SRW) and Superior High Quality Water (SHQW) Classifications for Ohio’S Water Qual- Ity Standards

Methods and Documen- te of the tation used to Propose Ecosystem: State Resource Water (SRW) and Superior High Quality Water (SHQW) Classifications for Ohio’s Water Qual- ity Standards

Kokosing River: SRW Candidate

Introduction High quality water bodies are valued Selection Criteria public resources because of their eco- Ohio EPA has drafted revisions to the logical and human benefits. Intact The selection of candidate water bod- 1 aquatic ecosystems provide substan- State's antidegradation policy which ies and delineation of SRW and tial environmental benefits to long- incorporate a level of protection SHQW segments were based on the term, sustainable environmental qual- between the minimum antidegradation following types of information: policy required under the Clean Water ity. The biological components of these systems act as a warning system that Act and the maximum protection 1.) The presence of endangered and can indicate potential threats to human afforded by federal regulations. The threatened fish, mussel, crayfish, and health, degradation of aesthetic values, most stringent application of antideg- amphibian species as designated for reductions in the quality and quantity radation is to allow absolutely no low- Ohio by the Ohio DNR (Department of of recreational opportunities, and other ering of water quality in waters Natural Resources), Division of Wild- ecosystem benefits or “services.” designated as Outstanding National life (2001). The inclusion of this infor- Some of these other services include Resource Waters. The minimum mation helps to focus on those species reliable and safe supplies of water for requirement allows for a lowering of that: (1) are most at risk from increased human consumption and industrial water quality to the established water point and nonpoint source pollution, production, assimilation of human and quality standards applicable to the (2) may not be adequately protected by other waste products, sediment trans- water body if a determination is made water quality criteria, and (3) are asso- port, water retention for reduced flood- that the lowering of quality is neces- ciated with those aesthetic properties ing, and the purification of both sary to accommodate important social of water bodies (e.g., high quality hab- ground and surface waters. The ability and economic development. The itat) valued by the public. These high of streams and rivers to provide those agency is proposing two intermediate quality water indicators have deterio- beneficial services and to act as envi- levels of protection for certain ecologi- rated throughout the United States; 55 ronmental indicators is reduced when- cally and recreationally important percent of the freshwater mussels ever their integrity is degraded (Ohio water bodies in the State that will per- fauna is considered extinct or imper- EPA 1996). The antidegradation policy manently reserve a portion of the iled (Williams et al. 1993) and 20 per- for the State Resource and Superior unused pollutant assimilative capacity, cent of the native fish fauna is High Quality Waters reserves a portion thereby assuring that future genera- considered imperiled (Master 1990). of the remaining assimilative capacity tions will enjoy a higher water quality The SRW and SHQW designations are to protect the integrity of Ohio’s high- than the minimally acceptable stan- intended to minimize further impover- est quality streams. dard. This document outlines the crite- ishment of Ohio’s aquatic biodiversity ria which will be used to select heritage. The data used in this process candidate streams for these two tiers: is from the late 1970s to the present 1.) State Resource Water2 (SRW) and and is either in Ohio EPA, Ohio DNR, 2.) Superior High Quality Water or Ohio DOT (Department of Trans- (SHQW). portation) databases, from universities 2. The existing SRW definition is (e.g., Ohio State University Museum being phased out and part of the process will be to move these of Biodiversity), or published in waters to the appropriate new reports. Frequency distributions of 1. Authority under 6111.12 tier. 3/25/02 FS1-2002-EAS 1 these species in our current electronic Ohio. Certain water bodies may have databases are illustrated in Figures A-1 especially intact, “near-pristine” levels State Resource Waters: (all sampling stations) and A-2 (cumu- of biotic integrity (e.g., W. Fk. L. Bea- Old Definition lative species by stream reach). ver Creek, Captina Creek, certain small The previous category of SRW was tributaries in the Hocking State Forest applied to streams that were either; 1.) 2.) The presence of viable populations and Wayne National Forest) and may designated as EWH streams or 2.) of fish species with a declining distri- qualify for Superior High Quality Water stream that flowed through a federal, bution across Ohio since 1978 (Ohio designations without the presence of the state, or local park or natural area. EPA 1996). listed species. The concept of “biologi- Although some of these assignments cal integrity” is a goal of the Clean were verified through biosurveys, many Declining species are species that Water Act and Ohio EPA has incorpo- were based on “table-top” decisions for the 1978 water quality standards. The have suffered reductions and rated this concept into water quality new SRW/SHQW definitions empha- increased fragmentation of their management. Frequency distributions of IBI and ICI scores are illustrated in sizes their ecological quality and vulnera- distributional range and abundance bility or their recreational characteristics. across Ohio (based on data col- Figures B-1 and B-3 (all sampling stations) and B-2 and B-4 (cumulative spe- All streams currently designated as SRW lected by various state agencies and in the water quality standards need to be cies by stream reach). universities over the past 15 years) changed to one of the new tiers. Current compared to historical distributions SRW streams without ambient data will 4.) Adjustments for Lake Erie drain- remain in a “holding” category where their as documented in the Fishes of age tributaries. Lake Erie drainage location (e.g., adjacent to other high qual- Ohio (Trautman 1981). These spe- streams pose a special case in assigning ity waters) or other information (e.g., cies have similar properties to the antidegradation tiers because of the judgement of field scientists) indicates endangered and threatened species, zoogeography of Ohio fishes and union- the possibility of qualifying for a SRW or and will likely follow suit if condi- ids. Because of Ohio’s glacial history, SHQW tier. At a minimum these waters the Lake Erie drainage has fewer tions continue to decline in Ohio’s will receive a higher priority for future endemic fish and mussel species than high quality waters. Added to the baseline monitoring and this listing will the Ohio River basin, and consequently endangered and threatened status prompt agency actions related to any has fewer endangered species. Because list (25 percent of Ohio fish fauna), antidegradation reviews. the declining designation brings the the IBI metrics calibrated for Ohio are based on expectations derived heavily proportion of the state fish fauna as streams in the Lake Erie drainage is an from the Ohio River basin, fewer fish potentially imperiled to 33 per- unusually high proportion of pollution species being present in the Lake Erie intolerant fish species within a given cent. It is important to protect basin also has implications for IBI watersheds from large scale alter- waterbody compared to statewide col- scores. For any given Lake Erie basin lections stratified by stream size (Figure ations to make recovery of these stream, IBI scores are likely to be lower 3). Here, unusually high is defined as species possible. Frequency distri- because metrics depending on the num- greater than or equal to 2 standard devi- butions of declining species are ber of species in a sample, especially ations. The abundance of pollution illustrated in Figures A-5 (all sam- the number of darter species and total intolerant fish species is dependent on pling stations) and A-6 (cumulative number of species, are likely to under- both water and habitat quality; there- species by stream reach). perform expectations derived from the fore, waterbodies supporting unusually Ohio River basin. Taken together in high relative abundances of these spe- light of points 1-3 above, Lake Erie 3.) The achievement of high biological cies are likely to have exceptional water tributaries are likely to have fewer integrity as defined by the Exceptional and habitat quality and should be pro- endangered fish species, fewer endan- Warmwater Habitat biocriteria for fish tected accordingly. gered mussel species, and lower IBI and macro-invertebrates delineated in scores on average than Ohio River trib- the Ohio WQS. Because biological In addition to consideration of these pri- utaries. These chance occurrences have integrity is defined in relation to least mary factors, other information is incor- no reflection on the intrinsic biological impacted reference sites, attainment of porated into this process, especially integrity of a given stream segment the Exceptional Warmwater Habitat when determining the boundaries of the within the Lake Erie drainage, and no (EWH) criteria indicates a site has Superior High Quality water segments. reflection on the ecological integrity of scored within the range of the top 25 These types of information may a given drainage basin as a whole percent of the least impacted reference include, but are not limited to: within the Lake Erie watershed, and sites in Ohio, or the nearest to “unim- therefore, should be accounted for when pacted” as it exists today. These are the A.) The quality of the habitat available assigning water quality antidegradation sites that generally harbor the strongest for aquatic life. The Qualitative Habitat tiers. and most viable populations of rare, Evaluation Index (QHEI) is the primary endangered, threatened, special status, habitat assessment tool used by Ohio An additional biological attribute that and declining species and are ecologi- EPA. can be used as a screening tool for cally the most important water bodies in assigning antidegradation tiers to

3/25/02 FS1-2002-EAS 2 High quality habitats are critical exceptional ecological and recreational ditions. High stream gradient tends to because maintenance of biological significance of these waters to Ohioans. discourage clayey silts from depositing integrity depends on high quality For additional rationale regarding the on and embedding stream substrates aquatic habitat as much as or perhaps assessment of scenic rivers, refer to and maintains high oxygen levels in more than good chemical water quality “Antidegradation Classifications streams and rivers (e.g., provides suit- to maintain robust, healthy, and high Assigned to State and National Scenic able conditions for freshwater mollusks value populations of aquatic life. River in Ohio.” in the tailwaters of Muskingum River Although many of the endangered, locks and dams). threatened, and declining species are D.) Geomorphological “boundaries”, especially sensitive to water quality, such as ecoregion boundaries, escarp- E.) Proximity of major urban popula- many are also habitat specialists and ments, the glacial boundary and associ- tion centers and existing water quality can be extirpated if their habitats are ated glacial features, and confluences management plans. Pollution control degraded or eliminated. High quality with tributaries of major subbasins efforts at some municipal and industrial habitat also reflects those aesthetic which can strongly affect aquatic habi- facilities have been so successful that qualities of natural water bodies that the tat characteristics and the resulting formerly grossly polluted aquatic envi- antidegradation philosophy attempts to fauna. Many of the stronger populations ronments are now substantially recov- protect for future generations. Fre- of endangered, threatened and declining ered. In a few cases, endangered species quency distributions of QHEI are illus- species and sites with high biological and/or very high biological diversity trated in Figures A-3 (all sampling community performance tend to occur have returned. These recovered systems stations) and A-4 (QHEI > 80 by stream at or near these boundaries. Stream gra- may merit special protection through reach). dient is another physical feature which designation as Superior High Quality has a profound effect on ecological con- Waters. In designating the specific B.) Biodiversity. A component of the biological criteria, species richness (biodiversity) is of special interest and is often highly correlated with biologi- Table 1: General guidelines for assigning SRW, SHQW, and GHQW tiers. cal integrity. Consideration of the top Attributes are considered singly and in aggregate. sites in Ohio, in terms of the total number of species, taxa, or sensitive species groups (e.g., Ephemoptera, Plecoptera, Attribute SRW SHQW GHQW Tricoptera - EPT taxa) captured, pro- Endangered & Multiple species, Present; smaller pop- Absent, or if present, vides strong confirmation that water Threatened large populations, ulations; may be less small populations or bodies are biologically significant. Species include most vulner- vulnerable species low vulnerability While the concept of biological integ- able rity certainly includes biodiversity, it Declining Species > 4 declining fish 2-4 declining fish < 2 declining spe- additionally encompasses ecosystem species/segment, species/segment, cies, typically small processes (i.e., nutrient cycles, trophic large populations moderate popula- populations tions interactions, speciation, etc.). It will also consider whether the biodiversity is IBI, ICI High mean scores, Lower mean scores, Lower mean scores, important as repopulation epicenters for very high max scores fewer high max few or none very scores or if more high currently degraded rivers (e.g., Yellow higher scores few Creek and Furnace run for the Cuya- other attributes hoga River). Vulnerability Little effluent, high May be more efflu- Lower vulnerability, C.) The existence of institutional desig- vulnerability ent, moderate vulner- for vulnerable com- ability ponents Director can nations that have already acknowl- still deny antidegra- edged the special characters of a water dation application body. The Scenic River designation in QHEI High percentage Fewer QHEI scores Few or no QHEI Ohio usually coincides with many of QHEI scores > 80 > 80, many above 70 scores > 80, fewer the ecological characteristics outlined above 70 above and has the additional advantage Relative Abundance Relative abundance Relative abundance Relative abundance of being supported by public policy that of Fish Species Sen- is > 3 SD compared is > 2 SD compared < 2 SD. identifies each as having significant sitive to Pollution to statewide collec- to statewide collec- ecological and aesthetic value to Ohio- and Habitat Destruc- tions of similar sized tions of similar sized tion streams. streams. ans. Furthermore, substantial public and private resources are often invested Multiple Attributes High co-occurrence Lower co-occur- Little co-occurrence, in scenic rivers. Scenic rivers which of above attributes rence or individual individual attributes attributes more mar- often marginal if support a high quality biological com- ginal present munity are recommended for inclusion into the SRW tier in recognition of the

3/25/02 FS1-2002-EAS 3 Mean Species Per Site Cumulative Species (Fish & Unionids) >8,000 All Stations By Segment - Candidate Streams 1000 400

0 - 0.25 species/station A-1350 A-2 800 300

250 600

200 Count Count 400 150

100 200

0 0 012345 0246810 Mean Number of Endangered, Threatened, Endangered & Threatened Species and Special Interest Species/Station

All QHEI Scores By Site Candidate Streams 300

800 A-3 A-4 250

600 200

150 Count 400 Count ,

100

200 50

0 0 0 20406080100 012345678910 QHEI Number of Sites with QHEI >= 80

Cumulative Species Per Segment All Sites/Mean Per Site Candidate Stream Segments Only 150 6000

0 - 0.25 species/station A-5 A-6 5000

100 4000

3000 Count Count

2000 50

1000

0 0 0123456 02468101214 Mean Declining Fish Species/Station Declining Fish Species

Figure A. Frequency distributions of: 1.) state endangered, threatened, and special concern species at all sampling stations, 2.) cumulative fish and unionid species number by segment for candidate streams, 4.) QHEI scores at all sampling stations, 4.) number of samples with QHEI scores > 80 in candidate stream segments, 5.) declining fish species at all sampling stations, and 6.) cumulative declining species number by segment for candidate streams.

3/25/02 FS1-2002-EAS 4 Number of ICIs 54-60 in a Candidate Segment ICIs at All Sites, All Years 500 300 B-1 B-2

250 400

200 300

150 Count

Count 200

100

0 0 012345678 0 102030405060 ICI Scores 54-60 ICI Scores

Number of IBIs 54-60 IBIs at All Sites, All Years in a Candidate Segment 600 500 B-3 B-4 500 400

400 300

300 Count Count 200

200

100 100

0 0 16 24 32 40 48 56 012345678910 IBI Scores IBI Scores 54-60

Rating Score By Segment Number of High Scoring Candidate Streams Components - Candidate Streams 150 250 B-6 B-5 200

100 150 Count Count 100

0 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 012345678 Rating Score Nb f"Hit"

Figure B. Frequency distributions of: 1.) ICI scores at all sampling stations, 2.) ICI scores 54-60 by segment for candidate streams, 3.) IBI scores at all sampling stations, 2.) IBI scores 54-60 by segment for candidate streams, 5.) rating scores for all candidate segments, and 6.) number of multiple attributes per segment for candidate streams.

3/25/02 FS1-2002-EAS 5 Superior High Quality Water, the and ecological databases provided by (4) three or more species of fish that are Agency must provide a reasonable Ohio DNR (Wildlife, Natural Areas and considered to be declining across Ohio. approach that recognizes the need to Preserves), and others (e.g., Ohio To aid in examining candidate streams a protect the aquatic resource and the DOT). Candidate water bodies have one rating was derived to broadly select need to provide continuity with previ- or more of the following attributes: candidates depending on the strength of ous wastewater management plans. each of these attributes and the occur- These previous plans often used 100 (1) viable populations of endangered or rence of multiple attributes. percent of the pollutant assimilative threatened species of fish, unionid mol- capacity in the stream, in which case the lusks, amphibians, or crayfish; State Resource Waters vs. Superior High Quality Water designation has little effect on discharge related (2) segments within which attainment Superior High Quality parameters. The SHQW tier, however, of the Exceptional Warmwater Habitat Waters: Vulnerability would provide more protection for non- (EWH) biocriteria for the IBI (Index of point and habitat impacts. Nonpoint Biotic Integrity) and/or the ICI (Inverte- Biological condition or integrity of source degradation can have the affect brate Community Index) have been Ohio streams occurs along a continuum of decreasing the assimilative capacity observed; in Ohio. The top tiers associated with of streams and the SHQW tier can be the antidegradation rule are designed to used to protect this. This existence of (3) “near pristine” characteristics of protect high quality waters for future water quality management plans will be biological integrity, which is defined as generations. The primary difference factored into the delineation of Superior consistent, strict attainment of the EWH between the SRW and SHQW tiers is High Quality Water segments whenever biocriteria and a significant proportion the assimilative capacity set-aside asso- appropriate. of locations with IBI or ICI scores ciated with each: 70% for SRW and greater than or equal to 56, and in the 35% for SHQW. The criteria outlined Selecting Candidate Water Lake Erie watershed, a fish community above are the baseline characteristics Bodies having a composition of pollution intol- for SRW or SHQW. The distinction erant species equalling or exceeding between these two groups of waters is two standard deviations compared to somewhat more subjective and is based Candidates for Superior High Quality statewide collections; on the “vulnerability of a water to dele- Water designation were generated by terious human impacts. Often, the examining data in Ohio EPA databases waters with good populations of the endangered, threatened and declining species, and high biological integrity are the most vulnerable to change and are also where there is significant uncertainty regarding their ability to withstand substantial changes in water or habitat quality.

Some waters with extremely high diversity, however, may not be considered highly vulnerable or we may be more certain of the response that the biota may exhibit based on their response to existing stressors. The Scioto River downstream of Columbus, for example, was severely impacted by point source impacts. This river has responded tre- mendously to pollutant load reductions from WWTPs, both in IBI changes and in the return of certain endangered, threatened, and declining species. Because the recovery occurred under current pollutant loadings, the river is Figure 3. Locations of stream fish populations having a relative not extremely “vulnerable” to this range abundance of pollution intolerant species equalling of loadings. While portions of the river or exceeding two standard deviations of statewide merit a SHQW tier (slightly elevated collections. anomalies still indicate some effects that would likely be addressed by an EWH designation) it would not be deemed vulnerable enough for a SRW 3/25/02 FS1-2002-EAS 6 tier. In addition, the current assem- blages are likely most vulnerable to sed- imentation and habitat degradation, and Table 2. Waters currently designated as SRW that were not candidates for SRW/SHQW because they did not have those threats can be addressed through sufficient ecological attributes or because no data exists. A the SHQW tier. The intact habitat in the “Holding” SRW is designed to raise the priority for sampling Scioto River has permitted the recovery and to be considered as potentially high quality in any of this river. Streams that have shown future antidegradation or regulatory decisions that could recovery despite relatively high pollut- affect these waters before they can be monitored. ant loadings, or streams with species that, on a case-by-case basis, are gener- River Stream Cur- Recommen- ally less vulnerable would be less likely Code rent dation candidates for SRW. Waters that are the SRW most likely candidates for SRW will be those at the upper end of the distribution 02-245 Clover Groff Ditch * LQW of sensitive ecological attributes being 02-212 Barron Creek + Holding considered and those that are not SRW/SHQW already effluent limited. 02-215 Howard Run + Holding Table 1 summarizes some of the charac- SRW/SHQW teristics that were used to distinguish between SRW, SHQW, and GHQW 02-216 Lake Run + Holding tiers. SRW/SHQW 02-217 Jumping Run + Holding Defining Superior High SRW/SHQW Quality and SRW Segments 02-218 Clover Run + Holding - SRW/SHQW The delineation of Superior High Qual- ity stream segments is based on an over- 02-001 Scioto River (Little Sci- +GHQW lay of the types of available data. The oto River to Bokes presence of an endangered or threatened Creek) species is considered significant, but the influence of this criterion is tempered with caveats. The identity of the species expanses of the floodplain and nearby ration of standardized ecological data, and its regional status are additionally land areas (e.g., Hocking State and experience and technical judgement is considered (Is it a resident species? Is it Wayne National Forests). still needed to determine the boundaries a stray from another area? Is the popula- of Superior segments. The water body tion significant? Are these locations the One of the most important pieces of specific rationale for individual seg- core of its remaining population in supporting information is the habitat ment delineations is summarized in a Ohio?). Stream segments where we find quality of the water body as measured justification document supporting the two or more declining species per sam- by the QHEI. Habitat quality reflects delineation of antidegradation tiers. ple (one or more in headwater streams) many of the other supporting factors Streams and rivers are open ecosystems are considered significant, with many of (ecoregion characteristics, stream gradi- and segments are considered and desig- the same caveats listed for endangered ent, stream modifications, tributary con- nated as SHQW within an ecosystem or threatened species. fluences) also considered to be and watershed framework. Manage- important. Average QHEI values ment of aquatic habitats in a watershed The attainment of the Exceptional greater than 70-75 over a segment are framework has been urged if we are to Warmwater Habitat (EWH) biocriteria generally considered sufficient for halt increasing imperilment of more for fish or macro-invertebrate commu- EWH attainment, given suitable water species. The purpose of the Superior nities is also considered a significant quality. Thus we consider this level as High Quality Water designation system factor. Sites with consistent attainment an additionally significant criterion for is to further protect our best remaining of EWH biocriteria at most sites and delineating Superior segments. QHEI aquatic ecosystems from activities that with index values that reach 56 or values greater than 80-90 are extraordi- would create pollution. higher at some locations are evidence of nary with only 2-3 percent of our sites “near pristine conditions” and receive scoring at or above this value; such high Nominated Streams proportionately more weighting in the scores are also given heavy weighting Superior segment delineation even in delineating Superior reaches. The streams or stream segments that when imperiled species are absent. were selected for the SRW and SHQW These near-pristine communities are Although the designation process tiers are illustrated in Figure 4, and related to limited development in large includes objective criteria, the incorpo- listed alphabetically with rationale and

3/25/02 FS1-2002-EAS 7 supporting information in Appendix 1. References Trautman, M. B. 1981. Fishes of Ohio. The Some stream segments that anecdotally Ohio State University Press, Columbus, appear to be high quality do not appear Ohio EPA. 1996. Ohio Water Resource Ohio. on the map because insufficient data Inventory, Volume 1. Ohio EPA, Division exist. These waters are placed in a of Surface Water. Williams, J. D., Warren, M. L. Jr., Cum- mings, K. S., Harris, J. L., and R.J. “Holding SRW/SHQW” category. Sev- Ohio DNR. 2001. Wildlife that are consid- Neves. 1993. Conservation status of eral examples of streams like these ered to be endangered, threatened, of spe- freshwater mussels of the United States appear in Table 2, and a list of all seg- cial interest, extirpated, or extinct in Ohio. and Canada. Fisheries 18(9): 6-22. ments on “Hold” appear in Appendix 2. Ohio Division of Wildlife Inservice Note, These streams will receive a high prior- June 2001. For more information, contact: ity for future monitoring and will receive more scrutiny for other activi- USFWS. 1999. Endangered, threatened, pro- Dan Dudleyr ties that might affect them. posed, and candidate species [Federal]; (614) 644-2876 Ohio. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Ohio Environmental Protection Agency Reynoldsburg, Ohio. Division of Surface Water P.O. Box 1049, Lazarus Government Center 122 S. Front Street, Columbus, Ohio 43216-1049 Master, L. 1990. The imperiled status of North American aquatic animals. Biodi- versity Network News 3: 1-2, 7-8.

Figure 4. Locations of streams proposed for the State Resource Water and Superior High Quality Water antidegradation tiers. For specific locations and segment descrip- tions, please refer to Appendix 1.

3/25/02 FS1-2002-EAS 8