Wicomico creekWatchers by fjzhangweiqun

VIEWS: 35 PAGES: 28

									                                        PROGRAM
                                        OVERVIEW




W icomico creekWatchers:
2007 Water Quality Monitoring Results




                                         cbf.org/hotc
ABOUT THE COVER:
A peaceful view of Shiles Creek, a Wicomico River tributary near Whitehaven, Maryland. The Wicomico River winds through Maryland’s
Eastern Shore, and Wicomico Creekwatchers volunteers conduct an ongoing water quality-monitoring project to assess, clarify, and make
public the health of the river and its tributary creeks and streams.
Photo Credit: Emily Seldomridge, Salisbury University Research Asst. for Wicomico Creekwatchers
                   Wicomico Creekwatchers:
              2007 Water Quality Monitoring Results


                                          SUMMARY
Wicomico Creekwatchers is a community partnership between the Chesapeake Bay Foundation
(CBF), the City of Salisbury, and Salisbury University (SU). Its mission is to collect and devel-
op objective, scientifically credible water quality data by recruiting and mobilizing a grassroots
volunteer force that monitors the waters of the Wicomico River and its tributaries on Mary-
land’s Lower Eastern Shore. Data collection is combined with analytical work by the Salisbury
University Department of Biological Sciences and the Horn Point Environmental Laboratory.
Wicomico Creekwatchers advances efforts of citizens, businesses, and public officials to ensure
that public policies and other management tools adequately protect and preserve Wicomico
River water quality.
Since its inception in 2002, Wicomico Creekwatchers has begun to establish a set of baseline
data for identifying water quality conditions and trends over time. Creekwatcher volunteers
monitor 25 sites throughout the Wicomico River’s mainstem and tributary system, collecting
samples from the following Wicomico tributaries and dammed water features (also known as
“impoundments”): Johnson Pond, Parker Pond, Schumaker Pond, the East Prong, Mitchell
Pond, Coulbourne Mill Pond, Tony Tank Lake, Allen Pond, Shiles Creek, and Rockawalkin
Creek. Their data can be used to identify areas within the river system where water quality
may be deteriorating.
Throughout this report, average monthly values are compared against thresholds to make
qualitative judgements about the health of each measured feature. The dissolved oxygen
threshold of 5mg/L is based on Maryland water quality criteria. The water clarity threshold
of 3 feet is within the range of water clarity criteria that are used by the states for regulatory
purposes.
Since Maryland does not have water quality criteria for nutrients or chlorophyll-a, we have cho-
sen to compare total nitrogen, total phosphorus, and chlorophyll-a against water quality criteria
and guidelines developed for surface waters by the Delaware Department of Natural Resources
and Environmental Control. Thresholds for nitrate and phosphate were recommended by Dr.
Thomas Fisher at the University of Maryland.
This report summarizes data generated from on-site measurements and analysis of water sam-
ples collected within the Wicomico River system from March through December 2007. Key
findings include:
 •	 Surface Dissolved Oxygen (DO) – In 2007, 13 percent of average monthly dissolved oxygen
    measurements were below the acceptable threshold (5.0 milligrams/Liter – mg/L). Such
    low levels are very unusual for surface waters. In 2006, all monthly readings showed
    greater oxygen levels. In 2006, all average monthly readings were above the 5 mg/L
    threshold.



                   Wicomico Creekwatchers: 2007 Water Quality Monitoring Results
                     chesapeake Bay Foundation, June 2008  cbf.org/hotc
                                                1
 •	 Water Clarity	 – The minimum threshold for water clarity is 36 inches. Roughly 91.5
    percent of the sampling sites had relatively poor water clarity (less than 36 inches),
    based on averaged monthly results at each site. This is up from 87 percent of samples in
    2006.
 •	 Chlorophyll a	 –	 Sixty percent of average monthly values for chlorophyll a were above
    a healthy threshold (10 micrograms/Liter – ug/L), suggesting elevated levels of algae;
    this includes eight percent of average monthly values above the upper threshold level
    (50ug/L) as well. In 2006, 58 percent of average monthly values were above 10ug/L,
    including about 10 percent that were higher than 50ug/L.
 •	 Total Nitrogen	–	For total nitrogen, only 16 percent of monthly averages indicate levels in
    the healthy range (below 1mg/L); the remaining 84 percent indicated moderate to severe
    problems. For nitrate, an important component of total nitrogen, roughly 80 percent
    of average monthly samples were greater than the healthy threshold. These values were
    slightly worse than in 2006.
 •	 Total Phosphorus – Thirty-eight percent of the average monthly data indicate levels in the
    healthy range (less than 0.05 mg/L). For phosphate, a primary component of total phos-
    phorus, 59 percent of average monthly samples were below acceptable levels. These
    values were slightly worse than in 2006.


                           PROGRAM HISTORY & OVERVIEW
In summer 2002, CBF, the Salisbury Area Chamber of Commerce, and Salisbury University
began working cooperatively with citizen volunteers to identify water quality sampling loca-
tions along the Wicomico River. Creekwatchers selected 28 sampling locations for monitoring
(Appendix 2) based on local knowledge of the tributary and equitable distribution through-
out the river system. Long-term, regular access to each site was also a deciding factor in selec-
tion in order to ensure collection locations remain consistent in future years. Three sampling
locations were eliminated from the program last year when access became limited.
Selected sampling sites generally have a water depth of approximately four feet to conform to
standard sampling protocol. Latitude/longitude coordinates for each site are indicated on the
site map (Figure 1).
Volunteer recruitment for Wicomico Creekwatchers began in summer of 2002. During an hour-
long training session, program managers provided sampling instructions (Appendix 4) to all
58 volunteers, demonstrated data collection procedures, and reviewed sampling techniques.
Newer participants continue to receive personal instruction in individualized sessions and
group review training. Most volunteers recruited and trained in 2002 remain engaged in the
program to date.




                   Wicomico Creekwatchers: 2007 Water Quality Monitoring Results
                     chesapeake Bay Foundation, June 2008  cbf.org/hotc
                                                2
                 Figure 1. Site Location Map
      *In 2007, site 6 (Shoemaker Pond East) was not monitored.




Wicomico Creekwatchers: 2007 Water Quality Monitoring Results
 chesapeake Bay Foundation, June 2008  cbf.org/hotc
                                 3
                                           METHODS
Creekwatchers collect water quality data at regular two-week intervals from March to De-
cember, and record site conditions at each location on a Water Quality Sampling Data Sheet
(Appendix 3). Features measured include tide, weather, wind strength and direction, level of
wave action, recent rainfall, and air and water temperature. No samples are collected in Janu-
ary or February, since biological activity and its effects on water quality is lower during the
winter months.
Creekwatchers measure water clarity using a Secchi disk. Sampling volunteers lower the black
and white disk into the water at the sampling location until it is no longer visible, at which
point the distance from disk to water surface is recorded in inches.
Water samples are collected using a standard BOD (biochemical oxygen demand) sampling
bottle. Empty BOD bottles are submerged three inches below the water’s surface at each sam-
pling location until full. Care is taken to ensure no air bubbles are present when the stopper
is inserted. Water samples are immediately put on ice and kept cool until they arrive at the
Salisbury University laboratory.
Beginning in 2006, analysis of total nitrogen and total phosphorus was added to the protocol.
Thirty-mL samples are placed in Nalgene sample bottles, frozen, and transported to Univer-
sity of Maryland’s Horn Point Laboratories for analysis. Periodically, a few chlorophyll a samples
are also analyzed at Horn Point Lab as a quality control check on Salisbury University’s analy-
sis equipment.
Creekwatchers collected samples every two weeks between March 2007 and December 2007.
The monthly averages for each site were calculated and then grouped to provide averages
for the four functionally distinct areas that make up the Wicomico system: the Ponds (areas
upstream of manmade barriers and impoundments); the “Upper” Wicomico (the region that
is tidal but freshwater and does not experience salinity intrusion); the “Lower” Wicomico
(the region that is tidal and subject to salinity intrusion) and the major tributary, Wicomico
Creek.
Samples were analyzed for the following water quality features:
    Dissolved Oxygen (DO): Dissolved oxygen below 5 mg/L is considered unhealthy for
    most aquatic species. Elevated DO at the surface can indicate high photosynthetic
    activity among algae in the water. Dissolved oxygen was analyzed in surface water
    samples in 2007.
    Turbidity/Water Clarity: Light is critical for aquatic plant growth; water clarity indicates
    the ability of light to penetrate through water. Poor water clarity indicates water is not
    clear enough for light to penetrate to a depth that supports the growth of underwater
    grasses. Water clarity of 36 inches or greater is considered healthy.
    Chlorophyll a: Chlorophyll is the pigment that allows plants—including algae—to con-
    vert sunlight into organic compounds in the process of photosynthesis. Chlorophyll a
    is the predominant type found in algae and cyanobacteria (blue-green algae), and its
    abundance is a good indicator of the amount of algae present in the water. Generally,
    lower levels of chlorophyll a represent healthier (lower nutrient) systems.


                    Wicomico Creekwatchers: 2007 Water Quality Monitoring Results
                      chesapeake Bay Foundation, June 2008  cbf.org/hotc
                                                 4
     Total Nitrogen: Nitrogen is an essential nutrient for both plants and animals, but an
     overabundance of nutrients generates algal blooms and subsequent low dissolved-
     oxygen levels. Nitrogen can be found in aquatic systems in several chemical forms,
     in both dissolved form and attached to particles. One form of nitrogen, nitrate, is
     particularly important in aquatic systems because it is easily taken up by algae. Both
     total nitrogen and nitrate results are reported.
     Total Phosphorus: Phosphorus is another key nutrient in aquatic systems, with the
     same overabundance problems as nitrogen. Phosphorus can occur in dissolved or-
     ganic and inorganic forms, often attached to particles of sediment. The dominant
     form of phosphorus in the Bay ecosystem is phosphate. Both total phosphorus and
     phosphate are reported.
Using the identified healthy water criteria, data were analyzed to determine the percentage of
monthly averages per site that fell outside the healthy range for each feature measured. High
degrees of departure from these levels indicate potential water quality problems. For pur-
poses of this report, nutrient criteria and guidelines developed and used in Delaware waters
were used for comparison with data from the Wicomico Creekwatchers samples. The Delaware
Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control (DNREC) uses the thresholds
shown in Table 1 below to indicate high, moderate, and low ranges for total nitrogen (TN),
total phosphorus (TP) and chlorophyll a (Chl a) in estuarine waters.1

Table 1. DNREC criteria for healthy range of features measured in this study. Values in the low to
moderate range represent healthier conditions than those in the higher range.

      Nutrient Range                   TN (mg/L)                      TP (mg/L)                  Chl a (ug/L)
           Low                            <1.0                          <0.05                        <10
        Moderate                        1.0 – 3.0                     0.05 – 0.1                   10 – 50
           High                           >3.0                          >0.1                         >50
These benchmarks reflect the most current thinking among scientists who are evaluating sur-
face water health based on nitrogen, phosphorus, and chlorophyll concentrations.




1
 State of Delaware. 2006 Assessment, Listing and Reporting Methodologies Pursuant to Sections 303(d) and 305(b) of the
Clean Water Act. April, 2006 http://www.dnrec.state.de.us/water2000/Sections/Watershed/TMDL/305and 303.htm



                       Wicomico Creekwatchers: 2007 Water Quality Monitoring Results
                          chesapeake Bay Foundation, June 2008  cbf.org/hotc
                                                          5
                                       2007 RESULTS

Dissolved Oxygen (DO)
Surface DO levels were generally quite high. Only 13 percent of average monthly values for
individual sites had unhealthy DO levels below 5mg/L.
Several factors could have contributed to this result. First, samples were collected at the sur-
face, where DO levels are generally higher. Most DO problems tend to occur in deeper waters,
where bacteria decompose organic matter (such as algae), using up oxygen in the process.
Second, because oxygen is produced during photosynthesis, high concentrations of live algae
can result in higher DO concentrations. Finally, the waters could be well-mixed, meaning that
tides and winds circulate additional oxygen from the air into the water.




                Figure 2. Monthly average DO for each of the four sampling areas.




                   Wicomico Creekwatchers: 2007 Water Quality Monitoring Results
                     chesapeake Bay Foundation, June 2008  cbf.org/hotc
                                                6
                                                                                                                          Figure 2a - Ponds Dissolved Oxygen                                                     Figure 2b - Upper Dissolved Oxygen




7
    chesapeake Bay Foundation, June 2008  cbf.org/hotc
                                                          Wicomico Creekwatchers: 2007 Water Quality Monitoring Results
                                                                                                                          Figure 2c - Lower Dissolved Oxygen                                                     Figure 2d - Wicomico Creek Dissolved Oxygen


                                                                                                                                                               Figure 2a – 2d. Monthly average DO for individual sites within each of the four sampling areas.
Turbidity/Water Clarity
Water clarity can reflect both phytoplankton growth and suspended sediment. This year, only
nine percent of monthly averaged readings were healthy, with a Secchi disk reading of greater
than 36 inches. In 2006, 13 percent of readings were healthy, achieving the minimum depth
of 36 inches.




            Figure 3. Monthly average water clarity for each of the four sampling areas.




                   Wicomico Creekwatchers: 2007 Water Quality Monitoring Results
                     chesapeake Bay Foundation, June 2008  cbf.org/hotc
                                                 8
                                                                                                                          Figure 3a - Ponds Water Clarity                                                          Figure 3b - Upper Water Clarity




9
    chesapeake Bay Foundation, June 2008  cbf.org/hotc
                                                          Wicomico Creekwatchers: 2007 Water Quality Monitoring Results
                                                                                                                          Figure 3c - Lower Water Clarity                                                          Figure 3d - Wicomico Creek Water Clarity


                                                                                                                                                            Figure 3a – 3d. Monthly average water clarity for individual sites within each of the four sampling areas.
Chlorophyll a
In 2007, 40 percent of average monthly values were less than 10 micrograms per liter (ug/L),
and considered healthy. Roughly 51 percent of monthly average values were between 10–
50ug/L. Nine percent were greater than 50ug/L. These values were only slightly better than
those in 2006.




           Figure 4. Monthly average chlorophyll a for each of the four sampling areas.




                  Wicomico Creekwatchers: 2007 Water Quality Monitoring Results
                    chesapeake Bay Foundation, June 2008  cbf.org/hotc
                                               10
                                                                                                                           Figure 4a - Ponds Chlorophyll                                                          Figure 4b - Upper Chlorophyll




11
     chesapeake Bay Foundation, June 2008  cbf.org/hotc
                                                           Wicomico Creekwatchers: 2007 Water Quality Monitoring Results
                                                                                                                           Figure 4c - Lower Chlorophyll                                                          Figure 4d - Wicomico Creek Chlorophyll


                                                                                                                                                 Figures 4a- 4d. Monthly average chlorophyll a for individual sites within each of the four sampling areas.
Total Nitrogen (TN)
Only 16 percent of average monthly values for	TN were in the healthiest range (below 1mg/L).
Roughly 47 percent of average monthly values were between 1 – 3mg/L and 37 percent were
higher than 3mg/L. These values were slightly worse than those in 2006.




           Figure 5. Monthly average total nitrogen for each of the four sampling areas.




                  Wicomico Creekwatchers: 2007 Water Quality Monitoring Results
                    chesapeake Bay Foundation, June 2008  cbf.org/hotc
                                               12
                                                                                                                           Figure 5a - Ponds Total Nitrogen                                                           Figure 5b - Upper Total Nitrogen




13
     chesapeake Bay Foundation, June 2008  cbf.org/hotc
                                                           Wicomico Creekwatchers: 2007 Water Quality Monitoring Results
                                                                                                                           Figure 5c - Lower Total Nitrogen                                                           Figure 5d - Wicomico Creek Total Nitrogen


                                                                                                                                                              Figures 5a – 5d. Monthly average total nitrogen for individual sites within each of the four sampling areas.
Nitrate (NO3-N)
In 2007, 19 percent of average monthly values were less than 0.1 mg/L and considered
healthy; 81 percent of nitrate values were above this threshold. In 2006, no nitrate values
were healthy. Nitrate levels at all sites showed an unhealthy peak in July. Additionally, some
sites also experienced an increase in October. (See Figs. 6a & b.)




              Figure 6. Monthly average nitrate for each of the four sampling areas.




                   Wicomico Creekwatchers: 2007 Water Quality Monitoring Results
                    chesapeake Bay Foundation, June 2008  cbf.org/hotc
                                                14
                                                                                                                           Figure 6a - Ponds Nitrate                                                               Figure 6b - Upper Nitrate




15
     chesapeake Bay Foundation, June 2008  cbf.org/hotc
                                                           Wicomico Creekwatchers: 2007 Water Quality Monitoring Results
                                                                                                                           Figure 6c - Lower Nitrate                                                               Figure 6d - Wicomico Creek Nitrate


                                                                                                                                                       Figures 6a- 6d. Monthly average nitrate concentrations for individual sites within each of the four sampling areas.
Total Phosphorus (TP)
In 2007, 38 percent of monthly average values were in the healthy range of less than 0.05mg/L.
Roughly 52 percent of values were between 0.05 – 0.1mg/l and 10 percent were greater than
0.1mg/L. These values were slightly worse than in 2006. Levels were generally higher and
much more variable in the ponds and in the upper portion of the river.




          Figure 7. Monthly average total phosphorus for each of the four sampling areas.




                   Wicomico Creekwatchers: 2007 Water Quality Monitoring Results
                     chesapeake Bay Foundation, June 2008  cbf.org/hotc
                                                16
                                                                                                                           Figure 7a - Ponds Total Phosphorus                                                    Figure 7b - Upper Total Phosphorus




17
     chesapeake Bay Foundation, June 2008  cbf.org/hotc
                                                           Wicomico Creekwatchers: 2007 Water Quality Monitoring Results
                                                                                                                           Figure 7c - Lower Total Phosphorus                                                    Figure 7d - Wicomico Creek Total Phosphorus


                                                                                                                                                       Figures 7a – 7d. Monthly average total phosphorus for individual sites within each of the four sampling areas.
Phosphate (PO4-P)
In 2007, 10 percent of average monthly values were less than 0.05. Phosphate was not re-
                                       ,
ported in 2006. Like the pattern for TP phosphate levels were far more variable and reached
extreme highs in the upper portion of the river. (See Figs. 8a & b.)




   Figure 8. Monthly average phosphate concentration for each of the four sampling area groups.




                   Wicomico Creekwatchers: 2007 Water Quality Monitoring Results
                     chesapeake Bay Foundation, June 2008  cbf.org/hotc
                                                18
                                                                                                                           Figure 8a - Ponds Phosphate Phosphorus                                              Figure 8b - Upper Phosphate Phosphorus




19
     chesapeake Bay Foundation, June 2008  cbf.org/hotc
                                                           Wicomico Creekwatchers: 2007 Water Quality Monitoring Results
                                                                                                                           Figure 8c - Lower Phosphate Phosphorus                                              Figure 8d - Wicomico Creek Phosphate Phosphorus


                                                                                                                                                         Figures 8a – 8d. Monthly Average phosphate for individual sites within each of the four sampling areas.
                                        DISCUSSIOn
Though essential to all Bay life, excessive levels of nitrogen and phosphorus are highly damaging
pollutants in the Chesapeake. These pollutants stimulate algae blooms that block sunlight from
reaching deeper waters and, when the algae die, lead to low dissolved oxygen levels (DO).
Water quality monitoring in 2007 continues to suggest unhealthy conditions within the
Wicomico River system, particularly in the Ponds and Upper Wicomico areas. High chlorophyll
a values in July and August, along with elevated surface dissolved oxygen, suggest high algae
growth during the late summer.
In early fall, chlorophyll a dropped, indicating a crash of overabundant phytoplankton. Decom-
posing algae may have contributed to the dangerous drop in surface DO levels in the early fall.
These low levels are relatively unusual for surface waters. In 2006, all monthly DO readings
were greater than the 5mg/L threshold.
Limited measurement of DO for deeper waters began in 2007 and also indicated levels below
those required for survival of aquatic life in the lower section of the Wicomico River. Wicomico
Creekwatchers will conduct more intensive deep-water DO sampling in 2008.	
The region surrounding the Wicomico River suffered a drought in 2007. Rainfall was more
than 10 inches below normal in Salisbury by the end of the sampling period, and salinity
increased accordingly. Generally, low rainfall leads to improved water quality as runoff of nitro-
gen, phosphorus, and sediments is reduced. This pattern was seen to a degree in water clarity,
as well as for nitrate. However, total phosphorus levels in 2007 were slightly higher than in
2006. Normally, phosphorus levels correspond closely to precipitation because the nutrient is
delivered to nearby waters via suspended sediment from sources such as farm fields. Evidence
is inconclusive as to why this was not the case.




                                                                               Figure 9.
                                                                               Total rainfall
                                                                               amounts for
                                                                               Salisbury, Maryland
                                                                               in 2007.




                                                                               Figure 10.
                                                                               Monthly averages
                                                                               of salinity for
                                                                               2006 and 2007.


                   Wicomico Creekwatchers: 2007 Water Quality Monitoring Results
                     chesapeake Bay Foundation, June 2008  cbf.org/hotc
                                                20
                                       COnCLUSIOnS
In many Chesapeake Bay tributaries, excessive nitrogen and phosphorus pollution has sub-
stantially decreased water quality and the health of aquatic habitat. Nitrogen and phosphorus
pollution stimulates too much algae growth, diminishes water clarity, and ultimately reduces
dissolved oxygen levels within the water. These changes reduce a water body’s aesthetic and
recreational values, and impair its ability to support healthy populations of aquatic life.
Data collected in the Wicomico River watershed during 2007 indicate that this system is
overenriched by nitrogen and phosphorus pollution. More than three quarters of sites show
moderate to high levels of total nitrogen and almost two thirds of sites show moderate to high
levels of total phosphorus. Almost half of the sampled sites show elevated chlorophyll a levels
and most sites had poor water clarity throughout the growing season. Upriver sites within
the Ponds and Upper Wicomico areas, in general, exhibited poorer water quality than down-
stream sites within the Lower Wicomico and Wicomico Creek. This discrepancy between
the upper and lower reaches of the watershed may be attributed to shallow water depths
upstream, reduced tidal action and natural flow, and stormwater runoff in the upper regions
of the watershed.
The likely sources of nitrogen and phosphorus in the watershed, including fertilizers and
treated wastewater, may be exacerbating poor Wicomico River water quality, even during a
year of very low rainfall. The improvement in water quality that would be expected under dry
conditions did not materialize, and it appears that nutrients from human activities are becom-
ing more important in affecting water quality in the river. Unless those pressures can be ad-
equately remedied, water quality in the Wicomico River watershed is not likely to improve.




                   Wicomico Creekwatchers: 2007 Water Quality Monitoring Results
                    chesapeake Bay Foundation, June 2008  cbf.org/hotc
                                                21
Appendix 1: Distribution List




               City of Salisbury Building, Housing and              Somerset County Division of Planning
               Zoning Department                                    and Zoning
               City of Salisbury City Council                       Somerset County Economic Development
                                                                    Commission
               City of Salisbury Office of the Mayor
                                                                    Somerset County Health Department,
               City of Salisbury Public Works Department            Environmental Health
               Congressman Wayne Gilchrest                          Somerset County Planning Commission
               Delegate Bennett Bozman                              Somerset County Public Library
               Delegate D. Page Elmore                              Somerset County Department of Tourism
               Delegate Norman H. Conway                            The Nature Conservancy Nanticoke
               Delmarva Poultry Industry                            Field Office
               Delmarva Water Transport Committee                   Tri-County League of Women Voters
               Friends of the Nanticoke River                       Ward Wildfowl Museum of Art
               Great Salisbury Committee                            Wicomico County Council
               Lower Eastern Shore Tributary Team                   Wicomico County Department of
                                                                    Planning, Zoning and Community
               Lower Shore Land Trust                               Development
               Maryland Department of Agriculture                   Wicomico County Department of
               Maryland Department of the Environment               Public Works

               Maryland Department of Natural Resources             Wicomico County Department of Parks,
                                                                    Recreation and Tourism
               Maryland Department of Planning
                                                                    Wicomico County Farm Bureau
               Nanticoke Watershed Alliance
                                                                    Wicomico County Free Library
               Nanticoke Watershed Preservation Group
                                                                    Wicomico County Health Department,
               Pemberton Historical Park                            Environmental Health Division
               Salisbury Area Chamber of Commerce                   Wicomico County Planning Commission
               Salisbury University Biology Department              Wicomico Environmental Trust
               Salisbury-Wicomico Economic                          University of Maryland Center for
               Development, Inc.                                    Environmental Science
               Salisbury Zoo                                        University of Maryland Cooperative
                                                                    Extension Wicomico County
               Senator J. Lowell Stoltzfus
                                                                    Urban Salisbury
               Somerset Board of County Commissioners
               Somerset County Department of Solid
               Waste and Drainage



                                  Wicomico Creekwatchers: 2007 Water Quality Monitoring Results
                                    chesapeake Bay Foundation, June 2008  cbf.org/hotc
                                                               22
Appendix 2: Sampling Site Description




               Site Number               Site Name                       Site Location (Lat./Long.)
               Upper Wicomico (orange)
               4                         Port Exchange                   N380˚ 21. 874' W750˚ 36. 382'
               8                         East Branch Downtown            N380˚ 21. 741' W750˚ 35. 067'
               19                        City East Side                  N380˚ 21. 015' W750˚ 37. 133'
               20                        Shad Point                      N380˚ 20. 285' W750˚ 37.481'
               Lower Wicomico (yellow)
               21                        Nithsdale                       N380˚ 20. 480'    W750˚ 40. 470'
               22                        Green Hill                      N380˚ 19. 835' W750˚ 44. 166'
               23                        Geipe                           N380˚ 18. 02.4' W750˚ 45. 31.5'
               24                        Mount Vernon                    N380˚ 14. 945' W750˚ 49. 886'
               25                        Shiles Creek                    N380˚ 16. 286' W750˚ 48. 788'
               26                        Rockawalkin                     N380˚ 20. 520' W750˚ 40. 811'
               27                        River Wharf                     N380˚ 21. 540' W750˚ 36. 150'
               28                        Whitehaven                      N380˚ 16. 095' W750˚ 47. 411'
               Ponds (blue)
               1                         North Johnson                   N380˚ 23.18.7' W750˚ 35.32.1'
               2                         TV Station                      N380˚ 23.025' W750˚ 34.935'
               3                         South Johnson                   N380˚ 22.772' W750˚ 35.856'
               5                         Parker Pond                     N380˚ 20. 750' W750˚ 32. 832'
               6                         Schumaker Pond East             N380˚ 20. 946' W750˚ 33. 795'
               7                         Schumaker Pond                  N380˚ 21.106 W750˚ 34.207'
               9                         Mitchell Pond                   N380˚ 21. 53.4' W750˚ 36. 46.9'
               12                        Coulbourne Mill Pond            N380˚ 19. 44.8' W750˚ 35. 32.8'
               13                        Fruitland North                 N380˚ 19. 570' W750˚ 36. 148'
               14                        Fruitland South                 N380˚ 19. 00.0' W750˚ 35. 59.2'
               15                        Tony Tank Lake                  N380˚ 20. 265' W750˚ 36. 869'
               Wicomico Creek (green)
               16                        Allen Pond                      N380˚ 17. 00.0' W750˚ 41. 28.2'
               17                        Wikander’s                      N380˚ 16. 87' W750˚ 43. 719'
               18                        Wicomico Yacht Club             N380˚ 17.112' W750˚ 45.178'




                                 Wicomico Creekwatchers: 2007 Water Quality Monitoring Results
                                  chesapeake Bay Foundation, June 2008  cbf.org/hotc
                                                              23
Appendix 3: Data Sheet


       Appendix 4: Data Sheet

                                        Wicomico Creekwatchers
                                      Water Quality Sampling Data Sheet


       Site Number                              Date:                                Time:

       Observers

       Tide                                                        Water Surface

          1      High                                                  1         Calm
          2      Middle Falling                                        2         Ripples
          3      Low                                                   3         Choppy
          4      Middle Flooding                                       4         Heavy Chop

       Weather                                                     Rainfall in Previous 48 Hours

          1      Clear                                                 1         None
          2      Partly Cloudy                                         2         Trace
          3      Overcast                                              3         Light
          4      Light Rain                                            4         Moderate
          5      Rain                                                  5         Heavy
          6      Heavy Rain                                            6         Monsoon
          7      Fog
          8      Snow                                              Air Temperature

       Wind                                                        Water Temperature

          1      Still                                             Secchi Disk Depth
          2      Light Wind
          3      Medium Wind                                       Bottomed Out
          4      Heavy Wind
                                                                       1         No
       Wind Direction                                                  2         Yes

          1       N                                                Water Sample Bottle Number
          2       NE
          3       E                                                Observations:
          4       SE
          5       S
          6       SW
          7       W
          8       NW

                                Wicomico Creekwatchers: 2007 Water Quality Monitoring Results
                                 chesapeake Bay Foundation, June 2008  cbf.org/hotc
                                                             24
Appendix 4: Sampling Instructions


   Appendix 5: Sampling Instructions

                                             Wicomico Creekwatchers
                                              Sampling Instructions

   1.      At your sampling site, use the Water Quality Sampling Data Sheet to record the following:

                  Site Number
                  Date
                  Time
                  Observers
                  Tide Conditions
                  Weather Conditions
                  Wind Conditions
                  Wind Direction
                  Water Surface Conditions
                  Rainfall in Previous 48 Hours

   2.      Air Temperature: Use the thermometer to measure the air temperature and record it on the data
           sheet.

   3.      Water Temperature: Use the thermometer to measure the water temperature and record it on
           the data sheet. Insert the thermometer just under the water’s surface, wait one minute before
           removing and record the measurement.

   4.      Secchi Disk Depth: Use the secchi disc to measure water clarity. Lower the disc into the water
           until you can no longer see it. Look away for a moment, then slowly raise the disc to the point
           where it just becomes visible. Note the mark on the rope closest to the water’s surface. Marks
           are at 3-inch intervals. Record the secchi disk depth in feet and inches on the data sheet.

           If the disc hits river bottom during lowering and you can still see it, record the secchi disc depth
           and circle “2 Yes” under “Bottomed Out” on the data sheet. Otherwise circle “1 No.”

   5.      Water Samples: On the data sheet, record the number located on the water sample bottle.
           Submerge the bottle 3 inches below the water’s surface, top end up, until it fills. Remove the
           bottle from the river and insert the stopper. IF ANY AIR BUBBLES ARE PRESENT AFTER
           INSERTING THE STOPPER, EMPTY THE BOTTLE AND REPEAT THE PROCEDURE.

           After collecting the water sample, bring it and the completed data sheet to CBF’s Salisbury
           Office as soon as possible. Use a cooler or refrigerator to keep water samples cool during
           transport or short-term storage. When you arrive at CBF, exchange your water sample bottle
           and data sheet with new ones.

   6.      Observations: Note anything you think might be of interest to those compiling and analyzing the
           data you have collected.




                                Wicomico Creekwatchers: 2007 Water Quality Monitoring Results
                                 chesapeake Bay Foundation, June 2008  cbf.org/hotc
                                                             25
                                                Heart of Chesapeake
                                                 212 West Main St., Suite 204B
                                                 Salisbury, MD 21801
                                                 410/543-1999

                                                Web site: cbf.org/hotc
                                                E-mail: hotcinfo@cbf.org

                                                Headquarters
                                                 Philip Merrill Environmental Center
                                                 6 Herndon Avenue
                                                 Annapolis, MD 21403
                                                 410/268-8816
                                                 410/269-0481 (from Baltimore metro)
                                                 301/261-2350 (from D.C. metro)
                                                Membership information: 888/SAVEBAY




                                                  C HESAPEAKE B AY WATERSHED




Wicomico Creekwatchers is a joint project of    The Chesapeake Bay’s 64,000-square-mile
Salisbury University and the Chesapeake Bay     watershed covers parts of six states and is
Foundation's Heart of the Chesapeake Project.   home to more than 17 million people.

June 2008

								
To top