Surface Water - Alabama Department of Environmental Management

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Appendix J. Physical characteristics and habitat quality of sites assessed in the Black Warrior and Cahaba River basins during ADEM's 2002 NPS Basinwide Screening Assessment. CU Cahaba River Sub-watershed 050 050 120 120 130 140 140 150 160 170 170 Appendix J--Page 1 of 6 Station PMUS-6 SAVS-7 AFF-2 BLU-1 WLT-1 MIL-1 OTWN-1 WAT-1 OAKG-3 CHIL-2 DRY-1 Date (YYMMDD) 020516 020516 020515 020515 20515 020514 020514 020514 020514 020509 020509 Subecoregion 67h 67h 65i 65i 65i 65i 65p 65i 65i 65a 65a Drainage area (mi 2 ) Width (ft) 20 20 15 30 20 25 15 15 25 5 25 Canopy cover b O S MS S 50/50 S S MO S MS MO Depth (ft) Riffle 0.4 0.3 1.0 0.1 Run 1.0 1.0 0.5 1.0 0.3 1.0 0.5 2.0 0.2 Pool 2.0 2.0 1.5 3.0 0.5 1.5 2.8 1.0 Substrate (%) Bedrock 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 65 (Clay) 0 70 (Clay) Boulder 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 (Clay) Cobble 10 5 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 10 (Clay) Gravel 46 20 0 0 5 2 1 20 0 0 5 (Clay) Sand 30 45 87 60 79 65 92 70 19 90 2 Silt 5 15 6 10 5 15 5 4 5 6 5 (Clay) Detritus 4 7 7 27 8 17 2 5 6 2 3 Clay 2 2 0 0 1 0 0 0 5 2 0 Organic silt 0 1 0 3 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 Habitat assessment form c RR RR GP GP GP GP GP RR GP GP GP Habitat survey (% maximum) Instream habitat quality 73 56 48 67 36 43 28 58 58 32 33 Sediment deposition 56 48 74 75 68 53 60 55 81 58 71 Sinuosity 72 20 45 40 43 40 38 68 38 43 45 Bank and vegetative stability 66 59 45 30 40 20 38 56 16 25 31 Riparian measurements 95 98 66 90 90 60 93 74 90 45 88 Habitat assessment score 174 149 129 138 115 94 114 152 126 93 110 % Maximum 72 62 58 63 52 43 52 63 57 42 50 Assessment d Excellent Good Good Excellent Good Fair Good Good Good Fair Good a. No flow; Assessment not conducted b. Canopy cover: S=shaded; MS=mostly shaded; 50/50=50% shaded; MO=mostly open; O=open c. Habitat assessment form: RR=riffle/run (Barbour et al. 1999); GP=glide/pool (Barbour et al. 1999) d. Assessment guidelines based on data collected at reference sites, 1991-2003; NG=no assessment guidelines e. Bridge construction; No assessment conducted f. Algal mats/Decaying algae g. Beaverdam; Not flowing; Assessment not conducted h. chemical/physical data collected during ADEM's §303(d) Monitoring Program
Appendix J, cont. Physical characteristics and habitat quality of sites assessed in the Black Warrior and Cahaba River basins during ADEM's 2002 NPS Basinwide Screening Assessment. CU Mulberry Fork Sub-watershed 010 010 010 010 020 030 040 070 080 090 100 100 Appendix J--Page 2 of 6 Station GSAMF-46 GSAMF-50 GSAMF-51 GSAMF-48 DUCC-69 BINC-190 h EMIC-73a MUDC-2 h GSAMF-33 GSAMF-35 OTC-1 SLOW-11 Date (YYMMDD) 020619 020621 020618 020618 020619 020620 020619 020619 020619 020709 020605 020605 Subecoregion 68d 68d 68d 68d 68d 68d 68d 68d 68e 68e 68f 68e Drainage area (mi 2 ) Width (ft) 25 20 15 35 55 30 25 15 30 80 45 17 Canopy cover b MS MS MS 50/50 MO MO 50/50 O 50/50 O MO S Depth (ft) Riffle 0.6 0.5 0.3 1.0 0.3 0.5 0.3 0.6 0.3 Run 1.3 1.0 1.0 1.8 1.0 1.0 1.3 1.0 1.5 2.3 1.0 Pool 2.5 1.5 2.5 3.5 2.5 1.5 3.0 1.2 2.0 3.5+ 2.0 Substrate (%) Bedrock 0 21 1 5 10 0 20 45 0 20 0 5 Boulder 50 31 5 15 50 5 5 12 7 30 5 2 Cobble 5 16 35 25 0 25 10 5 35 11 5 20 Gravel 10 11 35 35 0 30 15 7 30 15 15 20 Sand 20 16 15 10 25 25 35 18 15 5 35 45 Silt 10 2 4 4 10 10 10 5 10 2 10 0 Detritus 5 3 5 5 5 3 5 1 3 2 6 7 Clay 0 0 0 1 0 2 0 7 0 0 14 0 Organic silt 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 f 10 0 Habitat assessment form c RR RR RR RR GP RR RR RR RR GP GP RR Habitat survey (% maximum) Instream habitat quality 81 72 76 78 65 77 72 58 61 83 56 66 Sediment deposition 73 56 65 74 70 49 49 45 54 81 63 60 Sinuosity 93 92 78 55 30 72 38 80 68 68 35 80 Bank and vegetative stability 89 84 65 86 64 53 73 40 73 61 39 58 Riparian measurements 90 35 73 90 84 85 91 25 78 78 80 93 Habitat assessment score 203 156 169 191 148 167 162 109 156 170 125 173 % Maximum 85 65 70 80 67 70 67 45 65 77 57 72 Assessment d Excellent Good Good Excellent Excellent Good Excellent Fair Good Excellent Good Excellent a. No flow; Assessment not conducted b. Canopy cover: S=shaded; MS=mostly shaded; 50/50=50% shaded; MO=mostly open; O=open c. Habitat assessment form: RR=riffle/run (Barbour et al. 1999); GP=glide/pool (Barbour et al. 1999) d. Assessment guidelines based on data collected at reference sites, 1991-2003; NG=no assessment guidelines e. Bridge construction; No assessment conducted f. Algal mats/Decaying algae g. Beaverdam; Not flowing; Assessment not conducted h. chemical/physical data collected during ADEM's §303(d) Monitoring Program
Page 1 and 2:
SURFACE WATER QUALITY SCREENING ASS
Page 3 and 4:
Table of Contents TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page 5 and 6:
List of Figures LIST OF FIGURES 1 C
Page 7 and 8:
List of Abbreviations LIST OF ABBRE
Page 9 and 10:
Introduction INTRODUCTION Backgroun
Page 11 and 12:
Introduction document includes a de
Page 13 and 14:
Introduction Table 1, cont. List of
Page 15 and 16:
Methodology Table 7. Sub-watersheds
Page 17 and 18:
Methodology Fig. 1. Cataloging unit
Page 19 and 20:
Methodology Fig. 2. Level IV Ecoreg
Page 21 and 22:
Methodology The southern section of
Page 23 and 24:
Methodology The Southern Table Plat
Page 25 and 26:
Methodology Table 8. Current conver
Page 27 and 28:
Methodology SITE SELECTION Alabama
Page 29 and 30:
Methodology Process samples in the
Page 31 and 32:
Methodology Water quality samples a
Page 33 and 34:
Summary: BWC River Basins Summary:
Page 35 and 36:
Summary: BWC River Basins Fig. 3. C
Page 37 and 38:
Summary: BWC River Basins Fig. 4. E
Page 39 and 40:
Page 41 and 42:
Page 43 and 44:
Page 45 and 46:
Page 47 and 48:
Page 49 and 50:
Summary: BWC River Basins Fig. 10.
Page 51 and 52:
Page 53 and 54:
Page 55 and 56:
Page 57 and 58:
Summary: BWC River Basins Results o
Page 59 and 60:
Summary: BWC River Basins Impaired
Page 61 and 62:
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY BLANK 53
Page 63 and 64:
Summary: BWC River Basins Table 5,
Page 65 and 66:
Page 67 and 68:
Cahaba River (0315-0202) Cahaba Riv
Page 69 and 70:
Cahaba River (0315-0202) Types of a
Page 71 and 72:
Cahaba River (0315-0202) Fig. 15. I
Page 73 and 74:
Cahaba River (0315-0202) Sub-Waters
Page 75 and 76:
Cahaba River (0315-0202) suspended
Page 77 and 78:
Cahaba River (0315-0202) indicating
Page 79 and 80:
Cahaba River (0315-0202) assessed a
Page 81 and 82:
Cahaba River (0315-0202) Assessment
Page 83 and 84:
Mulberry Fork (0316-0109) Program (
Page 85 and 86:
Mulberry Fork (0316-0109) Fig. 16.
Page 87 and 88:
Mulberry Fork (0316-0109) List of i
Page 89 and 90:
Mulberry Fork (0316-0109) Assessmen
Page 91 and 92:
Mulberry Fork (0316-0109) greater t
Page 93 and 94:
Page 95 and 96:
Page 97 and 98:
Mulberry Fork (0316-0109) Eightmile
Page 99 and 100:
Mulberry Fork (0316-0109) Broglen R
Page 101 and 102:
Page 103 and 104:
Page 105 and 106:
Mulberry Fork (0316-0109) Sub-Water
Page 107 and 108:
Page 109 and 110:
Page 111 and 112:
Mulberry Fork (0316-0109) Bunkum Cr
Page 113 and 114:
Page 115 and 116:
Page 117 and 118:
Page 119 and 120:
Mulberry Fork (0316-0110) Sipsey Fo
Page 121 and 122:
Mulberry Fork (0316-0110) waters. A
Page 123 and 124:
Sipsey Fork (0316-0110) Fig. 17. 20
Page 125 and 126:
Sipsey Fork (0316-0110) Sub-Watersh
Page 127 and 128:
Sipsey Fork (0316-0110) and GSA (Ap
Page 129 and 130:
Sipsey Fork (0316-0110) Assessment
Page 131 and 132:
Page 133 and 134:
Page 135 and 136:
Page 137 and 138:
Page 139 and 140:
Sipsey Fork (0316-0110) unstable ba
Page 141 and 142:
Sipsey Fork (0316-0110) conditions
Page 143 and 144:
Locust Fork (0316-0111) Historical
Page 145 and 146:
Locust Fork (0316-0111) Fig. 18. 20
Page 147 and 148:
Locust Fork (0316-0111) Upper Locus
Page 149 and 150:
Locust Fork (0316-0111) ADEM 1999a)
Page 151 and 152:
Locust Fork (0316-0111) and fair/po
Page 153 and 154:
Locust Fork (0316-0111) bottom subs
Page 155 and 156:
Locust Fork (0316-0111) Assessment
Page 157 and 158:
Locust Fork (0316-0111) oxygen. ADE
Page 159 and 160:
Locust Fork (0316-0111) Longs Branc
Page 161 and 162:
Upper Black Warrior River (0316-011
Page 163 and 164:
Page 165 and 166:
Page 167 and 168:
Page 169 and 170:
Page 171 and 172:
Page 173 and 174:
Page 175 and 176:
Page 177 and 178:
Page 179 and 180:
Lower Black Warrior River (0316-011
Page 181 and 182:
Page 183 and 184:
Page 185 and 186:
Page 187 and 188:
Page 189 and 190:
Page 191 and 192:
Page 193 and 194:
Page 195 and 196:
Page 197 and 198:
Page 199 and 200:
References ACES. 1997. Soil areas o
Page 201 and 202:
References ADEM. 2002b. Nonpoint so
Page 203 and 204:
References APHA, AWWA, and WEF. 199
Page 205 and 206:
References Omernik, J.M. 1996. Leve
Page 207 and 208:
APPENDICES
Page 209 and 210:
Appendix A, cont. Land use percenta
Page 211 and 212:
Appendix B--Page 1 of 3 Appendix B.
Page 213 and 214:
Appendix B--Page 3 of 3 Appendix B,
Page 215 and 216:
Appendix C-2. List of waterbodies w
Page 217 and 218:
Appendix C-2, cont. List of waterbo
Page 219 and 220:
Appendix D, cont. Estimates of (H)i
Page 221 and 222:
Appendix D cont. Estimates of (H)ig
Page 223 and 224:
Appendix E. Stations assessed in th
Page 225 and 226:
Page 227 and 228:
Page 229 and 230:
Page 231 and 232:
Page 233 and 234:
Page 235 and 236:
Page 237 and 238: Appendix E. Stations assessed in th
Page 263 and 264: Appendix F--Page 2 of 2 Appendix F,
Page 265 and 266: Appendix G, cont. Summary of assess
Page 271 and 272: Appendix H, cont. Estimates of anim
Page 279 and 280: Appendix I. Sedimentation estimates
Page 281 and 282: Appendix I, cont. Sedimentation est
Page 287: Appendix I, cont. Sedimentation est
Page 291 and 292: Appendix J, cont. Physical characte
Page 293 and 294: Appendix J, cont. Physical characte
Page 295 and 296: Appendix K. Bioassessment results f
Page 301 and 302: Appendix L-2. ADEM Glide/Pool habit
Page 303 and 304: ADEM — FIELD OPERATIONS DIVISION
Page 305 and 306: Appendix M--Page 2 of 3 Appendix M.
Page 307 and 308: Appendix N. Concentration of metals
Page 309 and 310: Appendix O-1. Physical characterist
Page 315 and 316: Appendix O-3. Physical/chemical dat
Page 317 and 318: Appendix O-3--Page 3 of 4 Appendix
Page 319 and 320: Appendix P. §303(d) Waterbody Moni
Page 321 and 322: Appendix P-1. Physical characterist
Page 327 and 328: Appendix P-2. Bioassessment results
Page 329 and 330: Appendix P-3. Physical/chemical dat
Page 339 and 340:
Appendix P-3. Physical/chemical dat
Page 341 and 342:
Page 343 and 344:
Page 345 and 346:
Page 347 and 348:
Page 349 and 350:
Page 351 and 352:
Page 353 and 354:
Page 355 and 356:
Appendix Q. Periphyton Bioassessmen
Page 357 and 358:
Appendix Q--Page 2 of 2 Appendix Q.
Page 359 and 360:
Appendix R--Page 1 of 5 Appendix R.
Page 361 and 362:
Page 363 and 364:
Page 365 and 366:
Appendix S--Page 1 of 9 Appendix S.
Page 367 and 368:
Page 369 and 370:
Page 371 and 372:
Page 373 and 374:
Appendix S. Physical/chemical data
Page 375 and 376:
Appendix T-1. Results of habitat as
Page 377 and 378:
Appendix T-1. Results of habitat as
Page 379:
Appendix T-2--Page 1 of 1 Appendix
show all

Surface Water - Alabama Department of Environmental Management

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?