Prioritizing Zebra and Quagga Mussel Monitoring in the Columbia River Basin Prepared for Bonneville Power Administration and the Pacific States Marine Fisheries Commission BPA Contract Number: 00003373 TI Project Number: 152 by Steve Wells1 , Timothy D. Counihan2, Amy Puls2, Mark Sytsma1, and Brian Adair1 1Portland State University, Center for Lakes and Reservoirs, PO Box 751-ESM, Portland OR 97207-0751 2United States Geological Survey, Western Fisheries Research Center, Columbia River Research Laboratory, 5501A Cook-Underwood Road, Cook, WA 98605-9008 April 2010 Prioritizing Zebra and Quagga Mussel Monitoring in the Columbia River Basin Table of Contents Table of Contents ............................................................................................................................. i List of Figures ................................................................................................................................. ii List of Tables ................................................................................................................................. iii Disclaimer .................................................................................................................................... viii Foreword ..........................................................................................................................................1 Introduction ......................................................................................................................................1 Methods............................................................................................................................................2 Water Body Identification ...........................................................................................................2 Existing Water Quality and Boater Recreational Data ................................................................3 Development of Kriging Model of Calcium Concentrations .......................................................4 Field Data Collection ...................................................................................................................4 Prioritization ....................................................................................................................................8 Results ............................................................................................................................................12 Relative Risk of Mussel Establishment .....................................................................................12 Relative Risk of Mussel Introduction ........................................................................................30 Discussion ......................................................................................................................................40 Recommendations and Next Steps.................................................................................................55 References ......................................................................................................................................56 Appendix I .....................................................................................................................................59 Appendix II ....................................................................................................................................76 i Prioritizing Zebra and Quagga Mussel Monitoring in the Columbia River Basin List of Figures Figure 1. Universal Kriging map of the CRB and Greater Northwest showing predicted calcium concentrations as regional contours. The locations of measured dissolved calcium concentrations used to interpolate the calcium concentration contours are shown as green dots. ...........................4 Figure 2. Universal Kriging map of the CRB and Greater Northwest showing the locations of water bodies lacking water quality data relative to the predicted calcium concentration contours. Water bodies lacking data were identified as those with data found either upstream or downstream the water body in question, as well as those completely lacking data. .......................5 Figure 3. Map of water bodies showing risk categories for dreissenid mussel establishment. Risk category was determined by dissolved calcium concentration. High risk water bodies are shown with red dot, medium risk water bodies are orange, low risk are yellow, and very low risk water bodies are light green. Risk categories are estimates. The amount of data used to assign risk categories varied for each water body. Data is summarized in Appendix 1. Dreissenids can establish in areas identified with low to very low risk of establishment. ......................................29 ii Prioritizing Zebra and Quagga Mussel Monitoring in the Columbia River Basin List of Tables Table 1. Water bodies selected for field data collection of dissolved calcium and pH and the agency designated for sample collection. ........................................................................................6 Table 2. Dreissenid mussel responses to a) dissolved calcium concentrations and b) pH as reported in European and North American literature. Most studies were done with D. polymorpha. .....................................................................................................................................9 Table 3. The range of calcium and pH values used in other western studies to score water bodies regarding the risk of dreissenid establishment. ..............................................................................10 Table 4. Values of dissolved calcium (mg/L) used to assign a risk category to individual water bodies for determining the likelihood of dreissenid mussel establishment. ..................................11 Table 5. Value ranges of Recreational Boater Use data assigned to risk categories for the introduction of dreissenid mussels to a water body relative to other water bodies in a given state. Recreational boater use data were not consistent between states, and risk is assigned relative to those water bodies with data in each state. Risk categories were assigned to water bodies depending upon the quartiles of the recreational data. ..................................................................12 Table 6. Water bodies determined to have a high relative risk for dreissenid mussel establishment. Risk category was determined by mean dissolved [Ca2+], mg/L. Presence or absence of dreissenid mussels was predicted for the water bodies using mean calcium and pH data in the model developed by Ramcharan et al. (1992). The results of risk assessments done by state agencies and others are also presented. Blanks indicate no data were available. (1= Cohen and Weinstein (1998), 2= Utah Division of Wildlife Resources, and 3= Wells et al. (2008)). Risk categories are estimates. The amount of data used to assign risk categories varied for each water body. Data is summarized in Appendix 1, and risk categories based on one or two data points are flagged with an asterisk. Dreissenids can establish in areas identified with low to very low risk of establishment..................................................................................................................................13 Table 7. Water bodies determined to have a medium relative risk of dreissenid mussel establishment. Risk category was determined by mean dissolved [Ca2+], mg/L. Presence or absence of dreissenid mussels was predicted for the water bodies using mean calcium and pH data in the model developed by Ramcharan et al. (1992). The results of risk assessments done by state agencies and others are also presented. Blanks indicate no data were available. (1= Cohen and Weinstein (1998), 2= Utah Division of Wildlife Resources, and 3= Wells et al. (2008)). Risk categories are estimates. The amount of data used to assign risk categories varied for each water body. Data is summarized in Appendix 1, and risk categories based on one or two data points are flagged with an asterisk. Dreissenids can establish in areas identified with low to very low risk of establishment..................................................................................................................................19 Table 8. Water bodies determined to have a low relative risk of dreissenid mussel establishment. Risk category was determined by mean dissolved [Ca2+], mg/L. Presence or absence of dreissenid mussels was predicted for the water bodies using mean calcium and pH data in the model developed by Ramcharan et al. (1992). The results of risk assessments done by state agencies and others are also presented. Blanks indicate no data were available. (1= Cohen and Weinstein (1998), 2= Utah Division of Wildlife Resources, and 3= Wells et al. (2008)). Risk categories are estimates. The amount of data used to assign risk categories varied for each water iii Prioritizing Zebra and Quagga Mussel Monitoring in the Columbia River Basin body. Data is summarized in Appendix 1, and risk categories based on one or two data points are flagged with an asterisk. Dreissenids can establish in areas identified with low to very low risk of establishment..................................................................................................................................22 Table 9. Water bodies determined to have a very low relative risk of dreissenid mussel establishment. Risk category was determined by mean dissolved