Abstract:
The primary purpose of this review and summary of State and National biological assessment methods, physical habitat assessment methods, and biological criteria is to allow comparisons to be made between federal and states organizations that are directly or indirectly involved in aquatic resource monitoring and management. In addition to the individual reviews of identified methods, a number of tabular summaries were constructed to facilitate ready comparisons of elements and factors common to all or most reviewed methods. It was envisioned that assessments of current efforts of scientists and environmental management organizations involved in monitoring aquatic resources would provide some useful information concerning common monitoring practices and approaches that are in use including which primary indicator groups and measurement metrics are being used in aquatic assessments in US EPA Region 7. This work summarizes the specific methods used by all regulatory entities (and some non-regulatory groups) within states comprising US EPA region 7 and also includes some state and federal organizations that have well established methods and bioassessment programs. Some of the states included such as Ohio have a long history of bioassessment work and have established biological criteria for use in their state. Specific monitoring and biological assessment documents produced by or for National entities such as US EPA, USGS, and USFS were also reviewed as these agencies have long standing monitoring programs and years of associated aquatic data that could be used in evaluating specific methods.
Much of this review focuses on lotic ecosystems (e.g., streams and rivers) because these are the most common or prominent aquatic ecosystems of these facilities, and documentation of standard bioassessment methods for lentic ecosystems (e.g., ponds, lakes, wetlands) are few. The biological quality of lakes and ponds is often associated with chlorophyll a concentrations with persistently high levels (> 10μg/L) being indicative of cultural eutrophication. We have covered some biological methods for lakes and wetlands when these aquatic ecosystems were included in state determined methodologies.