Crabapple Creek IA 02-CED-502
mouth (NE 1/4 S1 T83N R6W Linn Co.) to headwaters in W 1/2 S36 T85N R6W Linn Co.
- Cycle
- 2016
- Release Status
- Final
- Overall IR
- 2 - Some of the designated uses are met but there is insufficient data to determine if remaining designated uses are met.
- Trend
- Unknown
- Created
- 8/31/2016 8:55:39 AM
- Updated
- 10/11/2016 9:30:45 AM
The presumptive Class A1 (primary contact recreation) uses remain "not assessed" (IR 3a) due to the lack of information upon which to base an assessment. The presumptive Class B(WW1) aquatic life uses remain assessed (evaluated) as "fully supported" (IR 2a) based on results of IDNR/SHL biological sampling conducted in 2001.
The Class presumptive Class B(WW1) aquatic life uses remain assessed (evaluated) as “fully supporting” based on data collected in 2001 as part of the IDNR/SHL stream biocriteria project. A series of biological metrics which reflect stream water quality and habitat integrity were calculated from the biocriteria sampling data. The biological metrics are based on the numbers and types of benthic macroinvertebrate taxa and 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) and a benthic macroinvertebrate index (BMIBI). The indexes rank the biological integrity of a stream sampling reach on a rising scale from 0 (minimum) to 100 (maximum). The 2001 FIBI score was 57 (good) and the BMIBI score was 70 (good). The aquatic life use support was assessed (evaluated) as fully supporting (=FS), based on a comparison of the FIBI and BMIBI scores with biological impairment criteria (BIC) established from a statistical analysis of data collected at stream ecoregion reference sites from 1994-2008. The non-riffle habitat FIBI BIC for this ecoregion is 44 and the natural substrate BMIBI BIC for this ecoregion is 70. Even though this site passed both the FIBI and BMIBI BICs, it is uncertain as to whether or not this segment is meeting the aquatic life criteria because it is a small headwater stream and doesn’t fall in the calibrated watershed size. Also, 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).