Des Plaines River Watershed Workgroup Midwest Biodiversity Institute

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Marylands Approach to Success Stories Presented to the Region III States Meeting May 12, 2009 Presented by Jim George.
Advertisements

Framework for the Ecological Assessment of Impacted Sediments at Mining Sites in Region 7 By Jason Gunter (R7 Life Scientist) and.
Measuring Water Pollution
TMDL Development Upper Kanawha River Watershed August 18, 2011 WV DEP WV DEP Dave Montali.
Report on Biological & Water Quality Monitoring in the East Branch DuPage Watershed: 2011 DuPage River-Salt Creek Work Group August 28, 2013 Chris O.
2009 Water Quality Monitoring Report – Fish Creek Vaughn Hauser, B.Sc. Naomi Parker, B.Sc., BIT, CEPIT.
Lec 12: Rapid Bioassessment Protocols (RBP’s)
Summary of Biological Assessment Programs and Biocriteria Development for States, Tribes, Territories, and Interstate Commissions: Streams and Wadeable.
Nutrient Standards – Where will they lead? OWEA / WEF Webinar February 24, 2011 Dan Dudley, Ohio EPA Division of Surface Water.
Chesapeake Bay Program Monitoring Activities and Monitoring Network Design Chesapeake Bay Program Monitoring Activities and Monitoring Network Design Stephen.
Presented at the 9 th Stakeholder Meeting Mike Herrmann, NCEEP Central Watershed Planner April 20th, 2010 Ecosystem Enhancement Program (EEP) Intake Stessor.
Common Monitoring Parameters. Step 1 Consider purpose/objectives of monitoring Assess use attainment Characterize watershed Identify pollutants and sources.
Missouri Nutrient Criteria Plan Mark Osborn October 20, 2005.
Analyzing Stream Condition Using EMAP Algae Data By Nick Paretti ARIZONA PHYCOLOGY ECOL 475.
Lecture ERS 482/682 (Fall 2002) TMDL Assessment ERS 482/682 Small Watershed Hydrology.
Alabama’s Water Quality Assessment and Listing Methodology ADEM QA Workshop February 13, 2006.
Pomme de Terre Lake Water Quality Summary Pomme de Terre Lake Water Quality Summary US Army Corps of Engineers Environmental Resources Section.
Linking Pollution to Water Body Integrity - First Year of Research Vladimir Novotny CDM Chair Professor Northeastern University.
NOAA Fisheries, Southwest Region Protected Resources Division Santa Rosa, California Science, Service, Stewardship Melanie D. Harrison, Ph.D Technical.
Lake Erie HABs Workshop Bill Fischbein Supervising Attorney Water Programs March 16, 2012 – Toledo March 30, Columbus.
The Non-tidal Water Quality Monitoring Network: past, present and future opportunities Katie Foreman Water Quality Analyst, UMCES-CBPO MASC Non-tidal Water.
Implementation Procedures (IPs) Brittany Lee Standards Implementation Team
The Great Miami River Created By: Vidya Misra, Ke’Avonna Williams, and Kristin Cummings.
TMDL Development Upper Guyandotte River Watershed May 4 th & 5 th, 2015.
NWQMC May 8, 2006 KEY ISSUES AND UNDERLYING CONCEPTS IN USE ATTAINABILITY ANALYSES FOR AQUATIC LIFE DESIGNATED USES Chris O. Yoder Center for Applied.
Aquatic Life Selenium Standards Cottonwood Creek Drainage Cherry Creek Segment 4b Regulation 38 June 9, 2015.
Proposed Nutrient Criteria for NH’s Estuaries Philip Trowbridge, P.E. NH Estuaries Project / NH DES November 17, 2008.
National Aquatic Resource Surveys Wadeable Streams Assessment Overview November, 2007.
Response of benthic algae communities to nutrient enrichment in agricultural streams: Implications for establishing nutrient criteria R.W. Black 1, P.W.
Deep River-Portage Burns Watershed TMDL Stakeholder Meeting March 13, 2013.
Adem.alabama.gov ADEM’s Monitoring Summary Reports Alabama – Tombigbee CWP Stakeholders Meeting Montgomery, Alabama 3 February 2010 Lisa Huff – ADEM Field.
Indicator Status Updates Overview Nita Sylvester, EPA CBPO Chair of STAR’s Indicator Workgroup.
Setting Standards: The Science of Water Quality Criteria EA Engineering, Science, and Technology ® Presented by: James B. Whitaker Review of Annex 1 of.
Water Quality in Tryon Creek Initial Results from Portland’s Revised Watershed Monitoring Approach.
NWQMC San Jose, CA May 8, 2006 Combining Dynamic Assessment with Traditional Monitoring Approaches to Improve Understanding of NPS Pollution Impacts William.
Report Card Scoring Several options under consideration for scoring and aggregating data.
Nutrient and Sediment Loading in Sougahatchee Creek and the Impacts on Aquatic Biota Report submitted to West Point Stevens and the Cities of Auburn and.
By Emily, Veronica, and Shelby (Group #1). Assignment n To develop a few hypothesis about the Fourmile watershed, in order to demonstrate our knowledge.
Potential Changes to Sections and 307.9: Standards Applicability and Attainment Gregg Easley TCEQ Water Quality Standards Team September 6, 2007.
Case Study Development of an Index of Biotic Integrity for the Mid-Atlantic Highland Region McCormick et al
Water Quality Investigations How Does Land-Use Impact Water Quality? Mitigating Water Quality – Current Issues July 9, 2015 Jim Kipp, Associate Director.
Development of Nutrient Water Quality Standards for Rivers and Streams in Ohio Ohio EPA ORSANCO, October 20, 2009 George Elmaraghy, P.E., Chief.
Storm Water Permit Program Authority to regulate storm water discharges derives from 40 CFR Illinois EPA is delegated authority to administer this.
Think about answering the questions: Who? What? Where? When? Why? How? Before your volunteers begin collecting data.
Texas Surface Water Quality Standards Update Joe Martin Water Quality Standards Work Leader Joe Martin Water Quality Standards Work Leader.
Streams & Rivers Lakes & Ponds Groundwater Monitoring
Freshwater Attributes
Watershed Health Indicators
GREAT BAY and NEW HAMPSHIRE WATER QUALITY STANDARDS
Shirley Birosik Environmental Specialist
California’s Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Central Coast Ambient Monitoring Program Using Multiple Lines of Evidence to Assess Biostimulatory.
Cara Cowan Watts Graduate Student Biosystems Engineering
Nutrient Benchmark Development
Nebraska Water Quality Index
Request Approval of (d) Listing Methodology
Drww general membership meeting
Public Meeting February 19, 2009
Public Meeting February 19, 2009
Debra S. Baker and Donald G. Huggins
Lake Erie HABs Workshop
Rich Batiuk U.S. EPA Chesapeake Bay Program Office
303(d) List March 9, 2016 WQC Jeff Manning, DWR
TOWARDS THE GOAL OF SETTING NUTRIENT CRITERIA FOR THE DELAWARE ESTUARY
History of Integrated Prioritization Systems
MSDGC Integrated Prioritization System (IPS)
Update on the NC Nutrient Criteria Development Plan
IBI’s: An Introduction
2018 Texas Surface Water Quality Standards Revision
Water Quality Planning Division Monitoring & Assessment Section
Water Quality Planning Division Monitoring & Assessment Section
Presentation transcript:

Des Plaines River Watershed Workgroup Midwest Biodiversity Institute Biological and Water Quality Assessment of the Upper Des Plaines Watershed Des Plaines River Watershed Workgroup August 17, 2017 Chris O. Yoder Midwest Biodiversity Institute Columbus, OH

Upper Des Plaines Watershed Bioassessment Pollution survey design – geometric allocation of sampling sites with additional sites positioned in proximity to suspected sources of stress & contamination. Each site assigned a consistent site code (e.g., 13-6). 70 sites sampled in mainstem & tributary subwatersheds in 2016. Each sampled for biological, habitat, & water quality parameters. Employed 3 crews over a July-October seasonal index period. Followed IEPA methods to ensure data consistency & relevance of results. Three year rotation will initiate in 2017. This design yielded 70 sites which was 3.5X the sites previously assessed by IEPA – so why would this be important?

Because the allocation of sampling sites positioned in closer proximity to sources of stress & contamination was needed to identify and rank all relevant pollution impacts and gradients – the result was a different set of causes than that identified by IEPA.

Evaluating Chemical Results: WQC & Threshold Effects Parameter Water Quality Criteria Effect Thresholds Non-effect Benchmarks IL Chronic IL Acute Ohio EPA SW Ohio NOAA SQRT Other Regional Reference IL Non-Standard Demand Group BOD5 NA -- 2.48 mg/L [HW Streams] 2.96 mg/L [WD Streams] 2.60 mg/L [BT Rivers] 2.00 mg/L [HW Streams] Dissolved Oxygen (D.O.) 5.5./6.0 mg/L [7-day rolling avg.] 3.5/5.0 mg/L [minimum] 7.2 mg/L [HW Streams] 5.32 mg/L [All Streams] 6.6 mg/L [HW Streams] Suspended Solids (TSS) 16.0 mg/L [HW Streams] 65.7 mg/L [HW Streams] 70.8 mg/L [WD Streams] 74.3 mg/L 28.0 mg/L [HW Streams] Nutrients Group Ammonia-N (NH3-N) 1.24 mg/L [pH 8.0/25°C] 8.40 mg/L 0.05 mg/L [HW Streams] 0.31 mg/L [HW Streams] 0.15 mg/L [DRSCW IPS] 0.025 mg/L [HW Streams] Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen (TKN) 0.50 mg/L [HW Streams] 0.51 mg/L [HW Streams] 0.58 mg/L [WD Streams] 1.05 mg/L [BT Rivers] 1.00 mg/L [DRSCW IPS11] 0.70 mg/L This was all we had to work with for the 2016 Upper Des Plaines bioassessment – the IPS will provide more regionally relevant stressor thresholds.

Illinois EPA Fish Index of Biotic Integrity The end goal are biological assemblages that meet the State’s aquatic life use “biocriteria”

Illinois EPA IBI Narrative Evaluations IL General Use Attainment Threshold

Sediment results for 2009

A “lines-of-evidence” approach is used to assign causes & sources. Finding Biological impairments is a first step in impaired waters listings. A “lines-of-evidence” approach is used to assign causes & sources.

Nutrient Criteria Options Traditional numeric criterion approach: Fixed concentration-based numbers for N and P. Focused on relationship with aquatic life and/or nuisance algal growths. . . . or based on regional reference conditions. Combined criteria approach – focused on the effects of nutrient enrichment. Multiple effect indicators - biocriteria, diel D.O. swing (some use pH swing), and benthic or sestonic chlorophyll a. Decision trees for attainment and non-attainment of biocriteria, exceedances of maximum D.O. swing, and levels of chlorophyll a

Proposed Stream Nutrient Assessment Procedure (SNAP): An Effects Based Approach STEP 1 STEP 2 STEP 3 STEP 4 Biological Criteria DO Swing 2 Benthic Chlorophyll 3 Preliminary Assessment: Trophic Condition Status of Evaluated Segment or Waterbody All indices attaining or in non-significant departure1 Normal or low swings (≤6.5 mg/l) Low to moderate (≤320 mg/m2) Attaining use / Not threatened High (>320 mg/m2) Attaining use, but may be threatened See Flow Chart A Wide swings (>6.5 mg/l) Low (≤182 mg/m2) Moderate to high (>182 mg/m2) Non-attaining (one or more indices below non-significant departure) Impaired, but cause(s) other than nutrients Chart B Impaired; likely nutrients over-enrichment Chart C Impaired; Nutrients over-enrichment