IBE5670/DC004 Rev 0

NS2 Freshwater Pearl Mussel Sub-Basin Management Plans

Phytobenthos monitoring of the Currane Catchment, Co. Kerry.

(SWRBD)

May & August 2009

Cummeragh, Cummeragh Bridge downstream view

Dr Bernadette Ní Chatháin

RPS Consulting Engineers, Mulkear House, Newtown Centre, Annacotty, Co. Limerick.

IBE5670/DC004 Rev 0

DOCUMENT CONTROL SHEET

Client Donegal County Council

Project Title National Freshwater Pearl Mussel Sub-Basin Management Plans

Document Title NS2 Currane Phytobenthos Report

Document No. DC014

DCS TOC Text List of Tables List of Figures No. of

Appendices This Document Comprises

1 1 23 0 0 2

Rev. Status Author(s) Reviewed By Approved By Office of Origin Issue Date

0 Draft Bernadette Ní

Chatháin

Bernadette Ní Chatháin

Limerick March 2010

IBE5670/DC004 Rev 0

Table of contents

1.0 Introduction............................................................................................................. 4 2 Methodology ............................................................................................................... 6

2.1 Macroscopic algae .............................................................................................. 6 2.2 Diatoms ............................................................................................................... 7

3 Results......................................................................................................................... 9 3.1 Macroscopic algae .............................................................................................. 9 3.2 Diatoms ............................................................................................................. 14

4.0 Discussion of results ............................................................................................. 19 References......................................................................................................................... 20 Appendix I – Site survey condition assessments .............................................................. 22 Appendix II – Site photographs and macroalgal photographs.......................................... 25

IBE5670/DC004 Rev 0

1.0 Introduction RPS Consulting Engineers have been commissioned to carry out phytobenthos sampling

(diatoms and macroscopic algae) on the Currane Freshwater Pearl Mussel catchment.

Sampling was carried out at 3 sites in the Currane catchment in Co. Kerry to aid in the

development of a Freshwater Pearl Mussel sub-basin management plan for the Currane.

The Currane catchment is part of the South Western River Basin District.

Two sites were sampled on the Cummeragh river, while one site was sampled on the

Capall river. A second site planned for sampling on the Capall river at the Bridge

upstream of Lough Currane was inaccessible on both sampling occasions due to river

flows. In addition the large boulder substrate would make this site unsuitable for

sampling due to the lack of cobble substrate and safety factors. Table 1 provides details

on these sites and Map 1 indicates the location of these sites.

Table 1 Currane phytobenthos monitoring sites

Catchment Site Code River Location FPM record Mussels found?

X Y

Currane CUR1 Capall NW of Cauteens (u/s Isknagahiny lough)

None. Is this a new record? Yes 58620 65224

Currane CUR2 Capall Br u/s L Currane At FPM site. E Ross 2007 Not sampled.

56774 65516

Currane CUR3 Cummeragh Cummeragh Bridge E. Ross. 2007 No 58610 72146

Currane CUR4 Cummeragh Dromkearne Bridge E. Ross. 2007 Yes 54522 68520

IBE5670/DC004 Rev 0

Map 1 NS2 Currane phytobenthos survey site locations

IBE5670/DC004 Rev 0

2 Methodology

2.1 Macroscopic algae Macroscopic algal surveys were conducted concurrently with the diatom surveys between mid-April and mid-June 2009. A second more detailed survey of macroscopically visible algae was also conducted between late July and mid September. A detailed inspection of a 10m length of each river site was conducted, and the nature of the stream environment, the substrata available for macroscopically visible growths and the nature and abundance of any macroscopic growth forms present were recorded. The presence of all macroscopically visible assemblages was recorded and their abundance estimated. Samples of visible macroalgae for microscopic analysis were taken from each kind of substratum as well as from different positions within the site, representing the variation in current velocity, degree of shading, and depth. On average between 2-6 samples were collected per site. Samples were kept on ice and in the dark in a cool box until returned to the laboratory for identification, usually within 1 to 4 days of collection, in order to perform identifications on un-preserved specimens. Identification and abundance assessment of the organisms present was performed using a compound microscope. Taxonomic keys from John et al. (2000), Wehr and Sheath (2003), Entwisle et al. (1997) and Whitton et al., (2000) were used. Identifications were mainly to genus level, with some species level identification for common macroalgae. The assessment provides a semi-quantitative estimate of the abundance of those taxa that are visible to the naked eye. The abundance of each macroscopic element is estimated using a simple descriptor scale from the draft CEN standard ‘Water quality – Guidance standard for the surveying, sampling and laboratory analysis of phytobenthos in shallow running water’. This is based on the percentage of the stream or river bed (within the survey unit) that is covered by the assemblage (Table 2). The quantification is based on “qualified judgment”. Table 2 Descriptor scale for algal abundance estimates of macroscopically visible elements

Scale Description of coverage at the survey unit

1 Rare: just visible in the field, covers < 1 % of the river bed

2 Occasional: covers 1 % to < 5 % of the river bed

3 Frequent: covers 5 % to < 25 % of the river bed

4 Abundant: covers 25 % to < 50 % of the river bed

5 Dominant: covers > 50 % of the river bed

In order to combine field macroscopic abundance estimates with laboratory abundance estimates, the following was adopted from the draft CEN standard.

IBE5670/DC004 Rev 0

Table 3 Final abundance estimates based on 5 point scales for field surveys and laboratory analysis Abundance in field Abundance in laboratory

1 Rare

2 Occasional

3 Frequent

4 Abundant

5 Dominant

Integrated estimate of abundance 1 (<1%) 1 1 1 1 1 2 (1% to <5%) 1 2 2 2 2 3 (5% to <25%) 1 2 3 3 3 4 (25% to <50%) 1 2 3 4 4 5 (>50%) 1 2 3 4 5

2.2 Diatoms

Diatoms can be found growing on most submerged surfaces; however, the composition of the community varies depending upon the substratum chosen. Ideally, a single substratum should be used at all sites included in a survey. Areas of the river bed with naturally occurring moveable hard surfaces (large pebbles, cobbles and boulders) are recommended wherever possible (CEN, 2003), and indices such as DARLEQ (Diatom Assessment of River and Lake Ecological Quality) have been designed with this substrate type as the preferred choice. Cobbles were the preferred substrate for the purposes of this survey. Suitable hard substrata were randomly sampled within the defined survey site. At least five cobbles were sampled from the centre channel at each river site. An area of approximately 10 cm2

or more from each hard substrate was brushed with a stiff toothbrush and the resultant diatom material transferred directly from the cobble in to a white tray. The cobble is then placed back in to the river. The sample is transferred to a labeled sampling tube. Preservation is required to stop cell division of diatoms and decomposition of organic matter. Lugols iodine was used to preserve samples during this survey. Samples were placed in a cool, dark fridge on return to the laboratory until processing was possible. Before processing, the sample is washed to remove all traces of Lugols iodine. A preliminary microscopic examination of the sample is performed in order to look for unusual features (e.g. large numbers of empty frustules, or distorted frustules). A portion of the sample is retained in case problems are encountered during the preparation process. For accurate identification of diatoms, it is necessary to remove all the cell contents and mount the diatoms using a mountant with a high refractive index. A cold acid (permanganate) method of cleaning was used (CEN, 2003). The cleaned diatom suspension is then dried on a coverslip, and mounted on a glass slide. Naphrax was used as the mounting medium. The slide is labeled with details of the river, site, sampling date, type of sample (riffle) and analyst’s initials.

IBE5670/DC004 Rev 0

Diatom valves were identified and counted at 1000x magnification until a minimum of 300 valves are enumerated and identified. The identification of diatoms followed the nomenclature in the monographs of Krammer and Lange-Bertalot (1986-1991), and any subsequent revisions of taxa were also adhered to. Results were entered in to excel and then analysed using a Microsoft windows programme designed as part of the DARLEQ project – Diatom Assessment of River and Lake Ecological Quality. The program implements a classification algorithm using a metric based on a revised Trophic Diatom Index (TDI). Details of the metric, algorithm and derivation of the status class boundaries are provided in Kelly et al. (2006 and 2008). The programme calculates the TDI score, Ecological Quality Ratio (EQR) and status class for each sample. EQRs are produced by comparing the observed TDI with that expected to be obtained if the site was at reference condition i.e. in the absence of eutrophication pressures.

IBE5670/DC004 Rev 0

3 Results The composition and abundance of the macroscopically visible algae at the sampling sites are presented in Section 3.1 below. The width of some genera is also recorded as it may potentially provide some information on different species within genera. This is a common practice for recording green filamentous algae in particular, as species level identification is difficult when reproductive structures are not evident. The results from the diatom assessment include the composition and abundance of each taxon and the results from the calculation of the Trophic Diatom Index which provides an EQR and Water Framework Directive status class for each site. These results are presented in Section 3.2. Site survey condition assessments were also completed for each site, and results are presented in Appendix I. Photographs taken of each site during sampling, and of macroalgae identified from each site are included in Appendix II.

3.1 Macroscopic algae

Table 4 May 2009 macroscopic algal composition and abundance (See Table 3 for explanation of details on ‘final abundance’) Site No 1 2 3

Catchment Currane Currane Currane

River Capall Cummeragh Cummeragh

Location NW of Cauteens Cummeragh Bridge Dromkearne Bridge

FPM record None. Is this a new record? E. Ross. 2007 E. Ross. 2007

Mussels found? Yes No Yes

X 58620 58610 54522

Y 65224 72146 68520

Site Code CUR1 CUR3 CUR4

Date sampled 20/05/2009 20/05/2009 20/05/2009

% Abundance of MA in field 5 to <10% 1 to <5% 5 to <10%

Presence/ absence

Final abundance

Presence/ absence

Final abundance

Presence/ absence

Final abundance

Batracospernum sp Present 3

Lemanea fluviatilis Present 1 Present 3

Spirogyra sp Present 2

Ulothrix zonata Present 1

IBE5670/DC004 Rev 0

Table 5 August 2009 macroscopic algal composition and abundance (See Table 3 for explanation on ‘final abundance’) (Note: Dromkearne Bridge on the Cummeragh river was not possible to same on the 17th of August 2009 due to high river levels and high flows)

Sample No 1 2

Catchment Currane Currane

River Capall Cummeragh

Location NW of Cauteens Cummeragh Bridge

FPM record None. Is this a new record? E. Ross. 2007

Mussels found? Yes No

X 58620 58610

Y 65224 72146

Site Code CUR1 CUR3

Date sampled 17/08/2009 17/08/2009

% Abundance of MA in field <1% <1%

Presence/absence Final abundance Presence/absence Final abundance

Bulbochaete sp Present 1

Microspora W=21.3µm Present 1

Mougeotia sp Present 1

Oedogonium sp Present 1

Scytonema sp. Present 1

Spirogyra sp Present 1

Vaucheria sp Present 1

IBE5670/DC004 Rev 0

Map 2 Results of macroscopic algal survey (% composition) – May 2009

IBE5670/DC004 Rev 0

Map 3 Results of macroscopic algal survey (% composition) – August 2009

IBE5670/DC004 Rev 0

Plate 1 Batracospermum sp Plate 2 Batracospermum sp., Capall river, NW of Cauteens

IBE5670/DC004 Rev 0

3.2 Diatoms

Table 6 Diatom count data

SampleID NS2_FPM_036 NS2_FPM_038 NS2_FPM_039 SiteID CUR1 CUR3 CUR4 SampleDate 20/05/2009 20/05/2009 20/05/2009 Alkalinity mg l-1 CaCO3 7.4 7.4 7.4 River Capall Cummeragh Cummeragh Site NW of

Cauteens Cummeragh

Bridge Dromkearne

Bridge Species Code

Species name Count Count

Count

AC143A Achnanthes oblongella 18 ZZZ835 Achnanthidium minutissimum 212 58 251 BR001A Brachysira vitrea (Anomoeoneis vitrea) 2 CO001A Cocconeis placentula 1 CY9999 Cyclotella sp. 8 EY017A Cymbella gracilis 4 CM004A Cymbella microcephala 1 EY011A Cymbella minuta 2 26 5 EY016A Cymbella silesiaca 1 59 8 EU009A Eunotia exigua 3 EU110A Eunotia minor 2 EU9999 Eunotia sp. 5 4 FR009I Fragilaria capucina var austrica 19 33 FR009G Fragilaria capucina var rumpens 1 1 FR009H Fragilaria capucina var. gracilis 4 FR9999 Fragilaria mazamaensis 1 ZZZ842 Fragilaria perminuta 1 17 4 YH001A Fragilaria pulchella 2 SY013A Fragilaria tenera 1 1 1 FR007A Fragilaria vaucheriae 18 38 11

IBE5670/DC004 Rev 0

SampleID NS2_FPM_036 NS2_FPM_038 NS2_FPM_039 SiteID CUR1 CUR3 CUR4 SampleDate 20/05/2009 20/05/2009 20/05/2009 Alkalinity mg l-1 CaCO3 7.4 7.4 7.4 River Capall Cummeragh Cummeragh Site NW of

Cauteens Cummeragh

Bridge Dromkearne

Bridge Species Code

Species name Count Count

Count

FU002A Frustulia rhomboides var viridula 2 GO004A Gomphonema gracile 3 GO013A Gomphonema parvulum 8 19 14 GO023A Gomphonema truncatum 1 3 HN001A Hannaea arcus 2 4 6 MR001A Meridion circulare 1 NA037A Navicula angusta 1 NA751A Navicula cryptotenella 1 NA008A Navicula rhynchocephala 1 NA9999 Navicula sp 1 NI031A Nitzschia linearis 1 NI009A Nitzschia palea 1 3 1 ZZZ897 Planothidium lanceolata 1 RE001A Reimeria sinuata 1 SU005A Surirella linearis 1 SY001A Synedra ulna 1 1 TA001A Tabellaria flocculosa 8 20 1 Total Count 308 308 314

IBE5670/DC004 Rev 0

Table 7 Results from DARLEQ SampleID SiteID SampleDate Alkalinity River Site Sample

sum Sum TDI

TDI eTDI EQR Class % Planktic

% Motile

% Organic tolerant

NS2_FPM_036 CUR1 20-May-2009 7 Capall NW of Cauteens 308 308 21.35 13.41 0.91 Good 0 1.62 3.25

NS2_FPM_038 CUR3 20-May-2009 7 Cummeragh Cummeragh Bridge

308 300 25.08 13.41 0.87 Good 2.6 2.6 7.14

NS2_FPM_039 CUR4 20-May-2009 7 Cummeragh Dromkearne Bridge

314 314 25.88 13.41 0.86 Good 0 0.64 4.78

Alkalinity data was sourced from Kerry County Council. Alkalinity data was available for the Dromkearne Bridge on the Cummeragh river. No data is

available for the Capall river, therefore the data from the one site surveyed on the Cummeragh was used to infer average alkalinity levels in both rivers. The annual average alkalinity value was utilised in the calculation of TDI for this catchment.

Explanation of terms o Sample ID – RPS internal identification o Site ID – RPS internal identification o Sample Date – as stated o Alkalinity – as stated o River – as stated o Site – location from which sample was taken o Sample sum – the number of diatom valves or species counted during analysis o Sum TDI – the sum of diatom valves or species used in the calculation of the Trophic Diatom Index o TDI – Trophic Diatom Index score o eTDI – expected Trophic Diatom Index score based on predicted TDI for observed alkalinity and season o EQR – Environmental Quality Ratio for each sampled based on predicted TDI for observed alkalinity and season o Class – WFD status class o % Plantic- % of taxa identified which were plantonic. These are excluded from status calculations. o % Motile - % of taxa counted which were motile o % Organic tolerant - % of taxa which are organic tolerant

IBE5670/DC004 Rev 0

Table 8 Confidence in classification Site code

No. Samples

Mean EQR Class CoC High CoC Good CoC Mod CoC Poor CoC Bad RoM CoC HG CoC MPB RoM-G/M

CUR1 1 0.908344 Good 38.472 46.32852 13.85645 1.301068 0.041957 53.67148 84.80052 15.19948 15.19948

CUR3 1 0.865199 Good 22.96372 49.73391 23.78527 3.360803 0.156298 50.26609 72.69763 27.30237 27.30237

CUR4 1 0.856047 Good 19.87667 50.81176 25.65606 3.510088 0.14543 49.18824 70.68843 29.31157 29.31157

Notes:

Explanation of terms used in Table o Site code – RPS internal identification o Number of samples – number of samples per site o Mean EQR – Mean Environmental Quality ratio for each site o Class - WFD status class o CoC – Confidence that the site belongs to the status class high o CoC – Confidence that the site belongs to the status class good o CoC – Confidence that the site belongs to the status class moderate o CoC – Confidence that the site belongs to the status class poor o CoC – Confidence that the site belongs to the status class bad o RoM – Risk of misclassification for predicted class o CoC HG – Confidence that the site is better than moderate class o CoC MPB – Confidence that the site is moderate or worse class o RoM G/M – Risk of misclassification above/below good/ moderate boundary

IBE5670/DC004 Rev 0

Map 4 TDI Results from DARLEQ – diatom index

IBE5670/DC004 Rev 0

4.0 Discussion of results The abundance of macroscopic algae on both sampling occasions – May and August 2009, can be considered acceptable in line with the environmental objectives under the Freshwater Pearl Mussel Regulations 2009. At two sites sampled in May 2009 (the Capall river north-west of Cauteens, and the Cummeragh river at Dromkearne Bridge), the abundance of macroscopic algae was recorded between 5 to 10%, which exceeds the environmental quality objective for freshwater pearl mussel habitats. The composition of the assemblage however was dominated by red algae – Batracospermum sp. in the former, and Lemanea fluviatilis in the latter. Batracospermum sp. has been identified from previous analysis of macroscopic algal datasets in Ireland and the UK (Kelly et al., 2006) as a likely indicator of high and good status, but requires further investigation via additional surveys in order to confirm this finding. In addition, Lemanea fluviatilis has been found frequently at Q5 sites in Ireland (Kelly-Quinn et al., 2005), although analysis of macroscopic algal datasets in Ireland and the UK (Kelly et al., 2006) found that there were too few samples in their dataset to identify a preference for specific water quality conditions. It is however the authors opinion that both of these taxa indicate at least good status in rivers in Ireland, and potentially high status. Neither species form mats which might cover river bed substrata, and neither do they trap silt in their assemblage. All three diatom samples failed the environmental quality objectives for diatoms in freshwater pearl mussel habitats. All sites were deemed to be at good status, while the objective is high status. Analysis of the confidence in classification indicates that for the Capall river north-west of Cauteens, little in the way of measures would be required to bring this site back to high status e.g. perhaps fencing to prevent sheep accessing the river which was observed during sampling, as there is a 38% change that it may already be at high status, or close to high status. The two sites on the Cummeragh river would require more in the way of measures to improve their status to high.

IBE5670/DC004 Rev 0

References CEN (2003). Water quality - Guidance standard for the routine sampling and pretreatment of benthic diatoms from rivers. EN 13946: 2003. Comité European de Normalisation, Geneva. CEN (2004). Water quality - Guidance standard for the identification, enumeration and interpretation of benthic diatom samples from running waters. EN 14407:2004. Comité European de Normalisation, Geneva. CEN standard (draft). Water quality – Guidance standard for the surveying, sampling and laboratory analysis of phytobenthos in shallow running water. John, D.M., Whitton, B.A. and Brook, A.J. (eds.) 2002 The freshwater algal flora of the British Isles. An identification guide to freshwater and terrestrial algal. Cambridge University Press. Kelly-Quinn, M., Harrington, T.J., Rippey, B., Bradley, C., Ní Chatháin, B., Dodkins, I., Trigg, D. 2005. Characterisation of Reference Conditions and Testing of Typology of Rivers. Report to Environment Protection Agency, Dublin, Ireland Kelly, M.G., Rippey, B., King, L., Ní Chatháin, B., McQuillan, C., and Poole, M. 2006. Use of phytobenthos for evaluating ecological status in Ireland. North South Shared Aquatic Resource (NS Share). Kelly, M.G., Juggins, S., Bennion, H., Burgess, A., Yallop, M., Hirst, H., King, L., Jamieson, J., Guthrie, R., Rippey, B. 2006. Use of diatoms for evaluating ecological status in UK freshwaters. Science Report – SC030103/SR4. Kelly. M.G., Juggins, S., Guthrie, R., Pritchard, S., Jamieson, J., Rippey, B., Hirst, H., and Yallop, M. 2008. Assessment of ecological status in U.K. rivers using diatoms. Freshwater Biology, 53, 403-422. Krammer, K. and Lange-Bertalot, H. 1986 Süsswasserflora von Mitteleuropa. Bacillariophyceae 2/1 Naviculaceae. Gustav Fischer, Stuttgart. Krammer, K. and Lange-Bertalot, H. 1988 Süsswasserflora von Mitteleuropa. Bacillariophyceae 2/2 Epithemiaceae, Surirellaceae. Gustav Fischer, Stuttgart. Krammer, K. and Lange-Bertalot, H. 1991a Süsswasserflora von Mitteleuropa. Bacillariophyceae 2/3 Centrales, Fragilariaceae, Eunotiaceae. Gustav Fischer, Stuttgart. Krammer, K. and Lange-Bertalot, H. 1991b Süsswasserflora von Mitteleuropa. Bacillariophyceae 2/4 Achnanthaceae und Gomphonema. Gustav Fischer, Stuttgart.

IBE5670/DC004 Rev 0

Wehr, John D., and Sheath, Robert G. 2003. Freshwater Algae of North America – Ecology and Classification. Academic Press. Whitton, B.A., Balbi, D.M., Gemmell, J.J., and Robinson, P.J. 2000 Blue-green algae of the British Isles interactive key to the species. (CD ROM). Department of Biological Sciences, University of Durham, Durham.

IBE5670/DC004 Rev 0

Appendix I – Site survey condition assessments

IBE5670/DC004 Rev 0

Catchment Name Currane Currane Currane Currane River Name Capall Capall Cummeragh Cummeragh Site Name Bridge u/s of L. Currane NW of Cauteens Dromkeare Bridge Cummeragh Bridge Date Sampled 20/05/2009 20/05/2009 20/05/2009 20/05/2009 X co-ordinate 56774 58620 54522 58610 Y co-ordinate 65516 65224 68520 72146 Main purpose of Visit Diatom/Macroscopic algal

Sampling Diatom/Macroscopic algal

Sampling Diatom/Macroscopic algal

Sampling Diatom/Macroscopic algal

Sampling

Bankside Vegetation Forestry (trees on one bank) grass & native trees

on other bank

Grassland Trees, natural Trees & bog vegetation

Surveyors B. Ní Cháthain, D. Aherne B. Ní Cháthain, D. Aherne B. Ní Cháthain, D. Aherne B. Ní Cháthain, D. Aherne Weather Overcast & drizzling Overcast & drizzling Overcast Sunny % Shading Dependant on time (100%) 0 50 <20 Bank Width 10.5 meters 12 meters 12 meters 8 meters Wet Width (m) Average Depth 40 50cm 40cm Average length survey Area (m) 10 m 10 m 10 m 10 m Velocity Slow Fast Fast Area of Survey Riffle/ Pool Riffle & Bank Riffle % Silt <5 % Sand <5 <5 % Gravel <50 <5 <10 % Pebble <10 <10 % Cobble <10 <50 <25 % Boulders <25 % Bedrock <10 % Filamentous Algae <10 <10 <5 % Rannunculus <25 % Myriophyllum <5 % Potamogeton <25

IBE5670/DC004 Rev 0

Catchment Name Currane Currane Currane Currane River Name Capall Capall Cummeragh Cummeragh Site Name Bridge u/s of L. Currane NW of Cauteens Dromkeare Bridge Cummeragh Bridge % Callitiche % Fontinalis <25 <50 Plume of Silt? Moderate None None

Other Observations Mussels sampled - near bank of river. Macrophyte abundance a problem - obscures river bed.

Dominates river bed, Branched green algae found

Only one mussel found but could not perform

extensive search due to flow

No mussels found. Macrophytes dominate this site & filamentous algae is hardly evident

Pressure Observations 1. Bridge structure noted as very intrusive on the river bed with many pillars built in the river channel. 2. Forestry flanks the river on one side; query whether adequate buffer is present but appears to be ok.

Sheep grazing on land adjacent to river with free access to the river as

no fencing is in place.

1. Bridge structure noted as pillars are in the river channel (old bridge). 2. Forestry noted in the catchment. (noted sign which stated the river was part of the Waterville Fisheries Development and is a salmon and seatrout nursery area).

IBE5670/DC004 Rev 0

Appendix II – Site photographs and macroalgal photographs