HomeMy WebLinkAboutPeconic Estuary Program Tidal Creeks Study Apr 99PECONIC ESTUARY PROGRAM
TIDAL CREEKS STUDY
Prepared For:
Suffolk County Department of Health Services
Department of Ecology
County Center, 2nd Floor
Riverhead, New York 11901-3397
Prepared By:
EEA, Inc.
55 Hilton Avenue
Garden City, New York 11530
(516) 746-4400
eea~ent.net
APRIL 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 01-4405-4980-18-1633 to the Suffolk County Department of
Health Services, it may not necessarily reflect the views of the Agency and no official endorsement should be inferred.
PECONIC ESTUARY TIDAL CREEKS STUDY
II.
III.
IV
TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION ...................................................... 1
Literature Review ....................................... 2
METHODOLOGY ..................................................... 2
B.
C.
D.
E.
F.
Water Quality .............................................. 2
Bathymetric Survey ........................................ 3
Hydrodynamic Survey ...................................... 3
Land Use ............................................ '. .... 5
Wildlife ................................................... 6
Grain Size and Maerobenthic Invertebrates .................... 6
REPORT
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
OF FINDINGS ................................................ 7
Water Quality .............................................. 7
Bathymetric Survey ........................................ 10
Hydrodynamic Survey ...................................... 11
Land Use ................................................. 11
Wildlife .................................................. 11
Grain Size and Macrobenthic Invertebrates .................... 11
RESULTS OF TEN TIDAL CREEKS .................................... 12
A. Fresh Pond ............................................... 12
1. Water Quality .................................. 12
2. Bathymetrie Survey ............................. 13
3. Hydrodynamic Survey ........................... 13
4. Land Use ..................................... 14
5. Wildlife ...................................... 15
6. Macrobenthic Invertebrates ....................... 15
B. Northwest Creek .......................................... 16
1. Water Quality .................................. 17
2. Bathymetric Survey ............................. 17
2. Hydrodynamic Survey ........................... 18
4. Land Use ..................................... 18
5. Wildlife ...................................... 19
6. Macrobenthic Invertebrates ....................... 19
C. Ligonee Creek ............................................. 20
1. Water Quality .................................. 20
2. Bathymetric Survey ............................. 21
3. Hydrodynamic Study ............................ 21
4. Land Use ..................................... 21
PECONIC ESTUARY TIDAL CREEKS STUDY
TABLE OF CONTENTS - Continued
5. Wildlife ...................................... 22
6. Macrobenthic Invertebrates ....................... 22
Alewife Creek ............................................. 23
1. Water Quality .................................. 23
2. Bathymetric Survey ............................. 24
3. Hydrodynamic Survey ........................... 24
4. Land Use ..................................... 25
5. Wildlife ................................. : ....25
6. Macrobenthic Invertebrates ....................... 26
Meetinghouse Creek ....................................... 26
1. Water Quality .................................. 27
2. Bathymetric Survey ............................. 28
3. Hydrodynamic Survey ........................... 28
4. Land Use ..................................... 28
5. Wildlife ...................................... 29
6. Macrobenthic Invertebrates ....................... 30
West Creek ............................................... 30
1. Water Quality .................................. 31
2. Bathymetric Survey ............................. 32
3. Hydrodynamic Survey ........................... 32
4. Land Use ..................................... 32
5. Wildlife ...................................... 33
6. Macrobenthic Invertebrates ....................... 33
Goose Creek .............................................. 34
1. Water Quality .................................. 34
2. Bathymetric Survey ............................. 35
3. Hydrodynamic Survey ........................... 35
4. Land Use ..................................... 36
5. Wildlife ....... : .............................. 36
6. Macrobenthic Invertebrates ....................... 37
Bass Creek ............................................... 37
1. Water Quality .................................. 38
2. Bathymetric Survey ............................. 39
3. Hydrodynamic Survey ........................... 39
4. Land Use ..................................... 39
5. Wildlife ...................................... 39
6. Macrobenthic Invertebrates ....................... 40
West Neck Creek .......................................... 40
1. Water Quality .................................. 41
2. Bathymetric Survey ............................. 42
PECONIC ESTUARY TIDAL CREEKS STUDY
IV.
TABLE OF CONTENTS - Continued
3. Hydrodynamic Survey ........................... 42
4. Land Use ..................................... 43
5. Wildlife ...................................... 43
6. Macrobenthic Invertebrates ....................... 44
Little Bay ................................................. 44
1. Water Quality .................................. 45
3.
4.
5.
6.
Bathymetr/c Survey ............................. 46
Hydrodynamic Survey ........................... 46
Land Use ..................................... 46
Wildlife ...................................... 47
Macrobenthic Invertebrates ....................... 47
ANALYSIS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 48
A. Fresh Pond ............................................... 48
C.
D.
E.
F.
G.
H.
I.
J.
Northwest Creek .......................................... 48
Ligonee Creek ............................................. 49
Alewife Creek ............................................. 50
Meetinghouse Creek ....................................... 50
51
West Creek ...............................................
Goose Creek .............................................. 52
· 52
Bass Creek ..............................................
West Neck Creek .......................................... 53
Little Bay ................................................. 54
CONCLUSIONS ...................................................... 55
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
PECONIC ESTUARY TIDAL CREEKS STUDY
I. INTRODUCTION
The overall objective of this study was to examine ten tidal creeks feeding Peconic Bay,
New York and to assess whether the degree of urbanization surrounding each creek could be
correlated to the water quality and macrobenthic community structures foUnd in each system.
The creeks chosen for study reflected a wide range of varying ~atershed e0nditions fi.om the near
pristine (e.g. wildlife refuges) to the heavily urbanized (e.g., hardened ~h0~elii~i residential or
industrial uplands).
Field data collection included water quality
chemistry and macrobenthic fauna. In addition,
conducted of the uplands surrounding each creek.
Locations of the ten creeks studied are shown
and categorization was
· Fresh Pond Creek
· Northwest Creek
· Ligonee Creek
· Alewife Creek
· Meetinghouse Creek
· West Creek ~
· Goose Creek ~
headwaters
each
also collected
t during December 1997 and July 1998 at both the
creeks. The sampling locations (head and mouth) of
11. Water chemistry and hydrodynamic samples were
The biological and hydrological analysis of the data was completed by EEA, Inc. The
l~d USe analysis was C6mpleted by Allee King Rosen & Fleming, Inc. (AKRF). This project
~ ~d by the U:S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and implemente~ under the
~ti°iii~fthe ~uffolk County Department of Health Services (SCDHS). Invaluable assistance
w~ pr°~ed ~ Mr. Vito Minei, Mr. Walter Dawydiak, and Mr Robert "Mack" Waters and
their staffs for providing necessary resoumes to complete the program. Add'~tional
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 data. The following sections of the report will
-1-
Location of Ten Tidal
Little Bay
Goose Creek
West Creek
~l~tin ~use Creek
West
Ligor
~Bass Creek
Pond
Figure 1
PEP Tidal Creeks Study -~tation Location Map
Not to scale
PECONIC ESTUARY TIDAL CREEKS STUDY
discuss the methodology, results, and discussion of the tidal creek survey.
Literature Review
Literature pertaining to this project was obtained in several different way~. Initial
investigation began with EEA's in-house library where many paPers R~g t° estuarine
ecology have been gathered over the years. A review of thcs0 papers and y~6p~ bibliographies
was undertaken. Concurrently, a computerized search of~e Internet and ~s~arch
(DIALOG) was also completed. The results of these s~[~s were_~ ~t~en to th~ li~,~s~ as
MSRC Stony Brook in an attempt to obtain the documeht~for reVie'~w.
In addition to published documents,
natural resource departments for unpublished "gra) ~
State Department of Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC)
maintains water quality data on all the creeks.
which provided water quality data, watershed
date for some of the areas.
Resource Department and the
Conservancy on Shelter Island were able to
creeks found within their municipalities.
All data were
tgencies and local town
he New York
tealth Services
nd natural resource
and the Nature
a studies associated with
ect. Whenever relevant, these data
II.
~er c in two forms. Physical chemistry (i.e., temperature,
sahmty; conduct~wty, pH,:and Secchi readings) w.re taken every t~me a s~te was visited. This
cons:i~ed of two reading~ ~ach at the head and mouth of each creek. The surface reading was
take~ in the upper six inches of the water column. The bottom reading is defined as within the
lo~st six inches of th~'Water column. Additionally, two rounds of nutrient analysis samples
~;~ ~en by EE~ith an additional round supplemented by SCDHS. Surface water was
~'~te~ the h~:~'d and mouth of each creek at the location of the benthic sampling station.
sa~pl~:W~ Collected and analyzed for: Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen (TKN), Total Dissolved
Kjeldahl Nitrogen (TDKN), Total Organic Carbon (TOC), Total Dissolved Organic Carbon
(TDOC), Nitrogen-Ammonia 0XlH~), Nitrite (NO~), Nitrate (NO0, Total Phosphorus (TPO4),
Total Dissolved Phosphorus (TDPO~), Ortho-Phosphorus (O-PO~), Total Coliforms (TCOL),
Fecal Coliforms (FCOL), Total Suspended Solids (TSS), and Chlorophyll-a (Chi. "A").
-2-
PECONIC ESTUARY TIDAL CREEKS STUDY
Sample analysis was performed by Chesapeake Biological Laboratory (CBL) for NH3,
NO2, NO3. TDPO4. TPO4, O-PO4, and TSS. Sample analysis for TKN, TDKN, TOC, DTOC was
conducted by Chemtech. The coliform analysis was conducted by Environmental T~sting
Laboratories; the chlorophyll-a samples by the Suffolk County Department of Healffi Services.
All sample analytsis conformed with ASTM standards. Results of the ~at~r quality analysis
appear in Appendix A.
B. Bathymetri¢ Survey
The bathymetric profile of each of the ten,
methods. In creeks with
was towed behind a boat at a slow
HYPACK survey software acquired data from the
System) and echo sounder twice per second.
West Creek, Bass Creek and Li
gauge to determine water depth. Each
logged the GPS coordinates, as well.
In both cases, the data were d6wnloaded to a topographic plotting program. The
bathymetric data were plotted on a b~e County Depa, tment of
Health Services in a ~
water
['two
profiler
Coastal Oceanographic
Fresh Pond,
a staff
reflect mean-low
creeks, a Falmouth Scientific 3DACM flow meter
was 24 hours. The meter collected data regarding the vector
(dire£!/6h) and velocit, current. In May of 1998, in conjunction with the eelgrass
wa[~iquality project, a idity sensor was added to collect additional data. The data were
d0~loaded to a laptop~?mputer at the end of each per/od and returned to the office to be
p~t(~ out and review'ed. 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 foll0wing creeks: Northwest Creek, West Creek, Bass Creek, Ligonee Creek, Alewife Creek,
and M~ 'tin,house 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.
-3-
PECONIC ESTUARY TIDAL CREEKS STUDY
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 ~ur is the x-axis, though
there are several data points in between the times which ar~ Shown.
An average was computed for every hour for each'bf the parameters
turbidity). The data which was downloaded
the form of Vn and Ve, which were used to derive tl :
equations were used to derive the velocity and vector:
in
values. ~e following
VelociW:
Velocity = square root (Vn^2 + Ve^2)
where Vn = Average velocity north
Ve = Average velocity east in cra/sec.
Vector:
Angle = atan (Vn/Ve)
ris
the following equations:
When
When Vn is
When Vn is
when vn:i§ less than
r = (90 - angle)
'than 0: Vector = (270 - angle)
e is le§s than 0: (Vector = (270 - angle)
i is greater than 0: Vector = (90 + angle)
Finally, checks must be ~ad~ for the following exceptions:
wh~ Vn = 0, and Ve!s less than 0. Vector ~s 270
when Vn = 0 and ¥~ is greater than 0: Vector is 90
Wh~nve = 0, and Vn is less than 0: Vector is 180
when Ve = 0, and Vn is greater than 0: Vector is 0
-4-
~ECONIC ESTUARY TIDAL CREEKS STUDY
Turbidity.:
Turbidity was computed by multiplying the AUX 1 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 results
hydr dyn App (7
of the o amic survey appear in endix C ~ ~
D. Land Use
For land use information pertairdng to land-based following parameters
were considered. These include: general residential ~ such as residential,
commercial, industrial, agricultural, recreational, and uses evaluated
included roadway coverage and the availability ~
were the water-related activities, such as
· ~;eva ly
The data were obtmned through__ tli~. luatmn· ~ data previous
gathered by the local towns, During the course
of the field samphng program, the fiel~ Crew sp~i checked and validated the information. The
land-based information included the Coverage ~hta for th~ Watershed residential land use
categories and densities with esthetes ' owned lots by distinguishing the
percentage dedicated to' 'al and industrial
centers, ~ gold courses, and protected parklands. A
made for protected areas such as public, private and not-for-profit
subdivision plans. Roadway coverages were
arterial). Availability of utilities was stated as
would areas ~
quantified through the use of aerial photography. The
prese,nce and location of t_he ~ooring fields and bulkhead fxontage was initially determined by
th~,~fiotography and lat~' ground truthed 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
-5-
PECONIC ESTUARY TIDAL CREEKS STUDY
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 finfish, shellfish, avian fauna,
mammalian species, and herpetile fauna was recorded. These observati0ns we[e made in
conjunction with some other aspect of the study. The U.S. F~!s~ & Wildlife S~rvice and
NYSDEC Natural Heritage Program were contacted to det~e~:rmi~e the
endangered, threatened, or species or specml concern ~n the stu y
in the narrative discussion of this report for each
F. Grain Size and Macrobenthic
Twenty grab stations were located within the one at the head
waters and at the mouth of each creek). Station >ling
Locations" maps within each stud) 0.025 meter-
square Petite bottom grab. :~
A single Ponar grab sample will i0e collect~t for grmn s~ze analysis. A total of 20
samples were collected, one at each 16cation f0r~taboratory~alysis. For the grain size analysis,
the entire contents of the Ponar
Chemtech for analysis.
three repli~ates ,
Ponar
transferred to a
full
sorting
· which was sent to
For the macrobenthic analysis,
; three replicates were randomly chosen
~adividual samples (entire contents of the
r mesh sieve (to remove fine particles), and then
abuffered 10 percent formalin solution. Only
tain was added to the formalin to aid in later
· In the laboratory, ~i ma~roinvertebrates were removed from the samples and identified to
species level, whenever P~ssible. The oligochaetes, chironomids, nemerteans, anthozoa, and
hy~0zoans were left ~.~gh taxonomic groupings because of the difficulty associated with their
identification or the sffihll size and scarcity of specimens. Detailed results ofmacrobenthic
in~brate densitie~ ~nd grain size analysis appears in Appendix E.
-6-
PECONIC ESTUARY TIDAL CREEKS STUDY
III. REPORT OF FINDINGS
1. Water Quality
The water quality analysis of these ten tidal creeks was done usin~ a limited data set. The
parameters mentioned above were all tested in three samplingperiods ( Y~? 6f 19~8 by SCDHS,
July 1998 by EEA, and September 1998 by EEA). Water q!~ai{~y data SCDHS
which could be applied to this study was also utilized in thj~.'~ analysis, chemis ~try
data which was collected by EEA upon each site visit (which consis~ted
conductivity, water temperature, pH, and salinity) was
quality trends were not within the scope of this proj
limited data set. It is anticipated that the water ~ r TetraTech will
address these general trends. The overall impact ofwa~?ri benthic communities
was given greater consideration in this study, rather th~ the quality degradation.
The water quality analysis is presented in Appen~?
To completely understand the relationshi~etween 9fi~fit inputs, primary productivity,
and the biotic communities associate8 ~ith eacla~)f the cree~s investigated, the analysis of
several parameters at each trophic le'4el was r~mred.. An' analytical review of the chemical
constituents found within eac~ creek included'~o~rg~c carbons (TOCs), coliform bacteria,
ni oge, m ?ho us , tion to analysis, each creek wasevaluated for
tempera~e~ s~ty, condUstxv[~; dmsolve~gen, pH, and transparency (Secchi) each tune a
field crew:~$i/~e site. All 6fthe analytical parameters evaluated were sampled within the
same tadal phas~ (e.:gS,!03v slack)eac~:.ttme samphng occurs, to negate d~fferences m chemistry
and biological ~ tidai:~3 V;~dations. This provided valuable data for
understanding the eh~i~!and the ~tmcmre of the biological communities found within each
creek syst~. The bml6~e~al goImnumt~es most influenced by these parameters would be the
phyt0plankton, zooplanktoii~:~d macrobenthic invertebrate populations. These, in turn, would
influence the finfish (ichthY0plankton -- eggs and larvae through adult), and shellfish (bay
sefli~ps hard clam, and¢lue crabs) populations found throughout the bay, which are
e~6h~mically importer to both the commercial and recreational fishermen that utilize the bay.
~ following detailed descriptions will provide the rationale for the sampling analysis that was
c0hdudted bY EEA for this study:
-7-
PECONIC ESTUARY TIDAL CREEKS STUDY
Carbon enters the ecosystem in many different forms, in particular as part o£!iving tissue.
Large mounts of total organic carbon (TOC) can be derived from the accumulat!0~ Of plant
material both fi.om vascular plants and minute planktonic plant species, known as phytoplankton,
which show up as Chlorophyll-a in water samples. Nutrient rich system§ increase the potential
· the presence
for plankton blooms which help increase the carbon loading 0fthe sed~ment; Als0,
of high TOC levels may indicate the presence &petroleum hydrocarbofi~ 6r ~at ~6ntaminated
'. ' the s stem The amount of or,amc material will strongly mfluens~ the~?nthic
runoffls entenng y · .,.. ,, ~; :~.
invertebrate communities that are established w~thin each?reek system, as wen as me p ~
species A total of 30 samples for TOC analysis were c6i!~fexi: C°llecti°ns °cc~ in J'uly
and September of 1998 by EEA and throughout the summ~e~:6~i998 by SCDHS.
Total organic carbon levels increased fi.om June io Se tidal creeks.
Slightly higher levels of TOC relative tc ;erved for the
headwaters of Northwest Creek and
Nitrogen
Nitrogen is a building block}°~protein arid a part 0f~nzymes. It is needed ~n an abundant
.... ~,, ¢,-~ ~-,~roduction o*owth ~'res~irati6~ Plants can only utilize nitrogen in a fixed form,
such as nitrites and nitrates, willie excep~i~i~9g~n-fixing bacteria and blue-green algae.
Nitrates leach~ed fi.om the s°il an~transpo iaage'water are an important source of
nitrogen fg~i~i ~ua~s commmt~ g the summer months, the mtrogen supply to an aquatic
resource ~e~[~; ~e ~utilizSd 6 ely by phytoplankton, in addition to many green
filamentous iliadS?Nitrates may~h:~i~ear from the surface water. As a result, phytoplankton
growth, or a "b!~9~'~ ~S ~ically redUCed in late summer. N~trates braid up ag_aln m ~e w,m, ter.
N~trogeno' us W~e~g from selvage disposal plants and other sources olten overioacl me
aquatic ecosystem with ~6ger~:~This can result in massive plankton growth and other
undesirable changes in th~?ommunity structure. Samples were collected ~n the same frequency
as .
;).; Exceotionallv high levels of nitrogen were observed in the water quality analysis f°r
M~etinghouse Creek h~dwaters, while the waters at the mouth of Meetxnghouse Creek, and the
h~i~vaters of both L{gonee Creek and Alewife Creek both indicate slightly higher nitrogen
le~6i~ ~eI~fi~6 tS the other sampling stations.
Phosphorous
Phosphorous is involved in photosynthesis, as well as in energy transfer within the plant
-8-
PECONIC ESTUARY TIDAL CREEKS STUDY
and in animals. Animals require an adequate supply of calcium and phosphorous in the proper
ratio, 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 ~alysis for the
headwaters of Meetinghouse Creek. The waters at the mouth of Meetinghouse Creek
andAlewife Creek, along with the waters at the mouth and hea~of Lig0fi~e creek indicate
slightly higher levels of phosphorus relative to the other samPling stati6~~
Coliform bacteria is an indication of waste
coliforms can originate from many sources including
plant effluent. The coliform bacteria is
Estuary. Coliforms have a significant
High levels of coliform bacteria detection 1
of existing shellfish beds. High .~, , beach closings. Water
samples were collected three times from:each ofthe selected ladal creeks to establish baseline
conditions.
The mouth waters o:
head waters of West Neck
waters Creek
feca
Estuary. The
. or sewage treatment
of total coliforms. The
Alewife Creek, and the mouth
Coliform. The headwaters of
and Fresh Pond indicate high values of
~? Dunng each site senes of basic water quality measurements
(e.g~temperature, salinity} conductivity, dissolved oxygen, pH, and transparency [Secchi]).
R~gs were taken W~.th a Yellow Spring Instrument (Y'SI) salinity and S-C-T meter, and a
S~ard Secchi disk. All readings were transcribed into' a field notebook or standard data
sh~ts~ i:These data Sheets appear in Appendix F. A table of the physical chemistry readings
c°ndu6ted at each site visit is included in the waterquality section of each creek.
-9-
PECONIC ESTUARY TIDAL CREEKS STUDY
Chlorophyll-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 Chlorophyll-a were good indi6ators that high
levels of nitrogen are present. The Chlorophyll-a samples were collected ig conjunction with
other chemical sampling by utilizing a 6-liter Van Dom b0ttlei SampleS:~ ~,wn.
off into
the
appropriate one-liter bottle and placed in a cooler. EEA :~ required b~ Ch~inT~h to filter th~
samples through a millipore filter with a vacuum pump~
frozen and shipped or delivered frozen to the analytical J
three times, along with the chemical analyzation.
Stations which indicate high levels of t Ligonee Creek head
waters, Meetinghouse Creek head waters
Relatively low levels were evident at the mouth ~ xad Northwest
Creek.
2. Bathymetric Survey
The results of the bathymetric s~ey pro,de the
Depth of the creeks can t
communities, and
impact the benthic communi~ty
private
of the ten creeks.
(SAV)
of these tidal creeks can also greatly
be displaced along with
'Works files have indicated the recent
data, dredging may also be done by
' recorded data.
idal Creek Last Dredged
-~i~h P,'6~d Yearly
Nis~thwest Creek 1961/1965/1971
Li{~onee Creek Never
~,lewife Creek Never
Meetinghouse Creek Spring, 1998
West Creek 1982/1994/1996
Goose Creek 1995
Bass Creek Never
West Neck Creek Fall, 1998
Little Bay Tributary Never
-10-
I~ECONIC ESTUARY TIDAL CREEKS STUDY
3. Hydrodynamic Survey
The hydrodynamm survey prowded data whmh was utthzed ~n the analys~s of the general
relative health and attributes of each creek. Though gener~h~ckodyn~e trends could not be
observed over a 24-hour period, minimum and maximum ~iocities, vec~rs~ mrbidi~ies and
temperatures were calculated and analyzed. These result~'~appear inth~ resuii~ ~f ~ffcreek~'
4. Land Use
The results of the land use survey
which can be correlated to
attributes
t here wasa;a~rect correlation
stressed
was also a direct correlation
lower nutrient loads and relativel,
and West Creek). Finally, ~
purposes was directly correlated wi~hi
and relatively stressed benthic
Ligonee Creek). There
by salt marsh with
Creek, Northwest Creek,
of'the watersheds for agricultural
nitrogen compounds),
Ne~l~ Creek, Meetinghouse Creek and, to a
were recorded each time a site was visited. In general,
all creeks which are common to this region. Any sightings of
en~gered, threatened 0r species of special concern which were observed were documented.
Th~ observations app6~ in the results of each creek and full tables appear in the field data
sh~ts (Appendix F).
6. Grain Size and Macrobenthic Invertebrates
Much can be learned from observing macrobenthic 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
-11-
PECONIC ESTUARY TIDAL CREEKS STUDY
by Iow diversity with high abundance, the system is likely to be degraded to some extent. 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 fi.om the §~p!es and identified to
species level, whenever possible. The oligochaetes, chiron0?/~es, ne~rte~S~ anthozoa, and
hydrozoans were distinguished in high taxonomic grouping~ b~Cause of ~ difficulty associated
with their identification or the small size and scarcity of ~imens. Ali :i~li6ate Samples were
analyzed from each station for each of the three sampling~eriods} The benthic anal~s~S was the
major scope of this project and is discussed for each ,general conclusiq~ 9fthe
benthic analysis is discussed in the conclusions
IV
RESULTS OF TEN TIDAL CREEKS
A. Fresh Pond
Fresh Pond is located along the soU{hwest c Bay within the Town of
East Hampton. Fresh Pond is a relat!~!~ small acres~! i_mpo~ .un,clm~ent attached
to Napeague Bay by a long (appro~ately 30~ east/~?t), narrow (20 to z> mot
north/south) stream channel. Both ~as are e!iremel~ s~llow, with an average depth of 0.5 to
1.5 feet. The inlet ~ is' open an~ ~ beeg~edged yearly by the town to facilitate
tidal flus Fresh Pon erhfied year-round. The stream channel
consists' x~hil'~'~'~'i~e pond is dominated by fine grain silts. No
sub-aa present rathe stream channel. The pond was completely dominated
b5
per thousand
shoreline %as fringed
within the fresh pond system averaged 24.8 parts
In general, the pond was surrounded by a
mixture of oaks and pitch pines (Pinus rigida). The
saltmarsh cordgrass (Spartina
alter~ra), salt common reed (Phragmites australis) and
gro~dsel tree (Bacchari~ h~
Fresh pond was ~urveyed fi.om September 30, 1997 to November 14, 1997 for the
hydrodynamic surv6~i on December 4, 1997 and July 14, 1998. fo.r m.acr.o.b_e.nth, i..c~nvoertebrates;
J~ ~; Juiy 36~d September 21; 1998 for water quality analys~s; ^phi 2>, tw~ mr
bathym~trY; andin July of 1998 for physical chemistry (P-chem) analysis. The following
sections report the results of each discipline.
1. Water Quality
-12-
PECONIC ESTUARY TIDAL CREEKS STUDY
Fresh Pond has a restricted outlet, which closes naturally during significant storm events.
This outlet is re-opeqed via an excavator. The NYSDEC has classified Fresh Pond as uncertified
for shellfishing year-round. The discharge from Fresh Pond is an actual, direct pollfi{ion 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 phosph0~s. The ~eg quality analysis of
Fresh Pond did indicate relatively high levels of total and fe~i:~olifo~:S i~ ~e sampling
conducted in June of 1998.
The physical chemistry data analysis of Fresh pond indicat~ relatively hig~ ~alinitYievels
(over 30 ppm), which was expected g~ven the t~dal flushifig 0fthis creek. The physical chemistry
field data analysis is presented below:
Date Location Depth Surface Bottom Surfad~ B6tt6m
(inches) Dissolved Salini~
Oxygen ~.~i(~gO) Jppm) (~)
(mg/)
9/10/97 Mouth 18,00
7/14/98 Head 2.00 ;~.~0
~ 6.60 37.20 37.20
Date Location Surface ;; Bottom:~;~,~,gun~c.e
Bottom
pH
Temperature Temper~i~J~!}- ~hd~ct v ~ Conductivi~
(C)~:~ ¢
(C) ~,~ ~? (ms) (ms)
9/10/97 Mo~th~ ~ 21 80:~.: ~
~-~ ¢*~ 43.47 8.00
7/14/98 eao ~ 23.10 ; 23¢10 37.20 37.20 7,80
,:~.. 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).
-13-
Fresh Pond
Sampling Locations
Napeague
Bay
Mouth
Head
PEP Tidal Creeks Study
Figure 2
Fresh
Not to scale Sampling Locations
PECONIC ESTUARY TIDAL CREEKS STUDY
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 (veak with a maximum of 21.8 em/sec observed on
September 31, 1997. The average direction was 155 degrees, south south-east, the average
velocity was 3.11 em/sec. The current dropped to near zero on the expected.
4. Land Use :
7
Fresh Pond is in the Town of East Hampton, approximately 1.25 miles north ~M0ntauk
Highway Fresh Pond Road runs along the southern portiofi ~pond. There are §~q~ra~
ho~ses across the road from the woods bordering this seclu~d linearly pristine pond. At the
end of Fresh Pond Road, approx,mately 20 yards fromthe shor~li~;~.~. ~[e m a rest faclhty, w~th
one-acre hard surface parking lot, a phone, and two restrooms. Th~ density, single-
family residential communities to the south
Fresh Pond has a surface
mouth to the pond's westernmost point,
vegetation, including
along the creek's edg~
This tidal creek f
mouth, *
north of
bluffs
southeast
Club.
The are~
and i length, from tidal creek
, surrounded by
and shrubs. In certain areas
~ ree~ are fifteen feet deep.
estimated 150 yards east of the creek's
with docks. Approximately .75 mile
t docks among the open space, dunes, and
;tate Park is located approximately six miles
outhwest of the pond is the South Fork Country
is best described as a forested residential area. A small
t,,wn r~i( and what appeared to be a septic system, can be found along
the~!~th side of the mouth. The park appears to recmve lnmted usage by small fam. ~!y groups.
Th~nterior of the syste~ is surrounded by forest with no road ends or other potential stormwater
~ff sources availabi6. Therefore, it would appear that there is little contributed to Fresh Pond
fr$~ i~d use activitiSs
- 14-
PECONIC ESTUARY TIDAL CREEKS STUDY
5. Wildlife
Various species of finfish, in particular bait species such as Atlantic silverside (Menida
menida), sand lance (Ammodytes americana), killifishes (Fundulus heteroclitus, F. ~ajalis, F.
Diaphanus and Cyprinodon variegatus) and white mullet (Mugel curema) appear~d to be
extremely abundant at times. Associated with the bait fish, in particular (i~g September and
October, were large schools ofjuvemle snapper bluefis~(Pomatomus~qltatrix), Also evident
in the system were numbers of young-of-year CYOY) winte~ flounder (Pi~rbne~t~samericanU*).
Large numbers of water-related avian s
belted kingfisher (Megaceryle alcyon ), 1
(Butorides striatus), great egret 0
commonly seen.
(Egretta thula) were
Many passerine species were often heard
Some of the more common species included,
black capped chickadee
goldfinch ( Garduelis tristis), common
brachyrhynchos).
6. Macrobenthic
)r forest.
, (Cyanocitta cristata),
American
American crow (Corvus
indicatine a coarser
distinctly different
he creek reflected a community most typically
those at the mouth were clearly different,
orgaSms observed at tl/~
gr~' ~ampi? ~
benthic organisms observed at the mouth of Fresh Pond.
In December, there was a total of 34 benthic
)fFresh Pond. Nemertean worms comprised over 40% of this
~ JU!Y, there 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%. h 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 ($treblospio benedicti) and a grouping of miscellaneous organisms, which have
-15-
PECONIC ESTUARY TIDAL CREEKS STUDY
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
occupying approximately 140 acres. The inlet connecting Northwest ~ to
is extremely narrow (less than 100 feet across). Northwest Creek is f?id fi~all~
which is maintained by the county, but has not been dredged since }~71.
The environment associated with the head ¢
the mouth, with a mean depth of 8.0 feet compared to areas of les There was no
apparent SAV observed while sampling in Northwest Creek. The V~f~iihj0ri~;0f the shoreline
is fringed by an expansive intertidal marsh dominated by saltmarsh E0rdgrassi/B~yond the marsh
is an oak/pine forest. The remaining portion of the creek shorelin~9ontains a ~sr~_ ~all stretch of
beach (approxn'nately 240 1.f.). Sahmt~es w~thin the creek~tem'ay~raged 26.5 ppt, ranging
fi.om 24 1 to 28 8 ~ot with little variation between the mo i;? ;
.... r ~z:~ ~ to 4 0
In eneral, the entire system ~s extremely shallbw, w~th an average d~th of 3.0 .
feet The deepest areas are at the mouth and northeast cora~where a moonng field ~s located.
· . - ~ ~ ~* . ~' . .
The depths m the northeast comer of the cree~,xceed lO~fget m som~arcas. The vast majority
of the Northwest Creek substrate consisted p~ ~i~ty fine g~{in mate~l with the exception of the
mouth and moonng area which m mostly~,rn~um san~. :,~.:/~, :~
Northwest Cree ~urveyed ~tember 9;'1998 to September 16, 1998 for the
hydrodynamic survey, 6~i~'~cem!?er 4 19~'~ ly 14, 1998 for marcrobenthic invertebrates,
June 9, July 30~, and sepi~mber 21, 1998 ~0 ~quality, April 24, 1998 for bathymetry, and
in July of 1998 for physical chemistry analysi§?~e following sections report the results of each
discipline. :
-16-
PECONIC ESTUARY TIDAL CREEKS STUDY
1. Water Quality
The shellfish resource of Northwest Creek is considered moderate to large, according to
NYSDEC. NYDEC has classified Northwest Creek as uncertified for shellfishing. Northwest
Harbor has numerous freshwater feeds in addition to sizeable underflow and shore ~eep
contributions. Tests by the NYSDEC of the waters of Northwest Creekfo~ ¢o!iforms after storms
suggest that it may develop water quality problems if steps are not taken ~9 abate coliform
sources. The coliform sources are presumed to be from septics situated ~ ~e ~ater table
approximate to creek waters. The water quality analysis of Northwest Ci-~ek ~0r~s study
tn&cate relatively Iow levels of phosphorus and mtrogen for the samples
The headwaters of Northwest Creek indicate relatively ~ ievei~0f total and
The physical chemistry,
Date Location Depth Surface Bott(
(inches) Dissolved Didst0
Oxygen
(mg/l)~ (mg
7/14/98 Head 36 74 ~:~ 7.~
7/14/98 Mouth 24 '6.9 ~;;~ 7
24.7
Date Location
26.6 26.6
Bottom ,~ce Bottom pH
,~mpe~ro ~,Conducbwty Conductivity
(C)~,?.}~ S~,~' (ms) (ms)
¢:;25 3 38 39.1 6.7
; ~4.8 41.3 41.3 7.8
7/14/98
' 2. Ba~etric Survey
Northwest Creek is uniformly shallow throughout with an average depth of 3.0 to 4.0
fe~; 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
Cognty Department of Public Works (SCDPW). However, SCDPW files indicate that this creek
ha~ fi~t b~h ~edged for over ten years.
-17-
Northwest Creek
Sampling Locations
Northwest
Harbor
Mouth
Head
PEP TidaLCreeks St,,dy
Not to scale
Figure 3
Northwest Creek
Sampling Locations
PECONIC ESTUARY TIDAL CREEKS STUDY
2. Hydrodynamic Survey
Based on the results of the hydrodynamic 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 i~ 3.0 feet above
mean low water. This is reported by the computer program !~des and cUrrentg for Windows
d by fi pli d by E~TNRD
1995" and confirme eld sam ng conducte ·
The current meter was deployed at the end of N6~ffi3west ¢~gnding R(
pattern within the creek appears to be variable, poss~bly~gr~intluenced.: ~w;~ by
than a predictable ebb and flood current pattern. The av~ ion of the current was
recordedas 130deerees, eastsouth-east Velocities within ii~e~!~ere fairly weak with a
maximum velocity of 9.9 em/sec. The average velocity:was 2.42 em/sec, As expected, velocities
dropped out to near zero on the slack water. .tudied from a first
quarter moon to a full moon.
4. Land Use .-/ .,¢~
Northwest Creek ~s located m;~ast Hampton, approximately 2.25 miles from the Village
of Sag Harbor. It is approximately:~ an estimated surface area of 183 acres.
Northwest Harbor Park ', of Northwest Creek. The creek's natural
deciduous and evergreen trees, and some
sand' meets Northwest Harbor. Northwest Landing Road runs
east of the 1/8 mile from the creek mouth. A boat rental house and
a b _' 20 boat moorings border the creek at the end of
~ residential dwellings line this road. Northeast of the
creek is Conservation Area encompassing 1,100 sf. Sag
Harbor G;lf Club is ap~r0~imateiY 1,000 feet west of the creek.
Approximately ~0. percent of the shorehne assocmted w~th Northwest Creek was
int~dal saltmarsh. ~i~ a very small portion of the northeast shoreline was bulkheaded,
app~6ximately 840 !in~a~ feet in front of nine houses, with 11 shorefront lots. Also associated
with (h~northeast Comer of the creek was a small mooring field which is maintained by Town
Tmsi~. N0rth~est Creek is completely surrounded by the Northwest Harbor Co. Park.
Imm~ateiy adjacent to the west of the park and the creek is the Barcelona Neck/Sag Harbor
Golf Club.
-18-
PECONIC ESTUARY TIDAL CREEKS STUDY
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
~ctoocr
As with Fresh Pond, shore birds or water dependent b~rds were ab~dant in the NorthweSt
Creek. This includes the belted kingfisher, great egret, an~ snowy egret,
such as the northern mockingbird (Mirnuspolyglottos),
house sparrow (Passer domestic*us) as well as
maenas) and ribbed mussels (Geukensia demissus) wer~
In2
Creek.
30%
the mouth
Arthropods
green crabs (Carcinus
6. Macrobenthic
The results of the macrobenthic ~pling '? > distinctly different
communities. Those present at the heaO of the ~ek reflec/e;d ~ommun/ty most typically
associated with silty fine grmn sediment while, those at th(mouth were clearly different
indicating a medium/coarse grained Sand ~!)~!
benthi~.~(gamsms observed at the mouth of Northwest
60% of these grabs, and Annelids comprised over
a total of 126 benthic organisms observed at
40% of these organisms, and
July, at the head of Northwest
Cre~. Annehds comprised qver 65% of these orgamsms, and Arthropods comprised
appi:0Ximately 25%. In December, there was a total of 382 benthic organisms observed at the
hea~pf Northwest Creek. Annelids comprised over 50% of these organisms, Arthropods
c0mp~sed approximately 40%. The benthic commumty found at the head of the creek tn July
was 2~inated b~elids (with significant abundance ofNeanthes succinea and Mediomastus
ambieseta)iln December, the head of the creek was also dominated by Annelids (again with an
abund~ce of Neanthes succinea, and also Scolecolepides viridis and Hypaniola grayi). In the
mouth in July, the benthic commun/ty 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
-19-
PECONIC ESTUARY TIDAL CREEKS STUDY
Haploscopoplos rubustus.
C. Ligonee Creek
Ligonee Creek is located in the southwest comer o~ the upper s~g Harb0r Cove entirely
located within the Town of Southampton. Ligonee Creelci~ a long (2,80~-e~t) ~ast to west and
narrow (average width approximately 200 feet) north to S~hth body 9£~ater hp~rO~a~ly .~3.
acres in size The sediments associated with the bottom ~fthe creek Uniformlfr°n~iSts ~f~ ~ilty
fmc grain material from the mouth to the head. No sub'~qU~t~c y?getatmn was evident
throughout the study period. In general, salinities were s~gher at the mouth (average
26 7 ~t) and lower at the head (average 17 3 ppt) This e~ b~affi~bu~ed to a six inch layer of
freshwater (0.6 ppt) on the surface at the head of the creek dunng ~o~d~. Bottom salnut~ s
were more uniform. The shoreline ofLigonee Cr~?~,mostly dey~p~or channehzed. A
narrow band of intertidal and nigh marsh can b~:~d ~ north and~sorth shores, primarily at
the mouth, wxth saltmarsh cordgrass and the grounds¢! ~;~gmpron~s~ng the bulk of
vegetation. :?
L~gonee Creek was surveyed fox, the hy~odynamxq~s~Y from August 25, 1998 to
August 26, 1998, for macr0bentniC inv~rtebrate~on December 4, 1997 and July 6, 1998, for
water quality analysis on June 9 1998, on July 28, 1998 for
and in Jul~ The following sections report
the
Brook. The waters
water qu~iity
chloropyh Il-a, phosphorus,
ponds located in Ligonee
ed to shellfishing by the NYSDEC. The
indicate relatively high levels of ammonia, total
~gen.
The physical chemxstry of L~gonee Creek ~nd~cate relatively low levels of sahmty. The
phy~!¢al chemistry fi~id data analysis appears below:
- 20 -
PECONIC ESTUARY TIDAL CREEKS STUDY
Date Location Depth Surface Bottom Surface Bottom
(inches) Dissolved Dissolved Salinity Salinity
Oxygen Oxygen (ppm) (ppm)
(rog/I) (mg/I)
7/6/98 Head 32.4 5.1 3.3 , ,.. 17 8: ,:::~:i, i9.7
7/6/98 Mouth 42 5.5 6.7 ~ 22 23.5
Date Location Surface Bottom-.~.Sdrface ~c Bottom dH
Temperature Temperature Co~i~J~i~ Conductivity
(C) (C) (ms) ~ j
7/6/98 Head 21.6 24.9 :~28.4 ':' :: ~ ~!5 6
7/6/g8 Mouth 25.5 26 ~ ,~'~n, ~.~ '38!5 ::" 6.5
2. Bathymetric
Ligonee Creek, unlike the
There is no recent record of
the creek is considerably deep
the creek is adead end cul de
creeks, is deeper with a central charmcl.
The station located at the mouth of
~ depth of 2.5 feet. The head of
with a depth o£0 to ! .0 feet. No boat
end of East Cove Road. The results of the
hydrodynamic study , normal ebb and current exist within Ligonee Creek,
alth0~gh ~ peaking at 5.5 cm/second and dropping out to near zero
d~ slack water periods. Based on the field observation in conjunction with the tides and
cur/ent program, it doe~:appear the typical ebb and flood tide 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 h~dr0dynamic study ended on a new moon.
-21 -
Ligonee Creek
Sampling Locations
Noyack
Bay
Mouth
Head
PEP Tidal Creeks Study
Sag
Harbor
Li..gonee ~
Figure 4
Ligonee Creek
Not to scale
Sampling Locations
PECONIC ESTUARY TIDAL CREEKS STUDY
4. Land Use
Ligonee Creek is located in Southampton, approximately ~/2 mile from 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 ~ajority of the
residences have maintained lawns. The rest of the creek is vegetated ~,th~re~s; wetlands, and
trees. The creek spills into Sag Harbor Cove to the north, and~9 the e~[:~i~gh The Little
Narrows passageway to Morris Cove and Upper Sag Harbor Cove. TheS~¢~baYments also have
houses and docks along their borders. ;
There are several ponds south of Ligonee Pond and
Crooked Pond. They are set back from the main roads that to them. The majority of
the land surrounding these ponds is vegetated with de 'and shrubs.
Ligonee Creek has one of the more develope
The entire shoreline is lined with 3
Point. Most of the houses have a small
power boat. A very small percentage of
5. Wildlife
The presence of t
activity of feeding
creek.
and
surveyed.
south sh0i~e, and four on Long
: with a small to medium sized
not overly evident. The surface
pecies, mostly evident within the
~; along with the great egret, belted kingfisher,
t and white-throated sparrow) which utilize the shoreline.
~iOertebrates
The results e ~ling program indicate that there is little difference
betw~ the benthic the head and mouth of the creek. This is, in part, due to
the ~imilarity in grain siZ~ 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.
- 22 -
PECONIC ESTUARY TIDAL CREEKS STUDY
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.
At the head of the creek in July, Annelids (with a significant abundance of:
Haploscopoplos rubustus) were the dominant organism. In p:~cember:~{ ~ he~a, the Annelids
were again the dominant organism, with an abundance of Ca~i~ella ca~it~a~dfltreblospio
benedicti (to a lesser extent). At the mouth of the creek, Ann~lids were ~ ~bmiiiant organism
discovered in both December and July. In December, si~ficant ab aanCa 6 f a i ella
capitata and Streblospio benedicti were again observed~ Mollus~$ %ere represent~i:i bY
significant abundance of Hydrobia minuta.
The shallow water shellfish survey (April 1998) con y**~he Comell Cooperative
...... ~-:~; .
Extension, had a samphng location ~n close proximity to EEA s lJe~e;?stat~on at the mouth of
....
the creek. The results of this survey ~ndmated that3~s~bs~ant~al poputaBon of hard clam
(Mercenarm mercenarza) was present, w~th n~h~ ~8~67 clams/9:2~ m~ found at thru
location.
D. Alewife Creek
Alewife Creek is located atthe south~end of N6rth Sea Harbor and is connected to Big
F~sh Pond tO ~e south and !s totally located Wi~ Town of Southampton Alewife Creek is
ne of th~i~?t t~dai~roe~ ~eyed, apprp~ately s~x acres m s~ze. The portmn of the
creek th od for ~ Pro~ ~s longi~i~proximately 2,600 feet (north to south) and
narrow (ea~'i~ }with ~ av~g~dth ofapproximatel 100 feet The shoreline of
Alewife Creek i~ h~avilY developed~.~w!.'th both residential housing, private power boats and docks
and two large:s~bli~ ~arinas ~11 patches of intertidal and high marsh (mostly salt'marsh
cordgras~c~'~o~i tr~e) are.preSent along the east and west shores. The sediments
associat~ with Alewife Creek are almost entirely comprised of fine grain silts with no sub-
aqu~ Vegetation present Salinities varied greatly at Alewife Creek with an overall average of
2
~ ppt. Sahmt~es at the mouth were the highest, averaging 26.5 ppt and lowest at the head,
a~ing 14.9 ppt. A harrow six-inch layer of freshwater (0.4 ppt) could be found floating
ab0~higher salinity levels at Iow tide.
i Alewife Creek was surveyed from August 24, 1998 to August 25, 1998 for the
hydr6dyn~nic 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.
- 23 -
Alewife Creek
Sampling Locations
Little
Peconic
Bay
Head
Alewife ~,
[J.l
Figure 5
PEP Tidal Creeks Study
Not to scale Alewife Creek
Sampling Locations
PECONIC ESTUARY TIDAL CREEKS STUDY
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 t%ts hi~e shown high
coliform counts which may be due to freshwater input from Big Fresh P6~id: ~e water quality
anal sis of Alewife Creek for this study indicated relative!yhigh levels ofni~ogen, total and
Y
fecal coliforms, and phosphorus. ~
The physical chemistry field data analysis appe oW: '
Date Location Depth Surface BS{{om s~cei, Bottom
(inches) Dissolved Dissolved s~iini~ Salinity
Oxygeq~ ~' ~®~
:~geo (pp~) (ppm)
7 ; i
7/14/98 Mouth 120 8 43 ~ 25. 26
7/14/98 Head 24 7.97 ~ 6.5 ~:~ ~18.3 24.2
Date Location Surrac~ Bott~ ! S~ce Bottom pH
TemPera~re Temp ~ C~ti~ctivity Conductivity
~f~(*C) ;¢, (C) ~ (ms) (ms)
7/14/98" ou~ ~5.8 25.3 40.12 40.92 8.1
7/14/98 Read :<,: 25~2 ~25.3 34.6 37.84 6.9
2. Survey
: Alewife Creek .t at the mouth with a central channel running most of the creek.
This ~hannel appears tog maintained to permit the passage of vessels up and down the creek.
Th~Depamnent of Pubi~C Works has never dredged this creek. This channel has an average
dePth of approximat¢i~ 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
de~, with small depressions of up to 8 feet deep.
- 24 -
PECONIC ESTUARY TIDAL CREEKS STUDY
3. Hydrodynamic Survey
The current meter was deployed in Alewife Creek, across the street fi.om 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 part based on the long
narrow dimensions of the creek. The currents have an average velocity 0~!67 6~second, with a
maximum of 4.27 em/sec and travel in an east northeast (66 degrees) ~i The
hydrodynamic survey ended six days before a first quarter ~%n.
4. Land Use
Alewife Creek is located in Southampton, a north of the Village of
Southampton. It is estimated to be 15 acres in surface ~a. of North
Sea Harbor, a bay on the north shore of the south ~9~o.f~Long to
Little Peconic Bay. North of the creek, on the ~ ofNo~h S~'Harbor, is Conscience
Point National Wildlife Refuge. An estimatcd~65 p ~fthe creek,S narrow, V2 mile long
waterfront is developed, mostly with sing!~2:~mily ~S~¢~S, ~ekSl bulkheads and two
marinas. ~?.
Single-family residences dot the
runs along the northeast section 0fNorth
tributary called Davis ' '
Cree~:i~etland
bulkhead
of N0rth Sea Harbor. Towd Point Road
-* on this road crosses over another
ck. There is a
Conscience Point National
side of North Sea Harbor.
Located on
entire shoreline is
shore); bulkheaded or
utilized waterways surveyed during this study.
marinaS(X0i~h r~or; than one hundred powerboats and assorted
of a small portion of the head of Alewife Creek, the
(24 on the eastem shore, 7 on the western
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.
- 25 -
PECONIC ESTUARY TIDAL CREEKS STUDY
Spawning typically occurs when the water temperature reaches 55 to 60° 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
(Lams argentatus) and double-crested cormorant (Phalocrocorax auritus).
Although the amount of shoreline vegetation is extremely limited! ~pe~e~ such as
ltmarsh cord ass, common reed, and the groundsel treE are present,~l~ng ~ ~lack locus~t.::
(Robinia pseudo-acacia), black cherry (Prun~ ~ co~bn three-s~i~e (Sc~s
pungens) present at the head of the creek. ' ~;~'
6. Macrobenthic Invertebrates
The results of the marcrobenthic , different
communities. Those present at ~ community most typically
associated with silty fine grain materials. ~t creek also were
represented by extremely shallow water aiiow tide (~.5 feet) . fluctuating salinities
(0.4. ppt on the surface and 16.0~ botto~ 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
Creek. ~lids
~served at the mouth of Alewife
In December, there was a total of 229
'Alewife Creek. Annelids comprised over 60% of
'35%.
:head of Alewife Creek. In December,
there at the head of Alewife Creek. Annelids
composed over 60% and Mollusks comprised over 30%.
The benthic com-fiaunity found at the head of the creek was dominated by polychaete
w0~s. Also observe~ ~as the Mollusk, Nassarius obsoletus. Conditions at the mouth of the
c~'~'were considerably more stable in terms of both depth and salinity. The sediments
C6hta~ ined a higher'~rcentage of medium sands along with the silty fines. At the mouth of the
cle~ in J~i~i ~ Annelids~were the dominant organism (with a large amount of Streblospio
benedictiObServed). To a lesser extent, Mollusks were observed (represented by Nassarius
obsoletus). In December, Streblospio benedicti were again abundant, as was Capitella capitata,
and the Arthropod Leptocheirus plumolosus.
- 26 -
PECONIC ESTUARY TIDAL CREEKS STUDY
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~urveyed. The Creek
is approximately 3,400 feet long north to south and 375 feet wide east to ~St on average. The
east side of the creek is the most heavily developed, while thei~est sid~ S~tiil e0ntains a '
significant amount of intertidal and high marsh. The spe~.i~ ~;mposi~i~:.!i:~ ~i~iar to the othe~
creeks surveyed with salt marsh cordgrass and groundseItree.
Salinities varied from the head of the creek with~ 6¥er~i~ salinit3 fit/
at the head averaged 18.3 ppt and 23.8 ppt at the mouth. ~The h6~aters of Meetinghouse
Creek, a formerly connected t~dal wetlands, drmn throu~ an a~gg~:LPng Island duck farm. A
noticeable freshwater layer was observed floating on top of the ~ti~ Water. Water depths
throughout the creek are maintained at a uniform depth of 6 to 8 fe~t :' ~etinghouse Creek has
been cited by SCDHS as contributing a signific~{~i~tri~nt load to t~ ~ec~nic Estuary system
and is under further mvestlgatlon.
Meetinghouse Creek was surveyed from ~U~ust 17, 19~g ~ August 18, 1998 for the
hydrodynamic study, on December 5; ~.997 anc~,,July 6, 1998 for macrobenthic invertebrates, June
11, July 30, and September 21, 1998 fo~ ater;~uahty analysis April 21, 1998 for bathymetfic
data and in July of 1998 for phYsic31 sections report the
results of each discipline.
The ~SDEC rePSrts that/~t~ ~)liform counts reached 2501 mpn/100 ml on August
12, 1994. ~ecal cohforms reached 460 mpn/10Oral on the same day. The water quality analysis
of Meetinghouse Creek ~o~:~ ~tUdy indicate that these waters are the most nutrient r/ch of all
the mPrdl00ml on Augus~ 12, eport. Relatively extremely high levels of nitrogen, ammonia,
php~homs, and total chl6rophyll-a were discovered Total and fecal coliform levels were
relatively average or slightly higher than the other creeks sampled in this study.
Y~ The ~hys!~al ~chemlstry analysis lndmated relatively high levels of dissolved oxygen, at
the siiffa% ~aiers and relatively low levels of dissolved oxygen at the bottom waters. The
phySical chemistry field data analysis appears below:
~ 27 -
Meetinghouse Creek
Sampling Locations
Head
~uth
/?
J
Flanders
Bay
PEP Tidal Creeks Study
Figure 6
Not to scale Meetinghouse Creek
Sampling Locations
PECONIC ESTUARY TIDAL CREEKS STUDY
Date Location Depth Surface Bottom Surface Bottom
"(inches) Dissolved Dissolved Satinity Salinity
Oxygen Oxygen (ppm) (ppm)
(mg/I) (mg/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 B0tt°~ pH
Temperature Temperatur~ '
Conductlm~
Conducbwty
(C) (C) ® .~ (ms) (ms~:':~:i')
7/16/98 Head 22.8 24 ~-28; 33.5 6.8
7/16/98 Mouth 25.9 24.9 33~5 36.9 8.6
The depth of Meetinghouse Creek i~:?iinta~d~bY re~l~ dredging to provide access to
the creek for recreational and commerci~ ~ssels. ~e DepOSit 6f Public Works last dredged
this creek in the Spring of 1998. The~ay~age dep~ for the n~hannel is 8.5 feet. The very
head of the creek ~n the wc]mty of~emacrobenthic statmn zs only approximately two feet at
· · · ~2~ ~'
mean low water. This statmn ~s norfl~ of the mannas and boat traffic.
Based
by the
is receiving
end of Harbor Road (along Beach Ave.)
deploYment and hydrological studies conducted
Services, it was apparent that Meetinghouse Creek
from ~rge drainage area. This was confirmed by low salinity
Given the larger size and narrow corridor associated
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 6ver a twenty-four hour period. The average velocity was recorded as
4~34~em/sec, with a maXimum of 12.2 em/sec. The average direction of the current was
d i¢ ned to be 90:§ degrees, east southeast. The hydrodynamic survey ended three days before
- 28 -
PECONIC ESTUARY TIDAL CREEKS STUDY
4. Land Use
wooded land
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 r~Staurant.
Crescent Duck Farm (a.k.a. Corwin's Duck Farm) is on Edgar Avenue g0rthweSt of the creek;
several commercial facilities, including two auto body shop~i~e with~ 1~821/4 mile of the
creek· Meetinghouse Creek Park is located near the headW~i~ of the C~ekl ¥6Ss Docking and
is northeast of the head of the creek. The~i:~mainder~0~dg~ A~x;enU~ prope. ~rP/
Storage
facility
between Hubbard Avenue and Main Road consists ofh6~}~, appr6~imately i/2,1 ~drei:~h~ An
elementary school is on the northwest comer of Main A¥~[ie and'Edgar Avenuel The L~
· . ~ ~ .
tram tracks are perpendmular to the creek. A sheet metal ~v0~shop !s on Hubbard Avenue across
from the tracks.
Meetinghouse Creek Road runs along the east side of the ~ei~2 ~'s Lighthouse
Manna and Meetinghouse Creek Inn Restaur~t;~6. ~ ~reek:~_ s~de pfth~s road· This road ~s
lined with houses to the end, where the creel~ ~;Bay. lndi~ Island County Park is
· :5~ ~;~:~'~ ~ .
southwest of the creek mouth, so there ~s no itevelopment ~ that area. The creek ~s
approxunately 30 percent vegetated w~th trees reeds and we~.~ds. Overlook Drive runs along
the west sxde of the creek· This ~s a narrow d~rt road which~as no sxgn and ~s approximately ½
, ¢ . .
rmle long. It ~s more secluded than ~ roads omthe creeks east sxde. There is swamp and
wooded land on the west s~de offs road fo~iI~e northern half of~ts length, and houses line the
east side along the creek· Th~:sOtithern half n both sides.
odlands are on Main Road near the creek's headwaters·
creek. Swamps and vacant
of the creek·
developed by two large marinas and
shore and private docks. In excess of 200
pow~[boats were observed ~llzing the waters of Meetinghouse Creek· The headwaters and
ass~lated drainage bas~ of Meetinghouse Creek are heavily utilized by agriculture.
5. Wildlife
Although not readily v~s~ble ~t must be assumed that large schools of bait fish are present
in M~tinghouse 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.
- 29 -
PECONIC ESTUARY TIDAL CREEKS STUDY
Large numbers of waterfowl were observed utilizing the creek during the various surveys.
These would include mailard, black duck, buffiehead (Bucephala albeola), mute swan (Cygnus
olor), as well as gulls and terns, such as the herring gull, greater black-backed (Larus marinus),
common tern and least tern (Sterna albifrons), belted kingfisher and numerous barn swallows
(Hirundo rustica) and a small nesting colony of purple martins (Progne~bis). ~umerous
hybrid duck (e.g., mallard, white domestic), were present in the creek at ~! Sbservation periods.
Passerine species appeared to be limited to those typically found iff iirban environments:
(e.g., house sparrow and starlings). :;
6. Macrobenthic Invertebrates
The results of the macrobenthic sampling program ~ the benthic
commtmities, those at the head and mouth, were ~tr~!y simil~: Th~ is~diment grain size
analysis indicated that both areas were similar, ~g m~stly a ~dY fine sand substrate.
In July, there was a total of 470 benthic orgY§ms 0b}~Qed at the mouth ot
Meetinghouse Creek. Annehds composed over ~9¥o oftheS~!~bs, and Arthropods comprised
over 40%. In December, there was a~)t0tal of 16~9 benthic orgamsms observed at the mouth of
Meetinghouse Creek. Arthropods compnsed a~ost 80% of these organisms, and Annelids
comprised approximately 20%.
in jui~} ~ere observed at the head of Meetinghouse
Creek ~¢0as comPri~ ~6st 75% of these grabs,and Annelids c°mpfised alto°st 25°/°'
In December, ~erelwas a total 6f 148 ~nthic organisms observed at the head of Meetinghouse
Creek. Annelld~ ~mp~sed almbSt 8~ 6fthese organisms, and Arthropods comprised over
:Ai both locations, the ffi6st abundant organisms was the amphipod Ampelisca abdtta.
This made the arthropodS th~ dominant group. The polychaete worm were the next most
abundant group, with a large abundance ofMediomastus ambieseta observed.
:reek
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.
- 30 -
PECONIC ESTUARY TIDAL CREEKS STUDY
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 saltmarsh cordgrass marsh separates the creek from the North Fork
Country Club. The headwaters of the creek flow through an intertidal marsh dominated by the
common reed. Salinities vary reD' little within the creek. The average salinity ~t the head
station was 26.1 ppt and 27.1 ppt at the mouth. No evidence of freshw~t~i' flo~:Was observed
within the creek. West Creek is extremely shallow with an a~erage d~ bfi~l.5 feet at MLW.
West Creek was surveyed from August 10 to AugUst I1, 1998 f0~
study, and December 5, 1997 and July 15, 1998 for macrObenthic in~ertebrate~?~e
and September 21, 1998 for water quality for bathymetr~?nd¢~i~ ~uly of
1998 for physical chemistry analysis. The following the results of each
discipline.
1. Water Quality
The waters of West Creek are op The NYSDEC
have reported high levels ofcoliforms ~!h~ese watem (total e~li~6~ levels of 2501 mpn/100 ml
on October 22, 1996 and again on December and fecal coliform levels of 120 on
October 22, 1996).The water ~ t Creek for this study indicate relatively low
levels of nitrogen, phosphorus, levels of West Creek
' higher than ~ study.
below.
Date ~=~-~:~ ~L~/~c,~on DeP~ Surface Bottom Surface Bottom
! ~?~ (in~ Dissolved Dissolved
Salinity Salinity
,~¢~ ,~;¢~:>~ ~ Oxygen Oxygen (Ppm) (ppm)
'' (mgll) (mg/I)
4/20/98 Flow ~ 30 24.4 24.4
. ~eter
5/~ 5/98 Flow 48 24.9 25
meter
~JlS198 Mouth 72 7.6 7.5 25.9 25.9
-31 -
West Creek
Sampling Locations
West
g
Mouth
Great
Peconic
Bay
~t
PEP Tidal Creeks Study
Figure 7
Not to scale West Creek
Sampling Locations
PECONIC ESTUARY TIDAL CREEKS STUDY
Date Location Surface Bottom Surface Bottom pH
Temperature Temperature Conductivity Conductivity
(C) (C) (ms) (ms)
4/20/98 Flow 12.4 12.4 38.42 3~.41~ 8
meter
5/15/98 Flow 16.6 16.5 :321~6 ;327 ~ 8.1
meter
7/15/98 Mouth 28.2 26.3 41,5 41.5 81
2. Bathymetric Survey
These results indicate that West Creek is
depth of the main creek is 1.0 to 1.5 feet
Great Peconic Bay has an average
creek in 1982, 1994, and 1996.
water. The average
inlet leading to
Th~ SCDPW has dredged this
The.current meter
about 5.
show
was
61.5 cra/sec.
are pro
four days pno~ [o
4. Land Use
,fthe New Suffolk Avenue Overpass,
conducted by EEA
exists at the mouth of West Creek where the meter
was 23.2 cm/sec, with a maximum velocity of
west northwest. Given the circular shape
is li[~¥y that current patterns might not be as clearly defined and
would be expected to be weak. The hydrodynamic survey
tuarter moon.
~ ;i-) i:;West creek is located in Southold. It _h,a_s approximately 153 acres of surface area, and 1S
on~:~ ]~gi Xlmost 85 percent of the creek s borders are vegetated with wetlands, common
reed, and deciduous and evergreen trees. 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
- 32 -
P'ECONIC ESTUARY TIDAL CREEKS STUDY
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 ~s. bUffer is extremely
narrow, (less than 50 feet in some locations). Grathwohl Road to the 4~s~d New Suffolk
Avenue to the south border the creek. Residential houses c~e found ~
and northwest, and a golf course (North Fork Country Cl[b) to the wesil'
ramp was available, it does not appear that boat traffic w~ .
primary uses of the ramp would appear to be access
observed on the creek.
who~ bllnds were
The majority of West Creek did not !appear to~isupp~;[~ge numbers of finfish. This
could be con~buted to the ye, shallow d~(hs ~d ~Re~g~¢~¢e~es enco~tered wimin me
creek. Templates ~ excess of31.6°~{89°F) ~ record~ ~h:'~uly 30, 1998. Nmbe~ of
bht fish ~d juve~le bluefish were obeyed at:~ mouth ~e creek by the New Suffo~
Avenue Bridge. ::5? ~¢~
s of am~ ~emes we tfl~ze ~e s~o~d~ng mtemdal m~sh ~d
· e open 5 would ~efic~ ~d sno~ e~et, ~eat blue
heror gull, le~t ~d co~on tern, mall~d ~d black duck ~d
It is ex~emely likely that West Creek is
utilized by passerine species ~ o~ obse~ations indicated.
also utilized by ~e ribbed mussel ~d fiddler crab w~ch
' 6. M~crobenthic Invertebrates
;:i:~:The results' ~f the macrobenthic sampling program revealed two distinctly different
benthi~ ~mmuni~ies. 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.
- 33 -
PECONIC ESTUARY TIDAL CREEKS STUDY
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 Annelids comprised over 30%. In December
there was a total of 296 benthic organisms observed at the mouth of West Creek. Annelids
comprised almost 50% of these organisms, and Mollusks comprised nearly 30%.
In July, there was a total of 136 benthic organisms observed at tlie ~ead 6fWest Creek.
Mollusks comprised almost 75% of these grabs, and Annelid~?mpnsed app~0x~mately 25 ~/o. In
December, there was a total of 67 benthic organisms obserVed at the h~d B~we~ Cyeek. ·
Mollusks comprised almost 80O/o of these organisms, and Annelids q6~¢ri~d ~d~t:~0O/o.
The samples collected at the mouth in July were dormnated w~th Mollusks (]gaSsarms
obsoletus was the most dominant), and in Decembe Ioligochaetes,
Nepthy incisa and Nucula proxima were each abundant).
The samples collected at the head in both December and ~1~ ~v~e dominated by the
Mollusks (Nassarius obsoletus was
G. Goose Creek
Goose Creek ~s located along ~e south;~lde of the North Fork and drains into Southold
Bay. Goose Creek is entirely located in the: t of S0~thold and is one of the largest creeks
; in size. ~q ek is fairly long, approximately 4,350 feet
east to 250 feet Wid~f~:i~i to south on average. Like many of the
other connecting the creek to Southold Bay.
is hilly:variable in depth, sediment type, SAV and shoreline
. fairl~'~l~tillow with an average depth of 1 to 4 feet, but contains
and small islands. The sediment ranges from very silty fine
grain ~tthe, head to coarse: at the mouth. Wigeon grass is present at the head, as well as an
intertidal ; 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
G06~e Creek and enlisti~d voluntary assistance with water quality monitoring of this creek. This
w~ ~di~ne as a p~lot pr6ject wahin the Town.
) ~se Creek was surveyed from April 13, 1998 to April 20, 1998 for the hydrodynamic
study, on 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 bathymetry, and in July of
1998 for physical chemistry analysis. The following sections report the results of each
discipline.
- 34-
PECONIC ESTUARY TIDAL CREEKS STUDY
1. Water Quality
The water quality analysis 0f Goose Creek indicated relatively low nutrient levels. The
physical chemistry field data analysis appears in the table below:
Date Location Depth Surface Bottom
(inches) Dissolved Dissolve~ :~ Sahnlty ;salini~
Oxygen Oxygen (ppm) /:~ (PP~)
(mg/I)
(mg/I)
4/13/98 Flow meter 10.04 9.82 ; ?v ~6.;4 26.5
4/20/98 36 25;g .,q,,,-: 25.7
7/15~98 Head 24 6.6 6.6 · ~u~: ~,<.: 55;26.8
7/15/98 Mouth 72 6.9 *~ 6 9
;~ 27.1 ~' ~-~ !27.2
Date Location Surface~; BOti0m i~ Sgff~Ce Bottom pH
Tempg[&~ure Te~¢erature ~Jctivity Conductivity
I~' (C) (ms) (ms)
~> '~-; 10 29.55 29.64 8.2
4/13/98 ¢% Flow meteF:, <~ 10.1
4~20 ,~ %, ~, ~: ~, 11.3 ¢ ~'¢ ~ 1.4 40.3 40.33 8
7/15i *'
Head ~, 25.8 25.9 42.2 42.5 8
7/15/98 '~ ¢, ~ Mouth ¢~t~' 24~1h~, 23.9 41.4 41.3 8
S~ey
~ Creek are extremely variable, but average out as
shallow, with an average~ate~ depth of 1 to 4 feet at mean low water. The average tidal
fluCtUation in Goose Cr~k is approximately 2.3 feet as determined from the Window '95 Tides
and Current Program~ An extensive sand bar/shoal occupies the east/central portion of the creek,
along ~ith two small islands. The deepest portion of the creek can be found at the mouth leading
iht0 S6~01dBa~i Goose Creek was last dredged in 1995.
-35 -
Goose .Creek
Sampling Locations
.~_. ~ / ~
PEP Tidal Creeks Study
Not to scale
Little
Peconic
Bay
Figure 8
Goose Creek
Sampling Locations
PECONIC ESTUARY TIDAL CREEKS STUDY
3. Hydrodynamic Survey
The current meter was deployed on the south side of the Bayview Rd. Overpass, about 5-
10 feet f~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 circUl~hap~ of the main body
of the creek, it is likely that current patterns might not be as'iCl~arly defifi~di ~d hre probably
ak ~e was a 3~ u~e(~00il (on
wind driven. Currents would be expected to be we . ;~ Q ~
April 19) during the hydrodynamic study.
Goose Creek, located in Southold, is appr !Y 163 a~r~;:~ §5~face area and 1.25
rnil~o l~n~ An a~timated 65 nercent of~e creekt~{~0nt is aev iOp a ~im houses, docks,
bul~eads ~d moo~gs; some powerboats ~e m cr~ ,S ~a~r~xl~ate?
vegetated wi~ wetl~ds ~d deciduous, ueF~.. Goos~Bay~~ i~on cea~ moan,, a oean eno
road wi~ ~e creek at the end. ~ere is a private beach for ~ose Bay Estates residents only.
Southold Yacht Club is at the mou~ 0f~e cree~Y~ bridge ~n ~e e~t side of the creek, on No~h
Ba~iew Road, ms over Th~ ~reek opens into Southold Bay. No~
of the creek on P~e I The reminder of tbs
road is e sou~ side of the creek, is l~ed
Drive ~d Gle~ Road, on the
at ~e creek. A cemete~ is on Mhn Road no,west of
the creek.
The
GoOSe Creek consists primarily of single unit residential
develop ~m.~efit§. pier on pilings; a few have a hardened shoreline
consisting of bulkheadi~g i facilities. Nearly all the homes have a small power boat.
A fe~jet skies ~ boats were moored in the bay. A small intertidal
mar~h 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
- 36-
PECONIC ESTUARY TIDAL CREEKS STUDY
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.
Avian species observed on or around the creek included the various species 0f egrets,
herons, ducks, and gulls mentioned at the other creeks. In addition, cana~ goose (Branta
canadensis), greater yellowlegs (Tringa melanoleuca), ospreY (Pandion ~ii~aetus), common
loon (Gayla immer), and common grackle (Quiscalus qu' were a!s~ ~erve'd. Raccoons
(Procyon lotor) were also determined to utilize the
6. Macrobenthic Invertebrates
The results of the macrobenthic sampling progr~ rev6aI~d ~6 distinctly different
benthic communities. The benthic community found at the mouil/iS ~r~ ~sociated with a high
..... ~:~ ¥;~% . .
energy system. This ~s confirmed by the gram~$!~.~ ~gl~s:.which reports a dominance of
gr els and coarse sand (96~ sand). The b~ntl~c co found a~the head of the creek ~s
that of a silty fine grain environment, also .q~i~ported!~); si~'analysis which reports
75% silt. ; :~'
In July, there was a total of~'0~;~ bent~c;~rganism§ ~6bserved at the mouth of Goose
Creek. Annelids comprised almo~:~0% of thee there was a total of 43
benthic organ/sms observed:~tth~/mouth ~ Aschelminthes comprised over 65%
of these ~ ~¢::~
In December
Annelid:
anisms observed at the head of Goose Creek.
. and Mollusca comprised approximately 30%.
observed at the head of Goose Creek.
tpproximately 50%.
At the head oft July, the benthic community was vew diverse; Tellina
agilis and Ampelisca abd]ia were two dominant organisms. In December at the head of the
creek, there was a div~ Annelid community and also an abundance of Aschelminthes. At the
mouth of the creek in July the Annelids particularly Capitella capitata were the dominant
orgamsm. The mouth in December was dominated by Aschelminthes.
- 37 -
PECONIC ESTUARY TIDAL CREEKS STUDY
H. Bass Creek
Bass Creek is located on the southeast peninsula of Shelter Island within the Mashomack
Preserve (The 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 !on[' S~vifi currents are
encountered in the inlet Bass Creek is relatively more pond ii~ke and ~l~ly shaped, and is
one of the shallowest areas surveyed in this study, with an average depth ~0~2 t~ 1.0 feet at
MLW. The upper section of Bass Creek has a nearly complete covera~ of~dg~;grass on the
bottom, while the lower section and inlet are near void 0fSAV.~ Salinities wer6 fi~arlyidentiCal
at the head and mouth. Average salinity at the mouth Was 27,5 ppt and 27.6 ppt at the head.
Bass Creek was surrounded by an intertidal marsh d0minated;~y saltmarsh cordgrass and
high marsh which was represented by groundsel tree, m~sh eia~ glasswort
(Salicornia sp.) and salt grass (Distichlis spicata), b!~nding into an uP!ands 0f northern bayberry
(Myricapensylvanica) and switchgrass ((Pani~gm ~rgqturn). The sal~ ~arsh is surrounded by a
deciduous forest dominated by black oak (QU~ '~lu~n~)'~/? ;
Bass Creek was surveyed from jUly 27, ;1998 for the hydrologmal
survey, on December 15, 1997 and JUlY 12, 19~:for macr0~enthic invertebrates, June 10,
August 3, and September 22, 1998 f0~ ~ater q~lity analysis, July 28, 1998 for bathymetry, and
in July of 1998 for physical chemisTM ~ The follOwing sections report the results of each
discipline.
The ~SDE~o~d~the water quality acceptable at Bass Creek. However, since Bass
Creek is kn6~ to harbo!:~g~ ~umbers of birds, the water quality must be carefully momtored
to detec(impacts the w i~ay have on the water quality. The water quality analysis of
BasS:Creek for this study(~dicate relatively low nutrient levels. The headwaters of Bass Creek
indicate high levels of total suspended solids (480 mg/1) for one sample taken in July of 1998.
~may be a laborato~ anomaly as the head waters at Bass Creek appeared relatively clear,
~:other TSS levels ~ere relatively average for this same sampling station during other
safftPlmg periods.
DisSOlved oxygen levels were observed to be lower relative to the other creeks studied.
The physical chemistry field data table appears below:
- 38 -
PECONIC ESTUARY TIDAL CREEKS STUDY
Date Location Depth Surface Bottom Surface Bottom
(inches) Dissolved Dissolved Salinity Salinity
Oxygen Oxygen (ppm) (ppm)
(rog/I) (mg/I)
7/28/98 Flow meter 4.6 4.77 27.7 2718
Date Location Surface Bottom ~i~rface :BoSom ;: ;PH
Temperature Temperature!~nductivity ConducfiVi~
(C) (C) ~?~ (ms)(ms) '
7/28/98 Flow meter 23.6 23.6 ~4~;0~1'? 43.1 7.8
2. Bathymetric Survey !~ ~ ~ :-'~ ;:
In general, Bass Creek ~s an extremel~,~shallowrbody of wate~:w~th an average depth of
0.2 to 1.0 feet at mean low water. The t~.9 inost notable ~Xeeptio. r~s hre a deep hole centrally
located within the narrow corridor that/(6;nnects th~ two m~ bt>flies of the creek and the channel
that has been cut through the mlet and {~nters th~,Shelter Island Sound. The water ~n these two
areas average approximately 2.2 feel; and 1-fo~ deep at.W, respectively.
The charmel by
the swift currents that pass through
~current creek inlet, south of the wood bridge·
The r~lts of the hydrod~rme survey conducted by EEA show that a clear ebb/flood current
patte~ exists at the mouth of Bass Creek, where the meter was deployed. The average velomty
of B~s Creek was 22.2 6m/sec, with a maximum of 51.9 cra/sec. The average direction was
123 ~degrees, east south-east. Given the circular and somewhat irregular shape of the main
b6d3~ °f the creek, it is likely that current patterns might not be as clearly defined, and are
pr0~iY wind driven. Currents would be expected to be weak. The Department of Public
W6~ ~pw) has never dredged this creek. The hydrodynamic survey concluded three days
prior tbai~ quarter moon.
-39-
Bass Creek
Sampling Locations
Shelter
PEP Tidal Creeks Study
Head
SS
Creek
Figure 9
Not to scale
Bass Creek
Sampling Locations
PECONIC ESTUARY TIDAL CREEKS STUDY
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 ~Cluded from public
usage. With the exception of whatever may come in on the fl0bd~ Island Sound,
the waters of Bass Creek appear to be as pristine as possibl~?
5. Wildlife
Bass Creek, like all the other creeks surveyed,
Atlantic silversides, which attract large schools ofj
At Bass Creek, the presence of bait fi
appeared to be restricted to the inlet area
(Callinectes sapidus) were observed ~
creek.:
fish, mostly
;r and October.
e bluefish
adult blue crabs
Avian species observed in and argimd Bass Creek wero:~ m~xture of passerine and
aquatic species. Common species included the greater black:backed gull, herring gull, greater
yellowlegs, song sparrow (Melosp~za rnelodt~ rufus-slde~ towhee (Pzpdo erythrophthalmus),
and barn swallow. Additional wildlife obs included the raccoon, white-tailed deer
( Odocoileus ~irginianus), toa ~dhousii fowleri).
The fling program revealed two distinctly different
found at the mouth is one associated with a high
energy system. This grain size analysis which reports a dominance of
gravei~and coarse sand, i ~ benthic community found at the head of the creek is that of a
sil )~ne grain enviroment, also supported by the grain size analysis, which reports 77% silt.
In July, there ~as 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%1 ~ ~0minant Mollusk at the mouth of Bass Creek in July was Hydrobia minuta, and the
domin~t ~elids 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.
- 40 -
PECONIC ESTUARY TIDAL CREEKS STUDY
In July, there was a total of 846 benthic organisms observed at the head of Bass Creek.
Annelids 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 wei:~ discovered
here also. In December, there was a total of I 1 benthic organisms obse~cl at th~ head of Bass
Creek. Arthropods comprised over 35% of these organis~;f~chelmifi~iand Annelids each
comprised approximatelv 25%
I. West Neck Creek
West Neck Creek is located in the southwest
is fairly large, approximately 100 acres in size. The
has an average width of 625 feet east to west and is
Shelter Island. The creek is fed by West Neck
Harbor to the south. It is heavily utilized
West Neck Creek consisted of muddy
vegetation was observed during the
mouth of the creek than
the head. Bottom salinities were
The shoreline of Wegt NeCk
piers for ~
upland
West Neck Creek
feet north to south and
of
and West Neck
The ~s'~diments associated with
No sub-aquatic
t averaged 27.8 ppt and 26.9 ppt at
surface.
of residential dwellings. In
Most properties have small docks and
some fashion to prevent erosion.
high marsh can also be found between areas of
,pread of these marshes. The undeveloped
~ predominantly a mixed deciduous forest.
,:~ West Neck gt 3, 1998 to August 4, 1998 for the
hy~gdynamic-';;~ - survey, on DeCember 15, 1997 and July 12, 1998 for macrobenthic invertebrates,
J~n~l 1, August 3, and~eptember 22, 1998 for water quality analysis, April 22, 1998 for
batff:~etry, and in jul~ of 1998 for physical chemistry analysis. The following sections report
the results of each discipline.
-41 -
West Neck Creek
Sampling Locations
Creek '~.
Shelter
Island
Sound
M~uth
PEP Tidal Creeks Study
Figure 10
Not to scale
West Neck Creek
Sampling Locations
PECONIC ESTUARY TIDAL CREEKS STUDY
1. Water Quality
The water quality of West Neck Creek is influenced by nutrient flow from the
groundwater. This nutrient flow is most likely due to the presence ora 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 poultry farm, the nutrient flow in the groundwater ~ould be a
concern for the next 20 to 30 years The water quality data ~ysis indicate Slightly higher
nutrient levels than the other creeks studied, and both the waters at the head and mouth of th
creek indicated extremely high levels of total colifon'n, rela'tive to the other ~ee~ Studied. ~
June through late July, a short, but relatively intensive brown tid~ (Aureococcus :
anonhagefferens) bloom occuredin West Neck Bay, whlch iSfe~;bY West Neck Creeki This
blogm peaked at approximately 600,000 cells/per millilit~r ~,t of the tidal creeks studied
were relatively fi'ce from brown tide blooms dunng thi~udy ~¢~[~g to New York S
Grant s Brown T~de Research Imt~at~v . ;~
The physical chemistry field data table )w:
Date Location Depth se~chi sfirfaCe ~',~. Bottom Surface Bottom
(inches) ;,2~(feet) DiSsolved ii?~!~01ved Salinity (ppm) Salinity
Oxygen Oxygen (ppm)
(rog/I) (rog/I)
.
8~3~98 :¢;:~ ¢ Flow meter~ ~;530 ~. }¢.82 6.81 27.9 27.8
~Elow mete~ ~t 30~, '~ 6.15 7.43 27.7 27.8
e/419~;
~'~'~'~'~' t r;~ . 27.9
8/10/98~3~ ~Flow:me e : 30<~ , 5.63 5.47 28
Date ,;f
Locatio0 ~, ;~?:,~Surface Bottom Surface Bottom pH
,: :?~, i~mperature Temperature Conductivity Conductivity
(;;; '(C) (C) (ms) (ms)
¢"' 98 26.4 45.36 44.5 8.2
8131 Flow m~ter 27.3
8/4/98 Flow meter 27.1 26.4 44.82 44.39 8
8/!0/98 Flow meter 26 26 44.19 44.18 8
- 42 -
PECONIC ESTUARY TIDAL CREEKS STUDY
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 Mon~clalr Ave,at the ~outh of West NeCk
Creek. The results of the hydrodynamic survey conducte~i[y,.EE~, shbw that a ~ie~ ?b~?~d
current pattern exists at the mouth of West Creek where ~!~et~ was deployed
velocity of the current was 3.67 em/sec, w~th a maxim ~ ~sec. The average direction
was 305.5 degrees, west north-west. G~ven the cu:cular~§h~ of~g mmn body of the creek, at m
hkely that current patterns might not be as clearly defined, an d are ~ro~ably wind driven.
Currents would expect to be weak. The k , con~i~ ~r days prior to a full
moon.
4. Land Use
West Neck Creek, approx~gi~l~
This is one of the largest creeks,
with single-famil)
in surface area, 1s located on Shelter Island.
1 1/8 mi~s in length. The waterfi'ont is dotted
Jndeveloped land, making-up
of wetlands, open space, and
Island of the creek on Menantic Road. A paved boat
launch is at, ~e ~id of Montclair Road has three docks and 25-30 slips.
This is a i ~fDaniel Road meets the creek, where there are
approxtmately 10 shps, ~d~l~ across the creek has a power boat, three more are anchored in the
water, along with one saii~t ~d one rowboat. Sliver Beach Residential Community is on
Bayshore Drive. A boat I~unch is at the end of this road.
The primary ~ of the land surrounding West Neck Creek is residential housing,
foll0wed c[gse~y 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. Th~ ~reek also received stormwater runoff from the many roads that abut the creek.
- 43 -
PECONIC ESTUARY TIDAL CREEKS STUDY
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 speq?s likely t° be foUnd in West Neck
Creek would include the striped bass, weakfish (Cynoscion r~alis), sCup(st~otomus chrysops),
bay anchovies (Anchoa mttchtlh), and several hemng (Alosa spp.) species,:'::, '
Similarly, the avian species were represented by/most of ~ ~ater fowi~d wing bird
species (i.e., duck, heron and egrets) previousl) likely ~tlat 6~
waterfowl species, such as lesser and greater soup
goldeneye (Bucephala clangula),
merganser (Lophodytes cucullatus) are likely to
large birds of prey were seen on the creek
hawk (Buteo jamaicensis).
marila), common
and hooded
t also be noted that two
the red-tailed
6. Macrobenthic Inv~ebrates ¢~
The results of the macroben~:samp~g program revealed that both the benthic
communities, those at the head and'mouth w~,r~ extremelY similar. The sediment grain size
analysis lic~ e simiI~/~onta~g mostly a muddy fine sand substrate.
~enthic organisms observed at the mouth of West Neck
Creek. anisms, and Aschelminthes comprised over
30%. £ In December, there was a total of
2382 benthic ai:th~ mouth of West Neck Creek. Arthropods comprised over
75% comprised approximately 25%. The Annelids were
dominated ~ were dominated by a very large
(over 1700 organisms). The Annelids were dominated by class
oligO~haetes, with aknoS!256 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
comprised approximately 25%. In December at the head of the creek, the Arthropods were
represented by over 600 Ampelisca abdita. There was also a significant abundance of
Paraphoxus epistomus and Corophium sp.
- 44 -
PECONIC ESTUARY TIDAL CREEKS STUDY
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 BeachState Park and open undeveloped
land to the north, and directly connected to Long Beach BaY~ch emp~ie~ ~to Orient Harbor
and ultimately into Gardiners Bay. Little Bay is approx~t~ly 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 an harsh t6 h and a
barrier beach-size back dune community to the south, along the small
man-made channels in the northeast corner.
Grain size at the mouth is medium sand with
consists mostly of fine silty/grain material.
Salinities showed little difference;between ~e
the mouth was 28.5 ppt and 27.6
and the head.
while the head
head. Average salinity at
influx was evident.
Little Ba)
study, on December 15, 1~c
3, and Se
1998 for the hydrodynamic
invertebrates, June 10, August
1998 for bathymetry, and in July
The following sections report the results of each
The water c of Little Bay creek indicate relatively low nutrient levels,
an~ ~verage to low chlo~Ph~ll-a, TOC, and coliform levels. The physical chemistry field data
analYsis table appears b~low
Date ~ Location Depth Surface Bottom Surface Bottom
(inches) Dissolved Dissolved Salinity Salinity
Oxygen Oxygen (ppm) (ppm)
(mg/I) (mg/1)
4/3/98 Flow meter 22 10.4 10.1 26.2 26.5
- 45 -
Little Bay Creek
Sampling Locations
Little
Bay
Creek
Head
Gardiners
Bay
PEP Tidal Creeks Study
Figure 11
Not to scale Little Bay Creek
Sampling Locations
PECONIC ESTUARY TIDAL CREEKS STUDY
Date Location Depth Surface Bottom Surface Bottom
(inches) Dissolved Dissolved Salinity Salinity
Oxygen Oxygen (ppm) (ppm)
(mg/I) (mg/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 suifaco~, Bottom PH ·
Temperature Temperature Con~uc!lw~,- Conductivity
(C) (C) , (ms)~ ~ (ms)
4/3/98 Flow meter 12.7 12.3,~ ~ ~31.31 ~/~'~"~ ~ ~
~ ~;: 408 ~ :~4b.8 8.1
4/13/98 Flow meter 9.7 9~;~ ~'
7/12/98 Head 27.5 :2~2 ~ 43~ ~ 43.3 7.5
7/1~98 Mouth 28.4 ? 26.2 ~ 45,~ 43.8 7.9
The DPW
Bathymetnc Survey
on Figure 3-10. Little Bay is
with an average depth of approximately 6 feet at MLW.
3. Survey
The c doyed at the mouth of Little Bay, at the eastern-most part of
Beach The result~ ~f the hydrodynamic survey conducted by EEA show that a clear
ebb/flood current patt~ exists at the mouth of Little Bay Tributary where the meter was
de~i6~ed. The average velocity of the current was 19.77 em/sec, with a maximum of 50.19
cm/s~'. The av~e direction was 179 degrees, south south-east. The hydrodynamic survey
began'~ ahew moon and concluded 1 day prior to a 1" quarter moon.
- 46 -
PECONIC ESTUARY TIDAL CREEKS STUDY
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.
Wetlands and woody vegetation engulf the edges. Little Bay is nestled between open space, salt
marshes, and Orient Beach State Park. The park office, a pl3ygmund, and rest fagility with a hard
top parking lot, are the only developments in the Park. N~Velopments are visible along creek~
A few farms are no~hwest of the creek. Orient By The S~is a low density residential
community north of the creek on Route 25 A cemeteryi~located °nRt 25 apP~ai~ly, i28
mile from the park s entrance. Cedar Birch Lane, an unP~'~xt'ro~id annroximatelv ~ ~ld~10n,,
bo ders the bay w~th approxmaately 10 houses. Narrow ~erRoad, an estimated 1.75 miles
from Little Bay, runs parallel to Hallocks Bay; this
Narrow River Road has a town ramp with 27 slips
berths/slips. A few small residential dwellings
along with what appeared to be man-made
along the banks. These homes support
and dock systems.
5. Wildlife
No direct
can
estuadne
into Long Beach Bay.
~ 50
creek
lp~n the dredge materials
with small piers
during the field surveys. This
or larger size of the creek. It is
' discussed (i.e., Atlantic silversides, ldllifish, sand
flounder) along with many other
each survey per/od. All of the previously discussed
present. Additionally, several pairs of osprey were
on plaffo,~ along the creek. Several pair of piping plovers (Charadrius
rn~l~6dus) were observed6n the adjacent beach along Gardiners Bay. Additional passerine
sP~s, in particular V~0us wood warbler (family Parulidae) were observed in the autumn
O!i~(Elaeagnus u~$~ellata) 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.
- 47 -
PECONIC ESTUARY TIDAL CREEKS STUDY
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 muddyfine sand substrate.
In July, there was a total of 402 benthic organisms obs¢!;Ved at th~ m~uth of L~ttle Bay
tributary. Annelids comprised over 65% ofthes, ' ~d Asch~?~i~prised over
20% The Annehds were dominated by Sylhs si es w~tdts, andStre!~!osp~o
benedicti in relatively equal abundances (approx amsms were coll~[~ ~q~ each
of these species). In December, there was a total ' ;ms observed ~ith~~ mouth
of Little Bay tributary. Annelids comprised alma anisms. These Annelids
were dominated by class Oligochaetes, with over
In July, there was a total of 2 benthic
tributary. There was one Aschelminthe and
total of 24 benthic organisms observed at
comprised almost 65% o
IV. ANALYSIS AND RI
A~ · Fresh Pond
there was a
. trib~tary. Arthropods
clearly indicate that, as expected, Fresh Pond
The pond itself is surrounded by a good buffer
of u[ ntertidal and high marsh ecosystem.
Abundances a somewhat lower in density than
problem. The mouth of Fresh Pond is clearly
a high efi~rgy gular basis by swirl currents during the tidal exchange.
The s6ft fine grain sediment f0find at the head of the pond would be expected to support a sizable
ben~c commurtity. The fact that it does not, may not reflect any anthropogenic effect; benthos
~Y,be controlled mo~?by the dense growth of widgeon grass which may sufficiently shade the
b~0~t limiting faunal development. A similar situation was also observed occurring in the
B~S Q~k system f0und in the Mashomack Preserve on Shelter Island. Both creeks/ponds are
eit/~eiy g~i~ in size and shape; both isolated from development; and both dense with
widgeon grass and low 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
- 48 -
I~ECONIC ESTUARY TIDAL CREEKS STUDY
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 th~headl and sand at the
mouth. The benthic community present at the head is extreni~ly well dev~i~P~d, and comprised
of numerous species, some of which are large and consider~:~ ~o be long g; sandwonns
(Neanthes succinea). The sand wor by tl [nn~ ~nn (HaPlOscoloplos
rubustus) at the head of the creek. ~ ,r~ ~ grain
possible salinity than anything else.
Northwest Creek does have'
dwellings, high coliform levels reported by
adjacent BarcelunaNeck Golf course. The
provide an adequate buffer against
Northwest Creek is still unexplained, ~
completely covered by eelgrass at one
The change in the position o~th~~
circulation patterns in the creek.
is unclear ifthi
sedimentation has covered ~
suggests
req~
and the
The td~'; ia~ of eelgrass in
nearly
g beating on the flushing and
shows a very shallow system. It
patterns or natural, or if this
them from redeveloping.
community is clearly well developed and strongly
Further surrounding land use changes, if any, may
Based on the stud~ findings Ligonee Creek is considered to be moderately disturbed (the
creek has been altered fi:om ~ts original shape). Numerous residential dwellings are present along
thoi~reek s banks. In many cases, the native vegetation has been cleared, and a small dock and
boat are m ~ts place: Although some mtert~dal salt marsh does exit contmmng salt marsh
c6id~ th~d0minant vegetation is the common reed. The banks of the creek have become
straight ~d 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 tributary 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 Department of Health Services
- 49 -
PECONIC ESTUARY TIDAL CREEKS STUDY
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 Treatment Plant
At both the head and mouth of the creek, the benthic community is dominated by the
polychaete worms Streblospio benedicti, Polydora ligni, Haploscoloplus rubustus, and the
amphipod,,lmpelisca abdita. The worms identified were dominant d~ng ~?~ sampling eve. nts,
while the amphipod represented only 1.5 percent of the catch, during D~C~mber and escalated to
30 percent in the winter.
The polychaetes that dominated the Ligonee Cree~: ~amp!eg ~e predomi~ ,antly S~e. ntary
species that thrive in nutrient-rich organic sediments. ' can be c6~ider~it
pioneer species, exploiting under-utilizer
dominant species present are the same as those that d
Jamaica Bay, New York, and the Hudson and Eas!
appears to be a stagnating system with a poor
The high densities of the s
nutrient levels. A positive aspect of this i~:that
providing a substantial food s
winter flounder.
great numbers. All of the
such as
Ligonee Creek
sink.
~t the creek is receiving high
have been documented as
i icular the young-of-year
, Alewife Creek represents a tidal system
with percent of the western shoreline is occupied by a
commercial power and sail boats. The remaining shoreline,
with the shallow and not navigable, is occupied by
: docks. Some intertidal vegetation was present, but was
common reed, clearly a sign of nutrient loading. Both the
head ~d mouth are' ' sand, with a slight increase of silts at the head. The benthic
co,unity structure is similar at both locations.
Polychaetes d6~inate the benthic community in both abundance and diversity. Species
~P/apre~ent are,similar i~ those in Ligonee Creek (Streblospio benedicti, Polydora ligne,
~S~OioPiuS /Obustus, Capitella capitata, and Tharyx occutus). All of these are considered
sedehtaryp°lychaetes. The amphipod Ampelisca abdita is present, but in low numbers. The
amphipod Leptocheirus plumolosus is present in extremely high densities, approximately
20,803/m2 or 83 percent of all the organisms collected. The change between Ampelisca and
Leptocheirus is most likely a function of grain size preference. Clearly, the presence of large
50-
PECONIC ESTUARY TIDAL CREEKS STUDY
numbers of Le£tocheirus 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 occ~g in deeded habitat found in
New York Harbor. The dredging of the mouth of Alewife Ci~k, adjafi~fit~o~e marina, most
likely disrupts the establishment of a well developed benthie:~;mmuni~ ~t;tlaht i6cationl but
sufficient nutrient must also be present to support the en6~untered deri~iiie~ '°~rg~sms
Alewife Creek is at least impacted directly the well devei~¢~;?~;reline
facilities and is receiving adequate nutrients to s
E. Meetinghouse Creek
By all accounts, Meetinghouse Cree~e highest loading of mtrogen of all the
tidal creeks surveyed, as reported by the Sti~olk Co~Ib eg!'~f Health Services This is
not unexpected, g~ven the upstream locati~n of tho Corwin I~Fann. The creek a,~,~;t;onaU,,
supports the largest commercial marma~assocmt~ w~th the tidal creek survey. The remainder of
the creek on the eastern shore is esid~i~l:,~ dwellinlS, bulkheaded,_
with
dock
and
private
vessels. The western shoreline h~ ~ome deg~pmen~t~ ~Ut is mostly intertidal marsh dominated
by saltmarsh ¢ordgrass. cl SAV w~}0~e!~. :~fl: However, there was an abundance of the
rich
dominatet
winte
consisted'o]
creek is one that 'is anticipated to occur in a nutrient
associated with Meetinghouse Creek is
., (73 and 57 percent of all organisms during the
respectively). The remainder of the dominant organisms
i.e., Streblospio benedicti, Mediomastus ambiseta, and
Polyd~ra ligni). As . these organisms are all typically associated with
nutrient rich, organic sediment, usually classified as impacted. This is not unexpected, given the
pre~ious history of the d~eek and the known nutrient loadings of the creek.
Th~ !arge numbers of Amphipods (up to 36,000/m~ will provide an excellent food source
for juvenil~ ~sh species, in particular, young-of-year winter flounder which have been known
to selectively feed on Ampelisca abdita. Therefore, the benthic sampling program only confirms
the water quality data identifying the creek as nutrient rich and correlates with the existing biota.
-51 -
PECONIC ESTUARY TIDAL CREEKS STUDY
F. West Creek
West Creek had been chosen 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 tOthe north
[upgradient], and a road with residential development to the east). All ha'ge potential to increase
the nutrient load of the creek· With the exception of the stormwater nm0~ the roadway, the
creek is buffered by saltmarsh on three sides. Most of the ~sh is: [n~ertidal marsh,
· wetland to the no~as dominat~d~b C6nmnon reed.
dom~natedby saltmarsh cordgrass. The z~; ,~ "; ~Y)~;~ '~-~,:~ ~ ~
the ex~stin water uali data from ~e Suffolk County DePartm.~nt[gf:.
A review of g q ty ~:~
Health services and the NYSDEC Shellfish Bureau d~d n~t Mdi~te nutrient loadxng~ !;The creek
is certified as open to shellfishing by NYSDEC. Althougl/;~:}~enthic communmes are
extremely different at the head and mouth, it would app~:~lit'~S i~ pmely a function of grain
size (the mouth is sandy and silty). ;: ~)
The benthic
organisms are best represented by the mud i
shell (Crepidulafornicata), and the
typically not found in'
worms: Ne£htys incisa,
the amphipod Leptocherirus
wetland buffei
1 developed e0mmumty. The
~ obsoletus), the common slipper
are mollusca species
anisms include the
The dominant arthropod was
on this benthic community, there does not
It would also appear that the
~ated nutrients coming from the
s relatively free from nutrients.
oi' the largest creeks surveyed during the tidal creek program.
The dominant land use the creek was residential homes, many of which had finger
piers docks and boats- ~d~:~::ei~ b-ulkheads. The creek was extremely shallow, almost non-
naVidable at low tide, wi~ the exception of a narrow channel along the south s~de. Some
· ~. . ~,~ . ·
lnte~dal marsh is preset and contmns patches dominated by saltmarsh cordgrass and patches
d~ated by commoh reed· The result of EEA's water quality analysis, Suffolk County Water
sUrVey} or NYSDEC indicated that the creek was overloaded by nutrients.
Th~ benthic community present differs between the head and mouth, but this can be
explained by the grain size differences (96 percent sand at the mouth and 75 percent 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 percent, and
-52-
~ECONIC ESTUARY TIDAL CREEKS STUDY
the clam Tellina agilis, 23 percent, followed by the sedentary worms, Mediomastus ambiseta and
Polydora ligni. The mouth was similar, dominated by Oligochaete worm (43 pement) along
with the polychaete worms (Mediomastus ambiesta 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 commtm~ty appears to be ~n trans~tlon, b~tw~een a well;developed one,
mdmat~ve by the high number of Tellina agilis and one d0~ifiated by s~e~!~t~xt species
Mediomastus and Capttella). The low density numbers .would appe~to mdm~t~ ~ the nutrient
load is sufficiently low to limit the abundance of the,
of this creek would be reqmred to determine the s heading:
H. Bass Creek
Bass Creek is the most isolate~
surveyed. The creek is located within tl
fringed with varying
sections of Bass Creek support a dense
evidence of dredging, and
through the narrow inlet.
Differences in the
in part
was 92
The pond is
forest. The upper
.ppears to be no
.~en;~ by swirl currents that pass
and the mouth can be explained
77 percent silt, while the mouth
The head of Bass Creek was extremely limited in terms
lne mqst at>unoant orgamsms during both sampling events was
the December and 35 percent in July). During July, Oligochaete
worms made up the The balance of the density was distributed among a
relat!y~ly small group Samples collected at the mouth were dominated by the
in December, but more evenly distributed in July between the
n~'ithta, the clam Gernma gernrna, severalpolychaetes (i.e., Haploscoloplus
·
Neanthos succtnea), as well as Oligochaete worms.
,
:The lack of benthic organisms at the head of Bass Creek is hard to explain as the water
quality ~arameters 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 community to develop. The vegetation
appears to be present year-round, as it was observed during each survey event. The swift current
- 53 -
PECONIC ESTUARY TIDAL CREEKS STUDY
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 $~eab!e fleet of pleasure
boats can be found moored at various locations along the creek. A few ~eas~tert~dal marsh
can be found alon the creek, but the shoreline is mostly~cupied byr6Sideh/i~ h~es witk
properties developed to the water's edge. Most homes h~ve, a dock mad boat.
Water quality sampling by EEA and the Suffolk County~epamnent of Health Services
has identffied the West Neck system as bemg nutrient n~' Th~;~:Wesg Neck System has been
known to have isolated brown tide events when no bro~ tide ~fis ~eP~e~ elsewhere in the
Pecon/cs.
.... .
The benthic commumty reflects the ~gti nutn~t !evel~~ The ~enthic commurnty of West
Neck Creek closely resembles that of Me~¢-ii~house C~~k (~t 90mpletely dominated by the
amphipod Ampelisca abdita). Arnpeliscd~vas found at both ff/~ii~d and mouth of the creek in
December, making up 75 and 52 ~ofthe t6~al number of organisms collected, respectively.
During July, Ampelisca made up ~
the mouth. This is
muddy
of all orgamsms at the head and only 10 percent at
s found at the head of West Neck
it the mouth. )4mpelisca typically favor a
were the Oligochaete worms,
, found in organic rich disturbed
· is evenly distributed between species such as
the and Parphoxus epistomus, and the clam Nucula
proximc~ Those three sP~i~S are typically found in well developed benthic communities in
undisturbed environments
iti fA~p<elis bdit pti lly high gi
~: Dens es o ca a a are exce ona , avera ng between 20,000 and
30,0~ 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
- 54-
PECONIC ESTUARY TIDAL CREEKS STUDY
presence of species; such as Ampelisca, while retarding the establishment of species such as
Paraphoxus and Nucula. In either case, the organisms present provide an excellent food source
for juvenile finfish species and will be readily utilized.
J.
Little
t~ay
L~ttle Bay ~s located at the extreme eastern t~p of the North Fork 6~fig Island. It is
buffered on all sides by an expansive saltmarsh. The soU~shore o£th~ba~i.~S~ntirely 6~
Orient Beach State Park; to the shore ~s almost completely saltm~h (both mtertad~ anti high).
A few resadent~al homes exist along the north shore locate~ ~!~gg a narrow tnbutary.~to the bay.
The tributary appears to be charmelized, based on the dr~dg~?~il p~iles along the shoreline. The
extreme head of Little Bay also appears to have been dredg~ ~ i~6~¢ time in the past
As expected, the sediments found at the de~¢;~nd head of~]~ ~aY consist of 88 percent
silts, while the mouth is 83 percent sand ~ :
The benthic community found at ~e head w~q/~ ! te~s of both abundance and
diversity. Densities at the head ranged ~ 34 tgj 8 while at the mouth, they
ranged fi.om 3,349 to 6,834 organis~nS/~x. Do~ant benthi~}ganisms at the mouth were
oligochaete worms, wo~S' Capitella capitata, and
Scolecolepides viridis, hyalina, and the arthropods
Hippolyte zo~t~ricola In general, this represents a good
shallow water
eelgrass
head station contained large amounts of organic
grass which was abundant in
the hea~6f the bay. No SAV was present at the mouth, but
of that station in Hallock Bay.
It is believed that th~ ~nthic 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 conditioi~'at the head station support only a limited stressed benthic community.
E~cloes not antm~pii{~ that these conditions are ~ndmat~ve of the entire habitat assomated w~th
the he, of L~ttle Bay, rather they only represent a very small area w~th poor circulation where
org~c 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.
- 55 -
PECONIC ESTUARY TIDAL CREEKS STUDY
V. CONCLUSIONS
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 !md use.
Though these three were the main parameters, consideration ~as give~ i~ ~gch ~pects as
wildlife, hydrography bathymetry and any other field obseSSions t~gh0ut this study. These
parameters were given a value of one through five which![~resented a shding gradient, with a
value of one indicatin~ an oligotro~hic system, and a value of five ~n~cat~ng a relatxvely
eutrophic system. At~er each of the three parameters w~e~ these valU~s.~e ~ded
together to assign an overall numerical value to
Water Quality_ Ouantification System
The creeks were evaluated with respect to ~!~qpality b~ ~hi~figg the water quality
data and physical chemist~ data that was obta~ t this s~dy} The values were
analyzed relatxvely to each other, instead of ~o ~ vels~
Phys caF Other Rank
Nutr! nt ·
Loa j g ' Chem stry Parameters (1-5)
(To~?i{rogen, (Salin(tYh~[§solved Fecal coliforms, TOC,
~ho$~orus, etc.)ii ~. O~en, etc.)
~ ] ::~Ave. rage Average Average 2
Fresh PS~ Cre6k.
~o~hwest Cme Average~ Average Poor 2
' ~; ;~ High~ Poor Poor 4
Llgonee Creek
Alewife Creek Lo~ Average Average - Poor 2
Meet n~house Creek ~
, ;~ ~e~ High Poor Poor 5
WeS?Creek ~' Average Average Average 1
GO~e Creek ~ Low Average Average 2
Bass Creek Average Average Average 2
West Neck Creek High Average Average - Poor 3
L E e 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.
-56-
PECONIC ESTUARY TIDAL CREEKS STUDY
Macrobenthic Invertebrate Quantification Swtem
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, Arnpelisca abdita, oligochaetes, and Streblospio benedicti am6n~ others, are
considered pioneer species, which are indicators of a disturbed system, 6~ sy~s~m which is
stressed to some degree. An abundance of the above-mentio~ed pioneer sp~]~ would indicate a
relatively stressed system, while a high abundance and but low, ~ce of pioneer
species would indicate a relatively ristine, :
Overall Ov~'all P~esence or Rank
Abundance '~''~ '
~?~[~ ;rs,tyi?-L~k of (1-5)
PitOn er
~ Species
Fresh Pond Creek Lo~;}!~ High.: Average 3
No~hwest Creek
Avera~ ~- H~gh ~ Hig~~' Low 1
Ligonee Creek ~ AVerage ~ ~&r~ge High - Ve~ High 4
Alewife ~[~6k~ ~;E0~Average~ Average Low - Average 3
Meebnghouse C[eek ~e ~ H~ h Low Ve~ High
~ g 5
West CreeE ~¥~ Average Low Low 2
Goose Creek Low AVerage High High 4
Bass Creek~;~ ~ ~; ~
.~ Hi High High 2
West Neck Creek ~ ~e~ High Low Ve~ High 5
Liffie Bay Creek
Low Average High 4
The ranking system represents a sliding gradient with a value of 1 indicating an
oligotmPhic system, and a value of 5 indicating a eutrophic system
- 57 -
PECONIC ESTUARY TIDAL CREEKS STUDY
Land Use Quantification Sytem
The creeks were evaluated for development density for the land use quantification. Such
attributes as numbers of houses, boats, docks, residential houses, and commercial ~Uildings were
considered, i.,
Development
Density
Fresh Pond Creek 1
',lorthwest Creek 2
_igonee Creek 4
~,lewife Creek 4
Meetinghouse Creek 5
~/est Creek 3
Goose Creek 4 ~!~i
~ass Creek 1
West Neck Creek 4 ~:~:'
Little Bay Creek ~!~!,1~
The ranking system represents ,a sl!~ifig gradie~! ~U'
a value of 1 nd cat nga re at v~ undeveloCea ~
watershed and, a value of ~ind~fing a relat~ve!~
developed watershed
-58-
PECONIC ESTUARY TIDAL CREEKS STUDY
Overall Ranking System
Tidal Creek Water Macrobenthic Land Overall
Quality Invertebrate Use Rank
Rank Rank Rank
--resh Pond 1 3 1 5
',lorthwest Creek 3 1 ~.? 21~?
Ligonee Creek 4 4 :~?~
~,lewife Creek 3 3
Meetinghouse Creek 5 5 ~i;; 5 15
West Creek 2 2 ;~ 3 ; 7
Goose Creek 3 4 4~ 1
[lass Creek 1 4
West Neck Creek 3 ~.~ 5 ':~%;~ 4
Little Bay Tributary 2 4 ;:? '. 1 7
The overall rank of the ten crbSks is a~{dm of the$ parameters used in this
evaluation (water qual~, ~acrobenthjc~0ve~ebrates and land use). The
overal ~&nk represents a ~l~d ng g~d~ent; ~ th a rank of 1-5 indicating a
relativel~ ~g reek;;~:~'p~¢6-10 representing a relatively "fai¢' creek, and
a rahEof 11-15 representing a relabvely poo¢ creek.
the Peconic Estuary representing a wide range
of waterShed variables. Ofp6t~ntial 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 closelyresembling communities found in water bodies such as Jamaica Bay,
New York and the Nev~York Harbor: Meetinghouse West Neck, Ligonee, and Alewife This is
ngt foully unexpec,te~ as the drmnages these creeks are associated w~th have been prewously
identified by thc Suffolk County Department of Health Service as areas with above normal levels
ofititt6gen. Inall 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 cfa single species extremely high. The
amphipod Ampelisca abdita was the dominant identified species. In some cases, Ampelisca
abundances exceeded 30,000/m~.
- 59 -
PECONIC ESTUARY TIDAL CREEKS STUDY
These species and densities indicate a stressed environment, which is most likely the
result of nutrient loading. The organisms present are not necessarily detrimental to the
environment, as they provide an excellent food source for many juvenile finfish species.
The remaining six creeks (Fresh Pond, Northwest Creek, West Creek Go0S~ Creek, Bass
Creek, and Little Bay) all appear to support well established benthic communitieS. This
determination is based on the presence of a diverse
large numbers of pioneering organisms, such
oligochaetes. In general, as one would expect,
systems, with predominantly open space (i.e.,
is the most developed of the six. It would a
is extremely beneficial in maintaining the eq~
that most of the nutrients are coming through the
in Jamaica Bay, it is clear that Spartina alterniflora
removing a significant amount from the
dominated by
even though it would appear
previous studies
capable of
- 60 -
PECONIC ESTUARY TIDAL CREEKS STUDY
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Andrle, R.E. & J.R. Carroll. 1988. The Atlas of Breeding Birds in New York Statg; Ithaca, NY:
Comell University Press.
Arthur D. Little, Inc., "Chemical
December, 1996.
Benyus, J.M. 1989. The Field I
Schuster, Inc. New York: 336 pp.
Boggs, Sam Jr., "Principles of Sedimentology
1987.
Bortman, Marci L. and Nancy Niedowski,
Peconic Estuary", 1988.
Britton, N.L. andHon. A. Brown. 1970.
Canada. VoL I-III.
Brown, R.G. 1985 "Effects of Wet~ on
Metropolitan Area, Minneso!a," ItS.
85-4170.
Resources of the
United States and
, of Rtm6ffEntering Lakes in the Twin Cities
Investigation Report
Bull, J.
Comell University Press. Ithaca, NY.
Bull, John
New York:
Cashin Associates,
January 1996.
C~, ,E,;, P.E. Hantzche and Y.J. L~tw~n, 1982 (Sep), "The use of wetlands for water pollution
c6~tr01, U.S. Enviro~ental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development,
Cineinatti, OH~
conant, R. & J.T. Collins. 1991. A Field Guide to Reptiles and Amphibians of Eastern and
Central North America. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company.
~ociety Field Guide to North American Birds.
Submerged Aquatic Vegetation Study,
Cowardin, L.M., V. Carter, F.C. Golet, & E.T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of Wetlands and
-61 -
PECONIC ESTUARY TIDAL CREEKS STUDY
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 Eutrophication in Four Different North Atl~tic Estuadne
Systems, University of Connectcut, Marine Sciences Department. P. 1792196,
Eisel, M.T., Shoreline Survey: Great Peconic,
Sciences Research Center.
Falmouth Scientific, Inc., 3-D Acoustic Current mef~i.(3D~ACm) Version 7.0 Operating
Instructions
Federal Emergency Management Agency. 1991.
York, Richmond County. Community Panel
Knobel, E. 1977. Field Guide to the Grasses,
Publications, New York, NY: 83 pp.
Meiorin, E.C
Governments.
of New
0102zC;
,f the United States. Dover
Marsh," Association of Bay Area
Meiorin
Water Marsh in Fremont,
for Wastewater Treatment - Municipal, Industrial and
Mitchell, R State Plants. Bulletin No. 458, New York State
Museum:
New York Sea Grant, "Br°~;Tide Research Initiative", Report #3, March 1999.
N~ York State Dep~ent of Environmental Conservation 1988. New York State Freshwater
~fl~d Maps.
Norris, James G, Sandy Wyllie-Echeverfia, 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.
Nuzzi, Robert, and R.M. Waters, The Spatial and Temporal Distribution of 'Brown Tide' in Eastern
- 62 -
I~ECONIC ESTUARY TIDAL CREEKS STUDY
Long Island, Suffolk County Department 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 Ultimat~ ~uide to the Peconic
Estuary", June, 1998. ~ ~
Peterson, L.A. 1977. A Field Guide to Edible Wild Plant§~ofEastem ~d
Houghton-Mifflin Company. Boston, MA: 330 pp
Reid, George K., and Richard D. Wood, "Ecology
Educational Publishing, 1976.
Reynolds, R.M., and J.J. Hurst, Qualit5
National Laboratory, January, 1994.
Litton
Brookhaven
Seapoint Sensors, Inc., Seapo 1997.
Suffolk County De~athnent of "Surfae~ Water Quality Monitoring Report -
Volumes I and II , January, 1998,~
Suffolk C~):pepartm ~ent~,of~g~ ServiaiS;(g~e Resources Bureau, Peconic Estuary Program
Surface Water Quahty Momto~g)993-1995 December 1995.
Suffolk of He~tk~Serv~ces, Brown T~de Comprehensive Assessment and
Suffolk Qbunty Depa,ui{eni:°fH6alth Services, Office of Ecology, Peconic Estuary Surface Water
QualitY; Nitrogen, Dissol~ed~ygen, and Submerged Aquatic Vegetation Habitat, October, 1998.
SI!~ CountY Department of Health Services, 1999. Nitrogen Loading Budget and Trends, Major,
Ext~al, Anthropogenic Nitrogen Sources: Groundwater and Duck Farms, January, 1999.
Sfiff6ik ~;unty Department of Planning, "Analysis of Dredging and Spoil Disposal Activity
CondfiCted 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.
- 63 -
PECONIC ESTUARY TIDAL CREEKS STUDY
Taylor, Sally L., and Martine Villalard, 1985: "Seaweeds of the Connecticut Shore, A Wader's
Guide," Connecticut Arboretum Bulletin No. 18, September 1985.
Tetra Tech, Inc., "Three Dimensional Hydrodynamic and Water Quality Model of PecOnic Estuary",
September, 1998.
United States Department of Agriculture Soil Conservation S~ce, Soil S ~urv~ ey;of Suffolk County,
New York, April 1997.
United States Fish and Wildlife Service, "Significant and:~tat Co~Pie~ 0~the New
York Bight Watershed", Southern New England - New Coastal Ecosystems Program,
Charlestown, Rhode Island, November, 1997.
United States Geological Survey, "Analysis of Ground-~ter Fi0W!paths ~d Travel Time to Three
Small Embayments Within the Pe Q6unty~ ~Ow York, July, 1996.
- 64 -
WATER QUALITY AND PHYSICAL CHEMISTRY
PEP Tidal Creek Study
Water Quality Laboratory Data from Samples Collected in June of 1998 by Suffolk County Department of
Health Services Office of Ecology
Date Time Name Loc Depth Secchi Temp D.O. Salinity T: Coliform I F. Coliform NH3 NOx
(ft) (ft) (C) (rog/I) (oloo) {mpnll00 mi) (mg/I) {mg/I)
6/9/98 9:35 Fresh Pond - mouth 1.0 > 1 16.6 7,8 27.05 4 4 0.034 < 0.005
6/9/98 10:36 iFresh Pond - heed 2.0 · 2 18.2 6.9 16.69 170 170 0.016 0.009
6/9198 11:48 lorthwestCreek-mouth 9.0 7.0 18.1 7.1 26.08 17 17 0.018 < 0.004
6/9/98 11:49 Northwest Creek - mouth B 17.5 7.0 ,
6/9/98 12:01 Northwest Creek- head 2.0 · 2 18.0 6.1 6.84 900 500 0.025 < 0.005
6/9/98 12:02 Northwest Creek - head B 18.8 6.1
619/98 13:36 Ligonee Creek - mouth 5.0 5.0 19.7 7.6 19.40 22 17 0.024 0.010
6/9/98 13:37 Ligonee Creek - mouth B 19.2 6.5
619/98 13:52 Ligonee Creek- head 2.5 2.5 19.0 8.3 16.19 23 13 0.106' 0.011
6/9198 13:53 Ligonee Creek - head B 19.1 8.6
--6~S 1~i~,8-- ~,l~if-e--C~ -~-m~ ....... 6.5 5.0- - '-~'§.~- ~.'~ 19.67 - 170 -'5~' .... -0.033 ,< 0.00~
6/9198 14:49 Alewife Creek- mouth B 18.8 8.5
619/98 15:02 Alewife Creek- head 1.0 · 1 19.6 7.9 4.45 300 170 0.042 0.048
6/10/98 8:33 Goose Creek - mouth 8.5 5.0 17.9 6.8 26.40 13 13 0.035 < O.00b
6/10/98 8:34 Goose Creek - mouth B 17.9 6.7
6/10/98 8:54 Goose Creek- head 2.0 · 2 18.7 5.7 26.03 23 23 0.027 < 0.005
6/10/98 10:03 West Creek - mouth 3.5 · 3.5 18.5 7.2 25.35 50 11 0.023 < 0.005
6110/98 10:04 West Creek - mouth B 18.5 7.3
6/10/98 10:31 West Creek- head 1.0 · 1 20.4 8.2 15.16 500 80 0.021 0.088
6/10198 12i0~-- Bass Creek - mouth 2.5 · 2.5 19.0 8.2 26.99 2 2 0.023 < 0.00~
6/10/98 12:03 Bass Creek - mouth B 19.2 8.0
6/10/98 12:18 Bass Creek - head 2.0 > 2 22.3 5.5 25.37 2 2 0.022 < 0.005
6/10/98 13:30 Little Bay- mouth 5.5 · 5.5 20.6 7.6 27.17 8 8 0.028 < 0.005
6/10/98 13:31 Little Bay - mouth B 19.7 8.5
6/10/98 13:43 LitUe Bay- head 13.5 5.5 20.7 8.2 26.32 2 2 0.036 < 0.005
6/10/98 13:44 Little Bay - head B 19.0 6.0
6111/98 6:46 Meetinghouse Creek - mouth 10.5 6.0 20.5 8.4 21.12 30 30 0.081 0.057
6/11/98 6:47 Meetinghouse Creek - mouth B 20.2 5.4
6/11198 7:16 Meetinghouse Creek- head 5.5 5.5 17.7 4.6 18.24 300 1.3_0____ 0:8_6_0 ~0:492
-- 6-/~ 'i/~8 ..... ~:-~' ~1~ ~i~-~ s~-{~;:e~l~ ead B 19.0 3.2
6/11/98 7:20 West Neck Creek - mouth 7.0 4.5 19.6 7.0 26.02 2 2 0.032 < 0.005
6/11/98 7:21 West Neck Creek - mouth B 19.6 6.8 <
6/11/98 7:33 West Neck Creek - head 8.9 4.0 20.0 7.1 25.46 17 17 0.028 0.005
6/11/98 7:34 West Neck Creek - head B 20.0 6.9
PEP Tidal Creek Study
Water Quality Laboratory Data from Samples Collected in June of 1998 by Suffolk County Department of
Health Services Office of Ecology
Date Time Name Urea TKN TDKN TPO4 TDPO4 o-PO4 SiO3 TOC TSS ChI-T Aureo
(mg/I) (mg/I) (mg/I) (mg/I) (mg/I) (mg/I) (mg/I) (mg/I) (mg/I) (ug/I) {cellslml)
6/9/98 9:35 Fresh Pond- mouth 0.012 0.22 0.24 0.056 0.055 0.011 0.192 1.920 2.0 136
6/9/98 10:36 Fresh Pond - head 0.017 0.67 0.22 0.047 0.032 0.009 1.130 4.260 3.0 0
6~9~98 11:48 Northwest Creek- mouth 0.016 0.42 0.25 0.055 0.043 0.008 0.280 2.180 1.8 136
6/9~98 11:49 Northwest Creek - mouth
6/9/98 12:01 Northwest Creek- head 0.020 0.43 0.44 0.034 0.030 0.005 1.630 8.560 7.3 0
6/9/98 12:02 Northwest Creek - head
6/9~98 13:36 Ligonee Creek- mouth 0.009 0.32 0.22 0.051 0.050 0.005 1.200 2.870 9.1 0
6/9/98 13:37 Ligonee Creek - mouth
6~9~98 13:52 Ligonee Creek- head 0.008 0.54 0.53 0.049 0.023 0.005 1.070 2.190 2.2 , 0
6/9/98 13:53 Ugonee Creek - head
6~9~98 14:48 Alewife Creek - mouth 0.015 0.38 0.27 0.042 0.023 0.006 0.656 2.630 3.2 68
6/9/98 14:49 Alewife Creek - mouth
6/9/98 15:02 Alewife Creek - head 0.009 0.58 0.39 0.045 0.022 < 0.005 0.395 4.100 8.2 0
6/16/98 8:33 Goose Creek - mouth 0.020 0.33 0.38 0.042 0.040 0.011 0.189 1.950 2.9 68
6/10/98 8:34 Goose Creek - mouth
6/10/98 8:54 Goose Creek - head 0.010 0.33 0.36 0.053 0.047 0.005 0.294 2.310 8.6 0
6/10/98 10:03 WestCreek-rnouth 0.011 0.31 0.36 0.037 0.044 0.007 0.151 2.380 1.8 0
6/10/98 10:04 West Creek- mouth
6/10/98 10:31 West Creek - head 0.009 0.62 0.51 0.036 0.027 < 0.005 0.334 6.100 11.0 0
6/10/98 12:02 Bass Creek - mouth 0.007 0.33 0.24 0.048 0.045 0.008 0.097 1.750 2.0 136
6/10/98 12:03 Bass Creek - mouth
6/10/98 12:18 3ass Creek - head 0.011 0.61 0.53 0.051 0.044 < 0.005 0.407 3.940 9.9 34
6/10/98 13:30 Little Bay- mouth 0.017 0.60 0.37 0.094 0.036 0.010 0.172 2.490 2.5 579
6/10/98 13:31 Little Bay - mouth
6/10198 13:43 Little Bay- head 0.013 0.56 0.52 0.059 0.047 0.014 0.239 3.030 3.5 238
6/10/98 13:44 Little Bay- head
6/11/98 6:46 Meetinghouse Creek- mouth 0.023 0.49 0.49 0.079 0.070 0.024 0.698 2.780 4.1 0
6/11/98 6:47 Meetinghouse Creek - mouth
6/1~-/98 7:16~ Meetin_g_house Creek - head 0.026 2.30 1.79 0.389 0.277 0.139 1.310 3.410 6.0 0
6/11/98 7:17 Meetinghouse Creek- head
6/11/98 7:20 West Neck Creek- mouth 0.013 0.46 0.43 0.100 0.051 0.006 0.695 3.060 4.1 42024
6/11/98 7:21 West Neck Creek - mouth
6/11/98 7:33 West Neck Creek - head 0.015 0.55 0.41 0.065 0.056 0.006 0.901 3.660 6.5 28560
6111/98 7:34 West Neck Creek - head
PEP Tidal Creek Study
Water Quality Laboratory Data from Samples Collected in July of 1998
~ C, mek Head ~0~9~-- <1 ND <10.0 <1 .O <1 .~-- <I~.0 10,4 ~_0.~8 0.~0~ -- ~.-~'~-- ~i~- l?._B ___ 0.0587
]
I
PEP Tidal Creek Study
1998 Water Quality Laboratory Data from Samples Collected in September of 1998
Dissolved
Total Total Dissolved Total Total
Sample Total Fecal Organic KJeldahl KJeidahl Organic Total Suspended Total
Collected Collforms Co#forms Carbon NEtrogen Nitrogen Carton Chlorophyll-a NH4 NO2 NO3 po4 Solids Phosphorus TDP
Sep-~-- 1--- {~---- 22 <t.{) <t.~-- -'--~.~-- 2.1 ~:~I-S-- -~.0004 -0:~§- -~.~'~4-- t~:~ --0:552Y'-- -~:~4~2-
Ammonia Values for Headwaters and Mouthwaters of Ten Tidal Creeks
4,500
4,000
3.500
3,000
2,500
2,000
1.500
1.000
0.500
0.000
q~ ~o'
E3June
· July
[] September
Total Suspended Soilds Values for Headwaters and Mouthwaters of Ten Tidal Creeks
2OO
180
160
140
120
100
8O
6O
4O
2O
0
Sampling Station
II July
September
30.000
Total Organic Carbon Values for Headwaters and Mouthwaters of Ten Tidal Creeks
25.000
20.000
15.000
10.000
5.000
I[]June
OSeptember
0,000
3 c,~ CJ c,~ ~ 0": ro O~ .,o 0 ~J 0 to O .L ~ _/.x'.'
Sampling Station
Total Chlorophyll-a Values for Headwaters and Mouthwaters of Ten Tidal Creeks
60.0
50.0
40.0
30.0
20.0
IE3June
m July
D September
10.0
0.0
Sampling Station
Fecal Coliform Values for Headwaters and Mouthwaters of Ten Tidal Creeks
6OO
5O0
400
30O
200
lO0
IE3 Jun~ -
,July
[] September
Sampling Station
Total Coliform Values for Headwaters and Mouthwaters of Ten Tidal Creeks
0
1,800
1,600
1,400
1,200
1,000
8OO
6OO
4O0
2OO
0
8amplin~ Station
IE~ June
lB Juty
[] September
Total Phosphorus Values for Headwaters and Mouthwaters of Ten Tidal Creeks
1.2
a.
I-
0.8
0.6
0.4
I~ll July
D September
0.2
0
Sampling Station
Dissolved Inorganic Phosphate (PO4) Values for Headwaters and Mouthwaters of Ten Tidal
Creeks
0.900
O
.~_
0,800
0.700
0,600
0.500
0,400
0.300
0.200
0.100
IE]June
· July
[] Septeml~er
Sampling Station
Total Dissolved Phosphorus Values for Headwaters and Mouthwaters of Ten Tidal Creeks
0.9
0.8
0~7
0.6
0,5
0,4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
8amplinfl Station
B July
[] September
NO2 + NO3 Values for Headwaters and Mouthwaters of Ten Tidal Creeks
3.000
2.500
2.000
1.500
1.000
0.500
0.000
~ ~o 0" ,-.'." 0" c,'." 0" 0'"" 0" 0'~ .0' 0'~ 0 d: 0 0'~ .~ O'-;~
~ .
Sampling Station
I~,, June
B July
[] September
NO2 Values for Headwaters and Mouthwaters of Ten Tidal Creeks
0.1
0.09
0.08
0,07
0.06
0.05
0.04
0.03
0.02
0.01
0
Samplinfl Station
eptember
BATHYMETRY
FRESH POND BATHYMETRY
36
30770(
1503400
1503600
1503800 1504000 1504200 1504400 1504600
1504800
CR Environmental, Inc.
639 Boxberry Hill Road
East Falmouth, Massachusetts 02536
Horizontal Coordinates: NAD 83, NY State PIm~e, L.I. (feet)
Survey Date: April 25, 1998 Vertical Reference: Mean Low Water
Survey Vessel: Spartina Contour Interval: 0.5 feet
NORTHWEST CREEK BATHYMETRY
313000
312000
311000
309000
308000
307000
1465000 1466000 146¢000 1468000
CR Environmental, Inc.
LIGONEE CREEK BATHYMETRY
304800
304700
304600~
304500- ~
304400~
304300~
304200
1450600 1450800
1451000
145i200 ~ ~
1451400 1451600 1451800 I 1452000
1452200
1452400
CR Environmental, Inc.
Survey Vessel: Spar~ina
Contour Interval: 0.5 feet
ALEWIFE CREEK BATHYMETRY
284600-i
283000
1420600 1421000 1421400 1421800
CR Environmental, Inc.
639 Boxberr7 Hill Road
i survey Dale: April 24, 1998
MEETINGHOUSE CREEK BATHYMETRY
1366000 1366500
CR Environmental, Ittc.
WEST CREEK BATHYMETRY
305500
30500(
1402000 1402500 1403000 1403500 1404000 1404500
CR Environmental, Inc.
I Survey Vessel: I Comour Imerval: 0,5 fee~
GOOSE CREEK BATHYMETRY
324000
323000
141~500 1418500 1419500 1420500 142i500
CR Environmental, Inc.
639 P, ox berry Hill Road
BASS CREEK BATHYMETRY
326000
325900
325800
325700
325600
325500
325400
325300
325200
325100
325000
324900
324800
324700
324600
324500
324400
324300
324200
324100
324000
323900
323800
323700
323600
1455200
1455500 1455800 1456100 1456400 1456700 1457000
CR Environmental, Inc.
WEST NECK CREEK BATHYMETRY
332000
331000-t
329000
328000
327000
326000
1437000 1438000 1439000 1440000
CR Environmental, Inc.
3630001
362500
362000
361500
361000
360500
360000
359500
359000
3585OO
LITTLE BAY, ORIENT POINT
BATHYMETRY
1463500 1464500 1465500 1466500
CR Environmental, Inc.
HYDROGRAPHIC CHARTS
Fresh Pond from 9~30~97 to 10/6197
18
16
14
m 12
2
0
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o o o o o o o o
Time
Fresh Pond
9~30~97 - 10~6~97
Velocity
Fresh Pond from 1017/97 to 10/13/97
20
18
16
o 14
o 8
0
4
2
0
000000000000000000000000000000
Time
Fresh Pond
10/7/97 - 10/13~97
Velocity
Fresh Pond from 10114197 to 10120197
14
0
~) 12
U)
4
2
0000000000000000000000
Time Fresh Pond
10114~97 - 10120/97
Velocity
Fresh Pond from 10/21/97 to 10/27197
18
16
14
~' 12
6
4
2
0
Time
Fresh Pond
0/21/97 - 10~27~97
Velocity
Fresh Pond from 10128197 to 1113197
25
2O
0 10
0
Time
0000000000
0~0~0~~
Fresh Pond
0~28~97 - 11 ~3~97
Velocity
Fresh Pond from 1114/97 to 11/10/97
25
20
0 10
0
Time Fresh Pond
11/4197 to 11/10/97
Velocity
Fresh Pond from 1114197 to 11110197
4OO
35O
3O0
250
200
150
100
5O
000000000000000000000000
Time
Fresh Pond
11 ~4~97 - 11 I10~97
Vector
Fresh Pond from 11/11/97 to 11114197
25
2O
'~ 15
0 10
0
0
000000000000000000000000000000
000000000000000000000000000000
Time Fresh Pond
11/~ 1/97 - 11/14/97
Velocity
Fresh Pond from 9~30~97 to 1016197
4OO
35O
300
250
200
150
100
50
0
Time
Fresh Pond
9~30~97 - 10~6~97
Vector
Fresh Pond from 10~7~97 to 10113197
4OO
35O
300
250
200
150
lO0
5O
0
Time
Fresh Pond
0~7~97 - 10/13~97
Vector
Fresh Pond from 10114197 to 10120197
400
350
30O
250
200
150
lO0
5O
Time Fresh Pond
10/14/97 - 10~20~97
Vector
Fresh Pond from 10/21/97 to 10/27197
400
350
3OO
250
200
150
lO0
50
000000000000000000000000000000
Time Fresh Pond
10/21/97 - 10/27/97
Vector
Fresh Pond from 10128197 to 1113197
400
35O
300
250
200
150
100
5O
0
Time
Fresh Pond
0~28~97 - 11 ~3~97
Vector
Fresh Pond from 11/11/97 to 11/14197
40O
350
300
250
200
150
100
5O
Time
Fresh Pond
1/97 - I 1/14/97
Vector
Northwest Creek from 9/9/98 to 9/16/98
12
10
6
~ 4
2
0 co 0 co 0 cO 0
Time
Northwest Creek
9~9~98 - 9116198
Velocity
Northwest Creek from 9/9/98 to 9/16/98
400
350
30O
250
200
150
lO0
5O
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Time
Northwest Creek
9~9~98 - 9116~98
Vector
Northwest Creek from 9/9/98 to 9/16/98
~ lO
0
t.0 it'3 LC) LC~ L~ Lt'3 t.C)
0 03 0 CO 0 03 0
.~- ('x,I ~-- ~ C~I
Time
Northwest Creek
9~9~98 - 9/16~98
Temperature
Northwest Creek from 9/9/98 to 9/16/98
3O
25
~ 20
}_ ~0
5
Time
Northwest Creek
9/9198 - 9/16/98
'Turbidity
Ligonee Creek from 8/25198 to 8126198
6
5
4
3
2
Time
Ligonee Creek
8/25/98 - 8/26/98
Velocity
Ligonee Creek from 8125/98 to 8/26198
40O
350
300
250
200
150
100
50
0
Time
Ligonee Creek
8/25/98 - 8/26/98
Vector
Ligonee Creek from 8125198 to 8126198
26.4
26.2
25.8
25.6
25.4
25.2
25
24.8
24.6
24.4
24.2
Time Ligonee Creek
8/25/98 - 8126/98
Temperature
Ligonee Creek from 8~25~98 to 8~26~98
45OO
4000
35OO
3000
2500
~:; 2000
I-- 1500
1000
500
0
Time
Ligonee Creek
8~25~98 - 8~26~98
Turbidity
Alewife Creek from 8~24~98 to 8~25~98
0.5
Time
Alewife Creek
8124/98 - 8~25~98
Velocity
250
Alewife Creek from 8~24~98 to 8~25~98
2OO
150
100
50
Time Alewife Creek
8124/98 - 8/25/98
Vector
Alewife Creek from 8~24~98 to 8~25~98
26.5
"~ 26
~ 25.5
~ 24.5
23.5
Time Alewife Creek
8/24/98 - 8/25/98
Temperature
Alewife Creek from 8~24~98 to 8~25~98
45OO
4000
35O0
3000
2500
'0 2000
I-" 1500
1000
5OO
Time Alewife Creek
8~24~98 - 8~25~98
Turbidity
Meetinghouse Creek from 8/17/98 to 8/18/98
14
12
o 10
0
> 4
2
0
~,,~' ~,,' ~' ~,' q~' fi, fi, fi, '
Time Meetinghouse Creek
8/17198 - 8/18/98
Velocity
Meetinghouse Creek from 8/17198 to 8118198
40O
35O
300 - -
250
2OO
150
100 ~ ~
50
.~. ,~. ~. ,.,~. ~,~. ,,,~.,~.~. ,,,~. ~,~. ~,,~. o.~. ¢.,o~. ~? ~? ~. ~. ¢. ~. ~- ~- ¢. ~..~..~.
Time
Meetinghouse Creek
8117~98 - 8/18198
Vector
Meetinghouse Creek from 8117~98 to 8118/98
27.6
27.4
27.2
0 27
26.8
26.6
26.4
~., 26.2
E
Time
Meetinghouse Creek
8/17~98 - 8/18/98
Temperature
Meetinghouse Creek from 8/17~98 to 8/18~98
3O
25
20
15
10
5
Time
Meetinghouse Creek
8/17/98 - 8/18/98
Turbidity
West Creek from 8110/98 to 8/11198
7O
60
50
40
30
20
10
I
0
Time West Creek
81~ 0~98 - 8/11/98
Velocity
West Creek from 8/10/98 - 8/11198
4OO
350
300
250
200
150
100
50
Time
West Creek
8/10/98 - 8/11198
Vector
West Creek from 8/10198 to 8111198
31
3O
29
28
27
26
25
Time
West Creek
8110/98 - 8/11/98
Temperature
West Creek from 8110/98 to 8/11/98
4500
4000
3500
3000
2500
2000
1500
1000
500
Time
West Creek
8110198-8111198
Turbidity
Goose Creek from 4/13~98 to 4~20~98
45
4O
35
3O
25
2O
15
10
5
0
Time Goose Creek
4/13~98 - 4~20~98
Velocity
Goose Creek from 4113~98 to 4~20~98
40O
350
300
250
200
150
100
50
0
~..~. ~. ~. ¢. ~. ~.~¢. ¢. ~- ¢. ¢. ¢. ¢. ~. ¢. ¢. ¢' ~' ~' ~' ~' ~' ¢' ¢' ~' ~' ~'
Time Goose Creek
4113~98 - 4/20/98
Vector
Bass Creek from 7~27~98 to 7~28~98
60
50
A 40
~ 30
~ 20
10
,~.,,,,~.,,,,~:,,?,,,~..,,,,~.-,~,,~,,~:~. ~. ~. ~. ~. ~. ~. ~. ~. ~. ~. ~. ,~. ,~. ,~. ~. ~. ~. ~. ~. ,~.. ,~.
Time Bass Creek
7/27/98 - 7128198
Velocity
Bass Creek from 7~27~98 to 7~28~98
35O
3OO
25O
2OO
150
lO0
5O
0
Time
Bass Creek
7~27~98 - 7~28~98
Vector
Bass Creek from 7~27~98 to 7~28~98
28
27
26
25
24
23
22
~.~,,~.~,~:~,,~. ,?;.~. ~,~. ~,~. ,,<~. ,,~. ~. ~. ~. ~. ~. ~. ~. ~. ~. ~. ~. ,~. ,~. ,~. ~. t~-<~- ~. ~. ,~'-~.
Time Bass Creek
7/27/98 - 7~28~98
Temperature
25
20
Bass Creek from 7~27~98 to 7~28~98
o~.~. ~,~. ,? ~. ,,,~. ~,~. ~. ,,~. ~,~. ~. ~'. ~- ~,~. ~- ~. ~. ~. ~. ~. ~' ~' q;' ~' "~' ~' ~' ~' 6. ~. ~.
Time E~ass Creek
7~27~98 - 7~28~98
Turbidity
West Neck Creek from 8~3~98 to 8~4~98
8
O
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
Time
West Neck Creek
8/3/98 - 8~4~98
Velocity
West Neck Creek from 8~3~98 to 8~4~98
400 ....
35O
300
25O
2O0
150
100
5O
0
Time
West Neck Creek
8~3~98 - 8/4/98
Vector
West Neck Creek from 8~3~98 to 8~4~98
27
26.5
26
25.5
24.5
Time
West Neck Creek
8/3/98 - 8~4~98
Temperature
West Neck Creek from 8~3~98 to 8~4~98
6
Time
West Neck Creek
8~3~98 - 8~4~98
Turbidity
Little Bay Tributary from 3/27/98 to 4/2/98
6O
50
o 40
30
0
· 20
10
Time
Little Bay Tributary
3/27/98 - 4/2/98
Velocity
Little Bay Tributary from 3/27/98 to 4/2/98
3OO
250
200
"~ 150
0
~¢ 100
>
5O
Time
Little Bay Tributary
3/27/98 - 4/2/98
Vector
LAND USE
PEP Tidal Creeks Study
Watershed and In-water Uses
Creek Municipality Watershed Uses Waterfront and Water Uses
Town / Village
Goose Creek ~outhold Residential, Aquaculture (most Maintained Lawn, Boat Discharges
productive creek - used for shelfish i2 Houses
seeding), Goose Creek Bay Beach 51 Docks
(private for residents of Goose Bay 23 Bulkh6eds
Estates) I Canoe
2 Jet Skis
6 Dinghies
50 Powerboats
2 Sailboats
*31 Moorings
1 Town Ramp (Gaden's Landing Road)
I Yacht Club (Southold)
West Neck Creek Shelter Island / Shelter Island Island Boat Yard and Marina 2 Boat Launches
Heights 45 slips
20-25 Docks
4 Powerboats
I Sailboat
1 Rowboat
Bass Creek Shelter IsLand Racrantional / Park - Mashomaek Undeveloped - In Preserve
Preserve, Nature Conservancy
Little Bay Tributary Southold / Orient Recreational / Park - Orient Beach I Powerboat
Statc Park Long Beach Bay (at thc mouth of Little Bay) has:
65 Slips/Berths
* 15 Moorings
I Dock]bulkhead
I Marina (Narrow Rivcr Road)
Key:
W - West
E - East
* - Mooring Capaciiy
F:kPEP97521AKRFPeconicTable.wpd
PEP Tidal Creeks Study
Watershed and In-water Uses
Creek Municipality Water, bed Uses Waterfront and Water Uses
Town / Village
Fresh Pond I East Hampton Recreational / Park, Alberts Landing
(I/4 mile north of ereck)
Northwest Creek East Hampton / Sag Harbor Residential, Northwest Harbor Park Road End (Ramp / Parking Lot)
(County) I Bulkhead
20 Moorings
2 Sailboats
Alewife Creek Mouth Southampton Residential (moderate), Commercial, Cement Boat Ramp, Maintained Lawn, Boat Discharges
North Sea Harbor Marina, Recreational / Park - 36 Houses (5 W, 31 E)
Conscience Point National Wildlife 18 Docks (5 W, 13 E)
Refuge (at creek mouth) 11 Bulkheads (4 W, 7 E)
I Barge (1 W)
2 Marinas (2 W)
I Houseboat (1 W)
116 Slips (116 W)
1 Jet Ski (1 W)
3 Dinghies (3 E)
97 Powerboats (80 W, 17 E)
14 Sailboats (12 W, 2 B)
Ligonee Creek Southampton / Sag Harbor Residential (low) Maintained Lawn, Boat Discharges, Road End
18 Houses
13 Docks
5 Dinghies
8 Powerboats
Meetinghouse Creek Rivcrhead / Aqueboguc Residential, Commercial, Marina (E) Culvert
32 Houses
28 Docks
10 Bulkheads
1 Marina
I Restaurant
182 Slips
29 Powerboats
23 Sailboats
West Creek Southold / Cutcbogue North Fork Country Club (VO, Fair 7-9 Private Docks/Bulkheads
to good creek used for shellfish 2 Houses (E)
seeding I Marina and Yecht Club I/4-1/2 mile east of creek
Town am. boat launch (Grathwohl Road)
FRESH POND WATER BASIN
NORTHWEST CREEK WATER BASIN
LITTLE BAY WATER BASIN
WEST CREEK WATER BASIN
WEST NECK CREEK WATER BASIN
MEETINGHOUSE CREEK WATER BASIN
LIGONEE CREEK WATER BASIN
GOOSE CREEK WATER BASIN
BASS CREEK WATER BASIN
ALEWIFE CREEK WATER BASIN
GRAIN SIZE & MA CROBENTHIC COMMUNITIES
PEP Tidal Creek Study
Grain Size Analysis
August 1998
Fresh Pond Mouth Grain Size
Northwest Creek Mouth Grain Size
Ligonee Creek Mouth Grain Size
Alewife Creek Mouth Grain Size
Fresh Pond Head Grain Size
Northwest Creek Head Grain Size
Ligonee Creek Head Grain Size
Alewife Creek Head Grain Size
· Sand (< 2.0mm and > .038 mm)
[] Silt (<.038 mm)
PEP Tidal Creek Study
Grain Size Analysis
August 1998
West Creek Mouth Grain Size
Goose Creek Mouth Grain Size
Little Bay Mouth Grain Size
Meetinghouse Creek Mouth Grain
Size
West Creek Head Grain Size
Goose Creek Head Grain Size
Little Bay Head Grain Size
Meetinghouse Creek Head Grain
Size
E~Sand (< 2.0mm and > .038 mm)
Silt (<.038 mm)
PEP Tidal Creek Study
Grain S. ize Analysis
August 1998
Bass Creek Mouth Grain Size
West Neck Creek Mouth Grain
Size
Bass Creek Head Grain Size
West Neck Creek Head Grain Size
~ S.a. nd (< 2.0mm and > .038 mm)
Sdt (<.038 mm)
Peconic Estuary Program
Tidal Creek Study
Grain Size Distribution
Station
West Creek HEAD
Percent Percent
Sand* Silt**
83%
4%
17%
West Creek MOUTH ~ 96%
;oose Creek MOUTH 96% , 4%
Goose Creek HEAD ' 25% 75%
Little Bay MOUTH 83% 17%
Little Bay HEAD 22% I 88%
Meetinghouse Creek MOUTH
Meetinghouse Creek HEAD
40% 6O%
14% ~ 86%
:resh Pond HEAD ~ 20% 80%
Fresh Pond MOUTH 96% 4%
Northwest Creek HEAD 93% i 7%
Northwest Creek MOUTH i 92% I 8%
Ligonee Creek HEAD 80% 20%
Ligonee Creek MOUTH 93% I 7%
Alewife Creek HEAD
69% I 31%
Alewife Creek MOUTH
10% 90%
Bass Creek HEAD 23% I 77%
Bass Creek MOUTH 92% 8%
Nest Neck Creek HEAD 87% I 13%
West Neck Creek MOUTH ~ 48% 52%
* = Sand represents grain sizes between 2°0 mm and .038 mm
** = Silt represents grain sizes less than .038 mm
Sampling Date: August 2, 1998 i =
Macrobenthic Invertebrate Densities for the PEP Tidal Creek Study
Fresh Pond, July 1998
Fresh Pond Head (Sample 1)
Fresh Pond Head (Sample 2)
Fresh Pond Head (Sample 3)
Fresh Pond Mouth
(Sample 1)
Fresh Pond Mouth
(Sample 2)
Bi Other
[] Mollusca
[] Arthropoda
· Aschelminthes
[] Annelida
Fresh Pond
Macrobenthic Invertebrate Densities
Fresh Pond, December 1998
Fresh Pond Head (Sample 1)
Fresh Pond Head (Sample 2)
Fresh Pond Head (Sample 3)
Fresh Pond Mouth (Sample 1)
Fresh Pond Mouth (Sample 2)
.~"~Other ·Aschelminthes i
[] Mollusca [] Annelida
[] Arthropoda ,,'
Fresh Pond Creek
M.acrobenthic Invertebrate Densities for the PEP Tidal Creek Study
Northwest Creek, July 1998
Northwest Creek Head (Sample 1)
Northwest Creek Head (Sample 2)
Northwest Creek Head (Sample 3)
Northwest Creek Mouth (Sample 1)
Northwest Creek Mouth (Sample 2)
Northwest Creek Mouth (Sample 3)
[] Other
Lq Mollusca
[] Arthropoda
· Aschelminthes
[] Annelida
Northwest Creek
Macrobenthic Invertebrate Densities
Northwest Creek, December 1998
Northwest Creek Head
(Sample 1)
Northwest Creek Head
(Sample 2)
Northwest Creek Head
Northwest CreekMouth
(Sample 2)
Northwest Creek Mouth
(Sample 3)
(Sample 3)
~F
,~[] Other · Aschelminthes
,~! [] Mollusca F~ Annelida
,,[] Arthropoda
Northwest Creek
Macrobenthic Invertebrate Densities for the PEP Tidal Creek Study
Ligonee Creek, July 1998
Ligonee Creek Head (Sample 1)
Ligonee Creek Head (Sample 2)
Ligonee Creek Mouth (Sample 3)
[] Other · Aschelminthes
[] Mollusca [] Annelida
[] Arthropoda
Ligonee Creek
Macrobenthic Invertebrate Densities
Ligonee Creek, December 1998
Ligonee Creek Head (Sample 1)
Llgonee Creek Head (Sample 2)
Ligonee Creek Head (Sample 3)
Ligonee Creek Mouth (Sample 1)
Ligonee Creek Mouth (Sample 2)
Ligonee Creek Mouth (Sample 3)
[] Other · Aschelminthes
[] Mollusca [] Annelida
[] Arthropoda
Ligonee Creek
Macrobenthic Invertebrate Densities for the PEP Tidal Creek Study
Alewife Creek, July 1998
Alewife Creek Mouth (Sample 1)
Alewife Creek Mouth (Sample 2)
[] Other
[] Mollusca
[] Arthropoda
· Aschelminthes
[] Annelida
Alewife Creek
Macrobenthic Invertebrate Densities
Alewife Creek, December 1998
Alewife Creek Head (Sample 1)
Aleweife Creek Head (Sample 2)
Alewife Creek Mouth (Sample 1)
Alewife Creek Mouth (Sample 2)
[] Other · Aschelminthes
[] Mollusca [] Annelida
[] Arthropoda
Alewife Creek
Macrobenthic Invertebrate Densities for the PEP Tidal Creek Study
Meetinghouse Creek, July 1998
Meetinghouse Creek Head
(Sample 1)
Meetinghouse Creek Head
Meetinghouse Creek Mouth
(Sample 1)
Meetinghouse Creek Mouth
(Sample 2)
(Sample 2)
[] Other
[] Mollusca
[] Arthropoda
· Aschelminthes
[] Annelida
Meetinghouse Creek
Macrobenthic Invertebrate Densities
Meetinghouse Creek, December 1998
Meetinghouse Creek Head
(Sample 1)
Meetinghouse Creek Head
(Sample 2)
Meetinghouse Creek Head
(Sample 3)
Meetinghouse Creek Mouth
(Sample 1)
Meetinghouse Creek Mouth
(Sample 2)
~ [] Other · Aschelminthes
= FI Mollusca ~ Annelida
~ [] Arthropoda
Meetinghouse Creek
Macrobenthic Invertebrate Densities for the PEP Tidal Creek Study
West Creek, July 1998
West Creek Head (Sample 1)
West Creek Head (Sample 2)
West Creek Mouth
(Sample 1)
West Creek Mouth
(Sample 2)
West Creek Mouth
(Sample 3)
I~! Other
[] Mollusca
[] Arthropoda
· Aschelminthes
[] Annelida
West Creek
Macrobenthic Invertebrate Densities
West Creek, December 1998
West Creek Head (Sample 2)
West Creek Head (Sample 3)
West Creek Mouth (Sample 1)
West Creek Mouth
(Sample 2)
West Creek Mouth
(Sample 3)
~ Other
[] Mollusca
[] Arthropoda
· Aschelminthes
[]Annelida
West Creek
Macrobenthic Invertebrate Densities for the PEP Tidal Creek Study
Goose Creek, July 1998
Goose Creek Head
(Sample 1 )
Goose Creek Head
(Sample 2)
Goose Creek Mouth
(Sample 1)
Goose Creek Mouth
(Sample 2)
~ Other
[] Mollusca
[] Arthropoda
· Aschelminthes
[] Annelida
Goose Creek
Macrobenthic Invertebrate Densities
Goose Creek, December 1998
Goose Creek Head
(Sample 1)
Goose Creek Mouth
(Sample 1 )
Goose Creek Head
(Sample 3)
Goose Creek Mouth
(Sample 3)
[] Other · Aschelminthes
[] Mollusca [] Annelida
[] Arthropoda
Goose Creek
Macrobenthic Invertebrate Densities for the PEP Tidal Creek Study
Bass Creek, July 1998
Bass Creek Head (Sample 1)
Bass Creek Head (Sample 2)
Bass Creek Mouth
(Sample 1)
Bass Creek Mouth
(Sample 2)
Bass Creek Mouth
(Sample 3)
[] Other
[] Mollusca
[] Arthropoda
· Aschelminthes
[] Annelida
Bass Creek
Macrobenthic Invertebrate Densities
Bass Creek, December 1998
Bass Creek Head (Sample 1)
Bass Creek Head (Sample 2)
Bass Creek Mouth
(Sample 1)
Bass Creek Mouth
(Sample 2)
Bass Creek Mouth
(Sample 3)
! [] Other · Aschelminthes
; [] Mollusca ~ Annelida
::" [] Arthropoda
Bass Creek
Macrobenthic Invertebrate Densities for the PEP Tidal Creek Study
West Neck Creek, July 1998
West Neck Creek Head
(Sample 1)
West Neck Creek Head
(Sample 2)
West Neck Creek Head
(Sample 3)
West Neck Creek Mouth
(Sample 1)
West Neck Creek Mouth
(Sample 2)
West Neck Creek Mouth
(Sample 3)
[] Other
[] Mollusca
[] Arthropoda
· Aschelminthes
[] Annelida
West Neck Creek
Macrobenthic Invertebrate Densities
West Neck Creek, December 1998
West Neck Creek Head
(Sample l)
West Neck Creek Head
(Sample 2)
West Neck Creek Mouth
(Sample 1)
West Neck Creek Mouth
(Sample 2)
West Neck Creek Mouth
(Sample 3)
BI Other
[] Mollusca
[] Arthropoda
· Aschelminthes
[] Annelida
West Neck Creek
Macrobenthic Invertebrate Densities for the PEP Tidal Creek Study
Little Bay Creek, July 1998
Little Bay Tributary Head
(Sample 1)
Little Bay Tributary Mouth
(Sample 1)
Little Bay Tributary Mouth
(Sample 2)
Little Bay Tributary Mouth
(Sample 3)
I~ Other
[] Mollusca
[] Arthropoda
· Aschelminthes
[] Annelida
Little Bay Creek
Macrobenthic Invertebrate Densities
Little Bay Creek, December 1998
Little Bay Head (Sample 2)
Little Bay Head (Sample 3)
Little Bay Mouth (Sample 1)
Little Bay Mouth (Sample 3)
[] Other
[] Mollusca
[] Arthropoda
· Aschelminthes
[] Annelida
Little Bay Creek
PEP Tidal Creeks Study
July 1998 Macrobenthlc invertebrate Densltiee
PEP Tlda! Creeks Study
July 1998 Macrobenthlc Invertebrate Densities
PEP Tidal Creeks Study
July 1998 Macrobenthlc Invertebrate Densities
PEP Tlda! Creeks Study
July 1998 Macrobenthlc Invertebrate Densities
PEP Tidal Creeks Study
July 1998 Macrobenthlc Invertebrate Densities
PEP Tidal Creeks Study
December 1998 Macrobenthlc Invertebrate Densities
Fresh Pond Norlhwest Creek Ligonee Creek Alewife Creek Meetinghouse Creek
Head Mouth Head I Mouth Head I Mouth Head Mouth Head Mouth
Aac.o,m,.,.aa: I'1 I I~1~1 14111 17141 I I 1~0161~1 I I I I I I I I Ill I
C~pidula fomicata 2 9
Crepidula plana
Crepidula convexa
Gastropoda sp I 1 1
Thais lapillus
Nassalfus n~tus 8 13 29 3
Urosalpinx cinema
Hydroblaminuta 1 2 10 12 3 3 22 31 6 4
Rictaxis punctost#atus 1
Blvalvla: 2
Myfilus edulis 1
Mersenar~a mersenada
PEP Tidal Creeks Study
December 1998 Macrobenthic Invertebrate Densities
Fresh Pond Northwest Creek LJgonee Creek Alewife Creek Meetinghouse Creek
Head Mouth Head Mouth Head M~uth Head Mouth Head Mouth
Species I 2 3 I 2 3 I 2 3 1 2 3 I 2 3 I 2 3 1 2 3 I 2 3 1 2 3 I 2 3
Pitar morrhuana 1
Tellina agi#s 3 2 6 I I 4 I I 1
Petr~cola pholadiformus
Lyonsia hyafina 4 2
Gemma gemma 1
Nucuta proxima
Ensis directus 1
Pranatlis speck)sa (?)
Mya arena~fa
Annellda:
Polygordius tdestinus 9
~hylk)docldae
Phylk)doce arenae 4
Eteone hete~opoda 1
Eumida sanguk)ea
Harmothoe extenuata
Glycera americana 1
Goniadella sp 11 11
Hydroides dlanthus
Nephtys picta
Syllklae
Syllis sp 1 1
Nephthy incisa
Podarke obscura 2 I 7 I 1 13
Micropntha sp 5 1
Nereimyra punctata
PEP Tidal Creeks Study
December t998 Macrobenthic Invertebrate Densities
Fresh Pond No~hwest C~eek Ugonee Creek Alev~fe Creek Meetinghouse Creek
Head Mouth Head Mouth Head Mouth Head Mouth Head Mouth
~p~,-~,,,= 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 I 2 3 I 2 3 I 2 3 I 2 3 I 2 3 I 2 3 I 2 3
Neanthes succinea 2 3 47 18 11 1 3 2
Neanthes sp I 2 2
Mediomastus ambieseta I 3 3 10 ! 25 I 22 47
~%~#a capitta I 4 I 4 80 20 5 39 3 7 43 32 1
Maldonidae
Clymenella torqueta 4
Owenla fusifonnis
Travisia camea
Spionidae sp
Streblospio benedicti 18 6 29 21 14 56 7 9 5 33 23 1 11 172
Paraonis sp
Spio sp
Polydara (JUV) I 1
polydora#gni I 2 2 4 I 15 7 4 5 15
Polydora socialis
$colelepis squamata 2
Paraonis fulgans 20
Sabellaria vulgaris
Arabella iriculor
Lumbrineds tenuis 1
Hap~;r~npoplos rubustus 1 I 16 8 23 t4 I 3 13 2
Cirratulidae
Cirratulus grandis 4
Pectina~a goulcli
Ampharate arctica
Amphitrite sp
PEP Tidal Creeks Study
December '1998 Macrobenthic Invertebrate Densities
Fresh Pond Northwest Creek Ugonee Creek Alewife Creek Meetinghouse Creek
Head Mouth Head Mouth Head Mouth Head Mouth Head Mouth
Species 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 I 2 3 I 2 3 I 2 3 I 2 3 I 2 3 I 2 3 I 2 3
Hypaniola grayi 16 22 12
Terebellklae
Pista cr~stata
Sabellidae 3
Class oligochaeta 4 20 I 5 23
Balanus amphitrite
Cymothoidae
Philoscta vittata 1
Leptochelia savignyf 1
Cyathura polita 16 6 14 I 3
Edotea I~ik~ba
Er~chsonella a~tenuata 2
'Sphaeroma quadddentatum 1 1
Salamae cocina 6 5
E~fchthonius sp 2 12 2
Amphipod sp 1
Leptochekus plumolosus 5 19 12 13 I I 47 22 1
Unciola irrorata I 1
Gammatus sp 1
Gammatus annutatus
Microdentopus gryllotalpa 4 3 2
Paraphoxus epistomus 1
C_,<~rophium sp 1 7
Lysianopsis alba I 19 5
Caprellidae
Leucon ame~cana 2 11 10 I I 6 1
PEP Tidal Creeks Study
December t998 Macrobenthlc Invertebrate Densities
Fresh Pond Northwes! Creek Ligonee Creek Alewife Creek Meetinghouse Creek
Head Mouth Head Mouth Head Mouth Head Mouth Head Mouth
Species I 2 3 I 2 3 I 2 3 I 2 3 1 2 3 I 2 3 I 2 3 I 2 3 I 2 3 I 2 3
Ampelisca abdita 2 3 2 894 431
Chironomis 1 2 23 16 6 2 4 1
Crangon septemspinosa 1
Palaemonetes sp I 7
Palaemonetes pugio 2 1
Hippolyte zoster~cola
Neomysis ame~fcana 2 6 I 2
Anu#da maritima
Neopeeopcus sayi
Melita nit, da
Listdella sp
Carcinus
Pagutus Iongicarpus 0
Totallnvertebrates 37 35 I 18 '14 0 118'14zl 121 0 65 6'1 123 82 6'124 173 38 57 32 0'137 92 0 60 45 43'1226 453
PEP Tidal Creeks Study
December 1998 Macrobenthlc Invertebrate Densities
West Creek Goose Creek Bass Creek West Neck Creek Little[ Bay
Head [ Mouth Head Mouth Head Mouth Head Mouth Head I Mouth
Crep/du/a plana 1
Gastropoda sp
PEP Tidal Creeks Study
December 1998 Macrobenthic Invertebrate Densities
West Creek Goose Creek Bass Creek West Neck Creek Little Bay
Head Mouth Head Moulh Head Mouth Head Mouth Head Mouth
Species 1 2 3 I 2 3 I 2 3 I 2 3 1 2 3 I 2 3 I 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 I 2 3
Ne~/s ~cte
Sy~dae
Sy~s sp
PEP Tidal Creeks Study
December 1998 Macrobenthlc Invertebrate Densities
West Creek Goose Creek Bass Creek West Neck Creek Little Bay
Head Mouth Head Mouth Head Mouth Head Mouth Head Mouth
species 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 I 2 3 I 2 3 I 2 3 I 2 3 I 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3
Spio sp
polydare (JUt/)
pamon/s fu/gens
Hypank#a grayf
PEP Tidal Creeks Study
December 1998 Macrobenthlc Inveffebrate Densities
west Creek Goose Creek Bass Creek West Neck Creek L~e Bay
Head I Mouth Head Moulh Head I Mouth Head Mouth Head I Mouth
Balanus amphitrite 2
Cymothotdae
Amphipod sp
PEP Tidal Creeks Study
December 1998 Macrobenthic Invertebrate Densities
West Creek Goose Creek Bass Creek West Neck Creek Little Bay
Head Moulh Head Mouth Head Mouth Head Mouth Head Mouth
Species 1 2 3 I 2 3 1 2 3 I 2 3 I 2 3 1 2 3 I 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3
2
Total lnvertebrates 0 15 52 97 198 I 20 0 12 15 {] 28 9 2 0 98 20 45 90 12si 0 1377 999 6 0 14 10 167 0 43
FIELD DATA SHEETS
FIELD DATA SHEET
PECONIC ESTUARY PROGRAM
TIDAL CREEK SURVEY - PROJECT 97521
Station: Fresh Pond (106)
Tributary To: Gardiners Bay
Last Rainfall Event: July 4 1998
Position:
LAT:
LONG:
HEAD MOUTH
N40.59.715' N40.59.728'
W072.07.046' W072.06.70T
Low Tide: 08:04, 20:33
High Tide: 01:35, 14:16
Field Crew: MPB/TWY
Weather: warm, (21.7 C) wind gusting to
20 mph fi:om west
Date: July 14, 1998
Time: 08:04
Last Dredged:
Moon: 34 quarter in 2 days
Restricted Outlet: YES, closes naturally during significant storm events, re-opened via
excavator.
Surrounding Land/Water Uses
Residential Commercial
Open Space Agricultural
Notes:
Inlet to Fresh Pond closed on
Land/Water Use Impacts
Storm Drain Size
Discharge
Road End
STP Outfall
Recreational/Park X Marina
And was re-opened on
Type Location
Color Apparent Source
Maintained Lawn Failed Septic Systems
Boat Discharges Other
By use of an excavator.
Culvert
Shoreline Condition
Bare, Non-Eroding
Bare, Eroding X (south bank)
Vegetated
Hardened, Sea Wall
Surrounding Land Use
Hardened, Bulkhead
Other
STRUCTURES/BOATS WEST EAST
Houses
Docks
Bulkheads
Barges
Marinas
Houseboats
Slips
Jet Skis
Dingies
Powerboats
Sailboats
Physical Water Chemistry
PARAMETER SURFACE SURFACE BOTTOM BOTTOM
(head) (mouth) (head) (mouth)
Dissolved Oxygen (mg/l) 6.6 6.6
Conductivity (MS) 37.2 37.2
Salinity (ppm) 24.5 24.5
Temperature (C) 23.1 23.1
pH 7.8
Depth 2.0- inches
Incidental Occurrences of Natural Resources
COMMON NAME LATIN NAME COMMENTS
widgeon grass Ruppia maritima only in ponded area near head
blue claw crab
soft-shelled clam Mya arenaria
slipper shell Crepidula fornicata
beach grass Ammophila breviligulata
dusty miller Artemesia stelleriana
iellow rocket Barberea vulgaris
seaside goldenrod Solidago semprevirens
rugose rose Rosa rugosa on path near bath house
pin oak Quercus palustris
post oak Quercus stellata
common reed Phragrnites australis
poplar Populus deltoides
salt marsh cordgrass Spartina alterniflora
marsh elder Ivafrutescens
groundsel tree Baccharis halimifoHa
high marsh cordgrass Sparina patens
kingbird Tyrannus tyrannus three dozen on wires near
parking lot
grackle Quiscalus quiscula
red-winged blackbird Agelius phoeniceus
osprey Pandion haliaetus
song sparrow Melospiza melodia
muskrat Ondatra zibenthicus
lion's mane jellyfish Cyanea capillata
FIELD DATA SHEET
PECONIC ESTUARY PROGRAM
TIDAL CREEK SURVEY - PROJECT 97521
Station: Northwest Creek
Tributary To: Northwest Harbor
Last Rainfall Event: July 4, 1998
Position: HEAD MOUTH
LAT. N41.00.856' N41.00.703'
LONG. W072.02.442~ W072.15.138'
Low Tide: 08:50, 21:19
High Tide: 02:13, 14:54
Restricted Outlet: NO, may shoal near mouth naturally
Surrounding Land/Water Uses
Residential X Commercial Recreational/Park
Open Space Agricultural
Field Crew: MPBfrWY
Weather: wind fi.om southwest 10 mph,
gusts 15-20 mph.
Date: July 14, 1998
Time: 14:00 (head), 14:57 (mouth)
Last Dredged:
Moon: 3~ quarter moon in 2 days
Marina
Notes: Town Permit required for boat launching. State designated recreational area. Closed for
shell fishing.
Local person indicated that the inlet has been changed since . Originally located
Land/Water Use Impacts
Storm Drain Size
Discharge Color
Road End X tramp/parking lot~
Type Location
Apparent Source
Maintained Lawn
Culvert
Failed Septic Systems
STP Outfall Boat Discharges Other
Shoreline Condition
Bare, Non-Eroding
Vegetated
Hardened, Sea Wall
Bare, Eroding
Hardened, Bulkhead
Other
Surrounding Land Use
STRUCTURES/BOATS WEST EAST
Houses
Docks
Bulkheads
Barges
Marinas
Houseboats
Slips
Jet Skis
Dingies
Powerboats
Sailboats
Physical Water Chemistry
PARAMETER SURFACE SURFACE BOTTOM BOTTOM
(head) (mouth) (head) (mouth)
Dissolved Oxygen (mg/1) 7.4 6.9 7.8 7.0
Conductivity (MS) 38.0 41.3 39.1 41.3
Salinity (ppm) 22.9 26.6 24.7 26.6
Temperature (C) 25.6 24.7 25.3 24.8
pH 6.7 7.8
Depth 3.0 feet 2.0 feet
Incidental Occurrem:es of Natural Resources
COMMON NAME LATIN NAME COMMENTS
rockweed Fucus vesiculosis
spider crab Libinia dubia
blue claw crab Callinectes sapidus
bay scallop Aequipecten irradians
slipper shell Crepidulafornicata
horse shoe crab Limulus polyphemus
osprey Pandion haliaems
American crow Corvus brachyrhynchos
red-winged blackbird Agelaius phoeniceus
herring gull Lams argentatus
great egret Casmerodius albus
barn swallow Hirundo rustica
double-breasted cormorant Phalacrocorax aurims
cfmmon reed Phragrnites australis
groundsel tree Baccharis halimifolia
salt marsh cordgrass Spartina alterniflora
high marsh cordgrass Spartina patens
spike grass Distichlis spicata
marsh elder Ivafrutescens
bayberry Myrica pensylvanica
beach plum Prunus maritima
black che~ Prunus serotina
red cedar Juniperus virginiana
pin oak Quercus palustris
black locust Robinia pseudoacacia
COMMON NAME LA TIN NAME COMMENTS
beach grass Ammophila breviligulata
seaside goldenrod Solidago semprevirens
Crugularia
sea rocket
seaside spurge
jingle shell
Hudsonia tomentosa
Additional Notes
FIELD DATA SHEET
PECONIC ESTUARY PROGRAM
TIDAL CREEK SURVEY - PROJECT 97521
Station: Ligonee Creek
Tributary To: Noyack Bay
Last Rainfall Event: July 4, 1998
Position: HEAD
LAT. N40.59.385'
LONG. W072.18.22 I'
Low Tide: 02:52, 14:51
High Tide: 08:50, 21:02
Restricted Outlet: NO
Surrounding LandfWater Uses
Residential X (low)
MOUTH
No Record
Commercial
Field Crew: MPB/TWY
Weather: Sunny, calm
Date: July 6, 1998
Time: 10:15 (head), 10:40 (mouth)
Last Dredged:
Moon: full moon in 3 days
Recreational/Park
Marina
Open Space Agricultural
Notes: Surround'rog vegetation is mostly maintained lawns and Phragmites australis.
Land/VVater Use Impacts
Storm Drain Size Type Location Culvert
Discharge Color Apparent Source
Road End 3[ Maintained Lawn X Failed Septic Systems
STP Outfall Boat Discharges 3[ Other
Shoreline Condition
Bare, Non-Eroding
Vegetated
Hardened, Sea Wall
Bare, Eroding X Considerable
Hardened, Bulkhead
Other
iurrounding Land Use
STRUCTURES/BOATS QUANTITY
Flouses 18
Docks 13
Bulkheads 0
Barges 0
Marinas 0
Houseboats 0
Slips 0
Jet Skis 0
Dingies 5
Powerboats 8
Sailboats 0
Physical Water Chemistry
PARAMETER SURFACE SURFACE BOTTOM BOTTOM
(head) (mouth) (head) (mouth)
Dissolved Oxygen (rog/l) 5.1 5.5 3.3 6.7
Conductivity (MS) : 28.4 30.8 34.5 : 38.5
Salinity (ppm) 17.8 22.0 19.7 23.5
Temperature (C) 21.6 25.5 24.9 26.0
pH 6.0 6.5
Depth 2.7 feet 3.5 feet
Incidental Occurrences of Natural Resources
COMMON NAME LATIN NAME COMMENTS
sea lettuce Ulva lactuca
rockweed Fucus vesiculosa
hard clam Mercenaria mercenaria
groundsel tree Baccharis halimifolia
red cherry Prunus serotina
black locust Robinia psuedoacacia
red cedar Juniperus virginiana
pin oak Quercus palustris
tree of heaven Ailanthus altissima
Canada goose Branta canadensis
great egret Casmerodius albus
brown-headed cowbird Molothrus ater
herring gull Larus argentatus
barn swallow Hirundo rustica
mallard duck Anas platyrhynchos
domestic dog
Additional Notes
Benthic invertebrate samples collected today. Sample at head consisted ora very orgar~ic fine
silt with many tube worms.
Considerable erosion on both the western and eastern banks.
Poor GPS reading message on GPS screen.
FIELD DATA SHEET
PECONIC ESTUARY PROGRAM
TIDAL CREEK SURVEY - PROJECT 97521
Station: Alewife Creek Mouth (104)
Tributary To: North Sea Harbor
Last Rainfall Event: July 4, 1998
Position: MOUTH l:l¥.AD
LAT: N40.56.235' N40.00.700'
LONG: W072.24.968' W072.15.141'
Low Tide: 08:50, 21:19
High Tide: 02:13, 14:54
Restricted Outlet: No
Surrounding Land/Water Uses
Field Crew: MPB/TWY
Weather: warm, partly sunny, wind gusts
to 25 mph fi.om west.
Date: July 14, 1998
Time: 17:59
Last Dredged:
Moon: 3~a quarter moon in 2 days
Residential X Commercial X Recreational/Park X Marina X
Open Space Agricultural
Notes: Moderately residential, 2 moderately sized Marina's located on western shoreline.
Conscience Point National Wildlife Refuge at mouth of creek. I-Iead waters of creek enter under
Noyack Road through a 24-inch culvert.
Land/Water Use Impacts
Storm Drain Size
Discharge Color
Type Location Culvert
Apparent Source Cement Boat Ramp X
Road End
STP Outfall
Maintained Lawn X
Boat Discharges X
Failed Septic Systems
Other
Shoreline Condition
Bare, Non-Eroding
Vegetated X
Hardened, Sea Wall
urrounding Land Use
Bare, Eroding
Hardened, Bulkhead X
Other
STRUCTURES/BOATS TOTAL WEST EAST
Houses 36 5 31
D o cks 18 5 13
Bulkheads 11 4 7
Barges 1 ! 0
Marinas 2 2 0
Houseboats 1 1 0
Slips 116 116 0
Jet Skis 1 1 0
Dingles 3 0 3
Powerboats 97 80 17
Sailboats 14 12 2
Physical Water Chemistry
PARAMETER SURFACE SURFACE BOTTOM BOTTOM
(head) (mouth) (head) (mouth)
Dissolved Oxygen (mg/i) 7.8 8.4 6.5 7.0
Conductivity (MS) 34.6 40.1 37.8 40.9
Salinity (ppm) 18.3 25.1 24.2 26.0
Temperature (C) 25.2 25.8 25.3 25.3
pH 6.9 8.2
Depth 2.0 feet 10.0 feet
Incidental Occurrences of Natural Resources
COMMON NAME LATIN NAME COMMENTS
banded killifish
red-winged blackbird in Phragrnites
mallard duck 2 male, 2 female
common reed Phragmites australis
black locust Robinia psuedoacacia
groundsel tree Baccharis halimifolia
salt marsh cordgrass Spartina alterniflora
black cherry Prunus serotina
Additional Notes
Benthic-Invertebrate samples collected today.
FIELD DATA SHEET
PECONIC ESTUARY PROGRAM
TIDAL CREEK SURVEY - PROJECT 97521
Station: Meetinghouse Creek
Tributary To: Flanders Bay
Last Rainfall Event: July 4, 1998:
Position: HEAD MOUTH
LAT. N40.56.338' N40.55.747'
LONG. W072.37.145' W072.36.942'
Low Tide: 00:12, 12:30
High Tide: 05:45, 18:25 (extreme)
Restricted Outlet: NO
Surrounding Land/Water Uses
Residential X Commercial X
Open Space Agricultural
Notes: Toadfish txaps in Creek for commercial sale
Land/Water Use Impacts
Field Crew: TWY/MYB
Weather:
Date: July 16, 1998
Time: 09:50 (head),
Last Dredged:
Moon: 3~d quarter moon today
Recreational/Park
Marina X
(Mouth)
Storm Drain Size Type Location Culvert X
Discharge Color Apparent Source
Road End Maintained Lawn Failed Septic Systems
STP Outfall Boat Discharges Other
Shoreline Condition
Bare, Non-Eroding
Vegetated
Hardened, Sea Wall
Bare, Eroding
Hardened, Bulkhead
Other
;urrounding Land Use
STRUCTURESfBOATS QUANTITY
Houses 32
Docks 28
Bulkheads 10
Barges 0
Marinas 1
Houseboats 0
Slips 182
Jet Skis 0
Dingies 0
Powerboats 29
Sailboats 23
Physical Water Chemistry
PARAMETER SURFACE SURFACE BOTTOM BOTTOM
(head) (mouth) (head) (mouth)
Dissolved Oxygen (mg/1) 12.5 13.9 3.5 4.1
Conductivity (MS) 28.5 33.5 33.5 36.9
Salinity (ppm) 15.0 20.8 21.6 23.8
Temperature (C) 22.8 25.9 24.0 24.9
pH 6.8 8.6
Depth 2.0 Feet 9.0 Feet
Incidental Occurrences of Natural Resources
COMMON NAME LATIN NAME COMMENTS
ribbed mussel Modiolus demissus
least tern Sterna albifrons
common tern Sterna hirundo
mute swan Cygnus olor
herring gull Larus argentatus
hybrid ducks with ducklings
double-crested cormorant Phalacrocorax auritus
starling Sturnus vulgaris
house sparrow Passer domesticus
greater black-backed gull Larus marinus
tree of heaven Ailanthus altissima
Additional Notes
FIELD DATA SHEET
PECOMC ESTUARY PROGRAM
TIDAL CREEK SURVEY - PROJECT 97521
Station: West Creek
Tributary To:
Last Rainfall Event: July 4, 1998
Position: HEAD
LAT:
LONG:
Low Tide:
High Tide:
Restricted Outlet: NO
Surrounding Land/Water Uses
Residential Commercial
Open Space Agricultural
Notes:
MOUTH
N40.59.514'
W072.28.940'
Field Crew: TWY/MJB
Weather:
Date: July 15, 1998
Time: 15:05 (mouth)
Last Dredged:
Moon:
Recreational/Park
Marina
LandfWater Use Impacts
Storm Drain Size
Discharge
Road End
STP Outfall
Type Location Culvert
Color Apparent Source
Maintained Lawn Failed Septic Systems
Boat Discharges Other
Shoreline Condition
Bare, Non-Eroding
Vegetated
Hardened, Sea Wall
;urrounding Land Use
Bare, Eroding
Hardened, Bulkhead
Other
STRUCTURES/BOATS WEST EAST
Houses 2
Docks
Bulkheads
. Barges
Marinas
Houseboats
Slips
Jet Skis
Dingies
Powerboats
Sailboats
Physical Water Chemistry
PARAMETER SURFACE SURFACE BOTTOM BOTTOM
(head) (mouth) (head) (mouth)
Dissolved Oxygen (rog/l) 7.6 7.5
Conductivity (MS) 41.5 41.5
Salinity (ppm) 25.9 25.9
Temperature (C) 26.2 26.3
pH 8.1
Depth 6.0 feet
Incidental Occurren.ces of Natural Resources
COMMON NAME LATIN NAME COMMENTS
Additional Notes
FIELD DATA SHEET
PECONIC ESTUARY PROGRAM
TIDAL CREEK SURVEY - PROJECT 97521
Station: Goose Creek
Tributary To: Southold Bay
Last Rainfall Event: July 4, 1998
Position: HEAD MOUTH
LAT. N40.55.810' N41.03.084
LONG. W072.36.955' W072.24.883'
Low Tide: 10:28, 23:05
High Tide: 03:54, 16:35
Restricted Outlet: NO
Surrounding Land/Water Uses
Residential X Commercial
Open Space Agricultural
Notes:
Town's scallop shellfish program near mouth.
Land/Water Use Impacts
Storm Drain
Discharge
Road End
STP Outfall
Field Crew: MJBFrWY
Weather:
Date: July 15, 1998
Time: 12:20 (head), 12:50 (mouth)
Last Dredged:
Moon: 3~d quarter moon tomorrow
Recreational/Park
Aquaculture X
Marina
Size Type Location Culvert
Color Apparent Source
Maintained Lawn X Failed Septic Systems
Boat Discharges X Other
Shoreline Condition
Bare, Non-Eroding
Vegetated X
Hardened, Sea Wall
Bare, Eroding
Hardened, Bulkhead X
Other
Surrounding Land Use
STRUCTURES/BOATS QUANTITY
Houses 92
Docks 51
Bulkheads 23
Barges 0
Marinas 0
Houseboats 0
Canoes 1
Jet Skis 2
Dingies 6
Powerboats 50
Sailboats 2
Physical Water Chemistry
PARAMETER SURFACE SURFACE BOTTOM BOTTOM
(head) (mouth) (head) (mouth)
Dissolved Oxygen (mg/l) 6.6 6.9 6.6 6.9
Conductivity (MS) 42.2 41.4 42.5 41.3
Salinity (ppm) 26.7 27.1 26.8 27.2
Temperature (C) 25.8 24.1 25.9 23.9
pH 8.0 8.0
Depth 2.0 feet 6.0 feet
Incidental Occurrences of Natural Resources
COMMON NAME LATIN NAME COMMENTS
bluefish :snapper
green heron Butorides striatus immature
osprey Pandion haliaetus nesting
least tern
red-winged blackbird Agelaius phoeniceus
common grackle Quascalus quiscula
mute swan Cygnus olor
herring gull Lams argentatus
Canada goose Branta canadensis
red cedar
common reed Phragmites australis
black cherry Pnmus serotina
spike grass Distichlis spicata
groundsel tree Baccharis halimifolia
salt marsh cordgrass Spartina alterniflora
pin oak Quercus palustris
black locust Robinia pseudoacacia
tree of heaven Ailanthus altissima
sea lettuce Ulva lacmca
Additional Notes
Private canal not surveyed.
Flow meter deployed on and retrieved on
FIELD DATA SHEET
PECONIC ESTUARY PROGRAM
TIDAL CREEK SURVEY - PROJECT 97521
Station: Bass Creek
Tributary To: Shelter Island Sound
Field Crew: MPB/TWY
Weather: Sunny, 85 F
Last Rainfall Event: July 4, 1998
Position:
HEAD MOUTH
LAT.
LONG.
Low Tide: 07:12, 19:24 (extreme)
High Tide: 12:31, 13:10
Date: July 12, 1998
Time: 09:10 (head)
10.00 (mouth)
Last Dredged:
Moon: 3'd quarter moon in 4 days
Restricted Outlet: moderatel neatural restriction due to shoaling.
Surrounding Land/Water Uses
Residential Commercial Reereationa~Park X
Open Space Agricultural
Notes: Mashomack Preserve, Nature Conservancy
Land/Water Use Impacts
Storm Drain Size Type Location
Discharge Color Apparent Source
Road End Maintained Lawn Failed Septic Systems
STP Outfall Boat Discharges Other
Marina
Culvert
Shoreline Condition
Bare, Non-Erod'mg
Vegetated
Hardened, Sea Wall
Surrounding Land Use
Bare, Eroding X
Hardened, Bulkhead
Other
STRUCTURES/BOATS WEST EAST
Houses
Docks
Bulkheads
Barges
Marinas
Houseboats
Slips
Jet Skis
Dingles
Powerboats
Sailboats
Physical Water Chemistry
PARAMETER SURFACE SURFACE BOTTOM BOTTOM
(head) (month) (head) (month)
Dissolved Oxygen (mg/l)
Conductivity (MS)
Salinity (ppm)
Temperature (C)
pH
Depth
Incidental Occurrences of Natural Resources
COMMON NAME LATIN NAME COMMENTS
lady Crab Ovalipes ocellatus
bay scallop ,4equipecten irradians predated
soft-shelled clam Mya arenaria
hard elam Mercenaria mercenaria
common periwinkle Littorina littorea
green crab Carcinus maenas
hermit crab Pagurus sp.
Slipper shell Crepidulafornicata dominant
razor clam Ensis directus
ribbed mussels Modiolus demissus
winter flounder YOY
striped bass YOY
bamboo worm Clymenella
red beard sponge Microciona prolifera common near foot bridge
mummichog Fundulus majalis
Fowler's toad Bufo woodhousii fowlerii
great egret Casmerodius albus resting/feeding
double-crested cormorant Phalacrocorax auritus
herring gull Larus argentatus
great blue heron Ardea herodius
roseate tern Sterna dougallii
mute swan Cygnus olor foraging
black-backed gull Lams marinus immature/resting
common tern Sterna-hirundo
COMMON NAME LATIN NAME COMMENTS
brown thrasher Toxostoma rutum
grey squirrel
raccoon
white-tailed deer male, feeding
chipmunk
salt marsh cordgrass Spartina alterniflora
common rockweed Fucus vesiculosis '
Green hollow weed Enteromorpha intestinalis
widgeon grass Ruppia maritima dominant near head
green fleece Codium fragilis
beach grass ~4mmophila breviligulata
bayber~ Myrica pensylvanica
groundsel tree Baccharis halimifolia
red cedar Juniperus virginiana
switchgrass Panicum virgatum
common milkweed Asclepias syriaca
marsh elder Ivafrutescens
common reed Phragrnites australis
spike grass Distichlis spicata
glasswort Salicornia europa
post oak Quercus stellata
pin oak Quercus palustris
Tupelo Nyssa sylvatica
Additional Notes
Small footbridge near mouth does not contribute to erosion. Osprey platform was not occupied
during this visit.
Area near mouth has some areas devoid of vegetation on the westem bank.
Northwestern banks of Bass Creek are dominated by Spartina alterniflora with moderately dense
ribbed mussel beds. An area On the northwestern high marsh is presently being encroached by
Phragmites australis.
Eastern shoreline is not experiencing erosion:
Flow meter deployed July 27, 1998 at 08:24:06. Flow meter was retreived on July 28, 1998 at
08:24:36.
Benthic invertebrate samples were collected today. Samples from the mouth were come-grained
material and hard-packed sand. Samples collected from the head was very organic, fine silty
material with sub-aquatic vegetation included.
FIELD DATA SHEET
PECONIC ESTUARY PROGRAM
TIDAL CREEK SURVEY - PROJECT 97521
Station: Little Bay Tributary
Tributary To: Hallocks Bay
Last Rainfall Event: July 4, 1998
Position: HEAD MOUTH
LAT. N41.08.900' N41.08.908'
LONG. W072.14.843' W072.14.830'
Low Tide: 07:00, 12:47
High Tide: 00:08, 12:47
Field Crew: MPB/TWY
Weather: sunny, 85 F
Date: July 12, 1998
Time: 17:28 (head), 17:54 (mouth)
Last Dredged:
Moon: 3~d quarter moon in 4 days
Restricted Outlet: NO, mouth sometimes shoals naturally with coarse grained material.
Surrounding Land/Water Uses
Residential Commercial
Open Space Agricultural
Notes: Orient Point State Park
Land/Water Use Impacts
Storm Drain
Discharge
Road End
STP Out fall
Shoreline Condition
Bare, Non-Eroding X
Vegetated
Recreational/Park X
Marina
Size Type Location Culvert
Color Apparent Source
Ma'mtalned Lawn Failed Septic Systems
Boat Discharges Other
Bare, Eroding
Hardened, Bulkhead
Hardened, Sea Wall Other
Surrounding Land Use
STRUCTURES/BOATS HEAD MOUTH
Houses
Docks
Bulkheads
Barges
Marinas
Houseboats
Slips
Jet Skis
Dingles
Powerboats 1
I Sailboats
Physical Water Chemistry
PARAMETER . SURFACE SURFACE BOTTOM BOTTOM
(head) (mouth) (head) (mouth)
Dissolved Oxygen (mg/l) 6.0 7.9 4.2 7.1
Conductivity (MS) 43.8 45.1 43.3 43.8
Salinity (ppm) 26.7 27.2 27.0 27.2
Temperature (C) 27.5 28.4 27.2 26.2
pH 7.5 7.9
Depth 2.5 feet 5.0 feet
Incidental Occurrences of Natural Resources
COMMON NAME LATIN NAME COMMENTS
green fleece Codium fragile floating
rockweed Fucus vesiculosis
ribbed mussel Modiolus demissus at base of Spartina
common reed Phragrnites australis
salt marsh cordgrass Spartina alterni, flora
poison ivy Rhus radicans
groundsel tree Baccharis halimifolia
black cherry Prunus serotina
!Catalpa
high marsh cordgrass Spartina patens
red cedar Juniperus virginiana
black pine
bay berry Myrica pensylvanica
barn swallow Hirundo rustica
American oystereatcher Haematopus palliatus
Additional Notes
Western shoreline is eroding slightly, eastern shoreline erosion is less and patchy.
LABORATORY PROTOCOLS
Seapoint
Turbidity
Meter
c set Manual
Seapoint Sensors,
8~'North Road Tel: t~03-t~a2-a921
Kin~ston._ NH 03548-3056 Fax ~ c~j.~ -6.~'_--~)_.' "'
Dimensions
12cm
Figure 1. Outline Drawing
Paye I
Specifications
Power Requirements:
Output:
Output Time Constant:
KMS Noise:
Power-up Transient Period:
Light Source Wavelength: 880 nm
Scatterance Angles:
Linearity:
7-20VDC. 3.5rna avg. 6mA pk
0-5.0 ',/'DC
0.1 sec
<1 mV
<lse~
15 - 150 degrees
<2% deviation 0-750 FTU
Sensitivity/Range:
100x gain: 200 mVfF'ru 25 FTU
20x ga/n: 40 mVfFTU 125 FTU
5x ga/n: I0 mV/~- 1 U 500 FTU
Ix ga/n: 2 mV/F'FU (<750 FTU) *
Temperature Coefficient: <0.05 %/°C
0°C to 65°C
6000 m (19.700 ft)
12 cm (4.7 in)
86 g (3.0
2.5 cra(l.0 in)
Operating Temperature:
Depth Capability:
Overall Length:
Sensor Weight (dry,):
Body Diameter:
Response to turbidity levels .?:eater than 750 FTU ts nonhnear
Pa,ge
FALMOUTH SCIENTIFIC, INC.
3-D ACOUSTIC CURRENT METER (3D-ACM)
VERSION 7.0
FIRMWARE VERSION 2.79
PIN A800-010
Operating Instructions
Falmouth Scientific Inc.
1140 Route 28A PO Box 315
Cataumet, MA 02534-0315
Phone: 508-564-7640
Fax: 508-564-7643
Emaii: fsi~.fatmouth.com
Website: www.falmouth.com
AS00-0!0 i 3D-ACM
velocity. Hence the pulse type sensor requires two wide band receivers and very
fast circuitry to measure extremely small time differences. Williams [3] in his BASS
design eliminated this particular problem by reversing the receivers and transducers
to determine any differences in time delays.
The continuous wave type sensor described by Brown [4] eliminated the need for
very high speed circuits by heterodyning the two received 1.6 MHz carder frequency
signals to obtain a beat frequency of 34 Hz and by measuring the phase difference
at 34 Hz with Iow power CMOS logic circuits. However this circuitry required a
second oscillator phase locked to the first at a frequency difference of 34 hz. The
requirement of two receivers, the 2nd oscillator and the phase locked loop required
a substantial amount of electronics, with a corresponding contribution to overall
size, cost, and power consumption.
The direction sensors in pi'evious designs used either gimballed compass cards with
optical readout or gimballed 2 axis fluxgate magnetometers. The compass card
design was fragile, expensive and did not have good dynamic response due to
inertia' of the card and the Iow magnetic torque inherent in compass cards. Similarly,
the gimballed fluxgate designs required jewel bearings to minimize errors due
imperfect leveling caused by beadng stickiness, and this in turn required enclosure
in an oil filled chamber to provide mechanical damping.
THE 3D-ACM DESIGN
Figure 1 (right) illustrates the location of the
acoustic paths used by the 3D-ACM. The
3D-ACM has a total of 4 axes (see fig. 1).
Each axis is 13 cm in length and has a
vertical separation of 10.5 cm. It can be
shown that only one of the four paths will be
s!gnificantly contaminated by the wake from
the center support strut. The microprocessor
is used to determine which axis is
contaminated by flow interaction with the
center' support strut, and will reject the data
from this axis. This is done by simply
determining from which quadrant, in the X-Y
ACBUSTIC ~--___~....,
PATHS '
TITANIUM
--HDUS1N6
30Ch long
PATHS
plane, the current is flowing. Only three axes are required for a complete solution
of the X, Y, and Z components of velocity, thus permitting the accurate
determination of current flow essentially uncontaminated by flow interaction with the
center strut.
The 3D-ACM includes a "no moving parts" direction sensor described below. It
MEMORY-7 3D-ACM
: ~d
c-v
Where
~od
C+V
o~= Angular frequency (rads per sec)
d = Distance between transducers A and B (cm)
c = Velocity of sound (cm per sec)
v = Component of velocity along path A --> B
-. ®a. - E)ba = 2covd
C2 + V2
v = c2 Ieee- e,a]
2cod
(C>>>V)
DETECTOR
Figure 2
MICROPROCESSOR
MEMORY-9 3D-ACM
PHASE MEASURING CIRCUIT
The phase sensitive detector shown in figures 4 ideally can be treated as an analog
multiplier whose output is the instantaneous product of the two inputs.
E, = K~ SIN('~"~ +
E, = F-., SIN('~"~ +
Where Ks. Kr are constants
.'. Eo,, = E, x E,
= ~ [cos (e, - e,) - (2~ + e,)]
2
Low pass filtering Eo,~gives
.'. E~: = K cos (®, - 6),) + Eo,
Where K = __K.K.K.:
2
and Eo, = Zero offset of the detector
If ®, = 0. then Eo = E=~ = K cos (®~) +
If (9, = 90. then Eeo = E,c = -K cos (®,) + E~,
If ®, = 180. then E,.o = Eu. = -K cos (®,) + Eo.
If 6), = 270. then E27o = E=c = K cos (®,) + Eo,
Eo - E,so = 2K cos (®.)
E27o - Eeo = 2K sin (E),)
(9, = arctan [ (E270 - E90~ ] (E0 - E180)
Hence E), is independent of the gain or any d.c. offsets in the phase sensitive detector. The
only requirement is that there be a linear relationship between the detector output and the
cosine of the phase angle between the signal and reference input.
MEMORY-11 3D-ACM
output from the integrator is fed back to the sense coil. The complete circuit is a
negative feedback system which balances the earth's field with an equal and
opposite field in the sense coil, The field generated by the sense coil is proportional
to the product of the number of tums and the feedback current Ir~. To minimize
power consumption the maximum value of required feedback current was minimized
by winding the sense coil with a large number of turns, The output voltage Eo,, is
given by
Eo~= Ir~.R~
Hence E~ is directly proportional to the component of magnetic field (H) parallel to
the axis of the sense coil. The advantage of this negative feedback scheme is that
the calibration of the magnetometer is essentially insensitive to changes in the
magnetic properties of the core.
MICROPROCESSOR
The instrument uses an 8052 derivative 87C528 processor. All code is written in
object oriented "C" in an IBM/PC environment cross complied for the target.
MEMORY-13 3D-ACM
The final design utilizes a 82C55 24 programmable inputJoutput port operating
under the 87C528 control to sequence the velocity measurement through the
various acoustic paths and reference phases and the measurement of the outputs
of the 3 magnetometers and the 2 tilt sensors. The numerically intensive
computations to process the raw data require the powerful 87C528. At 2 scans per
second the microprocessors operating as described will consume 25 mw average.
SUMMARY
The 3D-ACM is based on a simple, small design with a power consumption of 50
mw. Similarly the complete direction sensor (magnetometer and accelerometer)
consumes 5 mw, is small and extremely rugged and clearly meets the accuracy
requirements for a good current meter. It has been shown through tow tank testing
that the directional response will be substantially free from flow perturbation effects.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Gytre, Trygve "Ultrasonic Measurements of Ocean Currents Down to I mm/sec", IERE
Conf Proc #32 Instrumentation in Oceanography, 23-25 Sept., Univ. College N. Wales,
Bangor, U.K., pp 69-80.
Williams, A.J. 3rd "An Acoustic Sensor of Velocity for Benthic Boundary Laver Studies",
Bottom Turbulence, Proc. 8th intern. Liege Colloquium on Ocean Hydrodynamics.
Elsevier Oceanogr. Ser 19, Jacques C.J. Nihoul, Ed. Elsevier Sci. Pub. Co.,
Amsterdam-Oxford-N.Y. 1977
Williams A.J., 3rd et al,"Measurement of Turbulence in the Oceanic Bottom Boundary
Laver with an Acoustic Current Meter Arrav",Amer. Meteor. Soc., Jour. of Atmos. and
Oceanic Tech., Vol. 4, No. 2, June 1987,
Brown, N.L, and K.D. Lawson, Jr., "A high precision acoustic current sensor," Near
Surface Ocean Exoerimental Technoloa¥ Workshoo Proceedinas, Naval Ocean
Research and Development Activity, pp. 57-74, February 1980.
Lawson, K.D., Jr., N.L. Brown, D.H. Johnson, and R.A. Mattey, '% three-axis acoustic
current meter for small scale turbulence, Instrument Society of America, ASI 76269, pp.
501-508, 1976.
Geyger, W.A.,"The Rino-Core Ma{:netometer-a New Type of Second Harmonic
Fluxaate Maonetometer", Trans. AlEE (Commun. Electron.), vol. 81, pp. 65-73, Mar
1962.
MEMORY-15 3D-ACM
Designation: D 421 - 85 (Reapproved 1993)~
Standard Practice for
Dry Preparation of Soil Samples for Particle-Size Analysis and
Determination of Soil Constants
2. Referenced Dommenta
2.1 A~rM Starers:
D2217 t~acfi~ for We~ P'mpaz~fiou of Soft ~mpi~ for
E 11 fipc~doa f~ W~o~ S[~ for
4.4 Sampier--A ri~c sampler or ~npI= splitter, i'm'
quartm4ng the ~mple~.
5.1 E.xp~ the mihampie a~ ~r~';,~i ~rom ~e fietd to the
air = mom ~m uu~ ~ ~oro,gh~. B~ up ~
~om ~om-~i7 in ~e mo~ M~ a
by ~e ~ of a ~p~. T~ ~m of m~ ~ m
5.1.1 ~kf~Size A~ysis--For ~e ~ ~,~-
~ ~ ~u~ a No. 10 (2.~) ~e 2 ~ ~
~o~ ~ m 115 g or,dy ~ ~ 65 ~ of~ ~t
or ~y ~
~.12 Tes~ for ~o~ ~a~F~ ~e ~ f~ ~
~m ~ ~ ~e No. ~ (~) si~ 2._
~u~ m ~ ~o~t of ~0 ~ ~ ~ foHo~
T~
6. Prel~U'afio~ d Te~ Sample
6.1 ~ ~ ~on of~e ~ ~pie ~ for
p~ of~a ~d m~ ~e m~ ~ ~e m~ of~e m~
~ ~le ~,'~ for h~c m~- ~e
~he ~ ~mple by ~g ~ a No. 10 ~.~)
~ a ~b~r<ov~ ~e uu~ ~e ~om of ~
~d~ ~ ~o~u up imo ~e ~m~ ~
No. 10
6.3 W~ ~t ~dOU ~ ~ ~ ~ ~g
~ of ~ fine match, d~, ~d w~. K;~,d ~is m~ ~
~mg ~ ad ~ on me No. 4 (~.75-mm'~ deve ~d
7. Test _~mple for Patrick--She Azalysis
3.1 'Fhor~u~h.iy ',-,i~ toge-Ja~- the fx-ac'tmn~. ?-,x~.~ cbc No.
10 (2.00-mm) ~eve in both s~ev~g opemUoms, and by the
me~bod of quar..~n, ns or the use of a sampic:. ~ie'~ a porUon
~ D~21
wei~hln~ approximar~eiy 115 l for ,~nd? softs a=d app~oxl-
ma~!y 6I g for sil~ a~d clay soil forPar~c.Ie'siz~ a~l-~sis.
8. Tes~ S~mpt~ for Soil Co~s~s~s
~.1 S~-~.ram ~.lle Igm~i'~i'a~ portion oi~J:~e mat~ml ?~_~i. ng
,ae ~o. 10 (2.00-mm) ~'ic¥¢ i~m ~vo ~ by me, ms ora No.
~ (4~,1.~) m'~ Disca.~l t~ frac~.o,~ rc'..aia~ oa ~e No.
40 sim'e. U~ '~c fr~-'~io~ l~sdn! ~c No. ~0 ~icvc for ~¢
K .e~ords
9.1 d-9' i~,;,~u'ag, on; p~c!e-s:,.ze ,,,~IySlE S~I
i for
toml
~Lh. a
thc
9
)Designation: D 422 - 63 (Reapproved lggg)<~
Standard Test Method for
Particle-Size Analysis of Soils
D421 Pzac~m for Dry Pr~oa~oa of ~il .~.~lea for
Pa~de-~ A~a~.wJs zad D~-~mmadon ~£ 5oil
E I1 $~_~ca~oa for x~r~lotb. Siev~ for
~.~-pos~
E 100 S.~icadon for ASTM Hyciromc'~-s'
mad r-5_n'iag deAc~ in which a su/mbly mounter c!~'u-ic
mot~ v. tr~ a vm'-dcal shaft at a :~:~l of not 1~ th=,, 100~0
~N~ble
~) n~r more ,s~- l'fi ~ (38.1 ~) ~ ~e ~m of
d~ of~ d~ ~ ~ ~ 2 ,~=n ~ pm~d~ to hold
3 ~om 4 ~d 5).
No~ ~
3.3 ~rom~
mad h ~
~ cf s~4on, ~d ~o~ng m ~e ~u f~
hy~m~ 151H
3.4 S~on CyI~A ~ cyfin~ ~y
~ 8 ~ (~57
~d m~
sh~ be
3.5 T~o~A
(0.~'C).
A ~R ~ of ~ ~ciud~ ~e foRo~ng ~ote 6):
10
4
~old
;~p h
~r by
ilO
,
I'F
.I.
· ~ D 422
0.Z93- !e.oor'
FIG.
1R-ia.
~'=ptl. ~ t~iuil~[ i~ ~.,='c~oU 17, lz=.7 t:e 'a~ec[ i~ d=ir~L Th~ ~cl co~ ,'i~,
3.7 Water Bath or Consraznt-Temperamre
· ,~ter bzth or col~'zmlZ-*.e~I:~'~tte ro~m for
h~m~ ~l~ A ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ insured
~ ~ a room at ~ au~fi~y
3.9 ~ D~i~A wat~ or ~k ~ a
A
h-;fie
be brou~t to the r, cml~'~:u.m ~a: is ~,.oe~,ed to p~
du~n! ~c by~ome:er ~ For ~;ie, ~ ~e ~e=~
uon ~nder ~ ~o ~ p~ ia ~e ~:c ~ ~e ~ or
&~n~ water to ~ ~d s~ ~ broil to ~e
t~emra~ of ~c con~cllc~ ~r ~ or, ~' ~c ~m~-
ture, ~e ~z:e: fcr ~e ~ sh~l be ar ~c tem~t'~ oF~c
r~m. T~e b~c tempe~twe for ~e hy~ome~ t~ ~ 68?
CO'C). S~ v~aUOnS oF ~t'a~ do not ~t~u~
'O
Tesz c~mple
5.1 Prcmrc
o~
· e No. 10 ~ ~e m~ o~ ~ so~ ~ for
~t
5.1.1 ~e ~ of ~e ~ffion ~ on ~e No. I0 ~e
5.12
g for ~t ~d
52 ~o~on i~ ~c ~ ~on ~ of ~ D ~21 for
~ng of ~c ~ mfl ~I~ for pu~o~ of ~s. the
~la~ ~ a~ M~ 12.1.
and o~
SI~ ~YSIS OF ~ON ~ ON NO. 10
6.1 S~a~u the portion ~mn~ on me No. l0 (2.O0-
mm) ~iev~ imo a mSc~ of 5ac'ao~ u~ing thc 3-i~. (75-mmL
2-in. (50-mm), 1V:-i~. (37.5-mm), l-h" (25.0-mm), ¥,-in.
(19.~), ~ (93-mm), No. t (4.7~), ~d No. 10
g~, or ~ mn~y ~ may ~ n~'~ni~g on ~
~mpl~ or u~n ~e ~o~ for ~e ~ und=
6J Condum ~e ~ng ~on ~ m~q of a ~
md v~m~ moUon of ~e ~eve, ~mp~ ~ a j~
a~en ~ o~ to ~ ~c ~mple mo~g ~n~uo~y ov~
~enm m Ce rumple ~ou~ ~= si~e ~' h~d. Cou~ue
~c~ un~ ~o~ more ~han 1 m-~% of~e ~duc o= a
~c~ ~ l~t ~eve d~ng 1 rain of ~e~n~ ~
by ~g ~ ~d me~ of ~emg ~ d~'~ a~ve,
6.3 ~i~ ~c ~ of ~h ~on on a b~ance
~nfo~ng Io ~e rcqmmm~m of 3.1, At lhe end of
~ed ~o~d ~u~ cl~ly ~e o~ m~ of ~e q~'
~2
b
, 10
tc'~l
~lzt¢
ring
I-I'YDRO~.~.~,~.k AND ~ ~J~,~LYSi~ OF POWHON
P.~NG THE NO. 10 (2.00-~m) ~
7. l~ermlmuiou at Composim Correc~u f~r Hydr~mete~
7.1 ~m6c~ for
~ ~ ~
7.13 ~ n~ ~ount of ~e
~d ma~ ~ d~i~ ~en~y.
.7~ For ~uv~. a ~h
~ for a
may ~ ~ at ~o ~ ~ ~ ~g~ of
~ ~ te~-~ ~d co~o~ for ~ ~e-
73 ~ 1~
~h=d~ ~ ~e
~r a ihoa ~
~em~e of ~e ~ r~ ~e hF~m~ a} ~ top of
· e m~ fo~ on
~d om~; for h~ 152H
8. Hygr~cupic Moi.~c,ue
g.l When tM s~mple b wdgh~i for ti:.' hydromc:cr test.
v,~ ou~ ~u au.~li~9' potion of from 10 tc 15 $ in a smsd.l
me,.ai or ~t c~ntzine;, dry ,..M sample u: a com~.nt mass in
an oven at '-'~0 ± ?'F ( I 10 ± 5'C), and ~:~
file
9. Dislmrsion of Soft S~mple
9.1 When the s~il is mostly of the ch¥ and fir s~
out a mrnple o£ air-/hS/~oil of a!~proxima!e!y 50 S. When the
soil is mos, ly saud the sample should be approximately 100
g.
13
9~ ~ ~ sample in
125 m.L of ~ h~.~~ ~[u~on (~ g~).
S~ ~fl ~e ~ ~ ~ro~y ~ ~ow ~ ~ for at
1~ 16 h.
9.3 At ~e ~d of ~e ~
~r ~ ~e ~ ~n cap ~o~ ~ Fi~ 2,
~ ~y ~du~ ~om
~ or ~e~ ~mr ~o~ 9). Ada ~ or
· h.. ~ ~ S~ for a ~od
9.4~~B~% ~)~oveee
~-~ of a mb~ h~ A
~ ~e ~O ~d ~e ~n~l ~v~ ~ ~e mu~i
n~, m ~ ~e ~ vol~e ~ ~e ~p ~ ~0 m~ but
9.5 P~ ~e ~
cou~l ~ ~ ~ ~e pr~ ~ 20 ~ (1~ ~.
for o~y f ~i. ~ ~ ~o~
10. Hydrometer Te~t
10. I Imw~4;-~ly a.~ ~on, ~e ~fl - ~
10.2 U~g ~ ~ of~c ~d o~ ~e o~ cud
c/~u~ u~de do~ ~d ~k for a ~fi~ of I ~ to
~mpi~ ~c ~m~n of~e ~ ~o~ 1 I), At ~ ~d
1 ~ ~ ~e ~d~ in a conv~t l~fiou ~d
h)'~omc~ ~i~ a~ ~e foUo~g ~ of
(m~d ~om ~e ~.ning of ~m~muou), or ~
~on for ~e ~M ~ ~ 2. 5, ~5, ~, 60, 2~0, ~d
1~ mi~. M ~e ~=oU~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~e ~m~-
~ D4~
10.3
r~!
10.4
1 I. Siev~ Amlysis
TAI~.E 1 Yalue~ of C4)fr~ Fa¢:~, =. h=r Offi.~ve~ S~*-~C
(2.~-mm) ~iev~, and m~iplying the r~uk b~ 100. Tni~
value i~ ~e wdghz P/ im ~t~ e~ua6on for perc-.a~
Il.1 ~ faking.thc 6n~l hydrom~=-re~alug,:t~-~rer .,14~3 Tl~p~.~?-°"ofsoil re~i;~iggin'~'tx~iou a~the
die susl~ion to a No. 2(~ (75-9m) sk've and wa!h wi.ill tap .1 .evil. al whldl the hydrom~.-,~r is .mca.mr;rog thc d ~.~qw. of the
wal~ ualilth~,~h wamrls'd~ar. Tra~f=;th~mana/al on ~don may b~mlcalated.a~ follo~a {Now 13): For
C~J.~II.~TIONS AND RETORT
12. S'~.vc :-~ii~:~/=~ for ~ P~ ~ '~" ~
No. 10 (~) ~eve
12.1 ~ ~'~ ~ ~= No. l0 ~c by
o~-n7 ~t ~ ~c No. 10 d~ ~d m~l~g ~= ~t
~ I~. To o~n ~ ~,~t ~ ~ No. 10 d~ s~
12~ To ~ ~ to~ m~ of ~R ~ag ~e No. 4
~d ~ on ~ No. 10 ~ To ~ ~e t~ m~ of
~c ~>im ~e ~d ~ on ~e No. g d~ For ~e
I~3 TO ~,,,~e ~e ~ ~ ~ng for ~h
m~ of ~¢M ~d m~ly ~e ~t ~ 1~.
13. H~pic $~I Co--on Fs~ar
13.1 ~e g~&~M m~ ~on f~r ~ ~e
redo ~ ~e m~ of ~ ov~ ~pte and ~e
~ ~ ~fo~ ~. h ~ a num~ 1~ v~ on~
14. P~m of ~ ~ S~m
h~c mom croon ~,r.
14.2 ~ ~e ~ ora ~ omple ~ by
ovm~ m~ ~ by ~e ~amg ~ng ~ Nm 10
N~ 1~ ~,v~ '~on of ~ ~ f~ h~
'IS1H ~ ~t f~ ~ of ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Fo~ hy~m~:lS~:
· ,: r. ' .... · P = (~ .x 1~
a = ~on ~n m ~'~ to ~e ~g of
h~ 152~ ~u~ ~o~ on ~c ~e are
~mgu~ ~g a ~c ~ of 2.65. Co--on
~c~ ~ g~ i~ Table 1),
~ ~e ~Jnd ~, ~e ~m~ ~o~ for ~
~ ~ o~ a v~ of O~e for G~.
15. Di~meier of 502 Pardct~s
15.1 'Fne Hi~rne,.t~ of a pardc!e c~rr~ndi~g to the
pe.,r.2mtnge i'ndic:ated by a given hyd.romc'.-~ r~adi~g ~h~ll
c:llcalated according to Stokes' law (Note 14), on the
~a~ a lmrdd: of tlfis ~iameter. ~,~ a: fi:e surface of thc
mspemio~ at *.he ~ of sedime::u6on and h.ad ~_ded
to ',he level ~.t wtach the bydrome',~r is m~-.q~-mg the
of the ~u.qpe::~lon. ACCnrdlno~ tO Stoke'
D = .,r[30n/ggoIG - G~)l × LT
where:
D = dinrnet= of paracle, mm.
14
7
I(
112
si
, of
tion
aF-
n = co~.'~eat of ~ of the ~tznding medium
te.ml~:amxe of ~e ~n~ng
I~ zt wh~ ~e ~i~ of ~ r~ou h ~g
m~ ~ ~m a ~v~ h~me~ ~d
~ r~ ~ ~ B ~o~ ~ eff~
d~ ~ 2)),
T ~ ~t~ of ~c ~m ~nni.g of ~on to
~um (~ue my ~ ~ ~ 1.~ for ~ m~
~).
15.2 For muv~enm, i~ ~om ~e ~'~mfion
sion ~d ~e ~c ~ of~e mfi ~1~ V~u~
of K f~ a m~ of ~ ~d ~c
~ ~v~ ~ T~e 3. ~e ~ae of K d~ no~ ~ for
~d T ~ v~.-
15.3 V~u~ of D mY ~ mmp~ ~m e~mt ~-
~I-~e.
16. $ie*e Anal~is Values for Portion F;mer tM. No. 10
(2J~-am) Sieve
16.1 ~on of~ ~g ~e ~o~ ~e~
eter ~ ~volv~ ~ ~ ~e ~ ~ ~'~
No. 10 ~e,e ~ it.not ~ ,~v~ T~ ~ N ~ m
~d ~e ~t ~d~ by 100.
16.2 ~te ~ ~e t~ maqq ~ng ~e No. 2~
· e ~ of~e t~ ~¢le (=,~c~t~ in 14.2).
16.3 ~hte nero ~e m~ m~ ~g ~ch of ~e
o~ ~ev~ ~ a m~nner ~mql~r tO ~l Dven ~ 12.2.
16.4 ~cala~e ~q ~e to~ p~cn~ ~g by ~-
~ng ~e lo~ m~ g~g (= ~c~ted ~ 16.33 by ~e
to~ m~ or--pie (~ ~c~I~ M 14.2), =d mM~iy ~e
m~t by 1~
17. Graph
17.1 Whe= the hydrome'-~ ana/.,e~ i~ .ce=-form~, a D-apb
D 422
Tlffi.~ 2 Value,~ of El't~-,&m ~ Ba~d ~
l.o~'.e $2 ' ': -
11.2
of thC te~t Iz:zull~ ~tlall be made, plotting thc d/am¢~-rS &the
pa~lclm On a logarithmic smie as the ahsei~ and the
~ D422
TABL~ ~ Vaiue~ ~! K ~ar LI~ kl Equat~ fo~ Com~ ~ ~ I:~a~'e ~ ~ydtometm' Anat~
~-~I~L~
ot'~a gr~.h is op~ouaL
fi'om tabu. La',gfl.
18.
18.1 ']'he ~-tx>~ ~h.~J1 b:~u~
~ote 16),
18.1.3 ~ of~d
18.1.3.1 ~d~ or ~,
18.1.3~ P~~ ~d d~bl~
~d~l~ -. . .. .. ,
18.1.4 S~c ~, u ~Y ~ o~ iow,
~o. 10 (2.0~~) ~'~ ~"~
18.1.6 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~e 1~ of ~e
18~ F~ ~ ~ for ~mp~ ~ de~ze
~ ~ ~ T~e ~O~ ~ ~hnn ~ ~O. {0 dave
~ ~m ~e~.
18.3 Fo~ ~ for ~ch
~evc. ~c ~ r~d ~m
NOT~ IT--No. 8 (Z3~u~.~) -.ud NC. ~0 (3C~A~) ~e-~ ~ ~
16
~h,
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
I
1
1
1
Christopher E D'Elia
Erin E. Connor
Nancy L. Kaumeyer
Carolyn W. Keefe
Kathryn V. Wood
Carl E Zimmermann
May, 1997
Nutrient
Analytical
Services
Laboratory
Standard
Operating
Procedures
Technical Report Series No. 158-97
Chesapeake Biological Laboratory
University of Maryland
Center for Environmental Science
Solomons, Maryland 20688-0038
410-326-7252
INTRODUCTION
The following pages documeni the analytical methodologies performed by the Nutrient Analytical Services
Laboratory. at the University of Maryland Chesapeake Biological Laboratory (CBL). This m;nual includes
sections on dissolved inorganic nutrients, dissolved organic nutrients and particulate nutrients. Within each
of these sections, sample collection, storage, preparation and analysis are discussed. A final section
addresses data management and quality assurance/quality control (QA/QC).
Many of*he procedures discussed are used for the Maryland Mainstem portion &the Chesapeake Bay
Program.
Instrumentation includes:
· Technicon AutoAnalyzer II,
· Two channel Technicon TrAAcs-800 Nutrient Analyzer,
· OI Analytical Model 700 TOC Analyzer,
· Shimadzu TOC-5000 Total Organic Carbon Analyzer,
· Turner Designs TD-700 Fluornmeter,
· Sequoia Turner Fluorometer Model 112,
· Shimadzu UV-120-02 Spectrophotometer,
· Exeter Analytical, Inc. CE-440 Elemental Analyzer, and
· Rainin Co. Inc./Dionex hybrid Ion Chromatograph.
Gateway 2000 Pentium microcomputers with complete spreadsheet packages are used heavily in data
reduction and management.
High quality ( 18.3 megohm-cm) water is provided via a Barnstead NANOpure lI system. The Barnstead
system produces Type I Reagent Grade water equal to or exceeding standards established by the American
Society for Testing and Materials. First, water is filtered through a reverse osmosis membrane. Final
product water then passes through a series of five filters: one organic colloid, two mixed bed, one organic
free, and one final 0.2 gm filter. Throughout this report, the term "deionized water" refers to 18.3 rnegohrn-
em water and "frozen" refers to temperature < -20°C.
Table 1. Parameters routinely analyzed at the Nutrient Analytical Services Laboratory at CBL
DISSOLVED INORGANIC ORGANIC PARTICULATE
Ammonium-Nitrogen
Nitrite-Nitrogen
Nitrite+Nitrate-Nitrogen
Phosphate-Phosphorus
Silicate
Sulfate
Chloride
Nitrate-Nitrogen
Acid Persulfate Phosphorus
Persulfate Nitrogen
Persulfate Phosphorus
Dissolved Carbon
Carbon
Nitrogen
Phosphorus
Total Suspended Solids
Biogenic Silica
Chlorophyll a
Phaeopig'ments
i~3'FRI~NT ANAL ~?I CAL SER 'v'[ CE $ LAB O ~ T O R Y
Sample Data Reduction Process
2
· NH4. PO4*, N023. NO2 - filtered 0.7 um GFiF (4 mi, labelled
TON. TOP - filtered 0.7 um GF/F )10 mi. labelled test tubes)
DOC - filtered 0.7 um GFi~: (20 mi, labelled test tubesJ
TSS -- 0.7 um GFIF filter pad )label)ed, 2 replicates)
PC. PN - 0.7 um GF/F filter pad (labelled. 2 replicates)
PP - 0.7 um GFIF filter ped 0abelled. 2 replicates)
Si - fi)tared 0.7 um GFIF (4 mi. labelled AA II cups, Stored at
Sampies bfougt~ to laP. counted and date sheets checked for completeness
5'T.,~.4RD OPER.42'72VG PROCEDURES
[
[
[
DISSOLVED INORGANIC ANALYTES
Instrumentation
All of the dissolved inorganic nutrient procedures, particulate phosphorus and biogenic silica procedures
require the use of a segmented continuous flow analyzer such as the Technicon AutoAnalyzer II where
samples and reagents are continuously added in a specific sequence along a path of glass tubing and mixing
coils. Within the system of tubes, air bubbles injected at precise intervals sweep the walls of the tubing and
prevent diffusion between successive samples. Reactions in the AutoAnalyzer do not develop to completion
as in manual methods, but reach identical stages of development within each sample since every sample
follows the same path, timing and exposure to specific reagents.
The basic function of each component of the segmented continuous flow analyzer is discussed briefly below.
This explanation is similar to that of Sanborn and Larrance (1972).
Automatic Sampler
At a timed interval, the sampler probe alternately draws fluid from a tray of discrete samples and a wash
fluid receptacle. After each sample is drawn, the sample tray advances to the next sample position. A
bubble of air, which acts as a diffusion barrier, is aspirated into the sample stream between sample and wash.
The ratio of sample-to-wash time and the number of samples analyzed per hour are controlled by a cam
located in the top well of the sampler assembly. Cams are changed easily and are available for various
sampling rates.
The wash solution separates successive samples in the sample stream as indicated on the graphical record by
alternating minima (wash) and maxima (sample). The sample probe is connected to a stream divider that
delivers identical samples simultaneously to each manifold via the pump.
Proportioning Pump
The proportioning pump is a peristaltic-type pump that continuously delivers air, reagents and samples to the
manifold. Plastic pump tubes of various diameters are pressed between a series of moving rollers and a
platen. The motion of the rollers along the tubes delivers a continuous flow of samples and reagents. The
delivery rate is determined by the inside diameter of the tubes since the rollers move at a constant rate.
These pump tubes are available in a large assortment of delivery rates. The pump holds a maximum of 28
tubes and has an air bar that mechanically measures and injects identically sized air bubbles into the
analytical stream. The pump tubes delivering reagents, air and samples are connected to appropriate
manifolds.
Manifold
Each analysis requires a manifold specifically desi_maed for the chemical determination employed. The
manifolds are composed ora series of horizontal glass coils, injection finings and heating baths arranged for
the proper sequence of reactions leading to color deveinpment. The glass coils permit mixing of the sample
and the reagents; as t~vo solutions with different densities travel around each turn of the mixing coil, the
denser solution falls through the less dense one, causing mixing and creation of a homogenous mixture of the
NI)TRi~T ANALYT1C.4L SERVICES L~BORATORY
two solutions. The len_mh of the coil determines the amount of time allowed for chemical reaction between
the addition of successive reagents: Injection fittings for each of the reagents are placed between mixing,
coils; thus, a sample enters one end of the manifold, a reagent is added, and then another reagent is added
and mixed. After the addition of all reagents, and an adequate reaction time, the solution flows into a
colorimeter.
Colorimeter
The colorimeter measures the absorption of monochromatic light by the solution in the flow cell. Light from
a single source passes through two separate but identical interference filters that pass light within a narrow
spectral band. The light then passes through the appropriate flow cell and is projected onto a photombe.
The phototube generates an electrical signal in response to the intensity of the impinging light. The output
from each photombe is a measure of transmittance and is converted electronically by the colorimeter to a
signal proportional to absorbance. The relationship between transmittance and absorbance is given by the
equation A = log l/T; where A = absorbance and T = transmittance. The resulting signal is linear in
absorbance and directly proportional to concentration. As each sample passes through the flow cell, the
signals are sent to a recorder.
Recorder
Results of the analyses are continuously recorded by strip chart recorders or by computer using an IBM
compatible DPS00 software system by Labtronics Inc. Each recorder can simultaneously monitor two
separate analyses and the DP500 system can collect and analyze data from up to four different detectors
simultaneously. The output of the co[orimeter is proportional to absorbance and standards of known
concentration must be analyzed to relate absorbance to concentration. The analog signals can be converted
to absorbance values by referring to the Technicon reference curve and the standard calibration control.
Sampling and Storage
Collected water samples are filtered through Whatman GF/F filters (nominal pore size 0.7 gm), placed in
either polypropylene bottles or directly into 4 mi AutoAnalyzer cups and frozen. Samples for silicate are
treated in the same manner but are refrigerated at 4°C. All samples are analyzed within 28 days.
Operating Procedures
The following describes step-by-step operating procedures for the AutoAnalyzer II system.
I. Colorimeter - Turn power on and allow I0 minute~ for warm.up. Set ~a.ndard calibration se.ling for desired determination.
Recorder (or Computery - Turn power on and allow 0 m nute$ for recorder warm-uo Check recorder paper supply. If using
computer for data collection, load software and select appropriate sample method an~t sample table. Refer to Laberonics Inc.
DPS00 users manual for a description of system operation.
3. Sampler }Vater Rexer~'oirg - Check and fill the deionized water reservoir~.
4. Pump - Connect pump tubes and anach platen to pump. Starl pump with deionized water flowing through the wstem. Check
for leaks in tubes at connections and for a regular bubble panem in tge manifold.
5. Recorder - Start recorder. Paper should begin to move.
3TANDARD OpE.rM]TNG PROCEDLri~s
1
1
]
Color#neter - Check ZERO and FULL SCALE knob. ZERO simulates a zero output so that ZERO adjustment (screwdriver) of
the recorder can be made. Set knob to NOi~MAL md establish a baseline with deionized water using the BASELINE
CONTROL adjustment knob and a mdard calibration (STD CAL) sening of 1.0.
Allow reagents to pump through the ~stem and note any rise in baseline and readjust the baseline to zero. Refer to this rise as
the REAGENT BLANK (at a STD C,M, of 1.0).
An extremely wide range of nutrient concentrations found in Chesapeake Bay waters, both temporally and spatially, requires
use ora standard curve covering a large range and that covers a few STD CAi control se~ings.
10.
I1.
Reset zero baseline at the STD CAL control se~ing normally used for ~hat determination (e.g., particulate phosphorus STD
CAi of&O). Next, switch the STD CAL setting to 1.0. There should be no deflection of the pen at zero baseline. Note peak
hei[hts of standards at the various STD CAL se~tings along wi~h the STD CAi se~tings. This allows the operator to use STD
CA~ settings in the range of I to 4 (for this example) in analyzing standards and samples that otherwise would have gone off
scale. Intersperse s'~ndards in the run a~er approximately every 20 samples, including a standard analyzed at each STD CAi
se~ing employed durin~ the preceding 40 samples. A visual comparison with the day's initial sra~dard curve should indicate
no greater variance than 5% of ~e peak height (e.g,, initial standard peak height 60.0; subsequent standards acceptable in the
range of 57.0 to 63.0). If the variance exceeds 5%, identify the source of the problem, correct and re-analyze affected samples.
Adjust baseline a~er approximately every 20 samples. [fan adjusa'nant ofmora than I unit is required, identify the source of
the problem, correct and re-analyze affected samples.
At completion of the run, remove lines from reagents and place tubes in deinnized water.
Shut.down - Turn offrecorder. Wash system with I N hydrochloric acid for 15 minutes, followed by a 15 minute wash with
deionized water. Turn offpump, release proportioning platen and loosen pump tubes. Turn off colorimater.
Glassware
Glassware for all determinations are acid-washed with 10% hydrochloric acid followed by numerous rinses
with deionized water.
Calibration and Standardization
Please refer to each specific determination for the appropriate STD CAI. control setting and for the standard
concentrations used.
The STD CAL control setting located on the colorimeter allows the operator to adjust the electrical output to
the concentration range of the samples. Extremely low values (1~1) require high STD CAL settings (high
sensitivity.) whereas high values (mg/I) require lower STD CAL settings (lower sensitivity).
Concentrations of nutrients are calculated from the linear re_m'ession of the standard concentration
(independent variable) against the corresponding peak height (dependent variable). All standards analyzed at
a particular STD CAI. setting are included in the recession for that set of calculations. Only samples whose
peak heights were measured at that individual STD CAL setting are calculated from that recession. If a
broad range of sample concentrations requires that more than one STD CAi. setting be used throughout the
course ora run, then a separate recession must be employed for each STD CAi. setting. For example, peak
heights obtained from standards read at STD CAL 9.0 are used to obtain the linear regression for calculating
only the concentrations of samples whose peak height~ were read at STD CAL 9.0. Likewise, peak heights
obtained from standards read at STD CAi. 2.0 are used to obtain the linear re_m'ession for calculating only the
concentrations of samples whose peak heights were read at STD CAL 2.0.
NU2-,qlE.~T AMALY17C. AL SER VP~'~$ L~ORATORY
6
Peak heights are read manually from the strip chart or automatically by the DP500 software system,
depending on the AutoAnalyzer II system used. Operator vigilance is necessary throughout the run to ensure
that all peaks indicate steady state conditions for the reaction for each sample. If steady state conditions are
not obtained, {he samples are re-analyzed.
Stock standards are prepared with primary standard grade chemicals of each nutrient in deionized water. As
a general rule, stock solutions should be made every 6 months and the preparation date logged. Secondary
standards, where appropriate, are prepared with deionized water. Working standards are prepared daily with
deionized water or the appropriate matrix as described by the specific determination method and should
encompass the range of the samples.
All analysis documents are kept in bound notebooks and the carbon copy is given to the investigator or
granting agency. Information provided includes:
· name of the method;
· collection date;
· source of samples;
· analyst;
· analysis date;
· sample number;,
· sample concentration;
· results of duplicate analyses; and
· results of spike analyses.
~TANDARD OPEK4TING
27
ORGANIC ANALYTES
Rationale
Methods for measuring dissolved organic carbon, nitrogen and phosphorus are described in the following
sections. 'All procedures except Kjeidahl require the addition of potassium persuifate to a sample, which
when under heat and pressure, breaks down the organic constituents to inorganic forms. Inorganic fractions
then are subtracted from the total dissolved sample to yield the dissolved organic concentration. See Figures
7 and 8.
Sampling and Storage
Collected water samples are filtered through Whatman GF/F filters (nominal pore size 0.7 ~m) and placed in
appropriate containers and preserved. Table 2 presents sampling and storage practices for organic analytes.
Containers for dissolved organic carbon are acid washed in 10% I-ICI and rinsed thoroughly with deionized
water. Containers for nitrogen and phosphorus are autoclaved with potassium persulfate before use, then
rinsed thoroughly with deionized water only.
Table 2. Sampling and storage for organic analytes
ANALYTE VOLUIv~ (mi) STORAGE CONTAINER
Dissolved organic carbon -30 ,20°C Teflon or Borosilicate Glass Vial~
Dissolved nitrogen/phosphorus 10 -20°C Borosilicate Glass Screw-cap Tube
Dissolved phosphorus (acid persulfate) 20 -20°C Borosilicate Glass Screw-cap Tube
Dissolved Kjeldahl ~ 50 H:SOs Pol.vpropylene Centrifiige Tube
!
I
!
I
1
i
1
i
1
1
~ Teflon vials are used for freshwater samples. EPA recommended Wheaton-33® low extractable borosilicate
glass vials are used for saltwater samples.
TN
I 0.7 um
GF/F
fitter
PN TE)N
(E. ementat Analysis on Fitter) (Alkaline Pemuifate N [filtrate])
OiN DON
(NOS -+ NO2 -+ NH4 *' ) (Alkaline Pemulfate N [fi~ate[ - DIN}
I I
NO3 - NO2 - NH4*
All by standard automated
colodme~c pmcedums
Figure 7. Flow diagram of nitrogen analysis (-IW = total nitrogen. PN TM particulate nitrogen, TDN TM total
dissolved nitrogen, DIN = dissolved inorganic nitrogen, DON = dissolved organic nitrogen).
I~'RI F-N'f ~ ~ ~ .~E. R VICE$ LABORATORY
28
I
PP
(Extraction on Filter)
TP
0.7 um GFIF filter
TDP
(AJkaline Persulfate [ffitrate])
DIP DOP
(P04'3) (Alkaline Persulf~te [fi~ateI . DIP)
By standa~l automated
~lo~e~c
Figure 8. Flow diagram of phosphorus analysis m' = total phosphorus, pp = particulate phosphorus. TDP
= total dissolvedphospharus, DIP = dissolved inorganic phosphorus, DOP = dissolved organic
phosphorus).
o~i'AIVDARD OPE~ATING PROCF-.DUR~$
48
PARTICULATE ANALYTES
Rationale
The direct measurement of particulate carbon, paniculate nitrogen and particulate phosphorus is the preferred
method used by the Nutrient Analytical Services Laboratory.. A large volume can be filtered onto the pad,
yielding a representative sample. The alternative, subtraction of the dissolved concentrations from the total
sample concentration to determine the paniculate carbon concentration, of'ten yields negative values. Direct
measurement is rapid, sensitive and more precise.
Instrumentation
Particulate phosphorus and biogenic silica procedures require the use ora segmented continuous flow
analyzer such as the AutoAnalyzer II, previously described in the section Dissolved Inorganic Analytes.
Particulate carbon and particulate nitrogen procedures require the use of an elemental analyzer.
Sampling and Storage
A known volume of the collected water is filtered through Whatman GF/F filters (25 mm for particulate
carbon and nitrogen, and 47mm for paniculate phosphorus, nominal pore size 0.7 tam). The filter is folded,
piaced in an aluminum foil pouch and frozen until analysis. For bio,chic silica, water is filtered through a
0.4/am Nuclepore polycarbonate filter. The filter is placed in a 50 ~1 plastic centrifuge tube and stored at
room temperature.
Sediment samples are collected, dried and ground with a mortar and pestle to thoroughly blend the sample.
OPERATING PROC.~DURE$