REPORT OF THE INTERAGENCY BIOLOGICAL METHODS …micron (Jim) millimeter (mm) centimeter (cm) meter (m) kilometer (km) square centimeter (cm ) square meter (m2) gram (g) liter (L) milliliter

REPORT OF THE INTERAGENCY BIOLOGICAL

METHODS WORKSHOP

Edited by Martin E. Gurtz and Thomas A. Muir

U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY

Open-File Report 94-490

Workshop Participants and Contributors:

INTERGOVERNMENTAL TASK FORCE ON MONITORING WATER QUALITYU.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCYBUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENTBUREAU OF RECLAMATIONNATIONAL BIOLOGICAL SURVEYNATIONAL PARK SERVICEU.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICEU.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEYU.S. FOREST SERVICENATIONAL OCEANIC AND ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRATIONU.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERSOHIO RIVER VALLEY WATER SANITATION COMMISSIONTENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITYNORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT, HEALTH, AND NATURAL RESOURCESOHIO ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCYFEDERAL COORDINATING COUNCIL FOR SCIENCE, ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY

Raleigh, North Carolina

1994

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

BRUCE BABBITT, Secretary

U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY

Gordon P. Eaton, Director

Any use of trade, product, or firm names in this report is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Government.

For additional information write to:

District Chief U.S. Geological Survey 3916 Sunset Ridge Road Raleigh, North Carolina 27607

Copies of this report may be purchased from:

U.S. Geological Survey ESIC, Open-File Reports Section Box 25286, Mail Stop 517 Denver Federal Center Denver, Colorado 80225

FOREWORD

The Interagency Biological Methods Work shop and this report are part of an ongoing intergovernmental effort to improve water-quality monitoring nationwide. Beginning in 1992 under the leadership of the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, a partnership of Federal, State, and Tribal organizations initiated the Intergovernmental Task Force on Monitoring Water Quality (ITFM). Operating under the sponsorship of the Federal Water Information Coordination Program that is led by the USGS, the ITFM is evaluating water- quality monitoring and is developing recommen dations to improve water-quality information at all levels of government and in the private sector. In 1995, the ITFM will submit its final report to the Office of Management and Budget, Congress, States, and others. Based on the recommendations of the ITFM, agencies will implement the proposed strategy to improve water-quality monitoring.

From its beginning, the ITFM has recognized the importance of biological monitoring that supports efforts to protect human health, to pre serve and enhance ecological conditions, and to sustain a stable economy. The ITFM has identified as a priority the need to develop comparable biological and microbiological methods for interagency use. In response to this priority, the USGS National Water-Quality Assessment (NAWQA) Program hosted the Interagency Biological Methods Workshop to explore the development of comparable biological methods. Many ITFM member organizations participated in the work shop.

This report documents the results of these initial interagency deliberations. The participants identified similarities and differences in objectives, program designs, and methods among agencies. The workshop and this resulting report set the stage for future collaboration to foster the development and adoption of comparable methods wherever appropriate and consistent with agency missions and program objectives.

Interagency collaboration and the use of comparable biological methods can reduce costs, expand the base of biological information useful for decision making, and enhance scientific under standing of biological processes in relationship to physical and chemical processes in ecosystems. The ITFM appreciates the important step that the NAWQA Program and the workshop participants from other agencies have made toward improving water-quality monitoring generally and biological monitoring specifically.

Elizabeth FellowsU.S. Environmental Protection AgencyChairperson, ITFM

III

V

CONTENTS

Abstract.................................................................................................................................................................................... 1Introduction........................................................................................._ 1

Purpose and scope.......................................................................................................................................................... 2Acknowledgments.......................................................................................................................................................... 3

Report of fish workgroup......................................................................................................................................................... 4Similarities...................................................................................................................................................................^ 4Differences.....................................................................................»^ 5Opportunities for collaboration and research................................................................................................................. 5

Report of invertebrates workgroup.......................................................................................................................................... 5Similarities..............................................................................................................................................................^ 6Differences..................................................................................................^^ 6Opportunities for collaboration and research................................................................................................................. 7

Report of algae workgroup...................................................................................................................................................... 8Similarities. ................................................................................................................................................................^ 8Differences....................................................................................................^^ 9Opportunities for collaboration and research................................................................................................................. 10

Report of habitat workgroup.................................................................................................................................................... 10Similarities.............................................................................................................................................................^ 11Differences...............................................................................................^^ 11Opportunities for collaboration and research................................................................................................................. 12

Report of tissues workgroup...................................................................................................................................................^ 12Similarities..............................................................................................^^ 13Differences............................................................................................»^ 13Opportunities for collaboration and research................................................................................................................. 13

Summary.................................................................................................................................................................................. 14Appendix I. Names and addresses of workshop participants.................................................................................................. 78Appendix II. Workshop agenda............................................................................................................................................... 84Appendix III. List of participants in each workgroup.............................................................................................................. 85

FIGURES

1-7. Comparison charts of:1. Program objectives and design features................................................................................................................. 172. Fish protocols......................................................................................................................................................... 273. Invertebrate protocols............................................................................................................................................. 354. Algae protocols ...................................................................................................................................................... 465. Habitat protocols.................................................................................................................................................... 526. Physical and vegetative habitat characteristics...................................................................................................... 617. Tissue protocols...................................................................................................................................................... 62

CONVERSION FACTORS, TEMPERATURE, AND ABBREVIATIONS

Multiply

micron (Jim) millimeter (mm) centimeter (cm)

meter (m) kilometer (km)

square centimeter (cm ) square meter (m2)

gram (g)

liter (L) milliliter (mL)

By

Length

0.00003937 0.03937 0.3937 3.281 0.6214 Area

0.001076 10.76 Mass

0.03527 Volume

0.264 0.000264

To obtain

inch inch inch foot mile

square foot square foot

ounce, avoirdupois

gallon gallon

Temperature: Water temperature in degrees Celsius (°C) may be converted to degrees Fahrenheit (°F) as follows:

°F=1.8(°C) + 32

Following is a list of abbreviations of agency and program names used throughout this report:

BEST Biomonitoring of Environmental Status and Trends (NBS; part of USFWS at thetime of the workshop)

BLM Bureau of Land Management (DOI)B OR Bureau of Reclamation (DOI)DOI U.S. Department of the Interior

EMAP Environmental Monitoring and Assessment Program (USEPA)FDA Food and Drug Administration (USDA)

ITFM Intergovernmental Task Force on Monitoring Water QualityNAWQA National Water-Quality Assessment Program (USGS)

NBS National Biological Survey (DOI)NCBP National Contaminant Biomonitoring Program (NBS; part of USFWS at the time of

the workshop) NC-DEHNR North Carolina Department of Environment, Health, and

Natural Resources NOAA National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (U.S. Department of Commerce)

NFS National Park Service (DOI)NS&T National Status and Trends Program (NO A A)

Ohio EPA Ohio Environmental Protection AgencyORSANCO Ohio River Valley Water Sanitation Commission

RAT River Action Team (TV A)RBP's Rapid Bioassessment Protocols (State Programs)

TV A Tennessee Valley AuthorityUSDA U.S. Department of Agriculture

USEPA U.S. Environmental Protection AgencyUSFS U.S. Forest Service (USDA)

USFWS U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (DOI)USGS U.S. Geological Survey (DOI)

VI

The following abbreviations are used in figures 1-7 of this report:

AHHANOVA

BICDF

CERCLA

DCDDTDNADTH

FYGC/MS

GISGPS

IBIICI

MlWbNASQAN

NATTNAWQMN

NODCNPDESNPMPPCB's

PVCQA/QCQCTVQHEIQMH

RCRARF3

RTHSV

TMDLVDCWLA

WWTP

Aryl hydrocarbon hydroxylaseAnalysis of VarianceBiotic indexCumulative Distribution FunctionComprehensive Environmental Response,

Compensation and Liabilities ActDirect currentDichlorodiphenyltrichloroethaneDeoxyribose nucleic acidDepositional-targeted habitat (NAWQA)Fiscal yearGas chromatography/mass spectrometryGeographic Information SystemGlobal Positioning SystemIndex of Biotic IntegrityInvertebrate Community IndexModified Index of Well-beingNational Stream Quality Accounting Network (USGS)National Target Taxa (NAWQA)National Ambient Water Quality Monitoring NetworkNational Oceanographic Data CenterNational Pollutant Discharge Elimination SystemNational Pollutant Monitoring ProgramPolychlorinated biphenylsPolyvinyl chlorideQuality assurance/quality controlQualitative community tolerance valueQualitative Habitat Evaluation IndexQualitative multihabitat (NAWQA)Resource Conservation and Recovery ActRiver Reach File, Version 3Richest-targeted habitat (NAWQA)Screening ValueTotal maximum daily loadVolts DC (direct current)Waste load allocationWastewater treatment plant

VII

Report of the Interagency Biological Methods WorkshopEdited by Martin E. Gurtz anc/Thomas A. Muir

ABSTRACT

The U.S. Geological Survey hosted the Interagency Biological Methods Workshop in Reston, Virginia, during June 22-23, 1993. The purposes of the workshop were to (1) promote better communication among Federal agencies that are using or developing biological methods in water-quality assessment programs for streams and rivers, and (2) facilitate the sharing of data and interagency collaboration. The workshop was attended by 45 biologists representing numerous Federal agencies and programs, and a few regional and State programs that were selected to provide additional perspectives. The focus of the workshop was community assessment methods for fish, invertebrates, and algae; physical habitat characterization; and chemical analyses of biological tissues. Charts comparing program objectives, design features, and sampling methods were compiled from materials that were provided by participating agencies prior to the workshop and formed the basis for small workgroup discussions. Participants noted that differences in methods among programs were often necessitated by differences in program objectives. However, participants agreed that where programs have identified similar data needs, the use of common methods is beneficial. Opportunities discussed for improving data compatibility and information sharing included (1) modifying existing methods, (2) adding parameters, (3) improving access to data through shared databases (potentially with common database structures), and (4) future collaborative efforts that range from research on

selected protocol questions to followup meetings and continued discussions.

INTRODUCTION

Development of water-quality assessment programs having regional or national scope requires the use of consistent methods wherever possible to facilitate comparative analyses of spatial and temporal patterns. Although biological methods have been used in water-quality assessments for many years, only recently has there been an effort made to develop and implement consistent methods on a national scale in Federal programs. The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) has developed a series of biological sampling protocols for use in its National Water-Quality Assessment (NAWQA) Program. These protocols are designed to provide national consistency in collecting samples of biological communities, characterizing physical habitat conditions at several spatial scales (basin, segment, and reach), and collecting samples of biological tissues for chemical analyses of organic compounds and trace elements. In an effort to promote better communication among Federal agencies that are using or developing related methods for use in other programs of regional or national scope, and to facilitate the sharing of data and interagency collaboration, the USGS hosted the Interagency Biological Methods Workshop in Reston, Virginia, during June 22-23, 1993. This workshop also supported activities of the Intergovernmental Task Force on Monitoring Water Quality (ITFM) and the developing needs of the National Biological Survey (NBS). The workshop was attended by 45 biologists representing numerous Federal agencies and programs, as well as several regional and State programs selected to provide some perspectives from non-Federal biological monitoring programs (Appendix I).

Abstract

The objectives of the workshop were to1. Discuss protocols for collecting and

processing biological samples as part of water-quality or other resource- assessment activities (active or planned) having regional or national focus,

2. Compare sampling methods in the context of individual program objectives in order to highlight similarities and differences among programs, and

3. Increase the potential for datacompatibility and interagency collaboration.

The scope of the workshop included biological water-quality assessment methods for streams and rivers, with emphasis on methods being used by NAWQA and corresponding methods of other programs. Thus, the focus was on community assessment methods for fish, invertebrates, and algae; physical habitat characterization; and chemical analyses of biological tissues. Other biological methods (such as toxicity studies or biomarkers) and other types of water bodies (such as lakes or estuaries) were generally considered to be beyond the scope of the workshop. However, such topics were included in the discussions where appropriate-for example, in comparisons of programs for tissue studies. Participants were, for the most part, scientists knowledgeable about the technical details of the protocols used by their respective agencies.

The workshop was structured around a series of workgroup discussions that focused on methods in each of the principal categories-fish, invertebrates, algae, habitat, and tissues (Appendix II). Following an overview of the NAWQA Program and its biological components, plenary talks were given on the role of biological monitoring in State programs and the activities of the biological indicators group within ITFM. The remainder of the 2-day meeting was spent predominantly in small-group discussions (Appendix III), focusing on each category of protocol, narrative summaries of which are included in this document.

Prior to the workshop, participating agencies were provided a series of protocol charts that presented details of the objectives, design, and methods used in the NAWQA Program, with blank space provided for entering comparable information for other programs. Each agency or program was requested to return the

completed charts, and any appropriate protocols, or to bring them to the workshop. Copies of charts and protocols were distributed to participants at the beginning of the workshop and formed the basis for much of the discussion. Comparison charts (figs. 1-7 located at the back of this report) were compiled from materials provided by the participating agencies. To minimize duplication of information for programs represented by more than one component, general program objectives and design features are presented for several programs in figure 1. The NBS's Biomonitoring of Environmental Status and Trends (BEST) Program is included only in figure 1 because specific protocols are still in the development stage. (This program was part of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) at the time of the workshop.) Comparison charts for fish (fig. 2), invertebrates (fig. 3), algae (fig. 4), habitat (figs. 5 and 6), and tissues (fig. 7) include programs that provided the required information.

The primary focus of the workshop was on national-scale Federal programs because of the particular challenges associated with comparability of methods across such a large spatial scale; most, but not all, major agencies and programs using related methods were represented in the workshop. Because many regional, State, and local organizations have long histories of conducting biological assessments, representatives of several regional and State programs were invited to participate in the workshop. An overview of rapid bioassessment protocols (RBP's) was provided as applicable to the majority of States. Completed protocol charts also were provided by the Ohio Environmental Protection Agency (Ohio EPA) for fish, invertebrates, and habitat, and by the Ohio River Valley Water Sanitation Commission (ORS ANCO) for tissues; this information is included in the comparison charts. Several other agencies, such as the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) and the North Carolina Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources (NC-DEHNR), were represented in one or more workgroups and provided materials for discussion, but are not represented in the comparison charts.

Purpose and Scope

The purpose of this report is to summarize discussions that took place at the Interagency

2 Report of the Interagency Biological Methods Workshop

Biological Methods Workshop and facilitate communication and collaboration among Federal agencies using biological methods in water-quality assessments. A series of charts is provided that compares protocols in use or under development by the participating agencies. It is expected that this report will be a springboard for further discussion and future interagency collaborative efforts.

Acknowledgments

The success of this workshop was due in large part to the high degree of interest and support provided by all of the participating agencies. The editors particularly thank Elizabeth Fellows of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) for encouraging the leaders of the NAWQA Program to take the initiative in hosting the workshop. Members of the interagency committee who met April 29,1993, to plan the workshop included the following: Bill Breed of the U.S. Department of Energy, Wade Bryant

of the USFWS, Tony Cappelucci of the Bureau of Reclamation (BOR), Chris Faulkner of the USEPA Office of Water, Marty Gurtz of the USGS, Ron Huntsinger of the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), Ron Preston of the USEPA Region III, Gary Rosenlieb of the National Park Service (NPS), Steve Sorenson of the USGS, and Rick Swanson of the BLM. Tom Muir also participated in the planning session, representing both the USFWS and the Implementation Committee of the NBS. The editors also thank Chris Yoder of the Ohio EPA, who gave a presentation at the workshop on the activities of ITFM related to biological indicators; Mike Barbour of Tetra Tech, Inc., who gave a presentation on biological monitoring activities of State agency programs; and Dallas Peck (then Director) of the USGS, who made the opening remarks at the workshop.

The protocol-comparison charts represent considerable effort on the parts of the participating agencies to provide summaries of program features and sampling methods in a consistent format. Contributors to those parts of this report include:

Component

Objectives/ Design Features

Fish

Invertebrates

Algae

Habitat

Program (Agency)

NAWQA (USGS) EMAP (USEPA) RBP's (State Programs) BEST (NBS) Ohio EPA

NAWQA (USGS) EMAP (USEPA) RBP's (State Programs) Ohio EPA

NAWQA (USGS)EMAP (USEPA)BLM/USFSRBP's (State Programs)Ohio EPA

NAWQA (USGS) EMAP (USEPA)

NAWQA (USGS) EMAP (USEPA) RBP's (State Programs) Ohio EPA

Contributor

Marty Gurtz Steve Paulsen Mike Barbour Chris Schmitt Chris Yoder

Mike Meador Frank McCormick Mike Barbour Chris Yoder

Tom Cuffney Brian Hill Mark Vinson Mike Barbour Chris Yoder

Stephen Porter Brian Hill

Cliff Hupp, Mike Meador Phil Kaufmann Mike Barbour Chris Yoder

Introduction

Component

Tissues

Program (Agency)

NAWQA (USGS)EMAP (USEPA)Fish Contamination

Program (USEPA)National Study of Chemical

Residues in Fish (USEPA)National Contaminant Bio-

monitoring Program (NBS)National Status and

Trends Program (NOAA)ORSANCO

Contributor

Kent Crawford Roger Yeardly Skip Houseknecht

Ryan Childs

Chris Schmitt

Adriana Cantillo

Jerry Schulte

These contributors except for Steve Paulsen, Phil Kaufmann, Roger Yeardly, and Jerry Schulte-were participants in the workshop.

REPORT OF FISH WORKGROUP

by Michael R. Meador

The fish workgroup was attended by Mike Meador (facilitator), USGS; Frank McCormick, (recorder/reporter), USEPA; Ron Preston, USEPA; Mike Rexrode, USEPA; Charlie Saylor, TVA; Terry Short, USGS; Chris Yoder, Ohio EPA; and Steve Zylstra, representing the BEST program of the USFWS (now NBS). Written protocols for sampling activities as part of NAWQA, EMAP, and Ohio EPA were contributed. A general discussion of sampling procedures conducted by TVA also was presented.

Discussion of the expectations of the workgroup revealed that the participants hoped to achieve a better understanding of how different programs conduct their respective sampling activities and the "why" behind decision-making. There was unanimous agreement that tremendous potential for cooperation and collaboration exists among the programs represented, and that these need to occur at the technical level. The goals of the workgroup were to (1) compare and contrast current protocols for sampling fish community structure, (2) complete a comparison chart of the protocol methods represented, (3) establish a working relationship for continued interagency cooperation, and (4) discuss opportunities for future research and collaboration. In order to accomplish goals (1) and (2), the similarities and differences among agency protocols (fig. 2) were examined.

Similarities

The USGS, USEPA, Ohio EPA, and TVA are currently involved in programs that describe fish community structure based on a representative sample of the fish community. In these programs, fish community structure is assessed by sampling all habitats within the selected stream reach, which is identified based on the geomorphology of the stream. Stream reach lengths range from a minimum of 150 meters (m) to a maximum of 500 m. Sampling seasons vary but depend on specific sampling objectives and are related to ideal flow conditions; high flows and abnormal turbidity are avoided. Fish samples are collected in all programs by conducting at least one pass using a pulsed-DC electrofishing unit during daylight hours. The Ohio EPA and NAWQA Program recognize that night sampling of some rivers may be more effective than day sampling, especially in larger rivers; Ohio EPA conducts night sampling in the Ohio River. The Ohio EPA and NAWQA protocols recommend a minimum reach length of 500 m for nonwadeable sites. During electrofishing, wadeable sites are generally fished in an upstream direction, whereas nonwadeable sites are generally fished in a downstream direction.

All fish are identified to species in the field when possible, and examined for anomalies; some or all fish are measured. It was agreed that only ichthyologists should identify fish collected in the programs; however, there are no accepted criteria for establishing the credentials of an ichthyologist to make taxonomic identifications. This difficulty seems common to all programs.

Report of the Interagency Biological Methods Workshop

Specimens are retained for laboratory identification and (or) vouchers by fixing them in 10- percent buffered formalin for later storage in alcohol. At minimum, data analysis consists of providing species richness and relative abundance information. In all programs, consideration is being given to the use of multimetric indices and multivariate analytical procedures depending upon objectives.

Differences

The only programs represented that include sampling of fish communities in nonwadeable streams were the Ohio EPA and NAWQA programs. The Environmental Monitoring and Assessment Program (EMAP) determines reach lengths in wadeable streams based on about 40 times the channel width. However, because EMAP protocols are designed for wadeable streams only, this channel width determination results in reach lengths that are within the 150-m to 500-m range for wadeable streams that is common to all programs. The Ohio EPA's method consists of two passes through a sampling reach, using electrofishing gear. NAWQA, EMAP, and TVA conduct multiple- gear sampling using a combination of electrofishing and seining. However, NAWQA conducts electrofishing using two passes through a sampling reach; EMAP conducts electrofishing using one pass through a reach; and the number of passes conducted by TVA varies depending upon the number offish and habitat types.

The participants generally felt that the differences in fish sample collection methods among programs were relatively minor and would not affect the ability to compare data among programs. None of the programs is designed to determine estimates of populations. Therefore, no program is designed to sample all individuals, and some rare and possibly some "canary" species (for example, highly sensitive species, or species that are indicative of a specific environmental condition) can be missed.

There was considerable discussion regarding the types of ancillary data that can contribute to the understanding of fish community structure as it relates to water quality. Ancillary data include information on length, weight, and external anomalies. The group agreed that such data are generally important, particularly in situations where species richness is naturally low.

Opportunities for Collaboration and Research

The participants emphasized the need to work closely with the USFWS (and State biologists) on endangered species issues as they relate to sampling efforts. Collaborative sampling efforts could help to reduce concerns regarding the effects of sampling activities on endangered species. Some discussion also focused on animal rights issues and fish sampling activities; all protocols are being examined regarding these issues.

Some discussion was generated regarding a common electronic database; however, there was not sufficient time to pursue this topic in detail. All agreed that efforts should be made to make the data broadly available on electronic media.

The use of relative abundance data for fish in relation to environmental conditions has grown in acceptance among the scientific community. All agreed that data from the programs must be reported not only internally, but through peer-reviewed scientific journals as well. However, there is still an indication that managers and policy makers lack an understanding of the use of such data analyses. It is hoped that the efforts of all programs will help advance the acceptance of such data analyses by the non- scientific community.

Opportunities for collaboration include joint coordination of workshops or symposia to address issues such as the need to identify qualified ichthyologists, field and laboratory quality assurance/ quality control, and the use of museums in archiving material from water-quality assessment programs. Pilot projects also provide opportunities to evaluate field approaches of the participating programs, as well as opportunities to examine data collected by the various agencies.

REPORT OF INVERTEBRATES WORKGROUP

by Thomas F. Cuffney

The invertebrates workgroup consisted of Tom Cuffney (facilitator/reporter), USGS; Marc Sylvester (recorder), USGS; Steve Ahlstedt, TVA; Ted Angradi, U.S. Forest Service (USES); Marjorie Coombs, USEPA; Wayne Davis, USEPA; Chris Faulkner, USEPA; Brian Hill, USEPA; Roy Irwin, NPS;

Report of Invertebrates Workgroup

Dave Lenat, NC-DEHNR; Mark Nelson, BOR; and Mark Vinson, BLM.

Printed materials distributed to workgroup participants included descriptions of the following biomonitoring programs or activities of Federal agencies: NAWQA (USGS), EMAP and Rapid Bioassessment Protocols (RBP's) (USEPA), National Aquatic Monitoring Center (BLM/USFS), Biotic Condition Index protocol (USFS), and TVA's River Action Team (RAT) reconnaissance methods. Other written materials describing State programs of Ohio EPA, NC-DEHNR, and Kansas Department of Wildlife and Parks, and several volunteer stream- monitoring programs (including Streamside Bioassessment Izaak Walton League of America, Intensive Stream Bioassessment-Maryland Save Our Streams, and the River Watch Network) also were distributed. Protocol charts provided by NAWQA, EMAP, BLM/USFS, State programs (RBP's), and Ohio EPA are included in the comparison chart (fig. 3).

The session began with participants providing brief overviews of their biomonitoring programs, including NAWQA, EMAP, RBP's, RAT, North Carolina's stream-monitoring program, and the BLM/ USFS stream-biomonitoring programs. Dave Lenat presented some preliminary results from a collaborative study that investigated the comparability of benthic invertebrate-based water-quality assessment techniques used by several State and Federal agencies. Discussions then centered on similarities and differences among the programs, issues of common interest, and data comparability among programs. Principal discussion points included issues related to program objectives, reference sites, gear type (including mesh size), sampling designs, metrics, taxonomic resolution, sampling season, appropriate effort for objectives, and subsampling (100- and 300- organism counts). Because of time constraints, discussions emphasized mesh size, identification of midges (Chironomidae), reference sites, and subsampling.

Similarities

All invertebrate biomonitoring programs discussed by the workgroup have a similar objective- to provide an accurate assessment of the structure of the benthic invertebrate community that has relevance to water-quality conditions. Programs are oriented toward documenting the status of invertebrate

communities, determining trends (spatial and temporal) in community condition, and establishing cause-and-effeet relations. Other major areas of similarity include the following:

1. All programs integrate physical,chemical, and biological approaches to some extent.

2. Sampling is generally focused within a defined length of stream (sampling reach) associated with a sampling site. The size of the sampling reach and the criteria for establishing the sampling reach vary among programs.

3. Sampling within the sampling reach typically involves single-habitat sampling (usually a riffle) supplemented with a composite sample collected from multiple habitats within the reach.

4. All programs use multimetric approaches to data analysis, although some also use multivariate techniques.

5. Reference sites are important for datacomparisons and interpretations in all programs, although the dependence on reference sites varies among programs.

Differences

The various biomonitoring programs differ in the size of mesh used in sampler netting. USEPA uses 595-micron (fim) mesh for EMAP and recommends it for use in RBP's, though specific mesh requirements are not included in the RBP's. Mesh sizes of 425 \im and 210 \im are used by NAWQA; the BLM/USFS program uses 280-fim mesh, and the TV A programs use 900- to 1,000-jim mesh. The consensus of the group was that any mesh size from 210 to 1,000 fim could be (and has been) successfully used for water- quality assessment. In theory, the smaller the mesh size the more complete the representation of the community. However, this theoretical consideration must be balanced with the drawbacks associated with smaller mesh size: sampler backwash, large sample volumes, increased sample-processing costs, and increased numbers of partially identified small organisms. A mesh size of 300 to 600 (im was offered as a good operational range for community


assessments. However, the choice of mesh size needs to be determined by the objectives of the individual program and its budget and should include considerations of available historical data and the taxonomic groups deemed important to the interpretation of water-quality conditions. For example, if the program needs to represent smaller invertebrate groups, such as the chironomids, then a smaller mesh size is appropriate. Programs that focus on "EPT" taxa (Ephemeroptera, Plecoptera, Trichoptera) may prefer a larger mesh size.

Most programs select sampling locations on the basis of anticipated effects (point source or desired combination of environmental conditions). EMAP is unique in that it randomly selects sampling sites according to a national sampling grid. Differences in selection of sampling sites reflect the differences in objectives of each monitoring program. For example, some monitoring programs (RBP's and RAT) focus on rapidly identifying sites with degraded water-quality conditions and emphasize sampling large numbers of sites, quickly and inexpensively, to identify relatively large changes in water quality. Other programs focus on relating physical and chemical water-quality changes to biological changes (NAWQA), or to assessing water-quality conditions over broad geographic areas (EMAP), and require different site- selection procedures, sampling equipment, sample- processing strategies, and data-analysis procedures to support their objectives.

Programs differ in the degree of sample processing (field picking and subsampling) used to determine community structure. EMAP and NAWQA process samples with the intent of achieving a high level of taxonomic resolution (usually identification to lowest practicable taxon) and processing at least one- fourth of the entire sample. RBP's, TVA, and BLM/ USFS typically base processing on the removal of a minimum specified number of organisms (100,200, or 300) from the sample. Identifications for RBP's may be at the lowest practicable taxon or at a higher level depending upon the level of RBP's used. TVA and RBP's procedures also can involve field picking of samples, whereas EMAP, NAWQA, and BLM/USFS depend upon picking of invertebrates in the laboratory. It was apparent from some of the experiences of the workshop participants that employing 100- or 300- count field picks expedited sample processing considerably but missed substantial numbers and varieties of small invertebrates, particularly small

chironomids and oligochaetes. Preliminary analyses of NAWQA Program pilot-study samples also indicated that 100- or 300-count subsamples of invertebrates would have lead to significant underestimation of benthic invertebrate community composition and richness. However, 100- and 300-count subsamples have been used with great success in the RBP's and other State and Federal programs. Thus, decisions on sample-processing techniques should be based on the objectives of the various programs.

Programs also differ in whether taxonomic identifications include a detailed (genus or species) assessment of the chironomid community. For example, most current bioassessment metrics focus on EPT taxa and have relatively little emphasis on chironomid identifications made beyond family level. The major problems are the increased sampling effort and costs associated with collecting representative samples of midges, and identifying and quantifying midges. These problems must be balanced with the realization that in many instances the family Chironomidae constitutes more than half of the species at a site. Further, chironomid taxonomy has improved to the point that most individuals can be readily identified at least to genus, and chironomids are becoming increasingly diagnostic (increase information and differentiation) in bioassessment programs that include identifications at the genus or species level. The inclusion of chironomid identifications beyond family is largely dependent upon the program's objectives. Identification to family level is probably adequate for screening or impact assessment studies. However, for diagnostic studies of source, cause and effect, and trends, identification of chironomids to genus or species is probably preferable.


The group discussed the possibility of establishing a single approach to benthic-invertebrate biomonitoring that could be used for all agencies and programs, but the majority of the group felt that each program must use sampling methods and design that support its objectives and fit within budget constraints. It is apparent that the programs represented here constitute a continuum in effort that ranges from quick screenings intended to rapidly and inexpensively identify significant water-quality problems (the "scratch and sniff approach as described by Steve

Report of Invertebrates Workgroup

Ahlstedt) to detailed cause-and-effect studies that require integrated physical, chemical, and biological assessments. Consequently, it would be very difficult to develop a unified set of methods that could be readily adapted to the multiple objectives of all existing State and Federal water-quality assessment programs.

Discussions on data comparability focused on two issues: (1) integrating data sets and (2) comparing assessment results. Because of the different objectives and techniques employed by the various State and Federal programs, the group agreed that combining data sets should be done very cautiously. This is particularly true when combining quantitative information (densities or relative abundances). However, qualitative data, particularly the presence of a taxon at a site, presented fewer problems provided that there was sufficient confidence (quality assurance) in the identification. Unfortunately, data on the absence of a taxon are much more sensitive to differences in sampling design and need to be interpreted cautiously. There was basic agreement that the water-quality assessments produced by different programs could be fairly easily used among the various programs, particularly as a guide to the selection of sites. Additional interagency efforts to compare and contrast assessment results, such as one conducted by NC-DEHNR in January 1993, are needed to fully define data comparability issues.

A potential area for collaboration is in establishing reference sites and determining reference conditions. All programs recognized the value of reference sites and their use in ranking biological conditions among sites. Key issues related to the use of reference sites are (1) the availability of reference sites for certain types of streams (particularly, larger rivers), (2) criteria for selecting reference sites and matching them with assessment sites, and (3) the evaluation of the natural temporal (seasonal and annual) variability within, and spatial variability among, reference sites.

The efforts of the various State and Federal programs can and should be highly complementary, despite their apparent differences. Mutual benefits will accrue from continued communication and collaboration on methods, site selection, quality- assurance and quality-control techniques, databases, assessment metrics, taxonomy, reference site selection, and assessment of variability related to sampling method, season, year, site, and metric. Interagency efforts, such as the development of an interagency taxonomic database (National Oceanic and

Atmospheric Administration (NO A A), USEPA, and USGS) and the comparison of field methods, are important steps to fostering the exchange of consistent high-quality data among State and Federal agencies.

REPORT OF ALGAE WORKGROUP

by Stephen D. Porter

The algae workgroup was attended by Stephen Porter (facilitator/reporter), USGS; Brian Hill (recorder), USEPA; Steve Sorenson, USGS; and Marty Gurtz, USGS. Other informal discussions held with Chris Faulkner (USEPA), Ted Angradi (USFS), Mark Nelson (BOR), and Chris Yoder (Ohio EPA) during the course of the workshop contributed additional information concerning existing or proposed uses of algae for environmental assessments. The objectives of the workgroup meeting were to (1) compare and discuss current protocols and methods for using benthic algae (periphyton) for regional and national assessments of water quality, (2) compare and contrast program objectives and approaches relative to site selection, sampling strategies, methods of laboratory analyses, and data interpretation, (3) determine compatible uses of interagency algal data, (4) establish a working relationship for continued interagency cooperation and information exchange, and (5) discuss opportunities for future research and collaboration. Regional- or national-scale programs presently involved in sampling algal communities for water- quality assessments include only NAWQA and EMAP (fig- 4).

Similarities

The NAWQA and EMAP programs use similar approaches to collecting and processing algal samples, and analyzing data. Following are the similarities in algal protocols between these two programs:

1. Benthic algal samples are collected from natural substrates in conjunction with the collection of invertebrate samples.

2. Samples are collected from erosional and depositional habitats using similar (or compatible) methods; however, the habitats are targeted in the NAWQA program and randomized in the EMAP program.


3. Areas of benthic substrate sampledaccording to each protocol are similar, although the composite area of each habitat sampled by EMAP varies with the relative abundance of erosional and depositional areas in the sampling reach.

4. In both programs, quantitativeperiphyton samples are analyzed for species composition and abundance, chlorophyll a, and ash-free dry mass (although these analyses are a study- unit option for NAWQA, rather than a protocol requirement).

5. The same sample preservatives are used by both programs.

6. Both EMAP and NAWQA targetsampling activities to be conducted during stable, low-flow hydrologic conditions, and similar (at least qualitatively) ancillary information is collected by both programs.

Brian Hill indicated that EMAP will consider adding qualitative multihabitat sampling of periphyton to its algal protocol, as well as adopting protocols similar to NAWQA for sampling epipsammic and epipelic microhabitats. If EMAP personnel record the predominant microhabitat sampled in erosional and depositional habitats, certain algal data (quantitative epilithic, epipsammic, and epipelic samples) should be compatible with NAWQA data. Qualitative multihabitat periphyton samples collected by certain State agencies (for example, Kentucky and Montana) appear to be compatible with NAWQA protocols for the purpose of documenting a list of algal taxa and estimating taxa richness. Other State agencies (for example, Ohio and North Carolina) are in the process of establishing procedures for sampling benthic algae and have expressed interest in the NAWQA algal protocol.

Differences

With the exception of NAWQA, EMAP, and State monitoring programs, most agencies have not incorporated algal sampling into environmental assessment programs except for the purposes of (1) monitoring phytoplankton chlorophyll a concentrations to evaluate eutrophication processes or

taste-and-odor problems; (2) using periphyton (including aquatic mosses) to evaluate contaminant sources (for example, bioconcentration of metals (BOR) and acidification (USFS) from mine drainage, and numerous studies concerning effects of point- source discharges (State agencies)); and (3) reconstruction of historical changes in the pH or trophic state of lakes by examining diatom-frustule assemblages from sediment cores (EMAP-Great Lakes).

The primary differences between NAWQA and EMAP algal protocols include differences in the selection of instream sampling habitats, methods of sample compositing, and relative emphasis on obtaining structural or process measures of the algal community to assess spatial variation. These issues correspond to differences in the statistical design criteria and approaches of NAWQA and EMAP. Other differences include sampling frequency (NAWQA samples once per year for 3 successive years, with multiple-reach replication, at intensive ecological assessment sites; EMAP samples once every 4 years, with 10-percent annual resampling of sites). The EMAP protocol calls for routine determinations of chlorophyll a, ash-free dry mass, alkaline/acid phosphatase, and benthic metabolism, whereas the NAWQA protocol lists determinations of chlorophyll and ash-free dry mass as study-unit options. Further, the EMAP protocol presently does not provide for qualitative sampling of periphyton, quantitative sampling of phytoplankton, or alternative methods for sampling periphyton when the prescribed sampling gear cannot be used effectively (for example, methods for sampling epiphytic and epidendric microhabitats and certain epilithic microhabitats such as gravel substrates).

Quantitative algal protocols for NAWQA and EMAP differ considerably from those used by other agencies. Although the use of artificial substrates by State agencies meets their objectives for water-quality monitoring purposes, algal data obtained by this method are not comparable with NAWQA or EMAP data from natural substrates. However, artificial substrates are listed as a study-unit option in the NAWQA protocol (for example, for synoptic or case studies); study units could benefit from State-agency data and collaboration in cases where the type of artificial substrate and length of exposure period can be standardized. Phytoplankton chlorophyll samples are routinely collected by a number of agencies to assess

Report of Algae Workgroup

trophic conditions in lakes and reservoirs and to evaluate the effects of nutrient enrichment in large rivers. Quantitative phytoplankton samples (for analyses of chlorophyll and algal community structure) are listed as a study-unit option in the NAWQA algal protocol. However, the NAWQA data may not be directly comparable with data reported by other agencies because of differences in sample-collection methodology (width- and depth-integrated samples collected by the NAWQA program compared with sub surface or euphotic-zone samples collected by other agencies); these differences apply equally to water- chemistry data.


Opportunities for future collaboration and research include (1) increased standardization of collection and analysis protocols within the constraints of specific program objectives and approaches, (2) field testing the comparability of sampling procedures, (3) interagency cooperation concerning the development and enhancement of taxonomic and autecological databases, (4) development of protocols for assessments of large rivers, and (5) sharing of compatible data to supplement interpretation and synthesis of factors that contribute to observed environmental conditions. Interagency collaboration can ensure that protocols are continually refined to maximize information content for evaluating environmental differences and change, and to enhance the transferability of data among agency programs with different objectives or approaches. The costs of compiling and maintaining large taxonomic databases (including associated physical and chemical data) could be shared among environmental-assessment agencies. Similar cost savings can accrue by developing a common mechanism for taxonomic verifications, voucher repositories, quality-assurance procedures (for example, evaluation of sample variance associated with specific field and laboratory procedures), and integrated databases.

Workgroup members agreed that all programs would benefit from identifying key scientists and other individuals involved with regional-scale biological assessments of water quality and establishing informal interagency networks and coordination mechanisms. This process could be enhanced by developing interagency training programs, conducting periodic

workshops, and circulating protocols and experimental results. Improved standardization (or understanding of compatibility among protocol procedures) should increase the transferability of biological and water- chemistry data among programs. This understanding could potentially allow each program to interpret greater spatial resolution of factors that control water chemistry, habitat, and biological communities. For example, NAWQA could benefit from greater spatial characterization of reference reaches (particularly lower-order streams), and EMAP could benefit from information obtained from larger streams that integrate one or more human factors within distinct ecoregions. Collaboration with State agencies could enhance both programs and possibly lead to the development of opportunities for basic research and cooperative studies.

REPORT OF HABITAT WORKGROUP

by Cliff R. Hupp

This workgroup was composed of Cliff Hupp (facilitator), USGS; Mike Barbour (recorder/reporter), Tetra Tech, Inc.; George Gibson (reporter), USEPA; Susan Jackson, USEPA; Kerry Overton, USFS; Rick Swanson, BLM; Ron Parker, USEPA (one day); Stephen Porter, USGS (one day); and Dick Smythe, USFS (one day). The EMAP program was represented by the written comments provided by Phil Kaufmann (Oregon State University) prior to the meeting. The group established four goals for this meeting: (1) determine compatible uses of interagency habitat data, (2) discuss reasons for various elements in each protocol, (3) relate purpose/objective for conducting assessments to the methods used, and (4) establish a foundation for continued interagency cooperation and information exchange. For the most part all of these goals were attained, although there was insufficient time for detailed discussions of advantages and disadvantages of particular approaches. Participants now have a much clearer idea of the habitat programs in other agencies, which is a substantial achievement in itself.

The group listed several justifications for habitat descriptions that were common to all of the programs represented:

1. Habitat description provides the foundation for assessing and


interpreting the status of the biological communities.

2. Habitat description is necessary for the characterization of fluvial geomorphic and vegetative conditions, which are highly important parameters regardless of instream biota.

3. Habitat description is necessary todocument habitat or environmental impairment or degradation.

4. Habitat description is necessary todistinguish between habitat alteration and other forms of environmental degradation-for example toxins, nutrients, and sediment-that may be of interest where biota are used as environmental barometers.

In order to facilitate mutual understanding, a distinction in general objectives of the programs was made early in the discussions. A habitat characterization was defined as an attempt to objectively describe the composition and structure of the physical and vegetative environment. A habitat assessment further included judgments of the quality of the habitat for support of the biotic feature of interest. No program objective was strictly one or the other, but some clearly leaned toward assessment or characterization. The NAWQA Program is oriented strongly toward characterization, whereas State programs are focused toward assessment. EMAP, USFS, BLM, and BEST have a nearly equal split in general objectives between characterization and assessment. Thus, most agencies used habitat description to relate habitat to biota, to characterize the composition and structure of the local environment, to determine impaired habitats, and to distinguish habitat alterations from other perturbations that can affect instream biotic communities.

Other major points that were raised during the workgroup's discussion of program objectives included the following:

1. Reference sites were the cornerstones of most programs;

2. Objectives and questions drive the scale of the programs;

3. What constitutes "good" habitat can be defined; and

4. As objectives tend to converge, thevarious protocols should become more similar.

Topics 1, 2, and 4 require further interagency discus sion if the programs are to minimize duplication of effort and improve opportunities for cooperation and sharing of mutually useful information and data. All felt it was imperative to continue such discussions, especially considering current executive and depart mental objectives.

Similarities

The protocol-comparison chart (fig. 5) compares approaches for four programs that completed the matrix prior to the workshop. Discussions also included BEST, as well as monitoring activities in the USFS and BLM. Although no two programs were identical, NAWQA, BEST, and EMAP are reach-based and share, in a general way, many approaches. USFS and BLM are very similar to each other but are both non-reach based systems. Nearly half of the discussion focused on delineating individual elements of the various protocols, including aspects of the riparian zone (fig. 6). The similarities substantially exceeded the differences in both parameters and measurement tools.

Differences

Several significant differences among programs were identified by the workgroup. Future discussions and probable protocol alteration will be necessary for data to be fully compatible among agencies for the following protocol elements:

1. Light measurement All agencies would like to see improvement on quantification of this parameter. Some agencies use a canopy densiometer or direct light measurement at specific times or light conditions; nothing has been standardized.

2. Measurement of canopy cover/densitv- As with light measurement, the group felt that using a canopy densiometer would help quantify the light parameter beyond canopy opening. All felt the solar pathfinder has some advantages but is not yet standard.

3. Bank angle determination Some agencies measure bank angle as degrees from vertical, others as degrees from horizontal.

Report of Habitat Workgroup 11

4. Velocity and discharge measurement-- The various agencies noted a wide range of effort in obtaining data for these parameters. Most programs incorporate some measurements of current velocity, although they vary in the methods used and in the procedures for determining locations for the measurements. Only the USGS routinely measures stream discharge continuously at fixed sites; this approach was recognized as being desirable, but participants doubted whether continuous discharge records were achievable for all important sites for other agencies nationwide.

5. Reach definition/transect location-No two agencies have exactly the same definition of reach or approach to delineation and sub-reach sampling. This is an area that could use more interagency priority attention. However, the group found no insurmountable differences among the reach-based assessments that would seriously limit data exchange, although neither USFS nor BLM has a reach-based approach.

Approaches for describing the extent and character of the riparian zone also differed among agencies and programs. The group unanimously viewed the riparian zone as one of the most important aspects of stream assessments and noted that this zone has only recently received the attention deserved. The level of effort made to describe the extent and character of the riparian zone varies widely among agencies. The USFS and BLM have the most complete protocols for characterizing the riparian zone, spending as much effort there as on instream assessment. The USFS uses a longitudinal transect for visual estimates and a "greenline" riparian survey for quantitative data. The BLM also conducts visual estimates for the entire reach, with transects that yield quantitative information; additionally, BLM conducts intensive quantitative riparian surveys. NAWQA uses a plotless technique (point-quarter method) for quantifying riparian woody vegetation at all fixed sites, and permanent riparian plots at a subset of sites. EMAP uses both visual observations and quantitative transects of riparian vegetation. State programs typically do not

quantify characteristics of riparian zones, but rely solely on visual estimation techniques.


Opportunities and needs for future interagency collaboration include

1. Identifying key individuals, sharing staff directories, and regional coordination among programs, surveys, and field work;

2. Ensuring that all protocols are evolving documents so that programs remain flexible to converge in methods where appropriate;

3. Seeking standardization of parameters and sampling methods where possible;

4. Demonstrating common use of data among agencies;

5. Documenting and sharing exact methodology;

6. Identifying a minimum data set that is common to all programs at regional and national scales;

7. Developing a comparison of riparian classification systems among agencies; and

8. Developing interagency training,workshops, and information-transfer networks.

The group noted that the most immediate steps should include exchange of staff directories, resolution of methodology differences, identification of common reference sites, and evaluation of other habitat methods.

REPORT OF TISSUES WORKGROUP

by Steven Goodbred and J. Kent Crawford

Members of this workgroup included Kent Crawford (facilitator), USGS; Chris Schmitt (reporter), USFWS; Steve Goodbred (recorder), USFWS; Sarah Gerould, USGS; Ryan Childs, USEPA; Skip Houseknecht, USEPA; and Jim Lazorchak, USEPA. Adriana Cantillo, NOAA, and Candy Brassard, USEPA, each participated for one day only; Steve Sorenson, USGS, and Roy Irwin, NPS, also participated in a portion of the discussions. The workgroup defined the basic objective of the workshop


as completion of the protocol-comparison chart (fig. 7). Presentations were made describing objectives, design, target organisms, analyte list, analytical methods, and quality assurance for the following programs: NAWQA, EMAP, BEST, National Study of Chemical Residues in Fish (USEPA), Fish Contamination Program (USEPA), National Status and Trends Program (NOAA), and National Contaminant Biomonitoring Program (USFWS; now NBS). These presentations continued into the second day of the workshop, and were followed by a general discussion.

Similarities

The degree of similarity among programs was highly dependent on program objectives, which generally could be categorized as follows: (1) human health, (2) water quality, and (3) ecological health. Programs that focus on human health issues emphasize the analysis of edible portions of biota (for example, fish fillets or soft tissues of mussels). Water-quality programs use biological tissues as a tool to assess the occurrence and distribution of contaminants that are bioavailable. Other programs assess ecological health through indicator species and an understanding of trophic transfer. Greatest similarities occurred among programs with similar objectives. Fish were included among target taxa for all programs, and there was substantial similarity among lists of target analytes.

Differences

Each tissue analysis program represented at the workshop specifies a list of target taxa for collection and analysis. Each program includes fish as a target group, but all three USEPA programs and ORSANCO target only fish. The NAWQA Program lists the Asiatic clam as the preferred target taxon for both trace elements and organic compounds; in addition to fish, aquatic insects and aquatic plants also are targeted for trace elements in NAWQA. NOAA's National Status and Trends Program targets mussels and oysters in the Mussel Watch Project, and fish in the Benthic Surveillance Project.

Selection of target analytes commonly followed the reasoning used by USEPA's National Study of Chemical Residues in Fish, in which three criteria were applied for selecting a contaminant:

1. How much of a contaminant is in the environment and what portion will bioaccumulate in biota and the food chain?

2. How persistent is this contaminant and what are its sources-- past, present, and future?

3. How toxic is it?A notable difference among analyte lists of

different programs is polychlorinated biphenyls (PCB's). Some agencies are analyzing only total PCB's; some are analyzing specific congeners (not always the same ones); and some are summing congener-specific PCB's to get a total concentration. Even with congener-specific PCB data, which are very expensive to obtain, the lexicologically significant congeners~the aryl hydrocarbon hydroxylase (AHH) inducers are usually present in very small quantities that are masked in gas chromatography by the less toxic and more common PCB's. A unique tiered approach is being proposed by BEST, using total PCB concentrations as a screen and then doing a followup immunoassay analysis (using H4IIE, a continuous line of laboratory rat cells, which are exposed to contaminants and monitored for mutations or other responses) for samples with high total PCB concentrations to determine if toxicologically significant PCB congeners are present. This test is apparently cost effective and may be relevant for many tissue programs.


The most important recommendation for future collaboration among agencies is that national, regional, and State laboratories become involved in NOAA's Quality Assurance (QA) Project for tissue. This Project consists of a series of interlaboratory comparison exercises wherein each laboratory analyzes a variety of tissue matrices (currently both inorganic and organic); however, the number of participating laboratories may be limited by the amount of tissue sample material available. Results from these "round-robin" exercises will enable comparison of tissue data among programs and agencies. At this point, the National Contaminant Biomonitoring Program (NCBP), BEST, and NAWQA Program will be participating in NOAA's QA Project.

Report of Tissues Workgroup 13

Compatibility and availability of tissue databases also were discussed. For example, USEPA's STORET database has been valuable in many ways but is still difficult to use. The BEST program is exploring the possibility of using USGS's National Water Information System database.

The workgroup concluded that improving compatibility of tissue data among programs requires answers to several critical research questions, including the following:

1. How are edible portions related to whole fish body burdens? What ancillary variables should be measured? If conversion factors can be developed, what degree of confidence do they have?

2. How important are interspecificdifferences in contaminant body burdens? Are there ecologically homologous species that are similar in their ability to accumulate and transfer contaminants? Are there differences in trophic transfers to humans as opposed to wildlife?

3. Can we identify levels of concern for contaminants that bioaccumulate in fish? The group felt that there is a substantial need for a comprehensive and thorough update of national wildlife contaminant criteria; the only published criteria were developed by the National Academy of Sciences/ National Academy of Engineering Committee on Water Quality Criteria more than 20 years ago (in 1972).

4. How can we optimize samplingeffectiveness (maximize information return per dollar invested in sampling and analysis)? This can be achieved by optimizing compositing strategy, species selection, time of sampling, and ancillary variables.

The meeting ended with several participants discussing the possibility of a followup meeting to work on target analyte lists to make the various tissue programs more compatible. The session was successful in the exchange of protocols, compilation of information for the comparison chart, establishment of a dialogue, and identification of directions for future collaboration and research.

SUMMARY

by Martin E. Gurtz and Thomas A. Muir

The Interagency Biological Methods Workshop succeeded in its principal goal of promoting better communication among governmental organizations that use biological methods in water-resources programs. Participants freely exchanged information about existing and planned program activities and sampling protocols. Improving data comparability among programs can be accomplished only after first assessing differences and similarities and discussing the reasons for methods chosen by different programs. This workshop accomplished that important first step. This meeting and associated efforts are part of a larger process to consolidate protocols among Federal, State, local, and private agencies and organizations.

A consistent theme throughout the workshop was that differences in methods among programs largely occur because of differences in objectives of the individual programs. For example, programs represented in this workshop use different approaches to conducting tissue-analysis studies; depending on whether the objectives are driven by considerations for human health, water-quality assessment, or ecological health, the lists of target taxa (or target tissues within selected taxa) and target analytes vary substantially. Participants also noted some important similarities; EMAP and the NAWQA Program, for example, have converged on many aspects of sampling methods, including a stream-reach based approach for both biological sampling and habitat characterization. However, key differences in how reaches are selected and in how the sampling effort is distributed throughout the reach (for example, random transects as opposed to targeted habitats), are driven by basic design considerations of the programs and may influence the comparability of the data.

The consensus of the workshop participants was that the differences in objectives and sampling designs were appropriate and necessary, and that the programs represented were complementary rather than duplicative because the different approaches allow different questions to be addressed. Where programs have identified similar data needs, however, the use of common methods is mutually beneficial. Each workgroup was able to identify several opportunities for improving data compatibility and information sharing among programs. These opportunities could be


categorized as (1) modifying existing methods, (2) adding parameters, (3) improving access to data through shared databases (potentially with common database structures), arid (4) encouraging future collaborative efforts that range from research on selected protocol questions to followup meetings and continued discussions.

Most programs incorporate "reference," or "minimally impaired," conditions into the sampling design in some way, but programs differ in how those reference conditions are defined and whether reference comparisons need to be regional or site specific. Some participants felt that defining reference conditions might be an appropriate role for State agencies; such information is essential for the development of biological criteria by States and would be valuable information in support of numerous regional and national programs. A continuing dialogue among Federal and State programs would help to prioritize regional characteristics for which reference conditions need to be defined. Future partnerships among government agencies could lead to identification of types of data, and methods to be used, that represent a consistent common denominator among State and Federal programs-for example, in the characterization of reference conditions.

Compatibility of databases was another consistent theme among workgroup discussions.

Ongoing efforts through the Intergovernmental Task- Force on Monitoring Water Quality have begun the process of exchanging information about database and communication systems currently in use or being designed by Federal agencies. Participants in the workshop seemed unanimous in their view that these efforts deserve high priority.

Interagency discussions occur routinely among government biologists, through coincidental or planned exchanges at professional society meetings, participation on advisory panels, and collaboration involving informal comparative studies or formal interagency memoranda. Nevertheless, the Interagency Biological Methods Workshop provided a unique opportunity for biologists from a broad spectrum of agencies, with diverse missions and program objectives, to meet and exchange information about the programs they represent and the methods presently in use or under consideration. Participants agreed that the workshop was a successful forum for communication and improved understanding. The protocol charts in this report are expected to stimulate additional discussions among the workshop participants and other scientists who were not present at the workshop. We hope that this workshop report will provide a valuable framework for developing future interagency collaborative efforts.

Summary 15

COMPARISON CHARTS

Following are figures 1-7, which provide comparison charts of program objectives of the various participating agencies in the Interagency Biological Methods Workshop, as well as protocol comparisons for fish, invertebrates, algae, habitat, and tissues. (Lists of abbreviations and units of measure used in figures 1-7 are on page VI and VII at the front of this report.)


PROGRAM OBJECTIVES

S s: BJ- o- B |

PROGRAM DESIGN FEATURES

61.

fPROGRAM DESIGN FEATURES (continued)

g: 5' 3 2*3 p St g-§ £ § § n- *> £ & 00

p. rt

3p enS' SS 5. «

2. p $ y S 3i.2 JL ^^£ ^ ^ fir » 8* P. o !? a 2 S 5

PI. ^

ô o

3 3S 3§

p x

fi

.g z.v- "

C

3

*iini a

r;

n

*» a

3

1o

<v.

5 a.a.

SITE SELECTION STRATEGY

o35"sa.

£ 3' ^ s-ô^w^ S R ^p° Copg^h-.neîg^Sâ -t^^^^VO^S-ÔcoPr^^

SLg'pvopOJ^ BjJLp0^.

slIsllIiliN' lSa|§|?a|.itI £S B". l-» r-h fl) 5 <? n' & ° ^5SKoôo. gggl'S^gg gjl? H, o s. 3 e. Jl^ g a1gy'^Sprfn g- o {5- Q. _,fagl^Ssfll s-O.sa K'^^ 5' S « Sgl^S.sS.- £.SS aSlliii ?II

o oo o 3 t=JD- n>c oo ??

5-3-JQ CO

P &r'O> MS w

n 3

^ s o 5T

O a CO a H 53

C. E

colo

gica

l Syn

optic

Stu

dies

are

de

sign

ed to

mee

t spe

cifi

c st

udy-

un

it ob

ject

ives

with

in n

atio

nal p

ri

oriti

es, f

or e

xam

ple,

to e

valu

ate

the

spat

ial

dist

ribu

tion

of s

elec

ted

eco

lo

gica

l cha

ract

eris

tics

in re

latio

n to

ca

usat

ive

fact

ors,

suc

h as

land

use

s or

con

tam

inan

t sou

rces

and

in

stre

am h

abita

t con

ditio

ns. T

hese

st

udie

s m

ay in

clud

e an

y or

all

of

the

biol

ogic

al c

ompo

nent

s sa

m

pled

at t

he B

asic

Fix

ed S

ites.

(A

lso

see

fig. 1

.)

B. E

MA

P R

efer

ence

Site

s: A

suf

fi ci

ent n

umbe

r of

han

d-pi

cked

ref

er

ence

site

s w

ill b

e ch

osen

in e

ach

regi

on to

des

crib

e th

e bi

olog

ical

, ch

emic

al,

and

phys

ical

cha

ract

eris

tic

s of

rela

tivel

y un

dist

urbe

d st

ream

s an

d al

so th

ose

subj

ect t

o gr

adie

nts

of im

port

ant a

nthr

opo

ge

nic

stre

ssor

s. R

efer

ence

site

s m

ay a

lso

be lo

cate

d in

rea

ches

w

here

oth

er, m

ore

inte

nsiv

e da

ta

mon

itori

ng o

r ot

her

rela

ted

rese

arch

is ta

king

pla

ce.

D. E

mer

genc

y R

espo

nse.

Fol

low

in

g a

cata

stro

phic

eve

nt (

e.g.

, ch

emic

al s

pill,

fis

h ki

ll, e

tc.),

se

lect

ed s

tatio

ns w

ithin

a w

ater

sh

ed w

ould

be

surv

eyed

to e

valu

at

e m

agni

tude

of i

mpa

ct.

Em

erge

ncy

resp

onse

sam

plin

g is

so

met

imes

con

duct

ed u

nder

a d

if

fere

nt p

rogr

am o

r ag

ency

.

O £ NH

-

iN § < C/3

fe O

Sam

plin

g R

each

. Le

ngth

is d

eter

m

ined

by

a re

petit

ive

geom

orph

ic

sequ

ence

(e.g

., 2

riffle

s an

d 2

pool

s), o

r 20

chan

nel w

idth

s if

re

petit

ive

geom

orph

ic c

hann

el u

nits

ar

e no

t pre

sent

. Acc

epta

ble

rang

e fo

r w

adea

ble

stre

ams

is 1

50 m

to

500

m.

Ran

ge f

or n

onw

adea

ble

stre

ams

is 5

00 m

to 1

,000

m (l

onge

r re

ach

may

be

nece

ssar

y in

som

e ca

ses

for h

abita

t ass

essm

ent).

If

mul

tiple

reac

hes

are

sam

pled

, the

y ar

e lo

cate

d so

as

to e

nsur

e m

inim

al

fish

mov

emen

t bet

wee

n re

ache

s (e

.g.,

sepa

rate

d by

nat

ural

or m

an-

mad

e ba

rrie

rs o

r a m

inim

um d

is

tanc

e of

150

m).

Tiss

ues

may

be

colle

cted

from

are

as u

pstre

am o

r do

wns

trea

m f

rom

the

reac

h if

ne

eded

to o

btai

n an

ade

quat

e sa

m

ple,

as

long

as

ther

e ar

e no

inte

rven

in

g co

ntam

inan

t sou

rces

.

Sam

plin

g R

each

. Fo

r w

adea

ble

stre

ams,

reac

h le

ngth

is d

eter

min

ed

as 4

0 tim

es th

e w

ette

d w

idth

or

150

m, w

hich

ever

is g

reat

er. T

o de

ter

m

ine

the

wid

th th

at d

efin

es th

e re

ach,

sev

eral

rep

rese

ntat

ive

mea

sure

men

ts a

re t

aken

with

in a

di

stan

ce o

f abo

ut 1

0 ch

anne

l w

idth

s fr

om th

e m

appe

d po

int t

hat

defi

nes

the

mid

poin

t of

the

reac

h (s

ee b

elow

). T

he re

ach

is th

en "

laid

ou

t" 2

0 ch

anne

l-w

idth

s' di

stan

ce

upst

ream

and

20

chan

nel-

wid

ths'

dist

ance

dow

nstr

eam

. T

he 2

rea

ch

ends

may

be

adju

sted

plu

s or

m

inus

4 c

hann

el-w

idth

s' di

stan

ce

so th

at th

ey c

oinc

ide

with

bre

aks

in

chan

nel h

abita

t.

Sam

plin

g un

it is

det

erm

ined

by

indi

vidu

al S

tate

pro

gram

s an

d is

de

pend

ent o

n pa

ram

eter

s. F

or

exam

ple,

sam

plin

g fo

r fis

h is

usu

al

ly c

ondu

cted

with

in a

100

- to

50

0-m

rea

ch.

Sam

plin

g fo

r m

acro

- in

vert

ebra

tes

is f

rom

spe

cifie

d ha

b

itat t

ypes

with

in a

spe

cific

loca

tion

or re

ach.

Ins

trea

m h

abita

t par

ame

te

rs f

ocus

on

sam

plin

g re

ach;

cha

n

nel m

orph

olog

ical

fea

ture

s an

d w

ater

shed

par

amet

ers

requ

ire

a la

rger

sam

plin

g un

it.

No

info

rmat

ion

prov

ided

Spec

ific

sam

plin

g re

ach

(zon

e) d

is

tanc

es f

or s

ampl

ing

the

fish

com

m

unity

(an

d ev

alua

ting

habi

tat)

wer

e es

tabl

ishe

d vi

a sp

ecia

l stu

d

ies.

For

wad

ing

met

hods

, eac

h sa

mpl

ing

reac

h is

150

-200

m. F

or

boat

met

hods

, sam

plin

g re

ach

leng

th is

500

m. Q

ualit

ativ

e H

abita

t E

valu

atio

n In

dex

(QH

EI)

sam

plin

g re

ache

s co

rres

pond

to f

ish s

ites.

For i

nver

tebr

ates

, arti

ficia

l sub

st

rate

s ar

e po

sitio

ned

in a

run

habi

ta

t whe

re f

low

will

be

cont

inuo

us

over

the

6-w

eek

colo

niza

tion

peri

od. F

or n

atur

al s

ubst

rate

s, s

am

ple

site

s co

nsis

t of a

riff

le, r

un,

mar

gin,

and

poo

l sam

plin

g fo

r a

min

imum

of 3

0 m

inut

es a

nd th

ere

af

ter u

ntil

no n

ew ta

xa a

re o

bser

ved

base

d on

gro

ss e

xam

inat

ion.

Figu

re l

.~C

ompa

riso

n ch

art o

f pro

gram

obj

ectiv

es a

nd d

esig

n fe

atur

es.-C

onti

nued

(pag

e 5

of 1

0)

aK 2J. or"

3

a

3eraso

rsr*

rt ir

3a. a.

c « a.

SAMPLING FREQUENCY REPLICATION LOCATION OF SAMPLING UNIT AT SIT1

oO. fD f? O D

3 3 o fD >T3s-8go 5 cO r

a

n^ 3 m§8 8 B'w£T 57

CO

e.S'pGOXt o < fD fD

III><

fD GO f»

S I *LO

3 ^gg S I S* PI fDa^ s-!?t * >~i cr 1 3 S- gkg-rco % g§ p « 3 P. P »T3 O RS4 3 "

??

w fB

8 f? ii 1-1

g 21 £* §.IT £2o ff o ^

1?S P> 3 co

ST.i 3 H fD

^d S §" 3-

OQ 3

fD

>U3 £is-llS £u£'3 tr1 f> fD42 S ^< -i O fD fD fD

3 p PGo w § O

gf fD -£ £

X * W ^1 -T^" O fD Pc o p cr 5- w «T£<§.S! s.els'S «2sg g cuO 3

O t< O3 S a p O fD

»° S. 3" | cr a CD -^^^^ S, o g^ cr « 52. S 8* H » cS «p '

fD OT 3

O » » 5? *d OT t2 *!>3 o 2 ** B *° >TJ

C? fD O flO co O O

§ &£ § R S-

r S

III. P|H 8|^ 3-3 "^ ^ ® CX fD

S fD f> O & ° 5- fD

£ II g. g I f~ at I § g' f?* « a£§ ft

O S> fD GO3^ *~b (T> ^ ^3O w M < Co D-02-^^-3j«Dcj<BpsO»g

gf * '§ S sr^ O-H a°gjQ3-p g^ >? & ^

» GO3

§ g S-« i s

Ej «UCO Pp 33 OQ

^d ofT »

g g su §:§.» a^^^1 si!IIIM? ^ M ^S « S- o- § p§ti fT o CO fJ.

$ ^fD

R-

»~i

^3

<>o ^t> to3 ° °

fD I? 00GO 3~>d

E 8 » fflSc S- .- B. P 5'^ p & ° §^' &U B-o s-QJ fjt OQ

O co«> 3 fDP CO P

I

s

s ^ o ^4t-p p.g§I a'

s^5-S3 ^ t* *ô p 3&. o

IIh f°

Iff stiffI a i ^ °r ,1,r- & of c Q 3_ ;fD ^T (T> M- PS 'f-Tl ^ ?i 3 h-1 I

a' w

pt 3 fD 'd

~ OQ

OQ

3 co 3"D4f2.fD E? "5o«§«cT3g-^

OQ 3 & |. ^ S P g 8

§'o'2v5<: 3 J? rv£f a M ^ ^ < o "-r CL»

I3o

« ST S $ s"c R ^ ^ °° < CO g S 3 03 P- '*d

' ' W Si 03 e- ^

3 fD

O '« O , »_. *-(3 O 3 K_ MD3PK>3PW3- P iVd < 5 CT 3 CfD _ _ __ _

|ôg^^:!§^^Z.8 OP'S o 3 < fDO 3 v<; OT c. fT^d S E^

^ 8 g^'Sf?S £« "* r/*> ^ ^rl /-( * ^Tr-r fO HS B «

3 3

cf S rt S- Ci Si *"'

S o-ôs-af fD 3 fo o p P 2 M R- 3 O 5 "^ 3

^ ^ 3 3- p 3O P- O fD fD ^ 3

fDfD

' 10-» P OT l~r> *+t l~1' ' 3

^3 ^ *g- p §*/TS Q C xr\ 3 y

5^ 2. OQ '

|PMi

Figure

Comparison char

OQ 635o,2: n g..

rec/iW

S.O. m >£ cw"D

r?&3

3IOo DaD G ft>a

&̂3

$

SAMPLING SEASON (and other temporal considerations)

?i1

-8B.

ll

«!

liih'i g 3 CL H-. Q c.

ii

.f- 31oo ^. o 55- -

§.

. 1. 1

I'l

5-8.

Figure l.--Comparison chart of program objectives and design featur

es.--Continued (page 8 of 10)

SAMPLING SEASON (and other temporal considerations) (continued)

S 1. 1" 1 £' >^ CX G> (U CIS"Mt) O S "T3

B- § 2 jf| 1 1 a-£"S o K1

Field habitat (reach-level) assess ments are typically conducted as close to base-flow conditions as possible. Some elements may be done whenever it is convenient (e.g., surveys of monumented

cross sections may be easiest after

leaf-fall).

All sites sampled for a similar objective (e.g., fixed sites, synop

tics) should be sampled within a 3- to 4-week period. Sites for multi

ple-year comparisons should be sampled during similar conditions of season and flow to the extent

possible.

mMiijjjiz ' 'Xtyj&ififfiigfsf'sv.-.-V-::::.-^.v.v|^.-.-

SSjSJBiS^jfii:

m^^^^

mtmmmIfplil . .-.-. t*-. ::f-.: -JiLflf.:

wm$tm

JiiaîsP ?ii!?si?sili;;;?;

my^mm

?$mmm ximtffxffftfxf

XX^tt-fi&j-K :-::::t^3f:-:-:1ijJ^:+

mjîîxiiiOp^JIiîs^îis

mmmm

Figure

no 3

T3 &»3'o pnOf

r*O ^»

T33era23oa <t rt5- <t> c«

gaa. <t> c« cS'PS»&»&

P ino p aP<t> at̂o«VO

o ^»

PROGRAM DESIGN DOCUMENTS

>T3Ooo<~>ht3' f ^ ?? P5 " QP > Cft o* 6T" " <° tO 2 i-Q ^3£ £ § a § & VD̂ g S*VOK-S^fD^-^ ^ ^ & J

Êâ^l13^^ .£ p* ° W

t± o> <?9 /OX3 P? o S. 3 o' J 'fi /O O ^^ i^ *1 'v*^ >^- 5 ry% rî rsi l? 'v*^ i^- . B3 C ftD N» 52T3 /-^, 3 p C _, O ^ r? &: _ D s

«. ^

":::*^v

Hillfi iififii |pr^

£ !?- -r l?pr ft-" gT1 E|?ICft' " i> ^ C- -i30§|D§«2. ilii;:;

i-=?Il|ll?SP 1 "Îscg^ls.? IB-SÊ^^S- l>."S?^s?iiii«

.jiSRi

f ia 5'S .-. .vJ-!yJsv

jfiisl

CLa.

Illlfl'g Illltl'o r" ^ c« ^5 P. )> g. "^ " 5

"""'ill

- ;:'S?|^ f" | S- 3*. ^ g. -..- « -, ,

& pj |- D g- m S ^

D CX p CX 9

9Z

Figure l.--Comparison chart of program objectives and design features.--C on turned (page 10 of 10)

PROGRAM DESIGN DOCUMENTS(continued)

7. Whittier, T.R., and Paulsen, S.G., 1992, The surface water component of the Environmen

tal Monitoring and Assessment Program (EMAP): An over view: Journal of Aquatic Eco system Health, v. 1, p. 13-20.6. Paulsen, S.G., Larsen, D.P., Kaufman, P.R., Whittier, T.R.,

and others, 1991,EMAP-Sur- face Waters Monitoring and Research Strategy-Fiscal Year 1991, EP A/600/3-91/ 022: Corvallis, Oreg., U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development, 183 p.

5. U.S. Environmental Protec tion Agency, 1990, Biological criteria: National program

guidance for surface waters, EPA-440/5-90-004: Washing ton, D.C., Office of Water.

5. Paulsen, S.G., and Linthurst, R.A., 1994, Biological moni toring in the Environmental

Monitoring and Assessment Program, Chapter 14, in Loeb, S.L., and Spacie, A., eds., Bio logical monitoring of aquatic systems: Boca Raton, Fla., Lewis Publishers, p. 297-322.

4. Plafkin, J.L., Barbour, M.T., Porter, K.D., Gross, S.K., and Hughes, R.M., 1989, Rapid bioassessment protocols for use in streams and rivers: Benthic macroinvertebrates and fish, EPA/440/4-89-001: Washing

ton, D.C., USEPA, Office of Water.

:-&:iji$f:*:M!i&:ggQfl^jSSiK£-:SsS^:^jjjjjiiii¥::S::H:::::S:S:-:SS::S

lillllllftlSiS;S^:s*Pt?H

lll&lll;:;S!f5S:^::HjiiiiiiS

xv.'-a^:-:-:-:^-:---:-:,:-:

f:-f$*jt>*-\yHf:

mm^mx:::::::>x:$S:¥:::::':::::

111

ilipil

: //:

:/: :

: : :

: : :

: : :

: : :

: : :

: : :

. : :

: : :

: : :

:

CO

MP

ON

EN

TO

BJE

CT

IVE

(Fis

h)

[Not

e: A

lso

see f

ig. 1

fo

r Pr

ogra

m

Obj

ectiv

es a

nd

Des

ign

Fea

ture

s.]

(Occ

urre

nce

and

Dis

tribu

tion

Ass

essm

ent):

Eva

luat

e th

e st

ruct

ure

(spe

cies

com

posi

tion

and

rela

tive

abun

danc

e) o

f fish

co

mm

uniti

es w

ithin

sel

ecte

d sa

mpl

ing

reac

hes.

[Not

e: T

his

char

t is

mos

t app

ropr

iate

for

the

Occ

urre

nce

and

Dis

trib

utio

n A

sses

smen

t; m

odifi

catio

ns m

ay b

e m

ade

to

mee

t oth

er P

rogr

am o

bjec

tives

(e.

g.,

tren

ds a

nd c

ause

leffe

ct c

ase

stud

ies)

.]

Eva

luat

e fis

h co

mm

unity

fr

om r

epre

sent

ativ

e sa

mpl

es.

Eva

luat

e th

e st

ruct

ure

of fi

sh

asse

mbl

ages

(co

mm

uniti

es)

with

in t

arge

ted

habi

tats

, de

velo

p ta

xono

mic

list

s, a

nd

asse

ss t

he f

unct

ioni

ng o

f the

as

sem

blag

e ba

sed

on

know

ledg

e of

eco

logi

cal

proc

esse

s.

Dis

trib

utio

n an

d re

lativ

e ab

unda

nce

of fi

shes

with

in

sele

cted

sam

plin

g re

ache

s.

Eva

luat

e st

ruct

ural

and

fu

nctio

nal c

ondi

tion.

SAM

PL

E T

YP

ES

Rep

rese

ntat

ive

sam

ple

offis

h fr

om th

e sa

mpl

ing

reac

h ba

sed

on 2

sam

plin

g m

etho

ds.

[Rel

ativ

e Ab

unda

nce

Info

rmat

ion]

Rep

rese

ntat

ive

sam

ple

of fi

sh fr

om

the

sam

plin

g re

ach.

A m

ultip

le-h

abita

t sam

plin

g is

emph

asiz

ed fo

r fish

and

in

corp

orat

es a

ll ha

bita

ts w

ithin

a

sam

plin

g re

ach.

Rep

rese

ntat

ive

sam

ple

of th

e fis

h co

mm

unity

usi

ng g

ener

ator

- po

wer

ed p

ulse

d-D

C e

lectro

n" sh

ing

as a

sin

gle

met

hod.

SAM

PL

ING

STR

AT

EG

Y(G

ener

alap

proa

ch,

incl

udin

gco

mpo

siti

ng)

The

mos

t com

mon

sam

ple

cons

ists

of

2 pa

sses

of

an e

lect

rofi

shin

g un

it (b

ackp

ack,

bar

ge, o

r boa

t).

Thi

s is

fo

llow

ed b

y se

ine

colle

ctio

ns t

hat a

re

mos

t ap

prop

riat

e fo

r col

lect

ing

fish

in

that

reac

h (t

hree

50-

m s

eine

hau

ls

and

(or)

or k

ick

sein

e sa

mpl

ing

in ri

ffle

s at

wad

eabl

e si

tes;

3 s

hore

line

sein

e ha

uls

in 3

rep

rese

ntat

ive

sect

ions

of t

he

reac

h at

non

wad

eabl

e si

tes)

. If

el

ectr

ofis

hing

and

(or)

sei

ning

can

not b

e co

nduc

ted

beca

use

of re

ach

cond

ition

s (f

or e

xam

ple,

ext

rem

e co

nduc

tivity

an

d (o

r) a

deb

ris

load

that

pro

hibi

ts

sein

ing)

, the

n ot

her

met

hods

(gi

ll ne

tting

, hoo

p ne

tting

, sno

rkel

ing,

etc

.) ar

e co

nduc

ted

in c

onsu

ltatio

n w

ith l

ocal

fis

h ec

olog

ists

.

Sing

le p

ass

with

bac

kpac

k el

ectro

fishi

ng u

nit,

supp

lem

ente

d w

ith s

eini

ng f

or s

elec

ted

pool

ha

bita

ts a

nd ri

ffle

s.

Usu

ally

a s

ingl

e pa

ss c

onst

itute

s th

e sa

mpl

e. S

ome

stat

es c

ondu

ct

seve

ral p

asse

s of

a g

iven

reac

h.

Blo

ck n

ets

are

som

etim

es u

sed,

an

d de

plet

ion

popu

latio

n es

timat

es

cond

ucte

d.

A. E

lect

rofis

hing

sam

ples

are

co

llect

ed a

t eac

h si

te 1

to 3

tim

es

with

in th

e in

dex

sam

plin

g pe

riod

(Jun

e 15

- O

ctob

er 1

5).

B. A

ll sa

mpl

ing

is co

nduc

ted

durin

g da

ylig

ht h

ours

, exc

ept i

n th

e O

hio

Riv

er w

here

nig

ht

sam

plin

g w

as d

eter

min

ed to

be

mor

e ef

fect

ive.

Figu

re 2

.--C

ompa

riso

n ch

art

of fi

sh p

roto

cols

, (pa

ge 1

of 8

)

SAM

PLE

GE

AR

A. B

atte

ry-

(24-

volt

deep

cyc

le)

orge

nera

tor-

pow

ered

(11

5-vo

ltga

solin

e) b

ackp

ack

elec

trof

ishi

ngun

itB

. Bar

ge-o

pera

ted

elec

trof

ishi

ngun

itC

. Boa

t-op

erat

ed e

lect

rofi

shin

g un

it[N

ote:

All

elec

trof

ishi

ng u

nits

shou

ld b

e pu

lsed

-DC

.]D

. Bag

sei

ne :

7.6

- or

9.1

-m b

y1.

2-m

sei

ne a

ttach

ed to

2 w

oode

npo

les

31.8

mm

in d

iam

eter

; usu

ally

6.4-

mm

mes

h si

zeE

. Kic

k se

ine

: "co

mm

on s

ense

"se

ine,

3-m

by

1.2-

m s

eine

with

woo

den

pole

s 31

.8 m

m in

dia

met

er;

6.4-

mm

mes

h si

zeF.

Bea

ch s

eine

*: 3

0.5-

to 6

1-m

by

2.8-

m s

eine

with

woo

den

pole

s(u

sual

ly 5

1 m

m b

y 51

mm

); 9

.5-

mm

mes

h si

ze#

G. E

xper

imen

tal

gill

net

: 1.8

m

deep

with

6 s

ectio

ns o

f m

onof

ilam

ent m

esh,

7.6

m lo

ng

each

, usi

ng 1

3-, 2

5-, 3

8-, 5

1-, 7

6-,

and

102-

mm

mes

h si

ze (

bar

mea

sure

)H

. Hoo

p ne

t : f

iber

glas

s ho

ops

0.6

m in

dia

met

er, 3

.7 m

long

; un

trea

ted

38-m

m m

esh

(bar

m

easu

re);

thro

ats

on 2

nd a

nd 4

th o

f th

e 7

hoop

sN

ote:

Net

siz

es m

ay b

e ta

ilore

d to

lo

cal c

ondi

tions

; m

esh

size

s ar

e th

e m

axim

um a

ccep

tabl

e.

A. E

lect

rofi

shin

g: 3

60-w

att

puls

ed-D

C e

lect

rofi

shin

g un

it; d

ip n

ets

with

7-m

m

mes

h

B. S

eini

ng.

Kic

k/be

ach

sein

es

A. E

lect

rofi

shin

g. P

ram

- op

erat

ed u

nits

or

shor

e-

base

d un

its a

re t

he d

omin

ant

form

of g

ear.

Bac

kpac

k el

ectr

ofis

hing

uni

ts a

re u

sed

in s

mal

l str

eam

s, p

artic

ular

ly

head

wat

ers.

B. S

eini

ng.

Kic

k se

ines

are

so

met

imes

use

d in

riff

les,

an

d ba

g se

ines

are

use

d in

po

ols.

Usu

ally

this

gea

r is

em

ploy

ed o

nly

whe

n el

ectr

ofis

hing

is n

ot p

ossi

ble.

All

met

hods

em

ploy

pul

sed-

D

C e

lect

rofi

shin

g us

ing

gaso

line

gene

rato

rs.

Min

imum

wat

tage

s ar

e sp

ecif

ied

belo

w.

A. W

adin

g M

etho

ds: A

T&

J 17

36 V

DC

ele

ctro

fish

er/

gene

rato

r co

mbi

natio

n is

us

ed (

min

imum

1,7

50 w

atts

ou

tput

). T

his

is e

ither

tow

ed

in a

sm

all,

plas

tic t

owbo

at

(Spo

rt Y

ak)

or a

100

-m

heav

y-du

ty e

xten

sion

line

is

used

as

a ba

nk-s

et. T

his

is

used

in a

ll w

adea

ble

situ

atio

ns.

B. B

atte

ry B

ackp

ack

Uni

ts:

The

se a

re u

sed

unde

r ve

ry

rest

rict

ive

guid

elin

es a

nd

only

in th

e sm

alle

st

head

wat

er s

trea

ms.

C

. Boa

t-M

ount

ed U

nits

: T

hese

em

ploy

3,5

00-

to

5,00

0-w

att g

ener

ator

s w

ith

puls

ator

s th

at p

rodu

ce 5

00-

1,00

0 V

DC

at

10-2

0 am

pere

s.

Figu

re 2

.--C

ompa

riso

n ch

art o

f fish

pro

toco

ls.-C

ontin

ued

(pag

e 2

of 8

)

SAM

PLE

AR

EA

(fo

r pr

inci

pal

sam

ple

gear

ty

pes)

Are

a sa

mpl

ed is

the

entir

e sa

mpl

ing

reac

h.A

rea

sam

pled

is th

e en

tire

sam

plin

g re

ach.

Are

a sa

mpl

ed is

the

entir

e sa

mpl

ing

reac

h.W

adin

g M

etho

ds: T

he b

est

avai

labl

e ha

bita

t alo

ng o

ne

side

of th

e re

ach

is sa

mpl

ed. A

ll m

icro

habi

tats

are

incl

uded

.

Boa

t Met

hods

: The

bes

tav

aila

ble

shor

elin

e an

d ru

n ha

bita

t is

sam

pled

.

FIE

LD

CO

LL

EC

TIO

NST

EPS

1. C

hoos

e ap

prop

riate

sam

ple

gear

. [N

ote:

typi

cally

acc

ompl

ishe

d in

a

reco

nnai

ssan

ce p

rior

to s

ampl

ing]

2. I

f ele

ctro

fishi

ng c

an b

e co

nduc

ted,

mak

e 2

pass

es,

proc

eedi

ng f

rom

dow

nstre

am to

up

stre

am a

t wad

eabl

e si

tes

(ups

tream

to d

owns

tream

at

nonw

adea

ble

site

s).

3. C

olle

ct s

eine

sam

ples

as

appr

opria

te.

No

info

rmat

ion

prov

ided

Follo

w S

tand

ard

Ope

ratin

g Pr

oced

ures

est

ablis

hed

by

Stat

e W

ater

Res

ourc

es A

genc

y.

Trai

ned

indi

vidu

als

used

to

oper

ate

gear

.

1. S

elec

t gen

eral

site

loca

tion

durin

g pr

e-su

rvey

pla

nnin

g.2.

Ele

ctro

fishi

ng r

each

is

esta

blis

hed

and

mar

ked

for

futu

re p

asse

s. W

adin

g si

tes

are

sam

pled

in a

n up

stre

am

dire

ctio

n; b

oat s

ites

are

sam

pled

dow

nstre

am.

Figu

re 2

.--C

ompa

riso

n ch

art o

f fis

h pr

otoc

ols.

-Con

timie

d (p

age

3 of

8)

FIE

LD

PRO

CE

SSIN

GST

EPS

1. A

ll fis

h th

at c

an b

e id

entif

ied

to

spec

ies

in th

e fie

ld b

y an

icht

hyol

ogis

t ar

e an

esth

etiz

ed (

carb

on d

ioxi

de),

mea

sure

d (to

tal a

nd s

tand

ard

leng

th)

and

wei

ghed

(if m

ore

than

30

indi

vidu

als

of a

spe

cies

are

pre

sent

, th

en 3

0 ar

e se

lect

ed ra

ndom

ly f

or

mea

sure

men

t and

wei

ght).

2. A

ll fis

h ar

e ch

ecke

d fo

r the

pr

esen

ce o

f ext

erna

l ano

mal

ies

(def

orm

ities

, ero

ded

fins,

lesi

ons,

tu

mor

s, d

isea

ses,

and

par

asite

s).

3. S

peci

men

s th

at c

anno

t be

iden

tifie

d to

spe

cies

in th

e fie

ld a

re fi

xed

in 1

0-

perc

ent b

uffe

red

form

alin

for

late

r id

entif

icat

ion

in th

e la

bora

tory

. A

fter

2

days

to 1

wee

k in

for

mal

in (

to fi

x tis

sues

), sp

ecim

ens

are

trans

ferr

ed

(with

an

inte

rmed

iate

tap-

wat

er s

tep)

to

40-

perc

ent i

sopr

opyl

alc

ohol

or 7

0-

perc

ent e

than

ol f

or p

erm

anen

t pr

eser

vatio

n.

1. I

dent

ify a

ll fis

h to

spe

cies

.2.

Lar

gest

and

sm

alle

st in

divi

dual

s ar

e m

easu

red.

3. S

peci

men

s ar

e ch

ecke

d fo

r an

omal

ies.

4. V

ouch

er s

ubsa

mpl

e of

up

to 2

5 sp

ecim

ens

in 1

0-pe

rcen

t for

mal

in.

5. P

rese

rve

spec

imen

s th

at c

anno

t be

iden

tifie

d.

Follo

w S

tand

ard

Ope

ratin

g Pr

oced

ures

. Fis

h ar

e so

rted,

id

entif

ied,

and

enu

mer

ated

in th

e fie

ld. V

ouch

er s

peci

men

s or

thos

e di

ffic

ult t

o id

entif

y ar

e ta

ken

back

to

the

labo

rato

ry fo

r pro

cess

ing.

L

engt

h/w

eigh

t mea

sure

men

ts a

nd

batc

h bi

omas

s ar

e so

met

imes

do

ne. V

isua

l ins

pect

ions

for

di

seas

e an

d an

omal

ies

are

done

.

1. A

ll fis

h ar

e fie

ld id

entif

ied

to

ever

y pr

actic

able

ext

ent.

Fish

are

id

entif

ied,

cou

nted

, wei

ghed

, and

ex

amin

ed fo

r ext

erna

l ano

mal

ies.

A

n el

ectri

c pu

mp

is u

sed

to

reci

rcul

ate

and

repl

enis

h liv

e-w

ell

wat

er.

2. S

peci

men

s ar

e re

tain

ed fo

r la

bora

tory

iden

tific

atio

n an

d (o

r)

vouc

hers

as

nece

ssar

y. A

ll fis

h ar

e fix

ed in

10-

perc

ent f

orm

alin

and

la

ter

was

hed

in w

ater

and

tra

nsfe

rred

to in

crea

sing

co

ncen

tratio

ns o

f eth

anol

(in

the

labo

rato

ry, s

peci

men

s ar

e w

ashe

d an

d tra

nsfe

rred

thro

ugh

a se

ries

of

35-,

50-,

and

70-p

erce

nt e

than

ol).

Figu

re 2

.--C

ompa

riso

n ch

art

of fi

sh p

roto

cols

.-Con

tinu

ed (

page

4 o

f 8)

AN

CIL

LA

RY

DA

TA

AN

DC

OO

RD

INA

TE

Dc

AM

PT I

NH

k3

/X J.

V1J

T A

wJL

LÎ V

J

AC

TIV

ITIE

S

LE

VE

L O

FT

AX

ON

OM

Y

A. A

mbi

ent c

ondu

ctiv

ity, w

ater

tem

pera

ture

, and

dis

solv

ed-o

xyge

nm

easu

rem

ents

mad

e at

the

time

offis

h-co

mm

unity

sam

plin

gB

. Hab

itat d

ata

(rea

ch, s

egm

ent,

basi

n) o

btai

ned

for e

ach

Bas

ic F

ixed

Site

C. I

nver

tebr

ate

and

alga

l com

mun

itysa

mpl

es c

olle

cted

at e

ach

Bas

ic F

ixed

Site

D. A

dditi

onal

wat

er, s

edim

ent,

and

tissu

e ch

emis

try c

olle

cted

at e

ach

Bas

ic F

ixed

Site

E. C

ontin

uous

stre

am d

isch

arge

and

field

wat

er-q

ualit

y pa

ram

eter

s (e

.g.,

pH, t

empe

ratu

re) c

olle

cted

at e

ach

Bas

ic F

ixed

Site

Spec

ies

A. C

hem

istry

(qua

litat

ive

stre

amsi

de a

nd q

uant

itativ

ela

bora

tory

), te

mpe

ratu

re, d

isso

lved

oxyg

enB

. Phy

sica

l hab

itat

C. I

nver

tebr

ates

and

alg

aeD

. Sed

imen

t met

abol

ism

E. D

isch

arge

Spec

ies

lltl

llll

liti

;^

giii;

!;!;®

;;^

A. I

n si

tu m

easu

rem

ents

of

tem

pera

ture

, pH

, dis

solv

edox

ygen

, and

con

duct

ivity

B. P

hysi

cal m

easu

rem

ents

of

velo

city

and

(or)

flow

, som

etim

espa

rticl

e siz

e an

d ch

anne

lm

orph

olog

ical

det

ail

C. H

abita

t stru

ctur

e pa

ram

eter

sei

ther

mea

sure

d or

est

imat

ed w

ithvi

sual

-bas

ed te

chni

que

D. O

ther

asse

mbl

age

colle

ctio

ns a

sde

term

ined

by

Age

ncy

dire

ctiv

eE.

Wat

er, s

edim

ent,

and

tissu

ech

emis

try c

olle

cted

as r

equi

red

for

anal

ytic

al a

nd to

xico

logi

cal t

estin

g

Low

est p

ract

icab

le ta

xon

(usu

ally

spec

ies

or g

enus

)

A. C

hem

ical

ana

lyse

s of

wat

erco

lum

n, e

fflu

ents

, sed

imen

tsB.

Hab

itat e

valu

atio

n co

nduc

ted

usin

g th

e Q

ualit

ativ

e H

abita

tEv

alua

tion

Inde

x (Q

HEI

)C

. Inv

erte

brat

e sa

mpl

es (S

eese

ctio

n on

Inve

rtebr

ates

.)D

. Oth

er d

ata

may

incl

ude:

toxi

city

dat

a fro

m e

fflue

nt o

rse

dim

ent t

estin

g, b

iom

arke

rs, o

rtis

h co

ntam

inan

ts.

Spec

ies

and,

if n

eces

sary

,su

bspe

cies

; all

hybr

ids

are

iden

tifie

d.

Fig

ure

2.--

Com

pari

son

char

t of

fish

pro

toco

ls.-C

onti

nued

(pa

ge 5

of 8

)

1111

11

ill

DA

TA

A

NA

LY

SIS

A. D

escr

iptiv

e: s

peci

es l

ists

, ri

chne

ss, d

iver

sity

, si

mila

rity

B

. Mul

tivar

iate

: di

ffer

entia

tion

of s

ites

base

d on

com

mun

ities

, gr

adie

nt a

naly

sis

-- ev

alua

te

hang

es in

che

mic

al

(bio

logi

cal)

cha

ract

eris

tics

asso

ciat

ed w

ith c

hang

es in

bi

olog

ical

(ch

emic

al)

char

acte

rist

ics

usin

g, f

or

exam

ple,

tw

o-w

ay in

dica

tor

spec

ies

anal

ysis

(T

WIN

SPA

N),

detr

ende

d co

rres

pond

ence

an

alys

is (

DC

A),

and

cano

nica

l co

rres

pond

ence

ana

lysi

s (C

AN

OC

O).

C. B

iolo

gica

l Ind

ices

: D

ata

for

calc

ulat

ing

indi

ces

such

as

the

Inde

x of

Bio

tic I

nteg

rity

(IB

I)

will

be

avai

labl

e fr

om N

AW

QA

fis

h sa

mpl

ing.

IB

I's m

ay b

e ge

nera

ted

in s

tudy

uni

ts w

here

ap

prop

riat

e an

d w

ith c

oope

rato

r su

ppor

t.

Sam

e as

NA

WQ

A.

Mul

timet

ric

appr

oach

, whe

re

met

rics

and

ind

ices

are

ca

libra

ted

by s

trea

m c

lass

an

d re

gion

al e

xpec

tatio

ns,

and

repr

esen

t key

mea

sure

s of

ass

embl

age

elem

ents

and

pr

oces

ses.

Cal

ibra

tion

may

be

don

e by

mul

tivar

iate

te

chni

ques

. In

ass

essm

ent,

met

rics

are

cal

cula

ted,

va

lues

con

vert

ed to

sco

res,

an

d ag

greg

ated

to p

rovi

de a

n in

tegr

ated

ass

essm

ent.

A. D

escr

iptiv

e: s

peci

es,

rela

tive

abun

danc

e (n

umbe

rs, w

eigh

ts),

and

exte

rnal

ano

mal

ies,

di

seas

es, a

nd p

aras

ites

B. M

ultim

erri

c: I

ndex

of

Bio

tic I

nteg

rity

(IB

I) [

3 ve

r

sion

s m

odif

ied

for

appl

ica

tio

n in

Ohi

o];

Mod

ifie

d In

dex

of W

ell-

bein

g (M

lWb)

C

. Mul

tivar

iate

ana

lyse

s as

ne

eded

Figu

re 2

.-Com

pari

son

char

t of f

ish p

roto

cols

.-Con

tinue

d (p

age

6 of

8)

Ill;

QU

AL

ITY

A

SSU

RA

NC

E/

QU

AL

ITY

C

ON

TR

OL

(QA

/QC

)

A. S

tand

ardi

zed

prot

ocol

s an

dtra

inin

g of

fiel

d pe

rson

nel:

Reg

iona

lbi

olog

ists

pro

vide

coo

rdin

atio

n an

dov

ersi

ght o

f stu

dy-u

nit s

ampl

ing

activ

ities

.B

. Cen

traliz

ed u

nit:

Bio

logi

cal

Qua

lity

Ass

uran

ce U

nit a

t the

USG

S/N

atio

nal W

ater

Qua

lity

Labo

rato

ryov

erse

es c

ontr

acto

rs a

nd q

ualit

yas

sura

nce/

qual

ity c

ontro

l.C

. Ref

eren

ce c

olle

ctio

ns:

In-h

ouse

refe

renc

e co

llect

ions

are

mai

ntai

ned

by th

e B

iolo

gica

l Qua

lity

Ass

uran

ceU

nit.

D. V

ouch

er c

olle

ctio

ns:

Vou

cher

colle

ctio

ns a

re m

aint

aine

d in

out

side

repo

sito

ries

(e.g

., m

useu

ms)

.E.

Col

labo

ratio

n w

ith o

utsi

deta

xono

mis

ts in

clud

es v

erifi

catio

n of

iden

tific

atio

ns, u

pdat

ing

ofta

xono

mic

list

s, a

nd id

entif

icat

ion

and

desc

riptio

n of

new

spe

cies

.F.

Tax

onom

ic d

atab

ase

(inte

rage

ncy)

:N

atio

nal O

cean

ogra

phic

Dat

a C

ente

r(N

OD

C)

code

fac

ilita

tes

track

ing

ofna

me

chan

ges

over

tim

e an

d sh

arin

gof

dat

a am

ong

agen

cies

.G

. Int

egra

ted

data

base

: Nat

iona

lW

ater

Info

rmat

ion

Syst

em-I

I con

tain

sph

ysic

al (i

nclu

ding

hab

itat)

, che

mic

al,

and

biol

ogic

al d

ata,

with

fac

ilita

ted

data

ent

ry, v

erif

icat

ion,

and

ana

lysi

s.

Vou

cher

spe

cim

ens

and

"unk

now

ns"

will

be

arch

ived

by

prof

essi

onal

icht

hyol

ogis

ts a

t the

N

atio

nal M

useu

m o

f Nat

ural

H

isto

ry o

r by

cons

ulta

tion

with

sp

ecia

lists

in v

ario

us ta

xono

mic

gr

oups

.

A. D

ocum

ente

d St

anda

rdO

pera

ting

Proc

edur

esB

. Tra

ined

sta

ff a

ndde

linea

tion

of re

spon

sibi

lity

C. M

aint

enan

ce o

f a v

ouch

erco

llect

ion

D. C

ompu

teri

zed

data

base

and

anal

ytic

al p

rogr

ams

with

veri

fied

ent

ries

E. C

onsi

sten

t rep

ortin

g fo

rmat

and

met

ric

calc

ulat

ion

A. Q

A/Q

C is

cen

tral

lyor

gani

zed

in th

e E

colo

gica

lA

sses

smen

t Sec

tion.

Dis

tric

tsu

rfac

e-w

ater

uni

ts p

erfo

rmlim

ited

asse

ssm

ents

.B

. Ref

eren

ce c

olle

ctio

n is

mai

ntai

ned

in-h

ouse

.C

. Vou

cher

s ar

e de

posi

ted

inth

e O

hio

Stat

e U

nive

rsity

Mus

eum

of B

iodi

vers

ity.

D. A

ll da

ta a

re e

nter

ed in

to th

eFI

NS

subr

outin

e of

Ohi

oE

CO

S, a

Sta

te-w

ide

data

base

orga

nize

d an

d m

aint

aine

d by

Ohi

o EP

A.

Figu

re 2

.--C

ompa

riso

n ch

art o

f fish

pro

toco

ls.-C

onti

nued

(pa

ge 7

of 8

)

' fj

ffit

t&if

a'&

&$ft

fff*

.

m

PR

OT

OC

OL

D

OC

UM

EN

T1.

Mea

dor,

M.R

., C

uffn

ey,

T.F.

, and

Gur

tz, M

.E.,

1993

, M

etho

ds f

or c

olle

ctin

g sa

mpl

es

of fi

sh c

omm

uniti

es a

s pa

rt o

f th

e N

atio

nal

Wat

er-Q

ualit

y A

sses

smen

t Pro

gram

: U

.S.

Geo

logi

cal

Surv

ey O

pen-

File

R

epor

t 93-

104,

40

p.

1. K

lem

m, D

.J.,

and

Lazo

r-

chak

, J.M

., ed

s.,

1993

, Env

i

ronm

enta

l Mon

itori

ng a

nd

Ass

essm

ent P

rogr

am-S

ur

face

Wat

ers

and

Reg

ion

3 R

egio

nal-

EM

AP

1993

Pilo

t Fi

eld

Ope

ratio

ns a

nd M

eth

od

s M

anua

l Str

eam

s: C

in

cinn

ati,

Ohi

o, U

.S.

Env

iron

men

tal P

rote

ctio

n A

genc

y.

[See

fig

. 1:

Pro

gram

Des

ign

Doc

umen

ts.]

1. O

hio

Env

iron

men

tal P

ro

tect

ion

Age

ncy,

198

7, B

io

logi

cal

Cri

teri

a fo

r th

e Pr

otec

tion

of A

quat

ic L

ife,

V

olum

e n,

Use

rs m

anua

l fo

r bi

olog

ical

fie

ld e

valu

a

tion

of O

hio

rive

rs a

nd

stre

ams:

Div

isio

n of

Wat

er

Qua

lity

Plan

ning

and

A

sses

smen

t.

2. O

hio

Envi

ronm

enta

l Pro

te

ctio

n A

genc

y, 1

989,

Bio

lo

gica

l C

rite

ria

for

the

Prot

ectio

n of

Aqu

atic

Lif

e,

Vol

ume

El,

Stan

dard

ized

bi

olog

ical

fiel

d sa

mpl

ing

and

labo

rato

ry m

etho

ds f

or

asse

ssin

g fi

sh a

nd m

acro

in-

vert

ebra

te c

omm

uniti

es:

Div

isio

n of

Wat

er Q

ualit

y Pl

anni

ng a

nd A

sses

smen

t.

Figu

re 2

,-Com

pari

son

char

t of f

ish p

roto

cols

.-Con

tinu

ed (

page

8 o

f 8)

CO

MP

ON

EN

TO

BJE

CT

IVE

(Inv

erte

brat

es)

[Not

e: F

or

NA

WQ

A, E

MA

P,

RB

P's,

and

Ohi

o E

PA, a

lso

see f

ig. 1

fo

r Pr

ogra

m

Obj

ectiv

es a

nd

Des

ign

Fea

ture

s.]

(Occ

urre

nce

and

Dis

tribu

tion

Ass

essm

ent):

Eva

luat

e th

e st

ruct

ure

of b

enth

ic in

verte

br

ate

com

mun

ities

with

in ta

r ge

ted

habi

tats

, and

dev

elop

a

taxa

list

of i

nver

tebr

ates

of a

ll ha

bita

ts p

rese

nt, i

n se

lect

ed

sam

plin

g re

ache

s.[N

ote:

Thi

s ch

art i

s m

ost

appr

opri

ate f

or th

e O

ccur

re

nce

and

Dis

trib

utio

n A

sses

s

men

t; m

odifi

catio

ns m

ay b

e m

ade

to m

eet o

ther

Pro

gram

ob

ject

ives

(e.

g., t

rend

s an

d ca

use/

effe

ct c

ase

stud

ies)

.]

Eva

luat

e be

nthi

c in

ver

te

brat

e co

mm

unity

st

ruct

ure

in s

trea

ms

of

the

U.S

. to

dete

rmin

e co

mm

unity

res

pons

es

to k

now

n im

pact

s an

d to

est

imat

e th

e pr

opor

tio

n of

U.S

. str

eam

s th

at

are

impa

ired

.

Eval

uate

the

stru

ctur

e of

be

nthi

c m

acro

in ve

rtebr

ate

asse

mbl

ages

with

in ta

rget

ed

habi

tats

, dev

elop

taxo

nom

ic

lists

, and

ass

ess

the

func

tion

in

g of

the

asse

mbl

age

base

d on

the

pote

ntia

l fun

ctio

ning

fo

r a s

ite,

[gea

red

tow

ard

Cle

an W

ater

Act

impa

irmen

t le

vel d

eter

min

atio

ns a

nd

eval

uatio

n of

man

agem

ent

effe

cts]

Site

sel

ectio

n: S

ites

are

sele

cted

non

-ran

dom

ly to

re

pres

ent h

omog

eneo

us

land

-use

and

phy

siog

raph

ic

cond

ition

s. U

nit o

f sam

plin

g: re

pres

en

tativ

e ge

omor

phic

seq

uenc

e or

20

chan

nel w

idth

s, ca

. 15

0-50

0 m

Loc

atio

n of

sam

plin

g un

it at

site

: si

mila

r to

NA

WQ

A R

eplic

atio

n: M

ultip

le

reac

hes

(pre

fer 3

) and

mul

ti

ple

year

s (p

refe

r 3) a

re s

am

pled

as

mon

ey a

nd

man

pow

er a

llow

. S

ampl

ing

freq

uenc

y: o

nce

or tw

ice

per y

ear

Sam

plin

g se

ason

: sam

e co

nsid

erat

ions

as N

AW

QA

Eva

luat

e th

e st

ruct

ure

of b

enth

ic m

acro

inve

r-

tebr

ate

asse

mbl

ages

w

ithin

targ

eted

hab

itats

, de

velo

p ta

xono

mic

lis

ts, a

nd a

sses

s th

e fu

nctio

ning

of t

he

asse

mbl

age

base

d on

kn

owle

dge

of e

colo

gi

cal p

roce

sses

.

Dis

trib

utio

n an

d ab

un

danc

e of

the

mac

roin

- ve

rteb

rate

ass

embl

ages

of

lotic

hab

itats

: ev

alu

at

e th

e st

ruct

ural

inte

g

rity

of r

esid

ent

com

mun

ities

usi

ng a

rti

ficia

l su

bstr

ates

sup

ple

m

ente

d w

ith q

ualit

ativ

e sa

mpl

es o

f the

nat

ural

su

bstr

ates

.

Figu

re 3

.--C

ompa

riso

n ch

art o

f inv

erte

brat

e pr

otoc

ols,

(pag

e 1

of 1

1)

Ill

SAM

PL

E T

YP

ES

A. R

iche

st T

arge

ted

Hab

i ta

t (R

TH):

Sem

i-qua

ntita

tiv

e sa

mpl

e fr

om th

e ha

bita

t typ

e th

at (i

n th

e ab

senc

e of

hum

an in

flu

ence

s) is

exp

ecte

d to

sup

po

rt th

e ric

hest

as

sem

blag

e of

inve

rte

brat

es in

the

sam

plin

g re

ach

(e.g

., rif

fles,

sna

gs).

[Rel

ativ

e A

bund

ance

In

form

atio

n]

B. D

epos

ition

al T

arge

ted

Hab

itat

(DTi

D:

Sem

i- qu

antit

ativ

e sa

mpl

e fr

om a

fin

e-gr

aine

d, o

rgan

ical

ly

rich

dep

ositi

onal

hab

itat,

usua

lly a

poo

l. [R

elat

ive

Abu

ndan

ce In

form

atio

n]

C. Q

ualit

ativ

e M

ultih

abi-

iatlQ

MH

): Q

ualit

ativ

e sa

mpl

e co

mpo

site

d fr

om

all (

or a

s m

any

as p

ossi

bl

e) h

abita

t typ

es p

rese

nt

in th

e sa

mpl

ing

reac

h.[T

axa

Pre

senc

e In

form

a

tion]

A. R

iffl

e/ru

n ha

bita

ts:

Com

posi

te s

ampl

e B

. Poo

l/glid

e ha

bita

ts

(dep

ositi

onal

): C

om

posi

te s

ampl

e C

. Qua

litat

ive

Mul

ti-

habi

tat:

Com

posi

te

sam

ple

A. R

iffle

hab

itat:

Sem

i-

quan

titat

ive

sam

ples

are

ta

ken

from

riff

les

to b

e co

nsis

tent

with

pas

t sa

mpl

ing

effo

rts.

B. M

ultih

abita

t: Se

mi-

qu

antit

ativ

e sa

mpl

es a

re

colle

cted

from

all

maj

or

habi

tat t

ypes

, e.g

., sn

ags,

mar

gins

, veg

eta

tio

n be

ds, l

eaf p

acks

, an

d de

posi

tiona

l ar

eas.

Sam

ple

type

is b

ased

on

targ

eted

hab

itats

and

m

ay in

clud

e ep

ifau

nal

and

infa

unal

mac

roin

ver-

te

brat

es. T

wo

appr

oach

es

are

utili

zed

by S

tate

s:

A. S

ingl

e H

abita

t: Th

e de

cisi

on o

n th

e ta

rget

ed

habi

tat o

f cho

ice

is b

ased

on

the

mos

t pro

duct

ive

and

prev

alen

t hab

itat

repr

esen

tativ

e of

the

stre

am ty

pe b

eing

as

sess

ed. U

sual

ly a

n ep

i fa

unal

sub

stra

te is

em

phas

ized

, i.e

., rif

fle/

run

area

s in

hig

h gr

adie

nt

stre

ams,

and

sna

gs a

nd

vege

tatio

n m

ats

in lo

w

grad

ient

stre

ams.

B

. Mul

tihab

itat:

Spec

ific

habi

tats

are

iden

tifie

d an

d ca

tego

rized

for

sam

pl

ing

in s

ome

Stat

es.

Can

dida

te h

abita

ts u

sed

by S

tate

s in

clud

e co

b

ble,

sho

rezo

ne, s

nags

, sa

nd/s

ilt/c

lay,

veg

etat

ion

beds

, and

leaf

pac

ks.

A. A

rtif

icia

l su

bstr

ates

/ ru

n ha

bita

t: R

un h

abita

t w

ith a

con

tinuo

us c

ur

rent

spe

ed o

f mor

e th

an

0.3

feet

per

sec

ond.

B. Q

ualit

ativ

e / M

ulti-

ha

bita

t: Q

ualit

ativ

e sa

mpl

ing

is c

ondu

cted

by

dip

-net

/han

d pi

ck

ing

from

all

repr

esen

ta

tive

habi

tats

in th

e im

med

iate

sam

plin

g re

ach.

Figu

re 3

.~C

ompa

riso

n ch

art o

f inv

erte

brat

e pr

otoc

ols.

-Con

tinue

d (p

age

2 of

11)

:G:\

::::;K

:::::::S

SS

::::::S

:::::

*|p

ll;ll$

i$$

ili|

181

SAM

PL

ING

ST

RA

TE

GY

A. R

TH: C

ompo

site

of 5

sa

mpl

es f

rom

the

riche

st

targ

eted

hab

itat t

ype,

dis

tr

ibut

ed o

ver

mul

tiple

ex

ampl

es o

f the

targ

eted

ha

bita

t typ

e w

ithin

the

sam

plin

g re

ach.

Ext

rem

e ha

bita

t con

ditio

ns (

fast

est/

slow

est v

eloc

ities

; lar

gest

/ sm

alle

st s

ubst

rate

s; e

tc.)

are

avoi

ded.

B. D

TH: C

ompo

site

of (

a m

inim

um o

f) 5

sam

ples

fr

om th

e de

posi

tiona

l ta

rget

ed h

abita

t typ

e, d

is

trib

uted

ove

r m

ultip

le

exam

ples

of t

he ta

rget

ed

habi

tat t

ype

with

in th

e sa

mpl

ing

reac

h. E

xtre

me

exam

ples

of h

abita

t con

di

tions

are

avo

ided

. C

. OM

H: C

ompo

site

fro

m

as m

any

habi

tat t

ypes

as

poss

ible

with

in th

e sa

m

plin

g re

ach,

usi

ng e

qual

sa

mpl

ing

effo

rt in

eac

h ha

bita

t typ

e; l

imite

d to

to

tal s

ampl

ing

time

of

abou

t 1

hour

for

mos

t st

ream

s.

Nin

e tra

nsec

ts a

re e

qual

ly

spac

ed a

long

the

sam

pl

ing

reac

h. A

sam

ple

is

colle

cted

at e

ach

trans

ect

and

com

posi

ted

with

ot

her s

ampl

es f

rom

sim

i la

r hab

itats

. Thu

s, al

l rif

fle

/run

sam

ples

are

co

mpo

site

d, a

nd a

ll po

ol/

glid

e sa

mpl

es a

re c

om

posi

ted.

A to

tal o

f 9 s

ampl

es a

re

colle

cted

. The

se a

re a

ll rif

fle, a

ll po

ol, o

r a m

ix

ture

of t

hese

hab

itats

.

The

qual

itativ

e m

ulti-

ha

bita

t sam

ple

is a

com

po

site

of a

ll sa

mpl

es c

ol

lect

ed b

y th

is m

etho

d fr

om a

reac

h.

A. R

iffl

e ha

bita

t: C

om

posi

te o

f 5

Surb

er o

r H

ess

sam

ples

or

1-m

ki

ck n

et s

ampl

es f

rom

ri

ffle

typ

e ha

bita

t, di

s

trib

uted

ove

r m

ultip

le

exam

ples

of t

his

habi

ta

t typ

e w

ithin

the

sam

pl

ing

reac

h. E

xtre

me,

at

ypic

al h

abita

t con

di

tions

are

avo

ided

.

B. M

ultih

abita

t: C

om

posi

te s

ampl

e fr

om a

s m

any

habi

tat t

ypes

as

poss

ible

with

in th

e sa

mpl

ing

reac

h, u

sing

eq

ual s

ampl

ing

effo

rt in

ea

ch h

abita

t typ

e.

Rif

fle

and

mul

tihab

itat

sam

ples

are

kep

t sep

a

rate

.

A. S

ingl

e H

abita

t: C

ompo

site

of 2

sam

ples

fr

om d

iffe

rent

vel

ocity

/ de

pth

regi

mes

is d

one.

G

oal i

s ag

greg

ate

over

a

rela

tivel

y la

rge

area

to

get a

roun

d th

e no

rmal

pa

tchi

ness

in t

he e

nvi

ro

nmen

t.B

. Mul

tihab

itat:

Com

po

site

may

be

done

if

stan

dard

ized

leve

l of

ef

fort

is e

mpl

oyed

. A

ltern

ativ

ely,

hab

itat

sam

ples

kep

t sep

arat

e,

part

icul

arly

for

infa

una

vers

us e

pifa

una.

A. A

rtif

icia

l sub

stra

tes:

M

odif

ied

Hes

ter-

D

endy

des

ign

usin

g 5

sets

of p

late

s, e

ach

1 ft

in

sur

face

are

a. E

ach

sam

ple

is a

com

posi

te

of th

e en

tire

clus

ter

of 5

se

ts o

f pla

tes.

B. Q

ualit

ativ

e / M

ulti-

ha

bita

t: Q

ualit

ativ

e di

p-

net/h

and-

pick

ed s

am

ples

fro

m a

ll av

aila

ble

habi

tats

. Pre

dom

inan

t ta

xa fr

om e

ach

diff

eren

t ha

bita

t ar

e no

ted

on

field

she

ets.

Figu

re 3

.--C

ompa

riso

n ch

art o

f inv

erte

brat

e pr

otoc

ols.

-Con

tinue

d (p

age

3 of

11)

eS m

SAM

PLE

GE

AR

RTH

or

DT

H [

425-

|im

mes

h]:

A. W

adea

ble

coar

se-g

rain

ed

subs

trate

s: S

lack

sam

pler

("

Surb

er-o

n-a-

stic

k")

B. N

onw

adea

ble

coar

se

grai

ned

subs

trate

s: D

ome

sam

pler

; ar

tific

ial s

ubst

rate

s;

stov

epip

e sa

mpl

ers

C.W

adea

ble

fine-

grai

ned

subs

trate

s: G

rab

sam

pler

s (M

acan

, Ekm

an, P

onar

, Van

V

een,

or P

eter

sen)

D

. Non

wad

eabl

e fin

e

grai

ned

subs

trate

s: G

rab

sam

pl

ers

(Pon

ar, P

eter

sen,

Van

V

een,

or S

hipe

k)

E. W

oody

sna

gs a

nd m

acro

- ph

ytes

: D-f

ram

e di

p ne

t; Sl

ack

sam

pler

; sn

ag s

ampl

er

(Tho

rp a

nd o

ther

s)

QM

H [

210-

|im m

esh]

:D

-fra

me

kick

net

, sup

ple

m

ente

d by

oth

er te

chni

ques

as

app

ropr

iate

for d

iffer

ent

habi

tat t

ypes

. A

lso

colle

ct b

y vi

sual

insp

ectio

n an

d ha

nd-

pick

ing.

Tra

nsec

t sam

ples

: 59

5-

jiim

-mes

h Sl

ack

sam

pler

~

sta

ndar

d "S

urbe

r"

met

hods

for f

ast w

ater

s;

"sw

eep-

kick

" m

etho

d fo

r po

ols.

Qua

litat

ive

Mul

tihab

i-

tat:

sam

e as

for

N

AW

QA

A. R

iffl

e ha

bita

t: m

odi

fie

d Su

rber

or

Hes

s sa

mpl

ers

with

280

-|im

m

esh,

or k

ick

nets

with

28

0- to

425

-|Lim

mes

h.

280-

|im m

esh

is r

ecom

m

ende

d to

be

cons

iste

nt

with

pas

t sa

mpl

ing

effo

rts.

B

. Mul

tihab

itat:

1. D

epos

ition

al a

reas

: G

rab

sam

pler

s (P

onar

, Pe

ters

en)

2. W

oody

sna

gs a

nd

mac

roph

yte

beds

: m

od

ified

Sur

ber

or H

ess

sam

pler

s w

ith 2

80-|J

,m

mes

h, o

r ki

ck n

ets

with

28

0- to

425

-|J,m

mes

h3.

Str

eam

mar

gins

: m

odif

ied

Surb

er, H

ess,

or

kic

k ne

t4.

Lea

f pac

ks:

grab

sa

mpl

es, c

a. 1

L

Sam

plin

g ge

ar is

hab

itat

depe

nden

t, bu

t con

sist

s of

two

basi

c ca

tego

ries:

A. K

ick

nets

: K

ick

nets

(1

m2)

or D

-fra

me

dip

nets

(0.

09 m

") a

re u

sed

in s

trea

ms

whe

re v

eloc

ity

will

ass

ist i

n th

e ca

p

ture

of o

rgan

ism

s. A

la

rge

com

posi

ted

sam

pl

e is

obt

aine

d w

ith th

is

gear

. A s

tand

ardi

zed

leve

l of e

ffor

t is

empl

oyed

to q

uant

ify

the

sam

ple.

B. D

-fra

me

dip

nets

: Sa

mpl

ing

in v

ario

us h

ab

itat t

ypes

, suc

h as

sho

re-

zone

, dep

ositi

onal

are

as,

vege

tatio

n sn

ags,

as

wel

l as

riffle

s is

done

w

ith a

D-f

ram

e di

p ne

t. T

his

gear

is c

hose

n fo

r sa

mpl

ing

low

-gra

dien

t st

ream

s w

here

low

ve

loci

ty r

equi

res

a m

ore

activ

e ge

ar.

A. A

rtif

icia

l su

bstr

ates

: M

odif

ied

Hes

ter-

D

endy

con

sist

s of

a

clus

ter

of 5

set

s of

m

ason

ite p

late

s, e

ach

with

8 p

late

s se

para

ted

by 1

2 sp

acer

s an

d co

n

nect

ed w

ith a

n ey

ebol

t. E

ach

of th

e 5

plat

e-se

ts

mea

sure

s 1

ft

in s

ur

face

are

a. E

ach

sam

ple

is a

com

posi

te o

f the

en

tire

clus

ter

of 5

set

s of

pla

tes.

B. Q

ualit

ativ

e / M

ulti-

ha

bita

t: T

rian

gula

r-

fram

e di

p ne

ts w

ith N

o.

30 m

esh.

Als

o co

llect

by

vis

ual i

nspe

ctio

n an

d ha

nd-p

icki

ng.

Figu

re 3

.--C

ompa

riso

n ch

art o

f inv

erte

brat

e pr

otoc

ols.

-Con

tinue

d (p

age

4 of

11)

BB

HSA

MPL

E A

RE

A

(for

pri

ncip

al

sam

ple

gear

ty

pes)

Slac

k sa

mpl

er: 0

.5 m

by

0.5

m (

tota

l are

a sa

mpl

ed

is 5

tim

es 0

.25

m2

= 1.

25

Tota

l are

a sa

mpl

ed f

or

RTH

or

DT

H s

ampl

es

usin

g ot

her

gear

is 5

tim

es th

e ar

ea o

f an

indi

vi

dual

sam

ple.

QM

H s

ampl

es: n

ot a

ppli

ca

ble

Sam

easf

orN

AW

QA

;rj

ca. 0

.25

m

per

trans

ect.

Tota

l are

a sa

mpl

ed p

er

site

= 2

.25

m2

A. M

odifi

ed S

urbe

r r\

sam

pler

s: 0

.093

m

B. H

ess

sam

pler

s: t

ypi

cally

0.0

86 m

2 C

. Kic

k ne

ts: 0

.25m

2 (0

.5 m

by

0.5

m)

rec

om

men

ded

Tota

l are

a sa

mpl

ed f

or

all c

ompo

site

sam

ples

is

: (n

umbe

r of s

ampl

es)

times

(sa

mpl

ing

area

)

Mos

t Sta

tes

are

focu

s

ing

on a

com

posi

ted

sam

ple

tota

ling

appr

ox

imat

ely

2 m

of

sam

pl

ed a

rea.

Whe

n ki

ck

nets

and

dip

net

s ar

e us

ed, t

his

is th

e re

lativ

e sa

mpl

e si

ze. O

ther

gea

r ty

pica

lly s

ampl

es a

sm

alle

r ar

ea.

A. A

rtific

ial s

ubst

rate

s:

Tota

l are

a of

eac

h co

m

posi

te s

ampl

e (5

set

s of

pl

ates

) m

easu

res

1 fr

.

B. Q

ualit

ativ

e / M

ulti-

ha

bita

t: no

t app

licab

le

Figu

re 3

.--C

ompa

riso

n ch

art

of in

vert

ebra

te p

roto

cols

.-Con

tinu

ed (

page

5 o

f 11

)

'&yf

fi&m

8888

8888

8&

FIE

LD

CO

LL

EC

TIO

NST

EPS

1. D

ecid

e on

RTH

and

D

TH h

abita

t typ

es.

2. C

hoos

e ap

prop

riat

e sa

mpl

e ge

ar.

[Not

e: S

teps

1 a

nd 2

are

ty

pica

lly a

ccom

plis

hed

in a

rec

onna

issa

nce

prio

r to

sam

plin

g.]

3. C

olle

ct 5

RTH

sam

ples

in

dif

fere

nt e

xam

ples

of

the

targ

eted

hab

itat d

is

trib

uted

thro

ugho

ut th

e de

sign

ated

sam

plin

g re

ach.

Com

posi

te th

ese

sam

ples

.4.

Col

lect

5 D

TH

sam

ples

as

in S

tep

3 an

d co

mpo

s

ite th

em.

5. C

olle

ct Q

MH

sam

ple

by c

ompo

sitin

g co

llec

tio

ns f

rom

all

avai

labl

e in

stre

am h

abita

t typ

es in

th

e sa

mpl

ing

reac

h.

1. M

ark

trans

ects

.2.

Sel

ect l

eft,

cent

er, o

r ri

ght c

hann

el f

or s

am

plin

g (r

ando

m s

elec

tio

n).

3. C

olle

ct o

ne s

ampl

e fr

om e

ach

tran

sect

and

ad

d to

app

ropr

iate

com

po

site

sam

ple.

4. C

olle

ct 2

lO-f

im

qual

itativ

e sa

mpl

e.

A. R

iffle

hab

itat:

1. C

hoos

e ap

prop

riate

sa

mpl

ing

gear

.2.

Col

lect

5 s

ampl

es in

di

ffer

ent e

xam

ples

of

the

targ

eted

hab

itat d

is

trib

uted

thro

ugho

ut th

e sa

mpl

ing

reac

h.

Com

po

site

thes

e sa

mpl

es.

[Not

e: I

f the

se d

ata

are

to b

e co

mpa

red

with

th

ose

prev

ious

ly c

ol

lect

ed u

sing

USF

S St

anda

rd O

pera

ting

Pro

cedu

res,

col

lect

3-5

sa

mpl

es in

the

sam

e ri

f fle

(si

mila

r de

pth,

ve

loci

ty, s

ubst

rate

); d

o no

t com

posi

te th

ese

sam

ples

.]

B. M

ultih

abita

t:1.

Cho

ose

appr

opria

te

sam

plin

g ge

ar.

2. C

olle

ct s

ampl

e by

co

mpo

sitin

g co

llec

tio

ns f

rom

all

maj

or

habi

tat t

ypes

in th

e sa

mpl

ing

reac

h.

Follo

w S

tand

ard

Ope

r

atin

g Pr

oced

ures

est

ab

lishe

d by

Sta

te W

ater

R

esou

rces

Age

ncy.

1. S

elec

t gen

eral

site

lo

catio

n du

ring

pre-

su

rvey

pla

nnin

g.2.

Set

arti

ficia

l sub

st

rate

s in

run

hab

itat a

t a

suff

icie

nt d

epth

to

ensu

re w

ater

cov

erag

e.3.

Ret

rieve

arti

ficia

l su

bstra

tes

afte

r a 6

- w

eek

colo

niza

tion

perio

d.4.

Col

lect

qua

litat

ive

dip-

net/h

and-

pick

ed

sam

ple

from

run,

riff

le,

mar

gin,

and

poo

l by

sam

plin

g fo

r a

min

i m

um o

f 30

min

utes

and

th

erea

fter

unt

il no

new

ta

xa a

re o

bser

ved

base

d on

gro

ss e

xam

i na

tion.

Figu

re 3

.--C

ompa

riso

n ch

art o

f inv

erte

brat

e pr

otoc

ols.

-Con

tinue

d (p

age

6 of

11)

YIE

LD

PR

OC

ESS

ING

STE

PS

1. E

lutr

iate

, si

eve,

and

sp

lit th

e co

mpo

site

sam

pl

es u

ntil

sam

ple

volu

me

is l

ess

than

750

mL

(us

e N

o. 4

0 si

eve

[425

-|im

m

esh]

for

RT

H a

nd D

TK

; us

e N

o. 7

0 si

eve

[212

-|im

m

esh]

for

QM

H).

2. F

ix s

ampl

e in

10-

pe

rcen

t for

mal

in.

3. L

abel

and

shi

p sa

mpl

es

(to b

e sw

itche

d to

70-

pe

rcen

t eth

anol

with

in 1

0 w

orki

ng d

ays

follo

win

g re

ceip

t by

cont

ract

labo

ra

tory

).

1. I

f few

er th

an 3

tr

anse

cts

are

sam

pled

fo

r rif

fles

or p

ools

, the

to

tal

sam

ple

is s

aved

.2.

If m

ore

than

3

tran

sect

s ar

e sa

mpl

ed

for r

iffl

es o

r poo

ls, t

hen

sam

ple

is s

plit

into

th

irds

and

one

-thi

rd is

sa

ved.

3. S

ampl

es a

re p

re

serv

ed w

ith 7

0-pe

rcen

t et

hano

l.4.

Sam

ples

are

labe

led

and

trac

ked

befo

re s

hip

pi

ng to

con

trac

t lab

ora

to

ry (

no ti

me

limit

spec

ified

).

1. P

ick

out a

nd c

lean

la

rge

piec

es o

f or

gani

c m

atte

r (s

ticks

, lea

ves)

an

d ro

cks.

2. F

ix s

ampl

es w

ith 9

5-

perc

ent e

than

ol. I

f sa

m

ples

con

tain

larg

e am

ount

s of

org

anic

m

atte

r, fix

sam

ples

with

10

-per

cent

for

mal

in.

Rep

lace

for

mal

in w

ith

70-

to 9

5-pe

rcen

t eth

a

nol

with

in 1

0 da

ys.

3. L

abel

and

shi

p sa

m

ples

alo

ng w

ith s

am

plin

g in

form

atio

n an

d lo

catio

n in

form

atio

n to

th

e B

LM

Aqu

atic

Eco

sy

stem

Lab

orat

ory,

L

ogan

, Uta

h, o

r a

con

tr

act l

abor

ator

y.

Follo

w S

tand

ard

Ope

rat

ing

Proc

edur

es. T

wo

appr

oach

es fo

r fie

ld p

ro

cess

ing

of s

ampl

es a

re

adhe

red

to:

1. S

ampl

e so

rting

and

sub

- sa

mpl

ing

in th

e fie

ld.

Rem

aind

er o

f sam

ple

eith

er

disc

arde

d or

pre

serv

ed fo

r qu

ality

con

trol.

2. S

ampl

e pr

eser

ved

in ja

r, la

bele

d, a

nd re

turn

ed to

la

bora

tory

for p

roce

ssin

g.

Subs

ampl

ing,

whe

ther

do

ne in

the

field

or l

abor

a

tory

, gen

eral

ly fo

llow

s th

e 10

0- o

r 300

-org

anis

m te

ch

niqu

e. T

he s

ampl

e is

dis

tri

bute

d in

a h

omog

eneo

us

man

ner

in a

larg

e gr

idde

d pa

n. G

rids

are

rand

omly

se

lect

ed fo

r pro

cess

ing.

All

orga

nism

s ar

e re

mov

ed

from

the

sele

cted

grid

s.

Onc

e th

e ta

rget

ed n

umbe

r of

org

anis

ms

(100

or

300)

is

reac

hed,

no

mor

e gr

ids

are

proc

esse

d. S

ome

Stat

es

(e.g

., O

hio)

use

a F

olso

m

sam

ple

split

ter f

or a

ll su

b-

sam

plin

g as

an

alte

rnat

ive

to th

e R

BP

subs

ampl

ing.

1. P

lace

eac

h se

t of

plat

es in

a c

onta

iner

; pr

eser

ve w

ith 1

0-

perc

ent

form

alin

.2.

Dep

osit

repr

esen

ta

tive

taxa

fro

m q

ualit

a

tive

sam

ple

in a

se

para

te ja

r; p

rese

rve

with

10-

perc

ent f

orm

a

lin.

In L

abor

ator

y:1.

Dis

asse

mbl

e an

d sc

rape

art

ific

ial

sub

st

rate

s; s

cree

n w

ith N

o.

40 a

nd N

o. 3

0 si

eves

. Pl

ace

sam

ples

in 7

0-

perc

ent a

lcoh

ol.

2. P

lace

qua

litat

ive

sam

ple

in 7

0-pe

rcen

t al

coho

l.3.

Pro

cess

sub

sam

ples

w

ith a

Fol

som

sam

ple

split

ter j

ust p

rior

to

anal

ysis

.

Figu

re 3

.--C

ompa

riso

n ch

art

of in

vert

ebra

te p

roto

cols

.-Con

tinue

d (p

age

7 of

11)

||||||:||i|||||||i

AN

CIL

LA

RY

D

AT

A A

ND

C

OO

RD

INA

TE

D

SAM

PL

ING

A

CT

IVIT

IES

1. M

icro

habi

tat d

ata

(cur

re

nt v

eloc

ity, d

epth

, su

b

stra

te)

colle

cted

for

eac

h se

mi-

quan

titat

ive

sam

ple

2. H

abita

t dat

a (r

each

, se

gmen

t, ba

sin)

obt

aine

d fo

r ea

ch B

asic

Fix

ed S

ite3.

Fis

h an

d al

gae

com

mu

ni

ty s

ampl

es c

olle

cted

at

each

Bas

ic F

ixed

Site

4. W

ater

, se

dim

ent,

and

tissu

e ch

emis

try

col

le

cted

at e

ach

Bas

ic F

ixed

Si

te5.

Con

tinuo

us s

trea

m d

is

char

ge a

nd f

ield

wat

er-

qual

ity p

aram

eter

s (e

.g.,

pH, t

empe

ratu

re)

col

le

cted

at e

ach

Bas

ic F

ixed

Si

te

1. D

epth

mea

sure

d at

10

0 po

ints

alo

ng s

trea

m

reac

h; s

ubst

rate

mea

su

red

at 5

5 po

ints

in

each

rea

ch;

curr

ent

velo

city

mea

sure

d at

1

tran

sect

.2.

Sam

e as

NA

WQ

A3.

Sam

e as

NA

WQ

A4.

Sam

e as

NA

WQ

A

Spec

ific

supp

lem

enta

l da

ta h

ave

not y

et b

een

dete

rmin

ed.

A m

ini

mum

of

a fe

w s

tand

ard

habi

tat

mea

sure

men

ts

shou

ld b

e co

llect

ed a

t all

site

s, e

.g.,

USE

PA

RB

P's

phys

ical

hab

itat

asse

ssm

ent.

1. M

icro

habi

tat d

ata

(wat

er v

eloc

ity, d

epth

su

bstr

ate)

for

eac

h sa

m

ple

2. M

eso-

and

mac

roha

b-

itat d

ata

(rea

ch, s

tream

se

gmen

t, ba

sin)

3.

Sam

plin

g lo

catio

n in

form

atio

n to

fac

ilita

te

regi

onal

com

pari

sons

: w

ater

bod

y na

me,

co

unty

, sta

te, l

atitu

de,

long

itude

, ele

vatio

n,

stre

am o

rder

, riv

er m

ile,

hydr

olog

ic u

nit c

ode,

ec

oreg

ion,

sub

-eco

re-

gion

, maj

or la

nd u

se,

habi

tats

sam

pled

, sam

pl

ing

area

, typ

e of

sam

pl

er

A. I

n si

tu m

easu

re

men

ts o

f tem

pera

ture

, pH

, dis

solv

ed o

xyge

n,

and

cond

uctiv

ity

B. P

hysi

cal m

easu

re

men

ts o

f vel

ocity

and

(o

r) f

low

, som

etim

es

part

icle

siz

e an

d ch

an

nel m

orph

olog

ical

de

tail

C. H

abita

t st

ruct

ure

para

met

ers

eith

er m

ea

sure

d or

est

imat

ed w

ith

visu

al-b

ased

tech

niqu

e D

. Oth

er a

ssem

blag

e co

llect

ions

as

dete

r

min

ed b

y A

genc

y di

rec

tiv

esE

. Wat

er, s

edim

ent,

and

tissu

e ch

emis

try

colle

cted

as r

equi

red

for

anal

ytic

al a

nd to

xico

- lo

gica

l tes

ting

1. M

icro

habi

tat d

ata

are

reco

rded

on

a si

te

desc

ript

ion

shee

t.2.

Site

is id

entif

ied

by

stre

am n

ame,

riv

er

code

, riv

er m

ile, a

nd

latit

ude/

long

itude

. 2.

Fis

h, c

hem

istr

y, a

nd

phys

ical

dat

a ar

e co

l le

cted

at a

ll su

rvey

si

tes;

che

mis

try

data

on

ly a

nd s

ome

flow

in

form

atio

n (U

SGS

gage

s) a

re c

olle

cted

at

NA

WQ

MN

site

s.

Figu

re 3

.--C

ompa

riso

n ch

art

of in

vert

ebra

te p

roto

cols

.-Con

tinue

d (p

age

8 of

11)

II

LE

VE

L O

F T

AX

ON

OM

YL

owes

t pra

ctic

able

taxo

n (u

sual

ly s

peci

es o

r ge

nus,

as

spec

ified

for

vari

ous

grou

ps in

the

inve

rteb

rate

pro

cess

ing

prot

ocol

)

Sam

e as

NA

WQ

AA

. Ins

ects

(no

n-C

hi-

rono

mid

ae:

genu

s,

som

e sp

ecie

s B

. Chi

rono

mid

ae:

sub

fa

mily

, hop

e to

pro

gres

s to

gen

us le

vel

C. N

on-i

nsec

ts:

varie

s

Two

leve

ls (

1) lo

wes

t pr

actic

able

taxo

n (u

su

ally

spe

cies

or g

enus

, as

spec

ified

for

var

ious

gr

oups

in t

he S

tand

ard

Ope

ratin

g Pr

oced

ures

), or

(2)

fam

ily-l

evel

tax

on

omy

Low

est p

ract

icab

le

leve

l for

mos

t gro

ups

DA

TA

A

NA

LY

SIS

A. D

escr

iptiv

e: t

axa

lists

, ri

chne

ss, d

iver

sity

, sim

i la

rity

B. M

ultiv

aria

te:

diff

eren

tia

tion

of s

ites

base

d on

co

mm

uniti

es, g

radi

ent

anal

ysis

-- e

valu

ate

chan

ges

in b

iolo

gica

l ch

arac

teri

stic

s as

soci

ated

w

ith c

hang

es in

che

mic

al

char

acte

rist

ics

usin

g, fo

r ex

ampl

e, tw

o-w

ay in

dica

to

r sp

ecie

s an

alys

is

(TW

INSP

AN

), de

trend

ed

corr

espo

nden

ce a

naly

sis

(DC

A),

and

cano

nica

l co

rres

pond

ence

ana

lysi

s (C

AN

OC

O)

A. D

escr

iptiv

e: t

axa

lists

, ric

hnes

s, d

iver

sit

y, s

imila

rity

B. M

ultiv

aria

te: p

res

en

tly b

eing

eva

luat

ed

C. M

ultim

etri

c: I

nver

te

brat

e C

omm

unity

In

dex

(IC

I), B

io ti

c In

dex

(BI)

, etc

.; pr

es

ently

bei

ng e

valu

ated

A. D

escr

iptiv

e: t

axa

lists

, ric

hnes

s, d

iver

si

ty, s

imila

rity,

bio

tic

indi

ces,

mul

timet

ric

appr

oach

, ref

eren

ce

com

mun

ity c

ompa

ri

son,

eco

regi

onal

met

ric

valu

e co

mpa

riso

ns

B. M

ultiv

aria

te: d

iffer

en

tiatio

n of

site

s ba

sed

on c

omm

uniti

es, g

radi

en

t ana

lysi

s, a

nd

chan

ges

in c

ompa

nion

ha

bita

t and

che

mis

try

data

Mul

timet

ric a

ppro

ach,

w

here

met

rics

and

indi

ce

s ar

e ca

libra

ted

by

stre

am c

lass

and

re

gion

al e

xpec

tatio

ns,

and

repr

esen

t key

mea

su

res

of a

ssem

blag

e el

emen

ts a

nd p

ro

cess

es.

Cal

ibra

tion

may

be

done

by

mul

ti-

varia

te te

chni

ques

. In

asse

ssm

ent,

met

rics

are

calc

ulat

ed, a

nd v

alue

s ar

e co

nver

ted

to s

core

s an

d ag

greg

ated

to p

ro

vide

an

inte

grat

ed

asse

ssm

ent.

A. D

escr

iptiv

e: t

ypes

an

d nu

mbe

rs;

defo

rmi

ties

are

note

d B

. Mul

timet

ric:

Inve

rte

brat

e C

omm

unity

In

dex

(IC

I)C

. Qua

litat

ive

Com

mu

ni

ty T

oler

ance

Val

ue

(QC

TV)

[bas

ed o

n a

wei

ghte

d m

ean

ICI

valu

e ca

lcul

ated

for

each

taxo

n st

atew

ide]

D

. Mul

tivar

iate

ana

ly

ses

as n

eede

d

Figu

re 3

.--C

ompa

riso

n ch

art o

f inv

erte

brat

e pr

otoc

ols.-

Con

tinue

d (p

age

9 of

11)

II

QU

AL

ITY

A

SSU

RA

NC

E/

QU

AL

ITY

C

ON

TR

OL

(QA

/QC

)

A. S

tand

ardi

zed

prot

ocol

s an

d tr

aini

ng o

f fie

ld p

erso

nnel

. R

egio

nal b

iolo

gist

s pr

ovid

e co

ordi

natio

n an

d ov

ersi

ght o

f st

udy-

unit

sam

plin

g ac

tiviti

es.

B. C

entr

aliz

ed u

nit:

Bio

logi

cal

Qua

lity

Ass

uran

ce U

nit a

t the

U

SGS/

Nat

iona

l Wat

er Q

ualit

y L

abor

ator

y ov

erse

es c

ontr

acto

rs

and

qual

ity a

ssur

ance

/qua

lity

cont

rol.

C. F

ield

spl

it sa

mpl

es:

A p

er

cent

age

(e.g

., 10

per

cent

) of

fiel

d sp

lit s

ampl

es a

re p

roce

ssed

. D

. Ref

eren

ce c

olle

ctio

ns:

In-

hous

e re

fere

nce

colle

ctio

ns a

re

mai

ntai

ned

by th

e B

iolo

gica

l Q

ualit

y-A

ssur

ance

Uni

t. E

. Vou

cher

col

lect

ions

: V

ouch

er

colle

ctio

ns a

re m

aint

aine

d in

ou

tsid

e re

posi

tori

es (

e.g.

, mus

e

ums)

.F.

Col

labo

ratio

n w

ith o

utsi

de

taxo

nom

ists

incl

udes

ver

ific

a

tion

of id

entif

icat

ions

, upd

atin

g of

taxo

nom

ic li

sts,

and

iden

tifi

ca

tion

and

desc

ript

ion

of n

ew

spec

ies.

G. T

axon

omic

dat

abas

e (i

nter

- ag

ency

): N

atio

nal O

cean

o-

grap

hic

Dat

a C

ente

r (N

OD

C)

code

fac

ilita

tes

trac

king

of n

ame

chan

ges

over

tim

e an

d sh

arin

g of

da

ta a

mon

g ag

enci

es.

H. I

nteg

rate

d da

taba

se

(Nat

iona

l Wat

er I

nfor

mat

ion

Syst

em-I

I) c

onta

ins

phys

ical

(i

nclu

ding

hab

itat)

, che

mic

al,

and

biol

ogic

al d

ata,

with

fac

ili

tate

d da

ta e

ntry

, ver

ific

atio

n, a

nd

anal

ysis

.

A. I

n ge

nera

l, 10

per

ce

nt o

f sam

ples

will

be

reta

ined

by

USE

PA f

or

QA

/QC

.B

. All

mat

eria

l is

retu

rned

to U

SEPA

fol

lo

win

g id

entif

icat

ion

and

enum

erat

ion.

C

. All

sam

ples

are

sen

t fo

r ve

rifi

catio

n an

d ar

e tr

acke

d.

A. D

ocum

ente

d, p

eer

revi

ewed

Sta

ndar

d O

pera

ting

Proc

edur

es

B. T

rain

ed s

taff

C

. Vou

cher

col

lect

ions

, co

llabo

ratio

n w

ith o

ut

side

taxo

nom

ists

D

. Com

pute

rize

d da

ta

base

and

ana

lytic

al p

ro

gram

s w

ith v

erif

ied

entr

ies

E.

Con

sist

ent s

cien

tific

re

port

ing

form

at a

nd

data

sum

mar

y ca

lcul

a

tions

A. D

ocum

ente

d St

an

dard

Ope

ratin

g Pr

oce

du

res

B. T

rain

ed s

taff

and

de

linea

tion

of re

spon

si

bilit

yC

. Mai

nten

ance

of a

vo

uche

r co

llect

ion

D. C

ompu

teri

zed

data

ba

se a

nd a

naly

tical

pro

gr

ams

with

ver

ifie

d en

trie

sE

. Con

sist

ent r

epor

ting

form

at a

nd m

etri

c ca

l cu

latio

n

A. Q

A/Q

C is

cen

tral

ly

orga

nize

d w

ith th

e E

co

logi

cal A

sses

smen

t Se

ctio

n.B

. In-

hous

e re

fere

nce

colle

ctio

ns a

re m

ain

ta

ined

.C

. Vou

cher

s ar

e re

tain

ed fo

r an

exte

nded

pe

riod

(10

yea

rs).

D. C

olla

bora

tion

with

ou

tsid

e ta

xono

mis

ts

occu

rs a

s ne

eded

. E

. All

data

are

ent

ered

in

to t

he M

IDG

ES

sub

ro

utin

e of

Ohi

o E

CO

S,

a St

atew

ide

data

base

or

gani

zed

and

mai

n

tain

ed b

y O

hio

EPA

.

Figu

re 3

.--C

ompa

riso

n ch

art o

f inv

erte

brat

e pr

otoc

oIs.

-Con

tinue

d (p

age

10 o

f 11)

PR

OT

OC

OL

D

OC

UM

EN

TS

1. C

uffn

ey, T

.F.,

Gur

tz,

M.E

., an

d M

eado

r, M

.R.,

1993

, Gui

delin

es f

or th

e pr

oces

sing

and

qua

lity

assu

ranc

e of

ben

thic

in

vert

ebra

te s

ampl

es c

ol

lect

ed a

s pa

rt o

f the

N

atio

nal W

ater

-Qua

lity

Ass

essm

ent P

rogr

am:

U.S

. Geo

logi

cal S

urve

y O

pen-

File

Rep

ort 9

3-40

7,

80 p

.

2. C

uffn

ey, T

.F.,

Gur

tz,

M.E

., an

d M

eado

r, M

.R.,

1993

, Met

hods

for

col

le

ctin

g be

nthi

c in

vert

e

brat

e sa

mpl

es a

s pa

rt o

f th

e N

atio

nal W

ater

-Qua

l ity

Ass

essm

ent P

rogr

am:

U.S

. Geo

logi

cal S

urve

y O

pen-

File

Rep

ort 9

3-40

6,

66 p

.

1. K

lem

m, D

.J.,

and

Laz

orch

ak, J

.M.,

eds.

, 19

93, E

nvir

onm

enta

l M

onito

ring

and

Ass

ess

m

ent P

rogr

am-S

urfa

ce

Wat

ers

and

Reg

ion

3 R

egio

nal-

EM

AP

1993

Pi

lot F

ield

Ope

ratio

ns

and

Met

hods

Man

ual-

St

ream

s: C

inci

nnat

i, O

hio,

U.S

. Env

iron

m

enta

l Pro

tect

ion

Age

ncy.

Und

er d

evel

opm

ent i

n co

llabo

ratio

n w

ith th

e U

SGS,

USE

PA, U

SFS,

N

PS, a

nd S

tate

wat

er

qual

ity a

genc

ies.

(See

fig.

1: P

rogr

am

Des

ign

Doc

umen

ts.)

1. O

hio

Env

iron

men

ta

l Pro

tect

ion

Age

ncy,

198

7, B

iolo

gi

cal C

riter

ia f

or th

e Pr

o

tect

ion

of A

quat

ic L

ife,

Vol

ume

n, U

sers

man

ua

l for

bio

logi

cal f

ield

ev

alua

tion

of O

hio

riv

ers

and

stre

ams:

Div

i si

on o

f Wat

er Q

ualit

y Pl

anni

ng a

nd A

sses

s

men

t, 21

p.

2. O

hio

Env

iron

men

ta

l Pro

tect

ion

Age

ncy,

198

9, B

iolo

gi

cal C

rite

ria

for t

he P

ro

tect

ion

of A

quat

ic L

ife,

Vol

ume

HI,

Stan

dard

iz

ed b

iolo

gica

l fie

ld

sam

plin

g an

d la

bora

to

ry m

etho

ds f

or a

sses

s

ing

fish

and

mac

ro-

inve

rtebr

ate

com

mun

i tie

s: D

ivis

ion

of W

ater

Q

ualit

y Pl

anni

ng a

nd

Ass

essm

ent.

Figu

re 3

.-Com

pari

son

char

t of i

nver

tebr

ate

prot

ocol

s.-C

ontin

ued

(pag

e 11

of 1

1)

CO

MPO

NE

NT

O

BJE

CT

IVE

(Alg

ae)

[Not

e: A

lso

see f

ig. 1

fo

r Pro

gram

O

bjec

tives

and

D

esig

n F

eatu

res.]

(Occ

urre

nce

and

Dis

tribu

tion

Ass

essm

ent):

Eva

luat

e th

e st

ruct

ure

of b

enth

ic a

lgal

com

mun

ities

with

in ta

rget

ed h

abi

tats

and

mic

roha

bita

ts; d

evel

op a

list

of t

axa,

rela

tive

abun

da

nces

of t

axa,

and

est

imat

es o

f alg

al s

tand

ing

crop

in

sele

cted

sam

plin

g re

ache

s.[N

ote:

Thi

s ch

art i

s m

ost a

ppro

pria

te fo

r th

e O

ccur

renc

e an

d D

istr

ibu

tio

n A

sses

smen

t; m

odifi

catio

ns m

ay b

e m

ade

to m

eet o

ther

Pro

gram

ob

ject

ives

(e.

g., t

rend

s an

d ca

use!

'effe

ct c

ase

stud

ies)

.]

Eval

uate

alg

al c

omm

unity

stru

ctur

e in

stre

ams

of th

e U

.S.

to d

eter

min

e co

mm

unity

res

pons

es to

kno

wn

impa

cts

and

to e

stim

ate

the

prop

ortio

n of

U.S

. stre

ams

that

are

im

paire

d.

SAM

PLE

TY

PES

A. R

iche

st T

arge

ted

Hab

itat C

RTET

): Se

mi-

quan

titat

ive

sam

ple

from

the

pred

omin

ant p

erip

hyto

n m

icro

habi

tat w

ithin

the

rich

est

targ

eted

hab

itat s

elec

ted

for

inve

rteb

rate

sam

plin

g w

ithin

the

sam

plin

g re

ach

(e.g

., ep

ilith

ic p

erip

hyto

n m

icro

habi

tat i

n rif

fles;

ep

iden

dric

or

epip

hytic

per

iphy

ton

mic

roha

bita

t in

coas

tal p

lain

st

ream

s).

[Rel

ativ

e A

bund

ance

Inf

orm

atio

n; E

stim

ates

of A

lgal

St

andi

ng C

rop]

B. D

epos

ition

al T

arge

ted

Hab

itat O

PTED

: Sem

i-qu

antit

ativ

e sa

m

ple

from

a fi

ne-g

rain

ed, o

rgan

ical

ly r

ich

depo

sitio

nal h

abita

t, e.

g.,

epip

sam

mic

or

epip

elic

per

iphy

ton

mic

roha

bita

t in

a po

ol. [

Rel

a

tive

Abu

ndan

ce I

nfor

mat

ion;

Est

imat

es o

f Alg

al S

tand

ing

Cro

p]

C. Q

ualit

ativ

e M

ultih

abita

t (O

MIT

): A

com

posi

te q

ualit

ativ

e sa

m

ple

prep

ared

by

obta

inin

g se

para

te p

erip

hyto

n co

llect

ions

fro

m

each

of a

ll av

aila

ble

peri

phyt

on m

icro

habi

tats

and

com

posi

ting

equi

vale

nt b

iovo

lum

e fr

om e

ach

mic

roha

bita

t in

acco

rdan

ce w

ith

the

tota

l num

ber

of p

erip

hyto

n m

icro

habi

tats

pre

sent

in th

e sa

m

plin

g re

ach.

[Ta

xa P

rese

nce

Info

rmat

ion]

Opt

iona

l (m

ay b

e do

ne in

som

e st

udy

units

):

Sam

ples

are

col

lect

ed f

rom

riff

le/ru

n ha

bita

ts a

nd c

ompo

s

ited.

The

sam

e is

true

for p

ool/g

lide

habi

tats

(de

posi

tiona

l).

No

qual

itativ

e m

ultih

abita

t sam

ples

or p

hyto

plan

kton

sam

pl

es a

re c

olle

cted

at p

rese

nt.

D. P

hvto

plan

kton

sam

ples

: C

olle

ctio

n of

qua

ntita

tive

who

le-

wat

er s

ampl

e of

suff

icie

nt v

olum

e to

ens

ure

adeq

uate

phy

topl

ank

to

n m

ater

ial.

[Rel

ativ

e A

bund

ance

Inf

orm

atio

n; C

hlor

ophy

ll an

d A

sh-f

ree

Dry

Mas

s]

Figu

re 4

.--C

ompa

riso

n ch

art o

f alg

ae p

roto

cols

, (p

age

1 of

6)

SAM

PLIN

G

STR

AT

EG

YA

. RTH

: C

ompo

site

of 2

5 sa

mpl

es (

appr

oxim

atel

y 3

cm

each

) fr

om th

e pr

edom

inan

t per

iphy

ton

mic

roha

bita

t (na

tura

l sub

stra

tes)

in

the

rich

est t

arge

ted

habi

tat t

ype

(tota

l are

a ca

. 75

cm2)

dis

trib

ut

ed o

ver m

ultip

le e

xam

ples

of t

he ta

rget

ed h

abita

t typ

e w

ithin

the

sam

plin

g re

ach.

Ext

rem

e ha

bita

t con

ditio

ns (

fast

est/s

low

est v

eloc

iti

es;

larg

est/s

mal

lest

sub

stra

tes;

etc

.) ar

e av

oide

d.

B. D

TH:

Com

posi

te o

f a m

inim

um o

f 5 P

etri

-dis

h sa

mpl

es

(app

roxi

mat

ely

17 c

m2

each

) fr

om th

e ep

ipsa

mm

ic o

r ep

ipel

ic

mic

roha

bita

ts in

a d

epos

ition

al h

abita

t (to

tal a

rea

appr

oxim

atel

y 85

cm

2), d

istr

ibut

ed o

ver m

ultip

le e

xam

ples

of t

he d

epos

ition

al

targ

eted

hab

itat t

ype

with

in th

e sa

mpl

ing

reac

h. E

xtre

me

exam

ples

of

hab

itat c

ondi

tions

are

avo

ided

.C

. OM

H:

Con

sist

s of

3 s

epar

ate

sam

ple

type

s: m

icro

alga

e. m

ac-

alga

e, a

nd a

quat

ic m

osse

s. T

he m

icro

alga

e sa

mpl

e is

a co

mpo

s

ite fr

om a

ll av

aila

ble

peri

phyt

on m

icro

habi

tats

with

in th

e sa

mpl

ing

reac

h, u

sing

equ

al s

ampl

ing

effo

rt in

eac

h m

icro

habi

tat a

nd c

om

posi

ting

equa

l per

iphy

ton

volu

me

in a

ccor

danc

e w

ith th

e nu

mbe

r of

mic

roha

bita

ts;

limite

d to

tota

l sam

plin

g tim

e of

abo

ut 0

.5 h

our

tota

l sam

plin

g ef

fort

in m

ost s

tream

s.D

. Phv

topl

ankt

on s

ampl

es (

stud

y-un

it op

tion)

: W

idth

- an

d de

pth-

in

tegr

ated

sam

ples

col

lect

ed d

urin

g co

llect

ion

of w

ater

-che

mis

try

sam

ples

.

Nin

e tra

nsec

ts a

re e

qual

ly s

pace

d al

ong

the

sam

plin

g re

ach.

A s

ampl

e is

col

lect

ed a

t eac

h tra

nsec

t and

com

pos

ite

d w

ith o

ther

sam

ples

from

sim

ilar

habi

tats

. Thu

s, a

ll rif

fle

/run

(ero

sion

al)

sam

ples

are

com

posi

ted,

and

all

pool

/ gl

ide

(dep

ositi

onal

) sa

mpl

es a

re c

ompo

site

d.

A to

tal

of 9

sam

ples

are

col

lect

ed. T

hese

are

all

riffle

, all

pool

, or a

mix

ture

of t

hese

hab

itats

.

SAM

PLE

GE

AR

RTH

sam

ples

:A

. Mod

ified

syr

inge

sam

plin

g de

vice

(SG

-92

perip

hyto

n sa

mpl

er)

B. P

VC

cyl

inde

r or

pip

e sa

mpl

erC

. Foi

l tem

plat

e m

etho

dD

. Sur

ber/

Hes

s sa

mpl

er fo

r mac

roal

gae

E. A

rtific

ial s

ubst

rate

s D

TH

Sam

ples

: Pe

tri-

dish

sam

pler

QM

H s

ampl

es:

Col

lect

ion

by s

crap

ing,

bru

shin

g, s

uctio

ning

, and

ha

nd-p

icki

ng p

erip

hyto

n fr

om a

ll pe

riph

yton

mic

roha

bita

ts

Phyt

opla

nkto

n sa

mpl

es (

stud

y-un

it op

tion)

: A

. D-7

7 w

ater

sam

pler

B

. Kem

mer

er/V

an D

orn

sam

pler

s

Loo

se r

ock:

bru

sh (

toot

hbru

sh),

sam

ple

colle

ctio

n bo

ttle

Bed

rock

: sc

rape

r, su

ctio

n de

vice

(bl

unt e

nd o

f a b

ored

-out

[3/8

in.]

60-m

L sy

ringe

) So

ft b

eds:

suc

tion

devi

ce (

blun

t end

of a

bor

ed-o

ut [3

/8 in

.]60

-mL

syrin

ge)

Figu

re 4

.--C

ompa

riso

n ch

art o

f alg

ae p

roto

cols.

-Con

tinue

d (p

age

2 of

6)

SAM

PLE

AR

EA

(f

or p

rinc

ipal

sa

mpl

e ge

ar

type

s)

SG-9

2 pe

riph

yton

sam

pler

: ap

prox

imat

ely

3 cm

z ea

ch

(tota

l are

a sa

mpl

ed p

er r

each

is 2

5 tim

es 3

cm

2 =

75

cm2)

Petti

-dis

h sa

mpl

er:

appr

oxim

atel

y 17

cm

2 ea

ch (

tota

l are

a

Are

a pe

r sa

mpl

e (tr

anse

ct)

= 12

crr

rr\

Tota

l are

a sa

mpl

ed p

er re

ach

(9 tr

anse

cts)

= 1

08 c

m

9 /

sam

pled

per

reac

h is

5 tim

es 1

7 cm

=

85 c

m )

FIE

LD

CO

LL

EC

TIO

NST

EPS

Alg

al s

ampl

es a

re ty

pica

lly c

olle

cted

in a

ssoc

iatio

n w

ith

inve

rteb

rate

sam

plin

g.1.

Sel

ect p

redo

min

ant p

erip

hyto

n m

icro

habi

tat i

n th

e R

TH

and

DT

H c

hose

n fo

r in

verte

brat

e sa

mpl

ing.

2. C

hoos

e ap

prop

riat

e sa

mpl

e ge

ar.

[Not

e: S

teps

1 a

nd 2

are

typi

cally

acc

ompl

ishe

d in

a r

econ

na

issa

nce

prio

r to

sam

plin

g.]

3. C

olle

ct r

eplic

ate

RTH

sam

ples

fro

m th

e se

lect

ed p

eri

phyt

on m

icro

habi

tat (

typi

cally

epi

lithi

c, e

pide

ndric

, or

epi

phyt

ic)

thro

ugho

ut th

e de

sign

ated

sam

plin

g re

ach.

Com

po

site

the

repl

icat

e sa

mpl

es a

nd in

dica

te to

tal s

ampl

ing

area

on

field

dat

a sh

eet.

4. C

olle

ct re

plic

ate

DTH

sam

ples

fro

m th

e se

lect

ed p

erip

h

yton

mic

roha

bita

t (ty

pica

lly e

pips

amm

ic o

r epi

pelic

) th

roug

hout

the

desi

gnat

ed s

ampl

ing

reac

h. C

ompo

site

the

repl

icat

e sa

mpl

es a

nd in

dica

te to

tal s

ampl

ing

area

on

field

da

ta s

heet

.5.

Col

lect

QM

H s

ampl

es (

mic

roal

gae,

mac

roal

gae,

and

aq

uatic

mos

ses)

fro

m a

ll av

aila

ble

mic

roha

bita

ts w

ithin

the

desi

gnat

ed s

ampl

ing

reac

h. C

ompo

site

mic

roal

gal c

olle

c

tions

in a

ccor

danc

e w

ith th

e nu

mbe

r of

mic

roha

bita

ts

pres

ent i

n th

e sa

mpl

ing

reac

h.

Alg

al s

ampl

es a

re ty

pica

lly c

olle

cted

in a

ssoc

iatio

n w

ith

inve

rteb

rate

sam

plin

g.1.

Mar

k tra

nsec

ts.

2. S

elec

t lef

t, ce

nter

, or r

ight

cha

nnel

for

sam

plin

g (r

ando

m

sele

ctio

n).

3. C

olle

ct o

ne s

ampl

e fr

om e

ach

tran

sect

and

add

to a

ppro

pr

iate

com

posi

te s

ampl

e (e

ither

ero

sion

al o

r de

posi

tiona

l).

Figu

re 4

.--C

ompa

riso

n ch

art o

f alg

ae p

roto

cols

.-Con

tinue

d (p

age

3 of

6)

FIE

LD

PR

OC

ESS

ING

STE

PS

Alg

al s

ampl

es a

re p

roce

ssed

for

iden

tific

atio

n an

d en

umer

at

ion

of a

lgal

taxa

; se

lect

ed s

ubsa

mpl

es a

re p

repa

red

(stu

dy-u

nit o

ptio

n) f

or c

hlor

ophy

ll an

d as

h-fr

ee d

ry m

ass

dete

rmin

atio

ns.

1. T

axon

omic

Sam

ples

:a.

Pre

serv

e sa

mpl

es w

ith s

uffi

cien

t con

cent

rate

d bu

ff

ered

for

mal

in to

con

stitu

te a

3-

to 5

-per

cent

sol

utio

n in

the

final

sam

ple.

b. A

pply

an

exte

rnal

sam

ple

labe

l.c.

Tra

nspo

rt a

nd s

tore

pre

serv

ed s

ampl

es in

con

tain

ers

that

pre

vent

exp

osur

e to

ligh

t.2.

Chl

orop

hyll

and

Ash

-fre

e D

ry M

ass

(stu

dy-u

nit o

ptio

n):

a. S

ubsa

mpl

es f

rom

(un

pres

erve

d) a

lgal

sam

ples

are

fil

te

red

onto

.gla

ss-f

iber

filt

ers

(0.7

-jim

por

e si

ze),

usin

g a

filtr

atio

n as

sem

bly

and

a ha

nd-o

pera

ted

vacu

um

pum

p.b.

Filt

ers

are

fold

ed, w

rapp

ed in

foi

l, pl

aced

int

o fil

ter

cont

aine

rs,

and

prop

erly

lab

eled

. Sa

mpl

e an

d su

b-

sam

ple

volu

mes

are

rec

orde

d on

the

sam

ple

labe

l and

fie

ld d

ata

shee

t.c.

Filt

er c

onta

iner

s ar

e tr

ansp

orte

d to

the

anal

ytic

al l

ab

orat

ory

on d

ry ic

e, a

nd d

eter

min

atio

ns a

re m

ade

as

soon

as

prac

ticab

le.

1. T

axon

omic

sam

ples

: 50

mL

of e

ach

com

posi

te s

ampl

e (b

oth

eros

iona

l and

dep

ositi

onal

hab

itats

) is

pre

serv

ed w

ith

form

alin

.2.

Chl

orop

hyll

and

Ash

-fre

e D

ry M

ass:

25

to 5

0 m

L o

f ea

ch c

ompo

site

sam

ple

is f

ilter

ed o

nto

glas

s-fi

ber

filte

rs

(0.4

5 jim

) us

ing

a ha

nd-o

pera

ted

vacu

um p

ump.

a.

Chl

orop

hyll

Sam

ples

: Fi

lter

is f

olde

d, w

rapp

ed in

fo

il, a

nd f

roze

n on

dry

ice.

b. A

sh-f

ree

Dry

Mas

s Sa

mpl

es:

Sam

ple

is f

ilter

ed o

nto

pre-

leac

hed,

pre

-ash

ed, p

re-w

eigh

ed g

lass

-fib

er fi

lters

(0

.45

Jim

). Fi

lter

is w

rapp

ed u

nfol

ded

in fo

il, a

nd f

ro

zen

on d

ry ic

e.3.

Alk

alin

e/A

cid

Phos

phat

ase:

50

mL

of e

ach

com

posi

te

sam

ple

is f

roze

n on

dry

ice.

Figu

re 4

.--C

ompa

riso

n ch

art o

f alg

ae p

roto

cols

.-Con

tinue

d (p

age

4 of

6)

AN

CIL

LA

RY

D

AT

A A

ND

C

OO

RD

INA

TE

D

SAM

PL

ING

A

CT

IVIT

IES

1. M

icro

habi

tat d

ata

(cur

rent

vel

ocity

, dep

th, s

ubst

rate

) co

l le

cted

for e

ach

sem

i-qua

ntita

tive

(RTH

and

DTH

) sa

mpl

e.2.

Hab

itat d

ata

(rea

ch, s

egm

ent,

basi

n) o

btai

ned

for e

ach

Bas

ic F

ixed

Site

.3.

Fis

h an

d in

verte

brat

e co

mm

unity

sam

ples

col

lect

ed a

t ea

ch B

asic

Fix

ed S

ite; c

oord

inat

ed a

lgae

-inve

rtebr

ate

sam

ple

colle

ctio

n re

com

men

ded

for s

ynop

tic s

urve

y si

tes (

stud

y-un

it op

tion)

.4.

Wat

er, s

edim

ent,

and

tissu

e ch

emis

try c

olle

cted

at e

ach

Bas

ic F

ixed

. Site

.5.

Con

tinuo

us s

tream

dis

char

ge a

nd fi

eld

wat

er-q

ualit

y pa

ram

eter

s (e

.g.,

pH, t

empe

ratu

re) m

easu

red

at e

ach

Bas

ic

Fixe

d Si

te.

1. D

epth

mea

sure

d at

100

poi

nts

alon

g st

ream

reac

h; s

ub

stra

te m

easu

red

at 5

5 po

ints

in e

ach

reac

h; c

urre

nt v

eloc

ity

mea

sure

d at

1 t

rans

ect.

2. S

ame

as N

AW

QA

3. S

ame

as N

AW

QA

4. S

ame

as N

AW

QA

LE

VE

L O

F T

AX

ON

OM

YR

TH a

nd D

TH s

ampl

es: I

dent

ifica

tion

and

enum

erat

ion

(min

imum

of 5

00 li

ve c

ells

) of

alg

al ta

xa a

t the

low

est p

ract

i ca

ble

taxo

n, g

ener

ally

spe

cies

or v

arie

ty.

Bio

volu

me

calc

u

late

d fo

r dom

inan

t tax

a.O

MH

sam

ples

: Ide

ntifi

catio

n of

all

alga

l tax

a pr

esen

t in

sam

pl

es; H

YR

AX

mou

nts

are

prep

ared

for i

dent

ifica

tion

and

verif

icat

ion

of d

iato

m s

peci

es a

nd v

arie

ties.

Sam

e as

for N

AW

QA

, exc

ept:

EM

AP

is e

valu

atin

g th

e us

e of

200

cel

l cou

nts

No

qual

itativ

e sa

mpl

e

DA

TA

A

NA

LY

SIS

A. D

escr

iptiv

e: ta

xa li

sts,

richn

ess,

dive

rsity

, sim

ilarit

y B.

Mul

tivar

iate

: diff

eren

tiatio

n of

site

s ba

sed

on c

omm

uni

ties,

gra

dien

t ana

lysi

s ~

eval

uate

cha

nges

in c

hem

ical

(bi

o

logi

cal)

char

acte

ristic

s as

soci

ated

with

cha

nges

in b

iolo

gica

l (c

hem

ical

) ch

arac

teris

tics

usin

g, fo

r exa

mpl

e, tw

o-w

ay in

di

cato

r spe

cies

ana

lysi

s (T

WIN

SPA

N),

detre

nded

cor

resp

on

denc

e an

alys

is (

DC

A),

and

cano

nica

l cor

resp

onde

nce

anal

ysis

(C

AN

OC

O).

A. D

escr

iptiv

e: t

axa

lists

, ric

hnes

s, d

iver

sity

, sim

ilarit

yB

. Mul

tivar

iate

: pr

esen

tly b

eing

eva

luat

edC

. Ana

lysi

s of

Var

ianc

e: f

or im

pact

and

reg

iona

l tre

ndan

alys

es.

Figu

re 4

.--C

ompa

riso

n ch

art o

f alg

ae p

roto

cols

.-Con

tinue

d (p

age

5 of

6)

QU

AL

ITY

ASS

UR

AN

CE

/Q

UA

LIT

YC

ON

TR

OL

(QA

/QC

)

A. S

tand

ardi

zed

prot

ocol

s an

d tra

inin

g of

fiel

d pe

rson

nel.

Reg

iona

l bi

olog

ists

pro

vide

coo

rdin

atio

n an

d ov

ersi

ght

of s

tudy

-uni

t sam

plin

g ac

tiviti

es.

B. C

entr

aliz

ed u

nit:

Bio

logi

cal Q

ualit

y-A

ssur

ance

Uni

t at

the

USG

S/N

atio

nal W

ater

Qua

lity

Lab

orat

ory

over

sees

cont

ract

ors

and

qual

ity a

ssur

ance

/qua

lity

cont

rol.

C. F

ield

spl

it sa

mpl

es: A

per

cent

age

(e.g

., 10

per

cent

) of

field

spl

it sa

mpl

es is

pro

cess

ed.

D. R

efer

ence

col

lect

ions

: In-

hous

e re

fere

nce

colle

ctio

nsar

e m

aint

aine

d by

the

Bio

logi

cal Q

ualit

y-A

ssur

ance

Uni

t.E

. Vou

cher

col

lect

ions

: Vou

cher

col

lect

ions

are

mai

ntai

ned

in o

utsi

de r

epos

itori

es (

e.g.

, mus

eum

s).

F. C

olla

bora

tion

with

out

side

taxo

nom

ists

incl

udes

ver

ifi

catio

n of

iden

tific

atio

ns, u

pdat

ing

of ta

xono

mic

list

s,

and

iden

tific

atio

n an

d de

scrip

tion

of n

ew s

peci

es.

G. T

axon

omic

dat

abas

e (in

tera

genc

y): N

atio

nal O

cean

o-

grap

hic

Dat

a C

ente

r (N

OD

C)

code

fac

ilita

tes

track

ing

of n

ame

chan

ges

over

tim

e an

d sh

arin

g of

dat

a am

ong

agen

cies

.H

. Int

egra

ted

data

base

(N

atio

nal W

ater

Inf

orm

atio

n Sy

s-

tem

-II)

con

tain

s ph

ysic

al (

incl

udin

g ha

bita

t), c

hem

ical

, an

d bi

olog

ical

dat

a, w

ith f

acili

tate

d da

ta e

ntry

, ver

ifica

tio

n, a

nd a

naly

sis.

A. I

n ge

nera

l, 10

per

cent

of s

ampl

es w

ill b

e re

tain

ed b

y U

SEPA

to b

e re

chec

ked

by a

n in

depe

nden

t alg

alog

ist.

B. A

ll m

ater

ial i

s re

turn

ed to

USE

PA f

ollo

win

g id

entif

ica

tio

n an

d en

umer

atio

n.C

. Ref

eren

ce c

olle

ctio

ns w

ill b

e m

aint

aine

d at

USE

PA-

Cin

cinn

ati,

Ohi

o.

D. V

ouch

er c

olle

ctio

ns w

ill b

e st

ored

at U

SEPA

-Cin

cin-

nati,

Ohi

o.

E. S

ampl

e-tra

ckin

g of

all

sam

ples

sen

t for

ver

ifica

tion.

PRO

TO

CO

L

DO

CU

ME

NT

S1.

Por

ter,

S.D

., C

uffn

ey, T

.F.,

Gur

tz, M

.E.,

and

Mea

dor,

M.R

., 19

93, M

etho

ds fo

r col

lect

ing

alga

l sam

ples

as p

art o

f th

e N

atio

nal W

ater

-Qua

lity

Ass

essm

ent P

rogr

am: U

.S.

Geo

logi

cal

Surv

ey O

pen-

File

Rep

ort 9

3-40

9, 3

9 p.

1. K

lem

m, D

.J.,

and

Lazo

rcha

k, J

.M.,

eds.

, 19

93, E

nviro

n

men

tal M

onito

ring

and

Ass

essm

ent P

rogr

am-S

urf a

ce

Wat

ers

and

Reg

ion

3 R

egio

nal-

EM

AP

1993

Pilo

t Fie

ld

Ope

ratio

ns a

nd M

etho

ds M

anua

l Str

eam

s: C

inci

nnat

i, O

hio,

U.S

. Env

ironm

enta

l Pro

tect

ion

Age

ncy.

Figu

re 4

.--C

ompa

riso

n ch

art o

f alg

ae p

roto

cols

.-Con

tinue

d (p

age

6 of

6)

CO

MP

ON

EN

TO

BJE

CT

IVE

(Hab

itat)

[Not

e: A

lso

see f

ig.

1 for

Pro

gram

O

bjec

tives

and

D

esig

n F

eatu

res.

]

(Occ

urre

nce

and

Dis

tribu

tion

Ass

essm

ent):

Des

crib

e th

e en

vi

ronm

enta

l set

ting

of se

lect

ed s

ites

and

eval

uate

inst

ream

and

ripa

rian

feat

ures

with

in s

elec

ted

sam

plin

g re

ache

s.[N

ote:

Thi

s ch

art i

s m

ost a

ppro

pr

iate

/or

the

Occ

urre

nce

and

Dis

tr

ibut

ion

Ass

essm

ent;

m

odifi

catio

ns m

ay b

e m

ade

to

mee

t oth

er P

rogr

am o

bjec

tives

(e

.g.,

tren

ds a

nd c

ause

/effe

ct c

ase

stud

ies)

.]

1. P

rovi

de in

form

atio

n on

the

envi

ronm

ent a

nd p

hysi

cal h

abita

t st

ruct

ure

of re

ache

s to

aid

reac

h cl

assi

ficat

ion

and

pred

ict

expe

cted

bio

logi

cal c

ondi

tion.

2. P

rovi

de p

hysi

cal h

abita

t and

en

viro

nmen

tal s

tress

or in

form

a

tion

to d

iagn

ose

poss

ible

cau

ses

of

biot

ic im

pairm

ent i

n re

ache

s.3.

Pro

vide

cha

nnel

and

ripa

rian

habi

tat d

ata

suff

icie

ntly

pre

cise

to

allo

w e

xam

inat

ion

of re

spon

ses

of h

abita

t stru

ctur

e to

ripa

rian,

ba

sin,

and

regi

onal

stre

ssor

s.

Eval

uate

the

stru

ctur

e of

the

habi

tat a

nd re

late

it to

the

natu

ra

l stru

ctur

e ex

pect

ed fo

r the

re

gion

. Use

the

eval

uatio

n of

qu

ality

of h

abita

t stru

ctur

e to

en

hanc

e th

e bi

oass

essm

ent.

Des

crib

e an

d ch

arac

teriz

e sa

lient

mac

roha

bita

t attr

ibut

es

that

mos

t inf

luen

ce th

e aq

uatic

lif

e po

tent

ial o

f a s

tream

or

river

reac

h.

SAM

PL

ING

ST

RA

TE

GY

(G

ener

al

appr

oach

)

Hab

itat i

nfor

mat

ion

is co

llect

ed a

t fo

ur s

cale

s

Bas

in, S

egm

ent,

Rea

ch, a

nd M

icro

habi

tat:

A. B

asin

: Bas

in-s

cale

info

rmat

ion

is co

llect

ed th

roug

h ge

ogra

phic

in

form

atio

n sy

stem

(GIS

) dat

a

base

s. Th

ese

data

are

col

lect

ed a

t tw

o sc

ales

: one

that

per

mits

na

tiona

l co

vera

ge, a

nd o

ne th

at

repr

esen

ts a

t the

loca

l, or

stu

dy-

unit,

sca

le th

e m

ost r

ecen

t inf

or

mat

ion

and

high

est r

esol

utio

n av

aila

ble.

The

se d

ata

incl

ude:

1. D

rain

age

area

2. D

rain

age

shap

e3.

Dra

inag

e te

xtur

e

- co

ntin

ued

Phys

ical

Hab

itat a

nd L

ands

cape

C

hara

cter

izat

ion

info

rmat

ion

is c

ol

lect

ed a

t sca

les

rang

ing

from

Reg

ion

and

Bas

in d

own

to M

icro

habi

tat:

A. N

atio

nal.

Reg

iona

l. M

aior

Bas

in,

and

Cat

chm

ent S

cale

s: L

ands

cape

an

d la

rger

sca

le in

form

atio

n is

col

lect

ed fr

om m

appe

d da

ta, r

emot

e im

ager

y, a

nd o

ther

sou

rces

(e.

g., f

ish

stoc

king

and

was

tew

ater

dis

char

ge

reco

rds)

. It i

s co

mpi

led,

acc

esse

d,

and

anal

yzed

thro

ugh

geog

raph

ic

info

rmat

ion

syst

em (

GIS

) da

taba

ses,

to

be

asso

ciat

ed a

s an

cilla

ry in

form

a

tion

asso

ciat

ed w

ith e

ach

EMA

P sa

mpl

e re

ach.

The

se d

ata

are

col

lect

ed a

t var

ying

reso

lutio

n an

d ge

n

eral

ity a

ppro

pria

te fo

r the

sca

le u

nder

co

nsid

erat

ion

and

the

desi

red

use

of

~ co

ntin

ued

Mos

t Sta

tes

use

a vi

sual

-bas

ed

asse

ssm

ent t

echn

ique

, whe

re

the

qual

ity o

f eac

h pa

ram

eter

is

eval

uate

d as

a c

ontin

uum

. Ju

dgm

ent c

riter

ia a

re e

stab

lis

hed

and

tailo

red

for s

peci

fic

regi

ons

and

are

succ

inct

ly

defin

ed to

redu

ce in

vest

igat

or

bias

. A te

am a

ppro

ach

to

asse

ssm

ent i

s em

ploy

ed b

y m

ost a

genc

ies.

Spec

ific

para

met

ers

are

asse

ssed

that

repr

esen

t im

por

ta

nt a

spec

ts o

f phy

sica

l hab

itat

stru

ctur

e. T

hese

par

amet

ers

co

ntin

ued

Qua

litat

ive

Hab

itat E

valu

atio

n In

dex

(QH

EI) i

nfor

mat

ion

is co

llect

ed a

t eac

h fis

h sa

mpl

ing

site

. In

the

case

s of

mul

tiple

pa

sses

, the

QH

EI is

initi

ally

co

mpl

eted

dur

ing

the

first

pass

an

d re

exam

ined

and

adj

uste

d (if

nec

essa

ry) i

n su

bseq

uent

pa

sses

. Inf

orm

atio

n ut

ilize

d is

sim

ilar t

o th

at d

escr

ibed

for

NA

WQ

A.

Figu

re 5

.--C

ompa

riso

n ch

art o

f hab

itat p

roto

cols

, (p

age

1 of

9)

SAM

PLIN

G

STR

AT

EG

Y

(Con

tinue

d)

4. D

rain

age

dens

ity5.

Sto

rage

6. B

asin

relie

f7.

Eco

regi

on8.

Phy

siog

raph

ic p

rovi

nce

9. L

and

use

10. G

eolo

gic

type

11. S

oil t

ype

12. P

oten

tial n

atur

al v

eget

atio

n13

. Wet

land

s14

. Pre

cipi

tatio

n

B. S

egm

ent:

Segm

ent-s

cale

dat

a ar

e ob

tain

ed u

sing

GIS

and

7.5

- m

inut

e to

pogr

aphi

c m

aps.

Seg

m

ent i

s de

fined

as

that

par

t of

a st

ream

bou

nded

by

("m

ajor

") tr

ib

utar

y ju

nctio

ns o

r maj

or d

isco

nti

nuiti

es s

uch

as w

ater

falls

, la

ndfo

rm fe

atur

es, s

igni

fican

t ch

ange

s in

gra

dien

t, or

poi

nt-

sour

ce d

isch

arge

s. T

hese

dat

a in

clud

e:1.

Seg

men

t gra

dien

t2.

Ele

vatio

n3.

Cha

nnel

sin

uosi

ty4.

Stre

am o

rder

5. H

ydro

logi

c fe

atur

es (

dam

s, o

ut

falls

, brid

ges,

etc

.)

-- co

ntin

ued

the

info

rmat

ion

(diff

erin

g, fo

r exa

m

ple,

if th

e ob

ject

ive

is to

cla

ssify

the

site

, dia

gnos

e po

ssib

le c

ause

s fo

r re

ach-

leve

l cha

nges

, or t

rack

tren

ds

in la

nd u

se o

r veg

etat

ion

cove

r).

Thes

e da

ta in

clud

e:1.

Top

ogra

phic

dra

inag

e ar

ea2.

Dra

inag

e de

nsity

, bas

in m

orph

ome-

tr

y (e

.g, b

asin

relie

f, el

evat

ion,

etc

.)3.

Geo

logi

c ty

pe, s

oil t

ype

4. P

oten

tial n

atur

al v

eget

atio

n5.

Lan

d us

e/la

nd c

over

, inc

ludi

ng w

et

land

s6.

Pre

cipi

tatio

n, e

vapo

ratio

n, r

unof

f7.

Atm

osph

eric

dep

ositi

on r

ates

of

sele

cted

sub

stan

ces

8. E

core

gion

, phy

siog

raph

ic p

rovi

nce

9. Z

ooge

ogra

phic

reg

ions

(at

leas

t for

fis

h, b

irds

)10

. Pot

entia

l bar

rier

s/co

rrid

ors

to

biot

ic d

ispe

rsal

/mig

ratio

n (d

ams,

w

aste

wat

er in

puts

, etc

.)11

. Roa

d de

nsity

, hum

an/li

vest

ock

popu

latio

n de

nsity

12. W

aste

dis

char

ge p

erm

it de

nsity

B. S

egm

ent:

Segm

ents

are

def

ined

by

tribu

tary

junc

tions

on

1:10

0,00

0-

scal

e st

ream

trac

es c

onta

ined

in th

e R

iver

Rea

ch F

ile, V

ersi

on 3

(K

F3).

Segm

ent-s

cale

dat

a ar

e ob

tain

ed

from

a v

arie

ty o

f sou

rces

in a

dditi

on

to R

F3 it

self,

incl

udin

g 7.

5-m

inut

e m

aps

(1:2

4,00

0 sc

ale)

, Sta

te re

sour

ce

agen

cy re

cord

s, s

atel

lite

imag

ery,

and

in

som

e re

gion

s ae

rial p

hoto

grap

hy

and

pote

ntia

lly lo

w-e

leva

tion

vide

ogra

phy.

The

se d

ata

incl

ude:

1. S

egm

ent g

radi

ent,

elev

atio

n, v

alle

y bo

ttom

type

and

con

stra

int

2. S

egm

ent l

engt

h an

d ch

anne

l sin

uosi

ty

- c

onti

nued

rela

te to

inst

ream

hab

itat f

ea

ture

s, c

hann

el m

orph

olog

y,

and

bank

and

ripa

rian

veg

eta

tiv

e st

ruct

ure.

The

par

amet

ers

may

be

regi

onal

ly s

peci

fic o

r de

sign

ed fo

r sp

ecifi

c St

ate

pro

gr

ams.

Som

e pa

ram

eter

s ar

e as

sess

ed

for

the

imm

edia

te s

ampl

ing

loca

tion,

and

oth

ers

pert

ain

to

the

reac

h or

stre

am s

egm

ent,

or

perh

aps

to th

e en

tire

catc

h

men

t. H

owev

er, t

hey

gene

r

ally

incl

ude

the

follo

win

g:1.

Ext

ent a

nd a

bund

ance

of

inst

ream

cov

er f

or f

ish

2. Q

ualit

y of

the

bent

hic

or

epifa

unal

sub

stra

te3.

Ext

ent o

f em

bedd

edne

ss o

f th

e ep

ifaun

al s

ubst

rate

4. R

epre

sent

atio

n of

var

ious

ve

loci

ty a

nd d

epth

reg

imes

5. P

rese

nce

or a

bsen

ce o

f ch

anne

l al

tera

tion

6. E

xten

t of s

edim

ent d

epos

i tio

n7.

Sin

uosi

ty o

r fre

quen

cy o

f rif

fles

in a

reac

h8.

Sta

tus

of c

hann

el fu

llnes

s or

w

ette

d w

idth

9. C

ondi

tion

of b

anks

10. E

xten

t of v

eget

ativ

e pr

o

tect

ion

on b

anks

~ co

ntin

ued

Figu

re 5

.--C

ompa

riso

n ch

art o

f hab

itat p

roto

cols

.-Con

tinue

d (p

age

2 of

9)

SAM

PLIN

G

STR

AT

EG

Y

(Con

tinue

d)

C. R

each

: Rea

ch c

hara

cter

izat

ions

ar

e co

nduc

ted

to c

olle

ct d

ata

on

inst

ream

and

ripa

rian

feat

ures

. Tw

o le

vels

of r

each

-sca

le h

abita

t da

ta a

re c

olle

cted

. Th

e fir

st le

vel

cons

ists

of a

rela

tivel

y ra

pid

asse

ssm

ent o

f hab

itat c

ondi

tions

. Th

e se

cond

leve

l con

sist

s of

a

deta

iled,

sur

veye

d m

ap o

f the

re

ach.

The

se h

abita

t dat

a ar

e ob

tain

ed d

irect

ly fr

om fi

eld

mea

su

rem

ents

(se

e "F

ield

Col

lect

ion

Step

s" b

elow

).

~ co

ntin

ued

3. S

trea

m o

rder

(1:

100,

000

and

1:24

,000

map

sca

le)

4. R

ipar

ian

vege

tatio

n ~

like

ly in

ari

d an

d ag

ricu

ltura

l reg

ions

5. P

oten

tial b

arri

ers/

corr

idor

s (e

.g.,

dam

s, c

ulve

rts,

tem

pera

ture

bar

rier

s,

etc.

)6.

Ditc

hing

, cha

nnel

izat

ion,

flo

w

rero

utin

g an

d ca

naliz

atio

n

C.

Rea

ch: T

he r

each

phy

sica

l hab

itat

asse

ssm

ent e

mpl

oys

a ra

ndom

ized

, sy

stem

atic

spa

tial s

ampl

ing

desi

gn

that

min

imiz

es b

ias

in t

he p

lace

men

t an

d po

sitio

ning

of i

ndiv

idua

l mea

su

rem

ents

. Sam

plin

g ar

eas

or p

oint

s ar

e pl

aced

sys

tem

atic

ally

at s

paci

ngs

that

are

pro

port

iona

l to

bas

e-flo

w

chan

nel w

idth

. Mea

sure

men

ts a

re

mad

e w

here

pra

ctic

able

(or

, if n

eces

sa

ry, a

ttrib

utes

that

are

oth

erw

ise

mea

sure

able

can

be

estim

ated

), ra

ther

th

an in

terp

retin

g qu

ality

or i

mpo

r

tanc

e of

the

attri

bute

to b

iota

or i

ts im

porta

nce

as a

n in

dica

tor

of d

istu

r

banc

e. C

hann

el a

nd ri

pari

an h

abita

t ar

e ch

arac

teriz

ed b

ased

on

field

dat

a co

llect

ed a

t 10

0 po

sitio

ns a

long

the

chan

nel m

idlin

e (e

.g.,

habi

tat c

lass

, th

alw

eg d

epth

, wid

th),

at 1

1 ev

enly

sp

aced

cro

ss s

ectio

ns (

e.g.

, rip

aria

n ve

geta

tion

cove

r, su

bstr

ate

size

, fis

h co

ver)

, and

at 3

eve

nly

spac

ed v

alle

y cr

oss

sect

ions

(el

evat

ion

prof

ile, l

and

use)

. Rea

ch a

ttrib

utes

est

imat

ed b

y th

e da

ta a

naly

sis

incl

ude:

1. C

hann

el d

imen

sion

s an

d th

eir v

ari

abili

ty2.

Rea

ch g

radi

ent,

sinu

osity

, cha

nnel

shap

e

cont

inue

d

11. E

xten

t of g

razi

ng o

r ot

her

disr

uptiv

e pr

essu

re12

. Rip

aria

n ve

geta

tive

zone

w

idth

The

judg

men

t of t

hese

par

ame

te

rs d

epen

ds o

n th

e re

fere

nce

cond

ition

for

the

regi

on a

nd

stre

am ty

pe, a

nd th

e as

sess

ed

qual

ity o

f the

phy

sica

l hab

itat

stru

ctur

e is

adju

sted

acc

ord

in

gly.

Figu

re 5

.--C

ompa

riso

n ch

art o

f hab

itat p

roto

coIs

.-Con

tinue

d (p

age

3 of

9)

SAM

PLIN

G

STR

AT

EG

Y

(Con

tinue

d)

D. M

icro

habi

tat:

Mic

roha

bita

t da

ta (

velo

city

, sub

stra

te ty

pe, a

nd

dept

h) a

re c

olle

cted

at t

he lo

ca

tions

whe

re i

nver

tebr

ate

and

alga

l sa

mpl

es a

re ta

ken.

3. C

hann

el-u

nit s

cale

hab

itat c

lass

ific

a

tions

4. R

esid

ual p

ool

freq

uenc

y an

d di

men

si

ons

5. R

ipar

ian

vege

tatio

n st

ruct

ure/

cove

r in

thre

e la

yers

6. C

anop

y co

ver

over

str

eam

7. D

istr

ibut

ion

of s

ubst

rate

siz

es a

nd

embe

dded

ness

8. F

ish

cove

r9.

Hum

an d

istu

rban

ces/

land

use

in

chan

nel,

bank

s, a

nd r

ipar

ian

area

10. V

alle

y fo

rm a

nd c

hann

el in

cisi

on

D. M

icro

habi

tat:

Mic

roha

bita

t dat

a (e

.g.,

subs

trat

e, d

epth

, fis

h co

ver,

etc.

) ar

e co

llect

ed a

t 11

cro

ss-s

ectio

n tra

nsec

ts s

pace

d ev

enly

alo

ng th

e sa

mpl

ing

reac

h. T

hese

tran

sect

s ar

e al

so th

e lo

catio

ns w

here

mac

roin

ver-

te

brat

e an

d pe

riph

yton

sam

ples

are

ta

ken.

SAM

PLE

G

EA

R1.

Tap

e m

easu

re a

nd

rang

efin

der

2. B

runt

on c

ompa

ss3.

Clin

omet

er4.

Sur

veyi

ng r

od a

nd5.

Vel

ocity

met

er6.

Tre

e di

amet

er ta

pe

leve

l

mea

sure

1. T

ape

mea

sure

(50

-m f

iber

gl

ass)

and

rang

efin

der

2. B

earin

g co

mpa

ss (

Silv

a R

ange

r-ty

pe)

3. C

linom

eter

4. S

pher

ical

can

opy

dens

iom

- et

er5.

Sur

veyo

r's r

od (

tele

scop

in

g 1.

5 m

to 5

m o

r 7 m

)6.

Cal

ibra

ted

staf

f (1.

2m

mar

ked

in c

entim

eter

s) a

nd

hip

chai

n7.

Vel

ocity

met

er

Mos

tly v

isua

l-bas

ed t

ech

ni

que.

Sha

ding

den

siom

e-

ters

, flo

w m

eter

s, s

taff

ga

ge, a

nd m

easu

ring

tape

s so

met

imes

use

d. D

ata

shee

ts w

ith li

sts

of p

aram

e

ters

and

des

crip

tions

of

judg

men

t cri

teri

a ar

e pr

e

pare

d fo

r sp

ecifi

c re

gion

s or

eco

regi

ons,

or

stre

am

type

s.

1. Q

HEI

fie

ld s

heet

2. Q

HE

I pro

cedu

res

3. D

epth

pol

e gr

adua

ted

at

10-c

m in

terv

als

4. H

ip c

hain

Figu

re 5

.--C

ompa

riso

n ch

art o

f hab

itat p

roto

cols

.-Con

tmue

d (p

age

4 of

9)

SAM

PL

E

AR

EA

Fiel

d ha

bita

t mea

sure

men

ts

are

mad

e in

the

entir

e sa

m

plin

g re

ach.

Fiel

d ha

bita

t mea

sure

men

ts

are

mad

e th

roug

hout

the

sam

pl

ing

reac

h. "

Off

ice"

or

rem

ote

mea

sure

s ar

e m

ade

on

the

map

ped

segm

ent,

drai

nage

ba

sin,

or

regi

on,

as a

ppro

pri

at

e.

Bio

logi

cal s

ampl

ing

site

or

area

use

d to

ass

ess

spec

ific

inst

ream

par

amet

ers.

Rea

ch

is e

xpan

ded

beyo

nd s

ite to

ap

prop

riate

ly a

sses

s pa

ram

et

ers

rela

ted

to c

hann

el m

or

phol

ogy,

ban

k st

abili

ty, a

nd

ripar

ian

vege

tatio

n.

Ent

ire

sam

plin

g re

ach

(150

-200

m f

or w

adin

g si

tes;

500

m fo

r bo

at s

ites)

FIE

LD

CO

LL

EC

TIO

NST

EP

S

Onl

y da

ta fo

r rea

ch c

hara

cter

iza

tio

ns a

re c

olle

cted

in th

e fie

ld:

A. F

irst-L

evel

Rea

ch C

hara

cter

iz

atio

n ~

All

data

are

col

lect

ed

with

resp

ect t

o a

know

n re

fer

en

ce lo

catio

n (p

erm

anen

t stru

c

ture

suc

h as

a g

age

stat

ion

or

brid

ge).

This

loca

tion

is im

por

ta

nt fo

r lin

king

hab

itat d

ata

at

the

vario

us s

cale

s. C

olle

ctio

n of

da

ta is

bas

ed o

n th

e es

tabl

ish

m

ent o

f a m

inim

um o

f 6

trans

ects

, sys

tem

atic

ally

cho

sen

to r

epre

sent

con

ditio

ns in

geo

- m

orph

ic u

nits

(po

ols,

riffle

s, ru

ns).

Dat

a co

llect

ed in

clud

e:1.

Cha

nnel

wid

th2.

Ban

k w

idth

3. F

lood

-pla

in w

idth

4. S

tream

dep

th5.

Vel

ocity

6. B

ed s

ubst

rate

(Wen

twor

th

scal

e)7.

Em

bedd

edne

ss

- co

ntin

ued

The

Fiel

d Ph

ysic

al H

abita

t Pro

to

col c

onsi

sts

of 5

diff

eren

t co

mpo

nent

s (s

ee a

lso

Tabl

e 1

from

the

habi

tat p

roto

col d

ocu

m

ent):

A. T

halw

eg P

rofil

e: A

long

itudi

na

l sur

vey

of d

epth

, wid

th, a

nd

habi

tat c

lass

at

100

equa

lly

spac

ed p

oint

s al

ong

the

cent

er-

line

betw

een

the

two

ends

of t

he

sam

ple

stre

am re

ach.

[Th

is pr

o

vide

s res

idua

l poo

l vol

ume,

stre

am

size,

chan

nel c

ompl

exity

, and

pro

po

rtio

ns o

f hab

itat t

ypes

.] B

. Lar

ge W

oodv

Deb

ris T

allv

: C

ount

and

est

imat

e di

men

sion

s of

woo

dy d

ebris

in th

e ac

tive

chan

nel a

long

the

full

leng

th o

f th

e sa

mpl

e re

ach.

Est

imat

e th

e po

rtion

of e

ach

piec

e th

at is

pr

esen

tly in

unda

ted

by w

ater

. [T

his

com

pone

nt a

llows

pre

cise

es

timat

e of

woo

d an

d its

dist

ribu

tio

n wi

thin

the

reac

h.]

co

ntin

ued

Hab

itat a

sses

smen

ts a

re

usua

lly c

ondu

cted

aft

er b

io

logi

cal c

olle

ctio

ns, t

o m

ini

miz

e di

stur

banc

e an

d to

be

nefit

from

a d

irec

t exp

o

sure

of t

he in

vest

igat

or to

in

stre

am f

eatu

res.

Para

met

ers

in S

tate

pro

gr

ams

are

take

n fr

om th

e fo

llow

ing

list:

1. I

nstr

eam

cov

er2.

Epi

faun

al s

ubst

rate

cha

r

acte

riza

tion

3. C

hann

el a

ltera

tion

4. S

edim

ent d

epos

ition

5. B

otto

m s

cour

ing

6. C

hann

el s

inuo

sity

7. L

ower

ban

k ch

anne

l ca

paci

ty

- co

ntin

ued

The

gene

ral s

ite lo

catio

n is

se

lect

ed d

urin

g pr

e-su

rvey

pl

anni

ng. T

he s

ampl

ing

site

is

est

ablis

hed,

mea

sure

d,

and

mar

ked

for

futu

re

pass

es. Q

HEI

she

et is

com

pl

eted

by

the

fish

crew

le

ader

afte

r the

site

has

bee

n el

ectro

n"sh

ed. D

ata

incl

ude:

1. S

ubst

rate

: qu

ality

and

qu

antit

y, w

ith c

ondi

tion

(silt

, em

bedd

edne

ss)

2. C

over

: typ

es a

nd q

uant

ity3.

Cha

nnel

: sin

uosi

ty, d

evel

op

men

t, st

abili

ty, c

ondi

tion

4. R

ipar

ian

Zone

: w

idth

, qu

ality

, ban

k er

osio

n5.

Poo

l Qua

lity:

max

imum

de

pth,

cur

rent

type

s, m

or

phol

ogy

6. R

iffle

/Run

Qua

lity:

dep

th,

stab

ility

, em

bedd

edne

ss7.

Loc

al G

radi

ent:

atte

nu

ated

by

stre

am s

ize

Figu

re 5

.--C

ompa

riso

n ch

art o

f hab

itat p

roto

cols

.-Con

tinue

d (p

age

5 of

9)

FIE

LD

CO

LL

EC

TIO

N

STE

PS

(con

tinue

d)

A. F

irst-L

evel

Rea

ch C

hara

cter

iz

atio

n

cont

inue

d:8.

Sun

ang

le9.

Stre

am h

eadi

ng10

. Ban

k an

gle

11. B

ank

heig

ht12

. Ban

k ve

geta

tive

stab

ility

13. B

ank

shap

e14

. Ban

k er

osio

n15

. Hab

itat f

eatu

res

(cat

egor

ies

of in

stre

am c

over

such

as w

oody

sn

ags,

unde

rcut

ban

ks, e

tc.)

-- m

easu

red

with

in a

zon

e 2

m w

ide

on e

ither

sid

e of

eac

h tra

nsec

t lin

e.16

. Ban

k w

oody

veg

etat

ion -

eval

uate

d at

the

ends

of e

ach

trans

ect l

ine

usin

g a

poin

t-qua

r

ter m

etho

d.

B. S

econ

d-Le

vel R

each

Cha

rac

te

rizat

ion

-- D

ata

colle

cted

for

seco

nd-le

vel r

each

cha

ract

eriz

a

tions

incl

ude:

1. P

lani

met

ric m

ap o

f the

reac

h ba

sed

on s

urve

yed

prof

iles

of th

e flo

od p

lain

, wat

er s

urfa

ce, a

nd

chan

nel b

ed2.

A m

inim

um o

f 3 m

onum

ente

d cr

oss

sect

ions

3. A

qua

ntifi

ed p

artic

le-s

ize

anal

ys

is o

f the

cha

nnel

-bed

sub

stra

te4.

Per

man

ent p

lot v

eget

atio

n an

alys

is5.

Pho

todo

cum

enta

tion

C. C

hann

el/ri

paria

n cr

oss

sec

tio

ns:

At e

ach

of 1

1 ev

enly

sp

aced

cro

ss s

ectio

ns, m

easu

re

and

estim

ate

subs

trate

, ban

k ch

arac

teris

tics,

rip

aria

n ve

geta

tio

n st

ruct

ure,

can

opy

cove

r, ch

anne

l gra

dien

t, ch

anne

l com

pa

ss b

earin

g, f

ish

cove

r, an

d pr

esen

ce/p

roxi

mity

of h

uman

di

stur

banc

e ty

pes.

[Thi

s co

mpo

ne

nt a

llow

s ca

lcul

atio

n of

man

y at

trib

utes

con

trib

utin

g to

hab

itat

qual

ity a

nd ri

pari

an d

istu

r

banc

e.]

D. V

alle

y tra

nsec

ts: R

ough

m

easu

re o

f val

ley

elev

atio

n ch

ange

s an

d la

ndfo

rm c

lass

ifica

tio

n at

thre

e 40

-m c

ross

sec

tions

(2

0 m

out

from

bot

h le

ft an

d rig

ht b

anks

at b

otto

m, m

iddl

e,

and

top

of sa

mpl

e re

ach)

. [Th

is

com

pone

nt a

llow

s cl

assi

ficat

ion

of va

lley

type

.]E.

Dis

char

ge:

Mea

sure

inst

anta

ne

ous

disc

harg

e at

the

time

of

sam

plin

g, u

sing

flo

w m

eter

and

ve

loci

ty-a

rea

met

hod

whe

re p

os

sibl

e; p

orta

ble

wei

r or t

imed

fill

in

g of

buc

ket i

n ve

ry s

mal

l st

ream

s. [

Dis

char

ge g

ives

an

othe

r m

easu

re o

f the

str

eam

si

ze, a

nd is

hel

pful

for

inte

rpre

t in

g m

any

chem

ical

and

bio

logi

ca

l mea

sure

s.]

8. C

hann

el fl

ow s

tatu

s9.

Cha

nnel

sha

pe10

. Wid

th to

dep

th ra

tio11

. Ban

k st

abili

ty12

. Ban

k ve

geta

tive

prot

ec

tion

13. G

razi

ng o

r ot

her d

isru

p

tive

pres

sure

14. R

ipar

ian

vege

tativ

e zo

ne

wid

th15

. Can

opy

cove

r

In a

dditi

on to

the

abov

e, d

ata

are

colle

cted

on

the

follo

w

ing:

H

igh-

grad

ient

stre

ams:

Riff

le/p

ool s

eque

nce

Rat

io o

f poo

l dim

ensi

ons

to

riffle

dim

ensi

ons

Vel

ocity

/dep

th r

egim

e E

mbe

dded

ness

Per

cent

fine

sor Lo

w-g

radi

ent s

tream

s: P

ool v

aria

bilit

y P

ool s

ubst

rate

cha

ract

eriz

a

tion

Figu

re 5

.--C

ompa

riso

n ch

art o

f hab

itat p

roto

cols

.-Con

tinue

d (p

age

6 of

9)

AN

CIL

LA

RY

D

AT

A A

ND

C

OO

RD

INA

TE

D

SAM

PL

ING

A

CT

IVIT

IES

A. F

ish,

inve

rteb

rate

and

alg

al

com

mun

ity s

ampl

es a

re c

ol

lect

ed a

t eac

h B

asic

Fix

ed

Site

.B

. Wat

er, s

edim

ent,

and

tissu

e ch

emis

try

are

colle

cted

at

each

Bas

ic F

ixed

Site

. C

. Con

tinuo

us s

trea

m d

is

char

ge a

nd f

ield

wat

er-q

ualit

y pa

ram

eter

s (e

.g.,

pH, t

empe

ra

ture

) ar

e m

easu

red

at e

ach

Bas

ic F

ixed

Site

.

A. T

he p

rimar

y da

ta u

pon

whi

ch s

trea

m e

colo

gica

l re

spon

ses

will

be

dete

rmin

ed

are

biol

ogic

al. F

ish,

mac

roin

- ve

rteb

rate

, and

alg

al a

ssem

bl

age

sam

ples

are

col

lect

ed a

t al

l the

EM

AP

sam

ple

reac

hes.

B

. Fis

h tis

sue

cont

amin

ants

an

d se

dim

ent o

xyge

n de

man

d ar

e co

llect

ed a

t EM

AP

sam

ple

reac

hes.

In

the

Mid

-App

ala

ch

ian

and

Ore

gon

Pilo

ts,

Qua

litat

ive

Rap

id B

ioas

sess

- m

ent H

abita

t Ass

essm

ent

form

s w

ere

also

fill

ed o

ut to

co

mpa

re w

ith m

ore

quan

tita

tiv

e m

etho

ds.

C. F

ield

pH

, con

duct

ivity

, and

te

mpe

ratu

re a

re m

easu

red,

and

w

ater

sam

ple

is c

olle

cted

, for

ch

emis

try

at e

ach

EM

AP

sam

pl

e re

ach.

D. A

s pa

rt o

f pilo

t act

iviti

es,

sedi

men

ts w

ere

colle

cted

for

to

xici

ty b

ioas

say

at s

elec

ted

site

s.

A. B

iolo

gica

l ass

embl

age

colle

ctio

ns a

re m

ade

as

dete

rmin

ed b

y A

genc

y di

rect

ives

.B

. Wat

er, s

edim

ent,

and

tis

sue

chem

istr

y ar

e co

l le

cted

as

requ

ired

for

anal

ytic

al a

nd le

xico

logi

cal

test

ing.

C. I

n si

tu m

easu

rem

ents

of

tem

pera

ture

, pH

, dis

solv

ed

oxyg

en, a

nd c

ondu

ctiv

ity

are

mad

e.

A. Q

HE

I is

cond

ucte

d co

n

curr

ently

with

fis

h sa

m

plin

g.B

. Inv

erte

brat

e, c

hem

istry

, an

d ph

ysic

al in

form

atio

n is

obta

ined

for

eac

h si

te.

Figu

re 5

.--C

ompa

riso

n ch

art o

f hab

itat p

roto

cols

.--C

ontin

ued

(pag

e 7

of 9

)

S;:;:;

:::;:;?

;^îll

DA

TA

A

NA

LY

SIS

Raw

dat

a ar

e su

mm

ariz

ed to

de

scri

be e

ach

sam

plin

g re

ach.

M

ultiv

aria

te te

chni

ques

are

us

ed to

gro

up s

ites

acco

rdin

g to

com

mon

hab

itat f

eatu

res.

Raw

dat

a fr

om m

ultip

le f

ield

m

easu

rem

ent l

ocat

ions

with

in

each

sam

ple

reac

h w

ill b

e ag

greg

ated

or

aver

aged

to

yiel

d si

ngle

-rea

ch s

umm

ary

valu

es fo

r a

num

ber

of h

abita

t ch

arac

teri

stic

s (r

efer

to "

Fiel

d C

olle

ctio

n St

eps"

abo

ve f

or

prim

ary

anal

yses

of e

ach

of

the

5 fie

ld p

roto

col c

ompo

ne

nts)

.

Scor

es a

re to

tale

d fo

r al

l pa

ram

eter

s. T

he to

tal s

core

is

com

pare

d to

the

refe

r

ence

to o

btai

n a

perc

ent

age

com

paris

on.

Som

e St

ates

hav

e de

velo

ped

a pe

rcen

tage

or

scor

e th

resh

ol

d fo

r at

tain

ing

acce

pt

able

con

ditio

ns. I

ndiv

idua

l pa

ram

eter

val

ues

are

used

to

iden

tify

habi

tat d

egra

da

tion

and

to r

elat

e to

bio

log

ic

al c

ondi

tion.

QH

EI s

core

s ar

e ca

lcu

la

ted

base

d on

a n

umer

ic

inde

x ra

ngin

g fr

om 2

0-10

0.

Maj

or h

abita

t attr

ibut

es

that

cor

resp

ond

to h

igh

and

low

qua

lity

habi

tat h

ave

been

iden

tifie

d (R

anki

n,

1989

). A

mat

rix o

f the

se

attri

bute

s is

pro

duce

d fo

r ea

ch s

ite, w

hich

allo

ws

fur

th

er in

terp

reta

tion

of th

e ca

uses

of h

abita

t im

pair

m

ent.

Qua

lity

Ass

uran

ce/

Qua

lity

Con

trol

(QA

/QC

)

A. S

tand

ardi

zed

prot

ocol

s an

d tra

inin

g of

fiel

d pe

rson

nel.

Reg

iona

l bio

logi

sts

prov

ide

coor

dina

tion

and

over

sigh

t of

stud

y-un

it sa

mpl

ing

activ

ities

. B

. Int

egra

ted

data

base

(N

atio

nal W

ater

Info

rmat

ion

Syst

em-I

I) c

onta

ins

phys

ical

(in

clud

ing

habi

tat),

che

mic

al,

and

biol

ogic

al d

ata,

with

fac

il

itate

d da

ta e

ntry

, ver

ifica

tion,

an

d an

alys

is.

Dat

a qu

ality

con

trol

by

stan

da

rdiz

ed p

roto

cols

and

fie

ld

form

s, c

ompr

ehen

sive

cre

w

trai

ning

, fie

ld a

udits

, dat

abas

e ve

rifi

catio

n an

d va

lidat

ion.

D

ata

qual

ity a

sses

smen

t by

sam

plin

g re

plic

atio

n to

est

i m

ate

com

pone

nts

of v

aria

nce

and

prec

isio

n ("

sign

al-t

o-

nois

e" ra

tio).

A. D

ocum

ente

d St

anda

rd

Ope

ratin

g Pr

oced

ures

B

. Tra

ined

sta

ff a

nd d

elin

ea

tion

of re

spon

sibi

lity

C. M

aint

enan

ce o

f a

phot

odoc

umen

tatio

n re

cord

D

. Com

pute

rized

dat

abas

e an

d an

alyt

ical

pro

gram

s w

ith v

erifi

ed e

ntrie

s E

. Con

sist

ent r

epor

ting

for

m

at a

nd p

aram

eter

cal

cula

tio

n

A. E

xten

sive

trai

ning

tohe

lp s

tand

ardi

ze b

etw

een

rate

rsB

. One

-yea

r tra

inin

gre

fres

her r

equi

red

C. V

isua

l aid

s im

porta

nt

Figu

re 5

, Com

pari

son

char

t of h

abita

t pro

toco

ls.-C

ontin

ued

(pag

e 8

of 9

)

8

iiiiiiilii

PRO

TO

CO

L

DO

CU

ME

NT

1. M

eado

r, M

.R.,

Hup

p, C

.R.,

Cuf

fney

, T.F

., an

d G

urtz

, M

.E.,

1993

, Met

hods

for

cha

r

acte

rizin

g st

ream

hab

itat a

s pa

rt o

f the

Nat

iona

l Wat

er-

Qua

lity

Ass

essm

ent P

rogr

am:

U.S

. Geo

logi

cal S

urve

y O

pen-

Fi

le R

epor

t 93-

408,

48

p.

1. K

aufm

ann,

P.R

., an

dR

obis

on, E

.G.,

1993

, Phy

sica

l ha

bita

t as

sess

men

t, Se

ctio

n 6,

in

Kle

mm

, D

.J.,

and

Laz

or-

chak

, J.

M.,

eds.

, E

nvir

onm

en

tal

Mon

itori

ng a

nd

Ass

essm

ent P

rogr

am- S

urf a

ce

Wat

ers

and

Reg

ion

3 R

egio

nal-

EM

AP

199

3 P

ilot

Fi

eld

Ope

ratio

ns a

nd M

etho

ds

Man

ual

St

ream

s: C

inci

n

nati,

Ohi

o, U

.S.

Env

iron

men

ta

l Pr

otec

tion

Age

ncy.

1. B

arbo

ur, M

.T.,

and

Strib

- lin

g,J.

B.,

1991

, Use

of h

abi

tat a

sses

smen

t in

eval

uatin

g th

e bi

olog

ical

inte

grity

of

stre

am c

omm

uniti

es, i

n B

io

logi

cal c

riter

ia: R

esea

rch

and

regu

latio

n, E

PA-4

40/5

-91-

00

5: W

ashi

ngto

n, D

.C.,

USE

PA, O

ffic

e of

Wat

er, p

. 25

-38.

2. H

aysl

ip, G

.A.,

ed.,

1993

, EP

A R

egio

n 10

in-s

trea

m b

io

logi

cal m

onito

ring

hand

bo

ok, E

PA 9

10/9

-92-

013:

Se

attle

, Was

h., U

SEPA

, R

egio

n 10

, Env

iron

men

tal

Serv

ices

Div

isio

n.3.

Mid

-Atla

ntic

Coa

stal

St

ream

s W

orkg

roup

, (I

n pr

epar

atio

n). S

tand

ard

oper

at

ing

proc

edur

es a

nd t

echn

ical

ba

sis:

Mac

roin

vcrte

brat

e co

l le

ctio

n an

d ha

bita

t ass

essm

ent

for l

ow g

radi

ent,

nont

idal

st

ream

s: W

heel

ing,

WV

a.,

USE

PA, R

egio

n II

I.4.

Pla

fkin

, J.L

., B

arbo

ur,

M.T

., Po

rter,

K.D

., G

ross

,5.

K.,

and

Hug

hes,

R.M

., 19

89, R

apid

bio

asse

ssm

ent

prot

ocol

s fo

r use

in s

tream

s an

d riv

ers:

Ben

thic

mac

roin

- ve

rtebr

ates

and

fish

, EPA

/ 44

0/4-

89-0

01:

Was

hing

ton,

D

.C.,

USE

PA, O

ffic

e of

W

ater

.

1. O

hio

Env

iron

men

tal

Prot

ectio

n A

genc

y, 1

989,

B

iolo

gica

l Crit

eria

for t

he

Prot

ectio

n of

Aqu

atic

Life

, V

olum

e IE

, Sta

ndar

dize

d bi

olog

ical

fie

ld s

ampl

ing

and

labo

rato

ry m

etho

ds

for

asse

ssin

g fis

h an

d m

ac-

roin

vert

ebra

te c

omm

uni

ties:

Div

isio

n of

Wat

er

Qua

lity

Plan

ning

and

A

sses

smen

t.

2. R

anki

n, E

.T.,

1989

, The

Q

ualit

ativ

e H

abita

t Eva

lua

tio

n In

dex

(QH

EI):

Rat

io

nale

, Met

hods

, and

A

pplic

atio

n: D

ivis

ion

of

Wat

er Q

ualit

y Pl

anni

ng

and

Ass

essm

ent.

Figu

re 5

.-Com

pari

son

char

t of h

abita

t pr

otoc

ols.

-Con

tinue

d (p

age

9 of

9)

:&3&:-:&:§5:5Sx^^

j:|:j:j:j:|:j:|:j:|:j:j:|:|:|:|:j:|^^

Channel Width a. Wetted Width - at several placesb. Wetted Width -- one estimate

Channel Deptha. Via Transectb. Via Habitatc. Thalweg Depth

Channel Gradient

Bed Substrate (Visual)a. Pebble Countsb. Surface Fines (P/A=Presence/Absence)

Embeddedness

Habitat Features / Cover (Instream; e.g., snags,boulders, cobble, pools, etc.)

Large Woody Debris

Sun AngleShading (Canopy Cover)Stream Heading (Aspect)Channel Shape

VelocityDischarge (Flow)

Bank Angle (Hor=Horizontal, Ver= Vertical)Bank HeightBank Vegetative Stability (Platts)Bank ShapeBank Erosion

Bank WidthBankfull WidthFlood-plain Width

Riparian Zonea. Vegetation Typeb. Densityc. Dominanced. Vigor / Biomasse. Areal Extent / Widthf. Successional Stage (Size Class)

Human Disturbance

IlllllllllSSiSS^^SSS

x-x-XvxfSi-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-

iilpiiiilli

X

X

XX

XX

P/AX

X

Indirect

X

XIndirect

XX

X(Ver)XXXX

XIndirect

X

XX

IndirectX

IndirectIndirect

X

XXXX

XXXX

X

X

XX

Indirect

XX

X(Ver)XX

IndirectX

X

X

XIndirect

XIndirect

XIndirect

X

X

X

X

X

X

Indirect

XIndirectIndirect

XIndirect

XIndirect

X

Indirect

Indirect

IndirectXX

X

X

X

X

XXXX

X

X

XIndirect

XIndirect

X(Hor)

X

X

IndirectX

Indirect

X

X

XX

X

X

X

XXXX

X

X

IndirectOptional

XIndirect

X(Hor)

OptionalX

IndirectX

Indirect

XIndirectIndirectIndirectIndirectIndirect

Figure 6. Comparison chart of physical and vegetative habitat characteristics.

61

CO

MPO

NE

NT

OB

JEC

TIV

E(T

issu

es)

[Not

e: F

orN

AW

QA

and

EM

AP

, als

o se

e jig

. If o

r P

rogr

amO

bjec

tives

and

Des

ign

Fea

ture

s.]

(Occ

urre

nce

and

Dis

tri

butio

n A

sses

smen

t):

Det

erm

ine

the

occu

rre

nce

of tr

ace

elem

ents

and

orga

nic

com

po

unds

in r

elat

ion

toco

ntam

inan

t sou

rces

; pr

ovid

e im

prov

ed g

eo

grap

hic

cove

rage

with

resp

ect t

o pr

iori

ty c

on

stitu

ents

who

se o

ccur

re

nces

hav

e be

ende

tect

ed.

Est

ablis

hba

selin

e co

ncen

tra

tions

at s

ites

thou

ght t

o be

min

imal

ly a

ffec

ted

by h

uman

act

ivity

.[N

ote:

Thi

s ch

art

ism

ost

appr

opri

ate

for

the

Occ

urre

nce

and

Dis

trib

utio

n A

sses

sm

ent;

mod

ific

atio

nsm

ay b

e m

ade

to m

eet

othe

r P

rogr

am o

bjec

tiv

es (

e.g.

, tre

nds

and

caus

e/ 'e

ffect

cas

e st

ud-

ies)

.]

Est

imat

e, w

ith k

now

nun

certa

inty

, the

ext

ent

and

leve

ls o

f so

ciol

ogi

cally

im

port

ant c

on

tam

inan

ts, w

ith a

foc

uson

the

pote

ntia

l im

pact

to w

ildlif

e an

d hu

man

co

nsum

ers

(pri

mar

yfo

cus

is im

pact

to w

ild

life)

. As

the

only

con

ta

min

ants

indi

cato

r (fo

r E

MA

P), i

t has

the

func

tion

of re

gist

erin

gpr

esen

ce (

abse

nce)

of

impo

rtan

t con

tam

i

nant

s.

iili

iiii

liil

iii

;;;SS

i;;iS

:;^;fi

(i;^:i

iii:*i

SisiS

:Siii

^ !M

;;8i;;

;J^

To f

orm

ulat

e gu

idan

cefo

r St

ates

on

how

tosa

mpl

e an

d an

alyz

e fis

h an

d sh

ellf

ish

and

toco

nduc

t ris

k as

sess

m

ent,

risk

man

age

men

t, an

d ri

skco

mm

unic

atio

n ac

tivi

ties

rela

ted

to t

he is

su

ance

of c

onsu

mpt

ion

advi

sori

es.

Spec

ific

ob

ject

ives

(se

e R

efer

en

ce 1

, p. 7

6) a

re to

re

com

men

d: A

tier

ed m

onito

ring

stra

tegy

Tar

get s

peci

es

Tar

get a

naly

tes

in f

ish

and

shel

lfis

h tis

sue

R

isk-

base

d pr

oce

dure

s fo

r es

timat

ing

targ

et a

naly

te s

cree

ning

valu

es S

tand

ard

field

pro

ce

dure

s A

naly

tical

met

hods

P

roce

dure

s fo

r da

ta

man

agem

ent,

anal

ysis

,an

d re

port

ing

QA

/QC

pro

cedu

res

All

sam

plin

g an

d an

al

ysis

will

be

done

at t

hedi

scre

tion

of a

nd b

y th

e^tn

tf«

TT

^F

PA

's r

nlf

ouii

cb.

uoc»

jr/\

a i

vjic

will

be

rest

rict

ed to

prov

idin

g gu

idan

cere

late

d to

met

hods

and

proc

edur

es.

Illlllllllllll

Det

erm

ine

the

prev

ale

nce

of s

elec

ted

bio

ac

cum

ulat

ive

pollu

tant

sin

fis

h an

d to

ide

ntif

yco

rrel

atio

ns w

ithso

urce

s of

thes

e po

llut

ants

. Als

o es

timat

e hu

man

hea

lth r

isks

from

tho

se p

ollu

tant

sst

udie

d fo

r w

hich

can

ce

r po

tenc

y fa

ctor

s an

d (o

r) r

efer

ence

dose

s ha

ve b

een

esta

blis

hed.

Sam

ples

col

lect

ed a

t38

8 si

tes

and

anal

yzed

for

60 b

ioac

cum

ulat

ive

pollu

tant

s.

il|||

|;:|||

||||||

||||;

A. D

ocum

ent t

empo

ral

and

geog

raph

ic tr

ends

inth

e co

ncen

tratio

ns o

f bi

oacc

umul

ativ

e co

ntam

in

ants

in fi

sh a

nd a

vian

wild

life.

B. P

rovi

de f

eedb

ack

toth

e re

gula

tory

pro

cess

w

ith re

spec

t to

bioa

ccu

m

ulat

ive

cont

amin

ants

.C

. Pro

vide

fra

me-

of-r

ef-

eren

ce a

gain

st w

hich

to

com

pare

fin

ding

s fr

om

othe

r inv

estig

atio

ns.

D. P

rovi

de a

n ar

chiv

e of

tissu

e fo

r ret

rosp

ectiv

ean

alys

es, s

earc

hes

for

new

and

pre

viou

sly

unre

cogn

ized

con

tam

i na

nts,

and

met

hods

deve

lopm

ent.

The

NC

BP

was

com

po

sed

of th

ree

netw

orks

- fr

eshw

ater

fish

, duc

kw

ings

, and

sta

rling

s- -

whi

ch o

pera

ted

mor

e or

less

inde

pend

ently

. T

he N

CB

P or

igin

ated

in

1965

as

a co

mpo

nent

of

the

mul

tiage

ncy

Nat

iona

lPe

stici

de M

onito

ring

Pro

gram

(NPM

P), w

hich

focu

sed

larg

ely

on o

rga-

no

chlo

rine

inse

ctic

ides

(esp

ecia

lly D

DT)

. T

he c

ompo

nent

s w

ere

man

aged

as

a pa

rtner

ship

betw

een

rese

arch

and

oper

atio

nal e

lem

ents

with

in th

e U

SFW

S.

iiiiil

iiliii

iiiii

^^ A

f^-^

^-.

^^^^Â

-fff

ffK

y:

Det

erm

ine

the

curr

ent

stat

us a

nd d

etec

t any

chan

ges

in th

e en

viro

nm

enta

l qua

lity

of e

stua

-ri

ne a

nd c

oast

al w

ater

sby

usi

ng c

onta

min

ant

leve

ls (

maj

or a

nd t

race

el

emen

ts a

nd o

rgan

icco

ntam

inan

ts)

in s

edi

men

ts a

nd ti

ssue

s.

A. B

enth

ic S

urve

illa

nce

Proj

ect:

botto

m-

fish

liver

s an

d se

dim

ent

(93

stat

ions

)

B. M

usse

l Wat

chPr

ojec

t: m

usse

ls, o

ys

ters

and

sed

imen

ts (2

50st

atio

ns)

C. Q

ualit

y A

ssur

ance

Proj

ect

D. S

peci

men

Ban

k

E. B

ioef

fect

s Su

rvey

s an

d ot

hers

B Det

erm

ine

the

occu

rre

nce

of c

erta

in c

on

tam

inan

ts i

n fis

h fr

omth

e O

hio

Riv

er a

ndse

lect

ed tr

ibut

arie

s.

Figu

re 7

.~C

ompa

riso

n ch

art o

f tis

sue

prot

ocol

s, (p

age

1 of

15)

SIT

ESE

LE

CT

ION

ST

RA

TE

GY

In e

ach

stud

y un

it, t

is

sues

are

col

lect

ed a

t: A

. Occ

urre

nce

Surv

eysi

tes

sele

cted

to h

elp

defin

e w

hich

con

tam

ina

nts

occu

r in

bio

ta in

the

stud

y un

it. T

hese

si

tes

incl

ude

the

Bas

icFi

xed

Site

s, a

ndse

lect

ed o

ther

site

s w

here

con

tam

inat

ion

is li

kely

. T

he o

ccur

re

nce

surv

ey s

houl

din

clud

e si

tes

whe

re

bed

sedi

men

ts a

re c

ol

lect

ed f

or c

hem

ical

anal

yses

, ref

eren

ce

site

s (w

here

littl

e or

no

cont

amin

atio

n is

expe

cted

), an

d ec

olog

i

cal s

ynop

tic s

urve

ysi

tes

whe

reve

r pos

si

ble.

B. S

patia

l Dis

trib

utio

nSu

rvey

site

s to

impr

ove

geog

raph

ic c

over

age,

with

par

ticul

ar e

mph

a

sis

on a

sses

smen

t of

prio

rity

con

stitu

ents

iden

tifie

d in

the

occu

rre

nce

surv

ey.

(Als

o se

e fig

. 1:

Pro

gram

Obj

ectiv

es a

ndD

esig

n Fe

atur

es.)

Cho

sen

by E

MA

Ppr

obab

ility

des

ign

(Als

o se

e fa

g. 1:

Pro

gr

am O

bjec

tives

and

Des

ign

Feat

ures

.)

A. S

cree

ning

Stu

dy - S

ites

shou

ld b

e lo

cate

d in

fre

qu

ently

fis

hed

area

s ne

ar:

1. P

oint

sou

rces

suc

h as

: in

dust

rial o

r mun

icip

al d

is

char

ges,

com

bine

d se

wer

over

flow

s, u

rban

sto

rmdr

ains

2.

Non

poin

t sou

rce

inpu

ts

such

as:

lan

dfill

s, R

CR

A o

r Su

perf

und

CE

RC

LA

site

s a

reas

of i

nten

se a

gric

ul

tura

l, si

lvic

ultu

ral,

or

reso

urce

ext

ract

ion

activ

i tie

s or

urb

an la

nd d

evel

op

men

t a

reas

rec

eivi

ng in

puts

thro

ugh

mul

timed

ia m

ech

anis

ms

such

as

hydr

ogeo

- lo

gic

conn

ectio

ns o

r at

mos

pher

ic d

epos

ition

3.

Are

as a

ctin

g as

pot

entia

lpo

lluta

nt s

inks

whe

re c

on

tam

inat

ed s

edim

ents

acc

u

mul

ate

and

bioa

ccum

ulat

ion

pote

ntia

lm

ight

be

enha

nced

4. A

reas

whe

re s

edim

ents

ar

e di

stur

bed

by d

redg

ing

activ

ities

5. U

npol

lute

d ar

eas

that

can

serv

e as

ref

eren

ce s

ites

for s

ubse

quen

t int

ensi

ve

stud

ies

B. I

nten

sive

Stu

dy c

on

duct

ed a

t all

scre

enin

g si

tes

whe

re th

e se

lect

ed s

cree

nin

g va

lue

(SV

) fo

r one

or

mor

e ta

rget

ana

lyte

s w

as

exce

eded

.

A. T

arge

ted

Site

s: s

ites

whe

re c

onta

min

atio

n w

as k

now

n or

sus

pe

cted

, inc

ludi

ng lo

ca

tions

nea

r pul

p an

dpa

per

mill

s, re

fine

ries

usin

g th

e ca

taly

tic

refo

rmin

g pr

oces

s,Su

perf

und

site

s, f

orm

er

woo

d pr

eser

ving

ope

ra

tions

, oth

er in

dust

rial

si

tes,

pub

licly

ow

ned

trea

tmen

t wor

ks, a

ndag

ricu

ltura

l and

urb

anar

eas

(314

site

s).

B.N

ASQ

AN

Ref

er-

ence

Site

s (3

9 sit

es')

C. B

ackg

roun

d Si

tes

(35

site

s)

A.

Fish

.1.

Bas

ed o

n th

e as

sum

p

tion

that

fish

wou

ld in

te

grat

e pe

stic

ide

expo

sure

ov

er b

road

exp

anse

s of

time

and

spac

e, th

e or

ig

inal

fish

net

wor

k w

asco

mpo

sed

of 5

0 fix

ed

stat

ions

situ

ated

at k

ey

feat

ures

and

nod

alpo

ints

in th

e m

ajor

flow

in

g-w

ater

sys

tem

s of

th

e U

.S. a

nd th

e G

reat

La

kes

(coi

ncid

ent w

ith

USG

S N

ASQ

AN

site

s).

2. B

egin

ning

in 1

970,

the

num

ber o

f sta

tions

w

as d

oubl

ed (

i.e.,

to10

0),

but t

he c

olle

ctio

nfr

eque

ncy

was

hal

ved

(fal

l on

ly).

3. I

n 19

75, d

ue to

the

de

mis

e of

mos

t oth

eras

pect

s of

the

NPM

P,

17 a

dditi

onal

sta

tions

mor

e or

ient

ed to

the

ne

eds

of th

e U

SFW

Sw

ere

adde

d.

Som

e of

the

orig

inal

100

wer

e di

scon

tinue

d; 1

14st

atio

ns w

ere

sam

pled

from

197

6-86

. B

. St

arlin

gs:

Ran

dom

ly

sele

cted

loca

tions

with

in b

lock

s of

5de

gree

s la

titud

e/lo

ngitu

de i

n co

ntig

uous

Uni

ted

Stat

es.

C.

Duc

k W

ings

. N

o sp

ecif

ied

phys

ical

loca

tions

.[N

ote:

Sta

rlin

gs a

ndD

uck

Win

gs n

otdi

scus

sed f

urth

er in

this

com

pari

son

char

t.]

Illl^^

Site

s ar

e re

pres

enta

tive

of b

ays

or e

stua

ries

, an

d ar

e no

t nea

r kno

wn

hot s

pots

. Si

tes

are

revi

site

d on

a y

earl

yba

sis

once

est

ablis

hed.

Tis

sue

sam

ples

col

le

cted

fro

m f

ish

popu

la

tion

sam

plin

g si

tes,

i.e

., el

ectr

ofis

hing

or

lock

cham

ber

site

s.A

dditi

onal

site

s id

enti

fied

base

d on

his

tori

c in

form

atio

n or

lack

ther

eof.

Inpu

t rec

eive

d fr

om f

ish

and

wild

life

and

Stat

e he

alth

age

n

cies

.

Figu

re 7

.--C

ompa

riso

n ch

art o

f tiss

ue p

roto

cols

.-Con

tinue

d (p

age

2 of

15)

S

2

liiiji

iiiiii

iiiiil

iiilij

llisii

ilsi^

£££i

$ii;i

iliiii

lliiil

:£:

UN

IT O

FSA

MPL

ING

SAM

PLIN

GST

RA

TEG

Y

(Gen

eral

ap

proa

ch,

incl

udin

g sa

mpl

ety

pes

and

com

posi

ting)

iiliiB

lliiil

Blll

:;:;

:;:S

!:S

&*

:^:*

i:*

!£^^

Sam

plin

g re

ach,

as

defi

ned

for

ecol

ogic

alsu

rvey

s, p

lus

upst

ream

and

(or)

dow

nstr

eam

ar

eas

if n

eede

d to

obta

in s

ampl

e, a

s lo

ngas

the

re a

re n

o in

ter

veni

ng c

onta

min

ant

sour

ces.

(Se

e fig

. 1:

Prog

ram

Obj

ectiv

esan

d D

esig

n Fe

atur

es.)

Col

lect

a re

pres

enta

tive

com

posi

te s

ampl

e of

tar

ge

t tax

on (

taxa

) in

the

sam

plin

g re

ach,

nea

r th

e lo

catio

n of

sam

plin

gfo

r an

alys

es o

f w

ater

-co

lum

n an

d be

d-se

di

men

t che

mis

try

and

for

ecol

ogic

al s

tudi

es. A

t ea

ch s

ite, 2

typ

es o

fsa

mpl

es a

re c

olle

cted

:on

e fo

r ana

lyse

s of

trac

e el

emen

ts, a

nd

anot

her s

ampl

e fo

r or

gani

c co

mpo

unds

. The

sa

me

taxo

n is

col

lect

edat

as

man

y si

tes

as p

os

sibl

e w

ithin

a s

tudy

uni

t; na

tiona

l con

sist

ency

is

prov

ided

by

a na

tiona

llis

t of t

arge

t tax

a an

dde

cisi

on tr

ees

that

gui

dese

lect

ion

from

tha

t lis

tC

olle

ctio

n of

sam

ples

of m

ore

than

one

tax

on(p

refe

rabl

y a

fish

and

anin

vert

ebra

te t

axon

) is

sugg

este

d fo

r up

to 5

0pe

rcen

t of

the

Spat

ial

Dis

trib

utio

n Su

rvey

site

s.

^^^J^M

^S

^m

il^K

l::

i8iS

lifc

i^pii

i

Stre

am r

each

, 15

0 m

to50

0 m

(See

fig

. 1:

Pro

gr

am O

bjec

tives

and

Des

ign

Feat

ures

.)

A s

ubsa

mpl

e (o

r in

som

e ca

ses

the

entir

e sa

mpl

e) o

f a n

umbe

r of

indi

vidu

als

of a

targ

et

spec

ies

is c

hose

n fr

omth

e fin

al c

atch

for

that

stre

am re

ach,

or l

ake,

fo

r la

ter

com

posi

ting

and

anal

yses

. A

. Str

eam

s: P

rim

ary

Tar

get t

axa

are

smal

lfis

h, b

ecau

se t

hey

are

mor

e ub

iqui

tous

(co

m

pare

d w

ith la

rge

fish)

, ha

ve m

ore

repr

esen

ta

tive

valu

e fo

r co

ntam

ina

nts

leve

l in

a st

ream

re

ach,

and

are

mor

e re

le

vant

to w

ildlif

e co

nsum

er

s. S

econ

dary

Tar

get

taxa

(la

rge

fish)

tar

get

pred

ator

s (o

ver

botto

mfe

eder

s), s

houl

d ha

vegr

eate

r bi

oacc

umul

atio

nof

con

tam

inan

ts, a

nd a

rem

ore

rele

vant

to h

uman

cons

umer

s (f

isha

bilit

y).

B. L

akes

: Pr

imar

y Ta

rge

t tax

a ar

e pr

edat

ors,

and

Seco

ndar

y Ta

rget

taxa

are

bot

tom

fee

ders

.

^^^P

IIP

W^

Non

e pr

escr

ibed

Com

posi

te s

ampl

es o

ffi

sh f

illet

s (s

kin

on,

belly

fla

p re

tain

ed)

or

the

edib

le p

ortio

ns o

f sh

ellf

ish.

A.

Scre

enin

g St

udy:

O

ne c

ompo

site

sam

ple

of e

ach

of 2

targ

et s

pe

cies

at e

ach

scre

enin

gsi

te.

B. I

nten

sive

Stu

dy:

Whe

neve

r po

ssib

le,

the

targ

et s

peci

es i

n th

e sc

reen

ing

stud

y fo

und

conc

entr

atio

ns o

f one

or

mor

e of

the

targ

et a

na-

lyte

s sh

ould

be

resa

m-

pled

in th

e in

tens

ive

stud

y.

^liiiil

lllîili

i^^lll

llllil

iiiill

llilli

iii(li

ilit;i

iill

:?SS

SIi:i

;^^;

i%^^

:îS:

iiii^

:*s

Non

e pr

escr

ibed

Col

lect

are

pres

enta

tive

com

posi

te s

ampl

e of

ta

rget

tax

on f

or a

naly

se

s of

stu

died

pol

lut

ants

. Sa

mpl

e ty

pes

incl

ude:

Bot

tom

Fee

d

ers

(who

le b

ody)

and

G

ame

Spec

ies

(fill

et).

Bot

h sa

mpl

e ty

pes

ana

lyze

d fo

r al

l pol

luta

nts.

^^^^M

Hfy

Fish

: St

atio

n lo

catio

nsw

ere

loos

ely

defi

ned

and

gene

rally

wer

eco

mpo

sed

of a

reac

hor

, in

the

Gre

at L

akes

,a

larg

e op

en-w

ater

area

(e.

g.,

Sagi

naw

Bay

).

Sam

ples

of

fish

are

com

posi

ted

from

w

hole

, ad

ult

spec

i

men

s, a

s al

ike

in s

ize

and

wei

ght a

s po

ssib

le,

from

taxa

rep

rese

ntin

g 2

broa

dly-

defi

ned

cate

go

ries

p

reda

tory

and

botto

m-d

wel

ling

fish

es.

Stra

tegy

is b

ased

on

the

assu

mpt

ion

that

fis

h co

llect

ed f

rom

noda

l poi

nts

wou

ld

prov

ide

spac

e- a

nd

time-

inte

grat

ed a

ver

age

conc

entr

atio

ns o

fac

cum

ulat

ive

cont

ami

nant

s.

S:^

:^'il^

rt^

J:':^

fo'lfl

ii!

:i::ig

ii^lA

ll^lI

iflt

^.i

tltL

lia;:

;:

Non

e pr

escr

ibed

Col

lect

targ

et s

peci

esan

d se

dim

ent,

and

ana

ly

ze e

ach

sam

ple

for

the

list o

f ta

rget

ana

-ly

tes.

Con

sist

ent w

ith p

opu

latio

n st

udy

reac

hes

lock

cham

ber

or 5

00-

to 1

,000

-m "

elec

tro-

zone

s."

Col

lect

com

posi

te s

am

ples

of f

ish

from

the

follo

win

g gr

oups

: B

otto

m f

eede

r O

mni

vore

Pis

civo

re

Figu

re 7

.--C

ompa

riso

n ch

art o

f tiss

ue p

roto

coIs

.-Con

tinue

d (p

age

3 of

15)

RE

PLIC

AT

ION

A. D

uplic

ate

sam

ples

(of t

he s

ame

taxo

n) f

oror

gani

cs a

naly

ses

at 1

0pe

rcen

t of t

he s

ites.

B

. Thr

ee r

eplic

ate

sam

pl

es (

of th

e sa

me

taxo

n) f

or tr

ace

ele

men

t ana

lyse

s at

all

site

s (r

ecom

men

ded)

.C

. Thr

ee re

plic

ate

sam

pl

es (

of th

e sa

me

taxo

n) f

or b

oth

trac

e el

emen

ts a

nd o

rgan

icco

mpo

unds

rec

om

men

ded

at s

ites

sele

cted

for

tren

dsst

udie

s.

liil

iiii

ilil

liil

Rep

licat

ion

gene

rally

not d

one

sinc

e E

MA

Psa

mpl

e w

ill u

sual

lyco

nsis

t of m

ost o

r all

of

the

indi

vidu

als

of th

atsp

ecie

s fr

om a

giv

enst

ream

reac

h or

lake

.T

here

may

not

be

enou

gh ti

ssue

mas

s(s

trea

ms)

or

larg

e in

di

vidu

als

of e

qual

siz

e(l

akes

) for

2 s

ampl

es.

Rep

licat

ion

coul

d, a

ndpe

rhap

s sh

ould

, be

do

ne a

t tho

se lo

catio

nsw

here

the

catc

h of

ata

rget

spe

cies

is la

rge

enou

gh. R

epea

t vis

its,

how

ever

, ar

e be

ing

done

. Bec

ause

EM

AP

desi

gn is

pro

babi

listic

,ea

ch p

lot i

s a

repl

icat

ew

ithin

eac

h cl

ass

ofst

ream

(i.e

., 1s

t ord

er,

2nd

orde

r, 3r

d or

der)

.

A. S

cree

ning

Stu

dy:

Rep

licat

ion

stro

ngly

enco

urag

ed, b

utop

tiona

l. B

. Int

ensi

ve S

tudy

: U

SEPA

reco

mm

ends

that

Sta

tes

anal

yze

rep

licat

e co

mpo

site

sam

pl

es o

f eac

h ta

rget

spec

ies

at e

ach

sam

pl

ing

site

. All

repl

icat

eco

mpo

site

sam

ples

for a

give

n sa

mpl

ing

site

sh

ould

be

colle

cted

w

ithin

1 m

onth

of e

ach

othe

r so

that

tem

pora

l ch

ange

s in

con

tam

inan

tco

ncen

trat

ions

ass

oci

ated

with

the

repr

oduc

tiv

e cy

cle

of th

e ta

rget

spec

ies

are

min

imiz

ed.

(Als

o se

e Sa

mpl

e Si

ze

belo

w.)

:::£

:&:i

iJ5m

::^^

S:;:;

:;:;:-

^;^

SiS

^JlS

ijjS

Sî

iîi

ijij

iiii

tilS

iiS

ii:

No

field

rep

licat

esco

llect

edB

egin

ning

in 1

970,

one

fish

spec

ies

from

each

fis

h st

atio

n (u

su

ally

the

botto

m-d

wel

l

ing

spec

ies)

was

colle

cted

in d

uplic

ate.

Abo

ut 1

0 pe

rcen

t of

the

sam

ples

wer

e an

aly

zed

in d

uplic

ate.

Thr

ee s

tatio

ns p

er s

ite;

one

sam

ple

per

stat

ion.

Non

e sp

ecif

ied

(fun

din

g co

nstr

aine

d)

Figu

re 7

.--C

ompa

riso

n ch

art

of ti

ssue

pro

toco

ls.-C

onti

nued

(pa

ge 4

of

15)

SA

MP

LIN

GF

RE

QU

EN

CY

SA

MP

LIN

GS

EA

SO

N (

and

othe

r te

mpo

ral

cons

ider

atio

ns)

:i8S$

i:;$8

$iS^

A. O

ccur

renc

e Su

rvey

:O

nce;

usu

ally

don

e du

rin

g th

e ye

ar p

rece

ding

th

e 3-

year

inte

nsiv

e pe

riod

(cyc

le r

epea

ted

ever

y 9

year

s).

B. S

patia

l Dis

trib

utio

nSu

rvey

: O

nce;

usu

ally

done

dur

ing

the

first

ye

ar o

f the

3-y

ear

inte

n

sive

per

iod

(cyc

lere

peat

ed e

very

9ye

ars)

. M

ay in

clud

e a

seco

nd s

ampl

e fo

r a

subs

et o

f site

s pr

evi

ousl

y sa

mpl

ed f

or th

eO

ccur

renc

e Su

rvey

.C

. Tre

nds

site

s: O

nce

each

yea

r rec

omm

ende

dfo

r tre

nds

site

s

Lat

e su

mm

er o

r ea

rly

fall

(bas

e-fl

ow c

ondi

tio

ns p

refe

rred

; av

oid

spaw

ning

per

iods

of

targ

et ta

xa)

SSSS

SS^

MlS

iiyii

liis

illi

aiii

i^^^

iVi^

îî

i^^C

Fci

îii

i^^

::::

ÛIE

:::)

lta.

^^::

::.:

fi¥«

*CIa

>::

::

Onc

e ea

ch y

ear,

duri

ngth

e in

dex

peri

od (

Als

ose

e fig

. 1:

Pro

gram

O

bjec

tives

and

Des

ign

Feat

ures

.)

Inde

x pe

riod

cho

sen

from

ove

rlap

of b

est

sam

plin

g pe

riod

s fo

r ea

ch i

ndic

ator

; fo

rst

ream

s, t

his

is us

ually

duri

ng b

ase-

flow

con

di

tions

in th

e sp

ring.

lifl

llli

iili

iill

il

A. S

£ree

nuig

_Sfti

dx:

Bie

nnia

l scr

eeni

ng o

fw

ater

bod

ies

whe

re

com

mer

cial

, rec

re

atio

nal,

or s

ubsi

sten

ceha

rves

ting

is c

om

mon

ly p

ract

iced

.B

. Int

ensi

ve S

tudy

: A

s de

term

ined

by

resu

ltsof

scr

eeni

ng s

tudy

.

A. S

cree

ning

Stu

dy:

Sam

plin

g sh

ould

be

cond

ucte

d du

ring

the

peri

od w

hen

the

targ

et

spec

ies

is m

ost f

re

quen

tly h

arve

sted

, pre

fer

ably

lat

e su

mm

er to

early

fal

l.B

. Int

ensi

ve S

tudy

:Sh

ould

be

cond

ucte

ddu

ring

the

sam

e pe

riod

or p

erio

ds d

urin

gw

hich

scr

eeni

ng s

tud

ies

wer

e co

nduc

ted

(i.e.

,w

hen

the

targ

et s

peci

esar

e m

ost f

requ

ently

har

ve

sted

for c

onsu

mpt

ion)

and

shou

ld b

e co

ndu

cted

pre

fera

bly

with

in 1

yea

r of

the

scre

enin

g st

udie

s.

One

-tim

e on

ly s

am

plin

g (1

988)

Avo

id s

paw

ning

and

mig

ratio

n pe

riod

s.

^^ft

ftH

pil

ll

Fish

wer

e co

llect

edsp

ring

and

fall

ever

yye

ar fr

om 1

967-

69.

From

197

0-74

, the

y w

ere

colle

cted

eac

hfa

ll. F

rom

197

6-19

86,

fish

wer

e co

llect

edev

ery

othe

r ye

ar.

Beg

inni

ng i

n 19

70,

fish

wer

e co

llect

ed in

the

fall.

:î:y

-:^:

^:*:

::::;;::

::::::;:

:::<j::::

iM;i

::::::::

i:;:::

::::::::

::::N

atio

nal S

tatu

s

Ann

ually

for

Ben

thic

Surv

eilla

nce

and

Mus

se

l Wat

ch P

roje

cts

Bas

ed o

n w

ater

tem

per

atur

e; t

here

fore

, sam

pl

ing

time

varie

s ar

ound

the

cou

ntry

.

Onc

e ea

ch y

ear

Late

sum

mer

Figu

re 7

. Com

pari

son

char

t of t

issu

e pr

otoc

ols.-

-Con

tinue

d (p

age

5 of

15)

i:J:;:

;:;:;:

;:;:;:

^:;:;:

;:;:;:

;:;:;:

;:;:;S

::::S

:SSj

x;:g;:

j:

SAM

PLE

GE

AR

SAM

PLE

SIZ

E

:;;;g:

;j;:;:

;:;:$^

As

nece

ssar

y to

col

lect

suff

icie

nt n

umbe

r an

dm

ass

of s

peci

men

s of

targ

et ta

xa, i

nclu

ding

:el

ectro

fishi

ng a

ppar

atu

s, se

ines

, cla

m r

akes

,an

d fo

rcep

s.

A. M

ollu

sks:

10

orm

ore

indi

vidu

als

1 . T

race

ele

men

ts:

min

imum

5 g

wet

w

eigh

t sof

t tis

sues

(l

Og

optim

al)

2. O

rgan

ics:

Min

im

um 5

0 g

wet

w

eigh

t sof

t tis

sues

(1

00 g

opt

imal

) B

. Aqu

atic

inse

cts

(trac

e el

emen

ts o

nly)

:20

or m

ore

indi

vidu

al

s; m

inim

um 5

g w

etw

eigh

t (10

g o

ptim

al)

C. F

ish;.

5 or

mor

e in

di

vidu

als

(8 o

ptim

al)

1. T

race

ele

men

ts(li

vers

): m

inim

um

5 g

wet

wei

ght (

of

liver

s) (

10 g

opt

i m

al)

2. O

rgan

ics

(who

lefis

h): m

inim

um

50 g

wet

wei

ght

(100

g o

ptim

al)

D. A

quat

ic p

lant

s (tr

ace

elem

ents

onl

y):

apic

al 5

cm

of s

ever

al

indi

vidu

al p

lant

s; m

ini

mum

5 g

wet

wei

ght

(lO

g op

timal

)

§?iS

^^!^

iii;^

p*!^

S:§i

$

Mos

tly e

lect

rofis

hing

;se

inin

g in

som

e ca

ses

(als

o se

e se

ctio

n on

Fish

).

Fish

(st

ream

pilo

tst

udy)

Sm

all f

ish (

prim

ary

targ

et):

20 to

100

sm

all

fish

(abo

ve a

cer

tain

m

inim

um le

ngth

) per

com

posi

te

Lar

ge fi

sh (

seco

ndar

y ta

rget

, whe

re a

vail

ab

le):

3 to

5 in

divi

dual

s pe

r co

mpo

site

A. S

tream

s (p

ilot

stud

y):

20 to

100

sm

all

fish

(prim

ary

targ

et) a

re

colle

cted

abo

ve a

cer

ta

in m

inim

um le

ngth

; w

here

ava

ilabl

e, 3

to 5

la

rge

fish

(sec

onda

ry

targ

et)

are

also

col

le

cted

.B

. Lak

es: 3

to 5

larg

e in

divi

dual

s of

one

pr

edat

or (

prim

ary

tar

get)

or b

otto

m f

eede

r (s

econ

dary

targ

et)

spe

ci

es a

bove

a c

erta

in

min

imum

leng

th.

llll

ij|^

^pS

i|£il

ili

:-:SS

5S:;i

(^^'

'>i^

iiS

;ii!

ii:;

Vi:

:SS

::S

S

::::;:::

;::::;:

:;::

:!(i

:;|!i

i:J;

l^^^

^jf:

:::::::

::::::::

:::::

Not

spe

cifie

d ex

cept

that

che

mic

al m

etho

dssh

ould

not

be

used

.M

etho

ds s

houl

d si

mu

late

spo

rt, s

ubsi

sten

ce,

or c

omm

erci

al f

ishi

ngpr

actic

es u

sed

in th

est

udy

area

.

USE

PA d

oes

not r

ec

omm

end

one

set o

fsa

mpl

e si

ze re

quire

m

ents

(e.

g., n

umbe

r of

repl

icat

e co

mpo

site

sa

mpl

es p

er si

te a

nd th

enu

mbe

r of i

ndiv

idua

lspe

r com

posi

te s

ampl

e)

for a

ll fis

h co

ntam

inan

t m

onito

ring

stud

ies.

R

athe

r, U

SEPA

pre

se

nts

a m

ore

gene

ral

appr

oach

to s

ampl

esi

ze d

eter

min

atio

n th

atis

both

sci

entif

ical

lyde

fens

ible

and

cos

tef

fect

ive.

At e

ach

site,

St

ates

mus

t det

erm

ine

the

appr

opria

te n

um

ber o

f rep

li cat

e co

m

posi

te s

ampl

es a

nd

indi

vidu

als

per c

om

posi

te s

ampl

e ba

sed

on:

Site

-spe

cific

est

ima

tio

ns o

f the

pop

ulat

ion

varia

nce

of th

e ta

rget

an

alyt

e co

ncen

tratio

n F

ishe

ries

man

age

m

ent c

onsi

dera

tions

S

tatis

tical

pow

er c

on

side

ratio

ns

llil

iill

iill

llli

iii8

lcW

8BW

8i^

As

nece

ssar

y to

col

lect

suff

icie

nt n

umbe

r an

dm

ass

of s

peci

men

s of

targ

et ta

xon.

Fish

3 to

5 in

divi

dual

s(5

00 g

wet

wei

ght s

am

ple

mas

s)

lill

llli

iiil

iili

ii^^

iBfi^

ttiorti

foirii

iff^-

:i;|i

lil|i

;||ls

|Fi

sh c

ould

be

capt

ured

by a

ny m

eans

exc

ept

pois

onin

g (w

hich

was

rela

xed

to a

llow

the

use

of ro

teno

ne).

Col

le

ctor

s w

ere

war

ned

toav

oid

the

use

of c

hem

ica

lly tr

eate

d (i.

e.,

tarr

ed)

nets

.

Fish

: 5

who

le a

dult

spec

im

ens,

as a

like

in s

ize

and

wei

ght a

s pos

sibl

e;

com

posi

te s

ampl

e to

wei

gh a

t lea

st 1

poun

d,no

t to

exce

ed 2

5 po

unds

, with

no

indi

vi

dual

spe

cim

en

wei

ghin

g m

ore

than

5po

unds

.

Nat

iona

l Sta

tus

Illlil

llllli

iiilll

::;:i:

;;;:i:

;;;:;;

j;:|;i|

^tt^^

;|;;|:i;

;g:

Fis

h: v

ario

us tr

awls

. B

ival

ves:

dre

dge

orby

han

d, d

epen

ding

on w

ater

dep

th.

Sed

imen

t: gr

ab s

am

pler

s or

box

cor

ers.

A. M

usse

l Wat

ch:

3 tis

su

e co

mpo

site

sam

ples

per s

ite. N

umbe

r of

spec

imen

s pe

r com

pos

ite

var

ies

with

the

size

of

the

anim

als

-- us

ual

ly: 1. O

rgan

ics

anal

yses

: 20

oys

ters

or 3

0 m

usse

ls

2. E

lem

enta

l ana

ly

ses:

20 o

yste

rs o

r30

mus

sels

3. G

onad

al in

dex:

10

spec

imen

s4.

His

topa

thol

ogy:

10 s

peci

men

s B.

Fis

h: 3

0 fis

h liv

ers.

Each

live

r is

split

into

sa

mpl

es fo

r met

als,

orga

nics

, his

topa

thol

- og

y, a

ryl h

ydro

carb

on

hydr

oxyl

ase

(AH

H)

activ

ity a

nd D

NA

ad

duct

s. Th

e va

rious

su

bsam

ples

of t

he li

vers

ar

e co

mpo

site

d fo

r or

gani

c an

alys

is.

If Ih

e liv

ers

are

larg

e en

ough

, in

divi

dual

met

al a

naly

sis

is d

one.

liliî

iiî^l

lixiil

îi

Ele

ctro

fish

ing

Loc

kcha

mbe

r ro

ten

one

(loc

kcha

mbe

rpr

ogra

m c

urre

ntly

on h

old;

no

colle

ctio

ns)

Fish

5 t

o 10

indi

vidu

als

per

com

posi

te

Spe

cies

spe

cifi

c S

mal

lest

fis

h no

les

sth

an 7

5 pe

rcen

t of t

otal

leng

th o

f la

rges

t fis

h R

ight

-sid

e fil

lets

onl

y

Figu

re 7

.--C

ompa

riso

n ch

art o

f tiss

ue p

roto

col-

Con

tinu

ed (p

age

6 of

15)

TA

RG

ET

TA

XA

Prio

ritiz

ed g

roup

s of

ta

xa:

A. T

race

ele

men

ts:

1. C

orbi

cula

flu-

m

inea

(A

siat

ic

clam

) [s

oft t

issu

es]

2. A

quat

ic in

sect

s (i

mm

atur

es)

3. F

ish

(live

rs)

4. A

quat

ic p

lant

s B

. Org

anic

com

-

1. C

orbi

cula

flu-

m

ine a

(A

siat

ic

clam

) [s

oft t

issu

es]

2. F

ish

(who

le f

ish)

NA

tiona

l Tar

get T

axa

(NA

TT):

Cor

bicu

la f

lum

inea

(A

siat

ic c

lam

) B

. Aqu

atic

inse

cts

(im

mat

ures

):T

rich

opte

ra

Hyd

rops

yche

sp.

B

rach

ycen

trus

sp.

L

imne

philu

s sp

.C

hiro

nom

idae

C

hiro

nom

us s

p.

Plec

opte

ra

Perl

idae

Pe

rlod

idae

Pt

eron

arcy

idae

co

ntin

ued

Dep

ends

on

ecor

egio

n t

axa

will

usu

ally

con

si

st o

f mem

bers

of t

he

grou

ps s

how

n be

low

: A

. Str

eam

s 1.

Pri

mar

y ta

rget

gr

oup

Cyp

rini

dae

(ins

ec

tivor

ous)

Pe

rcid

ae (

dart

ers)

C

ottid

ae

2. S

econ

dary

targ

et

grou

p Sa

lmon

idae

C

entr

arch

idae

C

atos

tom

idae

Ic

talu

rida

e C

ypri

nus

carp

io

(Com

mon

car

p)

B. L

akes

1.

Pri

mar

y ta

rget

gr

oup

Salm

onid

ae (

trou

t)

Mic

ropt

erus

sal

mo-

ides

(L

arge

mou

th

bass

) M

icro

pter

us d

olo-

m

ieui

(Sm

all-

m

outh

bas

s)

Eso

cida

e Pe

rca

flav

esce

ns(Y

ello

w p

erch

) C

entr

arch

idae

2.

Sec

onda

ry ta

rget

gr

oup

Cat

osto

mid

ae

Icta

luri

dae

î'&

.&'&

'i'&

'&^'

ijj^

^

^:S

^S

^Î^

iîi

iiîa

^:;

:-^:

?SS:

:::

*::::

:::%

:::ilS

:*:W

jM::^

f:l:¥

::::::

::::::

v::

::::::::

::::::::

:::xy^

:*^3

i^!i

if&

:-i::

:v:::

:x:>:

:::::x

;: ;:;

:i:i:;

:!:;:

B;:i

(:l|J

i^|?

^fc:

*;:;:

i:;:;:

i:i:;:

S:

i^:^

:^:::

-:':::

^!^1!^

!^^:'^

1:/^'

: ::

:^:^

A. R

ecom

men

ded

Tar

ge

t Spe

cies

for

Inla

nd

Fres

h W

ater

s:

(Whi

te b

ass)

M

icro

pter

us s

alm

oide

s(L

arge

mou

th b

ass)

Po

mox

is n

igro

mac

ula-

tus

(Bla

ck c

rapp

ie)

Pom

oxis

ann

ular

is(W

hite

cra

ppie

) Pe

rca

flave

scen

s (Y

el

low

per

ch)

(Wal

leye

) C

vprin

us c

arpi

o ( C

om

mon

car

p)

soni

(W

hite

suc

ker)

(Cha

nnel

cat

fish)

Pv

lodi

ctis

oliv

aris

(Fla

thea

d ca

tfish

) Es

ox lu

cius

(N

orth

ern

pike

) Sa

lvel

inus

nam

avcu

sh(L

ake

trout

) O

ncor

hvnc

hus

mvk

iss

(Rai

nbow

trou

t) Sa

lmo

trutta

(Bro

wn

trout

)

B. R

ecom

men

ded

Targ

et

Spec

ies

for G

reat

Lak

es

Wat

ers:

M

oron

e ch

rvso

tis(W

hite

bas

s)

Mic

ropt

erus

dol

omie

ui(S

mal

lmou

th b

ass)

St

izos

tedi

on v

itreu

m(W

aUey

e)

co

ntin

ued

lillll

iiiili

iillll

:

Fish

:B

otto

m F

eede

rs

Cvp

rinu

s ca

roio

(Com

mon

car

p)

Cat

osto

mus

com

mer

-so

ni (

Whi

te s

ucke

r)

Icta

luru

s pu

ncta

tus

(Cha

nnel

cat

fish

)

Gam

e Sp

ecie

s

Sele

cted

by

USE

PA

Reg

iona

l or S

tate

Per

so

nnel

. Sug

gest

ed S

pe

cies

incl

ude:

M

oron

e ch

ryso

ps

(Whi

te b

ass)

Es

ox l

uciu

s (N

orth

er

n pi

ke)

Stiz

oste

dion

vitr

eum

(Wal

leye

) M

icro

pter

us s

alm

oid

es (

Lar

gem

outh

ba

ss)

Pom

oxis

sp.

(C

rapp

ie)

lillll

ilalii

illlil

lilii

lillli

lliili

illll

;lll

|lll

lll|li

Fish

.Fi

sh c

olle

ctor

s w

ere

prov

ided

with

a li

st o

f pr

efer

red

taxa

with

in

each

cat

egor

y (p

reda

to

ry o

r bo

ttom

-dw

ell

in

g) o

rgan

ized

by

habi

tat (

cold

-, co

ol-,

or w

arm

-wat

er)

from

w

hich

to s

elec

t. T

he

mos

t fre

quen

tly c

ol

lect

ed ta

xa in

clud

ed:

1. P

reda

tors

ides

(L

arge

mou

th

bass

) M

icro

pter

us d

olo

mie

ui (

Smal

lmou

th

bass

) Pe

rca

flave

scen

s (Y

el

low

per

ch)

Stiz

Qst

cdio

n vi

treu

m

(Wal

leye

) St

izos

tedi

on

cana

dens

e (S

auge

r)

Salv

elin

us n

amav

cu

sh (

Lake

tro

ut)

2. B

otto

m d

wel

lers

C

ypri

nus

carp

io

(Com

mon

car

p)

Icta

luru

s pu

ncta

tus

(Cha

nnel

cat

fish

) C

atos

tom

us s

p. (

suck

er

s)

Nat

iona

l Sta

tus

li!;il

|i||ii

iiiili

||;

llll

lili

ilil

ilil

ll

Ill

ll^^

A. M

usse

l Wat

ch:

Mvt

ilus

edul

is (

Blu

eM

usse

l) M

. cal

ifom

ianu

s (C

ali-

forn

ian

Mus

sel)

Cra

ssos

trea

virg

inic

a(A

mer

ican

Oys

ter)

O

stre

a sa

ndvi

cens

is(H

awai

ian

Oys

ter)

B. B

enth

ic S

urve

illan

ce.

Ari

us f

elis

(H

ardh

ead

Cat

fish)

C

heilo

trem

a sa

turn

um(B

lack

Cro

aker

) C

oree

onus

sar

dine

lla(L

east

Cis

co)

Cvn

osci

on a

rena

rius

(San

d Se

atro

ut)

Cvn

osci

on n

ebul

osus

(S

potte

d Se

atro

ut)

Gen

vone

mus

line

atus

(W

hite

Cro

aker

) H

ippo

glos

soid

es e

lass

- od

on (

Flat

head

Sol

e)

Hyp

sops

ctta

gut

tula

ta

(Dia

mon

d Tu

rbot

) L

agod

on rh

ombo

ides

(P

infis

h)

Lei

osto

mus

xan

thur

us

(Spo

t) Lo

pido

psct

ta b

ilinc

ala

(Roc

k So

le)

Lep

toco

ttus

arm

atus

(P

acifi

c St

agho

rn

Scul

pin)

L

irna

nda

aspe

ra (Y

el-

low

fin S

ole)

L

iops

etta

gla

cial

is

(Arc

tic F

loun

der)

c

ontin

ued

HI

Fis

h.

1. B

otto

m f

eede

r C

ypri

nus

carp

io

(Com

mon

car

p)

2. O

mni

vore

Ic

talu

rus

punc

tatu

s (C

hann

el c

atfi

sh)

3. P

isci

vore

--

one

of

the

follo

win

g:

Stiz

oste

dion

ca

nade

nse

(Sau

ger)

M

icro

pter

us d

olo

m

ieui

(Sm

allm

outh

ba

ss)

Stiz

oste

dion

vitr

eum

(WaU

eye)

M

oron

e ch

ryso

ps

(Whi

te b

ass)

a

nd

hybr

ids

(Whi

te b

ass

X s

trip

ed b

ass)

M

icro

pter

us s

alm

o

ides

(L

arge

mou

th

bass

)

Sele

ctio

n us

ually

sub

je

ct to

ava

ilabi

lity.

Figu

re 7

.--C

ompa

riso

n ch

art o

f tis

sue

prot

ocoI

s.-C

ontin

ued

(pag

e 7

of 1

5)

TA

RG

ET

TA

XA

(con

tinue

d)C

. Fis

h:C

yprin

us c

arpi

o (C

arp)

C

atos

tom

us c

omm

er-

soni

(Whi

te s

ucke

r)

Cat

osto

mus

cat

osto

- m

us (

Long

nose

su

cker

) C

atos

tom

us m

acro

- ch

eilu

s (L

arge

- sc

ale

suck

er)

Icta

luru

s pu

ncta

tus

(Cha

nnel

cat

fish)

M

icro

pter

us s

alm

o-

ides

(La

rgem

outh

ba

ss)

Lepo

mis

mac

roch

i- ru

s (B

lueg

ill)

Salv

elin

us f

ontin

alis

(Bro

ok tr

out)

Salm

o tru

tta (B

row

ntro

ut)

D. V

ascu

lar p

lant

s:

Po ta

mo g

e ton

sp.

(P

ondw

eed)

H

ydril

la v

ertic

illat

a (H

ydril

la)

Elod

ea sp

. (W

ater

- w

eed)

MH

HiB

i^l^

^^j^

P^^

P^

Gre

at L

akes

Wat

ers T

arge

t Sp

ecie

s (c

ontin

ued)

: C

vpri

nus

carp

io (

Com

m

on c

arp)

C

atos

tom

us c

omm

er-

soni

(W

hite

suc

ker)

Ic

talu

rus

punc

tatu

s(C

hann

el c

atfis

h)

Eso

x m

asqu

inon

gv(M

uske

llung

e)

Onc

orhv

nchu

s ts

chaw

-yt

scha

(C

hino

ok

salm

on)

Salv

elin

us n

amav

cush

(Lak

e tr

out)

O

ncor

hvnc

hus

mvk

iss

(Rai

nbow

trou

t)

Salm

o tr

utta

(B

row

ntr

out)

Oth

er L

ists

of T

arge

t Sp

ecie

s A

vaila

ble

for

the

follo

win

g E

stua

ries

an

d M

arin

e W

ater

s:

Nor

thea

st A

tlant

ic

(Mai

ne th

roug

h C

on

nect

icut

) M

id- A

tlant

ic (N

ew Y

ork

thro

ugh

Virg

inia

) S

outh

east

Atla

ntic

(N

orth

Car

olin

a th

roug

h Fl

orid

a)

Gul

f of M

exic

o (W

est

Coa

st o

f Flo

rida t

hrou

gh

Texa

s)

Sou

ther

n C

alifo

rnia

(S

anta

Mon

ica

Bay

to

Tiju

ana

Estu

ary)

P

acifi

c N

orth

wes

t (A

lask

a th

roug

h O

re

gon)

N

orth

ern

Cal

iforn

ia

(Kla

mat

h R

iver

thro

ugh

Mor

ro B

ay)

iBB

HH

$l

Mic

ropo

goni

as u

ndul

a-tu

s (A

tlant

ic C

roak

er)

Myo

xoce

phal

us o

cto-

de

cem

spin

osus

(L

ongh

om S

culp

in)

Myo

xoce

phal

us q

uad-

ri

com

is (

Four

-hor

n Sc

ulpi

n)

Para

labr

ax n

ebul

ifer

(B

arre

d Sa

nd B

ass)

Pa

ralic

hthy

s ca

lifom

i-

cus

(Cal

ifor

nia

Hal

i

but)

Pa

roph

rys

vetu

lus

(Eng

h'sh

Sol

e)

Phan

erod

on f

urca

tus

(Whi

te S

urf P

erch

) Pl

atic

hthy

s st

ella

tus

(Sta

rry

Flou

nder

) Pl

euro

icht

hys

ritte

ri

(Spo

tted

Tur

bot)

Pl

euro

nich

thvs

ver

tica-

lis (

Hom

yhea

d Tu

r

bot)

Po

goni

as c

rom

is

(Bla

ck D

rum

) Ps

eudo

pleu

rone

ctes

am

eric

anus

(W

inte

r Fl

ound

er)

Mor

one

amer

ican

a (W

hite

Per

ch)

Scia

enop

s oc

ella

tus

(Red

Dru

m)

Scop

htha

lmus

aqu

osus

(Win

dow

pane

Flo

un

der)

Se

riph

us p

olitu

s (Q

ueen

fish

) Sy

mph

urus

atr

icau

da

(Cal

ifor

nia

Tong

ue-

fish)

Bi

Figu

re 7

.--C

ompa

riso

n ch

art o

f tis

sue

prot

ocol

s.-C

ontin

ued

(pag

e 8

of 1

5)

LE

VE

L O

F T

AX

ON

OM

Y

TA

RG

ET

AN

AL

YT

ES

FO

RC

HE

MIC

AL

AN

AL

YSE

S

FIE

LD

C

OL

LE

CT

ION

ST

EPS

Spec

ies

A. C

hlor

inat

ed o

rgan

icco

mpo

unds

:l.O

rgan

ochl

orin

epe

stic

ides

2.

Pol

ychl

orin

ated

bi

phen

yls

(tot

al;

plan

to a

dd c

onge

ne

rs)

3. D

ioxi

ns/f

uran

s(l

imite

d nu

mbe

r of

site

s)B

. Pol

vcvc

lic a

rom

atic

hydr

ocar

bons

(in

vert

ebr

ates

onl

y)C

. Maj

or m

etal

s an

d tr

ace

elem

ents

Not

e: C

raw

ford

and

L

uom

a (1

993)

inc

lude

s a

char

t com

pari

ng ta

r

get a

naly

tes

of n

atio

nal

prog

ram

s.

As

nece

ssar

y to

obt

ain

an a

dequ

ate

sam

ple.

Spec

ies

A. C

hlor

inat

ed o

rgan

icco

mpo

unds

:1.

Org

anoc

hlor

ine

pest

icid

es

2. P

olyc

hlor

inat

ed

biph

enyl

s (i

ndiv

id

ual P

CB

con

ge

ners

, inc

ludi

ngco

plan

ars,

and

tota

l)B

. Maj

or_m

etal

s an

dtr

ace

elem

ents

: A

g. A

l.A

s, C

d, C

r, C

u, F

e, H

g,N

i, Pb

, Se,

Sn,

Zn

C. O

ther

chl

orin

ated

or

gani

cs a

nd m

etal

s-m

ay b

e ad

ded

base

d up

on re

gion

al c

once

rns

In a

ccor

danc

e w

ith

field

pro

toco

l for

fis

h co

mm

unity

col

lect

ions

(s

ee fi

g. 2

).

SSB

SSiji

îiji

jiifi

iiiiJ

iJJj

S^

::::::::

:::::::W

:W::f

l::!

w4

^:!r

wS

:fe:w

:w:::

:

Spec

ies

A. C

hlor

inat

ed o

rgan

icco

mpo

unds

:1.

Org

anoc

hlor

ine

pest

icid

es

2. P

olyc

hlor

inat

ed

biph

enyl

s: t

otal

PC

B c

onge

ners

3. D

ioxi

ns/f

uran

sB

. Org

anop

hosp

hate

pest

icid

eC

. Chl

orop

heno

xv h

er-

Hif

iHpc

D. P

olvc

vclic

aro

mat

ichy

droc

arbo

nsE

. Maj

or m

etal

s an

dtr

fir*

^ pl

pfT

ipnf

rQ*

c'H

rT

o

and

Se o

nly

Col

lect

spe

cim

ens

by

activ

e or

pas

sive

mea

ns

that

will

ens

ure

chem

i

cal i

nteg

rity

of t

he s

am

ple.

Spec

ies

A. C

hlor

inat

ed o

rgan

icco

mpo

unds

:1.

Org

anoc

hlor

ine

pest

icid

es

2. P

olyc

hlor

inat

ed

biph

enyl

s 3.

Dio

xins

/fur

ans

4. O

ther

B. P

olvc

vclic

aro

mat

ichy

droc

arbo

ns:

Bip

he-

nyl o

nly

C. M

ajor

met

als

and

trac

e el

emen

ts:

Hg

only

As

nece

ssar

y to

obt

ain

an a

dequ

ate

sam

ple.

||:lll

l|il|i

l|iii|

j!li||

jl

lill

liii

ilil

ll;!

iHiii

iiiiii

iiiiii

iU

sual

ly to

spe

cies

; ex

cept

ion

was

the

red-

ho

rses

(su

cker

s of

the

genu

s M

oxos

tom

a)

Fish

.A

. Chl

orin

ated

org

anic

com

poun

ds:

1. O

rgan

ochl

orin

e pe

s

ticid

es

2. P

olyc

hlor

inat

ed

biph

enyl

s (s

elec

ted

Aro

clor

s an

d to

tal

PCB

's)3.

Oth

erB

. Maj

or m

etal

s an

dtr

ace

elem

ents

: A

s, C

d,C

u, P

b, H

g, S

e, a

nd Z

non

ly

The

num

ber

of a

na

lyte

s va

ried

, but

gen

er

ally

inc

reas

ed o

ver

time.

Res

idue

s in

10

perc

ent o

f the

sam

ples

w

ere

conf

irm

ed b

y G

C/M

S.

As

nece

ssar

y to

obt

ain

an a

dequ

ate

sam

ple.

|§|||

|iili

:i|||

i|li

Spec

ies

A. C

hlor

inat

ed o

rgan

icco

mpo

unds

:1.

Org

anoc

hlor

ine

pest

icid

es

2. P

olyc

hlor

inat

ed

biph

enyl

s an

d co

n

gene

rsB

. Pol

vcvc

lic a

rom

atic

com

poun

dsC

. Maj

or m

etal

s an

dtra

ce e

lem

ents

D. T

ribu

tyl t

in s

peci

es

As

nece

ssar

y de

pend

in

g on

site

con

ditio

ns.

ll^p|j

iiÎil

;;iip

:pili

:;::;:

:;||||:

io^|

!!i|:

^5|l;

;;;;;;

:

Spec

ies

A. C

hlor

inat

ed o

rgan

icco

mpo

unds

:1.

Org

anoc

hlor

ine

pest

icid

es

2. P

olyc

hlor

inat

ed

biph

enyl

s B

. Pol

vcvc

lic a

rom

atic

com

poun

ds:

infr

eque

nt(e

very

3 y

ears

)

trace

ele

men

ts:

Cd,

Pb,

and

Hg

only

Non

e pr

ovid

ed

Figu

re 7

.--C

ompa

riso

n ch

art

of ti

ssue

pro

toco

ls.-C

ontin

ued

(pag

e 9

of 1

5)

FIE

LD

PRO

CE

SSIN

GST

EPS

SiSS

SSî

jSji^

iill

ippi|pii

i|pll

|

A. C

orbi

cula

:1.

Rin

se in

am

bien

tst

ream

wat

er.

2. H

old

in s

tream

wat

er a

t 10±

2°C

for

24 h

ours

.3.

Mea

sure

she

llle

ngth

. 4.

Pla

ce e

ntire

org

an

ism

in c

onta

iner

. 5.

Lab

el; f

reez

e on

dry

ic

e; s

hip

to la

bora

to

ry.

B. A

quat

ic in

sect

s: 1.

Rem

ove

inse

cts

from

cas

es if

nec

es

sary

. 2.

Rin

se in

am

bien

t st

ream

wat

er.

3. H

old

in s

tream

wat

er a

t 10±

2 °C

for

4 to

6 h

ours

.4.

Pla

ce in

labe

led

bag;

fre

eze

on d

ryic

e in

the

field

.5.

Iden

tify

spec

imen

s an

d se

lect

targ

et

spec

ies.

6. C

ount

indi

vidu

als;

obta

in c

ompo

site

wet

wei

ght;

re-

freez

e; s

hip

to la

bo

rato

ry.

C. p

ish

liver

s (tr

ace

ele

men

ts}:

1. C

aptu

re a

nd s

acri

fice

fish.

2. R

inse

usi

ng a

mbi

en

t wat

er.

3. O

btai

n to

tal l

engt

h(m

m) a

nd w

eigh

t(g

).~

cont

inue

d

K;îi

:**

'fei

^;:^

BI?*

i:i;:ii

*^:&

J^ll

il^^ll

^K

-:*

:^,!

:^!^

!)!:

;:;

1. S

ubsa

mpl

e ob

tain

edfr

om fi

sh c

omm

unity

sam

ple.

2. S

ampl

e (w

hole

fis

hon

ly)

wra

pped

in a

lu

min

um f

oil,

labe

led,

put i

n zi

p-lo

ck b

ag.

3. F

reez

e on

dry

ice

(or

plac

e on

ice)

in f

ield

; sh

ip to

labo

rato

ry.

||1|1

||||||||||||

llii

;lii

i|^^^

^pii

i|ili

ii

A. F

ish:

1. Id

entif

y to

spe

cies

.2.

Rin

se in

am

bien

tw

ater

.3.

Mea

sure

tota

l bod

yle

ngth

.4.

Det

erm

ine

sex

if

poss

ible

(op

tiona

l).

5. I

dent

ify m

orph

o

logi

cal a

bnor

mal

itie

s (o

ptio

nal).

6.

Wra

p in

divi

dual

ly

in h

eavy

alu

min

um

foil.

7. C

ool o

n ic

e im

me

di

atel

y (u

se d

ry ic

e if

to b

e he

ld fo

rm

ore

than

24

hour

s).

8. S

hip

to la

bora

tory

.

B. S

hellf

ish:

1. Id

entif

y to

spe

cies

. 2.

Scr

ub w

ith n

ylon

or n

atur

al fi

ber

brus

h.3.

Rin

se in

am

bien

tw

ater

.

co

ntin

ued

iHÎ

^Hfl

^

1. C

aptu

re a

nd sa

crifi

cefis

h.2.

Obt

ain

tota

l len

gth

and

wei

ght.

3. W

rap

fish

in a

lum

inu

m f

oil,

dull

side

next

to f

ish.

4. P

lace

in p

last

ic b

ag;

free

ze o

n dr

y ic

e;

ship

to la

bora

tory

.

|||l!li

||iiiH

i|j|il

i|i:i;

A.

Fish

:1.

Sor

t and

iden

tify

fish.

2. G

roup

fis

h in

to s

am

ples

by

spec

ies.

3. R

inse

in a

mbi

ent

wat

er.

4. W

eigh

and

mea

sure

sp

ecim

ens.

5.

Wra

p in

alu

min

umfo

il (s

hiny

sid

e ou

t).

6. P

lace

sam

ple

in

poly

ethy

lene

bag

.7.

Bag

toge

ther

the

5 sp

ecim

ens

com

pris

in

g a

sam

ple.

8. C

hill

sam

ple;

then

free

ze fo

r sto

rage

and

ship

men

t.

Nat

iona

l Sta

tus

A. M

usse

l Wat

chbi

valv

es:

1. A

nim

als

scru

bbed

usin

g se

awat

er.

2. A

nim

als

pack

aged

in a

lum

inum

foil

orpl

astic

dep

endi

ng

on a

naly

ses.

3. A

ny h

isto

path

ol-

ogy

data

obt

aine

d.4.

Spe

cim

ens

froz

en

and

ship

ped

to la

b

orat

ory.

5. (

Oys

ters

wer

e sh

ucke

d in

the

field

an

d th

e tis

sues

fro

ze

n.)

6. S

hell

leng

th, v

ol

ume,

etc

., re

cord

ed.

B. B

enth

ic S

urve

illa

nce

1. F

ish

colle

cted

usin

g tra

wl n

ets.

2. L

iver

s ex

cise

dan

d tis

sue

sam

ples

take

n fo

r var

ious

anal

yses

.

- co

ntin

ued

1. S

cale

fish

as

appr

opr

iate

.2.

Ski

n ca

tfish

.3.

Rem

ove

edib

le f

illet

from

righ

t sid

e. (D

o no

tpu

nctu

re g

ut in

pro

ce

ss.),

4.

Wra

p in

foo

d gr

ade

alum

inum

foil.

5.

Fre

eze

as s

oon

aspo

ssib

le.

Figu

re 7

.--C

ompa

riso

n ch

art

of ti

ssue

pro

toco

ls.--

Con

tinue

d (p

age

10 o

f 15)

FIE

LD

PRO

CE

SSIN

GST

EPS

(c

ontin

ued)

SSx'S

x'&ifS

ifc^

C. F

ishJ

iyer

sJcQ

nt.}

:4.

Tak

e sc

ale

(or

spin

e) s

ampl

e.

5. O

pen

body

cav

ity;

reco

rd m

atur

ity, s

ex.

6. E

xcis

e liv

er;

plac

ein

pre

clea

ned

glas

sja

r. 7.

Com

posi

te li

ver

sam

ple;

wei

gh;

plac

e ja

r in

labe

led

bag;

fre

eze

on d

ry

ice;

shi

p to

labo

ra

tory

. D

. Who

le f

ish

(org

an-

ics)

: Fo

llow

ste

ps C

.I.

thro

ugh

C.5

.: 6.

Wra

p fis

h in

alu

mi

num

foil,

dul

l sid

e ne

xt to

fis

h.7.

Wra

p ag

ain.

8. P

lace

in la

bele

dpl

astic

bag

; fr

eeze

on d

ry ic

e; s

hip

tola

bora

tory

.E

. Aqu

atic

pla

nts:

1. R

inse

sam

ple

(api

ca

l 5 c

m)

in a

mbi

ent

stre

am w

ater

.2.

Soa

k in

am

bien

tst

ream

wat

er a

t10

±2 'C

for

1 h

our.

3. C

hang

e w

ater

; so

akfo

r add

ition

al 1

hour

.4.

Rem

ove

plan

ts fr

omw

ater

, ob

tain

wet

wei

ght.

5. P

lace

in la

bele

dba

g; f

reez

e on

dry

ice;

shi

p to

labo

ra

tory

.

llllli

liipl

iiiiil

li:::

::::::

::::::

::::::

^:¥^

?iSt

!i|rti

::i:::

V:S

::x:::

:X:X

B. S

hellf

ish

(con

tin

ued)

:4.

Mea

sure

bod

y si

ze.

5. D

eter

min

e se

x if

po

ssib

le (

crus

ta

cean

s).

6. I

dent

ify

mor

pho

lo

gica

l abn

orm

ali

tie

s (o

ptio

nal)

. 7.

Wra

p in

divi

dual

ly

in h

eavy

alu

min

umfo

il. (

Spec

imen

s m

ay b

e gr

oupe

d in

w

ater

proo

f pla

stic

ba

gs.)

8. P

lace

on

ice;

shi

p to

labo

rato

ry.

§;^:^

:P^Jiii

iMiiil

Siil;:S

s?W

iWi^

fc'IS

few

SS-W

SwW

wxv

ftv

Illlll

liliil

lilill

ill

lliiil

illili

ii il:

iilill

iilj|i

|j||illl

lMiii

iiiiii

i

B. B

enth

ic S

urve

illa

nce

(con

tinue

d):

3. L

iver

sam

ples

co

mpo

site

d an

d fr

ozen

.4.

Age

, sex

, hea

lthco

nditi

on, a

nd s

ize

dete

rmin

ed.

All

sam

ple

proc

ess

in

g do

ne u

nder

cle

an

cond

ition

s. D

etai

lsof

sam

ple

proc

essi

ng

are

in L

auen

stei

n an

d C

antil

lo (

1993

). C

. Se

dim

ents

: C

om

posi

te s

ampl

es p

re

pare

d an

d ke

ptre

frig

erat

ed a

nd f

roze

n.

Fig

ure

7. C

ompa

riso

n ch

art

of ti

ssue

pro

toco

ls.-C

onti

nued

(pa

ge 1

1 of

15)

AN

CIL

LA

RY

DA

TA A

ND

CO

OR

DIN

AT

ED

SA

MP

LIN

GA

CT

IVIT

IES

A. F

ish

1. S

peci

es2.

Ind

ivid

ual

leng

than

d w

eigh

t3.

Ext

erna

l an

oma

lies

4. S

ex

5. A

ge

6. P

erce

nt m

oist

ure

7. L

ipid

con

tent

[o

rgan

ics

only

] B

. Ins

ects

1. S

peci

es2.

Com

posi

te w

eigh

t3.

Per

cent

moi

stur

eC

. Mol

lusk

s1.

Spe

cies

2. S

hell

leng

th3.

Com

posi

te w

eigh

t4.

Per

cent

moi

stur

e5.

Lip

id c

onte

nt[o

rgan

ics

only

]D

. Pla

nts

1. S

peci

es2.

Com

posi

te w

eigh

t3.

Per

cent

moi

stur

eE

. Bed

-sed

imen

t sam

pl

es f

or c

hem

ical

ana

lys

es o

f tr

ace

elem

ents

and

orga

nic

com

po

unds

col

lect

ed

~ co

ntin

ued

Fish

Tis

sue

Sam

ple

Tra

ckin

g Fo

rmin

clud

es t

he f

ollo

win

g:1.

Fis

h le

ngth

s (la

rge

fish)

2. N

umbe

r of

fish

(s

mal

l fis

h)

3. S

peci

es:

code

, co

m

mon

nam

e4.

Wer

e fis

h di

stri

b

uted

ove

r en

tire

stre

amre

ach

(or

from

all

lake

sam

plin

g st

atio

ns)?

As

a di

agno

stic

indi

ca

tor,

tissu

e co

ntam

inan

tle

vels

can

be

used

with

data

fro

m a

ll th

e in

di

cato

rs to

est

ablis

hpr

obab

le c

ause

of

impa

ct.

(See

Fie

ld P

roce

ssin

gSt

eps

abov

e.)

A. F

ish

1. S

peci

es2.

Ind

ivid

ual

leng

than

d w

eigh

t3.

Lip

id c

onte

nt (

lab

orat

ory)

A. F

ish

Fish

col

lect

ors

wer

eas

ked

to i

dent

ify

near

by c

onta

min

ant

sour

ces.

So

me

reco

rded

age

of t

he

fish.

Lip

id a

nd m

ois

tu

re c

onte

nt w

ere

dete

rmin

ed f

or e

ach

com

posi

te s

ampl

e.

Nat

iona

l Sta

tus

A. F

ish

1. S

peci

es2.

Siz

e an

d w

eigh

t3.

Gro

ss p

atho

logy

4. S

ex5.

Age

6.

Per

cent

moi

stur

e 7.

Lip

id c

onte

nt

B. B

ival

ves

1. S

peci

es

2. S

ize

3. G

onad

al s

tage

4. H

isto

path

olog

y5.

Per

kins

us m

arin

uspr

esen

ce

C. S

edim

ents

1. G

rain

siz

e2.

Tot

al O

rgan

ic C

ar

bon,

Tot

al I

nor

gani

c C

arbo

n3.

Cop

rost

onal

D. S

ite1.

Sal

inity

2. T

empe

ratu

re3.

Tid

al h

oriz

on

A. F

ish

1. S

peci

es2.

Tot

al le

ngth

and

wei

ght

3. E

xter

nal

anom

alie

s 4.

Per

cent

moi

stur

e 5.

Lip

id c

onte

nt

[org

anic

s on

ly]

Figu

re 7

.--C

ompa

riso

n ch

art

of ti

ssue

pro

toco

ls.-C

ontin

ued

(pag

e 12

of 1

5)

AN

CIL

LA

RY

D

ATA

AN

D

CO

OR

DIN

AT

ED

S

AM

PL

ING

A

CT

IVIT

IES

(c

onti

nued

)

DA

TA A

NA

LY

SIS

at s

ame

site

s as

tis

sues

, in

clud

ing

Bas

ic F

ixed

Si

tes.

Wat

er-c

hem

istr

y sa

mpl

es c

olle

cted

at

each

Bas

ic F

ixed

Site

. F.

Fis

h, i

nver

tebr

ate

and

alga

l com

mun

ity

sam

ples

col

lect

ed a

t ea

ch B

asic

Fix

ed S

ite.

G. C

ontin

uous

str

eam

di

scha

rge

and

field

w

ater

-qua

lity

para

me

te

rs (

e.g.

, pH

, tem

pera

tu

re)

mea

sure

d at

eac

h B

asic

Fix

ed S

ite.

A. C

onta

min

ant c

on-

cent

ratio

ns:

mea

ns a

ndra

nges

, am

ong

stat

ions

an

d w

ithin

sta

tions

B

. St

atis

tical

com

pari

- so

ns o

f st

atio

ns:

t-te

sts,

Ana

lysi

s of

Var

i an

ce (

AN

OV

A)

C. G

raph

ical

com

pari

- so

ns o

f co

ntam

inan

tco

ncen

trat

ions

D. A

naly

sis

of tr

ends

HH

^^B

Dat

a ca

n be

pre

sent

ed

in s

ever

al d

iffe

rent

w

ays.

EM

AP'

s pr

imar

y m

eans

will

be

by

Cum

ulat

ive

Dis

trib

u

tion

Func

tion

(CD

F).

His

togr

ams

and

map

s,

show

ing

perc

ent o

f si

tes

in a

regi

on w

here

ea

ch c

onta

min

ant i

s fo

und

abov

e a

cert

ain

leve

l (de

tect

ion

limit

or

leve

l of c

once

rn),

and

geog

raph

ic d

istr

ibu

tio

ns o

f the

se s

ites

also

ca

n be

use

d.

?::i

8p

i::j

!|i!

^^

::;:j:

;:;:;:

j:;:;:

;:^:*

;:SJ?

^|i::|

i-?*t

:t:|:;

:;:;:|

x;:;:

;:;:

A. T

arge

t ana

lyte

s (m

eans

and

ran

ges)

B

. Lip

id a

naly

sis

A. C

onta

min

ant c

on-

cent

ratio

nsB

. Sta

tistic

al a

naly

sis

to d

eter

min

e so

urce

corr

elat

ions

|i||l

ll||l

i|i|:l

l;li

l

A.

Fish

Fi

sh re

sults

wer

e su

b

ject

ed to

ana

lysi

s of

va

rian

ce a

nd c

ovar

i-

ance

to t

est f

or t

empo

ra

l tre

nds.

Geo

grap

hic

tren

ds w

ere

repo

rted

su

bjec

tivel

y.

liffi

M

Sam

e as

NA

WQ

A

iipliii

îiiiii

pîiii

::::

:::;

;||^

||lfi

^^|!

l||;^||f

;:::

::;:

Use

d by

Sta

te a

genc

ies

for

cons

umpt

ion

advi

so

ry p

urpo

ses.

Com

pa

red

agai

nst U

.S.

Dep

artm

ent o

f Agr

icul

tu

re F

ood

and

Dru

g A

dmin

istr

atio

n A

ctio

n L

evel

s.

Figu

re 7

.--C

ompa

riso

n ch

art o

f tiss

ue p

roto

cols

.-Con

tinue

d (p

age

13 o

f 15)

QU

AL

ITY

ASS

UR

AN

CE

/Q

UA

LIT

Y

CO

NT

RO

L

(QA

/QC

)

A. S

tand

ardi

zed

prot

ocol

s an

d tr

aini

ngof

fie

ld p

erso

nnel

. R

egio

nal b

iolo

gist

s pr

ovid

e co

ordi

natio

n an

d ov

ersi

ght o

f st

udy-

unit

sam

plin

gac

tiviti

es.

B. C

entr

aliz

ed u

nit:

Bio

logi

cal Q

ualit

y A

ssur

ance

Uni

t at t

heU

SGS/

Nat

iona

l Wat

erQ

ualit

y L

abor

ator

yve

rifi

es t

axon

omic

iden

tific

atio

ns o

f tax

aco

llect

ed f

or ti

ssue

anal

yses

. C

. Fie

ld P

A/P

C:

Cle

an e

quip

men

t and

inst

rum

ents

Hig

h-pu

rity

rea

gent

s G

love

s fo

r fie

ld d

is

sect

ions

F

ield

dup

licat

es f

or10

per

cent

of

site

s.D

. Lab

orat

ory

PA

/PC

: S

plit

sam

ples

Sta

ndar

d re

fere

nce

sam

ples

Spi

ked

sam

ples

Bla

nk s

ampl

es I

nter

labo

rato

ry c

om

pari

sons

E. I

nteg

rate

d da

taba

seN

atio

nal W

ater

Inf

or

mat

ion

Syst

em-I

I co

nta

ins

phys

ical

,ch

emic

al,

and

biol

ogi

cal d

ata,

with

fac

ili

tate

d da

ta e

ntry

,ve

rifi

catio

n, a

nd a

naly

si

s.

A. S

ampl

e tr

acki

ngsy

stem

("c

hain

of c

us

tody

").

B. L

abor

ator

y P

A/P

C:

Dup

licat

es S

pike

s C

heck

sta

ndar

ds

St

anda

rd r

efer

ence

mat

eria

ls L

abor

ator

y bl

anks

Con

trol

cha

rts

for

QC

sam

ples

iill

llli

Sli

illl

ii!

A. E

ach

labo

rato

rym

ust h

ave

an a

dequ

ate

QA

/QC

pro

gram

. B

. Met

hods

of

anal

ysis

m

ust b

e do

cum

ente

dan

d va

lidat

ed.

C. L

abor

ator

y PA

7PC

I C

alib

ratio

n st

anda

rds

Spi

ked

met

hod

blan

ks M

atri

x sp

ikes

Mat

rix

spik

e re

pli

cate

s L

abor

ator

y re

plic

ates

Ana

lytic

al r

eplic

ates

Iso

topi

cally

labe

led

inte

rnal

sta

ndar

ds S

urro

gate

spi

kes

Acc

urac

y-ba

sed

per

form

ance

eva

luat

ion

sam

ples

Spl

it sa

mpl

es

|i||il

ii|il

llli

||;

Lab

orat

ory

PA

/PC

:

Dio

xin/

fura

ns

1

Met

hod

blan

k

1 Sp

iked

bla

nk

1 D

etec

tion

limit

veri

fic

atio

n

1 D

uplic

ate

sam

ple

8

Env

iron

men

tal s

am

ples

Xen

obio

tics

1

Met

hod

blan

k

1 Sp

iked

bla

nk

1 D

uplic

ate

sam

ple

9 E

nvir

onm

enta

l sam

pl

es

i|il

lll|l|i|||i

l|||l

|

Fjsh

Ana

lyse

s of

fish

sam

pl

es w

ere

cros

s

chec

ked

by in

depe

n

dent

labo

rato

ries

.Id

entif

icat

ions

of

som

ere

sidu

es w

ere

con

firm

ed b

y G

C/M

S.

Ana

lytic

al Q

A/Q

Cin

clud

ed th

e an

alys

isof

pro

cedu

ral b

lank

s,in

tern

al a

nd e

xter

nal

stan

dard

s, r

efer

ence

mat

eria

ls, a

nd b

lind

repl

icat

es.

Aliq

uots

of

sam

ples

wer

e re

tain

edfo

r co

nfir

mat

ory

anal

yse

s.

illiii

iiilit

iliii

Ilill

llllli

liiill

lli

llll

llli

iill

llll

lifl

flj^

Nat

iona

l St

atus

and

Tre

nds

(NS&

T)

QA

Proj

ect o

vers

ees

the

anal

yses

by

NS&

T

coop

erat

ing

labo

rato

ri

es. P

erfo

rman

ce-

base

d so

no

met

hods

are

spec

ified

. Use

of

stan

dard

ref

eren

cem

ater

ials

, cer

tifie

d re

fer

ence

mat

eria

ls,

blan

ks, d

uplic

ates

, and

part

icip

atio

n in

inte

r-co

mpa

riso

n ex

erci

se is

requ

ired

.

Fiel

d in

stru

men

tscl

eane

d be

twee

n co

m

posi

te s

ampl

es (

not

indi

vidu

als

with

in a

co

mpo

site

). L

abor

ato

ry Q

A/Q

C a

s pr

ovi

ded

by T

exas

A&

MU

nive

rsity

. Spi

kes

and

dupl

icat

es o

n 10

per

ce

nt o

f sam

ples

.

Figu

re 7

.--C

ompa

riso

n ch

art

of ti

ssue

pro

toco

Is.-C

ontin

ued

(pag

e 14

of 1

5)

PRO

TO

CO

LD

OC

UM

EN

Tl.

Cra

wfo

rd,J

.K.,

and

Luom

a, S

.N.,

1993

, Gui

delin

es

for s

tudi

es o

f con

ta

min

ants

in b

io

logi

cal t

issu

es f

or

the

Nat

iona

l W

ater

- Qua

lity

Ass

essm

ent P

ro

gram

: U.S

. Geo

lo

gica

l Sur

vey

Ope

n-Fi

le R

epor

t92

-494

, 69

p.

1. B

aker

, J.R

., M

er-

ritt,

G.D

., an

d Su

t-la

r, D

.W.,

eds.

, 19

93, E

MA

P-Su

r-

face

Wat

ers

Lake

Fi

eld

Ope

ratio

ns,

Vol

umes

I an

d II:

L

as V

egas

, Nev

., U

.S. E

nvir

onm

enta

l Pr

otec

tion

Age

ncy,

E

nvir

onm

enta

l Mon

ito

ring

Syst

ems

Lab

or

ator

y.

2. K

lem

m, D

J., a

ndL

azor

chak

, J.M

.,ed

s., E

nvir

onm

enta

lM

onito

ring

and

Ass

essm

ent P

ro

gram

-Sur

face

W

ater

s an

d R

egio

n 3

Reg

iona

l-E

MA

P 19

93 P

ilot F

ield

Ope

ratio

ns a

nd

Met

hods

Man

ual-

Stre

ams:

Cin

cinn

ati,

Ohi

o, U

.S. E

nviro

nm

enta

l Pro

tect

ion

Age

ncy.

ll!ill

il|l|B

iiiIi

l||<-

:-:-:-

:-:-:-

:<-:-

:/^:^^

1»H.

'*'htf

:-j;-:

-s;-:-

:-:-:-

: : : :

: : :

1. U

.S. E

nvir

on

men

tal

Prot

ec

tion

Age

ncy,

199

3,

Gui

danc

e fo

r as

sess

ing

chem

i ca

l con

tam

inan

t da

ta f

or u

se in

fis

h ad

viso

ries:

Vol

um

e I:

Fish

sam

pl

ing

and

anal

ysis

: O

ffic

e of

Wat

er,

EPA

823

-R-9

3-00

2, v

ario

usly

page

d.

IWli

l^H

iiH

i^

1. U

.S. E

nvir

on

men

tal

Prot

ec

tion

Age

ncy,

198

4,

Sam

plin

g gu

idan

ce

man

ual f

or th

e N

atio

nal D

ioxi

n St

udy.

2. U

.S. E

nvir

on

men

tal

Pro

tec

ti

on A

genc

y, 1

986,

W

ork/

Qua

lity

Ass

ur

ance

Pro

ject

Pla

nfo

r the

Bio

accu

mul

a-tio

n St

udy.

3. U

.S. E

nvir

on-

YY

IOtt

tfll

m

Jt*

r\t

&f*

Illc

llld

l Jr

riH

cL-

tion

Age

ncy,

199

2,

Nat

iona

l stu

dy o

f ch

emic

al re

sidu

es in

fis

h (v

ols.

I and

II)

: O

ffic

e of

Sci

ence

and

Tech

nolo

gy,

Stan

dard

s an

dA

pplie

d Sc

ienc

eD

ivis

ion,

EPA

823

-R

-92-

008a

and

b,

vario

usly

pag

ed.

||;|||

|iali

Ki|:|;i

|li||!

:

1. S

chm

itt, C

.J.,

1988

, Ins

truct

ions

for

the

colle

ctio

n an

d sh

ipm

ent o

f N

atio

nal C

onta

mi

nant

Bio

mon

itorin

g Pr

ogra

m (

NC

BP)

fr

eshw

ater

fish

sam

pl

es: U

.S. F

ish

and

Wild

life

Serv

ice,

N

atio

nal F

ishe

ries

Con

tam

inan

t R

esea

rch

Cen

ter,

Col

umbi

a, M

o.,

Stan

dard

Ope

ratin

gPr

oced

ure

No.

F5.1

8, 1

8 p.

Stan

dard

Ope

ratin

g Pr

oced

ures

for

col

lec

tio

n of

star

lings

and

du

ck w

ings

, for

the

prep

arat

ion

of s

am

ples

, and

for

the

anal

yt

ical

che

mis

try a

re p

art

of th

e in

tern

al d

ocu

men

tatio

n m

aint

aine

dat

the

Patu

xent

Wild

life

Res

earc

h C

ente

r. -S

um

mar

ies

of th

ese

proc

e

dure

s ar

e pr

ovid

ed in

the

publ

ishe

d re

ports

from

thes

e ne

twor

ks.

Nat

iona

l Sta

tus

!!ll!

!^1.

Lau

enst

ein,

G.L

., an

d C

antil

lo,

A. Y

., ed

s.,

1993

, Sa

mpl

ing

and

ana

ly

tical

met

hods

of

the

NO

AA

Nat

iona

l St

atus

and

Tre

nds

Prog

ram

Nat

iona

l B

enth

ic S

urve

il

lanc

e an

d M

usse

l W

atch

Pro

ject

s 19

84-1

992,

Vol

um

es I

-IV:

Silv

erSp

ring,

Md.

, Tec

hni

cal M

emor

andu

mN

OA

A/N

OS/

OR

CA

/71

.

No

info

rmat

ion

prov

ided

Figu

re 7

.--C

ompa

riso

n ch

art o

f tis

sue

prot

ocol

s.-C

onti

nued

(pa

ge 1

5 of

15)

APPENDIXES

77

APPENDIX I: Names and Addresses of Workshop Participants

Federal Agencies Department of the Interior

Bureau of Land Management

Ron Huntsinger

Rick Swanson

Mark Vinson

Mark Nelson

Roy Irwin

Wade B. Bryant

Steven L. Goodbred

MS 2041620 L Street, NWWashington, DC 20036

Division of Wildlife and Fisheries MS 204LS 1849 C Street Washington, DC 20240

Department of Fisheries and Wildlife Utah State University Logan, UT 84322-5210 Internet: [email protected]

Bureau of Reclamation

P.O. Box 25007 Denver Federal Center Denver, CO 80225

National Park Service

Water Resources Division1201 Oak Ridge Drive, Suite 250Fort Collins, CO 80525

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

(presently with National Biological Survey)c/o U.S. Geological SurveySpalding Woods Office Park, Suite 1603850 Holcomb Bridge RoadNorcross,GA 30092Internet: [email protected]

(presently with National Biological Survey)c/o U.S. Geological SurveyRoom W-2234, Federal Building2800 Cottage WaySacramento, CA 95825Internet: [email protected]

Ph: (202) 452-7745

Ph: (202)653-9210 Fax: (202)653-9118

Ph: (801)797-2038 Fax: (801)797-1871

Ph: (303)231-5190

Ph: (303) 225-3520 Fax: (303)225-9965

Ph: (404) 409-7700 Fax: (404)409-7725

Ph: (916)978-4633x351 Fax: (916)978-4633

78

Thomas A. Muir

Christopher Schmitt

Stephen Zylstra

(presently with National Biological Sun>ey)c/o U.S. Geological Survey Ph:National Center, MS 413 Fax:12201 Sunrise Valley DriveReston, VA 22092Internet: [email protected]

(703)648-5114 (703) 648-5722

(presently with National Biological Survey) National Fisheries Contaminant

Research Center 4200 New Haven Road Columbia, MO 65201

Virginia Field Office Ph:P.O. Box 480 Fax:Mid-County CenterRoute No. 17White Marsh, VA 23183

Ph: (314)875-5399

(804) 693-6694 (804) 693-9032

J. Kent Crawford

Thomas F. Cuffney

Sarah Gerould

Martin E. Gurtz

Cliff R. Hupp

Michael R. Meador

U.S. Geological Survey

840 Market Street Lemoyne,PA 17043-1586 Internet: [email protected]

3916 Sunset Ridge Road Raleigh, NC 27607 Internet: [email protected]

National Center, MS 412 12201 Sunrise Valley Drive Reston, VA 22092 Internet: [email protected]


Spalding Woods Office Park, Suite 160 3850 Holcomb Bridge Road Norcross, GA 30092 Internet: [email protected]


Ph: (717)730-6975 Fax: (717)730-6997

Ph: (919)571-4019 Fax: (919)571-4041

Ph: (703) 648-6895 Fax: (703) 648-5295

Ph: (919)571-4018 Fax: (919)571-4041

Ph: (404) 409-7709 Fax: (404)409-7725

Ph: (919)571-4020 Fax: (919)571-4041

79

Stephen D. Porter

Terry M. Short

Denver Federal CenterBuilding 25, Box 25046, MS 406Lakewood, CO 80225Internet: [email protected]

Mail Stop 470 345 Middlefield Road Menlo Park, CA 94025 Internet: [email protected]

Stephen K. Sorenson National Center, MS 43312201 Sunrise Valley Drive Reston, VA 22092 Internet: [email protected]

Marc A. Sylvester Mail Stop 470 345 Middlefield Road Menlo Park, CA 94025 Internet: [email protected]

Ph: (303)236-5950x216 Fax: (303)236-5959

Ph: (415) 329-4324 Fax: (415)329-4463

Ph: (703)648-5113 Fax: (703)648-5295

Ph: (415) 329-4415 Fax: (415)329-4463

Other Federal Agencies--

Federal Coordinating Council for Science. Engineering and Technology

Penelope Firth Committee on Earth and Environmental Sciences c/o National Science Foundation Ph: 1800 G Street, NW Washington, DC 20550 Internet: [email protected]

(202) 357-7353

Adriana Cantillo

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

SSMCIV, ORCA21305 East-West Highway Silver Spring, MD 20910

Ph: (301)713-3028

Steven A. Ahlstedt

Tennessee Valley Authority

(presently with U.S. Geological Survey)400 West Summit Hill DriveWT8BKnoxville, TN 37902-1499Internet: [email protected]

Ph: (615)632-8748 Fax: (615)632-6855

80

Charles F. Saylor Water Management MSABL-1A-N 17 Ridge way Road Morris, TN 37828

Ph: (615)632-1779

Ed Theriot

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers

Waterways Experiment Station 3909 Halls Ferry Road Vicksburg, MS 39180

Ph: (601) 634-2398 Fax: (601)634-2398

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Can dace Brassard

Ryan Childs

Marjorie Coombs

Wayne S. Da vis

Chris K. Faulkner

George Gibson

Office of Pesticides Programs #7507C401 M Street, SWWashington, DC 20460Internet: [email protected]

Office of Water #4305 401 M Street, SW Washington, DC 20460

Office of Science and Technology SASD#4305 401 M Street, SW Washington, DC 20460

Office of Policy, Planning, and Evaluation#2162401 M Street, SWWashington, DC 20460

Office of Wetlands, Oceans, and Watersheds#4503FAssessment and Watershed Protection Branch401 M Street, SWWashington, DC 20460Internet: [email protected]

Office of Science and TechnologyHealth and Ecological Criteria Division #4304401 M Street, SWWashington, DC 20460

Ph: (703) 305-5392 Fax: (703)305-6309

Ph: (202) 260-7035 Fax: (202)260-9830

Ph. (202)260-9821 Fax: (202)260-9830

Ph: (202) 260-4906 Fax: (202)260-4903

Ph: (202) 260-6228 Fax: (202)260-1977

Ph: (202) 260-7580

81

Brian H. Hill

Skip Houseknecht

Susan Jackson

Office of Research and Development Environmental Monitoring Systems

Laboratory 3411 Church Street Cincinnati, OH 45244 Internet: [email protected]

(Deceased) *

Biocriteria ProgramHealth and Ecological Criteria Division #4304401 M Street, SWWashington, DC 20460

Office of Research and Development Environmental Monitoring Systems


Frank H. McCormick Office of Research and DevelopmentEnvironmental Monitoring Systems


Ph: (513)569-7077 Fax: (513)569-7078

Ph: (202)260-1800

James M. Lazorchak Ph: (513)569-7076 Fax: (513)569-7078

Ph: (513)569-7097 Fax: (513)569-7078

Ron Parker Ph: (703) 305-5505

Ronald Preston Ph: (304) 234-0245 Fax: (304) 234-0260

Office of Prevention, Pesticides,and Toxic Substances (H-7507C)

401 M Street, SW Washington, DC 20460

Region IIIEnvironmental Services Division303-Methodist Building11th and Chapline StreetsWheeling, WV 26003

Office of Prevention, Pesticides,and Toxic Substances

MS H-7507C 401 M Street, SW Washington, DC 20460

* For information about the Fish Contamination Program, contact Tom Armitage at:Office of Science and Technology Ph: (202) 260-7301

Mike Rexrode Ph: (703) 305-5578

Risk Assessment and Management Branch #4305 Fax: 401 M Street, SW Washington, DC 20460

(202) 260-9830

82

U.S. Forest Service

Ted Angradi Northeast Forest Experiment Station Ph: (304) 478-2000Box 404 Fax: (304)478-8692 Parson, WV 26287

Kerry Overton Intel-mountain Research Station Ph: (208) 364-4357316 Myrtle Street Fax: (208)364-4346 Boise, ID 83702

Dick Smythe (also represented National Biological Survey implementation team)Washington Office Ph: (202) 452-7745 14th and Independence, SW Washington, DC 20090-6090

State and Private Agencies

North Carolina Department of Environment. Health, and Natural Resources

David R. Lenat DEM/Environmental Sciences Branch Ph: (919) 733-69464401 Reedy Creek Road Fax: (919) 733-9959 Raleigh, NC 27607

Ohio Environmental Protection Agency

Chris O. Yoder Division of Water Quality Planning Ph: (614) 728-3377and Assessment Fax: (614) 728-3380

1685 Westbelt Drive Columbus, OH 43228

Tetra Tech. Inc.

Michael T. Barbour 10045 Red Run Boulevard, Suite 110 Ph: (410) 356-8993Owings Mills, MD 21117 Fax: (410) 356-9005

83

APPENDIX II: Workshop Agenda

Interagency Biological Methods WorkshopJune 22-23, 1993

U.S. Geological SurveyReston, Virginia

Agenda

Tuesday, June 228:30 AM Welcome and Opening Remarks

-- Dallas Peck, Director, U.S. Geological Survey 8:45 AM An Overview of NAWQA Biology and Workshop Objectives

-- Marty Gurtz, U.S. Geological Survey 9:20 AM The ITFM Perspective on Biological Indicators

-- Chris Yoder, Ohio Environmental Protection Agency 9:40 AM Overview of State Agency Biomonitoring Programs

-- Mike Barbour, Tetra Tech, Inc. 10:00 AM Break10:20 AM Brief remarks from participating agencies and programs 11:00 AM Objectives for Working Groups 11:15 AM Working Group Session I (assigned meeting rooms: Fish, Invertebrates, Algae,

Habitat, Tissues) O Introductions and backgrounds of participants

11:45 AM -- 1:00 PM Lunch (with your Working Group)

1:00 PM Working Group Session II (assigned meeting rooms)O Compilation of protocol chartsO Element-by-element discussion of protocol charts: note similarities, highlight

differences; discuss reasons for differences among protocolsO Prepare brief narratives discussing similarities and differences

4:30 PM Reconvene in Auditorium: Review progress of Working Groups

Wednesday, June 238:30 AM Working Group Session III (assigned meeting rooms)

O Continue discussions of protocol charts, if necessaryO Future directions: opportunities for research and collaboration

11:45 AM -1:OOPM Lunch

1:00 PM Reconvene in AuditoriumO Working Group Reports and DiscussionO Wrap-Up and Open Discussion

4:00 PM Adjourn

84

APPENDIX III: List of Participants in Each Workgroup

Fish WorkgroupMike Meador (Facilitator)Frank McCormick (Recorder/Reporter)

Invertebrates WorkgroupTom Cuffney (Facilitator/Reporter) Marc Sylvester (Recorder)

Ron Preston Mike Rexrode Charlie Saylor Terry Short Chris Yoder Steve Zylstra

Steve Ahlstedt Ted Angradi Marjorie Coombs Wayne Davis Chris Faulkner Brian Hill Roy Irwin Dave Lenat Mark Nelson Mark Vinson

Algae Workgroup (June 22 only)Stephen Porter (Facilitator/Reporter) Brian Hill (Recorder)

Marty Gurtz Steve Sorenson

Habitat WorkgroupCliff Hupp (Facilitator)Mike Barbour (Recorder/Reporter)George Gibson (Reporter)

Susan Jackson Kerry Overton Ron Parker Stephen Porter Dick Smythe Rick Swanson

Tissues WorkgroupKent Crawford (Facilitator) Steve Goodbred (Recorder) Chris Schmitt (Reporter)

Candy Brassard Adriana Cantillo Ryan Childs Sarah Gerould Skip Houseknecht Roy Irwin Jim Lazorchak Steve Sorenson

U S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1994 651-387 / 0092085

Documents

REPORT OF THE INTERAGENCY BIOLOGICAL METHODS …micron (Jim) millimeter (mm) centimeter (cm) meter (m) kilometer (km) square centimeter (cm ) square meter (m2) gram (g) liter (L) milliliter