Water quality monitoring in the headwaters of the , Otsego County, , summer, 2008 Molly Reed1

ABSTRACT The Susquehanna River flows from Otsego in Cooperstown, New York, to the . To improve the water quality of the bay, the EPA has specified total maximum annual loads for nitrogen, phosphorous, and land-based sediment measured at the New York/ boarder which New York State must comply with by 2011. This study monitored a 45-km-section of the Susquehanna between Cooperstown and Unadilla to identify the primary sources of nutrients, sediments, and other contaminants within the headwaters. Potential contamination sources include dairy farms, septic systems, urban runoff, and wastewater treatment plants. Five tributaries also join the river along this section which may contribute to total loads: , Cherry Valley Creek, , Charlotte Creek, and . We selected 21 sites to observe the affect of these inputs and monitored these sites weekly over a 12-week period between May and August 2008, with additional sampling in September and October. Laboratory and field analyses included total suspended sediments, nitrate, ammonia, total nitrogen, total phosphorous, temperature, pH, electrical conductivity, and dissolved oxygen. Concentrations of suspended sediment in Otego Creek were twice as high as other tributaries. River water immediately downstream of the Oneonta wastewater treatment plant had the highest concentrations of nutrients observed. Schenevus Creek and the urban watershed (City of Oneonta) also showed elevated concentrations of nutrients. This information can be used to pinpoint the most significant contamination sources and to improve watershed management strategies within the headwaters.

INTRODUCTION The Susquehanna River is an important part of the Chesapeake Bay watershed. It stretches 444 miles (Zurmuhlen 2006) through three different states in the northeast including New York, Pennsylvania, and . The Susquehanna River provides water for a number of municipalities, agriculture, and recreation, making it a vital part of the environment. This makes this area environmentally sensitive to any contamination. Agricultural runoff from surrounding farms, leaky septic tanks, or wastewater treatment plant discharge can contribute to increased fecal coliform colonies and nutrient concentrations. Fertilizers including nitrates and phosphates are also common pollutants along the Susquehanna River. Research was conducted at twenty one different sites along the Susquehanna River between Cooperstown and Unadilla, New York (Figure 1). The water quality at each site was

 OCCA Sponsored intern, summer 2008. Present affiliation: SUNY Oneonta. studied in order to determine the level of contamination present. The goal of this was to locate any problems, allowing for the development of more effective management strategies.

METHODS Twenty-one different sites along the Susquehanna River were evaluated twelve times from May to October 2008. These sites are illustrated in Figure 1, and descriptions and coordinates of each are provided in Table 1. Between Cooperstown and Unadilla New York, the tributaries and the main branch of the Susquehanna River were researched. A site above and below the confluences were chosen as a few of the key sites in this study (Figure 1). This was done in order to better understand where the contaminants, if any, are entering the river. One liter samples of water were taken from each site and sent back to the lab at the Biological Field Station where nutrients were examined. They were kept in a cooler with ice in order to help preserve and slow down any reactions which could occur if the samples were left out and became warm. All samples were taken from the sides of the river and streams with the a few exceptions. At bridge sites a bucket attached to a string was used. The bottles that were used to collect the samples were rinsed about three times with the sampling water and then the bottle was filled. The buckets used at bridge sites were also rinsed three times with the river water and then the bottles were filled. The bridge sites were at Portlandville SR9 north of Goodyear Lake, SR11 on route 28, and Otego Creek SR20. At every site the temperature, dissolved oxygen, conductivity, and pH were determined by the use of a Eureka Manta Multiprobe. At the Biological Field Station the samples were split and 0.8ml of 5.76 M sulfuric acid was added to 125 ml sample as a preservative. This allowed preservation of the nutrients located in the water so they could be analyzed. Total nitrogen, total phosphorus, nitrates, and ammonia were measured in mg/L through the use of a Lachat QuickChem FIA+ Water Analyzer®.

Figure 1. Location map showing Susquehanna River study sites in Otsego County, New York. Table 1. Description and coordinates of sites sampled on the Susquehanna River, summer 2008.

Sites Descriptions UTM Coordinates SR1 Located under and unused bridge in Phoenix Mills on Phoenix Road. 18t0504485 UTM 4723842 SR2 Located before convergence with Susquehanna River on Rt. 11c Surrounded by 18t0504052 railroad tracks, bridge, and fields. Oaks Creek. UTM 4723251 SR3 After intersection of both SR1 and SR2, 150ft from convergence. 18t0504129 UTM 4723189 SR4 Upstream of a summer camp, on farmland of Cooperstown Holstein Farm. 18t0503780 UTM 4722255 SR5 Downstream of a summer camp, surrounded by fields. 18t0504095 UTM 4720280 SR6 Cherry Valley Creek, before convergence with Susquehanna River off of Rt. 166 18t0505920 just after a small dam made from rocks. UTM 4715662 SR7 After convergence with slow moving water and is surrounded by fields, across 18t0505541 the street from SR8. UTM 4715399 SR8 Located before the Convergence of Cherry Valley Creek and Susquehanna 18t0505541 River. Located below a Bridge on Rt.166 at intersection with Rt.33, next to an UTM old barn. Has fairly stagnant water. 4715275 SR9 Located in Portlandville which is above Goodyear Lake, in a residential area. 18t0502646 Runoff accumulates and enters the river through the backyards of the people who UTM live in this area. Sampled from a bridge. 4708482 SR10 Is just before the intake of Colliersville dam at Goodyear Lake. Numerous zebra 18t0501223 mussels dwell here. It is below a residential area. UTM4705702

SR11 Schenevus Creek, located at a bridge on route 28 which runs next to a farm. 18t0502558 Livestock have direct access to the water at this site. Livestock present later in UTM the season. 4703737 SR12 Located downstream of Schenevus Creek confluence in Colliersville, which is 18t0500911 surrounded by fields and railroad tracks. UTM 4703653 SR13 Emmons Fishing Access site. Numerous dead crayfish present almost every 18t049901 week from fishermen. Upstream of Charlotte Creek. UTM 47007600 SR14 Charlotte Creek in Fortin Park in Oneonta. Fast moving, meanders, up stream of 18t0498803 convergence with Susquehanna River. UTM 470014 SR15 Behind Neptune Diner in Oneonta. Just before Mill Race Dam. Residential 18t0496326 populated area, across from South Side Mall. UTM 4699661

Table 1 (cont.). Description and coordinates of sites sampled on the Susquehanna River, summer 2008.

SR16 Oneonta Mill Race, west end of Neahwa Park. Before convergence with 18t0494827 Susquehanna River. Frequent low levels of water, located under a bridge used by UTM cars. 4699618 SR17 Downstream of Mills Race confluence. Forested area next to route 88. 18t0494708 UTM 4699090 SR18 Upstream of Oneonta’s Waste Water Treatment Plant. About 30m away from a 18t0491738 Waste Water Treatment Plant discharge pipe which creates a plume of discolored UTM water in the river. 4698487 SR19 Downstream of Waste Water Treatment Plant, about 500 meters from sewage 18t0494532 discharge pipe. UTM 4698183 SR20 Otego Creek bridge off route 7 upstream of confluence with Susquehanna River. 18t0490067 UTM 4698156 SR21 Unadilla, New York, off of Bridge Street adjacent to the USGS gauge station is. Latitude 42°19'17", Longitude 75°19'01" NAD27

RESULTS Total Phosphorus Total phosphorus results are represented Figure 2. With the exception of sites SR1 and SR19, concentrations are relatively stable, ranging from about 20 to 50 ug/l. SR1 and SR19 are influenced by the municipal sewage outfalls of the Village of Cooperstown and the City of Oneonta, respectively. Neither treatment plant is currently mandated to remove phosphorus.

120 ) l / g

u 100 (

s

u 80 r o h

p 60 s o

h 40 P

l a t 20 o T 0 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 Km from source

Figure 2. Total phosphorus concentrations (+/- 1 standard error) along the Susquehanna River, summer 2008. See Figure 1 and Table 1 for site descriptions. Ammonia

Results for ammonia testing are provided in Figure 3. Concentrations tended to be quite low, and those below the lab’s detectable limit (0.02 mg/l) were encountered on approximately 25% of the samples tested. When that was the case, they were considered as 0 mg/l for graphing purposes. The site exhibiting the highest (and most variable) concentrations was that below Oneonta’s wastewater treatment plant.

0.25

) 0.20 l / g m (

0.15 a i n o 0.10 m m A 0.05

0.00 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 Km from source

Figure 3. Ammonia concentrations (+/- 1 standard error) along the Susquehanna River, summer 2008. See Figure 1 and Table 1 for site descriptions.

Nitrite+nitrate Nitrite+nitrate concentrations are given in Figure 4. No particular trend in that parameter was discernable. Concentrations along all sites were lower than those in (Albright 2008), the river’s source.

0.50 ) l /

g 0.40 m (

e t 0.30 a r t i

N 0.20 + e t i r t

i 0.10 N 0.00 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 Km from source

Figure 4. Nitrite+nitrate concentrations (+/- 1 standard error) along the Susquehanna River, summer 2008. See Figure 1 and Table 1 for site descriptions.

Total Nitrogen Figure 5 summarizes total nitrogen concentrations. As with total phosphorus, the highest concentrations were at sites SR1 and SR19, below the wastewater treatment plants of Cooperstown and Oneonta. Aside from those sites, concentrations were comparable to those in Otsego Lake, the river’s source, at 0.69 mg/l (Albright 2008).

1.00 ) l /

g 0.80 m (

n 0.60 e g o r t i 0.40 N

l a t

o 0.20 T

0.00 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 Km from source

DISCUSSION A summary some potential impacts at each site is located in Table 2. Some sites did not appear to have been impacted. It is evident that Mill Race in Oneonta has water quality issues that should be addressed. Increased conductivity and nitrates were routinely observed. This site receives substantial runoff from an urban environment, which could account for increased nutrients. Maintenance practices at the surrounding fields in Neahwa Park may also be contributing to increased levels of nutrients and specific conductivity. The waste water treatment plants at both Cooperstown and Oneonta input substantial amounts of nutrients into the Susquehanna River. Early in sampling at the Oneonta discharge, a discolored plume of water was evident throughout the River as it flowed from the pipe. The second site below the waste water treatment plant was located a distance down from the pipe after a meander and an area of rocks and grass which was visible when water level was low. This allowed for the natural filtration of nutrients and pollutants. As it travels farther from the source, evidence shows that the nutrient data increases. Previous research indicates that there were some issues with the water quality surrounding summer camp in Cooperstown, New York. According to the research conducted by Castendyk (2007) in the summer of 2006, the levels of nutrient concentration in this area was relatively low compared to the New York State water quality standard for fresh surface water (NYSDEP 1999). The data set collected represents a slight increase of nutrient levels in this area compared to the 2006 data. In 2006, total phosphorus was about 35 µg/mL, and total nitrogen was 0.15 mg/L (Castendyk 2006), while in 2008 total phosphorus averaged about 40 µg/mL and total nitrogen averaged 0.7mg/L. From the nutrient data collected in 2008, there is no evidence that the summer camp during its peak tourist season has a negative effect on water quality.

Table 2. Evaluation of potential sources that impact the water quality of the Susquehanna River in Otsego County, New York.

Source Observed Impact Evidence Dairy Farm No Data represents no evident effects Dreams Park Septic System No No increased concentrations of any parameters that were tested Urban Runoff Yes Elevated electrical conductivity and nutrient levels in developed areas Waste Water Treatment Plant Yes Increase of nutrient concentrations at the site following the discharge pipe Oaks Creek No Data is consistent, not outliers present Cherry Valley Creek No Data is unswerving Schenevus Creek No No noticeable changes in data Charlotte Creek Yes Increase of sediment, greatly affected by rainfall events Otego Creek No Data is not variable, persistent throughout the data set

CONCLUSIONS Among the twenty one sites that were sampled, Neawha Park, Oneonta’s Waste Water Treatment plant, and Charlotte Creek had shown data that was atypical compared to the other sites along the Susquehanna River. At Neawha Park the urban runoff seems to have the most effect on the water quality. This park is used by the majority of Oneonta’s citizens for recreation, so addressing the water quality of this area is important. Focusing on the affects that the Waste Water Treatment plant has on the quality of the water of the Susquehanna River is also important. Data shows that it is one of the only sites which were sampled that is adding larger numbers of nutrients to the water. This issue also needs to be addressed before it largely affects the surrounding area. The City of Oneonta depends on the Waste Water Treatment Plant, so monitoring of this area needs to be carried out in case there is an increased amount of rainfall, which could increase the discharge, floods, or droughts that may disturb the water quality even further. All of these issues should be addressed and taken care of so there are fewer problems further downstream in the Susquehanna River watershed and Chesapeake Bay . ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Matt Albright and Holly Waterfield at the Biological Field Station for all of their help and use of equipment and resources. The interns at the Biological Field Station who helped me sample throughout the months of May to August. Leandra Baker and Fiona Lowry for sampling with me in September and October 2008. Devin Castendyk for introducing me to this research project, setting up and reviewing the data, and helping me with this paper. The Oneonta Research Foundation and the Otsego County Conservation Association for sponsoring this research.

REFERENCES Albright, M.F. 2008. Otsego Lake limnological monitoring, 2007. In 40th Ann. Rept. (2007). SUNY Oneonta Biol. Fld. Sta., SUNY Oneonta. Castendyk, D. 2007. Preliminary investigation of the impact of recent development on the quantity and quality of Susquehanna River Water along the Route 28 Corridor, Hartwick, New York. In 39th Ann. Rept. (2006). SUNY Oneonta Biol. Fld. Sta., SUNY Oneonta. EPA. 1983. Methods for the analysis of water and wastes. Environmental Monitoring and Support Lab. Office of Research and development. Cincinnati, OH. NOAA. Climatological Data. Vol. 120 no. 7 New York. July 2008. www.ncdc.noaa.gov/mpp.html NYSDEC. New York Department of Environmental Protection, Rules and Regulations, 6 NYCRR Part 703 New York State Department of Environmental Protection, Albany, New York. 1999. http://www.dec.state.ny.us/website/regs/part703.html. Zurmuhlen, S. 2007. Susquehanna River Quality Monitoring. In 39th Ann. Rept. (2006). SUNY Oneonta Biol. Fld. Sta., SUNY Oneonta.