DOCSLIB.ORG

Biological and Water Quality Study of Big Darby Creek and Selected Tributaries 2001/2002

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Biological and Water Quality Study of Big Darby Creek and Selected Tributaries 2001/2002 State of Ohio Environmental Protection Agency Division of Surface Water Biological and Water Quality Study of the Big Darby Creek Watershed, 2001/2002 Logan, Champaign, Union, Madison, Franklin and Pickaway Counties Greenside Darter Central Mottled Sculpin (Cottus bairdi bairdi) (Etheostoma blennioides Clubshell Mussel blennioides) (Pleurobema clava) Spotted Darter Eastern Banded Darter (Etheostoma maculatum) (Etheostoma zonale zonale) Helgrammite (Corydalus cornutus) Smallmouth Bass (Micropterus doloieui dolomieui) stonefly nymph mayfly nymph (Isonychia sp.) Bob Taft, Governor Christopher Jones, Director Biological and Water Quality Study of Big Darby Creek and Selected Tributaries 2001/2002 Logan, Champaign, Union, Madison, Franklin and Pickaway Counties, Ohio June 2004 Ohio EPA Technical Report EAS/2004-6-3 prepared by State of Ohio Environmental Protection Agency Division of Surface Water Lazarus Government Center 122 South Front St., Columbus OH 43215 Mail to: P.O. Box 1049, Columbus OH 43216-1049 Bob A Taft Governor, State of Ohio Christopher Jones Director, Ohio Environmental Protection Agency CONTENTS How To Use This Document.................................................. vii Notice to Users.............................................................. viii Acknowledgments .............................................................x Foreword ................................................................... xi Section A. General Study Discussion and Results A.1 Introduction.......................................................... A.1 A.2 Big Darby Creek Study Area Description ................................ A.10 A.2.1 Location / Size ..................................................A.10 A.2.2 Climate .......................................................A.10 A.2.3 Geology .......................................................A.13 A.2.4 Ecoregion ......................................................A.13 A.2.5 Groundwater ...................................................A.16 A.2.6 Soils ..........................................................A.16 A.2.7 Tributaries .....................................................A.19 A.2.8 Prairies / Wetlands ...............................................A.24 A.2.9 Land Use ......................................................A.29 A.2.10 Protected Lands .................................................A.32 A.2.11 Watershed Protection Funding Mechanisms - Non Point Source Pollution ................................................A.34 A.2.12 Local Government Structure - Land Use Planning ......................A.34 A.2.13 Conservation Programs - Practices ..................................A.36 A.3 Study Methods........................................................A.40 A.3.1 Determining Use Attainment Status .................................A.40 A.3.2 Habitat Assessment ..............................................A.41 A.3.3 Macroinvertebrate Community Assessment ...........................A.41 A.3.4 Fish Community Assessment ......................................A.42 A.3.5 Fish Tissue Assessment ...........................................A.42 A.3.6 Causal Associations ..............................................A.43 A.4 Summary of Findings by Data Type......................................A.44 A.4.1 Pollutant Loadings: 2001..........................................A.44 A.4.2 Spills and Wild Animal Kills in the Big Darby Creek Watershed: 1979-2002 ...........................................A.45 A.4.3 Chemical Water Quality ..........................................A.46 A.4.4 Datasonde™ Results .............................................A.53 A.4.5 Sediment Chemistry .............................................A.55 A.4.6 Instream and Riparian Habitat in Support of Aquatic Life ................A.57 i A.4.7 Macroinvertebrate Community .....................................A.66 A.4.7.1 Watershed Assessment ....................................A.66 A.4.7.2 Changes in Biological Community Performance: Macroinvertebrate Communities ............................A.77 A.4.7.3 Drainage Area Comparisons: Macroinvertebrate Communities ...........................................A.80 A.4.7.4 Trends in Unionid Mussel Communities ......................A.82 A.4.8 Fish Community ................................................A.84 A.4.8.1 Watershed Assessment ....................................A.84 A.4.8.2 Drainage Area Relationships ...............................A.93 A.5 Findings: Status of Designated Uses......................................A.96 A.5.1 Aquatic Life Uses ...............................................A.96 A.5.1.1 Understanding Use Attainability ...........................A.104 A.5.1.1.1 Background ..................................A.104 A.5.1.1.2 Requirements .................................A.105 A.5.1.2 Results ...............................................A.106 A.5.1.2.1 General Assigned Use Recommendations ..........A.107 A.5.1.2.2 Dual Assigned Use Recommendations .............A.118 A.5.2 Recreation Uses ................................................A.124 A.6 Findings: Discussion by Subwatershed ...................................A.130 A.7 Conclusions .........................................................A.163 A.8 Recommendations....................................................A.167 A.8.1 Protect Ground Water Sources ....................................A.167 A.8.2 Manage Storm Water ............................................A.167 A.8.3 Reduce Nutrient Enrichment ......................................A.168 A.8.4 Improve Habitat Quality .........................................A.169 A.8.5 Develop a Spill Response Plan ....................................A.170 A.8.6 Reduce Bacteria Levels ..........................................A.170 A.8.7 Monitor Watershed Condition .....................................A.171 A.8.7.1 Investigative Monitoring ..................................A.171 A.8.7.2 Periodic Follow-up Monitoring .............................A.172 A.8.7.3 Compliance Monitoring ...................................A.174 A.9 References ..........................................................A.175 A.10 Reader Assistance ...................................................A.181 A.10.1 Acronyms ....................................................A.181 A.10.2 Glossary ......................................................A.183 A.10.3 Mechanisms for Water Quality Impairment ..........................A.194 ii Section B. Detailed Discussion of Findings by Data Type List of Figures in Section B List of Tables in Section B B.1 Point Source Pollutant Loadings.......................................... B.1.1 B.2 Spills and Wild Animal Kills in the Big Darby Creek Watershed: 1979-2002 ...... B.2.1 B.3 Chemical Water Quality ................................................ B.3.1 B.3.1 Chemical, Physical Water Quality Changes: 1979-2001 ............... B.3.83 B.4 Datasonde Results ..................................................... B.4.1 B.5 Sediment Chemistry................................................... B.5.1 B.6 Instream and Riparian Habitat in Support of Aquatic Life ...................... B.6.1 B.7 Macroinvertebrate Community........................................... B.7.1 B.7.1 Watershed Assessment .......................................... B.7.1 B.7.2 Changes in Biological Community Performance: Macroinvertebrate Communities .................................. B.7.59 B.7.3 Drainage Area Comparisons: Macroinvertebrate Communities .......... B.7.67 B.7.4 Trends in Unionid Mussel Communities ............................ B.7.72 B.8 Fish Community...................................................... B.8.1 B.8.1 Watershed Assessment .......................................... B.8.1 B.8.2 Drainage Area Relationships ..................................... B.8.52 B.8.3 Fish Tissue Samples ........................................... B.8.67 Section C. Appendices List of Figures in Section C List of Tables in Section C C.1 Water Chemistry........................................................C.1 C.2 Physical Habitat ........................................................C.2 C.3 Mussel Species Richness Maps ............................................C.3 iii FIGURES IN SECTION A A.1. Map of the Big Darby Creek watershed ...................................A.12 A.2. Glacial geology in west central Ohio ......................................A.14 A.3. Ecoregions of Ohio with subecoregions...................................A.15 A.4. Glacial groundwater yield in the Big Darby watershed ........................A.17 A.5. Generalized soils map .................................................A.18 A.6. Prairies of the “Virginia Military Lands” ..................................A.26 A.7. Map of some fens and forest seeps on a portion of the Little Darby Creek ........A.27 A.8. Map of some fens and forest seeps on a portion of the Little Darby Creek ........A.28 A.9. 1997 land use in Darby Creek watershed ..................................A.31 A.10. Protected land .......................................................A.33 A.11. The four watershed assessment units of the Big Darby Creek watershed .........A.132 iv TABLES IN SECTION A A.1. Sampling locations in the Big Darby Creek watershed, June - October, 2001 .......A.3 A.2. Sampling locations in the Big Darby Creek watershed, June - October, 2002 .......A.7 A.3. Total monthly precipitation for the years 2000 - 2003, Bellefontaine and Marysville stations ................................................A.11 A.4.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Page 1 03089500 Mill Creek Near Berlin Center, Ohio 19.13 40.9638 80.9476 10.86 9.13 0.6880 58.17 0.77 0.41 2.10 03092000 Kale C
    Table 2-1. Basin characteristics determined for selected streamgages in Ohio and adjacent States. [Characteristics listed in this table are described in detail in the text portion of appendix 2; column headings used in this table are shown in parentheses adjacent to the bolded long variable names] Station number Station name DASS Latc Longc SL10-85 LFPath SVI Agric Imperv OpenWater W 03089500 Mill Creek near Berlin Center, Ohio 19.13 40.9638 80.9476 10.86 9.13 0.6880 58.17 0.77 0.41 2.10 03092000 Kale Creek near Pricetown, Ohio 21.68 41.0908 81.0409 14.09 12.88 0.8076 40.46 1.08 0.48 2.31 03092090 West Branch Mahoning River near Ravenna, Ohio 21.81 41.2084 81.1983 20.23 11.19 0.5068 38.65 2.35 1.01 2.51 03102950 Pymatuning Creek at Kinsman, Ohio 96.62 41.4985 80.6401 5.46 21.10 0.6267 52.26 0.82 1.18 5.60 03109500 Little Beaver Creek near East Liverpool, Ohio 495.57 40.8103 80.6732 7.89 55.27 0.4812 38.05 1.98 0.79 1.41 03110000 Yellow Creek near Hammondsville, Ohio 147.22 40.5091 80.8855 9.37 33.62 0.5439 19.84 0.34 0.33 0.36 03111500 Short Creek near Dillonvale, Ohio 122.95 40.2454 80.8859 15.25 27.26 0.3795 30.19 1.08 0.93 1.16 03111548 Wheeling Creek below Blaine, Ohio 97.60 40.1274 80.9477 13.43 27.46 0.3280 40.92 0.97 0.56 0.64 03114000 Captina Creek at Armstrongs Mills, Ohio 133.69 39.9307 81.0696 13.56 26.99 0.6797 32.76 0.54 0.64 0.66 03115400 Little Muskingum River at Bloomfield, Ohio 209.94 39.6699 81.1370 5.50 44.84 0.7516 10.00 0.25 0.12 0.12 03115500 Little Muskingum River at Fay, Ohio 258.25 39.6406 81.1531 4.32 60.10 0.7834
    [Show full text]
  • Spatial and Temporal Variability of River Periphyton Below a Hypereutrophic Lake and a Series of Dams
    Science of the Total Environment 541 (2016) 1382–1392 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Science of the Total Environment journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/scitotenv Spatial and temporal variability of river periphyton below a hypereutrophic lake and a series of dams Nadia D. Gillett a,⁎,YangdongPana, J. Eli Asarian b, Jacob Kann c a Environmental Science and Management, Portland State University, PO Box 751, Portland, OR 97207, USA b Riverbend Sciences, PO Box 2874, Weaverville, CA 96093, USA c Aquatic Ecosystem Sciences, 295 East Main St., Ashland, OR 97520, USA HIGHLIGHTS GRAPHICAL ABSTRACT • Klamath River is an “upside-down” river originating from a hypereutrophic lake. • Periphyton assemblages change season- ally with flow and longitudinally with nutrients. • Longitudinally, nutrients and benthic N-fixers show an inverse relationship. • This study can inform future nutrient reductions, flow regimes, and dam removals. article info abstract Article history: Klamath River is described as an “upside-down” river due to its origins from the hypereutrophic Upper Klamath Received 3 August 2015 Lake (UKL) and hydrology that is heavily regulated by upstream dams. Understanding the lake and reservoir ef- Received in revised form 7 October 2015 fects on benthic communities in the river can inform important aspects of its water quality dynamics. Periphyton Accepted 8 October 2015 samples were collected in May–November from 2004, 2006–2013 at nine long-term monitoring sites along Available online 11 November 2015 306 river km below UKL and a series of dams (n = 299). Cluster analysis of periphyton assemblages identified – Editor: D. Barcelo three statistically different periphyton groups (denoted Groups 1 3).
    [Show full text]
  • Ohiocontrolled Hunting
    CONTROLLED HUNTING OHIO OPPORTUNITIES 2020-2021 Application period JULY 1, 2020 to JULY 31, 2020 OHIO DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES DIVISION OF WILDLIFE wildohio.gov OHIO DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES DIVISION OF WILDLIFE The Division of Wildlife’s mission is to conserve and improve fish and wildlife resources and their habitats for sustainable use and appreciation by all. VISIT US ON THE WEB WILDOHIO.GOV FOR GENERAL INFORMATION 1-800-WILDLIFE (1-800-945-3543) TO REPORT WILDLIFE VIOLATIONS 1-800-POACHER (1-800-762-2437) DIVISION OF WILDLIFE **AVAILABLE 24 HOURS** DISTRICT OFFICES OHIO GAME CHECK OHIOGAMECHECK.COM WILDLIFE DISTRICT ONE 1500 Dublin Road 1-877-TAG-IT-OH Columbus, OH 43215 (1-877-824-4864) (614) 644‑3925 WILDLIFE DISTRICT TWO HIP CERTIFICATION 952 Lima Avenue 1-877-HIP-OHIO Findlay, OH 45840 (1-877-447-6446) (419) 424‑5000 WILDLIFE DISTRICT THREE FOLLOW US ON SOCIAL MEDIA 912 Portage Lakes Drive Akron, OH 44319 Like us on Facebook (330) 644‑2293 facebook.com/ohiodivisionofwildlife Follow us on Twitter WILDLIFE DISTRICT FOUR twitter.com/OhioDivWildlife 360 E. State Street Athens, OH 45701 (740) 589‑9930 WILDLIFE DISTRICT FIVE 1076 Old Springfield Pike Xenia, OH 45385 (937) 372‑9261 EQUAL OPPORTUNITY The Ohio Division of Wildlife offers equal opportunity regardless GOVERNOR, STATE OF OHIO of race, color, national origin, age, disability or sex (in education programs). If you believe you have been discriminated against in MIKE DeWINE any program, activity or facility, you should contact: The U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service Diversity & Civil Rights Programs-External Programs, DIRECTOR, OHIO DEPARTMENT 4040 N.
    [Show full text]
  • Stillwater River Opportunities for Recreation, from Kayaking and Canoeing to Fishing and Wildlife Watching
    Our rivers and streams offer wonderful Stillwater River opportunities for recreation, from kayaking and canoeing to fishing and wildlife watching. But it’s important to learn how to enjoy them safely. Review the information on the reverse side to make sure your next outing on the Stillwater River is a safe and fun adventure. HARDIN AUGLAIZE MERCER A N O The Great Miami River Watershed A I I H D O LOGAN N I SHELBY S T I L L W A T E R R E R I V V TOLEDO E I R CLEVELAND DARKE R CHAMPAIGN I M MIAMI A I M SW 65.0 T R A E E V I CLARK R R G A D SW 63.0 M MONTGOMERY DAYTON PREBLE SW 61.0 COLUMBUS GREENE R E V I R I M I A CINCINNATI M T A E BUTLER R SW 57.0 G WARREN SW 59.0 HAMILTON OHIO KENTUCKY SW 55.0 SW 53.7 SW 49.0 SW 53.0 SW 47.0 SW 45.0 SW 43.0 SW 51.0 SW 38.6 SW 41.0 SW 37.5 SW 35.0 SW 35.9 GC 27.0 GC 25.0 SW 32.4 GC 20.8 GC 13.7 GC 21.3 GC 13.0 GC 03.0 SW 32.3 GC GC 11.0 GC 09.0 GC 05.0 GC 23.6 GC 21.3 GC 19.5 GC 13.7 06.2 GC 01.7 SW 31.2 GC 15.0 GC 07.0 GC 01.6 GC 21.6 GC 17.0 SW 30.5 SW 29.4 SW 27.6 SW 27.0 SW 25.0 MAP SYMBOLS SW 23.3 SW 23.4 Ohio State Routes Brukner SW 21.5 Nature Center SW Stillwater River U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Antidegradation Classifications Assigned to State and National Scenic Rivers in Ohio Under Proposed Rules, March 25, 2002
    State of Ohio Environmental Protection Agency Antidegradation Classifications Assigned to State and National Scenic Rivers in Ohio under Proposed Rules, March 25, 2002 March 25, 2002 prepared by Division of Surface Water Division of Surface Water, 122 South Front St., PO Box 1049, Columbus, Ohio 43215 (614) 644-2001 Introduction Federal Water Quality Standard (WQS) program regulations require that States adopt and use an antidegradation policy. The policy has two distinct purposes. First, an antidegradation policy must provide a systematic and reasoned decision making process to evaluate the need to lower water quality. Regulated activities should not lower water quality unless the need to do so is demonstrated based on technical, social and economic criteria. The second purpose of an antidegradation policy is to ensure that the State’s highest quality streams, rivers and lakes are preserved. This document deals with the latter aspect of the antidegradation policy. Section 6111.12(A)(2) of the Ohio Revised Code specifically requires that the Ohio EPA establish provisions “ensuring that waters of exceptional recreational and ecological value are maintained as high quality resources for future generations.” Table 1 explains the proposed classification system to accomplish this directive. The shaded categories denote the special higher resource quality categories. The proposed rule contains 157 stream segments classified as either State Resource Waters (SRW) or Superior High Quality Waters (SHQW). The approximate mileage in each classification is shown in Table 1. The total mileage in both classifications represents less than four percent of Ohio’s streams. Refer to “Methods and Documentation Used to Propose State Resource Water and Superior High Quality Water Classifications for Ohio’s Water Quality Standards” (Ohio EPA, 2002) for further information about the process used to develop the list of streams.
    [Show full text]
  • Evaluating Beneficial Use: Recreation
    Ohio 2010 Integrated Report Section F Evaluating Beneficial Use: Recreation F1. Background Prior to the 2002 Integrated Report (IR), the reporting of recreation use impairment in Ohio was sporadic. Section 305(b) reports (1998 and earlier) may have included an indication of the potential for recreation use impairment in various streams, but a cohesive listing was not presented. The 2002 IR employed a uniform methodology to examine readily available data on fecal coliform counts. This approach was based on counting the number of exceedances of the secondary contact recreation use maximum criterion [5000 colony forming units (cfu)/100 ml fecal coliform or 576 cfu/100 ml Escherichia coli (E. coli)]. Any assessment unit with five or more samples over the last five years above these values was listed as having an impaired recreation use. The 2004 IR adopted a more statistically robust methodology for assessing the recreation use attainment of the State’s surface waters linked more directly to the applicable water quality standards. The methodology adopted in 2004 continued to be used through the 2008 IR. The 2008 IR also included a preview of changes anticipated at the time for the 2010 report based on the expectation that the watershed assessment unit (WAU) would change from a larger watershed size (11-digit hydrologic unit) to a smaller watershed size (12-digit hydrologic unit) and on four anticipated revisions to the water quality standards: 1) dropping the fecal coliform criteria; 2) creation of a tiered set of classes of primary contact recreation waters based on recreation use intensity; 3) revision of the geometric mean averaging period; and 4) extension of the recreation season.
    [Show full text]
  • Ohio Archaeological Inventory Form Instruction Manual
    Ohio Archaeological Inventory Form Instruction Manual With the support of the U.S. Department of the Interior’s Historic Preservation Fund and the Ohio Historic Preservation Office of the Ohio Historical Society Copyright © 2007 Ohio Historical Society, Inc. All rights reserved. The publication of these materials has been made possible in part by a grant from the U.S. Department of the Interior’s National Park Service, administered by the Ohio Historic Preservation Office. However, its contents do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the Department of the Interior, nor does the mention of trade names or commercial products imply their endorsement. The Ohio Historic Preservation Office receives federal assistance from the U.S. Department of the Interior’s Historic Preservation Fund. U.S. Department of the Interior regulations prohibit unlawful discrimination in depart- mental federally assisted programs on the basis of race, color, national origin, age or disability. Any person who believes he or she has been discriminated against in any program, activity, or facility operated by a recipient of Federal assistance should write to: Office of Equal Opportunity, U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service, 1849 C Street N.W., Washington D.C. 20240. Ohio Historic Preservation Office 567 East Hudson Street Columbus, Ohio 43211-1030 614/ 298-2000 Fax 614/ 298-2037 Visit us at www.ohiohistory.org OAl Rev. June 2003 Table of Contents Introduction and General Instructions 1 Definition of Archaeological Resource (Site) 1 Submitting an Ohio Archaeological Inventory Form 2 Itemized Instructions 3 A. Identification 3 1. Type of Form 3 2.
    [Show full text]
  • Cuyahoga River RAP State of the River Report
    CUYAHOGA RIVER REMEDIAL ACTION PLAN STATE OF THE RIVER REPORT & PROCEEDINGSPROCEEDINGS OFOF THETHE OCTOCTOBEROBER 25,25, 20012001 SYMPOSIUMSYMPOSIUM JANUARY 2002 Sponsored by: The Cuyahoga River Remedial Action Plan (RAP) Prepared by Cuyahoga River Remedial Action Plan Coordinating Committee Cuyahoga River Remedial Action Plan 1299 Superior Ave, Cleveland Ohio 44114 (216) 241-2414 FAX (216) 621-3024 This report was funded by grants from the George Gund Foundation, the Cleveland Foundation, the GAR Foundation, the Ohio EPEPAA andand thethe USUS ForestForest ServiceService DivisionDivision ofof StateState andand PrivatePrivate ForestryForestry NortheasternNortheastern Area,Area, andand technicaltechnical supportsupport from the Northeast Ohio Areawide Coordinating Agency. Additional reproduction of this report was funded with support from the US Environmental Protection Agency Great Lakes National Program Office CUYAHOGA RIVER REMEDIAL ACTION PLAN STATE OF THE RIVER REPORT AND PROCEEDINGS OF THE OCTOBER 25, 2001 SYMPOSIUM JANUARY 2002 Prepared by Cuyahoga River Remedial Action Plan Coordinating Committee Cuyahoga River Remedial Action Plan 1299 Superior Ave, Cleveland Ohio 44114 (216) 241-2414 FAX (216) 621-3024 This report was funded by grants from the George Gund Foundation, the Cleveland Foundation, the GAR Foundation, the Ohio EPA and the US Forest Service Division of State and Private Forestry Northeastern Area, and technical support from the Northeast Ohio Areawide Coordinating Agency Acknowledgements Preparation of this document
    [Show full text]
  • Biological and Water Quality Study of the Olentangy River and Selected Tributaries 1999 Delaware and Franklin Counties, Ohio
    State of Ohio Ecological Assessment Environmental Protection Agency Division of Surface Water Biological and Water Quality Study of the Olentangy River and Selected Tributaries 1999 Delaware and Franklin Counties, Ohio k Mayfly (Stenonema) Creek Chub (Semolotus atromaculatus) Bob Taft April 11, 2001 Governor, State of Ohio Christopher Jones Director, Ohio Environmental Protection Agency P.O. Box 1049, Lazarus Government Center, 122 S. Front St., Columbus, OH 43216-1049 MAS/2000-12-6 1999 Olentangy River TSD April 11, 2001 Biological and Water Quality Study of the Olentangy River and Selected Tributaries 1999 Delaware and Franklin Counties, Ohio April 11, 2001 OEPA Technical Report MAS/2000-12-6 prepared by State of Ohio Environmental Protection Agency Division of Surface Water Lazarus Government Center 122 South Front St., Columbus OH 43215 Mail to: P.O. Box 1049, Columbus OH 43216-1049 Bob A Taft Governor, State of Ohio Christopher Jones Director, Ohio Environmental Protection Agency MAS/2000-12-6 1999 Olentangy River TSD April 11, 2001 TABLE OF CONTENTS NOTICE TO USERS ........................................................ i ACKNOWLEDGMENTS .................................................... iii INTRODUCTION ..........................................................1 SUMMARY ...............................................................2 CONCLUSIONS ............................................................5 RECOMMENDATIONS ......................................................6 METHODS ...............................................................16
    [Show full text]
  • Flood of July 1-2, 1987, in North-Central Ohio
    FLOOD OF JULY 1-2, 1987, IN NORTH-CENTRAL OHIO By Ronald I. Mayo and James P. Mangus U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Open-File Report 89-376 Columbus, Ohio 1989 DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR MANUEL LUJAN, JR., Secretary U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Dallas L. Peck, Director For additional information Copies of this report can write to: be purchased from: District Chief U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Geological Survey Books and Open-File Reports 975 W. Third Avenue Box 25425, Federal Center Columbus, OH 43212-3192 Building 810 Denver, CO 80225 CONTENTS Abstract 1 Introduction 1 Weather conditions preceding the flood of July 1-2,1987 : Precipitation and runoff during the flood 3 Effects of the flood on municipalities in north-central Ohio Richland County 10 Shelby 10 Bellville 10 Mansfield 13 Crawford County 13 Bucyrus 13 Galion 13 Marion County 14 Marion 14 Morrow County 14 Mt. Gilead 14 Conclusions 16 References cited 16 ILLUSTRATIONS Figure 1. Location of study area 2 2. Hourly precipitation at radio station WMRN in Marion, Ohio, July 1-2, 1987 5 3. Isohyetal lines for storm of July 1-2, 1987, in north-central Ohio 4. Flood profile of Black Fork Mohican River at Shelby, Ohio 11 5. Flood profile of Clear Fork Mohican River at Bellville, Ohio 12 6. Flood profile of Whetstone Creek at Mt Gilead, Ohio 15 TABLES Table 1. Records of precipitation data, June 29 through July 2, 1987 in north-central Ohio 7 2. Summary of flood stages and discharges of streams and reservoirs in north-central Ohio 8 111 CONVERSION FACTORS AND ABBREVIATIONS For the convenience of readers who may prefer metric (International System) units rather than the inch-pound units used in this report, values may be converted by using the fol­ lowing factors: Multiply inch-pound unit By To obtain metric unit inch (in.) 25.4 millimeter (mm) foot (ft) 0.3048 meter (m) mile (mi) 1.609 kilometer (km) square mile (mi2) 2.590 square kilometer (km2) cubic foot per second cubic meter per second (ftVs) 0.02832 (m3/s) acre-foot 0.001233 cubic hectometer (hm3) IV FLOOD OF JULY 1-2,1987, IN NORTH-CENTRAL OHIO By Ronald I.
    [Show full text]
  • Periphyton, Excluding Diatoms and Desmids, from Yap, Caroline Islands
    Micronesica 23(1): 27-40, 1990 Periphyton, Excluding Diatoms and Desmids, from Yap, Caroline Islands CHRISTOPHER s. LOBBAN I The Marine Laboratory, University of Guam, Mangilao, GU 96923, U.S .A. and 2 FAY K. DAILY , WILLIAM A . DAILY\ ROBERT W . HOSHAW\ & MARIA SCHEFTER Abstract-Freshwater habitats of Yap, Federated States of Micronesia, are described, including first algal records. Periphyton and other visible algae were collected chiefly from streams and ponds. Streams were well shaded and lacked algae except in clearings; dominant algae were Schizothrix calcicola and Microcoleus spp. (Cyanophyta) and Cladophora sp. (Chlorophyta). Open ponds were dominated by blue-green algal mats, but some also had abundant Nitella and desmids. Desmids and diatoms were numerous and will be treated in other papers. The species list is short: 12 blue-green algae, 2 red algae, 2 charophytes, 7 filamentous greens, and 5 flagellates. All are new records for Yap and many for Micronesia. No endemic species were found . The freshwater algal flora of the Yap Islands does not show characteristics of the biota of "oceanic" islands. Introduction While there has been considerable study of marine algae in Micronesia (Tsuda & Wray 1977, Tsuda 1978, 1981), freshwater algae have been all but ignored throughout Micronesia, Melanesia, and Polynesia. However, studies of island freshwater algae could contribute to understanding of both tropical limnology and island biology. The distinctiveness of tropical limnology has recently been emphasized by Lewis (1987), who showed that limnological principles derived from studies of temperate lakes cannot be intuitively extrapolated to tropical lakes . The same is also true for transfer of knowledge of streams and ponds.
    [Show full text]
  • Biological Assessment of Water Pollution Using Periphyton Productivity: a Review
    Nature Environment and Pollution Technology p-ISSN: 0972-6268 Vol. 16 No. 2 pp. 559-567 2017 An International Quarterly Scientific Journal e-ISSN: 2395-3454 Review Research Paper Open Access Biological Assessment of Water Pollution Using Periphyton Productivity: A Review Shweta Singh†, Abhishek James and Ram Bharose Dept. of Environmental Science, School of Environment and Forestry, SHIATS, Naini-211 007, Allahabad, U.P., India †Corresponding author: Shweta Singh ABSTRACT Nat. Env. & Poll. Tech. Website: www.neptjournal.com Periphyton is an entire community of organisms and its productivity is quite significant in relation to total Received: 12-05-2016 primary production, which is often equal to or exceeding as biomass (ash free dry weight) in terms of Accepted: 16-07-2016 phytopigment content (chlorophyll-a) to assess water pollution. Productivity is caused by increased nutrient enrichment due to sewage and agro-industries. Periphyton is useful as biological indicator of Key Words: water pollution. Several biotic and abiotic environmental factors are affected due to periphyton growth. Bioassessment Its growth depends upon some factors such as temperature, light, pH, DO and nutrients (N and P). Biological indicator Productivity is often limited by nitrogen (N) and phosphorus (P) availability as periphyton use N Periphyton compounds and phosphorus for their growth. Chlorophyll-a alone is an inadequate predictor of the Water pollution relative contribution of different algal communities to the total primary production. Periphyton production is associated with various factors and can be evaluated by physico-chemical, chlorophyll and biomass estimation and causes several deleterious effects to water quality. INTRODUCTION isms are used to determine the situation of the environment Water is very important for the survival of all life forms and (Clements et al.
    [Show full text]