Aquatic invasive species present in Otsego County, NY water bodies Annie Yoo1, Kaylee Herzog2, and Holly Waterfield CLM3 INTRODUCTION Otsego County, located in central New York, experiences increased populations in the summer months largely related to tourism and outdoor recreation. Abundant water resources in the county, combined with this increase in summer traffic contribute to the risk of invasive species transport between water bodies and major watersheds. Knowledge of the current distribution of invasive species will allow natural resource managers to prioritize transport prevention and population control measures. Exotic invasive species are those not native to an area that outcompete native species. Such exotic, non-native species typically possess traits which, in combination with lack of natural disease and/or predators, allow them to out-compete native species (Santos et al. 2011) and in-so-doing have negative ecological and economic impacts. Some of these impacts include productivity losses in agriculture, forestry, and other segments of the U.S. economy (Pimentel 2005). Aquatic invasive species (AIS) pose major threats to biodiversity in ecosystems. They often overtake important native aquatic plants and animals, cause habitat degradation and loss, and interfere with water-based recreational activities (Zhang and Boyle 2010). Pimentel (2005) suggests it is difficult to estimate the full extent of the environmental damages caused by invasive species and the number of species extinctions they have caused because little is known about each of the ~750,000 species present in the United States. In most cases AIS are initially introduced to watersheds through recreational boating activities or unintentional “hitchhiking ” (Horvath 2008), which can occur through international trade, with invaders stowed in ships, planes, trucks, or packing materials (McNeely 2001). Aquatic invasive species and their impacts have been the subject of BFS research since its inception in 1968. In terms of surveys to document AIS distribution, surveys were conducted in 2011 to assess AIS in the Catskills region (Harman 2012), but no studies have involved a county-wide assessment in Otsego County. This study was conducted to evaluate the presence/absence of aquatic invasive algae, vascular plants, zooplankton, and invertebrate benthos present in the water bodies of Otsego County, New York. MATERIALS AND METHODS Eighteen lentic systems and 9 lotic systems (Table 1, Figure 1) were assessed for the presence of 24 exotic species (Table 2). Survey sites were chosen based on accessibility and also to achieve relatively even coverage of water bodies across the county, ensuring that the major water ways and water bodies were assessed. Sites chosen for the survey included NYS DEC Boat Launches and Public Fishing Access Points, as human traffic (and associated activities and 1 BFS Intern, summer 2013. Current affiliation: SUNY Oneonta. Funding provided by Otsego Land Trust. 2 SUNY Oneonta Biology Department Intern, summer 2013. Current affiliation: SUNY Oneonta. Funded, in part, by NSF. 3 Research Support Specialist, Biological Field Station (CLM = Certified Lake Manager). equipment) is the main vector for transport of invasive species from one locale to another. Additional survey sites for lotic systems were included at all accessible road-crossings. A complete listing of all site locations is provided in Appendix 1. Species not listed in Table 2 were not specifically searched for, though would have been noted if found. Bottom composition and substrate conditions were characterized for each site, and the presence of a Department of Environmental Conservation angling access or boat launch site was noted. GPS coordinates (datum: NAD 1987) for each survey site were recorded using a Garmin GPSmap 76CSx. Table 1.Otesgo County water bodies surveyed in 2013 for the presence/absence of 20 aquatic invasive species; Lentic (left) and lotic (right) systems Number of Lentic Systems (Lakes & Ponds) Lotic Systems (Rivers & Streams) Sites Sampled Allen Lake (Richfield Springs, NY) Butternut Creek 13 Arnold Lake (Hartwick, NY) Cherry Valley Creek 8 Basswood Pond (Burlington, NY) Oaks Creek 8 Belvedere Lake (Cherry Valley, NY) Otego Creek 10 Canadarago Lake (Richfield Springs, NY) Schenevus Creek 8 Crumhorn Lake (Milford, NY) Susquehanna River 9 Gilbert Lake (New Lisbon, NY) Unadilla River 13 Goey Pond (Hartwick, NY) Unnamed creek, Lull Hill Rd. (Laurens, NY) 1 Goodyear Lake (Portlandville, NY) Wharton Creek (tributary of Otego Creek) 6 Hunt Union Pond (Oneonta, NY) Larchwood Lake (New Lisbon, NY) Neahwa Pond (Oneonta, NY) Otsego Lake (Otsego, NY) Silver Lake (New Berlin, NY) Summit Lake (Springfield, NY) Susquehanna State Park Pond (Milford, NY) Wetland, unnamed (Oneonta, NY) Wilber Lake (Oneonta, NY) Lentic Systems Sixteen of the 18 lentic systems in this survey were examined via canoe. Permission was sought for access from private sites or onto water bodies with restricted public access (i.e., reservoirs, private residential communities). Observations were also made on shore. Presence of invasive emergent plants was assessed along shorelines, and benthic species were assessed by scanning the available hard substrates. Submerged vegetation was collected by hand-picking shallow rake tosses (two to four sites per system, dependent upon water body size and variability of substrate). Plankton samples were gathered using tow nets (80µm mesh). Otsego and Canadarago Lakes were not directly sampled during this survey due to the size and complexity of the systems; presence of invasive species was determined based on recent surveys by BFS personnel (i.e., Canadarago: Albright and Waterfield 2012; Otsego: McShane and Mehigan 2013, Tanner and Albright 2014, Vanassche and Wong in prep). Figure 1. Map depicting all sites surveyed in the 2013 AIS survey. White dots represent lentic, or still-water systems, black dots indicate lotic, or flowing water, systems. Lotic Systems Several locations were sampled along each of the nine lotic systems in this survey, resulting in a total of 76 sampling sites. Riparian areas were assessed at each site for the presence of invasive emergent plants. Seining, dip-netting, hand-sieving and hand-picking were also employed at each site to assess the presence of invasive invertebrates. Equipment Sterilization and Sample Preservation At the conclusion of sampling in each location, all equipment was removed from the water and rinsed on-shore with a diluted bleach or rock salt solution. Any organisms which were inconclusively identified on site were saved, marked with collection data, and transported on ice to the laboratory for definitive identification. Plankton samples were transported on ice to the laboratory, preserved with 70% ethanol, and analyzed under a dissecting microscope. Mapping and Data Portrayal Waypoints stored at each site were uploaded electronically using Global Mapper™ software. Information regarding the presence or absence of invasive species at each site was attached to each waypoint and graphically represented using ESRI ArcMap software. Data will also be uploaded to iMapInvasives, an online, GIS-based data management system used by citizen scientists, researchers, and natural resource managers to document, assess, and coordinate the management of invasive species. Table 2. Invasive species for which presence or absence was assessed at each survey site. Algae Didymosphenia germinate Didymo Nitellopsis obtusa starry stonewort Vascular Plants Egeria densa Brazillian elodea Hydrilla verticillata Hydrilla Myriophyllum spicatum Eurasian watermilfoil Myriophyllum aquaticum parrot’s feather Myriophyllum heterophyllum variable-leaved watermilfoil Fallopia japonica Japanese knotweed Lythrum salicaria purple loosestrife Phragmites australis common reed Trapa natans water chestnut Hydrocharis morsus-ranae European frog bit Potamogeton crispus curly leaf pondweed Zooplankton Bythotrephes cederstroemi spiny water flea Cercopagis pengoi fish hook water flea Invertebrate Benthos Cordylophora caspia freshwater hydroid Corbicula fluminea Asiatic clam Dreissena polymorpha zebra mussel Dreissena bugensis quagga mussel Bithynia tentaculata faucet snail Cipangopaludina chinensis Chinese mystery snail Potamopyrgus antipodarium New Zealand mud snail Orconectes rusticus rusty crayfish Eriocheir sinensis Chinese mitten crab Figure 2. Survey sheet used to document observations of AIS presence/absence at each site surveyed in the 2013 AIS Survey of Otsego County. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION Observations are summarized graphically in Figures 3-7 and in tabular form in Tables 3 and 4. Eight of the 24 surveyed species were observed in at least one location; this survey did not document the presence of any species previously undocumented in the county, though water chestnut, a high-priority species, was found in a new location. The species found were Orconectes rusticus, Trapa natans, Fallopia japonica, Myriophyllum spicatum, Lythrum salicaria, Potamogeton crispus, Nitellopsis obtusa, and Dreissena polymorpha. Of the sites surveyed, invasive species were found at 48 stream sites, representing 8 of the 9 lotic systems, and in nine of the 18 surveyed lentic waterbodies (Figure 3, Tables 3 and 4). Sites containing the greatest number of AIS were lentic systems, the top three of which were the three largest lakes included in the survey, Canadarago Lake (7 spp.), Goodyear Lake (5 spp.), and Otsego Lake (7 spp.). A brief overview of each species observed is provided