U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service rSiteiTAOOOl.W't'j-'fX ^ Region 3 IP#A/r^afi-f Ma^k Contaminants Program Break: 3. ¥ Other: f.-fr-?? j

•V Ecological Risk Assessment

Nahant Marsh, Davenport, Iowa^ ■ V'.

40228521 Superfund

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 4469 - 48th Avenue Court Rock Island, Illinois 61201 1998 Screening Level Ecological Risk Assessment for

Nahant Marsh, Davenport, Iowa by Mike Coffey

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Rock Island Field Office 4469 48th Avenue Court Rock Island, Illinois 61201

FINAL REPORT - June 9,1998

prepared for U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region VII Under Interagency Agreement Number 92220-1910-37YC Disclaimer

Mention of trade names or commercial products does not constitute endorsement or recommendation for use by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service or Department of Interior. No author assumes any liability or responsibility for damages (including consequential) caused by reliance on the materials presented, or from the use of any information, map, apparatus or method of processing disclosed in this report. The right is reserved to make changes without notice in specifications and materials contained herein.

Announcement

Equal opportunity to participate in, and benefit from, programs of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is available to all individuals regardless of age, race, color, national origin, religion, sex or disability. Persons who believe they have been discriminated against in any program, activity or facility operated by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service should contact:

U.S. Department of Interior Office of Equal Opportunity 1849 C Street, N.W. Washington, DC 20240

n Table of Contents

Introduction...... 1

Site History ...... 2

Site Visit ...... 4

Dead Bird Search Results ...... 4 Marsh Substrate Quality ...... 5 Marsh Ecology...... 5

Step One: Problem Formulation, Assessment Endpoints and Toxicity Evaluation...... 11

Problem Formulation...... 11 Tentative Receptors and Assessment Endpoihts...... 14 Toxicity Evaluation...... 16

Step Two: Screening Level Exposure Estimates and Risk Calculations...... 18

Exposure Estimates ...... 18 Risk Calculations ...... 20 Uncertainty Analysis...... 23

Conclusions...... 25

References ...... 26

in List of Figures

Figure 1. Location of Nahant Marsh...... 3

Figure 2. Hydrology of Nahant Marsh ...... 6

Figure 3. Habitat Type and Land Cover for Nahant Marsh ...... 8

Figure 4. GIS Map of Lead Shot Fall Zone...... 15

List of Tables

Table 1. Summary of Waterfowl Necropsy Findings ...... 5

Table 2. Exposure Estimates for the Food Chain Pathway...... 19

Table 3. Exposure Estimates for the Soil Ingestion Pathway ...... 20

Table 4. Screening Level Risk Hazard Quotients ...... 21

Table 5. Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbon Risk Factors...... 22

List of Appendices

Appendix A. River Action, Inc. Newsletter

Appendix B. Lists of Plant, Bird and Small Mammal Species Found at Nahant Marsh

Appendix C. Scientific Names for Species Mentioned in Report

Appendix D. Waterfowl Necropsy Reports Introduction

In 1994, natural resource personnel discovered lead poisoning problems from trap and skeet range operations at Nahant Marsh, Davenport, Iowa. Shortly thereafter, officials from Region VII of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) and Region 3 of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) started to discuss the contaminant problems and solutions for Nahant Marsh.

The USEPA initiated site characterization work under their authorities in 1996. The USFWS was tasked to complete the first phase of the ecological risk assessment under an existing Interagency Cooperative Agreement (IAG) for Superfund technical assistance. The USEPA project manager under the IAG was Steve Wharton. The phase one work included a screening level assessment of lead shot contamination. The screening level assessment follows Steps One and Two of the eight steps for the Superfund ecological risk assessment process.

The eight steps in the ecological risk assessment prpcess are outlined below (USEPA 1997).

Step One. Screening level problem formulation, develop tentative assessment endpoints and toxicity affects evaluation.

Step Two. Screening level exposure estimates and risk calculations.

Step Three. Baseline problem formulation, in depth ecotoxicological literature review, develop conceptual model, evaluate exposure pathways, finalize assessment endpoints and risk questions.

Step Four. Develop measurement endpoints and study design

Step Five. Verification of study design.

Step Six. Site investigation and data analysis

Step Seven. Risk characterization.

Step Eight. Risk management.

A site history and the results of the screening level ecological risk assessment are contained in this report. Screening level problem formulation, exposure estimates and risk calculations for this assessment were based on field information collected by USFWS and field data collected by a USEPA contractor (Ecology and Environment, Inc., Overland Park, Kansas - E & E) Preliminary Assessment and Site Investigation reports. Site History

Between 1969 and 1995, a private gun club used an urban area known as Nahant Marsh for a trap and skeet range. Tons of lead shot were deposited in the marsh based on estimates by the gun club using shooting records. The lead shot fall zone contains mostly wetland habitats.

Nahant Marsh is located along the Mississippi River at the southwestern edge of the City of Davenport, Scott County, Iowa (Figure 1). Davenport is one of the municipalities that make up the Quad Cities. There are about 350,000 people in the Quad Cities.

The marsh is bordered by Interstate 280 to the south, agricultural fields to the west, an industrial park to the north, a railroad yard and municipal sewage treatment plant (STP) to the east. The marsh proper is owned by three parties including the gun club and two individuals that lease their land for com and soybean production. The shot fall zone is believed^o be entirely within the gun club property.

During the 1970's, one of the landowners adjacent to the gun club dredged recent sediments from a drainage ditch that the runs through the marsh and placed the spoil back into the water in violation of the Clean Water Act. The spoil was removed and placed in the woods next to the gun club shooting area as mitigation. The spoil may contain lead shot because it was originally located along the back extent of the shot fall zone. The density of shot in the spoil heap is expected to be very low because it was from 230 to 250 yards from the shooting platforms which is slightly greater than the traveling distance for small lead shot. Number 7 to 9 size lead shot travels up to 225 yards.

During the early 1980's, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers - Rock Island District (USACOE) studied Nahant Marsh as part of an area flood protection project. A report was issued in 1982 by the USACOE that included information on local topography, hydrology and cultural resources for Nahant Marsh (USACOE 1982).

A citizen action group (River Action, Inc.) is in the process of developing a conservation plan for Nahant Marsh (see information in the newsletter in Appendix A). River Action, Inc. hopes to facilitate the purchase of the gun club property for use as an educational park. The gun club is interested in selling their property. The parties working with River Action, Inc. and interested in purchasing the Nahant Marsh property include the Iowa Natural Heritage Foundation, Augustana College (Rock Island, IL), Izaak Walton League, local and counties. The gun club now leases the property to a local motorcycle club.

2 n

Nahant Marsh

Figure 1. Location of Nahant Marsh, Scott Q)unty, Iowa. I

In 1997, E & E conducted an integrated site assessment for Nahant Marsh under contract by the USEPA. E & E completed the following for the assessment: soil and sediment TCLP analysis, shot density estimates, chemical analysis of soils, wetland sediments and water. Nahant Marsh was listed in CERCLIS in 1997.

Site Visit

Natural resource personnel have monitored Nahant Marsh since 1994. In addition, local government officials, college researchers and field volunteers studied plant communities and wildlife use at the marsh for a local environmental education project. Lists of the plant, bird and small mammal species found at the site are in Appendix B. Scientific names for the plant and animal common names used in this report are in Appendix C.

Iowa Conservation Officer Ed Kocal, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) Special Agent Walt Kocal, Service Contaminants Biologist Michael Coffey have periodically walked around the marsh with waterfoWI hunting dogs to search for sick or dead birds. In addition, resource personnel iiave periodically canoed around the marsh to look for birds and collect field samples within the shot fall zone.

Search for Dead Birds

A total of five sick waterfowl and a grebe were recovered during the 1994 and 1997 site visits. Four of these birds were submitted to the National Wildlife Health Center1 (NWHC) for examination by veterinary pathologists. One of the birds was submitted to the National Fish and Wildlife Forensics Laboratory2 for examination by veterinary pathologists. The five waterfowl specimens were diagnosed with lead poisoning. The necropsy results are summarized in Table 1. The necropsy reports are in Appendix D.

At least fourteen scavenged waterfowl carcasses were seen along the marsh shoreline in 1994. These carcasses were believed to be sick birds taken by predators.

1 The National Wildlife Health Center was a USFWS research facility that was eventually transferred to the U.S. Geological Survey when the National Biological Survey was formed. The facility employs board certified veterinary pathologists and provides wildlife necropsy and epidemiology services for the U.S. Department of Interior.

2 The National Fish and Wildlife Forensics Laboratory is an USFWS forensics facility that employs board certified veterinary pathologists and provides wildlife necropsy services for the USFWS Division of Law Enforcement.

4 Table 1. Summary of necropsy findings for moribund birds recovered from Nahant Marsh in 1994 and 1997. The source of these data is from necropsy and related laboratory reports. The National Wildlife Health Center uses 6.7 micrograms of lead per gram of tissue wet weight as an elevated liver lead concentration and 27 micrograms of lead per gram of tissue wet weight as diagnostic of lead toxicosis.

Species Date Diagnosis Number of Liver Lead Collected Shot in Gizzard Concentration1

Canada goose April 1994 Lead Poisoning 37 35.86

Canada goose November 1994 Lead Poisoning 50 14.00

Mallard November 1994 Lead Poisoning >20 35.55

Mallard November 1994 Lead Poisoning 20 33.33 i < Mallard November 1997 Lead Poisoning 30 58.92

1 Micrograms per gram, wet weight

Marsh Substrate Quality

There were different types of wetland substrates in the shot fall zone. Wetland substrate types included silty/sand areas, clay-muck bottom and organic substrates.

Wetland substrate samples near the gun club contained high densities of lead shot per grab sample. The area between 109 and 177 yards from the shooting platforms contained the highest density of lead shot. Samples containing up to 470 shot per square foot were collected by the USFWS at this distance. Samples containing up to 533 shot per square foot in the shot fall zone were collected by the USEPA contractor working at the site (E & E 1997)

Marsh Ecology

Nahant Marsh is in the floodplain of the Mississippi River, but is isolated from the river by a railroad grade levee. Floodwater from the Mississippi River can flow into Nahant Marsh through a ditch and culvert system that runs under Interstate highway 280 and through a series of wetlands that are between the Mississippi River and Nahant Marsh (Figure 2). The agricultural lands and industrial park also drain surface water into the marsh through a ditch system at the north end. Beaver dams at the marsh’s outlet help maintain deep water.

5 LEGEND

Mapproduoadbyll.S. Fish and WkJife Service - Rock Island Reid Office Nahant Marsh Ag. Ditch 92/97 M to Coffey Source of Spatial Data: U.S. Fish and VMIdife Service, National VtfeBands Inwntroy Railroads Iowa Department of Natural Resources, Transportation and Hydrography Rivers and Lakes H Nahant Wetlands « o

Figure 2. Hydrology of the Nahant Marsh area showing location and direction of Mississippi River flood water flow. The Nahant Marsh system included 92 acres of wetland habitats, 43 acres of bottomland forest habitat and less than 10 acres dry grassy cover (Figure 3). The wetland habitats included a mosaic of cattail, bulrush and open water patches. The dominant bottomland forest tree species include silver maple, willow species and cottonwood. There are also patches of catalpa trees around the marsh. The grassy openings supported mostly the exotic nuisance species, reed canary grass.

Historically, the open areas around Nahant Marsh contained vast sedge meadows (Guldner 1960). Relict plant populations from these communities are present in some grassy openings. Plant species believed to be extirpated from Scott County (eg. Turtle head) were discovered in the grassy areas by amateur botanists.

Canada goose, mallard, woodduck and killdeer are some of the wetland bird species that nest at the marsh. Great-blue herons from a nearby rookery along the river commonly use the marsh as a feeding site. Large numbers (500 to 1000 per day) of waterfowl and other wetland bird species use the marsh during migration periods (pers. obs.). The other wetland bird specie^ include the great egret, American coot, pied-billed grebe, common snipe, woodcock, rails and shorebirds. Bald eagles regularly forage at the marsh during the late winter and early spring. This area of the Mississippi River supports a large number of wintering bald eagles because of ice free water below the dam in Davenport.

Common wetland fauna such as frogs, snakes, turtles, small mammals and furbearers were observed at the marsh. Mammal species included deer mouse, vole, mink, muskrat, beaver, river otter, fox, coyote and deer. Frog species included northern leopard frog, western chorus frog and bullfrog. Snake species included water snake and garter snake. The turtle species include Blanding’s turtle, western painted turtle and common snapping turtle. The marsh fishery included the common carp, bowfin, green sunfish, bluegill and mudminnow.

Nahant Marsh is part of a larger wetland complex that extends to the south side of Interstate Highway 280. The wetlands on the south side of the interstate includes another estimated 400 acres of marsh and forested wetlands.

The Nahant Marsh complex may provide suitable habitat for size dependent wetland species such as rails and yellow-headed blackbirds (Weller and Gredrickson 1974). Habitat suitability may not be optimum for these sensitive marsh species because of limited open water with submergent plant beds and lack of extensive grassy perimeter (Schroeder 1982). Most of the marsh is surrounded by woody habitats or developed lands.

The lead shot fall zone contains about 5 percent surface area of the Nahant Marsh complex. A wetland functional assessment was completed for the shot fall zone.

7 LEGEND

/%/ Nahant Marsh Ag. Ditch Map produced by U S. Fish and VMkfifa Service - Rock Island Field Office 02/97 MteCofley

Railroads Source of Spatial Data: U.S. fish and VWIdife Service, National WbUands Invertrcy Nahant Wetlands Iowa Department of Natural Resources, Landuse and Landocwer Map Crop Reids Lowland Forest Tracts o

Figure 3. Habitat types and land cover around Nahant Marsh, Davenport, Iowa.

i Wetland Functional Assessment Results

Wildlife Habitat The wetland portion of the lead shot fall zone is a characteristic hemimarsh habitat. Cattail and river bulrush are the dominant emergent plant species. The open water patches in the cattail usually contain small beds of coontail, pondweeds and duckweeds. There were no other obligate plant species observed in the wetland portion of shot fall zone.

The grassy portion of the shot fall area contains zones grading from the shoreline to wet meadow to dry weedy field habitats. The wetland plant species along the shoreline and in the wet meadow zone include arrowhead, sedges, rushes, horehound or bugleweed, wild iris, reed, reed canary grass and indigo bush.

The juxtaposition of the hemimarsh and this grassy area increases the suitability for wetland dependent species. Wetlands adjacent to grassy cover versus woods or cropfields are preferred by a variety of wetland species including ducks and rails. f

Food chain production is likely high in the wetland portion of the shot fall zone. Aquatic submergent plants provide substrates for macroinvertebrates for birds and fishes. Aquatic submergent plant species and annual grasses produce seeds for a food source for migrating birds.

Fish Habitat The wetland portion of the shot fall zone does not have high fish habitat value. This area may support fish during wet years. The fish assemblage includes green sunfish, bluegill, bowfin and nuisance species such as common carp. During dry years the wetland portion has been a monotypic stand of cattail with little standing water.

Water Quality The wetland portion of the shot fall zone likely contributes to the overall function of improving water quality of agricultural run off and other upland surface run off. The water quality treatment function likely includes nutrient removal and sediment trapping. Denitrification and assimilation of nutrients can be high in a cattail habitat compared to other wetland types.

Natural Heritage Today, a small percent of Iowa’s natural wetlands remain in the state and especially in urban areas. We believe that some the sedge wetlands and especially the wet meadow habitats at Nahant Marsh are relict components of the presettlement landscape. For this reason, we place high value on the wet grassy portion of the shot fall zone. The hydrology and soils may be ideal for restoration of high quality meadow communities even though the current plant community is not unique or rare.

9 Cultural There is good access to Nahant Marsh at the shot fall zone. This part of the marsh was developed for the gunclub and includes driveways, picnic spots and observational towers. However, recreational activities such as fishing and bird watching at the shot fall zone are limited at this time because the land is private.

Disturbances Noise pollution is high at Nahant Marsh. Interstate automobile traffic and railroad yard activities contribute to the noise pollution problem.

Disturbances Associated with Response Alternatives Removal of up to a foot of substrate from within the deep emergent plant zone as a risk management action may or may not alter that plant community. Cattail communities are believed to quickly recolonize disturbed areas. Deep water may drown cattail or removal of hydric soils may expose underlying sand layers which may be unsuitable for many species of aquatic plants.

Deepening the deep emergent zone to create a pond habitat may or may not be beneficial. Creation of additional submergent vegetation beds along emergent plant stands improves habitat suitability for some unique wetland birds such as the yellow-head blackbird. The diversity of wetland animals may change if the depth of the water column is permanently increased to allow fish to overwinter and affect the wetland community structure.

Removal actions in the grassy portion of the shot fall zone could permanently change the existing grassy community. The wet meadow habitat may change to a deep water emergent plant community. The terrestrial old field habitat may change to a wet meadow habitat. Pioneer nuisance plant species such as the reed canary grass, may spread if not controlled because of the disturbance.

Many plant species in a meadow habitat have specific life history requirements often related to the amount and timing of water saturation. It is believed that restoration success rates of meadow communities are low because it may be difficult or costly to reproduce life history requirements.

The plant community in the wet meadow zone contains relatively common species and few native wetland forbs. The grass community of the meadow includes reed canary grass or small sedges. This part of the site also contains the clay target debris zone.

In summary, the wet grassy portion of the shot fall zone may be important and contribute significantly to the overall value of the Nahant Marsh ecosystem. The importance of the wet grassy opening in the shot fall zone is primarily based on potential wildlife habitat and natural heritage functions described above and not the quality of the existing plant community.

10 Step One. Problem Formulation, Tentative Assessment Endpoints and Toxicity Evaluation

Problem Formulation

Lead Shot Risks

Lead shot from trap and skeet range operations were deposited and concentrated over time in an estimated 26 acre area of Nahant Marsh. The area estimate was determined using Geographical Information Systems (GIS) analysis (Figure 4). The size of the shot fall zone was based on trajectory information for historic shooting platforms and maximum traveling distance for trap shotgun loads. We calculated the size of the impacted area to be 18.5 acres mix of open water and cattail/river bulrush cover, 2.9 acres of terrestrial grassy cover and up to 4.2 acres of bottomland and'upland woods. {

Ingestion of spent lead shot by birds is believed to be the most significant ecological hazard at the site. Birds ingest the lead shot while they are foraging in the wetland substrate and on adjacent soils in search of food and grit. Grit refers to small stones or other hard material retained in the muscular stomach of some birds that is used to help grind up food items. A good summary of wildlife lead poisoning problems is contained in the Environmental Impact Statement for Use of Lead Shot for Hunting Migratory Birds (USFWS 1986). Highlights from this summary are discussed below.

The size of the lead shot used for trap and skeet is the preferred size of grit and plant seeds for ducks and geese. The lead shot is absorbed under the low pH conditions in the stomach. A progressive illness results in a few weeks and terminates in death with the ingestion of a single lead shot.

Clinical signs of lead poisoning include muscular weakness. The animal may lose its ability to escape predators. Heavy predation at wetlands helps prevent the accumulation of dead animals that might cause people to notice a die-off. Large die-offs from lead shot poisoning are the result of a special combination of environmental factors.

Lead poisoning has been commonly reported for many species of birds (Eisler 1988). More information is available for waterfowl (ducks, geese, swans), columbiforms (doves, pigeons) and galliforms (quail, grouse, pheasant) likely because these species use grit the size of lead shot as part of their diet or the shot resembles their food items (Kendall et al 1996).

n Waterfowl are believed to be at the greatest risk from the deposited lead shot in the marsh because of their food habits, grit use and attraction to this wetland during migration times. The waterfowl - lead shot exposure pathway may be incomplete in deep water and dense emergent vegetation. Visiting ducks, geese and potentially swans and many of the mallards and Canada geese produced annually at the site may be affected by lead poisoning. An estimated 1.6 to 2.4 million waterfowl die annually across the nation from the problem of lead shot ingestion (USFWS 1986).

The bald eagle, red-tailed hawk and great homed owl may be at risk from eating the ill or dead birds found at the site. These birds-of-prey are at risk from secondary poisoning from ingesting any lead shot contained in the stomach tract of the avian food items.

The mourning dove may be the upland wildlife species at greatest risk from the ingestion of lead shot because of their food habits and grit use. / Direct Toxicity and Bioaccumulation t

Lead has contaminated the marsh surface water, wetland sediments and shoreline soils (E & E 1997). It is not known how the lead is partitioned in the wetland sediments and soil. It is not known how the elemental lead shot and fragments have contaminated the surrounding aerobic and anaerobic media.

Available lead can cause toxic effects in plants and invertebrates living in contaminated media (Eisler 1988).

Wildlife may be exposed to harmful amounts of lead from ingesting highly contaminated water, sediment and soil particles (Beyer et al 1997).

Lead can bioaccumulate in plants and invertebrates living in contaminated media (Eisler 1988). Wildlife may be exposed to lead from ingesting the contaminated food items, although lead does not biomagnify in the food chain (Eisler 1988).

Food Chain Risks

A variety of other wildlife species may be at risk for the site that include fish, amphibians, reptiles, mammals and other bird species either because they forage on plants growing in contaminated media, they consume animals that have accumulated lead in their tissues or they incidently ingest the contaminated media.

The earthworm can bioaccumulate lead from contaminated soil with bioaccumulation factors greater than one in some instances (Beyer 1990). The

12 earthworm is relatively tolerant of metal pollution and therefore can survive in contaminated soil (Neuhasuser et al 1986). This is an ecological problem because the organism is an important food source for many wildlife species. Vermivorous birds and small mammals are at risk because earthworms make up most of these animals’ diet (Martin et al 1951). Two wetland vermivores, the woodcock and short-tailed shrew, and the terrestrial vermivore, the robin, occur at the site.

Muskrat may be at risk if the potato-like tubers that are part of the root system of cattail and bullrush have bioconcentrated lead. The marsh supports a population of muskrat.

Shoreline species such as frogs and small mammals bioaccumulated lead and were adversely affected by living around lead contaminated soil at a trap range site in Jew Jersey (see Stansley and Roscoe 1996).

Colonial birds (eg. great-blue heron) that use the marsh to forage for frogs and small fish may be at risk if these food resources are/contaminated. There is a colonial bird rookery (300+ great-blue herons) near the city of Andalusia, Illinois which is about four miles from the site.

Birds-of-prey (eg. red-tailed hawk) that feed on small mammals such as voles and mice may be at risk if these food resources are contaminated.

All of the above mentioned birds are protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act. Bald eagles are listed as threatened under the Endangered Species Act and protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act, the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act. A waterfowl species, the trumpeter swan, is listed as endangered under the Endangered Species Act.

Other Risk Problems

A zone along the shoreline zone in front of the shooting platforms contains clay target debris. Clay targets may contain petroleum pitch (Remington 1990). The pitch contains polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon (PAH) compounds (Remington 1990). PAH chemicals may accumulate in the soils and reach toxic concentrations. PAH products can weather and bioremediate. The clay target debris may form a physical barrier over the soil and limit plants.

Risk management and response actions at the site may cause adverse ecological consequences. For example, as parts of the marsh are deepened from excavation, then certain existing wetland community types may be permanently changed to new communities that are less desirable.

13 Tentative Receptors and Assessment Endpoints

The selection of the following receptors and assessment endpoints was based on information in the problem formulation, the fact that there are high densities of lead shot in the wetland part of the lead shot fall zone and that highly contaminated soils are found in front of the shooting platforms.

Assessment Endpoint 1: Waterfowl mortality resulting from the ingestion of lead shot.

Large numbers of waterfowl presently use the marsh, either seasonally or year- round. In addition, trumpeter swans are being reintroduced in Iowa along the Mississippi River flyway, and they may stage at the marsh in the future. Exposure to lead shot creates a potential for direct toxicity to these waterfowl. An indirect effect resulting from lead poisoned waterfowl occurring at the site is the potential for toxicity to predators and scavengers, such as bald eagles, that feed on weakened and/or dying organisms and the carcasse^. Risks to predators and scavengers will be evaluated qualitatively.

The mallard was selected as a receptor for the lead shot ingestion pathway in wetland habitats. The mallard is a common waterfowl species that use grit and is found at the marsh and will represent all of the waterfowl species that may nest or use the site during migration times.

The mourning dove was not selected as a receptor for lead shot ingestion in terrestrial habitats for the following reasons: The high density lead shot areas are believed to be in the wetland habitats and not in the terrestrial habitats. The terrestrial plant living biomass, the slow decaying litter horizon, and the clay target debris all may break this exposure pathway with a physical barrier.

Assessment Endpoint 2: Mortality to vermivorous birds through lead exposure from contaminated food and incidental soil ingestion.

The woodcock was selected as a receptor for the food chain transfer pathway in wetland areas. The robin was selected as a receptor for the food chain transfer pathways in terrestrial areas.

Assessment Endpoint 3: Mortality of wetland plants and invertebrates serving as food resources for the selected receptors resulting from exposure to lead contaminated wetland soils and sediments.

The survival of selected wetland plant communities plays a key role in wildlife nutrition and in the site’s overall primary and secondary production.

14 Estimated Lead Shot Fail Zone

Boundaries based on shotgun trajectories and range of trap shotgun loads.

LEGEND A/Roads Map Produced by U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Rock Island Reid Office. 9/2/97 Mke Coffey AY Railroads //%// Marsh Ag. Ditch (D Sources of Spatial Data: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, National Wetlands Inventory Pi Shot Fall Zones 0 100200 Yards Iowa Department of Natural Resources, Transportation and Hydrography MB Nahant Marsh wm Shot Fall Zones estimated and cfigitized by staff at the Rock Island Reid Office

Figure 4. Approximate location of shot fall zones in Nahant Marsh, Davenport, Iowa, Toxicity Evaluation

This section includes information on relevant toxicity studies available in the literature that contain preferred toxicological benchmark data. Exposure levels that represent conservative thresholds for adverse effects were selected from these study reports.

Lead Shot Ingestion

The range of lead shot densities in hunted marsh sites from across the country was between zero and 2.71 per square foot (USFWS 1986). An average of one shot per square foot has been suggested as a background density for North American marshes (Irwin and Karstad 1972). Toxicity testing has not confirmed the value of one shot per square foot or other background densities as a no-observed- adverse-effect-level (NOAEL).

Irwin and Karstad (1972) exposed mallards to a seizes of particulate lead (325 mesh - 0.044 millimeter) equivalent to shot densities of 10, 50 and 100 shot per square foot in artificial wetlands. Exposures of 10 shot per square foot value had very low toxicity for the birds. Exposures of 50 shot per square foot value resulted in chronic lead toxicosis. Exposures of 100 shot per square foot value resulted in subacute lead toxicosis. The ten shot per square foot value may be used as the lowest-observed-adverse-effect-level (LOAEL). The ten shot per square foot value was used to screen for waterfowl - lead shot ingestion risks.

Toxicity from Exposure to Contaminated Abiotic Media

Published ecotoxicological benchmark values for lead contaminated water, wetland sediments and upland soils will be used to screen for ecological risks.

The screening value selected for lead in water is the USEPA chronic ambieni water quality criterion of 2.5 micrograms per liter (ue/L) at a water hardness of 100 milligrams per liter (me/D as calcium carbonate (USEPA 1986). Water quality data available from the USEPA contractor working at the site indicate specific water hardness values for the wetland between 149 and 320 mg/L as calcium carbonate (E & E 1997). These values correspond to site specific water quality criteria of 3.7 to 8.0 pg lead /L (dissolved).

The screening value selected for lead in sediments and wetland soil was the Ontario Ministry of the Environment lowest effect level of 31 milligramsper kilogram (mg/Kgl drv weight (Jaaeumei 1992). The screening values selectedJor the PAH compounds in sediments and wetland soil were the Ontario Ministry .Qf the Environment lowest effect levels (see Table 5 on P.age_22I (Jaagumgi 1992).

16 The screening value selected for lead in soil was set at 45 me/Ke drv weight. This value is based on the lowest available toxicity concentration value for terrestrial invertebrates and higher plants (EA Engineering 1991 and USEPA 1992).

Total leaf area of red oak was significantly reduced by 29 percent in sandy loam amended with a 50 mg lead (Dixon 1988).

Lead soil concentrations between 100 and 400 mg/Kg dry weight resulted in toxic responses to plants that include leaf necrosis, stunted growth, decreased photosynthesis and transpiration rates (Phalsson 1989, Davies 1990).

Total mortality within three weeks was observed for black-eyed Susan plants grown in urban soils with a bulk lead concentration of 900 mg/Kg dry weight (Miles and Parker 1979).

Test populations of springtail insects fed fungi gro^ in media amended with 45 mg/kg lead nitrate had decreased growth rate of second generation adults and reduced second generation adult survival (Bengtsson et al 1985).

Maximum allowable lead concentration for forest litter or soil that caused no adverse effects to invertebrates was between 100 and 200 mg/Kg (Bengtsson and Tranvik 1989).

The lethal concentration (LCJ0) for an earthworm species was 5941 mg/Kg (Neuhasuser et al 1986). Survival and reproduction were reduced in woodlice fed soil litter treated with 12,800 mg lead/Kg (Beyer and Anderson 1985).

Toxicity from Exposure to Contaminated Food

The screening value selected for the soil food chain pathway for vermivorous birds was the estimated wildlife NOAEL value (metallic lead) of 3.85 mg/Kg pgr dav (mg/ke-dl for the American robin and the common woodcock. (Sample 1996).

It should be noted that the availability of lead increases approximately three fold as the element is converted to the acetate form. The estimated wildlife NOAEL concentration for lead acetate for the robin and woodcock is 1.13 mg/kg-d.

17 Step Two. Screening Level Exposure Estimates and Risk Calculations

Exposure Estimates

Lead Shot Ingestion

Field sampling data from the USFWS indicated that wetland substrates in the shot fall zone contained an average of 236.7 (standard deviation = 225.3, n = 8) and a maximum of 470 lead shot per square foot. The USFWS sampling method used an Ekman dredge to collect substrate samples from the high lead shot density zone. Information provided in the Nahant Marsh integrated risk assessment indicated that an average of 26.8 (standard deviation = 87.3, n = 48) and a maximum of 533 lead shot were observed per square foot (E & E 1997). The E & E sampling method used a coring tool to collect substrate column samples along line transects throughout the lead shot fall zone. Tfyp different sampling methods and strategies used by the two organizations likely explain the disagreement in the results.

There are no shot density data available for the soil cover in the grassy portion of the shot fall zone.

Surface Water Toxicity

One surface water sample collected in the shot fall zone indicated a concentration of dissolved lead at 0.80 pg/L (E & E 1997).

Wetland Sediment/Soil Toxicity

The concentration of lead in two wetland sediment samples collected from within the shot fall zone were 9.4 and 27.3 mg/kg. The samples contained lead shot, but the shot was extracted by sieving prior to chemical analysis.

Ten different PAH compounds were detected in the two wetland substrate samples near the shoreline of the marsh in front of the club house (see Table 5 page 22).

Terrestrial Soil Toxicity

The concentration of lead in eighteen soil samples collected from between the club house/driveway and marsh shoreline ranged 15.1 to 35,900 mg/kg determined by chemical analysis (E & E 1997). The mean and 95% upper

18 confidence limit for these data are 7525 and 4724, respectively. Many of the samples contained lead shot when collected in the field, but the shot was extracted by sieving prior to chemical analysis.

Contaminated Food Chain Pathway

The food chain exposure estimates for the woodcock and robin feeding entirely on earthworms that are living in the lead contaminated soil area are outlined in Table 2.

Table 2. Exposure estimates (mg/Kg-d) for selected soil lead concentrations for the woodcock and robin food chain pathways.

Species Soil Lead1 Soil Lead Soil Lead Maximum Mean 95% UCL1

f Woodcock 2849 597 375

Robin 20,212 4237 2660

1 Micrograms per gram, dry weight, n=18 1 Upper Confidence Limit

The following formula was used to calculate the screening level exposure estimates:

Dose = soil lead concentration X average bioaccumulation factor X average food ingestion rate X dry weight to wet weight conversion factor.

The maximum soil lead concentration at Nahant Marsh was 35,900 mg/Kg, mean was 7525 mg/kg and 95% upper confidence limit was 4724 mg/Kg (all in dry weight).

Bioaccumulation factors (BAF) are reported in the literature for earthworms (Beyer 1990, Morgan and Morgan 1991, Wei-chun Ma 1987). The literature provides a range of BAFs for lead in earthworms of 0.07 to 9.15 (average 1.24).

The average weight for woodcock is 0.196 kilograms (Joyce 1990). Woodcock species ingest an average of 0.042 kilograms of food daily (Joyce 1990). Normalized for body weight, this equals 0.21 grams food per gram body weight per day. We assume for this model that the woodcock’s diet consisted of earthworms from the contaminated soil.

19 The average weight for the robin is 0.0773 kilograms (Dunning 1984). Robin species ingest an average of 0.1175 kilograms of food daily (Hazelton, et al 1984). Normalized for body weight, this equals 1.52 grams food per gram body weight per day. We assume for this model that the robin’s diet consisted of earthworms from the contaminated soil.

The wet weight to dry weight conversion factor of 0.2987 was based on an average of two values for percent moisture reported in the literature of 70 and 84 percent (average 77) (USEPA 1994 and Tyler 1973).

Contaminated Soil Ingestion Pathway

The exposure estimates for the woodcock and robin incidental soil ingestion while foraging for earthworms that are living in the lead contaminated soil area are outlined in Table 3.

Table 3. Exposure estimates (mg/Kg-d) for selected soil lead concentrations for the woodcock and robin soil ingestion pathways.

Species Soil Lead1 Soil Lead Soil Lead Maximum Mean 95% UCL1

Woodcock 230 48 30

Robin 1532 321 202

1 Micrograms per gram, dry weight, n=I8 1 Upper Confidence Limit

The following formula was used to calculate the screening level estimate for soil ingestion:

Dose = soil lead concentration X average food ingestion rate X soil ingestion rate factor X dry weight to wet weight conversion factor.

The soil ingestion rate factor for woodcock is 0.1 and 0.094 for the robin (Beyer et al 1994).

Risk Calculations

The screening level hazard quotients (HQ) were calculated by dividing the exposure estimate by the no effect or low effect benchmark ecotoxicity value.

20 The HQs exceeded one in the waterfowl lead shot ingestion pathway, terrestrial soil toxicity and avian food chain/soil ingestion exposure pathways (Table 4).

The HQ did not exceed one for surface water and for wetland sediment toxicity. These media are not predicted to be contaminated to the level to inhibit the production of waterfowl food (Table 4).

Table 4. Risk hazard quotients for the screening level contaminant exposure pathways at Nahant Marsh, Davenport, Iowa.

Exposure Assessment Hazard Pathway Endpoint Quotient

Lead Shot Ingestion Waterfowl Mortality 24* Surface Water Toxicity - Lead Aquatic Life Health <1 Wetland Sediment Toxicity - Lead Aquatic Life Health <1 Wetland Sediment/Soil Toxicity - PAHs Aquatic Life Health <1-21 Terrestrial Soil Toxicity - Lead Wetland Plant Health 105b Food Chain Woodcock Mortality 97b Soil Ingestion Pathway Woodcock Mortality 8b Food Chain Robin Mortality 691b Soil Ingestion Pathway Robin Mortality 53b

‘Based on mean shot density bBased on 95% UCL soil concentration

Lead Shot Ingestion

The averages from two studies on lead shot distribution for the wetland portion of the shot fall zone (26.8 to 236.7) exceeded the LOAEL value of ten. The lead shot ingestion pathway HQ was much greater than one.

Surface Water Toxicity

The exposure estimate for surface water lead (0.80 pg/L) did not exceed the lowest site specific screening value (3.7 pg/L). The HQ for direct toxicity to aquatic life from exposure to lead contaminated surface water is less than one.

Wetland Sediment/Soil Toxicity

The maximum exposure estimate for lead in wetland sediments (27.3 mg/Kg) did not exceed the screening value (31 mg/Kg). The HQ for direct toxicity to benthic macroinvertebrates from exposure to lead in sediments is less than one. The maximum concentrations for seven of the ten PAHs compounds detected at the marsh exceeded the respective chemical screening values (Table 5). The HQ for direct toxicity to benthic macroinvertebrates from exposure to PAH contaminated substrate is greater than one for the PAH compounds.

Table 5. Screening values (mg/Kg), exposure estimates (mg/Kg) and risk hazard quotients for the ten detected polycyclic hydrocarbon compounds that were detected in wetland soils and lowland fill sediment at Nahant Marsh, Davenport, Iowa.

Analyte Screening Exposure Risk Hazard Value' ' Estimate1 Quotient

Phenanthrcne 0.56 11.930 t 21 Anthracene 0.22 0.086 ' 0.4 Flouranthene 0.75 11.267 15 Pyrene 0.49 1.383 3 Benzo (a) anthracene 0.32 0.767 2 Chrysene 0.34 2.3 7 Benzo (b) flouranthene - 1.173 - Benzo (k) flouranthene 0.24 0.099 0.4 Benzo (a) pyrene 0.37 0.5 1.3 Benzo (ghi) perylene 0.17 0.3 2

1 Lowest effect levels in Ontario Ministry of the Environment sediment quality criteria (Jaagumgi 1992). 1 Maximum concentration detected for sampling station number 2 and 3. Sampling station two was in suspected terrestrial soil or upland fill material and next to a shooting platform.

Terrestrial Soil Toxicity

The maximum soil lead concentration of 35,900 mg/Kg exceeded the screening value for soils of 45 mg/Kg. Thirteen out of 18 (72 percent) of the soil test values exceeded this screening level value. The HQ for direct toxicity to terrestrial invertebrates and plants from exposure to lead contaminated soil exceeds one.

Contaminated Food and Soil Ingestion Pathway

The predicted dose of lead for the woodcock from feeding on contaminated food items (375 mg lead/Kg-d) and incidental soil ingestion (30 mg lead/Kg-d) were evaluated independently and compared with the NOAEL value of 3.85 mg lead/Kg-d.

22 The calculated HQs for the woodcock food chain and soil ingestion pathways each exceeded one. Adverse effects are predicted for the woodcock from feeding in the wet meadow and terrestrial portions of the lead shot fall zone. This calculation is based on the 95% upper confidence limit value for soil lead contamination.

The predicted dose of lead for the robin from feeding on contaminated food items (2660 mg lead/Kg-d) and incidental soil ingestion (202 mg lead/Kg-d) were evaluated independently and compared with the NOAEL value of 3.85 mg lead/Kg-d).

The calculated HQs for the robin food chain and soil ingestion pathways each exceeded one. Adverse effects are predicted for the robin from feeding in the terrestrial portion of the lead shot fall zone. This calculation is based on the 95% upper confidence limit value for soil lead contamination.

Uncertainty Analysis /

Surface Water Toxicity

The single measurement exposure estimate for surface water lead may underestimate actual concentrations. Lower pH conditions related to high respiration rates of phytoplankton during blooms that occur later in the summer may increase the dissolved lead concentration. The water retention or flushing rates for the wetland during late summer may be longer and help maintain dissolved lead concentrations. These conditions could result in an HQ greater than one.

Lead concentrations in the surface water from within the shot fall zones at six former trap and skeet ranges from across the country were between 1.4 and 838 pg/L (Stansley et al 1992). Only one surface water sample was available from the site for evaluating this exposure pathway.

Wetland Sediment/Soil Toxicity

The exposure estimate for lead and PAH contamination to wetland sediments is based on only two samples. Additional samples are needed to adequately characterize the wetland substrate because of their potential heterogeneity.

Terrestrial Soil Toxicity

The HQ for soil toxicity is much greater than one. However, the leaves or flowers of plants growing in the terrestrial portion of lead shot fall zone do not appear to

23 show symptoms of chemical stress. There does not appear to be any bare ground areas, even in the spots with a layer of clay target debris. However, the nearshore and shoreline zone adjacent to the shooting platforms contain cattail plants with deformed flowers. This screening level assessment has not fully characterized the bioavailability and ecotoxicity to cattail species from lead residues in the wetland soils.

Contaminated Food and Soil Ingestion Pathway

The food chain transfer models used to estimate the levels of lead in earthworms and exposure to the avian receptors are based on conservative desk top calculations and not site specific data from the marsh. There are uncertainties as to the potential of bioaccumulation of lead in earthworms living in the soil at the site.

Site specific soil parameters such as pH, grain size, organic carbon content may regulate the bioaccumulation of lead in soil dwelling invertebrates. The state in which the lead is partitioned in the soil column (fragments of elemental lead or sobbed and dissolved ions) may regulate the bioaccumulation of lead in soil dwelling invertebrates. These factors may result in a different estimate of exposure.

24 Conclusions

The screening level ecological risk assessment for Nahant Marsh predicted lead poisoning and potential mortality in waterfowl receptors from the ingestion of a spent lead shot in the marsh. The recovery of lead poisoned ducks and geese by natural resource personnel monitoring the site confirm the risks predicted for this exposure pathway.

The adversity of the predicted risks from the other exposure pathways evaluated in the screening level ecological risk assessment has not been confirmed. However, there may be adequate information in the screening level ecological risk assessment report to generally characterize ecological risks and help make risk management decisions for the site.

The uncertainties for the water toxicity and wetland sediment toxicity pathways may be resolved if necessary by collecting additional field data. The use of the additional field data will help increase the confidence and statistical power for the screening level risk calculations.

The remaining ecological risk pathways with uncertainties that were presented in the screening level ecological risk assessment include: 1) soil lead toxicity to plants and invertebrates, and 2) food chain lead hazards to avian receptors. The following risk questions were developed help resolve the uncertainties associated with the soil toxicity and food chain pathways. These risk questions may be used to help guide the development of measurement endpoints and future site investigations if deemed necessary.

Risk Questions:

1. What concentration of lead in the terrestrial soil represents a site specific threshold for adverse effects to plants and soil dwelling invertebrates? Could this concentration be used as a preliminary clean up goal?

2. What is the long term impact to the meadow habitat in the lead shot fall zone from implementing the various risk management scenarios? 3

3. What is the site specific earthworm bioaccumulation factor? Do the site specific risk calculations for the avian food chain transfer models show the potential for adverse effects?

25 References

Bengtsson, G., T. Gunnarsson and S. Rundgren. 1985. Influence of metals on reproduction, mortality and population growth in Onychiurus armatus collembola. Journal of Applied Ecology. 22(3):967-978

Bengtsson, G. and L. Travik. 1989. Critical metal concentrations for forest soil invertebrates, A review of the limitations. Water Air and Soil Pollution. 47:381- 417

Beyer, W.N., E.E. Connor and S. Gerould. 1994. Estimates of soil ingestion by wildlife. J. Wildl. Manage. 58(2):375-382

Beyer, N.W., L.J. Blus, C.J. Henny and D. Audet. 1997. The role of sediment ingestion in exposing wood ducks to lead. Ecotoxicology 6:1891-186

Beyer, W.N. and A. Anderson. 1985. Toxicity of \yoodlice of zinc and lead oxides added to soil litter. Ambio. 14:173-174

Beyer, W.N. 1990. Evaluating Soil Contamination. U.S. Fish and Widlife Service, Biological Report 90(2). 25pp.

Davies, B.E. 1990. Lead. In B.J. Alloway, ed., Heavy metals in soils. John Wiley & Sons, New York, NY.

Dieter, M.P. and M.T. Finley. 1979. Delta aminolevulinic acid dehydratase enzyme activity in blood, brain and liver of lead-dosed ducks. Environ. Res. 19:127-135

Dixon, R.K. 1988. Response of ectomycorrhizal Quercus rubra to soil cadmium, nickel and lead. Soil Biology and Biochemistry. 20:555-559

Dunning, J.B. Jr. 1984. Body weights of 686 species of North American birds. Western Bird Banding Association Monograph No. 1. Eldon Publishing, P.O.B. 446, Cave Creek, AZ

EA Engineering. 1991. Terrestrial soil fauna in environmental assessment and environmental management. Prepared for U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Exposure Assessment Group, Office of Health and Environmental Assessment. Prepared by EA Engineering, Science and Technology, 15 Loveton Circle, Sparks, MD

26 E & E - Ecology and Environment, Inc., Overland Park, Kansas. 1997. Integrated Site Assessment: Nahant Marsh, Davenport, Iowa

Eisler, R. 1988. Lead hazrds to fish, wildlfie and invertebrates: a synoptic review. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Biological Report 85(1.14). 134 pp.

Finley, M.T., M.P. Dieter and L.N. Locke. 1976. Sublethal effects of chronic lead ingestion in mallard ducks. Jour. Toxicol. And Environ. Health. 1:929-937

Guldner, L.F. 1960. Vascular plants of Scott and Muscatine Counties. Davenport Public Museum, Botancial Publication No. 1. Gordon Printing Co., Davenport, IA

Hazelton, P.K., R.J. Robel, A.D. Dayton (1984). Preferences and influences of paired food items on energy intake of American robins (Turdus migratorius) and gray catbirds (Dumetella carolinensis). J. Wildl. Manage. 48:198-202.

Hoffman, D.J., J.C. Franson, O.H. Pattee, C.M. Bujick and A. Anderson. 1985. Survival, growth and accumulation of ingested lead in nestling American kestrels (Falco sparvereius). Arch. Environ. Contain. Toxicol. 14:89-94

Hudson, R.H., R.K. Tucker and M.A. Haegele. 1984. Handbook of toxicity of pesticides to wildlife. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Resource Publication 153

Irwin, J.C. and L.H. Karstad. 1972. The toxicity for ducks of disintegrated lead shot in a simulated-marsh environment. J.Wild. Dis. 8:149-153

Jaagumagi, R. 1992. Development of the Ontarios provincial sediment quality guidelines for arsenic, cadmium, chromium, copper, iron, lead, manganese, mercury, nickel and zinc. Ontario Ministry of the Environment. Log 92-2309-069 PIBS 1964

Joyce, K.M. 1990. The westerly wetlands: an assessment of risk to wildlife from environmental contamination. New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection Draft Environmental Risk Assessment

Kendall, R.J. and T.E. Lacher Jr., C. Bunck, B. Daniel, C. Driver, C.E. Grue, F. Leighton, W. Stansley, P.G. Watanabe and M. Whitworth. 1996. An ecological risk assessment of lead shot exposure in non-waterfowl avian species: upland game birds and raptors. Envim. Toxicol, and Chem. 15:4-20

Martin, A.C., H.S. Zim and A.L. Nelson. 1951. American wildlife and plants, a guide to wildlife food habits. Dover Publications, Inc. NY

27 Miles, L.J. and G.R. Parker. 1979. Heavy metal interactions for Andropogon scoparius and Rudbeckia hirta grown on soil from urban and rural sites with heavy metal additions. Journal of Environmental Quality. 8(4):443-450

Morgan, J.E. and A.J. Morgan. 1991. Differences in the accumulated metal concentrations in tow epigeic earthworm species (Lumbricus rubellus and Dendrodrilus) living in contaminated soils. Bull. Environ. Contam. Toxicol. 47:296-301

Neuhasuser, E.F., R.C. Loehr and M.R. Malecki. 1986. Contact and artificial soil tests using earthworms to evaluate the impacts of wastes in soil. In Hazardous and industrial solid waste tesing: fouth symposium, ASTM STP 886. J.K. Petros, Jr., W.J. Lacy and R.A. Conway, eds. American Society for Testing and Materials, Philadelphia, PA. Pp. 192-203

Osborn, D., W.J. Eney and K.R. Bull. 1983. The toxicity of Triakyllead compounds to birds. Environ. Pollut. 31A:261-275/

Phalsson, A.M.B. 1989. Toxicity of heavy metals (Zn, Cu, Cd, Pb) to vascular plants: a literature reveiw. Water Air Soil Pollut. 47:287-319

Remington Arms Company. 1990. Toxicity of trap and skeet targets.

Sample, B.E., D.M. Opresko and G.W. Suter II. 1996. Toxicological Benchmarks for Wildlife: 1996 Revision. Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, TN

Schroeder, R.L. 1982. Habitat suitability index models: yellow-headed blackbird. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Office of Biological Services. Washington, DC. FWS/OBS-82/10.26

Stansley, W., L. Widjeskog and D.E. Roscoe. 1992. Lead contamination and mobility in surface water trap and skeet ranges. Bull. Environ. Contam. Toxicol. 49:640-64

Stansley, W. and D.E. Roscoe. 1996. The uptake and effects of lead in small mammals and frogs in a trap and skeet range. Arch. Environ. Contam. Toxicol. 30:220-226

Yyler, A.V. 1973. Caloric values of some North Atlantic invertibrates. Mar. Bio. 19:258-261

28 USACOE - U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Rock Island District. 1982. General Desing Memorandum Local Flood Protection, Mississippi River, Davenport, Iowa Phase II

USDOI - U.S. Department of Interior. 1987. Type B technical Information document: injury to fish and wildlife species. CERCAL 301 Project, Wahsington, DC

USEPA - U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1986. Quality critera for water, 1986. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water, Washington, DC. EPA 440/5-86-001

USEPA - U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1992. Ecological effects of soil lead contamination. Prepared by U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Toxics Integration Branch, Office of Emergency and Remedial Response, Washington, DC. < USEPA - U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1993. Wildlife exposure factors handbook, Volume I. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC. EPA/600/R-93/187a

USEPA - U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1994. Ecological assessment for the Byron Salvage Yard / Dirk’s Farm Operable Unit remedial investigation report - section 8. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region V, Chicago, IL.

USEPA - U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1997. Ecological risk assessment guidance for Sperfund: process for designing and conducting ecological risk assessments. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Emergency Response Team, Edison, NJ

USFWS - U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1986. Final supplemental environmental impact statement - use of lead shot for hunting migratory birds in the United States. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Office of Migratory Birds, Washington, DC

Wei chun Ma. 1987. Heavy metal accumulation in the mole and earthworms as an indicator of metal bioavailability in terrestrial environments. Bull. Environ. Contam. Toxicol. 39:933-938

Weller, M.W. and L.H. Fredrickson. 1974. Avian ecology of a managed glacial marsh. Living Bird. 12:269-291

29 Appendix A

River Action, Inc. Newsletter with Information on the ( Nahant Marsh Master Conservation Plan November, 1997 Volume 2. Issue 4

k-jj * | “A New Dawn for Nahant Marsh” Educates—Preserves

The educational Na­ hant Marsh poster, "A New Dawn for Nahant Marsh” is now available. This two-sided, full-color poster was devel­ oped to teach the value of an urban wetland, the species that are there and those that could make a comeback if the marsh is pre­ served.

*A New Dawn” is available through calls received after the last two years. River Action at a PRESERVE-RESPECT-PROTECT cost of $5 each. hours. The Nahant Commit­ They can be mailed NAHANT tee will be meeting for an additional $3. Water Quality Testing with a toxicologist The posters are MARSH More water quality from the USFWS to also available at tests were conducted help develop a plan of NO DUMPING other locations at the marsh last action for continuous around the Quad month. Turtle flesh testing at Nahant to Cities this winter REPORT and soil samples were address this problem. PROBLEMS TO tested for heavy met­ including the Wapsi 326-7755 River Environmental als, organo chlorines, Master Plan Education Center, and PCB’s. The test A Master Plan pro­ Putnam Museum, results revealed low posal made by the Protect, NAHANT numbers for almost Lakota Group / SE Mississippi River MARSH, NO DUMP­ everything. A chemi­ Group was accepted Visitor Center. ING, Report Prob- . cal indicative of diesel and the team made lems to 326-7755.” **No Dumping” fuel was found in a soil their first site visit in Six signs were fabri­ early October. They Signs sample taken near the cated by the Iowa bridge at Wapello Ave. gathered data by tour­ Signs developed by Prison Industries and ing the area, collect­ the Nahant Commit­ Low numbers are en­ Krit Magkrir will be installed by the couraging in terms of ing maps and data tee to help control City of Davenport at the health of the marsh sources from USFWS, RrverWqy illegal dumping at the marsh. The num­ but do little to unravel NRCS. and the City of Date: November 1997 the Marsh have ber to call is Environ­ the mystery as to why Davenport. A first re­ River Action, Inc. been fabricated. mental Inspections no amphibians have port is expected in mid lb,P. 0. Box 964 Office, City of Daven­ 'avenport, IA 52805 The signs read: been present in any December. port, and has an an­ numbers at Nahant in Published: Quarterly " Preserve-Respect- swering machine for Sub. Cost: Free

NOV 2 9 Designated Fund— Wish Ust: ®™|g|§ips,on the RiverWay In early October, River Ac­ tion received word that a New / Used Copier: • Ben Bullerworlh Porlcwrnj liqlilj $25,000 gift was made to We are in desperate need of a • John D wre Common! I.iqhls the Community Foundation new copier for the River Holiday Nighl s on iheP iver: 6 -10pm ih e weekends cl of the Great River Bend to Action office. If anyone riovemhcT 14 & 31 ond niqhllt/ (rc*n Novc-mU** 3.6 - Januanj 4 be placed in a designated knows a used copier that fund, from which River Ac­ could be purchased or The Heart Connection Children’s Cancer Programs and the Variety tion will receive the inter­ donated, please call the office: Club of the Quad Cities are sponsoring this mile-long drive through est. The donor, Mary Rose (319) 322-2969. holiday light show along the shore of the Mississippi River beginning at Hawkinson, set up the fund the foot of Marquette Street in downtown Davenport. All proceeds to benefit the Nahant Wishes Granted: benefit programs for special needs children. Advance tickets are on Marsh and other natural re­ sale at HyVee for $6 per car. Thanks to the tireless efforts source protection efforts on Village Chrislmas Wollc: December 5-6, 6:00 lo 9:00 p.m. the Mississippi River in the of Cliff Stewart, we have over The Village of East Davenport will again host the Christmas Walk with Quad Cities. a dozen blue bird houses to living windows, music, and Christmas displays of yesteryear in Village be placed at Nahant Marsh shops including a re-creation of “Art in the Park on Credit Island” at the and Pigeon Creek Park. Now that the fund has been River Action office featuring the characters from the Seurat painting in established by Mrs. Victorian period costumes. Logs used for the Credit Hawkinson, other donation Bald E aqle Dags: Island Art Project carvings to the Community Founda­ January 10, 8:3(^6ni lo 5:00pm &Januarg 11, 10:00am lo 5:00pm were donated by the Cities of tion can be desingated for Moline & Davenport and Quad City Conservation Alliance will hold its 12th annual Bald Eagle the River Action Fund, fur­ Days, Environmental Fair, and Wildlife Art Show. Admission is ther benefiting environ­ Arsenal Island Golf Club and transported to the Davenport $1.00 for adults, 50 cents for children. mental projects. artist’s workshop by Davey Housing Inventory Tree Service and American Iron Works. Follow the Bouncing Ball We are currently in the pro­ Speakers Bureau Forming The little plastic superball skitters across the classroom and a cess of inventorying buildings fourth grader rushes to retrieve it. in the Quad Cities that could River Action has a program be renovated and reused as about the Mississippi River avail­ “Ah, that’s good. But what happens if while you're playing jacks, riverfront housing. able to groups for presentation . the ball accidentally goes down the storm drain in front of your house? What happens class?” Help us by letting us know The program highlights the river­ about buildings you know of front revitalization, trail develop­ A virtual chorus erupts from the class: “It goes to the Missis­ that could be reused for hous­ ment, natural resources protec­ sippi.” ing either on the riverfront or tion, and economic development with a river view. in the Quad Cities both past and “That’s right, now what else shouldn’t go into that storm drain?” present. Please mail or call in your River Action is combining its drain painting program, “Don’t suggestions to the River Ac­ If you are interested in having the Dump—This drains into our river.” with classroom education— tion office: program presented to your group and civic action. Students, after participating in a interactive edu­ P. 0. Box 964, Davenport, IA or would like to consider being a cational session, are being asked to paint the storm grates in the 52805 speaker, please call the office. blocks around their schools. (312) 322-2969 (319) 322-2969. E-mail: [email protected] This “Sane Drain" program has been introduced in Rock Island and Davenport this fall, by Chuck Oestreich, Rock Island, with “Back From the Brink” Video Available: the other area cities scheduled for early next year. With the ad­ A film produced by the American Architecture Foundation, Back vent of warm spring weather, look for students putting knowledge From the Brink, Saving America's Cities by Design (total running to work—spraying a positive message on the storm grates in their time 56:40) tells the story of three American cities that have revi­ neighborhoods talized themselves using architecture and planning tools for restor­ ing a sense of community, improving livability, and enhancing eco­ Other community groups and organizations can also work on this nomic viability If you would like to use the video, please call the beneficial civic project Call River Action (322-2969) to sch River Action office (319) 322-2969 your involvement.

2 "W

Community-built Art Projects Interpret the River Sylvan Island’s Four-tiered From the highest tier, water would flow fountain: via a recirculating pump through the sculptures and into the pond below. Artist Jim Turner, Davenport has The pond would 20 ft. diameter l.S ft. been working with he Sylvan Island deep and planted with various indige­ Dreamers to develop an art project nous water plants. The industries de­ picted by the sculpture are the ice har­ ngat that interprets the industry on and Is -i around Sylvan Island both past and vesting, stone quarry and crushing, steel industry, and hydra-electric power. m present. The proposed sculpture is to be In addition to the sculpture, the group hopes to fabricate signs using core ten with constructed of iron approximately 60 inches in height and 30 inches in steel depicting fish and other wildlife age native to the island. at the diameter. The form would be a four ig in tiered fountain with the three lower tiers having sculpted depictions of The project is scheduled to be completed the industry from Sylvan’s past. next spring.

Campbell's bland Peace existing site by contrasting Garden / Fire Circle: the War Monument both aesthetically and thematically. Veteran RiverWay Artist Kunhild Blacklock has held two community meetings at Blacklock then designed a fire circle / peace garden the Fire Station on Campbell’s Island to work consisting of concrete with residents on developing benches covered with mosaics of Indian bead work an art site that will interpret designs and a concrete turtle the history of the island. in the center with a fire grated in the center of the The group decided that they turtle’s shell. wanted to develop an art project that honored the Members of the group will Native American history of work on the mosaics the island. They felt that this through the winter at the would work well within the firehouse.

Art in the Park Ted McElhiney designed a xlu- on Credit Island: project that mimics the George Seurat painting Sunday Afternoon le In July of this year, artist Ted on the Isle of La Grande Jatte. McElhiney began meeting with Ten life-size wooden figures from i community members to design the painting will be carved an h an art project that interprets the placed on the grassy bank on the history of the river at Credit slough side of Credit Island. The dge Island. figures are being carved by Tom heir Gleich, the artist of the Majestic It was decided by the group Hope sandhill crane sculpture in that the Victorian Era Davenport’s Vander Veer Park. his <1.ecreation on Credit Island was lute Isignificant period in the Stones with local historical facts Island’s history. will be placed at the site as well.

3 P. O. Bo* 964 Non Profit Org. 2016 E. River Drive US Postage Davenport, IA 52805 PAID Phone: (319)322-2969 Davenport. IA Fax: (319) 322-2969 Permit No. 303 1 ______e-mail: [email protected] RIVER* ACTION*INC Office hours: M-F 8:30 am to 5:00 pm QUFOCmESUSfl

cJ\V*T

O*' V.v^ co^'°e' Mike Coffey US Fish and Wildlife 4469 48th Avenue /Rock Island, IL 61201 Co^

RimWa existing enhancement funds under on the Mississippi River in the signed to coordinate the regula- ; Briefings: the current legislation. Quad Cities. They identified tions authorized by such legisla­ work and plans in economic tion as the National Historic ISTEA Bill: Upper Mississippi Could Be­ revitalization, natural resource Preservation Act, Clean Water ; come American Heritage and environmental protection, Act, and the National Park Ser- \ and historic and cultural preser­ vice. The bill to reauthorize ISTEA Riven vation for the application. is hung up in the Senate be­ cause of a term limitations bill. Since President Clinton’s Febru­ A ;public meeting will be held President Clinton will designate on Monday, December 1, 1997, ; A sue month extension of the ary announcement that he would 7:00 to 9:00 p.m. at the Mark of existing federal highway bill designate 10 American Heritage ten rivers in early 1998. has been granted to keep DOT Rivers this year, many river com­ the Quad Cities to gain input workers employed but won’t munities all over the U.S. have The initiative seeks to coordi­ from the public about their vi­ sions for the future of our river. produce any new grants. working on nomination applica­ nate the activities of federal tions, the Quad Cities included. agencies to aid communities There are 3 or 4 different varia­ seeking to improve their river Mayor Pat Gibbs, City of Dav­ tions of the bill being consid­ Since September, citizens, local and to employ revitalized rivers enport, will attend a Congres­ as a catalyst for economic de­ sional Briefing in Washington ered. When the bill does pass government, representative busi­ next spring, it will mean a 15 to ness interests, the Corps of Engi­ velopment. The interagency DC on December 5, to speak on group will also appoint a “river behalf of the American Heritage 20% increase in funding for neers, QC Arts, DNR, NRCS, transportation enhancements and local conservation groups navigator” to serve as a liaison Rivers program’s value to the and more authorization given have been meeting weekly in between the citizens and gov­ Quad City area and our goals for the future of the Mississippi to the states. River Action’s office to gather ernment. The program offers information on past accomplish­ no special funding and is non- River in our community, regulatory. However, it is de­ Bi-State has allocated all of the ments and visions for the future APPendix B Lists Iattt, Bird and Small m a Found at Mammal SPeeies Nah**t Marsh &

[he margin

davenport public museum onii" read PUBLICATIONS IN BOTANY w; istemum;” loensis” Number 1 rirginiana

“Cnicus m,-

the vascular plants

of iperly SCOTT AND MUSCATINE COUNTIES

With some reference to adjoining areas of surrounding Counties in Iowa and to

604, Rock Island and Whiteside Counties in Illinois. fi et itam b7 Ludwig F. Guldner Honorary Curator of Botany of The Davenport Public Museum

•lie A REGIONAL FLORA

0) Published through the M.L.D. Putnam Memorial Fund of the Davenport Public Museum Davenport, Iowa 1960

m

U'

$ir : ■ mm.:. M«lSv« upland or true prairie at Pint Hill Cemetery. The tract contains tKraa on# half Marsh northaast of MeCausland. lata fall aspact. Calamagrostii, Phalaris and cattail in tV icras and has navar baan ploughed or grased. Tha soil is Muscatlna silt loam. Most of tha foraground, sadgas In tha middla ground and to tha laft. grasses In tha foraground ara tha graatar bluestem; a faw spaars of tha Indian grass appear Photo by Stewart P«< it tha lowar laft. Thomas Morrissey in his Flora of tha Pina Hill Prairia Ralict (Proc. la. Acad, tc. 1956) listad 191 species collactad from this tract. Photo by Hanry Priastar

Shore plants. Mud-flat on the pond-shore on It. 61 at tha Wapsipinicon River. Tha Unceo1»< leaves In tha foraground ara the swamp water*dock; present hare also is tha arrowhead. / tha far right ara sadgas. Tha bushas ara tha button-bush. Thera is lamna floating on the w*»e Photo by Hanry Priastar In the background is alluvial forest, with pin and swamp while oaks, saplings of soft map! and river birch. Photo by Stewart P#< THE GRASSLANDS: THE SEDGE MEADOWS Flowering plants: Helianthus grosseserratus Lobelia syphilitica The low flat grasslands on first bottoms subject to overflow lie Vernonla fasclculata Polygonum hydroplperoides on the dark compact silt loams and silty clay loams of the Wabash Eupatorium serotlnum Lythrum alatum series. They are sometimes called “wild hay fields,” but because of the Apocynum slbiricum Lysimachia terrestris massive replacement of the grasses with sedges might more ap­ Asclepias incarnata Lysimachia ciliata propriately be called sedge meadows. The covering vegetation is Solidago gilvocanescens Cicuta maculata mostly composed of sedges belonging to the section Acutae (Carex Erlgeron annuus Erechtites hieracifolia Haydenii, Carex stricta, Carex Emoryii) disposed in extensive beds, Aster simplex Epilobium coioratum or compact stands so closely crowded as to exclude other plants. As Galium obtusum Oxypolis rigidior great beds commonly fail to produce fruiting heads, the exact de­ termination of the species in hand is uncertain. The slough grass (Spartina pectinacea), in tight stands may lie alongside the beds of sedges; and lesser colonies of other moisture loving grasses like the canary-reed grass (Phalaris arundinacea) and the Canadian blue- joint (Calamagrotis canadensis) and the red-top (Agrostis alba) may also be present. The rice-cut grass (Leersia oryzoides) occasionally occurs as tight green stands usually close at water’s edge. Other sedges are occasionally found, occuring mostly as isolated tufts, such as Carex trichocarpa, Carex lanuginosa and Carex scoparia. Early in the season a few flowering plants such as the bedstraw (Galium obstusum) and the swampcandle (Lysimachia terrestris) are occasionally found among the sedges. In the autumn a few colonies, mostly of tall Compositae, like the sawtooth sunflower (Helianthus grosseserratus) and the Canadian goldenrod (Solidago gilvocanescens) may show conspicuious blooms above the sedge. However, flowering plants find it difficult to gain a foothold in the dense sod formed by the luxuriant root-systems of the sedges and grasses. A few other plants among those mentioned under the heading Lowland Prairies may also be found here. A good example of the sedge meadow is the tract lying east of the road: from R. 61 to Nahant. Plants of the Sedge Meadows: Sedges: Carex Haydenii Carex vulpinoidea Carex stricta Carex scoparia Carex Emory! Carex tribuloides Carex lanuginosa Carex gravida Carex trichocarpa Grasses: Spartina pectinacea Phalaris arundinacea Calamagrostis canadensis Agrostis alba Leersia oryzoides Panlcutn virgatum prefers drier more sandy soils * \ — 27 — * KANTS OF NAHANT MARSH AND ADJACENT FLOOD PLAIN SO-i /AT ijAj-ek Equisetaceae - Horsetai1 Faraily

Equisetum arvense Common Horsetai Equisetum pratense Meadow Horsetai

Aspleniaceae - Spleenwort Family

Onoclea sensibilis Sensitive Fern

Cupressace^e - Cypress Family

Juniperus virginiana Red Cedar

TVphaceae - Cat-tail Family

Typha Iatifolia Common Cat-tai1

Sparganiaceae - Bur-reed Family < t Sparganium eurycarpum Giant Bur-reed rotamogetonaceae - Pondweed Family

Potamogeton crispus Curly Pondweed

Alismacea - Water Plantain Family

Sagittaria latifolia Common Arrowleaf Poaceae - Grass Family

Bromus inermis Smooth Brome Cenchus longispinus Sand Bur Echinochloa crus-gal 1i Barnyard Grass Elymus virginicus Virginia Wild Rye Leersia oryzoides Rice Cutgrass Muhlenbergia frondosa f. commutata Muhly Panicum virgatum Switch Grass Phragmites australis Common need Phalaris arundinaceae Reed Canary Grass Poa sylvestris Woodland Bluegrass Poa trivial is Meadow Grass y. Schizachyrium scoparium Little Bluestem Setaria lutescens Yellow Foxtail Setaria viridis Green Foxtail Spartina pectinata Cord Grass', Sporobolus asper Dropseed

Cyperaceae - Sedge Family

Carex spp. Unidentified Sedges Cyperus ferruginescens Michaux's Cyperus Cyperus strigosus Lean Sedge Scirpus acuta Hardstem Bull rush Scirpus americanus Three-square Scirpus atrovirens Dark-green Bulrush Scirpus fluviati1 is River Bulrush Scirpus validus Softstem Bull rush

Lemnaceae - Duckweed Family

Lemna minor Lesser Duckweed Spirodela polyrhiza Big Duckweed Wolffia Columbiana Water Meal

Juncaceae - Rush Family

Juncus sp. Unidentified Juncus

Smilacaceae - Smilax Family

Smilax lasioneuron Carrion Flower Shi lax rotundifolia Catbriar

Iridaceae - Iris Family

Iris sbrevei WiId Blue Iris

Salicaceae - Willow Family

Salix amygdaloides Peach-1eaved Willow Salix exigua Sandbar Willow Salix nigra Black Willow Salix petiolaris Slender Willow Populus deltoides Cottonwood

Jugulandaceae - Walnut Family

Carya cordiformis Bitternut Hickory

Corylaceae - Hazelnut Family

Cory 1 us americana Hazelnut Fagaceae - Beech Family

Quercus macrocarpa Bur Oak

Ulmaceae - Elm Family

Ulmus americana American Elm Ulmus rubra SIippery Elm

Moraceae - Mulberry Family

C&nnabis sativn Hemp Horus rubra Red Mulberry

Urticaceae - Nettle Family

Boebmeria cylindrica False Nettle Laportea canadensis Wood Nettle Pi lea pumila Clearweed Urtica dioica Stinging Nettle

Polygonaceae - Buckwheat Family

Polygonum amphibium Water Smartweed Polygonum convolvulus Black Bindweed Polygonum hydropiper Water Pepper Polygonum hydopiperoides Mild Water Pepper Polygonum pensyl vanicum Common Smartweed Polygonum sagi ttarium Tear Thumb Polygonum scandens False Buckwheat Polygonum virginianum i Virginia Knotweed Rumex altissimus ' Pale Dock Ttumex crispus Curly Dock

Chenopodiaceae - Goosefoot Family

Chenopodium album Goosefoot Cy’doloma atripl icifol ium Winged Pigweed

Amaranthaceae - Pigweed Family

Amaranthus retroflexus Rough Pigweed

Nyctaginaceae - Four-o’clock Family

Mirabilis nyctaginea Wild Four-o’clock

Phytolaccaeae - Pokeweed Family

Phytolacca americana Pokeweed

Caryophulaceae - Pink Family

Silene antirrhina Sleepy Catchfly

Ceratophylaceae - Hornwort Family

CeratophylIum demersum Coontai1

Ranunculaceae - Buttercup Family

Anemone canadensis Meadow Anemone Clematis pitched Leatherflower

Menispermaceae - Moonseed Family Menispermum canadense Moonseed

Brassicaceae - Mustard Family

Brassica nigra Black Mustard Lepidium virginicum Common Peppergrass Sisymbrium officinale var. leiocarpum Hedge Mustard Thlaspi arvense Field Penny Cress

Roseaceae - Rose Family

Potenti1 la simplex Common Cinquefoil

Caesalpiniaceae - Caesalpinia Family

Cassia fasciculata Partridge Pea

Fabaceae - Pea Family

Amorpha fruticosa / False Indigo Apios americana Groundnut Coronilla varia Crown Vetch Lotus corniculatus Birds-foot Trefoil Melilotus albus White Sweetclover Melilotus officinalis Yellow Sweetclover Hobinia pseudoacacia Black Locust Strophostyles helvola Trailing Wild Bean Trifolium dubium Little Hop Clover Trifolium pratense Red Clover

Vitaceae - Grape Family

Partbocissus quinquefol ia Virginia Creeper Vitis riparia Riverbank Grape

Oxalidaceae - Oxalis Family

Oxalis stricta Yellow Wood Sorrel

Euphorbiaceae - Spurge Family

Chamaesyce geyeri Geyer’s Spurge Chamaesyce supina Milk Spurge Croton glandulosus Sand Croton Euphorbia corollata Flowering Spurge Poinsettia dentata Wild Poinsettia

Anacardiaceae - Cashew Family

Rhus glabra Smooth Sumac Toxicodendron radicans Poison Ivy

Aceraceae - Map1e Fami1y Acer negundo Box Elder Acer saccharinum Silver Maple

Balsamaceae - Balsam Family Impatiens capensis Spotted Touch-me-not Impatiens pallida rale Touch-me-not

Malvaceae - Mallow Family

AbutiIon theophrastii Velvet-leaf Callirhoe digitata Poppy Mallow Hibiscus laevis Ha 1 bred-1eaved Rose Mallow

Hypericaceae - St. John’s-wort Family

Hypericum spbaerocarpum Round-fruited St. John’s-wort

Violaceae - Violet Family

Viola missouriensis ' Missouri Violet

Onagraceae - Evening Primrose Family

Gaura biennis Butterfly Flower Oenothera biennis Common Evening Primrose

Apiaceae - Carrot Family

Cicuta maculata Water Hemlock Daucus carota Queen Anne’s-Lace Heraculeum 1ana turn Cow rarsnip Sanicula marilandica Black Snakeroot Sium suave Water Parsnip Zizia aurea Colden Alexanders

Cornaceae - Dogwood Family

Cornus racemosa Gray Dogwood Cornus stolonifera Red Osier Dogwood

Oleaceae - Ash Family

Fraxinus nigra Black Ash Fraxinus pennsylvanica Green Ash

Apocynaceae - Dogbane Family

Apocynum cannabinum Dogbane

Asclepiadaceae - Milkweed Family

Asclepias incarnata Swamp Milkweed Asclepias syriaca Common Milkweed Asclepias vertici]lata Whorled Milkweed

Convovu1aceae - Morning-Glory Family

Convolvulus sepium Hedge Bindweed Ipomoea lacunosa Small White Morning-Glory Ipomoea pandurata Morning Glory

Cuscutaceae - Dodder Family

Cuscuta gronovii Dodder

Boraginaceae - Borage Family

Hackelia virginiana Stickseed

Verbenaceae - Verbena Family

Phyla lanceolata Fog-fruit Verbena hastata . Blue Vervain Verbena stricta ' Hoary Vervain Verbena urticifolia White Vervain

Laminaceae - Mint Family

Lycopus americanus Common Water Horehound Lycopus rube 11 us Stalked Water Horehound Mentha arvensis Field Mint Nepeta cataria Catnip Physostegia speciosa False Dragonhead Prunella vulgaris Self-heal Salvia reflexa Blue Sage Scutellaria galericulta Marsh Skullcap Scutellaria lateriflora Blue Skullcap Stachys tenuifolia Smooth Hedge Nettle Teucrium canadense American Cermander

Solanaceae - Nightshade Family

Phy'salis virginiana Ground Cherry Solanum carolinense Horse Nettle

Scrophulariaceae - Figwort Family

Mimulus alatus Winged Monkey-flower Scrophularia lanceolata Early Figwort Verbascum thapsus Wooly Mullein

Bignoniaceae - Bignonia Family

Catalpa speciosa Catalpa Chelone obiiqua var. speciosa Hose Turtlehead

Plantaginaceae - Plantain Family Plantago lanceolata Lance-leaved Plemtain PI ant ago major Common Plantain

Rubiaceae - Madder Family

Cephalanthus oxidentalis Buttonbush Galium aparine Goosegrass Galium trifidum Smal1 Bedstraw

Caprifoliaceae - Honeysuckle Family

Sambucus canadensis Elderberry

Dipsacaceae - Teasel Family

Dipsacus sylvestris Common Teasel

Cucurbitaceae - Gourd Family

Sicyos angulatus i * Bur Cucumber

Campanu1aceae - Bellflower Family

Campanula americana Tall Bellflower Lobelia siphilitica Great Blue Lobelia Triodanis perfoliata Venus’ Looking-glass

Asteraceae - Aster Family

Ambrosia artemisiifolia Common Ragweed Ambrosia trifida Giant Ragweed Arctium minus Common Burdock Aster azureus Sky-blue Aster Aster pilosus Heath Aster Aster simplex Panicled Aster Aster novae-angl iae New England Aster Aster simplex Panicled Aster Bidens coronata Ti ckseed-Sunf1ower Brickel1ia eupatorioides False Boneset Chicorium intybus Chickory Cirsium arvense Canada Thistle Cirsium vulgare Bui 1 Thistle Conyza canadensis Horseweed Erigeron strigosus Daisy Fleebane Eupatorium altissimum Tal1 Boneset Eupatorium macula turn Spotted Joe-Pye-weed Eupatorium perfoliatum Common Boneset Eupatorium purpureum Purple Joe-rye-weed Eupatorium rugosum White Snakeroot Eupatorium sessi1ifolium Upland Boneset Helenium autumnale Autumn Sneezeweed Hel ian thus strumosus Pale-leaved Wood Sunflower Helianthus tuberosus Jerusalem Artichoke Lactuca biennis Tal1 Blue Lettuce Lactuca serriola Prickly Lettuce Itudbeckia hirta Black-eyed Susan Solidago caesia Woodland Goldenrod Solidago canadensis Tal1 Goldenrod Sol idago gigantea Late Goldenrod Solidago ulmifolia Elm-leaved Goldenrod Sonchus arvensis Field Sow Thistle Sonchus oleracerus Common Sow Thistle Taraxacum officinale Common Dandelion Trapopogon porrifolius Salsify Xanthium strumarium Common Cocklebur $ QUAD-CITY BIRD FIELD CARD

Le Cooic'i Sparrow. . . .V**! Yellow-headed Blackbird. $ 7) Milo or ihf Dtwnpon • *ocl Wind Am Sharp-tailed Sparrow.. . Rusty Blackbird.... Fo» Sparrow...... V, . / • Brewer's Blackbird.. £ Song Sparrow Common Crackle. . Weather:... Uncoln'i Sparrow Brown-headed Cow bird. ••^jX.Wind:...... Swamp Sparrow.. Orchard Oriole...... S.----- White-throated Sparrow. Baltimore Oriole... NX... ^Tcmp:...... White-crowned Sparrow. Purple Finch...... S.. Harm' Sparrow...... NX.^X House Finch...... V ... §J5Time:...... Dark-eyed Junco...... Y.. Red Crossbill. *...... Lapland Longspur. White-winded Crossbill. P^^ftqPany Hours: Smith's Longapur Common Redpoll. Snow Bunting...... Pine Siskin...... : .5" Party Miles:. Bobolink...... S. Am- Goldfinch...... No. Species:. Red-winged Blackbird.. .\X.. Evening Grosbeak...... Eastern Meadowlark. House Sparrow...... NX— v - :. m. Observer:. ^V4- 7w c -y M’ .* ITiri'U'C I v. Western Meadowlark. • Eurasian Tree Sparrow. Lin based on ipcciei kcti oneftn . . nib-ipoionM teed . .. Ancriik (•) dnwo birds or unccmin nuui uid diould be noted k'.Ar^L. linedat nntron b.cl ot ord or documcnrcd.

Common Loon...... :vX::: N. Pintail...... Pied-billed Grebe.. Blue-winged Teal Homed Grebe...... N. Shovelcf Eared Grebe...... GadwaJI...... Am. White Pelican. Am. Wigcon...... Double-entd Cormorant Canvasback...... i: Redhead...... Pete Petersen’s Am. Bittern...... Z:':: Least Bittern...... Ring-nccked Duck.. Great Blue Heron. Greater Scaup...... v/ WILD BIRD SHOP Great Egret...... Leaser Scaup...... R Snowy Egret...... •OMsquaw...... * Black Scoter...... "Ererjtbmz for the * little Blue Heron.. BhrJ entburiast" Cattle Egret...... * Surf Scoter...... Green Heron...... * * White-winged Scoter 1106 Jersey Ridge Road Btk-crwnd Night-Heron. Common Goldeneye. . Qevenport, Iowa 52803 YUw-crwnd Nifht-Heron...... Bufftchcad...... Tundra Swan 4...... Hooded Merganser V::. Phone 319-323-2520 Gr. White-fronted Gooae^ ... Common Merganser Red-breasted Merganser^. Snow Goose...... 'k'f' *'' (locsuJim the VOLft oj Etti Dmnpon) Gooae...... Ruddy Duck Wood Duck...... Y. . .^y/r.. Turkey Vulture... Green-winged Teal...... °H>«T...... v- Please advije iu of any bird ieen in (His area Am. Black Duck. .. -X- Mallard...... V-...... &UN. Harrier. EhIc. not on this list.

Sharp-shinned Hawk..^!^. ... Am. Wuudcnrk. © Httfrtcd Lark. . ■ v/ . Nashville Warbler...... Northern Parvis...... X.----- Cooper's Hswk___NX...... Wilson's Phslanipe... Purple Minin...... VX yX.. • Yellow Warbler...... NX------N. Gnahawk...... yX. .. * Red-necked Phalaropc. Tree Swallow...... VX-XT Red-shouldered Hawk.. NX. ... Franklin's Gull. N. Rough-winged SwallupX.V .. Chestnut-aided Warbler. . Magnolia Warbler...... Broad-winged Hawk.. Bonaparte's Gull...... X ... Bank Swilbrw...... \X. Y.. NX.... Rcd-tailcd Hawk...... V...... Ring-billed Gull.... NX...... difr Swallow...... >XY.... Cape May Warbler...... ILtugh-Irgged Hawk...... , Herring Gull...... Bam Swallow.... Blk-«hrtd Blue Warbler. Yellow-romped Warbler. \ * Golden Eagle...... /T.... •Thayer's Gull...... Blue Jay.. ■ •lewrrBUsk -backed Gull...... Am. Crow. Bfk-thnd Green Warbler.. t Merlin...... * Glaucous Gull...... * fish Crow...... ,S Blackburnian Warbler___ Peregrine Falcon...... • Great Black-barked Gull .X? Black-capped Chirkadce %Spf. • Yellow-throated Warbler. Gray Panridge...... Caspian Tern...... V... Tufted Titmouse...... NX— Pine Warbler...... •Ouifcar...... Gwnmnn Tern Red-breasted Nuthatch. •Prairie Warbler... Ring-necked Pheasant...... Forster's Tern. White-breasted Nuihatc^. .A Palm Warbler...'. Bay-brctated Warbler. * Ruffed Grouse...... Black Tern...... y w-... v Brown Creeper... Wild Turkey...... yX...... Rock Dmw...Y...-X Carolina Wren. Blarkpnfl Warbler. N. Bnbwhite...... NX...... Mourning Dive...... V\... Kruse Wren... Cerulean Warbler. King Rati...*/...... Black-billed Cuckm...... Black-and-white Wai Winter Wren...... Am.Rcdstan...... V.X. VirginiaRatt./S"...... Yellow-billed Cuck.av Sedge Wren...... ■ * • • Eastern Scteerh-Owl. Marsh Wren...... VT...... Prut honorary Warbler-----\X... Cnmrmwi Mtwkrn..../...... Great Homed Owl___ Golden-cnrwned Kinglet.. X.. • Worm-eating Warbler...... Am. Co»a...... NX...... • Snowy Owl...... Ruby-crowned Kinglri...V\X Ovenbtrd...... - .S. Kuthem Watcnhrosh.. V- ■ ■ • Sandhdl Crane...... Barred Owl...... Blue-gfayGnatcaicher^. /V • Black-bellied Plover...... Ltng-earcd Owl...... Eastern Bluebird Louisiana Waienhrosh...... Kentucky Warbler. Lrssrr Golden Plover...... Short-cired Owl...... Veery Cunncninn Warbler... Semipalmsted Plover... Y.... N. Saw-whet Owl...... s' Gray-cKeeked Thrush Killdcet...... YX...... Gnwnuo Nigh.hawk. V .. Swiintio't Thrush Mourning Warbler. * Am. Avucci...... •Chuck-will's Widow. ... Hermit Thrush Ganmon Ydlowihma Grcaier Yrlbiwlegs...... Whip-ptutf-will...... Y. Wtaid Thrush •Hooded Warbler.. Lrssrr Yellowleg*...... Chimney Swifi...... \r ...... X Am. Rtrbtn...... SY. . Wilson's Warbler. Soliiary Sandpiper___NX____ Ruby-ihnd Humminghiriitd.Sr. . . Gray Catbird... Y -. Canada Warbler.. Belied Kingfisher .Sr.f. N. Miwkingbird...... ^\X^* Yellow-breasted Chat Spotted Sandpiper... V...... Red-headed Wuodpeckrrrr .. Sr. . BrownBrown ThrasherThrasher...... -V... • Summer Tanagcr.. Upland Sandpiper...... Red-bellied Wiadpeckcrn.y .y Warn Pipit...... ■/X...... Scarlet Tanager----- .. Hodaunian Gd«ii...... YeHtiw-blld Sapsucker Cedar Waiving. - V • • N. Cardinal...... Y....-.S. Rose-breasted Gnubcak. * Marbled Cndwk...... Downy Wiudpcckrt. * Nttfihem Shrike...... NX. .. Sandcrling...... Hairy Wiidprrkei.. Li^tgerhead Shrike. ■ . • Blue Grosbeak...... Indigu Bu«iing,,..,V. .X,. Srmipatmaied Sand pi pet...... N. Flicker...... European Starling. * Western Ssndpiper...... Pilcaicd W«aw.|hr«nied Viren Chipping Sps'row...... Y. .... Prcttwal Sandpiper... V Acadian Rnaulter Warbling Viren...... • Oay-culored Sparrow.. .S..... Dunlin...... * Alder Flycauher. . . vX Philadelphia Vire«». • Field Sparrow...... V, ...... Stilt Sandpiper...... Willow Flycauher. Red-eyed Viren. • • NX . . Vesper Spsrnrw...... Buff-breasted Sandpiper ...... Least Flyi-auher. . . Blue-winged Warbler...... Lark Sparrow ...... Sh>>n-billed Dowmher...... Eastern PKchc .. Golden-winged Warbler. Savannah Sparrow...... Lmg-bilkd Duwiultcr... . Gresr Cntd Flycsrcher Tennessee Wsrhler.. Y ... Grasshopper Sparrow...... GvomtMi Snipe...... V . . . . Eastern Kingbird. . Orange-crowned Wsrhler...... • Hcnslow’i Sparrow...... Appendix C

Scientific Names for Species Mentioned in Report List atsh Ecnl^ for 1 logical RiskAlants tod An • tA^-tZkH totion,ed‘tithe *'"W* FuliCg ant ■ BoWtn °ugle wCed £2— >&>/" l>er^Potfys * 'ePhah BuImsh ArmiacalvaCr0Chiruis Us LycoPUs as— r species Sc*p£spbeiana Cattail Sran, Pec>es £0nir”°nsndsminno* c°'Zc::a^ ryp^SDlec,es Conttnon caJ?P,ng tunle V»traZ,eS £3?— Cfte'y*asl Cyprus cetpentinQ £as 25d5*. i^eed

GZ2nake as—a—- Great'bljg[ Gretoash ^ HorlS,mhh Ardeaf°:^a!b^ Indib°Und Ffaxinn dias ‘',a

Z'-SZ ^dyKbits „ J ■KvSt*1** Pota'nogetnPOdicePs Reed ^C Spec'^ %^,es Reed cat. Robin*1** grass Qt‘*r£°lkCenSis p ntbra

SAret PCC,es pszzsr**Purd^Ki2Tnacea f/ver^ap/e as—> ringtail ‘nun *35r Tmiei Vote ‘head to*er Snake WZZhotedtUn,° %x$s* *0o«cock K°°ddtok Upccie. ”°°dlice acs****^ YeI,0w'headed hi db'tokbird ar—* Sw, Appendix D

Waterfowl Necropsy Reports n NATIONAL BIOLOGICAL SURVEY NATIONAL WILDLIFE HEALTH CENTER 6006 Schroeder Road Madison, Wisconsin 53711-6223 608-271-4640 (FTS 364-5418)

DIAGNOSTIC SERVICES CASE REPORT

se: # 12770 Epizoo: 94-064 RHT: KJM ilirnjjLt : Specimen descrlption/ldentification: Walt Koc.al Canada Goose, Seizure Tag No. 647218 IfWS-LE-Dcs Moines and USFWS Inv. No. 8377AP. g Federal B1dg. 0 Walnut St. 5 Moines, IA 50309 in» Submitted: 05/10/94 Location: Collected 04/28/94 at Naliant Marsli, Davenport Skeet Range, Scott Co., IA.

neral Diagnosis: Lead poisoning.

laments: - Lesions seen at necropsy and microscopic lesions in the heart are consistent tli lead poisoning in geese. The upper GI tract was impacted with grass and 37 lead shot, iiging in size from approximately #7.5 to #9 were found when the gizzard and duodenum ntent were rinsed. The liver lead residue was 35.86 ppm which is within the toxic range, significant bacteria were isolated from the liver.

per your request, the lead shot from the gizzard will be sent to SA Walt Kocal and the rcass will be returned to Mike Coffey.

Preliminary Report ( / / ) Final Report (07/19/94) date date

See attached necropsy records for individual specimen observations.

te: Copies of this report have been sent to: ______USFWS Regional Office (R0- ) Attention: ___ Migratory Bird Coordinator ___ F & W Enhancement: Endangered Species ___ F R W Enhancement: Environmental Contaminants Coordinator

Pathologist: Carol U. Metever. DVM Diplomate, American College of Veterinary Pathologists

you have questions regarding this case, contact: Kimberli J. G. Miller. DVM___ _ £08-271-4640 (FTS 364-5418). Include above Case Number. Diagnostic findings may e used for publication without the pathologist's knowledge and consent.

^3

M 1C 9 ^ IQ97 NATIONAL BIOLOGICAL SURVEY NATIONAL WILDLIFE HEALTH CENTER 6006 Schroeder Road Madison, Wisconsin 53711-6223 600-271-4640 FAX (600-364-5431)

DIAGNOSTIC SERVICES CASE REPORT

5: #13197, 001-005 EDizoo: 94-192 RHT: KAC —— , dtter: Specimen description/identification: falter Kocal 1 Canada Goose, 2 Mallard Ducks, fS-LE, 210 Walnut St. 1 American Coot, 1 Pied-billed Grebe Federal Duilding Seizure Tag No. 05023 and USFWS Inv. Moines, IA 50309 No. 0377AP.

i Submitted: 11/17/94 Location: Nahant Marsh, Davenport, ,Scott Co., IA.

aral Diagnosis: Lead Poisoning (001-003) Undetermined (004-005) . .•

: Canada goose (001), an adult male, was in excellent body condition vith more than pieces of lead shot within the gizzard and bile staining of the gizzard and liver, centrations were elevated in the liver (14 ppm vet wt.) and kidney (36.76 vet ght). Bacterial cultures were not significant and brain cholinesterase.activity vas ebin normal limits decreasing the likelihood of exposure to cholinesterase inhibiting pounds.

lard 002, an adult male, vas in fair body condition vith greater than 20 small ingested d pellets (generally 2-3 mm in diameter) in the gizzard. The gizzard and liver were bile ined. There were no other lesions present. Lead concentrations were elevated in the er (35.55 ppm vet vt.) and kidney (24.42 ppm vet vt.). Bacterial cultures were not nificant and the brain cholinesterase level vas within normal limits.

lard 003, an adult female, vas in poor body condition vith markedly reduced pectoral cle mass. The gizzard vas bile stained and contained 20 small lead shot about 2-3 mm in meter. Lead concentrations were elevated in the liver (33.33 ppm vet vt.) and kidney .05 ppm vet vt.).

American coot (004) vas a scavenged carcass that consisted of wings, legs and a small unt of flesh on the legs. The lead level in the bone vas 3.53 ppm vet weight.

d-billed grebe 005 vas in excellent body condition vith no evidence of infectious ease. Lead vas not detected in the liver or kidney.

fcssions 001-003 had tissue lead residues within the range that ve would consider toxic. 13197F se No.

t

Preliminary Report ( / / ) X Final Report (12/08/94) date date

See attached necropsy records for individual specimen observations. ite: Copies of this report have been sent to: _ USFWS Regional Office (RO- ) Attention: ___ Migratory Bird Coordinator ___ F & W Enhancement: Endangered Species ___ F & W Enhancement: Environmental Contaminants Coordinator

Pathologist: Christian Franson, DVM (^Jh-r^uuLA^UL , you have questions regarding this case, contact: Kathryn A. Converse, Ph.D. 8-271-4640. Include above Case Number. Diagnostic findings may not be used for Ecation without the pathologist's knowledge and consent.