f-C 3 3~f 2-2 5 W 6 10 - - - + - -
-f -
2 to 5 I' -. - m 0
"I' '
A P 4 0 POINT STATION G ~~ 40 - 8 40 I 30 - - 6 30 6 5 yn -.. . - - - -- - ... - - - - a 20 3 10 ---- - - - - - -~ ~ 2 10
~
.- w
- es,ob \ 1 I
0 0 J F M A M J J A 5 O N D 1975 CHLOROPHYLL dN l BIOM ASS i I ( l PRODUCTIVITY h Figure 5.3.2 Chlorophyll, biomass, and primary produc tivity by month and quarter : l I. Robinson Impoundment, January to Dece.mber 1975
s . . , 40
- $3j:
i 1.+y, I
.w
- w 3
I:%.: jjjgj 30 .
$?*:
.: 3:
. .l
~
- !$i:' _
o o
- n . .;;U.:
g si:is ;i:it liisi:2iss w p,. 20 b 6 *
- 85::
g ~ 5:'s . ....
- -:?. .&
o $.$.$. r 5::: Bi5 ' , wn
' :E:':;f
$2: -
Id -
.. k 5h$ .
.---..v.-
< $ - hS!!
bY5b n ,s,
'i$,.
;%'05 25W , v. :
.:.3:
$$:.r.
3;.. i:E5
, .:.g 5.j$)
). g. -
3: 55.:.:::.<:.
.:.x
- -;b-:,
. e. ...
- pM
;4: . ;'it!.'
-v ;7t:;.7 7,,.,, X.
52 -
- ' .E?t
- 5;g ': M P3E G
M1 ' '5't .. A-2 E-3 G A-2 E-3 G A-2 E-3
- o. A2 E-3 G A2 E.3 G A 2 E-3 G A-2 E-3 G A 2 E-3 G A -2 E3 G May 12,19 TS Aww.6,19FS Nov.11,1915 Aus 7.1914 Dec.12,1974 Mar. 6.19 Tb N w 27,1973 F ets.13.1914 June 29.1974
% ChlotutdiyEd
% CydewWhy14 hh
% Oiryu @ y:a E % Other C by number by sample date Figure 5.'J.3 Phytoplankton pogustation percent composition mW W W W W m IN_-
W W m W W W W W W W 2
E E E E E E E E EE E E E E- E E E E E t0 4 l l
,,wr . l.
. :o:
s ..o.:+;.
- ::.0. m. . w
.sw. -
3x' Hid%. t i
.w 5%: . g a
.-m - '
* ' :-m 528 r."
4:3 ems < T:$5i
- se' l
*n . .. . ..
t . 5:.: .
;:p ,
45-o g:_ , - . S 6 *- cx ggp ' l dii:., :d. wII!..[,
= i@: IMW.:s:s: s.sw . . . . . ,v.
w ni.i,. s..w.. y. . i s
- gn:
.s . ..
; q::t
- l ...
43-:
< ;:2M. : ,w::%.:
- 3:
-- w{tli
.,.r. , :
f.,, s
..sv.. .. ...
- v. ww MR.v.:. -.. s.e.y:.'
E, g s:pL :: :: Est swa , .s..w
- 0. .g.-:. .<-s:- tps:
.: w. . w
.:.m .: u sgs 2
i lll . No: AJ , za:-: .qg:: :e+5 y 3
- ssk::.:h. hhiis-h
,s j $k:N! ::N' p:9 . , .
- 5iN ks;i:
%g
.cp$ $
e - 5::% nua. .... .:+
, ss AR: 3% :::si 5%: - %%: : ' 4:
.9 3:%.;
Re::ss+, is "w.
.;:+ 3 39
' cm
-~;::- :::: . :'
y.u. ."- :p::+2
- 25.::.
w.
.. :%, . < x:
m ' s(,:
> .. ~ . -
- "s> ; '
- ijs:
g
.s:s: ti:k Mi;(: : :
- i:s:
+S- !:sf q..
- !:) :.:g<::, f5M :syi,. !
~
'i!EI . :
X+'
@ -- .. .!)'.
.- ... .y +pa:
v. w.s .' .v. e. . .w. . . . .
.sw w.-
.x+.... .w.. .w.-
2
- w. . c.w. .e.., g
<*~9: ':C %+::N^: ' t.:p : 5: M::i i*$p MFtyt*:
+"^::9N-:qg"- +> p: .?^*?
g ;.: :::g-
- . M. : As
., xj ON:
;32~:..Rt."
'MS ", "x.
';MF3 .,,., '
..;;i % ve v '%.p:: .
- 3.,v s-5 .
- 1.?.
vv ..~v..3.y. .A.; e
- .$.w$:.: -
.w
" M:G
[ 9;M::!!$i
~
;;-s2 ::i@!DN:: .v .43{e Jifjf. .;xy if<
.w . .e...c.v.,..<
-!!!!!y
. s ..
?s :f'.-
,,v,.
r.w. -. . . < < . , w,.
;;2;;.... ';MW v.
- .wg
...c ." " :!M$$
'- :.0.p*.. W.7 ::sR' :h
-:12":,.*
Ja::
;c . . ..
9M::#$f ::R?: q$$: :M2.;;32;: sv - tRt n':: , wv .w 1 ' r ' 5%:
'0ve : .v
- p
?v
,y
- 59: <:
- 23
. .w c.
- '.Si
- n> x::#:
..w.
0%; '- M ::-4-37%
- w k A-2 E-3 A-2 E-3 G G A-2 E-3 G A-2 E-3 G A-2 E 3 G A-2 E-3 G A-2 E-3 G A-2 E-3 G G A-2 'i.J Fed.13,1974 Ju. ,28,1974 Aug 7,1974 Dec.12.1974 Mar. 6.19 75 May 12.1975 Aug. 6.19 75 %v.11.19 75 Nov. 27.19 73
% Chlorophyta @ % Cyanophyta M
% Chrysophyta .i % Other R Figure 5.3.4 Phytoplankton population percent composition by biomass by sample date
{9 W A i u" 9;l , W 4!
- M 6
/( -
- I
- 76 l i*
7 9
- d F 1
/ /r -
f
, i ,
1 J A' o W
' , I i - l
',g i If n
e i 1!! D b M 'o r
' 1' ,
N O 2 J 3 W T- f N O
, i i ;I ;I IO I t 1' 5 T T A G A
T A T S f f O W
' , , ; . ,i a- l A' . E I T
e s d J b T T A l C C T R, V J 9 1 E S N E S N S T N W
- e l 4l! l A A
,. I I l M I i O ,
[/ / 4 T T P G e . ! A d n a W
. M,, , - ,
M , [- j
~
3 f
, g . '
i o F J E W 2 b D A
\ g-g
\ it = I N
r f o W
\
\s4' s
' 0 e
W { ' s- ,l8j r g S t u r a
, A r e
p a e J 4 F 9 t m e M 1 J 3
'M ti! t' ; . .
)
e F M n o z6 M
'Y / A c9 7
4 i 1 e t
# M
/
0 F o hl pi ur W i .6 s
. 1 ep R J ( A
/ -
i;A 8,1 g \ 8 D n3 m7 u9 l 1 W
\
S,g N o c
'r t O ri er l
m
\
\' li > ll ,f t p S aA 3 w ,
1 L et
/ q' t A 91 J
gn ae r m m ed vn
..F/ J A u o
1 5 I
'l '
i' l . l 1 M 5 r m 3
- 3. I A 5 n o
691 o oi o 9 G U 0-0 1 0 6 l t 0 4 0 3 % es r n ui gb a 0 0 o
- C io 4 3 2 t t
FI m
.m_-:-__ m--
I . TRANSECT A STATION 2 E13. .
' ~ ~'
6 ~~- g * -
. W 4 .. . - . - - . . --4 -- - - - . - -
- i -
2 2 ' # ;
~
0- 0 , TR ANSECT E STATION 3 (1# 4
' * - - -- ~ **
6 E , 4 . . _ _ E r yu
. . .. L . .
A ~+ &A ;
^ '
0 2.52 t j c 14 PO .T STATION G n. I 52 ,
~'
I I 10 -
-- ---: -~
8 - . - - - - 3 I _i _ . _ _ - . . . . 6 f -- - - - --~
!\
' b
/
2
--j---------
I A_a I: AA a M J J A S O N 6 J s M A M J J A $ 0 N O 1974 1973 NITROGEN A* A PHOSPHORUS % Figure 5.3.6 Tocal nitrate as N ersus total phosphate as P,,: Robinson Impoundment, May '.973 to December 1974
I su I TR ANSEC" A STATION 2_ l , 4 *-~~~ I 6 4 I 4 _. .. a ; 2 - i l \ . t l - -. . a l 1 TRANSECT E STATION 3 6 -- - - -
? 6 3 I
- . .. r k3.
i _ . e
. I w1. -
- +
g a 5 g POINT STATION G E I 6 -- ' I 4 -- -. _ . _ . _
/
/ s[
\ -
I 0 AW J P M A M J J A F 0 N O W 1975 NITROGEN t FHOSPHO RUS B_ Finuses 5 3 7 Total nitrata en N varnum total nhomohate am.. P : ___________ _ ________ __
I 6-1 E. 6.0 Benthos 6.1 Introduction I Benthic macroinvertebrates are animals living at least part of their life cycle upon or within the available substrate (e.g., bottom sediments, debris, vascular plants, filamentous algae, etc.) in an aquatic environment. Benthic organisms are less mobile than fish and require relatively longer periods to complete the aquatic portion of their life cycle than planktos Since benthic organisms exhibit limited mobility and relatively long life cycles, they are often slow to recolonize areas subjected to severe environ-I mental perturbations. The specific types and number of benthic org,anisms pre-sent at a site tend to reflect extreme rather than average environmental con-ditions which have occurred in the recent past. This reflection of extremes enables the benthos to act as detectors of even occasional severe environmental changes. (Garton and Harkins, 1970; Weber, 1973) The major taxonomic groups comprising a freshwater benthic connunity may include flatworms, roundworms, annelids, molluscs, crustaceans, and insects. Such a taxonomically diverse bentt : aommunity would contain organisms partici-I_ pating in .he aquatic food web at several trophic levels (i.e., some groups of benthic organisms are considered herbivores, other omnivores, while still others are carnivores) (Weber, 1973). Assuming organisms in one trophic level may be more sensitive to a particular adverse environmental condition than organisms in some other trophic level, an analysis of the physical "well-being" of the benthic community may yield valuable ir. formation conc.rning the suitability of an area for organisms occupying various levels of the trophic structure. The purpose of this investigation sas (1) to establish spatial and temporal distribution of selected groups of organisms, and (2) to evaluate the effects of the H. B. Robinson Steam Electric Plant effluent on selected portions of the benthic community. The ef f ects of thertu.1 ef fluent on benthic connunities have not been studied extensively at this time. Many of the studies conducted to date have dealt with rivers rather than lakes, or with lakes receiving organic enrichment, or heavy s11tation, etc. in addition to thermal effluent (Weiss et al., 1974). I
6-2 I Since the effects of thermal effluents on systems net complicated by other factors appear to be largely unknown, a comparison of Robinson Impoundment with similar black-water reservoirs is difficult. g Studies on the effects of thermal effluents include a study by Lenat and Weiss (1973) on Lake Wylie located in portions of North and South Carolina. They reported that in the area of thermal discharge the number of littoral organism groups (i.e. , taxa) exhibiting population density increases was approximately equal to the number of groups exhibiting population decreases. Thermal effluents also influenced the standing crop of several groups of organisms living in the sublittoral portions of the lake. From a study conducted on Lake Hyco, North Carolina, Weiss et al. (1974) reported that thermal effects on the littoral benthic community included depression of organism standing crop and diversity in the discharge pool and at a nearby lake station receiving the varm vater plume. As temperature rises above 4*C, water decreases in density. This decrease enables heated effluents to " float" over the colder water usually associated with increased depth. The greatest increases over ambient tem-peratures, therefore, may occur in the shalloser portions of a lake. Eenthic organisms inhabiting these shallow areaa are ef ten subjected to naturally g occurring severe daily and seasonal temperature fluctuations. If benthic 5 organisms d.n shallow arecs can survive these natural fluctuations, the effect o: the rma discharge may not be as great as might be expected (Lenat and Weiss, 1973). Without the benefit of pre-operational benthic data, it was not possible to determine if the observations made during this study adegaately reflect the relative numerical abundance, spatial distriburton, or species compr=1 tion of organisms present prior to plant operations. This s tudy may indicate the possible effects of plant effluent on the spatial and temporal g distributions of selected ben thic 'acroinvertebra te groups dur:.ng the recent past. l l I a-.
I 6-3 6.2 Methods Selected portions of Robinson lepoundment benthic community were sampled monthly from January 1975 through December 1975. Thi. sampling program included collection of three replicate samples at each of two station located I on each transect. Six transects were established at intervals along tne
~
length of the lake using preimpoundment topographic maps (Tigure 3.1.1). I Station locations illustrated in Figure 3.1.1 correspond to benthic sampling stations with the following exceptions: (1) benthic sampling station A-3 was located approximately 50 to 75 meters west of temperature sampling Station A-2, (2) benthic sampling Stations E-1, F-S, and G-S were located in littoral areas east of thermal sampling Stations E-1, F, and G respectively. Benthic samples were collected with a Petite Ponar Grab which sauples an area 15.2 cm x 5.2 cm (6 in x 6 in) and a volume, under optimal cenditions, of 2.46 1 (150 in ). Samples were washed on station using a U. S. Standard No. 30 mesh sieve. The sample residue was immediately placed in a plastic container and preserved with 10% formalin solution containing biological stain. l l In the laboratory each sample was hand sorted; benthic organisms were removed, l preserved in 70% ethyl alcohol, and stored to await enumeration and identifica-tion. Numbers of organisms were recorded to the lowest practical taxon with
~
the aid of suitable taxonomic references (Ross, 1944; Edmondson, 1944; Parrish, 1968; Klemm,1972 ; Brown, 1972 ; Mason, 1973). The identification of larval Chironomidae required the use of a compound scope and the mounting af organisms j using CMC-9 (Master's Chemical Company, 2504 South Harvey Ave., Bers7n, l Illinois 60402). The substrate contained in each benthic grab was subjectively characterized according to content as either silt-detritus or sand-detritus. This subjective description of substrate type as well as the depth of water overlying the substrate were recorded for each benthic grab. Additional month]y macroinvertebrate collections were made in portions of Black Creek above and below Robinson Impoundment (Stations E, K, and I) and in shallow areas of the impoundment adjacent to Transects E, F, and G using slightly modified multiplate samplers similar to the sampler described by Fullme. (1971). Three samplers were placed at each station with the first
6-4 sampler suspended at a depth of 0.3 m (0.98 ft) below the surface of the water, the I second at the 0.6 m (1.97 f t depth and the third at 0.9 m (2.95 f t). Samplers were set out at each station for approximately one =onth to allow sufficient time for colonization. Afterwards, the samplers were removed individually with special care being taken to collect all organisms. Benthic =acroinvertebrates were removed, preserved, and returned to the laboratory for analysis. Sa=plers were returned to the water. Analysis of benthic organisms following identification included computa-tion of mean diversity (d) using the machine formula presented by Lloyd, Zar, and Karr (1968). Although the initial study design for this 316 demonstration included determination of benthic biomass esti=ates of selected taxa collected in the Robinson Impoundment, these esti=ates could not be made for the following reasons:
- 1. Dominant taxa were not collected in sufficient numbers from each station to allow the determination of monthly biomass estimates.
- 2. Organisms representing many of the dominant taxa were mounted I
prior to identification, thus they were unavailable for biomass E estimates. E l 6.3 Results and Discussion 1 Although =any factors may cause the horizontal variation in the occurrence of benthic macroinvertebrates in Robinson I=poundment, some of the more obvious include subst: ate, depth, and temperature. In an attempt to reduce the inter-station variation in organism abundance due to differences in either substrate or l depth, stations were grouped according to depth and substrate similarities. The following four groups of staticu were established and designated as groups I, II, III, and IV. I E_
I 6-5 I Group Station Depth At Station Substrate ]' I A-1 3m sand-detritus C-1 3m sar.d-detritus E-3 2m sand-detritus II A-3 ' 10 m sand-detritus I. C-3 9m silt-detritus D-1 6m silt-detritus 111 D-3 2m silt-detritua F 3m silt-detritus G 2.5 m silt-detritus I 7V E-1 1m sand-derritus F-S 1m sand-detritus G-S 1m sand-detritus Since substrates sampled at Station A-3 appeared to contain more sand than substrates collected at Stations C-3 and D-1, the three stations are I considered loosely grouped according to deoth. Species Composition During the one-year study presented in this report, 135 taxa of benthic macroinvertebrates were collected in Robinson impoundment and portiens of Black Creek. The major taxonomic groups, presented in order of decreasing I numbers of taxa, include Diptera (60 taxa), Trichoptera (15 taxa), odonata . (12 taxa), Ephemeroptera (10 taxa) Plecoptera (10 taxa), Coleoptera (9 taxa), Annelida (9 taxa), Amphipoda (3 taxa), Lepidoptera (2 taxa), Turbellaria (1 taxon), Nematoda (1 taxon), Hydracarina (1 taxon), Collembola (1 taxon), and Megaloptera (1 caxon). A complete list of taxa is presented in Table 6.3.5. This table also 1ndicates taxa collected at Black Creek Stations H, K, and 1. I Groups of organisms represented in this list were callected using one or both sa=pling methods described above. The two types of samplers I
6-6 I collect qualitatively and quantitatively dif f erent faunal samples (Weber, 1973). The observed qualitatier differences in faunal samples can be summarized as follcws: (1) Petite Ponar samples contained organisms representing 26 taxa which were not collected by substrate samples. (2) substrate samples contained 44 taxa which were not present in ponar samples, and (3) the total number of i taxa (91) collected from ponar grabs was less than the total number (109) collected from multiple plate samplers. These differences indicate each of the two samplers collected organisms from slightly different portions of the benthic community present in the study area. The data obtained using penar grabs, therefore, cannot be easily compared with data obtained from substrate samplers. Since a comparsion will not be attempted, data obtained from grab sac:plers will be presented in the i=poundment portion of this report while data collected from multiplate sa=plers located at Stations H, I, and K will be presented in the Black Creek section. The number of taxa collected in a lake study is influenced by the number and type of microhabitats sat: pled, by the frequency and intensity cf sample collection, and by the type of sampler used. It is difficult, there-fore, to accurately compare the qualitative and quantitative aspects of total numbers of taxa collected from the Robinson Impoundment with numbers presented in other studies. g W 6.3.3. Numerically Dominant Organisms W 5 Although a relatively large number of taxa were collected throughout the study period, only a f ew groups of organisms could be considered numerically important. Arbitrarily defining a nus:erically important groun as one containing
>5% of the total organisms, the important taxa include Chironomidae ('.17. of the total), Oligochaeta (33%), and Culicidae (12%). Combined, these three taxa made up 36% of the total number of organisms collected. Organisms representing taxa not mentioned above were collected in relatively low numbers and were considered uncommon. With the exception of a few genera of Trichoptera 3
and Ephemeropters, considered important fish food organisms, the spatial and te=noral distributions of uncommon taxa were not determined fr:m this study. I w
I 6-7 Chironocidae Organisms representing 36 genera of Chironocidae (cidges) were taken from ponar samples. The numbers of genere collected in each subfamily include 18 genera of Chironominae, nine Orthocladiinae, and eight Tanypodinae. Chironomus (Chironominae) was the dominant midge representing 7.6 percent of the total number of Chirunocidae collected. The numerical dominance of Chironceus has been reported from other studies. For example, Weiss et al. (1974) reports Chironomus is a common W I dominant in shallow or eucrophic lakes, espec1 ally those with ther=celine formation. According to Hilsenhoff and harf (1968), Chironomus is the most common benthic organism in 14 Wisconsin lakes which have maximum depths of g 20-32 feet, relatively large profundal zones, and soft sediments. Although the total number of organisms repressnting Chironemus indicate it was the numerically dominant midge collected in Robinson Impoundment, this dominance was effectively restricted to the three relatively deep StationsA-3, C-3, and D-1. Figure 6.3.1 illustrates the observed spatial distribution of Chironomt2s, expressed as monthly mean number of organisms per meter collected Numbers of organisms ranged from a high of 579/m at I at each station. Station C-3 to a low of 82/m at Station D-1, while at Station A-3 an intermediate value of 222/m was observed. Numbers of organisms collected - at the remaining nine stations were comparatively low, ranging f rom 61/2 at Station A-1 to 2/m' at Station G. i The abundance presented above clearly indicate that Chironemus preferred the deeper stations. Depth preferences have been reported in o published studies including one conducted on Lake Washington by Thut (1969). He reported that numbers of fourth inster Chironomus sp. (nr. ferrucenoerittatus) gradually increased in abundance with increasing depth, finally reaching an He also observed a peak in the numerical I abundance peak at 50 meters (16.5 ft). , abundance of Chironomus plumosus at 10 meters (33 ft), while at greater depths abundance steadily decreased. A depth preference may explain the relatively higher numbers of organisms collected at Robinson impoundment Stations A-3, C-3, and D-1 and I I
6-8 the lower numbers collected at the remaining nine benthic stations. I E Other environmental factors appear to infinence the depth distribution of Chironomus. The influence of these factors was apparent from a comparison of the relative numerical abundance of Chironomus at stations of similar depth. For example, the depth at Station A-1 was E comparable to depth at Station C-1, yet monthlymean numbers collected were 5 not similar at these two statico:- (Figure 6. 3.1) . This station to station variability may be related to a depth pref erence coupled with various inter-station changes in environmental factors (e.g. availability of suitable
# food, microhabitat, temperature or dissolved oxyge.n concentrations) . It is unclear from this study which factor or combination of factors influenced inter-station change in the numerical abundance of Chironomus.
The number of generations per year of Chironomus_was not clearly g evident from tra data collected. A reasonable estimate, however, is one W generatien pr.r year with an abundance peak in the fall and winter, and decreasing numbers in the spring and su=mer. Since relatively large numbers of Chironomus preferred the deeper l coolsr stations and reached their peak abundance during the colder seasons, it appears that thermal effluents from the H. B. Robinson Plant did not E adve.sely effect the numerical abundance of Chironomus. In the subfamily Chironominae, other organisms considered common or frequently collected represented the genera Polvnedilum (2.4% of the total number of larval chironocids), Cladotanvtarsus (2.2%), Crvatochironouus (0.8%), and Harnischia (0.8%). These midges will be discussed in order of numerical abundance. The results of two studies, one conducted on Lake Wylie by Lenat and Weiss (1973), the other on 3elews Lake by Weiss et al. (1974), indicate polynedilum is a common littoral organism which may favor areas containing organic enrichment According to Lenat and Weirs, :his preference for enriched areas, rather than temperaturcs, may control the occurrence of Polvoedilum. E a_
6-9 I. The spatial distribution of Polvoedilum in Robinson impoundment is demonstrated in Figure 6.3.2, which presents the monthly mean numbe r of g 5 Polvoedilum/m collected at each of the 12 stations. These data indicate higher nt:abers of organisms were collected at Stations F-S, G-5, C-1, and A-1 I (correspeading no/m v'ere 72, 65, 53, and 44, respectively), lower numbers at Stations A-3 (1/m ), C-3 (none observed), and D-1 (1/m ) and intermediate I values at Stations D-3 (16/m ), E-1 (23/m ), E-3 (16/m ), F (ll/m ), and G (18/m ). These data indicate that Polvved11um were relatively comr.on at all stations where depth was less than 5 meters (16.5 f t.) and uncomon at the deeper stations. This depth distribution agrees, in part, with the above men , tioned published literature. I The spatial distribution of Polvoeidium presented in Figure 6.3.2 clearly indicates that comparable numbers of organisms were collected at several stations previously grouped as having similar substrate and depth. The monthly mean number collected at Station D-1 was comparable, for example, to the nu=bers collected at Station F and G (Group III). A second group of stations having similar depth and substrate include A-1. C-1, and E-3 (Group I). i The monthly mean number of Polvnedilum collected at Station A-1 was similar to l the number collected at Station C-1; however, abundance was reduced by one-half I at Station E-3. Stations E-1, F-S, and G-S (Group IV) were also grouped according to depth and substrate similarities. A comparison of the mean numbers of Polvoedilum collected at these three stations indicated abundance was similar at Stations F-S and G-S while the number of organisms collected at Station E-1 were decreased threefeld. With the exception of the relatively low numbers of organisms collected at Stations E-1 and E-3, comparable numbers of organisms were collected at all stations grouped as offering similar depths and substrates. Although naturally occurring environmental factors may be responsible for the depressed organism abundance observed at Station E-1 and I. E-3, this crudy did not eliminate the possibility that depressed organism abundance was due to a low tolerance to the effects of heated effluents. Other me::icers of the subfamily Chirononimae include Cladotanvtarsus, Barnischia, and Crvetochironomus. The spatial distribution of organisms repre-I .
l l l 6-10 I senting each taxon is presented in Table 6.3.2 as the conthly mean number of organisms /m collected at each cf the twelve benthic sampling stations. The observed spatial distribution of Cladotanvtarsus indicated organisms were either collected in relatively low numbers or were not encountered at the three relatively deep stations (i.e., A-3, C-3, and D-1). These data E appear to indicate that Cladotanvtarsus preferred the shallower areas of the W impoundment. The spatial distributior of Cladutanvtarsus_ also indicated organisms were encountered at all benthic sampling stations with the exception of the deeper stations mentioned above and Station E-1 and E-3 which are located in the discharge area. The absence of Cladotanvtarsus_ in the discharge area may be related to elevated water temperatures (Section 3.3.2) or other environmental factors not apparent from this study. The data presented in Table 6.3.2 indicate orga: isms representing g Harnischia were collected in ralatively higher numbers at Stations D-1, F, F-5, W G, and G-S and in lower numbers at the remaining benthic sampling stations. It was not clear f/cm this study what environ = ental factors influenced the observed station to station variation in organism abundance. Crvetechironomus was collected in relatively low number (1 organism /m')
, I at Stations A-3, C '1, D-1, and D-3 while at the remaining stations numbers of E E
organisms ranged from 3 organisms /m at Station F-S to 26 organisms /m' at Station A-1. These data (Table 6.3.2) do not clearly indicace if organism abundance is depressed at the mid-1=poundment stations. Tanvoodinae The Tanypodinae collected in Robinson Impoundment included Procladius, Ablabesuvia, and Clinotanvous.
~
Groups of organisms repreeenting procladius (3.5% of total number of midges collet.ced) and Ablabesevia (3.0% of midges collected) were considered common in benthi". sampling while C11notanvous (<1*.' of the midges collected) was frequently encountered. 1 I 1
I. 6-11 j two morphologically different furma of Procladius were collected in Robinson lepoundment. These forms will be represented as Procladiun I (aberrant) and 1 ocladius. The spatial distribution of organisms iepresenting each form was detervined to illustrate changes in abundance throughout the impoundment (Table 6.3.3). The group of organisms representing Srocladius (aberrant) included 22% of .11 Precisdius collected. Procladius (aberrant) was encountered in I collections from all twelve benthic stations except Station D-3. ranged frem a high of 138/m at Station E-1 to 1/n at Station A-3. Numbers Highest numbers were collected at the shallower stations (depth less than 1 meter), I lower numbers at the deeper stations (depth greater than 5 meters), and intermediate numbers at the remaining stations (Table 6.3.3). The spatial dAstribution observed for Procladius (aberrant) indicates an apparent preference for littoral areas. This preference is illustrated by a peak in the numerical abundance at Stations E-1 and F-S.- The relatively lower numbers of organisms collected at the third littoral station (G-S) cannot be adequately explained from the dcta collected. The study appears to indicate, however, that heated effluent did not adversely influence organism abundance at I any of the littoral stations. The spatial distribution of organisms representing the second morphological form of Procladius is illustrated in Table 6.3.3. These data - 1ndicate Procladius were present in collections from all benthic sampling stations. The monthly mean number of Procladius ranged from a high of 265/m-at Station G to a low of 34/m2 at Station E-1. The data also indicate relatively higher numbers of Procladius were collected at stations located in I the lower and upper icpoundment stations. In an attempt to limit the number of environmental factors other than temperature which might influence the observed inter-station variation in organism abundance, only stations with similar depths and substrates were compared for variations in numerical abundance. As mentioned above substrate and depth were similar at Stations A-1, C-1, and E-3. The monthly mean number of organisms collected at each of the two lower impoundment stations was greater than the mean number of I
l 6-12 I I organisms collected at Station E-3. Substrates and depth also appeared com-parable at Statiom G-S, F-S, E-1. The monthly mean number of Procladius collected at Stations G-S and F-S (ll4/}}