North Skunk River IA 03-NSK-854
from confluence with Cedar Cr. (S15 T75N R12W Keokuk Co.) to confluence with Middle Cr. in S35 T76N R14W Mahaska Co.
- Assessment Cycle
- 2018
- Release Status
- Final
- Data Collection Period
- Overall IR Category
- 5 - Water is impaired or threatened and a TMDL is needed.
- Trend
- Unknown
- Created
- 5/23/2019 2:40:52 PM
- Updated
- 8/2/2019 9:23:46 AM
The Class A1 (primary contact recreation) uses are assessed (monitored) as "partially supported" due to levels of indicator bacteria that exceed state water quality criteria. The Class B(WW2) aquatic life uses remain assessed as "not supporting" due to violations of state water quality criteria for chromium during the 2004-06 assessment period. Fish consumption uses remain "not assessed" due to the lack of fish contaminant monitoring in this river segment. The assessments of support of beneficial uses are based on results of DNR ambient monthly water quality monitoring conducted on the North Skunk River southwest of Sigourney in Keokuk County (STORET station 10540001) during the 2014-2016 assessment period and on 2013-2015 DNR/SHL biological sampling data. Data from this monitoring station were also used to assess support of the Class A1 and B(WW2) uses of the adjacent downstream segment of the North Skunk River (IA 03-NSK-853: mouth to the confluence with Cedar Creek near Sigourney).
The Class A1 (primary contact recreation) uses are assessed (monitored) as "partially supported" based on levels of indicator bacteria that exceeded state water quality criteria. The geometric means of indicator bacteria (E. coli) in the 23 samples collected during the recreational seasons of 2014 through 2016 at DNR station 10540001 were as follows: the 2014 geometric mean was 225 orgs/100 ml, the 2015 geometric mean was 219 orgs/100 ml, and the 2016 geometric mean was 385 orgs/100 ml. All three recreation season geometric means exceeded the Class A1 geometric mean criterion of 126 orgs/100 ml. Thirteen of the combined 23 samples (57%) exceeded Iowa’s Class A1 single-sample maximum criterion of 235 orgs/100 ml. According to U.S. EPA guidelines for Section 305(b) reporting and DNR’s assessment/listing methodology, if the geometric mean is greater than 126 orgs/100 ml., the primary contact recreation uses should be assessed as "impaired" (see pgs 3-33 to 3-35 of U.S. EPA 1997b). Thus, because at least one recreation season geometric mean exceeded criteria for Class A1 uses, these uses are assessed as "partially supported." In contrast to the aquatic life use assessment based on the 2004-2006 water quality data, biological sampling data collected in 2013-2015 by DNR/SHL suggests that the aquatic life uses in this segment are "fully supporting". This evaluated biological assessment was based on data collected in 2013 and 2014 as part of the DNR/SHL large river sampling project. A series of biological metrics that reflect stream water quality and habitat integrity were calculated from the biological sampling data. The biological metrics are based on the numbers and types of benthic macroinvertebrate taxa collected in the stream sampling reach. The biological metrics were combined to make a benthic macroinvertebrate index (BMIBI). The index ranks the biological integrity of a stream sampling reach on a rising scale from 0 (minimum) to 100 (maximum). The 2013-2015 BMIBI scores were 56, 57, 69 (all good). The aquatic life use support was assessed (evaluated) as fully supporting (=FS), based on a comparison of the BMIBI scores with biological impairment criteria (BIC) established from a statistical analysis of biological data collected at stream ecoregion reference sites from 1994-2008. The BMIBI BIC for this ecoregion is 51. This assessment is considered evaluated because the drainage area (631 mi2) above this sampling site was greater than the maximum limit (500 mi2) that was used to calibrate the Iowa wadeable stream impairment criteria. Even though this site passed the BMIBI BIC (3/3), it is uncertain as to whether or not this segment is meeting the aquatic life criteria because the site used for the assessment doesn’t fall in the calibrated watershed size.