|
Summary of Maryland’s
Pfiesteria-related 2001 Work Plans
Prepared by Maryland’s Pfiesteria Study Team
DRAFT- March 15, 2001
INTRODUCTION
The study plan developed by Maryland’s Pfiesteria Study Team for 1998,
1999 and 2000 took a comprehensive approach toward understanding the
environmental impacts and causes related to the outbreaks of Pfiesteria,
related organisms and fish health problems in Maryland’s waters. The
work plans for 2001 continue this comprehensive approach with scales of
work intensity again prioritized according to a four-tiered approach:
Level 1 - Rapid Response, Level II - Assessments of affected waterways,
Level III - Assessments of similar waterways to those systems previously
affected, and Level IV - Integration with existing monitoring programs
of Baywide characterization. Level I objectives focus on the rapid
response to assess suspected outbreaks of toxic Pfiesteria-like
organisms and fulfill the State’s obligation for data needed in the
protocol for river closures and reopenings. Comprehensive assessment
objectives focus on increasing our understanding of the habitat links
with toxic outbreaks and the vulnerability of areas to outbreaks,
identifying HAB species and their distribution in Maryland waters,
tracking improvements in water quality of impacted systems under
implemented management plans, examining alternative hypotheses for
observed fish health problems, and providing rigorous exposure data to
epidemiologists studying the human health impacts.
OVERVIEW
Level I assessments will continue to support rapid response to fish
health events as warranted. The Fish Health Hotline will again be in
operation and incoming calls will be evaluated for any need of a rapid
response to a described event and location. With the advances in
applications of new molecular probes developed over the past year, the
presence of Pfiesteria piscicida and several related species have been
available within 24-48 hours of a sample collection. Samples of fish
will be provided as warranted to the Sarbanes Oxford Laboratory and
associate agencies for histopathological and microbiological analyses.
Water samples will continue to be collected for harmful algal bloom
assessments related to an event and comparisons with non event periods
and locations. Samples will also be collected and testing conducted to
define nutrient and other habitat conditions at an event to examine all
potential factors affecting fish health.
Level II and III waterways will continue to serve as comprehensive
assessments of rivers affected in 1997, 1998, 1999, and 2000, along with
river systems with similar water quality and habitat conditions. Water
and habitat quality sampling intensity will be biweekly sampling, April
through October, on the Chicamacomico River and Pocomoke River in order
to capture the temporal variability in key parameters such as nutrients,
phytoplankton and dissolved oxygen. Sampling will be monthly on the
Middle River, Manokin River, Nanticoke River, Wicomico River, Big
Annemessex River, Trappe Creek and St. Martin River. Three water quality
and fish sampling sites have been added to Ayer Creek, a tributary of
Trappe Creek, and one water quality and fish sampling site has been
added to Marshall Creek in response to lesion outbreaks in 2000. These
new sites will be sampled twice a month. Longitudinal profiling for in
vivo fluorescence will continue in 2001 to document the spatial and
temporal positioning of chlorophyll maxima in each of the nine monitored
systems, following the same frequency for each system as described above
for water and habitat quality sampling. Phytoplankton species
composition data will be collected at selected locations along with
selected additional chemical analyses to discriminate dissolved organic
fractions (e.g. urea). Baseline sediment surveys to map the distribution
of Pfiesteria will continue, along with associated chemical/physical
characteristics, but the analysis of Pfiesteria will now use PCR
techniques which were initiated in the fall of 2000.
Fisheries is proposing to discontinue biweekly sampling on the
approximately 11 systems surveyed May-October, (Levels II and III).
Sampling is planned to continue with surface trawls, cast netting and
seining for menhaden on the Pocomoke River in 2001. A subset of the fish
health surveillance stations will also be used as simultaneous water
quality and Pfiesteria survey sites to better understand the
associations between fish health, Pfiesteria and water quality.
Experimental work on ulcer progression of myxosporidian infections and
their possible role in chronic ulcerative lesions in menhaden will be
examined. Cage studies at sites of potentially toxic Pfiesteria may also
be employed during this study year.
Level IV Baywide characterizations (enhancements and utilization of
existing programs) will continue to provide essential data for
comparisons and links to the intensified data collections that are
occurring on the Lower Eastern Shore region and Middle River. Details of
the program work plans are summarized in the following documents.
Analysis of data collected since 1997 will move toward integration of
water quality, habitat Pfiesteria, the algal community and fish.
Hypothesis testing will follow the objectives established at the outset
of the program including association between Pfiesteria and
environmental factors, and Pfiesteria and fish health.
The year 2001 will most likely represent the last year during which data
will be collected with the expressed purpose of evaluating the
relationships between Pfiesteria and fish health. In 2002 and beyond the
program will continue to satisfy rapid response objectives, evaluate
relationships between Pfiesteria and other HABs and environmental
conditions, track the effectiveness of management actions aimed at
lowering nutrient impacts, provide data to human health researchers, and
analyze the cumulative data sets to satisfy stated objectives.
Table of Contents for Maryland’s Pfiesteria-related
2001 Work Plans
MARYLAND’S PFIESTERIA-RELATED 2001 WORK PLAN:
HABITAT QUALITY AND PFIESTERIA
DRAFT- 3/15/01
Tidewater Ecosystem Assessment
Maryland Department of Natural Resources
580 Taylor Avenue
Annapolis, MD 21401
INTRODUCTION
In the summer of 1997, the Pocomoke River, Kings Creek on the Manokin
River, and the Chicamacomico River, all tributaries of the Chesapeake
Bay, experienced toxic outbreaks of Pfiesteria piscicida . These
outbreaks led to the implementation of a comprehensive monitoring and
research effort by the State of Maryland and its partners to evaluate
the factors that are associated with outbreaks of P. piscicida and
related species with potential toxicity. Sampling in 1998 and 1999 has
shown that Pfiesteria continues to be found active in the water column
at the sites of major menhaden lesion outbreaks and in the sediments of
a number of other tributaries. This monitoring effort has included a
rapid response capability to evaluate sites where fish health, human
health, or other conditions suggest that a toxic outbreak of Pfiesteria
may be present.
OBJECTIVES
The objectives for the 2001 sampling of habitat quality and Pfiesteria
surveillance are the following:
A. Rapid Response
1. Provide for the rapid response testing of, and reporting on, habitat
quality and Pfiesteria-like organisms in cases of suspected toxic
outbreaks.
2. Provide fish and water quality data needed to fulfill DNR’s
obligations under Maryland’s
“Protocol for Closing and Reopening Rivers Affected by Pfiesteria or
Pfiesteria-like Organisms.”
B. Environmental Assessments
3. Increase understanding of critical habitat factors contributing to
the frequency of toxic
outbreaks of Pfiesteria-like organisms.
4. Evaluate relationships between critical habitat factors and human
activities.
5. Identify areas vulnerable to outbreaks of toxic Pfiesteria or
Pfiesteria-like organisms.
6. Identify the principal harmful algal bloom species and their
distribution in Maryland’s waters, including support for development of
molecular probes.
7. Track improvements in water bodies affected by Pfiesteria-like
organisms that have implemented management programs.
8. Provide rigorous exposure data to epidemiologists studying the
relationship between toxic Pfiesteria-like dinoflagellates and human
health.
STUDY DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY
A. Habitat Quality Monitoring
Rapid response (Level I)
When a rapid response team is unable to identify an apparent cause of
the fish health problem (such as hypoxia, chemical spill, etc.), or when
instances of human health problems meeting the Centers for Disease
Control criteria are reported, three water quality samples will be
collected as soon as possible; one at the center of the event site, and
one each upstream and downstream of the center of the event within the
event site.
Longitudinal sampling (Level II and III)
Continuation of longitudinal sampling initiated in 1998, 1999, and 2000
at 8-17 stations April through October on the following rivers:
Level II: Pocomoke (twice a month), Chicamacomico (twice a month),
Manokin (once a month).
Level III: Middle, Nanticoke, Wicomico, Big Annemessex, St. Martin,
Trappe Creek/Newport
Bay (all once a month).
Long-term water quality monitoring (Level IV)
As part of the Chesapeake Bay Water Quality Monitoring Program, DNR will
continue to sample water quality at 55 stations in the Maryland
tributaries and 22 stations in the Maryland mainstem once or twice a
month (depending on season).
Measured variables
Sampling under all levels (Level I-Level IV) includes a broad suite of
physical and chemical variables. Several variables (specific
conductance, temperature, dissolved oxygen, pH, and secchi depth) are
measured in situ; discrete water samples will be collected and returned
to the laboratory for analysis of additional variables, including
nitrogen, phosphorus, carbon and silicon species, total suspended solids
and chlorophyll a. Due to little, if any, consistent differences with
depth in areas of low vertical density gradients, generally only a
surface sample will be taken for nutrients for Level I, Level II or
Level III systems. In Level IV systems, samples will be taken according
to the long-term monitoring program protocols, which include samples
taken at the surface and bottom, and at the deeper stations where
stratification is an issue, above and below the pycnocline.
Data management and analysis
Data will be managed using the same procedures in place for the
Chesapeake Bay Water Quality Monitoring Program. Data needed for rapid
response investigations and to determine closing and openings of rivers
will be prepared in simple tabular formats within hours of receipt from
the field and laboratories.
For comprehensive assessments in Levels II and III systems, various
exploratory analyses will be used to help identify spatial and temporal
patterns in prior years. Historic data will be used when available to
draw comparisons between current conditions and those in the past. The
analysis of various parameters will be conducted with the goal of
satisfying study objectives. Analyses will include:
1. Regional water quality patterns for Level II and III tributaries of
the Chesapeake and Coastal Bays
2. Current status and long-term trends for Level II, III and IV systems
3. Comparison of nutrient and habitat quality conditions among
tributaries within the appropriate salinity regime
4. Space-time distribution of habitat measures
5. Precipitation and river flow
6. Salinity dilution plots
7. Analyses of nutrient pools to understand patterns and transformations
between different nutrient fractions
In addition to the exploratory analyses, univariate and multivariate
methods will also be used in comparisons of affected vs. unaffected
regions to objectively identify water quality and other variables that
may be critical in identifying vulnerable water bodies and also suggest
potential remedial measures.
B. Pfiesteria piscicida, related dinoflagellate and associated algal
community monitoring
Rapid Response (Level I)
When no other cause for the observed fish health problem is apparent, or
human cases of illness meeting the CDC criteria are reported, Rapid
Response Teams will collect three water column samples; one at the site
of the event, and one each upstream and downstream of the epicenter, but
still within the extent of the event. If rapid response evaluations
result in the closure of a river, water samples for Pfiesteria and
associated phytoplankton will continue to be collected daily for the
first three days of the event, and then every third day thereafter until
the river is re-opened. Sampling site locations may change and expand as
the epicenter of the event moves.
Collected water samples from rapid response events will be split among
three primary laboratories. Preserved water column samples will be
scanned under light microscopy by Dr. Burkholder’s laboratory (NCSU) for
Pfiesteria piscicida-like cells; if presumptive P. piscicida cells are
found, fish bioassays will be conducted with unpreserved samples to
determine toxicity; if the bioassays are positive, scanning electron
microscopy will be conducted to confirm species identification. Unfixed
samples will also be sent to Dr. Oldach’s laboratory (UMD) for detection
of Pfiesteria’s presence through the use of molecular probes. Finally,
fixed water column samples will be analyzed by the Academy of Natural
Sciences for composition of associated algal community to the lowest
practical taxa. Selected samples will also be sent to Dr. Steidinger’s
laboratory (FL DEP) for SEM, Dr. Rublee (UNC Greensboro) and Dr. Vasta (UMD
COMB) for PCR analysis, and other researchers as appropriate.
Comprehensive assessment (Level II and Level III)
Water column samples for dinoflagellate and phytoplankton species
composition will be collected twice a month at three stations in the
Pocomoke River and Chicamacomico River in areas of outbreaks of
Pfiesteria activity in 1997 and/or areas of high chlorophyll densities.
The Middle River, Manokin River and St. Martin River also will be
sampled once a month at three stations. Once a month sampling at three
stations in Ayers Creek and one in Marshall Creek have been added in
response to lesion fish outbreaks in 2000. Microzooplankton samples will
be collected at one station in each of the Pocomoke, Transquaking, and
St. Martin River and at the station in Marshall Creek.
After settling, preserved samples are initially enumerated at 500X using
a random fields technique; a minimum of twenty random fields and 200
individual cells are enumerated and additional fields are counted until
the minimum count is attained. A low magnification scan (312.5X) is then
done of 20 random fields to estimate the rarer, larger forms within the
sample.
Individual taxon cell volumes are determined by calculating the
dimensions of the cell, determining the appropriate shape of the cell
and applying the dimensions to the volumetric equation (or combination
thereof) for that particular shape. The cell dimensions are calculated
by two methods - direct microscopic measurement and assigning a mean
value from the dimensions cited in the literature. Cell carbon values
are generated from literature values and estimates based on cell total
area and volume.
Data management and analysis
Rapid response sample presumptive counts results will be communicated as
soon as possible via telephone, fax, or e-mail to DNR staff and entered
into a spreadsheet table for tracking during extended investigations.
When bioassays are necessary, results will be submitted as summary
reports to DNR staff, who will keep a catalog of all results, both toxic
and non-toxic. As needed, interpretation of results will be based on
consultations with the Technical Advisory Committee.
Species composition data will be provided to DNR in Quattro Pro
spreadsheet files which will be converted into SAS files to become part
of the comprehensive database of SAS files constructed for coordination
of deliverables with the Chesapeake Bay Program. Level II and III system
species composition data will be interpreted regarding changes with
season in dominant species (both numeric and biomass dominants), the
presence and abundance of dinoflagellates and other key species
(including Cryptomonas sp. thought to be preferred food for Pfiesteria
and other species that may be important food for menhaden), linkages
with nutrients and comparisons to 1998, 1999, 2000, and 2001 data and to
data from the Chesapeake Bay Long-term Phytoplankton Monitoring Program
(which includes data back to 1985 for other areas around the Bay and its
tributaries).
C. Molecular Probes
During rapid response events, DNR will collect water samples from
affected systems for testing of new molecular technologies (e.g. toxin
and molecular probes) under development by Dr. Rublee, Dr. Oldach and
others. Samples will be processed according to each laboratories
protocols and requirements.
DNR will also be collecting monthly water samples from Level II, Level
III and Level IV systems to test for the presence of Pfiesteria piscicida and
Pfiesteria shumwayae by Dr. David Oldach’s laboratory at
University of Maryland. This work will identify presence/absence of
Pfiesteria and related cells using DNA probes developed by Dr. Oldach
and will be used to determine areas that have Pfiesteria populations
(note: alone, this work will only tell presence/absence, not whether the
cells are or could become toxic). A subset of the fish health
surveillance stations will also be used as simultaneous water quality
and Pfiesteria survey sites for improved linkage of analyses between the
three component programs.
D. Supplemental sampling (all supplemental sampling is contingent on the
availability of funding. Funding levels for 2001 have been significantly
reduced. It is therefore critical to evaluate the importance of each
supplemental sampling component)
1. In vivo Fluorescence
Horizontal distributions of chlorophyll a will be determined along the
longitudinal gradient of all Level II and III systems up to the tidal
fresh water segment. These measurements will allow better determination
of location and extent of peak chlorophyll areas linked to phytoplankton
blooms and allow for tracking of seasonal changes in the location,
extent and dominant species in these blooms. Continuous measurements
will also identify bloom locations that do not coincide with fixed
sampling locations. Profiles will be done once a month (twice a month in
the Pocomoke and Chicamacomico Rivers) from May through September, using
in vivo fluorescence. Samples for phytoplankton species composition (see
above) will also be collected from within the peak bloom areas. Sampling
and analysis will be done by the Academy of Natural Sciences.
2. Urea
Elevated concentrations of urea have been associated with high
concentrations of Pfiesteria (Lewitus et al. 1999). Samples will be
collected from 6 sites each from the Pocomoke (twice a month),
Chicamacomico (twice a month), Manokin (once a month) , St. Martin (once
a month) and Middle River (once a month). Samples will be analyzed and
reported on by Horn Point Laboratory, Cambridge, MD. Urea will be
analyzed using the urease method (Parsons et al. 1984).
Graphical analysis will be used for exploratory analysis. The urea data
will also be incorporated into the broader data analysis effort to
relate nutrient conditions to Pfiesteria and phytoplankton species
composition.
3. Sediment and Water survey
Sediment sampling will be conducted to test sites for the presence of
Pfiesteria and Pfiesteria-like organisms and to characterize the
sediment-nutrient environment. Sediment samples will be sent to both Dr. Oldach’s and Dr. Rhublee’s laboratories for processing using molecular
probes.
Samples sites will be determined based upon analysis results from
1998-2000 work, and will be randomly selected from all areas of these
systems that meet appropriate salinity and depth criteria.
Maryland Geological Survey will collect surficial sediment samples (top
four centimeters); sediment will be subsampled and analyzed for water
content, porosity, bulk density, and grain size according to MGS
standardized techniques. The dried sample from the water content
analyses will then be sent to the Chesapeake Biological Laboratory for
analysis of particulate nitrogen, particulate phosphorous and
particulate carbon
Approximately 100 unfixed water samples will also be collected from
approximately 70 Level II, III, and IV sites per month and sent to Dr.
Oldach’s laboratory for detection of Pfiesteria’s presence by molecular
probe. Samples will be collected at established sites and will be
coordinated with corresponding water quality and algal community
whenever possible. The objective of this sampling is to explore the
spatial and temporal distribution of Pfiesteria in Maryland waters and
the associated habitat conditions.
4. Continuous monitoring
A continuous monitoring project will be continued in 2001. The primary
objective of the continuous monitoring work is to provide time-relevant
data near the site of 1997's Pfiesteria outbreaks on the Pocomoke and Chicamacomico Rivers and another site on the Transquaking River to
classify conditions and time scales over which physical, chemical and
biological processes occur in this estuary. A second objective is to
evaluate summer hypoxia (low dissolved oxygen) which develops in the
middle portions of the Pocomoke River. In 2001, monitoring stations will
be divided between 3 sites in the Pocomoke River with 2 additional sites
in the Chicamacomico/Transquaking drainage.
High-frequency (every 15-min) observations of water temperature,
salinity, turbidity, pH, fluorescence and dissolved oxygen will be
collected using a YSI6600 moored in place from May through October.
Weekly water samples will be also collected to measure nutrients,
chlorophyll a and water column respiration rates.
The high frequency observations on dissolved oxygen and physical
conditions will be combined with water column respiration rates to study
the principal causes of summer hypoxia (work is in progress).
References
Lewitus et al. 1999.
Parson, T., Y. Maita and C.M. Lalli. 1984. A manual of chemical and
biological methods for seawater. Pergamon Press, Oxford.
MARYLAND’S PFIESTERIA-RELATED 2001 WORK PLAN:
FISH POPULATION, FISH HEALTH AND LESION SAMPLING
DRAFT 3/15/2001
Maryland Department of Natural Resources
Fisheries Service: Biological Monitoring and Analysis Program and
Sarbanes Cooperative Oxford Laboratory
Resource Assessment Service: Fish Index of Biotic Integrity Project
University of Maryland Center for Environmental Science
Horn Point Environmental Laboratory
In Cooperation with
Maryland Department of the Environment: Fish Kill Investigation Unit
INTRODUCTION
Maryland has adopted criteria to close bodies of water which may be
affected by harmful algal blooms (HAB’s). Closure criteria depend on the
determination of a toxic Pfiesteria outbreak based upon fish health and
mortality, presence of Pfiesteria in sufficient densities, the absence
of alternative causes for fish mortality events and appropriate habitat
conditions. The Department of Natural Resources’ (DNR) Fisheries Service
initiated a program in 1997 to monitor closed tributaries for the
presence of ulcerated fish. These directed programs were expanded in
1998, 1999 and 2000 to 1) sample Chesapeake Bay tributaries considered
at risk because of similar environmental characteristics, and 2) conduct
experimental studies directed at determining the etiology of the
ulcerative lesions found in Atlantic menhaden (Brevoortia tyrannus).
Also starting in 1998, all fish collected in other estuarine fish
monitoring projects were examined for the presence of exterior lesions.
In Maryland tidewater the prevalence of anomalies among all species was
0.54% (n=372,675) in 1998, 0.46% (n=347,081) in 1999 and 0.97%
(n=344460) in 2000.
Observations of fish collected during the morbidity events in 2000
reaffirmed the role of fungal infections in lesion development, but also
indicated that myxosporidians (protistan pathogens) could initiate
chronic ulcerative lesions in juvenile menhaden.
Several field experiments with caged fish were completed by Horn Point
Environmental Laboratory (HPL) during fish morbidity events in 1999. The
success of these experiments has provided a basis for more focused
studies in 2000.
OBJECTIVES
1. Provide information on the incidence and distribution of external
anomalies on fish in Maryland’s portion of Chesapeake Bay and oceanside
tributaries.
2. Document the pathology and microbiology of fish afflicted with skin
abnormalities.
3.Through coordinated experimental studies, field observations and
focused pathological investigations, pursue a goal of determining the
principal factor or factors involved in initiating ulcerative disease in
Atlantic menhaden.
4. Perform an experimental study to document progression of
myxosporidian infections and their possible involvement with the chronic
ulcerative lesions in menhaden.
5. Respond to citizen calls to the DNR Fish Health Hotline.
6. Provide researchers with healthy and diseased fish for
histopathological and microbiological analysis.
7. Work cooperatively with Maryland Department of the Environment (MDE)
to investigate fish morbidity and mortality events.
STUDY DESIGN AND METHODOLOGIES
A. Fish Studies
1. Field Monitoring
Rapid Response
i. STUDY DESIGN:
A 24-hour fish health hotline will be maintained by the Natural
Resources Police and based in the Tawes Building in Annapolis.
Biologists in the Biological Monitoring and Analysis Program (BMAP),
Sarbanes Cooperative Oxford Laboratory (SCOL) and Resource Assessment
Service (RAS) will cooperate with Maryland’s Department of the
Environment’s (MDE) Fish Kill Project to constitute the Rapid Response
Team. The team will respond to potential problem areas identified
through the Hotline. A cooperative working agreement between MDE’s Fish
Kill Project, SCOL, RAS and BMAP specifies responsibilities and duties
of the biologists responding to potential or active fish kill reports or
lesion events.
An after-hours and weekend response capability will be activated
beginning May 1 and continue through October. Personnel from MDE, BMAP,
Fish Health Project and RAS will be on standby to respond to Hotline
calls of fish kills or lesion events.
ii. SAMPLE ANALYSIS
Dead or dying fish at the site will be documented, identified by species
and enumerated using established fish kill counting guidelines. Fish
will be sampled at the site of the reported incident using gear most
appropriate to the physical characteristics of the water body and the
situation. Fish samples will be retained and processed for histology,
microbiology or toxicology if they are suitable for diagnostic purposes.
Water samples to detect HAB’s, habitat quality and pollutants will be
taken along with temperature, salinity, pH, dissolved oxygen and secchi
depth when dead, dying or lesioned fish are present or closure criteria
are met.
iii. DATA MANAGEMENT AND ANALYSIS
Project biologists are trained in boat handling and sampling protocols.
Sampling techniques and data recording practices will follow those
outlined in the Field Sampling Manual for Collection of Fish Data in
Support of the Pfiesteria Monitoring Project and the MDE Fish Kill
Investigation Manual. Gear will be deployed in a consistent manner to
assure comparable catch per unit of effort (CPUE) from river to river
and year to year. Personnel are trained in fish species identification,
lesion classification, necropsy techniques and water quality sampling.
Standardized field sheets are used to facilitate data entry. Coordinates
of area sampled will be recorded using the NAD 27 coordinate system.
Trained personnel will enter fish data into an Access data base in an
establish, consistent format. Edit checks will put limits on parameters
to eliminate errors. The data format is easily imported into statistical
packages such as d-Base, SAS, SPSS and GIS systems. Printouts will be
printed, verified and checked for outliers. A copy of all data collected
will also be imported into the Fish and Wildlife Health Program database
at SCOL. Data will be examined for time series trends and correlations
with other environmental parameters.
Baywide Characterization
Within DNR, six Fisheries BMAP projects and one RAS project will monitor
specific populations of fish and crabs in Chesapeake and oceanside
rivers and bays. (Some of these water bodies were previously listed
under Levels II or III. Sampling methods for Level IV are different than
Levels II and III and target different fish species and habitats.)
1. Chester River;
2. Choptank River;
3. Patuxent River;
4. Eastern Bay;
5. Tangier Sound;
6. Pocomoke Sound;
7. Susquehanna River;
7. Nanticoke River;
8. South River;
9. Nanjemoy River;
10. Potomac River; |
11. Mattawoman River
12. Wye River
13. Wicomico River (Western Shore)
14. Assateague Bay
15. Chincoteague Bay
16. Assawoman Bay
17. Isle of Wight Bay
18. Severn River
19. Big Annemessex River
20. Wicomico River (Eastern Shore)
|
For baywide characterization sampling, all Fisheries Service and
Resource Assessment Service projects will note the frequency and type of
anomalies on fish collected in various fishery-dependent and
fishery-independent samples taken in Maryland tidewater.
Fishery-dependent samples from commercial and recreational fisheries
will include pound nets, fyke nets, gills nets, eel pots and hook and
line. Fishery-independent methods include otter trawls, beach seines and
cast nets. Projects providing data include an angler survey on head
boats out of Crisfield, the Striped Bass Juvenile Survey, Striped Bass
Tagging Program, Blue Crab Trawl Survey, Bay Pound Net Survey, Coastal
Bays Trawl and Seine Project, Baseline Fish Health Survey, Biological
Indicators Trawl Survey and Fish Index of Biotic Integrity Project. An
additional multispecies investigation trawl survey in cooperation with
the Univ. of Md. Will be started this summer. Sampling location and
frequency have not been worked out but the survey will provide
additional coverage to these listed rivers as well as expanded coverage
into other rivers.
2. Research
i. LESION PROGRESSION
In 1999 and 2000, post-metamorphosis menhaden were captured in the
Pocomoke River with external lesions ranging from small areas of
reddening to penetrating dermal ulcers. In both years, lesions first
appeared in May-June and were absent by early July. In Pocomoke River,
as well as other tributaries, lesions characterized as “ulcerative
mycosis” have been observed from July into September. Spores of the
myxosporean Kudoa clupeidae have been found in most menhaden
microscopically examined throughout the May-September sampling season.
All May-June lesions have been associated with an unidentified invasive
plasmodium. It is currently unknown if these “early lesions” are
associated with ulcerative mycosis. In 2000, an observational study
conducted at the Horn Point Laboratory of fish with these “early
lesions” resulted in the complete disappearance of the lesions within
one month and subsequent low mortality. This observation suggests the
fish were able to heal although minimal histological evidence of healing
was observed. Some of the deceased fish had significant lesions
associated with the invasive plasmodium in their visceral organs.
However, no evidence of the invasive plasmodium was apparent in any fish
after healing. The unexpected speed with which the lesions healed
precluded an opportunity to observe the progression of disease and gain
an understanding of the mechanism by which menhaden healed. In 2001,
seine sampling will be conducted by HPL to follow the progression of
disease if and when early lesions are detected by DNR sampling crews.
Samples of healthy and clinically infected juveniles will be transported
to HPL and held in separate flow through tanks grouped by lesion
severity as follows:
Control: No grossly observable abnormalities
Mild: Minimal diffuse hemorrhage to moderate focal hemorrhage in the
epithelium
Severe: Raised focal or multi-focal protrusion of the epithelium
Each categorical group will be sub-sampled weekly or bi-weekly depending
on the actual size of the overall sample. Sub-samples will be processed
for routine histology and histopathological observations noted . Through
this effort, we hope to further our understanding of the relationship of
Kudoa clupeidae and the unidentified plasmodium with ulcerative
conditions in menhaden.
ii. KUDOA sp. PCR PROBE
Surface trawls will be used from April through the end of May in the
Pocomoke River to capture post metamorphis menhaden. Surface trawls are
8 ft x 8 ft nets of 3/8 in stretch mesh lined in the codend with 500F
plankton netting. They will be towed for six minutes with the tide.
Seine hauls will be made from the beginning of May through the end of
July on the Pocomoke River. Seine hauls will be made using a 100 ft x 4
ft net of ½ in stretch mesh. Collections will be made at historic
sampling locations.
Tributaries will be sampled at specific access points using cast nets
from May through October. Twenty casts will be made with a 6 ft net (1
in stretch mesh) at each designated site. Cast net sites will be
accessible by land. All sampling on the Pocomoke river will be done on a
biweekly basis.
Catch will be counted by species. Any abnormalities such as lesions,
mechanical damage or parasites will be noted. Lesions will be described
as new, old or recovering. All individuals with anomalies will be
measured. Collections of lesioned juvenile menhaden for Kudoa sp. PCR
analysis will be collected. Two sets of 20 fish with mild lesions and 20
fish with severe lesions will be collected. One set will be frozen on
dry ice, and the second set of fish will be fixed in paraformaldehyde.
Ten additional fish will be prepared for electron microscopy using
gluteraldehyde. Sub-samples of additional menhaden (5-10 depending on
size) will be fixed whole, or necropsied as appropriate, and fixed in
10% neutral buffered formalin for histological examination. These
collections may be made each day a particular tributary is sampled,
however, collections will be prioritized according to the needs of
cooperating pathologists and the specific questions to be addressed.
Multiple fish without external lesions can be fixed in one container,
however fish with lesions will be fixed in individual containers. These
containers will be labeled with the date, river, site, and corresponding
fish number from the data sheet. Samples for microbiology will be taken
at the request of fish health specialists.
iii. CAGE STUDIES
From 1997-2000 HPL and University of Maryland Eastern Shore U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service Cooperative Unit have been developing techniques
for caging white perch (Morone americana) and juvenile menhaden. The
principle of these studies was to place known healthy fish in an
environment where fish kills or lesions were found and follow the
progression of ulcer formation. We have been successful caging both
species with minimal stress, but no ulcer formation has been noted in
two years of study. It is apparent from 1999 caging efforts on the
Middle River that using this assay after lesions are detected is not a
worthwhile endeavor. Ulcerated fish were captured from the wild at
caging sites, while those in the cages remained unaffected. We have
demonstrated that it is possible to transport juvenile menhaden across
the state and cage them for over two weeks with minimal impact.
Therefore, cages will be used in 2001 only under the following criteria:
Pfiesteria-like organisms (PLOs) are detected at potentially toxic
levels by means of presumptive counts, or an acute fish morbidity or
mortality event is observed. Acute events are defined as either a fish
kill in progress or large numbers of fish displaying erratic behavior.
MARYLAND'S PFIESTERIA-RELATED 2001 WORK PLAN: WATERSHED POLLUTION SOURCE
ASSESSMENT
DRAFT- 3/15/2001
Maryland Department of the Environment
Maryland Department of Agriculture
United States Geological Survey
Maryland Department of Natural Resources
Natural Resources Conservation Service
Wicomico Soil Conservation District
Worcester Soil Conservation District
Somerset Soil Conservation District
INTRODUCTION
The watershed pollution source assessment involves a multi-faceted study
plan designed to provide the information and assessment tools required
to estimate the contribution of all major pollution sources in the
Pfiesteria affected watersheds and to evaluate the effectiveness and
time-frame of expected water quality response of ongoing pollution
control efforts. The study involves four major components:
(1) characterization of pollutant sources through inspection and
monitoring,
(2) estimation of pollutant loads through continuous monitoring and
modeling,
(3) evaluation of management practices through paired watershed
monitoring,
(4) identification of pollutant transport pathways and the timing of
pollutant delivery to surface waters.
OBJECTIVES
1. Characterize the relative magnitude of pollutant sources overall and
for different portions of the watershed.
2. Estimate pollutant loading from sources and areas identified above.
3. Estimate the effectiveness of management practices in reducing
pollutant loading to the affected areas.
4. Determine transport pathways and estimate "lag time" of pollutant
delivery.
5. Provide watershed characteristics to user groups such as the Lower
Eastern Shore Tributary Team to help direct implementation efforts.
STUDY DESIGN AND METHODOLOGIES
A. General Overview.
During 1997 and 1998 point and nonpoint source water quality monitoring
was initially conducted in the watersheds that have been previously
closed due to Pfiesteria outbreaks (Pocomoke, Kings Creek and Chicamacomico). Starting in 1998 monitoring activities have been
enhanced in the Pocomoke watershed and expanded to include other similar
watersheds, moving from south to north on Maryland's Eastern Shore,
including the Coastal Bays area.
Discharge and water quality data will continue to be collected in 2001
at all regulated point sources and at representative stream/river sites
in the study watersheds. A network of monitoring sites on all major
tributaries in the study watersheds will continue to be sampled
periodically during both high and low flow periods to obtain a broad
characterization of water quality conditions. Two new sites were
established in 1998, bringing to a total five sites to provide both
continuous flow monitoring and water quality monitoring in the Pocomoke
watershed. These sites will continue to operate during 2001. The broad
array of grab sampling sites in combination with the continuously
monitored sites will continue to provide the data needed to document
both the spatial and temporal variation of pollution sources in the
watershed. Water quality monitoring primarily focuses on nutrient,
sediment and bacteria levels. Monitoring for pesticides and other
potentially toxic contaminants will continue to be added periodically to
screen for possible contamination and/or if specific contaminants of
concern are identified during inspections of permitted facilities or
agricultural operations.
In conjunction with the water samples, data on watershed characteristics
(land use, soils, slopes, etc.) and land management practices (crop
types, fertilizer, manure, sludge application, and other data) will
continue to be compiled in GIS format in order to support the
development of computer models of the watershed, river and estuary. The
models will be calibrated to the available water quality monitoring
data. The models will be used to estimate the relative pollutant loading
contributions from different portions of the watershed and from
different source areas (cropland, urban/residential, forest, wetlands,
etc.) and sources (point sources, onsite sewage systems, manure,
fertilizer, sludge, etc.). This information is needed to guide pollution
control efforts into the areas and to the sources that are the most
significant contributors of the pollutant(s) of concern.
Paired watershed sites are being used to monitor the effectiveness of
selected management practices appropriate for the Lower Eastern Shore.
The project is a nested paired watershed study looking at the effect of
an aggressive conservation program on nutrient concentrations and loads
being discharged from the Green Branch sub- watershed into the Pocomoke
River. The paired watersheds are nested within a larger watershed were
monitoring is also being conducted to measure loads being discharged
from whole Green Branch sub- watershed.
This project has finished the calibration, or before phase (1994-1998),
of the project and began the treatment phase in the fall of 1998 in the
study watershed. The treatment phase consists of aggressive promotion of
nutrient management, the elimination of manure as a nutrient source and
cover crops on all available acres in the treatment watershed. These
paired watershed results, in conjunction with the models described
above, will also provide the means to estimate the overall effectiveness
of the watershed pollution control efforts that are initiated to correct
the identified problems.
The work identifying pollutant source pathways and timing of the
delivery of pollutants has been completed. The investigation will report
on nutrient concentrations in shallow groundwater, ground water flow
paths and the apparent age of ground water being discharged from the
paired watersheds in the fall of 2001. The determination of sediment
transport rates and nutrient reservoirs in sediment will also continue
through 2001.
B. Characterization of pollutant sources and estimation of pollutant
loadings.
1. Review of permit compliance records, inspection and sampling of
regulated pollution sources as required to document the characteristics
of regulated discharges in the watershed.
Field. Significant sources will be sampled in conjunction with periodic
intensive surveys of point and nonpoint sources in the watershed.
Laboratory: Standard laboratory methods will be used for conventional
pollutants. Toxic contaminants will be analyzed using methods described
in the associated Toxicant Component Work plan.
Data Management: Data will be assembled and verified using appropriate
data base software.
Data Analysis and Reporting: Average annual discharge flows and loads
will be computed from available sampling data. A report will be prepared
listing each source and summarizing its compliance record and pollutant
loading history.
2. Sampling of water quality and measurement of streamflow during high
and low flow periods at sites located throughout the lower Eastern
Shore.
Field: A sub-set of 20 sites has been selected from the larger suite of TMDL sampling sites to cover the major tributaries and source areas
These sites will be sampled at least 3 times over the course of the year
to characterize a range of flow conditions. Estimates of stream flow
will be made at the time of each sampling event.
Laboratory: Standard laboratory methods will be used for conventional
pollutants. Toxic contaminants will be analyzed using methods described
in the associated Toxicant Component Work plan.
Data Management: Data will be assembled and verified using appropriate
data base software.
Data Analysis and Reporting: Instantaneous yields of pollutants will be
calculated using discharge and concentration data. Data will be plotted
compared between sites to provide an overview of the relative magnitude
and range of the pollutant loads from different sources and areas in the
watershed. Data will also be used in the calibration of the watershed
models described below.
3. Nutrient Loading Assessment
Field: Monitoring sites have been established at Willards, on the
Pocomoke River, at the outlet of Nassawango Creek, and on Green Branch,
just above the confluence with the Pocomoke River, for continuous
discharge and water quality monitoring. Conducted by cooperatively by
USGS and DNR, water quality will be sampled biweekly and during storm
events.
Laboratory: Standard laboratory methods will be used for conventional
pollutants.
Data Management: Data will be assembled and verified using appropriate
data base software.
Data Analysis and Reporting: Data will be used to analyze annual trends
in flow and concentration, mass loadings for nutrients and suspended
solids, and to provide loading coefficients for specific sub-watersheds
within the Pocomoke basin.
4. Compilation and summary of available data on pollutant sources in the
watershed, including nutrient and pesticide applications (fertilizer,
manure, sludge, etc.), BMP implementation and atmospheric deposition on
cropland, urban and residential areas.
Field:
1. MDE will continue to develop GIS data layers for home sites with
septic systems, public service areas, and sewage application sites and a
data base for application rates in watersheds where TMDL's are being
developed.
2. DNR in conjunction with the Worcester Soil Conservation District, MDA,
NRCS and the local operators will continue to assemble actual
application rates and yields within paired watersheds.
3. Estimates of atmospheric deposition will continue to be made using
local rainfall data and estimates of constituent concentrations from a
number of sources (DNR, UM, SERC).
4. MDA will continue to collect data by sub-watershed on the number and
type's of BMP's constructed and acres under management.
Data Management: Data will be coded and managed in appropriate GIS
formats.
Data Analysis and Reporting: Data will be utilized in computer models
and summarized in tables and/or graphical form as appropriate. Data will
also be forwarded to EPA Chesapeake Bay Program for use in the Bay
Watershed Model.
5. Development of computer models of the watershed, river and estuary.
Data Analysis and Reporting: Data and information compiled as described
above will be used to support the development of computer models of the
watershed, stream/river network and estuary. Models are necessary to
extrapolate the available monitoring data and information on watershed
characteristics to estimate the pollutant load from different sources
and areas of the watershed. This information will be used to guide
pollution control efforts by helping to set appropriate permit limits
and to target voluntary pollution control measures to areas that contain
the most significant pollution sources.
The watershed will be modeled using the Hydrologic Simulation Program
Fortran (HSPF). Modeling in the subject watersheds will build upon
ongoing work by the Chesapeake Bay Program and Maryland's TMDL Program.
All significant sources will be included (point, nonpoint and
atmospheric). The watershed model will be calibrated to the water
quality data collected as described above.
The estuary will be modeled using the Water Quality Analysis Simulation
Program (WASP). The estuarine modeling will be used to estimate the
relative contributions of point sources and nonpoint sources from the
major tributaries that discharge to tidal waters in order to set
appropriate discharge limits that will achieve water quality goals. This
model will also be required in order to estimate the relative importance
of dilution vs. uptake of nutrients by algae and the marshes bordering
the estuary.
B. Estimation of effectiveness of management practices 1. Paired Watershed Study
Field: DNR has ongoing work on Green Branch in the Upper Pocomoke. The
project is a nested paired watershed study looking at the effect of an
aggressive conservation program on nutrient concentrations and loads
being discharged from the Green Branch sub- watershed into the Pocomoke
River. The paired watershed study is evaluating the effects of the
nutrient management BMP's on in stream nutrient concentrations and
loads. The treatment phase will consist of aggressive promotion of
nutrient management, the elimination of manure as a nutrient source and
cover crops on all available acres in the treatment watershed. The
paired watersheds are nested within a larger watershed were monitoring
is also being conducted to measure loads being discharged from whole
Green Branch sub-watershed.
This project has finished the calibration, or before phase (1994-1998)
of the project and began the treatment phase in the fall of 1998 in the
study watershed.
Laboratory: Standard laboratory methods will be used for conventional
pollutants.
Data Management: Data will be assembled and verified using appropriate
data base software.
Data Analysis and Reporting: Analysis of the relationship of the
nutrient concentrations for the treatment verses control watersheds for
the calibration and treatment periods will be performed. Changes in the
predicted treatment watershed values will be used to determine the
effect of the BMP implementation. The data will also be used to provide
nutrient load and yield data for Section B of this work plan.
C. Determine transport pathways and estimate "lag time" of pollutant
delivery 1. Determine "lag time" of nutrients in the ground-water.
Need to determine the flow system, associated nutrient concentrations,
and ground-water ages in selected areas to determine importance as
nutrient delivery pathway. Work for this task has been funded through a
coop study between the USGS MD District and the State of MD.
Data Analysis and Reporting: USGS will analyze and interpret
ground-water age and nutrient data from Summer, 1998 through the Summer
of 2000 sample collection. Results will be summarized in a report to be
published this fall (2001). Note: only one lab in the USA does GW age
dating so results can take up to six months.
2. Assess deposition and transport of sediments and associated nutrients
in the surface water system.
The time of travel sediment and associated P needs to be estimated to
understand the relation between sources and delivery. Funding to begin
this work will be under the USGS National Research Program and Ecosystem
Program efforts. The scope of work (number of sites and analysis) needs
to be enhanced with additional State and USGS funds.
Field: USGS will continue to collect data on sediment deposition rates
and associated nutrient concentrations in forested wetlands in the
Pocomoke river watershed. Sites will consist of transects with clay pads
to document sediment deposition and associated nutrient concentrations.
(Winter-Spring, 1998 and continuous for at least two years).
Laboratory: Standard USGS laboratory methods will be used for sediment
and nutrient
analysis.
Data Management: Data will be assembled and verified using appropriate
data base software.
Data Analysis and Reporting: The data interpretation and analysis of
data will be conducted during FY99and FY2000. |