ADBNet

The presumptive aquatic life uses remain assessed (evaluated) as “partially supported” based on biological data collected in 2001-2002 as part of an DNR Fisheries stream sampling project: Chariton research station. A series of biological metrics which reflect stream water quality and habitat integrity were calculated from the Fisheries sampling data. The biological metrics are based on the numbers and types of fish species that were collected in the stream sampling reach. The biological metrics were combined to make a fish community index of biotic integrity (FIBI). The index ranks the biological integrity of a stream sampling reach on a rising scale from 0 (minimum) to 100 (maximum). The 2001-2002 FIBI scores were was 31, 32 and 38 (all fair). The aquatic life use support was assessed (evaluated) as partially supporting (=PS), based on a comparison of the FIBI scores with biological impairment criteria (BIC) established for previous Section 305(b) reports. The biological impairment criteria were determined from a statistical analysis of data collected at stream ecoregion reference sites from 1994-2008. The FIBI BIC for this ecoregion is 33. This segment passed the FIBI BIC 1/3 times in the last 14years.

This aquatic life assessment is now considered "evaluated" based on a change in the 2010 DNR assessment methodology. DNR now requires a segment have two or more biological samples collected from the segment in multiple years over a recent five-year period to be considered “monitored”. This segment had multiple samples collected in the previous 14 years (2001-2014); however, the multiple samples were not collected during a recent five-year period. Additionally, because these data are now considered too old (greater than five years) to accurately characterize current water quality conditions, the assessment category is considered “evaluated” (indicating an assessment with relatively lower confidence) as opposed to "monitored" (indicating an assessment with relatively higher confidence). According to DNR’s assessment/listing methodology, impairments based on “evaluated” assessments are of lesser confidence and are thus not appropriate for Section 303(d) listing (Category 5 of the Integrated Report). DNR does, however, consider these impairments as appropriate for listing under either Category 2b or 3b of the Integrated Report (waters potentially impaired and in need of further investigation).

This assessment is also considered “evaluated” (of lower confidence) due to the lack of a biological assessment protocol for headwater streams. Prior to the changes in Iowa’s surface water classification that were approved by U.S. EPA in February 2008, this stream was classified only for general uses due to the inability of the stream to support a viable aquatic community at low-flow conditions. DNR’s existing biological assessment protocol, however, was calibrated to aquatic life reference conditions in larger wadeable streams with perennial flow. The aquatic environment of most headwater streams is one of extremes in water quality. Consequently, intermittent headwater streams tend to have biological diversity that is low relative to more stable aquatic environments of larger streams with perennial flow. Thus, the use of biological assessment methods developed for the ecologically more stable and diverse streams will likely overstate the existence of impairment in headwater streams. For these reasons, headwater stream reaches that show a failure to meet regional expectations for aquatic biota (fish or aquatic macroinvertebrates) will not be added to Iowa’s Section 303(d) list of impaired waters (Category 5 of the Integrated Report). The assessment type for these assessed waters will be considered "evaluated" (indicating an assessment with relatively lower confidence) as opposed to “monitored" (indicating an assessment with relatively high confidence). Such waters will be placed in either Category 2b or 3b of the IR and thus will be added to the state’s list of “waters in need of further investigation”.