recommendations for a terrestrial and freshwater monitoring regime for point lepreau, n.b

8/7/2019 Recommendations for a Terrestrial and Freshwater Monitoring Regime for Point Lepreau, N.B.

1/63

FINAL REPORT TO THE DEPARTMENT OF FISHERIES & OCEANS

RECOMMENDATIONSfORA TERRESTRIAL AND FRESHWATERMONITORING REGIMEFOR POINT lEPREAU, N. B.

[]n11[i[[1[:[[[[[[ .r* .[ ' f 8 ~l 'lL[

" N ~t , t q ....

.........

MARINE RESEARCH ASSOCIATES LTD.Lord's Cove Deer Island, N.B.

,..... /'


2/63

FINAL REPORT TO THE DEPARTMENT OF FISHERIES AND OCEANS

RECOMMENDATIONS FORA TERRESTRIAL AND FRESHWATER MONITORING REGIMEFOR POINT LEPREAU, NEW BRUNSWICKIdentification of major phases of freshwater and terrestrial environmentsthat would accumulate radionuclides released from the Point Lepreau NuclearGenerating Station.

MARINE RESEARCH ASSOCIATES LTD.Lord's Cove, Deer Island, N.B.Canada EOG 2JO

DSS File No: 08SC. FP 806-9-C101Date: March 31, 1980

./~ ~ - - - - ~ - ---


3/63

TABLE OF CONTENTS

PagePARTICIPATING STAFFACKNOWLEDGEMENTSINTRODUCTION 1THE STUDY AREA 3THE TERRESTRIAL AND FRESHWATER ENVIRONMENT 5THE TERRESTRIAL AND FRESHWATER BIOTA 13PRELIMINARY SPECIES SELECTION 27ECOLOGICAL PATHWAYS FOR RADIONUCLIDES 29THE PROPOSED MONITORING PROGRAM 33LITERATURE CITED 41DATA FILE FRESHWATER STREAMS - DUCK COVE

FRESHWATER STREAMS - DIPPER HARBOURL1TILE LEPREAU RIVERRETREAT LAKETERRESTRIAL STUDYSITES


4/63

PARTICIPATING MRA STAFFArthur A. MacKayRobert K. BosienBarry HillJohn GilmanGary WoodPeggy Lesl ieMargaret MacKayACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Project DirectorField DirectorField and Lab. TechnicianField TechnicianGraphics and PrintingData compilation, writer.Typesetting

We wish to acknowledge, with thanks, the co-operation and assistance wereceived from:Dr. John Smith, F&O Bedford Institute of Oceanography, Dartmouth, N.S.Mr. Ken Browne, Department of Environment, Province of N.B.Fredericton, N.B.Mr. David Methven, Memorial University, St. John's, N'f'I'd.Mr. C.H. Jones, Domestic Licensing Unit, F&O, Halifax, N.S.


5/63

Marine Research Associates Ltd. was contracted on October 5,1980 "t o identifythe major phases of freshwater and terrestrial environments that would accumulateradionuclides released from the Point Lepreau nuclear generating station". Objectives and proposed procedures were as follows:1. OBJECTIVETo develop a baseline review document to identify the major phases of the

freshwater and terrestrial environments that would accumulate radionuclides re-leased from the Point Lepreau nuclear generating station. This document will beused as a basis for the design and implementation of the land and freshwater environmental monitoring programs for the Point Lepreau nuclear station.

This baseline study should include the water, the sediment and the biota ofthose water courses that enter Duck Cove and Dipper Harbour and including theLittle Lepreau River and Retreat Lake. The biota section should include theselection of a local species of fish, an aquatic invertebrate and an aquatic plantwhich is readily available and which best reflects longterm effects resulting fromthe release of radioactivity from the Point Lepreau station. The selection shoulder:nphasize that the sampling and monitoring is to be related to environmentalhealth and should consider pathways leading to higher trophic levels other thanman.

,

INTRODUCTION

The report should include the calculated flushing rates of the lakes and flowrates of the rivers. Sites for the collection of undisturbed soil, lichen and plantsamples should also be identified. Field investigations should be carried ou t onlywhere there are information gaps that significantly affect the preparation of thisdocument.

2. PROCEDURESTASK 1 A literaturesearch will be conducted to determine the level of data

available.TASK 2 A preliminary evaluation of available literature indicates that fewdata are available on the freshwater streams mentioned. Consequently, we recommend a limited field examination of the streams in question as well as RetreatLake. These field investigations should include:

1) Physical characteristics2) Invertebrates3) Fish4) Bird species5) Mammals6) Bank cover7) Bottom characteristics8) Stream flow

Techniques will be modified from: Dodge, D.P. et. al. MANUAL OF IN-STRUCTIONS - AQUATIC HABITAT SURVEYS, Fisheries Branch, Ministry ofNatural Resources, Ontario.

TASK 3 Assemble data and prepare the final report.

1


6/63

2.1 THE STUDY AREA

THE

,

STUDY AREA

For the purpose of this study, the study area was considered to include the land,streams and lakes within a fifteen mile radius from the site of the nuclear generat-ing plant at Point Lepreau. As discussed in the body of this report, a much largerarea was considered in a general way. Specific studies were carried out at RetreatLake, Little Lepreau River and the streams draining into Duck Cove and DipperHarbour. A review of the literature showed that the greatest body of informationexisted for Lepreau River. Consequently, we have included these data as supplementaryinformation.2.2 STUDY SITES

Field investigations were limited in extent and a review of the literature revealed relatively little site-specific data. Areas of primary field studies conducted byMarine Research Associates are shown in Figure 2.2.1.

3


7/63

, l[

[

rI

l,

r

[r

FIGURE 2.2.1 STUDY AREAS EXAMINEDDURING FIELD STUDIES, (Also see data file).

1, Little Lepreau River drainage2. Dipper Harbour drainage3. Duck Cove drainage4, Retreat Lake

~ 9

\6 66'W

'"",..14,..

421 431 441

"'40tOU,DoSTlHCE OES COURSES I'lED$(10._ .. _ _ , "R_ __.. ..,aw 1 l ~ 2 1 l-_ -

"'""'38CONTOUR 'NTEINM. HETE... _ .. f __ s . . ~

N ~ l ~ 'T.--.. .- - ....lOW",

14 15 16 -05C"". !fl., .' ...-05

"'"

II1

-+

"'35"'"

96 19594-'"'"

iIit--+-- 93 -J-----+--_05'"-j---+-92-i---+--.,,;-'J,)M'i--

/


8/63

3.1 INTRODUCTION THE TERRESTRIAL ANDThis section provides background data on the physical and biotic characterist-

ics of thes tudy area. Of particular interest in terms of a monitoring program, areparameters which are common t o t he study area and which may influence thebiota of the area. Data provided in this section will serve as a foundation for theselection of "monitoring species" as well as monitoring design.

3.2 GEOLOGYThe geological character of an area is known to influence terrestrial and fresh-

water characteristics as well as the composition of plant communities and, conse-quently, animal communities.3.2.1 BEDROCK GEOLOGY. As can be seen in Figure 3.2.1, there are seven

principal geological formations in the study area.1) SilURIAN FORMATIONS composed chiefly of granite, diorite and allied types.

FRESHWATER ENVIRONMENT

2) lANCASTER FORMATION. The Lancaster formation consists chiefly of grey to green-ish grey sandstones. Some of the beds at thebaseare purplish redand conglomeratic. A t a numberof places the formation has yielded fossilplant fragments that serve to correlate it with the UttleRiver series of Duck Cove, near Saint John. The formation has dips up to 90 degrees, but on thewhole is much less deformed than the Mispek group (Alcock, 1944).3) LEPREAU FORMATION. The Lepreau formation consists of coarseconglomerate andsandstone containinglarge, well-rounded boulders. The beds aredeep and red and havea regularstrike and dip, the latter averagingabout 20 degrees. No fossils were found in them, but theirvery fresh character, and the fact that they contain boulders of all other rocks of the region, in-cluding the grey Lancastersandstones is evidence of their past Lancaster age. The rocks ... ofthe Lepreau formation are faulted (Alcock, 1944).4) COlDBROOK GROUP consisting of undivided volcanic rocks.5} MISSISSIPPIAN OR PENNSYLVANIAN FORMATIONS composed chiefly ofvolcanic and intrusive rocks, minor sandstones, conglomerate and shale.

The relationships between streams and lakes surveyed and bedrock geology areas follows:

1) Stream No.1 (Duck Cove) is located entirely in the lepreau formation.

2) Stream No.2 (Dipper Harbour) is located a t the junction of the lepreau form-ation and Mississipian or Pennsylvanian formations.3) Stream No.3 (Little Lepreau River) has its lower reaches in the lancaster form-ation and its headwaters principally in Silurian formations.4) Retreat lake is bounded by undivided volcanic rocks to the south and the lan-caster Formation to the north.

5


9/63

,261 271 28\ 291 301 31\ 321 331 34\ 351 BEDROCK GEOLOGY3.2.125'

PRINCIPAL GEOLOGICAL FEATURES'Oa---{)2 COLDBROOK GROUPChiefly basic volcanicrocks.C3

02 m COLDBROOK GROUP-0 1 Chiefly acidic volcanicrocks[mJ SILURIAN FORMATIONSGranite, diorite and allied01 5000 types

LANCASTER FORMATIONA :. 4." Sandstone, conglomerate andshale5OQO r-9 9 [ill]., f. LEPREAU FORMATION' ~ ' I / -fl IT 1'111" Conglomerate and sandstone Rll( k e,: fl l '( '"I\A [CJlmpbells99 Point COLDBROOK GROUP-9 8" Undivided Volcanic rocks.:::j;,"~ MISSISSIPPIAN OR PENN98 05' [bill SYLVANIAN FORMATIONS r- 05 -9 7 Chiefly volcanic and intrusiverocks, minor sandstone, conglomerate and shale

97 ocrn SILURIAN FORMATIONS-9 6 Granite, diorite and alliedtypesMISSISSIPPIAN OR PENN96 m SYLVANIAN FORMATIONS-9 5 Chiefly sandstone, conglomerateand shale; minor volcanic andintrusive rocks

95 RECORDED SAND DEPOSITS l-9 4 Interlidal and subtidal RECORDED MUD DEPOSITS l94 Intertidal and subtidal-9 310411.. 1 0 2 lFeF3 E3 H E3 I"'elon 1000 500 0 1000 2000 3000,ASHHe I93 Vlrds 1000 500 0 '000 2000 3000 li S E 3 HHH i6630' 25'I 131 132 1336 225000m. E. 126 127 128 129 130


10/63

3.3 SURFICIAL GEOLOGY

Soils in the study area are generally classified as bedrock and thin till over bedrock consisting of c l ay , r o ck f lo u r, s il t, san.d, gravel and boulders, occupying depressions inthebedrock;includes slope wash andrubble, prevalent in areas underlain by resistantbedrocktypes (Surveys and Mapping Branch, Ottawa, 1973). In t erms of utilization, soilclassification ranges from class 4 (Soils having severe limitations that restrict therange of crops or require special conservation practices) to class 7 (Soils having nocapability for arable culture or permanent pasture).

Maclaren Atlantic limited (1975) described soils a t t he plant site as follows:

"The actual site o f t he proposed plant is underlain by varying thickness of overburden consisting of peat, sand and gravel, and red stiff to medium marine claywith some glacial till. The distribution and thickness of these materials vary greatly as they fill a fairly irregular bedrock surface. In glacial channels scoured into thebedrock overburden thickness exceeds 60 feet. On the o ther hand there are numerous bedrock ridges exposed throughout the peninsula. In glacial channels andon outcrops along the coast numerous glacial striae are encountered indicating anapproximately northsouth t rend of ice movement. Since the direction of ice movement is almost parallel to the strike of the rock, differential erosion has produceda saw tooth rock profile controlled by the bedding and joint systems within therock." ,

, .

3.4 GROUNDWATER

"Groundwater is located within th e surficial gravels at depths of a f ew feet below the ground surface. This water table is held up or "perched" by the underlying impervious clays. In addition a second aquifer was located at or near the surface o f t he bedrock in t he bot tom of glacial c h a n n e l s ~ This water appears to beseeping downward along the surface of the bedrock either through open joints,or more likely through interconnected seams of gravel underlying the clays.Porosity of the bedrock is so low that all groundwater flow through the rock mustoccur in joints, fracture zones, etc. Extensive pressure testing in boreholes hasshown that the in situ permeability o f t he rock mass is in the order of 1O-5cm/sec.or relatively impervious, Le. indicating tight joints and fracture zones"'(MaclarenAtlantic Limited, 1975).

3.5 WIND

Westerly winds prevail in the study area throughout most of the year beingmore northwesterly in winter and southwesterly in summer. Average wind speedsf r om t he w es tandfrom the south equalsor exceed 15 miles perhour... 8riefly the averagemonthly wind speed throughout the year is greater at Point Lepreau than at the nearby inlandlocations of Pennfield Ridge and Saint John. During the winter the strong outflow of coldarctic airproduces storms south of the Bay of Fundy with resulting strong winds in the PointLepreau Area, whereas in summer, windsare moderate except for tropical storms

The most servere weather phenomena which occurat Point Lepreau are intense storms andtropical cyclones (HurricanesJ...it was estimatedthat winds in excess of 100miles per houroccurwith a frequency of once in twenty years (Maclaren Atlantic, 1975).

Data for wind direction and speed over a 12-year per iod at Point lepreau arefound in Figure 3.5.1 and are considered as representative for the study area.

I t should be noted that Point lepreau is a promontory which projects well ou tinto the Bay of Fundy. Strong winds blow unrestricted across open water from theeast, west and south and the full force of storms is often felt. Wind data for inlandlocalities would undoubtedly be less than that of the Point lepreau area.

7


11/63

8

15.9mph

'.

1,I. -... ;.

--

.V16.0mpn

!,

.'

I >:::/?';"i f ! ~ - - -.:.. ' ---."....

Ni .. - - - ~ %/ :--------------115%JI.4mph {'.-.

/

r:-., ... ,::, .... :-:-.'.- ~ .:.'- " ,..''.'

EI

FIGURE 3.5.1 PERCENT FREQUENCY WIND DIRECTIONAND AVERAGE SPEED (19391951). (Maclaren Atlantic, 1975).

r

[rr[

[[ll[


12/63

3.6 CLIMATIC FEATURES1) TEMPERATURES

The study area, being in the north temperate region, is characterized by warmsummers and cold winters. The Bay of Fundy strongly influences the climate resulting in somewhat cooler summer temperatures and warmer winters with more rainthan inland. Although the spring warm-up is late, the winters are not as cold as inNew Brunswick's interior.

Temperatures for the study area were no t available on a long-term basis. However, they would be somewhat similar to Saint John, N.B. Data presented inTable 3.6.1 for Saint John City can be considered representative for the studyarea. However, MacLaren Atlantic (1975) has pointed out: The mean annual temper'aturebased on a ten-year record for Penn field Ridge, within ten miles of Point Lepreau, is 41.9degrees F. The temperaturesmeasured over a 20 year period at SaintJohn...are quite similar,the onlv differences being that in summer the monthly mean temperatures at Point Lepreauare slightly higher (3 r f ~ g r e e s F I and in winter slightly lower (3 degrees F.) than in SaintJohn.Temperature data for Nov. 74 - Oct. 75 for Point Lepreau are presented in Table3.6.2.2) PRECIPITATION

Average monthly values for rainfall and snowfall from 2529 years data aregiven in Table 3.6.1. Data for Saint John city can be considered as representativefor the study area. At Point Lepreau, however, rainfall measurements for an aD-yearperiod indicate that rainfall occurs throurIJoutthe year and averages 33.61 inches per year, alesser amount than themeasuredamount of 42.88 inches in SaintJohn... Snowfall at PointLepreau averages 65.65 inches annuallyand occurs from October to May. As with rainfall, there

\In summer thecoolerair in this region causes much fog which seldom extends more thanten milesinland from the coast. Point Lepreau... is said to average ninety days of fog per year(Squires, 1976). Table 3.6.3 summarizes the occurrence of fog for a 10-year period at Pennfield Ridge (located approximately 35 miles southwest of Saint John)and for a 30-yearperiod at Saint John city, Saint John airport and Frederictonairport. The term"fog" here denotes the point at which visibility is reduced to5/8 mile or less. These data can be considered as representative for the studyarea.4) SUNSHINE

Conditions of sunshine and overcast conditions occurring at Saint John Cityare summarized in Table 3.6 .4 for a 10-20 year per iod. These data can be considered as representative for the study area.3.7 FRESHWATER STREAMS.

Streamflow data were only available for Lepreau River and Little LepreauRiver (Historical Streamflow Summary Atlantic Provinces to 1976). Little Lepreau River has a drainage area of 14.8 square miles. The monthly discharges incubic feet persecond for 1976 are as follows:

January 120 July - 33.0February - 85.1 August -March - 56.7 September -April - 89.4 OctoberMay - 79.5 November -June - 18.9 December -is less snow at Point Lepreau than at SaintJohn, which averages 85.4 inches annually.

Laren Atlantic, 1975).3) FOG

(Mac-The maximum instantaneous discharge was 1950 CFS at 2306 AST on Jan

uary 28 and the maximum daily discharge was 1040 CFS on January 29. Thesewere extremes recorded for the period of record.

Coastal fog occurs in the Saint John and Pennfield Ridge areas close to 100days annually while inland there is a greater continental influence (EnvironmentCanada, 19731.

Lepreau River has a drainage area of 92.1 square miles. Discharge rates areas follows in Table 3.7.1.

9


13/63

DAILY TEMPERATURE RAINFALL SNOWFALL

10

MONTH MAX. MIN. MEAN MEAN MEANJanuary 28.2 12.2 20.3 2.58 23.7February 30.1 13.4 21.7 2.39 21.0March 37.3 22.3 29.8 2.33 15.4April 47.0 32.3 39.7 3.46 4.9May 57.0 41.1 49.1 4.04 0.2JunE! 64.3 48.6 56.5 3.69 0.0July 70.1 54.0 62.0 3.53 0.0August 70.0 54.5 62.3 3.93 0.0September 64.3 49.5 56.9 3.93 0.0October 55.3 41.4 48.3 4.07 0.5November 44.8 32.3 38.6 5.33 3.8December 33.2 18.9 26.1 3.60 15.9Year 50.1 35.0 42.6 42.88 85.4

MEAN DAILY TEMPERATUREMONTH MAX. MIN.JaAuary 3.3 17.2April 6.1 . 2.2July 17.2 10.0October 11.7 7.7MEAN ANNUAL TEMPERATURE DC 4.4DAILY RANGE OF TEMPERATURE DC

January 20.5July 7.2EXTREME LOW TEMPERATURE DC 23.9EXTREME HIGH TEMPERATUREDC 25.6MEAN ANNUAL PRECIPITATION (mm) 525

TABLE 3.6.1 TEMPERATURE, RAINFAl l AND SNOWFAll DATA FORSAINT JOHN, N.B. (25-29 years data) (Maclaren Atlantic, 1975).

TABLE 3.6.2 TEMPERATURE AND PRECIPITATION DATA FOR POINTlEPREAU, N.B. (November, 1974 to October, 1975) (Maclaren Atlantic, 1977).

[[[[

ll


14/63

MONTH PENNFIELD SAINT JOHN SAINT JOHN F'TONRIDGE CITY AIRPORT AIRPORTJanuary 3.1 3.1 3.2 2.5Feb. 3.3 3.2 2.8 2.0March 6.4 5.3 4.5 2.4April 6.7 5.9 6.4 4.3May 12.0 11.4 9.5 2.8June 13.7 11.7 12.0 3.4July 17.7 17.2 17.1 4.0August 15.0 12.6 14.2 3.6Sept. 15.0 12.6 14.2 3.6Oct. 8.6 7.6 8.8 4.2Nov. 5.6 5.0 5.5 5.3December 3.9 3.4 2.6 2.8Year 107.5 98.0 99.2 41.1 TAB LE 3.6.3. MONTHLY MEAN DAYS WI I H AN INCIDENCE OF FOG ATSAINT JOHN, N.B. (Lornevil le ImpactStudy, Vol. 2).

MONTH

JanuaryFebruaryMarchAprilMayJuneJulyAugustSept.Oct.Nov.Dec.Year

MEAN8RIGHT SUNSHINE HOURS110125153159193201219209175153901081,895

MEAN AMOUNT OFCLOUD (Tenths)

5.95.76.16.36.26.76.76.25.86.26.86.2 TABLE 3,6.4. MONTHLY MEAN SUNSHINE AND CLOUD DATA FOR SAINTJOHN, N.B. (MacLaren Atlantic, 1977).

11


15/63

NEW aaU.SWICItLCPllaAU RIVER AT LZPR&AU - STATION MO. 01AOOOI

MONTHLY AXD AHNUAL "BAM DISCHARGES IN CUBIC p.aT PItR SECOND POR TH . PERIOD or RICORDy .. .19161917191 .19 "1920192119121n )\92111U 5192619:i171928192919]0, 9) 1\91219) )19 ) /I19 H193619)719)11939'"0,,,,"11219/1)19 U19'5"' 619 ' 719118194919501951195:01195319511195519561951195819591960196119li2196 )196111965"6 61961"6 819691910197119721973191'UH1976IUAN

2) '611 )OJ128'"'156 l .020 ')20'"'"'"95 . II101129151

'0 0"126 '",10 '85 .5191'"52 .636 . "'",, )10 '611.8'"'"'0 0'")21'"' "."

'"701'"'"'")1 2211" ,'I )!J7 ./1'"1)1I) )I) '96.11".10121 'I)')1 1

'"

n,90.661 . 912'95 .)U .888.11

'"118",1"89."'"111",921'"'"I) '91.512121 '5ll . 2I) '79.62) '11'. /1'"'"...112192'"'"'DO,, )51'51'10119 ''2 022)'"OI.80.'> 0'"11299 .9'"19 ''"'5 1'"18 .0H '",H. O'"

20 '

.....

'H'"'"'"10)1"'91'"281191"''"19110 ,18 '",95.999''"'"22)")".",,.,'"."'")1 9189'5 1"''"'"15 ''"",'51'"'")"'9 1'"9) . 11"'I"\8 ')0019 .]!'1 ,".'89'"".10 ')"'"'"

AP'12 U1:3)0'"lJ 10'",OJ1160'"".",,,.'"160'"'51'"".lOla'6 229 ')9 2'"'1 0'"'12'2 2."'"'",8 \9 2''"51 '" '71 ''",,,1010'"".OJ .71)'"15''12'"'"'"" ,'"" ,'"'"'I ),,.28 ''")"'",..'"

. . . .y

."'"H ''"'"'"'"."'"8\,'"'",..",'8 0",'1 5')1)62'"))2)9 1) "'9 119 '18 ''"'0 0'"'",,]'DO"''"'"'"'7 2'"'"'7 2'1 0,a20)".."'".))'"'8 7'"19 '",m'"'"1020,...") "...

JUN

..,191"'611.825.7"'5 ) . 510856 .2'08'9920 'm1>0'0 8".29 ''"'"11 )

'"'"95 . 1"15 9 . ''"" ,'"10 '11 .6'09'7 056 .8'"",'"7 0 . 1)l B80.0".59 .9'"'",82. I]0 89J .'"~ 8 . ~65 .999 .0'","!> l . II",,..'",,,'"'"95 .0'"

JU L

'"'1 0'-.0

'" . 195 .2)0 .8111.)",83 .9'"1"52.0I.,'"10 'lIS. ))1 .9., . 1)1.)H.)'"'"6 . 2!l6. I36 . 5'"-\.. 92 .0)) . '"1). 12 J. 7'"96 .6lS . lH.2'"28.97 1 . 782 .)'"12 'II 7 I5 t .9

18 ''"50 .16 . )28.2

12 '6lo5'"'"_) .1'"'"96 .0H .

12 '97 . 7

AUG

21'7) .9" '' 9 . 5,..)1'H .61"10727. _)"60 .227.2'1 050.072.510.966.6

1. ,10. ),. ,98.029.021.6

12 '17 . 9'"12.020. ,1) .9)0 . II)1. 010.4".98.096 .)85.9'21)5 .812 . \82 . 1'"55.818.512.090 . I"'...I I 6.. ,

117.010.9'"19 '62 . )91.821 '2 I .36 . 9,))87.0

np86 .6,) 118 '

'"21 . )...15.5"'9) .2)6 .9lI .58.9" '2 9 . _ .'"l I) .6)0 082.016.9". 036 . 8')1".4,OJ89. ,60.09) . 7".2). ,16.910. )12. ,19 '...

22 '~ 6 122)'"51 .858 . 9)8 .88_.912 ')5 .016.2'"18 ''"16 . 271.)

22 '..".,"59.'OJas .9'"62.089.7'"

OCTH,...

'"'"60.0'"5 9 . '11 .8'8 7'"'"'""," .".",",",32 .6)"19 '20)4) .9

'"'"".'"'"."1 1 . '.. ,)1 .2'87

l IS.6

'"'"'1 0'0 162.785.228 . )'"'"'2 9",,8 \'"".9) . I",10)51.1'"20]9 ) . 6) "".n.

10 ''"'"

NOY

26 )'"'"'"10 )'"'"7) .9."'0 0'"'"22 '98.0'0 0)90'6 0'"'0 7'"'"

'"".."n ,'19'"'"",",6 ). 9'"...'"'"'77)) )".91 . 0I) ')OJ'"'"')1'"'",OJ".)"'"'"n,11220 ''"'"1)1119'"'"'"

Dac'"",)",,,'"'2 0.")2 ')01'"'I ''"'"18 '1"92.1'"'"21 ''""..,.'"21 )18 ''"129'"'0922 )12 ''0 0'"'"28 .'2 9'1 0'1 966 . 6".'")10'")>0'"'")",..'"18 ''")9J,,,12 .'0 0'"'7 1."

...,".) "

.u.'8 7)2 '",,, )27 )'"a ,10 .",",'"'"'2 1'"'7 7'"21 '10 '19 ''"20 '21 '18 '19 '29.'0 0'"21 '21 '",'"10 .'"'10)"1 I 2 ~'"".'"'") "'"" ,,..)2 )19 )".'"'9 0'0 1".,>020))10)20'"'")"'5 9

YEAR19161917191119191920192119221923192111925192619271928192919)019 ) 119lZa ll19] / 119 H1936193719)1I9J919_ 019_ 119112I!U)19 ' 41945194619 ' 7194 '191191950195 I1952195)195_19551956195719581959196019611962""196'19651966196119681969191019711972197)I9 H19151976MEAN

f

LOCATION LAT 115 10 12 NLONG 66 28 00 w ORAINAGE AREANATURAL PLOW 92 . I SO MILES

12

FIGURE 3.7.1. STREAMFLOW DATA FOR LEPREAU RIVER. f


16/63

4.1 INTRODUCTION THE TERRESTRIALA search of the literature revealed relatively few sitespecific data on the

terrestrial and freshwater biota of the study area. In addition, extensive field studieswere beyond the scope of this study and some species, particularly terrestrialinvertebrates and aquatic plants, may be absent from our survey which wascarried ou t in late fall.

While we consider the absence of site-specific data as a serious shortcomingin terms of this work, available general data and the results o f our field surveyare sufficient to make a selection of monitoring species from those specieswhich are known to occur in the study area. It should be understood that otherspecies which have not yet been identified as occurring in the study area, may,in fact, be more suitable for a monitoring program.4.2 VEGETATION

AND FRESHWATER BIOTA

The study area lies in the Fundy Bay Ecoregion, described by Loucks (1968)as a community which is dominated by conifers and includes red spruce, balsam firand redmaple, with scattered white spruce, white birch and yellowbirch... The lesser vegetation is distinguishedby a number of species of boreal affinity. Cowberry, or rock cranberry, is common on the dry rocky sites, and cloudberry is found in the peat bogs. Canadaraspberry...is common . Mountain-ash is abundant...

The most important deterrent to rapidgrowth appears to be wind. Trees on headlands andexposed ridges havea short,broken appearance, even in dense stands. Although damage fromsaltspraymay be important, it does no t accountfor the appearanceof the treeson in land ridges.Trees do wel l i n areas nearthe coast protectedfrom wind, bu t ridges miles from the direct effectof saltspray look the same as coastal headlands. Shelterbelts of a wind-resistant species suchas white spruce havebeen observedproviding effective protection, and should be stressedin the silviculture of the Ecoregion. Shallow soils and extensive bare bedrock will make thisdifficult. Regeneration of conifers is usually goodon the deeper soils, bu t red maple ofsprout origin tends to dominatein a few areas.

MacLaren Atlantic (1977) carried out a more detailed survey of terrestrialvegetation near the plantwhich they described as follows

Of f the road to the Jighhouse and west through the forest south of the building site is aforest canopy formed mainly of black spruce and balsam with an occasional cedar, larch orwhite birch. There isan intermediate layer of smallerspruce, balsam, alders and a sparsescattering of mountain ash. An occasional shrub SJ.Jch as witherod and mountain holly isfound. The ground is carpeted with mosses, mainlypeatmoss, in which grow the characteristic species of thisshady, acid, saturated site - goldthread, twin flower. may f lower. bunch-berry, sorrel, starflower, creeping snowberry, sheeplaurel, Labrador tea, sedges, Indian pipeand the seedlings of witherodand mountain ash. Situated about half wayacross thePointare several rocky ridges coveredby shallow well-drainedsoil. Peatmoss is replaced by otherspecies on this drier ground. Bunchberry is abundant; there are somewood ferns, twin-flower, acuminate aster, club mosses, sedges, grasses, sarsaparilla and large-leafedgo ldenrod.Balsam is themain canopy tree with white birch saplings coming in below. In the drier partsat the north end of theclearedsite, bracken is common in the openings.

On the western shore the trees are very much inf luenced by the wind. storms, iceandsaltspray. The effect of prevailing windsis to deformmany of the balsam and spruce treesalong the west shore,causingdense stuntedgrowth six to fifteen feet high, resembling thegrowth of windswept alpine exposures. Tops of many of the taller trees nearthe shore aredead, and numerousdead lichen-coveredbalsam andspruce stand out above the canopyfarther inlandon thePoint.

t13


17/63

- .. Bogs, which area feature of this forest, range from theopen type, such as the onebesidethe road northeastof the lighthouse, to those which are almost covered by trees. The openbog is hedged by Labradortea and alders and is composedof a deep saturatedmat of peatmoss thrown up into hummocks, some of which are crowned with a white top of reindeerlichen. Growing in the peat is aspreading tangle of c1oudberry, cranberry, crowberry, falseSolomon's seal, cottongrass andother sedges. Themorecommon bogs are overgrown witha mat of peatmoss and sedges, dotted with pitcher plants. There is usuallya general scattering of stunted black spruce, larch and alder with thickets of Labrador tea, sweet galeandblackchokeberry. Crowberry and iris are also common.

In August 1974, two transects, each approximately 1,050m longacross the buildingsite, were sampled. Each consisted of a strip 2 metres wide within which all woody vegetation was counted in 2D-metre segments. In addition, ages were determined for over 100trees by counting the rings on stumps alongcut-lines orby takingcoreswith an incrementborer.

bour and on the eastside of Musquash Harbour. Further afieldsimilar forest is found eastof SaintJohn andin the west towards Black's Harbour.

Table 4.9.1 summarizes vegetation records fo r the study area.4.3 INVERTEBRATES

Numerous species of terrestrial invertebrates can be expected to occur inthe study area. No information on invertebrates was found in the literature andthese groups must, consequently, be excluded from a monitoring program.

Species of freshwater invertebrates collected during MRA surveys are listedin Table 4.9.1

4.4 FRESHWATER FISHES

The following fish are found within the Lepreau, Musquash and Mispec drainages butnotnecessarily in all drainages:

Hooper (1973) has summarized the inland fisheries in the general vicinity oft he s tudy area as follows:

14

Thedata for the transectsshows thepredominance of conifer, thehigh proportion of youngregeneration and the contrast between themainly wet situation on Transect I (TI) compared tothe better drainage soil on Transect II (Til). Themiscellaneous and unidentified category includeda few treesand a number of shrubssuch as witherod,mountain holly, sheep laurel. Labrador tea andrhodora. About 10percent of the sample was made up of deadstems from 1 to 14 inches in diameter. The information on growth showed a very wide variation, depending on moisture and shade.For example, two balsams about 45 years ol d were respectively 5 and 10 inches in diameter.Two black spruce, each abolJt 6 inches in diameter, were respectively about 30 and 85years old. A largersample of ages and diameters related to site could be necessary beforethe age composition of the forest could be established.

Comparison with forests a few milesinland and at a number of points along thecoast reovealed that the community on Point Lepreau is a fairly typical stand, although it seems tohave a somewhat higherproportion of deadand wind-molded trees. The high frequency offog and cooler temperaturesmay also influence growth and regeneration. Forests very simi lar in composition and l i fe form can be found along the coast. For example, thebogs ontheheadland south of Pocologan Harbour are virtually identical to the . on Point Lepreauand in theadjacentarea. The forest at Seely Head andaround Seely Cove is similar to thataround the base of Point Lepreau and along theroad to Dipper Harbour and Chance Har-

Coldwater Game Fish

Brook troutLandlocked salmonLake trout (togue)American smelt

Other Fish

YellowperchAmerican eelWhite suckerNinespine sticklebackBrown bullheadFall fishLake chubCreek chubNorthern red-belly daceBanded killifishCommon shiner

Lll


18/63

Table 4.9.1 gives the status of various fish species in the study area based onthe literature and MRA f ie ld surveys.

4.5 AMPHIBIANS

Eurycea bislineata

Anguilla rostrataCatostomus commersoniRhinichthys atratulusHybopsis plumbeaSemotilus atromaculatusChrosomus eosNotemigonus crysoleucasNotropis cornutusPungitiuspungitiusIctalurus nebulosus

Diemict ylus viridescens

Hemidaetylium SCl/tatum

Desmognathus fuscusPlethodon cinereus

Ambystoma maculatumA. laterale

American eelWh ite SuckerBlacknose daceLake chub

Creek chubNorthern red belly daceGolden shinerCommon shinerNinespine sticklebackBrown bullhead

Gorham (1970) l ists the following amphibians as occurring in New Brunswick:SALAMANDERS (Caudata)

'Spotted SalamanderBlue-spotted Salamander Red-spotted NewtDusky SalamanderRed-backed SalamanderFourtoed Salamander(hypothetical)Twolined Salamander

Nine to twelve inch brook troutarecommon in anglercreelsin the Lepreau drainage. Land-locked salmon and particularly lake trout (togue) catchesare found often in anglercreels inWest Longand Victoria lakes. The lake trout frequently range from 18 to 26 inches.

Brook trout are endemic and present in rare to abundant quantities throughout thedrain-ages. Landlockedsalmon are present in Loch Alva (Musquash) and West Long Lake (Lepreau)at least. Lake trout are known only in West Longand Victoria lakes although theyprobablyfind adverse summer living conditions in the latter lake. Lakesin the Musquash drainagehavevery large populations of warm water trash species (white suckersl yellow perchl fall fish) andminnow species. The competition offeredby these speciessignificantly reduces the ability ofthese lakes to produce coldwatergame fish populations. Lakes in the Lepreau drainagehavesomewhat better conditions for coldwater gamefish populations..

A surveyof angling pressures in New Brunswick in 1967by the author showed that about11 percent of the total rod days spentangling in theprovince were represented in the Lepreau,Musquash, Mispecand Black River drainages. This accounts for approximately 100,000 roddays per annum.

A study was conducted by Will iam Groom on elver observations in New Brunswick waters (1975). His findings fo r the Lepreau River can be summarized asfollows:

In his report on the Lepreau River, K_ Smith stated the only species offish observed werespeckled troutl Notropis minnows and chub.

Redmond (1974) reports the followi ng f ish species in the Lepreau River.

... very few elvers werepresent in this river from May 1 to 15... Catches increased steadily...until the midnighthigh tide of May 24...when over 500 elvers couldeasily be caughtin asinglescoop... The arrivalof large eels, up to 36 inches in length, were collecting in the poolarea... The last days of May ...saw large numbers of elversmassedunder the falls, up to 6,000per scoop...

Brook troutLake TroutRainbow smelt

Salvelinus fontinalisSalvelinus namaycushOsmerus mordax

TOADS AND FROGS (Salientia)

American Toad'Spring PeeperGray TreefrogBullfrog'Green FrogMink Frog'Wood Frog Leopard FrogPickerel Frog

Bufo americanusHyJa cruciferHyla versicolorRana catesbe;anaR. c1amitansR. septentr;onalisR. sylvaticaR. pipiensR. palustris

15


19/63

4.6 REPTilES

No reptile records were found fo r the study area. Gorham (1970) lists thefollowing species as occurring in New Brunswick.

On the basis of our experience in Charlotte County, species marked with anAskerisk (-) will be commonly found in the study area in the spring. During thesummer period, Ranaclamitans and Ranapipiens will be common in ponds, lakesand streams.

TURTLES

Snapping TurtleWood TurtlePainted Turtle

SNAKESWater Snake (hypothetical)"Red-bellied Snake"Garter SnakeRing-necked Snake'Smooth Green Snake

Chelydra serpentinaClemmys insculptaChrysemyspiera

Natrix sipedonStoreria occipitomaculataThamnophis sirtalisDradophispunctatusOpheodrys vernalis

Bird populationshava no t been studiedin the tornevilla araa (with the exception of a fewscatteredobservations from birdwatchers and dataobtained on the SaintJohn Breeding Bir dSurvey route (in 1970and 1971)) so we must make inferences about them,generally fromimpressionsof the fauna in similarhabitats to theeastand to the west

In thepradominant forest habitat we expect that there areapproximately 55 species ofbirdsregularlynesting in the area. An edditional 20 species could be found nestingreg ularlyin the ol d field and residential habitats. Expected minimumpopulation density of these birdsat the beginning of summer (excluding youngof the year and migrants, either orboth ofwhich are likaly to bepresent at any given time) is approximately 100nesting pairs per 100acres in the forestand about 150pairsper 100acresin the old field and residential habitats,i.e. about 17,000birds in thedevelopment area. These would raise to flying stage some25,000 to 30,000 young each year...

Winterpopulationsof birds in the developmentarea would vary greatly from year to yeardepending on fluctuating supplies of seeds and fruits. No winterbird censuses have everbeenconducted in New Brunswick 50 it is difficult to estimate thenumberof birds per acre.Studies in coniferous forests in other regions (Ontario, New Jersey, Connecticut) and our ownimpressions suggest that 20 to 60 birds per 100 acres would be usual. with perhaps 150birdsper 100acres in exceptional winters. The usualmid-winterpopulation within the development area would, then,be about3200 birds of 25 to 35 species.

In the triangle down wind of the developmentabout 50 landbird speciesmight be foundin winter with densities varyingusually20 to 150birds per 100 acres.

rrr

r[[

16

On the basis o f our e.xperience in Charlotte County, species marked with anAsterisk (-) will likely be common in the study area.

4.7 BIRDSIn a report by Baird, Christ ie and Pearce as part of the lorneville Enviro

nmentallmpact Study (1973), inferences were made concerning bird and landmammal populations of the lorneville area. Since lorneville is in the vicinityofour study area we consider the information of Baird et al. to generally apply.It should be noted however that certain species may not occur while others thatare no t mentioned may, in fact, be present at certain times of the year.

During spring and fall, mainlymid-March to earlyJune andmid-August to early November,large numbers of migrant land birds, which often tend to concentratealong coastlines, pass throughthe area. At times there might be as many as 50,000 transient birdsresting in thearea forfrom one to a few days. Smallernumbers of migrants would be presentat any time duringmigration.

Actual sight records of various species of birds reported in the study area havebeen identified by Squires (1976). Theseare listed in Table 4.7.1. I t should benoted; however, that the listing includes water birdsas well as rare or irregularvisitors and migrants. Thearea is a very important one for aquatic birds as an o v e r - w i n t ~ering area, a stopoverduringmigrationand as a visiting area. (Maclaren Atlantic, 1974).In fact the Canada land Inventory recognizes the area as having great importancefor migration or for wintering waterfowl.

LL

[l[


20/63

Bird species identified by MacLaren Atlantic (1977) in the study area arel isted in Tables4.7.3 and 4.7.4.

TABLE 4.7.1 REGULAR NESTING BIRDS IN LORNEVILLE DEVELOPMENTAREA.

1. Regular nesting birds in Lorneville development area.

b. Open Habitats

Sparrow HawkRuby-throated HummingbirdYellow-shafted FlickerTraill's FlycatcherBarn SwallowCliff SwallowBank Swallow

,Common CrowCatbirdStarlingYellowthroatHouse SparrowBobolinkRed-winged Blackbird

Common GrackleBrown-headed CowbirdAmerican GoldfinchSavannah SparrowChipping SparrowSong Sparrow

2. Land birds wintering in Lornevil le development area.a) Forested habitats

Black DuckGoshawkSharp-shinned HawkSpruce GrouseRuffed GrouseAmerican WoodcockSaw-whet OwlChimney SwiftHairy WoodpeckerDowny WoodpeckerYellow-bellied FlycatcherLeast FlycatcherEastern Wood PeweeOlive-sided Fly catcherTree SwallowGray JayBlue JayCommon RavenBlack-capped Chickadee

Boreal ChickadeeRed-breasted NuthatchBrown CreeperWinterWrenRobinHermit ThrushSwainson's ThrushGolden-crowned KingletRuby-crowned KingletCedar WaxwingSolitary VireoRed-eyed VireoTennessee WarblerNashville WarblerParulaWarblerYellow WarblerMagnolia WarblerCape MayWarblerMyrtle Warbler

Black-throated Green WarblerBlackburnian WarblerChestnut-sided WarblerBay-breasted WarblerOvenbirdNorthern WaterthrushMourning WarblerWilson's WarblerCanada WarblerAmerican RedstartRusty BlackbirdEvening GrosbeakPurple FinchPine SiskinWhite-winged CrossbillSlate-colored JuncoWhite-throated SparrowLincoln's Sparrow

a. Forested habitatsGoshawkRed-tailed HawkSpruce GrouseRuffed GrouseGreat Horned OwlSaw-whet OwlHairy WoodpeckerDowny WoodpeckerGray JayBlue JayCommon RavenBlack-capped ChickadeeBoreal ChickadeeRed-breasted NuthatchBrown CreeperGolden-crowned KingletEvening GrosbeakPurple FinchPine GrosbeakCommon RedpollPine SiskinAmerican GoldfinchRed Crossbill

b. Open habitatsSharp-shinned HawkCommon CrowRobinNorthern ShrikeStarlingHouse SparrowCommon GrackleBrown-headed CowbirdSlate-colored JuncoTree SparrowWhite-throated SparrowSong SparrowSnow Bunting

17


21/63

4.7,2 SIGHT RECORDS FOR BIRDS IN THE STUDY AREAActual sight records of various species of birds occurring in the study area. (Data

from Squires, 1976, The Birds of New Brunswick, N.B. Museum, Monographic SeriesNo.7, 2nd edition). (Nomenclature 'from Squires),

r

rCommon Loon Gavla immerRed-Throated Loon Gavla stellata Common Flicker Colaptes auratusRed-Necked Grebe Podiceps grisegena Eastern Kingbird Tyrannus tyrannusHorned Grebe Podiceps auritus Scissor-Tailed Flycatcher Muscivora forticataLittle Blue Heron Florida caeruJea Alder Flycatcher Empidonax alnorum,Common Goldeneye Bucephala cJanguJa Bank Swallow Riparia rapariaBarrqw's Goldeneye Bucephala is/andica Red-Breasted Nuthat ch Sitta canadensisBufflehead Bucephala ableola Brown Creeper Certhia {ami/farisHarlequin Duck Histrionicu$histrionicus Long-Billed Marsh Wren Telmatodytes palustrisKing Eider Somateria speetabilis Gray-Cheeked Thrush Catharus minimusWhite-Winged Seatea Melanitta deg/and; Eastern Bluebird Sialia sialisSurf Seater Melanitta perspicillat8 Golden-Crowned Kinglet Regulus satrapaBlack Seater Melanitta nigra Loggerhead Shrike Lanius ludovicianus LSharp-Shinned Hawk Accipiterstriatus Canada Warbler V V f l s o n i a c a n a d e n s ~ lBald Eagle Haliaeetus leucocephalus White-Winged Crossbill Loxia leucopteraPurple Sandpiper Calidrismaritima Lark Bunting CalamospizamelanocorysGreat Black-Backed Gull Larusmarinus Savannah Sparrow Passerculus sandwichensis lBonaparte's Gull Larus philadelphia Sharp-Tailed Sparrow Ammospiza caudacutaLeast Tern Sterna albifrons Field Sparrow Spizellapusilla lR'azorbill Alea lorda Fox Sparrow Passerella i1iacaCommon Murre Uria aalge Snow Bunting Plectrophenax nivalis

18

l


22/63

4.8 MAMMALS

Squires (1968) lists the following mammals as occurring in New Brunswick.(Nomenclature from Squires).

SHREWS AND MOLES INSECTIVORA

Records of occurrence for birds in the study area have not been summarizedin Table 4.9.1, since a separate monitoring program has been initiated for birdsby the Canadian Wildlife Service.

TABLE 4.7.3 BIRDS SEEN AND HEARD ON SAMPLE LINE, JUNE 1975.June 18 June 19 June 29

Species 0530-0630 hrs 0510-0620 hrs 1015-1055 hrsCommon flicker 1 1Alder flycatcher 1Least flycatcher 2 3 2Olive-sided flycatcher 1White-breasted nuthatch 1Winter wren 3 1American robin 1 2Hermit thrush 2 LSwainson's thrush 4 5 LRuby-crowned kinglet 4 4 1Tennessee warbler 6 5Magnolia warbler 6 6 1Black-throated green warbler 5 1Cape May warbler 1Chestnut-sided warbler 3 2Ovenbird 1Yellowthroat 6 6 1American redstart 2 4 1Brown-headed cowbird 1Purple finch 1Dark-eyed junco 1 1 1White-throated sparrow 7 6 1Unidentified 5 3 1Total 52 56 20Birds/minute 0.87 0.80 0.50TABLE 4.7.4. B IRDS IDENTIFIED IN THE FUNDY SHORE FOREST, JUNE1975.

Spruce grouse Tennessee warblerRuffed grouse Northern parulaCommon snipe Yellow-rumped warblerAlder flycatcher Yellow warbler

Least flycatcherOlive-sided flycatcherBlue JayCommon ravenCommon crowBlack-capped chickadeeWhite-breasted nuthatchRed-eyed vireoWinter wrenCatbirdAmerican RobinHermit thrushSwainson's thrushRuby-crowned kingletStarling

TOTA L - 3B species

"Masked ShrewSmoky ShrewArctic ShrewGaspe ShrewWater ShrewPygmy Shrew"Short-Tailed ShrewHairy-Tailed MoleStar-Nosed Mole

Magnolia warblerCape May warblerBlackburnian warblerChestnut-sided warblerBay-breasted warblerBlack-throated green warblerYellowthroatOvenbirdAmerican redstartCommon grackleBrown-headed cowbirdEvening grosbeakAmerican goldfinchDark-eyed juncoSong Sparrow

Sorex cinereusSorex fumeusSorex arcticusSorex gaspensisSorex palustr;sMicrosorex hoy;Blarina brevicaudaParasalops breweriCandy/ura cristata

19


23/63

20

BATS

"Little Brown BatKeen's Long-Eared BatLeast BatSilver-Haired BatBig Brown BatRed BatHoary Bat

HARES, RABBITS, ETC."Varying Hare

RODENTS"Woodchuck"ChipmunkGray Squirrel"Red SquirrelFlying Squirrel*Beaver"Deer MouseSouthern Bog LemmingNorthern Bog Lemming"Red-Backed Mouse"Meadow MouseRock Vole"MuskratNorway RatHouse MouseMeadowJumping MouseWoodland Jumping Mouse*Canada Porcupine

CHIROPTERA

Myotis lucifugusMyotis keeni;Myotis subulatusLasionycteris noctivagansEptesicus fU5CUSLasiurusborealisLasiurus cinereus

LAGOMORPHA

Lepusamericanus

RODENTIA

Maromota monaxTamias striatusSciurus carolinensisTamiase/ums hudsonicusGlaucomys sabrinusCastor canadensisPeromyscus maniculatusSynaptomys coopedSynaptomys borealisClethrionomysgapperiMicrotis pennsylvanicusMicro tis chrotorrhinusOndatra zibethicusRattus norvegicusMus musculusZapushudsoniclIsNapaeozapus insignisErethizon dorsa tum

Based on our experience in Charlotte County, species marked with an Asterisk (" )should occur commonly in the study area. l

l


24/63

Sight records and reports given by Maclaren Atlantic (1977) in the study areaare as follows:

Masked shrewShort-tailed shrewVarying hareWoodchuckRed squirrelDeer mouseRed-backed mouseSkunk

4.9 SUMMARY

Meadow voleMuskratMeadow jumping mouseWoodland jumping mousePorcupineRed foxBlack bearWhite-tailed deerMoose

Table 4.9.1 summarizes terrestrial and freshwater species records fo r the studyarea.

21


25/63

TABLE 4.9.1 SUMMARY RECORDS FOR TERRESTRIAL AND FRESHWATER BIOTA, POINT LEPREAU, N.B. r- ..SPECI ES E '"E .;:,'" '"'" '" a:'" .c:J :;;... '" '" '"?- probably occurs ..: '" .;:, .Y- I'" .0 '"> n a: ....J '"p . occurs. no data on abundance a I '"

.;:U ....J :J ...'" '" ...C common '".Y- '" '" '" '"n(,) n ... n ...A abundant :J ... '" '" '"0 0 ....J ....J a: f-

INVERTEBRATESTurbellaria

Phagocata velata C

Coelenterata --Hydra C CBryozoa

Fredericella sultana PAnnelida

Oligochaeta P C PHirudineaHelobdella sp. P C A-Glossiphoniidae t-- PErpobdellidae P

MysidaceaMysis sp. P

AmphipodaTalitridaeHyalella azteca C AGammarus sp. C

GastropodaPhysa sp. CLaevapex sp. C

- ._--22

I --SPECIES E '"E .;:,'" '"'" '" c:r: ...'" .0... :J '"... '" '" '"? . probably occurs ..: '" .;:, .Y- I'" '"> .0 n c:r: ....J


26/63

TABLE 4.9.1 Continued.

'"SPECIES '" E OJ '"E .2'" '"'" OJ cr:OJ .0::>'" '" OJ OJ '"7- probably occurs '" OJ .2 -'" :r:OJ '"> .0 C. cr: "iiiP - occurs, no data on abundance - '0 :r: OJ ::> .;: .;:


27/63

TAB LE 4.9.1 Continued.

'"SPECIES '" E '" '"E . -'" '"'" '" n: -'" :.ci- ::>1;; '" '" '" Q) '"]. probably occurs ..: Q) . "'" IQ)> .J:l n n: '" (i jP - occurs, no data on abundance ...Ja I Q) ::> ..,U ...J -'" '" -C - common '" Q) Q) Q) '""'" Q)n -;:;0 n n -A - abundant ::> - Q) Q) Q)0 0 ...J ...J n: I -AMPHIBIANSSpotted salamander ? ? ? ? ? ?Red-spotted newt ? ? ? ? ? ?American toad ? ? ? ? ? ?Spri ng peeper ? ? ? ? ? ?Green Frog ? ? ? ? ? ?Leopard Frog ? ? ? ? ? ?Wnod Fmn ? ? ? ? ? ?

REPTILESRedbellied snake ?Garter snake ?Smooth Green snake ?

MAMMALSMasked shrew CShort-tailed shrew CLinle brown bat ?Varying hare C C-AWoodchuck PChipmunk ?Red squirrel CBeaver C C CDeer mouse C

24

'"SPECIES '" E Q) '"E . -'" '"'" Q) n: . -Q) .J:l- ::> '"- '" '" '" Q)? - probably occurs '" ..: Q) . "'" IQ) .D n: '"> n ...J roP - occurs, no data on abundance a I Q) ::> .;:U ...J '" - -'" '"C- common "'" Q) Q) '" '"n0 n .E n -A - abundant ::> '" Q) '"0 0 ...J ...J n: l -Red-backed vole CMeadow vole CMuskrat CMeadow jumping mouse PWoodland jumping mouse PPorcupine P CRed fox PRaccoon P PMink ?Striped skunk PWhite-tailed deer P P P C-AMoose P PBlack bear P P

f : r

lll


28/63

TABLE 4.9.1. Cont inued.

SPECIES E '"E . '" '"'" '" II :

'".D::J1n '" '" '" '"?- probably occurs ..: '" . -'" I

'".D

'"P - occurs. no data on abundance > 0. II: -J0 I'"U -J ::Jro ro

C - common -'" '" '" '" '"'-' 0..9- 0.A - abundant ::J .!e '" '" '"0 0 -J -J II : I -TERRESTRIAL VE(;ETATIONSnruceFirCedarAlderMountain ashWhite BirchTamarackGoldthreadTwinflowerMayflower- BunchberrySorrelStarflowerCreeping snowberry -Sheep LaurelLabrador teaIndian pipeWitherodMountain hollyBrackenCloudberry

, CranberryCrowberry

SPECIES Q;EE '" . '"'" '" II: .!e'"

.D::J'"'" '" '"7 . probably occurs ..: '" . -'" I

'".D II : '"> 0. -J '"P - occurs, no data on abundance 0 I

'" ::J.; :U -J

'" '"C - common -'" '" '" '" '" '"0- -;::'-' 0. 0-A - abundant ::J '" '" '"0 0 -J -J II: I -Fake Solomon's sealCotton grassPitcher plantSweet galeBlack chokeberry

LICHENS, MOSSES & FUNGICladonia gracilis C-AC. pyxidata C-AC. rangiferina C-ASphagnum sp. ADicranella heteromalla CPhysia sp. CCentraria glauco CParmelia conspersa CUsnea strigosa CBracket fungi CCeratodon purpureus CLycoperdon pyriforme CPolystictus velsicolor C

25


29/63

TAB LE 4.9.1 Continued.

'"SPECI ES '" E '" '"E . -'" '" -" I'"

.0 a. cr: ...J 'iiiP- occurs, no data on abundance 0 :I:'" :J

.;:U ...J -


30/63

PRELIMINARY SPECIES SELECTION5.1 INTRODUCTION

While an inventory of the terrestrial and freshwater flora and fauna of thePoint Lepreau area is far from complete, numerous specieshave been identified asoccurring in the study area and selection of monitoring species is possible. Theobjective is to select species which will, because of their local status and ecological position, most rapidly and easily demonstrate the concentration of radionuclides in the terrestrial and freshwater systems. Consequently, we have es-tablished the following criteria for preliminary selection of monitoring species.

1. SPECIES STATUS. Suitable species should occur commonlyin the study area.2. ABUNDANCE. Suitable species should be sufficiently abundant to allow adequate sample collection.3. DISTRIBUTION. Suitable species should be generally distributedthroughout the study area and common elsewhere to allow for anexpanded sampling program if necessary.4. SIZE. Suitable species should be readily obtainable in sufficientbulk to insure sufficient sample mass.5. LOCATION. Since radionuclides are most likely to be transported in groundwater and drainage streams, species occurring in localities where drainage is slowed (sphagnum bogs, backwaters instreams, ponds or lakes) should be considered as primary "candidatespecies" since such areas should offer greater opportunities for concentration of water-borne radionuclides in the resident biota.6. ECOLOGICAL POSITION. Suitable species should occupy aposition in the iood web which leads to higher trophic levelsother than man.

27


31/63

28

5.2 PRELIMINARY LIST OF CANDIDATE SPECIES.Using the criteria listed above, the list of species recorded in the study area

was reviewed and the following species appear to be suitable fo r a monitoringprogram.

INVERTEBRATES

LeechCaddis fl y larvaeFISHBrook TroutNine-spine SticklebackAMPHIBIANS

Spotted SalamanderRed-spotted newtAmerican ToadSpring PeeperGreen FrogLeopard FrogWood FrogMAMMALS

BeaverMuskratTERRESTRIAL VEGETATION

CedarAlderReindeer MossSphagnum MossAQUATIC VEGETATION

Water HorsetailStonewart Algae

Helobdella sp.Trichoptera

Salvelinus fontinali sPungitius pungitius

Ambystoma maculatumDienictylus viridescensBufo americanusHy la cruciferRana c1amitansRana pipiensRana sylvatica

Castor canadensisOndatra zibethicus

Thuja occidentalisAlnus rugosaCladonia rangiferinaSphagnum sp.

Equisetum sp.Nitella sp.

r

l

r[[

llll


32/63

6.1 INTRODUCTION ECOLOGICAL PATHWAYSMaclaren Atlantic Ltd (1977) has presented an analysis of the anticipated

interaction between radioactivity and the environment. Annotated excerptswhich apply to the terrestrial and freshwater environments are presented be-low.

FOR RADIONUClIDES

6.3 RELEASES TO FRESHWATER

In addition, particulates and reactive vapours are lost f rom the plume by settling with de-position beinghighestnear the station. Gases and non-reactive vapors ultimately disperse inthe atmosphere.

There are no direct releases from the station in sourcesof freshwater. The Active WasteStorage facilities will be designed and operated to preventcontamination of groundwaterandsurface water. Both groundwaterand surface runoff at the facility will be sampledandanalyzed to demonstrate compliance with thisaim.

The average concentration of released material in air downwind from a source normallydecreases exponentially with distance from the source, and depends upon the source shape,effective height of release, the weather and the timeover which the release takes place. Radioactive decay also enhances removal of radionuc/ides from theplume.

25,000 Ci-MeV0.09 Ci0.006 Ci7,000 Ci

Fission gaseslodinesParticulatesTritium (HTOI

Nonetheless, the presenceof radionuclides in the environmentwhich result from theoperation of the Point Lepreau nuclear generating station must be considered in relation tothe potential radiation exposure of peopleand lower form biota. The magnitudeof exposurethat is likely to result from effluent depends uponmany complex relationships. These reolationships involve how, where, what kinds, and in wha tamountsradioactive materialsareintroduced into theenvironment, the pathwaysby which the radioactivity is transportedthrough the environment, and the ways and extent to which the environmentandits resourcesare used by man.

The AECB has an operating target for annual radioactive releases, during normal operation, of one percent or less of those releases corresponding to the maximum permissibledose fo r individualmembersof thepublic. The maximum calculated dose to a member ofthe public living at the site boundary, resulting from releases at this "target" level, is withi n t he normal variation of natural background radiation, and is indistinguishable from it.

During the operation of the Point Lepreau nucleargenerating station, small quantitiesof radioactivity willbe released to the air and to theocean. The AECB hasjurisdiction overreleases of radioactivity to the environment. The maximum permissibl e releases of radioactive materialfrom nucleargeneratingstations arederived from the recommendationsofthe International Commission on RadiologicalProtection (/CRP). The ICRP is an independ-ent, non-governmental body consisting of internationally recognizedexperts f rom manycountries and a wide varietyof scientificdisciplines.

6,2 RELEASESTO THE AIR

. Based on operating experience with CANDUPHWplants, theprojectedannualairbornereleases per-reactorare given by AECL as follows:

In spite of the foregoing, it must be stressed that airborne particulates ultimately will reach streams and lakes in run-off and will tend to concentrate in freshwater organisms.

29

'\,\


33/63

6.5 BUILDUPOF RADIONUCLIDES DUE TO AIR EMISSIONS,\I LSYSTEMS6.4 PATHWAYS FOR RADIOACTIVITY TO TERRE'

The value of K depends on the distance from thesource, theshape of the source, effectiveheight of release, the weather and the timeover which the release takesplace.

There are many methods of estimating atmosphericdispersion. Calculations fo r thedilution factors used in thissection were obtained from Bryant'sdata. This approach followsstandard practicein the Canadian nuclearindustry. Theconcentration of releasedmaterialsin air tel at a point somedistance from thesource isgiven by:

Generalized environmental pathways fo r releases to organisms other than manare shown in Figure 6.4.1.

Plants and animalscan be irradiated externallyby the decay o f fission gases in theeff luentplume and the decay of particulate material depositedon plant surfacesand soil.Radioactive nuclides enter land plantsby absorption and adsorption on above-groundleafyand woody portions, and by absorption through the below-ground root portions.Many of the nuclides will be inert relative to plant systemsand willa ccumulate passivelyon plants and soils. A number of radionuclides, however, enter into active plant metabolismand ma y be taken up by the plantsalong with the naturally-occurring forms of these elements. Such radionuclides m ay b e concentratedmany timesover the environmentallevelby the plants.

where

C= KO unitslm3

Q= release rate of materials (units/s)K= dilution factor Islm3)

Radioactive nuclides enter animalsystems in three ways: absorption and adsorption onthe skin, ingestion and inhalation. The relative importance of each route depends on thechemical form of the nuclidei tsel f, the form in which it is transported, the ability ofparticularlivingsystems to assimilate thatnuclide in thatchemical form and the potentialfor accumulation of that nuclide within animal tissue. An additional route exist'S formammalslthe forage-and/or prey-to-mother-milk-to-infantpathway. Carnivorous speciescould be subject to biological magnification where consumption of prey would progressively increase thebody burden. The build-Up o f 1-131 is no t expected to be significant due to its short half-life (eight days) and anticipated smaJl releases. Tritium will be released in watervapour formbu t does no t concentrate selectively in the environment.6.5 ENVIRONMENTAL EQUILIBRIUM

Thestack at Point Lepreau will exhaust to theatmosphere at a heightof 67 m. The re-lease point is at thetop of the heavy-waterupgrading tower, which is locatedbeside the reactorbuilding. Dilution measurementsat the Pickering Generating Station have shown that dilutionis estimated conservativelyby taking the effective height of release as the physicalheight,when Bryant's curves are used. Predictions of effectivestackheightareinexactl and aneffectiveheight of 50 m is assumed foradded conservatism_

From the Bryants I curvel the concentration at 70-80 km from the station is approximately1percent of thatat theplant boundary. The outerlimit of the zone of influence of the stationis, therefore, about 80 km. Even if emissionsleading to the maximum permissible dose rates atthe plant boundary were released, the dose rate at80 km VIIOuld be less than theannualfluctuations in the natural radiation background.

Animalsma y release accumulated nuclides to theenvironment in waste products to thesoil and atmosphere. Plant and animal wastesand deadmaterial faJl to the ground wherethey aredecomposed.

After start-up of the Point Lepreaunucleargenerating station the radioactive nuclideswill move towardsteadystate concentrations in the affected areas. Addit ionsto the e n v i r o ~ment will be made continually through stack emissions, bu t counterbalancing losses willoccur due to radioactivedec ay and physical transportou t of the system. Ultimately inputsandoutputs would achieve at leasta rough steadystate.

The deposition of long-lived particulate radionuclides from the plume wifJ be hifller nearthe station, and presents the possibility of cumulative b u i l d ~ u p in theenvironment. UsingBryant'S method and a deposition velocity of 3 x 10 -3 mis, the expecteddeposition rate at1 km is about 4 x 10 -3 mCi/km2y. As thepresent weapons test fallout rate o f theorder o f2 mCilkm2y just maintains thepresentenvironmentalcontamination of about 150 mCi/km2we may expect an equilibrium level from anticipated plant releases o f about 0.3mCi/km2.This smallamount of particulatecontamination on thegroundgivesrise to an annualdoseof 0.01 mrad, assuming the mean gamma energy to be O.7MeV.

ll

30

IG f iE 6.4.1 S IMPLIFIED TERRESTRIAL AND


34/63

PRECIPITATION ~ FR S ~ W A T E R PATHWAYS FOR RADIONUCLIDES.

IMMERSIONABSORPTIONINGESTION

TERRESTRIALCARNIVORES

RADIONUCLIDES INGASEOUS EFFLUENT

DIRECT RADIATIONINHALATIONADSORPTION

TERRESTRIALHERBIVORES

Decay. animal wastes

TERRESTRIALPLANTS

~ > " \

\ \""f . ~ ~ I N A " \ l ; : .. " > i 6 . : : ~ . . ... -o.':q:.'.::.'o:':j:}.:,f?:. " d . _. :- . __ . ' .: -ti.,"O::ir. ':6-9 ::'(1/f';CJ::.. .. "';cS: ..(t ..:u. "13" f)"',, ..,\C:,o.. ''''':a .. '0' / ) ' . ' :, ... ; ... : : '. '. .'.:.'.: .....;.::..:....: ~ . : . : : < . ~ ..; ~ . : . : } : . : : . , :.::0.' : : ~ ; ;'?"T':' .D..'?;}?:: AQUATIC PLANTS 0;

"'........ '" VI '-"}!/_ . PHYTo"PLANKTON ... ' . J { i J . ~DETRITUS FEEDERS ......... ~ .'.:: :0>.... -.-'sA. '.

........ \L' c : O : ~ " ' , HERB IVORES - - -- ::.'Cly'-...... _ :".i:--' .f Z O O P L A N K T ~ .....~ . < : '._ : . : t ~ : , j (N/!: '. YDRAIl'lAGI' :''0-:;, " , ... :'\,,-,' : : - O ~ . ~ : . CARNIVORES " . q f ~ ~ : ' : 7: : ' ' ' ~ . : ": .. : .. ' .- . . .. DETRITUS FEEDERS " ' ~ - . ' /. " ~ ; ~ .....~ : . .. : ;.-:':-j. . . ' , :..t:: . ' / {J." .. -. . ", . "".'.ft


35/63

32

6.6 DOSE TO TERRESTRIAL SYSTEMSThe Canadian designedoper ating targets l i m i t the dose rate at the exclusionarea boundary

from released radioactive materials to a small fraction of the natural background radiationlevel. This small increase in dose rate is no t expected to damage livingorganismsor theecosystem. It is worth noting that the Environmental Assessment ReviewPanel for thePointLepreau Nuclear Generating Station reported to the Minister of the Environment that:- Thequestion of the effect of radioactive discharges on organisms other thanman has been dis-cussed at considers/be length by a number of expert committees and panels in recent years.One o f the most recent o f these was an internationalpanel o f the Committeeon Oceano-graphy, U.S. National Academy of Sciences. A l l o f these bodiesagree that if environmentallevels of radiation are based on the proteetion of man then other organisms will no t beharmed. It must be noted thatthereis a dissenting opinion from a group in Sebastopol inthe U.S.S.R. They haveproduced a number of publications which claim observable damageto fish eggs developing in contaminated water where the totaldoses received were extreme-ly small (less than 10percentabovenormalbackgroundradiation). Otherresearch workers(including some in the U.S.S.R.J have beenunable to repeat their results.

The monitoring designs presently being considered for terrestrial, freshwaterand marine systems, of which this report is a part, assume that environmentalprograms should not be designed around pathways leading to man.6.7 DOSES FROM AIRBORNE RELEASES

NBEPChas estimated that a l m ~ t all of thedose at the exclusion area boundary will comefrom external irradiation from released fission gasesand from inhaled tritiated water vapour.The expected airconcentrations at theboundary willgivedoserates of about 1.4mrem/yfrom external irradiation, 0.08 mrem/y from inhaled tritiated water vapourand 0.01 mremlyfrom deposited particulates.

In addition, small amountsof iodine may be released, causing irradiation in man as a re-sult of food chain contamination or direct inhalation.

The expected airconcentrations at the boundary wouldgivea dose rate to the thyroidof an infant fed only locally produced cow.'s milk of about0.7 m r em / y. A s there is n o d a ir yindustry in thearea, the mostprobable route for exposure is by inhalation. The expected

air concentrations would give thyroid doserates ofabout 0.03 mrem/y to an infant and0.003mrem/y to an adult.

The totalannual dose from airborne releases at the boundary is therefore about 1.4mremsto both infants and adults. This is aboutone percent of the annualdose from naturalbackgroundradioactivity.

6.8 OTHER ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTSInactive liquidwastes at the Point Lepreau Nuclear Generating Station shouldhave a

negligible effect on the aquatic environment.

The description of chemicalsystems in Chapter 3 indicatedthat theuse of these materialswill be minimizedunder expected operatingconditions. It is believed that hydrazine andcyclohexylamine/morpholine concentrations in the boilerblowdown will be well belowtoxicity levels of 1.0 mg/I hydrazine a n d 0 . 3 mg/I morpholine. Once the blowdown ismixed with the cooling water discharge it will be greatly dilutedand its effect on the aquaticenvironment will be insignificant.

In addition, any other chemical liquid wastes (i.e. demineralizer wastes) will be treatedto requiredlevelsprior to entering the cooling water discharge. As with theboiler blowdown,any remainingchemicalconstituents in these wastes will havea negligible effect on theaquatic environment.

Only a small quantity of oilcontaminated wastes will be produced and these wastes willbe treated to ensure thatonly innocuousoil concentrations (i.e. 15mgl1) are allowed toenter the cooling water discharge.

Finally, sanitary wastes willbe treatedby conventional methods to ensure applicableeffluent standards are met.

As indicated,inactive solid wastescould be handled by various conventional methods. Allprocedures forhandling these wastes willbe reviewed with the properauthoritiesand therefore the effect on the environment shouldbe minimal.

Contaminantscontained in the productsof combustion generatedby the standby boilerand emergency dieselgenerators will be dispersed to acceptable levels by the properselectionof exhauststack heights.

[r[r[[r..

llrl

'I/10J


36/63

7.1 INTRODUCTIONIt is clear from the foregoing, thatthe release of radionuclides and particulates

is expected to fall within natural background levels, butthat biological concentrationin the environment may occur. This assumes a "best case" operational approach.However, it is clear that operational "events" do occur and it is our view that monitoring programsshould be designed from the "worst case" perspective since nothing is lost if values remain acceptable, and comparative background data are a-vailable if they are required.The proposed monitoring program, presented in this section, has been designed

with a viewto:1. determing those sampling areas in the environment whereradionuclides may concentrate physically.2. determining the best sampling area and locations from a"worst case" perspective, and3. determining those species which may be best suited totracing the passage of radioactivity through the biologicalsystems.

In each case, we have attempted to provide the rationale behind our recommendations

7.2 LIMITATIONS

As previously mentioned, site-specific data for the terrestrial and freshwaterbiota in the study area are not complete. These gaps in information create somelimitations in the selection of monitoring species. While numerous unrecordedspecies (which might be excellent candidates for a monitoring program) undoubtedly occur in the Point Lepreau area, we have hesitated to include thesesJ;lecies without first-hand knowledge about their occurrence, distribution andabundance and have only considered those species which have been recorded orwhich, as a result of our experience, we feel will be present. We must express our

,.THE PROPOSED

MONITORING PROGRAM

surprise that a more complete inventory of the terrestrial and freshwater biotawas not carried ou t prior to the construction phase.

7 .3 THE MONITORING AREAThe assessment of dispersal and deposition of long-lived particulate radio

nuclides presented in the preceeding section appears to be based on a steady-statetheoretical model and does not appear to take into account prevailing winds, varying wind velocities, inversions and modifications in dispersion created by the Bayof Fundy. The area of greatest influence is calculated to be in the immediate vic-inity of the stack and reduces to 1% of these values at 70-80 km.While a detailed analysis of dispersion patterns is beyond the scope of this work,

analyses carried out for sulphur dioxide emissions from the Coleson Cove ThermalGenerating plant throw some light on the variations in dispersion which can beanticipated (Lorneville Impact Study, 1973). Pertinent sections from this reportare reproduced below.

Because Lornevi/le is situatedat the boundary of two very differentsurfaces (the land andthe Bay of Fundy!. the dispersion of emissionscan be expected to be very dependentuponthe wind direction and, therefore, was divided into the following sections:

33


37/63

34

(i) Southwesterly windsblowing from the Lornevillearea towardSaintJohn (1900-2500)

Dispersion of emmissionsunder these conditionsis based on regional winddirection measuredat approximately 300 metres (990 feet) at the radiosonde station on Sable Island. For this winddirection it was found that "limited Mixing"conditions, in which pollutantsareuniformly mix-ed in the vertical directionbeneath an overlying inversion or stable layer, could cause the maxi-mum ground level concentration to exceedthe Maximum AcceptableAir Quality Objectiveof 0.34 ppm aboutone to three times permonth between May andOctober, andonce or twiceper month in the coldseason (November to Apri/). The point of maximum concentration couldbe from 3.6 to 6.2 milesdownwind of Lorneville and, therefore, could occur within SaintJohn.

Sustained afternoon advection inversions, in which the emissions are injected initially intoa stable layer, transported overland with relatively little dilution, and then broughtrapidly tothe surface in high concentrations by vertical mixing over the relatively warm land, could occurabout four times permonth in the warm seasonbut less than once permonth in the cold season.Thiscondition can persist for about four hours in themiddleof theday at a downwind pointwhich is continually shifting due to changes in wind direction and temperature structure ofthe air.

During thenight time theemissionsareoften prevented from reaching theground by aninversion layer which forms overnightnext to theground. About an hour after sunrise thislayer has been destroyed to the extent that the emissions, which have undergone relativelylittle dilution aloft, can be brought to theground in high concentrations. This "morning inversion breakUp"could takeplace from two to seven timesper month in the cold season.This condition lasts only about 30 to 45 minutesand thepoint at which it occurs is contin-ually shifting.

(iiJ Winds blowing inland from the Lorneville area in directions other than towards SaintJohn (0900-1900)

With this wind direction, sulphur dioxidecan be transported inlandtowards theSaintJohn watersupply lakesnorth of Lorneville, It was found that, under limitedmixingcon-ditions, maximum groundlevel concentrations could exceedthe Maximum Acceptable National Air Quality Objective north of Lorneville, once or twice per month throughout the year,fr;'r approximately fourhours each time.

Sustainedafternoon advection inversions could causehigh concentrations to reach ground

on two or three afternoonsper month in the warm season, bu t less than oncepermonth inthecoldseason. Morning inversion breakup couldoccurone to five timesper month in thecoldseason. Themaximum concentrations during the above three conditions will be at apoint 6 to 30 km (3.6-18.6miles) downwind of the source;this pointwil l be continuallyshifting because of changing wind direction and airtemperaturestructure.

(iii! Winds blowing from Lorneville overthe 8ay of Fundy towards Nova Scotia (2100-36(0).

It isdesirable to examine the impact the Lornevilleemissionsmay haveon the air qualityof western Nova Scotia. In the cold season, air passing from New Brunswick over the re-latively warmer waters of the Bay of Fundy, willbe warmed from belowand the Lornevilleemissions will be well mixed through a very deep layer of atmosphere. The dilution ratesover the Bay of Fundy willbe large andemissions are unlikely to reach Nova Scotia inmeasurableconcentrations.

In the warmseason, the plumecould travel for long distances in a duct between an elevatedstable layer and a stable layer forming next to the relatively cooler water of thebay. Analysisof this situation revealed that aftera distance of 100 km (62 miles) the Maximum AcceptableNational Air Quality Objectivecould be exceeded over Nova Scotia, bu t less than once permonth. Since this estimate was done without regard for thereduction of S02 concentrationsdue to chemicaldecay and washout by precipitation, it isestimated that theemissions thatareprojected to come initially from the Lorneville area are no t likely to affectthe agri-culture and forestry industries of Nova Scotia. Additional emissions, however, will increasethe chanceof Lorneville emissions affecting Nova Scotia.

While the above summary deals with sulphur dioxide, it is clear that somevariations in dispersion patterns may have implications with regards to dispersionfrom the Point Lepreau Nuclear Generating Station. In particular, we wish topoint out the following1) SOUTHWESTERLY WINDS (1900 - 2500 )

a) "Limited mixing" conditions could cause maximum groundlevel concentrations. This conformswith the analysis provided by MacLarenAtlantic (1977).

[

1/


38/63

b) Sustained afternoon advection inversions may transportemissions beyond the study area.

c) Night time inversion layer at ground level may preventemissions from reaching ground level resulting in the transport of particulatesbeyond the study area.

2) WINDS FROM OTHER DIRECTIONS (0900 -1800 )a) Under "limited mixing" emissions, afternoon advection in

versions and morning inversion breakup could cause deposition of particulatesup to 18.6 miles from the stack.3) WINDS BLOWING OVER THE BAY OF FUNDY TOWARDS NOVASCOTIA (2700 -3600 ).

a) During the summer, the plume may travel long distances ina duct between an elevated stable layer and a stable layer forming nex t t o t hecooler water of the Bay. High concentrations of particulates could be expectedup to 62 miles from the stack.

In the absence of a detailed dispersion study and assuming the "worst case"perspective, it would appear that the monitoring area should be expanded to takeinto account dispersion of particulates to outlying areas. The monitoring areaswhich should be included, if Coleson Cove data are applicable, are shown inFigure 7.3.1. An examination of wind frequency data (Figure 3.5.1) showsthat winds blow from 1800 t o 3600 approximately 76 percent of the time.Therefore, areas towards Saint John and the Nova Scotia shore should begiven primary consideration.

7.4 MONITORING SITESWhile we agree that emphasis should be given to the immediate area around

the plant, it is clear from the foregoing that a widersampling area should beconsidered and we would recommend that sampling sites should be establishedas follows.

1. ZERO TO FIVE MI LE RADIUS. Five terrestrial/freshwatersampling sites as shown in Figure 7.4.12. FIVE TOTEN MI LE RADIUS. Four terrestrial/freshwatersampling sites to be selected.3. TEN TO TWENTY MI LE RADIUS. At least two terrestrial/freshwater sites to be selected.4. NOVA SCOTIA. We have not recommended sites for NovaScotia. However, we would recommend that the establishmentof monitoring sites be considered.

It should be noted that we have combined both terrestrial and freshwatersampling sites since all of the recommended terrestrial species occur at these sites.

The only difficult species in terms of collection are the leeches andCaddis fly larvae. We would estimate that, if these two species can be obtainedwith relative ease, each sampling should not require more than 5 man-hours.Allowing for travel, the sampling time for the entire area recommended aboveshould be in the order of 45 to 55 man-hours or 6 to 7 man-days.

7.5 SAMPLING SEASONWe recommend that sampling be carried ou t during the summer or early fall

since most species occur in greater abundance and are more easily obtained during this period.7.6 SELECTION OF MONITORING SPECIES

While the contract requires identification of a suitable fish, invertebrate andaquatic plant as well assuitable sites for the collection of undisturbed soil, lichensand plantsamples, our examination of available species and food webs suggeststhat a broader spectrum should be examined to insure that entry of radionuclidesinto the numerous biological pathways is detected. Consequently, we recommend

35


39/63

AREA 1SOUTHEASTERLYWINDS

l

r"1fZl

_ _ J/

J

.,.,.

. .,..

FIGURE 7.3.1 TERRESTRIAL AND FRESHWATER MONITORINGAREA SUGGESTED BY COLESON COVE WIND DATA.

.,,,.,,,.

, ~

....

- \ \ ' iBRUNSWICK

AREA 3NORTHWESTERLYWINDS

/i9 ....:... /'

99

53.ll.~ ~ _....

S?


40/63

,

'0>

9 5

FIGURE 7.4.1 PROPOSED TERRESTRIAl!FRESHWATER SAMPLING SITES IN THEVICINITY OF THE POINT LEPREAU NUCLEARGENERATING STATION (See Data File for 1:20,000maps of all sites except Lepreau River.

-OJ

.....

J6 -02

--I

14

."II

-'-

15--L --f----- j ! '---L.. j l

,96 +95 I +-JI94-.,

" r t ~ : p : ' i b R " : 1 l l ~ ~ r i ; ' = ; = T ~ " : , ' . . f ~ ~ ~ ~ ; = : ; t ~ ~ ' I l j ~ W J i l l ~ I O ~ ~ ~ U ~ ~ ; I 2 ~ l l : 1 q : i I 3 ~ k : : ~ " ~ ~ 15,., "27' "

L

"- ' 3'!J." -r

I

J:

"

~ i!.

I II",

I"""

5 C Q N T O U ~ ."rE ...... ,.;I fEU tQUIOtSTA/'lCl lIS COUA8ES $(l "WS

! Q 2 ] ! ~ : ! = ~ t = ~ t : ~ t = ~ ~ = ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ : ~ ~ : ~ , : : ; t ~ : ~ : : ~ ~ ~ ... ; - : - : ~ ; - : ~ ..: - ~ . ~ - ~ . ~ . _ ; : : . : - : - ; ~ . ~ . ~ - ~ . T."=J-"92 - t ;c - - f - - - t : : . . . . ~ = A_=::,;::..-::::':'\9l1JWN 6


41/63

that species which occupy most ofthe basic trophic levels be included in the monitoring program.

This species was chosen over other trees because of its existance along consistent drainage areas. It is felt that exposure to water-borne radionuclides isenhanced in such a habitat.

We would suggest that the following samples be taken and analysed from theproposed sampling sites:TERRESTRIAL SAMPLES

1. Speckled Alder2. Reindeer moss3. Bog moss4. Flying insects (gross collection)5. Soil samples

AQUATIC SAMPLES1. Leech2. Caddis fly larvae3. Ninespine stickleback4. Green frog5. Muskrat6. Water Rorsetail7. Stream/Lake sediment samples

Alnus rugosaCladonia rangiferinaSphagnum sp.

H e/obdella sp.TrichopteraPungitius pungitiusRana c1amitansOndatrazibethicusEquisetumsp.

2. Reindeer moss (e/adonia rangiferinai. A primary colonizer, Reindeer moss occurscommonly on ledge outcrops often in well-drained areas. It has the ability to absorband retain moisture and would appear to be the most suitable species for monitoringsuch habitat.

While we have no information on its position in the food web i t is probablyutilized by insects and other invertebrates and serves as a minor browse for mammalian herbivores.

3. Bog moss (Sphagnum spi. Spagnum is abundant in poorly-drained depressions.This is a unique habitat where water-borne radionuclides may be concentrated.

Sphagnum is probably utilized by insects and mammalian herbivores.4. Flying insects. No specific terrestrial insect was identified as a suitable speciesfor a monitoring program. Nevertheless, forest insects are probably the most im-portant link in the terrestrial food web where they utilize forest plant cover andserve as food for numerous species on higher trophic levels. We believe that grossnight collection of night-flying insects will provide a suitable technique for sampling this important group.

I[r

l

38

Our rationale for incllJding these species, apart from preliminary selectioncriteria, is as follows:TERRESTRIAL SAMPLES1. Speckled Alder (A/nus rugosai. The speckled alder is a common species occurringin thickets in wet soil along streams, lakes, swamps and areas subject to springflooding (Canada, 1956).

While it is not a primary browse species it is on the base of the food web andwill be utilized by insects which are fed upon by amphibians, birds, mammals an!!reptiles.

5. Soil samples. Soil samples, including resident fauna, should be taken and monitored from both poorly drained and well-drained sites.

AQUATIC SAMPLES1. Leech (He/obdella spi. This member of the class Hirudinea, was chosen as a monitoring species because it met all the criteria for preliminary selection. Theseleeches were found to be common. Pennak (1978) indicates that this species isgenerally distributed over the region and can be found in a var iety of habitats,from lakes and ponds to springs, streams and marshes. This organism is of adequate sizefor rapid collection. However, as with the majority of freshwater invertebrates,

l

[


42/63

.,

a considerable amount of time would be necessary to collect sufficient quantitiesfor testing.

This leech has been found to live as a carnivore on a diet of snails or as aparisite of fish, reptiles and amphibians (Pennak, 1978). It is an important fishfood (Scott& Crossman, 1973). Helobdella provides an essential link in theecological web.which will pass radionuclides to higher trophic levels. It can befound year around in various aquatic habitats. It is most common at depths ofless than two meters and on substrates to which they can adhere. The standardcollection method is individual picking from the underside of rocks, logs, anddebris (Pennak, 1978).2. Caddis fly ITricoptera). Caddis fly larvae meet the basic criteria of a monitoringspecies. They were found to be common and in sufficient abundance at mostsites visited. Pennak (1978) indicates they are widely distributed in this region.They are relatively easy to collect, given sufficient time to obtain proper quantities.

Tricoptera larvae are most commonly omniverous, living off plant debris andsmall organisms found as they crawl across the bottom or which come into rangeof their substrate-attached cases (Pennak, 1978). They have been observed duringfish food surveys as an important component of the fishes diet, particularly trout(Pennak, 1978).

These organisms can be collected year round by picking from a relatively hardsubstrate or waShing them from debris and vegetation (Pennak, 1978).

3. Ninespine stickleback IPungitius pungitius) . The Ninespine stickleback, wasselected as a monitoring species due to its observed and reported (Scott and Crossman, 1973) abundance and distribution throughout the study area and surrounding region. They are relatively large and easily collected with a minnow siene.

The Ninespine stickleback is an opportunistic carnivore, living on a variety ofaquatic organisms; including crustaceans aquatic insects and smaller fish and eggs.It is a primary source of food for larger predator fish, such as trout and pickerelAs a result it forms an important link in the aquatic food web.

This species is most readily collected by siene netting.

4. Green Frog IRana c1amitans). The green frog is an efficient insect-eating amphibian which occurs commonly throughout the region. While most other amphibians can only be obtained in quantity during the spring breeding season, thegreen frog is common along the margins of streams, lakes and ponds throughoutthe summer months.

Since the green frog utilizes insects and serves as a food for many aquaticand terrestrial carnivores it is an important link in the food web.5. Muskrat IOndatra zibethicus). The muskrat occurs in streams, lakes and pondsthroughout the region. It is a large aquatic herbivore which utilizes a wide rangeof aquatic plants. As a result this species should provide an excellent samplingtool for assessing the presence of radionuclides. Muskrats are utilized by largepredators.6. Water Horsetail IEquisetum sp.). Water Horsetails occur commonly along streams,ponds and lakes and are easily collected.

Equisetum sp. is an important primary producer utilized by various aquatic in-sects, invertebrate herbivores and terrestrial herbivores.

This

recommendations for a terrestrial and freshwater monitoring regime for point lepreau, n.b

Documents