Surface Water - Alabama Department of Environmental Management

Cahaba River (0315-0202)
Types of assessments and assessment guidelines for projects that have generated monitored
assessment information.
Project
Assessment
Type a
ADEM’s §303(d) Waterbody Monitoring Program b
H, C, B
ADEM’s Reservoir Monitoring Program
C, B
ADEM’s Fish Tisue Monitoring Program
C
ADEM’s State Park Asesment Project(ADEM 1999d)
H, C, B
ADEM’s Ambient Monitoring Program b
H, C, B
University Tributary Nutrient Project b (ADEM 2000d)
C
ADEM’s Periphyton Bioasesment Pilot Study b (ADEM 2004d)
H, C, B
GSA’s Cahaba River Bioasesment (O’Neil 2002)
H, B
USEPA’s Biological and Water Quality Studies of the Cahaba River(Howard et al. H, C, B
2002)
UAB’s Asesment of the Cahaba River Using GIS(Angus et al. 1998)
B
1998 Cahaba River WQDS (ADEM 1999k) H, C, B
Nutrient utilization and primary production during low flow conditions in the Cahaba C
River, Alabama (Blancher and Sklenar 1999)
Water quality conditions in the Cahaba River and likely pollutant sources (Pitt 2000b) C
Report on Fishes and Macroinvertebrates of the Upper Cahaba River (Howell and
B
Davenport 2001)
Jeferson County’s Cahaba River Water Quality Assessment Program
H, C, B
Periphyton standing crop in the Cahaba River, Alabama, during low-flow conditions, H, B
2001 (TAI 2001)
Big Black Creek Water Quality Assessment, 1999-2000 (ADEM 2000e)
H, C, B
a H=habitat; C=chemical/physical; B=biological
b Data and summary of project included in Appendices
Overall condition for each station was rated as the lowest assessment result obtained
(Fig. 13, Appendix G). Eighteen stations (47%) were assessed as excellent or good.
Fourteen (37%) stations were assessed as fair. Six (16%) stations were assessed as poor.
Sub-watershed status: Four sub-watersheds were assessed as impaired (Fig. 13, Table 6).
A summary of the information available for each of these is provided in the following
section. Each summary discusses landuse, nonpoint source impairment potential,
assessments conducted within the sub-watershed, and nonpoint source priority status based
on available data. Appendices are located at the end of the report.
List of impaired sub-watersheds (a. TA: approved TMDL).
Sub-watershed 303(d)/
TMDL
Stream a
Lowest
Station
Assessment
Suspected Cause(s)
Cahaba R (0315-0202)
Suspected nonpoint source(s)
050 Cahaba R. Poor Sedimentation, Nutrient
enrichment
Pasture grazing, Mining, Urban
development
070 Cahaba R. Fair/Poor Sedimentation, Nutrient Mining, Historical forestry
enrichment, OE/DO
150 Cahaba R. Fair Sedimentation Pasture grazing, Crop runoff,
Forestry
170 Cahaba R. TA Poor Pathogens, Sedimentation,
Nutrient enrichment
Pasture grazing, Aquaculture, Septic
tank failure, Streambank erosion
61