MOE POND LIMNOLOGY AN ECOSYSTEM APPROACH C. W. M.
MOE POND LIMNOLOGYAND FISII POPULATION BIOLOGY:AN ECOSYSTEM APPROACHC. Mead McCoy,C. P.Madenjian, J. V. Adall1s,W. N. I-Iannan, D. M. Warner,M. F. Albright, and L. P. SohackiBIOLOGICAL FIELD STArrIONCOOPERSTOWN, NEW YORKOccasional Paper No. 33January 2000STATE UNIVERSITY COLLEGEAT ONEONTA
ACKNOWLEDGMENTSI wish to express my gratitude to the members of my graduate committee:Willard Harman, Leonard Sohacki and Bruce Dayton for their comments in thepreparation of this manuscript; and for the patience and understanding theyexhibited w lile I was their student. ·1 want to also thank Matthew Albright for hisskills in quantitative analyses of total phosphorous and nitrite/nitrate-N conductedon water samples collected from Moe Pond during this study. I thank DavidRamsey for his friendship and assistance in discussing chlorophyll amethodology. To all the SUNY Oneonta BFS interns who lent-a-hand during theMoe Pond field work of 1994 and 1995, I thank you for your efforts and trust thatthe spine wounds suffered were not in vain.To all those at USGS Great Lakes Science Center who supported myefforts through encouragement and facilities - Jerrine Nichols, Douglas Wilcox,Bruce Manny, James Hickey and Nancy Milton, I thank all of you. Also to DonaldSchloesser, with whom I share an office, I would like to thank you for your manyhelpful suggestions concerning the estimation of primary production in aquaticsystems. In particular, I wish to express my appreciation to Charles Madenjianand Jean Adams for their combined quantitative prowess, insight and direction indata analyses and their friendship. To Jeff Allen whom through our conversationconcerning the fate of golden shiner in Moe Pond brought to mind the beginningsof a trophic dynamics hypothesis, thanks Jeff.Most of all I want to thank Mead, Beulah and Leonard for their love.
ABSTRACTMoe Pond is located in upstate New York. It's watershed discharges into OtsegoLake which flows into the Susquehanna River. Moe Pond's watershed lies within a no public-access experimental area. The primary vegetation type present in the watershedis mixed northern hardwood and coniferous forest. The pond was treated with 56 tonsof limestone in the late 1960's which has continued to influence the limnology.The pond is a dimictic, unregulated, earthen-dike impoundment with surface areaequal to 15.6 hectares and a mean depth of 1.8 meters.Three maxima in phytoplankton biomass were observed: two summer blooms,27 June and 24 August, 1994 and one autumnal peak 16 November, 1994. Annualmean chlorophyll a in 1994-1995 was 22.4 1-19/1. Annual mean total phosphorous was30.4 1-19/1. Mean nitrite/nitrate-N concentrations were between 40-90 1-19/1 during theyear. Annual mean alkalinity ranged in concentration from 13-20 mg/l. Dissolvedoxygen concentrations exhibited hypoxic conditions in water 2.0-3.0 m in depth on onlytwo occasions: 28 March, 1994 just prior to spring overturn and 13 July, 1994 - sixteendays after the annual maximum in phytoplankton biomass. The annual mean pH rangedfrom 6.70-9.12. A regression equation was developed to estimate chlorophyll a fromSecchi depth measurements. Carlson's trophic state index (TSI) empirical model foundthe pond to be eutrophic, utilizing total phosphorous, chlorophyll a and Secchi depthvalues. Gross daily photosynthetic production, 3.47 g O)rn', was determined by a dielcommunity metabolism study, which was conducted 18 June through 19 June, 1995.Many incongruities were observed in the data collected during the limnologicalinvestigation that suggests that the pond is atypically eutrophic.The pond fish community consists of two species: brown bullhead, Ameiurusnebulosus, and golden shiner, Notemigonus chrysoleucas. The fishery is unexploited.The bullhead population was estimated to be 4,057 using a Schnabel capture recapture method of population estimation with mean total length 134 mm. Bullheadmean weight was estimated to be 50 g for a 175 mm modified Fyke net capturedindividual. Density was estimated at 260 bullhead/ha using the Schnabel populationestimate and 13 kg/ha using mean weight at length estimates. Annual survival rate ofage II through age V bullhead was 48% as estimated from a Peterson length frequencyanalysis (n 1370). Condition factor K (TL) for age II through age V was found to be K 1.29 (n 26).Golden shiner population structure analysis demonstrated an unimodal sizedistribution (i.e. stunting) with a maximum total length of 115 mm (n 137). Shiner meanweight was estimated to be 7.5 g. The shiner population estimate was 7,154 assuminga Poisson distribution of seven beach seine haul replicate samples. Shiner density wasestimated to be 5 kg/ha and 686 shiner/ha.Top-down biomanipulation is recommended to effect a trophic cascade in MoePond. The hypothetical consequences of stocking largemouth bass, Micropterussalmoides, adults are that an improvement in water quality and fish community growthand survival will result. Prior to biomanipulation a variety of additional research projectsshould be executed to provide greater understanding of phytoplankton, zooplankton andbenthos community dynamics.II
CONTENTSAcknowledgmentsAbstract.ContentsList of TablesList of FiguresList of AppendicesIntroductionMethodsResults (Limnology)Results (Fish Population Biology)DiscussionLiterature CitedAppendicesiiiiiiiiiivv1915344453A-1LIST OF TABLESTable 1. Limnological mean values for Moe Pond from 28 march, 1994 to 10 April,1995 andsampledat the same locationbetween0900 h - 1200 h16Table 2. Pearson correlation coefficients for all possible parings of limnological28parameters measured in Moe Pond 1994-95Table 3. Estimate of brown bullhead population (Schnabel, 1938), in Moe Pond,1995, using a multiple census method of capture-recapture with inversemodification (Ricker, 1975) (table format adapted from Van Den Avyle,1993)42Table 4. Limnological values for Moe Pond from 11 July, 1968 through November,1989 (Sohacki, 1972 and unpublished data)45Table 5. Comparison of brown bullhead length at age and condition factor atvarious locations49iii
LIST OF FIGURESFigure 1. Moe Pond Sub-Drainage Basin (i.e. watershed) (modified from Harman,1977)2Figure 2. Basin morphometry of Moe Pond (Sohacki, 1972). All fish capture gearand water sampling station are indicated10Figure 3. Chlorophyll a mean values Moe Pond 1994-19951718Figure 4. Total phosphorous values Moe Pond 1994-1995Figure 5. Nitrite/nitrate-N values Moe Pond 1994-199519Figure 6. Calcium values Moe Pond 1994-199521Figure 7. Alkalinity values Moe Pond 1994-19952223Figure 8. Temperature mean values Moe Pond 1994-1995Figure 9. Dissolved oxygen mean values Moe Pond 1994-199524Figure 10. pH mean values Moe Pond 1994-199525Figure 11 a. Specific conductance mean values Moe Pond 1994-199526Figure 12. Secchi depth values Moe Pond 1994-199527Figure 13. Comparison of Secchi depth with chlorophyll a 1994-953031Figure 14. Log transformation of data values from Moe Pond 1994-95Figure 15. Carlson 1'SI model estimate of Moe Pond 1994-9532Figure16.Diel Community metabolism of Moe Pond from18-19June,199533Figure 17. Minnow trap brown bullhead total catch from Moe Pond, summer351995Figure 18. Beach seine brown bullhead total catch from Moe Pond, summer199536Figure 19. Modified Fyke net brown bullhead total catch from Moe Pond, summer199537Figure 20. All gear brown bullhead total catch from Moe Pond, summer199538Figure 21. Minnow trap golden shiner total catch from Moe Pond, summer39.1995Figure 22. Beach Seine golden shiner total catch from Moe Pond, summer199540Figure 23. Beach seine & minnow trap golden shiner combined catch from41Moe Pond, summer 1995Figure 24. Estimate of brown bullhead annual survival rate from Moe Pond,43summer 1995Figure 25. Moe Pond ecosystem conceptual model51Figure 26.Moe Pond ecosystem post-biomanipulation hypothesized52mode!.IV
LIST OF APPENDICESMoe Pond Hydrolab and Seccl1i depth data collected fromAppendix A.28 March, 1994 through 10 April, 1995A-1Appendix B. Moe Pond alkalinity and calcium concentration data collected6 May, 1994 through 10 April, 1995B-1Appendix C.Moe Pond total phosphorous (TP) and .nitrite/nitrate-N(N02/N03-N) concentrations taken at various depths from 28 March, 1994through 10 April, 1995C-1Appendix O. Chlorophyll a extracted from phytoplankton collected from Moe Pond28 March, 1994 through 10 April, 19950-1Appendix E. Moe Pond diel community metabolism studyE-1Appendix F. Moe Pond hydrological (Le. discharge) data collected 16 June, 1994F-1through 15 August, 1995Appendix G. Moe Pond fish survey data collected 15 June through 15 August,1995G-1v
INTRODUCTIONI. Cultural HistoryMoe Pond (N 42 43', W 74 56') is located near the Village ofCooperstown, in Otsego County, New York. The pond was named for HenryAllen Moe, a past member of the New York State Historical Association(Harman, 1995). It is an artificial impoundment with an earthen dam andconcrete emergency spillway (Clikeman, 1978). The west concrete spillwayabutment face is dated 1939, indicating that the impoundment construction wascompleted nearly sixty years ago. A drainage devise having an adjustable flowvalve passes through the base of the dike allowing for impoundment level draw down and discharge of water into Willow Brook, and ultimately to Otsego Lake.The pond was drained in 1964 and a fire line was installed serving theFarmer's Museum, Inc. and the New York State Historical Association inCooperstown (Harman, 1972). In 1965 a line connecting the LeatherstockingGolf Course irrigation system with the fire line was completed (Harman, 1972).Using the pond water caused discoloration to the pin flags and golf coursegreens (Harman, 1972). In 1966 twenty-one tons of limestone were applied tothe pond followed by an additional 35 tons in 1967 (Harman, 1972). Thelimestone treatment was recommended by Cornell University and was successfulin removing the discoloration (Harman, 1977). In 1967 the golf course stoppedusing water from the pond to irrigate.In 1967 the property that is now considered to be the upper site (parcell),which includes Moe Pond and its watershed, was transferred to the StateUniversity of New York College at Oneonta (SUNY Oneonta) for the sum of OneDollar from the Leatherstocking Corporation (Harman, 1972) (Figure 1). Theupper site encompasses 362.37 acres (146.65 ha) (Harman, 1977). As a resultof ownership transfer to SUNY Oneonta, the entire upper site was designated arestricted access experimental research area (Harman, 1977).New Pond (N 42 89', W 74 57') is adjacent to the west shore of MoePond and lies within the upper site parcel (Figure 1). It was created in the 1960'sas a consequence of airport runway construction causing water to be impoundedand diverting the pond outflow from the west toward the east (Figure 1). NewPond is named in memory of John G. New, Professor and first chair of theBiology Department at SUNY Oneonta.Also included in the sale was another parcel where the main laboratory islocated (N 42 43', W 74 55') along the southwest shore of Otsego Lake, justnorthwest of the Village of Cooperstown.II. Natural HistoryThe following literature review of studies and theses published in theAnnual Reports and Occasional Papers of the Biological Field Station (BFS) isintended to illustrate the body of work that has preceded the present study, and
Figure 1. Moe Pond SUb-Drainage Basin (i.e. watershed)(modified from Hannan. 1977).2
its relevancy to the study of Moe Pond's ecology and watershed.Superficial Geology and SoilsA preliminary study of the geology of the Otsego Lake drainage basin,which includes Moe Pond, was done by Sales (1974) and led to further efforts inunderstanding the importance of geology to the biota of the Otsego Lakewatershed.Harman and Sohacki (1976) listed and mapped the soil types thatoccurred in the Otsego Lake watershed including those of the Moe Ponddrainage sub-basin.In 1977 two studies concerning the geology of the Otsego Lake drainagebasin were completed: Fleisher (1977) Glacial Geomorphology of the UpperSusquehanna Drainage; and Sales et a!. (1977) Geological Investigation ofOtsego Lake /I. The underlying geology of the Moe Pond basin and contiguouswatershed is composed of dark bluish gray shales, arenaceous shales andflaggy, and fine-grained argillaceous sandstone of the middle Devonian PantherMountain Formation (Harman, 1977). The pond substrate is mostly channery,silt and sand derived from Devonian shales and glacial deposits (Harman, 1977).Soils in the Willow Brook drainage basin, of which the Moe Pond sub drainage basin is a portion, are developed in glacial lodgement till which veneersthe bedrock. The high clay content of this till and the impermeable nature of theunderlying shales and siltstones reduce the infiltration capacity. Therefore,during heavy precipitation or snowmelt rapid saturation of the substrata occurs,and runoff directly into the stream is favored over infiltration (Clikeman, 1978).Komorowski (1994) generally describes the soils in the Moe Pond watershed tobe Lordstown-Mardin-Bath with a pH range of 4.2 - 7.8.Watershed and HydrologyThe Moe Pond sub-drainage basin (i.e. watershed) lies near theheadwaters of the Willow Brook drainage basin. There are no permanenttributaries that discharge into the pond. During the late winter and early springperiod, while the ground is still frozen, snow-melt and precipitation are releasedas overland flow and subterranean runoff, due to poor soil infiltration capacity.Hillside seeps then form to create an ephemeral tributary that flows into the northend of the pond.The Willow Brook drainage basin is comprised of 4 sub-basins totaling1.26 square miles (3.26 km 2 ) of which the Moe Pond sub-basin is 0.29 squaremiles (0.75 km 2 ) and comprising 23% of the total drainage basin (Clikeman,1978). Willow Brook flows through the Village of Cooperstown beforedischarging its waters into the south-end of Otsego Lake which is positioned atthe headwaters of the Susquehanna River drainage basin.The Moe Pond surface area is 38.6 acres (15.6 ha) (Sohacki, 1972). Theentire Moe Pond watershed encompasses 185.8 acres (75.2 ha) (Clikeman,1978). The surface area of the pond is approximately 21 % of the total Moe Pondwatershed acreage. Slightly over half of the acreage of the upper site is within3
the boundaries of the Moe Pond watershed (Figure 1).Clikeman (1978) found that Moe Pond contributed only 24% to the totalWillow Brook drainage basin discharge, but that the impoundment's storagecapacity was important in lessening the impact of storm events and flooding tothe lower portions of the watershed. In January, 1978 it was empiricallydetermined that Moe Pond discharged 30.9 cfm (0.52 cfs) into Willow Brook, andthat in September of the same year there was negligible discharge (Clikeman,1978).Following the work done by Clikeman (1978), a Moe Pond watershedestimated monthly water budget model was developed in an attempt to predictdischarge form the outlet of Moe Pond into Willow Brook for all months of theyear. It was determined that the estimated discharge for the months of Junethrough October, in any given year, would be zero or no spill. The month withthe single greatest estimated predicted discharge was 0.69 cfs in March (McCoy,1994).New Pond is not within Moe Pond's natural watershed boundaries.However, due to cultural alterations in drainage pattern, its altered outflowdischarges into Moe Pond during storm events (Harman, 1995) (Figure 1). NewPond has a surface area of 0.5 hectares and a mean depth of 4 ft (1.2 m) and amaximum of 8 ft (2.4 m) (Harman, 1999).Terrestrial Fungi and Non-Vascular PlantsMarr (1970) collected, identified and mapped the locations of the fungalspecies found throughout the upper site; in addition he included a species list ofall lichens, bryophytes and tracheopyhtes found. A survey listing the slimemolds at the upper site was completed by Marr (1971). A study that built on theearlier work done by Marr (1970) was completed by Kerlinger in 1975 locatingand compiling a species list and key to the lichens found in the upper site, andOtsego County.In 1985, Marr extended his studies of the upper site fungi community.Terrestrial Vascular PlantsPowell (1968) did a survey of woody and herbaceous plants at the uppersite and complied an extensive list of species present.Beginning in 1970 Dayton initiated work within the Moe Pond watershedexamining the differences between forest and old field primary production. Thisworked continued in the watershed until 1972. In 1973 he investigated Above Ground Dimensions and Weights of Representative Forest Trees at the uppersite. In 1974 he constructed a map of all the major plant communities found inthe upper site. Mathieu (1979) conducted a biomass study of a stand of Pinusresinosa (red pine) on the upper site. A compilation of all previous informationcollected on the upper site in regard to vascular plants was done by Settle(1981 ).4
Terrestrial InvertebratesA general invertebrate survey of the upper site was conducted by Raver(1968) and listed a diversity of taxa. MacNamara and Harman (1974) collectedand produced a species list of the terrestrial mollusks found in the northernhardwood forest of the upper site. Some of the mollusk specimens were found inguts of the terrestrial stage of the common newt (Notophthalmus viridescens)that inhabits the same area. Butts (1968 to present in BFS Annual Reports) hascontinued to monitor populations of mosquitos at the upper site since it'secological studies began. In addition, Butts has monitored the waterfowl activityon Moe Pond and in Experimental Area 5, also found on the upper site, as wellas deer tick populations throughout the area.In 1975, Norton and MacNamara completed a study of the terrestrial mitesfound at the upper site, which were identified from gut samples taken from theterrestrial stage of the common newt (i.e. red eft). During the present study ofMoe Pond and the previous fish survey of New pond (McCoy and Urban, 1995)no specimens of the aquatic stage of the common newt were observed by theinvestigator.House (1981; '1982) collected and completed an illustrated guide and keyto the adult dragonflies and damselflies. Some of the specimens used in the keywere collected at the upper site.Terrestrial VertebratesJohn G. New continued to oversee vertebrate studies and monitoring atthe upper site from 1968 to 1982. Through his efforts an extensive vertebratecollection has been maintained at SUNY Oneonta. In 1968, Reuss completed asurvey of the small mammals found at the upper site. Jorgenson (1974) alsosurveyed the small mammal species of the upper site. MacNamara (1976)cond ucted a study of The Diet and Feeding Habits ofthe Terrestrial Stage of theCommon Newt, all newts being collected from the upper site, Ward (1979)compiled a list of the Birds of the Biological Field Station (i.e. the upper site).Osenni (1984) studied the Ecological Determinates of Distribution for SeveralSmall Mammals. This investigation was completed within the boundaries of theupper site.LimnologyStam and Wassmer (1968) did an initial investigation of Moe Pond'slimnology during the summer months of that same year, and found that CO 2 andO2 concentrations both decreased over time at all depths. Total Phosphorousincreased at the bottom and decreased at the surface over time. Lightpenetration decreased over the summer and temperature increased at all depthsover time. pH remained slightly acidic throughout the study.In 1971, Harman commented on the state of Moe Pond as beingincongruous with ecological expectations. The watershed being well vegetatedand protected from further cultural land use disturbances, in combination withsoil parent materials derived from strongly acidic shales, would lead to the5
expectation that the trophic state would tend to be more oligotrophic (Harman,1971). In contrast to this expectation, the pond exhibited characteristics of beinga highly eutrophic water body (e.g. planktonic blooms in the summer resulting inSecchi depth measurements of less than 0.5 m, as well as late summer algalbloom die-ofts resulting in layers up to 1 cm in thickness over the surface of thepond) (Harman, 1971). Bacterial decomposition caused an extremely noxioussituation. Harman suspected some previous unknown cultural impact on thepond's productivity which was later determined to have been associated with 56tons of limestone having been added before BFS acquisition (Harman, 1972).The paucity of benthic invertebrate populations and aquatic macrophytes foundin the system was indicative of a situation normally seen in oligotrophic anddystrophic waters (Harman, 1971). Extremely high densities of planktonic algaeand several species of zooplankters were seen and appeared to support the ideathat the pond had been recently artificially fertilized (Harman, 1971). Sohacki(1972) presents a range of limnological data collected over the years from 1968through 1972 that supports the conclusions made by Harman (1971) that MoePond was eutrophic. Blue-green algae were determined to dominate thephytoplankton community (Sohacki, 1972). A morphometric map of the MoePond basin with bathometric contours was developed by Sohacki and Reuss in1969 and included in Sohacki (1972).Aquatic Macrophytes and MacroalgaeHarman (1971) surveyed and identified the four species of submergentmacrophytes found in Moe Pond: Chara sp., Najas flexilis, Potamogeton pusillusand Eleocharis sp. Phragmites was found at the upper site in 1994 at the southend of Moe Pond on the east side of the spillway outlet. Plant material removalwas conducted in an attempt to halt its expansion and continued colonization bythis invasive species.ZooplanktonThe zooplankton community present in Moe Pond was described byHarman in 1971.MacrobenthosHarman (1971; 1972) describes the macrobenthos present in Moe Pondby species. Harman and Olsen (1972) list the macrobenthos genera found inNew Pond. Also, in 1972, Harman and Herrmann reported their findingsconcerning The Population Dynamics of Two Species of Freshwater Gastropodsinhabiting Moe Pond. Harman and Katsigianis (1973) studied trematodes(i.e.flukes) that were parasitizing Moe Pond aquatic gastropods and goldenshiner. The aquatic mollusks of both Moe and New ponds were listed byMcNamara and Harman (1974) as well as, those found in the northern hardwoodforest community of the upper site. Some of the species listed for the terrestrialenvironment were taken from gut samples of red etfs.6
Aquatic VertebratesA survey conducted on Moe Pond's fish community by Stam and New(1968) using a minnow seine found only two species to be present: brownbullhead (Ameiurus nebulosus) and golden shiner (Notemigonus cryso/eucas)(AFS, 1991).In 1968, Reuss surveyed and listed by species the amphibians andreptiles (i.e. snapping turtle (Chelydra serpentina) and eastern garter snake(Thalmnopis sirtalis)) that occurred at the upper site (Conant and Collins, 1991).A survey of the Moe Pond fish community was conducted in the summerof 1993 as part of an Otsego Lake drainage basin wide fish survey of all thestreams and smaller standing water bodies found in the watershed (Foster,1995). It was reported by Foster that no change in the fish community hadoccurred since first surveyed by Stam and New (1968). In 1977, New compileda comprehensive list of all the recorded occurrences of aquatic and terrestrialherptofauna at the upper site.A preliminary fish survey of New Pond was conducted in the summer of1994 to determine fish species composition and population structure. It wasfound that pumpkinseed, Lepomis gibbosus was the only fish species present.The mean total length of the fish sampled (n 490) was 47 mm and the rangefound to be 18-140 mm. The mean total length suggested that the pumpkinseedpopulation exhibited slow growth (i.e. stunting). A few large individuals werepresent in the population. The majority (80.6%) of the population was clusteredbetween 33-57 mm in total length (McCoy and Urban, 1995). Pumpkinseedwere not found in Moe Pond.Ecosystem Level StudiesThe studies described below are of a more diverse nature. They wereconducted to assess a variety of ecosystem factors at work concurrently.Monostory (1971) investigated Stream - Lake Productivity Relations in theOtsego Lake Watershed. This study appears to have set in place the foundationfor finer-resolution stUdies to follow (e.g. Iannuzzi, 1991; Albright et aI., 1996). In1975, Dayton broadened his investigations and conducted a study of UplandForest Vegetation Along the Susquehanna Headwaters. Marr (1989) completeda synthesis work of the Forest Communities and Mycorrhizal Associates of theUpper BFS Site. Innauzzi (1991) completed an investigation of The ChemicalLimnology and Water Quality of Otsego Lake. A study of the PeriphytonBiomass and Identification Found in the Tributaries of Otsego Lake in Relation toSelected Environmental Parameters was completed by Komorowski (1994). Alimnological and Biological Survey of Weaver Lake was conducted by MacArthur(1995). In 1996 Albright et al. completed their work concerning Hydrology andNutrient Budgets for Otsego Lake. A compilation of 60 years of ecologicalinvestigations of the Otsego Lake watershed culminated in The State of OtsegoLake 1936 - 1996 (Harman et aI., 1997).7
III. The Present StudyPrevious studies, as described above, of the Moe Pond ecosystem havetended to be specialized in their scope, but when taken as a whole characterizerather well the terrestrial and aquatic components of the system. In addition, theecosystem level investigations that have been conducted on the entire OtsegoLake watershed and other smaller sub-units within the watershed have beeninstructive in attempting to use an ecosystem approach to Moe Pond.LimnologyThe limnological investigations were conducted over twelve consecutivemonths so as to describe the seasonal and with depth variations observed in theindividuallimnological parameters measured. A 24-hour community metabolismstudy was completed while collecting fish ecology data during the summerfollowing the completion of the Iimnological investigations. This empirical dataset was then used to characterize the trophic state of the pond ecosystem duringthe non-winter months of maximum phytoplankton biomass, as well as used toexamine some of the trends and patterns observed over the study period.The previous limnological data collected and cultural information knownconcerning the ecology of Moe Pond (Stam and Wassmer, 1968; Harman, 1971,1972, 1977; Sohacki, 1972) has been instrumental in gaining a long termperspective of the changes that have occurred over thirty years and allows for adiscussion of its limnological ontogeny.Fish Population BiologyFollowing the completion of the limnological data collection, aninvestigation of the Moe Pond fish community was conducted to assess allspecies present. Brown bullhead population size, structure, annual survival rateand condition were evaluated. Golden shiner population size and structure wereassessed, but other aspects of their population biology were not investigatedbecause of limitations inherent in the types of capture gear deployed during thestudy.Previous work had been done in relation to the fish community present inMoe Pond (Stam and New, 1968; Foster, 1995), using a qualitativemethodology. The present study approach was comprehensive in its samplingdesign so as to assess quantitatively as many aspects of the fish communitycomposition and structure as was possible given resource limitations.Other intentions of the study were to gain adequate insight into the fishecology of Moe Pond so as to be able to offer suggestions as to potentialmanagement improvements that could be implemented to increase the fishfaunal diversity and enhance its productivity. As a consequence of the abovestated objectives the potential effects of con specific, environmental and non piscine predation on the fish community are discussed.8
METHODSLimnologyLimnological analyses were performed and/or water samples collectedfrom Moe Pond approximately every two weeks from 28 March, 1994 through 10April, 1995, except for the period of 4 January through 6 February, 1995 when amidwinter thaw prevented sampling either due to thin ice or ice-out conditions.The single water quality station used in the present study was chosen at alocation of maximum depth of 3.8 m (Sohacki, 1972). All open-water samplingwas conducted from a rowboat at the buoy-marked site, identified as WQ onFigure 2. The winter and early spring periods of through-the-ice samplingrequired the use of a manual 8" ice-auger. All through-the-ice water qualityanalyses and sampling were conducted at the same site as the open-waterphase.Secchi disk transparency was determined over the side of a boat orthrough-the-ice to the nearest 5 cm of depth.A Hydrolab Surveyor II with probe model # SVR2-SU and Sonde unit withmodel 4041-CA circulator assembly was used to determine depth (m),watertemperature CC), dissolved oxygen [mg/l], pH and specific conductance(IJS/cm). The Hydrolab probe was calibrated before field use on a weekly basisfor four parameters. Hydrolab measurements were routinely taken at 0.5 mintervals, beginning at the surface to 3.0 m in depth, with the exception of 28March and 6 May, 1994 when the depths differed slightly from the standardizedroutine.A Wildco vertical opaque PVC alpha bottle (Cat NO.1940 046) was usedto collect all water samples. Samples were collected at three depths in the watercolumn: 0.0-0.5 m (subsurface), 1.0-1.5 m (mid-column) and 2.0-2.5 m Uust-off the-bottom). Chlorophyll a water samples were stored for transport from the fieldto the lab in (3) 2 I translucent Nalgene HOPE bottles. Samples collected fortotal phosphorous (TP), nitrite/nitrate-N (NO/N0 3 -N), alkalinity and calciumanalyses were stored and transported from the fiel
Moe Pond ecosystem conceptual model 51 Figure 26. Moe Pond ecosystem post-biomanipulation hypothesized mode!. 52. IV . LIST OF APPENDICES. Appendix A. Moe Pond Hydrolab and Seccl1i depth data collected from 28 March, 1994 through 10 April, 1995 A-1 . Appendix B. Moe Pond
frog.1 Moe is a boy frog .2. Moe likes boys .3. And he likes girls .4. All About Moe Level 1—Story 2 Moe Likes to Sing 8 We love Moe. 5 Moe can sing. 6 Moe can sing . 7. All About Moe Level 1—Story 2 Moe Likes to Sing 9 Moe
Advanced Undergravel Suction Grid Ecosystem Pond Philosophy – The Pond with annual maintenance and allows the homeowner to stock the pond with larger fish populations. The entire floor of this pond becomes a living bio-filter and digests debris that settles to the bottom of the pond. This i
FILLEY PARK RENOVATIONS Bloomfield, Connecticut FILLEY POND: Existing pond silted in and choking on organics Pond to be excavated to restore depth for fishing & skating Pond taken off-line from stream to reduce siltation Stream, Pond, Wetlands, & LID Restoring & Enhancing the Environmental Assets of the Park
Ohio Pond Management a guide to managing ponds for fishing and attracting wildlife H A N D B O O K. Ohio Pond Management Handbook . realize that pond management is as much an art as it is a science. The pond owner sho
pond is a structured type using concrete coated with Pond Shield Epoxy, the repair is simple and even someone with minimal skills can most likely render a repair. 3. Children Children are fascinated by ponds an
Long Pond Belgrade, Rome S&L state ramp on Castle Island Road, 2 miles west of Rt 27 Long Pond Windsor S&L state ramp, east shore of outlet Maranacook Pond Winthrop S&L state ramps in Winthrop and Readfield McGrath Pond Oakland S&L via boat from Salmon Pond Messalonskee Lake Belgrade S&L
15 Crane Hill Bridge River 1 Just before bridge on Streeter Pond and Crane Hill 17 Easton Road Pond 6 Beside Horse Arena at Fall Wind Farm 18 Dickinson Pond Pond 5 Just before #882 right on Pearl Lake Rd on right 19 Sunset Hill Golf Course Pond 6 Past Sunset Hill on Rt before South Rd.
ASTM C167 Standard test methods for thickness and density of blanket or batt thermal insulations ASTM C518 Standard test method for steady-state thermal transmission properties by means of the heat flow meter apparatus . TL-205 HOME INNOVATION RESEARCH LABS Page 6 of 6. ASTM C653 Standard guide for determination of the thermal resistance of low-density blanket-type mineral fiber insulation .
