Quality Assurance Project Plan for Field Collection - Saint ...

Quality Assurance Project Plan for Field Collection

Activities for Furbearer Mammal Study.

Beneficial Use Impairment Advancements

for the Massena/Akwesasne Area of Concern

on the St. Lawrence River.

GL-97221310-0

September 2011

Prepared for

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region 2 and

Great Lakes National Program Office

Prepared by

Jessica Jock, Project Manager

St. Regis Mohawk Tribe

Environment Division Akwesasne, 13655

Furbearer Mammal QAPP, September 2011_FINAL

Quality Assurance Project Plan Title and Approval Sheet

Project title: Furbearer Mammal Study

Massena/Akwesasne AOC St. Lawrence River - BUI Advancement

Prepared by: SRMT Environment Division

Approvals:

Jessica L. Jock, BUI Coordinator, SRMT Environment Division Date

Barbara Belasco, Project Manager, USEPA Region 2 Date

Kai Tang, USEPA Region 2 Quality Assurance (QA) Officer, Tribal Liaison Date

Kathryn Seaver, USEPA Region 2 Quality Assurance (QA) Officer Date

Angela Benedict, SRMT Quality Assurance Officer (QA) Officer Date

Project Initiation: October 1, 2011

Project Termination: September 30, 2013

Sampling Operations: St. Regis Mohawk Tribe Operations Manager: Jessica L. Jock, SRMT Environment

Laboratory Analysis: NEA PACE Analytical, Inc. Data Validation: Ann Casey

Ken Jock, SRMT Environment Division Director’s Approval Date


Distribution List

Barbara Belasco John Perrecone

EPA Project Officer RAP/AOC Program Manager

U.S. EPA - Region 2 U.S. EPA - Region 5 290 Broadway 77 West Jackson Blvd

New York, NY 10007 Chicago, IL 60604

(212)-637-3848 (312) - 353-1149 [email protected] [email protected]

Marcos Santos Ken Jock

U.S. EPA - Region 5 St. Regis Mohawk Tribe

Grants and Contract Mgt Branch Environment Division Director 77 West Jackson Blvd 412 State Route 37

Chicago, Illinois 60604 Akwesasne, 13655

(312) – 353 – 3490 (518) – 358-5937 [email protected] [email protected]

Kai Tang Ann C. Casey

USEPA Region 2 NEA Pace Analytical

QA Officer, Tribal Liaison Sr. Chemist, Program Manager

2890 Wood Bridge Avenue 2190 Technology Drive Edison, NJ 08837 Schenectady, NY 12308

(732)-321-4364 (518)-346-4592 ext 23

(732)-321-6616 (fax) (518)-381-6055 (fax) [email protected] [email protected]

Angela Benedict Kathryn Seaver SRMT Environment Division USEPA Region 2

Tribal QA Officer Air &Water QA Team

Akwesasne, NY 13665 2890 Wood Bridge Ave. (518)-358-5937 Edison, NJ 08837

(518)-358-6252 (fax) (732)-906-6800

[email protected] [email protected]

Jessica Jock Jay Wilkins

SRMT Environment Division SRMT Environment Division BUI Coordinator Wildlife Technician

Akwesasne, NY 13655 Akwesasne, NY 13655

(518)358- 5937 (518)358-5937 (518)358-6252 (fax) (518) 358-6252 (fax)

[email protected] [email protected]

mailto:[email protected]











TABLE OF CONTENTS

Sections Page

1.0 PROJECT/TASK ORGANIZATION 6 1.1 Project Management 6

2.0 PROBLEM DEFFINITION/BACKGROUND 9

2.1 Problem Definition 9 2.2 Background 10

3.0 PROJECT TASKS/DESCRIPTION 12

4.0 DATA QUALITY OBJECTIVES FOR MEASUREMENT DATA 17 4.1 Project Quality Objectives 19

4.2 Sampling Quality Objectives 19

5.0 SPECIAL TRAINING REQUIREMENTS 22

6.0 DOCUMENTATION AND RECORDS 22 6.1 Field Record Keeping 22

6.2 Location ID and Sample ID 22

6.3 Laboratory Reporting Data 23 7.0 SAMPLING PROCESS DESIGNS 24

8.0 SAMPLING METHODS REQUIREMENTS 28

9.0 SAMPLE HANDLING AND CUSTODY REQUIREMENTS 30 10.0 ANALYTICAL METHODS REQUIREMENTS 33

11.0 QUALITY CONTROL REQUIREMENTS 34

11.1 Field Quality Control 34

11.2 Laboratory Quality Control 34 12.0 INSTRUMENT/EQUIPMENT TESTING INSPECTION AND MAINTENANCE

REQUIREMENTS 37

13.0 INSTRUMENT CALIBRATION AND FREQUENCY 37 14.0 INSPECTION/ACCEPTANCE REQUIREMENTS FOR SUPPLIES AND 38

CONSUMABLES

15.0 DATA ACQUISTION REQUIREMENTS 38

16.0 DATA MANAGEMENT 39 17.0 ASSESSMENTS & RESPONSE ACTIONS 39

17.1 Assessments 39

17.2 Corrective Actions 40 18.0 REPORTS TO MANAGEMENTS 41

19.0 DATA REVIEW, VALIDATION, AND VERIFICATION REQUIREMENTS 41

20.0 VALIDATION AND VERIFICATION METHODS 42 20.1 Laboratory 42

20.2 Field 42

20.3 Audits 42

20.4 Corrective Actions 42 20.5 Reports 43

21.0 RECONCILIATION WITH DATA QUALITY OBJECTIVES 43

22.0 LITERATURE REFERENCED 44


FIGURES, TABLES, AND APPENDICES: Page

Figure 1.0 Organizational Chart 8

Figure 2.0 Massena Area of Concern Study Area for 12

Furbearer Mammals

Figure 3-1. Grasse River Inside AOC (Site #1) 46

Figure 3-2. Grasse River Outside AOC (Site #2) 47

Figure 3-3. St. Lawrence River Inside the AOC (Site #3) 48

Figure 3-4. St. Lawrence River Outside the AOC (Site #4) 49

Figure 3-5. Raquette River Inside the AOC (Site #5) 50

Figure 3-6. Raquette River Outside the AOC (Site #6) 51

Figure 3-7. St. Regis River Inside the AOC (Site #7) 52

Figure 3-8. St. Regis River Outside the AOC (Site #8) 53

Table 1.0 St. Lawrence River, Massena/Akwesasne AOC Beneficial Use 14

Impairments, Status and Delisting Criteria

for Furbearer Mammals

Table 2.0 Adverse Effects Thresholds for Tissue Residue and 18

Dietary Intake

Table 3.0 Target Species, Number, and Matrices 25

Table 4.0 Furbearer Mammal Survey Sites and Location ID (Inside AOC) 27

Table 5.0 Furbearer Mammal Survey Sites and Location ID (Outside AOC) 28

Table 6.0 Furbearer Mammal Tissue Analysis Analytical 33 Table 7.0 QC Requirements for Method 8082 (PCB Analysis) 35

Appendix A. Field Supplies Checklist 54

Appendix B. Health and Safety Plan 55

Appendix C. Furbearer Mammal Field Data Sheet 58

Appendix D. Standard Operating Procedures (SOP) for 60

Habitat Characterization

Appendix E. Standard Operating Procedures (SOP) for 65

Furbearer Collection

Appendix F. Standard Operating Procedures (SOP) for 69

Tissue Extraction

Appendix G. Standard Operating Procedures (SOP) for 73

Field Sample Handling, Packing, and Shipping Procedures


Section 1.0 PROJECT/TASK ORGANIZATION

This Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) describes the Quality Assurance (QA) and Quality Control

(QC) activities and procedures associated with collecting samples of aquatic furbearing species; beaver

(Castor canadensis), muskrat (Ondatra zibethicus), mink (Neovison vison), and river otter (Lontra

canadensis), and the woodland species raccoon (Procyon lotor) for the St. Lawrence River, Massena Area

of Concern (AOC). This effort is being conducted to make progress on four (4) Beneficial Use

Impairments (BUIs), specific to sentinel furbearer mammal species. Efforts include making progress on,

Restriction on Fish and Wildlife Consumption, Degradation of Fish and Wildlife Populations,

Bird/Animal Deformities or Reproductive Problems, and Loss of Fish and Wildlife Habitat. Sampling

design and laboratory analysis are developed to collect data to support the delisting criteria specific to

each of the four BUIs (Table 1). In addition, the already developed Winter Tracking QAPP outlines the

activities and procedures to conduct winter tracking surveys, specific to mink and otter, to support

population studies of sensitive species to persistent bioaccumulative chemicals. The Winter Tracking

observations are a supplemental activity to the larger Furbearer Mammal Study outlined below. Project

tasks will be carried out by key personnel listed below.

1.1 Project Management

The Project will be implemented by the St. Regis Mohawk Tribe’s Environment Division. Within our

Division, we have the technical and sampling equipment support to conduct the study. This section

includes an organization chart showing lines of authority and reporting responsibilities (Figure 1).

EPA Project Manager Barbara Belasco will be responsible for providing funding and QAPP approval, and coordination with the

proposed project and reporting needs.

SRMT Environment Director

Ken Jock, SRMT Environment Director, is responsible for providing financial and staff resources

necessary to meet project objectives and implement the requirements described in this QAPP. The

Director is the official project contact of all funding resources and has primary signing authority for all

purchases, project plans and correspondences.

Quality Assurance(QA) Officers

Angela Benedict, Tribal QA Officer is responsible for reviewing and approving all QAPPs according to

the Tribe’s Quality Assurance Management Plan, 2007 (QAMP) and Quality Assurance Management

Project Plan (QAPP) Guidance, September 6, 2001. She has signing authority for a project work plan for

the SRMT Environment Division. Angela is also responsible for conducting Audits and Assessments of

work done throughout the sampling program, and coordinating QAPP approval with Region 2 QA Team

( Kathryn Seaver ) and Tribal QA Liaison (Kai Tang).


SRMT Project Manger

Jessica Jock, Environmental Specialist and Beneficial Use Impairment (BUI) Coordinator will be

responsible for implementing study design, ensuring adherence to study design and accomplishment of

project objectives, coordinating with contractors, coordinating with other office departments involved

with the sampling, sampling oversight, reporting quarterly to EPA, and final report compilation. Should

there be a need for any change in study design, Barbara Belasco, USEPA will be contacted and consulted

with prior to any continued work.

Field Crew

Jay Wilkins and SRMT staff will be conducting field work including habitat identification, sampling

activities, processing, and procedures. Field tasks include deployment and monitoring, maintenance and

repairs of sampling devices and equipment. They will also be responsible for documentation and records

to be maintained in the field and throughout chain-of-custody process. They will be responsible for all

field data labeling, recording, management, and mapping GPS locations of sampling sites. They are

expected to follow all Standard Operating Procedures (SOP) outlined in Appendices below.

NEA-PACE Analytical

Furbearer mammals will be collected, and target tissue samples will be processed, packaged and shipped for laboratory analysis. Tissue samples will be submitted to NEA-A Division of Pace Analytical Services

(NEA-PACE) for homogenization, % lipids, PCBs (Aroclors), Mercury, Pesticides, and a limited number

of dioxin/furan analyses. The lab assigned Project Manager Ann Casey will be responsible for reviewing

QAPP to verify that analytical operations will meet project requirements, reviewing receipt of shipped samples and chain of custody, reporting on discrepancies within 24 hours of receipt, notifying SRMT

project manager regarding nonconformance or problems and implementing corrective actions.


Figure 1.0 Organization Chart of Management Furbearer Mammal Study

St. Lawrence River AOC BUI Coordinator

Jessica Jock, SRMT Environment Division

Field Sampling

Jay Wilkins, Wildlife Technician

SRMT Water Program Staff

SRMT Environment Division

Laboratory Analysis

NEA-PACE Analytical

Ann Casey

Project Management & Coordination

USEPA Project Officer

Barbara Belasco, USEPA Region 2

NY Watershed Management Branch

USEPA RAP/AOC Program

Manager

John Perrecone, USEPA Region 5 GLNPO

SRMT Quality Assurance Officer

Angela Benedict

USEPA Region II Quality Assurance

Kai Tang, Tribal Liaison

Kathryn Seaver, QA Officer

D

SRMT Environment Division Director

Ken Jock


Section 2.0 PROBLEM DEFINITION/BACKGROUND

This section describes the problem addressed by this project funding, and provides background and

historical information that supports the need for the project.

2.1 Problem Definition Identified as one of five Bi-National Areas of Concern (AOC) by the International Joint Commission

(IJC) under the Great Lakes Water Quality Act (GLWQA), the proposed project will take place in the St.

Lawrence River AOC Watershed, primarily in St. Lawrence County and the territory of Akwesasne. The Massena/Akwesasne AOC includes the Grasse (04150304), Racquette (04150305), and St. Regis

(04150306) tributaries, Power Canal on the Grasse River, and portions of the St. Lawrence River (Figure

2).

The St. Lawrence River (Massena/Akwesasne) Area of Concern (AOC) has previously been identified as

an AOC due to discharge of hazardous industrial byproducts to nearby tributaries, land, and the St.

Lawrence River itself, thus causing ecological impairments and impaired water quality. Contaminants of concern in the Massena AOC associated with facility releases include: polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs),

polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), dioxins, furans, cyanide, fluoride, phenols, volatile organic

compounds (VOCs), ammonia, styrene, phenols, sulfate, and metals (aluminum, lead, cadmium, and mercury). Chlorinated pesticides are considered Lake Ontario legacy chemicals of concern and mirex has

contributed to the fish advisories in the Massena AOC. Other organochlorine pesticides of concern

include chlordane, dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane (DDT), Dieldrin, Endrin, and hexachlorobenzene, as well as DDD and DDE (the breakdown products of DDT). Mercury is the primary contaminant of

concern in the Cornwall St. Lawrence River AOC, with some contribution from Massena industry and

atmospheric deposition within the watershed. Although there are no NYSDOH Health Advisories specific

to mercury in the St. Lawrence River watershed, there are advisories issued in Mohawk waters specific to mercury in fish.

The proposed sampling outlined below will only include tissue analysis for PCBs (Aroclor) as the primary contaminant of concern associated with industrial discharges to the St. Lawrence River AOC.

PAHs are assumed to be metabolized by the fish, therefore bioaccumulation is not expected in aquatic

furbearer mammals. Other site-specific chemicals of concern have not been historically detected at

equivalent elevated levels as PCBs, therefore they are not expected to be detected now after multiple remedial activity efforts. Dioxins and furans are associated with industrial discharges, but not at the same

frequency as PCBs, so only a few samples will utilize this analysis for detection of presence/absence in

mink tissue. Mercury and Pesticides (chlordane, DDT, Dieldrin, Endrin, hexachlorobenzene, mirex, and breakdown DDT products such as DDD and DDE) are more associated with the BiNational St. Lawrence

River AOC, and Great Lakes Legacy contaminants. Therefore all furbearer mammals collected in 2011

and 2012 will include PCBs (Aroclor), but only a subset for Mercury, Pesticides, and dioxin/furans will be analyzed.

While many remedial successes and contaminant mass reductions (i.e. primarily PCBs) have contributed

to the restoration of the AOC since 1995, excessive levels of contamination can still be found in sediments in the Grasse River Superfund Site boundaries, currently under remedial study investigations.

Fish tissue concentrations are elevated with PCBs, mercury, and in some cases other Great Lake legacy

chemicals. Not all chemicals are monitored for trend monitoring analysis. PCBs are the only chemical in resident adult fish that are routinely monitored for in the Grasse River by Alcoa. Fishand wildlife

advisories are still in effect in the Massena/Akwesasne AOC as per 2011-2012 NYSDOH Health Advice

on Eating Sportfish and Game at: http://www.health.ny.gov/environmental/outdoors/fish/health_advisories/docs/advisory_booklet_2011.pd

f .

http://www.health.ny.gov/environmental/outdoors/fish/health_advisories/docs/advisory_booklet_2011.pdf

http://www.health.ny.gov/environmental/outdoors/fish/health_advisories/docs/advisory_booklet_2011.pdf


Health risks to Mohawks from PCBs have been identified through epidemiological studies and subsistence/cultural exposure routes, including fish and wildlife sustenance practices associated with the

St. Lawrence River AOC. Due to traditional consumption patterns of Mohawks, SRMT proposes tissue

analysis of wildlife to address the Restrictions of Wildlife Consumption. Furbearer mammal species such

as beaver and muskrat have traditionally been consumed, and some species included by EPA in risk assessments as exposure routes in the St. Lawrence River area. In addition to consumption exposure

pathways to Mohawks, there is a scientific need to address BUI Delisting Criteria and Targets, and BUI

“Status”. St. Lawrence River AOC (Massena/Akwesasne) Beneficial Use Impairments (BUIs) for Restrictions on Fish &Wildlife Consumption and Loss of Fish &Wildlife Habitat have been listed as

Impaired, and need current data to update decision makers on BUI status since remedial activities in the

AOC. BUIs for Degradation of Fish & Wildlife Populations and Bird/Animal Deformities or Reproductive Problems lack clear lines of evidence to make a definitive status assessment, thus the need

for additional field data and information to make BUI Status determination. Piscivorous (fish-eating)

mammals such as river otter and mink are of special concern because of diet, habitat usage, and

sensitivity to contaminants such as polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs). Therefore this study will target those species, to the extent possible, to assess all the BUIs listed above with the exception of the Wildlife

Consumption, provided their anticipated presence in the AOC.

Aquatic mammals in the assessment area targeted for collection include muskrat (Ondatra zibethica),

beaver (Castor Canadensis), mink (Mustela vison), and river otter (Lutra canadensis). Although raccoon

(Procyon lotor) is often referred to as a woodland species of furbearer mammals, its preference for aquatic habitat, its omnivorous diet, and its opportunistic feeding habits suggest this species is a good

surrogate to evaluate organic contaminant presence in liver tissue. It is a sentinel species in abundance

with a relatively limited home range. Numerous studies throughout the United States have utilized

raccoon as a surrogate species for detection of anthropogenic contaminant presence (Mierzykowski et. al. 2011). It is expected that it will be difficult to collect a sufficient number of otter, therefore raccoon will

function as a surrogate species. Collection of raccoon will be targeted near rivers, thus capturing raccoons

that are omnivores of that habitat.

Mink populations have been shown to be sensitive to persistent organochlorine chemicals (POCs) during

laboratory studies. Mink will often foraging on fish, freshwater mussels, amphibians, young turtles, and muskrat, and have been found to have correlated reprocutive failure when exposed to certain threshold

concentrations of POCs. Since Otter have similar feeding habits of mink, it is assumed based on

published literature that the otter is equally sensitive to POCs such as polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), due to similar susceptibility to other contaminants. Mercury is a contaminant of concern from the adjacent

Cornwall AOC, and is known to occur from limited discharges from the Massena Industrial sites,

although not listed as a contaminants of concern. Since one of the objectives of this study plan is to make progress on Wildlife Consumption BUIs, and understanding Degradation of Wildlife Population of

sensitive species with large home ranges, analysis of tissue for Mercury is included.

Section 2.2 Background

Several remedial efforts have occurred to remove contaminant sources, improve water and sediment quality in and around the AOC between 1995-2011 for discharge outfalls, industrial soils, and adjacent

river sediments at all three industrial sites. As of 2011, efforts to decommission the “old” General Motors

were initiated. Although the facility will no longer be there, the unsecured landfill and groundwater treatment processes will be maintained with long-term monitoring, and many lagoons and storage areas

still need to be addressed. Although many chemicals exist in the AOC, the primary contaminant of


concern identified at all three industrial sites for in-situ river sediment remedial action by USEPA has

been PCBs, but phenols and VOCs (General Motors, 1995), PAHs and dibenzofurans (former Reynolds Metal, 2001 & 2009) have also been listed for remedial action.

In 1995 over 18,000 cubic yards of contaminated sediments greater than 1 mg/kg (ppm) PCBs were removed near Outfall 001 at the General Motors Central Foundry Plant, Massena, NY. In 2005, an

additional 13,000 cubic yards of sediments and bank soils were removed from the cove adjacent to the

GM property called Turtle Cover for materials greater than 0.1 ug/kg (ppm) PCBs as per Tribal Standards for Cleanup on Tribal Property. In 2001, over 87,000 cubic yards of contaminated sediments greater than

1mg/kg (ppm) PCBs, 10mg/kg (ppm) Total PAHs, and 1ug/kg (ppb) dibenzofurans were removed from

the St. Lawrence River Remediation Project (SLRRP) adjacent to the former Reynolds Metals Company in 2001. Final remedial action was conducted in 2009 at the SLRRP, and dredge cells in excedance of 10

mg/kg (ppm) PCBs and of 20 mg/kg (ppm) total PAHs were capped with an armor layer (USEPA,

December 2008). The Grasse River remains a source of contaminated sediment in the AOC that is still in

the Remedial Investigation and Feasible Study (RI/FS) Phase. Mass balance calculations indicate that there is over 1 million cubic yards of PCB contaminated sediment greater than 1mg/kg (ppm) in the lower

Grasse River Superfund Study Area. It is expected that USEPA will select an appropriate remedy to

mitigate risks to the biota, fish, human and ecological receptors by the end of this grant funding period (2013).

Data collected by NYSDEC in 1987-1988 targeted wildlife for study in the area surrounding the General

Motors facility and the Mohawk Territory. Results of that study indicate no beaver samples were

collected inside the AOC, and only a few samples (N=2) exist for beaver outside the AOC. A significant

number of muskrat samples (N=67) were taken, but no samples were taken from the Grasse River (NYSDEC 1992). There is no data on tissue concentrations of mink or otter in the St. Lawrence River

AOC. There is some recent data on PCBs concentrations on mink Outside the AOC from a DRAFT

Cornwall Status Trend Report (Hughes, 2009) that may be used for Outside AOC downstream comparison, if applicable.

Proposed monitoring in years 2011-2013 will provide an update and validation of current conditions of

populations, furbearer mammal habitat, and tissue concentrations. Comparison will be made between “inside AOC” and “outside AOC” locations. Comparison to historical data of wildlife tissue analysis, if

appropriate according to Section 15.0, and effects-based literature will assist in BUI advancement and

delisting efforts.


Figure 2.0 Massena/Akwesasne AOC for Furbearer Mammals

Section 3.0 PROJECT TASKS/DESCRIPTION To make advancements towards delisting criteria, monitoring is needed for terrestrial and aquatic animals,

including furbearers. Limited furbearer data exists from the AOC from preliminary investigations. Field

monitoring efforts are targeted for NYS regulated fall trapping season for permitted taking of animals with appropriate licenses. Field efforts will be appropriately coordinated with landowners, if needed,

both in NYS and Akwesasne prior to field surveys and collection. SRMT will utilize 2 Wildlife

Technicians to conduct the work outlined in this QAPP, and the use of SRMT’s Fish Technician and boat

for collection efforts conducted via river. Technicians will work under the supervision of BUI Coordinator, verify field gear is prepared (Appendix A), and Health and Safety Plan is followed (B) Fill-

out Field Data Sheets (Appendix C & D), and follow SOPs outlined in Appendix D - G. Proposed efforts

include: 1. Reconnaissance survey conducted in the early fall (October) of riverine habitat within the AOC

and appropriate and comparable reference locations outside AOC to obtain qualitative

information on habitat, and confirm appropriate sampling sites for trapping efforts.

2. Two field seasons (October 25th -December 15

th 2011 & 2012) will utilize a riverine and roadside

trap line sampling effort to collect quantitative information on furbearer populations along the

Grasse River, Raquette River, St. Regis River, and habitat appropriate sites along the St.

Lawrence River and associated watershed. 3. All samples collected will be tagged, recorded, and processed for tissue analysis, and

observations of external abnormalities. Measurements made will include weight of mammal (g),


weight of liver (g), length (mm) and weight (g) of bacula, and chemical analysis on liver tissue in

mink, otter, and raccoon, and muscle tissue in beaver and muskrat. Make qualitative observations using a ranking system for mammal fat as an indicator of health. Information to be recorded in

Furbearer Mammal Field Data Sheet (Appendix C). Qualitative observations on habitat

parameters to be scored using a ranking system outlined in 1999 USEPA’s Rapid Bioassessment

Protocol’s (Appendix D). 4. Target 74 samples per year from AOC and reference sites, representative of mink, otter, muskrat,

beaver, and raccoon to be submitted for chemical analysis ( PCBs (Aroclor), Mercury,

Pesticides(chlordane, DDD, DDE, DDT, Dieldrin, Endrin, Hexachlorobenzene, and mirex), dioxin/furan).

5. Chemical Analysis to utilize USEPA Method 8082A for PCBs, USEPA Method 7471B for

Mercury, USEPA Method 8081B for Pesticides, and USEPA Method 1613B for Dioxin/Furans. 6. Monthly winter tracking surveys (January-March 2010, 2011 2012) will be conducted to support

population studies, specific to mink and otter which have a large home range. Twenty seven 500-

m transects will be spatially distributed to have equal transects in the AOC and reference

locations for tracks and scat observations and record of species present.

Measurements

Sampling Design and Measurements are setup to assess current status of aquatic furbearer mammal species which feed predominately within the St. Lawrence River (Massena/Akwesasne) AOC, and

compare measurements made to comparable species, in comparable habitat, and river bodies at

upstream/Outside AOC locations. Mink and Otter are considered sensitive to the toxic effects of contaminants in the aquatic environment. Contaminants that bioaccumulate in beaver and muskrat may be

transported to humans through ingestion pathways, thus potentially causing long-term adverse human

health effects. Data Quality Objectives are designed to collect data to make a determination on Beneficial Use Impairment (BUIs) Status that are listed as “Unknown/Needs Further Assessment”, and provide

current update on BUIs listed as Impaired. The hypothesis of the study is that there is no significant

difference of the reproductive health, populations, contaminant burden, and physical habitat of furbearer

mammal species in the AOC compared to upstream AOC locations on the same bodies of water.

Specific Project Objectives include:

1. Estimate tissue based contaminant concentration burden to targeted furbearer mammals. Primary contaminant of concern is PCBs, with additional analyses for organochlorine pesticides, mercury,

and limited dioxin/furans.

2. Compare contaminant concentrations of furbearer mammals foraging Inside AOC to reference locations of furbearer mammals Outside the AOC.

3. Compare furbearer mammal contaminant tissue residue concentrations to published literature

toxicity reference value (TRVs) thresholds, or dietary thresholds if appropriate. See Table 2.

Below. 4. Asses the presence of any anomalies in furbearer mammals, provide a ranking score for adipose

tissue, and measurements of bacula for reproductive health measures.

5. Conduct a qualitative assessment and comparison of habitat for target furbearer mammals, and compare Inside AOC and Outside AOC.

6. Supplement field collection efforts and Wildlife Technician estimates of colony size with Winter

Tracking Survey to evaluate populations of target species.


To achieve the above objectives and support the hypothesis, measurements collected to address each BUI

is outlined in the Table 1 below.

Table 1. St. Lawrence River, Massena/Akwesasne AOC Beneficial Use Impairments,

Status and Delisting Criteria.

Beneficial Use

Impairment

Status Delisting Criteria Measurement

1.Restriction on

Fish and Wildlife

Consumption

Impaired Restrictions on fish and wildlife consumption in the

AOC due to watershed or in-place contaminants are

absent. No public health advisories are in effect for

human consumption that are due to watershed or AOC

specific sources; AND

Contaminant levels created by anthropogenic chemicals

due to watershed or in-place contaminants do not exceed

current standards, objectives, or guidelines in resident

fish and wildlife; AND

any remaining restrictions on fish and wildlife

consumption are due to upstream or downstream sources

that are addressed by other management plans, such as

Lakewide Management Plans (LaMPs).

-Quantitatively measure

contaminant burden in muscle

tissue (PCBs(Aroclor),

organochlorine pesticides

(chlordane, DDD, DDE, DDT,

Dieldrin, Endrin,

Hexachlorbenzene, and mirex),

mercury, and dioxin/furans)

-Compare 2011 & 2012 chemical

analysis data to Wildlife

Consumption Advisories. Use 2011

data to assist update to Mohawk

Consumption Advisory

Collect comparable # of samples

from upstream river locations

within the same body of water.

2.Degradation of

Fish and Wildlife

Populations

Unknown/

Needs

Further

Assessment

Environmental conditions support healthy, self-

sustaining communities of desired fish and wildlife at

predetermined levels of abundance that would be

expected from the amount and quality of suitable

physical, chemical, and biological habitat present; AND

Fish populations meet applicable Index of Biological

Integrity (IBI) and wildlife populations have healthy

reproducing populations of eagle, mink, otter, or other

sentinel species.

-Conduct a qualitative Habitat

Assessment according to USEPA

1999 Rapid Bioassessment

Protocols (RBPs).

-Use experienced field staff to

visually estimate colony size from

field signs of mammal activity, or

other field log notes.

-Use quantitative chemical data of

tissue burden in livers to compare

to adverse health effects threshold

levels for mink and otter (See Table

below)

4. Bird/Animal

Deformities or

Reproductive

Problems

Unknown,

Needs

Further

Assessment

Wetlands support healthy communities of significant

species and no reports of deformities from wildlife

officials. Exceptions may apply to limited background

effects; AND

Incidence rates, if present, of deformities (e.g. cross-bill

syndrome) or other reproductive problems (e.g. egg-

shell thinning) in sentinel wildlife species do not exceed

background levels of inland control populations.

-Weigh Liver for a liver somatic

index. Measure baculum weight

and length for reproductive health

indicators, and make visual

observation of external anomalies

6. Loss of Fish and

Wildlife Habitat

Impaired Amounts and quality of physical, chemical, and

biological habitat (including wetlands, riparian and

submerged aquatic vegetation, and buffers) are adequate

for fish and wildlife management goals (achieved and

protected); AND

Experts do not identify habitat loss as a cause for non-

attainment of Fish and Wildlife management goals.

-Conduct a qualitative Habitat

Assessment according to USEPA

1999 Rapid Bioassessment

Protocols (RBPs).

-Use expert field staff, with over 15

years of Furbearer Mammal

collection, to determine if habitat is

cause for non-attainment of species

in addition of qualitative

assessment above.


Field Data Collection

Field data collection activities will be recorded using project specific field data sheets (See Appendix C and D); similar information will be collected in the field during the targeted collection activities. For each

sample collected the following field data will be recorded:

General Sample Identification o Date

o Start/Stop time

o Weather o Field Crew

o Stream Characterization

o Observable Water Quality Indicators o Sample Collection Method

o Location ID

o Sample ID

Biological Data (See Appendix C)

o Species common name o Weight (nearest g) as Whole Carcass, and Skinned Carcass

o External Disease, Lesions, or abnormalities

o Heptosomatic Index (HIS): calculation of percent ratio of liver wet mass to total body wet mass: [(liver wt/body wt)*100]

o Body Fat Condition of mammal (standardized score ranking 0-5)

o Sex

o Bacula weight and length o Sample tissue weight

Habitat Data (See Appendix D) o Latitude/Longitude

o Stream Name/Basin

o Field Crew

o Date/Time o Watershed/Riparian Features

o Photographs (Upstream and Downstream, or bilateral direction)

o 8 Habitat Parameters (for Low Gradient Streams): Epifaunal Substrate/Available Cover

Pool Substrate Characterization

Pool Variability Channel Flow Status

Channel Alteration

Bank Stability

Vegetative Protection Riparian Vegetative Zone Width

Additional information such as daily log of trap set, check, replacement, new trap sets,

Latitude/Longitude of new trap sets, etc. and expert wildlife technician field observations (i.e. colony estimates, feed beds, etc.) will be made in the field log notebook. This information will be recorded daily

for the standard 50 Sampling Locations. Since it is not guaranteed that a sample will be collected from


one of the proposed 50 Locations, and some flexibility to setting traps within the home range of target

species (relative to the Location ID) will be needed, then these field changes will be noted in the field log book in association with one of the original proposed 50 Sites and Location IDs (Table 4 and Table 5).

Schedule/Tasks:

October 17th

-21st, 2011 – Habitat Assessment of proposed 50 Location Sites.

October 25th

, 2011 - Opening Day for Furbearer Trapping under NYSDEC Regulations. Begin Trap

Sets.

October 25 – December 15, 2011 – Sample Collection: Continue Trap Sets, Checks, and Mammal

Collection as needed to obtain total targeted sample size for 2011. Archive any additional collection of

whole animal skinned samples (i.e. specifically mink and/or otter) if submitted by other trappers in the

event sufficient sample size cannot be obtained by field crew.

Target collection of 74 mammals for chemical analysis (37 Inside AOC and 37 Outside AOC). Actual

number of samples submittal dependent on field collection efforts. All samples to include PCB, % lipids,

and homogenization. A subset for mercury, pesticides, and dioxin/furans will be requested as outlined on

Chain of Custody.

October 25, 2011 – January 31st, 2012 – Laboratory Analysis - Tissue Analysis and Lab Reporting

expected to be complete by January 31, 2012. Data verification by Project Manager, and communication

with Lab Project Manager as needed.

January – March 2012 – Winter Tracking Survey (See Previously Submitted QAPP)

Data compilation of 2011 Furbearer Mammal Chemical Analysis Results.

Compiled for USEPA Project Officer in coordination with Semi-Annual Report April 2012.

October 15th

-19th

, 2012 – Habitat Assessment of proposed 50 Location Sites. Comparable to 2011 for

temporal comparison.

October 25th

, 2012 - Opening Day for Furbearer Trapping under NYSDEC Regulations. Begin Trap

Sets.

October 25 – December 15, 2012 - Sample Collection: Continue Trap Sets, Checks, and Mammal

Collection as needed to obtain total targeted sample size for 2012. Archive any additional collection of

samples (i.e. specifically mink and/or otter) if submitted by other trappers in the event sufficient sample

size cannot be obtained by field crew.

Target collection of 74 mammals for chemical analysis (37 Inside AOC and 37 Outside AOC). Actual

number of samples submittal dependent on field collection efforts. All samples to include PCB, % lipids,

and homogenization.


October 25, 2012 – January 31st, 2013 – Laboratory Analysis - Tissue Analysis and Lab Reporting

expected to be complete by January 31, 2013. Data verification by Project Manager, and communication

with Lab Project Manager as needed.

January – March 2013 – Winter Tracking Survey (See Previously Submitted QAPP)

Data compilation of 2012 Furbearer Mammal Chemical Analysis Results.

Compiled for USEPA Project Officer in coordination with Semi-Annual Report April 2013.

March –June 2013 – Compilation of Furbearer Status Report

July – September 2013 –

(1) DRAFT BUI Status Report on Restrictions on Wildlife Consumption

(2) DRAFT BUI Status Report on Degradation of Wildlife Populations

(3) DRAFT BUI Status Report on Animal Deformities and Reproductive Problems

(4) DRAFT BUI Status Report on Loss of Wildlife Habitat

September – October 2013 - Finalize DRAFT Status Reports with USEPA, NYSDEC, and RAC.

Section 4.0 DATA QUALITY OBJECTIVES FOR MEASUREMENT DATA

To demonstrate impairments to semi-aquatic and aquatic furbearer mammals within the Area of Concern

due to PCBs and other contaminants, mammal tissue will be compared to literature based adverse effects threshold, when tissue based toxicity reference values (TRVs) are available. To verify there is no

statistical difference between contaminant related impacts to the furbearer mammals, mammal tissue will

be compared to the reference locations (Outside AOC). The reference locations will include comparable sample size, analyses, and habitat (to the extent possible). In the event sufficient mink, otter, and/or

raccoon cannot be obtained for tissue residue TRVs, to the extent possible, dietary TRVs will be utilized.

When fish tissue data exists for the Massena/Akwesasne AOC for the same temporal and spatial location,

it may be used to draw inference to use dietary toxicity reference values (TRVs) from published literature for effect of dietary dose and response specific to mink, otter, and raccoon (as a surrogate for Otter). No

literature is currently available on the effects of PCBs on beaver or muskrat.

Specific Project Objectives include:

1. Estimate tissue based contaminant concentration burden to targeted furbearer mammals.

Primary contaminant of concern is PCBs, with additional analyses for organochlorine

pesticides, mercury, and limited dioxin/furans. 2. Compare contaminant concentrations of furbearer mammals foraging Inside AOC to

reference locations of furbearer mammals Outside the AOC.

3. Compare furbearer mammal contaminant tissue residue concentrations to published literature toxicity reference value (TRVs) thresholds, or dietary thresholds if appropriate. No current

TRVs or dietary intake values exist for beaver and muskrat. See Table 2 below.

4. Asses the presence of any external anomalies in furbearer mammals, provide a ranking score for adipose tissue, presence of teats, and measurements of bacula for indicators of

reproductive health and maturity.

5. Conduct a qualitative assessment and comparison of habitat for target furbearer mammals,

and compare Inside AOC and Outside AOC.


6. Supplement field collection efforts and Wildlife Technician estimates of colony size with

Winter Tracking Survey to evaluate populations of target species.

These types of data have never been collected before for the St. Lawrence River AOC and we are not

aware of any “true value” scenarios. Therefore, rather than specifying arbitrary limits of uncertainty

associated with other parameters, we will use the performance criteria specified in the USEPA approved analytical methods for chemical analysis measurements.

Table 2. Adverse Effects Thresholds for Tissue Residue and Dietary Intake

Species Effects Measured Tissue

Concentration

Reference Chemical

MINK NOAEC female

reproduction

2.0 mg/kg liver

Wren et al. 1987 PCBs

Impaired

Reproduction

11.23 mg/kg liver

Platonow and

Karstad, 1973

PCBs

Mortality 11.99 mg/kg liver Platonow and

Karstad, 1973

PCBs

Mortality 4.0 mg/kg liver

4.3 mg/kg liver

Kamrin and Ringer

1996

Aulerich et al. 1973

PCBs

NOAEC

LOAEC

50-78 ng TEQ/kg

ww liver

189 ng TEQ/kg ww

liver

Blankenship et. al.

2008

TCDD

DIETARY DOSE

For Human

Consumption

Wildlife US FDA human

consumption limits

300 ng/g Eisler Chlordane

LC50 0.2 ug/kg dw

0.6 ug/kg dw

USDOI 1998 DDE

DDT

DIETARY DOSE

FOR WILDLIFE

CONSUMPTION

OTTER NOAEL 0.06 mg/kg/d - Sample et al 1996

Aroclors

LOAEL 0.41 mg/kg/d Sample et al 1996 Aroclors

RACCOON LOAEL Physiology 50 mg/kg (8 d) Meyers and

Schiller 1986

Aroclor 1254

MINK NOAEL for kit

production,

growth, and

survival

0.015-0.210

mg/kg/d

Heaton et al 1995

Jensen et al 1977

Hornshaw et al

1983

PCBs

NOAEC – No observable adverse effect concentration

LOAEC – Lowest observable adverse effect concentration

NOAEL – No observable adverse effect level

LOAEL – Lowest observable adverse effect level

LC50 – Lethal concentration that will kill half of the species tested


4.1 Project Quality Objectives

The specific objective of this study is to assess the tissue concentration of Furbearer mammals in the

Massena/Akwesasne Area of Concern. The objectives are outlined in Section 2.1. General quality

objectives, acceptance and performance criteria for the Massena/Akwesasne Furbearer Mammal Study are summarized below.

Secondary Data or Historical Data Collection:

o Quality Objective: To include existing data that meets quality objectives for the Remedial Action

Plan (RAP) as per NYSDEC or USEPA standards/procedures, or peer review

(i.e. publication). o Acceptability/Performance Criteria:

Data must be from original source

Data generated utilized approved methodologies (See Section 15.0)

Sampling and Analysis

o Quality Objective: To have samples and analytical results that accurately represent conditions in the

mammals from the site.

Data must be sufficient quality to meet regulatory requirements and assess comparison to background references.

Data must allow for comparison of chemical analyses of mammal tissue to

reference sites. Field sampling efforts must document activities and comply with this QAPP.

o Acceptability/Performance Criteria:

Data to be collected under an approved QAPP

Reporting limits should be comparable literature values from related studies Data to be compared to data collected in reference sites.

Field Records

o Quality Objectives:

To document all field activities and be representative of accurate field events Reports must be capable of withstanding legal scrutiny

o Acceptability/Performance Criteria:

Clear and legible documentation for sample collection and equipment

decontamination for final report Clear and legible documentation for field observation as documented in attached

field data sheets.

4.2 Sampling Quality Objectives

Acceptance and performance criteria are often specified in terms of precision, accuracy, representativeness, completeness, and comparability parameters. Numerical acceptance criteria cannot be

assigned to all parameters, but general performance goals are established for data collection activities.

Representativeness: Representativeness expresses the degree to which data represent a characteristic of a population, a

parameter variation at a sampling point, or an environmental condition. Representativeness is a qualitative

parameter, which is most concerned with proper design of the measurement program. Mink and Otter are used as the aquatic mammals most sensitive to contaminant exposure throughout the Great Lakes. It is

assumed sufficient mink and otter will not be available for chemical analysis based on their home range


and limited population size. Therefore based on aquatic feeding habits, species abundance, and limited

home range (in comparison to mink and otter), raccoon have been selected to be used as a surrogate species to determine liver exposure to contaminated food sources. In addition, some trappers and hunters

may still consume raccoon. Mink and Otter will still be targeted, with consideration of impacts to

population. Beaver and Muskrat are targeted due to human consumption preference. Beaver feed on

poplar trees adjacent to contaminated sites and may be exposed through vegetation, and muskrat are omnivores, often feeding on freshwater mussels that filter contaminated water. Site selection in the

Massena AOC utilizes judgmental selection based on previous exposure sources in the AOC, and suitable

habitat for target species (i.e. nearshore areas, riparian bank holes, tributary outlets, marshes, etc.). Furbearer mammals are habitat dependent and random sampling may only delay field collection efforts

and prevents capture of target species. To the extent possible sites were selected to be spatially

representative of river miles and comparable number of sites to represent Inside AOC vs. Outside AOC for each river system (Grasse, Raquette, St. Regis, and St. Lawrence River).

Spatial:

To appropriately delineate St. Lawrence River Massena/Akwesasne Area of Concern (AOC), lines were drawn on a map for representative river stretches in the Grasse River, Raquette River, St.Regis River, and

St. Lawrence River according to pre-determined AOC Boundaries (NYSDEC, 1990 Stage I). This area is

considered “Inside AOC”, while comparable river miles upstream of those stretches is considered “Outside AOC” for Site Selection. For the Furbearer Mammal Studies efforts to remain within

comparable river miles, within the home range of a target species, will be utilized, but once river trapping

becomes unsafe due to river ice conditions, sampling activities will be conducted via truck.

Temporal:

Mammal collection surveys will be conducted for a portion of the NYSDEC Regulated Trapping Season (October 25

th-December 15

th), to target collection of furbearer mammals for tissue burden concentrations

and reproduction health assessment. Two surveys (2011 and 2012) will be conducted to evaluate annual

variability. In addition, Winter Tracking Surveys will be conducted once a month January-March to support decisions on populations expected from the amount and quality of suitable habitat available.

Completeness:

Every reasonable effort will be made to collect the numbers and sizes of mammals described in Section 3.0 and 7.0. Sample size was selected based on expected number of mammals that could be collected

without impacting population size for subsequent years of sampling. The area of the AOC is relatively

small for sensitive species such as mink and otter with a large home range, and small populations. Therefore the proposed number of samples is considered complete. If after extensive collection efforts

and sampling of adjacent areas, number and target species can’t be obtained, SRMT BUI Coordinator will

consult with USEPA Project Officer, Barbara Belasco for mutual agreement on course of action. Possible courses of action might include collection of alternative target species, or collection of less target species.

Comparability:

Comparability is a qualitative parameter expressing the confidence with which one data set may be compared to another. Sample data should be comparable with other measurement data for similar samples

and sample conditions. This goal is achieved through the use of standard techniques to collect and analyze

samples. Historical data will be evaluated to ensure the methods and reporting limits are comparable to the proposed sampling. Secondary Data will only be evaluated if it is determined to be comparable and

appropriate according to Section 15.0.

Samples collected Inside the AOC will be compared to samples collected Outside the AOC for

measurement quality objectives consistent with the Delisting Criteria.


Precision

Precision measures the reproducibility of measurements under a given set of conditions. Specifically, it is a quantitative measure of the variability of a group of measurements compared to their average value,

usually stated in terms of standard deviation or coefficient of variation. It also may be measured as the

relative percent difference (RPD) between two values.

The most commonly used estimates of precision are the relative standard deviation or coefficient of

variation (CV) for multiple samples, and the relative percent difference (RPD) when only two samples are

available. These are defined as follows:

iX

SCVRSD 100

Where

S = Standard deviation of the Xi measurements

Xi = Arithmetic mean of the Xi measurements

and

2/100

21

21

XX

XXRPD

For this project the target RPD/RSD is 15% for acceptance of data for PCBs, Organochlorine, and Mercury chemical measurement precision. The Project Manager will select the sample(s) for additional

duplicate analysis. The original sample with be analyzed and additional sub-sample will be taken from

the homogenate and analysis separately. This is a tight target of acceptance if efforts to achieve project specific qualified reproducible data. In the event the 15% is not achieved, the data will be qualified by

following the laboratory-derived criteria for RPD for each appropriate analysis. If duplicate samples

exceed the laboratory RPD, the lab is required to reanalyze the associated sample and duplicate as long as

no sampling error was detected, provided enough sample remaining. If still no agreement in samples, a notation will be made stating there is a sample anomaly (i.e. non-homogeneous). Every effort will be

made to take corrective actions and resolve any anomalies for duplicates.

Accuracy

Accuracy measures the bias of the measurement system. Sources of this error are the sampling process,

field contamination, preservation, handling, sample matrix, sample preparation, and analysis. Data interpretation and reporting may also be significant sources of error. Typically, analytical accuracy is

assessed through the analysis of spiked samples and may be stated in terms of percent recovery or the

average (arithmetic mean) of the percent recovery. Blank samples are also analyzed to assess sampling

and analytical bias (i.e., sample contamination). Background measurements similarly assess measurement bias. The number of samples collected will impact the confidence of the statistical data evaluation.

Archive samples will be collected for analysis if additional samples are required.


Section 5.0 SPECIAL TRAINING REQUIREMENTS

The field sampling crew has been selected based on experience and previous furbearer knowledge to

perform all field activities. This includes the experience and ability to identify furbearer mammals and

tracks, and habitat, use the proper techniques with the sampling gear, sample collection procedures,

documentation, and chain-of-custody protocols for QC in the field. The crew leader has 15 + years of

training on NYSDEC Best Management Practices for collection and releasing of furbearer mammal

species (http://www.eregulations.com/newyork/hunting/furbearer-trapping/ ). Field crew leader has

comparable field experience in tissue and organ extraction.

Section 6.0 DOCUMENTATION AND RECORDS

6.1 Field Record Keeping

Field sampling documentation will occur for all sample locations. The use of a Field’s Supplies Record

Form (Appendix A) will be used to verify all equipment is on board for field sampling, and a Field Data

Sheet as provided in Appendix C will be used to record all pertinent information in regards to the

furbearer mammal collected, date/time, location, collector’s name, etc. Notations will be made as to available habitat, riparian vegetation, and any observed land use types as per Appendix D. Overall daily

project tasks, duties, problems, etc. will be noted in the field notebook. The Field Supplies Records and

Field Data Sheets will be filed in a 3 ring binder labeled with the project name and the Field Notebook will be labeled with the project name as well. Both will be stored in the Project Managers office for

future data analysis and compilation for the final report. Photocopies will be made of the Furbearer

Mammal Field Data Sheets and sent to the laboratory along with the Laboratory Chain-of-custody Form outlined (Appendix G).

6.2 Location ID and Sample ID

The Location ID will be based on the number assigned to the selection of sampling points from the sampling area and suitability for trap placement based on available habitat and land access (i.e. 001, 002,

003…032, 033). A Location ID will be assigned to each sampling location.

A Sample ID will be assigned to each mammal collected. The Sample ID will coordinate with the Location ID sampled and the furbearer mammal tissue to be sent to the lab to accurately keep track of

which tissue analysis results coordinate with location in the field and sample specifics. The Sample ID

will include the following:

A two character code for the main stem River

o SL for St. Lawrence River o GR for Grasse River

o RQ for Raquette River

o SR for St. Regis River

o SA for Salmon River o OW for Oswegatchie River

The location ID

A 3-letter Month, and six digit day and year of collection

http://www.eregulations.com/newyork/hunting/furbearer-trapping/


Identification of Targeted Furbearer Mammal collected for tissue analysis

o Mk – muskrat o Mi – mink

o Ot – otter

o Be – beaver

o Ra – raccoon

Identification of a duplicate sample (DUP)

Example #1: A raccoon collected adjacent to the Raquette River on in November 8, 2011:

RQ017NOV082011Ra

RQ017NOV082011Ra(DUP)

6.2.1 Field Personnel A Sample Identification Label will be attached to all composite sample 4 oz. jar using clear tape that

include Sampling date/time, Location ID, Sample ID, furbearer mammal collected, and chemical to be

analyzed. The Furbearer Mammal samples will be sent to the lab as liver and muscle tissue extractions,

and the selected laboratory will be responsible for homogenizing the sample. A Chain-of-Custody (COC)

Form provided by the Laboratory will be filled out and included in a sealed plastic bag taped to the top of

the cooler (Appendix G). Mammal tissue samples will be packed on 12-hr. ice packs and sent via Fed-ex

to the lab. Taping the COC in a plastic bag to the underside top of each cooler lid is a preventative step to

ensure the form does not get wet and compromise the written documentation.

Field team leaders are responsible for reviewing all completed documentation and signing the Field Data

Sheet and Chain-of-Custody (COC) Record.

6.3 Laboratory Data Reporting

The laboratory will provide an electronic data deliverable that matches all data reported on the hard copy

analytical report. The analytical summary report will include the sample aliquot analyzed, final extract volume, and dilution factor. The analytical summary data report also will include the laboratory reporting

limit and method detection limit (MDL) for all target compounds. These limits will be corrected for

percent moisture and all dilution factors. Any compounds found less than the reporting limit, but greater

than the MDL will be reported and qualified with a “J” flag as estimated.

QC reports will provide a summary report or batch identifier clearly linking all QC results to actual field

sample results. QC summary reports will include the laboratory control limits and flag any result reported outside control limits. The case narrative must include an explanation of all QC results reported outside

control limits. The laboratory must provide copies of any nonconformance or corrective action forms

associated with data in the laboratory report. Standard laboratory turn-around time for chemical reporting is 10 -14 days for PCBs, Mercury, and Pesticides. Dioxin/furans will take longer because they will be sent

to another lab for analyses. This will not pose a problem for data verification.


Section 7.0 SAMPLING PROCESS DESIGNS

Furbearer Mammals will be collected from 25 Sites representative of the Area of Concern, with an equal amount of Sites representative of reference Sites Outside the AOC (Table 4 & 5). See Figures 3-1:3-8 for

target sample locations. This study area is designed to address the necessary comparison to appropriate

reference locations, spatially distributed amongst four (4) river systems, to make definitive determination

on the Status of Beneficial Use Impairments associated with Furbearer Mammals as outlined in Table 1. Study objectives are directly linked to assessing human health concerns from wildlife consumption

(chemical analysis), reproductive health and abnormalities (chemical analysis and visual observation of

animal health), population (chemical analysis adverse health effect thresholds and field notes), and sufficient habitat for furbearer mammal populations and management goals (habitat characterization

comparison).

In attempts not to affect the sensitive population of target furbearer mammals via tissue sampling efforts,

a couple of sampling design measures have been adopted.

1. To prevent impact to otter populations, but obtain sufficient data to determine if chemical

contamination could contribute to adverse health effects, raccoon has been selected to function as a surrogate species.

2. To prevent overharvest of muskrat and beaver, two species easiest to collect, but may have

limited data use based on foraging habits, and expected contaminant concentration observed in muscle tissue, sampling design will allow a collection of either/or species.

3. Attempt to collect 5 mink Inside the AOC, and 5 Outside the AOC, at any location relevant, if

possible.


Table 3.0 Target Species, Number, and Matrices: Species Target River

Reach # of Samples

Target Tissue

Chemical Analysis 2011 Chemical Analysis

2012

INSIDE AOC

MINK 5 Liver PCBs, Mercury, Organochlorine

Pesticides, Dioxin/Furan (20%)

PCBs

OTTER/RACCOON Grasse River 3 Liver PCBs, Mercury, Organochlorine

Pesticides

PCBs

Raquette River 3 Liver PCBs, Mercury, Organochlorine

Pesticides

PCBs

St. Lawrence

River

3 Liver PCBs, Mercury, Organochlorine

Pesticides

PCBs

St. Regis River 3 Liver PCBs, Mercury, Organochlorine

Pesticides

PCBs

BEAVER/MUSKRAT Grasse River 5 Muscle PCBs, Mercury (20%),

Organochlorine Pesticides (20%)

PCBs

Raquette River 5 Muscle PCBs, Mercury (20%),

Organochlorine Pesticides(20%)

PCBs

St. Lawrence

River

5 Muscle PCBs, Mercury(20%),


PCBs

St. Regis River 5 Muscle PCBs, Mercury (20%), Organochlorine Pesticides (20%)

PCBs

Total (INSIDE AOC) 37

OUTSIDE

AOC

MINK 5 Liver PCBs, Mercury, Organochlorine

Pesticides, Dioxin/Furan (20%)

PCBs

OTTER/RACCOON Grasse River 3 Liver PCBs, Mercury, Organochlorine

Pesticides

PCBs

Raquette River 3 Liver PCBs, Mercury, Organochlorine

Pesticides

PCBs

St. Lawrence

River

3 Liver PCBs, Mercury, Organochlorine

Pesticides

PCBs

St. Regis River 3 Liver PCBs, Mercury, Organochlorine

Pesticides

PCBs

BEAVER/MUSKRAT Grasse River 5 Muscle PCBs, Mercury (20%),


PCBs

Raquette River 5 Muscle PCBs, Mercury (20%),


PCBs

St. Lawrence

River

5 Muscle PCBs, Mercury (20%),


PCBs

St. Regis River 5 Muscle PCBs, Mercury (20%),


PCBs

Total (OUTSIDE AOC)

37

Total Samples 2011 74 74 PCBs Analysis, 44 Mercury, 44

Organochlorine Pesticides, 2

Dioxin/Furan

Total Samples 2012 74 74 PCBs

TOTAL 2011 & 2012 148 Total PCBs (Aroclor), 44 Mercury,

44 Organochlorine Pesticides, 2-4 Dioxin/Furan


Target tissue for analysis for mink, otter, and/or raccoon will be the liver, and compared to literature

based reference values for reproductive failure analysis. One half of the liver will be submitted to the lab

for analysis. The other half will be archived at SRMT. Target tissue for beaver and muskrat will be a

representative composite sample of the muscle tissue from an individual to represent what is consumed by

human receptors. The composite sample of the beaver will be selected from 3 locations of the individual

beaver carcass to represent what a consumer may be exposed to for consumption assessment. The

composite samples for beaver and muskrat should be prepared from equal weights of each section of the

carcass. For the beaver, the first section will be from the loin muscle running parallel to the spine midway

of the animal’s body. This sample will be taken under the saddle and the saddle will be removed (the

saddle is the layer of fat and muscle tissue that that is in between the hide and the body mass of the

animal). Second sample section will be the muscle tissue of the higher thigh of the left hind leg. Third

sample section will be the muscle tissue of the beaver tail. The beaver tail is the portion of muscle and

bone from above the hind legs to the base of the appendage referred to as the flapper. A composite sample

of a muskrat will consist of two sections of muscle. For the muskrat, collection of a section from the loin

muscle that runs parallel to the spine, and a second section of the muscle tissue off the left hind leg will be

used.

Study objectives will focus on comparing similar sample size collected inside the AOC to Outside the

AOC. All samples will be analyzed for PCBs, with a subset of Mercury, Pesticides, and only 2 mink

samples each year for dioxin/furan sampling. SRMT Project Manager will indicate which species/samples

will be targeted for each analyte.


Table 4.0 Furbearer Mammal Survey Sites and Location ID (Inside AOC)

# of Sites Location ID Location Latitude Longitude

INSIDE AOC

1 GR001 South Shore near Mouth 44 58’59.62”N 74 46’21.30”W

2 GR002 North Shore near Amvets 44 58’49.30”N 74 46’42.61”W

3 GR003 South Shore, Marsh 55 58’35.90”N 74 47’0.60”W

4 GR004 South Shore, Haverstock Corner 44 58’7.37”N 74 47’11.26”W

5 GR005 North Shore 44 58’0.43”N 74 47’50.15”W

6 GR006 North Shore, Tributary Mouth 55 57’38.03”N 74 48’58.76”W

7 GR007 North Shore, adjacent ROPS 44 57’13.80”N 74 50’52.18”W

8 GR008 Unnamed Tributary 44 57’51.58”N 74 50’40.21”W

9 SL009 South Shore, Raquette Point 44 59’45.76”N 74 42.36.15”W

10 SL010 South Shore, adjacent Industry 44 59’11.85”N 74 45’18.02”W

11 SL011 Barnhart Island 44 59’5.66”N 74 49’48.66”W

12 SL012 Little Long Sault Island 44 59’36.04”N 74 52’54.40”W

13 SL013 131 Marsh 44 58’1.66”N 74 53’34.77”W

14 SL014 Long Sault Island 44 58’37.71”N 74 55’49.18”W

15 SL015 Power Canal 44 57’12.14”N 74 54”28.52”W

16 RQ016 North Shore, mouth 44 59’8.87”N 74 41’46.48”W

17 RQ017 South Shore 44 58’55.00”N 74 42’15.03”W

18 RQ018 North Shore, East Plant Outfall 44 58’33.44”N 74 44’36.11”W

19 RQ019 South Raquette Tributary 44 56’45’54”N 74 47’37.52”W

20 RQ020 North Shore 44 55’54.35”N 74 49’26.66”W

21 SR021 South Shore Inlet 44 59’38.07”N 74 38’48.39”W

22 SR022 Small Island 44 59’23.72”N 74 39’3.48”W

23 SR023 South Shore, Mid point 44 59’10.38”N 74 39’7.58”W

24 SR024 Island 44 58’45.17”N 74 39’18.59”W

25 SR025 North Shore 44 58’35.68”N 74 39’39.52”W


Table 5.0 Furbearer Mammal Survey Sites and Location ID (Outside AOC)

# of Sites Location ID Location Latitude Longitude

OUTSIDE AOC

26 GR026 37 Bridge 44 55’18.45”N 74 55’39.37”W

27 GR027 North Shore 44 54’59.52”N 74 56’3.22”W

28 GR028 North Shore, Mid point 44 54’50.21”N 74 56’50.41”W

29 GR029 MRGC 44 54’46.36”N 74 57’34.43”W

30 GR030 North Shore 44 54’42.39”N 74 58’10.38”W

31 GR031 South Shore, upstream 44 54’16.24”N 74 58’56.80”w

32 GR032 P. Curran flow 44 55’2.67”N 74 56’23.51”W

33 GR033 Club Flow on 37 44 55’24.49”N 74 57’5.18”W

34 SL034 Richards Point 44 57’26.70”W 74 57’42.53”W

35 SL035 Croil Island 44 58’55.64”N 74 57’49.98”W

36 SL036 Adjacent Yacht club 44 56’19.84”N 74 59’44.41”w

37 SL037 Wilson Hill Islands 44 55’46.51”N 75 0’40.65”W

38 SL038 South Shore, Coles 44 53’25.46”N 75 6’47.37”W

39 SL039 South Shore, Prentice 44 53’53.58”N 75 6’21.33”W

40 SL040 Brandy Brooke 44 52’33.12”N 75 9’49.23”W

41 RQ041 North Raquette Bridge 44 54’53.96”N 74 53’47.14”W

42 RQ042 South Shore, Cook Rd. 44 54’7.08”N 75 54’25.41”W

43 RQ043 North Shore 44 52’1.52”N 74 56”39.10”W

44 RQ044 Rte, 56 Bridge 44 50’49.70”N 74 58’33.01”W

45 RQ045 North Shore, bend 44 50’29.75”N 74 58’49.58”W

46 SR046 South marsh by school 44 58’14.22”N 74 40’3.10”W

47 SR047 South Shore 44 58’4.01”N 74 40’5.23”W

48 SR048 Ball Park Rd. 44 57’34.77”N 74 40’30.93”W

49 SR049 North Shore 44 57’33.43”N 74 41’10.25”W

50 SR050 Ditches Upper end 44 56’54.41”N 74 41’43.01”W

Section 8.0 SAMPLING METHODS REQUIREMENTS

Habitat Sampling Methods:

Physical habitat metrics can be derived from applying field methods to systematically assess physical

structure. Key habitat features will be rated or scored to provide a useful assessment of habitat quality. .

An assessment will be obtained when the selected habitat metrics are compared to known reference sites to assess the ecological integrity of each of the 50 sites. Physical characterization includes visual

observation and documentation of general land use, vegetation features, and other physical features that

contribute to the structure and function of the aquatic community. Because there is already a defined habitat area that is considered chemically stressed (Inside the AOC), scores and/or metrics derived from

evaluation will be used to compare to a defined habitat area that is considered good (Outside the AOC)

for a reference. The proposed characterization has been standardized by using the scoring criterion as outlined in USEPA (1999) Rapid Bioassessment Protocols For Streams and Wadeable Rivers. The

scoring criterion is based on the distribution of values in the population of sites, including reference

streams. A strong deviation (< 80%) from the reference expectations would indicate a habitat alteration of

that particular parameter may be impaired. This will be qualified by the ratio between the score for the Inside AOC station and the score for the Outside AOC condition to provide a percent comparability

measure for each station. Less than 80% would equate to suboptimal habitat condition category. The

station of interest is then classified on the basis of its similarity to expected conditions, and its apparent


potential to support an acceptable level of biological health. This habitat assessment approach based on

visual observations will focus on low-gradient streams. A variety of parameters as outlined on the Habitat Assessment Field Data Sheet for Low Gradient Streams in USEPA (1999) RBPs will be used.

(See Field Data Sheet)

Because use of judgment criteria can be subjective, a specific categorical scoring criterion will be used to minimize subjectivity. Furthermore, investigators will be experienced and adequately trained for

stream assessments. The observations will be made by both Field Technicians, for a consensus on

determination of quality. The technicians will observe 2 lengths of the sample reach to assess the parameters, or 100 feet upstream and downstream. Each parameter measured will correspond to the 4

categories reflecting a continuum of condition. . This standardization assumes that each metric has the

same value and importance, and that some % change in one metric is of equal value to assessment as a % change in another. The reference conditions are used to scale the assessment to the “best attainable”

situation for each tributary (St. Lawrence River, Grasse, Raquette, and St. Regis). The ratio between the

score for the test station and the score for the reference condition provides a percent comparability

measure for each station.

A variation of an Ecosummary Report Format will be used, inclusive of pictures of the habitat, to

document the results, and support the judged conditions of the assessed sites. This ½-1 page summary will be conducted for each of the 50 Sites. This information will be used only for reporting requirements

to USEPA, and for Resource Agencies to make a determination on the BUI status for Furbearer Mammals

habitat only. This information will not be available for public review due to the sensitive nature of the close proximity to personal property, and Trapping permission privileges. It is not wise to make known

publically locations of furbearer animals, when there is a market for their capture. To meet wildlife

management objectives, it is believed it is best to present the scoring metric values only to the public. See

Section 10.2.2 Report Format in USEPA’s RBPs (http://water.epa.gov/scitech/monitoring/rsl/bioassessment/index.cfm ).

Furbearer Mammal Sampling Methods:

Furbearer samples will be collected during New York state’s open trapping season for WMU 6a. The

target species will be trapped using various trapping methods that best fit the sample location and the

desired species, and following standard NYSDEC Trapping Best Management Practices http://www.eregulations.com/newyork/hunting/furbearer-trapping.. The majority of the sample collection

will be achieved by river and roadside trapping utilizing natural ditches, culverts and existing wetland

marshes. Sets accompanied by bait and lure will be used sparingly to limit the capture of non target species. Non target species and young of the year captures will be released when possible to try and limit

the impact on the population of a targeted area. All captures and releases will be noted in the field

notebook. Target sample collection will be achieved utilizing pocket sets, blind sets, and pathway sets using the appropriate sized leg gripping trap for the situation. Body Gripping traps will be used at run

locations with dive poles and in bank den locations.

The traps being used will be the responsibility of the field crew leader (Jay Wilkins). He will be responsible for setting them up properly, making sure they are in proper working order, and accountable

for the proper identification on each trap. The Leg Gripping traps used in this study will be the Sleepy

Creek #1 stoploss (mink and muskrat), Montana #1 ½ coil spring (mink, muskrat, & raccoon), MB550 (otter) and the Duke #5 longsprig (beaver & otter). The Body Gripping traps used in this study will be the

Bridger 150 (5 inch by 5 inch opening used for muskrat and mink), Bridger 220 (7 inch by 7 inch opening

used for muskrat, raccoon, & otter), and the Bridger 330 (10 inch by 10 inch opening used for beaver and otter).

http://water.epa.gov/scitech/monitoring/rsl/bioassessment/index.cfm

http://www.eregulations.com/newyork/hunting/furbearer-trapping


All the traps will be set up for use prior to going into the field. The Leg gripping traps will be base plated

and have double swivels attached. Additionally 3 feet of doubled #11 gauge wire will be added to them. The MB550’s will be set up with in-line shock springs and 12feet of machine chain with a grapple drag.

The Duke #5’s will be set up with a drowning system made from a MB crunch proof swivel and #9

trappers wire. The Body Gripping traps will be set up using an additional in-line swivel at the end of the

chain with 3 feet of doubled up #11 gauge wire attached to it. All of the traps being used are dyed brown using Speed Dip brand trap dye, and will be re-dipped as needed.

With the use of properly sized traps for the desired sample animal minimal contamination from sample to sample will take place. During the dispatch of an animal if a trap becomes contaminated with blood or

saliva then that trap will be removed and a fresh clean trap will be put back in its place.

Sample furbearers will be placed in plastic bags after dispatch and labeled using a color coded foot tag

Cull System noted with Sample ID to match the Furbearer Mammal Field Data Sheet. http://www.basspro.com/Bass-Pro-Shops-Cull-System/product/74111/-1205580 . Samples will be placed

in a cooler or large tote in the back of the truck for transport back to be processed. After sampling is done for the day the plastic bags will be disposed of and the coolers and totes will be washed out with soap and

hot water. All traps that are set during this study will be checked every 24 hours and not left over the

weekend unless a technician is able to work and check them. See additional Sampling Methods as outlined in SOP for Furbearer Collection (Appendix E).

Section 9.0 SAMPLE HANDLING AND CUSTODY REQUIREMENTS

All Sampling Procedures for setting traps, dispatching animal, and releasing non-target species will follow Standard Operating Procedures for Furbearer Collection (Appendix E). Once a target species is

collected, and it is determined it will be utilized for chemical analysis, a cull system identifier will be

placed on the sample hind foot for transport. Sample will be placed in a clean bin in the back of a truck for transport to laboratory. Once at laboratory, it will be determined if sufficient time to process animal,

or if whole animal will be placed in the freezer for next day tissue extraction and processing. If sufficient

freezer space, whole animals may be left in the freezer until sufficient time to thaw and process carcass

within the 1-year holding time allotment for biota. When ready for tissue extraction, Standard Operating Procedures for Tissue Extraction (Appendix F) and Standard Operating Procedures for Field Sample

Handling, Packing, and Shipping Procedures (Appendix G) will be followed. Field Crew Leader will

conduct the tissue extractions, while other staff records the notes and fill-in the field data sheet.

Liver Extraction (Otter, Mink, and Raccoon):

See Appendix F for step by step detail of dissection of carcass. Target tissue for analysis for mink, otter,

and/or raccoon will be the liver. One half of the liver will be submitted to the lab for analysis. The other

half will be archived at SRMT. Liver tissue will be weighed, and placed in a 4 oz. glass jar, labeled, and packaged for shipping (Appendix G). If next day shipping, sample will be located in the freezer until

ready for shipment.

http://www.basspro.com/Bass-Pro-Shops-Cull-System/product/74111/-1205580


Muscle Extraction (Beaver and Muskrat):

See Appendix F for step by step detail of Tissue Extraction. Target tissue for beaver and muskrat will be a representative composite sample of the muscle tissue from an individual mammal. The composite samples

for beaver and muskrat should be prepared from equal weights of each section of the carcass. Due to the

size difference for these two species, this tissue mass target will vary between the species. The composite

sample of the beaver will be selected from 3 locations of the individual beaver carcass to represent what a consumer may be exposed to for consumption assessment. For the beaver, target 50g from each section

for a composite, and collect a second composite for archival at SRMT. The first section will be from the

loin muscle running parallel to the spine midway of the animal’s body. This sample will be taken under the saddle and the saddle will be removed (the saddle is the layer of fat and muscle tissue that that is in

between the hide and the body mass of the animal). Second sample section will be the muscle tissue of the

higher thigh of the left hind leg. Third sample section will be the muscle tissue of the beaver tail. The beaver tail is the portion of muscle and bone from above the hind legs to the base of the appendage

referred to as the flapper. A minimum of 100 grams and a maximum of 200 grams will be submitted for

analysis for each beaver composite submitted to the laboratory in a 4 oz. glass jar.

A composite sample of a muskrat will consist of two sections of muscle, each approximately 25 g. For the

muskrat, collection of a section from the loin muscle that runs parallel to the spine, and a second section

of the muscle tissue off the left hind leg will be used. Species may be too small for a second collection for archival, therefore shipped sample will be archived at Laboratory for 30 days. If second collection for an

archival is possible, this procedure will be repeated at adjacent tissue locations to prepare sample for

archival at SRMT. Weigh and record each tissue extraction as per Appendix C. Place in a 4 oz glass jar, label, and prepare for shipment.

Sample Handling and Shipping

All tissue samples will be preserved on ice immediately after extraction and prepared to be shipped to the laboratory. The laboratory will either freeze the tissue sample, or process immediately. There are no

specific holding times for biota tissue. As general guideline tissue can be analyzed within one year of

freezing.

The transportation and handling of samples must be accomplished in a manner that not only protects the

integrity of samples but also prevents any detrimental effects due to the possible hazardous nature of the

samples. Regulations for packaging, marking, labeling, and shipping of hazardous materials are promulgated by the DOT in 49 CFR 171, 172, 173, and 177.

Sample Packaging Samples must be packaged carefully to avoid breakage or contamination and must be shipped to the

laboratory at proper temperatures. Samples for chemical analysis will be packed according to NEA-PACE

instruction.

Sample Custody

Formal sample custody procedures begin when the samples are collected. The laboratory must follow

written and approved SOPs for shipping, receiving, logging, and internally transferring samples. Sample identification documents must be carefully prepared so that sample identification and Chain of Custody

(COC) can be maintained and sample disposition controlled. Sample identification documents include:

Field data sheets;

Sample labels;

Custody seals; and COC records.


The primary objective of COC procedures is to provide an accurate written or computerized record that

can be used to trace the possession and handling of a sample from sampling through completion of all required analyses. A sample is in custody if it is:

In a team member’s physical possession;

In a team member’s view; Locked up; or

Kept in a secured area that is restricted to authorized personnel.

Field Custody Procedures

The following field custody procedure will be used for collection of samples:

As few persons as possible should handle samples;

Coolers or boxes containing cleaned bottles should be sealed with a custody

tape seal during transport to the field or while in storage prior to use; The sample collector is personally responsible for the care and custody of

samples collected until they are transferred to another person or dispatched

properly under COC rules; The sample collector will record sample data in the field data sheet; and

The Field Team Leader will determine whether proper custody procedures

were followed during the fieldwork and decide if additional samples are required.

Chain-of-Custody Record

The COC form must be fully completed in duplicate by the field technician designated by the Project Manager as responsible for sample shipment to the appropriate laboratory for analysis. In addition, if

samples are known to require rapid turnaround in the laboratory because of project time constraints or

analytical concerns (e.g., extraction time or sample retention period limitations), the person completing the COC record should note these constraints. The custody record also should indicate any special

preservation techniques necessary or whether samples need to be filtered. Copies of COC records are

maintained with the project file by the Field Crew Leader.

Custody Seals

Custody seals are preprinted, adhesive-backed seals with security slots designed to break if the seals are

disturbed. Custody seals are placed over the cap of individual sample bottles by the sampling technician. DOT-approved sample shipping containers are sealed in as many places as necessary to ensure security.

Seals must be signed and dated before use. Upon receipt at the laboratory, the custodian must check and

document on a cooler receipt form that seals on boxes and bottles are intact.


Section 10.0 ANALYTICAL METHODS REQUIREMENTS

The selected laboratory to perform the analyses is Northeast Analytical, A Division of Pace Analytical

Services (NEA-PACE). It is the responsibility of the laboratory to certify the validity and accuracy of the

data they submit, within the parameters of the methodology they utilize or may have been specified

below. The Project Chemist will take appropriate corrective actions as needed, and coordinate with the SRMT Project Manager. Analyses and reports shall be provided in Summary Reports and Electronic

PDF, and EDD.

Table 6.0 Furbearer Mammal Tissue Analysis Analytical

Chemicals for Analysis Target Analyte or Compounds Methodology

PCB (Aroclor) Aroclor 1016, Aroclor 1221,

Aroclor 1232, Aroclor 1242,

Aroclor 1248, Aroclor 1254, and

Aroclor 1260

EPA Method 8082A

Mercury Total (organic and inorganic) EPA Method 7471B

Dioxin/Furans All target analytes including

2,3,7,8 – TCDD, 2,3,7,8 –

TCDF, Total PeCDD,Total

PeCDF, Total HxCDD, Total

HxCDF, Total HpCDD, Total HpCDF, OCDD, and OCDF

EPA Method 1613B

Organochlorine Pesticides Chlordane, 4,4-DDD, 4,4-DDE,

4,4 DDT, Dieldrin, Endrin,

Hexachlorobenzene

EPA Method 8081B

NEA-PACE Analytical uses their own developed and approved SOPs for tissue preparation,

homogenization, extraction, and cleanup. SOP #-NE132-07 for Tissue and Preparation &

Homogenization for Biota and Plant Matrices (Reference Methods USEPA SW-846), SOP #NE158-05-

01 for The Extraction of Fish and Biota Material (Reference Methods EPA 3500A and 3600A), and

SOP#- NE017_09 for Extraction and Cleanup of Fish and Biota Materials (Reference Method 3540C &

EPA method 8082).

QA/QC samples will consist of one MS/MSD sample per 20 samples collected. QA/QC samples will be

prepared by the laboratory from submitted tissue samples.The Laboratory will perform tissue prep

grinding and homogenization.

-Technical Holding Time: 1 year (when kept frozen for sample to still be considered valid)

-Extraction Holding Time: 2 weeks (time allowable to extract sample once thawed)

-Contractual Holding Time: 40 days (time allowable between extraction and analysis) - Mercury Holding Time: 28 days (EPA Method 7471B)

NEA-PACE laboratory was chosen based on past performance history and experience, the precision and accuracy in their performance methods, and repeated years of qualification certifications. NEA-PACEis

certified by the New York State Department of Health and participates in the Environmental Laboratory

Approval Program (ELAP) and the USEPA WP QC Program. NEA, Inc. adheres to the strict QA/QC program outlined in the ELAP manual. Laboratory selection justification is based on:

Performance Methods

Experience and Past Performance History

Statement of Certification and Audits Cost Reasonability


Section 11.0 QUALITY CONTROL REQUIREMENTS

11.1 Field Quality Control

Data Quality is assured through the use of experienced and knowledgeable field crew, care taken in

observation and documentation procedures, and following SOPs. The SRMT QAMP will be followed as a

management tool for planning, implementing, documenting, and assessing the effectiveness of activities supporting environmental data operations (submitted electronically to EPA previously).

Experienced field personnel assure the accuracy of identification of target and non-target furbearer mammal species. The field crew is responsible for ensuring all sampling gear and equipment is in good

working condition and signing off on the Field Supplies Checklist (Appendix A).

Photographs are taken with a 6-inch ruler, arrows indicating upstream or downstream as necessary, and

Location ID. Carcasses are weighed in pounds (lbs), and converted to the nearest gram (g) as total weight

and skinned carcass weight. If possible, adipose tissue weight will be measured to the nearest tenth of a

gram (0.1g). When weighing liver and/or muscle tissue, measurements are recorded to the nearest tenth of a gram (0.1 g). External abnormalities are assessed using professional judgment, and body fat condition

is qualitatively ranked on a 0 to 5 scale based on subcutaneous, intra-abdominal, and mesentery fat

content. Scale ranking includes 0 = Emaciated, 1 = Thin, 2 = Fair, 3 = Good, 4 = Very Good, and 5 = Excellent. All observations and details are recorded in a Field Data Sheet. Sex of species and sexual

maturity (to determine if adult or juvenile) is verified by Field Crew Leader, and if appropriate,

measurements of bacula length (nearest mm) and weight (nearest tenth of a gram) will be recorded for raccoons. Field Crew Leader is responsible for all proper documentation in the Field Data Sheets and

Field Log Book as described in Section 6.0, and signs off on them indicating their review and approval.

Latitude and longitude coordinates are recorded for each sampling site using a handheld Magellen

eXplorist 610 Global-Positioning systems (GPS) to confirm sampling location, and distance traveled (if setting multiple traps at one Site Location). The handheld GPS has an accuracy of +/- 3 meters is only

used as a verification tool to estimate home range of targeted furbearer species, and is not critical for

Location ID positioning. SRMT Field staff are familiar with proposed site locations, river navigability and road access to wetlands, culverts, and ditches. Pre-determined Sites and Locations IDs are outlined in

Table 4 and Table 5 for Inside AOC and Outside AOC.

The SRMT Project Manager will review all field data sheets and documentation for any discrepancies and will be responsible to resolve those discrepancies.

11.2 Laboratory Quality Control Analyses QC data are necessary to determine precision and accuracy and to demonstrate the absence of

interferences and/or contamination of glassware and reagents. No specific field QC samples are required

for tissue samples. Laboratory-based QC will consist of standards, replicates, spikes, and blanks. Method QC limits for PCB analyses are provided in Table 7.

Analytical performance is monitored through QC samples and spikes, such as laboratory method blanks,

surrogate spikes, QC check samples, matrix spikes, matrix spike duplicates, duplicate samples, and duplicate injections.

One Method Blank (MB) per matrix per preparation batch for each anlaysis Surrogate Spikes for all samples analyzed for organic methods.

One Matrix Spike/Matrix Duplicate (MS/MD) for each analysis. The spike

solution must contain a broad range of analytes of concern at the site. The overall frequency of MS/MSD on project samples must be at least one per 20 samples.


Two extraction lab technicians will set up the 20 samples plus QC (Lab Blank, Lab Control Spike, and other field required QC samples) into Soxhlet. Sample extraction batches will be 20 samples or less,

depending on what is being received from field collection efforts. If more than 20 samples are received on

a given day, samples will be batched in extraction batches of 20. When possible, the remaining samples

will be held and combined with the next day’s shipment. This system will provide the most efficient QC batching.

Instances may arise where high sample concentrations, non-homogeneity of samples, or matrix interferences preclude achieving detection limits or associated QC target criteria. In such instances, data

will not be rejected a priori but will be examined on a case-by-case basis. The laboratory will report the

reason for deviations from these detection limits or noncompliance with QC criteria in the case narrative.

All approved QC target criteria and acceptance criteria for USEPA Methods for target analytes are

outlined in below links. Data that does not conform to the approved acceptance criteria as outlined by

EPA Methods will be flagged by the Project Chemist, reported to SRMT Project Manager for case by case decision of rejection. Summarized Acceptance Criteria details for the primary targeted contaminant,

PCBs, are provided below.

USEPA Method 8082A. 2007. http://www.epa.gov/osw/hazard/testmethods/sw846/pdfs/8082a.pdf

USEPA Method 7471B. 2007. http://www.epa.gov/osw/hazard/testmethods/sw846/pdfs/7471b.pdf

USEPA Method 1613B 1994. http://water.epa.gov/scitech/methods/cwa/organics/dioxins/upload/2007_07_10_methods_method_dioxin

s_1613.pdf

USEPA Method 8081B 2007. http://www.epa.gov/osw/hazard/testmethods/sw846/pdfs/8081b.pdf

Table 7. QC Requirements for Method 8082 (PCB Analysis) Quality Control Item Frequency Acceptance Criteria

Method Blank One per extraction batch of ≤20

samples of the same matrix per day

-Concentration does not exceed the

Reporting Limit for any PCB

Aroclor

-Meets 60-140% recovery

Matrix Spike/Matrix Spike

Duplicate (MS/MSD)

One MS/extraction of a batch of ≤20 -% recovery for MS must be within

method limits -Must meet Aroclor spike criteria of

50-150% recovery

-Must meet surrogate criteria of 60-

140%

-Will be used to calculate precision.

Surrogates Surrogates are added to all samples

and QC samples. Tetra-chloro-

meta-xylene (TCMX) and

Decachlorobiphenly (DCBP)

solution

-Percent recover for the surrogate

should be 60-140%

http://www.epa.gov/osw/hazard/testmethods/sw846/pdfs/8082a.pdf

http://www.epa.gov/osw/hazard/testmethods/sw846/pdfs/7471b.pdf

http://water.epa.gov/scitech/methods/cwa/organics/dioxins/upload/2007_07_10_methods_method_dioxins_1613.pdf

http://water.epa.gov/scitech/methods/cwa/organics/dioxins/upload/2007_07_10_methods_method_dioxins_1613.pdf

http://www.epa.gov/osw/hazard/testmethods/sw846/pdfs/8081b.pdf


Laboratory Method Blank Laboratory method blanks serve to demonstrate a contamination-free environment in the laboratory. The

goal is for method blanks to be free of contamination. Low-level contamination may be present, but must

be less than the level in samples as defined by the method SOP. If contamination is greater, samples are

analyzed. If contaminants are present in the method blank but not in project samples, no further action is required. All sources of contamination that are not common laboratory contaminants as defined in the

method SOPs must be investigated as part of the corrective action process. Sample results must not be

blank subtracted unless specifically required by the analytical method.

Surrogate Standards

Surrogate recoveries must be within QC criteria for method blanks and LCSs to demonstrate acceptable method performance. If surrogate recoveries are outside QC criteria for method blanks or LCSs,

corrective action is required and the Project Chemist should be notified. Surrogate recoveries in the

samples indicate the method performance on the particular sample matrix. Surrogate recoveries that are

outside QC criteria for a sample indicate a potential matrix effect. Matrix effects must be verified based on review of recoveries in the method blank or LCS, sample reanalysis, or evaluation of interfering

compounds.

Laboratory Control Sample

LCS recoveries must be monitored on control charts for all non-Contract Laboratory Procedure methods.

The LCS recovery must be within the control limits to demonstrate acceptable method performance. If LCS recoveries are outside QC criteria, then corrective action is required. After corrective action is

complete, sample re-analysis is required for failed parameters. For any other deviations from LCS control

limits that cannot be resolved by sample re-analysis within holding times, the Project Chemist must be

notified immediately. If samples are critically affected, the SRMT Project Manager may determine that re-sampling is required.

Matrix Spike Sample

MS recoveries are a measure of the performance of the method on the sample being analyzed. Field and

trip blanks must not be chosen for spiking. MS recoveries outside the control limits applied to the LCS

indicate matrix effects. Sample clean-up procedures may be warranted for samples with severe matrix effects. The laboratory should notify the Project Chemist of these instances to determine an appropriate

corrective action.

Matrix Spike Duplicate Sample

The MSD sample is commonly prepared in conjunction with the MS sample. The MSD is prepared from

a separate portion of the sample and processed with the same additions as the MS. The MSD is prepared for methods that do not typically show concentrations of target analytes above MDLs, such as organic

methods.

Duplicate Sample The duplicate is prepared for methods that typically show concentrations of target analytes above MDLs,

such as metals and wet chemistry methods. The RPDs between recoveries in the original and duplicate

measure the precision of the analytical method on the actual project samples. For this project, QC criteria for RPDs are 15 % for biota. If all other QC criteria are met, RPD results outside control limits indicate

potential matrix effects. The laboratory should investigate significant deviations in the RPD results by

observing the sample to determine any visual heterogeneity or reviewing sample chromatograms for matrix interference. If visual observation does not indicate a potential problem, the sample may be

reanalyzed. Potential matrix effects are reported in the case narrative


Section 12.0 INSTRUMENT/EQUIPMENT TESTING INSPECTION AND MAINTENANCE

REQUIREMENTS

All instruments and equipment are inspected prior to each sampling day to ensure that all equipment is in

working order and safe to use. Use of a GPS Magellan eXplorist 610 unit, A Hand held radio/cell phone,

will be needed in the field, and a balance will be utilized back at the office for weighing. It is important to check to make sure all units are charged prior to leaving the office. The GPS unit uses an external lead

acid camcorder battery as a source and can be recharged. A backup battery will be provided along with

the GPS unit from the GIS Coordinator upon pickup. Prior to departure, the field crew is responsible for making sure that equipment listed in is inspected and in proper working order.

The radio/cell phone (radio) is stored and maintained by the entrance to the SRMT Environment Office plugged in and charged for use. The field leader is responsible for making sure the radio is charged and

operable. If the designated radio to this project is not operable, there are backup radios that may be used

if needed located in the same place.

The balance to be utilized for measurements of less than 2000gram is a 22ADAM, Model PGL 2002

standard plug-in and chargeable balance. It is readable to the nearest 0.01g. To operate, press the “ON”

button. The machine will self-calibrate. To zero the balance, press “TARE.” http://www.adamequipment.com/am/pdf/868.pdf. The balance that will be utilized for measurements

larger than 2000gram (i.e. for weight measurements of the Whole Carcass, and Skinned Carcass) will be a

150 lb. Stainless Steel Open Country Sportsman’s Kitchen Digital Scale. This scale measures in pounds (lbs) and ounces (oz) and measures in 2 oz. increments. Weights will be measured in lbs, and converted to

grams. It has a tare function to allow for accurate and easy measurements to zero out the weight of

containers http://www.cabelas.com/food-storage-prep-open-country-digital-scale-1.shtml .

Section 13.0 INSTRUMENT CALIBRATION AND FREQUENCY

Calibration of instrumentation is required to ensure that the analytical system is operating correctly

and functioning at the proper sensitivity to meet established detection limits. Each instrument is

calibrated with standards prepared from certified reference materials appropriate to the type of instrument

and the linear range established for the analytical method. The frequency and acceptance criteria for

calibration of a particular instrument is determined by the manufacturer's guidelines, the analytical

method or the requirements outlined in the Scope of Work (SOW) of a special contract.

All instruments and equipment used during sampling and analysis will be operated and calibrated

according to the manufacturer’s guidelines and recommendations, as well as criteria set forth in applicable analytical methodology references. Personnel properly trained in these procedures will perform

operation and calibration of all instruments. SRMT field staff will be responsible for calibration of

balances for weight measurements, and laboratories will be responsible for equipment, apparatus,

calibrations, and procedures. A 150 lb. Stainless Steel Open Country Sportsman’s Kitchen Digital Scale will be used for Totaland Skinned Carcass weight of target species and A 22 ADAM PGL 2002 Balance

will be used for target tissue sample measurements. Specifications, calibrations, and user manual can be

found on http://www.adamequipment.com/am/pdf/868.pdf. Balance operations include zero the balance prior to weighing each individual, organ or tissue sample,

and reading the automatically calibrated result, measured to the nearest gram, or tenth of a gram (0.1).

Documentation of all field maintenance and calibration information will be maintained in the task

logbook. Magellan eXplorist 610 specifications, calibrations and user manual can be found on http://www.magellangps.com/Products/eXploristseries/eXplorist-610 .

http://www.adamequipment.com/am/pdf/868.pdf

http://www.cabelas.com/food-storage-prep-open-country-digital-scale-1.shtml

http://www.adamequipment.com/am/pdf/868.pdf

http://www.magellangps.com/Products/eXploristseries/eXplorist-610


Section 14.0 INSPECTION/ACCEPTANCE REQUIREMENTS FOR SUPPLIES AND

CONSUMABLES

It is the responsibility of the field crew to prepare and inspect all necessary field gear and equipment prior

to beginning and throughout the sampling and processing event. A Field Supplies Checklist (Appendix A) will document supplies needed for safety, adequate communication, and field observation notations.

An outline of a Health and Safety Plan is included (Appendix B). A Furbearer Mammal Field Data Sheet

(Appendix C) and a Habitat Characterization Data Sheet (Appendix D) will note the date of sampling and processing. Confirmation that this system was used will require a signature or indication of field staff who

completed the forms. A Standard Operating Procedure for Tissue Extraction (Appendix F) will document

supplies needed for safety, measurements, and tissue observation notations.

Section 15.0 DATA ACQUISTION REQUIREMENTS

For Non-Direct Measurements

As per USEPA guidance on Non-Direct Measurements in EPA QA/G-5, the rationale for selected

Secondary Data Usage is outlined below. Not all sources of information have been acquired. An internet

search for peer reviewed scientific literature will be conducted for selection of candidate data, as well as selection of data generated for Superfund Monitoring Repository from the facilities located within the

Area of Concern.

Some data on furbearer mammal tissue concentrations exists for the St. Lawrence River Area of Concern (AOC) from the NYSDEC 1992 Chemical Contaminants in Wildlife from Akwesasne and the Vicinity of

the General Motors Corporation/Central Foundry Division, Massena, NY Plant . This study did not

collect mink, otter, or raccoon, and only collected beaver from Outside the AOC, and no muskrat representative of the Grasse River. A Current Status and Trends of Aquatic Wildlife in the St. Lawrence

River (Cornwall) Area of Concern drafted by Hughes in 2009 reported on the collection of 6 mink liver

collected in the Cornwall AOC for analyses of coplanar PCBs with dioxin-like effects, dioxins and furans.

Other mink samples were analyzed for mercury and other metals. The Cornwall AOC report utilizes sampling sites specific to the north shore of the St. Lawrence River, which may not be indicative of

Massena industry sources, but a potential benchmark of comparison from Outside AOC sources. The

Ridgway and Alcoa field efforts report on external anomaly observations only.

Secondary data sources listed above will be reviewed only if they meet the project objectives and meet the following acceptance criteria of Data Quality Indicators (DQIs):

1. Representative: Geographically (i.e. Work done Inside AOC, or Outside AOC study area

boundaries for Furbearer Mammal Studies), and Temporal (annual or seasonal). 2. Comparability: Are literature study results and objectives applicable and comparable? (i.e.

chemical analyses metrics, wet weight vs dry weight, etc.).

3. Completeness: Did literature include a valid number of samples collected for measurement similar to sample size of interest?

4. Usability and Validity. SRMT Project Manager will review report to assess data validation

and quality. If data validation and QA/QC discussion is not included in report, SRMT will contact the author to inquire if work was conducted under an approved QAPP, and the

intended use of the data to determine the confidence of the data.


Reporting of the Secondary Data will be included in the Furbearer Status Report. This will include documentation of quality procedures used and whether or not the existing data met the project’s

acceptance criteria. Documentation of any programmatic or legal constraints on the use of existing data

and their impact on the project will be reported. This may include data that is not available for public

release or lack of background information of data generation or analysis methods.

Section 16.0 DATA MANAGEMENT

It is the responsibility of the Wildlife Technician to maintain field data sheets and field notebooks, and

confirm equipment checklist. Field observations will be tabulated in a Furbearer Mammal Field Data

Sheet (Appendix C) and Habitat Characterization Data Sheet (Appendix D) and brought back from the

field to the office. Field Data Sheets will be stored in a 3-ring binder only for this project with the project name on the outside cover at the SRMT Environment Division, in the Wildlife Technician’s Office.

Photographs of field observations will be uploaded daily and saved in dated Electronic Folders with

Location ID. Field notebooks will document a summary of daily field activities and any other notes in addition to the Field Data Sheet. Field data will be entered electronically into a Microsoft Excel or Access

Workbook by a Wildlife Technician.

For data collected under this project, the Project Manager will review all field data for accuracy. Any

field data not provided by the laboratory will be entered into a database or spreadsheet. The laboratory

will provide an electronic data deliverable (EDD) for all analytical reports that is consistent with their

standard spreadsheet. The SRMT Project Manager will process the EDD and review all laboratory and field data to verify the results against the hard copy and check for transcription errors. The Project

Chemist will review data against the criteria in this QAPP and add any data qualifiers. Data that will

appear on data tables for the report will be generated from EDD. SRMT will develop a central data source for all data handling operations, and will retain all electronic files. Electronic data will be backed up and

archived during daily entry and/or use. Field documents and records will be retained for up to 6 years

after the final report is issued.

Section 17.0 ASSESSMENTS & RESPONSE ACTIONS

17.1 Assessments

Field

The Tribal Quality Assurance Officer (TQAO) throughout the project will perform audits so that deficiencies can be found and corrected. Audits are to be conducted during the project at least once at the

beginning of the sampling and at least once more during the sampling by the TQAO and SRMT Project

Manager (Jessica Jock) to ensure that Field Data Sheets, Field Notebooks, Sample Handling, etc. are

completed and managed properly.

Should corrective actions need to be taken due to problems that are encountered , appropriate steps will be

taken to correct this. For example, if a procedure is not being followed, training or retraining of a technician may be required. Should a problem be encountered that needs corrective action involving the

Sampling Program outlined in this QAPP, appropriate chain of command communication as indicated in

Figure 1 will commence to effectively and efficiently rectify the problem or receive permission for any such changes. The SRMT Project Manager will be responsible for communicating to the EPA Project

Manager and TQAO any problems encountered, and responsible for communicating or distributing any


corrective actions needed to the field crew. All corrective actions will be documented and explained in

the field notebook, and semi-reports as necessary.

Laboratory

The laboratory must implement a comprehensive program of internal audits to verify compliance of their

systems with SOPs and QA manuals. NYSDOH must certify the laboratory and will perform external systems audits at an approximate frequency of once a year. External audits include reviews of analytical

capabilities and procedures, COC procedures, documentation, QA/QC, and laboratory organization. No

laboratory audits are planned for this project

17.2 Corrective Actions Corrective actions will be implemented as needed. In conjunction with the QA Officer and Laboratory

QA Coordinator, the Project Manager is responsible for initiating corrective action and implementing it in

the field and office, and the laboratory project manager is responsible for implementing it in the

laboratory. It is their combined responsibility to see that all sampling and analytical procedures are followed as specified and that the data generated meet the prescribed acceptance criteria. Specific

corrective actions necessary will be clearly documented in the logbooks or analytical reports.

Field Situations

The need for corrective action in the field may be determined by technical assessments

or by more direct means such as equipment malfunction. Once a problem has been identified, it may be addressed immediately or an audit report may serve as notification to project management staff that

corrective action is necessary.

Immediate corrective actions taken in the field will be documented in the project logbook. Corrective actions may include, but are not limited to:

■ Correcting equipment decontamination or sample handling procedures; ■ Recalibrating field instruments and checking battery charge;

■ Training field laboratory personnel in correct sample handling or collection

procedures; and

■ Accepting data with an acknowledged level of uncertainty.

After a corrective action has been implemented, its effectiveness will be verified. If the action does not

resolve the problem, appropriate personnel will be assigned to investigate and effectively remediate the problem.

Laboratory Situations

Out-of-control QC data, laboratory audits, or outside data review may determine the need for corrective

action in the laboratory. Corrective actions may include, but are not limited to:

■ Reanalyzing samples, if holding times permit;

■ Correcting laboratory procedures;

■ Recalibrating instruments using freshly prepared standards; ■ Replacing solvents or other reagents that give unacceptable blank values;

■ Training additional laboratory personnel in correct sample preparation and

analysis procedures; and ■ Accepting data with an acknowledged level of uncertainty.


The laboratory corrective actions must be defined in analytical SOPs. Any deviations

from approved corrective actions must be documented and approved by the Project Chemist.

Section 18.0 REPORTS TO MANAGEMENT

Upon completion of a project sampling effort, analytical and QC data will be included in a comprehensive technical report referred to as the Furbearer Status Report that summarizes field activities and provides a

data evaluation.

Serious data generation and measurement problems will be reported immediately to SRMT personnel.

Time and type of corrective action (if needed) will depend on the severity of the problem and relative

overall project importance. Corrective actions may include altering procedures in the field or modifying

laboratory protocol.

SRMT will implement peer review for all project deliverables including draft and final reports, and

technical memoranda with the Massena RAC Coordinator (Steve Litwhiler) and other NYSDEC staff, if appropriate. The peer review process provides for a critical evaluation of the deliverable by an individual

or team to determine if the deliverable will meet established criteria, quality objectives, technical

standards, and contractual obligations.

Reports will be produced by Jessica Jock, BUI Coordinator and QAPP Project Manager on the current

status or data analyses to USEPA during semi-annual reporting. Reporting will include project status,

progress, problems encountered, performance evaluations/audits, and approximation of semi-annual budget status specific to Contractual costs. Draft BUI Status Reports will be made available by the end of

the project in 2013. See Schedule Outline Section 3.0 above.

Section 19.0 DATA REVIEW, VALIDATION, AND VERIFICATION REQUIREMENTS

All data generated will be reviewed by comparing accuracy and precision results listed in Laboratory SOPs and Toxic Reference Values (TRVs) for adverse health effect thresholds listed

above in Section 4.0.

Field data and results will be reviewed by SRMT Project Manager for consistency with literature

values.. Differences in results may be explainable based upon sample dynamics, and/or the types

of differences and frequencies encountered.

Analytical reporting limits and target compounds and QC summary data for surrogates, method

blanks, LCS, and MS/MSD samples will be compared to limits listed in USEPA and Laboratory

methods used. Project Chemist will flag and report to SRMT Project Manger any results that do not conform to acceptable limits.

Calibration summary data will be checked by the laboratory to verify that all positive results for target compounds were generated under an acceptable calibration as defined by the analytical


method. Any deviations will be noted in the case narrative and reviewed by the Project Chemist,

Ann Casey (NEA-PACE).

Field data such as sample identifications and sample dates will be checked against the laboratory

report.

Raw data files from the field and laboratory will be reviewed if there is a significant problem

noted with the summary information.

Section 20.0 VALIDATION AND VERIFICATION METHODS

The entire project team is responsible for ongoing assessment of the technical work performed by the team, identification of nonconformance with the project objectives, and initiation, implementation and

documentation of corrective action. Independent performance and systems audits are technical

assessments that are a possible part of the QA/QC program. The following describes types of audits conducted, frequency of these audits, and personnel responsible for conducting audits.

20.1 Laboratory: The laboratory must implement a comprehensive program of internal audits to verify compliance of their

systems with SOPs and QA manuals.

NYSDOH must certify the laboratory and will perform external systems audits at an approximate

frequency of once a year. External audits include reviews of analytical capabilities and procedures, COC

procedures, documentation, QA/QC, and laboratory organization.

No laboratory audits are planned for this project.

20.2 Field:

All data generated during the field activities will be general information, sample identification numbers,

date, time, sample matrix, weights, and lengths, etc. and field data will be noted in pen or sharpie in a

field notebook and field data sheets.

20.3 Audits: To be performed by the SRMT Project Manager on the field employees at least once prior to field

sampling event, and once during. Field employees will have thoroughly reviewed the QAPP and are familiar with the basic procedures before Furbearer Mammal Samplingefforts.

20.4 Corrective Action:

All personnel involved with the study shall follow the QA/QC Sampling Plan to avoid in errors that may

occur in the field or in the laboratory. If a sample is not attainable from a designated sampling location,

then another sampling area will be chosen as described in Section 8.0, and Appendix E. More staff

training will be provided if deemed necessary through Audits, and all other Corrective Actions laid out in

Section 17.0 will be followed.


20.5 Reports:

The final report will include all data that has been attained throughout the study in text, tabular and

graphical form in Microsoft Programming (i.e., Excel, Word, and/or Access) and GIS mapping tools. The

final report will be completed when all data has been reviewed and submitted to the St. Regis Mohawk Tribe Environment Division where the final review and report compilation will take place.

Section 21.0 RECONCILIATION WITH DATA QUALITY OBJECTIVES

Project DQOs will be evaluated and discussed in April Semi-Annual Reporting Periods with the USEPA

Project Officer. Power of statistics will be demonstrated, and reported in the Status Report on Furbearer Mammals. Results will be used to contribute to the larger BUI Status Reports for Restrictions on Wildlife

Consumption, Degradation of Wildlife Populations, Animal Deformities and Reproductive Problems, and

loss of Wildlife Habitat.

Any deviations from analytical performance criteria or quality objectives for the project will be

documented in the data summary report provided to the data users for the project. The Lab QA Officer or

Project Chemist will work with the final users of the data in performing data quality assessments. The data quality assessment may include some or all of the following steps:

Data that are determined to be incomplete or not usable for the project will be

discussed with the project team. If critical data points are involved which impact the ability to complete project objectives, data reviewers will report immediately to the Project Manager. The

Project Manager will discuss resolution of the issue with technical staff and implement necessary

corrective actions (for example re-sampling);

Data that are non-detect but have elevated reporting limits due to matrix interference will be

compared to background values.

Data that are qualified as estimated will be used for all project decision making.

Data assessors comparing to results to background will have to account for the higher level of

uncertainty in their statistical analysis.

The usability of all data types for making comparisons between the site and reference area will be ensured

through careful attention to the following factors:

Selection of a suitable reference area. The chosen reference area will be ecologically similar, to

the extent possible, to the site. It will support, or be capable of supporting, the same mammal

species as the site so that differences between the site and reference area due to chemical

contamination will not be confounded with habitat effects.

Scientifically sound, acceptable methods will be used for all data collection activities so that

differences between the site and reference area, if identified, can be considered real, not artifacts

of sample collection.

Competent experienced Wildlife Technicians will be involved in all aspects of field work to

ensure that only high-quality data are collected.

Rigorous procedures and checks will be in place to ensure that all project data are accurately

recorded and incorporated into the project database.


Section 22.0 LITERATURE REFERENCED

Aulerich, Rj, RK Ringer, and S. Iwamoto. 1973. Reproductive failure and mortality in mink fed on Great

Lakes fish. Journal of Reproduction and Fertility. Supplement. 19:365-376.

Blankenship, A.L. et. al. 2008. Toxicity reference values for mink exposed to 2,3,7,8-tetrachlodibenzo-p-dioxin (TCDD) equivalents (TEQs). Ecotoxicology and Environmental Safety 69:325-349.

Ecology and Environment, Inc. to GLNPO December 16, 2008 for Approval. Summary of Delisting Criteria and Status for NYS Areas of Concern.

Eisler R. 1990. Chlordane hazards to fish, wildlife, and invertebrates: a synoptic review. USFWS. Biol. Rep. 85(1.21). Washington, DC. 49 pp.

Foley, R.E., S.J. Jackling, R.J. Sloan, M.K. Brown, 1998. Organochlorine and Mercury Residues in Wild

Mink and Otter: Comparison with Fish. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, Vol. 7, pp. 363-374.

Heaten et al. 1995. Dietary exposure of mink to carp from Saginaw Bay, Michigan. 2. Hematology and

liver Pathology. Arch. Environ. Contam. Toxicol. 29:411-417.

Hornshaw et. al. 1986. LC50 test results in polychlorinated biphenyl-fed mink: Age, season, and diet

comparisons. Arch. Environ. Contam. Toxico. 15:717-723.

Hughes, K.D. May 2009. DRAFT Current Status and Trends of Aquatic Wildlife in the St. Lawrence

River (Cornwall) Area of Concern. Prepared for Cornwall St. Lawrence River Restoration Council

(SLRRC).

Jensen et al 1977. Effects of PCBs and DDT on mink (Mustela vision) during the reproductive season.

Ambio 6 (4): 239.

Kamrin, MA and RK Ringer. 1996. Toxicological Implications of PCB residues in mammals. Ch. 6

SETAC Special Publication. CRC/Lewis Publishers.

Meyers and Schiller. 1986. TERRE-TOX: a database for the effects of anthropogenic substances on

terrestrial animals. J. Chem. Info. Comp. Sci. 26:33-36.

Mierzykowski S.E, D. Washington, F. Corey and D. Macek. 2011. Screening-Level Assessment of

Organochlorine Compounds in Raccoons (Procyon lotor) at Aroostook National Wildlife Refuge.

USFWS. Spec. Proj. Rep. FY09-MEFO-2-EC. Maine Field Office. Orono, ME. 31 pp.

NYSDEC, 1990. St. Lawrence River at Massena, New York Remedial Action Plan, Stage I. NYSDEC,

Division of Water, Bureau of Water Assessment and Management, Albany, NY

NYSDEC, 2006. St. Lawrence River at Massena, New York Remedial Action Plan Status Report,

NYSDEC, Division of Water, Bureau of Water Assessment and Management, Albany, NY. 133

NYSDEC 1992. Chemical contaminants in wildlife from the Mohawk Nation at Akwesasne and the

vicinity of the General Motors Corporation/Central Foundry Division, Massena, NY.


NYSDEC. 2011. Trapping Furbearers: An Introduction to Responsible Trapping. Student Manual.

Sportsman Eduation Program. New York State Department of Environmental Conservation. http://www.eregulations.com/newyork/hunting/furbearer-trapping

PACE Analytical Services, Inc. 2011. Standard Operating Procedure. The Extraction of Fish and Biota

Material. Reference Methods: EPA Method 3500Z and 3600A. (NE158-05-01).

PACE Analytical Services, Inc. 2011. Standard Operating Procedure. Extraction and Cleanup of Fish and

Biota Materials. Reference Methods: EPA Method 3540C & EPA Method 8082. (NE017-09).

PACE Analytical Services, Inc. 2011. Standard Operating Procedure. Tissue and Preparation &

Homogenization for Biota and Plant Matrices. Reference Methods: USEPA SW-846 Test Methods for Evaluating Solid Waste. (NE132-07).

Platanow, NS and LH Karstad. 1973. Dietary effect of polychlorinated biphenyls on mink. Can j. Comp.

Med. 37:91-400.

Sample, BE, DM Opresko, and GW Suter. 1996. Toxicological benchmarks for wildlife: 1996 Revision.

Prepared by the Risk Assessment Program Health Sciences Research Division Oak Ridge, TN. Prepared for US Department of Energy Office of Environmental Management.

USDOI. 1998. Guidelines for interpretation of the biological effects of selected constituents in biota, water, and sediment – DDT. National Irrigation Water Qaulity Program. Information Report No. 3.

http://www.usbr.gov/niwqp/guidelines/index.html

USEPA, July 1999. Bioassessment Protocols for Use in Streams and Wadeable Rivers. EPA 841-B-99-002.

USEPA Method 8082A. 2007. http://www.epa.gov/osw/hazard/testmethods/sw846/pdfs/8082a.pdf

USEPA Method 7471B. 2007. http://www.epa.gov/osw/hazard/testmethods/sw846/pdfs/7471b.pdf

USEPA Method 1613B 1994. http://water.epa.gov/scitech/methods/cwa/organics/dioxins/upload/2007_07_10_methods_method_dioxin

s_1613.pdf

USEPA Method 8081B 2007. http://www.epa.gov/osw/hazard/testmethods/sw846/pdfs/8081b.pdf

USEPA, December 2008. Explanation of Significant Differences: Reynolds Metals Company Site.

Village of Massena, St. Lawrence County, New York.

Wren, CD et al. 1987. The effects of polychlorinated biphenyls and methylmercury, singly and in

combination, on mink. I: Uptake and toxic responses. Arch. Environ. Contam. Toxicol. 16:441-447.

http://www.eregulations.com/newyork/hunting/furbearer-trapping

http://www.usbr.gov/niwqp/guidelines/index.html

http://www.epa.gov/osw/hazard/testmethods/sw846/pdfs/8082a.pdf


Figure 3-1. Grasse River Inside AOC (Area #1)


Figure 3-2. Grasse River Outside AOC (Area #2)


Figure 3-3. St. Lawrence River Inside the AOC (Area #3)


Figure 3-4. St. Lawrence River Outside the AOC (Area #4)


Figure 3-5. Raquette River Inside the AOC (Area #5)


Figure 3-6. Raquette River Outside the AOC (Area #6)


Figure 3-7. St. Regis River Inside the AOC (Area #7)


Figure 3-8. St. Regis River Outside the AOC (Area #8)


Appendix A. Field Supplies Checklist

Materials: Check:

Map of Survey Area and Transects _____

Field Data Sheets _____

All-Weather Field Book _____

“Rite in the Rain” pen or Sharpie _____

Hatchet _____

Digital Camera _____

Handheld GPS _____

First Aid Kit _____

Duct Tape _____

Survey Tape _____

Rope _____

Dispatch divice _____

Extra Batteries _____

Dry Sac with spare (socks, gloves, head gear, thermal underwear) _____

Headlamp and Flashlight _____

Portable Radio and/or Cell Phone _____

Gerber multi-plyer tool _____

18-neaoprene waterproof gloves _____

Catch pole and hook pole _____

Wire & Cutters _____

Outer layer coat and pants, with underlayers, and wool socks _____

Assorted Traps _____

Additional Supplies for Boat use

PFD personal floatation device _____

Safety Equipment Checklist _____

Eye protection _____

6 foot trap stakes _____

Extra parts for the motor, and spare spark plugs _____

Field Crew Leader Signature Date:


Appendix B. Health and Safety Plan

This protocol sets forth the field procedures to ensure safety of the Wildlife Technicians during late fall,

early winter sampling seasons. Activities will take place from a boat early in the sampling period

(October-November), and then will commence from shore (via truck/road) when the rivers are no longer

accessible.

Materials:

PPE (personal protective equipment) will vary depending on weather conditions.

1. Personal Floatation Device (PFD)

2. Boat Safety Equipment, including fire extinguisher, whistle, bucket, and engine kill coard.

3. Base layer of wicking fabric long underwear

4. Smart Wool wicking sox

5. Mid warmth layer that may or may not be needed

6. 3 in 1 outer shell waterproof coat

7. And outer pants- comfortable enough to wear under waders

8. North Face skull caps

9. 1000 gram thinsulate boots

10. Under Armor polar gloves

First Aid Kit Contents

1. EZ Care Instructions

2. A Comprehensive Guide to Wilderness and Travel Medicine – Written by Dr. Eric A Weiss.

3. Cohesive Flexible Bandage Wrap

4. Butterfly Closure Strips

5. Tincture of Benzoin Swab

6. Triple antibiotic Ointment (3)

7. Antiseptic Toweletts (5)

8. Sterile Gauze Dressings 4” x 4” & 2” x 2”

9. Non-Adherent Sterile Dressings 3” x 4”

10. Conforming Gauze Bandages 3”

11. Adhesive Bandages (10)

12. Q-tips (2)

13. Adhesive Tape ½ inch x 10 yards

14. Nitrile Examination Gloves (2)

15. Moleskin 7” x 4”

16. After Bite Sting Relief (2)

17. Bandage Scissors

18. Splinter Picker/Tick Remover Forceps

19. Ibuprofen 200mg (4)


20. Antihistamine (diphenhdyramine 25mg – 2)

21. Asprin 325mg (4)

22. Safety Pins (3)

23. 5’ x 9” trauma Pad

24. Petrolatum Gauze Dressing 3” x #”

Safety Equipment Needed for Trap Releases, or other protection needed against animals?

1. Hook pole

2. Catch Pole

3. Dispatch Device 4. Radios/Cell Phone and Extra Batteries

5. Rescue Rope

Field: 1. First Aid Kit will be checked and be placed behind the seat of the truck at all times, or in

the Dry-Sac in the boat at all times.

2. Along with First Aid Kit, Duct tape, Rope, and extra Batteries will be behind the seat or

in the Dry-sac for use if needed.

3. A dry Sac that contains spare dry sox, dry gloves, Handwarmer packets, Extra head gear,

headlamp & battery less flashlight, extra pair of thermal underwear, will be available if

needed.

4. A handheld GPS unit will be in the truck with extra batteries at all times.

5. A cell phone and/or a portable radio will be taken into the field each time. A check in

with base will be conducted upon arrival at first destination. If there is not a confirmation

of communication with base via portable radio, then use of a cell phone will commence.

6. Inspection of field personal equipment (i.e. waders, boots, rain gear, and gauntlets) will

be done by the individual and verified appropriate for daily field conditions. Extra field

clothing can be stored in the large storage box for transport in the back of the truck.

7. Traps needed will be placed in the locking job box in the back of the truck.

8. The setting and checking of traps will be performed with the buddy system, one

technician doing the work, and one technician performing safety observation and

response, if needed.

9. Traps that are to be set in deep water or water with a swift currant will also require that

the individual doing the work don a PFD (personal floatation device).

10. Field experience by the Wildlife Technician will be used to determine future weather

conditions, and variable water levels. Traps will not be set in water that may raise too

high do to upcoming weather conditions. This situation may make it dangerous for the

technician to access and check the trap, therefore it will be avoided if possible.


11. Traps will be pulled if the technician in charge believes that rising water conditions may

be unsafe in 24 hours. This will be conducted for the purposes of the safety of the field

technicians, as well as the well-being of the animals targeted to prevent an unnecessary

delay in trap check due to weather conditions.

12. Traps that do become inundated may be looked for with a hook pole ( 10 foot long

extendable rod with a small hook on one end) the hook allows you to search for the wire

from a safe distance. Traps may have to be left till the water subsides for the technicians

safety.

13. In order to check traps, often times the Wildlife Technician will need to trek in nearshore

waters, wetlands, and/or culverts. In the event of an accident that causes a slip in the

water, do not remove the water from waders until back to a place where they can stay

warm. Waders will provide a layer of insulation until dry clothes can be donned.

14. In the event of an injury, radio to base (located in office) and return to vehicle or shore

immediately. Fill out an accident/injury report (at office) and seek appropriate medical

attention.


Appendix C. Furbearer Mammal Field Data Sheet

Location _______________________ Form Completed By: _____________________________

Species Harvested ________________________ Trap Set# _________________________

River Basin Land/Water

Time am pm Date

Lat Long

WEATHER CONDITIONS

STREAM

CHARACTERIZATION

WATERSHED

FEATURES

RIPARIAN

VEGETATION

AQUATIC

VEGITATION

WATER

QUALITY

SIGNITURE _______________________________________ Date ___________

NOW Past 24 Hours Has there been rain in last 7 days ___ Overcast ___ YES ___ NO ___ ___ Rain ___ % of Cloud Cover_____ ___ Showers ___ AIR Temperature _____ ___ Clear/Sunny ___ Other _________________________

___ River ___creek/trib ___ Drainage Ditch ____Culvert ___ Marsh ___Woodland

Stream Origin ___ Spring Fed ___ Swamp ___ Runoff ___ Mixture of Origins

Estimated Size of Local Habitat Area __________________________________

__Forest ___Field/Pasture ___Agricultural ___Residential ___Commercial ___Industrial

Local Watershed NPS Pollution Local Watershed Erosion

___No Evidence ___Some Potential Sources ___none ___moderate

___Obvious Sources ___heavy

Indicate the dominate type and record the dominate species present:

___ Trees ___ Shrubs ___ Grasses ___ Herbaceous

Dominate species present ____________________________________

Indicate the Dominate Type and Record the Dominant Species Present:

___Rooted emergent ___Rooted Submergent ___ Rooted Floating ___ Free Floating ___ Algae

Dominate Species Present _________________________________________________________

Any Large Woody Debris __________________________________________________________

Water Odors

___Normal/None

___Petroleum

___Fishy

___Sewage

___Chemical

___Other

Water Surface Oils

___ None

___ Slick

___ Sheen

___ Globs

___ Flecks

___ Other

Turbidity (if not measured)

___ Clear

___ Opaque

___ Slightly Stained

___ Stained

___ Turbid

___ Other


METHODS USED

Sample ID

Total Weight

(kg) (g)

Skinned Carcass

Weight

( kg) (g)

Liver

Weight

(0.01g)

Sex

(M/F)

Bacula Bacula

Weight Length

(0.01g) (mm)

Section Location (if

applicable) Muscle Tissue

Weight

Lab Sample

(0.01g)

Muscle/Liver

Weight

Archive

(0.01g)

Liver Weight

Lab Sample

(0.01g)

Adipose Tissue

Weight

(0.01g)

Other

1.

2.

3.

Total Composite

Body Fat Condition: ___________________________________________________________

Body Fat Condition ranked on a 1 – 5 scale:

0- Emaciated, 1-Thin , 2-Fair, 3 -Good, 4-Very Good, 5-Excellent

Reproductive Notes: _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Abnormality Observations and Other Comments: _____________________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________________

___ Trapping ___ Visual Observation ___ Track & Dropping Identification

Trap and Size ______________________________ Intended for __________________________

Description ______________________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________________

Species Harvested at this location ___None

___Beaver ___ River Otter ___Raccoon ___Mink ___Muskrat ___Other

Species Observed at this location ___None

___Beaver ___River Otter ___ Raccoon ___Mink ___muskrat ___Other


Appendix D. Standard Operating Procedures (SOP) for Habitat

Characterization

The activities below are intended to evaluate habitat characteristics for purposes of evaluating the

amounts and quality of physical and biological habitat (including wetlands, riparian and submerged

aquatic vegetation, and buffers) are adequate wildlife management goals specific to furbearer mammals.

The physical habitat assessment will target riparian and some wetland habitat (including culverts, ditches,

other) where trapping locations are selected. All procedures will follow applicable USEPA Rapid

Bioassessment Protocols for Habitat Characterization Procedures.

(http://water.epa.gov/scitech/monitoring/rsl/bioassessment/index.cfm ).

Materials:

1. Physical Characterization and Water Quality Field Data Sheet (USEPA 1999)

2. Habitat Assessment Field Data Sheet (USEPA 1999)

3. Clipboard

4. Rite in the Rain pens or Sharpies

5. Digital Camera

6. Upstream/Downstream “arrows” or signs for photographing and documenting sampling reaches

7. Handheld GPS

Field Observations:

1. Arrive at one of the 50 sites for targeted furbearer mammal collection. These sites have already

been biasedly selected based on habitat signs (feeding beds, mammal tracks, etc) to have a

successful sample collection. Habitat only needs to be evaluated once, and should be conducted

the week before sampling begins, or earlier to assess vegetative growth prior to the onset of snow

and ice.

2. Two field technicians will use handheld GPS to locate the site.

3. Details and observations outlined below will be completed in the Habitat Assessment Data Sheet:

a. Station Identifier/Stream

b. Weather Conditions

c. Site Location/Map (this will include at least 2 photographs, one looking upstream and

one looking downstream. Arrows will be used to indicate “upstream” or “downstream” in

photograph. All Photographs will include Location ID. A central photograph may be

needed as well).

d. Watershed Features

e. Riparian Vegetation (this includes a buffer strip of a minimum of 18m).

f. Visual Water Quality Observations (i.e. odors, oils, etc/)


4. Two field technicians will provide numerical scores to 8 of the 10 parameters in the Habitat

Assessment Field Data Sheet for Low Gradient Streams. Parameters include:

a. Epifaunal substrate/Available Cover

b. Pool Substrate Characterization

c. Pool Variability

d. Channel Flow Status

e. Channel Alteration

f. Bank Stability

g. Vegetative Protection

h. Riparian Vegetative Zone Width

5. Complete Field Data Sheets for the site, initialize and date each page, and repeat steps 1-4.


Appendix E. Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) for Furbearer Collection

The protocol set forth in this Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) outlines the field procedures for the

harvest and collection of furbearing mammals within the AOC and close surrounding areas for tissue

sample analysis. Collection will be harvested from 4 aquatic furbearing species: Beaver(Castor

Canadensis), Muskrat(Ondatra zibethicus), Mink(Neovison vison), and the North American River Otter

(Lontra canadensis) and 1 furbearing woodland species, the Raccoon (Procyon lotor). As applicable,

methods and procedures for such harvesting will be in accordance with the New York State Trapping

Guidelines and Regulations and Wildlife Management Units (WMU) as outlined at

http://www.eregulations.com/newyork/hunting/furbearer-trapping/. Additional animals may be harvested

at a controlled level for a population study, or as incidental collection while targeting other species for

chemical analysis.

1.Furbearer Collection via Leg Grip and Body Grip Trapping Methods

Materials; The following materials will be used and available for use, as required, during collection of

sample species.

Health and Safety equipment (as required by the Health and Safety Plan);

N.Y. State Trapping Guidelines and Regulations

Field Notebook and Field data collection sheets

Appropriate sample containers with forms, N.Y. State furbearer tags, and labels

Modified Traps, including leg-grip, body-grip, and live cage style (catch and release)

Trapping Wire, Rebar Stakes, & Drowning Blocks and Weights

Lures and Bait for intended species

Trappers Waders & Shoulder length Gauntlets

Handheld GPS unit and Maps

Camera

Transport Cooler

Boat and Motor

Personal Floatation Devices (PFD’s)

Cull System

Dispatch Device

Catch Pole, Snare

Identification Tags and Licenses

Materials Continued:

Cleaning Equipment

Trapping Spade

Rope-Drag Rope


Furbearer Collection Procedures

Furbearer samples for laboratory analysis and or population research study will be collected from a boat

or via truck depending on ease and safety conditions for the time of year at designated river and marsh

locations. The procedures for the collection of sample animals are provided below. Due to changing

water levels and changing weather conditions some procedures may be altered slightly for safety reasons

of the personnel.

Furbearer Collection Procedure Using Leg-Grip Style Traps

1. Gear up for the weather conditions including waders and proper outerwear and gloves. Don the

appropriate safety equipment as required in the health and safety plan.

2. Select a habitat area within our targeted location that may have a population of target species

living in the area. Observation of tracks, feeding beds, or dens will determine the selection and

placement of traps.

3. Choose the correct trap size based on the desired animal that you intend to catch in that location.

4. In an area with a possibility of catching a larger animal at such location use a trap size suitable for

the larger animal.

5. Create a set based on type and location(for example pocket set for feeding area or resting, vs.

Blind set for crossover or pass through culvert)

6. Using wire attach the appropriate drowning device to the chain on the trap

7. Cable or a double strand of wire shall be used for larger target animals

8. Trap can be set in conjunction with bait or lure or both at some sets, Bait sets will not be used in

areas with in close proximity of inhabited dwellings with pets

9. Trap will be set so it has a covering required by N.Y.State DEC law. Trap must be completely

covered by water or a layer of earthen materials

10. More than one trap at a location will be wired to separate drowning divices as to not interfere

with the second trap

11. Trap will be set and left to operate overnight and checked within 24 hours

Furbearer Collection Procedure Using Body-Grip Style Traps



2. Select a habitat area that may or may not have a population of target species living in the area.


4. Blocking in a run or ditch may be required to be able to scale down a waterway for a body-grip to

be effective. This will be achieved by using natural debris to fill in part of the run

5. The trap will be set to the desired hieght in the run and stabilized based on size and water flow.

6. Stabilizing: in an ideal set a factory stabilizer will be attached to the trap and placed on the

bottom of the run. When a factory stabilizer is unavailable or not adequate for the set a system of

size appropriate sticks will be crossed through the springs to achieve a stable trap that will

function correctly

7. The trap will be wired to a terminate structure or a living tree or root system


8. A dive log will be placed over the trap.

9. Trap will be set and left to operate overnight and checked within 24 hours

Furbearer Collection Procedure Using Live Cage Style Traps in Areas Where Non Target Animals May

Be Present Or When The Goal Of Catch and Release is Warranted



2. Select a habitat area that may or may not have a population of target species living in the area.


4. Bait the trap for the intended target species

5. Set trap and check within 24 hours

Handling and Removal of deceased animal from trap procedure

1. Don proper PPE to handle LIVE animals

2. Check to make sure the animal is indeed deceased

3. Once confirmed deceased the animal may be taken out of the trap and placed in a plastic bag or

bin for transport

4. If more than 1 sample is wanted from this habitat then the trap may be reset at same location

5. If that is the completion of the trapping at that location then the trap will be removed from the set

and the habitat will be returned to as close as it was before the trapper disturbed it

6. The animal will then be properly furbearer possession tagged if required by N.Y.State DEC

7. The animal will have a cull tag attached to it for transport

8. A GPS coordinates reading will be taken of the catch location

9. An educated guess will be recorded of the area including estimated size of the area, estimated # of

undisturbed species that may still be living in the area, any abnormalities in the surrounding

habitat, and overall condition of the sample habitat

10. A Field Data sheet will be filled out giving as much detail that can be obtained at the time

11. The sample animal will then be transported back for processing

Handling and Removal of live animal from trap procedure

1. Don proper PPE to handle LIVE animals

2. Approach animal in a route that is free from debris and trip hazards

3. Do not loose visual contact with the animal

4. Determine if the trapped animal is suitable for harvest, or should be released

5. If animal is to be dispatched then it will be done as humanely as possible.

6. The dispatched animal will not be approached until confirmation is made that such animal is

deceased.

7. Animals that are non-target species (i.e. bird of prey, domestic animal, or other furbearer mammal

not targeted for study) will be released and recorded in field notebook. If animal is a target species,

but it is determined it is not a good sample due to size, Female in the spring of the year, for

population study use only, etc., it will be released and recorded in field notebook.

8. If animal is to be released then it will be done in a manner that causes the least amount of stress on

the animal Non target animals will be secured with a catch pole by one technician and the trap will


be removed by the other technician, after everyone is clear of the area and the technician feels

comfortable the animal will be released from the catch pole. A non target animal will be one that is

not suitable for the study such as A specie not covered under the outlined project, a young of the

year animal, or a domestic animal. A sick or diseased looking sample will be euthanized and

arrangements will be made with NYSDEC and NYDOH to assess the animals health.

9. It will then be determined if the trap will be placed back at that location or moved to another.

10. A Furbearer Mammal Field Data Sheet will be completed at the location of harvest, will stay with

the sample in transport to laboratory for processing.

11. A cull System identifier will be placed on the samples hind foot and the cull board will be filled out

for transport

12. The sample animal can then be placed in a clean bin in the back of truck separate of any other

animals. Since it will be late-October-December, it is anticipated weather will be cool enough for

preservation. On unexpected warm days (> 60°F), the sample will be placed in a large cooler on

top of a bed of ice.

13. The sample will then be transported back to the processing location where visual observations will

be done, looking for abnormalities, odd coloration characteristics, and hair quality for the time of

year. Observations will be noted on the Furbearer Mammal Field Data Sheet.

14. Then the sample may be placed in the freezer with a label and cull identifier on it to ensure its

harvest location is not jeopardized

15. If time and space is available than the sample can be processed that day


Appendix F. Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) for Tissue Extraction

The protocol set forth in this Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) outlines the lab procedures for the

extraction of the liver for 3 furbearer species: Mink (Neovison vison), North American River Otter

(Lontra canadensis) and the Raccoon (Procyon lotor). The processing and extraction will be performed

in a clean 12’ by 12’ shed set up for the purpose of clean furbearer processing. The shed will be set up to

have sanitary stainless steel countertops and a washing and disinfecting station.

Materials: ; The following materials will be used and available for use, as required, during the dissection

and extraction process.

PPE, including apron, splashguard glasses, latex gloves, long sleeve shirts, pants, and

protective work boots.

Field Notebook and Field data collection sheets

Appropriate sample containers with forms, N.Y.State furbearer tags, and labels

PGL 2002 top loading digital scale (0.01 grams)

O Country large capacity digital scale (lbs. and kgs)

Cleaning and sanitation equipment

o Clorox disinfecting wipes

o Oder Killz disinfecting solution

o Bleach

o Fast Orange hand cleaner o Force Flex garbage bags

Scotch Brite Greener clean non scratch scrub sponges4oz Wide Mouth Jar & Cap Specimen

Jars (eNasco Science)

3-Carolina #3 scalpel Handles with 200-disposable Sterile blades size 10 and 12

60-Feather disposable sterile scalpel no. 22

Dexter Sani-Safe skinning knives

Small Caliper ruler

Nitrile disposable gloves

2-Carolina Biological Cartilage Knife 1 ¾

Carolina Biological Dissecting kits with pins, forceps, tissue scrapers, and tissue scissors

5x Magnifying viewer

Streamline anti-fog Goggles

Satterlee bone saw

Poly Sheeting

Reynolds Wrap Aluminum foil, food grade.

Ziplock Double Zipper Freezer Bags, 1 gal., and I qt.

Stainless steel pans

Stainless steel countertop with wood cutting boards covered with 2 layers of aluminum foil

Avery Laboratory Research Notebook

Waterproof tape over Sample labels

Bradyid Tamper proof Security seal


Skinning:

1. Skinning of the mammal is required to obtain access to the organs. After obtaining a sample from

the field, return to the field laboratory to weigh, measure, skin, and dissect. Skinning should be

done as soon as possible after they are killed. The skin is easier to remove when the animal is

fresh.

2. Wear gloves when handling the animal to avoid diseases such as rabies, tularemia, distemper, and

dermatophilus.

3. Don appropriate PPE for skinning procedures, including apron, latex gloves, protective eyewear

with splashguards, and appropriate footwear. Brush or comb any burrs or dirt out of fur before

handling, and be cautious of fleas, ticks, and mites that may be on the animal’s fur. Be diligent in

washing hands with warm water and soap when handling fur, and changing gloves to prevent

cross contamination from one individual to the next.

4. Weigh and record the weight of the mammal as Total Weight. Depending on size, this could be

done in pounds (lbs) or kilograms (kg), and then converted to grams (g).

5. All skinning will be performed in accordance with New York State Fur Handling procedures for

cased (mink, muskrat, raccoon, and otter) and open pelts (beaver).

http://www.dec.ny.gov/docs/wildlife_pdf/nytrapedmanual.pdf

6. Once the mammal has been skinned, weigh and record the weight of the mammal as Skinned

Carcass Weight. Depending on size, this could be done in pounds (lbs) or kilograms (kg), and

then converted to grams (g).

7. The carcass will then be cleaned off of any excess blood and wrapped in plastic, A label will be

placed on the outside of the plastic and covered with packaging tape to make sure it doesn’t come

off. The label will include the date, sample ID, and Location ID.

8. The carcass can then be placed in the freezer to partially freeze for extraction work that day or to

be preformed the next day.

The skin of the sample will also have the same information on a label and will be connected through

the eye hole with a zip tie until no longer needed.

9. Scrub the surfaces with water and a 10% bleach solution to reduce chances of infection from the

animal. All disposable materials should be double bagged for disposal with regular garbage.

10. Repeat steps #1-7 for the next sample

11. The animal will then be frozen slightly to make the dissection process easier.

Liver Extraction:

1. Wash all utensils, the stainless steel cutting surface, any cutting boards, and surfaces with a

cleaning solution, tap water, and disposable sponge. Conduct a final rinse with distilled water.

2. All sample processing will take place on a cutting board fixed with a disposable pre-cut piece of

aluminum foil inside of a stainless steel pan to contain specimen. Pins from the dissection kit

may be used to hold the sample in place, but will not be in contact with any part of the extracted

sample. When tissue removal is complete, aluminum foil will be disposed of with the carcass.

3. Rinse all utensil handles used for processing before, and after each sample (mammal). Disposable

blades will be used for each individual sample to prevent cross-contamination.



4. Gloves must be worn when handling tissue samples. Latex gloves may be worn. All gloves must

be talc or dust free.

5. Tissue samples should ideally be processed immediately after collection. If this is not possible,

carcass should be frozen until time of processing. Tissue should be partially thawed before

starting to be able to cut through the flesh. NOTE: if whole bodies are not being processed, and

the tissue is partially frozen during dissection, there is less of a chance of puncturing the gut

cavity and any internal organs. Accidental puncture of the internal organs may contaminate the

part(s) of the animal that have been selected for analysis. Unintended ruptures of internal organs

may also occur during the freezing process. If this is observed during dissection, it must be noted

in the processing records.

6. Prior to making the first incision, determine and record on field data sheet, sex of mammal, and

any observed anomalies on the tissue and its location. Notes of sexual maturity or reproductive

health of females will be made if there are signs of carrying a previous litter. Male sexual

maturity may be made for Otter and Raccoon by measuring and weighing the Bacula.

7. Make a qualitative estimate of subcutaneous, intra-abdominal, and mesentery adipose tissue on a

0 to 5 scale (0 = Emaciated, 1 = Thin, 2 = Fair, 3 = Good, 4, = Very Good, 5 = Excellent).

8. Dissecting tools such as scalpel, scissor, forceps, pins and tray will be used. Before dissecting the

sample, pin the animal (at the legs) to a piece of plywood covered with aluminum foil with the

ventral side up inside a stainless steel tray.

9. Trained and experienced technicians will begin the incision by opening up the abdominal cavity

from the genitals to the sternum to make the internal organs accessible.

10. Cutting the skin flap at the abdomen cavity, carefully separate the adipose tissue from the muscle

tissue. Below it should be a white/yellow material. Take this material out. Weigh and record the

adipose tissue.

11. Extreme caution will be used by the technicians to gently move aside the intestines to access the

liver underneath. Latex or Nitrile gloves will be worn at all times to ensure no cross-

contamination or exposure of sample to particles that would be considered foreign to internal

organs.

12. Prior to cutting the targeted organ, the liver, use sterilized forceps to lift the liver for severing

from connected tissue so underlying organs are not disturbed or accidentally punctured.

13. Weigh and record the weight of the liver, and place in a smaller stainless steel pan for sample

preparation. Use a sheet of wax paper, or aluminum foil on the scale for each tissue measurement.

Change between each measurement. Total liver weight will vary by species, but expected to range

from 30g – 300g

14. Cut liver in half. Prepare one half for shipment to a lab. And the other half to be archived at

SRMT in a freezer. Place samples in 4 oz. glass specimenjar with an aluminum barrier and screw

top lid affixed with a security seal and sample label. See sample handling, packaging, and

shipping procedures below in Appendix G. Store sample in freezer until shipment to lab.

15. 30-40 grams is needed for lab analysis. If a Total liver weight does not allow for half of a liver to

be archived at SRMT, the whole liver may be submitted to the laboratory, and archival request at

lab facility. This may be the case for some mink. Raccoon and Otter should be of sufficient size.

16. Identify each organ, and remove them from the abdomen cavity if needed. Below the thoracic

region is the abdomen. The major organs of abdomen include liver (dark colored organ), stomach

(beneath the liver), spleen (attached to the lower side of stomach), small intestine (highly coiled


digestive organ), pancreas (between stomach and small intestine), large intestine or colon

(continuation of small intestine that leads to anus), cecum (intermediate structure between small

and large intestine) and rectum (just before anus).

17. All disposable materials must be double bagged for disposal. Dispose of carcasses as per

NYSDEC regulations outlined in http://www.dec.ny.gov/docs/wildlife_pdf/nytrapedmanual.pdf

18. Wash all equipment and utensils with 10% bleach and Distilled water, and repeat Steps #1-16.

19. The only expected waste fluids will be associated with any unabsorbed 10% bleach and water that

was not collected via disposable media. Any excess waste fluids will be collected in a 5-gallon

bucket under the open drain sink, allow the bleach to evaporate, and then disposed of in a drain

for normal water treatment.

Muscle Extraction:

1. Follow steps #1-9 above for Liver extraction. Instead of targeting the liver, after adipose tissue

has been removed and weighed target the appropriate muscle tissue for beaver and muskrat.

2. Target Muscle tissue with no more than 10% fatty tissue from the left hind leg of the beaver and

muskrat. If there is trap damage to the left hind leg of a sample animal causing blood impact and

bruising to the muscle tissue, the other leg will be used. Record in field data sheet.

3. For beaver, a composite muscle tissue representative of that one individual will be collected.

Target a minimum of a 50g cut for each section. The first section will be from the loin muscle

running parallel to the spine midway of the animal’s body. This sample will be taken under the

saddle and the saddle will be removed (the saddle is the layer of fat and muscle tissue that that is

in between the hide and the body mass of the animal). Second sample section will be the muscle

tissue of the higher thigh of the left hind leg. Third sample section will be the muscle tissue of

the beaver tail. The beaver tail is the portion of muscle and bone from above the hind legs to the

base of the appendage referred to as the flapper.

4. Weigh and record each muscle section. Place in 4oz. glass jar, label, and prepare for shipment.

5. A minimum of 100 grams, and a maximum of 200 grams will be submitted for analysis

6. Repeat step #3-4. Collect a second composite from similar locations for archival at SRMT,

instead of shipment.

7. If a muskrat, a composite sample of a muskrat will consist of two sections of muscle. Target a

minimum of a 25 g cut for each section. First collection will be from a section from the loin

muscle that runs parallel to the spine, and a second section of the muscle tissue off the left hind

leg will be used. 50 g total will be targeted for laboratory submittal. Sample size may be too

small for an archival sample; shipped sample will be archived at laboratory for 30 days.

8. Weigh and record each muscle section. Place in 4 oz. glass jar, label, and prepare for shipment.



Appendix G. Standard Operating Procedures (SOP) for Field Sample

Handling, Packing, and Shipping Procedures

This protocol sets forth the field procedures for sample handling, packing, and shipping for all tissue

samples collected for the Furbearer Mammal Study.

Handling:

1. Fill in sample label with:

a. Sample ID

b. Sampled by

c. Location

d. Analysis required

e. Date

f. Time Sampled

g. Comments

i. Include Tissue type

ii. Preservative if added

2. Cover the label with clear packing tape to secure the label onto the container

3. Check the caps on the sample containers to ensure that they are tightly sealed.

4. Place a security seal over the container cap. Use clear packaging tape to prevent it from becoming

loose, if necessary.

5. Initiate chain-of-custody by designated sampling personnel responsible for sample custody (after

sampling or prior to sample packing). Note: if the designated sampling person relinquishes the

samples to other sampling or field personnel for packaging or other purposes, the samplers will

complete the chain-of custody prior to this transfer. The appropriate personnel will sign and date

the chain-of-custody form to document the sample custody transfer.

Packing :

1. Using packing tape, secure the outside and inside of the drain plug at the bottom of the cooler that

is used for sample transport, if applicable.

2. Remove 4 oz. glass jar samples from the freezer, if necessary.

3. Place each 4 oz. glass jar inside pipe insulation tubes to prevent breakage.

4. Place one to two inches of cushioning material at the bottom of the cooler.

5. Package ice in double lined Ziploc ®-type plastic bags and place loosely in the cooler. Do not

pack ice so tightly that it may prevent addition of sufficient cushioning material.

6. Fill the remaining space in the cooler with cushioning material.

7. Place the completed chain-of-custody forms from laboratory in a large Ziploc ®-type bag and

tape the forms to the inside of the cooler lid.


8. Close the lid of the cooler and fasten with packing tape.

9. Wrap strapping tape around both ends of the cooler at least twice.

10. Mark the cooler on the outside with the following information: shipping address, return address,

“Fragile” labels on top and on one side, and arrows indicating “This Side UP” on two adjacent

sides.

Shipping :

1. All samples will be delivered by an express carrier within 48 hours or less from the date of

sample collection.

2. Send an electronic chain-of-custody to laboratory and/or call laboratory Project Manager to notify

a shipment is to be expected. This is particularly important if shipment is sent close to a weekend,

or holiday.

3. The following chain-of-custody procedures will apply to sample shipping:

a. Relinquish the sample containers to the laboratory via express carrier. The signed and

dated forms should be included in the cooler. The express carrier is not required to sign

the chain-of-custody forms. The sampler should retain the express carrier receipt or bill

of lading.

b. When the samples are received by the laboratory, the laboratory personnel shall complete

the chain-of-custody forms by recording receipt of samples, measure and record the

internal temperature of the shipping container, and then check the sample identification

numbers on the containers to the chain-of-custody forms.

Quality Assurance Project Plan for Field Collection - Saint ...

Documents

Transcript of Quality Assurance Project Plan for Field Collection - Saint ...