East Big Creek IA 02-CED-503
mouth (S30 T84N R5W Linn Co.) to Hwy 151 crossing in S27 T84N R5W Linn Co.
- Cycle
- 2018
- 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
- 5/13/2019 12:34:57 PM
- Updated
- 5/13/2019 12:36:09 PM
The presumptive Class A1 (primary contact recreation) uses remain "not assessed" due to the lack of information upon which to base an assessment. The Class B(WW2) aquatic life uses are assessed (evaluated) as "fully supporting" based on results of DNR/SHL biological sampling in 2001.
The Class B(WW2) aquatic life uses remains assessed (evaluated) as “fully supporting” based on data collected in 2001 as part of the DNR/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 72 (excellent) and the BMIBI score was 75 (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 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 1994-2004. The riffle habitat FIBI BIC for this ecoregion is 65 and the natural substrate BMIBI BIC for this ecoregion is 70. This aquatic life assessment is considered "evaluated" because there were not two or more samples collected from this segment in multiple years over 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). Despite this change in assessment methodology and type, this waterbody remains in IR Category 2a.