Wills Creek Preassessment

Home , Little Wills Creek, Wills Mountain

Eric Null Len Lichvar

Produced by Somerset Conservation District, 6024 Glades Pike Road Suite 103, Somerset, PA

1 2 Wills Creek Preassessment Eric Null Len Lichvar March 2010

Somerset Conservation District

Funding for this project provided by the Foundation for Pennsylvania Watersheds

With special assistance from the Pennsylvania Fish and Boat Commission

Photos by Len Lichvar, Eric Null, and Amanda Deal

Copies of this report may be obtained by contacting the Somerset Conservation District 6024 Glades Pike Road, Suite 103 Somerset, PA 15501 Phone (814) 445-4652 ext.5 Fax (814) 445-2044 E-mail [email protected] Report text may be accessed on the Somerset Conservation District Website http://www.somersetcd.org/ 3 Table of Contents

Forward/Acknowledgements………...……………………………………………….7

Introduction………………………………………………………..………………….8

Methods………………………………………………………………………………10

Results…………………………………………………..…………………………....14

Discussion…………………………………………..………………………………..29

Recommendations …………………………………….…………………………….30

Literature Cited……………………………………….……………………………...31

Appendix 1— Macroinvertebrates collected at each site

Appendix 2—Fishes collected at each site

Wills Creek Sampling Station 5

4 List of Figures

Figure 1. The Wills Creek watershed………………………………………………………....8

Figure 2. Wills Creek Preassessment sampling points…………………………………...….11

Figure 3. Macroinvertebrate species richness of the Wills Creek Watershed……………….15

Figure 4. Shannon-Weaver Diversity Index for the macroinvertebrates communities of the Wills Creek Watershed……………………………………………………..16

Figure 5. HBI scores for the Wills Creek watershed………………………………………....17

Figure 6. Percent EPT taxa in the Wills Creek watershed…………………………………....18

Figure 7. Percent Dominant taxa in the Wills Creek watershed……………………………...18

Figure 8. Percent acid tolerant taxa in the Wills Creek watershed…………………………...19

Figure 9. Fish species richness in the Wills Creek watershed ………………………………..21

Figure 10. Shannon-Weaver diversity index for fish communities in the Wills Creek Watershed…………………………………………………………………...22

Figure 11. WC1 trophic feeding levels…………………………………………………….….22

Figure 12 WC2 trophic feeding levels………………………………………………………..23

Figure 13. WC3 trophic feeding levels………………………………………………………..23 . Figure 14. WC4 trophic feeding levels………………………………………………………..24

Figure 15. WC5 trophic feeding levels…………………………………………………….….24

Figure 16. WC6 trophic feeding levels………………………………………………………..25

Figure 17. BC1 trophic feeding levels………………………………………………………...25

Figure 18. BC2 trophic feeding levels………………………………………………………...26

Figure 19. LWC trophic feeding levels……………………………………………………….26

Figure 20. GR trophic feeding levels………………………………………………………….27

Figure 21. Wills Creek watershed PHI scores………………………………………………...28

FORWARD and ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The Wills Creek watershed in Somerset County is a sparsely populated region with some rugged terrain. Perhaps not surprisingly then it has not received a great deal of human intervention. This could be deemed good since it has been spared some of man's intrusions and resultant negative impacts. It could also be considered not such a good thing since the same lack of attention provides for minimal understanding of the region and often can lead to eventual decision making without regard for the important natural resources it harbors.

The Wills Creek watershed Preassessment was designed to determine the current status of the watershed and its resources so that as development pressure eventually finds its way into this last vestige of relatively untouched Somerset County landscape, the resources that make it a special place will be respected and retained to the greatest extent possible.

If and when this lofty goal is accomplished it will be because of the foresighted interest of the Foundation for Pennsylvania Watersheds and its willingness to fund and support this important project. It will also be a testament to the Somerset Conservation District for its ability to look to the future and take proactive steps to safeguard an otherwise vulnerable region.

Special thanks go to District Biologist Eric Null for taking the lead in this endeavor and to District support staff such as Dave Kemp, Amanda Deal and Bob Hook for their ex- pertise and assistance. Also a special thanks to the Pennsylvania Fish and Boat Commis- sion Area 7 and Area 8 Fisheries Managers and their staff as well as the Habitat Man- agement Division in both areas for their essential assistance in gathering data.

The Wills Creek watershed is a special place and the special efforts put forth by all in- volved will be even more appreciated and understood in the future than they are today.

Len Lichvar District Manager Somerset Conservation District

6 INTRODUCTION

Watersheds in Southwestern Pennsylvania are known for suffering from detrimental impacts from abandoned mine drainage (AMD), organic loading, and urban sprawl. Because of these pollution impacts almost all the major watersheds as well as sub watersheds have been assessed and evaluated chemically, physically, and biologically. Extensive remediation efforts have occurred in some of these watersheds and conservation easements and ordnances have been established on some of the more pristine areas. One major watershed in southwestern Pennsylvania that has gone relatively unassessed is the Wills Creek watershed. Wills Creek is a fourth order stream that flows into the North Branch of the Potomac River in the city of Cum- berland, Maryland. The total drainage area of the Wills Creek watershed is 65,682.4 hectares (253.6 square miles), with 50,012.8 hectares (193.1 square miles) located in Pennsylvania. The Wills Creek watershed begins in the Big Savage Mountains in Pennsylvania and flows south- east approximately 64.3 km (40mi) to its confluence with the Potomac River in Cumberland Maryland. Wills Creek does not encounter any large areas of human population until it crosses the Pennsylvania border with Maryland. The highest population in the Pennsylvania portion of watershed is the Borough of Hyndman, located in Bedford County with a population of 1005 residents. The total population of the entire watershed is estimated at 32,017 with the majority of the populace occurring in Maryland. Urbanized land use only comprises 2.4% of the total watershed in Pennsylvania (MDE 2006). Figure 1 illustrates the location and area of the Wills Creek watershed.

The Wills Creek watershed is located on the Appalachian Plateau. The surface geology of the watershed is comprised of strongly folded and faulted sedimentary rock providing a rough topography. The Appalachian Plateau is characterized by gently folded shale, siltstone, and sandstone. (MDE 2006) The soils of the watershed are comprised of Dekalb, Ernest, and Hazelton soil series. (MDE 2006) There are no major coal seams located in the Pennsylvania portion of the watershed. The topography of the watershed is characterized by steep peaks and valleys. The creek ranges from extremely high gradient to low gradient flows. The stream is characterized by large stone and boulder bottoms throughout the majority of the mainstem. Most of the tributaries and headwaters are completely forested. Forested land comprises 84.2% of entire Pennsylvania portion of the watershed. Agricultural land uses utilize 13.4% of the Pennsylvania portion of Wills Creek, with water supply only using 18 acres of the watershed. (MDE 2006) The only major physical impact that has occurred in the Pennsylvania portion of the watershed has been very large flood events that have altered the stream channel. These events led to levee construction outside of the stream channel in the borough of Hyndman and City of Cumberland, Maryland. Figure 1 illustrates the area of the Wills Creek watershed.

7 Figure 1 The Wills Creek Watershed Watershed Creek Wills The 1 Figure

8 Previous assessments and studies The only information that has been attained from the Wills Creek watershed comes from very few non Pennsylvania specific studies, and other small assessments. The Maryland Depart- ment of the Environment investigated the Pennsylvania portion of the watershed for their 2006 reports to the United States Environmental Protection Agency concerning total maximum daily loads for fecal bacteria and sediment for the watershed in regards to possible Chesapeake Bay impacts. These surveys did not utilize specific sites in Pennsylvania and did not assess the physical and biological components of the watershed. Instead the PA portion of the watershed was assessed broadly for its total impact to the North Branch of the Potomac River. The find- ings of this study were that the PA portion contributed far less fecal and sediment impacts than the much smaller more urbanized Maryland portion. The Pennsylvania Fish and Boat Commis- sion performed a small fish survey in 1981 in the Pennsylvania portion of the watershed. The Western Pennsylvania Conservancy in corporation with the Somerset Conservation District assessed an exceptional value tributary, Laurel Run for a Cold Water Conservation Plan in 2006. The survey determined that Laurel Run had a large stable population of brook trout (Salvelinus fontinalis). (WPC 2007) There was a survey conducted by Frostburg State University in 2001 that assessed the hybridization between two species of sculpin in the main stem of Wills Creek (Kinziger and Raesly 2001). The Maryland portion of the watershed has been routinely assessed by the Maryland Biological Stream Survey (MBSS). Samples are collected from the Maryland portion of the watershed on a rotational basis to assess urbanized and mining impacts to the watershed. The Pennsylvania portion of the watershed remained relatively unassessed with no baseline data available.

Purpose of this study The Pennsylvania portion of the watershed comprises the majority (76%) of the entire Wills Creek watershed, but has no baseline data for biology, chemistry, and physical habitat. The watershed’s remote location in an underdeveloped and sparsely populated region have made conservation efforts seem less urgent, however that priority is changing. The watershed is one of many locations where gas well drillers will be drilling for Marcellus Shale Natural Gas. The exploration for this type of natural gas produces millions of gallons of water that contain high conductivity and chloride ion content. The remote location and rugged terrain of the watershed make accidental discharges of this fracturing water a potentially noticeable threat. The ex- traction of water for gas drilling is another threat to the watershed because of the apparent lack of water recharge and withdrawal capabilities in the watershed due to the geology of the watershed. The proximity of the watershed to the city of Cumberland and Washington D.C make unplanned development a threat to the watershed in the future. The purpose of this study was to assess the watershed to attain baseline biological, chemical, and physical data on the mainstem of Wills Creek and its major tributaries. This baseline data will be used to assess any possible impacts that may threaten the watershed. This data will also be used to apply for a full River Conservation Plan through the Pennsylvania Depart- ment of Natural Resources and other watershed scale protection funding. The results of this preassessment will be made known to the public through the conservation district’s web site, news letters, media releases, and presentations given to conservation groups and other civic organiza- tions.

9 METHODS

Ten sites were selected from the Wills Creek Watershed to be sampled in the preassessment. One site (WC1) will be located in the headwater reaches of Wills Creek as a control site. One site (BC1) will be located at the confluence of two major tributaries of Wills Creek, Hil- legas Run and Brush Creek to assess these two headwater streams. The remaining sites were chosen by the location of all third order tributaries of Wills Creek; Glencoe (WC2), Fairhope (WC3), Bedford County line (WC4) below the borough of Hyndman (WC5) and at the Pennsyl- vania Maryland state line (WC6). A site will be located on the mainstem of Wills Creek above and below all confluences of 3rd order tributaries; Brush Creek (BC2), Little Wills Creek (LWC), and Gladdens Run (GR) to assess any impacts that occur from the large tributaries of Wills Creek. A site will be located upstream from the mouth of all 3rd order tributaries to assess the tributary itself. Assessing these segments and the data collected will allow the ability to lo- cate specific areas where possible impacts are occurring, so in the full watershed assessment special focus can be given to these areas and specific headwater evaluations may be performed on impacted areas. The locations of the sampling sites in the watershed are located in Figure 2.

Wills Creek Valley Bedford County

10 Figure 2: Wills Creek Preassessment Sampling Points

Chemistry

Water chemistry was collected four times during the sampling year. One spring peak and base flow and one fall peak and base flow sample were taken. The parameters of pH, acid- ity, total aluminum, total manganese, alkalinity, total dissolved solids, specific conductance and iron will be used to test for mine drainage and heavy metals. The parameters of total nitrates and total phosphates were tested to determine if organic loading is present in the watershed. The water samples were sent to a private independent laboratory for analysis and compared to the Pennsylvania Code Chapter 93 designated use requirements for each parameter. Temperature was taken at three specific sites year round using a data logging device. Multiple temperatures will be taken at each site each day. The Pennsylvania Code Chapter 93 classifies the mainstem of Wills Creek as a cold water fishery (CWF). The temperature data loggers were placed in the mainstem of Wills where the stream order changes to compare the temperatures in each section with the designated temperatures of the PA Code 93. Each individual segment measured 11 with a data logger was compared to the seasonal designated temperatures mandated by PA Code 93.

Biology

Macroinvertebrates

The benthic macroinvertebrates were sampled in the fall of 2008 and spring of 2009. Macroinvertebrate samples were collected using a 0.30 x 0.30m Suber Sampler. Five sub samples were taken from across riffle areas within each site. The five sub samples were pooled as one sample. Macroinvertebrates were preserved in the field with 70% isopropyl alcohol and taken to the Allegheny Community College Laboratory for enumeration and identification to the lowest taxonomic level practicable (usually genus level). (Klemm et.al. 1990) The data from the ten sites were assessed using multiple metrics to determine if pollution and physical impacts have occurred. The Shannon-Weaver (S-W) mean diversity index was used to assess the diversity of taxa in each site. The diversity metric measures the occurrence of total taxa and the distribution of the taxa. When diversity scores are low this indicates that the site in dominated by only a few different taxa, which can indicate the presence of a pollutant. The Hilsenhoff Biotic Index (HBI) will assess organic loading impacts by assigning an organic tolerance score to each taxon. These scores are then multiplied by the total number of taxa found in the site. This number is then divided by the total number of organisms found in the sample. This calculation is carried out for each taxa and the results are added together to obtain the HBI score. HBI scores lower than 1.75 indicate excellent water quality, scores in the 1.76-2.5 range indicate good water quality, scores in the 2.51-3.75 range indicate fair water quality a score above 3.75 indicates substantial organic loading impacts. Percent Ephemeroptera (mayflies), Plecoptera (stoneflies), and Trichoptera (caddis flies) (EPT) index was used to detect acidification and organic loading, the lower the percent composition of EPT taxa the more likely the water has sustained a pollution impact. Other metrics that were used are percent dominant taxa, species richness, and percent acid tolerant taxa. The percent dominant taxa measures the percentage that the most collected individual taxa collected in a site composes of the total number of macroinvertebrates collected in the site. When dominant taxa comprise 45% and higher of the total amount of invertebrates collected from a site a pollutant may be present. Species richness is the number of taxa collected from each site. The more taxa collected the healthier the stream. The percent of acid tolerant taxa assess the percentage of macroinvertebrates in a site that are tolerant to acidic pollution. When these taxa dominate the sample it indicates that acidic conditions are present. The taxa present in this assessment were compared with the MBSS collections to determine differences between the watersheds as it flows through the state of Maryland. Fish The Somerset Conservation District partnered with the Pennsylvania Fish and Boat Commission (PFBC) area 7 and 8 management units to conduct an electrofishing survey of the Wills Creek watershed. Fish were sampled at all ten survey sites. A 200 meter one pass IBI method was used to sample the fish at each site. The data collected will be assessed by the PFBC using the Pennsylvania fish IBI that is presently being developed. An alternating current backpack electrofishing unit set 100-125 volts was used to collect the specimens. All fish were classified in the field to species level and returned to the stream as soon as possible. Voucher 12 specimens were retained for all specimens that could not be classified in the field. These specimens were fixed in the field in 10% formalin and taken to the laboratory for positive identification. For the purpose of this assessment the fish communities were assessed by measuring the diversity of taxa at each site. The Shannon-Weaver index was also used for the fish. Total taxa were counted at each site to determine the community structure of fish. Percent composition of trophic feeding guilds was assessed to determine if a balanced food web is present at each site. Trophic level analysis determines the percentage of herbivores, picivores, generalists, omnivores, and insectivores present in a particular site. Sites without a diverse distribution of feeding guilds can indicate pollution. The taxa present in this assessment will be compared with the MBSS collections to determine differences between the watersheds as it flows through the state of Maryland.

Wills Creek Sampling Site 1 Physical Habitat

Stream bank erosion and stream channel integrity were assessed at the ten sampling sites using the United States Environmental Protection Agency’s Protocols for Rapid Bio- assessment physical habitat evaluation sheets (Barbour et. Al. 1999). Three individuals observed and measured the physical parameters independently and chose a score for each parameter. When the assessment forms were completed, the three separate scores were averaged to obtain a final score. With physical habitat evaluations the survey was able to assess any damage that has been done to the stream bank and track any future physical impairment that may arise. GIS Mapping

The Somerset Conservation District will establish a Geographical Information System (GIS) database to map the watershed and any impacts that may be present in the watershed. The GIS mapping and database will allow for data storage and assessment of strategic areas that conservation easements need to be allocated to ensure that the Wills Creek watershed remains a pristine watershed. 13 RESULTS

Chemistry

Len Lichvar collecting water chemistry samples Instream temperature data logger

All water quality parameters sampled were within state criteria at both peak and base flows. Due to low precipitation levels only a spring peak flow was obtained. Sufficient rain fall was not encountered in the fall to increase flows above 300 ft3/sec. Alkalinities ranged from 37 to 122 mg/l in base flows and 22-35 mg/l in peak flow. Base flow pH values were 7.35-8.88. Peak flows lowered pH values to 6.6-7.02, but this is not a biological limiting factor. The de- pressed values are due to acidic precipitation that occurs in the region. All metals (iron, aluminum, and manganese) were well below state maximums allowed for a CWF. There was no increase in nitrates or phosphates at peak or base flows. Sulfate concentrations remained below 50 mg/l in all stations throughout the assessment. Temperature Three temperature probes were deployed, one in WC1, another in WC 3 (center of the mainstem in Pennsylvania), and one in WC 6 (PA state line station). The probes were retrieved from WC 1 and 6. The WC 3 probe was lost due to an anchoring malfunction. Temperatures in the WC 1 area remained below the PA Code 93 allotted seasonal temperatures throughout the year. Average temperature in WC 6 violated CWF criteria during the August 16-30th period. Code 93 criteria state that the maximum temperature for that period is 66 degrees Fahrenheit. The WC 6 average temperature was 70 degrees for this period. Biological

Benthic Macroinvertebrates All sites were sampled in fall 2008 and spring 2009. All sites except WC 3 and 4 exhibited good diversity and harbored large populations of pollution intolerant taxa during the fall 2008 sampling.

14 During the spring 2009 sampling all sites exhibited macroinvertebrate communities indicative of a stream having no large scale pollution episodes. The results for the individual metrics are located in subsequent paragraphs. Appendix A contains a list of all taxa found in the assess- mentSpecies Richness Species richness was pooled for each site from the spring and fall samplings. All sites had abundant total taxa. Wills Creek Site 1 contained the most taxa (44) of the surveyed sites. The total taxa numbers are located in Figure 3

Figure 3: Marroinvertebrate species richness of the Wills Creek watershed

Total Taxa Present in the Wills Creek Watershed

25 Number of Taxa Total Taxa Present 20

0 Wills 1 Wills 2 Wills 3 Wills 4 Wills 5 Wills 6 Trib 1 Trib 2 Trib 3 Trib 4 Site

Shannon Weaver Diversity Index

Diversity indices remained evenly distributed throughout the watershed in the fall of 2008 except for WC 3 and 4. WC 3 and 4 had a very large population of Fossoria spp., these mollusks could be observed throughout the mainstem. WC 3 and 4 had abnormally large populations of Fossoria spp during this sampling, WC 3 populations was comprised of 82% Fos- soria spp. and WC 4 was comprised of 68% Fossoria spp. Normally populations of mollusks this size can be explained by organic loading but the water chemistry did not indicate organic loading and excessive periphyton and algae were not present in either site. Water chemistry and clarity of these sites was analogous to an infertile spring creek at peak and base flows. The other taxa present were comprised mostly of organic intolerant taxa. In the spring 2009 sampling all sites exhibited comparable diversities. WC 3 and 4 had large Fossoria spp. populations but these populations did not make up the majority of the total number of taxa collected. WC 3 contained 15% Fossoria spp. while WC 4 was comprised of only 4% Fossoria spp. Figure 4

15 Figure 4 Shannon-Weaver Diversity Index for the macroinvertebrate communities of the Wills Creek watershed

Wills Assessment Macroinvertebrate Mean Diversity

3.50000

3.00000

2.50000

2.00000 Fall Spring Diversity 1.50000

1.00000

0.50000

0.00000 Wills 1 Wills 2 Wills 3 Wills 4 Wills 5 Wills 6 Trib 1 Trib 2 Trib 3 Trib 4 Site

Drake mayfly nymph genus Ephemera

The Hilsenhoff Biotic Index

The Hilsenhoff Biotic Index scores for all sites indicated fair to excellent water quality in regards to organic pollution in the watershed. WC 1 and 2 and the tributary sites 1 through 4 exhibited good water quality (Score values <2.51) in both spring and fall. WC 3-6 exhibited fair water quality for both sampling periods. There were no sites that had any indication of moder- ate to severe organic pollution. WC 3 and 4 in the fall of 2009 had elevated Fossoria spp populations but due to the sensitivity of the other taxa these sites remained well below the score level indicating substantial organic pollution. Figure 5 contains the HBI score values for the spring and fall samplings.

16 Figure 5: HBI scores for the Wills Creek Watershed

HBI Scores for Wills Creek Assessment

3.5

2.5

2 Fall Spring Score 1.5

0.5

0 Wills 1 Wills 2 Wills 3 Wills 4 Wills 5 Wills 6 Trib 1 Trib 2 Trib 3 Trib 4 Site

EPT Taxa Spring and fall samplings were pooled for each site to obtain a total percent EPT taxa for each site. The sites with the lowest EPT score were WC 3and 4. The low scores can be attributed to the increase in Fossoria spp in the fall 2008 samples. The remaining sites ranged from 42-82 percent with WC 1 and BC 2 having 82% of total taxa being comprised EPT taxa. Figure 6 contains the EPT scores for the assessment.

Mayfly Nymph Genus Baetisca Water Penny Genus Psephenus

17 Figure 6: Percent EPT taxa in the Wills Creek watershed

Percent EPT Taxa for the Wills Creek Watershed

Percent EPT Taxa

Percent 40

0 Wills 1 Wills 2 Wills 3 Wills 4 Wills 5 Wills 6 Trib 1 Trib 2 Trib 3 Trib 4 Site

Percent Dominant Taxa

All sites with the exceptions of WC 3 and 4 in the fall 2008 sampling maintain a percent dominant taxa composition of less that 40%. Sites 3 and 4 percent dominant taxa are comprised of Fossoria spp. The results for percent dominant taxa are located in Figure 7. Figure 7: Percent dominant taxa in the Wills Creek watershed

Percent Dominant Taxa in the Wills Creek Watershed

50 Fall 2008 Spring 2009 Percent 40

0 Wills 1 Wills 2 Wills 3 Wills 4 Wills 5 Wills 6 Trib 1 Trib 2 Trib 3 Trib 4 Site

18 Percent Acid tolerant Taxa The acid tolerant taxa where pooled for each site for the spring and fall samplings. All sites had low acid tolerant taxa composition. WC 5 and GR had the highest percentage of acid tolerant taxa, but neither exceeded 36%. The results for the percent composition of acid tolerant taxa are located in Figure 8. Figure 8: Percent acid tolerant taxa in the Wills Creek watershed

Percent Acid Tolerant Taxa in the Wills Creek Watershed

Trib 4

Trib 3

Trib 2

Trib 1

Wills 6 Percent Acid Tolerant Taxa Site Wills 5

Wills 4

Wills 3

Wills 2

Wills 1

0.00000 5.00000 10.00000 15.00000 20.00000 25.00000 30.00000 35.00000 40.00000 Percent

MBSS Data vs. Preassessment Data The MBSS sampling in 2004 on the mainstem of Wills Creek in Maryland yielded 30 total taxa. WC 6 was used to make the comparison between the two states data. WC6 yielded 31 total taxa. While the total taxa numbers were very similar the composition of the communities was not as similar. 67.5% of the Maryland collection was comprised of the same taxa found in WC6. The majority of the 32.5% uncommon taxa can be attributed to the high occurrence of Drunella spp. Both the Pennsylvania and Maryland sections of the Wills Creek mainstem contain pollution intolerant species. The mainstem of the creek retains its diverse macroinvertebrate community throughout its course.

Slate Drake Nymph Genus Isonychia

19 Fish Sampling

PFBC and Conservation District staff electrofishing Wills Creek

Hold over brown trout captured on Wills Creek Large fallfish captured on lower Wills Creek

Species Richness The total taxa collected from each site range from 12 in BC1 to 25 in WC5. All sites contain total taxa numbers that are indicative of unimpacted populations. Pollution tolerant species such as white suckers (Catostomus commersonii), creek chub (Semolitus atromaculatus), and blacknose dace (Rhinichthys atratulus) occur in large numbers in some sites, but coincide with stabile high populations of intolerant taxa such as sculpin (Cottus spp). northern hog sucker (Hypentelium nigricans), and central stone roller (Campostoma anomalum). The fish communities of each site appear balanced in regards to pollution tolerant and intolerant taxa occurrences. Figure 9 contains the total taxa collected at each site, while Appendix 2 lists all

20 Figure 9: Fish species richness in the Wills Creek watershed

Species Richness in the Wills Creek Watershed

15 Number of Taxa Number of Taxa

0 Wills 1 Wills 2 Wills 3 Wills 4 Wills 5 Wills 6 Trib 1 Trib 2 Trib 3 Trib 4 Site

Shannon-Weaver Mean Diversity As with the macroinvertebrates the S-W index was used to determine fish diversity for each site. Diversity values remained similar for WC1, WC2 and all tributaries, diversity values for WC3-WC6 were higher but WC3-WC4 all maintained similar diversities. The results for fish diversity are located in Figure 10.

A rare find in Somerset County. An adult American Eel captured in Wills Creek at Fairhope 21 Figure 10: Shannon-Weaver diversity index for the fish communities in the Wills Creek watershed

Mean Diversity of Fish

2.5

1.5 Mean Diversity of Fish Diversity Score Diversity

0.5

0 Wills 1 Wills 2 Wills 3 Wills 4 Wills 5 Wills 6 Trib 1 Trib 2 Trib 3 Trib 4 Site

Trophic Feeding Guilds The compositions of trophic feeding guilds are located in Figures 11-20. Figure 11: WC1 Trophic feeding levels

Wills Creek Site 1 Trophic Levels

3% 2%

16%

Piscivores Insectivores Omnivores Generalists Herbivores 21%

58%

22 Figure 12: WC2 trophic feeding levels

Wills Creek Site 2 Trophic Levels

4% 0%

22% 34%

Piscivores Insectivores Omnivores Generalists Herbivores

40%

Figure 13: WC3 trophic feeding levels

Wills Creek Site 3 Trophic Levels

15% 17%

Piscivores Insectivores Omnivores 12% Generalists Herbivores

52%

23 Figure 14: WC4 trophic feeding levels

Wills Creek Site 4 Trophic Levels

15%

26%

Piscivores Insectivores Omnivores Generalists 3% Herbivores

11%

45%

Figure 15: WC5 trophic feeding levels

Wills Creek Site 5 Trophic Levels

22%

Piscivores 1% Insectivores Omnivores Generalists 8% Herbivores

63%

24 Figure 16: WC6 trophic feeding levels

Wills Creek Site 6 Trophic levels

4% 6% 12%

17%

Piscivores Insectivores Omnivores Generalists Herbivores

61%

Figure 17: BC1 trophic feeding levels

Wills Creek Trib 1 Trophic Levels

0% 1%

40% 45% Piscivores Insectivores Omnivores Generalists Herbivores

14%

25 Figure 18: BC2 trophic feeding levels

Wills Creek Trib 2 Trophic Levels

1% 8%

42% Piscivores Insectivores Omnivores Generalists 41% Herbivores

Figure 19: LWC trophic feeding levels

Wills Creek Trib 3 Trophic Levels

1% 7% 14%

Piscivores Insectivores Omnivores Generalists Herbivores

74%

26 Figure 20: GR trophic feeding levels

Wills Creek Trib 4 Trophic Levels

2% 1%

34%

Piscivores Insectivores Omnivores Generalists Herbivores 57%

A very large rock bass captured on Gladdens Run

MBSS Comparison The comparison between Wills Creek in Pennsylvania and Wills Creek in Maryland was made between the MBSS site on Wills Creek and WC6. The Maryland portion of the watershed contained 16 taxa while WC6 contained 23 taxa. The decrease in fish taxa can be explained by the lower gradient of the creek in Maryland and the increase in urbanized and industrial impacts that occur in the Maryland portion of the watershed.

27 Physical Habitat Index

Wills Creek Sampling Site 3

WC4, BC1, and BC2 scored in the optimal range, while all other sites PHI values were in the sub optimal range. The values for each site are located in Figure 21

Figure 21: Wills Creek watershed PHI scores

Physical Habitat Scores

180

160

140

120

100 PHI Score 80 PHI Scores

0 Wills 1 Wills 2 Wills 3 Wills 4 Wills 5 Wills 6 Trib 1 Trib 2 Trib 3 Trib 4 Site 28 GIS Mapping

A GIS data base will be constructed by the Somerset Conservation District, pending grant acquisition for a conservation priority related mapping of the entire county. DISCUSSION

A wild brook trout captured in the headwaters of Wills Creek.

While certain indicators such as the increase in Fossoria spp. and the large occurrence of white suckers and blacknose dace could indicate pollution events, the water chemistry, other fish and macroinvertebrates indicate an intact, diverse and unimpacted stream. Wild brook and brown trout were captured in WC1. Wild brown trout were also captured in BC2. Holdover hatchery trout were present in WC1-4, BC1-2, and LWC. An American eel was also collected in WC3. The fish populations in the lower reaches of Wills Creek are indicative of a high quality warm water fishery (HQ-WWF) not a CWF. This is further enforced by the temperature vio- lation occurring in WC6 during mid and late August. The two main deterrents to the entire mainstem not having an optimal rating on the physical habitat scoring were the low gradient/ width in the lower reaches of the creek and the effects of natural flood events throughout the entire watershed. Wills Creek is one of the last truly untouched large watersheds in the western region of Pennsylvania. While its head waters are not prime wild trout waters due to the natural low gradient and slight sedimentation caused by geologic features, it is theorized that all of the 1st

29 and 2nd order tributaries of Wills Creek harbor high populations of wild/native brook trout and/ or wild brown trout. The lower reaches of Wills Creek support a high population of smallmouth bass, a sought after species by warm water anglers. The Wills Creek watershed is a rare glimpse into what large watersheds were like before any industrialized impacts had occurred.

A large smallmouth bass captured in lower Wills Creek

RECOMMENDATIONS

A proactive approach to conservation is recommended to sustain the quality of this water resource. This watershed is extremely underdeveloped, but with populated areas surrounding this watershed the threat of urban sprawl and unplanned development is a constant possibility. The exploration for Marcellus Shale natural gas can pose a large problem to the area due to water withdrawals and possible water pollution.

• Assess and determine the amount of water that can be withdrawn from the watershed without negatively impacting the current flow regime and water quality.

• Educate and inform landowners in regard to using conservation easements and the benefits they derive for both landowners and the natural resources .

• Maintain the forest canopy and forested stream buffers through the implementation of land- owner forest management and stewardship plans.

• Inform and educate landowners on timber management regarding Best Management Prac- tices (BMPs) during timber harvest operations. 30 • Conduct fish surveys of all tributaries to assess wild brook trout stocks and document current water quality in the tributaries. Utilize the PFBC wild brook trout management program and Eastern Brook Trout Venture to futher enhance and protect wild brook trout.

• Create a GIS conservation priority map for the Wills Creek watershed.

• Inform and educate decision makers such as township supervisors, county commissioners, other elected officials, and local residents of the information gathered in the Preassessment so that future development and changes are planned with the best available resource information.

• Improve dirt and gravel roads. The SCD administers the county’s Dirt and Gravel Road Pro- gram. The townships within the Wills Creek watershed should be enrolled and implement this program in order to reduce sediment impacts to the watershed.

• Continue to monitor and survey chemical and biological components of the Wills Creek watershed that have already been included in the Preassessment to determine any changes in the stream over time.

• Implement a full PA DCNR River Conservation Plan for the Wills Creek Watershed.

The Wills Creek watershed is a rare exception where conservation can be proactive and sustain the resource instead of correcting the abuse.

31 LITERATURE CITED

Barbour, M.T., J. Gerritsen, B.D. Snyder, and J. B. Stribling 1999 Rapid Bioassessment Proto- cols for use in wadeable streams and rivers:Periphyton, Benthic macroinvertebrates and fish, second edition. EPA 841-B-99-002. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency; Office of Water; Washington, D.C.

Klemm D.J., P.A. Lewis, F. Fulk 1990 Macroinvertebrate field and laboratory methods for evaluating the biological integrity of surface waters. EPA600/4-90/030 US Environmental Pro- tection Agency Cincinnati, OH.

Linke S., R.C. Bailey, J. Schwindt 1999 Temporal variability of stream bioassessments using benthic macroinvertebrates. Freshwater Biology 42, 575-584

MDE 2006. Total maximum daily load of fecal bacteria for the Wills Creek basin, Garrett and Allegany Counties, Maryland. Maryland Department of the Environment USEPA submission. Wills Creek TMDL fecal bacteria. Baltimore, Maryland

MDE 2006. Total maximum daily load of sediment in the Wills Creek watershed, Garrett and Allegany Counties, Maryland. Maryland Department of the Environment USEPA submission. Wills Creek sediment TMDL. Baltimore, Maryland

Merritt R.W. Cummings 1996 An introduction to aquatic insects of North America Kendal/ Hunt Publishing Co. Dubuque, Iowa.

Peckarsky, B.L., P.R. Fraissinet, M.A. Penton, and D.J. Conklin 1990 Freshwater macroinvertebrates of northeastern North America Cornell University Press Ithaca, NY

Pennsylvania Code. 2001. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. Title 25 Environmental Protection. Department of Environmental Protection, Bureau of Water Supply and Wastewater Manage- ment, Division of Water Quality Assessment and Standards Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, Chapter 93.

Stribling J., B. Jessup, J. White 1998 Development of a benthic index of biological integrity for Maryland. CBWP-EA-98-3. Tetra tech Inc. Owings Mills, Maryland.

Washington S., Knaggs D. 1996 Methods for determinig species-habitat relationships, illus- trated with field work on freshwater macroinvertebrates in an upland catchment. Journal of Bio- logical Education. 30, 257-270

WPC 2007. Laurel Run watershed coldwater conservation plan. The Coldwater Heritage Part- nership. Western Pennsylvania Conservancy, Blairsville, Pennsylvania.

2 3 6 1 1 1 45 11 Trib 4

1 5 1 1 1 2 1 3 10 29 Trib

1 3 1 4 4 5 1 1 2 2 14 20 Trib

1 6 7 1 8 3 1 1 1 2 1 Trib

1 1 7 5 1 5 6 15 Wills

3 3 2 9 1 5 43 40 24 98 Wills

1 9 1 1 4 1 4 10 Wills

4 7 6 3 1 1 1 3 Wills

2 2 8 1 3 1 2 14 55 31 Wills

5 7 1 5 1 7 5 1 1 1 1 1 19 46 64 38 75 15 Wills Appendix1

Baetis Shipsa Genus Sweltsa Prostoia Suwallia Baetisca Chimarra Cyrnellus Psilotreta Isonychia Hagenella Podmosta Eccoptura Ephemera Neophylax Acroneuria Glossosma Stenonema Pteronarcys Ephemerella Nyctiophylax Lepidostoma Dolophilodes Hydropsyche Theliopsyche Helicopsyche Brachycentrus Paraleptophlebia Cheumatopsyche

Family Perlidae Baetidae Uenoidae Baetiscidae Nemouridae Isonychiidae Ephemeridae Phryganeidae Heptageniidae Chloroperlidae Odontoceridae Pteronarcyidae Leptophlebidae Philopotamidae Ephemerellidae Hydropsychidae Brachycentridae Helicopsychidae Glossosomatidae Lepidostomatidae Polycentropodidae

Macroinvertebrates collected at each site in the Wills Creek Preassessment Fall 2008 Fall2008 Preassessment Creek Wills thein siteat each collected Macroinvertebrates

Order Plecoptera Trichoptera Ephemerotera

2 7 5 1 32 Trib 4

1 7 4 1 4 1 3 20 32 10 Trib

1 4 2 1 2 3 2 Trib

1 1 3 2 4 4 2 2 3 1 Trib

1 3 5 6 1 2 1 2 1 4

10 28 12 6 Wills

1 7 1 6 2 1 4 8 43 71 5 Wills

2 1 1 2 3 6 10

119 4 Wills

6 1 2 148

3 Wills

2 2 5 3 3 1 7 2 2 2 13 22

2 Wills

2 1 1 1 3 7 1 5 5 4 1 1

1 Wills

Appendix 1 Continued Appendix1 Continued

Argia

Genus

Agabetes Antocha Antherix Gomphus Stylogomphus Boyeria Optioservus Promoresia Microclloepus Stenelmis Psephenus Dineutus Celina Berosus Nigronia Corydalus Sialis Hexatoma Tipula Simula Thaumalea Ferrissia Fossoria

Coenagrionidae

Aeshnidae Anthericidae Ancylidae Gomphidae Elmidae Psephenidae Gyrinidae Dytiscidae Hydrophilidae Corydalidae Sialidae Chironomidae Tipulidae Simulidae Thaumaleida Lymnaeidae Cambarridae Family

Zygoptera

Anisoptera Coleoptera Megaloptera Diptera Gastropoda Tubificidae Decopoda Order

4 1 8 2 1 1 1 5 22 39 11 23 63 12 Trib

3 5 3 2 3 1 3 5 1 1 3 15 65 38 Trib

2 2 4 5 1 2 3 1 13 24 Trib

1 9 4 4 1 3 5 2 1 6 7 1 10 29 12 Trib

6 6 8 4 2 1 2 9 8 5 10 Wills

5 3 7 2 4 1 1 2 1 1 3 22 16 35 41 12 Wills

4 2 1 1 2 5 1 3 9 3 1 5 2 5 1 1 2 1 2 1 29 Wills

3 5 5 3 1 9 1 2 2 2 3 5 2 1 2 Wills

2 5 7 3 2 6 2 3 8 3 7 6 1 3 29 12 23 Wills

1 5 5 8 4 1 1 1 8 4 2 3 16 10 35 10 38 Wills Appendix2

Acentrella Amphinemura Acroneuria Agentina Baetis Ephemerella Drunella Ephemera Stenonema Stenacron Epeorus Paraleptophlebia Isonychia Caenis Perlesta Pteronarcys Paraleuctra Leuctra Capnia Paracapnia Cheumatopsyche Hydropsyche Dolophilodes Chimarra Cyrnellus Cernotina Polycentropus Nyctiophylax Brachycentrus Micrasema Genus

Baetidae Ephemerellidae Ephemeridae Heptageniidae Leptophlebidae Isonychiidae Caeniidae Nemouridae Perlidae Pteronarcyidae Capniidae Hydropsychidae Philopotamidae Polycentropodidae Brachycentridae Family Leuctridae Macroinvertebrates collected at each site in the Wills Creek Preassessment Fall 2008 Fall2008 Preassessment Creek Wills thein siteat each collected Macroinvertebrates

Order Ephemerotera Plecoptera Trichoptera

4 2 1 2 1 1 2 3 10 57 Trib

1 1 7 8 9 8 1 3 Trib

1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 Trib

1 1 3 7 1 5 1 27 Trib

6 1 2 1 1 3 5 8 2 7 3 8 3 Wills

5 4 6 1 2 4 1 8 1 5 11 17 Wills

4 1 1 1 7 4 4 1 29 Wills

3 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 20 13 Wills

2 1 1 9 1 4 7 2 2 1 11 34 17 11 Wills

1 1 4 2 2 1 7 4 7 2 3 Wills Appendix 2 Continued Appendix2 Continued

Genus

Apatania Argia Antocha Neophylax Glossosma Hydatophylax Rhyacophila Helicopsyche Gomphus Omhiogomphus Boyeria Optioservus Microclloepus Stenelmis Psephenus Helichus Nigronia Corydalus Hexatoma Erioptera Cryptolabis Pseudolimnophila Simula Prosimula Ferrissia Fossoria

Aeshnidae Ancylidae Uenoidae Lepidostomatidae Glossosomatidae Limnephilidae Rhyacophilidae Helicopsychidae Coenagrionidae Gomphidae Elmidae Psephenidae Dryopidae Corydalidae Chironomidae Tipulidae Simulidae Lymnaeidae Cambarridae Family

Zygoptera Anisoptera Coleoptera Megaloptera Diptera Gastropoda Tubificidae Decopoda Order

1 9 1 12 38 33 74 26 26 51 480 483 188 Trib 4

1 4 8 4 60 25 27 70 61 17 18 14 641 175 125 Trib 3

5 1 4 1 9 1 3 61 91 18 42 16 23 112 377 591 Trib 2

4 9 1 4 32 38 48 133 131 142 438 Trib 1

2 4 1 4 4 5 14 68 17 54 50 16 16 50 75 104 145 475 230 Wills 6

2 3 8 1 9 65 12 23 45 22 12 25 123 249 124 544 310 711 248 Wills 5

1 3 2 13 12 55 17 14 20 11 24 15 48 43 81 11 137 Wills 4

3 1 1 1 2 16 77 58 11 43 55 25 78 17 32 14 104 110 Appendix3 Wills 3

2 6 2 1 4 7 32 98 67 86 718 443 511 117 178 Wills 2

4 7 1 3 6 3 4 1 13 18 25 177 135 161 162 136 Wills 1 Fish species collected during the Wills Creek Preassessment Preassessment Creek Wills theduring Fishcollected species

Americaleel Hatchery Rainbow Trout Hatchery Brook Trout Wild Trout Brook Wild Trout Brown Hatchery Brown Trout Red Brest Sunfish Large Mouth Bass Green Sunfish Bluegill Rock Bass Pumpkin Seed Smallmouth Bass White Sucker Northern SuckerHog Greenside Darter Fan Tailed Darter Tesslated Darter Madtom BullheadYellow Sculpin Creek Chub Rosyside Dace Black Nose Dace Long Nose Dace Central Roller Stone Blunt Nose Minnow River Chub Cutlips Minnow Fallfish Fish Species 37

6 1428

Trib 4

5 2 1257

Trib 3

1 1356

Trib 2

981

Trib 1

1414

4 17 20 39

Wills 6

3241

1 8 14 19 188 475

Wills 5

531

1 23

Wills 4

19 653

Wills 3

2272

Appendix 3 Continued Appendix3 Continued

Wills 2

14 856

Wills 1

Mimic Shiner Spotfin Shiner Rosyface Shiner Striped Shiner Spottail Shiner Common Shiner Unkown Minnow Fish Species Total Fish Caught Total Species 38 39