BFS Technical Report #30
THE STATE OF CANADARAGO LAKE, 2011
MATTHEW F. ALBRIGHT HOLLY A. WATERFIELD
Submitted by W.N. HARMAN
SUNY Oneonta Biological Field Station 5838 St. Hwy. 80 Cooperstown, NY 13326
February 2012
BFS Technical Report #30
THE STATE OF CANADARAGO LAKE, 2011
MATTHEW F. ALBRIGHT HOLLY A. WATERFIELD
Submitted by W.N. HARMAN
SUNY Oneonta Biological Field Station 5838 St. Hwy. 80 Cooperstown, NY 13326
February 2012
Available Online at:
http://bfs.oneonta.edu (see “Publications”)
http://www.otsegosoilandwater.com
Table of Contents
Preface……………………………………………………………………………………………1 Executive Summary………………………………………………………………………………..1 Introduction…………………..……………………………………………………………………4 Geology………………………………………………………………………………………7 Land use……………………………………………………………………………………..7 Climate………………………………………………………………………………………12 Socioeconomic characteristics…………………..……………………………………………12 Municipal wastewater treatment……………………….………………………………………13 Tributary monitoring……………………………………………………………………………….14 Physical water quality…………………………………………………………………………15 Dissolved oxygen………………………………………………………….……………15 Specific conductance and pH……………………………………………………………18 Chemical water quality………………………………………………………….……………19 Major ions………………………………………………………………………………19 Major plant nutrients………………………………………………………………………………20 Nitrogen………………………………………………………………………………20 Phosphorus………………………………………………………………………………22 Storm runoff……………………………………………………………………………………………24 Stream macroinvertebrates………………………………………………………………………………28 Bacteria……………………………………………………………………………………………37 Tributaries……………………………………………………………………………………………39 Lake……………………………………………………………………………………………41 Lake monitoring………………………………………………………………………………42 Physical limnology………………………………………………………………………………42 Interpretation of isopleth graphs……………………………………………………43 Temperature………………………………………………………………………………44 Transparency………………………………………………………………… 45 Dissolved oxygen…………………………………………………………………48 Chemical limnology………………………………………………………………… 51 Nutrients………………………………………………………………………………51 Phosphorus…………………………………………………………………51 Nitrogen…………………………………………………………………53
Phytoplankton community and chlorophylla………………………………………………………………………………57 Phytoplankton species and community characteristics……………………………………………………57
Chlorophylla……………………………………………………………………………………………60 Zooplankton……………………………………………………………………………… 64 Aquatic macrophytes (plants)…………………………………………………………………71 References……………………………………………………………………………… 82 Fisheries survey of Canadarago Lake, NY (from Brooking et al. 2012)…………………………………………………………………86 Appendix A. Canadarago Lake Beneficial Use Study - Executive Summary……………………………………………………108 Appendix B. Physiochemical water quality data: tributaries……………………………………………………114 Appendix C. Major ion concentrations: 1968-1972……………………………………………………116 Appendix D. Nutrient concentrations: tributaries……………………………………………………117 Appendix E. Physiochemical water quality data: lake…………………………………………………………………119 Appendix F. Nutrient concentrations: lake…………………………………………………………………122 The State of Canadarago Lake, 2011
Preface
This contribution, The State of Canadarago Lake, 2011 is the culmination of a multi- sponsored contract awarded to the State University of New York College at Oneonta’s Biological Field Station through the Otsego County Soil and Water Conservation District. It compares conditions documented through the late 1970s by Harr et al. (1980) with those of 2008 to 2010 and is intended to provide information that may help guide decisions related to the management and protection of Canadarago Lake. Partners contributing to this project include Senator James Seward, Assemblyman William Magee, Otsego County Board of Representatives, the Canadarago Lake Improvement Association, and the Town Boards of Richfield, Otsego and Exeter. The section entitled “Fisheries Surveys of Canadarago Lake, NY” was compiled by Brooking et al. (2012) of the Cornell Warmwater Fisheries Unit, with input from the NYSDEC, and is provided here in its entirety (p. 86).
Executive Summary
Canadarago Lake is a 770 ha (1,903 ac) waterbody located in Otsego County, New York. It is eutrophic; it tends to support high production of algae and rooted plants and its hypolimnion (deep water) looses oxygen during the summer. By the early 1970s, high algal production had substantially degraded the lake. At that time algal production was recognized to be limited, or controlled, by the presence of phosphorus in the lake; the addition of that nutrient would stimulate further algal growth. Also, the relative amounts (ratio) of nitrogen and phosphorus influence the amount and types of algae that are present. In 1973, the Village of Richfield Springs upgraded its wastewater treatment plant to include phosphorus removal; that, coupled with the New York State high phosphate detergent ban in the same year, reduced phosphorus loading to the lake by nearly 50% (see Municipal wastewater treatment, p. 13). The resultant reduction of phosphorus in the lake has been credited with improving conditions considerably.
Nitrogen and phosphorus concentrations in nearly all the major tributaries decreased between the 1970s and 2010 (see Tributary monitoring, Major plant nutrients, p. 20). The exception is that nitrate levels in Ocquionis Creek, below the wastewater treatment plant’s discharge, were higher in recent years than they had been in the 1970s. This increase in nitrate concentration reflects the treatment plant’s effective conversion of ammonia to nitrate. Participation by the agricultural community in USDA-sponsored best management projects and water quality improvement strategies may be, in part, credited with these watershed-wide improvements (see Land use, p. 7). Herkimer Creek has the best water quality during baseline conditions, but it, along with Hyder Creek, delivers considerably more suspended sediment, total phosphorus and total nitrogen (per unit area of its drainage basin) than do Hyder Creek and Ocquionis Creek (not including inputs from the wastewater treatment plant) following heavy rains (see Land runoff – nutrient contributions, p. 24). In an evaluation of water quality based on the types of benthic invertebrate communities present in the creek beds (bottom-living insects,
- 1 - The State of Canadarago Lake, 2011
mollusks, crayfish, etc.), Herkimer Creek appears to be the most degraded, Ocquionis Creek the least degraded, and Trout Brook and Hyder Creek both moderately degraded (see Stream macroinvertebrates p. 28).
Phosphorus loading to the lake has decreased since the 1970s, but there is currently conflicting evidence as to whether phosphorus or nitrogen limits algal production. Concentrations of both nutrients are lower than what is typically found in lakes exhibiting eutrophic characteristics (Wetzel 2001). The ratio of nitrogen to phosphorus suggests which of those two nutrients appears to be the most limiting to algal growth. Ratios determined in the spring, before algae take up nutrients for their growth, imply that phosphorus may be limiting (TN:TP = 40). The form of nitrogen available to living organisms, (mainly nitrate N) is depleted during summer, suggesting limitation by that nutrient. Algal communities are also influenced by conditions such as temperature and nutrient concentrations, so shifts in nutrient limitation can be inferred from changes in the types of algae present. A recent shift in the algal community toward an increased prevalence of nitrogen fixing blue-green algae (cyanobacteria) (see Phytoplankton community and chlorophylla, p. 57) also implies seasonal nitrogen limitation. The changes in the community could also be influenced by the establishment of zebra mussels (see later paragraph).
Total nitrogen concentrations in recent years are similar to those reported in the 1970s. At that time, in the summer months, ammonia was reportedly the main fraction whereas in recent years it was virtually absent in all but the deepest, anoxic waters. There was no reduction in overall nitrogen loading from the wastewater treatment plant; however, upgrades to the treatment plant resulted in the conversion of ammonia to nitrate. This conversion decreased ammonia, which is potentially toxic to aquatic organisms, and increased the concentrations of nitrate released to Ocquionis Creek. Management projects in the watershed that would reduce nitrogen in the lake, without corresponding decreases in phosphorus, should be carefully evaluated as they affect the N:P ratio and might actually favor the growth of undesirable cyanobacteria, which can thrive under low nitrate conditions.
The character of Canadarago Lake has been strongly influenced by the establishment of three known aquatic nuisance species in recent years. In 2002 zebra mussels (Driessena polymorpha) were first documented (Horvath and Lord 2003). This exotic bivalve is an effective filter feeder and was likely influential in the increase in water transparency from 2002 through 2009 (see Transparency, p. 45). However, its tendency to preferentially filter desirable algae may be allowing cyanobacteria and filamentous green algae to proliferate due to reduced competition (see Phytoplankton community and chlorophylla, p. 57). Alewife (Alosa pseudoharengus), a non-native plankton-eating forage fish, was first documented in 1999 but only recently has become a dominant part of the lake community (see Fisheries section, p. 86; Brooking et al. 2012). Alewife can upset the trophic balance of a waterbody by reducing the abundance and average size of zooplankton (see Zooplankton p. 64), which in turn can decrease
- 2 - The State of Canadarago Lake, 2011
grazing on algae, resulting in increased algal abundance and reduced water clarity. Alewife also can reduce gamefish numbers by foraging on their fry. The third recent exotic nuisance species is starry stonewort (Nitellopsis obtusa), a macroalga resembling a rooted plant. Starry stonewort was first documented by this study in 2010 (see Aquatic macrophytes, p. 71). It is currently recognized as an aggressive, exotic nuisance species with the ability to form dense beds in relatively deep (2+ m; 6 ft) water, thereby having substantial impacts on lake ecology and recreational uses (Pullman and Crawford 2010). Control measures that would reduce the abundance of any of these nuisance species ought to be considered and efforts should be made to prevent the introduction of other exotic species.
Frequent flooding of near-lake properties is an important concern to lake community members. Flooding events can damage lakeside property and inundate wastewater treatment systems, allowing for the release of potentially harmful bacteria to the lake. While recent bacterial studies do not suggest widespread instances of poor system performance (see Bacteria, p. 37), considering the condition of treatment systems around nearby Otsego Lake together with the site constraints surrounding Canadarago Lake, substandard treatment is likely and further evaluation of systems is warranted. A study of the lake’s hydrology and hydraulics was recently released by Malcolm Pirnie, Inc. (2011) which offered options to address the flooding situation. The executive summary of that report is provided here (Appendix A; p. 108).
This report describes Canadarago Lake as it is in 2011. Lakes are dynamic and Canadarago is no exception, so it must be recognized that the lake will continue to change as a function of natural and human-induced processes. In order to move forward with the management of the lake and its watershed, members of the lake community must first come to a consensus on their desired outcomes and develop long-term management goals with specific actions to undertake in order to achieve them. The information contained here can be used to help guide the development of most goals, expectations, and actions, as management activities must be based on an understanding of the watershed’s influence and the lake’s ecology. Efforts to manage Canadarago Lake ought to be coupled with continued monitoring in order to evaluate the success of such activities, and to better understand the dynamics of the system.
- 3 - The State of Canadarago Lake, 2011
Introduction
Canadarago Lake (N42o49.3’, W75o00.4’) is a dimictic waterbody of glacial origin located in the Towns of Richfield, Otsego and Exeter, Otsego County New York (Figure 1). It drains to the south via Oaks Creek, which joins the Susquehanna River about 5 km (3.1 mi) south of Otsego Lake. It has a surface area of 770 ha (1,903 ac) and a maximum depth of about 13 m (43 ft). The surrounding watershed is 17,450 ha (43,100 ac), giving a surface area to watershed ratio of 1:23. The rolling terrain of the watershed ranges in elevation from about 400 m (1,300 ft) to about 580 m (1,900 ft). Table 1 summarizes some morphological characteristics of Canadarago Lake; Figure 2 provides a bathymetric map.
Table 1. Morphological characteristics of Canadarago Lake (adapted from Harr et al. 1980).
Length 6.50 km 4.04 mi Width 2.22 km 1.38 mi Surface area 770 ha 1903 ac Maximum depth 13.4 m 43.9 ft Mean depth 10.0 m 32.8 ft Volume 7.70 x 107 m3 2.03 x 1010 gal Shoreline length 16.05 km 9.97 mi
Early reports suggest that the lake is likely quite productive in its natural state (that is, exhibits seasonal algal blooms, reduced water transparency, robust growth of rooted plants and loss of deep water dissolved oxygen during summer months). Increasing eutrophication was evident throughout the 1900s. Cultural additions of phosphorus were implicated in this degradation, the sources being runoff from cannery, tannery and agricultural (dairy) waste and by inadequately treated sewage from the growing Village of Richfield Springs. Numerous studies have been conducted on various aspects of Canadarago Lake and its watershed. Those prior to 1980 have been summarized by Harr et al. 1980. This current report is largely dependent upon that summary for historical comparisons.
- 4 - The State of Canadarago Lake, 2011
Figure 1. Map of Canadarago Lake watershed showing municipal boundaries and major roadways. Watershed boundary from USDA-NRCS (2009).
- 5 - The State of Canadarago Lake, 2011
Scale in feet
Figure 2. Bathymetric map of Canadarago Lake; contours in feet (modified from Weir 1977).
- 6 - The State of Canadarago Lake, 2011
Four permanent tributaries (Herkimer Creek, Hyder Creek, Trout Brook and Ocquionis Creek) together comprise 78% of the lake’s watershed (Figure 3). Historically, summertime lake levels frequently dropped by a meter (3 ft) or more, exposing extended mudflats and causing recreational and navigational problems (Malcolm Pirnie, Inc. 2011). In 1964, a concrete device was built at the lake’s outlet, Oaks Creek, allowing some control over summer water levels. While the structure achieved its intent, the restriction caused by it made the lake more susceptible to flooding. High lake levels occasionally cause property damage, and health concerns exist due to the submergence of onsite wastewater treatment (“septic”) systems. The Otsego County Soil and Water Conservation District commissioned Malcolm Pirnie, Inc. to investigate alternatives to remedy this situation. The executive summary of that report is included here (Appendix A, p. 108).
Geology (from Harr et al. 1980)
The Canadarago Lake watershed lies within the Allegheny plateau. The area was modified several times by glaciation during the Pleistocene epoch, most recently approximately 11,000-12,000 years ago. The northern portion of the watershed, predominantly in Herkimer County and drained by Trout Brook and Ocquionis Creek (see Figure 3), is dominated by Helderberg and Onondaga limestones. The relief in this area tends to be less than 30 m (100 ft), and wetlands and muck deposits in the valley floors are common. The remainder of the watershed, drained by Herkimer Creek and Hyder Creek in Otsego County, is comprised of more shale-bearing Marcellus and Panther Mountain formations. The relief in this region is greater and wetlands are fewer. Figure 4 provides a map of the geology of the watershed.
Land Use
Forest and agriculture together account for 88% of land area within the watershed, with forested lands comprising greater than 50% of the total (2001 National Land Cover Dataset, Homer 2004). The major land use categories and cover types found within Canadarago Lake’s watershed in 2001 are summarized in Table 2 and illustrated in Figure 5 (data from Homer et al. 2004). The methods for determining land use and land cover type have changed over time, thus direct comparisons between the 1970 and 2001 land use data must be made understanding that limitations exist. There has been an apparent a shift from agricultural to forested land. The 2001 agricultural category included grassland or herbaceous cover which is likely abandoned or inactive in terms of agricultural use and therefore may overestimate the land area in active agriculture.
In the Otsego County portion of Canadarago Lake’s watershed, the number of conventional dairies and the number of dairy cows have decreased, though the number of acres being used in active agriculture has remained steady (Capraro 2012). The number of “farms” has most likely remained the same. The number of smaller farms such as beef, horse, and crop has increased, replacing the conventional dairy. Using the Otsego County Soil & Water
- 7 - The State of Canadarago Lake, 2011
Conservation District’s Agricultural Environmental Management and Farm Service Agency data, the current number of active cropland acres (cropland acres are those that are producing an agricultural commodity) is roughly 1,660 ha (4,100 acres). According to the data there are 14 active dairy farms, 4 beef farms and 2 crop farms located with the Otsego County portion of the Canadarago Lake watershed, housing about 1,700 Animal Units (450 kg, or 1000 lb, per Animal Unit). USDA program participation within the watershed has increased over the past 30 years with the number of programs available to the agricultural community. Participation changes from year to year with the varying number of farms, changes in farm managers and the changes in programs. According to data from the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), there have been 19 farms that have participated in Farm Bill conservation programs since 1996 (Capraro 2012). These farms have enrolled about 1,210 ha (3,000 acres) of farmland into conservation programs for the protection of water quality, the reduction of soil erosion and to benefit local wildlife habitat.
Table 2. Broad land use and cover type categories in the watershed of Canadarago Lake in terms of percent land area in each use category circa 1970 (from Harr et al. 1980) and circa 2001 (Homer et al. 2004).
Percent of Watershed Area Land Use Category circa 1970 circa 2001 Forest 35.56 54.38 Agriculture 51.21 33.62 Parks and Mowed Areas 0.33 4.25 Residential Development 2.36 1.10 Commercial and Industrial 0.44 0.05 Bare Rock, Quarry 0.21 0.02 Open Water 2.82 1.00 Wetland 6.80 5.58 Other (semi-public lands) 0.27
- 8 - The State of Canadarago Lake, 2011
Figure 3. Canadarago Lake watershed showing major tributaries and the outlet. Watershed boundary modified from 12-Digit HUC dataset (USDA-NRCS et al. 2009); tributaries from the National Hydrography Dataset (USGS 2010).
- 9 - The State of Canadarago Lake, 2011
Figure 4. Map of bedrock geology in the Canadarago Lake watershed (data source: New York State Museum 1999).
- 10 - The State of Canadarago Lake, 2011
Figure 5. Major land cover and land use categories within the Canadarago Lake watershed (data source: NLCD 2001: Homer et al. 2004)
- 11 - The State of Canadarago Lake, 2011
Climate
The central-northern portion of Otsego County possesses a humid continental climate (Harman et al. 1996). Prevailing winds are westerly, being somewhat northerly in the winter and southerly in the summer. Summers are relatively warm and humid, due to the prevalence of winds originating from the Gulf of Mexico or surrounding waters. Winter tends to be cold and long. Outbreaks of polar air originating from Canada frequently cross over Lake Ontario in such a way as to cause heavy “lake effect” snow squalls over the area. The area receives about 50% of possible sunshine annually.
Precipitation is spread relatively even over the year, with the heavier storms usually associated with winter coastal storms or lake effect snowstorms and summer thunderstorms. Summer rainfall amounts are generally favorable for agricultural activities. Rain events of more than 2.5. cm (1 in) in a 24 hour period typically occur from 6 to 8 times a year. Annual precipitation averages about 100 cm (40 in), with about 200 cm (79 in) of snowfall. Typically, more snow falls in the northern part of Otsego County and into Herkimer County (Harman et al. 1996).
Summer maximum temperatures typically range between 20o and 30o C, and temperatures exceeding 30o C generally occur an average of 5 times a year. Winter temperatures drop below -18oC (0oF) an average of 18 times a year. Low temperatures of less than -290C (-20oF) are not uncommon.
Socioeconomic characteristics
Canadarago Lake is valued for the recreational opportunities it provides, with boating and fishing its primary uses. Its proximity to Utica (48 km; 30 mi) and Albany (112 km; 70 mi) along U.S. Rt. 20, a major route in New York, allows for its use by a considerable population (Harr et al. 1980). See Figure 1 for a map of the watershed showing the political boundaries
A summary of socioeconomic characteristics for 2011, including median family income and home value, educational degrees attained, mean age and population density, by each of the major towns in the drainage basin, is provided in Table 3. Median household income is $49,817 (New York State average = $54,047) and medium home cost is $101,350 (New York State average = $276,700). In 1979, the mean years of formal schooling by the adult population was 10.6 (Harr et al. 1980). In 2011, 85% of the population had attained at least a high school degree and 20% had received two or four year college degrees (www.bestplaces.net 2011). The most notable change in the work force relates to farm workers; in 1979, almost a quarter of the adult population was employed as such, while in 2011, that had dropped to about 2%.
- 12 - The State of Canadarago Lake, 2011
Table 3. Median family income and home cost percent of adult population having at least a high school,undergraduate or graduate degree, median age, and population density of each town in the Canadarago Lake watershed.
Population County and Median family Median home % HS %2-4 year % grad median age density township income ($) cost ($) degree college degree (year) (per mi2) Herkimer Columbia 51,980 102,300 88.8 25.0 5.4 37.1 48 Warren 48,481 92,100 85.0 21.5 6.3 36.9 29 Otsego Exeter 51,302 103,400 81.5 16 3.8 43.3 30 Richfield 47,504 107,600 83.5 19.2 8.7 42.6 43
Municipal wastewater treatment
Residents of the Village of Richfield Springs are served by a municipal wastewater treatment plant, originally built in 1895, which discharges into Ocquionis Creek approximately 0.8 km (0.5 mi) upstream from the lake (Harr et al.). By 1972, upgrades to the treatment plant included sewage lagoons and secondary treatment. Studies by Fuhs et al. (1972a, 19072b; from Harr et al. 1980) suggested that approximately 50% of the lake’s annual phosphorus loading originated from the treatment plant’s outfall. Because that nutrient was considered responsible for Canadarago Lake’s advanced state of eutrophication, further upgrades to the treatment plant in 1973 included phosphorus removal by chemical (aluminum sulfate) flocculation. The resultant reduction in phosphorus loading, as well as that following the 1973 high-phosphorus detergent ban, was credited with increasing water clarity, reducing peak algal blooms and reducing the relative abundance of cyanobacteria (blue-green algae) throughout the growing season (Harr et al. 1980).
Subsequent upgrades to the treatment plant have been made in 1998, 1992, 2002 and most recently beginning in 2010. These have included sewer line replacements to reduce infiltration, and replacements and improvements of infrastructural components at the treatment plant. During BFS monitoring, total phosphorus of the effluent was consistently less than 0.1 mg/l, well below its design target of 0.5 mg/l (Harr et al. 1980). Nitrogen is not removed from the effluent. Over 2010, total nitrogen content of the effluent averaged 10.8 mg/l, of which 7.9 mg/l was in the form of nitrite+nitrate. Currently, about 1,500 individuals are served and an average of 530 m3/day (140,000 gal/day) is treated.
- 13 - The State of Canadarago Lake, 2011
Tributary monitoring Recent tributary monitoring by the BFS occurred in the summer of 2008 (Bailey and Albright 2009), and over 2009 (Bailey and Albright 2010) and 2010 (Waterfield, Albright and Mazziotta 2011). Sampling was conducted biweekly from May through September and monthly October through April. The four main tributaries were evaluated, as well as Oaks Creek, the outlet. Additionally, Ocquionis Creek was monitored both above and below the site where the Village of Richfield Springs discharges its municipal wastewater effluent to evaluate that particular influence on water quality. Table 4 describes the sites and Figure 6 displays them on a map. The primary intent of the tributary monitoring was to recognize the influence of the streams on Canadarago Lake, and to detect any evidence of cultural impacts to stream quality which, if mitigated, might favorably affect conditions of the stream as well as those of the lake. Monitoring included conducting field measurements of temperature, dissolved oxygen, pH and conductivity. Samples were collected for the analysis of total phosphorus (molybdenum blue ascorbic acid method following persulfate digestion (Liao and Marten 2001), total nitrogen (cadmium reduction method following persulfate digestion (Pritzlaff 2003, Ebina 1983 et al.)) and nitrate (cadmium reduction method (Pritzlaff 2003)). Ammonia (phenolate method (Liao 2001)) was evaluated in 2009 then was discontinued as it was consistently below levels of detection. Samples were less frequently tested for calcium and chlorides. Additionally, samples were collected for fecal coliform over the summers (see Bacteria section, p. 37).
Table 4. Sampling sites employed during 2008-2010 tributary, outlet, and treatment plant sample collections.
Herkimer Creek Abbreviation: HK. C. North of the Village of Schuyler Lake on State Route 28; sampled east of bridge.
Hyder Creek Abbreviation: HY. C. South of Dennison Road (NYSP boat launch access road) on State Route 28; sampled west of bridge.
Trout Brook (Mink Creek) Abbreviation: T.B. Just north of Canadarago Lake on Elm Street Extension; sampled east of bridge.
Ocquionis Creek North Abbreviation: O.C. 1 The beginning of Elm Street Extension, just south of Bronner Street; sampled south of bridge.
Ocquionis Creek South Abbreviation: O.C. 2 End of Bloomfield Drive, through the rear gate of the waste treatment plant; sampled downstream of effluent discharge.
Waste Treatment Plant Abbreviation: W.T. End of Bloomfield Drive, through gate and into plant, sampled from effluent pipe
Oaks Creek Abbreviation: OK. C. East of the Village of Schuyler Lake on County Route 22; sampled north of bridge.
- 14 - The State of Canadarago Lake, 2011
Figure 6. Canadarago Lake watershed showing tributary sampling sites. Watershed boundary from USDA-NRCS (2009); streams data source: National Hydrography Dataset (USGS 2010).
Physical water quality All physical water quality data collected on Canadarago Lake’s tributaries between 2008 and 2010 is included in Appendix B (p. 114). Dissolved Oxygen
Temperature, dissolved oxygen, conductivity, and pH were measured concurrently at each tributary sampling site using a Eureka Amphibian/Manta® or a Hydrolab® Scout 2
- 15 - The State of Canadarago Lake, 2011
multiprobe digital microprocessor which had been calibrated according to manufacturer’s instruction prior to use. Dissolved oxygen concentrations were not reported for tributary streams in the 1968-1970 study (Harr et al.1980). Table 5 presents minimum and maximum dissolved oxygen concentrations measured between 2008 and 2010, along with the date of measurement, total number of measurements taken during the study, and the number of measurements less than 5 mg/l at each sample site. During summer, when oxygen levels have the greatest potential to stress aquatic life, minimum concentrations in the tributary streams ranged from a high of 7.61 mg/l at Ocquionis 1 down to 4.53 mg/l at Ocquionis 2 (Table 5). The former site is located in a riffle area and the latter in a slow flowing stretch, so these differences do not necessarily reflect inputs from the wastewater treatment plant. In general, concentrations were closely tied to temperature measurements, though instances occurred where concentrations were well below saturation (see Figure 7). In 2010, seasonal minimum concentrations fell below 5 mg/l in Trout Brook and at Ocquionis 2 on 19 July (Table 5) and again on 7 July at Ocquionis 2, creating potentially stressful conditions for fish and other sensitive aquatic life. Scatter plots of temperature versus dissolved oxygen concentration were created to compare measured concentrations to 100% saturation (Figure 7). Data for the 100% saturation curve were obtained from Wetzel (2001). Measured values above the line indicate a state of supersaturation, where excess oxygen is being produced within the water column by photosynthesis. Values below the line indicate conditions where oxygen is being consumed by biological or chemical processes, including aerobic respiration of organisms and the breakdown of dissolved organic materials (Wetzel 2001). In general, flowing waters were under-saturated at higher temperatures.
Table 5. Dissolved oxygen concentration (mg/l) minimum and maximum values measured in Canadarago Lake tributaries between June 2008 and December 2010. Also given is the sample size for each stream and the number of observations falling below 5 mg/l.
Dissolved Oxygen (mg/l) Tributary min date max date n No. < 5 Herkimer 6.76 7/19/10 15.78 12/21/10 29 0 Hyder 5.76 7/19/10 15.96 12/21/10 29 0 Trout 4.49 7/19/10 14.34 11/19/09 26 1 Ocquionis 1 7.61 7/19/10 15.73 12/21/10 26 0 Ocquionis 2 4.53 7/19/10 13.82 2/22/10 27 1 Oaks 4.40 7/7/10 16.04 12/21/10 29 3
- 16 - The State of Canadarago Lake, 2011
Herkimer Creek Hyder Creek 45 45
C) C) o o 35 35
25 25
15 15 5 5 Temperature ( Temperature ( -5 -5 5 10 15 5 10 15 Dissolved Oxygen (mg/l) Dissolved Oxygen (mg/l)
Trout Brook 45
C)
o 35
25 15 5 Temperature ( -5 5 10 15 Dissolved Oxygen (mg/l)
Ocquionis Creek 1 Ocquionis Creek 2
45 45 C) C) o 35 o 35 25 25 15 15
5 5 Temperature ( Temperature ( -5 -5
5 10 15 5 10 15 Dissolved Oxygen (mg/l) Dissolved Oxygen (mg/l)
Figure 7. Scatter plot of dissolved oxygen (mg/l) versus temperature measurements taken from 2008-2010 compared to theoretical 100% saturation (from Wetzel 2001) for the four major tributary sites, and Ocq. 2, downstream of the wastewater plant discharge.
- 17 - The State of Canadarago Lake, 2011
Specific Conductance and pH
Specific conductance gives an indication of dissolved ions in solution without defining the particular ions present. Conductivity is often also used to identify and document spikes in ion concentrations that are typically associated with inputs of salt-based compounds, such as occurs during spring runoff events when accumulated road salts enter streams. Baseline pH and conductance are strongly influenced by geology. Mean specific conductance and pH for the tributaries are given in Figures 8 and 9, respectively, and summarized in Table 6. Both datasets imply relatively hard, well buffered waters, reflecting conditions similar to those described by Harr et al. (1980). There is a substantial difference in conductivity measured in Trout Brook and Herkimer Creek, which reflects the change in geology from predominantly limestone bedrock in the northern portion of the watershed to formations containing shale and sandstone further south (see Figure 4). No extreme low values or spikes were documented during the 2008-2010 sampling that might indicate isolated pollution events.
0.600
0.400
0.200
Specific Conductance (ms/cm) 0.000 Herkimer Hyder Trout Ocquionis 1 Ocquionis 2 Oaks
Figure 8. Mean specific conductance (ms/cm) measured between June 2008 and December 2010 in Canadarago Lake tributaries and the lake outlet (Oaks Cr.). Bars indicate standard error.
- 18 - The State of Canadarago Lake, 2011
9.00 8.75 8.50
8.25
8.00
units pH 7.75
7.50 7.25
7.00 Herkimer Hyder Trout Ocquionis 1Ocquionis 2 Oaks Figure 9. Mean pH measured between June 2008 and December 2010 in Canadarago Lake tributaries and the lake outlet (Oaks Cr.). Bars indicate standard error.
Table 6. Specific conductance and pH mean and extreme values, collected from 2008-2010 on Canadarago Lake tributaries and outlet with corresponding standard error (SE) and sample size (n).
Specific Conductance (ms/cm) pH Tributary min mean max SE n min mean max SE n Herkimer 0.162 0.273 0.361 0.024 29 7.06 7.99 8.85 0.17 28 Hyder 0.225 0.427 0.496 0.026 28 7.04 7.96 8.54 0.16 28 Trout 0.317 0.522 0.624 0.036 26 7.05 8.01 8.58 0.14 25 Ocquionis 1 0.303 0.435 0.541 0.022 26 7.03 8.08 10.02 0.22 25 Ocquionis 2 0.316 0.445 0.567 0.025 27 7.20 7.95 8.62 0.14 26 Oaks 0.225 0.320 0.356 0.012 29 7.08 7.91 8.64 0.14 28
Chemical water quality Major Ions
As summarized by Harr et al. (1980), the ion concentrations are characteristic of relatively hard, alkaline waters due to calcium carbonate (dissolved limestone). Herkimer Creek exhibits lower total ion concentration than the other tributaries, though not significantly lower than the mean. Influences of local sulfur springs on sulfur and magnesium concentrations in Trout Brook and Ocquionis Creek were documented. Appendix C (p. 116) summarizes chemical composition of the tributaries and outlet, including major ions and various nutrient fractions, over the 1968 to 1970 period (Harr et al. 1980). Recent efforts by the BFS were focused on describing nutrient inputs to the lake in order to allow resource managers to prioritize efforts to improve water quality within the watershed
- 19 - The State of Canadarago Lake, 2011
and Canadarago Lake proper. Thus, efforts included minimal analysis of the major geologically- based ions. Calcium concentrations measured on 2 June 2009 and 22 February 2010 aligned with the historical tributary means and concentration ranges in all cases, ranging from 48 mg/l in Herkimer Creek to 50 mg/l in both Ocquionis sites. The major differences between tributaries corresponded with variation in bedrock geology formations within the watershed. Chlorides were determined during a runoff event associated with a snowmelt event in March 2010 and indicated elevated concentrations at all sites, with substantial loading of road salts to Trout Brook (110 mg/l). A stratum of water having high conductivity was documented in the lake in March 2009, indicating watershed inputs containing high concentrations of road salts; these concentrations are not necessarily detrimental, though there may be other contaminants present with the road salts that are not measured and may have potentially harmful effects. Major Plant Nutrients
Table 7 contains mean and extreme nitrogen fractions and total phosphorus concentrations measured during the 2008-2010 monitoring efforts along with corresponding standard error (SE) and sample size. Appendix D (p. 117) provides nutrient concentrations during that period in full. Direct comparisons between current and historical mean nutrient concentrations for each tributary were not possible, as the 1980 report presented logarithmic, rather than arithmetic, means. In order to provide some level of comparison, historical concentration ranges (minimum and maximum values) were plotted along with the 2008-2010 sample mean and range. Overall, the ranges observed for 2008 to 2010 samples were smaller and the concentrations were lower, indicating a decrease in elevated loading events in the watershed as a whole. However, the sampling regime differed between the 1968-70 study and the present. Earlier collections targeted spring runoff, when elevated concentrations of suspended sediments and nutrients would occur, resulting in higher calculated means. In the 2008-2010 study, sampling efforts were more intensive during the growing season (May through October) and sampling during March and April, when spring runoff events typically occur, was conducted on a monthly basis. Thus, efforts were less likely to capture spring runoff events and as a result, the maximum concentrations observed may underestimate the actual maximum values that occur during the year. Nitrogen Total nitrogen exhibited a smaller ranger and lower extreme values during 2008 and 2010 than during 1969-1970 (Figure 10). As previously mentioned, sampling strategy and timing may in part account for this difference, as organic materials and other nitrogen- containing compounds are likely to be elevated during periods of higher runoff. BFS sampling was less intensive during these conditions than was the earlier monitoring. Ammonia concentrations were negligible (below detectable level of 20 µg/l) at all sites except Ocquionis 2, where the wastewater treatment plant inputs contributed to a measureable, but low, mean of about 100 µg/l. Historically, ammonia concentrations ranged from 10 µg/l to 1200 µg/l at Ocquionis 2. Even above the treatment plant discharge, Ocquionis Creek contained higher concentrations than all other tributaries, and concentrations downstream of the discharge increased an average of 200 µg/l (Harr et al. 1980).
- 20 - The State of Canadarago Lake, 2011
Table 7. Minimum, mean, and maximum nutrient concentrations (including standard error and sample size) for all tributary, outlet, and wastewater treatment plant effluent (WTP effluent) samples collected between June 2008 and December 2010.
Tributary Min Mean Max SE n Total Phosphorus (µg/l) Herkimer 4 10 31 1.33 37 Hyder 4 18 40 1.98 37 Trout 4 29 104 4.04 35 Ocquionis 1 4 23 53 2.40 34 Ocquionis 2 4 38 236 7.54 35 WTP effluent 9 124 540 20.03 31 Oaks 4 25 104 2.88 37
Nitrate (mg/l) Herkimer 0.02 0.15 0.59 0.03 38 Hyder 0.11 0.39 1.01 0.03 38 Trout 0.02 0.43 1.54 0.06 36 Ocquionis 1 0.16 0.48 0.78 0.03 35 Ocquionis 2 0.08 0.72 2.31 0.07 36 WTP effluent 1.03 12.01 77.50 2.88 31 Oaks 0.02 0.09 0.84 0.03 38
Ammonia (mg/l) Herkimer 0.02 0.01 0.07 0.00 24 Hyder 0.02 0.02 0.08 0.00 24 Trout 0.02 0.04 0.14 0.01 22 Ocquionis 1 0.02 0.03 0.09 0.01 24 Ocquionis 2 0.02 0.10 0.46 0.02 25 WTP effluent 0.02 3.55 30.30 1.54 21 Oaks 0.02 0.03 0.09 0.01 25
Total Nitrogen (mg/l) Herkimer 0.04 0.34 1.45 0.04 35 Hyder 0.04 0.66 2.25 0.06 35 Trout 0.04 0.83 2.42 0.07 33 Ocquionis 1 0.32 0.74 1.21 0.04 33 Ocquionis 2 0.32 1.20 3.19 0.12 33 WTP effluent 5.50 10.79 15.80 0.53 27 Oaks 0.04 0.44 1.99 0.05 35
- 21 - The State of Canadarago Lake, 2011
Nitrate+nitrite concentrations generally followed a similar trend to total nitrogen, with the exception of Ocquionis 2, which experienced highly variable concentrations (Figure 11). Nitrate is not currently regulated in the wastewater discharge, and so is not removed during treatment. The range observed from 2008-2010 substantially exceeded that documented in ’68-’70 and is a result of the treatment plant’s more efficient conversion of ammonium-N to the nitrate form. In Trout Brook, the range of concentrations was high, though not greater than that reported by Harr et al. (1980). This is the rare case where current high values approach historic levels.
5000
4500 4000 3500
3000 1968-1970 Minimum 2500 2000 1968-1970 Maximum 1500 2008-2010 Mean Total Nitrogen (µg/l) 1000 I 2008-2010 Range 500 0 Herkimer Hyder Trout Ocquionis Ocquionis Oaks 1 2 Stream Sites Figure 10. Minimum (1st solid bar) and maximum (2nd solid bar) total nitrogen concentrations (µg/l) measured from 1968-1970, 2008-2010 mean (3rd solid bar) and range (capped line) of concentrations measured. 2008-2010 data and summary, standard error and sample size given in Table 7. 1968-1970 data taken from Harr et al. (1980); total nitrogen data compiled by summation of nitrate+nitrite, ammonia, organic soluble, and organic particulate concentrations.
Phosphorus 2008-2010 monitoring results encompassed a smaller range in values, lower mean, and drastically lower maximum values compared to historical concentrations, though such a range may still exist (Figure 12). Intensive storm event monitoring during June 2009 (see Storm runoff section, p. 24) captured a peak total phosphorus concentration in Herkimer Creek of 174 µg/l which is greater than the maximum concentration observed during routine monitoring over the ’08-’10 time period (max 31 µg/l) and ’68-’70 sampling (max 144 µg/l), which included the more frequent, weekly sampling during snow melt.
- 22 - The State of Canadarago Lake, 2011
2500
2000
1500 1968-1970 Minimum 1968-1970 Maximum 1000 Nitrate+nitrite (ug/l) 2008-2010 Mean 500 I 2008-2010 Range
0 Herkimer Hyder Trout Ocquionis Ocquionis Oaks 1 2 Stream Sites Figure 11. Minimum (1st solid bar) and maximum (2nd solid bar) nitrate+nitrite concentrations (µg/l) measured from 1968-1970, 2008-2010 mean (3rd solid bar) and range (capped line) of concentrations measured. 2008-2010 data and summary, standard error and sample size given in Table 7. 1968-1970 data taken from Harr et al. (1980).
9
Figure 12. Minimum (1st solid bar) and maximum (2nd solid bar) total phosphorus concentrations (µg/L) measured from 1968-1970, 2008-2010 mean (3rd solid bar) and range (capped line) of concentrations measured. 2008-2010 data and summary, standard error and sample size given in Table 7. 1968-1970 data taken from Harr et al. (1980); total phosphorus data compiled by summation of soluble reactive and total particulate concentrations.
- 23 - The State of Canadarago Lake, 2011
Storm runoff In order to assess loads of sediment and nutrients associated with the higher flows experienced during rain events, intensive monitoring was conducted at each tributary site and the lake’s outlet between 17 and 19 June 2009 over the course of a significant rain event (3.5 cm (1.37 in) fell over 24 hrs). Discharge measurements were made at each tributary sampling site prior to and over the course of the runoff event. Samples for nutrient and sediment analysis were collected concurrent with discharge measurements. Figures 13 and 14 use phosphorus and discharge measurements collected at Herkimer Creek as an example to demonstrate how flow and nutrient concentrations were used to estimate nutrient loading rates over time. Table 8 provides an overview of discharge rates, nutrient concentrations and loading rates over the course of the storm. These data were used to estimate loading rates for each parameter (volume over the course of the event; Table 9) and areal export rates (volume per ha/day; Table 10). Original work plans included the monitoring of additional storm events, though peak flow conditions continuously exceeded those in which work could be safely conducted. The delivery rates of nutrients and suspended sediments during the runoff event were in contrast with water quality associated with baseflow conditions. Herkimer Creek had the highest sediment and phosphorus export rates of the four streams (Figure 10) during the moderately high flow conditions associated with this rain event whereas during baseflow conditions, phosphorus concentrations there were significantly lower than any other tributary. Ocquionis Creek (above the effluent outfall) was moderately degraded during base flow conditions, but had low nutrient export rates during the runoff event.
- 24 - The State of Canadarago Lake, 2011
200 200
150 150
100 100
TotalDischarge(m3/min) 50 50 TotalPhosphorus (µg/l)
0 0 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 Time (days) Total Discharge Total Phosphorus Figure 13. Discharge and total phosphorus concentrations in Herkimer Creek over the course of the 17 to 19 June 2009 rain event.
40 34.6 35 30
25 20 19.0 15 13.8 10
TotalPhosphorus (kg/day) 5 2.95 0 0.28 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0
Time (days)
Figure 14. Loading rates of total phosphorus from Herkimer Creek over the course of the 17 to 19 June 2009 rain event.
- 25 -
Table 8. A summary of discharge values and the concentrations of ammonia, nitrite+nitrate, total nitrogen and total phosphorus, as well as the loading rates of the same, for each tributary, and Oaks Creek (the lake’s outlet) over the course of the 17 to 19 June 2009 rain event.
Relative NH4 N+N TN TP TSS Disch. TP TN N+N NH4 TSS SITE date Time (mg/l) (mg/l) (mg/l) (ug/l) (mg/l) (m3/min) (kg/day) (kg/day) (kg/day) (kg/day) (kg/day) TRIBUTARIES Herkimer Cr. 6/16 0.0 0.00 0.09 0.31 15.20 1.78 12.55 0.27 5.55 1.66 0.00 32.13 Herkimer Cr. 6/17 0.8 0.01 0.24 0.42 71.17 82.25 134.84 13.82 81.16 47.18 1.15 15970.22 Herkimer Cr. 6/18 1.1 0.01 0.34 0.48 173.87 131.80 138.23 34.61 96.14 67.88 2.83 26234.64 Herkimer Cr. 6/18 1.3 0.04 0.47 0.72 113.87 30.10 116.12 19.04 120.90 78.09 6.13 5033.11 Herkimer Cr. 6/19 1.9 0.01 0.23 0.33 26.57 7.20 77.11 2.95 36.86 25.32 0.81 799.46
Hyder Cr. 6/16 0.0 0.00 0.45 0.75 10.59 14.33 5.63 0.09 6.10 3.67 0.00 116.23 Hyder Cr. 6/17 0.8 0.02 0.29 0.48 69.77 48.17 52.69 5.29 36.42 22.15 1.81 3654.33 Hyder Cr. 6/18 1.1 0.02 0.65 0.70 100.87 38.33 93.27 13.55 94.15 87.30 3.08 5148.27 Hyder Cr. 6/18 1.3 0.01 0.31 0.51 72.27 23.20 101.95 10.61 74.58 44.92 1.51 3405.91 Hyder Cr. 6/19 1.9 0.03 0.40 0.53 35.57 11.80 51.29 2.63 39.22 29.18 1.92 871.60 - 26 Trout Br. 6/17 0.0 0.05 0.28 0.47 8.12 8.33 9.10 0.11 6.17 3.62 0.65 109.23 Trout Br. 6/18 0.8 0.02 0.53 0.68 104.87 55.50 79.48 12.00 78.17 60.32 2.77 6352.05 Trout Br. 6/18 1.1 0.04 0.40 0.71 103.87 42.29 94.04 14.06 96.14 53.49 5.95 5726.01 Trout Br. 6/18 1.3 0.03 0.49 0.71 148.87 37.90 115.19 24.69 118.27 81.78 5.56 6286.72 Trout Br. 6/19 1.9 0.05 0.53 0.76 60.37 19.20 92.96 8.08 101.06 70.27 7.12 2570.05
Ocquionis Cr. 6/16 0.0 0.00 0.28 0.86 29.30 20.89 24.03 1.01 29.90 9.73 0.00 722.97
Ocquionis Cr. 6/17 0.9 0.04 0.42 0.60 63.47 23.22 62.07 5.67 53.98 37.45 3.58 2075.46 The State of CanadaragoLake,2011 Ocquionis Cr. 6/18 1.1 0.03 0.47 0.74 71.47 29.44 73.65 7.58 78.27 49.85 3.36 3122.94 Ocquionis Cr. 6/18 1.3 0.02 0.56 0.59 97.57 32.70 103.03 14.47 87.53 82.78 2.61 4851.33 Ocquionis Cr. 6/19 2.0 0.03 0.55 0.72 61.87 22.10 103.65 9.23 107.02 82.24 4.90 3298.60
OUTLET Oaks Cr. 6/16 0.0 0.00 0.03 0.36 0.00 4.50 105.02 0.00 53.69 3.86 0.00 680.56 Oaks Cr. 6/17 0.8 0.00 0.12 0.38 33.97 5.00 129.21 6.32 70.70 22.89 0.91 930.32 Oaks Cr. 6/18 1.1 0.02 0.06 0.23 22.77 6.56 140.05 4.59 45.58 11.41 4.94 1322.03 Oaks Cr. 6/18 1.3 0.02 0.14 0.41 42.87 6.30 149.46 9.23 87.38 29.70 4.69 1355.91 Oaks Cr. 6/19 1.9 0.03 0.11 0.36 26.37 3.60 183.24 6.96 94.73 30.08 9.09 949.90 The State of Canadarago Lake, 2011
Table 9. Final summary of the total loadings of sediment, total phosphorus, ammonia, nitrite+nitrate, and total nitrogen, in kg, for each tributary, and the outlet, over the course of the 17 to 19 June 2009 runoff event.
Total Sediment Phosphorus Ammonia Nitrate+Nitrite Total Nitrogen Site (kg) (kg) (kg) (kg) (kg) Herkimer Creek 17421.65 24.75 4.07 82.37 130.38 Hyder Creek 4927.15 11.19 2.90 60.77 86.17 Trout Brook 8189.16 22.14 7.44 114.97 144.70 Ocquionis Creek 5374.94 14.65 5.70 101.04 136.67 Total inflow: 35912.90 72.73 20.11 359.15 497.92 Oaks Creek (outlet) 1901.76 10.42 6.34 37.79 134.72
Table 10. Export rates (g/ha/day) of sediment, total phosphorus, ammonia, nitrite+nitrate and total nitrogen for each tributary over the course of the 17 to 19 June 2009 runoff event.
Total Sediment Phosphorus Ammonia Nitrate+Nitrite Total Nitrogen Site (g/ha/day) (g/ha/day) (g/ha/day) (g/ha/day) (g/ha/day) Herkimer Creek 2559.82 3.64 0.60 12.10 19.16 Hyder Creek 871.97 1.98 0.51 10.75 15.25 Trout Brook 1416.86 3.83 1.29 19.89 25.04 Ocquionis Creek 573.24 1.56 0.61 10.78 14.58
- 27 - The State of Canadarago Lake, 2011
Stream macroinvertebrates
During the summer of 2010, the macrobenthic invertebrate communities of the four main tributaries of Canadargo Lake were evaluated (Bailey 2011). Community composition is indicative of varying degrees of water quality conditions and impairments (Hilsenhoff 1988). Because these organisms require certain conditions throughout their lives, their assemblage at a given site can provide insight into predominating conditions there, whereas direct water quality testing is limited to describing instantaneous conditions.
Benthic macroinvertebrate samples were collected from Herkimer Creek, Hyder Creek, Trout Brook, and Ocquionis Creek (Figure 15) on 20 July 2010. The Ocquionis Creek site was upstream of the Richfield Springs wastewater treatment plant discharge. All tributary sampling sites were similar to those outlined in Bailey and Albright (2009) for water quality monitoring, though some modification was necessary so that the sampling was done in riffle areas to be consistent with established sampling protocol (NYSDEC 2009). Collections were made using a Wildco® Hess Sampler (33 cm (13”) ID x 41 cm (16”) H) outfitted with a 600µm mesh sock and sample cup; the area sampled was 855 cm2 (133 in2). This sampler is an aluminum cylinder with mesh on the upstream side of the device to allow stream-flow through it. The sampler is inserted several cm into the creek bed. As the current moves though it, the user agitates the benthic substrate within the sampler, disrupting organisms which are then carried to the sampling cup. Preserved samples were brought back to the lab for identification. All organisms were identified to the family level according to Merrit and Cummins (1996) and Peckarsky et al. (1995). A biological assessment of water quality was then conducted by converting recorded taxa to four common water quality indices used to determine the health of the riffle community. These indices included Taxa Richness, Ephemeroptera-Plecoptera-Trichoptera (EPT) richness, Family-level Biotic Index (FBI), and Percent Model Affinity (PMA). This mode of assessment varies slightly from the NYSDEC Biological Assessment of Water Quality which typically uses the indices of Species Richness and Hilsenhoff’s Biotic Index (HBI) (NYS-DEC 2009). These two indices were substituted with Taxa Richness and Family-level Biotic Index (FBI) (Hilsenhoff 1988), due to the family level identification conducted during this study. Although these changes were made in indices, the standard Biological Assessment Profile (BAP) chart of index values for riffle habitats (NYSDEC 2009) was used to report water quality and water quality impact values. These minor adjustments were considered to have little impact on the actual water quality scores and were undertaken to create a more rapid assessment structure.
A summary of organisms collected from Herkimer Creek, Hyder Creek, Trout Brook and Ocquionis Creek can be found in Table 11. Biological assessment of water quality charts for those streams can be found in Figures 16-19, respectively. Figure 20 summarizes the indices for all streams. Herkimer Creek contained the highest level of chironomids (non-biting midges), yielding 116 specimens; these are commonly associated with poor water quality. Herkimer scored the lowest in the water quality assessment, averaging 2.6, just outside the “severely impacted” category (Figure 16).
The largest concentration of oligochaetes (aquatic worms), another indicator of poor water quality (Hilsenhoff 1988), was found in Hyder Creek with 192 observed within the sampling area. Hyder averaged a 2.9 on the common water quality scale. Trout Brook scored the highest within the Percent Model Affinity (PMA) index with a score of 63 (Figure 18). This stream averaged a 4.6 on the common water quality scale, well within the “moderate impact”
- 28 - The State of Canadarago Lake, 2011 category. Ocquionis Creek, which clearly displayed the highest level of diversity (15 different taxa), also scored the highest within the Ephemeroptera-Plecoptera-Trichoptera (EPT) richness (6 taxa) and Family-level Biotic Index (FBI) (46). Organisms from within the orders Ephemeroptera-Plecoptera-Trichoptera are known to be indicators of good water quality (Voshell 2002). Ocquionis displayed the overall best stream quality, averaging a 5.4 on the common scale and fell in the category of “slight impact” on the water quality impact scale (Figure 19).
Figure 15. Map of Canadarago Lake showing sites used for macrobenthic collections, summer 2010. Sites differed from those used for water quality testing in that they were moved, if necessary, to adjacent riffle areas.
- 29 - The State of Canadarago Lake, 2011
Table 11. Summary of the benthic invertebrates collected in the Canadarago Lake watershed, summer 2010.
Herkimer Creek Hyder Creek
Number of Number of Taxa Taxa Organisms Organisms Diptera Diptera Unknown 2 Unknown 2 Chironomidae 116 Chironomidae 92 Hemiptera Oligochaeta Corixidae 3 Unknown 192 Notonectidae 3 Ephemeroptera Oligochaeta Caenidae (Caenis) 5 Unknown 6 Trichoptera Ephemeroptera Limnephilidae 3 Caenidae (Caenis) 8 Coleoptera Coleoptera Elmidae 8 Elmidae 3 Psephenidae 1 Psephenidae 1 Decapoda Decapoda Cambaridae 1 Cambaridae 9 Palaemonidae 10 Total 151 Acariformes Hydracarina 2 Total 316
- 30 - The State of Canadarago Lake, 2011
Table 11 (cont.). Summary of the benthic invertebrates collected in the Canadarago Lake watershed, summer 2010.
Trout Brook Ocquionis Creek
Number of Number of Taxa Taxa Organisms Organisms Diptera Diptera Chironomidae 53 Unknown 2 Oligochaeta Chironomidae 24 Unknown 16 Oligochaeta Hemiptera Unknown 24 Unknown 1 Ephemeroptera Ephemeroptera Heptageniidae 9 Metreopodidae 33 Baetidae 3 Trichoptera Trichoptera Hydropsychidae 34 Leptoceridae 6 Plecoptera Hydropsychidae 8 Perlidae 2 Plecoptera Coleoptera Perlidae 5 Elmidae 112 Leuctridae 5 Decapoda Coleoptera Palaemonidae 9 Elmidae 75 Gastropoda Psephenidae 1 Lymnaeidae 2 Megaloptera Total 262 Sialidae 3 Decapoda Cambaridae 116 Palaemonidae 2 Gastropoda Sphaeriidae 6 Total 289
- 31 - The State of Canadarago Lake, 2011
Figure 16. Herkimer Creek, Biological Assessment Profile (BAP) of index values for riffle habitats. Values from four indices; taxa richness, EPT richness, Family-level Biotic Index (FBI), and Percent Model Affinity (PMA) are converted to a common 0-10 scale. The mean value of the four indices represents the assessed impact for the site.
- 32 - The State of Canadarago Lake, 2011
Figure 17. Hyder Creek, Biological Assessment Profile (BAP) of index values for riffle habitats. Values from four indices; taxa richness, EPT richness, Family-level Biotic Index (FBI), and Percent Model Affinity (PMA) are converted to a common 0-10 scale. The mean value of the four indices represents the assessed impact for the site.
- 33 - The State of Canadarago Lake, 2011
Figure 18. Trout Brook, Biological Assessment Profile (BAP) of index values for riffle habitats. Values from four indices; taxa richness, EPT richness, Family-level Biotic Index (FBI), and Percent Model Affinity (PMA) are converted to a common 0-10 scale. The mean value of the four indices represents the assessed impact for the site.
- 34 - The State of Canadarago Lake, 2011
Figure 19. Ocquionis Creek, Biological Assessment Profile (BAP) of index values for riffle habitats. Values from four indices; taxa richness, EPT richness, Family-level Biotic Index (FBI), and Percent Model Affinity (PMA) are converted to a common 0-10 scale. The mean value of the four indices represents the assessed impact for the site.
- 35 - The State of Canadarago Lake, 2011
Figure 20. Mean values all sites, Biological Assessment Profile (BAP) of index values for all sampled riffle habitats. The mean value of the four indices represents the assessed impact for each site.
- 36 - The State of Canadarago Lake, 2011
Bacteria An ongoing concern among the Canadarago Lake community relates to the perennial flooding of near-lake property (Malcolm Pirnie, Inc. 2011). Some concerns are associated with damage to shoreline infrastructure. Additional concerns are associated with the submergence of lakeside wastewater treatment (“septic”) systems. During times of high water, there is concern that submergence of private wastewater treatment systems poses potential human health risks (Malcolm Pirnie, Inc. 2011; see Appendix A, p. 108). Also, the inundation of systems could cause substantial flushing of phosphorus and nitrogen to the lake. Few details are known regarding the current state of treatment systems around Canadarago Lake, and no inspection program is currently instituted to monitor their functionality or treatment performance. However, some inferences can be made based upon recent findings around nearby Otsego Lake. In 2005, an inspection and management program commenced; this program found that the majority of systems were not functioning properly due to antiquated and undersized designs, poor maintenance, and location relative to restrictive geologic and soil features (McIntyre 2010). Approximately half of the inspected systems required system upgrades. It is likely that the condition and state of treatment by systems along the shore of Canadarago is similar. Fecal coliform bacteria are gram negative, non-sporulating bacilli shaped bacteria that make up a group of indicator organisms used to evaluate water quality (APHA 1989). This group includes Pseudomonas, Streptococcus, Staphylococcus and Legionella species as well as Escherichia coli. Members of the fecal coliform group are naturally found in warm- blooded mammalian and bird intestines and are not necessarily harmful to humans. High coliform colony counts, however, indicate the likely presence of pathogenic organisms, including viruses (Coxsackie A,B, Hepatitis A, adenovirus types 3, 4) and parasites (such as Giardia sp. and Cryptosporidium sp.) present in the designated sampling area (APHA, 1989). High fecal coliform bacteria counts can also be indicative of elevated phosphorus and nitrogen releases from poorly performing treatment systems, as well as other byproducts associated with wastewater.
Fecal coliform bacteria were evaluated adjacent to the lake shore, the major tributaries and outlet during the summers of 2009 (Bailey and Albright 2010) and 2010 (Mazziotta 2011). Samples were collected biweekly in 2009 from 24 May to 31 August and weekly in 2010 from 7 June to 18 August. A possible correlation between coliform and sediment content was evaluated for the tributary and outlet sites on three dates, as elevated concentrations of pathogenic bacteria have been associated with elevated suspended sediment (Murdoch et al. 1996).
Figure 21 shows the lake and tributary sites evaluated in 2009 and 2010. The lake sites tended to be near clusters of camps in close proximity to the lake shore. Table 12 describes the site locations.
- 37 - The State of Canadarago Lake, 2011
Fecal coliform abundance was determined using the membrane filter (MF) technique (APHA, 1989). Colonies were counted after the incubation period and reported as colonies per 100 ml. Samples for total suspended sediment analysis (TSS) were collected along with fecal coliform on the tributary sites on 8 June, 7 July, and 19 July 2010. Total suspended sediment samples were analyzed using the gravimetric method (APHA 1989).
Figure 21. Location of fecal coliform sampling sites on Canadarago Lake and its tributaries, 2009-2010.
- 38 - The State of Canadarago Lake, 2011
Table 12. Descriptions and locations of sampling sites on Canadarago Lake and its tributaries.
Tributary and Outlet Sampling Sites Oaks Creek Abbreviation: Oak . East of the Village of Schuyler Lake on County Route 22; sampled north of bridge. Herkimer Creek Abbreviation: Hrk . North of the Village of Schuyler Lake on State Route 28; sampled east of bridge. Hyder Creek Abbreviation: Hyd . South of Dennison Road (NYSP boat launch access road) on State Route 28; sampled west of bridge. Trout Brook (Mink Creek) Abbreviation: T.B. . Just north of Canadarago Lake on Elm Street Extension; sampled east of bridge. Ocquionis Creek North Abbreviation: O.C. 1 The beginning of Elm Street Extension, just south of Bronner Street; sampled south of bridge. Ocquionis Creek South Abbreviation: O.C. 2 End of Bloomfield Drive, through the rear gate of the waste treatment plant; sampled downstream of effluent discharge. Waste Treatment Plant Abbreviation: W.T.P. End of Bloomfield Drive, through gate and into plant, sampled from effluent pipe
Lake Sampling Sites Lake Profiling Site Abbreviation: C.L. L.P Deepest spot encountered (11.48-12.45 m; 37.5-41 ft). (N 42° 49.339’ W 75° 00.032’) Canadarago 1: Abbreviation: C.L. 1 Northwest side of Lake, northern most lake sampling spot. (N 42°50.323' W 74°59.941') Canadarago 2: Abbreviation: C.L. 2 West side of Lake, north of boat launch. (N 42° 49.776’ W 75° 00.398’) Canadarago 3: Abbreviation: C.L. 3 West side of Lake, south of boat launch. (N 42° 49.788’ W 75° 00.414’) Canadarago 4: Abbreviation: C.L. 4 West side of Lake, southern most lake sampling spot. (N 42° 48.870’ W 75° 00.901’) Canadarago 5: Abbreviation: C.L. 5 Southeast side of Lake, south of Deowongo Island. (N 42°48.00' W 75°00.112') Canadarago 6: Abbreviation: C.L. 6 East side of Lake, east of Deowongo Island. (N 42°48.456' W 74°59.947')
Tributaries Figures 22 and 23 summarize mean fecal coliform concentrations (per 100 ml), including standard error bars, at each tributary over the summers of 2009 and 2010, respectively. Similar trends between the years are apparent, with Trout Brook typically having the highest concentrations and Oaks Creek (the lake’s outlet) having the lowest. However, concentrations in 2010 were approximately twice those of 2009 at most sites.
- 39 - The State of Canadarago Lake, 2011
Higher concentrations encountered in 2010 were despite the fact that precipitation varied markedly between the two years. Over the summer (May-August) 2009, 24.6 in (62.5 cm) of rain fell over the area, spread relatively evenly over the 4 months. Over the same period in 2010, 16.7 in (42.4 cm) fell (NYSHA 2011). Total suspended sediment concentrations were highly correlated with fecal coliform concentrations when collected concurrently in 2010. Regression analysis on 18 data pairs (3 dates of collection from 6 sites) yielded r2= 0.98.
2000
1600
1200
800 Colonies/100 ml Colonies/100 400
0 Oak Hrk Hyd T.B O.C 1 O.C 2
Figure 22. Fecal coliform concentrations at tributaries sites over the summer, 2009. See Figure 21 for site locations.
2000
1600
1200
800 Colonies/100 ml Colonies/100 400
0 Oak Hrk Hyd T.B O.C 1 O.C 2
Figure 23. Fecal coliform concentrations at tributaries sites over the summer, 2010. See Figure 21 for site locations.
- 40 - The State of Canadarago Lake, 2011
Lake Figures 24 and 25 summarize mean fecal coliform concentrations (per 100 ml), including standard error bars, at each lake site over the summers of 2009 and 2010, respectively. Because concentrations at some sites were much higher in 2010, Figure 5 displays the data logarithmically. Over the course of study, two samples exceeded 100 colonies/100 ml: 187 colonies/100 ml at site CL1 on 21 June 2010 and >2,000 colonies/100 ml at CL4 on 19 July 2010 (see Figure 21 for site locations). Site CL1 is near the mouth of Trout Brook and conditions there might have been influenced by conditions in that stream. Site CL4 is not near a stream but is adjacent to a number of camps near the lake at low elevation. High concentrations there might have been influenced by septic inputs. The actual concentration could not be reported as the colony density at the lowest sample volume processed exceeded the ideal limit of 200 colonies/100 ml (APHA 1989). Excepting that date, the average concentration for this site was 5 colonies/100 ml.
10
8
6
4 Colonies/100 ml Colonies/100 2
0 CL1 CL2 CL3 CL4 CL5 CL6
Figure 24. Fecal coliform concentrations at tributaries sites over the summer, 2009. See Figure 21 for site locations.
1000
100
10
Colonies/100 ml 1
C.L. L.P. C.L. 1 C.L. 2 C.L. 3 C.L. 4 C.L. 5 C.L. 6
0 Figure 25. Fecal coliform concentrations at tributaries sites over the summer, 2010. Note logarithmic scale. See Figure 21 for site locations.
- 41 - The State of Canadarago Lake, 2011
Lake monitoring Physical limnology
Monitoring by BFS personnel commenced with pilot work occurring biweekly through the summer of 2008 (Bailey and Albright 2009). Further monitoring occurred over 2009 (Bailey and Albright 2010) and 2010 (Waterfield, Albright and Mazziotta 2011). Sampling was conducted biweekly from June through September and monthly during January through May and October to November (tenuous ice conditions prevented collections in December both years). All physical and chemical profiles, as well as Secchi transparency determinations, were conducted at the lake’s deepest point (~12m; Figure 26). Physical measurements were taken at 2 m intervals and included temperature, dissolved oxygen, pH and conductivity. Samples were collected at 3 m intervals for the analysis of total phosphorus, total nitrogen and nitrate. Ammonia was evaluated in 2009 then was discontinued as it was consistently below levels of detection. Samples were less frequently tested for calcium and chlorides. Additionally, samples were collected for fecal coliform over the summers of 2009 and 2010 (see Bacteria p. 36).
Profile site
Figure 26. Bathymetric map of Canadarago Lake showing main tributaries and profile site. Bathymetry in feet.
- 42 - The State of Canadarago Lake, 2011
Interpretation of isopleth graphs
Figure 27 is a graph showing thermal (temperature) isopleths (lines of equal temperature) throughout the year. The X-axis (horizontal) denotes time from January 2010 through December 2010. The dots along the X-axis indicate the dates when measurements were taken in the field. The Y-axis (vertical) shows depth in meters. Overall, the figure illustrates lake temperature over the course of one calendar year and is useful in identifying the general stratification pattern (development of thermal layers) and when compared to graphs for other years, variations in that pattern between years. Differences in patterns between lakes can be discerned by comparing this type of figure. One can also use the graph to obtain information on lake conditions for a particular date. For example, we can estimate the temperature at various depths for 15 July by first drawing a line vertically from top to bottom starting mid-way between July and August (line A). Where this line crosses a temperature isopleth, you can draw a horizontal line to find the depth at which that temperature occurred (lines B, C, D, and E); therefore, at about 3.8 meters depth (line B), the temperature was about 24oC. Shallower it was warmer, in deeper water it was colder. Just above 6 meters (line C), the temperature was 22oC; just deeper than 6 meters (line D), the temperature was 20oC. Just below 8 meters, the temperature was 15oC. Using this method, you can approximate the temperature at any depth for any day of the year. With enough samples or measured values, we can draw isopleths for oxygen concentrations, chlorophyll a concentration, or any other water quality characteristics that we have measured. All physical water quality data collected on Canadarago Lake between 2008 and 2010 is included in Appendix E (p. 119).
Figure 27. Thermal isopleths for Canadarago Lake, 2010, as an example of how to interpret the data contained therein (see text above).
- 43 - The State of Canadarago Lake, 2011
Temperature
Canadarago Lake is dimictic; it exhibits stratification throughout both winter and summer months while mixing occurs in the spring and fall. This is typical of moderately deep lakes of temperate latitudes. Figures 28 and 29 depict thermal isopleths (year-long profiles) for the lake over 2009 and 2010, respectively. Mixing in both years occurred through March and April. Stratification was evident by late May in 2009 and mid May 2010. Bottom temperatures in July through September ranged from 13.1oC to 13.8oC in 2009, and from 11.6oC to 13.1oC in 2010. The mean epilimnion depth was approximately 7 m. Fall mixing occurred through October and November both years. Profiles seen here are similar to those occurring in 1968 (Figure 30; Hetling 1977), though that year bottom temperatures exceeded 15oC throughout September.
Figure 28. Temperature isopleths for Canadarago Lake, 2009. Isopleths in oC.
- 44 - The State of Canadarago Lake, 2011
Figure 29. Temperature isopleths for Canadarago Lake, 2010. Isopleths in oC.
Figure 30. Temperature isopleths for Canadarago Lake, 1968 (Harr et al. 1980). Isopleths in oC.
Transparency
Mean summertime (May-September) Secchi transparencies from 1968 to 2010 (where available) are provided in Figure 31. Modest improvements noted beginning in 1973 were largely due to brief clear water phases occurring most years in July or August (note increased
- 45 - The State of Canadarago Lake, 2011
SE bars; Figure 31), which indicated “improved conditions” (Harr et al. 1980). The onset of this situation was coincident with phosphorus removal from Richfield Springs’ wastewater effluent by alum precipitation. Between the 1970s and 1990s, enough time had elapsed that reductions in phosphorus loading from the upgraded wastewater treatment facility and the high-phosphate detergent ban led to reduced in-lake availability of that nutrient, and in turn, reduced algal productivity and increased water clarity.
The marked increase of clarity following 2001 is likely resultant of the introduction of zebra mussels (Driessena polymorpha), an exotic bivalve which has been recognized to increase clarity through algal grazing (D’Itri 1997). That organism was first documented in 2002, and based on the size of the larger individuals, the introduction is believed to have occurred in 2000 or 2001 (Horvath and Lord 2003). While not formally evaluated, reports by lakeside residents (i.e., Sluyter 2009), implied that mussel densities on artificial structures were in decline following 2008. That decline was concurrent with a shift in dominant algal forms from those more planktonic to those more filamentous, as well as a greater abundance of cyanobacteria (blue-green algae) (see Phytoplankton section, p. 57). Both of those groups could be favored by mussels grazing primarily on more planktonic, edible forms of algae (Pillsbury et al., 2002). Figure 32 provides a more detailed overview of Secchi transparencies collected by BFS from 2008-2010.
Year '68 '69 '71'72'73'74'75'76'77'78 '90'91'92'93'94'95'96'97'98'99'00'01'02'03'04'05'06'07'08'09'10 0
1
2
3
4
Secchi Transparency (m) (m) Transparency Secchi 5
6
7
Figure 31. Annual summer (May through September) Secchi transparency, where available, 1968-2010 (Harr et al. 1980, Brooking et al. 2012).
- 46 - The State of Canadarago Lake, 2011
I-----2008 ----- I ------2009 ------I -----2010 ------I
0
1
2
3
4
5
6 Secchi Disk SecchiDisk Transparency (m) 7
8
Figure 32. Secchi transparency on each date measured, 2008-2010.
Figure 33 provides Secchi data lumped into six time periods characterized by prevailing conditions which are believed to have meaningful influences on water clarity; historic conditions, nutrient loading by Richfield Springs wastewater treatment plant, implementation of phosphorus removal at the treatment plant, high abundance of predatory fish, effects of zebra mussels and increasing abundance of alewife (Brooking et al 2012; see Fisheries section, p. 86).
- 47 - The State of Canadarago Lake, 2011
Figure 33. Historical changes in water clarity in Canadarago Lake as influenced by various nutrient and biological conditions (Brooking et al. 2012).
Dissolved oxygen
Following the onset of summer stratification, deeper (hypolimnetic) waters, being physically separated from the atmosphere, begin to lose dissolved oxygen fairly rapidly due to organic decomposition. This is influenced by the lake’s fairly eutrophic nature and moderate depth.
Dissolved oxygen was first recorded in 1935 (date not given) by Tressler and Bere (1936); near bottom concentrations then were reported as “low, but the amount was enough for fish to live comfortably”. In the summer of 1959 Shepard (1959) reported that “more than 60% of the bottom waters… contained insufficient oxygen to support fish life (< 3mg/l)” (Harr et al. 1980). It was believed that this resulted in slow growth rates of most fish species around that time. In 1974-75, water from about 6m and deeper were anoxic by August.
Seasonal dissolved oxygen profiles for 1968 are shown in Figure 34 (Harr et al. 1980). Stratification was evident by the first sampling in mid-May and bottom waters were anoxic below 9-10 m from mid July through late September. Fall mixing commenced in early November.
- 48 - The State of Canadarago Lake, 2011
Figure 34. Dissolved oxygen isopleths for Canadarago Lake, 1968 (Harr et al. 1980). Isopleths in mg/l.
Year-long dissolved oxygen profiles of 2009 and 2010 are given in Figures 35 and 36, respectively. (The strata below the 1 mg/l isopleths are considered near anoxic, given the sensitivity at low concentrations of the Clark cell type probe used.) In both these years, bottom waters were essentially anoxic by late mid June, nearly a month earlier than what was observed in 1968. The depth below which concentrations were less than 1 mg/l was about 7.5 m in 2009 and 6.0 m in 2010. Figure 37 shows oxygen profiles on 25 August 2009 and on 19 July 2010, when hypolimnetic concentrations were at their lowest of each year.
- 49 - The State of Canadarago Lake, 2011
Figure 35. Dissolved oxygen isopleths for Canadarago Lake, 2009. Isopleths in mg/l.
Figure 36. Dissolved oxygen isopleths for Canadarago Lake, 2010. Isopleths in mg/l.
- 50 - The State of Canadarago Lake, 2011
Dissolved Oxygen (mg/l) Dissolved Oxygen (mg/l)
0 2 4 6 8 0 2 4 6 8 0 0
2 2
4 4
6 6
(m) Depth 8 (m) Depth 8
10 10
12 12
8/25/2009 7/19/2010 Figure 37. Dissolved oxygen profiles for 25 Aug 2009 (left) and 19 July 2010 (right), the dates on which hypolimnetic concentrations were at their minimum.
Chemical limnology Nutrients
All nutrient data collected on Canadarago Lake between 2008 and 2010 is included in Appendix F (p. 122).
Phosphorus Total phosphorus (analyzed by persulfate digestion followed by single reagent ascorbic acid; Liao and Marten 2001) concentrations during spring overturn in both 2009 and 2010 were about 10 µg/l. This is in contrast to earlier values of about 20 µg/l reported in spring 1968 and of about 40 µg/l in 1969 (Harr et al. 1980). In 1973, the Village of Richfield Springs began removing phosphorus from its municipal treatment system by alum precipitation (Harr et al. 1980). In spring 1974, total phosphorus averaged 9 µg/l.
Figures 38 and 39 display year long total phosphorus isopleths for 2009 and 2010. Figure 40 shows total phosphorus profiles on 23 September 2009 and 15 September 2010 (the dates exhibiting maximum near-bottom concentrations for each year). Internal loading of phosphorus was evident. This situation comes about when iron/phosphorus complexes are reduced in the absence of oxygen, and the phosphorus is released into overlying waters (i.e., Bostrom et al. 1982). Internal loading dynamics closely paralleled hypolimnetic oxygen reduction (see Figures 35 and 36). Phosphorous accumulation began both years in June and persisted until fall turnover, at which time water column averages were 22 µg/l in 2009 and 20 µg/l in 2010. This implies that most of the internally loaded phosphorus precipitates out of the water column as it is re-oxidized.
- 51 - The State of Canadarago Lake, 2011
Figure 41 shows mean summer epilimnetic (0-4 m) total phosphorus concentrations for 2001, 2008, 2009 and 2010, indicating substantial variability over a relatively short timeframe. Comparing these values with mean Secchi transparencies (see Figure 31) suggests a strong correlation between the two.
Figure 38. Total phosphorus isopleths for Canadarago Lake, 2009. Isopleths in µg/l.
Figure 39. Total phosphorus isopleths for Canadarago Lake, 2010. Isopleths in µg/l.
- 52 - The State of Canadarago Lake, 2011
Total Phosphorus (µg/l)) Total Phosphorus (µg/l))
0 2 00 400 600 800 0 200 400 600 0 0
2 2
4 4
6 6 Depth (m) Depth (m) Depth 8 8
10 10
12 12
9/23/2009 8/25/2010
Figure 40. Total phosphorus profiles for 23 September 2009 (left) and 15 September 2010 (right), the dates on which near bottom concentrations were at their maximum.
30
25
20
15
10 total phosphorus total (µg/l)
5
0 2001 2008 2009 2010
Figure 41. Canadarago Lake mean summer epilimnetic total phosphorus concentrations, 2001 and 2008-2010 (+/- SE).
Nitrogen Annual profiles of total nitrogen for 2009 and 2010 are provided in Figures 42 and 43. Concentrations were determined using cadmium reduction (Pritzlaff 2003) following peroxodisulfate digestion (Ebina et al. 1983). Column wide concentrations during summer stratification were typically 0.3 and 0.5 mg/l. Near-bottom increases of nitrogen during the latter
- 53 - The State of Canadarago Lake, 2011 periods of stratification were correlated, in 2009, with elevated ammonia concentrations. (Ammonia was not evaluated in 2010.) That year, ammonia was present in the bottom one- meter strata over the duration of hypolimnetic anoxia, concentrations peaking at 1.2 mg/l on 23 September.
Figure 42. Total nitrogen isopleths for Canadarago Lake, 2009. Isopleths in mg/l.
Figure 43. Total nitrogen isopleths for Canadarago Lake, 2010. Isopleths in mg/l.
- 54 - The State of Canadarago Lake, 2011
Nitrate concentrations, determined using the cadmium reduction method (Pritzlaff 1983), are profiled in Figures 44 and 45. Nitrate, the form of nitrogen most bioavailable for algal uptake, averaged 0.35 mg/l at spring overturn in 2009 and 0.25 mg/l at spring overturn in 2010. In both years, nitrate levels quickly declined to those below detection (<0.02 mg/l) following the onset of summer stratification. This is presumably due to algal uptake. Similar nitrate depletion during the growing seasons of 1968-69 was also noted by Harr et al. (1980). Monthly May-October surface samples analyzed for nitrate by Brooking et al. (2012) from 1992 through 2008 also revealed declining concentrations over the course of stratification, though concentrations were typically above 0.05 mg/l. During summer 2008, overlap of sampling efforts by Carter and Albright (2009) and Brooking et al. (2012) allowed for a comparison of laboratory performance. Both showed surface concentrations that are largely in agreement, implying that the loss of nitrogen in 2009 and 2010 is real and not an artifact of laboratory performance. The shift in nitrate between pre- and post 2008 conditions suggests a shift towards nitrogen limitation.
Figure 44. Nitrate isopleths for Canadarago Lake, 2009. Isopleths in mg/l.
- 55 - The State of Canadarago Lake, 2011
Figure 45. Nitrate isopleths for Canadarago Lake, 2010. Isopleths in mg/l.
- 56 - The State of Canadarago Lake, 2011
Phytoplankton community and chlorophylla
Aquatic algae inhabit a variety of environments, occupying various niches in a body of water. Phytoplanktonic algae, which are suspended or swim freely in open water, are the focus of this study. The type of algae present and their abundance in an aquatic system can reflect a lake’s trophic status and may be indicative of contamination from the addition of nutrients from agriculture run-off or sewage (Prescott 1964). Conditions of salinity, size, depth, transparency, nutrient conditions, pH, and pollution effect the composition and abundance of algae present in a body of water (Sheath and Wehr 2003), thus the algal composition is, to some degree, a reflection of the condition of a body of water. The presence of certain organisms, such as the exotic zebra mussel (Dreissena polymorpha) can also affect algae abundance, and can shift dominance from more desirable types to undesirable cyanobacteria (blue-green algae) (Pillsbury et al. 2002). Algal communities can be assessed by a number of methods, ranging from intensive total cell counts, where all cells in a sample are counted and identified, to general assessments of total algal abundance and biomass based on the photosynthetic pigment chlorophylla. Excessive algal growth can be unsightly and cause odor problems. Upon its death and decomposition, it causes oxygen declines in deeper parts of the lake, reducing potential fish habitat. Elevated levels of cyanobacteria are also associated with various biotoxins and can pose risks to animals and humans, even by contact recreation. This report summarizes the findings reported by Harr et al. (1980) (total cell counts, biomass estimates, as well as chlorophylla concentration), Brooking, et al (2012) (chlorophylla concentration), and 2009 results from BFS monitoring (relative abundance and chlorophylla concentration) (Primmer 2010).
In 2009 algal composition was described and chlorophylla concentrations were determined for samples collected in June and July from 0-3m composite depth samples (Primmer 2010). Sampling locations are shown in Figure 46. Collection sites and methods were comparable to shallow “epilimnion” composite samples taken between 1968 and 1976 (Harr et al. 1980). In 2010, surface samples were collected for chlorophylla from one site only (CL-2). It should be recognized that these shallow samples do not represent the entire algal community which likely exists to much greater depths based on available light inferred from Secchi depth (see Physical limnology, p. 42).
Phytoplankton species and community characteristics
Samples were collected for phytoplankton analysis on 16 and 29 June and 14 July 2009. In the field, equal volumes of each discrete depth sample were combined into a single 1-3m composite sample and preserved with Lugol’s solution. In the lab, the samples were set aside to settle for at least 24 hours. A total of 5 ml from the settled portion of each sample were surveyed for the following phytoplankton taxa according to Prescott (1954): Chlorophyta, Cyanophyta (=cyanobacteria), Chrysophyta, and Pyrrophyta. For consistency with older reports, the traditional taxonomic divisions were used here, though Cyanophyta is now recognized as Cyanobacteria. For each sample, 1 ml of the settled portion of sample was examined and all cells were counted in a Palmer-Maloney slide using a digital compound microscope. This was repeated 5 times so that 5 ml in total were examined. Percent composition of taxa was calculated for each sample based on cell counts.
- 57 - The State of Canadarago Lake, 2011
Figure 46. Canadarago Lake, Otsego County, NY showing 2009 phytoplankton and chlorophylla sampling sites.
Though the 2009 dataset is limited in scope (only sampled on three dates), the community was dominated by chlorophytes (~75 %), with cyanophytes consistently second-most dominant (Figure 47). Taxonomic comparisons were made most years between 1968 and 1976 (Harr et al. 1980) based on relative proportions of biomass contributed by each taxonomic group. During this time a major shift was documented in dominance and bloom-developing species corresponding to upgrades at the Richfield Springs Wastewater Treatment Plant. Conditions in 2009 were more closely aligned with those observed prior to 1972 when chlorophytes dominated the community overall and cyanophyte algae formed periodic extreme blooms.
- 58 - The State of Canadarago Lake, 2011
100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30%
PercentComposition 20% 10%
0% 16-Jun 29-Jun 14-Jul 16-Jun 29-Jun 14-Jul 16-Jun 29-Jun 14-Jul
CL 1 CL 2 CL 3
Chlorophyta Cyanophyta Pyrrophyta Chrysophyta
Figure 47. Composition of four different algal groups based on cell counts; Chlorophyta, Cyanophyta, Pyrrophyta and Chrysophyta for a 1-3meter depth sample for Canadarago Lake in 2009, sample sites CL-1, CL-2, and CL-3.
Though no samples were examined in 2010, observations indicated continued changes in the algae community, likely due to a combination of influences from the 10-year old zebra mussel population and increasing alewife population; both have been documented as mediators of change in lake-wide food webs (Pillsbury et al. 2002, and Harman et al. 2002). In June and July 2010 blooms were reported by lake-side residents and confirmed to be the filamentous chlorophytes (green algae) Spirogyra sp. and Mougeotia sp. by BFS staff. Later in 2010 cyanophytes (blue-green algae), including Microsystis sp., were observed during routine sampling.
In summary, algal community composition has changed over the period of time from 1968 to 2010. Following the treatment plant’s phosphorus removal upgrade, the community became more evenly distributed among the major taxonomic groups, with cyanophytes being the most common group. Extreme blooms of chlorophytes occurred on occasion (Harr et al. 1980). The role of cyanophytes in the community shifted from sub-dominant and bloom-forming prior to 1972, to dominant in the mid-‘70s (Harr et al. 1980) and more recently have been increasing in abundance later in the summer when nitrate availability is low, a condition to which cyanophytes are well-adapted. Recent weather patterns have led to higher maximum summer surface temperatures, also favoring the growth of cyanophytes. In the 1970s, the dominant cyanophytes were not typically nitrogen-fixing taxa, while those found recently have included those with nitrogen-fixing capabilities. The combined effects of filtration by zebra mussels and reduced grazing by zooplankton (as a result of increasing alewife population) tend to favor growth of cyanophytes (i.e. Pillsbury et al. 2002, Harman et al. 2002) and will likely continue to influence algal abundance and community dynamics in Canadarago Lake.
- 59 - The State of Canadarago Lake, 2011
Chlorophylla
Chlorophylla analysis was performed on samples collected on 9, 16, and 29 June, 14 and 28 July 2009, 24 May and 7 June 2010. Lake water was passed through a filter; chlorophylla was extracted from it and measured flourometrically according to the methods of Welschmeyer (1994). Chlorophylla concentrations at the 3 collection sites are presented in Table 13; values ranged from 1.0 µg/l (CL-3 on 14 July) to a maximum of 6.3 µg/l (CL-3 on 29 June). The two values reported in 2010 fell within the range observed in 2009. These values are low compared to those generally associated with eutrophic conditions (Wetzel 2001). Results from 2009 were comparable to those presented by Harr et al. (1980) for the years of 1969, ’72, and ’76 (Figure 48), though there were major variations in the concentrations observed in those years outside of the June-July time period. Earlier results (1968, ’69, ’72, ’73, ’74, ’76) presented in Figure 49 illustrate the high degree of inter-annual variation observed, even over a relatively short time period. This variability was also observed in the phosphorus data (see Chemical limnology section, p. 51). Such variation is also evident in more recent data collected by Brooking et al. (2012), which is included in Table 14 and illustrated in its entirety in Figure 50.
Data were collected intermittently between 1968 and 1976 (Harr et al. 1980), and monthly from May through October of 1990 through 2010 by Cornell University researchers. Sampling methodologies differ between these efforts, so it is difficult to directly compare conditions across the entire time period. Despite differences in sampling regime, peak values observed over a large dataset can indicate changes in the frequency and severity of blooms, especially given the period of time encompassed by the dataset of Brooking et al. (2012). Harr et al. (1980) summarized the highlights of their dataset by categorizing the extreme values in terms of frequency of occurrence (Table 14.) Due to analytical limitations at the time of the study, the authors assumed that the results obtained generally underestimated actual concentrations, especially at low concentrations. Thus, the categorization scheme took this situation into account. When similarly categorized, data from Brooking et al. (2012) indicate a decrease in typical concentrations as well as decreased magnitude and frequency of occurrence of extreme values. Between 1968 and 1976, extreme values greater than 25 µg/l were reported in 5 out of the 7 years during which monitoring was conducted; values greater than 10 µg/l were reported for 19 of 58 growing season samples (33%). In the 21 years of monitoring between 1990 and 2010, a value greater than 25 µg/l was reported on a single occasion and concentrations greater than 10 µg/l were reported for 10 of 102 growing season samples (8%) during that period of time. From 1995 to 2010, values less than or equal to 5 µg/l were the typical result, characterizing 75 out of 102 samples (74%). Since 1968 chlorophylla concentrations have decreased and become more stable, exhibiting less inter- and intra-annual variation, especially since 1995 (figures 49 and 50), though concentrations have begun to increase slightly since 2008. This is likely tied to increases in the alewife population (Brooking et al. 2012), as alewife feed heavily on the large-bodied zooplankton that generally graze epilimnetic algae most effectively (Warner 1999) (see Fisheries section, p. 86).
- 60 - The State of Canadarago Lake, 2011
Table 13. 2009 chlorophylla (µg/l) 1-3 meter composite for Canadarago Lake, New York, sample sites CL-1, CL-2, and CL-3.
Date CL-1 CL-2 CL-3 Average 6/9/2009 4.1 2.9 2.1 3.0 6/16/2009 5.3 3.2 2.7 3.7 6/29/2009 6.1 6 6.3 6.1 7/14/2009 4.4 2.2 1 2.5 7/28/2009 4.2 2.5 3.9 3.5 Average 4.81 3.36 3.2
25
20
15
Concentration Concentration (µg/l) 10 a 5
0 Chlorophyll
Month and Year
Figure 48. Canadarago Lake 1-3m composite chlorophylla concentrations (µg/l) for samples collected in June and July 1968, ’69, ’72, ’73, ’74, ’76 (Harr et al. 1980), 2009 and 2010.
Table 14. Chlorophylla concentration (µg/l) patterns observed during three periods of time, as reported in Harr et al. (1980) and summarized from Brooking et al. (2012).
1968-1976 1990-1999 2000-2010 < 5 µg/l rare typical typical ~ 10 µg/l typical 1 per year > 10 1 per year > 10 > 20 µg/l 1-2 per year 1 per decade did not occur ≥ 30 µg/l 1 per year did not occur did not occur
- 61 - The State of Canadarago Lake, 2011
Figure 49. Chlorophylla concentrations (µg/l) in the epilimnion of Canadarago Lake, 1968 through 1976 (used with permission, from Harr et al. 1980).
- 62 -
30
25 20
15 Conc. (µg/l)
a 10 5
Chlorophyll 0 MJJASO MJJASO MJJASO MJJASO MJJASO MJJASO MJJASO MJJASO 1990 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 30
25
20 15 Conc. (µg/l) a
- 63 10
5
Chlorophyll 0 MJJASO MJJASO MJJASO MJJASO MJJASO MJJASO MJJASO MJJASO 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 30 The State of CanadaragoLake,2011 25
20 15 Conc. (µg/l) a 10
5
Chlorophyll 0 MJJASO MJJASO MJJASO 2008 2009 2010
Figure 50. Chlorophylla concentrations (µg/l) in Canadarago Lake based on monthly growing season samples collected at the surface from 1990 to 2010 by Cornell University researchers (Brooking et al. 2012). The State of Canadarago Lake, 2011
Zooplankton
A comprehensive evaluation of the zooplankton study was undertaken between 1972 and 1978, wherein samples were collected at five sites year round with a 0.5 m, 130 µm, net (Harr). (That mesh size likely missed a fraction of rotifers). During this time, 22 species of cladocerans were identified, as well as 6 species of copepods and 8 species of rotifers.
Figure 51 summarizes the counts of the main zooplankton groups in Canadarago Lake over the course of the ’72-‘78 study, and Figure 52 provides overall abundances and dry weight biomass estimates of the total zooplankton community (from Smith 1978, in Harr et al. 1980). The community assemblage varied over the course of the study, though the major groups followed fairly consistent seasonal progressions. Abundances and biomass estimates tended to peak during summer and fall. Mean summer biomass estimates for 1973, 1974 and 1975 were 130, 120 and 170 µg/l, respectively.
There were no significant differences in total biomass between sampling stations or between years. Differences in individual dry weights, which did vary significantly between years, were attributed to lower rates of grazing by fish in 1974-1975, when individual zooplankton sizes were larger and the abundance of several planktivorous fish species were lower (Harr et al. 1980).
Number liter per
Figure 51. Number of rotifers, copepods and cladocerans per liter, 1972-1976 (from Smith 1978, in Harr et al. 1980).
- 64 - The State of Canadarago Lake, 2011
Dry weight per liter weightDry per
Number liter per
Figure 52. Abundance and dry weight biomass of total zooplankton in Canadarago Lake, 1972- 1976 (from Smith 1978, in Harr et al. 1980).
The zooplankton community was again evaluated in the summers of 2009 (Gillespie 2010) and 2010 (Albright 2011). In 2009, 3 sampling stations were monitored (see Figure 53) biweekly from mid June through mid-July. In 2010, only site CL2 was sampled, with collections made biweekly from late May through August. Zooplankton samples were collected using a 20 cm diameter plankton net with a 63 µm mesh on a weighted cup. The net was lowered to a depth of 6 m (the approximate depth to the thermocline) and retrieved. A G.O. ™ mechanical flow meter mounted across the net opening allowed for the determination of the volume of lake water filtered. Aliquots of 1.0 ml of preserved sample were placed on Sedgwick-Rafter cells and analyzed using a compound microscope having digital imaging and analysis capabilities (2009), or with an ocular micrometer (2010). Organisms were identified and measured to the nearest 0.001 mm. Over 100 organisms were counted on each sampling date. Mean densities and lengths for cladocerans, copepods and rotifers were used to calculate dry weight (as per Peters and Downing 1984) for individual organisms and for the community on each date and daily epilimnetic filtering rates were estimated by equations provided by Knoechel and Holtby (1986).
- 65 - The State of Canadarago Lake, 2011
CL1
CL2
CL3
Figure 53. Canadarago Lake, New York, showing locations of sites sampled over summer 2009 and 2010.
Table 15 provides a summary of all data collected throughout the study. These include values for mean epilimnetic temperature, numbers of each taxon per liter, mean length, mean dry weight per individual and per liter, phosphorus regeneration rates per individual and per liter, filtering rates and the percentage of the epilimnion filtered per day. For comparison, Table 16 summarizes average monthly zooplankton size, density, biomass and average daphnid biomass reported by Brooking et al. (2012) for the May-October period from 1990 to 2010.
Figure 54 graphically provides the biomass (dry weight; µg/l) contributed by rotifers, copepods and cladocerans over the summer of 2009. Figure 3 similarly shows biomass of zooplankton over the summer of 2010. The mean biomass in 2009 was 632 µg/l, markedly higher than the seasonal mean of 248 µg/l reported that year by Brooking et al. (2012); this was due to the high abundance of large cladocerans collected in early June (see Figure 54). In 2010, mean biomass had dropped to 160 µg/l, agreeing with that reported for 2010 (162 ug/l) by Brooking (2012). Larger bodied cladocerans (i.e., daphnids) contributed smaller proportions of biomass in 2010 than in 2009, with copepods and cladocera being similar while rotifers contributed substantially less (though being considerably smaller bodied, they often were numerically dominant).
- 66 - The State of Canadarago Lake, 2011
Table 15. Summary of mean epilimnetic temperature, zooplankton densities and mean length per taxa, mean weight per individual and per liter, and percent of the epilimnion filtered per day on each date sampled in 2009 and 2010.
% Epilimnion 2009 Mean Temp. #/L Mean length Mean Dry Wt Dry Wt (°C) (mm) (µg) (µg/L) Filtered/day 6/16/09 16.02 Cladocera 154 0.665 5.123 789 68.2 Copepoda 187 0.316 1.224 237 13.4 Rotifers 912 0.166 0.453 398 12.3 Total 1424 93.9 6/29/09 18.09 Cladocera 32 0.449 2.526 83 5.0 Copepoda 84 0.295 1.052 94 5.6 Rotifers 274 0.107 0.102 29 1.3 Total 206 11.9 7/14/09 20.39 Cladocera 23 0.873 9.783 220 19.6 Copepoda 44 0.264 0.877 42 2.1 Rotifers 57 0.105 0.088 5 0.3 Total 267 22.0
2010 Mean Temp. #/L Mean length Mean Dry Wt Dry Wt % Epilimnion (°C) (mm) (µg) (µg/L) Filtered/day 5/24/10 15.8 Cladocera 12 0.304 0.820 10 0.7 Copepoda 72 0.261 0.803 58 3.0 Rotifers 236 0.108 0.117 27 1.1 Total 95 4.8 6/7/10 18.8 Cladocera 207 0.257 0.604 125 8.3 Copepoda 319 0.296 1.186 378 18.2 Rotifers 85 0.096 0.083 7 0.3 Total 510 26.8 6/22/10 20.1 Cladocera 79 0.322 1.047 83 5.6 Copepoda 40 0.409 1.905 76 5.1 Rotifers 18 0.117 0.115 2 0.1 Total 161 10.8 7/19/10 23.4 Cladocera 16 0.235 0.525 8 0.5 Copepoda 45 0.305 1.130 51 2.8 Rotifers 92 0.114 0.107 10 0.5 Total 69 3.8 8/4/10 23.5 Cladocera 28 0.259 0.590 17 1.2 Copepoda 22 0.170 0.275 6 0.3 Rotifers 417 0.117 0.121 50 2.4 Total 73 3.9 8/31/10 21.8 Cladocera 6 0.383 1.385 8 0.6 Copepoda 23 0.178 0.281 7 0.4 Rotifers 254 0.133 0.150 38 2.0 Total 53 3.0
- 67 -
Table 16. Zooplankton average size (mm), density (#/l) and biomass (µg/l) in Canadarago Lake from 1990-2010 (Brooking et al. 2012).
Average Size (mm) Date 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 Average May 0.75 0.70 0.87 1.11 0.65 1.05 1.20 0.85 0.84 1.05 0.65 - 0.60 0.50 1.07 0.87 0.56 0.72 - 0.570 0.581 0.80 June 0.81 0.74 1.22 0.94 0.92 1.08 0.93 0.76 0.78 0.61 0.68 1.37 1.02 1.01 1.05 0.98 0.69 0.81 0.77 0.708 0.459 0.87 July 0.50 0.85 1.25 0.62 0.84 0.86 0.60 0.89 0.56 0.40 0.67 0.61 0.41 0.78 0.74 0.71 0.80 0.91 0.92 0.924 0.581 0.73 August 0.82 0.70 1.20 0.55 0.94 0.78 0.90 0.79 0.55 0.32 0.77 0.56 - 0.90 0.43 0.86 0.79 0.54 0.92 0.710 0.330 0.72 September 0.71 0.81 - 0.55 1.05 0.83 0.78 0.59 0.91 0.93 0.85 0.40 0.83 0.86 0.96 0.81 0.66 0.67 0.87 0.393 0.362 0.74 October 0.98 1.12 1.35 0.86 0.87 0.88 1.03 0.87 0.79 0.71 1.03 0.78 - 1.07 0.95 0.84 0.75 0.96 0.82 0.353 0.371 0.87
Mean 0.76 0.82 1.18 0.77 0.88 0.91 0.91 0.79 0.74 0.67 0.78 0.74 0.72 0.85 0.87 0.84 0.71 0.77 0.86 0.61 0.45 0.79
Average Density (#/l) Date 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 Average May 28.5 45.3 40.9 43.3 32.3 69.7 22.8 53.9 37.9 50.5 129.4 - 67.0 60.1 46.3 34.0 86.6 41.9 - 17.0 58.77 50.8 June 29.2 28.5 22.2 26.9 44.2 27.4 21.1 28.5 29.3 45.8 17.3 19.8 7.7 34.4 55.5 32.3 69.0 13.7 38.5 65.5 177.8 39.7 July 65.6 29.2 13.6 14.4 14.4 32.9 17.3 33.3 28.6 30.6 17.9 52.6 32.6 14.4 46.3 42.8 34.3 30.4 41.7 83.3 33.4 33.8 August 25.2 26.9 19.3 48.5 15.1 16.1 15.8 30.6 38.9 128.3 25.5 85.7 - 20.2 150.3 53.2 14.8 21.9 27.1 27.7 118 45.5 September 22.7 30.2 - 67.4 23.6 32.4 24.8 31.8 25.7 66.9 47.8 153.3 21.3 19.7 42.8 45.4 14.1 40.7 44.0 87.4 60.11 45.1
- 68 October 13.2 17.9 21.4 43.5 19.7 14.5 25.7 26.8 26.8 27.4 27.0 25.7 - 25.4 30.3 38.1 39.2 17.3 38.2 74.1 69.62 31.1
Mean 30.7 29.7 23.5 40.7 24.9 32.2 21.2 34.1 31.2 58.2 44.1 67.4 32.1 29.0 61.9 41.0 43.0 27.7 37.9 59.2 86.3 41.0
Average Biomass (ug/l) Date 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 Average May 230 260 254 653 174 799 405 512 371 667 405 - 322 153 395 316 248 300 - 39.6 117.2 348 June 273 165 440 316 588 417 241 200 249 175 74 371 126 369 554 409 402 118 283 311.0 419.3 310 July 144 256 229 35 273 320 93 388 122 52 120 121 76 120 157 218 276 373 415 761.9 103.1 221 August 169 130 346 191 184 118 168 220 205 166 139 266 - 191 282 402 105 75 233 140.1 148.7 194 September 91 180 - 171 312 254 164 105 262 458 419 189 154 157 285 298 66 216 306 137.7 85.78 215 October 148 259 452 341 184 185 320 203 311 114 355 119 - 356 194 219 232 203 273 95.2 97.33 233 The State of Canadarago Lake, 2011
Mean 176 208 344 285 286 349 232 271 253 272 252 252 170 224 311 310 222 214 302 248 162 254
Daphnia Biomass (ug/l) Date 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 Average May 197 192 124 511 57 653 358 436 319 618 93a - 216b 0 354 260 40b 198 - 5b 0 244 June 249 98 260 269 460 364b 201 173 201 114 246a 367 117b 271 444b 298 295b 95 209 202b 2a 235 July 17 133 108 0 102 242b 51b 344 67 0 37a 0 0 90 2 171 185b 329 290 522b 1a 128 August 99 47 216 0 128 37 102b 133 122 0 70 0 - 142b 25a 207 62b 25 148 22b 0 79 September 26 75 - 0 222 38 38 38 183 282a 39a 21a 0 100b 155ab 34 32b 100 200b 18b 0 80 October 123 147 151 24ab 94 82 246b 52 240 23a 278a 40a - 298 64ab 5ab 153b 184 207b 0 0 121
Mean 119 115 172 134 177 236 166 196 189 173 127 86 83 150 174 163 128 155 211 128 0 148
All Daphnia are D. pulicaria unless otherwise specified. a Includes some D. retrocurva . b Includes some D. galeata/mendotae . The State of Canadarago Lake, 2011
1600 1400 rotifera 1200
copepoda 1000 cladocera 800
600
weight Dry (µg/l) 400 200 0 6/16 6/29 7/14 2009 Figure 54. Dry weight (µg/l) contributed by rotifers, copepods and cladocerans over the summer of 2009 in Canadarago Lake.
1600
1400 1200 rotifera
copepoda 1000 cladocera 800
600 weight Dry (µg/l) 400
200
0 5/24 6/7 6/22 7/19 8/4 8/31
2010 Figure 55. Dry weight (µg/l) contributed by rotifers, copepods and cladocerans over the summer of 2010 in Canadarago Lake.
- 69 - The State of Canadarago Lake, 2011
While the most recent surveys were not as intensive as those in the 1970s, spatially, temporally, or as taxonomically rigorous, differences seem apparent. Rotifers were more numerous in 2009-2010 than in the 1970s, though this may be due to differences in collection methods (a coarser net was used in the 1970s). In the 2009 study, there were no differences in the communities at the different sampling stations on a given date. Peak biomass occurred at about the same time in most years (early to mid June), though the maximum values encountered in 2009-2010 were substantially higher than those of earlier years. Cladocerans were more abundant in summer 2009 than in any other year, with 60% being contributed by the large bodied daphnids, the balance being smaller bosminids. High abundances in mid June, coupled with a relatively high mean length (0.665 mm), resulted in a calculated epilimnetic filtering rate exceeding 90% per day. In contrast, daphnids were virtually absent in 2010, being collected on only one date (22 June) over the season and contributing ~2% of the cladocerans community (the balance being bosminids). On a qualitative, one day survey conducted in June 2008, daphnids and bosminids each accounted for only about1% (by number) of the total zooplankton community (Bailey and Albright 2009).
On most dates between the two time periods (1973-1976 vs. 2009-2010), the crustacean plankton seemed functionally similar, considering both abundance and biomass. The most notable change, a recent decrease in mean cladoceran size noted here, as well as by Brooking et al. (2012), was due to the virtual elimination of daphnids, which is likely attributed to the recent establishment of the non-native efficient planktivore, the alewife (Alosa psuedoharengus; see Fisheries section, p. 86) (Brooking et al, 2012).
- 70 - The State of Canadarago Lake, 2011
Aquatic Macrophytes (plants)
1935-1980 (from Harr et al. 1980)
Initial surveys of the aquatic plants in Canadarago Lake indicated luxuriant growth, with both emergent and submergent plants being abundant (from Muenscher 1936). Bulrush (Scirpus actus) was the dominant emergent, growing in over 2 m water depth and covering the shoal (Sunken Island). It, with bur reed (Sparganium eurycarpum), cattail (Typha latifolia) and the floating yellow water lily (reported as Nuphar advena, most likely N. variegatum), was also abundant along the north and south ends of the lake. The submergents Stuckenia pectinata (syn. Potamogeton pectinatus), Heteranthera dubia and Ceratophyllum demersum were considered abundant.
The abundance of aquatic plants continued through at least 1942, when aerial photographs indicated an increase in vegetation since 1935 (from Markham et al. 1977). However, following a 1958 survey, it was noted that aquatic vegetation was not abundant (from Shepherd 1959). Vegetative maps produced from aerial photographs in 1968 indicated that aquatic vegetation together occupied 1.7% of the lake area (from Markham et al. 1977). In 1935 the plants had occupied an estimated 29% of the lake area. The decline was likely due to the installation of a water control device at the lake outlet in 1956 (Harr et al. 1980), which would have raised the water level and caused disturbance to the littoral zone (shallow, near- shore areas). Between 1968 and 1976, the total aquatic vegetation increased from 1.7% to 2.8% of the lake area. Most of that change was due to increases in the submergent community, namely be H. dubia, Elodea canadensis, Chara sp. and the exotic Myriophyllum spicatum. Potamogeton crispus, another exotic species, was present in the lake at this time but was probably under reported, as it grows earlier in the season than the dates on which the aerial photos were taken (20 July-27 September). Most emergent species had declined, but pickerelweed (Ponterderia cordata) increased.
2008-2010
In 2008, an aquatic plant inventory was conducted from 19 to 25 June as part of the pilot study (Bailey and Albright 2009) of the lake system. On 16 July 2009 a similar survey was conducted (Bailey and Albright 2010). A more comprehensive survey was carried out through the summer of 2010, during which 13 sites (Figure 56) were visited on six dates between 8 June and 12 July (Smith 2010). During that work, abundance estimates were determined using the Point Intercept Rake Toss Relative Abundance Method (PIRTRAM) (Lord and Johnson 2006). The PITRAM method is intended to evaluate relative abundance within sample areas and is not necessarily representative of lake wide communities.
PIRTRAM provides plant species presence-absence, frequency, and relative abundance (Lord and Johnson 2006). While evaluating the plant community of macrophytes of Lake Moraine, the PIRTRAM was compared to the biomass method (Harman et al. 2009). The PIRTRAM provided similar presence-absence of aquatic macrophytes but was found to underestimate biomass 80% of the time compared to actual plant dry weight determinations.
- 71 - The State of Canadarago Lake, 2011
Relative abundance between species followed similar patterns when compared actual biomass determinations. For the PIRTRAM, two garden rake heads were welded back-to-back to form a double sided rake; this was connected to a 10m (33ft) long nylon cord. The rake was tossed and, once settled, retrieved slowly. Sampling was done in triplicate at each site, with each throw oriented in a different direction Retrieved plant species were then separated, identified by species, and assigned an abundance category, as outlined in Table 17. Biomass range estimates (g/m2) were assigned for each of the above abundance categories. The midpoint of each category was used for data analysis. The total plant biomass at each site was calculated as the sum of the mean biomass for each species (based on three tosses) at each site. Additionally, plants were recorded as “observed” if they were not pulled up by the rake but could be seen from the boat at the sample site.
Figure 56. Canadarago Lake, New York, showing sites sampled for aquatic macrophytes, summer 2010.
- 72 - The State of Canadarago Lake, 2011
Table 17. Biomass range estimate of plants in g/m2, by species, utilized in the rake toss (PRTRAM) method. Mid values were used as estimates in the following tables and figures.
Total Dry Weight Abundance Categories Field Measure (g/m^2) mid low high Z" = no plants " Nothing 0 0 0 0 T" = trace plants " Fingerful 0.1 - 2 1 0. 1 2 S" = sparse plants " Handful 2 - 140 71 2 140 M" = medium plants " Rakeful 140 - 230 185 140 230 D" = dense plants " Can't bring in boat 230- 450+ 340 230 450
Figures 57 through 69 graphically describe the plant community at each site over the summer of 2010. A total of 15 submersed species were found, one floating species was observed but not collected (Nuphar variegatum), and two emergent species were also observed but not collected (Pontederia cordata, and Typha latifolia). Two additional submersed species and one emergent were collected between 2008-2009 (all at low abundance). Three plants observed were exotic species (Myriophyllum spicatum, Potamogeton crispus, and Nitellopsis obtusa). This was the first study which documented N. obtusa (starry stonewort) in Canadarago Lake. The invasive nature of this species and its ability to quickly form dense beds in relatively deep (2+ m) water can have profound impacts lake ecology and recreational uses (Pullman and Crawford 2010). It was found to be fairly abundant as the season progressed at sites 3 and 4 (the northwest shore). In 2009, Bailey and Albright (2010) reported that P. crispus and M. spicatum were confined primarily to the north end of the lake, but in 2010 they were more abundant at the south and west shore. Neither was widespread or abundant. Elodea canadensis and the macroalga Chara vulgaris were widespread and were encountered the most frequently, with the latter contributing about twice the biomass of the former. Ceratophyllum demersum and Vallisneria americana were also considered abundant, though their distributions were more patchy.
- 73 - The State of Canadarago Lake, 2011
Site 1 1200 2) 1000
800
600
400
200 Mean mid-point mid-point MeanDry Weight (g/m
0 6/8 6/14 6/21 6/28 7/7 7/12
Figure 57. Summary of estimated biomass (g/m2) for each species of aquatic macrophyte collected using the PIRTRAM rake toss method for all sampling dates in the summer of 2010 at site 1. See Figure 56 for site location.
Site 2 1200 ) 2 1000
800
600
400
200 Mean mid-point mid-point MeanDry Weight (g/m 0 6/8 6/14 6/21 6/28 7/7 7/12
Figure 58. Summary of estimated biomass (g/m2) for each species of aquatic macrophyte collected using the PIRTRAM rake toss method for all sampling dates in the summer of 2010 at site 2. See Figure 56 for site location.
- 74 - The State of Canadarago Lake, 2011
Site 3 1200 ) 2 1000
800
600
400
200 Mean mid-point mid-point MeanDry Weight (g/m 0 6/8 6/14 6/21 6/28 7/7 7/12
Figure 59. Summary of estimated biomass (g/m2) for each species of aquatic macrophyte collected using the PIRTRAM rake toss method for all sampling dates in the summer of 2010 at site 3. See Figure 56 for site location.
Site 4 1200 ) 2 1000
800
600
400
200 Mean mid-point mid-point MeanDry Weight (g/m
0 6/8 6/14 6/21 6/28 7/7 7/12
Figure 60. Summary of estimated biomass (g/m2) for each species of aquatic macrophyte collected using the PIRTRAM rake toss method for all sampling dates in the summer of 2010 at site 4. See Figure 56 for site location.
- 75 - The State of Canadarago Lake, 2011
Site 5 1200 ) 2 1000
800
600
400
200 Mean mid-point mid-point MeanDry Weight (g/m
0 6/8 6/14 6/21 6/28 7/7 7/12
Figure 61. Summary of estimated biomass (g/m2) for each species of aquatic macrophyte collected using the PIRTRAM rake toss method for all sampling dates in the summer of 2010 at site 5. See Figure 56 for site location.
Site 6 1200 ) 2 1000
800
600
400
200 Mean mid-point mid-point MeanDry Weight (g/m
0 6/8 6/14 6/21 6/28 7/7 7/12
Figure 62. Summary of estimated biomass (g/m2) for each species of aquatic macrophyte collected using the PIRTRAM rake toss method for all sampling dates in the summer of 2010 at site 6. See Figure 56 for site location.
- 76 - The State of Canadarago Lake, 2011
Site 7 1200 ) 2 1000
800
600
400
200 Mean mid-point mid-point MeanDry Weight (g/m
0 6/8 6/14 6/21 6/28 7/7 7/12
Figure 63. Summary of estimated biomass (g/m2) for each species of aquatic macrophyte collected using the PIRTRAM rake toss method for all sampling dates in the summer of 2010 at site 7. See Figure 56 for site location.
Site 8 1200 ) 2 1000
800
600
400
200 Mean mid-point mid-point MeanDry Weight (g/m
0 6/8 6/14 6/21 6/28 7/7 7/12
Figure 64. Summary of estimated biomass (g/m2) for each species of aquatic macrophyte collected using the PIRTRAM rake toss method for all sampling dates in the summer of 2010 at site 8. See Figure 56 for site location.
- 77 - The State of Canadarago Lake, 2011
Site 9 1200 ) 2 1000
800
600
400
200 Mean mid-point mid-point MeanDry Weight (g/m 0 6/8 6/14 6/21 6/28 7/7 7/12
Figure 65. Summary of estimated biomass (g/m2) for each species of aquatic macrophyte collected using the PIRTRAM rake toss method for all sampling dates in the summer of 2010 at site 9. See Figure 56 for site location.
Site 9A 1200 ) 2 1000
800
600
400
200 Mean mid-point mid-point MeanDry Weight (g/m 0 6/8 6/14 6/21 6/28 7/7 7/12
Figure 66. Summary of estimated biomass (g/m2) for each species of aquatic macrophyte collected using the PIRTRAM rake toss method for all sampling dates in the summer of 2010 at site 9A. See Figure 56 for site location.
- 78 - The State of Canadarago Lake, 2011
Site 9B 1200 ) 2 1000
800
600
400
200 Mean mid-point mid-point MeanDry Weight (g/m 0 6/8 6/14 6/21 6/28 7/7 7/12
Figure 67. Summary of estimated biomass (g/m2) for each species of aquatic macrophyte collected using the PIRTRAM rake toss method for all sampling dates in the summer of 2010 at site 9B. See Figure 56 for site location.
Site 10 1200 ) 2 1000
800
600
400
200 Mean mid-point mid-point MeanDry Weight (g/m 0 6/8 6/14 6/21 6/28 7/7 7/12
Figure 68. Summary of estimated biomass (g/m2) for each species of aquatic macrophyte collected using the PIRTRAM rake toss method for all sampling dates in the summer of 2010 at site 10. See Figure 56 for site location.
- 79 - The State of Canadarago Lake, 2011
Site 11 1200 ) 2 1000
800
600
400
200 Mean mid-point mid-point MeanDry Weight (g/m 0 6/8 6/14 6/21 6/28 7/7 7/12
Figure 69. Summary of estimated biomass (g/m2) for each species of aquatic macrophyte collected using the PIRTRAM rake toss method for all sampling dates in the summer of 2010 at site 11. See Figure 56 for site location.
Plant species comprising the communities during the surveys of 1935 (from Muenscher 1936), 1976 (from Markham et al. 1977) and 2008-2010 are summarized in Table 18. For the 2008-2010 surveys, categories were based on the frequency of occurrence of each species across sites and dates; A= >50%, C= 20-50%, F= 5-20%, I< 5% and O (observed, N/A %). The diversity of submergent species is lower than reported in a 1935 survey, when 21 submergent species were considered abundant, common or frequent. This reduction is largely due to the loss of Potamogeton species. The decline of floating and emergent species has been much more pronounced, with only four species being observed during the most recent survey, compared with six floating and 14 emergent species in 1935 and five floating and 13 emergent species in 1976. Those groups may have been under-represented due to the focus of the recent survey.
- 80 - The State of Canadarago Lake, 2011
Table 18. Plant species of Canadarago Lake, 1935, 1976 and 2008-2010. A= abundant, C= common, F= Frequent, I= infrequent and O= observed but not collected. Nomenclature follows Flora on North America (1993+). * denotes macroalgae.
Species 1935 1976 2008-2010 Submergent Bidens beckii C Ceratophyllum demersum A F A Chara vulgaris* C C A Elodea canadensis C C A Heteranthera dubia A C C Myriophyllum spicatum F C F Najas flexis C Najas sp. F Nitella sp.* F Nitellopsis obtusa* F Potamogeton amplifolius F I Potamogeton crispus I C C Potamogeton epihydrous I Potamogeton foliosus F I Potamogeton friesii C Potamogeton gramineus C I Potamogeton illinoensis C I Potamogeton nodosus C Potamogeton pectinatus A F Potamogeton perfoliatus C I Potamogeton praelongus I C Potamogeton pusillus F Potamogeton richardsonii I Potamogeton zosteriformis F I Ranunculus aquatilis C F C Ranunculus flammula I Stuckenia filiformis F Utricularia vulgaris C I Vallisneria americana C I A Floating Lemna minor F F Nuphar variegata C C O Nymphaea odorata I F Persicaria amphibium I F Potamogeton natans F Spirodela polyrrhiza F F Emergent Acorus calamus F I Carex lasiocarpa I Dulichium arundinaceum I Eleocharis acicularis F Eleocharis palustris F I Equisetum fluviatile I F Ludwigia palustris I I Phalaris arundinaceae C Pontederia cordata F C O Saggitaria latifolia F F Schoenplectus acutus A C Schoenplectus tabernaemontani F F O Sparganium americanum I I Sparganium eurycarpum F C Typha latifolia F C O Zizania aquatica I
- 81 - The State of Canadarago Lake, 2011
References
Albright, M.F. 2011. A survey of Canadarago Lake’s zooplankton community, summer 2010. In 43rd Ann. Rept. (2010). SUNY Oneonta Biol. Fld. Sta., SUNY Oneonta.
APHA, AWWA, WPCF. 1989. Standard methods for the examination of water and wastewater. 12th ed. American Public Health Association. Washington, D.C.
Bailey, C. and M.F. Albright. 2009. Pilot survey of Canadarago Lake and its tributaries, 2008. In 41st Ann. Rept. (2008). SUNY Oneonta Biol. Fld. Sta., SUNY Oneonta.
Bailey, C. and M.F. Albright. 2010. Continued monitoring of Canadarago Lake and its tributaries, 2009. In 42nd Ann. Rept. (2009). SUNY Oneonta Biol. Fld. Sta., SUNY Oneonta.
Bostrom, B., M. Jansson and C. Forsberg. 1982. Phosphorus release from lake sediments. Arch. Hydrobiol. Beih. Ergebn. Limnol. 18:5-59.
Brooking, T.E., J.R. Jackson, L.G. Rudstam, and N.D. McBride. 2012. Fisheries Surveys of Canadarago Lake, NY. Cornell Warmwater Fisheries Unit, Cornell Univ. Biol. Fld. Sta., Cornell University.
Capraro, A. 2012. Personal communication. Natural Resources Conservation Service. Cooperstown, NY.
D’Itri, F.M. 1997. Zebra mussels and aquatic nuisance species. Ann Arbor Press, Inc.
Ebina, J., T. Tsutsi, and T. Shirai. 1983. Simultaneous determination of total nitrogen and total phosphorus in water using peroxodisulfate oxidation. Water Res. 17(12):1721-1726.
Esjmont-Karabin, J. 1984. Phosphorus and nitrogen excretion by lake zooplankton (rotifers and crustaceans) in relation to the individual body weights of the animals, ambient temperature, and presence of food. Ekologia Polska 32:3-42.
Flora of North America Editorial Committee. 1993+. Flora of North America north of Mexico. 16+ vols. New York and Oxford.
Fuhs, G.W., S.P. Allen, T.B. Lyons and E.J. LaRow. 1972a. Canadarago Lake eutrophication study, lake and tributary surveys, 1968-1970. Tech. Pap. No. 8. NYS Dept. of Environ. Cons. Albany, NY.
Fuhs, G.W., S.D. Demmerle, E. Canelli and M. Chen. 1972b. Characterization of phosphorus- limited plankton algae (with reflections on the limitation concept). Limnol. Oceanogr., Spec. Symp. 1,113-133.
- 82 - The State of Canadarago Lake, 2011
Gillespie, S. 2010. A survey of Canadarago Lake’s zooplankton community, summer 2009. In 42nd Ann. Rept. (2009). SUNY Oneonta Biol. Fld. Sta., SUNY Oneonta.
Harman, W.N., M.F. Albright and D.M. Warner. 2002. Trophic changes in Otsego Lake, NY following the introduction of the alewife (Alosa pseudohargenous). Lake and Reserv. Manage. 18(3)215-226.
Harr, T.E., G.W. Fuhs, D.M. Green, L.J. Hetling, S.B. Smith and S.P. Allen. 1980. Limnology of Canadarago Lake. In J.A. Bloomfield (ed.). Lakes of New York State, Vol. III. Ecology of the lakes of East-Central New York. Academic Press, Inc. New York City.
Hilsenhoff ,W.L. 1988. Rapid field assessment of organic pollution with a family-level biotic index. Journal of the North American Benthological Society, 7 (1):65-68.
Homer, C. C. Huang, L. Yang, B. Wylie and M. Coan. 2004. Development of a 2001 national land cover database for the United States. Photogrammetric Engineering and Remote Sensing. 70(7):829-840.
Horvath, T.G. and P.H. Lord. 2003. First report of zebra mussels (Dreissena polymorpha) in Canadarago Lake. In 35th Ann. Rept. (2002). SUNY Oneonta Biol. Fld. Sta., SUNY Oneonta.
Knoechel, R. and B. Holtbly.1986 Construction of body length model for the prediction of cladoceran community filtering rates. Limnol. Oceanogr. 31(1):1-16.
Liao, N. 2001. Determination of ammonia by flow injection analysis. QuikChem ® Method 10- 107-06-1-J. Lachat Instruments, Loveland, CO. Lord, P.H. and R.L. Johnson, 2006. Aquatic plant monitoring guidelines. http://www.dec.ny.gov/docs/water_pdf/aquatic06.pdf
Malcolm Pirnie, Inc. 2011. Canadarago Lake beneficial use study. Prepared for Otsego County Soil and Water Conservation District. Clifton Park, NY.
Markham, B.L., W.R. Philipson, T. Liang and D.M. Green. 1977. Changes in the aquatic macrophytes accompanying phosphorus reduction in a eutrophic lake in New York State: an assessment based on remotely sensed and other data. Research Project Technical Completion Report, Project No. A-069-NY. Office of Water Research and Technologies, U.S. Dept. of the Interior, Washington D.C.
Mazziotta, N. 2011. A survey of fecal coliform bacteria in Canadarago Lake and its tributaries. In 43rd Ann. Rept. (2010). SUNY Oneonta Biol. Fld. Sta., SUNY Oneonta.
McIntyre, W. 2010. Otsego Lake management program for onsite wastewater treatment systems (OWTS). Prepared for Otsego lake Watershed Supervisory Committee, Cooperstown, NY.
- 83 - The State of Canadarago Lake, 2011
Merritt, R.W. and K.W. Cummins. 1996. An introduction to the aquatic insects of North America, 3rd Ed. Kandall/Hunt Publishing Company. Dubuque, IA.
Muenscher, W.C. 1936. Aquatic vegetation of the Susquehanna and Delaware areas. In A biological survey of the Delaware and Susquehanna watersheds, Suppl. 25th Ann. Rep., 1935. NYSDEC, Albany.
Murdoch, T., Cheo, M., & O'Laughlin, K. 1996. Streamkeeper's field guide (second ed.). Adopt- A-Stream Foundation. Everett, WA.
New York State Department of Environmental Conservation. 2009. Standard operating procedure: Biological monitoring of surface waters in New York State. Albany, NY.
New York State Historical Association. 2011. National Weather Service observer. Cooperstown, NY.
New York State Museum. 1999. Bedrock Geology – New York State. New York State Museum Technology Center, Albany, NY.
Peckarsky, B.L., P.R. Fraissinet, M.A. Penton, and D.J. Conklin. 1995. Freshwater macroinvertebrates of northeastern North America. Comstock Publishing Associates- Cornell University Press. Ithaca, NY.
Peters, R.H. and Downing, J.A. 1984. Empirical analysis of zooplankton filtering and feeding rates. Limnol. and Oceanogr. 29(4):763-784.
Pillsbury, R. W., R. L. Lowe, Y. D. Pan, and J. L. Greenwood. 2002. Changes in the benthic algal community and nutrient limitation in Saginaw Bay, Lake Huron, during the invasion of the zebra mussel (Dreissena polymorpha). Journal of the North American Benthological Society. (21)2:238-252.
Prescott, G. W. 1954. The fresh-water algae. WM. C. Brown Company. Dubuque.
Primmer, I. 2010. Chlorophyll a and phytoplankton survey, Canadarago Lake, 2009. In 42nd Ann. Rept. (2009). SUNY Oneonta Biol. Fld. Sta., SUNY Oneonta.
Pritzlaff, D. 2003. Determination of nitrate/nitrite in surface and wastewaters by flow injection analysis. QuikChem ® Method 10-107-04-1-C. Lachat Instruments, Loveland, CO.
Pullman, G.D. and G. Crawford. 2010. A decade of starry stonewort in Michigan. Lakeline summer 2010. North American Lake Management Society. 30(2):36-42.
Rudstam, L.G., T.E. Brooking, S.D. Krueger and J.R. Jackson. 2011. Analysis of compensatory responses in land-locked alewives to walleye predation: A tale of two lakes. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 140:1587-1603.
- 84 - The State of Canadarago Lake, 2011
Sheath, R.G., J.D. Wehr. 2003. Introduction to freshwater algae. In: Freshwater algae of North America. Elsevier. San Diego.
Smith, S.B. 1978. Initial response of invertebrate communities to nutrient reduction (Report on zooplankton). N.Y. Fed. Aid Proj. F-29-R (final report for Job I d). NYSDEC, Albany.
Smith, T.F. 2011. 2010 Canadarago Lake aquatic macrophyte survey. In 43rd Ann. Rept. (2010). SUNY Oneonta Biol. Fld. Sta., SUNY Oneonta.
USDA-NRCS, US EPA, NCGC. 2009. Watershed boundary dataset. US Department of Agriculture Natural Resources Conservation Service, National Cartography and Geospatial Center. Available URL: http://datagateway.nrcs.usda.gov
USGS and NYSDEC. 2010. National Hydrography Dataset (Line). US Geological Survey and NYS Department of Environmental Conservation. Available URL: http://nhd.usgs.gov
Voshell, J.R. 2002. A guide to common freshwater invertebrates of North America. McDonald & Woodward Publishing Company. Blacksburg, VA.
Warner, D.M. 1999. Alewife in Otsego Lake: a comparison of their direct and indirect nd mechanisms of impact on transparency and chlorophylla. 32 Occas. Pap. SUNY Oneonta Biol. Fld. Sta., SUNY Oneonta.
Waterfield, H.A., M.F. Albright and N. Mazziotta. 2011. Continued monitoring of Canadarago Lake and its tributaries, 2010 results (interim report). In 43rd Ann. Rept. (2010). SUNY Oneonta Biol. Fld. Sta., SUNY Oneonta.
Wetzel, R.G. 2001. Limnology: lake and river ecosystems (3rd Ed). Academic Press, San Diego.
Welschmyer, N.A. 1994. Fluorometric analysis of chlorophyll a in the presence of chlorophyll b and pheopigments. Limnol. Oceanogr. 39:1985-1992.
- 85 - The State of Canadarago Lake, 2011
Fisheries Surveys of Canadarago Lake, NY
By Thomas E. Brooking J. Randy Jackson Lars G. Rudstam Norman D. McBride1
January 2012
Cornell Warmwater Fisheries Unit Cornell University Biological Field Station 900 Shackelton Point Rd. Bridgeport, NY 13030 http://www.dnr.cornell.edu/fieldst/cbfs.htm
1New York State Department of Environmental Conservation Region 4 Fisheries 65561 State Highway 10, Suite 1 Stamford, NY 12167 http://www.dec.ny.gov/about/611.html
- 86 - The State of Canadarago Lake, 2011
Abstract
This report presents the fisheries and limnology data from Canadarago Lake collected over the last two decades, and interprets the results using historical data available from the lake. The adult walleye population from 2004-2008 was estimated at 15,600-18,700 adult fish. Electrofishing and gillnetting each year have provided information on fish populations in Canadarago Lake since the late 1980’s. The gillnet catch of adult walleye decreased in 2008 and 2010 from the high catches seen throughout the last decade. Electrofishing catch of adult walleye also decreased in 2009 and 2010 to less than half of the long term average. Decreases in adult walleye are not surprising given the low numbers of young walleye found in recent years. Walleye fingerling stocking was begun in 2011 by NYSDEC to help increase numbers of young walleye. Yellow perch remain high in gillnet catches and electrofishing, though the number of young perch has decreased in recent years as well. High growth rates of walleye have been seen in recent years, probably due to abundant yellow perch and alewife. Populations of bass, sunfish, chain pickerel and other fish were monitored as well. Tiger muskellunge were stocked to provide a trophy fishery through 2010. Alewife were first found in 1999, and their numbers continue to increase, approaching the level found in some other alewife lakes. Growth rate and condition of alewife were high. Zooplankton size and biomass have decreased due to alewife predation, resulting in decreased water clarity. Zebra mussels were first found in the lake in 2002, and the competing effects of zebra mussels and alewife on the lake’s ecology are discussed.
Introduction Canadarago Lake has been studied extensively since 1968, including descriptions of the chemical and physical limnology, flora, fauna, and fishery (Harr et al. 1980). Since the early 1970’s, Canadarago Lake has been sampled through a unique partnership between the Cornell Warmwater Fisheries Unit (CWFU) and the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC). Sampling has included both fisheries and limnology surveys through the 1970’s and 1980’s when major changes were occurring in the fish populations and the limnological characteristics of Canadarago Lake (Green and Smith, 1976; Green 1986; Green and Sanford 1995; Olson et al. 2001). Improvements in water clarity resulted, in part, from reductions in nutrients following the construction of a new sewage treatment plant in 1973 and bans on phosphorus in detergents (Fuhs 1973), and in part from changes in the fish community. A population of small, slow growing yellow perch (Perca flavescens) dominated Canadarago Lake throughout the 1970’s and 1980’s. These small perch eat zooplankton, sometimes causing large declines in zooplankton, increases in algae, and low water clarity. A highly successful walleye (Sander vitreus) stocking program in the mid-1980’s established a popular walleye fishery and substantially reduced perch numbers while greatly improving the size of perch. This resulted in improved zooplankton and water clarity, along with increased angling opportunities.
Stocked walleye established a naturally-reproducing population of walleye in the 1980’s. Spawning occurred on shoals and in at least 3 tributaries of the lake, and strong natural year-classes of walleye were produced in 1984-86 (Green 1986; Green and Sanford 1995). By 1987, natural reproduction was high enough to cause concerns that walleye had become over-abundant. To prevent this, the angling regulations were
- 87 - The State of Canadarago Lake, 2011 liberalized from 3 to 5 fish per day, and the minimum length limit decreased from 18 to 15 inches, beginning with the 1988 season. Anglers responded en masse, harvesting an estimated 81-95% of the population in 1988 that had built up just under the previous 18" size limit. Just a year later in 1989, the number of walleye harvested had returned to more normal levels of about 5-11% (Willms and Green 2007).
Fisheries and limnology surveys were continued through the 1990’s (summarized in Brooking et al. 2001) and the 2000’s (reports produced most years from 2001-2008 by Brooking et al., also in Rudstam et al. 2011). These were periods of high numbers and good growth for both walleye and yellow perch. Populations of bass, sunfish, chain pickerel and others were monitored as well. Tiger muskellunge were stocked by NYSDEC to provide a trophy fishery through 2010, but was terminated in 2011 due to lack of success. Unauthorized introductions of alewife (Alosa pseudoharengus) in 1999 and zebra mussels (Dreissena polymorpha) in 2002 set the stage for potentially large changes in Canadarago Lake. Alewife can dramatically alter a lake by consuming large numbers of zooplankton (Foster 1993; Warner 1999; Harman et al. 2003), and alewife also eat large numbers of fish larvae (Brooking et al. 1998, Brandt et al. 1987). They were first found in Canadarago Lake in 1999 and have increased. Zebra mussels were first detected in 2002 and can cause large changes in water clarity by filtering phytoplankton (algae), which affects the food web and could eventually affect fish populations (Mayer et al. 2000; Idrisi et al. 2001). The data presented in this report are helpful to monitor changes in Canadarago Lake fisheries and limnology, and to determine the effects of introduced species such as alewife and zebra mussels.
Materials and Methods
Canadarago Lake is a 770 ha lake with a mean depth of 7.5 m and a maximum depth of 13.4 m. It is located in east-central New York at an altitude of 396 m and forms one of the headwaters of the Susquehanna River. The lake is eutrophic with medium hardness and alkalinity. Stratification occurs each summer with the thermocline forming at about 5-8 m, and the hypolimnion is generally anoxic for about 2 months. The lake supports a diverse fish community of at least 37 species. Predator populations are dominated by walleye, largemouth bass (Micropterus salmoides), smallmouth bass (Micropterus dolomieu), and chain pickerel (Esox niger). Yellow perch and sunfish (Lepomis spp.) are the dominant forage species, along with recently introduced alewife.
Gillnetting has been conducted in alternate years since 1983 by staff from NYSDEC Region 4 and Cornell University. Standard gillnets and procedures were used as outlined in the NYSDEC Percid Sampling Manual (Forney et al. 1994, see also Brooking et al. 2001). Two nets per month were set in June, July, August, and September. Nets were 45.7 m (150 ft) long monofilament, 1.8 m (6 ft) deep with six different panels of mesh. Nets were set parallel to shore overnight, for approximately 20 h. Gillnet surveys have been conducted approximately biannually since 1983, and in most years from 1972-79. All fish were measured and a sample weighed. Scales were taken from walleye and yellow perch to estimate their age. Walleye were also checked for fin clips as part of a population estimate. Growth rate was estimated from the scales for walleye and perch.
- 88 - The State of Canadarago Lake, 2011
Electrofishing was done by Cornell University and NYSDEC Region 4 in nearly all years since 1990 along a fixed long-term site of 3.1 km along the western shore of the lake (Brooking et al. 2001). Walleye, bass, and pickerel were collected the entire time, and all fish were collected for 0.25 h on two runs. Catch rates were reported separately for young and adult fish. All fish were identified, counted and measured. Scales were taken from a sample of walleye and yellow perch to estimate their age. An additional electrofishing survey was done is spring 2010 by NYSDEC Region 4 according to standardized centrarchid sampling methods (Green 1989).
An estimate of the number of adult walleye was done in 2004 and 2008. Walleye were marked in the spring with a finclip, and then released back into the lake to mix with the entire population. The number of fish in the population was then estimated from the percent of fish that have a finclip. Trap nets were used by Cornell University during the walleye spawning run to finclip fish. Up to 7 trap nets were set immediately after ice-out and checked every 1 to 2 days. Nets were set inside the mouths of Hyder Creek and Ocquionis Creek, with additional nets set off points along the west shore and the shoal off the south tip of the island. Walleye were removed from the nets, counted by sex, clipped with a ventral fin clip and released. A sample from each site was measured and scales taken for aging. Nets were fished until the catch decreased substantially, usually after 10- 14 days. Walleye caught later in the year by electrofishing and gillnet were checked for fin clips, and the total population of walleye was estimated based on the ratio of fin clipped fish. Only age-3+ and older walleye were included in the estimate. Biomass of walleye was estimated based on the numbers and average weight of fish.
Alewife gillnets described in Brooking and Rudstam (2009) have been set since 1999. Each net had seven 3 m wide panels of different mesh sizes. Nets were 21 m long by 6 m deep. Nets were set inshore in approximately 6 m of water from the surface to the bottom. Mid-lake sets were also done using two nets; one floating net from 0-6 m deep, and one sinking net from 6-12 m deep. Nets were set at night and left in for 4-14 hrs. Alewife were counted, measured and weighed. Otoliths (fish ear bones) were removed from a sample of alewife and aged using a microscope.
Hydroacoustic sampling was conducted on the same night as alewife netting to estimate the number of alewife in the lake. Acoustic estimates of alewife have been collected since 2003. A transducer was towed along 7-9 transects across the lake each year. Data were saved to a computer, and later processed to calculate the density of fish. Noise from the lake bottom, bubbles from waves, aquatic plants, and other non-fish echoes were removed. Details may be found in Rudstam et al. (2011).
Larval fish fry were sampled since 2005, and compared with samples from 1976- 1988 to estimate the abundance of walleye and yellow perch fry. Samplers consisted of a clear plexiglass tube with very fine 530 micron mesh nets (Miller 1961). Four samplers were towed simultaneously from a boom mounted on the stern of a boat at a speed of approximately 3.5 m/sec (7.8 mph) for 7.5 minutes. Each sampler strained about 12 m3 of water/sample. Approximately 48 hauls were done each year, and tows were made parallel to bottom contours covering most areas of the lake. Depths were stratified to cover the entire water column, down to 10 m. Samples were then preserved in the field and held for identification and measurement in the lab under a microscope.
- 89 - The State of Canadarago Lake, 2011
Water quality data were collected since 1990, once a month from May to October at one standard, center-lake station. This station is located in 12.2 m (40 feet) of water, approximately halfway between Sunken Island Shoal and the east shore (Brooking et al. 2001). Temperature and oxygen were recorded at 1 m depth intervals, and water clarity was measured using a Secchi disk. A water sample was also taken just under the surface for total phosphorus, nitrate, and chlorophyll-a concentrations. This sample was returned to the Cornell Biological Field Station for analysis using standard techniques described in Idrisi et al. (2001). A vertical zooplankton tow was taken from bottom to top in about 12.2 m (40 feet) of water using a 0.5 m, 153 um mesh net and returned to the Cornell Biological Field Station for analysis. Number and type of zooplankton were counted and measured to obtain density (number/l), average size (mm), and biomass (ug dry weight/l).
Results and Discussion
Using the number of finclipped fish in the population, the walleye population was estimated at 15,797 adult walleye in 2008, and 18,667 adult walleye in 2004 (Table 1). This is about 20-24 walleye per hectare in Canadarago Lake. For comparison, walleye in Oneida Lake (one of the highest lakes in NY) usually average 15-30 walleye/ha (Rudstam et al. 2009, Rudstam and Jackson 2009).
Gillnet catch rates of adult walleye have ranged from 8-21 fish/net between 1983- 2010, and currently average about 12/net (Table 2; Figure 1). The gillnet catch of adult walleye decreased in 2008 and 2010 from the high catches seen throughout the last decade, but was still higher than Oneida Lake (approximately 3-7 fish/150’ net) and many other New York State waters (Jackson et al. 2003; Rudstam et al. 2009).
Table 1. Mark-recapture population estimate for walleye age-3+ and older in Canadarago Lake, 2004 and 2008. Estimate is from combined electrofishing and gillnet samples.
2004 Age class Population Biomass (kg/ha) 95%CI 3+ 3,322 2.65 4+ 2,058 1.97 5+ 5,193 5.97 6+ 2,246 2.70 7+ 1,965 2.29 >8+ 3,883 5.46 Total 18,667 21.03 +/-829
2008 Age class Population Biomass (kg/ha) 95%CI 3+ 3,220 1.51 4+ 2,829 2.04 5+ 2,872 2.94 6+ 1,915 2.28 7+ 1,958 2.75 >8+ 3,003 5.68 Total 15,797 17.22 +/-794
- 90 - Table 2. Standard gillnet catch per 150’ net-night in Canadarago Lake.
Species 1983 1985 1987 1989 1991 1993 1995 1997 1999 2001 2003 2004 2006 2008 2010 Average
Yellow perch 117.1 90.7 55.8 51.0 64.6 68.1 31.6 57.6 114.0 83.8 45.6 33.9 96.0 99.1 56.1 71.0 Walleye 8.4 21.4 13.8 10.6 11.9 13.9 16.3 15.3 17.4 18.1 21.6 19.6 15.6 12.8 11.8 15.2 Smallmouth bass 2.8 1.4 2.0 0.4 0.8 0.8 0.6 0.0 0.4 0.1 0.1 0.5 1.1 0.4 0.6 0.8 Largemouth bass 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.6 0.1 0.3 0.1 1.3 0.8 0.3 0.3 0.5 0.6 0.3 0.3 Golden shiner 5.8 2.8 1.4 2.6 0.1 1.1 0.4 4.8 2.5 1.8 0.0 3.4 1.1 0 0.3 1.9 Bluegill 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.1 0.1 0.5 1.1 0.6 1.1 0.1 0.3 0.1 0.3 Pumpkinseed 0.0 0.0 1.3 1.6 7.6 4.0 1.8 1.8 3.5 2.8 3.1 2.1 1.9 1.0 2.4 2.3 Chain pickerel 5.0 0.2 0.1 0.3 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.4 0.8 0.9 0.3 0.4 2.0 0 0.6 0.7 Black crappie 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.3 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.6 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0.5 0 0.1
- 91 Brown bullhead 5.0 0.1 0.5 0.1 2.6 0.0 0.3 0.0 0.3 0.9 0.0 0 0.6 0.5 0.5 0.8 White sucker 2.1 3.0 2.8 2.8 2.1 0.6 1.0 1.5 1.9 2.1 0.8 2.3 4.0 0 3.6 2.0 Tiger muskie 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 1.0 0.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0 0.1 Redhorse 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 0 0.0 0.1 0 0.0 Fallfish 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0 0.0 Brown trout 0.4 0.2 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.0 0 0.4 0 0 0.1 Carp 0.2 0.0 0.1 0.4 0.3 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0.4 0 0.1 Yellow bullhead 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.6 0.1 0.4 0.8 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.8 2.3 0.4 Rock bass 0.6 0.9 1.5 2.1 1.9 1.8 0.5 1.3 1.3 1.5 0.8 2.9 2.0 1.8 2.8 1.6 Rudd 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.8 2.8 2.3 0.3 0.4 2.3 0.9 2.4 0.8 The State of CanadaragoLake,2011 Alewife 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.0 0.8 0 6.0 16.9 56.4 5.4 Creek chubsucker 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.30.3 0 0.1 0.0 The State of Canadarago Lake, 2011
25
20
15
10
5
Catch per 150' net 150' per Catch 0 1983 1985 1987 1989 1991 1993 1995 1997 1999 2001 2003 2004 2006 2008 2010
Figure 1. Catch of adult walleye in gillnets at Canadarago Lake, 1983-2010. Catch of adult yellow perch in gillnets has varied from 32-117 fish/net, and currently averages about 56 fish/net Table 2; Figure 2). This is high compared to Oneida Lake (avg. 7-15/net) and some other New York State waters (Forney et al. 1994; Rudstam et al. 2009). The gillnet catch of yellow perch indicated large numbers of young fish.
140
120
100
80
60
40
20 Catch per 150' net 150' per Catch
0 1983 1985 1987 1989 1991 1993 1995 1997 1999 2001 2003 2004 2006 2008 2010
Figure 2. Catch of yellow perch in gillnets set at Canadarago Lake, 1983-2010.
The electrofishing catch of adult walleye has ranged from 8-44 fish/hr from 1990- 2010, and is currently at its lowest point of about 8 fish/hr (Table 3; Figure 3). Electrofishing catch rates indicated very few young walleye the last 4 years. Decreases in adult abundance are not surprising given the low number of young walleye in recent years.
- 92 - Table 3. Fall electrofishing catch (#/h) in Canadarago Lake, 1990-2010.
Species 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 Fall 2010 Spring* Fall Avg. Walleye yoy 0.3 5.5 0.4 43.0 1.0 11.3 1.6 1.0 3.4 17.9 8.0 1.7 2.8 22.5 1.8 0.0 3.3 0.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 6.3 Walleye > yoy 26.7 34.2 13.8 11.0 16.8 38.0 28.1 17.5 44.3 20.7 28.5 15.3 12.8 37.0 21.6 33.6 27.9 17.4 8.3 7.8 54.9 23.1 Largemouth bass yoy 13.1 41.0 1.4 1.8 5.4 1.5 5.1 22.9 11.6 12.6 40.0 9.8 68.7 28.3 40.5 0.3 20.3 Largemouth bass > yoy 6.0 4.8 9.3 14.4 19.2 13.9 9.3 7.3 15.9 7.2 14.5 10.7 3.5 10.0 6.9 9.7 10.2 Smallmouth bass yoy 10.1 41.8 6.8 1.0 0.0 3.7 2.2 0.8 0.0 0.7 1.8 1.8 0.8 1.7 0.8 0.0 0.0 4.6 Smallmouth bass > yoy 8.9 18.8 9.5 1.4 1.1 9.1 2.9 0.0 0.0 1.4 0.0 5.5 1.6 0.0 0.0 0.9 13.4 3.8 Chain pickerel yoy 5.2 0.7 6.1 0.5 0.5 0.4 0.0 1.7 1.8 1.4 5.4 2.7 45.1 13.9 3.3 0.9 0.6 5.6 Chain pickerel > yoy 6.8 1.7 1.8 4.5 4.9 2.6 0.7 4.2 1.8 0.7 1.8 3.6 2.5 10.4 2.5 2.6 1.7 3.3 Tiger muskie yoy 0.2 1.8 2.9 5.5 0.0 5.3 0.0 0.0 7.2 0.0 2.7 0.8 13.9 1.7 8.6 0.0 3.4 Tiger muskie > yoy 0.2 0.2 1.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1
Predator shocking time (h) 6.3 6.0 2.8 2.2 2.3 2.2 1.9 2.0 1.7 5.4 0.0 1.4 1.2 1.1 1.4 1.1 1.1 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 3.5 2.1
Lepomis spp. yoy 12.0 6.0 17.0 64.0 2.0 20.0 2.0 0.0 78.0 0.0 2.0 28.0 6.0 1.0 18.2 Bluegill > yoy 30.0 16.0 60.0 82.0 16.0 6.0 44.0 6.0 20.0 32.0 22.0 6.0 2.0 10.0 26.3 Pumpkinseed > yoy 42.0 46.0 23.0 30.0 26.0 26.0 34.0 0.0 19.0 82.0 62.0 26.0 16.0 90.0 33.2 Killifish 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 6.0 6.0 2.0 8.0 0.0 0.0 2.2 Yellow perch yoy 8.0 11.0 2.0 115.0 208.0 650.0 444.0 738.0 904.0 762.0 1918.0 10.0 544.0 28.0 38.0 453.0 Yellow perch > yoy 43.0 53.0 28.0 68.0 29.0 29.0 26.0 77.0 82.0 190.0 120.0 394.0 138.0 950.0 440.0 1270.0 262.0 524.0 282.0 262.4 Rockbass yoy 0.0 0.0 11.0 6.0 8.0 2.0 10.0 30.0 4.0 50.0 16.0 112.0 14.0 2.0 20.2 Rockbass > yoy 88.0 44.0 195.0 86.0 50.0 150.0 72.0 22.0 116.0 112.0 110.0 252.0 104.0 97.0 107.8
- 93 Carp 0.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 4.0 2.0 0.0 4.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.2 Common shiner 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.3 Brown bullhead 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 8.0 6.0 4.0 20.0 16.0 26.0 50.0 18.0 35.0 12.0 Yellow bullhead 0.0 6.0 3.0 2.0 0.0 4.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 14.0 4.0 0.0 0.0 5.0 2.7 Bluntnose minnow 24.0 14.0 21.0 12.0 8.0 24.0 16.0 22.0 0.0 8.0 0.0 6.0 0.0 0.0 11.9 Darter 2.0 2.0 8.0 4.0 8.0 0.0 30.0 12.0 6.0 18.0 0.0 22.0 2.0 1.0 8.8 Golden shiner 4.0 8.0 3.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 8.0 0.0 18.0 0.0 8.0 26.0 28.0 0.0 8.1 Notropis spp. 0.0 0.0 3.0 0.0 8.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 1.3 Black crappie yoy 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Black crappie > yoy 2.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 Chubsucker 0.0 2.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.2 White sucker 30.0 32.0 10.0 2.0 80.0 46.0 56.0 12.0 42.0 52.0 54.0 24.0 60.0 44.0 38.5 Redhorse 2.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.3 Fallfish 2.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.3 The State of CanadaragoLake,2011 Brown trout 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 Rudd 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 Alewife 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 4.0 5.0 0.3
"All-species" time (h) 0.0 0.0 0.5 0.5 0.0 2.2 0.0 2.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 1.0 0.5
Standard Area VIII only: Walleye yoy 1.1 0.4 43.0 1.0 11.3 1.6 1.0 3.4 20.6 8.0 1.7 1.8 22.5 1.8 0.0 3.3 0.9 0.0 0.0 6.5 Walleye > yoy 30.3 13.8 11.0 16.8 38.0 28.1 17.5 44.3 37.8 28.5 15.3 12.8 37.0 21.6 33.6 27.9 17.4 8.3 7.8 23.6 Shocking time (h) 1.8 unk. 2.8 2.2 2.3 2.2 1.9 2.0 1.7 2.3 1.4 1.2 1.1 1.4 1.1 1.1 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.6 * 2010 Spring Survey was a whole lake Centrarchid Survey, and is not included in the long-term average of the fall surveys.
The State of Canadarago Lake, 2011
50 45 40 35 30 25 20
Catchrate(#/h) 15 10 5 0 2002 2008 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2009 2010
Figure 3. Electrofishing catch rate of adult walleye in Canadarago Lake, 1990-2010.
The electrofishing catch of adult yellow perch over the same period ranged from 26-1,270 fish/hr (Table 3; Figure 4). This has decreased in recent years but still remains high. The catch of young yellow perch has been extremely high since 2000, though it has decreased some in recent years.
1400
1200
1000
800
600
Catchrate(#/h) 400
200
0 2004 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
Figure 4. Electrofishing catch rate of adult yellow perch in Canadarago Lake, 1990- 2010.
- 94 - The State of Canadarago Lake, 2011
Walleye growth rates have remained high (Figure 5), while yellow perch growth rates have decreased (Figure 6), a common scenario in many lakes (Rudstam et al. 1996). Growth rates of both species are probably the result of large numbers of yellow perch, and increasing numbers of alewife. A review of perch growth rates in alewife lakes (Brooking et al. 2005) indicates that adult growth of perch is often but not always slow in alewife lakes. This depends on alewife abundance and whether they consume all the zooplankton.
550
500
450
400
350 Gillnet Length (mm) Length 300 Electrofishing
250
200 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010
Figure 5. Length of age-4+ walleye from gillnet and electrofishing.
350
300
250
200
150
Length (mm) Length Gillnet 100 Electrofishing 50
0 1990 1993 1996 1999 2002 2005 2008 2011
Figure 6. Length at age-4+ of yellow perch from gillnet and electrofishing.
- 95 - The State of Canadarago Lake, 2011
Alewife numbers have increased in Canadarago Lake since they were first found in 1999. In the alewife nets, the catch of 6-58/net-h was still considered to be low however; in other established alewife lakes, catches in the same nets were often 50- 100/net-h (Table 4).
Table 4. Canadarago Lake alewife catch (#/net-h) in small mesh gillnets, with comparisons to some other alewife lakes.
Date # Alewife # Sites Time set Catch/net/hr Canadarago Lake 1999 0 4 12.0 0.0 2000 0 4 12.0 0.0 2001 1 4 12.0 0.0 2002 0 4 12.0 0.0 2003 30 5 14.0 0.4 2004 151 4 15.8 2.4 2005 313 4 16.4 4.8 2006 182 4 4.3 10.7 2007 1074 4 4.6 58.0 2008 90 4 4.6 4.9 2009 836 4 5.0 41.8 2010 238 4 2.9 20.4 2011 99 4 4.4 5.6 Other lakes for comparison Otsego 2002 198 1 2.0 99.0 Otsego 1999 228 1 2.0 114.0 Conesus 1996 517 1 4.0 129.3 Conesus 1997 318 1 4.0 79.5 Conesus 1998 163 1 4.0 40.8 Cayuta Lake 1995 222 1 2.0 111.0 Cayuta Lake 1996 280 1 2.0 140.0 Cayuta Lake 2000 768 2 2.0 192.0 Cayuta Lake 2002 302 2 2.0 75.5 Cayuta Lake 2003 441 3 2.5 58.8 Cayuta Lake 2004 681 3 3.1 73.9 Cayuta Lake 2005 619 3 1.9 108.6 Cayuta Lake 2006 787 3 1.5 178.5 Cayuta Lake 2007 668 3 3.2 70.2 Cayuta Lake 2008 1565 3 5.1 101.7
Cayuta Lake 2009 433 4 2.3 47.5
Acoustic estimates indicate the alewife population has reached up to 3,464 fish/ha in 2010 (Table 5; Figure 7). This is beginning to reach abundance levels found in other alewife lakes. Alewife growth rates were high, but have slowed as alewife become more abundant. Alewife populations typically go through large fluctuations from year to year, with overwinter die-offs common (Colby 1971; Lepak and Kraft 2008). The alewife population may still be expanding but has begun to reach levels where food may be a limiting factor. Predators such as walleye, bass and pickerel have not prevented the alewife expansion to date in Canadarago Lake, but may have substantially slowed the expansion. If the alewife population expands to levels found in other alewife lakes, impacts on the walleye, perch, and zooplankton communities could be severe (Wells 1970; O’Gorman et al. 1991; Brooking et al. 1998).
- 96 - The State of Canadarago Lake, 2011
Table 5. Alewife density (#/ha) from acoustics surveys in Canadarago Lake, 1999-2010.
Alewife/ha, surface to bottom SE Alewife biomass (kg/ha) Canadarago Lake 10/1/1999 0 - 0.0 10/1/2000 0 - 0.0 10/29/2001 0 - 0.0 9/13/2002 0 - 0.0 10/24/2003 26 10 0.4 10/13/2004 15 13 0.5 10/28/2005 9 5 0.2 10/16/2006 376 261 17.5 11/8/2007 293 101 12.4 11/3/2008 691 306 42.3
11/11/2009 1,048 378 41.0 11/2/2010 3,464 2,199 86.5
Cayuta Lake 10/9/1995 13,139 6,560 108.1 9/18/2000 24,472 10,692 185.6 9/30/2002 18,867 6,272 258.1 10/6/2003 14,469 9,835 167.7 10/5/2004 14,386 6,542 214.3 10/17/2005 8,298 1,474 145.4 10/9/2006 4,688 1,171 83.7 10/29/2007 3,798 1,650 44.1 10/13/2008 3,845 1,794 61.4
10/27/2009 5,711 2,495 66.3
Sampling for larval fish fry indicated very low numbers of walleye fry from 2005- 2011 (Table 6). The low walleye fry catches agree with the low catch of young walleye in electrofishing the past several years. Alewife have been shown to prey on larval fish (Kohler and Ney 1980; Mason and Brandt 1996; Brooking et al. 1998) and it is likely that walleye numbers will decline dramatically from alewife predation. Effects on young yellow perch are sometimes similar, though perch fry can reach much higher levels (>10/m3) than walleye and can maintain moderate populations in some alewife lakes. Fry sampling found large numbers of perch from 2005-2011 when they were only 8 mm long, but substantially reduced numbers 4-5 weeks later when they were 18 mm long. Based on electrofishing catch of young perch in the fall, alewife appear to have reduced the huge numbers of young perch seen previously, though alewife effects on walleye appear to be greater. Walleye fry may be more vulnerable to alewife because they are less abundant and are present earlier in the season when fewer other larval fish are present to buffer predation.
- 97 - The State of Canadarago Lake, 2011
9000
8000
7000
6000
5000
4000
3000
Alewife abundance(#/ha) Alewife 2000
1000
0 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
Figure 7. Acoustic estimate of alewife abundance in Canadarago Lake.
Table 6. Results from walleye (WE) and yellow perch (YP) spring fry sampling in Canadarago Lake from 1976-2011.
8 mm YP survey 18 mm YP survey
date WE/sample YP/sample # samples Date YP/sample # samples % mortality
5/24/1976 0.00 3.6 - ---- 5/13/1985 0.00 28.6 - ---- 5/23/1985 0.00 26.3 - ---- 5/19/1986 0.00 81.5 - ---- 4/28/1987 0.78 0.0 32 ---- 5/1/1987 0.28 0.3 32 ---- 5/4/1987 0.00 0.0 32 ---- 5/12/1988 1.25 0.0 32 ---- 5/16/1988 0.96 3.7 32 ---- 5/18/1988 0.83 5.3 32 ---- 5/24/2005 0.00 38.6 60 ---- 5/24/2006 0.02 65.2 48 ---- 5/16/2008 0.02 11.7 48 ---- 5/14/2009 0.02 195.9 48 6/10/2009 0.85 48 99.6 5/14/2010 0.00 20.3 44 6/22/2010 0.12 48 99.4
5/25/2011 0.00 61.4 48 ----
- 98 - The State of Canadarago Lake, 2011
In response to the low numbers of young walleye found in electrofishing and fry sampling after the expansion of alewife, NYSDEC has initiated a walleye stocking program beginning in 2011. Approximately 40,000 walleye fall fingerlings are being stocked in September for 5 years beginning in 2011. This program is intended to boost walleye recruitment by offsetting some of the losses of young walleye to alewife predation.
The average size and biomass of zooplankton have shown recent declines in Canadarago Lake (Figure 8; Table 7). Average size of 0.45 mm in 2010 and biomass of 162 ug/L were the lowest we have seen in Canadarago Lake in at least 22 years. Biomass of Daphnia (a large, preferred zooplankton) declined to almost zero in late 2009 and 2010. These changes in zooplankton are what is often seen when alewife become abundant, similar to the changes observed in Otsego Lake (Harman et al. 2003) and Onondaga Lake (Wang et al. 2010) following alewife establishment.
1.6
1.4
1.2
1.0
0.8
0.6
Avg. size (mm) size Avg. 0.4
0.2
0.0 5/9/1994 5/9/2010 5/9/1990 5/9/1991 5/9/1992 5/9/1993 5/9/1995 5/9/1996 5/9/1997 5/9/1998 5/9/1999 5/9/2000 5/9/2001 5/9/2002 5/9/2003 5/9/2004 5/9/2005 5/9/2006 5/9/2007 5/9/2008 5/9/2009
Figure 8. Zooplankton average size in Canadarago Lake, 1990-2010.
- 99 - Table 7. Zooplankton average size (mm), density (#/l) and biomass (ug/l) in Canadarago Lake from 1990-2010.
Average Size (mm) Date 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 Average May 0.75 0.70 0.87 1.11 0.65 1.05 1.20 0.85 0.84 1.05 0.65 - 0.60 0.50 1.07 0.87 0.56 0.72 - 0.570 0.581 0.80 June 0.81 0.74 1.22 0.94 0.92 1.08 0.93 0.76 0.78 0.61 0.68 1.37 1.02 1.01 1.05 0.98 0.69 0.81 0.77 0.708 0.459 0.87 July 0.50 0.85 1.25 0.62 0.84 0.86 0.60 0.89 0.56 0.40 0.67 0.61 0.41 0.78 0.74 0.71 0.80 0.91 0.92 0.924 0.581 0.73 August 0.82 0.70 1.20 0.55 0.94 0.78 0.90 0.79 0.55 0.32 0.77 0.56 - 0.90 0.43 0.86 0.79 0.54 0.92 0.710 0.330 0.72 September 0.71 0.81 - 0.55 1.05 0.83 0.78 0.59 0.91 0.93 0.85 0.40 0.83 0.86 0.96 0.81 0.66 0.67 0.87 0.393 0.362 0.74 October 0.98 1.12 1.35 0.86 0.87 0.88 1.03 0.87 0.79 0.71 1.03 0.78 - 1.07 0.95 0.84 0.75 0.96 0.82 0.353 0.371 0.87
Mean 0.76 0.82 1.18 0.77 0.88 0.91 0.91 0.79 0.74 0.67 0.78 0.74 0.72 0.85 0.87 0.84 0.71 0.77 0.86 0.61 0.45 0.79
Average Density (#/l) Date 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 Average May 28.5 45.3 40.9 43.3 32.3 69.7 22.8 53.9 37.9 50.5 129.4 - 67.0 60.1 46.3 34.0 86.6 41.9 - 17.0 58.77 50.8 June 29.2 28.5 22.2 26.9 44.2 27.4 21.1 28.5 29.3 45.8 17.3 19.8 7.7 34.4 55.5 32.3 69.0 13.7 38.5 65.5 177.8 39.7 July 65.6 29.2 13.6 14.4 14.4 32.9 17.3 33.3 28.6 30.6 17.9 52.6 32.6 14.4 46.3 42.8 34.3 30.4 41.7 83.3 33.4 33.8 August 25.2 26.9 19.3 48.5 15.1 16.1 15.8 30.6 38.9 128.3 25.5 85.7 - 20.2 150.3 53.2 14.8 21.9 27.1 27.7 118 45.5 September 22.7 30.2 - 67.4 23.6 32.4 24.8 31.8 25.7 66.9 47.8 153.3 21.3 19.7 42.8 45.4 14.1 40.7 44.0 87.4 60.11 45.1
- 100 October 13.2 17.9 21.4 43.5 19.7 14.5 25.7 26.8 26.8 27.4 27.0 25.7 - 25.4 30.3 38.1 39.2 17.3 38.2 74.1 69.62 31.1
Mean 30.7 29.7 23.5 40.7 24.9 32.2 21.2 34.1 31.2 58.2 44.1 67.4 32.1 29.0 61.9 41.0 43.0 27.7 37.9 59.2 86.3 41.0
Average Biomass (ug/l) Date 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 Average May 230 260 254 653 174 799 405 512 371 667 405 - 322 153 395 316 248 300 - 39.6 117.2 348 June 273 165 440 316 588 417 241 200 249 175 74 371 126 369 554 409 402 118 283 311.0 419.3 310 July 144 256 229 35 273 320 93 388 122 52 120 121 76 120 157 218 276 373 415 761.9 103.1 221 August 169 130 346 191 184 118 168 220 205 166 139 266 - 191 282 402 105 75 233 140.1 148.7 194 September 91 180 - 171 312 254 164 105 262 458 419 189 154 157 285 298 66 216 306 137.7 85.78 215 October 148 259 452 341 184 185 320 203 311 114 355 119 - 356 194 219 232 203 273 95.2 97.33 233 The State of CanadaragoLake,2011
Mean 176 208 344 285 286 349 232 271 253 272 252 252 170 224 311 310 222 214 302 248 162 254
Daphnia Biomass (ug/l) Date 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 Average May 197 192 124 511 57 653 358 436 319 618 93a - 216b 0 354 260 40b 198 - 5b 0 244 June 249 98 260 269 460 364b 201 173 201 114 246a 367 117b 271 444b 298 295b 95 209 202b 2a 235 July 17 133 108 0 102 242b 51b 344 67 0 37a 0 0 90 2 171 185b 329 290 522b 1a 128 August 99 47 216 0 128 37 102b 133 122 0 70 0 - 142b 25a 207 62b 25 148 22b 0 79 September 26 75 - 0 222 38 38 38 183 282a 39a 21a 0 100b 155ab 34 32b 100 200b 18b 0 80 October 123 147 151 24ab 94 82 246b 52 240 23a 278a 40a - 298 64ab 5ab 153b 184 207b 0 0 121
Mean 119 115 172 134 177 236 166 196 189 173 127 86 83 150 174 163 128 155 211 128 0 148
All Daphnia are D. pulicaria unless otherwise specified. a Includes some D. retrocurva. b Includes some D. galeata/mendotae . The State of Canadarago Lake, 2011
Water clarity in Canadarago Lake has undergone large changes in the past 40 years (Figures 9 and 10; Table 8). Historically, water clarity from 1973 and before the sewage treatment plant was built averaged 1.8 m Secchi disk depth. In the four years after treatment began, water clarity increased 24% to 2.2 m. Water clarity increased another 92% to 4.2 m from 1987-89, after walleye were established and reduced the huge numbers of yellow perch. A further increase of 17% to 4.9 m has been seen in recent years (2004-2008) most likely due to the establishment of zebra mussels in 2002. Water clarity declined substantially to 2.6 m in 2010, likely as a result of increased alewife consuming zooplankton. Improvements in water clarity may be limited by alewife effects even if phosphorus loading declines (Harman et al. 2003, Wang et al. 2010).
9
8 Zebra Mussels 7 first detected
6
5
4
3
Secchi depth (m) Secchi 2
1
0 5/1/1993 5/1/2009 5/1/1990 5/1/1991 5/1/1992 5/1/1994 5/1/1995 5/1/1996 5/1/1997 5/1/1998 5/1/1999 5/1/2000 5/1/2001 5/1/2002 5/1/2003 5/1/2004 5/1/2005 5/1/2006 5/1/2007 5/1/2008 5/1/2010
Figure 9. Water clarity in Canadarago Lake measured by Secchi disk depth, 1990-2010.
- 101 - The State of Canadarago Lake, 2011
6
5
4
3
2 Secchi depth (m) depth Secchi
1
0 1935 Historic 1969-72 Before 1973-76 1987-89 Period 2004-08 Zebra 2009 Alewife Sewage Immediately of high Mussel Effect depress Treatment following predator zooplankton sewage biomass treatment
Figure 10. Historical changes in water clarity in Canadarago Lake under differing predominant conditions.
Alewife often cause a large decline in zooplankton, which causes an increase in phytoplankton (algae), and a decrease in water clarity (as observed in nearby Otsego Lake, Harman et al. 2003). Zebra mussels increase water clarity by filtering phytoplankton. This increased water clarity can often result in increased aquatic plants and algae on the lake bottom (Zhu et al. 2006). Increased water clarity may also increase predation on larval fish (Irwin et al. 2009). Both zebra mussels and alewife are increasing in Canadarago Lake, and have the potential to affect walleye and yellow perch populations, along with the entire aquatic food web. Our ongoing studies of Canadarago Lake will help us learn about the combined effects of these two species on a lake ecosystem and its fishery.
- 102 - Table 8. Limnology and Secchi disk depth (m) in Canadarago Lake from 1990-2010.
Chlorophyll-a (ug/l) Date 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 Average May - - - 1.2 1.1 12.3 1.3 1.9 1.5 2.8 4.4 - 1.7 13.6 0.7 0.8 6.6 0.7 1.2 1.6 2.0826 3.3 June - - - 2.7 0.6 1.5 1.2 2.3 2.5 2.4 2.2 0.5 6.4 1.6 3.4 - 2.6 2.7 1.9 5.0 6.9377 2.7 July 5.1 - - 6.0 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.2 4.8 2.3 4.9 3.8 5.1 4.3 4.3 - 3.6 2.6 2.9 2.7 1.7622 3.6 August 7.5 - - 2.5 10.4 1.8 2.9 2.5 1.7 2.3 0.2 2.0 - 1.5 2.9 1.4 - 3.0 3.3 1.2 3.0545 2.9 September 6.4 - - 3.6 25.9 5.3 3.6 2.7 7.4 2.6 9.8 2.1 1.3 0.9 5.8 - 3.3 5.0 - 6.2 - 5.7 October 3.1 - - 16.2 10.5 5.2 4.1 3.4 7.8 17.5 3.1 14.9 - 3.7 7.2 3.3 - 3.0 10.0 10.0 8.4906 7.7
Average 5.5 - - 5.3 8.4 4.8 2.7 2.7 4.3 5.0 4.1 4.7 3.6 4.3 4.0 1.8 4.0 2.8 3.9 4.4 4.5 4.3
Total Phosphorus (ug/l) Date 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 Average May -- - 7.3 11.5 6.8 6.2 5.9 12.7 5.5 12.0 - 11.0 9.5 4.6 6.8 5.1 7.4 6.2 - - 7.9 June -- 11.3 9.1 10.9 6.8 24.6 5.4 11.8 6.1 3.6 8.3 7.9 7.2 7.8 5.0 8.3 9.3 8.1 - - 8.9 July 7.0 - 9.5 14.6 12.5 6.4 9.7 5.9 9.5 6.8 3.0 8.5 5.5 6.3 8.2 5.2 10.4 10.7 6.9 - - 8.1 - 103 August 6.3 - 11.3 9.9 13.9 8.5 10.2 6.6 11.3 8.4 3.6 11.9 - 5.7 8.7 7.4 10.6 9.5 8.7 - - 9.0 September 10.7 - 16.3 13.4 37.6 11.4 11.2 7.1 15.7 7.6 6.9 12.8 10.3 5.9 10.2 5.5 16.6 9.7 - - - 12.3 October 10.9 - 15.3 17.0 23.3 7.6 11.9 6.1 14.4 8.7 14.8 12.6 - 10.0 10.2 8.1 22.0 13.1 15.1 - - 13.0
Average 8.7 - 12.7 11.9 18.3 7.9 12.3 6.1 12.6 7.2 7.3 10.8 8.7 7.4 8.3 6.3 12.2 9.9 9.0 - - 9.9
Nitrogen (NO3, ug/l) Date 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 Average May -- 345 - 89 343 552 482 576 401 344 - 328 361 252 404 239 381 336 - - 362 June -- 291 - 96 207 472 407 388 205 - 808 151 187 265 161 139 210 - - - 285 The State of CanadaragoLake,2011 July 326 - 190 - 110 136 341 234 122 - 181 65 68 114 53 135 100 52 64 - - 143 August 223 - 110 - 71 136 130 67 83 - 59 54 - 49 72 43 48 55 - - 86 September 84 - 56 - 86 129 50 57 88 - 71 60 34 49 66 49 56 56 - - - 66 October 169 - 103 - 77 143 115 46 94 - 77 65 - 44 53 109 174 123 59 - - 97
Average 201 - 182 - 88 182 277 216 225 303 146 211 145 151 123 155 125 145 129 - - 177
Secchi disk (m) Date 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 Average May 5.3 2.1 3.0 7.2 4.1 2.4 5.2 3.7 6.3 4.7 1.5 - 3.4 1.6 8.0 7.5 3.0 8.2 - 6.0 3.5 4.6 June 5.6 2.5 5.7 3.6 8.1 6.1 6.1 4.1 4.0 2.5 3.2 5.8 3.2 5.1 3.6 8.4 5.1 4.5 8.2 4.0 1.6 4.8 July 1.4 1.4 4.5 2.1 3.4 2.5 4.0 1.8 2.3 1.8 3.1 1.3 1.7 1.7 3.6 5.6 4.3 5.0 - 5.7 2.3 3.0 August 4.4 3.2 3.2 4.0 4.2 3.1 5.3 4.8 4.2 3.9 3.6 2.7 - 3.2 3.6 4.5 4.5 4.0 4.0 4.4 2.7 3.9 September 3.0 6.3 1.6 2.8 4.4 2.5 4.4 3.0 3.8 3.6 4.5 3.7 3.4 5.7 4.5 4.6 4.2 5.1 4.5 3.9 2.9 3.9 October 4.8 4.3 2.5 1.8 2.0 3.4 4.7 - - 5.5 3.6 1.8 - 3.2 4.0 2.9 3.5 4.1 3.2 3.1 2.5 3.4
Average 4.1 3.3 3.4 3.6 4.4 3.4 4.9 3.5 4.1 3.7 3.2 3.0 2.9 3.4 4.6 5.6 4.1 5.1 5.0 4.5 2.6 3.9 The State of Canadarago Lake, 2011
Conclusion Long-term sampling of the fish and lower trophic levels in Canadarago Lake has enabled us to monitor changes in the fish populations, introduction of new species, and their impacts on the aquatic food web. Beginning in the 1970’s, establishment of a sewage treatment facility substantially decreased nutrient input to the lake. Stocking of walleye in the 1980’s had large impacts on the ecosystem as well, resulting in a much improved fishery for both walleye and yellow perch, along with increased water clarity. Natural reproduction sustained a large walleye population for several decades. The introduction of alewife and zebra mussels began changes in the 2000’s which continue to impact walleye recruitment, water clarity, and the entire aquatic food web. Walleye stocking was initiated in 2011 by NYSDEC in order to mediate impacts on walleye recruitment. Approximately 40,000 walleye fall fingerlings are being stocked in September for 5 years beginning in 2011. Fisheries and limnology surveys have documented past and present changes which have had large effects on the walleye and perch populations in Canadarago Lake, along with the entire food web.
Acknowledgements
Many individuals assisted the authors with the collection of this data including Fred Linhart, Scott Wells and other DEC Region 4 staff. This project was funded as part of New York Federal Aid in Sportfish Restoration Grants F-56-R, Job 1-2 and F-61-R, Study 2, Job 2-6.
References
Brandt, S. B, D. M. Mason, D. B. MacNaill, T. Coates, and J. E. Gannon. 1987. Predation by alewife on yellow perch in Lake Ontario. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 116:641-645.
Brooking, T. E., L. G. Rudstam, M. H. Olson, and A. J. VanDeValk. 1998. Size-dependent alewife predation on larval walleyes in laboratory experiments. North American Journal of Fisheries Management 18:960-965.
Brooking, T. E, L. G. Rudstam, D. M. Green, F. Linhart, E. L. Mills, and M. H. Olson. 2001. A summary of fisheries and limnology surveys of Canadarago Lake, NY: The decade of the 1990’s. New York State Department of Environmental Conservation. Albany, NY.
Brooking, T. E., J. R. Jackson, L G. Rudstam, and D. M. Green. 2005. Surveys of fish and limnology at Canadarago Lake, NY in 2004. New York State Department of Environmental Conservation. Albany, NY. 28 pp.
- 104 - The State of Canadarago Lake, 2011
Brooking, T. E. and L. G. Rudstam. 2009. Hydroacoustic target strength distributions of alewives in a net-cage compared with field surveys: Deciphering target strength distributions and effect on density estimates. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 138:471–486.
Colby, P. J. 1971. Alewife dieoffs: why do they occur? Limnos 4:18-27.
Forney, J. L., L. G. Rudstam, and D. M. Green. 1994. Percid sampling manual. New York State Department of Environmental Conservation. Albany, NY.
Foster, J.R. 1993. Alewife population dynamics in Otsego Lake. In 25th Annual Report, 1992. SUNY Oneonta Biological Field Station. SUNY Oneonta. Cooperstown, NY.
Fuhs, G. W. 1973. Canadarago lake eutrophication study: Lake and tributary surveys 1968- 1970. New York State Department of Environmental Conservation. Environmental Quality, Research and Development Unit. December 1972. 296 pp.
Green, D. M. and S. B. Smith. 1976. Zooplankton, zoobenthos and fish populations in Canadarago Lake during the initial stages of nutrient control. Tech. Pap No 48, New York State Department of Environmental Conservation. Albany, NY.
Green, D. M. 1986. Post-stocking survival of walleye fingerlings in Canadarago Lake, NY. In R. h. Stroud, ed. Fish Culture in Fisheries Management. American Fisheries Society, Bethesda, MD. pp. 381-389.
Green, D. M. 1989. Centrarchid Sampling Manual. New York State Department of Environmental Conservation. Albany, NY.
Green, D. M. and D. K. Sanford. 1995. Comparison of the fishery of Canadarago Lake in the 1970’s and 1989-91 following the stocking of walleye and tiger muskellunge. New York State Department of Environmental Conservation. Albany, NY.
Harman, W. N., M. F. Albright, and D. M. Warner. 2003. Trophic changes in Otsego Lake, NY following the introduction of the alewife (Alosa pseudoharengus). Lake and Reservoir Management 18:215-226.
Harr, T. E., G. W. Fuhs, D. M. Green, L. J. Hetling, S. B. Smith, and S. P. Allen. 1980. Limnology of Canadarago Lake. Pages 129-264 in J. A. Bloomfield, editor. Lakes of New York State. Academic Press, New York.
Idrisi, N., E. L. Mills, L. G. Rudstam, and D. J. Stewart. 2001. Impact of zebra mussels, Dreissena polymorpha, on the pelagic lower trophic levels of Oneida Lake, New York. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 58:1430-1441.
Irwin, B. J., L. G. Rudstam, J. R. Jackson, A. J. VanDeValk, J. L. Forney, and D. G. Fitzgerald. 2009. Depensatory mortality, density-dependent growth, and delayed compensation: disentangling the interplay of mortality, growth, and density during
- 105 - The State of Canadarago Lake, 2011
early life stages of yellow perch. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 138:99-110.
Jackson, J. R., T. E. Brooking, A. J. VanDeValk, and L. G. Rudstam. 2003. Factors affecting survival of stocked walleye in New York lakes. Final Report. New York State Department of Environmental Conservation. Albany, NY. 67 pp.
Kohler, C. C. and J. J. Ney. 1980. Piscivory in a landlocked alewife population. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Science 37:1314-1317.
Lepak, J. M. and C. E. Kraft. 2008. Alewife mortality, condition, and immune response to prolonged cold temperatures. Journal of Great Lakes Research 34:134-142.
Mason, D. M., and S. B. Brandt. 1996. Effect of alewife predation on survival of larval yellow perch in an embayment of Lake Ontario. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 53:1609-1617.
Mayer, C. M., A. J. VanDeValk, J. L. Forney, L. G. Rudstam, and E. L. Mills. 2000. The response of yellow perch in Oneida Lake, NY to the establishment of zebra mussels. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 57:742-754.
Miller, D. 1961. A modification of the small Hardy plankton sampler for simultaneous high speed plankton hauls. Bulletin of Marine Ecology 45:165-172.
O’Gorman, R., E. L. Mills, and J. S. DeGisi. 1991. Use of zooplankton to assess the movement and distribution of alewife in south-central Lake Ontario in the spring. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 48:2250-2257.
Olson, M. H., D. M. Green, and L. G. Rudstam. 2001. Changes in yellow perch growth associated with the establishment of a walleye population in Canadarago Lake, NY. Ecology of Freshwater Fish 10:11-20.
Rudstam, L. G., D. M. Green, J. L. Forney, D. L. Stang, and J. T. Evans. 1996. Evidence of biotic interactions between walleye and yellow perch in New York State lakes. Annales Zoologica Fennici 33:443-449.
Rudstam, L. G. and J. R. Jackson. 2009. Estimates of walleye abundance for Oneida Lake, NY (1957-2008). Page http://hdl.handle.net/1813/12693 eCommons@Cornell, Cornell University Library, Ithaca, NY.
Rudstam, L. G., J. R. Jackson, T. E. Brooking, S. D. Krueger, J. L. Forney, W. W. Fetzer, R. L. DeBruyne, E. L. Mills, J. W. Swan, A. Siefert, and K. T. Holeck. 2009. Oneida Lake and its Fishery in 2008. New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, Albany, NY.
Rudstam, L. G., T. E. Brooking, S. D. Krueger, J. R. Jackson, and L. Wetherbee. 2011. Analysis of compensatory responses in land-locked alewives to walleye predation: a tale of two lakes. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 140:1587-1603.
- 106 - The State of Canadarago Lake, 2011
Wang, R. W., L. G. Rudstam, T. E. Brooking, D. J. Snyder, M. A. Arrigo, and E. L. Mills. 2010. Food web effects and the disappearance of the spring clear water phase in Onondaga Lake following nutrient loading reductions. Lake and Reservoir Management 26:169 – 177.
Warner, D. M. 1999. Alewife in Otsego Lake: A comparison of their direct and indirect mechanisms of impact on transparency and chlorophyll-a. 32nd Occasional Paper, SUNY Oneonta Biological Field Station, SUNY Oneonta. Oneonta, NY.
Wells, L. 1970. Effects of alewife predation on zooplankton populations in Lake Michigan. Limnology and Oceanography 15:556-565.
Willms, A. R. and D. M. Green. 2007. Reconstruction of walleye exploitation based on angler diary records and a model of predicted catches. Mathematical Biosciences 210:96-120.
Zhu, B., D. G. Fitzgerald, C. M. Mayer, L. G. Rudstam, and E. L. Mills. 2006. Alteration of ecosystem function by zebra mussels in Oneida lake, NY: Impacts on submerged macrophytes. Ecosystems 9:1017-102.
- 107 -
APPENDICES Appendix A. Canadarago Beneficial Use Study, Executive Summary The State of Canadarago Lake, 2011
Otsego County Soil & Water Conservation District 967 CO HWY 33 River Road Cooperstown, NY 13326-9222
Canadarago Lake
Beneficial Use Study
February 2011
Report Prepared By: Malcolm Pirnie, Inc. 855 Route 146 Suite 210 Clifton Park, NY 12065 6581001 518.250.7300
- 108 - Appendix A. Canadarago Beneficial Use Study, Executive Summary The State of Canadarago Lake, 2011
Executive Summary
Canadarago Lake is a recreational reservoir that drains through Oaks Creek to the south. Prior to 1964, the lake’s discharge was uncontrolled (had no weir) and the lake level reportedly fell three to four feet exposing large mud flats along the shoreline during extended dry periods. In 1963 the Canadarago Lake Improvement Association, a voluntary organization of property owners around the lake, applied to New York State for a permit to construct a control structure that would stabilize water levels during the summer months. In 1964 a concrete weir was constructed across Oaks Creek approximately one mile downstream from the lake’s outlet forming Panther Mountain Dam. Construction of the dam eliminated summer season low lake levels. However, the dam caused an increase in shoreline flooding. Historically, the lake level has been managed to maximize the recreational benefits derived. Seasonal lowering of the lake is performed in an effort to reduce the impact of spring flows and snowmelt.
Following the June 2006 flooding, the New York State Department of Health (NYSDOH) issued a letter to the town supervisors of Exeter, Otsego, and Richmond, and the Otsego County Board of Representatives indicating their concern that flooding and high lake levels pose a threat to public health due to the potential impact on private onsite sewage disposal systems around the lake. Prior to this storm event, Malcolm Pirnie, Inc. (MPI), an Environmental Engineering firm, had produced a Preliminary Engineering Report (1999) and a Design Report (2004) that considered repairing the existing spillway and constructing a new, adjacent spillway to increase capacity. In 2007 the Otsego County Soil and Water Conservation District (District) requested an update of the cost estimates for the work described in the 2004 Design Report. In addition and consistent with the recommendations in the earlier reports, it was agreed that a comprehensive watershed analyses be performed to facilitate a more informed decision on whether to commit the financial resources toward the proposed spillway construction. Subsequently, MPI was hired to perform a Canadarago Lake Beneficial Use Study to evaluate proposed Panther Mountain Dam modifications and subsequent recreational season lake level management alternatives. This document presents the findings of this study.
The Canadarago Lake Beneficial Use Study was performed using a detailed hydrologic model of the Canadarago Lake watershed in conjunction with a detailed hydraulic model of Oaks Creek. The hydrologic model was developed to simulate the rainfall and run-off processes of the watershed that drains to Canadarago Lake. This model computes the volume and rate of run-off that would result from various sizes of storm events and considers such things as the watershed soils, land use, land cover, and available storage
Otsego County Soil & Water Conservation District Canadarago Lake Beneficial Use Study i H:\PROJECT\6581001\DOC\Report\Canadarago Lake Beneficial Use
Report 27DEC10.docx
- 109 - Appendix A. Canadarago Beneficial Use Study, Executive Summary The State of Canadarago Lake, 2011
within Canadarago Lake. The hydraulic model simulates the behavior of Oaks Creek between Canadarago Lake and Cattown Road and considers such things as the channel shape, slope, and channel bottom characteristics including the presence of the dam. A survey of Oaks Creek and the flood plain areas was used as the basis of the hydraulic model which can compute the Oaks Creek and Canadarago Lake water surface elevations, depth of flow, and flow velocities at specific stream cross sections. Together, the hydrologic and hydraulic models can simulate the natural behavior of the Canadarago Lake watershed and Oaks Creek as they respond to proposed changes to the Panther Mountain Dam and lake level management strategies.
The technical elements of the Beneficial Use Study were developed to evaluate the performance of both the existing structure as well as the proposed Panther Mountain Dam modifications. The evaluations were designed to simulate the performance of the Lake, Dam, and Oaks Creek during summertime storms where the lake is maintained at recreational levels as were present preceding the June 2006 storm event. Four structural alternatives were considered in the analyses:
1. Repair of the existing spillway only;
2. Construction of the proposed spillway and repair of the existing spillway;
3. Lowering of the existing spillway. and
4. Removal of the existing dam and spillway.
The hydrologic analyses to determine the inflow to Canadarago Lake were performed using the 24-hour, 1-, 2-, 10-, and 100-year design storms. The storm frequency, 24-hour rainfall depth, modeled peak inflow rates and total inflow volumes contributing to Canadarago Lake for each design storm event are summarized in Table E-1.
Table E-1: Hydrologic Model Inflow to Canadarago Lake
Storm Frequency 24-hour Rainfall Depth Peak Inflow Rate Total Inflow Volume (YR) (in) (CFS) (AC-FT)
1 2.4 1,566.5 1,540.7
2 2.8 2,353.7 2,254.6
10 4.0 5,277.5 4,842.6
100 5.9 10,959.0 9,780.1
Otsego County Soil & Water Conservation District Canadarago Lake Beneficial Use Study ii H:\PROJECT\6581001\DOC\Report\Canadarago Lake Beneficial Use
Report 27DEC10.docx
- 110 - Appendix A. Canadarago Beneficial Use Study, Executive Summary The State of Canadarago Lake, 2011
The inflow rate is significantly reduced by the storage within the lake with the outflow from the lake being dependent upon the design of the outlet structure (the dam), the initial lake level and the behavior of Oaks Creek. The performance of the first two structural alternatives was compared using three flood control (lake level management) approaches. These lake management approaches were:
1. Maintain a lake elevation of 1,279.1 feet (top of the existing I-beam when in place);
2. Maintain a lake elevation of 1,278.1 feet (top of existing weir, current winter level, I-beam raised); and
3. Lower lake 24-hours in advance of a storm.
For most conditions, the discharge over the Panther Mountain Dam is controlled by Oaks Creek downstream of the dam. The 2009 topographic survey showed a gradual increase in streambed elevation between the dam and its confluence with Phinney and Lidell Creeks. This elevated stream bed creates a backup of water that limits outflow from the lake and reduces the effectiveness of the existing and proposed spillway. For storm events as small as the 1-year storm, the proposed spillway becomes submerged making the high point of the confluence with Lidell Creek the controlling factor and minimizing any benefit that would be gained by widening and lowering the existing structure (the weir submerges at 330 cubic feet per second (cfs) and the proposed 1-year flow is 370 cfs).
Comparisons were made between the various structural alternatives and lake level management approaches. The greatest benefit that can be reasonably achieved while still maintaining the existing recreational level would be from implementing the proposed spillway along with a 24-hour release in advance of a storm. In comparison to the existing conditions (I-Beam in Place) these changes offer increased spillway capacity but only moderate reductions in lake levels as the Oaks Creek restriction and the significant storage volume within the lake dominate the hydrologic process. For example, the peak discharge increases from approximately 40 cfs to 370 cfs for the 1-year storm event and from approximately 670 cfs to 1,430 cfs for the 100-year storm event. While these values appear significant, our analyses shows that the proposed spillway offers only moderate benefits as the increased outflow capacity of the structure has limited impact on the Canadarago Lake level reducing elevations by only 0.5+/- feet for all storm events considered. The maximum predicted reduction of 0.61 feet occurs for the 100-year storm event reducing the lake level from 1,282.83 feet to 1,282.22 feet.
A greater flood control benefit can be achieved by permanently raising the existing I-Beam thereby lowering the recreational lake level by one foot to the winter pool level. Lowering the lake level provides additional reservoir storage. With more storage, less
Otsego County Soil & Water Conservation District Canadarago Lake Beneficial Use Study iii H:\PROJECT\6581001\DOC\Report\Canadarago Lake Beneficial Use
Report 27DEC10.docx
- 111 - Appendix A. Canadarago Beneficial Use Study, Executive Summary The State of Canadarago Lake, 2011
flow is needed to pass over the spillway. This is a low cost alternative that provides additional flood storage and effectively reduces the peak lake levels by approximately one foot for all storm events considered. However this alternative negatively impacts recreational uses of the lake.
Analyses were also performed to determine the amount of time it takes to lower the lake level prior to a storm event. The drawdown analyses were performed for both the existing and proposed conditions. Both analyses showed that the lake level could not be lowered quickly enough prior to a storm to prevent flooding. Specifically, the existing structure could only lower the lake by 0.06 feet in 24-hours compared to 0.13 feet for the proposed structure. Similarly, it would take nearly 20 days to lower the lake one foot with the existing structure and 14 days with the proposed structure.
Removal of the dam was also considered. This alternative assumed a starting lake level of 1,275.10 feet based on the next highest controlling elevation surveyed downstream of the dam. Removing the dam provides available storage at the initiation of a storm event because the lake level remains low at all times. Not surprisingly, the significantly reduced starting elevation and increased storage capacity results in predicted lake levels that are approximately three feet lower than the existing conditions. However, removing the dam eliminates the ability to maintain the lake level for recreational purposes. Similar springtime flood storage could be achieved by lowering the elevation of the existing concrete weir.
No modifications to the existing Panther Mountain Dam were identified that could both significantly reduce peak flood levels and maintain the existing recreational lake level. Reduced flood levels can only be achieved through long-term lowering of the lake level which is not an acceptable solution during the recreational season. It is our opinion that the proposed spillway construction cannot sufficiently reduce flooding during the recreational season to justify its cost. Little flood control benefit is gained by adding the proposed spillway, whether the existing operation is maintained or the lake level is permanently lowered. More significant flood control benefits can be realized by operating with the existing structure but with a reduced lake level or by the removal of the dam and spillway altogether. Significant reductions in peak lake levels could be achieved with the removal of the dam and spillway but at the expense of maintaining the existing seasonal lake level.
Therefore, it is our recommendation that the existing dam and spillway be repaired in order to maintain the current functionality and that the concrete weir elevation be lowered to allow for a lower winter level thereby creating additional spring flood storage and maximizing its discharge capacity.
Otsego County Soil & Water Conservation District Canadarago Lake Beneficial Use Study iv H:\PROJECT\6581001\DOC\Report\Canadarago Lake Beneficial Use
Report 27DEC10.docx
- 112 - Appendix A. Canadarago Beneficial Use Study, Executive Summary The State of Canadarago Lake, 2011
Elimination of the potential public health and water quality impacts due to flooding of private onsite sewage disposal systems around the lake should be addressed on a case by case basis. A comprehensive appraisal of the waterfront properties should be performed to identify potentially affected systems. The identified systems could be relocated, eliminated, or the sanitary wastes transported to a publically owned treatment facility.
Otsego County Soil & Water Conservation District Canadarago Lake Beneficial Use Study v H:\PROJECT\6581001\DOC\Report\Canadarago Lake Beneficial Use
Report 27DEC10.docx
- 113 - Appendix B. Physiochemical water quality measurements for Canadarago Lake tributary streams and lake outlet (Oaks Cr.) collected between June 2008 and December 2010.
6/11/08 6/18/08 6/25/08 7/2/08 7/9/08 7/16/08 7/23/08 1/6/09 2/11/09 3/6/09 4/24/09 6/2/09 6/16/09 6/29/09 7/14/09 7/28/09 8/11/09 8/25/09 9/9/09 Temp (C) Location OK. C 23.47 18.85 20.12 20.65 22.65 21.52 21.29 0.18 1.54 1.66 7.77 17.99 14.64 21.08 20.16 21.35 21.61 21.31 19.96 HK. C 20.52 15.44 16.99 16.50 19.63 17.70 18.37 -0.15 -0.10 -0.12 6.35 16.89 14.54 17.12 16.43 19.84 18.88 16.86 16.45 HY. C 19.69 15.36 17.09 17.82 22.53 18.96 18.48 -0.20 -0.19 -0.20 5.95 15.93 14.61 17.56 15.99 19.33 19.24 17.18 16.34 T.B. 20.00 15.24 16.82 19.51 24.62 20.65 20.43 -0.30 -0.23 -0.27 5.30 14.99 14.00 18.29 15.27 18.51 19.26 17.37 15.77 O.C. 1 18.00 14.83 16.51 16.52 21.32 17.65 19.40 0.38 2.06 1.35 6.47 15.64 15.51 17.85 15.07 17.30 18.15 17.78 15.39 O.C. 2 19.87 15.07 17.26 17.88 22.29 18.83 20.20 NA NA 1.34 6.14 14.66 14.66 17.42 14.73 17.80 18.04 17.76 15.99
pH Location OK. C 7.77 7.74 NA 8.05 7.87 7.83 7.65 7.94 8.17 7.92 8.07 8.09 7.95 8.02 7.98 7.78 7.55 7.66 HK. C 8.21 8.07 NA 8.09 7.83 7.90 7.90 8.06 7.89 8.01 7.86 8.21 7.56 7.78 8.09 8.14 8.08 8.30 HY. C 8.16 8.19 NA 8.20 8.04 8.16 8.16 7.92 8.05 7.97 7.64 8.12 7.97 7.94 8.01 8.13 8.10 8.16 T.B. 8.08 8.14 NA 8.08 8.02 8.17 8.17 7.90 8.06 7.97 7.67 8.05 8.03 7.73 8.00 8.27 8.09 8.35 O.C. 1 8.07 8.09 NA 8.14 7.93 8.05 8.05 7.97 8.22 8.08 7.63 8.16 8.06 7.82 8.08 8.11 7.96 8.22 O.C. 2 7.80 7.86 NA 7.57 7.04 7.66 7.62 NA NA 8.06 7.95 8.15 7.95 7.55 8.02 8.05 7.95 8.10
DO (mg/l) Location OK. C 6.44 6.07 5.36 7.01 6.92 5.73 4.45 12.13 12.03 12.30 13.12 11.15 9.13 7.76 9.75 8.07 7.26 6.36 6.83 HK. C 8.05 8.71 8.87 7.50 5.81 7.61 9.42 13.23 13.02 12.93 12.93 9.56 9.01 8.73 9.70 9.55 8.75 9.23 10.52 HY. C 8.49 8.94 9.53 7.98 5.72 7.28 8.55 13.28 12.77 12.47 12.78 10.56 9.42 9.50 10.30 9.10 9.03 8.69 8.86 T.B. 7.32 7.88 7.70 5.25 4.64 5.96 6.69 13.32 12.88 12.49 13.06 10.46 9.28 7.86 8.12 6.61 9.59 8.99 10.98
- 114 O.C. 1 8.24 8.29 8.27 7.76 5.88 7.07 8.09 13.60 13.35 13.36 12.70 10.23 8.19 9.35 9.71 8.90 8.88 8.32 9.86 O.C. 2 5.70 2.89 7.59 3.92 1.51 0.98 5.38 NA NA 13.29 12.47 10.29 8.78 7.63 8.56 7.37 8.36 7.94 8.13
COND (mmho/cm) Location OK. C 0.315 0.314 0.310 0.330 0.356 0.318 0.295 0.319 0.321 0.331 0.321 0.265 0.225 0.310 0.338 0.332 0.324 0.315 0.327 HK. C 0.275 0.326 0.320 0.354 0.379 0.349 0.291 0.213 0.212 0.218 0.221 0.196 0.357 0.241 0.298 0.312 0.296 0.278 0.322 HY. C 0.422 0.470 0.480 0.473 0.492 0.457 0.432 0.375 0.414 0.387 0.374 0.332 0.225 0.432 0.480 0.463 0.477 0.422 0.481 T.B. 0.550 0.504 0.540 0.594 0.670 0.624 0.630 0.469 0.624 0.533 0.465 0.427 0.317 0.562 0.607 0.612 0.554 0.384 0.582 O.C. 1 0.417 0.418 0.420 0.430 0.496 0.493 0.514 0.388 0.459 0.428 0.380 0.303 0.431 0.423 0.448 0.459 0.449 0.378 0.474 O.C. 2 0.418 0.461 0.460 0.494 0.567 0.427 0.526 NA NA 0.446 0.405 0.316 0.334 0.443 0.468 0.468 0.463 0.381 0.494 The State of CanadaragoLake,2011 Appendix B (cont'd). Physiochemical water quality measurements for Canadarago Lake tributary streams and lake outlet (Oaks Cr.) collected between June 2008 and December 2010.
9/23/09 10/21/09 11/19/09 1/7/10 2/22/10 3/18/10 4/21/10 5/24/10 6/7/10 6/22/10 7/7/10 7/19/10 8/31/10 9/15/10 10/13/10 11/16/10 12/21/10 Temp (C) Location OK. C 19.79 9.72 7.55 1.58 3.35 2.31 11.42 16.36 18.97 20.75 24.78 23.48 21.47 15.97 12.11 7.03 0.57 HK. C 16.09 7.29 4.04 0.12 1.44 2.26 11.12 17.09 15.82 17.77 20.38 19.48 18.79 13.94 8.21 5.86 0.21 HY. C 16.77 7.09 3.99 0.00 0.54 1.55 10.19 18.37 15.46 19.89 23.71 21.61 20.86 14.47 8.15 5.65 0.00 T.B. 16.38 6.41 3.31 frozen n/a 2.53 11.66 19.28 15.86 19.53 22.62 23.18 18.87 13.06 7.82 5.31 O.C. 1 16.08 6.70 4.13 0.68 1.90 2.16 11.60 15.68 18.48 18.42 17.67 11.90 5.83 0.77 O.C. 2 16.02 6.76 3.86 0.36 1.23 0.73 10.52 15.14 13.95 16.50 19.67 21.43 17.64 12.65 9.01 5.86 0.74
pH Location OK. C 7.97 7.95 8.06 8.64 8.05 7.77 7.69 8.07 7.58 7.73 7.83 7.39 7.84 7.08 7.83 8.26 8.63 HK. C 8.02 8.85 7.79 8.68 8.00 7.70 7.41 7.96 7.54 7.85 8.02 7.76 8.32 7.06 8.22 8.35 8.34 HY. C 7.99 8.54 7.80 8.53 7.31 7.71 7.40 8.02 7.54 7.85 7.94 7.85 8.12 7.04 8.28 8.31 8.52 T.B. 8.04 8.28 7.99 frozen frozen 7.80 7.76 8.18 7.83 7.74 8.16 7.95 8.22 7.05 8.48 8.58 O.C. 1 8.05 10.02 8.04 8.33 7.87 7.75 7.76 7.87 8.03 7.96 8.13 7.03 8.40 8.51 O.C. 2 7.89 8.62 8.01 8.53 8.05 7.93 7.32 8.08 7.68 7.87 7.67 7.77 8.10 7.20 8.23 8.30 7.79
DO (mg/l) Location OK. C 4.67 7.85 11.87 13.97 13.10 11.87 12.53 9.95 8.36 6.64 4.40 4.44 7.32 6.13 8.85 11.26 16.04 HK. C 9.48 11.35 12.76 12.91 13.68 13.20 10.96 9.41 9.22 9.75 7.13 6.76 9.77 8.42 11.91 13.06 15.78 HY. C 8.60 11.18 12.84 12.94 13.64 13.51 11.65 9.53 10.31 8.61 7.05 5.76 8.94 8.12 12.16 12.40 15.96 T.B. 9.16 11.93 14.34 frozen n/a 13.15 12.37 9.37 10.39 6.91 5.99 4.49 10.13 9.54 12.62 13.87
- 115 O.C. 1 8.63 11.33 13.21 13.95 13.68 13.24 11.49 9.58 8.56 7.61 11.02 9.50 12.68 15.73 O.C. 2 7.64 11.02 12.55 13.02 13.82 13.48 11.67 8.88 8.94 8.31 7.34 4.53 9.13 7.50 10.83 12.63 13.76
COND (mmho/cm) Location OK. C 0.348 0.323 0.334 0.346 0.340 0.297 0.351 0.356 0.319 0.337 0.328 0.300 0.331 0.322 0.268 0.312 0.338 HK. C 0.357 0.279 0.270 0.251 0.263 0.162 0.232 0.292 0.273 0.336 0.361 0.328 0.310 0.347 0.223 0.237 0.240 HY. C 0.495 0.465 0.456 0.450 0.436 0.403 0.430 0.390 0.448 0.474 0.449 0.479 0.496 0.384 0.420 0.431 T.B. 0.611 0.552 0.533 frozen 0.398 0.492 0.561 0.450 0.562 0.556 0.566 0.600 0.607 0.452 0.497 O.C. 1 0.502 0.459 0.459 0.541 0.477 0.350 0.395 0.435 0.435 0.433 0.417 0.456 0.438 0.483 O.C. 2 0.528 0.469 0.473 0.567 0.509 0.355 0.416 0.450 0.415 0.467 0.445 0.450 0.431 0.474 0.383 0.453 0.500 The State of CanadaragoLake,2011 The State of Canadarago Lake, 2011
- 116 - Appendix D. Nutrient concentrations for Canadarago Lake tributary streams and lake outlet (Oaks Cr.) collected between June 2008 and December 2010.
6/11/08 6/18/08 6/25/08 7/2/08 7/9/08 7/16/08 7/23/08 1/6/09 2/11/09 3/6/09 4/24/09 6/2/09 6/16/09 6/29/09 7/14/09 7/28/09 8/11/09 8/25/09 9/9/09 Total Phosphorus (µg/l) Location OK. C 104 35.9 31.5 36.4 26.7 22.0 33.0 12.5 13.4 10.2 5.5 22.1 NA 24.5 60.3 26.1 4.0 23.7 15.7 HK. C 23.8 7.0 30.9 7.4 4.9 7.9 26.3 5.9 18.4 14.2 4.0 4.0 NA 15.5 9.9 9.8 4.0 19.0 12.0 HY. C 33.3 21.1 21.2 38.3 40.4 31.5 39.6 10.5 14.9 8.2 4.0 15.2 NA 13.3 11.2 13.7 4.0 21.1 4.7 T.B. 104 53.2 39.4 55.8 62.5 57.2 71.1 11.7 32.7 13.9 6.2 10.6 NA 28.6 25.0 56.6 4.0 31.4 8.5 O.C. 1 53.3 32.2 34.1 38.9 41.0 43.3 44.5 20.5 20.4 10.8 8.6 22.1 NA 28.9 40.4 29.2 4.0 40.3 6.5 O.C. 2 97 82.4 51.6 59.9 114.0 236.0 85.3 NA 33.6 10.0 11.0 29.3 NA 30.2 21.0 33.6 4.0 45.3 16.8 WTP NA NA 198.5 77.7 64.5 114.0 300.0 NA 540.0 144.5 149.5 213.5 NA 116.6 58.5 298.5 80.4 154.0
Nitrate (mg/l) Location OK. C 0.06 0.04 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.23 0.28 0.36 0.30 0.07 0.03 0.04 0.02 0.03 0.01 0.01 0.01 HK. C 0.15 0.06 0.04 0.12 0.03 0.05 0.10 0.47 0.38 0.55 0.12 0.11 0.09 0.28 0.06 0.08 0.34 0.01 0.01 HY. C 0.23 0.29 0.14 0.24 0.14 0.17 0.28 0.88 0.67 1.01 0.41 0.31 0.45 0.56 0.47 0.50 0.11 0.38 0.39 T.B. 0.27 0.18 0.13 0.15 0.09 0.16 0.18 1.31 1.00 1.54 0.43 0.31 0.38 0.68 0.29 0.25 0.37 0.01 0.35 O.C. 1 0.45 0.61 0.34 0.59 0.48 0.47 0.35 0.74 0.72 0.74 0.38 0.16 0.28 0.44 0.50 0.48 0.43 0.25 0.43 O.C. 2 0.65 0.69 0.56 1.01 0.62 0.57 1.00 NA 0.84 0.77 0.57 0.31 0.44 0.65 0.68 1.13 0.54 0.29 0.93 WTP NA 3.96 8.09 9.35 9.85 10.67 9.62 NA 3.66 58.70 77.50 NA NA NA 7.77 10.44 7.78 6.93 8.96
Ammonia (mg/l) Location OK. C 0.09 0.06 0.03 0.03 0.06 0.02 0.03 0.00 0.05 0.07 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 HK. C 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.04 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
- 117 HY. C 0.02 0.03 0.03 0.05 0.08 0.04 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 T.B. 0.06 0.03 0.04 0.12 0.14 0.10 0.06 0.00 0.10 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.04 0.04 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.00 O.C. 1 0.02 0.02 0.03 0.05 0.09 0.05 0.04 0.00 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.03 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 O.C. 2 0.06 0.32 0.10 0.11 0.11 0.28 0.14 NA 0.29 0.00 0.05 0.09 0.00 0.03 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 WTP NA 5.36 0.19 0.22 0.10 0.04 0.06 NA 6.89 30.30 13.99 NA NA NA 0.00 0.00 4.91 0.00 0.00
Total Nitrogen mg/l) Location OK. C 0.44 0.55 0.33 0.38 0.27 0.37 0.28 0.51 0.59 0.42 0.36 0.44 0.36 0.36 0.50 0.39 0.04 0.31 0.34 HK. C 0.37 0.31 0.25 0.30 0.16 0.27 0.35 0.55 0.55 0.45 0.11 0.30 0.31 0.35 0.24 0.14 0.29 0.32 0.23 HY. C 0.58 0.68 0.58 0.54 0.42 0.55 0.65 0.95 0.83 0.86 0.37 0.58 0.75 0.62 0.65 0.63 0.02 0.90 0.47 T.B. 0.94 0.81 0.60 0.69 0.60 0.80 0.82 1.42 1.26 1.41 0.47 0.75 0.83 0.77 0.72 0.71 0.45 0.60 0.54 O.C. 1 0.90 1.02 0.88 0.82 0.80 0.88 0.74 0.93 0.96 0.69 0.41 0.51 0.86 0.57 0.91 0.76 0.47 0.69 0.58 O.C. 2 1.33 1.71 1.36 1.43 2.73 2.05 1.60 NA 1.29 0.71 0.65 0.99 0.95 0.64 1.05 1.34 0.60 0.73 1.06 The State of CanadaragoLake,2011 WTP NA 9.29 8.34 9.66 12.10 11.32 10.57 NA 12.20 6.03 NA 9.12 9.74 NA NA 13.25 NA 7.10 8.58 Appendix D (cont'd). Nutrient concentrations for Canadarago Lake tributary streams and lake outlet (Oaks Cr.) collected between June 2008 and December 2010.
9/23/09 10/21/09 11/19/09 1/7/10 2/22/10 3/18/10 4/21/10 5/24/10 6/7/10 6/22/10 7/7/10 7/19/10 8/4/10 8/18/10 8/31/10 9/15/10 10/13/10 11/16/10 12/21/10
Total Phosphorus (µg/l) Location OK. C 27.9 30.2 13.0 28.2 18.3 18.0 8.8 18.3 25.9 36.1 28.8 25.4 31.2 27.8 25.1 21.0 18.9 13.0 13.0 HK. C 5.1 4.0 4.0 9.7 8.1 22.7 4.0 4.0 13.9 6.9 10.7 4.0 19.9 10.3 5.8 8.1 6.5 6.0 4.0 HY. C 13.2 4.0 7.7 10.6 16.5 19.3 4.9 17.5 23.5 34.3 24.8 40.1 19.1 31.3 14.6 18.4 5.3 4.6 4.0 T.B. 10.1 4.0 4.6 NA NA 37.9 5.3 27.7 30.3 40.7 34.5 47.8 32.7 20.1 24.3 18.5 7.2 6.0 10.4 O.C. 1 20.1 4.0 6.8 16.9 17.8 33.3 10.1 NA 29.0 23.2 20.2 19.8 21.9 25.8 10.1 5.5 8.1 O.C. 2 32.1 6.2 9.3 12.4 14.0 30.8 11.7 23.6 NA 41.7 28.9 31.5 29.4 36.1 27.2 15.1 10.8 6.0 12.7 WTP 71.5 8.7 79.2 92.7 62.8 287.0 50.0 75.8 NA 110.5 46.8 62.1 86.7 41.9 NA 66.0 68.8 50.3 68.4
Nitrate (mg/l) Location OK. C 0.04 0.03 0.04 0.11 0.21 0.26 0.20 0.84 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.06 0.14 HK. C 0.03 0.17 0.15 0.30 0.41 0.59 0.06 0.09 0.14 0.10 0.08 0.08 0.02 0.03 0.03 0.01 0.11 0.09 0.24 HY. C 0.71 0.36 0.42 0.44 0.59 0.78 0.27 0.34 0.30 0.35 0.15 0.50 0.35 0.27 0.14 0.34 0.28 0.28 0.52 T.B. 0.51 0.67 0.69 NA NA 1.01 0.22 0.32 0.21 0.27 0.24 0.28 0.23 0.13 0.30 0.29 0.41 0.50 0.98 O.C. 1 0.51 0.43 0.33 0.50 0.69 0.66 0.25 NA NA 0.78 0.44 0.70 0.69 0.40 0.23 0.52 0.35 0.53 O.C. 2 0.84 0.60 0.69 0.70 0.90 0.68 0.52 0.08 NA 1.44 0.59 1.11 0.93 2.31 0.37 0.41 0.30 0.41 0.71 WTP 4.89 12.30 10.70 1.79 1.70 4.52 7.75 10.85 NA 14.80 8.30 11.60 10.75 10.55 NA 10.40 9.78 1.03 7.40
Ammonia (mg/l) Location OK. C 0.06 0.08 0.07 0.08 0.08 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
- 118 HK. C 0.00 0.03 0.07 0.00 0.00 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA HY. C 0.03 0.04 0.07 0.00 0.04 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA T.B. 0.00 0.11 0.06 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA O.C. 1 0.02 0.04 0.09 0.04 0.05 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA O.C. 2 0.46 0.05 0.05 0.08 0.11 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA WTP 6.02 0.20 0.92 1.26 2.12 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 1.94 NA NA
Total Nitrogen mg/l) Location OK. C 0.54 0.49 0.22 0.51 0.51 0.55 0.46 1.99 0.36 NA 0.51 NA 0.51 0.31 0.34 0.02 NA 0.32 0.49 HK. C 0.21 0.26 0.17 0.44 0.56 0.80 0.16 1.45 0.26 NA 0.45 NA 0.31 0.21 0.17 0.02 NA 0.05 0.40 HY. C 1.08 0.60 0.39 0.61 0.74 1.00 0.46 2.25 0.55 NA 0.64 NA 0.81 0.67 0.45 0.42 NA 0.28 0.65
T.B. 0.91 1.03 0.54 NA NA 1.29 0.58 2.42 0.64 NA 0.70 NA 0.74 0.53 0.65 0.40 NA 0.68 1.22 The State of CanadaragoLake,2011 O.C. 1 0.86 0.75 0.32 0.78 0.87 0.96 0.48 NA NA NA 0.96 NA 1.21 0.87 0.52 0.42 NA 0.35 0.75 O.C. 2 1.77 0.93 0.52 1.01 1.13 0.97 0.78 2.61 NA NA 1.17 NA 0.32 3.19 0.72 0.77 NA 0.57 0.91 WTP 13.70 13.40 12.40 11.10 10.90 5.50 8.60 15.68 NA NA 12.70 NA 14.00 12.85 NA 15.80 NA 8.99 8.29 Appendix E. Physiochemical water quality measurements for Canadarago Lake (surface to 12m) collected in June and July 2008.
6/11/08 6/19/08 6/25/08 7/2/08 7/9/08 7/16/08 7/23/08 Temp (C) Depth (m) 0 22.49 20.53 21.10 22.42 24.49 23.07 24.24 2 22.48 20.54 20.98 22.36 24.48 23.07 24.25 4 22.00 20.55 20.93 22.28 23.98 23.04 24.24 6 17.31 17.83 19.40 20.59 20.62 22.14 23.07 8 14.36 14.33 14.35 14.27 15.99 16.18 16.86 10 10.96 11.89 11.99 12.02 13.65 12.87 12.87 12 10.49 11.33 11.52 11.56 11.57 12.01 12.15
pH Depth (m) 0 8.49 8.43 8.40 8.66 8.48 no data 8.42 2 8.45 8.36 8.41 8.62 8.56 no data 8.44 4 8.43 8.36 8.44 8.61 8.57 no data 8.46 6 8.45 8.31 8.28 8.36 8.38 no data 8.32 8 8.19 7.93 7.89 7.70 7.85 no data 7.58 10 7.76 7.65 7.62 7.59 7.68 no data 7.52 12 7.64 7.59 7.58 7.62 7.74 no data 7.56
DO (mg/l) Depth (m) 0 8.90 8.25 9.03 9.76 8.00 8.91 8.78 2 9.12 8.44 9.11 9.26 7.93 8.96 8.89 4 9.29 8.47 9.14 9.51 8.10 9.02 8.76
- 119 6 10.01 9.41 8.58 8.56 7.76 8.74 8.66 8 8.60 6.72 6.31 3.23 4.81 3.15 2.09 10 2.20 1.88 0.77 0.25 1.19 0.33 0.12 12 1.00 0.49 0.22 0.09 0.25 0.08 0.07
COND (mmho/cm) Depth (m) 0 0.345 0.342 0.338 0.333 0.327 0.321 0.248 2 0.345 0.342 0.338 0.333 0.327 0.321 0.248 4 0.346 0.342 0.338 0.333 0.327 0.320 0.248 6 0.349 0.351 0.346 0.342 0.341 0.327 0.256 8 0.356 0.358 0.359 0.362 0.359 0.361 0.287 10 0.369 0.368 0.370 0.372 0.367 0.372 0.298 12 0.371 0.372 0.372 0.376 0.382 0.380 0.305 The State of CanadaragoLake,2011 Appendix E (cont'd). Physiochemical water quality measurements for Canadarago Lake (surface to 12m) collected between January and December 2009.
1/6/09 2/11/09 3/6/09 4/24/09 6/2/09 6/16/09 6/29/09 7/14/09 7/28/09 8/11/09 8/25/09 9/9/09 9/23/09 10/21/09 11/19/09 Temp (C) Depth (m) 0 0.34 -0.06 0.13 7.28 15.89 20.86 21.94 20.54 21.97 22.61 24.24 21.28 18.49 10.76 8.14 2 0.39 0.60 1.24 7.05 15.67 20.80 21.83 20.52 21.92 22.50 23.75 21.22 18.45 10.76 7.75 4 0.40 0.66 1.21 6.95 NA 18.50 21.10 20.46 21.88 22.33 23.69 21.00 18.37 10.75 7.74 6 0.42 0.76 0.75 6.93 15.62 16.02 18.09 20.39 21.74 21.42 22.83 20.22 18.24 10.74 7.71 8 0.57 1.15 1.31 6.90 15.51 14.87 14.86 14.71 17.33 18.47 19.22 18.86 18.18 10.72 7.71 10 0.67 1.15 1.41 6.87 NA 13.04 13.67 13.85 13.26 14.21 14.58 15.04 16.46 10.70 7.72 12 0.64 1.53 1.63 6.89 12.77 12.47 12.76 NA 13.05 13.33 13.61 13.74 13.76 10.35 6.96
pH Depth (m) 0 8.21 8.10 7.92 8.62 8.57 8.41 8.78 7.56 8.73 8.40 8.26 8.48 8.05 8.22 8.15 2 8.18 8.14 7.98 8.75 8.58 8.42 8.77 7.53 8.82 8.36 8.23 8.47 8.01 8.21 8.14 4 8.16 8.11 7.99 8.74 NA 8.28 8.61 7.46 8.83 8.36 8.25 8.37 7.97 8.19 8.13 6 8.11 8.05 7.87 8.74 8.55 8.34 8.21 7.72 8.81 8.16 7.85 7.87 7.92 8.17 8.13 8 8.07 7.98 7.78 8.48 8.56 7.96 8.00 7.04 9.22 7.57 7.52 7.51 7.87 8.17 8.13 10 8.04 7.90 7.75 8.32 NA 7.70 7.90 7.04 8.82 7.58 7.58 7.56 7.43 8.15 8.14 12 7.87 7.87 7.75 8.23 7.89 7.60 7.85 NA 8.62 7.62 7.59 7.59 7.40 8.04 8.04
DO (mg/l) Depth (m) 0 13.47 12.14 13.45 12.10 9.72 9.15 9.94 8.35 8.73 8.20 7.47 9.21 8.28 9.81 10.56 2 13.01 12.26 12.15 12.07 9.98 9.41 10.20 8.12 8.99 8.15 7.52 9.09 8.15 9.70 10.57 4 12.79 11.68 11.94 11.99 NA 9.35 8.57 7.96 8.82 8.15 7.53 8.64 8.01 9.69 10.52
- 120 6 10.82 11.25 11.92 9.98 9.17 6.30 7.77 8.53 6.91 5.25 5.76 7.58 9.76 10.45 8 12.11 9.37 9.07 11.88 9.00 5.90 2.43 0.20 0.63 1.23 0.70 0.33 7.46 9.79 10.48 10 11.64 8.45 8.87 11.87 NA 0.83 0.30 0.18 0.20 0.52 0.48 0.36 0.60 9.85 10.52 12 11.09 8.51 8.70 11.71 3.50 0.14 0.20 NA 0.15 0.33 0.43 0.37 0.37 9.54 9.85
COND (mmho/cm) Depth (m) 0 0.327 0.345 0.339 0.349 0.347 0.351 0.325 0.343 0.336 0.329 0.321 0.318 0.338 0.328 0.343 2 0.325 0.343 0.347 0.349 0.346 0.352 0.325 0.343 0.336 0.329 0.321 0.318 0.338 0.328 0.343 4 0.325 0.343 0.347 0.349 NA 0.366 0.331 0.343 0.335 0.329 0.321 0.319 0.339 0.328 0.342 6 0.325 0.350 0.398 0.348 0.347 0.362 0.367 0.344 0.336 0.331 0.332 0.329 0.338 0.328 0.342 8 0.325 0.364 0.387 0.346 0.346 0.368 0.351 0.373 0.364 0.354 0.350 0.354 0.339 0.327 0.342 10 0.330 0.385 0.416 0.347 NA 0.378 0.358 0.377 0.384 0.373 0.375 0.373 0.364 0.329 0.342
12 0.382 0.420 0.436 0.348 0.360 0.379 0.362 NA 0.384 0.382 0.384 0.387 0.404 0.343 0.373 The State of CanadaragoLake,2011 Appendix E (cont'd). Physiochemical water quality measurements for Canadarago Lake (surface to 12m) collected between January and December 2009.
1/7/10 2/22/10 3/18/10 4/21/10 5/24/10 6/7/10 6/22/10 7/7/10 7/19/10 8/18/10 8/31/10 9/15/10 10/13/10 11/16/10 Temp (C) Depth (m) 0 0.76 0.00 1.91 9.64 18.35 20.56 21.57 26.16 25.00 22.89 22.47 18.24 14.20 7.32 2 2.05 1.73 2.88 9.45 17.37 20.52 21.37 25.27 24.90 22.89 21.84 18.24 14.21 7.31 4 2.07 1.98 2.91 8.65 14.11 20.07 19.79 22.00 24.79 22.87 21.68 18.23 14.20 7.31 6 2.15 2.15 2.44 8.41 13.24 13.94 17.48 18.13 19.09 22.84 21.05 18.21 14.19 7.30 8 2.26 2.27 2.50 8.38 12.11 13.94 13.07 13.18 13.36 17.50 18.47 18.20 14.18 7.30 10 2.17 1.88 2.39 8.14 11.34 11.43 12.09 11.91 11.89 13.44 13.90 15.10 14.17 7.31 12 2.38 2.53 2.32 7.86 11.23 11.42 11.81 11.60 11.83 11.99 12.52 13.11 13.44 7.19
pH Depth (m) 0 8.39 7.90 8.19 7.91 8.74 8.27 8.62 8.26 8.19 8.20 7.82 7.22 8.27 8.54 2 8.56 7.64 7.65 7.93 8.76 8.26 8.61 8.08 8.19 8.21 7.79 7.30 8.20 8.55 4 8.59 7.53 7.64 7.95 8.69 8.21 8.67 7.95 8.18 8.19 7.74 7.33 8.20 8.52 6 8.55 7.40 7.51 8.02 8.63 8.17 8.30 7.40 7.56 8.17 8.22 7.53 8.18 8.51 8 8.49 7.25 7.37 8.04 8.54 7.83 7.95 7.56 7.69 7.45 8.05 7.71 8.17 8.50 10 8.29 7.23 7.33 7.83 8.26 7.52 7.91 7.85 7.73 7.51 8.42 8.55 8.16 8.47 12 8.15 7.20 7.29 7.59 8.15 7.49 7.82 7.83 7.66 7.53 8.29 8.75 7.93 8.24
DO (mg/L) Depth (m) 0 14.63 14.71 13.56 11.75 11.67 8.88 11.37 8.98 7.57 7.39 8.15 7.48 9.04 10.79 2 13.07 11.30 11.90 11.78 11.50 8.89 11.33 9.01 7.23 7.32 8.39 7.22 9.10 10.76 4 12.97 10.72 11.86 11.85 11.51 8.91 10.62 8.21 7.21 7.22 8.01 7.22 9.14 11.00
- 121 6 12.68 9.64 9.75 11.74 10.27 10.17 6.80 0.21 0.38 7.16 7.73 7.04 9.12 11.12 8 12.20 8.75 7.96 11.56 8.87 5.21 0.59 0.09 0.19 0.86 3.63 6.89 9.15 11.52 10 11.24 9.03 9.34 10.92 6.40 1.21 0.08 0.08 0.25 0.56 0.29 0.49 9.11 11.40 12 9.85 7.91 8.10 10.15 5.89 1.18 0.07 0.06 0.47 0.66 0.34 0.60 7.88 9.88
COND (mmho/cm) Depth (m) 0 0.372 0.365 0.182 0.364 0.358 0.327 0.330 0.323 0.286 0.269 0.328 0.319 0.276 0.319 2 0.361 0.354 0.367 0.364 0.358 0.327 0.330 0.322 0.296 0.269 0.326 0.319 0.276 0.319 4 0.361 0.357 0.367 0.364 0.360 0.327 0.334 0.326 0.296 0.269 0.322 0.319 0.276 0.319 6 0.362 0.375 0.386 0.363 0.363 0.344 0.354 0.355 0.334 0.268 0.323 0.319 0.276 0.319 8 0.363 0.389 0.404 0.363 0.365 0.350 0.371 0.381 0.356 0.314 0.357 0.319 0.277 0.319 10 0.435 0.453 0.443 0.367 0.367 0.354 0.372 0.383 0.363 0.330 0.385 0.380 0.277 0.319
12 0.487 0.452 0.529 0.367 0.368 0.354 0.375 0.386 0.367 0.343 0.392 0.399 0.322 0.335 The State of CanadaragoLake,2011 Appendix F. Nutrient concentrations for Canadarago Lake (surface to 12m) collected between June and August 2008.
6/11/08 6/19/08 6/25/08 7/2/08 7/9/08 7/16/08 7/23/08 8/20/08 Total Phosphorus (ug/l) Depth (m) 09 7 10 11 5 15 9 4 49 10 11 9 9 13 8 6 813 9 12 20 11 14 16 14 12 17 26 22 45 77 130 141 104
Nitrate+Nitrite Depth (m) 0 0.22 0.14 0.15 0.07 0.03 0.02 BD BD 4 0.21 0.15 0.13 0.07 0.04 0.02 BD 0.02 8 0.23 0.18 0.16 0.14 0.13 0.13 0.12 0.02 12 0.11 0.09 0.16 BD BD BD BD 0.02
Ammonia Depth (m) 0 0.02 BD BD BD 0.05 BD 0.02 BD 4 BD BD BD 0.03 0.05 BD 0.02 0.02 8 BD BD 0.04 0.17 0.23 0.13 0.16 BD
- 122 12 0.21 0.22 0.31 0.34 0.38 0.32 0.29 0.06
Total Nitrogen Depth (m) 0 0.52 0.45 0.44 0.28 0.20 0.32 0.27 0.32 4 0.42 0.43 0.42 0.35 0.22 0.31 0.26 0.30 8 0.39 0.45 0.49 0.48 0.51 0.58 0.60 0.26 12 0.39 0.50 0.39 0.49 0.58 0.80 0.70 0.73
BD = below detection level (0.02 mg/l for nitrate and ammonia,0.04 mg/l for total nitrogen, and 4 µg/l for total phosphorus) The State of CanadaragoLake,2011 Appendix F (cont'd). Nutrient concentrations for Canadarago Lake (surface to 12m) collected between January and December 2009.
1/6/09 2/11/09 3/6/09 4/24/09 6/2/09 6/16/09 6/29/09 7/14/09 7/28/09 8/11/09 8/25/09 9/9/09 9/23/09 10/21/09 11/19/09 Total Phosphorus (µg/l) Depth (m) 09 5 3 10 26 NA 10 NA 15 49 7 15 61 18 8 311 6 5 9 18 NA NA NA 13 21 14 17 37 23 43 613 9 3 13 12 NA 17 19 15 13 16 26 20 27 16 912 9 21 8 6 NA NA NA 44 54 68 25 19 21 15 12 9 10 12 5 11 NA 46 76 93 208 387 1440 608 23 21
Nitrate (mg/l) Depth (m) 0 0.24 0.27 0.39 0.39 0.09 0.02 BD NA 0.04 BD 0.32 BD BD BD 0.03 3 0.24 0.26 0.32 0.39 0.08 0.03 NA NA 0.04 BD BD BD BD BD 0.04 6 0.24 0.27 0.32 0.39 0.08 0.06 0.07 0.01 0.03 BD BD BD BD 0.02 0.04 9 0.23 0.33 0.62 0.39 0.09 0.10 NA NA 0.04 BD BD BD BD 0.02 0.04 12 0.26 0.44 0.59 0.39 0.14 0.06 0.09 0.02 0.04 BD BD BD 0.25 BD 0.10
Ammonia (mg/l) Depth (m) 0 0.02 0.06 0.04 BD BD BD 0.02 NA 0.03 BD BD BD 0.08 0.08 0.08 3 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.03 BD BD NA NA BD BD BD BD 0.05 0.05 0.11 6 0.02 0.05 0.04 0.02 BD BD 0.05 NA BD BD BD 0.53 0.03 0.05 0.12
- 123 9 0.03 0.06 0.04 0.03 BD 0.06 NA NA BD BD BD BD 0.05 0.07 0.09 12 0.03 0.08 0.09 BD 0.09 0.26 0.36 0.23 0.44 0.47 0.82 0.95 1.24 0.06 0.08
Total Nitrogen mg/l) Depth (m) 0 0.52 0.52 0.47 0.44 0.39 0.47 0.27 NA 0.21 0.29 0.28 0.57 0.46 0.54 0.28 3 0.53 0.52 0.40 0.46 0.38 0.51 NA NA 0.22 0.08 0.32 0.28 0.280.39 0.390.43 0.430.28 0.28 6 0.52 0.54 0.41 0.46 0.40 0.49 0.44 0.37 0.25 0.00 0.28 0.20 0.32 0.48 0.23 9 0.49 0.59 0.64 0.43 0.38 0.43 NA NA 0.26 0.08 0.42 0.26 0.38 0.45 0.26 12 0.53 0.73 0.62 0.44 0.49 0.65 0.64 0.61 0.68 0.52 0.97 0.95 2.02 0.44 0.31 The State of CanadaragoLake,2011 BD = below detection level (0.02 mg/l for nitrate and ammonia,0.04 mg/l for total nitrogen, and 4 µg/l for total phosphorus) Appendix F (cont'd). Nutrient concentrations for Canadarago Lake (surface to 12m) collected between January and December 2010.
1/7/10 2/22/10 3/18/10 4/21/10 5/24/10 6/7/10 6/22/10 7/7/10 7/19/10 8/4/10 8/18/10 8/31/10 9/15/10 10/13/10 11/16/10 Total Phosphorus (µg/l) Depth (m) 035 39 7 6 71 11 15 14 12 9 19 18 21 19 12 321 25 10 5 28 14 30 22 7 20 47 27 22 20 17 618 11 11 6 20 16 25 10 16 24 18 20 26 17 16 916 12 10 6 18 18 22 53 84 77 50 41 25 17 11 12 12 18 15 7 22 28 44 126 174 NA 241 105 366 24 12
Nitrate (mg/l) Depth (m) 0 0.08 0.26 0.21 0.25 0.06 0.01 0.01 BD 0.02 BD BD BD BD 0.03 0.17 3 0.07 0.22 0.18 0.25 0.06 0.01 0.01 BD BD BD BD BD BD 0.03 0.04 6 0.08 0.19 0.20 0.25 0.08 0.01 0.01 BD BD BD BD BD BD 0.03 0.04 9 0.09 0.27 0.35 0.25 0.12 0.08 0.01 BD BD BD BD BD BD 0.03 0.04 12 0.33 0.50 0.53 0.25 0.13 0.08 0.01 BD BD BD BD BD BD 0.03 0.04
Ammonia (mg/l) Depth (m) 0 0.19 0.06 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 0.01 0.01 NA NA 3 0.11 0.06 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 0.01 0.01 NA NA 6 0.05 0.10 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 0.01 0.01 NA NA
- 124 9 0.08 0.09 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 0.01 0.04 NA NA 12 0.09 0.12 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 0.02 0.87 NA NA
Total Nitrogen mg/l) Depth (m) 0 0.70 0.75 0.42 0.56 1.96 0.24 0.26 0.33 0.28 0.42 0.29 0.72 0.30 0.20 0.00 3 0.51 0.71 0.49 0.55 1.86 0.23 0.30 0.38 0.17 0.39 0.38 0.37 0.00 0.21 0.30 6 0.44 0.52 0.52 0.62 1.97 0.26 0.29 0.35 0.19 0.46 0.30 0.30 0.10 0.29 0.25 9 0.48 0.58 0.60 0.50 1.84 0.39 0.29 0.40 0.33 0.71 0.48 0.33 0.00 0.21 0.20 12 0.68 0.85 0.80 0.50 1.93 0.53 0.46 0.59 0.51 0.98 0.72 0.62 0.27 0.21
BD = below detection level (0.02 mg/l for nitrate and ammonia,0.04 mg/l for total nitrogen, and 4 µg/l for total phosphorus) The State of CanadaragoLake,2011