The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About20080868 Ver 2_Draft minutes PCS Creeks Mtg 25 Aug 2016V2_20170227ANNOTATED AGENDA (annotations are in italics and a "+ " indicates a TO DO) AUGUST 25 2016 MEETING TO DISCUSS THE PCS CREEKS STUDY MONITORING YEAR 2015 REPORT 0900-1400 US Army Corps of Engineers Washington NC Office ATTENDEES: Tom Steffens, USACE Anthony Scarbraugh, NCDWR Jason Rock, NCDMF Jeff Furness, PCS Phosphate Dr. Enrique Reyes, ECU Dr. Jamie DeWitt, ECU VIA TELECONFERENCE: Mike Wicker, USFWS (0900-1200) Maria Dunn, NCWRC (0900-1200) Dr. David Kimmel, NOAA (1015-121 A) Quick summary of creeks stud; Dr. Sidd Mitra, ECU Sam Cooper, CZR CZR ;ZR -Z At request of Tom Steffens, Jeff Furness provided update and overview of mine progress and mitigation to date. MOD ALT L: All impacts to NCPC were com plete by the end of 2015 (although mining continues in NCPC todaf . In February 2096, Bonnerton mine operations were begun. By the end of 20 6, one dragline will move over to Bonnerton and begin mining in earj20 9 7; the other two draglines will begin Bonnerton operations later in 2097. MITIGATION. Allprojects approved in the 2009 permit are colleted and the five year monitoring cycle is over for five sites with verbal agreements from agencies on success (Kutman Creek, Hell S).)Iami, Sage Gut, Back Creek, and Bay City. P and U Lands phases are still active. o Multi -agency review and input on 1998 plan of study and 2011 final plan of study o Review tables of parameters monitored and frequency of monitoring o Review individual creeks and locations of monitoring equipment Julia Berger covered this quick review and reminded the group that at the agencies' request, the background photographs used for the monitoring location figures are updated eachyear to reflect the most current aerial view of Mod Alt L progress. B) TO DOs from 2015 Science Panel Meeting Minutes — none At the 2015 creeks meeting agencies had requested a comparison of the timing of deep water depressurization well activity to the hydrologic behavior of individual wells in the creeks study, particularly in the upperparts of the creeks. This request opped off the PCS/CZR radar during preparation of the 2015 report. ♦ Correlations and trend analyses between these wells will be included in the 2016 report as part of the answer to Question 2. A:VX C) Executive Summary 2015 Report (P( Jeff Furness discussed b.-iefl and asked for /q D) Drainage Basin Reductions for 2015 (PCS) a) Figures I -C2, I -C3 and I -C4 iL Two creeks impacted in 2015 Jacks (1 st postyear� and Jacobs 2nd postyear�. Like the monitoring location figures, the overview drainage ba figure is replaced eachyear with the latest PCSj7a, +A (7* requestem Creek to be included in 2016 depictions E) Discussion of the ROD Special Condition S Six Questions a) Q1 -Flow changes (CZR/PCS) Past weir use, limitations of weir use f ow, and bidirectionalflow in Huddles Cut and lower reaches of some of the other creeks were discussed. CZR drew attention to the qualitative nature oft flow observations and that the final plan of study had agreed that monitoring flow in bidirectional creek systems was unnecessary. Bidirectional flow is possible at all Huddles Cut flow observation locations and while both wind direction and direction of flow are noted during the CZR observations, the current table did not eliminate observed flow events which may have been wind tide water blown into a system above the observation point which then be to return downstream upon a change in wind direction. Agencies expressed concern that changes in flow regime could contribute to subtle changes noted* vegetation and that ecotypes in some areas could be in transition. Additional discussion occurred about use of a water budget to hep identi fi how much rainfall no longer reaches the creeks cut off from their larger drainage basin and whether such changes could alter productivity. It was noted that the permitprocess did not require any study ofproductivity and that the parameters in the study (eg., chlorophyll a, fish, and benthos should serve as indirect measures of potential changes in productivity. ♦Agencies to ponderpotential loss ofproductivity due to reduced rainfall and any mitigation needed. b Q2 -Geomorphic or vegetative character Aanges CZR/PCSrP g� ) No significant changes noted in pre- to post -comparisons for hydrology or vegetation. For the benefit of new attendees/listeners, transitionyears for vegetation ere described and defined and all were reminded that only one impact creek (Tooley was ored in 2015. Some discussion was about how to account for large storm events t ay produce to ups (i.e.,, `upland islands') which couldgive the appearance that brackish intolerant or upland species have increased in importance, or bowflowpaffer may change such t in early years the vegetation plots were closer to or further away from a `channel" which also may contribute to changes in importance percentages of variois ipecies. It was acknowledged that where the plots are for most creeks, thefloodplain is very narrow or even c nneli�Zed in some cases (exceptions are Huddles Cut and Duck Creek). CZR indicated that within the individual plots/quadrats with64 in a transect, it might be noted on the Cajorms if there was a new overturned tree, or t ow h d changed, but data analysis does not consider such details. TFhile it was toted t es like a hurricane might be enough to drive a creek teetering on change into a e cotype z.. arine shrub scrub in Jacks Creek, it was agreed that for the longer monitored creeks, and as data are added for the other creeks, to ups and flow path changes)vould be part of the continuum and should not be treated dierently in the analysis. "Contrary" behavior of Drinkwater Creek well DWIW7I C was discussed relative to earlier agency request about the relationshp of mine depressurisation well activity to creeks study wells. Agencies wondered in general if enough data has been collected to go into proactive mode and predict that when the mine does x, thaty will occur. ♦ CZR to add note in report text that well DWV1I Cis at higher elevation than the other wells in this array. ♦ CZR toinclude results of Bonnerton non-riverine hardwood forest hydrology monitoring into nextyear's creek report. ♦NCD" to determine which section of the reportis appropriate for the Bonnerton hydrology information. c) Q3 -Forage base changes (CZR/PCS) Huddles Cutis the only creek with any significant differences in pre- and post- results for fish which reflected a drop in spot CPUE. However, there are so many factors that may have influenced the catch: the mobile sand bar which can narrow and widen the channel, the strong wave from the arrzval/departure of the ferrysince the engine ere changed, water levels at times are such that the throat of the fyke net is out of the water, predation by raccoons, fluctuations* vegetative debris which clogs the ne , and whether or not the creek is confined to the floodplain. Mr. Rock asked about correlations betweeno er sites and in Is and whether trends were the same. The older reports co ' ined these correlation eports of late have used the dendrograms and other analysis. There was a significantpre- to post- derence between upstream sweeps in les Cut but the dendrogram for benthos for all years shows that Hud les Cut years cluster only with itself compared to the other creeks; however, pre- and postyears l ster together. A trophic level and feedingguild fu��y correspondence analysis was done for the benthos for the first time and showed similar results as above with no clear trend to implicate the mine as a cause of any noted change. For 2075, there was only on year ofpre Mod Alt L for comparison in Long Creek to compare to Tooley. ♦ CZR to add PA2 to the benthicguilds pre- Vipostjears box plot comparison of Tooley, Muddy, and Long creeks. Nk d) 4- Managed fish Chan s (CZR/PCS) Results mimics the other fish in the forage base section except for the mummichog in Huddles Cut. Differences* spot, menhaden, and croaker drive the cluster and Huddles Cut separates out from the other creeks. No penaid shrimp or blue crab have beencaught to date in DCUT1 1. Jason Rock indicated that NCDMF also saw an increase in brown shrimp in 2015, mostly whites in 2016 and an overall downward trend in catch of blue crab. e) Q5 -Metals in sediment or water column (Dr. Jamie DeWitt/CZR) Dr. DeWlitt reminded the group about the limitations of the data without replicates and how she bends the data to make pseudoreplicates for comparative purposes. She also reminded the group that the ERL/ERM values are equal only to the probability of adverse effect. The data were compared pre- to control, post- to control, and pre- to post which showed that metal concentrations were higherpre- compared to post-. Additional discussion revolved around the elevated apparently anomalous 2015 result for Zinc in Jacks Creek and the analysis of a second sediment sample of Jacks Creek which occurred in spring 2016. Dr. DeT�itt and Dr. Mitra reminded the group that different metals bebave differently in di erent containers even when a fixative is used by the laborato y to stabilise a sample. A sample may also change over ti ,between the time a sample is collected, analysed, and the lab is asked to re -run the analysis on the archived sample, or a location could be sampled in the morning and again in the afternoon at the same location and return different results. Metal complexation in the statural environment is highly variable, some metals are more susceptible than others to,natural perturbations in parameters, and many move back and forth from the sediment to the water column depending on particular drivers such as salinity and organics. ♦ CZR to enter laboratory metals results into raw data spreadsheet and r tables upon rece pt of results from the lab to capture potential anomalies sooner but results will still be subject to the vagaries mentioned above. T -2015 elevated result for Zinc in Jacks will remain in the tab a note about the second sample result f) Q6 -Water quality changes (Dr. Dave Kimmel via telecom with Powerpoint presentation/ Dr. Enrique Reyes) CZR provided short history of the ECU lead scientists and contributing scientists for the water quality and metals sections of the creeks study. For 2016 analysis, Dr. Reyes is the principal scientist for the water quality section. Dr. Kimmel presented and summarised the O6 creeks water quality figures and tables from the report (temporal and spatial and pre- and posh and reminded all that there is little published literature onAe' such as those in the PCS study. He also noted that while changes have occurred zpost-impact creeks (eg., flashier behavior and increase in nutrients for first fewyears), so far at least, overtime they resemble the controls and that the magnitudes of those changes are not ecologically significant in his opinion. He also reminded the group that while principal components analysis (PCA ) is a wonderful tool to see relationsh ps within a large dataset, it also may mask specific trends of a particular parameter. However, a particularparameter can be looked at independently at any time (eg., salinity thisyear�. There was additional discussion about which nutrients were limiting in these creeks and the potential role they may play in aquatic productivity. In Dr. Kimmel's opinion, aquatic productivity for finfish in NC is more tied to events outside the NC estuaries and that limiting nutrients for fish are not a problem, although an increase in light may be a problem. The question of adequate sample side was also discussed; as was the logistical constraint of money allotted for scientific studies that almost never allows for the number of samples necessary to truly understand the function of systems or how to adequately mitigate for some changes such as less flow. IM g) Long term salinity study in Pamlico River (Dr. Dave Kimmel) Dr. Kimmel also presented results of long in the Pamlico River from the mouth of tl consistent trend similar to other east coast projections. Tar River discharge and F) Fish trophic assemblages (handout) 998 — 20/5) ACU study of salinity trends up to W/ es and iy (CZR/PCS) ved a positive level rise Fish assemblage analysis band out was descfibed and there were no comments. ♦ CZR to incl e this fis rophic analysis in annual reports. G) EBI continuation without benefit of Larry Eaton (retires in September) There was discussion about the retirement of Larry Eaton and the value of continued use of the EBI since Larry has been the assigner of sensitivity values to the benthic species used in the EBL Onjabo 50 percfretd the species have values assigned. Anthony Scarbraugh indicated that Lary will be "" gone for six months and then will return on a grant; also that someone at Land Resources Section did their thesis on estuarine benthos. ♦NCDTIR to etermine what to do about continued EBI and sensitivity assignments. AN H) Suggestions for 2016 report None in addition to ♦ indicators. 1) Miscellaneous South of 33 tractpre-impact creek sampling will likely begin in 2078. In 2077, there will be additional discussion and field visit(s) to select the creek and determine where and how to monitor.