DOCSLIB.ORG

1 Willard N. Harman

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
1 Willard N. Harman 1 INTRODUCTION Willard N. Harman The Biological Field station (BFS) continued to work closely with both graduate and undergraduate students whose efforts were critical to this Annual Report and to the ongoing research on the Otsego Lake ecosystem. Matthew Albright, Mead McCoy and David Ramsey continued their graduate work, the former with the support of the Otsego County Conservation Association (OCCA) and the U.s. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). OCCA also funded three high school students: two via FHV Mecklenbury Conservation fellowships plus support for a Village of Cooperstown intern to monitor water quality in the upper Susquehanna. These positions were held by Darcy King, Cherry Valley Central, and Kristen France and Colleen Moriarty, Oneonta High School, respectively. The New York Academy of Sciences Research Training internships supported Anne Mary Meyers from Owen D. Young, Brooke Baker from Oneonta and Tavis Austin from Cooperstwon High. Dylan Sickles and James Hakala from SUNY Cobleskill were sponsored by Robert C. MacWatters Internships in the Aquatic Sciences, funded by the OCCA, SUNY Cobleskill, SUNY Oneonta and the Biological Field Station. Marcy Goldberg, from Rochester polytechnic Institute, received an OCCA Rufus J. Thayer Otsego Lake Research Assistantship. Tina Nelson, SUNY Oneonta, helped in the office with support from the Oneonta Alumni Association. Jodi Fiorella and Kaaren Illsley, both from SUNY Oneonta, completed undergraduate and graduate "directed study" problems, respectively. Linda Taylor, SUNY Oneonta, held a Peterson Family (Greenwoods Conservancy) Internship. The OCCA generously provided funding, joining the "Friends of Goodyear Swamp Sanctuary", to repair the walkways at Goodyear Swamp Sanctuary. Don Denmead, Ken Beckering and Philip DeBlasi, all from SUNY Oneonta, did the work. James Nash, a high school volunteer from Buffalo, NY., and Erin Stock, a Herkimer-Oneida County BOCES, School for Excellence Intern, were involved in the summers research programs. Drs. L. P. Sohacki, W. L. Butts, and B.R. Dayton continued long term studies in their areas of expertise. Dr. John Foster, from the SUNY Cobleskill Fisheries and Wildlife Technology Program, worked his fifth year as a BFS Visiting Researcher. Students enrolled in several SUNY Oneonta and SUNY Cobleskill on-campus com:ses and attended field exercises on site. Bio. 108, Ecology and Field Biology, was offered by B.R. Dayton to selected high school students during the summer. More than 1,200 K-12 students visited the BFS and received hands-on experiences on Otesgo Lake and BFS woodlands over the year. Several talented citizen volunteers again helped at the BFS. They were Brian Bitteker, Kathy Ernst, Matt LaPilusa, Greg Lindenfelser, Dan Rosen and Miriam Sharick. Field Station boats were provided to the OCCA for Otsego Lake Cleanup Day and Water Chestnut Day. The BFS provided a berth and personnel to engage in OCCA "Waterwatch" activities. 2 The OCCA again sponsored the annual Otsego Lake Boat census. The results are shown below. Types of 8/2/90 7/31/91 8/5/92 7/9/93 7/27/94 Boats Sailboats 190 243 220 181 208 Rowboats/ 275 285 243 266 311 Canoes Outboards 443 470 407 405 461 Inboards 42 60 22 27 16 Inboard/ 281 213 219 215 227 Outboard Misc. 44 61 47 51 62 TOTAL 1275 1332 1158 1145 1285 Table 1. Recent otsego Lake boat census. Funding for BFS researc:1. and educational programs was obtained in 1994 from many citizens and local organizations via the OCCA, the SUNY Graduate Research Initiative Program, the SUNY Oneonta Foundation, the SUNY Office of Educational Technology, the Village of Cooperstown, the USEPA, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NY Sea Grant Colleges) and the Mary Imogene Basset Hospital's Science Partnership Program. We thank the OCCA for their support via the Otsego Lake Committee, FHV Mecklenburg Conservation Fellowships, the Rufus J.Thayer Otsgeo Lake Research Assistantships, the Louis B. Hager Conservation Education Awards, the Robert C. MacWatters Internships in the Aquatic Sciences, matching funds for a Visiting Researcher, and funding for several special projects and in all the other ways they positively affect our programs. Willard N. Ha n Professor and Director March 1996 5 ONGOING STUDIES: OTSEGO LAKE MONITORING: 1994 Otsego Lake water Levels Willard N. Harman K. S. Ernst'" The following data were collected at the Biological Field Station and illustrated by K. S. Ernst. Lake surface elevation readings in centimeters, above (+) or below (-) mean water level. Mean level = 364.1 m = 1194.5 feet above sea level. 40 30 E u oS 20 ~ 01 "iii 10 J:~ ~'._ _.~.I-<._ -.~.I-<._ .~ 0 •• .. .._.>----.""'" . ;: -10 Days -20 ~ *BFS Volunteer: Graphics and Design Present Address: 13 Yard Avenue, Farmingdale, NJ 07727 6 March 1994 4 7 10 13 16 19 22 25 28 31 50 i i 40 30 E () oS 20 .E Cl '(jj 10 :I: ... I ~ n:J 3 o I -10 ~ I ---­ -20 -30 l Days April 1994 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 -10 -2C ·30 Days 7 May 1994 4 7 10 13 16 19 22 25 28 31 50 40 30 E CJ .S: 20 E Cl 'Qj 10 J:... ~ ......... Ql ~ ;; 0 . .... 3: ·10 ·20 ·30 Days June 1994 4 7 10 13 16 19 22 25 28 =f 30 E CJ .S: 20 E .~ 10 J:... Ql 0 ....--...... ........,. ... " ;; ~ ~._ .. ./ ........,.._ --l - ...". 3: ·10 ·20 -30 Days 8 August 1994 4 7 10 13 16 19 22 25 28 31 50 '--~,-,~, -, I I 40 30 E [ u .5 20 j:; OJ .~ 10 :I:... a> iQ 0 3= ·10 -20 ·30 Days 9 September 1994 10 13 16 19 22 25 28 - ...>-t.r·-..·>-t·t----....·-._•._._.t_--r---­ Days October 1994 4 7 10 13 16 19 22 25 28 31 50 40 30 E (J .= 20 1: 01 'iij 10 J: ~ 0 ~ ;: -10 .......--.._--.._._----,-----------_..... ........... _-..... -20 -30 Days 10 Novem ber 1994 4 7 10 13 16 19 22 25 28 50 ,- i i --0­ ,---------,-.-­ 40 30 E 0 .= 20 ~ Cl 'a; 10 :I: G:i 0 iii 3 -10 ,/ • • • • • • • • • • • • .......... • • .......---.­ -20 ·30 Days December 1994 4 7 10 13 16 19 22 25 28 31 50 i~~-f [ ---,---,---, 40 30 E 0 .E 20 t :c Cl 'ii 10 :I:.. G.l iii 0 f 3 ·10 ·20 ·30 DilYs 11 Otsego Lake Limnological Monitoring, 1994 Willard N. Harman ABSTRACT Limnological analyses of several abiotic factors were performed during the calendar year 1994 at Otsego Lake, Cooperstown, N.Y. The purpose was to monitor the chemical and physical parameters affecting lake water quality for comparison with past findings. This work was part of an ongoing study begun approximately twenty-seven years ago. Measurements using a Hydrolab Surveyor II were gathered at the deepest spot in the Lake (TR4-C). Water temperature, dissolved oxygen, pH and conductivity were measured at 2 m intervals from 0 to 20 m and from 40 to SO m, and with 10 m intervals between 20 and 40 m. The data, after comparison with information collected in the past, indicate water quality varies in regard to the volume of cold water fish habitat in late summer. These changes are attributed to fluctuations in nutrient loading and weather conditions. INTRODUCTION Otsego Lake is a glacially formed, dimictic lake supporting a cold water fishery. The Lake is generally classified as being chemically mesotrophic, although flora and fauna characteristically associated with oligotrophic lakes are present (Iannuzzi, 1991). Since the establishment in 1968 of the field station, limnological investigations have been ongoing (Clikeman, 1979; Godfrey, 1980; Harman, 1974; Harman and Sohacki, 1976; Harman, 1978; Harman, 1979; Harman, 1980; Harman and Sohacki, 1980; Homburger and Buttigieg, 1991; Iannuzzi, 1988; Monostory, 1972; Sohacki, 1970; Sohacki, 1971; Sohacki, 1972; Sohacki, 1973; Sohacki, 1974; Sohacki, 1975; Starn and Wassmer, 1969). This study is the continuation of year-round work which began in 1991 to monitor lake water quality. The data collected in this report runs for the calendar year and is comparable with contributions by Homburger and Buttigieg (1992), Groff, et. al. (1993), and Harman (1994). MATERIALS AND METHODS Data collection for this year's investigation began January 18 and continued until December 27, 1994. During winter months (Jan.-Mar.) while the ice covered the surface of the lake, readings were taken monthly. During periods of open water trimonthly or weekly readings were collected. Data was taken near the deepest part of the Lake (TR4-C) (see Figure 1). Past studies have shown the Lake is chemically homogenous (Iannuzzi, 1988). Through the use of bored holes in the ice or the use of a field station boat, measurements were recorded at 2 m intervals between 0 and 20 m and 40 m to the bottom. Ten (10) meter intervals were used between 20 and 40 m. Measurements of pH, temperature, dissolved oxygen and conductivity were recorded on site with the use of a multiprobe digital microprocessor. RESULTS Temperature Surface temperature reached a high of 23.So C on July 21 and lows of OOC when under ice. The near bottom temperatures ranged from 2.8o C on January 18 to S.lo C on September 20 and October 18. The thermocline, a zone where temperatures change rapidly, was usually 12 Figure 1. Otsego Lake transects and sample stations. G,.90dyeer ~ I?~O--~North End .:lwamp fiM49l'~, 6"1 ) Sanctuarv (¥ '-~ '7 ; 648 TR-"r­ 647 .I55:? ( ) 78-0 (553 646 (t~'JC!arke Point 645 I ~ I~~ \ ~5~.k. 656 \ / ~71 \Hyde Say G~~! TR, -S \ '';J! / 64 t, ,,-r---­I ;' ! I I I ! West Shore Rat Cove 13 Figure 2. 1993 Otsego Lake dissolved oxygen profiles. Isopleths in mg/l. o~~,,----------:,,----c------:'----~~-------------ef0--1 I 5 10 15 20 Depth in Meters 25 30 35 40 45 50 January March May July September November Figure 3.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Pearly Mussels in NY State Susquehanna Watershed Paul H
    Pearly mussels in NY State Susquehanna Watershed Paul H. Lord, Willard N. Harman & Timothy N. Pokorny Introduction Preliminary Results Discussion Pearly mussels (unionids) New unionid SGCN identified • Mobile substrates appear exacerbated endangered native mollusks in Susquehanna River Watershed by surge stormwater inputs • Life cycle complex • Eastern Pearlshell (Margaritifera margaritifera) - made worse by impervious surfaces - includes fish parasitism -- in Otselic River headwaters • Unionids impacted - involves watershed quality parameters Historical SGCN found in many locations by ↓O2, siltation, endocrine disrupting chemicals • 4 Species of Greatest Conservation Need • Regularly downstream of extended riffle - from human watershed use (SGCN) historically found • Require minimally mobile substrates • River location consistency with old maps in NY State Susquehanna Watershed • No observed wastewater treatment plant impact associated with ↑ unionids - Brook Floater (Alasmidonta varicosa) -adult unionids more easily observed - Green Floater (Lasmigona subviridis) Table 1. NYSDEC freshwater pearly mussel “species of greatest conservation need” (SGCN) observed in the Upper Susquehanna from kayaks - Yellow Lamp Mussel (Lampsilis cariosa) Watershed while mapping and searching rivers in the summers of 2008 Elktoe -Elktoe (Alasmidonta marginata) and 2009. Brook Floater = Alasmidonta varicosa; elktoe = Alasmidonta • Prior sampling done where convenient marginata; green floater = Lasmigona subviridis; yellow lamp mussel = - normally at intersection
    [Show full text]
  • Flood Event of 4/5/1941 - 4/7/1941
    Flood Event of 4/5/1941 - 4/7/1941 Chemung Site Flood Stage Date Crest Flow Category Basin Stream County of Gage County of Forecast Point Chemung 16.00 4/6/1941 16.92 55,300 Minor Chemung Chemung River Chemung Chemung Corning 29.00 4/6/1941 30.09 -9,999 Moderate Chemung Chemung River Steuben Steuben Main Stem Susquehanna Site Flood Stage Date Crest Flow Category Basin Stream County of Gage County of Forecast Point Monroeton 14.00 4/5/1941 14.20 8,640 Minor Upper Main Stem Towanda Creek Bradford Bradford Susquehanna Towanda 16.00 4/6/1941 18.47 122,000 Moderate Upper Main Stem Susquehanna River Bradford Bradford Susquehanna Wilkes-Barre 22.00 4/7/1941 23.50 138,000 Minor Upper Main Stem Susquehanna River Luzerne Luzerne Susquehanna North Branch Susquehanna Site Flood Stage Date Crest Flow Category Basin Stream County of Gage County of Forecast Point Chenango Forks 10.00 4/7/1941 11.86 29,000 Minor North Branch Chenango River Broome Broome Susquehanna Cincinnatus 9.00 4/6/1941 9.44 4,980 Minor North Branch Otselic River Cortland Cortland Susquehanna Conklin 11.00 4/6/1941 13.40 24,900 Minor North Branch North Branch Broome Broome Susquehanna Susquehanna River Cortland 8.00 4/6/1941 12.49 7,880 Moderate North Branch Tioughnioga River Cortland Cortland Susquehanna Sherburne 8.00 4/6/1941 9.25 4,960 Moderate North Branch Chenango River Chenango Chenango Susquehanna Vestal 18.00 4/7/1941 20.29 53,400 Minor North Branch North Branch Broome Broome Susquehanna Susquehanna River Created On: 8/16/2016 Page 1 of 2 Waverly 11.00 4/6/1941 14.75 68,500 Minor North Branch North Branch Bradford Tioga Susquehanna Susquehanna River Weather Summary The weather summary is unavailable at this time.
    [Show full text]
  • State of New York City's Plants 2018
    STATE OF NEW YORK CITY’S PLANTS 2018 Daniel Atha & Brian Boom © 2018 The New York Botanical Garden All rights reserved ISBN 978-0-89327-955-4 Center for Conservation Strategy The New York Botanical Garden 2900 Southern Boulevard Bronx, NY 10458 All photos NYBG staff Citation: Atha, D. and B. Boom. 2018. State of New York City’s Plants 2018. Center for Conservation Strategy. The New York Botanical Garden, Bronx, NY. 132 pp. STATE OF NEW YORK CITY’S PLANTS 2018 4 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 6 INTRODUCTION 10 DOCUMENTING THE CITY’S PLANTS 10 The Flora of New York City 11 Rare Species 14 Focus on Specific Area 16 Botanical Spectacle: Summer Snow 18 CITIZEN SCIENCE 20 THREATS TO THE CITY’S PLANTS 24 NEW YORK STATE PROHIBITED AND REGULATED INVASIVE SPECIES FOUND IN NEW YORK CITY 26 LOOKING AHEAD 27 CONTRIBUTORS AND ACKNOWLEGMENTS 30 LITERATURE CITED 31 APPENDIX Checklist of the Spontaneous Vascular Plants of New York City 32 Ferns and Fern Allies 35 Gymnosperms 36 Nymphaeales and Magnoliids 37 Monocots 67 Dicots 3 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This report, State of New York City’s Plants 2018, is the first rankings of rare, threatened, endangered, and extinct species of what is envisioned by the Center for Conservation Strategy known from New York City, and based on this compilation of The New York Botanical Garden as annual updates thirteen percent of the City’s flora is imperiled or extinct in New summarizing the status of the spontaneous plant species of the York City. five boroughs of New York City. This year’s report deals with the City’s vascular plants (ferns and fern allies, gymnosperms, We have begun the process of assessing conservation status and flowering plants), but in the future it is planned to phase in at the local level for all species.
    [Show full text]
  • Susquehanna Riyer Drainage Basin
    'M, General Hydrographic Water-Supply and Irrigation Paper No. 109 Series -j Investigations, 13 .N, Water Power, 9 DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR UNITED STATES GEOLOGICAL SURVEY CHARLES D. WALCOTT, DIRECTOR HYDROGRAPHY OF THE SUSQUEHANNA RIYER DRAINAGE BASIN BY JOHN C. HOYT AND ROBERT H. ANDERSON WASHINGTON GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 1 9 0 5 CONTENTS. Page. Letter of transmittaL_.__.______.____.__..__.___._______.._.__..__..__... 7 Introduction......---..-.-..-.--.-.-----............_-........--._.----.- 9 Acknowledgments -..___.______.._.___.________________.____.___--_----.. 9 Description of drainage area......--..--..--.....-_....-....-....-....--.- 10 General features- -----_.____._.__..__._.___._..__-____.__-__---------- 10 Susquehanna River below West Branch ___...______-_--__.------_.--. 19 Susquehanna River above West Branch .............................. 21 West Branch ....................................................... 23 Navigation .--..........._-..........-....................-...---..-....- 24 Measurements of flow..................-.....-..-.---......-.-..---...... 25 Susquehanna River at Binghamton, N. Y_-..---...-.-...----.....-..- 25 Ghenango River at Binghamton, N. Y................................ 34 Susquehanna River at Wilkesbarre, Pa......_............-...----_--. 43 Susquehanna River at Danville, Pa..........._..................._... 56 West Branch at Williamsport, Pa .._.................--...--....- _ - - 67 West Branch at Allenwood, Pa.....-........-...-.._.---.---.-..-.-.. 84 Juniata River at Newport, Pa...-----......--....-...-....--..-..---.-
    [Show full text]
  • Upper Susquehanna Subbasin Survey: a Water Quality and Biological Assessment, June – September 2007
    Upper Susquehanna Subbasin Survey: A Water Quality and Biological Assessment, June – September 2007 The Susquehanna River Basin Commission (SRBC) conducted a water quality and biological survey of the Upper Susquehanna Subbasin from June to September 2007. This survey is part of SRBC’s Subbasin Survey Program, which is funded in part by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). The Subbasin Survey Program consists of two- year assessments in each of the six major subbasins (Figure 1) on a rotating schedule. This report details the Year-1 survey, which consists of point-in-time water chemistry, macroinvertebrate, and habitat data collection and assessments of the major tributaries and areas of interest throughout the Upper Susquehanna Subbasin. The Year-2 survey will be conducted in the Tioughnioga River over a one-year time period beginning in summer 2008. The Year-2 survey is part of a larger monitoring effort associated with an environmental restoration effort at Whitney Point Lake. Previous SRBC surveys of the Upper Susquehanna Subbasin were conducted in 1998 (Stoe, 1999) and 1984 (McMorran, 1985). Subbasin survey information is used by SRBC staff and others to: • evaluate the chemical, biological, and habitat conditions of streams in the basin; • identify major sources of pollution and lengths of streams impacted; • identify high quality sections of streams that need to be protected; • maintain a database that can be used to document changes in stream quality over time; • review projects affecting water quality in the basin; and • identify areas for more intensive study. Description of the Upper Susquehanna Subbasin The Upper Susquehanna Subbasin is an interstate subbasin that drains approximately 4,950 square miles of southcentral New York and a small portion of northeastern Pennsylvania.
    [Show full text]
  • Section 4: County Profile
    SECTION 4: COUNTY PROFILE SECTION 4: COUNTY PROFILE Broome County profile information is presented in the plan and analyzed to develop an understanding of a study area, including the economic, structural, and population assets at risk and the particular concerns that may be present related to hazards analyzed later in this plan (e.g., low lying areas prone to flooding or a high percentage of vulnerable persons in an area). This profile provides general information for Broome County (physical setting, population and demographics, general building stock, and land use and population trends) and critical facilities located within the County. GENERAL INFORMATION Broome County is a rural community located within the south-central part or “Southern Tier” of New York State. The Southern Tier is a geographical term that refers to the counties of New York State that lie west of the Catskill Mountains, along the northern border of Pennsylvania. Broome County lies directly west of Delaware County, 137 miles southwest of Albany and approximately 177 miles northwest of New York City. Broome County occupies approximately 715 square miles and has a population of approximately 199,031 (U.S. Census, 2011). Broome County is one of the 62 counties in New York State and is comprised of one city, sixteen towns, seven villages and many hamlets. The City of Binghamton is the County seat and is located at the confluence of the Susquehanna and Chenango Rivers. The City of Binghamton is part of the “Triple Cities,” which also includes the Villages of Endicott and Johnson City. With two Interstates and a major state route intersecting in the City of Binghamton, the area is the crossroads of the Southern Tier.
    [Show full text]
  • Floristic Quality Assessment Report
    FLORISTIC QUALITY ASSESSMENT IN INDIANA: THE CONCEPT, USE, AND DEVELOPMENT OF COEFFICIENTS OF CONSERVATISM Tulip poplar (Liriodendron tulipifera) the State tree of Indiana June 2004 Final Report for ARN A305-4-53 EPA Wetland Program Development Grant CD975586-01 Prepared by: Paul E. Rothrock, Ph.D. Taylor University Upland, IN 46989-1001 Introduction Since the early nineteenth century the Indiana landscape has undergone a massive transformation (Jackson 1997). In the pre-settlement period, Indiana was an almost unbroken blanket of forests, prairies, and wetlands. Much of the land was cleared, plowed, or drained for lumber, the raising of crops, and a range of urban and industrial activities. Indiana’s native biota is now restricted to relatively small and often isolated tracts across the State. This fragmentation and reduction of the State’s biological diversity has challenged Hoosiers to look carefully at how to monitor further changes within our remnant natural communities and how to effectively conserve and even restore many of these valuable places within our State. To meet this monitoring, conservation, and restoration challenge, one needs to develop a variety of appropriate analytical tools. Ideally these techniques should be simple to learn and apply, give consistent results between different observers, and be repeatable. Floristic Assessment, which includes metrics such as the Floristic Quality Index (FQI) and Mean C values, has gained wide acceptance among environmental scientists and decision-makers, land stewards, and restoration ecologists in Indiana’s neighboring states and regions: Illinois (Taft et al. 1997), Michigan (Herman et al. 1996), Missouri (Ladd 1996), and Wisconsin (Bernthal 2003) as well as northern Ohio (Andreas 1993) and southern Ontario (Oldham et al.
    [Show full text]
  • Index of Surface-Water Records
    ~EOLOGICAL SURVEY CIRCULAR 138 July 1951 INDEX OF SURFACE-WATER RECORDS PART I.-NORTH ATLANTIC SLOPE BASINS TO SEPTEMBER 30, 1950 Prepared by Boston District UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Oscar L. Chapman, Secretary GEOLOGICAL SURVEY W. E. Wrather, Director Washington, 'J. C. Free on application to the Geological Survey, Washington 26, D. C. INDEX OF SURFACE-WATER RECORDS PART 1.-NORTH ATLANTIC SLOPE BASINS TO SEPTEMBER 30, 1950 EXPLANATION The index lists the stream-flow and reservoir stations in the North Atlantic Slope Basins for which records have been or are to be published for periods prior to Sept. 30, 1950. The stations are listed in downstream order. Tributary streams are indicated by indention. Station names are given in their most recently published forms. Parentheses around part of a station name indicate that the inclosed word or words were used in an earlier published name of the station or in a name under which records were published by some agency other than the Geological Survey. The drainage areas, in square miles, are the latest figures pu~lished or otherwise available at this time. Drainage areas that were obviously inconsistent with other drainage areas on the same stream have been omitted. Under "period of record" breaks of less than a 12-month period are not shown. A dash not followed immediately by a closing date shows that the station was in operation on September 30, 1950. The years given are calendar years. Periods·of records published by agencies other than the Geological Survey are listed in parentheses only when they contain more detailed information or are for periods not reported in publications of the Geological Survey.
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix – Priority Brook Trout Subwatersheds Within the Chesapeake Bay Watershed
    Appendix – Priority Brook Trout Subwatersheds within the Chesapeake Bay Watershed Appendix Table I. Subwatersheds within the Chesapeake Bay watershed that have a priority score ≥ 0.79. HUC 12 Priority HUC 12 Code HUC 12 Name Score Classification 020501060202 Millstone Creek-Schrader Creek 0.86 Intact 020501061302 Upper Bowman Creek 0.87 Intact 020501070401 Little Nescopeck Creek-Nescopeck Creek 0.83 Intact 020501070501 Headwaters Huntington Creek 0.97 Intact 020501070502 Kitchen Creek 0.92 Intact 020501070701 East Branch Fishing Creek 0.86 Intact 020501070702 West Branch Fishing Creek 0.98 Intact 020502010504 Cold Stream 0.89 Intact 020502010505 Sixmile Run 0.94 Reduced 020502010602 Gifford Run-Mosquito Creek 0.88 Reduced 020502010702 Trout Run 0.88 Intact 020502010704 Deer Creek 0.87 Reduced 020502010710 Sterling Run 0.91 Reduced 020502010711 Birch Island Run 1.24 Intact 020502010712 Lower Three Runs-West Branch Susquehanna River 0.99 Intact 020502020102 Sinnemahoning Portage Creek-Driftwood Branch Sinnemahoning Creek 1.03 Intact 020502020203 North Creek 1.06 Reduced 020502020204 West Creek 1.19 Intact 020502020205 Hunts Run 0.99 Intact 020502020206 Sterling Run 1.15 Reduced 020502020301 Upper Bennett Branch Sinnemahoning Creek 1.07 Intact 020502020302 Kersey Run 0.84 Intact 020502020303 Laurel Run 0.93 Reduced 020502020306 Spring Run 1.13 Intact 020502020310 Hicks Run 0.94 Reduced 020502020311 Mix Run 1.19 Intact 020502020312 Lower Bennett Branch Sinnemahoning Creek 1.13 Intact 020502020403 Upper First Fork Sinnemahoning Creek 0.96
    [Show full text]
  • Annual Report, 2011
    Susquehanna River Basin Commission www.srbc.net SRBC Annual Report 2011 40th Anniversary Edition 1971 - 2011 Pine Creek, Tioga County, Pa. 1 9 7 1 - 2 0 1 1 Welcome Executive Director’s Message In 2011, the Commission marked an important milestone – its 40th anniversary. We reflected not only on the agency’s many programmatic accomplishments over the years, but we also took the time to remember and honor the many dedicated people who drafted and helped enact the Susquehanna River Basin Compact. The Compact established the Commission as the guardian of the Susquehanna River. Standing in the Pantheon of those who advocated for watershed management in the Susquehanna basin are Frederick Zimmermann, Dr. Maurice Goddard, Harris Breth and William James, to name just a few. Upon the passage of the compact, William Voigt, Jr., who served as the Executive Director of the advisory committee that drafted the Compact, wrote, “A host of people consisting of a broad mix of realists, pragmatists, idealists, and others dreamed, labored, perspired and persevered to make the compact what it is and to safeguard it…Henceforth the destiny of the compact and of the water resources of the Susquehanna River Basin will rest in the hands of the commission established. I speak only for myself, of course, but have little doubt that my Paul O. Swartz sentiment is that of the overwhelming majority of all who had a hand, large or small, in the ultimate result. It is a fervent hope that performance under the compact will match or exceed the highest aims of the most dedicated in our group.” Today, while we stand in the shadows of those from the Commission’s past, it is my hope that we have and will continue to live up to the expectations of those who created the SRBC Compact.
    [Show full text]
  • Fish-Community Composition in Otselic River, in the Vicinity of Whitney Point Lake, Broome and Cortland Counties, New York, 2000
    U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey FISH-COMMUNITY COMPOSITION IN OTSELIC RIVER, IN THE VICINITY OF WHITNEY POINT LAKE, BROOME AND CORTLAND COUNTIES, NEW YORK, 2000 Open-File Report 01-78 Prepared in cooperation with the U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS, BALTIMORE DISTRICT U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey FISH-COMMUNITY COMPOSITION IN OTSELIC RIVER, IN THE VICINITY OF WHITNEY POINT LAKE, BROOME AND CORTLAND COUNTIES, NEW YORK, 2000 by Robin A. Brightbill and Michael D. Bilger Open-File Report 01-78 Prepared in cooperation with the U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS, BALTIMORE DISTRICT New Cumberland, Pennsylvania 2001 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR GALE A. NORTON, Secretary U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Charles G. Groat, Director The use of product names in this report is for identification purposes only and does not constitute endorsement by the U.S. Government. For additional information Copies of this report may be write to: purchased from: District Chief U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Geological Survey Branch of Information Services 215 Limekiln Road Box 25286 New Cumberland, Pennsylvania 17070-2424 Denver, Colorado 80225-0286 ii CONTENTS Page Abstract . 1 Introduction . 1 Description of the dam and stream study reaches . 2 Study methods . 4 Fish sampling . 4 Habitat quantification . 4 Data analysis . 4 Fish-community composition. 6 Summary . 10 References cited . 10 Appendix. 12 ILLUSTRATION Figure 1. Map showing location of reaches sampled for fish communities upstream and downstream of Whitney Point Lake, N.Y., 2000 . 3 TABLES Table 1. Taxa list, native or exotic, trophic status, tolerance value, number of individuals, total weight by species and for all species, total number of individuals, total number of species, catch-per-unit effort, Shannon Index, Jaccard Coefficient, and Index of Similarity for fish communities upstream and downstream of Whitney Point Lake, N.Y., 2000.
    [Show full text]
  • Whitney Point Adaptive Management Plan a FiveYear Summary Luanne Steffy, Aquatic Ecologist December 2013
    Whitney Point Adaptive Management Plan A Five-Year Summary Luanne Steffy, Aquatic Ecologist December 2013 Whitney Point Lake is a 1,200-acre U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) reservoir located on the Otselic River in Broome County, New York (Figure 1), that was completed in 1942 primarily for flood control purposes. Starting in mid-1990s, the Susquehanna River Basin Commission (Commission), USACE, and New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC) began discussions about a water management and environmental restoration project in Whitney Point Lake that would allow for water storage in the lake to be used for low flow augmentation releases. Over the following decade, discussions, negotiations, and planning continued until in 2008, a lake modification and environmental restoration plan was completed. This agreement called for not only the elimination of winter drawdown, replaced by a maintained year-round water level in Whitney Point Lake, but also provided for environmental releases from the lake to augment low flow conditions downstream in the Otselic, Tioughnioga, Chenango, and, ultimately, Susquehanna Rivers. Other supplemental improvements were also made to the lake and surrounding park area including constructed wetlands, wildlife habitat improvements, and updated recreational facilities. In order to monitor the ecological ramifications of the lake modifications and restoration plan, a five-year Adaptive Management Plan (AMP) was also established in 2008 as part of the environmental restoration plan which was to be carried out from 2009-2013. The long-term goal of the monitoring portion of the AMP was to document potential impacts of flow augmentation on aquatic communities in Whitney Point Lake and the surrounding watersheds.
    [Show full text]