DOCSLIB.ORG

Ambient Biological Monitoring in Rivers and Streams: Benthic Macroinvertebrates and Periphyton

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Ambient Biological Monitoring in Rivers and Streams: Benthic Macroinvertebrates and Periphyton Quality Assurance Monitoring Plan Ambient Biological Monitoring in Rivers and Streams: Benthic Macroinvertebrates and Periphyton August 2010 Publication No. 10-03-109 Publication Information This plan is available on the Department of Ecology’s website at www.ecy.wa.gov/biblio/1003109.html. Data for this project will be available on Ecology’s Environmental Information Management (EIM) website at www.ecy.wa.gov/eim/index.htm. Search User Study IDs: WHM_WAM0, WHM_ERR0, WHM_SEN, WHM_BIO, WHM_WAM0_P, WHM_ERR0_P, WHM_SEN_P, WHM_BIO_P. Ecology’s Activity Tracker Code for this study is 01-610. Author and Contact Information Karen Adams P.O. Box 47600 Environmental Assessment Program Washington State Department of Ecology Olympia, WA 98504-7710 For more information contact: Communications Consultant Phone: 360-407-6834 Washington State Department of Ecology - www.ecy.wa.gov/ o Headquarters, Olympia 360-407-6000 o Northwest Regional Office, Bellevue 425-649-7000 o Southwest Regional Office, Olympia 360-407-6300 o Central Regional Office, Yakima 509-575-2490 o Eastern Regional Office, Spokane 509-329-3400 Any use of product or firm names in this publication is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the author or the Department of Ecology. To ask about the availability of this document in a format for the visually impaired, call 360-407-6834. Persons with hearing loss can call 711 for Washington Relay Service. Persons with a speech disability can call 877- 833-6341. Quality Assurance Monitoring Plan Ambient Biological Monitoring in Rivers and Streams: Benthic Macroinvertebrates and Periphyton August 2010 Approved by: Signature: Date: June 2010 Karen Adams, Author / Project Manager, EAP Signature: Date: July 2010 Tighe Stuart, Field Investigator, Eastern Regional Office, EAP Signature: Date: June 2010 Dan Dugger, Field Investigator, Central Regional Office, EAP Signature: Date: June 2010 George Onwumere, Author’s Unit Supervisor, EAP Signature: Date: June 2010 Robert F. Cusimano, Author’s Section Manager, EAP Signature: Date: July 2010 Gary Arnold, Section Manager for the Field Investigators, EAP Signature: Date: July 2010 Will Kendra, Section Manager for the Project Area, EAP Signature: Date: July 2010 Wease Bollman, Taxonomist, Rhithron Associates, Inc. Signature: Date: August 2010 Stuart Magoon, Director, Manchester Environmental Laboratory, EAP Signature: Date: July 2010 Bill Kammin, Ecology Quality Assurance Officer Signatures are not available on the Internet version. EAP - Environmental Assessment Program. EIM - Environmental Information Management system. Page 1 Table of Contents Page List of Figures and Tables....................................................................................................4 Abstract ................................................................................................................................5 Background ..........................................................................................................................6 Study Area and Surroundings ........................................................................................6 History of Ambient Biological Monitoring in Washington State ..................................9 Project Description.............................................................................................................12 Goals and Objectives ...................................................................................................12 Organization and Schedule ................................................................................................15 Budget ................................................................................................................................17 Quality Objectives .............................................................................................................18 Field Quality Assurance ...............................................................................................18 Sampling Process Design (Experimental Design) .............................................................20 Field Operations ...........................................................................................................20 Site Verification ...........................................................................................................24 Data Management and Common Applications ..................................................................27 Data Storage .................................................................................................................27 Data Analysis ...............................................................................................................27 Data Preparation...........................................................................................................27 Audits and Reports .............................................................................................................29 Data Verification ................................................................................................................29 Data Verification ..........................................................................................................29 Data Usability Assessment ..........................................................................................30 Acceptance Criteria for Existing Data .........................................................................31 Corrective Actions for Inadequate Data ......................................................................31 References ..........................................................................................................................32 Appendix A. Glossary, Acronyms, and Abbreviations ......................................................41 Appendix B. Measurement Procedures..............................................................................50 B-1. Site Verification and Layout for Wadeable Streams ...........................................50 B-2. In-Situ Measurements in Wadeable Streams ......................................................61 B-3. Estimating Discharge in Wadeable Streams .......................................................64 B-4. Water Sampling in Wadeable Streams ...............................................................71 B-5. Sediment Chemistry Sampling ...........................................................................78 B-6. Bank Measurements at Major Transects in Waded Streams ..............................84 B-7. Substrate and Depth Measurements at Major Transects in Waded Streams ......88 B-8. Shade Measurements at Major Transects in Waded Streams .............................92 B-9. Estimating Fish Cover at Major Transects in Waded Streams ...........................95 B-10. Human Influence at Major Transects in Waded Streams .................................97 Page 2 B-11. Riparian Vegetation Structure at Major Transects in Waded Streams ...........100 B-12. Measuring Thalweg Depth in Waded Streams ...............................................104 B-13. Large Woody Debris Tally for Waded Streams of Western Washington ......106 B-14. Habitat Unit Descriptions Along the Main Channel Thalweg ........................109 B-15. Side-Channel Descriptions..............................................................................113 B-16. Width and Substrate Measurements at Minor Transects in Waded Streams ..115 B-17. Measuring Slope and Bearing in Wadeable Streams ......................................118 Appendix C. Sampling Procedures .................................................................................121 C-1. Field Sampling Benthos in Wadeable Streams .................................................121 C-2. Taxonomic Lab Sampling Benthos from Wadeable Streams ...........................126 C-3. Field Sampling Periphyton in Wadeable Streams ............................................128 Quality Control ..........................................................................................................138 C-4. Taxonomic Lab Sampling Periphyton from Wadeable Streams.......................143 Appendix D. Quality Control Procedures .......................................................................146 D-1. Quality Control for In-Situ Meters ...................................................................146 D-2. Quality Control for Laboratory Analysis – Benthos.........................................153 D-3. Quality Control for Laboratory Analysis – Periphyton ....................................155 Appendix E. Field Forms for Ambient Biological Monitoring in Washington. .............156 Appendix F. Field Equipment Checklist .........................................................................166 Appendix G. Standard Taxonomic Effort (except Chironomidae) ................................168 Appendix H. Taxonomic Effort for Chironomidae.........................................................173 Appendix I. Aggregation of Taxa ...................................................................................175 Appendix J. Standard Chain of Custody Form ...............................................................176 Page 3 List of Figures and Tables Page Figures Figure 1. Washington State Ambient Biological Field Sites (1993-2006) and Ecoregions as defined by Omernik and Gallant (1986). ........................................................................ 7 Figure 2. Schematic sampling design for reach-wide
Load more

Recommended publications
  • &WILDLIFE Tlmber/FISH/WILDLIFE ECOREGION BIOASSESSMENT
    53 TFW-WQl l-92-001 &WILDLIFE TlMBER/FISH/WILDLIFE ECOREGION BIOASSESSMENT PILOT PROJECT July 1992 Ecology Publica.tion No. 92-63 prinred on recycled paper The Department of Ecology is an Equal Opportunity and Ajinnative Action employer and shall not discriminate on the basis of race, creed, color, national origin, sex, marital status, sexual orientation, age, religion, or disability as defined by applicable state and/orfederal regulations or statutes. If you have special accommodation needs, please contact the Environmental Investigations and Laboratory Services Program, Wutershed Assessments Section, Barbara Tovrea at (206) 407-6696 (voice). Ecology’s telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD) number at Ecology Headquarters is (206) 407-6006. For additional copies of this publication, please contact: Department of Ecology Publications Disttibutions Ofice at P. 0. Box 47600 Olympia, Washington 98504-7600 (206) 407-7472 Refer to Publication Number 92-6.3 WASHINGTON STATE DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY &WILDLIFE TIMBER/FISH/WILDLIFE ECOREGION BIOASSESSMENT PILOT PROJECT by Robert W. Plotnikoff Washington State Department of Ecology Environmental Investigations and Laboratory Services Program Watershed Assessments Section Olympia, Washington 98504-7710 July 1.992 TABLE OF C:ONTENTS LISTOFTABLES . ..iii LIST OF FIGURES . ” . I ,, I . iv ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS .................................... vi ABSTRACT ........................................... .v ii INTRODUCTION Biological Assessment ................................... 1 Integration of Monitoring
    [Show full text]
  • (Trichoptera: Limnephilidae) in Western North America By
    AN ABSTRACT OF THE THESIS OF Robert W. Wisseman for the degree of Master ofScience in Entomology presented on August 6, 1987 Title: Biology and Distribution of the Dicosmoecinae (Trichoptera: Limnsphilidae) in Western North America Redacted for privacy Abstract approved: N. H. Anderson Literature and museum records have been reviewed to provide a summary on the distribution, habitat associations and biology of six western North American Dicosmoecinae genera and the single eastern North American genus, Ironoquia. Results of this survey are presented and discussed for Allocosmoecus,Amphicosmoecus and Ecclisomvia. Field studies were conducted in western Oregon on the life-histories of four species, Dicosmoecusatripes, D. failvipes, Onocosmoecus unicolor andEcclisocosmoecus scvlla. Although there are similarities between generain the general habitat requirements, the differences or variability is such that we cannot generalize to a "typical" dicosmoecine life-history strategy. A common thread for the subfamily is the association with cool, montane streams. However, within this stream category habitat associations range from semi-aquatic, through first-order specialists, to river inhabitants. In feeding habits most species are omnivorous, but they range from being primarilydetritivorous to algal grazers. The seasonal occurrence of the various life stages and voltinism patterns are also variable. Larvae show inter- and intraspecificsegregation in the utilization of food resources and microhabitatsin streams. Larval life-history patterns appear to be closely linked to seasonal regimes in stream discharge. A functional role for the various types of case architecture seen between and within species is examined. Manipulation of case architecture appears to enable efficient utilization of a changing seasonal pattern of microhabitats and food resources.
    [Show full text]
  • Monitoring Wilderness Stream Ecosystems
    United States Department of Monitoring Agriculture Forest Service Wilderness Stream Rocky Mountain Ecosystems Research Station General Technical Jeffrey C. Davis Report RMRS-GTR-70 G. Wayne Minshall Christopher T. Robinson January 2001 Peter Landres Abstract Davis, Jeffrey C.; Minshall, G. Wayne; Robinson, Christopher T.; Landres, Peter. 2001. Monitoring wilderness stream ecosystems. Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-70. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. 137 p. A protocol and methods for monitoring the major physical, chemical, and biological components of stream ecosystems are presented. The monitor- ing protocol is organized into four stages. At stage 1 information is obtained on a basic set of parameters that describe stream ecosystems. Each following stage builds upon stage 1 by increasing the number of parameters and the detail and frequency of the measurements. Stage 4 supplements analyses of stream biotic structure with measurements of stream function: carbon and nutrient processes. Standard methods are presented that were selected or modified through extensive field applica- tion for use in remote settings. Keywords: bioassessment, methods, sampling, macroinvertebrates, production The Authors emphasize aquatic benthic inverte- brates, community dynamics, and Jeffrey C. Davis is an aquatic ecolo- stream ecosystem structure and func- gist currently working in Coastal Man- tion. For the past 19 years he has agement for the State of Alaska. He been conducting research on the received his B.S. from the University long-term effects of wildfires on of Alaska, Anchorage, and his M.S. stream ecosystems. He has authored from Idaho State University. His re- over 100 peer-reviewed journal ar- search has focused on nutrient dy- ticles and 85 technical reports.
    [Show full text]
  • Microsoft Outlook
    Joey Steil From: Leslie Jordan <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, September 25, 2018 1:13 PM To: Angela Ruberto Subject: Potential Environmental Beneficial Users of Surface Water in Your GSA Attachments: Paso Basin - County of San Luis Obispo Groundwater Sustainabilit_detail.xls; Field_Descriptions.xlsx; Freshwater_Species_Data_Sources.xls; FW_Paper_PLOSONE.pdf; FW_Paper_PLOSONE_S1.pdf; FW_Paper_PLOSONE_S2.pdf; FW_Paper_PLOSONE_S3.pdf; FW_Paper_PLOSONE_S4.pdf CALIFORNIA WATER | GROUNDWATER To: GSAs We write to provide a starting point for addressing environmental beneficial users of surface water, as required under the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA). SGMA seeks to achieve sustainability, which is defined as the absence of several undesirable results, including “depletions of interconnected surface water that have significant and unreasonable adverse impacts on beneficial users of surface water” (Water Code §10721). The Nature Conservancy (TNC) is a science-based, nonprofit organization with a mission to conserve the lands and waters on which all life depends. Like humans, plants and animals often rely on groundwater for survival, which is why TNC helped develop, and is now helping to implement, SGMA. Earlier this year, we launched the Groundwater Resource Hub, which is an online resource intended to help make it easier and cheaper to address environmental requirements under SGMA. As a first step in addressing when depletions might have an adverse impact, The Nature Conservancy recommends identifying the beneficial users of surface water, which include environmental users. This is a critical step, as it is impossible to define “significant and unreasonable adverse impacts” without knowing what is being impacted. To make this easy, we are providing this letter and the accompanying documents as the best available science on the freshwater species within the boundary of your groundwater sustainability agency (GSA).
    [Show full text]
  • Analysis of the Effects of Rotenone on Aquatic Invertebrates
    APPENDIX D Analysis of the Effects of Rotenone on Aquatic Invertebrates APPENDIX D ERRATA SHEET This technical report was prepared for the Humboldt-Toiyabe National Forest. This errata sheet only addresses the technical corrections to the report as a result of the public comments, the agency review process, and conversions with report authors. Technical corrections to the An Analysis of the Effects of Rotenone on Aquatic Invertebrate Assemblages in the Silver King Creek Basin, California, include: Correction of text in Appendix 12, pages 109-191, which incorrectly states that “Abundance data are presented as the estimated number of individuals per square meter”. Corrected text is “Abundance data are presented as the estimated number of individuals per 0.279 square meters”. Please note, to estimate the number of individuals per square meter, multiply abundance figures for taxa by 3.58. AN ANALYSIS OF THE EFFECTS OF ROTENONE ON AQUATIC INVERTEBRATE ASSEMBLAGES IN THE SILVER KING CREEK BASIN, CALIFORNIA Mark R. Vinson, PhD and Deanna K. Vinson June 2007 Prepared for U.S. Forest Service Humboldt-Toiyabe National Forest Carson City, NV ii TABLE OF CONTENTS List of Tables ...................................................................................................................iv List of Figures ..................................................................................................................vi Summary......................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • DBR Y W OREGON STATE
    The Distribution and Biology of the A. 15 Oregon Trichoptera PEE .1l(-.", DBR Y w OREGON STATE Technical Bulletin 134 AGRICULTURAL 11 EXPERIMENTI STATION Oregon State University Corvallis, Oregon INovember 1976 FOREWORD There are four major groups of insectswhoseimmature stages are almost all aquatic: the caddisflies (Trichoptera), the dragonflies and damselflies (Odonata), the mayflies (Ephemeroptera), and the stoneflies (Plecoptera). These groups are conspicuous and important elements in most freshwater habitats. There are about 7,000 described species of caddisflies known from the world, and about 1,200 of these are found in America north of Mexico. All play a significant ro'e in various aquatic ecosystems, some as carnivores and others as consumers of plant tissues. The latter group of species is an important converter of plant to animal biomass. Both groups provide food for fish, not only in larval but in pupal and adult stages as well. Experienced fishermen have long imitated these larvae and adults with a wide variety of flies and other artificial lures. It is not surprising, then, that the caddisflies have been studied in detail in many parts of the world, and Oregon, with its wide variety of aquatic habitats, is no exception. Any significant accumulation of these insects, including their various develop- mental stages (egg, larva, pupa, adult) requires the combined efforts of many people. Some collect, some describe new species or various life stages, and others concentrate on studying and describing the habits of one or more species. Gradually, a body of information accumulates about a group of insects for a particular region, but this information is often widely scattered and much effort is required to synthesize and collate the knowledge.
    [Show full text]
  • Predator Technical Report
    Report DEQ08-LAB-0048-TR PREDATOR: Development and use of RIVPACS-type macroinvertebrate models to assess the biotic condition of wadeable Oregon streams (November 2005 models) By: Shannon Hubler July 2008 Last Update 07/14/2008 DEQ08-LAB-0048-TR Version 1.1 Web pub#: 10-LAB-004 This report prepared by: Oregon Department of Environmental Quality Laboratory and Environmental Assessment Division Watershed Assessment Section 3150 NW 229th, Suite 150, Hillsboro, Oregon 97124 U.S.A. 1-800-452-4011 www.oregon.gov/deq Contact: Shannon Hubler (503) 693-5728 1 List of Tables ...................................................................................................................... 3 List of Figures ..................................................................................................................... 3 Rationale ............................................................................................................................. 4 What is a Predictive Model? ............................................................................................... 4 Why Macroinvertebrates? ................................................................................................... 4 The PREDictive Assessment Tool for Oregon (PREDATOR) .......................................... 5 How does a predictive model differ from a Multi-metric approach? ................................. 5 Developing the Models ....................................................................................................... 5 Macroinvertebrate
    [Show full text]
  • Integrated Aquatic Community and Water
    National Park Service U.S. Department of the Interior Natural Resource Stewardship and Science Integrated Aquatic Community and Water Quality Monitoring of Wadeable Streams in the Klamath Network – Annual Report 2011 results from Whiskeytown National Recreation Area and Lassen Volcanic National Park Natural Resource Technical Report NPS/KLMN/NRTR—2014/904 ON THE COVER Crystal Creek, Whiskeytown National Recreation Area Photograph by: Charles Stanley, Field Crew Leader Integrated Aquatic Community and Water Quality Monitoring of Wadeable Streams in the Klamath Network – Annual Report 2011 results from Whiskeytown National Recreation Area and Lassen Volcanic National Park Natural Resource Technical Report NPS/KLMN/NRTR—2014/904 Eric C. Dinger, and Daniel A. Sarr National Park Service 1250 Siskiyou Blvd Southern Oregon University Ashland, Oregon 97520 August 2014 U.S. Department of the Interior National Park Service Natural Resource Stewardship and Science Fort Collins, Colorado The National Park Service, Natural Resource Stewardship and Science office in Fort Collins, Colorado, publishes a range of reports that address natural resource topics. These reports are of interest and applicability to a broad audience in the National Park Service and others in natural resource management, including scientists, conservation and environmental constituencies, and the public. The Natural Resource Technical Report Series is used to disseminate results of scientific studies in the physical, biological, and social sciences for both the advancement of science and the achievement of the National Park Service mission. The series provides contributors with a forum for displaying comprehensive data that are often deleted from journals because of page limitations. All manuscripts in the series receive the appropriate level of peer review to ensure that the information is scientifically credible, technically accurate, appropriately written for the intended audience, and designed and published in a professional manner.
    [Show full text]
  • An Annotated List of Insects and Other Arthropods
    This file was created by scanning the printed publication. Text errors identified by the software have been corrected; however, some errors may remain. Invertebrates of the H.J. Andrews Experimental Forest, Western Cascade Range, Oregon. V: An Annotated List of Insects and Other Arthropods Gary L Parsons Gerasimos Cassis Andrew R. Moldenke John D. Lattin Norman H. Anderson Jeffrey C. Miller Paul Hammond Timothy D. Schowalter U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service Pacific Northwest Research Station Portland, Oregon November 1991 Parson, Gary L.; Cassis, Gerasimos; Moldenke, Andrew R.; Lattin, John D.; Anderson, Norman H.; Miller, Jeffrey C; Hammond, Paul; Schowalter, Timothy D. 1991. Invertebrates of the H.J. Andrews Experimental Forest, western Cascade Range, Oregon. V: An annotated list of insects and other arthropods. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-290. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. 168 p. An annotated list of species of insects and other arthropods that have been col- lected and studies on the H.J. Andrews Experimental forest, western Cascade Range, Oregon. The list includes 459 families, 2,096 genera, and 3,402 species. All species have been authoritatively identified by more than 100 specialists. In- formation is included on habitat type, functional group, plant or animal host, relative abundances, collection information, and literature references where available. There is a brief discussion of the Andrews Forest as habitat for arthropods with photo- graphs of representative habitats within the Forest. Illustrations of selected ar- thropods are included as is a bibliography. Keywords: Invertebrates, insects, H.J. Andrews Experimental forest, arthropods, annotated list, forest ecosystem, old-growth forests.
    [Show full text]
  • Aquatic Biology of the San Joaquin- Tulare Basins, California: Analysis of Available Data Through 1992
    Aquatic Biology of the San Joaquin- Tulare Basins, California: Analysis of Available Data Through 1992 By LARRY R. BROWN Prepared in cooperation with the National Water-Quality Assessment Program U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY WATER-SUPPLY PAPER 2471 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 publication is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Government. UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE, WASHINGTON: 1996 For sale by the U.S. Geological Survey Branch of Information Services Box 25286 Federal Center Denver, CO 80225-0286 Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data Brown, Larry R. Aquatic biology of the San Joaquin-Tulare Basins, California : Analysis of available data through 1992 / by Larry R. Brown ; prepared in cooperation with the National Water-Quality Assessment Program. p. cm. (U.S. Geological Survey water-supply paper ; 2471) Includes bibliographical references (p. ). 1 . Freshwater biology California San Joaquin River Watershed. 2. Freshwater biology California Tulare Lake Watershed. 3. Aquatic organisms Effect of water pollution on California San Joaquin River Watershed. 4. Aquatic organisms Effect of water pollution on California Tulare Lake Watershed I. National Water-Quality Assessment Program (U.S.) II. Title. III. Series QH105.C2B667 1996 574.92'9794'8 dc20 96-21432 CIP ISBN 0-607-8621 4-9 FOREWORD The mission of the U.S. Geological Survey Describe how water quality is changing over (USGS) is to assess the quantity and quality of the time. earth resources of the Nation and to provide informa­ Improve understanding of the primary natural tion that will assist resource managers and policymak- and human factors that affect water-quality ers at Federal, State, and local levels in making sound conditions.
    [Show full text]
  • Quantitative Linkages Between Sediment Supply, Streambed Fine Sediment, and Benthic Macroinvertebrates in Streams of the Klamath National Forest
    Technical Report on Quantitative Linkages Between Sediment Supply, Streambed Fine Sediment, and Benthic Macroinvertebrates in Streams of the Klamath National Forest Prepared by: The University of California, Berkeley Matthew Cover Christine May Vincent Resh William Dietrich For: United States Forest Service, Pacific Southwest Region, and Klamath National Forest Agreement #03-CR-11052007-042 July 2006 Quantitative Linkages Between Sediment Supply, Streambed Fine Sediment, and Benthic Macroinvertebrates in Streams of the Klamath National Forest Prepared by, Matthew Cover and Vincent Resh, Department of Environmental Science, Policy, and Management, Division of Insect Biology, University of California at Berkeley Christine May and William Dietrich, Department of Earth and Planetary Science, University of California at Berkeley Abstract A major gap that currently limits accurate prediction of cumulative watershed effects is the lack of quantifiable relationships between sediment supply, channel conditions, and the magnitude of a biological response. We addressed this uncertainty by testing in six streams of the Klamath National Forest whether increased sediment supply resulted in elevated levels of streambed fine sediment stored in pools and riffles, and whether fine bed material in turn was correlated with spawning gravel quality and altered benthic assemblages. Results of this study indicate that there are significant, measurable differences in streambed fine sediment levels between basins in the Klamath National Forest with high and low sediment supply as estimated by two models: (1) a fine sediment model based on a locally-calibrated version of the universal soil loss equation and (2) an empirical mass-wasting-based landslide model. Increased sediment supply was directly correlated with fine sediment stored in pools and riffles, and with an overall fining of the median grain size.
    [Show full text]
  • Ex. 281-US-407 Timothy L
    UIdaho Law Digital Commons @ UIdaho Law In re Klamath River (Klamath Tribe) Hedden-Nicely 12-4-2009 Ex. 281-US-407 Timothy L. Nightengale R2 Resource Consultants Dudley W. Reiser R2 Resource Consultants, Inc. Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.law.uidaho.edu/klamath Recommended Citation Nightengale, Timothy L. and Reiser, Dudley W., "Ex. 281-US-407" (2009). In re Klamath River (Klamath Tribe). 224. https://digitalcommons.law.uidaho.edu/klamath/224 This Expert Report is brought to you for free and open access by the Hedden-Nicely at Digital Commons @ UIdaho Law. It has been accepted for inclusion in In re Klamath River (Klamath Tribe) by an authorized administrator of Digital Commons @ UIdaho Law. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Comparison of Benthic Macroinvertebrates in Spring- Versus Run-off- Dominated Streams in the Upper Klamath Basin, Oregon Prepared for: Bureau of Indian Affairs Portland, Oregon Prepared by: R2 Resource Consultants, Inc. 15250 NE 95th Street Redmond, Washington 98052 May 2005 Ex. 281-US-407 Page 1 of 104 Comparison of Benthic Macroinvertebrates in Spring- versus Run-off-Dominated Streams in the Upper Klamath Basin, Oregon Prepared for: Bureau of Indian Affairs Portland, Oregon Prepared by: R2 Resource Consultants, Inc. Timothy L. Nightengale, M.S. and Dudley W. Reiser, Ph.D. 15250 NE 95th Street Redmond, Washington May 2005 Ex. 281-US-407 Page 2 of 104 Bureau of Indian Affairs Upper Klamath Basin Springs Versus Runoff CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .........................................................................................................VII
    [Show full text]