United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Region 5
77 West Jackson Boulevard
Chicago, Illinois 60604
EPA 905-R-96-007
NTS
September 1997
&EPA
Biological Characterization
of the Middle Fork
Anderson River,
Perry County, Indiana
-------
EPA Technical Report
BIOLOGICAL CHARACTERIZATION OF THE
MIDDLE FORK ANDERSON RIVER,
PERRY COUNTY, INDIANA
by Thomas P. Simon
-------
CONTENTS
Page
Abstract 1
Introduction 1
Purpose and Scope 2
Description of the Study Area 2
Methods 3
Survey Design 3
Sample Collection 3
Results 7
Biological Integrity 7
Designated Uses 10
References 10
ILLUSTRATIONS
Figures
1. Project Map showing the location of sampling locations on the Middle Fork Anderson River . . .4
2. Trends in biotic integrity for the Middle Fork Anderson River 8
3. Trends in biotic integrity for Sulphur Fork, Kraus Creek, and Theis Creek 8
TABLES
Table 1. Interim Scoring Criteria for 12 IBI metrics for low to moderate gradient
stream systems within the Interior River Lowland for the Ohio River
subsection 6
2. Biotic Integrity classes used in assessing fish communities along with
general descriptions of their attributes (Karr et al. 1986) 7
3. Habitat quality of 12 locations in the Middle Fork Anderson River watershed 9
APPENDIX
1. Metric scoring for individual stations sampled within the Middle Fork Anderson River. . 12.
2. Statewide list of Indiana species considered to be headwater species for
evaluating permanent habitat in headwater streams (after Smith 1971). . .42
3. Statewide list of Indiana fish species considered to be sensitive to a wide
variety of environmental disturbances including water quality and habitat
degradation. 43
4. Statewide list of species considered to be highly tolerant to a wide variety
of environmental disturbances including water quality and habitat
degradation. 44
5. Statewide list of Indiana fish species considered to be omnivores. 45
6. Statewide list of Indiana fish species considered to be msectivores. 46
-------
Biological Characterization
APPENDIX (CONTINUED)
7. Statewide list of Indiana fish species considered to be carnivores. 48
8. Statewide list of Indiana species considered to be pioneer species
(indicators of temporally unavailable or stressed habitats (after Larimore
and Smith 1963; Smith 1971)). 49
9. Statewide list of Indiana fish species considered to be simple lithophilous
spawners. 50
-------
Middle Fork Anderson River
BIOLOGICALCHARACTERIZATIONOF THE MIDDLE FORK ANDERSON RIVER,
PERRY COUNTY, INDIANA
by Thomas P. Simon
Abstract
The Middle Fork of the Anderson River is currently under review for the completion of an intensive project
channelizing a significant portion of the watershed. During the fall of 1994, a biological characterization
study evaluated the integrity of twelve locations on the Middle Fork Anderson River and tributaries. The
biological conditions found in the watershed reflected complete recovery from an earlier channelization event
and was habitat limited only in areas which has been routinely maintained through select dredging projects.
Fish community attributes reflected good IBI scores for portions of the watershed which would be scheduled
for rechannelization, suggesting that the biological communities are typical of similar streams with general
designated use category. A use attainability analysis for the lower Middle Fork Anderson River should be
conducted to preserve this reach as an exceptional aquatic resource.
Introduction
The Middle Anderson River has been selected as a watershed within Indiana which is considered for flow
modification under the authority of the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS). This program is
designed to mitigate flooding and ecosystem decline through habitat modification including channelization
and flood control structure construction. The Middle Fork Anderson River has been a targeted watershed
due to the potential high instantaneous flow measured in the system and the associated impacts on
agriculture and adjacent land use. The Middle Fork contains about 170 miles of permanent and intermittent
streams of which 34 miles have been planned for channel work as part of the Middle Fork Anderson river
project under the provision of PL 566. The work plan for the Middle Fork was authorized on August 28,
1961. As of 1980,11.9 miles of stream channelization has been completed (Hottell 1980). Flood control
structure, channelization, shoal removal, clearing and snagging are recommended for the Middle Fork
Anderson River in order to facilitate flood damage control, sediment overwash and swamping, erosion
damage, water management problems with drainage including excavation of drainage channels. The primary
reason for the project includes reduction of total land acreage subject to flooding (NRCS 1980).
During the fall of 1994, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) and Indiana Department of
Environmental Management (IDEM) evaluated the biological potential of the Middle Fork Anderson River
to determine the potential for meeting current designated uses. The biological structure and function was
evaluated using the Index of Biotic Integrity, a multi-metric index used to quantify water resource integrity
(Karr 1981;Karr et al. 1986).
The term biological integrity originated in the Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972 (PL 92-
500). Karr and Dudley (1981) defined biological integrity as, "the ability of an aquatic ecosystem to support
and maintain a balanced, integrated, adaptive community of organisms having a species composition,
diversity, and functional organization comparable to the best natural habitats within a region". Expectations
for the regional areas of similarity in Indiana, termed "reference condition", have been developed over the
past five years through a cooperative project between the IDEM and USEPA. Each of Indiana's six
ecoregions have been investigated to determine "least impacted" conditions across current ecoregion
boundaries. Recognizing the possibility that no areas in Indiana's landscape have escaped dramatic alteration
since the industrial revolution, efforts to characterize the best attainable conditions for the biological
-------
Biological Characterization
community have evaluated fish community structure and function. The IBI, as a multi-metric index, was
developed for warmwater stream fish communities in Indiana and Illinois and uses characteristics (termed
"metrics") of the community to identify important aspects.
Purpose and Scope
This report presents the investigative design, methodology, and results from the sampling of twelve locations
in the Middle Fork Anderson River. The criteria used for evaluating the biological integrity of the streams
are based on interim criteria for the Interior River Lowland ecoregion, Ohio River subdivision. Criteria is
determined from extensive sampling across the Interior River Lowland (as defined by Omernik and Gallant
1988) which was used to score the metric expectations for characteristics requiring drainage area calibration.
Stations were selected which corresponded to previous investigations by the USEPA and Indiana Department
of Natural Resources (IDNR). The following study objectives are considered:
1) What is the current status of the aquatic communities of the Middle Fork Anderson River
watershed? The fish community was used as an environmental indicator or direct measure
of the aquatic health of the system since the data analysis component of the project was less
intensive than using the macroinvertebrate community. Also, the fish community evaluates
data over a longer time frame due to life history aspects and ability of the fish communities
to assimilate information over larger spatial scales.
2) Are the appropriate designated uses assigned to the Middle Fork Anderson River? The
designated use for the Middle Fork Anderson River is general use. This suggests that the
stream should be capable of supporting a warmwater fish community.
3) Does the species assemblage of the Middle Fork Anderson River possess any unique or rare
species which are either receiving State or Federal protection? Species diversity was evaluated
by a comparison of threatened or endangered species listed under the protection of the
Federal Endangered Species Act and State of Indiana List of Endangered, Threatened, and
Special Concern taxa (Simon et al. 1992).
Description of the Study Area
The Middle Fork Anderson River is a small watershed found in extreme southern Indiana. The watershed
lies primarily in Perry County and forms the border between the Interior River Lowland and the Interior
Plateau ecoregions as defined by Omernik and Gallant (1988). The ecoregion consists of dissected glacial till
plain which is covered by thick mantle loess, rolling narrow ridgetops, and hilly to steep ridge and valley
slopes. The Interior River Lowland is an area of varied land use including forestry, diverse cropland
agriculture, orchards, livestock and oil and gas production. The Middle Fork drains 69,400acres and lies on
the edge of the Crawford Upland (USDA 1969). Major land use in the drainage is woodland (46%),
cropland (25%), and grassland (22.5%). Nearly 20% of the land is publicly owned by the U.S. Forest Service
and managed for public fishing (Hottell 1980).
The Middle Fork Anderson River is a tributary of the Anderson River and has a drainage area of 106 miles2
(Hoggatt 1975). The Middle Fork begins in Crawford County but is primarily contained in Perry County.
The study area for this investigation was concentrated between Bristow and the confluence of the Middle
Fork with the Anderson River. The river flows southwest across northwestern and central Perry County.
-------
Middle Fork Anderson River
The primary land use is agricultural and livestock production.
Stations selected for the current investigation correspond to historical collections made by the IDNR and
EPA during the last decade. Twelve locations (Fig. 1) were sampled in the Middle Fork Anderson River (6
sites) and select tributaries (Sulphur Fork (2); Kraus Creek (2); and Theis Creek (2)) to determine fish
community integrity.
From upstream to downstream, the stations include Perry County (station 94170): Middle Fork Anderson
River, at SR 145 bridge, Bristow, Clark Twp. T 4W R 3W S 27; Perry County (station 94171): Middle Fork
Anderson River, 2 mi S Bristow, Anderson Twp. T 5S R 3W S 4; Perry County (station 94179): Middle Fork
Anderson River, 2.75 mi S Bristow, Anderson Twp. T 5S R 3W S 9; Perry County (station 94174): Sulphur
Fork, at SR 145 bridge, 2.5 mi S Bristow, Anderson Twp. T 5S R 3W S 11; Perry County (station 94173):
Sulphur Fork, 1.5 mi W SR 145 off dirt road, 3 mi SE Bristow, Anderson Twp. T 5S R 3W S 12; Perry
County (station 94175): Kraus Creek, at SR 145 bridge, 9 mi N Cannelton, Anderson Twp. T 5S R 3W S 26;
Perry County (station 94176): Kraus Creek, at CR 82 bridge, 6.75 mi S Bristow, Anderson Twp. T 5S R 3W
R 33; Perry County (station 94177): Middle Fork Anderson River, 6.75 mi N Cannelton, Anderson Twp. T
6S R 3W S 5; Perry County (station 94178): Middle Fork Anderson River, Lincoln's Ford, 6 mi S Bristow,
Anderson Twp. T 5S R 3W S 28; Perry County (station 94172) Middle Fork Anderson River, at CR 116
bridge, 4.125 mi S Bristow, Anderson Twp. T 5S R 3W S 15; Perry County (station 94180): Theis Creek, off
CR 116 at bridge 26,4.5 mi S Bristow, Anderson Twp. T 5S R 3W S 22; and Perry County (station 94181):
Theis Creek, at SR 145 bridge, 4.5 mi S Bristow, Anderson Twp. T 5S R 3W S 23.
Methods
Survey design
Sample locations were selected based on historical'collection events in the Middle Fork Anderson River.
Shelby Gerking was the first to collect from a single location in the Middle Fork during his investigation of
Indiana fish distribution during the mid 1940's (Gerking 1945). Stream surveys were collected by Indiana
Department of Natural Resources personnel during the early 1970's(Keller 1971), early 1980's(Hottell
1980), and late 1980's(Stefanavage 1989) and early 1990's(T. Simon, unpublished data). Stefanavage has
conducted additional surveys of the impoundments during the last five years (T. Stefanavage, personal
communication).
Sample collection
Qualitative Habitat Evaluation Index (QHEI): Habitat evaluation was completed in conjunction with the fish
survey. The QHEI, developed by Ohio EPA (1987), provides numerical assignments for six criteria to assess
riffle and pool quality. Scoring incorporates substrate quality, instream cover, channel morphology, riparian
zone and bank erosion, and pool and riffle quality based on drainage area. The QHEI also has a component
which rates stream gradient since many features of the habitat are determined by critical flow velocities.
This metric was eliminated from our evaluation since the gradient throughout this watershed was low to
moderate and typical of the Interior River Lowland. Since results were only being compared within a narrow
range this did not matter for our analysis. Based on information derived from the Ohio EPA, a QHEI score
of 75 is considered exceptional and meeting Clean Water Act goals.
Fish Community Structure and Function: Standard operating procedures of the EPA, Region 5, for conducting
-------
COUTH. MIIE
n s rir,f.'.sutt>utK
CIVIL [OWIISWP llll£
SEniOi'l HUE
SECTtlTN NUMBER
PW0 FIOAD
GRAVE! flOAD
Dili I BOAQ
FARM HOAR
WIEBSI/HtHIRHW/iV
BRIDGE
DUllOIIIG
SCI 1001
ciiuncii
CEME1ERV
PEHENWIAL STREAM
IHlLnMllTEH! SIHtAM
WATEIiSIIEDBOUHDAitV
linAIHAriE AI1EA CON fROLLED
BV smucTimE
DRAIHAGE AREA COMIflOLLEB
BY EXISTING STRUCTURE
DRAINAGE AR6A ACREAGE
EXISTING STRUCTURE
Fl OODWATER RETARDING STRUCTURE
MUlTIPLF PURPOSE STRUG HIRE
ftEACII
SIRUCTlIRt NUMBER
IFTTFHS INDICATE PURPOSE
UPWATER SUPPLY
HECHEATION
CHANNEL WORK (COMPt El ED)
Cl EARING, SHAGGING A SlIltAI REMOVAL
CHAUNEL EXCAVATION
CHANNEL WORK (PLANNED)
DEBHIS & SflOM REMOVAI
CflAHMEl EXCAVATION
CLEARING, SNAGGING 4 SHOAL REMOVAL
Figure 1. Project Map showing the location of sampling locations of the Middle Fork Anderson River.
MIDDLl FORK OF ANDliSOlM RIVER WATERSHED
CRAWFORD AND PERRY COUNTIES
IMDIAWA
-------
Biological Characterization
Fig. 1. Project Map showing the location of sampling locations on the Middle Fork Anderson River
-------
Middle Fork Anderson River
Rapid Assessment of Ambient Water Quality using Fish (EPA 1988) were used. The methods are based on
those described for fish by Ohio EPA (1987), Karr (1981), and Karr et al. (1986) for evaluating midwestern
warmwater streams. Electrofishing collection gear was employed to collect a "representative" collection of
species occurring within a stream reach. Leopold et al. (1964) in evaluating various sized streams in North
America found that major habitat cycles (i.e. riffle, run, pool) were repeated every 15 stream widths. Sample
distances were based on 15 times the stream width with a minimum sample distance of 50 m. Since all
stream segments were wadable, a long-line electrofishing unit comprised of a T&J pulsed D-C unit capable
of 1750 watt output was fished in an upstream direction, output was 300 volts and approximately 6-8 amps.
Collected specimens were placed in a live well, identified to species, measured for bulk weight and length
ranges for each species, and released.
Stream community health was evaluated using the Index of Biotic Integrity (Karr et al. 1986). The IBI relies
on multiple attributes based on community concepts, to evaluate complex systems. The IBI incorporates
professional judgement in a systematic and sound manner, but sets quantitative criteria that enables
determination of biological integrity based on species richness and composition, trophic composition,
reproductive guilds, and fish abundance and individual condition. The IBI metrics are a modification of
Karr's original (Table 1) to better evaluate important community attributes of Interior River Lowland
streams. The Indiana version of the IBI for the Interior River Lowland retains the same precepts and
evaluation ability as Karr's original. Metrics reflect insights from several perspectives and cumulatively are
responsive to changes of relatively small magnitude, as well as broad ranges of environmental degradation.
Since metrics respond differentially to various perturbations (e.g.,siltation versus toxic chemicals), as well as
to various levels within the ranges of integrity, conditions can be determined with considerable accuracy. The
interpretation of IBI numerical scoring is incorporated into six narrative categories (Table 2).
The IBI requires calibration in order to provide accurate depictions of reference condition within a region
(Hughes 1995). Reference conditions were defined from areas of least impact from anthropogenic activities.
Although reference sites may not exist in Indiana, subtle aspects of community structure and function are
exhibited in streams with minimal impact. By evaluating aspects of the community function the structural
attributes of the community emerges from a large database. Several of the metrics are drainage size
dependent and require the selection of numerical expectations in order to score metrics. The EPA in
cooperation with IDEM are providing reference conditions for each of the recognized regions in Indiana
(Simon 1991; Simon 1992; Simon 1994). Sampling of the Interior River Lowland ecoregion was completed
during 1994. Interim criteria are presented in Table 2 for the Ohio River subdivision. This area would
encompass the Middle Fork Anderson River. Interim criteria are presented for small headwater streams less
(< 20 mi2) and for wadable streams (> 20-1000mi2). For this analysis results for the maximum species
richness lines are presented for stations between 10-20 mi2 and for streams between 80-100 mi2. The
reference database contained stream segments which generally had an intact riparian corridor; was free from
toxic pollutant influence and major point source dischargers; lacked obvious diffuse non-point source impacts,
such as agriculture and silviculture; and generally had consistent habitat cycles representative of the region.
Metrics used for the current study are modifications of the original IBI (Karr 1981) and more closely reflect
accepted changes designed by Ohio Environmental Protection Agency (1987) and Simon (1991) for the
Central Corn Belt Plain.
-------
Biological Characterization
Table 1. Interim Scoring Criteria for 12 IBI metrics for low to moderate gradient stream systems within the
Interior River Lowland for the Ohio River subsection.
Metric
Category
Metric
Scoring Criteria by Drainage Area
< 20 mi2 > 20-100 mi2
Species
Composition
Total number of species 6-12
Number of darter/sculpin/
madtom species 1-2
Number of darter species
% Headwater species 13-26%
Number of sunfish species
Number of minnow species 3-6
7-16
1-3
2-3
Trophic
Composition
Fish
Condition
Number of sucker species
Number of sensitive species 2-4
% Tolerant species 25-50%
% Omnivores 18-33%
% Insectivores 25-50%
% Pioneer Species 22-48%
% Carnivores
Catch per unit effort 125-275
% Simple lithophils 16-34%
% DELT anomalies 0.1-1.3%
1-3
3-5
25-50%
18-33%
25-50%
2-5%
150-300
16-34%
0.1-1.3%
' Special scoring procedures required when less than 25 (headwater) or 50 individuals (wadeable) are
collected.
-------
Middle Fork Anderson River
Table 2. Biotic Integrity classes used in assessing fish communities along with general descriptions of their
attributes (Karr et al. 1986).
Total IBI
Score
Integrity
Class
Attributes
58-60
48-52
40-44
28-34
12-22
Excellent Comparable to the best situation without human disturbance; all regionally
expected species for the habitat and stream size, including the most
intolerant forms are present with a full array of age (size) classes; balanced
trophic structure.
Good Species richness somewhat below expectation, especially due to the loss of
the most intolerant forms; some species are present with less than optimal
abundance or size distributions; trophic structure shows some signs of
stress.
Fair Signs of additional deterioration include loss of intolerant forms, fewer
species, highly skewed trophic structure (e.g. increasing frequency of
omnivores and other tolerant species); older age classes of top predators
may be rare.
Poor Dominated by omnivores, tolerant forms, and habitat generalists; few top
carnivores; growth rates and condition factors commonly depressed; hybrids
and diseased fish often present.
Very Poor Few fish present, mostly introduced or tolerant forms; hybrids common;
disease, parasites, fin damage, and other anomalies regular.
No fish Repeated sampling finds no fish.
Results
Biological Integrity
The general ecological health of the Middle Fork Anderson River is in the "Good" narrative category.
Biological integrity improves downstream with a low rating of "Fair-Poor" in Bristow (station 94170; IBI =
36) and an "Excellent" rating at the lowermost station upstream of the mouth of the Anderson River (station
94177; IBI = 57). Middle reaches of the study zone typically scored in the "Fair-Good" category. Declines
in biological integrity in the upper portions of the Middle Fork may be attributed to past channelization
events upstream of Bristow and the movement of suspended sediment and bedload through the system.
Evidence of this effect is the low proportion of simple lithophilic (broadcast and egg-burying species
requiring rock substrates) species from Bristow to the County Road 116 bridge (station 94179). The lack of
substrate heterogeneity also reduced habitat for sensitive species. Removal of shoals and riffle habitats also
reduced the number of darter species at Bristow.
-------
Biological Characterization
A. Middle Fork Anderson River
Trends in Biological Integrity
B. Tributaries Middle Fork Anderson
River—Trends in Biological Integrity
cO r
50 t
~0
IIUI
1970
198O
1989
^992
1994
23 5O 75
DRAINAGE APEA (SO.
100
125
CD
GO
<
4O'
20
20
1O
0
19
. fc- • . _.
£5 = = - \ y^
S. »fc^»— ^^^^^^
iM
71 198O 1989 1992 1994
YEAR
SUtfxr For
Dirt Road
••••• SulpKr Rx
SR 145
Thele Cree
CO 1 16
Kraua Oet
SH 145
KrauB Cre«
CR 82
Three tributaries of the Middle Fork Anderson River had biological integrity scores typically in the "Fair"
rating category. Biological integrity improved downstream for Sulphur Fork and Theis Creek and did not
vary appreciably for Kraus Creek. Each tributary segment had two sampling points. Both Kraus and Theis
Creek lacked species typical of headwater stream segments, while the upstream site on Theis Creek and both
stations on Kraus Creek had high incidence of pioneer species. Pioneer species increase in areas where
water quantity is limiting and are the first species to recolonize an area because of the tolerant nature of the
species and ability to endure harsh environments. The simple lithophilic species metric also reflected
lowered expectations probably as a result of the lack of flow during periods of the year.
Habitat ratings based on the QHEI indicate a reduction of available habitat in the stream segment between
Bristow (station 94170; QHEI = 60.3) and the middle zone (station 94172; QHEI = 40.6). Station 94172
also had the lowest habitat quality observed in the Middle Fork (Table 3). The lower three stations all met
Ohio EPA habitat criteria with scores above 75 (94179 = 75.4,94178 = 78.3,and 94177 = 82). Lowered
scores in the upper three stations were a result of substrate quality, lack of riffles, and the evidence of bank
erosion. Habitat quality declined downstream in Sulphur Fork, remained consistent in Theis Creek, and
improved marginally in Kraus Creek. Lower Sulphur Fork (station 94-173, QHEI = 32.3) and both sites on
Kraus Creek reflected a stream channel recovering from a previous channelization events. The detrimental
activities associated with clearing, snagging, and shoal removal prevent biological communities from
inhabiting disturbed segments. Stream segments affected by high to moderate influence from channel
modification include the Middle Fork Anderson River (stations 94172,94171,94170); Sulphur Fork (station
94173); and Kraus Creek (stations 94176 and 94175).
Evaluation of trends in the Middle Fork Anderson River from 1971 to 1994 show that biological integrity has
improved with time and longitudinal distance downstream (Fig. 2A). Improvement in biological integrity has
been observed in each year monitoring has been conducted. The largest improvements in biological integrity
has been observed in the lowermost Middle Fork Anderson River site (station 94177.increase of 20 IBI
points between 1970 and 1994). IBI ratings for the station has shown an improvement from "Poor-Fair"
during 1970 to a rating of "Excellent" in 1994. This station had the best habitat of all Middle Fork Anderson
River locations.
8
-------
Table 3. Matrix of QHEI scores and corresponding natural and modified channel habitat attributes
from the Middle Fork Anderson River watershed during 1994.
Site
Number QHEI
Natural Channel Attributes
ll ! • i I
jiilfjjjijl
J^ 2 £ £•- = z a" °
j^^iillliiii
Modified Channel Attribute
High Influence Moderate Influence
F I I
Je 4"3§>^7l5«^.|ll§|'
-------
Biological Characterization
Biological integrity of the tributaries of the Middle Fork have been relatively stable between 1971-1994, with
the exception of the downstream Sulphur Fork location (94173; Fig. 2B). The upstream Sulphur Fork
location between 1980 and 1989 declined substantially (ca. 10 IBI points) in biological integrity. Only
Sulphur Fork at the SR 145 bridge (station 94174) has shown any improvement in biological integrity (period
between 1992-1994). Since no major point source dischargers occur in the watershed, differences in biological
integrity of the Middle Fork can be attributed to changes in landuse and channelization.
The number of species collected between Hottell's investigation during the 1980'sand 1994 show a reduction
in diversity. The reduction in diversity can only be attributed to largescale landuse disturbance in the
watershed. The construction of impoundments reduce migration and recolonization potential of upstream
tributaries during extremes in flow conditions. These barriers reduce any fish species from occupying
tributaries during drought conditions, likewise the degradation of habitat as a result of channel excavation,
shoal removal, and clearing and snagging activities only accentuates problems during high flow events and
result in flooding. The importance of riparian wetlands for the decrease in nutrient transport, decrease of
erosion, importance to certain sensitive fish species, and the stabilization of banks during high flow events
cannot be overstated. Best Management Practices must include the protection of these vital riparian wetland
areas for the continued existence of some endangered species including aquatic and terrestrial communities.
Designated Uses
The Middle Fork Anderson River is a general use stream in the state of Indiana. Based on the Index of
Biotic Integrity results the Middle Fork is typical of streams classified as a general use stream. Since the
lower portions of the Middle Fork Anderson River reflect near exceptional attributes of the Interior River
Lowland, a use attainability analysis should be conducted to determine if the reach should receive additional
protection from encroaching land management practices. Channelization of tributary segments and the
Middle Fork proper will reduce available habitats, decrease riparian corridor and instream habitat for aquatic
and terrestrial organisms, and cause the reduction and loss of sensitive species.
References
Hoggatt, R.E. 1975. Drainage Areas of Indiana Streams. U.S. Geological Survey, Indianapolis, Indiana.
Hottell, H.E. 1980. Middle Fork Anderson River, Perry and Crawford Counties Stream Survey report.
Indiana Department of Natural Resources, Indianapolis, Indiana. Unpublished report 27 pp.
Hughes, R.M. 1995. Determination of reference conditions, in W.S. Davis and T.P. Simon. Biological Criteria
and Assessment: Tools for Water Resource Decision Making. Lewis Publishers, Ann Arbor, Michigan.
Karr, J.R. 1981. Assessment of biotic integrity using fish communities. Fisheries 6:21-27.
Karr, J.R..K.D. Fausch, P.L. Angermeier, P.R. Yant, and I.J. Schlosser. 1986. Assessing biological integrity
in running waters: a method and its rationale. Illinois Natural History Survey, Special Publication 5. 28 pp.
Karr, J.R. and D.R. Dudley. 1981. Ecological perspective on water quality goals. Environmental Management
5: 55-68.
10
-------
Middle Fork Anderson River
Keller, C.R. 1971. Middle Fork Anderson River, Stream Survey Report, Perry and Crawford Counties.
Indiana Department of Natural Resources, Indianapolis, Indiana. Unpublished report.
Leopold, L.B..M.G. Woolman, and J.P. Miller. 1964. Fluvial processes in Geomorphology. W.H. Freeman,
San Francisco, California.
Ohio Environmental Protection Agency. 1987. Biological criteria for the protection of aquatic life: Volume II.
Users manual for biological field assessment of Ohio surface waters. Ohio Environmental Protection Agency,
Columbus.
Omemik, J.M. and A.L. Gallant. 1988. Ecoregions of the upper Midwest States. U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Environmental Research Laboratory, Corvallis, Oregon. EPA 600/3-88/037.
Simon, T.P. 1991. Development of Index of Biotic Integrity expectations for the ecoregions of Indiana.
I. Central Corn Belt Plain. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, Chicago, Illinois. EPA 905/9-
91/025.
Simon, T.P. 1992. Biological criteria development for large rivers with an emphasis on an assessment of the
White River drainage, Indiana. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, Chicago, Illinois. EPA
905/R-92/006.
Simon, T.P. 1994 Development of Index of Biotic Integrity expectations for the ecoregions of Indiana.
II. Huron-Erie Lake Plain. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, Chicago, Illinois. EPA 905/R-
92/007.
Simon, T.P..J.O. Whitaker, Jr, J.S. Castrale, and S.A. Minton. 1992. Checklist of the vertebrates of Indiana.
Proceedings of the Indiana Academy of Science 101:95-126.
Stefanavage, T.C. 1993. Fisheries Survey of the Anderson River watershed, 1989 fish management report.
Indiana Department of Natural Resources, Division of Fish and Wildlife, Indianapolis, Indiana. Unpublished
report 58 pp.
U.S. Department of Agriculture. 1969. Soil Survey, Perry County, Indiana. Soil Conservation and Forest
Service. 70 pp.
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service. 1980. Environmental Impact Assessment- Middle
Fork Anderson River. U.S. SCS, Indiana.
11
-------
Biological Characterization
Appendix I. Metric scoring for individual stations sampled within the Middle Fork Anderson River.
Site 94170
Perry Co: Middle Fork Anderson River, at SR 145 bridge, Bristow, Clark Twp. T 4S R 3W S 27
Drainage area: 39.8 mi2
Metric
Category
Metric
Scoring Criteria
Actual
IBI Score
Species
Composition
Trophic
Composition
Fish
Condition
Total number of species
Number of darter/sculpin/
madtom species
Number of darter species
% Headwater species
Number of sunfish species
Number of minnow species
Number of sucker species
Number of sensitive species
% Tolerant species
% Omnivores
% Insectivores
% Pioneer Species
% Carnivores
Catch per unit effort
% Simple lithophils
% DELT anomalies
2
1
10.3%
24%
51.7%
20.7%
29
6.8%
0
Total IBI Score
3
1
5
3
5
1
1
5
36
12
-------
Middle Fork Anderson River
Site 94171
Perry Co: Middle Fork Anderson River, 2 mi S Bristow, Anderson Twp. T 5S R 3W S 4
Drainage area: 43.8mi2
Metric
Category
Metric
Scoring Criteria
Actual
IBI Score
Species
Composition
Fish
Condition
Total number of species
Number of darter/sculpin/
madtom species
Number of darter species
% Headwater species
Number of sunfish species
Number of minnow species
19
Trophic
Composition
Number of sucker species
Number of sensitive species
% Tolerant species
% Omnivores
% Insectivores
2
1
1.2%
0
85.7%
3
1
5
5
. 5
% Pioneer Species
% Carnivores
Catch per unit effort
% Simple lithophils
% DELT anomalies
14.3% 5
84 1
16.7% 3
0 5
Total IBI Score 46
13
-------
Biological Characterization
Site 94172
Perry Co: Middle Fork Anderson River, 2.75 mi S Bristow, Anderson Twp. T 5S R 3W S 9
Drainage area: 44.8 mi2
Metric
Category
Metric
Scoring Criteria
Actual
IBI Score
Species
Composition
Fish
Condition
Total number of species
Number of darter/sculpin/
madtom species
Number of darter species
% Headwater species
Number of sunfish species
Number of minnow species
13
Trophic
Composition
Number of sucker species
Number of sensitive species
% Tolerant species
% Omnivores
% Insectivores
0
2
1.9%
1.9%
91.4%
1
1
5
5
5
% Pioneer Species
% Carnivores
Catch per unit effort
% Simple lithophils
% DELT anomalies
6.7% 5
105 1
0% 1
0 5
Total IBI Score 40
14
-------
Middle Fork Anderson River
Site 94173
Perry Co: Sulphur Fork, at SR 145 bridge, 2.5 mi S Bristow, Anderson Twp. T 5S R 3W S 11
Drainage area: 27.1 mi2
Metric
Category
Metric
Scoring Criteria
Actual
IBI Score
Species
Composition
Total number of species
Number of darter/sculpin/
madtom species
Number of darter species
% Headwater species
Number of sunfish species
Number of minnow species
18
Trophic
Composition
Number of sucker species
Number of sensitive species
% Tolerant species
% Omnivores
% Insectivores
1
2
18.8%
14.6%
79.7%
3
1
5
5
5
Fish
Condition
% Pioneer Species
% Carnivores
Catch per unit effort
% Simple lithophils
% DELT anomalies
3.1% 3
192 3
1.6% 1
0 5
Total IBI Score 44
15
-------
Biological Characterization
Site 94174
Perry Co: Sulphur Fork, 1.5 mi W SR 145 off dirt road, 3 mi SE Bristow, Anderson Twp. T 5S R 3W S 12
Drainage area: 23.2mi2
Metric
Category
Metric
Scoring Criteria
Actual
IBI Score
Species
Composition
Fish
Condition
Total number of species
Number of darter/sculpin/
madtom species
Number of darter species
% Headwater species
Number of sunfish species
Number of minnow species
16
Trophic
Composition
Number of sucker species
Number of sensitive species
% Tolerant species
% Omnivores
% Insectivores
1
4
42.3%
41.8%
57.2%
3
3
3
1
5
% Pioneer Species
% Carnivores
Catch per unit effort
% Simple lithophils
% DELT anomalies
1.0%
194
1.5%
0
Total IBI Score
38
16
-------
Middle Fork Anderson River
Site 94175
Perry Co: Kraus Creek, at SR 145 bridge, 9 mi N Cannelton, Anderson Twp. T 5S R 3W S 26
Drainage area: 6.2 mi2
Metric
Category
Metric
Scoring Criteria
Actual
IBI Score
Species
Composition
Total number of species 13
Number of darter/sculpin/
madtom species 1
Number of darter species
% Headwater species 0.3%
Number of sunfish species
Number of minnow species 4
Number of sucker species
Number of sensitive species 2
Trophic
Composition
Fish
Condition
% Tolerant species
% Omnivores
% Insectivores
% Pioneer Species
% Carnivores
Catch per unit effort
% Simple lithophils
% DELT anomalies
25.3%
21.5%
59.2%
43.6%
316
0.1%
0
Total IBI Score
3
3
3
5
3
5
1
5
40
17
-------
Biological Characterization
Site 94176
Perry Co: Kraus
Drainage area: 8
Metric
Category
Species
Composition
Trophic
Composition
Fish
Condition
Creek, at CR 82 bridge, 6.75 mi
.2 mi2
Metric
Total number of species
Number of darter/ sculpin/
madtom species
Number of darter species
% Headwater species
Number of sunfish species
Number of minnow species
Number of sucker species
Number of sensitive species
% Tolerant species
% Omnivores
% Insectivores
% Pioneer Species
% Carnivores
Catch per unit effort
% Simple lithophils
% DELT anomalies
S Bristow, Anderson Twp. T 5S R 3W S 33
Scorine Criteria
Actual
13
2
0
4
2
34.8%
30.4%
69.5%
36.4%
187
0.5%
0
Total IBI Score
IBI Score
5
3
1
3
3
3
3
5
3
3
1
5
38
18
-------
Middle Fork Anderson River
Site 94177
Perry Co: Middle Fork Anderson River, 6.75 mi N Cannelton, Anderson Twp. T 5S R 3W S 5
Drainage area: 105 mi2
Metric
Category
Metric
Scoring Criteria
Actual
IBI Score
Species
Composition
Fish
Condition
Total number of species
Number of darter/sculpin/
madtom species
Number of darter species
% Headwater species
Number of sunfish species
Number of minnow species
23
Trophic
Composition
Number of sucker species
Number of sensitive species
% Tolerant species
% Omnivores
% Insectivores
3
5
18.8%
16.0%
81.1%
3
3
5
5
5
% Pioneer Species
% Carnivores
Catch per unit effort
% Simple lithophils
% DELT anomalies
2.6% 3
313 5
57.5% 5
0 5
Total IBI Score 57
19
-------
Biological Characterization
Site 94178
Perry Co: Middle Fork Anderson River, at Lincoln's Ford, 6 mi S Bristow, Anderson Twp. T 5S R 3W S 28
Drainage area: 92.5 mi2
Metric
Category
Species
Composition
Trophic
Composition
Fish
Condition
Metric
Total number of species
Number of darter/ sculpin/
madtom species
Number of darter species
% Headwater species
Number of sunfish species
Number of minnow species
Number of sucker species
Number of sensitive species
% Tolerant species
% Omnivores
% Insectivores
% Pioneer Species
% Carnivores
Catch per unit effort
% Simple lithophils
% DELT anomalies
Scoring Criteria
Actual
22
2
3
3
4
23.5%
22.3%
75.9%
0.4%
651
42.9%
0
Total IBI Score
IBI Score
5
3
3
3
3
5
3
5
1
5
5
5
46
20
-------
Middle Fork Anderson River
Site 94179
Perry Co: Middle Fork Anderson River, at CR 116 bridge, 4.125 mi S Bristow, Anderson Twp. T 5S R 3W
S IS; Drainage area: 79.6 mi2
Metric
Category
Metric
Scoring Criteria
Actual
IBI Score
Species
Composition
Total number of species
Number of darter/sculpin/
madtom species
Number of darter species
% Headwater species
Number of sunfish species
Number of minnow species
16
Number of sucker species
2
Number of sensitive species 3
Trophic
Composition
Fish
Condition
% Tolerant species
% Omnivores
% Insectivores
% Pioneer Species
% Carnivores
Catch per unit effort
% Simple lithophils
% DELT anomalies
20.1%
15.9%
58.9%
25.2%
214
1.9%
0
Total IBI Score
3
3
5
5
5
5
3
1
5
46
21
-------
Biological Characterization
Site 94180
Perry Co: Theis Creek, off CR 116 at bridge 26,4.5 mi S Bristow, Anderson Twp. T 5S R 3W S 22
Drainage area: 9.5 mi2
Metric
Category
Metric
Scoring Criteria
Actual
IBI Score
Species
Composition Total number of species
Number of darter/sculpin/
madtom species
Number of darter species
% Headwater species
Number of sunfish species
Number of minnow species
Number of sucker species
Number of sensitive species
% Tolerant species
Trophic
Composition % Omnivores
% Insectivores
% Pioneer Species
% Carnivores
Fish
Condition
Catch per unit effort
% Simple lithophils
% DELT anomalies
12
3
12.0%
10.2%
89.2%
13.9%
166
4.8%
0
Total IBI Score
3
5
5
5
5
3
1
5
43
22
-------
Middle Fork Anderson River
Site 94181
Perry Co: Theis Creek, at SR 145 bridge, 4.5 mi S Bristow, Anderson Twp. T 5S R 3W S 23
Drainage area: 6.5 mi2
Metric
Category
Species
Composition
Metric
Total number of species
Scoring Criteria
Actual
18
IBI Score
5
Number of darter/sculpin/
madtom species
Number of darter species
% Headwater species
Number of sunfish species
Number of minnow species
Number of sucker species
0.5%
Number of sensitive species 4
Trophic
Composition
Fish
Condition
% Tolerant species
% Omnivores
% Insectivores
% Pioneer Species
% Carnivores
Catch per unit effort
% Simple lithophils
% DELT anomalies
31.7%
30.8%
46.9%
59.6%
441
6.0%
0
Total IBI Score
3
3
3
3
1
5
1
5
36
23
-------
Biological Characterization
Site 1 (Keller 1971)
Perry Co: Middle Fork Anderson River, 6.75 mi n Cannelton, Anderson Twp. T 5S R 3W S 5
Drainage area: 105 mi2
Metric
Category
Metric
Scoring Criteria
Actual
IBI Score
Species
Composition
Fish
Condition
Total number of species
Number of darter/sculpin/
madtom species
Number of darter species
% Headwater species
Number of sunfish species
Number of minnow species
16
Trophic
Composition
Number of sucker species
Number of sensitive species
% Tolerant species
% Omnivores
% Insectivores
1
3
34.0%
30.4
59.0%
3
3
3
3
5
% Pioneer Species
% Carnivores
Catch per unit effort
% Simple lithophils
% DELT anomalies
1.7% 1
1118 5
4.5% 1
0 5
Total IBI Score 38
24
-------
Middle Fork Anderson River
Site 1 (Hottell 1980)
Perry Co: Middle Fork Anderson River, 6.75 mi n Cannelton, Anderson Twp. T 5S R 3W S 5
Drainage area: 105 mi2
Metric
Category
Metric
Scoring Criteria
Actual
IBI Score
Species
Composition
Fish
Condition
Total number of species
Number of darter/sculpin/
madtom species
Number of darter species
% Headwater species
Number of sunfish species
Number of minnow species
22
Trophic
Composition
Number of sucker species
Number of sensitive species
% Tolerant species
% Omnivores
% Insectivores
4
5
34.2%
15.4%
66.5%
5
3
3
5
5
% Pioneer Species
% Carnivores
Catch per unit effort
% Simple lithophils
% DELT anomalies
7.5% 5
663 5
25.8 3
0 5
Total IBI Score 48
25
-------
Biological Characterization
Site 1 (Stefanavage 1989)
Perry Co: Middle Fork Anderson River, 6.75 mi n Cannelton, Anderson Twp. T 5S R 3W S 5
Drainage area: 105 mi2
Metric
Category
Metric
Scoring Criteria
Actual
IBI Score
Species
Composition
Fish
Condition
Total number of species
Number of darter/sculpin/
madtom species
Number of darter species
% Headwater species
Number of sunfish species
Number of minnow species
18
Trophic
Composition
Number of sucker species
Number of sensitive species
% Tolerant species
% Omnivores
% Insectivores
5
3
25.556
19.3%
71.2%
5
4
3
3
5
% Pioneer Species
% Carnivores
Catch per unit effort
% Simple lithophils
% DELT anomalies
8.5%
212
48.6
0
Total IBI Score
3
5
5
48
26
-------
Middle Fork Anderson River
Site 2 (Keller 1971)
Perry Co: Kraus Creek, at CR 82 bridge, 6.75 mi S Bristow, Anderson Twp. T 5S R 3W S 33
Drainage area: 8.2 mi2
Metric
Category
Metric
Scoring Criteria
Actual
IBI Score
Species
Composition
Total number of species 15
Number of darter/sculpin/
madtom species 2
Number of darter species
% Headwater species 0.3%
Number of sunfish species
Number of minnow species 3
Number of sucker species
Number of sensitive species 2
Trophic
Composition
Fish
Condition
% Tolerant species
% Omnivores
% Insectivores
% Pioneer Species
% Carnivores
Catch per unit effort
% Simple lithophils
% DELT anomalies
53.9%
48.9%
33.5%
20.0%
779
1.2%
0
Total IBI Score
3
5
1
3
5
5
1
5
40
27
-------
Biological Characterization
Site 3 (Keller 1971)
Perry Co: Theis Creek, off CR 116 at bridge 26, 4.5 mi S Bristow, Anderson Twp. T 5S R 3W S 22
Drainage area: 9.5 mi2
Metric
Category
Metric
Scoring Criteria
Actual
IBI Score
Species
Composition
Total number of species
Number of darter/sculpin/
madtom species
Number of darter species
% Headwater species
Number of sunfish species
Number of minnow species
Number of sucker species
21
Number of sensitive species 2
Trophic
Composition
Fish
Condition
% Tolerant species
% Omnivores
% Insectivores
% Pioneer Species
% Carnivores
Catch per unit effort
% Simple lithophils
% DELT anomalies
15.6%
11.9%
48.1%
46.6%
320
1.9%
0
Total IBI Score
3
5
5
3
3
5
1
5
42
28
-------
Middle Fork Anderson River
Site 3 (Hottell 1980)
Perry Co: Theis Creek, off CR 116 at bridge 26,4.5 mi S Bristow, Anderson Twp. T 5S R 3W S 22
Drainage area: 9.5 mi2
Metric
Category
Metric
Scoring Criteria
Actual
IBI Score
Species
Composition
Total number of species 20
Number of darter/sculpin/
madtotn species 3
Number of darter species
% Headwater species 0.7%
Number of sunfish species
Number of minnow species 3
Number of sucker species
Number of sensitive species 2
Trophic
Composition
Fish
Condition
% Tolerant species
% Omnivores
% Insectivores
% Pioneer Species
% Carnivores
Catch per unit effort
% Simple lithophils
% DELT anomalies
22.0%
20.4%
77.8%
17.6%
437
4.1%
0
Total IBI Score
3
5
3
5
5
5
1
5
46
29
-------
Biological Characterization
Site MNON (Stefanavage 1989)
Perry Co: Middle Fork Anderson River, at Lincoln's Ford, 6 mi S Bristow, Anderson Twp. T 5S R 3W S 28
Drainage area: 92.5 mi2
Metric
Category
Metric
Scoring Criteria
Actual
IBI Score
Species
Composition
Fish
Condition
Total number of species
Number of darter/sculpin/
madtom species
Number of darter species
% Headwater species
Number of sunfish species
Number of minnow species
16
Trophic
Composition
Number of sucker species
Number of sensitive species
% Tolerant species
% Omnivores
% Insectivores
3
4
7.2%
50.8%
79.7%
3
3
5
5
5
% Pioneer Species
% Carnivores
Catch per unit effort
% Simple lithophils
% DELT anomalies
10.1% 5
69 1
8.7% 1
0 5
Total IBI Score 42
30
-------
Middle Fork Anderson River
Site 5 (Keller 1971)
Perry Co: Middle Fork Anderson River, Anderson Twp. T 5S R 3W S 15
Drainage area: 44.8 mi2
Metric
Category
Metric
Scoring Criteria
Actual
IBI Score
Species
Composition
Fish
Condition
Total number of species
Number of darter/sculpin/
madtom species
Number of darter species
% Headwater species
Number of sunfish species
Number of minnow species
14
Trophic
Composition
Number of sucker species
Number of sensitive species
% Tolerant species
% Omnivores
% Insectivores
1
2
57.3%
52.4
35.4%
3
1
1
1
3
% Pioneer Species
% Carnivores
Catch per unit effort
% Simple lithophils
% DELT anomalies
7.3%
82
6.1%
0
Total IBI Score
1
1
5
30
31
-------
Biological Characterization
Site 5 (Hottell 1980)
Perry Co: Middle Fork Anderson River, Anderson Twp. T 5S R 3W S 15
Drainage area: 44.8 mi2
Metric
Category
Metric
Scoring Criteria
Actual
IBI Score
Species
Composition
Fish
Condition
Total number of species
Number of darter/sculpin/
madtom species
Number of darter species
% Headwater species
Number of sunfish species
Number of minnow species
19
Trophic
Composition
Number of sucker species
Number of sensitive species
% Tolerant species
% Omnivores
% Insectivores
3
3
23.7%
13.5
71.2%
3
3
5
5
5
% Pioneer Species
% Carnivores
Catch per unit effort
% Simple lithophils
% DELT anomalies
13.5%
156
5.1%
0
Total IBI Score
46
32
-------
Middle Fork Anderson River
Site 6 (Hottell 1980)
Perry Co: Middle Fork Anderson River, at SR 145 bridge, Bristow, Clark Twp. T 4S R 3W S 27
Drainage area: 39.8 mi2
Metric
Category
Metric
Scoring Criteria
Actual
IBI Score
Species
Composition
Fish
Condition
Total number of species
Number of darter/sculpin/
madtom species
Number of darter species
% Headwater species
Number of sunfish species
Number of minnow species
27
Trophic
Composition
Number of sucker species
Number of sensitive species
% Tolerant species
% Omnivores
% Insectivores
4
4
36.7%
31.5%
58.9%
5
3
3
3
5
% Pioneer Species
% Carnivores
Catch per unit effort
% Simple lithophils
% DELT anomalies
2.1% 3
333 5
7.5% 1
0 5
Total IBI Score 44
33
-------
Biological Characterization
Site M6 (Stefanavage 1989)
Perry Co: Middle Fork Anderson River, at SR 145 bridge, Bristow, Clark Twp. T 4S R 3W S 27
Drainage area: 39.8 mi2
Metric
Category
Metric
Scoring Criteria
Actual
IBI Score
Species
Composition
Fish
Condition
Total number of species
Number of darter/sculpin/
madtom species
Number of darter species
% Headwater species
Number of sunfish species
Number of minnow species
23
Trophic
Composition
Number of sucker species
Number of sensitive species
% Tolerant species
% Omnivores
% Insectivores
4
3
29.6 %
10.2%
62.4%
5
3
3
5
5
% Pioneer Species
% Carnivores
Catch per unit effort
% Simple lithophils
% DELT anomalies
8.1%
186
7.0%
0
Total IBI Score
44
34
-------
Middle Fork Anderson River
Site 7 (Keller 1970)
Perry Co: Sulphur Fork, 1.5 mi W SR 145 off dirt road, 3 mi SE Bristow, Anderson Twp. T 5S R 3W S 11
Drainage area: ca. 23.2 mi2
Metric
Category
Scoring Criteria
Metric
Actual
IBI Score
Species
Composition Total number of species
Number of darter/sculpin/
madtom species
Number of darter species
% Headwater species
Number of sunfish species
Number of minnow species
Number of sucker species
Number of sensitive species
% Tolerant species
Trophic
Composition % Omnivores
% Insectivores
% Pioneer Species
% Carnivores
17
Fish
Condition
Catch per unit effort
% Simple lithophils
% DELT anomalies
4
1
30.1%
23.1%
62.4%
5
1
3
3
5
7.5% 5
173 3
2.3% 1
0 5
Total IBI Score 44
35
-------
Biological Characterization
Site 7 (Hottell 1980)
Perry Co: Sulphur Fork, 1.5 mi W SR 145 off dirt road, 3 mi SE Bristow, Anderson Twp. T 5S R 3W S 12
Drainage area: 23.2 mi2
Metric
Category
Species
Composition
Metric
Total number of species
Scoring Criteria
Actual
25
IBI Score
5
Fish
Condition
Number of darter/sculpin/
madtom species
Number of darter species
% Headwater species
Number of sunfish species
Number of minnow species
Trophic
Composition
Number of sucker species
Number of sensitive species
% Tolerant species
% Omnivores
% Insectivores
3
4
23.4%
21.7%
54.9%
3
3
5
3
5
% Pioneer Species
% Carnivores
Catch per unit effort
% Simple lithophils
% DELT anomalies
2.9%
410
7.1%
0
Total IBI Score
46
36
-------
Middle Fork Anderson River
Site M7 (Stefanavage 1989)
Perry Co: Sulphur Fork, 1.5 mi W SR 145 off dirt road, 3 mi SE Bristow, Anderson Twp. T 5S R 3W S 12
Drainage area: 23.2 mi2
Metric
Category
Metric
Scoring Criteria
Actual
mi Score
Species
Composition
Total number of species
Number of darter/sculpin/
madtom species
Number of darter species
% Headwater species
Number of sunfish species
Number of minnow species
12
Number of sucker species
1
Number of sensitive species 2
Trophic
Composition
Fish
Condition
% Tolerant species
% Omnivores
% Insectivores
% Pioneer Species
% Carnivores
Catch per unit effort
% Simple lithophils
% DELT anomalies
28.7%
26.3%
65.1%
7.8%
129
3.1%
0
Total IBI Score
3
1
3
3
5
5
1
1
5
34
37
-------
Biological Characterization
Site 92131 (Simon 1992)
Perry Co: Kraus Creek, at SR 145 bridge, 9 mi N Cannelton, Anderson Twp. T 5S R 3W S 26
Drainage area: 6.2 mi2
Metric
Category
Metric
Scoring Criteria
Actual
IBI Score
Species
Composition
Total number of species 17
Number of darter/sculpin/
madtom species 2
Number of darter species
% Headwater species 2.5%
Number of sunfish species
Number of minnow species 6
Number of sucker species
Number of sensitive species 3
Trophic
Composition
Fish
Condition
% Tolerant species
% Omnivores
% Insectivores
% Pioneer Species
% Carnivores
Catch per unit effort
% Simple lithophils
% DELT anomalies
20.9%
18.3%
59.7%
50.7%
278
7.2%
0
Total IBI Score
3
5
3
5
1
5
1
5
40
38
-------
Middle Fork Anderson River
Site 92132 (Simon 1992)
Perry Co: Sulphur Fork, at SR 145 bridge, 2.5 mi S Bristow, Anderson Twp. T 5S R 3W S 11
Drainage area: 27.1 mi2
Metric
Category
Metric
Scoring Criteria
Actual
IBI Score
Species
Composition Total number of species
Number of darter/sculpin/
madtom species
Number of darter species
% Headwater species
Number of sunfish species
Number of minnow species
Number of sucker species
Number of sensitive species
% Tolerant species
Trophic
Composition % Omnivores
% Insectivores
% Pioneer Species
% Carnivores
Fish
Condition
Catch per unit effort
% Simple lithophils
% DELT anomalies
16
1
2
39.2%
16.3%
61.4%
3
I
3
5
5
2.6%
153
0%
0
Total IBI Score
36
39
-------
Biological Characterization
Site 92133 (Simon 1992)
Perry Co: Middle Fork Anderson River, at dirt
23
Drainage area:
Metric
Category
Species
Composition
Trophic
Composition
Fish
Condition
41.8mi2
Metric
Total number of species
Number of darter/sculpin/
madtom species
Number of darter species
% Headwater species
Number of sunfish species
Number of minnow species
Number of sucker species
Number of sensitive species
% Tolerant species
% Omnivores
% Insectivores
% Pioneer Species
% Carnivores
Catch per unit effort
% Simple lithophils
% DELT anomalies
road bridge, 0.75 mi NE Bristow, Clark Twp. T 4S R 3W S
Scoriae Criteria
Actual
23
3
5
2
3
37.3%
36.7%
47.6%
5.8%
311
4.2%
0
Total IBI Score
IBI Score
5
3
5
3
3
3
1
3
5
5
1
5
47
40
-------
Middle Fork Anderson River
Site 92134 (Simon 1992)
Perry Co: Middle Fork Anderson River, at SR 62 bridge, 1 mi E Uniontown, Oil Twp. T 3S R 2W S 28
Drainage area: 8.18 mi2
Metric
Category
Metric
Scoring Criteria
Actual
IBI Score
Species
Composition
Total number of species 14
Number of darter/sculpin/
madtom species 3
Number of darter species
% Headwater species 29.2%
Number of sunfish species
Number of minnow species 3
Number of sucker species
Number of sensitive species 1
Trophic
Composition
Fish
Condition
% Tolerant species
% Omnivores
% Insectivores
% Pioneer Species
% Carnivores
Catch per unit effort
% Simple lithophils
% DELT anomalies
6.9%
5.5%
56.9%
36.1%
72
11.1%
0
Total IBI Score
1
5
5
5
3
1
1
5
39
41
-------
Biological Characterization
Appendix II. Statewide list of Indiana species considered to be headwater species for evaluating permanent
habitat in headwater streams (after Smith 1971).
Least brook lamprey
American brook lamprey
Redside dace
Blacknose dace
Southern redbelly dace
Brook stickleback
Fantail darter
Mottled sculpin
Banded sculpin
Lampetra aepyptera
Lampetra appendix
Clinostomus elongatus
Rhinichthys atratulus
Phoxinus erythrogaster
Culaea inconstans
Etheosloma flabellare
Cottus bairdi
Cottus carolinae
42
-------
Middle Fork Anderson River
Appendix III. Statewide list of Indiana fish species considered to be sensitive to a wide variety of
environmental disturbances including water quality and habitat degradation.
Common Name Scientific Name
Ohio lamprey Ichthyomyzon bdellium
Northern brook lamprey I.fossor
Least brook lamprey Lampetra aepyptera
American brook lamprey L. appendix
Paddlefish
Goldeye
Mooneye
Redside dace
Streamline chub
Gravel chub
Speckled chub
Bigeye chub
Pallid shiner
Rosefui shiner
Horayhead chub
River chub
Pugnose shiner
Popeye shiner
Bigeye shiner
Ironcolor shiner
Blacknose shiner
Blackchin shiner
Sand shiner
Silver shiner
Rosyface shiner
Silverband shiner
Weed shiner
Mimic shiner
Channel shiner
Pugnose minnow
Longnose dace
Blue sucker
Highfm carpsucker
Northern hogsucker
Silver redhorse
Ohio redhorse
River redhorse
Black redhorse
Golden redhorse
Polyodon spatula
Hiodon alosoides
H. tergisus
Clinostomus elongatus
Erimystax dissimilis
E. x-punctatcf
Extrarius aestivalis
Hybopsis amblops
H. amnis
Lythrurus ardent
Nocomis biguttatus
N. micropogon
Notropis anogenus
N. ariommus
N. hoops
N. chafybaeus
N. heterolepis
N. heterodon
N. ludibunduf
N. photogenis
N. rubellus
N. shumardi
N. texanus
N. volucellus
N. wickliffi
Opsopoeodus emiliae
Rhinichthys cataractae
Cydeptus elongatus
Carpiodes velifer
Hypentelium nigricans
Moxostoma anisurum
Moxostoma breviceps
Moxostoma carinatum
M. duquesnei
M. erythrurum
Common Name
Shorthead redhorse
Greater redhorse
Mountain madtotn
Slender madtom
Stonecat
Brindled madtom
Freckled madtom
Northern madtom
Northern cavefish
Southern cavefish
Northern studfish
Starhead topminnow
Brook silverside
Rock bass
Longear sunfish
Smallmouth bass
Western sand darter
Eastern sand darter
Crystal darter
Greenside darter
Rainbow darter
Bluebreast darter
Harlequin darter
Spotted darter
Spottail darter
Tippecanoe darter
Variegate darter
Banded darter
Logperch
Channel darter
Gilt darter
Slenderhead darter
Dusky darter
Saddleback darter
Scientific Name
M. macrolepidotum
M. Valenciennes i
Noturus eleutherus
N. exilis
N.flavus
N. miurus
N. noaurnus
N. stigmosus
Amblyopsis spelaea
Typhlichthys subterraneus
Fundulus catenatus
F. dispar
Labidesthes sicculus
Ambloplites rupestris
Lepomis megalotis
Micropterus dolomieu
Ammocrypta clara
A. pellucida
Crystallariaasprella
Etheostoma blennioides
E. caeruleum
£'. camurum
E. histrio
E. maculatum
E. squamiceps
E. tippecanoe
E. variatum
E. zonale
Percina caprodes
P. copelandi
P. evides
P. phoxocephala
P. sciera
P. vigil
* This species is tentatively placed in this category
until further life history data is available.
43
-------
Biological Characterization
Appendix IV. Statewide list of species considered to be highly tolerant to a wide variety of environmental
disturbances including water quality and habitat degradation.
Common Name
Longnose gar
Shortnose gar
American eel
Gizzard shad
Central mudminnow
Goldfish
Grass carp
Red shiner
Carp
Silver carp
Bighead carp
Black carp
Golden shiner
Bluntnose minnow
Fathead minnow
Blacknose dace
Creek chub
Rudd
White sucker
River carpsucker
Quillback
Smallmouth buffalo
Bigmouth buffalo
Black bullhead
Yellow bullhead
Channel catfish
Flathead catfish
Banded killifisfa
White bass
White perch
Green sunfish
Freshwater drum
Scientific Name
Lepisosteus osseus1
Lepisosteus platostomus'
Anguilla rostrata
Dorosoma cepedianum
Umbra limi
Carassius aural us
Ctenopharyngodon idella
Cyprinella lutrensis
Cyprinus carpio
Hypophthalmichthys molitrix
H. nobilis
Mylopharyngodon piceus
Notemigonus crysoleucas
Pimephales notatus
Pimephales promelas
Rhinichthys atratulus
Semotilus atromaculatus
Scardinius erythrophthalmus
Catostomus commersoni
Carpiodes carpio1
Carpiodes cyprinus*
Ictiobus bubalu?
Ictiobus cyprineUus*
Ameiurus melas
Ameiurus natalis*
Ictalurus punctatus
Pylodictis olivaris
Fundulus diaphanus
Morone chrysops'
Morone americana
Lepomis cyanellus
Aplodinotus grunniens'
" This species is being considered as
listed in Simon (1991; 1992).
'highlytolerant" rather than "moderately tolerant" or "unclassified" as
44
-------
Middle Fork Anderson River
Appendix V. Statewide list of Indiana fish species considered to be omnivores.
Common Name Scientific Name
Gizzard shad Dorosoma cepedianum*
Threadfin shad Dorosoma petenense'
Central mudminnow Umbra limi
Goldfish Carassius auratus
Grass carp Ctenopharyngodon idella
Carp Cyprinus carplo
Cypress minnow Hybognathus hayi
Mississippi silvery minnow Hybognathus nuchalis
Silver carp Hypopthalmichthys molitrix
Black carp Mylopharyngodon piceus
Bluntnose minnow Pimephales not at us
Fathead minnow Pimephales promelas
Bullhead minnow Pimephales vigilax
Rudd Scardinius erythrophthalmus
River carpsucker Carpiodes carpio*
Quillback Carpiodes cyprinus*
Highfin carpsucker Carpiodes velifer
White sucker Catostomus commersoni
This species is being added to the Statewide list based on additional information not available in Simon
(1991).
45
-------
Biological Characterization
Appendix VI. Statewide list of Indiana fish species considered to be insectivores.
Common Name
Shovelnose sturgeon
Goldeye
Mooneye
Redside dace
Lake chub
Red shiner
Spotfin shiner
Steelcolor shiner
Silverjaw minnow
Streamline chub
Gravel chub
Speckled chub
Bigeye chub
Pallid shiner
Striped shiner
Common shiner
Rosefin shiner
Ribbon shiner
Redfin shiner
Silver chub
Hornyhead chub
River chub
Golden shiner
Pugnose shiner
Emerald shiner
Popeye shiner
River shiner
Bigeye shiner
Ghost shiner
Ironcolor shiner
Bigmouth shiner
Blacknose shiner
Blackchin shiner
Spottail shiner
Sand shiner
Silver shiner
Rosyface shiner
Silverband shiner
Weed shiner
Mimic shiner
Channel shiner
Scientific Name
Scaphirhynchus platorynchus
Hiodon alosoides
H. tergisus
Clinostomus elongatus
Couesius plumbeus
Cyprinella lutrensis
C. spiloptera
C. whipplei
Ericymba buccata
Erimystax dissimilis
E. x-punctata
Extrarius aestivalis
Hybopsis amblops
H. amnis
Luxilus chrysocephalus
L. cornutus
Lythrurus ardens
L. fumeus
L. umbratilis
Macrhybopsis storeriana
Nocomis biguttatus
N. micropogon
Notemigonus crysoleucas
Notropis anogenus
N. atherinoid.es
N. ariommus
N. blennius
N. hoops
N. buchanani
N. chalybaeus
N. dorsalis
N. heterolepis
N. heterodon
N. hudsonius
N. ludibundus
N. photogenis
N. rubellus
N. shumardi
N. texanus
N. volucellus
N. wickliffi
Common Name
Pugnose minnow
Suckermouth minnow
Longnose dace
Blue sucker
Longnose sucker
Creek chubsucker
Lake chubsucker
Northern hogsucker
Spotted sucker
Silver redhorse
Ohio redhorse
River redhorse
Black redhorse
Golden redhorse
Shorthead redhorse
Greater redhorse
Black bullhead
Yellow bullhead
Brown bullhead
Mountain madtom
Slender madtom
Stonecat
Tadpole madtom
Brindled madtom
Freckled madtom
Northern madtom
Pirate perch
Trout-perch
Northern studfish
Banded killifish
Starhead topminnow
Blackstripe topminnow
Mosquitofish
Brook silverside
Inland silverside
Scientific Name
Opsopoeodus emiliae
Phenacobius mirabilis
Rhinichthys cataractae
Cycleptus elongatus
Catostomus catostomus
Erimyzon oblongus
E. sucetta
Hypentelium nigricans
Minytrema melanops
Moxostoma anisurum
M. breviceps
M. carinatum
M. duquesnei
M. erythrurum
M. macrolepidotum
M. valenciennesi
Ameiurus melas
A. natalis
A. nebulosus
Noturus eleutherus
N. exilis
N. flavus
N. gyrinus
N. miurus
N. nocturnus
N. stigmosus
Aphredoderus sayanus
Percopsis omiscomaycus
Fundulus catenatus
F. diaphanus
F. dispar
F. notatus
Gambusia affinis
Labidethes sicculus
Menidia beryllina
46
-------
Middle Fork Anderson River
Common Name
Brook stickleback
Ninespine stickleback
Threespine stickleback
Flier
Green sunfish
Pumpkinseed
Orangespotted sunfish
Bluegill
Longear sunfish
Redear sunfish
Spotted sunfish
Bantam sunfish
Scientific Name
Culaea inconstans
Pungitius pungitius
Gasterosteus aculeatus
Centrarchus macropterus
Lepomis cyanellus
L. gibbosus
L. humilis
L. macrochirus
L. megalotis
L. microlophus
L. punctatus
L. symmetricus
Common Name
Mottled sculpin
Banded sculpin
Spoonhead sculpin
Round goby
Scientific Name
Cottus bairdi
C. carolinae
C. ricei
Neogobius melanostomus
' This list of species is based on best available
information. Species tentatively placed in this
category will remain until additional information is
available.
Banded pygmy sunfish Elassoma zonatum
Crystal darter
Western sand darter
Eastern sand darter
Mud darter
Greenside darter
Rainbow darter
Bluebreast darter
Bluntnose darter
Iowa darter
fantail darter
Slough darter
Harlequin darter
Spotted darter
Least darter
Johnny darter
Orangethroat darter
Spottail darter
Tippecanoe darter
Variegate darter
Banded darter
Logperch
Channel darter
Gilt darter
Blackside darter
Slenderhead darter
Dusky darter
River darter
Yellow saddleback
darter
Crystallaria asprella
Ammocrypta clara
A. pellucida
Etheostoma asprigene
E. blennioides
E. caeruleum
E. camurum
E. chlorosoma
E. exile
E. flabellare
E. gracile
E. histrio
E. maculatum
E. microperca
E. nigrum
E. spectabile
E. squamiceps
E. tippecanoe
E. variatum
E. zonale
Percina caprodes
P. copelandi
P. evides
P. maculata
P. phoxocephala
P. sciera
P. shumardi
P. vigil
47
-------
Biological Characterization
Appendix VII. Statewide list of Indiana fish species considered to be carnivores.
Common Name
Ohio lamprey
Chestnut lamprey
Silver lamprey
Sea lamprey
Alligator gar
Spotted gar
Longnose gar
Shortnose gar
Bowfin
American eel
Skipjack herring
Rainbow trout
Coho salmon
Chinook salmon
Brook trout
Lake trout
Atlantic salmon
Brown trout
Grass pickerel
Northern pike
Muskellunge
Blue catfish
Channel catfish
Flathead catfish
White bass
Yellow bass
Striped bass
Rock bass
Warmouth
Smallmouth bass
Spotted bass
Largemouth bass
Walleye
Sauger
Scientific Name
Ichthyomyzon bdellium
I. casteneus
I. unicuspis
Petromyzon marinus
Atractosteus spatula
Lepisosteus oculatus
L. osseus
L. platostomus
Amia calva
Anguilla rostrata
Alosa chtysochloris
Oncorhynchus mykiss
O. kisutch
O. tshawytscha
Salvelinus fontinalis
S. namaycush
Salmo solar
S. trutta
Esox americanus
E. lucius
E. masquinongy
Ictalurus furcatus
I. punctatus
Pylodictis olivaris
Morone chrysops
M. mississippiensis
M. saxatilis
Ambloplites rupestris
Lepomis gulosus
Micropterus dolomieu
M. punctulatus
M. salmoides
Stizostedion vitreum
S. canadense
48
-------
Middle Fork Anderson River
Appendix VIII. Statewide list of Indiana species considered to be pioneer species (indicators of temporally
unavailable or stressed habitats (after Larimore and Smith 1963; Smith 1971)).
Common Name
Central stoneroller
Largescale stoneroller
Silverjaw minnow
Bluntnose minnow
Fathead minnow
Creek chub
Creek chubsucker
Lake chubsucker
Green sunfish
Johnny darter
Orangethroat darter
Scientific Name
Campostoma anomalum
Campostoma oligolepis
Ericymba buccata
Pimephales notatus
Pimpehales promelas
Semotilus atromaculatus
Erimyzon oblongus
Erimyzon sucetta
Lepomis cyanellus
Etheostoma nigrum
Etheostoma spectabile
49
-------
Biological Characterization
Appendix IX. Statewide list of Indiana fish species considered to be simple iithophilous spawners.
Common Name
Paddlefish
Lake sturgeon
Shovelnose sturgeon
Redside dace
Lake chub
Streamline chub
Gravel chub
Cypress minnow
Miss, silvery minnow
Bigeye chub
Pallid shiner
Popeye shiner
River shiner
Bigeye shiner
Silver shiner
Rosyface shiner
Silverband shiner
Suckermouth minnow
Southern redbelly dace
Blacknose dace
Longnose dace
Blue sucker
Longnose sucker
White sucker
Northern hogsucker
Scientific Narne
Polyodon spathula
Acipenser Julvescens
Scaphirhynchus platorynchus
Clinostomus elongatus
Couesius plumbeus
Erimystax dissimilis?
E. x-punctatct
Hybognathus hayi*
H. nuchalis
Hybopsis amblops
H. (minis'
Notropis ariommus*
N. blennius
N. hoops
N. photogenis
N. rubellus
N. shumardi
Phenacobius mirabilis
Phoxinus erythrogaster
Rhinichthys atratulus
R. cataractae
Cycleptus elongatus
Catostomus catostomus
C. commersoni
Hypentelium nigricans
Common Name
Spotted sucker
Silver redhorse
Ohio redhorse
River redhorse
Black redhorse
Golden redhorse
Shorthead redhorse
Greater redhorse
Burbot
Western sand darter
Eastern sand darter
Crystal darter
Rainbow darter
Orangethroat darter
Tippecanoe darter
Variegate darter
Logperch
Channel darter
Gilt darter
Blackside darter
Slenderhead darter
Dusky darter
River darter
Saddleback darter
Sauger
Walleye
Scientific Name
Minytrema melanops
Moxostoma anisurum
M. breviceps
M. carinatum
M. duquesnei
M. erythrurum
M. macrolepidotum
M. valenciennesi
Lota lota
Ammocrypta clara
A. pellucida
Crystallaria asprella
Etheostoma caeruleum
E. spectabile
E. tippecanoe
E. variatum
Percina caprodes
P. copelandi
P. evides
P. maculata
P. phoxocephala
P. sciera
P. shumardi
P. vigil
Stizostedion canadense
S. vitreum
* This species is tentatively placed in this
classification until further life history information is
available.
50
------- |