DOCSLIB.ORG

White River Watershed Assessment Project

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
White River Watershed Assessment Project PHASE 1 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT OF THE WHITE RIVER WATERSHED WHITE RIVER, SOUTH DAKOTA Topical Report RSI-1820 prepared for South Dakota Department of Environment and Natural Resources 523 East Capitol Avenue Pierre, South Dakota 57501 September 2007 PHASE 1 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT OF THE WHITE RIVER WATERSHED WHITE RIVER, SOUTH DAKOTA Topical Report RSI-1820 prepared for South Dakota Department of Environment and Natural Resources 523 East Capitol Avenue Pierre, South Dakota 57501 September 2007 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Project Title: White River Watershed Assessment Project Project Start Date: October 1, 2003 Project Completion Date: December 31, 2004 Funding: Total Budget: $ 80,000 Total EPA Budget: $ 48,000 Total Expenditures of EPA Funds: $ 48,000 Total Section 319 Match Accrued: $ 32,000 Budget Revisions: No Revisions Total Expenditures: $ 80,000 SUMMARY OF ACCOMPLISHMENTS The White River is the second largest western tributary to the Missouri River in South Dakota [Fryda, 2001]. It enters Lake Francis Case, a reservoir located in central South Dakota on the Missouri River, just south of Oacoma, South Dakota, and has a contributing drainage area of approximately 9,940 square miles. The largest contributing drainage area of a tributary to the White River is the Little White River, with a drainage area of approximately 1,670 square miles. The White River was listed on South Dakota’s 303(d) list of impaired waterbodies for exceedences of water-quality standards for total suspended solids (TSS) and fecal coliform bacteria. The White River flows out of northwestern Nebraska into southwestern South Dakota and follows an easterly route until it discharges into the Missouri River. Shortly after it enters the state of South Dakota, the river flows through Badlands National Park, which is famous for its rugged, steep terrain with little to no vegetation on the easily weathered side slopes. A geographic information system (GIS) sediment loss model was created using the Revised Universal Soil Loss Equation (RUSLE). This model created a relative magnitude raster image of potential sediment erosion. The results of this analysis were used to identify areas of high potential erosion and sediment loss and to ensure proper distribution of physical habitat sampling locations. Ten sites were established for assessment of physical habitat and biologic integrity following procedures presented in the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) Environmental Monitoring Assessment Program (EMAP) field operating procedure [U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2001a]. These sites ranged in location from Crawford, Nebraska, near the headwaters, to the mouth near Oacoma, South Dakota. An index of biologic integrity (IBI) was i created for benthic macroinvertebrates and periphyton samples. A multimetric approach was used for the development of IBIs with seven metrics being used for the benthic IBI and eleven metrics used for the periphyton IBI. Regression analysis was performed between physical habitat assessment data, biological data and historic discharge, and water-quality data to identify relations between channel morphology, riparian vegetation characteristics, biologic integrity, and water quality. The White River has long been a river of special interest because of the Missouri River Reservoirs and the impact the White River might have on reservoir storage. Historical gage data were available for the White River, dating as far back as 1928 at the station near the mouth of the river, the White River near Oacoma. A statistical analysis of the historic data set was performed to characterize hydrologic conditions in the watershed. The hydrology of the watershed was analyzed at 19 long-term gage stations for stream discharge. Water-quality data were also analyzed at nine stations, with TSS and fecal coliforms being the focus. No new discharge or water-quality data were collected for this project. The data suggest the White River can be broken down into three distinct reaches: (1) from the headwaters to the confluence of Willow Creek, roughly 5 miles downstream of the gage station near Oglala; (2) from Willow Creek to the confluence of the Little White River; and (3) from the confluence of the Little White River to the mouth of the river near Oacoma, South Dakota. These reaches are shown in Figure ES-1. Reach 2 in and around Badlands National Park, was identified as the transitional and critical reach by all methods of analysis. In this reach, the river receives a large percentage of its TSS and fecal coliform load. The physical habitat and river morphology change considerably with biologic integrity degrading. The confluence of the Little White River also represents a second change in the White River. The measured physical habitat changed slightly, mainly regarding riparian vegetation. Also, the fecal coliform concentrations are less below this location while the general hydrology of the river changes slightly. Because of the large natural background of TSS in this system, the TSS standard of 158 milligrams per liter (mg/l) is not attainable. Best management practices (BMPs) will only reduce the TSS loading a minimal percent. BMPs for fecal coliforms can be implemented to attain the water-quality standard of 2,000 colony-forming units per 100 milliliters (cfu/100 ml). Suggested BMPs for fecal coliform reduction, such as a grazing management system, off-site water, and riparian vegetation stabilization, will also have the potential to reduce the TSS loading. ii RSI-1465-04-001 Figure ES-1. Reach Definitions. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Cooperation and input from the following organizations and people are greatly appreciated. Without their support, this project would have been difficult to complete. • South Dakota Department of Environment and Natural Resources —Bob Smith —Gene Stueven • South Dakota School of Mines and Technology —Dr. Scott Kenner —Dr. Thomas Fontaine • United States Geological Survey —Joyce Williamson • Mellette County Conservation District —Kara Krogman iii • Badlands Resource, Conservation and Development (RC&D) —Geri Livermont —Gayle Kocer • South-Central RC&D —Theresa Benda • Bureau of Indian Affairs —Paul Hoffman • Counties of and cities within the White River Watershed. iv TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION................................................................................................................ 1 2.0 PROJECT GOALS, OBJECTIVES, AND TASKS ........................................................ 4 2.1 GOALS........................................................................................................................... 4 2.2 OBJECTIVES AND TASKS ........................................................................................ 4 2.3 PLANNED AND ACTUAL MILESTONES, PRODUCTS, AND COMPLETION DATES........................................................................................................................... 12 2.4 EVALUATION OF GOAL ACHIEVEMENT ............................................................. 12 3.0 DATA ANALYSIS, METHODS, AND RESULTS.......................................................... 14 3.1 WATERSHED HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY .......................................... 14 3.1.1 Precipitation....................................................................................................... 14 3.1.2 Hydrologic Analysis ........................................................................................... 15 3.1.2.1 White River Hydrology Summary ..................................................... 21 3.1.2.2 Little White River Hydrology Summary........................................... 21 3.1.2.3 Baseflow-Dominated Gage Station.................................................... 22 3.1.2.4 Event-Dominated Gage Station......................................................... 22 3.1.2.5 Mix Flow Regime-Dominated Gage Stations.................................... 22 3.1.3 Water-Quality Analysis..................................................................................... 26 3.1.3.1 Exceedence Analysis........................................................................... 28 3.1.3.2 Load Duration Curves ........................................................................ 28 3.1.3.3 Annual Load Estimates...................................................................... 30 3.1.3.4 Fecal Coliform Source Tracking ........................................................ 32 3.1.3.5 Trend Analysis .................................................................................... 37 3.1.4 Water-Quality Results....................................................................................... 37 3.1.4.1 Crawford .............................................................................................. 37 3.1.4.2 Whitney................................................................................................ 38 3.1.4.3 Chadron NW........................................................................................ 38 3.1.4.4 Chadron ............................................................................................... 39 3.1.4.5 Bordeaux Creek................................................................................... 39 3.1.4.6 Oglala................................................................................................... 39 3.1.4.7 Kadoka ................................................................................................. 40 3.1.4.8 White River Near White River..........................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Flooding the Missouri Valley the Politics of Dam Site Selection and Design
    University of Nebraska - Lincoln DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln Great Plains Quarterly Great Plains Studies, Center for Summer 1997 Flooding The Missouri Valley The Politics Of Dam Site Selection And Design Robert Kelley Schneiders Texas Tech University Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/greatplainsquarterly Part of the Other International and Area Studies Commons Schneiders, Robert Kelley, "Flooding The Missouri Valley The Politics Of Dam Site Selection And Design" (1997). Great Plains Quarterly. 1954. https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/greatplainsquarterly/1954 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Great Plains Studies, Center for at DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. It has been accepted for inclusion in Great Plains Quarterly by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. FLOODING THE MISSOURI VALLEY THE POLITICS OF DAM SITE SELECTION AND DESIGN ROBERT KELLEY SCHNEIDERS In December 1944 the United States Con­ Dakota is 160 feet high and 10,700 feet long. gress passed a Rivers and Harbors Bill that The reservoir behind it stretches 140 miles authorized the construction of the Pick-Sloan north-northwest along the Missouri Valley. plan for Missouri River development. From Oahe Dam, near Pierre, South Dakota, sur­ 1946 to 1966, the United States Army Corps passes even Fort Randall Dam at 242 feet high of Engineers, with the assistance of private and 9300 feet long.! Oahe's reservoir stretches contractors, implemented much of that plan 250 miles upstream. The completion of Gar­ in the Missouri River Valley. In that twenty­ rison Dam in North Dakota, and Oahe, Big year period, five of the world's largest earthen Bend, Fort Randall, and Gavin's Point dams dams were built across the main-stem of the in South Dakota resulted in the innundation Missouri River in North and South Dakota.
    [Show full text]
  • Today's Missouri River
    DID YOU KNOW? The Missouri River is the longest river in North America. The Missouri is the world’s 15th- TODAY’S longest river. The Missouri has the nickname MISSOURI RIVER “Big Muddy,” because of the large The Missouri River has been an important resource for amount of silt that it carries. people living along or near it for thousands of years. As time went on and the corridor of the Missouri River was developed and populations increased, efforts have been There are approximately 150 fish made to control flows, create storage, and prevent flooding. species in the Missouri River, and As a result, six mainstem dams have been in place for more about 300 species of birds live in the than half a century, with the goal of bringing substantial Missouri River’s region. economic, environmental, and social benefits to the people of North Dakota and nine other states. The Missouri’s aquatic and riparian Since the building of the mainstem dams, it has been habitats also support several species realized that for all of the benefits that were provided, the of mammals, such as mink, river dams have also brought controversy. They have created otter, beaver, muskrat, and raccoon. competition between water users, loss of riparian habitat, impacts to endangered species, stream bank erosion, and delta formation - which are only a few of the complex issues The major dams built on the river related to today’s Missouri River management. were Fort Peck, Garrison, Oahe, Big Bend, Fort Randall, and Gavin’s Point. This educational booklet will outline the many benefits that the Missouri River provides, and also summarize some of the biggest issues that are facing river managers and residents within the basin today.
    [Show full text]
  • Wildlife Habitat Evaluation of the Unchannelized Missouri River in South Dakota
    South Dakota State University Open PRAIRIE: Open Public Research Access Institutional Repository and Information Exchange Electronic Theses and Dissertations 1977 Wildlife Habitat Evaluation of the Unchannelized Missouri River in South Dakota James R. Clapp Follow this and additional works at: https://openprairie.sdstate.edu/etd Part of the Natural Resources and Conservation Commons Recommended Citation Clapp, James R., "Wildlife Habitat Evaluation of the Unchannelized Missouri River in South Dakota" (1977). Electronic Theses and Dissertations. 27. https://openprairie.sdstate.edu/etd/27 This Thesis - Open Access is brought to you for free and open access by Open PRAIRIE: Open Public Research Access Institutional Repository and Information Exchange. It has been accepted for inclusion in Electronic Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of Open PRAIRIE: Open Public Research Access Institutional Repository and Information Exchange. For more information, please contact [email protected]. WILDLIFE HABITAT EVALUATION OF THE UNCHANNELIZED MISSOURI RIVER IN SOUTH DAKOTA BY JAMES R. CLAPP A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree Master of Science, Major in Wildlife and Fisheries Sciences Wildlife Option South Dakota State University 1977 WILDLIFE HABITAT EVALUATION OF THE UNCHANNELIZED MISSOURI RIVER IN SOUTH DAKOTA This thesis is approved as a creditable and independent investi- gation by a candidate for the degree, Master of Science, and is acceptable for meeting the thesis requirements for this. degree. Acceptance of this thesis does not imply that the conclusions reached by the candidate are necessarily the conclusions of the major department. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS My sincere appreciation is extended to my graduate advisor, Dr.
    [Show full text]
  • Emerging Reservoir Delta‐Backwaters
    Ecological Monographs, 0(0), 2019, e01363 © 2019 by the Ecological Society of America Emerging reservoir delta-backwaters: biophysical dynamics and riparian biodiversity 1,4 1 2 3 MALIA A. VOLKE, W. C ARTER JOHNSON, MARK D. DIXON, AND MICHAEL L. SCOTT 1Department of Natural Resource Management, South Dakota State University, SNP 138 Box 2140B, Brookings, South Dakota 57007 USA 2Department of Biology, University of South Dakota, 414 E. Clark Street, Vermillion, South Dakota 57069 USA 3Watershed Sciences Department, Utah State University, 5210 Old Main Hill, NR 210, Logan, Utah 84322 USA Citation: Volke, M. A., W. C. Johnson, M. D. Dixon, and M. L. Scott. 2019. Emerging reser- voir delta-backwaters: biophysical dynamics and riparian biodiversity. Ecological Monographs 00(00):e01363. 10.1002/ecm.1363 Abstract. Deltas and backwater-affected bottomlands are forming along tributary and mainstem confluences in reservoirs worldwide. Emergence of prograding deltas, along with related upstream hydrogeomorphic changes to river bottomlands in the backwater fluctua- tion zones of reservoirs, signals the development of new and dynamic riparian and wetland habitats. This study was conducted along the regulated Missouri River, USA, to examine delta-backwater formation and describe vegetation response to its development and dynam- ics. Our research focused specifically on the delta-backwater forming at the confluence of the White River tributary and Lake Francis Case reservoir. Objectives of the research were to: (1) describe and analyze the process of delta-backwater formation over space and time; (2) determine by field sampling and GIS mapping how vegetation has responded to devel- opment of the delta-backwater; and (3) compare the woody plant communities of the delta-backwater to those along free-flowing and regulated remnant river reaches.
    [Show full text]
  • Charles River Watershed 2002 Biological Assessment
    Technical Memorandum TM-72-8 CHARLES RIVER WATERSHED 2002 BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT John F. Fiorentino Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection Division of Watershed Management 7 December 2005 CN 191.0 Charles River Watershed 2002-2006 Water Quality Assessment Report Appendix C C1 72wqar07.doc DWM CN 136.5 CONTENTS Introduction 3 Basin Description 6 Methods 7 Macroinvertebrate Sampling 7 Macroinvertebrate Sample Processing and Analysis 8 Habitat Assessment 9 Quality Control 9 Results and Discussion 10 Summary and Recommendations 26 Literature Cited 28 Appendix – Macroinvertebrate taxa list, RBPIII benthos analysis, Habitat evaluations 31 Tables and Figures Table 1. Macroinvertebrate biomonitoring station locations 4 Table 2. Perceived problems addressed during the 2002 survey 4 Table 3. Summary of possible causes of benthos impairment and recommended actions 27 Figure 1. Map showing biomonitoring station locations 5 Figure 2. DEP biologist conducting macroinvertebrate “kick” sampling 7 Figure 3. Schematic of the RBPIII analysis as it relates to Tiered Aquatic Life Use 26 Charles River Watershed 2002-2006 Water Quality Assessment Report Appendix C C2 72wqar07.doc DWM CN 136.5 INTRODUCTION Biological monitoring is a useful means of detecting anthropogenic impacts to the aquatic community. Resident biota (e.g., benthic macroinvertebrates, fish, periphyton) in a water body are natural monitors of environmental quality and can reveal the effects of episodic and cumulative pollution and habitat alteration (Barbour et al. 1999, Barbour et al. 1995). Biological surveys and assessments are the primary approaches to biomonitoring. As part of the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection/ Division of Watershed Management’s (MassDEP/DWM) 2002 Charles River watershed assessments, aquatic benthic macroinvertebrate biomonitoring was conducted to evaluate the biological health of various streams within the watershed.
    [Show full text]
  • Annual Fish Population and Angler Use and Sport Fish Harvest Surveys on Lake Francis Case, South Dakota, 2009
    SOUTH DAKOTA Downloaded from http://meridian.allenpress.com/jfwm/article-supplement/433055/pdf/10_3996122018-jfwm-115_s7/ by guest on 24 September 2021 ANNUAL FISH POPULATION AND ANGLER USE AND SPORT FISH HARVEST SURVEYS ON LAKE FRANCIS CASE, SOUTH DAKOTA, 2009 South Dakota Department of Game, Fish and Parks Wildlife Division Joe Foss Building Annual Report Pierre, South Dakota 57501-3182 No. 10-13 ANNUAL FISH POPULATION AND ANGLER USE AND SPORT FISH HARVEST SURVEYS ON LAKE FRANCIS CASE, SOUTH DAKOTA, 2009 by Downloaded from http://meridian.allenpress.com/jfwm/article-supplement/433055/pdf/10_3996122018-jfwm-115_s7/ by guest on 24 September 2021 Jason Sorensen and Gary Knecht American Creek Fisheries Station, SOUTH DAKOTA DEPARTMENT OF GAME, FISH AND PARKS Annual Report Dingell-Johnson Project---------------------------------------------------------------------F-21-R-42 Study Numbers--------------------------------------------------------------------------2102 and 2109 Date--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------December, 2010 Reservoir Program Administrator Department Secretary James Riis Jeff Vonk Fisheries Program Administrator Division Director Geno Adams Tony Leif Grants Coordinator Aquatic Section Leader Nora Kohlenberg John Lott PREFACE Information collected during 2009 is summarized in this report. Copies of this report and references to the data can be made with permission from the authors or Director of the Division of Wildlife, South Dakota Department of Game, Fish and Parks, 523 E. Capitol, Pierre, South Dakota 57501-3182. The authors would like to acknowledge the following individuals from the South Dakota Department of Game, Fish and Parks who helped with administrating, data collection, editing, or manuscript preparation: Wes Bouska, Chris Longhenry, James Riis, Sandi Knippling, Darla Kusser, Tim Anderson, Brian Boe, Dane Pauley and Rachel Trible.
    [Show full text]
  • Lewis & Clark on the Great Plains Timeline
    Page 8 • 2004 Lewis and Clark on the Great Plains 2004 • Page 9 LLeewwiiss aanndd CCllaarrkk oonn tthhee GGrreeaatt PPllaaiinnss TTiimmeelliinnee FFrroomm NNeebbrraasskkaa CCiittyy,, NNeebbrraasskkaa ttoo PPiieerrrree,, SSoouutthh DDaakkoottaa ARIKARA July 19, 1804 – In the vicinity of Nebraska City, Nebraska. Clark, in for the boy grew up to be the famous “Struck By The Ree”, Chief of the pursuit of an elk, ascends a hill and discovers the “bound less Prairie”. SOUTH Yankton Tribe. “Struck By The Ree’s” monument is located in Greenwood, South Dakota. Lake Oahe DAKOTA July 20, 1804 – Near Nebraska City, Nebraska. Clark’s observation of TETON SIOUX the “parched prairies” was noted. As the Corps traveled through the Great September 7, 1804 – Corps camp was at “the Tower,” four miles Plains it was understood that fires were ecologically important wherever Oahe Visitor Center SANTEE SIOUX southeast of the Nebraska/South Dakota border on the Nebraska side, grass growth was abundant to prevent secondary growth. They were set near Lynch, Nebraska. The men investigated a prairie dog town, PIERRE by lightning or accidentally by humans, or often Indians set fires SANTEE SIOUX 29 described it for science and captured a prairie dog. This captured prairie BIG BEND purposely for signaling or for improving grazing. Lily Park dog survived the trip in the keelboat to Fort Mandan, wintered over and Bad River Confluence/Teton Council site Akta Lakota Museum Lower Brule YANKTON SIOUX returned back down river to Washington DC for President Jefferson. TETON SIOUX TETON CHAMBERLAIN SIOUX• July 24, 1804 – For several days the Corps stayed at a site they called 90 Lewis and Clark Information Center “Camp White Catfish”, near modern day Bellevue, Nebraska.
    [Show full text]
  • Biological and Water Quality Study of Mill Creek and Tributaries 2011
    Biological and Water Quality Study of Mill Creek and Tributaries 2011 Mill Creek downstream from Hopple Street MSD Agreement 15x11039 Project Number 10180900 MBI/2012‐6‐10 Mill Creek Bioassessment 2011 September 15, 2012 2011 Biological and Water Quality Study of Mill Creek and Tributaries Hamilton County, Ohio Technical Report MBI/2012‐6‐10 MSD Project Number 10180900 September 15, 2012 Prepared for: Metropolitan Sewer District of Greater Cincinnati 1081 Woodrow Street Cincinnati, OH 45204 Submitted by: Midwest Biodiversity Institute P.O. Box 21561 Columbus, Ohio 43221‐0561 Chris O. Yoder, Research Director [email protected] i MBI/2012‐6‐10 Mill Creek Bioassessment 2011 September 15, 2012 Table of Contents List of Tables ................................................................................................................................... iii List of Figures .................................................................................................................................. iv Acknowledgements ....................................................................................................................... vii Glossary of Terms ......................................................................................................................... viii List of Acronyms ........................................................................................................................... xvi FOREWORD .................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • WALLEYE Stizostedion V
    FIR/S119 FAO Fisheries Synopsis No. 119 Stizostedion v. vitreum 1,70(14)015,01 SYNOPSIS OF BIOLOGICAL DATA ON THE WALLEYE Stizostedion v. vitreum (Mitchill 1818) A, F - O FOOD AND AGRICULTURE ORGANIZATION OFTHE UNID NP.TION3 FISHERIES SYNOR.9ES This series of documents, issued by FAO, CSI RO, I NP and NMFS, contains comprehensive reviews of present knowledge on species and stocks of aquatic organisms of present or potential economic interest. The Fishery Resources and Environment Division of FAO is responsible for the overall coordination of the series. The primary purpose of this series is to make existing information readily available to fishery scientists according to a standard pattern, and by so doing also to draw attention to gaps in knowledge. It is hoped 41E11 synopses in this series will be useful to other scientists initiating investigations of the species concerned or or rMaIeci onPs, as a means of exchange of knowledge among those already working on the species, and as the basis íoi study of fisheries resources. They will be brought up to date from time to time as further inform.'t:i available. The documents of this Series are issued under the following titles: Symbol FAO Fisheries Synopsis No. 9R/S CS1RO Fisheries Synopsis No. INP Sinopsis sobre la Pesca No. NMFS Fisheries Synopsis No. filMFR/S Synopses in these series are compiled according to a standard outline described in Fib/S1 Rev. 1 (1965). FAO, CSI RO, INP and NMFS are working to secure the cooperation of other organizations and of individual scientists in drafting synopses on species about which they have knowledge, and welcome offers of help in this task.
    [Show full text]
  • Surface and Ground Waters Monitoring Strategy
    Surface and Ground Waters Monitoring Strategy Little Miami R. Near Morrow @ Stubbs Mill Rd DST Division of Surface Water April 2021 AMS/2021‐TECHN‐1 Surface and Ground Waters Monitoring Strategy April 2021 Table of Contents Introduction ............................................................................................................................................................................................... 1 Ohio’s Water Resources ........................................................................................................................................................................ 1 I. U.S. EPA Water Monitoring Strategy Framework ................................................................................................................... 4 II. Ohio EPA Water Monitoring Programs ..................................................................................................................................... 4 A. Monitoring Program Strategy ................................................................................................................................................... 4 A.1 Headwaters, Streams and Rivers ..................................................................................................................................... 5 A.2 Inland Lakes and Reservoirs ........................................................................................................................................... 12 A.3 Lake Erie – Rivers, Harbors, Shoreline and Open Waters ..................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Volunteer Stream Monitoring: a Methods Manual
    United States Office of Water EPA 841-B-97-003 Environmental Protection 4503F November 1997 Agency Volunteer Stream Monitoring: A Methods Manual View full version of document Adobe Acrobat Reader is required to view PDF documents. The most recent version of the Adobe Acrobat Reader is available as a free download. An Adobe Acrobat plug-in for assisted technologies is also available. Contents Chapter 1 Introduction 1.1 Manual Organization Chapter 2 Elements of a Stream Study 2.1 Basic Concepts 2.2 Designing the Stream Study 2.3 Safety Considerations 2.4 Basic Equipment Chapter 3 Watershed Survey Methods 3.1 How to Conduct a Watershed Survey 3.2 The Visual Assessment ❍ Watershed Survey Visual Assessment (PDF, 15.4 KB) Chapter 4 Macroinvertebrates and Habitat 4.1 Stream Habitat Walk ❍ Stream Habitat Walk (PDF, 139.0 KB) 4.2 Streamside Biosurvey ❍ Streamside Biosurvey: Macroinvertebrates (PDF, 32.7 KB) ❍ Streamside Biosurvey: Habitat Walk (PDF, 24.6 KB) 4.3 Intensive Stream Biosurvey ❍ Selecting Metrics to Determine Stream Health ❍ Intensive Biosurvey: Macroinvertebrate Assessment (PDF, 92.7 KB) ❍ Intensive Biosurvey: Habitat Assessment (PDF, 82.8 KB) Chapter 5 Water Quality Conditions ❍ Quality Assurance, Quality Control, and Quality Assessment Measures 5.1 Stream Flow ❍ Data Form for Calculating Flow (PDF, 9.7 KB) 5.2 Dissolved Oxygen and Biochemical Oxygen Demand 5.3 Temperature 5.4 pH 5.5 Turbidity 5.6 Phosphorus 5.7 Nitrates 5.8 Total Solids 5.9 Conductivity 5.10 Total Alkalinity 5.11 Fecal Bacteria ❍ Water Quality Sampling Field Data Sheet (PDF, 6.2 KB) Chapter 6 Managing and Presenting Monitoring Data 6.1 Managing Volunteer Data 6.2 Presenting the Data 6.3 Producing Reports Appendices A.
    [Show full text]
  • US Fish and Wildlife Service 1889-1985
    Selected Research Publication Series of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 1889-1985 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE / RESOURCE PUBLICATION 159 Resource Publication This publication of the Fish and Wildlife Service is one of a series of semitechnical or instructional materials dealing with investigations related to wildlife and fish. Each is published as a separate paper. The Service distributes a limited number of these reports for the use of Federal and State agencies and cooperators. Copies of this publication may be obtained from the Publications Unit, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Matomic Building, Room 148, Washington, DC 20240, or may be purchased from the Government Print­ ing Office, Superintendent of Documents, Washington, DC 20402, and the National Technical Informa­ tion Service (NTIS), 5285 Port Royal Road, Springfield, VA 22161. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Research and development series. (Resource publication / United States Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service ; 159) Bibliography: p. 163 Supt.ofDocs.no.: 1:49.66:159 1. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service-Bibliography. 2. Wild­ life management—United States—Bibliography. 3. Wildlife conservation—United States—Bibliography. I. Cortese, Thomas J. II. Groshek, Barbara A. III. Series: Resource publication (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service); 159. S914.A3 no. 159 [016.639] 86-600039 [Z7994.W55] [SK361] Selected Research Publication Series of the U.S . Fish and Wildlife Service, 1889-1985 Compiled by Thomas J. Cortese Barbara A. Groshek UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE Resource Publication 159 Washington, DC " 1987 Preface This bibliography provides a detailed record of publications in 10 selected Research and Development series produced by the U.S .
    [Show full text]