(navigation image)
Home American Libraries | Canadian Libraries | Universal Library | Community Texts | Project Gutenberg | Children's Library | Biodiversity Heritage Library | Additional Collections
Search: Advanced Search
Anonymous User (login or join us)
Upload
See other formats

Full text of "New Haven Harbor ecological studies summary report, 1970-1977"

Summary Report 
1970-1977 

Prepared for 

The United Illuminating Company 

New Haven, Connecticut 



New Haven 

Harbor 

Ecological 

Studies 

1979 




Normandeau 
Associates, Inc. 





, 


T 


■ 


\ 


.ENGLISH if/ 
STATION //; 




J> NEW HKJVi:^'^ 


f^^^ 




M. LONCWH^ ^ ^ 


f-NEW 




L.^^Ri-~- 


, HAVEN 
\; HARBOR 




WEST ■ j 


1 STATION 




HAVEN I 


/ 




POINljl^^ "i 


\- 




^^ 


P 




-ri^^^*^''^ 


Jk 




-i^^'"^ 


/^^' 


f 




K 


J 


^/ - 


- 





tXvirr 




\'\^-^ 




TO) 


New Haven 




Harbor 


Ecological 




Studies 




Summary Report 




1970-1977 





Prepared for 

The United Illuminating Connpany 

New Haven, Connecticut 

by 

Normandeau Associates, Inc. 

Bedford, New Hampshire 

Edited by 

Andrew J. McCusker 

Weldon S. Bosworth, Ph.D. 



April 1979 



TABLE OF CONTENTS 



PAGE 

ABSTRACT ii 

PREFACE iii - VI 

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS vii - ix 

1.0 INTRODUCTION 1-1 to 1-24 

2.0 LITERATURE REVIEW 2-1 to 2-31 

3.0 HYDROGRAPHY 3-1 to 3-107 

4.0 PLANKTON 4-1 to 4-94 

5.0 EXPOSURE PANELS 5-1 to 5-53 

6.0 SUBTIDAL INFAUNA 6-1 to 6-64 

7.0 INTERTIDAL INFAUNA 7-1 to 7-30 

8.0 EPIBENTHIC INVERTEBRATES 8-1 to 8-49 

9.0 OYSTER STUDY i . . 9-1 to 9-37 

10.0 TRACE METALS 10-1 to 10-44 

11.0 ICHTHYOFAUNA 11-1 to 11-123 

12.0 AVIFAUNA 12-1 to 12-54 

13.0 SUMMARY 13-1 to 13-26 



Digitized by the Internet Archive 

in 2010 with funding from 

Boston Library Consortium Member Libraries 



http://www.archive.org/details/newhavenharborecOOnorm 



ABSTRACT 

The New Haven Harbor (Connecticut) Ecological Studies Summary Report 
presents results from a seven-year monitoring program and analyzes possible im- 
pacts of United Illuminating Company's 460 MW oil-fired electric generating sta- 
tion on harbor biota. The report fulfulls an NPDES discharge permit requirement 
and, in addition, is designed to maximize usefulness of the data base to other re- 
searchers. Individual report sections are presented to characterize New Haven 
Harbor and analyze plant impacts on: Hydrography , Plankton, Exposure Panels, Sub- 
tidal Infauna, Epibenthic Invertebrates, Oyster Growth, Trace Metals, Ichthyofauna 
and Avifauna. 

Hydrographic studies characterized in New Haven Harbor as a temperate 
estuary defined by predictable seasonal changes in physical and chemical water 
parameters that are primarily regulated by temperature and precipitation. The hy- 
drographic regime in proximity to the plant is altered by operation of the plant's 
condenser cooling system which draws in harbor water through a shoreline intake 
structure at 625 cfs and discharges subaqueously near the shipping channel (700' 
from shore) at a design AT of 8.3°C (15°F) . Effects of cooling system operation 
on the current regime were restricted to small areas adjacent to intake and dis- 
charge structures , and effects on heavy metal concentrations or dissolved gases 
were inconsequential. As determined by mathematical modeling, the thermal plume 
from the plant was buoyant for most salinity-temperature conditions. Aerial in- 
frared imagery and thermal/dye studies showed the surface extent of the plume to 
be limited - area bounded by the isotherm 2°F AT was less than 0.6% of the inner 
harbor surface area . 

Biological parameters in New Haven Harbor, including species richness , 
abundance and spatial distribution, fluctuated widely from year to year, but over- 
all, most species assemblages could be characterized by somewhat predictable, 
seasonal trends, similar to those observed in other Long Island Sound harbors. 
Each biological assemblage was generally characterized by a group of numerically 
and temporally dominant species over the duration of the study. Though abundances 
and occurrence of these dominants varied substantially , most dominant species showed 
predictable seasonal patterns in presence/ absence , abundances and spatial utili- 
zation of the harbor. 

Mechanisms of plant impact on the harbor addressed in this report in- 
clude impingement of epibenthic invertebrates and finfish, plankton entrainment 
through the cooling water system, effects of altered current patterns associated 
with the intake and discharge structures, possible changes in dissolved gases and 
contact of organisms with the thermal plume. The small size buoyant nature, and 
dynamics of the plume minimize its potential to impact the harbor biota, conse- 
quently impingement on the traveling screens and entrainment through the cooling 
system were determined to be the most important potential modes of plant effect on 
the biota. Impacts were analyzed by comparing the two years of operational data 
with the range of values observed during the five preoperational years. Several 
species showed distributional or abundance changes, but were either 1) local changes 
not in proximity to the plant; 2) harborwide and not restricted to the area of the 
plant; or 3) not coincident with plant impact. 

The overall conclusion from comparison of preoperational and operational 
periods for all assemblages monitored with respect to species composition, abundance, 
diversity , and spatial and temporal distribution was that the plant had no dis- 
cernible impact on the biota of New Haven Harbor. 



n 



PREFACE 



As one who had a hand on the throttle of the Connecticut River 
Ecological Study (Merriman and Thorpe, 1976) , it has been a privilege 
for me to examine this work on New Haven Harbor. 

Both studies have dealt with the same problem: namely, the effects 
on the aquatic ecosystem of the operation of a once-through condenser- 
cooling complex as employed by an electricity-generating station. These 
effects may be of two sorts: first, those resulting from the impact of 
the thermal effluent emanating from the plant; and second, those 
involving either the impingement of fish and other organisms on the 
intake screen or the entrainment of the smaller elements of the biota 
that are sucked through the screen and pass through the system. 

For the purpose of discussion here, it matters not at all that one 
power plant, Connecticut Yankee (CY) , is nuclear while the other. New 
Haven Harbor Station (NHHS) , is oil-fired. Fundamentally, we are con- 
cerned with thermal and associated effects - i.e., what are the impacts, 
potential or real, on the assemblage of plants and animals in the 
affected area? 

Apart from the basic nature of the problem, the two studies have 
certain other features in common. As the cros flies, the plants are 
only 25 miles apart, so that in general they are subject to much the 
same meteorological and seasonal vicissitudes . Both discharge their 
waste heat into relatively large, though partially circumscribed , areas 
of water that are characterized by a substantial amount of movement. 
The one (CY) discharges its water at a rate of some 825 cubic feet per 
second approximately 20° Fahrenheit warmer than when it was withdrawn 
from the river 90 seconds earlier; the other (NHHS) operates its cooling 
system at a rate of 625 cfs with a temperature increase of 15°F. 

At this point the gross features of the two studies become sharply 
divergent. The one is essentially a riverine situation where, though 
subject to major tidal effects, there is no salinity and the down-stream 
flow of fresh water is predominant. This contrasts with the present 
study that deals with an estuarine zone in which the saline waters of 
Long Island Sound prevail over the relatively small runoff from several 
rivers and in which the tidal flow is by far the most influential. As a 
result, not only are the hydrographic conditions vastly different but 
the flora and fauna, with only minor overlap, are wholly distinct from 
those of the Connecticut Yankee situation. It is precisely these sorts 
of differences that led Bell (1971) and others to point out the fallacy 
in making universal regulations governing thermal discharges without 
regard for the conditions peculiar to each plant site. Furthermore, 
the methods of discharge of the heated effluent from the two plants are 
radically different so that the respective impacts of each body of 



m 



warmed water on their related ecosystems are in no way comparable, 
although in fact each gives every evidence oF being admirably suited to 
its particular situat ion. 

It is not surprising therefore that the overall direction and con- 
tent of these two studies, riverine and estuarine, are singularly differ- 
ent. With Connecticut Yankee there was the possibility that the thermal 
discharge might completely block the passage of valuable anadromous fish 
such as shad to their spawning grounds and thus eliminate the species 
from the river in much the same way that salmon were eradicated by dams 
at the turn into the 19th century. For this reason, and perhaps also 
because of the predilection of the CY study staff and directors, some 
two-thirds of the published report on this study is devoted to fishes 
(Coutant, 1977) . The present work on New Haven Harbor offers a much 
more balanced treatment of the ecology of the region and related matters. 
It is also comprehensive, both as to subject matter and detail. For 
example, apart from the scenarios on plankton, benthos and fishes, there 
are separate sections on oysters, avifauna , trace metals, etc. As for 
detail, unusually high numbers of different kinds of organisms were 
encountered in this work - e.g., over 300 benthic forms in New Haven 
Harbor. In short, the New Haven Harbor Study is an exhaustive presen- 
tation that fully documents the ecology of the estuary and provides a 
solid basis for future comparison. 

In the consideration of these two studies, there is another matter 
that needs mention. The Connecticut River study was blessed with a 
remarkable continuity of staff and methodology from its inception in 
1965 to its completion nine years later. Moreover, its scientific 
personnel were permanently located in the Essex Marine Laboratory with 
immediate access to the study area, and this in turn led to the fact 
that the authors of the summary monograph were all directly involved in 
the field work from start to finish. The New Haven Harbor study, 1970- 
1977, was not as fortunate in these several regards. As a consequence a 
number of additional problems had to be addressed , particularly in 
interpreting the results of changes in sampling methodology . Let it be 
said, however, that this Summary Report is meticulous and circumspect in 
its treatment of the data involved. I raise the subject to emphasize 
two points: first, that in studies of this sort the initial design of 
the field work and its consistency are directly related to the success 
of the project and the return on the investment; and second, that the 
overall conclusions in this report are in no way impaired by the above- 
mentioned circumstances . 

The stated purposes of the New Haven Harbor Ecological Studies 
(Introduction, p, 1-2) were to "evaluate possible impacts of the generating 
station on the harbor ecosystem," and "to describe the ecology of New Haven 
Harbor." This Summary Report indicates at every turn that there appear to 
be no adverse environmental effects of any consequence. As to the descrip- 
tive ecology, I have already spoken of its detail and scope, and a glance 
at the various Tables of Contents of the individual sections will bear me 
out. The information on the fauna and flora that is contained in this 
report can be looked upon as a sort of data bank, and as such it is 
extremely valuable. Moreover, as indicated throughout this volume, there 



IV 



are similar accumulations of available data from other areas on both the 
north and south shores of Long Island Sound. There is also unpublished 
material (e.g., Rhoads on the benthic fauna of the Sound, personal 
communication) as well as information scattered through the more formal 
published literature. It occurs to me that from all these sources it 
would be possible for some interested party to put together a definitive 
documented inventory of the fauna and flora of Long Island Sound. Such 
a volume on this distinctive and most important body of water would be 
of enormous scientific and practical use - a modern counterpart, if you 
like, of the early classic by Sumner, Osburn, and Cole (1913) , "A Bio- 
logical Survey of the Waters of Woods Hole and Vicinity ." 

Let me here turn to a subject of broader dimensions . The New Haven 
Harbor Station Ecological Studies have amply fulfilled the requirements 
embodied in the various federal pollution control and environmental 
policy acts and amendments as they developed before and during the 
course of the investigation here reported. Furthermore, as indicated 
above, there is also now available a wealth of ecological information on 
a number of other specific areas on the Long Island Sound shoreline; 
these base-line data are the outcome of intensive scrutiny under the 
same regulations that dictated the present study. In this regard we owe 
much to the movement that led to the requirements for detailed examina- 
tion of localities where there was the potential for "thermal pollution" - 
the popular and often intemperate terminology that had its origin with 
the development of nuclear power in the utility business. Now, it seems 
to me, it is appropriate that the public in Connecticut and New York be 
made aware of the thorough nature of these environmental monitoring 
studies, which, it should be noted, have been conducted at enormous 
expense. Uninformed and unbridled public pressure on regulatory agencies 
might thereby be modified. What is needed at this stage is more flexi- 
bility in the regulatory processes, especially with an eye to the time 
requirements that so impede our progress toward a reasonable degree of 
energy independence. I believe that in the present state of our assembled 
knowledge of Long Island Sound we are now in a position to take positive 
steps in this direction. 

Like so many others, I worry in the broader context about the 
entangling regulatory web now plaguing us in so many walks of life; it 
can be a debilitating and stultifying process, pernicious in the long 
run. The need for such straight-laced canon clearly comes under question 
in all fields of scientific and technological endeavor. Its reductio ad 
absurdum in the field of medicine is illustrated by penicillin. If this 
wonder drug, introduced 40 years ago, were discovered today the chances 
are that it "...would not pass the extensive animal research tests that 
are a prerequisite to marketing" (Altman, 1979) . A different example of 
the stifling effect imposed by present federal regulatory policy is that 
of the system of grant and contract proposals for research support - 
particularly as it applies to the academic community . Thus Leopold 
(1970) estimates that last year some 2700 man-years were invested in 
proposal writing, and suggests that we may be approaching the fanciful 
situation alluded to a decade and a half ago where if "...some group 
should ever want to bring research progress to a standstill, they could 
do so by establishing a competitive grant system under which all researchers 
would be required to prepare written proposals describing what they wished 



to work on." And in a similar vein, relating to the mounting bureaucratic 
red tape, an eminent professor of biology at Yale was recently quoted as 
saying that paperwork "wouldn't have to go much farther and I'd say it 
wasn't worth it." 

No one will argue against the need for reasonable regulation at 
federal, state, or municipal levels; but overdone, it more than defeats 
its purpose -it strangles. This applies to environmental affairs just as 
much as it does in the examples cited above. 

This New Haven Harbor Summary Report can thus be viewed in a dual 
capacity . It has accomplished its aims of evaluating possible impacts 
and describing the local ecology with a high level of scientific pro- 
ficiency and integrity. It is also an instrument that may be used by 
example to bring about tractable regulation that will allow us to get on 
more effectively with the necessary and vital conduct of our energy affairs 
without unreasonable disruption of the environment. 

Daniel Merriman 
8 March 1979 



REFERENCES CITED 



Altman, L. K. 1979. Why penicillin continues to grow in importance. 
N.Y. Times, Feb. 6 (C):l-2. 

Bell, W. H. 1971. Thermal effluents from electrical power generation. 
Fish. Res. Board Can., Tech. Rep. 262. 54 pp. 

Coutant, C. C. 1977. Reviews. Trans. Am. Fish. Soc. 106 (1) : 115-116. 

Duxbury? A. C. 1963. A hydrographic survey of New Haven Harbor 1962-1963. 
Conn. Water Resources Bull. No. 3A: 19 pp., with 2 Appendices and 
66 Figs. 

Leopold, A. C. 1979. The burden of competitive grants. Science 203 
(4381) -.607. 

Merriman, D. , and L. M. Thorpe. 1976. The Connecticut River ecological 
study: the impact of a nuclear power plant. Am. Fish. Soc, Mono- 
graph No. 1: xi+252 pp. , 

Siomner, F. B., R. C. Osburn, and L. J. Cole. 1913. A biological survey 
of the waters of Woods Hole and vicinity. Part II, section III: A 
catalogue of the marine fauna. Bull. U. S. Bur. Fisheries, XXXI (II): 
549-794. 



VI 



ACKNOWLEDGMENTS 



An effort such as the studies assembled into this report, encom- 
passing many years and different contracting companies and individuals , 
obviously required the efforts of many individuals quite aside from 
those of the various authors. 

We would like to here acknowledge the efforts of those who have 
contributed most importantly and most recently to the study program and 
the report. Field and laboratory personnel who participated in the data 
acquisition process are listed, along with their respective roles, at 
the end of this section. 



Program Development and Early Years 

The formative years - early program guidance , environmental impact 
analysis and inclusion of mitigative measures - were largely guided by 
John Davis of Normandeau Associates, Inc. (NAI) . Certain technical pro- 
gram elements and overall review and guidance were provided by Gordon A. 
Riley and Peter J. Wangersky of Dalhousio University, Halifax, Nova 
Scotia, and Karl Turekian, Robert Gordon, Robert Berner and Donald 
Rhoads of Yale University . Important ideas and recommendations were 
contributed by many other concerned individuals and scientists . The 
major efforts of United Illuminating Co. (UI) project manager Richard 
Grossi, with the nearly full-time efforts of William Wakefield, project 
engineer - civil and permits, and their commitment to full consideration 
of environmental concerns were vital. 

From the last stages of construction, Marcus McCraven, now Vice 
President-Environmental Engineering, and David Darner, certainly the most 
biologically perceptive mechanical engineer we know, kept close contact 
with the program through hard questioning and continued involvement in 
maintaining an effective and fully responsive environmental program. 

Mr. Wadsworth Owen of the University of Delaware directed 1976 dye 
and thermal surveys to define the plant's thermal plume. 



Data Acquisition 

Collection and analysis of most of the data utilized in this report 
was completed by the W. F. Clapp Laboratories of the Battelle Memorial 
Institute, Duxbury, MA (1971-1975) and by Marine Research, Inc., Falmouth, 
MA (1975-1977) . Robert Hillman, and later Charles Willingham, were 
responsible for Battelle' s efforts with a capable Edward C. (Ned) Kelly 
directly supervising both field and laboratory efforts. 

Alexander Beichek was in charge of the Marine Research, Inc. effort. 
Specific program data acquisition responsibilities were shared by Richard 



vn 



Toner (zooplankton and phytoplankton) , Michael Scherer (ichthyoplankton) , 
Kris Swanson (benthic invertebrates) , Donald Bourne (finfish) , and John 
Garey (hydrographic) . Field efforts were under the effective direction 
of James Fox and Derek MacDonald . 



The Report 

We can say no more of the editorial review of Daniel Merriman, 
Professor emeritus of Yale University, and David Damer, Environmental 
Engineer for UI than that they offered countless suggestions on the 
papers and that we found them constructive to the point that we made 
adjustments in response to nearly all of them. Professor Merriman' s 
perspectives on the presentation of scientific data, his understanding 
of power plant impacts, and his skill as an editor were invaluable. Mr. 
Darner's clarity of perspective and demand for clarity in writing have 
hopefully guided us to produce a report that can be read and understood 
by the non-ecologist as well as the discipline specialist. 

Many whose names appear as authors of various papers contributed 
substantially more to the total report than in writing the individual 
sections. Particularly intensive and extensive were efforts by David 
Pease, Paul Ferreira and Drew Harvell, all of NAT. Unheralded, criti- 
cally needed assistance on data manipulation and anlysis came from NAI 
scientific programmer, Richard Ploss and statistician, Ronna LaPenn. 
Jon Witman assisted in preliminary analysis of benthic data. 

Finally, we commend for an excellent job in the face of numerous 
revisions (we won't say how many) and a heavy work load of technical 
typing - Jane Bieniek, Judith Eaton and Elissa Cusumano, and for 
publications work, Fred Silsby and Ann Lemay . John Fay, head of NAI's 
publications , proofed all final drafts in addition to supervising the 
publication effort. Theresa Carpentieri of UI guided final publications 
efforts . 



vm 



NEW HAVEN ECOLOGICAI. MONITORING STUDIES 
FIELD AND I,ABOIV\TORY 1'1>;ksONNKT, 1971-1977 



Name 



Field 



Company 



1971 1972 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 



Charles Willingham 
Jay Wcnnemer 
Edward Butlur 
Sandy Archibald 
Edward Kelly 
John Williams 
F. William Driver 
Herbert Howland 
James Fox 
Derek MacDonald 
Kris Swanson 
Joth Davis 
George Wheelwright 
Arnold Rosengren 
Diane Ciaccio 
Armand Hamel 
Rose Petrecca 

Laboratory 

Benthos 

Bea Richards 
Edward Butler 
Edward Kelly 
Ellen Price 
Kris Swanson 
Rose Petrecca 

Finfish 

Jay Wennemer 
Edward Kelly 
James Fox 
Derek MacDonald 

Plankton 

Paul Batson 
John Williams 
Marc Stuart 
F. William Driver 
Jay Wennemer 
Fred Tone 
Theo Bugsch 
Michael Scherer 
Barry Brooks 
Armand Hamel 
Leslie Fonger 
Robert Silvia 
Deborah Queen 
Diane Thier 
Diane Ciaccio 
Elizabeth Sechoka 
Terence Hayes 



CL/B 


X 


X 


1 










CL/}i 


X 


X 


X 










CL/B 


X 


X 


X 


X 


X 


X 




CL/B 


X 


X 


X 










CL/B 




X 


X 


X 


X 


X 




CL/B 






X 


X 


X 


X 




CL/B 






X 


X 


X 


X 




CL/B 






X 


X 


X 






MRI 












X 


X 


MR I 














X 


MRI 












X 


X 


MRI 














X 


MRI 












X 


X 


MRI 














X 


MRI 














X 


MRI 












X 


X 


MRI 














X 


Company 
















CL/B 


X 


X 


X 


X 


X 


X 




CL/B 


X 


X 












CL/B 




X 


X 


X 


X 


X 




CL/B 


X 


X 


X 


X 


X 






MRI 












X 


X 


MRI 














X 


CL/B 


X 


X 


X 










CL/B 




X 


X 


X 


X 


X 




MRI 












X 




MRI 












X 


X 


CL/B 


X 


X 


X 


X 








CL/B 






X 


X 


X 


X 




CL/B 








X 


X 


X 




CL/B 






X 


X 


X 


X 




CL/B 


X 


X 


X 










CL/B 


X 


X 


X 










CL/B 






X 


X 








MRI 












X 




MRI 












X 


X 


MRI 












X 


X 


MRI 














X 


MRI 












X 


X 


MRI 












X 


X 


MRI 












X 


X 


MRI 














X 


MRI 














X 


MRI 














X 



CL/B = Clapp Laboratories, Battelle 
MRI = Marine Research, Inc. 



IX 



NEW HAVEN HARBOR 

ECOLOGICAL STUDIES 

SUMMARY REPORT, 1979 



1.0 INTRODUCTION 

by Andrew J. McCusker and John D. Davis 
Normandeau Associates, Inc. 
Bedford, N. H. 



TABLE OF CONTENTS 



PAGE 

INTRODUCTION 1-1 

General Description of New Haven Harbor 1-3 

Harbor Usage 1-7 

New Haven Harbor Station * 1-8 

Cooling Water 1-11 

Drainage and Sanitary Wastes 1-12 

Siting and Related Studies 1-14 

Monitoring Studies Program 1-16 

Literature Cited 1-22 

LIST OF FIGURES 

1-1. New Haven Harbor location map 1-4 

1-2. Average hourly gross electrical generation (in MW) 
plotted by day for New Haven Harbor Station, 1975 

through 1977 1-9 

1-3. Plot plan of New Haven Harbor Station generating plant. . 1-10 

1-4. Plan of New Haven Harbor Station circulating water 

intake structure 1-13 



LIST OF TABLES 



1-1. SUMMARY OF SAMPLING REGIME FOR NEW HAVEN HARBOR 

STATION ECOLOGICAL STUDIES AS IT EXISTED IN OCTOBER 1977. 1-20 



1.0 INTRODUCTION 

by Andrew J. McCusker and John D. Davis 
Normandeau Associates, Inc. 
Bedford, N. H. 



New Haven Harbor Station, a 460-MW oil-fired electric gener- 
ating station operated by The United Illuminating Company (UI) , is 
located on the east shore of New Haven Harbor in New Haven, Connecticut. 
During normal operations, the plant interacts with the harbor in several 

ways. Through operation of a 625-cfs once-through cooling system, the 

9 
plant adds waste heat to the harbor water at a rate of 2.1 x 10 BTU 

per hour with a design temperature increase (AT) of 15 °F. The plant 
receives oil via barge approximately once a week. Additional inter- 
action results from maintenance dredging of a channel leading to the 
intake structure and around the oil off-loading pier. 

Planning for the New Haven Harbor Station began in 1970, 
construction in 1973, and commercial operations in August 1975. The 
overall process from planning through operations made the project 
sxibject to the Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1969 and amend- 
ments of 1972 and 1977, the National Environmental Policy Act of 1972, 
and regulations pursuant to those acts. Relevant regulations included 
effluent standards and guidelines for the steam electric-power gener- 
ating point-source category promulgated in October 1974 as well as the 
316a and 316b draft guidelines also first issued in 1974. In September 
1973, the State of Connecticut received approval from the Administrator 
of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to administer the NPDES 
program through its Department of Environmental Protection. Under this 
evolving framework of regulators and regulations, studies were conducted 
to evaluate potential environmental impacts , to aid development of 
recommendations for mitigative design measures, and to monitor environ- 
mental effects of construction and operation of the facility. 

During planning and construction phases, the U.S. Army Corps 
of Engineers (ACE) was the lead federal agency, and in 1972 prepared an 



1-1 



1-2 



Environmental Impact Statement. Construction permits were granted and 
in October 1973 an NPDES permit was issued by the Connecticut DEP, 
authorizing operation of the facility through June 1977 and specifying 
monitoring and reporting requirements as well as discharge limitations 
and criteria. The subsequent NPDES permit, effective June 30, 1977, 
stipulated that UI: 

...submit to the Commissioner a summary report 
concerning all biological monitoring studies. 
Such a report shall address the relationship 
of monitoring data collected after station 
start-up to baseline data collected prior to 
station operation. 

It is in response to this requirement that this summary report is 
presented. 

The format and general approach to the summary report is 
intended to maximize the utility of the data collected for the United 
Illuminating-sponsored environmental study programs, both with regard to pro- 
visions of the permit requirement and to the scientific community. The 
basic format reflects consideration of The Connecticut River Ecologi- 
cal Study monograph (Merriman and Thorpe, 1976) which sxommarized nine 
years of monitoring data and special studies related to the Connecticut 
Yankee Haddam Neck nuclear plant. The two efforts are similar in appli- 
cation of multi-year monitoring program data to consider impacts largely 
related to impingement, entrainment and thermal addition; however, they 
differ significantly in program structure and content. 

The objectives of the New Haven Harbor Ecological Studies 
Summary Report are twofold: first, to describe the ecology of New Haven 
Harbor; and second, to identify and evaluate possible impacts of the 
generating station on the harbor ecosystem. There has been no previous 
comprehensive ecological study of New Haven Harbor with which compari- 
sons can be made. Incorporated into the data base for this report are 
results of Ul-sponsored programs, including preoperational and opera- 



1-3 



tional monitoring studies and studies performed for special purposes, as 
well as data available from other sources which are pertinent to New 
Haven Harbor. These latter include data from greater Long Island Sound 
and other estuaries in the general area, and they provide the perspec- 
tive with which to relate the biological, physical and chemical struc- 
ture of New Haven Harbor to the larger Long Island Sound ecosystem. 

Most of the program papers in this report are made up of two 
major sections; the first characterizes New Haven Harbor in relation to 
the specific program; the second addresses the potential and observed 
impacts of New Haven Harbor Station operation on the harbor. Physical- 
chemical water quality and biological parameters in New Haven Harbor are 
characterized with emphasis on annual, seasonal and distributional 
trends. The relationship between the New Haven Harbor ecosystem and 
that of Long Island Sound and other harbors on the Sound is considered 
by comparison with historical and concurrent data. In the "impact" 
sections, potential mechanisms by which the plant might have an effect 
are identified and consideration is given to how these impacts might be 
detected through the available data. Preoperational and operational 
data are evaluated for observable plant impacts, and effects of potential 
importance are analyzed in detail. 



General Description of New Haven Harbor 



The New Haven Harbor estuary is located on the northern shore 
of Long Island Sound (Figure 1-1) . The harbor, with its north-south 
axis, is a shallow embayment of approximately 8 square nautical miles of 
water surface within boundaries established by the Long Island Sound 
breakwaters and the mouths of the West, Mill and Quinnipiac Rivers. It 
is about 4 miles long and varies in width from about 4 miles at its 
mouth to about one-half mile just below the Tomlinson Bridge at its 
northern end. The harbor entrance is protected by three large stone 
breakwaters, the main channel entering through a gap between the east- 
ernmost and central breakwaters. 



1-4 




OUTER HARBOR 



© 



NEW HAVEN HARBOR 
SAMPLING STATIONS 



LONG ISLAND SOUND 



Figure 1-1. New Haven Harbor location map. New Haven Harbor 
Ecological Studies Summary Report, 1979. 



1-5 



The harbor channel, which varies in width from 400 ft to 800 
ft and is 35-ft deep at mean low water, follows the eastern shore of the 
estuary where the naturally deepest water occurs. A large shoal area 
that is exposed or barely covered at low tide is located between Sandy 
Point and City Point on the west side of the harbor. The only shoal 
areas along the east side of the harbor are located southwest of the New 
Haven Harbor Station site, between the site and the harbor channel. 

North of the Tomlinson Bridge, the harbor channel continues up 
the Quinnipiac River as far as Grand Avenue in a 200-ft wide by 16-ft 
deep section and up the Mill River in a channel that is 200-ft wide and 
12-ft deep to the confluence of the East and West forks of the Mill River. 
Opposite the Harbor Station site, a 100-ft wide by 12-ft deep navigation 
channel diverges from the main harbor channel and proceeds up the West 
River to the Kimberly Avenue Bridge and thence 600 ft upstream in a 
section which is 75-ft wide by 9-ft deep. 

Freshwater is fed into the harbor by the Quinnipiac, Mill and 
West Rivers which drain 164, 40 and 37 square miles, respectively. The 
mean annual runoff entering the estuary from these rivers is about 435 
cfs, and the minimum annual runoff about 215 cfs. 

Two tide gauges were maintained in New Haven Harbor by The 
National Oceanic Survey (National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Admini- 
stration) : one at Southwest Ledge Light, which is located at the eastern 
edge of the harbor entrance channel, and one within the harbor at Long 
Wharf. The mean tidal range is 6.2 ft at the harbor entrance and 6.3 ft 
within the harbor. The minimum tidal range is about 4.9 ft. 

The tidal prism (water entering and leaving the harbor meas- 

9 
ured from mean low water to mean high water) is about 1.9 x 10 cu ft. 

9 
The volume of the harbor is about 4.4 x 10 cu ft at mean sea level. 

Consequently, the volume of water entering the harbor over the approxi- 
mate six-hour period from mean low water to mean high water or the 
volume leaving over the six-hour period from mean high water to mean low 
water is equivalent to 43 percent of the harbor volume at mean sea 



1-6 



level (EBASCO, 1971a) . Averaged over the tidal cycle, the water enter- 
ing and leaving the harbor flows at a rate of about 88,000 cfs; this is 
140 times the 625 cfs Harbor Station cooling-water flow. 

Two tidal current gauges were also maintained in the harbor by 
The National Oceanic Survey: one in the harbor entrance channel and the 
other at the Tomlinson Bridge. In the estuary channel inside the break- 
waters the average current is approximately 0.4 knot or 0.68 fps. 

The bedrock underlying the harbor area is probably a sedi- 

J 

mentary deposit of Triassic age and consists solely of Arkosic sand- 
stones. No shale or conglomerate has been observed in cores sampled in 
New Haven Harbor. New Haven Harbor is now a tidal estuary in which 
recent silts and sands are being deposited. Modified glacial soils 
deposited by running and quiet waters fill in the depressed regions 
resulting from glaciation; some soft organic silt containing fragments 
of shells occur above the glacial deposits. 



Meteorology 

Connecticut lies in a transition zone of westerly air currents 
that encompass the southward movement of dry polar air masses and the 
northern movement of moist tropical air masses . It is within this tran- 
sition zone that storm centers form and move. 

Superimposed on these large-scale effects are those created by 
New Haven's proximity to Long Island Sound. During the warmer months 
when air temperatures exceed those of the water, a sea breeze is likely 
to occur which tends to reinforce normal wind flow from the south or 
southwest during this season of the year. Such sea breezes occur only 
when the pressure gradient is weak along Long Island Sound. This marine 
environment moderates the climate of New Haven by producing cooler 
summers and warmer winters in comparison with those in inland areas. In 
addition, the low- level air mass wind speeds are increased by the sea 
breeze in spring and summer. 



1-7 



Wind-speed and direction instrumentation were in operation at 
Tweed New Haven Airport through 1969, although data were not recorded 
for full 24-hour periods. Continuous wind speed and direction readings 
are also obtained by The United Illuminating Company at the English 
Station, but the exposure of the instrument is poor for west to north- 
west winds. Comparison of concurrent New Haven data from the meteorolo- 
gical tower at New Haven Harbor Station and Bridgeport data indicated 
good agreement, and therefore, 10 years of continuous wind speed and 
direction data from Bridgeport were used to describe patterns of wind 
speed and direction after the meteorological station closed at Tweed New 
Haven Airport. Winter wind patterns showed strong flow from the north- 
west, characteristic of a post-frontal situation. The summer pattern 
showed the characteristic southwesterly flow that may be reinforced by 
the sea breeze. 

Patterns of precipitation and temperature are presented in 
detail in Section 3.0; in general south-central Connecticut annually 
experiences about 45 inches of precipitation and has an annual mean 
temperature of approximately 50 °F. 

Extremes of meteorological conditions in the harbor area, such 
as extended drought or heavy precipitation, storm winds (hurricanes) or 
extremes of temperature are reflected in the harbor waters as salinity, 
wave, turbidity, and temperature effects. These effects were considered 
as they directly alter the harbor's hydrography and secondarily as they 
may have affected the biota. Specific occurrences are considered within 
individual discussion sections. 



Harbor Usage 

New Haven Harbor is visibly modified by its roles in commerce. 
The harbor waters serve as a reservoir for cooling water for several 
industrial and power-generating facilities, and a disposal ground for 
municipal and industrial wastes. Because the harbor serves as a major 
port (USACE, 1973a), it is subject to chronic, low level and occasional 
major oil spills, as well as impacts associated with maintenance dredging. 



1-8 



The waters of inner New Haven Harbor are classified as unacceptable by 
Connecticut Water Quality Standards with projected improvement by 1983 
(Connecticxit DEP, 1978) . Discharges into the harbor include primary 
treated sewage from the East Street and Boulevard Treatment Facilities, 
and industrial effluents (NAI, 1975). 



New Haven Harbor Station 

The New Haven Harbor Station site is located in New Haven, 
Connecticut, on the eastern shore of New Haven Harbor about 4 miles 
above the estuary mouth (Figure 1-1) . The site is situated on partially 
filled ground and lies about 8.4 ft above mean sea level. It is bounded 
on the south by East Shore Park and the expanded sewage treatment plant, 
on the east by the East Shore Parkway and the East Shore Sewage Treatment 
Plant; on the north by an oil tank farm and oil tanker unloading facilities; 
and on the west by New Haven Harbor. Approximately 1000 ft of shallow 
water separates the site from the New Haven Harbor channel. The channel 
is 800-ft wide and 35-ft deep at mean low water at this point. 

The station is an oil-fired unit which commenced commercial 
operation on August 29, 1975. It is a nominal 400 Mw unit, and is 
capable of producing a maximum gross output of 460 Mw with a net station 
output of approximately 445 Mw. Actual operating data as daily average 
kilowatts per hour are presented in Figure 1-2 . 

A plot plan of the plant is shown in Figure 1-3. About 60 
acres of land are enclosed between the existing riprap shoreline and the 
plant property lines to the east. The boiler, turbine generator, con- 
trol room and administration building are in the southwest corner of the 
property while the fuel oil storage tanks are on the southeast corner. 
The circulating water intake channel extends from the center of the 
property at the existing riprap shoreline to the eastern edge of the 
navigation channel, and the subaqueous discharge pipeline is located 
just south of the existing oil unloading dock and extends 700 ft off- 
shore from the riprap shoreline, terminating 300 ft east of the channel. 



1-9 




SEPTEMBER I OCTOBER I NOVEMBER 

1975 



DECEMBER 



«C UJ 




JANUARY I FEBRUARY I MARCH I APRIL T MAY I JUNE 

1976 




JULY AUGUST I SEPTEMBER I OCTOBER NOVEMBER I DECEMBER 

1976 




tIKUST I SEPTEWES 

1977, 



Figure 1-2. Average hourly gross electrical generation (in MW) plotted 
by day for New Haven Harbor Station, 1975 through 1977. 
New Haven Harbor Ecological Studies Summary Report, 1979. 



I-IO 



EAsi smiRE ?mM\ .^ - ------ 




'^^'.'>"^ 



DISCHARGE 
;'"\ (35' DEPTH) 



EASTERLY EDGE OF 800' WIDE CHANNEL-38' DEEP 



- DISCHARGE 
BASIN 



Figure 1-3. Plot plan of New Haven Harbor Station generating plant. New 
Haven Harbor Ecological Studies Summary Report, 1979. 



1-11 



The Harbor Station burns #6 fuel oil. This oil's high visco- 
sity would reduce seepage into the soil in the event of a spill. The 
unloading pier is equipped with an oil boom, and a comprehensive oil 
spill contingency plan has been prepared. 



Coolinq Water 



When operated at 100 percent load (gross rating) , 625 cubic 

3 
feet per second (cfs) (17.7 m per second) of cooling water is pumped 

from the harbor through the plant to remove some 2100 x 10 BTU/hr (529 
Kcal/hr) of waste heat from the condenser. In the process of removing 
this waste heat the temperature of the cooling water is raised approx- 
imately 15 F (8.3 C) . 



The cooling water for the unit's condenser is taken from and 
discharged into New Haven Harbor. The locations of the intake channel, 
intake structure, and discharge pipe are shown in Figure 1-3. The 
intake channel extends from the shoreline to the eastern edge of the 
harbor channel, a distance of about 900 ft. The cooling water is with- 
drawn from the intake channel via a reinforced concrete intake structure 
located at the existing riprap shoreline. The unidirectional flow of 
water into the intake results in accumulation of fish and debris on 
screens over the intake. The Federal Water Pollution Control Act 
Amendments of 1972 requires under Provision 316b that "the location, 
design, construction and capacity of cooling water intake structures 
reflect the best available technology for minimizing adverse environ- 
mental impact." To help prevent the entrapment and impingement of fish, 
the structure was designed so that the approach velocity in the structure 
prior to the traveling water screens is less than 1.0 ft per second 
(fps) (30.5 cm per second). In addition, the structure includes a "fish 
lip" or vertical wall 6 ft high in front of all openings to the coarse 
bar racks. This fish lip was designed to minimize entrapment and 
impingement of demersal fish. Details of the intake structure design 
are presented in Figure 1-4. 



1-12 



From the intake structure the cooling water is pumped through 
the condenser, heated 15 F and then discharged to New Haven Harbor 
through a 9-ft diameter subaqueous pipeline, terminating at a point 
approximately 700 ft offshore (Figure 1-3) . The cooling water is dis- 
charged at a depth approximately 35 ft below mean low water level. 
Design velocity in the pipeline and at the point of discharge is about 
10 fps (305 cm per second) . The purpose of discharging the cooling 
water subaqueously is to promote rapid mixing with harbor water, and 
this results in a minimized temperature increase at the surface. 



Dvai-nacie and Sanitary Wastes 

The surface-water drainage system for the property empties 
into New Haven Harbor. Rainwater runoff accompanied by soil, pebbles, 
some dust and possibly leaves (natural runoff matter) is conveyed to the 
harbor through this system. The roof drains and surface drains are 
directed to the surface water drainage system. 

Chemical wastes including boiler blowdown from the plant are 
collected, treated and released to a percolating lagoon where the water 
ultimately enters the groundwater table; unconcentrated solids are 
retained in the collection lagoons for disposal. 

No biocides are used to control fouling organisms in the 
circulating water system; mechanical cleaning is used when necessary. 

Trash and sanitary sewage disposals are routed to the New 
Haven city facilities. Trash collected from the traveling water screens 
and trash racks at the circulating water intake is transported in con- 
tainers to the city dump. Sewage is treated at the East Shore Sewage 
Treatment Plant of the City of New Haven. 



1-13 



tD l/l 


rp= 






















^6 




<-> 3 




1 

f 




g 


.l=.r 










3 - 








— 1 O 




■ 




SL ■ 




00 


• • 


O 




• 


to 


1- 




Ll_ 


•^ 


< • 




• 


00 


_1 




o 


< 


• LU 






CO 


_l 




LTV 




LU II 




CNI 


C3 


> 




VD 


Z 


_l 






— 


-HL LU 




II 


M 


O > 






— 


< LU 




LU 


oo 


O —1 




2- 




DC 




::d 


z 


Q- < 




_i 


LU 


Q. LU 




o 


UJ 


< OO 




> 


QC 








<_) 


• Z 




:2 


00 


I/O < 




o 




• LU 




_i 


CJ 


Q- z: 




Ll. 


-z. 










U- 1 




z 


_1 






o 


LU 


o s: 




— 


> 


• ^ 




oo 


< 


— h- 




LU 


OL 


vg 




O 


1- 


00 








LU 


• 


• 


• 


1- 


, — 


CM 


cr\ 


o 








z 










UJ 
UJ 



UJ 

_l 
< 
o 



(U 




s- 




3 




+J 




u 




3 




S- 




4-> 




10 




(1) 


. 


.1^ 


C3^ 


fO 


r-~. 


+-> 


CTl 


E 


I — 


• r— 






« 


s- 


+-> 


0) 


s- 


4-> 


o 


(O 


CL 


•5 


0) 




q; 


ai 




c 


>> 


•^ 


s- 


+j 


na 


(0 


E 


r— 


F 


3 


3 


O 


00 


S- 




•r— 


(O 


■o 


O) 




•r— 


c 


T3 


o 


-1 


•I— 


+-> 


4J {T) 


« 




+J 


^~ 


C/0 


fO 




U 


s- 


•r- 


o 


cn 


XI 


o 


s- 


^— 


ra 


o 


DI 


o 




UJ 


c 




<u 


s- 


> 


o 


<0 J3 


DC 


%~ 




<a 


so: 


<u 




z: 


c 




0) 


M- 


> 


O 


la 




3r 


c 




(O 


5 


r— 


(U 


a. 


z 



OJ 



cn 



ONiwnnoa.- , 

SN33!i:s »3imi 
Sdwnd Hsvn H33iiDs J aaivH 3iin3Ami | 



1-14 



Siting and Related Studies 

Earliest serious consideration of the New Haven Harbor envi- 
rons as a site for a potential electric generating station was begun by 
Northeast Utilities Company in the mid-1960 ' s ; and evaluation of pos- 
sible sites adjacent to the harbor from an environmental standpoint was 
made in 1957 (TRC, 1967) . The United Illuminating Company pursued this 
possibility further, and in 1970, environmental and design engineering 
studies were begun for a 400-MW, oil-fired generating station proposed 
for the present site; this area, then owned by UI , was formerly the 
Connecticut Coke Company. 

Environmental studies commenced with studies of the harbor's 
macroalgae communities (Prince and Melville, 1970) and plankton surveys 
(Raytheon, 1970) . These early studies led to a multidisciplinary base- 
line study executed from June 1970 through April 1971 (Raytheon, 1971a, 
1971b, 1971c) . Data from these studies were used for the preparation of 
an Environmental Report (EBASCO, 1971b) and were incorporated into the 
Draft Environmental Statement (Army Corps of Engineers, 1971) which 
served as a basis for subsequent environmental monitoring studies. The 
DES was duly circulated to interested citizens, citizens' groups and 
agencies for comments, which were received and responded to, and the 
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers released a Final Environmental Statement in 
compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1972 on June 
15, 1973 (Army Corps of Engineers, 1973b). 

Studies to determine the hydrodynamic characteristics of the 
harbor and to model the proposed discharge of condenser cooling water 
were conducted by Ebasco Services in 1970 and 1971. Results of these 
studies and model studies (University of Florida, 1972) confirmed the 
feasibility of utilizing once-through cooling in the proposed generating 
station, and provided design specifications for the discharge structure. 

Niimerous studies were conducted for UI on anticipated and 
realized impacts of construction of New Haven Harbor Station facilities. 



1-15 



Anticipation of dredging requirtiments for construction of the intake; and 
discharge structures resulted in the following studies: analyses of 
sediments to be dredged (NAT, 1971, 1972); alternatives for dredge spoil 
disposal (NAI, 1972; Gordon, Rhoads and Turekian, 1972); impacts of 
dredging (Gordon, 1973a) ; and impacts of dredge spoil disposal in Long 
Island Sound (Gordon, 1973b; Pratt and O'Connor, 1973; Rhoads, 1972a, 
1973b) . 

During New Haven Harbor Station construction, observed seagull 
mortality at the construction site led to a brief pathological study 
which concluded that the deaths were due to Aspergillosis, a contagious 
fungal disease of birds. It was concluded that this disease was in no 
way related to construction activities (NAI, 1974a) . 

After New Haven Harbor Station construction was completed, 
further dredging-related studies were conducted to assess the impacts of 
construction of transmission lines from New Haven Harbor Station to 
English Station. Assessed impacts included dredging, benthic habitat 
removal, and land disposal in East Shore Park (NAI, 1975a, 1975b) . 

Five studies were also conducted after operations commenced in 
1975 with objectives of describing and evaluating actual or potential 
plant impacts. A study of current velocities around the intake struc- 
ture (with various combinations of the three cooling water pumps in 
operation) was conducted in order to evaluate whether operation met 
design specifications (NAI, 1973). A three-dimensional thermal survey 
and aerial infrared imagery described the thermal characteristics of the 
harbor during New Haven Harbor Station operations and delineated the 
discharge plume in a limited fashion (NAI, 1976a) . Later, NAI (1977a) 
completed a series of thermal and dye studies to more precisely describe 
the plume. An assessment of the thermal toxicity of the discharge to 
representative New Haven species was presented in a literature review 
(NAI, 1976b) . When biofouling of the condenser tubes became an oper- 
ational problem in 1976, NAI (1976c) studied the identity and composi- 
tion of the fouling bacteria and assessed the viability of treatment 
with biocides to solve the problem. 



1-16 



Monitoring Studies Program 

Comi.irehcnsive environmental monitoriiuj studii's, tho main 
suljji^ct of this rc|»ort, were commenced in May l'//() cuid L:ont; inucd l.liroiujli 
October 1977 in New Haven Harbor. The monitoring program was designed 
to evaluate the effect of United Illuminating ' s New Haven Harbor Station 
on the water quality and biota of the Harbor. 

In broad terms, the objective of the monitoring program was to 
provide a basis for evaluating whether or not the plant was adversely 
impacting the New Haven Harbor environment. Certain provisions of the 
NPDES "Permit to Discharge" issued in October 1973 specifically addressed 
environmental matters that were directly relevant to the monitoring 
program design: 

1. No effluent may be acutely toxic to any indigenous spe- 
cies in New Haven Harbor (Special Conditions [General] 
[4]),- 

2. The discharge shall not interfere with the spawning of 
fish or invertebrates (Special Conditions [Specific] (1) 

g); 

3. The discharge shall not alter the balanced indigenous 
population of New Haven Harbor or its tributary waters 

(Special Conditions [Specific] (1) h) ; 

4. The thermal plume shall not block zones of fish passage 
(Special Conditions [Specific] (1) i) ; and, 

5. The thermal plume shall have minimal contact with the 
surrounding shoreline (Special Conditions [Specific] (1) 
J). 

These conditions have all been taken into account through 
direct studies of the thermal plume, through the detailed monitoring 
program, or through theoretical considerations. 



1-17 



The primary direct discharge from the plant into harbor waters 
is the cooling-system water to which plant operation adds its waste 
heat; no other toxic element is contributed by the station. The waste 
heat is not anticipated to impact harbor biota directly, based on a 
consideration of known temperature tolerances for 14 selected repre- 
sentative species of fishes and invertebrates. This conclusion is 
qualified by maintenance of water temperatures within the imposed 
discharge temperature limitations of AT 15°F and a 90°F maximum (NAI, 
1976) . 

The permit conditions related to blockage of "zones of pas- 
sage" and "contact with the surrounding shoreline" are satisfied by the 
thermal plume description studies including the 1976 infrared overflight 
and 1977 dye and thermal surveys. 

The answers to the question as to whether or not there has 
been interference with spawning and alteration of the "balanced indi- 
genous population of New Haven Harbor or its tributary waters" has been 
a basic consideration of the ecological monitoring program. Guidance 
with regard to these concerns was provided by the US EPA (1977b) . 
Specifically, EPA (1977b) stated: 



Any significant change in standing crop may 
indicate an adverse impact resulting from the heated 
discharge, and any appreciable alteration in the com- 
position and relative abundance . . . constitutes an 
imbalance in the community and indicates possible 
adverse impact. 



Though the New Haven Harbor Station Ecological Monitoring 
Studies program was designed prior to this specific EPA statement, the 
program design quite clearly reflects these considerations. The program 
objectives were to establish baselines of patterns in ecological param- 
eters so that possible deviations could be identified after the plant 
commenced operation. Impacts, adverse, non-important or beneficial, 
were to be sought in changes of composition, relative abundances and 
spatial and temporal distributions. 



1-18 



The monitoring program for operational impacts in New Haven 
Harbor is based on a series of facts and assumptions that are important 
to understanding the approach utilized for the analysis of impacts in 
this report: 

1. The harbor has an apparent (though untested) high ex- 
change rate with Long Island Sound. This is deduced from 
the large tidal prism (43% of harbor volume at MSL) , and 
the general LIS net flow pattern past the harbor mouth 
(EBASCO, 1971) . 

2. The cooling water flow of New Haven Harbor Station is 
only 0.7% of the average tidal flow rate. 

These two facts are the basis for the assumption that even 
under the worst conditions of total mortality of entrained organisms, 
exchange with Long Island Sound waters and associated plankton popu- 
lations would override any potential plant-operationally induced 
reduction in population abundances. 

Study of plankton populations was geared toward detection of 
any shifts in dominance or abundance levels, particularly by consider- 
ation of spatial differences. Sampling was performed throughout the 
harbor. The generating station impact on plankton populations was 
considered to be within acceptable limits provided that species compo- 
sition, abundance levels and the relationship of species distribution 
between stations remained similar throughout preoperational and operational 
periods. Any observed qualitative changes would need to be examined in 
detail, their potential ecological importance considered, as well as 
their spatial extent and longevity. 

"Analysis of Impacts" in each section of this report provides 
a comprehensive description of mechanisms of potential impact, considers 
the potential of available data to evaluate the impacts, and proceeds to 
examine the data for plant effects. Where possible changes in standing 



1-19 



crop, composition or relative abundance (EPA, 1977b) , or in harbor util- 
ization patterns are observed, extent of changes, limitations on the 
analytical methods and implications of the impacts are discussed in 
detail. 

The discharge from the plant cooling system was designed for 
rapid mixing of the heated effluent with harbor waters. Maximum obser- 
vable temperature increase predicted by the University of Florida physical 
model (University of Florida, 1972) when the buoyant plume intersected 
the surface was small 2.2°C (4°F) . Further, since the plume discharges 
at the edge of the shipping channel, an area characterized by strong 
surface currents, little buildup of heated waters was anticipated; thus, 
the plume would be difficult for any fish to "follow". This discharge 
was also expected to minimize the likelihood of any problem with cold 
shock of fish or epibenthic invertebrates whose presence depended on the 
elevated temperature of the thermal plume. Plume entrainment of plank- 
tonic organisms was also expected to have negligible impact because 
there would be a minimal temperature elevation of short duration. 
Similarly, contact of the thermal plume with any shoreline or benthic 
habitat was expected to be minimal if it occurred at all. If the plume 
should impinge upon the shoreline, temperature elevations were expected 
to be low and duration brief. 

Sample stations utilized for the studies are shown in Figure 
1-1. Sampling frequencies, stations, and techniques for both the bio- 
logical and water quality parameters are summarized in Table 1-1. Phys- 
ical-chemical water-quality parameters were monitored on a monthly basis 
at 17 stations. Those parameters measured were depth-related tempera- 
ture, salinity, dissolved oxygen, hydrogen ion concentration (pH) , and 
water transparency. Eight biological programs were conducted in con- 
junction with the water-quality sampling. Sampling frequency, number of 
stations, and station locations varied with each parameter for the 
biological program. Monthly year-round sampling was established to 
monitor chlorophyll a, phytoplankton, zooplankton, ichthyoplankton, 
exposure panel biota, oyster growth, avian composition, and finfish 



1-20 



TABLE 1-1. SUMMARY OF SAMPLING REGIME FOR NEW HAVEN HARBOR STATION 
ECOLOGICAL STUDIES AS IT EXISTED IN OCTOBER, 1977. NEW 
HAVEN HARBOR ECOLOGICAL STUDIES SUMMARY REPORT, 1979. 



PROGRAM 


SAMPLING 
TECHNIQUE 


MONTHS 
JASON DJFMAMJ 


STATIONS 


iEPLICATES 


DEPTHS 


TIDES 


Physical/ 
Chemical 


As 
required 


xxxxxxxxxxxx 


1,2,3,4,5,6,8, 
9,11,12,13,15, 
15,18,19,20,22 


None 


Surf, to bottom 

1 meter 

increments 


Ebb, 
Flood 


Chlorophyll a 


1 liter 
bottle 


xxxxxxxxxxxx 


2,3,6,8,11,18,20 


None 


Surface 


Ebb, 
Flood 


Phytoplankton 


250 ml 
bottle 


xxxxxxxxxxxx 


2,3,6,8,11,18,20 


None 


Surface 


Ebb, 
Flood 


Zooplankton 


1/2 meter 

#10 mesh 

net 


xxxxxxxxxxxx 


3,6,8,11,18,20 


None 


Near surface 
near bottom 


Ebb, 
Flood 


Ichthyoplankton 


1 meter 
.505mm 
mesh net 


xxxxxxxxxxxx 


3,6,8,11,18,20 


None 


Oblique 
surface-bottom 


Ebb, 
Flood 


Gill Nets 


150' 

variable 

mesh 


xxxxxxxxxxxx 


8a, 8, 13,19 


None 


Near 
Bottom 




Shore-Zone 
Seining 


100' 
bag seine 


XXXXX XXX 


Sandy Point, Long 
Wharf, Harbor Sta- 
tion, Morris Cove 


None 






Otter Trawls 


25' Otter 


xxxxxxxxxxxx 


5,8,11,13,19,22 


Duplicate 






Exposure Panels 


Wood/ 

asbestos 

Panels 


XXXXXXXXXXXX 


Harbor Station, 
Long Wharf, Fort 
Hale 


None 


Near 
Surface 




Bird Observations 


Visual 
Obser- 
vations 


xxxxxxxxxxxx 


Areas 1,2,3,4,5 


None 






Subtidal 
Benthos 


Ponar 
Grab 


XX XX 


3,5,6,8,11,13 


Five 






Intertidal Fauna 
and Flora 


l/16m^ 
cofferdam 


X X 


Long Wharf, Harbor 
Station Pier areas 
Sandy Point 


Duplicate 


mid tide, 
low tide 
lines 




Oyster Growth 


Oyster 
Cages 


XXXXXXXXXXXX 


Fort Hale, Harbor 
Station Pier areas 


None 






Oyster Condition 
Index 


Oyster 
Cages 


X X 


Harbor Station 
Pier, Fort Hale 


As indi- 
cated 







1-21 



populations (gill net, trav/1) . Shore-zone fish seining was conducted 
monthly with exception of the winter months. Sample scheduling for the 
remaining programs, intertidal fauna and flora, benthic infauna, and 
determination of the oyster condition index was designed to assess 
seasonal changes in the biota. 

As stated above, the objectives of this report are to describe 
the ecology of New Haven Harbor, and to identify and evaluate possible 
impacts of the plant operations on the harbor ecosystem. The intention 
is to produce a thorough and synthesized "description" which could serve 
as a foundation for consideration of environmental impacts and, secondly, 
to provide a useful basis for comparison by other researchers with other 
estuaries and harbors or with New Haven Harbor in future studies. Prior 
to this report there was no comprehensive body of ecological information 
on New Haven Harbor. Short-term studies that generally rely on monthly 
or seasonal sampling efforts have a probability of missing some major 
short-lived occurrences in either physical or biological parameters. On 
the other hand, the New Haven Harbor Ecological studies, which relied on 
monthly data-acquisition over all seasons for seven consecutive years 
provides an excellent base for characterizing environmental conditions 
in New Haven Harbor. 



1-22 



LITERATURE CITED -- INTRODUCTION 



Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection. 1978. Connecticut 
water quality standards and classifications. 89 pp. 

EBASCO. 1971a. Coke Works Generating Plant effect of heated cooling 

water discharge on the temperature distribution of New Haven Harbor. 
Prepared for United Illuminating Co., New Haven, Connecticut. 19 pp. 

EBASCO. 1971b. Environmental report: Coke Works Site, June 1971. 

Prepared for United Illuminating Company, New Haven, Connecticut. 
10 sections. 

Environmental Protection Agency. 1977. Federal Register. 

Gordon, R. B. 1973. Turbidity due to dredge operations at the Coke 

Works Site, New Haven Harbor, Connecticut: Initial Study Results. 
Prepared for United Illiominating Company, New Haven, Connecticut. 

Gordon, R. B. , D. Rhoads and K. K. Turekian. 1972. The environmental 

consequences of dredge spoil disposal in central Long Island Sound: 
I. The New Haven Spoil Ground and New Haven Harbor. Report to the 
New England Division, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, October 1972. 

Merriman, D. and L. M. Thorpe (eds.). 1975. The Connecticut River 

Ecological Study. The impact of a nuclear power plant. Am. Fish. 
Soc. , Monogr. No. 1. 252 pp. 

Normandeau Associates, Inc. 1971. Ecological considerations of the 

Coke Works Site, New Haven Harbor, Connecticut. Prepared for the 
United Illuminating Company, New Haven, Connecticut. 64 pp. 

. 19721 Addendum 12 of environmental report: Coke Works 



Site, June 1971. Marine Sediments, New Haven Harbor, Connecticut. 
Results of analyses and proposals for dredge spoil disposal. Pre- 
pared for United Illuminating Company, New Haven, Connecticut. 
134 pp. 

. 1973a. New Haven Ecological Studies, New Haven, Connecticut. 



Annual Report, 1971-1972 for the United Illuminating Company, New 
Haven, Connecticut. 208 pp. 

. 1974. Supplemental research on the effects of thermal dis- 



charge from the English Generating Station on the ecology of Grand 
Avenue Reach, New Haven Harbor, Connecticut. Prepared for the United 
Illuminating Company, New Haven, Connecticut. 120 pp. 

. 1975a. New Haven Harbor Station Ecological Monitoring 



Studies, New Haven Harbor, Connecticut. Annual Report 1974 for 
the United Illuminating Company, New Haven, Connecticut. 223 pp. 



1-23 



1975b. Ecological studies conducted at selected sites 



in New Haven Harbor, Connecticut. Prepared for the City of New 
Haven, Connecticut. 115 pp. 

• 1975c. Potential effects of the October 1974 oil spill 



on New Haven Harbor Ecology. Prepared for the United Illuminating 
Company, New Haven, Connecticut. 35 pp. 

. 1976a. New Haven Harbor Thermal Regime during operation of 



the New Haven Harbor Station, September 1975. Prepared for the 
United Illuminating Company, New Haven, Connecticut. 31 pp. 

- 1976b. New Haven Harbor Station Ecological Monitoring 



Studies, 1976: Acute Toxicity Studies. Prepared for the United 
Illuminating Company, New Haven, Connecticut. 64 pp. 

• 1976c. New Haven Harbor Station Condenser Tube Fouling 



Study (draft). Prepared for the United Illiminating Company, New 
Haven, Connecticut. 12 pp. 

- 1977. Thermal surveys. New Haven Harbor, summer and fall. 



1976. Prepared for the United Illuminating Company, New Haven, 
Connecticut. 70 pp. 

Pratt, S. D. and T. P. O' Conner. 1973. Burial of dredge spoil in Long 

Island Sound. Prepared for Normandeau Associates, Inc. and submitted 
to United Illuminating Company, New Haven, Connecticut. 

Prince, J. S. and L. A. Melville. 1970. New Haven Report, Algal. June 
and August 1970. unpublished. 5 pp. 

Raytheon. 1970. New Haven Harbor Plankton Survey, April-May 1970. 

Prepared for United Illuminating Company, New Haven, Connecticut. 
49 pp. ' 

. 1971a. New Haven Ecological Survey Data Report, June- 



December 1970. Prepared for United Illuminating Company, New 
Haven, Connecticut. 179 pp. 

. 1971b. New Haven Harbor Ecological Survey, Data Report, 



December 1970-April 1971. Prepared for United Illuminating Company, 
New Haven, Connecticut. 11 sections. 

Rhoads, D. 1972a. The environmental consequences of dredge spoil 

disposal in central Long Island Sound: I. Benthic biology of the 
New Haven dump site. unpublished report to U.S. Army Corps of 
Engineers and the United Illuminating Company. 40 pp. 

. 1973b. The environmental consequences of dredge spoil dis- 



posal in central Long Island Sound. Ill: Benthic biology of the 
south central site, 1972. Prepared for United Illuminating Company. 

TRC Service Corporation. 1967. Preliminary site evaluation. Fort Hale, 
New Haven, Connecticut. Prepared for the Northeast Utilities Ser- 
vice Company, Berlin, Connecticut. 75 pp. 



1-24 



United States Army Corps of Engineers. 1971. Draft environmental 
statement: New Haven Harbor, Connecticut 

1973a. Final environmental statement: New Haven Harbor, 



Connecticut Maintenance Dredging. 171 pp and appendices. 

1973b. Environmental statement. Coke Works electric gene- 



rating plant. New Haven Harbor, Connecticut. 

University of Florida. 1972. Buoyant jet discharge model study for 

Coke Works power plant. New Haven Harbor, Connecticut. DCOE, FEIES, 
University of Florida. 



NEW HAVEN HARBOR 

ECOLOGICAL STUDIES 

SUMMARY REPORT, 1979 



2.0 LITERATURE OVERVIEW 

by C. Drew Harvell and Kenneth A. Simon 
Normandeau Associates, Inc. 
Bedford, N. H. 



TABLE OF CONTENTS 

PAGE 

WATER QUALITY AND HYDROGRAPHY 2-2 

PLANKTON 2-4 

FINFISH 2-5 

AVIFAUNA 2-7 

BENTHOS 2-7 

BIBLIOGRAPHY 2-11 



2.0 LITERATURE OVERVIEW 

by C. Drew Marvel 1 and Kenneth A. Simon 
Normandeau Associates, Inc. 
Bedford, N. H. 



This literature overview is intended to provide an intro- 
duction to the general and comparative literature available for New 
Haven Harbor and greater Long Island Sound. The review is not intended 
to be comprehensive; that function is left to the individual report 
sections. This material includes comparative information on historical 
and existing biotic and abiotic parameters in New Haven Harbor and 
greater Long Island Sound and is meant to aid in the evaluation of 
potential plant impact. The review is divided into five primary sec- 
tions dealing with water quality and hydrography, plankton, finfish, 
avifauna and benthos. Sources for much of this information include NAI 
data files, utility reports for generating stations, and records main- 
tained by private and governmental agencies. 

A substantial quantity of information is available concerning 
the general ecology of Long Island Sound and its shores as well as the 
ecology and habits of specific organisms common to New Haven Harbor and 
the Sound. The particular scope of this review encompasses the general 
ecology of central and western Long Island Sound and New Haven Harbor 
(Figure 1-1) . The emphasis rests on providing information from New 
Haven Harbor, comparable harbors on the north side of the Sound, other 
power plants, and Long Island Sound in general. Most studies reported 
herein were conducted during the past ten years, corresponding to the 
period of intensive baseline, preoperational and operational monitoring 
studies in New Haven. Studies conducted prior to this period are 
included when they provide direct historical comparison or were the only 
sources available. Further information on selected individual citations 
is presented as annotations in the accompanying bibliography. 



2-1 



2-2 



WATER QUALITY AND HYDROGRAPHY 

General water quality information, including dissolved oxyqen, 
salinity, pH, temperature and public-health related data (primarily 
total fecal coliform bacteria counts) is available from a number of 
studies. Data on nutrients and trace contaminants are more limited. 
Information on hydrographic characteristics is available from studies 
conducted both in New Haven Harbor and Long Island Sound. 

Data for New Haven Harbor are available from Duxbury (1964) , 
who provided seasonal information on nutrient concentrations and distri- 
butions and current regimes in the harbor. Beginning in 1968 the United 
States Geologic Survey Water Resources Division (U.S.G.S., 1968-1977) 
conducted a general water resources survey, providing data on a wide 
spectrum of water quality and chemical parameters involving several 
samplings per year from stations in the Quinnipiac and Mill Rivers and 
New Haven Harbor. A later study (1970, unpiiblished) conducted by the 
Federal Water Quality Administration provided measurements of dissolved 
oxygen and pH from inner and outer harbor locations. NAI (1971a, 1972, 
1973, 1974a, 1974b, 1975a, 1976a, 1977a, 1978) has provided a substan- 
tial water quality data base (temperature, dissolved oxygen, pH, salin- 
ity and turbidity) for the inner and outer harbor regions. Additional 
water temperature data are available from aerial infrared surveys (Good- 
kind & O'Day and Fay, Spofford, and Thorndike, 1970; NAI, 1971, 1977b) for 
determining effluent plume configurations and from thermal plxime base- 
line studies for the English Station (NAI, 1971) and New Haven Harbor 
Station (EBASCO, 1971b; NAI, 1976b) . The Goodkind harbor model was 
directed primarily toward modeling of dissolved oxygen and biological 
oxygen demands of various sewage treatment/outfall location schemes. 

Duxbury 's study on water circulation in New Haven Harbor has 
been the only major effort to utilize a full field measurement program. 
Duxbury 's general circulation patterns and current velocities have 
served as basic elements of nearly all subsequent hydrodynamic work in 
New Haven Harbor. These data were used in the circulation model of 



2-3 



Quirk, Lawler and Matusky (1969) and water quality model of Goodkind et 
al. (1970). Water quality models have been prepared for the harbor and 
Quinnipiac River as part of sewage treatment facility design and water 
management programs (Quirk, Lawler and Matusky, 1969; Goodkind et al . , 
1970; and Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection, 1977) . 
More recent work conducted for sewage outfall location studies (NAI, 
1975b) provided supplemental data on surface and near surface currents. 
At the present time, a new dynamic model of the harbor is being prepared 
based on new current and tide data (NAI, 1979, unpublished). 

Outside of New Haven Harbor, water quality data are more abun- 
dant for the central and western sections of Long Island Sound. The 
State University of New York (SUNY) Marine Science Research Center 
published data on seasonal fluctuations in dissolved oxygen and temp- 
erature (Hardy and Weyl, 1970, 1971) and nutrients (Hardy, 1972 and 
1972b) . The National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) from Sandy Hook, 
New Jersey, initiated an extensive environmental baseline study for the 
Sound in 1972; data have been collected since then, though only small 
amounts have been published. Infoirmation on chemistry, nutrients, and 
temperature is available in Reid, Frame, and Drexter (1976) , and further 
studies on nutrients and their distribution include a Sound-wide study 
by Bowman (1977). Monitoring programs at Stamford (NAI, 1974c), Bridge- 
port (NAI, 1973), Niantic Bay (Battelle, 1977, 1978), Shoreham, (NYOSL, 
1974) , Norwalk Harbor, Housatonic River at Devon, Connecticut River at 
Middletown and Thames Estuary at Montville (Lawler, Matusky and Skelly 
Engineers, 1975a, 1975b, 1975c and 1976) provide information on seasonal 
variation and water quality gradients from coastal areas throughout the 
Sound. Data are also available from a predictive model of water tempera- 
ture gradients in the Sound and the impact of power plant discharges 
(Stone and Webster, 1972) . In addition, temperature loss from surface 
waters of a thermal plume to the overlying air mass during calm and 
windy conditions was studied by Williams (1971) at Northport, New York. 



2-4 



Extensive studies of water mass movement and general water 
circulation in the Sound have been undertaken during the past 20 years. 
The majority of the early work was carried out from the Bingham Oceano- 
graphic Laboratory, Yale University; thus, Riley (1956, 1959) and Riley 
and Conover (1956) provided data concerning general circulation and 
hydrographic parameters for the Central Sound. More recent studies of 
circulation in the western and to a lesser degree central Sound have 
been conducted from SUNY by Hardy and Weyl (1970), Hardy (1972), and Jay 
and Bowman (1975) . 



PLANKTON 

Investigations of the plankton community generally include 
zoo-, phyto-, and ichthyoplankton populations. These populations form 
the base of the food chain and, because of their importance, have been 
widely studied in greater Long Island Sound. Data from New Haven Harbor 
are available from studies conducted by NAI for United Illuminating Co. 
(Raytheon, 1970a, 1971, and NAI, 1973, 1974a, 1974b, 1975a, 1976a, 
1977a, 1978a) . This information provides baseline preoperational and 
operational data on zooplankton, phytoplankton and ichthyoplankton 
populations in the harbor, and is the basis for this summary report. 

The earliest studies of greater Long Island Sound plankton 
were undertaken during the early to mid-1950' s. During this period, 
programs conducted through the Bingham Oceanographic Laboratory included 
studies of zooplankton (Deevey, 1956), ichthyoplankton (Richards, 1959) 
and phytoplankton (Conover, 1956, and Riley and Conover, 1967) . The 
greatest emphasis of these studies was placed on populations from the 
central region of the Sound. During the 1970 's extensive work was done 
on inshore and near- shore plankton populations in the central region of 
the Sound as part of power-plant baseline and monitoring programs . 
Thus, at Bridgeport a small-scale zooplankton sampling program was 
conducted as part of an operational monitoring program during summer and 
fall of 1971 (NAI, 1973b) . Sv±)stantial work has also been conducted for 



2-5 

the Long Island Lighting Company at Northport, Port Jefferson, Shoreham 
and Jamesport. Baseline and preoperational studies, conducted during 
1973 and 1974, included work on zooplankton at Shoreham (NYOSL, 1974) 
and ichthyoplankton studies at Shoreham (NYOSL, 1974) , Jfimesport 
(Austin, 1974b) and at Northport (Williams, 1971; Austin, Dickerson and 
Hickey, 1974). Baseline and preoperational phytoplankton data are avail- 
able from Jamesport (Nuzzi, 1975) and Shoreham (NYOSL, 1974) , respect- 
ively. Later ichthyoplankton studies were conducted at Port Jefferson, 
Northport and Glenwood (EEH, 1977a, b, c) . Data are also available for 
the tidal reaches of the Mill River (NAI, 1974e) . 

In the western region of the Sound the National Marine Fish- 
eries Service (1971, unpublished) conducted a small sampling program. 
Further studies in the western Sound include inshore programs at Stam- 
ford for ichthyo-, zoo-, and phytoplankton diversity (NAI, 1974c), 
general plankton populations in western Sound waters (NYOSL, 1974) , 
western Sound copepod populations (NYOSL, 1974) , and vertical distribu- 
tion of winter zooplankton populations (Caplan, 1976) . The Corps of 
Engineers also conducted an extensive study of planktonic populations in 
the immediate vicinity of the mid-Sound Eatons Neck dredge spoil dis- 
posal site (Caplan, 1977; Nuzzi, 1977) . 

In the eastern Sound, preoperational and operational plankton 
studies investigating seasonal distributions of zooplankton and phyto- 
plankton and diurnal studies on ichthyoplankton were conducted at 
Niantic Bay by Battelle (1977, 1978). 



FINFISH 

New Haven Harbor and Long Island Sound support an abundant and 
diverse ichthyofauna. Considerable information is available concerning 
habits, general distribution, and ecology of many of the species common 
to the Sound (Project Oceanology, 1977) . However, relatively little 
information is available concerning seasonal abundances and degree of 
utilization of New Haven and other Long Island Sound estuaries. 



2-6 



The only previous survey of shore-zone fishes in New Haven 
Harbor is provided by Warfel and Merriman (1944) , and that was confined 
to Morris Cove. No historical data are available on demersal and pela- 
gic species in the harbor. Recent data (including abundances, distri- 
bution, and size) on these populations in the harbor were collected as 
part of baseline and monitoring programs for the Harbor (Raytheon, 1970, 
1971; NAI, 1971a, 1973, 1974a, 1974b, 1974c, 1974e, 1975a, 1976a, 1977a, 
and 1978) . A fisheries study was conducted for the City of New Haven in 
the harbor (NAI, 1975b). 

Contemporaneous fisheries studies providing information on 
seasonal distributions and abundance were conducted at a number of sites 
in the Sound. Along the northern shore of the Sound, data are available 
from studies in Stamford and Bridgeport Harbors (NAI, 1974d and 1973b), 
Niantic Bay (Battelle, 1977) and New London (Department of the Navy, 
1977). Hillman et al . (1977) described shore-zone fishes at Niantic Bay 
and their lack of response to a thermal discharge. Along the south 

shore of the Sound, comprehensive studies were conducted at Shoreham and 
Northport power plant sites (NYOSL, 1973 and 1974; Zawacki and Briggs, 
1976; and Perlmutter, 1971). These programs are not comparable in 
terms of methods and equipment with those conducted on the north shore 
of the Sound, but they do illustrate general population trends in Long 
Island Sound. 

A number of programs evaluating impingement at power plants 
provide some information on community composition and seasonal trends in 
abundance. Data are available from the Thames Estuary (Montville Sta- 
tion) , Connecticut River (Middletown Station) , Housatonic River (Devon 
Station) and Norwalk Harbor (NUSCO, unpublished) ; Bridgeport and New 
Haven Harbor (UI unpublished); Niantic Bay (Millstone Point) (Battelle, 
1977, 1978); Northport, Port Jefferson, and Glenwoood, Long Island 
(Equitable Environmental Health, 1977) . 

General life-history information from the Sound includes 
studies on striped bass (Austin and Custer, 1977; Clark, 1968; Schaeffer 



2-7 



1972) , winter flounder (Jeffries and Johnson, 1974; McCracken, 1963; 
Pearcy, 1962) , summer flounder (Powell and Schwartz, 1977) , and studies 
on the general distribution of pelagic and demersal fishes in the Sound 
(Pearcy and Richards, 1962; Jensen, 1977; Alperin and Schaeffer, 1965; 
Richards, 1963) . 



AVIFAUNA 

The most comprehensive source of data describing bird life in 
New Haven Harbor is that generated by the New Haven Harbor Station 
baseline and monitoring programs (Raytheon, 1971; NAI , 1971a, 1973, 
1974a, 1974b, 1975a, 1976a, 1977a, and 1978a) . These data provide 
information on seasonal variation in species composition, abundance, and 
distribution in the harbor. Additional sources of information include 
the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service mid-winter waterfowl inventory (NAI, 
1971) , Christmas bird census and records of sightings of rare or unusual 
birds in the New Haven area (Conn. Audubon, 1977) . Sources of informa- 
tion on bird populations in the remainder of the Sound include the Fish 
and Wildlife mid-winter survey and Audubon Christmas bird count. The 
R.I. Dept. of Natural Resources, and Conn., R.I. and N.Y. Aud\ibon Soci- 
eties provide useful information as well. In addition to these data, 
the New York Department of Environmental Conservation collects mid- 
winter bird counts along the north and south shores of Long Island 
(N.Y.D.E.C, 1977). 



BENTHOS 

Included in studies of the benthos are s\ibtidal and intertidal 
infauna, epi fauna and flora, as well as exposure panel communities. 

In the central region, infaunal, epifaunal and floral surveys 
in New Haven were made in conjunction with United Illuminating' s New 
Haven Harbor Station. Surveys covering subtidal and intertidal flora 



2-8 



and fauna were conducted by Raytheon (1971) and NAI (1973, 1974a, 1974b, 
1975a, 1976a, 1977a, and 1978). During 1974, additional benthic and 
intertidal studies were conducted for the City of Now Haven (NAI , 
1975b). Cunningham (1972, unpublished) also conducted a year-long 
survey of the Long Wharf flats on the western side of New Haven Harbor. 

An assessment of dredge spoil disposal activities was under- 
taken at the New Haven dumping grounds for the Corps of Engineers by 
Rhoads (1972, 1973a, 1973b, 1973c, 1973d, 1973e, 1974a, 1974b, 1974c, 
1975; Rhoads, Allen and Goldhaber, 1975). During an investigation of 
the New Haven dumping grounds, Rhoads also conducted a survey of pre- 
and post-dredged benthic communities in the New Haven shipping channel 
(Rhoads, 1973a, 1973e, 1974b, 1974c) for the Corps of Engineers. 
Rhoads and Michael (1975, 1976, 1977, 1978) carried out seasonal in- 
vestigations of subtidal communities in New Haven's inner harbor region 
and Morris Cove in conjunction with the United Illuminating program. 
Other studies conducted at or in the vicinity of the New Haven dump site 
included assessment of recolonization of dredge spoil and community 
structure (Franz, 1976; McCall, 1977; Fisher and McCall, 1973). Epi- 
faunal data are also available from impingement records maintained by 
the United Illuminating Company. 

Benthic investigations in central Long Island Sound were first 
conducted by Sanders (1956) as part of the overall Bingham Oceanographic 
Laboratory survey on the oceanography of Long Island Sound. During the 
period between 1972 and 1975, the National Marine Fisheries Service 
conducted an environmental baseline study for the Sound. Benthic 
infauna were sampled at over 100 stations during the first year of the 
program, and sampling on a reduced scale continued through 1975. To 
date, benthic samples from the earlier years have been analyzed but no 
formal reports have been prepared. The National Marine Fisheries Ser- 
vice has provided us with unpublished data on the Sound epifaunal pop- 
ulations. 



2-9 



During the period between 1970 and 1974 additional power- 
plant monitoring and baseline benthic data from the central Sound are 
available from studies conducted on the north shore at Bridgeport, and 
at Northport and Shoreham on the south shore. Subtidal and intertidal 
infauna and epifauna surveys in Bridgeport Harbor were conducted during 
1971 and 1972 (NAI, 1973b) as part of an operational baseline program. 
Ernst (1970) and D'Agostino and Colgate (1973) provided data on the 
nearshore subtidal communities and potential impacts from plant oper- 
ation at Northport. Winter polychaete populations in areas in and out 
of the Northport thermal plume were investigated by Mulstray (1971) . 
Hechtel (1970) conducted intertidal studies during plant operation at 
Northport. D'Agostino and Serafy (1974) provided baseline data on s\ib- 
tidal infauna and epifauna at Shoreham during 1973 and 1974. 

In the western region of the Sound, baseline studies conducted 
at Stamford, Connecticut, for a proposed nuclear power plant provide 
infauna and epifauna data collected by techniques comparable to those 
used in New Haven (NAI, 1974c). Additional intertidal and shallow 
subtidal studies have been conducted in the vicinity of Stamford (Vil- 
lage Creek) to assess the impact of a minor fuel oil spill (NAI, 1974f) . 

In the eastern Sound inshore subtidal and intertidal studies 
were conducted at Niantic Bay for Northeast Utilities by Battelle (1977) 
and in the upper reaches of Niantic Bay for the City of New Haven (NAI, 
1975b) . Subtidal infaunal and epifaunal studies were also conducted at 
New London (Thames River) for a major dredging program (Department of 
the Navy, 1977, unpublished). 

Exposure panel surveys were less common than other benthic 
programs. Clapp (1937) conducted an early study of fouling along the 
New England coast and included stations in New Haven. Subsequent to 
Clapp 's work, exposure-panel data have been collected at New Haven and 
Niantic Bay from 1971 through the present (NAI, 1971, 1973a, 1974a, 
1974b, 1975a, 1976a, 1977a, 1978; Battelle, 1977). Sampling frequency 
and techniques at the two sites are comparable. Compatible data have 



2-10 



also been collected in Stamford Harbor (NAI, 1974d) during 1972 and 
1973. Exposure panels maintained in Bridgeport as part of the general 
baseline survey during 1972 were not comparable to those used in the 
other contemporaneous Sound studies; however, they do provide qualita- 
tive data on seasonal patterns of abundance and composition. Hillman 
(1973) used data from Stamford, Niantic Bay, and New Haven Harbor to 
examine environmental monitoring through the use of fouling panels and 
compared species richness in the three harbors. 

The annotated bibliography which follows contains all refer- 
ences described in this literature overview as well as selected abstracts , 
The latter were chosen on the basis of their comparability to New Haven 
Harbor. The abstracts briefly describe the body of information avail- 
able, the study location, and dates and sampling methods where appli- 
cable. 



2-11 



BIBLIOGRAPHY 



Alperin, I. M. and R. H. Schaeffer. 1965. Marine fishes new or uncom- 
mon to Long Island. New York Fish and Game Jour. 12:1-16. 



Amish, R. 1974. Preliminary assessment of the winter flounder, Pseudo- 
pleuronectes americanus population on Herod Point Shoal, Shoreham, 
Long Island with emphasis on reproduction. IN: Volume IV of the 
preoperational ecological monitoring program of the marine environs 
at LILCO Nuclear Power Generating Facility, Shoreham, Long Island, 
N.Y. 5 sections. 

Evaluated the utilization of Herod Point Shoal as a winter flounder 
spawning or nursery area through measurement of indirect parameters 
such as occurrence, gonadal development and larval abundance. 



Army Corps of Engineers. 1972. New Haven Harbor, Connecticut Maint- 
enance Dredging. 

Determined zinc, lead and copper content and chemical oxygen demand 
of dredge spoil. Alternatives for dredge spoil are discussed. 



1973a. Final environmental statement: New Haven Harbor, 



Connecticut Maintenance Dredging. 171 pp and appendices. 

A consideration of the suitability of the New Haven Dump Grounds as 
a regional dredge disposal site for central and western Long Island 
Sound . 



1973b. Environmental statement. Coke Works Electric Generating 



Plant, New Haven Harbor, Connecticut. 



Austin, H. , M. Dickinson and C. Hickey. 1973. An ecological study of 
the ichthyofauna at the Northport power station, Long Island, New 
York prepared for LILCO by the Fisheries Oceanography Department of 
the New York Ocean Science Laboratory (NYOSL) . 248 pp. 

Ichthyoplankton data presented biweekly as the number of eggs and 
larvae per unit volume from surface and bottom tows, and egg-size 
by species. Adult fish-impingement data were presented as biomass 
and summary of the number of individuals impinged. Fishes from 
trawls, gills and seines were sexed, weighed, measured (measures 
and ranges presented) , and stomach contents described. Fish results 
presented by species with information on distribution, brood habits 
and reproductive cycle. Zooplankton data included seasonal esti- 
mates of biomass along with species composition for copepods . 



2-12 



Austin, H. and O. Custer. 1974. Seasonal migration of striped bass in 
Long Island Sound as compiled from American Littoral Society tag 
returns. From a paper presented at Pish Tag Seminar, NYOSL, Mon- 
tauk, N.Y. Dec. 14:24-35. 



Austin, H.M., A. Sosnow and C. Hickey. 1974. The effects of tempera- 
ture on the development and survival of the eggs and larvae of the 
Atlantic silversides {Menidia menidia) . Section XI, Volume IV in 
Preoperational Ecological Monitoring Program at the Long Island 
Lighting Company, Shoreham, Long Island. 5 sections. 

The study simulated the thermal effects of entrainment in the 
condenser of an electric power generating station on Atlantic 
silverside larvae. 



Battelle Memorial Institute. 1973. Environmental monitoring program: 

service program marine ecology and biology. New Haven Harbor, Conn- 
ecticut, May-October 1971. Prepared for Northeast Utilities Ser- 
vice Company. 16 sections. 

This data report presents the results of monitoring programs simi- 
lar to those presently conducted. The general sampling regime and 
sample stations were the same. Notable difference from current 
data include less detailed identification, especially for phyto- 
plankton; fish eggs and larvae were not identified; and less intense 
waterfowl program. 



Battelle Columbus Laboratories. 1977. A monitoring program on the 

ecology of the marine environment of the Millstone Point, Connec- 
ticut area. Annual Report Ecological and Hydrographic Studies 
1976. Prepared for Northeast Utilities Service Company, Berlin, 
CT. 7 sections. 

Primarily a compilation of raw and synthesized data from all pro- 
grams conducted during 1976. Programs include: fouling, inter- 
tidal and subtidal benthos, zooplankton, ichthyoplankton, finfish, 
impingement, birds (osprey only), heavy metals, lobster and winter 
flounder population estimates and entrainment. Entrainment program 
section of report similar in scope and format to NAI programs 
(written by C. Fontneau) . Data for most programs include material 
for years prior to 1976. 



Battelle Colimibus Laboratories. 1978. A monitoring program on the 
ecology of the marine environment of the Millstone Point, Conn- 
ecticut area. Annual report of ecological and hydrographic studies, 
1977. prepared for Northeast Utilities Service Company, Berlin, 
CT. 9 sections. 



2-13 



Bowman, M.J. 1977. Nutrient distribution and transport in Long Island 
Sound. Estuarine Coast. Mar. Sci. 5:531-548. 



Caplan, R.I. 1976. Vertical distribution and reproduction of marine 
zooplankton. I: Winter patterns in Long Island Sound. 10 pp in 
preparation. 



1977. Aquatic disposal field investigations, Batons Neck, 



disposal site. Long Island Sound. Appendix E predisposal baseline 
conditions of zooplankton assemblages. Tech Rep. D-77-6. Army 
Corps of Engineers, WES, Vicksburg, MI. 104 pp. 



Clapp. 1937. Marine piling investigation prepared by the New England 
Committee on marine piling investigation. 249 pp. 

Information provided on fouling communities from 1934-1936 located 
on the northeast coast from northern Maine to Long Island Sound. 
Some tropical stations were included. 



Clark, J. 1968. Seasonal movements of striped bass contingents of Long 

Island Sound and the New York Bight. Trans. Am. Fish. Soc. 97(4) :320- 
343. 



Connecticut Audubon Society. 1977. Christmas Bird Census. 



Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection. Fish kill data for 
Connecticut Rivers and coastal waters, 1968 to present (1977) un- 
tabulated data. 



Conover, S.M. 1956. Oceanography of Long Island Sound, 1952-1954. IV: 
Phytoplankton . Bull. Bingham Oceanogr. Coll. 15:62-112. 



Custer, O. 1974. SCUBA observation. IN: Voliime IV, Section VIII of 
the Preoperational Ecological Monitoring Program of the Marine 
Environs at the Long Island Lighting Company (LILCO) Nuclear Power 
Generating Facility, Shoreham, Long Island, New York. 5 sections. 

SCUBA studies were designed to identify and quantify populations of 
fish, invertebrates and macroscopic algae on transects in and near 
offshore waters of Shoreham, Long Island. 



D'Agostino, A. and W. A. Colgate. 1973. Infaunal invertebrates in the 
near shore waters of Long Island Sound benthos of Northport. LILCO 
Tech. Rept. SR-72-22. 31 pp. 



2-14 



D'Agostino, A. and D. K. Serafy. 1974. Benthic invertebrates of the 
nearshore waters. IN^: Voliome IV of the Preoperational Ecological 
Monitoring Program of the Marine Environs at LILCO Nuclear Power 
Generating Facility, Shoreham, Long Island, New York. 5 sections. 

Study objectives were to obtain a quantitative seasonal census of 
benthic invertebrates from an area where an offshore thermal dis- 
charge was pro£:)osed and a control area. Additional objectives were 
to determine relative efficiencies of four benthic grab samplers 
and to determine if commercial quantities of lobsters, whelks and 
clams were present at Shoreham. 



Deevey, G. B. 1956. Oceanography of Long Island Sound, 1952-1954. V. 
Zooplankton. Bull. Bingham Oceanogr. Coll. 15:113-155. 



Department of the Navy. 1973. Environmental Impact Statement, New 
London, Conn. Volume 1. 215 pp and appended letters. 



Duxbury, A. C. 1964. A hydrographic survey of New Haven Harbor 1962- 
1963. Connecticut Water Resources Bull. No. 3A. 19 pp. 



EBASCO. 1970. New Haven Harbor Hydrographic Study Program. Prepared 
for United Illuminating Company, New Haven, Connecticut. 8 pp. 



1971a. Environmental Report: Coke Works Site, June 1971. 



Prepared for United Illuminating Company, New Haven, Connecticut. 
10 sections. 

Review of background data collected to date. Data cover meteor- 
ology, air quality, population statistics, terrestrial and aquatic 
fauna and flora, noise generation, aesthetics and potential bene- 
ficial and negative impacts of the station. 



1971b. 400 MW Coke Works generating plant effect of heated 



cooling water discharge on the temperature distribution of New 
Haven Harbor. Prepared for United Illuminating Company, New Haven, 
Connecticut. 19 pp. 

Description of New Haven Harbor thermal regime and evaluation of 
the effect of the Coke Works Station discharge on the temperature 
distribution of New Haven Harbor. General Harbor isotherms de- 
veloped and maximum seasonal temperatures projected. 



2-15 



Environmental Protection Agency, New York and Connecticut. 1975. 
People and the Sound, water management. Prepared for the New 
England River Basins Commission. 129 pp. 

The report outlined the existing water supply situation and water 
quality problems in Long Island Sound. Included a general dis- 
cussion of major sources of pollution in Long Island Sound. 



Equitable Environmental Health, Inc. 1977a. Port Jefferson Generating 
Station Final Aquatic Ecology Report. Prepared for Long Island 
Lighting Company, Hicksville, New York. 110 pp. 

Ichthyoplankton entrainment, fish and epibenthic faunal impingement 
and epibenthic fauna found in the thermal plume were examined at 
the Port Jefferson Generating Station. Monthly impingement and 
biweekly entrainment samples were supplemented by quarterly sam- 
pling in near- and far-field plume areas. Quarterly sampling 
included ichthyoplankton, trawls, crab pots, grabs, gill and trap 
nets along with other commercial collection techniques (rakes, 
tongs, etc.) designed to collect commercial species. 



. 1977b. Northport Generating Station, Final Aquatic Ecology 

Report. Prepared for Long Island Lighting Company, Hicksville, New 
York. 50 pp. 

Fish eggs and larval densities entrained in the plant cooling 
system were compared with those in catches from near field waters 
at the Northport, Long Island Generating Station. 



1977c. Glenwood Generating Station Final Aquatic Ecology 



Report. Prepared for Long Island Lighting Company, Hicksville, New 
York. 112 pp. 

Ichthyoplankton entrainment, fish and epibenthic faunal impingement 
and community composition were examined in near- and far-field 
stations in the thermal plume of the Glenwood Station. Quanti- 
tative sampling programs were as follows: biweekly entrainment, 
monthly impingement, and seasonal plume area studies (spring, sum- 
mer and fall) except benthos which was sampled a single time 
(fall) . Benthic sampling was directed toward evaluation of commer- 
cial species. 



Ernst, E.J. 1970. Biological effects of thermal effluents, Northport, 
New York. Part II: Flora and fauna of the jetty and deeper water 
areas. Mar. Sci. Res. Cent., Stonybrook. Tech. Rept. pp. 53-74. 



2-16 



Federal Water Quality Administration. 1970. New Haven Harbor shellfish 
resource and water quality. U.S. Dept. of Interior, Northeast 
Region, Needham Heights, Mass. 22 pp. 



Federal Power Commission Staff. 1975. People and the Sound, Power and 
the Environment prepared for the New England River Basins 
Commission. 129 pp. 

A program was devised for supplying an adequate and reliable source 
of electrical energy with a minimum of environmental and social 
disruption. 



Fisher, J. B. and P. L. McCall. 1973. The effect of environmental 
perturbations on benthic communities: an experiment in benthic 
recolonization and succession in Long Island Sound. Unpublished 
manuscript. Dept. Geology and Geophysics, Yale University. 33 pp. 



Franz, D. 1976. Benthic molluscan assemblages in relation to sediment 
gradients in Northeastern Long Island Sound, Connecticut. Mala- 
cologia. 15 (2) : 377-399. 



Goodkind & O'Day and Fay, Spofford, and Thorndike. 1970. Report upon 
tidal studies of New Haven Harbor. Book I: New Haven Thermal 
Imagery. Prepared for City of New Haven Department of Public 
Works. 19 pp. 

Delineation of surface thermal gradients of New Haven Harbor for 8 
July 1970. 



Goodkind & O'Day and Fay, Spofford, and Thorndike. 1970. Report upon 
tidal studies of New Haven Harbor. Book II: New Haven Thermal 
Imagery. Prepared for City of New Haven Department of Public 
Works. 12 pp. 

Delineation of surface thermal gradients of New Haven Harbor for 9 
July 1970. 



1970b. Report upon tidal studies of New Haven Harbor. 



Prepared for City of New Haven Department of Public Works. 19 pp. 

IR overflights showed tidal patterns and indicated that the inner 
harbor is large enough to produce adequate dilution of pollution 
loads. 



1970c. Summary and recommendations of reports upon facil- 



ities for secondary treatment of sewage and industrial wastewaters. 
Report No. 3. Prepared for City of New Haven Department of Public 
Works. 23 pp and appended data. 



2-17 



This study evaluated flow rates, site location, mode of treatment, 
facilities, outfall locations, construction and operational costs 
with regard to the final design of secondary sewage treatment 
facilities in New Haven. The final recommendation was for con- 
struction of the facility at the Boulevard site on Long Wharf. 



Hardy, C. D. 1972a. Movement and quality of Long Island Sound waters, 
1971. SUNY Mar. Sci. Res. Ctr. Stonybrook. Tech. Kept. No. 17. 
64 pp. 



. 1972b. Hydrographic data report: Long Island Sound 1970. 

Part II. SUNY Mar. Sci. Res. Cent., Stonybrook. Tech. Rept. No. 
13. 20 pp. 



Water quality parameters (temperature, salinity, chlorophyll a, 
turbidity, NH3, ortho POi^ and urea) were measured in Long 
Island Sound during periods of maximiim runoff and maximum tempera- 
tures and stratification (April and August 1971) . 

Parameters measured on the Marine Science Research Center cruise of 
5-7 October 1970 include temperature, salinity, nutrients, DO, and 
chlorophyll a. Data were collected on a continuous basis and at 
discrete stations throughout the Sound. 



Hardy, C. D. and P. K. Weyl. 1970. Hydrographic data report: Long 

Island Sound 1970 Part I. SUNY Mar. Sci. Res. Cent., Stonybrook. 
Tech. Rep. No. 5. 96 pp. 

Hydrographic data report for cruises conducted by the Marine 
Sciences Research Center in western Long Island Sound between 28 
January and 21 April 1970. Parameters measured were salinity, 
temperature, reactive phosphate, inorganic nitrogen, oxidizable 
ammonia and chlorophyll a. Data were collected on a continuous 
basis at a depth of 1 m using a flow through system. The majority 
of the data were collected west of the Bridgeport/Port Jefferson 
area. Data collected east of this line were primarily from the 
southern side of the Sound. 



1971. Distribution of dissolved oxygen in the waters of 



western Long Island Sound. SUNY Marine Science Research Center, 
Stonybrook. Tech. Rept. No. 11. 37 pp. 

Surveys were conducted during 7-15 August and on 5 October 1970 in 
western Long Island Sound. 



Hechtel, G. J. 1970. Biological effects of thermal effluents, "North- 
port, New York. Part 1. Intertidal benthic invertebrates. Mar. 
Sci. Res. Cent., Stonybrook, New York. Tech Rept., pp. 1-52. 



2-U 



Soft and hard substrate intertidal faunal assemblages were sampled 
to determine thejrmal discharge impact and relation to other Long 
Island Sound areas. 



Hillman, R. E. 1973. Environmental monitoring through the use of expo- 
sure panels. IN_: Fisheries and Energy Production: A Symposiiom. 
(ed.) S. B. Saila. D. C. Heath and Company, Lexington, MA. pp. 55-76, 

This report presents a comparison of exposure panel data from Niantic 
Bay, New Haven Harbor and Stamford Harbor sampled from October 1971 
through September 1972. Sampling methods were similar for all 
studies. 



Hillman, R. E., N. Davis, and S. Wennemer. 1977. Abundance, diversity 
and stability in shore-zone fish communities in an area of Long 
Island Sound affected by the thermal discharge of a nuclear power 
plant. Estuar. Coast. Mar. Sci. 5:355-381. 



Jay, D. A. and M. J. Bowman. 1975. The physical oceanography and water 
quality of New York Harbor and western Long Island Sound. SUNY 
Mar. Sci. Res. Ctr., Stonybrook, New York, Tech. Rep. No. 23. 71 
pp. 

The majority of this report was related to literature reports of 
circulation and hydrology of New York Harbor and adjacent rivers. 
Material concerning Long Island Sound was limited to a brief over- 
view. 



Jeffries, H. P. and W. C. Johnson. 1974. Seasonal distributions of 

bottom fishes in the Narragansett Bay area, seven-year variation in 
the abundance of winter flounder {Pseudopleuronectes americanus) . 
J. Fish. Res. Bd. Can. 31:1057-1066. 



Jensen, A. C. 1977. New York Marine Fisheries: Changing needs in a 
changing environment. New York Fish and Game Jour. Vol. 24(2): 
99-128. 



Lawler, Matusky and Skelly Engineers. 1975a. Norwalk Harbor Station, 
Thermal Pl\mie Studies. Prepared for Connecticut Light and Power 
Company, Berlin, Connecticut. 15 pp and appendices. 



1975b. Devon Station, Thermal Plume Studies. Prepared for 



Connecticut Light and Power Company, Berlin, Connecticut. 21 pp 
and appendices . 



2-19 



1975c. Middletown Station, Theirmal Plume Studies. Pre- 



pared for the Hartford Electric Light Company, Berlin, Connecticut. 
9 pp and appendices. 



1976. Montville Station, Thermal Plume Studies. Prepared 



for Connecticut Light and Power Company, Berlin, Connecticut. 13 
pp and appendices. 



Marine Sciences Research Center, SUNY, Stonybrook, New York. 1970. 

Biological effects of thermal pollution, Northport, New York. SUNY 
Mar. Sci. Res. Ctr., Tech. Rpt. No. 3. 107 pp. 

Investigated the impact of thermal discharges on hard and soft 
substrate intertidal and subtidal faunal and floral communities. 



McCall, P. L. 1977. Community patterns and adaptive strategies of the 
infaunal benthos of Long Island Sound. J. Mar. Res. 35:221-266. 



McCracken, F. D. 1963. Seasonal movements of the winter flounder, 
PseudopleuTonectes americanus (Walbaum) on the Atlantic coast. 
Fish. Res. Bd. Can, 20 (2) : 551-586. 



Mulstray, R. 1971. Winter survey of polychaete fauna. IN: Studies on 
the effects of a steam-generating station on the marine environment 
at Northport, New York. Mar. Sci. Res. Ctr., SUNY, Tech. Rept. 
9:91-104. 



New England River Basins Commission. 1975. People and the Sound: A 
plan for Long Island Sound. 225 pp. 

The Commission outlined an economically and environmentally sound 
plan for the development of Long Island Sound. Included are EPA 
restrictions on wastewater facility grants from EPA and environ- 
mental impact statements for some projects. 



New York Ocean Science Laboratory. 1974. Preoperational ecological 
monitoring program of the marine environs at LILCO, Shoreham 
Nuclear Power Station, Shoreham, New York, Volume 1: Physical and 
Chemical Oceanography. Prepared for LILCO, Hicksville, New York. 2 
sections. 



. 1974. Preoperational ecological monitoring program of the 

marine environs at LILCO, Shoreham Nuclear Power Station, Shoreham, 
New York. Volxome II: Phy toplankton , zooplankton and ichthyo- 
plankton. prepared for LILCO, Hicksville, New York. 3 sections. 



2-20 



This data report provides information on seasonal and spatial 
variability in plankton populations during 1973 off the Shoreham, 
New York area. Sampling was conducted monthly and biweekly at five 
stations depending upon program and season. Quarterly, diurnal 
sampling at 20 stations. Data presented in tables and figures, 
little raw data, statistical comparisons limited. 



1974. Preoperational ecological monitoring program of the 



marine environs at LILCO, Shoreham Nuclear Power Station, Shoreham, 
New York. Volume III: Fishery ecology. Prepared for LILCO, 
Hicksville, New York. 1 section. 

Programs conducted during 1973 include shore-zone seines, trawls 
and gill nets. Sampling was conducted monthly with biweekly 
efforts during critical periods — April, May, Jiine, September and 
October. Available data include standard lengths, age, stomach 
contents and weight, total body weight and gonadal index. In 
addition, horizontal and vertical distributions of more common 
species are plotted for the Shoreham area. 



New York State Department of Environmental Conservation. 1977. New 

York State midwinter aerial waterfowl survey in Long Island Sound. 
5 pp. 



Normandeau Associates, Inc. 1971. Ecological considerations of the 

Coke Works Site, New Haven Harbor, Connecticut. Prepared for the 
United Illuminating Company, New Haven, Connecticut. 64 pp. 



. 1971. A bathythermographic survey of the receiving waters 

adjacent to the English Generating Station, New Haven, CT. , July 
1971. Prepared for United Illuminating Company, New Haven, CT. 29 
pp. 



Data report described the thermal regime in the Mill River during 
various tidal conditions in July 1971. 



1972. Addendum 12 of environmental report: Coke Works 



site, June 1971. Marine Sediments, New Haven Harbor, Connecticut. 
Results of analyses and proposals for dredge spoil disposal. 
Prepared for United Illuminating Company, New Haven, CT. 134 pp. 

Determined quality of sediments in the vicinity of the Coke 
Works site and evaluated potential spoil disposal schemes. 
Includes metal and organic analyses. 



3-21 



I — I CTt 



DQ >- 




o 



cxl 



a: 



O '>i ^ ^ coo^5 
(MTW) W 'Hld3a 



LlJ i^ 



CQ ^ 




•o 



£ 

o 
o 



(MIW) W'HldHO 



llj r>. 

I— I CTl 



CQ >- 
CQ CC 







CO 
OQ 





. 
















./ 


■.. 














/ ^ 


' 






/ / 








'-.^ 








vv 








^~'' 


>^ 


^^^^ 




y^ /^ 


y^ 




■v 




/ y 


^ 




■^ UJ 










■* o 














/ Si 






■»• < 




/ 




^ 




ro 








^ 




/ 


W 




^-tV- 


CM 
in 

o 



-a 

O) 



c 
o 
o 



CO 

s- 
cn 



(MHW) W'Hid3a 



to (D g ^ 



3-22 



LU p^ 



CQ 

ca 






CQ 




T3 
<U 

C 



O 



10 OD _ 

(MHW) H 'HidSa 



(mnw) H'Hidaa 



2-23 



1976a. New Haven Harbor Station Ecological Monitoring 



Studies, New Haven Harbor, Connecticut. Annual Report 1975 pre- 
pared for the United Illuminating Company, New Haven, Connecticut. 
312 pp. 



1976b. New Haven Harbor Thermal Regime during operation of 



the New Haven Harbor Station, September 1975 prepared for the 
United Illuminating Company, New Haven, Conn. 31 pp. 



1976c. New Haven Harbor Station Condenser Tube Fouling 



Study (draft) prepared for the United Illuminating Company, New 
Haven, Connecticut. 12 pp. 

Determined the nature of the fouling material in condenser tubes of 
the New Haven Harbor Station and whether chlorinating to levels 
within EPA effluent limitations would control the problem. Surface 
films and accumulated condenser tube sludge were sampled on April 
7, 1976. 



. 1976d. New Haven Harbor Station Ecological Monitoring 

Studies, 1976: Acute Toxicity Studies prepared for the United 
Illuminating Company, New Haven, Conn. 64 jDp. 



Sufficient information in the literature on heat tolerance was 
found for all species to conclude that no substantial toxic effects 
were expected from station operation. Species selected for the 
study were: Skeletonema costatum, Acartia clausi , Acartia tonsa, 
Crangon septemspinosa, Crassostrea virginica, Homarus americanus , 
Mytilus edulis, Teredo navalis, Pseudopleuronectes americanus , 
Pomatomus saltatrix , Cynoscion regalis, Brevoortia ty r annus , Anchoa 
mitchilli, Morone saxatilis. 



1977a. New Haven Harbor Station Ecological Monitoring 



Studies, New Haven Harbor, Connecticut. Annual Report 1976 for the 
United Illuminating Company, New Haven, Connecticut. 376 pp. 



1977b. Thermal surveys New Haven Harbor Summer and Fall, 



1976 prepared for the United Illuminating Company, New Haven, 
Connecticut. 70 pp. 

The study defined the thermal plume of the New Haven Harbor Station 
as required by the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination (NPDES) 
Permit to Discharge. Surveys by Rhodamine WT and 3-D temperature 
sampling were conducted in July, August and October 1976. 



2-24 



1978. New Haven Harbor Station Ecological Monitoring 



Study, New Haven Harbor, Connecticut Annual Report 1977 prepared 
for the United Illuminating Company. 359 pp. 



1979. In preparation. New Haven Sewage Treatment Facility 



siting environmental assessment prepared for the City of New Haven, 
New Haven, Connecticut. 



Northeast Utilities Service Company. 1976. Data report of fin- and 

shellfish impinged from August 1975 to August 1976 at Devon Station, 
Middletown Station, Norwalk Harbor, and Montville Station. 37 pp. 



Nuzzi, R. 1977. Aquatic disposal field investigations. Batons Neck 

disposal site. Long Island Sound. Appendix F predisposal baseline 
conditions of phytoplankton assemblages. Tech. Rep. D-77-6, Army 
Corps of Eng., WES, Vicksburg, MI. 42 pp. 



1977. Aquatic disposal field investigations, Eatons Neck 



disposal site. Long Island Sound. Predisposal baseline conditions 
of zooplankton assemblages. Tech. Rep. D-77-6, ACE. Vicksburg, 
MI. 104 pp. 



Pearcy, W. G. 1962. Ecology of an estuarine population of winter 

flounder, Pseudopleuronectes americanus (Walbaum) . Parts 1-IV. 
Bull. Bingham. Ocean. Coll. Vol. 18(1). 125 pp. 



Pearcy, W. G. and S.' W. Richards. 1962. Distribution and ecology of 
fishes of the Mystic River estuary, Connecticut. Ecol. 45:248- 
259. 



Perlmutter, A. 1971. Ecological study of the aquatic environs of the 

proposed nuclear power station of LILCO at Shoreham: 1970-1971 and 
summary 1968-1971 prepared for LILCO. 136 pp. 



Powell and Schwartz. 1977. Distribution of Paralichthid flounders 

(Bothidae Paralichthys ) in North Carolina estuaries. Ches. Sci. 
18:334-339. 



Prince, J. S. and L. A. Melville. 1970. New Haven Report, Algal. June 
August 1970 unpublished 5 pp. 

Examination of macroalgae at four hard-substrate sites in New Haven 
Harbor in June, July and August 1970. 



2-25 

Quirk, Lawler and Matusky Engineers. 1969. New Haven Harbor effect of 
increased waste treatment and outfall location on water quality. 
Prepared for State of Connecticut Water Resources Commission, mimeo 
25 pp. 

Determined the effect of various sewage treatment schemes on New 
Haven Harbor water quality (BOD loadings and DO levels) based on a 
steady-state mathematical model. 



Raytheon Company. 1970. New Haven Harbor plankton survey, April-May 

1970. Prepared for United Illiominating Company, New Haven, CT. 49 
pp. 

Hydrographic delimitation of thermocline (at 5 meters) and water 
quality regimes in the inner and outer harbor. Parameters measured 
include temperature, salinity, DO and turbidity. Zooplankton com- 
parisons (numbers available) by station and date were made, as well 
as an examination of the efficiency of #10 and #20 mesh nets (#10 
net deemed more efficient at capturing larger zooplankters) . 



Raytheon Company. 1970. New Haven Harbor Ecological Survey, Data 
Report, June-December 1970. Prepared for United Illuminating 
Company, New Haven, CT. 179 pp. 

Data were presented but not discussed for June-December 1970. Pro- 
grams were conducted as at the present time with minor changes, in 
particular station locations, sampling regime, the alteration of 
some programs and the presence of programs no longer conducted as 
part of the regular monthly programs: macroalgae, Mya study, 
Thorsen bottles and aerial thermal overflights . 



1971. New Haven Harbor Ecological Survey, Data Report, 



December 1970-April 1971. Prepared for United Illuminating Com- 
pany, New Haven, CT. 11 sections. 

Data report of baseline survey of biological communities and asso- 
ciated hydrographic parameters in New Haven Harbor sampling regime 
same as Raytheon 1970. 



Reid, R. N., A. B. Frame and A. F. Drexter. Unpublished. Environmental 
baseline studies in Long Island 1972-1975. National Marine Fish- 
eries Service, NOAA, Sandy Hook, New Jersey. 11 pp and appendices. 

Data report, no further analysis completed on benthic infauna or 
sediment and water chemistry. Data available on benthos from July 
1972 cruise, ; in addition, water quality including surface and 
bottom temperature, salinity, dissolved oxygen, N02» NO 3, NHl|. , urea 
and ortho PO4 data were collected summer 1972, April and September 
1973. Sediments, from July 1972, include grain size, carbonates 
and organic content. Stations of interest include 52, 60, 61, 58 
(New Haven area) , 71 (Shoreham) and 48 and 49 (Port Jefferson) . 



2-26 



Rhoads, D.C. 1972. The environmental consequences of dredge spoil 

disposal in central Long Island Sound: I. Benthic biology of the 
New Haven dump site. Unpublished Report to U.S. Army Corps of 
Engineers and the United Illuminating Co. 40 pp. 



1973. The environmental consequences of dredge spoil 



disposal in central Long Island Sound. II: Benthic biology of the 
New Haven Harbor Channel and northwest control site. Prepared for 
United Illuminating Company, New Haven, CT. 61 pp. 

Provided baseline data on benthic infaunal community at a proposed 
dredge site and a control site adjacent to the New Haven dumping 
ground . 



1973b. The environmental consequences of dredge spoil 



disposal in central Long Island Sound. Ill: Benthic biology of 
the south control site, 1972. Prepared for United Illiiminating 
Company, New Haven, CT. 44 pp. 

Baseline data provided on benthic infaunal community at a proposed 
control site near the New Haven dumping ground. Data on bivalve 
and gastropod biomass presented. Polychaete data not completed. 
Raw data presented in appendix. 



1973c. The environmental consequences of dredge spoil dis- 



posal in central Long Island Sound: IV. Benthic sampling Guilford 
Harbor dredging project predredging study. Unpublished Report to 
U.S. Army Corps, of Engineers. 15 pp. 



1973d. The environmental consequences of dredge spoil dis- 



posal in central Long Island Sound: V. Benthic biology of the 
Milford, Branford, and Guilford Dump Grounds. Unpublished Report 
to U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and United Illuminating Co. 38 pp. 



1973e. The environmental consequences of dredge spoil dis- 



posal in central Long Island Sound: VIII. Benthic biology of the 
New Haven ship channel, dump site, south and northwest control 
sites, Siammer 1973. Unpioblished Report to U.S. Army Corps of 
Engineers and the United Illuminating Co. 64 pp. 



1974a. The environmental consequences of dredge spoil dis- 



posal in central Long Island Sound: VIII. Changes in spatial and 
temporal abundance patterns of benthic molluscs sampled from New 
Haven Harbor Dump Site, South and Northwest Control Sites, 1972- 
1973 (pre-dump) baseline). Unpublished Report to U.S. Army Corps 
of Engineers and the United Illuminating Co. 49 pp. 



2-27 



• 1974b. The environmental consequences of dredge spoil dis- 
posal in central Long Island Sound: IX. Benthic biology of the 
New Haven Harbor ship channel, New Haven dump site, new south 
control and northwest control sites, February-March, 1974 (during 
dredging and dumping operations). Unpublished Report to U.S. Army 
Corps of Engineers. 50 pp. 



• 1974c. The environmental consequences of dredge spoil dis- 
posal in central Long Island Sound: X. Benthic biology of the New 
Haven Harbor ship channel. New Haven dump site, new south control 
and northwest control sites, July, 1974 (postdredging and dumping). 
Unpublished Report to U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 79 pp. 



1975. The environmental consequences of dredge spoil dis- 



posal in Central Long Island Sound: XIII. The use of bivalve 
depth assemblages to recognize environmental change in central 
Long Island over the past 150 years. Unpublished Report to U.S. 
Army Corps of Engineers. 41 pp. 



Rhoads, D. C. and A. D. Michael. 1975. Benthic monitoring study for 
the United Illuminating Company Coke Works Site Power Plant. 
Report I: Baseline data, 1974. Unpublished report. 22 pages and 
appended data sheets. 

Provided baseline information for monitoring the effects of thermal 
discharge from the New Haven Harbor Station on benthic population 
structure at Morris Cove and inner harbor stations. 



1976. Benthic monitoring study for the United Illuminating 



Company Coke Works site power plant. Report 11: Benthic monitoring 
during plant testing and early operation 1975. Unpublished report. 
8 pages and appended data sheets . 



1977. Benthic monitoring study for the United Illuminating 



Company Coke Works site power plant. Report III: Benthic moni- 
toring during plant testing and early operations 1976. Unpublished 
report. 10 pages and appended data sheets. 



1978. Benthic monitoring study for the United Illuminating 



Company Coke Works Site Power Plant. Report IV: Benthic moni- 
toring during plant testing and early operation 1978. Unpublished 
report. 11 pages and appended data sheets. 



Rhoads, D. C, R. C. Allen, and M. B. Goldhaber. 1975. The influence 
of colonizing benthos on physical properties and chemical diagen- 
esis of the New Haven dump site. TN_: Environmental Consequences 
of Dredge Spoil Disposal in Central Long Island Sound, XI. Unpub- 
lished report to U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 45 pp. 



2-28 



Sampling from June 1974 through April 1975 at the New Haven dump 
site examined the influence and succession of colonizing benthos 
on physical x^roperties and chemical diagenesis. 



Richards, S. W. 1959. Pelagic fish eggs and larvae of Long Island 
Sound. Bull. Bingham Oceanogr. Coll., 95-124. 

Present survey data from 1954-1955 with comparisons to the 1952- 
1953 survey. Data provided information on spatial and temporal 
distribution on eggs and larvae of 22 species. Variations in 
abundance were related primarily to dominant species, chiefly 
Anchoa, the most common species encountered. Data were presented 
by species with descriptions of distributions along with size of 
eggs and larvae. 



Richards, S. W. 1963. The demersal fish population of Long Island 
Sound. I: Species composition and relative abundance in two 
localities, 1956-1957. Bull. Bingham Oceanogr. Coll. 18(2): 5-31. 



Riley, G. A. and S. M. Conover. 1956. Oceanography of Long Island 

Sound, 1952-1954. Ill: Bull. Bingham Oceanogr. Coll. 15-47-61. 



Sanders, H. L. 1956. Oceanography of Long Island Sound, 1952-1954. 

The biology of marine bottom communities. Bull. Bingham Oceanogr. 
Coll. 15:345-414. 



Schaeffer, R. H. 1967-1972. Species composition, size and seasonal 
abundance of fish in the surf waters of Long Island, New York. 
Fish and Game Jour. 14(l):l-46. 



Stone and Webster Engineers. 1972. Temperature prediction model for 

Long Island Sound. Prepared for the Long Island Sound study group. 
5 sections. 



TRC Service Corporation. 1967. Preliminary site evaluation. Fort Hale, 
New Haven, Connecticut prepared for the Northeast Utilities Service 
Company, Berlin, CT. 75 pp. 

Historical data covering meteorology, water resources, geology, 
hydrology, aquatic ecology, air quality and socio-economic para- 
meters for the Fort Hale/Coke Works site and New Haven area. 



2-29 



Turekian, K. , R. Gordon and A. Michael. 1974. Report on heavy metal 
studies conducted in New Haven Harbor during June 1974. Prepared 
for United Illuminating Company, New Haven, CT. 3 pp. 

Data report for sampling period June 1974. Metals examined were 
copper, lead, zinc, cadmium and mercury at Morris Cove and Harbor 
Station sites. 



United Illuminating Company. 1977. New Haven Harbor Station #1 impinge- 
ment data. Mimeo, raw data. 



1977. Bridgeport Harbor Station impingement data. January- 



December 1977, mimeo, raw data. 



1970. The United Illuminating Company Thermal Discharge. 



Mimeo, 28 pp. 



U.S. Coast Guard. Oil spill records and pollution case log book. U.S. 
Coast Guard, New Haven Group. Coast Guard files. 



U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and National Marine Fisheries Service. 
1975. People and the Sound, Fish and Wildlife prepared for the 
New England River Basins Commission. 56 pp. 

The report assembled information on the ecosystem of the Long 
Island Sound (LIS) region, its fishery and its wildlife and re- 
commended measures for uses of these resources that will be com- 
patible on an environmental, economic and social basis. 



U.S. Geologic Survey. 1970-1973; 1971-1973. Water resources data for 
Connecticut. U.S.G.S. Water-data report. CT-71, 72, 73-1, 75-1. 
4 volumes. 



Valenti, R. J. 1974. The effects of temperature and thermal shocks on 
the development of embryos and larvae of the winter flounder 
(Pseudopleuronectes americanus) . Section X, Volume IV of Preoper- 
ational Ecological Monitoring Program at the Long Island Lighting 
Company Shoreham Nuclear Power Station, Shoreham, Long Island, New 
York. 5 sections. 

Studies determined thermal tolerances of winter flounder larvae and 
embryos. Test temperatures and duration times were representative 
of increased temperature ranges due to power plant condensers and 
entrainment times for larvae within the condensers. 



2-30 



Warfel, H. E. and D. Merriman. 1944. Studies on the marine resources 
of southern New England. I: An analysis of the fish pojmlations 
of the shore zone. Bull. Bingham Oceanogr. Coll. 9(2):1-91. 

The survey on the shore-zone fish populations of New Haven Harbor 
was conducted from July 1942 through June 1943. Sampling included 
biweekly seine collections from the Morris Cove region of New Haven 
Harbor. Data presented for the more common species, include length- 
frequency curves and life cycle information. Fish abundance data 
were also compared to water temperature, salinity and interrela- 
tionship with prey availability and trophic structure of the com- 
munity. Temperature and prey availability affect population size 
with low winter temperatures apparently excluding all species. 



Westman, J. R. and R. F. Nigrelli. 1955. Preliminary studies of men- 
haden and their mass mortalities in Long Island and New Jersey 
waters. N.Y. Fish and Game Jour. 2:142-153. 



Weyl, P. K. 1971. Temperature distribution of the heated effluent from 
the Northport Power Station (LILCO) in Long Island Sound. Tech. 
Rept. No. 10, Marine Science Research Center, SUNY at Stonybrook, 
New York. 25 pp. 

Three surveys were conducted to define the configuration of a 
thermal plume resulting from the discharge of heated effluent into 
Long Island Sound. Samples were taken at depths of 15, 50 and 85 
cm in May 1959, February and July 1970. 



Williams, G. C. 1971. Studies on the effects of a steam electric 
generating plant in the marine environment at Northport, N.Y. 
SUNY, Mar. Sci. Res. Ctr. Tech Rept. No. 9. 42 pp. 



Williams, G. C, D. C. Williams, and R. J. Miller. 1973. Mortality 

rates of planktonic eggs of the cunner, Tautogolabrus adspersus , in 
Long Island Sound. IN: Proceedings of a workshop on eggs, larval 
and juvenile stages of fish in Atlantic Coast estuaries. USDC, 
NOAA, NMFS Tech. Publ . No. 1. pp 181-195, 

The natural survival rates of fish eggs were examined in the Old 
Field Point region of Long Island (longitude 73°08' west central 
region of Sound) . 



Young, J.D. 1975. Menhaden and power plants: a growing concern. NMFS 
Paper No. 1094, pages 19-23. 

A review of literature of the impact of heat and cold shock, entrain- 
ment and impingement on menhaden. 



2-31 



Young, J.S. and I. Gibson. 1973. Effect of thermal effluent on migrating 
menhaden. Mar. Pollut. Bull., Vol. 4:44-95. 

An investigation jnto impact of heated effluents on menhaden. 



Zawacki, C.S. and P.T. Briggs. 1976. Fish investigations in Long Island 
Sound at a nuclear power station site at Shoreham, New York. N.Y. 
Fish and Game Jour. 23(l):34-50. 



NEW HAVEN HARBOR 

ECOLOGICAL STUDIES 

SUMMARY REPORT, 1979 



3.0 HYDROGRAPHY OF NEW HAVEN HARBOR AND PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL 
EFFECTS FROM OPERATION OF NEW HAVEN HARBOR STATION 

By Michael Tubman, ' 

David Pease and Allan Hartwell 
Normandeau Associates, Inc. 
Bedford, N. H. 



TABLE OF CONTENTS 



PAGE 

INTRODUCTION 3-1 

Study Area 3-1 

General Hydrogra:phy of New Haven Harbor 3-2 

Hydrology of the New Haven Harbor Drainage Basin 3-3 

General Patterns of Circulation in long Island Sound 3-5 

Climatology 3-S 

Previous Studies - New Haven Harbor 3-6 

Previous Studies - Long Island Sound 3-8 

Environmental Studies at Other Power Plant Sites 3-9 

METHODS 3-10 

Monthly Surveys 3-10 

Continuous Monitoring Station 3-12 

DESCRIPTION OF NEW HAVEN HARBOR HYDROGRAPHY 3-12 

Estuarine Classification and Harbor-Wide Circulation Patterns . 3-13 

Salinity Distribution 3-17 

Temperature Distribution for the Sample Year 3-28 

Temperature-Salinity : Patterns of Density Changes During 

the Sample Year 3-32 

Dissolved Oxygen Distribution 3-34 

pH Distribution 3-35 

Transparency 3-41 

Spatial Variability Patterns 3-41 

Comparisons Among Study Years 3-52 

Summary: Characterization of New Haven Harbor Hydrography . . . 3-55 

ANALYSIS OF IMPACT 3-57 

Modification of Local Current Patterns 3-58 

Modification of the Thermal Regime in the Harbor 3-75 

Changes in Dissolved Oxygen Concentration 3-91 



PAGE 



Increased Turbidity 3-96 

Summary of Impacts S-99 

LITERATURE CITED — HYDROGRAPHIC 3-101 



11 



LIST OF FIGURES 



PAGE 



3-1. Estimated mean monthly runoff, 1967-1977 3-4 

3-2. Monthly precipitation and monthly means of daily temp- 
erature maxima and minima in Bridgeport, Connecticut 
area, v/ith predicted runoff for New Haven Harbor 
watershed 3-7 

3-3. Physical/chemical data collected from May 1971 to 

October 1977 3_T1 

3-4. Composite flood (a) and ebb (b) tide currents. New 

Haven Harbor (From Duxbury, 1963) 3-16 

3-5. Salinity and temperature transects along the axis of 
the New Haven Harbor channel, ebb tide, November 
1976-October 1977 3-18 

3-6. Surface and bottom, flood and ebb tide salinity con- 
tours for November 1975 and February, May, August, 
October 1977 3-24 

3-7. Surface and bottom, flood and ebb tide temperature 

contours for November 1976 and February, May, August, 

October 1977 3-29 

3-8. Temperature vs. salinity. Stations 3 and 20, surface 
and bottom, flood and ebb tides, October 1976-October 
1977 3-33 

3-9. Monthly surface and bottom dissolved oxygen (mg/1 ) 
by tide and depth. Stations 3, 8 and 20, from May 
1971 through October 1977 3-36 

3-10. Monthly surface and bottom pH on ebb and flood tide. 

Stations 3 and 20, from May 1971 through October 1977 . . 3-39 

3-11. Monthly surface and bottom salinity and temperature 
data from Station 3, flood and ebb tides, in New 
Haven Harbor, Connecticut 3-42 

3-12. Monthly surface and bottom salinity and temperature 
data from Station 8, flood and ebb tides, in New 
Haven Harbor, Connecticut 3-44 



IIX 



PAGE 



3-13. Monthly surface and bottom salinity and temperature data 
from Station 20, flood and ebb tides, in New Haven Har- 
bor, Connecticut 3-^6 

3-14. Vector sum of tide and intake current velocities at 

the entrance to the intake channel 3-59 

3-15. Definition sketch of University of Florida model 

tests (From UFLA, 1972) 3-61 

3-16. Velocity distribution along axis of plume (UFLA, 1972). . 3-62 

3-17. Surface isotherms, AT (°F) from UFLA, 1972 3-67 

3-18. Projected surface AT (°F) based on dye concentrations, 

high water slack, August 25, 1976, thermal survey .... 3-68 

3-19. Projected surface AT (°F) based on dye concentrations, 

mid ebb current, August 24, 1976, thermal survey 3-69 

3-20. Transect for determining the tidal input of momentum 

to Section A during flood tide 3-71 

3-21. EBASCO model segments (EBASCO, 1971) 3-76 

3-22. Full depth tidal cycle average water temperature 

increases (°F) (EBASCO, 1971) 3-78 

3-23. EBASCO dye study stations (EBASCO, 1971) 3-80 

3-24. Isotherms (At °F) from October 13, 1976, thermal survey 

at low water slack 3-85 

3-25. Isotherms (At °F) from October 13, 1976, thermal survey 

during maximum flood current 3-86 

3-26. Isotherms (At °F) from October 13, 1976, thermal survey 

at high water slack 3-87 

3-27. Isotherms (At °F) from October 13, 1976, thermal survey 

during maximum ebb currents 3-89 

3-28. Post-operational bathymetric survey of discharge area 

(USACE, January 1978; unpublished) 3-97 

3-29. Preoperational bathymetric survey of discharge area 

(USACE, May 1974; unpublished) 3-98 



IV 



LIST OF TABLES 



PAGE 

3-1. SUMMARY OF CLIMATOLOGICAL AND HYDROGRAPHIC CONDITIONS, 

1970-1977 3-53 

3-2. MAXIMUM CROSS-SECTIONAL AREA OF DISCHARGE FLOW-AWAY 

AT SELECTED VELOCITIES '3-63 

3-3. RESULTS OF NAI HYDROGRAPHIC SURVEY DURING DECEMBER 

1977 - EBB TIDE 3-65 

3-4. FULL DEPTH AVERAGE TEMPERATURE INCREASE, MAY 1970. . . . 3-81 

3-5. FULL DEPTH AVERAGE TEMPERATURE INCREASE, SEPTEMBER 1978. 3-82 

3-6. SUMMARY OF HONEYWELL CONTINUOUS MEAN ANNUAL WATER 

TEMPERATURE DATA FOR PREOPERATIONAL AND POST-OPERA- 
TIONAL CONDITIONS 3-83 

3-7. PROPERTIES OF A HYPOTHETICAL WATER COLUMN, CHARACTER- 
ISTIC OF WINTER CONDITIONS 3-87 

3-8. PERCENT SATURATION OF DISSOLVED OXYGEN AT THE SURFACE 

DURING 1976 AT EBB TIDE 3-95 



3.0 HYDROGRAPHY OF NEW HAVEN HARBOR AND PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL 
EFFECTS FROM OPERATION OF NEW HAVEN HARBOR STATION 

By Michael Tubman, David Pease and Allan Hartwell 

Normandeau Associates, Inc. 

Bedford, N. H. 



INTRODUCTION 

The purpose of this section is to describe the results of more 
than seven years of intensive, year-round hydrographic studies in New 
Haven Harbor. The data, which were collected as part of UI ' s ongoing 
ecological monitoring studies for the New Haven Harbor Station, have 
been used in combination with various other studies of the Harbor and 
adjacent waters of Long Island Sound to present a comprehensive picture 
of hydrographic conditions both before and after plant startup in 1975. 
The seasonal variability of the inner and the outer harbor waters has 
received particular emphasis, and the hydrographic impacts of plant 
operation are reviewed in detail. 



Study Area 

New Haven Harbor is a shallow embayment located on the north- 
ern shore of Long Island Sound slightly east of its midpoint, roughly 
halfway between New York City and Providence, Rhode Island. It is one 
of the largest harbors on Long Island Sound. Hydrographically , New 
Haven Harbor is an estuary as defined by Pritchard (1967) . Circulation 
and mixing patterns, which dominate almost all other aspects of estu- 
arine behavior, are difficult to measure and analyze because they are 
cumulative results of tides, freshwater flow, irregularities in the 
estuarine configuration, and density differences between fresh and salt 
water (National Academy of Sciences, 1977) . 

New Haven Harbor is largely surrounded by urbanized land. The 
intensity of this urbanization and associated industrialization has 
brought with it all the attendant problems of municipal and industrial 
pollution ranging from sewage to oil spills . 



3-1 



3-2 



At present, effluent from three primary sewage treatment 
plants flows into New Haven Harbor. The East Street and Boulevard 
plants discharge at their shoreline locations on the west side of the 
harbor; the East Shore plant empties its wastes through a shallow 

subaqueous discharge south of the New Haven Harbor Station; their 

3 
combined volume is on the order of 4.4 m /sec (100 million gal/day or 

3 
156 ft /sec) . In addition, the West Haven facility (secondary treat- 
ment) near Sandy Point empties into the main channel area east of Sandy 
Point via a subsurface discharge. 



Several inland communities discharge their municipal wastes 
into the Quinnipiac River, although all now have secondary sewage 
treatment facilities. According to the Connecticut Department of Envi- 
ronmental Protection (1977) , the waters of New Haven Harbor are at pres- 
ent classified as follows: inner harbor, SD (ijnacceptable) ; outer 
harbor, SD and SC (unsuitable for bathing) ; and adjacent Sound beyond 
the breakwaters, SB (suitable for bathing). 



General Hydrography of New Haven Harbor 

To delineate the harbor area for purposes of this study, three 
breakwaters are considered to boiond the harbor on the Sound side and 
locations in the three rivers, Quinnipiac, Mill, and West, are used as 
boundaries at the head of the harbor (Figure 1-1) . For the purpose of 
this report, the harbor is divided into two parts by a line between 
Sandy Point and Fort Hale Point which separates it into inner and outer 
portions. These boundaries were also used by Duxbury (1963). 

The bottom of the outer harbor is sandy with large areas of 
shell reefs and some exposed bedrock, while the inner harbor bottom is 
composed chiefly of fine-grained sediments with a high organic content. 



According to Duxbury (1963) , the total area of the harbor 

2 
within the arbitrarily chosen limits is approximately 18.4 km , with 4.2 



3-3 



2 2 

km of this area representing the inner harbor and 14.1 km the outer 

harbor (areas determined from mean low water (MLW) datum contour on 
NOAA-NOS Chart No. 218). Mean depths below MLW are 3.5 m for the total 
harbor with 2.7 m and 3.7 m for the inner and outer harbors, respect- 
ively. Since the mean tidal range for New Haven Harbor is approximately 

7 3 
1.9 m (NOAA-NOS, 1977), the tidal prism is approximately 5.3 x 10 m . 

This prism represents a conservative estimate of the mean volume of 

water that must flood into and ebb out of the harbor during a complete 

tidal cycle. The entrance to the harbor is formed by a dredged channel, 

the depth of which decreases from approximately 10.4 m at the breakwater 

entrance to 4.9 m at the Ferry Street Bridge in the Quinnipiac River 

(Figure 1-1) . 



Hydrology of the New Haven Harbor Drainage Basin 

2 
The Quxnnxpiac, Mill and West Rivers drain a total of 624 km 

2 
(241 mi ) of south central Connecticut, with the Quinnipiac contributing 

about 80% of the total flow. Normal precipitation and runoff data from 

U.S. Geological Survey records (USGS, 1959 to 1976) show little monthly 

variation over a well-doc\imented annual cycle (Long Island Sound Regional 

* 
Study, 1963) . This annual cycle of estimated total monthly runoff for 

1967 to 1977 shows peak values in March (mean of 24.2 m /sec), a gradual 

3 
decrease through the spring and early summer to a low of 7.1 m /sec in 

August, and then a gradual increase through the fall and winter culmina- 
ting with the March peak (Figure 3-1) . This annual cycle plays a major 
role in the patterns of harbor circulation. 



* . 2 

Assuming uniform rainfall over the entire 624 km area, runoff data 

from the gauged portions of the drainage basin were used to esti- 
mate runoff from the ungauged portions and compute an approximate 
monthly total. 



3-4 



SJ3 '3ivy Moij nvioi Misva hhn 



o 

o 



o 


o 


in 


o 


CM 


o 



o 


o 


in 


o 


r~ 


in 



o 

LO 
CM 




-Q 



-O 



-CO 



-< 



--3 



--:> 



-< 





C 




<u 




> 




« 




re . 




en 




S r~. 




OJ o-i 




s: ,— 




• €% 




r^ 4-> 




r- s- 




cn o 


, 


t— a. 


f= 


1 0) 


3 


r^ q; 


E 


kO 




CTl >> 


sr 


1— S- 




n3 


E 


rt ^ 


i*- E 


s_ 


4- 3 


o 


o tn 




E 


i= 


3 CO 


3 


S- CU 


E 


>>-a 


X 


1 — 3 


ft3 


-C +-) 


E 


+J 00 




E 


i(_ 


O I— 


O 


E <0 




o 


S^ 


E •!- 


fO 


(0 en 


O) 


OJ o 


>) 


E >— 
o 


{/> 


-a o 


QJ 


o) uj 


+-> 


+j 


<e 


ns S- 


o 


E O 




•1- J3 


"O 


+J S- 


c: 


(/5 fO 




UJ 31 


IJD 


• 


r^ 


I 


c ^ 


n 


S- 




CLI 


0) 


J3 


S- 



-U- 



CD 



O 



in 



O 



in 

CM 



o 

CM 



in 



o 



in 



OBS/gN '3iVy MOIJ 1\/iOi NISVa HHN 



3-5 



General Patterns of Circulation in Long Island Sound 



The waters of New Haven Harbor ultimately flush into Long 

2 
Island Sound, which covers more than 2400 km and whose circulation 

patterns have been well characterized by the Long Island Sound Regional 

Study (197 3) . The following is a brief summary from that report. 



Circulation patterns in Long Island Sound and adjacent estu- 
aries are controlled by tides, fresh water inflow, winds and other 
weather conditions , bottom topography and salinity and temperature 
gradients. The circulation pattern influences the chemical composition 
of the water and the sediment distribution within the basin. In gen- 
eral, the tidal range increases to the west, while current velocities 
decrease. The circulation pattern in the Long Island tidal basin shows 
an exchange of water at the eastern end with a net outward flow of 
surface water to Block Island Sound and an influx of more dense bottom 
water from Block Island Sound. In western Long Island Sound, surface 
fresh water moves eastward into the Sound from the East River, while 
Sound bottom water flows westward into the East River. In central Long 
Island Sound, the tidal current patterns flow in an elliptical counter- 
clockwise direction. Upwelling occurs in the central Sound, resulting 
in decreased transport in bottom layers . Upwelling has been reported 
along the Connecticut shore between New Haven and Old Saybrook and in 
coastal Long Island between Mattituck Inlet and Orient Point (Hollman 
and Sandberg, 1972 in Long Island Sound Regional Study, 1973) . Tidal 
currents run parallel to the shoreline under the influence of coastal 
topography . 



Climatology 

The Long Island Sound climate has also been described in some 
detail in the Long Island Sound Regional Study (1973) . The four sea- 
sons, consistent monthly precipitation, localized temperature changes, 
and the moderating maritime influence of Long Island Sound air masses 



3-6 



characterize the climate of this area. The moderating maritime influ- 
ence is most evident in late spring and summer, when water temperatures 
are cooler than air temperatures, and in the late autumn and winter, 
when water temperatures are generally warmer than air temperatures. The 
climate is spatially and annually variable. Mean annual temperatures 
range from 9.4 to 12.8°C decreasing eastward from New York City, inland 
from the Connecticut coastline, and eastward on Long Island (Long Island 
Sound Regional Study, 1973) . Monthly means of daily maximum and daily 
minimum air temperature from 1971 to 1977 at Bridgeport, Connecticut, 
show a regular pattern (Figure 3-2) . Warmest temperatures generally 
occurred in July, but during 1973 and 1976 peak temperatures occurred in 
August; highest summer mean was in July 1974 (29.2 C) whereas the lowest 
was in July 1971 and August 1976 (18.3 C) . Coldest temperatures occurred 
in January or February with record cold occurring in January 1977, when 
the mean minimum was -8.1 C and the mean maximum -1.4 C. 

Monthly totals of daily precipitation at Bridgeport from 1971 
to 1977 are presented in Figure 3-2. 



Previous Studies - New Haven Harbor 

The harbor has been actively studied from a number of view- 
points over the years. The New Haven Harbor Station Ecological Mon- 
itoring Studies by Normandeau Associates, Inc. (NAI) provide the most 
recent and comprehensive information on hydrographic characteristics of 
the harbor waters. Beginning in May 1971, monthly hydrographic surveys 

(up to 20 harbor-wide sampling stations and continuous in situ monitor- 
ing) have measured the following parameters: temperature, salinity, 
dissolved oxygen, pH, and turbidity (NAI, 1971b, 1972, 1973a, 1974a, 
1974b, 1975a, 1976a, 1977a and 1978a). On September 3, 1975, a series 
of thermal infra-red overflights was conducted to docioment the New Haven 
Harbor thermal regime during operation of the New Haven Harbor Station 

(NAI, 1976b); extensive in situ information on ambient water temperatures 
was also collected during these overflights. During the summer and fall 



3-7 



Sa3i3WIiN33 



3q 3ynivy3dW3i 



1J3 
CO 






00 
CM 






o 

CSJ 



J L 



I I I 





u_ 


Q. 




U- 


I-H 




O 


CJ 




Z 


LU 




rJ 


Di 




q: 


Q. 








c: 


1 









r- 



T- 
o 



00 



-T- 

U3 



-r 



T" 

CM 



o 




z 




o 




t/^ 




< 


r^ 


"0 


r. 


'-D 


Oi 


V. 


•— « 


<r 




E 




Ll- 








O 




z 




o 




00 




«I 


^£) 


-3 


p^ 


-^ 


en 


s- 


1-H 


>I 




z 




li- 




T 




o 




z 




o 




c/) 




<r 


in 


^^ 


r^ 


•-3 


crv 


^ 


*— 1 


er 




E 




Li. 




•-^ 




o 




•z. 




o 




OO 




«£ 


"* 


•-3 


p^ 


^^ 


en 


TL 


— < 


<t 




i: 




Li- 




O 




Q 




Z 




o 




(/I 




«t 


ro 


•-3 


r^ 


T 


en 


Z 


t— 1 


< 




Z 




Li- 




-n 




o 




•^ 




o 




w^ 




«S 


CVJ 


o 


r^ 


o 


Ol 


£ 


1—1 


< 




a: 




u. 




^^ 




o 




z 




o 




CO 




<: 


^H 


'O 


r^ 


-s 


Ol 


£ 


I— 1 


< 




z: 




u. 




o 




a 




z 




o 




oo 




<£ 


o 


Tl 


r^ 


'O 


a> 


z: 


.— » 


t. 




s 




u. 




T 





o o o 

n c\j .-H "— ' 

1 1 I 1 


I-H 






' 










^ --^ -~ 




o 

z 




, ^ — ^ 




o 








iTl 




C^ \,^^ 




•5 


r- 




-3 


t-» 


""^ V. ^********»w 




T) 


Oi 


■* ,^ ^****»1,^,^^ 




Z 


t-* 


*^ ,.^ ^****- 




«I 




"* " "^--"tr-"^ 


■^m,^ 






^^^^"^ 


> 


a 








^^---^i^iiii^-^^^-- — 




z 
o 








v> 




^^ c"^ 




< 


vo 




'^ 


r^ 


\^._ V 




-o 


o» 


^' "^^ ^^.^^ 




£ 


f-H 


^*-"-,.^^---^-..^^^ 








"^^ 


> 


o 

z 




-^ — ^_ — * 




^ -^ ^^^t"""''^ 




o 




•^■^ ^—-"'''^^'^ 




lo 




r^^" ^""^"^ 




«I 


IT) 


!„^^^ ^ 




'O 


r^ 


**• S^ ^'^*''^*«ii,fc_ 




^^ 


Ol 


"^^■^ 






t—f 


*** ^ ^***«iS,,^ 




z 




*> > 


k 






-— ""^^.-^^-""■"■^ 










o 
z 




-*'^'^ ^'^^ 




o 




.*- "^ "^ ^" 




«rt 




Z^" f 




«s 


^ 


"II, ^^^ 




T 


rv 


""^•s- ^^*- 




'Tt 


a> 


*^ "*■*» "m^^ 




z: 


t— « 


^*"^ ^""^^^ 




•I 




~"^^ ^ 


> 






- - - -■ ^..S^-— -^"^^ 


s: 


a 

z 




•^'^ ^ _^*— "^^"^^ 


=) 


o 




Q- c;^^^ 


t— t 


lO 


fO 


^ 


-^ 


r-* 


^^^^^^^^"""^-^ 


1— t 






i -^^I^ 


:? 








3 C""c^^^^^^^ 




z 
o 


CM 

1^ 


^* "^^ ^^*^**Nfc^ 




T) 


o\ 


^ ■* ^*''***'*'^^ 




£ 


»-i 


*" "* — „^ ^^^ 




«t 




** ■«. ^^■^^niii,^,^^^ 




£ 




-? ^ 


> 














*'' .^^ 




o 




^~'~ZS^^^ — — 




z 
o 








l« 




^ J 




«t 


»-t 


v^ V 




"O 


r^ 




'O 


o> 


^* "^^ -* ^****''^'*'*>^ 




£ 


9^ 


"** "^-^ ^^ ^.^^ 




«C 




** «^ "^*iiii^^ 




£ 




"^^^^ 


„^^ 


lU. 




•^ 




'^ 




t^ 




* 


■^^ 


r^ _.. — — ■ 








Li_ <n . • 




o 




o T-* .^■ — 




l<0 




.*- 




i>C 




_ , / 




"o 








£ 




SL LO ~-~ — 




£ 
u. 




^ \ 




•o 




-T ' 1 1 1 I 1 


J 




^ 



•r- o 

E J3 

S- 

-a re 

n3 

fo o) t~^ 

E > CTi 
•I- 03 I — 

X re 

fT3 *» 

E S ■!-> 

O) s- 
oj 2: o 

S- Q. 

3 S- O) 

+-> o q: 
to *<- 

s- >> 

O) u- s_ 

cm- n3 
E O E 
CD c: E 

+-> =3 3 

1 — T3 to 
•I- (U cu 

fO -t-> •!- 

•I- 3 

H- 73 -•-> 
0)00 

I/) O-I — 
C (O 

03 .C O 

0) +-> •!— 

E •■- CD 

s o 
>5 ■— 

I— " o 

.C ro O 

+-> QJ UJ 

C S- 

O 03 S_ 

E O 

+-> J2 

-Obs- 
cure 
03 -r- n; 

c o c 

o OI O) 

•r- C > 
■M C 03 

fd o n: 
+-> o 

Q. " <D 

•p- 4-> :z 
o s- 

CD O 
S- Q. • 
Q- O) T3 

I •!- l/J 

x: s_ s- 

■1-) CD OJ 
E -M 

O C 03 



CM 

I 

CO 

t- 
en 



o 

00 



CD 



C3 



o 

CM 



S3H3NI 



Jo 3bniVy3dW3i 



3-8 



of 1976, a series of three-dimensional thermal surveys and continuous 
releases of Rhodamine WT dye were conducted to distinguish the thermal 
load introduced by the New Haven Harbor Station from other natural and 
man-made thermal influences (NAI, 1977b). 

A mathematical model developed in 1971 by EBASCO was used to 
evaluate possible discharge configurations. Physical model studies by 
the University of Florida were used to evaluate a buoyant jet configura- 
tion for the plant discharge (UOF, 1972). 

Limited drogue studies and current-meter measurements have 
helped to confirm historical data on circulation patterns in the estuary 
relative to dispersal of sewage effluents (NAI, 1975b; Goodkind & O'Day 
and Fay, Spofford and Thorndike, 1970a and b; and Quirk, Lawler and 
Matusky Engineers, 1969). Other data sources include hydrographic 
surveys and a hydrodynamic mathematical model being developed for New 
Haven sewage treatment plant siting (NAI, in preparation) . Additional 
data have been reported in earlier Raytheon ecological studies of the 
harbor (1970a, 1970b, 1971), Duxbury's studies of general circulation 
patterns in the harbor (1963) , and in government doc\iments on the harbor 
shellfish resource and water quality (FWQA, 1970) and maintenance of 
dredging activities (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 1973b) . 

Various studies of UI's English Station, located in the upper 
estuary on the Mill River about 2.6 km north of the New Haven Harbor 
Station, have focused on turbine heat specifications (UI, 1970) , the 
effect of heated cooling water discharges on Harbor temperatures (EBASCO, 
1971a and b and NAI, 1971a, 1974c and 1974e) , and thermal surveys of the 
receiving waters adjacent to the plant. 



Previous Studies - Long Island Sound 

A fairly broad data base is available for the waters of Long 
Island Sound. A report on the water quality of Long Island Sound was 



3-9 



prepared by the Federal Water Supply and Pollution Control Administra- 
tion (1969) and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (1971). Basic 
hydrographic studies of the Sound were conducted by Riley and Conover 
(1956) , and Riley (1956 and 1959) . Reports were compiled on the move- 
ment and quality of Long Island Sound waters (Hardy and Weyl, 1970; 
Hardy, 1972a and b) , distribution of dissolved oxygen in Long Island 
Sound (Hardy and Weyl, 1971), sources and movements of water in the 
Sound (Long Island Sound Regional Study, 1973 and 1975) , physical ocean- 
ography and water quality of western Long Island Sound (Jay and Bowman, 
1975) , gravitational circulation in Long Island Sound (Wilson, 1976) , 
and environmental baseline studies in the Sound from 1972 to 1975 by the 
National Marine Fisheries Service (Reid, Frame and Drexler, 1976) . A 
temperature prediction model for Long Island Sound was prepared by Stone 
and Webster (1972). More recently. Bowman has prepared a pollution 
prediction model of Long Island Sound (1976) and examined nutrient 
distribution and transport in the Sound (1977) . Garvine and Monk have 
studied the frontal structure of the Connecticut River plume (1974) , and 
Gordon (1973) and Bokuniewicz (1974, 1975 and 1976) have published a 
number of reports on sedimentation and dredging activities in Long 
Island Sound. 



EnviTormental Studies at Other Power Plant Sites 

In addition, certain environmental data from various other 
operating power plants on Long Island Sound are available for purposes 
of comparison with possible impacts at New Haven Harbor Station. These 
include: thermal surveys and hydrographic studies at Bridgeport, Con- 
necticut (NAI, 1973b); biological studies at Stamford, Connecticut (NAI, 
1974d) ; thermal plume studies at Middletown, Montville, Norwalk and 
Devon Stations (Lawler, Matusky and Skelly Engineers, 1975a, b and c; 
1976); hydrographic studies at Millstone Nuclear Station (Battelle, 
1977) ; biological and hydrographic studies of thermal pollution at 
Northport, New York (SUNY Marine Sciences Research Center, 1970; Weyl, 
1971) ; and baseline studies at Shoreham Station, New York (New York Ocean 



3-10 



Science Laboratory, 1974) . Local climatological data to supplement 
these studies are available from various National Weather Bureau Sta- 
tions including both New Haven (through 1969) and Bridgeport (through 
1977) , Connecticut. 



METHODS 

Physical and chemical measurements were taken monthly in New 
Haven Harbor and adjacent Long Island Sound from May 1971 through 
October 1977. Station locations are shown in Figure 3-3. Results of 
these monthly surveys provide a comparison with data collected at the 
continuous monitoring station located on the New Haven Harbor Station 
pier. 



Monthly Sicrveys 

Profile measurements of temperature, conductivity, dissolved 
oxygen, pH, and transparency were obtained during monthly surveys at 17 
sampling stations (Figure 3-3) at both high and low tides. Measurements 
were made at 1-m depth intervals from surface to bottom. Temperature, 
conductivity, dissolved oxygen, and pH values were measured in the field 
using a Hydrolab Surveyor Model 6D water quality analyzer. Transparency 
was measured with a Secchi disc. On each given survey date, data were 
collected during 3-hr periods within 1.5 hrs of high-water slack (data 
designated as "flood") and low-water slack (data designated as "ebb") . 
Salinity values were calculated from conductivity observations . 

Prior to each monthly survey, the Hydrolab Surveyor system was 
calibrated in accordance with procedures recommended by the manufac- 
turer, as modified by NAI for the purposes of this study. Calibration 
of the system was checked after each survey to permit evaluation of the 
acceptability of data. All data were accepted. 



3-11 



Physical/Chemical 
Sampling Stations 





1971 








JAN FtU r-lAFt APR 


MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV 


DEC 




F E F E F C F E 


F E F E r I F E F E F E F E 


F E 


1 




XX XX XX XX XX XX XX 


X X 


2 




XX XX XX XX XX XX XX 


X X 


'^ 




XX XX XX XX XX XX XX 


X X 






XX XX XX XX XX XX XX 


X X 


5 




XX XX XX XX XX XX XX 


X X 


6 




XX XX XX XX XX XX XX 


X X 


9 
= 11 


PROGRAM NOT 
INITIATED 


XX XX XX XX XX XX XX 
XX XX XX XX XX XX XX 

XX XX XX XX XX XX XX 


X X 

X X 
X X 






XX XX XX XX XX XX XX 


X X 






XX XX XX XX XX XX XX 


X X 


U 15 




XX XX XX XX XX XX XX 


X X 


15 




XX XX XX XX XX XX XX 


X X 


18 




XX XX XX XX XX XX XX 


X X 


20 




XX XX XX XX XX XX XX 


X X 


■n 




XX XX XX XX XX XX XX 


X X 


22 




XX XX XX XX XX XX XX 


X X 





2> 


.ENGLISH fh 
STftTlON it 1 


^ NEW HAVEN yt*" 
\^ LONG WHABtf *• 


f 


>L^ oty: 


y 5 9 

r 3 


\ NEW HAVEN 
n HARBOR 
^ STATION 


V 6 




\ 


WEST i 
HAVEN I 




) 


SANO?ilr» 
PCHNTjr 


^,- 


^ 




15 

16 


12 V 


18 


20 


22 


^"^^\ 21 









1972 






1973 












JAN FEB MAR 


APR 


MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC 


JAN FEB MAR APR MAY 


JUN 


JUL AUG SEP 


OCT NOV 


DEC 




F E F E F E 


F E 


FE FE FE FE FE FE FE FE 


F E F E F E F E F E 


F E 


F E F E F E 


F E F E 


F E 


1 


XX XX XX 




XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX 


XX XX XX XX XX 


X X 


XX XX XX 


XX XX 




2 


XX XX XX 




XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX 


XX XX XX XX XX 


X X 


XX XX XX 


XX XX 




3 


XX XX XX 




XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX 


XX XX XX XX XX 


X X 


XX XX XX 


XX XX 




4 


XX XX XX 




XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX 


XX XX XX XX XX 


X X 


XX XX XX 


XX XX 




5 


XX XX XX 




XX XXXXXXXXXXXX 


XX XX XX XX XX 


X X 


XX XX XX 


XX XX 




6 


XX XX XX 




XXX XXXXXXXXXXXX 


XX XX XX XX XX 


X X 


XX XX XX 


XX XX 




^ 8 


XX XX XX 




XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX 


XX XX XX XX XX 


X X 


XX XX XX 


XX XX 




g 9 


XX XX XX 


Q 


XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX 


XX XX XX XX XX 


X X 


XX XX XX 


XX XX 




1=11 


XX XX XX 


t^ 


XX XXXXXXXXXX 


XX XX XX XX XX 


X X 


XX XX XX 


XX XX 


3 


2 12 


XX XX XX 


UJ 


XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX 


XX XX XX XX XX 


X X 


XX XX XX 


XX XX 


o 


"^ 13 


XX XX XX 


d 


XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX 


XX XX XX XX XX 


X X 


XX XX XX 


XX XX 


y 


15 


XX XX XX 


y 


XX XXXX XXXXXX 


XX XX XX XX XX 


X X 


X XXX 


XXXX 


C3 


16 


XX XX XX 


car 


XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX 


XX XX XX XX XX 


X X 


X X X X X 


XX XX 




18 


XX XX XX 


^ 


XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX 


XX XX XX XX XX 


X X 


X X X X X 


XXX 


s 


20 


XX XX XX 


•^ 


XXXXXXXXXXXX XXX 


XXXXXX XX 


X X 


X XXX 


XX XX 


s 


21 


XX XX XX 


^ 


XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX 


XX XX XX XX XX 


X X 


XXX 


XX XX 


o 


22 


XX XX XX 




XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX 


XX XX XX XX XX 


X X 


X XXX 


XX XX 







1974 


1975 




JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC 


JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC 




F E F E F E F E F E F E F E F E F E F E F E F E 


F E F E F E F E F E F E F E F E F E F E F E F E 


1 


XXXX XX XX XX XXXXXX X XX X XX 


XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX 


2 


XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX X XX 


XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX 


3 


XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX 


XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX 


4 


XX XX XX XX X XX XX XX XX XX XX XX 


XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX 


5 


XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX 


XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX 


6 


XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX 


XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX 


8 


XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX KX 


XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX 


1^ 9 


XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX 


XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX 


^ ll 


XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX 


XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX 


P 12 


XX XX XX X XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX 


XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX 


2 13 


XXXX X X XXXX XXXX XX XX XX XX 


XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX X XX 


•^ 15 


XX XX XX X XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX 


XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX X XX 


16 


XX XX X X XX XXXX XXXX XX XX XX 


XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX X XX 


18 


XXXXX X XXXXXXVXXXX XXXX 


XX XXXX XX XX XX XX XXXXX X XX 


20 


XX X X XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX 


XXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXX XX 


21 


X X X XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX 


XXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXX XX 


22 


X X X XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX 


XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX 





1976 










1977 








JAN FEB 


MAR 


APR MAY JUN 


JUL AUG SEP OCT 


NOV DEC 


JAN 


FEB 


MAR APR HAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC 




F E F E 


F t 


F E F E F E 


F E F E F E F E 


F E F E 


F E 


F E 


FE FE FE FE FE FE FE FE FE FE 


1 


XX XX 


X X 


XX XX XX 


XX XX XX XX 


XX XX 


x 


X X 


XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX 


2 


XX XX 


X X 


XX XX XX 


XX XX XX XX 


XX XX 


X 


X X 


XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX .XX XX 


3 


XX XX 


X X 


XX XX XX 


XX XX XX XX 


XX XX 


X 


X X 


XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX 


4 


XX XX 


X 


XX XX XX 


XX XX XX XX 


XX XX 


X 


X X 


XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX 


5 


XX XX 


X X 


XX XX XX 


XX XX XX XX 


XX XX 


X 


X X 


XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX 


6 


XX XX 


X X 


XX XX XX 


XX XX XX XX 


XX XX 


X 


X X 


XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX 


8 


XX XX 


X X 


XX XX XX 


XX XX XX XX 


XX XX 




X X 


XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX 




XX XX 


X X 


XX XX XX 


XX XX XX XX 


XX XX 


X 


X X 


XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX 


g n 


X X 


X X 


XX XX XX 


XX XX XX XX 


XX XX 




X X 


XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX 




XX XX 


X X 


XX XX XX 


XX XX XX XX 


XX XX 




X X 


XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX 




XX XX 


X X 


XX XX XX 


XX XX XX XX 


XXXX 




X X 


XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX 




XX XX 


X X 


XX XX XX 


XX XX XX XX 


XXXX 




X X 


XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX 


18 
20 
21 
22 


XX XX 


X X 


XX XX XX 


XX XX XX XX 


XX XX 




X X 


XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX 


XX XX 


X X 


XX XX XX 


XX XX XX XX 


XX XX 




X X 


XXXXXX XXXXXXXX X XX X 


XX XX 


X X 


XX XX XX 


XX XX XX XX 


XXXX 




X X 


XX XXXX XX XX XX XX XX XX X 


XX XX 


X X 


XXX XX 


XX XX XX XX 


XX XX 




X X 


XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX 


XX XX 


X X 


XX XX XX 


XX XX XX XX 


XX XX 




X X 


XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX 



Figure 3-3. Physical/Chemical data collected from May 1971 to October 1977. 
New Haven Harbor Station Ecological Monitoring Studies, 1979. 



3-12 



In addition to routine survey and post-survey calibrations, 
beginning in July 1976 water samples were collected at Stations 2, 9 and 
20 at surface and near bottom on each ebb-tide survey for independent 
determination of salinity (by laboratory salinometer) and dissolved 
oxygen (by Winkler titration) . These independent estimates were used as 
a check on accuracy of the Hydrolab Surveyor. 



Continuous Monitoring Station 

A Honeywell continuous water quality monitoring station has 
been in operation on the New Haven Harbor Station pier since August 
1970. Water is pumped to the sensing instrument package from a depth of 
12 ft below mean sea level (MSL) ; reported data refer to this depth 
unless otherwise indicated. Except for gaps due to maintenance and 
malfunctions, data have been recorded continuously at 6-min intervals 
for the following parameters: 

Time Temperature (at surface and -12 ft 

pH MSL) 

Conductivity Tide height (diaphragm positioned at 

Turbidity -12 ft MSL) 

Dissolved Oxygen 

Accuracy of the various sensors was checked weekly against alternative 
instruments or chemical analysis (dissolved oxygen) and appropriate 
adjustments were made to the Honeywell unit accordingly. 



DESCRIPTION OF NEW HAVEN HARBOR HYDROGRAPHY 

In general, our surveys have shown that New Haven Harbor 
experiences typical seasonal patterns in physical/chemical parameters: 
1) warmest water temperatures are reached in July and August, while 
coldest temperatures occur in January and February; 2) lowest salinities 



3-13 



occur during periods of winter thaw {February, March) and spring runoff 
(April and May) ; and 3) dissolved oxygen levels are inversely related to 
seasonal temperature fluctuations. Transparency and pH show little 
evidence of seasonal variation. 

Description of the hydrography of New Haven Harbor necessi- 
tates the detailed presentation of data which characterize spatial and 
temporal differences and similarities in the parameters measured. To 
facilitate these comparisons, actual data, rather than statistical 
constructs (means, standard deviations, etc.) are presented. The final 
year of data collection, November 1976-October 1977, was arbitrarily 
selected as a "sample year" for detailed examination of spatial and 
seasonal trends. This sample year description was then utilized as a 
basis for multi-year comparisons. This approach reduces the redundancy 
attendant with presentation of all data years in detail and avoids the 
artificiality of combinative statistics. Means of observations dis- 
tributed among many years may not represent either characteristic or 
actual occurrences, and thus require more critical review than actual 
values. 

Our characterization of the hydrography of New Haven Harbor 
consists of a general description of circulation patterns and the estu- 
arine nature of the harbor, a detailed description of a sample year by 
month, a discussion of characteristic spatial variability within the 
harbor, a description of similarities and differences between the sample 
year and other years studied, and a summary of the hydrography of New 
Haven Harbor. 



Estuarine Classification and Harbor-W-ide Circulation Patterns 

The major estuaries in the Long Island Sound region are the 
Connecticut, Thames, Housatonic and Quinnipiac (NERBC, 1973) . In gen- 
eral, there is a two-layer transport system at the heads of these estu- 
aries. Fresh water flows seaward near the surface while the tides move 



3-14 



denser saline water upstream along the river bottom. Salinity generally 
increases downstream and from top to bottom at any point in the brackish 
fjart of t}i(.' fjKtuary. Tho distribution of salinity chancj(?s with the 
tidal stage and the amount of fresh water inflow. 

Though various attempts have been made to classify estuaries 
into types (Officer, 1977) , such typif ications must remain somewhat im- 
precise, as there is a continuous range in nature of such character- 
istics as geometry, bathymetric configuration, and physical character- 
istics of circulation and mixing. Furthermore, estuaries are by defi- 
nition the interface of river and sea, making them extremely dynamic and 
changeable. Nevertheless, despite the inherent problems, a distinction 
can be made in terms of the vertical salinity distribution. Estuaries 
can range from a "well-mixed" condition in which there is essentially no 
variation in the salinity in a vertical column, to a "stratified" con- 
dition with a halocline between the upper and lower portions of a water 
column. In New Haven Harbor, conditions range from unstratified to 
weakly or partially stratified (salinity change of a few parts per 
thousand (ppt) from surface to bottom) to a "strongly or highly stra- 
tified" situation (salinity change of at least 5 to 10 ppt from surface 
to bottom) . 

The driving forces for estuarine circulation are longitudinal 
surface slope (acting in a "down estuary" direction) and the longitudi- 
nal density gradient force which is a function of ambient salinity and 
temperature (acting in an "up estuary" direction) . These two driving 
forces are balanced by the internal and bottom frictional forces. 
For the condition in which the river runoff is small, as in New Haven, 
the net effect is that the surface slope force will be dominant in the 
upper portion of the water column, producing a seaward flow, and that 
the density gradient force will be dominant in the lower portion of the 
water column, producing a landward flow. In some cases there can be an 
important contribution from a third driving force, wind stress at the 
surface, and in fact wind effects are often important in New Haven 
Harbor circulation. 



3-15 



General circulation patterns in New Haven Harbor have been 
documented by Duxbury (1963) . His composite chart for flood-tidal 
currents (Figure 3-4) shows an indraft from Long Island Sound at speeds 
varying from 22 to 45 cm/sec flowing northward along the channel axis 
and upward into the Quinnipiac at 27 cm/sec. Apparently the flow into 
Morris Cove is not as strong during the flood as during the ebb, sug- 
gesting that residual inner harbor waters from the preceding ebb tide 
are not entirely displaced by the flood. During the ebbing tide, a 
small eddy forms between Long Wharf and the West River channel, causing 
a localized trapping of water and a consequent decrease in flushing rate 
(Figure 3-4) . The velocity shear between this eddy and the flow out of 
the main channel creates a line of floating debris (personal obser- 
vation) . Also, there is a tendency for the ebb to flow into Morris Cove 
at a relatively high rate near shore (27 cm/sec) causing debris from the 
inner harbor to be carried close to the shore at both Fort Hale and 
Lighthouse Points. Flow observations at the mouth of the Mill and 
Quinnipiac Rivers show ebb trapping of Mill River effluent along the 
western bank and eventual contribution to the eddy off Long Wharf. On 
the flooding tide, water from the inner harbor is carried upstream into 
both rivers. 

Data collected by NOAA-NOS at the harbor entrance show a mean 
maximum current velocity of 21 cm/sec on flood tide and 31 cm/sec on 
the ebb. At the Tomlinson Bridge, mean peak tidal current velocity is 
21 cm/sec on flood and 26 cm/sec on ebb. Tidal flow rates vary accord- 
ing to the stage of the tide but average about 2500 m /sec over an 
entire 12.4-hr tidal cycle. Ebbing tidal currents are stronger than 
those on flood (Duxbury, 1963) due to the net seaward transport of 
freshwater runoff. Stronger currents are generally restricted to the 
main harbor channel, except for fairly strong (37 to 67 cm/sec) currents 
to the south of Morris Cove and directly off Lighthouse Point during ebb 
tide. In the main channel inside the breakwaters, the average current 
is only 21 cm/sec. 



-3-16 




Figure 3-4. Composite flood (a) and ebb (b) tide currents, New Haven Harbor 
(From Duxbury, 1963), New Haven Harbor Ecological Studies 
Summary Report, 1979. 



3-17 



Data from thermal infrared overflights, aerial photographs of 
sewage effluent plumes, and drogue studies in the inner harbor confirm 
the basic circulation pattern described by Duxbury. 



Salinity Distribution 

The physical/chemical water column measurement program for the 
New Haven Harbor Station Ecological Studies has focused on ambient 
salinity and temperature distributions. Review of the data from monthly 
hydrographic surveys since May 1971, continuous measurements from the 
Honeywell Water Quality Monitor (operating at the New Haven Harbor 
Station pier since August 1970) , plant intake measurements by UI per- 
sonnel, and special suirveys and supplemental data from other workers in 
the harbor show that the degree of stratification varies sharply from 
the head of the estuary (moderately stratified) to the mouth of the 

estuary (weakly stratified or well mixed) . 

') 

In general. New Haven Harbor's salinity fluctuations reflect 
relative changes of rates of evaporation and precipitation (runoff) . As 
a result of high evaporation and low freshwater runoff, maximum salinity 
values are observed from June to September; lowest values occur during 
February, March and April when freshwater runoff is at a peak. Warmer, 
less saline water tends to flow out over cooler, more saline (and con- 
sequently, denser) ocean water. Ebb-tide salinity values are lower than 
flood-tide values at inner harbor stations during periods of significant 
runoff. Mean salinity over the course of the sample year was 20.9 ppt 
and ranged from 2.0 to 27.7 ppt. 

Data from the sample year (November 1976 through October 1977) 
show the details of annual salinity variations in the Harbor (Figures 3- 
5, 3-6) . During November sampling, Long Island Sound waters along the 
axis of the main channel near the harbor mouth ranged from 27 ppt on the 
surface to 28 ppt on the bottom. On the flooding tide, strong landward 
flov/s created a sharp gradient between Stations 8 and 11 and carried 

(Text continued on page 3-26) 



3-18 




1>C 



LU rc 

Q UJ 
1—1 CD 



C2 o 



o 

o 









CTl 



UJ Qc: 

O LU 

I — I CO 

I— s: 

UJ 

CQ C_3 

CQ UJ 

UJ Q 




cTS; 



(MTW) W 'Hid3a 



(«TW) W 'HldSa 



Vi3 
CTl 



UJ cc 
Q UJ 
I — 1 CQ 



CQ >■ 
CQ O 




0) 



o 



UD 




M- r^ 




o en 




1 — CO 




on oj 




•1- S- -r- 




X <u -o 




fd jo 3 




E +J 




QJ O) C/) 




-C > 




+J O r— 




:s (o 




en o 




C •< -r- 




O QJ en 




.— -o o 




(C •!- 1 — 




■)-> o 




on o 




+J J3 UJ 




O J3 




CU <U S_ 




to O 




E "-Q 




<0 1— S- 




S- OJ (O 




4-> £z n: 




c: 




CU (O c: 




S- ^ CU 




3 o > 




4-> (O 


■ 


03 s- rn 


crv 


s- o 


r--. 


0) J3 S 


CTl 


Q. S- CU 


r— 


E "3 2: 




CU nr 


A 


+-> 


-!-> 


c • 


s- 


T3 0) f^- 


o 


c: > r^ 


Q. 


re (0 '^ 


CU 


n: <— 


Csl 


>> 




+-> S s- 


>> 


•r- CU CU 


S- 


C 2: J2 


(13 


•t- o 


(= 


1— CU +-> 


E 


ro ^ O 


3 


CO +-> o '>o 


• 




ro 




CU 




s_ 




Z! 




cn 





03 00 O ^ 

(WTW) W 'Hid3a 



(MTW) W ' 



3-19 




.n 






Q >- 

1—1 on 

h- < 

CO z 
CO << 
UJ 'D 



o 
o 



a: 









LU >- 

Q oc 
1-1 <c 
I— =) 

CO ca 

CO L±J 
LU Ll_ 




_^ri 



-a 

(U 



o 
o 



0-3 



(MIM) w'Hidaa 



(M1N) N'Hld3a 



1^ 

(Ti 



Q >- 

1-1 Di 

I- < 

CQ Z 
CQ < 
LU '-0 








-o 


ro- 










-M 




E 


C 






o 


__ 




o 


tn : 










• 


o J 




LO 




CO 




<u 






s- 



(MHW) W*Hid3a 



T» I T 1 

^ *D OD O i^ 



3-20 










O 

o 









D3 q; 

CQ CL. 
UJ et 









- 








r / 


\ 




rO- 


f/ 


rj^^«<. 






/ 


/7\ 


; 






/ 


1 / 


"- UJ 






/ / 


/ 


s 






' / 


/ 


K 






/ 


/ 


■^ < 




00- 


;y , ,-^i 






/ / 










/ / 










/ / 




< 






/ / 




* 


* 




/ / 








— 




f 




V 




- 








^ 


ro 








^ 


w 
























/ 










/ 










/ 








*£- 


/ 




s. 


d 















CVJl 


— «— 1 — 1— r 









■a 

+-> 

o 
o 



(wnw) N'Hidsa 



(MIW) w'Hidsa 



UJ 01 



o 

CQ Qi 
CQ CC 




QJ 

3 



o 



LO 

I 

CO 

cu 

s- 
::3 
en 



(MHW) W'HidSa 



(«nw) w'Hidsa 



3-21 



I — I CTi 



03 >- 
CO eC 






CQ >- 
CQ < 







■)-> 

c 
o 



73 



o 



CO 

O) 

3 



(M-IWl W'HidaO 



(MIW) w'Hidao 



3-22 



Q en 



CO 



Q CTi 



CO 




T3 
<U 



C 

o 
o 



(U 



4-> 

c 
o 
o 



(U 

i- 

3 



ID 00 

(AMW) W 'HidSa 



(M"1W) W'HidSa 



3-23 




en 



en 

LtJ LU 



CQ UJ 




o 



oc 









1 — 1 UJ 
1— CQ 
O 
03 h- 
CQ O 
LU O 



^ X 



(MHW) H'HldSa 



(M1N) W'HldBQ 






Qi 

UJ UJ 

Q CQ 



OQ Q- 
CQ UJ 
UJ 00 




-a 

0) 



o 
o 



LO 

I 

oo 

<u 

s- 

CD 



(«nw) w'Hidaa 



(MHW) w Hidaa 



3-24 







"— *i5e^ 


5^, 


IsS 




.^, 


jj 


% • 




s«E 


V" 






J^ \ 


§7 






_ii 


^ 


J-f-r- V* 


i^^-^ 


-^5-^ 


F 


■\ 


• 


•0*1 


^V 


^^>--- 




,--^ 


\ 






-^e:^ 




y 








• 


\ 
/ 



>- 

CQ 






LU 
CQ 



„^^J_N^^^,^ 




^*^s % /^ % 


\ " 




■\\ ■ 




:\ 













r 














«r^^ 




h^ 




ii 


ii ■ 


1m 


^ 


in 


•to 


'V 


\ . 




5? 








■ \ 

/ 



T3 
(U 



O 
O 



CO r^ CTi 
S- cr. r^ 
3 .— en 

o I— 
+-> s- 

C (D ' 
O -Q +-> 

o o s- 
+J o 
>, O CL 
+-> O O) 
•r- Qi 

•r- ■!-> >, 

1— l/l s- 

n3 :3 n3 

i/i en E 

=3 E 

0) cC 3 

•O OO 

•1^ >> t/5 

JD s: -r- 

O) «> 3 

n3 3 1— 

•O -Q O 
O OJ -r- 
O U- CT> 
t— O 

M- -O I— 
C O 
•> (O o 
E LlJ 

o <r> 
+-> r- s_ 
+-> o-i o 

O .— J2 

ja s- 

s- ro 

-a O) n: 

c XJ 
(O E E 

0) > > 
O O na 

rts z: re 

S- i- 3 

3 O Ol 

00 <+- z 



to 

I 

00 



0) 

5- 
3 



aooid 33wjyns 



aooid woiioa 



3-25 




>- 
en 

<: 

cn 

CO 



,«-.c,=V.!iv^^ 








" ' 


.1 






3e* 




' 




tr 


. 


■iJ^% 


',52 




^ 


c \ 






■ 


>^-^ 


/■I 


\ 


v_/ . 


\ 




> 






1 




\ 


■"^I^j 


• 






•s; 


































s5>\ 




























2S 


*ta 




\\ 






\ 
















,./ 


a 


si 


At' 

Is 


\ 




// 


.^i^^ 








\ 


^ 


/ / 

1 



-a 






!fi iM-\ 


>■ 




,^^:^3 


J ^ , 


"^ •%• 


""~~ — w ^p^ 




SPs 


S. '^ "Sk.' 










ii 


■*^ 2^ 


\ 


■^^^ 


'^*'\ 


\ 

/ 



o 



I 

CO 



993 33vjyns 



393 woiiog 



3-26 



residual ebb-tidal waters from the preceding tide (24.1 to 26 ppt) 
northward into the upper estuary. On the ebbing tide, salinities near 
the head of the estuary decreased to 19 to 25 ])pt and relatively fresh 
waters were carried southward beyond Fort Hale Park. At the harbor 
mouth, salinities were essentially unchanged through both phases of the 
tide. In December, salinity at the harbor mouth was down slightly, to 
26 ppt at the surface and 27 ppt near the bottom. Flood-tidal salin- 
ities throughout the estuary were 1 to 2 ppt lower than in November, 
whereas on the ebbing tide values at the head of the estuary were down 
to 12.7 ppt. Due to severe weather conditions during January, only ebb 
tide inner harbor measurements were made. Data showed that, on the 
ebbing tide, pronounced freshening was apparent at the head of the 
estuary (down to 6 ppt) . February conditions were very similar to those 
observed during December. Flood- tidal surface salinity values also 
showed freshened discharge from the West River extending out beyond 
Sandy Point and slightly more saline conditions on the east side of the 
harbor. 

By March, the influence of peak annual runoff caused a marked 
decrease in salinities. During flood tide, salinities at the harbor 
mouth were 26 ppt, at both the surface and bottom. The inner harbor 
showed pronounced near-surface stratification; salinity ranged from 12 
to 19 ppt. On the ebbing tide, salinities near the head of the estuary 
decreased to 6 ppt and strong stratification was evident out beyond 
Station 11. The remainder of the outer harbor actually had higher 
salinities. In April, the same basic pattern was repeated, with pro- 
nounced salinity stratification in the inner harbor and slightly higher 
salinities in the outer harbor on the ebbing tide. 

In May, salinities reached the lowest values of the year, 
probably due to a lag of the salinity minima of Long Island Sound waters 
behind the annual peak in runoff. Flood-tidal salinities were about 25 
ppt at the harbor mouth, slightly lower in the inner harbor, and strongly 
stratified near the head (down to 12 ppt) . As during the preceding 
months, ebb tidal salinities in the outer harbor showed a slight in- 



3-27 



crease over flood (about 1 ppt overall) and strong stratification at 
Station 1 (8.7 ppt at the surface and 11.2 ppt at the bottom). The 
salinity contour maps for May showed more saline conditions along the 
main channel and the eastern portion of the harbor, with less saline 
waters in the western portion of the harbor. In June, salinities 
started to increase again. Long Island Sound waters at the harbor mouth 
were vertically homogeneous, averaging around 26.6 ppt. Flood-tidal 
stratification was fairly weak (down to 17.9 ppt on the surface at 
Station 3) . During ebb tide, the mid-channel waters showed very little 
change, whereas, near the head of the harbor, surface salinities were 
down to 11.9 ppt and some stratification was apparent. July salinities 
rose slightly, to 27.7 ppt at Station 1. Both flood and ebb waters near 
the head of the estuary showed patterns identical to those of June, but 
with salinities 1 to 2 ppt higher. 

During August, when runoff typically reaches its yearly min- 
imum. Long Island Sound waters ranged from 24.8 to 27.0 ppt. The outer 
harbor was quite homogeneous, whereas the inner harbor and the head of 
the estuary were considerably more saline than earlier in the year (18.9 
to 26.3 ppt) with no pronounced stratification. It is also noteworthy 
that overall ebb-tidal salinity values were lower than flood-tidal 
values. The contour maps for August again showed a tendency for less 
saline waters on the west side of the harbor and more saline waters on 
the east side. By September, Sound waters had higher salinities, aver- 
aging around 25 ppt at the harbor mouth on both phases of the tide. 
More stratification than during the summer was apparent near the head of 
the estuary (down to 15 ppt on the ebbing tide) as a consequence of 
increased runoff. By October, the salinities of Sound waters were 
dropping again (down to 26-27 ppt) , strong stratification was again 
apparent in the inner harbor on flood and ebb tides, and runoff was 
increasing to typical seasonal levels. 



3-28 



Temperatuve Distribution for the Sample Year 

Temperature, in addition to salinity, plays an important role 
in harbor hydrodynamics and in determining the distribution of biolo- 
gical communities. 

In general, inner harbor stations have the highest tempera- 
tures as well as the greatest tidal temperature variations. The mean 
temperature for 17 stations over the sample year was 12.3 C, with a 
minimum monthly mean of 1.3 C and a maximum of 26.6 C. Maximum values 
were recorded in July and August. Thermal stratification, as well as 
pronounced salinity stratification, was evident during April at nearly 
all ebb-tidal survey stations. Little thermal variation with depth, 
tide or station location was seen during other monthly surveys. Excep- 
tions were at Station 2, near United Illuminating Company's English < 
Station discharge, and at Station 8, near the New Haven Harbor Station. 
At both of these locations, temperatures higher than ambient conditions 
were occasionally observed. 

Data from the sample year (November 1976 through October 1977) 
showed details of annual temperature variations in the Harbor (Figures 
3-5, 3-7) . In November, Long Island Sound waters along the axis of the 
main channel near the harbor mouth were isothermal (7.5 C) . Some 
elevated temperatures (8.0 to 8.5 C) were observed in the middle of the 
harbor during ebb tide, possibly corresponding to the Harbor Station 
discharge plume. Near the head of the estuary, conditions were iso- 
thermal and identical to those at the harbor mouth on both phases of the 
tide (7.5 C). By December, temperatures had dropped sharply. Long 
Island Sound waters and those of the outer harbor were generally iso- 
thermal (at 3.5 C) , whereas near the head of the estuary temperatures 
were somewhat lower (2.5 C) . At a few locations, the water column was 
theimally stratified, with the coldest water at the surface. Due to the 
severe cold weather, and attendant freezing, January data are incom- 
plete. Ebb tide temperatures were 0.0 C and colder. 



3-29 




ID 
ZD 



,^^ 


V'- 










-/ 
















7 


'>> 




5=5 




























li 


7 


'■ 


■ \ 







02 






'"■^s^tjs. 




I 














^^ 


\ 


^IS 




,/ 


'^, 




, ' 




JJ 


^^ 






/. 


■ *%. 


y . 


>x 


>- 


- SmrT^r 






\ 




— ....^ 




\ ^ 


oc 








\ 




. 






<: 




'^sT 




^ 


--7^:^ 


\n °x 




\. 


> 




S5^ 


i> 




i^i 


Q 


"v 


^— 


rr 




5i 


^k*^ 


. 


vl 


• \ 


^■ 


v,^^ \ 


m 




?s 


t^ 




.>W 




• 


^x. \ 


UJ 
Ll_ 


-^s^ 


^ 


A 


% 


^1i 




■^ 


■ / 







^ 




















































ItX 


V 


*Ss 




y^ 






JJ 


^ 


<Y 


^^ 


/■ 




\ ■ 


o 


V 


<^ 




,..-. 












N 






\ 


-.s^ 


^ 


J 


If 




I 


\ 

• / 




jn\ Jijjj/*^ 


^ \ ■ 


IV£ 


■ \ 


...^ \ 


1 

r 



■a 
<u 



4-> 

c 
o 

C_J 



lO 






s- 


s 




:3 


r-~ 


• 


o 


r^ 


o-i 


+j 


en 


1^ 


E 


1 — 


o^ 


O 




1 — 


o 


J- 






<u 


#1 


QJ 


J3 


-M 


i- 


o 


S- 


13 


+-) 


o 


+-) 


o 


Q. 


n3 


o 


(U 


S- 




cc 


O) 


r\ 




Q.+J 


>, 


e 


CO 


C 


cu 


3 


<o 


+-> 


cn E 




3 


i- 


(U eC 


ZJ 


-a 




00 


•1— 


•\ 




-!-> 


>i 


lO 




iC 


O) 


J3 


■?■ 




n 




■o 


(U 


n 


3 




>»+-> 


-o 


1- 


I/) 


c 


(O 




(O 


3 


r— 




s_ 


fO 


■o 


X5 


o 


o 


OJ 


•p— 


o 


Ll- 


CD 


1^ 




o 


M- 


T3 






C 


o 


r* 


IB 


o 


h: 




UJ 


O 


UD 




+-> 


1^ 


S- 


+J 


CT> 


o 


o 


, — 


JD 


XI 




S- 




S- 


fO 


-o 


a> 


n: 


E 


J3 




(O 


e 


c: 




OJ 


QJ 


0) 


> 


> 


o 


o 


n3 


(TS 


7" 


31 


M- 






S- 


S- 


2 


3 


o 


cu 


oo 4- z: 


r^ 






CO 






QJ 






S- 






3 






O) 







aooij 33vjyns 



aooij woiioa 



3-30 





Si ^~ 




IrS 






-»-\ 


1 . ■ 






s 


JL 


-^ 


/T 


A 


^\ . 


cc 


V 


K- 


• 




^_^" 






LU 




V 


• 


^ 




N 




no 




S| • 


'''^ 


1 


\ 


\ 


\ 


O 




li 


^^ 




i\s-. 




\ 


1— 




qa 


J 


^**^'. 


V T 


\ 


o 






^ 


y^ 


li 






o 


-=^=^ 


J 




if 






• / 





^\ ■ 




• \ 


j/^^H \ 


■ / 







, 


1 






t Ig5 .>i*-v- 


1^ ' 




5j ^ 


V »S5 1 J^ \ 


5y^ 


1— 


^ 


\- j>»>^/ ■ 


v^. \^ _ 


OO 




^K.' "^ 




— ) 






^8: ' " 


t3 




Si ^ ^^ 


/■ \ 




-=<^ 


<^ *i \ 


C ' 







Qi 
LU 
CO 





^: — 



















'■^^ 


lI 




S.S 




, 


5^ 


• 




is 


\\ 




;g 




_i^ 




\ 


>- 


-^ 


O ''^ 




^ 


*«^ 


% 




\\ • 


ai 






V 






r --- 


^^« 


\ 


<: 






?l^ 


• ] 


> 


>i 


■)°^ 


^ 


rj 






H 


^^£^ 




\ 


°\ 


q; 






ii 






A«^ 


'', \ 


CQ 
UJ 










'j^ 






~ 


U- 


-=-=^ 


^ 


J 




S| 




X 


■ ;/ 





. 


ET- 


T 














5s v; 


, if! 


r/- 






£g_^» 




■"vT • \ 




\ 


to 


B 


MT 

'* J 


CO 

V 


' \ 

7 


"f- f' 






X. 








^ii -^5 >^ 1 


1* • 


IH 


V4i-I^^^ 


N 






• \ 




/lassi'-'"'^ \ 


<: 


-^ 


-jr^ *i \ 


/ 



■a 
cu 



o 



(U 

i- 

CD 



aa3 33Vjyns 



993 lAl0ii09 



3-31 



By February, temperatures in the outer harbor and adjacent 
waters of Long Island Sound were as low as -0.5 C. Waters of the inner 
harbor were slightly wanner (up to 1.0 C) . The surface temj)orature maps 
show that warmer inner harbor waters tended to occupy the western side 
of the harbor whereas the eastern side was dominated by the colder Long 
Island Sound waters. 

March cross-sectional data show the cold isothermal conditions 
of Long Island Sound at the harbor mouth (Station 20) (average temp- 
erature was 3.0 to 3.5 C) . Within the inner harbor, a warmed near- 
surface layer about 1 m thick of up to 6.5 C was clearly evident. Near 
the head of the estuary on the ebbing tide, warm, low-salinity waters 
from upland drainage were flushed into the main harbor near Station 3 
and formed this surface layer. On the flooding tide, this warmed water 
became trapped on the western side of the harbor and colder, more saline 
waters intruded landward into the upper estuary. By April, seasonal 
warming of Long Island Sound waters was well established, with average 
temperatures of 8.0 to 9.0 C. Ebb-tidal temperatures were up to 14.5 C 
at Station 1 and the stratified layer across the inner harbor was almost 
2 m thick. The pattern for May remained about the same except that 
temperatures had increased by a few degrees (to 10.5 to 11.5 C) at the 
harbor mouth and up to 16.0 C in the Quinnipiac (Station 1) . On the 
flood tide, the warmed inner harbor waters from the preceding ebb tide 
moved toward the western half of the harbor. 

In June, Long Island Sound waters developed strong thermal 
stratification, averaging 17.5 C near the surface and 14.0 C near the 
bottom (Figure 3-5) . Across the inner harbor, temperatures were higher, 
but vertical gradients were less distinct due to greater mixing and a 
weak halocline. In July, the Sound showed a fairly thick, warm near- 
surface layer (21.0 to 22.7 C) and cool near-bottom waters (19.0 to 20.0 C) 
Land runoff on the ebbing tide was up to 26.0 C, but the isotherms 
indicated weaker stratification and more vertical mixing across most of 
the harbor. 



3-32 



By August, conditions had changed dramatically. The edge of 
Long Island Sound at Station 20 was essentially isothermal, ranging from 
21.2 to 22.0 C. Likewise, the entire harbor showed essentially no stra- 
tification, nor was there much variation between flood tide and ebb 
tide. This uniformity is also evident in the temperature contour maps. 
September conditions showed almost identical patterns , but temperatures 
were already starting to drop slightly with the passage of siimmer. With 
increased storm activity and runoff in the fall, October temperatures 
dropped sharply to 14.5 C in the Sound and outer harbor and 13.0 to 13.5 C 
near the head of the estuary. Conditions were quite uniform from sta- 
tion to station, with very little difference between tidal phases. 



Tempevature-Salinitij : Patterns of Density Changes During the Sample Year 

The inner harbor waters, as typified by the data collected at . 
Station 3, showed a sharp contrast between near-surface and near-bottom - 
waters for both flood tide and ebb tide (Figure 3-8) . Near-bottom 
waters cooled rapidly throughout the winter, starting in November and 
reaching minimum values in February. A slight January thaw was 
reflected as an ebb tide freshening. In March and April, salinities 
declined and temperatures increased sharply. Through July, temperatures 
continued to rise as salinities increased at the surface and were stable 
near bottom. In July and August, both the highest temperatures and the 
highest salinities were observed. Through the fall, temperatures 
dropped rapidly and salinities decreased slightly. This pattern for 
near-bottom waters is remarkably consistent for both tidal phases, but 
ebb-tidal conditions were sometimes 5 ppt fresher than flood-tidal 
conditions (Figure 3-8) . 

Near-surface waters overall had much lower salinities and 
slightly higher temperatures than near-bottom waters, but the annual 



3-33 



STATION 3 




24- 


SURFACE FLOOD 


J 
















22- 




y 


y 


>'^ ^^' 






/ 


«f 


A 


20- 






/ 
/ 




1R- 




\ 


/ 


/ / 


16- 








J 


(/ 


14 ■ 


y 


-^ ^ 


1977 




1977 


17- 


/ 






M^ 


10 


/ 






\ 


8- 


/ 




1976 


.»4»"" 




/ 






6- 






/ 
/ 
/ 


' 




4- 


N. 


s. 


/ 


/io 








•q 


n 


2- 








\ 






N 


. F 


A 



12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 



SALINITY (PPT) 



STATION 20 



24 

22 

20 

18 

16 

14 

12 

10 

8 

6 

4 

2 





• SURFACE EBB 

-BOTTOM EBB 




,Jf ,'0 1977 
1976 



24 
22 H 

20 
18 
16 
14 
12 
10 



ATN 
I r N 



Hi 



"~i 1 1 1 1 1 1 r" F- 

12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 f'28 

SALINITY (PPT) 



SALINITY (PPT) 



SURFACE FLOOD 

BOTTOM FLOOD 




12 14 16 18 20 22 24 25 >" 28 
SALINITY (PPT) 



Figure 3-8. Temperature vs salinity, Stations 3 and 20, surface and 
bottom, flood and ebb tides, October 1976-October 1977. 
New Haven Harbor Ecological Studies Summary Report, 1979. 



3-34 



cycle was very similar. At this station, the lowest salinities occurred 
in March and April and the highest in July, August, and September. 
Lowest near-surface temperatures were observed in January and February 
whereas the highest occurred in July. Month-to-month temperatures 
between flood and ebb have been quite similar, but ebb-tidal salinities 
were 2 to 6 ppt fresher than flood-tidal conditions (Figure 3-8) . 

The waters of the outer harbor at the periphery of Long Island 
Sound (Station 20) are much less variable from near-surface to near- 
bottom and flood tide to ebb tide (Figure 3-8) . The annual cycle start- 
ing in November showed relatively constant salinities and decreasing 
temperatures through February. Temperatures then rose through July, 
while salinities dropped to the lowest levels of the year in May and 
August. Temperatures were relatively stable July through September, 
then decreased with relatively constant salinity through October. Ebb- 
tidal salinities tended to be about 1 to 2 ppt lower than flood-tidal 
values . 

These data show that runoff from land drainage plays a major 
role in driving circulation by establishing salinity gradients within 
the New Haven Harbor estuary. The more saline, colder Long Island Sound 
waters tend to intrude landward at depth. Some of this water mixes with 
the near-surface waters at the head of the estuary and returns seaward 
to complete the cycle. 



Dissolved Oxygen Distribution 

Dissolved oxygen (DO) is a critical factor affecting the 
distribution and abundance of aquatic organisms in New Haven Harbor. 
Variability of conditions within the Harbor is caused by the combined 
influence of ambient temperatures and biological fluctuations, indus- 
trial discharges, and sewage effluents. 

The physical/chemical studies for the New Haven Harbor Station 
Ecological Monitoring Studies program have shown a pronounced annual 



3-35 



cycle (Figure 3-9) . Peak levels occurred in January and February (up to 
14.0 to 15.0 mg/1) ; values then declined to minimum levels in July, 
August, and September and returned to peak values by December. The most 
unfavorable dissolved oxygen conditions occurred at the confluence of 
the Mill and Quinnipiac Rivers, but all three of the innermost stations 
(Stations 1, 2 and 3) had numerous dissolved oxygen readings in the 
unacceptable (<4.0 mg/1) range. 



pH Distribution 

Average pH in New Haven Harbor was 7.6, with a maximum of 9.7 
and a minimum of 6.0 (Figure 3-10). There are no indications that 
fluctuations of pH are correlated with depth, tidal phase, or station 
location. Because of the considerable neutralizing potential of the 
saline waters, pH is generally an insignificant factor in the ecology of 

New Haven Harbor. 

\ 

Summary data from Station 3 , representing conditions in the 
inner harbor from 1971 through 1911 , show mean values between 6 and 9 
(Figure 3-10) . Flood-tidal conditions have tended to be quite uniform 
with slightly lower values near the surface than near the bottom. Ebb 
tidal conditions showed more variability, with readings in July 1975 as 
low as 6.0. 

Waters in the outer harbor at Station 20 showed average pH 
values between 7 and 9 (Figure 3-10) . At this location, there is little 
variation between flood-tidal and ebb-tidal conditions, but near-surface 
values tend to be slightly higher than near-bottom values. 

Continuous measurements from the Honeywell Water Quality 
Monitor located on the pier off the New Haven Harbor Station showed 
little variation in pH on both a daily and seasonal basis. Because of 
its uniformity, pH does not appear to have been an important controlling 
parameter in New Haven Harbor. 



(Text continued on page 3-41) 



3-36 





< < 



./ 



UJ 
O 



o 

CO 



o 

ID 

I 
I 

r 



CM 



— r 
o 



00 



— r 



r^ 

M 



D 




Z 




o 




1/1 




<£ 


p^ 


O 


r^ 


-3 


CT> 


s: 


t-H 


■a: 




e: 




u. 




o 




o 




z 




o 




to 




«I 


VO 


'^ 


r^ 


-r> 


01 


•z. 


f— 1 


•a: 




Z 




u. 




-i 




o 




z: 




o 




t/i 




•a: 


tn 


T) 


r^ 


rj 


en 


i: 


1—1 


<: 




z 




Uu 




rs 




o 




z 




o 




LO 




< 


«3- 


'^ 


t^ 


-3 


Ol 


•SL 


1— 1 


et 




s: 




U. 




'O 




Q 




Z 




O 




1/1 




<£ 


ro 


-o 


r>^ 


'^ 


oi 


s 


r— ( 


•a: 




e: 




Li- 




ra 
o 






z 




o 




IT) 




<: 


CNl 


rs 


r^ 


'TJ 


en 


s 


I— ( 


«t 




s: 




u- 




■-3 
O 






Z 




o 




1/1 




■< 


»— ( 


■D 


r^ 


rj 


en 


s 


.— < 


ct 




2: 




LL. 




'^ 







^---' 



UJ 

o 



CD 
CD 
liJ 



C\J 



— I— 
o 



-1 1 17 

00 vo «:r 








z 









to 




<: 


1 — 


T) 


P^ 


-3 


tn 


E 


*-H 


«E 




£: 




u. 




-3 







Z 









10 




<: 


VO 


'o 


r^ 


-3 


Ol 


:e 


•-H 


<£ 




■Si 




u. 











z 









(/I 




<: 


10 


"^ 


r^ 


-3 


en 


Si 


•—1 


«t 




E 




U- 




-3 

a 






z 









c/^ 




•a: 


«a- 


•-> 


r^ 


T) 


en 


:£ 


•-4 


<: 




s 




Lt- 




'^ 







Z 









I/) 




< 


n 


-3 


1 — 


-^ 


en 


:e 


T-H 


<: 




z 




LL. 










z 









00 




<: 


CsJ 


T 


r^ 


-3 


en 


e: 


T-A 


<: 




£: 




u. 




■-3 








Z 









OO 




1 


1— t 


-^ 


r^ 


•-3 


en 


z: 


r-^ 


<: 




•Si 




u. 




-3 









0) 






3 






C 






•r— 






+-> 






C 
















#% 






x: 


c 




-t-J 


(U 




0. 


> 




0) 


n5 




T3 


zr. 




•0 


2 




E 


0) 




(O 


^ 




OJ 






T3 


• 




•r- 


r^ 




■4-) 


r^ 


, 




Oi 


CTl 


>> 


n— 


r^ 


J3 


S- 


cri 


^ — V 


<u 




r— 


-Q 


r« 


^*^ 





+-> 


cri+-> 


S- 


E 













Q. 
OJ 


c 


JC 


q: 


(U 


ai 




ai 


3 


>i 


>> 


s- 


X 


5- 


IT3 


-E 






+-> 


^ 


■0 




:3 


0) 


r— 


00 


> 1^ 




1— 


O^ 


ly) 





^— 


OJ 


l/l 




•r- 


(/I 


>^-a 


•r- 


,fO 


=5 


•0 2: 


-M 






00 


E 


-E 










^— 


+-> 


s- 


ro 


+J 


M- 


<_) 







•f— 


-Q 


#* 


cn 










-0 


C^J 


r— 


C 







n3 T3 







c 


LlI 


0) 


(0 









E 


ro 


00 





4- 




•r- 


S- 


t\ 


+-> 


rs 


CO 


ro 


(/) 




+J 




C/1 


00 


>i 


E 









S- 


x: 


•r— 





+J 


+J XI 


c 


to 


s- 





4-> 


rO 


2: c/o 3: 


cri 






CO 






<u 






s_ 







1 /6ui N39AX0 QBAIOSSia 



1 /6ui N39AX0 a3A10SSia 



3-37 



■o 

(U 




Ui 

o 



o 
o 
o 



o 
CO 



o 








o 






z 






o 






OO 






«t 


r^ 




■T> 


1^ 




^D 


o> 




S 


f— 1 




«s 






s 






Ll_ 






-3 










Z 






o 






00 






<t 


vo 




■-3 


p^ 




■-O 


01 




S 


f-H 




<: 






s 






a. 
















z 






o 






<r> 






<: 


Ln 




-3 


rv. 




o 


CT> 




e: 


f-H 




■c 






s 






Lj_ 






o 










z 






o 






m 






t 


«3- 




•-3 


r^ 




-^ 


01 




^ 


I— i 




«r 






s: 






Lu 






-3 










z 






o 






to 






<: 


n 




-3 


r^ 




T> 


CTi 




:e 


f-H 




•c 






2: 






u. 






-3 

a 










z 













Ul 






■=£ 


00 




T3 


P-- 




'^ 


01 




s: 


t— ( 




<: 






s: 






Ll_ 






■-3 










z 













oo 






<s 


f-H 




■-3 


r^ 







01 




s: 


f-H 




"C 






e: 






u. 






-o 


^^ 







CD 

ca 

UJ 



CM 



00 



U3 






T 

CM 



i/6ui N39AX0 a3Anossia 



"1 I I — \ — 1 — r 

CM O 00 VO ^1- CM 



1/6LU N39AX0 QBAIOSSia 








z 









l/l 




a: 


.r~. 


-3 


r*^ 


-3 


CJl 


s: 


f-H 


<: 




z: 




u_ 




-3 







Z 









1/1 




< 


U3 


'^ 


r^ 


'O 


CTl 


S 


f-H 


■=t 




e: 




Ll. 




a 






z 









00 




<: 


Ln 


-3 


r^ 


•-3 


<y\ 


E 


f-H 


ec 




2: 




Ll- 




'O 







Z 









1/1 




ct 


«3- 


'O 


1 — 


'r> 


01 


e: 


•-I 


■t 




s 




u. 










Z 









1/1 




cr 


m 


-3 


r^ 


-^ 


CT> 


s 


f— 1 


■4 




s 




U- 











z 









oo 




«t 


CM 


'^ 


r^ 


•-3 


Ov 


e: 


f-H 


cC 




e: 




u. 




'O 







z 









uo 




«t 


r-H 





rs. 


•-3 


Ol 


e: 


f-H 


<: 




2: 




u. 




■-3 





o 



13 

3 



o 



en 



(U 

en 



3-38 



o 

CM 



I— 

1/5 




<^. 



< v 



UJ 

o 



o 
o 
o 




o 



o 

I 



—r 

CSJ 



1^ 

o 



1^ 

CO 



o 




z: 




o 




uo 




ct 


r^ 


-^ 


P-* 


-3 


CT> 


s: 


t-H 


•a: 




s 




u. 




^Z) 




o 




z 




o 




CO 




<: 


vo 


•r> 


p^ 


'^ 


01 


s: 


t— ( 


<. 




s 




u. 




o 




o 




z: 




o 




00 




<c 


in 


■-D 


r^ 


O 


Oi 


z: 


.— ) 


<t 




s 




u. 




'^ 




Q 




Z 




o 




to 




<« 


«3- 


T) 


P^ 


O 


cn 


s 


t— ) 


< 




£ 




U- 




•-D 




O 




Z 




o 




I/O 




•a: 


ro 


•-3 


r^ 


Ti 


CTi 


z 


.—) 


<s 




s: 




u. 




T> 




o 




z 




o 




00 




«t 


CM 


^ 


r^ 


-3 


CT. 


2: 


1— « 


<c 




2: 




u. 














z 









00 




■* 


">H 


'^ 


r^ 


-^ 


01 


z 


i~-i 


<: 




z 




u. 




T) 









UJ 
Q 



CD 
QQ 




f — r 



T r 








z 









00 




<: 


1^ 


■-3 


r^ 


-:> 


CTl 


E 


r-H 


■S 




S 




u. 




-7 









z 









00 




•s 


VO 


'D 


r^ 


':> 


C71 


s 


v-H 


<: 




z: 




u_ 











z 









00 




cC 


in 


T) 


r^ 


-3 


CT> 


z: 


T— * 


•* 




s 




U- 




•-3 







Z 









00 




■s 


^ 


"-3 


P^ 


T) 


cn 


Z 


f— t 


•t 




:£ 




Li. 




■-3 






Z 









oo 




«t 


ro 


■-3 


r^ 


rj 


<T> 


s 


t—t 


«£ 




S 




u. 










Z 









00 




< 


C\J 


'O 


r-- 


TJ 


01 


s: 


i-H 


<c 




z 




u. 




•-3 






z 









00 




•a: 


«— 1 


-3 


P^ 


"-3 


CT> 


S 


f-H 


<C 




:e 




Ll. 




r3 


^^ 



W3 



>* C^ O 03 l£) -^ CM 



-o 

O) 

•r— 
+-> 

C 

o 




00 



0) 



l/6w N39AX0 a3A10SSia 



1/61U N39AX0 aiAiossia 



3-30 




o 

h- 

I— 

1/5 







V 




o 

CO 



CJ 

<: 

Ll. 



o 






co 



T 






"T" 
Ln 



o 






z 




o 




oo 




< 


r^ 


-3 


r^ 


"TD 


en 


z: 


I— t 


<. 




2: 




u. 




^o 




o 




z 




o 




CO 




< 


l£l 


'T! 


1 — 


n 


cn 


zs: 


T— ) 


<: 




:€. 




U- 




o 






z 




o 




OO 




c£ 


LTl 


'^ 


1 — 


T) 


Ol 


e: 


1— t 


«i 




s: 




u. 




o 






z 




o 




c/: 




•t 


■a- 


-3 


r^ 


O 


CTi 


Z 


f-H 


<: 




s: 




Ll- 




"3 

O 






z 




o 




c/l 




ct 


n 


T) 


r^ 


O 


Ol 


s: 


i~t 


ct 




s 




ix. 




Q 






Z 




o 




oo 




et 


C\J 


'^ 


(^ 


-3 


CTl 


s 


.— 1 


<i 




^ 




U. 




•-3 
O 






z 




o 




OO 




>a: 


•—) 


-o 


r^ 


-o 


o^ 


z 


.— 1 


<: 




z 




LL. 




T 






-^ 




liJ 



CD 
CQ 




n ^ 1 r — I r 

O CT^ 00 r-~ <^ un 



o 




z 




o 




OO 




>a: 


r^ 


^3 


r-^ 


-3 


a\ 


3: 


r-4 


■a: 




e: 




Lj- 




^ 




o 




z 




o 




I/) 




ct 


^ 


■D 


r^ 


'O 


Ol 


s: 


.—1 


«£ 




e: 




Li- 




-3 




a 




z 




o 




uo 




ct 


LO 


-3 


r^ 


-3 


en 


2: 


«— 1 


ct 




e: 




U- 




-3 




O 




Z 




o 




to 




ct 


•«3- 


-3 


1^ 


■-3 


Ol 


e: 


t— 1 


«a: 




:e 




U- 




■-3 




O 




z 




o 




Ul 




ct 


CO 


o 


r^ 


Tl 


Ol 


s: 


--H 


cf 




s: 




u_ 




^^ 




o 




z 




o 




in 




ct 


CN) 


^3 


1 — 


^O 


Ol 


Z 


^H 


<t 




s: 




U- 




^r> 




o 




z 




o 




(/5 




ct 


r-1 


'O 


r~. 


'O 


Ol 


S 


t-H 


«£ 




s: 




U- 




.12. 









■o 






<u 


CO 




=3 


nd 20 
Studi 




o 

C_) 


03 






r^ 






CO fO 






o 






00 •!- 






C CD 






O O 






•1 — r— 






4-> O 






n3 O 






+J UJ 






C/1 






i. 






1 O 






0) -Q 






t3 S- 






■■- 03 






•+-> nr 






-o c 






O 0) 






o > 






r— to 






M- n: 






-a S 






c o) 






(O s 






JD 






JD ■ 






O) r~ 






t-^ 






c cri 






O i— 






3Z s- 






CL 0) 






.n 






E O 






O +J 






+J CJ 






-M O 






O 






XI -c 


c« 




cnoi 




•O 3 


r--. 




c: o 


en 




rC S- 


^— 




j::: 






OJ +-> 


ri 




o 


+J 




fO 1 — 


S- 




<4- r-^ 


o 




s- cr. 


Q- 




3 1— 


OJ 




CO 


Ct: 




>. 






>, n3 


>> 




I— s: 


s- 




jC 


(O 




■»-' B 


^ 




E O 


£ 




O S- 


=5 




s: '+- 


00 





I 

CO 






Q. 



Q. 



3-40 



Z 

o 

I- 
I- 
o 
m 




o 






A 



o 

en 



'\ 



o 



I/) 



-e 



\/ 






Q 
O 
O 



en 



CO 






Q 




Z 




O 




oo 




<: 


r^ 


•n 


r^ 


T) 


01 


2: 


•—1 


ct 




s 




Ll- 




•"3 









Z 









in 




<t 


1^ 


•-3 


r^ 


•^ 


en 


2: 


1— ( 


•a: 




£ 




u. 




T> 




Q 




Z 









I/) 




«t 


if> 


"^ 


rs. 


•n 


CTl 


S 


1— 1 


e£ 




S 




Ll. 




-3 









Z 









oo 




<£ 


«a- 


■-3 


r^ 


'O 


CTl 


2: 


«-H 


«£ 




s: 




Ll. 




TJ 









Z 









Ln 




<c 


m 


o 


p^ 


■-3 


CT> 


s 


^-' 


«I 




£ 




LI. 




'^ 









Z 









on 




<: 


CO 


'o 


r^ 


■-3 


CTl 


z 


»-H 


«a: 




z: 




Lt. 




-3 




Q 




Z 









oo 




<£ 


^H 


"-3 


r^ 


-3 


en 


Z 


.-H 


«t 




E 




u. 




"O 





UJ 

o 

< 

LL. 
CO 







w 




UJ 



m 

UJ 



I I I I 1 — 

o cTi 00 f^ <x> Ln 








z 









00 




<: 


r^ 


-3 


r^ 


T) 


CTi 


s 


t— t 


■a: 




s: 




Ll. 




•-3 







Z 









OO 




«£ 


U3 


■-3 


p^ 


'O 


cn 


s 


»-H 


«t 




z 




Ll- 




•-3 







Z 









on 




<: 


LT) 


•-3 


P^ 


-3 


CT> 


s: 


i-H 


«« 




:£ 




Ll_ 










Z 









on 




<c 


^3- 


-3 


P^ 


Tl 


CTi 


2: 


1— t 


«t 




S 




U. 




T) 







z 









on 




«t 


m 


T) 


p^ 


-3 


en 


2: 


*-H 


<x. 




2: 




u- 











z 









on 




<: 


CS] 


T) 


r^ 


-3 


CT> 


z 


f-H 


=c 




2: 




Li- 




■-3 








Z 









on 




«t 


.—I 





r^ 


-3 


CTl 


2: 


t— 1 


<. 




s 




u. 




-D 





-a 

3 



ST 

o 
o 



I 

CO 






CD 



3: 

Q. 



3-41 



Transparency 

Water transparency data, as measured by Secchi disc, showed 
that New Haven Harbor is a relatively turbid estuary. Typical values 
ranged from 0.2 m to 2.3 m with a mean of 1.1 m. Transparency was 
slightly greater in the outer harbor than in the inner harbor. Trans- 
parency is affected by various factors, including phytoplankton abun- 
dance, suspended particulate matter, dissolved materials, and incident 
light. Thus, transparency was only used as a qualitative indication of 
depth of the photic zone; no attempt was made to link observations to 
specific causative factors. 



Spatial Variability Patterns 

The waters of the inner harbor show a relatively wide vari- 
ation of physical/chemical parameters over the course of any tidal 
cycle, season, or year (Figure 3-9, 3-10, 3-11, 3-12). Salinity, dis- 
solved oxygen, and temperature measurements show a tendency for waters 
from near the head of the estuary to flush seaward on the ebb, sometimes 
temporarily being trapped in an eddy on the western side of the harbor. 

The waters of the outer harbor adjacent to Long Island Sound 
show very little variation from flood to ebb tide, but \indergo a syste- 
matic annual cycle (Figures 3-9, 3-10, 3-13). Thus, the outer harbor 
shows relatively free exchange with Long Island Sound, and a tendency 
for such waters to occupy the eastern side of the inner harbor through- 
out the tidal cycle is noticeable. 



Quinnipiaa River 

Station 1 in the lower reaches of the Quinnipiac River, showed 
the highest variability of salinity, temperature, dissolved oxygen, 

(Text continued on page 3-48) 



3-42 



CO 

o 

I—) 

I— 

I— 



tjj 



O 
O 
O 




^:- 



-r 

o 

CO 



n r 

tn o 

C\J CVJ 






o 




z 




o 




l/l 




< 


p^ 


■-3 


r^ 


-3 


CT> 


S 


I— 1 


■t 




2 




Ll. 




•"3 




Q 




Z 




O 




IT) 




<: 


KD 


T> 


r^ 


T) 


Ol 


s 


»-H 


«i 




s 




U- 




T) 




Q 




Z 




o 




1/1 




et 


LO 


-3 


r^ 


"O 


CT> 


s 


f— 1 


<c 




•z. 




u. 




'O 




o 




z 




o 




1/1 




eC 


«3- 


Ti 


r-~ 


-3 


CTv 


■z. 


•— t 


«I 




s: 




Ll. 




-3 




O 




Z 




o 




00 




ct 


C»5 


•-3 


P^ 


T) 


cn 


e: 


»-^ 


«t 




s 




u. 




'O 




o 




z 




o 




OO 




«t 


CM 


o 


r^ 


■-3 


0^ 


s: 


«-H 


<: 




s 




U- 




T 




O 




Z 




o 




oo 




<: 


^H 


-o 


r^ 


-TJ 


CTl 


s: 


r-H 


•a: 




£: 




Ll- 




O 






» 



o 



CM 



CM 






"T" 
o 



a 




z 




o 




KO 




<: 


r^ 


-^ 


r^ 


-3 


01 


2: 


t— < 


<i 




■z. 




u_ 








Q 




z 




o 




un 




<: 


U3 


-D 


t^^ 


-3 


a^ 


:c 


t— 1 


< 




s: 




u» 




o 




o 




z 




o 




UO 




•a: 


Lf) 


-3 


r-^ 


-3 


CJl 


■Si 


f-H 


< 




2: 




Ll_ 




•^ 




C3 




Z 




o 




t/l 




•a: 


«3- 


'-i 


r^ 


^ 


01 


s: 


•—1 


■s 












U- 




■^ 




o 




z 




o 




LO 




c£ 


n 


-3 


r^ 


■-3 


CT. 


s 


»— < 


cr 




■z. 




L:- 




-T> 




Ci 




z 




o 




CO 




■a; 


tSJ 


T 


r^ 


r> 


CT. 


2: 


t— 1 


■=• 




z 




u_ 




^> 




o 




z 




o 




1/5 




■a: 


f— 1 


-T> 


r^ 


^3 


CM 


s: 


t—* 


■=: 




2: 




LU 




-3 









■0 






CU 






3 






E 


#^ 


s_ 




CO 





4-> 




j3 


E 


c: 


S- 








K> 





•r- 


3: 




-(-> 






n3 


E 




+-> 


CU 




00 


> 




E 


nr 











s- 


S 




1+- 


0) 

2: 




(C 






4-> 






(0 


. 




■a 


4-1 

3 




dj 


(J 




s_ 


.(— 




:3 


-I-J 




+j 







ro 


O) 




s- 


c 




dj 


c 




Q. 







E C_5 




a; 






-i-> 


#t 






s- 


• 


-a 


en 


c 


.Q 


r^ 


<o 


S- 


en 




ro 


r^ 


>)3= 




4-> 




« 


• 1 — 


c 


+-> 


E 


0) 


S- 


• 1 — 


> 





1 — 


rt5 


Q. 


fO 


nz 


Q) 


to 


S 


q: 


E 


CU 


>. 





:z 


S- 


■M 




(O 


+-> 


E 


E 





•I— 


E 


JD 




3 




*. 


C/0 


-0 


00 




C 


0) 


00 


(O "D 


(U 




•r— 


■f— 


CU 


+j -o 







=! 


(O 


J3 


4-> 


f- 


ja 


00 


S- 


d) 




3 




p— 


c/1 


■a 


IW 




E 





>, (O 


•r- 






cr> 


j:: 


T3 





-i-J 







c 





'0 











I 

CO 



s- 



(icJd) AIINIIVS 



(Do) 3yni\/y3dW3i 



3-43 



CO 

o 
I — f 
I— 
< 
I— 

00 



O 



OQ 

m 




o 

CQ 



C_3 



00 




o 
00 



o 

CM CM 



T 

LO 



-r 

LD 



o 




z 




o 




oo 




«t 


r^ 


-3 


r^ 


T) 


oi 


s: 


r-H 


=r 




s: 




u. 




■-D 




O 




z 




o 




<yO 




<: 


U3 


"o 


r^ 


'o 


en 


e: 


f-H 


et 




e: 




Lu 




■^ 




Q 




Z 




O 




00 




< 


Ln 


•-3 


f^ 


■-3 


en 


£ 


f-H 


<c 




s: 




Lu 




'O 




O 




z 




o 




OO 




=£ 


■a- 


-3 


p- 


T) 


CT> 


s: 


«-H 


< 




s 




U- 




•-:> 




o 




^ 




o 




to 




■a: 


n 


-3 


r^ 


T) 


oi 


E 


t-H 


< 




e: 




Ll. 




-3 




O 




Z 




o 




lo 




•a: 


CO 


-^ 


r-- 


T) 


a> 


e: 


f-H 


«s 




z 




U- 




— 1 




Q 




z: 




o 




(/I 




ct 


*—i 


TJ 


r^ 


-^ 


CT> 


£ 


t— 1 


«r 




s 




Lt- 




"-3 









c 



o 
o 



1 — I — r 

O LD O LD 

CO OO CSJ 1— I 



r 

LD 



(idd) AilNUVS 



Oo) 3ynivy3dW3i 



-a 
cu 



o 
o 



I 

CO 

zs 

C7) 



3-44 




CO 
o 

\ — I 

I— 

ct 
\- 




o 



o 

D3 



Ul 

o 



o 
o 
o 







! ^ 



1? 



Q 




■z. 




o 




CO 




<: 


r^ 


•-3 


r^ 


-i 


cr> 


s 


i-H 


•s 




e: 




u. 










z 




o 




lO 




«E 


VD 


-^ 


r^ 


-3 


Ol 


e: 


r-H 


<: 




s: 




Ll. 




Q 






Z 




O 




oo 




cC 


to 


■-3 


r^ 


-3 


CTi 


■s. 


f— 1 


•t 




s 




U. 










z 




o 




to 




«I 


>* 


T 


r** 


o 


en 


s 


r-( 


<t 




s: 




U- 




-3 

a 






z 




o 




irt 




« 


to 


-3 


r^ 


O 


as 


e: 


.—1 


•a: 




s: 




u- 










z 




o 




to 




«t 


CM 


-3 


1 — 


-3 


CTl 


S 


t— 1 


«t 




:£ 




Li_ 










z 




o 




oo 




«t 


.-H 


-3 


1^ 


■-3 


Ol 


:^ 


1—1 


< 




•E. 




U. 




T> 








•c-' 



1^ 

o 
n 



T r 



n r 



o 


■^"^ 


z 




o 




1/1 




<: 


r^ 


-3 


r^ 


-^ 


en 


s 


t— t 


<c 




£ 




u_ 




o 




~^ 


z 




o 




to 




■a: 


VD 


■T) 


r^ 


-3 


CT> 


s 


»— * 


■a: 




s 




u. 




■-3 
O 






Z 




o 




I/O 




«£ 


ID 


-3 


r~ 


-3 


en 


s 


f— 1 


«I 




s. 




U- 










z 




o 




to 




<: 


>a- 


■-3 


r~ 


"13 


Ol 


■z. 


1— t 


<: 




E 




u. 




■-3 
Q 






Z 




o 




to 




•a: 


n 


■T} 


1 — 


■-3 


Ol 


2: 


»-H 


<« 




E 




Ll_ 










z 




o 




to 




■=c 


OJ 


■-3 


r^ 


•r> 


CT> 


E 


f— 4 


•a: 




s 




Ll- 




•-3 

o 






z 




o 




I/O 




=c 


f-« 


'O 


r^ 


'O 


CTi 


s 


.-H 


< 




z 




u- 




-3 





00 o 
c s- 

O ro 

•■- 3: 
+-> 

(O c 
+3 <D 

1/1 > 
to 

E n: 

o 

S- 3 
M- OJ 

to 

+J 

to • 
-O +J 

3 

O) o 
S- -1- 

3 +-> 
+-> o 

to O) 

s- c 

O) E 
Q. O 
E O 
O) 
4J ^ • 

■O O 1^ 

(O S- I — 

to 
+-> •> 

•r- E +J 

c <u s- 

•.- > O 

1— (O o. 
(O n: <u 
to a: 



3 
C 
•r— 
+-> 

o 
o 



OJ 



o 

■D 



>1 

lO 

c E 

•r- E 

, 3 

(/I 

OJ to 



(O -O O) 



o 

(O 
<4- 

s- 

3 



+-1 13 

3 



T3 

C 

>, to 

■!-> O 
E O 
O r— 



I 
CO 



O 



in 



o 

CM 



in 



o m o in o in 

CO CVJ OsJ I— t r-l 



OJ 

s- 

3 
D1 



(idd) AilNIlVS 



Oo) 3ynivy3dW3i 



3-45 




o 
►—I 

I— 

eC 
I— 
(/I 







Ui 

o 



m 
m 



o 

CO 






Q 




Z 




O 




on 




ct 


r^ 


-3 


r^ 


•ra 


oi 


E 


t— 1 


<: 




S 




u. 




•-3 




O 




z 




o 




t/) 




«t 


ID 


s 


r^ 


-3 


Ol 


z: 


i-H 


ct 




s 




li- 




-3 




O 




z 




o 




1/5 




«£ 


LD 


-3 


r^ 


'O 


en 


s: 


r-H 


<t. 




s 




Lj- 




-3 




cn 




z 




o 




oo 




«£ 


«a- 


■^ 


r^ 


T) 


(TV 


S 


f— 1 


«t 




S 




LU 




■-3 




o 




z 




o 




I/O 




«£ 


ro 


-3 


r^ 


-3 


Oi 


s: 


^H 


■a: 




E 




u. 




■-3 




Q 




Z 




O 




1/1 




■I 


CSJ 


T 


P-^ 


•^ 


cn 


e: 


t— ( 


d 




e: 




u. 




-3 




O 




z 




o 




l/l 




«r 


■;-( 


■-3 


(^ 


•^ 


crv 


:£ 


t-H 


«i 




s 




U- 




■-3 






CD 
CO 



IT) 
CM 



O 
CM 



\r» 



1 

o 

CO 


1 

CM 


1 

o 

CM 


1 

1—4 


1 

o 


1 



(idd) AiiNnvs 



Oo) 3ynivy3dW3i 



T3 



o 



CO 

O) 

s- 

D1 



3-46 




o 



I— 
in 




O 

I- 

Q 
O 
O 



\ 



o 

CO 



o 

Li_ 
OH 

ZD 



1 \ 1 1 1 r 

o un o ID o in 

fO CM CM r-» t-H 



o 




z 




o 




lO 




•a: 


.1^ 


■^ 


f^ 


Ti 


(71 


s 




•a: 




E 




Ll. 










Z 




o 




oo 




<: 


lO 


■-3 


r^ 


■-3 


o> 


:£ 


»— 1 


<c 




:e 




u. 










z 




o 




oo 




■a: 


in 


-^ 


r-. 


T) 


CTl 


:£ 


f— t 


■4 




s: 




u. 




-3 
O 






z 




o 




to 




•a: 


>a- 


"^ 


r^ 


o 


CTl 


s 


f-H 


«: 




s 




Li- 




-3 






Z 




o 




I/O 




«t 


n 


-3 


r^ 


■-3 


Ol 


s 


•— t 


•a: 




ze: 




Ll_ 




-3 
O 






Z 




o 




00 




•t 


OJ 


-^ 


1 — 


o 


en 


e: 


1—1 


•t 




s 




IJU 




•-3 






Z 




O 




i>n 




•a: 


f— 1 


'^ 


r^ 


■-3 


en 


z 


t-H 


<a: 




z: 




u. 




o 








T3 




0) 




3 


" 


c 


o s- 


•r" 


CM O 


+J 


J2 


c 


C S- 


o 


o (o 


o 


•.- ^ 




+-> 




(T3 E 




4-> <U 




OO > 




<a 




E m 




O 




S- S 




4- 0) 




■z. 




(0 




4-> 




to • 




T3 4-> 




3 




cu u 




S- •■- 




3 4J 




•4-> O 




rO OJ 




t. C 




<U C 




CL O 




£ O 




(U 




+-> " 




s- . 




X3 O (D 




C JQ 1^ 




fO S- (Tl 




« ,— 




>ini 




■(-> 




•1- C -M 




C CU S- 




•-- > O 




1— (O Q. 




n3 31 0) 




CO q; 




S 




E OJ >, 




O Z S- 




4J ra 




+-> c E 




O-r- E 




J3 3 




•>oo 




■O (JO 




C (U (/5 




(O T3 (1) 




•r- 'r- 




0) +3 T3 




U 3 




rtJ XI +J 




t- JD t/T 




S- OJ 




3 r— 




to X3 fO 




C O 




>,«•.- 




1— cn 




^ -o o 




4-> o .— 




coo 




o .— o 





o 
CO 



in 

CM 



O in 

CM t— I 



"T" 
o 



in 



CO 



CO 



(U 



(idd) AilNIIVS 



(Do) 3ynivy3dW3i 



3-47 





o 



< 




• 




UJ 



m 

UJ 



}> 



o 

CO 






00 



1 \ I \ r 
o lO o in o 
ro CJ cvj — — 



o 




z 




o 




1/1 




«s 


r» 


T 


r^ 


-3 


Ol 


E 


»— t 


«£ 




e: 




Ll- 




'O 




o 




z: 




o 




1/1 




"C 


lO 


o 


t^ 


•D 


ai 


s 


»-H 


cr 




s 




Ll. 




■-3 




O 




Z 




o 




00 




•a 


Ln 


o 


r^ 


T) 


Ol 


E 


»— ( 


•S 




S 




u. 




-3 




O 




Z 




o 




00 




<t 


^ 


o 


r^ 


-3 


Ol 


s: 


T— 1 


<: 




s: 




u. 




•-3 




O 




Z 




o 




oo 




<c 


ro 


o 


r^ 


T 


CT> 


s: 


I— 1 


«£ 




s 




U- 




-3 




D 




Z 




o 




oo 




■a: 


PJ 


'o 


r^ 


'O 


CTl 


s: 


.—1 


er 




z 




U- 




^3 




O 




z 




o 




00 




•s 


■;— ( 


-3 


p^ 


T) 


o% 


:c 


»— 1 


•a: 




£ 




u. 




-o 








■=3 
■C 




lO 



O »o 



o th> o 

CJ — — 



-r 
in 



a 


"■■^" 


z 




o 




lo 




<: 


t^ 


-3 


P** 


o 


CTi 


X 


I— 1 


<: 




s: 




U- 




^3 




O 




z 




o 




U1 




"S 


lO 


-i 


r^ 


-3 


Ol 


S 


»— < 


et 




E 




Ll- 




•-3 




Q 




Z 




o 




oo 




«r 


Ln 


-3 


p^ 


-3 


Ol 


S 


t— 1 


<: 




s: 




u. 




-3 




Q 




Z 




o 




oo 




■a: 


■a- 


-3 


r^ 


-T> 


Ol 


Z 


.— i 


•a: 




:£ 




u. 




'n 




Q 




Z 




o 




oo 




«a: 


ro 


'^ 


r^ 


"TS 


Ol 


s: 


t— 4 


< 




e: 




Lt_ 




■-3 




Q 




Z 




o 




to 




<: 


OJ 


-o 


r^ 


-3 


Ol 


e: 


*— 1 


«i 




E 




U- 




•-3 




Q 




z 




o 




oo 




«t 


t— 1 


'^ 


r^ 


•-3 


Ol 


E 


»— 1 


■« 




E 




U- 




•-3 





-a 
a; 



o 

CJ 



(idd) AilNnVS 



Oo) 3ynivy3dW3i 



0) 

s- 

CD 



3-48 



and pH in the harbor. These changes were coincident with periods of 
high or low freshwater flow from the river, which warms in the spring 
and cools in the fall more quickly than the harbor waters, and which 
governs salinity in most of the harbor. Quinnipiac River flow dilutes 
harbor water progressively less as it mixes toward Long Island Sound; 
its dilution effects were most evident in the river itself. 



Mill River 

Because of its low flow rate and extensive industrialization 
(Fisher, 1974) , Mill River waters are the most deteriorated of those 
entering New Haven Harbor. Low freshwater flow minimizes flushing, so 
that water which has been contaminated from the East Street sewage 
treatment plant and by industrial wastes is impounded in the Mill River 
on successive tidal cycles. This impoundment causes further deteri- 
oration of water quality by exposure to grossly polluted sediments (NAI, 
1974c) and to heating by the English Generating Station. The highest 
temperatures, most variable pH, and lowest dissolved oxygen and trans- 
parency were found in the Mill River (Station 2) . 



Mill- Quinnipiac Confluence 

The harbor proper begins at the confluence of the Mill and 
Quinnipiac Rivers, and the marine waters clearly dominate the hydro- 
graphy and water quality of the area. Freshened waters from the Quin- 
nipiac (which is tidal far above Station 1) commonly cause a "salt- 
wedge" structure at Station 3; this is most prominent during periods of 
high runoff. Salinity may differ by more than 10 ppt between surface 
and bottom (7m, MLW) . The Mill River contributes turbid, heated water 
with variable pH and low dissolved oxygen concentration to this site on 
the ebbing tide. During flood tide. East Street sewage effluent flows 
up to the site, and into the Mill River as well. High temperatures. 



3-49 



highly variable pH, and low dissolved oxygen and transparency were char- 
acteristic of the confluence. The influence of runoff on salinity and 
temperature was always evident there. 



Long Wharf Shore 

The Long Wharf Shore area extends from the East Street sewage 
treatment plant to City Point and was sampled at Stations 4 and 5. This 
area is influenced by the sewage treatment plant discharges at its north 
and south boundaries, flow from the Mill-Quinnipiac confluence and West 
River, and eddy circulation as dociomented by Duxbury (1963) and con- 
firmed by NAI {1974a) . The area is characteristically shallow (3-6 m, 
MLW) and is typically less influenced by runoff than the head of the 
estuary. We observed peak summer temperatures in this area which were 
sometimes 1-2 C wanner than the rest of the inner or outer harbor. 
Salinity, dissolved oxygen, and pH were less variable than at the Mill- 
Quinnipiac confluence but still occurred over a very broad range. Low 
summer dissolved oxygen concentrations were similar to those found 
upstream. 



West River Mouth 

Station 6 was located near the mouth of the West River in the 
shallow (4m, MLW) West River Channel. Only during peak runoff periods 
did this area differ substantially from the Long Wharf Shore area; at 
these times, salinities 3-5 ppt lower than adjacent areas were observed 
in the West River mouth area. 



Inner Harbor Shipping Channel 

Two stations (8, 9) were situated near the shipping channel 
just off New Haven Harbor Station in 13 and 7 m (MLW) of water, respect- 



3-50 



ively. This area was slightly stratified with respect to salinity and 
temperature except in midsummer, when rxinoff was minimal. Transparency 
and dissolved oxygen concentrations were higher than in the balance of 
the inner harbor; pH, salinity, and temperature fluctuations were less 
because of the greater depth and proximity to the outer harbor. 



Inner-Outev Harbor Boundary 

The division between inner and outer harbors occurs at the 
natural constriction formed by Sandy Point on the West and by Fort Hale 
Park on the East. Our sampling indicated that this boundary was typi- 
fied by characteristics intermediate to those of the inner and outer 
harbors. This boundary zone was sampled at Station 11 in the main 
shipping channel in 12 m of water (MLW) . Except in cases of extremely 
high runoff, there was little difference between the inner harbor ship- 
ping channel area and this boundary location; when runoff was extreme, 
horizontal and vertical salinity gradients were observed that were 
unique to this boundary area, i.e., they differed from both the inner 
and outer harbors proper. 



Morris Cove 

Morris Cove is shallow (3-4 m, MLW) and has strong ebb-tidal 
currents (Duxbury, 1963) that carry inner harbor waters into the outer 
harbor and Long Island Sound. The cove is typically well mixed and 
similar to Long Island Sound, except on ebb tides during periods of 
siibstantial runoff, when near-surface dilution is extensive. Morris 
Cove faces a long southwest fetch; when southwest winds persisted for a 
few days, supersaturation {>150%) of dissolved oxygen was observed in 
near-surface waters. Biological productivity might contribute to this 
phenomenon . 



3-51 



Sandy Point 

South of Sandy Point, a shallow station (Station 15, 2 m, MLW) 
was monitored which was atypical of the rest of the harbor. High sur- 
face temperatures, low salinities, and variable dissolved oxygen con- 
centrations characterized this station. We believe that these conditions 
were due to at least three causes: 1) West Haven Sewage Treatment Plant 
discharge; 2) eddy entrapment of ebb tide water during flood tide; and 
3) transport of inner harbor waters around or over Sandy Point to this 
area during ebb tide. 



OuteT Harbor Proper 

Outer harbor stations (16, 18) showed a slight harbor influ- 
ence, particularly by exhibiting reduced surface salinity during periods 
of peak runoff. Otherwise this large area was not distinct from adja- 
cent Long Island Sound. ' 



Long Island Sound 

No saline stratification was observed in this area. Dilution 
by fresh water was uniform throughout the water column, since the Conn- 
ecticut River, the major freshwater source for Long Island Sound, meas- 
urably dilutes much of North Central Long Island Sound during the spring 
freshet (Riley, 1952) . Thermal stratification was iincommon but did 
occur briefly in July 1977. Dissolved oxygen concentrations rarely fell 
below 7.0 mg/1; when this happened, it did not persist. Values of pH 
were stable and usually between 8.0 and 8.5. Transparency was generally 
greater than that observed within the harbor. 



3-52 



Comparisons Among Study Years 

Meteorological parameters having the most influence on harbor 
hydrography are precipitation, incident solar radiation, wind and air 
temperature. We had no data on insolation; wind data was available but 
is related to estuarine hydrographic processes in such complex ways that 
no attempt was made to ascertain wind effects. Precipitation is added 
to Harbor waters via runoff, which integrates precipitation with the 
hydrologic characteristics and preconditions of the drainage basin. 
Monthly mean runoff and air temperature for the study period are shown 
in Figure 3-4, as is also monthly total precipitation. Annual differ- 
ences in hydrographic parameters are generally climatologically induced. 
Annual patterns of surface, bottom, ebb and flood-tide temperature and 
salinity (Figures 3-11, 3-12 and 3-13) , dissolved oxygen (Figure 3-9) , 
and pH (Figure 3-10) were compared and notable differences are presented 
in Table 3-1. Also presented in Table 3-1 are climatological departures 
from the norm. Years are presented on a November-October basis, when 
the data permit, to facilitate comparison with the preceding detailed 
characterization of the sample year. 

Most years had characteristic periods of reduced salinity and 
intense stratification corresponding to spring runoff and, when summer 
was not too dry, low salinity periods corresponding to fall rains, 
although the magnitude and timing of these periods varied considerably. 
Dry summers caused reductions in the ground water, so that fall rains 
were absorbed rather than released as runoff. Sampling began in May 1971; 
although precipitation was heavy in that month, preceding conditions had 
been so dry that runoff was minimal. Unusually heavy rains in July, 
August and September led to reduced salinity in September. In 1972, 
harbor salinity was low in June, due to a very wet spring. Because of a 
dry Slimmer, no early fall salinity reduction occurred. However, heavy 
October rains led to low salinity in November. This wet period per- 
sisted through July 1973; consequently, low salinities were character- 
istic of January- June 1973. August through November was relatively dry 
and no fall salinity low was observed. December 1973 and January and 
March 1974 precipitation led to reduced salinities in the last of 1973 



3-53 



0£. 
O 






o 



o 
o 



<_> 



cC I-- 

Qi CT) 
Ci3 I— 
O 

d; " 
Q I— 

>- q; 

31 O 
Q LU 

<: 

>- 
_j cc 
■=c <: 
o s: 

O 00 

_i 

O CyO 

I— uu 

S Q 



tJ C/5 



o ■< 

>- 1—1 

< o 
2: —I 
s: o 
ra o 
oo uj 



I 

CO 






-1- 


1 


.-1 








M 

§ 

M 




.H 






rH 






rH 




•3 






a. 


1 


1 




E 






g 






g 






1 




g 























































•z. 




s 




•z 




2 






g 






g 




2 






+- 






































^ 






































LiJ ^ 






































ej 






































>- >— • 






































X 1— 






































°g 


t 




















0) 
















Q 1— 


t 




















+J 
















LU ^ 


I 




















c 
















>• LiJ 






















■H 










■jg 






_l 
















}-4 






s 














O^ 
















0) 






1 
















t/> 
















4J 






i-H 






iH 










LO l_J 
















C 






H 






i-t 


























■^^ 






(d 






Id 




■p 






c^ 




rtJ 











2 




S 






P4 






b 

^ 




1 






■\- 
































>, 






LU 












>^ 




















}^ 






CC 




4-1 








^ 




















Id 






^3 




w 




^1 




fl 










rH 










3 






1— 




p 




(1) 




3 










-H 










u 






s 












J3 










ft 










■8 






LU 




< 








CU 










< 










Ph 






Q- 








-p 




&4 




















1 






£ 




x: 




1% 




















V4 










LU 




tn 




CD 




>. 


U 








^ 










^ 






J— 




-H 




W 






CJ 


0) 






CJ 






•i 




1 






oc 












3 


£ 


sx 
















§ 






LU 








>i 




d 


CU 




















V 






1— 




>i 




H 


^4 


(0 


> 


iJ 













<U 




K 






s 




1 

s 

5 




5 


(U 


X 





8 






g 






Q 

•s 

■A 




1 






* 




S-i 
OJ 




>i 








>. 






>i 






QJ 










LU 


0) 


^ 




1^ 




x: 


U 






U 


u 
(d 


cu 




i 




Id 






ID 


^ 


■p 




3 




cr 


tu 


3 




S 


3 


XI 




QJ 








1— 


a 




c 






J3 


c 


>i 


X) 


c 







U 




3 
C 






S 


0) 







to 




x: 





(d 


H 





fd 


ij 




Q} 








> 






•-:i 






4J 


•d 


3 


■p 


h) 







Q 




>i 


u 


LU 





i-i 




1 






U 




1^ 


8 











rH 


(^ 


(d 


QJ 


Q. 


2 


Q) 




U 









^j 




S^ 






U 


■iH 




s 


•i 


e: 




1 




0) 




Vj 











0) 






4 


U 


j^ 




LU 

1— 


1 




^ 




•i 


I 


"i 


r-l 




-p 






f* 


(1) 
j2 


X 


s 




>1 


■P 




<u 




3 


01 


u 


•-\ 




3 








E 








OL 




a 




u 




<u 


^:) 


> 


ft 




> 


tT> 


■H 


> 


>i 


1-1 


2 




3 


cu 




0) 




> 







< 







3 


M 





^^ 




(d 


1 


< 


•T) 


Ul 




Q 





2 


^ 


2 


x: 




2 


< 


§■ 


2 


3 


s 


s 


■p 

CO 




j:: 


j:: 




x: 






u 


x: 


u 


3 


x: 






x: 


U 




x: 


3 




tr 


Cr 




Cr 




S 


k 


Di 


u 


w 


Di 


>. 


3 


D> 


XX 


s 


CP 


Cn 




•H 


■rH 




-H 




3 




-H 




3 


-H 


(d 





'>H 


OJ 


a 


-iH 


3 




X 


X 




X 




^ 


X 


^ 


<( 


X 


S 


H 


X 


bn 


x: 


< 


















1 






I 
































x: 






(d 
















•1- 






















g 






XI 










>- 
















m 






m 






u 










I— 
















s 






^^ 






u 




H 


































Id 




■H 






•2L 




1-1 
























S 




h 










0) 








)-i 


0) 


i^ 






V4 






1 




ft 






_1 




1 

■p 

Oh 
0) 




cu 




OJ 

•i 

cu 
> 




c 

3 

& 


QJ 

1 


OJ 






0) 






3 
c 
fd 




< 

nj 


0) 








cn 




Id 




•z 


3 


Q 






z 


■H 




1^ 




S 


XI 









s 










C 




>^ 




3 


Vj 








s 


-p 








3 




S 




J 


•d 


5 


1 




3 


< 




3 




3 


J_ 






^ 








M 






























l 






QJ 


QJ 






4J 






















* 






C 


1 






W 


Vl 














>i 


x: 






^ 


(U 




3 






3 


CJ 










■P 




Vj 







^ 


> 


c 




Fi 


cu 






tP 


i 




nH 






m 


1 


td 


M 










3 




1 


+J 


>i 




3 




-H 




ft 


3 


sx 


3 


1 






s 


I'D 




>i 


a 






< 


CU 




U 


M 


CU 


a> 





M 




1— 








^ 


OJ 


3 


.H 









ft 


01 


to 


3 


M >i 


XI 






«< 


+J 


:s 




fS 


en 


*D 




iH 


0) 




< 


XI 




< 


rd r^ 


QJ 


x: 




1— 


Q- 





^4 


3 






U 


■r4 


Q 


£ f; 




E 






S 3 


U. 


Oi 






(U 


r-\ 


<D 


c 


>. 


k 


CU 


V4 




tj> 




0) 


>^ 




1-:) 




■H 




Q_ 







J3 


rt 


r-\ 


CU 


XI 


a 




M --H 


^ 


u 


^ 


>i 




M 


x: 






X 


4J 





1^ 


3 


XI 





< 


3 


n! J2 


CU 


(U 


3 J= 


V4 


cu 


Q) 






CJ 


<l) 


a 


■P 




•n 


E 


J-* 







S 


1 


Q 


T) Cp 


(d 


t-K C 








LU 




0) 


U 


j: 




cu 


u 




.H 


u 




.H 


3 


3 1^ 


>^ 


u 


CC 










CJi 




> 





H 




- (U 


OJ 




- x: 


c 


- >D CU 




.H 


0) 


O- 


r^ 


X 

0) 


.H 


x 


1^ 


i 


-p 


CU 

•i 


M 
0) 


& -i 


> 



JJ 




fd 




> 




3 
"D 


■i 








(U 




ja 




in 


J3 


(0 0) 


2 


cn 


(d 0) 




XI M 0) 


2 




QJ 




>, 


4:: 


£ 


>, 





j:: 


3 


0) 





3 -P 




3 


§ •§ 


x: 


-H +J 






+J 




k 


tJ> 


J^ 


h 


■p 3 


cr 


tr 


> 


4J 


C ft 




Cn 


cr 


■P ^ ft 


3 


>. 


ft 




OJ 


■H 





11) 





-H 


3 





U 


fd cu 


3 


3 


(0 QJ 


-rH 


ft 0) 


3 


rd 


QJ 




> 


X 


c 


> 


rH 


X 


< 


s 





1-1 U] 


< 


ID +J 


X 


< W 


S 


W 










^ 




CN 




rJ, 






1 






in 




1 
1^ 












■-{ 


p- 


CN 


r- 




r- 


'O' 




r- 


in 




r- 


vD 


r- 


r- 










r- 


CT> 


r- 


CTi 


r- 


CTi 


r- 




CTi 


r- 




o% 


r^ 


m 


p- 






1 H 




CJi 


-H 


CT» 


n-( 


en 


.H 


cn 




,-\ 


CTl 




1-1 


en 


iH 


cn 






[^ 




•-K 








~-\ 




.H 












.H 




T-\ 






a> 


rH 




U 




^ 




1-1 






u 






Vl 




^ 








i^ M 


P' 


U 


<U 


ij 


(U 


u 


0) 


U 




flj 


M 




QJ 


Vl 




u 








01 


I 


1 


QJ 
XI 


i 


0) 
X3 




01 
J3 






0) 
XI 




■i 


cu 
XI 


■| 


01 
XI 






-H 







0) 





OJ 





Q) 







cu 







QJ 





QJ 









>i )-( 


>. 


4-» 


> 


-P 


> 


JJ 


> 


+J 




> 


-p 




> 


4-1 


> 


■p 






5 9* 


(D 


u 





U 


















u 







CJ 












E < 


S 





2 





2 





2 







^ 







2 





2 








3-54 



and the spring of 1974. April-August and October-November were dry 
periods; September rains had no detectable effect on salinity regimes, 
although November salinities were reduced in the inner harbor (possibly 
because sampling coincided with a neap tide) . December 1974- January 
1975 precipitation caused reduced salinity from January through April. 
Despite a wet July and September, no fall salinity low occurred in 1975. 
Above average precipitation in January 1976 led to reduced salinities 
January-March; much of the rest of the spring and sxommer was suffi- 
ciently dry to preclude fall salinity minima. Rainy March and September 
1977 were reflected in March- April and October salinity minima. 

A salinity minimum period reflecting runoff conditions has 
occurred consistently between December and June; the duration, timing 
and extent of the period is dependent on climatology and hydrology of 
the drainage basin. Fall minima were apparent in 1971, 1972, 1974 and 
1977, 

Water temperatures were not similar to air temperatures in 
absolute terms, because conductive heat transfer across the air-water 
interface is small compared to radiational transfer processes. However, 
since the same radiational effects govern air and water heat transfer, 
variation in patterns of air and water temperature are grossly similar. 

In 1971, there was no atmospheric correspondence with unusu- 
ally low May and high August water temperatures. In turn, unusually 
warm September and October air temperatures had no apparent effect on 
water temperature. A relatively mild winter 1971-1972 saw normal water 
temperatures; siimmer and fall 1972 waters were colder than in other 
years, while air temperatures were normal for those seasons until 
November, when they were below average. In January and February 1973, 
the harbor was unusually warm, though no comparable climatological 
pattern occurred. Despite a climatologically warm period that persisted 
from March 1973 through August 1974, no departure from normal water 
temperature was observed during this period. An unusually cold October 
1974 was comparable for air and water. December 1974 was also cold in 



3-55 



the harbor, although weather in November- January was warm. Below aver- 
age air and water temperatures occurred in April 1975. December 1975 
was uncommonly warm in New Haven Harbor, as were air temperatures in 
November-December 1975. December through February 1976 was unusually 
cold, accompanied by widespread freezing of the harbor, corresponding 
with low air temperatures during this period. 

Only in August 1971 was an unusually warm summer month 
reflected in water temperature measurements. In 1972, sximmer was 
exceptionally cool. Warm winters occurred in 1972-1973, and 1975-1976, 
while 1974-1975 and 1976-1977 were unusually cold. Cold falls were 
characteristic of 1972 and 1974. Only in 1971 did spring temperatures 
depart from normal, when May was unusually cool. 

Dissolved oxygen concentration patterns varied little with 
four exceptions . The levels failed to reach typical annual peaks in 
winter 1972-1973 and in fall and winter 1973-1974. Also, the typical 
fall increase was delayed in fall 1976. In 1977, a midsummer peak 
occurred in August, between July and September minima; in other years, 
August dissolved oxygen concentrations were low and similar to other 
midsummer minima. No correspondence was detected between these altered 
annual patterns of dissolved oxygen concentration and climatological 
effects. 

No seasonal, climatological or other pattern of significance 
was evident in pH data. 



Summarij: Char act erization of New Haven Harbor Eydpogvaphy 

Physical/chemical characteristics of New Haven Harbor studied 
were generally similar 1971 through 1977 (NAI, 1971; 1973; 1974a; 1974b; 
1975a; 1976a; 1977a, 1978a). Salinity, temperature, and, to a lesser 
degree, dissolved oxygen reflected the various years' climatology. 
Winter 1977 was colder than winters of 1972 through 1976 (NOAA, 1978), 



3-56 



causing extensive freezing in the harbor during January and February. 
As a result of heavy rains, 1972 runoff was greater than other years, 
resulting in reduced salinity values. Spring and fall stratification 
due to spring snowmelt and fall runoff respectively were regular occur- 
rences. Dissolved oxygen levels peaked in the colder months and during 
major phytoplankton blooms; minimiom concentrations were observed in 
midsxmiiner. Dissolved oxygen increased more slowly in 1974, 1975, and 
1975 from summer minima to winter maxima than in other years. Trans- 
parency and pH did not vary substantially from year to year. 

Winter temperature minima occurred in January or February and 
summer maxima occurred in July or August in all years. Temperature was 
most variable in the inner harbor, relatively remote from the moderating 
influence of Long Island Sound. 

In all years, stratification patterns were primarily dependent 
on precipitation and runoff within the tributary basins . Temperature is 
less important than salinity in controlling density, and hence strati- 
fication; thus the river mouths and inner harbor were stratified most 
often and most dramatically. Relatively stable thermal stratification, 
typical of less well-mixed, deeper coastal areas, was not characteristic 
of New Haven Harbor in any years studied. This is indicative of a high 
degree of turbulent mixing due to wind and tidal effects in this shallow 
harbor . 

Dissolved oxygen concentrations showed typical seasonality, 
with reduced levels in summer months. This summer reduction is caused 
by a decrease in oxygen soliibility (which is inversely related to both 
temperature and salinity) and by increased BOD from heightened bacterial 
decomposition of organic wastes , which is also directly related to 
increased temperatures. In the inner harbor, there were many DO read- 
ings below 4.0 ppm in July, August and September in all years. Higher 
and less variable concentrations were typical of the outer harbor. 
Unusually high values in near-surface layers may be attributable to 
production of oxygen through active photosynthesis by phytoplankton, or 
to exceptionally strong turbulent mixing. 



3-57 



The pH measured during monthly sampling was generally within 
the normal range for natural estuarine waters, and showed no consistent 
spatial or temporal pattern but was most variable in the inner harbor, 
especially near the river mouths. The average values compiled in 1977 
were not substantially different from the average values compiled from 
1971 through 1976. 

Water transparency measurements showed no marked trends . In 
general, extinction depths were similar over the seven years studied. 
Inner harbor waters were generally slightly less transparent than outer 
harbor or Long Island Sound waters. 



ANALYSIS OF IMPACTS 

The New Haven Harbor Station affects the hydrography of the 
harbor by its intake of water at one location and its subsequent dis- 
charge several hundred meters away. The water that passes through the 
plant is mixed and heated between intake and discharge. Possible 
impacts of this system relative to the physical/chemical or hydrographic 
factors of the harbor include : 

1. Modification of local current and wave patterns 

2. Modification of the thermal regime in the harbor. 

3. Changes in dissolved oxygen concentration. 

4. Increased turbidity. 

Evidence for the occurrence of these impacts and evaluation of 
their extent is presented below. 



3-58 



Modifioation of Local Current Patterns 

The momentum of the water entering the intake structure and 
leaving the discharge pipe must contribute to some degree to the local 
current patterns. 

The intake structure draws cooling water from the easterly end 
of an intake channel 230 m in length which runs from the intake struc- 
ture to a point 30 to 45 m from the eastern edge of the main shipping 
channel (Figure 1-3) . The intake channel was dredged to a depth of 9 m 
below mean sea level and crosses the shallow area adjacent to the plant 
site. Piers north and south of the plant may restrict flow that is part 
of the main harbor circulation from entering the shallow waters surround- 
ing the intake channel. Skimming walls on the intake structure limit 
flow immediately in front of the structure to depths greater than 2.5 m 
below mean sea level. It is reasonable to believe that water enters the 
intake structure and channel from the shallow water area between the 
piers as well as from the westerly end of the channel. During normal 

operations at 100% generating capacity with three cooling water pumps in 

3 
operation, the design flow for the intake structure is 18 m /sec. 

Assuming conservatively that the shallow water area does not contribute 

to the condenser cooling water, all of the flow would enter from the 

westerly end of the channel; in this case impact on the main harbor 

circulation by entrainment of water which is part of that circulation 

would be at a maximum. If the flow was uniform over the cross-sectional 

area of the intake channel, current speeds of 8 cm/sec at low tide and 5 

cm/sec at high tide would be needed to deliver the cooling water to the 

intake structure at the required rate. At the westerly end of the 

intake channel, the flow into the channel would add to the tidal current 

(amplitude 21 cm/sec) as is shown in Figure 3-14. Figure 3-14, a simple 

vector addition of the intake velocities and tidal current velocities, 

shows that at the beginning of the intake channel the maximum flood and 

ebb currents would be deflected by no more than 20° from their normal 

path (parallel to the main channel) and that at slack tide a current 



3-S9 



I 




FLOOD TIDE 




SLACK TIDE 



21 FT/SEC (0.06 M/SEC) 



EBB TIDE 



Figure 3-14. Vector sum of tide and intake current velocities at the entrance 
to the intake channel. New Haven Harbor Ecological Studies 
Summary Report, 1979, 



3-60 



which is about a third of the maximum tidal currents would be directed 
down the axis of the intake channel. This effect, which is the worst 
possible, would bo limited to the width of the intake channel and the 
immediate vicinity of its westerly end. Further out toward the main 
channel, the intake velocities would decrease rapidly as the volume of 
water involved in supplying the cooling-water intake system increased. 
In the main channel , the intake velocities would be small and their 
effect on the tidal currents negligible. 

To quantify the velocities and temperatures in the pl\ime, a 
physical model was constructed and various tests were conducted by the 
Florida Engineering and Industrial Experiment Station (1972) , and sche- 
matic representation of the behavior of the discharge plume is depicted 
in Figure 3-15. Figure 3-16 shows the determined velocity distribution 
along the axis of the plume. The speeds shown for the 37 to 43 m dis- 
tances are the speeds measured in the area where the pl\jme intersects 
the surface, the "boil area". Figure 3-16 shows these speeds to have 
been approximately 107 cm/sec. Flow-away velocities from the boil area 
are caused by the initial horizontal component of the momentum of the 
discharge and, to a lesser degree, by the density-induced convection as 
the lighter, warm water tends to spread over larger and larger areas. 
The maximum cross-sectional area of the flow-away velocity is small and 
is inversely proportional to the velocity (Table 3-2) . To assess the 
magnitudes of the flow-away velocities, the scale of the model was 
changed from the 1:20 scale used to obtain the data presented in Figure 
3-16, to a scale of 1:40. The results of the 1 to 40 scale test show 
that from the boil zone to the navigation channel the surface velocities 
were of the order of 61 cm/sec, reducing gradually to about 18 cm/sec 
near the opposite edge of the channel. The velocities of the discharge 
plume were directed primarily across the channel even during maximum 
flow in the channel (approximately 21 cm/sec) . The reason for the 
cross-channel flow direction of the discharged water was that in the 
model basin the warmer water tended to ride on top of the cooler water 
where the main resistance to its flow was the interface friction, which 
had a relatively small effect on the discharge velocities . In the real 



3-61 




lii 



=3 




_J 


Lu 


a. 


O 


1- 

UJ 

-3 


> 

< 


u. 


Q 


o 


2 




r) 


tu 

2 


oiJJ 


0Q2 




. z> 


_1 


-J_J 


tr 


<Q. 


UJ 


2 


h- 


= (- 


z 


^LU 


iij 


o^ 


o 


2 





UJ 




o 


UJ 


< 


N 


U- 

tr 

CO 


O 


a: 


z 


Li 




1- 


a 


< 



op. 





o 




s_ 




Ll 


• 




cn 


. 


r^ 


(/) 


o^ 


+-> 


1 — 


(/) 




<u 


A 


+-> 


+J 




s_ 


r— 


o 


(U 


a. 


T3 


(U 


o q; 


F 






>> 


to 


s- 


-o 


(0 


•r- 


^ 


s- 


^ 


o 


zs 


^— 


oo 


LL- 






CO 


M- 


QJ 


O 






-o 


>, 


n 


+J 


■i-> 


•p— 


(/5 


I/) 




i- 


r— 


<u 


ITS 


> 


o 


■r~ 


•r~ 


c 


CT 


ro 


O 




l~~ 


4- 


O 


O 


o 




LxJ 


^ 




(J 


S- 


+J 


o 


<U JO 


^ 


S- 


to 


tO 



h 



3-62 



(03S/U1D) ■ l\ 






en 


• 


r^ 


^.-^ 


en 


CM 


1 — 


r^ 




<T» 


A 


r— 


-|-> 




s- 


«« 


o 


■=c 


Q- 


_i 


ci; 


Ll_ 


a: 


rD 




V ^ 


>^ 




t- 


a> 


fO 


B 


£ 


3 


t": 


r^ 


:3 


Q.C/1 


^- 


to 


o 


0) 




•r- 


to 


-o 


•r— 


3 


X 


4J 


n3 


00 


CD 


1 


C 


rc 


o 


U 


r— 


• r- 


ro 


cn 




o 


C 


r— 


o 


o 


• ^ 


(J 


+-> 


LlJ 


3 




J3 


s- 




o 


S- 


J3 


-l-> 


s- 


to 


lO 




3: 


-o 






c 


>. 


<u 


-•-> 


> 


• r— 


to 


O 


3= 


o 




r— 


■s 


<u 


(U 



I 

CO 

(U 

s- 

3 



(09sAi) -A 



3-63 



TABLE 3-2. MAXIMUM CROSS-SECTIONAL AREA OF DISCHARGE FLOW-AWAY 
AT SELECTED VELOCITIES. NEW HAVEN HARBOR ECOLOGICAL 
STUDIES SUMMARY REPORT, 1979. 



VELOCITY (m/sec) 


AREA (m^) 


107 


16i6 


100 


19.3 


51 


29.1 


21 


83.0 


18 


96.8 



3-64 



situation, the salinity of the discharged water plays a major role in 
determining the density difference between the ambient water and the 
discharged water. As may be seen by examining the available data, this 
can alter the applicability of the model to the situation existing in 
New Haven Harbor. 

In December 1977, a hydrographic survey was conducted during 
ebb tide. The stations for this survey are shown in Figure 3-1 and some 
of the results in Table 3-3. If the water below 2 m at Station 4 is 
fully mixed, the resulting temperature and salinity would be approxi- 
mately 5.3 C and 22.4 ppt. We assume this mixing occurs in the gener- 
ating station; thus, the discharged water would have a salinity of 22.4 
ppt, a temperature of 13.6 C (5.3 C plus 8.3 C AT) and a corresponding 
density of 16.6 o units. Table 3-3 shows the density at Station 8 at 
1 m to be 10.5 a units and at 10 m to be 19.6 a units; thus, the 
density of the discharge water is intermediate to that of the water at 
1 m of depth and that at 10 m. This means that at Station 8 the plume 
would not rise to the surface even though it is approximately 15 F (8.3 C) 
waarmer than the surrounding water at discharge. The tendency for the 
plume to stay submerged is further increased by the fact that, as the 
water comes out of the discharge pipe, it is mixing with the deeper 
waters near Station 8, lowering its temperature and increasing its 
salinity and, thereby, its density. From this it is reasonable to 
believe that the rise in temperature at Station 8 at 3 and 5 m below 
the surface is due to a submerged plume; evidence of the plxime at 3 m 
can be seen at Station 11 (Table 3-3) . A submerged plume that mixes 
with the ambient water on all sides will have flow-away velocities that 
are lower than those predicted by the physical model, where mixing 
occurred only along the lower interface. The situation that leads to a 
siibmerged plume occurs primarily during the winter when there is marked 
salinity stratification. 

Most of the time, however, the salinity stratification is not 
sufficient to result in a submerged plume. More normal conditions are 
those that existed during the thermal surveys conducted by NAI during 



3-65 



TABLE 3-3. RESULTS OF NAI HYDROGRAPHIC SURVEY DURING 
DECEMBER 1977 - EBB TIDE. NEW HAVEN HARBOR 
ECOLOGICAL STUDIES SUMMARY REPORT, 1979. 



STATION 4 






DEPTH 
(Meters) 


TEMPERATURE 
(C) 


SALINITY 
{%) 


' SURFACE 


4.0 


5.6 


1 


5.0 


13.9 


2 


5.0 


20.6 


3 


5.0 


24.1 


4 


5.5 


24.1 



STATION 8 



SURFACE 


5.0 


12.6 


1 


5.0 


13.2 


2 


5.5 


22.0 


3 


7.0 


22.7 


5 


7.0 


23.4 


10 


5.0 


24.8 


11 


5.0 


25.5 



STATION 11 



SURFACE 


5.0 


11.9 


1 


5.0 


15.9 


2 


5.5 


19,9 


3 


5.7 


22.0 


5 


5.5 


24.1 


10 


5.5 


24.5 


12 


5.5 


24.8 



3-66 



July, August and October 1976. During these surveys, Rhodamine WT dye 
was added to the cooling water inside the generating station. Dye 
concentrations were converted to temperatures above ambient by assuming 
a direct relationship between dye dilution and dilution of discharged 
cooling water (NAI, 1976) . No velocity measurements have been taken in 
the plume in New Haven Harbor, but by making some qualitative compar- 
isons between the temperature dilutions measured during the thermal 
surveys and those predicted by the physical model, it is possible to get 
an idea of how reasonable it is to expect that plume velocities pre- 
dicted by the physical model will be present in New Haven Harbor. 

Figure 3-17 shows the results of the surface temperature 
measurements obtained from the University of Florida physical model. 
Shown are isotherms of degrees above ambient temperature with the out- 
flow located at 0.0. Figures 3-18 and 3-19 show the results of the NAI 
s-urvey conducted during August. During the survey, the plume inter- 
sected the surface near the easterly edge of the navigation channel; the 
distance from the end of the discharge pipe to the inner and outer edges 
of the 4 F (2.2 C) AT isotherm are approximately 61 and 122 m respect- 
ively (the boil area must be somewhere inside this isotherm) . Figure 3- 
17 shows the axis of the maximum temperature of the plume in the phys- 
ical model intersecting the surface 53 m from the end of the discharge 
pipe. The temperature rise of the discharge water in the boil area in 
the physical model is also around 4 F (2.2 C) ; however, in this partic- 
ular model run the temperatxire of the cooling water was increased to 
10.3 C and the discharge rate lowered to 14 m /sec. Exact comparisons , 
between the test runs made with the physical model and the measurements 
made by NAI during 1976 and 1977 vary from test run to test run and 
between hydrographic and thermal surveys. This is not surprising con- 
sidering the natural forces in New Haven Harbor that were not taken into 
account in the model (including wind and wave-induced turbulence) , and 
the inherent limitations of a physical model. In general, however, one 
similarity and one difference between the results of the physical model 
test runs and what has been observed in New Haven Harbor are evident. 
The difference and similarity can be seen in Figures 3-17, 3-18 and 3-19 



3-67 



600 



- 182.4 



500 



-152.0 



40C-121.6 



E \ii 300 



<_3 

< 
I— 

00 

I— ) 



200 



100 



oo 
a: 



-91.2 !- 



-60.8 



-30.4 




60.8 



304 
_J 



METERS 
I 



PROTOTYPE PARAMETERS 

9.0 ft (2.7 m) 

500 cfs (14.2 m^/sec) 

18.75 F (10.4 C) 

30.0 ft (9.1 m) 

8.57 

95.2 F (35.1 C) 

0.18 ft/sec (0.05 m/sec) 



304 



6Q8 
_1 



200 



100 





FEET 



100 



200 



DISTANCE FROM OUTFALL 



Figure 3-17. Surface isotherms, aT^F) from UFLA, 1972. (1:40 scale) 
New Haven Harbor Ecological Studies Summary Report, 1979. 



3-68 




Figure 3-18. Projected surface AT (°F) based on dye concentrations, high 
water slack, August 25, 1976, thermal survey. New Haven 
Harbor Ecological Studies Summary Report, 1979. 



3-69 




Figure 3-19. Projected surface AT (°F) based on dye concentrations, mid 
ebb current, August 24, 1976, thermal survey. New Haven 
Harbor Ecological Studies Summary Report, 1979. 



3-70 



which show the plume in New Haven Harbor generally rising to the surface 
further from the discharge point than was predicted from physical model 
results and the temperature rise in the boil area being approximately 
the same as is seen in the physical model results. 

The consistent delayed rise of the plimie to the surface in New 
Haven Harbor is probably due to the fact that the mixing of salinities 
there does not create as great a density difference as was present in 
the physical model, which only took into account temperature differ- 
ences. However, because the temperature rise in the boil area was 
predicted quite well by the physical model and because the plume seems 
to mix with the ambient water to approximately the same extent as was 
predicted by the model, we expect the plxraie to have momentum similar to 
model prediction when it reaches the surface of the harbor. Thus, 
the flow-away velocities found in the University of Florida model basin 
may reasonably be expected to be similar to those which are actually 
present. 

The flow- away velocities of the discharge were limited to, and 
only measured at, the surface in the model. The potential of the dis- 
charge to affect the momentum balance in the inner harbor can be 
assessed by comparing the average momentum of the tide through the 
discharge location (Transect 1; Figure 3-20) with the momentum of the 
discharge. 

The mean tidal height is 1.9 m. Assuming the stand of the 
tide is nearly synchronous throughout the harbor in region A (Figure 3- 
20) and that the tide can be represented as a one component sinusoid: 



dh ^ ^(-^^"^ " = 1.34 X 10-^ ^ 

max (12.4 hr) (3600 -^) 



where ( -.. ) 

at 

max 



3-71 





\ ■ ■ 


s 

.\lengush #/ 

^STATION #/• 




i# NEW HAVtH-^T^ 
\^ LONG WHAF«ir n 


c 




l^g^p^Ri— 


^ NEW 
-{ HAVEN 
\; HARBOR 




WEST "4 


1 STATION 




HAVEN i 


e 




sandyJl-»^^— , 

POINTSr 1 


\ 




. -iiiSSSi^ 


F 




' ^ ^iv^fi'^*^ 


^k- 




^ 


> 



Figure 3-20. Transect for determining the 
Section A during flood tide. 
Studies Summary Report, 1979 



tidal input of momentum to 
Nev\; Haven Harbor Ecological 



3-72 



is the maximum rate of change of the elevation of the sea surface. Since 
the current is approximately 90° out of phase with the tide height, 

dt 

max 

occurs at same time as maximum tidal currents. The cross-sectional area 

3 2 
of Transect 1 is 7.9 x 10 m ; therefore, assuming the current is perpen- 
dicular to the transect, the average maximum velocity through Transect 1 
is: 

(1.35 X 10~^m/s) (2.7 x lO^m^) „ ^ 

_ 4_g cm/sec 



3 2 

7.9 X 10 m 

where 2.7 x 10 m is the surface area of region A (Figure 3.4-8) at mid- 
tide. The spatial average of the current through Transect 1 in cm/sec 
can be represented as : 

. ^ Z-n-t 
V avg = 4.6 cos ^ — ;; — 
^ 12.4 

The root-mean- squared velocity is 0.707 times the amplitude; 
therefore, during flood or ebb tide, the average momentum of the water, 
integrated over the cross-sectional area of Transect 1 is: 

(4.6 X 10~^m/s) (.707) (7.9 x lo\^) (1.02 x 10^ Kg/m^) = 2.62 x lo\g/ 



The momentum at Transect 1 due to the discharge from the 
station, integrated over the cross-sectional area of the discharge pipe 
is: 

(17.7 m'/s) (1.02 x lo\g/m"^) = 1.8 x lo\g/s 

Thus, the contribution of the tidal currents to the momentum balance 
through a narrow transect in the inner harbor is over ten times greater 
than that of the cooling water discharge. The relative importance of 
tidal currents increases rapidly as one moves away from the discharge 
point . 




3-73 



To further put the magnitude of the discharge in perspective, 
we calculated the total kinetic energy (KE) of the discharge, which can 
be calculated for one phase of the tide as: 

KE = 1/2 mv^ 

where m equals the mass of the water entrained over 6.2 hours and v 
equals the discharge velocity. 

o 1 ^ 

KE = 1/2 • 3.92 X 10 Kg • 9 . 3 m /sec = 1.8 x 10 ergs 

We then calculated the potential energy (PE) of the tidal prism, which 
is discharged as, kinetic energy in tidal currents and friction: 

PE = mgh 

where m equals the mass of the tidal prism, g equals the acceleration 
due to gravity and h is the integrated head of the tide above mean low 
water. 

PE = (5.0 X 10 Kg) • (9.8 m/sec ) • (0.95 m) = 4.66 x lO"""^ ergs 

Thus, the mechanical energy added to the harbor circulation by the 
Harbor Station's circulating pump system is approximately 4% of the 
energy attributable to the rise and fall of the tides. 

Flow-away velocities of the cooling water discharge plume 
discussed above result in currents persisting primarily in a narrow 
band, 15 to 30 m wide. They do not pose any problem to larger vessels, 
nor any direct hazard to smaller craft, but can cause some deflection of 

small craft from their courses. For example, a boat traveling at 10 

2 
knots (5.1 X 10 cm/sec) might drift sideways 4-5 m while passing across 

the full width of the current zone. This is a minor effect when com- 
pared to the effect of a strong crosswind. Boats close together are not 
driven together by the current, since they are both affected by it. 



3-74 



Surface waves of about 8 cm in height have been observed in 
the boil area as a result of the discharge. They pose no hazard to 
ships or boats of any kind. 

Water velocities associated with the intake have also been 
discussed above. The resulting currents are out of the main paths of 
ships and boats using the harbor and are of insignificant velocity in 
terms of their effect on navigation. 

In summary, the intake and discharge of cooling water at the 
maximum design rate: 

1. makes a small contribution to the momentum balance in 
the inner harbor and a minor addition to the kinetics of 
the harbor as a whole, and therefore is not expected to 
have an effect on the large scale circulation patterns. 

2. could result in maximum velocities in the intake channel 
of 8 cm/sec at low tide and 5 cm/sec at high tide, and 
cause the peak tidal currents at the westerly end of the 
intake channel to deviate from their normal direction 
parallel to the axis of the main channel by less than 20° 
to the east; this effect decreases rapidly away from the 
intake channel and is negligible in the main channel of 
the harbor. 

3. can cause surface currents directed in a narrow band, 
cross-channel at the discharge location, that are estimated 
to be from 61 to 91 cm/sec on the easterly edge of the 
navigation channel, falling to 18 cm/sec near the oppo- 
site edge of the channel. The cross-sectional areas 
affected by these currents are small. On rare occasions 
during the winter, these velocities may occur below the 
surface (submerged plume) . 



3-75 



Modification of the Thermal Regime in the Harbor 

When operating at 100% capacity, the thermal load on the 
harbor from the generating station is 2160 x 10 BTU/hr (545 Kcal/hr) . 
Some of this discharged heat is flushed into Long Island Sound by the 
tide, and some is transferred to the atmosphere. If harbor temperatures 
do not rise to the temperature of the discharged water, the rate at 
which the heat is dissipated must equal the rate at which it is intro- 
duced into the harbor waters. Since, however, transport and dissipation 
of the heat is a function of temperature, this equilibri\am may not be 
reached before the heat has been mixed throughout the harbor and average 
harbor temperatures thus raised. 

Close to the point of discharge, the transport of heat through 
mixing with the ambient water proceeds at a very high rate in comparison 
with the dissipation of heat through the naviface. In this area, the 
temperature increase will be much higher than that experienced by sta- 
tions outside the direct influence of the plume. ) 

A segmented mathematical model of New Haven Harbor was devel- 
oped by Ebasco Services, Inc. (1971) to assess the effect of the gener- 
ating station thermal load on average temperatures in New Haven Harbor. 
The Harbor was divided into 36 discrete segments (Figure 3-21) and an 
energy balance equation written for each segment. These equations 
assessed explicitly the effect upon the time and depth-averaged temp- 
erature of heat exchange across the air-water interface, mixing of the 
heat load within the harbor, and the direct input of heat from New Haven 
Harbor Station and the UI English Station (Figure 3-21) . Exchange of 
heat with the Sound is not accounted for in the model : no heat is 
assumed to cross any of the external boundaries of the model, which 
include the southern boundaries of segments 33, 34, 35 and 36. This 
means that, for the model, all the heat discharged by the power plants 
must be dissipated to the atmosphere within the bounds of the model 
segments. In the natural system, some of the water which leaves the 
harbor on the ebb tide is carried away by currents in the Sound and does 



3-76 




Figure 3-21. EBASCO model segments (EBASCO, 1971), 
Studies Summary Report, 1979. 



New Haven Harbor Ecological 



3-77 



not return on the flood tide: the water which does not return carries 
away heat. The projjortion of water that is flushed has not been studied 
for Now Haven Harbor; however, the assumption used in the model, namely 
that all the heat returns with the flooding tide, maximizes the temp- 
erature increase in the harbor and is thus conservative. 

A minimum flow condition that can occur during July and August 
and corresponding average meteorological conditions for these months 
were used as inputs to the model. Dispersion coefficients were deter- 
mined by applying the model to predict the salinity distribution meas- 
ured during July and August of 1963 (Duxbury, 1963); current speeds and 
directions were from the same source. 

Figure 3-22 shows the full-depth tidal cycle average harbor 
temperature increase resulting from operation of the New Haven Harbor 
Generating Station at 100% capacity (heat load of 545 x 10 Kcal/hr) and 
operation of the UI English Station at 50% capacity (heat load of 170 x 
10 Kcal/hr) . The English Station is located on the Mill River and 
during operation discharges cooling water to model segment 5. The 
figure shows that the inner part of the harbor is subjected to an 
average temperature rise of about 0.8 F (0.4 C) with outlying areas 
about 0.5 F (0.3 C) above ambient temperature. 

The mathematical model-predicted temperatures represent the 
average temperatures throughout the water column for each segment at a 
steady-state condition. For steady state to occur, the parameters 
affecting temperature, i.e., meteorology, freshwater flow, diffusion 
coefficients, and heat loads, must be constant for periods ranging from 
about two weeks to a month. In actuality, these parameters are con- 
tinually varying and a steady-state condition does not occur. However, 
since Ebasco has chosen realistic worst-case conditions as non-varying 
inputs, and because the flushing of heat into the Sound is underesti- 
mated, the temperatures determined by the model can be considered to be 
conservatively high. 



3-78 



>- 
z 


Z 




Z 


UJ 

O 


tn 

1— 


< 


< 




o 


< 


z 














5; 

o 


a. 

o 

7 


a: 
O 


3 
or 


LU 
> 
< 


U- 


O 

z 


< 


< 

I 


1— 
in 

O 


iXJ 

—J 

u 

>- 


o 


< 


ai 


z 

UJ 

> 

< 

I 


LU 


u 


7 


z 

3 


lU 

o 

(A 


LJJ 


_J 

< 


o 

CO 

u- 




^ 




3 




u- 




m 


< 


h— 


1 


O 


o 


O 




< 


1— 


>— 

z 


UJ 


Z 


a: 

UJ 

a. 


UJ 

o 


Q 

UJ 


3 


^ 




> 


— » 


> 

UJ 


LU 


o 




LLI 


—J 

-) 


X 


o 






li- 


Oi 



"^"M 




Figure 3-22. Full depth tidal cycle average water temperature increases (°F) 
(EBASCO, 1971). New Haven Harbor Ecological Studies Summary 
Report, 1979. 



3-79 



Hydrographic surveys of New Haven Harbor were conducted by 
Ebasco during May and September 1970 (Ebasco, 1971) . The surveys con- 
sisted of releasing, at a known constant rate, a 30% solution of Rhoda- 
mine B dye at the generating station discharge location and measuring 
the resulting dye concentrations at the locations in the harbor shown in 
Figure 3-23. Full-depth-averaged dye concentrations were obtained for 
each survey location and related to temperature in the same manner as 
was done for the NAI thermal surveys (NAI, 1976). Tables 3-4 and 3-5 
show the temperature increase for the generating station, converted from 
measured dye concentrations as an ebb slack, flood slack and tidal cycle 
average. 

On a full-depth-average basis. Tables 3-4 and 3-5 show that 
only one survey station, namely E20, will be subjected to temperature 
increases of 1 F (0.5 C) or greater. A maximum full-depth-average 
temperature increase of 1.22 F (0.7 C) was recorded at survey station 
£20 at ebb slack during the EBASCO September survey. These temperature 
estimates do not take into account thermal decay due to heat loss to the 
atmosphere across the air-water interface. EBASCO also erected a non- 
steady-state model for thermal plume (EBASCO, 1971) which was in general 
agreement with the more accurate surveys and dye studies conducted post- 
operationally (NAI, 1976; 1977). 

Continuous measurements of near-surface and near-bottom water 
temperatures were made at the Honeywell Water Quality Monitor from 1974 
through 1977. Table 3-6 gives the mean annual near-surface and near- 
bottom temperatures for September to August, 1974-75, 1975-76, and 1976- 
77. During the first year of plant operation (September 1975 to August 
1976) , mean annual temperatures rose about 0.8 F over the preceding 
year. From September 1976 to August 1977, mean temperatures dropped to 
about 52.9 F, or about 1.6 F lower than in the preoperational year 
shown, in response to the record cold of that year. It can be seen from 
the Honeywell data that naturally occurring mean temperature fluctua- 
tions are greater than those which may occur as a result of the thermal 
load from the generating plant. Table 3-6 also shows that, on a yearly- 

(Text continued on page 3-84) 



3-80 




Figure 3-23. EBASCO dye study stations (EBASCO, 1971). New Haven Harbor 
Ecological Studies Summary Report, 1979. 



3-81 



TABLE 3-4. FULL DEPTH AVERAGE TEMPERATURE INCREASE, MAY, 1970 
NEW HAVEN HARBOR ECOLOGICAL STUDIES SUMMARY REPORT, 
1979. 



TEMPERATURE (F) 



LOCATION 


EBB 


FLOOD 


TIDAL AVERAGE 


E 2 


.20 


.35 


.28 


E 3 


.22 


.32 


.27 


E 5 


.26 


.25 


.26 


E 6 


.24 


.30 


.27 


E 7 


.30 


.34 


.32 


E 9 


.42 


.35 


.39 


E 13 


.60 


.56 


.58 


E 19 


.46 


.45 


.46 


E 20 


.98 


.65 


.82 


E 23 


.36 


.24 


.30 


E 24 


.52 


.64 


.58 


E 30 


.21 


.10 


.16 


E 31 


.23 


.11 


.17 


E 32 


.28 


.22 


.25 


E 35 


.15 


.04 


.10 



3-82 



TABLE 3-5. FULL DEPTH AVERAGE TEMPERATURE INCREASE, SEPTEMBER 1978. 
NEW HAVEN HARBOR ECOLOGICAL STUDIES SUMMARY REPORT, 1979. 



TEMPERATURE (F) 



LOCATION 


EBB 


FLOOD 


TIDAL AVERAGE 


E 2 


.13 


.76 


.45 


E 3 


.14 


.58 


.36 


E 5 


.51 


.70 


.61 


E 6 


,24 


.44 


.34 


E 7 


.35 


.52 


.44 


E 9 


.41 


.18 


.30 


E 13 


.44. 


.54 


.49 


E 19 


.26 


.22 


.24 


E 20 


1.22 


.20 


.71 


E 23 


.28 


.08 


.18 


E 24 


.53 


,14 


.34 


E 30 


.02 


.01 


.02 


E 31 


.06 


.02 


.04 


E 32 


.27 


.12 


,20 


E 35 


.04 


.00 


,02 



3-83 



TABLE 3-6. SUMMARY OF HONEYWELL CONTINUOUS MEAN ANNUAL WATER TEMPERATURE 
DATA FOR PREOPERATIONAL AND POST-OPERATIONAL CONDITIONS. 
NEW HAVEN HARBOR ECOLOGICAL STUDIES SUMMARY REPORT, 1979. 



PERIOD 


NEAR SURFACE 


NEAR BOTTOM 


X 


X a 


PREOPERATIONAL 


■ 




Sept. 1974 






to Aug. 1975 


54.48F 15.01 


54.48F 13.64 


POST-OPERATIONAL 






Sept 1975 






to Aug. 1976 


55.27F 13.82 


55.19F 13.75 


Sept. 1976 






to Aug. 1977 


52.91F 15.08 


52.96F 15.24 



3-84 



average basis, the temperature increase due to operation of the gen- 
erating station is probably less than IF (0.6 C) at the water quality 
monitor . 

The NAI thermal surveys conducted during July, August, and 
October 1976 give quantitative information about the extent of the 
generating station thermal plume. The results of the surveys conducted 
during October 13, 1976, are shown in Figures 3-24 through 3-27. At 
slack low water, a small plume is apparent near the discharge point 
(Figure 3-24) . Its maximum surface temperature rise was about 5 F 
(2.8 C) above ambient. The percentage of the surface area of the inner 
harbor bounded by the 4 F AT isotherm is less than 0.1%. The 3, 2 and 1 F 
(1.7, 1.1 and .6 C) AT isotherms bound 0.4, 0.6, and 1 percent respect- 
ively of the inner harbor surface area. Cross-sectional data show the 
plxome to have been a near surface feature (Figure 3-24) . Temperatures 
representing AT's of 3 to 5 F (1,7 - 2.8 C) occupied the upper 4 m of 
the water colxmn. From 4 to 7m, AT's were 2 to 3 F. Below the 7 m 
depth, temperatures were at or very close to ambient. 

At maximum flood tide, the plant's thermal plume was less con- 
centrated, due to greater mixing with ambient waters (Figure 3-25) . The 
temperature rise directly above the discharge point was about 3 F, with 
the 3 F AT isotherm enclosing less than 0.1% of the inner harbor surface 
area. The 1 to 2 F AT portion of the plume water was observed to curve 
across the navigation channel and up toward Long Wharf, with the 1 F AT 
isotherm enclosing 2.4% of the inner harbor area. The cross-sectional 
presentation shows the pl\ime concentrated near the discharge, with 
dilution down to less than 1 F AT occurring only a short distance from ' 
the plume axis. 

At high water slack (Figure 3-26) , the maximim surface temp- 
erature increase was 2 F, but covered a very small surface area near the 
discharge (less than 0.1%). The 1 F AT isotherm covered 2.2% of the 
area of the inner harbor. Cross-sectional data show that the thermal 
pliome intersected the bottom directly in front of the discharge. At 



3-85 




■*-> 

ra • 
O 1— 



(T3 


S- 




o 


>^ 


Q. 


<v 


cu 


> a: 


i~ 




3 


>, 


to 


t. 




ro 


f^ 


F 


ro 


H 


F 


3 


S- 


00 


0) 




-C 


</) 


+-) 


OJ 




• r- 


«\ 


XI 


«£) 


3 


1^ 


+-> 


cn 


oo 


1 — 






r^ 


r\ 


ro 


CO 


O 


r— 


•r- 




Ol 


s- 


o 


cu 


^— 


-Q 


o 


O 


o 


+-> 


UJ 


o 




o 


S- 




o 


E J3 


O 


S- 


s- 


(T3 


<4- 


J= 


,_ 


c 


U- 


0) 


o 


> 




ro 


■*-> 


::e 


< 





s- 




OJ 


• 


x: 


^ 


+-> 


o 


o 


ro 


i/i 


r— 


l-H 


(/) 


■ 




^ 




C>sJ 




CO 




ai 




S- 




3 




01 




•^ 




U- 





3-86 




2 
O 

y- 


iri ^ 
t 2 ^ 


pi 


N e 




S ^ K 


£ 




•" g'^-^ 


1^ 


VSSS" 






z 


MAX 
(EST) 

rr OUT 

FROM 


a 




UJ Ui UJ z o 


^ 


^tn%- 





(T> 




^ 




CTl 


B 


■"^ 


3 


«^ 


E 4-> 




i. 


X 


o 


ns 


Q. 


H 


<U 




d; 


ai 




c 


>, 


•^ 


i- 


s- 


fO 


3 


F 


T3 


l- 




3 


>,00 


<U 




> 


to 


s- 


0) 


=3 


■r- 


to 


T3 




3 


r^ 


+-> 


ro 


C/1 


E 




s- 


^— 


cu 


(O 


JC 


o 


+-> 






01 


*\ 


o 


ID 




r^ 


o 


<D 


u 


r— 


UJ 


n 


s- 


CO 


o 


r^ 


J3 




t. 


S- 


fO 


<u 3: 


J2 




o 


c 


+-> 


OJ 


CJ 


> 


o 


n3 




:r 


F 




O 


■s 


s- 


<u 


4- 


z 


, , 




Ll_ 




O 


• 


+-> 


+-> 


< 


E 


^^^ 


0) 




s- 


l/l 


s- 


^ 


3 


^ 


o 


(U 




-C T3 


+-> 


O' 


O 


o 


10 


I — 



ID 
CM 



s- 

3 
CD 



3-87 




u 



cu 



en 



■t-> . 

> 

S- " 

Ifl S- 

O 

r— O. 

E a: 

s- 

O) >, 
^ S- 
■t-> (O 



UD 3 

1 — (/) 

(U 

•^ -r- 

CO T3 

1— 3 

+J 

s- 00 

(U 

^ I— 

O <T3 
■M O 

O -r- 

O CD 

O 

E .— 

O O 

s- o 



u. o 

o J3 



E a; 
1. > 



+-> 
O 



OO 

I 

CO 

<U 

3 



3-88 



this time the 1 F AT isotherm bounded 30.5% of the cross-sectional area 
of Transect F (Figure 3-26) . 

At maximum ebb, the ])lant's thermal plume had tlic greatest 
horizontal extent (Figure 3-27) . Temperature rises of 4 F occurred 
above the discharge. Temperature increases of 1 to 2 F extended beyond 
Fort Hale Park. The area bounded by the 1 F AT isotherm is equal to 
12.6% of the surface area of the inner harbor. Cross-sectional data 
show water with increased temperature of 2 to 3 F extending from surface 
to bottom in the water column at the transect just south of the dis- 
charge where the plume enters the main channel (Transect G, Figure 3- 
27) . At this time there was no area in the main channel at Transect G 
which did not have a temperature rise of at least 1 to 2 F. Further 
south of the discharge point, the pliome apparently thinned out and 
possibly formed a surface layer 1 to 2 m thick. 

Generally, the NAI dye and thermal surveys showed that the 
percentage of the surface area of the inner harbor subjected to a 
temperature rise of 1 to 4 F was small. In each study, the area bounded 
by the 4 F AT isotherm was equal to or less than one-tenth of one per- 
cent of the total inner harbor area. The areas bounded by AT isotherms 
of 3 F ranged from zero to 0.4% in October and from 0.1% to 0.5% in 
August. A much larger area was bounded by the 2 F AT isotherm; the 
percentage affected ranged from less than 0.1% to 3% in October and from 
0.5% to 5.5% in August. The percentage of surface area bounded by a AT 
of 1 F ranged between 0.7% and 12.6% in October and between 2.7% and 
11.2% in August. 

In October, the percentage of the cross-sectional area of 
Transect F bounded by the 4 F AT isotherm was zero during four of the 
eight tide phases studied, and it ranged to a maximvun of 2.9% during low 
slack on October 13. For August, the range was between zero and 3.2%. 
The 3 F AT isothejrm bounded up to 6.7% and 8.5% of Transect F in October 
and August, respectively. The area bounded by the 2 F AT isotherm 
ranged from 1.9% to 22.8% in October and from 10.4% to 20.6% in August. 
The areal extent of the 1 F AT contour was quite variable in October, 



3-89 










to u_ 


g 






sis 


^ 






o-' '^ 








= i5 


i 


s 


03 


^11 








- 1- s 




o 


< 




i 






lil i- ^ 

LU Z O 










'St 


& 


1- 


Ps!*'^ 



J3 




^ 




cu 




F 


. 


-i 


o-i 


!= 


I^ 




U1 


X 


1 — 


fd 




t 


•s 




-M 


en 


S- 


c: 


o 


•f— 


Q. 


<- 


CU 


3 


ac 


TD 






>, 


>1 


!- 


0) 


(0 


> 


h- 


1- 


t 


3 


3 


on 


C/O 


, 




re 


en 


F 


CU 


s_ 


•r— 


<u -o 


x: 


3 


+-> 


+-> 




U~) 


r« 




(^ 


r— 


r-. 


(13 


(Tl 


O 


r— 


• n- 




C71 


•^ 


O 


CO 


r— 


1 — 


o 




o 


!- 


LJJ 


0) 




ja 


i- 


o 


o 


+-> J2 


O 


S- 


o 


(0 




n: 


t 




o 


c 


S- 


a; 


l+- 


> 




« 


— ^ 


n: 


u_ 







•5 


+J 


CU 


< 


^ 


— 




(/) 


, 


F 


00 


!- 


+-> 


CU 


E 


.c 


OJ 


4-> 


s-_ 


O 


1- 


00 


3 


♦— H 


u 


r^ 




CM 




CO 




<u 




S- 




3 




05 





3-90 



ranging from 7.4% to 40.2%. August showed less variability; the range 
then was from 22.3% to 41.6% of the area of Transect F. 

During 1976, NAI analyzed aerial infrared imagery and "ground 
truth" information to assess the extent of the generating station ther- 
mal plume and the magnitude of other thermal inputs to New Haven Harbor 
(NAI, 1976) . These data covered the period of September 3 and 4. With 
the plant at or near full load, it was found that the 2 F AT isotherm 
encompassed approximately 2.3 to 5.5% of the inner harbor surface area 
at high slack and maximum ebb flow, respectively. The maximum surface 
temperature in the vicinity of the discharge was 74 F during low slack 
tide. This represented an increase of 4 F over adjacent surface water 
temperatures . 

Increased surface water temperatures were observed in other 
areas of the harbor. Maximum surface temperatures from the UI English 
Station of 72 to 76 F (22.2-24.4 C) were observed in the Mill River. In 
the shoal areas along the western side of the harbor, solar radiation 
raised the temperature of the water above 74 F (23.3 C) . 

Thermal addition was not sufficient to cause fog or to signifi- 
cantly affect winter ice cover. 

In summary, the thermal discharge from New Haven Harbor Gen- 
erating Station: 

1. raises full-depth tidal cycle average temperatures 
by less than 0.8 F in the inner part of the harbor 
and less than 0.5 F in outlying areas. 

2. raises surface temperatures by a maximum of 4 F where the 
plume intersects the surface. 

3. can occasionally cover the complete cross-sectional area 
of the navigation channel with water 1 to 2 F warmer than 
ambient. 



3-91 



Changes in Dissolved Oxygen Concentration 

The solubility of oxygen in sea water is a function of temp- 
erature), salinity and |iressurc. Solubility dexrrcascs with ijicrcasiuq 
temi'craturc and salinity, but increases with increasing prc.-.ssure. 

The New Haven Harbor Generating Station changes the oxygen 
solubility by mixing water properties at intake and increasing the 
temperature of the water by 15 F. The effect that the change in solu- 
bility has on the actual amount of dissolved oxygen contained in the 
harbor waters depends on the percent saturation of the discharged water 
and the pressure. When water with a percent saturation over 100% reaches 
depths where the pressure is not great enough to keep the oxygen dis- 
solved, oxygen may bubble out and be lost to the atmosphere. The poten- 
tial for this occurrence in New Haven Harbor can be demonstrated for 
winter conditions. 

Table 3-7 gives the properties of a hypothetical water column 
which are typical of that at Station 4 during the winter. The dissolved 
oxygen content of the water was determined by assuming 100% saturation. 

If the water column was quickly and completely mixed at the 
intake to the generating station, the water would have a temperature of 
1.9 C, a salinity of 17.6 ppt, and a dissolved oxygen concentration of 
12.2 mg/1. At the discharge, the temperature of the water would'be 10.2 C. 
The solubility of oxygen in water of 10.2 C and 17.6 ppt is 6.87 ml/1 
(9.8 mg/1 at 1 atm) , thus the percent saturation of the discharge is 
124%. The 12.2 mg/1 of oxygen does not have a volume of 6.87 ml/1 until 
it reaches a depth of 4 m below the surface, by which time it has been 
mixed with the ambient water in a ratio of approximately 3 to 1. 
Ass\iming that the ambient water in the region of the discharge has a 
salinity of 24 ppt, a temperature of 3 C, and is 100% saturated with 
dissolved oxygen (concentration of 11.3 mg/1), the plume water at the 



The percent saturation of oxygen in sea water is defined as one hundred 
times the observed concentration of dissolved oxygen divided by its 
solubility in water at the same temperature and salinity under a 
pressure of 1 atm. 



3-92 



TABLE 3-7. PROPERTIES OF A HYPOTHETICAL WATER COLUMN, 
CHARACTERISTIC OF WINTER CONDITIONS. NEW 
HAVEN HARBOR ECOLOGICAL STUDIES SUMMARY REPORT, 
1979. 



DEPTH 


TEMPERATURE 


SALINITY 


DISSOLVED OXYGEN 


(M) 


(°C) 


(%) 


(PPM) 


SURFACE 


0.3 


2.9 


13.8 


1 


0.8 


6.2 


13.6 


2 


1.3 


10.7 


12.8 


3 


1.7 


22.6 


11.7 


4 


3.3 


23.2 


11.2 


5 


3.0 


23.5 


11.3 


6 


2.5 


23.5 


11.4 


7 


2.5 


23.5 


11.4 



3-93 



4 m depth has a salinity of 22.4 ppt, a temperature of 4.8 C, and a dis- 
solved oxygen concentration of 11.5 mg/l. The solubility of oxygen in 
water with these properties is 7.6 ml/1 (10.9 mg/l at 1 atms) . This 
means that the? plume water is 106% saturated at a depth of 4 m. At 4 m 
the volume of 11.5 mg/l of oxygen is less than the saturation value, so 
there is no tendency for the oxygen to come out of solution. When the 
plume reaches the surface it has been diluted by an additional factor of 
approximately 25 to 1. Assuming that the last 4 m of the water column 
has a salinity of 10 ppt, a temperature of 1 C and is 100% saturated, 
the discharge water would have a salinity of 19.9 ppt, a temperature of 
4 C, and a dissolved oxygen concentration of 11.8 mg/l when it reaches 
the surface. With these properties, the discharge water at the Harbor 
surface is 105% saturated with oxygen and could potentially lose 0.4 
mg/l of oxygen to the atmosphere. 

The potential for this loss of oxygen to occur in water which 
has passed through power plants has been recognized and studied at other 
locations. Jacobson (1976) studied the oxygen balance in the condenser- 
cooling water system of the Connecticut Yankee Plant and found that 
oxygen concentrations decreased throughout the cooling system (which 
unlike the New Haven Harbor Generating Station system included contact 
with the atmosphere before discharge into the river) when intake waters 
became supersaturated upon the addition of heat. These losses ranged 
between 0.9 and 1.3 mg/l and usually occurred at ambient water tempera- 
tures below 6 C and at ambient dissolved oxygen concentrations above 
11.8 mg/l. Dissolved oxygen concentrations remained virtually unchanged 
after passage through the condenser when percent oxygen saturations in 
the heated water were below 100%. Adams (1969) , studying two tidewater 
power plants in California, noted supersaturation of oxygen in the 
discharge waters but found no changes in dissolved oxygen concentra- 
tions. 

The situation that appears to exist in New Haven Harbor is 
that the generating station has little effect on the amount of oxygen 
dissolved in the Harbor waters. During the summer months, the harbor is 



3-94 



undcrsaturated with regard to oxygen. The generating station will raise 
the percent saturation by approximately 17% at discharge. Usually this 
will be reduced to less than 7% by mixing with the ambient water before 
the discharge plume reaches the surface. Since the inner harbor percent 
saturations are generally below 70% from June through August, an in- 
crease of even 17% would not create a situation where oxygen could be 
lost by the Harbor waters. 

The example test case shows that, during the winter the gen- 
erating station could cause oxygen supersaturation in the discharge 
plume, and that in the example there is a potential to lose 0.4 mg/1 of 
oxygen to the atmosphere. Whether oxygen is actually lost to the atmos- 
phere in the Harbor, as occurred in the study by Jacobson (1976) , or 
whether there is supersaturation without any loss of oxygen, such as was 
observed by Adams (1969) , cannot be determined from the available data. 

Table 3-8 shows the percent of oxygen saturation at the 
surface at Stations 4, 8, 9, 11 and 16 for January through December 1976 
during ebb tide. It can be seen that supersaturation of the surface 
waters is common throughout the year at Station 16 and at all stations 
during the winter. These high values are probably due to the rapid 
natural mixing of water properties that characterizes this and most 
other estuaries. Station 8, which is most likely to represent plume 
water, does not show unusually high values of percent saturation. 
Examination of the dissolved oxygen concentrations observed at Station 8 
during 1976 reveals that they were not low in comparison to Stations 4 
and 9. 

In summary, the New Haven Harbor Generating Station has no 
effect on dissolved oxygen concentrations in the harbor during the 
summer months when the percent saturation is well below 100%. During 
the winter, when percent oxygen saturation is near or greater than 100%, 
the station has the potential for driving a small amount (less than 1 
mg/1) of oxygen out of solution by heating and mixing of waters; how- 
ever, natural estuarine mixing in the harbor causes a great deal of 



3-95 



TABLE 3-8. PERCENT SATURATION OF DISSOLVED OXYGEN AT THE SURFACE 
DURING 1976 AT EBB TIDE. NEW HAVEN HARBOR ECOLOGICAL 
STUDIES SUMMARY REPORT, 1979. 





Sta. 4 


Sta. 9 


Sta. 8 


Sta. 11 


Sta. 16 


January 




84 


98 






February 


116 


120 


123 


122 


128 


March 




86 


75 


80 


110 


April 


119 


137 


125 


131 


135 


May 




94 


91 


93 


98 


June 


42 


43 


76 


88 


114 


July 


32 


54 


70 


101 


127 


August 


49 


70 


69 


83 


100 


September 


56 


101 


89 


86 


126 


October 


86 


98 


96 


88 


97 


November 


91 


98 


101 


101 


102 


December 


98 


103 


98 


127 


104 



3-96 



super saturation during this time of year. In at least one study (Adams, 
1969) , oxygen supersaturation in thermal discharge has been found to 
occur without the loss of oxygen to the atmosphere. Oxygen removal can 
only occur when amJjiont oxygen concentrations are relatively Viigh, and 
thus has no adverse ecological impact. 



Increased Turbidity , 

The physical model studies conducted by the University of 
Florida (UOF, 1972) predicted extensive scour of the bottom during the 
startup of operations at the generating plant if preventive measures 
were not taken. In response to this prediction, UI installed a pro- 
tective rip-rap on the bottom at the end of the discharge pipe. Figure 
3-28 shows the protective rip-rap and selected depth contours from a 
bathymetric survey conducted by the Army Corps of Engineers in January 
1978; Figure 3-29 shows selected contours from a survey conducted in the 
spring of 1974 before the generating station began operations. From 
these two figures it can be seen that the dredging done when the dis- 
charge pipe was installed changed the bottom in the vicinity of the 
discharge. Figure 3-28 shows a short trench or hole that begins at the 
westerly end of the rip-rap. Though this area may have been dug out 
during the dredging operations, it may also have been scoured out by the 
discharged water. It was shown earlier (p. 69) that the plume travels 
further horizontally before rising to the surface than was found in the 
physical model. This extended horizontal reach of the discharged water 
may indicate that the area of the protective rip-rap is less than what 
is needed to prevent scour of the bottom. If the area of the bottom 

that could be scoured is defined by the 38 ft (11.6 m) depth contour, 

2 
then Figure 3-28 shows 2327 m to be affected. A sediment trap study 

conducted by Battelle (1971) shows the rate of deposition in this area 

to be about 1.5 cm/mo. If the generating station was taken off line for 

a week the amount of sediment which potentially could be resuspended by 

the discharge would be approximately: 



■3-97 



O) 












fY 












UJ 

(— 
III 





un 


Ol 


00 


r-- 


ro 


CO 


.—4 


.— 1 





5: 


1—1 


i-H 


I-H 


I — 1 


1 — 1 


i- 


r^ 










LLl 


• 








• 


III 


CvJ 


I— 1 


0-1 


t-^ 


LO 


U- 


<=!■ 


>* 


CO 


CO 


CO 



UJ <C 

in o 



Q_ 
UJ 




00 

cr. < 

1 — CTl 
S- I— 



ro S- 

-^ O 

Q. 

•> O) 

UJ OC 

=c >> 

00 S- 

=> re 

ro 13 

S- 

ro to 

CD •!- 
CD-O 
S- 3 
fO +-> 

x: 00 
o 

(/) 1 — 
•1- ro 
-o o 

■4- CD 

o o 

>,'o 
O) u 

> UJ 
S- 

3 S- 

(/l o 

J2 

O S- 

•I- ro 

s- :e 

-c ro 

ro 

J2 3 

<u 

I— 2: 

ro 
c 
o • 

ro OJ 

OJ (/I 
C1.-I- 
O I— 
I -D 
4-> 3 
LO Q. 

O c: 
Q- 3 



00 

CNJ 

I 

CO 
OJ 



3-98 



>- 
_i Qi 

LU =t 



00 












d: 












m 


LC) 


CM 


cn 


oo 


r^ 


1— 


• 


• 


• 


• 


♦ 


UJ 


CM 


CvJ 


i-H 


>— < 


o 


s: 


.— 1 


r-l 


r-H 


I— 1 


r— 1 


I— 












UJ 


I— 1 


O 


cn 


r^ 


Ln 


LU 


^ 


«=1- 


CO 


CO 


CO 


u_ 













Q. 
LU 
Q 




CD 

• "cn 

CT> •> 
r- +-> 

i- 

>> 2 

ns Q. 

a: 

»i 

LU >> 
O S- 
cC 03 
00 E 
=> E 
- — 3 

fO 

O) 1/1 
S- OJ 

ro •■- 
■o 

CD n 
C7)+-> 

s- 00 

-C I— 
O fO 
(/> o 

"O cn 

o 

^- r- 

o o 

o 

>)LU 
CD 

> s- 
1- o 
3 -Q 

(O 
O 31 

•r— 

5- C 

-(-> d) 

cu > 

E « 

ro O) 



n3 • 

c: ^-- 
O X) 

•r- QJ 

•P x: 

03 (/> 

S- T- 

O) r- 
Q.JD 
-O 3 

' s- c 

Q. 3 



CT> 

CVJ 

I 

ro 

<U 

i- 



3-99 



(2327 m^) (1.5 — ) {^=r^ — ) = 8.7 m"^ (11.6 yd"^) 
mo 4 wks 

The rate at which the sediment could be scoured out (and the 
resultant turbidity) cannot be easily determined. 

Analysis of measurements of water transparency (or depth of 
visibility readings from Secchi disc measurements) and turbidity show no 
distinct patterns relative to plant operations. 



Sumrnary of Impacts 

In summary, the impacts of New Haven Harbor Station opera- 
tions appear to be slight. Minor alterations of local current patterns, 
creation of 8-cm waves, and small, localized increases in turbidity near 
the discharge during start-up after prolonged down-time probably occur, 
though none of these have been measured. Dissolved oxygen concentra- 
tions could be reduced slightly (<17%) when saturation is near or 
greater than 100% — in effect, when minor alteration of DO is ecolo- 
gically unimportant. Monitoring programs have detected no change in DO 
concentrations attributable to New Haven Harbor Station operations . 

The only impact quantitatively measured was the establishment 
of a thermal plume which: 1) is detectable (At > 1°F) over a maximum of 
42% of the inner harbor surface, 2) creates a small "boil" where surface 
temperatures may be elevated by as much as 4 F over ambient, 3) occa- 
sionally covers the complete cross-sectional area of the navigation 
channel with water 1-2 F warmer than ambient. 

The New Haven Harbor Station discharge may raise average 
temperatures in the inner and outer harbors by less than 0.8 F and 0.5 F, 
respectively. This increase is less than that induced by annual clima- 
tological variation. 



3-100 



Overall, the- impacts of New Haven Harbor Station operations on 
New Haven Harbor hydrography are small and lie well wi thin the range of 
phenomena in nature. From these data it would appear to be highly 
unlikely that the impacts of the New Haven Harbor Station would have any 
significant, adverse environmental effects. 



3-101 



LITERATURE CITED -- HYDROGRAPHIC 



Adams, J. R. 1969. Thermal power, aquatic life and kilowatts on the 
Pacific coast. Nucl. News. September: 75-79. 

Battelle Memorial Institute. 1971. Environmental monitoring program: 
Service program, marine ecology and biology. New Haven Harbor, 
Connecticut, May-October 1971. Prepared for United Illuminating 
Company, New Haven, Connecticut. 

Battelle Columbus Laboratories. 1977. A monitoring program on the 
ecology of the marine environment of the Millstone Point, Conn- 
ecticut area: Annual report of ecological and hydrographic 
studies 1976. Prepared for Northeast Utilities Service Company, 
Berlin, Connecticut. 

Bokuniewicz, Henry J. 1976. Estuarine sediment flux evaluated in 

Long Island Sound. Ph.D. dissertation, Yale University. 170 pp. 

, J. Gebert and R. B. Gordon. 1975. Recent sedimentation 



in Long Island Sound. 7th Annual Long Island Sound Conference, 
City University of New York, New York, New York. 

Bokuniewicz, Henry J., R. B. Gordon and C. C. Pilbeam. 1974. Circu- 
lation and sedimentation in central Long Island Sound. i(ABS) 
Trans. Am. Geophys. Union. Vol. 5. p. 280. 

Bowman, M. J. 1976. Pollution predicted model of Long Island Sound. 
IN: Proceedings of Civil Engineering in the Oceans/Ill, Newark, 
Delaware, 9-13 June 1975. American Society of Civil Engineers, 
New York. pp. 1084-1103. 

. 1977. Nutrient distributions and transport in Long Island 



Sound. Estuarine and Coastal Marine Science. 5:531-548. 

Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection - Water Compliance 
Unit. 1977. Connecticut water quality standards and classifica- 
tions. 90 pp. 

Duxbury, Alyn C. 1963. A hydrographic survey of New Haven Harbor, 
1962-1963. Yale University. 

EBASCO Services, Inc. 1971a. Environmental Report: Coke Works Site, 
June 1971. Prepared for The United Illuminating Company, New 
Haven, Connecticut. 

. 1971b. 400 MW Coke Works Generating Plant: effect of 



heated cooling water discharge on the temperature distribution 

of New Haven Harbor. Prepared for The United Illuminating Company, 

New Haven, Connecticut. 



3-102 



Environmental Protection Agency. 1971. Report on the water quality 
of Long Island Sound. EPA Water Quality Office. CWT-10-29. 

Federal Water Pollution Control Administration. 1959. Report on the 
water quality of Long Island Sound. 

Federal Water Quality Administration. 1970. New Haven Harbor shellfish 
resource and water quality. U.S. Dept. of Interior, Northeast 
Region, Needham Heights, Mass. 22 pp. 

Fisher, J. B. 1974. History of the Mill River. (unpublished) mimeo- 
graphed. 

Florida Engineering and Industrial Experiment Station, Dept. of Coastal 
and Oceanographic Engineering. 1972. Buoyant jet discharge model 
study for Coke Works power plant. New Haven Harbor, Connecticut. 

Garvine , R. W. and J. D. Monk. 1974. Frontal structure of a river plume. 
J. Geophys. Res. 79:2251-2273. 

Goodkind, O' Day-Fay, Spofford and Thorndike. 1970a. Summary and recom- 
mendations of reports upon facilities for secondary treatment of 
sewage and industrial waste waters. Report No. 3. Prepared for 
the City of New Haven Department of Public Works. 

1970b. Report upon tidal studies of New Haven Harbor 



and New Haven thermal imagery. Prepared for the City of New 
Haven Department of Public Works . 3 volumes . 

Gordon, R. B. 1973. Turbidity due to dredge operations at the Coke 

Works site. New Haven Harbor, Connecticut. Department of Geology 
and Geophysics, Yale University, New Haven, Connecticut. 

Hardy, C. D. 1972a. Hydrographic data report: Long Island Sound, 

1970, Part II. Mar. Sci. Res. Cent., Tech. Kept. No. 13. 20 pp. 

. 1972b. Movement and quality of Long Island Sound waters. 



1971. Mar. Sci. Res. Cent., Tech. Rept. No. 17. 64 pp. 

and P. K. Weyl. 1970. Hydrographic data report: Long 

Island Sound 1970. Part I. Mar. Sci. Cent., Tech. Rept. No. 6. 
96 pp. 

. 1971. Distribution of dissolved oxygen in the waters of 

western Long Island Sound. Mar. Sci. Res. Cent., Tech. Rept. No. 
11. 37 pp. 

Jacobson, P. M. 1976. Oxygen balance in the condenser-cooling water 
system of the Connecticut Yankee Plant. IN: The Connecticut 
River Ecological Study — The impact of a nuclear power plant. 
D. Merriman and L. M. Thorpe (eds.). American Fisheries Society. 
Monograph No. 1. pp. 35-38. 



3-103 



Jay, D. A. and M. J. Bowman. 1975. The physical oceanography and 

water quality of New York Harbor and western Long Island Sound. 
Mar. Sci. Res. Ctr. SUNY/SB Tech. Rpt. Ser. No. 23. 71 pp. 

Lawler, Matusky and Skelly Engineers. 1975a. Norwalk Harbor Station, 
Thermal Plume Studies. Prepared for Connecticut Light and Power 
Company, Berlin, Connecticut. 

1975b. Middletown Station, Thermal Plume Studies. Pre- 



pared for the Hartford Electric Light Company, Berlin, Connecti- 
cut. 

. 1975c. Devon Station, Thermal Plume Studies. Prepared 



for Connecticut Light and Power Company, Berlin, Connecticut. 

. 1976. Montville Station, Thermal Plume Studies. Pre- 
pared for Connecticut Light and Power Company, Berlin, Connecti- 
cut. 

Long Island Sound Regional Study. 1973. Sources and movements of 

water. An interim report. New England River Basins Commission, 
New Haven, Connecticut. 45 pp. 

. 1975. People and the Sound, power and environment. New 



England River Basins Commission. New Haven, Connecticut. 83 pp. 

National Academy of Sciences. 1977. Estuaries, geophysics and the 

environment. National Academy of Sciences, Washington, D. C. 127 
pp. 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration — National Ocean 

Survey. 1977. Tide tables 1977, high and low water predictions, 
east coast of North and South America, pp. 212. 

New York Ocean Science Laboratory. 1974. Preoperational ecological 
monitoring program of the marine environs at the Long Island 
Lighting Company (LILCO) Nuclear Power Generating Facility, Shore- 
ham, Long Island, New York. Volume I: Physical Oceanography and 
chemical oceanography. 

Normandeau Associates, Inc. 1971a. A bathythermographic survey of the 
receiving waters adjacent to the English Generating Station, New 
Haven, Connecticut. July 1971. Prepared for The United Illiimin- 
ating Company, New Haven, Connecticut. 

. 1971b. Report on bacteriological, chemical and physical 

analyses of bottom sediments at the Coke Works site. New Haven 
Harbor, Connecticut. Prepared for The United Illuminating Company, 
New Haven, Connecticut. Draft. 



3-104 



1972. Addendum 12 of environmental report: Coke Works 



site, June 1971, Marine Sediments, New Haven Harbor, Connecticut. 
Results of analyses and proposals for dredge spoil disposal. 
Prepared for The United Illuminating Company, New Haven, Connect- 
icut. 

1973a. Coke Works Ecological Monitoring Studies, New yaven 



Connecticut. Annual Report, May 1971-March 1972. 
. 1973b. Bridgeport Harbor Ecological Studies, 1971-1972. 



Biological and hydrographic study reports. 296 pp. 

1974a. Coke Vtorks Ecological Monitoring Studies, New Haven 



Harbor, Connecticut. Annual Report, May 1972-March 1973. 

1974b. Coke Works Ecological Monitoring Studies, New Haven 



Harbor, Connecticut. Interim Report, May-December 1973. 

1974c. Possible effects of thermal discharge from the 



English Generating Station on the ecology of New Haven Harbor, 
Connecticut. 

1974d. Stamford Harbor Ecological Studies, Stamford, 



Connecticut. Prepared for Northeast Utilities Service Company, 
Final Report. 

. 1974e. Supplementary research on the effects of thermal 



discharge from the English Generating Station on the ecology of 
Grand Avenue Reach, New Haven Harbor, Connecticut. 

. 1975a. New Haven Harbor Station Ecological Monitoring Studies, 



New Haven, Connecticut. Annual Report, January-December 1974. 
. 1975b. Ecological studies conducted at selected sites in 



New Haven Harbor, Connecticut. Prepared for the City of New Haven. 
103 pp. 

. 1976a. New Haven Harbor Station Ecological Monitoring Studies, 



New Haven, Connecticut. Annual Report, January-December 1975. 
. 1976b. New Haven Harbor thermal regime during operation of 



the New Haven Harbor Station, September 3, 1975. 
. 1977a. New Haven Harbor Station Ecological Monitoring Studies, 



New Haven, Connecticut. Annual Report, January-December 1976. 
. 1977b. Thermal surveys of New Haven Harbor, Summer and 



Fall 1976. 



3-105 



1978a. New Haven Harbor Station Ecological Monitoring Studies, 



New Haven, Connecticut. Annual Report, January-October 1977. 

Officer, Charles B. 1977. Longitudinal circulation and mixing rela- 
tions in estuaries, pp. 13-21 IN: National Academy of Science, 
Estuaries, Geophysics and the Environment. Washington, D. C. 127 
pp. 

Pritchard, Donald W. 1957. What is an estuary: physical viewpoint, 
pp. 3-5 IN: George H. Lauff (ed.). Estuaries. Amer. Assoc. 
Advancement of Science, Washington, D. C. Publ. No. 83. 757 pp. 

Quirk, Lawler and Matusky Engineers. 1969. New Haven Harbor: effect 

of increased waste treatment and outfall location on water quality. 
Prepared for State of Connecticut Water Resources Commission. 

Raytheon Company. 1970a. New Haven Harbor plankton survey, April-May 
1970. 

1970b. New Haven Harbor Ecological Survey, Data Report, 
June-November 1970. Prepared for The United Illuminating Company, 
New Haven, Connecticut. 179 pp. 

1971. New Haven Harbor Ecological Survey, Data Report, 
December 1970-April 1971. Prepared for The United Illuminating 
Company, New Haven, Connecticut. ) 

Reid, R. N. , A. B. Frame and A. F. Drexler. 1976. Environmental base- 
line studies in Long Island 1972-1975. National Marine Fisheries 
Service, NOAA, Sandy Hook, New Jersey. 

Riley, G. A. 1952. Hydrography of Long Island and Block Island Sounds. 
Bull. Bingham. Oceanogr. Coll. 13. pp. 5-39. 

. 1956. Review of the oceanography of Long Island Sound. 



Deep Sea Research Supplement. 3:224-238. 
and S. A. M. Conover. 1956. Oceanography of Long Island 



Sound, 1952-1954. Ill: Chemical oceanography. Bulletin of the 
Bingham Oceanogr. Collec. 15. pp. 47-61. 

Riley, G. A. 1959. Oceanography of Long Island Sound, 1954-1955. 
Bulletin of the Bingham Oceanographic Collec. 17. pp. 9-29. 

Stone and Webster. 1972. Temperature prediction model for Long Island 
Sound. The Long Island Sound Study Group. 

SUNY, Marine Science Research Center. 1970. Biological Effects of 

thermal pollution, Northport, New York. Mar. Sci. Res. Ctr. , SUNY 
Tech. Rept. No. 3. 107 pp. 



3-106 



United Illuminating Company. 1970. The United Illuminating Company 
Thermal Discharge. 

University of Florida. 1972. Buoyant jet discharge model study for 
Coke Works power plant. New Haven Harbor, Connecticut. DCOE, 
FEIES, University of Florida, 

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 1973a. Environmental statement, Coke 
Works Electric Generating Plant, New Haven Harbor, Connecticut. 

. 1973b. Maintenance dredging. New Haven Harbor, Connecti- 



cut. Final Environmental Statement. 

U.S. Coast Guard. Oil spill records and pollution cases log book. U.S. 
Coast Guard New Haven Group. Unpxiblished data. 

U.S. Geological Survey, Water Resources Division. 1971. 1970 Water 

Resource Data for Connecticut. U.S. Geological Survey Water Data 
Report CT-70-1. 

1972. 1971 Water Resource Data for Connecticut. U.S. 



Geological Survey Water Data Report CT-71-1. 

1973. 1972 Water Resource Data for Connecticut. U.S. 



Geological Survey Water Data Report CT-72-1. 

1974. 1973 Water Resource Data for Connecticut. U.S. 



Geological Survey Water Data Report CT-73-1. 

1975. 1974 Water Resource Data for Connecticut. U.S. 



Geological Survey Water Data Report CT-74-1. 

1976. 1975 Water Resource Data for Connecticut. U.S. 



Geological Survey Water Data Report CT-75-1. 

1977. 1976 Water Resource Data for Connecticut. U.S. 



Geological Survey Water Data Report CT-75-1. 

Weyl, P. K. 1971. Temperature distribution of the heated effluent from 
the Northport Power Station (LILCO) in Long Island Sound. Tech. 
Rept. No. 10, Marine Science Research Center, SUNY at Stony Brook, 
New York. 25 pp. 

Wilson, R. E. 1976. Gravitational circulation in Long Island Sound. 
Estuarine and Coastal Marine Science. 4:443-453. 



NEW HAVEN HARBOR STATION 
ECOLOGICAL STUDIES 
SUMMARY REPOT, 1979 



4.0 PLANKTON 

By Stephen A. Grabe, Doreen S. Newhouse, 
David N.' Pease, and Neil B. Savage 
Normandeau Associates, Inc. 
Bedford, N. H. 



TABLE OF CONTENTS 



PAGE 

INTRODUCTION 4-1 

METHODS AND MATERIALS 4-4 

Phytoplankton 4-4 

Zooplankton 4-6 

lahthyoplankton 4-8 

CHARACTERIZATION OF THE NEW HAVEN HARBOR PLANKTON COMMUNITY . . 4-10 

Phytoplankton 4-10 

Zooplankton 4-28 

lahthyoplankton 4-49 

Selected Species 4-S9 

Analysis of Impacts 4-7 Z 

LITERATURE CITED — PLANKTON . 4-82 

APPENDIX 4-86 



LIST OF FIGURES 



PAGE 



4-1. Phytoplankton, primary productivity and chlorophyll a 

samples collected from May 1971 to October 1977 4-5 

3 
4-2. Monthly average chlorophyll a concentration (mg/m ), 

standard deviation and range for Stations 3, 8, 18 and 

20 on ebb tide; May 1971 through October 1977 4-11 

4-3. Monthly chlorophyll a concentrations (mg/m ) at 

Stations 3, 8, 18 and 20 on ebb and flood tide; May 

1971 through October 1977 4-12 

4-4. Total phytoplankton abundance (cells/liter) at 

Stations 3, 8 and 20 on ebb and flood tide; May 1974 

through October 1977 4-14 

4-5. Abundance (cells/liter) of Skeletonema costatum at 

Stations 3, 8 and 20; May 1974 through October 1977. . . 4-18 

4-6. Abundance (cells/liter) of Cyolotella spp., Thalassi- 
osira votula and Thalassiosira spp. at Stations 3, 8 
and 20; May 1974 through October 1977 4-20 

4-7. Abundance (cells/liter) of Thalassiosira pseudonana 
at Stations 3, 8 and 20; May 1974 through October 
1977 4-21 

4-8. Abundance (eel Is/ liter) of Thalassionema nitz- 

sohioides at Stations 3, 8 and 20; May 1974 through 

October 1977 4-22 

4-9. Abundance (cells/liter) of Leiptocylindrus minimus 
at Stations 3, 8 and 20; May 1974 through October 
1977 4-24 

4-10. Abundance (cells/liter) of Eetevooapsa triquetra 
at Stations 3, 8 and 20; January through October 
1977 4-25 

4-11. Abundance (cells/liter) of Cryptophyceae at Stations 

3, 8 and 20; May 1974 through October 1977 4-27 



11 



PAGE 

3 
4-12. Total zooplankton {#/m ) at Stations 3, 8 and 20 on 

ebb and flood tide; July 1973 through October 1977. . . . 4-31 

3 
4-13. Total zooplankton (#/m ) at Stations 3, 8 and 20 on 

surface and bottom (tides combined); July 1973 through 
October 1977 4-32 

4-14. Numbers per cubic meter of total zooplankton organisms 
and Acavtia spp. taken with a No. 10 net [333 ym at 
Millstone] at a) New Haven Harbor, Stations 8 and 11 
averaged, 1976; b) Niantic Bay, Millstone Stations 5 
and 8 averaged, 1973-1976; c) Block Island Sound, 1949. . 4-34 

4-15. Relative percentages of important copepod species from 
a) Long Island Sound, March 1952 to June 1953 (from 
Deevey, 1956); b) Millstone Units I and II discharge, 
1976 and 1977 [333 ym net (from Battelle, 1978)] 4-35 

3 
4-16. Abundance (#/m ) of Aoavtia hudsonica and Acavtia 
tonsa at Stations 3, 8 and 20; July 1973 through 
October 1977 4-37 

3 
4-17. Abundance (#/m ) of Temora longiaomis at Stations 

3, 8 and 20; July 1973 through October 1977 4-41 

3 
4-18. Abundance (#/m ) of Copepoda nauplii and copepodites 

at Stations 3, 8 and 20; July 1973 through October 

1977 4-42 

3 
4-19. Abundance (#/m ) of Barnacle cyprids and nauplii at 

Stations 3, 8 and 20; July 1973 through October 1977. . . 4-44 

3 
4-20. Abundance (#/m ) of Polychaeta larvae at Stations 3, 

8 and 20; July 1973 through October 1977 4-46 

3 
4-21. Abundance (#/m ) of Gastropoda veligers and Bivalve 

larvae at Stations 3, 8 and 20; July 1973 through 

October 1977 4-47 

3 
4-22. Abundance (#/m ) of Harpacticoida at Stations 3, 8 

and 20; July 1973 through October 1977 4-48 

4-23. Overall percent composition of fish eggs of selected 

species in New Haven Harbor during each sampling period 

from 1974 through 1977 4-57 



111 



PAGE 



4-24. Overall percent composition of fish larvae of selected 
species in New Haven Harbor during each sampling period 
from 1974 through 1977 4-58 

4-25. Abundance by station of Anchoa spp. eggs (during June 
1975 through 1977; and July 1974 through 1977) and 
larvae (during July and August 1974 through 1977) .... 4-62 

4-26. Abundance by station of PseudopleiiPoneGtes americanus 
larvae (during April and May 1975 through 1977) and 
Cynoscion vegalis (during July 1974 through 1977) .... 4-64 

4-27. Abundance by station of Labrid eggs (during June), 
Urophyais/Enohelyopus/Peprilus eggs (during April 
and May) 4-70 

4-28. Mean density of selected species at all stations, 

depths and tides by month, July 1973-October 1977 . . . . 4-77 

4-29. Mean density of selected species at all stations, 

depths and tides by month, July 1973 through October 

1977 4-78 

4-30. Mean density of selected species at all stations, 

depths and tides by month, July 1973 through October 

1977. 4-79 



IV 



LIST OF TABLES 



PAGE 

4-1. DOMINANT^ PHYTOPLANKTERS IN NEW HAVEN HARBOR FROM 1974 

THROUGH 1977 4-16 

4-2. MONTHLY RANKING OF THE TEN MOST ABUNDANT PHYTOPLANKTON 
TAXA (MEAN OF ALL STATIONS AND BOTH TIDES FROM MAY 
1974 THROUGH OCTOBER 1977) 4-17 

4-3. COMPARISON OF MAXIMUM CELL DENSITIES RECORDED FOR SEVEN 
DOMINANT SPECIES OF PHYTOPLANKTON DURING THE PRESENT 
STUDY WITH LITERATURE RECORDS FOR LONG ISLAND SOUND, 
AND GREAT SOUTH AND MORICHES BAYS 4-29 

4-4. DOMINANT^ ZOOPLANKTERS IN NEW HAVEN HARBOR FROM 1973 

THROUGH 1977 4-35 

4-5. MONTHLY RANKING* OF THE TEN MOST ABUNDANT ZOOPLANKTON 
TAXA (BASED ON MEAN OF ALL STATIONS AND BOTH TIDES 
FROM JULY 1973 THROUGH OCTOBER 1977) 4-39 

4-6. NUMERICALLY DOMINANT (>1%) FISH EGGS AND LARVAE 

COLLECTED FROM NEW HAVEN HARBOR FROM 1974 THROUGH 

1977 4-50 

4-7. DOMINANT SPECIES OF FISH EGGS REPORTED FROM LONG 

ISLAND SOUND AND ADJACENT WATERS FROM 1943 THROUGH 

1975 4-51 

4-8. DOMINANT SPECIES OF FISH LARVAE REPORTED FROM LONG 
ISLAND SOUND AND ADJACENT WATERS FROM 1943 THROUGH 
1975 4-52 

4-9. MEAN ABUNDANCE (NO./m^) OF TOTAL FISH EGGS AND LARVAE 

COLLECTED FROM NEW HAVEN HARBOR FROM 1974 THROUGH 1977. . 4-55 

4-10. DOMINANT (>20%) FISH EGGS AND LARVAE, AND PERCENT 

COMPOSITION BY STATION IN NEW HAVEN HARBOR FROM 1974 

THROUGH 1977 4-56 

4-11. COMPARISON OF ICHTHYOPLANKTON ABUNDANCE (NO./m^) AT 
RICHARDS' (1959) STATION 1, 1952 THROUGH 1955 TO THE 
AVERAGE^ OF NEW HAVEN HARBOR STATIONS FROM 1974 
THROUGH 1977 4-60 



V 



PAGE 

4-12. ABUNDANCE {#/m"^) OF WINTER FLOUNDER {PSEUDOPLEURO- 
NECTES AMERICANUS) LARVAE IN NEW HAVEN HARBOR AND 
ADJACENT WATERS 4-65 

4-13. ABUNDANCE (#/m^) OF WEAKFISH [CYNOSCION REGALIS) 

LARVAE IN NEW HAVEN HARBOR AND ADJACENT WATERS 4-67 

4-14. ABUNDANCE {#/m^) OF LABRID EGGS IN NEW HAVEN 

HARBOR AND ADJACENT WATERS . 4-69 

4-15. ABUNDANCE {#/\^) OF UROPHYCIS/ENCHELYOPUS/PEPRILUS 

EGGS IN NEW HAVEN HARBOR AND ADJACENT WATERS 4-72 

4-16. RELATIVE DENSITIES OF SELECTED TAXA COMPARED BY 

MONTH BETWEEN OPERATIONAL AND PREOPERATIONAL YEARS. 
(OPERATIONAL DATA ADJUSTED FOR SAMPLING DIFFER- 
ENCES BY REGRESSION EQUATION)* 4-80 



VI 



4.0 PLANKTON 



by 

Stephen Grabe, Doreen Newhouse, David Pease, and Neil Savage 
Normandeau Associates, Inc. 
Bedford, N. H. 



INTRODUCTION 

New Haven Harbor provides an extremely fertile habitat for 
phytoplankton due to its proximity to terrestrial nutrient sources and 
the protection against dispersal afforded by the configuration and 
shallowness of the harbor. Harbor waters also support substantial 
zooplankton and ichthyoplankton populations that ultimately depend on 
phytoplankton for food. Since most finfish and many benthic inverte- 
brates, such as crabs and oysters, spend a portion of their lives in the 
plankton, any change in planktonic populations affects not only the food 
available to subsequent levels in the food web but also the magnitude of 
larval recruitment to adult populations of many aquatic animals. 

Plankton investigations in southern New England waters in 
proximity to New Haven Harbor were begun by Yale University's Bingham 
Oceanographic Laboratory during the late 1930' s. An early report by 
Riley (1941) focused on north central Long Island Sound. Between 1943 
and 1949, investigative emphasis by the Bingham Laboratory shifted to 
Block Island Sound resulting in studies on phytoplankton (Riley, 1952) , 
zooplankton (Deevey, 1952a; 1952b) , and ichthyoplankton (Merriman and 
Sclar, 1952) . A broad-scale survey of Long Island Sound conducted 
between 1952 and 1954 included studies on phytoplankton (S. Conover, 
1956) , zooplankton (R. Conover, 1956; Deevey, 1956) and ichthyoplankton 
(Wheatland, 1956) . Results of subsequent studies of the Long Island 
Sound plankton community in 1954 and 1955 were reported by Riley and 
Conover (1967) for phytoplankton and by Richards (1959) for ichthy- 
oplankton. Data from an additional ichthyoplankton survey conducted 
from April 1964 through May 1966 in the vicinity of Old Field Point near 
the southern shore of Long Island Sound, were reported by Williams 
(1968) . 

4-1 



4-2 



Primary sources of information pertaining to more recent 
plankton surveys include reports on studies performed for the Long 
Island Lighting Company (LILCO) at Shoreham Station (1973) , Northport 

(1973, 1976), and Port Jefferson (1976). Data on phytoplankton, zoo- 
plankton, and ichthyoplankton are also contained in reports prepared for 
Northeast Utilities Service Company concerning environmental monitoring 
studies at Millstone Point (1971-1976) and Stamford (1971-1973). Williams 

(1971) discussed the influence of Northport Generating Station on the 
resident zooplankton community. Purdin (1973) presented a paper des- 
cribing seasonal fluctuations in copepod populations in the vicinity of 
Shoreham Station. Caplan (1977) reported results of a six-month zoo- 
plankton and ichthyoplankton study on patterns of distribution in con- 
nection with a U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' dredge-spoil predisposal 
site study at Eaton's Neck in western Long Island Sound. Such data 
provide a useful perspective in evaluating observed fluctuations in New 
Haven Harbor plankton data. 

In Long Island Sound, a major phytoplankton bloom typically 
occurs in late winter. A series of lesser blooms usually follow in 
spring, summer, and autumn. The timing and intensity of these blooms 
depend on a number of variables, among which are: 1) departures from 
the seasonal norm of sea temperature, 2) availability of inorganic 
nitrogen, and 3) zooplankton grazing pressure (TRIGOM-PARC , 1974). 
Diatoms, especially Skeletonema costatum, Thalassiosira spp., and 
Thalassionema nitzschioides , constitute the dominant net phytoplankters 
with dinoflagellates represented in substantial quantities, particularly 
during the warmer months. Species present represent a diverse mixture 
of temperate and boreal types, some with sheltered estuarine affinities 
and others with open coastal affinities (TRIGOM-PARC, 1974) . 

Among the invertebrate components of the Long Island Sound 
zooplankton, virtually every phylum in the animal kingdom is repre- 
sented. Principal holoplankters (animals which spend their entire lives 
as plankton) are copepods, such as Acartia tonsa, Acartia hudsonica (= 
clausi) , Oithona spp., Paracalanus crassirostris, Temora longicornis. 



4-3 



and Pseudocalanus minutus. The two Acartia species constitute the 
dominant zooplankters; Acartia hudsonica is characteristically the 
winter-spring dominant, while A. tonsa is typically the dominant in 
summer and fall. Among the meroplankton (embryonic and larval stages of 
animals which are not planktonic later in life) , principal forms include 
the larvae of benthic invertebrates, such as barnacles, polychaete 
worms, molluscs, and echinoderms, as well as the larvae of epibenthic 
crustaceans (e.g., shrimps, crabs, and lobsters). The tychoplankton 
(transient epibenthic animals) was relatively sparse and was represented 
primarily by harpacticoid copepods. 

Finfish eggs and larvae captured by net tows and reported for 
Long Island Sound and contiguous marine waters represent only a portion 
of the fish fauna inhabiting or frequenting the area. Early life stages 
of anadromous species are not present in Sound waters but are encountered 
in fresh or brackish waters. Some species that spawn in marine waters 
produce demersal eggs that sink and either lie loosely or are attached 
to various types of bottom substrate; generally, only newly hatched 
larvae of these species are found in the plankton. Fishes that shed 
planktonic eggs in marine waters tend to be those which range over wide 
areas of the open coast and/or continental shelf, and have a dispersed 
spawning pattern (TRIGOM-PARC, 1974). For Long Island Sound and vicinity, 
late winter through mid-summer is usually the period of high ichthyo- 
plankton abundance, while for individual species, the planktonic period 
typically averages 3-5 months (Bigelow and Schroeder, 1953) . Finfish 
species that are numerically dominant in the ichthyoplankton of Long 
Island Sound include eggs and larvae of Tautogolabrus adspersus (cunner) , 
Anchoa mitchilli (bay anchovy) , Brevoortia tyrannus (menhaden) , and 
Enchelyopus cimbrius (four-beard rockling) ; eggs of Tautoga onitis 
(tautog) ; and larvae of Ammodytes americanus (sand lance) and Pseudo- 
pleuronectes americanus (winter flounder) . In Long Island sound and 
adjacent waters successional periods of dominance in the ichthyoplankton 
appear to be as follows: E. cimbrius, mid-winter through late spring; 
A. americanus and P. americanus , early to late spring; T. adspersus , T. 
onitis, and A. mitchilli , late spring through mid-summer; and B. tyrannus, 
late spring and returning again in early fall (Wheatland, 1956; Richards, 
1959; Caplan, 1977) . 



4-4 



The following sections summarize phytoplankton, zooplankton 
and ichthyoplankton monitoring studies conducted as part of the New 
Haven Harbor Station Ecological Program for The United Illuminating 
Company from May 1971 through October 1977. Descriptions of methods are 
followed by discussions of the components of the New Haven Harbor plank- 
ton community and by an assessment of generating station operational 
impacts . 



METHODS AND MATERIALS 

Phytoplankton 

Surface daytime whole-water samples were collected monthly for 

chlorophyll a determinations (May 1971 through October 1977) and phyto- 

* 
plankton taxonomic analysis (May 1972 through October 1977 ) during both 

flood and ebb tides at Stations 3, 6, 8, 18 and 20. Stations 2 and 11 
were added to this sampling scheme in January 1974 and May 1975, respect- 
ively (Figure 4-1) . Although primary productivity determinations util- 
izing the dissolved oxygen technique (Strickland, 1960; Strickland and 
Parsons, 1968) were conducted periodically from May 1971 through Decem- 
ber 1974, these data are not considered herein due to anomalous results 
(including negative estimates of gross photosynthesis) . 

Each chlorophyll a sample was prefiltered through a 333ym mesh 
filter to remove debris and larger organisms , treated with approximately 
2 ml of saturated MgCO solution to retard degradation, and filtered 
through a glass fiber filter (.45ym pore size). Filters were kept 
frozen pending extraction. Chlorophyll a was extracted by macerating 
each filter in 90% aqueous acetone and centrifuging. Prior to July 
1976, samples were analyzed by the spec tropho tome trie method (Strickland 
and Parsons, 1972). From July 1976 through October 1977, fluorescence 
was determined using a Turner fluorometer that had been calibrated 



From May 1971 through April 1972, phytoplankton were analyzed from 
12.5 cm diameter, 76um mesh Clarke-Bumpus net tows. 



4-5 



Phytoplankton and Chlorophyll a_ 
Sampling Stations 







1971 




















TIDE 




MAY 


JUN 


JOL 


AOG 


SEP 


OCT 


NOV 


DEC 


3 






Xm 


Xxo 


Xxo 


Xxo 


Xxo 


Xxo 


Xxo 


Xxo 








Xxo 


Xxo 


Xxo 


Xxo 


Xxo 


Xxo 


Xxo 


Xxo 


6 






Xxo 


Xxo 


Xxo 


Xxo 


Xxo 


Xxo 


Xxo 


Xxo 


2: 






Xxo 


Xxu 


Xxo 


Xxo 


Xxo 


Xxo 


Xxo 


Xxo 


I ' 




PROGRAM NOT 




















INITIATED 


Xxi) 


Xxo 


Xxo 


Xxo 


Xxo 


Xxo 


Xxo 


Xxo 






Xxo 


Xxo 


Xxo 


Xxo 


Xxo 


Xxo 


Xxo 


Xxo 


18 






Xxo 


Xxo 


Xxo 


Xxo 


Xxo 


Xxo 


Xxo 


Xxo 








Xxo 


Xxo 


Xxo 


Xxo 


Xxo 


Xxo 


Xxo 


Xxo 


20 


FE 




Xxo 


Xxo 


Xxo 


Xxo 


Xxo 


Xxo 


Xxo 


Xxo 








Xxo 


Xxo 


Xxo 


Xxo 


Xxo 


Xxo 


Xxo 


Xxo 



X = Phytopldokton 
X = Chlorophyll a 
= Priiiidry 

Productivi ty 
F = Flood Tide 
E = Ebb Tide 




1972 

JAN FEB MAR APR 



MAY JON JOL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC 



JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AOG SEP OCT NOV DEC 



20 



Xxo 
Xxo 



Xxo 
Xxo 



Xxo 
Xxo 



Xxo Xxo 
Xxo Xxo 



Xx Xxo Xxo 
Xx Xxo Xxo 



Xx Xx Xx 
Xx Xx Xx 



Xx Xx Xx Xx 
Xx X Xx Xx 



Xx Xx 
Xx Xx 



X Xx Xx Xx 
X Xx Xx Xx 



Xx 
Xx 



Xxo Xxo 
Xxo Xxo 



Xxo Xxo 
Xxo Xxo 



Xx 
Xx 



Xx Xx Xx Xx 
Xx Xx Xx Xx 



Xx Xxo Xxo 
Xx Xxo Xxo 



Xx Xx 
Xx Xx 



Xx 
Xx 



Xx Xx 
Xx Xx 



Xx Xx Xx 
Xx Xx Xx 



Xx Xxo 
Xx Xxo 



Xx Xxo 
Xx Xxo 



Xx Xxo 
X Xxo 



Xx Xx 
Xx Xxo 



Xx Xx 
Xx Xxo 



Xxo 
Xxo 



Xxo 
Xxo 



Xxo 
Xxo 



Xxo 
Xxo 



Xxo 
Xxi 



Xxo 
Xxo 



Xxo 
Xxo 



Xxo 
Xxo 



Xxo 
Xxo 



Xxo 
Xxo 



Xxo Xx 
Xxo Xx 



Xxo Xx 
Xxo Xx 



Xxo Xx 
Xxo Xx 



Xxo Xx 
Xxo Xx 



Xxo Xx 
Xxo Xx 



Xxo 
Xxo 



Xxo 
Xxo 



Xxo 
Xxo 



Xxo 
Xxo 



Xxo 
Xxo 









1974 




























1975 






























JAN 


FEB 


MAR 


APR 


MAY 


JON 


JOL 


AOG 


SEP 


OCT 


NOV 


DEC 




TIDE 


JAN 


FEB 


MAR 


APR 


MAY 


JUN 


JUL 


AUG 


SEP 


OCT 


NOV 


DEC 




2 




Xxo 
Xxo 


Xxo 
Xxo 


Xxo 
Xxo 


Xxo 
Xxo 


Xx 
Xx 


Xxo 
Xxo 


Xx 
Xx 


Xxo 
Xxo 


Xxo 
Xx 


Xxo 
Xxo 


Xxo 
Xxo 


Xxo 
Xxo 


2 




Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


Xx 

Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 




3 




Xxo 
Xxo 


Xxo 
Xxo 


Xxo 
Xx 


Xxo 
Xxo 


Xx 
Xx 


Xxo 
Xxo 


Xxo 
Xx 


Xxo 
Xxo 


Xxo 
Xxo 


Xxo 
Xxo 


Xxo 
Xxo 


Xxo 
Xxo 


3 




Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


Xx 

Xx 


1 


6 




Xxo 
Xxo 


Xxo 
Xxo 


Xxo 
Xx 


Xxo 
Xxo 


Xx 
Xx 


Xxo 
Xxo 


Xx 
Xx 


Xxo 
Xxo 


Xxo 
Xxo 


Xxo 
Xxo 


Xxo 
Xxo 


Xxo 

Xxo 


6 




Xx 
Xx 


X 

Xx 


X 

Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


g 


8 




Xxo 
Xxo 


Xxo 
Xxo 


Xxo 
Xx 


Xxo 
Xxo 


Xx 
Xx 


Xxo 
Xxo 


Xx 
Xx 


Xxo 
Xxo 


Xxo 
Xxo 


Xxo 
Xxo 


Xxo 
Xxo 


Xxo 
Xxo 


£ 8 




Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


Xx 

Xx 




18 




Xxo 
Xxo 


Xxo 
Xxo 


Xxo 
Xx 


Xxo 
Xxo 


Xx 
Xx 


Xxo 
Xxo 


Xx 
Xx 


Xxo 
Xxo 


Xxo 
Xxo 


Xxo 
Xxo 


Xxo 
Xxo 


Xxo 
Xxo 


11 












X 
X 


X 
X 


X 
X 


X 
X 


X 
X 


X 
X 


X 
X 


X 
X 




20 




Xxo 
Xxo 


Xxo 
xo 


Xxo 
Xx 


Xxo 
Xxo 


Xx 
Xx 


Xxo 
Xxo 


Xx 
Xx 


xo 
Xxo 


Xxo 
Xxo 


Xxo 
Xxo 


Xxo 
Xxo 


Xxo 
Xxo 


18 
20 




Xx 
Xx 

Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 

Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 

Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 

Xx 
Xx 


X 
Xx 

Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 

Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 

Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 

Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 

Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 

Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 

Xx 

Xx 


Xx 
Xx 

Xx 
Xx 





































1976 
























1977 




















TIDE 


JAN 


FF3 


"M 


APR 


MAY 


JUN 


JUL 


AUG 


SEP 


OCT 


NOV 


DEC 


JAN FEB 


(WR 


APR 


MAY 


JUN 


JUL 


AUG 


SEP 


OCT 


2 




Xx 
Xx 


Xx 

Xx 


Xx 

Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


3 




Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


6 




Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


5 8 




Xx 

Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


11 




Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


Xx 

Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


18 




Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


Xx 

Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


XX 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


20 




Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


Xx 

Xx 


Xx 

Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


Xx 

Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 


Xx 
Xx 



Figure 4-1. Phytoplankton, primary productivity and chlorophyll a^ 
samples collected from May 1971 to October 1977. 
New Haven Harbor Ecological Studies Summary Report, 1979. 



4-6 



spectrophotometrically according to Strickland and Parsons (1972) . 

After acidification with HCl, phaeophytin was determined and chlorophyll 

3 
a concentrations (mg/m ) were computed for each sample. 



Following preservation with either formalin or Lugol ' s Iodine 
solution, aliquots were prepared from each phytoplankton sample and 
allowed to settle prior to enumeration, according to the Utermohl tech- 
nique (1958) . Prior to May 1974, phytoplankton taxa were generally 
identified only to major group; these data appear in earlier reports 
(NAI, 1973, 1974a, b) . Beginning in May 1974, phytoplankton were iden- 
tified to genus and species where possible, and abundance estimates 
(cells/1) were computed for each taxon. 

An index of dominance (Sanders, 1960) was computed by ranking 
(from 10 to 1) mean abundances of individual phytoplankton taxa over all 
stations and tides during each month. Monthly ranks were summed for 
each taxon to yield yearly biological index values. Taxa were then 
ordered by biological index value as an indicator of overall dominance 
within each year. 

The following phytoplankton species/taxa were selected for 
detailed discussion: 

Skeletonema costatum Thalassiosira/Cgclotella sp. 

Thalassionema nit zschio ides Leptocylindrus minimus 
Heterocapsa triguetra Cryptophyceae 



Zooplankton 

Two-minute daytime plankton tows were collected monthly on 
both ebb and flood tides at near-surface and near-bottom water levels. 
From May 1971 through June 1976, collections were made at Stations 3, 6, 
8, 18 and 20 utilizing a Clark-Bumpus (CB) sampler fitted with a 76pm 
mesh net; Station 11 was added to this sampling scheme in May 1975 



4-7 



(Figure 4-1). From June 1975 through October 1977, a 0.5 m diameter 
conical not, fitted with a 158ym nylon mesh, was used. The new method 
was afiojjli'.'d IjcMj.JUfu; of a n(j(;(i Lo oljtain mort; (]uantitat Lvc Lnformation on 
larger animals which appeared to possess some ability to avoid the 
smaller, slower-filtering sampler, and because the volume of the sample 
taken by the smaller net was concluded to be inadequate. For a period 
of 13 months (June 1975 through June 1976) the two collection methods 
described above were employed concurrently to evaluate comparability 
between them. In all cases sample volume was estimated using a mouth- 
mounted General Oceanics digital flowmeter. 

In the laboratory, aliquots of zooplankton samples, which had 
been preserved in 5% gluteraldehyde, were extracted and placed in Sedge- 
wick-Rafter counting cells for identification and enumeration of the 
zooplankters present. Levels of taxonomic identification were deter- 
mined by practical ability and interest in specific groups. Adults of 
numerically important copepods were differentiated to species, while 
most other groups (e.g., polychaetes, molluscs, and crustaceans other 

than copepods) were usually not differentiated beyond order or suborder. 

3 
Abiondance estimates (numbers/m ) were computed for each taxon. 

Sanders' (1960) biological importance values were utilized to 
indicate overall dominance. Relative proportions of holoplankton, 
meroplankton, and tychoplankton were computed according to collection 
date, combining all stations, depths, and tides. Data collected prior 
to July 1973 are not presented herein and may be found elsewhere (NAI, 
1973; 1974) . The following 11 taxonomic/life-stage categories were 
selected for detailed presentation patterns because of their dominance 
in zooplankton collections from 1973 through 1977: 



4-8" 



HOLOPLANKTON MEROPLANKTON 

Copepoda nauplii Polychaete larvae 

Copepoda copepodites Gastropod veligers 

Harpacticoida Bivalve veligers 

Acartia tonsa Barnacle nauplii 

Acartia hudsonica Barnacle cyprids 
Temora longicornis 



To evaluate comparability of zooplankton collection methods, 
data collected during the 13-month period when both were in use were 

siibmitted to simple regression analysis. Population density estimates 

3 
(numbers/m ) of nine abundant taxa from both methods were transformed to 

log (x+1) values, matched by station, collection date, tide, and 
depth. Two versions of the regression analysis were employed: 1) data 
were matched where organisms of a particular taxon were captured by 
either one or both collection methods, and 2) data were matched only 
where both collection methods resulted in captures. The purpose of the 
second type of regression analysis was to indicate the position of the 
axis through the cluster of matched data points, disregarding those that 
fell directly on the x or y axis (i.e., which included a zero as one of 
the values in the pair) . The rationale for this exclusion was that when 
the two methods yielded contradictory results on a presence-absence 
basis, clearly the method indicating absence was not sampling with any 
comparability to the other method, due either to differing thresholds of 
detection between methods or to real heterogeneity in the sampled environ- 
ment. Simply stated, one method was completely ineffective at capture, 
regardless of the actual concentrations present. Inclusion of these 
points merely obscured the relationship between the two methods when 
both were effective. 



lohthijop lankton 

Daytime ichthyoplankton collections were made monthly from May 
1971 through May 1972 and from July 1974 through October 1977 (excluding 
January 1977) with a 1-m diameter plankton net outfitted with either 
333ym (July 1974 through April 1975) or 505ym (May 1971 through May 1972 



4-9 



and May 1975 through October 1977) mesh netting and a mouth-mounted 

General Oceanics digital flowmeter that estimated the volume of water 

* 
filtered by the net . Collections were made near both flood and ebb 

slack tides by 10-minute oblique net tows against the prevailing tide. 

Stations 3, 6, 8, 18 and 20 were sampled during all dates, and Station 

11 was sampled from May 1975 through October 1977 (Figure 4-1) . Samples 

were preserved in 5% formalin. 

From June 1972 through June 1974, a 12.5-cm diameter Clarke- 
Bumpus sampler outfitted with 76)jm mesh netting was used. Near-surface 
and near-bottom samples were collected by towing the net for two-minute 
intervals on both flood and ebb tides. Clarke-Bumpus collections were 
preserved in buffered 5% glutaraldehyde. 

Data collected prior to July 1974 are not presented due to the 
methodological differences, which render the data noncomparable to 
latter years. Quality of the identifications is questionable, and 
quantitative accuracy is such that data should only be treated qual- 
itatively. These data may be found in previous reports (NAI, 1973; 
1974) . 

All fish eggs and larvae in a sample were counted and iden- 
tified, except where organism densities were relatively large. In these 
cases, subsamples were taken so that the minimum number of eggs and 
larvae counted per aliquot were as follows: 



ALIQUOT MINIMUM NUMBER TO BE IDENTIFIED 

SIZE EGGS LARVAE 

1/2 100 100 

1/4 100 200 

1/8 200 300 

1/16 300 

1/32 400 

3 

Density of fish eggs and larvae were expressed as number per m . 



* 

Collections from both 333vim and 505ym nets were assumed to be 

comparable . 



4-10 



Some species of eggs proved particularly difficult to identify 
to genus due to similar morphology and size (e.g., habr id/ Limanda and 
Enchelyopus/Urophycis/Peprilus) and were pooled. Based on numerical 
dominance as well as commercial and/or recreational importance, the 
following five taxa were selected for detailed discussion: 



Anchoa spp. eggs and larvae 
Pseudopleuronectes americanus larvae 
Cynoscion regalis larvae 
Labrid eggs 
Urophycis/Enchelyopus/Peprilus eggs 



CHARACTERIZATION OF THE NEW HAVEN HARBOR PLANKTON COMMUNITY 

Phy top lankton 



In New Haven Harbor, phytoplankton biomass estimated by chlor- 

3 
ophyll a concentrations generally remained at low levels (4 to 5 mg/m ) 

from September through January (Figure 4-2) . From February through 

August, mean chlorophyll a concentrations were usually between 5 and 20 

3 
mg/m ; however, considerable inter-year variability was evident within 

each month, probably due to differences in timing and magnitude of 
phytoplankton blooms which may not be fully characterized by once- 
monthly sampling. From 1971 through 1975, chlorophyll a peaks only 
rarely exceeding 2 5 mg/m occurred between February and November (Figure 

4-3) . During 1976 and 1977, however, the frequency of occurrence of 

3 
chlorophyll a peaks greater than 25 mg/m increased; in addition, unlike 

previous years, major late winter (February /March) peaks were also 

observed throughout the harbor. 



Total phytoplankton cell density distributions from 1974 
through 1977 indicated a general increase in standing stock over time 
(Figure 4-4) . During 1974 and 1975, the seasonal phytoplankton abun- 



Eggs of the cunner and tautog (the only common Labridae in Long Island 
Sound) have been identified to species by Richards (Wheatland, 1956; 
Richards, 1959); however, characteristics adequate for positive iden- 
tification of early stage eggs have not been documented. 

(Text continued on page 4-15) 



4-li 



^^ 



IS 

z 
o 



< 



I I I 



o in o in o m o 
s 10 ID in in ^ ^ 



-1 — I — I — I — I — I — I — 
in O in o in O in 
lO lO pj CM — — 



z 



o 

CD 



t- 
< 



^ 






u 

o 



o 

o 



^^ 






' I I I I I I I I I I I I 

OinOinOinOinOinoinO 
N <s <o in in ^ * lo lo evj CM — ~ 

(^ui/6iu) V iiAHdOyOHHO 




T — r — I — I — I — I — r 
O in O in O m O 
r>- <o (o in in ^ « 



-r 

in O in o in O K> 
ro lO CM CM — — 



o 






ts 

>^M 



CQ 
(S 



I- 



^^ 



^^ 



ts t: 



IS 

IE 



^ 



p — I — I — I — I — r 
O n o in O in 
r- <o <o n n « 



o 


in 


o 


in 


o 


in 


O 


«■ 


lO 


lO 


CM 


CM 







> 
o 

z 



u 
o 

I- 
o. 
Ill 
(/) 

<s 

■ 3 
< 

_ _l 



Ul 

z 

3 



(^u]/6iu) E- mAHdOyOlHO 





r-- 






r^ 




■o 


cri 




c 


r^ 




(B 


S- 




C 


0) 




o 


J3 




•r— 


O 




4-> 


-M 




fO 


O 




•r— 


O 




> 






CD 


-C 




-o 


13 




■o 


O 




S- 


s_ 




fO 


.c 




T3 


+j 




C 




• 


fO 


1 — 


en 


+-> 


r~- 


r^ 


(/I 


cr. 


en 




1 — 


' — 


^-^ 


>i 


.. 


■n 


fO 


+-> 


E 


s: 


o 


C7> 


> #^ 


Q. 


F 


CD 


CD 




■o 


CC 


c 


+J 


>i 


o 




i. 


•r- 


-Q 


(0 


+J 


J3 


F 


(C 


CD 


F 


!^ 




3 


+J 


C 


C/0 


C 


o 




cu 




to 


u 


o 


CD 


c 


CM 


•p- 


o 




T3 


o 


T3 


3 




c 


-M 


G 


(O 


C/1 


r- 


CX3 


, 


r— 


^— 


(O 


>. 




o 


j:: 


*i 


•r— 


Q-OO 


CD 


O 




O 


s- 


#^ 




o 


ro 


o 


^— 




o 


-C 


C/l 


-U 


o 


c: 






o 


S- 


0) 


1 — 


o 


C714J 


J3 


rO 


(O 


S_ 


s- 


+j 


CO 


OJ 


^ 


n: 


> 






ro 


S- 


c 




o 


a; 


>>«+- 


> 






to 


-C 


CD 


IE 


+J 


en 




c 


c: 


^ 


o 


to 


0) 


5: 


S- 


Z 


CM 






^ 






<U 






S- 







CD 



4-12 




I — I — I — I — I — I — r — I — I — I — r 



(j.W/6iu) D nAHdOaOIHD 



O IQ O 
t^ <D tS) 



o 


-r 

tn 


A 




-r 

o 




— r- 

o 


-T 


in 


'J- 




ro 


fO 


CO 







(j.W/6uj) V inAHdOaOIHD 



•a 

0) 

C 
•r- 
+-> 

c 
.— o 

ra o 

o 



C CD 

o o 
o "o 

UJ 

•a 

c s- 
n3 O 

-Q 
OD S- 
I— 03 



CO c: 

a> 

•> > 

n n3 

:jz 

CO 

£= S 

O OJ 



4-> • 

+-> crv 
ta .— 

-— ^ s- 

E J2 

~-- o 
cr>-i-> 
E o 

^— O 



to 
o 



i- 
+-> 



CD 

o 



I— CTt 

O CD oi 

c: 1 — I — 
O 



G 



>> " 

fO +-> 

s i- 
o 

_ .„ Q. 

— CD CU 

>>-o q; 



Q--l-> 

o 

s- -a 
o o 
.— o 

-C 1 — 
c_> 






00 



>)"0 (/I 
I — £Z d) 
^ ro •!- 
+J XI 

c: jo 3 
o -Q +-) 
s: cu 00 



I 



cu 

S- 
CD 



4-13 




o lA 6 iS o 

f^ ifl (O If) R 



■a 

0) 

3 

•r— 
+-> 

o 

C_3 



S- 
en 



ro (*1 cj 00 — 



(j,W/6iu) V niAHdOyOIHD 



(^W/6uj)d llAHdOaOIHD 



4-14 



STATION 3 




10 _ 



MJ J ASONDJ FMAMJJASONDJ FMAMJJASONDJ FMAMJJASO 

1974 1975 1976 1977 



CC 



CO 



STATION 8 






CQ 




MJJASONDJFMAMJJASONDJFMAMJJASONDJ FMAMJJASO 

1974 1975 1976 1977 




ASONDJFMAMJJASONDJ FMAMJ"J ASONDJFMAMJ 

1975 1976 1977 



Figure 4-4, Total phytoplankton abundance (cells/liter) at Stations 3, 

8 and 20 on ebb and flood tide; May 1974 through October 

1977. New Haven Harbor Ecological Studies Summary Report, 
1979. 



4-15 



dance pattern was characterized by low densities (usually less than 10 

cells/liter) from October through February and higher levels from March 

through September; peak densities (2 x 10 to 2 x 10 cells/liter) 

generally occurred during July and/or August. In 1976, the seasonal 

pattern changed to a rapid development from low January levels to a 

7 
dramatic peak (1-3 x 10 cells/liter) in February; in the outer harbor, 

a decline to a June minimum was followed by a second peak in August, 

while in the inner harbor the spring/summer peaks were more sporadic. 

In 1977, the February peak reoccurred (January was not sampled) , and was 

followed by June and August peaks with additional station-dependent 

pulses during April and October (Figure 4-4) . 



From 1974 through 1977, the New Haven Harbor phytoplankton 
community was dominated by several species of centric diatoms (primarily 
Skeletonema costatum and a suite of Thalassiosira/Cyclotella species) ; 
microflagellates including cryptophytes {Chroomonas sp., Rhodomonas sp. 
and Cryptomonas sp. ) , chrysophytes {Calycomonas sp. and Olisthodiscus 
luteus and unspecified microflagellates) ; dinof lagellates (including 
Heterocapsa triquetra and Katodinium rotundatum] ; and pennate diatoms 
(primarily Thalassionema nitzschioides) (Table 4-1) . Skeletonema cos- 
tatum, Thalassiosira/Cyclotella species and microflagellates were among 
the ten dominant taxa during every month, while more seasonal contri- 
butions to community dominance were made by other taxa including dino- 
f lagellates (generally late spring and summer) (Table 4-2) . 

The centric diatom, Skeletonema costatum, is eurythermal , 
euryhaline and cosmopolitan in distribution (Smayda, 1958) and has 
historically been an important component of the Long Island Sound 
phytoplankton community (Conover, 1956; Riley and Conover , 1967). In 
New Haven Harbor, S. costatum has been present ubiquitously and during 
all seasons since 1974 (Figure 4-5). In 1974 and 1975,' blooms occurred 
from May through July and/or October. Abundance of this species has 



increased during the four-year period reported here; S. costatum has 

7 
been present in bloom proportions (cell densities greater than 10 /li 

in July 1975, February 1976 and 1977, and June 1977 (Figure 4-5) . 



(Text continued on page 4-19) 



4-16 



TABLE 4-1. DOMINANrPHYTOPLANKTERS IN NEW HAVEN HARBOR FROM 1974 THROUGH 

1977. NEW HAVEN HARBOR ECOLOGICAL STUDIES SUMMARY REPORT, 1979. 













BIOLOGICAL 




1974 


1975 


1976 


1977 


INDEX 


Skeletonema costatum 


9 


6 


10 


9 


34 


Thalassiosira sp. 


6 


8 


8 


8 


30 


Unspecified flagellates 


1 


10 


9 


10 


30 


Cyclotella sp. 


10 


9 


3 




22 


Thalassiosira pseudonana- 


7 


4 




7 


18 


Chroomonas sp . 


8 


6 






14 


Calycomonas sp. 


4 


7 


3 




14 


Thalassionema nitzschioides 




2 


7 


4 


13 


Chaetoceros sp . 






5 


5 


10 


Rhodomonas sp . 


5 


5 






10 


Unspecified dinoflagellate 






1 


6 


7 


Leptocylindrus minimus 






6 




6 


Asterionella glacialis 






5 




5 


Thalassiosira rotula 






4 




4 


Thalassiosira nordenskioldii 








3 


3 


Unspecified Pennales 




3 






3 


Cryptomonas sp . 


3 . 








3 


Euglena sp. 


2 








2 


Phaeodactylum tricornutum 






2 




2 


Katodinium rotundatum 








2 


2 


Olisthodiscus luteus 








2 


2 


Tetraselmis sp. 


1 








1 


Asterionella formosa 




1 






1 


Rhizosolenia fragilissima 








1 


1 



Determined by ranking individually within each year followed by ranking 
biological index values for each year as a whole. 



4-17 



TABLE 4-2. MONTHLY RANKING OF THE TEN MOST ABUNDANT PHYTOPLANKTON TAXA 
(MEAN OF ALL STATIONS AND BOTH TIDES FROM MAY 1974 THROUGH 
OCTOBER 1977). NEW HAVEN HARBOR ECOLOGICAL SUTDIES SUMMARY 
REPORT, 1979. 



1974 



1975 





f1 


J 


J 


A 


S 





N 


D 


[NDEX 


Cyclotella sp. 


9 


5 


B 


10 


5 


4 


9 


6 


56 


SkGletonema costatuni 


10 




9 




8 


10 


10 


8 


55 


Chroomonas sp. 


7 


7 


6 


7 




8 


6 


3 


44 


Thalassiosira pseudonana 


8 


10 


7 


5 


7 


5 






42 


Thalassiosira sp. 






5 




3 


7 


8 


10 


33 


Rhodomonas sp. 


5 


8 




9 






3 


2 


27 


Calycomonas gracilis 






2 


4 


10 




2 


5 


23 


Cryptomonas sp. 


2 


6 




i 


6 




7 




22 


Euglena sp. 


4 


4 


4 


6 




1 






19 


Unspecified flagellates 


6 


3 












4 


13 


Tetraselmis sp. 






10 


2 






1 




13 


Thalassionema nitzschioides 














5 


7 


12 


Chaetoceros curvisetus 










9 


3 






12 


Asterionella glacialis 


1 










9 






10 


Leptocylindrus minimus 






1 










9 


10 


Peridinimn sp. 




9 














9 


Pbaeodactylum tricornutim 








8 










8 


Scenedesmus sp. 


3 


2 






2 








7 


Chaetoceros debilis 












6 






6 


Chaetoceros sp. 






3 






2 






5 


Coelastrum sp. 










4 










Hemiselmis sp. 














4 






Cryptophyceae 








3 












Pyramimonas 




1 
















Rhlzosolenia hebetata 










1 










Unspecified Pennales 
















1 







J 


F 


M 


A 


H 


J 


J 


A 


S 





N 


D 


BI 


Unspecified flagellates 
Cyclotella sp. 
Thalassiosira sp. 
Calycomonas sp. 
SJceletonema costatum 


10 
9 
7 

6 
5 


10 

8 
5 

7 

1 


9 

7 

10 

4 

3 


3 
6 
10 
9 

5 


2 

6 

10 

5 

9 


5 

3 

e 

10 


6 
9 

5 
10 


6 
7 

10 


7 
2 

4 

10 


10 
8 

7 
9 

3 


6 

5 

10 

7 


e 

7 
10 
9 


82 
79 
77 
75 
56 


Chroomones sp. 
Rhodomonas sp. 
Thalassiosira pseudonana 
Unspecified Pennales 
Thalassionema nitzschioides 


3 

4 
8 


6 
3 

9 
4 


6 
5 

8 

2 


4 

7 


1 
7 


6 

7 
9 


1 
8 

7 


5 
9 
8 


9 


6 
4 

2 


9 

4 


4 

2 


55 
41 
31 
29 
27 


Asterionella formosa 








6 










fi 




fl 


3 


23 


Leptocylindrus minimus 


















5 


5 


3 


5 


18 


Tetraselmis sp. 
Cryptomonas sp. 


2 


2 


1 






2 


4 
3 


1 
3 






2 




10 
10 


Euglena ap. 












4 


2 




1 


1 


I 




9 


Thalassiosira nordenskioldii 










8 
















8 


Chaetoceros curvisetus 


















fl 








8 


Thalassiosira decipiens 
Unspecified Dinophyceae 
Cryptomonadaceae 
Rhlzosolenia delicatula 








2 


4 
3 






4 


3 






1 


7 
4 

4 
2 


Pyramimonas sp. 
Paraiia sulcata 


1 














2 










2 

1 


Nitzschia sp. 








1 


















1 


Fragilaria crotonensis 












1 














1 



1976 



1977 





J 


F 


H 


A 


M 


J 


J 


A 


s 





N 


D 


BI 


Skeletonema costatunt 


10 


10 


10 


8 


10 


5 


8 


8 


8 


S 


8 


8 


101 


Unspecified flagellates 


3 






6 


6 


7 


10 


10 


9 


10 


10 


10 


81 


Thalassiosiza sp. 


6 


1 








9 


9 


9 


10 


9 


9 


9 


71 


Thalassionema nitzschioides 


8 


9 


9 


5 


9 


6 










5 


6 


57 


Leptocylindrus minimus 


9 


6 


7 


10 


4 








6 


7 






49 


Chaetoceros sp. 






1 






3 


3 


6 


7 




6 


7 


33 


Asterionella glacialis 


2 


7 


5 










7 


2 


3 


3 


4 


33 


Thalassiosira rotula 


7 


8 


8 




















23 


Cyclotella sp. 










8 


10 














18 


Calijcononas sp. 






4 


9 


5 
















18 


Phaeodacttjlim tricornutum 
















2 


4 


2 


7 




15 


Unspecified dinof lagellate 








2 






7 


3 


3 








15 


Euglenophyceae 














5 


1 


1 


5 






12 


Thalassiosira pseudonana 








4 


7 
















11 


Prorocentrum redfieldi 














6 




5 








11 


Schroderella delicatula 




5 


6 




















11 


Rhlzosolenia delicatula 








7 




2 














9 


Unspecified Pennales 


1 












1 


4 








3 


9 


Thalassiosira nordenskioldii 






















4 


5 


9 


Heterocapsa triquetrun 












S 














8 


Cryptononas sp. 




















■6 


1 






Parana sulcata 




















4 


2 


1 




Detonula confervacea 


5 






















2 




Cylindrotheca closterium 
















5 












Thalassiosira cravida 


4 


























Chaetoceros curvisetus 




4 
























Asterionella formosa 






3 


1 




















Euglena sp. 








3 




1 
















Tetraselmis jp. 












4 
















Nitzschia delicatissima 














4 














Rhodomonas sp. 










3 


















Prorocentrum minimum 














2 






1 








Chaetoceros debilis 




2 
























peridinium sp. 










2 


















Scenedesmus sp. 










1 





















J F 


M 


A 


M 


J 


J 


A 


s 


N D 


BI 


Unspecified flagellates 


8 


9 


9 


10 


9 


9 


8 


9 


10 


81 


Skeletonema costatum 


10 


10 


6 


4 


10 


3 


7 


7 


8 


65 


Thalassiosira sp. 


7 


6 




9 


6 


2 


9 


6 


6 


51 


Thalassiosira pseudonana 






10 


5 




10 


10 


8 


7 


50 


Unspecified dinoflagellate 




1 


4 




5 


7 


5 


5 


5 


32 


Chaetoceros sp. 


5 


8 










4 


10 




27 


Thalassionema nitzschioides 


6 


4 






8 




3 






21 


Thalassiosira nordenskioldii 


9 


7 
















16 


Katodinium rotundatuta 






8 






6 








14 


Olisthodiscus luteus 






7 


7 












14 


Rhlzosolenia fragilissima 








6 


7 










13 


Unspecified Pennales 


2 


3 


1 


2 










4 


12 


CryptoiTKinas sp. 






3 












9 


12 


Pyraminonas sp. 










1 


5 




4 


2 


12 


Phaeodactylum tricornutum 




5 


5 








1 






11 


Rhlzosolenia delicatula 






2 


8 












10 


Prorocentrum redfieldi 












8 








8 


Asterionella glacialis 


3 
















3 


6 


Leptocylindrus minimus 








3 








2 


1 


6 


Cylindrotheca closterium 














6 






6 


Ankistrodesmus sp. 








1 


4 










5 


Paralia sulcata 




2 














2 




Detonula confervacea 


4 




















Oxytoxum sp. 












4 










Asterionella formosa 










3 












Euglenophyceae 
















J 






Olisthodiscus sp. 
















3 






Gymnodinium sp. 










2 












Lithodesmium unduiatura 














2 








Chaetoceros af finis 
















1 






Leptocylindrus danicus 


1 




















Closterium sp 














1 









4-18 



a3ndws iON 



CO 00 o 

OvJ 






en 



Ln 
u. cri 





(/) 




<u 




•r- 


T3 -O 


C 


3 


(0 


+J 




oo 


00 






1^ 


*t 


(O 


CO 


o 




• r— 


CO 


D) 


c 


O 


o 


i-~ 


•r— 


o 


-l-> 


o 


(W 


LU 


+-> 




1/1 


s- 




o 


+-> J3 


fO 


i. 




(0 


g 


3C 


+:> 


C 


« 


<u 


+i 


> 


03 


(O 


O n: 


O 






2 


« 


flj 


Sz: 






S 




o 


■ 


-1^ t-^ 


<» r~^ 


r~i cyi 


w 


r~ 


rV 




CO 


S- 




O) 


M- JD 


O 


o 




+-> 


^— ^ 


o 


s- o 


0) 




+-> ^ • 


•r- 


en en 


1— 


3r-^ 


'■^^ 


ocn 


(/) 


S-r— 


r— 


^ " 


r^ 


■M ■!-> 


<u 


s- 


o "x^ o 


^■— ' 


^ Q. 




^ Ol 


OJ 


1— Di 


o 




c: 


>> >> 


n3 


ea i- 


-o s: rtj 


c 


t 


3 


• *\ ^ 


^ 


Z) 3 


ca; oo 00 



o |iiii ' ' I ' o I'"" ' ' ' o I' ' ' 1 1 1 I I I ' I p i 

o o o 2 o 

o o o g O 






CD 

o 
o 



i- 

3 
D1 



o 
o 
o 

o 
o 



o 
o 
o 



o 
o 
o 



o 
o 



(y3in/sm33) BDNvoNnev 



4-19 



Thalassiosira/Cyclotella species represent a suite of species 
including T. pseudonana (= Cyclotella nana) , T. rotula and T. norden- 
skioldii . T. nordenskioldii , an important component of the Long Island 
Sound phytoplankton community, was considered by Conover (1956) to 
exhibit best growth during late-winter conditions of low light and 
temperature. In New Haven Harbor, T. nordenskioldii was dominant in May 
1975, and may have also been the major component of the Thalassiosira 
sp. bloom from January through June and October through December of that 
year (Table 4-2; Figure 4-6) . T. nordenskioldii was again dominant from 
November 1976 through March 1977. Thus, along with S. costatum, T. 
nordenskioldii probably contributed to the major late-winter phyto- 
plankton blooms 1975 through 1977. 

Within the Thalassiosira/Cyclotella suite, Thalassiosira 
pseudonana was the dominant taxon differentiated to species (Table 4-1) . 
It reportedly experiences good growth at salinities from 4 /oo to 30 
/oo (Guillard and Ryther, 1962) , and large blooms (>5 x 10 cells/1) 
have been recorded in Great South and Moriches Bay, Long Island (Hul- 
burt, 1970) . In New Haven Harbor, abundance peaks (10 -10 cells/1) 

occurred in May, June and/or July from 1974 through 1976 (Figure 4-7) . 

7 
In 1977, however, peaks in April and August approached 10 cells per 

liter and appeared to be highest in the inner harbor. T. pseudonana 

probably contributed to the Cyclotella spp. and Thalassiosira spp. peaks 

observed from 1974 through 1977 (Figure 4-6, 4-7). 

Thalassionema nitzschioides is a cosmopolitan, principally- 
neritic pennate diatom (Smayda, 1958) which experiences best growth at 
low light and temperature levels but possesses wider tolerances in 
southern stocks (Riley and Conover, 1967) . In New Haven Harbor, T. 
nitzschioides has been consistently dominant from December through 
February; during 1976 it was a dominant during all months except July 



through October and in 1977 it was dominant in February, March, June and 
August (Table 4-2) . Highest densities (greater than 10 cells/liter) 
occurred during March and May 1976 and in June 1977 (Figure 4-8) . 



(Text continued on page 4-23) 



4-20 



3 
+i 
O 

CO 

o 
03 

CO 
G 

1 


1 

1 
1 


t\J 






aaidwvs ION 























1^. — rZT". ZZ.ZZ'.'ZS7Z.~^ .Z-TJT.Z 
























000' 


' 





I § 2 



a. 

Q 



aaidHus ION 



c-l 03 evj 
Z Z z 



jllll I I I I q|IIII I I I 



nnTTm-r 



CL 
(/I 

« 
CO 

o 

CO 
CO 

« 



Eh 



CL 






Q. 






CO 


(C 




« 







Sh 


■ 1 — 




•v^ 


CT 




CO 










r— 




•ri 







CO 







CO 


LU 




Ci 






r-^ 


S- 




« 







r« -Q 




ti 


s- 

n3 




•a 


:n 




c 






to 


cu 




« 


> 




r-^ 


m 




s 3: 




■l-i 






ei 


5 




i^ 


CU 




« 






!s 






•jJ 


• 




CO 


r-^ 




1^ 




•f^ 


en 




CO 


r— 




CO 






« 


S- 


. 


t~-i 


CIJ 




^ 


-Q 





bn 


4-> 





»» 







O-x: 




Cl 


cm 




to 


3 





« 


s- 




r-Ji 


jC 




^-J. 


+-> 




01 






-P «d- 




Ci 


1 — 




r~J 


CTl 




^■l 


r— 




=V1 




> 


<o 


>,CT. 




fO 


^^ 


4- 


^ CT. 





* n 


■— 


^— ^ 





#\ 


S- 


:>vj 


-M 


OJ 




S- 


4-> -0 





•1 


c: 


Q- 


^ 


to 




CO 


X) 




1 — 




>> 


f— 


«\ 


S- 


cu 


<^ 


fO 







£ 


'- — -' 


CO 


£ 




c 


:3 


cu 





/I 





r— 




c 


-!-> 


CO 


(O 


to 


aj 


•0 


+-> 


1— 


c 


r) 


-0 


3 




3 


JD 


+-> 


+-> 


cC 


10 


yi 



,1""^ 



.["III I I I o|l"l'l I I ol""" ' ' ol 



CO 



(y3in/sii33) BotJVQNnev 



{y3iii/sii33) 33NvaNngv 



s- 
en 



4-21 



QHIdWVS iON 



o 

CO 00 CM 



00 (/I 00 



o ' 
o 

o 
o 
o 



TTT I r^ 



O 

O 

o 
o 
o 



,|"'i" I ' ' ol ' ol""" ' ' ol 



n 




fO 






o 






•1— 






D1 


-» 




o 


•^ 




o 
o 


z 


I/) 


LU 


< 


o 


s- 




• r— 


o 


* 1-- 


4-) 


J2 


r-^ 


<n 


s- 


•^ o^ 


+-> 


(0 


t— 1 


OO 


n: 


-a 








+-> 


c: 




fO 


> 




« 


fO 


O 




n: 


n 


§ 


S 




o 


cu 


< 


'tj 2: 




s 




-a 


CO 


• 


^ 


Cui^ 






t^ 


Z 


G O-i . 




?H 


>— o-i 


< 


•^ 


r-- 




to 


s-cn 


Z VA 


o 


OJr— 


r^ 


•^ JD 


t en 


CO 


o •> 


1 — r 


CO 


+-) +J 


^ 


« 


U i- 




Ki O O 


o 


G 


Q- 


z 


g 


x: cu 

:3 




t- 


o >> 




o 


S- s- 






-C CO 


< 


-'-^ 


4-> E 


i- 


E 




<u ■* :3 




+-» i^ 00 




•r— 


(Tl 






1 — in 


Z 


CO 


cu 


< LO 


^— 


n3 T3 


r^ 


^— 


s: =s 


z en 


O) 


+-> 


1—1 


o 


.r,oo 


u. 




O 
OJ 1 — 




0) 


(0 




o -o o 


o 


c 


C -1- 




(O 


(O en 


z 


■o 


o 




c 


CO .— 


o 


3 


o 




J3 


" u 


» 


<c 


C^ LU 


< 






-. ^ 


. 




r^ 


r-~. 




_ en 


1 




^ ,—1 


"* 




a 


cu 





o 
o 



o 
o 



o 
o 



o' 

o 

o 



D1 



(y3in/sni33) aoNvatjnav 



4-22 



a31dWVS ION 



o 
ro cX) c\j 



o 
o 
o 

o 
o 



■ III I I I — I o I Ill °|' ' I o| '"" ' ' ol 



' 




«i 


z 




O 


< 




4-> J- 
ro O 


s 




4-> Jn 




r^ 


</) S- 


L 


en 


to 




t— t 


-u zn 


-» 




to 


o 




05 0) 






•^ n: 


o 




o at 






03 2: 


< 






-» 






-^ 




(3 cri , 


z 




S 5- en 


< 




O! ,— 




•r^ J2 






03 " 


z 


vo 


05 +-> +-> 




CT> 


<3 S- 


II. 


i<s 


-» 




r§ .C O) 




E-1 cnoi 


a 




3 


z 




s- s- 






S- E 
(1) «d- 3 


M 




■(-> r-v 00 

•I- CTi 


< 




1 — 1 — </5 
^^ 0) 


-» 




W >,T- 




1— fo -0 


"9 




^— ^ —5 




<U +J 


z 




'"oo 




>-'0 






C\J 1— 


< 


LD 


<U (0 


z 




(J T3 

c c •<- 

(0 (O CD 


u. 




-a 
C CO .— 

3 






J3 ' 


Q 




ca: 00 Lu 


z 




CO 


o 




1 


CO 




<u 


< 




3 


-9 


«i- 


D) 




r~. 






en 


Li_ 



o 
o 

o 
o 

o 



O I 

o 
o 



o 
o 



o 
o 



(y3in/sii33) BONvaunav 



4-23 



Leptocylindrus miniinus is a boreal, neritic diatom reportedly 
associated with the spring Thalassiosira bloom in the Gulf of Maine 
(Lillick, 1940) . L. minimus is difficult to distinguish from L. dani- 
cus , which was considered a major dominant in Long Island Sound (Cono- 
ver, 1956; Riley and Conover, 1967) . In New Haven Harbor, a major bloom 
(10 to 10 cells/liter) of L. minimus occurred during April 1976 
(Figure 4-9) following a period of consistent dominance that began in 
September 1975 (Table 4-2) . This species was also dominant during July 
and December 1974, September/October 1976 and less so during May, Sept- 
ember and October 1977. 

Dinof lagellates have generally occurred as dominants during 
late spring and summer in New Haven Harbor (Table 4-2) as has histor- 
ically been the case for Long Island Sound (Conover, 1956; Riley and 
Conover, 1967) . In June 1974, a non- toxic red-water bloom of the dino- 
flagellate Peridinium sp. (which may have been Heterocapsa triguetra = 
Peridinium triquetrum) was observed. In 1975, dinof lagellates were 
dominant sporadically only during May and December. During 1976, 
several dinof lagellates were dominant from April through October; major 
features were the reoccurrence of a Heterocapsa triguetra bloom in June 
and blooms of unspecified taxa and Prorocentrum spp. primarily from July 
through September (Table 4-2) . In 1977, unspecified dinof lagellates 
were among the ten dominant taxa from March through October, with addi- 
tional blooms of Heterocapsa triguetra in February (Figure 4-10) , Kato- 
dinium rotundatum in April (Table 4-2) and July and Prorocentrum red- 
fieldii in July (Table 4-2) . 

Microflagellates have been consistent dominants in New Haven 
Harbor, although prior to July 1976 unspecified taxa were probably 
underestimated during microscopic examination (NAI, 1977) . During 1977, 

for example, unspecified microflagellates were consistently dominant, 

5 6 

with abundances ranging from 3 x 10 to 9 x 10 cells/1 (NAI, 1978). Of 

the microf lagellate taxa identified to genus, two cryptophycean genera 

(Chroomonas sp. and Rhodomonas sp.) appeared as overall dominants in 

1974 through 1975, and a third cryptophycean {Cryptomonas sp.) was an 

overall dominant in 1974 only (Table 4-1) . In 1976 and 1977, Chroomonas 



4-24 



o 

CO CM 



I 



00 oo 



o|llll l I I I 

o 
o . 

o 
o 

o 



oF 

CD 
O 

O 
O 
CD 



T-T^ 



o 
o 
o 

o 
o 



III 1 1 I 



o 
o 
o 



iiiii I I I — r 



Mill I I I 



o 
o 



llllll I I I 






lo 



CO 



< 




CO t— 

ro 

to O 


z 




O CD 


u. 




■1- O 
+J r— 


-s 




(C O 


a 




00 UJ 


z 




•4-> S- 

(0 o 
J3 






CO s- 


0) 




S 3: 


< 






-3 


l~^ 


^S 


-> 


CTl 
« — t 


w rn 


Z 






< 






z 






u. 






-3 




&;>— 
<» 






i-:i s- 

0) 


Z 




^- J3 
o o 


o 






<0 




s_ o . 

CU CT. 


< 




•1- CD CTl 




Ln 


>— =S p- 




r--. 


^- o 


-1 


CTl 


to S- 




1 — 1 


1— -C •> 


z 




1— +-> +J 




(U s- 


< 




U "* o 




^^t^ O- 






cn CD 


± 




(D •— OC 

o 






(O n3 t- 


-3 






o 




=3 ■' E 
J3 O =3 


z 




< CVJ t/1 


o 






CO 


■=d- 


en 




CTl 


^ 


-» 


t-H 


OJ 



(y3in/sii33) BDNVQNnav 



4-25 



a31dWVS iON 



o 
ro CO CM 



t/) 00 00 



I o|ll>< ■ > I — ' ol ' " ' ' ' ' 

o o 



q[ II II I I I — I o|"" ' ' ' — I o|"<> I I I I 



< 




(/I s- 






c o 


z 




o ^ 




r-^ 


-M (O 


u. 


r^ 


(O 3: 




en 


4-> 




r-l 


00 c: 






+-> > 


o 




ro fO 


z 






o 






n 




tr: 


< 




HJ r-. . 




^ en en 






«-— r-- 


-3 




03 , en 








Z 




Qi o o 
4^ O Q. 


< 




ft; ^ q: 


2 




en 




<J3 


O O i- 


u. 


r-^ 


i- (B 




en 


'-^-c E 




t— 1 


S- +-> E 


-a 




+J >iO0 


O 




•r- S- 
1 — fO CO 


Z 




to C •!- 
r— (O -O 


O 




1— '-0 3 
0) 4-> 


m 




u ••'00 




^-o 






CNJ 1— 


< 




QJ 03 

o -a o 

C C T- 


-3 




fO n3 en 

-a o 


-3 




C 00 r- 

3 o 

J3 "^ O 


Z 




ca: CO Lu 


< 




. 




un 


o 


Z 


r-^ 


' 




1—4 


"^ 


b. 




cu 



o 

o 



o 
o 



o 
o 
o 



o 
o 



Dl 



(a3in/sii33) 3DNvaNnav 



4-26 



sp. was not a dominant taxon; Rhodomonas sp. was a dominant in May 
(1976) and Cryptomonas sp. was a dominant in April (1977) , October (1976 
and 1977) and November (1976) (Table 4-2) . Abundance of Cryptophyceae 
from 1974 through 1977 is presented in Figure 4-11; their apparent 
reduced occurrence and dominance during the latter half of 1976 and in 
1977 may have been an artifact resulting from the inclusion of members 
of this group with the unspecified flagellate group during this period. 

In summary, phytoplankton cell densities and chlorophyll a 
concentrations in New Haven Harbor from 1974 through 1977 were generally 
lowest from October through January. During this period the diatoms, 
Skeletonema costatum and Thalassiosira/Cyclotella spp., and microflag- 
ellates usually dominated the phytoplankton assemblage. Other diatoms, 
most notably Thalassionema nitzschioides , Leptocylindrus minimus, and 
Asterionella spp. also appeared during this period. From February 
through April, during which time cell densities and chlorophyll a 
concentrations generally peaked, several diatoms and microf lagellates 
achieved prominence. In 1975 during this late-winter/early spring 
period, Thalassiosira/Cyclotella spp. , unspecified pennate diatoms and 
flagellates, Thalassionema nitzschioides, Asterionella formosa, Caly- 
comonas sp. , Chroomonas sp. , and Rhodomonas sp. were dominants. In 1976 
a major bloom of Skeletonema costatum was responsible for the cell 
density maximum in February and was succeeded by blooms of T. nitzschi- 
oides , T. rotula, Schroderella delicatula and Asterionella glacialis in 
March, and Leptocylindrus minimus and Calycomonas sp. in April. In 
1911 , a major February bloom of Skeletonema costatum reoccurred, and 
persisted into March when it was accompanied by unspecified flagellates, 
Chaetoceros sp. , Thalassiosira nordenskioldii and Thalassiosira sp. , 
and Phaeodactylum tricornutum; in April, of T. pseudonana, unspecified 
flagellates, Olisthodiscus luteus, and the dinof lagellate, Katodinium 
rotundatum, were dominant. In May from 1974 through 1976 Skeletonema 
costatum and Thalassiosira/Cyclotella spp. were dominant; in 1976, 
however, T. nitzschioides was also important. In May 1911, unspecified 
flagellates and Olisthodiscus luteus as well as the diatoms, Thalas- 
siosira sp. and Rhizosolenia spp., were dominant. During June and July, 
Thalassiosira/Cyclotella species (including T. pseudonana) , dinoflag- 



4-27 



o 
ro CO CM 



00 <^ t>0 



a31dWVS iON 



'O 

o 

o 
o 
o 



III I I I — r 



oi 

CD 
O 

o 
o 



I ol ' ' ' ol'"" ' ' ' ol 

o o o 

O O .— I 



11. 1^ 

cr> 



■ IJD 









to 




tu 




• •% •! — 




o -o 




OJ ^ 




•)-> 




-a oo 




c: 




rO 1— 




(O 




CO O 




•r- 




** C7) 




CO O 




^— 




c/1 O 




C O 




o uj 




• 1 — 




^-> S- 




ro O 




4-> JD 




00 S- 




(O 




+-> 31 




(O 




c 




cu <u 




rO > 




Ol <a 




o zsz 




>, 




.i: S 




o- cu 




o ^ 




+-> 




Q. 




>> • 




s- r^ 




o r-^ 




CT^ 




M- 1— 




o 




s- 




^-~. cu 




S- J2 




OJ o 


• 


+-> ■4-> 


CTi 


•f- o 


r-^ 


r- O 


cr» 


*^ 


r^ 


LO .C 




1— CD 


Cl 


r— 3 


+j 


<u o 


s- 


u s- 


o 


---j^ 


Q. 


-i-> 


CU 


cu 


q; 


o «d- 




c r-~ 


>. 


n3 C71 


!^ 


-O F— 


rO 


c 


F 


3 >, E 


J2 n3 


3 


ca: s: c/) 



I 



OJ 



(y3in/S1"l33) HONVQNnaV 



4-28 



ellates (including H. triquetra) , unspecified flagellates and Skele- 
tonema costatum (June 1975 through 1977; July 1974 through 1977) were 
dominant. August's community was usually dominated by flagellates and 
Thalassiosira/Cyclotella species (including T. pseudonana) ; Skeletonema 
costatum (1976 and 1977) , Chaetoceros sp. (1976 and 1977) , and pennate 
diatoms (P. tricornutum in 1974, unspecified Pennales in 1975 and 1976, 
C. closterium in 1976 and 1977, and A. glacialis in 1976) were also 
dominant in August. During September, flagellates continued to dominate 
with diatoms such as Skeletonema costatum (1974 through 1977) , Chae- 
toceros spp. , C. curvisetus in 1974 and 1975 and Chaetoceros sp. in 1976 
and 1977, Thalassiosira/Cyclotella sp. (1974 through 1977) , and Lepto- 
cylindrus minimus (1975 through 1977) . 

A comparison of maximum cell densities recorded for seven of 
the dominant species during the present study compared with literature 
records for Long Island Sound and Great South and Moriches Bays, is 
presented in Table 4-3. Similar order-of -magnitude densities were found 
for all but Thalassionema nitzschoides whose peak New Haven Harbor 
densities were higher than those reported for Long Island Sound, and 
Thalassiosira pseudonana which was less dense in New Haven Harbor than 
in Great South and Meriches Bay. 



Characterisation of the New Haven Harbor Zooplankton 

Characterization of the New Haven Harbor zooplankton in this 
study relies on data produced by two different methods of sampling and 
laboratory analysis. Further, because the second method was instituted 
just several months prior to the plant going on line, understanding of 
the differences in density estimates based on the two different methods 
is vital to analysis of impacts. 

Results of a 13-month comparability study are presented in 
detail in Appendix 4-1. The foremost observation is that the two methods 
yielded radically different density estimates. Of the two methods, the 



4-29 



TABLE 4-3. COMPARISON OF MAXIMUM CELL DENSITIES RECORDED FOR SEVEN 

DOMINANT SPECIES OF PHYTOPLANKTON DURING THE PRESENT STUDY 
WITH LITERATURE RECORDS FOR LONG ISLAND SOUND, AND GREAT 
SOUTH AND MORICHES BAYS. NEW HAVEN HARBOR ECOLOGICAL 
STUDIES SUMMARY REPORT, 1979. 



MAXIMUM CELL DENSITIES 
(CELLS/LITER) 





LITERATURE 
REPORTS 


PRESENT 
STUDY 


Skeletonema costatum 


>3.0 X 10''(1) 
1.1 X 10''(2) 


1-3 X lo'^ 


Thalassiosira pseudonana 


5.5 X 10^(3) 


1 X 10^ 


Thalassionema nitzschioides 


6.0 X lO^d) 
8.7 X 10^(2) 


1-2 X 10^ 


Leptocylindrus minimus 


9.1 X 10^(1) 

1.2 X 10^(2) 


1-10 X 10^ 


Thalassiosira rotula 


3.8 X 10^(1) 
7.7 X 10^(2) 


1 X 10^ 


Heterocapsa triguetra 


4.0 X 10^(2) 


1-4 X 10^ 


Thalassiosira nordenskioldii 


6.0 X 10^(1) 
2.9 X 10^(2) 


9.7 X 10^ 



(1) Long Island Sound; Conover (1956) 

(2) Long Island Sound; Riley and Conover (1967) 

(3) Great South and Moriches Bay; Hulburt (1970) 



4-30 



earlicjr, (Jl arko-HumiJus (CB) mctliod was considerably Jess accurate. (!B 
determinations were characterized by a high threshold density for taxa 
detection (100 to 200 per m ) . Below threshold, taxa densities were 
underestimated: when organisms were most abundant, densities were 
overestimated. In addition, though the reverse also occurred, there 
were far more instances when the CB yielded no organisms of a particular 
taxon while the half-meter net (1/2 meter) indicated organism presence. 
Lower sample volumes, higher clogging rates and, perhaps, higher avoidance 
rates combined to make the CB method inconsistent in estimation of 
organisms present at low densities, and less accurate overall. 

Comparisons of data derived from the two methods must be made 
with care, and any comparisons of study results to be made which require 
cross-method comparisons should be based on sets of data and not on 
individual samples or stations. In broad terms, regression equations 
show that CB estimates ranged up to 1.5 orders of magnitude higher than 
1/2-meter estimates at the lower end of the density range observed in 
the harbor. At highest observed densities, 1/2-meter estimates were in 
the same range as those derived from CB samples . For copepod nauplii 
and polychaete larvae, CB estimates were nearly always higher than 1/2- 
meter estimates over the observed density range. For certain taxa, over 
the observed range of values, CB estimates were generally higher than 
1/2-meter at lower observed densities: at highest observed densities 
estimates were about even with the two methods. These taxa included 
copepod copepodites, cirripedia nauplii, and gastropod veligers. 
Acartia spp. seem to have been equally estimated by the two methods at 
lower observed densities but at the upper range of observed densities 
1/2-meter sampling yielded higher densities than CB sampling. 

From 1973 through 1976, total zooplankton abundances in New 
Haven Harbor were usually at lowest seasonal levels in December and 
January (Figures 4-12 and 4-13) . Abundances generally increased to 
seasonal peaks by March or April (1974 through 1976) ; in 1977, this peak 
was delayed until May/June. This delay may have been related to the 
exceptionally cold winter of 1976-1977, although no definite connection 



4-31 



100,000 



10,000 



CO 

E 









100 



STATION 3 




~V \;i 



EeS TIDE 

FLOOD TIDE 




1,000,000 



100,000 



JASONDJFMAMJJASONDJFMAMJJASONOJFMAMJJASONDJFMAMJJASO 

1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 



=tt= 



Q 
CO 

< 



1,000 



STATION 8 




1,000,000 



\_^ 100,000 

+ 1 

n 

E 



< 



CO 

< 



JASONDJFMAMJJASONDJFMAMJJASONDJFMAMJJASONDJFMAMJJASO 

1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 



STATION 20 




JASONDJFMAMJJASONOJFMAMJJASONDJFMAMJJASONDJFMAMJJASO 

1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 



Figure 4-12. 



Total zooplankton (#/m-^) at Stations 3, 8 and 20 on ebb 
and flood tide; July 1973 through October 1977. New 
Haven Harbor Ecological Studies Summary Report, 1979, 



4-32 



B 






CQ 

< 



100,000 



STATION 3 




JASONDJFMAMJJASONDJFMAMJJASONDJFMAMJJASONDJFMAMJJASO 

1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 



E 



O 



< 



CQ 

< 



- 


STATION 


8 


. 






100,000 


VV ' A / 


A"' /\'' 


n 




A 


10,000 


* 1 • \ A 




t-A 1 Hv / 


M K / 


l\ 




\ \ \ 




\'7 ''•■ ''' \ /' 


A 


i 


1,000 


> \/ ' 
, \ 
\ 1 

\ 1 




SURFACE \' 


NOT SAMPLED 


1 / 








1 1 
1 1 


100 


u 






1 


'■' 



JASONDJFUAMJJASONDJFUAUJJASONOJFMAMJJASONDJFMAMJJASO 

1974 1975 1976 1977 



CO 






CQ 

■St 



10,000 



STATION 20 




JASONDJFMAMJJASONDJFMAMJJASONDJFMAMJJASONDJFMAMJJASO 

1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 



Fiqure 4-13. 



Total zooplankton (#/m ) at Stations 3, 8 and 20 on surface 
and bottom (tides combined); July 1973 through October 1977. 
New Haven Harbor Ecological Studies Summary Report, 1979. 



4-33 



was made. Abundances usually remained at peak levels, with some fluc- 
tuations, through June, and declined by July (1974 and 1975) or August 
(1976 and 1977). Secondary abundance peaks, usually lower in magnitude 
than the initial late-spring/early summer peak, occurred from August 
through October 1974, in August 1975, from September through November 
1976 and in September 1977. Although tidal and depth differences were 
occasionally apparent, seasonality appeared to exert the strongest 
influence on overall abundance estimates. 

New Haven abundances were similar but slightly greater than 
those recorded at Millstone Point (Niantic Bay) (Figure 4-14) . Seasonal 
abundance peaks occurred in the early summer at Millstone Point and 
declined precipitously in the winter as at New Haven Harbor (Figure 4- 
14) . In Block Island Sound, Deevey (1952a) found total abundances similar 
to Millstone Point with an early summer maximum and winter decline (Fig- 
ure 4-14c) . 

As in nearly all of the world's marine waters, the major 
component of the New Haven Harbor zooplankton were holoplankters, 
predominantly calanoid copepods (Figure 4-15) . In New Haven Harbor, the 
dominant copepods were Acartia tonsa and Acartia hudsonica (= clausi) 

(Table 4-4) . Together, these two congeners comprised the majority of 
the total zooplankton and as much as 93% of the calanoid copepod assem- 
blage (Figure 4-14) (NAI , 1977; 1978). A. hudsonica normally exhibited 
a major population bloom in the spring while A. tonsa populations peaked 
in mid- to late summer; typically, when the density of one species was at 
a peak level, the other was virtually absent (Figure 4-16) . Similar to 
the pattern observed in New Haven Harbor, total zooplankton species 
abundance peaks at Millstone Point coincided with A. tonsa and A. 
hudsonica peaks (Figure 4-14b) . The successional pattern of A. hud- 
sonica spring dominance/A. tonsa summer dominance was apparent at Mill- 
stone (Figure 4-14b) . Conover (1956) and Jeffries (1962) were among the 
first to describe this successional relationship which generally pre- 
vails in most estuaries and embayments from Cape Cod to Cape Hatteras 

(Cronin et aJ . , 1962; Jeffries, 1964; Heinle, 1966; Sage and Herman, 
1972) . 

(Text continued on page 4-38) 



GO , oon 



4(),nno 



30,000- 



^ 20,000 




TOTAL ZOOPLANKTON 

ACARTIA SPP, 

ACARTIA IlunSONTCA 

ACARTJA TONSA 





^--^ 




t^ 


^ 


k I 


1 




1 

N 




h 



NEW HAVEN HARBOR, 1976 



50,000- 
40,000 - 
30,000- 
20,000 - 
10,000- 




i" I I 

Sp Su F W 

1973 



-\ — T" — I — I — I — r 

Sp Su F W Sp Su F 



IIANTIC BAY (MILLSTONE POINT) 



C. 



Figure 4-14. 



30,000 ■ 



20,000 ■ 



10,000- 




j'f'm'a'm'j'j'a's'o'n'd 
BLOCK ISLAND SOUND, 1949 



Numbers per cubic meter of total zooplankton organisms and 
Acartia spp. taken with a No. 10 net [333 pm at Millstone] 
at a) New Haven Harbor, Stations 8 and 11 averaged, 1976; 
b) Niantic Bay, Millstone Stations 5 and 8 averaged, 1973- 
1976; c) Block Island Sound, 1949. New Haven Harbor 
Ecological Studies Summary Report, 1979. 



4-35 




100-1 
90- 
80- 

^ 70- 

o 

E 60- 

00 

o 

^ 50-1 

o 

^ 40H 



20- 
10- 








__NON-COPEPOD ZOOPLANKTON 

Pseudodiaptomus 
ooronatus 
' PseudoaaZanus minutus 

Centropages hamatus 

— Temora longicornis 



■A, hudsonioa 



■ A . tonsa 



1976 



1977 (JAN-SEP) 



Figure 4-15. Relative oercentages of important copepod species from 
a) Long Island Sound, March 1952 to June 1953 (from 
Deevey, 1956); b) Millstone Units I and II discharge, 
1976 and 1977 [333 ym net (from Battel le, 1978)]. 
New Haven Harbor Ecological Studies Summary Report, 1979. 



4-36 



TABLE 4-4 



DOMINANT^ ZOOPLANKTERS IN NEW HAVEN HARBOR FROM 1973 THROUGH 
1977. NEW HAVEN HARBOR ECOLOGICAL STUDIES SUMMARY REPORT, 1979. 





1973 


1974 


1975 


1976 


1977 


BIOLOGICAL 
INDEX 


Copepoda copepodites 


9 


9 


10 


10 


10 


48 


Copepoda nauplii 


10 


10 


9 


8 


7 


44 


Barnacle nauplii 


8 


8 


5 


7 


8 


36 


Acartia hudsonica 





7 


8 


9 


9 


33 


Acartia tonsa 


6 


5 


6 


6 


6 


29 


Polychaeta 


7 


6 


2 


4 


1 


20 


Oithona spp. 


2 


4 


7 


5 





18 


Harpacticoida 


5 


2 








4 


11 


Cyclopoida 





1 


4 


2 





7 


Gastropod veligers 


4 











3 


7 


Bivalve veligers 


3 


3 











6 



Determined by ranking individually within each year followed by ranking 
biological index values for each year as a whole. 



4-37 



+ 

CO 

B 
=«t= 



o 



CO 



100, oqc 












Aaartia 


hudsonica 




































STN 3 1 






STN 8 ,1 1 








STN 20 


1 ■ ': 


• 1 -" 




10,000^ 


1 
1 

1 


1 
1 

j 1 


i! Ill; 


III 


I- 


1 
j 1 


1 


1 


1,00^ 




! 


1 




li' 






I|[ 1 


i i! 




1] 


1 


z 


I 1 






li 1 
li i ' 


'i'- ! 




! 1 

1 !li 

1 1 1 < !■ ■ 


!l|il 
' ii ji 




■1 
Ii 

1 1 '' 








1 


100_ 








1 1 

i ! 

i 1 1 






li i 1 
11 i I 


,| 






I ' ' 


' 'i ! 


1 !' I| 

iliil 

I Ii 


I 1 

1 ! 

I I 


i! " 

!l 


ij 
ii 












; 








1 1 1 

i 1 i 








! 1 1 


i II 1 








■ ill 


1 ji 1 
1 i 




1 !q lit 




' j 


















1 ' 1 










' ! 






j i 




' M 




j lUJ 














( 












1 1 










1 


! 


1 ' ! 




1 ii 
1 li 




' l< ii 


|| ., 




id- 1 

\s: 1 








il 

il 








10 






















'i' i 






j 1 j 




1 !| 1 1 


1 i ' 


i 


luo 






































' 1 1 j 


1 1 1 1 ' 1 














1 


;i— 1 


























' j 














1 1 i 1 








ii 1 








° 


























1 1 












1 li ! 


. ' ' 








[III 






1 


■ s: 1 
1 1 


















J 




J 


ii 


jli 


jlii 


1 




l] 


ii 


iili 


I'li'i 

''I'll 
III ill 


jlii 

ill! 


1 
1 
1 


II li 


!,i|ili 
liiiiii 
llillll 


lllll 


1 i 1 1 
1 ' II 
li 1 1 


U 


i 

1 


1 j 

i " 
i 1 


ii 


ii 


ii 


il 


Ll 


i 1 


L 



JASO N OJFMAMJJASONDJ FMAMJJ AS 



1973 



1974 



1975 



ONDJFMAMJJ 
1976 



AS N D J 



F M A M J 
977 



10,000 



1,000 



+ 
00 



<: 



CQ 



100 



10 



Aoart^a tonsa 



STN 3 

STN 8 

STN 20 



J A S 

1973 



i J F M 

1974 



J_L 



i.i 



i i 



i ! 



o 



jLl 



J JASON DJFMAMJ 
1975 



JASON DJF MA 
1976 



M J J A S N 



D J F M A 

1977 



M J J A S 



Figure 4-16. Abundance (#/iti ) of Acartia hudsonica and Aaartia tonsa at 
Stations 3, 8 and 20; July 1973 through October 1977. 
New Haven Harbor Ecological Studies Summary Report, 1979. 



4-38 



Other calanoid species that exhibited substantial seasonal 
abundance peaks may be regarded as subdominants to the Acartia species. 
This subdominant category includes Pseudodiaptomus coronatus and Pseudo- 
calanus minutus , which appear in most years to be prominent members of 
the New Haven Harbor zooplankton assemblage during colder months (Novem- 
ber through April; Table 4-5) . Pseudodiaptomus coronatus was also 
reported as a prominent copepod at Millstone Point (Figure 4-15b) . 
Pseudocalanus minutus showed a similar pattern of winter dominance among 
copepods in greater Long Island Sound and comprised about the same 
proportion of total zooplankton at Millstone Point as at New Haven Har- 
bor and Long Island Sound (Figure 4-15) . 

Abundance of Temora longicornis appears to have increased in 
recent years (Figure 4-17) . In I'ilA, T. longicornis was present in New 
Haven Harbor zooplankton collections only from February through June. 
Peak abundance has typically occurred in late spring; maximum densities 
increased with each year. In 1977, T. longicornis became numerically 
the third most important copepod species and ranked sixth among all 
zooplankton categories differentiated. These recent findings are 
consistent with Long Island Sound and Millstone Point data which indi- 
cate Temora longicornis as a late spring dominant (Figure 4-15a) (Mill- 
stone 1973-1975). At Millstone, Temora longicornis comprised approxi- 
mately the same proportion of the total zooplankton as seen by Deevey 
(1956) in Long Island Sound. 

Predictably, early copepod developmental stages (i.e. , nauplii 
and copepodites) outranked adult forms in niimerical abundance (Table 4- 
4) . Nauplii constitute the earliest of developmental stages and can 
reasonably be expected to have been far more abundant than copepodites 
(intermediate developmental stages) on a yearly average basis. That 
this was not reflected in the data (Figure 4-18) from 1975 through 1977 
may be due to selective sampling of organisms of larger body size. 

In addition to the calanoid copepod species discussed above, 
small cyclopoid copepods of the genus Oithona have occurred in New Haven 

(Text continued on page 4-43) 



4-39 



TABLE 4-5. MONTHLY RANKING* OF THE TEN MOST ABUNDANT ZOOPLANKTON 

TAXA (BASED ON MEAN OF ALL STATIONS AND BOTH TIDES FROM 
JULY 1973 THROUGH OCTOBER 1977). NEW HAVEN HARBOR 
ECOLOGICAL STUDIES SUMF^ARY REPORT, 1979. 



1973 





J r H A M J J 


A 


S 




10 


N 

III 


D 


BI 


Coi>epod naupii i 


7 


ID 


10 


lu 


57 


Copepod copepodites 


3 


7 


7 


y 


y 


9 


44 


Barnacle nauplii 


9 


5 


9 


7 


8 


5 


43 


Polychaeta 


8 


9 


8 


8 


6 





39 


Acartia tonsa 


1 


8 


3 


5 


7 


8 


32 


Harpacticoida 


4 


3 


5 


3 


5 


6 


26 


Gastropod veligers 


6 


4 


4 


2 


3 


3 


22 


Bivalve veligers 


5 


2 


6 


6 








19 


Oithona spp. 





1 


2 


4 


4 





11 


Tintinnidae 


10 

















10 


Acartia hudsonica 














2 


7 


9 


Barnacle cyprids 


2 


6 














8 


PseudodiaptomuE corona 


tus 














4 


4 



1974 





J 


F 


M 


A 


M 


J 


J 


A 


s 





N 


D 


BI 


Copepod nauplii 


10 


10 


10 


8 


10 


7 


9 


9 


10 


10 


10 


10 


113 


Copepod copepodites 


8 


9 


8 


9 


8 


4 


4 


7 


8 


7 


9 


9 


90 


Barnacle nauplii 


1 


8 


6 





9 


8 


7 


4 


7 


8 


8 


5 


71 


Acartia hudsonica 


6 


7 


9 


10 


6 


9 











1 


4 


7 


59 


Polychaeta 














5 


10 


10 


10 


9 


9 


3 





56 


Acartia tonsa 


7 


6 


2 











2 


8 





2 


7 


8 


42 


Oithona spp. 


2 


4 


5 


4 














3 


5 


5 


2 


- 30 


Bivalve veligers 














7 


5 


8 





6 


4 








30 


Harpacticoida 


5 


3 


3 


7 


3 


1 

















4 


26 


Cyclopoida 




















3 


3 


2 


6 


6 


6 


26 


Gastropod veligers 

















3 


6 


6 


4 


3 


2 





24 


Pseudocalanus minutus 


3 


5 


7 


6 


























21 


Rotifera 


9 





4 














5 











3 


21 



1975 





J 


F 


M 


A 


M 


J 


J 


A 


s 





N 


D 


BI 


Copepoda copepodites 


9 


8 


8 


8 


10 


7 


10 


10 


10 


10 


10 


10 


110 


Copepoda nauplii 


10 


9 


9 


10 


9 


1 


4 


7 


9 


8 


8 


8 


92 


Acartia hudsonica 


7 


10 


10 


9 


8 


9 


3 


8 





1 


7 


9 


81 


Oi thona spp . 


6 


7 


5 


3 








6 


6 


8 


6 


4 


5 


56 


Acartia tonsa 


8 

















9 


9 


6 


7 


9 


7 


55 


Barnacle nauplii 


2 


4 


2 





6 


10 


1 


3 


7 


9 


3 


3 


50 


Cyclopoida 


5 





3 


4 


7 





2 


5 


5 


5 


5 


6 


47 


Gastropoda 

















8 


8 


4 


4 


3 


1 





28 


Polychaeta 








1 





5 


4 


7 


1 


3 


3 








20 



10 was most abundant taxon, 1 was 10th most abundant, 
signifies ranking not among top 10 organisms 



Continued 



4-40 



TABLE 4-5. (Continued) 



1976 





J 


F 


M 


A 


M 


J 


J 


A 


S 





N 


D 


BI 


Copepoda copepodites 


7 


9 


9 


9 


9 


8 


1 








10 


6 


4 


72 


Acartia hudsonica 


2 


8 


8 


10 


10 


10 


3 











9 


10 


70 


Copepoda nauplii 


8 


10 


10 


7 


6 


2 


8 


3 


6 


3 


1 


2 


66 


Barnacle nauplii 


4 


2 


6 


5 


7 


9 





8 


7 


5 





5 


58 


Acartia tonsa 




















7 


10 


10 


6 


10 


9 


52 


Oithona spp. 


9 


3 





1 


2 





6 





4 


7 


8 


7 


47 


Polychaeta 





7 


7 


4 


4 


4 


5 


7 


3 


1 


4 





46 


Pseudocalanus minutus 











3 








2 





a 


9 


7 


3 


32 


Cyclopoida 


6 


5 


1 





5 


3 











8 


2 





30 


Pseudodiaptomus coro- 




























natus 


■5 


4 

















1 


5 


4 


3 


8 


30 


Harpacticoida 


3 


1 





2 


8 


6 

















6 


26 


Gastropod veligers 














1 


7 


4 


6 


2 


2 








22 


Barnacle cyprids 








5 











9 


9 


1 











24 



1977 





J 


F 


M 


A 


M 


J 


J 


A 


S 


N D 


BI 


Copepoda copepodites 




5 


7 


10 


10 


10 


9 


8 


9 


10 


78 


Acartia hudsonica 




7 


8 


9 


9 


8 


3 








9 


53. 


Barnacle nauplii 




9 


1 





4 


7 


7 


9 


10 





47 


Copepoda nauplii 


a 


10 


9 


3 


5 








1 


6 


2 


36 


Acartia tonsa 


J 








5 


3 





8 


4 


7 


7 


34 


Temora longicornis 


a. 
s 

< 


3 


4 


8 


8 


9 














32 


Harpacticoida 


8 


6 


7 


7 


4 














32 


Gastropod veligers 


U) 














6 


5 


10 


4 


1 


26 


Barnacle cyprids 


O 

z 





5 


4 








6 


7 


3 





26 


Polychaeta 


6 


10 





1 


3 


4 











24 


Cyclopoida 






















5 


8 


8 


21 


Pseudocalanus minutus 







2 


2 


6 


5 











4 


19 



4-'1 



QBldWVS iON 






< U3 



I 

o 

CO CO CM 



00 CO 00 



o 
o 

CD 



II I I I o mil 

o ' 

o 



I I o llllli I I I o llllll 



in 

S ,—1 






ro 





CO 






O) 






•1 — 






T3 






3 




> rt 


+J 




o 


oo 




CM 


^ 




T3 


(O 




E 


o 




fO 


CD 




CO 


o 




w\ 


o 




ro 


o 

LlJ 




(/) 






c: 


S- 




o 


o 




• f— 


-Q 




4J 


S- 




(O 


"3 




4-> 


rc 




OO 


c 




4-> 


0) 




ra 


> 

(0 




w 


3: 




•vi 








g 




o 


s: 




<:) 






•ri 






Cn 


• 




S r^ 




O 1^ 




l~-^ CTl 






r— 




^1 






^ 


s- 




o 


OJ 




i? 


-Q 




(» 


O 




O 


CTl 
CTl 




-C 


' 


^ — » 


CD 




n 


3 


»> 


F 


o 


+-> 




S- 


S- 


=*fc ^ 


o 


*— ^ 


-M 


Q. 


O) 


ro 


d; 


o 


r^ 




c 


cy. 


>! 


ro 


r— 


S- 


-o 




rc3 


c 


>. E 


3 




H 


J3 


3 


3 


<: 


■-3 


o^ 



I 

s- 

3 
CD 



(I + £^/#) 33N\/aNngv 



4-42 



m 

E 






ca 



100,000 



10,000 



1,000 



100 



10 



Copepoda nauplii 



j i 

'ill' 

Hi i ' 
''I'M ' 
i'<l'''l ' ' 

' '' i' i' ii ' '1 

li'i 1 !■ i ''' 

'lilmliJ'i'i 

i lilliiiiiii 

iii'i'i'i''i''' !'! 
! 'jliiiii''! ''! 
< lili'lli'!; !l< 
!i'i 1' ip il 

|)'ii i'i' 'l''i| 

jiiiliJjiilij 111 


i 

i,i ij j 

iiii., iiii 

' 'i:l 1'! i'l. 

11 li'^ii: 

1 ' ;ii''''>! 

!ii !i;i;i: 

ili'i li'iii 

i|l|i|;l|!l ;|i 
iiiliiUijliljij 



J A S N 

1973 



JFMAMJJASONDJFMAMJJASOND 



STN 3. 
STN 8. 



STN 20 



1974 



1975 



J F M , 

1976 



Uiil 



rjj AS ON DJ FMAM 

1977 



+ 

CO 

E 






CO 



1,000,000 



100,000 



10,000 



1,000. 



100 



10 



STN 3 - 
STN 8 _ 
STN 20. 



Copepoda copepodites 



J ASONOJ FMAM J J 

1973 1974 



ASONDJ FMAMJ 
1975 



JASON 



D J FMAM 
1976 



J J A S N 



L^ 



D J F M 

1977 



A MJ J A SO 



Figure 4-18. Abundance (#/in ) of Copepoda nauplii and copepodites at 
Stations 3, 8 and 20; July 1973 through October 1977. 
New Haven Harbor Ecological Studies Summary Report, 1979. 



4-43 



Harbor on a fairly regular and essentially year-round basis. Oithona 
sp(p). was, however, relatively scarce in 1977 collections (Table 4-5). 

Deevey {1952a) reported Oithona sp. as a year round consti- 
tuent of Block Island Sound plankton which comprised a large percent of 
the fall copepods (Figure 4-15) . Oithona. sp. was not reported at 
Millstone Point, probably because of the larger net size used (333pin vs 
158 ym net at New Haven and Long Island Sound) . 

Important members of the invertebrate meroplankton assemblage 
in New Haven Harbor included pelagic larvae of barnacles, gastropods, 
polychaete worms, and bivalve molluscs (Table 4-4) . Among the mero- 
plankters, barnacle larvae consistently ranked highest in abundance 
(Table 4-4) . Judging from sessile adult abundance, the species repre- 
sented have been primarily Balanus eburneus and B. improvisus . A poly- 
modal pattern of seasonal abiindance is suggested in Figure 4-19 and 
presumably represents successive spawning episodes. Peaks of repro- 
ductive activity appeared to be May- July and September-October, with a 
third, relatively modest, population peak occurring in February-March. 
In the case of barnacle cyprids (a later developmental stage) , there 
appeared to be essentially two abundance peaks per year (Figure 4-19) , 
the first occurring in March or April and the second from June through 
August. These peaks corresponded to the February-March and May- July 
naupliar population peaks. There appears to have been no cyprid peak 
corresponding to the September naupliar peak perhaps due to: 1) onset 
of winter and consequent scarcity of food, and/or 2) encounter with 
particular predators, such as ctenophores that have occurred in sub- 
stantial quantities during the months of August and September (NAI, 
1978) . Deevey (1952a) reported Balanus sp. larvae in Block Island Sound 
from January through April. 

Polychaete larvae ranked close to barnacle larvae in overall 
numerical importance (Table 4-4) particularly in 1973 and 1974 when data 
were derived from a Clarke-Bumpus net (76ym mesh) . During 1975, 1976 
and 1977, after a summer peak, there was a decline in abundance (Figure 



4-41 



10,000 Barnacle cyprids 



+ 

CO 



=H= 






<: 



1,000 



100 



10 



LU 



STN 3 . 
STN 8 - 
STN 20" 



m 



I I I 



ill 



illiiil 



JASONOJFMAMJJASONDJ FMAMJJASONDJ 



L_i 



1973 



1974 



1975 



F M A M 

1976 



JU 



NDJ FMAMJJ ASO 

1977 



100,000 



10,000 



E 









1,000 



100 



10 



Barnacle nauplii 



i ! 



Llll 



t 



JA SON DJ FMAMJJASONDJFMAMJJASONDJ 



\k 



STN 3 

STN 8 

STN 20 



1 I 

i j 



ill 





1973 



1974 



1975 



F M A M 

1976 



J J A S N 



D J F M A 

1977 



I ! 



M J J ASO 



Figure 4-19. 



3 
Abundance (#/ni ) of Barnacle cyprids and nauplii at Stations 3, 
8 and 20; July 1973 through October 1977. New Haven Harbor 
Ecological Studies Summary Report, 1979. 



4-45 



4-20). This difference may be the result of the net change, i.e., small 
newly hatched larvae captured in earlier years by the 76ym CB net may 
have been undersampled by the larger mesh, ISym 1/2-meter net. These 
small larvae were probably most prevalent in early to late summer and 
early fall months. Doevcy (1952a) reported polychaete larvae in spring 
Block Island Sound plankton samples. It may be reasonably assumed that 
a great many taxa comprise the polychaete group with no one taxon pre- 
dominating on a yearly basis. 

Veliger larvae of gastropod and bivalve molluscs occurred pri- 
marily during warmer months in New Haven Harbor (May through November) 
and in Long Island Sound (Deevey, 1952a) . Again, body-size selectivity 
of the larger mesh net appears to be the most likely explanation for 
changes in ranking regarding the bivalves (Table 4-4) and for changes in 
the appearance of seasonal population fluctuation patterns comparing 
1973 and 1974 with 1975 through 1977 data for both gastropods and 
bivalves (Figure 4-21) . The most abundant gastropod veliger was pro- 
bably Littorina si^p. ; from close examination of a few samples, Mytilus 
edulis and My a arenaria were the predominant bivalve larvae. Larvae of 
the American oyster {Crassostrea virginica) probably comprised a small 

but important fraction of the bivalve assemblage in mid- July, with peak 

3 
densities of 10 to 70 larvae per m during 1977 (NAI, 1978). Though 

these densities of oyster larvae are unexceptional in Long Island Sound 

(Loosanoff and Engel, 1940) , because of the temporal nature of peaks in 

oyster larvae, data from monthly sampling cannot be assumed to give 

representative data on oyster larvae densities. 

Of the major tychopelagic forms represented in New Haven 
Harbor zooplankton collections , only harpacticoid copepods ranked rela- 
tively high in overall abundance (Table 4-4) . As in the case of poly- 
chaete and gastropod larvae, a sharp summer reduction in numbers fol- 
lowing a late spring peak was observed during the years 1975 through 
1977 (Figure 4-22) . No summer decline was indicated in 1973. In 1974, 
however, harpacticoids disappeared completely from Clarke-Bumpus col- 
lections during July and August. 

(Text continued on page 4-49) 



4-46 



QBldNVS iON 



ro CO 



O 

CM 



oo oo oo 



o mill I I 
o ' 
o 

O 

o 



' o 
o 
o 



HUM I r 



o|ll"ll 

o 

o 



o 



I o|lllll I I I 





in 


~> 


OJ 


z 


•^ 




-o 


< 


3 


z r^ 


+-> 


r^ 


.^00 


'•- a^ 


o 


s '—1 


<NJ 1 — 




03 




■o o 


Z 


C T- 




CO D1 


o 


O 


tn 


00 1— 




o 


< 


•> o 


-i 


CO LU 


~i 


(/) S- 




c: o 




O -Q 


4 


•1- %- 


IX) 


+-> fO 


s r~- 


rO 3: 


u. <^ 


-(J 




00 c 


-> 


Ol 


o 


+-> > 




n3 IT3 


z 


3r 




cu 


o 


re) S 


10 


> <U 




s- z: 


< 


03 


-» 


' — 


-5 


ro r- 


z 


■4J r-- 




0) en 




(O I— 


z Ln 


j= 


r^ 


O S- 


u. CTt 


>, <u 




.— XI 


-^ 


o o 


Q 


Q- +-> . 


Z 


M- o r~^ 


o 


o o^ 


<o 


^ r— 




'-^ en 


< 


00 :3 - 




E o +-> 


-s 


^ i- s- 




=te .^ O 




^— 4-> Q. 


Z 


OJ 


< 


idance 

1973 
ary R 


u. CTi 
1 — 1 


-> 


ii >, E 


o 


1 =i 


z 


■< --D l>0 


o 




« <^ 




r-~ 


• 


< en 


O 


» — 1 


OJ 


-3 


1 




"=1- 




0) 




s- . 




3 




cn 



(i+^w/#) 33NvaNna\/ 



4-47 



10.000 



1,000 



en 

E 



< 



100 



10 



Gastropoda veligers 



STN 3 

STN 8 

STN 20 



J L 



I 



J ASON DJF M AMJJASO N DJFMA M JJASON D 



jLl 



1973 



1974 



1975 



J F M A 

1976 



JUi 



M J J A S N 



II O 
k 



DJFMA 

1977 



M J J A SO 



10,000 



CO 

E 






< 



Bivalvia larvae 



W J —WW 








1 










1 
i 






STN 




3 










- 


; ! 1 CTM 


- 


1 
, 1 1 


1 1 

1 ! STN 20 


1,000" 




1 1 
1 1 
1 1 


1 1 


1, 1 , 
III I 


1 

1 
1 1 


100 




1 

1 [ 
1 ' 
' h 

[ill 


1 


1 1 


' 


\r 




1 
1 


1 

1 

■ 1 




- 






ll 
i 1 






|i| 


1 ll 
1 II 


i 


j 1 


l| 


1 
1 1 


' 1 

i 1 i 










1 1 






ll 1 1 


1 




1 1 




J 1 1 






1 . LU 1 














1 ' ' 




1 




h 


1 j 




1 ' 




j 


1 1 -J 1 




10 






|l 






l!ll 


1 


1 1 


1 1 


1 




Ml 




1 

1 1 


1 


1 ci_ 






— 






1 , 








1 


' 


il 


I . 




1 




1 1 


1 


1 "^ 






- 






1 1 






ilii 


1 


' 1 


1 






|i' 


j: 


1 ' 1 




j 1 '^ 






- 




1 


l[ 






ll'' 


1' 


|l 


|l 


1 i 1 






|i 


1 ' 


II 1 1 


1 1 


■ 1 1— 
1 ! ° 




1'' , 


- 


-1 


l| 
h 


i| 

111 


L 


1 1 1 


mi 


ll 


|i 


1 
11 


1 ll 




J 


1 


ii 


II , 1 

ill ! 1 

III 1 1 


li 

u 


! 1 z 

ill! . . I, : 


ii 


i|! 1 

ill i . 
Ill ll 



J A S 

1973 



NDJFMAMJJASONDJ FMAMJJASONDJFMAMJJASONOJFMAMJJASO 



1974 



1975 



1976 



1977 



Mgure 4-'<lI. Abundance (#/ni ) of Gastropoda veligers and Bivalve larvae at 
Stations 3, 8 and 20; July 1973 through October 1977. New 
Haven Harbor Ecological Studies Summary Report, 1979, 



4-48 







_: _■_— 


o 
m 

< 

z 


to 




— 7ZS.Z 


<u 






-o 








t/) 


^ 




■— ."ZT". I^T_Z'."Z.~. Zl.~.^ rZLT—.'ZJT.Z: 


,_ 




—TLZ rL^.'Z-nZJr.^ST-Z.T—TJl 


u. CD 

-3 
O 

z 
o 

< 

-3 
-3 
Z 

!- 

•^ en 
-. '-' 

o 
z 
o 

CO 

< 

-3 

z 

z r-~ 

u.ai 

.— ( 

-3 

o 

z 
o 

(0 

4 

-3 
-3 

z 

<s 

z en 

r— 1 
11. 

-3 

o 

z 
°oo 

<2 

-3 








__^_ ______ 


o •■- 




a31dW\/S iON 


and 2 
coloc 








_."" 


uu 




Z.Z 


00 




—.1 


' o 

CO J3 




^^..^^__^ 


o 




- 


— 




~ 


,_ , __ ,_ ..^ , _^ .__ . . .^, 


•1- c 
4-> OJ 






_ 


to > 




.sr-r:.=.7z^jz.7:^.:: 


4-> la 
OO 3: 




______ _^ 


fO O) 




____ _-3_j^ — 




i 


■z. 




H 


-o 




_ rJLT^^ ^JTJZ 


o r^ 




— ~ -— "T^^.'^.J". ILT*-I1 n^ z 






•I— CTl 
4J r— 






O 
<C S- 









S- JO 
03 O 

^-^ en 

CO 3 «> 

=*»= .E O 




—^ ._ ..^ _ 






STN 3 
STN 8 
STN 20 






— - ■(-> Q. 
CU 




i 
i 

i 


^^ . ~ ^ ^ ^ ^ _ — — - -^ -^ ^ ^ _ ^_ .■ ■• ^ 


(T3 r— S- 
C >, E 






■jrr — .-zjnir.rr-Tur.zL nrmnz-."z.r7j: 






. -_ . _ . _ . ^— .11, ,«^, .^ . _ 


3 1— E 
cC ""D OO 




~ ~ "" "" ^ T^^.H-TLZ.Z^.^Ti^ 




_._."rr_--T::i.T-" 


CM 




.... _ .....^._._ 


CVJ 




"" ~ "~ ~ ™TUT — "" T*.™ ^ ^ ^1 


cn 






II j| 








000 


1 1 


'ol'"' 
o 

n 


1 1 1 qIIMII I I 1 ol'"" ' ' ' 
o '-' 




'1— 



(I+gUJ/#) 33NVaNn9V 



4-49 



In summary, the winter months (December through February) 
represented a period of low zooplankton productivity. Earliest repro- 
ductive response to the onset of spring conditions was typically found 
among the ranking calanoid copepod species (particularly Acartia hud- 
sonica) and barnacles (i.e., Balanus sp (p) . ) . Late spring and early 
summer was a period of particularly intense reproductive activity for 
many benthic invertebrates including barnacles, polychaetes, bivalves 
and gastropods. Production of planktonic larvae continued throughout 
the summer: as indicated by CB sample results smaller-bodied forms 
reached maximum abundances and dominated plankton samples during the 
warmest months of the year (July and August). Among the holoplankters, 
Acartia tonsa usually became dominant during mid- to late summer. In 
autumn, the winter faunal assemblage, consisting of calanoid copepods 
and barnacle larvae, returned to prominence. The New Haven Harbor 
plankton assemblage is consistent in composition and seasonal distri- 
bution with that seen in greater Long Island Sound and nearby harbors. 



lohthijop lankton 

Of the more than 45 ichthyoplankton taxa identified in New 
Haven Harbor from 1974 through 1977 (Appendix Table 4-2) , the dominant 
forms (Table 4-6) were generally similar to those reported from Long 
Island Sound and adjacent waters from 1943 through 1975 (Tables 4-7 and 
4-8) . These dominant species included Anchoa spp. and hahrxd/ Limanda 
eggs, and Anchoa spp. and Ammodytes larvae. Taxa dominant as adults and 
juveniles in seine, trawl, and gill net collections made as part of the 
Harbor Station monitoring program (Section 11.0) and Warfel and Merri- 
man's seine collections (1944), but not important in ichthyoplankton 
collections, included Menidia menidia, Fundulus spp., Brevoortia tyrannus , 
Sphaeroides maculatus , Osmerus mordax , Microgadus tomcod and Alosa spp. 
These predominantly shorezone species largely spawn in areas adjacent to 
the harbor proper (freshwater reaches of the estuary and intertidal 
beaches) which were not sampled for ichthyoplankton; the absence of 
these species in the ichthyoplankton sampled does not indicate inability 
to spawn in the area. 

(Text continued on page 4-53) 



4-50 



TABLE 4-6. NUMERICALLY DOMINANT {>}%) FISH EGGS AND LARVAE COLLECTED 
FROM NEW HAVEN HARBOR FROM 1974 THROUGH 1977. NEW HAVEN 
HARBOR ECOLOGICAL STUDIES SUMMARY REPORT, 1979. 



FISH EGGS 



1974 



1975 



1. Lahr id/ Limanda (97.5) 

2. Anchoa spp. (2.4) 



1. Anchoa spp. (39.9) 

2. Scomber scombrus (28.8) 

3. Labrid/Limanda (26.5) 

4. Unidentified (2.0) 



1976 



1977 



1. Anchoa spp. (51.3) 1. 

2. Labrid/Limarida (28.5) 2. 

3. Urophycis/Enchelyopus/Peprilus 3. 

(8.5) 

4. Scomber scombrus (2-3) 



Anchoa spp. (90.8) 
habrLd/Limanda (4.9) 
Scophthalmus/Paralichthys (1.8) 



FISH LARVAE 



1974 



1975 



1. Anchoa spp. (99.2) 



1976 



1. Anchoa spp. (95.6) 

2. Ammodytes americanus (1.5) 

1977 



1. Anchoa spp. (87.8) 

2. Myoxocephalus (2.9) 

3. Pseudopleuronectes americanus 

(2.8) 

4. Cynoscion regalis (2.3) 

5. Ammodytes americanus (2.0) 



1 . Anchoa spp . (93.1) 

2. Ammodytes americanus (3.1) 

3. Pseudopleuronectes americanus 

(1.5) 



Numbers in parentheses are percent composition 



4-51 



TABLE 4-7. DOMINANT SPECIES OF FISH EGGS REPORTED FROM LONG ISLAND SOUND 
AND ADJACENT WATERS FROM 1943 THROUGH 1975. NEW HAVEN HARBOR 
ECOLOGICAL STUDY SUMMARY REPORT, 1979. 



Merriman and Sclar (1952) 
Block Island Sound, 1943-1946 



Wheatland (1956) 

Long Island Sound, 1952-1954 



1. Cy nose ion regal is 

2. Tautogolabrus adspersus 

3. Peprilus (Poronotus) spp. 

4 . Gadus morhua 

5 . Scomber scombrus 



1. Anchoa mitchilli 

2. Tautoaolabrus adspersus 

3. Brevoortia tyrannus 

4. Enchelyopus ciwbrius 

5 . Scopthalmus (Lophopsetta) 

aquosus 



Richards (1959) 

Long Island Sound, 1954-1955 

1954 



1955 



1. Anchoa mitchilli 

2. Tautogolabrus adspersus 

3. Tautoga onitis 

4. Enchelyopus cimbrius 

5. Scopthalmus (Lophopsetta) 

aquosus 



1. Anchoa mitchilli 

2. Enchelyopus cimbrius 

3. Tautogolabrus adspersus 

4. Tautoga onitis 

5. Stenotomus chrysops 



Herman (1963) 

Narragansett Bay, R.I., 1957 



Pearcy and Richards (1962) 
Mystic River, Conn., 1958-1960 



1. Tautogolabrus adspersus 

2. Tautoga onitis 

3 . Brevoortia tyrannus 

4. Prionotus evolans 

5. Stenotomus chrysops 

6. Scophthalmus aquosus 



1. Labridae 

2. Pseudopleuronectes americanus 



Williams (1968) 
Long Island Sound 



Northeast Utilities (1976) 
Millstone Point, 1971-1975 



1. Enchelyopus cimbrius 

2 . Scophthalmus aquosus 

3. Tautogolabrus adspersus 

4. Anchoa mitchilli 

5. Brevoortia tyrannus 

6. Tautoga onitis 

7. Prionotus spp. 



1 . Lahr id/ Limanda 

2 . Scomber scombrus 

3. Anchoa mitchilli 

4. Brevoortia tyrannus 

5. Prionotus spp. 



4-52 



TABLE 4-8. DOMINANT SPECIES OF FISH LARVAE REPORTED FROM LONG ISLAND 

SOUND AND ADJACENT WATERS FROM 1943 THROUGH 1975. NEW HAVEN 
HARBOR ECOLOGICAL STUDIES SUMMARY REPORT, 1979. 



Merriman and Sclar (1952) 
Block Island Sound, 1943-1946 

1. Cynoscion regalis 

2. Tautogolabrus adspersus 

3. Urophycis spp. 

4. Limanda ferruginea 

5. Myoxocephalus spp. 



Wheatland (1956) 

Long Island Sound, 1952-1954 

1. Anchoa mltchilli 

2. Ammodytes americanus 

3. Brevoortia tyrannus 

4. Pseudopleuronectes americanus 



Richards (1959) 

Long Island Sound, 1954-1955 

1954 



1955 



1. Anchoa mitchilli 1. 

2. Brevoortia tyrannus 2. 

3. Pseudopleuronectes americanus 3. 

4. Cynoscion regalis 4. 

5. Ammodytes americanus 5. 



Ammodytes americanus 
Anchoa mitchilli 
Brevoortia tyrannus 
Pseudopleuronectes americanus 
Tautogolabrus adspersus 



Herman (1963) 
Narragansett Bay, R.I, 



1957 



Pearcy and Richards (1962) 
Mystic River, Conn., 1958-1960 



1. Myoxocephalus spp. 

2. Ammodytes americanus 

3. Tautogolabrus adspersus 

4. Anchoa mitchilli 

5. Menidia menidia 



1 . Pseudopleuronectes americanus 

2. Microgadus tomcod 

3. Myoxocephalus aeneus 

4. Anchoa mitchilli 

5. Pholis gunnellus 



Northeast Utilities (1976) 
Millstone Point, Conn., 1971' 



1975 



1. Engraulidae 

2 . Scomber scombrus 

3. Tautogolabrus adspersus 

4. Tautoga onitis 

5 . Pseudopleuronectes americanus 

6. Scophthalmus aquosus 



4-53 



Anchoa spp. eggs and larvae (representing pooled Engraulidae, 

Anchoa spp., A. mitchilli, and A. hepsetus) were selected for detailed 

discussion because they comprised the most abundant taxon during the 

1974-1977 study period and because they have been historically dominant 

in the area (Tables 4-6, 4-7 and 4-8) . It is assumed that A. mitchilli 

is the predominant species, since the majority of ichthyoplankton and 

fisheries investigations conducted between Sandy Hook, New Jersey, and 

Long Island Sound have failed to collect any A. hepsetus (Warfel and 

Merriman, 1944; Merriman and Sclar, 1952; Wheatland, 1956; Richards, 

1959; Herman, 1963; Croker, 1965) . Bigelow and Schroeder (1953) noted 

* 
that A. hepsetus is most common from Chesapeake Bay south . 

Cynoscion regalis and Pseudopleuronectes awericanus were 
selected because they are important to recreational and commercial 
fisheries in the study area. C. regalis spawns in Long Island Sound 
(Warfel and Merriman, 1944; Wheatland, 1956; Richards, 1959), while 
P. americanus spawns in estuaries (Pearcy, 1962) between Labrador and 
Georgia (Leim and Scott, 1966) . Both species utilize New Haven Harbor 
as a nursery area (Warfel and Merriman, 1944) . 

Labrid/Limarida and Urophycis/Enchelyopus/Peprilus egg types 
were selected because they were relatively abundant and constitute the 
reproductive products of species common to the area (see Section 11.0). 
Labri d/Limanda eggs are morphologically difficult to distinguish (Wheat- 
land, 1956; Merriman and Sclar, 1952) . This group is considered to be 
virtually all Labrid eggs {Tautogolabrus adspersus and/or Tautoga 
onitis) , since adults of both species are locally abundant while Limanda 
ferruginea is relatively rare (see Section 11.0). L. ferruginea spawn- 
ing appears to be concentrated offshore, since no eggs have been iden- 
tified in several previous surveys of Long Island Sound (Wheatland, 
1956; Richards, 1959; Herman, 1963) or Block Island Sound (Merriman and 



* 

Specimens of A. hepsetus have been collected in New Haven Harbor (see 

Section 11.00, in Long Island Sound near Shoreham (a single specimen) 
by Zawacki and Briggs (1976) , and in the Mystic River, Connecticut 
(Pearcy and Richards, 1962), while both eggs and adults have been 
identified from collections near the Millstone Point Nuclear Gener- 
ating Station (Northeast Utilities Service Company, 1976) . 



4-54 



Sclar, 1952) and larvae have generally been rare. The hahr id/ Limanda 
egg type has been common near the Millstone Point Nuclear Generating 
Station; these eggs also appear to be primarily Labrids (Northeast 
Utilities Service Company, 1976) . 

Urophycis/Enchelyopus/Peprilus eggs are also difficult to 
distinguish from one another. Of the three component genera, Peprilus 
triacanthus probably contributes least to this group since spawning is 
apparently concentrated more offshore (Wheatland, 1956; Austin, 1976) , 
although Peprilus eggs have been collected from Millstone Point (North- 
east Utilities Service Company, 1976) and Narragansett Bay (Herman, 
1963) . The majority of this egg type is probably Enchelyopus cimbrius 
since other investigators found them relatively abundant in the Long 
Island Sound Area (Table 4-7) , while Urophycis and Peprilus eggs were 
generally unimportant. 

In New Haven Harbor from 1974 through 1977, total fish egg 
abundance generally peaked during June and July (Table 4-9) when Anchoa 
spp. eggs predominated (Figure 4-23) ; Scomber scombrus eggs, however, 
comprised a major fraction during May 1975. Fish-egg abundance was 
relatively low between August and April of each year (Table 4-9) . 
Generally, fish egg densities were higher at Stations 18 and 20 from 
1974 through 1976, while during 1977 fish eggs were more abundant at 
Stations 8 and 11 (Table 4-9) . Dominant taxa were Labrids (1974-1976) , 
Anchoa spp. (1976, 1977), and S. scombrus (1975) (Table 4-10). Although 
sample collection only occurred monthly and preoperational (prior to 
August 1975) data are limited, seasonality of the dominant taxa did not 
appear to vary much over the four-year study period (Figure 4-23) . 
Inter-year variation of dominants was consistent over all stations 
(Table 4-10) . Inter-year variation in fish-egg abundance (Table 4-9) 
was consistent with the inter-year variability found by other invest- 
igators in the Long Island Sound area and is discussed below. 

Fish larvae were most abundant during July and August of each 
year when Anchoa spp. predominated (Table 4-9; Figure 4-24) . In addition 

(Text continued on page 4-59) 



4-55 



en 
o • 

eC CTi 



> q; 




<c o 




re D- 




LU 




3 q: 




UJ 




^ :^ 




a: 




2: <: 


' 


2: 




Qi 2: 


■^ 


u. rD 





t/O 

LU 00 


1— 
■a: 
1— 


I— LU 


CO 


1—1 




LU Q 



1— t 


_l ZD 


—1 1— 


Q 


00 


:d 





_i 


_l 





LU CC 


X 

UJ 


< 




> 1—1 


l/l 


q: 


z 


< 





—1 —I 


1— 





< 


Q 


1- 


^ LU 


</l 




1 


00 


< 


e3 cQ 




tD d; 


Li_ 


LU et 





n: 


z: 


31 


et 


00 ^ 


LU 


1—1 LU 


s: 


U- > 


■ — ' 


CC 


CO 


—1 -jz 


■z. 


<c 


■=t 


1— 3 


UJ 


LU 


e: 


1— z 


>- 




_i 


Ll_ 


n: 


• 


h- 






2: 


00 CTi 


E .— 





ZD 
LU O 

z re 

< I- 

Q 

CO en 

< .— 



< o 

LU q; 



00 

CD 










1 


UJ 








1 


Q 






1 


> 






1 











1 


z: 






• 1 
V 


1— 









OJ 






















ro 


CO 


00 r- 


D- 








O^ CN 


UJ 











00 










00 





<N fN 


03 


in 


VD 


^ 


=> 


r~ 


rH 


00 >o 


■« 




. 








r-t 


.H 




CO 


OJ 


^ 


—1 


LD 


a^ 


ro CTi 


=) 


^ 


r-H 


rs] LD 


■-3 










CN 




10 '^r 

(-M .H 
iH 






CM 





■z. 


1 


ID 


.H 1X1 


=) 


1 


r^ 


in CO 


■-o 


1 


• 


■ • 






LD 


ro t~~ 






CM 


<-\ ro 






CN 


ro ^ 


>- 


1 


01 


.H rH 




1 


ro 


^ CO 


TT 


1 


• 











ID ID 






CN 








00 


00 01 


q; 


1 


'^ 


rs] (N 


Q- 


1 


CM 


r- 


■< 


1 




ro 






(N 


CO CN 


q: 


1 


(M 


r- 


■a: 


1 





i^ 


s: 


1 










^ 


(N 


CQ 


1 








UJ 


1 








U- 


1 






s: 


r 




1 


■a: 


1 





1 


'^ 


1 




1 




^ 


10 


\o X- 




1^ 


r~ 


r^ (^ 




<yi 


(Ti 


<Ti (T. 




^^ 


r^ 


.H .H 



LU 








-H 


iH 


ro 











1 


UJ 








1 


a 






• 1 






as 


rH 


->■ 




IN 


1 











1 


z 






• 1 




in 


CTi 


rH CD 


h— 








CN 

























ID 


kD 


*X) in 


Q. 


rH 


ro 


rH r-^ 


LU 








rH 


00 










CTI 


00 


ro CO 


CD 


r- 


in 


ro 01 


ZD 


r~ 


CTl 


M' 00 


<: 




> 






•^ 


•H 






in 


>X1 


.H VD 


_i 


r^ 


CO 


01 


ID 


CN 


rsi 


'J 


■-3 


* 


> 








rH 


CO ro 






rH 


CNJ 






CTi 


M' IN 


T^ 


1 


>* 


CO CTI 


=3 


1 


H 


CNi 


^ 


1 




' * 






CN 


01 CO 


>- 


1 


in 


r-\ r^ 


•< 


1 








s: 


1 










CT. 


ro r^ 


d; 


1 


CTI 


rH rH 


D. 


1 


rM 


in 


=t 


1 




rH 






IN 


CD IN 


q: 


1 


^ 


ro r^ 


<Si 


1 





CN rH 


2: 


1 




' ' 






ro 


r- 


DQ 


1 


rH 


ni rH 


LU 


1 








U- 












ID 


r-\ 


■Zi 


r 





1 


=C 


1 


iH 


1 





1 




■ 1 




T 


in 


•s> x~- 




r- 


t^ 


x~- r- 




01 


CT\ 


o\ 01 




.H 


rH 


rH rH 






<: 

LL 
O 

< 

LU 

00 



I— 
c/1 



00 
03 
03 









rH 





CJ 


01 


'J' 


00 <X) 




C5 


ro 


01 -^r 


< 




> 


■ 


1- 


rH 


r- 


rH \S> 


00 






rH rH 


00 


in 





01 CD 




ro 


r~- 


in ro 




^0 


rsj 


^ 


■a: 




• 


< « 


1— 




in 


01 01 


00 






r-A 


_ 




CO 


ro 


, — 


1 


rH 


CTl CM 




1 


T-\ 


ID ■^ 


■a: 


1 


■ 




1— 




in 


rH in 


CO 






IN 


00 


^ 





ru 




CN 


01 


ni CO 


< 


1.0 


ro 


i~- ■* 


\— 


• 






00 




CN 


rH CO 
IN 


CI3 


r- 


■a" 


rH 00 




r-- 





ID 


<: 





^ 


■^ ro 


1— 


> 


* 


• < 


CO 




ro 


CD 


CIO 


■^ 





rH en 




in 


ro 


rH ■a' 


cC 


nj 


ro 


ID ro 


1— 


> 


> 


• 


CO 




rN 


cri 




■cr 


in 


CD I~- 




r- 


(^ 


P- P- 




01 


m 


01 CTI 




^ 


rH 


rH rH 









01 


in 


rH 


CM 


01 


UJ 


in 




ro 


m 


rN 01 


CC 


■ 


. 


. ■ 


1— 


CM 




m Tf 


00 








00 










ro 


m 


i^ ro 




ro 


CO 


IN ro 


< 


01 


m 


ro [^ 


1— 




• 


* > 


00 




rH 


rH 






in 


rH ni 


, — 


1 


in 


CD t^ 




1 


•* 


rH CD 


■a: 


1 




• ■ 


1- 




CN) 


rH IN 


00 








CO 


^0 


■^Ji 


ro 00 




'T 


CD 


rH CN 


< 


ro 


•* 


ro ,-\ 


1- 


■ 




• • 


00 






CN 


CO 


LO 





ro ro 




ro 


a) 


ij [^ 


<; 


^ 


CO 


ro in 


1— 


• 




• • 


00 








ro 


in 


01 


CD 




in 


CM 


r^ in 


< 


T 


[^ 


ro C1J 


H- 


* 


• 


• * 


00 




H 


in 




■q- 


in 


CD (^ 




i^ 


1^ 


r^ [^ 




rri 


oi 


01 01 




rH 


rH 


rH rH 



■a 

ID 
4J 

o 
(1) 



§ 



<Tl 



CO 



4-56 





at 




r^ 




m 


z: 




u. 




=» 


ip« 


<CI— 


3::q: 




o 


3:cL 


UJ 


ijj 


^d; 


2: 


>- 


»— 1 


q; 




ef 


^ 




o 


^ 


( — 1 


n 


1-00 


< 




1— OO 


00 UJ 




1 — 1 


:^Q 


corD 




1— 


^ 


in 


CJ> 




1— t 


_i 


1— < 


1 — 1 


<LJ 


oo 


1 — 1 


o e3 


a. o 


s: 


_i 


o o 


o 


o 




LU 


1— 




s: 


Qi 


LU O 


o 


m 


q: d; 


LlJ 


■=r 


a. 


31 


Q 


2: 


s 


LU 


cC > 




< 


M 


n: 


LlJ 




■< 3 


> 


LU 


a: 


:z 


■=c 




_j 




Q 


t^ 


■zi 


r^ 


<c en 




i^ 


oo 




C3 


nr 


o 





LU 


— ) 







n: 


Qi 


oo 


nr 


l-H 


1- 


U- 






«=^ 


^— ^ 


r^ 


Jfii 


en 


o 


r— 


CM 




A 


s: 


^--' 







m 


1— 


U- 


:z 




cC q: 


z o 


1 — 1 


CQ 


■z. oc 


o< 


Q 


nz 



00 



I 



03 



00 

C3 

























r~- 


LD -^ 


CM (Ti 


CM 




ro 


rvi 


ro 


en 




if) 


ro (T^ 


n '^ 


r^ 




cn 





CM 


en 




en 


^ ro 


in ro 


r- 




en 


en 


<n 


en 





~^ 


»— v_ 


-^ ^^ 


— 




^^ 











CNJ 




M 


















TJ 


OJ Qj 


fC T! 


fC 




m 


It! 


UJ 


V 




■rH 


■a 


-H 





















U 


j:; e 


-q u 


^ 




j:; 


-q 


•q 


^ 




■s 





^ 


CJ 


















q 


q fo 


q 




q 


q 


q 


q 




1^ 


KC CO 


KC .J 


-^ 




-^ 


-^ 


KC 


f^ 




.-^ 


--^ --^ 


,-v ,-N 


^-^ 


.,-^ 


,-^ 


^^ 


,^ 




Ol 


in ^D 


ro n 







ID 


ro 


ro 


r- 




\0 


in in 


CM 


CO 




00 


■sf 


CM 







<J\ 


LO CM 


VI) ro 


CT^ 




en 


en 


r- 


CO 


CO 


•-^ 


w- _- 


^- — 


-^ 




^_, 


_. 


_ 





^— 






















TS 


la 'd 


ICJ Tl 


<TJ 




fO 


m 


tj 


fa 




■rH 


-H 


-H 





















u 


^ !h 


^ )-l 


-q 




■q 


^ 


■q 


-q 




^ 


H^ 


q "S 




q 






q 



q 



q 


CJ 

q 




y^ 


f5: J 


-^ hi 


-=1: 




-=1; 


■^ 


^=5: 


1^ 






.-^ .^^ 


--, ^--, 


„,_^ 




^_^ 


^^ 


^^ 






n 


CO r-{ 


^ 






■nT 


CM 


ro 






in 


kO in 


ro 






CO 


<-{ 


rH 




1 


"d" n 


^ ro 


CTi 






en 


en 


en 


, 




■^ --^ 


^- ._. 


^^ 




, 


v_ 


_ 


^ 


r— 


1 










1 












H3 T3 


Tl tj 


fC 






(0 


•a 


t! 






-H 


■H 






















-P ^ 


U rd 


-q 






■q 


j:? 


■q 






^ 


^a 


U 









CJ 


CJ 






q (« 


q 






q 


q 


q 






-=5 Hi 


hi Kq 


-=1: 






-^ 


-=1: 


-^ 




.,-^ 


--- --V --, 


.— > ^-v 


,_^ 


^^ 


^ ^ 


^^ 


,__ 







in ^ ro 


I^ CM 


en 







r\! 


H 


■^ 







H r- ro 


in -^ 


ro 




0* 





H 


en 







ro (N og 


in ^ 


<y\ 







en 


t-~ 


CO 




.-1 










r-{ 








00 


^ 


"m "" 


' ' 


""' 




"^-' 


' 


— ' 


*■ — 




X! 


tj qj 'd 


ti Ti 


la 




(C 


(t! 


IS 


nj 




-H 


.Q -H 


-rH 





















i^ 


^ S ^J 


-? ^ 


^ 




^ 


^ 


^ 


-q 




^ 


0^ 


^-s 



q 





q 




q 




q 



q 




J 


KC to 1-1 


r^ h^ 


^ 




^ 


-^ 


■^ 


^=1; 




_ 


, , ^_^ 


,_^ 


,^ 


^^ 


,_^ 


__^ 


_^ 




• 


■^ tM 


cn 


'X) 




■sf 


00 


00 


S' 




CO 


iH CTl 


r~- 


m 




en 


in 


rH 


r^ 




CTi 


in CM 


CO 


en 




en 


en 


en 


CO 


10 


— 


'" X 


^ 


^ 




-- 


— 


— 


— 




T3 


'0 QJ 


13 


•a 




la 


(t! 


m 


(C 




-H 




■H 





















S-1 


M 


-q 




x; 


■q 


-q 


-q 




^ 


^ 8 


-§ 



q 






q 




q 



q 


q 




i-^I 


a CO 


i-:i 


f^ 




-^ 


f^: 


r: 


1=5: 




,-^ 


^--. — , ,-> 


^~. ,— 


,— ^ 


^_^ 


^_^ 


^_^ 


^_^ 




r~ 


■^ (N rH 


r^ CO 


CX) 




ro 


c-l 





en 




<n 


(N CM CM 


en 


VD 




en 


CO 


^ 


r- 




0^ 


po ro n 


in CM 


CO 




en 


en 


r-- 


en 


CO 


~— 


Is 


-' — ' 


— 




-- 


-- 


— 


— 




-o 


Q) T3 H! 


T3 (C 


IB 




m 


(Q 


H3 


IT! 




-H 


^ -H 


■rH 





















M 


S 5-1 -q 


M J5 


•q 




^ 


■q 


j:; 


x; 




^ 


^ q 


rd q 




q 





q 



q 




q 



q 




J 


CO 1^ Kq 


hi r: 


-=5 




■^C 


f^: 


■^ 


1^ 


CSl 


^ 


in 


VD 


1^ 




'^ 


in 


eC 


i^ 


< 


r- 


(^ 


r~ 


r- 


LU 


r~- 


[^ 


t^ 


i^ 


LU 


en 


(Ti 


(7> 


en 


<C 


en 


en 


en 


en 


>- 


H 


rH 


i-H 


i-i 


> 
< 


iH 


H 


H 


rH 



ei) 
H 

CO 

o 

2; 



O 
-H 
■P 
•rH 

to 
o 

O 
O 

■P 
C 

eu 
o 

ei) 
CM 



4-57 



100- 



90 



80- 



70- 



E 60- 



to 

o 

o 

C_3 






50- 



40- 



30- 



20- 



10- 



i 



ANCHOA SPP. 



I ll\BRld/LIMANDA 

^ UROPHYCIS/ENCHELYOPUS 

» PARALICHTHYS/ 
» SCOPHTHALMUS 



li 

ill 



i 



II 



I 

I 



I 



I 



1 






i 



I 
m 



i 



1 

III 









I 



si 



I 



I 



I 

i 



m 



I 
I 

I 
I 

I 
II 



II 



I 
I 



ll 



1 



1 



I 









J 



JFMAMJJASONDJFMAMJJASON 

1974 1975 



DJFMAMJJASONDJ 

1976 



FMAMJJASO 

1977 



Figure 4-23. 



Overall percent composition of fish eggs of selected species 
in New Haven Harbor during each sampling period from 1974 
through 1977. New Haven Harbor Ecological Studies Summary 
Report, 1979. 



4-5E 



I 



ABCEOA SP. 



I AMMODYTES AMERICANUS 
^ PSEUDOPLEURONECTES AM. 
I CLUPEA HARENGUS 
|j SCOPHTEALMUS AQUOSUS 



100-1 



90- 



00 

o 

a. 

s: 
o 
o 



80 



70- 



60- 



50 



o 

§ 40- 



30- 



20- 



10- 



J F M A 



\ 



Jf 

I 



■ 



— ■■■■ 1 ;^?^!^^'^-l 

MJJASONDJFMAMJJA 

1974 1975 



1 CYNOSCION REGALIS 

2 PARALICHTHYS DENTATUS 

3 TAUTOGOLABRUS ADSPERSUS 

4 SCOMBER SCOMBRUS 



I 

2 Is 

m 



1 






I 






I 

I 

I 



I 
I 

I 



I 



IIM 



SONDJFMAMJJASONDJ 

1976 



FMAMJJASO 

1977 



Figure 4-24. Overall percent composition of fish larvae of selected 
species in New Haven Harbor during each sampling period 
from 1974 through 1977. New Haven Harbor Ecological 
Studies Summary Report, 1979. 



4-59 



to Anchoa spp., AnimorJytcs americanus (February-April) and Pseudopleuro- 
nectes americanus (A])ril-May) larvae were seasonal dominants (Figure 4- 
24) . Fish larval densities were most often highest at Station 20, and 
to a lesser extent, Stations 11 and 3, and least abundant at Station 6 
(Table 4-9) . Anchoa spp. larvae accounted for 71 to 100% of the larvae 
collected at a given station during any sampling year (Table 4-10) . 
Larval abundance changed little between pre- and post-operational 
sampling dates (Table 4-9) . 

General seasonal comparisons of total egg and larval abundance 
may be made between recent data from New Haven Harbor and that presented 
by Richards (1959) for Station 1 near Milford, Connecticut for the years 
1952 through 1955. Differences in sampling gear (Richards used a 12.5- 
cm Clarke-Biompus sampler with 570ijm and 366ym mesh nets) and station 
location limit the conclusions, but comparison of general abundance 
levels is instructive. As shown in Table 4-11, seasonality was quite 
similar and abundances were generally within an order of magnitude; 
dominant taxa were also similar (Tables 4-6, 4-7 and 4-8) . On the other 
hand, comparison with Millstone Point data (Battelle, 1977) showed that 
egg and larval densities in New Haven Harbor (daytime collections) were 
up to several orders of magnitude less than at Millstone where nighttime 
oblique hauls with 333vim mesh nets (61 cm diameter) were made. Such 
differences probably reflect day-night differences due to avoidance and 
vertical migration (Clutter and Anraku, 1968) more than differences in 
gear type. 



Selected Species 

Anchoa sp. 

Anchoa mitchilli eggs have been present in Long Island Sound 
from June through August at water temperatures ranging between 13.3- 
24. 4C and salinities of 19.3-27.9 ppt (Herman, 1963; Wheatland, 1956). 
Both eggs and larvae are more abundant inshore (<20m) (Herman, 1963; 
Richards, 1959; Wheatland, 1956), with eggs more abundant at the surface 



4-60 



TABLE 4-11. COMPARISON OF ICHTHYOPLANKTON ABUNDANCE {#/n?) AT RICHARDS' 
(1959) STATION 1, 1952 THROUGH 1955 TO THE AVERAGE^ OF NEW 
HAVEN HARBOR STATIONS FROM 1974 THROUGH 1977. NEW HAVEN 
HARBOR ECOLOGICAL STUDIES SUMMARY REPORT, 1979. 





WINTER 


SPRING 


SUMMER 


FALL 




(DEC-FEB) 


(MAR-MAY) 


(JUN-AUG) 


(SEP-NOV) 


FISH EGGS 










STATION 1 










1952 




1.45 


47.36 


0.59 


1953 


0.00 


1.01 


3.66 


0.00 


1954 


0.00 


1.38 


18.25 


0.00 


1955 


0.00 


1.67 


48.50 


0.03 


NEW HAVEN HARBOR 










1974 








1.61 


<0,01 


1975 


<0.01 


6.89 


9.04 


<0.01 


1976 


0.00 


3.47 


13.52 


0.03 


1977 


<0.01 


2.52 


51.02 


0.02 


FISH LARVAE 










STATION 1 










1952 





0.23 


1.45 


2.46 


1953 


0.07 


0.06 


0.20 


0.48 


1954 


0.24 


0.04 


1.32 


0.24 


1955 


0.19 


0.17 


3.06 


0.14 


NEW HAVEN HARBOR 










1974 








2.53 


0.01 


1975 


0.04 


0.12 


4.46 


0.02 


1976 


0.01 


0.26 


2.87 


0.04 


1977 


0.01 


0.42 


8.20 


0.02 



Mean of all stations and tides 
= No sample 



4-61 



(Williams, 1968) and larvae more abundant near the bottom (Pearcy and 
Richards, 1962) . No ecological information is available on spawning of 
A. hepsetus in the Long Island Sound area. 

Anchoa spp. eggs (Figure 4-25) were generally present in New 
Haven Harbor from May through August with a June/ July peak. During 1975 
and 1976 most were collected at Stations 18 and 20, while in 1977 more 
were collected at Stations 8, 11, 18 and 20; lowest densities were 
generally found at Station 6. During 1974, Anchoa spp. egg density was 
too low to describe a spatial pattern. Mean abundance over equivalent 
time periods (May through October) increased each year with the 1977 
mean approximately seven times that of the 1975 mean. Richards (1959) 
also reported marked fluctuations (2100% increase) in A. mitchilli eggs 
at her Long Island Sound Station 1 between 1952 and 1953. This increase 
was postulated to be related to food supply (i.e., suitable zooplankton) ; 
no such relationship was evident with New Haven Harbor zooplankton. 
Mean egg densities during 1952 and 1953 (Wheatland, 1956) were similar 
(11.04 and 1.48/m , respectively) to densities observed in New Haven 
Harbor from 1974 through 1977, although August densities in 1952 and 
1953 were markedly higher than August densities observed in New Haven 
Harbor from 1974 through 1977. During June and July from 1974 through 
1977, variation in abundance between years for each station in New Haven 
Harbor was generally similar (Figure 4-25) . 

Anchoa spp. larvae (Figure 4-2 5) were generally present from 
June through September with maximum abundance occurring during either 
July (1975 through 1977) or August (1974) . Distribution within the 
harbor did not indicate a marked affinity for any particular station; 
lowest numbers, however, usually occurred at Stations 5 and 8. Annual 
mean abundance was generally similar from 1974 through 1976, with an 
increase noted during 1977. Wheatland's (1956) mean densities of 

A. mitchilli lairvae in Long Island Sound for June through December in 

3 

1952 and 1953 (0.84 and 0.24/m , respectively) were somewhat less than 

the densities observed in New Haven Harbor during this study. Such 
differences may of course reflect differences in sampling gear as noted 



4-62 



-CP- 



-<'•- 



00 












z 












o 












*—* 
j — 






1— 1 


00 


o 


ea; 


ro 


y3 00 


.— 1 


I— 1 


cvj 


1— 












to 


<] 


o • 


< 


G 


■ 



-09 — <- 



Di<- 



-<o- 



-D- 



-<-•- 



-^•— n- 



-o- 



^a- 



-cKi-a 



n- 



1 1 1 I I I — I — I — r 



1 1 1 I I I — I — I — r 



1 1 1 I I I 



T — r 



I M M I I — I r 



•«■ — CXJ- 



0)01 
Olfv- 



_^_». 



-<a- 



D-««-»<l— O- 



-40- 



■D- 



-<3—0- 



I I I M I I I 



I I I I I I 1 



en 



CD 



in 

CTl 



en 






cri 



LD 



en 



en 



en 



ir> 

en 



en 






U3 

en 



in 
en 






:3 



=3 
'"3 






a. 

CO 



CD 



CO 



Q. 

8 



■ ^ 




en 


r^ 




r-^ 


r^ 




(T> 


o-i 






1 — 








«d- 


n 


-S= 


^ 


4-> 


en en 


S- 


n 


1 — 


o 


o 




CL 


S- 


+-) 


<u 


x: 


10 


q; 


+-> 


3 






en 


>, 


ui 


3 


s- 


i~~ 


er 


tO 


oi 






r— 


•o 


^ 




c 


3 


<D 


to CO 


c 






3 


>, 


t/) 


■"D 




0) 




3 


•r- 


CD 


T 


-a 


e 




3 




CT)+-> 


s- 


C 


C>0 


3 


•1— 




"O 


S- 


r— 




3 


CO 




-o 


O 


1/1 


^— ^ 


•r— 


en 




O) 


O) 


cu 


o 


a> 


(0 






> 


o 


• 


s- 


o 


Q. 


(O 


LU 


Q. 


1 — 




(/I 




t. 




■a 


o 


« 


C JQ 


O 


(O 


&- 


rS* 




(0 


ir^ 


^^^ 


3: 


s' 


r>. 




•^ 


i^ 


c 




en 


(U 


4- 


^— 


> 


O 




ta 




x: 


3: 


C 


O) 




o 


:3 


5 


•r- 


o 


at 


+J 


s- s: 


(Ti 


x: 




+J 


+-> 




LO 




• 




•=* 


^^ 


>>r-~ 


r--. 


J3 


en 


r^ 




1^ 


en 


Ol 




r— 


o 


>, 




c 




£ 


n3 


:3 


cn 


-a 


■-D 


3 


c: 




O 


3 T3 


s- 


^ 


c 


^ 


< 


(O 


-p 


Ln 






CM 






■* 






0) 






S- 






3 






CT 







o 
o 



M y3d sy3awnN 



o 
o 



4-63 



above, but may also be due to the preference for inshore areas by ancho- 
vies {Wheatland, 1956; Herman, 1963) . 

May through December larvae: egg ratios for 1975 through 1977 

(1:1.56, 1:3.87 and 1:5.31, respectively) are comparable with the 1:5.5 
ratio calculated by Wheatland (1956) for 1953; the 1952 ratio (1:14.4) 
may have reflected sampling errors as well as increased mortality 

(Wheatland, 1956) . Thus, it appears that egg mortality estimates from 

New Haven Harbor are fairly consistent with data from two decades earlier. 



Pseudopteuponeates ameTvoanus 

Winter flounder, Pseudopleuronectes americanus , spawn in upper 
reaches of estuaries at salinities from 3.2 to 29.5 ppt. Eggs and early 
larval stages are nondispersive, remaining near the areas in which they 
were spawned. In the Long Island Sound area, spawning commences in 
December, peaks in March and then declines (Wheatland, 1956; Pearcy, 
1962; Herman, 1963) . In New Haven Harbor, P. americanus larvae were 
present from March through June in 1975 and 1976 and from April through 
July in 1977 (Figure 4-26) . Peak densities occurred during May (1975) 
and April (1976 and 1977) ; the 1974 program did not cover the appropri- 
ate time period to contribute information about P. americanus larval 
distribution (Table 4-12) . April and/or May maxima have also been 
observed in Long Island Sound by Battelle (1977) and Wheatland (1956) 
(Table 4-12) , while Pearcy (1962) found maximum larval densities during 
March and April 1959 in the Mystic River. Such differences in timing of 
maximum densities reflect tidal action removing larvae from the estu- 
aries (Wheatland, 1956) . Warfel and Merriman (1944) believed that the 
Morris Cove area of New Haven Harbor (sampled with 30-foot seine) was an 
important nursery area. 

Monthly concentrations of winter flounder larvae in New Haven 
Harbor from 1974 through 1977 were generally lower than those found by 
Pearcy (1962) in the Mystic River, as well as by Battelle (1977) near 
Millstone Point in 1976 and in Long Island Sound in 1954 and 1955 were 



4-64 



m o* 4 — □- 



K— ^- 



1 1 I I I — I — I r 



1 1 11 I I — r 



1 1 I I I I — I — r 



I I I — I — I r 



en 






IT) 
CTl 



O 

o 



o 
o 



•o-^-n- 



(/5 

o 



r-H CX) O 

CO 1X> 00 >— ' >— I CVJ 

<] ,0 • ^ D ■ 



<-m- 



-a- 



-« 



■<—• ^-•— ■- 



© 



-o<- 



-#-0 D— <- 



I I I I I I — I — r 



I M I I I — I — I 1 1 I I I I I — I — r 



1 1 I I I I 1 I r 






vo 



IX) 
Ol 



>- 






(T> Q. 



LO 

Ol 



■a: 



^^ 
'=1: 

I 





en >, 


en 


c: £- 


c 


•r- n3 


■r- 


S- E 


S- 


3 E 


rs -0 3 


-a 


LO 




QJ 1/1 


CD 


fO 0) 


(D 


> -^ 


> 


s- -o 


i- 


<a 3 


n3 


1— +J 




t/O 




to 


CO 


•^ >— 


Sf 


r~i to 




« 


^ 


(S)--- 


1;^ 


!» CD 


•^ 


?^ 



g o 
o o 

o 

CO s- 
o o 

n3 



CO 

S 3: 
o -a 
%, c a 
S to cu 

Qi) > 

r-J - — . fO 

"Xj Ol S 
S ■— OJ 

CO -c 
Rj O) 



4- 

o 



O 
•r- IT) 

(O Ol 



en 

13 

JD ^ ■(-> 



CO 



0-1 



o) -a ^ "^ 

E res 01 " 
n3 I— -t-) 
-O ■— S- 

C -I- >i O 
3 S- .— Q- 
X5 Q. =3 0) 

<: <: --s Qi 



CM 






o 
o 



o 
o 



M y3d syaaunN 



4-65 



cc 






■z. o 






t-\ CL. 






LU 






LU cc 






< 






> >- 






a: cc 






<<C 






-js: 






s 






-^ro 






Co 00 






fci 






fe; t>0 


OO 




^ UJ 


■z. 




G — 


cc 




HQ 


UJ 




cc; => 


s. 




^^- 






s </> 


z 




■=t: 


o 




_i 


1—1 




co< 


1- 




Cq O 


cC 




E~ii-> 


1- 




O CD 


to 




Pqo 






^ _i 






oo 






cc; o 






Sui 






fe! 






1-q CC 






R^O 






O CO 






Ci cc 






t:i< 






fqa: 










^UJ 






>• 






cc<^ 






ui 3: 


^— ^ 




o 


1— 




z s 






=) UJ 






o -z. 


■z. 




_1 


o 




Ll_ 


1—1 




• 


1— 




cc 00 


<c 




Lij q; 


1— 




1- UJ 


00 




•z. l- 






!-.< 


CJ3 




33 


■z. 

1 — 1 




U. t- 


Q 




O Z 


ZD 




UJ 


_J 




'--O 


O 




CO ct 


X 




E rs 


UJ 




^Q 






=*=< 






^.— ^ 


CO 




Q 


•z. 




UJ -z. 


cC 




o< 


UJ 




z 


•z. 




< q: 






oo 


•>- 




z CO 


1 


q: 


=> cc: 


:e 


o 


CQ < 


h- 


CQ 


< 31 


■z 


o: 




o 


•a: 




s: 


3: 


CM 




z 


1 




UJ 

> 


^ 






UJ 






—I 




3 


CQ 




UJ 


< 




z 








<y\ 


t-~ 


<n 










r-\ 


in 


o 








rH 





CM 


• 


• 


• 


• 





















rH 


CTi 


^ 










in 


in 


CO 














r^ 


• 


« 


• 


• 























ro 


in 






H 


vo 





^- 










r-l 


r^ 




• 


• 


• 




















ID 


r-i 


(Ti 










in 


r- 


00 











<-\ 







G 













<NJ 





in 










iH 





U3 
















• 


• 


• 


• 





















cn 


CNJ 


IN 










IN 


r~ 


CO 







• 










CD 






















H 


_J 














Z3 














rD 


• 


• 


• 


• 




















nH 


H 


ro 


2: 


1 








r^J 


ra 


1 











■-3 


1 


• 


■ 


• 










V 









LT) 


<Ti 


■nJ- 


>- 


1 


r-K 





in 


cc 


1 











S 




> 


• 


• 






















00 


ro 


d; 


1 


iH 


ro 


<n 


Q. 


1 





CN 


rsi 


cC 




■ 


• 


■ 



















H 


CN 





CC 


1 





H 





g 


1 




• 


















d 


q: 


"^ 


IT) 


\o 


r- 


<c 


r~ 


C^ 


T- 


r^ 


UJ 


Ol 


tyi 


(yv 


tn 


>- 


i-H 


rH 


<-\ 


iH 



o 

CJ 



o 

D- 



00 



o 
o 
o 



o 
o 



o 



00 
ro 



O 



^D 
cn 



CM 



o 

■z. 

< 

_J 

00 

I— I 

CD 

■z. 
o 



























H 











• 


• 











ro 


rH 











^ 


r- 






















CN 














CN 


fO 


in 


in 


0^ 


CT^ 


rH 


T-\ 



r- 






en 






H 






^— ' 






0) 






H 






rH 






OJ 


^~, 




4-) 


VD 




+J 


in 




(rt 


<yi 




PQ 


rH 




^ 






r^ 


T! 




1 


fi 


<U 


h 


itJ 


rH 




rH 


a 


OJ 


4-1 




rH 


itJ 


Tj 




OJ 





6 


e 







C) 


II 


M 


!h 




h 


h 


1 



4-66 



generally greater than those in Long Island Sound during 1952 and 1953 
(Table 4-12) . It must be reiterated that such comparisons are limited 
by differences in gear, gear deployment, and study design, which may 
either mask or exaggerate naturally-occurring differences such as those 
due to differences in year-class strength. Generally, however, for the 
years compared, densities of P. americanus larvae in New Haven Harbor 
were lower than those found in the Mystic River and near Millstone Point 
(night collections) and those in Long Island Sound. Mean abundances 
were generally greatest at Stations 8, 20 and 11 and lowest at Station 
6; similar densities were observed during 1976 and 1977 (Table 4-12) . 
Mean abundance at Station 8 (March through July) underwent the greatest 
increase between 1975 and 1976 (850%) and 1976-1977 (350%) . 



Cynosaion vegalis 

Weakfish, Cynoscion regalis , are siimmer migrants in the Long 
Island Sound area (Bigelow and Schroeder, 1953) . Although several 
studies have described spawning activities north of Chesapeake Bay (cf. 
Merriner, 1976) , Harmic (1958, cited in Merriner, 1976) hypothesized 
that northern spawning is probably not sufficient to maintain northern 
populations, with recruitment to these areas dependent upon fish (age 
III+) spawned in more southern waters. 

Weakfish larvae are present in Long Island Sound waters 
between June and September (Merriman and Sclar, 1952; Wheatland, 1956; 
Richards, 1959; Herman, 1963; Battelle, 1977) and have been most abun- 
dant during July (Table 4-13) . Larval densities in New Haven Harbor 
during July have generally been one to two orders of magnitude greater 
than those reported from Millstone Point in 1976 (Battelle, 1977) and an 
order of magnitude greater than those from Long Island Sound proper in 
1952 and 1953 (Wheatland, 1956) (Table 4-13). Within New Haven Harbor, 
fewest larvae have been collected at Stations 6 and 18, while greatest 
concentrations have occurred at the two stations furthest apart. Stations 
3 and 20; no explanation is available for this pattern (Figure 4-26) . 



4-67 



TABLE 4-13. ABUNDANCE (#/m ) OF WEAKFISH {CYWSCION REGALIS) LARVAE 

IN NEW HAVEN HARBOR AND ADJACENT WATERS. NEW HAVEN HARBOR 
ECOLOGICAL STUDIES SUMMARY REPORT, 1979. 



MONTHLY MEANS 
(EXCLUDING STATION 11) 

NEW HAVEN HARBOR 



STATION MEANS 





JUN 


JUL 


AUG 


3 


6 


8 


11 


18 


20 


1974 





























1975 


.004 


.034 


.007 


.003 





.055 


.007 


.011 


.007 


1976 


.001 


.208 





.142 


.001 


.030 


.099 


<.001 


.113 


1977 


<.001 


.175 





.100 


.042 


.036 


.015 


.007 


.107 



MILLSTONE POINT, CONNECTICUT 



1976 


.002 .005 





LONG ISLAND SOUND^ 


1952 
1953 


.08 
.05 







From Table F-7, Battelle (197Q) 



From . Wheatland (1956) 
= No sample 



4-68 



Inter-year differences in abundance have been noted. While no 
weakfish larvae were collected during 1974 and only low numbers during 
1975, levels during 1976 and 1977 were similar to each other and markedly 
greater than 1975 (Table 4-13). C. regalis has a history of variable 
spawning success (Austin, 1976) indicating that such fluctuations may be 
intrinsic to the biology of the species. No consistent pattern of 
inter-year variation by station was observed, although abundance at 
Stations 3, 11 and 20 increased through 1976 and then decreased during 
1977 (Figure 4-26) . 



Labvid eggs 

Labrid eggs were present in New Haven Harbor ichthyoplankton 
collections from May through September from 1975 through 1977, with low 
densities also reported during March 1975 and in October of 1975 and 
1977. Peak abundance of Labrid eggs occurred during June and July both 
in New Haven Harbor and in other areas of Long Island Sound (Table 4- 
14). This temporal distribution was similar to Herman's (1963) and 
Richards' (1959) data for cunner {Tautogolabrus adspersus) in Long 
Island Sound. Battelle (1977) reported Labrid/Limanda eggs in the 
Millstone Point area between January and November. Since spawning of 
yellowtail flounder {Limanda ferruginea) commences in March (Smith et 
al., 1978), there is a possibility that some of the eggs collected near 
Millstone Point were L. ferruginea. 

More Labrid eggs were collected at Station 20 during 1974, 
1976 and 1977 although similar mean concentrations occurred at Stations 
11, 20 and 8 during 1975; Station 6 generally had the fewest eggs (Table 
4-14). Mean egg-density was relatively low during 1975, increased 
approximately by a factor of five in 1976 and then decreased by about 
one-half (50%) in 1977. These trends were generally consistent at all 
stations, with a marked increase noted at four stations between 1975 and 
1976 and a decrease at three stations between 1976. and 1977 (Figure 4- 
27) . 



4-69 



CO 



< 

OO 



1— 
OO 

CD 



CJ 
X 

LU 






q; o 
o ^ 





r- 


a^ 


iX) in 




(N 


<y\ 


^ (Ti 


o 


ro 


LO 


H CO 


C\J 


• 


■ 


• ■ 




■H 




VO fM 




CO 


n 


CO VD 




•* 


n 


(Tl rH 


03 


r- 


'd" 


r- r- 


'~ 


" 


* 


<-< 






o 


o in 




1 


H 


in '^ 


1 — 


1 


^ 


rH l£) 


' 


1 


' 


rH 




vX) 


r- 


O (>) 




■— 1 


^ 


a> H 


CO 


O 


in 


o o 




.H 




PO .H 




rW 


CO 


■^ in 


^D 


n 


CM 


O rH 




o 


CN 


li) rn 




o 


O 


CN CM 


CO 


ro 


00 


ro CTi 




PO 


^ 


in ro 






,— 1 


ro 


h- 




o 


O 


o 


O 


o 


O O 


o 




V 




D. 


.-1 


r- 


a> CO 


Ul 


O 


o 


00 <N 


00 


O 


o 


o o 




(y\ 


ro 


o -^ 


o 


o 


fH 


CO o 


ZD 


^ 


rvi 


o \a 


< 


■ 


• 


• 






.-i 


^ 




(M 


■^ 


r- •* 


_l 


LO 


^ 


(N ro 


ro 


.-1 


^ 


■* 00 


•-o 


■ 


■ 


• ■ 




OJ 




ro rH 






■* 


CO rH 


^ 


1 


^ 


rH ,-i 


=1 


1 


[^ 


^^^ o 


"-D 


1 


• 


• • 






rH 


CO in 






CTi 


CM CO 


>- 


1 


r~ 


in ^ 


c:^ 


1 


in 


o o 


^ 




■ 


ro ,-\ 


q; 


1 






Q- 


1 


o 


o o 


<c 


1 






Cd 


i 


t^ 




<c 


1 


o 


o o 


'gr 


1 


o 






'J- 


in 


\D r~- 




r^ 


i^ 


r- r^ 




<T\ 


a^ 


<y\ cr> 




r-A 


rH 


:-i r-\ 



CJ 
LU 



O 



o 

LlJ 

o 
I— 

OO 



h- 


r^ <g< 


t_) 


og o 


o 


o o 




^ r-i 


Q- 


O ro 


LU 


r^ ro 


OO 


• • 




rH 




r- r^ 


CJ 


ro r- 


r: 


rH O 


<C 






>* CTi 




VD 




■* 'a- 




in CO 


_l 


in "* 


^ 


• • 


r3 


00 o 




in o 




ID r- 




ro 




o 


z 


in ro 


ZD 


• • 


•-^ 


•H ro 




ID ^ 




O ■=}• 




r\l 




>* ID 




•=1' CN 


>- 


r\l w 


■cC 


• • 


s: 


CO r- 




"* en 




t-{ 




CD 


d: 


ro 


Q_ 


o r- 


< 






rH 


d: 


H 


< 


O !^ 




■sC 


q; 


ro ■sf 


<: 


r- r^ 


LU 


a^ CT> 


>- 


r^ rH 



CVJ 



O 
OO 



_J 

OO 

o 



h- 


in 


o 





o 




Q. 


en 


LU 





00 




CD 


ID rH 


rD 


rH rH 


< 


• • 




r^j 


_j 


CO 00 


rD 


00 r- 


■-3 


■ • 




rH ,->. 


■z. 


■^ r^ 


ZD 


rH a\ 


■-^ 


• • 




ro r~- 


>- 


00 


<: 


r^g ro 


^ 


■ • 




rH ^ 


Di 




Q_ 





<C 




d; 




■< 





2: 




ct: 


rsi ro 


<C 


in in 


LU 


0^ CTi 


>- 


r-\ r-\ 



0) 

ft 

-M 

'a 

It! 

s 

1^ 
\ 

•H 

^J 
(d 

1^ 

-d 
C 

(0 

0) 

nj 

■H 
U 
XI 

cd 

ij 

m 
0) 
■d 

H 

u 

•H 






a) 


^—^ 




4-1 


ID 




■P 


in 




Hi 


CTi 




PQ 


rH 




>. 






r- 


Ti 




1 


c 


0) 


Uh 


td 


rH 




H 


a 


(U 


+J 


e 


rH 


(d 


ITt 


X! 


(D 


OT 


(0 

EH 







b 


g 




C) 





II 


M 


!h 




Uh 


h 


1 



4-Vl) 



• ■4<3 — D— B-O- 



2 ro ^ 00 



03 o 



<] o 



< a 



D — ■ — m-M—< — o- 



•— o — o I 









in 
cri 



<• •4B— □ — O- 



-D H- 



o-m o- 



{Mil I — r 

O 
O 



1 I I I I — T" 

o 



T 1 1 I I I I — I 1 1 1 1 M I I I 1 1 I 






kO 1— 1 
CTi Q_ 



Lf) 

en 



o 
o 



-«— CM- 



■•-O <- 



•40 — n ■•-<>- 



Mill I — I [ T 



{MM I — I — I 1 1 M I I I — I — I r 



o 
o 



o 
o 



,w y3d sy3awnN 






r«. CIS 



Q 

CTl 13 CO 
,-1 '^ «C 



LO 

I — 



CO 


€% 


S 4-> 


r-^ 


s- 


•v^ 


o 


V:h 


o. 


Cu cu 


a 


q: 


\. >> 


to 


s^ 


3 


tC 


Cue 


Ci 


t 


Si 


:3 


v-~i 


t/) 


W 




^ 


CO 


V^ 


OJ 


S" 


■r— 


Ul 


TO 


•-S 


3 


CO 


+-> 


•r^ 


CjO 


O 




^\^ 


r— 


rs: 


(O 


fXO 


Oi 


•1 — 


>^ 


CD 


ICD 


O 




r— 


«^ 


o 


^ s 


o 


CD 


LU 


E 




:3 


s- 


■"D 


o 




JD 


cn 


£- 


cz 


(T3 


■1 — 


in 


s- 




:3 


c 


■o 


<u 


V ^ 


> 




(13 


CO 


m 


cn 




cn 3 


Q) 


cu 




z: 


-o 




•1 — 




S- 


• 


-Q 


* — % 


rtS 


>> 


_J 


CO 










4- 




O 


T3 




C 


c: 


(0 


o 




•1 — 


1— 


+J 


•r— 


(O 


S- 


+-> 


o. 


CO <: 


>. 


cn 


XI 


c: 




•1 — 


cu 


s- 


u 


13 


d 


-a 


m 


^— ' 


-o 




c 


CO 


13 


cn 


jO 


C71 


<C 


cu 


r-~ 




CM 




"^ 




0) 




s^ 





cn 



4-71 



Labrid egg abundance in New Haven Harbor compared favorably 
with Herman's (1963) data from Narragansett Bay and with Wheatland's 
(1956) data from Long Island Sound (Table 4-14) . However, abundances at 
Millstone Point during 1973 and 1974 (Battelle, 1977) were generally two 
orders of magnitude greater than those reported from other areas (Table 
4-14) . These comparisons suggest that New Haven Harbor is not a unique 
spawning area for Labrids . 



Urophyois/Enche lyopus/Pepri- lus Eggs 

As noted earlier, this group probably receives its greatest 
contribution from E. cimbrius , since this species has been the most 
abundant of this egg type in other investigations (Wheatland, 1956; 
Richards, 1959; Herman, 1963; Williams, 1968; Battelle, 1977) . Eggs of 
this type were present in New Haven Harbor between February and Septem- 
ber, corresponding to the observations of Battelle (1977) and Wheatland 
(1956) . Eggs were most abundant during April and May both in New Haven 
Harbor as well as other areas of Long Island Sound (Table 4-15) . 

Greater numbers of eggs were collected at Station 8 in 1975 
and 1977, while during 1976 they were most abundant at Station 20; 
lowest abundance in each year occurred at Station 6 (Table 4-15) . 
Inter-year differences were evident, with 1976 a peak year. This 
differed from the pattern at Millstone Point where 1975 was a peak year 
and 1976 was a relatively poor year (Table 4-15) . Egg densities in New 
Haven Harbor from 1975 through 1977 were generally similar to both 
Millstone (1973, 1974, and 1976) and Long Island Sound (1952 and 1953) 

(Table 4-15) . Inter-year variation by station was somewhat variable and 
may reflect differences in spawning success of the component species 

(Figure 4-27) . 

In summary, the ichthyoplankton assemblage in New Haven Harbor 
was dominated by Anchoa spp. eggs and larvae, Labrid eggs and Urophycis/ 
Enchelyopus/Peprilus eggs, and was similar to assemblages noted in other 



4-72 



o en 


cQ r^ 


q; en 


eC .— 


3: 


z: 1— 


uj q: 


>■ o 


<C Q- 


:r UJ 


a: 


3 


LU >- 


z: Qi 


^^ 


^ S 


' — " ?^ 


ZD 


00 00 


o 


O 00 


LU UJ 


l-H 


Co Q 


£3 rs 


H •— 


H to 


tt; 


Oj _J 


kW 


R^ o 


\'-< 


cq o 


1:^.0 


CL, _l 


ao 


NiO 


tC) LU 


fc] 


te! Dd 


^o 


^ CQ 


bq ai 


•NSC 




>^ LlI 


1H> 


U^cC 


O JZ 


ft; 


£:3 3 


LU 



CO 00 

•~~,LU 
=«=: I— 



O I— 

<: llj 

D3 Q 



I 



oo 



LU 



I— 

00 



< 
I— 
00 






C_) 
X 



00 



h- 



o 
CO 



CQ 







o 


CN \D 






CN 


rf ^ 


o 


o 


--I 


r~- nH 


CM 






^ 






o 


^ ^ 


00 


o 


CTl 


ro vo 






O 


in r-{ 




1 


CO 


rH CO 


^— 


1 


^ 


in ro 


'~ 


1 


o 


CO CO 






r- 


o r- 


CO 


o 


fO 


IC IX) 






r-\ 


fO M* 






' 


• • 






CO 


in r~- 


to 


o 


rH 


CN CO 






o 


o o 






n 


00 o 


ro 


o 


■* 


o r- 






o 


r^ CO 


1— 








o 


o 


o 


o o 


o 








D- 






r-i r-( 


LU 


o 


o 


o o 


OO 






o o 






H 


r~ rvj 


C3 




o 


o o 


^ 


o 


o 


o o 


•a: 




V 








.-1 


O C^J 


_i 




o 


CO o 


^ 


o 


o 


o o 


o 




V 


■ 


^ 


1 


cr\ 


O CO 


rD 


1 


in 


H O 


"-0 


1 


nH 


O O 






CO 


"^J' (Ti 


^ 


1 


CN 


O CO 


■< 




•sP 


"* CN 


s: 


I 


' 


H 






o 


o r- 


d: 


1 


^ 


^ r-i 


D- 


1 


n^ 


m r- 


cC 


1 




ro 






H 


rH ro 


Qi 


1 


o 


'3' H 


=t 


1 


o 


>D o 


s: 


1 


• 




CQ 


1 


"* 




LU 


1 


o 


O O 


U. 


1 


o 






■* 


in 


kD r- 




r- 


r- 


r^ t-~ 




a\ 


cn 


0^ CTi 




H 


rH 


H nH 



C_3 

I— ( 

I— 

o 



o 

C_) 



o 
a. 

LU 

O 

I— 
OO 



h- 


ro 


•^ 




o 


O 


in 


o o 


o 


O 


o 




Q- 


a\ 


^ 


CTl 


LU 


H 


.H 


r^ o 


C/1 


• 


o 


o 


CD 


CO 


CTi 


r-- r~ 


^ 


VD 


r~ 


\D O 


<: 


H 


in 


tN O 






• 






CO 


CM 


CN CN 


_i 


CO 


m 


CO r-~ 


rD 


r^ 


CO 


ID o 


■-o 


• 


• 


• • 






tH 


ro 




o 


o^ 


CO O 


"^ 


CTi 


vD 


00 'l' 


■=> 


ID 


in 


CO ■^ 


■-0 


• 


• 


t • 






CN 


rH 




O 


in 


CM 00 


>- 


>* 


"^ 


CO CO 


c^ 


in 


r-~ 


O rH 








-* 






CN 


CO CO 


Qi 




O 


CTi n 


D- 


o 


ro 


in o 


<: 




• 


t • 






rH 


in 


q; 




CN 


in 


<: 


o 


in 


in o 


s: 




iH 


r- 










CO 






^ 


LU 


o 


o 


'd- o 


Ll_ 






o 


q; 


ro 


■* 


in kD 


< 


r- 


i^ 


r~ r~- 


UJ 


OS 


<y\ 


CTl CT\ 


>- 


H 


rH 


r-A rH 



CM 



o 
00 

Q 

2: 

cC 

_l 
00 
t— ( 

CJ3 

o 



h- 








O 


o 


O 


1 


O 






1 


Q. 






1 


UJ 


o 


o 


1 


00 






1 


CJ3 






1 


rD 


o 


o 


1 


< 








_j 






1 


ZD 


o 


o 


1 


'-Z> 






1 


z: 


as 


r- 


1 


Z3 


rH 


o 


r 


■-D 






1 


>- 


CO 


en 


1 






CN 


1 
1 


q; 


ID 


"* 


1 


a. 


(y\ 


CTl 




«=c 






1 


ai 


•^ 


H 


<-\ 


=3: 


>* 


"vf 


^^ 


s 








CQ 


1 




M- 


LU 


1 


O 


o 


Ll_ 


1 




• 


CH 


CM 


to 


■* 


< 


in 


in 


in 


UJ 


01 


en 


en 


>- 


rH 


rH 


^ 



0) 

+j 
c 
►^ 

■rl 

sx 

(^ 

c 

0) 

■rl 



M 

H 
U 
C 

•H 



tn 



0) 


^^ 




■p 


1,0 




-p 


in 




ni 


m 




n 


H 




^ 






r-~ 


T1 


0) 


1 


C 


rH 


t4 


10 

rH 


Q, 


aj 


+J 


fo 


H 


(rt 


to 


EH 


<D 




2 


g 


g 


II 










M 


U 


1 


\ 


fa 
CN 


1 
1 



4-73 



inshore areas of Long Island Sound over a 30-year period. Fish-egg 
densities were generally low except during June and July when Anchoa 
spp. and Labrids predominated. Urophycis/Enchelyopus/Peprilus eggs were 
most abundant during April and May. Total fish eggs and Anchoa spp. 
eggs were most abundant at Stations 18 and 20 (1975, 1976) and 8, 11, 
and 18 (1977). Labrid eggs were generally most abundant at Station 20. 
Urophycis/Enchelyopus/Peprilus eggs were most ab\indant at Stations 8 
(1975, 1977) and 20 (1976) . Fish larvae were most abundant during July 
and August, reflecting the appearance of Anchoa spp. larvae. Larvae of 
Cynoscion regalis , an important sportfish, were also most abundant 
during July, while lairvae of Pseudopleuronectes americanus, a major 
commercial and recreational fish, were most abundant during April and 
May. Total fish larvae were most abundant at Stations 20, 11 and 3. 
Anchoa sp(p). larvae showed little evidence of spatial heterogeneity 
throughout the survey period. C. regalis larvae did show evidence of 
spatial heterogeneity but the pattern was difficult to interpret. P. 
americanus larvae were most abundant at Stations 8, 20 and 11 with 
Station 8, located in proximity to the New Haven Harbor Station, under- 
going the greatest relative increases in annual abundance between 1975 
and 1977. 



ANALYSIS OF IMPACTS 

There are two principal means by which the plankton community 
may be directly impacted by the operation of New Haven Harbor Station : 
1) by being drawn through the power plant's cooling system, (entrainment) 
and 2) by being exposed to the heated discharge as it diffuses and mixes 
with the receiving water. In the case of power-plant passage, both 
temperature and mechanical injury appear to be instr\imental in causing 
mortality; temperature alone is responsible for the detrimental effects 
of plume entrainment. Other potential causes of death include stresses 
associated with abrupt increases and decreases in hydraulic pressure 
(e.g., formation of gas emboli in body fluids) as organisms pass through 
various parts of the cooling system, and contact with biocides and other 



4-74 



chemicals released with the cooling water (Clark and Brownell, 1973; 
Marcy, 1975; EPA, 1977a). New Haven Harbor Station does not utilize 
biocides in its cooling Water system. 

Of the two potential sources of impact, power plant passage 
has been considered to pose the more serious problem (Miller and Beck, 
1975) . Zooplankton (including ichthyoplankton) mortalities due to plant 
passage range from to 100% (Marcy, 1975; Jeffries and Johnson, 1976; 
Cannon et al . , 1978). Recent studies have indicated that entrainment 
mortalities were low at temperatures below theirmal tolerance limits for 
species tested and increased as lethal thermal thresholds (generally 
30°C) were approached and exceeded (Cannon et al . , 1978). Though it 
probably reflects a substantial overestimate of the loss due to entrain- 
ment (cropping) , assumption of 100% entrainment mortality certainly pre- 
sents the worst-possible situation regarding entrainment effects. If 
entrainment loss projections based on 100% mortality are within an 
acceptable level, then further effort to define precise mortality in a 
given system is unnecessary. Furthermore, survivors of plant-passage 
stresses may be more susceptible to infection, predation, and develop- 
mental aberrations than organisms not subjected to passage through the 
cooling system (Clark and Brownell, 1973; Ulanowicz, 1975) . 

It is difficult to directly address the question of how well 
natural populations can accomodate attrition rates associated with 
power-plant passage. Enright (1977) , for example, has pointed out that 
obtaining estimates of the quantities of meroplankters passing through a 
power-plant cooling system has little practical value since the rela- 
tionship between such quantities (assumed to represent total losses) and 
post-larval recruitment is rather obscure. To evaluate power-plant 
impact on attached or infaunal organisms, Enright (1977) recommends 
investigation of changes in rates of post-larval settlement on arti- 
ficially prepared substrates. This general approach was utilized in the 
exposure panel studies presented in Section 5 of this report. Further 
guidance with regard to this question has been provided by the US EPA 
(1977b). Specifically, EPA (1977b) states: 



4-75 



Any significant change in standing crop may indicate 
an adverse impact resulting from the heated discharge, 
and any appreciative alteration in the composition and 
relative abundance ... constitutes an imbalance in the 
conunuiiL ty and in<JJcatos possible adverse .im|)<acL. 



Although phytoplankters are susceptible to the same thermal 
and mechanical stresses as zooplankters , the former possess enormously 
greater reproductive potential (often doubling population size in less 
than a day) and thus can more easily accommodate extremely high indi- 
vidual cell attrition rates, which are also caused naturally by the 
cells sinking and by grazing pressures. Thus, there is no reason to 
consider individual phytoplankton cell deaths a significant issue with 
regard to power plant impact. What should be considered, however, is 
the potential for changes in overall levels of production and standing 
stock and/or a shift in the kinds of phytoplankton produced in the 
altered system (Yentsch, 1977) . 

Most of the studies designed to examine effects of power-plant 
passage on phytoplankton populations have focused on short-term altera- 
tions. In general, these studies have illustrated that, in temperate 
latitudes, production is stimulated during cooler months and inhibited 
during warmer months (Warriner and Brehmer, 1966; Morgan and Stress, 
1969) and that biocide addition (not utilized at New Haven Harbor Sta- 
tion) may be more important than heat in reducing production levels 

(Flemer and Sherk, 1977) . Due to natural variability in phytoplankton 
standing stock and its dependence on many factors, it becomes difficult 
to isolate causes of long-term changes in production levels; such assess- 
ment is particularly difficult in nutrient-enriched areas (such as New 
Haven Harbor) where standing stock varies considerably among years 

(Flemer and Sherk, 1977) . With respect to changes in the kinds of 
phytoplankton produced. Carpenter (1973) has demonstrated experimentally 
that heat addition can accelerate natural succession from diatoms to 
dinof lagellates ; however, in natural systems, the dynamics of toxic 
dinof lagellate blooms remain poorly understood. Hanson and Gilfillan 

(1975) , however, have implicated two major aggravators of red-tide 
conditions: sewage discharge and dredging. 



4-76 



As evidenced by chlorophyll a values (Figure 4-3) , phyto- 
plankton blooms have progressively increased in magnitude during the 
post-operational years (1975 through 1977) . Accompanying such changes 
has been an increase in the intensity of late-winter/early spring blooms 
of Skeletonema costatum. Non-toxic dinof lagellate blooms have occurred 
during both preoperational (e.g. , June 1974) and post-operational (e.g. , 
June 1976) periods; in addition, Conover (1956) alluded to red-tide con- 
ditions in New Haven Harbor during the early 1950 's. There has been no 
evidence of causal relationships between Harbor Station operations and 
changes in phytoplankton population parameters . 

A comparison of monthly mean densities (stations, depths and 

tides averaged) for July 1973-October 1977 is presented for pre- versus 

post-operational comparisons of nine selected zooplankton taxa in Fig- 

* 
ures 4-28 to 4-30 . Table 4-16 summarizes the differences observed in 

zooplankton assemblages by evaluating whether or not operational data 

(as converted to CB equivalences) fell within the ranges established by 

preoperational monitoring. For most taxa, operational estimates fell 

within or exceeded these ranges during at least 10 months (Table 4-16) . 

The general category of copepod copepodites were consistently less 

abundant in the operational period, probably due to the fact that many 

were classified as Acartia copepodites during this period (Figures 4-28, 

4-29 and 4-30) . All other species showing reduced abundance since 

operation commenced did so in months of peak abundances. Our conclusion 

regarding the CB data was that this method overestimated density during 

peak abundance periods. This interpretation of the comparability study 

results (Appendix 4-1) implies that high estimates of preoperational 

zooplankton densities were erroneous , that post-operational data are 

accurate, and that there is no evidence to indicate any adverse impact 

of Harbor Station activities on zooplankton populations. Operational 



* 

Data from samples taken by the 1/2 m net were adjusted to CB equivalences 

by application of the regression equations defined in the comparability 
study. While these equations did not describe the data well, they pro- 
vide the best available method to approximate comparability between 
methods . 



(Text continued on page 4-81) 



4-77 



T 

61 PREOPERATIONAL PERIOD 



OPERATIONAL PERIOD / liO SAMPLE 



Q- 



+ 
X 



o 



UJ 



I J I F I M 



Acartia copepodites 



I V; I 1 I A I o I ^ I ., I rn 



A 

T 



M ' J 



T T 



A ' S ' N ' D 

Acartia tonsa 



M ' A ' M 



A ' S ' ' N ' D 

Acartia hudsonica 



I J '""T r 



TT 



' N 



Figure 4-28. Mean density of selected sp-r-cies at all stations, depths and 
tides by month, July 1973 through October 1977. New Haven 
Harbor Ecological Studies Summary Report, 1979. 



4-78 



T 



ei PREOPERATIONAL PERIOD I OPERATIONAL PERIOD / NO SAMPLE 



Temora longiaomis 



O) 

CL 



+ 

X 



(Si 

o 



>- 
I— 

I — 1 
00 

Q 

< 



Tt 



Tt, 
l| 

l| 
II 
ll 
|1 

ii 

l| 



Tt 



T T Copepods copepodites 



T ; 



I I "" I 1 

AMJJASOND 

T Copepod nauplii 



V 



Figure 4-29. 



[lean density of selected species at all stations, depths 
and tides by month, July 1973 through October 1977. New 
Haven Harbor Ecological Studies Summary Report, 1979. 



4-79 



T 



e I PREOPERATIONAL PERIOD I OPERATIONAL PERIOD / NO SAMPLE 



s-i 



Q. 



+ 
X 



C3 
O 



>- 
I— 
(— ( 
00 

UJ 
Q 



2- 



Cirripedia nauplii 



Tt 



N D 

Polychaete larvae 



N D 

Gastropod veligers 



Figure 4-30. Mean density of selected species at all stations, depths 
and tides by month, July 1973 through October 1977. New 
Haven Harbor Ecological Studies Summary Report, 1979. 



4-80 



TABLE 4-16. RELATIVE DENSITIES OF SELECTED TAXA COMPARED BY MONTH 

BETWEEN OPERATIONAL AND PREOPERATIONAL YEARS. (OPERATIONAL 
DATA ADJUSTED FOR SAMPLING DIFFERENCES BY REGRESSION 
EQUATION).* NEW HAVEN HARBOR STATION ECOLOGICAL STUDIES 
SUMMARY REPORT, 197^. 





J 


F 


M 


A 


M 


J 


J 


A 


S 





N 


D 


Acartia copepodites 


+ 


+ 


+ 


+ 








+ 


+ 


+ 


+ 


+ 


+ 


A. hudsonica 











- 


- 





+ 


+ 





+ 


+ 


+ 


A . tonsa 








+ 


+ 


+ 





+ 


+ 


+ 


+ 


+ 


+ 


Temora longicornis 


+ 


+ 


+ 


+ 


+ 


+ 


+ 


+ 


+ 


+ 


+ 


+ 


Copepod copepodites 
Copepod nauplii 
Cirripedia nauplii 




+ 
+ 


+ 

+ 




+ 
+ 


+ 


- 










+ 




+ 
+ 


- 





+ 



+ 
+ 


Gastropod veligers 


+ 


+ 


+ 


+ 


+ 





+ 


- 


+ 


+ 


+ 


+ 


Polychaete larvae 


+ 


+ 


+ 


+ 















+ 


+ 



— = Operational below preoperational range 
+ = Operational above preoperational range 
= Operational within preoperational range 

See discussion of zooplankton comparability - Appendix 4-1. 



4-81 



densities and species composition were consistent with those reported at 
Millstone Point (Battelle, 1977, 1978) and greater Long Island Sound 
(Deevey, 1952a, 1952b, 1956). 

In New Haven Harbor, year-to-year fluctuations occurred in 
total ichthyoplankton abundance, as well as abundance of selected taxa, 
but were not indicative of impact, judging from the natural variability 
as seen in studies conducted in Long Island Sound and vicinity between 
1943 and 1968. For some taxa (e.g., Anchoa mitchilli) , numerical den- 
sities during periods of peak abundance increased, comparing the years 
1974 and 1975 with 1976 and 1977. The number of taxa represented was 
lowest during the abbreviated 1974 program and was somewhat greater in 
years having expanded sampling programs. Dominant taxonomic groups were 
similar from year to year. Observed seasons of peak occurrence, domi- 
nant taxa, and species represented among the ichthyoplankton in New 
Haven Harbor all closely resembled comparable data collected and 
reported by previous investigators of Long Island Sound ichthyofauna. 

Few spatial differences were detected in any of the plankton 
studies (NAI, 1978a; 1977a; 1976a; 1975a; 1974a; 1974b; 1973). All dif- 
ferences between stations were attributable to salinity, light and depth 
gradients and were independent of Harbor Station operations. 

The overall conclusion is that plankton assemblages of New 
Haven Harbor which have existed subsequent to operation of New Haven 
Harbor Station are largely indistinguishable, qualitatively and quan- 
titatively, from assemblages that existed prior to power plant oper- 
ation. A notable exception to this generalization involves increases in 
phytoplankton standing crop. Though these increases may reasonably be 
attributable to influences such as improved water quality and expanded 
treatment of municipal waste discharges, monitoring data offers no means 
of evaluating this possibility. 



4-82 



4.0 LITERATURE CITED 



Austin, H. M. 1976. Distribution and abundance of ichthyoplankton in 
the New York Bight during the fall in 1971. N.Y. Fish Game J. 
23(1) :58-72. 

Battelle. 1977. Annual report on a monitoring program on the ecology 

of the marine environment of the Millstone Point, Connecticut area. 
Prepared for Northeast Utilities Service Company Report No. 14748. 

Bigelow, H. and W. Schroeder. 1953. Fishes of the Gulf of Maine. U.S. 
Fish and Wild. Serv. , Fish. Bull. 577 pp. 

Cannon, T. C, S. M. Jinks, L. R. King and G. J. Lauer. 1978. Survival 
of entrained ichthyoplankton and macroinvertebrates at Hudson River 
power plants. IN: L. D. Jensen (ed.). Fourth National Workshop on 
Entrainment and Impingement. EA Communications, Melville, N. Y. 
pp. 343-356. 

Caplan, R. I. 1977. Aquatic disposal field investigations, Eatons Neck 
Disposal Site, Long Island Sound. Appendix E. Predisposal base- 
line conditions of zooplankton assemblages. U.S. Army Engineer 
Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg and N. Y. Ocean Science 
Lab, Montauk. Tech. Rept. D-77-6. 104 pp. 

Carpenter, E. J. 1973. Brackish-water phytoplankton response to temp- 
erature elevation. Est. Coast. Mar. Sci. 1(1): 37-44. 

Clark, J. and W. Brownell. 1973. Electric Power Plants in the Coastal 
Zone: Environmental Issues. Am. Litt. Soc. Spec. Publ. No. 7. 

Clutter, R. I. and M. Anraku. 1968. Avoidance of Samplers. IN: Zoo- 
plankton sampling. UNESCO. 

Croker, R. 1965. Planktonic fish eggs and larvae of Sandy Hook estu- 
ary. Chesapeake Sci. 6(2):92-95. 

Deevey, G. B. 1952a. A survey of the zooplankton of Block Island 
Sound. Bull. Bing. Oceanogr. Coll. 13 (3) : 65-119. 

. 1952b. Quantity and composition of the zooplankton of 

Block Island Sound, 1949. Bull. Bing. Oceanogr. Coll. 13 (3) : 120-164. 



1956. Oceanography of Long Island Sound 1952-1954. V. 



Zooplankton: Bull. Bing. Oceanogr. Coll. 15:113-155. 

Enright. 1977. Power plants and plankton. Marine Pollution Bulletin, 
8(7) :158-163. 

EPA, 1973. Biological field and laboratory methods for measuring 

the quality of surface waters and effluents. [C. I. Weber, ed. ] 
Program Element 1BA02 7. Cincinnati. 



4-83 



Flemer, D. and J. A. Sherk, Jr. 1977. The effects of steam electric 
station operation on entrained phytoplankton. Hydrobiologia. 
55(1) :33-44. 

Hanson, S. and E. Gilfillan. 1975. Effects of polluted and non-pol- 
luted sediments on the growth of Gonyaulax tamarensis . Envir. 
Ltrs. 9(1): 33-41. 

Harmic, J. L. 1958. Some aspects of the development and ecology of the 
pelagic phase of the gray squeteague, Cynoscion regalis (Bloch and 
Schneider), in the Delaware estuary. Thesis, Univ. of Delaware, 
Newark. 84 pp. 

Herman, S. 1963. Planktonic fish eggs and larvae of Narragansett Bay. 
Limnol. Oceanogr. 8 (1) : 103-109. 

Jeffries, H. P. and W. C. Johnson II. 1976. Petroleum, temperature, 
and toxicants: examples of suspected responses by plankton and 
benthos on the continental shelf. IN : B. Manowitz (ed. ) . Effects 
of energy-related activities on the Atlantic continental shelf. 
Conf. at Brookhaven Nat. Lab, Nov. 10-12, 1975. pp. 96-108. 

Leim, A. H. and W. B. Scott. 1966. Fishes of the Atlantic coast of 
Canada. Fish Res. Bd. Can. Bull. 155. 485 pp. 

Lillick, L. G. 1940. Phytoplankton and planktonic protozoa of the off- 
shore waters of the Gulf of Maine. Part II: Qualitative composi- 
tion of the planktonic flora. Trans. Am. Phil. Soc. 31(3) :193- 
237. 

Marcy, B. C, Jr. 1975. Entrainment of organisms at power plants, with 
emphasis on fishes — an overview, pp. 89-106. IN^: S. B. Saila 
(ed.). Fisheries and Energy Production: A Symposium. D. C. Heath 
& Co., Lexington, Mass. 300 pp. 

Merriman, D. and R. Sclar. 1952. The pelagic fish eggs and larvae of 
Block Island Sound. Bull. Bingham Oceanogr. Coll. 13 (3) : 165-219. 

Merriner, J. V. 1976. Aspects of the reproductive biology of the 
weakfish, Cynoscion regalis (Sciaenidae) , in North Carolina. 
Fishery Bull. 74:18-26. 

Miller, D. C. and A. D. Beck. 1975. Development and application of 

criteria per marine cooling waters. IN_: Environmental effects of 
cooling systems at nuclear power plants (symposium) . Proc. Intl. 
Atomic Energy Agency, Vienna, Aus . pp. 639-657. 

Morgan, R. P. and R. G. Stross. 1969. Destruction of phytoplankton in 
the cooling water supply of a steam electric station. Ches. Sci. 
10(3 and 4) : 165-171. 

Normandeau Associates, Inc. 1973. New Haven Harbor Ecological Studies. 
New Haven, Connecticut. Ann. Rept. 1971-1972. Prep, for United 
Illuminating Co. , New Haven, Connecticut. 208 pp. 



4-84 



. 1974. Coke Works Ecological Monitoring Studies, New Haven 

Harbor, Connecticut. Ann. Rapt. 1972-1973 for the United Illumin- 
ating Company, New Haven, Connecticut. 215 pp. 

Northeast Utilities Service Company. 1976. Millstone Nuclear Power 

Station Units 1, 2 and 3. Environmental Assessment of the Conden- 
ser Cooling Water Intake Structures 316(b) Demonstration. 

Pearcy, W. G. 1962. Ecology of an estuarine population of winter 

flounder, Pseudopleuronectes americanus (Walbaum) . II. Distri- 
bution and dynamics of larvae. Bull. Bingham Oceanogr. Coll. 
XVIII: 16-62. 

Pearcy, W. G. and S. W. Richards. 1962. Distribution and ecology of 

fishes of the Mystic River estuary, Connecticut. Ecology. 43(2): 
248-259. 

Purdin. 1973. The population fluctuation of major adult copepods in 
Long Island Sound near Shoreham. Abstracts of the 6th Annual 
LIS conference -- Current research in an urban sea. Long Island 
Sound, N. Y. Ocean Sci. Lab., Montauk, New York. 

Richards, S. 1959. Pelagic fish eggs and larvae in Long Island Sound. 
IN : Oceanography of Long Island Sound. Bull. Bingham Oceanogr. 
Coll. 17(1) :95-124. 

Smayda, T. J. 1958. Biogeographical studies of marine phytoplankton. 
Oikos. 9(2) : 158-191. 

Smith, W. G. , J. D. Sibunka and A. Wells. 1978. Diel movements of 
larval yellowtail flounder, Limanda ferruginea , determined from 
discrete depth sampling. Fishery Bull. 76 (1) : 167-178. 

Ulanowicz, R. E. 1975. The mechanical effects of water flow on fish 
eggs and larvae, pp. 77-88. IN : S. B. Saila (ed. ) . Fisheries 
and Energy Production: A Symposium. D. C. Heath and Co. , Lex- 
ington, Mass. 300 pp. 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1977a. Guidance for evaluating 
the adverse impact of cooling water intake structures on the aqua- 
tic environment: Section 316(b). PL 92-500. 59 pp. 

. 1977b. Interagency 316(a) Technical Guidance Manual and 

Guide for Thermal Effects Sections of Nuclear Facilities Environ- 
mental Impact Statements. 79 pp. 

War f el, H. E. and D. Merriman. 1944. Studies on the marine resources 

of southern New England. I. An analysis of the fish population of 
the shore zone. Bull. Bingham Oceanogr. Coll. 9(2):1-91. 

Warriner, J. E. and M. L. Brehmer. 1966. The effects of thermal 

effluents on marine organisms. Int. J. Air Water Pollut. 10:277- 
289. 



4-85 



Wheatland, S. 1956. Pelagic fish eggs and larvae. IN : Oceanography 
of Long Island Sound, 1952-1954, Part VII. Bull. Bingham Ocean- 
ogr. Coll. 15:234-314. 

Wiebe, P. H. , G. D. Grice and E. Hoagland. 1973. Acid-iron waste as a 
factor affecting the distribution and abiondance of zooplankton in 
the New York Bight. II. Spatial variations in the field and 
implications for monitoring studies. Est. Coastal Mar. Sci. 1:51- 
64. 

Williams, G. C. 1968. Bathymetric distribution of planktonic fish eggs 
in Long Island Soiind. Limnol. Oceanogr. 13 (2) : 382-385. 

Yentsch, C. S. 1977. Plankton production. MESA New York Bight Atlas 
Monograph 12. New York Sea Grant Institute, Albany, N.Y. 25 pp. 

Zawacki, C. S. and P. T. Briggs. 1976. Fish investigations in Long 

Island Sound at a nuclear power station site at Shoreham, New York. 
NY Fish and Game J. 23(l):34-50. 



APPENDIX 4.1 



4-87 



APPENDIX 4-1 



COMPARABILITY OF ZOOPLANKTON COLLECTION METHODS 

Scatter plots (Appendix Figure 4-1) and correlation coeffi- 
cients (Appendix Table 4-1) demonstrate that there was little consistent 
relationship between density estimates derived from the Clark-Bumpus (CB) 
and 0.5 m net (1/2-meter) methods. It is our opinion that the larger 
diameter, larger-meshed (158y) 1/2-meter nets used since June 1975, pro- 
vided estimates more representative of true population than did the 
previous method (12.5 cm, 76ym Clarke-Bumpus) . The small' CB net yielded 
different and erratic quantitative estimates compared to the 1/2 meter 
net. The larger net sampled larger volumes and was less susceptible to 
mesh clogging, which impairs filtering and flowmeter accuracy. The 
larger net was still sufficiently fine (158ym) to capture small zooplank- 
ters, such as veliger larvae of molluscs and copepod and barnacle 
nauplii . 

Scatter plots and regression analyses for each of the 9 
selected abundant species provide some information useful in comparing 
the validity of the two methods. Scatter plots demonstrate the lower 
limits of detection by each method and the frequency and densities at 
which one method was effective while the other was ineffective at catching 
each species. From the regression equation, a point of equivalence was 
calculated: this was the point at which both methods should provide 
equivalent density estimates (in the regression line equation, the case 
where x = y) . For 1/2-m net density estimates below the equivalence 
point, comparable CB densities would be higher, while above this point 
CB estimates should be lower than 1/2-m density estimates. In general, 
the 1/2 m net had lower thresholds of detection by ten to one hundred 
times. Consistently with this, the 1/2-m net indicated presence while 
the CB net indicated absence more often than the reverse, for most 
species. Each species is discussed with respect to these factors. 
Considerations are based on Appendix Figure 4-1 and Appendix Table 4-1. 

Acartia spp. copepodites were captured in the 1/2 m net on 
numerous occasions when they were absent from the CB sample. The CB 
net never captured Acartia copepodites in densities less than 125/m ; 
the larger net yielded density estimates as low as 3/m . According to the 
regression equation, the CB estimate would be greater than the estimate 
provided by 1/2 m net at all times except during peaks of abundance 
(>8604/m ) . The scatter plot, however, showed that the regression pre- 
diction was a poor approximation of the relationship between the methods, 
with an actual distribution spanning greater than two orders of magni- 
tude around the regression line. 

Acartia hudsonica was also more effectively captured by the 
1/2 m net than by the CB; both capture rate and detection thresholds were 
facorable for the 1/2 m net. According to the regression equation, esti- 



4-88 



in 

I — I 

>- 
_i 

■zz 



1 1 1 


en 


re. 


r' ■ 


CC 




o 


«\ 


C J 


1— 




ai 


■ • 


o 


00 


Q. 


Q 


LU 


o 


q; 










1— 


>- 


uu 


OL 


s 


<C 



1— ( 


00 


h- 




C_) 


00 


LlJ 


LU 


_J 


1 — 1 


_J 


Q 


o 


■=> 


o 


h- 




</1 


?r 




o 


_J 


h- ■< 


^^ 


O 


■ZL 


1 — 1 


ct O 


_l O 


Q. 


_1 


o o 


O CJ 


hvl 


UJ 


Ll_ 


Qi 


o o 




no 


>- 


Qi 


h- cC 



CQ UJ 

Q_ 
O LU 



I 



CQ 



X 

I — I 
Q 



D- 
D- 

























r- 


o 


o 


'3* 


IN 


o 


CN 


o 


•-^ 




■^ 


vD 


■* 


in 




'T 


o 




G^ 




r- 


vD 


CO 




rH 


^ 


H 


CD 


r- 




r-i 


rH 


r4 


rH 


CN 


T, 


CN 


tN 


CN 




+ 


+ 


+ 


+ 


+ 


+ 


+ 


+ 


+ 




\D 


o 


u> 


^ 


o 


cr. 


(N 


r- 


cn 




in 




r- 


(N 


r- 




CD 


•3- 


(N 




in 


'3- 


■^ 


"^ 


PO 


^ 


'3' 


■~J 


^. 


^ 


„ 


„ 


„ 


^ 


^ 


„ 


„ 


„ 


^ 


o z 

CO >-« 


•H 


-H 


^ 


<-\ 


--I 


■-1 


•H 


^ 


rH 


+ 


+ 


+ 


+ 


+ 


+ 


+ 


+ 


+ 


CO h- 




















LU ct 


rH 




r-J 






.H 




■-K 




OL ■=> 


N 


CQ 


N 


N 


N 


tsi 


N 


N 


N 


CD CD- 




















LU LlI 


O 


O 


O 


O 


o 


O 


O 


O 


O 


CC 






.H 




-H 






rH 


fH 




Cn 


01 


tr- 


tT> 


tr 


Oi 


cn 


Cp 


cn 




S 


s 


3 


S 


3 


3 


3 


3 


3 




m 


CQ 


CQ 


CQ 


CQ 


PQ 


m 


CQ 


CQ 




o 


U 


U 


U 


U 


U 


o 


U 


U 




o 


O 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 








.-) 
















tr 


tr 


D^ 


Cr> 


tr 


cr 


cr> 


CP 


cn 




3 


S 


5 


3 


3 


3 


3 


3 


3 


z 1— 




















oz 




















H-. UJ 




















1— >— 1 


r- 


r-\ 


CM 


VO 


in 


CO 


^ 


VO 


Oi 


CC (-> 


r- 


r- 


O 


CO 


CD 


r- 


vD 


o 


•^ 


_l 1— 1 






^D 


ID 


in 




VD 






LU U- 




















CXL U- 


o 


o 


O 


O 


d 


d 


d 


d 


o 


q; LU 




















o o 




















o o 








































i=) 




















_J 


















ro 


o 


S 


E 


e 


E 


e 


E 


E 


E 


E 


^ 1- 


\ 


\ 


\ 


\ 


\ 


\ 


\ 


\ 


\ 


i/i-— - rvi 




CN 






•^ 


O 




m 




LU CO 












in 








or LU 




















^ I—" 




















1— 1— 








































Z CO 




















o z 




















i-i LU 




















1— Q 




fO 


n 










ro 


ro 


<_J^-' 


g 


_E 


E 


E 


E 


£ 


E 


E 


E 


UJ CO 


< 




\ 


\ 


\ 


\ 


\ 


\ 


\ 


t— o 


in 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 




o 


O 


LU 




o 


o 


o 


o 


o 




in 


in 


C3 


/H 


OJ 


CN 


CM 


*"* 


O) 


rH 


T-\ 


^ 


1— 




















z: 








































o 




















Q. 


m 


n 


m 


n 








ro 






E 


E 


E 


E 


E 


E 


E 


E 


E 


LU hJ 


< 


< 


< 


< 


\ 


\ 


\ 


\ 


\ 


tj 


'^ 


in 


r- 


o 


H 


^ 


r- 




r- 


-Z. II 


o 


in 


^ 


T 




-^ 


OJ 


IN 




LU 


VD 






CO 


CM 


M 


•^ 


O 


'3' 


_1 CQ 




















■a: (_3 


CD 


-H 




'3- 




n 


<-\ 


(N 


■'d- 


>■ 












fO 


.H 




rH 






















=1 




















cr 




















LU 




















_l CO 1— 




















«i: LU ^ 




















h- s: CD 




vo 


CD 


vO 


Ol 




CI 


CO 


CO 


o t-i ra 


CO 


vo 


■q* 


n 


^D 


CO 


VO 


in 


r- 


h=l-«C 




















o 








































H- -- 




















O 


m 


in 


nH 


in 


CN 


in 


r^ 


CO 


cC— M 




















O O 




















O 




















o ^ 




















1— h- 




















LU 




















ooe: 




















LU 




















d; >- 




















■=> CQ 




















1^-^ 




















H-t CQ 




vD 


tN 


en 


O 


in 


cn 


VD 




<c S 




fN 




rH 


CM 






<N 


rH 


u. 






















U1 








en 












<l) 






m 


0} 




-H 


V) 






-P 


nj 




"M 


■P 




■H 


U 


Q) 




■H 


u 




c 


■H 






at 


(TJ 




■d 


"■S 




q 


-O 


•H 


a 


di 


> 




o 


q 










■H 


3 


■rH 


U 




0^ 


5 


IQ 





en 


M 


2 


rH 


fO 




ST 


ui 


U 


•*H 


(U 


a 


c 


0) 


iH 




a 


-o 




& 


Q 


:3 




> 






o 


3 


i5 


C 





nJ 


nJ 




'^ 




u 


■c; 







u 


c 


•H 


•a 


4J 




IB 


(0 


•a 


•-4 


T3 


-a 




^ 


s 




"H 


-H 


■H 


•u 








a 





J^ 




■U 


■u 


4J 


tj 


a 


a 


■H 


u 


o 




(h 


M 


(h 




<u 


m 


k 


4-1 


>1 




"TJ 


nj 


1J 




a 


a 


VI 


w 















Q] 








-H 


ra 


o 




*»: 


«i: 


«; 


Es 


u 


o 


O 


u 


dl 



4-89 



Copepod nauplii 



Copepod copepodites 



s.o 

4.5- 

«.0- 

3.5. 

3.0. 

?.S. 

2.0- 



4.0. 
3.5 
3.(H' 
2.5. 
2.0. 
1.5- 
1.0- 
0.5 



1 — I 1 1 — I 1 1 1 1 1 — I 1 1 1 1 1 1 ! 1 1 1 

0.5 1.0 1,5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0 



"T — 1 — I — r 'l ""i — I — r-T — T" "l "l ■] — I — 1 

0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 



Cirripeda nauplii 



Gastropod veligers 



CO 




s 




10 




z 


EH 


< 


W 


o 


z 


OS 




o 


tn 




P 


' — - 


Pi 


+ 

X 


§ 


o 


w 


^ 


1 


tn 


fi3 





2 


r-l 


Ph 


^"^ 


r^ 


>< 


u 


w 




w 




s 




U4 




u 





I I I I — n~i — I I I 

0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 



?.5 3.0 



1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 

4.0 4.5 5.0 5,5 



Temora longicornis 



Polychaeta 



4.5 
4.0 
3.5 
3.0- 
2.5. 
2.0. 
1.5- 
1.0- 
0.5- 
0- 



I ' I l "1 ' I 'T ' I ' 1 " ! 'I'V I' I ' I I I I I I 

0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.,5 4.0 4.5 5.0. 



■"I — I 'i 'i' 'i 'i — 1 — i — f r"i I T" 

0,5 1 1,5 2.0 2,5 3,0 3.5 



T — I — I — i — 1 

4,0 4.5 5,0 



h METER NET DENSITY (log X+1) ORGANISMS* M 



Appendix Figure 4-1 



Comparability of zooplankton collection methods: 
simple regression scatter plots. New Ha ven Harbor 
Ecological Studies Summary Report, 1979. 



4-')() 



Acartia copepodites 



. A" 



I i I — i ' r I — I — I "i r™ i' I ■" I — ri I I I 

0.5 l.O 2.0 2.S 3.0 3.5 fl.O a. 5 5.0 5.5 



Acartia hudsonica 



Acartia tonsa 





ro 










1 

S 


b.O- 








w 










jgj 


4.5- 






Eh 


w 




* 




m 


H 








Z 




4.0- 








^5 

o 


3.5- 






^ 


^^ 


J.U- 


. 




D 


rH 






„^ 


pa 
1 


+ 

o 


i',0- 




• 


•^ 




,-1 


1.5 - 






Hi 










o 


H 


1,0- 
0.5- 








Q 












ill 










0.5 


1.0 1,5 2,0 



5.5- 
5.0 — 
1.5 — 
1.0— 
3.5 — 
3.0- 
2.5 — 
2.6_ 
1.5 — 
l.O- 
0.5 — 



2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 



— I 

5.0 



I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 

0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 



h METER NET DENSITY (log X+1) ORGANISMS • M 



-3 



Appendix Figure 4-1. (Continued) 



4-91 



mates of density would be higher for the 1/2 m net during spring peaks 
and somewhat lower than CB-estimated densities when less than 1355/m 
occurred according to both methods. The scatter plot showed that the 
regression line was based on few erratically distributed points. 

Acartia tonsa was detected in lower densities by the 1/2 m net 
than by the CB and had an equivalence point just less than midsxmimer 
peak densities. Presence/absence differences between the methods were 
peculiar, in that, when CB samples indicated densities greater than 
5000/m , 1/2 m net samples generally indicated absence. The reverse 
occurred at 1/2 m net densities below 400/m . Thus, CB samples produced 
high estimates of peak abundance and low estimates at other times. This 
scatter plot showed that a small number of poorly related points con- 
tributed to the regression. 

Temora longicornis was captured twice as frequently by the 
1/2 m net and was only caught by both methods on 15 occasions, clearly 
showing that the CB net was relatively ineffective for this species. 
The equivalence point was above most peaks of abundance, so that, when 
captured by the CB net, this method gave the higher density estimate. 
However, because of the paucity and scatter of points, there is little 
reason to have faith in the regression equation. 

Copepod copepodites were more effectively sampled by the 1/2 m 
net, as shown by capture frequency and detection threshold. Also, at 
densities below 2251/m the CB net gave higher density estimates than 
the 1/2 m net; such densities were exceeded only during major spring or 
fall abundance peaks as measured by the CB net . Although some evidence 
of linearity was apparent in the scatter-plot, many of the points 
plotted were nearly an order of magnitude removed from the regression line. 

Copepod nauplii were sampled similarly by the two methods in 
terms of detection thresholds; presence/absence disagreements were few 
The equivalence point was exceptionally high, near the absolute peak of 
abundance, and was rarely exceeded by the CB net and never by the 1/2 m net. 
Scatter was substantial and the plot showed no real linear tendency. 

Cirripedia nauplii were more frequently captured by the 1/2 m 
net than by the CB net (Table 4-4) ; this was attributable to the numerous 
catches by the 1/2 m net at densities below the threshold of detection 
for the CB net. As with copepod nauplii, the equivalence point was 
high (11,427/m ) and corresponded to sporadic and infrequent abundance 
peaks. While scatter was great, a distinct linear tendency was apparent. 

Gastropod veligers were captured far more frequently and 
effectively by the 1/2 m net; on 26 occasions low densities were indicated 
by the 1/2 m net which were undetected by the high- threshold CB method. 
Gastropod larvae were rarely more dense than the equivalence value of 
2023/m , and were thus estiamted as more abundant (when captured) by 
the CB net. Linearity was not apparent in the scatter-plot. 

Polychaete larvae were fairly effectively sampled by both 
methods, although both indicated absence a nimber of times when contradicted 



4-92 



by the other method. As with all other taxa, the 1/2 m net had the 
lower detection threshold; like copepod and Cirripedia nauplii, the high 
equivalence value (14,437/in ) was exceeded only in peaks of abundance. 
The scatter-plot was distinctly non-linear and deviation from the 
regression line by an order of magnitude or more was common. 

To summarize the comparability study results, it was clear 
that the two methods yielded radically different density estimates. We 
believe that the CB method was less accurate, underestimating most taxa 
when densities were near or below detection threshold densities (100- 
200/m ) and overestimating peak densities, which were generally those in 
excess of the equivalence value (Appendix Table 4-1) . Underestimates are 
attributed to patchiness of the zooplankton assemblage and low sample 
voliomes from the small net; overestimates are explained by patchiness 
and inaccuracies in the estimation of sample volume. Since the CB and 
1/2-meter net sample different volumes of water they are likely to result 
in different estimates of population densities that are reflective of 
the dispersion characteristics of the species being smapled. Both 
methods are also limited in accuracy by net clogging and by the error 
resulting from subsampling in the laboratory. We conclude that the 1/2-meter 
net was the best practical sampling method for application to zooplankton 
assemblages of New Haven Harbor. The Clarke-Bumpus net did not meet the 
basic guideline for plankton sampling recommended by EPA (1973) . 



APPENDIX TABLE 4-2. 



4-93 

SPECIES LIST OF ICHTHYOPLANKTON IDENTIFIED FROM NEW HAVEN 
HARBOR COLLECTIONS FROM 1974 THROUGH 1977. NEW HAVEN HARBOR 
ECOLOGICAL STUDIES SUMMARY REPORT, 1979. 





EGGS 
1971 1972 1973 1974 197b 197() 1977 


LARVAC 
1971 1972 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 


Anguillidae 

Anguilla rostrata 




X XXX 


Clupeidae 
Alosa sp. 

Brevoortia tyrannus 
Clupea spp. 
C. harengus 


X X X X 


X X X X X 
XX X 
XX X 
X 
X XXX 


Engraulidae 
Anchoa sp. 
A. hepsetus 
A. mltchilli 


X 
X 
X X X X 


XXX 

X X 

X X X X 


Osmeridae 

Osmerus mordax 


X 


X 


Gadidae 

Enchelyopus cimbrius 
Gadus morhua 
Merluccius sp. 
M. bilinearis 
Microgadus tomcod 
Urophycis sp. 
U. chuss 


XXX 

X 
X X 
X 

X 
XXX 


XX XXX 
X X 

X 
X X 


Cyprinodontidae 
Fundulus sp. 




X X 


Atherinidae 
Menidia sp. 
M. menidia 




X X 
XXX X 




EGGS 
1971 1972 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 


LARVAE 
1971 1972 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 


Gasterosteidae 

Gasterosteus aculeatus 




X 


Syngnathidae 

Hippocampus erectus 
Syngnathus fuscus 


X 


X 

XX X X X X 


Sparidae 

Stenotomus spp. 
S . chrysops 


X 


X 

X X 


Sclaenidae 

Cynoscion regalis 
Menticirrhus saxatilis 


XX X 
X X 


X XX 


Labridae 

Tautoga onitis 
Tautogolahrus adspersus 


X X 
XXX 
XXX 


XX XXX 
X X X X X 


Stichaoidae 

Lumpenus lumpretaoformis 




X 


Pholidae 

Pholis gunnellus 


X 


X XXX 


AJTunodytidae 
Ammodytes sp. 




X X X X X X 


Gobiidae 

Gobiosoma ginsburgi 




X X 

X X 


Scombridae 

Scomber scombrus 


XXX 


XXX 



(Continued) 



4-94 



APPENDIX TABLE 4-2. (Continued) 





EGGS 
1971 1972 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 


LARVAE 
1971 1972 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 


Stromateidae 

Peprilus triacanthus 




X XXX 


Triglidae 

Prionotus spp. 


X X X X 


X X 


Cottidae 

Myoxocephalas sp. 
W. aenaeus 




X X X X X X 
X 


Cyciopteridae 
Liparis sp. 




X 


Bothidae 

Etropus microstomus 
Paralichthys dentatus 
P. oblongus 
ii^copltthalmus aquosus 


X 
X X 
X 
X X 


XXX 
X X X X X 


Pli'urt^iu'ctidnc 

Liiiunda tcrritKjiiwa 
Pscudopleuroncctos 
americanus 


X X 
X 


XXX XXX 


Soleidae 

Trinectes maculatas 


X X 


X X 


Tetradontidae 

Sphaeroides maculatus 




XXX 


Unidentified 


X X X X 


X 


Labridae/L-imanda ferruginea 
U rophycis /Enche lyopus /Pepr ilus 
Enchelyopus/Merluccius 
Urophycis/Merl ucci us 
Scopthalmus/ Paralichthys 


X X X X 
X X 
X 
X 
X X 





X = Present 



MEW HAVEN HARBOR 

ECOLOGICAL STUDIES 

SUMMARY REPORT, 1979 



5.0 EXPOSURE PANELS 

by C. Drew Harvell 
Kenneth A. Simon and Andrew J. McCusker 

Normandeau Associates, Inc. 
Bedford, N. H. 



TABLE OF CONTENTS 



PAGE 

INTRODUCTION 5-1 

METHODS 5-2 

CHARACTERIZATION OF THE NEW HAVEN HARBOR EXPOSURE 

PANEL COMMUNITY 6-7 

Charaateristic Taxa 5-20 

Selected Taxa 5-20 

COMPARISON OF NEW HAVEN HARBOR WITH OTHER LONG ISLAND 

SOUND SITES 5-37 

ANALYSIS OF IMPACTS OF NEW HAVEN HARBOR STATION OPERATION . . . 5-41 

SUMMARY 5-43 

LITERATURE CITED 5-50 



LIST OF FIGURES 



PAGE 

5-1. Location of three exposure panel stations within 

New Haven Harbor 5-4 

5-2. Configuration of exposure panel array and construction 

of exposure panels 5-4 

5-3. Settlement times of abundant taxa on short-term panels 

by month, from July 1971 through October 1977 5-8 

5-4. Species richness by month and by station for long- 
term panels, August 1971 through October 1977, with 
mean monthly water temperatures 5-11 

5-5. Species on long-term panels by station and by year, 

August 1971 through October 1977 5-12 

5-6. Abundance of Balanus arenatus by year and by station, 

for years present, August 1971 through October 1977. . . 5-21 

5-7. Abundance of Balanus spp. by year and by station, for 

years present, August 1971 through October 1977 5-21 

5-8. Abundance of Balanus improvisus by year and by station, 

August 1971 through October 1977 5-22 

5-9. Abundance of Balanus ebumeus by year and by station, 

August 1971 through October 1977 5-23 

5-10. Abundance of Obelia longissima by year and by station, 

August 1971 through October 1977 5-24 

5-11. Abundance of Polydora spp./mudworm tubes by year and 

by station, August 1971 through October 1977 5-25 

5-12. Abundance of Covophium insidiosum by year and by 

station, August 1971 through October 1977 5-26 

5-13. Abundance of Teredo navalis by year and by station, 

August 1971 through October 1977 5-27 

5-14. Abundance of Mytilus edulis by year and by station, 

August 1971 through October 1977 .... ' 5-28 



IT 



LIST OF TABLES 



PAGE 

5-1 . TOTAL NUMBER OF MONTHS LONG-TERM PANELS SUBMERGED .... 5-5 

5-2. SPECIES RICHNESS ON SHORT-TERM PANELS BY MONTH, 

AUGUST 1971 THROUGH OCTOBER 1977 5-10 

5-3. HIGHEST TAXA DISTRIBUTION OVER STATION FOR SHORT- AND 

LONG-TERM PANELS COMBINED 5-13 

5-4. CHARACTERISTIC TAXA DISTRIBUTIONS BY YEAR AND BY STATION 

(SHORT- AND LONG-TERM COMBINED) 5-18 

5-5. PERCENT OCCURRENCE OF ALL TAXA ON LONG-TERM PANELS AT 

EACH STATION, AUGUST 1971 THROUGH OCTOBER 1977 5-19 

5-6. FAUNAL SPECIES PRESENT AT SELECTED LOCATIONS IN 

LONG ISLAND SOUND 5-33 

5-7. CHARACTERISTIC TAXA PRESENT AT NEW HAVEN HARBOR AND 

MILLSTONE HARBOR 1977 5-40 

5-8. SPECIES DISTRIBUTION (BY STATION) FOR SHORT-AND LONG- 
TERM PANELS COMBINED 5-44 



m 



5.0 EXPOSURE PANELS 

by C. Drew Harvell, Kenneth A. Simon and Andrew McCusker 

Normandeau Associates, Inc. 
Bedford, N. H. 



INTRODUCTION 

Submerged hard substrates become overgrown by plant and 
animal assemblages known as fouling communities. Hydroids , mussels, 
tunicates, and marine borers are the predominant community constituents, 
while motile species form a more transient component of the assemblage. 
Epibiotic communities may accelerate deterioration of wooden structures 
or foul power station cooling systems and ship bottoms (Battelle, 1977) . 
Exposure panels of various sizes and materials have been widely used for 
the study of fouling communities (Pomerat and Weiss, 1946). 

The exposure panel component of the New Haven Harbor Station 
Ecological Monitoring Studies was designed to evaluate the impact of the 
generating station operations on abundance, distribution, and seasonal 
patterns of populations attached to artificial substrates in New Haven 
Harbor. Information concerning the abundance and distribution of 
fouling organisms in New Haven Harbor was collected preoperationally , 
(July 1970 through July 1975) , and operationally (July 1975 through 
October 1977) as part of The United Illuminating Company's baseline and 
monitoring programs . These data have been presented and evaluated in a 
series of reports prepared from 1970 through the current year (Raytheon, 
1970a, 1970b, 1971; NAI, 1973a, 1974a, 1974b, 1975a, 1976a, 1977a, 
1978) . 

Fouling organisms were sampled on short- (1-month) and long- 
term (1-year) exposure panels. Short-term panels provide information 
regarding times and lengths of reproductive periods for species colo- 
nizing relatively bare panel surfaces. Long-term panels yield infor- 
mation on temporal sequences as well as seasonal growth patterns 



5-1 



5-2 



of colonizing species. Spiecies that do not settle on short-term panels 
due to absence of proper "niche" may settle on long-term panels and 
contribute to the development of the fouling community. 

Fouling-panel studies can be particularly effective in deter- 
mining the extent of impact of a thermal discharge. Settlement times 
and community composition are intricately related to water temperature 
(Naylor, 1965; Osman, 1977) ; consequently, thermal addition may alter 
spawning and settling periods as well as differentially affecting growth 
rates. Panel studies are also an effective measure of availability of 
recruitable larvae, a parameter potentially influenced by entrainment in 
the power station cooling water intake system. Enright (1977) suggested 
that although numerous, the number of larvae entrained is not ecologically 
significant in most cases, and that panel surveys provide the most 
conclusive information on the subject. 

The monitoring program was designed to characterize the normal 
New Haven Harbor community as well as to detect any impact of the power 
station on the community. The section entitled "Characterization of 
Community" discusses natural, seasonal and annual fluctuations as well 
as spatial variations in dominant species distribution. These param- 
eters are compared with other sites in Long Island Sound. 

Potential modes of power station impact are examined in the 
"analysis of impact" section. These parameters are considered with 
reference to the New Haven Harbor community, utilizing information from 
other thermal impact studies in Long Island Sound. Data from preopera- 
tional and operational periods are compared to detect presence or 
absence of impact. 



METHODS 

Exposure panels were maintained at Long Wharf, the New Haven 
Harbor Station pier (referred to as the Coke Works Pier prior to 1976) 



5-3 



and on a dolphin off Fort Hale Park in New Haven Harbor (Figure 5-1) . 
The New Haven Harbor Station pier site is closest to the thermal plume, 
and is in close proximity to Station 9, sampled monthly as ].iart of the 
hydrographic program (Figure 5-1). A special survey (NAI, 1977b) 
revealed that the thermal plume from Harbor Station could occasionally 
intersect Stations 8 and 9 with a temperature increase above ambient of 
0.5-1.0°C. 

A rack containing a series of horizontal 3-1/2" x 10" x 3/4" 
asbestos-faced pine panels was installed at each site one meter below 
the approximate spring low-tide level (Figure 5-2). Each month from 
July 1971 through October 1977 two panels were removed from each sta- 
tion: a short-term panel that had been exposed for 1 month and a long- 
term panel that had normally been submerged for 12 months (Table 5-1) . 
Two new panels were installed each month to replace those removed. 
During the first year of the program (1971) , long-term panels were 
removed after the second month and every month thereafter until the 
twelfth month. Consequently, until the study was a year old (July 1972), 
long-term panels showed a monthly progression of colonization and growth, 
rather than a twelve-month accumulation of species. This was also true 
on panels replaced after destruction of the panel arrays by storms and 
ice (September 1976; March 1977) . Sampling occurred each month from 1971 
through 1977 except where indicated in Table 5-1. 

After collection, each panel was placed in a container with 
sea water and refrigerated for not more than three days prior to iden- 
tification. (Prior to 1976, panels were wrapped in wet newsprint and 
refrigerated before placement in individual running seawater baths) . 
Enumeration and size observations were made on all macroscopic epifauna 
attached to the asbestos panel, and from July 1976 through October 1977 
color photographs were made of each panel. Wooden blocks were scraped 
clean and examined for boring organisms. 

The experimental regime of 12-month long-term and 1-month 
short-term panels was selected in New Haven Harbor to provide infor- 




Figure 5-1 . 



Location of three exposure panel stations within New Haven 
Harbor at (A) Fort Hale, (B) New Haven Harbor Station and 
(C) Long Wharf, with hydrographic Station 9. New Haven 
Harbor Ecological Studies Summary Report, 19-7-9. 



! ;i 





LOCATION OF 
/ SHORT-TERM PANEL 



WOOD 

ASBESTOS 

Figure 5-2. 





/ 








^ 




/ 




/ 




/ 




/ 


/ 




/ 


/ 


' 


/ 

/ 








/ , r' 








1 


o o 

/ 

/ • 


m^ 


' / 





^ 


6 o 

/ 
/ 


S^ 




/ 




O 

• / 




o' o 




o o 








/ 




/ 


/ 




/'''■' 




'f ' 




// 

/> 




V / 




-it 



Configuration of exposure panel array and construction of 
exposure panels (mounted with asbestos side away from iron 
frame). New Haven Harbor Ecological Studies Summary Report, 

1979. 



5-5 



TABLE 5-1. TOTAL NUMBER OF MONTHS LONG-TERM PANELS SUBMERGED. 
HARBOR ECOLOGICAL STUDIES SUMMARY REPORT, 1979. 



NEW HAVEN 





J 


F 


M 


A 


M 


J 


J 


A 


S 





N 


D 


1971 


























FH 
















1 


2 


3 


4 


5 


HS 
















1 


2 


3 


4 


5 


LW 
















1 


2 


3 


4 


5 


1972 


























FH 


6 


7 


8 


9 


10 


11 


12 


12 


12 


12 


12 


12 


HS 


6 


7 


8 


8 


10 


11 


12 


12 


12 


12 


12 


12 


LW 


6 


7 


8 


9 


10 


11 


12 


12 


12 


12 


12 


12 


1973 


























FH 


12 


12 


12 


12 


12 


12 


12 


12 


12 


12 


12 


12 


HS 


12 


12 


12 


12 


12 


12 


12 


12 


12 


12 


12 


12 


LW 


12 


12 


12 


12 


12 


12 


12 


12 


12 


12 


12 


12 


1974 


























FH 


12 


12 


12 


12 


12 


12 


12 


12 


12 


12 


12 


12 


HS 


12 


12 


12 


12 


12 


12 


12 


12 


12 


12 


12 


12 


LW 


12 


12 


12 


12 


12 


12 


12 


12 


12 


12 


12 


12 


1975 


























FH 


12 


12 


12 


12 


12 


12 


12 


12 


12 


12 


12 


Lost 


HS 


12 


12 


12 


12 


12 


12 


12 


12 


12 


12 


12 


12 


LW 


12 


12 


12 


12 


12 


12 


12 


12 


12 


12 


12 


12 


1976 


























FH 


12 


12 


12 


12 


12 


12 


12 


12 


Lost 




1 


2 


HS 


12 


12 


12 


12 


12 


12 


12 


12 


12 


12 


12 


12 


LW 


12 


12 


12 


12 


12 


12 


12 


12 


12 


12 


12 


12 


1977 


























FH 


3 


4 


Lost 




1 


2 


3 


4 


5 


6 


7 


8 


HS 


12 


12 


12 


12 


12 


12 


12 


12 


12 


12 


12 


12 


LW 


12 


12 


12 


12 


12 


12 


12 


12 


12 


12 


12 


12 



5-6 



mation relevant to a thermal impact study and the most useful compara- 
tive information relative to greater Long Island Sound. This type of 
program yields information concerning time and length of larval recruit- 
ment periods and "climax community" compositions. The short-term panels 
provide a good indication of times of reproductive activity in panel 
assemblage members, which is usually dependent upon water temperature 
(Cory and Nauman, 1969; Osmann, 1977) . Information on temporal pro- 
gression of the community is not available through the study design. 

Data are presented as recorded but may not always consistently 
reflect the actual situation due to personnel changes in May 1975 and 
July 1976. After May 1975 attempts were made to improve the accuracy of 
the data; estimation techniques for percent cover of hydroids changed in 
May 1976, along with the addition of a verified reference collection. 
Greater emphasis was placed on the identification and enumeration of 
smaller organisms. In some cases the use of absolute numbers replaced 
percent cover estimations; all animals are currently enumerated except 
for colonial liydroids, tunicatos and bryozoans. To ensure no loss of data 
comparability due to the contractor change in 1976, efforts were made to 
improve the level of identification to the species level. In 1976, 
specific, generic and familial level identifications were reported. 
Seventeen of the higher taxa were replaced in 1977 by more precise 
nomenclature. For example, in 1976, mudworm tubes, Polydora spp. and 
P. ligni were recorded, but in 1977 more careful identification esta- 
blished that only P. ligni was present. Because species richness is 
strongly influenced by this type of change, its usefulness in the study 
is limited. The emphasis in determining the nature of the fouling panel 
community is more reliably directed to a consideration of the species 
which occur frequently or abundantly in the harbor. 

Similar sampling methods were used on other fouling-panel 
studies conducted in the Long Island Sound area (Niantic Bay and Stam- 
ford Harbor; Battelle, 1978 and NAI, 1974c respectively). Studies in 
Bridgeport Harbor (NAI, 1973b) utilized different techniques: 3" x 3" 
glass panels that were fixed in one percent formalin immediately after 



5-7 



collection. Samples collected at one site each in Bridgeport and New 
Haven Harbor during a 1935 survey (Clapp, 1937) used nine 4" x 4" x 6" 
pine blocks attached to a wooden board. The exposure scheme in the 1935 
survey was similar to the present study in that each month two blocks 
were removed and replaced (long-term and short-term); the longest long- 
term block was on site from February-November 1935. Stamford Harbor 
long-term panels (1971-1973, NAI, 1974c) were sampled to describe 
temporal succession from the period of initial exposure (Panel number 2 
removed after 2 months exposure. Panel number 3 after 3 months... Panel 
number 12 after 12 months) . 



CHARACTERIZATION OF THE NEW HAVEN HARBOR EXPOSURE PANEL COMMUNITY 

The New Haven Harbor fouling community observed on exposure 
panels was similar in terms of dominant taxa, species richness, temporal 
variability and spatial distribution over all years of the study (NAI, 
1978) . The long-term fouling community was doninated by barnacles 
[Balanus spp. ) , hydroids (Ohelia longissima) , mussels [Mytilus edulis) , 
marine borers (Teredo navalis) , mudworms {Polydora ligni) , and tube- 
dwelling amphipods (Corophium insidiosum) . Dominance was determined by 
percent occurrence and abundance over all years. (Percent occurrence 
values were calculated by dividing the total number of times an organism 
appeared at a given station by the number of samples taken over the 
seven-year period at that station. ) Most taxa exhibited seasonal fluc- 
tuations in abundance related to spawning and settlement. Long-term 
panels did not show clear seasonal patterns. In some years, high summer 
species-richness values on long-term panels occurred (1977) , but spring 
or fall maxima were equally prevalent over the entire seven-year study 
period (Figure 5-4) . The number of taxa was usually lower at Long Wharf 
than Harbor Station or Fort Hale. 

The short-term fouling community was dominated (>3-4 yrs 
presence) by Obelia spp.. Nereis succinea, Balanus eburneus , and Mytilus 
edulis. Seasonal distributions are a function of reproductive timing 



5-8 



I 

Vi 



WW 






I 



1^ 






r 



i 



ii 

11 



ff 



^14 



it 

4 

^ 5 



^TT 

^ ^ 

^ ^ 

^ ^ 

^ ^ 
-&-». 



Si 



I 



I 



\^ 



11 



C 



Vn 






g ^ ^gx^.^li 



il 



-M- 



! 






Ml 



^^^ 



* 



vtrk 






1 



<! ^ ^ 



* 



I 



i 



in 



in 



1 



If 



f 



-f- 



$; 



If 



^ 5 ^ 



I 



i^^-^ 



I 



ni 



111 



^1 






I 



J 



Iff 



II 



^ 



I 



u 



1 1 1 i^ o 



1 



II 



i 



I! 



I 



■ 



0) 0) 0) 

u o u 

c c c 

<D 0) QJ 

cn w 01 

0) 0) 0) 

n ^J 1^ 

Oj CI) CLi 

www 

!h ^^ !m 

(Ti rO to 

0) 0) 0) 

CM ■si" I^ 

I I I 

^ n LD 



IS 



T 






>1 






E i- 






O fO 






s- E 






>+- E 






3 






- (/5 






x: 






+-> (/) 




H 


C OJ 




H 


o •!- 




Ob 


E -O 




Vj 


3 




0) 


>,+-> 




> 


JO 00 







to 1 — 




c 


r— re 




IB 


QJ o 






E -r- 




-P 


« Ol 




ifl 


Q- O 






^— 




"0 


E O 




C 


s- o 




IT! 


0) uj 






+-> 




W 


1 S- 




Id 


■M O 




a) 


s- ja 




>i 


o s- 






-E (O 







1/5 3r 




C 



C E 






o <u 




4J 


> 




M 


(0 (O 




(C 


X n: 




UJ 


ra 




H 


4-> S 






(U 




•P 






Id 


+J 






c 




^ 


fO • 







■o r-~ 




IH 


E r-~. 






3 CTl 




m 


J2 1— 




fi 


rO 







s_ 




•H 


M- O) 




•P 


O JD 




nJ 


O 




-P 


tn +J 




I/) 


0) o 






E O 




H 


•1— 




iH 


4-> J^ 


cn 


Id 




CTl 


•p 


E O 




(d 


OJ S_ 






E ^ 


*» 


Di 


0) +J 


4-> 


c 


r— 


S- 


■rl 


-l-> 1— 


o 


M 


+J r^ 


Q- 


M 


(U en 


dJ 


3 


C/1 I— 


ai 















U) 


CO 




ID 

■H 


ID 






(1) 


Ol 




ft 


S- 




w 



5-9 



with most species settling from June through October (Figure 5-3) . 
Species richness values were greatest in July, August and September for 
all years (Table 5-2) . Species richness was usually lower at Long Wharf 
than Fort Hale or Harbor Station, reflecting decreased water quality in 
the inner harbor. 

Species richness on long-term panels showed annual increases 
from 1971 through 1976 and a decrease in 1977 (Figures 5-4, 5-5). As 
already indicated, however, this parameter is influenced by taxonomic 
refinements, panel losses and length of sampling period. Table 5-3 was 
constructed to assess the effect of 1975 and 1976 taxonomic changes on 
the data. Species are included in the highest taxon that could have 
been used at any time. For example, in some years barnacles were 
identified to Balanus spp. , consequently more specific taxa, B. ebur- 
neus , B. crenatus and B. improvisus are grouped under Balanus spp. 
and times of occurrence noted. Many of the polychaete species have been 
grouped in families as the lowest meaningful taxon, while in some cases 
the class designation Polychaeta was used. Taxa are marked to indicate 
changes in identification resulting from the 1975 personnel change, as 
well as changes instituted with the new contractor in 1976. The latter 
have a limited impact on Table 5-3 data because the changes are largely 
refinements of previously identified taxa. Figure 5-4, however, shows a 
large 1976 species richness increase reflecting an increase in more 
specific taxa, accompanying the previously used general classifications, 
but this increase is not a true indication of an actual species richness 
increase. The 1977 decrease is related to long-term panel loss at Fort 
Hale, and the shortened sample period (10 months) as well as taxonomic 
refinements . 

Seasonal trends in long-term panel species richness were 
variable in New Haven Harbor. High summer richness occurred in the 
summer of 1977, but not in 1975 and 1976, and was probably a function of 
recruitment from spawning populations (Osman, 1977) . The general trend 
of unpolluted estuaries is toward high summer richness (Calder and 
Brehmer, 1967; NAI, 1975b; NUSCO, 1977), but this trend may be vari- 

Text continued on page 5-16. 



5-10 



TABLE 5-2. SPECIES RICHNESS ON SHORT-TERM PANELS BY MONTH, AUGUST 1971 
THROUGH OCTOBER 1977. NEW HAVEN HARBOR ECOLOGICAL STUDIES 
SUMMARY REPORT, 1979. 













SHORT 


TERM PANELS 










Fort Hale 


J 


F 


M 


A 


M 


J 


J 


A 


S 





N 


D 


TOTAL 


1971 
















6 


2 


5 


2 


1 


6 


1972 


1 











3 


2 


2 


7 


4 


3 


2 


1 


9 


1973 


1 








2 





2 





3 


6 


3 


3 





7 


1974 


2 





1 





4 


5 


1 


4 


5 


6 


1 


1 


12 


1975 


1 











4 


2 


5 


7 


14 


10 


1 


1 


19 


1976 


ND 


1 


ND 


3 


2 


3 


6 


10 


ND 


ND 








18 


1977 








ND 


ND 





2 


19 


13 


2 


4 








21 


Harbor Station 


1971 
















4 


2 


4 


1 


1 


7 


1972 


1 











2 


3 


2 


3 


3 


2 


2 





7 


1973 


3 








1 


3 


1 


5 


3 


2 





3 


2 


12 


1974 











1 


2 


3 


3 


8 


6 


5 


2 


1 


8 


1975 


1 





1 


1 


7 


4 


9 


5 


11 


7 


1 





26 


1976 








3 


1 





4 


11 


13 


17 


7 


1 





28 


1977 











1 





1 


17 


22 


4 


1 








30 


Long Wharf 


1971 
















3 





3 


3 





5 


1972 














1 


2 


2 


2 


1 


1 


1 





3 


1973 


1 














2 


4 


2 


3 


3 


1 


1 


6 


1974 


1 








1 


3 


2 


1 


3 


6 


3 


1 





8 


1975 














5 


2 


4 


3 


10 


2 








17 


1976 








3 


1 


1 


2 


5 


10 


11 


4 








19 


1977 











1 





1 


7 


10 


3 











14 



ND 



No Data 



3ynivy3dN3i 



5-11 



I I I I I I I \ \ I L_l 1 



3 3ynivy3dW3i 




•^ (NJ O CO (£1 ^ 
C\J OJ OJ ^ ^ -- 

I I \ I I L 



J i I I L 



o 




VXVi 



r-. 




en 




' — 




-!-> 




to 




3 




CD 




3 




<c 




A 




</) 




r~~ 




<u • 




C (/I 




(0 0) 




Q- S- 




3 


01 


E +J 


r-^ 


S- n3 


o^ 


O) S- 


^~ 


+-> d) 


«% 


1 CL-t-> 


y> E 


i- 


c 0) 


o 


o -t-> 


Q- 




0) 


s- 


Qi 


S- (U 




O -t-> 


>> 


4- (0 


S- 


s 


fO 


sr 


E 


O =-, E 


•r— r^ 


_) 


+-> j:: 


oo 


res -M 




-)-> c: 


CO 


ui o 


<U 


E 


•1— 


>> 


■o 


JD C 


3 


(T3 


+-) 


"O O) 


oo 


e E 




rci 


r^ 


^ 


(O 


j= +J 


o 


4-" •.- 


•r— 


c 2 


ai 


o 


o 


f= " 


r^ 


r>. 


o 


>ir-. 


u 


JD CTi 


UJ 


f>^ 




00 


s- 


on S- 


o 


QJ (U 


JD 


c: jD 


s- 


^ o 


ra 


O -!-> 


:r 


•1- o 




S- o 


E 




(U 


00 ^ 


> 


(1) en 


fO 


•r- 3 


■m 


o o 




a; s_ 


5 


CL-C 


OJ 


00 -!-> 


^ 


"* 




Ln 




<u 




£- 





n 1 I I 



"1 I I I I r 

* SH Q 00 U) ^ 



VXVi 



5-12 



1 



58 

54 
52 
46 

42 H 
38 



^. 34H 



a. 

00 



o 

CO 



30- 

26- 

22- 

18 

14 H 

10 
6- 
2 — 



FORT HALE 



HARBOR STATION 



LONG WHARF 




1971 



1972 



1973 



1974 



1975 



1976 



1977 



Figure 5-5. Species richness on long-term panels by station and by year, 
August 1971 through October 1977. New Haven Harbor 
Ecological Studies Summary Report, 1979. 



5-13 



Di 
C! 
(0 

o 

u 
o 

4-1 

o 

IT) 
4J 

o 
o 

\o 
r- 



0) 

c 

re 

u 



0) 

c 
c 
o 
w 

M 
0) 

in 
r- 





1 

3 










X 




XXX 


X 


X X 




X X 




X X 




_l 




























r~» 






























r^ 


oo 










X X 




XXX 


X 


X X 




X XX 




X X 


en 


:r. 






























31 










X 




XXX 




X X 




X XX 




X 




3 


X 




X 




X X 




XXX 


X 


X X 


X 


X X 




X X 




—1 






























00 

re 


X 








X X 




XXX 


X 


X X 


X 


X © 




X X 


r— 
































Ll_ 


X 




X 




XXX 




X X 


X 


X X 


X 






X X 




3 
_l 

re 










X X 




X X 




X X 


X 


X 




X X 


LO 






X 




XXX 




X X 




X X 


X 


X© 




X X 






X© 




@x 




XXX 




X X 




X X 


X 






X X 




3 










X 






X 






X 




X X 




_l 




























^ 






























1^ 


00 

-r- 










X X 




XXX 


X 


X 


X 


X 




X X 


































U- 










X X 




X X 


X 


X 


X 


X 




X 




Ij 










X 




X X 


X 






X 




X 


CO 




























r-- 


OO 


X 








X X 




X X 


X 


X X 


X 


X X 




X X 


cn 


3: 






























re 

U- 










XXX 




X X 


X 




X 


X X 




X X 




3 










X 




X 


X 










X 




_J 




























CM 






























r~ 


OO 










X X 




X 






X 






X X 


CTl 


~^ 








































X X 




X 


X 


X 


X 






X X 




3 














X 












X 




_1 




























^— 






























r- 


OO 










X 




X 












X X 


CTl 


n: 






























3r 
u. 










X 




X 












X X 










■H 






























-i^ 




a 


























(0 q 




(0 












•>s 














M fQ 




o 












^ 














Q) -q 




N 








m 




Q< 














M-l k 













•>H 




M 










• 




■H gj 




Si 








(H 















a, 




M ^ 




4-1 








to 




t) 










a, 




o o 




c 




<c 




bi 




3 




• 






CO 




a -q 




< 




M 




M 




u 




a • 






<" m 


^ 




< 




< 


0) 3 




3 






<, 


tn a 






(0 "^ 


T3 IB 


H 


a n 


a 


rO O 




fc. 




w a> 


u 


a 






(U "H 


w 


<U -H 


0^ 


a • Qj 


H 


• T! W 








■H fC 


en 


ro W 






9 y S 


fe 


•H (H 


< 


W ft ■r4 


h:i 


a-H ^ 


Q) 


(U (Q 


0) 


QJ T3 


D 


Q) 






< >< 2 


H 


4-1 t3 


Q 


a 4-1 


W 


a u 


rfl 


nj -H 


(0 


0) (h -h 


J 


in re 






hP a, ^ 


« 


•rH c; 


H 


6 w -M 


z 


CO 


T3 


TJ Sh 


TJ 


n3 QJ 0) rH 


i-:| 


■U M 




<c 


o 


■P 


z 


3 +J 


s 


T3 <U 


•iH 


■rH HJ 


•H 


Ti c; fo rH 


o 


to 3 




X 


^ p ■;;? 


(h 


C x; 


u 


•H H3 C 


<: 


to -!«i 





rH -H 


rH 


■H O 13 OJ 


s 


'a 




=a: 


i^ w 




(D 




-H 0) 




■■S rH M 


c 


H M 


p 


C !h -H XI 




to -rH 




h- 


O i^i 




'O -H 




d) M Ti 




<u H nj 


>, 


0) Q) 


a 


3 rH OJ 




to Dj 






'"' "S 




-H -H 




-H QJ -r^ 




M >< t( 


r-( 


jq -Q 


^1 


•H re ^ M 




re QJ 






-C r? 




C (0 




nj -c) c; 




(U ^ 


o 


(C H3 


(U 


a -w >i OJ 




!h M 






u (^ 




D tn 




!13 O D 




a: fij a. 


ft 


CO Co 


en 


en CO en Eh 




o o 



T3 
(U 
3 
C 
•H 
4J 
C 

o 



5-14 





. — ^ 




XXX X 








X 




X X X X 




Ij 


















r^ 




















r\ 


OO 




XX X 








X 




X X X X 


en 


re 


















1 — 






















nr 


X 


X X 




X 




X 




XXX 




u_ 




















3 




XX X 








X 




X X 




_J 




















3= 




XXX |x 








X 




X X X X 




IE 
U- 




XXX 








X 




XX X 




3 




XX X 




X 




X 




X 




_l 


















LO 




















r-^ 


00 




XX X 








X 




X XX 


en 


re 






















® 


XXX 








X 




X X 




-g; 








X 




X 




X 




_J 


















"=t 




















r^ 


C/0 




X X 








X 




X 


en 


IC 
























XXX 








X 




XXX 




3 




XX X 








X 




X 




_l 


















n 




















t^ 


CO 




X X 








X 




X 


CD 


n: 




















3: 




X X 








X 




X 




3 




X X 








X 




X X 




_I 


















C\J 




















^^ 


00 




X X 








X 




X XX 


en 


n: 


















r— 






















IE 




X X 




X 




X 




X X 




3 




X 








X 








—1 


















^— 




















r- 


OO 




X 








X 




X 


CT> 


zn 




















Li- 




X 








X 




X 




























to 


s 


















■■H 


Q 


















M 


o 


















t! 


04 
















CO 


c; to 


o 
















•-s 


3 


CO 
















m M 


•H (B 


H 




„,->. 












M -M 


t8 ■□ (U 


— " 




< 




„ . 








3 -tJ 






H 




<: 








(0 


•u to q c: 


< 




Q 




Q 


Ti • dJ 






W Ni 


m -H OJ -H 


w 


• 


w 




o 


O ft (fl 






-Cl HJ 


C; m r-H 4J u 


u 


(C ft 


04 


• 


Oi 


ft ft Ti 






o to 


3-^3 • (1) Qj 


< 


q ft 


H 


ft 


H 


-H Q) W -H 








M !h ^3 ft n5 0) X 


B 


■■H m 


g 


ft 


m 


4:; nj (CM 






fO t! 


(TJ (U ft 'd to q 


OT 


M 


en 


04 


ft Ti S 0) <D 






M q 


la q w -H -H 


D 


g OJ 


H 




^ 


B -H 3 T! 




ce 


M -M 


M Q) to a (C Ci, (t3 


ai 




u 


to 


^ 


(0 i-l -ri -r-l 




X 


Q) M 


-H ^ 3 (C -H -M -H C 


u 


M 




3 


— ' 


.-1 -q !-4 M 




<c 


-a 


tU HJM-HTi ta-rH 




(C o 




q 




TJ 0) Qj rtJ >i 




\— 


■ri -W 


M -H 3 0) It] to M 




*^ q 




to 




■H M g £ 






!h +J 


■unj+JOiHMOrtJ 

■h3i3i3(UJ:JMU 




QJ 6 




M 




i-4 ft M S 






--H 




t! -M 




(C 




rti rti 0) 






Q ^^ 


^s:g:fe;H&Ht>fj; 




^ •■^ 




Kl 




rt: u tj u H 



5-15 







3 


X 












X 




X 




X 








X 


LO 








_j 
































IN 






r^ 








































r-. 


00 


X X 










X 


X 




X 




X 








X X 


0> 


OJ 




CT\ 


zc 
































(N 


ro 








X X! 












X 




X 




X 










CM 








3 


@ 








X 


* 
X 


X X 




X 




X X 








X X 


o 




u 


CTl 


3: 










X 




X X 




X 




x@ 




X 




X X 


^ 






Ll_ 


® 




© 


® 


X 




xLxJ 




X 




X@ X 








X X 






u 


4-1 




3 


® 








X 




X 








X 










O 




u 

2 


cn 


re 


X 








X 


© 


X 




© 




X 








X X 


00 
CM 


CO 


+J 








































c 




JC 


x: 






X 


X 




X 






X 


X X 








X X 


O 




o 
u 




Ll_ 
































CO 




vD 




3 






























X 


<y\ 




r~ 




_1 




































(Ti 


«* 






































H 


r~. 


oo 










X 




X 




X 




X 








X X 


f-A 


in 


D 


(T> 


3: 














X 








X 








X 


CM 

rH 


OJ 












































3 






























X 


tN 




fd 




_l 
































iH 




O 


CO 


00 














X 








X 








X X 


O 
(M 


CM 




' 


n: 










X 




X 




X 




X 




X 




X 


r-H 








U- 
































tNl 















































3 






















X 








X 


.-1 




J^ 




_1 
































r-\ 




GJ 


CM 






































a 


r^ 


oo 






















X 








X 


•^ 


cn 


<T> 


in 
































nH 


.H 


in 


' 


:r. 














X 




X 




X 










t~- 




cn 




Ll_ 
































r-l 




r-l 














"~~" 


























o 




3 
_I 

00 

zsz 


















X 




X 
X 
X 








X 
X 
X 


o 


rH 














to 








































c 

















































































h 






•M 








to 


























Mh 






to 








•M 












^^ 














•M 






to 






to 


c; 












T3 














to M 






■H 




~ w 


c 


Sh 








•H 




d) 














3 4J 






M 




S -M 


to 


to to 








M 




a 














to to 






M 




3 M 


•H 


+J &, 


< 






OJ 




■H 














to 3 




• 


■M IB 




O -H 


to 


c: ^ -H 


H 


•H 




to 




iB-i 












CO 


Q) bi 


tj 


Qa 


■H ^ 




3i 


to 


tU c 




■■s 




to 


IB 












3 


!s 3 


(^ 


a 


+J 


<< 


•S to 


M 


M (0 3 


s 


to 







X 


X 








fO 


— v^ 


+J 


Q, (C 


ti 


to 


to to 


EH 


is to 


M 


3 +J 


w 


(U 




M 


IB 


to u 








ro +J to 


< 


<a 


Cb 


X 




-C! 3 


u 


Oj tn -w 


to 


•U to IB 


w 


.C! 


< 


-q 


H 


e^ 








4J (0 'a 


a 


Ih 


'a to 


Q) 


to 


Is (U 


o 


■H 


Q, 


to O M 


Q 


iH 


Eh 


. 




CO 








tC -U -H 


o 


o 


3 


+J 


(D 


(U Qj 


Oi 


E (0 M 




3 £5 M 


O 


,0 


< 


to tt 


m 


4-1 C 








C! -w 


ft 


(H 


Q) Q) 




+J 


-c; o 


CM 


3 -M >H 


to 


M (U 


S 


Mh 


§ 


a 














r-l qj -H 


< 


^ 


Q* a, 


0) 


(U 


c; 


o 


■H .i< 3 


M 


S Vh 


H 




to 0) 




■H 








tc -a c 


u 


•H 





Q< 


^ 


to (B 


E-1 


t) C! +J 


3 


to IB Q( 


K 


to 


O 


3 


u 


^ -M 








^ 


w 




c; c; 







3 Q< 


u 


•H (0 


to 


U 


to 


ffi 


-H IB 


o 


tU lO 








(B tJ 


Q 


(H 


tJ fC 




^ 


<U 


w 


c; ^ <o 





M M 


W 


•M 


u 


r-H r-( 


Q 


■Q -^ 








(tl 4J 4J 




<D 


Q, D^ 


(U 


g-^ 




O M M 


+J 


•U +J N 




U 




3i 3 


^ 


E t/2 








to -H -ri 




O 


S 


Qj 


(13 




3l tU 3 


Q, 


-H 




(U 




M t3l 


p 


r-* ' 








to --H M 




« 


M ^ 





M 


c; +J 




^ tn 


Si 


<U Q) ^ 




■U 




■U -H 


s 


2 








(0 Q) Q) 




<a 


3 (U 


Q) 


ts 


tC -H 




M 3 


(H 


M M 




to 




o 2 












f^ s: §: 




o 


b] tt: 


^ 


a^ 


a, q; 




KC cq cq 


o 


Cq Cq. CO 




-^ 




cq S; 







5-16 



able. Cory and Nauman (1963) found reduced numbers and high mortality 
in a Patuxent River Estuary thermal effluent discharge canal in August, 
although the same canal showed high summer species richness the fol- 
lowing August. 

Settlement on short-term panels usually began in March, with 
most taxa present in July, August and September as a function of spring 
and summer recruitment; settlement declined thereafter (Figure 5-3, 
Table 5-2) . Settlement followed the same general sequence of epifaunal 
dominants as in a North Carolina estuary discussed by Dean & Bellis 
(1975) , with barnacles and hydroids settling in the spring, bryozoans in 
the summer, and a smaller set of barnacles in the fall. An increase in 
short-term panel species richness values from 1971 through 1977 was 
probably a result of taxonomic refinements, but could also be indicative 
of some water quality improvements as was the case with species diver- 
sity at Niantic Bay (Battelle, 1978) . For most years, settlement on 
short-term panels was greater at New Haven Harbor Station and Fort Hale 
than Long Wharf, probably reflecting deteriorated water quality at Long 
Wharf (Table 5-2) . 

During most years of the study, certain trends in spatial 
distribution were evident. Species richness values were lower at Long 
Wharf on short-term panels for all years and on long-term panels for all 
years except 1976 and 1977 (Table 5-2, Figure 5-5). The apparent reversal 
of this trend in 1977 is probably accounted for by the loss of the panel 
array at Fort Hale that year and resultant immaturity of the communities 
on Fort Hale long-term panels that were examined. Decreasing richness 
from outer to inner harbor is characteristic of polluted estuaries 
(Calder and Brehmer, 1967) and was also seen in Bridgeport and Stamford 
Harbors (NAI, 1973b, 1974c). Long Wharf generally showed a reduced 
salinity (from 1 to 4 /oo depending on tide and season) due to its 
proximity to the freshwater influx of the Mill and Quinnipiac Rivers 
(NAI, 1977a) . This may reduce the number of species occurring there. 



5-17 



Table 5-4 shows, by year and station, the distribution of char- 
acteristic species on short- and long-term panels (present at all stations 
for at least one year and with a total percent occurrence over all 
panels and years of greater than 3.5%) . The following sjiecies were 
present for all years at most stations: Balanus eburneus , Obelia 
longissima, Styllochus ellipticus , Crepidula fornicata , Nereis succinea, 
Electra crustulenta, and Corophium insidiosum. This consistent occur- 
rence resulted in high percent-occurrence values irrespective of abso- 
lute quantity (Table 5-5) . Other species showed a more narrow distri- 
bution limited to one or two stations. These limited distributions were 
probably related to pollution tolerance, with more opportunistic species 
such as Polydora ligni and Corophium insidiosum occurring with greater 
frequency in the inner harbor (Table 5-5) . Both species are considered 
to be indicators of organic pollution (Anger, 1977; Wass, 1967; Rosen- 
berg, 1976; Grassle and Grassle, 1976) . Recent data, in which more 
careful enumerations of these small organisms were made, showed greater 
abundances of P. ligni and C. insidiosum at Long Wharf than Harbor 
Station and Fort Hale. Less tolerant species, such as Mytilus edulis , 
Teredo navalis and Obelia longissima occured more frequently at Fort 
Hale and Harbor Station (Table 5-5) . These species may be sensitive to 
either high levels of organic pollution, low dissolved oxygen, or 
increased temperatures (Grave, 1933; NAI, 1976; Clapp, 1937) . 

In general. New Haven Harbor supported a diverse fouling 
community with definite spatial and temporal species distributions. 
Species richness was generally high at Fort Hale in the outer harbor and 
decreased at Long Wharf in the inner harbor. Most taxa exhibited sea- 
sonal fluctuations in abundance related to spawning and settlement. 
Settlement on short-term panels usually occurred in July, August and 
September, at the height of the reproductive season. Long-term panels 
did not show as clear a seasonal pattern; maxima occurred in spring, 
siommer or fall. Dominant species remained consistent in spatial dis- 
tribution, with fluctuating abundances. Most displayed a seasonal 
pattern of abundance. 



5-18 



q; 




LU 




t- 




C3 




■z. 




o 




— 1 




Q 




:z 


• 


<■ 


CT> 




r^ 


1 


a> 


1— 


r— 


Di 


A 


O 


1— 


IE 


ct: 


00 


o 


*■ — ' 


a. 



Ql 



1 — 1 


>- 


1— 


oc 


=x. 




\- 


^ 


KTl 


^ 




r3 


>- 


00 


CO 






to 


Q 


UJ 


Z 


1— 1 


<: 


Q 




Z3 


d; 


I— 


<: 


00 


LlJ 




>- 


— 1 




< 


>- 


o 


CO 


1 — I 




CD 


00 


O 


^ 


_J 


o 


o 


1 — 1 


o 


1— 


Ll] 


ID 




CO 


an 


1 — 1 


o 


Qi 


CQ 


1— 


OL 


00 


■a: 



X > 

■< < 



<_) 



00 

LU -— -. 

I— Q 

O LU 

<: s: 

D; 1—1 

cC CQ 

rn s: 

o o 

o 



I 

LO 



CO 



I3 

1 

1 E 


1 1 1 1 1 >i ^ 

1 1 1 1 >: ^ I 


r 

1 


1 1 1 1 X 1 X 

1 1 1 1 1 x; x: 


1; 


XX 

1 1 1 1 1 X X 
1 1 1 1 1 X X 


1^ 


XXXI XXX 
X X X X 1 XX 

X X X >: X X X 




1 1 1 1 1 >: X 

XX 


3 


1 1 1 X 1 X 1 
1 XI 1 XXI 


ta 3 


1 I 1 1 X X I 
1 X X X X X X 
1 X X X X X 1 


3 

1' 


1 1 1 1 X X 1 
1 1 1 X X X 1 
1 1 1 X X X 1 




1 XXI XXX 

X X X X X X X 

X X X X X X X 


2 


S?!P?SSK 



3 


1 1 X , X X X 
1 1 1 1 X X X 

1 j 1 1 1 1 X 




1 X X X X X X 

, X X X X X X 
, X X , X X X 


3 S 

L 


X X X X X X , 

X X X X X X X 
X X X 1 X X , 


1= 

CO 

ft; Lj_ 


XX 

X X X X X X X 
X X X X X X 1 


3 

1 

UJ 


1 1 t 1 X X 1 
1 1 1 XXXI 
1 X X X X X j 


i = 

^ u. 

CO 


1 1 1 I X X X 
j 1 X X X X X 

1 X 1 X X X X 


1' 


1 1 X X X X X 

XX 

1 1 1 1 t 1 X 


1 = 
%- 

% 
g ^ 


t XXI XXX 
X X X X X X X 
X X X X X X X 


la 
1 


1 XXXI XX 

1 1 X X 1 X X 
1 X X X t XI 




^ (N f^ ■0' m vD t- 
r- r- r- r- r- r- t- 



g 3 

i 


1 1 1 1 X X , 
1 , 1 X X X , 
p 1 X , X X 1 


IS 
1 3 


1 1 1 1 !>"< 

1 1 1 1 X X X 

1 1 1 1 1 1 X 


r 

1: 


, X X X X X X 

, X X X X X X 

X X X X X X X 


3 


J j j j 1 j X 

1 1 1 X X X X 


i3 

i 
r 

s = 

Ll. 


1 ' !=*!<' 1 

1 1 1 X X 1 I 


3 
5 E 


XI 1 X X X X 
XI 1 X X X X 
XXI X X X X 


S 3 

i 

3 


X X X X X X X 

;?: X X X X X X 

X X X X X X X 


S3 3 

Si. 

i: 


X X X 1 X X 1 
X X X X X X j 
X X X X X X 1 ' 


1^ 

^E 


j X X j XXX 

1 X X X X X X 
1 X X X X X X 




rH (N n ^ 1/1 \D r- 



in 3 

LU _t 
CD 

i ¥ 

g 

i 
E 


1 1 X X , X , 
, , X X X , , 

1 1 ** ** 1 r 1 


^3 

to 1/) 


t 1 1 1 ^ ^ 1 

, , X X X X , 
, X X X X X 1 


3 

u. 


1 1 X , , X , 
1 , X X X 1 

III > 
1 1 =< 1 =< ^ 1 


£3 

1 

i " 


j [ j j j X X 
j j j X X X X 
1 j [ j j X j 


§ 3 

1. 

i = 


X X X X [ j 1 
X X X X XXX 
X [ X X j j [ 


l3 


1 1 j j j X j 
j j X X X X X 
j j j j X X j 


1; 

a E 


X X [ j XXX 
X X X X XXX 
X X X X XXX 


i = 

i 

i 


! ! ! ! { ^'^ 

X X X j j X X 


% 3 

a: 

i 

|e 


j j ] ] 1 X X 

1 : 1 1 1 x>' 

1 1 1 1 1 X X 




rH <N fO ^ m 10 1^ 



5-19 



TABLE 5-5. PERCENT OCCURRENCE OF ALL TAXA ON LONG-TERM PANELS AT EACH 

STATION, AUGUST 1971 THROUGH OCTOBER 1Q77. new HAVEN HARBOR 
ECOLOGICAL STUDIES SUMMARY REPORT, 1979 



FORT HALE 




HARBOR STATION 




LONG WHARF 






PERCENT 




PERCENT 




PERCENT 


SPECIES 


OCCURRENCE 


SPECIES 


OCCURRENCE 


SPECIES 


OCCURRENCE 


Nereis succinea 


87. 


Balanus eburneus 


B9.6 


Balanus eburneus 


96.1 


Balanus eburneus 


75.3 


Nereis succinea 


67.5 


Nereis succinea 


74.0 


Teredo navalis 


64.9 


Crepidula fornicata 


62.3 


Corophium insidiosum 


62.3 


Mytilis edulis 


63.6 


Teredo navalis 


62.3 


Styllochus ellipticus 


46.8 


ObeXia longissima 


54.5 


Obelia longissima 


58.4 


Obelia longissin^ 


45.5 


Electra crustulenta 


42.9 


Crepidula plana 


58.4 


Teredo navalis 


32.5 


Balanus improvisus 


33.8 


Styllochus ellipticus 


48.1 


Balanus improvisus 


32.5 


Corophium insidiosum 


32.5 


Corophium insidiosum 


45.5 


Crepidula plana 


31.2 


Styllochus ellipticus 


29.9 


Molgula citrina 


40.3 


Mytilus edulis 


25.9 


Crepidula fornicata 


27.3 


Sabella microphthalma 


38.9 


Polydora ligni 


22.1 


Serpulidae 


24.7 


Mytilus edulis 


35.1 


Mudworm tubes 


20.8 


Metridium senile 


23.4 


Electra crustulenta 


31.2 


rJeccra crustulenta 


18.2 


Panopeus herbstii 


22.1 


Metridium senile 


29.9 


Sabella microphthalma 


15.6 


Obelia sp. 


20.1 


Botryllus schlosseri 


28.6 


Obelia sp. 


11.7 


Sabella tnicrophthalma 


19.5 


Molgula manhattensis 


24.7 


Euplana gracilis 


10.4 


Crassostrea virginica 


19.5 


Serpulidae 


23.4 


Crassostrea virginica 


9.1 


Czepidula plana 


18.2 


Balanus improvisus 


22.1 


Nereis arenaceodonta 


9.1 


Mudworm tubes 


12.9 


Molgula spp. 


20.8 


Rhithropanopeus harrissi 


7.8 


Balanus crenatus 


12.9 


obelia sp. 


19.5 


Bowerbankia gracilis 


7.8 


Balanus spp. 


11.7 


Crassostrea virginica 


18.2 


Molgula citrina 


7.8 


Sagartia sp. 


10.4 


Rhithropanopeus harrissi 


18.2 


Lepidonotus squamatus 


7.8 


Bowerbankia gracilis 


10.4 


Polydora ligni 


16.9 


Mya arenaria 


6.5 


Schizoporella unicornis 


9.1 


Panopeus herbstii 


15.6 


Balanus sp. 


6.5 


Molgula citrina 


9.1 


Balanus crenatus 


14.3 


Unidentified hydrozoan 


6.5 


Caprellidae 


9.1 


Mudworm tubes 


14.3 


Wetridium senile 


5.2 


Hydzoides dianthus 


7.8 


Serpulid tubes 


14.3 


Podarke obscura 


5.2 


Hydroides sp. 


7.8 


Hydroides dianthus 


12.9 


Molgula manhattensis 


5.2 


Crassostrea sp. 


7.8 


Eumida sanguinea 


11.7 


Molgula spp. 


5.2 


Gammaridae 


7.8 


L^-p±ijonotus sguainatus 


11.7 






Molgula spp. 


7.8 


Bowerbankia gracilis 


11.7 






Botryllus schlosseri 


6.5 


Balanus spp. 


10.4 






Neopanope texana 


6.4 


Podarke obscura 


9.1 






Mya arenaria 


6.5 


Microdeutopus gryllotalpa 


9.1 






Actinaria sp 


5.2 


Actinaria sp. 


7.8 






Nereis arenaceodonta 


5.2 


Unidentified hydrozoan 


6.5 






Sabellidae 


5.2 


Hydroides spp. 
Unidentified decapoda 
Neopanope texana 
Eteone heteropoda 
Euplana gracilis 
Nereis arenaceodonta 
Syllidae 


6.5 
6.5 
6.4 
5.2 
5.1 
5.2 
5.2 







ALL STATIONS COMBINED 








PERCENT 




PERCENT 


SPECIES 


OCCURRENCE 


SPECIES 


OCCURRENCE 


Balanus eburneus 


87.0 


caprellidae 


5.2 


Nereis succinea 


75.3 


Gammaridae 


5.2 


Obelia longissima 


52.8 


Melita nitida 


5.2 


Teredo insidiosum 


52.4 


Sagartia sp. 


4.8 


Corophium insidiosum 


45.9 


Euplana gracilis 


4.8 


Styllochus ellipticus 


41.6 


Hydroides spp. 


4.8 


Mytilus edulis 


40.3 


Serpulid tubes 


4.8 


Crepidula fornicata 


38.5 


Mya arenaria 


4.8 


Crepidula plana 


35.9 


Microdeutopus gryllotalpa 


4.8 


Electra crustulenta 


29.9 


Eteone heteropoda 


3.5 


Balanus improvisus 


28.1 


Crassostrea spp. 


3.5 


Sabella microphthalma 


23.4 


Schizoporella unicornis 


3.5 


Metridium senile 


19.5 


Teredinidae 


3.4 


Molgula citrina 


19.0 


Sabellidae 


3.0 


Obelia spp. 


17.3 


Syllidae 


3.0 


Serpulidae 


16.5 


Unidentified decapod i 


2.6 


Crassostrea virginica 


15.6 


Jassa falcata 


2.2 


Mudworm tubes 


15.2 


Enteromorpha 


1.7 


Polydora ligni 


13.9 


Campanularia spp. 


1.7 


Panopeus herbstii 


13.4 


Diadujnene leucolena 


1.7 


Botryllus schlosseri 


12.6 


Unidentified anthozoan 


1.7 


Molgula spp. 


11.3 


Phyllodoce sp. 


1.7 


Molgula manhattensis 


10.8 


Ampithoe valida 


1.7 


Bowerbankia gracilis 


10.0 


Phyllodocidae 


1.3 


Rhithropanopeus harrissi 


10.0 


PotamiJJa neglecta 


1.3 


Balanus spp. 


9.5 


Spionidae 


1.3 


Balanus crenatus 


9.1 


Crepidula spp. 


1.3 


Hydroides dianthus 


7.8 


Caprella penantis 


1.3 


Lepidonotus squamatus 


6.5 


Microdeutopus ancmalus 


1.3 


Podarke obscura 


6.1 


Unidentified amphiiiod 


1.3 


Nereis arenaceodonta 


6.1 


Halichondria bowerbankia 


1.1 


Actinaria sp. 


5.6 


unidentified porifera 


1.1 


Neopanope texana 


5.6 


Ha led urn sp. 


1.1 


Unidentified hydrozoan 


5.2 


Sagartidae 


1.1 


Eumida sanguinea 


5.2 


Eteone sp. 


1.1 


Polydora spp. 


5.2 







5-20 



Charaoter'istic Taxa 

Of the species considered to be characteristic, seven were 
characterized by high frequency of occurrence {> 19 % overall) (Table 5- 
5) but generally low density. These taxa include Nereis succinea, 
Styllochus ellipticus , Crepidula spp. , Electra crustulenta, Sahella 
micropthalma, Metridium senile, and Molgula spp. Each will be briefly 
discussed with reference to percent occurrence and short-term panel 
settlement. 

Dominant taxa, characterized by high numerical abundance as 
well as high frequency of occurrence, are treated in more detail. 
Included as dominants are Balanus spp., Obelia longissima, Polydora 
ligni , Corophium insidiosum. Teredo navalis , and Mytilus edulis . Cras- 
sostrea virginica is also discussed because of its economic importance 
in the harbor. The discussion for each relates life-history and thermal 
tolerances to seasonal and spatial distributions, including occurrence 
in New Haven Harbor and greater Long Island Sound. Figures 5-6 through 
5-14 depict spatial/temporal distributions and abundances. The latter 
are converted from absolute numbers of individuals or percent coverage 
to 1, 2, 3 or 4 for consistency in presentation (see key. Figure 5-7). 
For Balanus, all the different taxonomic levels encountered in the study 
period are presented. Balanus spp. was used in 1975 and 1976 only. S. 
crenatus occurred only in 1974. 



Selected Taxa 

Nereis succinea ranked second in percent occurrence (75% 
overall) and was consistently present at all stations (Tables 5-4, 5-5) . 
Numbers were seldom great but this motile polychaete was a consistent 
component of the harbor fouling panel community. It occurred from July 
through October on short-term panels (Figure 5-3) . 



Text continued on page 5-29 



5-21 



FORT HALE 



1974 




JFMAMJJASOND 



HARBOR STATION 




JFMAMJJASOND 

LONG-TERM PANELS 



LONG WHARF 



JFMAMJJASOND 



Figure 5-6, 



Abundance*of Balanus avenatus by year and by station, for 
years present, August 1971 through October 1977. New Haven 
Harbor Ecological Studies Summary Report, 1979. 



FORT HALE 



1975 



1976 





NO 



JFMAMJJASOND 



HARBOR STATION 




^ 



JFMAMJJASOND 

LONG-TERM PANELS 



LONG WHARF 




JFMAMJJASOND 



Figure 5-7. Abundance*of Balanus spp. by year and by station, for years 
present, August 1971 through October 1977. New Haven Harbor 
Ecological Studies Summary Report, 1979. 



LEGEND 




INDEX PERCENT COVERAGE i' INDIVIDUALS 



NO COVERAGE 
<252 COVERAGE 
26-50°/; COVERAGE = 
51-75% COVERAGE = 
76-100% COVERAGE^ 



COUNT 
1-100 COUNT 
101-500 COUNT 
501-1000 COUNT 
>1000 COUNT 



ND = NO DATA 



Key for Figures 5-6 through 5-13, 



MUDWORM TUBES 
(WHERE FOUND) 



percent coverage 



5-22 



1971 



1972 



ciycn 



1973 



1974 



FORT HALE 



o- 



<y 



1975 -<( y- 



-ND 



1976 



1977 



x>-- 



-ND 




JFMAMJJASOND 



HARBOR STATION 



-o- 



o 



<y^>o 



xxx>- 



JFMAMJJASOND 

LONG-TERM PANELS 



LONG WHARF 



■o-o- 



rxxx^ 



-<y< 



X? 



JFMAMJJASOND 



Figure 5-8. Abundance*of Balanus improvisus by year and by station, 
August 1971 through October 1977. New Haven Harbor 
Ecological Studies Summary Report, 1979. 



% coverage until July 1976, individuals/panel thereafter. 



5-23 



1971 



FORT HALE 



1972 




1973 



1974 



1975 



1976 





ND -• 



v 



1977 ND 




JFMAMJJASOND 



HARBOR STATION 



^O 



JFMAMJJASOND 



LONG WHARF 




^v/ 



^\ 





■~w 



JFMAMJJASOND 



LONG-TERM PANELS 



Figure 5-9. Abundance*of Balanus ebuimeus by year and by station, 
August 1971 through October 1977, New Haven Harbor 
Ecological Studies Summary Report, 1979. 



% coverage until July 1976, individuals/panol thereafter. 



5-24 



1971 



FORT HALE 



1972 




^' 



r 



1973 



1974 



no — < 



1975 



1976 




1977 



NO |XJ 



HARBOR STATION 



o< 




zz> — < 



> 




> 



JFMAMJJASONO JFMAMJJASOND 

LONG-TERM PANELS 



LONG WHARF 



< X 



> 



X 





JFMAMJJASOND 



Figure 5-10. Abundance*of Ohelia longissima by year and by station, 
August 1971 through October 1977. New Haven Harbor 
Ecological Studies Summary Report, 1979. 



V coverage 



5-25 



1971 



1972 



1973 



1974 



1975 



1976 



1977 



FORT HALE 




■ND -I 



ND 



<3 



JFMAMJJASOND 



HARBOR STATION 



MUDWORMS 

\ /■ s y \/ 



< 




JFMAMJJASOND 



LONG WHARF 



MUDWORMS 
v_A \ 



<K 





JFMAMJJASOND 



LONG-TERM PANELS 



Figure 5-11. Abundance*of Polydora spp./mudworm tubes by year and by 
station, August 1971 through October 1977. New Haven 
Harbor Ecological Studies Summary Report, 1979. 



individuals/panel 



5-26 



1971 



FORT HALE 



1972 



1973 



1974 o — <x: 



1975 



1976 



1977 



-o < 



xxx>- 



X>K>ND- 



>"0 



JFMAMJJASOND 



HARBOR STATION 



-< 



yo- 



<x>-<z 



> — < 




LONG WHARF 



-o < 



xyc 



3^K^> 



<: 





JFMAMJJASOND JFMAMJJASOND 

LONG-TERM PANELS 



Figure 5-12. Abundance*of Corophium insidiosum by year and by station, 
August 1971 through October 1977. New Haven Harbor 
Ecological Studies Summary Report, 1979. 



individuals/panel 



5-27 



1971 



1972 



1973 



FORT HALE 

Wxx: 



\ 



1974 



1975 



1976 



M 



r\f\ 



1977 



ND -- 



— ND 



JFMAMJJASONDl 



HARBOR STATION 



-o 



x=C1 



-<iyoc 



>o — <\ 




JFMAMJJASONO 



LONG WHARF 



< 



x:^ 



<^ 



bc>-< 



> 




JFMAMJJASONO 



LONG-TERM PANELS 



Figure 5-13. Abundance*of Teredo navalis by year and by station, 
August 1971 through October 1977. New Haven Harbor 
Ecological Studies Summary Report, 1979. 



% coverage until January 1976, individuals/panel thereafter. 



5-28 



FORT HALE 



1971 



1972 



1973 




1974 



1975 



1976 



1977 



\ 



/ 




ND -- 




ND 



JFMAMJJASOND 



HARBOR STATION 



LONG WHARF 



o<z 



:30<zk: 



xx> 



o 



JFMAMJJASOND 

LONG-TERM PANELS 



-^> 





JFMAMJJASOND 



Figure 5-14. Abunclance*of Mytilus edulis by year and by station, 
August 1971 through October 1977. New Haven Harbor 
Ecological Studies Summary Report, 197?. 



% coverage until January 1975, individuals/panel thereafter 



5-29 



Stgllochus ellipticus , a turbellarian, ranked 42% overall, and 
was consistently present at all stations in low numbers (Tables 5-4, 5- 
5) . This motile species preys mainly on barnacles (Osman, 1977) . Its 
presence on short-term panels was observed from June through October 
(Figure 5-3) . Osman (1977) noted settlement from late June through 
October in the Woods Hole region. 

Crepidula fornicata and C. plana, slipper shells, showed 
percent occurrences of 38% and 36% respectively and occurred at all 
stations for most years (Tables 5-4, 5-5) . C. plana was consistently 
found on short-term panels in July and August (Figure 5-3) . 

Electra crustulenta , an ectoproct, showed an overall percent 
occurrence of 30% with presence at all stations for most years (Table 5- 
5) . Occurrence on short-term panels was noted from August through 
October (Figure 5-3). Hoagland et al . (1977) noted fall settlement of 
this species in a New Jersey estuary. 

Sabella microphthalma , a. tiibe-dwelling polychaete, had a 
percent occurrence of 23% overall in the assemblage (Table 5-5) . Osman 
(1977) noted that this species was able to extend its tube linearly and 
keep the open feeding end ahead of overgrowing species. He suggested 
that overgrowth of other taxa against the base of their tubes may add an 
additional layer of protection. Settlement was observed from July 
through October in New Haven Harbor. Osman (1977) noted settlement from 
July through August at Woods Hole (Figure 5-3) . 

Metridium senile, an anemone, had a 20% occurrence overall and 
was most common at Fort Hale and Harbor Station (Table 5-5) . Its up- 
right growth pattern, allows it to feed and spawn above the majority of 
other settling species, enabling it to exist on crowded panels (Osman, 
1977) . 

Molgula citrina and Molgula spp. showed 19% and 11% occurrence 
overall respectively with most consistent occurrence at Harbor Station 



5-30 



(Table 5-5) . This solitary tunicate can form fairly extensive assem- 
blages on crowded panels because of its small basal area and upright 
growth form (Osman, 1977) . Osman observed that Molgula spp. dominated 
entire panels in the Woods Hole region. Settlement on short-term panels 
occurred from July through October in New Haven Harbor (Figure 5-3), 
and from May through October at Woods Hole (Osmann, 1977) . 
Hoagland et al. (1977) observed settlement of M. manhattensis throughout 
the fall in New Jersey. 



Dominant Taxa 

Balanus spp. 

Balanus eburneus , B. improvisus and B. crenatus were present 
during some sampling periods on New Haven Harbor panels from 1971 
through 1977 (Figures 5-6, 5-8, 5-9). Balanus spp., which consisted 
mostly of difficult-to-identify juveniles, was recorded from 1975 to 1976 
(Figure 5-7) . B. improvisus and B. eburneus were codominants in New 
Haven Harbor with B. eburneus more abundant prior to 1976 and B. impro- 
visus more abundant thereafter. B. crenatus was abundant only in 131 A. 
B. eburneus and B. improvisus occurred at all sites, while B. crenatus 
never occurred at Long Wharf. 

The three barnacle species have similar life history patterns. 
Though hermaphroditic, barnacles usually cross-fertilize. Adults brood 
the eggs in the mantle cavity and the nauplius larvae hatch as plankton. 
Cypris larvae are the mature planktonic stage which subsequently settle 
and metamorphose into adults. Barnacles are gregarious and preferably 
set with other barnacles but in general any hard substrate will suffice. 
There are a host of factors including texture, angle, and current rate 
which influence barnacle settlement (Crisp and Barnes, 1954, Crisp and 
Stubbings, 1957). Balanus improvisus has been reported to settle in 
greater numbers in low salinity estuaries (NAI, 1977c). 



5-31 



Settlement of barnacle spat was similar in 1977 at New Haven 
Harbor to previous years. Observations on settlement are not complete 
for each species because barnacle spat are difficult to identify. In 
1977, settlement of Balanus spp. on short-term panels was first observed 
in April with a second, more intense set occurring in June through 
October, and peaks in June, July and September (variable) . Balanus 
improvisus was identified in the April set and comprised one-half of the 
July set. B. eburneus was positively identified only in mid- June, but 
as the majority of the juveniles in June and September were unidentified 
it is likely that there were more B. eburneus than indicated. Grave 
(1933) observed B. eburneus setting at Woods Hole in mid- June through 
July with a small September set. 

The apparent recent increase in Balanus improvisus beginning 
in 1975 probably reflects a series of more successful spawnings for 
the species in New Haven Harbor but it may be related to improved iden- 
tification of juvenile forms from Balanus spp. to Balanus improvisus . 
B. improvisus occurred in slightly greater numbers at Long Wharf than 
the other stations but did not show a substantially greater percent 
occurrence at this lower salinity station. Hydrographic data for New 
Haven Harbor do not indicate any temperature changes that could be the 
basis for species composition shifts. The shift to Balanus improvisus 
does not appear to be a Long Island Sound phenomenon because data from 
Millstone 1975 and 1977 indicate high numbers of B. eburneus (Battelle, 
1977, 1978). Millstone data for 1973 showed only B. eburneus and B. 
crenatus on long-term panels although B. crenatus was excluded at the 
effluent station (Battelle, 1977) . Short-term panels at Millstone showed 
S. eburneus settling in July, August and September and B. improvisus in 
August; no Balanus crenatus were seen on 1973 short-term panels. In New 
Jersey, B. eburneus was reported to set throughout the summer and into 
September; larvae of B. improvisus and B. crenatus began settling after 
September (Hoagland et al . , 1978). Fall population reductions of B. 
eburneus (Figure 5-9) seen most years at all stations in New Haven 
Harbor corresponds to observations of high mortality rates of balanoids 
in September and October (Fuller, 1946, in TRIGOM, 1973) . 



5-32 



Obel'ia long-issima 

Distribution and seasonal abundance patterns of O. longissima 
remained consistent at Now Haven harbor over the period studied. Maxi- 
mum coverage was reported from late winter through spring with peaks in 
February, March and April. "Die-off" of colonies at all sites with 
increasing temperatures usually occurred after May/ June (Figure 5-10) . 
The short-term, month-to-month variability observed was probably a 
function of colony growth rate. During spring settlement, the number of 
polyps in a growing colony doubles every 2-3 days, allowing for rapid 
colonization of substrate (Grave, 1933). The colony consists of hun- 
dreds of thousands of individuals before it becomes sexually mature. 
The normal longevity of a colony is less than one year (Grave, 1933). 

Seasonal abundance patterns of Obelia were consistent in New 
Haven Harbor and followed patterns similar to those observed in the 
Woods Hole region. At Long Wharf and Harbor Station, the inner harbor 
sites, numbers were slightly lower than at Fort Hale in the outer har- 
bor. Grave (1933) described lower Obelia densities in areas siibject to 
higher levels of suspended matter at Woods Hole. He postulated that the 
reduction in growth was related to contamination of Obelia by bacterial 
populations associated with the suspended matter. In New Haven higher 
levels of suspended matter generally occur in the inner harbor (NAI, 
1978) , possibly accounting for the lower Long Wharf and Harbor Station 
densities. Degeneration of colonies at all sites when temperatures 
increased after May /June was observed in New Haven Harbor (Figure 5-10) 
and by Grave (1933) in Woods Hole. Subsequent new growth occurred in 
September at Woods Hole from vegetative remains of spring populations . 
At Niantic Bay, Obelia occurred throughout 1973 with lower densities 
in August. Obelia settled on short-term panels at Niantic primarily in 
June (Battelle, 1974). 



5-33 



Potydora ligni 

Polydora lignl is a small, tube-dwelling spionid polychaete 
commonly found on oyster and mussel beds. It was extremely abundant 
from July 1976 through 1977 on panels maintained at Long Wharf and 
occurred in lower numbers throughout New Haven Harbor. 

Work on pollution-indicator species revealed this opportun- 
istic (Grassle and Grassle, 1974) mudworm to be an indicator of organic 
pollution (Anger, 1977; Leppakoski, 1975). It is restricted to estu- 
aries (Blake, 1969) where it builds tubes of silt from suspended sedi- 
ments (TRIGOM, 1973) . Reproduction occurs early in the spring (TRIGOM, 
1973) , after which adults brood their eggs in tiibes and the larvae are 
released to the water column from April through July (Blake, 1969) . P. 

ligni are gregarious with larvae tending to settle near other mudworm 

2 
tubes. Larsen (in TRIGOM, 1973) reported peak densities of 10,721/m as 

a normal post-reproductive level. These high densities can cause exten- 
sive silt build-up resulting in oyster mortality (Daro and Polk, 1973; 
Galtsoff , 1964) . 

Distribution of Polydora ligni in New Haven Harbor and other 
Long Island Sound estuaries has been sporadic. Unusually high numbers 
recorded in New Haven Harbor at Long Wharf in 1976 and 1977 may have 
been the result of a successful population set (Figure 5-11) ; alterna- 
tively, previous years' samplings may have underestimated this species, 
when it was recorded in lower niambers as mudworm tubes. The generally 
higher abundance at Long Wharf is probably related to the higher silt 
content of the inner harbor. Seasonal peak abundances were reported in 
July at Long Wharf in 1976 and all stations in 1977. Mudworm tubes at 
Millstone were recorded in August and September 1973 on short-term 
panels. 



5-34 



Corophiwn i-nsidiosiffn 

Corophium insidiosum, a tube-dwelling amphipod, increased in 
abundance throughout the study, with maximum numbers at Long Wliarf . 

Corophium Insidiosum has been classed as an opportunistic 
species and an indicator of slight organic pollution (Anger, 1977) . C. 
insidiosum spawns within its burrows from February through April, the 
females retaining the larvae in their brood pouch. Females may have 4-5 

broods per year, the offspring of which reproduce in the same season. 

2 
Densities may reach 63,000/m (TRIGOM, 1973). C. insidiosum is a com- 
mensal of P. ligni , utilizing the polychaete tubes to provide suitable 
habitat as well as feeding on microorganisms living in the tubes (Daro 
and Polk, 1973) . The similarity in distribution between C. insidiosum 
and P. ligni has been documented in a number of areas: Maine (Fuller, 
1946) , Chesapeake Bay (Cory, 1967) , California (Graham and Gay, 1945) , 
North Sea (Daro, 1970) , and the Baltic Sea (Anger, 1977) . 

Corophium insidiosum distribution patterns in New Haven Harbor 
were similar to other areas. Percent occurrence values of 62, 46 and 33 
percent at Long Wharf, Harbor Station and Fort Hale, respectively, in 
conjunction with Figure 5-12, indicate maximum numbers and occurrence at 

Long Wharf, a silty, inner-harbor station. Highest abundances, exceed- 

2 
ing 250,000/m , in 1977 were reported during July and August following 

juvenile settlement (NAI , 1978a). The 1976 abundance peak was also 

during the summer, but 1974, 1973 and 1972 showed spring maxima with 

smaller numbers settling in the fall. Studies at the Piscataqua River, 

New Hampshire showed C. insidiosum settling mainly in the spring and 

summer (NAI, 1977c) . C. insidiosum at Niantic Bay settled primarily in 

August (1973) on short-term panels and showed highest long-term panel 

densities in July; it was present in high numbers all months of 1973 

except May (Battelle, 1978). 



5-35 



Teredo navatis 

Teredo naval is , the shipworm, is common on the east coast in 
temperate waters (Turner, 1966) . It was an abundant species in New 
Haven Harbor prior to its sudden absence from the panels beginning in 
September 1976. Recent data (July 1978) from subsequent studies in New 
Haven Harbor indicate a return to previous densities (NAT, in prepara- 
tion) . Figure 5-13 shows a decreasing abundance gradient from Fort Hale 
to Long Wharf, which may be related to poorer water quality in the inner 
harbor . 

Success and cosmopolitan distribution are attributable to the 
habit of brooding young, and the wide salinity and temperature tolerance 
of T. navalis (R. Turner, 1966) . Roch (in Clapp, 1937) reported con- 
siderable tolerance to low dissolved oxygen and salinity and attributed 
this to the ability of T. navalis to seal off its burrow in an incom- 
patible meditim; it was observed to withdraw for up to 33 days in poor 
conditions. Boring activity decreased in low-salinity water, silty con- 
ditions, or temperatures less than 5°C or greater than 25°C (Roch, in 
Clapp, 1937). T. navalis normally spawns at temperatures between 17.5 
and 30°C and retains the embryos in burrows, releasing larvae from 13 to 
30°C (Culliney, 1975). 

Distributions of T. navalis in New Haven Harbor and greater 
Long Island Sound were consistent with literature reports. Percent 
occurrence values were 65, 62 and 32 percent at Fort Hale, Harbor Sta- 
tion and Long Wharf, respectively (Table 5-5) . Figure 5-13 indicates 
early summer maxima at all stations with decreases in August and sub- 
sequent increases in the fall. Data from Niantic Bay (Battelle, 1974) 
showed consistent monthly infestation with a maximum in July followed by 
an August decline. Short-term panels in New Haven Harbor showed Septem- 
ber and October settling in 1971, 1973, 1974, 1975 (Figure 5-3). 
Niantic Bay data for 1973 indicated August and (primarily) September 
settlement. Teredo settled at a similar time in a New Jersey estuary 
(Hoagland, et al., 1977). After August 1976 in New Haven Harbor, T. 



5-36 



navalis disappeared at all stations. The reason for its disappearance 
is not clear, but other studies have recorded wide fluctuations in the 
Teredo abundance pattern in the Long Island Sound area (Clapp, 1937) . 



Mytilus edulis 

Mytilus edulis, the common blue mussel, is widely distributed 
around the world in temperate waters (TRIGOM, 1973) . Distribution at 
New Haven Harbor showed abundances decreasing from outer to inner harbor 
stations for all years (Figure 5-14) . 

Mytilus is considered to be fairly tolerant of organic pollu- 
tion (Anger, 1976), but is sensitive to high summer temperatures. The 
optimum temperature for the species is between 5-20°C (TRIGOM, 1973) 
(sometimes exceeded by late summer temperatures in New Haven Harbor) , 
and it has an absolute upper lethal temperature of 30°C (Van Winkle, 
1973 in NAI, 1977b). The adult mussel's ventilation rate drops at 
temperatures in excess of 20°C (Widdows , 1973). Mytilus spat, however, 
live four times as long as adults at 28 °C (Pearce, 1969) . Settlement of 
mytilids is largely temperature dependent and does not normally begin 
until early summer when water temperatures exceed 13°C (WHOI , 1952). 

New Haven Harbor Mytilus distributions were consistent with 
other observed mytilid distributions in Long Island Sound. Short-term 
panel data (Figure 5-3) indicated that settlement occurred primarily in 
the summer but overlapped the spring and fall of some years. Millstone 
Harbor panels showed that Mytilus settled in September (Battelle, 1974). 
Mytilus is common in Long Island Sound, occurring at Bridgeport (NAI, 
1973b) , Millstone, and New Haven Harbor; it is absent only at Stamford 
(NAI, 1973c) . Within New Haven Harbor, Mytilus showed percent occur- 
rences of 64, 35 and 22 percent at Fort Hale, Harbor Station and Long 
Wharf respectively (Table 5-5) . Abundances also showed a gradient 
decreasing from Fort Hale to Long Wharf (Figure 5-14) , probably related 
to poorer water quality in the inner harbor. 



5-37 



Crassostrea virginica 

New Haven Harbor serves as a primary natural source of oyster 
seed for Long Island Sound (NAI, 1978a). Oysters showed greater numbers 
on exposure panels at Fort Hale and Harbor Station and occurred during 
all years at these stations. Presence on short-term panels was limited 
to August and September (Figure 5-3) . 

C. virginica has been recorded in sheltered, shallow subtidal, 
and intertidal marine and estuarine water (TRIGOM, 1973) with temper- 
atures ranging seasonally from 1-32°C (Galtsoff , 1964) . They are in- 
active at temperatures less than 8°C and mortality increases at greater 
than 35°C (Mackin, 1968) . Reproduction occurs during the summer when 
temperatures exceed 20 °C, usually from late June to late August in Long 
Island Sound (Loosanoff , 1965 in TRIGOM, 197 3) . The average female 
oyster releases over 50 million eggs per year from which about one dozen 
reach maturity. The planktonic larvae are quite specific in their 
settling requirement for other oyster shells which results in low 
recruitment on short-term panels. 



COMPARISON OF NEW HAVEN HARBOR WITH OTHER LONG ISLAND SOUND SITES 

Hillman (1973) compared the results of expo sure -panel studies 
conducted in the Long Island Sound area in 1971-1972 at Niantic Bay and 
Stamford and New Haven Harbors. He observed a similarity in phyla 
present on panels at all sites, but noted a greater total number of 
species at Niantic Bay, which he attributed to better water quality. 
Table 5-6 lists abundant species taken from fouling panels at four sites 
in Long Island Sound from October 1971-Septeinber 1972. New Haven Harbor 
and Niantic Bay had a number of species in common: Balanus eburneus , B. 
improvisus , Teredo navalis, Corophium insidiosum, Mytilus edulis , 
Nereis succinea, and Halichondria bowerhankia. Of these common species, 
Stamford had three (Corophium sp. , Nereis succinea and Teredo navalis) 
and Bridgeport had two (Mytilus edulis and Nereis succinea) . 



5-3E 



o 
tn 

eC • 

1—1 o-i 
CD 
O 1— 

_i q: 
o 

I — I LlJ 

oo 
2: >- 

o Dc: 

h-H ca: 
I— s: 

o ^ 

O CO 

I 

00 
Q LlJ 



_l 00 
U-> —I 

<C 

I— o 

ILD 
f— O 

LU O 
OO <-J 

LU LU 

q; 

Q_ q: 
o 
u~) en 
LU q; 
1—1 <: 

CJ 31 
LU 

o_ ^ 

OT LU 

<: a: 



<C LU 



I 



CO 

=1: 






fd 


h 


T) 





-H 




U 


m 


(T1 


■H 


.-t 


h 


T 


fT3 


C 



■H 


t3 


iH 


C 









j:: 


3 





■u 








QJ 


<n 


10 


^ 



6 Qj 



tn U] 






OJ 


ai 


^ 


-4 




n 


f> 




u 





n 


■H 


■n 


Tl 


HI 


(1) 


M 


U 


111 


ai 


tH 


H 



01 


m 




c 


ui 




n 





-H 


■n 


■H 


(Ji 




iH 


l-ri 


(11 


a 


h 



3i 3^ :j^ 
S 5: 5: 



Q) O 

q -H 0) Q> 

O M -H -H 

3 0) C U 

U) Qj ft) O 

« in a o 

■-t -H o -< 

<U <U 4J .H 

(D tl) <y x: 

<: ^ .J Q. 





Ifl 


3 


m 





Cr 


r 


■-H 


01 Ul 


-s 


tjl 


rO 



D Q) U -U 



0) OJ rH -rH 

:5: ^ Cl^ -J 





c 


-U 


c 






■■H 


fa 









Cn 





-o 






U ij 


■M 







0) w 




c 


Q) 


HI 


'H --H 


•v ^ 


M 





l: 


M --H 







10 


•M 


3 (0 




i^ 


C 


11 


■0 b. 







0) 


11 


4) 13 


cB ^ 


fO 


u 


^ 


C 


~H -U 


■-s 


TJ 


m 




3 « 


3 






3 


■a 


tJ 


10 


ui 


--H T3 


■~) to 


■-I 


■M 


■-^ 


■~l <D 


Q. to 


Q- 


lU 


01 


*J h 


TJ 


0) 


iH 


iH 


S^ CD 


^ 1h 


M 


(1) 


Ul 


s: tH 


U 


u 


a 


a 









q 










n 










Tl 




■H 




in 
«1 


ii 




« 




t: 


u 


1/1 


hi 




■M 


in 


c 


■M 




1) 


;: 


(II 


■-H 




11 


01 


h 






3 


M 


■M 


Tl 




w 


01 


^ 


h 


u. 











Ul 


10 


K1 


10 


■n 




■H 


■'H 


•H 


::ti 


11 


111 


111 


(11 


•-H 


•H 


M 


M 


h 





u, 


111 


Ul 


HI 


u. 


05 


S: 


a 


a 



■■H 


m 






(1 




-U 


■-i 


M 


-u 






■■^ 




C 


10 


■CI 





to 




M 




(U 


m 


q 


t:; 


■_T 


tn 


•u 




M 


M 


■'^ 


n 


-U 


-u 


(J) 




3 




M 


Li. 




u> 


h 




■U 






■-H 


L^ 


n 







01 


Li. 


I) 


Lh 


(H 


(I 


01 




3 






•U 


M 


(> 


hi 




U 


<n 


t^ 




U 


M 









M 




m 






m 


QJ 






'M 


■M 


I/) 


10 


'-^ 


f> 


f^ 


10 


a: 


Lh 


IJ 


1-1 


-H 


n 


u 





Li. 





r 


M 


<J1 


4J 


-u 


■u 





^ 








■H 




Li. 


1h 


E= 




H 


u- 


u. 


•U 


3> 


u 


■H 








S 


-H 


Lh 


u 


Kj 


OJ 


e) 


u 


tq 






t) 10 to 10 10 q 
q r^ 3 -H 3 to 

■•H 01 Q) > -u l-i 



Q. o 
O q 
M g 
o -M 
o 1^ 



q 


n 


11 


^ 


iH 


kH 


q 




3 


0, 


(11 


^ 


A) 


F 


M 


91 


H) 


■•s 





■u 


10 


10 


to 


(H 


::! 


n 


n 


kn 


q 


q 


q 


3 


in 


11 


01 


-H 


•-H 


--H 


M 


HI 


01 


m 


in 


A1 


W 


m 


Ul 






3 
k -I 

6 iJ 



to 

^ ID '~< 

01 -13 TJ 

•3 ■-( Q, 

e Is (Q 

■H 3 '-^ 

10 -u 3 

to 

la ID o 

--H -H -Ul 

3 3 Q, 

tJi bi 3i 

3 3 M 

cq 10 O 



O 



M 




3 


h 






■n 


to 


to 


■n 






q 


3 


•H 


q 






■■H 


01 




■•H 


(11 




'-H 


q 





'-^ 


■u 




rn 


M 


IH 


rr 




m 


tl 


3 


u. 





+J 


q 




•« 


tl 




q 


■'^ 


S 


CI 


•H 


K 


«l 


M 


3 






3 


'n 




•H 


to 


w 


■H 






J-' 


3 


3 


•q 


(11 




Q. 


q 


q 


Q. 


■u 


in 


(1 


111 


(n 


(1 


•H 




M 


M 


■-I 


^ 




(ii 


(1 






t) 


Ql 







« 


m 





S 


1^ 



. 5 
ft 3 

to J3 



•S "-i 

p q 





c 


to 


M 




W 


M -U 




•H q 




tl m 


H 


(tj M 




^ 3 




bi 4J 




10 


-s 




-1 


■■i IH 


«j 


•V tJ 


^ 


q 
It] ttj 


^ 


* iH 


tl 


u -u 


e^ 


01 


■-1 


S Ul 


•q 


M 


tl 


ttl lu 


115 



■•^ 


10 


h 


■H 


Q) 


10 


10 


q 


Ul 


m 





-u 


M 


■u 


•q 


m 


tl 


■q 


to 


q 



o o 



5-39 



Examination of 1977 biota on long-term panels in New Haven 
Harbor and Niantic Bay reveals a similar faunal composition (Table 5-7) . 
As in 1971-1972, Niantic panels had a diverse flora while New Haven 
Harbor panels had almost no algae at all. Sites at Millstone Point 

(Niantic Bay) and Harbor Station show 48 and 51 faunal species respect- 
ively (Battelle, 1978; NAI , 1978). Characteristic New Haven species not 
occurring at Niantic (1977) were: Molgula sp. , Mya arenaria, Polydora 
sp. , and Electra crustulenta. Dominant species occurring since 1971 at 
Millstone were: Obelia sp. , Mytilus edulis , Nereis succinea, Botryllus 
schlosseri , and Crassostrea virginica. Dominant Niantic Bay species not 
represented at New Haven Harbor are Limnoria tripunctata, Chelura tere- 
brans, and Idotea phosphorea . Virtually all of the current Millstone 
faunal species were represented at New Haven Harbor; many of the algal 
species were not. This is also true for Stamford and Bridgeport Harbors 

(Table 5-6) . In the 1935 study of New Haven Harbor, only dominant 
species were determined (Battelle, 1937). This study listed Balanus 
eburneus , Obelia spp. , Corophium spp. , Molgula spp. , and Mytilus edulis 
as occurring in New Haven Harbor. Most of these are currently recorded 
as dominants, occurring at most stations during years of the current 
study. A major change observed in New Haven Harbor was the temporary 
disappearance of Teredo navalis in 1976 after a highly consistent occur- 
rence from 1971 through August 1976. As indicated earlier, previous 
work in the Long Island Sound region has documented such fluctuations in 
the species (Clapp, 1937) . 

In summary, the present study shows that New Haven Harbor had 
high faunal species richness relative to other Long Island Sound panel 
study sites. Annual differences in community structure within New Haven 
Harbor which have been reported may be attributed to taxonomic refine- 
ments, changes in water quality, and length of sample period. In gen- 
eral, it is difficult to define a "typical" Long Island Sound fouling 
community. Panel colonization is directly dependent upon the abundance 
of settling larvae, which in turn is a function of seasonality, larval 
selectivity, and the immediate physical/chemical characteristics of the 
area. Changes in seasonal hydrographic parameters can affect the entire 



5-40 



TABLE 5-7. CHARACTERISTIC TAXA PRESENT AT NEW HAVEN HARBOR AND MILLSTONE 
POINT, 1977. NEW HAVEN HARBOR ECOLOGICAL STUDIES SUmARY 
REPORT, 1979. 





NEW HAVEN HARBOR (1977) 


NIANTIC BAY 


(1977) 


Obclia longissima 


X 


X 




Metridium senile 


X 


— 




Euplana gracilis 


X 


X 




Stylochus ellipticus 


X 


X 




Eteone heteropoda 


X 


-- 




Eumida sanguimida 


X 


X 




Hydroides dianthus 


X 


X 




Lepidonotas squamatus 


X 


X 




Nereis succinea 


X 


X 




I'olydora ligni 


X 


-- 




Sabella wiccophthalma 


X 


X 




Crassostrea virginica 


X 


X 




Crepidula fornicata 


X 


X 




C. plana 


X 


X 




My a arenaria 


X 


-- 




Mytilus edulis 


X 


X 




Teredo navalis 


X 


X 




Balanus eburneus 


X 


X 




B. improvisus 


X 


X 




Caprellidae 


X 


X 




Corophium insidiosum 


X 


X 




Microdeutopus 


X 


-- 




gryllotalpa 








Rithropanopeus harissi 


X 


— 




Bowerbankia gracilis 


X 


— 




Electra crustulenta 


X 


X 




Botryllus schlosseri 


X 


X 




Molgula citrina 


X 


— 




Molgula manhattensis 


X 


— 





X = present 

— = absent 
* 
present at all Stations in New Haven Harbor for at least one year and 
with a total rank abundance >3.5%. 



5-41 



composition of a community (Osman, 1977) . Osman found substantial 
differences in community structure which were dependent upon the time of 
initial settlement, length of exposure, size of panel, and nature of 
disturbance. In New Jersey, yearly cycles in settlement were reported 
to be similar from year to year, but species composition was annually 
variable (Hoagland, 1977) . There does, however, seem to be a fairly 
stable New Haven Harbor panel assemblage that bears some similarity to 
Millstone (1977) and undergoes periodic additions and deletions. Domi- 
nant members of this assemblage include: Corophium insidiosum, Polydora 
ligni, Balanus eburneus , B. improvisus , Obelia longissima. Teredo nava- 
lis, and Mytilus edulis. 



ANALYSIS OF IMPACTS OF NEW HAVEN HARBOR STATION OPERATION 

The possible impact of New Haven Harbor Station operation on 
the benthic community as studied by exposure panels would be related to 
operation of the condenser-cooling system. The condensers receive 
ambient temperature water and discharge heated effluent at 15 °F above 
ambient (NAI, 1976b). The thermal plume (dating from operation start-up 
29 August 1975) intersects the surface at a temperature of 4°F above 
ambient and occupies an area less than 0.1% of the inner harbor. The 3, 
2 and 1°F isotherms bound 0.4, 0.6 and 1.0 percent of the inner harbor 
area, respectively (Section 3-2 this report) . A special survey revealed 
that the thermal plume from the station could occasionally intersect 
Stations 8 and 9 with a 0.9 - 1.8°F (0.5 - 1°C) temperature increase 
(NAI, 1977) . The New Haven Harbor Station fouling panel array (B) is 
adjacent to Station 9 (Figure 5-1) . 

Entrainment in the condenser cooling water and exposure to 
increased water temperatures from the thermal plume are the major modes 
of impact associated with power-station operation. As discussed in the 
introduction, entrainment may reduce numbers of recrui table larvae to 
the fouling panel community. Depending on their magnitude, increased 
water temperatures have a range of potential impacts upon the community/ 



5-42 



including: increase or decrease in productivity, behavioral changes, 
shifting species composition, lengthening of spawning/settlement period, 
reduction in physical condition and cumulative effects resulting in 

death. Cory and Nauman (1969) and Naiiman and Cory (1969) measured 

2 
increases in panel productivity (gm dry wt/m time) in effluent canals 

at two sites in the Patuxent River Estuary. Tinsman and Maurer (1974) 

observed greater condition indices (amount of stored glycogen) and meat 

weight of oysters in effluent waters. All of the above researchers 

noted increased productivity for some years and mortality for other 

years in July/August in thermal effluent canals due to temperature 

increases. In mussels {Mytilus edulis) , behavior that could also result 

in increased loss due to predation occurred at temperatures well below 

lethal limits (Pearce, 1969) ; at 24°C, normal aggregation of Mytilus did 

not occur and the byssal fibers, while attached, did not secure the 

mussel firmly to the substratum. A thermal addition could result in a 

range extension of warmer water species or exclusion of colder-water 

species existing at the limits of thermal tolerance (Naylor, 1965) . 

Prolonged breeding periods have been reported in a number of thermal 

addition studies (NAI, 1973b, 1977c). Pearce (1969) noted that heat 

added subsequent to another stress or pollution factor, often 

resulted in mortality at a lower critical temperature. Many of the 

adverse effects caused by thermal impact are reversible. Thus, Naylor 

(1965) noted a rapid return of a thermally-impacted community to its 

original composition. 

The New Haven Harbor fouling community did not indicate any 
impact from station operation. An examination of species-richness 
values over the entire period revealed an increase from 1971 to 1976, 
followed by a decrease in 1977 at all stations as previously discussed 
(Figure 5-4) . A change in taxonomic treatment clearly accounts for some 
differences; other factors are the shorter sampling period in 1977 and 
loss of long-term panels at Fort Hale in 1977. Teredo's absence from 
1976 to 1978 is not considered to be related to New Haven Harbor Station 
operation; its disappearance was not localized at Harbor Station and it 
was recorded in high numbers in recent (1978) data. None of the domi- 



5-43 



nant species showed changes in distribution or abundance that could be 
related to station operation. Three previously unrecorded species at 
Harbor Station and other stations were found in 1976: Rithropanopeus 
arrissi, Eteone heteropoda and Euplana gracilis. Numerous other species 
have been variable in occurrence (Table 5-8) . 

The study conducted at Bridgeport Harbor 1971-1972 (NAI, 1973) 
did not discern any effect of thermal effluent on faunal composition. 
The difference between control and effluent station temperatures was 
11°C (March-August 1971) . The most obvious effect was the month-earlier 
settlement of most species in the effluent. Species present are listed 
in Table 5-6. Faunal diversity was greater at the discharge than the 
control; this is the opposite of the result at the Piscataqua River 
estuary in New Hampshire and Millstone Harbor where the immediate dis- 
charge area was lower in diversity (NAI, 1977a; Battelle, 1977). In 
addition, at Millstone, a subtropical species. Teredo bartschll , has 
occurred regularly in the effluent since 1975. 

Careful examination of potential modes of electrical gener- 
ating plant impact indicate that there has been no measurable effect on 
New Haven Harbor Station fouling communities. 



SUMMARY 

A total of 75 species and numerous higher taxa were identified 
from New Haven Harbor exposure panels during the sampling period August 
1971-October 1977 (Table 5-8) . The dominant species were the barnacles, 
Balanus eburneus and B. Improvisus , the hydroid, Obella longlsslma, the 
amphipod, Corophlum Insldlosum, the polychaete, Polydora llgnl, the 
mussel, Mytilus edulls , and the ship borer. Teredo navalls . Spatial 
trends in species richness were evident within the harbor. Species 
richness at Fort Hale and Harbor Station, was higher than at Long Wharf 
for most years. General seasonal trends in species richness were not 
consistent. The maximum number of species occurred in either spring. 



Text continued on page 5-49 



5-44 



o 






1— 


o-i 


1 


t-~- 


o 


H", 


^ 




o 




_J 


n 




h- 


Q 


QL 


7^. 


O 


-r 


D- 


1 


UJ 


h- 


CH 


az 




O 


>- 


-r 


az 


00 


<t 




>- 


Di 


> 


o 


ZD 


Ll_ 


OO 




00 


z: 


UJ 


o 


I — 1 


^—^ 


en 



< 
>- o 

m I — I 

- — O 

_J 
S O 

o o 



CO o 
I— I CQ 

Di cc: 

oo 31 



OO > 



o 



OO 



00 
I 

LO 

UJ 

_1 
CQ 



1977 
FH HS LW 






X 
X 
X 


X 


X X 
X X 
X X 


1976 
FH HS LW 


X 

X X 

X 


X 
X 


X XXX 
XXX 

X X X X X 


XX X 
XXX 
X X XX 


X X 
XXX 

X 


1975 
FH HS LW 


X X 


X 
X 


XXX 

X X X X 

X X X X X 


XX X 
X 

X X 


X X 
X X 


1974 
FH HS LW 






X X 
X X 


X 

XXX 
X X 


X 

X 


1973 
FH HS LW 


X 




X 

X 

X X 


X X 
X 


X 

X 
X 


1972 
FH HS LW 






X 

X X 

X 


X 

X X 


X 
X 
X 


1971 
FH HS LW 






X 
X 




X 
X 
X 




ALGAE 

Chlorophyceae 
Enteromorpha sp. 
Polysiphonia sp. 
Ulva lactuca 


PORIFERA 

Halichondria bowerbanki i 
Unidentified porifera 


HYDROIDEA 

Campanularia spp. 
Halecium sp. 
Obelia longissima 
Obelia sp. 
Unidentified hydrozoan 


ANTHOZOA 

Actinaria 

Diadumene leucolena 
Metridium senile 
Sagartidae 
Sagartia sp. 
Unidentified anthozoan 


PLATYHELMINTHES 

Euplana gracilis 
Stylochus ellipticus 
Nematodea 



5-45 



•a 



o 



03 
I 



CO 





3: 

1 




X X 


X 




X 




XXX 


X X 


r^ 






















00 




X XX XXX XX 


X 




X 




XXX 


X X 
























3: 




XXX X 






X 




XXX 


X X 




3: 




X X 


X 


X 


X 


X 


X X X X X 


X X 




_i 


















kO 




















r — 


oo 




X XX 


X X 




X 




X X X X X X 


X X 


CTl 


:i: 


















r^ 






















3Z 
Ll_ 




XXX 


X X 




X 




X 


X X 




3 
_I 




X XX 






X 




X 


X X 


IT) 


















r^ 


oo 




X 






X 




XX X 


X X 


en 


IC 


















r— 


























X 






•X 




X XX 


X X 




3 






X 








X X 






_J 


















■=3- 




















r^ 


oo 




X 


X 




X 




X X 


X 


CTi 


n: 


















1 — 






















n: 






X 




X 




X X 


X 




LJ- 




















3 






X 




X 


X 


X XX 






_l 


















00 




















r^ 


OO 






X 




X 




X X X 


X X 


a^ 


3: 




















U- 






X 




X 




X >i X 






3 






X 




X 




X 






1 


















OJ 




















t^ 


oo 










X 




X 




CTi 


HI 


















r— 






















re 






X 




X 


X 


X 


X 




u. 




















3 








X 












_J 


















^— 




















r^ 


oo 








X 


X 








CTl 


a: 




















ul 








X 


X 
















w 










<a 










3 


(Q 








6 








ttJ 


-u 


■u 








M to 








10 -U 0] 


m 


o 






IB 


CO --i 








3 fO to ta 3 


E 


q 






to -u 


■^ is 








4J -Q +j ta ta =! -c; 


t! 









■H 


■u fo 






< 


3 (CWOJ-HC-U 


3 


'a 


(D 




ITS -H 0) 


-q bi 






H 


•c; Q< qj-mcmOjc; 


• tr- 


QJ 


Q) 




• M -ri (C r-l 


D^ -H 






W 


a, u • q'c-'HiD-uta 


Oi W 


u 


q 


0) 


ft 3 q •r^ « b^ 


3 






< 


W Ol (h -m -rH 3 -^ ^ -h 


a 


tj 


■H 


(0 


to bi O • 0) (U 


M t. 






K 


OW(U •MMtntadJ'O 


tn to 


q 


u 


T! 


to -H a XI q 









U 


O +J • Dj -H --i q 0) 


3 


(D 





•W 


(UrQr-jtotfiSa) tu 


•H m 






>i 


+ji/)05<i)CiiWrCiti(c cutn 


to -u 


M 


3 


O 


-P nj (D cC 


S. -H 






1-4 


■H33^W wmoo) 


0) o 


ra 


to 





<tj ta fa ID M 13 


in 






O 


M+j^j tCtCtC •H^'D 


'a q 






ts 


t30(H MMS-H-s-H 


<C fO 






0. 


4J 3l 3l 01 d) -rH -H -iM m -U •'H 


•-I 


to 


to 





0•VOOOMO■r^lH 


M '-H 








■'SM'-H C q'-HM'-MtJ-'S 


-o 


•'^ 


•H 


--I 


MM'^'Q'OOCEH 


-S r-H 








^000013fC^D■•^^E^ 


U -M 


Q) 


QJ 


r-l 


M(TJ3i3i:y^S>imtP 
3iT3M'-H'-ST3'-H-UX) 


0) (U 








£i,-u-U 0) (Dm-HM S-Q M'O 


t3 a, 


M 


M 


>1 


.Ci ,q 








E33-U-U3333t5n33l 


3i OJ 


Q) 


Q) 


x; 


■cooooaoo'fl 


t! nj 








i=!:Ki;i^Iiqtqk|Iiifc|t;k.a;a; 


a; t^ 


15 


S 


ft 


i:\.a,n,CgD,afta,w 


t/) to 



5-46 



-a 

3 



C 

o 
c_> 



CO 
I 



< 



1977 
FH HS LW 


X X 

X X 
X X 


XX XXX 
XXX XX X 
XX XX X 




1976 
FH HS LW 


X XX 
XX X 
X 


XXX X X X X 
XXX XX XX 

xxxxx xxxx 


X 


1975 
FH HS LW 


X X 

XX X 

X 


X X X X XXX 
xxxx XXX 

xxxxx X X X X 




1974 
FH HS LW 


X 
X 


X XX 

XXX XX 
XX XXX 




1973 
FH \\S LW 


X X 
X X 


XX xxxx 

XXX XXX 
XXX XXX 




1972 
FH HS LW 


X 
X 


XX XXX 
XXX XX 
XXX XX 




1971 
FH HS LW 




X X 
XX X 
XX X 






Serpulidae 

Serpulid tubes 

Spio filicornis 

Spionidae 

Staurrnereis rudolphi 

Strehlospio benedicti 

Syllidae 

Terebellidae 

Terebella lapidaria 

Unidentified polychaeta 


MOLLUSCA 

Crassostrea spp. 

Crassostrea virginica 

Crepidula fornicata 

Crepidula plana 

Crepi dula spp . 

Doridella obscura 

Littorina saxatilis 

Mitrella lunata 

Mya arenaria 

Mytilus edulis 

Nucula sp. 

Teredo navalis 

Teredinidae 

Thracia septentrional is 

Urosalpinx cinereus 


(T3 
C 
•■H 

U 

< 



5-47 



-o 

C 



O 



00 
I 



< 





3 
_i 










X 


X 


X 




X 


X 


X 


X X 


X 


r-^ 




























1^ 


Ul 










X 


X 


X 




X X 


X 


X 


X X 


X X 


en 


zc 




























r— 
































re 




X 






X 


X 


X 




X 


X 


X 


X 


X 




Ll_ 






























S 










X 


X 


X 




X X 




X X 


X 


X 




_J 




























lO 






























1^ 


t/0 










X 


X 


X 




X X 




X 


X 


X 


en 


n: 








































X 


X 


X 




X 




X 


X X 






"3 




X 






X 


X 


X 








X 








Ij 




























LT) 






























r^ 


00 










X 


X 


X 




X 




X 


X 


X 


CTl 


n: 




























1 — 


u. 










X 


X 


X 




X 




X 








3 




X X 






X 


X 


X 








X 








_J 




























<^ 






























r~~ 


Ul 








X 


X 


X 


X 








X 






en 


3Z 




























p— 
































n: 








>^ 


X 


X 


X 




X 




X 


X 






u. 






























3 










X 












X 








_I 




























oo 






























p^ 


e/5 










X 












X 






o^ 


a: 




























^ 


3: 










X 












X 








3 










X 












X 


X 






—1 




























CM 






























r^ 


e/) 










X 












X 


X 


X 


en 


n: 






























3= 




X 






X 


X 


X 








X 


X 






3 










X 


X 


















_1 




























p— 






























1 — 


u^ 










X 


X 












X 




en 


m 








































X 


X 










X 


































ca 






























D< 






























M 






























CO ttj 




























CO to 


3 +J 








ta 


















E 


3 <D 


M 








4J 


















3 


c a. 


fC '~1 








(C 








to 






t! 




to 


<n -M 


S M 








t5 








3 






q 


to 





to -i-) 3 


Si 










w 


w 


CO 






fO 


•N 


■•H 


3 (C tn 


q !^ 








c 


<: 


D 


3 


■H 






S rg 


■u 


ti 


-u +j q q 


to tn 








3 


H 


+J 


Q) 


> 




<; 


■H t3 TJ 


q 


■■H 


(C to Q) 0) H) 










Qj 


Q 


(C 


c 


o 




Q 


tn -tH 


to 


to • 


M 3 (h fO rn 


CO CO 






< 


ta . -M 


W 


q 


u 


M 


• 


o 


C --i • ft 


C 


q ft 


3 fe • Tl to -u 


3 3 






Q 


c; ft H 


04 


0) 


3 


a< 


ft 


cu 


ctj ft ■r^ 0) 


Q 


■rS CD 


q fC ft -H tj 


Q, Q^ 






O 


•H M +J 


H 


in 


^ 


s 


ft 


H 


M t> to .jS m 


1^ 




(CftJMMCnlHiHU 


O 






Oj 


M 


0:; 





Q) 


••H 


CO 


K 


ft'O 




S E 


a) 0) Q) i-H 


+J +J 






o 


nj ic <a 


Pi 










ft 


Qj as <u e•'^ 


HJ 


3 3 


TJtOtOtoCOOOtI 


3 3 






en 


5 -H -M 


H 


U] 


CO 


CO 


to 


^ 


O nJrH 


M 


•H -H 


■H333300H-I 


<U Q) 






H 


!h M 


u 


3 


3 


3 


3 


^ 


■i:; ^ j:; -tH 


M 


j:; x; 


^^ k( ^ in ^ S^ ^ 


'O T3 








Hi O 




« 


c 


c; 


c; 




4-1 4J -VJ TJ tl) 


CU 


Q, Oj 


'Cn3m't)'a>i3i(a 


O 












"i 


fC 


ni 


ItJ 




•r-l .^ -r-l .^ H 


U 





SEEEE'^'qto 


!h in 








QJ E ^ 




-H 


M 


■-i 


M 




g< (i, g* iJ ft 


Q. 


(h M 


EE5§5OOC0 


D 








(B -H -rH 




H] 


to 


to 


ta 




e g^ 6 © "3 


<a 


O 


ronjranjujtotora 


•H -H 








1^ >^ M 




cq 


cq 


cq 


cq 




■=5 KC Kq < O 


CJ 


O tJ 


OUCJCJCJHHI^ 


§: s: 



•xi 

0) 
3 
C 

•rH 

o 
u 



5-48 



o 



CO 

I 

un 



CO 





3 


>< 












X 






X 




X 
















X 




_J 










































r- 












































r^ 


</) 


X 










X 


X 






X 




X 












X 


X 


X 


CTi 


3: 












































31 


X 












X 






X 




X 




















2 


X 








X 


X 


X X 






X 




X 




X 








X 




X X 




—J 










































1 — 


00 










X 




X X 


X 




X 




X 


X 






X 




X 


X 


X X 


en 


2r 










































r— 














































n: 






X 




X 




X X 


X 




X 




X 


X 


X 








X 




X X 




u. 












































3 


X X 








X 




X 


X 








X 
















X 




Zj 










































LO 












































r^ 


00 


X 








X X 




X 


X 




X 




X 












X 


X 


XXX 


cr, 


in 
























































































31 


X X 






X 


X 




X 


X 






X 


X 




X 








X 




X 




u. 












































3 






































X 






_J 










































•=d- 












































r^ 


00 










X 




X 










X 












X 


X 


X X 


en 


:c 


























































X 






X 




X 














X 






^ 






































X 


X 




_i 










































CO 












































r^ 


00 














X 










X 












X 


X 




CTl 


zn 






















































X 




X 






X 




X 








X 






X 


X 




3: 
























X 














X 






_i 










































CM 












































p^ 


oo 
























X 














X 




en 


-c 












































LL. 














X 






X 




X 




















3 
























X 














X 






_I 










































r— 












































r~» 


OO 
























X 














X 




en 


:jz 












































ni 




















X 




X 














X 






















« 












































c 










































■-H 













































to 


M 












to 
























to 






to 


4s 












•M 


















TD 






3 






•"i 


•M 






<ts 






q 












(ti ra 













« 






M 


T3 In 




E to 


q 






M 








■M 




CO -^^ ti 






ft 






05 






U 


-u 




3 •'S 


TJ 


T! 


to 











(s 




•■H "^ ^ 






■H 






(U 







<n 


ft to 




M 


■H 


■u 


31 





< 






0) 




W O Tl 






^ 






>H 


• 


•H 


•H -q 


m 3 




31--I 


to 


q 


j:; 


•H 


B 


•H 




to 




C -rH i-l 






ft ft 




CO 


i^ 


(C ft 


&. 


•M 


U &1 




M 


tt3 


tu 





q 




•'-i 




CO. 




^ S 2 






w £ 




3 


OJ 


q ft 


3 


■u to 


Q) 3 


<; 


ttS 


M 


M 


t! 


3 


S 


to 







tJ 


•S r^ ^ 






(13 rt) 




4J 


TD 


(tj CO 


ft 


to 3 


"O ts 


e^ 


ft M "3 


M 


3 


-u 




s 


<D 




M 


q 


+j EH O 






to -u nj 


<: 


ta 




X 




-Q 0) 




u 


tr. +J 


<0 


4J 


to 


tj 


w 


■^ 


< 


^ 


'M 


IT! 






3 (tj 73 -a 


Q 


>H 


V) 


dJ to 


to 


is ft -n 10 


o 


E -ri 


ft 


to 


o 


--H 


Q 


(H 


E-i 





Sh 


j:; . tJ 'O 






Q, -U -H 0) 


o 





3 


■U 0) 


<D 


Q) 


0) 3 


Pi 


3 -tJ ^ 




3 


q 


M 


O 





< 


to 


4J 


R Oi 0^ 0) 






C -U -H 


a< 


>H 


0) 


+J 


+J 


-q q 


•H GJ 


& 


•^ -H M 


13 


M 





0) 


3 


^ 


§ 




•■s 


rg Oi ■'^ •'^ 






4J 0) -H 4-1 
5 TS q -H 


< 


fs 


a, 


(D <U 


<b 


<t3 


tM a, 


o 


t) -i^ 3 


"-H 





S 


is 


M 




CO 





E M 4-1 4-1 






u 


•■H 





ft q 


q 


to ft 


•H 


tn 


■M q -u 


3 






a 


X 


to 


O 


3 




■r4 -H 






(U -P 


w 




q 








3 O 


-u q 


u 


q ft3 


to 


t3 


t3 


u 


tj 


X 


M 


t3 


ni m -^ ■>-> 






tj in <Tj c 


Q 


>^ 


ta 


q S 


E 


(U ^ 


c en 


w 


-Q tj 


O 


!h 


(s 


o 


u 


■-1 


u 


M 


r-H 


f-^ T-J C C 






O -U -U 0) 




Q) 


o, 


(3 Q) 


<U 


ft -q 


0) Dj 




3^ is M 


■U 


+J 


■u 


N 




M 




3l 


3 


3 3 0) CD 






M -H -H T) 







3^ 


ft to 


TJ 


-u 


TD 




0) 3 


ft 








•-{ 




0) 




M 


toi 


tn tJi T3 T) 






M M -H 




C 


tj 


-H 


M 


q -^ 


■H X 




3i S tn 


31 


tu 


<D 


■q 




-u 




+J 


M 


r-H f^ '"H ■'H 






■-H <U Q) C 




<T] 


3 


qj eg 


V 


03 ^ 


C 




-SOS 


In 


■-H 


■-H 







to 










c c 






s: s: §: D 




O 


Cq 


:5 G^ 


n^ 


ft K. 


D ::: 




f^: oa m 


tJ 


lil 


Ctl 


to 




^ 




CI 


s: 


^ ^ D D 



5-49 



fall or summer. These long-term panel difjtributions are probably 
related to larval settlement as they coincide with peak spawning peri- 
ods. Settlement on short-term panels occurs in early spring and summer 
for most taxa such as Obelia spp. , Corophium insidiosum, Polydora llgni , 
and Mytilus edulis . Fall settlement is seen as a smaller peak in some 
species (e.g., Balanus spp., Polydora ligni) and with Balanus , is 
generally the result of spawning from barnacles that settled in the 
spring (Grave, 1933) . 

Analysis of the New Haven Harbor exposure panel data shows no 
change from preoperational to operational years attributable to power 
station activities. Fluctuation in seasonal and annual distributions of 
panel -community members is characteristic of the assemblage. Similar 
patterns are seen in other fouling panel studies in the greater Long 
Island Sound area. The harbor in general appears to support a pro- 
ductive, relatively stable panel community which has not been impacted 
by the New Haven Harbor Station operation. 



5-50 



LITERATURE CITED -- EXPOSURE PANELS 



Anger, K. \911 . Benthic invertebrates as indicators of organic pollu- 
tion in the western Baltic Sea. Int. Review Ges. Hydrobiol. 
16(2) :187-203. 

Battelle: William F. Clapp Laboratories. 1973. A monitoring program on 
the ecology of the marine environment of the Millstone Point, 
Connecticut area. Prepared for the Northeast Utilities Service 
Company. 16 sections. 

. 1977. A monitoring program on the ecology of the marine 



environment of the Millstone Point, Connecticut area. Annual 
Report of Ecological and Hydrographic Studies, 1976. Prepared for 
Northeast Utilities Service Company, Berlin, Connecticut. 7 sections. 

. 1978. A monitoring program on the ecology of the marine 



environment of the Millstone Point, Connecticut area. Annual 
Report of Ecological and Hydrographic Studies, 1977. Prepared for 
Northeast Utilities Service Company, Berlin, Connecticut. 9 sec- 
tions. 

Blake, J. A. 1969. Reproduction and larval development of Polydora from 
northern New England (Polychaeta:Spionidae) . Ophelia. 7:1-63 
(December 1969) . 

Calder, D.R. and M.C. Brehmer. 1967. Seasonal occurrence of epifauna 
on test panels in Hampton Roads, Virginia. Int. Jour. Ocean and 
Limnol. 1:149-164. 

Clapp, William F. Laboratories. 1937. Marine piling investigation, 

1935-1936. Prepared by the New England Committee on Marine Piling 
Investigation. 249 pp. 

Cory, R.L. and J.W. Nauman. 1969. Epifauna and thermal additions in 
the Upper Patuxent River estuary. Chesapeake Science. Vol. 10: 
210-217. 

Crisp, D.T. and H. Barnes. 1954. The orientation and distribution of 
barnacles at settlement, with particular reference to surface 
contour. J. Anim. Ecol. 23:142-162. 

and H.G. Stubbings. 1957. The orientation of barnacles to 



water currents. J. Anim. Ecol. 26:179-196. 

Culliney, J.L. 1975. Comparative larval development of the shipworms 
Bankia gouldi and Teredo navalis . Marine Biol. 29:254-251. 

Daro, M.M. 1970. L' association des amphipodes et Polydora ciliata a 
la cote Beige. Neth. J. Sea Res. 5:96-100. 



5-51 



and P. Polk. 1973. The autecology of Polydora ciliata along 



the Belgian coast. Neth. J. Sea Res. 6:130-140. 

Dean, T.A. and V.J. Belles. 1975. Seasonal and spatial distribution of 
epifauna in the Pamlico River estuary. North Carolina. J. Elisha 
Mitchell Sci-Sco. 91:1-12. 

Enright, J.T. 1977. Power plants and plankton. Marine Pollution Bulletin 
8(7) :158-163. 

Feldmeth, C. and M. Alpert. 1977. The effect of temperature on the 
distribution and biomass of Mytilus edulis in the Alamitas Bay 
area. Veliger. 20:39-42. 

Galtsoff, P.S. 1964. The American oyster, Crassostrea virginica Gmelin. 
Fish. Bull, of Fish and Wildl. Serv. 641:4-29. 

Grassle, J.F. and J. P. Grassle. 1974. Opportunistic life histories and 
genetic systems in marine benthic polychaetes. J. Mar. Res. 
32:253-284. 

Grave, B.H. 1933. Rate of growth, age at sexual maturity and duration 
of life of certain sessile organisms at Woods Hole, Massachusetts. 
Biol. Bull. 65:375-386, 

Hillman, R.E. 1973. Environmental monitoring through the use of expo- 
sure panels. IN: S. B. Saila (ed.). Fisheries and Energy Produc- 
tion: A Symposium. Lexington Books, Lexington, Massachusetts, 
pp. 55-76. 

Hoagland, K.E., L. Crocket and M. Rochester. 1978. Analysis of popu- 
lations of boring and fouling organisms in the vicinity of the 
Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station. Prepared for U.S. Nuclear 
Regulatory Commission. 44 pp. 

Leppakoski, E. 1975. Assessment of degree of pollution on the basis of 
macrozoobenthos in marine and brackish-water environments. ACTA. 
Academiae Aboensis. Series B, Vol. 35. pp. 1-90. 

Nauman, J.L. and R.L. Cory. 1969. Theinnal addition and epifaunal 

organisms at Chalk Point, Maryland. Chesapeake Science. Vol. 10 
(3+4) : 218-226. 

Nay lor, E. 1965. Biological effects of a heated effluent in docks at 
Swansea, S. Wales. Zoo. Soc. Lond. Proc. 144:253-267. 

Normandeau Associates, Inc. 1971. Ecological considerations of the 

Coke Works Site, New Haven Harbor, Connecticut. Prepared for The 
United Illuminating Company, New Haven, Connecticut. 64 pp. 

. 1973a. New Haven Harbor Ecological Studies, New Haven, 



Connecticut. Annual Report 1971-1972. Prepared for The United 
Illuminating Company, New Haven, Connecticut. 208 pp. 



5-52 



1973b. Bridgeport Harbor Ecological Studies 1971-1972. 



Prei^ared for The United Illuminating Company, New Haven, Connect- 
icut. lOb pp. 

1974a. Coke Works Ecological Monitoring Studies, New Haven 



Harbor, Connecticut. Annual Report 1972-1973. Prepared for The 
United Illuminating Company, New Haven, Connecticut. 215 pp. 

1974b. Coke Works Ecological Monitoring Studies, New Haven 



Harbor, Connecticut. Interim Report May-December 1973. Prepared 
for The United Illuminating Company, New Haven, Connecticut. 199 
pp. 

. 1974c. Stamford Harbor Ecological Studies. Final Report 



1971-1973. Prepared for Northeast Utilities Service Company. 159 
pp. 

1975a. New Haven Harbor Station Ecological Monitoring 



Studies, New Haven Harbor, Connecticut. Annual Report 1974. 
Prepared for The United Illuminating Company, New Haven, Connecti- 
icut. 

1975b. Ecological studies conducted at selected sites in 



New Haven Harbor, Connecticut. Prepared for The United Illumin- 
ating Company, New Haven, Connecticut. 114 pp. 

1976a. New Haven Harbor Station Ecological Monitoring 



Studies, New Haven Harbor, Connecticut. Annual Report 1975. 
Prepared for The United Illuminating Company, New Haven, Conn- 
ecticut. 312 pp. 

. 1975b. New Haven Harbor thermal regime during operation of 



the New Haven Harbor Station September 1975. Prepared for The 
United Illuminating Company, New Haven, Connecticut. 31 pp. 

1976c. New Haven Harbor Ecological Monitoring Studies, New 



Haven Harbor, Connecticut. Acute Toxicity Studies. Prepared for 
The United Illuminating Company, New Haven, Connecticut. 64 pp. 

1977a. New Haven Harbor Station Ecological Monitoring 



Studies, New Haven Harbor, Connecticut. Annual Report 1976. 
Prepared for The United Illuminating Company, New Haven, Conn- 
ecticut. 376 pp. 

1977b. Thermal surveys: New Haven Harbor, summer and fall 



1976. Prepared for The United Illuminating Company, New Haven, 
Connecticut. 70 pp. 

. 1977c. Piscataqua River Ecological Studies, 1976. Mon- 



itoring Study Report No. 7. Prepared for Public Service Company of 
New Hampshire. 



5-53 



. 1978. New Haven Harbor Ecological Monitoring Studies, New 

Haven Harbor, Connecticut. Annual Report 1977. Prepared for The 
United Illimiinating Company, New Haven, Connecticut. 359 pp. 

Osmann, R.W. 1977. Establishment and development of a marine epifaunal 
community. Ecological Monographs. Vol. 47(l):37-63. 

Pearce, J.B. 1969. Thermal addition and the benthos. Cape Cod Canal. 
Chesapeake Science. 10 (314) : 227-233. 

Pomerat, CM. and CM. Weiss. 1946. The influence of texture and 
composition of surface on the attachment of sedentary marine 
organisms. Biol. Bull. 91:57-65. 

Raytheon. 1970a. New Haven Harbor Plankton Survey, April-May 1970. 
Prepared for The United Illuminating Company, New Haven, Conn- 
ecticut. 49 pp. 

. 1970b. New Haven Harbor Ecological Survey, June-December 



1970. Prepared for The United Illuminating Company, New Haven, 
Connecticut. 179 pp. 

. 1971. New Haven Harbor Ecological Survey, December- April 



1971. Prepared for The United Illiominating Company, New Haven, 
Connecticut. 11 sections. 

Rosenberg, R. 1976. Benthic faunal dynamics during succession follow- 
ing pollution abatement in a Swedish estuary. Cikos. 27:414-427. 

Tinsman, J.C and D.L. Maurer. 1974. Effects of thermal effluent on 
the American oyster, pp. 223-236 IN: Thermal Ecology. A.E.C 
Symposium Series. 

TRIGOM-PARC 1974. A socio-economic and environmental inventory of the 
North Atlantic region. Prepared for Biireau of Land Management, 
Marine Minerals Division, South Portland, Maine. 8 Volumes. 

Turner, R.D. 1966. A survey and illustrated catalogue of the Tere- 
dinidae. Museum of Compararive Zoology. 265 pp. Cambridge, 
Massachusetts . 

Wass, M.L. 1967. Biological and physiological basis of indicator 
organisms and communities. IN: T.A. Olson and F.J. Burgess. 
Pollution and Marine Ecology. Inter science. New York. pp. 271- 
283. 

Widdows, J. 1973. Effect of temperature and food on the heartbeat, 

ventilation rate and oxygen uptake of Mytilus edulis . Mar. Biol. 
(Berlin). 20 (4) : 265-276. 

Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution. 1952. Marine fouling and its 
prevention. 338 pp. 



NEW HAVEN HARBOR 

ECOLOGICAL STUDIES 

SUMMARY REPORT, 1979 



6.0 SUBTIDAL BENTHOS 

by David J. Hartzband and Andrew J. McCusker 

Normandeau Associates, Inc. 

Bedford, N. H. 

Richard McGrath and Allan B. Michael 

Taxon, Inc. 

Salem, Massachusetts 

Donald A. Rhoads 
Department of Geology and Geophysics 
Yale University 
New Haven, Connecticut 



TABLE OF CONTENTS 

PAGE 

TNTUODUCTION (,•_■/ 

METHODS 6-2 

R & M Program g_2 

NAI Program g-g 

Data Analysis . . . ' g-Q 

CHARACTERIZATION OF NEW HAVEN HARBOR 6-9 

Species Composition 6-10 

Species Richness 6-26 

Faunal Density 6-28 

Diversity 6-Z4 

Within- Station Variability 6-27 

Classification Analysis 6-41 

ANALYSIS OF IMPACTS 6-53 

Species Richness 6-55 

Species Density 6-56 

Diversity 6-59 

SUMMARY , 6-59 

LITERATURE CITED 6-62 



LIST OF FIGURES 

PAGE 

6-1. New Haven Harbor benthic station location map 6-3 

6-2. Spatial distribution of New Haven Harbor character- 
istic benthic Annelid species with frequency of 
occurrence values 6-18 

6-3. Spatial distribution of New Haven Harbor character- 
istic benthic mollusc species with frequency of 
occurrence values 6-20 

6-4. Mean densities (individuals/m ) of New Haven Harbor 
characteristic species (averaged for all samples 
in which species was present). Number of samples 
in which species was found is indicated by numeral 
at top of bar 6-22 

6-5. Mean total species per station for Morris Cove and 

Inner Harbor stations, May 1973 through October 1977 . . 6-30 

2 
6-6. Faunal densities (individuals/m ) for Morris Cove 

deep water (Stations E,F); Morris Cove shallow 

water (Stations A,G) and Inner Harbor (Stations 

5, 10) J . . 6-32 

6-7. Brillouin diversity (H, ) histograms for Morris Cove, 

Inner Harbor and combined data (R & M data only) 6-35 

6-8. Station grouping dendrograms from normal (Q-mode) 

cluster analysis, by sampling date 6-42 

6-9. Spatial distribution of station groups* identified 

from dendrograms (Figure 6-7) 6-46 

6-10. Inverse (R-mode) dendrograms from cluster analysis, 

by year (Refer to Table 6-3 for species codes) 6-47 



11 



LIST OF TABLES 

PAGE 

6-1. DATES OF SUBTIDAL BENTHIC SAMPLING FROM MAY 1973 

THROUGH JANUARY 1978 AT ALL STATIONS 6-4 

6-2. NEW HAVEN HARBOR BENTHIC SPECIES LIST 6-11 

6-3. ABRIDGED BENTHIC SPECIES LIST* 6-14 

6-4. DISTRIBUTION OF NEW HAVEN HARBOR CHARACTERISTIC 

BENTHIC SPECIES AMONG STATION GROUPS 6-17 

6-5. TOTAL NUMBER OF SPECIES PER STATION, MAY 1973 - 

JANUARY 1978 6-27 

6-6. FAUNAE DENSITY (MEAN INDIVIDUALS/m^) BY STATION 

MAY 1973 THROUGH JANUARY 1978 6-29 



6-7. COEFFICIENT OF VARIATION (CV) (% OF MEAN) VALUES 
FOR NUMBER OF SPECIES, NUMBER OF INDIVIDUALS 
AND DIVERSITY, 1977, BASED ON 3 REPLICATE SAMPLES .... 6-38 

6-8. COEFFICIENT OF VARIATION (CV) (% OF MEAN) VALUES 

AVERAGED FOR NEW HAVEN HARBOR, 1977; INNER HARBOR 
AND MORRIS COVE SITES AND CV VALUES FROM PLYMOUTH, 
MASSACHUSETTS 6-39 

6-9. BENTHIC SPECIES CHARACTERISTIC OF GROUP STATIONS FOR 
FOUR STATION GROUPS (RANKED BY FREQUENCY OF 
OCCURRENCE) 6-49 

6-10. TRENDS IN MEAN DENSITY FOR 14 CHARACTERISTIC SPECIES 

EVALUATED VIA SPEARMAN'S RHO 6-57 

6-11. RESULTS OF PAIRED T-TESTS FOR FAUNAL DENSITY CHANGES 

FOR ALL POSSIBLE PAIRS OF YEARS 6-58 

6-12. RESULTS OF PAIRED T-TESTS FOR DIVERSITY (H') CHANGES 

FOR ALL POSSIBLE PAIRS OF YEARS 6-60 



111 



6.0 SUBTIDAL BENTHOS 

by David J. Hartzband and Andrew J. McCusker 
Normandeau Associates, Inc., Bedford, N. H. 

Richard McGrath and Allan B. Michael 
Taxon, Inc., Salem, Mass. 

Donald A. Rhoads 
Department of Geology and Geophysics, Yale University, New Haven, Conn, 



INTRODUCTION 

study of the population dynamics of benthic species can pro- 
vide important insights into long-term disturbance history of the sea- 
floor. Benthic species, especially infauna, are relatively immobile as 
adults and therefore are exposed to changes in the ambient environment. 
Changes in environmental quality are reflected both in selective mor- 
tality of adults and also in the recruitment success of newly settled 
larvae. 

The temporal and spatial persistence of the species composi- 
tion at a particular location reflects the temporal and spatial sta- 
bility of the habitat. In polluted, or otherwise dynamically changing 
environments, the benthos are in a continual state of successional 
change. The species composition of such a low-order successional stage 
is very unpredictable. In less variable physical and chemical habitats, 
the benthic fauna can maintain its structure for longer periods of time. 
Biotic interactions can develop and the organisms can modify their 
environment to some degree. This internal "stasis" is manifested in 
persistent and predictable species associations. 

Long-term observations are necessary to document the dynamics 
of benthic populations. Without the time perspective, it is presently 
not possible to distinguish a pioneer benthic stage from a persistent 
climax comm\inity. 

The purpose of this study was to detect any acute or long-term 
changes in the New Haven Harbor benthos which might be attributable to 



6-1 



6-2 



power station impact. Direct contact of the buoyant thermal plume with 
the subtidal benthic habitat is unlikely (see Section 3.0). However, 
benthic populations might be indirectly affected by reduced larval 
recruitment due to larval mortality from entrainment through the con- 
denser cooling system or thermal shock through contact with the plume 
outside of the power station. Further impacts could result from any 
alterations in either predator or prey populations. 

This report siammarizes data collected by two separate inves- 
tigations which were conducted concurrently from 1974 through 1978. The 
first of these studies has been under the direction of Normandeau Asso- 
ciates, Inc. (NAI) since 1970. The NAI benthic infaunal program was 
part of the more comprehensive New Haven Harbor Station Ecological 
Monitoring Studies (NHHSEMS) . The second benthic program was conducted 
by D. C. Rhoads and A. D. Michael (R&M) of Yale University and Taxon, 
Inc., Salem, Massachusetts, respectively. The latter study was initiated 
in 1974 as part of a program responding to the "special benthic study" 
provision [Item 4(A)(2)] of NHHS's 1973 NPDES discharge permit. This 
study has been independent of the NAI program and R&M reports have been 
included as Appendices to the NHHSEMS Annual reports. 



METHODS 

Though the two studies employed similarly sized sampling 
devices and the same mesh size for sieving, station locations and sam- 
pling schedules for the two studies were different. Station locations 
for both studies are shown in Figure 6-1 and sampling dates are listed 
in Table 6-1. 



R&M Program 

The R&M sampling program comprised 19 (later 20) stations 
which were sampled four times a year (March, August, October, December- 



6-3 




♦ RHOADS & MICHAEL STATIONS 
O NAI STATIONS 



LONG ISLAND SOUND 



Figure 6-1. New Haven Harbor benthic station location map. New Haven 
Harbor Ecological Study Summary Report, 1979. 



6-4 



00 

r-~ • 

CTi CTi 

I — r^ 

CTi 

>- 1 — 

q; 

<c " 
rD I— 
^ q; 
<: o 

•-0 Q- 
LU 

CD 
=1 >- 

o q: 
d; cc 

ic s: 

CO LT) 



>- Q 



O _l 

ce: < 

U- o 
C3 CD 

z: o 

1—1 _J 
—I o 

Q. CJ 
S LU 
<C 

00 □; 
O 

o CO 
I — c q; 

h- a: 



—I <: 



CO z: 

ZD 
U. 00 

o z 

o 

00 1—1 

UJ 1— 

I— <c 

=1: H- 
Q 00 



I 

IX) 



CO 

■a: 



00 r^ 



O 

I— 
■a: 



I I I r I 
I I I I I 
I I I I I 



xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxwcxxxx 



xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 

XXX xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 

xxxxxxllllllllllllllllllll 
I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 

I I I I I I 

I I I I I IXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX 
I I I I I I 



X X X X X X I I I I 

I I I I 



I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 
I I I I I I f I I I I I I I I I 
I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 



I I I I I I I 

] 11 I I IXXXXXXIXXXXXXXXXXXXX 

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 

I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 

xxxxxxiiiiiiiiitiiiiiiriri 

I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 

I I I I I I 

I II I I IXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX 

I I I I I 1 

I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 
1 I I I I I 1 I I I I I I I I 
I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 



I I I I I I 

I II I I I X X X X 

I I I I I I 



xxxxxxxxxx 



xxxxxxxxxx 



X X X X X X I 



I I I I 



X X X X 



1 X X X X 



I X X X X 



I I I I 

X I I I I 

I I I I 



I X X X X 



I I I I 
I I I I 
I I I I 



I X X X X 



I I I I 
I I I I 
I I I I 



xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 



xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 



xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 



I I I I 



I I I 
I I I 
I I I 



I I I I 
I I I I 
I I I I I I 



I I I 



xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 



xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 



xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 



I I I I I I I I I I I I I 
I I I I I I I I I I I I I 
I I I I I I I I I I I I I 



xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 



I I I I I I I I I I 
I I I I I I I I I I 
I I I I I I I I I I 



I I I I 



xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 



I I I I Ill 

I I I I I I I ' ' 

I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 



I I I I I I I I I I 
I I I I I I I I I ' 



I I I I 



I I I I I I I I I I 



c 






(1) 


n 




X 


(U 




m 


i-H 




V 


B 




OJ 


01 




H 


w 


£ 


Oj 




■P 


B 


■p 


c 


fl 







UJ 


2; 


^ 


II 


II 


II 


X 


, 


■>! 



^rnnHrvim-^^iriv^ir^ 



coo^O<mUQWIJyOK 



6-5 



January) from March 1974 through January 1978. Data for January 1978, 
beyond the October 1977 cutoff for this report, are included in this 
case because they complete the data set for the fourth and final year of 
this special program. Ten stations (1-10) were initially established in 
the inner harbor adjacent to the power plant site. One additional inner 
harbor station (4a) , located between the intake structure and discharge 
pipe, was added in 1976. This station is characterized by a coarse- 
grained bottom relatively free from organic detritus. This is an 
unusual condition for an inner-harbor siibstrate and is probably related 
to dredging activity. 

A control or reference site was located outside of the imme- 
diate vicinity of the plant to reduce the possibility that both sites 
might be impacted by the thermal discharge. Variation in hydrographic 
parameters between harbor areas limited the selection of a control site. 
Nine stations (A-I) were therefore selected in Morris Cove as comparison 
sites. Although the Morris Cove stations represent a slightly different 
hydrographic regime, the range of sediment types is similar to that 
found near the plant. f 

At each sampling date in 1974 and 1975, duplicate samples were 

2 
taken with a 0.04 m Van Veen grab. Sampling intensity was increased to 

triplicates beginning in 1976 in order to better estimate spatial 

patchiness of the benthos. Samples were returned to the laboratory and 

2 
sieved through a 1.0 mm mesh stainless steel sieve. An 80 cm sub- 
sample, at selected stations, was washed through a 0.297 mm mesh sieve. 
Collection of the 0.297 mm subsamples was suspended after analysis of 
the subsamples for 1974 showed that no unique faunal components were 
missed by using a 1.0 mm sieve. Additional analysis of six 0.297 mm 
samples collected in 1975-1977 confirmed the earlier result. All sieved 
samples were fixed in formalin, stained with rose bengal to facilitate 
sorting, and preserved in 70% ethanol. 



6-6 



NAI Program 

The NAI sampling program was a continuation of a baseline 
study initiated under NAI direction by the Raytheon Company in 1970. 
The present methodology was standardized in 1973, and data collected 
prior to 1973 are not considered in this report, except as a quali- 
tative reference. 

2 
Sampling was done with a 0.053 m Ponar grab sampler (recov- 

3 
erable volume = 7450 cm ) . Five replicate samples were collected at 

each of three stations (5, 8 and 13) during 1973 and 1974 and six 

stations (3, 5, 6, 8, 11, 13) from 1975 through 1977. As some of the 

stations bear the same n\americal designation as some R & M stations, all 

NAI stations will hereafter be designated with an "N" suffix in all 

text, tables and figures. Samples were sieved through a 1.0 mm mesh 

sieve, and preserved in a 5% formalin solution in the field. 

NAI stations were designated as either inner harbor (3N, 5N, 
5N) , shipping channel (8N, UN) or outer harbor (13N) . The inner harbor 
NAI stations are generally in shallower areas more distant from the 
power station than are the R & M stations. Stations 8N and UN are not 
directly comparable with any of the R & M stations, while Station 13N is 
spatially contiguous with the Morris Cove control stations. 



Data Analysis 

Data analyses included calculation of information-theory 

diversity indices (Shannon-Weaver, H' ; Brillouin, H) and related values 

(J' , H' , H' . ) . These indices were calculated separately for each 
max min 

replicate. Data processing was done at the Woods Hole Oceanographic 
Institution (WHOI) computing facility. The Shannon-Weaver formula is 
expressed by: 



6-7 



H' = Z p. log p. 
i=l 

where: p. = proportion of the i species in the sample. The Brillouin 
index is calculated as: 

.. 1 -, N! 

log 



N ^ n ' n^! . . . n ! 
12 s 

where : N = total individuals 
S = number of species 
n. = number of individuals for the i species. 

These two diversity indices have been used somewhat inter- 
changeably by ecologists and the decision as to which is appropriate 
is based upon theoretical considerations best siammarized by Pielou 
(1966, 1975). It is convenient to consider H (Brillouin) as repre- 
senting the diversity present in the sample itself and H' (Shannon- 
Weaver) to be an estimator of the diversity in the population from which 
the sample is drawn. In practice, the choice of an index is not of 
prime importance because both are highly correlated (r = 0.9725 for a 
random sample of data from the present study) . 

J', or evenness, is a measure of how equally the various 
component species are represented in the population in terms of their 
numerical density, and is calculated from: 



J = 



log 

s 



where: s = number of species. 



H' is the highest value that H' can assxame given a certain 
max 

number of species. This occurs when the J' value is at a maximum, which 
is when all species are represented equally. H' is calculated by: 

1 -, 1 
H = - — r— log — — - = log 

max S ^ S ^s 



6-8 



H' . is defined as the lowest possible diversity (H') value for a 
population with a given number of species. This occurs when all species 
but one are represented by a single individual and is calculated as: 

1 N' 



min N ^ (N-S+1) ! 

Normal (Q-mode) and inverse (R-mode) cluster analyses were 
performed on data from each sampling period separately and for all 
sampling periods combined. In all cases the mean value of all repli- 
cates was used for each species. All classification analyses were 
computed using the program SPSTCL at the WHOI computing center. No 
transformations were applied to the data. The similarity coefficient 
used was percent similarity (standardized Bray-Curtis) and the cluster- 
ing strategy was group average sorting. 

Normal cluster analyses were conducted on the results for 
individual sampling events from the R & M study from March 1974 to 
January 1978. NAI samples that had been collected within one month of 
the R St M samples were included in the analyses . Norinal and inverse 
analyses were also computed on the annual data-set for each of the four 
years. In each inverse analysis only the 40 most abundant species for 
the particular year were considered. Nodal analyses, in which the 
normal and inverse classification results are compared in a single 
matrix, were prepared for 1974 and 1977. Because no consistent station 
groupings had been identified at the time the nodal analyses were com- 
puted, constancy values were calculated for individual stations and 
species. The nodal analyses did not add any new information and, 
hence, are not presented in this report. 

Means of various population parameters (species richness, 
faunal density, diversity) were tested for significant differences over 
space and time using standard paired and unpaired Student's t proce- 
dures. In all cases two-tailed tests were used with a rejection cri- 
terion of 0.05. Spearman's coefficient of rank correlation was used to 



5-9 



evaluate trends in certain parameters over time. Collections were 
ranked in chronological order and the parameter being examined was 
ranked according to its position in the range of values expressed in the 
time scries. A reflection renjion of 0.05 was usc>d consistently in this 
procedure. 

Numbers of taxa and individuals per sample were analyzed for 
differences by years, seasons and stations via three-way ANOVA. This 
analysis was j^e^^foi^med by the NAI Technical Data Processing & Analysis 
Group. In order to incorporate the most temporally extensive but con- 
sistent data base possible into this analysis, only data from the spring 
and summer samplings at Stations 5N, 8N and 13N over the 1973-1977 
period were used. All data were standardized by a log (X + 1) trans- 
formation. The null hypotheses under consideration were: 1) the exper- 
imental stations in general would not exhibit changes over years, or 2) 
that Stations 5N and 8N would show changes with the inception of station 
operation while the Morris Cove Station 13N would not. 



CHARACTERIZATION OF THE NEW HAVEN HARBOR BENTHIC INFAUNA 

As might be expected in a temperate, shallow, estuarine embay- 
ment, the subtidal benthos in New Haven Harbor is spatially and season- 
ally variable in terms of species composition, faunal densities and 
species richness. In addition, the New Haven Harbor benthos has been 
characterized by extreme year-to-year variability in these parameters. 
The most abundant fauna are either opportunistic, have short life spans, 
or are highly mobile species that are rarely present through a full 
annual cycle. The parameters of species richness, faunal density and 
diversity are considered in detail and examined for spatial and seasonal 
patterns, particularly as they are related to changes in the environ- 
mental condition of the harbor. Those species commonly found in the 
area which, on the basis of abundances and frequencies of occurrence, 
best characterize the benthic assemblage of New Haven Harbor are dis- 
cussed in greater detail. Faunal groupings are identified and their 



6-10 



spatial distributions and within-station variability in the data is 
addressed. The information developed in this section provides a frame- 
work for the analysis of potential impacts of New Haven Harbor Station. 
The high spatial and temfjoral faunal variability which characterized the 
New Haven Harbor benthos over the period of this study, prevented us 
from utilizing more sophisticated data-reduction techniques which can 
ordinarily be employed in analyses of benthic faunal data. We therefore 
had to take an interpretive approach that relies heavily on the more 
qualitative and descriptive aspects of the data. 



Species Composition 

A master species list (Table 6-2) was compiled from the com- 
bined data of Normandeau Associates, Inc. (NAI) from 1973-1977 and the 
Rhoads and Michael (R & M) 1974-1977 program. The list comprises 302 
species or higher taxa: all major macrofaunal groups identified from 
previous studies of southern New England estuaries are represented. 

The master species list was examined for inconsistencies due 
to changes in taxonomic identification procedures and a number of minor 
taxonomic discrepancies were found. Most of these problems were resolved 
merely by consulting appropriate systematic sources . Several incon- 
sistencies in the list were due only to the level of identification: 
Porifera, Cnidaria, Platyhelminthes and Chordata were generally iden- 
tified to the species level in NAI data but only to phylum by R & M. 
Similarly, the Eulalia sp. included in the NAI list was assumed to be 
Eulalia viridis as identified by R & M. Some inconsistencies between 
the two lists arose as a result of differences in the literature source 
used in faunal identifications. This type of discrepancy resulted in 
several minor changes. The bivalve genus Callocardia was relisted under 
its more current name Pi tar; the amphipod genus Carinogammarus was 
updated to Ganmarus ; Crangon vulgaris was assumed to be Crangon sept- 
emspinosa; and the polychaete identified as Eteone alba was assumed to 
be Eteone lactea. Finally, a bivalve that had been variously identified 



6-11 



ro'rririvDr-cooooOOOOOOO 

CriCT>CriOTCT\oS'H'-Hr-(i— (<— (•HrHtHr— «<— 1 



1 CN rn ^ i/l vfl CO CTi 



SSSSSSESES 






O 
U 









o 



o 



T) (fl OJ ^ ro 



in T) 

• 3 (fl to i^ 
10 0) ■ 



+j tr* -I 



l-t S-l -H tj c 



o w s a- 



■u J< -u D ^ 

a fT3 q; i-i -h jD 

-M o -c: — t CD ^ 

Q a. o u ►^ ciH 



o ■--< -u fl e 



4-' o QJ --4 ■ 



Ch a o 
3 s fi. 



1 Q. tB 



n 




M 




'0 




u 




-u 






m 


4j 


■^ 




n 


to 


-U 




nj (B 




:^ q C 










i~l 


>< 


fu 


W 






m 


Cl 




-u 


:n 


rn 














tt 




■H 




• 'n 


n 




-H 




10 




4J 


-u 


X 


10 


•H *a 


















[1. 3 


-u 










'C 


■H 
























0. 


u) m 




Itl 




4J 






fH 
























H 


u 




















UJ 
















+1 




F 












tn 



































m 


































■H u 


■n 






•-H 






■H 


















u, 




0, 












M 












■H 


•'-t -H 


t) 






Cl 














'n 




















"Tl 


D, Q, Q. 






■u 




n 




■U -H 


■H 




















^ tH 


'0 




Tl 






^ 








w 






m 








































■■H 








•H 


'H 


n 


Di -"1 


cq 


000 


u 








>< 


-^ 


-^ 


Cq tq 


lil 





a: 


a: 


H 












'-I s: 



o^o-— lrN^n"^mlJ3^-CDC^o>— fr'jf^*TLni^r~-coiT\o 






r-coa3COCDcococococDCD(7^crii 



o 

CO 

<: 



< 







r-S 


■H 













E 


^ 




t) 






n> 


ta E 


















-i 




■M 






-1 






■H 












r-H -r-( 


u 














■1.1 


(0 ^ 


to M 










■-H --H 






















to 








•-( m 
















0, 




4J bi 


CJ -H 






























• ftJ c 




















n 


• Qi m 


iH 


tr. t3 


U 


0* -O i^ 




■u 




Q. 



















r-H --( 




to -H 


Tl 






to J5 


■•H 










































«B (0 


t. QJ 




to 3 --H 


n 


■u 








•-i 


^ 






rf 


na M fH 




M 





a-M 


■U 


al 




■M ■-! 




'tj 




10 
























M 










-H -^ 




-4 


Q, Q, 






■c 






t^ 












73 E e 




--i QJ 





C/1 




t) 







^ 




■^ 








3i fO OJ 


(11 


!U -S 


-H --H 


M 










:3 












M -u -u 












■•H 




■H "H 




















U U 




Q 


0. 





C. D^ 








-c 


x; \ 


<c 


a. Q. a, 


to 


to to 


CO CO 


CO D VI 


tJi 


to 


to 


to to 


to 


t^ 


^ 




tH ra 



a c -H E -H E 



E "^ Ih !D (0 '^ 



fo to to O -s 











n 


■H 








■-H 








4-1 






m 










+j 












CI 




















"1 




1 













tn 


■H 


in 






-iH 




u -u 


■u 


^ 












:% 


CI 




'n 


















t= 








-H 




•'-1 


■n 




fti 








-s 


































■-s 












■■s 


jj 






^. 


c 


c 




■M 




































> 












-I.) 






u, 








M 


j.- 


Ql 


u. 








n F 
















M 




yi 


■u 






CI 




U] 


n. -^ 


•^ 


u. 


tc 





^^: 


S: 


s 


CQ 




S: 


C/l 




'=T 







o 



< < < < < 



rHCNm-crij-)vDr-coaiOHCNmtTinvor-co<7ii 






^3- in VD t^ 



t/0 



z^ 


CTi 


LU 


r^ 


CO 


<Ti 




r-^ 


a: 







•» 


CQ 


1— 


q; 


a: 


St 


IT 


a. 




iij 


:;s: 


cd 


UJ 




>• 


>- 


cc q; 


n: <: 



to 


■u 


Ql 


(h 




fTl 


H 




■U 


• -H 





q 


(I) 


m 


qi 




to 


fn 




M 




to 




10 


yi 






fC 


IR 




l: 


Q) 


fli 


<U --H 


■'H 
















'H 






ts 


'tl 




•S 


QJ 




Q) -1 




E 



■-f^4JiJ+J333>i;fgo 





(T1 


4J 


u 


to 


F 


rO ^i 


■'-\ 


t) 




m 


q) 






in 




in 


Itl 


a 




E 0) 


n 








to 








-q 


n 


t) 


-c 


M 


TJ r-l 


q 


4J 




q 


■H 


■H 




ti 




q 




^j 




3 'Q 


qi 


q 







^ 


M 






r 


Cl) 


u 


q 




Gi 3 


^J 


ei 






Ul 


m 




fn 




^ 


'n 


m 


to W 








<lt 


in 


yi 


to 


tn 




N; 


■~i 


■H 








to 






^ 


"-* 


Cll 


J5 


q) 


"H 


•a 


q 


CO W 


■-H 














t^ 


■■H 








(J) 






-i 




■■-t 








m 








m 


i' 


■U i^ 


M 


(fl 


to 








■H 








n 




4J 





Ul 


u. 




u^ 


CO 


qi 












Ti 








<i 




11 












-u 











-H 


4J 
























'O -o 


In 








i> 




4-1 


ri 


tl 






M 


■-i 




¥ 


m 


■T^ 


■n 


■H 


■-4 


-1^ 




l-^ 


M 


•-i 


*n 


O, 






























-1 










:"n 




tD 





a: 


a; 


a: 


^~i 


^■^ *J 


i-J 


►^ 


s: 


5: 


S 


s: 


E: 



O C E <C « -H 

O Qj 3 ^H O -H TJ 



Cj q 3\ Q) q fiJ 

, tJ (U ttj Ih O 4J to 

rS 3 tn ^^ -H O H) 3 -H 

(0 CO &i i* nJ 4J ' 

to X ■-< 

to 10 to to -H o m 

■M "H -H -H j:: o q 

QJ HJ CU 1) Qj t7> fO 

t( k* IH ^ D -,4 iH 









Tl 


"1 






-1 


M^ 


to e 


m 




Ct 


Q, 


ni 











CO 


(0 




■H 










■■H 






•-H 









t) 


yi 


ti 


n 






^ 





CI 


u 




^ 


fn 


ti 


m 




Tl 


yi 


yi 


kl 


^ 




r 





n 


q 


-V 


■'^ 


<t 











rri 


M 




■n 


■n 


41 








m 


-T 


=n 


=ri 


n 


rri 3. 


'.T* 


'n 


'ri 




-i 


-i 


III 


■q x: 


-q 




C~l 


n 





<^ 


a. 


Q- a, 


a. 


a^ 




a^ 


a. 





d) 


■^^^ 








~ 










.-t (N m i^- 


u-i kD 














a^ 


^ cN m -^ un 


z 


2 z 


■?', 


7^ 


T'. 


2 2 


J 


hJ J J J 




















&- 0- D4 a- 0. 


u 


tJ u 


t ) 


C ) 


C J 


U U 


a. 


a. an a- a- 


a, a- 














C-) 





































00 



I 



CQ 





CI1 




»*.l 






■U --H 


-H 






tJ cu 


M 














3 


^ 


4J 


m 


q 


D 


in 


"f^ 







•H 




-a 








t! "-H 


q 



tj q q O o 



q tj q 

-M ■-! Qj 1h 

•H M --H E CJ 

■~H ta tg rj^ -H 

tj a: a; a: s: 



Q} fQ fo q to 'a 

ftj -H 'a to o^ E 

—1 q 

CP -H E E O tJ 

fij C ^ 3 3 ■-( -H 

13 -I q ■'s --H u 

■H 3 -H tJ t3 (B tn 

O O "B '-1 'M ■'H TJ 

T> Vj 3 4J -U Qj Lj 

>, p O <U CJ XJ to 

X m cq 5: s: o to 



ro q (0 yj 3 

-H 3 ^ 

i^ fO tn to O 



a, &H a, a. to E^ 



■H 4J (U Qj 

-q -H E q 

Qj Qj In O 



CO an ca cQ CO 



tj 'l -H <D K 



6-12 



+j n, u) — I 



^ 


q 


:3 


3 


a 




-Q 


QJ 


h 





a 


^ 


Dj 


■u -u 


N 


g 


OJ 





Cl^ (J 




^ 


C 


3i <U 


^ 


u 





m 


U ^ 





H 


cq 


o 


Cj [q 


Co 



'Q 


0. 




'U 


m 


M 


'-I 




'fj 


HI 


,0 


g 


CI. 





'd 


^M 


V) 


-.-4 










^ 





U) 


tn 


w 


dj 


u 


13 


fa 


tJ 


4J 


■HI 


■-s 




■H 


0) 


^ 


Lj 


M 


^ 


< 


4-> 


QJ 


QJ 


(b 











-u 


M 




10 


Ifl 


i/i 


\ 





-=3; 


«^ 


-^ 


D 


X 



■H 


(Q 


nj 


u 


E 




(fl 


(C 





-s 


•~-i 


x: 


3 


3 


u 


tn 


tJl 




-"H 




M 








\ 


s: 


S 


D 



COC^OHrNr^■d■u^^Dr^CDa^Or-^^slrn■^;TLnu^^^como■HO)^n•^Ln^Dr^coa^O't'^H^N^n•q•lnln^D^^ 
UUUCJOCJUUUUUUUOOCJOUCJUUOUUUUUUUUUUUOCJUUUUUCJUOUUUtJU 




3 10 
(DO) 

c: 10 dj o w 
O >. -q 

M O h to 



o D a. Q, s: u fei 




Ck q W 

c 
ta to fO -M 

--+ 3 TD "H 

M <D Qj O *^ 

Q) Id O CU 13 

q -rH (K 3 X U 

(flOnJ.H'OQjft-H 
QJ tOTJ'-l-H'a g^ 

u-qga)>^o<<D 

(fl O Qj J^ QJ M bi 

c-H ftaoMO 

In 01 nj >, -H \ Qj 

■ ffi s: D tD 



OHCN^n^ln\D^-■coo^Or^cN^^•g■^o^--coa^o^— i(Nro'^\Dr--coiTiO>HfNfo»3'irivDr-- 
UUOUUUUOUUCJUCJUUUUUCJUUUUCJUUUUUOOUUUUUUUUOUOUUU 



















•M 




















E 


4J 







3 


1h 


0} 











U 


--H 


to 






3 






« 


to 


11 








x; 


















(0 




13 


01 




■-s to 





3 








q 


x: 


■-s 


0) 


01 




■U 






3 


QJ 


q 








■u 
















E 


'l^, 


01 




3 


to 


^ 


+J 


^5 








"S ^ 


4J 


0) 


M 


3 




3 




« 


W 


t3 


u 


0] 


u 




■M 


13 












ft) 


3 


a, u 


3 


3 


■-^ 


■H 


13 -H 


13 


•M 


to 






Qj 3 


q 


1] 


Cl. 


■U 


m 


U 


U) 


Z] 


'H 


■■H 





■-S 


■u 


In 


E 









m 






4J 


1h 


■^ 'O 


■-i 


q 


t> 


M 


q '0 


■u 


Q- 


3 


01 


01 


to 01 


P 


M 


^ 


13 




5 


3 


<u 


:> 







Q. 


■H 





to 


QJ 


m 









D 


■-1 





q -H 


M 


Ql 


QJ 


U 


■H 'H 


3 


U 


4-> 


•-i 


u 


E 01 





-Q 


'O 




01 


p 


q 


q 





q 


H 


QJ 


-H 


q 







^ 




■>-( 




13 


T3 


-a 


■H M 


• 


(^ 


13 


QJ 


-H W 




• to 


U 


■H 


q 


Q) Qt 









3 


3 


^ 


(D 


tq 


k, 


nj 


Q) 


M 







to 










j:: 


13 


q 


-Ci 


u 


Q. U 


a-u 







q 


31 q 


p 


ft 


M 


u 


Qj 


4J U 


q 


01 


01 


q 





y 


■-H 


3 


Q4 


M 


e 





o. 




■*H 




-H 




■u 


q 




fO 


t» 


0) fc. 


to 01 








-H 


^ 


m CO 





QJ 


2 


a, a, 




3 


D 


q 





3 


IJ 


fl 


E 


fO 


u 


c 






M 


u 


"-H 




■~H 


"H 










3 


to 


0) 


fH 






^ *" 


IH 


t^ 


e 


Ql Qt 




■H 


a; 


u 




E 


X3 


Q) 


■M 


fl 




QJ 


to 


S 


3> 


QJ 


k 


ci* 


U 


^^ 




13 


u 


(d QJ 


Q) 13 


3 


3 




e E 


E 


E -u 


^ 


O 




to 13 




q 


s- 
















to 




■-H 


e 






-U 


01 


^ 




13 


O 





U 


^ 


-M 


■-t 


ftJ 


3 3 


3 


3 


■H 


rQ 


01 




13 








to 


12 


to 


W 


tn 


10 


01 


■H 


10 


M 


3 


to 















(0 


w 


01 j:: 


-q 


Q, 


Q* 


M 


■H -M 


■H 


■^i Qj 






3 


q 0] 


■r-1 


x; 


q 


3 


3 


3 


3 


3 


3 


3 


<J) 




3l 








-o 


u 


u 


m 






■H 




■H -u 


■u j:; 










s: x: 


j:: 


x: q 


^ 


M 


c 


3 


-c 


■u 


S 


tH 


M 


Is 


q 


q 


q 


q 


:y\ 


0] 


■U 





^ 


■H 


QJ 


QJ 


QJ 


u 









M -H 


■-1 4J 


■H 


•■-* 


tu 


D, Q, 


Oh 


Dh-M 


<D 


QJ 


■H 


b> q 





5 


Q, 








u 


u 


(n 


m 




■-H 


W 


-u 


3 


Ih 


-U 


^J 


■u 


Js 





QJ 


Q) 


Q} -q 


-q C 


M 


■-H 


^ 








-1 











q -H 


■M 





3i 








■-H 


-H 




-H 




W 


13 


Oh 


nil 













QJ 


M 


CI, 




Oh D* 


Q^ u 


■H 


M 


Oh 


^ iH 


^ 


^ M 


q 


q 


^ 


13 


f-S 


"r^ 


ki 








1J 


(H 


ra 


u 


Qj 


3i 


■"-t 


3 


>< 


j:: 


'O 


'O 


13 


13 


3 


E 




B £ 


E 


1] 


U 


fB 








13 


ro 


u 


13 


U q 


3 


>H 


3 


D 


13 


(0 


na 


aq 


03 


ai 


:5 


5: 


Q 


8 


u 


fcl 


tl 


H 


^ 


^ 


«: 


^ 


KC ^ 


-1 ^ 


O 


o 


O 


o o 


o 


O <J 


O 


o 


U 


O n: 


d 


tq 


[q 


(J 


O 


^ 



a 0] ^ c to 

tq (H Q) O 3 



3 3 to C O 
M iH 3 U 

nj 13 t^ 1) 31 



ra ttj o 3i to 

U u a: 4: H 



■o 

O) 



iDt^tDCTiOrHfNn'a'LntDf^COCnO.HfM'd'LntDr-CDO^O^OJf^'^U^tDr-CDCTlOrHCNrHfO^invDr-tJJtJlO 

ESSSSSEEESSESSSSSSSEESSSaEESESSESSEasSEEEaaSS 



o 

O 



c to to to 



OvJ 

I 

LU 

_J 
CO 

<: 







^ 


3 


3 


■-H 






■u 








-u 


3 





ti 


q 


,^ 




13 to 






)s 




? 







W 


•H 






u 








*:^ 


+J 


■H 


U) D 


13 


3 




E 0) 






QJ 







is 





01 


1° 




w 


M 


2 






t. 


3 




-S 13 


■■s 







3l •'H 


0} 


01 


4J 




■-( 




■H 


"3 


tn 






3 


E 


01 




■■H 


W 


a 


Is q 


T3 




u 


q -O 






q 


13 


-q 




t! 


E 


Qj 


13 




q 


'-i 






iH 


■H 


3 


-q 3 






Ol 


3i --i 










-10 






QJ 


-u 


■H 


3 


m 


ii 


3 




-U 


J3 


'a 


-q a x: 


3 


13 


3 






u 




? 


M 


rtJ 




13 


13 


k) 


tl 







q 










Is 





q 


■U 


O 


& 


IS 


ftJ 


Q) 


5 


■M 






-W 


13 


Q) 


Q, 


1^ 


QJ 


li 


(0 


fO 


01 


to 13 1-* 


bi 


U 


pQ 


Qj 0] 


n 


u 




4j 


xi 


^ 


01 


01 




q 






Q. 


■u 


(0 


3 




Qj 


QJ f-S 














c 








^n 


3 


3 


U 


Qj 


to 


13 








•-H 







U E 


u 






"3 13 


tj 




■IS 






? 


M 


M 


■H 


M 


3 




m 


tn 


13 


^ 






■-S 


Is 


H 


13 


r-s -^ 


q 





q 






P 








q 


tJ 








■"H 


M 


13 


■U 


q 


q -H Is 





0] 


to 


3 3 


"'H 


'O 





P 


p 


p 






■M 




■■H 


Qj 


3 


3 


3 


to 


VI 


3i 


3> M fa 


13 


3 


3 


to 0] 


-"H 


QJ 


•Q 


O 





Is 


13 


'S 


M 


tl 


'U 


01 


U 








to 





-H 


•~H -U +J 


q 




■u 


■~l -^ 


M 


^ 


ts 


"S 


2 


Qj 








3 


3> 


31 


3i 


3 


3 


3 


13 


t3 





Q) -H 


13 


Qj 


Qj 


Qj a 


m 


QJ 


3 


5: 


S: 


s: 


s 


5: 


s 


s: 


s: 


5: 


a; 


a: 


5: 


5: 


O 


q: 


ai q; q] 


D. 


an 


a; 


to to 


eii 


6 


ts 



D, >< E 



TJ -U N U 



o . -u o q a IS 



q --I a n a 



u u ca-rS'HtjjoioO'-^ 

q-UOl'O'O 31S-H3 

ts tJ O'-H-HI-'-U'Q'-i 
O-H M O 0\IU 3i3i3 

&Htt:q)NNoQ:a;oa; 



E D 3 TJ > 13 fc. 



(B -q 01 Q) Q, r 

> Is 3i Q) H H -■ 

■H 3 13 13 M "N. "X 

PQ Es O to tj D D I 



>-13 



as Pholas , Barnea or Cyrtopleura, was listed as Cyrtopleura. None of 
the identification inconsistencies affected the analyses reported here. 

The master list of approximately 300 taxa is large for what 
has been shown in previous reports to be a severely impacted estuarine 
system. Studies in comparable estuaries have rarely reported such a 
large inventory. In a study of Raritan Bay-Lower New York Harbor, 
McGrath (1974) reported only 47 species over a much larger and more 
varied area, though over a considerably shorter period. In the same New 
York estuary. Dean (1975) reported only 127 species in a program encom- 
passing four years of intensive sampling. Sanders (1956) in a study in 
central Long Island Sound, identified only 119 species and McGrath et 
al. (1978), working in a nearby Connecticut estuary, found 68 species. 
Although this program was not carried through a full seasonal cycle, the 
samples represented a very wide variety of habitats. 

The New Haven Harbor benthic sampling program was more inten- 
sive and extended over a greater number of years than the studies cited. 
Many of the New Haven Harbor species encountered were seen very rarely 
and in small numbers. These rare species cannot be considered repre- 
sentative of the area. In addition, many of the species were present 
only as juveniles and the number of species that develop persistent 
adult populations is small. The magnitude of the total species list 
should not be considered indicative of a healthy estuarine benthic 
habitat. 

The importance of immature or transient species in the species 
list may be seen by noting that the abridged species list (Table 6-3) , 
which comprises only those species occurring in one or more percent of 
the combined replicate samples over all years, includes only 50 species. 
This figure is probably more representative of the actual species rich- 
ness present in the harbor. The abridged list contains a good repre- 
sentation of opportunistic, or pioneering, organisms which tend to 
dominate in a strongly physically-controlled environment where periodic 
mortalities create a continual disclimax community. Such species as 



6-14 



TABLE 6-3. ABRIDGED BENTHIC SPECIES LIST 
SUnriARY REPORT, 1979. 



NEW HAVEN HARBOR ECOLOGICAL 



Code 

R 

A2 

AlO 

A13 

A17 

A21 

A23 

A29 

A31 

A33 

A38 

A40 

A43 

A47 

A52 

A53 

A56 

A66 

A67 

A68 

A75 

A78 

M3 

M4 

Mil 



Rhyncocoela 
Capitella capitata 
Eteone sp. 
Eumida sanguinea 
Glycera americana 
Hydroides dianthus 
Lepidonotus squamatus 
Mediomastus ambiseta 
Nephtys incisa 
Nereis succinea 
Oligochaeta 
Pectinaria gouldii 
Phyllodoce arenae 
Polydora ligni 
Sabella microphthalma 
Sabellaria vulgaris - 
Scoloplos frag His 
Sthenelais boa 
Streblospio benedicti 
Tharyx acutus 
Eusyllis sp. 
Ampharete arctica 
Crepidula fornicata 
Crepidula plana 
Anomia simplex 



Code 

M14 

Ml 5 

M17 

M18 

M24 

M28 

M31 

M32 

M35 

M38 

M46 

M50 

M54 

M56 

C3 

C5 

C16 

C19 

C29 

C34 

C43 

C54 

C56 

C61 

C69 



Ensis di rectus 
Gemma gemma 
Hiatella striata 
Ilyanassa obsoleta 
Lyonsia hyalina 
Mercenaria mercenaria 
Mulinia lateralis 
Mya arenaria 
Nucula proxima 
Nassarius trivittatus 
Retusa canaliculata 
Tellina agilis 
Rictaxis punctostriatus 
Yoldia limatula 
Balanus improvisus 
Neomysis americana 
Ampelisca abdita 
Ampithoe valida 
Corophium spp. 
Crangon septemspinosus 
Gammarus lawrencianus 
Microdeutopus gryllotalpa 
Neopanope texana 
Pagurus longicarpus 
Undo la irrorata 



Species present in one or more percent of all replicate samples 



6-15 



Streblospio benedicti and Capitella capitata are generally recognized as 
belonging to this group (Fisher and McCall, 1973) and have even been 
categorized by some authors as "pollution-indicators" (Dean, 1970; Pear- 
son and Rosenberg, 1978; Reish, 1961 and Wass, 1967), although the 
severe physical stresses that favor their presence need not be x^ollution 
related. 

Some indication of the extent to which an area has been 
degraded by pollutants is provided through examination of the number of 
species representing each of the three major benthic groups: poly- 
chaetes, molluscs, and crustaceans. Organisms living in an unpolluted 
habitat generally represent a wide variety of both feeding types and 
life strategies. As a habitat becomes progressively degraded by pollu- 
tants, this trophic and biological variety is reduced. In heavily 
impacted habitats , organisms which biologically concentrate pollutants 
such as carnivores or tubicolous filter feeders tend to be eliminated 
leaving primarily surface deposit feeders. Reish (1972) , gives examples 
showing that impacted areas are usually dominated by near-surface depo- 
sit feeding polychaetes and that filter feeding molluscs and crustaceans 
are reduced. This overall result can be used to evaluate, strictly, on 
a comparative basis, the polychaete : mollusc : crustacean species ratio 
of New Haven Harbor, 

The combined New Haven species list contains a polychaete : 
mollusc : crustacean species ratio of 1.2 : 0.8 : 1.0, which is not 
indicative of a strongly stressed area. The P : M : C ratio for the 
more characteristic abridged list, however, is 1.2 : 1.0 : 0.7 which 
shows a decrease in richness of crustaceans. For comparison, the 
ratios for the two Raritan Bay studies were 1.6 : 0.6 : 0.8 (McGrath, 
1974) and 1.3 : 1.0 : 0.8 (Dean, 1976). Although the decrease in crus- 
taceans is seen in only one of the two studies, the relative increase in 
polychaetes is obvious. In Clinton Harbor, a relatively pristine Conn- 
ecticut estuary, the ratio was 1.0 : 0.8 : 1.2, indicating that, under 



6-15 



limited stress in an otherwise similar estuary, crustaciians are> well 
repreuenteci. 

Based upon the raw frequency-of-occurrence data and the spe- 
cies groups generated by the classification analysis, a group of species 
considered to be characteristic of the benthic infauna of New Haven 
Harbor was developed (Table 6-4) . In order to qualify for inclusion, a 
species had to be either ubiquitous or dominant. A ubiquitous species 
was considered to be any species present at 20 or more of the 26 sta- 
tions at some time over the four years of the combined programs. Dom- 
inant species were those which were among the top five at a station in 
terms of frequency of occurrence. 

In most cases, species which were ubiquitous were also domi- 
nant at one or more stations. Every species which was important to the 
determination of station groupings also qualified as ubiquitous. This 
indicates that, in this study, the abundance data of the particular 
component species were critical to the identification of station clus- 
ters: presence/absence data would not have allowed detection of the 
clusters. The fact that only 14 species qualified as either ubiquitous 
or dominant is further support for how unrepresentative most of the spe- 
cies were. 

Frequencies of occurrence based on all samples from a particu- 
lar station are plotted on charts of New Haven Harbor for 10 of the 4 
ubiquitous species identified above (Figures 6-2 and 6-3) . Crangon 
septemspinosa , and Neomysis americana, Nucula proxima and Pagurus longi- 
carpus are not shown because of their consistently low frequency of 
occurrence. Several distinct distribution patterns in the harbor can be 
seen from these time-averaged distributions. Among the polychaetes, the 
dominant and widespread group in all areas of the harbor. Nereis succinea 
and Streblospio benedicti were most ubiquitous (Figure 6-2) . Nereis was 
most common at inner harbor stations 6 and 10, where it occurred in 69% 
and 81% of all samples, respectively, and was also abundant in the 
coarser-grained Morris Cove samples where it was present in more than 

(Text continued on page 6-21) 



6-17 



TABLE 6-4. DISTRIBUTION OF NEW HAVEN HARBOR CHARACTERISTIC BENTHIC 

SPECIES AMONG STATION GROUPS. NEW HAVEN HARBOR ECOLOGICAL 
STUDIES SUMMARY REPORT, 1979. 







STATION 


GROUP* 




SPECIES 


1 


2 


3 


4 


Glycera americana 




c 


c 




Nephtys incisa 






c 


c 


Nereis succinea 


C 


c 




c 


Poly dor a ligni 










Streblospio benedict! 


D 


c 




c 


Oligochaeta 










Gemma gemma 


D 








Tellina agilis 




c 


c 




Nucula proxima 






c 




Mulinia lateralis 






c . 




Nassarius trivittatus 






I 




Neomysis americana 










Crangon septemspinosa 


D 








Pagurus longicarpus 




D 







C = characteristic of station group — present in at least 50% of 
samples from all stations in the group 

D = dominant for station group — among the five most abundant 
species in the station group. 



*1 = Inner Harbor 

2 = Morris Cove shallow water 

3 = Morris Cove deep water 

4 = Stations 8N, 13N 



6-18 



Nephtys inaisa 



Nereis succinea 




Streblospio benediati 



Glyoeva americana 




Figure 6-2. Spatial distribution of New Haven Harbor characteristic 
benthic Annelid species with frequency of occurrence 
values. New Haven Harbor Ecological Study Summary 
Report, 1979. 



6-19 



Tolydora ligni 



Oligochaeta 




Figure 6-2. (Continued) 



6-20 



Gemma gemma 



Mulinia lateralis 



f^. 25-50 % 
N^ 51-75% 
la > 76% 




Nassarius trivittatus 



v.N^;S 51-75% 

■1 >7e% 




Tellina agi 


lis 








MILL Jf 
RIVER * 


QUINNIPIAC a 
RIVER M 




ism ^5-5:% 




X^ 51-75% 
■1 >7«% 


^ 


tENGLIBH #e 
^STATION :M M 


^ WEST 

^ RIVER LONG WH 




f 


WEST.|& ^i 

RIVER >v: -^ 


^j^j 


r NEW HAVEN 

|; 1 HARBOR STATION 


^B ^^ 


WEST M 


il 


f 


HAVEN 1 

sandIL-/* 

POINTlr 


<f^ 


/p' FORT HALE 
fe, PARK 


. VjisSsM^^'^ 




/WLIGHTHOUSE 
fe POINT 



Figure 6-3. Spatial distribution of New Haven Harbor characteristic 
benthic mollusc species with frequency of occurrence 
values. New Haven Harbor Ecological Study Summary 
Report, 1979. 



6-21 



50% of all samples from Stations A, C, D and G. These four stations, 
forming an arc around thd northern and western periphery of the Cove, 
are characterized by a coarser grained sediment than the deeper areas of 
the Cove and, hence, support a different fauna. Nereis was present in 
at least 25% of the samples at nearly all other stations, including 
those immediately adjacent to the generating station. Nereis was numeri- 
cally abundant through all sampling months and years (Figure 6-4) . 

The spatial distribution of Streblospio benedicti , an oppor- 
tunistic polychaete found in many polluted estuarine environments, was 
similar to that of Nereis (Figure 6-2) . Like Nereis, Streblospio was 
present in greater than 25% of the samples from nearly all stations. 
Although occasionally reaching high densities in the inner harbor, 
Streblospio did not occur at inner harbor stations in the frequencies 
exhibited by Nereis. Except for Station 8, it never was present in more 
than 50% of the samples from this area. Streblospio occurred most 
frequently in Morris Cove, particularly at the shallower, coarser- 
grained stations where Nereis was also most abundant. Streblospio was 
niomerically important in all study years and seasons (Figure 6-4) . 

Among those species that were present in frequencies greater 
than 25% at several stations, Nephtys incisa exhibited the most discrete 
spatial distribution (Figure 6-2) . Nephtys was characteristic only of 
the deeper areas of the inner harbor, at Stations 8 and 8N, but was 
present in greatest frequency in the deeper areas of Morris Cove, at all 
stations except A, C, D and G. This Morris Cove pattern is the opposite 
of that described above for Nereis and Streblospio. Nephtys was found 
in low average densities over all seasons through the years of the study 
(Figure 6-4) . 

Glycera americana was found at only three inner harbor sta- 
tions, 4a, 8 and 9, in greater than 25% of all samples (Figure 6-2) . In 
Morris Cove Glycera exhibited a distributional pattern similar to 
Streblospio and Nereis, reaching greatest frequencies of occurrence at 

(Text continued on page 6-25) 



1000^ 



100 = 



>- 
I— 

CO 

LU 
Q 

■a: 



10 - 



6-22 

MOLLUSCS 
1000 



NASSMIUS TRIVITTATUS 



8 7 



2 I 



1000 =1 



100 = 



to 

z 



z 



10 = 



MA DMAOD AOD AOJ 
S/0 F/M F/M 

1974 1975 1976 1977 



MULINIA LATERALIS 



16 



8 6 



MA DMAOD AOD AOJ 
S/0 F/M F/M 

1974 1975 1976 1977 



100 r 



10 r 



TELLINA AGILIS 



16 



10 



12 



T I I 

MA DMAOD AOD, AOJ 
S/O F/M F/M 

1974 1975 1976 1977 



1000 3 



100 = 



10 = 




MA DMAOD AOD AOJ 
S/0 F/M F/M 

1974 1975 1976 1977 



Figure 6-4. Mean densities 'indi viduals/m") of New Hav.;n Harbor char- 
acteristic species (averaged for all samples in which species 
was present). Number of samples in which species was found 
is indicated by numeral at top of bar. New Haven Harbor 
Ecological Study Summary Report, 1979. 



Continued 



5-23 



1000 a 



>- 

5 100- 

z 

Ul 

a 

< 



10 



NEPHTYS INCISA 



ANNELIDS 



1000 



13 



8 8 



1 1 T 1 1 T T T 'I 1 I I I I I r 
MA DMAOD AOD AOJ 
S/0 F/M F/M 

1974 1975 1976 1977 



100 



10 Z 



STREBLOSPIO BENEDICTI 

o 
10 o 

12 9 12 13 Ln 

20 



10 



15 



I I I ' I 1 1 T T 1 T T 1 T 1 
MA DMAOD AOD AOJ 
S/D FAl F/M 

1974 1975 1976 1977 



1000 =1 



^ 100 = 

LlJ 
Q 

10 



GLYCERA AMERICANA 



t 



12 



8 10 



H-W 



1000 iz, 



100: 



^- 



MA DMAOD AOD AOJ 
S/0 F/M F/M 

1974 1975 1976 1977 



10 :: 



NEREIS SUCCINEA 



10 



10 



10 



16 



M A„, D M A D^,. A D^, A J 
S/O F/M F/M 

1974 1975 1976 1977 



Figure 6-4. (Continued) 



Continued 



6-24 



1000 =1 POLYVOEA LIGNI 



100 



>- 
I— 

I— I 
00 

z 

Ul 

o 

z 



- I 



10 



ANNELIDS 
1000 



100- 



10 



10 



OLIGOCHAETES 



T 



3 5 



12 



14 



10 



1- 



1974 1975 1976 1977 

ARTH'^xOPODS 



1000 



100 = 



00 

z 

LU 



10 = 



1000 



CRANGON SEPTEMSPINOSA 



MA DMAOD AOD AOJ 
S/0 F/M F/M 

1974 1975 1976 1977 



NEOMYSIS AMERICANA 



100 = 



10 



I I I 



10 



10 



LU 



< 
UJ 



10:: 



I I I I I I I I I I I I t 
MA DMAOD AOD AOJ 
S/0 I^M F/M 

1974 1975 1976 1977 



I I 7 : I I I 

MA DMAOD AOD AOJ 
S/0 F/M F/M 

1974 1975 1976 1977 



Figure 6-4. (Continued; 



6-25 



nearshore coarse-grained stations, particularly Stations C and G. There 
was no apparent seasonal or annual variation observed in Glycera den- 
sities (Figure 6-4) . 

The remaining ubiquitous polychaete, Polydora ligni , did not 
occur with sufficient frequency at any stations to show a clear pattern 
of distribution and, indeed, was never present in more than 50% of the 
samples from any single station (Figure 6-2) . However, its distribution 
was generally similar to that of Glycera with only scattered occurrences 
in the inner harbor and more consistent occurrence in Morris Cove, 
particularly at coarser grained sediment stations. Densities and fre- 
quency of station occurrence data show no seasonal patterns, but seem to 
have increased since August 1976 (Figure 6-4) . 

Of the four molluscan species included in Figure 6-3, only 
Telliiia agilis and Mulinia lateralis were present in a sufficient number 
of samples to allow generalized statements about their patterns of 
distribution. Both were present in limited numbers in the inner harbor. 
Both species were often collected at Stations 8 and 8N. Tellina also 
occurred at Stations 4, 4A, 9 and 10 in greater than 25% of the samples 
while Mulinia was also frequently present only at Station 5N. Both 
bivalve species were collected most often from stations in Morris Cove. 
Tellina was considerably more abundant than Mulinia. Mulinia was pres- 
ent in over 50% of the samples only at Station F, while Tellina was 
present in greater than half of the samples from nearly all stations in 
the Cove, reaching its greatest frequency of occurrence (87%) at Station 
C. This species was least abiindant at Station F, where it was present 
in only 25% of the samples. Tellina was generally most abundant in the 
shallower areas of the cove, where Mulinia was least abundant. Densi- 
ties and station occurrences were variable with some indication of 
summer/ fall recruitment (Figure 6-4). For Mulinia, 1975 and 1977 were 
years of particularly high abundance. For Tellina, 1977 was the year of 
highest density. 

The remaining ubiquitous species are generally too sparse to 
allow detailed analysis of their distributions. Oligochaetes (Figure 



6-26 



5-2) were generally i^resent in low frequencies at Morris Cove stations 
and, in the inner harbor, were only present in greater than 25% of the 
samples from a small group of stations. Greatest frequency of occur- 
rence for oligochaetes was at Station D, where they were present in 56% 
of the samples. Gemma gemma reached frequencies of greater than 25% 
only at four stations in the inner harbor, while Nassarius trivittatus 
was present at low levels at both inner harbor and Morris Cove stations 
(Figure 6-2) . Abundances and station occurrences of oligochaetes and 
Gemma were variable over the study period. Nassarius was usually pres- 
ent at low average densities, though at a variable number of stations 
(Figure 6-4) . 



Species Richness 

The total number of species at a station is often one of the 
more conservative characteristics of a community and, as such, varia- 
tions from the norm may serve as an indicator of community stress. This 
parameter, however, does not necessarily relate to community stability 
(May, 1973) . The total number of species for each station over all 
samplings is presented in Table 6-5. These values reflect total species 
present at a station and are not the mean of the replicates. Direct 
comparisons among data from the three levels of sampling intensity (R&M 
pre-1975; R&M post-1975; and NAI) , are not legitimate. 

An interesting and somewhat perplexing phenomenon of the New 
Haven benthic system is a precipitous drop in species richness and 
faunal density at certain stations during the peak of the summer. The 
"August effect" was tentatively first proposed by Rhoads and Michael 
(1975) and subsequently developed and modified in following reports 
(Rhoads and Michael, 1977, 1978). The occurrence of this phenomenon 
is fairly well documented in the R&M data although it is apparently not 
exhibited at some stations and the actual causes appear to be more 
complex than first proposed. 



6-27 



<: 


Z 


Z 


2 


S 


2 


2 










m 
































I/) 






VO 


CO 




ro 
iH 


.H 


fN 


ro 


•^ 


'^ 


in 


^ 


r- 


00 


<y^ 


O 
.H 


< 


OQ 


U 


Q 


w 


fr^ 


o 


X 


H 


= co 














H 


CN 


CN 


H 


CO 


-H 


o 


o 


rH 


o 


in 


H 


f^ 


in 


VO 










rH 


•-3 Ol 






























CN 


<N 




CN 


CN 


f*i 


CN 


CN 


CN 


CN 


rH 


n- 






















































t— t-^ 


•^ 


r- 


o 


en 


^ 


cn 


U3 


O 


t-\ 


■=T 


r^ 


ro 


-a- 


-H 


^ 


^ 


m 


<J\ 


rH 


ro 


rsj 










ro 
























CN 








CN 






CN 


rH 


ro 


CN 


rH 


CN 


r-t 


(N 


1 — 






















































tJ r-. 


{T» 


r- 


r- 


m 


(N 


in 


O 


r^ 


o 


O 


00 


o 


00 


o 


in 


rH 


ro 


r- 


CO 


(N 


^ 


r^ 


00 


O 




H 


13 r-. 






















^ 




H 




CN 






ro 




(N 


ro 








«< CTi 




















































< — 






















































Z l-~ 


CN 


^ 


•^ 


in 


CO 


CN 










































^^f^ 












rH 










































^(Tl 






















































' — 






















































C£. \~~ 














O 


o 


o 


o 


rH 


o 


(H 


rH 


o 


o 


ro 


o 


CN 


rH 


^ 


^ 


<-t 


r^ 


^ 


iX) 


^[^ 






























H 








t-i 


CNJ 


CN 


rH 


H 


CN 


,-t 


rH 
























































CO 1 — 


^ 


r-\ 


CTl 


O 


P^ 


CO 










































uj r*^ 




x~\ 




(N 




-H 










































u. en 






















































» — 






















































(_) U3 














o 


CN 


o 


o 


nH 


'-\ 


I 


■^ 


ro 


cr. 


cn 


D 


^ 


CO 


(Ti 


CO 


CO 


o 


.H 


CT> 


































iH 


rH 


PO 


ro 


rH 


CM 


rH 




r*j 
































1 




























( — 






















































1— vo 


O 


r^ 


^ 


CN 


CN 


m 


o 


o 


o 


vi) 


H 


CN 


in 


\0 


00 


cn 


^0 


o 


cn 
















o r-~ 






















.H 








r-\ 






CN 


















o Ol 






















































»^ 






















































Ci3 U3 


ro 


^ 


00 


o 


ro 


CO 


o 


o 


fH 


ro 


O 


o 


00 


r> 


.H 


.H 


r> 


CN 


ro 


in 


o 


CN 


r-^ 


in 


vD 




=>f~- 




















(N 




















rH 


CN 






■H 




iH 


«:ct> 






















































1 — 






















































z <o 


m 


CN 


o 


00 


m 


in 










































izi r-^ 












H 










































'O CTl 






















































• — 






















































Qi l£) 














o 


o 


O 


(N 


r^ 


t-\ 


IX) 


M 


ro 


■^ 


O] 


rh 


H 


m 


<-\ 


O 


r^ 


■^ 


o 


^ 


- £ CTl 
































r-i 






rH 




CN 


t~\ 




H 


rH 


rH 
























































CQ <S3 


rg 


in 


M" 


r- 


<N 


■^ 










































LU r-v 












.—I 










































U. CTl 






















































1 — 






















































c_) tn 














o 


CN 


CN 


■<r 


1 


c^ 


r- 


en 


in 


rH 


cn 


•^ 


n\ 


m 


in 


o 


<D 


■'d' 


■<* 


rH 
























1 




















^ 


rH 










Q CT> 






















1 
































r^ 






















































1— Lf) 


M 


ro 


m 


o 


in 


^ 


(N 


nH 


iH 


o 


1 


T-\ 


CN 


rH 


rn 


vO 


r- 


o 


rH 


CN 


CO 


CN 


rH 


00 


^ 


■^ 


o r^ 








r-\ 




r-\ 








iH 


1 






-H 












CN) 




rH 


rH 


rH 


rH 


f-i 
























1 
































f^ 






















































tD in 


ro 


CN 


r- 


^0 


r-K 


rH 


O 


O 


O 


in 


1 


o 


ro 


ro 


ro 


O 


f~> 


CO 


ro 


^^J 


(T\ 












Z3 r^ 












CM 










1 




.H 




























•S. CTl 






















































• — 






















































z un 


^ 


\.0 


o 


in 


on 


■^ 










































=) r~ 


H 




r^ 






iH 










































•-D Ol 






















































• — 






















































q: in 














(N 


M 


O 


ro 


1 


(N 


in 


CN 


'^ 


nH 


in 


CN 


ro 


in 


o 


r- 


in 


rH 


VO 


in 


^ 1^ 






















1 
































2 oi 






















1 
































1 — 






















































O ■=!■ 














in 


H 


m 


r- 


1 


o 


CN 


o 


vO 


CN 


in 


m 






m 


vO 




o 






UJ r-» 






















































Q Ol 






















1 
































1 — 






















































1— «* 














H 


rH 


o 


vo 


1 


(N 


ro 


r- 


vO 


in 


in 


ro 


y? 


r- 


o 


VO 


rH 


o 


in 


in 


c_> r~. 




































rH 


















O Ol 






















1 
































'^ 






















































Q. >* 


1 


VO 


1 


.H 


1 


-H 










































UJ r^ 


1 




1 


H 




(N 










































00 CTl 


I 




1 




1 












































' — 






















































O "3- 














o 


o 


iH 


ro 


1 


f-1 


m 


•^ . 


■CN 


m 


■^ 


.H 


ro 


ro 


cn 


o 


CN 


<y\ 


r^j 


'T 


Z3 r^ 






















1 
































«£ Ol 






















i 
































' — 






















































>- -a- 


1 


o 


) 


fN 




m 










































SS; 


1 

1 




1 
1 




1 
1 


H 










































• — 






















































c^t 














i-\ 


O 


ro 


o 


1 


C-) 


-H 


o 


o 


rH 


o 


o 


in 


r^ 




^ 




tn 




in 


^2 






















1 

1 




















rH 








rH 


i-i 


CD ro 


I 


on 




m 














































13 r~ 


t 


r-\ 


1 


nH 


1 


m 










































«t Ol 


1 




1 




1 












































' — 






















































■>- n 


1 


in 


1 


in 














































SS; 


1 
1 


l-t 


1 
1 




1 
1 


r-\ 


1 
1 


1 

1 






































^~ 






















































^ 


2 


2 


Z 


2 


2 


2 










(ri 
































1— 




in 


^ 


CO 


rH 


m 


H 


CN 


ro 


"^ 


■^ 


in 


•.o 


r^ 


m 


<7\ 


o 


< 


CQ 


n 


n 


w 


t4 


n 


X 


M 












rH 


-H 






















H 





















13 
0) 

Ol 

e 

ol 

'/; 

o 

2 



6-28 



Particularly low summer species richness values during the 
summer have not generally been observed in the NAI study (Table 6-5) . 
When combined data from both programs are considered, a reoccurring 
phenomenon of low summer species richness is not apparent (Figure 6-5) . 
Further discussion of this phenomenon, will be included in the section 
on faunal densities. 

In addition to the lack of support for a general August effect. 
Figure 6-5 shows that throughout the study, the mean number of species 
per station was consistently higher at Morris Cove stations. The gen- 
eral pattern of fluctuations in species richness was similar for both 
areas. Morris Cove supported on the order of 1.5 to 2 times as many 
species per station as the inner harbor. 



Faunal Density 

The mean faunal density for each station/sampling period over 
the entire study is presented in Table 6-6. The high temporal variation 
in density observed in New Haven Harbor is similar to other benthic 
habitats which are unable to support a temporally or spatially persis- 
tent fauna. The highest densities seen in the data are caused by inva- 
sions of r-selected opportunistic species that subsequently experience mass 
mortalities. In turn, other opportunists invade the habitat (McCall, 
1977; Rhoads, McCall and Yingst, 1978). This colonization pattern is 
most evident in the inner harbor, which is subjected to greater envi- 
ronmental stress than Morris Cove. For example. Station 4A experienced 
a large invasion of Strehlospio benedict! and oligochaetes between 

October and December of 1976 increasing the faunal density from 375 to 

2 
9333 individuals/m (Figure 6-4, Table 6-6). These species were entirely 

absent from the station by March of 1977, apparently because of over- 
winter mortalities. Station 6 experienced an invasion of Streblospio 
and Gemma gemma, a small bivalve, over the summer of 1975, increasing 

densities by a factor of 10 over five months (2075 to 21888 individ- 

2 
uals/m ) . This dense population had essentially disappeared by October 

2 

1975 when the density had declined to 125 individuals/m . 



6-29 



TABLE 6-6. 



FAUNAL DENSITY (MEAN 
THROUGH JANUARY 1978. 
SUMMARY REPORT, 1979. 



INDIVIDUALS/ni ) BY 
NEW HAVEN HARBOR 



STATION, MAY 1973 
ECOLOGICAL STUDIES 















SEP- 


















MAY 


AUG 


riAR 


MAY 


AUG 


OCT 


DEC 


MAR 


JUN 


AUG 


OCT 


DEC 


FEB 


STATION 


1973 


1973 


1974 


1974 


1974 


1974 


1974 


1975 


1975 


1975 


1975 


1975 


1976 


1 






12 







12 


75 


25 







25 


88 




2 














12 





12 







12 


112 




3 






50 




12 





412 










12 


50 




4 











62 


625 


725 


338 




62 


2S8 


375 




4a 






NS 




NE 


;:s 


NS 


NS 




NS 


NS 


NS 




5 














333 


338 


150 







100 


50 




6 






25 




1,325 


1,312 


125 


2,075 




21,888 


125 


288 




7 






12 




IBS 


350 


350 


88 




788 


2,062 


312 




8 











62 


225 


225 


138 




138 


912 


75 




9 






12 




200 


38 


88 


25 




512 


1,212 


12 




10 











412 


6c8 


688 


7,238 




325 


462 


225 




A 






288 




50 


1,3"5 


600 


38 




200 





38 




B 






12 




100 


325 


350 


150 




33 


12 


2,650 




C 






238 




38 


412 


112 


100 




50 


3,250 


412 




D 






650 




638 


412 


650 


362 




3,088 


438 


1,112 




E 






75 




NS 


312 


7,900 


1,000 




50 


5,938 


1,312 




F 






50 




35C 


1,183 


750 


250 




38 


10,912 


10,788 




G 






188 




275 


2,112 


NS 


2,538 




50 


3,738 


475 




H 






300 




30 


i,6;o 


3,938 


4,088 




125 


6,752 


2,150 




I 






550 




162 


1,8 = 3 


538 


1,362 




112 


4,675 


7,762 




3N 


















1,131 


40 


20 




15 


5N 


157 


7,396 




8 




554 






105 


1,187 


403 




72 


6N 


















1,341 


431 


44 




19 


8N 


15 


3,019 




76 




4,231 






370 


40 


117 




72 


UN 


















89 


4 


411 




37 


13N 


33 


2,145 




214 




3,853 






692 


378 


2,971 




139 



STATION 


MAR 

1976 


JUN 
1975 


AUG 
1976 


OCT 
1976 


DEC 

1976 


FEB 
1977 


MAR JUN AUG 
1977 1977 1977 


OCT 
1977 


1978 


X 


S 


1 













Q 







8 


208 


8 


23.8 


54.8 


2 













33 







8 





8 


12.3 


28.0 


3 







3 
















225 


58 


51.7 


111.5 


4 
4a 


2,083 
700 





1,742 


1,233 

375 



9,333 





8 



21,967 


108 
4,267 


8 
2,117 


369.2 
5063.6 


574.6 
7472.7 


5 


8 







17 


17 










25 


8 


65.7 


114.2 


6 

7 
8 


192 

8 

25 




367 


3 


100 

50 

1,693 


1S3 

33 

4,625 




8 
8 

1,075 


1,725 



2,567 


253 

25 
-9,059 


1,650 



5,217 


2015.4 

267.1 

1631.2 


5353.6 

524.2 

2578.5 


9 


453 




3 


758 


n 







8 


308 


5,925 


600.9 


1460.5 


10 


42 







317 


1,833 




42 


175 


208 


92 


796.7 


1775.1 


A 


467 




58 


1,117 


6,825 




NS 


25,725 


2,525 


1,358 


2714.3 


6600.4 


B 


275 




92 


392 


13,467 




792 


100 


2,683 


4,275 


1607.1 


3402.7 


C 


142 




1,125 


617 


1,883 




2,975 


2,392 


7,358 


10,708 


2019.5 


3021.7 


D 


2,283 




653 


1,883 


9,925 




4,525 


13,367 


2,150 


3,950 


2883.8 


3711.0 


E 


442 




75 


25 


750 




675 


125 


4,142 


8,492 


2090.9 


3000.3 


F 


342 




150 


150 


203 




833 


300 


5,725 


15,253 


3043.2 


4887.0 


G 
H 


517 
250 




317 

300 


783 

150 


2,492 
517 




10,425 
500 


2,758 
183 


3,033 
2,392 


5,175 
2,067 


2398.4 
1617.0 


2721.5 
1945.3 


I 


1,550 




733 


150 


142 




517 


225 


2,692 


6,408 


1841.6 


2387.3 


3N 




11 


2,634 


83 




49 




143 


94 




408.1 


821.0 


5N 




19 


1,005 


423 




98 




306 


4,702 




1101.3 


2101.8 


6N 
8N 





121 


325 
193 


233 
930 




242 

1,517 




383 
1,223 


355 
1,494 




353.9 
903.4 


416.6 
1262.5 


UN 




125 


68 


571 




139 




132 


1,732 




322.5 


495 . 9 


13N 




1,133 


635 


276 




454 




2,321 


2,260 




1353.9 


1242.8 



NS = Not saincjled 



6-30 




CO 




r^ 




m 


' 




11 








-^ 


>! 


CT> 


m 




s: 






«^ 


o 


+-> 


CO 


i- 


c 





o 


Q. 


• 1 — 


CU 


4-> 


DC 


to 




+-> 


>-, 


(/I 


S- 




na 


S- 




o 


^ 


J3 


3 


s- 


C/1 


<a 




:n 


i/i 




(U 


s- 


•1 — 


OJ 


-0 


c 


3 


E 


-p 


1 — 1 


LO 


■o 


r— 


E 


to 


<a 







-r- 


QJ 


CTl 


> 





o 


1 — 


o 










tn 


LjJ 


•1 — 




S- 


s- 


S- 





O -Q 


?^ 


s- 




ra 


s- 


3Z 


o 




M- 


c 




<u 


c 


> 


o 


fO 


•r- 


3: 


-(-> 




(0 


^ 


+-> 


OJ 


I/) 


^ 


S- 




Ol 


• 


Q-r^ 




r^ 


to CT> 


(U 


^— 


■r- 




u 


s- 


cu 


OJ 


Q-JQ 


CO 







+J 


^— 





rtJ 





+-> 




O 


-E 


+J 


CD 




3 


E 





fd 


<- 


a; 


.E 


2; 


•)-> 


LO 




CO 




QJ 




S- 




3 




O) 





S3i33ds JO yaawnM 



6-31 



In addition to these fluctuations there is a seasonal pattern 
of change in faunal density which has been noted in previous reports. 
Figure 6-6 shows these density changes at 1) two Morris Cove deep-water 
(fine sediment) stations, 2) two Morris Cove shallow-water (coarse-grained 
sediment) stations and 3) two inner harbor deep-water stations, respect- 
ively. All three areas exhibit the same general trend. Seasonal den- 
sity minima tend to occur in late-sxommer, with the densest populations 
generally occurring in late fall. This is particularly evident in the 
inner harbor, although somewhat less clear at the shallow-water Morris 
Cove stations, and again readily discernible at the deep Morris Cove 
station although the radical changes in density characteristic of the 
other areas are not so apparent (Figure 6-5) . 

The pattern of seasonal density minima occurring in the late- 
summer is somewhat unusual as most natural benthic populations, if they 
exhibit pronounced seasonality, tend to develop maximum densities during 
this period and into the early fall. In an unpolluted bottom area, 
particularly one exposed to storms, the late fall/early winter period is 
marked by low densities. The pattern observed in New Haven Harbor tends 
to confirm the conclusions offered in earlier reports that pollution- 
related stresses, which are most evident during the summer, are the 
primary controlling factor for the New Haven benthos. In light of these 
data on faunal density it is possible to place the hypothesis of an 
"August effect" in its proper perspective. 

From Figure 6-6 we see that Station 5 shows a precipitous 
decrease in faunal density during August for each of the four years of 
the program. This pattern is somewhat less evident at Station 10 and at 
shallow stations in Morris Cove, and quite marked, though without such 
precipitous declines, in the deeper Morris Cove stations. These obser- 
vations , combined with the fact that August declines were not apparent 
at the NAI inner harbor stations tend to indicate that the occurrence of 
dramatic faunal declines in August depends upon station location and 
water depth. Dissolved oxygen data (Normandeau Associates, Inc., 1975- 
1978) indicate that dissolved oxygen values generally decrease with 



b-i'Z 



a: 
o 




gii 1 1 I I I — I — I oi l 1 1 I I I — r 



o 
o 

ui 

I — I 

Qi 

□i 

o 








— - 1^:^--______^ 
























~ "~^ ~Z^ 


« 










^ -''',„-- — '' 












•c'% — 
















UJ 






Ll_ 


L^SlSZly^ 




:z 




^ ^ 


s: 


\ — 


— -_____^^^ 


o 




Cl_ 


o 


> 


' -^ 


?• 1— < 




1 1 1 


1 — 1 


1 


^,^^^ 


1— 




LlJ 


h- 


J 


^^^^^-''^ 


•a: 




Q 


I— 

r""' 
1 


^^\^ 




1— 
1/1 




UJ 




~^ ' ^^ — r 


' 






> 










" '" -^ 


O 






- __- ■' ■ 






o 




__-— ^"^ — ^^^^^^^^ 


"" 






00 


-= 


~ r'' 








d; 




■ T'i-^^^^^^^ 








d; 




*^~. " • 






- 


o 




^ -- ^ 








s: 




""---__^ 






- 


























gM 1 1 


Mil 1 ol 1 1 II 1 1 1 1 


ol 1 1 M 1 1 1 


— 1 


olll M 1 1 1 1 



-g 



(/) •- 




E Ln 




o 




•I— CO 




4-5 C 




rti o 




+-> -r- 




1/1 4-) 




^-' 03 




+J 




s- oo 




OJ — - 




4-) 




(0 s- 


, 


S o 


m 


J2 


1 — 


Q. S- 


CTv 


O) n3 




cu z: 




T3 


r\ 


S- 


4-> 


d) OJ 


S^ 


> c: 


o 


O E 


Q- 


O 1— ' 


tu 




OL 


(/) T3 




■t- E 


>^ 


S- fO 


S- 


s- 


fO 


0-— 


£ 


r: o 


£ 


*i 


3 


s- ca: 


to 


o 




<4- to 


to 


c 


cu 


'-- o 


• 1 — 


(NJ •!- 


T3 


E +-> 


^ 


^^ ro 


4-> 


to +-> 


(/I 


r— to 




(O — 


r— 


3 


<T3 


-a 5- 


O 


•1- 0) 


•r— 


> 4J 


CD 


•I- ro 


o 


■o S 


r— 


E 


O 


•>— 3 


o 


O 


UJ 


r— 




(/) 1 — 


5- 


0) fO 


o 


•1- -E 


J^ 


+J to 


S- 


•1— 


ro 


to cu 


zc 


E > 




CU O 


E 


-a o 


CU 




> 


I— to 


ra 


(O -r- 


m 


E S- 




3 S- 


5 


fO o 


cu 



I 

CU 

S- 

C75 



,w y3cj sivnaiAiQNi 



6-33 



depth and are at seasonal minima in the inner harbor during summer 
months. Three of the NAI inner harbor stations are located in shallow 
areas where the decreasing oxygen concentration with depth is not as 
important a factor. The other two NAI stations are located in channels, 
where periodic ship traffic may contribute to the mixing and aeration of 
bottom water and where saline and comparatively oxygen-rich water from 
Long Island Sound moves up-harbor along the bottom. 

An additional factor in the August population decline appears 
to be associated substratum type, which is a function of local hydro- 
graphic conditions and dredging history. Coarse-grained substrata, in 
addition to containing lower levels of heavy metal ions, are indicative 
of bottom scour by water movement which also tends to produce vertical 
mixing and locally elevated dissolved oxygen values. The effect of 
substratum in limiting the August mortalities may be seen at Station 8. 
Prior to August 1977 this station consisted of organic-rich mud and 
showed an August effect. During 1978, after the station siibstrate had 
been changed to gravel probably by current changes resulting from dredging 
activity, August mortalities did not occur. In addition. Station 4A, a 
sand-gravel substratum station located in shallow water on a pile of 
dredged material in the inner harbor reached some of its highest den- 
sities in August. 

The August mortalities were most pronounced when the three 
factors (location in the inner harbor, deep-water, and muddy substrata), 
occur together. These factors characterize most of the R & M inner 
harbor stations. Non-coincidence of the factors results in an unclear 
pattern of seasonality as seen in the shallow water Morris Cove sta- 
tions. A combination of deep-water and muddy substrata seems to have 
produced a degree of stress during August which was sufficient to pro- 
duce the characteristic seasonal pattern but without the catastrophic 
population decreases observed in the inner harbor (Figure 6-6) . 

One additional feature of Figure 6-6 is that Morris Cove sta- 
tions generally exhibited greater faunal densities than the inner harbor 
stations and were only rarely devoid of benthic macrofauna. The deeper 
Morris Cove stations showed considerable persistence and predictibility 



6-34 



as compared with the other two areas . This is probably related to the 
combined factor of reduced pollution stress and increased physical 
stability of the substratum. 



DiveY'si by 

Information- theory diversity values (Shannon- Weaver Diversity, 

Brillouin Diversity, Evenness, H and H . ) for all samples are 

max mxn 

presented in Appendix 1. The extreme variability of these parameters in 
New Haven Harbor is apparent. Often the variability among replicates is 
as great as the range of variability seen over an entire sampling per- 
iod. Although there have been several attempts to relate absolute 
diversity values to some observed or measured level of pollution-induced 
stress, the applicability of diversity values as absolute indices of 
environmental degradation has largely been dismissed. The consideration 
of diversity indices in the New Haven Harbor program is generally 
restricted to spatial and temporal comparisons of patterns of faunal 
richness and abundance. 

Some patterns in the distribution of diversity values within 
the harbor can be identified, however, even with the high within-station 
variability. Brillouin diversity frequency distributions (H^) for 
individual replicates from the R&M study are presented as histograms by 
sampling period in Figure 6-7. Morris Cove and inner harbor stations 
are presented as separate groupings and a third histogram combining all 
samples is also included. Examination of these histograms establishes a 
pattern of diversity in the harbor which is consistent with our earlier 
observations of species richness and density. 

Morris Cove stations demonstrate a consistently higher range 
of diversity values than inner harbor stations. In 1974, for example, 
inner harbor diversities, rarely exceeded a value of 1.5. At Morris 
Cove in 1974, values were frequently greater than 1.5, and often exceeded 
2.0 even during March, the sampling period with the lowest mean diver- 



6-35 






u 



MORRIS COVE 



n rt-n I n n 



so 

20 
10 - 



INNER HARBOR 



30 
20- 

10- 



I n I I I I I I I 1 



ALL COMBINED 



n-rm i n n 



(/, 20- 



1.0 2.0 J.O l.U 2.0 3.0 [.0 !.n 3.0 

SO -| 

20 



10 — 



rfl I I M I I I I 



rrm 



I I I I I 



r-:. 30-1 
UJ 20- 

o 

«3 10- 
o 



1.0 2.0 3.0 



n n n-m 1 1 I 



rITn-n 



I I I I 



1.0 2.0 3.0 1.0 . 2.0 3.0 

30-1 30 -, 



1.0 2.0 3.0 



m n n 



rhrrrrm 



;? 30 ■ 
q: 

IXI 20- 

co 

s: 

UJ 

<j 10 • 

UJ 

o 



30 - 
20- 



"k-rrn' 



n I I I I 



I I I I I ' I I I I I I I I I I I I 

1.0 2.0 3.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 

30- 

20- 




SO —1 

ir> 

a: 20- 

3 10- 



1.0 2.0 3.0 



T1 M I I I I I I 

1.0 2.0 3.0 



ifl- 



n I 1 1 1 

1.0 2.0 3.0 



30-1 

ZO 

10- 



~H~I rrTh 1 1 11 

1.0 2.0 3.0 



30- 
20- 

lO 



R^ 



n I I I I I I I 



n rh I 1 1 1 

1.0 2.0 3.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 



a 



U1 30-1 



I— 20- 
00 



30-1 

20 

10- 



llfl=R 



I I I I I I I 

1.0 2.0 3.0 



30-1 

20 

10- 



~n m n I I I I 

1.0 2.0 3.0 



"TTTTi n I I 



t" so 

OH 

UJ 20 
CO 

o 

I— 

O 10 - 

o 



30— I 
ZO- 
IC- 



rh m r-n- 



=n-i 



30- 
ZO— 

10— 



^ 



-n 

1.0 2.0 3.0 



-rm rfhm 



1.0 2.0 3.0 



in SO -1 



UJ 

(-} 

UJ 

o 



1.0 2.0 3.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 

30-1 SO-i 



20 — 
10— 



I I n rTh I I I I n rTrrri^ 



20- 

10- 



1.0 2.0 3.0 

Hb 



I I I I 
1.0 2.0 3.0 

Hb 



-ftffft- 



T-F 



1.0 2.0 3.0 

Hb 



Figure 6-7. Brillouin diversity (H, ) histograms for Morris Cove, Inner Harbor 
and combined data (R & M data only). New Haven Harbor Ecological 
Studies Summary Report, 1979. 



Continued 



6-36 



i=f=f 



MORRIS COVE 



m^^ 



1.0 2.0 3.0 



C3 

=> 10- 



1.0 2.0 3.0 



iP so-| 



LU 20- 



h-Th I rrrm 



uj eo- 

CQ 



(_3 

LU 




30-, 



1.0 2.0 3.0 



rTTf>TfTfT-, 



1.0 2.0 3.0 



S 10- 



q- 



R-dln-i 



^ 



1.0 2.0 3.0 



!~^ 30- 
U 20- 
5 ,0- 



INNER HARBOR 



• n n I [ I I I I I 



Z.U 3.0 



"Ti I I I I n I I I 

1.0 2.0 3.0 



30-1 
20 

10- 



n-mm 



T-r-i 

1.0 2.0 3.0 



n I n 



1.0 2.0 3.0 



30 
20 
10- 



n I n I n I I I 

1.0 2.0 3.0 



n i mh iii n iM 



on 

UJ 20- 

CO 

o 



1.0 2.0 3.0 



n m-ffTTh m 



30- 
20- 
10- 

30- 
20- 



ALL COMBINED 



M I rriTn 



"1 I 

I II .' II 1,0 



30- 
20- 
10— 



Thn rr-n m 



1.0 2.0 3.0 

30-1 



20 
10— 



TKfhhn 



1.0 2.0 3.0 

30-1 



H=f=H 



k=rfl 



1.0 2-0 3.0 



30 

20- 

I0_ 



m n kn 



1.0 2.0 3.0 



30- 
20- 
10- 



f 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 n 1 1 



1.0 2.0 3.0 



■f=^ 



^ 



1.0 2.0 3.0 

30-, 



1.0 2.0 3.0 



rrrm- 



" I I I n n 



1.0 2.0 3.0 




rnTTTT 



CO 30-1 

^ 20- 

■a: 

5 10- 



mTrn 



Fh 



1.0 2.0 3.0 

Hb 



M 1 1 1 1 1 n M I 

1.0 2.0 3.0 

Hb 



1.0 2.0 3.0 



^rrfTTlTh 



rr 

1.0 2.0 3.0 

Hb 



Figure 6-7. (Continued) 



6-37 



sity. Due to the degree of variability in the data it is difficult to 
detect a true seasonal trend of diversity; however, in 1974, 1975 and 
1977 diversities in Morris Cove reached their greatest values in Octo- 
ber or December. Thi:; type of seasonal trend is common in natural com- 
munities as spring recruitment commencing during spring months extends 
into the summer and fall increasing species richness and density. A 
slight trend of annually increasing values was also apparent at Morris 
Cove. The inner harbor diversities were lower and less consistent than 
those at Morris Cove. The trend of higher late fall values was noted 
in October 1974 and 1975 but was obscure for other years. The greater 
variation and lower diversities in the inner harbor may be related to 
the environmental stresses encountered by benthic organisms due to 
increased pollutant impact in the inner harbor during late summer. 



Within-Station Variability 

In order to develop an understanding of the variability of 
three important biological parameters (species richness, density, and 
diversity) , the coefficients of variation (CV) among three replicates 
for each parameter were calculated for six stations for 1977 (Table 6- 
7) . Stations in Morris Cove were selected at random. This was not 
considered appropriate for inner harbor stations as, in some cases, 
there were only three or four stations with any macrofauna. Inner 
harbor stations with the most animals were selected so that the results 
might in some way represent the "best" case. One might argue that three 
replicate samples containing no macrofauna show low variance , but we 
cannot be sure that there were no animals adjacent to the sampling area. 

The mean CV values for the three parameters are presented for 
the inner harbor and Morris Cove samples separately in Table 6-8. The 
CV for these parameters range from 20.7 to 74.0% of the mean. The 
number of individuals in a sample is the most variable of the three. 
Diversity, which is effectively limited to a range of 0.0 to approxi- 
mately 4.0, was the most stable parameter among replicates with a CV of 



6-38 



TABLE 6-7. COEFFICIENT OF VARIATION (CV) (% OF MEAN) VALUES FOR NUMBER OF 
SPECIES, NUMBER OF INDIVIDUALS AND DIVERSITY, 1977, BASED ON 
3 REPLICATE SAMPLES. NEW HAVEN HARBOR ECOLOGICAL STUDIES 
SUMMARY REPORT, 1979, 







# SPECIES 


# INDIVIDUALS 


DIVERSITY 


MONTH 


STATION 


1977 


1977 


1977 


March 


6 


175.0 


175.0 


* 




7 


175.0 


175.0 


* 




10 


86.0 


171.0 


87.0 




B 


51.0 


67.0 


21.0 




D 


28.0 


39.0 


20.0 




I 


33.0 


28.0 


24.0 


August 


6 


48.0 


19.0 


17.0 




7 


18.0 


49.0 


6.0 




10 


50.0 


38.0 


95.0 




B 


33.0 


25.0 


36.0 




D 


40.0 


94.0 


17.0 




I 


44.0 


63.0 


21.0 


October 


6 


17.0 


97.0 


40.0 




7 


22.0 


22.0 


37.0 




10 


0.0 


104.0 


7.0 




B 


24.0 


16.0 


8.0 




D 


16.0 


20.0 


6.0 




I 


19.0 


49.0 


52.0 


December 


6 


16.0 


55.0 


31.0 




7 


5.0 


20.0 


25.0 




10 


66.0 


33,0 


100.0 




B 


16.0 


61.0 


26.0 




D 


6.0 


27.0 


1.0 




I 


22.0 


8.0 


17.0 



Not recorded 



6-39 



TABLE 6-8. COEFFICIENT OF VARIATION (CV) {% OF MEAN) VALUES AVERAGED 
FOR NEW HAVEN HARBOR, 1977-, INNER HARBOR AND MORRIS COVE 
SITES AND CV VALUES FROM PLYMOUTH, MASSACHUSETTS. NEW 
HAVEN HARBOR ECOLOGICAL STUDIES SUMMARY REPORT, 1979. 





# SPECIES 


# INDIVIDUALS 


DIVERSITY 


New Haven Harbor 








Inner Harbor 1977 


47.3 


74.0 


42.0 


Morris Cove 1977 


27.6 


29.0 


20.7 


* 

P lymouth , Mass, 








Depth 








10' 


11.8 


49.4 


27.0 


20' 


16.3 


35.9 


23.5 



From Michael et al . , 1978. 



6-40 



50% or less of the mean. Variability of species richness was inter- 
mediate between the other two parameters. 

In all cases, variability between replicates was greater in 
the inner harbor than in Morris Cove. This is to be expected as even a 
cursory examination of the raw data reveals greater differences among 
replicates from the inner harbor than from Morris Cove. 

As a comparison, Michael et al . (1978), in summarizing the 
results of a subtidal sampling program at Plymouth, Massachusetts where 
three replicates were collected, foiind the variation reported in Table 
6-8. 

The Plymouth data are from an area that is not subject to pol- 
lution stress, although it experiences a fair degree of natural distur- 
bance by wave action. The Morris Cove results are closer to the lower 
CV values of the Plymouth data, whereas the inner harbor represents a 
more variable environment with higher CV values . 

Species which were designated as characteristic were also 
examined for variability among replicates. Two sampling periods from 
1977 were chosen at random and the data from stations that the par- 
ticular species characterized were tested for variation among repli- 
cates. In general the CV for individual characteristic species ranges 
from 50% to 100% of the mean. This parameter is therefore less pre- 
dictable than species richness, diversity, or total number of individ- 
uals. 



6-41 



Classification Analysis 

Results of the cluster analyses are presented as dendrograms 
in Figure 6-8 and 6-10 and mapped in Figure 6-9. Analysis of the dendro- 
grams by strictly objective methods is difficult because of the temporally 
and spatially irregular appearances of a number of opportunistic and 
eurytopic species. Station similarities are inconsistent and generally 
low. In order to attempt to identify some objective station groupings 
in the harbor, the normal (Q-type) dendrograms were examined for linkages 
between stations at a level above 0.5. These were recorded for each 
sampling period and subsequently arranged in a trellis diagram (not 
presented) showing number of linkages >0.5 over the entire program for 
all possible pairs of stations. Because the NAI stations did not occur 
in all of the dendrograms, the number of such linkages for these sta- 
tions was increased proportionately. Station-pairs that had four or 
more pairings >0.5 in common were relatively rare and formed four rather 
discrete groupings. Their spatial distributions are shown in Figure 6- 
10. Examination of the inverse (R-type) dendrograms (Figure 6-10) and 
the species frequency lists, identifies the component species groups 
which are responsible for the described clusters (Table 6-9) . 

A three-station cluster comprising Stations 5, 10 and 6N 
occupies a small band of the inner harbor reaching from City Point to 
the channel opposite the New Haven Harbor Station (Figure 6-9) . This 
was the only cluster to appear in the inner harbor. The formation of 
clusters in this type of analysis requires some consistency, or at least 
congruent variation, in the species composition at the stations in 
question. This is clearly difficult to find in New Haven inner harbor. 

The species which dominates the inner harbor cluster is 
Nereis succinea (Table 6-9) . Though nodal analyses are not presented in 
this report, some results are reported that are useful to provide an 
objective and simple way to consider the relationships of species and 
station groupings. Constancy of Nereis was high for the inner harbor 
station group, particularly for Station 10 (i.e., proportion of Nereis 

(Text continued on page 6-50) 



6-42 









L 




r- 




L_ 












r 1 1 




r- ■ ■ I 1 I 1 1 1 






C_5 









C_3 



^ 



^=E 



Cr 



I — I — I — I — I — I r 





o> 




r--. 




>i o^ 




XI ,-1 




" ** 




(/) +-) 




■r- S- 




CO O 




>> Q- 


t^ 


r— 0) 


r^ 


n3 Qi 


<Ti 


c 


.— 1 


fO >, 




s- 


-r 


i- 03 


C_) 


QJ E 


QC 


"^ ^ 


=c 


=3 Ul 












O (/) 




0) 




> — s .,— 




QJ -a 




T3 3 




o +-> 




E oo 




c-.— 




~ — ro 




o 




^— •! 




ro en 




E O 




i_ 1 — 




o o 




e o 




LU 




E 




o s_ 


x: 


s- o 


(J 


<+- JD 


S- 


s- 


fO 


CO 03 


^' 


E in 




ro 


■ 


s- c 


03 


Cr cu 




O > 




s- ro 




-D ni 




c 




O) s 




XJ 0) 




^ 




cr 




E 




•r— • 




Q- 0) 




3 +J 




o ro 




s- -a 




en 




cn 




c c: 


to 


O T- 


t~~. 




CT> 


-M Q- 


1—1 


ro E 




-(-> ro 


DH 


00 in 


O 




q: 




< 


, 




oc 




to 




OJ 




S- 




3 




C7> 



AiiavilHls ju si]A]i 



6-43 



-o 

O) 

13 



01 



00 

ZD 



£; 



o 






5 00 






+-> 

C71 















r 






















L 








' — 








r- 


l_. 



CTl 



00 

ZD 

< 



i.laVlUl? JO 51W31 





- ♦ 

- Q 

. J 

. I 
■« 

- * 


to 

r-- 

1— 1 

h- 

CD 










































































































^ 






















































^ 






^^ 








■a 

0) 






^ 




3 








c 

•r— 






















J 
























-{I 


00 


6 


















ff 







6-44 



-a 

:3 



^ 



r^ 



c 



■Cc 






LU 
CQ 
O 

[— 

o 



T 1 — r 




o 



iiaviihis JO si3«n 



S- 
Ol 

-Q 
O 

+J 

u 
o 



en 



CO 

o 



o 
o 





— 








- UI 

- a 
. n 

- U) 

. X 

z 

-o 

. r 
- » 


r-. 
cn 

r— 1 

g; 

LU 
CQ 

o 
1— 
o 
o 








1 








^ 












- 










































r— 








L 














^ 
































- 


1 






1 


















- 








1 1 


T3 






3 




1 


C 






1 


•p- 






+J 








c 




1 


Q 


1 

















1 — -1 1 r 






en 



6-45 





l— 




J— 










- 












— 








' — 










1 I-- 


1 1 1 


1 1 1 I I 



LO 
CTi 



UJ 
CQ 






CT. 



LU 

03 



LU 



s- 

Ol 
-Q 

E 
O) 

o 

Ol 
Q 



en 






LU 

ca 



LU 

ca 



o 

LU 



LU 



■a 
cu 



r. 



o 
o 



J, i J, J, 



AilBVTIHlS JO S13A3T 



T~i i; r 



CO 



cu 

s- 

C7> 



6-46 




INNER HARBOR CLUSTER 
8N, 13M CLUSTER 



■ 



MORRIS COVE SHALLOW CLUSTER 
MORRIS COVE DEEP CLUSTER 



Figure 6-9 . Spatial distribution of station groups * identified from 
dendrograms (Figure 6-7). New Haven Harbor Ecological 
Studies Summary Report. 1978. 

* Station groups were those determined from Figure 6-7 to have four 
or more pairings with a similarity of >0.5. 



6-47 




1974 



0.0—] 








































.»f 






r 


. , „.j 


; ' 1 




0.1 — 






—J . 






T 














r-^ 




1 






_— 1 




1 - 


-] 




r-H " 1 




0.2 — 


I 




1 








pi-, 


r- 












^ 










J 
















1 




















pJ. 




M- 












H 






i 






































0.5- 














|-L| 












rn 






























0.6- 


























































0.7- 


























































0.8- 


























































09- 

1 n- - 


























































g 


s 


1 


s£ 


X 




5 g 


s 2 


£ i 


g 


3 ' 


i ' 


f ! 


3 J 


5 Q 




-1 3 
171 


3 £ 


c as 


5 I 


: a 


; 3 


■J o 


5 S 


Si 


a 


1 


o 


o 



1975 



Figure 6-10. Inverse (R-mode) dendrograms from cluster analysis, by year 
(Refer to Table 6-3 for species codes). New Haven Harbor 
Ecological Studies Summary Report, 1979. 



Continued 



fi-48 




1976 



0.0 -I 














, 1 ■= 1 


0.1 - 
0.2 _ 






1 


" 




r 
-1 


1 


T^lX^ h ^ 


0.3. 
0.4 _ 


1 




0.5 _ 
0.6_ 


^ 


-| 








r^i 






0-7 _ 


















0.8 _ 
0.9 _ 








r- 


-| 








1.0 



















J. c?; .— o 






O J» 3: n 3 O 3> 
-~j kO CTi -^ Ji CTi tji 



X- i^3:i>3rij>j> 



1977 



Figure 6-10. (Continued) 



6-49 



TABLE 6-9. BENTHIC SPECIES CHARACTERISTIC OF GROUP STATIONS FOR FOUR STATION 
GROUPS (RANKED BY FREQUENCY OF OCCURRENCE). NEW HAVEN HARBOR 
ECOLOGICAL STUDIES SUMMARY REPORT, 1979. 



INNER' HARBOR CLUSTER 





STATION 5 




STATION 10 


STATION 6N 


1. 


Crangon septemspinosa 


1. 


Nereis succinea 1. 


Nereis succinea 


2. 


Nereis succinea 


2. 


Streblospio benedicti 2. 


Streblospio benedicti 


3. 


Capitella capita ta 


3. 


Gemma gemma 3. 


Ilyanassa obsoleta 


4. 


Glycera americana 


4. 


Capitella capitata 4. 


Gemma gemma 



MORRIS COVE DEEP CLUSTER 





STATION B 




STATION E 




STATION F 


1. 


Nephtys incisa 


1. 


Nephtys incisa 


1. 


Nephtys incisa 


2. 


Tellina agilis 


2. 


Tellina agilis 


2. 


Nucula proxima 


3. 


Streblospio benedicti 


3. 


Nucula proxima 


3. 


Mulinia lateralis 


4. 


Glycera americana 


4. 


Ampelisca abdita 


4. 


Glycera americana 


5. 


Sabellaria vulgaris 


5. 


Retusa canaliculata 


5. 


Ampelisca abdita 




STATION H 




STATION I 




STATION UN 


1. 


Nephtys incisa 


1. 


Nephtys incisa 


1. 


Nephtys incisa 


2. 


Tellina agilis 


2. 


Tellina agilis 


2. 


Mulinia lateralis 


3. 


Mulinia lateralis 


3. 


Nucula proxima 


3. 


Streblospio benedicti 


4. 


Glycera americana 


4. 


Mulinia lateralis 


4. 


Oligochaeta 


5. 


Oligochaeta 


5. 


Retusa canaliculata 


5. 


Ampelisca abdita 





STATIONS 


8N, 


13N 


CLUSTER 




STATION 8N 






STATION 13N 


1. 


Nephtys incisa 






1. Streblospio benedicti 


2. 


Streblospio benedicti 






2. Oligochaeta 


3. 


Oligochaeta 






3. Tellina agilis 


4. 


Mulinia lateralis 






4. Nephtys incisa 


5. 


Nereis succinea 






5. Mulinia lateralis 



MORRIS COVE SHALLOW CLUSTER 





STATION A 




STATION C 




STATION G 


1. 


Nereis succinea 


1. 


Tellina agilis 


1. 


Nereis succinea 


2. 


Tellina agilis 


2. 


Glycera americana 


2. 


Glycera americana 


3. 


Streblospio benedicti 


3. 


Nereis succinea 


3. 


Pagurus longicarpus 


4. 


Glycera americana 


4. 


Pagurus longicarpus 


4. 


Tellina agilis 


5. 


Pagurus longicarpus 


5. 


Streblospio benedicti 


5. 


Nassarius trivittatus 



6-50 



occurrences in samples from this group were high compared to the total 
number of possible occurrences or the total number of samples) . Because 
Nereis was ubiquitous, its fidelity for the group was found to bo low 
(i.e., its constancy with the inner harbor cluster was not particularly 
higher than its constancy harborwide) . Nereis was the sixbdominant at 
Station 5 where Crangon was dominant. However, Crangon , a motile epi- 
benthic species, appears to have even lower fidelity than Nereis, 
occurring throughout the harbor in approximately the same frequency. 
Streblospio benedicti and Capitella capitata, two opportunistic poly- 
chaetes, also appear as subdominants in this grouping at two stations 
each. Streblospio occurs at high levels in one of the other groupings 
as well as this one, but Capitella exhibits high fidelity and appears as 
a dominant species in this grouping only. As might be expected, this 
cluster exhibits the best example of a stressed environment populated by 
several opportunistic species, primarily polychaetes. 

A second cluster of three stations (A, C, G) also became 
apparent from the trellis diagram. These stations occupy a horseshoe- 
shape area around the northern and western periphery of Morris Cove. 
Although no sediment grain-size data were analyzed by either study, 
field sampling personnel have identified this area of Morris Cove as 
consisting of a coarse-grained usually muddy sand. This area is dis- 
tinct from the very soft silt-clay sediments which are typical of the 
deeper central portions of Morris Cove. Station D, however, which is 
spatially contiguous to this cluster, and apparently consisting of a 
similar substratum, showed no particular affinity to this, or any other, 
cluster. 

This second, well-defined cluster, occupying the shallower 
portions of Morris Cove is characterized by a somewhat more complex and 
diverse faunal assemblage (Table 6-9) . Nereis succinea again occurs as 
the dominant species at two of the stations and as a subdominant at the 
third. Here, however. Nereis is accompanied by a n\imber of codomi- 
nants, some of which were not dominant in the inner harbor cluster. 
These include Tellina agilis , Glycera americana, Streblospio benedicti 
and Pagurus longicarpus . Of these, Tellina and Pagurus exhibit somewhat 



6-51 



greater fidelity as Pagurus occurs as a codominant only within this 
cluster, while Tellina reaches its greatest dominance here. Streblospio 
and Glycera are much more widespread in the harbor and appear as com- 
ponents of many communities. 

The third and largest cluster, and the one which exhibits the 
highest affinities, occupies the central portion of Morris Cove. 
Included in this group are Stations B, E, F, I, H and UN, which are in 
the shipping channel a short distance to the north of the Cove. This 
group of stations produced a very distinct cluster located in soft silt- 
clay substratum which may indicate an area of greater physical stability 
than the sediments characteristic of the (A, C, G) cluster. 

The large group of stations in the central portion of Morris 
Cove exhibits the most distinct and consistent community in the harbor. 
The dominant species at each of the six component stations of this group 
is Nephtys incisa, a species which showed both constancy and fidelity 
for this cluster. The subdominant species at each of the six stations 
was one of three small bivalves, Tellina agilis, Nucula proxima or 
Mulinia lateralis . The ubiquitous pair of polychaete species {Glycera 
and Streblospio) was also present at nearly every station. Apparently, 
however, the deterministic faunal component of this community is the 
polychaete, Nephtys, accompanied by one of three bivalves. 

One additional aspect of this Nephtys community that is some- 
what unusual is the presence of the tiibicolous amphipod, Ampelisca spp. , 
at most of the stations. No amphipod species was present as a co- 
dominant in any of the other clusters. Since amphipods, particularly 
Ampeliscid amphipods, have become recognized as extremely pollution- 
sensitive, their presence in these Morris Cove samples indicates that 
this area is relatively unpolluted in relation to the rest of the har- 
bor, particularly in regard to petroleum hydrocarbons. 

An additional minor cluster of two spatially separated sta- 
tions 8N and 13N, was also recognized. This small group is of limited 



6-52 



significance except that it is somewhat surprising that 13N did not 
group with either of the two Morris Cove clusters and that 8N, which is 
well up into the inner harbor, showed such strong affinity to a station 
from the control site. This particular station pair exhibited tlie 
strongest affinity observed in the program. 

This fourth small cluster (Stations 8N and 13N) is of limited 
value in understanding the dynamics of the Harbor ecosystem and will 
only be treated briefly. These two stations appear to be composites of 
several components of the other three clusters. Nephtys and Nereis both 
appear as codominants. Streblsopio, Tellina and Mulinia are also 
present. The controlling faunal component that appears to define this 
cluster, however, is the dominant position of Streblospio and Oligo- 
chaetes, which are generally not present with this frequency in other 
clusters. Were it not for the Oligochaete component. Station 8N would 
probably show stronger affinity for the large central Morris Cove group 
and 13N would cluster with the peripheral Morris Cove group. 

The first and last of the groupings described above are 
faunistically sparse and difficult to relate to other estuaries. The 
two Morris Cove communities, however, bear resemblances to faunal 
assemblages that have been described from other areas. McGrath (1974) 
described a similar pattern of faunal distribution in Raritan Bay-Lower 
New York Harbor. The two communities in Raritan Bay, which is also a 
polluted estuary, were dominated by Streblospio-Tellina in coarser 
sediments as seen in New Haven Harbor and Nephtys-Mulinla in the muds. 

Streblospio benedicti and Tellina agilis were described by 
McGrath at al . (1978) as two of the characterizing organisms of Clinton 
Harbor, a relatively unpolluted estuary a short distance to the north of 
New Haven. Other aspects of the benthic populations, including range of 
species richness, faunal density and diversity, as well as dominant 
species, were comparable between Clinton Harbor and Morris Cove stations 
in New Haven. 



6-53 



The community occupying the deeper portions of Morris Cove is 
similar to the Nephtys incisa-Yoldia limatula community of Long Island 
Sound described by Sanders (1956) , and the Nephtys-Nucula proxiim 
community of Buzzards Bay (Sanders, 1960). The primary difference 
between these communities and the assemblage at New Haven is that the 
latter has a lower species richness and faunal density than Long Island 
Sound or Buzzards Bay- The Morris Cove community also has a greater 
number of opportunistic species. 

Reference to the literature and other areas in Long Island 
Sound indicates that the benthic fauna of New Haven Harbor is generally 
characteristic of a polluted estuary. Some faunal components of Morris 
Cove, however, correspond to those of less polluted areas, reflecting 
better water quality conditions in Morris Cove than in the inner harbor. 



ANALYSIS OF IMPACTS 

Power generating stations utilizing once-through cooling 
systems impact the marine benthic environment in a number of ways. The 
direct impact of the heated effluent may be sufficient to elevate temp- 
eratures in the receiving body of water to a point which is detrimental 
to the survival of some of the resident species. This type of impact 
may affect adults, juveniles, or larvae of benthic infauna. Further, 
heat may alter competitive advantages or behavior, indirectly producing 
mortality. Although the direct effects of heat on marine communities 
have received considerable attention from the pxiblic, they have been 
shown in many cases to be one of the least objectionable impacts of 
generating stations, and due to the buoyant nature of the discharge are 
not likely to impact benthic populations. There have been no measurable 
changes in bottom temperature at any benthic stations in New Haven Harbor. 
Further, as discussed in the physical-chemical section of this report 
(Section 3) , there is no evidence to suggest that dissolved oxygen 
values in New Haven Harbor have decreased by any measurable amount due 
to the operation of New Haven Harbor Station. 



6-54 



Entrainment, the passage of the planktonic dispersal stages of 
many marine organisms through station cooling systems, often produces 
large mortalities (Enright, 1977) . Nearly all of the dominant species 
in New Haven Harbor have planktonic larvae and are therefore potentially 
subjected to losses from this impact. In the absence of actual entrain- 
ment data, the effect of this impact must be inferred from recruitment 
patterns during appropriate seasons. Another type of impact, impinge- 
ment, occurs when adults are trapped on the various screening systems at 
the station intake. While this type of impact may often be severe for 
finfish individuals, benthic infaunal invertebrate species are generally 
not subject to impingement losses. 

Due to the low ratio of plant cooling water flow to the volume 
of water moved with each tide, the minimal harbor area experiencing 
heightened temperatures from the discharge plvune, and the lack of direct 
plume contact with the benthic habitat, minimal impact of New Haven Har- 
bor Station operations on the benthos was anticipated. Since there is 
minimal potential for plant impact on the subtidal benthos, particularly 
on any given spatially limited area, impact is not analyzed in great 
detail for individual stations. Instead, analysis consists of compar- 
isons of diversity, species richness, general density and abundant 
species density between preoperational and operational periods at groups 
of stations within the harbor. 

The addition of environmental stress to an already severely 
impacted ecosystem would be expected to result in the elimination of indi- 
viduals and then species that are near their tolerance limits . This poten- 
tial impact was evaluated by comparing the number of species collected in all 
samples taken prior to August 1975 with all samples collected after that date. 
The data were analyzed via a standard t-test with no correction for 
season as the species richness data show no obvious seasonality. No 
significant differences in mean number of species per station were found 
via this procedure (t = -.0807, p > 0.9). Because any potential impact 
of this nature would be most acute in the inner harbor these stations 
were tested separately and, again, no significant differences were found 



6-55 



between preoperational and postoperational species richness (t= 
.4285, 0.5 < p < 0.9). Because late summer appears to be the period of 
greatest stress for populations in the harbor, the species richness data 
for August of 1974 were compared and paired by station, with similar 
data for 1975, 1976 and 1977. In all cases, results were not signifi- 
cant, indicating no decrease in summer species richness after operation 
of New Haven Harbor Station commenced. 



Species Riahness 

The primary factor limiting the application of statistical 
analysis to the New Haven Harbor benthic data is the large degree of 
variability. The results of the three-way ANOVA to test the impact of 
year, season and station on species richness and faunal density indicate 
that all three factors and their interactions were significant (p < 
.001) for all parameters, with the exception of season vs. station. 
Numbers of taxa for each station-season combination were examined for 
significant differences between preoperational and postoperational data. 
For two of these comparisons (Station 8, spring; Station 13, summer) the 
results were significant, with greater numbers of taxa postoperationally 
at Station 8 and greater niombers of taxa preoperational ly at Station 13. 
Because the transformation procedure was not successful in eliminating 
heteroscedasticity (unequal variance) for the faunal density data, and 
the overall results of the ANOVA indicate an apparently patternless 
variability, these contrasts were not analyzed for numbers of individ- 
uals. These results are indicative of a system with large and extremely 
variable changes in its faunal structure in both time and space. The 
only meaningful statistically significant relationship concerning spe- 
cies richness was that between the inner harbor and Morris Cove. The 
preoperational and postoperational species richness data were compared 
for inner harbor stations vs. Morris Cove stations and paired by sam- 
pling period. In both cases Morris Cove was found to contain signif- 
icantly more species than the inner harbor (preoperational, t = 4.5134, 
p < .001; postoperational, t = 5.628, p < .001). 



6-56 



Speaies Density 

Abundance data on the 14 characteristic species identified in 
Table 6-10 were evaluated for trends over the course of the study via 
Spearman's coefficient of rank correlation (Conover, 1971). The cal- 
culated correlation values and their significance levels are presented 
in Table 5-10. Of the 14 characteristic species, nine show a statistically 
significant tendency to increase in abundance over the course of the 
study. 

Because 1977 was identified (see below) as a year of unusually 
high abundances, the data were re-ranked and Spearman's coefficient 
recalculated for the 12 collections from 1973 through 1976 only. Of the 
nine species showing significant increases in density over the entire 
study, six also showed significant increases from 1973 to 1976, indi- 
cating that the overall increase in faunal density during 1977 was not 
the only factor responsible for the trend toward greater densities among 
ubiquitous species. 

Overall faunal density shows an increase from pre- to post- 
operational periods. This was examined for significance by seasonally 
paired t-tests conducted on the faunal density data for all possible 
combinations of years before and after plant operation. "Years" in this 
case refers to full years before or after operation and not calendar 
years. The resulting matrices of t values are shown in Table 6-11. 
Inspection of these results reveals that there has been no statistically 
significant change in faunal density at inner harbor stations over the 
course of the program, although the data do suggest a general increase 
in density. The only significant change in faunal density involves the 
Morris Cove data, where faunal densities were significantly higher in 
1977 than in either 1974 or 1976. Densities were also greater than in 
1975, although not significantly so. Increases in faunal density from 
pre operational to operational years at Morris Cove and inner harbor 
stations is not indicative of a positive Harbor Station impact on the 
benthic infaunal community. The general harborwide nature of the increase 



6-57 



TABLE 6-10. TRENDS IN MEAN DENSITY FOR 14 CHARACTERISTIC SPECIES EVALUATED 
VIA SPEARMAN'S RHO. NEW HAVEN HARBOR ECOLOGICAL STUDIES 
SUMMARY REPORT, 1979. 







SIGNIFICANCE 


LEVEL 


SPECIES 


INDICATED TREND 


1974-1976 


1974-1977 


Streblospio benedict! 


increase 


p<.01 


ns 


Nephtys incisa 


- 


ns 


ns 


Oligochaeta 


increase 


p<.001 


p<.05 


Glycera americana 


increase 


p<.01 


ns 


Nereis succinea 


- 


ns 


ns 


Poly dor a ligni 


increase 


p<.01 


p<.05 


Gemma gemma 


- 


ns 


ns 


Mulinia lateralis 


increase 


p<.01 


p<.05 


Tellina agilis 


increase 


p<.01 


ns 


Nassarius trivittatus 


increase 


p<.01 


p<.01 


Neomysis americana 


increase 


p<.01 


p<.05 


Crangon septemspinosa 


increase 


p<.01 


p<.01 


Nucula proxima 


- 


ns 


ns 


Pagurus longicarpus 


— 


ns 


ns 



6-58 



TABLE 6-11. RESULTS OF PAIRED T-TESTS FOR FAUNAL DENSITY CHANGES FOR 
ALL POSSIBLE PAIRS OF YEARS. NEW HAVEN HARBOR ECOLOGICAL 
STUDIES SUMMARY REPORT, 1979. 



INNER HARBOR STATIONS 





1973 - 74 


1974 - 75 


1975 - 76 


1974 - 


- 75 


.5687 (ns) 


- 


- 


1975 - 


- 76 


.1220 (ns) 


.4216 (ns) 


- 


1976 - 


- 77 


3.4741 (ns) 


1.9705 (ns) 


1.5259 (ns) 



MORRIS COVE STATIONS 





1973 - 74 


1974 - 75 


1975 - 76 


1974 - 


- 75 


.9062 (ns) 


- 


- 


1975 - 


- 76 


.3676 (ns) 




- 


1976 - 


- 77 


5.376 (p<.05) 


1.8210 (ns) 


7.6475 (p<.05) 



6-59 



suggests either an improvement in water quality or, more likely, a random 
increase rather than a plant impact. 



DiveY'Siltij 

Because the summer has been identified as the period of 
greatest stress for the benthic infauna in New Haven Harbor, power 
station effects on diversity should be most evident in the summer. To 
evaluate the possibility of reduced diversities in the inner harbor due 
to station operation, a series of paired t-tests was run on the Shannon- 
Weaver diversity values for the six stations closest to the discharge 
(4, 7, 8, 8N, 5, 9) and six control stations from Morris Cove. A matrix 
of comparisons for each location over all years was constructed (Table 
6-12) from the results. 

For all comparisons except one, there is no significant dif- 
ference between the mean diversity at the selected stations for pre- 
operational vs. postoperational years. The single exception is for 1974 
compared with 1976 at Morris Cove, where diversities were significantly 
greater in 1976 (p < .05) . This isolated observation is of no general 
significance and the observed pattern of minimal changes in diversity 
supports the conclusion of no apparent impact on benthic macrofaunal 
diversity due to station operation. 



SUMMARY 

A composite list generated by the NAI (1973-1977) and R & M 
(1974-1978) benthic studies in New Haven Harbor consists of over 300 
taxa. Species richness values did not have consistent seasonal patterns 
but were higher at Morris Cove than in the inner harbor. Faunal diversity 
in the inner harbor was typically low; values of 0.0 were common. 
Diversities were higher in Morris Cove than in the inner harbor. A 
slight trend of increasing diversity was observed over the course of the 



6-60 



TADLE 6-12. RESULTS OF PAIRED T-TESTS FOR DIVERSITY (H') CHANGES 
FOR ALL POSSIBLE PAIRS OF YEARS. NEW HAVEN HARBOR 
ECOLOGICAL STUDIES SUMMARY REPORT, 1979. 



INNER HARBOR STATIONS 





1973 - 74 


1974 - 75 


1975 - 76 


1974 - 


- 75 


1.1078 (ns) 


— 


_ 


1975 - 


- 76 


.6767 (ns) 


.3827 (ns) 


- 


1976 - 


- 77 


.0124 (ns) 


.5792 (ns) 


.3953 (ns) 



MORRIS COVE STATIONS 





1973 - 74 


1974 - 75 


1975 - 76 


1974 - 


75 


.8806 (ns) 


- 


- 


1975 - 


76 


3.0732 (p<.05) 


.3854 (ns) 


- 


1976 - 


77 


2.4842 (ns) 


1.5251 (ns) 


1.1513 (ns) 



6-61 



study. Faunal density was extremely variable with an annual minimum in 
sioitimer and a maximum in winter. The summer minimum or "August effect" 
in New Haven Harbor appears to have been associated with the combined 
stresses of low dissolved oxygen, organic rich silt-clay substrata, 
and an inner harbor location. 

Analysis of species richness, faunal density and diversity for 
significant changes between preoperational and operational periods 
revealed no apparent impact of the New Haven Harbor Station on the 
benthic infaunal assemblages of New Haven Harbor. 



6-62 



LITERATURE CITED -- SUBTIDAL BENTHOS 



Conover, W. J. 1971. Practical nonparamfetric statistics. Wiley, New 
York. 462 pp. 

Dean, D. 1970. Water quality — benthic invertebrate relationships in 
estuaries. Ira C. Darling Center for Research, Teaching and 
Service, Walpole, Maine. Mimeo report. 

. 1975. Raritan Bay macrobenthos survey, 1952-1960. NOAA/ 



NMFS data Report 99. Seattle, Washington, 51 pp. 

Enright. 1977. Power Plants and Plankton. Marine Pollution Bulletin, 
8(7) :158-163. 

Fisher, J. B. and P. L. McCall. 1973. The effect of environmental 
perturbations on benthic communities: an experiment in benthic 
recolonization and succession in Long Island Sound. Unpublished 
report. Dept. Geology and Geophysics, Yale University. 33 pp. 

Jones, D. J. 1972. Changes in the ecological balance of invertebrate 
communities in kelp holdfast habitats of some polluted North Sea 
waters. Helgolander wiss. Meeresunters. 23:248-260. 

1952. The bottom fauna and the food of flatfish off the 



Cumberland Coast. J. Anim. Ecol. 21:182-205. 

McCall, P. L. 1977. Community patterns and adaptive strategies of the 
infaunal benthos of Long Island Sound. J. Mar. Res. 35:221-266. 

McGrath, R. A. 1974. Benthic macrofaunal census of Raritan Bay — 

preliminary results. Pap. No. 24. 3rd Symp. Hudson River Ecol. 
Mar 22-23, 1973. Bear Mt. , New York, Hudson River Environ. Soc. 

and A. D. Michael. 1978. Environmental assessment of the 



Clinton Harbor, Connecticut estuary. Report to Flaherty-Giavara 
Assoc. , New Haven, Connecticut. 60 pp. & appendices. 

Normandeau Associates, Inc. 1973. New Haven Harbor Ecological Studies, 
New Haven, Connecticut. Annual Report 1971-1972 for The United 
Illximinating Company, New Haven, Connecticut. 208 pp. 

. 1974a. Coke Works Ecological Monitoring Studies, New Haven 



Harbor, Connecticut. Annual Report 1972-1973 for The United 
Illuminating Company, New Haven, Connecticut. 215 pp. 

. 1974b. Coke Works Ecological Monitoring Studies, New Haven 



Harbor, Connecticut. Interim Report May-December 1973 for The 
United Illuminating Company, New Haven, Connecticut. 199 pp. 



6-63 



1975a. New Haven Harbor Station Ecological Monitoring 



Studies, New Haven Harbor, Connecticut. Annual Report 1974 for 
The United Illuminating Company, New Haven, Connecticut. 223 pp. 

. 1975b. Ecological studies conducted at selected sites in 



New Haven Harbor, Connecticut. 114 pp. 
. 1976. New Haven Harbor Station Ecological Monitoring 



Studies, New Haven Harbor, Connecticut. Annual Report 1975 for The 
United Illuminating Company, New Haven, Connecticut. 312 pp. 

. 1977a. New Haven Harbor Station Ecological Monitoring 



Studies, New Haven Harbor, Connecticut. Annual Report 1976 for The 
United Illuminating Company, New Haven, Connecticut. 376 pp. 

. 1977b. Piscataqua River Ecological Studies 1976. Moni- 



toring Study Report No. 7 for Public Service Company of New Hampshire. 

Pearson, T.H. and R. Rosenberg. 1978. Macrobenthic succession in 
relation to organic enrichment and pollution of the marine en- 
vironment. Oceanogr. Mar. Biol. Am. Rev., 16, pp. 229-311. 

Pielou, E. C. 1966. The measurement of diversity in different types of 
biological collections. Theoret. Biol. 13:131-144. 

. 1975. Ecological diversity. Wiley, New York. 165 pp. 



Reish, D. J. 1961. A study of benthic fauna in a recently constructed 
boat harbor in southern California. Ecology. 42:84-91. 

, T.J. Kauwling and A.J. Mearns. 1975. Marine and estuarine 



pollution. J. Water Pollution Control Federation 47 (6) :1617-1635 . 

Rhoads, D. C. and A. D. Michael. 1975. Benthic monitoring study for 
The United Illuminating Company Coke Works Site Power Plant. 
Report I: Baseline data 1974. Unpublished report. 22 pages and 
appended data sheets. 

. 1976. Benthic monitoring study for The United Illuminating 



Company Coke Works Site Power Plant. Report II: Benthic monitor- 
ing during plant testing and early operation 1975. Unpublished 
report. 8 pages and appended data sheets. 

. 1977. Benthic monitoring study for The United Illuminating 



Company Coke Works Site Power Plant. Report III: Benthic moni- 
toring during plant testing and early operation 1976. Unpublished 
report. 10 pages and appended data sheets. 

. 1978. Benthic monitoring study for The United Illuminating 



Company Coke Works Site Power Plant. Report IV: Benthic monitor- 
ing during plant testing and early operation 1978. Unpublished 
report. 11 pages and appended data sheets. 



6-64 



_, McCall and Yingst. In Press. The ecology of sea-floor 



disturbances. Am. Scientist. 

Sanders, H.L. 1956. Oceanography of Long Island Sound, 1952-1954. 
X. The biology of marine bottom coitimunities. Bull. Bingham 
Oceanogr. Coll. 15:345-413. 

. 1960. Benthic studies in Buzzards Bay. III. The structure 



of the soft-bottom community. Limnol. Oceanogr. 5:138-158. 

Wass, M.L. 1967. Biological and physiological basis of indicator 
organisms and communities. IN^: T.A. Olson and F.J. Burgess, 
Pollution and Marine Ecology, Interscience, New York. pp. 
271-283. 

Wigley, R.L. 1965. Density-dependent food relationships with refer- 
ence to New England groundfish. ICNAF Spec. Publ. 6:583-589. 



NEIJ HAVEN HARBOR 

ECOLOGICAL STUDIES 

SUMMARY REPORT, 1979 



7.0 INTERTIDAL 
by Stephen Dudley and Catherine D. Harvell 

Normandeau Associates, Inc. 
Bedford, N. H. 



TABLE OF CONTENTS 



PAGE 

INTRODUCTION 7-1 

METHODS 7-3 

CHARACTERIZATION OF NEW HAVEN HARBOR INTERTIDAL FAUNA 7-4 

Dominant Species .' 7-10 

COMPARISON OF NEW HAVEN HARBOR WITH OTHER LONG ISLAND 

SOUND SITES 7-20 

ANALYSIS OF IMPACT 7-21 

SUMMARY 7-27 

LITERATURE CITED 7-28 



LIST OF FIGURES 



PAGE 

7-1. Intertidal areas sampled in New Haven Harbor from 

May 1971 through October 1977 7-2 

7-2. Population densities of dominant molluscs, Mya avenaria. 
Gamma ijemna, Ilyanassa obsoleta and Macoma balthica by 
station at intertidal areas in New Haven Harbor 1971 
through 1977 7-11 

7-3. Population densities of dominant polychaete taxa. Nereis 
sucoinea^ Spionidae, Capitellidae and Nereis spp., by 
station at intertidal areas in New Haven Harbor 1971 
through 1977 7-18 

7-4. Population densities of dominant arthropods, Balanus 

improvisus and Limulus polyphemus by station at inter- 
tidal areas in New Haven Harbor 1971 through 1977. . . . 7-19 



LIST OF TABLES 

7-1. OCCURRENCE OF INTERTIDAL INVERTEBRATES FROM MAY 1971 

THROUGH OCTOBER 1977 AT ALL STATIONS IN NEW HAVEN HARBOR 7-5 

7-2. DOMINANT TAXA COMMONLY COLLECTED AT NEW HAVEN HARBOR 

INTERTIDAL STATIONS FROM 1971 THROUGH 1977 7-8 

7-3. TOTAL NUMBERS OF ORGANISMS (#/M^) COLLECTED AT INTER- 
TIDAL STATION TRANSECTS FROM 1971 THROUGH 1977 7-3 

7-4. NUMBERS OF TAXA COLLECTED AT INTERTIDAL STATION 

TRANSECTS FROM 1971 THROUGH 1977 7-9 

7-5. MEAN LENGTHS (MM) OF MYA MENARIA COLLECTED ON NEW 

HAVEN HARBOR INTERTIDAL TRANSECTS FROM MAY 1971 THROUGH 

MAY 1977 7-9 

7-6. ABUNDANT TAXA COLLECTED ON EAST SHORE INTERTIDAL 

TRANSECTS DURING MAY AND OCTOBER FROM 1971-1977 7-12 

7-7. ABUNDANT TAXA COLLECTED ON SANDY POINT INTERTIDAL 

TRANSECTS IN MAY AND OCTOBER FROM 1971-1977 7-13 

7-8. ABUNDANT TAXA COLLECTED ON LONG WHARF INTERTIDAL 

TRANSECTS IN MAY AND OCTOBER FROM 1971-1977 7-14 

7-9. THE MOST ABUNDANT TAXA COLLECTED AT INTERTIDAL STATIONS 

DURING PREOPERATIONAL YEARS 7-24 

7-10. FAUNAE DOMINANCE BASED ON PERCENT OCCURRENCE IN ALL 
SAMPLE SETS FOR EACH INTERTIDAL STATION DURING PRE- 
OPERATIONAL AND OPERATIONAL SAMPLING PERIODS 7-25 



n 



7.0 INTERTIDAL 

by Stephen Dudley and C. Drew Harvell 

Normandeau Associates, Inc. 
Bedford, N. H. 



INTRODUCTION 

The intertidal zone is the most physically variable habitat in 
an estuarine environment (Gaspers, 1967). Floral and faunal ecology is 
regulated by a changing physical/chemical regime and biological pro- 
cesses such as predation and competition (Connell, 1951; Paine, 1966; 
Dayton, 1971) . Organisms inhabiting the intertidal flats are an impor- 
tant component of the estuarine ecosystem since they act as a food 
source for shore-zone fishes, shorebirds and waterfowl. 

New Haven Harbor is an urbanized estuary containing over 600 
acres of intertidal habitat, consisting of soft-substrate flats with 
little algal growth. More than half of this area is located in the 
inner harbor (Figure 7-1) . Industrial and municipal wastes added to the 
normally fluctuating physical/chemical regime produce a harsh environ- 
ment for sessile marine taxa. New Haven Harbor intertidal taxa typify 
those characterized by Anger (1975) as organic pollution indicators. 
Organic waste enters New Haven Harbor from four sewage treatment 
plant (STP) outfalls (Figure 7-1) rendering the inner harbor area 
unsuitable for public recreational purposes according to state standards 
(Conn. State D.E.P., 1978). 

The intertidal area is particularly sensitive to buoyant 
effluents that can impact the habitat through contact or deposition by 
tidal action. A small oil spill (not related to New Haven Harbor Sta- 
tion operation) occurred in New Haven Harbor during the study period 
(October 6, 1974) , but, a special study did not detect any significant 
impact by the floating oil slick. Impingement of buoyant heated dis- 
charge water is a possible source of powerplant impact on the intertidal 
habitat; however, hydrographic data indicate that impingement of the 
thermal plume on any intertidal area is minimal in New Haven Harbor. 

7-1 



7-2 




y PRIMARY TRANSECTS 
A ALTERNATE TRANSECTS 



/ / 
\ \ 



Figure 7-1. Intertidal areas sampled in New Haven Harbor from May 1971 
through October 1977 on (A) Sandy Point, (B) East Shore and 
(C) Long Wharf transects. New Haven Harbor Ecological 
Studies Summary Report, 1979. 



7-3 



The purpose of this study was twofold: 1) to characterize the 
New Haven Harbor intertidal community with respect to temporal and spatial 
patterns of species distribution and abundance, and 2) to establish a data 
base of preoperational (1971-1975) and operational (1975-1977) data from 
which to analyze any potential impact from the station. 



METHODS 

Intertidal fauna were sampled at three stations in New Haven 
Harbor in May (spring) and October (fall) from 1971 through 1977 except 
October 1977 at Sandy Point (Figure 7-1) . The intertidal area at Sandy 
Point station was not exposed at that time, apparently due to erosion 
and sliomping associated with nearby dredging. Permanent transects were 
established in 1971 at the stations marked in Figure 7-1 as follows: 
(a) Sandy Point - transect extended north-south on the south side of 
Sandy Point about 150 meters west of the beginning of the breakwater. A 
parallel reserve transect was marked off 50 meters closer to the break- 
water. Although not sampled, such reserve transects were established 
and maintained throughout the study in case some drastic change occurred 
in the primary sampling transect. (b) East Shore — this station was 
closest to the Harbor Station discharge. It was sampled using a transect 
running east-west about 75 meters south of Harbor Station pier. A 
parallel reserve transect was marked off an added 50 meters to the 
south. (c) Long Wharf — the transect northwest-southeast about 450 
meters west of Long Wharf. The reserve transect was established 50 
meters closer to Long Wharf. Sediments along the transects ranged from 
soft mud at the Long Wharf station, to firm, muddy sand at both Sandy 
Point and East Shore Stations. 

2 
Duplicate l/16m samples were taken at low and mid-intertidal 

areas along each of three primary transects (four samples per transect) . 

Sediments were removed to a depth of 25 cm and sieved through 2 mm mesh 

screens to separate macrofauna from sediments. Collected fauna were 

then preserved in buffered formalin and returned to the laboratory where 

the species were identified and counted. 



7-4 



2 

Species were analyzed for abiindance (#/in ) and frequency of 

occurrence (percent occurrence) . High percent occurrence (number of 
sample iseriods a taxon was present divided by total number of sample 
poriods) was used to identify species that were consistently present, 
includint) those that W(!rc low in abundance. Abundant taxa wore those 
wlii.ch characterized a station, based on their higher relative abundances 
in samples (Table 7-4) . Overall dominance (common taxa) was determined 
by ranking all taxa collected both by frequency of occurrence in samples 
over seven years and by total abundance over the same period. Rank 
scores were assigned to taxa on both lists (i.e., the taxon ranked first 
was given a score of 1, second ranked 2, etc.). Scores for each taxon 
were added from both lists and the lowest 10 scoring taxa were desig- 
nated as dominant (Table 7-1) . Species richness (total number of taxa) 
was used as a measure of diversity for a given station or year. 

Obvious constraints are imposed upon interpretation of results 
by the complexity of the intertidal environment as well as the temporally- 
limited (semi-annual) sampling regime. The abbreviated sampling regime 
was selected because of the minimal plant operational impact anticipated 
in the intertidal area; spring and fall sampling were most likely to re- 
flect any changes in faunal overwintering success and recruitment. 
Knowledge of unrecorded interim events would have simplified interpre- 
tation of the data; nonetheless it is clear that any major changes in 
the community habitat would have been evident. 



CHARACTERIZATION OF NEW HAVEN HARBOR INTERTIDAL FAUNA 

During the seven-year period of biological monitoring along 
intertidal transects in New Haven Harbor, a total of 90 invertebrate 
taxa and 6914 individuals were collected (Table 7-1) . Of the 90 taxa, 
22 were represented by only one or two individuals, and 60 taxa were 
found in either one (35 taxa) , two (18 taxa) or three (7 taxa) sample 
sets. Samples taken at a given station in a single month and tidal 
period were considered a sample set. Mya arenaria. Nereis succinea. 



7-5 



CTi 
r— oo 

UJ 
fV I — I 
LU Q 

CQ rD 
O H- 
I— CO 
C_) 
O —J 

a: o 

CD 1— I 

o o 

n: o 
h- o 



CTi o 

1— CQ 

>- <c 



o > 

oc < 



oo 



CO • 
UJ od 

I— o 

OC CQ 

UJ q: 



Q eC 
1—1 31 
I— cr, 
d; 2 r-~ 

LU LU cri 



Li_ ai 

c/1 o 
:z Q- 

LU O LU 
C_3 I— 1 Di 

LU cC >. 

01 \— Cd 

ct: 00 ct 

o _i 2: 
o — 1 rD 

O cC 1/1 



I 



□3 











^ oj 


■^ T 






<_> 




































'~ 


■a: 




^ S 


^ r-i CO 


__ 


^_ 




-]■ 


'0 




r? 


■-J 











m 






























'" 7-^ -^ 


•"* "^ 




i~ 




'T CO )i^ 


IN J?! »y ^ 






u 




rr vD ^ 


<H r- lo 

















en 


d 




^ JD O) ^ 


s :5 3 s -^ 


Li- 
ce: 













I— 




>U r., -^ S 


r>i vij CO 


3: 


«^ 









|rj in iTi iD (D 


3 









-H ri _^ .:^ 


cn 










>o 


uJ 






•a: 






CO I- ^ -q- '^ 







_s:, , 




























s "^ 




n 

























CT^ 




















CO MJ 






2 






y? .n 
















^ 




'-r -J- aj 


-T ,. ,^ ,j ^ 






u 



















.£1 ,-i 






























•a: 












E 








■^ 


>_ 




vr 






;:;;[ 







% 


















~ 


i 










■»— 


,_ 












t_) 











































CD ° ° ° 






J. 




^ 


_ 


1— 




CD 03 


toco)!^^ ■^•^ 03^ r^ ^O-TO 




i£» 


t_) 










r-. 































s ^ -^ 


lOCM ID "^^ '^ S"^ 






J. 




-d- 


Ln 


t-j 




S ^ rr 2 ^ 


^ ^ ^ CO - 3 -^ 



































1!; -d- <T 


■^0 M)CN T^^ CM 







i~ 




to ^ 




•a- 


u 




^ % 


^ CD CD CD ^ ^ % 


Q- 


01 







U3 
p-l 


(N 


1 




i. 




S S "^ 


og 1^ T CO -q- 2 




















CO T '"^ 


^ £^ rM ■a- ^ * 




ro 


(_> 




'^ -'f ^ CD 


t"' r~- . -J ^ ^ 




r-~ 











o> 














j_ 




CD i^ rj 


Pj >* 


CTi 


1— 





CO 


^ rl 










(N fsl CO ^ 








i_ 




in u-i 


r^ ■^ 


^■^ 


I— 




CD (DO VD 






ol 


t_3 





CO ^ ^ in 












vO .y (M CO 'J' 








X 




r^ ^ ^ " 


n- "^ 




^~ 


h- 




VD vD vi) n- 


CO CO (N .qi 











"^ ■* n ^ nH 


^ CO r~ (M 




r- 







ID 


H 




CTi 












^ 






^ 


to 


\o 


(_) 




>0 ^ 


CO 

















CT* 


























<: 




^ ^ CO 


M f^) 






e: 








^^ 


i_ 






(^ „ M) CD 













■-t nH r-) ^ 

















cn 














CC 




tT ^ VD 









s: 






^ 


^^ 


,_ 




? S ' 


•^ JO ^ a, 


CC 


•a- 




















Ul 


CT, 


















S ^ P! 


(N "^ 


ce 




■* 




o^ 







E 








77 


Hj 




s s s 


S 1 ^ '^ - 




cn 




J. 




. " 


^ 




1— 






CO ^ 






(_) 






(N ^a 




r-. 









M 




Oi 














J. 




' 






1— 




CD TT 






;:; 


8 




tr 




















1 




^ ■* 


T -? ^ 










." 


M 










« ;o 13 r^ e 












3 3 Cj -H 1h 


pj '5 ■" 










JJ fO -^ 1- C 


4J -tj ■" U 










1!*J 'D'O^C -3 *- 


rc-H latiitj L.«V)--; 










- lU 4J 4J ^. .^ C i1 « 


4j --i 10 ^ -is 'H -I — -H 3 T: 










t- (J CI i-o -u t- C 3 ■-< ■? 


(o*atn S-Cs-u i.w~.-u J 












ii-Hiflq iOc:c; 11 ■ 3"(o toe 










4.ic:c*J034j^ ■-, ji-o's w-4m 


■~)3-u0 OCdJQjO Qj amiJCri3 -hOj 










»:; a- 3 M ^ :y ■-. ^ .-, ^ .« I, — ^ •-, 










■^o^cja-flqL. ^eT?ci'ij~--c~- 


ujroaj&c (u 'Mi;^ ^« .|qS • 'oau'-'O b; 












<ooij ---iw -u oijaHwwt- -uS D. w--iM'a'*^«H 00 










■O 'an]U--)-O0je-'SlU ■-*■-(■« 0.0^0)01100)30, O) o-h 










3 IB UJ ly ry i/) l, 6 i".' —< ~H 13 t "y fJ W 


■H'U'H-'HC(UClJii3Tt'OM<-UllO H3'H'0'0 nl<-HQJW(OlO«'d(ll''HR, Q. 










>a<-2~i'at^!5'U3 4jSj5k,i] c ~ 


10 r-^•~^n^^^3^^l/l~^'D 4iQ;Ci. (uu)«)t.'O'O'B'a-'S-HOOO0'Ofl'--)W0J''' 










3 3 'M n -H -H -M (n & y 3 (U ai « D .-J m 


4Jnj^~,3Tj Q) ■Hm.^ccQOj'O .H-HiH-HiHO-i~<-H-H-'-''a;'^ora 








'DC'CTJ-QiUlH-.k, .-jC-H-tMat'CC 


a^4Ja•^iJCOCtJQ)u22■H-M■iiC'SlnUlU)-H-^00'OOQ.Q-Q.Q--'■r^'^';^'dX 








-tj -H p C lU i-J W 1^ 2 £ OJ C 'J -H -1 ■-> ■-< 


fljflj^Jiifl'I^-HOCC'DSSt^L-W'Q-H-MM-M-IC-oC ODOOOOaC ^-Q-^pv 








aiiis.a'^ij-uk.w-.weou'-i-i --,i,~i~. 


j:: (0-H-i tjiiOi-HO U U U^-QIJ'OQJ ll CD Qj Ol-H ai^+J-H-H— (M'^aO (l)>-'h 








< 


■r^'?'^^"*'"' > fl!E ;j 1.-C--H fa4JlJ~,~^ 


<u.caS,>Joto-iiuQ]>,3,3^lEtj-^^^';i;Sj:ja-i-iooooppv<-H-HiH-H;g 








u 


- tj'Hk,Si.-,--,-,n,^kHO'0OO3>3iCJO 01 


aO CJfflfa-H ll)-M^4J4Ji-l-H--H333im(]) njo, Javi l^UOOUOOJ Q,Ci,iJ >-£^ 








L2^«?oua:Ni^fca<oou5:s:SE:s:s:Q.ss 








3 


1 > 


h-l 'H -^ 








J _<5 -H 










g^ 


m 


3 Q. 










5 



t3 
0) 

13 
C 
■H 
-P 
C 
O 

u 



7-6 



o 



I 



CQ 



r- o 






73 q C t; >v 



tl (J 

as 



Qi Qj ij -u In . Cn 
u <U C n] 1} Oi 3 
E'OtJ-HUWQj'B 



cj c 01 Q) :ii 



accOoiwoO' 
CO'uCn.agE; 



tjOU]a:oa.a.Q.6. I 



1 O 1) 

; T3 tj T3 

J tq Lg -H 



O W E E 
0) O -H -H 

=; £ -^ 'J 



P4 



7-7 



Gemma gemma, Ilyanassa obsoleta, and Macoma balthica (Table 7-2) were 
consistently the most conmon taxa collected. Species richness and 
density showed seasonal fluctuations with fall maxima. Sandy Point 
station showed the greatest species richness and highest density of 
individuals of the three stations sampled (Tables 7-3, 7-4) , while East 
Shore usually showed lowest numbers and lowest species richness. 

Species density generally increased from spring to fall with 
low values again the following spring. Fall maxima were related to 
spring and summer recruitment which was often heavy for certain dominant 
taxa. Spring recruitment was usually not evident in May because the 
newly settled juveniles were too small for retention by the 2-mm mesh 
screen used for sieving. The low spring densities relative to those in 
the fall seen in many years are indicative of either predation or 
natural overwinter mortality. The most severe overwinter mortalities as 
evidenced by reduced spring density occurred at East Shore in 1971, 
1972, 1973 and 1977. Winter mortality was pronounced in Mya arenaria , a 
dominant species for which size data are available (Table 7-5) . Mya 
grow about 10 mm per year, on the average, for about seven years (more 
in the first year, less after 3 years) (Newcombe, 1935) . Mya in New 
Haven Harbor seldom survive past the length of 25 mm, indicating mor- 
tality in either the first or second year. At East Shore absence of 
clams in 1972 and spring 1973 and smaller clams in spring 1974, suggests 
an inability to overwinter (Table 7-5) . At Long Wharf, spring clams 
were consistently larger than fall clams, suggesting overwinter success 
and growth. High winter mortality occurring at East Shore was probably 
related to the station's exposure to winter north winds which pile ice 
on intertidal areas and increase wind and wave erosion. Both Sandy 
Point and Long Wharf are lee shores with respect to northwest winds and 
may not be as heavily impacted by winter weather. 

Annual variability in density characterized the intertidal 
community over the seven-year study period. The overall variation was 
most pronounced at East Shore and Long Wharf (Table 7-3) due to large 
fluctuations in Mya density. The highest densities of Mya were observed 



7-8 



TABLE 7-2. DOMINANT TAXA COMMONLY COLLECTED AT NEW HAVEN HARBOR INTERTIDAL 
STATIONS FROM 1971 THROUGH 1977. NEW HAVEN HARBOR ECOLOGICAL 
STUDIES SUMMARY REPORT, 1979. 



RANK^ 


TAXA 


1 


Mga arenaria (soft-shell clam) 


2 


Nereis succinea (sand worm) 


3 


Nereis spp. (sand worm) 


4 


Genrnia gemma (gem shell) 


5 


Ilyanassa obsoleta (mud snail) 


6 


Macoma balthica (macoma clam) 


7 


Balanus improvisus (barnacle) 


8 


Spionldae (spionid worms) 


9 


Limalus polyphemus (horseshoe crab) 


10 


Capitellidae (capitellid worms) 



Based on frequency of presence in a sample and total abundance 
May be primarily juvenile N. succinea 



TABLE 7-3. TOTAL NUMBERS OF ORGANISMS (#/M^) COLLECTED AT 
STATION TRANSECTS FROM 1971 THROUGH 1977. NE'I 
ECOLOGICAL STUDIES SUMMARY REPORT, 1979. 



INTERTIDAL 
HAVEN HARBOR 





EAST SHORE 


LONG WHARF 


SANDY 


POINT 


YEAR 


MAY OCT 


MAY OCT 


MAY 


OCT 


1971 


16 112 


300 


404* 


732 


1972 


4 396 


692 860 


564 


1260 


1973 


24 2972 


312 564 


1934 


672 


1974 


300** 604** 


260 6564 


132 


2040 


1975 


232 400 


676 1288 


828 


1296 


1976 


192** 52 


296 84 


1620 


1576 


1977 


36 4344 


64 2852 


944 


NS 


X 

ALL YEARS 


114 1268 


328 1784 


918 


1262 


X PRE- 
OPERATIONAL 


115 1009 


388 2072 


772 


1176 


X 

OPERATIONAL 


114 1598 


180 1408 


1282 


1436 



*Does not include Balanus which were observed but not 
enumerated in May 1971. 

**High densities of Limulus eggs collected in samples 

NS Transects not sampled 



7-9 



TABLE 7-4. NUMBERS OF TAXA COLLECTED AT INTERTIDAL STATION TRANSECTS 
FROM 1971 THROUGH 1977. NEW HAVEN HARBOR ECOLOGICAL 
STUDIES SUMMARY REPORT, 1979 . 





EAST 


SHORE 


LONG 


WHARF 


SANDY 


POINT 


yeJ\r 


MAY 


OCT 


MAY 


OCT 


MAY 


OCT 


1971 


5 


2 





3 


10 


4 


1972 


1 


5 


4 


10 


6 


4 


1973 


3 


10 


5 


7 


9 


14 


1974 


5 


11 


7 


14 


11 


12 


1975 


10 


8 


12 


11 


14 


16 


1976 


7 


3 


8 


5 


12 


19 


1977 


5 


14 


8 


11 


8 


NS 


X 


5 


8 


6 


9 


10 


12 


All Years 














X 


5 


7 


6 


8.5 


10 


10 


Preoperational 














X 


6 


8 


8 


9 


10 


12 


Operational 















NS Transects not sampled - Station had been dredged away. 



TABLE 7-5. MEAN LENGTHS (MM) OF MIA ARENARIA COLLECTED ON NEW HAVEN HARBOR 
INTERTIDAL TRANSECTS FROM MAY 1971 THROUGH MAY 1976*. 
NEW HAVEN HARBOR ECOLOGICAL STUDIES SUMMARY REPORT, 1979. 





EAST SHORE 


LONG WHARF 


SANDY 


POINT 


YEAR 


MAY OCT 


MAY OCT 


MAY 


OCT 


1971 


17.0 7.6 


11.6 


30.0 


13.5 


1972 


- 


18.8 10.8 


28.0 


15.3 


1973 


14.5 


23.0 10.0 


- 


9.4 


1974 


10.0 12.7 


26.6 13.3 


12.0 


- 


1975 


26.8 21.0 


15.6 14.3 


14.0 


17.0 


1976 


17.0 ND 


24.2 ND 


- 


ND 



Subsequent size data not available 

ND = No data 



7-10 



at East Shore in October 1973 and 1977 and at Long Wharf in October 1974 
and 1977 (Figure 7-2) . 

Although variable, no trends were apparent in annual species 
richness values, except a slight increase from 1971 to 1977 (Table 7-4) . 
seasonal trend was fairly consistent: generally, richness was greater 
in fall than spring, related to spring/summer recruitment and winter 
"die off". The greatest number of species occurred at Sandy Point, 
possibly related to its protected nature as discussed above, and its 
proximity to cleaner, outer harbor waters. Lowest species richness 
occurred at East Shore for most years and overall. 

Ten taxa were selected as overall dominants whose distribution 
at particular stations was fairly consistent (Table 7-1) . At East Shore, 
fauna were sparse in May, except for moderate numbers of annelids and 
molluscs. In October, Mya arenaria, Balanus improvisus and Nereis 
succinea were abundant for four out of seven years, and Limulus poly- 
phemus for three (Table 7-6) . At Sandy Point, Ilyanassa obsoleta was 
abundant in spring/fall for most years and Gemma gemma for the first 
three years and spring 1974 (Table 7-7) . At Long Wharf Mya was the main 
dominant, with Nereis occurring in lesser numbers for most years (Table 
7-8). Of the dominant species, four appeared in all sample periods: 
Nereis succinea, Mya arenaria, Ilyanassa obsoleta, and Gemma gemma. 



Dorrtinant Species 

Population densities of dominant species in New Haven Harbor, 
as indicated by the sampling program, are presented by station and month 
in Tables 7-6 through 8. Most species showed trends in spatial and 
temporal distribution. The eight highest ranked species (Table 7-2) are 
discussed in some detail below. 

The soft-shell clam [Mya arenaria) was the most numerous 
bivalve sampled in the New Haven Harbor intertidal community (Figure 7-2) 



Text continued on page 7-15 



7-11 



I 






OPEN SYMBOLS REPRESENT SPECIES ABSENCE 
CLOSED SYMBOL REPRESENTS SPECIES 



^ 30 LLUbtU SYMBOL KLPRLStNIS SFhi 
A !§ D 580 COLLECTED IN LOW DENSITIES 



EAST LONG SANDY 
SHORE WHARF POINT 





400 




300 


•• ' 




NJ 

5: 


200- 


1/1 


100 


s: 




LD 





t—^ 




2^ 




<C 




ts 




cc 


600- 







— ' 


500 


>- 




\— 


400 


t-H 




</1 


300 


^ 




UJ 


200 




100 








1971 



§; 



1971 



Mya arenaria 



I 



1. 



AD/v A^« ABO A^» _;$:< AJyo Ax-O 



. 



., 



1972 1973 



1974 
MAY 



1975 



1976 1977 



^ Axxjii 



2696 2888 

II 



1972 



^O J 



O -^>. AMI 



1973 1974 1975 
OCTOBER 



1976 1977 



00 
C/1 



o 



300n 



200' 



100' 



Gemma gemma 
m 



AD* AD 




1971 



1972 1973 



I 

AOac Ali^O ABO ADO 



1974 
MAY 



3616^2880 CS. 

>- 
h- 
I — I 

z: 

LU 
Q 



L 



300' 



200- 



100' 




1975 



1976 1977 



Aa a A y g i^S 



1971 



1972 



^O A^O ADg Av\0 



1973 1974 1975 
OCTOBER 



1976 1977 



200- 



100- 



Ilyanassa obsoleta 

276 4fi4 1(140 



«/1 
to 



< 

cm 
o 



>- 
I— 
I— I 

z 

UJ 

a 



AD" 



lOOn 



ADO ADg ADa; ADi< 



AD< 



ADO 



1971 



1972 1973 1974 1975 



1976 1977 



200n 



100- 



ADO 




00 

2: 
00 

'-' 300n 
o 



Macoma batthica 



^ 



ADJ8 ADM ABO A^O A»0 A'^O ADO 



1971 



1972 1973 



200 



iO Av\0 



>- 
I— 
I— t 
00 

LjJ 
O 



100 



1974 
MAY 



1975 



1976 1977 



§ 



&m 



1971 



1972 



1973 1974 1975 
OCTOBER 



1976 1977 



1971 



1972 



1973 1974 1975 
OCTOBER 






ADflt A^^O ADO aS« ado A^ 



Ms. 



1976 1977 



Figure 7-2. Population densities of dominant molluscs^ Mya arenariay 
Gemma gemma:, Ityanassa obsoleta and Macoma balthiaa by 
station at Intertidal Areas in New Haven Harbor 1971 
through 1977. New Haven Harbor Ecological Studies 
Summary Report, 1979. 



7-li 



TABLE 7-6. ABUNDANT TAXA COLLECTED ON EAST SHORE INTERTIDAL TRANSECTS 
DURING MAY AND OCTOBER FROM 1971-1977. NEW HAVEN HARBOR 
ECOLOGICAL STUDIES SUMMARY REPORT, 1979. 



MAY 


OCTOUrR 


YEAR 


TAXA 


#/rn^ 


TAXA 


#/m^ 


1971 


(few taxa collectecJ) 




Mya arenaria 
Ilyanassa obsoleta 


64 
48 


1972 


(few taxa collected) 




Balanus improvisus 
Nereis spp. 
Orbinidae 


196 

100 

64 


1973 


Gemma gemma 


12 


Mya arenaria 


2696 




(few taxa collected) 




Nereis succinea 
Balanus improvisus 
Spionidae 


100 
48 
32 


1974 


Littorina obtusata 


128 


Limulus polyphemus 


276 




Capitellidae 


92 


Balanus improvisus 


112 




Mytilus edulis 


72 


Mya arenaria 


92 




( Limulus eggs 9468) 




Gemma gemma 
Nereis virens 
(Limulus eggs 3184) 


40 
36 


1975 


Oligochaetes 


112 


Limulus polyphemus 


172 




Capitellidae 


60 


Scoloplos fragllis 


140 




Scolecolepides viridis 


16 


Nereis succinea 


28 




My a arenaria 


16 






1976 


Scolopl ous sp . 


132 


Spio filicornis 


28 




Spionidae 


28 


Ilyanassa obsoleta 


16 




(Limulus eggs 820) 








1977 


Oligochaetes 


16 


Mya arenaria 
Limulus polyphemus 
Nereis succinea 
Balanus improvisus 
Scoloplos sp. 


3616 

292 

180 

76 

72 



7-13 



TABLE 7-7. ABUNDANT TAXA COLLECTED ON SANDY POINT INTERTIDAL TRANSECTS 

IN MAY AND OCTOBER FROM 1971-1977. NEW HAVEN HARBOR ECOLOGICAL 
STUDIES SUMMARY REPORT, 1979 



MAY 


OCTOBER 


YEAR 


TAXA 


#/m^ 


TAXA 


#/m^ 


1971 


Ilyanassa obsoleta 


276 


Gemma gemma 


448 




Macoma balthica 


32 


Ilyanassa obsoleta 


188 




Modiolus modiolus 


28 


Mya arenaria 


56 




Mya arenaria 


24 


Macoma balthica 


40 




Nereis succinea 


24 






1972 


Gemma gemma 


252 


Gemma gemma 


840 




Nereis succinea 


136 


Nereis spp. 


172 




Nereis spp. 


108 


Nereis succinea 


80 




Macoma balthica 


52 


Mya arenaria 
Nassarius trivittatus 


64 
56 


1973 


Gemma gemma 


1726 


Mya arenaria 


180 




Ilyanassa obsoleta 


132 


Gemma gemma 


152 




Nereis spp. 


33 


Balanus improvisus 
Poly dor a sp. 
Ilyanassa obsoleta 


108 
72 
44 


1974 


Gemma gemma 


20 


Ilyanassa obsoleta 


1636 




Ilyanassa obsoleta 


16 


Cirratulidae 


224 




Spionidae 


16 


Balanus improvisus 
Spionidae 


76 
20 


1975 


Ilyanassa obsoleta 


464 


Ilyanassa obsoleta 


668 




Cirratulidae 


240 


Cirratulidae 


524 




Spionidae 


32 






1976 


Ilyanassa obsoleta 


1040 


Spio filicornis 


1156 




Scolecolepides viridis 


412 


Pectinaria gouldii 


136 




Spionidae 


52 


Oligochaetes 


68 




Cirratulidae 


52 


Balanus improvisus 
Nereis succinea 


32 
28 


1977 


Scoloplos robustus 


420 








Spio filicornis 


380 


No samples taken 






Balanus improvisus 


48 








Protodrilus sp. 


40 







7-14 



TABLE 7-8. ABUNDANT TAXA COLLECTED ON LONG WHARF INTERTIDAL TRANSECTS 
IN MAY AND OCTOBER FROM 1971-1977. NEW HAVEN HARBOR 
ECOLOGICAL STUDIES SUMMARY REPORT, 1979. 



MAY 


OCTOBER 




YEAR 


TAXA 


#/m^ 


TAXA 


#/\/ 


1971 


No fauna collected 




Mya arenaria 


284 


1972 


Nereis spp. 


264 


Nerei s spp . 


616 




Nereis succinea 


220 


Nereis succinea 


120 




Mya arenaria 


196 


Mya arenaria 
Gemma gemma 
Mitrella lunata 


48 
24 
24 


1973 


Nereis succinea 


156 


Mya arenaria 


336 




Gemma gemma 


80 


Macoma balthica 


72 




Nereis spp. 


68 


Nereis succinea 
Nereidae 
Gemma gemma 


64 
56 
20 


1974 


Mya arenaria 


160 


Mya arenaria 


4888 




Macoma bait hie a 


64 


Poly dor a sp. 


960 




Nereidae 


16 


Gemma gemma 
Ilyanassa obsoleta 
Nereis succinea 


224 

172 

96 


1975 


Mya arenaria 


220 


Mya arenaria 


536 




Gemma gemma 


136 


Gemma gemma 


304 




Capitellidae 


96 


Ilyanassa obsoleta 


100 




Nereis succinea 


92 


Nereidae 


92 




Neridae 


84 


Nereis succinea 


72 


1976 


Mya arenaria 


180 


Balanus improvisus 


60 




Nereis succinea 


56 


(few taxa collected) 






Macoma balthica 


24 






1977 


Mya arenaria 


20 


Mya arenaria 


2380 




(few taxa collected) 




Macoma balthica 
Nereis succinea 
Mulinia lateralis 
Gemma gemma 


220 

100 

40 

20 



7-15 



Annual variability of Mq.i wn;; pronounced at the East Shore tran- 
sc^ct. It showed highest jiumbers at Long Wharf and East Shore after 
1973, reaching over 200()/in ' l:or three years in Octob(jr samplings. The 
high October abundances relative to spring, indicate a heavy spring/sum- 
mer settlement and overwinter mortality. This coincides with Mya spawn- 
ing in southern New England from May through November (Ropes and Stick- 
ney, 1965) . After a planktonic life of about three weeks the larvae 
settle on a wide range of sediment types and establish themselves as 
sessile filter feeders where they are preyed upon by birds, bottom fish, 
Limulus , larger polychaetes, and crabs (TRIGOM, 1973). Individuals 
normally establish burrows at about 25 cm and subsequently spawn (Dowe 
and Wallace, 1957) . Size data, as discussed above, indicate that Mya 
did not establish mature populations on the New Haven Harbor transects 
studied (Table 7-5) . Mya populations apparently recruit from some other 
area in New Haven Harbor or Long Island Sound. 

The gem clam (Gemma gemma) was the second most numerous bi- 
valve in New Haven Harbor intertidal samples. It was most abundant at 
Sandy Point where it occurred from 1971 through 1973 (Figure 7-2) . In 
1974 and 1975 Gemma was numerous only at Long Wharf. In 1976 and 1977 
it was found in low numbers at all stations . Gemma does not have a 
planktonic larval phase since the young are released from a brood as 
juveniles and settle in the immediate area inhabited by the adults 
(Sellmer, 1967). Because of this reproduction mode, dense, highly- 
localized colonies of Gemma tend to form. Brood release occurs about 
mid-Slimmer and juveniles may grow to 2 mm by late fall (TRIGOM, 1973) . 
If initial brood releases occur in mid-summer in New Haven, individual 
Gemma are probably too small in October to be retained on the 2 mm 
sieves used in this study. The populations of Gemma are probably sub- 
ject to the same predatory pressures as described for Mya. 

The macoma clam (Macoma balthica) was abundant at Sandy Point 
in 1971 and 1972 and at Long Wharf from 1973 to 1977 (Figure 7-2) . 
Macoma spawns in late spring after which its planktonic larvae live in 
the water column about a month before settlement. Adults have been 
reported to live up to 25 years, feeding on detritus and other sediment 



7-16 



surface food sources (TRIGOM, 1973) . Its predators are similar to those 
described for Mya and Ccjmina . 

These three dominant bivalves were found in greatest numbers 
and with the highest frequency of occurrence at Long Wharf Station. 
Bivalves were numerous at Sandy Point Station from 1971 through 1973 but 
subsequently declined. 

The only dominant gastropod, the mud snail (Ilyanassa obso- 
leta) , was almost exclusively found at Sandy Point. Its presence was 
highly variable over time (Figure 7-2). In two years, 1972 and 1977, 
they were scarce or absent. By contrast, they were especially numerous 
from 1974 through 1976. Sediment changes that enhanced the s\ibstrate 
for occupation by Ilyanassa and discouraged the settlement of bivalves 
may have occurred at that station in 1972-1974. According to Jenner 
(1957) , however, variable distributions are common. Reproduction of 
this deposit feeder (Scheltema, 1964) occurs in the sizmmer when females 
deposit encapsulated eggs on a hard substrate where the embryos develop 
until hatching — usually (depending on temperature) within a month. 
Released larvae have a planktonic stage and eventually settle and meta- 
morphose (Scheltema, 1967) . It is probable that the proximity of a rock 
jetty to the transect and the s\ibstrate it offers for egg capsule depo- 
sition is a factor influencing the occurrence of this gastropod on the 
Sandy Point transect. 

The sandworm, {Nereis succinea) , the most-common large poly- 
chaete in New Haven Harbor, is also considered to be the most ubiquitous 
polychaete in Long Island Sound intertidal areas (Sibley and Sibley, 
1969) . Nereis was common in most years at all stations, especially in 
October. May population abundances at East Shore were low in all years, 
and at Sandy Point and Long Wharf relatively high abundances during the 
period 1971-1973 decreased from 1974 through 1977 (Figure 7-3) . Nereis 
succinea breeds in the water column by swarming in the evenings during 
summer months. Its larvae are planktonic and mature to deposit-feeding 
adults. Wass (1967) included Nereis succinea as one of a number of 



7-17 



pollution tolerant polychaetes. It was also one of two taxa which 
survived a summer exposed directly to a power-plant thermal effluent in 
York River, Virginia (Wariner and Brehmer, 1965) , and was one of the few 
species collected in the discharge canal of LILCO's Northport Power 
Plant (Hechtel, 1970). 

In addition to N. succinea, Capitellid worms (predominantly 
Capitella capitata) and Spionid worms (primarily Polydora sp. ) were the 
other polychaetes which were abundant in New Haven Harbor. Cunningham 
(1972) reported Capitella capitata as the only capitellid he collected 
at Long Wharf; he also reported both Polydora sp. and Streblospio bene- 
dict! to be numerous spionids at his stations on the Long Wharf flat, 
especially in summer months. These taxa may have been more numerous but 
because of their size were not retained on the 2-mm mesh sieve used in 
the UI program. Cunningham used 0.25 and 0.5-mm mesh sieves. Capi- 
tellidae were absent at all New Haven stations during some sampling 
periods (Figure 7-3) . When they were present, they were most numerous 
in May. Spionidae also exhibited highly variable distributions and . 
densities (Figure 7-3) . They were abundant only in October 1974 and 
1975 at Long Wharf. Capitellids and Spionids have been rare at New 
Haven stations since May 1976. Both taxa are deposit feeders with 
planktonic larval stages. Wass (1967) and Daro and Polk (1973) both 
include Capitella capitata and Polydora sp. as pollution tolerant spe- 
cies. 

Barnacles {Balanus improvisus) were the only abundant crus- 
taceans collected. Because they settle on hard substrates, their pop- 
ulation fluctuations were not accurately reflected in this sampling 
program; rather, Balanus abundances reflected chance collections of 
rocks with the infaunal samples. However, over time its relative 
distribution at the stations can be monitored. Naupliar, and cirripede 
larvae were numerous in summer plankton samples (Section 4.0) and 
barnacles were commonly found on any exposed shell, wood, or rock 
located within a sample area. Balanus improvisus was commonly collected 
at all stations in October but did not seem to overwinter well (Figure 
7-4). 



7-18 



00 
CO 



O 



00 

UJ 
Q 



300- 



200- 



100- 



I 






Nerezs succinea 



A §;a So 

EAST LONG SANDY 
SHORE WHARF POINT 



OPEN SYMBOLS REPRESENT SPECIES ABSENCE 
CLOSED SYMBOL REPRESENTS SPECIES 
COLLECTED IN LOW DENSITIES 



^ ^ 



lAD» Aitj 






I .. 



1971 



1972 



A^O AD* A?^* A$:n. C\»» 



60 
40- 
20 



1973 1974 
MAY 



1975 



1976 1977 



200 



100 



ADO 




J 



^ K^ A. S 



1971 1972 1973 1974 1975 

OCTOBER 



1976 1977 



■—I 

■zz 

<: 

a: 

O 80i 

6CH 

E 40 

■Z. 20- 

UJ 

Q 



1971 



1971 



Spionidae 



ADO AD/v ADO A. 



AD 




ADO 



1972 1973 



1974 
MAY 



1972 



J 



1975 



I 



1976 1977 



ADO A$?m Bdk h^ a^ ado Ago 



1973 1974 1975 
OCTOBER 



1976 1977 



00 

CO 



■a: 

CD 

o 



00 



Capitellidae 



100- 
80- 
60- 
40- 
20- 



ADO ADO ADO 




300- 



^ 200- 

oo 

00 100 



1971 



1972 1973 



1974 
MAY 



apS a$:;o 



1975 1976 1977 



40-1 
20' 

q Iado ado 

1971 1972 



o 

>. 200- 



100- 



ADO 



1971 



J 



PS ADO BdO ADW A^>» 
1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 
OCTOBER 



ADO 



1971 



Nereis spp. 



^ 



_A^ 



1972 1973 



^ AD* A 



1974 
MAY 



DO Ax>0 ADO 



1975 1976 1977 



1972 



ADO A^« ADO ADO ADO 



1973 1974 1975 
OCTOBER 



1976 1977 



Figure 7-3. Population densities of dominant polychaete taxa, Nereis 
suooinea, Spionidae, Capitellidae and Nereis spp., by 
station at Intertidal Areas in New Haven Harbor 1971 
through 1977. New Haven Harbor Ecological Studies 
-Summary Report, 1979, 



7-19 



I 






OPEN SYMBOLS REPRESENT SPECIES ABSENCE 
CLOSED SYMBOL REPRESENTS SPECIES 
Q COLLECTED IN LOW DENSITIES 









EAST LONG SANDY 












SHORE WHARF POINT 








2: 


100-1 


Balanus improvisus 




1 — 1 


0- 
200- 


ADO 


AQO 


ADO ADO 


ADO 


ADO 


AD^ 





1971 


1972 


1973 1974 
MAY 


1975 


1976 


1977 


>- 
1— 
I— t 
00 


100- 


ADO 


n« 


ii y 


ADO 


aIs 


Ido 






1971 


1972 


1973 1974 
OCTOBER 


1975 


1976 


1977 



00 

00 



CD 

o 



>- 

I— 

I — \ 

00 

LU 
Q 



lOOn 



L-imulus polyphemus 

*EGGS COLLECTED IN SAMPLES 



ADO ADO ADO* ^DO ADO A«0 ADO 



300 



200 




1971 



1972 



1973 1974 1975 
OCTOBER 



1976 1977 



Figure 7-4. Population densities of dominant arthropods, Balanus 
improvisus and Limulus polyphemus by station at 
intertidal areas in New Haven Harbor, 1971 through 
1977. New Haven Harbor Ecological Studies 
Summary Report, 1979.. 



7-20 



The horseshoe crab {Limulus polyphemus) , was abundant during 
October samplings at East Shore station (Figure 7-4) in three of seven 
years studied. Reproduction has been reported to occur in May in this 
area (TRICiOM, 1973) . Female crabs deposit their eggs in intertidal 
sediments where they are fertilized by the males. Limulus has no 
planktonic stage; eggs develop and hatch as juveniles. Both eggs and 
juveniles were commonly collected at East Shore. Juveniles and adults 
prey upon invertebrates such as bivalves and polychaetes in the shallow 
sediments (Shuster, 1950) . 

In summary, the fauna at intertidal stations studied in New 
Haven Harbor had lower species richness and greater variability within 
the harbor (i.e., Long Wharf and East Shore Stations) than in the outer 
harbor (i.e., Sandy Point). The taxa that characterized this habitat 
are ubiquitous in Long Island Sound and also tend to be those found in 
polluted environments elsewhere on the east coast. Many of these taxa, 
except for Limulus polyphemus , Ilyanassa obsoleta, and polychaetes, are 
sessile infaunal organisms that settle predominantly in summer. Over- 
winter survival was higher at Sandy Point than at inner harbor stations , 
as discussed. Variability from year to year in population densities was 
highly erratic, but this is normal for prolific taxa with pelagic larvae 
even in unaltered environments (NAI, 1977a, 1977b). 



COMPARISON OF NEW HAVEN HARBOR WITH OTHER LONG ISLAND SOUND SITES 

Dominant intertidal faiinal components in New Haven Harbor were 
similar to those described independently in the same (Cunningham, 1972) 
and in other nearby urbanized estuaries. Cunningham examined the Long 
Wharf intertidal areas from 1971 to 1974 and described a faunal commu- 
nity similar to that described by NAI. Using smaller mesh sizes for 
sieves, he collected greater numbers of spionids, oligochaetes , and 
polychaetes {Eteone heteropoda) than were collected by our sampling 
techniques. Our study indicated greater Mya density than Cunningham 
estimated. These differing results for Mya indicate high spatial 



7-21 



heterogeneity in the fauna of the expansive Long Wharf intertidal flat. 
At Norwalk, Connecticut, Gemma gemma, Ilyanassa obsoleta , Mya arenaria , 
and Scoloplos acutus were most numerous (NAI, 1974) . At Stamford Harbor 
the most numerous fauna were Mya arenaria , Ilyanassa obsoleta , Nereis 
succinea, and Spionidae (NAI, 1974). A Bridgeport Harbor study (NAI, 
1973) indicated that Nereis arenaceodonta , Scolecolepides viridis , 
and Spio setosa were the most ubiquitous of the polychaetes, that the 
wide-ranging molluscs were Ilyanassa obsoleta, Mya arenaria and Gemma 
gemma, and that Limulus polyphemus was the most prevalent arthropod. 

Other community parameters, such as seasonal species richness 
and abundance were variable between New Haven Harbor and other areas. 
In the current New Haven study, species richness and abundances were 
generally greatest in the October sample period, due to spring and 
summer recruitment. Cunningham's data also indicated high summer abun- 
dances in 1972 and; 1973. At Stamford (NAI, 1974) sampling in July and Octo- 
ber showed that samples taken in August 1971 and January, February, March 
and May of 1972 at low and mid-intertidal stations in Bridgeport yielded 
maximum summer species richness, but abundances were greatest in the 
winter, due to high year-round populations of polychaetes and bivalves 
(NAI, 1973) . 



ANALYSIS OF IMPACT 

The purpose of the seven-year monitoring program was to detect 
any direct or indirect impacts of the United Illuminating Company gener- 
ating station on the fauna of New Haven Harbor. The condenser-cooling 
system of New Haven Harbor Station is a potential source of impact on 
the intertidal fauna of the harbor. In general, the use of estuarine 
and oceanic water in power station cooling systems has resulted in high 
rates of invertebrate and fish larval mortalities for those entrained 
(Enright, 1977). However, Enright (1977) suggested that, due to high natu- 
ral excesses of larvae produced, larval mortality from entrainment may not 

significantly influence adult settling populations. 



7-22 



The New Haven Harbor Station condenser-cooling water system 
takes in ambient temperature water and discharges effluent at 15 °F above 
ambient (NAI, 197Gb). Maximiim plume temperature is reduced to 4°F above 
ambient at the surface in the immediate area of discharge (Section 3.0). 
No intertidal areas are directly impinged by the thermal effluent, 
according to isotherms plotted from infrared overflight data and temp- 
erature and dye studies (Section 3.0). It is possible that the East 
Shore transect could be minimally impinged under special wind and tide 
conditions, as it falls within the area of hydrographic Stations 8 and 9 
which could be affected by a 0.9 to 1.8°P (0.5 to l.OC) increase (Section 
3.0). However, planktonic larvae that are vital to maintenance and 
repopulation of intertidal areas might be moved some distance by the 
plume momentum or they might be stressed by contact with the pl\ime, in 
either case altering settlement. Furthermore, the entrainment of eggs 
or pelagic larvae of intertidal community members could result in mor- 
tality or sublethal effects. 

Indirect effects which thermal effluents may have on inter- 
tidal populations are numerous. Due to effluent discharge currents, 
changes may occur in circulation which promote erosion or increased 
sedimentation of an intertidal area. Food sources may be depleted if 
plankton abundance, a primary component in the diet of intertidal 
filter feeders, is reduced by entrainment; conversely, food could become 
more available as detritus due to entrainment mortality. Changes in 
predatory pressure may result from shifts in distribution and behavior 
of predators due to increased local temperatures. In New Haven Harbor, 
which already receives a variety of industrial and municipal wastes, 
heated effluents might encourage synergistic effects and therefore 
increase the toxicity of pollutants (Nay lor, 1965) . Preoperational dis- 
solved oxygen concentrations in the harbor have been dociamented to be 
extremely low in the summer. This is unrelated to station operation and 
probably represents natural summer conditions of low dissolved oxygen 
solubility (Section 3.0). Thus n\amerous mechanisms exist which could 
affect the intertidal faunal composition of New Haven Harbor. These 
effects, whether positive or negative, could be manifested in sudden 



7-23 



changes in faunal composition and densities or they might occur slowly, 
detectable only by long-term monitoring. Either type of change would be 
masked by natural varial)iiiLy in the community and biological cycles 
affecting populations. 

The intertidal fauna data collected at the three stations in 
New Haven Harbor were examined for evidence of thermal impact resulting 
from operation of the New Haven Harbor Station. A qualitative com- 
parison of mean numbers of taxa (Table 7-3) indicates that species 
richness did not change substantially after operation began. A similar 
comparison of total numbers of organisms (Table 7-3) indicates that mean 
densities found at East Shore and Sandy Point during operational years 
were either similar or had increased over preoperational years. At Long 
Wharf, reduction in numbers is attributable to large natural variations 
in Mya densities. 

Analysis of changes by sampling period showed considerable 
variability. Of particular interest were declines in faunal distri- 
bution and densities detected by October 1976 samples at the inner 
harbor stations. Long Wharf and East Shore. A similar depression was 
noted in the subtidal benthic populations of the inner harbor in an 
August 1976 sampling by Rhoads and Michael (1977) . They believed that 
low levels of dissolved oxygen were responsible for observed die-offs. 
Low dissolved oxygen concentrations may also have caused the 1976 inter- 
tidal mortality. Because dissolved oxygen levels are not close to 
saturation values during the summer, plant operations do not further 
reduce concentrations (Section 3.0). October reductions in species 
richness and organism density were not observed in 1977, indicating that 
the die-off observed in 1976 was not a persistent summer phenomenon in 
New Haven Harbor. 

Occurrences of dominant species over time are summarized in 
Tables 7-2 to 7-4 and by comparison of preperational and operational 
periods in Tables 7-9 and 7-10. The results show that dominant fauna 
collected in preoperational samples were generally found at similar or 



7-24 



TABLE 7-9, 



THE f'lOST ABUNDANT TAXA COLLECTED AT INTERTIDAL STATIONS 

DURING OPERATIONAL YEARS (1971 THROUGH MAY 1975) AND ■ 
DUKING YEARS (OCTOBER 1975 THROUGH 1977). NEW HAVEN 
HARBOR ECOLOGICAL STUDIES SUMMARY REPORT, 1979. 



PREOPERATIONAL 

Afya arenaria 
Balanus improvisus 
Limulus polyphemus 
Capitellidae 
Nereis succinea 
Nereis spp. 



PREOPERATIONAL 

Afya arenaria 
Nereis spp. 
Pol ydora sp . 
Nereis succinea 
Gemma gemma 
Ilyanassa obsoleta 
Macoma balthica 



#/m 



l<l 


EAST 


SHORE 








OPERATIONAL 


319 


* 




Mya arenaria 


40 






Limulus polyphemus 


32 






Nereis succinea 


20 






Scoloplos sp. 


20 






Balanus improvisus 


11 








o 


LONG 


WHARF 




c. 






OPERATIONAL 


682 






My a arenaria 


128 






Gemma gemma 


107 






Macoma balthica 


83 






Nereis succinea 


54 






Ilyanassa obsoleta 


20 








16 









728 
94 
42 
41 
16 



624 
66 
62 
49 
24 



PREOPERATIONAL 

Gemma gemma 
Ilyanassa obsoleta 
Cirratulidae 
Mya arenaria 
Nereis spp. 
Nereis succinea 
Balanus improvisus 
Macoma balthica 
Spionidae 



m' 


SANDY 


POINT 




#/m^ 






OPERATIONAL 


382 






Ilyanassa obsoleta 


427 


306 






Spio filicornis 


384 


52 






Cirratulidae 


144 


38 






Scoloplos robustus** 


105 


37 






Scolecolepides viridis 


** 103 


29 






Pectinaria gouldii 


34 


23 






Balanus improvisus 


20 


16 






Spionidae 


17 


10 






Nereis succinea 


15 



Represents the mean of all observed densities 
converted to #/in . 



** All individuals were collected in one sampling period. 



7-2f 



TABLE 7-10. FAUNAL DOMINANCE BASED ON PERCENT OCCURRENCE IN ALL SAMPLE SETS 

FOR EACH INTERTIDAL STATION DURING PREOPERATIONAL AND OPERATIONAL 
SAMPLING PERIODS. NEW HAVEN HARBOR ECOLOGICAL STUDIES 
SUMMARY REPORT, 1979 



PREOPERATIONAL 



Nereis succinea 
Mya arenaria 
Gemma gemma 
Ilyanassa obsoleta 
Balanus improvisus 
Capitallidae 



PREOPERATIONAL 

Ilyanassa obsoleta 
Gemma gemma 
Mya arenaria 
Nereis spp. 
Nereis succinea 
Spionidae 
Macoma bait hie a 
Gl ycera spp . 



PREOPERATIONAL 

Mya arenaria 
Nereis spp. 
Nereis succinea 
Gemma gemma 
Macoma balthica 
Eteone spp . 



EAST SHORE 


OPERATIONAL^ 




% 


% 


78 


Mya arenaria 


80 


67 


Limulus polyphemus 


60 


44 


Balanus improvisus 


40 


33 


Nereis succinea 


40 


33 


Oligochaetes 


40 


33 






LONG WHARF 

% 


OPERATIONAL 


% 


78 


Nereis succinea 


100 


78 


Mya arenaria 


100 


78 


Ilyanassa obsoleta 


60 


78 


Gemma gemma 


60 


78 


Ma coma bait hi ca 


60 


56 


Limulus polyphemus 


60 


44 






44 






SANDY POINT 

% 


OPERATIONAL 


% 


89 


Nereis succinea 


80 


78 


Tellina agilis 


60 


67 


Mya arenaria 


40 


56 


Ilyanassa obsoleta 


40 


44 


Capitella capita ta 


40 


44 







Preoperational period 1971-1975 (27 sample sets 

transect) 



9 samplings at each 



"Operational period 1975-1977 (15 sample sets - 5 samplings at each 

transect) 



7-26 



increased densities during plant operation. The Sandy Point station, 
closest to the outer harbor, was the most variable between preopera- 
tional and operational periods . Gemma gemma was numerous in preoper- 
ational years at Sandy Point but from mid-1975 onward was not commonly 
found. Also there were three polychaetes, Spio filicornis , Scoleco- 
lepides viridis , and Scoloplos robustus which were not abundant in pre- 
operational years but were collected in abundance during at least one 
sample period after operation began. Preoperational and operational 
frequency of occurrence by station is shown in Table 7-10. Most dom- 
inant species had similar values during preoperational and operational 
periods. Major changes at East Shore were drops in Nereis succinia and 
Gemma gemma frequency; N. succinea remained high at other stations. The 
decrease of Nereis is probably attributable to its high spatial hetero- 
geneity compounded by the small number of sample sets from which values 

were calculated. In the preoperational period. Gemma gemma was present 

2 
in abundances of less than 40/m at East Shore when present. Its rank- 
ing as a dominant is due to high preoperational numbers at Sandy Point. 
The operational period decrease at Sandy Point may indicate a harbor- 
wide decrease in Gemma populations which would not be likely to be 
related to station operation. 

Gemma gemma was the only dominant species that showed a 
population change coincident with plant operation. Gemma populations 
declined at Sandy Point in May 1975 and at Long Wharf in October 1975, 
just prior to and after commencement of operations. Other bivalves, Mya 
arenaria and Macoma balthica, were scarce in October 1976 and May 1977 
as discussed above, but by October 1977 densities had increased to 
previous levels. Gemma, which does not have a pelagic larval stage, 
must rely on successful local populations to reestablish itself. It may 
also have been a victim of a summer die-off. 

None of the fluctuations in distribution and abundance in New 
Haven Harbor were suggestive of operational impact of New Haven Harbor 
Station on the intertidal fauna. The dominant taxa collected in the 
New Haven Harbor intertidal zone are characteristic of opportunistic species 



7-27 



as defined by Grassle and Grassle (1974) in that they utilize an unpre- 
dictable environment, by increasing rapidly to early maturing indivi- 
duals which exist in dense populations. Consequently, either New Haven 
Harbor or Long Island Sound populations of these ubiquitous species 
should continue to provide larval populations to inhabit the New Haven 
intertidal areas each year. Unless new severe stresses occur in the 
Harbor, it appears that intertidal areas will continue to offer the same 
resources to tolerant colonists and subsequent foragers and predators 
with little or no consequence from operation of the New Haven Harbor 
Station. 



SUMMARY 

A total of 90 invertebrate taxa were collected from the inter- 
tidal area of New Haven Harbor over the seven-year sampling period. 
Dominant taxa were Mya arenaria. Nereis succinea , Nereis spp. , Gemma 
gemma, Ilyanassa obsoleta, Macoma balthica, Balanus improvisus, Spioni- 
dae, Limulus polyphemus , and Capitellidae. Seasonal trends of increased 
species richness and abundance in October relative to May were apparent 
in most years. Greatest species richness and lowest annual variation 
occurred at Sandy Point: these parameters were reversed at East Shore. 
Except for the somewhat reduced faunal richness at inner harbor stations 
in 1976 (which subsequently increased) , there were no events that sug- 
gested impact by plant operations. Hydrographic data show minimal, if 
any, impingement of the thermal plume on intertidal areas (Section 3.0). 



7-28 



7.0 LITERATURE CITED 



Aiiqor, K. 197S. On the influence of sewage pollution on inshore benthic 
communities in South Kiel Bay. Part 2: Quantitative studies on 
community structure. Helgolander Wiss. Meeresunter. 27:408-438. 

Caspers, H. 1967. Estuaries: analysis of definitions and biological 

considerations, pp. 6-8 IN: Estuaries (ed.). G. H. Lauff. Publ. 
No. 83. AAAS, Washington, D.C. 

Connell, J. H. 1961. The influence of interspecific competition and 

other factors on the distribution of the barnacle Cthamalus stellatus . 
Ecology, 42:710-723. 

Connecticut State Department of Environmental Protection. 1977. Connecti- 
cut Water Quality Standards and Classifications. 

Cunningham. Unpublished report: Long Wharf flats. 

Daro, M. H. and P. Polk. 1973. The autecology of Polydora ciliata along 
the Belgian Coast. Neth. J. Sea Res. 6:130-140. 

Dayton, P. K. 1971. Competition, disturbance and community organization: 
the provision and subsequent utilization of space in a rocky inter- 
tidal community. Ecol. Monogr. 41:351-389. 

Dowe, R. L. and D. E. Wallace. 1957. The Maine Clam: Mya arenaria. 
Maine Department of Seas and Shore Fisheries Bull. 

Enright, j. t. 1977. Power plants and plankton. Marine Pollution Bull. 
8(7) :158-163. 

Grassle, J. F. and J. P. Grassle. 1974. Opportunistic life histories of 
genetic systems in marine benthic polychaetes. J. Mar. Res. 32:253- 
284. 

Hechtel, G. J. 1970. Biological effects of thermal effluents, Northport, 
New York. Part I: Intertidal benthic invertebrates. Mar. Sci. Res. 
Cent., Stonybrook, Tech. Rep., p. 1-52. 

Jenner, C. E. 1957. Schooling behavior in mud snails in Barnstable 

Harbor leading to the formation of massive aggregations in a popula- 
tion of Nassarius obsoletus . Biol. Bull. 113:328-329. 

Nay lor, E. 1965. Biological effects of a heated effluent in docks at 
Swansea, South Wales. Zoo. Soc. Lond. Proc. 144:253-268. 

Newcombe, C. L. 1935. Growth of Mya arenaria in the Bay of Fundy region. 
Can. Jour, of Res. Vol. 13, Sec. D(6) :97-135. 



7-29 



Normandeau Associates, Inc. 1971. Ecological considerations of the 

Coke Works Site, New Haven Harbor, Connecticut. Prepared for The 
United Illuminating Company, New Haven, Connecticut. 64 pp. 

• 1973a. New Haven Harbor Ecological Studies, New Haven, 



Connecticut. Annual Report, 1971-1972 for The United Illuminating 
Company, New Haven, Connecticut. 208 pp. 

1973b. Bridgeport Harbor Ecological Studies 1971-1972. Bio- 



logical and Hydrographic Reports. Prepared for The United Illumin- 
ating Company. 196 pp. 

• 1974a. Coke Works Ecological Monitoring Studies, New Haven 



Harbor, Connecticut. Annual Report, 1972-1973 for The United 
Illuminating Company, New Haven, Connecticut. 215 pp. 

. 1974b. Coke Works Ecological Monitoring Studies, New Haven 



Harbor, Connecticut. Interim Report, May-December 1973 for The 
United Illuminating Company, New Haven, Connecticut. 199 pp. 

1974c. Stamford Harbor Ecological Studies , Final Report 



1971-1973. Prepared for Northeast Utilities Service Company. 
159 pp. 

. 1974d. Studies of Village Creek and other estuaries in the 



Norwalk, Connecticut area, August-October 1972. Prepared for the 
Connecticut Light and Power Company. 97 pp. 

• 1975. New Haven Harbor Station Ecological Monitoring 



Studies, New Haven Harbor, Connecticut. Annual Report 1974 for The 
United Illuminating Company, New Haven, Connecticut. 223 pp. 

. 1976. New Haven Harbor Station Ecological Monitoring 



Studies, New Haven Harbor, Connecticut. Annual Report 1975 for The 
United Illuminating Company, New Haven, Connecticut. 213 pp. 

1977. New Haven Harbor Station Ecological Monitoring 



Studies, New Haven Harbor, Connecticut. Annual Report 1976 for The 
United Illuminating Company, New Haven, Connecticut. 376 pp. 

. 1978. New Haven Harbor Ecological Monitoring Studies, New 



Haven Harbor, Connecticut. Annual Report 1977 for The United 
Illiominating Company, New Haven, Connecticut. 359 pp. 

Paine, R. T. 1966. Food web complexity and species diversity. Amer. 
Natur. 100:65-75. 

Ropes, J. W. and A. P. Stickney. 1965. Reproductive cycle of Mya are- 
naria in New England. Biol. Bull. 128 (2) : 315-327. 

Selmer, G. P. 1967. Functional morphology and ecological life history 
of the gem clam. Gemma gemma. Malacologia. 5:137-223. 



7-30 



Shuster, C. N. 1950. Observations on the natural history of the Amer- 
ican horseshoe crab, Limulus polyphemus . Third report on investi- 
gations of methods of improving the shellfish resources of Massa- 
chusetts, Contr. No. 564 WHOI. 18-23. 

Sibley, B. and D. Sibley. 1969. The intertidal invertebrates of Leetes 
Island and the Thimble Island region of Connecticut. Unpublished. 
56 pp. 

TRIGOM-PARC . 1974. A socioeconomic and environmental inventory of the 
North Atlantic region. Prepared for Bureau of Land Management, 
Marine Minerals Division. 8 volumes. South Portland, Maine. 

Warriner, J. E. and M. L. Brehmer. 1966. The effects of thermal efflu- 
ents on marine organisms. Air and Water Poll. 10:277-289. 

Wass, M. L. 1967. Biological and physiological basis of indicator 

organisms and communities. Section II: Indications of pollution, 
pp. 271-283 IN Pollution and Marine Ecology. T. A. Olson and F. J. 
Burgers. Interscience Publishers, New York. 



NEW HAVEN HARBOR 

ECOLOGICAL STUDIES 

SUMMARY REPORT, 1979 



8.0 EPIBENTHIC INVERTEBRATES 

by Paul F. Ferreira, Jr., Kenneth A. Simon and Andrew J. McCusker 

Normandeau Associates, Inc. 
Bedford, N. H. 



TABLE OF CONTENTS 



PAGE 



INTWDUCTION 8-1 

METHODS 8-1 

CHARACTERIZATION OF NEW HAVEN HARBOR EPIBENTHIC INVERTEBRATE 

COMMUNITY 8-6 

Selected Species 8-13 

ANALYSIS OF IMPACT 8-26 

LITERATURE CITED 8-46 



LIST OF FIGURES 



PAGE 

8-1. Epibenthic (otter trawl) samples collected through 

October 1977 8=2_ 

8-2. Monthly abundance of Cvangon septemspinosa collected 
in lO-minute epibenthic trawls from Stations 5, 8, 
11, 13, 19 and 20, January 1974 through October 1977 . . 8-16 

8-3. Percent of Crangon collected per size category in 
New Haven Harbor during various times of the year, 
from July 1976 through October 1977 8-18 

8-4. Monthly abundance of Asterias forbesi collected in 
10-minute epibenthic trawls from Stations 5, 8, 11, 
13, 19 and 20, January 1974 through October 1977 . . . . 8-22 

8-5. Monthly abundance of Cancer ivvovatus collected in 
10-minute epibenthic trawls from Stations 5, 8, 11, 
13, 19 and 20, January 1974 through October 1977 .... 8-25 

8-6. Distribution of Cancev irroratus by season in New 

Haven Harbor from 197-^ through 1977 8-26 

8-7. Monthly abundance of Ovalipes ocellatuc, collected 

in 10-minute epibenthic trawls from Stations 5, 8, 11, 

13, 19 and 20, January 1974 through October 1977 .... 8-30 

8-8. Monthly abundance of Homopus amerioanus collected in 

10-minute epibenthic trawls from Stations 5, 8, 11, 13, 

19 and 20, January 1974 through October 1977 8-32 

8-9. Monthly abundance of Squilla empusa collected in 

10-minute epibenthic trawls from Stations 5, 8, 11, 13, 

19 and 20, January 1974 through October 1977 3-35 



n 



LIST OF TABLES 



PAGE 

8-1. INVERTEBRATE FAUNA COLLECTED FROM EPIBEMTHIC TRAWLS 

IN NEW HAVEN HARBOR, MAY 1971 THROUGH OCTOBER 1977. . . . 8-7 

8-2. TOTAL ANNUAL ABUNDANCE, RANK OF ABUNDANCE AND 

EPIBENTHIC SPECIES RICHNESS BY STATION FROM JANUARY 

1974 THROUGH OCTOBER 1977 8-9 

8-3. ANNUAL ABUNDANCE BY STATION AND STATION RANK BY 

YEAR FOR THE TWELVE MOST COMMON EPIBENTHIC INVER- 
TEBRATES, JANUARY 1974 THROUGH OCTOBER 1977 8-12 

8-4. RANK OF ABUNDANCE AND PERCENT OF TOTAL CATCH 

FOR SELECTED EPIBENTHIC SPECIES, 1974 THROUGH 1977. . . . 8-14 

8-5. MEAN NUMBER OF EPIBENTHIC INVERTEBRATES IMPINGED 

PER 24 HOURS, MONTHLY, ON TRAVELING SCREENS OF THE 

NEW HAVEN HARBOR STATION COOLING WATER INTAKE SYSTEM. . . 8-44 



m 



8.0 EPIBENTHIC INVERTEBRATES 

by Paul Ferreira, Jr., Kenneth Simon and Andrew fIcCusker 

Normandeau Associates, Inc. 

Bedford, N. H. 



INTRODUCTION 

Analysis of the invertebrate fauna collected as part of the 
demersal finfish trawling program supplied information on a segment of 
the benthic community that was not sampled in other monitoring programs. 
The mobility and relatively large size of most epibenthic invertebrate 
species are the prime reasons why they were not collected by other 
benthic sampling methods. Due in a large part to their mobility, 
epibenthic species sampled by trawling can be characterized by consider- 
able spatial and temporal variability. Changes in distribution can, 
however, be related to seasonal movements, avoidance of environmental 
perturbations or stressful conditions, or attraction to a particular 
event or area. Monitoring of epibenthic species populations provides a 
data base to aid in detecting any major distributional or abundance 
changes that could be related to the New Haven Harbor Station operation. 

This report provides a comprehensive description of the New 
Haven Harbor epibenthic invertebrate community and assesses the impact 
of operation of the New Haven Harbor Station based on a review of all 
information available from the NHHSEMS data base. Six of the most 
commonly encountered invertebrate species are discussed in detail. 



METHODS 

Epibenthic sampling, designed for evaluation of epibenthic in- 
vertebrates and demersal fish populations , was conducted monthly at 
Stations 5, 8, 11, 13, 19 and 20 (Figure 8-1). Station 5, located at 
the shoal area midway between Long Wharf and the City Point sewer outfall, 
was established to supply data concerning the inner harbor epifaunal 



8-1 



8-2 



Epibenthic (Otter Trawl) 
Sampling Stations 







J F 


M 


A 


M 


J 


J 


A S 


N 


D 


OO 


5 








X 


X 


X 


X 


X X 


X 


^ 


8 








X 


X 


X 


X X 


X X 


X 


Ol ^ 


13 








X 


X 


X 


X 


X 


X 


1— 


19 










X 


X 


X X 


X X 


X 


CyO 


20 








X 


X 


X 


X X 


X X 


X 






J F 


M 


A 


M 


J 


J 


A S 


N 


D 


1/1 


5 


X 






X 


X 


X 




X 




^A 


8 


X X 


X 


X 


X 


X 


X 


X X 


X X 


X 


Ch ^_ 


13 


X X 


X 


X 


X 




X 


X X 


X X 


X 


1— 


19 


X X 


X 


X 


X 




X 


X 


X X 


X 


t/1 


20 


X X 


X 


X 


X 


X 


X 


X X 


X X 


X 






J F 


M 


A 


M 


J 


J 


A S 


N 


D 




S 


X X 


X 


X 


X 


X 


X 


X X 


X X 


X 




8 
13 


X X 
X X 


X 
X 


X 


X 
X 


X 
X 


X 
X 


X 
X X 


X 
X X 


X 
X 




19 


X X 


X 


X 


X 


X 


X 


X X 


X X 


X 


OO 


20 


X X 


X 


X 


X 


X 


X 


X X 


X X 


X 






J F 


M 


A 


M 


J 


J 


A S 


N 


D 


C/) 


5 


X X 


X 


X 


X 


X 


X 


X X 


X X 


X 




8 




X 


X 


X 


X 


X 


X X 


X X 


X 


tn I— 


13 


X X 


X 


X 


X 


X 


X 


X X 


X X 


X 


I— 


19 


X X 


X 


X 


X 


X 


X 


X X 


X X 


X 


00 


20 


X X 


X 


X 


X 


X 


X 


X X 


X X 


X 






X X 


X 


X 


X 


X 


X 


X X 


X X 


X 






J F 


M 


A 


M 


J 


J 


A S 


N 


D 




5 


X X 


X 


X 


X 


X 


X 


X X 


X X 


X 


z: 


8 


X X 


X 


X 


X 


X 


X 


X X 


X X 


X 


Ln o 

1^ !-• 


n 








X 


X 


X 


X X 


X X 


X 


^5 


13 


X X 


X 


X 


X 


X 


X 


X X 


X X 


X 


1— 
1/1 


19 


X X 




X 


X 


X 


X 


X X 


X X 


X 




20 


X X 


X 


X 


X 


X 


X 


X X 


X X 


X 






J F 


M 


A 


M 


J 


J 


A S 


N 


D 




5 


X X 


X 


X 


X 


X 


X 


X X 


X X 


X 


z 


8 


X X 


X 


X 


X 


X 


X 


X X 


X X 


X 


kD O 

r-^ t— 1 


11 


X X 


X 


X 


X 


X 


X 


X X 


X X 


X 


Ol 1— 


13 


X X 


X 


X 


X 


X 


X 


X X 


X X 


X 


1/1 


19 


X X 


X 


X 


X 


X 


X 


X X 


X X 


X- 




20 


X X 


X 


X 


X 


X 


X 


X X 


X X 


X 




20 





J F M A M J J A S 


5 


xxxxxxxxx 


^ 8 


xxxxxxxxx 


1:^2 n 


xxxxxxxxx 


2:fe 13 


xxxxxxxxx 


U 19 


xxxxxxxxx 


20 


xxxxxxxxx 



Figure 8-1. Epibenthic (otter trawl) samples collected through October 

1977. New Haven Harbor Ecological Studies Summary Report, 1979. 



8-3 



assemblages . Located in the main channel directly off the New Haven 
Harbor Station site, Station 8 is most proximal to the New Haven Harbor 
Station thermal discharge and would be expected to have the greatest 
potential for experiencing direct effects of the discharge. Station 11, 
located in the main channel off Fort Hale Park and considered representa- 
tive of the middle-harbor area, was added to the epibenthic program in 
May 1975 to serve as a field control because of its similarities to 
Station 8 in terms of depth, bottom substrate, and water quality. The 
outer harbor stations, which would be expected to be least directly 
influenced by either the thermal plume or any general warming of the 
water, include the southern part of Morris Cove, Station 13; the shoal 
area off Savin Rock, Station 19; and the main channel outside the harbor 
breakwaters. Station 20. 

Sampling was conducted monthly from May 1971 through October 
1977 (Figure 8-1) . Due to severe ice-cover conditions in the harbor, 
January 1977 was the only month in which no sampling was conducted. 
Epibenthic collections were made using a 25-ft Marinovich semi-balloon 
otter trawl constructed with a 1-3/8-inch stretch-mesh body and wings, 
and fitted with a 1/4-inch "Ace" knotless cod-end liner. 

Several changes in sampling design were made during the 
monitoring program. Initially, single tows, 15 minutes in duration, at 
approximately 1-2 kn against the tide were taken at each station from 
May 1971 through December 1973. Tow duration was reduced to 10 minutes 
in January 1974. During May and June 1975 the single 10-minute tow was 
replaced by duplicate 5-minute tows in an attempt to upgrade the quality 
of sampling in the epibenthic invertebrate and demersal finfish program. 
Evaluation of May and June 1975 data led to a final design (used from 
July 1975 through October 1977) of duplicate 10-minute tows. In order 
to maintain consistency with preoperational data, analyses in this 
report are based on data from the first tow rather than a composite of 
both tows. Data from the second tow were used to subjectively confirm 

the reliability of data from the first tow. 

J 



8-4 



The fifteen-minute tows utilized through December 1973 repre- 
sent a considerably larger area sampled in comparison to the 10-minute 
tows utilized during the remainder of the program. For this reason data 
prior to 1974 cannot be used to make quantitative comparisons with the 
1974 through 1977 data base. It can, however, be used qualitatively in 
comparing spatial and temporal trends in species relative abundance. 
Data collected as part of the 5-minute duplicate tows utilized during 
May and June 1975 must also be viewed with caution; however, in this 
case, data from the duplicate tows were combined, thus approximating a 
single 10-minute tow. Data collected from the duplicate 10-minute 
trawls utilized July 1975 through October 1977 can be used to make 
quantitative comparisons with data obtained from single 10-minute trawls 
used January 1974 through April 1975 since only the first tow was used 
for data analyses . 

Organisms collected in the trawls were identified and counted 
in the field. In addition, beginning in July 1976, length and weight 
(wet) data were collected for several of the more important species. 
Crustaceans were weighed and sexed, and gravid females noted. Size 
measurements were taken as follows: crabs were measured for greatest 
carapace width; sand shrimp for total length; and lobsters for both 
total length and carapace length. Starfish were weighed and greatest 
diameter measured. 

When large numbers (several hundred individuals) of a species 
were collected, counts were based on a subsample of the total. The size 
of the subsample varied with the individual species; in general, 25 
individuals were used for a subsample and total count was estimated on 
the basis of the weight of the subsample compared to the total weight of 
the individuals. In the case of small, highly abundant species such as 
the sand shrimp, ten 100-ml subsamples were counted to arrive at the 
total estimated count. From July 1975 through October 1977, when dupli- 
cate 10-minute trawls were used, the contents of both tows were identi- 
fied and counted. At each station and sample period, length and weight 
data were collected for organisms in the first tow; organisms in the 



8-5 



second tow were measured only when composition of the tows were deter- 
mined subjectively to be dissimilar or if considerably fewer individuals 
of a given species wore collected in the first tow. 

Impinqement data collected by United Illuminating Company per- 
sonnel have been used to provide additional information on the epiben- 
thic community, particularly in terms of seasonal abundance patterns as 
well as a basis for consideration of the potential impact of the New 
Haven Harbor Station operation on the epibenthic community. Impingement 
data are presented as the average n\imber of organisms impinged per 24 
hours, monthly from August 1975 through October 1977. 

Data acquired as part of monitoring programs for other utili- 
ties in Long Island Sound have been used as a basis for comparison of 
New Haven Harbor with other Long Island Sound sites. The Stamford 
Harbor Ecological Studies (NAI, 1974) conducted for the Northeast 
Utilities Service Company supply epibenthic invertebrate data for 
Stamford Harbor from April 1971 through October 1973. The same otter 
trawl as was used in the New Haven program was utilized in Stamford, and 
tow duration (15 minutes) was the same as in the 1971 through 1973 
NHHSEMS (NAI, 1972, 1973, 1974) epibenthic sampling. Sampling was 
conducted monthly from April 1971 through December 1972 and bimonthly 
through October 1973. All months but January were sampled at least 
once. Monthly catch per unit effort as well as seasonal and annual 
averages for the seven most abundant invertebrate species is presented 
in the Stamford Harbor report. 

Epibenthic surveys at Shoreham and Port Jefferson, Long 
Island, are not directly comparable to NHHSEMS data because of the 
difference in sampling techniques. However, these data are useful in 
making qualitative comparisons of seasonal trends . Sampling was con- 
ducted using lobster pots and whelk traps at Shoreham; and lobster, crab 
and whelk pots, clam rakes, and bottom grabs at Port Jefferson. 

Impingement programs conducted in conjunction with monitoring 
programs for various Long Island Sound power plants provide information 



8-6 



on abundances, size and seasonality of impinged epibenthic inverte- 
brates. In addition to New Haven Harbor Station, impingement data are 
available for Millstone Nuclear Power Station, Waterford, Connecticut; 
Bridgeport Harbor Station, Bridgeport Harbor; Devon Station, Housatonic 
River; Middletown Station, Connecticut River; Montville Station, Thames 
River estuary; Norwalk Harbor Station, Norwalk Harbor; Northport Sta- 
tion, Northport, Long Island; Port Jefferson Station, Port Jefferson, 
Long Island and Glenwood Station, Glenwood, Long Island. Data from 
these stations have been used to qualify observations made in New Haven 
Harbor and they provide input into evaluation of seasonal movements of 
migratory species. 



CHARACTERIZATION OF NEW HAVEN HARBOR EPIBENTHIC INVERTEBRATE COMMUNITY 

During the course of the New Haven Harbor Station Ecological 
Monitoring Studies, 44 epibenthic invertebrate taxa were collected 
(Table 8-1) . Fourteen taxa were common to all years of the program (1971- 
1977) ; an additional six were encountered during all of the last five 
years of the study (1973-1977) (Table 8-1). The total nximber of epi- 
benthic taxa collected yearly did not vary s\abstantially. Maximum 
niombers of taxa were collected during 1972 (28 taxa) and 1977 (27 taxa) , 
while the least numbers were observed in 1975 and 1976 (24 taxa each 
year) (Table 8-1) . Largely as a result of variations in the abundance 
of Crangon, total annual abundance varied substantially from year to 
year. Highest annual abundances of all species were observed during 
1975 (114,000 individuals) and 1977 (112,000 individuals) while lowest 
abundances occurred during 1974 (56,000 individuals) and 1976 (76,000 
individuals) (Table 8-2) . The 1-3/8" mesh on the wings and body of the 
otter trawl is actually too large to effectively sample Crangon. By 
comparison of duplicate tows, however, it can be seen that reasonably 
comparable numbers are collected and therefore Crangon abundance esti- 
mates are included. 

The distribution of epibenthic invertebrates in New Haven 
Harbor is governed by a number of factors, including: sediment type, 



8-7 



TABLE 8-1. INVERTEBRATE FAUNA COLLECTED FROM EPIBENTHIC TRAWLS IN 
NEW HAVEN HARBOR, MAY 1971 THROUGH OCTOBER 1977 NEW 
HAVEN HARBOR ECOLOGICAL STUDIES SUMMARY REPORT, 1979. 





MAY-DEC 


JAN-DEC 


JAN-DEC 


JAN-DEC 


JAN -DEC 


JAN-DEC 


FEB-OCT 


SPECIES 


1971 


1972 


1973 


1974 


1975 


1976 


1977 


Aeguipecten irradians 


X 














'Anemone unidentified 


X 


- 












Arbacia punctulata 




X 












*AstaTte undata 














X 


Asterias forbesi 


X 


X 


X 


X 


X 


X 


X 


Asterias vulgaris 


X 














Asterias sp. 


X 


X 


X 










^Astrangia danae 














X 


*Balanus balanoides 


X 




X 










*P^lanus eburneus 


X 














*Balanus improvisus 


X 














*Balanus sp. 






X 








X 


Busycon canaliculatum 




X 


X 


X 


X 


X 


X 


Busycon carica 














X 


*Bryozoa 














X 


Callinectes sapidus 




X 


X 


X 


X 


X 


X 


Cancer irroratus 


X 


X 


X 


X 


X 


X 


X 


Cancer sp. 


X 


X 












Carcinus maenas 




X 


X 


X 


X 


X 


X 


*Chalina sp. 










X 






*Chalina oculata 














X 


*Cirolana concharum 














X 


*Cliona celata 


X 






X 








*Cliona sp. 




X 








X 


X 


Crangon septemspinosa 


X 


X 


X 


X 


X 


X 


X 


Crangon vulgaris 


X 














Crassostrea virginica 


X 


X 


X 


X 


X 


X 


X 


Crepidula fornicata 


X 


X 


X 


X 


X 


X 


X 


Crepidula plana 


X 


X 


X 


X 


X 


X 


X 


Crepidula convexa 






X 










*Ctenophore 








X 


X 


X 


X 


*Cyanea capillata 










X 


X 




*Cyanea sp. 














X 


*Ensis directus 




X 


X 










Eupleura caudata 








X 








Baminoea solitaria 














X 


*Hymeniacidon sp. 










X 






Howarus americanus 


X 


X 


X 


X 


X 


X 


X 


Ilyanassa obsoleta 


X 


X 


X 


X 


X 


X 


X 


* I Ilex ill ecebrosus 






X 










*Lepidonotus squamatus 


X 














Libinia dubia 










X 


X 




Libinia emarginata 




X 






X 


X 


X 


Libinia sp. 


X 


X 


X 


X 









Continued 



8-8 



TABLE «-l. (Continued) 





MAY-DEC 


JAN-DEC 


JAN-DEC 


JAN-DEC 


JAN-DEC 


JAN-DEC 


FEB-OCT 


SPECIES 


1971 


1972 


1973 


1974 


1975 


1976 


1977 


Llmulus polyphemus 


x 


X 


X 


X 


X 


X 


X 


*Loligo pealei 




X 




X 


X 


X 


X 


Lunatia heros 


x 


X 










X 


*Mercenaria mercenaria 


X 


X 


X 


X 




X 


X 


*Metridium senile 




, 










X 


*Metridium sp. 


X 


X 


X 




X 






*Microciona prolifera 


X 


X 




X 


X 




X 


* Modiolus modiolus 














X 


*Mogula manhattensis 












X 




*Mogula sp. 












X 


X 


*Mulinia lateralis 












X 


X 


*Mya arenaria 














X 


My sis sp. 


X 














*AytiIus edulis 










X 


X 


X 


Nassarius trivittata 


X 


X 


X 


X 


X 


X 


X 


Nassarius sp. 




X 












Neopanope sayi 


X 


X 


X 


X 


X 


X 


X 


*Nereis sp. 






X 










*Nucula sp. 












X 




*Obelia sp. 








X 








Ovalipes ocellatus 


X 


X 


X 


X 


X 


X 


X 


Oval i pes sp. 


X 


X 












Fagurus longicarpus 


X 


X 


X 


X 


X 


X 


X 


Pagurus pollicaris 




X 


X 


X 


X 


X 


X 


Pagurus sp. 


X 




X 










Palaemonetes sp. 










X 


X 




Palaemonetes vulgaris 


X 






X 






X 


Panopeus herbstii 


X 


X 










X 


Penaeus aztecus 








X 


X 




X 


* Pi tar morrhuana 








X 


X 






Polinices duplicata 


X 


X 


X 


X 


X 


X 


X 


Polinices heros 








X 




X 




Retusa obtusa 






X 










Sguilla ewpusa 






X 


X 


X 


X 


X 


*Tellina sp. 






X 










*Thuiaria robusta 












X 




*Thyone briareus 














X 


Urosalpinx cinerea 




X 


X 


X 


X 


X 


X 


*yoldia limatula 














X 


Total nvunber of taxa 
















collected 


35 


34 


33 


32 • 


34 


35 


47 


Total number of Epi- 
















benthic taxa 
















collected 


26 


28 


26 


25 


24 


24 


27 



Individuals collected in trawl but not counted as part of the 
total number of epibenthic species. 



r,-n 



o >- 


1 — 1 


a: 


1- ■=£. 


<=c s: 


I— 


s: 


00 


ro 




I/O 


>- 




CO 


in 




LlI 


LT) 


1 — 1 


OO 


Q 



00 



Qi cC 




o 


00 


(—1 


UJ 


CD 


1—4 


O 


o 


_J 


LU O 


a. 


o 


oo 


LU 


o 


Qi 


l-H 


o 


nr 


CQ 


h- 


Qi 


s: < 


LU 


:c 


CQ 




1— I 


z 


a. 


LU 


LU 


> 




< 


Q 


31 


■Zi 




< 3 




LU 


■K 


Z 


LU 




O 




S 


• 


< 1^ 


Q 


t^ 


:s 


cn 


r5 


r^ 


DQ 




■=c q; 




LU 


U- 


CQ 


o o 




1- 


i^ 


CJ 


z: o 


< 




o: n: 




CD 


#t 


=) 


LU O 


O 


d; 


Z 


3:: 


< 1- 


Q 




Z 


<* 


ro r^ 


CQ 


o-i 


< 




_l 


:^ o^ 


< q: r^ 


ra cc c^ 


2: 


ZD — 


z 


■z. 


< <: •> 




•-2 1- 


_j 


d: 


< s: o 


I— O Q- 


c 


Qi LU 


h- 


u- q: 



OO 



00 



CQ 



_1 


ID Kf -^ r-{ 


CO 


"sT 


en 


00 












•=c 


r~ o r-- CO 


■^ 


O 


CO 


CO 






in 


^ 


<^ r^ 


1— 


00 H O (71 


00 


H 


en 


o 






CM 


CM 


CM CM 


o 


^ ^ ^ ^ 


•» 


^ 


^ 


■». 












h- 


in 'fl' ID ■<3' 

in rH r- rH 


in 
in 


•-i 


in 
















lo o rH in 


CO 


O 


o 


CO 














t-- iH kO "^ 


'^ 


H 


in 


rH 






r~- 


kT) 


CO en 


o 


>x> in o CTi 


\D 


in 


CO 


rH 




in <* in in 


rH 


rH 


rH rH 


CVJ 


•^ CNJ CO ro 


■sT 


CM 


rvi 


H 














H CTi O CD 


•~\ 


cn 


CM 


kiD 














ro H iH CM 


(O 


rH 


CM 


o 






r- 


r^ 


CO r- 


ai 


o o o in 


o 


o 


(J1 


in 




•^ in ^ >* 


r-i 


rH 


rH rH 




in CM rH rH 


in 


CM 


O 
rH 


t-{ 














^0 O csl rvi 


VD 


o 


O 


rsi 














CTi vD in >£i 


(Ti 


^ 


in 


in 






r- 


00 


CO 0> 


CO 


CM CTi ro O 


r\i 


0> 


CO 


o 




CM CO CO 00 


rH 


rH 


rH rH 




i-t CO ro o 


rH 
rH 


CO 


ro 


CD 
H 














rH O (O 




H 


^ 


IX) 












■)t 


CM -^ 00 


W 


CM 


•-\ 


r^ 




w 


en 


"a* 


cn en 


■x 


en "^l* 00 (N 


S 


■* 


CO 


CM 




S rH CM CM 


S 


rH 


rH rH 


r^ 


3 - - - 




^ 


^ 


^ 












' 


VD iX) Ol 
ro rH CN 




CO 




CNl 














CN ro in CM 


CM 


n 


t^ 


rH 














CM O CM CO 


Cv) 


O 


rH 


r-~ 






00 


in 


t> O 


CO 


^D CM i^ r- 
in in -^ ^D 

CM CO rH <* 


>Xl 

in 

CM 


CN 

in 

CO 


rH 






rH rH CM H 


rH 


rH 


rH rv) 




H rH '3' rH 


rH 


rH 


•^ 


O 














in cn r^ 00 


in 


CTl 


r~- 


CM 






r~- 


VD 


r^ ix) 


Ln 


CM (Tl H CO 

en 00 r- ro 

CN H CM 


CM 


(71 

00 

CM 


rH 
rH 


CO 
ro" 

CM 




CO CM rH CM 


rH 


rH 


rH rH 




H- 




















q; 


■^ in H) r~- 


'fl' 


in 


\o 


r- 




■^ in i£) i^ 


-=* 


in 


\D t-~ 


■a; 


r-- r~- t~~ r- 


r~ 


r- 


r-- 


r- 




r^ r^ r^ r-~ 


r- 


r- 


r~- r- 


LU 


CTi (Tl cyi CTi 


en 


CTi 


<T\ 


en 




en en m en 


en 


en 


en en 


>- 


^ .-i --t <-t 


•-( 


rH 


r-\ 


rH 




rH rH rH rH 


rH 


H 


rH rH 
















w 




















* 




w 
en 


















(U 


u 


0) 










(fl 








u 


(U 


C 










(U 








c 


ft 


rc; 










■H 








cd 


w 


o 










u 








Ti 




■H 










(U 








C! 


u 


»; 










ft 








:3 


•H 










m 


en 








^ 


:g 


eu 








(U 


o 










a 


■rl 








•H 


■H 








m 


0) 











o 


,c 











^ 


(U 








d) 


-p 










•H 


ft 








ft 


c 








^i 


ft 


en 








tn 










re 


W 


u 








rH 


■H 








rt 


rH 


-H 








rH 


R' 










Iti 


^ 








a 


W 






















r-f 


rH 








•H 


Eh 


a) 








fl 


Cti 








-P 




X! 








+J 


-P 








nJ 


!h 


•rl 




















-P 





ft 








E-i 


E-I 








w 


MH 


w 







rH M 

c ,c: 

O 4J 

■H O 
-P 

(d CD 

(U -P 

ft 

o ;c; 

o -p 

H -rf 

ft S 

eu 0) 

Q) ,i4 

15 C 



c 
eu 

(U 

XI 
■p 

■H 



o 

-H -d 
■P ceJ 



o 

>i -rl 
-P +J 

m 
en 



■H 

a 

•rl 



MH 
O 

(0 

u 



x; 
-p 

en 

•H 

eu 
-p 



T) Id 
M o 

-H 



-a 

•H 



tJi (U 

c 3 



■H 



T3 

0) 
X! 

rH 
O 
C 

■rl 

■P 
O 
C 



en 
U 
fd 

(U 

>i 

rH 

(d 
c; 
o 

•H 
-P 

(d • 
sh en 
eu C 
ft O 
O -rl 
-P 
13 (d 
C 4-) 
(d w 





en 




fi 









-H 


in 


-P 


r- 


td 


en 


-P 


rH 


en 


m 


rH 


c 


rH 


•H 


(d 


Sh 




;3 


!h 


T) 







m 


rH 




rH 


r- 




i^ 


c; 


en 


o 


rH 


•rl 




P 


!ti 


cd 


C 


-P 


■H 


en 


!h 




;3 


-P 


T! 


Id 




m 


tn 


c 


C 


-H 


•H 



ft 



eo 
Xi 
-P 

o 
g 

00 

MH 
O 



ITJ 
•P 
O 
EH 



4- 



8-10 



temperature, salinity, and dissolved oxygen, as well as biological 
factors such as available food source, predator-prey relations, and 
interspecific and intraspecific competition for available habitat 
resources. As is the case in most estuarine systems, physical and 
chemical parameters varied from one area to another resulting in dif- 
ferences in species composition and relative abundances. In New Haven 
Harbor, low salinities in the inner harbor, particularly during winter 
and spring, restrict many stenohaline species such as the common star- 
fish, Asterias forbesi, from the area. In contrast, euryhaline species 
such as Palaemonetes vulgaris , a caridean shrimp, and the mud snail, 
Ilyanassa obsoleta can tolerate fluctuating salinities and are abundant 
in this area. The inner harbor is characteristically a highly variable 
environment. Physical/chemical parameters such as temperature, dis- 
solved oxygen and salinity fluctuate widely. During summer, dissolved 
oxygen drops considerably (4.0 ppm and lower) and temperatures are high 

(22-24°C) . During winter the opposite occurs: temperatvires may drop to 
near freezing and dissolved oxygen increases to supersaturation levels. 
As a result, many organisms move in and out of the area in response to 
the changing environmental conditions, and species composition and 
abundances fluctuate widely over the course of a year. 

Inner harbor Station 5 has consistently ranked among the top 
three stations in annual abiondance (Table 8-2) , Characteristic epi- 
benthic species in this area have been Crangon septemspinosa , Ilyanassa 
obsoleta, Limulus polyphemus and Palaemonetes vulgaris , and to a lesser 
degree, Nassarius trivittatus and Ovalipes ocellatus (NAI, 1978a). 

The epibenthic invertebrate community in the deeper water of 
the main shipping channel in the vicinity of the Harbor Station dis- 
charge (Station 8) and middle harbor (Station 11) was composed of a 
somewhat different array of epifa\inal species (NAI, 1975a, 1976a, 1977 
and 1978a) . Both stations were similar in terms of species composition 
and abundance, and typically ranked either first or second in total 
annual abundance (Table 8-2) . Salinity at these areas does not fluc- 
tuate to as large a degree as at Station 5. Bottom dissolved oxygen 



8-11 



does reach lov; levels during July, August and September, but not to the 
degree and duration observed at Station 5 (Section 3.0). Stations 8 and 
11, particularly along the edges of the shipping channel, consist largely 
of black/grey marine mud (NAI, 1972) which is cohesive enough to allow 
several types of organisms to burrow into it for shelter. Lobsters, 
mantis shrimp and sand shrimp, all of which are burrowers , were found in 
high abundances in these areas (Table 8-3) . The benthic infauna, con- 
sisting primarily of polychaetes, oligochaetes and molluscs, was occa- 
sionally abundant in this area (NAI, 1978a) and the sediments contained 
much detritus. As a result, predatory species such as Asterias forbesi, 
Lunatia heros , Polinices duplicata, Neopanope sayi, Pagurus longicarpus , 
and to a lesser degree. Cancer irroratus , have an ample food supply and 
are common to the area. 

In the outer harbor area, fluctuations in salinity, tempera- 
ture and dissolved oxygen are reduced due to increased Long Island Sound 
influence and decreased freshwater influence from the three main tribu- 
taries to New Haven Harbor. As a result, certain species which were 
absent or collected in low abundances in the inner harbor were collected 
in high abundances in the outer harbor. Principal species in this 
category were Cancer irroratus , Pagurus pollicaris and Libinia emar- 
ginata. Lobsters, mantis shrimp and sand shrimp were taken in lesser 
abundances in the outer harbor — possibly as a result of differences in 
the sediment composition. Since lobsters readily establish shelter in 
rocky habitats that are not conducive to trawling, it is deemed probable 
that their abundance in the outer harbor amongst the rocky outcrops and 
harbor breakwaters was greater than indicated by outer harbor trawl 
data; the abundance of lobster traps in the vicinity of the breakwaters 
and adjacent hard-bottom areas supports this conclusion (NAI, 1977) . 

Many epibenthic invertebrates in New Haven Harbor undergo 
seasonal changes in abundance apparently related to changes in water 
temperature and possibly dissolved oxygen. In general, abundance was 
highest during periods of moderate water temperatures - i.e., late 
spring to early summer and fall; it was lowest during periods of extreme 



8-12 



TABLE 8-3. ANNUAL ABUNDANCE BY STATION AND STATION RANK BY YEAR (IN 
PARENTHESES) FOR THE TWELVE MOST COMMON EPIBENTHIC INVER- 
TEBRATES, JANUARY 1974 THROUGH OCTOBER 1977. NEW HAVEN 
HARBOR ECOLOGICAL STUDIES SUMMARY REPORT, 1979. 



SPECIES 


YEAR 


5 


8 


11 


13 


19 


20 


TOTAL 


Crangon septemspinosa 


1974 


5,222 


2) 


20,161 (1) 


NS 




1,408 


(5) 


2,354 


(3) 


1,926 


(4) 


31,071 




1975 


27,746 


2) 


33,103 (1) 


34,825 


(1) 


4,062 


(3) 


716 


(4) 


677 


(5) 


101,129 




1976 


15,191 


1) 


13,778 (2) 


15,482 


(1) 


12,045 


(3) 


9,903 


(4) 


1,957 


(5) 


68,356 




1977 t 


10,870 


2) 


46,138 (1) 


28,375 


(2) 


6,878 


(3) 


453 


(5) 


676 


(4) 


93,390 


Asterias forbesi 


1974 


215 


5) 


5,078 (2) 


NS 




9,450 


(1) 


1,446 


(3) 


922 


(4) 


17,111 




1975 


520 


4) 


1,841 (2) 


1,001 


(3) 


3,199 


(1) 


776 


(3) 


436 


(5) 


7,773 




1976 


99 


5) 


429 (2) 


946 


(1) 


646 


(1) 


221 


(4) 


310 


(3) 


2,651 




1977 


28 


5) 


91 (3) 


221 


(1) 


125 


(1) 


65 


(4) 


99 


(2) 


629 


Cancer irroratus 


1974 


120 


4) 


150 (3) 


NS 




83 


(5) 


830 


(2) 


1,264 


(1) 


2,447 




1975 


86 


3) 


54 (5) 


106 


(3) 


157 


(2) 


56 


(4) 


234 


(1) 


693 




1976 


48 


5) 


91 (4) 


66 


(5) 


122 


(3) 


235 


(1) 


174 


(2) 


736 




1977 


56 


5) 


122 (4) 


175 


(3) 


279 


(3) 


611 


(1) 


135 


(2) 


1,378 


Ovalipes ocellatus 


1974 


30 


1) 


11 (2) 


NS 




19 


(3) 





(5) 


2 


(4) 


62 




1975 


191 


2) 


27 (3) 


60 


(3) 


1,156 


(1) 





(5) 


4 


(4) 


1,438 




1976 


11 


4) 


13 (3) 


57 


(2) 


80 


(1) 


9 


(5) 


37 


(2) 


207 




1977 


125 


3) 


196 (2) 


267 


(2) 


2,599 


(1) 


14 


(5) 


19 


(4) 


3,220 


Ilyanassa obsoleta 


1974 


2,959 


1) 


4 (2) 


NS 







(4) 





(4) 


1 


(3) 


2,964 




1975 


223 


1) 


(2) 





(2) 





(2) 





(2) 





(2) 


223 




1976 


1,605 


1) 


(4) 


1 


(3) 





(4) 


3 


(2) 


1 


(3) 


1,610 




1977 


94 


1) 


1 (2) 


1 


(2) 





(3) 





(3) 





(3) 


96 


Pagurus longicarpus 


1974 


4 


5) 


25 (3) 


NS 




255 


(1) 


186 


(2) 


24 


(4) 


494 




1975 


29 


5) 


37 (4) 


227 


(2) 


261 


(1) 


194 


(2) 


61 


(3) 


809 




1976 


36 


5) 


40 (4) 


50 


(4) 


268 


(1) 


143 


(2) 


99 


(3) 


636 




1977 


73 


3) 


35 (5) 


35 


(5) 


107 


(2) 


194 


(1) 


70 


(4) 


514 


Nassarius trivittata 


1974 


609 


1) 


87 (2) 


NS 




21 


(4) 


75 


(3) 


16 


(5) 


808 




1975 


6 


3) 


1 (5) 


1 


(5) 


7 


(2) 


30 


(1) 


2 


(4) 


47 




1976 


29 


2) 


27 (3) 


27 


(3) 


13 


(5) 


78 


(1) 


20 


(4) 


194 




1977 


1 


3) 


2 (2) 





(4) 


1 


(3) 


1 


(3) 


5 


(1) 


10 


Squilla empusa 


1974 





3) 


18 (1) 


NS 




1 


(2) 





(3) 





(3) 


19 




1975 


18 


2) 


62 (1) 


57 


(2) 


2 


(4) 


11 


(3) 





(5) 


150 




1976 


73 


3) 


114 (1) 


107 


(3) 


14 


(5) 


115 


(2) 


23 


(4) 


446 




1977 


9 


4) 


89 (1) 


66 


(2) 


15 


(2) 


14 


(3) 


1 


(5) 


194 


Lihinia emarginata 


1974 





4) 


1 (3) 


NS 







!4) 


3 


(2) 


265 


(1) 


269 




1975 





5) 


10 (4) 


4 


(5) 


29 


(2) 


52 


(1) 


20 


(3) 


115 




1976 


15 


4) 


16 (3) 


22 


(2) 


2 


(5) 


89 


(1) 


17 


(2) 


161 




1977 


3 


5) 


4 (4) 


7 


(3) 


6 


(3) 


16 


(1) 


9 


(2) 


45 


Homarus americanus 


1974 


3 


3) 


59 (1) 


NS 




19 


(2) 


2 


(4) 


2 


(4) 


85 




1975 


5 


3) 


44 (1) 


90 


(1) 


17 


(2) 


2 


(4) 





(5) 


158 




1976 


2 


4) 


45 (1) 


31 


(2) 


24 


(2) 


11 


(3) 


2 


(5) 


114 




1977 


1 


5) 


52 (1) 


61 


(1) 


8 


(2) 


6 


(3) 


2 


(4) 


130 


Neopanope sayi 


1974 


3 


4) 


10 (3) 


NS 




13 


(2) 


2 


(5) 


27 


(1) 


55 




1975 


2 


5) 


7 (3) 


3 


(4) 


3 


(4) 


27 


(1) 


24 


(2) 


66 




1976 


5 


5) 


16 (3) 


15 


(4) 


43 


(2) 


7 


(4) 


75 


(1) 


161 




1977 


13 


4) 


16 (2) 


25 


(2) 


14 


(3) 


5 


(5) 


26 


(1) 


99 


Pagurus pollicaris 


1974 





3) 


(3) 


NS 




3 


(2) 


6 


(1) 





(3) 


9 




1975 





4) 


(4) 


2 


(3) 


2 


(3) 


7 


(2) 


39 


(1) 


50 




1976 





5) 


1 (4) 


1 


(4) 


3 


(3) 


37 


(2) 


90 


(1) 


132 




1977 





5) 


1 (4) 


20 


(3) 


4 


(3) 


106 


(1) 


54 


(2) 


185 



Station 11 not included in ranking in order to maintain continuity in station rank between preoperational 
and operational years. The value indicated is the rank for Station 11 had it been ranked with the 
other stations. 

Total of 8 months sampling at Station 11 during 1975. 

Total of 9 months sampling during 1977 for all stations. 



8-13 



water temperature - i.e., winter and more notably mid-siommer. Seasonal 
abundance patterns as judged from sampling may also have reflected local 
inshore-offshore movements or changing degrees of activity. In the 
section to follow ("Selected Species"), detailed consideration is given 
to six commonly encountered epibenthic species, with consideration of 
their seasonal and annual abundance patterns, and distribution. 

Other epibenthic species inhabit New Haven Harbor waters but 
are collected in abundances too low to accurately characterize their 
individual distribution or abundance patterns. Included in this cate- 
gory are: Busycon canaliculatum, the channeled whelk; Nassarius tri- 
vittatus , a mud snail common intertidally on mud flats; the oyster- 
drill, Urosalpinx cinerea; the commercially important blue crab, Callin- 
ectes sapidus; the green crab, Carcinus maenas ; the mud crabs, Neopanope 
sayi and Panopeus herbstii; Limulus polyphemus , the horseshoe crab; and 
the moon-snai]s Lanatia heros and Polinices duplicata, both predacious 
carnivores that feed on other molluscs. Many of these species were not 
quantitatively collected by otter trawls either because of their size or 
because their preferred habitat is not conducive to bottom trawling. 



Selected Species 

Cvangon septemspinosa 

The numerically dominant epibenthic invertebrate in New Haven 
Harbor was the caridean shrimp, Crangon septemspinosa. The sand shrimp, 
Crangon, consistently ranked first in abundance, comprising from 56 to 
90 percent of the total annual catch (Table 8-4) . Crangon forms an 
integral part of the food web in New Haven Harbor; considered a scaven- 
ger and secondary consumer, it feeds on organic detritus, small poly- 
chaetes, and benthic and planktonic crustaceans (Price, 1962; Regnault, 
1976) . In turn, Crangon forms an important food source for many finfish 
species such as flounder, weakfish, bluefish, skates and rays (Bigelow 
and Schroeder, 1953, and Price, 1962). In the western North Atlantic, 
Crangon ranges from Baffin Bay to east Florida (Williams, 1965). 



8-14 



TABLE 8-4. RANK OF ABUNDANCE AND PERCENT OF TOTAL CATCH FOR SELECTED 
EPIBENTHIC SPECIES, 1974 THROUGH 1977. NEW HAVEN HARBOR 
ECOLOGICAL STUDIES SUMMARY REPORT, 1979. 





1974-1977 


1977 


1976 


1975 


1974 


SPECIES 


RANK 


RANK 


%1 


RANK 


%1 


RANK 


%1 


RANK 


%1 


Crangon septemspinosa 


1 


1 


81.0 


1 


89.8 


1 


88.6 


1 


55.6 


Asterias forbesi 


2 


5 


0.6 


2 


3.5 


2 


6.8 


2 


25.2 


Cancer irroratus 


3 


4 


1.2 


4 


1.0 


6 


0.6 


4 


4.4 


Ovalipes ocellatus 


4 


3 


2.8 


8 


0.3 


3 


1.3 


11 


0.1 


Ilyanassa obsoleta 


5 


11 


<0.1 


3 


2.0 


7 


0.2 


3 


5.3 


Pagurus longicarpus 


6 


6 


0.5 


5 


0.8 


5 


0.7 


6 


0.9 


Nassarius trivittata 


7 


17 


<0.1 


9 


0.3 


15 


<0.1 


5 


1.4 


Sguilla empusa 


8 


7 


0.2 


6 


0.6 


9 


0.1 


17 


<0.1 


Libinia emarginata 


9 


12 


<0.1 


10 


0.2 


10 


0.1 


7 


0.5 


Homarus americanus 


10 


9 


0.1 


13 


0.1 


8 


0.1 


10 


0.1 


Neopanope sayi 


11 


10 


<0.1 


10 


0.2 


12 


<0.1 


12 


0.1 


Pagurus pollicaris 


12 


8 


0.2 


11 


0.2 


14 


<0.1 


15 


<0.1 



Percent of total annual catch 



8-15 



In New Haven Harbor Crangon was collected most abundantly at 
the inner and middle harbor stations and least abundantly in the outer 
harbor (Stations 19 and 20) (Table 8-3) . Total annual abundance of this 
species has fluctuated, with highest numbers found during 1975 (101,000 
individuals) and the 9-month survey of 1977 (93,000 individuals) , while 
lowest abundances were observed during 1974 (31,000 individuals) and 
1976 (68,000 individuals) (Table 8-3). Variability in catch-abundance 
was also evident on a monthly basis; however, no clearly defined sea- 
sonal pattern was observed (Figure 8-2) . In the outer harbor (Stations 
19 and 20) , where Crangon abundances were low, a trend of decreasing 
abundance during summer and early fall was apparent. However, no such 
trends were apparent at inner and middle harbor stations where abun- 
dances and variability in abundance was high. In New Haven Harbor, 
variations in abundance between months and stations were as high as four 
orders of magnitude, indicating the extreme spatial patchiness of the 
Crangon population. In a study of the benthic epifauna of Long Island 
Sound, Richards and Riley (1967) similarly found the abundance of Crangon 
to be highly variable due to patchiness , thus obscuring seasonal abun- 
dance patterns. 

Variability in the abundance data of Crangon is to some degree 
a result of the inability of the trawl to quantitatively sample this 
species. Under normal circtomstances the 1-3/8-inch mesh of the trawl's 
wings and body is too large to effectively sample small individuals. 
Clogging of the trawl, however, can increase the nvunber of small indi- 
viduals collected, thereby providing an additional source of variability 
in the abundance data. Variability in the abundance of Crangon may also 
be attributed to its mode of existence. Crangon utilizes both infaunal 
and epifaunal habitats, spending much time foraging on the bottom and 
occasionally among the plankton, while at other times burrowing into the 
bottom sediments (Price, 1962). Such behavior can greatly affect the 
pattern of abundance as determined by epibenthic trawls . Epibenthic 
densities estimated from trawl data may not reflect actual densities 
since many individuals may be inhabiting burrows. Because of the 
observed similarity in catch abundance between duplicate tows, however. 



8-16 












-^ 
E 

E 









■a: 

E 
E 

z 


< 

E 
u. 
















r 






- 


















qridwvs_iON_ 


E 




OlIdHtfS ION 


oaidwvs ION 


IL 










^ 













































E 






"T 






E 






U- 






-= 


'—^ ^ 




Q 

Z 

E 
<t 
E 
U. 



E 
< 
E 




1 — 1 

< 

CO — 






«: 

<: 

E 


«: 

-3 
E 

< 

E 




CM 

s: 


1— t 

1— 
<: 
1— 
00 




° 

















:e 






■s 






E 








~l 


, „ .^ . 


aHMi 





- —— ' ■ — 


■^ 


CO 

1— 1 






= 


2: 


1 — 1 




mm^ 


T 


1— 






«S 


00 
















-^ 













— 1 — pill 1 1 I 1 — 1 










E 
E 
-^ 

Z 


< 

E 
■a: 
E 






E 

«t 

E 

u. 



<c 
-:) 

E 
E 
-3 






























. 












r 












«r 


^^^ 










E 




OJldUtfS iON_ 












031dWVS iON 





aaidwvs iON 










^ 




























«r 


^^" 






















■^ 






^ 




«s 






r 








u. 












"^ 




a 
z 


-D 

E 

«i 

E 





Z 


< 

E 
< 
E 


^~ 















ra 












^ 


_ 






- 














E 




— 




E 






Li. 






Z- 








<C 

E 
E 
-D 






z' 


E 
< 
E 


t— 1 

i-H 

1 — 1 

1— 
< 
1— 

00 


c 




a 


IT) 




CX) 


a. 

<: 




















'' 


1— 

I— 
t/1 




* ' 


E 

1 


< 








t/^ a31dHV$ ION 


U- 






-^ 













d+i') sivnaiAiQNi JO djawnN 



(i+u) simaiAioNi JO a3aNnN 



(It") SIVnClAIONI JO !l39WnN 



8-17 



abundance data can be used with some degree of quantitative validity, 
particularly in evaluating relative spatial and temporal trends in 
abundance . 

Although catch-abundances of Crangon were variable, size 
distribution of Crangon populations in New Haven Harbor exhibited a 
measurable degree of seasonality with modal size increasing from fall 
through spring and decreasing during summer (Figure 8-3) . From July 
through October 1976, 60% of the Crangon measured in trawl samples 
ranged in length from 21 to 30 mm with the 26-30 size-category con- 
taining the largest proportion of the catch. Modal size of Crangon 
increased from November 1976 through February 1977 when 60% of the 
individuals measured ranged in length from 26 to 40 mm and the 31 - 35 
mm size-category contained the largest portion of the catch. During 
spring (March through June 1977) the modal size of Crangon continued to 
increase. During this period 60% of the individuals measured ranged in 
length from 31 to 45 mm and the 41 to 45 size-category contained the 
largest portion of the catch. During summer and early fall (July- 
October 1977) the modal length of Crangon decreased. As in 1976, 60% of 
the individuals measured ranged in length from 21 to 30mm and the 26-30 
size-category contained the largest portion of the catch. This decrease 
in population size was attributable to both a large decrease in the 
number of shrimp in the larger size-categories as well as an increase in 
the number of shrimp in the smaller size-categories. 

In New Haven Harbor, it is not certain whether adult shrimp 
migrate from the harbor during summer or whether they are simply exposed 
to an elevated level of predation once having reached a certain size 
(maximum size of C. septemspinosa is approximately 70mm; Price, 1962; 
NAI, 1978a) . Price (1962) observed a similar seasonality of size- 
distribution of Crangon in Delaware Bay; highest abundance of sand 
shrimp was observed during spring with largest individuals also collect- 
ed during this period. Three year-classes of females and two year- 
classes of males inhabit the waters of Delaware Bay during spring; 
during summer, the oldest year-classes of both sexes disappear from the 



8-18 









t_3 



30- 
25-1 

20- 

15- 

10- 

5- 

0- 
25- 

20- 

15' 

■f-J lOH 

5- 

0- 
25- 

20- 

1— 

^ 15 

CJ 

Qi 

LU 10- 

CL- 

5- 


40 

35- 







■•III 










JULY - OCTOBER 1976 








V 

1 








^- U^ 



NOVEMBER 1976 - 
FEBRUARY 1977 



LU 



MARCH - JUNE 1977 



JULY - OCTOBER 1977 



^20 21-25 26-30 31-35 36-40 41-45 46-50 51-55 56-60 i61 

TOTAL LENGTH IN MILLIMETERS 



Figure 8-3. Percent of Crangon collected per size category in New Haven 
Harbor during various times of the year, from July 1976 
through October 1977. New Haven Harbor Ecological Studies 
Summary Report, 1979. 



8-19 



area. As a result, mean lengths and abundances decreased in Delaware Bay 
from spring to late siimmer. Price was not certain whether this was due 
to increased predation or migration, but he suggested that Crangon 
undergoes a seasonal change in spawning grounds from inshore waters to 
deeper offshore waters. Seasonal migrations are also documented for 
Crangon septemspinosa in estuaries near Beaufort, North Carolina; here 
shrimp move offshore beginning in July and August and return the follow- 
ing v/inter and spring (Williams, 1965). 

Seasonal migrations of the European brown shrimp, Crangon 
crangon, in European waters are well documented (Boddeke, 1975 and 
1976) . Adult shrimp were observed to undergo local inshore-offshore 
movements . Shoreward movement was observed during the spring with 
gravid females the first to move in followed by adult males; emigration 
of adults, including sexually ripe shrimp, occurred during the fall. 
Juvenile shrimp did not migrate to the extent of adults and usually 
remained in coastal waters year round (Boddeke, 1976) . 

i 

In New Haven Harbor, size-data for Crangon septemspinosa sug- 
gest that adult shrimp migrate into the harbor during spring and peak in 
abundance during May and June which would explain the gradual increase 
in the modal size of shrimp during this period. During summer, increas- 
ing temperatures and possibly decreasing dissolved oxygen levels may act 
to stimulate emigration of adults from the harbor to deeper waters. 
Since juveniles do not migrate to the extent of adults (Boddeke, 1976; 
Price, 1962), modal size-distribution observed during the summer would 
reflect a predominantly juvenile population. Also, since the number of 
small shrimp collected during the summer tends to increase - possibly as 
a result of growth to catchable size from the previous years' spawning - 
migration of adult shrimp is not apparent in the abundance data. During 
winter and spring, a gradual return of adult shrimp occurs with a 
resulting increase in modal size. Observations by Richards and Riley 
(1967) on the benthic epifauna of Long Island Sound further supports 
this conclusion; they found that the standing crop of Crangon in Long 
Island Sound increased during late sxommer. This may reflect movement 
of adult sand shrimp from inshore waters to the deeper waters of Long 
Island Sound during this period. 



8-20 



Asterias forbesi 

The common starfish, Asterias forbesi, has been the second 
most abundant species collected in epibenthic trawls. It ranges from 
Cape Cod Bay to Cape Hatteras and is common from the littoral zone to 
approximately 49 m (Gosner, 1971). Asterias, although primarily a 
predator of bivalve molluscs, will consume fish or almost any other 
organisms that it can capture. Hardy (1965) indicated that starfish in 
general are perhaps the most voracious of the invertebrate carnivores. 
During the period 1966 to 1969 the starfish, Asterias forbesi, was cited 
as the most important cause of oyster mortality in Long Island Sound 
(MacKenzie, 1969) . In unprotected areas, starfish can reduce a commercially 

viable set of oysters to noncommercial levels in weeks . Under controlled 
laboratory conditions adult starfish have been observed to eat an average 
of five oysters each per 28-day period in water having an optimal tempera- 
ture for feeding (20°C) (MacKenzie, 1969) . 

In New Haven Harbor, the abundance of starfish has steadily 
declined since 1974 when 17,000 individuals were collected (25% of the 
total catch) (Table 8-3 and 8-4) . Numbers decreased to 7800 collected in 

1975 (7% of the total catch) and 2700 in 1976 (4% of the total catch) . 

The trend continued in 1977, when the total 9-month catch (630 individuals) 
decreased by 60% from that recorded during the same 9-month period in 

1976 (2100 individuals) . A consistent decline was observed at all 
stations in the harbor. 

Long-term fluctuations in the abundance of starfish are well 
documented (Galtsoff , 1964) . High yearly abundances are often followed 
by years of relatively low nximbers . Such fluctuations are attributable 
to variations in survival of planktonic larvae as well as larval setting 
success (Galtsoff and Loosanoff, 1939). It is likely that the decline 
in abundance of starfish in New Haven Harbor here reported was a result 
of such natural fluctuations. This conclusion is further supported by 
the fact that monitoring data collected in New Haven Harbor since 
October 1977 revealed an upward trend in starfish abundance during 1978, 



8-21 



L() l(!V(!l.s similar to those observed during 1976. A second factor which 
may contribute to the observed decline in the abxindance of starfish is 
"mopping" and the use of biocides such as lime (calcium oxide) by 
commercial oyster companies to protect oyster beds from starfish pre- 
dation. "Mopping" consists of dragging large mops over oyster beds for 
approximately 10 minutes; starfish clinging to the mops are hauled from 
the water and destroyed. Lime is spread over the bed to keep starfish 
from feeding and to destroy them. Oyster beds in New Haven Harbor, as 
well as other parts of Long Island Sound, are periodically treated by 
both methods to keep the abundance of starfish, molluscs and oyster- 
fouling organisms to a minimum (MacKenzie, 1970 and 1977) . Periodic 
treatment of oyster beds by "mopping", biocides or both would be ex- 
pected to result in a decline in starfish abundance in the general 
vicinity of the treated area. Because of the relatively small size and 
semi-enclosed nature of New Haven Harbor, continued "mopping" and bio- 
cide protection of oyster beds could play a dominant role in the steady 
decline of the harbor population of Asterias . 

During each year of the program, monthly variations in abun- 
dance of Asterias were considerable and no apparent trends were evident 
(Figure 8-4) . In a review of over 40 years of data relating to abun- 
dance of Asterias in coastal waters between New Haven and Bridgeport, 
Loosanoff (personal communication, 1975) found no trends "or patterns in 
starfish abundance (NAI, 1977) . Similarly, no seasonal patterns of 
starfish abundance were evident in Stamford Harbor during the 1971-1973 
Stamford Harbor Ecological Studies (NAI, 1974). 

Despite the annual decline in abundance, patterns of distribu- 
tion of Asterias as indicated by trawl data have been relatively consis- 
tent throughout the monitoring study. Highest abundances occurred in 
^'.orris Cove (Station 13) and in the main shipping channel in the vicinity 
ot tho Harbor Station discharge and middle harbor (Table 8-3) . Since 
starfish are attracted to active oyster beds (Galtsoff , 1964) that are 
not sampled in this program, harborwide starfish distribution may be 
somewhat different than indicated by trawl data. Starfish are slightly 



8-22 



OaidWVS iON 



Ir o- 

I— I 

I— 

h- 
00 



031dWVS iON 



cyi 






oaidwvs lOK 



O 
CVJ 



<: 
I— 



|IMM I I I |llll I 



— |IMI I I I I |llll I I I 

O O 

8 2 






^ 


O 

xn 

•X 

u. 

z 
o 

< 

< 






o 
X 

z: 

-^ 
o 

o 

< 

X 

< 

X 


















to 

eC 

X 








031dWVS iON 








Q31dMVS ION 







031dHVS ION 


T 
















« 




■^ 














— 


< 




















X 




















" 
















•^ 




— - 


3e 
o 

lO 

<: 

X 
X 

X ^ 

X 

Li. 


CO 

o 

I— 




o 
■t 

X 

< 
c 

O 
Z 
O 

X 

*t 

X 






O 










^ 










'^ 
















^ 








^ 




















STATION 11 
1 
1 






<■ 














u. 








o 


^— •^— 


, 




1 
1 
1 
1 

- NOT SAMPLED - 


— ^ 


LO 












■z. 
o 


1 — ^^ 






















1— 

<c 
1— 

CO 














X 










« 




031dWVS ION 








•^ 






*" 


lllll 1 1 1 




' 


1'" )'" 


■ ■ 1 I M.ll 1 ■ t 







s 




lO 




s- 




+J 


• ' 




r^ 


o r^ 


•r- 


en 


f 




•l-> 




C 


s- 


<u 


O) 


JD JQ 


•r- 


o 


Q.+J - 


<U 


o 




o 


(U 




4-> 


x: 


3 


en 


C 


3 . 


•r- 


O oi 


E 


S- l-> 


1 


-C CT> 


o 


+J r- 


^— 






«* •« 


c 


r>>. -p 


•r- 


CT> S- 




>— O 


•o 


Q. 


<U 


>> <U 


+-> 


s- q; 


O 


re 


<U 


3 >, 


n— 


c S- 


r— 


re re 


O --O E 


O 


E 




" 3 


•r^ O to 


CO CM 


Q) 


10 


fQ -O <U 


S^ 


C •!- 


.o 


re T3 


"=H. 


3 




<Ti -M 


to 


>— to 


« 




•^ 


n P— 


CO re 


<» 


>— o 


+i 




CO 


" C7) 


^ 


>— o 




^^ f> 


M- 


o 


O 


- u 




00 UJ 


cu 




o 


•> s- 


c 


LD O 


(0 


J3 


-o 


(A S- 


c 


c re 


3 


O 31 


XI 


•r- 


to 


■M C 




re <u 


>»+J > 




to re 


JC 


31 


-p 


E 


c 


o s 


o 


S- 01 



00 






O) 



ll«i'' SlV'KMMONl lO a.l3rtilH 



(I*") siviMiAiaNi JO aaawtiN 



8-23 



stenohaline in that they prefer water of high salinity (Galtsoff , 1964) . 
As such, they are somewhat restricted from the innermost harbor area, 
particularly during the spring. The same situation was observed at 
Stamford Harbor (NAI, 1974), where Asterias was rarely found at the 
innermost harbor station. 

From July 1976 through October 1977 Asterias ranged in size 
from 25 mm to 132 mm and averaged 99 mm (NAI, 1978a and 1977). No 
seasonal or distributional trends in size of starfish were evident from 
the limited size data acquired during that sixteen-month period. 



Cancer irroratus 

The rock crab. Cancer irroratus , ranked third in overall 
abundance of epifauna from 1974 through 1977 (Table 8-4) . It ranges 
from Labrador to South Carolina (Williams, 1965; Gosner, 1971) and has 
potential value as a commercial fisheries resource (Marchant and Holm- 
ser, 1975) . Toward the southern extent of its range. Cancer is more 
common in deeper water. Water temperatures ranging from 14 to 21 °C 

(Marchant and Holmser, 1975) and salinities of 20 to 32 ppt are optimal 
for adult Cancer. Although termed the rock crab. Cancer irroratus is 
most common on sandy bottoms (Jeffries, 1966; Saila and Pratt, 1973). 
It does , however , venture on to coarse gravel and mixed rocky bottoms 

(Musich and McEachran, 1972) as well as muddy bottoms (Scarratt and 
Lowe, 1972) . Rock crabs feed actively upon polychaetes, mussels, gas- 
tropods, starfish and sea urchins, and most food appears to be taken 
alive (Scarret and Lowe, 1972) . Rock crabs in turn are preyed on by 
large demersal fish and lobsters (Scarret and Lowe, 1972) . 

In New Haven Harbor, the annual abundance of Cancer varied 
over the course of the monitoring program with lowest abundances ob- 
served during 1975 and 1976 (approximately 700 individuals each year) 
and highest abundances during 1974 (2500 individuals) and 1977 (1400 



8-24 



individuals) (Table 8-3) . Such yearly variations may be attributed to 
natural fluctuations in growth, mortality and recruitment as well as 
variations in catch success of the otter trawl. Similar fluctuations in 
the annual abundance of Cancer have been observed in other New England 
waters (Turner, 1954) . 

Populations of Cancer in the harbor showed a well-defined 
seasonal pattern of abundance (Figure 8-5). Although the pattern 
exhibited some variability from year to year and station to station, 
highest numbers were typically encountered during the winter, spring and 
fall. A siibstantial decline was coincident with periods of high water 
temperatures and low dissolved oxygen during July, August and September. 
Seasonal distribution of Cancer in New Haven Harbor, by year, is shown 
in Figure 8-6. Cancer was generally most abundant in the outer harbor 
during fall and winter with abundances increasing in the inner harbor 
during spring. During summer Cancer was collected in low abundances at 
all stations sampled. Abundances again increased in the outer harbor 
with the return of fall. This pattern occurred during each year with 
only minor exceptions. 

Although extensive migratory behavior is not characteristic of 
Cancer, local inshore-offshore movements have been documented for popula- 
tions located near their southern geographic limit (Saila and Pratt, 

1973) where Cancer is abundant in shallow waters during the colder 
months only; during summer it migrates to deeper waters. In New Haven 
Harbor migration generally begins around April or May, and immigration 
from the Sound to the harbor occurs in October. This is similar to 
observations by Winget et al. (1974) for Cancer irroratus in Delaware 
Bay, where crabs began migration from the bay in April and returned in 
November. Similar patterns of abundance were observed at Stamford 
Harbor during the 1971-1973 Stamford Harbor Ecological Studies (NAI, 

1974) and at Port Jefferson during the 1976 pot survey of commercially 
important invertebrate species (EEHI, 1977). 



8-25 




/ 



o 

o 



, aiTdHWS XON 



CO 



< 
I— 

t/0 





o 




2 


X 


a. ^™^i» 


"^ 




"- 


■H^i^^^^ 


u. 


-^ aaidwtfs ION 


T a31dWVS iON 


— 




<= ^^^^^^ 


^ 




z 




< 


A H J J A S 

1 


< 










"— 






L — -^ — 






Q ^ 




o ^^ 

z: 


^ •■■■■ 




< 


^ ^^^^H^^^^ 






"- 




Li. 




"- 






- P. 




^ Ui - .1 








O 


A H J J A S 

ATI ON 


M J J A S 

TATION 
1 
















j^^ 






^ 











riTTTT 



OaidHVS ION 



LO 

o 

►—4 

I— 

<c 
I— 

CO 



Q3ndWVS ION 



CO 
o 

t— ( 

I— 

•a: 
I— 

00 



Q31dHVS iON 



1 1 I I — I inn 

s 



oaidwvs iON 

fTTTlTT- T -i — 



< 

X I— 

I/) 



i- 
+J • 

•I- en 



E s- 
<u <u 
-Q .a 

•I- o 
Q.+J 
<U (J 

o 
+J ^ 

3 CD 

E 3 • 

•r- o a~i 

E s- 1-^ 

I .E CTi 
O 4-> .— 

E r-- •»-> 

•I- CTi S- 

I— o 

T3 Q- 

<D >, OJ 

+-> S- ci; 

O (O 

OJ 3 >» 

■— E 1- 

r— (0 tJ 

O --3 g 

O E 

" 3 

CO O I/) 

S CM 

+i (/) 

5^4 E -r- 

•ti I— 00 

SB OO lO 
O I— <-> 
«< '^" 

to .— o 

M- *" 'o 

O " O 

00 LU 

O •> 5- 
E LO O 
(O -Q 
T3 M S- 
E E n3 
3 O 3: 

(O +J E 
>,-•-> > 

I— oo n3 

^ n: 

■^ E , 

EOS 
O S- <U 



LT) 
I 

CO 

O) 

s- 

3 
CD 



u*") siviwmoNi JO a3flHiiN 



(i*u) sivnaiAioNi JO xsewriN 



(!♦") sivnoiAiONi dO aaawnN 



8-26 




1974 



1975 





A WINTER (JAN-FEB) 
D SPRING (APR-HAY) 
SUMMER (JUL-AUG) 
X FALL (SEP-OCT) 


1 


f \ 




EACH SYMBOL REPRESENTS ( 
2% OF ANNUAL CATCH 9 ^ 
736 


V-ENGLISH // 
^STATION / / 


'^ 


NEW HAVEN 
LONG WHARE/ 


/^" 


/ 




ifti^jaT^ XX 


XXXX 


/iiiNEW HAVEN 
\ HARBOR 
U STATION 


WFST t 
HAVEN 1 

SANOYjU^**^— -, 


o^.n 


\ 


-i^^ 


^ 




CO % 

XX • h 
xxx^^ 

^S;M9RGAN 


XXXXX 

\>;\xx 
wwx 




^.^ 


/ 




:^. 


XXXXXXXX 




1 



1976 



1977 



I iwu»v S-6. Distribution of Cancer ii'i'cvaUis by season in New Haven 
Harbor from 1974 through 1977. New Haven Harbor 
Ecological Studies Summary Report, 1979. 



8-27 



In a study of the rock crab, Cancer irroratus , and the spider 
crab, Libinia emarginata, in Delaware Bay, Winget et al . (1974) observed 
that the occurrence of C. irroratus was generally opposite that of 
L. emarginata. Whereas Cancer was most abundant from November through 
April, Libinia was generally most abundant from April through late 
October. and early November. In New Haven Harbor Libinia has been col- 
lected in relatively low numbers; however, as demonstrated by Winget et 
al . , it has occurred most abundantly from June through October when 
Cancer abundance in the harbor was low. No apparent interrelationship 
of the species exists that would account for the relationship between 
the migratory patterns of these two species; however, it is reasonable 
to assume that competition for available food and habitat resources is 
diminished by this general migratory scheme. Differences in the migra- 
tory pattern of these two species could also be related to differences 
in their temperature tolerances. Cancer is a boreal species, and as 
such is more tolerant of cold temperatures and less tolerant of high 
summer temperatures. Libinia on the other hand, is more of a warm- 
water species, and therefore, is more tolerant of high summer temp- 
eratures and less tolerant of low winter temperatures. 

Although it is not certain when Cancer spawns in New Haven 
Harbor, evidence indicates that spawning (egg extrusion and fertiliza- 
tion) takes place during late fall or winter, brooding continues into 
spring and the developing eggs hatch into planktonic larvae in late 
spring-early summer (NAI, 1978a, 1977 and 1976a) . Scarrett and Lowe 
(1972) reported peak abundances of Cancer larvae in the Northumberland 
Strait, Gulf of St. Lawrence, during late summer. Krouse (1972) indicated 
that C. irroratus spawn during late fall-early winter along the Maine 
coast and that eggs hatch during the spring. During 1977 the abundance 
of Cancer larvae in New Haven Harbor was relatively low, but peak abun- 
dances occurred during June (NAI, 1978a). Prior to 1977, Cancer larvae 
were not specifically identified, but decapod larvae, which probably 
included Cancer, were present in the plankton only from May through 
August. Since Cancer begins its migration to deeper waters during April 
and May, it can be expected that a substantial amount of larval develop- 
ment occurs outside the harbor. This is important in two respects. The 



8-28 



first is that water temperature in the harbor during June averages 
approximately 16 to 19 °C and increases to greater than 20 °C during July 
and August. Optimal growth of Cancer irroratus larvae occurs at 15°C, 
and at temperatures above 20 °C the metabolic rate is reduced (Saila and 
Pratt, 1973). Thus, larvae hatched in deeper waters during late spring 
and summer would not be subjected to deleteriously high water temper- 
atures. Secondly, if, as is indicated, a substantial amount of larval 
development occurs in deeper waters , larval entrainment by the Harbor 
Station would be minimized. 

Most rock crabs collected in the harbor were relatively 
small, ranging in size (greatest carapace width) from 2 to 80 mm, while 
most were from 45 to 55 mm (adult carapace width averages approximately 
95mm [VJilliams, 1965] and reaches 140 mm [Gosner, 1931]). No temporal 
or spatial trends in size of Cancer were evident. Low abundance of 
crabs and a lack of size data during summer may prevent detection of 
possible seasonal size patterns. 



Ovalipes ocetlatus 

Ovalipes ocellatus , the lady or calico crab, ranges from 
Prince Edward Island, Canada, to Charleston, South Carolina and is 
common on a variety of bottoms, particularly sand (Williams, 1965). 
Like most portunid crabs, Ovalipes is quick, highly aggressive, and 
pugnacious (Gosner, 1971) . The annual abundance of Ovalipes has shown 
considerable yearly variation (Table 8-3) . Lowest abundances were 
collected during 1974 (60 individuals) and 1976 (200 individuals) , 
while highest abundances were collected during 1975 (1400 individuals) 
and 1977 (3220 individuals) . A comparable trend in annual abundance is 
apparent in the impingement data for the New Haven Harbor Station (Table 
8-5, page 8-44). Generally, Ovalipes has been most abundant in the 
inner harbor and Morris Cove. Moderate numbers occurred in the middle 
harbor (Station 11) and relatively few in the outer harbor (Stations 19 
and 20) (Table 8-3) . During 1975 and 1977 when annual abundances were 
high, Morris Cove (Station 13) accounted for 80% of the total catch of 
Ovalipes. 



8-29 



Ovalipes exhibited a well-defined seasonal pattern of 
abundance in New Haven Harbor (Figure 8-7) , with the largest numbers 
being consistently collected during the late summer and early fall. 
Based on abundance data, Ovalipes enters the harbor during summer, 
reaches peak abundances during early fall and leaves the harbor before 
onset of winter. A similar peak in abundance was observed in Stamford 
Harbor during 1972 (NAI, 1974) and impingement data from Bridgeport 
(1977), Millstone (1977) and New Haven Harbor (1975-1977) also reveal 
fall peaks. In New Haven Harbor a small -spring peak was also evident in 
the impingement data during 1976 and 1977 (Table 8-5) ; this was not evi- 
dent in the trawl data. 

It is not certain why Ovalipes migrates to the harbor during 
summer and fall or even where it may be migrating from. However, as 
with Libinia, one advantage of the s\ammer-fall migration is that competi- 
tion for food and habitat resources with Cancer may be minimized. Since 
preferred habitat and food resources are similar for these two species, 
this type of migratory scheme allows Ovalipes to inhabit inshore waters 
when the abundance of Cancer is low, and offshore waters when inshore 
Cancer abundances are high, thus decreasing interspecific interactions. 
Little interaction is expected between Ovalipes and Libinia (also a 
summer-fall migrant) since these two species generally utilize different 
areas of the harbor, Ovalipes being collected most abundantly in the 
inner harbor and Morris Cove, and Libinia in the outer harbor at Stations 
19 and 20. 



Homavus amerioanus 

The lobster, Homarus americanus , is the most commercially and 
recreationally valuable crustacean along the coast of northeastern 
United States (Saila and Pratt, 1973) . It ranges from Labrador to North 
Carolina and is common in Long Island Sound. In southern New England 
waters , Homarus is abundant from the subtidal zone to the edge of the 
continental shelf. South of Long Island, however, it is restricted to 
deeper waters due to warm temperatures and a lack of suitable substrate 



8-30 



iiii-* 







o 




o 














o 






^ 




-• 






lo 










^^ 


^ 




-. 












< 




U- 






X 

■I 


— 


a31dWVS iON 


-^ 


aiidwvs iON 


Q 





oaidwvs ION 


-3 






o 


"^^ 






z 
















o 




O 














O 










< 












T 




-^ 






^ 






T 




-i 












x: 
















t 
















E 










z 






u. 




^ 






l^ 







-^ 




-T) 






-, 






Q 




D 




«M 


o 






O 




S 






= 








iO 
















■-3 








CO 




o 


CT> 


a 


o 




o 


t— 1 


•" 


= 


T— 1 


o 


C\J 




z 


zz 




^ 


Z 


^ 




^ 


o 




«I 


O 


<: 


o 




<c 


>— 1 




'^ 


1— 1 


-^ 


1— 1 




'^ r 


1— 




-^ 


t- 


T 


1— 




-^ i: 


< 




E 


<: 


E 


<c 




z 


1— 




< 


1- 


<: 


H- 




< 


c/> 




u. 


oo 




00 




z 






'^ 




T 






-^ 
























o 








































^■^ 


<: 






«r 




— 


<£ 




^i" 


-a 






■^ 






r, p; 




^" 


o 






T 






-o2 






< 

u. 






z 




- 


z 
z 




(]3-|dMVS ION 


o 




C31dHVS ION 


T 





a31dWV5 ION 









o 









" 






o 






z 







z 














-3 






< 

-3 












Z 






Z 




^m 


z 






<: 






■t 






<c 






z 






Z 






z 






i*- 






u. 






u. 






o 






-3 






■^ 






o 






O 






a 










^ 






J^ 






< 






< 






■£ 






-, 






^ 






'? ^ 




^H 


z 






z 






Z 






<: 






<c 








<t 






z 






z: 








z 






u- 






u. 








IJ- 






'^ 






-^ 








-^ 






o 






CI 


I— 1 









LO 




= 


00 




z 


1 — 1 




z 




^™ 


o 

















=C 


— 




2: 




t~ 


2: 


-1 


t/l 


o 




*»■ 







■s 





X 






"^ 


^ 


1 — 1 




"^ 


1—* 




-ft 






i — 










<c 




z 


<: 




z 


<: 


a 


z 


H- 






h- 




< 


1— 


^ 


< 


00 






00 




z 


oo 














^ 




aaidwvs iON 


"" 






_, 



ro 




S- 




4J 




• 




•I- r^ 




sz r^ 




-(-> CTl 




C r— 




CU 




^ S- 




..- 0) 




Q.JD 




<u 




-M 




0) 




-M 




=S 




C J= 




•1- a> 




B 3 


• 


1 


m 


S- 


f^ 


1— -C 


rri 


+J 




c 




•.- ^ 


A 


r~-. 


•*-> 


-0 en 


s- 


OJ 1— 





-M 


Q. 


>, QJ 


QJ s- 


OC 


r— la 




1— =J 


>> 


E 


s- 


<D 


ro 


■D 


^ 


03 


£ 


s •> 


3 


■+^ 


00 


tJ CM 




vo 


«1 


t-^ "O 


(U 


Q> C 


"r— 


t) (0 -0 





3 


01 


4J 


03 I— 


1/1 


Q> 




fi4 » 


^— 


•v^ CO 


(O 


T~i 1 





« 


•r— 


;i ' 


CD 


i— 





^- 


r^ 


M- 





•> 





00 


LU 


O) 




•> 


s- 


E m 





(0 


J3 


-0 V) 


S. 


E C 


10 


3 3: 


X) •!- 




CO -M 


c 


(0 


a> 


>>4-> 


> 


1— C/1 


fO 


x: 


a: 


-•-> E 




c 


5 


S- 


(U 



CO 






en 



51VMHM«iI 10 SISKi'N 



(iwi sivnoi.MONi JO usamiN 



(i+'i) simciAioNi iO a38wnN 



8-31 



(Saila and Pratt, 1973) . Lobsters are common to both rocky and muddy 
areas (Saila and Pratt, 1973; Berril and Stewart, 1972). Both these 
completely different types of habitat provide the lobster with shelter, 
either by the presence of crevices or ledges to hide in, or in the case 
of muddy areas, the opportunity to excavate burrows. 

In New Haven Harbor, lobsters were generally collected in low 
abundance, accounting for 1% by number of the total catch during every 
year of the program (Table 8-4) . Lobsters are nocturnal, spending much 
time in their shelters during the day and being most active during the 
night. Hence, daytime trawls only sample a small percentage of the 
total population. Lobsters were collected throughout New Haven Harbor: 
highest abundances occured in the shipping channel in the vicinity of 
the Harbor Station discharge (Station 8) and in the middle harbor area 
(Station 11) , with moderate abundances in Morris Cove (Station 13) (Table 8-3) 
Lobsters were typically collected in lowest abundances in the shoal area 
between Long Wharf and the City Point sewer outfall (Station 5) , and the 

outer harbor area (Stations 19 and 20) . 

1 

Seasonal patterns of abundance were apparent for lobster popu- 
lations in New Haven Harbor particularly at Stations 8 and 11 where 
abundances were highest (Figure 8-8) . Abundances increased during the 
late spring-early summer (May and June) , declined in July and August, 
and often increased again in the fall (September-November) . Spring and 
fall peaks were coincident with moderate water temperatures (8-17°C) and 
low numbers with extreme temperatures (0-3°C and 19-24°C) . This corre- 
lates well with known patterns in lobster activity. McLeese and Wilder 
(1958) have shown that lobster activity increases between 2 and 25°C 
with a plateau between 10 and 20 °C. Temperatures above 25 °C resulted in 
substantial decreases in activity and eventually led to complete in- 
activity. 

Peak abundances in the trawl samples during spring and fall 
may reflect increased lobster activity during these periods of optimal 
water temperature. Low abundance during winter and possibly summer may 



8-32 



V ■ 



iiio ' 





«< 


CJ 




^ 


Q 






Q 




^■^ 


11 




M«M 


LO 






^ 




~~ 


:^ 




— 


■* 










«MN 


3: 






z 






z 




^^^M 






*■■ 


u. 






z 




Q31dWVS ION 


-^ 




QBIdWVS ION 


-i 




OBIdWVS iON 


T 




■M. 


a 






o 






o 






3: 




tmm 


5E 






z 




•UB.1 


o 




,__ 


CD 






o 






< 




^ 








< 




OH 


< 




"■ 












•M 


u. 




^ 


u. 






'^ 







Q 

O 

a: 






o 

z 
o 

•a: 
z 






a 

o 

z 
< 




















CO 




o 


O^ 




Q 


O 




o 


t— 1 




o 


.— 1 




o 


OJ 




o 


z 


1 ■' 


en 


■z. 




LO 


s 




<-0 


o 




«t 


o 




-S 


o 




■E 


1 — 1 

1— 




-3 


1— 1 

1— 




T 


1 — 1 




■^ S 














ca: 




E 


<: 


^M 


E 


<c 




Z 


1— 


^ 


•« 


h- 




•a: 


1— 




< 


oo 






oo 




^ 


in 




z 

u. 












TTT 










a31dHVS iON 



ID 

o 

>—* 

H- 

\— 



a31<dHVS ION 



CO 

O 
I— I 

1— 
=1 
I— 
OO 



031JWVS ION 



oaidwvs ION 



I— 
00 






• 
•1- t^ 

C r— 
O) 
J3 S- 

•r- a; 

O) o 

■M - 
(U u 
+J o 

3 

C J= 
•I- CD 
E 3 . 

1 O CT) 

o t- r-, 

1— J= CTl 
+J r— 

E 

•I- ^ « 

■o CT^ s- 
O) I— o 

-M Q. 

<-> >, <L) 

s- q; 
= t^ 

ro fO 
^ E 



(U 



O 
O 



S " =3 

e o CO 

e CM 

o </> 

^ C -r- 



6 cy» 4J 
1— 00 

CO 

fi CO to 



=§^" 



en 
o 



^- o 
o •> o 

00 UJ 
(J »- S- 

c in o 

fO -Q 

■o to s- 
c: E n3 

3 O IC 

n3 +-> E 

(O CU 

>^+J > 

I— OO (O 
^ a: 

4-> E 
E o 2 
o s- <u 
E M- z: 



CO 
00 
O) 

s. 

3 
CD 



j 



- 



"' sivuinuiNi (0 !iiaKi^\ 



"! sivnciiMONi JO a3ahinN 



(Itu) SIMCIAIONI iO ViiM) 



8-33 



be due to a decline in lobster activity as a result of extreme water 
temperatures and therefore fewer individuals collected in trawls. 
Similar patterns of abundance have been observed at other Long Island 
Sound sites. Thus at Port Jefferson (EEHI, 1977), lobster abundance 
during 1976 increased from winter to spring and decreased during the 
summer; however, no fall peaks in lobster abundance were observed. In 
Stamford Harbor (NAI, 1974) peak abundances of lobster occurred during 
fall, 1971, 1972, and 1973, while a spring peak was also observed during 
1971. At Millstone Point (NUSCO, 1976) lobsters were impinged on cool- 
ing-water intake screens of the Millstone Nuclear Power Station in 
highest abundances during May and June, 1976, and in lesser abundances 
in July; numbers were low during winter, late summer and fall. Whether 
or not lobsters in New Haven Harbor migrate during periods of increased 
activity is not certain. However, although inshore lobster populations 
are generally non-migratory, seasonal movements related to changes in 
depth and substrate do occur (Saila and Pratt, 1973) . For example, 
immigration and emigration of lobsters in Fisher's Island Sound has been 
described by Stewart (1972) ; lobster populations were observed to emi- 
grate from the Sound during spring and early summer, and immigrate to 
the Sound during fall, remaining until the following spring. This 
correlates with abundance patterns observed in New Haven Harbor. 



Sqwttta empusa 

The stomatopod shrimp, Squilla empusa, ranges from New England 
to South America and is found in shallow waters of the subtidal zone to 
depths of 154 m (Gosner, 1971) . The mantis shrimp is a raptorial carni- 
vore that feeds primarily on small fish and decapod shrimp (Caldwell and 
Dingle, 1976) . A burrower, Squilla lives in irregular shaped holes and 
trenches in the bottom. Examination of mantis shrimp burrows has 
revealed that two distinct types of burrows are constructed and inhabited 
on a seasonal basis (McCluskey, personal communication). During the 
summer Squilla inhabits relatively shallow U-shaped burrows often with 
two openings. During winter in northern waters Squilla abandons its 
summer burrow and inhabits a deep vertical burrow (up to 4.4 m) con- 



8-34 



CO ivably excavated in an attempt to avoid intolerably low water temper- 
atures (<5°C) (McCluskey, 1977) . Laboratory observations have shown 
that individuals without burrows die when exposed to water temperatures 
of 5°C; while individuals within burrows survive temperatures to 0°C 
(McCluskey, 1977) . Except during winter, when Sguilla is inactive and 
deep in its burrow, it spends much time at the entrance to its burrow in 
wait of prey (Caldwell and Dingle, 1976) . 

In New Haven Harbor, the abundance of Sguilla as determined by 
trawl sampling is highly seasonal (Figure 8-9) . Peak abtindances were 
observed during September, October and November coincident with declining 
seasonal temperature maxima. During the remainder of the year abundances 
were extremely low. It is not clear why the Sguilla catches peak in 
abundance during the fall, but it may be related to mating (occurring 
out of the burrow) or possibly its change from summer to winter burrow. 
This is supported by the fact that increased epibenthic activity of 
Sguilla during October and November is also reflected in the 1976 impinge- 
ment data from Port Jefferson and Glenwood, as well as the New Haven 
Harbor Station impingement data for August 1975 through October 1977. 
As in otter trawl samples, Sguilla was found impinged in highest abun- 
dances during October and November, and in low abundances during the 
remainder of the year. 

On an annual basis, Sguilla was typically collected in low 
numbers. Sguilla ranked 8th in overall abundance from 1974 through 1977 
comprising less than 0.1 percent to 0.6 percent of the total catch 
(Table 8-4) . Sguilla was found in highest abundances at Stations 8 and 
11 (Table 8-3) . Because of its burrowing behavior, abundance is to a 
large degree related to suitable habitat. Sguilla is typically found 
on silty/clay or muddy bottoms where burrows can easily be excavated 
(Gosner, 1971) . Based on benthic grab samples taken in the main channel 
in tho vicinity of the Harbor Station discharge and middle harbor region 
(NAl, 1078a), as well as analysis of marine sediments adjacent to the 
New Haven Harbor Station (NAI, 1972) , black to gray marine mud is pre- 
dominant in this area. This type of sediment permits the excavation of 
deep burrows essential for winter survival of Sguilla. 



B-3E 



OaidWtfS ION 



aandwvs ion 



a31dWVS ION 



O 
o 



CO 



< 
I— 
in 



cy\ 



I— 
00 



o 



< 

1— 

00 



"T llllll I I ' 1 I |IMII I ( I IIIII M I 



o 

£TTt 



























<c 






o 




— 


•t 










— 


-3 




— 


z: 




03ndH»S iON 


-= 




OJldHVS iON 


T 




ajiduvs ION 


-^ 




-^ 


o 












Q 








2 




^ 


«: 




— 


■* 




•^ 


■C 










^^ 


-3 






o> 






z 






£ 




^^ 


x: 






3C 






■c 
E 




"~ 


-a: 






U- 






u. 






u. 






-3 














o 







Q 






O 






O 




— 


O 






VI 






LO 






m 






« 




^H 


■t 






«t 






•^ 




"■ 


T 
•^ 












a: 




^^M 


£ 




^H 


z 






<c 






ct 






< 






s: 






Z 






E 






u- 






u. 








u. 






-3 






-5 








o 







o 








o 


1—1 







"— 


LD 




= 


00 




^ 


I— 1 






o 


o 

1— 
00 






o 

1 — t 

1— 

f— 

oo 


a3^dHvs ION 


< 


o 

1 — 1 

< 
1— 
to 


C 

a 

3 

c 

3 




< 
—1 en 

E 

Z 
Ll. 



5 






lO 


• 




s- t-^ 




-M 1^ 






CT^ 




O 


1 — 




• ^ 






x: 


S- 




4-> 


0) 




C 


XI 




0) 


o 




XI 


4J 




•r- 


o 




0.0 




(U 


x: 




cu 


Dl 




•4-> 


3 


. 


3 


o 


fTl 


c 


S- 


f--- 


•r— 


x: 


m 


t 


-M 




o 


^ 


n 


r— 


r--. 


+J 




a> 


s- 


C 


n— 


o 


•^ 




Q- 




>, <u 


T3 


S- C£. 


0) 


fC 




4J 


3 


>> 


O 


C 


s- 


<U 


(O 


IB 




rs 


t= 


r— 




t^ 


o 


« 


3 


u o oo 




CM 




G 




tn 


03 -O 


(U 


S 


C 


•r- 




ra 


T3 

3 


m 


cr> 


■(-> 






00 


« 






<<i 


«t 


r— 


t~i 


CO 


(O 


•v^ 


1— 


o 


S 




•^ 


fv 


r* 


en 


1/3 


1 


o 




f— 


^— 


^- 




o 


o 


«t 


o 




CO 


LU 


<a 






o 


9\ 


s- 


c: 


Ln 


o 


<o 




X) 


-o 


CO 


s- 


E 


c 


(0 


3 


o zn 


XI 






n3 


■t-) 


c 




ro 


<u 


>,4-> 


> 




OO 


lO 


.£= 




:r: 


+J 


F 




C 


o 


% 


o 


s- 


0) 


s: 


<+- 


z 



00 

s- 

3 

cn 



ijiiii 1 1 I — llllll 1 1 



— 1 1 |llll I I I I |IM| I I I I llllll I I I 1 



|llll I I I I lllll I I I I llllll I I I 1 



(uu) snvnaiAioNi jo yjsunii 



(I+u) slVnOIAIOKI JO MJSWnN 



(i+u) sivnaiAioNi JO ajawnii 



8-36 



Catch-data collected during the survey indicate that Squilla 
occurs in relatively low abundances; however, because of the burrowing 
nature of mantis shrimp, otter trawls cannot be expected to provide a 
reliable estimate of Squilla abundance. Benthic grabs are also in- 
effective since mantis shrimp can move deej) into their burrows away from 
the area sampled by the grab. Gosner (1971) gives account of a lysio- 
squillid which went undetected on the south shore of Cape Cod, an area 
of frequent ecological investigations, until 1958. Caldwell and Dingle 
(1976) indicate that although Squilla are numerous enough in some waters 
to be a major predator, they are not collected in high abundances because 
of their burrowing behavior. It is likely that Squilla are much more 
abundant in New Haven Harbor than catch data indicate and that they may 
contribute more significantly to ecosystem dynamics in the harbor than 
has heretofore been assumed. 



ANALYSIS OF IMPACT 

Epibenthic organisms may be directly affected by power plants 
in three major ways: 1) by contact with elevated temperatures associated 
with the thermal discharge plume, as well as sudden cooling of waters 
influenced by the plume whenever the plant shuts down; 2) by entrainment 
of eggs and larvae in the water passing through the power plant's cool- 
ing system; and 3) by impingement of organisms on the cooling-system 
intake screens. In this section, the possible effects on the epibenthic 
community of these three modes of impact are discussed and related to 
the situation observed in New Haven Harbor, and an analysis of impact of 
the Harbor Station on the epibenthos is presented based on data collected 
prior to and during operation of the New Haven Harbor Station. 

The effects on estuarine organisms of elevated temperatures 
from power plant thermal effluents are well documented (Talmage and 
Coutant, 1978). A discussion and literature review of the tolerances 
and responses of marine invertebrates to natural and artificial temper- 
ature regimes has been presented by Kinne (1970) . The effects of elevated 
temperature on most organisms appears to be greatest during the reproduc- 



8-37 



t-i'^e, embryonic, and larval developmental stages (Kinne, 1970). Spawning 
in many marine organisms is stimulated by the attainment of a certain 
minimal water temperature (Davis, 1972; Mitchell, 1974; Wilson and Seed, 
1974; Crawford and Homsher, 1975; Kinne, 1970). Above-normal seasonal 
temperatures can result in spawning at inappropriate times with a res\ It- 
ing decrease in larval survival success. Embryonic de^'elopment is 
inhibited above a certain species-specific critical temperature (Davis, 
1972; Kinne, 1970; Talmage and Coutant, 1978). This inhibition can lead 
to prolonged planktonic existence, and consequently a longer exposure of 
the organism to intensive predation with a resulting decrease in the 
probability of survival. In New Haven Harbor, the influence of elevated 
water temperatures on reproduction and embryonic and larval development 
is not considered of major significance to the viability of the adult 
populations, since the extent of the thermal impact area is limited (At 
> 1°F detectable over a maximiom of 42% of the inner harbor surface. 
Section 3.0) and because the harbor does not appear to be a major 
spawning ground for most of the epibenthic invertebrates present. This 
second position is supported by the relatively low densities of larval 
epibenthic invertebrates collected annually in plankton tows (Section 
4.0). The decapod crustaceans — including C. septemspinosa , C. irrora- 
tus , 0. ocellatus , and H. americanus — comprise the most numerous group 
of invertebrates collected in bottom trawls; yet comparatively low 

larval densities of this group have been observed in the plankton 

3 
(yearly average of 4.5 to 23.3 larvae/m /month) (Section 4.0). This and 

evidence indicating that some invertebrates such as C septemspinosa and 

C. irroratus migrate from the harbor prior to the egg-hatching period, 

suggest that Long Island Sound supplies the major source of juveniles 

for most epibenthic invertebrate populations in the harbor. Recruitment 

to the adult population of larvae from the harbor is believed to be 

small in comparison to the contribution to the harbor of juvenile 

animals from Long Island Sound. 

Artificially elevated temperatures associated with a power 
plant discharge can also influence adult distribution with a resulting 
change in community structure (Kinne, 1970; Logan and Maurer, 1975; 



8-38 



Talmage and Coutant, 1978) . Because of the mobility of many epibenthic 
invertebrates, avoidance of or attraction to the thermal plume can 
readily occur and result in a change in species richness and individual 
species abundance. Logan and Maurer (1975) observed an area s-ubjected 
to thermal effluent discharge in which species number and individual 
species abundances decreased. 

Increased water temperatures can result in changes in the 
occurrence of species located near their thermogeographic limit. In New 
Haven Harbor, Homarus amerlcanus , for example, is abundant to the south 
of Long Island Sound in offshore waters only (Saila and Pratt, 1973) ; it 
avoids inshore waters because of high temperatures as well as a lack of 
suitable sxobstrate. In terms of inshore populations, Long Island Sound 
can be considered a thermogeographic limit for the lobster (Saila and 
Pratt, 1973) . Harbor-water temperatures increased above normal could 
exclude lobsters, particularly from the area of the thermal discharge. 
On the other hand, species such as Panaeus aztecus , Libinia dubia, 
Callinectes sapidus, Panopeus herbstii , Eupleura caudata and Haminoea 
solitaria are epibenthic species in New Haven Harbor living at the 
northern extremes of their geographic range. Increased temperatures 
could allow a greater abundance of these species to inhabit or frequent 
the harbor and this in turn would have an effect on the natural com- 
munity structure through competition for available resources. 

Sudden decreases in water temperature can be more detrimental 
to organisms inhabiting an area than long-term temperature elevations 
(Kinne, 1970) . Acclimation of marine organisms to artificially elevated 
water temperature during winter can result in the organisms ' inability to 
return to ambient water temperatures in the event heating by the power 
plant stops (Pennsylvania Fish Commission, 1971; Robinson, 1970; cited 
in Water Quality Criteria 1972, EPA-R3-73-033) . In such cases where the 
thermal discharge suddenly stops, cold-shock may occur. 

In New Haven Harbor, direct impacts of the thermal discharge 
on the distribution and occurrence of epibenthic invertebrates present 



8-39 



little problem, since the thermal plume generally does not influence 
bottom waters to a measurable extent. The "Analysis of Impacts" portion 
of the Hydrographic section (Section 3.0) indicates that the thermal 
plume is essentially a near-surface feature. Even in the area of the 
discharge, bottom waters are usually close to ambient. The maximum 
observed temperature increase for bottom waters in the area of the 
discharge was approximately 2°F and bottom- temperature elevations of 
this magnitude are uncommon. For this reason impacts on the epibenthos 
in New Haven Harbor as a result of artificially elevated water temp- 
eratures and sudden cooling of the water when the plant goes off-line 
can be expected to be minimal. 

Entrainment of eggs and larvae of epifaunal organisms has the 
potential for serious impact on the epibenthic community. This is 
particularly true for resident species that reproduce within the limits 
of the harbor. For these species, chronic destruction of a portion of 
the egg and larval stages could eventually result in observable decreases 
in the population. We do not, however, consider entrainment of eggs and 
larvae of the epibenthic invertebrates in New Haven Harbor to present a 
serious threat to the epibenthic community for two reasons. First, 
based on annual meroplankton abundances in New Haven Harbor (Section 
4.0), and to some extent the behavioral tendencies of the epibenthic 
organisms, it appears likely that Long Island Sound supplies the major 
sources of eggs and larvae and that, as indicated previously, no major 
spawning occurs in the harbor. Secondly, assuming 100% mortality of 
entrained eggs and larvae, because of the comparatively small cooling 
water flow of the New Haven Harbor plant (0.7% of the average tidal flow 
rate) and the large exchange of harbor water with Long Island Sound 
(assumption based on a tidal prism of 43% of the harbor voliome at MSL 
coupled with a general LIS net flow pattern past the harbor mouth) , it 
is reasonable to assume that only a minute percentage of the eggs and 
larvae present in the harbor pass through the power-plant cooling sys- 
tem. This amount is wholly insignificant in comparison to the quantity 
of eggs and larvae that move in and out of the harbor with the tides. 



8-40 



Mortality due to impingement on cooling-water intake screens 
can also have serious consequences on marine organisms (Uziel, 1978) . 
Impinged organisms may die directly as a result of mechanical abrasion 
or simply by being removed from the water when the screens are cleaned. 
Animals that are returned to the water may die indirectly as a result of 
high stress conditions which lead to decreased resistance to disease and 
predation, or an inability to compete for food (Hanson et al . , 1977). 
Impingement of epibenthic invertebrates on the cooling-water intake 
screens of the New Haven Harbor Station is discussed in some detail on 
page 8-43; it does not appear to be detrimental to the populations as a 
whole. 

Given the limited impacts of Station operations as surmised 
and the general structure of the epibenthic monitoring program, it is 
not possible -- with any degree of confidence — to evaluate specific- 
ally the individual effects of the three major modes of impacts of the 
Harbor Station on the epibenthos in New Haven Harbor, i.e., effects of 
contact with elevated temperatures or exposure to sudden decreases in 
temperature, entrainment of eggs and larvae in the power plant's cooling 
system, and impingement of adults on the cooling-system intake screens. 
The program was designed to allow evaluation of the total impact of the 
Harbor Station on the epibenthos — that is , the c\amulative effects of 
all potential modes of impact. This has been accomplished by comparing 
annual trends in species composition, abundance and distribution prior 
to and during operation of the New Haven Harbor Station. 

In terms of the overall composition of the epibenthic fauna in 
New Haven Harbor, only minor changes have been observed since the 
initiation of the New Haven Harbor Station Ecological Monitoring Studies . 
These changes are primarily related to improvements in field identifica- 
tion with a resulting increase in levels of identification; secondarily 
they are related to the incidental occurrence of species not commonly 
collected in otter trawls. The total number of epibenthic species 
collected annually was similar for each year of the study and ranged 
from 24 to 28 (Table 8-1) . Of the 44 epibenthic species encountered 



8-41 



during the seven-year program, 14 were encountered every year of the 
study (1971-1977) . An additional six were encountered during all of the 
last five years (1973-1977). Thus, of the 24 to 28 invertebrate taxa 
collected annually bo^qinning in 1973, 20 taxa or 70 to B0'(, of tlio.sc; 
collected each year were common to all years. The remaining 20 to 30%, 
4 to 8 species, that were not collected consistently were made up of 
species which: 1) are not commonly collected in otter trawls (Crepiduia 
convexa, Haminoea solitaria and Retusa obtusa) , 2) generally occur in 
low abundances in the areas sampled {Eupleura caudata, Palaemonetes 
vulgaris; and 3) are near their northern geographic limit and occur 
occasionally in the harbor {Libinia dubia, Penaeus aztecus) . 

Variations in annual abundance of the 12 most commonly col- 
lected invertebrate species during preoperational and operational years 
generally fall into four main categories (Table 8-3) : 1) small with no 
substantial difference between years — i.e., Pagurus longicarpus , 
Homarus americanus , and Neopanopi sayi; 2) fluctuating, with periods of 
high and low abundances observed during both preoperational and oper- 
ational years -- i.e., Ovalipes ocellatus , Cancer irroratus , Ilyanassa 
obsoletus , Nassarius trivitatus , and Crangon septemspinosa; 3) trends of 
increasing abundance — i.e., Squilla empusa and Pagurus pollicaris , and 
4) trends of decreasing abundance — i.e., Asterias forbesi and Libinia 
emarginata. Species included in the first two categories pose no par- 
ticular concern since their abundances appeared stable over the period 
of this monitoring study. Abundance trends of species included in the 
last two categories warrant further consideration and explanation since 
long-term changes could conceivably be indicative of Harbor Station 
impact. 

The hermit crab, Pagurus pollicaris , which belongs to the 
third category, is typically collected most abundantly in the outer 
harbor (Stations 19 and 20) . Abundance in sampling hauls has increased 
from a yearly total of 9 in 1974 to 185 in 1977. Because of its restricted 
distribution to the outer harbor, however, it is doubtful that the 
Harbor Station discharge has any relationship to the increasing abun- 



8-42 



dance of this species. More likely, increasing abundances of P. polli- 
caris in the outer harbor are a result of natural variations in Long 
Island Sound populations. This is further substantiated by a lack of 
evidence indicating any elevation in bottom water temperatures in the 
outer harbor attributable to Harbor Station operation (Section 3.0). 
Unfortunately, however, there are no Long Island Sound studies which 
provide data on P. pollicaris abundances. 

Sguilla empusa, also in the third category, has been collected 
most abundantly in the vicinity of the Harbor Station discharge. Annual 
abundance of this species as indicated by sampling increased from 1974 
through 1976 and decreased slightly during 1977 (Table 8-3). Because of 
their burrowing nature, however, mantis shrimp were not effectively 
sampled by otter trawl and it is therefore difficult to make any accur- 
ate conclusions concerning variations in annual abundances. Also, 
because this species has been collected abundantly only during one or 
two months of the year, it may be that during each year the trawl sam- 
ples were taken during slightly different phases of the fall peak thus 
resulting in varying catch sizes from year to year. 

The spider crab, Libinia emarginata, showed a general decrease 
in abundance from 1974 through 1977 (Table 8-3) . This decrease was not 
considerable and probably reflected natural variations in catch success 
of the otter trawl. On a station-to-station basis, variations in annual 
abundance between preoperational and operational years were not sxibstan- 
tial except at Station 20. At this station, high abundances (265 indi- 
viduals) were observed during 1974; there were only 9 individuals ob- 
served in 1977. The high annual abundance figure for 1974 was primarily 
the result of a single large catch (265 individuals) of Libinia at 
Station 20 during June. 

The starfish. Aster ias forbesi, was the only species which 
showed any major changes in annual abundance. As indicated earlier, the 
abundance of Asterias decreased consistently from a high of 17,000 in 
1974 to a low of 600 during the 9-month survey of 1977. Although it is 



8-43 



difficult to draw any definite conclusions as to the downward trend in 
starfish abundance in New Haven Harbor, it is doubtful that the observed 
decrease was in any way related to operation of the Harbor Station 
electric generating facility. The decline in starfish abundance first 
became apparent in March 1975, prior to the time that the Harbor Station 
went on-line (NAI, 1976a) . Also, it is well documented (Galtsoff , 1964) 
that long-term fluctuations in starfish abundance occur: high yearly 
abundances are often followed by years of relative scarcity. Treatment 
of oyster beds in the harbor by mopping and with biocides also affects 
starfish abundance. Finally, the decline in starfish abundance was 
apparent at all stations sampled, including stations with low impact 
likelihood (Stations 13, 19 and 20), and no substantial changes in dis- 
tribution were evident. 

Rank of abundance by station, annually for the 12 most common 
epibenthic invertebrates, is presented along with annual species abun- 
dance by station in Table 8-3. Judging from annual abundance and sta- 
tion rank by year for each of the 12 selected species, it is evident 
that only minor variations in species distribution occurred between 
preoperational and operational years. These variations are probably pri- 
marily attributable to the mobility of epibenthic invertebrates as well 
as natural fluctuations in abundance and vicissitudes in catch success. 

Variations in rank of abundance for all twelve species were 
notably small in the area of the thermal discharge (Station 8) . In no 
case did species abiindance and/or station rank indicate major changes in 
distribution. This is particularly important since Station 8 would be 
expected to have the greatest potential for manifesting direct effects 
of the discharge. 

Several species of epibenthic invertebrates have been impinged 
on the traveling screens of the cooling-water intake system. Cancer 

irroratus , Ovalipes ocellatus and Squilla empusa were impinged in high- 
est abundances (Table 8-5). Impingement of Cancer was high only during 
October and November 1975 (average of 200 per 24 hours) . Since that 



8-44 



>- 


LU 




_1 


^ 




re <c 




1— 


1— 




s 


:z 


• 


o 


t— I 


m 


s: 




r-^ 




Ql 


CTi 


•» 


LU 




oo 


1— 




cc: ca: 


#» 


riD 3 1— 


o 




q; 


3: CD 


o 




;^ 


Q. 


"* 


t— 4 


LU 


C\J 


_1 

o 


cc 


q; 


o 


>- 


LU 


o 


en 


Q. 




<s: 




z: 


JT 


Q o s: 


LU 


t— t 


TD 


C3 H- 


00 


2: 


<c 




1 — 1 


h- 00 


Cl- 


oo 


LU 


•y 




1— 1 


t-H 


Di 


Q 




o rD 


00 CQ 1— 


LU 


d; 


OO 


1- -a: 




•< 3: — 1 


Qi 




< 


CQ 


s: 


o 


LU 


LU 


1— 1 


1— 


> 


o 


Oi ct O 


LU 


■Xi 


_l 


> 




o 


■z. 


' -z 


o 


t— 1 


LU 

2: 


LU 


o 




q; 


1 — 1 


LU O 


:i: 


za 


CO 


1— 1— d; 


■z. 




<r 


LU 


u_ 


3C 


CQ O 




H-* 




z: 


c 


1/1 


LU 


LU 


z 


> 




UJ ct 


U- 


LU 


3: 


o q: 






O 3 


cc: 


OO 


LU 







www 










W 






in IT) o 










o 




Q 


■ • • 
^ r- •<* 
LO in H 
















www 










w 




2: 


o o in 
o o r- 

fS tsl fM 










in 


LO 




H W 










W 


r-~ 


o 


O O 










o 


<n 




O O 










o 






(N n 










in 






W 










w 




00 


o 
in 










o 
in 






o r- 










VO 




<c 












CM 
H 








to 
















3 




to 












tl 




3 












•■^ 




q 












ti. 


to 


t1 










• tJ 


•n 


(W 













a to 


to 


c 


■H 


m 








a 3 




(!) 


M 


•H 








• m Q, 


to 


W 




^ 








a E 


Q) 


S 


g 


3 








a Q) 


+J 




m 


tl 








in to 





to 












Qj «a 


111 


3 


to 


m 








M Q,M 


R 


q 


3 


•■H 








QJ -H M 


■M 


■H 


Is 


q 


1-1 






M -H 


M 


I) 


Tl 


•H 


<; 






R m 3 


M 


M 


S 


-Q 


H 






ra fc- tji 


itl 


t1 


O 


•H 


() 






o o to 


O 


Cj 


tq 


M 


Eri 



CQ CD 



<: ■< OO 
LU o; >- 
s: I— oo 



I 



I ■ 









VD 




VO 






CN 




O 




O 




"* 






in 








in o 










in 








• • 










• 




z: 




CO o 
CN 










CO 
in 

CN 




o 




jiNnoo 


ON 








n 


ro 










1.0 




oo 


o 


O 










o 






VD 


CO 


CM 


^ 




^ 


^ 




■< 


• 


• 


• 














■H 


O 


O 


d 




d 


CO 






n 


o 


o 


CO 




CO 


(Tl 




rs 


• 


• 


• 


• 




• 








tN 


CO 


.-1 


i-i 




o 


r-- 


lO 


















r-^ 


















(71 


















r^ 




O 


n 


CO 




O 




>£l 




"-o 


• 


• 


• 




• 




• 






^ 


in 


r-H 




rH 




CO 






in 


in CO 


CO 




CO 




'sf 




s: 


• 


• • 


• 




• 










CM 




CM 




o 




.-1 
t~ 








in 










in 




< 




• 
in 










in 






rsi 












CN 




5: 


d 












d 








00 










en 




Ll_ 




d 










o 






ro 


CO 










1.0 




■-0 


d 


d 










o 










to 


















3 




CO 














tl 




3 














•H 




q 














li. 


to 


tl 












• t> 


•ti 


tl 















a to 


CO 


q 


•■s 


ti 










a 3 




Q) 


H 


■H 








• 


W Q, 


to 


Tl 


a) 


^ 








a, 


E 


0) 


e 


ti 


3 








Uj 


0) 


■u 




ti 


Tl 








tn 


M 





to 














Q) "0 


<1) 


3 


CO 


tl 








w 


Q- -H 


q 


q 


3 


■H 








f" 


•-H -H 


•■s 


•H 


H 


q 


>A 









r--( -rH 


-H 





tl 


■-H 


< 






q 


!? ^^ 


'-H 


Is 


E 


^ 


H 






<o 


^ ty 


tl 


11 


O 


•H 


O 






<J 


O CO 


o 


(J 


a: 


M 


tH 





■ 




CO 




CO 




Q 




00 
CN CN 




00 












w 






00 


w w 


CO 


ID 




Z 


• 


in 


• 


• 






CO 


t-- 





CO 








w 




W 




o 




ID 





kO 

CO 






CO 







CO 




I/O 


• 






• 









rH 
CO 




r-H 
CO 






CO 


CO 


CO 


(Tl 




■* 


• 


• 


• 


• 









i-l 





rH 






CO 


00 in 


in 


10 




•-3 


• 


• • 


• 


• 









in 





t^ 


r-. 












r-. 












en 












■" 


■-D 


00 


00 C^l 


00 


UD 






>* 


in 


d 


in 








in 










CO 


CO CN 




^ 




s: 




■ • 










in 


in nH 



CM 




CM 
H 
CM 








in 




in 




«« 




'S' 




'J' 




2: 








Ll. 








■D 




iNnOD 


ON 










to 












3 to 












-a 3 












•H q 












Q) to tj 












• t! tj nj 












a to to q --H 


tj 










as Q) (s 


■-H 








• 


m Qj to s Q) 


.Cl 








a 


e Q) E E 


3 








a 


OJ +J t) 


tJ 








to 


to to 

0) t! Q) 3 to 


tJ 








H 


cij -H q q 3 


•M 








'^ 


■H "-H -H -H M 


q 


^ 






(.) 


t-H -ri r-H (Q 


•■H 






q 


tj 3 M W E 


.4 


H 






tl 


fc. tji tJ tj 


•H 












CO tj a: 


M 


H 



8-45 



period the number of Cancer individuals impinged has been small (average 
of to 6 per 24 hours) . The decrease in the impingement of Cancer 
since December 1975 does not appear to reflect any decrease in the pop- 
ulation abundance of this species since, during 1977, Cancer was col- 
lected in trawls in relatively high abundances. Maximum impingement of 
the calico crab, Ovalipes ocellatus , and the mantis shrimp, Squilla 
empusa, occurred during October and November. During periods of peak 
impingement the average number of animals impinged per 24 hours ranged 
from 50 to over 250 for Ovalipes and 100 to 1200 for Squilla. Ovalipes 
was also impinged in lesser numbers during April, May and June when the 
average number of animals impinged per 24 hours ranged from 5 to 200. 
The magnitude of impingement of Ovalipes and Squilla has generally been 
consistent with trawl data. Ovalipes was collected in highest abun- 
dances in otter trawls during 1975 and 1977 while relatively few were 
collected during 1976. Similarly, highest numbers of Ovalipes were 
impinged during 1975 and 1977, while only moderate nvimbers were impinged 
in 1976. Squilla was collected in highest abundances during 1976 and 
impingement was also high during this year. Comparison of preopera- 
tional with operational trawl data shows no trends of decreasing catch 
abundance of Cancer, Ovalipes or Squilla as might be expected if exces- 
sive impingement had occurred. 

In conclusion, with one exception, no major changes in epi- 
benthic species abundance and distribution within New Haven Harbor have 
been apparent since the New Haven Harbor Station began operation (29 
August 1975) . Variations observed in species composition, distribution 
and abundance during all operational years appear to be well within the 
range of variability established by preoperational monitoring. The 
starfish, Asterias forbesi, was the only species that showed any major 
change in abundance; there has been no evidence to date that suggests 
that the observed annual decrease in catch abundance of this species was 
attributable to the operation of the New Haven Harbor Station. The 
operation of New Haven Harbor Station appears to have had no detectable 
influence on the epibenthic invertebrate community in New Haven Harbor. 



8-46 



LITERATURE CITED 



Berrill, M. and R. Stewart. 1973. Tunnel-digging in mud by newly- 
settled American lobsters, Homarus americanus. J. Fish. Res. Bd. 
Can. 30-285-287. 

Bigelow, H. B. and W. C. Schroeder. 1953. Fishes of the Gulf of Maine. 
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Serv. , Fish. Bull. 74. 577 pp. 

Boddeke, R. 1975. Autumn migration and vertical distribution of the 
brown shrimp, Crangon crangon (L.), in relation to environmental 
conditions. Proc. 9th Europ. Mar. Biol. Symp. 1975. pp. 483-494. 

. 1976. The seasonal migration of the brown shrimp, Crangon 



crangon. Neth. J. Sea Res. 10:103-130. 

Caldwell, R. L. and H. Dingle. 1976. Stoma topods. Scientific American. 
324(1) :80-89. 

Crawford, E.A. and Homsher, P.J., DNA studies of a Chesapeake Bay popula- 
tion of the tunicate, Molgula manhattensis , (De-Kay) (Ascidacea) . 
Chesapeake Sci., 16, 208 (1975). 

Davis, C.C. 1972. The effects of pollutants on the reproduction of 

marine organisms. p. 305-311 IN M. Ruivo (ed.). Marine pollution 
and sea life. Fishing News (Books) Ltd., London, England. 624 pp. 

Equitable Environmental Health, Inc. 1977. Port Jefferson Generating 
Station Final Aquatic Ecology Report. Prepared for Long Island 
Lighting Company. 110 pp. 

Galtsoff, P. S. 1964. The American oyster, Crassostrea virginica, 

(Gmelin) . U.S. Fish and Wildl. Serv., Fishery Bulletin. 641:1-480. 

Gosner, K. L. 1971. Guide to identification of marine and estuarine 

invertebrates (Cape Hatteras to the Bay of Fundy) . Wiley and Sons, 
Inc., New York, NY. 693 pp. 

Hanson, C. H. , R. W. White and W. L. Hiram. 1977. Entrapment and 

impingement of fishes by power plant cooling water intakes: an 
overview. Marine Fisheries Review. 39(10) :1-17. 

Jeffries, H. P. 1966. Partitioning of the estuarine environment by 
two species of Cancer. Ecol. 47 (3) : 187-191. 

Kinno, O. 19~0. Temperature - Invertebrates. pp. 407-513 IN O. Kinne 
led.). Marine Ecology. Volume I - Environmental Factors, Part I. 
Wiley - Interscience, New York. 681 pp. 

Krouse, J. S. 1972. Some life history aspects of the rock crab. Cancer 
irroratus, in the Gulf of Maine. J. Fish. Res. Bd. Can. 29:1479- 

1482. 



8-47 



Logan, T. D. and D. Maurer. 1975. Diversity of marine invertebrates in 
a thermal effluent. Jour. Water Pol. Contr. Fed. 47 (3) : 515-523. 

MacKenzie, C.L. 1970a. Oyster culture in Long Island Sound. U.S. Fish 
and Wildlife Service, separate No. 859. 

Marchant, A. and A. Holmsen. 1975. Harvesting Rock and Jonah crabs in 
Rhode Island: some technical and economic aspects. Resource 
Economics/NOAA Sea Grant. University of Rhode Island, Marine 
Memorand\im Number 35. Kingston, R.I. 1975. 

McCluskey, W.J., Jr. 1978. Surface swarming of Sguilla empusa Say 

(Stomatopoda) in Narragansett Bay, Rhode Island, U.S.A. Crustaceana. 

McLeese, D.W. and D.G. Wilder. 1958. The activity and catchability of 
the lobster (Homarus americanus) in relation to temperature. J. 
Fish. Res. Bd. Can. 15:1345-1354. 

Mitchell, R. Aspects of the ecology of the lamellibranch, Mercenaria 
mercenaria, (L. ) in British waters. Hydrobiol. Bull., 8, 124 
(1974) . 

Musick, J. A. and J.D. McEachran. 1972. Autumn and winter occurrence of 
decapod crustaceans in Chesapeake Bight, U.S.A. Crustaceana, 
22(2) :190-200. 

National Academy of Sciences/National Academy of Engineering. 1973. 
Water Quality Criteria 1972. EPA-R3-73-033-March 1973. 

Normandeau Associates, Inc. 1972. Marine Sediments New Haven Harbor, 
Connecticut: Results of Analysis and Proposals for Dredge Spoil 
Disposal. Addendum 12 of Environment Report Coke Works Site, June, 
1971. 134pp. 

1974. Stamford Harbor Ecological Studies, Stamford, Conn- 



ecticut. Final Report 1971-1973 for the Northeast Utilities Ser- 
vice Company. 159pp. 

1974a. Coke Works Ecological Monitoring Studies, New Haven 



Harbor, Connecticut. Annual Report, 1972-1973 for The United 
Illuminating Company, New Haven, Connecticut. 215pp. 

1974b. Coke Works Ecological Monitoring Studies, New Haven 



Harbor, Connecticut. Interim Report, May - December 1973 for the 
United Illuminating Company, New Haven, Connecticut. 199pp. 

1975a. New Haven Harbor Station Ecological Monitoring 



Studies, New Haven Harbor, Connecticut. Annual Report, 1974 for 
The United Illuminating Company, New Haven, Connecticut. 223pp. 

1976a. New Haven Harbor Station Ecological Monitoring 



Studies New Haven Harbor, Connecticut. Annual Report, 1975 for The 
United Illuminating Company, New Haven, Connecticut. 312pp. 



8-48 



1977a. New Haven Harbor Station Ecological Monitoring 



Studies, New Haven Harbor, Connecticut. Annual Report 1976 for The 
United Illuminating Company, New Haven, Connecticut. 376pp. 

. 1978a. New Haven Harbor Ecological Monitoring Studies, New 



Haven Harbor, Connecticut. Annual Report 1977 for The United 
Illuminating Company, New Haven, Connecticut. 359pp. 

Northeast Utilities Service Company. 1977. Annual Report. Millstone 
Nuclear Power Station Entrainment Studies Units 1 and 2. 

Price, K.S., Jr. 1962. Biology of the sand shrimp, Crangon septem- 

spinosa, in the shore zone of the Delaware Bay Region. Ches. Sci. 
3:224-255. 

Regnault, M. 1976. Influence of svibstratum on mortality and increment 
of shrimp Crangon crangon. Cahiers de Biologie Marine. 17:347- 
359. 

Richards, S.W. and G.A. Riley. 1967. Aspects of Oceanography of Long 
Island Sound. VI. The benthic epifauna of Long Island Sound. 
Bull. Bingham Oceanogr. Coll. 19(2):4-135. 

Saila, S.B. and S.D. Pratt. 1973. IN: Coastal and Offshore Environ- 
mental Inventory Cape Hatteras to Nantucket Shoals. S.B. Saila 
(coordinator). URI Marine Publication Series, p. 6.1-6.125. 

Scarratt, D. J. , and R. Lowe. 1972. Biology of rock crab. Cancer irror- 
atus , in Northumberland Strait. J. Fish. Res. Bd. Canada 29:161- 
166. 

Stewart, L.L. 1972. The seasonal movements, population dynamics and 
ecology of the lobster, Homarus americanus , off Ram Island, Conn- 
ecticut. Ph.D. Thesis, Univ. of Conn. 

Talmage, S.S., and C.C. Coutant. 1978. Thermal Effects. Jour. Water 
Poll. Control Fed., 50:1514-1552. 

Thomas, M.L.H. 1969. Overwintering of American lobsters, Homarus 

americanus, in burrows in Bideford River, P.E.I. J. Fish. Res. Bd. 
Can. 25:2725-2727. 

Turner, H.J. 1954. The edible crab fishery of Boston Harbor. Seventh 
report on investigations of the shellfisheries of Massachusetts. 
Woods Hole Oceanogr. Occ. Pap. 

Uziel, M.S. 1978. Impingement. Jour. Water Poll. Control Fed., 
50:1553-1567. 

Williams, A. B. 1965. Marine decapod crustaceans of the Carolinas. 
Fish. Bull. 65:1-298. 



8-49 



Wilson, J.H., and Seed, R. , Reproduction in Mytilus edulis L. (Mollusca: 
Bivalvia) in Carlingford Lough, Northern Ireland. Ir. Fish. Invest. 
Ser. B. , 15, 1 (1974) . 

Winget, R.R. , D. Maurer and H. Seymour. 1974. Occurrence, size com- 
position and sex ratio of the rock crab. Cancer irroratus Say and 
the spider crab, Libinia emarginata leach in Delaware Bay. J. Nat. 
Hist. 8:199-205. 



NEW HAVEN HARBOR 
ECOLOGICAL STUDIES SUMMARY REPORT, 1979 



9.0 OYSTER STUDIES 
by David J. Hartzband and David N. Pease 

Normandeau Associates, Inc. 
Bedford, N. H. 



TABLE OF CONTENTS 

PAGE 

INTRODUCTION 9-1 

METHODS 9-5 

1971-1973 9-5 

1974-1977 ■ 9-6 

Hypothesis Testing 9-6 

RESULTS ■ . . . . 9-9 

Mortality 9-9 

Change in Length (Growth) 9-15 

DISCUSSION 9-19 

LITERATURE CITED. , .- 9-29 

STATISTICAL APPENDIX 9-34 



LIST OF FIGURES 

PAGE 

9-1. Oyster grounds in New Haven Harbor, Connecticut 9-2 

9-2. Oyster growth study measurements taken from May 
1971 through November 1977 at (A) New Haven 
Harbor Station, (B) Long Wharf and (C) Fort 
Hale ■ . 9-3 

9-3. Dry weight condition indices with standard 
deviation range for control and experimental 
oysters, 1973-1977 9-10 

9-4. Oyster survivorship (% survival) by month, 

1973-1977 9-11 

9-5. Mean oyster lengths at Fort Hale and 
New Haven Harbor Station, May through 
December, 1972-1977 9-12 

9-6. Difference in adjusted final length versus 
adjusted mean length (mm) by station and 
year i . . . 9-16 

9-7. Mean oyster-length by station, sampling period 

and year 9-18 



n 



LIST OF TABLES 

PAGE 

9-1. MEAN LENGTH, DRY WEIGHT, DWCI , WWCI AND CAVITY 
VOLUMES OF OYSTERS FROM CONTROL, HARBOR STATION 
AND FORT HALE SAMPLES, 1973-1977 9-7 

9-2. PERCENT SURVIVAL OF OYSTERS AT NEW HAVEN HARBOR 

STATION AND FORT HALE: MAY-NOVEMBER, 1973-1977. ...... 9-13 

9-3. OYSTER MORTALITY DATA, 1974-1977 9-14 

9-4. OYSTER MORTALITY VERSUS YEAR AND STATION. 

RESULTS OF 3-WAY TESTS 9-14 

9-5. OYSTER MORTALITY VERSUS YEAR (G-TEST) 9-14 

9-6. NET GROWTH (IN MM) OF OYSTERS HELD AT NEW HAVEN 
HARBOR STATION AND FORT HALE; MAY-NOVEMBER, 
1972-1977 9-16 

9-7. NET GROWTH VERSUS YEAR; COVARIANCE ANALYSIS 9-16 

9-8. ADJACENT MONTHS DURING WHICH SIGNIFICANT* 

GROWTH OCCURRED 9-17 

9-9. CHLOROPHYLL a CONCENTRATIONS (mg/m^) AT THE 

NEW HAVEN HARBOR STATION, 1974-1976 9-20 

9-10 NUMBERS OF ASTERIAS FORBESI COLLECTED DURING 
10-MINUTE TRAWLS AT THE NEW HAVEN HARBOR 
STATION, 1974-1976 9-22 

9-11 CORRELATION ANALYSIS OF PERCENT SURVIVAL OF OYSTERS: 

1973 VERSUS 1974-1977 9-23 

9-12 CORRELATION PATTERNS FOR ALLOMETRIC VARIABLES 

BETWEEN STATIONS AND BETWEEN YEARS (1973-1977) 9-26 



m 



9.0 OYSTER STUDIES 

by David J. Hartzband and David N. Pease 
Normandeau Associates, Inc. 
Bedford, N. H. 

INTRODUCTION 

New Haven Harbor has historically served as a natural source 
of seed oysters (Crassostrea virginica) for the Long Island Sound oyster 
fishery (Figure 9-1) . The environmentally stressed conditions in the 
harbor presently necessitate the dredging and transferral of premarketable 
oysters (10-15 cm) to less impacted areas such as Oyster Bay, Northport 
Harbor, Peconic Bay and Gardiner's Bay, New York for "self-cleaning" 
(MacKenzie, 1970) . The primary sources of environmental stress in New 
Haven Harbor are the extensive influx of domestic and industrial effluents, 
periodic oil spills and dredging (Army Corps of Engineers, 1973) . 

The objectives of oyster studies were to provide baseline 
information on oyster growth and condition in New Haven Harbor prior to 
start-up of New Haven Harbor Station and to assess the possible effects 
of the generating station's activities after operations commenced in 
July 1975 (commercial operations began 29 August) . 

These studies have been carried out in New Haven Harbor as ' 
part of the New Haven Harbor Station Environmental Monitoring Studies 
since 1971, four years prior to initiation of station operations. The 
1971-1973 study was designed to monitor monthly change in length and 
weight of oysters held at three sites in New Haven Harbor : Fort Hale 
(C) , New Haven Harbor Station (A) and Long Wharf (B) (Figure 9-2) . New 
Haven Harbor Station pier was used as a study site to provide a base line 
for evaluation of possible near-field effects of the generating sta- 
tion's activities on existing inner harbor oyster growth and condition. 
The Long Wharf site was utilized as an inner harbor control, while the 
Fort Hale fishing pier site was utilized to identify typical patterns of 
oyster gro\>rth in the outer harbor where there could be expected to be 



9-1 



9-2 




Figure 9-1. Oyster grounds in Nev>/ Haven Harbor, Connecticut. 
Harbor Ecological Studies Summary Report, 1978. 



New Haven 



9-3 



Oyster Study Locations 



1971 

Harbor Station (A) 

Long Wharf (B) 

Fort Hale (C) 



MJJASOND 

xxxxxxxx 
xxxxxxxx 
xxxxxxxx 



1972 



JFMAMJJASOND 



Harbor Station (A) xxxxxxxxxxxx 

Long Wharf (B) xxxxxxxxxxxx 

Fort Hale (C) xxxxxxxxxxxx 



1973 



JFMAMJJASOND 



Harbor Station (A) x x x x x 
Long Wharf (B) x x x x 
Fort Hale (C) x x x x x 



1974 JFMAMJJASOND 

Harbor Station (A) x x 

Fort Hale (C) x x 



1975 JFMAMJJASOND 

Harbor Station (A) x x x x x x 

Fort Hale (C) x x x x x x 



1976 JFMAMJJASOND 

Harbor Station (A) x x x x x x x 

Fort Hale (C) x x x x x x x 



1977 JFMAMJJASON 

Harbor Station (A) x x x x x x x 

Fort Hale (C) x x x x x x x 




Figure 9-2. Oyster growth study measurements taken from May 1971 through 
November 1977 at (A) New Haven Harbor Station, (B) Long Wharf 
and (C) Fort Hale. New Haven Harbor Ecological Studies 
Summary Report, 1979. 



9-4 



relativoly little if any effect of New Haven Harbor Station operation but 
wliere water quality and food availability would be generally similar. 

The study was modified in May 1973. Oysters were purchased 
from New Haven Harbor instead of Marion, Massachusetts, where they 
previously had been obtained. Also, because of high oyster mortalities 
(up to 50% per month) not typical of the other two sites. Long Wharf was 
abandoned as a study site. More importantly, the program was revised to 
define the condition of the oysters, in addition to documenting changes 
in length. Condition index (CI) , based on the relationship between the 
weight of the oyster meat to the volume of the shell cavity, is used as 
a measure of the quality of the meat but cannot be applied directly to 
growth (Galtsoff , 1964) . 

The operation of a generating station could potentially affect 
oyster growth and condition in New Haven Harbor by altering certain physical,| 
chemical and biological parameters. The primary parameters that could 
be affected are temperature, dissolved oxygen, turbidity and food supply. 
Rather than design a series of experiments to determine the separate and 
combined effects of changes in these parameters on oyster biology, this 
study focused on the overall properties of oyster growth and mortality. 
By performing in situ experimental measurements of growth and mortality 
parameters, it was possible to formulate and test specific hypotheses 
that are directly applicable to the determination of the potential 
impact of the operation of New Haven Harbor Station on the growth and 
survival capabilities of oyster populations in the harbor. 

Three hypotheses were developed with respect to these ob- 
jectives and statistically tested to determine if any postoperational 
effects could be delineated and attributed to the activity of New Haven 
Harbor station. These hypotheses were: 1) mortality differs by station 
or by year; 2) net change in length (growth) varies by station or by 
year and 3) seasonal growth patterns differ at the two stations. It was 
possible to test only a corollary hypothesis of 3) namely: length 
changes at the two experimental stations occur in the same time periods 



9-5 



for a given year. In addition, growth, mortality and condition index 
were compared graphically to determine if postoperational changes in 
patterns could be detected. Appropriate data sets were used for hypo- 
thesis testing while the entire data set (1972-1977) was used for 
graphic comparisons. 



METHODS 

A brief, general resume of sampling and measurement methodol- 
ogies for each of the two overall experimental periods (May 1971-April 
1973 and May 1973-November 1977) follows. For detailed methods, ana- 
lytic techniques, and specific results for each year's study, refer to 
the relevant Normandeau Associates, Inc. reports (NAI: 1973, 1974a, 
1974b, 1975, 1976, 1977, 1978). 



1971 - 1973 

) 

Trays of live oysters were emplaced in July 1971 at the Fort 
Hale fishing pier, the outer end of the Harbor Station pier and on Long 
Wharf (Figure 9-2). At each site, a wire basket containing trays of oysters 
was attached to the pier in such a position that it would remain sub- 
merged at all tidal levels (approximately six feet below mean low water) . 
Trays were separated into two sections. The larger part contained 
50 measured and weighed oysters. The remaining portion of the basket 
held a reserve supply of oysters to be added to the study group as 
mortality replacements. These oysters were purchased from oyster 
growers in Marion, Massachusetts, and had been grown on the west side of 
Buzzard's Bay. Once each month, the trays were raised and all oysters 
scraped clean of fouling growth. Each living specimen was measured with 
calipers along its greatest length and weighed (Ohaus spring scale) in a 
ir.esh basket immersed in a pail of harbor water. 

The August 1971 inspection of the oyster baskets revealed that 
the Fort Hale sample had been vandalized, and all oysters removed. The 



9-6 



tray was therefore moved to a less accessible dolphin offshore from the 
Fort Hale pier and restocked with a new sample in September 1971. In 
May 1972 all remaining oysters at all stations were discarded and 
replaced with new specimens, also from the Marion, Massachusetts, area. 
The experiment was then continued until April 1973. 



1974 - 1977 

Starting in 1973 a bushel of oysters was purchased from 
Long Island Oyster Farms in New Haven, in May or June of each sampling 
year. About 200 oysters of various lengths were selected and divided by 
a random sampling technique into three portions. One hundred and fifty 
were numbered with identification tags, measured and 75 each placed in 
trays at Harbor Station and Fort Hale. Fifty oysters were returned to 
the laboratory to serve as initial controls . The following measurements 
were taken: shell length, total volume (by displacement) and air weight 
of intact oyster, volume and dry weight of shells, volume and wet and 
dry weight of meat. The condition index (CI) was calculated by dividing 
oyster meat weight by the shell cavity volume (total oyster volume minus 
the volume of shells) and multiplying the quotient by 100 (Galtsoff , 
1964) . Oyster lengths were measured at the beginning and end of the 
experiment in 1974 and monthly during the experiment in 1975-1977. 
Harbor Station and Fort Hale oysters were sacrificed at the end of each 
experimental year and subjected to the same volume and weight measure- 
ments (Table 9-1) . 



Hypothesis Testing 

The data acquired by these methods were used each year to make 
statistical comparisons between stations and to test the validity of the 
three summary hypotheses as here described. Hypothesis (1) mortality 
differs by station or by year, was tested with a series of 3-way 
Otosts (Sokal and Rohlf, 1969). Factors were a) stations, b) years 



1 



9-7 



O —I 

a: < 
1— o 

Z I— I 

o o 
o o 

_l 
s: o 
o o 

C£. UJ 

u. 
m o 

C£. CO 
Ixl C£. 
I— < 
(/I 3: 

>- 

o z 



o ear 
00 



>- r^ 

I— CT> 

I— I r— 
> I 

«a: CO 

<Ti 
Q t— 

I— I UJ 

t_> _J 

S Q- 

< 

H-i <y\ 
O LU r^ 
S — I O^ 
Q < .— 



I— I— 1— 

CD O O 
I— I Lu D. 
UJ UJ 
S Q Qi 

>- <>- 

a: Qi 

Q z «=c 

o 2: 



I— <: i>o 
cs I— 
2: (/^ 

UJ C/) 

_] q; UJ 

O H-l 

Z CQ Q 

cc q: Z3 
UJ <: I— 
s a: t/1 



(Tl 



CO 









r^ 


i-H 


CT> 


r- 


VO 


<o 


CM 


in 


[^ 


■* 


10 


■<» 




> r^ 




• 




















• 






01^ 




t 


in 


CM 


d 


rH 


CM 


CO 


00 


'T 


1* 





CM 




Z CT> 




00 








rH 




■■* 




CM 




<-< 






*" 


































n 


CD 


rH 


CM 


CTl 


CO 


CM 


^ 


CM 


r- 


ro 


ro 




> «o 




• 




• 




• 


• 


■ 




• 






• 




01^ 


M" 





00 


in 


rH 


■^ 


n 





lO 


in 


01 


d 


"J 


UJ 


z 


<s> 











•-{ 







H 


ro 




CM 




_J 


>— 




H 




























in 


CM 


fO 


>* 





n 


CO 


00 




(N 


rH 


in 




> ir> 




• 


• 


• 


• 


• 


• 


• 


• 


• 


• 


• 


• 


1— 


ot^ 





in 


^ 


10 


rH 


ID 


in 


CO 


1 


CO 


CO 


01 


t 


oc 


Z Ol 


in 





iH 






.-1 




M' 


•-^ 


•* 


rH 


rH 







^ 




r^ 
























u. 




































^ 


in 





H 


r-- 


CT^ 


CM 


ro 


r-j 


ID 


VD 


00 




O"* 












• 






• 












ui r^ 


00 


d 


p~' 


in 


rH 


■* 


in 


(O 


■* 


ID 





r- 


CO 




a O) 


IT) 











rH 




un 


CM 


ro 


H 


rH 






■" 




iH 


























CO 







in 


CO 


CTl 





I^ 


U-, 


kO 


CD 


00 


10 


CM 




LU r^ 






» 


■ 


• 


• 


• 












> 




Q <Ti 





(TV 


CO 


CO 





rH 


n 


in 


01 


CM 


CM 


10 


^ 






r~ 


<n 








•-< 




in 


H 


ro 


rH 


rH 






or- 

Z CTl 




n 


>* 


CO 


in 


c\ 


vo 


CO 


CO 


ro 


10 


in 


01 






r- 


vO 


H 


d 


d 


CM 


00 


d 


r^ 


vO 


r~ 


H 








CO 












CN 


rH 


CM 








z 





































00 


lO 


lO 


CTl 


^ 


CTl 


VO 


J^ 


VD 


eg 


CO 


01 


1— t 


=> vo 












• 












• 




1— 


t-«. 


r~ 


(>! 


r-' 


m 








<*' 


CO 


■^ 





CO 


CO 


ro 


< 


z w 


^D 











rH 




in 


CM 


^ 


rH 


rH 




l- 






H 
























l/> 




































10 


CO 


CO 


CO 


ID 





lO 


in 


t^ 





01 


vo 


QC 


> m 






• 


■ 


■ 


• 


t 




■ 


• 


• 









or- 


H 


d 


CM 


■* 





•<* 


^o 


in 


00 


in 


00 


ro 


CO 


CO 


Z <S\ 


UI 





1-1 






rH 




"d" 


rH 


ro 


rH 


rH 




oc 


f— 




rH 
























•s. 






























3: 
































"^t 




W 


CM 


00 


r- 


0% 


n 


CM 


CO 


ro 


CO 


00 


CO 




UI r^ 










• 


• 


• 




• 


• 


• 








Q Ol 


kO 


fO 


r- 


CM 





CTl 


■* 


CM 


t^ 


rH 


rH 


f-< 


CM 




■" 


in 


<n 












^ 


rH 


ro 


rH 


H 






CO 




IC 


a\ 


m 


lO 


in 


«* 


»* 


in 


ro 


CM 


CM 


VO 




UI f- 












• 


• 






• 


• 


• 






Q 0^ 


vo 


rH 


10' 


r^ 


d 


r~ 


CM 


ro 


rH 


r- 


CO 


rH 


CM 






VO 


m 












I- 


rH 


CM 




rH 






Z l~. 




in 


CTl 


CO 


m 


>* 


in 


CO 


yj 


"* 


CM 


ro 


CO 




Z3 1--. 




• 


• 


• 


• 


• 


■ 








t 


t 


• 




■^ <y\ 





10 


•>* 


rH 








•'I' 


•-{ 


CO 


"f 


ID 


ID 


rH 


1 


f— 


in 


vO 








rH 




in 


CM 


f-\ 







































q; 






























1— 


>- VO 




r- 


n 


m 


in 


<£) 


in 


00 


in 


rH 


rH 


01 


01 


z 



gs^ 





CN 


<S) 


m 


d 


in 


00 


10 


in 


[^ 


ro 


01 


• 
rH 





I— 


in 


00 








H 




'J 


rvi 


CM 


r^ 






_l 






























< 


Z ID 




CO 


rH 


ID 


■;r 


in 


>* 


ro 


m 


in 


in 





10 


z 


=) r-- 








• 




• 


■ 


• 




• 


• 


• 


• 


1—* 


■D 0^ 


CO 


CN 


in 


CM 


rH 


CO 


CO 





■"^ 





CM 


CM 


in 


C3 




'T 


<n 


iH 










>* 


r-i 


ro 


rH 


rH 




1— 1 






























q: 

































>;"* 




r- 


CM 


CO 


CO 


0^ 


ro 


01 


CTl 


ID 


CO 


(Jl 







g^ 





eg 


lO 


m 


d 





n 


00 


CM 


CM 





•^ 


ro 






in 


m 








rH 




^ 


rH 


ro 


r^ 


rH 






>- CO 




CM 


CO 


CM 


VD 


a\ 


CM 


CO 


01 





•^ 


^ 


•<* 









oi 


>* 


CM 


d 


00 


ro 


CO 


kO 


r~ 


CO 


• 

ro 


ro 






in 


00 












in 


<-\ 


CM 




rH 


























5 














i 




I 












n 


















— ^ 












0) 














x 
















^ 














4J 




4J 












rH 




JJ 










01 




^ 

















J3 










a 




01 












> 




01 










« 




■H 
















•H 










Hi 




s 












^ 




1 










s 








H 




H 




•H 
















>1 




U 




y 




> 




+J 














»H 




S 




s 




ID 




<U 








Z 


^ 


in 


Q 


to 


Q 


0) 




to 


U 


01 


S 





9-8 



(1974-1977) and c) mortality. The analysis was carried out with respect 
to total number of oysters, live oysters and dead oysters. Total number 
of oysters reflected the number known to be alive, the number known to 
be dead and the number of oysters with missing tags but known to be 
alive. Missing oysters vrere considered dead except when untagged 
oysters were not noted, (as in 1975) . In this latter case, all missing 
oysters were excluded from the analysis as were oysters whose status was 
questionable. Tests of this hypothesis used a per experiment alpha 
level of 0.05. 

Hypothesis (2) net change in length (growth) varies by 
station or by year, was tested by means of a covariance analysis (Guen- 
ther, 1964) . The covariate or "concomitant" variable in this analysis 
was initial length and the dependent variable v/as final length. The 
independent classification variables were stations and years. Data were 
treated as a 2-f actor, completely randomized design with one concomitant 
variable. Scheffe's method for multiple comparison (Scheffe, 1969) was 
employed when so indicated by the results of the ANOVA (Analysis of Vari- 
ance) . Additionally, because of problems of heterogeneity of variances 
(see statistical appendix) , three independent covariance analyses were 
used to assess station variation within years. Factors were a) stations 
and b) initial length (covariate) . No transformation was applied to the 
data set because none were consistently successful in normalizing the 
variance for the entire data set. Data included all oysters for which 
initial and final lengths were recorded. 

Hypothesis (3) length changes at the two experimental 
stations occur in the same time periods for a given year, was tested 
with a mixed model randomized block ANOVA for each station within each 
year (Kirk, 1968; Gill, 1977). Tukey's procedure for multiple compari- 
sons was used to assess mean length differences by months . When vari- 
ances were heterogeneous, modified Tukey's procedures were used. Com- 
parison of growth patterns were assessed based on differences in results 
for the two stations. Data included all oysters that were measured in 
all months. 



9-9 



These hypotheses were indirectly addressed with respect to the 
entire data set (1971-1977) by means of graphic comparisons between 
stations and between years (Figures 9-3, 9-4 and 9-5). This was espec- 
ially important for hypotheses 2 and 3 where the nature of the data 
precluded the inclusion of preoperation results in the formal hypo- 
thesis testing (see Statistical Appendix) . 



RESULTS 

Table 9-1 gives mean length, dry weight, dry weight condition 
index, wet weight condition index and cavity volumes for control and 
experimental oysters from 1973 - 1977, while Figure 9-3 graphs dry 
weight condition index of control and experimental oysters for the same 
time period. These summary data are presented for perspective and . 
to temporarily extend the results of hypothesis testing. 



Mortality 

Figure 9-4 graphs percent survival of oysters by month from 
1973 to 1977, while Table 9-2 presents the data with summary statistics 
from which these graphs were developed. These data show that percent 
survival (the complement of percent mortality) appeared similar in all 
years (range 80-96%) except 1975 when percent survival dropped to 67- 
69%. 

Table 9-3 displays oyster mortality data from 1974-1977. 
These data were used to test hypothesis (1) , with regard to differences 
in mortality attributable to station and year. Table 9-4 presents the 
results of hypothesis testing for mortality versus year and station, and 
Table 9-5 presents the results of a pairwise comparison of years, two 
years at a time. The results shown in Table 9-4 indicate that oyster 
mortality was independent of station but dependent upon year. The 
mortality by station by year interaction was not significant. The 



Text continued on page 15 



9-10 



1 \ — r 



CM 
CM 



O 

CXI 



00 



to 



1 — \ \ r 



I I r 

o 00 



^^ 


r-^ 








CTl 

I— ( 


-o 

r— 




o 




o 


to 


1— 




S- 


OJ 


o 




+J 


■r— 






• c 


-a 






o 


3 


UJ 




o 


•4-> 
OO 


s 




s- 








o 


r— 


ce: 
o 




li- 


o 






eu 


•1— 






en 


en 


^^ 


^o 


E 


o 




1^ 


(O 


r— 


^u- 


en 


S- 


o 


==u 


i-H 




o 






E 


UJ 






o 








•r— 


i- 


o 




+■' 


o 






rtJ 


XI 


^ 






s- 


<_) 




> 


(O 






(U 


or 






T3 




UJ 






E 


^ 




T3 


<u 


0£ 




S- 


> 




(0 


to 


Ll_ 






nr 






n3 


5 


^o 


in 


+-> 


0) 


^r 


r^ 


to 


z: 


"? 


en 






=^ro 


r-H 


JC 








+-> 


• 






■ r— 


r^ 






S r-- 


o 






CTl 


QC 




to 


1 — 


z 




0) 


1 


CJ 




u 00 . 






■ r- 


r-v 






■o 


o 


UJ 




E 


p— 


s 




•r- 


•^ • 


":: 




E 


to CTl 


o 




o 


s- r-- 








O) CTl 






+J 


+J 1— 


^s 


"-1- 

r^ 


-a 


to 




c 


O +J 


1^ 


r-H 


o 
o 


s- 
.— o 






+-> 


+-> OJ 


_I 




j:: 


E q: 


o: 




en 


QJ 






•1— 


E >i 


K 




(U 


•r- S_ 






s 


S- (C 
OJ E 






>> CL E 






S- 


X 13 




Q 


cu ui 







CO 


a: = 


<r> 


1 




1 — 


en 




CTl 




^t; 


c— 1 


(1) 

3 
05 



to 



"iVAiAyns iN33a3d 



9-11 



r~ 


ro 


to 


't 


r- 


r^ 


1^ 


r-- 


0^ 


CT> 


<T> 


0^ 



i/ 

V 



/■'■' 



4 

i 
i 



/ 



to ro r- «;j- 
ft. t^ r~ r~ 

0» O) 0^ Oi 




in 



■J >■•■ 



> 

-O 



I- 

-O 

o 



0- 

-llJ 
en 












U-^ 



o 

s- 



> 

ro 



o 



in 

01 



—3 <: 



-S 



-o 
o 



-UJ 



-3 

< 



t/1 
_l o 

-ID CQ 



-3 
-a 



r 

o 
o 



.5 



r^ 




f-- 




a> 




1 — 




CO 




r~~ 




Ol 




•— 




«t 




r~ 








+J 


• 


C Ol 


o 


1 — 


E 


cn 




r— 


>i 




JD 


w\ 




+-> 


^.^. 


5- 


f— . 


O 


fO 


Dl 


> 


0) 




q; 


> 




s- 


>> 


3 


s- 


(/) 


(0 




£ 


&s 


E 




3 




00 


Q. 




•t— 


l/> 


J=. 


0) 


1/) 


•r— 


S- 


-o 


o 


3 


> 


4-> 




tn 


> 




s- 


^- 


3 


1T3 


(/I 


O 




•r— 


s- 


ai 


cu 


o 


+J 


^- 


(/I 


o 


>, 


o 


o 


LU 


^ 




■=i- 




(T> 




0) 




s- 




=5 




cr 





o 



o 
oo 



o 



o 

CD 



ivAiAyns iNBoyBd 



9-12 




o 



on 
o 



s_ 




OJ 




J^ 




E 




O) 




o 




cu 




Q 




-E 




01 




rs 









s- 




^ 




-1-) 


cr. 




r~^ 


>, cri 


"3 


^— 


2: 






#t 


•^ 


+-> 


c 


s- 








•r— 


Q. 


+J 


cu 


(0 


CC 


+-> 




to 


>, 




s- 


S- 


m 







^ 


^ 


s- 


3 


ro 


00 


a: 






w 


£= 


cu 


cu 


"1— 


> 


■0 


fC 


3 


^ 


+-> 




I/O 


s 




cu 


1 — 


■z. 


re 




(J 


-a 


•r- 


E 


CD 


« 







r^ 


O) 





r— 


(J 


n3 


LU 


re 






S- 


+-> 





s_ 


^ 





s_ 


Ll_ 


(O 




in 


+-> 




re 


c 




cu 


to 


> 


.c: 


(O 


+J 


3: 


O) 




E 


2 


(U 


cu 


1 — 


z: 


s- 




cu 


• 


■4-> 


t^ 


</l 


1^ 


>5cri 





•— 


c 


CM 


(0 


r~~ 


cu 


01 



ID 
I 

(U 

s- 

(7> 



(uiui) H19N3-1 yniSAO 



9-13 







1 


in 


<,o 


O) 


in 


in 


in 


:r 


to 


1 


■ 


• 


• 


• 




• 


Ll_ 




' 


in 


Oi 


OD 


o-i 


0-1 


G^ 






o 


r- 


rH 


r- 


^ 


^ 


■"S- 


oo 


IX 


o 


(Ti 


CTl 


co 


CO 


00 


00 


=n 




H 


























CO 


00 


CO 






1 


rH 


■* 


CO 


« 








to 


1 


• 


• 


• 


o 


Q 


O 






1 


n 


a\ 


(Ti 


rH 


r-^ 


r-\ 






o 


CO 


en 


kD 


LO 


in 


in 




IX 


o 


CTl 


00 


CO 


00 


CO 


CO 




l~^ 


















p^ 




o 


vo 


iXI 


VD 


VD 


in 




(y\ 




o 


cr. 


a\ 


CTl 


Ol 


00 








H 














<o 


















r-- 


O 


t^ 


LO 


r^ 


r- 


in 


VD 




a~i 


O 


Oi 


en 


CO 


00 


00 


CTl 




r— 


iH 














LU 


















_l 


















<c 


LO 
















nz 


1^ 


O 


n 


r- 


en 


01 


CTl 


in 




CTl 


O 


cr> 


r^ 


VD 


VD 


VD 


00 


1— 


1 — 


i-l 














en 


















o 


















Lj_ 


•* 












- 






r^ 


O 


o 


rH 


o 


o 


o 


Ol 




CTl 


O 


o 


00 


CO 


00 


CO 


VD 




■" 


iH 


r-H 














CO 


















r-^ 




o 


r^ 


ID 


n 


ro 


o 




en 




o 


Ol 


CTl 


CTl 


01 


CO 








H 
















1 


ID 


iri 


VD 


o 


ro 


ro 




to 


1 


■ 


■ 


• 


« 


• 


CTl 






1 


r~- 


o 


00 


01 


CTl 






IX 


O 


r- 


ro 


CO 


in 


ro 


(N 






o 


a> 


cyi 


00 


CO 


00 








rH 












01 




r^ 


















t--. 




o 


r- 


CN 


01 


CO 


ro 




en 




o 


a\ 


CTl 


CO 


CO 


CO 




■" 




H 














KO 
















■z. 


r^ 


O 


o 


n 


H 


H 


o> 


r^ 


o 


en 


O 


o 


CTl 


cri 


Ol 


CO 


CO 


•-H 


r— 


iH 


rH 












1— 


















<c 


















I— 


















00 


LO 


















r- 


o 


n 


LD 


n 


Ol 


r~- 


Ol 


q; 


en 


O 


CO 


r~ 


r-~ 


VO 


VD 


00 


o 




rH 














CQ 


















q; 


















cC 


















31 


<^ 


















r^ 


o 


o 


o 


r- 


Ln 


in 


in 




en 


O 


o 


o 


CO 


00 


CO 


00 




r— 


rH 


T-^ 


rH 












OO 


















r^ 




o 


o 


in 


o^ 


CO 


00 




en 




o 


O 


<Ti 


CO 


CO 


00 




' 




rH 


H 














>H 


i 


hj 


O 


ft 


Eh 


> 






^ 


5 


D 


D 


pa 


U 


O 








f^ 


•^ 


< 


w 


O 


S 



G 
O 

•rl 
+J 

(d 

■rl 
> 
tt) 

u 
c 

4-1 
W 



X W 



9-14 



TABLE 9-3. OYSTER MORTALITY DATA, 1974-1977. 
STUDIES SUMMARY REPORT, 1979. 



NEW HAVEN HARBOR ECOLOGICAL 







LIVE 


DEAD 


TOTAL 


1974 


Fort Hale 
Harbor Station 
Total 


58 

54 

112 


16 
14 

30 


74 

68 

142 


1975 


Fort Hale 
Harbor Station 
Total 


50 

50 

100 


23 
22 

45 


73 

72 

145 


1976 


Fort Hale 
Harbor Station 
Total 


64 

65 

129 


11 

9 

20 


75 

74 

149 


1977 


Fort Hale 
Harbor Station 
Total 


43 

65 

108 


2 
10 
12 


45 

75 

120 


1974- 
1977 


Fort Hale 
Harbor Station 
Total 


215 
234 
449 


52 

55 

107 


267 
289 
556 



TABLE 9-4. OYSTER MORTALITY VERSUS YEAR AND STATION. RESULTS OF 3-WAY TESTS. 
NEW HAVEN HARBOR ECOLOGICAL STUDIES SUMMARY REPORT, 1978. 



HYPOTHESIS TESTED 


DEGREES OF 
FREEDOM 


G 


Mortality x Station x Year 
Station X Year 
Mortality x Year 
Mortality x Station 

Mortality x Station x Year 


10 
3 
3 

1 
3 


32,98* 
6.98 

23.01* 
0.02 
2.98 



TABLE 9-5. OYSTER MORTALITY VERSUS YEAR (G-TEST). 
STUDIES SUMMARY REPORT, 1978. 



NEW HAVEN HARBOR ECOLOGICAL 







DEGREES OF 






YEARS 


HYPOTHESIS 


FREEDOM 


G 




1974, 1975 


Mortality x Year 


1 


3.67 




1974, 1976 


Mortality x Year 


1 


3.05 




1974, 1977 


Mortality x Year 


1 


6.19 




1975, 1976 


Mortality x Year 


1 


13.50* 




1975, 1977 


Mortality x Year 


1 


18.29* 




1976, 1977 


Mortality x Year 


1 


0.75 





* Result significant, per experiment alpha = 0.05. 



9-15 



results shown in Table 9-5 indicate that mortality in 1976 and 1977 was 
siynif icantly lower than mortality in 1975. 



Change in Length (Growth) 

Figure 9-5 shows mean oyster length by month at each station 
during the period 1974-1977, and Table 9-5 shows net growth (mm) of 
oysters at each station during the same time period. These data appear 
to indicate that net growth was high at both stations in 1975, 1976 and 
1977 although mean length was low in 1977. Net growth in Table 9-6 has 
not been adjusted for initial length as was done in the covariance 
analysis test of hypothesis (2) . Table 9-7 expresses the results of the 
test of this hypothesis (see statistical appendix) as a series of in- 
equalities relating adjusted net growth and year, while Figure 9-6 com- 
pares the pattern of growth by station and by year. These results 
indicate that growth at both stations was greatest in 1976, least in 
1977 and intermediate in 1975. Thus, yearly variation was highly sig- 
nificant but between-station variation was not. The station-by-year 
interaction was not significant at a nominal alpha level of 0.05. 

Within-year growth patterns (Hypothesis (3)) were tested using 
a complex analysis of variance technique with pairwise multiple compari- 
sons to determine those months between which mean length differed sig- 
nificantly. Table 9-8 and Figure 9-7 show the results of this analysis. 
The multiple comparisons showed that significant growth took place 
during the same time periods at both experimental stations in 1975, 1976 
and 1977 with the exception that in 1975 the first significant growth 
increase took place one month later at Fort Hale than at Harbor Station. 



Text continued on page 19 



TABLE 9-6. 



9-16 



NET GROWTH (IN MM) OF OYSTERS HELD AT NEW HAVEN HARBOR STATION 
AND FORT HALE; MAY-NOVEMBER, 1972-1977. NEW HAVEN HARBOR 
ECOLOGICAL STUDIES SUMMARY REPORT, 1979. 



I 



HARBOR STATION 
1972 1973 1974 1975 1977 x s 



9.0 6.4 13.9 20.3 15.8 11.1 6.9 



X = Mean length 

s = Standard deviation 



FORT HALE 
1972 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 



HS & FH 
X s 



9.0 14.4 7.7 13.9 18. 



14.1 13.0 4.0 



12.0 5.5 



TABLE 9-7. NET GROWTH VERSUS YEAR; COVARIANCE ANALYSIS. NEW HAVEN 
HARBOR ECOLOGICAL STUDIES SUMMARY REPORT, 1979. 

1976, 1975 >1977 {P< 0.001, experimentwise) 

1976 >1975 (O.OOK P< 0.005, experimentwise) 



6-1 



4- 



2- 



0- 



-4- 



FORT HALE 




HARBOR STATION 

BOTH STATIONS 



1975 



1976 



1977 



Figure 9-6. Difference in adjusted final length versus adjusted mean 
length (mm) by station and year. New Haven Harbor 
Ecological Studies Summary Report, 1979. 



9-17 



TABLE 9-8. ADJACENT MONTHS DURING WHICH SIGNIFICANT* GROWTH OCCURRED. 
NEW HAVEN HARBOR ECOLOGICAL STUDIES SUMMARY REPORT, 1979. 



1975 HARBOR STATION FORT HALE 

Jul > Jun . Aug > Jul 

Sep > Aug Sep > Aug 



1976 HARBOR STATION FORT HALE 

Jun > May Jun > May 

Jul > Jun Jul > Jun 

Aug > Jul Aug > Jul 

Sep > Aug Sep > Aug 

Oct > Sep Oct > Sep 



1977 HARBOR STATION FORT HALE 

Aug > Jul Aug > Jul 

Sep > Aug Sep > Aug 



* 



At experimentwise a = 0.05. 



9-18 



FORT HALE 



Growth at Fort Hale between indicated month 
and previous month was significant 
[d, = .05) 



H 



Growth at Harbor Station between indicated 



HARBOR STATION month and previous month was significant 

K = -05) 



llO-i 



105- 



1 100- 



1— 
CD 



95- 



2 go- 



es - 



80- 




-I — I — I — \ — \ — r 

1 2 3 4 5 6 

1975 




T-~i — I — \ — I — ] — r 

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 

1976 




1 — \ — \ — I — I — r-r 

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 
1977 



Figure 9-7. Mean oyster-length by station, sampling period and year. 
New Haven Harbor Ecological Studies Summary Report, 1979. 



9-19 



DISCUSSION 

Much work has been done on the biology of Crassostrea vir- 
ginica, but little of it deals with the hypotheses and variables that 
have been addressed in this study. Most of this historical work has 
dealt with the commercial aspects of oyster development and culture 
(MacKenzie, 1970a, b, 1977a, b; Loosanoff, 1932, 1965, 1966). Galtsoff 
(1964) summarized the Icnowledge of oyster biology and included a section 
in his monograph on the effect of "pollution" on oyster populations. 
Many recent investigations focus on the effect of changes in specific 
physical or chemical parameters on oyster populations (Davis, and Cala- 
brese, 1964; Lough, 1975; Frazier, 1975; Diaz, 1968) . As previously 
described, this study investigates the potential impact of the operation 
of an electric generating station on oyster growth and mortality in New 
Haven Harbor. Three factors are discussed below with respect to the 
determination of possible pre- and post-operational effects of the New 
Haven Harbor Station, and in relation to the hypotheses and variables of 
this study. These factors are mortality, growth and condition index. 

Mortality was statistically analyzed for the years 1974-1977 
and found to be independent of station but dependent on year. This 
indicates that differing environmental conditions at the two experi- 
mental sites, including any environmental modification due to the oper- 
ation of New Haven Harbor Station, had no effect on overall oyster 
mortality. Mortality was significantly higher in 1975 at both sites 
than in any other year tested. This may have been associated with the 
low condition indices observed in the initial control oysters in 1975 
(Table 9-1) . Since mortalities were high in June and July (Figure 9-4) 
it is possible that the oysters purchased were not as healthy as in 
previous years, and thus were more easily subject to disease or preda- 
tion. Data from several other program elements were examined to deter- 
mine if there was any correlation between the observed high oyster 
mortality in 1975 and variations in occurrence of known predators or 
food supply. Table 9-9 shows monthly measurements of chlorophyll a for 
1974-1976 at Harbor Station. The patterns for all three years are quite 



9-20 



TABLE 9-9. CHLOROPHYLL a CONCENTRATIONS (mg/m'^) AT THE NEW HAVEN HARBOR 

STATION, 1974-1976. NEW HAVEN HARBOR ECOLOGICAL STUDIES SUMMARY 
REPORT, 1979. 



MONTH 


TIDE 


1974 


1975 


1976 


January 


ebb 


0.82 


1.70 


2.10 




flood 


1.48 


2.00 


2.30 


February 


ebb 


1.78 


0.90 


13.20 




flood 


1.57 


1.00 


4.40 


March 


ebb 


1.94 


4.60 


11.20 




flood 


1.74 


3.70 


10.90 


April 


ebb 


12.91 


22.20 


38.40 




flood 


26.39 


14.80 


10.90 


May 


ebb 


11.24 


3.00 


16.00 




flood 


21.78 


8.70 


10.10 


June 


ebb 


10.31 


1.90* 


43.60 




flood 


10.06 


1.10* 


52.00 


July 


ebb 


59.37 


1.40* 


NS 




flood 


38.74 


1.40* 


15.30 


August 


ebb 


5.88 


3.60 


10.50 




flood 


46.76 


5.90 


19.60 


September 


ebb 


4.59 


6.10 


20.80 




flood 


5.42 


5.60 


17.10 


October 


ebb 


2.00 


7.60 


4.60 




flood 


7.70 


2.80 


2.90 


November 


ebb 


1.70 


5.50 


3.60 




flood 


2.90 


3.40 


7.10 


December 


ebb 


2.30 


0.90 


2.40 




flood 


3.80 


1.50 


NS 



Anomalous data 
NS = No sample 



9-21 



similar except for anomalously low concentrations in the June, July and 
August, 1975 data. Phytoplankton total cell counts wore not corres- 
pondingly low and chlorojjhyll data for this time period aro ;;u:;poct (sc>o 
Section 4) . It therefore does not seem likely that low food supply was 
the cause of the observed high mortality. The only known predator of 
adult oysters found in great numbers near Harbor Station (epibenthic 
trawl station 8) was the seastar Aster ias forbesi which was occasionally 
found in the experimental trays. Table 9-10 shows the monthly occurrence 
of A. forbesi in epibenthic trawls at Harbor Station from 1974-1976. 
The greatest densities of seastars, May-October 1974, were not correlated 
with the highest oyster mortalities. May- July 1975. It does not seem 
likely that predation was the cause of the observed high mortality, but 
that poor initial health as indicated by low condition indices was. 

Table 9-2 indicates percent survival of oysters by month at 

both Harbor Station and Fort Hale during the period 1973-1977. Data 

from 1973 were not included in the hypothesis testing analysis because 

time periods during which measurements were taken were different than in 

subsequent years. However, a correlation analysis (alpha = 0.05) shows 

that monthly change in percent survival at both experimental stations 

was very similar for 1973 and all subsequent years. Table 9-11 gives 

correlation coefficient (r) values for 1973 versus all subsequent years 

at both Harbor Station and Fort Hale. These values ranged from 0.77 

(1975, Harbor Station) to ,0.97 (1977, Harbor Station; r„ ^^ = 0.4). 

0. 05 

These results imply that the same pattern of mortality was exhibited in 

1973 as in subsequent years, i.e., mortality was not significantly 

different between stations (r = 0.97, alpha = 0.01), mortality was 

significantly higher in 1975 than in 1973 (r = 0.77, r„ „^ = 0.84) and 

. 05 

mortality was similar between years 1973 and 1974, 1976, 1977. These 
results corroborate the conclusions of the tests of hypothesis 1) that 
pre- and postoperational mortalities were similar and that no effect can 
be discerned on oyster mortality with respect to the operation of New 
Haven Harbor Station. 



9-22 



TABLE 9-10. NUMBERS OF ASTERIAS FORBESI COLLECTED DURING 10-MINUTE TRAWLS AT 
THE NEW HAVEN HARBOR STATION, 1974-1976. NEW HAVEN HARBOR ECO- 
LOGICAL STUDIES SUMMARY REPORT, 1979. 





1974 


1975 


1976 


January 





250 


26 


February 





240 


12 


March 


13 


60 


90 


April 





24 


12 


May 


2250 


216 


39 


June 


660 


260 


20 


July 


515 


66 


94 


August 


496 


240 


3 


September 


530 


176 


6 


October 


408 


214 


29 


November 


160 


45 


68 


Deccml^er 


46 


50 


30 



( 



9-23 



TABLE 9-n. CORRELATION ANALYSIS OF PERCENT SURVIVAL OF OYSTERS: 1973 VERSUS 
1974-1977. NEW HAVEN HARBOR ECOLOGICAL STUDIES SUMMARY REPORT 
1979. 





HARBOR STATION 


FORT HALE 




1973 


1973 


1974 


0.93 


0.90 


1975 


0.77* 


0.96 


1976 


• 0.86 


0.97 


1977 


0.97 


0.83 



Value shows nonsignificant correlation — all other values significant. 



r^ „, = 0.84 
0.05 



9-24 



Dame (1972) reported that allometric relationships for sub- 
tidal and intertidal oyster populations (North Inlet, Georgetown, South 
Carolina) varied with oyster size. He further speculated that loca] en- 
vironmental conditions such as tidal range, wave action and water chem- 
istry might be important in determining shell weight/dry body weight 
ratios and other growth relationships in oyster populations. In light 
of Dame's findings and speculation it was necessary that any test of 
a hypothesis with respect to oyster growth take into account differences 
due to initial size and also make evident distinctions between areas of 
potentially different environmental conditions (stations) . The covariance 
analysis carried out to test hypothesis (2) met these criteria. This 
analysis utilized data from 1975-1977 and showed that yearly variation 
in net growth was highly significant but that between-station variation 
was not (minimum, 0.001<P<0.005) . 

The patterns of mean net oyster growth by month between Fort 
Hale and Harbor Station for the years 1973 - 1977 were not significantly 
different (Spearman's rank correlation test, P=0.56, P = 0.55; 
Conover, 1971) . There was, however, significant variation in mean net 
growth between years 1973-1977 (Kruskal-VJallis test, T=430.6, T = 
19.7; Conover 1971). The results of both the Spearman's rank correla- 
tion and Kruskal-Wallis test on the extended data set corroborate the 
results of the covariance analysis. 

The potential relationship between allometric measurements and 
environmental parameters that affect oyster growth suggested a method 
for including those allometric measurements not used in the formal 
hypothesis testing analysis. If similar environmental conditions are 
reflected in similar allometric relationships then similar environmental 
conditions should be reflected in patterns of correlation between any 
two of the allometric relationships. More specifically, similar environ- 
mental conditions should produce similar patterns of correlation between 
cavity volume and mean length or any two allometric parameters. Mean 
length, cavity volume, wet weight and dry weight measurements from this 
study (1973-1977) were assembled into matrices by year and by station. 



9-25 



Each pair of parameters was then correlated (Spearman's rank correlation 
test, Conover, 1971) . The results of this correlation analysis are 
shown in Table 9-12. Correlation patterns between these allometric 
parameters are very similar for Harbor Station and Fort Hale experi- 
mental groups over all years combined. This is indicated by the fact 
that all correlation values for these parameters between station are 
positively significant. It is clear, however, that correlation patterns 
between years are not similar. If, as Dame suggests, oyster growth is 
contingent upon local environmental conditions, these results imply that 
environmental conditions which are relevant to oyster growth were simi- 
lar at both stations during pre- and post-operational periods. These 
results temporarily extend the conclusions of the ANOVA. 

Table 9-1 and Figure 9-3 show the patterns of condition 
indices for control and experimental oysters. Figure 9-3 shows that in 
all instances dry weight condition indices were lower at Harbor Station 
than at Fort Hale, and that in all but one instance (1975) condition 
indices at Harbor Station were lower than in the initial controls. 
During 1975 initial control oysters had low condition indices, a factor 
probably reflected in the high initial mortality at both stations. 
Condition index was first expressed by Grave (1912) as the quality or 
fatness of oysters measured as the volume of space enclosed by the two 
valves actually occupied by oyster meat. Hopkins (1949) suggested that 
the ratio of dry weight of oyster meat (G) x 100 divided by cavity 
volume (ml) be used as the condition index. Butler (1949) states that 
condition indices for C. virginica range from 1 to 17 with 10 indicating 
a marketable oyster. Finally Galtsoff (1964) standardized the measure- 
ment of cavity volume by displacement of water. 

Few studies have used condition index as a measure of the 
health of oyster populations. Galtsoff (1964) and Ogle et al . (1977) 
noted that measurements of condition index have a seasonal pattern which 
is influenced by time of spawning and amount of food available. Con- 
dition is generally low after spawning but then builds up as glycogen is 



9-26 



TABLE 9-12. CORRELATION PATTERNS FOR ALLOMETRIC VARIABLES BETWEEN STATIONS 
AND BETWEEN YEARS (1973-1977). NEW HAVEN HARBOR ECOLOGICAL 
STUDIES SUMMARY REPORT, 1979. 



Harbor 
Station 



Fort 
Hale 



ml 


Mean 
Length 
(ml) 


Cavity 

Volume 

(cv) 


Wet Dry 
Weight Weight 
(ww) (dw) 


Mean Cavity Wet Dry 
Length Volume Weight Weight 
(ml) (cv) (ww (dw) 

1973, 
ml 


cv 


0.98 






cv 0.50 


WW 


1.0 


0.98 




WW 0.99 0.50 


dw 


1.0 


0.98 


1.0 


dw 0.99 0.99 0.99 










1974 


ml 








ml 


cv 


1.0 






cv 0.87 


WW 


1.0 


1.0 




WW 0.87 1.0 


dw 


0.90 


0.90 


0.90 


dw 0.5 0.87 0.87 










1975 




P 0.05, 


p= 0.2,- 


— ,0.8 


ml 

cv 0.50 

WW 0.0 0.50 

dw-0.50 0.87 0.87 




1976 










ml 










cv 0.76 










WW 1.0 0.50 










dw -0.76 -0.50 -0.76 




1977 










ml 










cv 1.0 










WW 0.99 0.99 










dw 1.0 0.99 1.0 



P 0.05, p= 0.1, , 0.9 



9-27 



built back up in the tissues. In a study of condition of C. virginica 
from Pearl Harbor, Hawaii, Sakuda (1966) found a typical seasonal pat- 
tern with high values during December, January and February (CI=6-7.7) 
and low values during June, July and August (CI = 2-4) . He attributed 
the very low condition indices of oysters from some beds to unfavorable 
environmental conditions, primarily excessive silting. Ogle et al . 
(1977) in a transfer experiment designed to detect the effect of depth 
on oyster growth also detejrmined a seasonal pattern for condition index 
e.g., high in June 1973 (13.2-15.5); low in December, 1973 (5.0-7.0) higher 
in March 1974 (7.9-10.8) and low in June 1974 (1.3-2.2). The authors 
explain the high condition indices in June of 1973 as due to a lack of 
spawning because of transfer. 

Dry weight condition indices in this study ranged from 8.5 to 
15.6 in May/ June for initial controls to 6.9-14.6 in November/December 
at Harbor Station and 11.0-16.0 in November/December at Fort Hale. 
These condition indices are generally higher than those in the studies 
of both Sakuda (1966) and Ogle et al . (1977). Seasonal patterns are not 
as well defined in the New Haven data because of the range of condition 
indices recorded. Low condition indices at Harbor Station relative to Fort 
Hale were consistently low both during pre- (1973-1974) and post- (1976- 
1977) operational studies at the Harbor Station site. It is therefore 
likely that these low indices are more a reflection of the greater 
environmental impact in the inner harbor from various sources other than 
from plant operation. In 1967 the FWQA conducted water quality investi- 
gations in New Haven Harbor and concluded that the inner harbor area was 

grossly polluted. They measured dissolved oxygen levels of 4.0 mg/1 and 

5 4 

total and fecal coliform densities in excess of 10 and 3.6 x 10 /lOO 

ml, respectively. Data from the current study indicate a range of 

dissolved oxygen measurements in the harbor of 2.5-14.5 mg/1. Even in 

the outer harbor total coliform counts were above standards and sewage 

sludge deposits exceeding 6 inches in depth were prevalent in the area 

(reported in Army Corps of Engineers, 1973) . Laboratory tests have 

shown oysters to take up 2.5-5.0 mg/hr of oxygen (Galtsoff, 1964), so it 

is possible that at some concentrations recorded in New Haven Harbor 

this rate of uptake could not be maintained. As filter feeders, oysters 



9-28 



take up and accumulate coliform bacteria in their bodies. These bacteria 
are not directly toxic but oysters with high coliform concentrations 
cannot be directly harvested for food. Applequist et al . (1972) also 
found the harbor to be enriched in mercury which they attributed to 
municipal sewage outfalls. 



I 



In summary, all combined analyses for both oyster mortality 
and growth indicated that significant variation occurred between years 
but not between experimental stations. The one parameter, dry weight 
condition index, which did represent a difference between experimental 
stations, was a consistent pre-and post-operational phenomenon. The 
interpretation of these results leads to the conclusion that no effect 
of the operation of New Haven Harbor Station could be determined on the 
growth, mortality or commercial viability (as measured by condition 
index) of experimental oyster populations within New Haven Harbor. 



9-29 



LITERATURE CITED 



Army Corps of Engineers. 1973. Final environmental statement, main- 
tenance dredging, New Haven Harbor. New England Division, Waltham, 

HA. 

Butler, P. A. 1949. An investigation of oyster producing areas in 

Louisiana and Mississippi damaged by flood waters in 1945. Special 
Scientific Report, U.S. Fish and Wildl. Serv. , No. 8. 29 pp. 

Conover, W. J. 1971. Practical non-parametric statistics. J. Wiley & 
Sons, New York. 462 pp. 

Dame, R. F., Jr. 1971. The ecological energies of growth, respiration 
and assimilation in the intertidal American oyster, Crassostrea 
virginica (Gmelin) . Ph.D. dissertation, University of South Carolina, 
Columbia. 81 pp. 

Davis, H. C. and A. Calabrese. 1964. Combined effects of temperature 

and salinity on development of eggs and growth of larvae of M. mer- 
cenaria and C. virginica. Fish. Bull. 63:643-655. 

Diaz, R. J. 1968. Effects of thermal shock on larvae of the oyster, 
Crassostrea virginica (Gmelin). Master's thesis, Virginia Insti- 
tute of Marine Science, Gloucester Point. 35 pp. 

Frazier, J. M. 1975. The dynamics of metals in the American oyster, 
Crassostrea virginica. I: Seasonal effects. Chesapeake Science. 
16(3) :162-171. 

Galtsoff, P. S. 1964. The American oyster, Crassostrea virginica 
(Gmelin) . U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Fishery Bulletin. 
64:1-480. 

Gill, J. L. 1977. Multiple comparisons of means when variance is not 
homogeneous. Jour, of Dairy Science. 60:444-449. 

Grave, C. (ed.). 1912. A manual of oyster culture in Maryland. Fourth 
Report of the Shell Fish Commission of Maryland, 1912. pp. 279-348. 

Hopkins, A. E. 1949. Determination of condition of oysters. Science. 
110:567-588. 

Kirk, R. E. 1968. Experimental design. Procedures for the Behavioral 
Sciences. Brooks/Cole Publ. Company, Belmont, California. 577 pp. 

Loosanoff, V. L. 1932. Observations on propagation of oysters in James 
and Corrotonan Rivers and seaside of Virginia. Publication of the 
Virginia Commission of Fisheries. 1-46. 



9-30 



1965. Gonad development and discharge of spawn in oysters 



of Long Island Sound. Biol. Bull. 129:546-561. 

1966. Time and intensity of setting of the oyster, Crass- 



ostrea virginica , in Long Island Sound. Biol. Bull. 130:211-227. 

Lough, R. G. 1975. A reevaluation of the combined effects of tempera- 
ture and salinity on survival and growth of bivalve larvae using 
response surface techniques. Fish. Bull. 73{l):86-89. 

MacKenzie, C. L. 1970a. Oysters culture in Long Island Sound. U.S. 
Fish and Wildlife Service, Separate No. 859. 27-40 

1970b. Causes of oyster spat mortality, conditions of oyster 



setting beds and recommendations for oyster bed management. Proceed- 
ings of the National Shell Fisheries Association. 60:59-67. 

1977a. Use of quicklime to increase oyster seed production. 



Agriculture. 10 (1977) :45-51 . 

1977b. Development of an aquacultural program for rehabilita- 



tion of damaged oyster reefs in Mississippi. Marine Fisheries Review. 
39(5):1-13. 

Normandeau Associates, Inc. 1973. New Haven Harbor Ecological Studies, 
New Haven, Connecticut. Annual Report 1971-1972 for The United 
Illuminating Company. 208 pp. 

1974a. Coke Works Ecological Monitoring Studies, New Haven 



Harbor, Connecticut. Annual Report, 1972-1973 for The United Illumin- 
ating Company, New Haven, Connecticut. 215 pp. 

1974b. Coke Works Ecological Monitoring Studies, New Haven 



Harbor, Connecticut. Interim Report, May-December 197 3 for The 
United Illuminating Company, New Haven, Connecticut. 199 pp. 

1975a. New Haven Harbor Station Ecological Monitoring 



Studies, New Haven Harbor, Connecticut. Annual Report, 1974 for 
The United Illxmiinating Company, New Haven, Connecticut. 223 pp. 

1976. New Haven Harbor Station Ecological MOnitoring 



Studies, New Haven Harbor, Connecticut. Annual Report, 1975 for 
The United Illuminating Company, New Haven, Connecticut. 312 pp. 

. 1977. New Haven Harbor Station Ecological Monitoring 



Studies, New Haven Harbor, Connecticut. Annual Report, 1976 for 
The United Illuminating Company, New Haven, Connecticut. 375 pp. 

. 1978. New Haven Harbor Ecological Monitoring Studies, 



New Haven Harbor, Connecticut. Annual Report, 1977 for The United 
Illuminating Company, New Haven, Connecticut. 3 59 pp. 



9-31 



Ogle, J., S. M. Ray and W. J. Wardle. 1977. The effect of depth on 

survival and growth of oysters in suspension culture from a petro- 
leum platform off the Texas Coast. Gulf Research Reports. 6(1): 
31-37. 

Sakuda, H. M. 1966. Condition of American oyster Crassostrea virginica, 
in West Lock, Pearl Harbor, Hawaii. Transactions of the American 
Fisheries Society. 95 (4) :426-429. 

Scheffe, H. 1969. Analysis of Variance. Prentice-Hall, Inc., Englewood 
Cliffs, New Jersey. 199 pp. 

Sokal, R. R. and F. J. Rohlf. 1969. Biometry, the principles and practice 
of statistics in biological research. W. H. Freeman and Company, 
San Francisco. 776 pp. 



STATISTICAL APPENDIX 



9-33 



APPENDIX 



The purpose of this statistical appendix is to clarify the 
basic assumptions and constraints relevant to the tests of specific 
hypotheses carried out on the data. The 3-way G test used to evaluate 
hypothesis (1) had no constraints other than those already described in 
the Methods Section. 

The statistical analysis used to test hypothesis (2) con- 
tained some bias. The assiomptions underlying a covariance analysis 
include the usual ones of normality and homogeneity of variance as well 
as additional assumptions concerning the linearity of dependent and 
concomitant variables. The very important assumption of homoscedasticity 
(homogeneity of variance) was not met by the data set even after the 
application of various transformations. Differences in variances were 
severe between years and less severe but usually significant between 
stations in the same year. There is a strong possibility that oysters 
each year were not sampled from the same population, i.e., the stocks 
from which the experimental oysters were acquired each year had suffi- 
ciently different genomes that the environmental conditions to which 
they were exposed resulted in different phenotypic expressions of the 
parameters measured. 

The covariance analysis adjusts differences among treatments 
for the effects of the covariate. In this analysis differences in final 
length due to differences in initial length were removed so that only 
variation due to station, year and "error" were assessed. The Scheffe 
method is generally used to test contrasts among means in a covariance 
analysis. This is a very conservative technique when used in pairwise 
comparisons and when data are heterogeneous the procedure maintains an 
"average" alpha level over the series of all possible linear compari- 
sons. The Scheffe method for pairwise comparisons was employed in this 
analysis. A completely unbiased parametric test for this hypothesis is 
not currently available. 

Hypothesis (3) , length changes at the two experimental stations 
occur in the same time periods for a given year, was tested using a Geisser- 
Greenhouse conservative F-test (Kirk, 1968) for fixed-effects in a mixed- 
model, randomized-block design with repeated measures ANOVA. Such a design 
requires the sringent assumption of symmetry of the variance-covariance 
matrix; however, with the conservative procedure used there is no need to 
test for or meet this requirement if treatment effects are significant. 



9-34 



Treatment effects were highly significant for all data (Appendix Table 
9-1) indicating that increase in length (growth) was significant at both 
stations in 1975, 1976 and 1977. 

Tukey procedures for pairwise multiple comparisons were then 
employed to determine those months between which mean length differed 
significantly. Of particular interest are significant differences 
between adjacent months as these indicate periods of active growth. 
Except for Harbor Station, 1977, variances by months were homogeneous 
within each station/year data set, therefore modified comparison pro- 
cedures had to be used for the Harbor Station, 1977 data in order to 
maintain an experimentwise alpha level of 0.05 (Gill, 1977). Appendix 
Tables 9-2 and 9-3 show the results of this analysis which are sum- 
marized in Table 9-8 and Figure 9-7. 



9-3? 



>-> a: 

00 =t 



:^ I/) 
O 

O 00 

_J UJ 

m I— t 
Q 

Q =3 

Lul 1— 

M OO 
( — I 

s: —i 

o <c 

z: H-i 

< o 
q: o 
_j 
—I o 
UJ o 
Q UJ 
O 

o 

CJ CO 
X =t 

— nr 



00 UJ 

< > 
o nz 



to ■ 




1- 00 




_J LU 




ZD CC 




OO :=> 




UJ OO 




a: ec 




UJ 




s: 




3: Q 


. 


h- UJ 


c-i 


O 1— 


l'-^ 


z:<C 


Ol 


UJ UJ 


f^ 


_l D- 




UJ 


*» 


q: ch 


1— 


UJ 


q: 


t- 3: o 


00 1— 


D. 


>- l-H 


UJ 


O 3 Qi 



I 






UJ 





* 






















* 






















, 


■K 






* 








■K 








* 








* 








•x 






CO 


* 






* 








■K 








* 








■K 








* 






c 


^ 






■K 








* 








eO 








* 








* 






O 


(Ti 






H 








^ 








rH 








rsj 








o 






o 


ro 






«D 








CN 








r-^ 








ro 








CN 






Ll_ 








O 
(N 








ro 
CN 
















cn 
en 








tn 
o 

rH 






C/1 














































C 


in 






(Ti 








en 








00 








^D 








ro 






o 


"S- 






in 








in 








■* 








in 








CN 






o 


^ 






^ 








». 








h. 








h. 








«. 






u_ 


[^ 






rH 








rH 








rH 








rH 








rH 






Q 
















































* * 






















* 


* 




















. 


* * 






* 


* 






* 


* 






* 


* 






* 


■K 






■X 


* 




> 


* * 






•t! 


■K 






* 


* 






* 


* 






* 


* 






* 


* 




c 


VO LTl 






* 


* 






* 


* 






eO 


CO 






* 


* 






* 


•K 




o 


cn CO 






r^ 


(Ti 






■^ 


■^ 






H 


r- 






CN 


'S' 






O 


rH 




(J 


fo o 






^ 


O 






CN 


in 






r- 


<-i 






ro 


O 






CN 


00 




u. 


n in 






d 

CN 
CN 


CN 






■vT 
ro 
CM 


en" 








ro 






oi 
en 

rH 


• 

o 

CN 






en 
o 

rH 


rH 






r- CNj 


CO 




CD 


H 


OJ 




ro 


en 


00 




-sf 


en 


ro 




rH 


00 


o 




r~- 


ro 


CN 




IX) 01 


(N 




in 


ro 


CN 




in 


CN 


rH 




o 


H 


CO 




■^ 


IX) 


in 




ro 


en 


in 


OO 


in en 


O 




<y\ 


O 


00 




•-\ 


in 


"^ 




rH 


en 


rH 




[^ 


o 


CO 




CD 


CN 


tx 




1,28 

1,31 


CN 




rH 

o 


CN 
CN 


rH 




CN 
ro 

ro 


ro 


rH 




ro 

rH 


ro 

rH 


rM 




00 
IX) 

ro 


ro 


H 




ro 

en 


o 






in in 


in 


in 


VD 


<n 


^ 


en 


^0 


en 


^ 


en 


eO 


CO 


o 


ro 


eX) 


VD 


IX) 


CO 


iX) 


ro 


CO r- 


u. 


■st" 


(N 


r- 




in 


in 


iH 




in 


in 


rH 




>* 


^ 


tn 




in 


ro 


en 




rvj 


ro H 


Q 




CNJ 


IN 






n 


■^ 






ro 


■vf 






CN 


CN 






ro 


ro 






rH M 


























00 


CN 


in 


in 


















n ro 


n 


o 


in 


in 


en 


O 


CN 


CO 


r-\ 


rH 


iH 


ro 


r-i 


eo 


in 


O 


CM 


r^ 


r^ 


in 


H CO 




00 \S 


(N 


i^ 


(^ 


CO 


en 


^ 


en 


H 


en 


• 

o 


in 


rH 


o 


iXl 


^' 


co" 


in 


r- 


CN 


i~- 


IX) in 


00 


CN (Ti 


vD 


CO 


r-\ 


<yi 


■=* 


eD 


CN 


CO 


rH 


ro 


in 


o 


■^ 


en 


r\l 


in 


<-t 


en 


CO 


IX) 


r^ i^ 


t/1 


■vt< ro 


in 


ro 


H 


en 


■sf 


in 


en 


en 


o 


en 


•-{ 


CM 


CN 


in 


r-f 


t^ 


<N 


o 


in 


ro 


H rH 




<X) CTi 


^ 


O 


■^ 


CM 


VD 


ro 


en 


[^ 


in 


CM 


CO 


^ 


in 


en 


CN 


o 


IX) 


en 


in 


CM 


rH en 




in 




[^ 


CN 


H 




-* 


rH 






ro 




IX) 




r- 


rvi 


CN 




^ 












w 








en 








en 








to 








to 








tn 






u 








U 








!h 








U 








U 








U 






Q) 








Q) 








(U 








eu 








eu 








eu 


u_ s 




■p 








+J 








+J 








4-) 








4J 








•P 


o o 




to 








m 








to 








M 








to 








tn 


1— H 




>1 








>. 








>i 








>1 








>i 








>i 


UJ 1— 




O 








o 








o 








O 








O 








o 


O ct 














































Di 1— . 




X 








X 








X 








X 








X 








X 


ZD a: 


en 








en 








en 








to 








to 








to 




o <c 


03 M 


to 




to 


!h 


en 




en 


!h 


tn 




tn 


Sh 


to 




tn 


Sh 


tn 




tn 


U 


to 


OO > 


^ (U 


x: 


r-\ 


X 


(1) 


^ 


rH 


x; 


(U 


^ 


H 


x: 


eu 


^ 


r-{ 


Xi 


eu 


^ 


r-{ 


x: 


<u 


^ rH 




4J 4J 


+j 


d 


+J 


+J 


+J 


ITJ 


■p 


+J 


•p 


m 


4-1 


4J 


4-1 


<i 


4J 


4J 


4J 


ffl 


4J 


4-1 


4-1 fd 




C (n 


c 


■p 


c 


en 


C 


-p 


d 


en 


c 


4-1 


C 


to 


a 


4-1 


a 


tn 


d 


4-) 


C 


tn 


C 4-1 




>i 











>. 


o 








>< 











>i 


o 








>i 











>i 







S O 


s 


E-1 


s 


O 


S 


&H 


s 


O 


s 


EH 


S 


O 


s 


E-< 


g 


O 


a 


Eh 


S 


O 


S EH 




in 






1X3 








r~ 
































r-~ 






r- 








r^ 
































en 






en 








en 
































H 






rH 








rH 






























UJ 














































_l 


K 






«. 








k. 








m 








IX) 








[^ 






CQ 


C 






fi 








c 








r- 








1^ 








r^ 






< 









o 

















en 








en 








en 






t—t 


•rH 






•H 








■H 








H 








r-t 








rH 






ai 


4J 






+J 








■P 






























< 


d 






n) 








rfl 








k. 








%. 








^ 






> 








4-1 

en 

u 
o 
X3 

ac 








4J 
CO 

Sh 


X2 
Sh 
fd 

K 








0) 
H 
(tS 

K 

4J 
U 









0) 

<-\ 
K 
4J 









(U 
H 

a 
■p 

Sh 
O 

|J4 









e 






C) 






TJ 






eu 






fl) 






M 






Mh 






ip 






o 






en 




O 


tu 





■H 


(1) 


•H 


4J 


Sh 


4J 


m 


tv 


(0 


M 


eu 

T5 


Sh 


h 


eu 


h 


H 


> 


tl) 


(t1 


•H 


> 


C 


4J 


•H 


o 


trt 


■P 


■H 


> 


Ifl 


4J 


^4 


> 


fl 


(IJ 


U 


a) 


tn 


(U 


> 


C 


tn 


fi 


o 


C 


n 


CJ 


o 


o 


II 


u 


11 


tn 


II 


> 


c 


tn 


e. 


o 


C 


n 


u 





o 


h 


u 


h 


p 


h 



II II 



APPENDIX TABLE 9-2, 



FORT HALE 1975 



9-36 



TUKEY'S PROCEDURE. MEAN LENGTH (MM) BY MONTH -- FORT HALE. 
NEW HAVEN HARBOR ECOLOGICAL STUDIES SUMMARY REPORT, 1979. 





NOV 


OCT 


SEP 


AUG 


JUL 


JUN 


106.18 


Nov 






* 


* 


* 


* 


106.02 


Oct 








* 


* 


* 


103.35 


Sep 








* 


* 


* 


98.78 


Aug 










* 


* 


95.12 


Jul 














92.51 


Jun 















i 



L > MSe/n q. 05, -6, -293 

> 21.83/49 

> 2.7079 



FORT HALE 1976 





OCT 


NOV 


SEP 


AUG 


JUL 


JUN 


MAY 


103.40 


Oct 




* 


* 


* 


* 


* 


* 


100.00 


Nov 








* 


* 


* 


* 


98.68 


Sep 








* 


* 


* 


* 


95.93 


Aug 










* 


* 


* 


91.49 


Jul 












* 


* 


85.67 


Jun 














* 


81.25 


May 

















L > 18.50/57 (4.1954) = 2.3901 



FORT HALE 1977 





NOV 


SEP 


OCT 


AUG 


JUL 


MAY 


JUN 


84.67 


Nov 








* 


* 


* 


* 


83.77 


Sep 








* 


* 


* 


* 


83.00 


Oct 








* 


* 


* 


* 


77.58 


Aug 










* 


* 


* 


72.63 


Jul 
















70.63 


May 
















70.58 


Jun 

















L > 8.52/24 (4.2317) = 2.52].3 



9-37 



APPENDIX TABLE 9-3. 



TUKEY'S PROCEDURE. MEAN LENGTH (MM) BY MONTH — HARBOR STATION. 
NEW HAVEN HARBOR ECOLOGICAL STUDIES SUMMARY REPORT, 1979. 



HARBOR STATION, 


1975 














NOV 


SEP 


OCT 


AUG 


JUL 


JUN 


100.65 Nov 








* 


* 


* 


100.30 Sep 








* 


* 


* 


99.20 Oct 








* 


* 


* 


95.26 Aug 












* 


94.91 Jul 












* 


86.63 Jun 















L > MSe 



q.05; K; Va = 2028/45 (4.0652) = 26992 



HARBOR STATION, 


1976 














OCT NOV SEP 


AUG 


JUL 


JUN 


MAY 


104.45 Oct 




* 


* 


* 


* 


* 


102.93 Nov 




* 


* 


* 


* 


* 


98.40 Sep 






* 


* 


* 


* 


95.52 Aug 








* 


* 


* 


92.18 Jul 










* 

1 


* 


86.12 Jun 












* 


82.67 May 















L > 18.22/60 (4.1941) = 2.31118 



HARBOR STATION, 1977 (Modified Tukey Procedures for Heterogeneous Variance) 





OCT 


NOV 


SEP 


AUG 


JUL 


JUN 


MAY 


88.35 


Oct 








* 


* 


* 


* 


87.28 


Nov 








* 


* 


* 


* 


85.85 


Sep 








* 


* 


* 


* 


78.97 


Aug 










* 


* 


* 


73.77 


Jul 
















72.02 


Jun 
















71.47 


May 

















NEW HAVEN HARBOR 

ECOLOGICAL STUDIES 

SUMMARY REPORT, 1979 



10.0 TRACE METALS 
by K. K. Turekian 

Department of Geology and Geophysics 
Yale University, New Haven, Connecticut 



TABLE OF CONTENTS 

PAGE 

fNTHODlJCTION 10-1 

TRACE METALS IN SEDIMENTS 10-2 

Controls on Tvaae-Metal Distribution in Sediments 10-2 

The Distribution of Trace Metals in - ■ 

Long Island Sound Sediments 10-9 

The Role of Atmospheric Transport in Trace 

Metal Input to Long Island Sound 10-15 

The Kinetics of Trace-Metal Scavenging 

from the Water Column 10-20 

Summary of Controls on Trace Metal Distribution 

in Long Island Sound Sediments 10-22' 

TRACE METALS IN ORCANISMS 10-24 

Observed Trace Metal Distributions in Mussels 

and Oysters from Long Island Sound 10-24 

Mussels 10-26 

Time Variations in Mercenaria and Crassostrea 

from New Haven Harbor 10- S3 

Trace-Metals Composition of Organisms in the 

Central Basin of Long Island Sound 10-3'6 

ANALYSIS OF IMPACTS 10-40 

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS 10-41 

Long Island Sound 10-41 

New Haven Harbor 10-41 

REFERENCES CITED 10-43 



LIST OF FIGURES 



PAGE 

10-1. The concentration of silver in the Quinnipiac River 

system ■10_4 

10-2. The concentration of silver, lead and copper in sedi- 
ments of the Quinnipiac River system and in New 
Haven Harbor 10-5 

10-3. The distribution of mercury (in ppm) in the tops 

of sediments from New Haven Harbor 10-7 

10-4. The relation of zinc concentration to organic content 
in sediments from the New Haven Harbor channel and 
potential dredge disposal site in Long Island Sound . . 10-8 

10-5. Distribution of copper in the tops of cores raised from 

Long Island Sound 10-10 

10-6. Distribution of zinc in the tops of cores raised 

from Long Island Sound 10-11 

10-7. Distribution of lead in the tops of cores raised 

from Long Island Sound 10-12 

10-8. Sediment size distribution in Long Island Sound .... 10-13 

10-9. The depth of distribution of Hg, Pb, Cu and Zn in cores 10-14 

10-10. Correspondence of age of layers in the Farm River 
salt marsh, determined by Pb-210 and sea level rise 
curve from tide gauge data 10-16 

10-11. Flux of metals as a function of time in the Farm River 

salt marsh 10-18 

210 
10-12. Total Pb in surface water versus concentration of 

suspended solids taken over time at a station in 

central Long Island Sound 10-21 

10-13. Copper concentration in oysters as a function of time 

at six locations along the Connecticut coast 10-21 

10-14. Cadmium concentration in oysters as a function of time 

at six locations along the Connecticut coast 10-27 

10-15. Zinc concentration in oysters as a function of time 

at six locations along the Connecticut coast 10-27 

ii 



PAGE 

10-16. Sampling locations for mussels studied for trace 

metals 10-28 

10-17. Lead concentration of dry soft tissues of mussels as 

a function of location along the Connecticut coast. . . 10-28 

10-18. Cadmium concentration of dry soft tissues of mussels 

as a function of location along the Connecticut coast . 10-29 

10-19. Copper concentration of dry soft tissues of mussels 

as a function of location along the Connecticut coast . 10-29 

10-20. Zinc concentration of dry soft tissues of mussels 

as a function of location along the Connecticut coast . 10-30 

10-21. Nickel concentration of dry soft tissues of mussels 

as a function of location along the Connecticut coast . 10-30 

10-22. Distribution of Nickel in unfiltered surface waters 

of Long Island Sound . 10-32 



m 



LIST OF TABLES 



PAGE 

10-1. CALCULATED EXCESS METAL FLUX (ug/cm^/yr) TO THE 
SURFACE OF THE FARM RIVER SALT MARSH COMPARED TO 
MEASURED ATMOSPHERIC DEPOSITION RATES AT SELECTED 
SITES 10-19 

10-2. ROLE OF PLANKTON IN ^^°Pb TRANSPORT OUT OF THE 

OCEAN SURFACE LAYER 10-22 

10-3 ^^°Pb AND PLUTONIUM INVENTORIES IN LONG ISLAND SOUND 

SEDIMENTS 10-25 

10-4. TIME VARIATION IN CONCENTRATIONS OF Cu, Pb, Zn, Cd, 
AND Hg IN SOFT TISSUE OF MERCENARIA MERCENARIA AT 
TWO SITES IN NEW HAVEN HARBOR 10-34 

10-5. COPPER AND ZINC CONCENTRATIONS (pg/g OF DRY SOFT 
TISSUE) OF DIFFERENT BIVALVE SPECIES AT VARIOUS 
LOCATIONS IN NEW HAVEN HARBOR 10-35 

10-6. TRACE ELEMENTS IN SMALL SEDIMENT-DWELLING CLAMS IN 

NEW HAVEN HARBOR AND CENTRAL LONG ISLAND SOUND 10-37 

10-7. COMPOSITION OF ANEMONES FROM LONG ISLAND SOUND 

AND THE MID-ATLANTIC RIDGE 10-39 



TV 



10.0 TRACE METALS 

By K. K. Turekian 
Department of Geology and Geophysics 
Yale University, New Haven, Connecticut 



INTRODUCTION 



The mobilization of many trace elements is effected by natural 
processes acting at the Earth's surface. Weathering results in the 
alteration of rocks with the release and redistribution of many of the 
trace elements in the process. Some part of this released load enters 
the groundwater system in solution and ultimately makes its way to the 
oceans via streams. Another part becomes incorporated in the soil 
profile in association with the organic fraction. This material also 
makes its way to the sea as the result of erosion. During transport the 
different components of this entourage are influenced by the chemical- 
physical processes acting in streams and in the estuarine system result- 
ing in the distribution of the trace metals that we observe in the estu- 
ary. Upon reaching the estuarine zone the metals do not commonly become 
passive but can undergo a flux and redistribution through natural sedi- 
mentation-erosion processes, chemical mobilization, or incorporation 
into biota. 

Man has added to the natural trace-metal load by injecting 
materials, resulting from his activities, into every part of the pathway. 
Atmospheric transport deposits alien nuclides on to the surface invading 
the soil profiles as well as the estuarine or sea surface. Metal- 
bearing effluent from industries imprints the streams and groundwater 
with contaminants. Domestic sewage is funneled through treatment plants, 
but not all metals or other toxic materials are completely isolated. 

The consequences of these human perturbations on the natural 
trace-metal regime of the coastal system are readily observed in the 
biota, water and sediments. Elevated metal levels have been well documen- 
ted. The response, however, has not been the same everywhere and the 
potential damage to the environment cannot always be directly correlated 



10-1 



10-2 



with increased contaminant levels even where they occur. The tolerable 
levels, the degrees of irreversible sequestering and other factors all 
must enter into the evaluation of man's impact on the environment. 

In this report I discuss what we now know of the factors in- 
fluencing controls on trace-metal distribution in New Haven Harbor and 
Long Island Sound and the subsequent effects on resident biota. Con- 
sideration is also given to possible effects of New Haven Harbor Station 
on harbor trace-metal concentrations. I draw on the published and 
unpublished work of our group at Yale, as well as the results of several 
other studies done at other institutions. 



TRACE METALS IN SEDIMENTS 

Controls on Trace-Metal Distribution in Sediments 

Stream Supplij 

The dissolved trace-metal concentration of streams is controlled 
not only by input from the weathering of rocks and from aerosols but 

also by the chemical reactions occurring within the streams. The evidence 

210 
from studies utilizing Pb as a tracer for heavy metal behavior m 

streams indicates rapid scavenging by particles associated with the 

flowing water (Benninger, Lewis and Turekian, 1975; Lewis, 1977). 

Surfaces of organic debris and manganese and iron oxide coatings appear 

to be the primary agents. Competing with this process is the foirmation 

of dissolved organic-chelated compounds. Much of the dissolved iron 

found in streams, for instance, is in this form (Sholkovitz, 1976). 

A study of Connecticut streams (Turekian, 1971) indicated that 
the trace-metals, cobalt and silver, are maintained in solution at low 
concentrations as the result of the scavenging action of suspended 
particles. Even where acid industrial wastes are dumped into the stream, 
as in the Naugatuck River which joins the Housatonic River, suspended 

particles act to lower the dissolved concentrations. I infer from 

210 
studies involving the behavior of Pb in the Susquehanna River and of 



10-3 

Co and Ag in the major Connecticut rivers that the dissolved trace-metal 
concentration is maintained at low levels in stream water and thus the 
primary mode of transportation to the estuarine zone is via particles. 

Our work on the Quinnipiac River, a river carry inq effluents 
from the major metal industries of Meriden and Wallingford and entering 
into New Haven Harbor, supports this expectation. Figure 10-1 shows the 
distribution of total silver in Quinnipiac River waters and demonstrates 
an increase in concentration through Wallingford. In Wallingford, the 
>0.45pm fraction (associated with particles) adds to the 3 pg/1 delivered 
from the uncontaminated reservoirs. 

Figure 10-2 shows that the bottom sediments of the system are 
strongly impacted by the trafce-metal injections from industry. The 
remarkable feature of the observed pattern, however, is that the concen- 
trations of Ag, Pb and Cu decrease almost to ambient precontaminated 
sediment values shortly after the point of impact. This is probably due 
to the presence of a series of small dams along the Quinnipiac River 
that allow the metal- laden particles to settle out. 

The Housatonic River, emptying into the Sound about 15 km to the 
west of New Haven Harbor, with its heavily polluted tributary, the Nauga- 
tuck River, as mentioned above, supplies a significant amount of trace 
metals to the adjacent part of the Long Island Sound, mainly in particle 
form (Turekian, 1971) . In contrast, as noted above, the Quinnipiac River, 
although also polluted by metals, appears to be retaining the metal-contami- 
nated sediments behind a series of dams. The stream transport of trace 
metals to New Haven Harbor and on to the Sound is minimal compared to sources 
in the harbor itself as we shall see. The role of damming is certainly 
one important factor in inhibiting transfer of metal-polluted sediments to 
the estuarine zone. 



Sewer Outfalls - New Haven Harbor 

Applequist, Katz and Turekian (1972) showed that the mercury 
concentration in the sediments of New Haven Harbor varied in relation to 



10-4 




Figure 10-1. The concentration of silver in the Quinnipiac River system. 
Analyses are on unfiltered water. New Haven Harbor 
Ecological Studies Summary Report, 1979. 



10-5 



The high impact of the metal industry of 
Meriden and Wallingford is felt locally 
but becomes markedly attenuated downstream. 



Wallingford 



New Haven 




Ag 0.2 

Pb 270 

Cu 80 

Brodlay Hubbard Ires. 



Concer.trations in 
sedlnents in ppia. 



Figure 10-2. The concentration of silver, lead and copper in sediments of 

the Quinnipiac River system and in New Haven Harbor. New Haven 
Harbor Ecological Studies Summary Report, 1979, 



10-6 



distance from the several sewage treatment plants discharging into the 
harbor (Figure 10-3) . As is the case with most of the older New England 
cities, storm sewers are combined with sanitary sewers and the effluent 
is j'rocessed throug?i the sewage treatment plants. During periods of high 
dischairqi" asr.ociatod with large storms, the treatment plant is byi'assed 
and the unprocessed effluent is debouched directly into the harbor, 
resulting in organic carbon and metal enrichment of the sediment around 
the outfalls. We found high Pb, Zn and Cu associated with the sewer 
outfall south of Long Wharf. Our most detailed study of the sedimentary 
organic and heavy metal content association with sewer outfalls was 
made prior to construction of New Haven Harbor Station on the East Shore 
just off the Harbor Station property (old Coke Works site) . Detailed 
studies of the tissue heavy metals concentration of bivalves from the 
same area will be discussed later. A plot of the zinc concentration 
versus volatile solids (assumed to be mainly organic material) for New 
Haven Harbor is shown in Figure 10-4. Comparison with a site in central 
Long Island Sound grax^hically shows the role of near-shore outfall 
contamination . 

Thus we see that the trace-metal patterns in near-shore sedi- 
ments of the Connecticut shore of Long Island Sound are determined 
primarily by the location of sewer outfalls. The stream supply of 
industrial contamination is expressed where damming does not act as a 
sediment trap between the point of injection and the entry into the 
estuary. 

Maintenance or construction-related dredging of metal-contam- 
inated sediments results in the transport of the material to other 
locations in the Sound where the dredge spoil is dumped. The identi- 
fication of such dumping has been made in the New York Bight using trace 
metals and organic content as well as other indicators (Gross, 1976; 
Carmody, Pearce and Yasso, 1973) but, as we shall see, other factors 
operate in Long Island Sound to attenuate the effect of maintaining a 
local identity. 



10-7 



STP 




Figure 10-3. 



The distribution of mercury (in ppm) in the tops of 
sediments from New liaven Harbor. The dominant control 
is in proximity to sewage treatment plant (STP) out- 
falls (after Applequist, Katz and Turekian, 1972). 
New Haven Harbor Ecological Studies Summary Report, 1979, 



10-8 



400 



.i2 300- 
o 

•^200 

>\ 
\_ 

e 

Q. 
Q. 



. DISPOSAL SITE-CENTRAL LONG 

ISLAND SOUND 
ONEW HAVEN CHANNEL 



t 
424 
o 



563 t 
o olOOO 









JL 



JL 



_L 



_L 



I 



2 3 4 5 6 7 8 
% VOLATILE SOLIDS 



9 iO 



Figure 10-4, 



The relation of zinc concentration to organic content (expressed 
as % volatile solids) in sediments from the New Haven Harbor 
channel and potential dredge disposal site in Long Island Sound 
about 5 miles south of New Haven. Data from the U.S. Corps of 
Engineers files (New Haven Harbor Project: Report on Environ- 
mental Sampling and Testing, 1972), These show concordance with 
Yale data on trace elements obtained throughout the harbor. 
New Haven Harbor Ecological Studies Summary Report, 1979. 



10-9 

The Distribution of Trace Metals in Long Island Sound Sediments 

Horizontal Distribution 

Greig, Reid and Wenzlogg (1977) have recently made a detailed 
study of the distribution of a number of trace metals (Sb, Cd, Co, Cr, 
Cu, Pb, Mn, Ni, Ag, Sc, Zn) in the top 4 cm of Long Island Sound sedi- 
ments using a Smith-Mclntyre grab sampler. The choice of 4 cm was 
fortuitous since this represents, within plus or minus a centimeter, the 



rapidly reworked portion of the sediments as determined at Yale University 

234 
using Th (Aller and Cochran, 1976) . Figures 10-5 through 10-7 show 

concentration maps for Cu, Zn and Pb constructed from their data. 



The primary control on the trace-metal concentration is the 
grain size of the sediment. This can be seen by comparing Figures 10- 
5 through 10-7 with Figure 10-8 which shows the grain-size distribution 
in the Sound. The sand rich sediments have the lowest trace-metal 
content. There is, however, an important second-order effect related to 
the source of trace metals to coastal waters. Sediments adjacent to 
Throgs Neck, the Housatonic River and New Haven Harbor are higher in 
trace metals than other sediments of the same grain size. These three 
areas are heavily impacted either by sewer outfalls or direct injection 
of industrial sewage along a contiguous channel (as in the Naugatuck- 
Housatonic system) . 



Distribution With Depth of Trace Metals in Cores 

A nvimber of cores collected from central Long Island Sound 
have been analyzed for trace metals as a function of sediment depth 
(Thomson, Turekian and McCaffrey, 1975) . They show roughly the same 
patterns for Cu, Zn, Pb and Hg (Figure 10-9) with a homogeneous upper 2 to 
4 cm zone and a roughly exponential decrease to a depth of about 30 cm. 
At greater depths there are occasional peaks of high concentrations. 

Thomson, Turekian and McCaffrey (1975) interpreted the dis- 
tribution patterns of metals to 30 cm as representing a superficial zone 



Text continued on page 10-15 



10-10 




en 
CD 





-^.^ 


en 


-1 


O) 


ai 


3. 




*'^~^ 


;i 




o 


Ol 




O 


o 


3. 


o 


o 


CM 




LD 




1 


o 


1 


1 


o 


r~~ 


o 


o 


o 


V 


. — 


Ln 





en 















:•:•:•:•:■:•: 






><>>y^i 






m^ 






•:•:•:•:•:•:• 






















c 






3 






o 






oo 






■t3 






C 






(C 


• 




n— 


.- — % 




1/1 


r^ 




1 — 1 






cn 


t—~ 




c 


^ -» 




o 






— 1 


i+- 


• 




<4- 


CTi 


1- 


O 


r^ 


o 




CT> 


s- 


N 


.— 1 


M- 


fO 






CIJ 


r\ 


-O 3 


+-> 


a; 




s- 


(/) 


XJ 


o 


•r— 


c 


Q. 


rri 


fn 


0) 


S- 


-o 


Qi 


(/) 


•1 — 


>> 


0) 


0) 


i- 


S- 


q; 


(O 


o 




f= 


o 


#> 


h- 




CD 


:3 


M- 


•1 — 


C/5 


O 


O) 






!- 


C/1 


(/I 


ts 


O) 


Cl 




• 1 — 


O 4- -O 


4-5 


o 


3 
-M 


(U 


re 


OO 


-C 


-i-> 




+-> 


(O 


r— 




t3 


fO 


E 




<J 


•1 — 


QJ 


•1 — 




-C 


CD 


S- 


+-> 


O 


a) 




r— 


O- 


F 


o 


Q- 


O 


o 


o 


s- 


LU 


(J 


4- 


S- 


4- 


-o 


o 


O 


0) 


JD 




-t-J 


s_ 


c 


u 


to 


o 


3 


:jC 




s- 




•(-> 


+-> 


e: 


3 


(/) 


0) 


J3 


c 


> 


•1 — 


o 


ro 


S- 


o 


n: 


+-> 






to 


CL s 


•1 — 


(t3 


0) 


Q s: z: 


Ln 






o 






' — 






O) 






s_ 






:2 






en 





I 



10-11 




OT 



CT) 



OV 


CD 


en 

3. 


CD 


Ol 


3. 




"■"^^ 


;i 




O 


U) 




O 


o 




o 


o 


CM 




Ln 




1 


<_) 


1 

o 


1 
o 


o 

o 


CM 
A 


1 — 


in 









: 






mm 


■ 






mm 








■•■•>•:■•■:■ 








::>:¥:¥: 


. 






fflW::; 













T3 




C 




3 




O 




00 




-o . 




E '— -■ 




(t3 r-. 




1— r^ 




m oi 




1 — 1 1 — 




■^-^ 




CD 




E •+- 


• 


O M- 


cn 


— 1 O 


r~- 


1 


CT< 


E tsi 


t-H 


O fO 




J- cu 


»1 


■+- 3 


4-> 




S- 


•o -o 


o 


<U E 


n. 


U) 03 


Q) 




ac 


fo -a 




s- ■.- 


>i 


O) 


s- 


CO d; 


03 


<D 


F 


s- - 


F 


o en 


Z! 


o •!- 


00 


cu 




(+- s- 


(/) 


O C3 


0) 




• ^ 


1/1 H- 


■a 


Q. O 


3 


o 


+-> 


-M fO 


00 


4J 




(U (C 


^— 


jc -o 


10 


+J 


o 


<u 


•1 — 


E -E 


en 


■1- +J 


o 




t — 


U E 


o 


E O 


o 


•1- S- 


UJ 


N M- 






S- 


4- -O 


o 


O 0) 


j2 


-l-> 


S- 


E O 


fO 


O 3 


zn 


•I- S- 




+J -4-) 


E 


3 I/) 


QJ 


-Q E 


> 


•.- O 


ro 


S- (J 


zn 


+-> 




(/I Q. 


■? 


•1- (O 


<u 


Q s: 


i^ 


to 




O 




' — 




(U 




5- 




=S 




Dl 





10-12 






en 


-^^ 


cn 








en 


3. 


cn 


CD 


en 


3. 




~^.^ 


**^ 


3. 




o 


cn 


cn 




o 


o 


a 


3. 


O 


o 


(NJ 






LD 


r^ 


1 


o 


O 


1 


1 


o 


o 


^— 


o 


o 


o 


CM 


V 


p— 


LO 


1 — 


A 

























:•:•:■:•:■:•: 










SW::: 










WxW 










:W:¥S 










:¥:¥:¥: 






















^^ ^ 













•o 






E 






3 






O 






CO 






T3 


. 




c 


- — ^ 




re 


■^ 




1 — 


~-~ 




i/i 


cn 




1 — \ 







CD 






C 


4- 


• 


o 


■4- 


cn 


_1 


O 


■^ 




1— 


cn 


Vr 


N 


t— ( 


O 


re 




i- 


CIJ 


•^ 


M- 


3 


4-> 


XJ 


T5 


o 


CU 


C 


Q. 


CO 


re 


0) 


•r- 




d; 


re XJ 




s- 


•r— 


>! 




<U 


S- 


l/l 


d; 


re 


cu 




^ 


!- 


« 


£ 


O 


CD 


T 


o 


QJ 


00 


If- 


!- 


to 


O CJ3 


<u 






•r- 


00 M- "O 


Q. 


O 


3 


O 




4-> 


-M 


re 
■i-> 


OO 


(U 


re 


1^ 


^ T5 


re 


+-> 




o 




OJ 


•1— 


C 


-C 


CD 




4-> 


o 


T3 


F 


o 


re 


o 


o 


aj 


E- 


LlJ 




<+- 


s- 


M- T3 


o 


o 


O) -Q 




+J 


s_ 


c 


O 


re 


o 


3 


re 




S- 




+-> 


-l-> 


c: 


:3 


to 


<u 


jn 


c 


> 


•1— 


o 


re 


s- 


u 


n: 


+-> 






to 


Q. 


5 


•1— 


re 


0) 


Q 


s: 


2: 


r^ 






c: 












a 






s. 






3 




CD 





10-13 




■o 






C 4- 






:3 o 






o 


i/i 




Ul +J 


0) 




c 


•r- 




TO <u 


-n 




s= E 


^ 




fO -l-> 


+-> 




r- S- 


C/1 




to rc 






1-1 Q. 


^_ 




<U 


lO 




OIQ 


tj 




c 


•^- 




o +-> 


Ol 




_J Z3 


o 




= U 






•1— 


o 




E 4-> 


o 




O CJ 


UJ 




S- 0) 






U- c 


S- 




— c 


o 




o 


J3 




o 






■O QJ 


T- 




E x: 






3 4-> 


c 




o 


QJ 




oo >> > 




JD 


fO 




•o 


n: 




E -O 






03 QJ 


^ 




1— x: 


QJ 




I/) (/I 


Z 




1—1 •!- 






r— 






en ja 


• 




c :3 


^ — % 




O CLl-^ 




_i 


r- 




- 


CT^ 




C (O 


r— 




•1- QJ 






O 


C 




c s- 


■1 — 




O 3 






•1- o 


E 




+-> (/I 


O 




3 OJ 






^ q: 


+-> 


• 


•r- 


O 


cn 


S- r— 


0) 


r^ 


+-> (O 


+-> 


CTi 


on S- 


o 


t— 1 


■r- 3 


s- 




XJ +-> 


Q. 


•^ 


<a 




-(-> 


<U -ZL 


^— 


s- 


N 


(O 


o 


•>- <4- 


-l-> 


Q. 


(/) o 


c 


q; 




QJ 


Qi 


+-> l/l 


b 




E (O 


c 


>. 


<U r- 


o 


S- 


E +-> 


s- 


rO 


•.- ■< 


•r- 


F 


■o 


> 


1- 


O) c 


E 


-z 


00 < 


UJ 


00 



CO 



QJ 

s- 



10-14 



-10' 



73M0* 





NEW HAVEN 



sc 



1148 
O 



■5' 



CORE 1148 
PPM (Ash 5C0°C) 

0.1 0.2 0.3 20 30 40 20 60 



-I- 30 

h- 

Q. 

O 10 



50 




CORE 1036 
PPM (Ash 500*0 

180 20 60 120 

OH ^ 




X4I^00' 




Figure 10-9. 



The depth of distribution of Hg, Pb, Cu and Zn in cores: 1148 
(from Thomson, Turekian and McAffrey, 1975) and 1036 (analyzed 
at Yale); showing their respective locations off New Haven Harbor. 
New Haven Harbor Ecological Studies Summary Report, 1979. 



10-15 



of biologically mixed material and the deeper portion as reflecting the 
increasing contamination of Long Island Sound sediments by human intro- 



duction of metals. Assuming no mixing below the top few centimeters, 
they used the distribui 
on the metal profiles. 



210 
they used the distribution of Pb to date the core and put a chronology 



We now know that this was an oversimplified interpretation. 

210 
Benninger et al (1979) have shown that the trace-metal and Pb data 

can be interpreted as due to diffusion-like biological mixing to depths 
of 15 cm and episodic deep burrowing to depths of one meter or more. 
Thus the exponential decrease of trace metals is the result of two 
processes, one an increasing metal flux to the sediments with time, and 
the other a redistribution based on a diffusion-like mixing process near 
the top of the core. It is not possible to reconstruct the time- 
scale of metal pollution accumulations without unravelling the contri- 
butions of the sediment mixing processes. 



The Rote of Atmospheric Transport in Tvace Metal Input to 
Long Island Sound 

The Historical Record in a Salt Marsh 

Unlike sediments in Long Island Sound, salt marsh deposits are 
not subject to major bioturbation. Therefore, if they continue to grow 
upward, each layer should preserve a record reflective of the deposi- 
tional environment at that point in time. As sea level rises over 
geologic time the saltmarsh elevation will grow upward to keep pace. 
Tidal gauge data (Figure 10-10) show that during the past 100 years sea 
level has been rising relative to the Connecticut coast at a rate of 
about 2 mm per year. This is probably related to a world-wide rise in 
sea level resulting from climate-induced changes on the earth's water 
balance. 



McCaffrey (1977) and McCaffrey and Thomson (1979) have shown 

210 
that the Pb (22 year half life) concentration at each level in a 

vertical profile of the salt marsh predicts the rate of sea level change 



10-16 



O 

o 



o 

CD 



O 
CVJ 



< 



o 

00 



o 



o + 




«■ O) 
^ -M 
CO 4- 
S- (0 

(O 

E i- 

(t3 O 
-l-> 4-> -Q 

ro TD re 

CO n: 

•-^ en c 
•a 3 oj 
s- re > 
o en re 

M- 3= 

c: O) 
re -o S 
s- -r- cu 

CQ 4-J IT 



s_ o • 

> M- CTl 
•r- r-^ 

d; o) CTi 

> 1— 

3 



re o 



QJ 
O) CO 



+-> 

S- 

o 
a. 

O) 

a: 

s- 
re 



. en 

+J s- I— .-I 



c I— -a 

•r- OJ c 

> re 

CO 0) 

S- r- >, 

O) <D 

>, re s- 
re CD M- 

f — CO t- 

re 
<+- -o o 
o c o 

re ST 

cncD -o 

re I— E 

CM re 

M- I 

O -Q " 

D- r-- 
cu r-^ 

E -Q p— 
OJ 

-o -o " 

E O) >> 

O E cu 

Q.T- S- 

lo E "+- 

OJ S- 4- 

s- <D re 

S- ■)-> C_3 

O O) o 

o -o s: 



:3 

C/0 

CO 
O) 
•p— 

-a 

3 
+-> 
C>0 



o 



I 



c> 



O 



O 
rO 



mo • |9A9-| 22.61 Moiag MldSQ 






■r- 

U- 



10-17 



especially as the rate has not been constant over the past 100 years 

(Figure 10-10) . In addition, these researchers showed that the calculated 

Pb flux, as determined by the standing crop of unsupported Pb in 
the salt marsh, equaled the atmospheric flux as determined for New Haven 
by Benninyor (1978). This implies that:' (1) the traco metal distribu- 
tion vertically in the salt marsh reflects the changing flux over time 
and that no vertical migration of the trace metals is expected by diffusion 
or biological activity; and (2) that there should be an atmospheric flux 
of trace metals recorded in the growing salt marsh. Indeed the calcu- 
lated flux of Cu, Pb and Zn (Figure 10-11) appears to be almost solely 

atmospheric as the predicted flux of these metals is in agreement with 

210 
the estimated atmospheric flux (Table 10-1) . That both the Pb and trace- 
metal fluxes to the salt marsh can be ascribed almost completely to an 
atmospheric source is not surprising since the surface of a salt marsh, 
on which Spartina alterniflora grows, is inundated by sea water only 
about 5% of the time. The remainder of the time it behaves like an 
atmospheric collector. 



The Intei'pretation of the Trace Metal Record in Long Island Sound Coves 

We can now test the following question: how much of the trace 
metal content of Long Island Sound sediments may be explained by an 

atmospheric source? To answer the question, we integrate the total 

210 
excess Pb m a core with the integrated excess metal content. Bennin- 

210 
ger (1978) has shown that the Pb content in Long Island Sound sediment 

is due predominantly to atmospheric supply and that there is no loss 

from the Sound. We then compare the ratio of integrated trace-metal 

210 
content to integrated Pb content found in a sediment core from the 

area under consideration to the ratio found by McCaffrey (1977) and 
McCaffrey and Thomson (1979) in the salt marsh. This normalization 
overcomes the problem of both horizontal and vertical mobility in the 
sediment. When such a calculation is made for the Long Island Sound 
long core (core 1148, Fig. 10-9) analyzed by Thomson, Turekian and McCaffrey 
(1975) it shows that all the Pb could be explained as of atmospheric 
origin, probably also most of the Zn and a smaller fraction of the 



10-18 



CM 
I 



£ 
u 

X 

_J 
u. 

CO 

in 

UJ 

o 

X 

LJ 




OJ CJ CJ CJ CM CvJ <\J 

N m to — <7> h- lo 

(7> C7> C7) C7> GO 00 GO 



CM 

ro 

00 



CM CM 
— 0) 
GO h- 



CTl 



Qi 



rd 



O) 



03 -l-J 

(/) " s_ 
C O 
S- O Q. 
O) CO QJ 
> E QC 

o 

S- -O E 

S§ 
00 

>, 

■r- (O -5 
0) O 00 

^ S.^ 
Oct 

O CTl o 
•r- 1 — O 

■•-> UJ 
>> s- 



3 



O 
(/I 



s- 

+-) 

. ^- 



J3 



c 
cu 
> 
res 



fO 



I/) CTl 

S- r-- 

rei en 

u_ E r- 



3 



3 
CD 



a V 3 A 



10-19 



TABLE 10-1. CALCULATED EXCESS METAL FLUX (y g/cm Vyr) TO THE SURFACE OF 
THE FARM RIVER SALT MARSH COMPARED TO MEASURED ATMOSPHERIC 
DEPOSITION RATES AT SELECTED SITES. NEW HAVEN HARBOR ECO- 
LOGICAL STUDIES SUMMARY REPORT, 1979. 



SITE AND 
COLLECTION DATA 



Branford, Ct. salt marsh 
(1977) 

New York City 
(1969-1970) 

Nantucket, Ma. 
(1966-1967) 



Cu 



8±2 



9.8 



5.6 



Zn 



12±3 



32 



7.6 



Pb 



7±4 



35 



8.5 



REFERENCE 



McCaffrey (1977) and McCaffrey 
and Thomson (1979) 

Volchok and Bogen (1971) 



Lazrus, Lorange and Lodge (1970) 



10-20 



copper. Thus, we conclude that the atmospheric burden of trace metals 
to the sediments of Long Island Sound is not trivial and indeed may be 
dominant for at least some elements. 



The Kinetiaii of Trace-Metal Scavenging from the Water Column 

210 
The above discussxon tacitly assumed that Pb and the trace 

metals have a very short transit time as dissolved species in the water 

column. This implies efficient scavenging and removal of these nuclides 

from Long Island Sound. This hypothesis is supported by the results of 

210 
Benninger (1978) on Pb distribution in Long Island Sound waters. 

210 
Figure 10-12 shows that virtually all of the Pb in Long Island Sound 

210 
waters is associated with particles. The dissolved Pb concentration 

is nil. When this is compared to the much higher open-ocean surface- 
water concentrations (Nozaki, Thomson and Turekian, 1976) , it is clear 
that nearshore processes quickly and effectively remove reactive chemi- 
cal species from the water column. Aller and Cochran (1976) came to the 

234 
same conclusion regarding Th in Long Island Sound. Together these 

results imply that the mean residence time of reactive metals in the 

water of Long Island Sound with respect to removal into the sediments is 

of the order of days. 



The agent of scavenging of the trace metals is almost certainly 

adsorption on particles rather than association with plankton. Table 10-2 

210 
shows how the flux of Pb out of the ocean surface is ascribable 

almost totally to the effect of particle scavenging. Most other reactive 

elements probably behave in a similar fashion. Most of the particles in 

Long Island Sound are resuspended bottom sediments and probably include 

manganese and iron oxide coatings that are effective adsorbers of many 

trace metals. 



Any geographic redistribution of elements in Long Island Sound 
is thus affected by the transport of particles from the moment of sca- 
venging to final burial in the sediments (see Turekian, 1977 for a more 
detailed discussion) . This generalization does not hold for manganese 
or iron completely as these elements (and others affected by coprecipita- 



lQ-21 



Q. 
o 



o 

o 



0.30 



0.20 — 




0.10 — 



Figure 10-12, 



210 
Total Pb in surface water versus concentration of suspended 

solids taken over time at a station in central Long Island Sound. 

The plot shows that there is virtually no ^lOp^ dissolved in Long 

Island Sound, having been effectively scavenged to the sediments 

on a wery rapid time scale (After Benninger, 1978). 

New Haven Harbor Ecological Studies Summary Report, 1979. 



COPPER 



Figure 10-13. 



4,500 




BRIDGEPORT 



NEW HAVEN 
NEW LONDON 
NORWALK 
NOANK 



T- 



Copper concentration in oysters as a function of time at six 
locations along the Connecticut coast. (Plotted from the 
data of Feng and Ruddy, 1974). New Haven Harbor Ecological 
Studies Summary Report, 1979. 



10-22 









t 


TABLE 10-2. ROLE OF PLANKTON IN ^^°Pb TRANSPORT OUT OF THE OCEAN 




SURFACE LAYER. NEW HAVEN HARBOR ECOLOGICAL STUDIES. 




SUMMARY REPORT, 1979. 






Coastal : 


Open Ocean: 






Long Island Sound 


North Pacific 




Type of Environment 


(Benninger, 1976) 


(Nozaki & Tsunogai , 

1 


1976) 


-2 -1 
Productivity gCdry wt) m y 


1000 


200 




Pb in plankton dpm g (dry wt) 


<2 


<5 




Pb flux out of mixed layer 


<0.2 


0.1 




-2 -1 
dpm cm y 








Pb atmospheric flux dpm cm y 


1.0 


2.0 




Percent transported by plankton 


<20% 


<5% 




settling* 








* 210 

With residence times of a year or less the remaining Pb must be 




transported by particles. 









10-23 



tion) are easily mobilized in solution under reducing conditions but 
their ultimate fate is burial in the sediment. 



Summary of Controls on Trace Metal Distribution in Long Island Sound 

Sediments 

There are three main sources of trace-metal supply to the 
sediments of Long Island Sound as stated above: (1) industrially de- 
rived metal-rich particles from streams draining into harbors and 
directly into the Sound; (2) sewer outfalls in coastal areas; and (3) 
atmospherically transported materials. In addition, it is possible to 
include trace-metal-rich dredge spoils from contaminated harbors and 
channels as a source analogous to the situation observed in the New York 
Bight. 

The pattern of trace-metal distribution in the sediments of 
Long Island Sound follows, to a first approximation, the pattern of 
grain- size distribution - the trace-metal concentrations are highest, on 
the average, in the finest grained sediments. But the second order 
effect related to localized trace-metal inputs from contaminated rivers 
or from sewer outfalls can also be seen - in particular, the sediments 
of the western part of the Sound nearest to the highly impacted New York 
City area around Throgs Neck. Those in the area west of the Housatonic 
River estuary and those in New Haven Harbor are conspicuously higher in 
trace metals than surrounding sediments independent of grain size. 

There is evidence from the distribution of energy at the 
bottom of the Sound (Bokuniewicz, Gebert and Gordon, 1976) that the top 
few millimeters of the fine-grained, metal-rich sediments, are resuspen- 
ded and moved around the bottom of the Sound's central basin. This 

process would tend to homogenize the trace-metal concentrations at the 

234 
sediment-water interface. When considering the Th (24 day half life) 

standing crop distribution in the uppermost part of the sediment column 

in cores collected from different water depths (Aller, Benninger and 

Cochran, 1979) , the time scale of this homogenization process is on the 

order of months. 



10-24 



The time frame for trace metals reaching their ultimate r(?s- 
positories in Iiong Island Sound then will be determined by the effici- 
ency of burial of the trace metal-rich components deep in the sediment 
column out of the domain of surficial resuspension and redistribution. 
This burial is principally affected by deep burrowing organisms such as 
the Crustacea. Documentation comes from Benninger and Aller (1979) 
using plutonium as the man-made tracer (injected into the environment 

primarily in 1962 with secondary injections of smaller magnitude since 

210 
then) and Pb as the steady-state tracer. Table 10-3 is taken from their 

work and shows that sediments in the deeper parts of Long Island Sound 

have a larger standing crop of both of the nuclides than the sediments 

in the shallow area, principally due to transfer to greater depths in 

the sediment column. This implies that the deeper part of the basin is 

the dominant repository for trace metals introduced into the Sound 

because of deeper biological reworking. 



TRACE METALS IN ORGANISMS 

Observed Trace Metal Distributions in Mussels and Oysters 
from Long Island Sound 

Mussels and oysters (epifauna) are filter feeders which attach 
to hard surfaces. Their isolation from the sediment means that their 
trace-metal compositions are likely to be reflective, primarily, of the 
suspended material in the water. The extent to which organisms more 
intimately associated with the sediment (infauna) also reflect the 
suspendable material can only be established by a comparison between 
these infaunal organisms and the hard substrate species like the oysters 
and the mussels. In this section, therefore, the data available on 
trace-metal concentrations in mussels and oysters from the Connecticut 
shore are reviewed. 



10-25 



TABLE 10-3. ^°Pb AND PLUTONIUM INVENTORIES IN LONG ISLAND SOUND 

SEDIMENTS (BENNINGER AND ALLER, 1979). NEW HAVEN HARBOR 
ECOLOGICAL STUDIES SUMMARY REPORT, 1979. 





NWC (14 m) 


DEEP (34 111) 


Long-term sediment accumulation 
rate*, cm y" 


0.06 


0.1 


Pb-210 "sediment accumulation 
rate", cm y~^ 


0.11 


0.57 


Dominant organisms 


shal low-burrowing 
mobile 


deep-burrowing 
sedentary 




deep- feeding 
deposit feeders 


shallow-deposit or 
suspension feeders 


Excess Pb inventory, 
dpm cm 


11.1 


78.2 


Plutonium inventory (1975) , 
dpm cm" 2 


0.22 


0.86 



Based on the total thickness accumulated during the past 8000 years, 



10-26 



Feng and Ruddy (1974) made a detailed study of the composition 
of the soft tissue of oysters {Crassostrea virginica) harvested along 
the Connecticut coast. A single stock of oysters obtained as yearlings 
were transferred to six stations on the Connecticut coast: (1) Norwalk 
Harbor at the Northeast Utilities Company pier, (2) Bridgeport at the 
Pleasure Beach Bridge, (3) the Housatonic River below Devon, (4) New 
Haven Harbor at the Coast Guard Station finger pier, (5) New London 
Harbor at the U.S. Navy Underwater Systems Center pier and (6) Noank at 
the University of Connecticut Marine Sciences Institute pier. The stock 
was then sampled periodically between June 1972 and April 1974 and 
tissue analyzed for Cd, Cu, Hg, Mn and Zn. The oyster tissue did not 
vary significantly in the concentration of these elements from the 
native oysters also analyzed. The highest values for all of the trace 
elements except mercury are found at the Bridgeport and Housatonic 
sites. 

Figures 10-13 - 10-15 show the changes in composition with time, 
at each of the six locations, for Zn, Cd and Cu, respectively. There is 
clearly a marked increase from the summer of June 1972 to the winter of 
1974 for the Housatonic-Bridgeport region for all metals and a marked 
increase for zinc for all other locations except Norwalk which seems to 
have gone through a maximum in the winter or spring of 1973. 



Mussels 



Trace metals in Long Island Sound mussels were determined at 
Yale University (Curran, 1976 and additional data)*. A map of the 
sampling locations is shown in Figure 10-16. The geographic variations of 
trace metals in native mussels collected in 1975 show (Figures 10-17- 10-21) 
the same patterns as the oysters although the concentrations are con- 
siderably lower in the mussels. The pattern holds for all the trace 
metals analyzed including Pb and Ni as well as Zn, Cd and Cu. The other 
region of high metal concentration in the mussels is the area around 
Throgs Neck. 



* 
The analytical methods used at Yale have been reported in the 1975 Annual 

Report to the United Illuminating Company through Normandeau Associates, Inc. 



HHinoi COHl 




Figure 10-14. 



Cadmium concentration in oysters as a function of time at six 
locations along the Connecticut coast. (Plotted from the 
data of Feng and Ruddy, 1974). New Haven Harbor Ecological 
Studies Summary Report, 1979. 



ZINC 



CD 
I — f 



Q 



M 



Q- 
Q. 



16,000 



5,000 
4,000 



NEW LONDON 



BRIDGEPORT 




Figure 10-15. ^inc concentration in oysters as a function of time at six 
locations along the Connecticut coast. (Plotted from the 
data of Feng and Ruddy, 1974). New Haven Harbor Ecological 
Studies Summary Report, 1979. 



lQ-28 




Finure in-]fi. Sampling locations for mussels studied for trace metals 
(Collected by D. Curran of Yale). New Haven Harbor 
Ecological Studies Summary Report, 1979. 



30 _ 



00 
00 

r- 20 






en 



J2 
D- 



10- 



^ 



a: 

UJ 

> 



o 

z 
o 

< 

to 

O 

I 



9 



?> 



EAST 



■> 



a" 



,6 



(I>— o 



^ ^ ^ 



~-OPb 



I 2 



-r 
3 



-i—r 
4 5 



T" 
7 



TT- 
8 9 



10 



II 



12 



Figure 10-17.. 



Lead concentration of dry soft tissues of mussels as a function 
of location along the Connecticut coast. (See Figure 16 for 
locations, after Curran, 1976). New Haven Harbor Ecological 
Studies Summary Report, 1979. 



10- 2 a 



30H 



CO 
00 



>- 






•o 



20- 



10- 



> 

o 

z 
o 

H 
< 



EAST 




— r- 
10 



— r- 

12 



123 45 67 89 



Figure 10-18. Cadmium concentration of dry soft tissues of mussels as a function 
of location along the Connecticut coast. (See Figure 16 for 
locations, after Curran, 1976). New Haven Harbor Ecological 
Studies Summary Report, 1979. 



40- 



C/1 



>- 

CD 

CD 

3. 



C_3 



30- 



20- 



10- 




— 1 — I — 
8 9 



EAST- 



12 3 4 5 6 7 



— 1 — 
12 



Figure 10-19. 



Copper concentration of dry soft tissues of mussels as a function 
of location along the Connecticut coast. (See Figure 16 for 
locations, after Curran, 1976). New Haven Harbor Ecological 
Studies Summary Report, 1979. 



lQ-30 



300- 









CD 



ZOO- 



CD 






100- 



HOUSATONIC RIVER 




Zn 



I 2 3 



4 5 



-1 — r— 
6 7 



I I 
8 9 



-1 — 
10 



12 



Figure 10-2^. 



Zinc concentration of dry soft tissues of mussels as a function 
of location along the Connecticut coast. (See Figure 16 for 
location s, after Curran. 1976) . New Haven Harbor Ecological 
'Studies Summary Report, 1979. 



c/) 



>- 

Q 4H 






HOUSATONIC RIVER 




10 



-I — T 
2 3 



"T~r 

4 5 



n r 

6 7 



8 9 



1^ 
II 



12 



Figure 10-21 



Nickel concentration of dry soft tissues of mussels as a function 
of location along the Connecticut coast. (See Figure 16 for 
locations, after Curran, 1976). New Haven Harbor Ecological 
Studies Summary Report, 1979. 



10-31 
The Cause of the Observed Trace-Metal Distributions 

Obviously both oyster and mussel tissue composition are influenced 
by the trace-metal content of the particles they ingest. There should 
then be a relationship between the chemical properties of the particles 
of the surrounding water and the sediments and the compositions of the 
tissues. Consequently, the chemical composition of the ingestible 
particles could be inferred from two environmental indicators : the 
composition of the sediments at the sediment-water interface, and the 
composition of the bulk water (including the fine-grained particles) 
associated with the organisms. 

Considering the trace-metal maps for the top five cm of Long 
Island Sound sediment cores (Figures 10-5-7) , there is a marked similarity 
between the areas of high metal concentrations in the sediments and high 
concentrations in the mussels and oysters. Similarly, a comparison of 
the Ni concentrations in mussels (Figure 10-21) with the coastal distri- 
bution of rti'in unfiltered Long Island Sound water (Figure 10-22) also 
shows a marked correlation. [Nickel is the only element analyzed in the 
mussel study which has also been extensively analyzed in water samples 
from along the Connecticut coast (Turekian, 1971) ] . I conclude that 
the primary source of the metals found in elevated levels in the soft 
tissues of mussels and oysters is the suspended organic-rich debris in 
the Sound. -—This is accentuated where a significant source of metal- 
bearing organic-rich particles from human activities is introduced by 
direct supply or secondary resuspension. Therefore, a strong correlation 
exists between high metal concentrations in all components of the coastal 
system -- water, sediment and organisms and the proximity of freshwater 
stream and sewer discharges. 

Redistribution of particulate material from point and in part 
non-point ( i.e., atmospheric) injections occurs in the sediments of the 
Sound. Siibsequent dilution of this high-metal-content particulate 
matter with indigenously produced, low-metal-content planktonic debris 
plus material from "cleaner" sediments in the Sound acts to obscure 
point sources. This occurs within a relatively short distance (one - two 
miles) from the point of injection. 



10-32 



4iri5'- 



NICKEL 

(^g/L) 




Figure 10-22. Distribution of Nickel in unfiltered surface waters of 

Long Island Sound (after Turekian, 1971). New Haven Harbor 
Ecological Studies Summary Report, 1979. 



10-33 

T-Lme Variations in Meroenaria and Crassostrea from New Haven Harbor 

Metals analysis of soft tissue from Mercenaria mercenaria (the 
hard-shell clam) have been conducted periodically using specimens from 
the New Haven Plarbor site and Morris Cove, New Haven Harbor, since the 
summer of 1974. Sampling was performed concurrently with the Rhoads and 
Michael investigations (see Section 6.0 Benthos) as part of the study to 
meet the requirements of Section 4(A)(2) of the NPDES discharge permit. 
The two sample locations are on either side of the Coast Guard Station 
location that was utilized in the oyster study conducted by Feng and 
Ruddy (1974) discussed above. Statistical analysis of the data presented 
in Table 4 shows no significant difference (p<0.05) in concentrations 
between the two sites and over time except in the case of lead. The 
higher values for lead at the Harbor Station site are possibly related 
to the site's proximity to the East Shore Sewage Treatment Plant Outfall. 
This is based on data presented earlier showing higher rates of metals 
accumulation in organisms near point sources. The Mercenaria are primarily 
affected by the ingestion of suspended organic matter, high in metals, 
from sewer outfalls, rather than by the surrounding sediments. 

Levels of copper, cadmium and zinc in oysters maintained in 
New Haven Harbor (Figures 10-13 - 10-15) follow trends observed in other 
harbors along the Connecticut shore. With the exception of zinc, 
concentrations remained relatively constant over the two-year period studied. 

Trace-Metals Composition Comparisons Among Organisms from New Haven Harbor 

It has been already noted that oysters and mussels concentrate 
trace elements to different extents by ingesting edible particles; 
oysters generally possess higher metal content than mussels. Compari- 
sons have also been made between several other species. 

Table 10-5 shows a comparison of metal concentrations in five 
species of bivalves collected in New Haven Harbor. Of the five bivalves, 
two {Crassostrea and Mytilus) are considered as epifauna and the remaining 
three {Mercenaria, Mulinia and Yoldia) are considered as infaunal species. 



10-34 



TABLE 10-4. TIME VARIATION IN CONCENTRATIONS OF Cu, Pb, Zn, Cd AND Hg IN SOFT 
TISSUE OF MERCENARIA MERCENARIA AT TWO SITES IN NEW HAVEN HARBOR. 
(ALL CONCENTRATIONS IN yg/g OF DRY SAMPLE). NEW HAVEN HARBOR 
ECOLOGICAL STUDIES SUMMARY REPORT, 1979. 









SAMPLING TIME 




SITE 


SEDIMENT 

yg/g 


SUMMER 
1974 


WINTER 
1974-75 


SUMMER 
1975 


SUMMER 
1976 


WINTER 
1976-77 


Morris Cove (control 
site) 

Niomber analyzed 

LOI* (%) 

Cu 

Pb 

Zn 

Cd 

Hg 


(summer 
1974) 

3 

5.7 
39 
26 
113 

0.12 


3 

21 
4.3 
157 
1.3 
0.33 


6 

22 
6.9 
198 

2.5 
- 0.2 


3 

18 
3.7 
271 
1.6 


5 

26 
2.5 
116 
0.84 


5 

21 
2.8 
137 
1.0 


UI (Coke Works Site) 

Number analyzed 

* 

LOI 

Cu 
Pb 
Zn 

Cd 
Hg 


2 

5.6 
16 
16 
100 

0.10 


3 

24 

6.0 
184 
1.3 
0.76 


6 

35 

12.8 
379 
2.4 
1.6 


7 

16 
5.6 
265 
1.5 


5 

31 
4.5 
145 
1.6^- 


5 

24 
3.2 
165 
1.4 



LOI = Loss on ignition ~ organic matter 



10-35 



TABLE 10-5.. COPPER AND ZINC CONCENTRATIONS (yg/g OF DRY SOFT TISSUE) OF 
DIFFERENT BIVALVE SPECIES AT VARIOUS LOCATIONS IN NEW 
HAVEN HARBOR. NEW HAVEN HARBOR ECOLOGICAL STUDIES SUMMARY 
■ REPORT, 1979. 



LOCATION IN NEW HAVEN 




UI COKE 


COAST GUARD 




HARBOR: 


MORRIS COVE 


WORKS 


STATION 


CHANNEL 


YEAR OF COLLECTION: 


SUMMER 1975 


SUMMER 1975 


1972-1974 


1973 




(1) 


(1) 


(2) 


(3) 


COPPER 










Mercenaria 


18 


16 






Mytilus 


12 


23 






Crassostrea 






460 




Mulinia 








19 


Yoldia 








14 


ZINC 










Mercenaria 


271 


265 






Mytilus ' 


268 


270 






Crassostrea 






5800 




Mulinia 








31 


Yoldia 








43 



(1) From Table 4 

(2) From Feng and Ruddy (1974) 

(3) Samples collected and analyzed at Yale University 
in conjunction with an environmental study for 
dredging in connection with the construction of 
the United Illuminating Harbor Station site. 



10-36 



Yoldia is a deposit feeder and Mulinia a suspension feeder. Both species 
are primarily influenced by the material at the sediment water interface. 
In contrast, Crassostrea, Mytilus and Mercenaria are most sensitive to 
the metal-rich organic matter making up the primary particle flux. 

Data collected from the Harbor show Crassostrea acciomulating 
the greatest levels of the trace metals measured. In general, zinc was 
accumulated to a much greater degree than copper. 

Of interest is the possible correlation between diet and metal 
concentrations in the bivalves studied assuming no specific biologically- 
mediated internal fractionation of metals in these organisms. Oysters 
apparently readily assimilate the primary metal-rich organic debris 
derived from fresh water sources; mussels and Mercenaria, with a lower 
concentration of heavy metals, ingest a mixture of high concentrations 
of this primary material and lower concentrations of secondary planktonic 
debris and resuspended sediments, whereas the two small clams with low 
metal concentrations derive their nourishment principally from resuspended 
sediment with its characteristically lower metal concentrations. 



Trace-Metals Composit'ton of Organisms in the Centvat Basin of Long 
Island Sound 

Infaunat Bivalves 

A rich infauna is associated with the sediment of the deeper 
waters of Long Island Sound. These species are not normally regarded as 
a human food resource but some fish and lobsters depend in part on these 
organisms as a food source. We focus attention on two deposit feeding 
bivalves, Yoldia and Nucula , and two suspension feeders, Mulinia and 
Pitar. Table 10-6 shows a comparison among these species from samplings in 
the central Long Island Sound basin and New Haven Harbor, and reveals 
relatively little difference in bivalve-tissue metals composition bet- 
ween the two areas. 



10-37 



TABLE 10-6. TRACE ELEMENTS IN SMALL SEDIMENT-DWELLING CLAMS FROM NEW HAVEN 
HARBOR AND CENTRAL LONG ISLAND SOUND. NEW HAVEN HARBOR 
ECOLOGICAL STUDIES SUMMARY REPORT, 1979. 





pg/g DRY SOFT TISSUE 
Zn Cu 


Deposit feeders 

Yoldia New Haven Harbor (2) 
Long Island Sound (7) 

Nucula Long Island Sound (1) 


43 14 
36 18 

28 49 


Suspension feeders 

Mulinia New Haven Harbor (5) 
Long Island Sound (12) 

Pitar Long Island Sound (6) 


31 19 
26 23 

25 12 



( ) indicates number of individuals analyzed 



10-38 



Anemones 

This group of organisms is unique in that its members expose 
a large amount of mucus-like tissue to seawater at the sediment-water 
interface. Not only is it able to sequester particles rich in elements 
but the mucopolysaccharide composition of this material acts as a 
scavenger for trace elements from seawater as well. This may explain 
the very high concentration of trace metals in these organisms. A 
comparison of the trace-element composition of an anemone (species 
unknown) from 2500 meters depth in the Mid-Atlantic Ridge with that of 
Cerianthus americanus , (common in Long Island Sound) shows that they 
are within a factor of 3 to 9 of each other in concentration for the 
elements analyzed. This implies that trace metal sequestering is a 
property of this organism wherever it is found (Table 10-7) and not con- 
strained by the peculiar chemistry of the substrate. 



10-39 



TABLE 10-7. COMPOSITION OF ANEMONES FROM LONG ISLAND SOUND (LIS) AND THE 
MID-ATLANTIC RIDGE (MAR). NEW HAVEN HARBOR ECOLOGICAL 
STUDIES SUMMARY REPORT, 1979. 







lag/g DRY SOFT TISSUE 








Zn Cu Pb 


Cd 


LIS 


Cerianthus (7) 


736 89 4.1 


4.6 


MAR 


Anemone (species unknown) (1) 








(2500 meters depth) 


143 10 14 


0.85 



( ) indicates number of individuals analyzed 



10-40 



ANALYSIS OF IMPACTS 

The supply of trace metals from domestic and industrial sewage 
is imprinted on the sediments adjacent to the source of impact as we 
have seen in the first section. The organisms feeding on suspended 
organic material respond in their trace-metal concentration to this 
input. New Haven Harbor is one such impacted area but does not influ- 
ence the biota as strongly as the Housatonic River or Throgs Neck (East 
River) systems. Changes in trace-metal supply with time exist in some 
locations around the Sound, but they are not marked in New Haven Harbor 
as reflected in the long time-scale study of Mercenaria mercenaria at 
two sites in the harbor. 

The role of New Haven Harbor Station as a potential source of 
trace-metal input in New Haven Harbor is limited. Surface runoff from 
the plant site and leachate from the percolation lagoon that receives 
treated plant wastes are the most probable sources. The addition of 
trace metals to the condenser cooling water during plant passage is 
effectively eliminated since the condenser tiibes are titanium, a metal 
extremely resistant to corrosion and erosion and the txibesheets are 
alximinum with bronze epoxy- coating. Contributions from plant-site 
runoff, consisting primarily of dust particles and other material from 
atmospheric sources, is not expected to be different from other similar- 
sized land areas around the harbor. The percolation lagoon receives 
treated effluents from such in-plant sources as floor drains and demin- 
eralizer regeneration wastes. The leaching of trace metals from the 
percolation lagoon into the harbor is dependent upon the composition 
(permeability and sediment type) of soils underlying the lagoon. Any 
contribution from this source would enter the harbor via the ground- 
water, most probably in the vicinity of the plant waterfront and the 
drainage ditch located to the south of the plant property line. This 
contribution would be insignificant compared to metals entering the 
harbor from the adjacent sewer outfall. 



10-41 



As the long time-scale study (Table 10-4) covers several years 
which bracket the construction and operation of the New Haven Harbor 
United Illuminating power plant, it is evident that the impact of this 
plant on the biota of the region is not measurable so far as the trace 
metals are concerned. 



SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS 

Long Island Sound 

Trace metals are supplied to Long Island Sound by three path- 
ways: (1) atmosphere, (2) metal-rich particles from contaminated undammed 
streams directly leading into the Sound and (3) trace-metal-rich organic 
particles derived from sewer outfalls that debouch into harbors. 

Mussels and oysters growing on hard substrates along the 
shores of Lo^g Island Sound utilize and reflect the trace-metal- 
enriched particles associated with the second two sources. ) 

These trace-metal-rich sources also imprint themselves on the 
bottom sediments although the bottom circulation in the Sound tends to 
mobilize and homogenize the sediment at the sediment-water interface. 

Over a long timeframe the sediments of the deeper parts of 
Long Island Sound serve as the principal repository for trace metals 
injected into the Sound due to the higher frequency of deep distribution 
by Crustacea in sediments found in deeper waters. 



New Haven Harbor 

Trace metals enter New Haven Harbor from the Quinnipiac 
River, major sewer outfalls located near Long Wharf and New Haven Harbor 
Station as well as from the atmosphere. The dominant source is the 



10-42 



sewer outfalls. New Haven Harbor sediments, therefore, contain high 
metal concentrations relative to greater Long Island Sound because of 
discharges from several sewage treatment plants. Any contribution from 
the New Haven Harbor is relatively small and obscured by contributions 
from the sewer outfalls. 

Soft tissue of Crassostrea virginica showed lower levels of 
trace metals in New Haven Harbor oysters than in five other Long Island 
Harbors studied. Suspension and deposit feeding molluscs showed slightly 
higher zinc in New Haven Harbor, but lower copper relative to Long 
Island Sound. C. virginica showed higher concentrations of these 
metals than other bivalves analyzed including Mercenaria mercenaria and 
Mytilus edulis. 

Trace-metal concentrations did not show a pronounced seasonal 
or spatial pattern in Mercenaria mercenaria soft tissue in New Haven 
Harbor. 

Impact from New Haven Harbor Station on the trace-metal regime 
in New Haven Harbor, if present, is overwhelmed by the ambient long-term 
trace metal supply and removal patterns. 



ACKNOWLEDGMENTS: This research was supported by the United Illum- 
inating Company and the Department of Energy. 
Various students at Yale participated in the ana- 
lytical program. They are R. J. McCaffrey, D. Curran, 
J. K. Cochran, D. M. DeMaster, L. K. Benninger and 
G. Paoia. 



10-43 



REFERENCES CITED 



Aller, R.C. and J.K. Cochran. 1976. 234 Th/238 U disequilibrium in 

near-shore sediment: particle reworking and diagenetic time scales. 
Earth Planet. Sci. Letters 29:37-50. 

, L.K. Benninger and J.K. Cochran. 1979. Tracking particle 



associated processes in near-shore environments by use of 234 Th/ 
238 U disequilibrium. In preparation. 

Applequist, M.D., A. Katz and K.K. Turekian. 1972. Distribution of 

mercury in the sediments of New Haven (CT) Harbor. Environ. Sci. 
Tech. 6:1123-1124. 

Benninger, L.K. 1976. The use of uranium-series radionuclides as tracers 
of geochemical processes in Long Island Sound. Ph.D. Thesis, Yale 
University. 

. 1978. 210 Pb balance in Long Island Sound. Geochem. 



Cosmochim. Acta 42:1165-1174. 
and R.C. Aller. 1979. 234 Th, 210 Pb and plutonium inventories 



in sediments of Long Island Sound as a function of macrobenthic commu- 
nity. In preparation. , 

, D.M. Lewis and K.K. Turekian. 1975. The use of natural Pb-210 



as a heavy metal tracer in the river-estuarine system, p. 202-210 
IN : T.M. Church (ed.). Marine Chemistry in the Coastal Environment. 
American Chemical Society Symposium Series 18. 

, A.C. AlleT ■ J.K. Cochran and K.K. Turekian. 1979. Effects of 



biological sediment mixing on the 210 Pb chronology and trace metal 
distribution in a Long Island Sound sediment core. Earth Planet. 
Sci. Letters. In press 

Bokuniewicz, H.J., J. Gebert and R.B. Gordon. 1976. Sediment mass balance 
in a large estuary (Long Island Sound) . Estuar. Coast. Mar. Sci. 
4:523-536. 

Carmody, D.J., J.B. Pearce and W.E. Yasso. 1973. Trace metals in sediments 
of the New York Bight. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 4:132-135. 

Curran, D. 1976. Use of the blue mussel, Mytilus edulis, as an indicator 
for heavy metal pollutants in Long Island Sound. Unpublished Senior 
Thesis, Yale University. 

Feng, S.Y. and G.M. Ruddy. 1974. Zn, Cn, Cd, Mn, and Kg in oysters along 

the Connecticut coast, p. 132-161. IN: Final Report to Office of Sea 
Grant Programs by the University of Connecticut Marine Sciences Institute. 



10-44 



Grieg, R.A. , R.N. Reid and D.R. Wenzloff. 1911. Trace metal concentra- 
tions in sediments from Long Island Sound. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 8:183-188. 

Gross, M.G. 1976. Sources of urban waste. p. 150-161. IN: M.G. Gross 
(ed) . Middle Atlantic Continental Shelf and the New York Bight. Am. 
Soc. Limn. Oceanog. Spec. Symp. 2. 

Lazrus, A.L. , E. Lorange, and J. P. Lodge, Jr. 1970. Lead and other metal 
ions in precipitation. Environ. Sci. Tech. 4:55-58. 

Lewis, D.M. 1977. The use of 210 Pb as a heavy metal tracer in the Sus- 
quehanna River system. Geochem. Cosmochim. Acta. 41:1557-1564. 

McCaffrey, R.J. 1977. A record of the acciimulation of sediment and trace 
metals in a Connecticut, U.S.A., salt marsh. Ph.D. Thesis, Yale Univ. 

and J. Thomson. 1979. The use of 210 Pb in determining fluxes 



to a Connecticut salt marsh. In preparation. 

Nozaki, Y. and S. Tsunogai. 1976. 226 Ra, 210 Pb and 210 Po disequilibrium 
in the western North Pacific. Earth Planet. Sci. Letters. 32:313-321. 

, J. Thomson and K.K. Turekian. 1976. The distribution of 210 Ph 



and 210 Po in the surface waters of the Pacific Ocean. Earth Planet. 
Sci. Letters. 32:304-312. 

Sholkovitz, E.R. 1976. Flocculation of dissolved organic and inorganic 
matter during the mixing of river water and seawater. Geochim. 
Cosmochim. Acta. 40:831-845. 

Thomson, J., K.K. Turekian and R.J. McCaffrey. 1975. The accumulation 

of metals in and release from sediments of Long Island Soxind. p. 28-44 
IN : L.E. Cronin (ed) . Estuarine Research Volume 1. Academic Press. 

Turekian, K.K. 1971. Rivers, tributaries and estuaries, p. 9-73. IN: 
D.W. Hood (ed) Impingement of Man on the Ocean. Wiley. 

1977. The fate of metals in the oceans. Geochim. Cosmochim. 



Acta. 41:1139-1144. 

Volchok, H.L. and D. Bogen. 1971. Trace metals - fallout in New York City. 
p. 1-91 to 1-107. IN: Health and Safety Laboratory Fallout Program 
Quarterly Summary Report, U.S.A.C.E., April 1, 1971, New York, N.Y. 



NEW HAVEN HARBOR 

ECOLOGICAL STUDIES 

SUMMARY REPORT, 1979 



n.O FINFISH OF NEW HAVEN HARBOR 

By David N. Pease, 
Neil B. Savage and Christopher J. Schmitt 

Normandeau Associates, Inc. 
Bedford, N. H. 



TABLE OF CONTENTS 



PAGE 



INTRODUCTION 11-1 

Rev-tew of Comparable Studies 11-1 

METHODS 11-5 

Otter Trawl Sampling 11-7 

Gill Net Sampling 11-7 

Shore-Zone Seining 11-8 

Monitoring of Impingement 11-8 

lohthyoplankton 11-8 

Processing of Specimens 11-8 

CHARACTERIZATION OF NEW HAVEN HARBOR ICHTHYOFAUNA 11-9 

Distribution of New Haven Harbor lohthyofauna 11-9 

Summary of Representative Species 11-93 

ANALYSIS OF IMPACTS 11-99 

Passage Through the Cooling Water System: Pumped Entrainment . 11-102 

Impingement 11-106 

Thermal Addition 11-109 

Impact 11-111 

LITERATURE CITED 11-115 



LIST OF FIGURES 



PAGE 



11-1. Finfish samples taken through October 1977 using gill 
nets, seine nets, and otter trawls (stations as indi- 
cated) 11-6 

11-2. Relative abundance of dominant shore-zone fishes, 

April 1971 through October 1977 11-16 

11-3. Monthly mean abundance of Pseudoipleuroneotes 

ameriaanus collected by otter trawl from May 1971 

through October 1977 11-22 

11-4. Total length (mean, range and std. dev.) of Pseudo- 
pleuroneates ameriaanus captured by various sampling 
devices in New Haven Harbor, Connecticut, from May 
1971 through October 1977 11-23 

11-5. Mean daily impingement of winter flounder {Pseudo- 
pteuponeates ameriaanus) by month at the New Haven 
Harbor Station, August 1975 through October 1977. .. . 11-25 

11-6. Total length (mean, range and std. dev.) of Sooph- 
thalrms aquosus captured by various sampling devices 
in New Haven Harbor, Connecticut, from May 1971 
through October 1977 11-28 

11-7. Monthly mean abundance of Saophthalmus aquosus 
collected by otter trawl from May 1971 through 
October 1977 11-30 

11-8. Total length (mean, range and std. dev.) of Tauto- 
goldbrus adspersus captured by various sampling 
devices in New Haven Harbor, Connecticut, from 
May 1971 through October 1977 11-33 

11-9. Monthly mean abundances of Tautogolabrus adspersus 
collected by trawl from May 1971 through October 
1977 11-35 

11-10. Monthly mean abundance of Stenotomus ahvysops 

collected by trawl from May 1971 through October 

1977 11-37 



11 



PAGE 



11-11. Total length (mean, range and std. dev.) of Stenotomus 
chrysops captured by various sampling devices in New 
Haven Harbor, Connecticut, from May 1971 through 
October 1977 11-38 

11-12. Monthly mean abundance of Paraliahthys dentatus 

collected by seine, gill net and otter trawl from 

May 1971 through October 1977 11-41 

11-13. Total length (mean, range and std. dev.) of Para- 
lichthys dentatus captured by various sampling 
devices in New Haven Harbor, Connecticut, from 
May 1971 through October 1977 11-43 

11-14. Monthly mean abundance of Clupea harengus collected 
by gill net and otter trawl from May 1971 through 
October 1977 11-46 

11-15. Total length (mean, range and std. dev.) of Clupea 
harengus captured by various sampling devices in 
New Haven Harbor, Connecticut, from May 1971 through 
October 1977 11-47 

11-16. Monthly mean abundance of Brevoovtia tyrannus 
collected by seine and gill net from May 1971 
through October 1977 11-50 

11-17. Total length (mean, range and std. dev.) of 

Brevoortia tyrannus captured by various sampling 

devices in New Haven Harbor, Connecticut, from 

May 1971 through October 1977 11-51 

11-18. Mean daily impingement of menhaden [Brevoortia 

tyrannus) by month at the New Haven Harbor Station; 

August 1975 through October 1977 11-54 

11-19. Total length (mean, range and std. dev.) of Alosa 
pseudoharengus captured by various sampling devices 
in New Haven Harbor, Connecticut, from May 1971 
through October 1977 11-56 

11-20. Monthly mean abundance of Alosa pseudoharengus 

collected by gill nets and otter trawls from 1971 

through 1977 11-59 

11-21. Total length (mean, range and std. dev.) of Alosa 
aestivalis captured by various sampling devices in 
New Haven Harbor, Connecticut, from May 1971 through 
October 1977 11-60 



111 



PAGE 

11-22. Monthly mean abundance of Alosa aestivalis collected 

by gill nets and otter trawls from 1971 through 1977. . 11-62 

11-23. Total length (mean, range and std. dev.) of Osmerus 
mordax captured by various sampling devices in New 
Haven Harbor, Connecticut, from May 1971 through 
October 1977 11-65 

11-24. Monthly mean abundance of Osmerus mordax collected 

by gill nets and otter trawls from 1971 through 1977. . 11-67 

11-25. Monthly mean abundance of Alosa sapidissima collected 

by gill nets and otter trawls from 1971 through 1977. . 11-68 

11-26. Total length (mean, range and std. dev.) of Anahoa 
mitahilli captured by various sampling devices in 
New Haven Harbor, Connecticut, from May 1971 through 
October 1977 11-70 

11-27. Monthly mean abundance of Anahoa mitahilli collected 

by trawls from 1971 through 1977 11-72 

11-28. Monthly mean abundance of SaorribeT saomhrus collected 
by gill net and otter trawl from May 1971 through 
October 1977 11-75 

11-29. Total length (mean, range and std. dev.) of Scomber 
saombrus captured by various sampling devices in New 
Haven Harbor, Connecticut, from May 1971 through 
October 1977 11-76 

11-30. Total length (mean, range and std. dev.) of Cynosoion 
regalis captured by various sampling devices in New 
Haven Harbor, Connecticut, from May 1971 through 
October 1977 11-80 

11-31. Monthly mean abundance of Cynosoion regalis collected 
by gill net and otter trawl from May 1971 through 
October 1977 11-82 

11-32. Mean daily impingement of weakfish {Cynosaion regalis) 
by month at the New Haven Harbor Station; August 1975 
through October 1977 11-84 

11-33. Monthly mean abundance of Pomatomus saltatrix collected 
by seine and gill net from May 1971 through October 
1977 11-85 



IV 



PAGE 



11-34. Total length (mean, range and std. dev.) of Pomatomus 
saltatrix captured by various sampling devices in New 
Haven Harbor, Connecticut, from May 1971 through 
October 1977 11-86 

11-35. Total length (mean, range and std. dev.) of Mcronc 
saxatilis captured by various sampling devices in 
New Haven Harbor, Connecticut, from May 1971 through 
October 1977 11-90 

11-36. Monthly mean abundance of Morone saxatilis collected 
by seine and gill net from May 1971 through October 
1977 11-92 



LIST OF TABLES 



PAGE 



11-1. RATIONALE FOR SELECTION OF NEW HAVEN FINFISH SPECIES 

ADDRESSED INDIVIDUALLY 11-10 

1-2. LIST OF FINFISH SPECIES COLLECTED IN NEW HAVEN HARBOR, 

APRIL 1970 THROUGH OCTOBER 1977 11-12 

11-3. IMPACT OF PASSAGE THROUGH THE COOLING WATER SYSTEM 

FOR FISH SPECIES FROM NEW HAVEN HARBOR, CONNECTICUT . . 11-104 

1-4. MEAN DAILY IMPINGEMENT OF FINFI