Biological Contaminants Program & Division of Ecological Services Bloomington Field Office Submitted June 2008 Preliminary Diagnosis of Contaminant Patterns in Streams and Rivers of National Wildlife Refuges in Indiana Fish and Wildlife Service U.S. Department of the Interior Biological Contaminants Program & Division of Ecological Services Bloomington Field Office Submitted June 2008 Preliminary Diagnosis of Contaminant Patterns in Streams and Rivers of National Wildlife Refuges in Indiana Fish and Wildlife Service U.S. Department of the Interior DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE REGION # 3 FY06-08 ENVIRONMENTAL CONTAMINANTS PROGRAM ON-REFUGE INVESTIGATIONS SUB-ACTIVITY Preliminary Diagnosis of Contaminant Patterns in Streams and Rivers of National Wildlife Refuges in Indiana U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Bloomington Field Office 620 South Walker Street Bloomington, Indiana 47403-2121 in collaboration with Indiana Department of Environmental Management Biological Studies Section 2525 Shadeland Avenue (SHAD #16) Indianapolis, Indiana 46204 June 1, 2008 Congressional District # 1, 2, 8, 9 DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE REGION # 3 FY06-08 ENVIRONMENTAL CONTAMINANTS PROGRAM ON-REFUGE INVESTIGATIONS SUB-ACTIVITY Preliminary Diagnosis of Contaminant Patterns in Streams and Rivers of National Wildlife Refuges in Indiana Project ID: 1261-3N34 by Thomas P. Simon U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Bloomington Field Office 620 South Walker Street Bloomington, Indiana 47403-2121 June 1, 2008 Congressional District # 1, 2, 8, 9 TABLE OF CONTENTS Executive Summary I. Introduction II. Methods and Materials a) Study area descriptions b) Study design c) Field collection methods d) Laboratory chemical methods e) Statistical Analyses III. Results and Discussion A. Biological Assemblages of National Wildlife Refuges a) Fish assemblages 1) Patoka NWR 2) Big Oaks NWR 3) Muscatatuck NWR b) Macroinvertebrate assemblages 1) Patoka NWR 2) Big Oaks NWR 3) Muscatatuck NWR c) Crayfish assemblages 1) Patoka NWR 2) Big Oaks NWR 3) Muscatatuck NWR B. Stressor Identification a) Local Scale effects based on three indicators (fish, macroinvertbrates, crayfish) 1) Patoka NWR 2) Big Oaks NWR 3) Muscatatuck NWR b) Watershed Level Effects based on fish indicator 1)Patoka River watershed 2) Vernon Fork Muscatatuck River C. Management Actions Appendices 1. Indicator by site for land use and cover, habitat, fish, macroinvertebrates, and crayfish including metrics for collected sites during 2006-2007 surveys of the Muscatatuck and Big Oaks National Wildlife Refuges, Vernon Fork Muscatatuck River watershed, Indiana. 2. Indicator by site for land use and cover, habitat, fish, macroinvertebrates, and crayfish including metrics for collected sites during 2006-2007 surveys of the Patoka River National Wildlife Refuges, Patoka River watershed, Indiana. Preliminary Diagnosis of Contaminant Patterns in Streams and Rivers of National Wildlife Refuges in Indiana I. INTRODUCTION Aquatic assemblages have been used as “canaries in the coal mine” to describe specific patterns that aquatic impacts have caused. These impacts have “signature” effects that change specific attributes of resident members of the aquatic communities (Simon 2003; Karr and Yoder 2004). Fish, benthic macroinvertebrate, crayfish, and mussels have been shown to have varying sensitivity levels that when exposed to different levels and types of contaminants will cause declines in species richness, sensitive species, trophic and reproductive function, abundance, and presence of deformities, eroded fins, lesions, and tumors (DELT) anomalies. These principles have been used by Karr et al (1986) and modified for application in Indiana (Simon 1991, 1992, 1994, 1997, 1998; Simon and Stahl 1998, 2001; Simon and Dufour 1998) to develop indices of biotic integrity (IBI). By evaluating patterns in IBI response, specific biological response signatures can be diagnosed that provide an inexpensive opportunity to evaluate patterns in contaminant and pollution effects (Simon 2003). The goal of biological integrity, unlike fishable and swimmable goals, encompasses all factors affecting the ecosystem. Karr and Dudley (1981) define biological integrity as “the capability of supporting and maintaining a balanced, integrated, adaptive community of organisms having a species composition, diversity, and functional organization comparable to that of the natural habitat of the region.” That is, a site with high biological integrity will have had little or no influence from human society. Limited investigations of contaminants in National Wildlife Refuges have been accomplished in Indiana, with the exception of CAP investigations. However, few on-the-ground assessments have been conducted that document the status of aquatic assemblages and how they might be affected by contaminants in these refuges. Documented levels of metals and nutrients have been documented in the vicinity of the National Wildlife Refuges; however, the extent and magnitude of the problem has not been well documented. Simon et al. (1995) conducted a study of the Patoka River National Wildlife Refuge (PNWR) to evaluate patterns caused by acid mine leachate on fish assemblages in areas severely impaired by acid mine drainage influences. Simon (2005) completed an evaluation of oil and brine effects on crayfish in the PNWR. This study found an important link between predictive presence of crayfish species and five inorganic and 23 organic contaminants that were specifically linked to oil and brine effluents including patterns in four metals specific to brine effluents. The Bloomington Field Office conducted a study of 10-12 streams sites in the Muscatatuck National Wildlife Refuge (MNWR) that provides some historical fish assemblage information. However, this lack of information has 2 caused refuge managers to try and manage and restore habitats without information necessary to avert contaminant problems, which would either jeopardize or diminish the benefits of these actions. Declines in aquatic biodiversity and biological integrity have been observed in the main stem of the Patoka and Muscatatuck Rivers and the tributaries of many of these rivers may no longer be supportive of sensitive rare species (Simon et al. 1995). Anthropogenic environmental stresses and habitat degradation associated with the decline include acid mine leaching, erosion and heavy metal toxicity due to strip mining, waste products related to oil and gas drilling, and agricultural cropland runoff. National Pollution Discharge and Elimination System (NPDES) permited discharges have also caused or influenced the biodiversity of these areas and one refuge occurs on portions of a historic military installation. Watershed Description The current study focused on metal contaminants and nutrient impacts in two watersheds that National Wildlife Refuges within Indiana occur. Sampling was conducted over two years in both the Vernon Fork of the Muscatatuck and the Patoka river drainages. National Wildlife Refuges (NWR) occurring in the Vernon Fork of the Muscatatuck River includes the Muscatatuck NWR and Big Oaks NWR, while a single refuge occurs in the Patoka River floodplain. The Muscatatuck River watershed has a 1,140 mi2 watershed having a wide range of biological habitats and environmental conditions. The Vernon Fork of the Muscatatuck watershed includes Sloan’s crayfish, a species of special interest to Region 3, and has experienced intensive invasion threats from the rusty crayfish (Orconectes rusticus). Nutrients impacts are pervasive in the Vernon Fork watershed and the Big Oaks NWR incorporates portions of Jefferson Proving Ground, a former military base that has documented impairments from exploded ordnances and metal contamination. In addition, the Muscatatuck NWR receives runoff drainage through Sandy Branch from the City of Seymour, Indiana, and from high density residential land uses. Sobiech and Sparks (1997) found that metal levels in fish tissue levels exceeded fish consumption advisories. The State of Indiana had determined that several streams entering the Muscatatuck NWR are listed as not meeting designated uses for aquatic life. The Patoka River watershed has a drainage basin of approximately 838 mi2 and has a wide range of know conditions that are impairing NWR stream quality including acid mine drainage, oil and gas exploration, and impacts from coal mining (Simon et al., 1995). The area supports the largest known populations of the Indiana crayfish (Orconectes indianensis), a former Federal candidate species. Numerous stream segments are listed by the State of Indiana as not meeting aquatic life designed uses because of metal contaminants. Entire lengths of stream within the watershed including the South Fork of the Patoka River are listed because of acid mine drainage contamination. 3 Study Objectives, Hypotheses, and Threats to Trust Resources Threats to Resource – Documented or Suspected Many streams and rivers in Indiana are experiencing declines in the number of individuals and declines in species richness. Declines in fish assemblages are known from the mainstem of the Patoka River as a result of oil exploration and brine effluents (Simon et al. 1994). In addition, Simon (2005) documented impacts from oil and gas exploration from tributaries of the Patoka River in the vicinity of the PRNWR. These impairments showed statistically significant relationships between five metals and brine effluents (Simon 2005). Sparks and Sobiech