Stream Ecosystem Assessment Group 1 Camp Caesar August 2003.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Information Needs for the Integrated F&W Program (ESA and Power Act) Jim Geiselman - BPA.
Advertisements

Riparian Thinning: Logic Paths for Silvicultural Prescriptions
Evaluation of Aquatic Ecosystem Health Using a Multi-metric Index of Biological Integrity for Okanagan Streams.
Biological Response of Two North Central PA Streams After Flood of September 2011 Fred Rogers CWI, Supervisor Dr. Mel Zimmerman Introduction: Within Pennsylvania,
What’s Mud Got to Do With It? Stephen J. Klaine, Ph.D. Department of Biological Sciences Clemson University
Clearwater River Habitat/Bioassessment
Aquatic Entomology ZOOL 484/584 Policies Course outline - website.
Summary of Case Studies Designed to Determine the Influence of Multiple Stressors on Benthic Communities in Urban California Streams Lenwood W. Hall, Jr.
Watershed System Physical Properties Stream flow (cfs) Stream Channel Pattern Substrate Chemical Properties pH Dissolved Oxygen Temperature Nutrients Turbidity.
Developing an Index of Stream – Wetland – Riparian Condition Brooks et al
Habitat Assessment Developed by Ken Cooke Kentucky Division of Water Watershed Watch Program Coordinator Modified by Mike Kemp Professor of Environmental.
Water It was wet!. pH pH measures the acidity or alkalinity of water. We tested pH of the Huntington River, Sherman Brook, and rainwater. We collected.
Common Monitoring Parameters. Step 1 Consider purpose/objectives of monitoring Assess use attainment Characterize watershed Identify pollutants and sources.
A landscape perspective of stream food webs: Exploring cumulative effects and defining biotic thresholds.
Bioassessment 1.0. Stream Visual Assessment Protocol 1. Turbidity 2. Plant growth 3. Channel Condition 4. Channel Flow Alteration 5. Percent Embeddedness.
Watershed Assessment (ENSC 202)
Assessing Aquatic Ecosystems & Measurement. Aquatic Ecosystem Assessment The health of an aquatic ecosystem can be determined by examining a variety of.
EEP Watershed Planning Overview August 12, Ecosystem Enhancement Program Nationally recognized, innovative, non-regulatory program formed in July.
“Habitat Assessment Using the QHEI “ Edward T. Rankin June 6 City of Columbus, Level 3 Training Course Columbus, Ohio Senior ResearchScientist
River Ecosystem Assessment Group 2 Josh Parenti Josh Parenti Tristan Bond Tristan Bond Brady Russell Brady Russell Laura Kingsbury Laura Kingsbury Robert.
Greg Jennings, PhD, PE Professor, Biological & Agricultural Engineering North Carolina State University BAE 579: Stream Restoration Lesson.
Scientific motivation of the CHaMP project: How CHaMP data can be used to answer fish and habitat management questions Chris Jordan – NOAA-Fisheries Brice.
Ecology and environment, inc. International Specialists in the Environment The McKinstry Creek & Riparian Area NYSDOT Rt. 219 Mitigation Project Analysis.
Hydrosapiens GIV eSAT of Vermont: Water Group 2013 Ben DeJong, Nina Brundage, Caitlin Beaudet, Julie Rickner, Mariah Ollive, Hannah VanGuilder, Heather.
Probabilistic Monitoring of Streams Below Small Impoundments in Tennessee Debbie Arnwine Water Pollution Control
How do humans affect watersheds, the hydrologic cycle and stream ecology ? AKA management implications.
Riparian Effectiveness Evaluations Indicator Development Peter J. Tschaplinski Research Branch Ministry of Forests.
Applications of habitat data to fishery management Distribution and abundance of habitat for different life stages Barriers to migration; Waterfalls /
Habitat Presentation 1 Phil Kaufmann --- USEPA, Corvallis, OR
STREAM ECOSYSTEMS.
Stream Processes and Habitat Ryan Johnson. Overview Watershed Processes – Factors and their effects on the watershed as a whole Stream Processes – Factors.
Andrew Lipsky State Biologist USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Rhode island Watershed Stewardship Class: Introduction.
Module 10/11 Stream Surveys Stream Surveys – September 2004 Part 2 – Habitat Assessment.
Development of a Southeastern Reference Stream Monitoring Network Debbie Arnwine Water Resources, TDEC
Kentucky’s comprehensive Water Monitoring and Assessment Program addresses water quality management objectives outlined in the Clean Water Act, as well.
The Importance of Professionally Trained Citizen Monitors For California Bioassessment Jim Harrington WPCL Bioassessment Laboratory.
Assessing Linkages between Nearshore Habitat and Estuarine Fish Communities in the Chesapeake Bay Donna Marie Bilkovic*, Carl H. Hershner, Kirk J. Havens,
Stream Quality Assessment Biological Monitoring. WHY Monitor Stream Quality? To determine if problems exist in our streams and rivers.
Effects of Multi-scale Environmental Characteristics on Agricultural Stream Biota in the Midwestern USA 5th National Monitoring Conference May 9, 2006.
Fish Assemblages of the Wabash River Mark Pyron. Wabash River Fishes 1.Large river 2.High diversity 3.History of human impact 4.Fish assemblages respond.
Flowing water.  vitally important geologically, biologically, historically and culturally.  contain only 0.001% of the total amount of the worlds water.
WATER QUALITY ANALYSIS AND MODELING OF AMBALANGA RIVER PRESENTED BY: JUAN RAFAEL ANGELES JESSICA M. JUNIO MARIAN MAE MELLIZAS IAN KEITH RELUCIO MARY JOY.
Rapid Bioassessment Protocols for low gradient streams) for species richness, composition and pollution tolerance, as well as a composite benthic macroinvertebrate.
Identifying Changes to Stream Condition caused by Urbanization How understanding the responses can improve ecological risk characterization
Comparison of Benthic Invertebrate Communities Upstream and Downstream of Proposed Culvert Installations in Alabama Amy C. Gill USGS, Alabama Water Science.
National Monitoring Conference May 7-11, 2006
Multimetric Concepts Index 101 Michael Paul; Jeroen Gerritsen Tetra Tech, Inc.
Lec 11: Stream Ecology- Abiotic Features Lentic-Lotic Comparisons -Major influences & processes Hydrology, Morphology, & Discharge Human Alterations.
Water Assessment Data Lab Assignment # 5 Land Use The first thing you notice when field sampling is the area around your site. What type of land use.
Section 3: Stream Deposition
EPA HWI Comments on CA Assessment June 26, 2013 HSP Call 2 major categories of comments: – Report writing (we will work on this) – Content/Analysis/Discussion.
Case Study Development of an Index of Biotic Integrity for the Mid-Atlantic Highland Region McCormick et al
New Mexico Watershed Watch Your school name and river name This project funded by the NM Dept. Of Game & Fish and the Sports Fish Restoration Program.
Qualitative Habitat Evaluation Index Bradley Hansen John Nieber Department of Bioproducts and Biosystems Engineering For BBE 4535/5535 Fall 2011.
Stream and Watershed Information What does it consist of? Who has it? Where do you find it?
Stream Geomorphic Assessment of Allen Brook Jarrett Arthur, Amy Myers Shea Hagy, Mike McDonald.
Mountaintop Mining/Valley Fills in Appalachia
River Vocabulary Science 1.
Riparian Management Effectiveness Evaluations
J. M. C. K Jayawardhana1, W. D. T. M Gunawardhana 1, E. P
Lotic vs. Lentic Systems
Henrico County Stream Assessment / Watershed Management Program
Stream Geomorphic Assessment of Allen Brook
Water Testing Project for the North Fork River
Module 10/11 Stream Surveys
Mulberry River Watershed Management Plan
Discharge, stream flow & channel shape
Summary of Case Studies Designed to Determine the Influence of Multiple Stressors on Benthic Communities in Urban California Streams Lenwood W. Hall, Jr.
Module # 17 Overview of Geomorphic Channel Design Practice
Kastanis- Existing Conditions
Presentation transcript:

Stream Ecosystem Assessment Group 1 Camp Caesar August 2003

Group 1 Study Sites Birch River Craig’s Run Big Rough Run South Fork Cranberry River

Birch River – General Description Watershed –Elk River –48.41 km^2 –Mixed (Ag., Forest, Residential) –Moderate NPS; low local erosion 3 rd Order Perennial Coldwater stream LB: Forest (Sycamore, Alder);RB: Narrow Riparian Zone (due to road) Low LWD Aquatic Veg. (Sedge: 2%, Biofilm: 85%) Sediment Type – Boulder/Cobble Bed

Birch River – General Description Geology –Stream origin: Non-Glacial Montane –Rock types: Pottsville sandstone – low buffering cap. Conemaugh shale – moderate buffering cap.

Birch River – General Description Sampling Conditions –Cloud Cover: 90% –Air Temp: 75 F –Hvy rainfall in last several days Visual Condition –High canopy cover –Low erosion stream banks adj. road

Birch River - Stream Flow Channel Data –Wetted width = 9 m –Avg depth = 0.28 m –Cross sectional area = 2.45 m^2 –Avg velocity = 0.36 m^2 Discharge Q = 1.05 m^3/sec

Birch River – Water Quality

Birch River EPA Rapid Visual Habitat Assessment Epifaunal Substrate/Vegetative Cover Embeddedness Velocity/Depth Regime Sediment Deposition Channel Flow Status Channel Alteration Frequency of Riffles Bank Stability Vegetative Protection Riparian Vegetative Zone Width /9 6/6 7/5 Total = 156 (78%)

Birch River – Benthic Invertebrates

Birch River – Fish

Birch River – Overall Condition Score

Group 1.4 Sue Byrd & Renee Fleshman Big Rough Run Stream Assessment

Big Rough Run General Description Cranberry River 6.99 km 2 basin area (1.05 m 3 /s) Pottsville Sandstone Cranberry Wilderness Impacted by road

Big Rough Run Water Quality pH= 4.96 Conductivity = 27 µs/cm 3 Total Hardness = 34 mg/l CaCO 3 Alkalinity = 0 mg/l CaCO 3 Indicates sterile acidic conditions

Big Rough Run EPA Rapid Visual Habitat Assessment Epifaunal Substrate/Vegetative Cover Embeddedness Velocity/Depth Regime Sediment Deposition Channel Flow Status Channel Alteration Frequency of Riffles Bank Stability Vegetative Protection Riparian Vegetative Zone Width /7 9/9 9/6 Total = 142 (71%)

Big Rough Run – Benthic Invertebrates IndicesScore% Correlation % EPT Abundance EPT Richness % Generally Tolerant % Ephemeroptera Modified Hilsenhoff Index % Dominance Taxa Richness WVSCI84.2 Acid SCI74.4 Site Name Stream Rating Scale - SCI ExcellentGoodMarginalPoor Big Rough Run > < 55.0 Site Code Stream Rating Scale - S0S ExcellentGoodMarginalPoor 0 > < 11.0

Big Rough Run (Absence of Fish)

Big Rough Run

Stream Ecosystem Assessment Group 1.2 CRAIGS RUN Camp Caesar August 2003

Craigs Run – General Description Williams/Gauley Watershed 8.71 km 2 Basin Area (Discharge = 0.04m 3 /s) Forest Land Use (Monongahela National Forest) Aggrading Stream: Cobble/Gravel Mauch Chunk & Pottsville Geology

Craigs Run – Water Quality pH – 7.47 Conductivity – 32 microsiemens/cm^3 Total Hardness – 17 mg/L CaCO3 Alkalinity – 20 mg/L CaCO3 Data Indicates Relatively Sterile Basin

Craigs Run EPA Rapid Visual Habitat Assessment Epifaunal Substrate/Vegetative Cover Embeddedness Velocity/Depth Regime Sediment Deposition Channel Flow Status Channel Alteration Frequency of Riffles Bank Stability Vegetative Protection Riparian Vegetative Zone Width /4 8/8 10/10 Total = 138 (69%)

Craigs Run– Benthic Invertebrates

Craigs Run - Fish

CRAIGS RUN

Stream Ecosystem Assessment Group 1.3 (G. Boyd, A. Dobson, D. Redgate) South Fork Cranberry River August 2003

South Fork Cranberry River – General Description Cranberry River km2 basin area (1.07 m3/s) Mauch Chunk Shale & Sandstone Cranberry Wilderness Dominated by headwater bog – humic acids

South Fork Cranberry River – Water Quality pH= 7.53 Conductivity = µs/cm 3 (Average) Total Hardness = 1 mg/l CaCO 3 Alkalinity = 0.4 mg/l CaCO 3 Circum-neutral, softwater stream

South Fork Cranberry River - EPA Rapid Visual Habitat Assessment Epifaunal Substrate/Vegetative Cover Embeddedness Velocity/Depth Regime Sediment Deposition Channel Flow Status Channel Alteration Frequency of Riffles Bank Stability Vegetative Protection Riparian Vegetative Zone Width /8 9/9 Total = 166 (83%)

South Fork Cranberry River – Benthic Invertebrates

South Fork Cranberry River – Fish

South Fork Cranberry River

Summary Birch River Craig’s Run Big Rough Run South Fork Cranberry River