sign in sign up
<<
Home , Bowman Creek, Chest Creek, Larrys Creek, Little Clearfield Creek, Mehoopany Creek, Muncy Creek

Remote Monitoring Network Data Report of Baseline Conditions for 2010/2011 A SUMMARY Basin Commission

Publication No. 280 Modified April 5, 2012

Abstract Approximately 85 percent of the collected at five-minute intervals and Susquehanna River Basin is underlain uploaded to SRBC’s public web site by shales containing natural gas, (mdw.srbc.net/remotewaterquality/) including the Marcellus shale at predetermined intervals via cell or formation. Extracting gas from these satellite transmission. formations became economically feasible through hydraulic fracturing Since initiating the RWQMN project – the process of using large volumes in January 2010, SRBC has been of water to fracture shales and release collecting baseline water quality trapped gas. conditions in smaller watersheds within the headwaters’ region of With the onset of hydraulic fracturing the basin, where data have typically activities in the Susquehanna River been scarce to non-existent. This will Basin, the Susquehanna River Basin help characterize the basin’s water Commission (SRBC) initiated resources and evaluate any impact additional water quality monitoring on water quality from natural gas activities to generate data that can development over the next 5-10 years. help determine if natural gas drilling activities are or are not changing water The focus of this report is on the quality conditions. Most notably, data collected at the initial 37 remote Purpose of this Report Is: SRBC established the Remote water quality stations installed from Water Quality Monitoring Network January to December 2010. These are To release data characterizing baseline (RWQMN) for real-time, continuous the stations for which SRBC had at water quality conditions to determine the monitoring. least six months of data collected and existing conditions within select watersheds assessed in preparation for this first – not to draw conclusions on water quality At the time of this report, SRBC’s RWQMN summary data report. impacts – for the watersheds containing the RWQMN consists of 51 monitoring first 37 monitoring stations installed by SRBC. stations installed in select watersheds After analyzing attributes of each within the region of the basin station, SRBC decided to group As with any science-based project where experiencing unconventional shale them by ecoregions for data analysis. baseline conditions need to be set first, SRBC gas development. The stations are SRBC concentrated its analysis on is continuing to collect and analyze data located in a variety of areas including the continuous data for pH, specific at all 51 stations before it can determine if state , state gamelands, private conductance, and , as well any observed water quality conditions are property, and municipal property. as on water samples analyzed in a departures from baseline conditions. lab for other chemical parameters. Each station is equipped with a data Stations that had field chemistry To inform the public about the future sonde, data platform, and a solar atypical of their ecoregion were direction of data collection and analysis panel or power source to continuously identified for future analysis. SRBC monitor the following parameters: pH, anticipates continuing data collection efforts, and where more detailed studies will temperature, conductance, dissolved at all stations and periodically issuing be conducted at targeted stations based on oxygen, and turbidity. The data are subsequent data reports. the baseline data results and other water quality observations. This publication is a summary of the full Contact: Dawn Hintz report, which is available on SRBC’s web Environmental Scientist II/Database Analyst site at mdw.srbc.net/remotewaterquality/. Phone: (717) 238-0423 Email: [email protected] 1 Introduction The network currently stands at 51 • Non-impaired or minimally With the majority of the Susquehanna stations (Appendix A), which includes impaired waterbodies; River Basin (85 percent) underlain the stations funded by East Resources, • Presence of wastewater with natural gas shales and hydraulic Inc. as well as those funded by discharges; fracturing increasing since 2008, the Department of • Presence of drinking water SRBC initiated measures to manage Conservation and Natural Resources intakes; water resources and encourage (PADCNR), State • ; sustainable use and development, and Energy Research and Development • morphology that would established a real-time, continuous Authority, and Headwaters Resource allow the data sonde to be in water quality monitoring network & Conservation Development Council moving water during all flow called the Remote Water Quality Sinnemahoning Stakeholders Committee. regimes; Monitoring Network (RWQMN). • Availability of sunlight to power Specific criteria were identified for all the battery; and, This report is focused on the initial 37 stations selected within the shale gas • Local interest. stations (Figure 1) installed and for region. The following criteria were Stations were located on both private which there has been enough time to considered when locating stations: and public lands having met all or the collect and assess a sufficient amount • Watershed size between 30-60 majority of the identified criteria. of data. Funding for the intial stations square miles; was provided by SRBC’s general • Gas pad density and other gas The initial 18 months of sampling in operating fund and a contribution related infrastructure (on the these watersheds have allowed SRBC from East Resources, Inc. ground or proposed); to build a substantial baseline dataset

Figure 1. Map of the Initial 37 RWQMN Stations 2 in smaller and headwater areas previously lacking these types of data. The period of data collection for the 37 sites ranges from six to 18 months (Appendix B). Baseline data on these streams will assist SRBC and other agencies to detect if activities in the watershed are having an adverse effect on the water quality.

Equipment and Parameters Each RWQMN station is comprised of the same equipment: data sonde, data platform, and solar panel or other power source.

The data sonde is a multi-parameter SRBC staff installs data sonde at a station along , Sullivan County, Pa. water quality sonde (see photo lower right) with an optical dissolved oxygen probe, an optical turbidity probe, a pH probe, and a conductance and will have elevated conductance graph, and determine basic statistics temperature probe. The data sonde measurements. Dissolved oxygen from the raw data. General project also includes a non-vented relative is the amount of oxygen available information and maps are also found depth sensor. The entire unit is placed to aquatic life in a ; aquatic on the user-friendly web site at mdw. in protective housing in free-flowing life needs are generally above 4-5 srbc.net/remotewaterquality/. water at each site. milligrams/liter (mg/l) range. Oxygen levels are impacted by temperature The data platform stores the water and organic material. Turbidity is the quality observations and transmits measure of water clarity and typically the data by either cellular or satellite increases with higher flows or other signal, depending on the type of instream disturbance, as sediment and communications needed at the station other particulate matter mobilize. location. The data platform is powered by a rechargeable 12V battery The data sonde collects the water B connected to a solar panel or other quality parameters as frequently A power source. as every five minutes with data D transmission times varying based on C The continuously-monitored water the type of communication. Data from quality parameters at each station stations with cellular data transmission include temperature, pH, conductance, are uploaded every two hours, while Each station is equipped with a data dissolved oxygen, and turbidity. data from stations utilizing satellite sonde (above) that measures dissolved data communication are uploaded oxygen, turbidity, pH, conductance pH is the measure of the stream water every four hours. Data transmitted via and temperature. The data sonde also acidity or alkalinity. In Pennsylvania, satellite telemetry are an average of the includes a non-vented relative depth the water quality standard range for pH data collected at five-minute intervals sensor. is 6.0 to 9.0 and the New York water over the four-hour time period. A – Dissolved Oxygen quality standard range is 6.5 to 8.5. B – pH Conductance is the ability of water to The data are uploaded to a public web C – Turbidity conduct electricity; streams with high site maintained by SRBC. The web D – Conductance/Temperature levels of dissolved solids and chlorides site allows users to view, download,

3 Results North Central Appalachian The stations located in this ecoregion The 37 RWQMN stations are Ecoregion are designated as cold water fishes distributed over three Level Ten stations fall within the North (CWF), high-quality cold water fishes III ecoregions: North Central Central Appalachian ecoregion (HQ-CWF), or exceptional value Appalachian, Northern Appalachian (Figure 2). This ecoregion is a waters (EV), with the exception of the and Uplands, and Central forested, sedimentary upland that has Tioga River, which is designated as Appalachian Ridges and Valleys high hills and low mountains. It is warm water fishes (WWF). Bowman (Table 1). divided into an unglaciated western Creek, , Long region and a glaciated eastern region. Run, Elk Run, and Blockhouse Creek The majority of the shale gas region Seven of the 10 RWQMN sites are are meeting their designated uses. of the Susquehanna River Basin is located in the Glaciated Allegheny and Run have located in the Northern Appalachian High Plateau subecoregion and the short stream segments impaired by Plateau and Uplands and the North remaining three are located in the abandoned mine drainage (AMD) and Central Appalachian ecoregions Unglaciated Allegheny High Plateau Loyalsock Creek, Tioga River, and (Figure 2) (Woods and others, 1996). subecoregion. A significant portion of Kitchen Creek contain segments of Pennsylvania’s oil and gas production acid deposition impairment. is located in this region (Woods and other, 1996). (continued on page 6)

Figure 2. Map of the Initial 37 RWQMN Stations Shown with the Level III Ecoregions

4 Table 1. RWQMN Station List with Basic Watershed Characteristics Impaired % Impaired Gas Well Dominant Watershed Dominant Bedrock Gas Watershed Name Map ID Stream Stream Pad Landuse(s) Size (mi2) Geology Wells*1 Miles2 Miles2 Approvals*1 Northern Appalachian Plateau and Uplands (70%) Apalachin Creek 11 43 Shale 0 0% 0 0 Agriculture (26%) Forest (73%) Baldwin Creek 8 35 Shale 0 0% 0 0 Agriculture (21%) Forest (70%) Canacadea Creek 7 47 Shale 0 0% 0 0 Agriculture (23%) Forest (70%) Catatonk Creek 5 30 Shale 0 0% 0 0 Agriculture (16%) Forest (67%) Cherry Valley Creek 2 51 Shale 0 0% 1 0 Agriculture (23%) Forest (73%) Choconut Creek 10 38 Shale 0 0% 0 0 Agriculture (23%) Agriculture (53%) Crooked Creek 18 47 Shale 0 0% 18 21 Forest (44%) Agriculture (51%) Hammond Creek 13 29 Shale 0 0% 11 19 Forest (46%) Forest (68%) 19 38 Sandstone 4.3 6% 1 0 Agriculture (23%) Forest (68%) Little 24 11 Sandstone 0 0% 4 2 Agriculture (26%) Forest (48%) 20 52 Sandstone 0 0% 56 58 Agriculture (48%) Forest (62%) 4 48 Shale 0 0% 0 0 Agriculture (34%) Forest (35%) Sangerfield River 1 52 Shale 0 0% 0 0 Agriculture (32%) Forest (60%) Sing Sing Creek 6 35 Shale 0 0% 0 0 Agriculture (21%) Forest (68%) Snake Creek 15 45 Sandstone 0 0% 13 19 Agriculture (28%) South Branch Tunkhannock Forest (55%) 23 70 Sandstone 2.1 2% 3 0 Creek Agriculture (32%) Forest (74%) 14 52 Sandstone 0 0% 7 0 Agriculture (18%) Agriculture (51%) Sugar Creek 17 56 Sandstone 10.8 13% 44 99 Forest (48%) Agriculture (55%) Tomjack Creek 16 27 Shale 0 0% 25 15 Forest (42%) Forest (64%) Trout Brook 3 36 Shale 0 0% 0 0 Agriculture (31%) Agriculture (52%) Tuscarora Creek 9 53 Shale 0 0% 0 0 Forest (42%) Forest (64%) 12 47 Shale 1.8 2% 23 6 Agriculture (33%)

* As tracked by SRBC (table continued on next page) 1 Multiple wells can be located on one pad. Data last updated February 2012 2 PA and NY State 2011 Integrated List and 2011 Priority Waterbodies List

5 Table 1. RWQMN Station List with Basic Watershed Characteristics (continued) Impaired % Impaired Gas Well Dominant Watershed Dominant Bedrock Gas Watershed Name Map ID Stream Stream Pad Landuse(s) Size (mi2) Geology Wells*1 Miles2 Miles2 Approvals*1 Northern Central Appalachian Forest (75%) Blockhouse Creek 28 38 Sandstone 0 0% 6 0 Agriculture (21%) 29 Forest (90%) 54 Sandstone 0 0% 3 0 Forest (82%) Elk Run 26 21 Sandstone 0 0% 21 13 Agriculture (11%) Kitchen Creek 30 Forest (88%) 20 Sandstone 1.8 5% 0 0 Forest (76%) Larrys Creek 31 29 Sandstone 1.9 4% 15 4 Agriculture (22%) Forest (81%) Long Run 22 21 Sandstone 0 0% 0 0 Agriculture (14%) Forest (86%) Loyalsock Creek 27 27 Sandstone 55.0 100% 0 0 Grassland (9%) Forest (85%) Tioga River 21 13 Sandstone 4.2 18% 5 11 Grassland (9%) Forest (91%) Trout Run 24 33 Sandstone 1.5 3% 24 4 Grassland (8%) Forest (86%) West Branch Pine Creek 25 70 Sandstone 0 0% 1 0 Grassland (13%) Central Appalachian Ridges and Valleys Bobs Creek 37 Forest (92%) 17 Sandstone 0 0% 1 3 Forest (60%) 36 44 Shale 29.6 24% 0 0 Agriculture (35%) Forest (74%) Little 35 44 Sandstone 0 0% 2 1 Agriculture (22%) Forest (57%) Little 32 51 Sandstone 1.8 2% 28 16 Agriculture (39%) Forest (88%) Marsh Creek 33 44 Sandstone 17.1 20% 1 0 Agriculture (11%) * As tracked by SRBC 1 Multiple wells can be located on one pad. Data last updated February 2012 2 PA and NY State 2011 Integrated List and 2011 Priority Waterbodies List

Within the North Central Appalachian Overall, the RWQMN stations ecoregion there are five stations that Overall, the RWQMN stations exhibiting the lowest conductance, present similar characteristics and exhibiting the lowest conductance, pH, and turbidity values are located water quality results: Loyalsock pH, and turbidity values are in the North Central Appalachian Creek, Tioga River, Bowman Creek, located in the North Central ecoregion. All of these streams can Kitchen Creek, and Trout Run. Appalachian ecoregion. All of be characterized as naturally acidic Watershed characteristics considered these streams can be characterized systems with low buffering capacities. include subecoregion, land use, as naturally acidic systems with The median pH ranged from 5.78 to geology, and drainage size. Of these 6.86. The low buffering capacities, five watersheds, Trout Run is the low buffering capacities. as evidenced by very low alkalinity, only one located in the Unglaciated allow for even small introductions of Allegheny High Plateau subecoregion. acidic solutions to dramatically drop Land use in the watersheds is at sandstone and the drainage size varies the pH causing adverse effects to minimum 85 percent forested and less for these watersheds (14 to 54 square aquatic organisms. than 10 percent agricultural land. The miles). underlying geology of the stations is

6 Low concentrations of chloride, Conductance is fairly low sulfate and dissolved solids in the in these streams ranging water column were recorded at these from 48 to 81 μS/cm. stations from grab samples. Low The median turbidity and conductance values, ranging from dissolved oxygen range 35 to 60 μS/cm in these watersheds, from 1.4 to 9.4 NTU are consistent with these findings. and 9.8 to 12.2 mg/l, Chloride, sulfate, and dissolved solids respectively. concentrations have a tendency to increase with human activities in a The Blockhouse Creek watershed. Conductance may slightly station is the outlier increase during low flow periods; in this ecoregion, and however, these systems consistently does not share the water yield low values. quality characteristics of SRBC staff conducts Aquatic Resource Survey along the other nine stations Meshoppen Creek in Wyoming County, Pa. Monitoring Turbidity and dissolved oxygen in in the ecoregion. The found elevated pH values at this station; report streams often reflect land use in the watershed characteristics recommends further investigation. watershed. Watersheds that drain are consistent with the predominantly forested land and other watersheds in contain very little agriculture typically the ecoregion–sandstone geology, significant amount of natural gas have low turbidity and high dissolved Glaciated Allegheny High Plateau development activities. Twenty-two oxygen. The forested land use provides subecoregion, and dominant forested of the 37 stations discussed in this canopy cover to maintain cooler water land use. There is a small portion report are located in this ecoregion. temperatures and root systems to help of the drainage area that lies in the This region is characterized by control erosion. The median turbidity Northern Appalachian Plateau and open valleys and low mountains value for these watersheds is less Uplands ecoregion that may influence that are able to support woodlands than 2.0 NTU and dissolved oxygen the water chemistry. In addition, and agriculture. It is typically less concentrations range from 10.9 to about one-fifth of the watershed is forested than the bordering Glaciated 12.7 mg/l. agriculture, and a major transportation Allegheny High Plateau subecoregion corridor (State Route 15) bisects the (Woods and others, 1999). The 22 Of the remaining five stations in the headwaters. stations in this ecoregion are split North Central Appalachian ecoregion, between the Northeastern Uplands and four stations display comparable Continuous monitoring results Glaciated Low Plateau subecoregions. water chemistry results. Larrys Creek, display a median pH value of almost Seven stations are located within the West Branch Pine Creek, Long Run, 8, indicating a basic stream system. Northeastern Uplands subecoregion and Elk Run share the same sandstone Grab sample alkalinity values are and the remaining 15 stations are geology, but are divided between the almost double the highest value (40 located in the Glaciated Low Plateau Glaciated Allegheny High Plateau mg/l and 27 mg/l, respectively) in the subecoregion. subecoregion (Long Run and Elk other nine watersheds. Conductance Run) and the Unglaciated Allegheny for Blockhouse Creek averages The Northeastern Uplands subecoregion High Plateau subecoregion (Larrys 140 μS/cm, much higher than other typically is higher in elevation and Creek and West Branch Pine Creek). monitored streams in the North Central more forested than the Glaciated Agriculture is more common in these Appalachian ecoregion. The average Low Plateau. The seven stations watersheds, covering up to 22 percent dissolved oxygen is 9.5 mg/l, but the located in the Northeastern Uplands of the watershed; forested land use is median turbidity is only 0.5 NTU. subecoregion include the Lackawanna less and ranges from 76 to 82 percent River, Starrucca Creek, Snake Creek, coverage. Choconut Creek, Wappasening Creek, Apalachin Creek, and Meshoppen There is only a small difference in Northern Appalachian Creek (approximately 50 percent of the water chemistry exhibited in this Plateau and Uplands Ecoregion this watershed is in the Glaciated group of stations compared to the Low Plateau). These watersheds have first grouping. These systems also The Northern Appalachian Plateau designated uses of EV, HQ-CWF, have limited buffering capacities, but and Uplands ecoregion, which spans CWF, or Class C, with the exception of have more neutral water chemistry a large portion of the Susquehanna Choconut Creek, which is designated (median pH range from 7.00 to 7.21). River Basin, has experienced a as WWF in Pennsylvania.

7 “”

Overall, these stations have lower Central Appalachian Ridges pH and conductance values when and Valleys Ecoregion compared to the stations in the With only a small portion of this Glaciated Low Plateau. Conductance ecoregion underlain by Marcellus values range from 77 to 135 μS/cm shale, the Central Appalachian indicating low levels of dissolved Ridges and Valleys ecoregion, an solids in the waterbodies. Lab water area of parallel ridges and valleys, is quality samples collected at the experiencing very little natural gas stations support the continuous data. development activities. Five of the seven stations exhibit Given this fact, SRBC located only five neutral water chemistry with median continuous monitoring stations in this pH values ranging from 6.97 to 7.22; region. These stations include Bobs however, Meshoppen and Starrucca Creek, Chest Creek, Little Clearfield Creeks do not follow this pattern with Creek, Marsh Creek, and Little Muncy median pH values exceeding 7.6. Creek. Portions of Marsh Creek and These two systems will require further Watersheds lie investigation to determine the reason Station along , Wyoming County, Pa. in the North Central Appalachian for the atypical pH values. ecoregion. These watersheds are underlain with sandstone geology, The remaining 15 stations in the sulfate, chloride, , with the exception of Chest Creek’s Northern Appalachian Plateau and and conductance concentrations as shale geology. Uplands are located in the Glaciated well as turbidity are typically found Low Plateau subecoregion. This at higher ranges within these types Neutral water chemistry characterizes includes stations Little Mehoopany of settings (Missouri Department of these watersheds with median pH Creek, Nanticoke Creek, Trout Brook, Natural Resources, 2006). values ranging from 7.11 to 7.49. Baldwin Creek, Tomjack Creek, Average specific conductance Crooked Creek, Cherry Valley Creek, The stations in this ecoregion have concentrations vary in the watersheds Hammond Creek, Tuscarora Creek, slightly basic water chemistry with ranging from 77 to 384 μS/cm. Sangerfield River, South Branch median pH values ranging from 7.12 Chest Creek and Little Clearfield Tunkhannock Creek, Sugar Creek, to 8.04. Overall, conductance is higher Creek both lie in areas that have Catatonk Creek, Sing Sing Creek, and in this subecoregion, ranging from been mined and which contain more Canacadea Creek. The six streams in 108 to 379 μS/cm, indicating higher than 20 percent agriculture land use Pennsylvania are designated as CWF levels of dissolved solids in the water in their contributing areas. These or trout stocked fishes (TSF) with the column. Little Mehoopany Creek two watersheds show some of the exception of Crooked Creek, which and Nanticoke Creek are the only two highest conductance concentrations is designated as WWF. The nine watersheds in the subecoregion with of the RWQMN stations, but the streams in New York are classified conductance below 150 μS/cm. concentrations are relatively low as Class C, Class C(t) or Class C(ts), when compared to impaired AMD which represent higher quality waters. Median turbidity values for 16 streams in the region. Little Clearfield Baldwin Creek has a small stream stations located in the ecoregion range and Chest Creeks are located in the segment designated as Class B. from 2 to 10 NTU; three stations have Uplands and Valleys of Mixed Land median turbidity below 2 NTU and Use subecoregion and are primarily Surficial glacial till geology consists three stations have median turbidity designated as HQ-CWF streams. of unconsolidated material deposited above 10 NTU. Dissolved oxygen on bedrock by a continental glacier concentrations (greater than 9 mg/l) Bobs Creek, located in the Northern and can measure up to 50 meters are well above the levels needed Sandstone Ridge subecoregion, has in thickness. Most of New York’s to sustain aquatic life. Turbidity at greater than 90 percent forested lands, bedrock geology is covered by glacial several stations (Apalachin Creek, has no stream impairments and is till deposits (Rogers and others, Canacadea Creek, and Sugar Creek) designated as a HQ-CWF. It also has 1999). Streams in this portion of was studied further with results the lowest conductance concentration the Susquehanna River Basin can found in the Turbidity and Specific and most neutral water quality of the generally be characterized as having Conductance section of this report. stations in the Central Appalachian highly mobile, unconsolidated Ridges and Valleys ecoregion. substrate material. Based on the The average specific conductance leachability of glacial till geology, concentration is 77 μS/cm and the median pH value of 7.11. 8 Little Muncy Creek and Marsh Creek are both located in the Northern Dissected Ridges and Knobs subecoregion and are designated as CWF. The Little Muncy Creek and Marsh Creek Watersheds contain about 40 percent and 10 percent agricultural land use, respectively (Table 1). Median turbidity is less than 3 NTU, but the large standard deviations surrounding the mean values indicate more variability over a range of conditions.

Turbidity and Specific Conductance Variability of Select Field Parameters by Ecoregion Figure 3. Box Plot for Specific Conductance by Ecoregion Due to the nature of natural gas development and concerns over potential water quality impacts, turbidity and specific conductance were selected as surrogate indicator parameters. A box plot depicts the median value of the dataset, inter- quartile ranges, as well as the range of outliers. For these data analyses, the top and bottom five percent of data values were eliminated to remove extreme data values. The following box plots provide a graphical representation of the distinct differences in baseline specific conductance and turbidity data across ecoregions.

The box plot for specific conductance is divided into four box-and-whisker Figure 4. Box Plot for Turbidity by Ecoregion plots, one for each ecoregion with the Central Appalachian Ridges and Valleys ecoregion being divided into largest number of stations and shows of these stations are impacted by two plots because of AMD impacted a greater variability. The majority AMD. With few stations, a greater stations (Figure 3). AMD typically of stations have a glacial till surficial variability is typical in a box plot and impacts the specific conductance geology; however, several stations this is portrayed in the two Central of water chemistry. The box plot do not share this geology. Glacial Appalachian box-and-whisker plots. indicates a significant difference till geology can contribute to higher Chest and Little Clearfield Creeks are in specific conductance between specific conductance, explaining the represented in the AMD impacted plot ecoregions. larger variability and higher upper and show a greater variability than the range in specific conductance in the streams not impacted by AMD. The North Central Appalachian ecoregion. ecoregion is tightly grouped indicating Turbidity for each station was grouped low variability of specific conductance. The Central Appalachian Ridges by ecoregion and visually presented The Northern Appalachian Plateau and Valleys ecoregion only contains in a box plot (Figure 4). None of and Uplands ecoregion contains the five monitoring stations, and two the ecoregions show a significant 9 difference in turbidity as the inter- Correlating Precipitation with Kendall’s tau coefficient is a non- quartile ranges overlap each other. Field Parameters at Select parametric test that analyzes for the Observed data in the North Central Stations statistical dependence of the variables. Appalachian ecoregion show low Pearson’s correlation coefficient is a variability in turbidity as it did with Several stations exhibiting large measure of linear dependence of two specific conductance, indicating standard deviations in turbidity variables. similar and consistent water chemistry and specific conductance were within the monitored watersheds in identified for closer analysis (Tables None of the preliminary statistics this ecoregion. 2 and 3). Two correlation analyses from the identified stations show were performed for each station to a significant correlation between determine any correlative relationship precipitation and either of the field between precipitation and these two chemistry parameters (Tables 2 and parameters. Both analyses, Kendall’s 3). The variables were correlated tau coefficient and Pearson’s directly by date and time and also with correlation coefficient, measure a one-day lag period (precipitation dependence of two variables on each 24 hours prior was compared with other. Perfect correlation between parameter concentration). As the the variables in either analysis would project moves forward, a continued result in a coefficient of 1 or -1; a effort will be made to incorporate the coefficient of 1 represents a positive influence of precipitation on water correlation and a coefficient of -1 chemistry, especially in light of the represents a negative correlation. various seasonal influences.

Table 2. Selected Sites for Closer Analysis between Turbidity and Precipitation Site Median Standard Deviation Kendall’s tau Pearson’s rho

Canacadea Creek 5.15 199.47 -0.02 -0.16 Long Run 9.40 186.39 -0.20 -.022 SRBC staff verifies that the station along Marsh Creek 2.70 123.38 0.25 0.36 Loyalsock Creek is working. Apalachin Creek 5.27 123.12 0.23 0.14 Bobs Creek 2.70 108.05 0.19 0.03 The variability seen in the turbidity Sugar Creek 5.60 82.37 0.31 0.36 in the Northern Appalachian Plateau and Uplands stations could be linked Larrys Creek 1.46 9.60 0.14 0.37 with the glacial till geology and the Loyalsock Creek 0.38 9.20 0.20 0.49 land use in the ecoregion. Streams located in areas of glacial till geology typically will have higher turbidity (Cornell Cooperative Extension – Table 3. Selected Site for Closer Analysis between Ulster County, 2007). Specific Conductance and Precipitation The Central Appalachian ecoregion Site Mean Standard Deviation Kendall’s tau Pearson’s rho displays less variability than the Northern Appalachian Plateau and Canacadea Creek 379 137 -0.01 -0.09 Uplands ecoregion, but still indicates Sugar Creek 285 135 -0.02 -0.07 inconsistency in baseline turbidity South Branch Tunkhannock Creek 263 81 -0.07 -0.01 values between the stations in the ecoregion. Many factors may Hammond Creek 179 9 -0.09 -0.07 contribute to this variability, including sample size (5), difference in land uses, and AMD impacts.

10 Water Chemistry – Table 4. Water Chemistry Parameters Analyzed at the Lab Lab Samples Six Times/Year Four Times/Year Acidity, Hot Alkalinity, Bicarbonate In addition to the five continuously Alkalinity Alkalinity, Carbonate recorded water chemistry parameters at the RWQMN stations, SRBC staff Barium Bromide collects water samples, which are Chloride analyzed at a certified lab, four or pH Dioxide six times a year. These additional Specific Conductance Gross Alpha parameters and the frequency at Sulfate Gross Beta which they are measured are noted Total Dissolved Solids Lithium in Table 4. Each RWQMN station Total Organic Carbon has been analyzed for the additional parameters at least once and a subset Nitrate of 15 stations have been monitored for Potassium the parameters on a regular schedule. These stations include Apalachin Creek, Bobs Creek, Bowman Creek, Cherry Valley Creek, Elk Run, , Little Muncy Creek, Meshoppen Creek, Sing Sing Creek, South Branch Tunkhannock Creek, Starrucca Creek, Sugar Creek, Trout Brook, Trout Run, and West Branch North Central Appalachian Pine Creek. Beginning in October Northern Appalachian Plateau 2011, routine sampling was initiated Central Appalachian Ridges and Valleys at all 51 stations on an eight-to-nine- week schedule for the additional parameters.

A further evaluation of water chemistry at each RWQMN site was done using the supplementary lab chemistry data collected at each site. The major anion and cation structure in percentages for each station was compared using a Piper Diagram. A Piper Diagram is useful for showing the characteristics of multiple stations on one diagram. The cations are plotted on the left triangle, while the anions are plotted on the right triangle. The points on the two triangles are projected upward into the diamond where they will intersect to visually show the difference in ion chemistry between the stations (University of Idaho, 2001).

The cation and anion data collected at each RWQMN site were plotted on a Piper Diagram and visually grouped by ecoregion (Figure 5). The Figure 5. RWQMN Piper Diagram

11 North Central Appalachian ecoregion Conclusions and/or conductance. Also, more showed the most diversity within its The first 18 months of the RWQMN targeted sampling will be conducted stations. Trout Run and Kitchen Creek, project have provided an abundance upstream of the RWQMN stations represented by the two red squares on of baseline water quality data for based on data collected during the the right side of the diamond, indicate headwater streams in the northern first 18 months of the project. Stream water chemistry conditions different tier of Pennsylvania and New York morphology, which can be a potential from the other seven stations located portions of the Susquehanna River influence on water chemistry, is in the North Central Appalachians. Basin. However, to accurately another characteristic that SRBC will determine if changes in the water study in these targeted watersheds. The stations in the Northern chemistry are the result of natural gas Appalachian Plateau and Uplands development activities, and not normal Also, to begin establishing biological ecoregion exhibit similar water and/or seasonal variation, additional baseline conditions in these chemistry, as indicated by the blue continuous data are needed. To watersheds, macroinvertebrates were triangles. Looking at the Central achieve this, SRBC plans to continue collected in fall 2011 at each of the Appalachian Ridges and Valleys collecting continuous monitoring data RWQMN sites. Macroinvertebrates ecoregion, there are two groupings from the 51 established stations over will be collected at the stations of stations. Chest Creek, Little the next several years. during the same season each year Clearfield Creek, and Bobs Creek are to limit the influence of seasonal grouped together towards the top of While the need to maintain a variation. Fish will be collected the diamond and Little Muncy Creek continuous water quality monitoring at several of the RWQMN sites in and Marsh Creek are grouped near the network for all the RWQMN stations is conjunction with several other SRBC middle of the diamond. Bobs Creek is clear, several stations exhibited water projects during spring/summer 2012. an outlier in this ecoregion, exhibiting chemistry characteristics, while within Macroinvertebrate and/or fish data at cation and anion percentages closer to water quality standards, warranting each station will allow for comparison the two streams impacted by AMD. further investigation. These anomalies or documentation of any degradation may have been demonstrated in the of biota to the extent it can be linked to continuous monitoring data, the anion changes in the water quality. and cation structure, or in both sets of data (Table 5). Future RWQMN data reports will continue to describe baseline water In addition to maintaining the chemistry and biological data continuous monitoring of these collected at all stations, but will also stations, SRBC will begin more include detailed information on the detailed data collection in these targeted watersheds and the results of watersheds. Some of the data SRBC’s analysis following pollution collection efforts planned will involve events where the data can be directly automated water collection for lab attributed to specific events. Little Muncy Creek, Central Appalachian analysis triggered by turbidity, pH, Ridges and Valleys ecoregion. Table 5. Watersheds Requiring Further Study Watershed Reason for Further Study

Blockhouse Creek Water chemistry results differ from other watersheds in the same ecoregion

Kitchen Creek Cation and anion percentages are different from other watersheds in the same ecoregion

Trout Run Cation and anion percentages are different from other watersheds in the same ecoregion; observed specific conductance spikes not attributable to known causes

Meshoppen Creek Elevated pH levels compared to other watersheds in the same ecoregion

Starrucca Creek Elevated pH levels compared to other watersheds in the same ecoregion

Bobs Creek Observed specific conductance spikes not attributable to known causes; cation and anion percentages correlate closer with AMD impaired watersheds than non-impaired

12 APPENDIX A RWQMN Watersheds – 51 Stations

References Cornell Cooperative Extension – Ulster County, New York City Department of Environmental Protection, and U.S. Army Engineer Research Development Center. 2007. Upper Esopus Creek Management Plan. Volume I: Summary of Finding and Recommendations. Missouri Department of Natural Resources. 2006. Water Quality in Missouri’s Larger Rivers. http://dnr.mo.gov/pubs/pub2020.pdf. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. 2012. NNDC Climate Data Online. http://cdo.ncdc.noaa.gov/pls/plclimprod/cdomain.subqueryrouter. New York State Department of Environmental Conservation. 1999. §703.3 Water quality standards for pH, dissolved oxygen, dissolved solids, odor, color and turbidity. http://www. dec.ny.gov/regs/4590.html#16132. Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection. 2010. Chapter 93. Water Quality Standards. http://www.pacode.com/secure/data/025/chapter93/025_0093.pdf. Rogers, W.B., Y.W. Isachsen, T.D Mock, and R.E. Nyahay. Overview of New York Geology. Adapted from Education Leaflet 33. http://gretchen.geo.rpi.edu/roecker/nys/nys_ edu. pamphlet.html. University of Idaho. 2001. Groundwater Chemistry. Graphical Displays. http://www.sci.uidaho.edu/geol464_564/Powerpoint/Lecture%201d%20468_568nc.ppt. Woods, A.J., J.M. Omernik, and D.D. Brown. 1999. Level III and IV Ecoregions of Delaware, , Pennsylvania, Virginia, and . Environmental Protection Agency. National Health and Environmental Effects Research Laboratory, Corvallis, Oregon. ftp://ftp.epa.gov/wed/ecoregions/reg3/reg3_eco_desc.doc. Woods, A.J., J.M. Omernik, D.D. Brown, and C.W. Kiilsgaard. 1996. Level III and IV Ecoregions of Pennsylvania and the Blue Ridge Mountains, the Ridge and Valley, and Central Appalachians of Virginia, West Virginia, and Maryland: EPA/600/R-96/077, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, National Health and Environmental Effects Research Laboratory, Corvallis, Oregon. 50 pp.

13 APPENDIX B Data Collection Timeframe

Stream Name Map ID Station Period of Data Collection

Apalachin Creek 11 Apalachin Creek near Apalachin, NY 12/14/2010 – 7/5/2011 Baldwin Creek 8 Baldwin Creek near Lowman, NY 12/7/2010 – 6/20/2011 Blockhouse Creek 28 Blockhouse Creek near English Center, PA 6/4/2010 – 5/23/2011 Bobs Creek 37 Bobs Creek near Pavia, PA 3/30/2010 – 7/27/2011 Bowman Creek 29 Bowman Creek near Noxen, PA 4/1/2010 – 7/11/2011 Canacadea Creek 7 Canacadea Creek near Almond, NY 12/17/2010 – 7/5/2011 Catatonk Creek 5 Upper Catatonk Creek near Spencer, NY 12/16/2010 – 6/20/2011 Cherry Valley Creek 2 Cherry Valley Creek near Middlefield, NY 12/2/2010 – 6/28/2011 Chest Creek 36 Chest Creek near Patton, PA 9/21/2010 – 7/18/2011 Choconut Creek 10 Choconut Creek near Vestal Center, NY 1/27/2010 – 6/27/2011 Crooked Creek 18 Upper Crooked Creek near Keeneyville, PA 6/16/2010 – 7/5/2011 Elk Run 26 Elk Run near Watrous, PA 6/23/2010 – 6/6/2011 Hammond Creek 13 Hammond Creek near Millerton, PA 1/27/2010 – 6/20/2011 Kitchen Creek 30 Kitchen Creek near Huntington Mills, PA 10/30/2010 – 6/1/2011 Lackawanna River 19 Lackawanna River near Forest City, PA 7/14/2010 – 5/26/2011 Larrys Creek 31 Larrys Creek near Salladasburg, PA 3/30/2010 – 5/23/2011 Little Clearfield Creek 35 Little Clearfield Creek near Dimeling, PA 4/28/2010 – 7/18/2011 Little Mehoopany Creek 24 Little Mehoopany Creek near North Mehoopany, PA 9/8/2010 – 7/6/2011 Little Muncy Creek 32 Little Muncy Creek near Moreland, PA 8/6/2010 – 5/25/2011 Long Run 22 Long Run near Gaines, PA 12/17/2010 – 6/6/2011 Loyalsock Creek 27 Loyalsock Creek near Ringdale, PA 6/3/2010 – 7/6/2011 Marsh Creek 33 Marsh Creek near Blanchard, PA 6/30/2010 – 6/7/2011 Meshoppen Creek 20 Meshoppen Creek near Kaiserville, PA 1/27/2010 – 6/1/2011 Nanticoke Creek 4 Nanticoke Creek near Maine, NY 12/16/2011 – 6/8/2011 Sangerfield River 1 Sangerfield River near Poolville, NY 12/2/2010 – 6/28/2011 Sing Sing Creek 6 Sing Sing Creek near Big Flats, NY 12/1/2010 – 6/6/2011 Snake Creek 15 Snake Creek near Lawsville Center, PA 6/2/2010 – 7/6/2011 South Branch Tunkhannock Creek 23 South Branch Tunkhannock Creek near La Plume, PA 7/2/2010 – 5/16/2011 Starrucca Creek 14 Starrucca Creek near Stevens Point, PA 7/1/2010- 7/11/2011 Sugar Creek 17 Sugar Creek near Troy, PA 4/27/2010 – 6/1/2011 Tioga River 21 Tioga River near Fall Brook, PA 6/23/2010 – 6/20/2011 Tomjack Creek 16 Tomjack Creek near Burlington, PA 4/17/2010 – 7/5/2011 Trout Brook 3 Trout Brook near McGraw, NY 12/16/2010 – 6/28/2011 Trout Run 24 Trout Run near Shawville, PA 4/28/2010 – 6/7/2011 Tuscarora Creek 9 Upper Tuscarora Creek near Woodhull, NY 12/16/2010 – 6/6/2011 Wappasening Creek 12 Wappasening Creek near Windham Center, PA 6/2/2010 – 7/5/2011 West Branch Pine Creek 25 West Branch Pine Creek near Galeton, PA 6/3/2010 – 7/18/2011

14 APPENDIX C Continuous Water Chemistry Statistics 9.20 9.60 35.72 36.87 66.32 61.43 43.01 10.79 66.56 67.79 23.05 43.37 36.18 49.56 96.54 65.86 10.31 80.60 31.26 82.37 23.98 25.47 58.91 72.86 24.47 32.12 32.42 41.58 31.69 Turb NTU 123.38 174.78 186.39 127.68 129.88 123.12 108.05 199.47 StDev 9.67 9.56 1.31 1.17 6.41 8.54 9.22 1.65 6.15 2.95 4.50 6.03 4.23 33.02 92.74 16.09 34.82 11.75 12.36 16.45 14.56 10.08 47.91 23.36 38.09 16.58 24.02 15.12 19.08 34.13 20.33 24.62 14.85 12.77 12.10 63.12 11.03 NTU Turb Turb Mean 3.00 1.60 0.38 2.70 7.48 9.40 2.26 2.70 0.27 2.40 2.40 2.16 2.90 2.33 1.60 0.97 4.51 1.61 2.54 2.50 5.60 0.55 1.46 0.60 5.27 5.73 0.50 2.70 1.81 7.58 6.40 5.59 5.15 3.43 15.00 20.27 17.12 Median Turb NTU Turb pH 7.62 7.18 7.16 6.33 7.38 7.91 6.95 7.63 7.86 7.81 5.76 7.90 7.06 7.66 7.47 7.13 7.02 7.74 6.76 7.00 6.75 6.97 7.49 7.61 7.74 7.21 7.60 7.22 7.26 7.92 7.11 6.86 7.63 7.23 7.10 8.04 7.74 Median DO 2.51 1.27 1.48 2.25 2.87 1.74 0.77 1.87 1.84 1.72 1.73 1.66 3.15 3.07 2.05 1.86 2.42 2.19 1.86 2.09 1.41 2.38 0.97 2.87 2.52 1.58 2.22 2.35 2.22 1.11 1.83 1.69 1.65 1.71 2.56 2.20 1.64 mg/l StDev DO 9.59 9.08 9.42 9.52 11.15 13.23 10.91 11.60 11.82 12.24 11.68 12.26 12.86 11.23 10.29 11.36 12.26 11.84 10.72 11.62 11.44 11.68 12.78 11.34 10.31 11.16 11.34 11.18 12.02 12.84 10.97 11.17 11.87 10.91 11.41 12.30 10.74 mg/l Mean DO 9.62 9.17 9.79 9.32 11.11 13.59 10.49 12.23 12.35 10.41 12.03 13.09 13.52 10.85 10.59 12.21 12.19 12.37 10.32 10.93 11.72 11.61 13.09 12.05 10.85 11.25 11.97 10.33 13.14 14.02 10.34 11.14 12.64 11.06 11.39 12.90 11.20 mg/l Median 0.01 0.05 0.09 0.025 0.036 0.016 0.038 0.057 0.009 0.141 0.054 0.042 0.012 0.026 0.034 0.022 0.021 0.081 0.012 0.023 0.012 0.019 0.135 0.063 0.005 0.192 0.018 0.022 0.043 0.013 0.014 0.041 0.072 0.026 0.031 0.137 0.107 StDev μS/cm SpCond 0.25 0.09 0.06 0.06 0.05 0.09 0.14 0.122 0.125 0.035 0.118 0.048 0.077 0.377 0.181 0.157 0.198 0.051 0.103 0.197 0.108 0.101 0.263 0.043 0.081 0.077 0.285 0.184 0.384 0.083 0.156 0.158 0.077 0.192 0.245 0.379 0.288 Mean μS/cm SpCond 0.03 0.21 0.124 0.127 0.257 0.107 0.044 0.066 0.348 0.088 0.184 0.157 0.192 0.048 0.099 0.178 0.059 0.108 0.094 0.255 0.042 0.073 0.075 0.055 0.045 0.084 0.198 0.081 0.085 0.155 0.156 0.148 0.077 0.184 0.251 0.373 0.277 μS/cm SpCond Median (=>) 1,264 1,475 1,741 1,943 8,765 1,745 3,134 2,767 1,034 41,585 54,502 90,156 72,979 12,212 43,831 99,477 59,693 55,768 42,743 93,671 86,411 57,400 66,341 82,777 59,485 48,418 53,461 21,834 76,238 53,427 53,019 126,513 114,423 103,282 126,356 105,247 136,439 Number of Number of observations observations 4 1 6 3 9 8 7 2 5 20 27 33 25 22 15 16 24 12 13 30 24 32 23 14 21 26 19 31 29 10 18 35 17 11 28 37 36 Map ID Site Elk Run Long Run Trout Run Trout Tioga River Tioga Bobs Creek Bobs Trout Sugar Creek Sugar Chest Creek Chest Snake Creek Snake Larrys Creek Larrys Marsh Creek Marsh Kitchen Creek Kitchen Baldwin Creek Tomjack Creek Tomjack Crooked Creek Crooked Bowman Creek Bowman Sing Creek Catatonk Creek Catatonk Starrucca Creek Starrucca Loyalsock Creek Loyalsock Tuscarora Creek Tuscarora Choconut Creek Choconut Apalachin Creek Nanticoke Creek Nanticoke Hammond Creek Sangerfield River Sangerfield Canacadea Creek Canacadea Blockhouse Creek Lackawanna River Lackawanna Meshoppen Creek Meshoppen Little Muncy Creek Little Cherry Valley Creek Cherry Valley Wappasening Creek Wappasening Little Clearfield Creek Clearfield Little West Branch Pine Creek Branch West Little Mehoopany Creek Mehoopany Little South Branch Tunkhannock Creek Tunkhannock South Branch

15 Lick Run, Clinton County, Pa

Acknowledgments The Susquehanna River Basin Commission (SRBC) wishes to thank the more than 35 state, county, and local government agencies and private landowners who partnered with SRBC on the installation of the RWQMN stations. These partnerships made it possible for SRBC to locate and install each monitoring station.

SRBC also thanks the partners who provided the invaluable funding necessary to 1721 North Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17102 launch the successful real-time water quality monitoring network. The RWQMN Phone: 717-238-0423 is funded by private and public sector contributions and by SRBC, which covers Fax: 717-238-2436 the network’s ongoing maintenance expenses. To date, the funding partners are: Web: www.srbc.net • East Resources, Inc. Email: [email protected] • New York State Energy Research and Development Authority • Pennsylvania Department of Conservation and Natural Resources • Headwaters Resource Conservation & Development Council Sinnemahoning Stakeholders Committee