The Re-Birth of Marsh Creek, 2013

The Re-birth of Marsh Creek (2013) Chronicling the benefits of Harbour Cleanup in the Marsh Creek watershed of Saint John, New Brunswick, Canada.

Matthieu LeBlanc Zachary Sears Edited by Tim Vickers & Graeme Stewart-Robertson 1

About the Authors

Matthieu LeBlanc Matthieu LeBlanc was born in 1988; he was raised in the small community of Saint Louis de Kent where he graduated in 2006 from the Mgr. Marcel Francois Richard high school.

He followed high school with postsecondary education completing his first year of Environmental Technology at NBCC Miramichi. He later transferred into the chemical technology program at NBCC Saint John.

Zackary Sears Zackary Sears was born and raised in Saint John, New Brunswick and graduated from Saint John High School in 2009 with high honours.

Following high school he immediately attended the Chemical Engineering Program at the University of New Brunswick in Saint John for two years.

During this time he realized his true passion in chemistry and decided to change career paths from Chemical Engineering to Chemical Technology and began the Chemical Technology Program at the New Brunswick Community College Saint John.

ii

Executive Summary The 4,300 hectare Marsh Creek watershed is the most predominant landscape feature in the eastern quadrant of the City of Saint John, New Brunswick. Unfortunately the watershed has been subjected to centuries of anthropogenic stressors, the most notable of which has been the annual deposition of millions of litres untreated municipal wastewaters into the last few kilometres of the watercourse. ACAP Saint John has been conducting water quality analyses in Marsh Creek since 1993, with the view towards quantifying the impact of wastewater deposition on surface water quality and using this information to unifying community support for achieving city-wide wastewater treatment; a project referred to as ‘Harbour Cleanup’.

The successful initiation and advancement of the Harbour Cleanup wastewater treatment project has resulted in the projected cessation of untreated municipal wastewater depositions into Marsh Creek by early summer 2014. ACAP Saint John, in recognising the unprecedented opportunity to document the year-to-year changes in physical and biological parameters in Marsh Creek, added (in 2012) a new multi-year environmental monitoring program to its long running water quality analyses program. This additional monitoring program provided a more detailed evaluation of water quality parameters and fish community assemblages in the last 2km of Marsh Creek, beginning just upstream of the suspected transition zone for wastewater inputs and the influence of seawater from the Bay of Fundy. The success of the 2012 monitoring project in identifying definitive trends in both water quality and fish community assemblages in the lower stretches of Marsh Creek validated the continuation of monitoring the ecological recovery of Marsh Creek following the completion of the Harbour Cleanup project.

This report summarises the rationale, procedures and findings of water quality analyses and fish sampling in Marsh Creek in 2013, and incorporates them into historical data sets. The information obtained in 2013 indicates that wastewater inputs have resulted in demonstrably higher levels of fecal coliform bacteria, orthophosphates and suspended solids in receiving waters, and that these levels increase with downstream flow. While dissolved oxygen, pH and surface water temperatures did not demonstrate substantial spatially-oriented differences, salinity measures showed marked increases in the lowest 2km. The single most notable increases in coliform bacteria, orthophosphates, suspended solids and salinity all occurred between 200m and 300m upstream of the Courtenay Tide Gates located at the outlet to Marsh Creek. This distinct transitional zone occurs at a point of confluence of another tributary (Dutchman’s Creek) as well as a flow-restricting series of culverts that run beneath train tracks. The relative influence of each of these ‘transitional factors’ will be evaluated in future studies following the cessation of wastewater inputs.

This project also measured and documented flow rates for two of three seawater permeations that exist within the Courtenay Causeway. The channels formed by leaks in the causeway result in an estimated 1.5 million litres per hour of seawater entering the Courtenay forebay during high tide conditions. The influx of seawater through the antiquated tide gates (which are showing signs of structural decay) into the forebay when combined with the three permeations raises concerns about the effectiveness of the causeway in alleviating the chronic annual flooding in upstream sections of Marsh Creek.

iii

Sampling for fish also highlighted distinct differences in community assemblages that exist upstream and downstream of the tide gates. The upstream (Courtenay forebay) sampling resulted in a species composition dominated by the brackish and freshwater fishes Mummichog (Fundulus heterclitus) and Pumpkinseed sunfish (Lepomis gibbosus), respectively. The downstream (Courtenay Bay) samples were dominated by the marine species Atlantic Tomcod (Microgadus tomcod). The occurrence of migrating anadromous fish such as Rainbow smelt (Osmerus mordax) in the downstream samples and their absence in the upstream sample, despite a mere 250m separation, adds credence to the contention that the flapper-style metal tide gates are posing a barrier to the upstream migration of anadromous fish such as Rainbow smelt and Gaspereau (Alosa pseudoharengus).

The occurrence of two freshwater species (Pumpkinseed sunfish and Brown bullhead (Ictalurus nebulosus)) in the downstream catch following heavy precipitation (i.e. high-water) events, and their mortalities in the fyke nets, suggests that freshwater fishes are ‘washing out’ of Marsh Creek during high water. If the tide gates are posing a barrier to upstream passage of fish, then those that wash out and into the intertidal Courtenay Bay may be destined to suffer high [read absolute] mortality rates.

This project also took advantage of field time to acquire other observations relevant to the long term ecological integrity of the Marsh Creek ecosystem. One notable finding included what is believed to be the first reported confirmation of the invasive European Green crab (Carcinus maenus) in the Courtenay forebay, upstream of the tide gates. The potential influence of this invasive species on the ecological integrity of the forebay is uncertain, and should be monitored in future studies.

Another relevant observation involved the November 2013 collapse of a wooden retaining wall behind the Canada Post property located along Rothesay Avenue approximately 300m upstream of the tide gates. The property on which a wood preservative treatment facility was operated from ~1930 through 1970, now sits atop thousands of cubic metres of creosote contaminated soil. The collapse of the retaining wall has not only resulting in the deposition of sand and gravel into Marsh Creek, but has raised the spectre of the liberation of creosote into the watercourse.

The collation of pre-existing water quality measures with new information obtained in the 2013 study on chemical, biological and physical parameters within Marsh Creek provides the most comprehensive understanding of the current state of the environment in Marsh Creek. The baseline information contained herein provides the requisite framework upon which to not only measure future changes within the watershed, but to develop recommendations for further imp[roving upon the functional value of this watershed to our community.

iv

Acknowledgements This project was made possible through grants provided by the New Brunswick Environmental Trust Fund, Environment Canada’s Atlantic Ecosystem Initiative, the New Brunswick Wildlife Trust Fund, the New Brunswick Internal Services Agency Employment Development [S.E.E.D.] Program, and Canada Summer Jobs (CSJ). Special mention must also be given to the Chemical Technology program of the New Brunswick Community College (Saint John) for their generous use of laboratory space and apparatus, and their technical guidance.

v

Table of Contents Subject

Page

About the Authors Executive Summary Acknowledgements Table of Contents

ii iii iv v

1.0 Background

1

1.1 Overview of the Marsh Creek Watershed 1.2 History

1 1

2.0 Methodology

2

2.1 Water Quality Analyses 2.1.1 Comparative Historical Data 2.1.2 Sampling Stations Analysis A 2.1.3 Sampling Stations Analysis B 2.1.4 Water Quality Parameters

2 2 3 3 5

2.2 Water Quality Procedures 2.2.A Field pH 2.2.B Dissolved Oxygen 2.2.C Salinity 2.2.D Orthophosphates 2.2.E Total Suspended Solids 2.2.F Fecal Coliform 2.2.G Lab pH 2.2.H Volumetric Flow of Salt Water Permeations

7 7 7 7 7 8 9 10 11

2.3 Sampling of Fish 2.3.1 Electrofishing 2.3.2 Fyke Nets 2.3.3 Beach Seines 2.3.4 Reporting of Fish Collected

12 12 13 13 14

2.4 Other Observations

14

3.0 Results

15

3.1 Water Quality Parameters 3.1.1 Analysis A Water Quality Parameters 3.1.2 Analysis B Water Quality Parameters 3.1.3. Volumetric Flow of Saltwater Permeation

15 15 16 20

vi

3.2 Fish Collection 3.2.1 Lower Marsh Creek 3.2.2 Ashburn Lake 3.2.2 Ashburn Creek

21 21 24 24

3.3 Other Observations 3.3.1 European Green Crab 3.3.2 Canada Post Retaining Wall

24 24 25

4.0 Discussion

27

4.1 Water Quality Parameters (Upstream/Downstream) 4.2 Water Quality Parameters (Lower Marsh Creek) 4.3 Salt Water Permeation Through the Causeway 4.4 Fish Community Assemblages 4.5 Other Observations 4.5.1. Substrates 4.5.2 Green Crab 4.5.3 Canada Post Retaining Wall Collapse

27 28 28 29 30 30 31 31

5.0 References

32

6.0 Appendices

34

vii

1.0 Background 1.1 Overview of the Marsh Creek Watershed The Marsh Creek watershed is a 4,000+ hectare feature located in the eastern quadrant of Saint John, New Brunswick, Canada, that drains directly into the Bay of Fundy (Figure 1.1). The watershed consists of six primary watercourses, eighteen lakes and countless wetlands, including a brackish semi-tidal wetland at its terminus. Marsh Creek, which served as a valuable natural asset for early settlers, became an internationally recognized environmental concern due in large part to its receipt of untreated municipal wastewater and the existence of heavy creosote contamination in the sediments of its lower reaches. Locally, the creek is also subject to extreme flooding resulting from its low-lying drainage basin, commercial and residential developments in and around its floodplain and the cumulative effects of crustal subsidence and watercourse channel and wetland infilling.

Figure 1.1: The Marsh Creek Watershed (outlined in red) in Saint John, New Brunswick.

1.2 History Saint John, New Brunswick, as one of the most rapidly changing urban environments in Atlantic Canada, is currently undertaking several once-in-a-lifetime alterations that have the potential to significantly improve the water quality of inland and near-shore environments. The most noteworthy of these alterations is the pending (2013/2014) completion of the Saint John Harbour Cleanup project, which will result in the cessation of the centuries old practice of discharging raw sewage into its urban waterways, including Marsh Creek, Courtenay Bay, Saint John Harbour, and ultimately the Bay of Fundy.

1

Harbour Cleanup, which has come about largely from two decades of dedicated community engagement by ACAP Saint John, represents the single greatest opportunity in recent history to restore the recipient near-shore water quality of Saint John, thereby improving the habitat needed to increase (and potentially even restore) the diversity of flora and resident and transient fauna. As such, the information acquired in this project represents one of the last opportunities in Canadian history to acquire the baseline metrics needed to measure and document any changes that occur in the associated biodiversity following the cessation of untreated municipal wastewater discharges into near-shore environments.

The objectives of this project were to acquire the final baseline (pre-wastewater treatment) water quality measurements and fish community assemblages within the estuarine and aquatic habitats of Marsh Creek and the Courtenay Bay Forebay. The scope of this report included the recipient waters as well as those immediately above (upstream of) the zone of influence. This project was designed to acquire data and present information a format that will enable comparable data to be collected and analysed in subsequent years. It must also be noted that field staff were instructed to be vigilant and take note of any other conditions that could increase our understanding of the current status of this ecosystem.

2.0 Methodology 2.1 Water Quality Analyses 2.1.1 Comparative Historical Data This project conducted two separate water quality analyses in the Marsh Creek watershed to enable comparison with two distinct historical data sets.

Analysis A involved a simple upstream (U)/downstream (D) comparison relative to the area receiving wastewater discharges (Figure 2.1 A)..

These sample stations have data acquired in various years between 1993 and [now] 2013.

Analysis B consisted of five sample stations in the last 2 km of Marsh Creek used to conduct a more defined concentration gradient analyses within the wastewater discharge zone (Figure 2.1 A). These sample stations were first established in the 2012 Marsh Creek study.

Figure 2.1A: Water quality monitoring stations used for the Marsh Creek Watershed in 2013.

2

2.1.2 Sample Stations Analysis A The stations used in Analysis A included a Downstream Site (45째 16' 32", 66째 00' 00") located on the downstream side of the access road/rail crossing which contains three metal culverts (Figure 2.1 B (left)); and an Upstream Site (45째 16' 59", 66째03'02") located on the downstream side of the small bridge on Glen Road near MacKay Street (Figure 2.1 B (right)).

Figure 2.1 B. Downstream (left) and Upstream (right) Sampling Stations used in water quality monitoring in Marsh Creek in various years between 1993 and 2013.

2.1.3 Sample Stations Analysis B Analysis B, which measured water quality measurements in 2012 and 2013, incorporated five sampling stations located approximately 500 m apart within the last 2km of Marsh Creek (Figure 2.1 C). The stations included two sites in the Courtenay Forebay and three sites above the three culvert station used as the Downstream Sampling Station in Analysis A (Section 2.1.2). The characteristics of the five individual Sampling Stations used in Analysis B are provided in Table 2.1 and in Figures 2.1D and 2.1E.

Figure 2.1.C: Map showing the location of the five Sampling Stations used in Marsh Creek water quality Analysis B (2012 & 2013).

3

Table 2.1. Characteristics of Sampling Stations used in Marsh Creek water quality Analysis B in 2012 and 2013.

Site Number

GPS Coordinates

Site Description

1

45.277506, -66.047122

Located on the upstream side of the Courtenay tide gates at the terminus of Marsh Creek.

2

45.281560, -66.048694

Located approximately 500 m upstream from Site 1, just upstream of where Dutchman’s Creek enters Marsh Creek.

3

45.284844, -66.052393

Located 500 m upstream from Site 2 immediately (2m) upstream of the raw sewage outfall adjacent to the Sunbury parking lot.

4

45.288143, -66.048764

Located 500 m upstream from Site 3 immediately upstream of another raw sewage outfall.

45.290998, -66.043606

Located upstream of the raw sewage outfalls, approximately 2 km from the outlet of Marsh Creek at the tide gates (Site 1).

This sampling station was located beneath the train bridge adjacent to Rothesay Avenue.

5

Figure 2.1D. Images of Sample Site 1 (left) and 2 (right) used in Water Quality Analysis B conducted in Marsh Creek in 2012 and 2013.

4

Figure 2.1E. Images of Sample Site 3 (left), 4 (middle) and 5 (right) used in Water Quality Analysis B conducted in Marsh Creek in 2012 and 2013.

2.1.4 Water Quality Parameters Water quality parameters measured in 2013 included dissolved oxygen, salinity, pH, orthophosphates, total suspended solids, and fecal coliform. Historically, ammonia concentration, nitrates, and turbidity were parameters that had also been recorded for the upstream and downstream (Analysis A) sampling locations. Ammonia and turbidity tests were last preformed durring the 2007 testing period while nitrates were only measured during the 2003 testing period.

Ammonia is one of the most important pollutants in the aquatic environment due to its high toxicity to nature and “its ubiquity in surface water systems. It is discharged in large quantities from industrial, municipal, and agricultural waste waters. Ammonia assumes two chemical forms in aqueous solutions: : NH4+ - ionized (less/nontoxic) and NH3 - unionized (toxic).� (William E. Yake, Robert K. James). The concentration of both ionized and unionized ammonia in a aqueous solution of ammonia is a function of pH, temperature, and ionic strength of that solution (William E. Yake, Robert K. James).

Dissolved oxygen (DO) refers to the amount of oxygen that is dissolved in water and is usually represented in parts per million (ppm) or percent saturation. Oxygen is introduced into a watercourse via the atmosphere and photosysthesis. Moving water will see typically higher concentrations of disolved oxygen (at any given temperature) due to its churning. Oxygen is removed from the watercourse by the respiration of aquatic life, decomposition, and chemical reactions that consume oxygen. Sewage water often contains organic materials that are decomposed by micro-organisms which use oxygen in the proccess. DO is also sensitive to temperature with colder water typically holding more oxygen than warmer water. When more oxygen is being consumed than produced, the DO levels will decline and cause some of the more sensitive animals to leave, weaken or die. DO is constantly fluctuating seasonally as well as day to day (EPA).

The pH scale is a logarithmic function that represents the concentration of hydrogen ions in a solution. The pH scale is expressed as follows; a pH of 0 represents maximum acidity, 7 is neutral, and 14 is the maximum limit for bases. Being a logarithmic scale, every pH level under 7 is 10 times more acidic than the previous one. The same can be said for bases; every pH level above 7 is 10 times more basic than the previous one (EPA). A healthy watercourse should have a pH between 6 and 8. As a stream acidifies and reaches 5 or lower, unwanted species of plankton and mosses will start to appear while fish populations start to disappear. As the pH drops below 4.5, the stream will become devoid of fish life. High pH levels can damage the outer surfaces of fish like the gills and

5

eyes and can even cause death. High pH can also increase the toxicity of other chemicals such as ammonia which becomes 10 times greater when a pH value of 7 increases to 8 (Lenntech).

Salinity represents the amount of dissolved salts that are present in water. The types of salt ions that are predominant in surface waters include sodium, chloride, magnesium, calcium, and sulfate.

Surface waters have varying levels of salinity. For example, fresh snow melting is pure water and contains no salts, therefore having a theoretical value of zero for salinity. This can be compared to the salinity in the oceans where the water contains an abundance of salt ions (Encyclopaedia Britannica Inc.) with typically oceanic salinities being 32 – 36 ppt (grams salt per litre).

Phosphorus and nitrogen are essential plant and animal nutrients; phosphate is the form of phosphorus used by aquatic plants. In aquatic ecosystems nitrogen is generally readily available; however, phosphate is most often the limiting reagent for growth. Therefore when abnormal amounts of phosphates are introduced to aquatic ecosystems, it can rapidly cause increases in the biological activity of certain organisms and disrupt the ecological balance of the waterway. Some sources of phosphates are agricultural runoff (fertilizer), biological waste (sewage, manure), and industrial waste (NCSU).

The term Total Suspended Solids (TSS) refers to the measurement of the dry-weight of the particles trapped by a filter through a filtration process. The solids are a mixture of organic (algae or bacteria) and inorganic (clay or silt) components. These suspended particles, which will scatter light as it tries to pass through the water, will affect the turbidity or cloudiness of a water body and can be represented in nephelometric turbidity units (NTU). However, TSS is most commonly expressed in mg/L. Some sources of the organic and inorganic components which contribute to TSS and turbidity are eroding soil, microscopic organisms, industrial and municipal effluent, and suspended bottom sediment. From early spring to early fall there is an increase in turbidity and TSS due to spring runoff, microscopic organisms, and algae blooms. Due to these changes, throughout the seasons, the amount of sunlight that algae and other aquatic life can absorb will increase and decrease significantly as well.

Fecal coliform bacteria are largely found in the intestinal tracts of warm-blooded animals including humans. Increased levels of fecal coliforms can be indicative of a failure in wastewater treatment, a break in the integrity of the distribution system, or possible pathogenic contamination. Fecal coliforms can also enter a water body through direct waste from mammals, birds, agricultural runoff, storm runoff, and human sewage. Since fecal coliform are an indication that other pathogens may be present, any water body that contains elevated levels of fecal coliforms has the potential to transmit diseases. Testing for fecal coliform is inexpensive, reliable and fast (1-day incubation). Observing the fecal coliform levels and fluctuations can provide an estimation of the relative amounts of pathogenic contamination within a water body. The standard for recreational water quality limit (contact such as wading, swimming and, fishing) is 200 fecal coliform per 100 mL of water (10% not >400) (Task Force).

Volumetric flow is the measure of a volume displacement over time that can be represented by m 3/s in the standard system of units (SI). The Courtenay Bay causeway experiences salt water permeation that causes the formation of small salt water streams running into the Forebay area. The volumetric flow can be used to indicate the amount of salt water that is introduced from salt water permeation to the Forebay during high tide.

6

2.2 Water Quality Procedures 2.2.A Field pH A handheld pH meter (Fisher Scientific, Accumet AP Series, Handheld pH/mV/Ion Meter) was used to test the pH in the field. The meter was standardized prior to testing using pH buffers 4 and 7. The probe of the meter was then immersed in the creek and moved in a small circular motion.

This was continued until the value stabilized on the pH meter and that value was then recorded.

This same procedure was repeated at each sampling site.

2.2.B Dissolved Oxygen Testing the Dissolved Oxygen (D.O.) was also conducted in the field using a handheld meter (YSI EcoSense DO200, Field/Lab, Dissolved Oxygen and Temperature Instrument). Calibration of this meter required knowing the approximate atmospheric pressure in mBars and the salinity concentration in ppt. Salinity was assumed to be approximately 35 ppt in sea water and 0 ppt for fresh water. The probe of the meter was then immersed in the creek and moved in a small circular motion until the reading stabilized. This reading was then recorded and the method was repeated at every site.

2.2.C Salinity Salinity was measured in the field via a handheld conductivity meter. The Accumet AP 65 conductivity meter was prepared by setting the cell constant to 10.0 cm-1 for an optimal conductivity range of 1,000 to 200,000 ÎźS/cm. The probe was then dipped in the water 3 times to completely wet the surface. The temperature and conductivity of the water were obtained by using the AP 65 meter along with the atmospheric pressure for that time of day which was retrieved from the weather network website. These values were then computed into a salinity calculator which was created using Microsoft Excel in order to convert conductivity at a particular temperature and pressure to salinity in parts per thousand (PPT) (Appendix A, sample calculation F-5).

2.2.D Orthophosphates The phosphate concentration was determined using the ascorbic acid method. The process involved mixing 25ml of each sample and 2-3 drops of phenolphthalein indicator with 4ml of a previously mixed combined reagent. The combined reagent was composed of 50ml of 5N Sulphuric acid, 5ml of potassium Antimonyl Tartrate solution, 15ml Ammonium Molybdate solution, and 30ml of Abscorbic acid solution. After the mixing was completed the samples were left to sit for at least 10 minutes but no more than 30 minutes and then placed in the spectrophotometer. The transmittance and absorbance were then measured using the spectrophotometer and recorded.

A calibration curve was constructed to represent the phosphate concentration in mg/ by first dissolving 0.11g of KH2PO4 into a 250 mL volumetric flask containing distilled water. Using an eppendorf pipette, 2 mL of this solution was then transferred to another 250 mL volumetric flask that was then topped off using distilled water. Using the diluted stock solution, standards of approximately 0.04, 0.08, 0.12, 0.16, 0.20, 0.24, 0.28, 0.32, and 0.36 mg/L were created. This was done by pipetting 5, 10, 15, 20, 25, 30, 35, 40, and 45 ml of the stock solution into separately labelled 150 ml beakers. Deionised water was added to each beaker so that the total volume in each beaker was 50ml. A 10th 150ml beaker was also prepared with 50 ml of distilled water to later be used as a blank sample. Next, 8 mL of the reagent was then added to all 10 beakers. The beakers were then swirled to ensure proper mixing, and then between 10 and 30 minutes (max) were allowed for color development (Figure 2.2.A). The absorbance and transmittance were then recorded for all 10 7

beakers. The absorbance and the known mg/ L were then plotted and, using Microsoft Excel to generate a best fit line from the plotted graph (Appendix B), the absorbance values that were recorded from the Marsh Creek water sample were then converted into mg/L (Appendix A, sample calculation F-2).

Figure 2.2.A: Photograph showing the results of 10 minutes of color development for all 10 beakers used in the color development procedure of the Orthophosphate Calibration Curve.

2.2.E Total Suspended Solids: Total suspended solids (TSS) were measured using the vacuum filtration method. A glass fibre filter disk (Whatman Grade 934-AH Circles 55mm) was washed by rinsing 20 mL of distilled water and allowing it to be filtered out through a vacuum filtration, this was then repeated twice. The filter was then placed into an aluminum weighing dish and transferred into an oven that was set at 105 degrees Celsius for approximately one hour. The filter and aluminum weighing dish were then removed from the oven and transferred into a desiccator were they were cooled to room temperature. They were then weighed using an analytical balance, the mass was recorded and they were, again, returned to the oven for at least another 20 minutes. Following this, the filter and aluminum weighing dish were once again placed into a desiccator prior to being weighed. After weighing them, if the two weights were within Âą 0.0003 g, they were considered to have reached a constant weight. A predetermined sample size of 100 mL was slowly poured onto the filter, after which the apparatus was rinsed three times with distilled water to ensure that the entire sample had been filtered and none was left on the walls of the apparatus (Figure 2.2.B).

Once the filtration was completed, the same constant weight procedure was followed. TSS in milligrams per liter was then calculated by subtracting the initial constant weight value from the final weight (Appendix A, sample calculation F-3). All results were then recorded.

8

Figure 2.2.B: Image showing the residue left on the filter paper after filtration was completed during the Total Suspended Solids procedure.

2.2.F Fecal Coliform The membrane filtration technique was used for the testing of fecal coliform bacteria. An m-FC agar containing 1% rosolic acid was prepared and placed into sterile Petri dishes. A Millipore (EZ Pak membrane; white, gridded, 0.45μm pore size, 47mm) filter was added to a Microanalysis Filter Holder and centered accurately on the support screen. Multiple dilutions of the same sample were prepared and then slowly added to the apparatus, a vacuum was then applied. Once the filtration process was completed the membrane filter was removed from the apparatus and placed into a previously prepared petri dish. The petri dishes were then incubated upside down at 44.5°C (±0.2°C) for 24 hours.

After 24 hours, the petri dishes were removed from the incubator. Only the blue colonies on the petri dishes were counted. When choosing which plate to count, plates between 20 and 60 colonies were preferred. If all plates were above 60 colonies, the data had to be represented as > 60. If some of the plates had a count under 20, the additional steps had to be taken to determine the fecal concentration (refer to Appendix A sample calculation F-1). Using the dilution ratio of the sample used for the specific petri dishes, the colony forming units (CFU) per 100 mL of water were calculated and recorded. The accepted way of expressing fecal coliform level in water is in terms of the number of colony forming units per 100 millilitres of water (CFU/100 ml).

9

The Downstream Site (Analysis A) and sites 1 and 2 (Analysis B) were expected to have higher concentrations of fecal coliforms due to the known receipt of untreated wastewater, and thus during the first week of sampling they were diluted to 1/100, 1/1000, and 1/10000. Sites 3, 4, and 5 were expected to contain less fecal contamination thus were diluted to: 1/10, 1/100, and 1/1000. The Upstream Site was expected to have the lowest contamination of all the sites and was only diluted to 1/10 and 1/100.

After completing the first week of sampling, the dilutions were adjusted as needed. The following dilutions were prepared for the Downstream Site and sites 1 and 2 for all of the remaining sampling days: 1/100, 1/1000, 1/10000, 1/100000. Site 3 had the following dilutions for the remainder of the sampling runs: 1/10, 1/100, 1/1000, and 1/10000. The dilutions for site 4 and 5 were also permanently changed to: 1/10, 1/100, and 1/1000 (Figure 2.2.C). As for the Upstream site, the dilutions for the second and third week were changed to: 1/10, 1/100, and 1000, a straight filtration with no dilution was then added for the fourth and fifth week.

Figure 2.2.C: Image showing the Coliform Forming Units (CFU) per 100ml water sample taken from Analysis B Site 5 in Marsh Creek. The sample dilutions were (from left to right) 1/1 (no dilution), 1/10, 1/100, and 1/1000.

2.2.G Lab pH The pH level was also tested in the lab by standardizing the pH meter with the 4, 7, and 10 pH buffers. The probe was then immersed into a beaker containing the desired sample. When the pH measurement stabilized, the value was recorded and the probe was then rinsed thoroughly with distilled water. The procedure was then repeated for the remaining samples.

10

2.2.H Volumetric Flow of Salt Water Permeations Three permeations in the Courtenay Causeway allow for the influx of salt water from Courtenay Bay into the Courtenay Forebay during high tide events (Figure 2.2.D). The volumetric flow of two of these ‘channels’ (1 & 3) were measured in order to estimate the volume of salt water permeation that was added to the lower reaches of Marsh Creek during high tide cycles. Volumetric flow of Channel 2 was not measured due to low water levels during this study.

Figure 2.2.D : Aerial image highlighting the locations of three salt water permeations through the Courtenay causeway. (Bing.com ©Microsoft Corp).

Volumetric flow was calculated by determining both the average area of the channel and the linear flow velocity and then multiplying them together. To calculate the linear velocity, a fairly straight section of the channel was measured and flagged at a distance of 7 meters (Figure 2.2.E). A tennis ball was then released above the first flag flowing downstream as a stop watch was used to record the time interval between both flags. An average was then calculated from three consecutive trials.

In determining the area of the channel, the width of the channel was measured with a measuring tape at 1.75 meter intervals along the flagged stretch of the channel.

The average of these widths was then calculated and recorded. In determining the depth of the water, a meter stick was placed vertically in the water at several points across the width of the channel, these depths were recorded and their average was determined. The average area was then calculated by taking both the average depth and width and multiplying them together.

Figure 2.2.E: Image showing a 7m section (flagged with pink ribbons) of salt water Channel 1 flowing into the Courtenay Forebay of Marsh Creek during a high tide event.

11

2.3 Sampling of Fish 2.3.1 Electrofishing Electrofishing was conducted in the Ashburn Creek tributary of Marsh Creek on June 19, 2013.

Electrofishing activities were conducted using a battery-powered Smith-Root LR-24 electrofisher (Figure 2.3.A). The certified operators were Tim Vickers and Graeme Stewart-Robertson of ACAP Saint John. The settings used were varied depending on the substrate, water conductivity and the effect they were having on fish. In most cases, the built-in quick setup option was used and minor adjustments (typically to the voltage) were made as necessary. The 'on time' and settings were noted upon completion of each site. Dip nets were used to capture fish which were then transferred to a 5 gallon bucket of water until they could be measured and released back to their original environment as quickly as possible.

Figure 2.3.A. Image showing ACAP staff calibrating a Smith Root LR-24 electrofisher used to sample fish in Marsh Creek.

12

2.3.2 Fyke nets Two Fyke nets were used to collect fish in the lower reaches of Marsh Creek on May 31, June 13, 20 & 27, and September 26 (Figure 2.3.B). On each occasion one net was set in the riverine section located approximately 250m upstream of the tide gates located within the Courtenay Bay Causeway, and the second net was set in the Marsh Creek channel in the Courtenay Bay estuary approximately 50m below the tide gates. The nets were set during low tide and checked during a subsequent low tide either 12 or 24 hours after the set. Tide heights were closely monitored to prevent the nets from becoming completely emergent during any period so as to maintain the submergence of any trapped fish within the holding end. Fish were removed from nets, placed in a 5 gallon pail, identified, measured, counted, and then immediately returned to the watershed. Fyke nets were also used to sample fish in Ashburn Lake on July 3 & 31 and August 23, 2013.

Figure 2.3.B. Fyke nets set in Marsh Creek (Courtenay Forebay left; Courtenay Bay right) on May 30, 2013.

2.3.3 Beach Seine Beach seines were used in Ashburn Lake on July 3 & 31 and August 23 using a 10m x 1.5m seine (Figure 2.3.C). Three substrate types were sampled (sandy, mixed organic & rock, and organic) and were in keeping with historical sample locations conducted in each of the past five years. Sampling was conducted as part of an ongoing youth education program, and as a presence/absence study conducted by ACAP Saint John. Fish parameters (i.e. length, abundance, etc.) were not collected so as to maintain the health of the fish.

Figure 2.3.C. Beach seining in Ashburn Lake, July 3, 2013.

13

2.3.4 Reporting of Fish Collected The lengths of all fish recorded herein were measured as total lengths to the nearest millimetre. The common names of fishes mentioned this report can be referenced to their scientific names (Table 2.3.A).

Table 2.3.A. A list of common fish names and their corresponding scientific names used in ACAP Saint John reports.

Common Name Alewife American eel Atlantic salmon Atlantic tomcod Blacknose dace Brook trout Brown bullhead Brown trout Chain pickerel Creek chub Four spine stickleback Golden shiner Mummichog Nine spine stickleback Northern Redbelly dace Pearl dace Pumpkinseed sunfish Rainbow smelt Three spine stickleback White perch White sucker Winter flounder Yellow perch

Scientific Name Alosa pseudoharengus Anguilla rostrata Salmo salar Microgadus tomcod Rhinichthys atratulus Salvelinus fontinalis Ictalurus nebulosus Salmo trutta Esox niger Semotilus atromaculatus Apeltes quadracus Notemigonus crysoleucas Fundulus heterclitus Pungitius pungitius Chrosomus eos Semotilus margarita Lepomis gibbosus Osmerus mordax Gasterosteus aculeatus Morone americana Catostomus commersoni Psuedopleuronectes americanus Perca flavescens

2.4 Other Observations ACAP Saint John instructed its staff to be vigilant in observing any other parameters that could influence the current or future integrity of the Marsh Creek ecosystem. While these other parameters were not measured during this project, they were documented and included in this report due to their relevance to the long term management objectives of the Marsh Creek watershed, a principle upon which this project was founded.

14

3.0 Results 3.1 Water quality Parameters 3.1.1 Analysis A Water Quality Parameters Water quality parameters averaged across five sample periods in 2013 (Appendix C) showed marked differences in dissolved oxygen, fecal coliforms, total phosphates, total suspended solids and salinity between the upstream and downstream sites (Table 3.1.A). Temperatures were comparable (17.7 0C upstream, 17.8 0C downstream), with small standard deviations in all parameters except fecal coliforms (Table 3.1.B). While both field and laboratory pH readings indicated lower pH values in the upstream location, the field pH readings indicated substantially greater differences than the lab pH readings (Table 3.1.A). However, equipment failure with the field pH meter necessitated the cessation of subsequent field pH readings. The questionable state of the field pH meter is such that only lab pH measurements were used for analysis in this study.

Table 3.1.A: Calculated averages of water quality parameters measured for Marsh Creek Analysis A (upstream/downstream) from five sample periods in 2013.

Averages for 2013 Date:

Tides

Temp (°C)

Field pH

D.O. (ppm)

Fecal Coliforms (CFU/100mL)

Upstream Downstream

Low - Mid Low - Mid

17.7 17.8

6.62 10.71

9.17 7.61

695 494,375

Orthophosphates %Transmittance

Absorbance

98.6 75.2

0.006 0.126

Total phosphates (mg/L) 0.002 0.050

Lab pH

TSS Salinity (mg/L) (ppt)

6.50 7.19

1.0 5.6

0.06 0.38

Table 3.1.B: Standard deviations for calculated averages of water quality parameters measured for Marsh Creek Analysis A (upstream/downstream) from five sample periods in 2013.

STD Averages for 2013 Date:

Sample Size (n=5)

Upstream Downstream

5 5

STD Temp STD Field (°C) pH 1 1

0.0 0.0

Orthophosphates STD STD Fecal STD Total D.O. Coliforms STD %Transmittance STD Absorbance phosphates (ppm) (CFU/100mL) (mg/L) 0.6 5.E+02 0.8 0.004 0.001 2 5.E+05 7 0.04 0.02

STD TSS (mg/L)

STD Salinity (ppt)

2 4

0.01 0.3

The fecal coliform counts obtained in 2013 (Table 3.1.A) were included in the historical (2005 – 2012) data set for these sampling stations (Appendix D). The 2013 results were consistent with those obtained in previous years where the Upstream fecal coliform values were substantially lower than those for the Downstream site (Figure 3.1.A).

15

Figure 3.1.A: Fecal coliforms (CFU/100ml sample) measured in Marsh Creek Upstream and Downstream sample stations from 1995 through 2013. The logarithmic scale does not permit the “zero CFU� values obtained in the 2005 and 2006 Upstream site to be plotted. Values were not obtained in years 2008, 2009, 2010 and 2012 and are represented only as a trend line for these years.

3.1.2 Analysis B Water Quality Parameters Water samples were acquired in 2013 from five sample periods, each three days in duration, which included June 24-26, July 9-11, July 23-25, July 29-31 and August 6-8 (Appendix E; Tables E-1 through E-5). The average values for water quality parameters acquired in five sample periods indicated a general trend of increasing salinity, total suspended solids, total phosphates and fecal coliforms and decreasing water temperature and dissolved oxygen as one moves from the most upstream site (Site 5) to the most downstream site (Site 1) (Table 3.1.C).

It must be noted that due to equipment failure, the field pH was only recorded during the first week of sampling. While the values for field pH were included below in Table 3.1.C, and did indicate a similar trend to those obtained on the first sampling period of June 24-26, 2013 (Appendix E: Table E-1) there are not representative of the average over the five sample periods and should not be used for comparison with the lab pH results. Overall, pH values obtained in Analysis B showed a similar trend to those in Analysis A, with a very slight increase in pH in the most downstream sample site versus the most upstream sample site (Tables 3.1.A & 3.1.C).

The wide range of values obtained within a single sample site amongst the five sample dates resulted in a considerable degree of within site variation in some parameters, especially fecal coliforms and total dissolved solids. The standard deviation of the within-site samples was greatest for all parameters in Site 1 (Table 3.1.D).

16

Table 3.1.C: Calculated averages of water quality parameters measured for Marsh Creek Analysis B (five sample sites in the last 2km of the watercourse) from five sample periods in 2013.

Averages for 2013 Orthophosphates Date:

Tides

Temp (째C)

Field pH

D.O. (ppm)

Site 1 Site 2 Site 3 Site 4 Site 5

Low - Mid Low - Mid Low - Mid Low - Mid Low - Mid

15.9 17.8 15.1 18.4 18.1

6.83 6.99 8.52 8.42 7.54

5.14 7.04 7.83 8.13 6.98

Fecal Coliforms (CFU/100mL) 254,214 >122,857 48,417 >55,750 1,511

%Transmittance

Absorbance

78.7 75.2 78.3 92.1 94.7

0.091 0.086 0.029 0.031 0.022

Total phosphates (mg/L) 0.043 0.050 0.014 0.014 0.009

Lab pH 7.12 7.27 7.10 6.97 6.83

TSS Salinity (mg/L) (ppt) 5.9 4.1 2.3 2.1 0.7

10.16 1.00 0.16 0.16 0.18

Table 3.1.D: Standard deviations for calculated averages of water quality parameters measured for Marsh Creek Analysis B from five sample periods in 2013.

STD of Averages for 2013 Orthophosphates

Date:

Sample Size (n)

Site 1 Site 2 Site 3 Site 4 Site 5

7 7 7 7 7

STD Fecal STD Temp STD D.O. Coliforms STD (째C) (ppm) (CFU/100mL) %Transmittance 1 1 2 1 1

1 1 4 3 2

4.E+05 6.E+04 5.E+04 6.E+04 2.E+03

9 6 3 2 2

STD Absorbance 0.03 0.03 0.01 0.01 0.01

STD Total phosphates (mg/L) 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.004 0.003

STD TSS (mg/L)

STD Salinity (ppt)

5 4 3 3 2

6 1 0.02 0.03 0.02

Fecal coliform levels (colony forming units CFU /100ml) were plotted amongst the five sample stations for 2012 and 2013 (Figure 3.1.B). The results did not indicate a strong consistent trend amongst the five sites between 2012 and 2013; however, both years did indicate a trend towards declining fecal coliform concentrations as one moved upstream from Site 2. The upstream decrease in fecal coliform concentration was most pronounced in the 2013 samples (Figure 3.1.B). It must be noted that the values for 2012 and for Sites 2 & 4 in 2013 were plotted as absolute; however, the values obtained in the laboratory analyses indicated coliform levels were greater than those indicated.

While the absolute values were not determined, the methodology did allow for approximations to maintain the viability of the trend amongst sites.

Total suspended solids (mg TSS/L) were plotted amongst the five sample stations for 2012 and 2013 (Figure 3.1.C). The results indicated a consistent trend amongst the five sites between 2012 and 2013 with demonstrable increases in TSS as one moved from the most upstream Station 5 to the downstream Station 1. While the trend TSS to increase in downstream sites was consistent, the degree to which this increase occurred was not consistent amongst years with 2012 values being 58.9 times higher in Site 1 than Site 5, verso an 8.4 times increase in 2013. (Figure 3.1.C). Absolute TSS values were also considerably higher in 2012 versus 2013, ranging from 5.4 times at Site 5 to 37.5 times greater at Site 1.

Total phosphates (measured as orthophosphate in mg /L) were plotted amongst the five sample stations for 2012 and 2013 (Figure 3.1.D). The results indicated a consistent trend between 2012 and 2013 with increased phosphate concentrations as one moved downstream from Site 4. The trend for increased phosphate concentrations was more pronounced in 2013 where downstream Sites 1 & 2 were 4.8 and 5.6 times greater than Upstream Site 5, respectively (Figure 3.1.D).

17

Figure 3.1.B: Fecal coliforms (CFU/100ml sample) measured in five sites in lower Marsh Creek (Analysis B) in 2012 and 2013. The 2012 Site 4 sample was discarded and no data was acquired.

Figure 3.1.C: Total Suspended Solids (mgTSS/L) measured in five sites in lower Marsh Creek (Analysis B) in 2012 and 2013. The 2012 Site 4 sample was discarded and no data was acquired.

18

Figure 3.1.D: Orthophosphate (mgTSS/L) measured in five sites in lower Marsh Creek (Analysis B) in 2012 and 2013.

Salinity, measured across the five sample sites in 2013, indicated a distinct decrease in salt concentration as one moved upstream from Site 1 (Figure 3.1.E). Salinity varied little upstream of Site 2, with Sites 3, 4 & 5 having salinities of 0.16, 0.16 & 0.18 0/00, respectively (Table 3.1.C).

Figure 3.1.E: Salinity (part per thousand 0/00) measured in five sites in lower Marsh Creek (Analysis B) in 2012 and 2013.

19

3.1.3. Volumetric Flow of Saltwater Permeation ACAP staff documented the characteristics of three distinct channels (refer to Figure 2.2.D) that allow sea water from the Bay of Fundy to permeate the Courtenay Causeway and enter the forebay of lower Marsh Creek (Figures 3.1.F-3.1.H). While salt water intrusion was clearly visible in all three channels, the techniques used to calculate water volumes did not lend themselves readily to the physical characteristics of Channel 2, and as such were not determined in this study. Calculations indicate that during tidal cycles of at least 6.8m that Channel 1 can deliver 1,116 m 3 /hour of sea water into the forebay, with Channel 3 delivering 384 m3 /hour (Table 3.1.E).

Table 3.1.E : Calculation of the volumetric flows of sea water into the Courtenay Forebay of Marsh Creek from two permeation channels within the Courtenay Causeway.

Volumetric Flow Testing for 2013 Stream Number 1 Number 1 Number 2

Date:

Time:

High Tide Height (m)

Temperature

Salinity (ppt)

Volumetric flows m3/ hour

L / hour

4-Jul-13

10:06

7.09

-

-

1,017

1,016,646

2-Aug-13

9:20

6.80

17.2

13.69

1,116

1,116,151

2-Aug-13

9:40

6.80

17.5

14.36

384

384,212

Figure 3.1.F: Courtenay Forebay Channel 1 at low tide (left) and high tide (right)

20

Figure 3.1.G: Courtenay Forebay Channel 2 at low tide (left) and high tide (right)

Figure 3.1.H: Courtenay Forebay Channel 3 at low tide (left) and high tide (right)

3.2 Fish Collection 3.2.1 Lower Marsh Creek Fyke Nets A total of 52 fish comprised of 11 different species were collected from ten separate hauls between May 31 and September 26, 2013 (Table 3.2.A). The fyke net catch in the upstream site (Courtenay Forebay above tide gates) contained only four species and was dominated by Pumpkinseed sunfish (52.9%) and Mummichog (35.3%). A single Golden shiner (5.9%) and 4-spine stickleback (5.9%) comprised the remaining two species.

The downstream site (Courtenay Bay below tide gates) resulted in the capture of 32 fish of five different species, and was dominated by Tomcod at 70.6% (Table 3.2.B). Rainbow smelt and Pumpkinseed sunfish were the second most-frequently captured fish (11.8% each), with a single American eel and Brown bullhead each comprising 2.9 % of the remaining total catch.

21

Table 3.2.A: Fish species composition caught in fyke nets in the Courtenay Forebay, 2013.

Species 4 spine stickleback Golden shiner Mummichog Pumpkinseed sunfish

Number Caught 1 1 6 9

% of Total Catch 5.9 5.9 35.3 52.9

Range (TL in mm) 71 97 78 - 104 78 - 110

Table 3.2.B: Fish species composition caught in fyke nets in Courtenay Bay, 2013.

Species Tomcod Rainbow smelt Pumpkinseed sunfish American eel Brown bullhead

Number Caught 24 4 4 1 1

% of Total Catch 70.6 11.8 11.8 2.9 2.9

Range (TL in mm) 106 - 250 162 – 242 75 – 100 510 265

Fish species captured by fyke nets in 2012 and 2013 (Table 3.2.C & Figure 3.2.A) indicate a distinct pattern of community assemblage differentiation between the upstream (Above tide gates) and downstream (Below tide gate) sample sites. The upstream site was dominated brackish species (Mummichog 71.4% and American eel 11.4%) in 2012, and a combination of Freshwater (Pumpkinseed sunfish 52.9%) and brackish (Mummichog 35.3%) species in 2013; while the downstream site was dominated by the marine fish species Tomcod which comprised 93.0% and 73.6% of the total catch at that location in 2012 and 2013, respectively (Table 3.2.C).

The occurrence of three freshwater species (Pumpkinseed sunfish, Brown trout and Brown bullhead) in the ‘Below’ fyke net catches was unexpected. All of these fish with the exception of the Brown trout were found dead in the fyke nets. The occurrence of these fish followed heavy rainfall events that precipitated high water levels in Marsh Creek.

22

Table 3.2.C: Relative abundance (%) of fish species captured in fyke nets in two locations in Marsh Creek in 2012 (ACAPSJ 2012) and 2013. Percentage of catch represents within sample treatments (i.e. percentage of total catch within a given site and year). Fish are categorised and colour coded based on their reported (Scott and Crossman 1973) preponderance for aquatic, brackish or marine environments. The species codes provided are used in Figure 3.2.A. Predominant Habitat Freshwater

Brackish

Marine

% of Total Catch Per Site Per Year 2012 2013 2012 2013 Above Above Below Below 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.9 0.0 0.0 0.4 0.0 0.0 5.9 0.0 0.0 1.4 52.9 0.0 11.8 4.3 0.0 0.0 0.0

Species Brown Bullhead Brown Trout Golden Shiner Pumpkinseed Sunfish White Sucker

CODE BB BT GS PS WS

Yellow Perch American Eel Fourspine Stickleback Mummichog Rainbow Smelt Threespine stickleback

YP AE FSP MM RS TSP

4.3 11.4 0.0 71.4 1.4 4.3

0.0 0.0 5.9 35.3 0.0 0.0

0.0 0.4 0.0 0.0 4.8 0.0

0.0 2.9 0.0 0.0 11.8 0.0

White Perch Atlantic Herring Atlantic Tomcod Winter Flounder

WP AH TC WF

0.0 0.0 1.4 0.0

0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

0.4 0.4 93.0 0.4

0.0 0.0 70.6 0.0

Figure 3.2.A: Bar chart depicting the percentage of species captured by fyke nets in two locations in Marsh Creek in 2012 and 2013. The ‘Above’ site was located approximately 200m upstream of the Courtenay tide gates; while the ‘below’ site was located in Courtenay Bay approximately 50m downstream of the Courtenay tide gates. Fish species codes are provided in Table 3.2.C. 23

3.2.2 Ashburn Lake Fyke Nets Two fyke nets were set in Ashburn Lake on each of July 3, July 31 and August 23, 2013. The nets were part of an outdoor youth education program conducted each year at the Glen Carpenter Centre. The nets performed poorly, yielding only two fish for the effort; an American eel and a White sucker.

Beach Seine Beach seining was used to collect fish from Ashburn Lake, on three different occasions (July 3, July 31 and August 23, 2013). Fish were neither measured nor counted due to warmer water temperatures, and because the intent of this sampling to serve as an educational medium for youth and as an annual presence / absence monitoring protocol for ACAP. Fish collected in 2013 included White sucker, age 0+ Brown trout, Pearl dace, Northern Redbelly dace, Blacknose dace, Creek chub and Mummichog.

3.2.3 Ashburn Creek Electrofishing was conducted on June 19, 2013 to determine fish species composition in Ashburn Creek as well as to conduct an initial ‘fin marking’ procedure to assess the success of a pending removal of a barrier to the upstream passage of fish. Sixteen fish were captured which were comprised of five different species (Table 3.2.C). Lower caudal fin clips were given to the two Brown trout prevent re-counting at a later date and to determine upstream/downstream, mobility.

Table 3.2.C: Fish captured by electroseining in lower Ashburn Creek on June 19, 2013.

Species Brown trout Brook trout Blacknosed dace American eel

Number Captured 2 1 6 5

Total length (mm) 61, 122 22 61, 63, 70, 73, 75, 85 140 - 160

3.3 Other Observations 3.3.1: European Green Crab ACAP staff captured (in a fyke net set on September 25-26, 2013) and recorded what is believed to be the first documented occurrence of the invasive Green crab (Carcinus maenus) in the Courtenay Forebay. The specimen was captured at a location approximately 200m upstream of the tide gates located within the Courtenay Causeway. The green crab was easily identified by the five sharp spines on either side of its eyes, and the three rounded spines between its eyes (Figure 3.3.A).

24

Figure 3.3.A: Photo of the (believed) first confirmed occurrence of the invasive European Green crab (Carcinus maenus) in the Courtenay Forebay of Marsh Creek; September 26, 2013.

3.3.2. Canada Post Retaining Wall A ~200m section of Marsh Creek adjacent to the Canada Post property on Rothesay Avenue is contaminated with creosote resultant from the wood preservative operations of the Likely Lumber Mill that existed on the banks of Marsh Creek from approximately 1930-1970 (ACAP Saint John 2003). A Phase I Environmental Assessment on the site in 1996 precipitated a Phase I and Phase II Environmental Assessment on the Canada Post property, after which a steel retaining wall was inserted along the base of the property below a wooden retaining wall (Figure 3.3.B) adjacent to Marsh Creek to reduce the migration of creosote from the property into the watercourse (ACAP Saint John 2005).

ACAP staff observed that (in late November 2013) the structural integrity of a section of the wooden retaining wall had failed (Figure 3.3.B - bottom) and that the remaining wall sections (upstream and downstream of the collapse) were at risk of similar failures in structural integrity (Figure 3.3.C.). ACAP’s Executive Director reported the event to the Regional Office of the NB Department of Environment and to Mr. Dan Hurley, Saint John Operations Manager of Canada Post Corporation. Mr. Hurley provided a quick response indicating that they were aware of the situation and that they had an engineering firm as well as a property management firm taking the necessary actions to prevent exacerbating the situation.

25

Figure 3.3.B: Images showing the state of Canada Post’s wooden retaining wall in the bank of Marsh Creek prior to collapse (top) and immediately after collapse (bottom) in late November 2013.

Figure 3.3.C: Image indicating the state of Canada Post’s wooden retaining wall in the bank of Marsh Creek immediately upstream of the section that collapsed in late November 2013.

26

4.0 Discussion 4.1 Water Quality Parameters (Upstream/Downstream) Water quality parameters conducted since 1993 consistently indicated that substantial differences exist between the upstream and downstream aquatic environments in Marsh Creek. Specifically, the water quality characteristics of the downstream sample site were (as expected) more indicative of an aquatic ecosystem in receipt of untreated municipal wastewater. The most substantial support of this contention was the recurring elevated levels of fecal coliform bacteria in the downstream samples, which have consistently been ten to 10,000 times greater than the recommended Canadian guidelines for safe contact level of 200CFU/100ml water sample (Task Force). The upstream site by comparison only recorded levels greater than the guidelines in 53.8% of the samples, only one of which was more than ten times greater than the 200CFU guideline.

The elevated levels of fecal coliforms in the downstream site were clearly attributable to the [estimated] nine municipal outfalls that enter the watercourse above the sampling station; however, the periodic elevated levels in the upstream location, although substantially lower than downstream, are still worthy of note. While the water quality analysis did not investigate potential sources of fecal contamination, likely sources in the upstream location include fecal coliforms from animals (domestic and wildlife). Several other parameters also support the contention that the characteristics of the downstream aquatic environment have been by largely influenced by the chronic deposition of untreated municipal wastewater. The higher concentrations of orthophosphates and total suspended solids recorded in the downstream location are also common occurrences in waters receiving municipal wastewater.

The differences in salinity between upstream and downstream locations reflect the saltwater permeations delivered via the three confirmed channels that have formed from permeations in the causeway, combined with seawater intrusions that occur through the malfunctioning Courtenay tide gates. This ~500m long brackish forebay constitutes a distinct change in ecotype between the aquatic Marsh Creek proper and the recipient Bay of Fundy.

Average summer surface water temperatures, pH and dissolved oxygen did not indicate any substantial differences between the upstream and downstream sites, despite the potential for the wastewater recipient downstream samples to be reflective of higher biochemical oxygen demand (lower DO) associated with the decomposition of organic materials in the water column. Given that water samples were all taken during daylight hours when photosynthetic processes would have been adding oxygen to the waters, and that samples were taken close to the surface (where diffusion and wave action would increase the opportunity for oxygen to enter the water), it is not unrealistic to expect comparable DO levels. The safety of the project staff prevented water samples from being taken during night time periods when the higher respiratory requirements of bacterial decomposition may have negated the balancing effects of photosynthesis in the downstream samples.

27

4.2 Water Quality Parameters (Lower Marsh Creek) The water samples measured from the five downstream locations in 2012 and 2013 showed a similar pattern to that of the Upstream/Downstream treatment with fecal coliforms, orthophosphates, total suspended solids and salinity (2013 only) increasing from upstream to downstream. Average lab pH and surface water temperatures did show minor differences amongst sites, but no discernable trend was apparent. While the pattern amongst the five sample stations was comparable between 2012 and 2013, the absolute value of the two of the parameters (fecals, and TSS) differed between the years, with concentrations of fecal coliforms measuring higher in 2013 and suspended solids measuring higher in 2012. Possible reasons for such differences were not investigated in this study, and are likely the result of several contributing factors including varying wastewater load regimes, the amount of suspended solids entering Marsh Creek from Courtenay Bay or the amount of turbation caused by wind action. The variation in orthophosphate levels that indicated 2013 levels were higher than 2012 in downstream sites but similar in upstream sites also supports the contention that between year and amongst site variation is indicative of a highly dynamic environment.

Overall, the downstream water quality monitoring treatment (Analysis B) provided greater resolution in terms of understanding the physical and chemical characteristics associated with the transition zone between the brackish environment at the tide gates and the aquatic environment of the upstream sites. Despite differences in the absolute values of several parameters between 2013 and 2012, four parameters (TSS, fecals, ortho-P and salinity) displayed a consistent trend of noticeable increased concentrations between sample station 3 and the subsequent downstream sample station 2.

The consistent increase in water quality parameter concentrations between site 3 and site 2 is likely attributable to both the physical characteristics of the Courtenay Forebay and the amount of municipal wastewater entering the watercourse. Specifically, a physical barrier (sill) exists in the form of three metal culverts situated beneath a rail line approximately 200m upstream of site 2 (see Figure 2.1.3). These culverts are not only grossly undersized for the volume of water draining from the upstream sections but are elevated such that only one of the culverts enables water passage during low flow conditions. As such, the upstream movement (back flooding) of water from the forebay during high tide conditions would be restricted at these culverts, thereby reducing the amount of seawater and concentrated wastewater in the forebay from reaching site 3.

The higher levels of fecal coliform bacteria, suspended solids and orthophosphates at site 2 (versus site 3) is also likely attributed to the influx of highly concentrated untreated municipal wastewater from Dutchman’s Creek, which enters Marsh Creek immediately adjacent to sample station 2. The concentration of sewage in Dutchman’s Creek has historically been so much greater than in Marsh Creek (based on visual observations) that ACAP has not even considered taking and analysing water samples.

4.3 Salt Water Permeation Through The Causeway The introduction of saltwater into the forebay occurs at high tide through faulty tide gates and through the permeation of three streams. Volumetric flows were not obtained through the tide gates due to the hazardous nature of working in this environment, nor were they obtained for Channel 2 due to its low flow rates at the tide heights encountered during this study. Overall it was determined that Channel 1 introduced approximately three times as much seawater into the forebay as Channel 3, combining for an estimated 1.5 million litres per hour during peak flow conditions.

28

The total estimated volume of seawater entering the forebay was not determined in this study.

Future studies should take into consideration the delay between the rising tide and the point at which seawater permeation actually occurs, as well as changes in flow rates with varying tidal heights, the inputs of Channel three and most importantly, the inflow of seawater from the tide gates which (based on field observations) is a substantial contributor of seawater to the forebay.

The influx of seawater alters the physical and chemical characteristics of the forebay. The additional water volume reduces the total capacity of the forebay to hold drainage water from Marsh Creek, thereby retarding stormwater drainage in the upstream channels. As such, the permeation of seawater into the Courtenay Forebay likely exacerbates the degree and duration of flooding that occurs on an annual basis in the commercial and residential districts situated among Marsh Creek’s upstream tributaries of Cold Brook, Major’s Brook and Little Marsh Creek.

The brackish environment of the forebay created by seawater inputs has created microhabitats consistent with a marine intertidal zone, complete with macroalgae (Ascophyllum nodosum and Fucus vesiculosus) and the common periwinkle (Littorina littorea). Fish species collected in 2012 (ACAP 2012), at locations where the channels 1, 2 and 3 enter the forebay were consistent with brackish environments and were dominated by Mummichog (99.7%) and Four-spine stickleback (0.03 %) two species known to prefer brackish environments (Scott and Crossman 1973).

4.4 Fish Community Assemblages Fish collected in 2012 (ACAPSJ 2012) and 2013 indicate distinct differences in the composition of fish communities between the brackish forebay and lower (marine) environments of Marsh Creek.

The forebay (Upstream) fyke net site, which was dominated by Mummichog and Pumpkinseed sunfish, was located immediately adjacent to the water quality parameter sample Site 2, which has been described (Section 4.2 above) as a transition zone where the influences of seawater intrusion coincide with the changing influences of municipal wastewater depositions. Mummichog are known to be tolerant of changes in salinity and pollution (Chesapeake Bay Program) which may partly explain their high relative abundance at this location. At the time of this draft report (March 2014), the City of Saint John indicated that several key pieces of infrastructure associated with Harbour Cleanup (i.e. municipal wastewater treatment) had been completed and commissioned such that a number of sewer outfalls entering Marsh Creek had been diverted and that others would follow suite in the coming weeks (Graham Huddleston, personal communication). The cessation of all untreated municipal wastewater depositions into Marsh Creek will undoubtedly result in changes (improvements) to the water quality in the lower sections, especially the Courtenay Forebay. The implications of these changes in water quality on fish community assemblages should be closely monitored to characterise the ecological benefits of wastewater treatment on the Marsh Creek ecosystem.

The Courtenay Bay (Downstream) site was clearly dominated by marine species, especially Tomcod.

The occurrence of the anadromous American smelt in the downstream catch, and its absence in the Upstream catch, continues to support the contention that the flapper-style tide gates located within the Courtenay Causeway pose a barrier to the upstream movement of anadromous fish. However, it should be noted however that the tide gates do not pose a barrier to the upstream movement of all fish species. A single Tomcod was captured in 2012 at the Upstream site, and American eels of varying lengths are abundant throughout the greater Marsh Creek watershed indicating their continual passage through the tide gates. Furthermore, the capture of a Green crab in the forebay in 29

2013 also suggests the viability of some upstream passage. Visual observations of the tide gates have found them to be in a state of considerable disrepair, with the O-ring absent from one culvert, significant concrete erosion on most surfaces, and a hole in at least one of the gates itself. These permeations in the integrity of the gates’ seals not only explain the intrusion of seawater into the forebay, but also the ability of the three aforementioned species to navigate through into the forebay. Tomcod, American eels and the Green crab are all partial to moving in and around submerged structures, and their ability to navigate through holes in the tide gates is not an unrealistic contention. Anadromous fishes by comparison often require specific attraction flows especially during high tide cycles to encourage upstream movement. The closing of the tide gates during high tide cycles would negate the attraction flows needed for these species and could explain the lack of rainbow smelt in the upstream catches.

Historical fish collection in the upstream sections of Marsh Creek proper have found fish community assemblages typical of slow moving southern New Brunswick watercourses, with an abundance of cyprinids, Brook trout, some spiny-rayed fishes (yellow perch and pumpkinseed sunfish) and American eels, with Mummichog also present (ACAPSJ unpublished data). The occurrence of some of these species in the Upstream catch was not a surprise to researchers; however, the occurrence of Pumpkinseed sunfish and a Brown bullhead in the Downstream site (below the tide gates) was unexpected. It is likely that these fish travelled out of the upstream sections during high-water (high flow) events, as their captures coincided with heavy precipitation events. It is worth noting that the freshwater species captured in the Downstream site were all dead in the fyke nets, despite the nets being situated in a location that would provide shelter from fast moving waters. It is probable that the highly saline environment of Courtenay Bay resulted in the death of these fish. These findings suggest freshwater fishes may routinely be washed out of the Marsh Creek watershed during high water events, and may be unable to return to the upstream sites due to the physical barrier posed by the tide gates or through degraded physical states caused by low salinity tolerances.

4.5 Other Observations 4.5.1. Substrates There is little doubt that the ecological consequences resulting from the historic (˃ 200 years) deposition of municipal wastewater into Marsh Creek can be viewed as being largely undesirable.

Although determining the direct ecological effects of wastewater deposition were not an objective of this study, anecdotal field observations suggest that the aquatic substrate in the Courtenay Forebay and the raceway below the tide gates has been degraded in terms of the availability of interstitial spacing amongst the rocks. The substrate in the most upstream section of the forebay consists primarily of a deep layer of fine, black and grey anaerobic organic materials, especially in transition area (Site 2/Upstream) where Dutchman’s Creek mixes with Marsh Creek. While the most downstream section of the forebay (just above the tide gates) as well as the raceway in Courtenay Bay itself contains larger rock and rubble, the substrate is covered with a slimy grey and off-white material that is clearly comprised of not yet decomposed bathroom tissues and other organic substances. Red carpet-like patches of (presumably) Tubifex worms are also clearly visible throughout the slimy masses. Given the pending onset of Harbour Cleanup prior to the 2014 spring freshet, it will be of interest to observe any positive changes that occur to these substrates as erosional and biochemical processes begin to erase years of chronic wastewater related depositions.

30

4.5.2. Green Crab The capture of what is believed to be the first invasive European Green Crab (Carcinus maenas) in the Courtenay Forebay raises questions about the potential for this invasive species to influence any positive ecological changes that result from the cessation of wastewater depositions. The Green Crab is recognized as a serious threat to the coastal eco-systems of Atlantic Canada and is welldocumented in the nearshore waters of southern New Brunswick. However, the Courtenay Forebay is ostensibly closed to the marine environment by way of tide gates. The arrival of this aggressive crustacean in a previously ‘closed’ estuarine eco-system raises concerns about the long-term management implications for regional tidal marshes, including the Saint Rest Marsh and the Red Head Marsh, which (along with the Courtenay Forebay) are designated as Provincially Significant Wetlands by the Province of New Brunswick. The existence and distribution of this invasive crustacean in southern New Brunswick coastal marshes should be researched with the view toward determining if any management objectives are warranted.

4.5.3. Canada Post Retaining Wall Collapse The collapse of the retaining wall behind Canada Post, which coincides with the completion of Harbour Cleanup, re-establishes the need to identify a permanent solution to what is now the most predominant source of pollution in the Marsh Creek watershed; creosote contamination. While the deposition of sand and sediment from the Canada Post property is undesirable, it pales in comparison to the prospects of the highly toxic and carcinogen bioaccumulant creosote adding to existing creosote contamination in the sediments of Marsh Creek. Canada Post, being a federal corporation and the site of the former Likely Lumber mill that caused the original creosote contamination, should be reviewed for qualification within the Federal Contaminated Sites program so that this longstanding (≥ 80 years) environmental liability in the heart of Saint John can be eliminated once and for all.

31

5.0 References Atlantic Coastal Action Program (ACAP) Saint John Inc. 2003. “The 2004 Marsh Creek Remediation Technology Demonstration Project”. www.acapsj.com/reports Atlantic Coastal Action Program (ACAP) Saint John Inc. 2003. “2003 Marsh Creek Passive Recovery Project”. www.acapsj.com/reports Atlantic Coastal Action Program (ACAP) Saint John Inc. 2012. “Fish Collection: Summary 2012. A year-end report on the collection and sampling of fish from three Saint John, New Brunswick watersheds by the Atlantic Coastal Action Program (ACAP) Saint John”. www.acapsj.com/reports Chesapeake Bay Program. http://www.chesapeakebay.net/fieldguide/critter/mummichog Dohrman, Paul. "How to convert conductivity to salinity." n.d. eHow. http://www.ehow.co.uk/how_5911746_convert-conductivity-salinity.html. 20 June 2013.

Encyclopædia Britannica, Inc. "Biosphere." 2013. Encyclopædia Britannica. http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/66191/biosphere/70878/Salinity. 20 June 2013.

Environment, Task Force on water Quality Guidelines of the Canadian Council of Ministers of the.

Canadian Water Quality Guidelines. Ottawa, 1994. Book.

EPA. "5.2 Dissolved Oxygen and Biochemical Oxygen Demand." 6 March 2012. Water: Monitoring & Assessment . http://water.epa.gov/type/rsl/monitoring/vms52.cfm. 3 July 2013.

—. "What is pH?" 04 December 2012. Acid Rain. http://www.epa.gov/acidrain/measure/ph.html.

June 2013.

Fast, Don. "3.1 Natural Sources / Depletion." 18 February 1997. Government of British Columbia. http://www.env.gov.bc.ca/wat/wq/BCguidelines/do/do-02.htm. 4 July 2013.

—. "Ambient Water Quality Criteria for Dissolved Oxygen." 18 February 1997. Government of British Columbia. http://www.env.gov.bc.ca/wat/wq/BCguidelines/do/do_over.html. 4 July 2013.

—. "Ambient Water Quality Guidelines (Criteria) for Turbidity, ." 7 August 2001. Government of British Columbia. http://www.env.gov.bc.ca/wat/wq/BCguidelines/turbidity/turbidity.html.

July 2013.

Group, NCSU Water Quality. "Phosphorus." 1976. WaterShedss. http://www.water.ncsu.edu/watershedss/info/phos.html. 3 July 2013.

32

James, William E. Yake and Robert K. "Setting Effluent Ammonia Limits to Meet In-Stream Toxicity Criteria." Journal (Water Pollution Control Federation Vol. 55, No. 3, Part I. Water Environment Federation, 1983. 303-309. http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.2307/25041852?uid=3739416&uid=2&uid=3737720&ui d=4&sid=21102555970873.

Johnson, T.R. "Water Quality Criteria for Microbiological Indicators ." 7 August 2001. Government of British Columbia. http://www.env.gov.bc.ca/wat/wq/BCguidelines/microbiology/microbiology.html. July 2013.

Lenntech. "Acids & alkalis in freshwater." 2012. Water Treatment Solutions. http://www.lenntech.com/aquatic/acids-alkalis.htm. June 2013.

Microbiology, Environmental Health. Total and Fecal coliform and E. coli Analyses by Membrane Filter Methods. 2006. http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:3Kc4aWhzGzIJ:www.unc.edu/co urses/2006spring/envr/133/001/ENVR133_Lab2_2006.doc+why+must+u+count+betwe en+2060+fecal+coliforms+on+mfc+agar&cd=4&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=cahttp://webcache. googleusercontent.com/sea. 15 August 2013. <http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:3Kc4aWhzGzIJ:www.unc.edu/c ourses/2006spring/envr/133/001/ENVR133_Lab2_2006.doc+why+must+u+count+betw een+2060+fecal+coliforms+on+mfc+agar&cd=4&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=cahttp://webcache .googleusercontent.com/sea>.

NEOGEN. "m-FC Agar (7397)." July 2008. Acumedia. http://www.neogen.com/Acumedia/pdf/ProdInfo/7397_PI.pdf. June 2013.

Scott, W. and E. Crossman. 1973. Freshwater Fishes of Canada. Fisheries Research Board of Canada, Bulletin 184.

Thursby, Glen, Don Miller, Sherry Poucher, Laura Coiro, Wayne Munns, and Timothy Gleason.

"Ambient Aquatic Life Water Quality Criteria for Dissolved Oxygen (Saltwater): Cape Cod to Cape Hatteras." November 2000. EPA. http://water.epa.gov/scitech/swguidance/standards/upload/2007_03_01_criteria_dissolve d_docriteria.pdf. July 2013.

USGS. "Fecal Indicator Bacteria and Sanitary Water Quality." 21 December 2007. USGS: science for a changing world. http://mi.water.usgs.gov/h2oqual/BactHOWeb.html. June 2013.

Wenner, E., M. Thompson, and D. Sanger. "Water Quality." n.d. NOAA. http://nerrs.noaa.gov/doc/siteprofile/acebasin/html/envicond/watqual/wqintro.htm. July 2013.

33

6.0 Appendices Appendix A: Sample Calculations used to determine water quality parameters in Marsh Creek in 2013.

F-1: Fecal coliforms: In determining the total amount of fecal coliforms in a 100mL of sample a plate count between 20 â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 60 coliform bacteria must be counted from a 20mL sample.

Counted fecal coliforms = Counted bacteria *Dilution Where: Counted bacteria = are the bacteria counted in agar plate from a 20mL sample.

Dilution = is the dilution of bacteria counted in the agar plate If the Counted bacteria is less than 20 then Counted fecal coliforms =

â&#x2C6;&#x2018; Counted bacteria Dilution Total olume

20

Where: Total Volume = the total amount of sample poured through the filter for bacteria counted plates that had counts of less than 20. http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:3Kc4aWhzGzIJ:www.unc.edu/courses/2006spring /envr/133/001/ENVR133_Lab2_2006.doc+why+must+u+count+between+2060+fecal+coliforms+on+mfc+agar&cd=4&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=cahttp://webcache.googleusercontent.com /search?q=cache:3Kc4aWhzGzIJ:www.unc.edu/courses/2006spring/envr/133/001/ENVR133_Lab2_2006. doc+why+must+u+count+between+20-60+fecal+coliforms+on+mfc+agar&cd=4&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=ca Total Fecal Coliforms Counted fecal coliforms 5 Where: Total Fecal Coliforms = the total amount of fecal coliforms from a 100mL sample Counted fecal coliforms = the amount of coliform bacteria counted

34

Sample Calculation Counted fecal coliforms = 26

CFU *1000 20mL CFU 20mL

Total Fecal Coliforms 26,000

= 26,000

CFU 20mL CFU

5 = 130,000 100mL

Sample Calculation if counts are below 20 Counted fecal coliforms

16 10,000 3 100,000 20ml 20ml

CFU

= 230,000 20mL

CFU

CFU

Total Fecal Coliforms 230,000 20mL 5 = 1,150,000 100mL F-2: Orthophosphates: To determine the amount of phosphates in a litre sample of water the equation from the calibration graph must be used.

Refer to Appendix Y = 2.4918 * X X = 2.4

18

Where: Y = absorbance value from spectrophotometer X = total phosphates in mg/L Sample Calculation 0.0 6 18

X = 2.4

0.03

mg L

35

F-3: Total Suspended Solids: In order to determine how much total suspended solids are in a litre of sample a calculation was made by using 100mL of sample. tss = filter after â&#x20AC;&#x201C; filter prior Where: tss = the total suspended solids in 100mL sample measured in g/100m filter after = the weight of the filter and aluminum foil container after the sample was poured filter prior = the weight of the filter and aluminum foil container before the pouring of the TSS = tss*1000

sample.

*10

, where TSS = the total suspended solids in 1 litre sample measured in mg/L Sample Calculation tss = 1.4593

g 100mL

g 100mL

- 1.4591

g 100mL

TSS = 2.0*10-4

* 1000

= 2.0*10-4

g 100mL

*10 = 2.0

E-4: Average pH In calculation an average pH value from a given number of pH values, you must first convert the pH value into a hydrogen ion concentration pH = -log[H+] [H¸+] = 10^ (-pH) Where: pH = the measurement value H+ = is the hydrogen concentration in units of molarity (M)

36

Next you take the average of the H+ values and then convert that average back into a pH to get your average pH value.

Avg H+ = ( â&#x2C6;&#x2018; Avg pH = -log (Avg H+) Where: n = number of terms of H+ Avg H+ = the average hydrogen concentrations in units of molarity (M) Avg pH = the average pH value Sample Calculation [H¸+] = 10^ (-7.25) = 5.62E-08 M Avg H+ = (5.62E-08 5.13E-08 4.57E-08 6.46E-08

.12E-08 1.12E-07 1.12E-07

Avg pH = -log (7.62E-08)

7.62E-08 M

7.12

F-5: Salinity Equation: In calculating the salinity an equation to find conductivity ratio (R) must first be calculated (

)

( ) (

) ( )

37

Next the r-sub-t must be calculated which is a function of temperature: r sub t C0 C1 t C2 (t) 2 C3 (t) 3 C4 (t) 4 Where: t =temperature (degrees Celsius) C0 = 6.77E-01 C1 = 2.01E-02 C2 = 1.10E-04 C3 = -7E-07 C4 = 1.00E-09 r sub t 6.77E 01 2.01E 02 18.5 1.10E 04 (18.5) 2 7E 07 (18.5) 3 1.00E 0 (18.5) 4 r-sub-t = 1.08 A function of pressure and temperature called R-sub-p must now be calculated as follows: R sub p 1 p (E0 E1 p E2 (p) 2)/(1 D0 t D1 (t) 2 (D2 D3 t) R) Where: t = temperature (degrees Celsius) p = pressure (in decabars) R = previous calculation E0 = 2.07E-05 E1 = -6.37E-10 E2 = 3.99E-15 D0 = 3.43E-02 D1 = 4.46E-04 D2 = 4.22E-01 D3 = -3.11E-03

38

R-sub-p 1 10.0 (2.07E-05 6.37E-10 10.0

3.99E-15

(10.0 ) 2)/(1 3.43E 02 18.5 4.46E 04 (18.5) 2 (4.22E 01 3.11E 03 18.5)

)

R-sub-p = 1.00 Next R-sub-t must be calculated as a function of R, r-sub-t, and R-sub-p as follows: R sub t

R (R sub p r sub t

R-sub-t

(1.00 1.08

7.63E-03

An equation for S must now be calculated as follows: S

t 15 (B0 B1 (R sub t) (1/2) B2 R sub t B3 (R sub t) (3/2) B4 (R sub t) 2 (1 k (t 15)) B5 (R sub t) (5/2)) Where: t = temperature (degrees Celsius) R-sub-t = previously calculated k = 0.0162 B0 = 0.0005 B1 = -0.006 B2 = -0.007 B3 = -0.038 B4 = 0.0636 B5 = -0.014

39

S

15 (0.0005 (1 0.0162 (18.5 15))

0.006(7.63E 03) (1/2)

0.007 7.63E 03

0.038 (7.63E 03) (3/2) 0.0636 (7.63E 03) 2 0.014 (7.63E 03) (5/2)) S = -2.02E-04 Finally to calculate Salinity in units of ppt the following equation must be used: Salinity

A0 A1 (R sub t

1 2

A2 R sub t A3 (R sub t) (3/2)

A4 (R sub t) 2 A5 (R sub t) (5/2) S Where: S = previous calculation A0 = 0.008 A1 = -0.169 A2 = 25.385 A3 = 14.094 A4 = -7.026 A5 = 2.7081 Salinity

0.008 0.16 (

1 2

25.385 7.63E 03 14.0 4 (7.63E 03) (3/2)

7.026 (7.63E 03) 2 2.7081 (7.63E 03) (5/2) 2.02E 04 Salinity = 0.20 ppt

40

Appendix B. Calibration curve of Absorbance vs Total Phosphates

41

Appendix C. Water quality parameters measured for Marsh Creek Analysis A (Upstream/Downstream) in 2013.

Table C-1: Summary of water quality parameters for Marsh Creek Analysis A for June 24-26, 2013 Date: June 25 Samples 26, 2013 Upstream 1 Downstream 1

Tides Low Low

Temp Field pH D.O. (ppm) (°C) 18.4 6.62 9.63 17.6 7.69 10.71

Fecal Coliforms Orthophosphates (CFU/100mL) %Transmittance Absorbance >6000 98.0 0.009 1,200,000 75.4 0.123

Total 0.004 0.049

Lab TSS Salinity (ppt) pH (mg/L) 6.25 0.0 0.07 8.09 5.0 0.89

Table C-2: Summary of water quality parameters for Marsh Creek Analysis A for July 9-11, 2013 Date: July 9 Samples 11, 2013 Upstream 1 Downstream 1

Tides Low Low

Temp Field pH D.O. (ppm) (°C) 17.8 9.85 18.8 9.38

Fecal Coliforms Orthophosphates (CFU/100mL) %Transmittance Absorbance 1,400 98.0 0.009 525,000 65.0 0.187

Total 0.004 0.075

Lab TSS Salinity (ppt) pH (mg/L) 6.79 0.0 0.05 7.77 3.0 0.30

Table C-3: Summary of water quality parameters for Marsh Creek Analysis A for July 23-25, 2013 Date: July 23 Samples 25, 2013 Upstream Downstream

1 1

Tides Low - Mid Low - Mid

Temp Field pH D.O. (ppm) (°C) 16.6 16.2

-

8.85 6.30

Fecal Coliforms (CFU/100mL) 550 -

Orthophosphates %Transmittance Absorbance 98.2 0.008 85.6 0.067

Total 0.003 0.027

Lab TSS Salinity (ppt) pH (mg/L) 6.48 6.95

5.0 10.0

0.06 0.24

Table C-4: Summary of water quality parameters for Marsh Creek Analysis A for July 29-31, 2013 Orthophosphates Date: July 29 Samples 31, 2013 Upstream Downstream

1 1

Tides High - Mid High - Mid

Temp Field pH D.O. (ppm) (°C) 19.4 18.4

-

8.27 5.41

Fecal Coliforms (CFU/100mL)

Lab TSS Total Salinity (ppt) %Transmittance Absorbance phosphates pH (mg/L) (mg/L) 280 99.8 0.001 0.000 6.65 0.0 0.06 85,000 73.2 0.136 0.055 6.91 0.0 0.19

Table C-5: Summary of water quality parameters for Marsh Creek Analysis A for August 6-8, 2013 Orthophosphates Date: August 6 Samples - 8, 2013 Upstream Downstream

1 1

Tides Low - Mid Low - Mid

Temp Field pH D.O. (ppm) (°C) 16.2 18.1

-

9.24 6.23

Fecal Coliforms (CFU/100mL)

Lab TSS Total Salinity (ppt) %Transmittance Absorbance phosphates pH (mg/L) (mg/L) 550 99.2 0.004 0.002 6.51 0.0 0.06 167,500 76.8 0.115 0.046 7.23 10.0 0.30

42

Appendix D. Water quality parameters measured for Marsh Creek Analysis A (Upstream (top) and Downstream (bottom)) for years 1995 through 2011.

Yearly Summary of Data [Marsh Creek Upstream] Ammonia Concentrations Year

Salinity (ppt)

2011

2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002 2001 2000 1999 1998 1997 1996 1995 1994 1993

pH

Turbidity Suspended Fecal (CFU) (NTU) solids (g/L)

7.3

613

Free (mg/L)

% Dissociated

Total (mg/L)

Total Phosphate (mg/L)

1.962

0.000796

0.0122

0.049 0.040 0.1170 0.05 0.05 0.06

0.023 0.010 0.0145

Total Nitrate (mg/L)

Dissloved Oxygen Oxygen Saturation (mg/L) (% )

0.0012

0 0.0556

7.31

6.857

1669

0.04

0.075 0.097 0.031 0.1 0.1 0.131 0.06 0.25 0.07 0.09 0.16 0.18

7.20 7.19 7.36 6.90 6.92 7.73 7.68 7.83 7.52 7.32 7.85 7.72

1.60 0.27 0.61 5.50 5.45 <1 4.92 2.90 2.24 1.68 4.17 3.79

329 325 114.97 192 192.5 159 293.5 106.3 33.9 2336

0.002 0.0027

1.9586

0.0017

1.744

5.36 8.17 8.12 5.50 5.54 8.49 8.48 9.44 8.56 8.66 8.02 5.89

89.29

94.84

Yearly Summary of Data [Marsh Creek Downstream] Ammonia Concentrations Year

Salinity (ppt)

2011

2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002 2001 2000 1999 1998 1997 1996 1995 1994 1993

pH

Turbidity Suspended Fecal (CFU) (NTU) solids (g/L)

7.85

54086

1.47

7.36

8.857

0.21 6.30 0.65 4.70 4.70 4.23 2.58 2.65 4.70 5.90 6.87 3.35

7.34 7.66 7.33 7.10 7.07 7.59 7.44 7.41 7.28 7.71 7.66 7.41

3.30 0.70 1.00 4.50 4.50 4.00 5.70 9.65 7.32 5.57 13.61 9.24

4,052,381 7,228,571 15,825,556 4,379,445 1,841,667 557,500 143,889 143,889 160,625 173,700 69,857 23,703 31,456

Free (mg/L)

% Total Dissociated (mg/L)

0.0066

Total Phosphate (mg/L)

Total Nitrate (mg/L)

Dissloved Oxygen Oxygen Saturation (mg/L) (% )

0.1068

0.8318

1.827

0.017 0.0052

0.008

1.6999

0.0141

0.231

0.916 0.256 0.2805 1 1 0.45

0.171 0.084 0.0829

1.508

2.03 9.54 7.75 5.20 5.23 7.81 6.19 5.90 7.12 9.10 7.87 6.28

62.03

74.33

43

Appendix E. Water quality parameters measured for Marsh Creek Analysis B (five locations in the last 2 km stretch) in 2013.

Table E-1: Summary of water quality parameters for Marsh Creek Analysis B for June 24-26, 2013 Orthophosphates Date: June 24 Samples 26, 2013

Site 1 Site 2 Site 3 Site 4 Site 5

1 2 3 1 1 1 1

Tides

Temp (째C)

Field pH

D.O. (ppm)

Low Low Low Low Low Low Low

14.4 14.4 14.9 17.1 18.9 18.9 18.5

7.01 6.99 6.49 6.99 8.52 8.42 7.54

5.27 5.50 5.56 9.10 14.94 14.83 10.01

Fecal Coliforms (CFU/100mL)

Total %Transmittance Absorbance phosphates (mg/L) 130,000 80.2 0.096 0.039 110,000 79.0 0.103 0.041 25,000 77.0 0.113 0.045 105,000 75.2 0.123 0.049 105,000 93.8 0.028 0.011 3,500 93.0 0.031 0.012 50 92.2 0.036 0.014

Lab pH 7.25 7.29 7.34 7.74 8.82 8.61 7.16

TSS Salinity (ppt) (mg/L) 2.0 5.0 4.0 6.0 1.0 8.0 0.0

13.74 17.13 17.25 1.90 0.20 0.20 0.20

Table E-2: Summary of water quality parameters for Marsh Creek Analysis B for July 9-11, 2013 Orthophosphates Date: July 9 -11, Samples 2013 Site 1 Site 2 Site 3 Site 4 Site 5

1 1 2 3 1 1 1

Tides

Temp (째C)

Field pH

D.O. (ppm)

Low Low Low Low Low Low Low

16.9 18.3 18.4 18.5 19.5 19.5 19.4

-

5.08 7.76 7.84 8.08 12.46 10.68 9.06

Fecal Coliforms (CFU/100mL) 1,150,000 215,000 175,000 155,000 23,000 >60000 300

Total %Transmittance Absorbance phosphates (mg/L) 66.2 0.072 0.072 73.0 0.055 0.055 67.6 0.068 0.068 70.2 0.062 0.062 87.6 0.023 0.023 88.2 0.022 0.022 95.6 0.008 0.008

Lab pH 7.19 7.41 7.42 7.50 8.34 7.73 7.65

TSS Salinity (ppt) (mg/L) 4.0 1.0 4.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

11.30 1.06 1.09 1.11 0.20 0.20 0.20

Table E-3: Summary of water quality parameters for Marsh Creek Analysis B for July 23-25, 2013 Orthophosphates Date: July 23 25, 2013 Site 1 Site 2 Site 3 Site 4 Site 5

Samples

Tides

Temp (째C)

1 1 1 2 3 1 1

Low - Mid Low - Mid Low - Mid Low - Mid Low - Mid Low - Mid Low - Mid

16.1 16.2 16.2 16.1 16.1 16.2 15.8

Field pH

D.O. (ppm)

-

5.25 6.03 6.57 6.47 6.49 6.32 6.14

Fecal Coliforms (CFU/100mL) 240,000 105,000 112,500 15,500 21,000 120,000 2,700

Total TSS Lab pH Salinity (ppt) %Transmittance Absorbance phosphates (mg/L) (mg/L) 79.8 0.098 0.039 7.04 12.0 3.93 86.4 0.063 0.025 7.11 9.0 0.24 89.4 0.048 0.019 6.82 5.0 0.16 89.4 0.049 0.020 6.94 3.0 0.15 92.8 0.032 0.013 7.04 7.0 0.21 92.2 0.035 0.014 6.75 2.0 0.15 95.0 0.022 0.009 6.61 0.0 0.16

44

Table E-4: Summary of water quality parameters for Marsh Creek Analysis B for July 29-31, 2013 Orthophosphates Date: July 29 31, 2013 Site 1 Site 2 Site 3 Site 4 Site 5

Samples

Tides

Temp (째C)

1 1 1 1 2 3 1

High - Mid High - Mid High - Mid High - Mid High - Mid High - Mid High - Mid

18.0 17.9 18.6 18.6 18.5 18.5 18.5

Field pH

D.O. (ppm)

-

5.37 5.23 6.17 5.72 5.94 5.86 5.95

Fecal Coliforms (CFU/100mL) 19,500 >60000 >60000 27,500 4,250 5,250

Total %Transmittance Absorbance phosphates (mg/L) 94.6 0.025 0.010 76.6 0.116 0.047 94.0 0.027 0.011 92.2 0.035 0.014 94.0 0.027 0.011 91.6 0.038 0.015 94.6 0.024 0.010

Lab pH 6.95 6.95 6.87 6.73 6.79 6.83 6.65

TSS Salinity (ppt) (mg/L) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 5.0 5.0

1.45 1.21 0.17 0.14 0.16 0.13 0.13

Table E-5: Summary of water quality parameters for Marsh Creek Analysis B for August 6-8, 2013 Orthophosphates Date: August 6 Samples 8, 2013 Site 1 Site 2 Site 3 Site 4 Site 5

1 1 1 1 1 2 3

Tides

Temp (째C)

Field pH

D.O. (ppm)

Low - Mid Low - Mid Low - Mid Low - Mid Low - Mid Low - Mid Low - Mid

16.9 17.9 18.9 18.8 18.0 18.1 18.1

-

3.97 5.26 7.85 7.59 5.61 5.98 6.08

Fecal Coliforms (CFU/100mL) 105,000 45,000 13,500 115,000 1,425 400 450

Total %Transmittance Absorbance phosphates (mg/L) 73.8 0.132 0.053 77.2 0.112 0.045 95.0 0.023 0.009 93.6 0.029 0.012 95.2 0.021 0.008 93.0 0.031 0.012 97.4 0.011 0.004

Lab pH 6.95 7.20 7.24 7.25 6.70 6.83 6.90

TSS Salinity (ppt) (mg/L) 14.0 8.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

6.35 0.41 0.18 0.16 0.18 0.18 0.18

45

Appendix F. Water quality parameters measured for Marsh Creek Analysis B (five locations in the last 2 km stretch) in 2012.

Table A-2: Summary table of results for August 1, 2012 Week 1 Tide

Temp.

Field pH D.O (ppm)

Total Fecal Coliforms (CFU/100mL) >300 >300 >300

Orthophosphates %T Absorb.

80.8 0.092 80.4 0.095 81.4 0.089

Lab pH

mg TSS/L

6.83 6.84 6.90

937.5 380.0 ND

Site 1

Sample 1 Sample 2 Sample 3

High/Middle Tide

6.72

/

Site 2

Sample 1

High/Middle Tide

6.52

/

>300

90.0

0.046

6.87

ND

Site 3

Sample1

High/Middle Tide

6.40

/

>300

89.0

0.051

6.94

ND

Site 4

Sample1

High/Middle Tide

6.55

/

>300

25.4

0.021

7.13

ND

Site 5

Sample1

High/Middle Tide

/

/

>300

83.6

0.078

7.10

ND

Lab pH

mg TSS/L

7.23

2.5

22째C

Table A-2: Summary table of results for August 8, 2012 Week 2 Tide

Temp.

Field pH D.O (ppm)

Sample 1 Site 1

Total Fecal Coliforms (CFU/100mL) >3000 >3000 >3000

Orthophosphates %T Absorb.

90.4 0.043

Going out

6.96

/

6.72

6.4

>3000

91.8 91.0 92.2

0.037

7.01

ND

6.88

2.5

>3000

88.4

0.054

7.12

10.0

Site 2

Sample 1

Going out

Site 3

Sample1

Coming In

Site 4

Sample1

/

/

/

-

/

/

/

/

Site 5

Sample1

Coming In

7.01

6.06

>3000

97.0

0.012

7.10

5.0

22째C

46

Table A-3: Summary table of results for August 14, 2012 Week 3 Tide

Temp.

Total Fecal Coliforms (CFU/100mL)

Field pH D.O (ppm)

Orthophosphates %T Absorb.

Lab pH

mg TSS/L

Site 1

Sample 1

High

7.18

5.24

>30000

97.8

0.010

7.45

2.5

Site 2

Sample 1

High

6.81

2.66

>30000

93.8

0.027

7.26

2.5

Site 3

Sample1 Sample2 Sample3

High

6.62

2.5

>30000 >30000 >30000

81.8 89.0 89.8

0.088 0.051 0.047

6.99 7.10 7.17

12.5 ND ND

Site 4

Sample1

High

/

/

-

/

/

/

/

Site 5

Sample1

High

6.54

6.5

>30000

98.6

0.006

7.48

ND

Lab pH

mg TSS/L

20.4째C

Table A-4: Summary table of results for August 16, 2012 Week 4 Tide

Temp.

Field pH D.O (ppm)

Total Fecal Coliforms (CFU/100mL)

Orthophosphates %T Absorb.

Site 1

Sample 1 Middle (Coming In)

/

/

-

94.0

0.028

7.37

220.0

Site 2

Sample 1 Middle (Coming In)

/

1.84

>700000

89.0

0.051

7.05

7.5

Site 3

Sample1 Middle (Coming In)

/

1.91

>100000

95.4

0.020

7.27

15.0

Site 4

Sample1 Middle (Coming In)

/

/

-

/

/

/

/

Site 5

Sample1 Sample2 Middle (Coming In) Sample3

/

6.98

-

95.8 97.4 97.4

0.018 0.012 0.012

7.69 7.61 7.61

2.5 ND ND

22.8째C

Table A-5: Average of the 2012 water quality measures from Sites 1 through 5 (Tables A-1 through A-4) Averages for 2012 Orthophosphates Fecal Coliform Site Field pH D.O (ppm) Lab pH mg TTS/L (CFU/100 mL) %T Absorb. mg/L 1 2 3 4 5

6.83 6.68 6.70 6.55 6.78

5.24 3.63 2.30 / 6.51

90.8 91.1 89.9 25.4 94.0

0.043 0.040 0.047 0.021 0.028

0.017 0.016 0.019 0.008 0.011

7.23 7.05 7.11 7.13 7.33

221.0 72.5 12.5 ND 3.75

> 8325 > 95825 > 20825 > 8325

47