The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutPeconic Estuary Program Tidal Creek Study October 1999PECONIC ESTUARY PROGRAM TIDAL CREEK STUDY Prepared For: Suffolk County Department of Health Services Department of Ecology County Center, 2~ Floor Riverhead, New York 11901-3397 Prepared By: EEA, Inc. 55 Hilton Avenue Garden City, New York 11530 (516) 746-4400 eea(-~ent, net OCTOBER 1999 Although the information in this document has been funded wholly or in part by the United States Environmental Protection Agency under Contractual Agreement number 01-~405--4980-18-1633 to the Suffolk Count' Department of Health Sercices, it may not necessarily reflect the views of the AgenQ' and no official endorsement should be inferred. .ABSTRACT .................................................. ~ ......... 1 INTRODUCTION ...................................................... 1 Literature Review ...................................................... 3 IH. METHODOLOGY ..................................................... 3 IV* Vie A. B. C. D. E. F. Water Quality ................................ Bathymetric Survey ........................... Hydrodynamic Survey ........................ Land Use ................................... Wildlife ..................................... Grain Size and Macrobenthic Invertebrates ...... 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Water Quality .................................................... 8 Bathymetric Survey .............................................. 11 Hydrodynamic Survey ............................................ 11 Land Use ....................................................... 12 Wildlife ........................................................ 12 Grain Size and Macrobenthic Invertebrates .......................... 12 RANKING SYSTEM OF TEN TIDAL CREEKS ........................... 13 Macrobenthic Invertebrate Quantification System .................... 14 Land Use Quantification Sytem .................................... 15 Overall Ranking System .......................................... 16 RESULTS OF TEN TIDAL CREEKS .................................... 16 A. Fresh Pond ............................................... 16 1. Water Quality ................................. 17 2. Bathymetric Survey ............................ 18 3. Hydrodynamic Survey .......................... 18 4. Land Use .................................... 18 5. Wildlife ..................................... 19 6. Macrobenthic Invertebrates .................... 20 B. Northwest Creek ......................................... 20 1. Water Quality ................................ 21 2. Bathymetric Survey ........................... 22 3. Hydrodynamic Survey ......................... 22 4. Land Use .................................... 23 5. Wildlife ...................................... 23 6. Macrobenthic Invertebrates ..................... 24 C. Ligonee Creek ............................................. 24 1. Water Quality ................................. 25 2. Bathymetric Survey ............................ 26 He 3. Hydrodynamic Study .......... 4. Land Use .................... 5. Wildlife ..................... 6. Macrobenthic Invertebrates .... Alewife Creek ...................... 1. Water Quality ................ 2. Bathymetric Survey ........... 3. Hydrodynamic Survey ......... 4. Land Use .................... 5. Wildlife ..................... 6. Macrobenthic Invertebrates . Meetinghouse Creek ................... 1. Water Quality ............. 2. Bathymetric Survey ........ 3. Hydrodynamic Survey ...... 4. Land Use ................. 5. Wildlife .................. 6. Macrobenthic Invertebrates . West Creek ........................... 1. Water Quality ............. 2. Bathymetric Survey ........ 3. Hydrodynamic Survey ...... 4. Land Use ................. 5. Wildlife .................. 6. Macrobenthic Invertebrates . Goose Creek ....................... 1. Water Quality .......... 2. Bathymetric Survey ..... 3. Hydrodynamic Survey ... 4. Land Use .................... 5. Wildlife ..................... 6. Macrobenthic Invertebrates ..... Bass Creek ............................... 1. Water Quafity ................. 2. Bathymetric Survey ............ 3. Hydrodynamic Survey .......... 4. Land Use .................... 5. Wildlife ..................... 6. Macrobenthic Invertebrates .. West Neck Creek ....................... 2. 3. 4. 5. Water Quality .............. Bathymetric Survey ......... Hydrodynamic Survey ....... Land Use .................. Wildlife ................... ................ 26 ................ 26 ..... 27 ..... 27 ..... 28 ..... 28 ..... 29 ..... 29 ..... 29 ..... 30 ..... 31 ....... 31 ....... 32 ....... 33 ....... 33 ....... 33 ........ 34 ........ 34 ........ 35 ........ 36 ...... 36 ................... 37 ................... 37 ................... 38 ...................... 39 ...................... 39 ...................... 40 ...................... 40 ............... 40 ............. .. 41 ............... 41 ............... 42 .............. 43 ...... 43 .............. 44 .............. 44 .............. 44 ............... . 45 ..... 45 ................. 46 ................. 47 ................. 47 ................. 47 .................. 48 6. Macrobenthic Invertebrates ......... ;'.. ~;-': ...... 48 ' 49 Little Bay ...................... 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Water Quality ................................. 50 Bathymctric Survey ............................ 50 Hydrodynamic Survey .......................... 51 Land Use ..................................... 51 Wildlife ...................................... 51 Macrobenthic Invertebrates ..................... 52 VII ANALYSIS AND RECOMMENDATIONS .... 52 B. C. D. E. F. G. H. I. J. Fresh Pond ............................................... 52 Northwest Creek .......................................... 53 Ligonee Creek .. 54 Alewife Creek ............................................. 54 Meetinghouse Creek ..................... West Creek ............................. Goose Creek ............................ Bass Creek ............................. West Neck Creek ........................ Little Bay ............................... ................. 55 ................. 56 ................. 59 VIII. CONCLUSIONS .......... ...................................... ... . .. 60 BIBLIOGRAPHY APPENDICES A - Water Quality and Physical Chemistry B - Bathymetry C - Hydrographic Charts D - Land Use E - Grain Size & Macrobenthic Communities F - Field Data Sheets G - Laboratory Protocols I. ' ABSTRACT EEA evaluated ten tidal creeks throughout the Peconic Estuary representing a wide range of watershed variables. Primary focus was directed towards the collection and analysis of the macrobenthic invertebrate communities of these ten tidal creeks. Analysis of the macrobenthic communities indicated the relative health of the creeks. Land use, water quality, bathymetry, hydrodynamics, physical chemislry, grain size, and wildlife was also evaluated, with the intention of obtaining an overall analysis of the ten creeks, and also to assess whether the land use surrounding each creek could be correlated to the water quality and macrobenthic community structures found in each system. The ultimate goal of this study was to understand the relationship between nutrient inputs, primary productivity, and the biotic communities within the creeks and land use of immediately adjacent shorelines by comparing collected data for each selected creek. Nub'lent loading appeared to be the primary impact to the creeks. Of the ten creeks, four clearly had a benthic community slructure which was more representative of a nutrient rich environment closely resembling communities found in water bodies such as Jamaica Bay, New York and the New York Harbor: Meetinghouse, West Neck, Ligonee, and Alewife. This is not totally unexpected, as the drainages these creeks are associated with have been previously identified by the Suffolk County Department of Health Service as areas with above normal levels of nitrogen. In all cases, the source of nitrogen has been identified as a municipal sewage treatment plant, or in the case of Meetinghouse Creek, an active duck farm. In most cases, the diversity in each creek was low, and the density of a single species extremely high. The amphipodAmpelisca abdita was the dominant identified species. In some cases, Ampelisca abundances exceeded 30,000/m2'. These species and densities indicate a stressed environment, which is most likely the result of nuu'ient loading. The organisms present are not necessarily detrimental to the environment, as they provide an excellent food source for many juvenile fmfish species. The remaining six creeks (Fresh Pond, Northwest Creek, West Creek, Goose Creek, Bass Creek, and Little Bay) all appear to support well established benthic communities. This determination is based on the presence of a diverse benthic community that is not dominated by large numbers of pioneering organisms, such as the ampeliscids, spionid worms, and oligochaetes. In general, as one would expect, these six creeks are the more underdeveloped systems, with predominantly open space (i.e., intertidal marsh) surrounding them. Goose Creek is the most developed of the six. It would appear that the presence of extensive intertidal marsh is extremely beneficial in maintaining the equilibrium in the creek, even though it would appear that most of the nutrients are coming through the groundwater. II. INTRODUCTION The overall objective of this study was to examine ten tidal creeks feeding Peconic Bay, -1- iq~w York and to assess whether the degree of urbanization surrounding each creek ~imld be correlated to the water quality and macmbenthic community structures found in cacti system. The creeks chosen for study reflected a wide range of varying watershed conditions f~om the near pristine (e.g. wildlife refuges) to the heavily urbanized (e.g., hardened shoreline, residential or industrial uplands). Field data collection included water quality measurements, hydrodynamics, sediment chemistry and macrobenthic fauna. In addition, a land use review and categorization was conducted of the uplands surrounding each creek. Locations of the ten creeks studied are shown on Figure 1, and were: * Fresh Pond Creek $ Northwest Creek · Ligonee Creek · Alewife Creek · Meetinghouse Creek · West Creek · Goose Creek · Bass Creek · West Neck Creek · Little Bay Creek Macrobenthic samples were collected during December 1997 and July 1998 at both the headwaters and mouth of each of the tidal creeks. The sampling locations (head and mouth) of each creek are shown in Figures 2 through 11. Water chemistry and hydrodynamic samples were also collected throughout the program. The biological and hydrological analysis of the data was completed by EEA, Inc. The land use analysis was completed by Allee King Rosen & Fleming, Inc. (AKRF). This project was funded by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and implemented under the direction of the Suffolk County Department of Health Services (SCDHS). Invaluable assistance was provided by Mr. Vito Minei, Mr. Walter Dawydiak, and Mr. Robert "Mack" Waters and their staffs for providing necessary resources to complete the program. Additional acknowledgment to Mr. Mike Scheibel of"The Nature Conservancy" and Mr. Larry Penny of the East Hampton Town Natural Resource Department for allowing permission to sample their waters and provide use with previously collected dam. The following sections of the report will discuss the methodology, results, and discussion of the tidal creek survey. -2- Literature Review Literature pertaining to this project was obtained in several different ways. Initial investigation began with EEA's in-house library where many papers pertaining to estuarine ecology have been gathered over the years. A review of these papers and report bibliographies was undertaken. Concurrently, a computerized search of the Interact and research file (DIALOG) was also completed. The results of these studies were taken to the libraries, such as MSRC Stony Brook in an attempt to obtain the documents for review. In addition to published documems, EEA contacted the various agencies and local town natural resource deparmaents for unpublished "gray literature." This included the New York State Departmem of Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC) Shellfish Departmem which mainlains water quality data on all the creeks, Suffolk County Department of Health Sendces which provided water quality data, watershed analysis, shellfish densities and natural resource date for some of the areas. Additional town agencies, in particular the East Hampton Natural Resource Department and the Southampton Department of Land Management, and the Nature Conservancy on Shelter Island were able to provide assistance with studies associated with creeks found within their municipalities. All data were reviewed for applicability to the project. Whenever relevant, these data were incorporated and cited within the report. IH. METHODOLOGY A. Water Quality Water quality data were collected in two forms. Physical chemistry (i.e., temperature, salinity, conductivity, pH, and Secchi readings) were taken every time a site was visited. This consisted of two readings each at the head and mouth of each creek. The surface reading was taken in the upper six inches of the water colunm. The bottom reading is defined as within the lowest six inches of the water column. Additionally, two rounds of nutrient analysis samples were taken by EEA with an additional round supplemented by SCDHS. Surface water was collected at the head and mouth of each creek at the location of the benthic sampling station. Samples were collected and analyzed for: Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen (TKN), Total Dissolved Kjeldahl Nitrogen (TDKN), Total Organic Carbon (TOC), Total Dissolved Organic Carbon (TDOC), Nitrogen-Ammonia (NH3), Nitrite (NO2), Nitrate (NO3), Total Phosphorus (TPO4), Total Dissolved Phosphorus (TDPO4), Ortho-Phosphorus (O-PO4), Total Coliforms (TCOL), Fecal Coliforms (FCOL), Total Suspended Solids (TSS), and Chlorophyll-a (Chi. "A"). Sample analysis was performed by Chesapeake Biological Laboratory (CBL) for NH3. NO2, NO~. TDPO4.TPO4, O-PO4, and TSS. Sample analysis for TKN, TDKN, TOC, DTOC was conducted by Chemtech. The coliform analysis was conducted by Environmental Testing Laboratories; the chlorophyll-a samples by the Suffolk County Department of Health Services. -3- ~ll sample analytsis conformed with ASTM standards. Results of the water qutfli~malysis appeaMn Appendix A. The water quality sampling program that was initiated for this study included three separate collection periods. All three collection periods collected the water samples fxom both the head and mouth of each of the ten tidal creeks. EEA collected water samples in July and September of 1998. Suffolk County Department of Health Services collected water samples in June of 1998. All three sampling periods were analyzed for the same parameters and at the same locations, and were therefore utilized to indicate the general water quality of these creeks during this study. B. Bathymetric Survey The bathymetric profile of each of the ten creeks was determined utilizing one of two methods. In creeks with a water depth of greater than three feet, a sub-acoustical bottom profiler was towed behind a boat at a slow speed behind a small outboard vessel. Coastal Oceanographic HYPACK survey software acquired data fzom the DGPS (Differential Geographic Positioning System) and echo sounder twice per second. In the four shallowest creeks (i.e., Fresh Pond, West Creek, Bass Creek and Ligonee Creek), the bathymetry was determined by utilizing a staff gauge to determine water depth. Each depth was manually entered into the computer which logged the GPS coordinates, as well. In both cases, the data were downloaded to a topographic plotting program. The bathymetric data were plotted on a base map provided by the Suffolk County Department of Health Services in a GIS format. Additionally, all depths were normalized to reflect mean-low water (MLW) at NGVD. Results of the bathymetric survey appear in Appendix B. C. Hydrodynamic Survey At the mouth of each of the ten tidal creeks, a Falmouth Scientific 3DACM flow meter was deployed for a minimum of 24 hours. The meter collected data regarding the vector (direction) and velocity (speed) of the current. In May of 1998, in conjunction with the eelgrass water quality project, a turbidity sensor was added to collect additional data. The data were downloaded to a laptop computer at the end of each period and returned to the office to be printed out and reviewed. Collected data was backed-up in the office. The meter was programmed to record data once every 15 seconds of every 15 minutes for the following creeks: Northwest Creek, West Creek, Bass Creek, Ligonee Creek, Alewife Creek, and Meetinghouse Creek. The meter was programmed to record data once every 15 minutes for the following creeks: West Neck Creek and Fresh Pond. Finally, the meter was programmed to record data once every 30 minutes, in two consecutive minutes for the following creeks: Goose Creek and Little Bay Creek. -4- Temperature Temperature was taken directly from the data, averaged for every hour, and graphed using Excel. The graphs compare time versus temperature. The x-axis shows the time, and to make the graph legible, only a few representations of the times are shown (a general pattern can therefore be interpreted). For most creeks, only one time per hour is shown on the x-axis, though there are several data points in between the times which are shown. An average was computed for every hour for each of the parameters (velocity, vector and turbidity). The data which was downloaded from the meter for velocity and vector was given in the form of Vn and Ve, which were used to derive the vector and velocity values. The following equations were used to derive the velocity and vector: Velocity: Velocity = square root (Vn^2 + Ve^2) where Vn = Average velocity north in cra/sec, and Ve = Average velocity east in cra/sec. Vector: Angle = atan (Vn/Ve) After calculating the angle, the vector is determined by the following equations: When Vn and Ve are greater than 0: Vector = (90 - angle) When Vn is greater than 0, and Ve is less than 0: Vector = (270 - angle) When Vn is less than 0, and Ve is less than 0: (Vector = (270 - angle) When Vn is less than 0, and Ve is greater than 0: Vector = (90 + angle) Finally, checks must be made for the following exceptions: When Vn = 0, and Ve is less than 0: Vector is 270 When Vn = 0, and Ve is greater than 0: Vector is 90 When Ve = 0, and Vn is less than 0: Vector is 180 When Ve = 0, and Vn is greater than 0: Vector is 0 TurbidiW: Turbidity was computed by multiplying the AUX1 value that the meter reported by (.0061) to convert the reading into FTU (Formazin Turbidity Units). The vector, velocity, and turbidity were graphed in the same form as the temperature. The results -5- of'the hydrodynamic survey appear in Appendix C. D. Land Use For land use information pertaining to land-based activities, the following parameters were considered. These include: general residential land use categories, such as residential, commercial, industrial, agricultural, recreational, and open space. Additional land uses evaluated included roadway coverage and the availability of utilities. Also included in the land use section were the water-related activities, such as marinas and mooring areas. The data were obtained through the evaluation of existing land use data previously gathered by the local towns, and the examination of recent aerial photography. During the course of the field sampling program, the field crew spot checked and validated the information. The land-based information included the coverage data for the watershed residential land use categories and densities with estimates of areas within privately owned lots by distinguishing the percentage dedicated to built coverage, the percentage dedicated to commercial and industrial centers, agricultural uses, recreational uses such as gold courses, and protected parklands. A separate identification was made for protected areas such as public, private and not-for-profit owned wetlands and natural resource areas on subdivision plans. Roadway coverages were estimated based on length and type (e.g., collector, arterial). Availability of utilities was stated as would areas of septic systems. The water-related uses were quantified through the use of aerial photography. The presence and location of the mooring fields and bulkhead frontage was initially determined by the photography and later ground trothed in the field. Additionally, the dredging records of each creek were evaluated. Detailed results of land use and water basins of each of the creeks appears in Appendix D. E. Wildlife Observations of wildlife species were made during each of the visits to a site. Specifically, the presence and relative abundance (if applicable) of fmfish, shellfish, avian fauna, mammalian species, and herpetile fauna was recorded. These observations were made in conjunction with some other aspect of the study. The U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service and NYSDEC Natural Heritage Program were contacted to determine the presence of rare, endangered, threatened, or species or special concern in the study area. The results are provided in the narrative discussion of this report for each of the ten study areas. F. Grain Size and Macrobenthic Invertebrates -6- - - ' Twenty grab stations were located within the ten tidal creeks surveyed (one atxhe head waters and at the mouth of each creek). Station locations are illustrated in the "Sampling Locations" maps within each study area narrative. Samples were collected with a 0.025 meter- square Petite bottom grab. A single Ponar grab sample will be collected for grain size analysis. A total of 20 samples were collected, one at each location for laboratory analysis. For the grain size analysis, the entire contents of the Ponar grab were transferred into a container which was sent to Chemtech for analysis. Only full grab samples were utilized. For the macrobenthic analysis, three replicates were collected at each station. Two of the three replicates were randomly chosen for analysis with the remaining samples archived. Individual samples (entire contents of the Ponar grab) were washed on a 0.5 millimeter mesh sieve (to remove fine panicles), and then transferred to ajar, labeled, and preserved with a buffered 10 percent formalin solution. Only full grab samples were utilized. Rose bengal stain was added to the formalin to aid in later sorting of the organisms. In the laboratory, all macroinvertebrates were removed from the samples and identified to species level, whenever possible. The oligochaetes, chironomids, nemerteans, anthozoa, and hydrozoans were left as high taxonomic groupings because of the difficulty associated with their identification or the small size and scarcity of specimens. Detailed results of macrobenthic invertebrate densities and grain size analysis appears in Appendix E. IV. REPORT OF FINDINGS 1. Water Quality The water quality analysis of these ten tidal creeks was done using a limited data set. The parameters mentioned above were all tested in three sampling periods ( June of 1998 by SCDHS, July 1998 by EEA, and September 1998 by EEA). Water quality data provided by SCDHS which could be applied to this study was also utilized in this analysis. Also, physical chemistry data which was collected by EEA upon each site visit (which consisted of dissolved oxygen, conductivity, water temperature, pH, and salinity) was also analyzed. However, general water quality Ixends were not within the scope of this project and could not be identified with the limited data set. It is anticipated that the water quality model being developed by TetraTech will address these general trends. The overall impact of water quality on the benthic communities was given greater consideration in this study, rather than the causes of water quality degradation. The water quality analysis is presented in Appendix A. -7- ~ - - Samplin~ Rationale To completely understand the relationship between nutrient inputs, primary productivity, and the biotic communities associated with each of the creeks investigated, the analysis of several parameters at each trophic level was required.. An analytical review of the chemical constituents found within each creek included total organic carbons (TOCs), coliform bacteria, nitrogen, and phosphorus. In addition to the laboratory analysis, each creek was evaluated for temperature, salinity, conductivity, dissolved oxygen, pH, and transparency (Secchi) each time a field crew visited the site. All of the analytical parameters evaluated were sampled within the same tidal phase (e.g. Iow slack) each time sampling occurs, to negate differences in chemistry and biological activity due tb tidal stage variations. This provided valuable data for understanding the chemistry and the structure of the biological communities found within each creek system. The biological communities most influenced by these parameters would be the phytoplankton, zooplankton, and macrobenthic invertebrate populations. These, in mm, would influence the £mfish (ichthyoplankton -- eggs and larvae through adult), and shellfish (bay scallops, hard clam, and blue crabs) populations found throughout the bay, which are economically important to both the commercial and recreational fishermen that utilize the bay. The following detailed descriptions will provide the rationale for the sampling analysis that was conducted by EEA for this study: Total Organic Carbon Carbon enters the ecosystem in many different forms, in particular as part of living tissue. Large amounts of total organic carbon (TOC) can be derived fi.om the accumulation of plant material both from vascular plants and minute planktonic plant species, known as phytoplankton, which show up as Chiorophyll-a in water samples. Nutrient rich systems increase the potential for plankton blooms which help increase the carbon loading of the sediment. Also, the presence of high TOC levels may indicate the presence of petroleum hydrocarbons or that contaminated runoff is entering the system. The amount of organic material will strongly influence the benthic invertebrate communities that are established within each creek system, as well as the plant species. A total of 30 samples for TOC analysis were collected. Collections occurred in July and September of 1998 by EEA and throughout the summer of 1998 by SCDHS. Total organic carbon levels increased fi.om June to September for all tidal creeks. Slightly higher levels of TOC relative to the other sampling locations were observed for the headwaters of Northwest Creek and West Creek. Nitrogen Nitrogen is a building block of protein and a part of enzymes. It is needed in an abundant supply for reproduction, growth, and respiration. Plants can only utilize nitrogen in a fixed form, such as nitrites and nitrates, with the exception of nitrogen-fixing bacteria and blue-green algae. Nitrates leached from the soil and transported by drainage water are an important source of -8- - 'nitrogen for aquatic communities. During the summer months, the nitrogen supply-Xo an aquatic resource area may be utilized completely by phytoplanlaon, in addition to many green filamentous algae. Nitrates may disappear from the surface water. As a result, phytoplankton growth, or a "bloom" is typically reduced in late summer. A reduction in phytoplankton concentrations in the spring and summer months may also be caused by increased grazing by phytoplankton. Nitrates build up again in the winter. Nitrogenous wastes draining from sewage disposal plants and other sources often overload the aquatic ecosystem with nitrogen. This can result in massive plankton growth and other undesirable changes in the community structure. Samples were collected in the same frequency as TOC. Exceptionally high levels of nitrogen were observed in the water quality analysis for Meetinghouse Creek headwaters, while the waters at the mouth of Meeilnghouse Creek, and the headwaters of both Ligonee Creek and Alewife Creek both indicate slightly higher nitrogen levels relative to the other sampling stations. Phosohorous Phosphorous is involved in photosynthesis, as well as in energy transfer within the plant and in animals. Animals require an adequate supply of calcium and phosphorous in the proper milo, preferably 2:1 in the presence of vitamin D. When the supply of phosphorus in plants is low, growth is arrested, maturity delayed, and roots stunted. Samples were collected in the same frequency as TOC. Exceptionally high phosphorus levels were observed in the water quality analysis for the headwaters of Meetinghouse Creek. The waters at the mouth of Meeilnghouse Creek andAlewife Creek, along with the waters at the mouth and head of Ligonee Creek indicate slightly higher levels of phosphorus relative to the other sampling stations. Coliform Bacteria Coliform bacteria is an indication of waste product deposition within the Estuary. The coliforms can originate from many sources including duck farms, waterfowl, or sewage treatment plant effluent. The coliform bacteria is easily transported via storm water runoff into the Estuary. Coliforms have a significant impact to the water quality and water-related resources. High levels of coliform bacteria detection by NYSDEC can temporarily suspend the harvesting of existing shellfish beds. High coliform detection levels have facilitated beach closings. Water samples were collected three times from each of the selected tidal creeks to establish baseline conditions. The mouth waters of West Neck Creek had the highest values of total coliforms. The head waters of West Neck Creek, Northwest Creek, West Creek, Alewife Creek, and the mouth waters of Alewife Creek also indicate high levels of Total Coliform. The headwaters of Northwest Creek, Alewife Creek, Meetinghouse Creek, and Fresh Pond indicate high values of fecal coliform. -9- General Physical Characteristics. During each site survey, EEA collected a series of basic water quality measurements (e.g., temperature, salinity, conductivity, dissolved oxygen, pH, and transparency [Secehi]). Readings were taken with a Yellow Spring Iustmment (YSI) salinity and S-C-T meter, and a Standard Secchi disk. All readings were transcribed into a field notebook or standard data sheets. These data sheets appear in Appendix F. A table of the physical chemistry readings conducted at each site visit is included in the waterquality section of each creek. ChloroChvll-a A good measure of water quality and a reflection of the volume and source of nutrient loading within a system can be calculated by the level of Chlorophyll-a that was present during the sampling program of this study. High levels of Chlomphyll-a were good indicators that high levels of nitrogen are present. The Chlorophyll-a samples were collected in conjunction with other chemical sampling by utilizing a 6-liter Van Dom bottle. Samples were drawn off into the appropriate one-liter bottle and placed in a cooler. EEA was required by ChemTech to filter the samples through a millipore filter with a vacuum pump. The filters containing samples were frozan and shipped or delivered frozen to the analytical laboratory. CNorophyll-a was analyzed three times, along with the chemical analyzation. Stations which indicate high levels of total chlorophyll-a include Ligonee Creek head waters, Meetinghouse Creek head waters and mouth waters, and Bass Creek head waters. Relatively low levels were evidem at the mouth and headwaters of Fresh Pond and Northwest Creek. 2. Bathymetric Survey The results of the bathymetric survey provide the physical structure of the ten creeks. Depth of the creeks can be correlated with light extinction, varying subaquatic vegetation (SAV) communities, and therefore benthic communities. Dredging of these tidal creeks can also greatly impact the benthic community structure, as the immotile organisms will be displaced along with the dredge material. The Suffolk County Department of Works files have indicated the recent dredging history of the ten creeks. Though this is valuable data, dredging may also be done by private homeowners or businesses, which is not typically recorded data. Tidal Creek Last Dredged Fresh Pond Yearly Northwest Creek 1961/1965/1971 Ligonee Creek Never Alewife Creek Never Meetinghouse Creek Spring, 1998 -10- West Creek 1982/1994/1996 Goose Creek 1995 Bass Creek Never West Neck Creek Fall, 1998 Little Bay Tributary Never 3. Hydrodynamic Survey The hydrodynamic survey provided data which was utilized in the analysis of the general relative health and attributes of each creek. Though general hydrodynamic trends could not be observed over a 24-hour period, minimum and maximum velocities, vectors, turbidities and temperatures were calculated and analyzed. These results appear in the results of each creek. 4. Land Use The results of the land use survey for the ten tidal creeks demonstrated many attributes which can be correlated to other findings within this study. There was a direct correlation between watersheds with high development and in-water-uses with high nutrient loads and stressed benthic communities in some creeks (Meetinghouse Creek and Ligonee Creek). There was also a direct correlation with relatively low-land-use/development shorelines, encompassed by salt marsh with nutrient loads which did not appear significantly elevated and relatively stable benthic communities (Bass Creek, Northwest Creek, and West Creek). Finally, the historic and/or present use of the watersheds for agricultural purposes was directly correlated with high nutrient loading (particularly nitrogen compounds), and relatively stressed benthic communities (West Neck Creek, Meetinghouse Creek and, to a lesser extent, Little Bay Creek). Stress, in this report is defined as a habitat indicative of change. This change is usually caused by antropogenic sources. Stressed communities are usually represented by rapid-reproductive, pioneer species, as opposed to "un-stressed" communities, which would be dominated by more stable species. 5. Wildlife Incidental occurrences of wildlife were recorded each time a site was visited. In general, all creeks were found to support species which are common to this region. Any sightings of endangered, threatened or species of special concern which were observed were documented. These observations appear in the results of each creek and full tables appear in the field data sheets (Appendix F). -11- + Grain Size and Macrobenthic Invertebrates Much can be learned from observing macmbenthic invertebrate communities. Benthic communities must conform to the overall water and sediment quality. This was determined by the diversity and abundance of each species. In general, ifa benthic community is represented by Iow diversity with high abundance, the system is likely to be degraded to some extent (Cerrato, 1983). If the community contains high diversity, with fewer individuals per species, this would be indicative of a healthy system. Benthic samples for all 10 creeks were taken in July and December of 1998. In the laboratory, all macroinvertebrates were removed from the samples and identified to species level, whenever possible. The oligochaetes, chironomides, nemerteans, anthozoa, and hydrozoans were distinguished in high taxonomic groupings because of the difficulty associated with their identification or the small size and scarcity of specimens. All replicate samples were analyzed from each station for each of the three sampling periods. The benthic analysis was the major scope of this project and is discussed for each creek and the general conclusions of the benthic analysis is discussed in the conclusions of this report. V. RANKING SYSTEM OF TEN TIDAL CREEKS EEA developed a system where the ten creeks were evaluated, using several parameters, to develop a ranking system among the creeks. The three main parameters that were utilized for this ranking system were: water quality, macrobenthic invertebrate densities, and land use. Though these three were the main parameters, consideration was given to such aspects as wildlife, hydrography, bathymetry and any other field observations throughout this study. These parameters were given a value of one through five, which represented a sliding gradient, with a value of one indicating an oligotrophic system, and a value of five indicating a relatively eutrophic system. After each of the three parameters were quantified, these values were added together to assign an overall numerical value to each creek. Water OualiW Quantification System The creeks were evaluated with respect to water quality by analyzing the water quality data and physical chemistry data that was obtained throughout this study. The values were analyzed relatively to each other, instead of to standard levels. - 12- Nutrient Physical Other Rank Loading Chemistry Parameters (1-5) (Total Nitrogen, (Salinity, Dissolved (Fecal coliforms, TOC, Phosphorus, etc.) Oxygen, etc.) Temperature, pH) Fresh Pond Creek Average Average Average 2 Northwest Creek Average - Low Average Poor 2 Ligonee Creek High Poor Poor 4 Alewife Creek Low Average Average - Poor 2 Vleetinghouse Creek Very High Poor Poor 5 /Vest Creek High Average Average 3 $oose Creek Average Average Average 3 E~ass Creek Average Average Average 2 ~Vest Neck Creek High Average Average - Poor 3 Little Bay Creek Average Average Average 2 The ranking system represents a sliding gradient with a value of 1 indicating an oligotrophic system, and a value of 5 indicating a eutrophic system. Note: This ranking system was compiled using very limited monitoring data in some instances. Macrobenthic Invertebrate Quantification System The creeks were evaluated for the overall abundance of benthic invertebrates and also the overall diversity that was observed. The presence or lack of pioneer species was also considered. Capitella capitata, Ampelisca abdita, oligochaetes, and Streblospio benedicti among others, are considered pioneer species, which are indicators of a disturbed system, or a system which is stressed to some degree. An abundance of the above-mentioned pioneer species would indicate a relatively stressed system, while a high abundance and diversity, but low occurrence of pioneer species would indicate a relatively unstressed system. Overall Overall Presence or Rank Abundance Diversity Lack of (1-5) Pioneer Species - 13- Fresh Pond Creek Low High Average ='-~ 3 ~lorthwest Creek Average - High High Low 1 _igonee Creek Average Average High - Very High 4 ~,lewife Creek Low - Average Low - Average Low - Average 3 Meetinghouse Creek Very High Low Very High 5 ~/est Creek Average Low Low 2 Goose Creek Low - Average High High 4 Bass Creek High High High 2 West Neck Creek Very High Low Very High 5 Little Bay Creek Low Average High 4 The ranking system represents a sliding gradient with a value of 1 indicating an oligotrephic system, and a value of 5 indicating a eutrophic system Land Use Ouantification Svtem The creeks were evaluated for development density for the land use quantification. Such attributes as numbers of houses, boats, docks, residential houses, and commercial buildings were considered. Development Edge Quality Rank Density (Agricultural stresses, (1-5) shoreline hardening, natural vegetation) Fresh Pond Creek 1 1 1 Northwest Creek 2 3 3 Ligonee Creek 4 3 4 Alewife Creek 4 3 4 Meetinghouse Creek 5 5 5 West Creek 3 4 4 Goose Creek 4 3 4 Bass Creek 1 1 1 West Neck Creek 4 3 4 Little Bay Creek 1 4 3 -14- Development Edge Quality :'-'Rank Density (Agricultural stresses, (1-5) shoreline hardening, natural vegetation) The ranking system represents a sliding gradient witl~ This ranking system represents a a value of 1 indicating a relatively undeveloped sliding gradient with a value of 1 watershed, and a value of 5 indicating a relativelyindicating a relatively naturally developed watershed, vegetated watershed (and a substantial vegetative buffer), and a value of 5 indicating a watershed relatively stressed from agriculture or shoreline hardening (with little or no natural vegetative buffer)~ etc. Overall Rankin~ System Tidal Creek Water Macrobenthic Land Overall Quality Invertebrate Use Rank Rank Rank Rank Fresh Pond 1 3 1 5 Northwest Creek 3 1 2 6 Ligonee Creek 4 4 4 12 Alewife Creek 3 3 4 10 Meetinghouse Creek 5 5 5 15 West Creek 2 2 4 7 Goose Creek 3 4 4 11 :~ass Creek 1 2 1 4 A/est Neck Creek 3 5 4 12 Little Bay Tributary 2 4 3 7 -15- 'The overall rank of the ten creeks is a sum of the 3 parameters used in evaluation (water quality, macrobenthic invertebrates and land use). The overall rank represents a sliding gradient, with a rank of 1-5 indicating a relatively "good" creek, a rank of 6-10 representing a relatively "fair" creek, and a rank of 11-15 representing a relatively "poor" creek. VI. RESULTS OF TEN TIDAL CREEKS Fresh Pond Fresh Pond is located along the southwest comer of Napeague Bay within the Town of East Hampton. Fresh Pond is a relatively small (approximately 18 acres) impoundmem attached to Napeague Bay by a long (approximately 300 foot east/west), narrow (20 to 25 foot north/south) stream channel. Both areas are extremely shallow, with an average depth of 0.5 to 1.5 feet. The inlet to Fresh Pond is open and has been dredged yearly by the town to facilitate tidal flushing. The entire area of Fresh Pond is uncertified year-round. The stream channel consists primarily of medium coarse sand, while the pond is dominated by fine grain silts. No sub-aquatic vegetation was present in the stream channel. The pond was completely dominated by widgeongrass (Ruppia maritima). Salinities within the fresh pond system averaged 24.8 parts per thousand (ppt) with a range of 21.9 to 27.6 ppt. In general, the pond was surrounded by a mixed deciduous evergreen forest with a mixture of oaks and pitch pines (t'inus rigida). The shoreline was fringed with emergent vegetation, mostly saltmarsh cordgrass (Spartina alterniflora), salt meadow cordgrass ($partina patens), common reed (£hragmites australis) and groundsel tree (Baccharis halimifolia). Fresh pond was surveyed from September 30, 1997 to November 14, 1997 for the hydrodynamic survey; on December 4, 1997 and July 14, 1998 for macrobenthic invertebrates; June 9, July 30th and September 21, 1998 for water quality analysis; April 25, 1998 for bathymetry; and in July of 1998 for physical chemistry (P-them) analysis. The following sections report the results of each discipline. 1. Water Quality Fresh Pond has a restricted outlet, which closes naturally during significant storm evems. This outlet is re-opened via an excavator. The NYSDEC has classified Fresh Pond as uncertified for shellfishing year-round. The discharge from Fresh Pond is an actual, direct pollution source to Napeague Bay. The water quality analysis of Fresh Pond for this study show relatively low levels of ammonia, nitrogen, total chlorophyll-a, and phosphorus. The water quality analysis of Fresh Pond did indicate relatively high levels of total and fecal coliforms in the sampling conducted in June of 1998. - 16- The physical chemismy data analysis of Fresh Pond indicate relatively high ~alinlty levels (over 30 ppm), which was expected given the tidal flushing of this creek. The physical chemistry field data analysis is presented below: Date Location Depth Surface Bottom Su~ce Bottom I (inches) Dissolved Dissolved Salinity Salinity ~ Oxygen Oxygen (rog/I)(ppm) (ppm) (mg/I) 9/10/97 Mouth 18.00 30,00 7/14/98 Head 2.00 6.60 6.60 37.20 37.20 Date Location Surface Bottom Surface Bottom pH Temperature Temperature Conductivity Conductivity (C) (C) (ms) (ms) 9/10/97 Mouth 21.80 43,47 8.00 7/14/98 Head 23.10 23.10 37.20 37.20 7.80 2. Bathymetric Survey Fresh Pond is a uniformly shallow body of water connected to Napeague Bay by a narrow stream channel. The average water depth is 0.3 to 1.8 feet at mean low water. 3. Hydrodynamic Survey Based on the results of the hydrodynamic survey conducted by EEA and numerous tidal studies conducted by the East Hampton Town Natural Resources Department, the tidal cycle is relatively normal with two ebb tides and two flood tides a day. The only anomaly is a slight interruption in the ebb tide as the flood tide begins to come in and backs it up (EHTNRD 1998). The current meter was deployed at the northeast comer of the pond. The current pattern within the pond appears to be variable and more influenced by the wind direction than the tidal cycle. Velocity with the pond are fairly weak with a maximin of 21.8 cm/sec observed on September 31, 1997. The average direction was 155 degrees, south south-east, the average velocity was 3.11 cm/sec. The current dropped to near zero on the slack water, as expected. -17- 4. Land Use Fresh Pond is in the Town of East Hampton, appmximately 1.25 miles north of Montauk Highway. Fresh Pond Road runs along the southern portion of the pond. There are several houses across the road fi.om the woods bordering this secluded and nearly pristine pond. At the end of Fresh Pond Road, approximately 20 yards fi.om the shoreline, there is a rest facility, with a one-acre hard surface parking lot, a phone, and two restrooms. There are low density, single- family residential communities to the south, west and north. Fresh Pond has a surface area of approximately 20 acres, and a length, from tidal creek mouth to the pond's westernmost point, of Va mile. It is almost completely surrounded by vegetation, including common reed, deciduous and evergreen trees, and shrubs. In certain areas along the creek's edge near the mouth, the reeds are fifteen feet deep. This tidal creek flows east into Napeague Bay. An estimated 150 yards east of the creek's mouth, approximately fifteen houses line the bay, some with docks. Approximately .75 mile north of the creek's mouth, there are a few houses and docks among the open space, dunes, and bluffs that border Napeague Bay. Napeague State Park is located approximately six miles southeast of Fresh Pond. Approximately 1 mile southwest of the pond is the South Fork Country Club. The area surrounding Fresh Pond is best described as a forested residential area~ A small town park, with restroom facilities and what appeared to be a septic system, can be found along the south side of the mouth. The park appears to receive limited usage by small family groups. The interior of the system is surrounded by forest with no road ends or other potential stormwater runoff sources available. Therefore, it would appear that there is little contributed to Fresh Pond from land use activities. 5. Wildlife Various species of finflsh, in particular bait species such as Atlantic silverside (Menida menida), sand lance (Ammodytes americana), killifishes (Fundulus heteroclitus, F. majalis, ~ Diaphanus and Cyprinodon variegatus) and white mullet (Mugel curema) appeared to be extremely abundant at times. Associated with the bait fish, in particular during September and October, were large schools of juvenile "snapper" bluefish (Pomatomus saltatrix). Also evident in the system were numbers of young-of-year (YOY) winter flounder (Pleuronectes arnericanus). Large numbers of water-related avian species, such as the osprey (Pandion haliaetus), belted kingfisher (Megaceryle alcyon), great blue heron (Ardea herodias), green heron (Butorides striatus), great egret (Casmerodius albus), and snowy egret (Egretta thula) were commonly seen. Many passerine species were often heard calling from the adjacent shoreline or forest. -18- - 'S6me of the more common species included, but not limited to, the bluejay (Cydnoditt~ cristata), black capped chickadee (Parus atricapillus), gray catbird (Durnetella carolinensis), American goldfinch (Garduelis tristis), common flicker (Colaptes auratus), and American crow (Corvus brachyrhynchos). 6. Macrobenthic Invertebrates The results of the macrobenthic sampling program revealed two distinctly different communities. Those present at the head of the creek reflected a community most typically associated with silty frae grain sediments, while those at the mouth were clearly different, indicating a coarser grained sand. In July, there was a total of 61 benthic organisms observed at the mouth of Fresh Pond. Aunelids comprised over 95% ofthase organisms. In December, there was a total of 34 benthic organisms observed at the mouth of Fresh Pond. Nemertean worms comprised over 40% of this grab sample. In July, them was a total of 345 benthic organisms observed at the head of Fresh Pond. Annelids comprised almost 80% of these organisms, and Mollusks comprised approximately 15%. In December, there was a total of 73 benthic organisms observed at the head of Fresh Pond· Annelids comprised over 65% of these organisms. The benthic community found at the head of the creek in December was dominated by both Annelids (Streblospio benedicn) and a grouping of miscellaneous organisms, which have been defined in this report as "Other" (Molgula manhattensis). At the head of the Fresh Pond in July, Annelids were dominant with Hypaniola grayi, and to a lesser extent, oligochaeta. The benthic community found at the mouth of Fresh Pond in December was dominated by Nemertean worms, and in July, the mouth community was dominated by Annelids (Streblospio benedicti). · B. Northwest Creek Northwest Creek is immediately adjacent to Northwest Harbor which drains into Gardiners Bay. Northwest Creek is solely located within the Town of East Hampton. Northwest Creek is a relatively long (approximately 1.3 miles) and narrow (an average 1,250 feet) estuary occupying approximately 140 acres. The inlet connecting Northwest Creek to Northwest Harbor is extremely narrow (less than 100 feet across). Northwest Creek is fed tidally by this inlet which is maintained by the county, but has not been dredged since 1971. The environment associated with the head of Northwest Creek was much shallower than the mouth, with a mean depth of S.0 feet compared to areas of less than 1 foot. There was no -19- - -apparent SAV observed while sampling in Northwest Creek. The vast majority'Bf th-eshoreline is fringed by an expansive intertidal marsh dominated by saltmarsh cordgrass. Beydnd the marsh is an oak/pine forest. The remaining portion of the creek shoreline COl~taln~ a small stretch of beach (approximately 240 l.f.). Salirdties within the creek system averaged 26.5 ppt, ranging fi:om 24.1 to 28.8 ppt with little variation between the mouth and head. In general, the entire system is extremely shallow, with an average depth of 3.0 to 4.0 feet. The deepest areas are at the mouth and northeast comer where a mooring field is located. The depths in the northeast comer of the creek exceed 10 feet in some areas. The vast majority of the Northwest Creek substrate consisted of silty fine grain material with the exception of the mouth and mooring area which is mostly medium sands. Northwest Creek was surveyed fi:om September 9, 1998 to September 16, 1998 for the hydrodynamic survey, on December 4, 1997 and July 14, 1998 for marcrobenthic invertebrates, June 9, July 30~, and September 21, 1998 for water quality, April 24, 1998 for bathymeay, and in July of 1998 for physical chemistry analysis. The following sections report the results of each discipline. 1. Water Quality The shellfish resource of Northwest Creek is considered moderate to large, according to NYSDEC. NYSDEC has classified Northwest Creek as uncertified for shellfishing. Northwest Harbor has numerous freshwater feeds in addition to sizeable undefflow and shore seep contributions. Tests by the NYSDEC of the waters of Northwest Creek for coliforms after storms suggest that it may develop water quality problems if steps are not taken to abate coliform sources. The coliform sources are presumed to be fi:om septics situated in the water table approximate to creek waters. The water quality analysis of Northwest Creek for this study indicate relatively low levels of phosphorus and nitrogen for the samples taken during this study. The headwaters of Northwest Creek indicate relatively high levels of total and fecal coliforms. The water quality of Northwest Creek indicated that it may be a stressed system. This is believed to be a function of flushing coupled with meteorological conditions. The physical chemistry field data analysis appears below: Date Location Depth Surface Bottom Surface Bottom (inches) Dissolved Dissolved Salinity Salinity Oxygen Oxygen (ppm) (ppm) (rog/I) (mg/I) 7/14/98 Head 36 7.4 7.8 22.9 24.7 7/14/98 Mouth 24 6.9 7 26.6 26.6 - 20 - '. Date Location Surface Bottom Surface Bottom Temperature Temperature Conductivity Conductivity (C) (C) (ms) (ms) 7/14/98 Head 25.6 25.3 38 39,1 6.7 7/14/98 Mouth 24.7 24.8 41.3 41.3 7.8 2. Bathymetric Survey Northwest Creek is uniformly shallow throughout with an average depth of 3.0 to 4.0 feet. The only exceptions are the narrow inlet and body mooring area where the water depth averages 8.0 feet deep. The creek channel is maintained by dredging conducted by Suffolk County Department of Public Works (SCDPW). However, SCDPW files indicate that this creek has not been dredged for over ten years. 3. Hydrodynamic Survey Based on the results of the hydrodyllamic survey, as well as regular observations conducted by EEA and numerous tidal studies conducted by the East Hampton Town Natural Resources Department, the tidal cycle is relatively normal with two ebb tides and two flood tides in a twenty-four hour period. The tidal height in Northwest Creek on average is 3.0 feet above mean low water. This is reported by the computer program "Tides and Currents for Windows 1995" and confirmed by field sampling conducted by EHTNRD. The current meter was deployed at the end of Northwest Landing Road. The current pattern within the creek appears to be variable, possibly more influenced by the wind direction than a predictable ebb and flood current pattern. The average direction of the current was recorded as 130 degrees, east south-east. Velocities within the creek were fairly weak with a maximum velocity of 9.9 cra/sec. The average velocity was 2.42 cra/sec. As expected, velocities dropped out to near zero on the slack water. The hydrodynamic survey was studied from a first quarter moon to a full moon. 4. Land Use Northwest Creek is located in East Hampton, approximately 2.25 miles from the Village of Sag Harbor. It is approximately 1.5 miles long, with an estimated surface area of 183 acres. Northwest Harbor Park (County) surrounds the majority of Northwest Creek. The creek's natural surroundings consist of vegetation, including wetlands, deciduous and evergreen trees, and some sandy beach. The mouth of the creek meets Northwest Harbor. Northwest Landing Road runs east of the creek and ends approximately 1/8 mile from the creek mouth. A boat rental house and -21 - ~ bulkhead/parking lot with approximately 20 boat moorings border the creek at'the-~nd of Northwest Landing Road. Single-family residential dwellings line this road. Northeast of the creek is anew York State Environmental Conservation Area encompassing 1,100 sr. Sag Harbor Golf Club is approximately 1,000 feet west of the creek. Approximately 80 percent of the shoreline associated with Northwest Creek was intertidal saltmarsh. Only a very small portion of the northeast shoreline was bulkheaded, approximately 840 linear feet in front of nine houses, with 11 shorefront lots. Also associated with the northeast comer of the creek was a small mooring field which is maintained by Town Trustees. Northwest Creek is completely surrounded by the Northwest Harbor Co. Park. Immediately adjacent to the west of the park and the creek is the Barcelona Neck/Sag Harbor Golf Club. 5. Wildlife Observation of fish, given the large size of the system, was somewhat difficult, although the presence of schools ofbaitfish, in particular the Atlantic silverside and Atlantic menhaden (Brevoortia tyrannus) and large schools of juvenile bluefish were present during September and October. As with Fresh Pond, shore birds or water dependent birds were abundant in the Northwest Creek. This includes the belted kingfisher, great egret, and snowy egret, as well as passerines such as the northern mockingbird (Mirnuspolyglottos), mourning dove (Zenaida rnacroura) and house sparrow (Passer domesticus) as well as others based on the available habitat. Larger megabenthic invertebrates such as fiddler crabs (Uca Sp.), green crabs (Carcinus rnaenas) and ribbed mussels (Geukensia dernissus) were present along the shoreline. 6. Macrobenthic Invertebmtas The results of the macrobenthic sampling program revealed two distinctly different communities. Those present at the head of the creek reflected a community most typically associated with silty fmc grain sediment, while those at the mouth were clearly different indicating a medium/coarse grained sand. In July, there was a total of 53 benthic organisms observed at the mouth of Northwest Creek. Nemertean worms comprised nearly 60% of these grabs, and Annelids comprised over 30% of these organisms. In December, there was a total of 126 benthic organisms observed at the mouth of Northwest Creek. Annelids comprised over 40% of these organisms, and Arthropods comprised approximately 30%. In July, there was a total of 409 benthic organisms observed at the head of Northwest - 22 - ~Cmek. Annelids comprised over 65% of these organisms, and Arthropods com'pris-ed~ approximately 25%. In December, there was a total of 382 benthic organisms observed at the head of Northwest Creek. Annelids comprised over 50% of these organisms, Arthropods comprised approximately 40%. The benthic community found at the head of the creek in July was dominated by Annelids (with significant abundance ofNeanthes succinea and Mediornastus ambieseta). In December, the head of the creek was also dominated by Annelids (again with an abundance of Neanthes succinea, and also Scolecolepides viridis and Hypaniola grayi). In the mouth in July, the benthic community was dominated by Nemertean worms, and to a lesser extent, the Annelids (abundances ofPolygordius triestinus were observed). The mouth in December was again dominated by Annelids, with abundances of Paraonisfulgens and Haploscopoplos rubustus. C. Ligonee Creek Ligonee Creek is located in the southwest comer of the upper Sag Harbor Cove entirely located within the Town of Southampton. Ligonee Creek is a long (2,800 feet) east to west and narrow (average width approximately 200 feet) north to south body of water approximately 13 acres in size. The sediments associated with the bottom of the creek uniformly consists of a silty f'me grain material from the mouth to the head. No sub-aquatic vegetation was evident throughout the study period. In general, salinities were somewhat higher at the mouth (average 26.7 ppt) and lower at the head (average 17.3 ppt). This can be attributed to a six inch layer of freshwater (0.6 ppt) on the surface at the head of the creek during low fide. Bottom salinities were more uniform. The shoreline of Ligonee Creek was mostly developed or channelized. A narrow band of intertidal and high marsh can be found on the north and south shores, primarily at the mouth, with saltmarsh cordgrass and the groundsel tree compromising the bulk of the vegetation. Ligonee Creek was chosen for this study, in park due to the substantial plume of organic contaminants from the former Rowe Industries site which discharges into the creek. Ligonee Creek was surveyed for the hydrodynamic study from August 25, 1998 to August 26, 1998, for macrobenthic invertebrates on December 4, 1997 and July 6, 1998, for water quality analysis on June 9, July 30, and September 21, 1998, on July 28, 1998 for bathymettaj, and in July of 1998 for physical chemistry analysis. The following sections report the results of each analysis. 1. Water Quality There is the potential for freshwater input from a few small ponds located in Ligonee Brook. The waters of Ligonee Creek have been closed to shellfishing by the NYSDEC. The water quality analysis of Ligonee Creek indicate relatively high levels of ammonia, total chlorophyll-a, phosphorus, and nitrogen. - 23 - ' - - ~ ' The physical chemistry of Ligonee Creek indicate relatively low levels of salinity. The physical chemistry field data analysis appears below: Date Location Depth Surface Bottom Surface Bottom (inches) Dissolved Dissolved Salinity Salinity Oxygen Oxygen (ppm) (ppm) (rog/I) (rog/I) 7/6/98 Head 32.4 5.1 3.3 17.8 19.7 7/6/98 Mouth 42 5,5 6.7 22 23,5 Date Location Surface Bottom Surface Bottom pH Temperature Temperature Conductivity Conductivity (C) (C) (ms) (ms) 7/6/98 Head 21.6 24.9 28.4 34.5 6 7/6/98 Mouth 25.5 26 30.8 38.5 6,5 2. Bathymetric Survey Ligonee Creek, unlike the previously discussed creeks, is deeper with a central channel. There is no recent record of dredging occurring in the creek. The station located at the mouth of the creek is considerably deeper than the head of the creek with a depth of 2.5 feet. The head of the creek is a dead end cul de sac and extremely shallow, with a depth of 0 to 1.0 feet. No boat traffic or piers exist in the upper 300 feet of the creek. 3. Hydrodynamic Study The current meter was deployed at the end of East Cove Road. The results of the hydrodynamic study indicate that a nearly normal ebb and current exist within Ligonee Creek, although currents remain fairly weak, peaking at 5.5 cra/second and dropping out to near zero during slack water periods. Based on the field observation in conjunction with the tides and current program, it does appear the typical ebb and flood fide pattern exists within the creek. The average mean high tide in the Ligonee Creek is 3.0 feet above mean low water. The average direction of the current was 266 degrees west south-west. The average velocity was 3.1 cm/sec. The hydrodynamic study ended on a new moon. - 24 - - · 4. Land Use ~'~-' Ligonee Creek is located in Southampton, approximately ½ mile fi.om the Village of Sag Harbor. It is approximately 20-25 acres in surface area An estimated 55 percent of this 3/4 mile long creek is lined with single family residences, docks; and moorings. A majority of the residences have maintained lawns. The rest of the creek is vegetated with reeds, wetlands, and trees. The creek spills into Sag Harbor Cove to the north, and to the east through The Little Narrows passageway to Morris Cove and Upper Sag Harbor Cove. These embayments also have houses and docks along their borders. There are several ponds south of Ligonee Creek. They are Round Pond, Long Pond, and Crooked Pond. They are set back fi.om the main roads that run parallel to them. The majority of the land surrounding these ponds is vegetated with deciduous woods and shrubs. Ligonee Creek has one of the more developed shorelines of the tidal creeks surveyed. The entire shoreline is lined with 34 residential dwellings on the south shore, and four on Long Point. Most of the houses have a small dock and pier complex with a small to medium sized powerboat. A very small percentage of the shoreline is bulkheaded. 5. Wildlife The presence of fmfish utilizing Ligonee Creek was not overly evident. The surface activity of feeding fish appeared within the creek. Avian species, mostly evident within the creek, were the mallard duck (Anasplatyrhynchos), along with the great egret, belted kingfisher, and passerine species (e.g., gray catbird and white-tkroated sparrow) which utilize the shoreline. 6. Macrobenthic Invertebrates The results of the macrobenthic sampling program indicate that there is little difference between the benthic community found at the head and mouth of the creek. This is, in part, due to the similarity in grain size between the two stations. Grain size at the mouth was 93 percent sand, and 80 percent sand at the head. In July, there was a total of three benthic organisms observed at the mouth of Ligonee Creek. These three organisms were all Annelids. In December, there was a total of 335 benthic organisms observed at the mouth of Ligonee Creek. Annelids comprised over 40% of these organisms, and Arthropods comprised approximately 30%. In July, there was a total of 53 benthic organisms observed at the head of Ligonee Creek. Annelids comprised over 75% of these organisms, and Arthropods comprised approximately 15%. In December, there was a total of211 benthic organisms observed at the head of Ligonee Creek. Annelids comprised over 90% of these organisms. - 25 - ~ At the head of the creek in July, Annelids (with a significant abundance of Haploscopoplos rubustus) were the dominant organism. In December at the head, the Annelids were again the dominant organism, with an abundance of Capitella capitata and Streblospio benedicti (to a lesser extent). At the mouth of the creek, Annelids were the dominant organism discovered in both December and July. In December, significant abundances of Capitella capitata and Streblospio benedicti were again observed. Mollusks were represented by a si~tmificant abundance of Hydrobia rninuta. The shallow water shellfish survey (April 1998) conducted by the Col-nell Cooperative Extension, had a sampling location in close proximity to EEA's benthic station at the mouth of the creek. The results of this survey indicated that a substantial population of hard clam (Mercenaria mercenaria) was present, with numbers of 8.67 clams/9.29 m2 found at this location. D. Alewife Creek Alewife Creek is located at the southern end of North Sea Harbor and is connected to Big Fish Pond to the south and is totally located within the Town of Southampton. Alewife Creek is one of the smallest tidal creeks surveyed, approximately six acres in size. The portion of the creek that was studied for this project is long, approximately 2,600 feet (north to south) and narrow (east to west), with an average width of approximately 100 feet. The shoreline of Alewife Creek is heavily developed with both residential housing, private power boats and docks and two large-scale public marinas. Small patches of intertidal and high marsh (mostly saltmarsh cordgrass and groundsel tree) are present along the east and west shores. The sediments associated with Alewife Creek are almost entirely comprised of fine grain silts with no sub- aquatic vegetation present. Salinifies varied greatly at Alewife Creek with an overall average of 20.7 ppt. Salinifies at the mouth were the highest, averaging 26.5 ppt and lowest at the head, averaging 14.9 ppt. A narrow six-inch layer of freshwater (0.4 ppt) could be found floating above higher salinity levels at low tide. Alewife Creek was surveyed f~om August 24, 1998 to August 25, 1998 for the hydrodynamic survey, on December 4, 1997 and July 6, 1998 for macrobenthic invertebrates, June 9, July 30 and September 21, 1998 for water quality analysis, April 24,1998 for bathymetry, and in July of 1998 for physical chemistry analysis. The following sections report on the results of each discipline. - 26 - 1. Water Quality Water quality at Alewife Creek has been identified as a problem by the NYSDEC, and the creek is closed to shellfishing on a year-round basis. Tidal flushing of the creek is poor, and the creek itself can actually be considered a pollution source. NYSDEC tests have shown high coliform counts, which may be due to freshwater input from Big Fresh Pond. The water quality analysis of Alewife Creek for this study indicated relatively high levels of nitrogen, total and fecal coliforms, and phosphorus. The physical chemistry field data analysis appears below: Date Location Depth Surface Bottom Surface Bottom (inches) Dissolved Dissolved Salinity Salinity Oxygen Oxygen (pprn) (ppm) (rog/I) (mg/I) 7/14/98 Mouth 120 8.43 7 25,1 26 7/14198 Head 24 7,97 6.5 18.3 24.2 Date Location Surface Bottom Surface Bottom pH Temperature Temperature Conductivity ~ Conductivity (C) (C) (ms) (ms) 7/14/98 Mouth 25.8 25.3 40.12 40.92 8.1 7/14/98 Head 25.2 25.3 34.6 37.84 6.9 2. Bathymetric Survey Alewife Creek is deepest at the mouth with a central channel running most of the creek. This channel appears to be maintained to permit the passage of vessels up and down the creek. The Department of Public Works has never dredged this creek. This channel has an average depth of approxlmately 5 feet. Only the upper 200 feet of the creek are not maintained, very shallow and mostly silted in. The depth of this portion of the creek are approximately 1 to 3 feet deep, with small depressions of up to 8 feet deep. 3. Hydrodynamic Survey The current meter was deployed in Alewife Creek, across the street from the intersection of North Sea Road and Conscience Point Road. Based upon the results of the hydrodynamic survey, there appears to be a consistent ebb/flood pattern. This is in pm based on the long narrow dimensions of the creek. The currents have an average velocity of 2.67 cm/second, with a - 27 - ' ~ ' ~nhximarn of 4.27 cra/sec and travel in an east northeast (66 degrees) direction. The'--" hydrodynamic survey ended six days before a fa'st quarter moon. 4. Land Use Alewife Creek is located in Southampton, approximately 3.5 miles north of the Village of Southampton. It is estimated to be 15 acres in surface area. Alewife Creek is a tributary of North Sea Harbor, a bay on the north shore of the south fork of Long Island that has a connection to Little Peconic Bay. North of the creek, on the northwest side of North Sea Harbor, is Conscience Point National Wildlife Refuge. An estimated 65 percent of the creek's narrow, ½ mile long water~ont is developed, mostly with single-family residences, docks, bulkheads, and two marinas. Single-family residences dot the eastern shore of North Sea Harbor. Towd Point Road runs along the northeast section of North Sea Harbor. A bridge on this road crosses over another tributary called Davis Creek. Wetland vegetation covers 95 percent of this creek. There is a bulkhead on the harbor side near the end of Towd Point Road. Conscience Point National Wildlife Refuge borders 25 percent of the western side of North Sea Harbor. Alewife Creek is one of the most highly utilized waterways surveyed during this study. Located on the creek are two marinas with more than one hundred powerboats and assorted recreational vessels. With the exception of a small portion of the head of Alewife Creek, the entire shoreline is bordered by residential homes (24 on the eastern shore, 7 on the western shore), bulkheaded or two large public marinas. 5. Wildlife The headwaters of Alewife Creek were noted to contain large schools of bait fish, in particular, Atlantic silversides, several killifish species, and juvenile bluefish during September and October. Numbers of bluefish did not appear as high in Alewife Creek as other creeks. Alewife Creek is noted for historically supporting a migratory run of Alewife herring (Alosa pseudoharengus), and anadromous species that would spawn in the waters of Big Fish Pond. Spawning typically occurs when the water temperature reaches 55 to 600 F, sometime during April or May of each year. Avian fauna observed utilizing the waters of Alewife Creek included the kingfisher, egrets, herons, and mallard ducks, in addition to the common tern (Sterna hirundo), herring gull (Larus argentatus) and double-crested cormorant (Phalocrocorax auritus). Although the amount of shoreline vegetation is extremely limited, species such as saltmarsh cordgrass, common reed, and the groundsel tree are present along with black locust -28 - ' ~ -(Robiniapseudo-acacia), black cherry (Prunus serotina), and common three-square(Scirpus pungens) present at the head of the creek. 6. Macrobenthic Invertebrates The results of the marcrobenthic sampling program revealed two distinctly different communities. Those present at the head of the creek reflected a community most typically associated with silty fine grain materials. Conditions at the head of the creek also were represented by extremely shallow water at low tide (0.5 fee0 and widely fluctuating salinities (0.4. ppt on the surface and 16.0 ppt on the bottom at low tide to 26.4 ppt on the surface and 27.6 ppt on the bottom at high tide). In July, there was a total of 259 benthic organisms observed at the mouth of Alewife Creek. Annelids comprised over 80% of these grabs. In December, there was a total of 229 benthic organisms observed at the mouth of Alewife Creek. Annelids comprised over 60% of these organisms, and Arthropods comprised approximately 35%. In July, no benthic organisms were observed at the head of Alewife Creek. In December, there was a total of 89 benthic organisms observed at the head of Alewife Creek. Annelids comprised over 60% of these organisms, and Mollusks comprised over 30%. The benthic comrmlnity found at the head of the creek was dominated by polychaete worms. Also observed was the Mollusk, Nassarius obsoletus. Conditions at the mouth of the creek were considerably more stable in terms of both depth and salixfity. The sediments contained a higher percentage of medium sands along with the silty fines. At the mouth of the creek in July, the Annelids were the dominant organism (with a large amount of Streblospio benedicti observed). To a lesser extent, Mollusks were observed (represented by Nassarius obsoletus). In December, Streblospio benedicti were again abundant, as was Cap#ella capitata, and the Arthropod I, eptocheirus plurnolosus. E. Meetinghouse Creek Meetinghouse Creek is the western-most creek surveyed, located in the northwest comer of Flanders Bay within the Town of Riverhead. Meetinghouse Creek is a medium sized creek of approximately 30+ acres, and is the most developed of all the tidal creeks surveyed. The Creek is approximately 3,400 feet long north to south and 375 feet wide east to west on average. The east side of the creek is the most heavily developed, while the west side still contains a significant amount of intertidal and high marsh. The species composition is similar to the other creeks surveyed with salt marsh cordgrass and groundsel tree. Salinities varied from the head of the creek with an overall salinity of 21.1 ppt. Salinities - 29 - ~at'the head averaged 18.3 ppt and 23.8 ppt at the mouth. The headwaters of Meetin-ghouse Creek; a formerly connected tidal wetlands, drain through an active Long Island duck farm. A noticeable freshwater layer was observed floating on top of the saltier water. Water depths throughout the creek are maintained at a uniform depth of 6 to 8 feet. Meetinghouse Creek has been cited by SCDHS as contributing a significant nutrient load to the Peconic Estuary system, and is under further investigation. Meetinghouse Creek was surveyed from August 17, 1998 to August 18, 1998 for the hydrodynamic study, on December 5, 1997 and July 6, 1998 for macrobenthic invertebrates, June 11, July 30, and September 21, 1998 for water quality analysis, April 21, 1998 for bathymetric data and in July of 1998 for physical chemistty analysis. The following sections report the results of each discipline. 1. Water Quality The NYSDEC reports that total coliform counts reached 2501 mpn/100 ml on August 12, 1994. Fecal coliforms reached 460 mpn/100mi on the same day. The water quality analysis of Meetinghouse Creek for this study indicate that these waters are the most nutrient rich of all the mpn/100mi on August 12, eport. Relatively extremely high levels of nitrogen, ammonia, phosphorus, and total chlorophyll-a were discovered. Total and fecal coliform levels were relatively average or slightly higher than the other creeks sampled in this study. The physical chemistry analysis indicated relatively high levels of dissolved oxygen, at the surface waters and relatively low levels of dissolved oxygen at the bottom waters. The physical chemislxy field data analysis appears below: Date Location Depth Surface Bottom Surface Bottom (inches) Dissolved Dissolved Salinity Salinity Oxygen Oxygen (ppm) (ppm) (mg/I) (rog/I) 7/16/98 Head 24 12.5 3.5 15 21.6 7/16/98 Mouth 108 13.9 4.1 20.8 23.8 Date Location Surface Bottom Surface Bottom pH Temperature Temperature Conductivity Conductivity (C) (C) (ms) (ms) 7/16198 Head 22.8 24 28.5 33.5 6.8 7/16/98 Mouth 25.9 24.9 33.5 36.9 8.6 - 30 - Bathyme~c Survey The depth of Meetinghouse Creek is maintained by regular dredging to provide access to the creek for recreational and commemial vessels. The Deparanent of Public Works last dredged this creek in the Spring of 1998. The average depth for the main channel is 8.5 feet. The very head of the creek in the vicinity of the macrobenthic station is only approximately two feet at mean low water. This station is north of the marinas and boat traffic. 3. Hydrodynamic Survey The current meter was deployed north of the end of Harbor Road (along Beach Ave.) Based upon the results of EEA's current meter deployment and hydrological studies conducted by the Suffolk County Depatlment of Health Services, it was apparent that Meetinghouse Creek is receiving fresh water influx from a large drainage area. This was confirmed by Iow salinity readings collected during various surveys. Given the larger size and narrow corridor associated with Meetinghouse Creek, the likelihood of a wind driven system is unlikely. This is evident by the data collected. It appears that, based on the data collected, regular tidal regime consists of two floods and two ebbs over a twenty-four hour period. The average velocity was recorded as 4.34 cm/sec, with a maxlrmun of 12.2 cra/sec. The average direction of the current was determined to be 90.8 degrees, east southeast. The hydrodynamic survey ended three days before a new moon. 4. Land Use Meetinghouse Creek is located in Riverhead. It's approximate 51- acre surface area makes it one of the largest of the ten creeks. Approximately 1.25 miles long, Meetinghouse Creek's banks are lined with single-family residences and docks, a marina, and a restaurant. Crescent Duck Farm (a.k.a. Corwin's Duck Farm) is on Edgar Avenue northwest of the creek; several commercial facilities, including two auto body shops, are within 1/8-1/4 mile of the creek. Meetinghouse Creek Park is located near the headwaters of the creek. Voss Docking and Storage facility is northeast of the head of the creek. The remainder of Edgar Avenue property between Hubbard Avenue and Main Road consists of houses, approximately 1/2-1 acre each. An elementary school is on the northwest comer of Main Avenue and Edgar Avenue. The LIRR train tracks are perpendicular to the creek. A sheet metal workshop is on Hubbard Avenue across from the tracks. Meetinghouse Creek Road hms along the east side of the creek. Larry's Lighthouse Marina and Meetinghouse Creek Inn Restaurant are on the creek side of this road. Tiffs road is lined with houses to the end, where the creek meets Flanders Bay. Indian Island County Park is southwest of the creek mouth, so there is no development in that area. The creek is approximately 30 percent vegetated with trees, reeds, and wetlands. Overlook Drive runs along the west side of the creek. This is a narrow dirt road, which has no sign and is approximately ¥2 mile long. It is more secluded than the roads on the creek's east side. There is swamp and -31 - - ~vooded land on the west side of this road for the northern half of its length, and fiou~'S' line the east siffe along the creek. The southern half has houses on both sides. Aquebogue Cemetery and woodlands are on Main Road near the creek's headwaters. Crystal Pine Estates is a new community being developed north of the creek. Swamps and vacant wooded land along Main Road engulf the head of the creek. The shoreline of Meetinghouse Creek is highly developed by two large marinas and numerous residential development with bulkheaded shore and private docks. In excess of 200 power boats were observed utilizing the waters of Meetinghouse Creek. The headwaters and associated drainage basins of Meetinghouse Creek are heavily utilized by agriculture. 5. Wildlife Although not readily visible, it must be assumed that large schools of bait fish are present in Meetinghouse Creek. This is based on the large schools of juvenile bluefish observed feeding in the creek during September and October. Also, based on anecdotal information, a harvestable number of oyster toadfish (Opsanus tau) exist within the creek. Large numbers of waterfowl were observed utilizing the creek during the various surveys. These would include mallard, black duck, buffiehead (Bucephala albeola), mute swan (Cygnus olor), as well as gulls and terns, such as the herring gull, greater black-backed (£arus raarinus), common tern and least tern (Sterna albifrons), belted kingfisher and numerous barn swallows (Hirundo rustica) and a small nesting colony of purple martins (Progne subis). Numerous hybrid duck (e.g., mallard, whitedomestic), were present in the creek at all observation periods. Passerine species appeared to be limited to those typically found in urban environments (e.g., house sparrow and starlings). 6. Macrobenthic Invertebrates The results of the macrobenthic sampling program revealed that both the benthic communities, those at the head and mouth, were extremely similar. The sediment grain size analysis indicated that both areas were similar, containing mostly a muddy fine sand substrate. In July, there was a total of 470 benthic organisms observed at the mouth of Meetinghouse Creek. Annelids comprised over 50% of these grabs, and Arthropods comprised over 40%. In December, there was a total of 1679 benthic organisms observed at the mouth of Meetinghouse Creek. Arthropods comprised almost 80% of these organisms, and Annelids comprised approximately 20%. In July, there was a total of 51 $ benthic organisms observed at the head of Meetinghouse - 32 - - ~feek. Arthropods comprised almost 75% of these grabs, and Aunelids comprised almost 25%. In December, there was a total of 148 benthic organisms observed at the head of Meetinghouse Creek. Aunelids comprised almost 80% of these organisms, and Arthropods comprised over 20%. At both locations, the most abundant organisms was the amphipod Ampelisca abdita. This made the arthropods the dominant group. The polychaete worm were the next most abundant group, with a large abundance ofMediomastus arnbieseta observed. F. West Creek West Creek is located on the south side of the north fork and drains into the Great Peconic Bay, and is solely located within the Town of Southold. West Creek is fairly small at approximately 55 acres and resembles a pond rather than a creek. The inlet connecting West Creek to Great Peconic Bay is long and narrow, approximately 1,200 feet by 150 feet. The entire shoreline is buffered by an intertidal marsh system. Along the east side, the marsh is mostly common reed which separates the creek and Grathwohl Road by approximately 50 feet. To the west, a salmaarsh cordgrass marsh separates the creek fxom the North Fork Country Club. The headwaters of the creek flow through an intertidal marsh dominated by the common reed. Salinities va~ very little within the creek. The average salinity at the head station was 26.1 ppt and 27.1 ppt at the mouth. No evidence of fxeshwater flow was observed within the creek. West Creek is extremely shallow with an average depth of 1-1.5 feet at MLW. West Creek was surveyed t~om August 10 to August 11, 1998 for the hydrodynamic study, and December 5, 1997 and July 15, 1998 for macrobenthic invertebrates, June 10, July 30, and September 21, 1998 for water quality analysis, April 20, 1998 for bathymetry, and in July of 1998 for physical chemistry analysis. The following sections report the results of each discipline. 1. Water Quality The waters of West Creek are open (certified) to shellfish harvesting. The NYSDEC have reported high levels of coliforms in these waters (total coliform levels of 2501 mpn/100 ml on October 22, 1996 and again on December 15, 1992, and fecal coliform levels of 120 on October 22, 1996).The water quality analysis of West Creek for tiffs study indicate relatively low levels of nilxogen, phosphorus, and ammonia. Total and fecal coliform levels of West Creek were relatively higher than the other creeks sampled in this study. The physical chemistry field data table appears below. - 33 - Date Location Depth Surface Bottom Surface Bottom-~l (inches) Dissolved Dissolved Salinity Salinity ~ Oxygen Oxygen (ppm) (ppm) (mg/1) (rog/I) 4~20~98 Flow 30 24.4 24.4 meter 5/15/98 Flow 48 24.9 25 meter 7/15/98 Mouth 72 7.6 7.5 25.9 25.9 Date Location Surface Bottom Surface Bottom pH Temperature Temperature ,;onductivityConductivity (C) (C) (ms) (ms) 4~20~98 Flow 12.4 12.4 38.42 38.41 8 meter 5/15/98 Flow 16.6 16.5 32.76 32.7 8.1 meter 7/15/98 Mouth 26.2 26.3 41.5 41.5 8.1 2. Bathymetric Survey These results indicate that West Creek is a uniformly shallow body of water. The average depth of the main creek is 1.0 to 1.5 feet at mean low tide. The channelized inlet leading to Great Peconic Bay has an average depth of approximately 1 foot. The SCDPW has dredged this creek in 1982, 1994, and 1996. 3. Hydrodynamic Survey The current meter was deployed on the north side of the New Suffolk Avenue Overpass, about 5-10 feet from the east bank. The results of the hydrodynamic survey conducted by EEA show that a clear ebb/flood current pattern exists at the mouth of West Creek where the meter was deployed. The average velocity of the current was 23.2 cm/sec, with a maximum velocity of 61.5 cna/sec. The average direction was 313 degrees, west northwest. Given the circular shape of the main body of the creek, it is likely that current patterns might not be as clearly defined and are probably wind drive. Currents would be expected to be weak. The hydrodynamic survey concluded four days prior to a 3rd quarter moon. - 34- 4. Land Use West Creek is located in Southold. It has approximately 153 acres of surface area, and is one mile long. Almost 85 percent of the creek's borders are vegetated with wetlands, common reed, and deciduous and evergreen urees. Other than the 2000 feet of golf course and less than 10 houses that are on the creek's edges, the land bordering this creek is undeveloped. Four houses are on a bulkhead with moorings at mouth of creek. North Fork Country Club is located on the west side of the creek. Grathwohl Road runs along the east side of the creek. No houses line the creek on this road, but houses are on the east side of Grathwohl. There are no paved boat launches. New Suffolk Avenue is perpendicular to the creek and has a bridge, approximately 200-300 feet from the creek mouth, that crosses over the creek. West Creek is buffered on all shores from direct contact, although this buffer is extremely narrow, (less than 50 feet in some locations). C-rathwohl Road to the east and New Suffolk Avenue to the south border the creek. Residential houses can be found to the east, southwest, and northwest, and a golf course (North Fork Country Club) to the west. Although a launch ramp was available, it does not appear that boat traffic was significant in the creek. One of the primary uses of the ramp would appear to be access to the waterfowl hunters whose blinds were observed on the creek. 5. Wildlife The majority of West Creek did not appear to support large numbers of finfish. This could be contributed to the very shallow depths and extreme temperatures encountered within the creek. Temperatures in excess of 31.6°C (89°F) were recorded on July 30, 1998. Numbers of bait fish and juvenile bluefish were observed at the mouth of the creek by the New Suffolk Avenue Bridge. Large numbers of avian species were noted to utilize the surrounding intertidal marsh and the open waters of the creek. This would include the American and snowy egret, great blue heron, herring gull, greater blackback gull, least and common tern, mallard and black duck and the red-winged blackbird (Agelaiusphoeniceus). It is extremely likely that West Creek is utilized by more water fowl, shorebird and passerine species than our observations indicated. The edge of the creek was also utilized by the ribbed mussel and fiddler crab which appeared to be numerous. - 35 - 6. Macrobenthic Invertebrates The results of the macrobenthic sampling program revealed two distinctly different benthic communities. The benthic community found at the mouth is one associated with a high energy system. This is confirmed by the grain size analysis which reports a dominance of gravels and coarse sand. The benthic community found at the head of the creek is that of a silty fine grain environment, also supported by the grain size analysis which reports 83% silt. In July, there was a total of 178 benthic organisms observed at the mouth of West Creek. Mollusks comprised over 60% of these grabs, and Aunelids comprised over 30%. In December, there was a total of 296 benthic organisms observed at the mouth of West Creek. Aunelids comprised almost 50% of these organisms, and Mollusks comprised nearly 30%. In July, there was a total of 136 benthic organisms observed at the head of West Creek. Mollusks comprised almost 75% of these grabs, and Annelids comprised approximately 25%. In December, there was a total of 67 benthic organisms observed at the head of West Creek. Mollusks comprised almost 80% of these organisms, and Annelids comprised almost 20%. The samples collected at the mouth in July were dominated with Mollusks (Nassarius obsoletus was the most dominant), and in December Annelids were dominate (oligochaetes, Nepthy incisa and Nucula proxima were each abundant). The samples collected at the head in both December and July were dominated by the Mollusks (Nassarius obsoletus was again the most dominant). G. Goose Creek Goose Creek is located along the south side of the North Fork and drains into Southold Bay. Goose Creek is entirely located in the Town of Southold and is one of the largest creeks surveyed, approximately 120 acres in size. Goose Creek is fairly long, approximately 4,350 feet east to west and approximately 1,250 feet wide north to south on average. Like many of the other creeks, it has a very narrow inlet connecting the creek to Southold Bay. In general, Goose Creek is highly variable in depth, sediment type, SAV and shoreline development. Goose Creek is fairly shallow with an average depth of 1 to 4 feet, but contains deep holes, channels, sand bars, and small islands. The sediment ranges from very silty fine grain at the head to coarse gravel at the mouth. Wigeon grass is present at the head, as well as an intertidal marsh complex. Salinities show very little variation between the head and mouth, averaging 27.8 ppt at the head and 28.1 ppt at the mouth. The Town of Southold has adopted Goose Creek and enlisted voluntary assistance with water quality monitoring of this creek. This was done as a pilot project within the Town. -36- - ' Goose Creek was surveyed fi:om April 13, 1998 to April 20, 1998 for the.hy~gdynamic study, o~n December 5, 1997, and July 15, 1998 for macrobenthic invertebrates, June .10, July 30th and September 21, 1998 for water quality analysis, April 20, 1998 for bathymela% and in July of 1998 for physical chemistry analysis. The following sections report the results of each discipline. 1. Water Quality Preliminary screening of the water quality analysis of Goose Creek did not indicate significantly elevated nutrient levels. The physical chemistry field data analysis appears in the table below: Date Location Depth Surface Bottom Surface Bottom (inches) Dissolved Dissolved Salinity Salinity Oxygen Oxygen (ppm) (ppm) (rog/I) (rog/I) 4/13/98 Flow meter 10,04 9,82 26,4 26.5 4/20/98 36 25.7 25.7 7/15/98 Head 24 6,6 6,6 26.7 26.8 7/15/98 Mouth 72 6.9 6.9 27.1 27.2 Date Location Surface Bottom Surface Bottom pH Temperature Temperature Conductivity Conductivity (C) (C) (ms) (ms) 4/13/98 Flow meter 10.1 10 29.55 29.64 8.2 4/20/98 11.3 11,4 40,3 40.33 8 7/15/98 Head 25.8 25.9 42.2 42.5 8 7/15/98 Mouth 24.1 23.9 41.4 41.3 8 2. Bathymetric Survey The depths associated with Goose Creek are extremely variable, but average out as shallow, with an average water depth of 1 to 4 feet at mean low water. The average tidal fluctuation in Goose Creek is approximately 2.3 feet as determined fi:om the Window '95 Tides and Current Program. An extensive sand bar/shoal occupies the east/central portion of the creek, along with two small islands. The deepest portion of the creek can be found at the mouth leading into Southold Bay. Goose Creek was last dredged in 1995. - 37 - 3. Hydrodyvamic Survey ~The current meter was deployed on the south side of the Bayview Rd. Overpass, about 5- 10 feet fi:om the western bank. The results of the hydrodynamic survey conducted by EEA show that a clear ebb/flood current pattern exists at the mouth of Goose Creek, where the meter was deployed. The average velocity of the current was 14.1 em/sec, with a maximum of 42.3 em/sec, the average direction was 76.4 degrees, east northeast. Given the circular shape of the main body of the creek, it is likely that current patterns might not be as clearly defmed, and are probably wind driven. Currents would be expected to be weak. There was a 3ra Quarter moon (on April 19) during the hydrodynamic study. 4. Land Use Goose Creek, located in Southold, is approximately 163 acres in surface area and 1.25 miles long. An estimated 65 percent of the creek's waterfront is developed with houses, docks, bulkheads and moorings; some powerboats are moored. The creek is approximately 35 percent vegetated with wetlands and deciduous trees. Goose Bay Estates is on Cedar Road, a dead end road with the creek at the end. There is a private beach for Goose Bay Estates residents only. Southold Yacht Club is at the mouth of the creek. A bridge on the east side of the creek, on North Bayview Road, runs over the creek close to its mouth. The creek opens into Southold Bay. North of the creek on Pine Neck Road, the land is wooded with trees and shrubs. The remainder of this road is lined with residences. Waterview Road, located on the south side of the creek, is lined with houses; the ones on the creek have docks. Williams Drive and Glenn Road, on the northwest side of the creek, are dead end at the creek. A cemetery is on Main Road northwest of the creek. The shoreline surrounding Goose Creek consists primarily of single unit residential developments. Most have a small finger pier on pilings; a few have a hardened shoreline consisting of buikheading and docking facilities. Nearly all the homes have a small power boat. A few jet skies were also present and some boats were moored in the bay. A small intertidal marsh surrounds the head of the bay station. 5. Wildlife The presence of large schools of bait fish, mostly Atlantic silversides and Atlantic menhaden, were evident during most of the site surveys. As would be expected, given the presence of bait fish, large schools of juvenile bluefish were also present during September and October. Given the larger size and somewhat deeper water, it is safe to assume many different finfish species (e.g., striped bass [Morone saxatilis], white perch [M. americana], summer flounder [Paralichthys dentatus], winter flounder [Pleuronectes americanus], etc.) are likely to utilize the creek. - 38 - - ' Avian species observed on or around the creek included the vadons species of-egrets, hemnsr ducks, and gulls mentioned at the other creeks. In addition, Canada goose (Branta canadensis), greater yellowlegs (Tringa raelanoleuca), osprey (Pandion haliaetus), common loon (Gayla imraer), and common grackle (Quiscalus quiscula) were also observed. Raccoons (Procyon lotor) were also determined to utilize the creek. 6. Macrobenthic Invertebrates The results of the macrobenthic sampling program revealed two distinctly different benthic communities. The benthic community found at the mouth is one associated with a high energy system. This is confn-med by the grain size analysis which reports a dominance of gravels and coarse sand (96% sand). The benthic community found at the head of the creek is that of a silty fine grain environment, also supported by the grain size analysis which reports 75% silt. In July, there was a total of 202 benthic organisms observed at the mouth of Goose Creek..~nnelids comprised almost 90% of these grabs. In December, there was a total of 43 benthic organisms observed at the mouth of Goose Creek. Aschelminthes comprised over 65% of these organisms, and Arthropods comprised over 15%. In July, there was a total of 371 benthic organisms observed at the head of Goose Creek. Arth. ropods comprised almost 40% of these grabs, and Mollusca comprised approximately 30%. In December, there was a total of 32 benthic organisms observed at the head of Goose Creek. Annelids and Aschelminthes each comprised approximately 50%. At the head of Goose Creek in July, the benthic community was very diverse; Tellina agilis and.4mpelisca abdita were two dominant organisms. In December at the head of the creek, there was a diverse Annelid community and also an abundance of Aschelminthes. At the mouth of the creek in July, the Annelids, particularly Capitella capitata were the dominant organism. The mouth in December was dominated by Aschelminthes. H. Bass Creek Bass Creek is located on the southeast peninsula of Shelter Island within the Mashomack Preserve ri'he Nature Conservancy). The creek falls within the Town of Shelter Island. Bass Creek is relatively small (approximately 14 acres) and is connected to Shelter Island Sound by a narrow (approximately 25 feet) inlet which is approximately 200 feet long. Swift currents are encountered in the inlet. Bass Creek is relatively more pond-like and irregularly shaped, and is one of the shallowest areas surveyed in this study, with an average depth of 0.2 to 1.0 feet at MLW. The upper section of Bass Creek has a nearly complete coverage of widgeon grass on the bottom, while the lower section and inlet are near void of SAV. Salinities were nearly identical at the head and mouth. Average salinity at the mouth was 27.5 ppt and 27.6 ppt at the head. - 39- ' ' - Bass Creek was surrounded by an intertidal marsh dominated by saltmarsh cordgrass and high m~u'sh which was represented by groundsel tree, marsh elder (IYafrutescens), glasswort (Salicornia sp.) and salt grass (Distichlis spicata), blending into an uplands of northern bayberry (Myricapensylvanica) and switchgrass ((Panicum virgaturn). The salt marsh is surrounded by a deciduous forest dominated by black oak (Quercus velutina). Bass Creek was surveyed from July 27, 1998 to July 28, 1998 for the hydrological survey, on December 15, 1997 and July 12, 1998 for macrobenthic invertebrates, June 10, August 3, and September 22, 1998 for water quality analysis, July 28, 1998 for bathymetry, and in July of 1998 for physical chemislzy analysis. The following sections report the results of each discipline. 1. Water Quality The NYSDEC found the water quality acceptable at Bass Creek. However, since Bass Creek is known to harbor large numbers of birds, the water quality must be carefully monitored to detect impacts the waterfowl may have on the water quality. Preliminary screening of the water quality analysis of Bass Creek for this study did not indicate significantly elevated nutrient levels. The headwaters of Bass Creek indicate high levels of total suspended solids (480 mg/l) for one sample taken in July of 1998. This may be a laboratory anomaly, as the head waters at Bass Creek appeared relatively clear, and other TSS levels were relatively average for this same sampling station during other sampling periods. Dissolved oxygen levels were observed to be lower relative to the other creeks studied. The physical chemist~ field data table appears below: Date Location Depth Surface Bottom Surface Bottom (inches) Dissolved Dissolved Salinity Salinity Oxygen Oxygen (ppm) (ppm) (mg/I) (rog/I) 7/28/98 Flow meter 4.6 4,77 27.7 27,8 Date Location Surface Bottom Surface Bottom pH Temperature Temperature Conductivity Conductivity (C) (C) (ms) (ms) 7/28/98 Flow meter 23.6 23.6 43.01 43.1 7.8 - 40 - - · 2. Bathymetric Survey In general, Bass Creek is an extremely shallow body of water with an average depth of 0.2 to 1.0 feet at mean low water. The two most notable exceptions are a deep hole centrally located within the narrow corridor that connects the two main bodies of the creek and the channel that has been cut through the inlet and enters the Shelter Island Sound. The water in these two areas average approximately 2.2 feet and 1-foot deep at IVILW, respectively. The channel by the inlet has been obviously cut by the swift currents that pass through the inlet. The other deep hole is unexplained. 3. Hydrodynamic Survey The current meter was deployed at the mouth of the creek inlet, south of the wood bridge. The results of the hydrodynamic survey conducted by EEA show that a clear ebb/flood current pattern exists at the mouth of Bass Creek, where the meter was deployed. The average velocity of Bass Creek was 22.2 cra/sec, with a maximum of 51.9 cna/sec. The average direction was 123.8 degrees, east south-east. Given the circular and somewhat irregular shape of the main body of the creek, it is likely that current patterns might not be as clearly defined, and are probably wind driven. Currents would be expected to be weak. The Department of Public Works (DPW) has never dredged this creek. The hydrodynamic survey concluded three days prior to a 1a quarter moon. 4. Land Use Bass Creek is located on Shelter Island. This creek is approximately 3/5 mile long, with a surface area estimated at 61 acres. Bass Creek is located in Mashomack Preserve, owned by the Nature Conservancy; therefore, no development exists on the creeks borders. Prior to preservation, the property was the estate of a private residence and was excluded from public usage. With the exception of whatever may come in on the flood tide fxom Shelter Island Sound, the waters of Bass Creek appear to be as pristine as possible. 5. Wildlife Bass Creek, like all the other creeks surveyed, contained a population of bait fish, mostly Atlantic silversides, which attract large schools ofjuvehile bluefish in September and October. At Bass Creek, the presence of bait fish and feeding activity associated with the bluefish appeared to be restricted to the inlet area, at least during our surveys. Large adult blue crabs (Callinectes sapidus) were observed in the lower portion of the creek. Avian species observed in and around Bass Creek were a mixture of passerine and -41 - - ~.qimtic species. Common species included the greater black-backed gull, herring gull; greater yellowlegs, song sparrow (Melospiza melodia), rufus-sided towhee (Pipilo erythrophthalrnus), and barn swallow. Additional wildlife observed included the raccoon, white-tailed deer ( Odocoileus virginianus), and fowler's toad (Bufo woodhousii fowleri). 6. Macrobenthic Invertebrates The results of the macrobenthic sampling program revealed two distinctly different benthic communities. The benthic community found at the mouth is one associated with a high energy system. This is confirmed by the grain size analysis which reports a dominance of gravels and coarse sand, while the benthic community found at the head of the creek is that of a silty fine grain environment, also supported by the grain size analysis, which reports 77% silt. In July, there was a total of 305 benthic organisms observed at the mouth of Bass Creek. Annelids comprised almost 50% of these organisms, and Mollusks comprised approximately 40%. The dominant Mollusk at the mouth of Bass Creek in July was Hydrobia rninuta, and the dominant Aunelids were Oligochaetes and Haploscopoplos rubustus. In December, there was a total of 163 benthic organisms observed at the mouth of Bass Creek. Arthropods comprised over 50% of these organisms, and Aschelminthes comprised approximately 25%. The Arthropod Caprellidae was the most dominant at the mouth in December. In July, there was a total of 846 benthic organisms observed at the head of Bass Creek. Aunelids comprised almost 65% of these organisms, and Aschelminthes comprised approximately 35%. The Annelid Capitella capitata was discovered in a large abundance (over 500 organisms) at the head of the creek in July, and almost 300 Aschelminthes were discovered here also; In December, there was a total of 11 benthic organisms observed at the head of Bass Creek. Arthropods comprised over 35% of these organisms, Aschelminthes and Annelids each comprised approximately 25%. I. West Neck Creek West Neck Creek is located in the southwest quadrant of Shelter Island. West Neck Creek is fairly large, approximately 100 acres in size. The creek is nearly 7,000 feet north to south and has an average width of 625 feet east to west and is located completely within the Town of Shelter Island. The creek is fed by West Neck Bay to the north and drains into West Neck Harbor to the south. It is heavily utilized by recreational boaters. The sediments associated with West Neck Creek consisted of muddy fine sands throughout the system. No sub-aquatic vegetation was observed during the study period. Salinifies averaged only slightly higher at the mouth of the creek than at the head. The salinity at the mouth averaged 27.8 ppt and 26.9 ppt at the head. Bottom salinities were only slightly higher than the surface. - 42 - - - . The shoreline of West Neck Creek consists predominantly of residential.~w_e~!~ngs. In many cases, development extends to the water's edge. Most properties have small do. cks and piers f& boats; shores are bulkheaded or stabilized in some fashion to prevent erosion. Narrow strips of intertidal marsh and high marsh can also be found between areas of development. Steep sloping shores prevent the spread of these marshes. The undeveloped upland portions of the shore are predominantly a mixed deciduous forest. West Neck Creek was surveyed fi.om to August 3, 1998 to August 4, 1998 for the hydrodynamic survey, on December 15, 1997 and July 12, 1998 for macrobenthic invertebrates, June 11, August 3, and September 22, 1998 for water quality analysis, April 22, 1998 for bathymet~y, and in July of 1998 for physical chemistry analysis. The following sections report the results of each discipline. 1. WaterQuality The water quality of West Neck Creek is influenced by nutrient flow fi.om the groundwater. This nutrient flow is most likely due to the presence of a capped landfill and an area that was once a poultry farm in close proximity to the creek. Though neither area is still being utilized as a landfill or poultt3, farm, the nutrient flow in the groundwater could be a concern for the next 20 to 30 years. The water quality data analysis indicate slightly higher nutrient levels than the other creeks studied, and both the waters at the head and mouth of the creek indicated extremely high levels of total coliform, relative to the other creeks studied. In June through late July, a short, but relatively intensive brown fide (Aureococcns anophagefferens) bloom occttredin West Neck Bay, which is fed by West Neck Creek. This bloom peaked at approximately 600,000 cells/per milliliter. The rest of the tidal creeks studied were relatively flee from brown tide blooms during this study, according to New York Sea Grant's "Brown Tide Research Initiative". The physical chemistu field data table appears below: Date Location Depth Secchi Surface Bottom Surface Bottom (inches) (feet) Dissolved Dissolved Salinity (ppm)Salinity Oxygen Oxygen (ppm) (rog/I) (mg/I) 8/3/98 Flow meter 30 7.82 6.81 27,9 27.8 8/4/98 Flow meter 30 6.15 7.43 27.7 27.8 8/10/98 Flow meter 30 5.63 5.47 28 27.9 - 43 - Date Location Surface Bottom Surface Bottom ~._H.. Temperature Temperature ConductivityConductivit~ ~ (C) (C) (ms) (ms) 8~3~98 Flow meter 27.3 26.4 45.36 44.5 8.2 8/4/98 Flow meter 27.1 26.4 44.82 44.39 8 8/10/98 Flow meter 26 26 44.19 44.18 8 2. Bathymetric Survey West Neck Creek is uniformly deep throughout with an average depth of approximately 8 feet at MLW. The depth of West Neck Creek is maintained through periodic dredging to permit boat access. The DPW last dredged this creek in the fall of 1998. 3. Hydrodynamic Survey The current meter was deployed at the end of Montclair Ave, at the mouth of West Neck Creek. The results of the hydrodynamic survey conducted by EEA show that a clear ebb/flood current pattern exists at the mouth of West Creek where the meter was deployed. The average velocity of the current was 3.67 em/sec, with a maximum of 7.4 cm/sec. The average direction was 305.5 degrees, west north-west. Given the circular shape of the main body of the creek, it is likely that current patterns might not be as clearly defined, an'd are probably wind driven. Currents would expect to be weak. The hydrodynamic study concluded four days prior to a full moon. 4. Land Use West Neck Creek, approximately 183 acres in surface area, is located on Shelter Island. This is one of the largest creeks, at an estimated 1 1/8 miles in length. The waterfront is dotted with single-family residences with docks-some have powerboats. Undeveloped land, making-up approximately 40 percent of the creek's borders, consists of wetlands, open space, and vegetation. Island Boat Yard and Marina are east of the creek on Menantic Road. A paved boat launch is at end of Simpson Road. The end of Montclair Road has three docks and 25-30 slips. This is a low density residential area. The end of Daniel Road meets the creek, where there are approximately 10 slips, a dock across the creek has a power boat, three more are anchored in the water, along with one sailboat and one rowboat. Silver Beach Residential Community is on Bayshore Drive. A boat launch is at the end of this road. The primary use of the land surrounding West Neck Creek is residential housing, - 44 - ' followed closely by recreational boating. Not all of the houses along the creek are connected to the island sewer system. Many still have septic systems that have potential to leach into the creek. The creek also received stormwater nmoff from the many roads that abut the creek. 5. Wildlife The greater average depth and size did not permit the observation of bait fish or predatory species as in the smaller and shallower creeks. It can be safety assumed that the previously mentioned species (i.e., Atlantic silversides, killifish, bluefish, Atlantic menhaden, and winter flounder are likely to utilize the creek. Additionally, fish species likely to be found in West Neck Creek would include the striped bass, weakfish (Cynoscion regalis), soup (Stenotornus chrysops), bay anchovies (Anchoa raitchilli), and several herring (Alosa spp.) species. Similarly, the avian species were represented by most of the water fowl and wading bird species (i.e., duck, heron and egrets) previously discussed. It is extremely likely that other waterfowl species, such as lesser and greater scup (Aythya affinis and A. rnarila), common goldeneye (Bucephala clangula), red-breasted merganser (Mergus servator), and hooded merganser (Lophodytes cucullatus) are likely to utilize the creek. It should also be noted that two large birds of prey were seen on the creek, the osprey (Pandion haliaetus) and the md-tailed hawk (Buteo jaraaicensis). 6. Macrobenthic Invertebrates The results of the macrobenthic sampling program revealed that both the benthic communities, those at the head and mouth were extremely similar. The sediment grain size analysis indicated that both areas were similar, containing mostly a muddy fine sand substrate. In July, there was a total of 627 benthic orgaulsms observed at the mouth of West Neck Creek. Annelids comprised over 40% of these organisms, and Aschelminthes comprised over 30%. Of the Annelids, oligochaetas were the most abundant. In December, there was a total of 2382 benthic organisms observed at the mouth of West Neck Creek. Arthropods comprised over 75% of these organisms, and Annelids comprised approximately 25%. The Annelids were dominated by Capitella capitata, while the Arthropods were dominated by a very large abundance ofArnpelisca abdita (over 1700 organisms). The Annelids were dominated by class oligochaetes, with almost 250 organisms observed. In July, there was a total of 1080 benthic organisms observed at the head of West Neck Creek. Arthropods comprised almost 80% of these organisms, and Annelids comprised approximately 15%. In December, there was a total of 1341 benthic organisms observed at the head of West Neck Creek. Arthropods comprised over 65% of these organisms, Annelids - 45 - - ~omprised approximately 25%. In December at the head of the creek, the Arthropods-.were represeIlted by over 600.4m!aeli$ca abdita. There was also a significant abundance of Paraphoxus epistomu$ and Corophium sp. J. Little Bay Little Bay is located at the extreme eastern end of the North Fork at Orient Point, within the Town of Southold, bordered to the south by Orient Beach State Park and open undeveloped land to the north, and directly connected to Long Beach Bay which empties into Orient Harbor and ultimately into Gardiners Bay. Little Bay is approximately 5,625 feet long (east to west) and averages 625 feet wide (north to south) for a total of approximately 80 acres in size. The shoreline of Little Bay is bordered by aa expansive intertidal marsh to the north and a barrier beach-size back dune community to the south. Some development exists along the small man-made eharmels in the northeast corner. The sediment associated with Little Bay varies greatly between the mouth and the head. Grain size at the mouth is medium sand with gravel and pebbles mixed in, while the head consists mostly of fine silty/grain material. Sallnities showed little difference between the mouth and the head. Average salinity at the mouth was 28.5 ppt and 27.6 ppt at the head. No evidence of freshwater influx was evident. Little Bay was surveyed from March 27, 1998 to April 2, 1998 for the hydrodynamic study, on December 15, 1997 and July 12, 1998 for macrobenthic invertebrates, June 10, August 3, and September 22, 1998 for water quality analysis, April 21, 1998 for bathymet~y, and in July of 1998 for physical chemistry analysis. The following sections report the results of each discipline. 1. Water Quality Preliminary screening of the water quality of Little Bay creek did not indicate significantly elevated nutrient levels, and average to low chlorophyll-a, TOC, and coliform levels. The physical chemistxy field data analysis table appears below: Date Location Depth Surface Bottom Surface Bottom (inches) Dissolved Dissolved Salinity Salinity Oxygen Oxygen (ppm) (ppm) (mg/I) (rog/t) 4~3~98 Flow meter 22 10.4 10.1 26.2 26.5 - 46 - - Date Location Depth Surface Bottom Surface Bottom (inches) Dissolved Dissolved Salinity Salinity Oxygen Oxygen (pprn) (ppm) (mg/I) (m~l/I) 4/13/98 Flow meter 24 9.27 9.02 25.9 26 7/12/98 Head 30 6 4.2 26.7 27 7/12/98 Mouth 60 7.9 7.1 27.2 27.2 Date Location Surface Bottom Surface Bottom pH Temperature Temperature Conductivity Conductivity (c) (c) (ms) (ms) 4~3~98 Flow meter 12.7 12.3 31.31 31.18 8 4/13/98 Flow meter 9.7 9.6 40.8 40.8 8.1 7/12/98 Head 27.5 27.2 43.8 43.3 7.5 7/12/98 Mouth 28.4 26.2 45.1 43.8 7.9 2. Bathyme~ic Survey The results of the bathymetric survey are presented on Figure 3-10. Little Bay is uniformly deep throughout the system with an average depth of approximately 6 feet at MLW. The DPW has never dredged this tributary. 3. Hydrodynamic Survey The current meter was deployed at the mouth of Little Bay, at the eastern-most part of Orient Beach. The results of the hydrodynamic survey conducted by EEA show that a clear ebb/flood current pattern exists at the mouth of Little Bay Tributary where the meter was deployed. The average velocity of the current was 19.77 cm/sec, with a maximum of 50.19 em/sec. The average direction was 179 degrees, south south-east. The hydrodynamic survey began on a new moon and concluded 1 day prior to a 1~ quarter moon. 4. Land Use Little Bay Tributary, located in Orient Point, is approximately 1.25 miles long and 184 acres in surface area. A restaurant, marina and the Orient Point ferry are the commercial developments in the area. Almost 95 percent of the land bordering the creek is undeveloped. - 47 - Wetlands and woody vegetation engulf the edges. Little Bay is nestled between'opela-space, salt marshos, and Orient Beach State Park. The park office, a playground, and rest facility with a hard top parking lot, are the only developments in the Park. No developments are visible along creek. A few farms are northwest of the creek. Orient By The Sea is a low density residential community north of the creek on Route 25. A cemetery is located on Rt 25 approximately 1/8 mile fi:om the park's entrance. Cedar Birch Lane, an unpaved mad approximately ~ mile long, borders the bay with approximately 10 houses. Narrow River Road, an estimated 1.75 miles fi:om Little Bay, hms parallel to Hallocks Bay; this and Little Bay flow into Long Beach Bay. Narrow River Road has a town ramp with 27 slips and a marina with approximately 50 berths/slips. A few small residential dwellings are located in the northeast quadrant of the creek along with what appeared to be man-made channels. This was based upon the dredge materials along the banks. These homes support a limited number of power boats along with small piers and dock systems. 5. Wildlife No direct evidence of bait fish or predatory fish was noted during the~ field surveys. This can possibly be attributed to the time of day, stage of tide or larger size of the creek. It is anticipated that most of the species previously discussed (i.e., Atlantic silversides, killifish, sand lance, bluefish, striped bass, weakfish, summer and winter flounder) along with many other estuarine species, are likely to be found in the creek. Avian species were abundant during each survey period. All of the previously discussed waterfowl and wading bird species were present. Additionally, several pairs of osprey were observed nesting on platforms along the creek. Several pair of piping plovers (Charadrius melodus) were observed on the adjacent beach along Gardiners Bay. Additional passerine species, in particular various wood warbler (family Parulidae) were observed in the autumn olives (Elaeagnus umbellata) along the north shore. This occurred during the fall migration in September. During the September 22, 1998 water quality survey, numerous northern diamondback terrapin (Malaclemys terrapin) were observed in Little Bay. A single red fox (Vulpesfulva) was sighted on the beach during the spring 1998 hydrological survey. 6. Macrobenthic Invertebrates The results of the macrobenthic sampling program revealed that both the benthic communities, those at the head and mouth were extremely similar. The sediment grain size analysis indicated that both areas were similar, containing mostly a muddy fine sand substrate. In July, there was a total of 402 benthic organisms observed at the mouth of Little Bay -48 - '~butary. Annelids comprised over 65% of these organisms, and Aschelminthes comprised over 20%. ~The Annelids were dominated by Syllis sp., Scolecolepides viridis, and Streblospio benedicti in relatively equal abundances (approximately 45 organisms were collected from each of these species). In December, there was a total of 210 benthic organisms observed at the mouth of Little Bay tributary. Annelids comprised almost 90% of these organisms. These Annelids were dominated by class Oligochaetes, with over 120 organisms collected. In July, there was a total of 2 benthic organisms observed at the head of Little Bay tributary. There was one Aschelminthe and one Annelid observed. In December, there was a total of 24 benthic organisms observed at the head of Little Bay tributary. Arthropods comprised almost 65% of these organisms, Annelids comprised approximately 25%. VH. ANALYSIS AND RECOMMENDATIONS A. Fresh Pond The results of the various field programs clearly indicate that, as expected, Fresh Pond functions as a typical coastal estuafine tidal pond. The pond itself is surrounded by a good buffer of upland forest and fringed by a well developed intertidal and high marsh ecosystem. Abundances and types of macrobenthic organisms, although somewhat lower in density than originally anticipated, do not indicate a significant problem. The mouth of Fresh Pond is clearly a high energy environment, swept on a regular basis by swift currents during the tidal exchange. The soft fine grain sediment found at the head of the pond would be expected to support a sizable benthic community. The fact that it does not, may not reflect any anthropogenic effect; benthos may be controlled more by the dense growth of widgeon grass which may sufficiently shade the bottom, limiting faunal development. A similar situation was also observed occurring in the Bass Creek system found in the Mashomack Preserve on Shelter Island. Both creeks/ponds are extremely similar in size and shape; both isolated from development; and both dense with widgeon grass and Iow benthic diversity and abundances at the head. It is believed that the dense growths of widgeon grass is not a result of nutrient loading and is a natural phenomenon that is controlling the benthic community. Therefore, it is recommended by EEA that Fresh Pond should not require additional survey work, unless the surrounding environment is altered significantly. B. Northwest Creek The benthic communities associated with the head and mouth of Northwest Creek are distinctly different. This is directly attributed to sediment types, silts at the head, and sand at the mouth. The benthic community present at the head is extremely well developed, and comprised of numerous species, some of which are large and considered to be long lived, e.g. sandworms (Neanthes succinea). The sand worms are replaced by the Orbinnid worm (Haploscoloplos rubustus) at the head of the creek. The species difference is more a function of grain size and - 49 - - -possible salinity than anything else. Northwest Creek does have potential to be impacted given the presence of residential dwellings, high coliform levels reported by NYSDEC, bnikheading, moored vessels, and the adjacent Barcelona Neck Golf course. The surrounding salt marsh and forest habitat may provide an adequate buffer against runoff from all directions. The total lack of eelgrass in Northwest Creek is still unexplained, given the historical evidence that the creek was nearly completely covered by eelgrass at one time. The change in the position of the inlet may have a strong bearing on the flushing and circulation patterns in the creek. The bathymetric survey clearly shows a very shallow system. It is unclear if this sedimentation is the result of shifted circulation patterns or natural, or if this sedimentation has covered existing eelgrass beds preventing them from redeveloping. In any event, the present benthic community is clearly well developed and strongly suggests a system which is not impacted. Further surrounding land use changes, if any, may require a re-evalnation of the benthos. C. Ligonee Creek Based on the study findings, Ligonee Creek is considered to be moderately disturbed (the creek has been altered from its original shape). Numerous residential dwellings are present along the creek's banks. In many cases, the native vegetation has been cleared, and a small dock and boat are in its place. Although some intertidal salt marsh does exit containing salt marsh cordgrass, the dominant vegetation is the common reed. The banks of the creek have become straight and the comers sharp, apparently the result of past dredging and widening. The head of the creek is a dead-end. The area in which the head water tributmy would have originated from is a developed lot with a residential home. Additionally, Ligonee Creek is part of the Sag Harbor watershed. This area has been identified by the Suffolk County Depa~h,ent of Health Sendces as having above average nitrogen levels at their sampling station located nearby. A significant potential contributor of this nitrogen load has been the Sag Harbor Sewage TreaUnant Plant At both the head and mouth of the creek, the benthic community is dominated by the polychaete worms Streblospio benedicti, £olydora ligni, Haploscoloplus rubustus, and the arnphipod.dmpelisca abdita. The worms identified were dominant during both sampling events, while the arnphipod represented only 1.5 percent of the catch during December and escalated to 30 percent in the winter. The polychaetes that dominated the Ligonee Creek samples are predominantly sedentary species that thrive in nutrient-rich organic sediments. Additionally, they can be considered pioneer species, exploiting under-utilized habitat and reproducing in great numbers. All of the dominant species present are the same as those that dominate highly eutrophic systems, such as - 50- - jamaica Bay, New York, and the Hudson and East Rivers of New York Harbor.- Ligonee Creek appears to be a stagnating system with a poor flushing rate and acting as a nutrient sink. The high densities of the species discussed indicate that the creek is receiving high nutrient levels. A positive aspect of this is that organisms present have been documented as providing a substantial food source for many finfish species, in particular the young-of-year winter flounder. D. Alewife Creek As with the previously discussed Ligonee Cree, Alewife Creek represents a tidal system with a well developed shoreline. At least 50 percent of the western shoreline is occupied by a commercial marina providing slips for numerous power and sail boats. The remaining shoreline, with the exception of the head which is extremely shallow and not navigable, is occupied by residential homes, bulkhead and private docks. Some intertidal vegetation was present, but was almost completely dominated by the common reed, clearly a sign of nutrient loading. Both the head and mouth are predominantly sand, with a slight increase of silts at the head. The benthic community structure is similar at both locations. Polychaetes dominate the benthic community in both abundance and diversity. Species present are similar to those in Ligonee Creek (Streblospio benedicti, Polydora ligne, Haploscoloplus robustus, Capitella capitata, and Tharyx occutus). All of these are considered sedentarypolychaetes. The arnphipodArnpelisca abdita is present, but in low numbers. The arnphipod Leptocheirus plurnolosus is present in extremely high densities, approximately 20,803/m2 or 83 pement of all the organisms collected. The change betweenArapelisca and Leptocheirus is most likely a function of grain size preference. Clearly, the presence of large numbers of Leptocheirus indicate a species exploiting available habitat to its fullest. An adequate food source and nutrient rich sediments must be present to support such high densities. The benthic community structure of Alewife Creek is similar to Ligonee Creek. In both cases, the species present are short-lived, highly prolific species, capable of colonizing available habitat. All of the species present have been identified occurring in degraded habitat found in New York Harbor. The dredging of the mouth of Alewife Creek, adjacent to the marina, most likely disrupts the establishment of a well developed benthic community at that location, but sufficient nutrient must also be present to support the encountered densities of organisms. Alewife Creek is at least impacted directly and indirectly by the well developed shoreline facilities and is receiving adequate nutrients to support the benthic community. -51 - - - E. Meetinghouse Creek ~ By all accounts, Meetinghouse Creek receives the highest loading of nitrogen of all the tidal creeks surveyed, as reported by the Suffolk County Department of Health Services. This is not unexpected, given the upstream location of the Convin Duck Farm. The creek additionally supports the largest commercial marina associated with the tidal creek survey. The remainder of the creek on the eastern shore is mostly residential dwellings, bulldaeaded, with dock and private vessels. The western shoreline has some development, but is mostly intertidal marsh dominated by saltmarsh cordgrass. No rooted SAV was observed. However, there was an abundance of the macroalgae Ulva lactuca (sea lettuce) The benthic community found in the creek is one that is anticipated to occur in a nutrient rich, muddy-sand environment. The benthic community associated with Meetinghouse Creek is dominated by the Amphipod Arnpelisca abdita (73 and 57 percent of all organisms during the winter and summer sampling season, respectively). The remainder of the dominant organisms consisted of sedentary polychaetes (i.e., Streblospio benedicti, Mediomastus ambiseta, and Polydora lignO. As previously discussed, these organisms are all typically associated with nutrient rich, organic sediment, usually classified as impacted. This is not unexpected, given the previous history of the creek and the known nulrient loadings of the creek. The large numbers of Amphipods (up to 36,000/m2) will provide an excellent food source for juvenile flnfish species, in particular, young-of-year winter flounder which have been known to selectively feed on.drnpelisca abdita. Therefore, the benthic sampling program only confirms the water quality data identifying the creek as nu~ient rich and correlates with the existing biota. F. West Creek West Creek had been chcsen for study based on the variety of potential impacted sources located nearby (a large golf course, to the west and northwest, a farm and orchard to the north [upgradient], and a road with residential development to the east). All have potential to increase the nutrient load of the creek. With the exception of the stormwater runoff from the roadway, the creek is buffered by sallrnarsh on three sides. Most of the saltmarsh is typical intertidal marsh, dominated by saltmarsh cordgrass. The wetland to the north was dominated by common reed. A review of the existing water quality data from the Suffolk County Department of Health services and the NYSDEC Shellfish Bureau did not indicate nutrient loading. The creek is certified as open to shellfishing by NYSDEC. Although the benthic communities are extremely different at the head and mouth, it would appear that this is purely a function of grain size (the mouth is sandy and silty). The benthic organisms present represent a stable, well developed community. The organisms are best represented by the mud dog whelk (Nassarius obsoletus), the common slipper - 52 - - ~hell (Crepidulafornicata), and the dwarftellina (Tellina agilis). All are mollusca species tyPic~ly not found in impacted environments. The remaining abundant organisms include the worms: Nephtys incisa, Tharxy accitus, and Scolecolepides viridis. The dominant arthropod was the amphipod Leptocherirusplumolosus. Based on this benthic community, there does not appear to be any significant ecological stresses on the creek. It would also appear that the wetland buffer is sufficiently large enough to remove the anticipated nutrients coming from the golf course and farmland, and that the stormwater runoff is relatively free from nutrients. G. Goose Creek Goose Creek represents one of the largest creeks surveyed during the tidal creek program. The dominant land use surrounding the creek was residential homes, many of which had finger piers, docks and boats, and a few bulkheads. The creek was extremely shallow, almost non- navigable at low tide, with the exception of a narrow channel along the south side. Some intertidal marsh is present and contains patches dominated by sallmarsh cordgrass and patches dominated by common reed. The result of EEA's water quality analysis, Suffolk County Water Survey, or NYSDEC indicated that the creek was overloaded by nutrients. The benthic community present differs between the head and mouth, but this can be explained by the grain size differences (96 pement sand at the mouth and 75 pement silts at the head). The species composition at both locations more closely resembles a stressed system. The samples collected at the head during July were dominated by Ampelisca abdita, 36 pement, and the clam Tellina agilis, 23 pement, followed by the sedentaxy worms, Mediomastus arnbiseta and Polydora ligni. The mouth was similar, dominated by Oligochaete worm (43 pement) along with the polychaete worms (Mediornastus arnbiesta and Capitella capitata. The December samples were dominated by nemotod worms and the spionid worm Streblospio benedicti. In both cases, abundance was relatively low, with December significantly lower than July. The benthic community appears to be in transition, between a well developed one, indicative by the high number of Tellina agilis and one dominated by stress-related species (e.g., Mediomastus and Capitella). The low density numbers would appear to indicate that the nutrient load is sufficiently low to limit the abundance of the organisms present. Continued monitoring of this creek would be required to determine the direction that Goose Creek is heading. H. Bass Creek Bass Creek is the most isolated creek from human activities of all the tidal creeks surveyed. The creek is located within the Mashomack Preserve on Shelter Island. The pond is fringed with varying amounts of intertidal marsh with an adjacent mature oak forest. The upper sections of Bass Creek support a dense growth of widgeon grass. There appears to be no evidence of dredging, and the mouth appears to be scoured open by swift currents that pass - 53 - -through the narrow inlet. ~ Differences in the benthic community between the head and the mouth can be explained in part by the sediment types. The head of creek consisted of 77 percent silt, while the mouth was 92 percent sand. The benthic community found at the head of Bass Creek was extremely limited in terms of both density and diversity. The most abundant organisms during both sampling events was the Nematod worm (33 percent in December and 35 percent in July). During July, Oligochaete worms made up the remaining 62 percent. The balance of the density was distributed among a relatively small group of organisms. Samples collected at the mouth were dominated by the Caprellid amphipod (57 percent) in December, but more evenly distributed in July between the gas~opod Hydrobia minuta, the clam Gemma gemma, several polychaetes (i.e., Haploscoloplus rubustus and Neanthos succinea), as well as Oligochaete worms. The lack of benthic organisms at the head of Bass Creek is hard to explain as the water quality parameters were good, and there is no evidence of disturbances from around the creek. One possible explanation may be the abundant widgeon grass. The nearly complete coverage of the bottom may prevent the potential for a benthic commtmity to develop. The vegetation appears to be present year-round, as it was observed during each survey event. The swift current and coarse sediment types at the mouth create a limited environmental, only suitable for certain species. I. West Neck Creek West Neck Creek connects West Neck to West Neck Harbor. A sizeable fleet of pleasure boats can be found moored at various locations along the creek. A few areas of intertidal marsh can be found along the creek, but the shoreline is mostly occupied by residential homes with properties developed to the water's edge. Most homes have a dock and boat. Water quality sampling by EEA and the Suffolk County Depa[m~ent of Health Services has identified the West Neck system as being nutrient rich. The West Neck System has been known t~ have isolated brown tide events when no brown tide was reported elsewhere in the Peconlcs. The benthic community reflects the high nutrient levels. The benthic community of West Neck Creek closely resembles that of Meetinghouse Creek (almost completely dominated by the amphipod Ampelisca abdita). Ampelisca was found at both the head and mouth of the creek in December, making up 75 and 52 percent of the total number of organisms collected, respectively. During July, Arnpelisca made up 69 percent of all organisms at the head and only 10 percent at the mouth. This is somewhat surprising since the sediments found at the head of West Neck Creek were 87 percent sand and only 48 percent sand at the mouth. Ampelisca typically favor a - 54- - inuddy-sand mix, not pure sand. Other benthic species dominating the benthic community were the Oligochaete worms, Nematod worms, and Capitella capitata, all commonly found in organic rich disturbed environments. The remainder of the community is evenly distributed between species such as the Amphipods Leptocheirus plumolosus, and Parphoxus epistomus, and the clam Nucula proxima. Those three species are typically found in well developed benthic communities in undisturbed environments. Densities ofAmpelisca abdita are exceptionally high, averaging between 20,000 and 30,000 Ampelisca/m2 in most samples (similar densities to Meetinghouse Creek). Given the presence of benthic organisms found in undisturbed systems and given the limited sampling period, it is unclear in which state of flux the benthic community is in. Possibly pioneer species are taking advantage of degrading conditions, or the stable environment organisms taking advantage of improving water quality conditions. Additionally, West Neck Creek is periodically dredged to maintain the boat channels. This may contribute to constant presence of species, such as .4mpelisca, while retarding the establishment of species such as Paraphoxus and Nucula. In either case, the organisms present provide an excellent food source for juvenile fmfish species and will be readily utilized. J. Little Bay Little Bay is located at the extreme eastern tip of the North Fork of Long Island. It is buffered on all sides by an expansive saltmarsh. The south shore of the bay consists entirely of Orient Beach State Park; to the shore is almost completely saltmarsh (both intertidal and high). A few residential homes exist along the north shore located along a narrow tributary to the bay. The tributary appears to be channelized, based on the dredge spoil piles along the shoreline. The extreme head of Little Bay also appears to have been dredged at some time in the past. As expected, the sediments found at the dead end head of Little Bay consist of 88 percent silts, while the mouth is 83 percent sand. The benthic community found at the head was very low in terms of both abundance and diversity. Densities at the head ranged from 34 to 408 organlsms/m2, while at the mouth, they ranged from 3,349 to 6,834 organlsms/m2. Dominant benthic organisms at the mouth were oligochaete worms, nematod worms, the polychaete worms Capitella capitata, and Scolecolepides viridis, the clams Gemma gemma and Lyonsia hyalina, and the arthropods Hippolyte zostericola, Corophium sp. and Ampelisca abdita. In general, this represents a good diversity. Additionally, the samples collected at the head station contained large amounts of organic - 55 - material, mostly what appeared to be decomposing widgeon grass which was abundam in shallow~ water near, but not at the head of the bay. No SAV was present at the mouth, but eelgrass was abundant immediately west of that station in Hallock Bay. It is believed that the benthic community associated with the mouth of Little Bay represents a typical, well developed community, while those present at the head do not. It would appear that the condition at the head station support only a limited stressed benthic community. EEA does not anticipate that these conditions are indicative of the entire habitat associated with the head of Little Bay, rather they only represent a ve~ small area with poor circulation where organic material collects and decomposes, restricting the benthic development in a localized area. The Little Bay benthic community structure is not representative of a stressed waterway with a nutrient loading problem, nor is there any evidence to suggest a nutrient rich system. VHI. CONCLUSIONS EEA evaluated ten tidal creeks throughout the Peconlc Estuary representing a wide range of watershed variables. Of potential impacts, nutrient loading appeared to be primary. Of those ten, four clearly had a benthic community structure which was more representative of a nutrient rich environment closely resembling communities found in water bodies such as Jamaica Bay, New York and the New York Harbor: Meetinghouse, West Neck, Ligonee, and Alewife. This is not totally unexpected, as the drainages these creeks are associated with have been previously identified by the Suffolk County Department of Health Service as areas with above normal levels of nitrogen. In all cases, the source of nitrogen has been identified as a municipal sewage trealment plant, or in the case of Meetinghouse Creek, an active duck farm. In most cases, the diversity in each creek was low, and the density of a single species extremely high. The amphipod,,lrapelisca abdita was the dominant identified species. In some cases, Ampelisca abundances exceeded 30,000/m2' These species and densities indicate a stressed environment, which is most likely the result of nutrient loading. On a system-wide basis, the primary sources of nitrogen which causes most of this nutrient loading is due to on-site disposal systems and residential and agricultural fertilizers. The organ/sm present are not necessarily detrimental to the environment, as they provide an excellent food source for many juvenile fmfish species. The remaining six creeks (Fresh Pond, Northwest Creek, West Creek, Goose Creek, Bass Creek, and Little Bay) all appear to support well established benthic communities. This determination is based on the presence of a diverse benthic community that is not dominated by large numbers of pioneering organisms, such as the ampeliscids, spionid worms, and oligochaetes. In general, as one would expect, these six creeks are the more underdeveloped systems, with predominantly open space (i.e., intertidal marsh) surrounding them. Goose Creek - 56- is the most developed of the six. It would appear that the presence of extensive intertidal marsh is extremely beneficial in maintaining the equilibrium in the creek, even though it would appear that most of the nutrients are coming through the groundwater. Based on EEA's previous studies in Jamaica Bay, it is clear that Spartina alterniflora is a sink for nutrients and capable of removing a significant mount from the surrounding waterbody. It is recommended that further studies be concluded on a more in-depth, longer term analysis, with fewer creeks. This tidal creek study can be used to choose a smaller number of creeks, which would represent a highly impacted system, a relatively low-impacted system, and possibly one in between. With a smaller set of variables, it would be possible to further study these creeks, to determine to what extent the land use practices have on the overall health of the system. The benthic studies that were concluded for this project will prove even more valuable if compared to data sets in the future. Also, a continued analysis of the water quality parameters of these creeks is necessary, and possibly a more in-depth study would reveal trends which may parallel certain land use practices. - 57 - BIBLIOGRAPHY Andrle, R.E. & J.R. Carroll. 1988. The Atlas of Breeding Birds inNew York State. Ithaca, NY: Comell University Press. Arthur D. Little, Inc., "Chemical Contaminant Distributions in Peconic Estuary Sediments", December, 1996. Benyus, J.M. 1989. The Field Guide to Wildlife Habitats of the Eastern United States. Simon & Schuster, Inc. New York: 336 pp. Boggs, Sam Jr., "Principles of Sedimentology and Stratigraphy", Merrill Publishing Company, 1987. Boatman, Marci L. and Nancy Niedowski, "Characterization Report of the Living Resources of the Peeonic Estuary", 1988. Britton, N.L. and Hon. A. Brown. 1970. An Illustrated Flora of the No,bern United States and Canada. Vol. I-III. Dover Publications, New York, NY. Brown, R.G. 1985 "Effects of Wetlands on Quality of Runoff Entering Lakes in the Twin Cities Metropolitan Area, Mimaesota,' U.S. Geological Survey Water Resources Investigation Report 85-4170. Bull, J. 1985. Birds of New York State. Comell University Press. Ithaca, NY. Bull, John & J. Farrand, Jr. 1977. The Audubon Society Field Guide to North American Birds. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, Inc. Cashin Associates, P.C., Peconic Estuary Program Final Submerged Aquatic Vegetation Study, January 1996. Cerrato, R.M. and F.T. Scheier, 1983. Effects of Borrow Pits on Distribution and Abundances of Benthic Fauna in the Lower Bay of New York Harbor. Draft Report to NY District, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 255 pp. Chan, E., P.E. Hantzche and Y.J. Litwin, 1982 (Sep), "The use of wetlands for water pollution control," U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development, Cincinatti, OH. Conant, R. & J.T. Collins. 1991. A Field Guide to Reptiles and Amphibians of Eastern and -58- Central North America. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company. Cowar~in, L.M., V. Caner, F.C. Golet, & E.T. La_Roe. 1979. Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the United States. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington, D.C., FWS/OBS-79/31. De Jonge, Victor N., Walter Boynton, Christopher F. D'Elia, Ragnar Elmgrean, and Barbara L. Welsh, Responses to Developments in Eulxophicafion in Four Different North Atlantic Estuarine Systems, University of Connectcut, Marine Sciences Department. P. 179-196. Eisel, M.T., Shoreline Survey: Great Peconic, Little Peconic, Gardiners, and Napeague Bays, Marine Sciences Research Center. Falmouth Scientific, Inc., 3-D Acoustic Currem Meter (3D-ACM) Version 7.0 Operating Instructions. Federal Emergency Management Agency. 1991. Flood Insurance Rate Maps, City of New York, Richmond County. Community Panel Numbers 360497 0102-C. Knobel, E. 1977. Field Guide to the Grasses, Sedges and Rushes of the United States. Dover Publications, New York, NY: 83 pp. Meiorin, E.C. 1986 "Urban Stormwater Treatment at Coyote Hills Marsh," Association of Bay Area Govemmants. Meiorin, E.C. 1989 "Urban Runoff Trealment in a Fresh/Brackish Water Marsh in Fremont, California," in Constructed Wetlands for Wastewater Treatment - Municipal, Industrial and Agricultural, Hammer, D.A., ed., 1989 Mitchell, R.S. 1986. A Checklist of New York State Plants. Bulletin No. 458, New York State Museum: Albany, NY. New York Sea Grant, "Brown Tide Research Initiative", Report #3, March 1999. New York State Department of Environmental Conservation 1988. New York State Freshwater Wetland Maps. Norris, James G, Sandy Wyllie-Echeverda, Thomas Mumford, Allison Bailey, and Terry Turner, (1997): Estimating Basal Area Coverage of Subtidal Seagrass Beds Using Underwater Videography. Aquatic Botany, 58 (1997) 269-287. NuT,i, Robert, and R.M. Waters, The Spatial and Temporal Distribution of'Brown Tide' in Eastern - 59- Long Island, Suffolk County Deparanent of Health Services. ,~--. Paradiso, J.L. 1969. Mammals of Maryland. U.S. Dept. of the Interior, Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife. North American Fauna no. 66. Peconic Estuary Program Citizens' Advisory Committee, "The Ultimate Guide to the Peeonic Estuary", June, 1998. Peterson, L.A. 1977. A Field Guide to Edible Wild Plants of Eastern and Central North America. Houghton-Mifflin Company. Boston, MA: 330 pp. Reid, George K., and Richard D. Wood, "Ecology of Inland Waters and Estuaries", Litton Educational Publishing, 1976. Reynolds, R.M., and J.J. Hurst, Quality Assurance Manual, Meteorology Program, Brookhaven National Laboratory, January, 1994. Seapoint Sensors, Inc., Seapoint Turbidity Meter User Manual, February, 1997. Suffolk County Depaxuuent of Health Services, "Surface Water Quality Monitoring Report - Volumes I and II", Janumy, 1998. Suffolk County Deparmaent of Health Services, Marine Resources Bureau, Peconic Estuary Program Surface Water Quality Monitoring 1993-1995, December, 1995. Suffolk County Department of Health Services, "Brown Tide Comprehensive Assessment and Management Program". Suffolk County Department of Health Services, Office of Ecology, Peconic Estuary Surface Water Quality; Nitrogen, Dissolved Oxygen, and Submerged Aquatic Vegetation Habitat, October, 1998. Suffolk County Depaxm~ent of Health Services, 1999. Nitrogen Loading Budget and Trends, Major, External, Anthropogenic Nitrogen Sources: Groundwater and Duck Farms, January, 1999. Suffolk County Department of Planning, "Analysis of Dredging and Spoil Disposal Activity Conducted by Suffolk County, Historical Perspective and a Look to the Future, October 1985. Suffolk County Department of Planning, "Peconic Estuary Program Water Dependent Use and Underwater Land Ownership Inventory", April 1997. Taylor, Sally L., and Martine Villalard, 1985: "Seaweeds of the Connecticut Shore, A Wader's Guide," Connecticut Arboretum Bulletin No. 18, September 1985. - 60 - - Tetra Teeh, Inc., "Three Dimensional Hydrodynamic and Water Quality Model ofPeeonic Estuary", September, 1998. United States Departraem of Agriculture Soil Conservation Service, Soil Survey of Suffolk County, New York, April 1997. United States Fish and Wildlife Service, "Significant Habitats and Habitat Complexes of the New York Bight Watershed", Southern New England - New York Bight, Coastal Ecosystems Program, Charlestown, Rhode Island, November, 1997. United States Geological Survey, "Analysis of Ground-Water Flow Paths and Travel Time to Three Small Embayments Within the Peconic Estuaxy, Eastern Suffolk County, New York, July, 1996. -61 -