> 4
EPA
United States Office of
Environmental Protection Research and Development
Agency Washington DC 20460
EPA/600/5-91/288
May 1991
IMPLEMENTATION PLAN FOR
MONITORING THE ESTUARINE
WATERS OF THE LOUISIANIAN
'/','•
PROVINCE • 1991 DEMONSTRATION
Environmental Monitoring
and Assessment Program
-------
UT ">- r
ftltft
EPA/600/5-91-288
May 1991
IMPLEMENTATION PLAN FOR MONITORING THE ESTUARINE WATERS OF THE
LOUISIANIAN PROVINCE - 1991 DEMONSTRATION
J. Kevin Summers1, John M. Macauley1, and P. Thomas Heitmuller2
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Environmental Research Laboratory, Gulf Breeze, FL
2 Technical Resources, Inc., Gulf Breeze, FL
ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH LABORATORY
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
GULF BREEZE, FLORIDA 32561
PROPERTY OF
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
-------
DISCLAIMER
The information in this document has been wholly or in part funded by the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency. It has been subjected to the Agency's review, and it has been approved for publication as an EPA
document. Mention of trade names does not constitute endorsement or recommendation for use.
-------
PREFACE
Environmental regulatory programs in the United States have been estimated to cost more than $70
billion annually. Most of these programs address specific local pollution problems and appear to be effective
for the specific purpose for which they were designed. However, the means to assess the effectiveness of
these programs in protecting the environment at national and regional scales and over the long-term do
not exist. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) considers it critical to establish monitoring and
assessment programs to confirm effectiveness of pollution control strategies and corroborate the science
on which they are based.
The Environmental Monitoring and Assessment Program (EMAP) is a nationwide initiative by EPA's Office
of Research and Development (ORD). It was developed in response to the demand for information on the
condition of the nation's ecological resources. The near coastal element of EMAP (EMAP-NC) presently
represents one such ecological resource-estuaries. This document specifically addresses the development
of an implementation plan for a demonstration of the efficacy and utility of EMAP-NC in the Louisianian
Province (I.e., estuaries of the Gulf of Mexico) in 1991.
Although EMAP is funded by ORD, it Is designed as an integrated federal program. Throughout the
planning of EMAP-NC in the Louisianian Province, ORD worked with other federal agencies, including the
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), the
resources and water quality agencies of the five Gulf states (Florida, Alabama, Mississippi, Louisiana, and
Texas), as well as other offices within EPA (e.g., Gulf of Mexico Program, Regions IV and VI). These
agencies and other offices will participate in the collection and use of EMAP data.
Information obtained in the 1991 EMAP-NC Louisianian Province Demonstration will be used to: (1)
demonstrate the value of integrated, multiagency monitoring programs for planning, setting priorities, and
evaluating the condition of the estuarine resources in the Gulf of Mexico; (2) define a sampling approach
for quantifying the extent and magnitude of pollution problems in Gulf of Mexico estuaries; (3) develop
standardized monitoring methods that can be transferred to other programs and agencies for sampling the
near coastal environment; (4) identify and resolve logistical issues associated with implementing a
multiagency national status and trends ecological monitoring program.
The sampling design used by EMAP-NC for the 1991 Louisianian Province Demonstration combines the
strengths of systematic sampling designs with an understanding of estuarine systems to provide unbiased
estimates of the condition of estuarine resources. Information from individual sample sites will be used for
regional estimates for three classes of estuarine resources: (1) large estuaries (e.g., Apalachee Bay, Mobile
Bay, Mississippi Sound, Lake Pontchartrain, Galveston Bay); large tidal rivers (i.e., Mississippi River); (3)
small estuaries, bays, inlets, tidal creeks, and tidal rivers (e.g., Cedar Bayou, East Bay Bayou, Withlacoochie
River, Little Lake Pelican Bay). Design modifications appropriate for representing the condition and trends
in the extent and magnitude of ecological problems will be used when the Louisianian Province Program
is implemented.
iii
-------
NOTICE
This document is the final revision of the implementation plan for the Louisianian Province of the Near
Coastal component of the Environmental Monitoring and Assessment Program (EMAP).
The report should be cited as follows:
Summers, J.K, J.M. Macauley, and P.T. Heitmuller. 1991. Implementation Plan for Monitoring the
Estuarine Waters of the Louisianian Province - 1991 Demonstration. EPA/600/5-91/228. U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development, Environmental Research
Laboratory, Gulf Breeze, FL
iv
-------
Table of Contents
Preface iii
Notice iv
List of Tables vi
List of Figures vii
1.0 Introduction 1
2.0 Coordination 3
3.0 Sample Design 8
4.0 Indicator Development and Evaluation 50
5.0 Logistics 91
6.0 Information Management 119
7.0 Quality Assurance 127
8.0 References 147
-------
List of Tables
Table 3-1. List frame of estuarine systems within the Louisianian Province with
surface areas greater than 2.6 km2 18
Table 3-2. Small Louisiana bayous greater the 1 km2 but less than 2.6 km2 in surface
area. Systems shown are associated with the larger estuarine system indicated ... 23
Table 3-3. 1991 Base sampling locations for large estuary class 29
Table 3-4. 1991 base sampling locations (random and index) for the large tidal
river class 31
Table 3-5. 1991 base sampling locations (random and index) for small estuary/tidal
river class 34
Table 3-6. Indicator testing and evaluation sites for 1991 based on a priori judgments
concerning the degree of sediment contamination due to agricultural (AG)
and industrial (IN) sources and the anticipated dissolved oxygen
concentration (DO) 39
Table 3-7. Supplementary sampling stations in 1991 to evaluate the effect of sampling
scale on parameter estimation 42
Table 3-8. Anticipated 1992 Estuarine Systems to be sampled and the projected number
of samples from each system 44
Table 3-9. Anticipated 1993 Estuarine Systems to be sampled and the projected number
of samples from each system 46
Table 3-10. Anticipated 1994 Estuarine Systems to be sampled and the projected number
of samples from each sample 48
Table 4-1. List of EMAP-NC indicators by major category 56
Table 4-2. Indicators selected for measurement in the 1991 Louisianian Province
Monitoring Demonstration 57
Table 4-3. Chemicals to be measured in sediments during the 1991 Louisianian
Province Monitoring Demonstration 65
Table 4-4. Anticipated catch frequencies of Gulf finfish and shellfish based
on available trawl data from the Gulf States (1980-1989) 74
Table 4-5. Chemicals to be measured in tissue during the 1991 Louisianian
Province Monitoring Demonstration 75
Table 4-6. Priority ecological indicators selected as applicable for EMAP-NC monitoring 83
Table 4-7. Synopsis of potential data sources for stressor indicators 86
Table 4-8. Major data sources for the National Coastal Pollution Discharge
Inventory 00
vi
-------
Table 5-1. Distribution of 1991 Louisianian Province Monitoring Demonstration
samples among station types and sampling sub-regions 96
Table 5-2. Activities performed at each station type to be
sampled in the Louisianian Province 98
Table 5-3. Sampling locations and respective staging areas for the 1991
Louisianian Province Monitoring Demonstration 109
Table 7-1. Measurement Quality Objectives for EMAP-NC indicators
and associated data 132
Table 7-2. Quality assurance sample types, type of data generated, and
measurement quality expressed for all measurement variables 138
Table 7-3. Warning and control limits for quality control samples 141
Table 7-4. Recommended detection limits for EMAP-NC chemical analyses 142
List of Figures
Figure 3-1. EMAP-NC biogeographical provinces 12
Figure 3-2. Base sampling stations for 1991 Louisianian Province Monitoring
Demonstration 32
Figure 3-3. Indicator testing and evaluation stations for the 1991 Louisianian
Province Monitoring Demonstration 40
Figure 4-1. Primary evaluation criteria used by EMAP-NC in the tiered indicator
selection strategy 52
Figure 4-2. Overview of the indicator strategy for the EMAP near coastal program.
The manner in which indicators are related to the major environmental
problems and impacts is also shown 55
Figure 5-1. Sampling sub-regions of Louisianian Province 92
Figure 5-2. Management structure for the 1991 Louisianian Province Monitoring
Demonstration 107
Rgure 6-1. Louisianian Province Information Management Team 120
Figure 7-1. The three stages of developing Data Quality Objectives 129
Figure 7-2. Example of a control chart 146
vii
-------
1.0 INTRODUCTION
The Environmental Monitoring and Assessment Program / Near Coastal Program (EMAP-NC) is designed
to provide a quantitative assessment of the regional extent of coastal environmental problems by measuring
status and change in selected ecological condition indicators. The Near Coastal monitoring program began
in 1990 with a demonstration in the Virginian Province (Cape Cod, MA to Cape Henry, VA). EMAP-NC
proposes to continue the development of the monitoring program with the implementation of a
demonstration project in the estuaries of the Louisianian Province (Gulf of Mexico) beginning in the summer
of 1991.
Sampling to be conducted in 1991 represents the second year of base monitoring demonstrations for
EMAP-NC. As described in the 1990 Research Plan for the Virginian Province (US EPA, 1990), 1991
sampling activities will include further monitoring demonstrations in the Virginian and Louisianian Provinces.
The implementation plan presented below describes the sampling and logistical activities planned for the
monitoring demonstration in the Louisianian Province to be conducted In July-August 1991 and the analytical
activities planned for the collected data during July 1991-January 1992. A data summary report will be
available in June 1992.
The basic strategies to be employed In the Louisianian Province (e.g., long-term probability-based
sampling, early emphasis on estuarine waters, measurement of indicators with known interpretability) are
identical to those described for the 1990 sampling in the Virginian Province (US EPA, 1990). The key issues
regarding the near coastal strategy for implementation in the Louisianian Province are described in
subsequent chapters.
This document Is organized into sections that describe the major elements of the proposed monitoring
program for the Louisianian Province. These elements are:
o Coordination (Chapter 2.0) lists the primary groups involved in environmental management of the
Gulf of Mexico resources with whom EMAP-NC will have interaction and describes planned activities.
-------
o Sampling Design (Chapter 3.0) provides a detailed description of the proposed sampling appro30*1
for base-level monitoring as well as details concerning special studies conducted to assess indicator
sensitivity and spatial variability.
o Indicator Selection and Evaluation (Chapter 4.0) describes the strategy used to select the parameters
to be measured (i.e., indicators of environmental quality) and describes the activities that will
evaluate the sensitivity of the indicators. In addition, this chapter details retrospective data collection
and analysis activities completed for key elements of the proposed plan (e.g., optimal sampling times
for DO characterization, selection of target species).
o Logistics Plan (Chapter 5.0) details the sampling activities, communications procedures, training,
and the contingency plans for unexpected events. Plans for the reconnaissance of all 'planned*
sampling locations are described. The project management structure that will be used to monitor
the status of all program sampling, laboratory processing, and shipping activities Is detailed.
o Information Management (Chapter 6.0) provides a general description of the data management
procedures that will be used to store and manipulate the monitoring data.
o Quality Assurance (Chapter 7.0) details the procedures that will be used to ensure that the quality
of the data collected is sufficient to meet program objectives and the steps that will be followed in
subsequent monitoring years to prepare data quality objectives for the Louisianian Province
Monitoring.
o References (Chapter 8.0)
-------
2.0 COORDINATION
To meet the objectives of the EMAP-Near Coastal program In the Loulsianlan Province will require dose
cooperation with other federal agencies, state resource and water quality agencies, interested groups, and
many other offices within EPA involved in environmental management of Gulf of Mexico resources. Many
of these parties are listed below and the following text describes our planned activities to ensure cooperative
interaction with these groups. Of major concern to the success of monitoring efforts in the Louisianian
Province are:
o The Gulf Of Mexico Program (GOMP)
o EPA Regions IV and VI
o NOAA's Status and Trends, Strategic Assessments, and Coastwatch Programs
o EPA's Office of Marine and Estuarine Protection
o Fish and Wildlife Service
o State Resource and Water Quality Agencies
o Gulf Coast Estuarine Research Institutions.
Estuarine systems are recognized as a National resource and there are many Federal, State, and local
agencies concerned with their health, regulation, or management The Louisianian Province component
of EMAP-Near Coastal will coordinate its activities with each of these groups and work jointly with several
of these groups in the execution of the monitoring demonstration.
-------
The Louisianian Province Team is actively working with the Gulf of Mexico Program (GOMP)-
views its mission as the coordinator and facilitator of environmental activities in the Gulf of Mexico. This
program has the longer term responsibility of developing a comprehensive action plan for the management
of Gulf resources. As such, the program has a definite need for the type of information that will be
generated by the Louisianian Province monitoring effort. GOMP has assisted EMAP-Near Coastal by
reviewing earlier versions of this implementation plan. EMAP-Near Coastal has updated the GOMP steering
committee at its regularly scheduled sessions. GOMP, EMAP-NC, and the EPA Environmental Research
Laboratory at Gulf Breeze, FL signed a memorandum of understanding to cooperate in the execution of
EMAP-NC in the Louisianian Province. In addition, EMAP-NC continues to work closely with members of
the Toxic Substances and Pesticides Subcommittee in the review of our sediment and tissue contaminants
analyte list, in the selection of Indicator Testing and Evaluation sites (ITEs), and in the development of local
monitoring plans. Finally, EMAP-Near Coastal was a co-sponsor of the GOMP workshop convened to
address problems associated with local monitoring of small estuarine systems. (One of the issues addressed
at this workshop was the potential use of EMAP information, designs, and strategies at the local level.)
EPA Regions IV and VI have regulatory jurisdiction over the coastal environments comprising the
Louisianian Province. EMAP representatives (e.g., GOMP Director, EMAP-NC Associate Director, Louisianian
Province Technical Director) have met with representatives of the Regions IV and VI to update them on the
progress of EMAP-Near Coastal. Regional representatives for Regions IV and VI are also members of the
GOMP Steering Committee and the Louisianian Province Peer Review Panel and, thus, might fulfill dual roles
in the dissemination of information concerning EMAP activities in the Louisianian Province. In addition,
EMAP-NC briefings included ORD Regional Scientists, ESD Directors, and other regional personnel. Finally,
the EMAP Associate Director/Near Coastal will notify the Regional Administrator, Deputy Regional
Administrator, and the ESD Director prior to the initiation of the sampling program in the Louisianian
Province. These actions should assist the Regions in tracking all activities in their Region and should provide
notice so that the Regions can contribute to our efforts.
EMAP-Near Coastal is currently working closely with NOAA's National Status and Trends Program,
-------
Coastal Oceans Program, the Strategic Assessments Branch, and several of its research personnel. The
joint NOAA/EPA committee on near coastal monitoring activities has been briefed concerning planned 1991
activities in the Gulf of Mexico and is considering a proposed joint research effort to further develop
biological and ecological indicators of ecosystem status. In 1991, NOAA's Coastal Oceans Program (COP)
will play an important role in a cooperative EMAP, USFWS, Gulf of Mexico States, and NOAA-COP project
to map submerged aquatic vegetation in the Gulf of Mexico. This cooperative effort will help develop and
will implement a protocol consistent with NOAA's effort to construct a national SAV inventory. In this
cooperative project, SAV habitat will be: 1) photographed, 2) interpreted, 3) verified by surface level
sampling, 4) compiled on a base map, 5) reviewed, and 6) digitized. NOAA will provide in kind support,
technical expertise, and coordination for groundtruthing, map review, and quality control. In addition, NOAA
may extend the planned coverage of SAV habitats by extending coverage seaward of EMAP's near-coastal
focus in areas such as the Big Bend area of Florida.
The Louisianian Province includes two National Estuary Programs (i.e., GaJveston Bay and Barataria
Bay). While the emphases of these NEP, the development of a Comprehensive Conservation and
Management Plan for their respective estuaries, have a somewhat different perspective than the regional and
national assessments proposed by EMAP, we will interact with the Galveston and Barataria NEPs by
providing briefings concerning EMAP-Near Coastal's activities and will strive to develop joint activities where
feasible.
The Louisianian Province Team is interacting with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife's (USFWS) National Wetlands
Research Center (In conjunction with NOAA's Coastal Oceans Program) in the development of the
submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV) monitoring activities of the Louisianian Province. In 1991,
USFWS/NOAA will be an integral part of the SAV mapping program in the Louisianian Province and in the
development of a sampling and indicator strategy for the assessment of the ecological status of these
resources. The Louisianian Province Team is currently interacting with representatives from each of the flve
Gulf States resource agencies, through USFWS/NOAA, for the ground-truthing of the SAV mapping activities
that will be initiated In 1991.
-------
The ultimate goal of EMAP-Near Coastal is to develop a program to monitor the condition of the Nation's
coastal resources on a National scale. Recognizing that knowledge on the condition of estuarine resources
is as important locally as it is nationally, state and local agencies will undoubtedly be interested in expanding
the EMAP program/strategy to meet local and site-specific needs. The Louisianian Province Team is
currently interacting with representatives of many of the state resource agencies in the Louisianian Province;
including Florida Department of Natural Resources, Florida Department of Environmental Regulation,
Alabama Department of Environmental Management, Mississippi Bureau of Marine Resources, Mississippi
Office of Pollution Control, Louisiana Department of Natural Resources, Louisiana Department of Water
Quality and Texas Department of Parks and Wildlife, Texas Water Commission, and Texas Water
Development Board. This interaction spans a number of activities including briefings concerning progress,
cooperative efforts within the Toxic Substances and Pesticides Subcommittee of the GOMP, discussions to
help state agencies with responsibilities for monitoring to use the EMAP strategy and approach, the use of
state personnel to augment sampling crews, and eventually the training of state resource personnel in EMAP-
NC's protocols and methods. This early interaction is important to secure cooperation and develop an
understanding of EMAP's goals and objectives; particularly, if these state agencies may be involved in the
execution of EMAP components at some future time.
The success of the Louisianian Province implementation depends to a large extent upon the cooperation
of the state agencies and research facilities of the Gulf community. We have made a concerted effort to brief
many of the major estuarine research centers concerning the progress of EMAP-Near Coastal. In addition,
EMAP-NC's implementation is a cooperative effort involving five Gulf Coast research centers to implement
key aspects of the program. These activities include environmental sampling, benthic sample processing
and evaluation, analytical chemistry support, biomarker evaluation, and SAV mapping. As a result, the Gulf
Coast Research Laboratory, Ocean Springs, MS; the University of Mississippi, Oxford, MS; Texas MM
University's Geochemfeal and Environmental Research Group, College Station, TX; Louisiana State
University, Baton Rouge, LA; the University of West Florida, Pensacola, FL; and Dauphin Island Sea
Laboratory, Dauphin Island, AL will be partners with EPA in the implementation of EMAP in the Louisianian
Province.
-------
The peer review process has been an important aspect of the development of the implementation of
the monitoring demonstration in the Louisianian Province. This process has consisted of two levels of
review: (1) a national peer panel that has reviewed the EMAP-NC Program of which the Louisianian Province
Demonstration is a part, and (2) a regional peer panel that has reviewed the specifics of the Louisianian
Province Demonstration. The regional peer panel is comprised of members of the Gulf research and
regulatory community including academia, federal and state research facilities, and EPA Regions IV and VI.
The regional peer panel will remain as a review group for EMAP-NC Louisianian Province activities.
-------
3.0 SAMPUNG DESIGN
To accomplish its objectives, EMAP-NC must collect information on the following:
o The current quantity, extent (e.g., square kilometers, hectares), and geographic distribution of each
near coastal ecosystem class of interest;
o The proportion of each ecosystem class that is currently in "acceptable" condition;
o The proportions that are degrading or improving, in what regions, and at what rate; and
o The likely causes of degradation or improvement
The above issues are important to environmental decision makers for two reasons: (1) decision makers
are concerned with the outright loss of ecosystems, as is currently the case with wetlands, and
(2) degradation of a portion of an ecosystem resource that is abundant (e.g., high-salinity estuarine waters)
is generally more acceptable than degradation of a resource that is limited (e.g., spawning and nursery
habitats for shrimp species or productive oyster habitat).
Because EMAP-NC seeks to make statistically unbiased estimates of ecological condition with known
confidence, sampling sites cannot be selected subjectively. Rather, they must be selected by a process that
ensures the validity of future analyses. Therefore, the sampling network must be probability-based. If the
sampling points represent a statistically valid probability sample, the estimates of ecosystem extent and
status can be expanded, with quantifiable confidence, to yield estimates for an entire region or nation.
This chapter provides the details for the sampling design to be used in the 1991 Louisianian Province
Monitoring Demonstration. Monitoring in the Louisianian Province is being initiated with a demonstration
project rather than by full-scale implementation because sufficient information is not presently available to
-------
accomplish the following:
o Determine the appropriate sampling scale to represent resource condition;
o Estimate the uncertainty associated with many indicators;
o Define nominal-subnominal boundaries for many indicators;
o Evaluate the reliability of many indicator responses; and
o Develop Data Quality Objectives (DQOs).
The objectives of the 1991 Louisianian Province Monitoring Demonstration are to obtain the information
needed to: (1) demonstrate the usefulness and ease of presentation of the data resulting from applying the
EMAP monitoring approach, (2) develop a logistically feasible sampling design that will define the status and
trends of estuaries in the Louisianian Province and will be flexible enough to address alternative objectives,
and (3) evaluate trade-offs between cost and uncertainty, allowing DQOs to be developed before full-scale
implementation occurs. The data collected during the 1991 Louisianian Province Monitoring Demonstration
will contribute to the establishment of baseline determinations of environmental conditions. However, if the
scale of sampling (I.e., grid density) and the measured uncertainty levels are acceptable, the results of the
1991 Louisianian Province Monitoring Demonstration can be used as year 1 of a four year monitoring cyde.
The 1991 Louisianian Province Monitoring Demonstration sampling design is different from a full-scale
implementation design because it includes sampling strategies that will address important design questions,
such as:
o Intensive sampling to evaluate the influence of spatial scale on the assessment of status, to define
a spatial scale that is adequate for full-scale implementation in later years, and to assess the value
-------
of information collected from index sampling sites relative to information collected at randomly
located sites.
o Testing and evaluation of indicators to determine the validity, reliability, sensitivity, specificity, and
repeatability of indicator responses to discriminate between known environmentally "good" and
"poor" conditions.
Much of the information collected from the intensive sampling programs listed above will be applicable
to the design of sampling programs in other provinces (e.g., reliability of indicator responses, value of
information from index sample locations). EMAP-NC plans to conduct intensive sampling prior to
implementing field programs in new provinces or when incorporating new resource types (i.e., coastal
waters). The amount of intensive sampling that will be required is expected to decline substantially as
additional regions are incorporated into the program and more information becomes available on the scale
of regional variation. The design presented in this chapter is modeled after the successes of the Virginian
Province Demonstration Project in 1990and represents a model that could be used each time new provinces
or resource types are incorporated into the program.
The remainder of this chapter is presented in two parts:
o Classification - the organization of estuarine resources within a region into classes to facilitate
sampling and interpretation of findings; and
o Sampling Design - the detailed statistical sampling design for the 1991 Louisianian Province
Monitoring Demonstration.
10
-------
3-1 Region and Estuarine Classification
The region to be sampled in the 1991 Louisianian Province Monitoring Demonstration includes the
majority of the United States' coastline of the Gulf of Mexico. The Louisianian Province (Fig. 3-1) extends
from Andote Key, Florida, to the United States-Mexico border at the Rio Grande.
The region has a subtropical climate and is characterized by extensive sandy beaches (e.g., Pensacoia
region), extensive marsh and swamp areas (e.g. Atchafalaya/Vermilion Bays), barrier island systems (e.g.,
Texas barrier islands), broad hypersaline lagoons (e.g., Laguna Madre), and an expansive deltaic system
(e.g., Mississippi Delta).
EMAP-NC proposes to classify near coastal ecosystems (e.g., estuaries) within the Louisianian Province
in a manner that defines groups of systems as follows:
o Systems for which a common sampling design can be used.
o Systems where the variability of indicators within a group (I.e., class) is less than that which occurs
among groups, thereby reducing the number of samples necessary to represent ecological
conditions accurately.
o Systems which allow inferences about systems that are not sampled to be made with a high degree
of confidence.
The classification scheme presented in this section is applicable to estuaries; however, the approach
used and the principles developed are applicable to all near coastal ecosystem types. The scheme will be
applied to other ecosystem types as they are incorporated into EMAP-NC.
11
-------
Columbian
Callfomian
Great Lakes
Acadian
Aleutian — Alaskan
Figure 3-1. EMAP-NC Biogeographical Provinces.
12
-------
EMAP-NC has given a high priority to classification variables and schemes that define geographic units.
The formulation of these classes, especially those that have boundaries that are variable and difficult to
define, can severely limit the usefulness of the data for addressing alternative or "new" objectives. In
addition, because classes are the smallest sampling units for which data will be summarized, it is important
that EMAP-NC class boundaries be delineated in a manner that is meaningful to a broad range of audiences,
from the public to scientists. Geographic units are meaningful to all interested parties. It is essential that
the boundaries of the classes be defined on the basis of geographic units meaningful for resource
management and regulatory action. If class boundaries vary on short time scales (e.g., years or less) or
cannot be accurately delineated in a manner for which enforceable decisions can be made, then the value
of the EMAP Near Coastal data to environmental decision makers will be reduced greatly.
A review of the literature identified potential classification variables that reduced within-class variance
in indicators as salinity, sediment type, pollutant loadings and variables used to infer pollutant loadings
(e.g., human population density), and physical dimensions. Use of salinity, sediment type, and pollutant
loadings as classification variables would result in the definition of classes for which the area) extent could
vary dramatically from year-to-year or over the time period of EMAP-NC.
A classification scheme based upon physical dimensions (surface area, length/average width) was
chosen because physical data have the following advantages:
o Physical dimensions change minimally over the time scale of concern and do not adversely influence
the value of resulting data to address alternative or 'new* objectives;
o Surface Areas can be used to aggregate or segregate the data into geographic units that are
meaningful from a regulatory and general interest perspective; and
o Physical dimensions define groups of systems that can be sampled with a common design and for
which data can be aggregated to make meaningful regional and national statements about
13
-------
ecological status and trends.
Although salinity, sediment characteristics, and pollutant loadings are not appropriate a priori
classification variables, they can be used as post-classification variables during the analysis phase because
they have dramatic effects on the ecological aspects of the ecosystem. These system parameters will be
used to define subpopulations that will facilitate interpretation and synthesis of the data. EMAP-NC will use
subpopulations defined by these variables for making inter-regional and intra-regional comparisons of
specific indicators and, eventually, comparisons of trends in indicators. The major constraint associated
with using salinity, sediment characteristics, and pollution loading variables in a post-classification mode is
that the number of samples comprising subpopulations will vary. The effect of varying sample sizes will be
an uncontrollable variation in the uncertainty levels associated with findings.
A total of 30,146 km2 of estuarine waters is present in the Louisianian Province (i.e., estuarine systems
> 2.6 km2 and with tidal ranges > 2.5 cm). Table 3-1 provides a list of the estuarine resources of the
Louisianian Province with surface areas greater than or equal to 2.6 km2 (~ 1 mi2). Resources with surface
areas less than 2.6 km2 were not included in the base sampling frame. However, small bayou systems (i.e.,
surface areas from 1 to 2.6 km2) comprise a large number of estuarine systems in the Mississippi Delta
region of Louisiana. A sampling frame of the 418 small bayou systems in lower Louisiana was compiled
(Table 3-2) to assess the similarity of bayou-systems to the estuaries in the EMAP-NC small estuary category,
based on available data. Using information about physical dimensions, estuarine waters of the Louisianian
Province were classified into three base sampling categories: large estuarine systems, large tidal rivers, and
small estuarine systems. Large estuarine systems were defined to have surface areas greater than 260 km2
and aspect ratios (length/average width) less than 20. Large tidal rivers were defined as having surface
areas greater than 260 km2 and aspect ratios greater than 20. Small estuarine systems were defined to have
surface areas less than 260 km2 but greater than or equal to 2.6 km2. In addition, an experimental class
comprised of small bayou systems was defined to have surface areas greater than 1 km2 but less than 2.6
km2. This experimental class was defined only for the lower Louisiana area and, due to fiscal constraints,
will not be evaluated until 1992.
14
-------
These classes represent estuaries with potentially different behaviors in relation to pollution and other
stressors because of different dilution capacities, flushing characteristics, and other factors. The boundaries
of these classes can be delineated accurately from available NOAA maps and are not likely to change within
the time frame of EMAP. In addition, the classes of small estuaries, large tidal rivers, and large estuaries
are meaningful to environmental managers, Congress, scientists, and the public. These classes also form
categories for the development and implementation of regional and national management actions.
Application of the classification scheme to the Louisianlan Province results in the identification of:
o Twenty-eight (28) large estuarine systems with a total surface area of 23,773 km2 (79% of the total
base area to be sampled);
o One (1) large tidal river (i.e., Mississippi River) with a total surface area of 307 km2 (1% of the total
base area to be sampled); and
o One hundred fifty-six (156) small estuarine systems with a total surface area of 6,066 km2 (20% of
the total base area to be sampled).
o Four hundred eighteen (418) small bayou systems with a total surface area of 878 km2 (not induded
in total base area).
3.3 Sampling Design
EMAP-NC in the Louisianan Province will focus on collecting data for indicators of environmental quality
during an index period, when some estuarine responses to anthropogenic and climatic stresses are
anticipated to be most severe. The proposed sampling design combines the strengths of systematic and
random sampling with an understanding of estuarine systems to collect data that will provide unbiased
estimates of the status of the Nation's estuarine resources. This design also wfll provide reasonable
15
-------
approximations of the variability associated with such estimates.
The following characteristics distinguish the EMAP-NC sampling design from most other monitoring
program designs:
o The scale of sampling is regional. The spatial scale of most other monitoring programs is
smaller (i.e., individual estuarine systems or portions of systems) (Wolfe et al. 1987; NRC
1991a, 1991b).
o Standardized sampling methods are used across broad geographical regions. Methods used
by most monitoring programs are generally standardized across regions; therefore, available
data rarely can be combined to perform regional assessments (NRC 1991 a, 1991b).
o Sampling is limited to an index period when environmental stress is expected to be most
severe; however, sampling effort in the index period is Intense. Most other monitoring
programs sample throughout the year resulting in the inability to make rigorous statements
about any particular time period.
o Measurements are focused on categories of indicators that are linked to major environmental
concerns and to each other, allowing the definition of the extent and magnitude of impacts
associated with potential causes. Most other monitoring programs are specific to one
pollution problem and sample only a few parameters directly related to that problem.
Frequently, different programs monitor the effects of the same pollution problem, in the
same system, using different parameters (NRC 1991b). Consequently, data from ongoing
programs rarely can be combined to estimate the regional extent of even one pollution
problem (NRC 1991a).
o A combination of random and systematic components Is used in the EMAP-NC design to
obtain broad, complete geographic coverage of resource distributions and unbiased
16
-------
estimates of status and trends. Most other monitoring programs sample at fixed stations,
do not have complete coverage of resource distributions, and do not Include both random
and systematic elements (NRC 1991 a; Wolfe et al. 1987). In most cases, locations where
problems are perceived to be small are not sampled. Unfortunately, these perceptions of
the lack of any problems generally cannot be supported.
17
-------
Table 3-1. List frame of estuarine systems within the Loulsianian Province with surface areas greater
than 2.6 km2 (Class refers to estuarine class type: S=Small estuary or tidal river; R = Large
tidal river; and L=Large estuary).
State Estuary
Alabama Dauphin Bay
Heron Bay
Tensaw River
Woif Bay
Perdido River
Weeks Bay
Little Lagoon
Mobile "iver
Pelican Bay
Grand .ay
Bon Secour Bay
Mobile Bay
Florida St. Martins River
Escambia River
Withlacoochee River
Waccasassa River
Steinhatchee River
Ecofina River
Crystal River
Blackwater River
Old River
Indian Bay
Bayou Grande
Homosassa River
Chassahowitza River
Carabelle River
Ochlockonee River
Goose Creek Bay
Choctawhatchee River
Big Lagoon
Bayou St. John
Ochlockonee Bay
Oyster Bay
Suwannee River
Grand Lagoon
St Andrew Sound
Horseshoe Cove
Apalachicda River
Deadman Bay
Andote Anchorage
Lake Wimico
Withlacoochee Bay
Crystal Bay
Chassahowitza Bay
Class
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
L
L
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
Surface Area
(km2)
2.9
2.9
5.1
5.4
6.4
7.0
8.3
12.8
30.2
37.3
274.2
895.8
2.6
2.6
2.7
2.7
2.7
2.8
3.1
3.1
3.2
3.8
3.8
4.1
4.2
4.2
5.4
6.7
8.5
9.0
9.0
10.2
11.0
13.6
15.4
21.2
24.1
25.6
27.1
33.8
35.8
36.6
38.4
40.3
Aspect
3.2
3.2
200.0
5.8
40.0
2.3
13.0
125.0
1.2
2.0
1.3
3.0
25.0
25.0
26.5
26.4
26.6
26.5
30.0
30.1
20.0
1.5
24.0
40.0
40.0
40.3
53.0
1.5
83.0
7.1
14.0
4.0
2.5
33.3
6.0
8.3
2.4
250.0
2.7
2.7
3.5
2.0
1.7
1.3
18
-------
Table 3-1. List frame of estuarine systems within the Louisianian Province with surface areas greater
than 2.6 km2 (Class refers to estuarine dass type: S=Small estuary or tidal river R = Large
tidal river; and L=Large estuary).
State
Florida
(Cont'd)
Louisiana
Estuary
St. Vincent Sound
Homosassa Bay
East Bay
(Apalachicola)
Waccasassa Bay
Perdido Bay
Suwannee Sound
Cedar Keys
St. Josephs Bay
Santa Rosa Sound
Apalachicola Bay
St. George Sound
Choctawhatchee Bay
Pensacda Bay
St. Andrews Bay
Apalachee Bay
Sabine River
Amite River
Pearl River
Bayou Terrebone
Wax Lake Outlet
Bayou Teche
The Rigolets
Mermentau River
Calcasieu River
Vermilion River
Mississippi River Gulf
Outlet Canal
SW Louisiana Lakes
Belle River
Lost Lake
Grand Bay
Lake De Cade
Lake St. Catherine
Blind Bay
Atchafalaya River
Caillou Lake
Wax Lake
Bayou LaFourche
Lake Mercant
West Bay
Lake Plourde
Lake Felicity
Lake Verret
Class
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
L
L
L
L
L
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
Surface Area
(km2)
43.8
44.8
55.3
69.0
80.1
95.2
126.2
157.4
189.2
204.3
327.7
398.1
412.0
419.8
2223.9
2.6
4.1
5.1
5.1
5.1
5.1
7.7
10.2
10.6
11.5
12.7
12.8
12.8
20.5
23.0
25.6
28.7
30.7
31.2
38.4
41.0
43.5
51.2
53.8
61.4
76.8
76.9
Aspect
6.7
2.8
3.0
3.2
7.1
2.3
1.8
2.5
16.8
2.2
8.0
6.2
3.9
6.6
3.0
100.0
160.0
200.0
200.0
50.0
200.0
12.0
100.0
103.5
200.0
220.0
1.0
125.0
2.0
4.0
2.5
1.1
3.0
305.0
1.7
4.0
425.0
1.3
2.3
1.5
1.2
3.3
19
-------
Table 3-1. List frame of estuarine systems within the Louisianian Province with surface areas greater
than 2.6 km2 (Class refers to estuarine class type: S=Small estuary or tidal river; R=Large
tidal river; and L=Large estuary).
State
Louisiana
(Cont'd)
Mississippi
Texas
Estuary
Garden Island Bay
Lake Barre
Lac des Ailemands
Fourteague Bay
Little Lake
Bay Boudreau
Caminada Bay
Lake Cataouatche
Lake Raccourci
East Bay
Lake Pelto
Timbalier Bay
Sabine Lake
White Lake
Grand Lake
Lake Salvador
Lake Maurepas
Calcasieu Lake
Mississippi River
Caillou Bay
Terrebone Bay
Barataria Bay
Vermilion Bay
Atchafalaya Bay
Lake Borgne
Cote Blance (E&W)
Breton Sound
Lake Pontchartrain
Chandeleur Sound
Pascagoula River
Bernard Bayou
West Pascagoula River
Heron Bay
Portersville Bay
Point Aux Chenes Bay
Little Lake
Pascagoula Bay
Biloxi Bay
St. Louis Bay
Mississippi Sound
Gam Lake
Star Lake
Class
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
L
L
R
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
L
S
S
Surface Area
(km2)
81.9
82.0
122.9
123.1
125.9
129.0
133.6
133.9
134.0
153.6
153.6
204.8
211.2
212.0
222.2
245.8
276.5
294.2
307.2
356.3
358.4
368.6
460.8
491.5
819.2
1126.4
1474.6
2580.5
3686.4
2.6
2.6
2.6
4.6
6.4
7.7
7.7
14.3
38.7
49.8
2587.9
2.6
2.6
Aspect
2.0
2.0
1.3
3.0
1.4
1.4
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.7
1.7
1.3
2.7
2.3
1.8
1.5
1.3
4.3
187.5
1.8
1.4
1.0
2.2
3.3
1.3
1.1
1.8
3.1
2.5
100.0
125.0
25.0
1.3
2.5
1.3
1.3
1.4
7.7
1.5
8.7
1.0
1.0
20
-------
Table 3-1. List frame of estuarine systems within the Louisianian Province with surface areas greater
than 2.6 km2 (Class refers to estuarine class type: S=Small estuary or tidal river; R = Large
tidal river; and L=Large estuary).
State
Texas
(Cont'd)
Estuary
Lake Austin
Oyster Lake
Lavaca River
Chocolate Bayou
Highland Bayou
Guadalupe River
Offatts Bayou
San Jacinto Bay
Scott Bay
Colorado Arroyo
Neches River
Dickinson Bayou
Brazos River
San Bernard River
Galveston Channel
Dickinson Bay
Burnett Bay
Oso Creek
Tule Lake Channel
Freeport Harbor
Rio Grande
Aransas Passes
Bastrop Bay
Moses Lake/Dollar Bay
Drum Bay
Jones Bay
Pringle Lake
Sabine-Neches Canal
Laguna Mad re Bays
Cedar Lakes
South Bay (Laguna Madre)
Houston Ship Canal
Powderhom Lake
Shoalwater Bay
Oso Bay
Chocolate Bay
Bolivar Roads
Christmas Bay
Caracahua Bay
Hynes Bay
St. Charles Bay
Tres Palacios Bay
Redfish Bay
Mesquite Bay
Class
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
Surface Area
(km2)
2.6
2.6
2.6
2.6
2.6
2.6
2.8
3.1
3.1
3.8
4.0
4.1
4.1
4.1
4.3
4.3
4.5
4.6
4.7
5.1
5.1
5.8
5.8
7.7
7.7
7.7
7.7
10.0
10.2
10.2
10.3
10.4
11.5
11.5
12.8
19.2
22.0
23.0
26.9
30.7
34.6
35.8
38.4
41.0
Aspect
1.0
1.0
100.0
25.0
100.0
100.0
27.5
3.3
1.0
66.7
155.0
40.0
160.0
160.0
18.7
1.0
2.8
20.0
45.5
12.5
200.0
100.0
1.0
3.0
1.3
1.5
3.0
97.5
2.0
4.0
1.0
102.0
4.5
18.0
5.0
3.3
2.2
1.0
4.7
3.0
6.0
3.5
1.7
1.0
21
-------
Table 3-1. List frame of estuarine systems within the Louisianian Province with surface areas greater
than 2.6 km2 (Class refers to estuarine class type: S=Small estuary or tidal river; R=Large
tidal river; and L=Large estuary).
State
Texas
(Cont'd)
Estuary
Copano Bay
East Matagorda Bay
Lavaca Bay
Espiritu Santo Bay
Aransas Bay
San Antonio Bay
Baffin Bay
East Bay (Galveston)
West Bay (Galveston)
Corpus Christ! Bay
Matagorda Bay
Galveston Bay
Laguna Madre
Class
S
S
S
S
S
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
Surface Area
(km2)
102.4
115.2
117.8
112.9
161.3
266.2
266.4
268.8
269.1
286.7
399.4
860.2
1323.5
Aspect
2.5
7.2
2.9
3.0
5.1
2.5
2.5
2.1
2.2
1.8
3.7
1.7
17.1
22
-------
Table 3-2.
Small Louisiana bayous greater than 1 km2 but less than 2.6 km2 In surface area. Systems
shown are associated with the larger estuarine system indicated.
Timbalier Bav System:
1. Devils Bay
2. Bay Champagne
3. Bay Marchand
4. Pierte Bay
5. Bayou Moreau
6. Laurier Bay
7. Lake Billiot
8. Bayou Blue
9. Catfish Lake
10. Grand Bayou
11. Deep Lake
12. Bay Courant
13. Bayou Pointe au Chien
14. Bayou Moreau
Barataria Bay System:
1. Lake Laurier
2. Lake Pelourde
3. South Lake
4. Southwest Louisiana Canal
5. Caminada Bay
6. Bay Tambour
7. Bay des lletes
8. West Champagne
9. Fishermans Bay
10. North Lake
11. Bayou Ferblanc
12. Round Lake
13. Bayou Casse Tete
14. Creole Bay
15. Briste Lake
16. Pound Lake
17. Hackberry Bay
18. Grand Bayou
19. Mud Lake
20. Bay Dosaris
21. Bayou St Denis
22. Bayou Rlgolettes
23. Bayou Perot
24. Bayou Dupont
25. Dupre Cut
26. Bayou Barataria
27. Raquette Bay
28. Lake Hermitage
29. Bayou Grand Chenier
30. Wilkinson Canal
Terrebone Bay System:
1. Old Lady Lake
2. Bayou Jean Lacroix
3. Lake Chien
4. Lake Tambour
5. Wonder Lake
6. Bayou Barre
7. Bayou La Cache
8. Bayou Terrebone
9. Lake St Jean Baptlste
10. Bay Lost Reef
11. Lake la Graisse
12. Bay Welsh
13. Tambour Bay
14. Bay Blanc
15. Jacko Bay
16. Coupe Nouvelle
17. Bay Round
18. Pelican Lake
19. Bayou Sale
20. Bay Sale
21. Deer Bay
22. Bayou Petit Caillou
23. Deep Saline
24. Houma Navigation Canal
25. Bayou Grand Caillou
26. Bay Chaland
27. Bay la Peur
28. Sweetwater Pond
29. Four Point Bayou
30. Quitman Lake
31. LakeCero
32. Long Lake
33. Lake Fields
34. Bayou L'Eau Bleu
Caillou Bav System:
1. Dog Lake
2. Bay Voison
3. Charleys Bay
4. Bayou Colyell
5. Bayou Plat
6. Felix Lake
7. Bayou Grand Caillou
8. Grand Bayou du Large
9. Moncleuse Bay
10. Bayou Sauyeur
23
-------
Table 3-2. Small Louisiana bayous greater than 1 km2 but less than 2.6 km2 in surface area. Systems
shown are associated with the larger estuarine system indicated.
Barataria Bav System (Cont'd):
31. Upper Wilkinson Bay
32. Wilkinson Bay
33. Bay Chene Reur
34. Bay Sansbois
35. Freeport Sulfur Canal
36. Lake Grand Ecaille
37. Cat Bay
38. Bayou Frfi
39. Bay Melville
40. Bay Long
41. Bay Ronquille
42. Robinson Canal
43. Billet Bay
44. Lake Washington
45. Lake Robinson
46. Pipe Bay
47. Garden Bay
48. Bay Lanaux
Mississippi Delta Bays:
1. Bay Joe Wise
2. Bastian Bay
3. Adams Bay
4. Grand Bayou
5. Bay de la Cheniere
6. Bayou Long
7. English Bay
8. Drakes Bay
9. Bayou Huertes
10. Bay Pommed'Or
11. Big Cypress Bayou
12. Cyprien Bay
13. Bay Coquette
14. Skipjack Bay
15. Bay Jacques
16. Chicharas Bay
17. Bayou Grand Laird
18. Hospital Bay
19. Yellow Cotton Bay
20. Spanish Pass
21. Bay Tambour
22. Sandy Point Bay
23. Reur Pond
24. Red Pass
25. Tiger Pass
26. Bayou Tony
27. Pass de Wharf
Caillou Bav System (Cont'd):
11. Bay Long
12. Bayou du Large
13. King Lake
14. Mud Lake
15. Mudhole Bay
16. Bay Junop
17. Fiddlers Lake
18. Blue Hammock Bayou
19. Oyster Bayou
20. Bay Castagnier
21. Mosquito Bay
22. Lake Chapeau
23. Big Carencro Bayou
24. Carencro Lake
25. Small Bayou LaPointe
26. Lac Pagie
27. Bayou Mauvais Bois
28. Lake Penchant
29. Lake Theriot
30. Bayou Penchant
31. Lake Hatch
32. Bayou Copasaw
33. Bayou Cocodrie
Atchafalava Bav System:
1. Creole Bayou
2. Bayou Penchant
3. Plumb Lake
4. Plumb Bayou
5. Palmetto Bayou
6. Crooked Bayou
7. Deer Island Bayou
8. Sweetbay Lake
9. Avoca Island Cutoff
10. Little Horn Bayou
11. LakeCascha
12. Turtle Bayou
13. Piquant Bayou
14. Bayou L'Ourse
15. Big Wax Bayou
16. Grassy Lake
17. Rat Lake
18. Little Bay
19. East Bay
20. Little Hog Bayou
21. Big Hog Bayou
24
-------
Table 3-2.
Small Louisiana bayous greater than 1 km2 but less than 2.6 km2 in surface area. Systems
shown are associated with the larger estuarine system indicated.
Mississippi Delta Bavs(Cont'd):
28. Pass Tante Rhine
29. Grand Pass
30. Chawee Bay
31. Jaquines Pass
32. Williams Pass
33. Felice Bayou
34. Riverside Bay
35. Zinzin Bay
36. Dixon Bay
37. Scott Bay
38. Cockier Bay
39. Whale Bay
40. Southwest Pass
41. South Pass
42. Cheniere Pass
43. Redfish Bay
44. Southeast Pass
45. Pass a Loutre
46. Jackass Bay
47. North Pass
48. Customhouse Bay
49. Bull Bay
50. Raphael Pass
51. Horse Shoe Pond
52. Bucket Bend
53. Main Pass
54. Woodyard Pond
55-83. 29 Unnamed South Pass Bays
84-130. 47 Unnamed Delta National
Wildlife Refuge Bays
Breton Sound System:
1. Alexis Bay
2. Carencro Bay
3. Grand Bay
4. Grand Couqille Bay
5. Little Couquille Bay
6. Bay Denesse
7. Quarantine Bay
8. CuseJtch Bay
9. California Bay
10. Bay la Mer
11. Allen Bay
12. Auguste Bay
13. Long Bayou
14. American Bay
Atchafalava Bav System (Cont'd):
22. Belle Isle Lake
23. Little Wax Bayou
24. New Pass Bay
25. Wax Lake Outlet
26. Six Mile Lake
27. Pierre Bay
28. Bayou Long
29. Hog Bayou
30. Bayou Blue
Cote Blanche Bav System:
1. Bayou Sale Bay
2. Bayou Sale
3. Fresh Water Lake
4. Mud Lake
5. Franklin Canal
6. Pipeline Canal
7. Charenton Canal
8. Bayou Choupique
9. Lake Sand
10. Bayou Blanc
11. Lake Ferme
12. Oyster Lake
13. Lake Blanc
14. Lake Micheal
15. Lake Tom
16. Lucien Lake
17. Bayou Lucien
18. Hackberry Lake
19. Hummock Lake
20. Bayou Cypremort
Vermilion Bay System:
1. Weeks Bay
2. Weeks Bayou
3. Wilkins Canal
4. New Iberia Drainage Canal
5. Tigre Lagoon
6. Lake Peigneur
Chandeleur Sound System:
1. Lake Anathaslo
2. Twilight Harbor
3. Eloi Bay
25
-------
Table 3-2. Small Louisiana bayous greater than 1 km2 but less than 2.6 km2 in surface area. Systems
shown are associated with the larger estuarine system indicated.
Breton Sound System (Cont'd):
15. Bay Crabe
16. Black Bay
17. Bay Gardene
18. Bay La Fourche
19. Third Bay
20. Grand Point Bay
21. Back Levee Canal
22. River Aux Chenes
23. Bay of River Aux Chenes
24. Bakers Bay
25. Bayou La Croix
26. Forty Arpent Canal
27. Big Mar
28. Delacroix Canal
29. Reggio Canal
30. Spanish Lake
31. Grand Lake
32. Lake Batola
33. Sun Lagoon
34. Lost Lake
35. Lake Lery
36. Reggio Canal #2
37. Bayou la Change
38. Hopedale Lagoon
39. Middle Bayou
40. Bayou Terre au Poeuts
41. Lake Amedee
42. Bay Shallow
43. False Bayou
44. Lost Rat Bayou
45. Lake Campo
46. Dead Duck Pass
47. Lake Pato Caballo
48. Round Lake
49. Lake Batola
50. Bottle Lagoon
51. Lake Calebasse
52. Lake Jean Louis Robin
53. Mississippi River Gulf Outlet
54. Lake Couquille
55. Pisana Lagoon
56. Lake of Second Trees
57. Lake Machias
58. Lake Fortuna
59. Drum Bay
60. Saint Helena Bay
Chandeleur Sound System (Cont'd):
4. Lake Eliot
5. Bayou Pointe-en-Pointe
6. Bayou la Loutre
7. Halfmoon Lake
8. Christmas Camp Lake
9. Treasure Bay #1
10. Morgan Harbor
11. White Log Lake #1
12. White Log Lake #2
13. Skiff Lake
14. Lake of the Mound
15. Blind Lagoon
16. Long Lagoon
17. Engineers Canal
18. Halfmoon Pass Bay
19. Bayou Cuyago
20. Padre Bayou
21. Grand Bayou
22. Magill Lagoon
23. Lakes of Bayou Merron
24. Bobs Lake
25. Cutoff Lagoon
26. Bayou Biloxi
27. Muscle Bay
28. Stump Lagoon
29. Drum Lake
30. Lake Eugenie
31. Lawson Bay
32. Drum Bay
33. Keelboat Pass
34. Live Oak Bay
35. Conkey Cove
36. Fishing Smack Bay
37. Fox Bay
38. Redfish Bend
39. Cranetown Bay
40. Kerchimbo Bay
41. Shell Island Lake
42. Indian Mound Bay
43. Treasure Bay #2
26
-------
Index samples will be collected to facilitate and enhance the interpretation of the data from
randomly selected sites. Most other monitoring programs include only index samples.
Consequently, these programs cannot be used to describe, in a probabilistic sense, the
degree to which the data are representative of conditions throughout the resource (NRC
1991 a).
The intended time frame of sampling is long-term (decades), and trend evaluations will be
based on multi-year baselines. Most other monitoring programs are limited in duration
(several years), with baselines based on one or two years of data; therefore, trend evaluation
relies on differences among years (Wolfe et al. 1987; NRC 1991 a). This approach is dearly
flawed because of the high year-to-year variation characteristic of near coastal resources
(e.g., Holland etal. 1987).
3.3.1 Base Sample Selection for Large Estuarine Systems
Sampling sites in large estuarine systems were selected using a randomly placed systematic grid. The
distance between the systematically spaced grid points is approximately 18 km. This grid is an extension
of the grid proposed for generic use by EMAP (Overton 1989). It is hierarchical, consisting of a series of
grids representing increasing spatial densities, that are appropriate for sampling at national, regional,
subregional, and local scales. An hexagonal space or cell was identified surrounding each grid point and
a randomly placed sample site was selected for each hexagon.
For the 1991 Loulsianian Province Monitoring Demonstration, 625 grid sample locations were identified
within an area designated as the Gulf Coast extending from 50 km inland to 50 km offshore. The 625
potential sampling sites were plotted on NOAA nautical charts, and 55 were found to be within the
boundaries of large estuarine systems. The remaining potential sites were located primarily on land, and
in the Gulf of Mexico, while some were located in large tidal rivers or in small estuaries. According to
27
-------
available NOAA charts, seven (7) of these 55 base locations for large estuarine systems were found to
occupy areas with restricted access or depths less than 1 m (i.e., Mobile Bay, Mississippi Sound, Laguna
Madre, Choctawhatchee Bay). The 55 potential sites for large estuarine monitoring are listed in Table 3-
3 and shown in Fig. 3-2. All of these sites, with the exception of the seven shallow water sites, will be
sampled in the 1991 Louisianian Province Monitoring Demonstration.
3.3.2 Base Sample Selection for Large Tidal River Systems
The selection of sampling sites for the large tidal rivers class was based on a linear analog of the design
for the large estuarine systems. A systematic linear grid was used to characterize the spine of the
Mississippi River to a point 150 km upstream from the mouth (i.e., approximately head of tide). The spine
is located systematically on the river, placing the start-point of the spine at the mouths of the tidal river
(i.e., the Missississippi River has four primary outlets). The spine was broken into segments every 15 km.
The first four segments occurred between river-kilometer 0 and 15 as delineated by the four separate passes
and subsequent segments were determined every 15 km along the upstream course of the river resulting
in a total of ten (10) segments. A random location was selected within each tidal river segment. In addition,
an index site was located in each tidal river segment along the downstream margin of the segment; index
sampling sites were located in a deep, muddy portion of the transect, usually near the channel. The design
for large tidal rivers results in 20 locations (10 index samples and 10 random samples). The 20 sample
locations (Index and random) for the Mississippi River are listed in Table 3-4 and are shown in Fig. 3-2.
3.3.3 Base Sample Selection for Small Estuarine Systems
The small estuarine systems class was composed of 156 systems. For the 1991 Louisianian Province
Monitoring Demonstration, 47 (i.e., ~ 30 percent) of the available small estuarine systems were selected
randomly. These systems were geographically dispersed from east to west by combining adjacent small
estuaries into groups of four and taking a systematic random sample from each group. Both an index
sampling site and a randomly selected sampling site deeper than 1 m, where possible, were identified within
28
-------
Table 3-3. 1991 base sampling locations for large estuary class.
Estuary
Apalachee Bay, FL
Choctawhatchee Bay, FL
Bon Secour Bay, AL
Mobile Bay, AL
Mississippi Sound, MS
Chandeleur Sound, LA
Breton Sound, LA
Lake Borgne, LA
Lake Ponchartrain, LA
30
29
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
30
29
29
30
30
30
30
30
30
Location
Latitude (N)
0.76'
54.23'
1.56'
24.54'*
18.13'
35,43'
25.93'*
18.66'
15.26'
12.86'
20.63'
14.48'
22.66'*
16.46
15.48
7.63'
8.13'
58.24'
59.23'
41.68'
53.20*
56.69'
44.61'
30.84'
31.06'
39.03'
5.30'
56.71'
59.56'
10.30'
14.22'
20.02'
2.74'
10.03'
9.97'
83
84
84
86
87
88
88
88
88
88
88
88
89
89
89
89
89
88
88
89
89
89
89
89
89
89
89
89
89
89
90
90
90
90
90
Longitude (W)
59.47'
12.56'
16.22'
26.55'*
57.94'
3.22'
6.21'*
12.65'
26.05'
29.47'
54.22'
57.49'
1.76'*
3.44'
9.64'
21.10'
28.62'
51.08'
58.21'
0.45'
4.90'
6.47'
13.97'
6.09'
11.78'
12.24'
38.82'
42.88'
46.38'
49.18'
2.14'
9.98'
10.01'
10.04'
19.99'
Lake Maurepas, LA
30
15.00'
90 30.00'
29
-------
Table 3-3. Continued.
Estuary
Location
Latitude (N)
Lake Salvador, LA
Barataria Bay, LA
Terrebone Bay, LA
Caillou Bay, LA
Cote Blance Bays, LA
Vermilion Bay, LA
Galveston Bay, TX
Matagorda Bay, TX
San Antonio Bay, TX
Laguna Madre, TX
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
28
28
28
26
26
27
26
26
45.00'
24.54'
21.55'
7.32'
8.84'
34.69'
36.88'
48.94'
37.85'
20.71'
39.18'
34.38'
35.58'
16.85'
21.78'*
36.19'*
20.35'*
55.44'*
59.49'
Longitude (W)
90
89
89
90
91
91
91
91
92
94
94
96
96
96
97
97
97
97
97
14.99'
55.67'
57.74'
28.47'
3.69'
34.18'
41.99*
52.28'
1.70'
44.47'
49.32'
16.76'
25.46'
47.22'
16.03'*
21.27'*
22.17'*
26.89'*
26.98'
* Depth of site is anticipated to be less than 1 meter.
30
-------
Table 3-4. 1991 base sampling locations (random and index) for the large tidal river class.
Tidal River Segment
Number
Mississippi
River 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Sample
Type
R
I
R
I
R
I
R
I
R
I
R
I
R
I
R
I .
R
I
R
I
Location
Latitude (N) Longitude (W)
28
28
29
28
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
57.09'
54.90'
8.50'
59.11'
12.29'
12.88'
12.50'
9.00'
21.00'
16.85'
20.60'
20.88'
35.11'
27.41'
44.04'
35.43'
46.80'
44.50'
57.41'
52.80'
89
89
89
89
89
89
89
89
89
89
89
89
89
89
89
89
90
90
90
89
23.80'
25.40'
14.91'
8.50'
2.20'
1.20'
16.98'
15.17'
25.12'
21.02'
29.60'
28.24'
49.22'
37.30'
59.89'
49.60'
1.30'
0.51'
2.30'
54.21*
31
-------
Figure 3-2. Base Sampling Stations For 1991 Louisianian Province Monitoring.
32
-------
the boundaries of these 47 small estuaries. The index site was selected by using available information on
sediment type, depth, and geometry to identify a net depositional environment. In small tidal rivers, the
index site was located at the mouth of the river in a muddy sediment (e.g., Old River, FL). In small estuaries,
the index site was located at the deep central portion (spine) of the estuary. The 94 sampling sites (index
and random) for small estuarine systems are listed in Table 3-5 and shown in Fig. 3-2.
3.3.4 Definition of the Index Period
Many of the proposed indicators (see Table 3.2) exhibit large intra-annual variability (e.g., Oviatt and
Nixon 1973; Jeffries and Terceiro 1985; Crassle et al. 1985; Holland et al. 1987). EMAP-NC does not have
the resources to characterize this variability or to assess status in all seasons. Therefore, sampling will be
limited to a confined portion of the year (i.e., an index period) when indicators are expected to show the
greatest response to anthropogenic and climatic stress.
For most near coastal ecosystems in the Northern Hemisphere, mid-summer (July-August) is the period
when ecological responses to pollution exposure are likely to be most severe. During this period, dissolved
oxygen concentrations are most likely to approach stressful, low values (Holland et al. 1977; USEPA 1984;
Oviatt 1981; Officer et al. 1984). Moreover, the cycling and adverse effects of sediment contaminant
exposure are generally greatest at the low dilution flows and high temperatures that occur in mid-summer
(Connell and Miller 1984; Sprague 1985, Mayer et al. 1989). Water concentrations of contaminants may be
highest during late spring-early summer runoff events from agricultural fields in specific locales. However,
most information points to the use of summer as the appropriate index period for EMAP-NC. This index
period is characterized by a slightly protracted time span in The Louisianian Province, generally July-
September.
The definition of the boundaries of the summer index period is a critical element of the sampling design.
This is particularly true for indicators that have a high degree of variation within the summer period (e.g.,
dissolved oxygen concentration) and for indicators for which little Is known about variation over the summer
33
-------
Table 3-5. 1991 base sampling locations (random and index) for small estuary/tidal river class.
Tidal River or
Estuary
Florida
Anclote Anchorage
Homosassa River
Crystal Bay
Withlacoochee River
Suwannee Sound
Ecofina River
Oyster Bay
Ochlockonee River
St. Josephs Bay
Bayou Grande
Big Lagoon
Old River
Alabama
Bay La Launch
Bon Secour River
Tensaw River
Sample
Type
R
I
R
I
R
I
R
I
R
I
R
I
R
I
R
I
R
I
R
I
R
I
R
I
R
I
R
I
R
I
Location
Latitude (N) Longitude (W)
28
28
28
28
28
28
29
29
29
29
30
30
30
30
29
29
29
29
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
11.21'
10.21'
46.59'
46.36'
53.96'
53.24'
0.19'
0.12'
16.78'
14.89'
2.27'
2.18'
3.43'
2.61'
59.25'
58.92'
51.86'
48.80'
22.21'
22.50'
19.23'
19.25'
17.26'
16.79'
18.43'
18.43'
17.22'
17.09'
48.49'
41.35'
82
82
82
82
82
82
82
82
83
83
83
83
84
84
84
84
85
85
87
87
87
87
87
87
87
87
87
87
87
88
48.49'
49.72'
39.42'
42.10'
42.52'
44.41'
45.26'
45.74'
9.00'
7.55'
55.39'*
55.61'*
18.02'
18.83'
29.57'
26.61'
22.27'
22.89'
17.62'
15.98'
19.82'
21.52'
30.00'
32.40'
33.05'
33.41'
45.28'
45.70'
55.20'
0.00'
34
-------
Table 3-5. 1991 base sampling locations (random and index) for small estuary/tidal river class.
Tidal River or
Estuary
Alabama (Cont'dl
Pelican Bay
Grand Bay
Mississippi
West Pascagoula River
Bernard Bayou
St. Louis Bay
Louisiana
Garden Island Bay
Mississippi River
Gulf Outlet Canal
Lake St. Catherine
Little Lake
Lake Raccourcl
Amite River
Lake Pelto
Lake Plourde
Belle River
Sample
Type
R
I
R
I
R
I
R
I
R
I
R
I
R
I
R
I
R
I
R
I
R
I
R
I
R
I
R
I
Location
Latitude (N) Longitude (W)
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
29
29
29
29
30
30
29
29
29
29
30
30
29
29
29
29
29
29
12.85'
14.00'
22.30'
22.89'
22.13'
22.38'
25.30'
24.90'
21.81'
19.30'
2.51'
1.69'
50.48'
41.27'
7.71'
7.71'
28.75'
27.70'
13.97'
12.38'
17.97'
17.84'
4.92'
4.13'
43.60'
42.20'
53.40'
50.25'
88
88
88
88
88
88
88
88
89
89
89
89
89
89
89
89
90
90
90
90
90
90
90
90
91
91
91
91
3.23'
5.69'
22.12'
20.33'
36.48'
36.13'
57.40'
53.12'
20.09'
18.41'
6.35'
6.50'
37.42'
24.19'
43.06'*
44.31'*
8.60'
5.40'
20.31'
18.60'
36.00'
33.60'
47.70'
44.41'
10.00'
7.35'
12.48'
9.05'
35
-------
Table 3-5. 1991 base sampling locations (random and index) for small estuary/tidal river class.
Tidal River or
Estuary
Louisiana (Cont'd)
Grand Lake
Calcasieu River
Texas
Star Lake
East Bay Bayou
Moses Lake/Dollar Bay
Cedar Bayou
San Jacinto Bay
Highland Bayou
Bastrop Bay
Cedar Lakes
Caracahua Bay
Powderhom Lake
Lavaca River
Hynes Bay
Copano Bay
Sample
Type
R
I
R
I
R
I
R
I
R
I
R
I
R
I
R
I
R
I
R
I
R
I
R
I
R
I
R
I
R
I
Location
Latitude (N) Longitude (W)
29
29
30
30
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
28
28
28
28
28
28
28
28
28
28
28
28
56.40'
53.65'
7.30'
3.40'
40.64'
40.45'
33.83'
33.44'
25.53'
26.57'
42.43'
41.85'
42.39'
42.35'
18.62
19.78
5.79'
5.50'
49.60'
50.50'
41.60'
37.55'
29.07'
30.00'
45.00'
41.55'
23.71*
20.00'
4.79'
7.35'
92
92
93
93
94
94
94
94
94
94
94
94
95
95
94
94
95
95
95
95
96
96
96
96
96
96
96
96
97
97
45.85'
45.00'
20.30'
19.00'
10.71'*
10.00'*
26.00'
28.44'
54.61'
55.32'
56.08'
56.92'
2.60'
1.37'
57.08*
56.32*
10.00'
11.00'
31.91'*
30.45'*
24.11'
22.52'
31.48'*
30.00'*
34.84'
34.60'
47.28'
44.80'
8.886
1.60'
36
-------
Table 3-5. 1991 base sampling locations (random and index) for small estuary/tidal river class.
Tidal River or
Estuary
Texas (Cont'd)
Tule Lake Channel
South Bay
Rio Grande
Sample
Type
R
I
R
I
R
I
Location
Latitude (N) Longitude (W)
27
27
26
26
25
25
49.21'
48.71 '
1.60'
1.60'
57.37'
57.37'
97
97
97
97
97
97
26.94'
23.41'
11.98'
11.44'
11.35'
8.72'
* Depth of site is anticipated to be less than 1 m.
37
-------
(e.g., contaminants in fish flesh, gross pathology of fish).
Because of the importance of establishing a reasonable and appropriate index period, a special sampling
program was conducted in 1990 in Northern Gulf of Mexico estuaries to assess the variability of the index
period. Measurements were made at 8 locations in the Louisianian Province characterizing a variety of
continuous dissolved oxygen and contaminant conditions. Continuous dissolved oxygen monitoring was
not initiated at a larger number of stations because it was not logistically possible. The eight selected
locations were located predominately in small estuarine systems. Four of these sites were selected because
available information and expert opinion suggested that they were all likely to exhibit low dissolved oxygen
conditions (i.e., < 2 ppm) for some period. The dissolved oxygen criteria of consistently greater than 2.0
mg/l was selected because this condition has little impact upon biota (Vernberg 1972; Renand 1986;
Coutant 1985; Chittenden 1971) in absence of other stressors. Dissolved oxygen concentrations that are
consistently less than 2.0 mg/l may have substantial impact upon estuarine and marine biota (e.g., Vernberg
1972). Data from the 1990 stations and retrospective water quality information confirmed that the period
from July 1 through September 30 has low dissolved oxygen concentrations for long continuous periods
of time at those Gulf sites experiencing oxygen stress, while many "low* dissolved oxygen sites could be
expected to continue to exhibit oxygen stress through September. The anticipated sampling index period
for the Louisianian Province will be July 15 through September 15.
3.3.5 Indicator Testing and Evaluation
Sufficient information to verify the reliability of indicator responses throughout the Louisianian
Province is not available. Therefore, testing and evaluation of indicators will be conducted at 16 locations
(Table 3-6; Rg. 3-3) to determine the reliability of indicators to discriminate between polluted and unpolluted
environments. These 16 locations include two geographic subregions (Eastern and Western Gulf of Mexico).
Eight sites, with varying combinations of expected pollution stress were selected within each geographic
subregion based on the knowledge of regional/local experts. For example, the eastern region of the
Louisianian Province will be represented by samples from PerdkJo Bay, Alabama (expected low industrial
and agricultural contaminants and low dissolved oxygen); Bayou Casotte, Mississippi (expected low
38
-------
Table 3-6. Indicator testing and evaluation sites for 1991 based on a priori judgements concerning the
degree of sediment contamination due to agricultural (AQ) and industrial (IN) sources and the
anticipated dissolved oxygen concentration (DO). (L= Low levels; H= High Levels).
Tidal River or
Estuary
Sample Type
DO AG IN
Location
Latitude (N) Longitude (W)
East Gulf of Mexico
Perdido Bay, FL/AL
Bayou Casotte, MS
Wolf Bay, AL
Mobile Bay, AL
Apalachicola Bay, PL
Watsons Bayou, FL
Choctawhatchee River, FL
Escambia Bay, FL
L
L
L
L
H
H
H
H
L
L
H
H
L
L
H
H
L
H
L
H
L
H
L
H
30
30
30
30
29
30
30
30
27.08'
20.00'
19.71'
37.00'
40.00'
8.59'
24.00'
31.70'
87
88
87
88
84
85
86
87
22.60'
30.71'
35.72'
0.00'
56.65'
38.00'
8.00'
10.00'
West Gulf of Mexico
Calcasieu Lake, LA
Houston Ship Canal, TX
Arroyo Colorado, TX
Brazos River, TX
San Antonio Bay, TX
Galveston Bay, TX
Laguna Madre, TX
Lavaca Bay, TX
L
L
L
L
H
H
H
H.
L
L
H
H
L
L
H
H
L
H
L
H
L
H
L
H
29
29
26
28
28
29
27
28
59.38'
44.09'
20.03'
57.61'
18.30'
31.66'
8.00'
38.30'
93
95
97
95
96
94
97
96
20.03'
8.00'
25.76'
22.60'
39.90'
56.90'
16.00'
32.41'
39
-------
Figure 3-3. Indicator Testing and Evaluation Stations for Louisianian Province
Monitoring.
40
-------
agricultural contaminants, high industrial contaminants, and low dissolved oxygen); Wolf Bay, Alabama
(expected high agricultural contaminants, low industrial contaminants, and low dissolved oxygen); Mobile
Bay, Alabama (expected high agricultural contaminants, high industrial contaminants, and low dissolved
oxygen); Apalachicola Bay Florida (expected low agricultural contaminants, low industrial contaminants, and
high dissolved oxygen); Watson's Bayou, Florida (expected low agricultural contaminants, high industrial
contaminants, and high dissolved oxygen); Choctawhatchee River, Florida (expected high agricultural
contaminants, low industrial contaminants, and high dissolved oxygen); and, Escambia Bay, Florida
(expected high agricultural contaminants, high industrial contaminants, and high dissolved oxygen).
Indicator testing and evaluation sites will be sampled during the index period (July 15-September 15).
The entire suite of exposure and response indicators, including research Indicators (see Table 4-2), will be
measured at these sites.
3.3.6 Supplemental Sampling
Sufficient data are not available to ascertain if the spatial sampling scale used in the Virginian Province
to represent the ecological condition (I.e., cells of 280 km2) will adequately represent large estuarine systems
in the Louisianian Province, using the selected indicators. To address this problem, Mobile Bay will be
sampled at a density four times greater (i.e., sample points approximately 9 km apart; 13 additional sampling
sites) than that of the other large estuaries (Table 3-7). This spatially intensive data set will be used to
evaluate the benefits of an enhanced grid for the assessment of ecological condition.
The information resulting from the supplemental sampling program in Mobile Bay has the added benefit
of providing information that will assist the Gulf of Mexico Program's Demonstration Project to identify
environmental concerns, design future monitoring activities, and formulate the Comprehensive Management
Action Plan for the Gulf of Mexico. The information will also facilitate the evaluation of the effect of spatial
scale on DQOs.
41
-------
Table 3-7. Supplementary sampling stations in 1991 to evaluate the effect of sampling scale on parameter
estimation.
Tidal River or Sample Location
Estuary Type Latitude (N) Longitude (W)
Mobile Bay L 30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
14.45'*
19.51'
16.57*
28.92'
29.79'
45.19'
19.90*
33.96'
22.28'
39.36'*
26.17'
20.55'
18.21'
87
87
87
87
88
88
88
88
88
88
88
88
88
50.88'*
51.71'
55.88'
59.21'
0.46'
0.59'
1.25'
1.61'
2.79'
3.04'*
3.99'
5.81'
7.69'
*Depth at site anticipated to be less than 1 m.
42
-------
3.4 Overview of Sampling Activities
The 1991 Louisianian Province Monitoring Demonstration sampling activities will be conducted during
a summer index period, extending from July 15 through September 15. A total of 198 sites will be sampled
in 1991 as follows:
o 112 base sampling sites;
o 16 indicator testing and evaluation sites
o 57 index sampling sites in small estuaries and large tidal rivers
o 13 supplemental sampling sites.
Based on the analysis of the information obtained from these samples, a detailed sampling design for
future years will be developed. The total sampling effort in future years probably will be about 75 percent
of the 1991 effort. In subsequent monitoring years, only an array of base stations will be sampled in each
year, although during the initial years of the Louisianian Province Monitoring some additional index
monitoring and indicator testing may be completed. Tables 3-8 through 3-10 delineate the estuarine systems
and the number of samples from each system that would be expected if the 1991 design were implemented
for the remainder of the four-year cycle (1992-1994).
43
-------
Table 3-8. Anticipated 1992 Estuarine Systems to be sampled and the projected number of samples from
each system (L=Large Estuary Class; R=Large Tidal River Class; S= Small Estuary and Tidal
River Class).
Estuarine System ' Sample Type Number of Samples
Alabama
Dauphin Bay S 2
Wolf Bay S 2
Mobile Bay L 3
Florida
Waccasassa River S 2
Indian Bay S 2
Chassahowitza River S 2
Carabelle River S 2
Bayou St. John S 2
St. Andrew Sound S 2
Horseshoe Cove S 2
Lake Wimico S 2
Withlacoochee Bay S 2
Apalachicola Bay S 2
St. George Sound L 1
Choctawnatchee Bay L 2
Pensacda Bay L 3
St. Andrews Bay L 1
Apalachee Bay L 5
j
Louisiana
Sabine River S 2
Bayou Terrebone S 2
Bayou Teche S 2
Lake De Cade S 2
Lake Mercant S 2
Lake Felicity S 2
Lake Verret S 2
Bay Boudreau S 2
Lake Cataoatche S 2
East Bay S 2
Sabine Lake L 1
Calcasieu Lake L 1
Caillou Bay L 1
Terrebone Bay L 3
Barataria Bay L 2
Vermilion Bay L 1
Atchafalaya Bay L 1
Lake Borgne L 3
Cote Blanc Bays L 3
44
-------
Table 3-8. Anticipated 1992 Estuarine Systems to be sampled and the projected number of samples from
each system (L=Large Estuary Class; R = Large Tidal River Class; S= Small Estuary and Tidal
River Class).
Estuarine System Sample Type Number of Samples
Louisiana (Cont'd)
Breton Sound L 6
Lake Pontchartrain L 5
Chandeleur Sound L 8
Mississippi River R 20
Mississippi
Heron Bay S 2
Point Aux Chenes Bay S 2
Mississippi Sound L 7
Texas
Lake Austin S 2
Scott Bay S 2
Offatts Bayou S 2
Dickinson Bay S 2
Drum Bay S 2
Houston Ship Canal S 2
Chocolate Bayou S 2
Christmas Bay S 2
Redfish Bay S 2
Mesquite Bay S 2
Lavaca Bay S 2
Espiritu Santo Bay S 2
San Antonio Bay L 1
Baffin Bay L 1
East Bay (Galveston Bay) L 1
West Bay (Galveston Bay) L 1
Corpus Christ! Bay L 2
Matagorda Bay I- 3
Galveston Bay L 5
Laguna Madre L 2
45
-------
Table 3-9. Anticipated 1993 Estuarine Systems to be sampled and the projected number of samples from
each system (L=Large Estuary Class; R = Large Tidal River Class; S= Small Estuary and Tidal
River Class).
Estuarine System Sample Type Number of Samples
Alabama
Little Lagoon S 2
Heron Bay S 2
Perdido River S 2
Mobile Bay L 3
Tor]
Chassahowitza Bay S 2
St. Martins River S 2
Waccasassa Bay S 2
Santa Rosa Sound S 2
Suwannee River S 2
Deadman Bay S 2
Ochlockonee Bay S 2
Apalachicola River S 2
East Bay (Apalachicola) S 2
Blackwater River S 2
St. George Sound L 1
Choctawhatchee Bay L 1
Pensacola Bay L 4
St. Andrews Bay L 1
Apalachee Bay L 3
Louisiana
Grand Bay S 2
West Bay S 2
Wax Lake Outlet S 2
Lac Des Allemands S 2
Caillou Lake S 2
Lost Lake S 2
Fourieague Bay S 2
Sabine Lake L 1
Calcasieu Lake L 1
Caillou Bay L 1
Terrebone Bay L 2
Barataria Bay L 1
Vermilion Bay L 2
Atchafalaya Bay L 1
Lake Borgne L 2
Cote Blanc Bays L 2
46
-------
Table 3-9. Anticipated 1993 Estuarine Systems to be sampled and the projected number of samples from
each system (L=Large Estuary Class; R=Large Tidal River Class; S= Small Estuary and Tidal
River Class).
Estuarine System
Louisiana (Cont'd)
Breton Sound
Lake Pontchartrain
Chandeleur Sound
Mississippi River
Mississippi
Little Lake
Pascagoula Bay
Mississippi Sound
Sample Type
L
L
L
R
S
S
L
Number of Samples
8
7
7
20
2
2
6
Texas
Galveston Channel S 2
Oyster Lake S 2
Brazos River S 2
Aransas Passes S 2
Oso Creek S 2
East Matagorda Bay S 2
Chocolate Bay S 2
Shoalwater Bay S 2
Aransas Bay S 2
Nueces Bay S 2
San Antonio Bay L 1
Baffin Bay L 1
East Bay (Galveston Bay) L 1
West Bay (Galveston Bay) L 1
Corpus Christ! Bay L 2
Matagorda Bay L 2
Galveston Bay I- 7
Laguna Madre L 1
47
-------
Table 3-10. Anticipated 1994 Estuarine Systems to be sampled and the projected number of samples from
each system (L=Large Estuary Class; R=Large Tidal River Class; S= Small Estuary and Tidal
River Class).
Estuarine System Sample Type Number of Samples
Alabama
Mobile River S 2
Weeks Bay S 2
Mobile Bay L 4
Honda
Homosassa Bay S 2
Crystal River S 2
Cedar Keys Bays S 2
Steinhatchee River S 2
Goose Creek Bay S 2
Grand Lagoon S 2
Choctawhatchee River S 2
St. Vincent Sound S 2
Escambia River S 2
Perdido Bay S 2
St. George Sound L 1
Choctawnatchee Bay L 1
Pensacola Bay L 1
St. Andrews Bay L 1
Apalachee Bay L 2
Louisiana
Timbalier Bay S 2
White Lake S 2
The Rigolets S 2
Pearl River S 2
Blind Bay S 2
Bayou LaFourche S 2
Caminada Bay S 2
Atchafalaya River S 2
Lake Barre S 2
Mermenteau River S 2
Wax Lake S 2
Sabine Lake L 1
Calcasieu Lake L 1
Caillou Bay L 1
Terrebone Bay L 2
Barataria Bay L 2
Vermilion Bay L 1
Atchafalaya Bay L 1
Lake Borgne L 3
48
-------
Table 3-10. Anticipated 1994 Estuarine Systems to be sampled and the projected number of samples from
each system (L=Large Estuary Class; R=Large Tidal River Class; S= Small Estuary and Tidal
River Class).
Estuarine System Sample Type Number of Samples
Louisiana (Cont'd)
Cote Blanc Bays L 2
Breton Sound L 7
Lake Pontchartrain L 5
Chandeleur Sound L 5
Mississippi River R 20
Mississippi
Portersville Bay S 2
Pascagoula River S 2
Biloxi Bay S 2
Mississippi Sound L 6
Texas
Neches River S 2
Dickinson Bayou S 2
Clam Lake S 2
Bolivar Roads S 2
San Bernard River S 2
Guadalupe River S 2
Burnett Bay S 2
Colorado Arroyo S 2
Freeport Harbor S 2
Tres Palacios Bay S 2
Jones Bay S 2
Pringle Lake S 2
St. Charles Bay S 2
Oso Bay S 2
San Antonio Bay L 1
Baffin Bay L 1
East Bay (Galveston Bay) L 1
West Bay (Galveston Bay) L 1
Corpus Christ! Bay L 1
Matagorda Bay L 2
Galveston Bay L 7
Lagurta Madre L 4
49
-------
4.0 INDICATOR DEVELOPMENT AND EVALUATION
EMAP-NC does not have the resources to monitor all of the ecological parameters of concern to the
public, Congress, scientists, and environmental managers. Therefore, the limited resources available must
be focused on the system attributes that are of greatest concern, ecologically, and best address program
objectives. The purpose of this chapter is to describe and explain the strategy used to identify and select
indicators generically for EMAP-NC and, by extension, for the Louisianian Province. In the first section of
the chapter, we describe in abbreviated form, the generic approach to indicator selection that is being used
by all resource groups within EMAP; this process is explained fully in EMAP-Near Coastal Program Plan for
1990 (U.S. EPA, 1990). In the remaining sections of the chapter, we describe the application of that
approach to identify indicators to be measured for the 1991 Louisianian Province Monitoring Demonstration.
4.1 EMAP-NC Framework for Indicator Selection
To function within the constraints of limited resources, a defined set of efficient, yet effective, parameters
that serve as indicators of environmental quality will be measured. EMAP-NC indicators will be selected to
be:
o Related to ecological condition in a way that can be quantified and interpreted
o Applicable across a range of habitats and biogeographical provinces
o Valued by, and of concern to, society
o Quantifiable in a standardized manner with a high degree of repeatability.
The selection of indicators that will be used by EMAP-NC is an ongoing process. It is anticipated that
50
-------
a number of years will be required before a relatively complete list of indicators is developed that is
applicable across geographic regions. The selection process consists of the following steps:
o Identification of valued ecosystem attributes and stressors that affect them;
o Development of a conceptual source-receptor model that links valued ecosystem attributes to
stressors;
o Using the conceptual model to identify all possible candidate indicators;
o Evaluation and classification of candidate indicators into categories (core, developmental, research)
using evaluation criteria that are generic to all EMAP resource groups (e.g., forests, arid lands,
agroecosytems);
o Testing and evaluation of indicators to assess their ability to discriminate between polluted and
unpolluted sites;
o Conducting regional scale demonstration projects to show the feasibility and value of indicator data;
and,
o Periodic re-evaluation of indicators.
While the first three steps of the Indicator selection process are targeted towards inclusion of all relevant
possible indicators, the next three phases of the EMAP Indicator development strategy focus on exclusion
of indicators that currently cannot be measured within EMAP constraints, as well as identifying a subset of
the indicators to be designated as research or developmental indicators. The process of establishing
priorities is guided both by a set of criteria for indicator selection and by peer reviews of research plans.
As an Indicator advances through the indicator development process, different criteria are emphasized (Fig.
4-1). At each step the criteria become more focused on the value of the data.
51
-------
PRIMARY EVALUATION CRITERIA USED BY EMAP-NC
IN THE TIERED INDICATOR SELECTION STRATEGY.
• Regional data Intarpretable within conceptual model
• Provide* naw, Important ineight* not available from
•xlitlng program*
• Co*t In proportion to value o( freight*
Important within the conceptual model
R**pon*iv*n*** demonaliated
In lab or small-ecale Held ttudy
Low Incremental coet
/ CANDIDATE X
\
• Not
• Tei
1 REJECTED 1
> Reeponelve to *tr***ora on a regional icale
• Method* believed feaelWe on a regional tcale
• Not r**pon*lv* to *tr**aor* of concern
Redundant with cuperlor meaauree
Not measurable on an EMAP frame
1 • Temporally unMabJ* within the index period
Figure 4-1. Primary evaluation criteria used by EMAP-NC in the tiered
indicator selection strategy.
52
-------
Categories of indicators that were identified and will be sampled by EMAP-NC include the following:
o Response Indicators - Measurements that quantify the integrated response of ecological resources
to individual or multiple stressors. Examples include measures of the condition of individuals (e.g.,
frequency of tumors or other pathological disorders in fish), populations (e.g., abundance, biomass),
and communities (e.g., species composition, diversity).
o Exposure Indicators - Physical, chemical, and biological measurements that quantify pollutant
exposure, habitat degradation, or other facets of degraded ecological condition. Examples include
contaminant concentrations in the water, sediments, and biological media; the acute toxicity of
sediments to indigenous or sensitive biota; and dissolved oxygen concentration.
o Habitat Indicators - Physical, chemical, and biological measurements that provide basic information
about the natural environmental setting. Examples include acreage of submerged aquatic
vegetation, water depth, salinity, sediment characteristics, and temperature. Habitat indicators will
be used to normalize values for exposure and response indicators across environmental gradients.
Habitat Indicators may also be used as a basis for defining subpopulations of interest for
assessments.
o Stressor Indicators - Economic, social, or engineering measures that can be used to identify the
sources of environmental problems and poor ecological condition. Examples include human
demographics, land-use patterns, discharge records from manufacturing and sewage treatment
facilities, freshwater inflows, and pesticide usage on the watershed. Stressor data will be gathered
primarily from existing federal and state programs (e.g., NOAA's National Coastal Pollution Discharge
Inventory-NCPDI; wetland acreage and extent from FWS's National Wetland Inventory, NOAA, and
State wetland inventories and maps), from other EMAP task groups (e.g., the extent and distribution
of forests), as well as from local permitting/planning agencies.
53
-------
The relationships among indicator categories are summarized in Fig. 4-2. Information on exposure,
habitat, and stressor indicators will be used to identify potential factors that contribute to the status and
trends of response indicators. A list of indicators that were used in the first year of the program in the
Virginian Province is provided in Table 4-1.
4.2 Estuarine Candidate Indicators
Approximately 150 candidate indicators were identified from the conceptual model of near coastal
systems. Following preliminary selection and categorization of candidate indicators, a series of workshops
to identify, evaluate, and discuss potential indicators of ecological condition and environmental quality was
held in December 1989. Participants were requested to identify, evaluate, and establish priorities for
indicators for the 1990 Demonstration Project and to recommend measurement and analysis methods for
potential indicators. Conclusions and findings of the workshops were used to refine the list of indicators that
were measured in the 1990 Demonstration Program.
As pointed out in the previous section, indicator selection is an ongoing process. The 1991 Louisianian
Province Monitoring Demonstration reviewed the data from the initial 1990 Demonstration in the Virginian
Province to finalize the selection of indicators and to elevate some candidate indicators to research status
(Table 4-2). This section of the chapter identifies which Indicators were placed into each category for the
1991 Louisianian Province Monitoring Demonstration, provides the
rationale for these placements and gives an overview of the methodology to be used for measurement of
those indicators that were selected for use in the 1991 Louisianian Province Monitoring Demonstration.
Although the tiered selection process for indicators was conducted from candidate upwards to core,
indicators are presented here from core downward to place emphasis on those measurements most
important to the program.
54
-------
EMAP-NC INDICATOR STRATEGY
Living
Abunduw* Blomus
Bwittwd and bh ^
DfvwaKy/Compowllon
BMlttMMFW)
Rih Ptthology/HtepofMthology
IMPACTS
Unr OlMo«Md Oxygm
EutropNcrton
• Contaminrtoo
Habitat ModMcatl on
CumulMlv* Impacts
PROBLEMS
Low DU»o*v»d Oxyg«i
W«t«r
SMUm
FtehUuMt*
loMMy*
WMw
S*dim*nt
NudtonVBOO Lowing*
Contimlnwit Lowing* .
Hydroleglc Uodlflc*«oM
ShoraUn* 0*v«opmnl
FrMhmtw Dl>charg«
HABITAT
INDICATORS
Land UM P«tt»m«
Pollutant Loadings
Human Population D*n«ty
Human Dwnograpnica
Sallnfty
Figure 4-2. Overview of the indicator strategy for the EMAP near coastal program.
The manner in which indicators are related to the major environmental
problems, and Impacts is also shown.
55
-------
Table 4-1. List of EMAP-NC indicators (by major category) used in The Virginian Province in 1990.
Category
Proposed Indicator
Core
Developmental
Research
Benthic species composition and biomass
Salinity
Sediment characteristics
Water depth
Apparent redox potential discontinuity
Sediment contaminant concentration
Sediment toxicity
Contaminants in fish flesh
Contaminants in large bivalves
Relative abundance of large burrowing blvalues
Gross pathology of fish
Continuous and point measurements of dissolved oxygen concentration
Water column toxicity
Fish community composition
Histopathology of fish
56
-------
Table 4-2. Indicators selected for measurement in the 1991 Louisianian Province Monitoring Demonstration
CATEGORY
PROPOSED INDICATOR
Core
Developmental
Research
Benthic Species Composition and Biomass
Habitat Indicators (Apparent Redox Potential Discontinuity, Salinity, Temperature,
pH, Sediment Characteristics, Water Depth)
Sediment Contaminant Concentration
Sediment Toxicity
Dissolved Oxygen Concentration (Continuous and Instantaneous)
Contaminants in Fish and Shellfish Tissue
Gross Pathology of Fish
Relative Abundance of Large Burrowing Bivalves
Aesthetic Indicators (flotsam, jetsam, odor, water clarity)
Acreage of Submerged Aquatic Vegetation
Fish Community Composition
Histopathology of Fish
Blood Chemistry
Stable Isotope Ratios
Bile Florescence
Liver Lesions
Fish Condition Index
Liver Contaminant Concentrations
Whole Fish Contaminant Concentrations
57
-------
4.2.1 Core Indicators
4.2.1.1 Benthic Species Composition and Blomass
Macrobenthic organisms play an important role in the estuarine and coastal waters conceptual model.
As major secondary consumers in coastal marine ecosystems, benthos represents an important linkage
between primary producers and higher trophic levels for both planktonic and detritus-based food webs
(Frithsen 1989, Holland et al. 1989). Benthos are a particularly important food source for juvenile fish and
crustaceans (Chao and Mustek 1977, Bell and Coull 1978, Homer et al. 1980, Holland et al. 1989).
Macrobenthic feeding activities can also remove large amounts of paniculate material from the water,
especially in shallow (< 10m) environments, improving water quality by increasing water clarity and limiting
phytoplankton production (doem 1982, Officer et al. 1982; Holland et al. 1989).
The benthic macroinvertebrate species composition and abundance indicator has been placed in the
core group not only because of its importance, but also because of its responsiveness to the kinds of
environmental stress gradients of interest to EMAP-NC. Benthic assemblages are composed of diverse taxa
with a variety of reproductive modes, feeding guilds, life-history characteristics, and physiological tolerances
to environmental conditions (Warwick 1980; Frithsen 1989; Bilyard 1987). As a result, benthic populations
respond to changes in environmental quality, both natural and anthropogenic, in a variety of ways (Pearson
and Rosenberg 1978, Rhoads et al. 1978; Boesch and Rosenberg 1981). Responses of some species (e.g.,
filter feeders and species with pelagic life stages) are indicative of water-quality changes, while responses
of others (e.g., organisms that burrow in or feed on sediments) may be indicative of changes in sediment
quality.
Furthermore, most benthic species have limited mobility and cannot avoid stressful environmental
conditions. Thus, benthic assemblages are likely to respond to many of the problems that will be
emphasized by EMAP-NC, including toxic pollution, eutrophication, sediment quality, habitat modification,
multiple pollution stresses, and climate change (Sanders et al. 1980, Elmgren and Frithsen 1982, Rhoads
58
-------
et al. 1978, Frithsen et aJ. 1985, Holland et at. 1987). Macrobenthos abundance, composition, and biomass
have a history of use in regional estuarine monitoring programs and have served as an effective indicator
for describing the extent and magnitude of pollution impacts in near coastal ecosystems, as well as for
assessing the effectiveness of management actions.
Natural benthic species composition, abundance, and biomass are determined largely by naturally
occurring habitat conditions including salinity and sediment type (Sanders et al. 1965, Carriker 1967, Boesch
1977, Dauer et al. 1984, Holland et al. 1987, 1989). The distributions of some benthic organisms are
remarkably predictable along estuarine gradients, and, In the absence of antropogenic stressors, can be
characterized by similar groups of species over broad latitudinal ranges (Thorson 1957; Holland et al. 1987).
Information on changes in benthic population and community parameters due to habitat characteristics
can be useful for separating natural variation from changes associated with human activities (Holland et al.
1987).
Data for the benthic species composition and biomass indicator will be obtained by collecting three
replicate 413-cm2 samples with a Young-modified Van Veen grab. The Young grab was selected as the
appropriate sampling gear because it is easily deployed from small boats and adequately samples both mud
and sand habitats. Other gear choices did not sample such a broad range of sediment types adequately
(e.g., Wildco Box Corer, Ponar grab, Van Veen grab) or could not be deployed as easily from the small
boats proposed for use by EMAP-NC (e.g., spade box corer, Smith-Mclntyre grab). Hard sediments (e.g.,
rock) that cannot be sampled adequately by the Young-modified Van Veen grab will not be sampled by
EMAP-NC. Sediments with dense submerged aquatic vegetation or oyster shell will be sampled using a
modified small-scale box cover. However, the proportion of these habitat types that are not sampleable by
our conventional gear will be estimated and will not be included in condition estimates of the province.
Benthic samples will be sieved in the field through a 0.5-mm screen and preserved in a 10% buffered
formalin solution to which rose bengal has been added. In the laboratory, organisms will be identified to
the lowest taxonomlc level practical and counted. The dry-weight biomass of major taxa will be measured.
59
-------
4.2.1.2 Habitat Indicators - Salinity. Temperature. oH. Sediment Characteristics RPD. W?ter Clarity, and
Water Depth
Habitat indicators provide important information about the environmental setting of a sample site. Salinity
and temperature are among the most important environmental factors controlling the distribution of biota
and ecological processes in estuaries (Remane and Schlieper 1971). Organic content, grain-size distribution,
and depth of the redox potential discontinuity (RPD) layer are some of the major sediment characteristics
that influence benthic invertebrate distributions. Water depth itself has little direct effect on estuarine biota
because most U.S. estuaries are relatively shallow, and the pressure changes that occur are minor.
However, in almost all estuaries, changes in water depth are associated with changes in sediment
characteristics, dissolved oxygen concentration, and temperature.
Cumulatively, the above parameters define the major habitats sampled by EMAP-NC, and information
on these habitat indicators will be essential for normalizing changes of exposure and response indicators
to environmental gradients. They also will be used to define subpopulations for analysis and integration
activities.
These indicators have been advanced to core status because they are essential to Interpretation of
response and exposure indicators, because regional sampling is feasible, and because it can be
accomplished at little incremental cost. Some of the measures, notably salinity and temperature, are variable
within the index period, but they vary in a predictable manner with respect to known factors such as tide,
time, and freshwater flow. The single measurements taken at the time of sample collection will provide a
reference point for post-classifying the site into a stratum with a known range for these variables.
Point-in-time salinity, temperature, pH, and water depth measurements will be taken using a Hydrolab
Surveyor II, at each sampling site. Sediment characteristics (e.g., water content, grain size distribution,
organic carbon content) will be determined for all sampling sites by using the procedures of Plumb (1981).
The RPD will be assessed by visually measuring the depth of the color change in sediments in clear plastic
60
-------
cores extracted from each sample collected for benthic species composition and btomass. In addition, a
grain-size analysis of each sediment subsample collected for benthic community analyses will be determined.
Water clarity will be measured by determination of Photosynthetically Active Radiation (RAR). PAR will
be measured using a U-COR irradiometer to indicate the degree to which turbidity can inhibit photosynthetic
activity. In addition, measurement of the 1% irradiance depth will be measured using a Seechi disk.
4.2.2 Developmental Indicators
Table 4-2 lists developmental indicators proposed for use in the 1991 Louisianian Province Monitoring
Demonstration. A brief justification for the selection of each indicator, and a summary of the measurement
methods that will be used for each indicator, is provided below.
4.2.2.1 Sediment Contaminant Concentrations
Metals, organic chemicals, and fine-grained particulates entering estuaries from freshwater inflows, point
sources of pollution, and various nonpoint sources, including atmospheric deposition, generally accumulate
within the sediments and are retained within estuaries (Turekian 1977; Forstner and W'rttman 1981; Nixon
et al. 1986; Hinga 1988; Schubel and Carter 1984). This is because different contaminants have specific
affinities for adsorption onto particles (Hinga 1988; Honeyman and Santschi 1988). Chemical and microbial
contaminants generally adsorb to fine-grained materials in the water and are deposited on the bottom,
accumulating at deposition sites such as regions of low current velocity, deep basins, and the zone of
maximum turbidity. Contaminant concentration in sediments is dependent upon Interactions between natural
(e.g., physical sediment characteristics) and anthropogenic factors (e.g., type and volume of contaminant
loadings) (Sharpe et al. 1984).
Bottom sediments in some harbors near urban areas and industrial centers are so contaminated that they
represent a threat to both human and ecological health (OTA 1987; NRC1989; Weaver 1984). Contaminated
61
-------
sediments are not limited to harbors near industrial centers and urban areas; they are also associated with
pollutant runoff from agricultural areas and may be an important source of contaminant Input to estuaries
(Boynton et al. 1988; Pait et al. 1989).
Sediment contamination meets three criteria for elevation to developmental status. It is feasible to
sample on a regional scale; it is clearly important to assessment endpoints; and the expected variability
within the index period is expected to be minimal.
The geographic extent of contaminated sediments and the ecological effects of exposure to them are
poorly defined (NRC 1989, NOAA 1988). Even in highly contaminated bays and harbors (e.g., Bayou
Casotte, Houston Ship Canal, Freeport Harbor, the extent and magnitude of contamination often is not
known (NRC 1989). Because high quality regional information on the extent and magnitude of sediment
contamination does not exist, environmental managers do not know whether the pollution abatement
measures that have been taken to reduce contaminant loadings are having the desired effect, nor do they
have the information to establish priorities for future cleanup efforts. The sediment contamination indicator
addresses these needs.
Sediment samples for determination of contaminant concentrations will be collected by using a Young-
modified Van Veen grab. The surface sediment (top 2-3 cm) will be removed from three or more grab
samples and composited. During collection, care will be taken to use only samples that have undisturbed
sediment surfaces. The composite sample will be homogenized, and a subsample measured for
contaminant concentrations.
Initially, the NOAA National Status and Trends suite of contaminants will be measured in the
homogenized subsample (Table 3-3). The NOAA suite includes chlorinated pesticides, polychlorinated
biphenyls (PCBs), polyaromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), major elements, and toxic metals. The NOAA Status
and Trends and EMAP quality assurance programs have developed measurement methods jointly that will
provide data of sufficient quality to meet the objectives of both Agencies. Several contaminants of special
62
-------
Interest in the Louisianian Province have been added to the list of analytes for the 1991 Monitoring
Demonstation to provide a further characterization of sediments exposed to petrochemical effluents and
intensive agricultural runoff (Table 4-3). These new analytes include: aliphatic hydrocarbons to assess
sediment contaminants due to petrochemical refining, selected polycydic aromatic hydrocarbons to assess
contaminantion from estuarine oil drilling, and selected pesticides (i.e., endosulfan and toxaphene) used in
agricultural practices in Gulf states. In addition, the frequency of "produced" waters in the estuarine habitats
of the Gulf will be assessed through the use of selected PAH isomers (R. Albritton, Louisiana Department
of Water Quality, pers. comm.) that occur frequently only at "produced" water sites; namely, 1,2,3, -c
naphthalene; 1,2,3, -c phenanthrene; and 1,2,3, -c pyrene-dibenzopyathene.
The pesticides list provided in Table 4-3 primarily addresses contaminants that have been banned. We
will investigate, in 1992, the efficacy of analyzing for classes of pesticides that are commonly used in Gulf
states but generally exhibit poor persistence in sediments (e.g., pyrethrokds, triazinines, carbamates).
4.2.2.2 Sediment Toxicitv
Sediment toxlcity tests are the most direct measure available for determining the toxicity of contaminants
In sediments. These tests provide information that is Independent of chemical characterizations and
ecological surveys (Chapman 1988), and they improve upon the direct measure of the effects of
contaminants in sediments because many contaminants are tightly bound to sediment particles or are
chemically complexed and are not biologically available (USEPA1989). However, sediment toxicity can not
be used entirely In replacement of direct measurement of sediment contaminant concentrations, because
the latter may be an important part of interpreting the causes for observed mortality in the toxicity test.
Sediment toxicity testing has had many applications in both marine and freshwater environments (Swartz
1987; Chapman 1988) and has become an integral part of many benthic assessment programs (Swartz
1989). A particularly important application is in programs seeking to establish contaminant-specific effects.
63
-------
Sediment toxicity represents a developmental indicator based on the same criteria as sediment
contaminants: (1) regional scale sampling is feasible, (2) it is important to the assessment endpoint, and
(3) variability within the index period is expected to be minimal.
EMAP-NC proposes to measure acute toxicity of surface sediments as an estimate of contaminant
bioavailability and toxicity. The sediments used for the toxicity tests will be subsampled from the same
composite from which sediment contaminant concentrations and sediment physical/chemical properties are
determined. Data on the physical and chemical characteristics of sediments (e.g., grain size, acid volatile
sulfides, and organic carbon content) will be used to determine whether such sediment properties are
associated with the degree of toxicity.
The sediment toxicity tests proposed for the Louisianian Province will employ standard methods (Swartz
et al. 1985) but will use the East Coast amphipod, Ampelisca abdita. This species has been shown to be
both acutely and chronically sensitive to contaminated sediments (Breteler et al. 1989; Scott and Redmond
1989; DiToro et al. in press). Because Ampellsca is a tube dweller, it is tolerant of a wider range of sediment
types than the West Coast species, Rhepoxvnius (Long and Buchman 1989) and Ampelisa can be easily
cultured. In addition, sediment toxicity tests using the mysid, Mysidopsls bahia. will be conducted as a
surrogate of the toxicity of collected sediments to the commercially important penaeid shrimps. Mysids will
not burrow into sediments but will come in contact with sediments and have been used to assess the
contaminant toxicity of sediment samples. Penaeid shrimp did interact directly with the sediment but it is
not feasible, presently, to test penaeid shrimp with sediments from all sampling sites. Toxicity tests will be
conducted with penaeid shrimp with sediment collected from the 16 ITE sampling sites to evaluate the
logistical difficulties of using this test organism for future monitoring years. In addition, we will evaluate the
use of a pdychacte as a test organism at the 16 ITE sites.
For a typical bioassay, a 200-ml aliquot of sediment from the homogenized, composited 2-3 cm, top layer
of grab samples collected at a sampling site will be placed In a 1-1 beaker and covered with 700 ml of water.
64
-------
Table 4-3. Chemicals to be measured in sediments at base stations during the 1991 Louisianian
Province Monitoring Demonstration
Polvcvlic Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAHs)
Acenaphthene
Acenaphthylene
Anthracene
Benz(a)anthracene
Benzo(b)fluoranthene
Benzo(k)fluoranthene
Benzo(g, h, i) perylene
Benzo(i) pyrene
Benzo(s)pyrene
Biphenyl
Chrysene
Diben(a,h)anthracene
2,6 dimethylnaphthalene
Ruoranthene
Ruorene
2-methyl naphthalene
1 -methyl napthalene
1 -methyl phenanthrene
Naphthalene
1,2,3,-c naphthalene
Perylene
Phenanthrene
1,2,3,-c phenanthene
1,2,3,-c,d pyrene
Pyrene
1,2,3-c pyrene-dibenzopyathene
Aliphatic Hydrocarbons
n-dodecane
n-heptadecane
n-hexadecane
n-nonadecane
n-octadecane
n-pentadecane
Phytane
Pristane
Major Elements
Aluminum
Iron
Manganese
Trace Elements
Arsenic
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
Selenium
Silver
Tin
Zinc
DDT and its metaboltties
o,p'-DDD
p,p'-DDD
o.p'-DDE
p,p'-DDE
o,p'-DDT
p,p'-DDT
Pesticides
Aldrin
Alpha-Chlordane
Trans-NonacWor
Dleldrin
Endrin
Endosuifan
Heptachlor
Heptachlor epoxide
HexacMorobenzene
LJndane (gamma-BHC)
Mirex
Toxaphene
65
-------
Table 4-3. Chemicals to be measured in sediments during the 1991 Louisianian Province Monitoring
Demonstration
PCB Congeners
Congener
# Location of Cl's
8 24'
18 2 2'5
28 244'
52 2 2'5 5'
44 2 2'3 5'
66 2 3'4 4'
74 24 4'5
77 3 3'4 4'
99 2 2'4 4'5
101 2 2'4 5 5*
118 23'44'5
153 2 2'4 4'5 5'
105 2 3 3'4 4'
126 3 3'4 4'5
138 2 2'3 4 4'5'
187 2 2'3 4'5 5'6
128 2 2'3 3'4 4'
180 2 2'3 4 4'5 5'
170 22'33'44'5
195 22'33'44'56
206 2 2'3 3'4 4'5 5'6
209 2 2'3 3'4 4'5 5'6 6'
Other Measurements
Butyltins
Acid Volatile Sulfide
Total Organic Carbon
66
-------
Bioassays will be conducted for 10 days for Amoelisca and 4 days for mysids, penaeid shrimps, and
polychaetes under static conditions with aeration; temperature will be maintained at 20°C for all tests; there
will be five replicated test containers of Amoelisca for each test sediment and three for mysids, penaeid
shrimp, and polychaetes.
4.2.2.3 Dissolved Oxygen Concentration
Adequate dissolved oxygen (DO) is required for the maintenance of populations of fish, shellfish, and
other aquatic biota. Most estuarine populations can tolerate dissolved oxygen concentrations below 100%
of saturation without apparent adverse effects. Prolonged exposures to less than 60% oxygen saturation,
however, may result in altered behavior, reduced growth, adverse reproductive effects, and/or mortality
(Vemberg 1972; Reish and Barnard 1960). Exposure to less than 2 ppm for extended periods of time (hours
to days) causes mortality to most biota, especially during summer months, when metabolic rates and
ambient temperatures are high. Additional stresses that occur in conjunction with low dissolved oxygen
(e.g., exposure to hydrogen sulfide) may cause as much, if not more, harm to aquatic biota than exposure
to low dissolved oxygen concentrations alone (Brongersma-Sanders 1957; Brown 1964; Theede 1973). In
addition, aquatic populations exposed to low dissolved oxygen concentrations may be more susceptible to
the adverse effects of other stressors (e.g., disease, metals, pH, toxic chemicals).
Dissolved oxygen concentration is potentially both an exposure and response indicator. As a response
indicator, It can reflect the cumulative system-level effects of eutrophication from nutrient or sewage loading.
As an exposure indicator, It reflects the potential biological stresses of low dissolved oxygen concentrations
on biota. However, dissolved oxygen concentrations, even in bottom waters, can fluctuate greatly with tide,
wind patterns, and biological activity. Before dissolved oxygen can be used as a core indicator, the
following questions concerning Its stability and variability at a site must be answered:
o Is the dynamic frequency distribution of dissolved oxygen concentration stable over the summer
period?
67
-------
o Is there sufficient predictability in dissolved oxygen patterns so that the degree of low dissolved
oxygen can be predicted by using an instantaneous or short-term continuous measurement record?
These questions must be addressed in order to quantify the low" dissolved oxygen stress (magnitude
and duration of extreme events) to which biota might be exposured during the summer. The reliability of
the dissolved oxygen indicator was examined in the Virginian Province Demonstration in 1990 at roughly 30
locations throughout the region and at 8 ITE sites in the northern Gulf of Mexico. Complete information is
not available for the 30 continuous DO monitoring sites in the Virginian Province. However, 30-day records
of continuous bottom DO concentrations (every 15 minutes) are available for 4, a priori, low-dissolved
oxygen stations and 4, a priori, high-dissolved oxygen stations in Gulf of Mexico esturaries (criterion for low
dissolved oxygen was > 15% of observations being < 2 ppm) (Summers and Engle 1991) for the period
August 1-31, 1991.
EMAP-Near Coastal cannot afford, fiscally or logistically, to monitor all 198 base and index stations
continuously for 30 days. Therefore, subsampiing of the 8 temporal records collected in 1990 was used to
evaluate the effect of shorter time-interval sampling upon the accuracy of the classification of the sites.
Monte Carlo subsampiing of the full record of dissolved oxygen measurements at each site was used
to construct data sets for each of the following continuous scenarios: 24-hour, 48-hour, 72-hour, and 96-
hour. Because the logistical problems associated with continuous measures at all base stations prohibit
measurement for greater than 4 days, alternative metrics to continuous distributions were investigated that
utilized short-term measurements (i.e., 12-24 hour) to characterize an Instantaneous measure or set of
measures of dissolved oxygen. These "instantaneous" classification measures were the minimum DO
concentration for a 24-hour period, the DO concentration at dawn (i.e., roughly 0500), and the nighttime
mean DO concentration. Sites experiencing high frequencies of hypoxia were poorly characterized using
a 24-96 hour continuous distribution (i.e.. success rate < 60%). Neither the nighttime mean nor the dawn
DO concentrations correctly classified "poor" sites at a rate greater than 75% while the 24-hour minimum
DO concentration correctly classified 'good" and "poor" sites more than 85% of time.
68
-------
The reliability of dissolved oxygen as an indicator will be examined further in the 1991 Louisianian
Province Monitoring Demonstration. Two types of dissolved oxygen measurements will be made: (1) con-
tinuous bottom water measurements (approximately every 15 minutes) for 12-24 hours but over nighttime
hours and (2) point-in-time water column profiles to characterize dissolved oxygen conditions at the time
of other sample collections.
Continuous measurements of bottom water dissolved oxygen concentration will be made at all
monitoring sites over a 12-24 hour period inclusive of nighttime hours. Based on available data, these sites
are anticipated to have highly variable dissolved oxygen concentrations within the 24-hour period. As a
result, the combination of the minimum, dawn, and mean nighttime concentrations of dissolved oxygen will
be used to classify the site based on the established DO criterion. A Hydrolab DataSonde III, equipped with
a polarographic dissolved oxygen electrode and a digital datalogger, will be used to make these
measurements. In addition to DO concentrations, the DataSonde III will be programmed to take
measurements of conductivity, temperature, salinity, depth and pH about 0.5 m off the bottom every 15 min-
utes. The unit will be deployed between 6 AM and 6 PM and retrieved between the hours of 6 AM and 6
PM the following day. The retrieved DataSonde III will be returned to the mobile laboratory where the stored
data will be retrieved, the instrument calibrated, and reinitiated for subsequent deployment. Immediately after
deployment and prior to retrieval of the DataSonde III, point-in-time measures of dissolved oxygen
concentration and other parameters will be taken with the HydroLab Surveyor II. These measurements will
be used as a quality assurance check of the DataSonde III.
Point-in-time water column profiles of dissolved oxygen concentration will be made each time a sampling
site Is visited by using a HydroLab Surveyor II equipped with a polarographic dissolved oxygen electrode.
The point-in-times measure will be used as a response indicator to estimate the extent of low dissolved
oxygen conditions at the time of sampling.
69
-------
4.2.2.4 Contaminants In Fish Flesh
One of the questions that the concerned public most frequently asks environmental managers is "Do fish
contain contaminants?" This question Is one of the assessment endpoints of EMAP The Indicator of
contaminants in fish flesh is of overwhelming importance to the assessment endpoint and is intended to
answer this question on a regional scale. It is a critical component of the Near Coastal conceptual model,
and analytical methods for analyzing contaminants are well-established. The largest concern with the
indicator is that we may be unable to catch fish at a sufficient number of the sites to warrant inclusion of this
measure in the program. Fish samples will be archived initially, and the decision to proceed with chemical
analysis will be conditioned upon achieving sufficient numbers.
In addition to serving as a response indicator for human usage of estuaries, contaminants in fish tissue
also will provide a measure of ecological exposure of valued biota to contaminants in the environment. As
previously noted, the presence of contaminants in sediments does not mean that they are available for
uptake into the food web. Contaminants present in fish tissue obviously have made their way into the food
web and are available to higher trophic levels. In addition, long-term, region-wide changes in the average
concentration of a particular contaminant in fish flesh over a number of years provides useful information
about contaminant input, bioavailability, or both (NOAA 1989). This information, however, must be
normalized for the influence of size, species-specific physiological differences, and other factors that are
known to influence contaminant concentrations In fish flesh (Sloan et al. 1988).
While the presence of contaminants in tissue implies exposure to bioavailable contaminants, the absence
of contaminants in fish flesh, without regard to other measures of impact, does not necessarily indicate the
absence of available contaminants. The reasons for this are:
o Many contaminants are taken up and metabolized by fish; consequently, even when fish are
constantly exposed to a contaminant, that contaminant may not accumulate in their flesh.
70
-------
o Contaminants may cause mortality before they accumulate in the flesh.
Many of the factors that influence contaminant concentration in fish flesh are species-, and compound-
specific. The indicator testing and evaluation program is designed to define the relative importance of
these factors to EMAP-NC.
Rsh for tissue analysis will be collected at each sampling location by using a 16-ft otter trawl. Trawls
will be towed for 10 minutes against the tide, at a boat speed of approximately 1 m/s. Up to five individuals
from each of 10 target species will be retained from each trawl and frozen for tissue analysis. The list of
target species is based on: (1) the expectation of capture at a high percentage of sampling stations, (2)
commercial/recreational value, and (3) use by one or more coastal states in tissue toxics monitoring
programs. Catch expectations were estimated by conducting a retrospective analysis of available finfish and
shellfish monitoring data collected by resource agencies in each of the Gulf States. Frequencies of
collection within each state's estuarine waters were estimated and then these frequencies were weighted by
the expected number of EMAP sampling stations within the state's waters to calculated the expected
frequencies of catch during the 1991 Louisianian Province Monitoring Demonstration. These frequencies
are shown in Table 4-4, with the anticipated target species delineated.
Not all of the target species collected and frozen will be processed for chemical analysis. Selection of
taxa for processing will depend largely on the frequency of capture of selected species at sampling sites;
more broadly distributed species will be favored. Bottom-dwelling fish will be processed preferentially
because: (1) they tend to be more stationary than pelagic fish, and (2) they generally accumulate
contaminants associated with bottom sediments at a faster rate and have a higher incidence of pathologic
abnormalities than pelagic fish. Four species, all benthic or epifaunal feeders, are expected in high
frequency (Le-, brown shrimp, Atlantic croaker, spot, and hardhead catfish) and contaminant analysis will
begin upon receipt of shipment of these species.
71
-------
The selection of additional target fish and shellfish species for chemical analyses will not be made until
after all collections have been completed and an evaluation of the target species collected at the greatest
number of stations by estuarine class, sediment type, and geographic subregion has been completed. A
species will have to be collected at >. 50% of the sampling site within an estuarine class to be of use in the
program.
Generally, five individuals from each of the target species will be composited for analysis; however, the
final decision on the number of fish to composite will be delayed until the number of each target species
collected at sampling sites and the size of the individuals is known. Muscle tissue will be dissected from
the dorsal region of the fish by using titanium blades, with care being taken not to incorporate skin, scales,
or bone into the sample. The chemicals measured and analytical procedures to be used are similar to those
used in the NOAA Status and Trends Program (Table 4-5).
The ingestion of contaminated tissues is also a source of these contaminants of wildlife (e.g., wading
birds, ospreys). Fillets could underestimate the levels of potential ingestion by only evaluating contaminant
loads in muscle tissue. Therefore, at the 16ITE stations, we will assess the magnitude of this underestimate
by analyzing the contaminants (Table 4-5) found in fillet, whole body, and livers of the target species.
4.2.2.5 Gross Pathology of Fish
The incidence of gross pathological disorders in fish such as fin erosion, somatic ulcers, cataracts, and
axial skeletal "aesthetic' abnormalities is an important set of criteria used by the public to judge the quality
of a water body. The indicator was advanced to developmental status because it is dearly important to
assessment endpoints, it is responsive, and there is a small incremental cost for testing the indicator, given
that trawling activity is already taking place at each site to capture fish for tissue analysis.
Gross pathological disorders have a scientific base; severely polluted habitats have a higher frequency
of gross pathological disorders than similar, less polluted habitats (Sinderman 1979; O'Connor et al. 1987;
72
-------
Buhler and Williams 1988; Malins et al. 1984,1988). Laboratory exposures to contaminants such as PCBs,
petroleum products, and pesticides, suggest that many gross pathological disorders are associated with
long-term contaminant exposure (Sinderman 1979; Capuzzo et al. 1988; MkJdaugh and Hemmer 1988). Fish
pathology is not ready for core status because several questions remain to be answered, including the
following:
o Can sufficient numbers and kinds of target species be collected within the EMAP-NC sampling
design and logistical constraints to provide meaningful data on the incidence of gross pathological
disorders?
o Is the incidence of pathological defects sufficiently high at polluted sites to be distinguished from
'clean* sites, given the level of sampling effort (i.e., previous studies at severely polluted sites have
found Incidences of 10% or less, and it is likely that we will collect fewer than 100 fish at most
sites).
Answers to these questions should provide the information needed to determine whether the fish gross
pathology indicator should be added to the core indicator suite during full implementation of EMAP-NC.
All individuals of each target species from each trawl sample will be examined externally for gross
pathological disorders including skin ulcers, fin erosion, gill abnormalities, visible tumors, cataracts, or
spinal abnormalities. Rsh found to have pathological defects will be preserved for detailed histopatholog-
Ical examination. Results of the detailed examination will be used to identify possible causes of aberrations
and to ensure that the conditions noted were not ones that could result from abrasion and physical damage
during collection.
In addition, we will evaluate the development of a health condition index for estuarine fish using the
methodology described by Goede (1989). This autopsy-based method combines information concerning
73
-------
Table 4-4.
Species
Catch frequencies (> 1.0%) of Gulf finfish based on available trawl data from Gulf States (1
1989) and anticipated catch frequencies (overall) during the 1991 Louisianian Province Monitoring
Demonstration.
FL
Trawl (ft)
Stretch Mesh (in)
Lined
Mesh Liner
No. of Trawls
No. of Stations
No. EMAP Stations
Brown Shrimp*
Atlantic Croaker*
White Shrimp*
Hardhead Catfish*
Blue Crab*
Spot*
Pinfish*
Southern Rounder*
Sand Seatrout*
Bay Anchovy**
Gafftopsail Cat*
Gulf Menhaden
Bay Whiff
Striped Anchovy**
Striped Mullet
Atlantic bumper
Spotted Seatrout
Lizardfish
B. Tonguefish
Pink Shrimp
Hogchoker
Threadfin Shad
Least Puffer
Squid
Sheepshead
Gulf Butterfish
Gulf crab
Silver Perch
Red Drum
Harvestfish
Crevalle Jack
Sp. Mackerel
Black Drum
Atlantic Threadfin
Bighead Searobin
Southern Kingfish
AL
16
2.00
No
24
8
34
80.00
66.70
0.00
53.30
26.70
46.70
60.00
20.00
0.00
6.70
0.00
13.30
0.00
6.70
0.00
0.00
0.00
13.30
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
6.70
0.00
20.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
13.30
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
16
1.50
Yes
140
10
24
59.29
60.71
49.29
37.86
60.71
45.00
8.57
34.29
58.57
74.29
22.14
9.29
46.43
20.71
0.00
20.71
0.00
31.43
35.71
15.00
22.14
13.47
29.29
11.10
0.00
2.86
11.10
9.52
0.00
11.68
5.71
2.14
0.00
17.14
12.86
12.14
MS
LA
TX
16
1.25
Yes
0.25
71
6
19
25.35
36.62
29.58
35.21
23.94
23.94
4.22
29.58
36.62
94.37
16.90
18.31
32.39
40.85
0.00
23.94
0.00
9.86
28.17
1.41
22.53
23.94
23.94
23.94
0.00
1.41
33.80
35.21
0.00
18.31
1.41
4.22
0.00
0.00
4.23
2.82
16
1.50
Yes
0.25
4445
20
73
75.59
34.80
64.57
28.64
34.81
23.24
75.75
74.00
33.84
45.22
21.46
16.27
38.87
28.50
11.50
12.00
10.00
7.70
4.90
11.50
10.10
11.56
2.20
2.20
0.00
3.30
0.00
0.00
0.00
1.20
1.13
3.33
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
20
1.50
No
—
400
10
48
85.00
95.00
85.00
92.50
95.00
92.50
95.00
67.50
70.00
0.00
67.50
72.50
10.00
0.00
32.50
10.00
32.50
5.00
5.00
12.50
0.00
0.00
5.00
5.00
27.50
0.00
0.00
0.00
15.00
0.00
0.00
5.00
10.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Overall
16.80
1.55
5080
54
198
71.83
58.19
53.23
50.11
50.11
46.76
48.14
40.64
40.06
35.88
28.58
28.74
25.49
18.09
12.12
11.66
11.57
11.09
10.05
9.22
8.57
8.20
7.87
6.82
6.67
5.13
4.59
4.53
3.64
3.62
3.53
3.10
2.42
2.08
1.96
1.74
* Target Species
** Poorly collected unless net is lined
74
-------
Table 4-5 Chemicals to be measured in tissues during the 1991 Louisianian Province Monitoring
Demonstration
DDT and its Metabolites Trace Elements
o,p'-DDD Aluminum
P,P'-DDD Arsenic
o,p'-DDE Cadmium
p,p'-DDE Chromium
o,p'-DDT Copper
p,p'-DDT Iron
Lead
Pesticides Mercury
Nickel
Aldrin Selenium
Alpha-Chlordane Silver
Trans-Nonachlor Tin
Dieldrin Zinc
Endrin
Endosulfan
Heptachlor
Heptachlor epoxide
Hexachlorobenzene
Undane (gamma-BHC)
Mirex
Toxaphene
PCS Congeners
(#) Location of CI's
824'
18 22'5
28 244'
52 22'55'
44 22'35'
66 23'44'
74 244'5
77 33'44'
99 22'44'5
101 22'355'
118 23'44'5
153 22'44'55'
105 233*44'
126 33'44'5
138 22'344'5'
187 22'34'55'6
128 22'33'44'
180 22'344'55'
170 22'33'44'5
195 22'33'44'56
206 2 2'3 3'4 4'5 5'6
209 2 2'3 3'4 4'5 5'6 6'
75
-------
basic blood parameters, length and weight, external pathology, and internal pathology to calculate an index
of health. We will employ this method at the 16 ITE sites to evaluate the efficacy of using the health
condition index as a future part of the base sampling effort.
4.2.2.6 Relative Abundance and Tissue Contaminant Concentrations of Lame Shellfish
Estuarine waters continue to produce large quantities of economically important shellfish even
though substantial portions of shellfish-producing areas in virtually every coastal state are closed because
of pollution impacts (Broutman and Leonard 1986; Leonard et al. 1989). The large shellfish indicators (i.e.,
abundance of large shellfish and tissue contaminant concentrations) were given developmental status
because of their importance to the assessment endpoint of human use, a small incremental cost, the
availability of proven methods to analyze contaminants, and the likely success of index site samples.
Problems that threaten shellfish include low dissolved oxygen concentration, toxic contamination
of sediments and tissues, and microbial and viral contamination of tissues. These insults reduce growth and
survival, adversely affecting production. They also reduce the value and quality of shellfish meats for human
consumption. The relative immobility of shellfish makes them good integrators of long-term environmental
conditions at the site where they were collected. The burrowing life style of many shellfish places them at
a location where exposure to hazards, such as low dissolved oxygen stress and contaminants, is likely to
be high. The occurrence of large-sized (I.e., older) shellfish at a site generally is considered to be an
indicator that environmental conditions at that site have been biologically acceptable over time.
Rlter feeding bivalves pump large quantities of water across the surface of their gills and remove
large amounts of paniculate material from the water (Galtsoff 1964; Dame et al. 1980; Ooem 1982;
Jorgensen et al. 1986; Doering et al. 1986). A substantial portion of the captured material is ingested, and
the associated contaminants may be accumulated in tissues to concentrations many times higher than those
in the water. Tissue contamination increases or decreases with respect to ambient concentrations (Roesijadi
et al. 1987; Pruell et al. 1987). Bivalve tissue contaminant concentrations are influenced by many factors
76
-------
including: species, size, season, sexual maturity, and environmental setting. If variation attributable to these
factors can be partitioned, and sufficient numbers of individuals can be collected, contaminant concentration
in the tissues of bivalves is a potentially useful core indicator of contamination.
The NOAA Status and Trends Program has been measuring contaminant concentrations in tissues
of bivalves (oysters and mussels) of higher salinity estuarine waters (> 10 ppt) since 1986. NOAA, however,
does not collect data on burrowing shellfish or shellfish from low salinity areas. As a part of the 1991
Louisianian Province Monitoring Demonstration, EMAP-NC will determine whether sufficient numbers of large,
easily collected filter-feeding bivalves occur in lower salinity waters to justify their inclusion in the NOAA
Status and Trends Program. Such a program would provide useful information on the extent and magnitude
of contaminant exposure in habitats that are particularly vulnerable to contaminant impacts (Schubel and
Carter 1984; Sharpe et al. 1984).
Large infaunal shellfish will be collected from each site by using a bivalve rake equipped with a
2.5 cm mesh liner. The duration of the dredge tows will be five minutes, which will allow the dredge to
sample as much sediment as possible without becoming clogged. All large shellfish collected in each
sample will be counted and identified to species level. Shell length of target species will be measured to
provide an indication of the age structure of the population.
Up to 20 individuals of each target species will be scrubbed of sediment and other material by using
a nylon or natural fiber brush, frozen, and shipped to the analytical laboratory on dry ice. These 20
individuals will represent the largest specimens available in the collection. In the laboratory, composited
whole-body tissue samples will be made by homogenizing soft parts, and the NOAA National Status and
Trends suite of bivalve tissue contaminants will be measured on homogenized tissue subsamples (Table 4-
5). As with fish, the decision to proceed with chemical analysis, and the species which will actually be
analyzed, will be determined by the number of sites at which bivalves are collected.
77
-------
4.2.2.7 Aesthetic Indicators (Flotsam. Jetsam. Odor. Water Clarity)
One of the human-use endpoints is visual aesthetics of an environment. A habitat is degraded for
human use if floating and deposited garbage and trash are abundant, if there are noxious odors, or if the
water is not clean in appearance. Because of their importance to assessment endpoints and low incremen-
tal cost for observation, these parameters were included as developmental indicators.
Although easy to observe and measure, flotsam, jetsam, and odor generally are not measured, and
almost nothing is known of their variability and stability as indicators. Rotsam is likely to be highly variable,
because it Is subject to movement by wind and tides, and its input rate may not be stable. Presence of
flotsam and odors will be noted at each EMAP-NC sampling site during the 1991 Louisianian Province
Monitoring Demonstration.
Water clarity will be measured by determination of Photosynthetically Active Radiation (PAR).
Photosynthetically active radiation (PAR) will be measured to indicate the degree to which turbidity can
inhibit photosynthetic activity. PAR wilf be measured with a LJ-COR irradiometer.
4.2.2.8. Extent of Submerged Aquatic Vegetation Beds
During the 1991 Louisianian Province Monitoring Demonstration, EMAP-NC will begin to map the
location and extent of the submersed aquatic vegetation (SAV) beds throughout the coastal region of the
Gulf of Mexico (exclusive of the region south of Tampa, FL). Review of available information (CSA and
Mattel Labs, 1985; Eleuterius, 1987; Dunton, 1990; Onuf and Quammen, 1990) provide some characterization
of the distribution of SAV beds in the 'Big Bend' region of Florida; western Mississippi Sound, Mississippi;
and, southern Laguna Madre, Texas. However, much of the Louisianian Province remains unstudied or
characterization of the existence of SAV beds is anecdotal. In addition, although similar methodologies have
been used in numerous SAV remote sensing studies, significant differences in methodology makes combined
use of the available information very difficult. This indicator Is designed to address two major issues:
78
-------
o Development of a baseline for the extent and distribution of SAV beds in the Louisianian
Province
o Development of a list frame of SAV beds for the development of a monitoring program to
ascertain the status and trends of these habitats.
The SAV mapping effort will consist of two parts; namely, (1) remote sensing overflights of coastal
regions of the Louisianian Province (including Chandeleur Sound, Breton Sound, and Apalachee Bay), and
(2) ground-truthing to verify the remotely sensed data. Overflights will be conducted in late summer/ early
fall and the overflight data will be used to produce maps, over a 4-year period, delineating the presence and
extent of SAV beds (minimal detection size of a bed will be 0.25 hecture). In 1991, the region between
Pensacola Bay, Fl_ and Apalachee Bay, Fl_ (inclusive) will be mapped and ground-truthed. Ground-truthing
will consist of visitation to a randomly selected number of beds to confirm existence and physical dimensions
as well as to measure dominant species, biomass, and density.
An effort will be made in Year 1 to determine appropriate indicators of SAV bed condition for
employment in Year 2 of the monitoring in the Louisianian Province by holding a SAV Indicator Workshop.
Candidate indicators include available underwater photosynthetically active radiation or PAR (Dunton 1990),
photosynthate reserve (Dawes and Lawrence 1979), and biomass and density of submersed seagrasses.
4.2.2.9. Coastal Wetlands
Because of the prominence of the 'no net loss' national policy concerning loss of wetlands habitat
and the importance of wetlands as a land margin ecosystem pressured by multiple anthropogenic stresses,
EMAP-NC Is working cooperatively with the EMAP Wetlands Resource Group to develop a pilot wetlands
project In coastal wetlands within the Louisianian Province. This pilot will be conducted by the EMAP-
Wetiands Group In September 1991 and the content of this pilot will be described in a subsequent document
compiled by the EMAP-Wetlands Resource Group.
79
-------
4.2.3 Research Indicators
Table 4-2 includes the list of the research indicators that will be used for the 1991 Louisianian
Province Monitoring Demonstration. A brief justification for the selection of each of these indicators, and
a summary of the measurement methods that will be used is provided below. The general purpose of
sampling these indicators during the 1991 Monitoring Demonstration is to obtain the information required
to determine whether they should be evaluated further, should be removed from the list of potential
indicators because of some deficiency, or should be incorporated into the developmental indicator suite.
4.2.3.1 Fish Community Composition
Estuarine fish have economic, recreational, and ecological value. Some are harvested; others serve
as forage for predators that have great aesthetic value (birds, mammals). Many fish species hold a position
in the top 30% to 50% of the estuarine food chain. Therefore, fish community indicators were advanced to
research status because of their importance to assessment endpoints and their role in the conceptual model
of estuarine resources.
Factors controlling species composition and abundance of estuarine fish communities are complex
and not well understood. However, most fish Geologists agree that the assemblages of fishes that occurs
at a sampling site are controlled by water quality parameters, contaminant concentrations and inputs, and
habitat conditions (Weinstein et a!. 1980). For example, stressed areas may have depauperate fish
communities or be dominated by pollution-tolerant species such as mummichogs or carp (Haedrich and
Haedrich 1974; Jeffries and Terceiro 1985; Weinstein et al. 1980; Livingston 1987). Polluted sites are thought
to contain less diverse and less stable fish assemblages than unpolluted sites. The degree to which
information on fish community composition can be used to assess the status of estuarine environments on
regional scales is unknown. A major purpose of evaluating fish community composition as part of the
Louisianian Province Monitoring Demonstration is to determine whether regional scale information on fish
80
-------
community characteristics can be used as an indicator of environmental quality. If fish community data
could be used In this manner, it would be particularly meaningful to a broad range of audiences.
4.2.3.2 HistODatholoav of Fish Population?
While gross fish pathology is a potential response Indicator of environmental status (O'Connor et
al. 1987) that is easy and economical to measure, it may not provide insight into the potential cause of the
pathology. To address this concern, EMAP-NC will perform detailed histopathological examinations of
randomly selected individuals of target and non-target fish species at the indicator testing and evaluation
sites. All individuals of each target species that "fail" the field gross pathology examination and up to 25
randomly selected individuals of each target species that "pass" the field examination at the indicator testing
and evaluation sites will undergo a detailed histopathological examination. In addition, up to 10 randomly
selected individuals from non-target species collected at these sites will be examined similarly.
Histopathology advanced to research indicator status on the same criteria as gross pathology; however, it
Is not being implemented on a regional basis until it can be shown to enhance our ability to discriminate
between polluted and unpolluted sites.
Representative tissue samples will be taken from specimens and processed for histological analysis.
Tissue samples will be dehydrated in an ethand gradient, cleared in a xylene substitute, infiltrated, and
embedded in paraffin. Sections will be cut at 6 am on a rotary microtome, stained with Harris' hematoxylin
and eosin, and examined microscopically by a trained pathologist The results of this microscopic
examination will be used to assess the relationship between the incidence of external abnormalities and
internal histopathological abnormalities, to characterize the types of external/internal pathologies, and to
create a baseline of histopathological information for the Louisianian Province. Based on these findings, a
determination will be made regarding whether histopathological examination warrants further considera-
tion by EMAP-NC.
81
-------
4.2.3.3. Suboraanismal Bioindicators
Considerable basic research effort is being conducted on a wide range of suborganismal
bioindicators (e.g., genetic, biochemical, physiological) that will represent precursors to major changes in
organismal condition (e.g., mortality, growth, reproduction) and/or population condition (e.g., abundance,
production, reproductive success). The major advantage of bioindicators is that they may be an early
warning indicator of exposure to environmental stress. Monitoring in the Louisianian Province in 1991 will
concentrate on testing the applicability of selected bioindicators to assess their reliability and sensitivity as
ecological indicators in the context of regional and national monitoring.
EMAP-NC is interacting with the EPA Research Laboratories at Gulf Breeze, FL; Narragansett, Rl;
and Ouluth, MM, the EPA Monitoring Support Laboratory at Cincinnati, OH, and the National Marine Fisheries
Service Laboratory in Seattle, WA, to develop a basic strategy that will help to incorporate suborganismal
indicators into the developmental stage of EMAP indicators. An advisory group, comprised of
representatives from these laboratories, has been formed to develop a short list of bioindicators that could
be evaluated by EMAP-NC. This advisory group developed a list of 30 potential bioindicators of exposure
and effects (Table 4-6) along with their judgement concerning the readiness of these parameters for field
usage. As a result of this effort, the monitoring demonstration in the Louisianian province will examine the
efficacy of several bioindicators: bile flourescence, blood chemistry, stable isotopes, detailed histopathology
including hepatic lesions, and skeletal development During the 1991 monitoring in the Louisianian Province,
these four bioindicators will be examined for selected target finfish species from the 16ITE sites (i.e., good
and poor quality sites based on best judgement). The results of these analyses will provide information
concerning the ability of the selected bioindicators to discriminate between sites characterized by "good'
environmental quality and "poor" environmental quality.
82
-------
Table 4-6. Priority ecological indicators selected as applicable for EMAP-NC monitoring.
Indicator
Availability for Testing
Interest
Exposure
Base HE
Stable C&N Isotopes
Tissue Hydrocarbons
Hepatopancreas Glutathione
Stress Proteins
Bile Rourescence
Hepatic Hydrocarbons
Hepatic P-450
Hepatic Glutathione
Effects
DMA Adducts
DNA Strand Breaks
Genetic Diversity
Blood Chemistry
Blood Protein Adducts
Plasma Chemistry
Nitroblue Tetrazollum
Organism of
Microorganisms
Crustaceans/Molluscs
Crustaceans
Fish
Fish
Fish
Fish
Fish
Crustaceans/Molluscs
Fish
j
Molluscs
Fish
Fish
Fish
Fish
Molluscs
Hemocyte Salinity Regulation Molluscs
PIKA
Brown Cells
Neoplastlc Lesions
Detailed Hlstopathdogy
Early Hepatic Lesions
Molluscs
Molluscs
Molluscs
Fish
Fish
No
Yes
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
Yes
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes*
Yes*
Yes*
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Parameter already field validated to limited extent
83
-------
Table 4-6. Continued
Indicator
Condition Indices
RNA:DNA Ratios
Protein Synthesis
Sperm Motility
Germ Cell Analysis
Organosomatic Index
Skeletal Development
Organism of
Interest
Molluscs
Molluscs
Fish
Fish
Fish
Fish
Availability for Testing
Jli
No
No
No
No
No
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
84
-------
4.2.4 Stressor Indicators
The stressor indicators, including an overview of the specific parameters to be estimated and their
sources, are defined in Table 4-7. This list of stressors includes factors associated with natural climatic and
hydrographic data (e.g., river discharge), basic land use patterns and utilization rates (e.g., population
density), commercial and regulatory information (e.g., shellfish bed classification), point source loadings
(e.g., industrial effluents), and non-point source loadings (e.g., agricultural runoff). Most of the information
on stressor indicators relating to pollutant loadings will be obtained from an update of NOAA's National
Coastal Pollution Discharge Inventory (NCPDI). The data sources NOAA includes in the NCPDI are
extensive; a partia] list of these sources is presented in Table 4-8. These stressor indicators will not be
sampled concurrently in the field with other indicators by the Louisianian Province sampling teams.
4.2.5 Future Indicators
In a long-term status and trends monitoring program, it is important to maintain continuity in the
indicators that are measured. However, it is also important to continually re-evaluate whether the techniques
used to measure those indicators remain the most cost-effective and precise, particularly as technology
improves (NRC 1990a). In addition, candidate indicators must be examined continually to determine
whether their addition to the program would improve our ability to characterize environmental conditions and
identify factors contributing to that condition.
EMAP-NC will maintain two types of indicator development activities as the program progresses. One
will concentrate on development of new candidate indicators, or studies to advance candidate indicators to
research indicator status. This program will emphasize basic research, will be conducted primarily through
extramural research, and will be funded through ORD or the EPA grants program that is administered
independently of, and integrated across, resource groups. In contrast studies conducted within EMAP-
NC will be more applied and will concentrate on tests to advance research indicators to developmental or
core status. EMAP-NC efforts will build upon basic research conducted in laboratory settings or at kxal
scales by testing and evaluating promising indicators on a regional or national scale. While it is difficult to
85
-------
Table 4-7. Synposls of potential data sources for stressor Indicators
Stressor Indicator
Specific Parameters
Source(s)
Freshwater Discharge
Volume of Inflow
Atmospheric Temperature
Wind Speed and Direction
Atmospheric Deposition
Daly mean, median, and range
at the earth's surface for key
locations within each region
Wind speed and direction at the
earth's surface for key locations
within each region
Rainfall In cms. loading of
atmospheric pollutants
o U.S. Geological Survey (USGS)
- National Stream Quality Accounting Network (NASQAN)
- Water Data Reports
- National Water Data Exchange (NAWDEX)
o National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)
- National Coastal Pollution Discharge Inventory (NCPD)
o National Climate Center Archives (NCCA)
o National Climate Center Archives (NCCA)
o National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)
- Local Cllmatological Data
o National Climate Center Archives (NCCA)
o Natlnal Atmospheric Deposition Program (NADP)
o Multi-state Atmospheric Power Production Pollution Study
o Utility Add Precipitation Program (UAPSP)
-------
Table 4-7. (Continued)
Stressor Indicator
Specific Parameters
Source(s)
00
Polutant Loadings by
Categories Including:
o Point Sources
• Industrial Discharge
by Category
- Municipal Sewage
o Non-Point Sources
-Urban Runoff
• Non-Urban Runoff
(I.e., agriculture.
forests, etc.)
- Irrigation Return
Rows
Land Use Patterns
Human Population Density
Fishery Landings
Shettflsh Bed Classification
Flow, biological oxygen
demand, organic pollutants,
number of wastewater treatment plants,
number of Industrial dischargers.
number of power plants
Area, % urban. % agriculture,
% forest, % wetland. % water,
% barrier, number of major and
minor urban areas
Density, density by occupation
and Industrial category
Commercial and Recreational
catch statistics
Area. % approved for harvesting
o National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)
- National Coastal Pollution Discharge Inventory (NCPDI)
o National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)
- National Coastal Pollution Discharge Inventory (NCPDI)
o U.S. Census of Population
o United Nations Demographic Yearbook
o U.S. Census of Manufacturing
o U.S. Agriculture Census
o National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)
o National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS)
o National Shettflsh Register of Classified Estuarine Waters
-------
Table 4-8. Major data sources for the National coastal Pollution
Discharge Inventory (modified from Basta et al, 1985)
Source Category
Institutions
Major Data Sources
Pollutant! In Stremflow
Enuring the Coaatal Zom
US. Gtafcafcal Stn*l
State Water Quality A«tacki
USGS National Stnan Qualty AoEnuntfnf N and Regional
Plannkuj Offlccf
Induatry arfanbBdoai
EPA Data laaia, RaaorU, and Rafuladnni
- NPDES Dteharfi Monitoring Kaaorta (DMR)
- Ptrmlt Covilianct Sjfttm (PCS)
• IMlNaadtScraj
• indiiatrlal FactlHki Dtoetarft (IFD) Flk
. SKtkm HI, 1M, u4 M3t Bacta PBUM
. aniunt thBlttUDM CuMtUm. aW S
SUtt Water Quality iaaartl
Baata Painkat laawli
Urban Noopolnl Runoff
• US. Ga>tafk>l SITTCJ
• Nidoml Wailh*r Snrnj
>BuramoftB«C»Wf
• State Water Quality A«adM
• Sactkn 2M and Riftonal
Planning Offleai
CPA NalkMal Urkaa BuMff Pi*r*B (N1AP)
EPA NatkMwMt EoluaOw «T Cea*bbM« Snw Owrflom
and UrhM Stornr««Ur Rmoff
USGS Lan4 UM Data aW Amlytto Profram (LUDA)
1TI1 riimn nf rnpnaillaa
1»*3 and 1M3 County aW OtJ Date look
' 1>«J EPA Natat SUTMJ
NOAA Local CBmatolojIral H*t*
Non'iirban ^foapou]t RunalT
Nadonal Wcadw S,'Elaalal CoacantratloB IB Sollf'
Atrkultuiml brtauta Offlca Racoroa tor ftrtlllatr and
PaMkMtUaa
NOAA LacaJ dlnaibilaflal Data
Oatj SoU. an4 Sarnjt Maai
Sacttal Mi and RifkMl Pkarnta* Stadha
Irrl(atkM Rttorn Flam
•OS. DtaarbntBt tt AcrfcaMun
• SoU CoaaaratlM Stfrka
> EPA R^taMl OOkaa
• USGS Rtftooal Offlni
liiialTTiln Maiup I
Matt*
USGS, Slate, and R^loaal Water Quality Manajmunt Slndki
OllandGuOpcralon
• US Giotoffc»I Sirrtal
• EPA Rational OOtca>
US COM Guard
Slate OH and Gat Profrmni
> Amtrkaa PttrohiaB baUbita
USCG PoUmut bcldot Rcnortof SfOm (PBS)
iri"f! Tnaair iltiia Ittrlatiia i1n lainl nil mil ruduilkai
tfc*Off*onOn«ralan
EPA DrUta* Platform Ptrmla and PUfcrai Dteharp
ChamdarfamlkM Studio
API Inoator; of Wrtli and Drflupi StattaUci
State OU and Gai Pntm FBa
OOC Pollutant Dbcfaar|t CtarmctertaUoa Studlaa
MarlntTrmorportaUoa
US. Caut Guard
UN hrtmatto
OraaataillN
Port AataorMia ki US. and
Mote
MARADV,
uses
COC,
r Data Fib
Dndflnf Optraton
UA Ar»y Carpi of Eaflnatn
EPA Rtcloaal Offlea
UN InUmanonal Marlttant
Ortanbaaoa
EPAOcauOu
•BFHaf
COE Rtsort at CoaarM, • AdmtaMntkm of
DHB0UMI Adtrtdaa1*
IMO Dndca MaUrW Dhnonl UBOIK
Abbreviations: SCS, U.S. Department of Agriculture Soil Conservation Service; API, American Petroleum Institute; OOC,
Offshore Operators Committee; USCG, U.S. Coast Guard; MARAD.U.S. Department of Commerce
Maritime Administration; COE, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers; IMO, UN International Maritime
Organization (formerly IMCO, Intergovernmental Maritime Consultative Organization).
88
-------
be precise about future plans. It appears likely that indicator development within EMAP-NC will focus on
four areas during the next few years: (1) suborganismal measures such as biomarkers, (2) remote sensing
of primary producers, and (3) measurement of status and trends for wetlands and SAV, (4) evaluation of
additional contaminants.
Although suborganismal measures (e.g., blood chemistry and bile contaminants) will be introduced as
a indicator during the 1991 Louisianian Province Monitoring Demonstration, the scope will be limited in the
initial year. Considerable basic research effort Is being conducted on a wide range of suborganismal
measures, that includes genetic, biochemical and tissue biomarkers, and many of these have been found
to be promising Indicators of environmental stress. However, many of these bloindicators are general
biological responses to many types of stress. Research Into diagnostic specificity is needed to provide
useful insight into the types of stress (exposure) causing the response. The major advantage of biomarkers
is that they may provide early warning indicator of exposure to environmental stress. At present, EMAP-
NC is using measures that provide a reliable indication that an impact has occurred. In the future, however,
we undoubtedly will need to Incorporate more sensitive measures to identify which sites presently
unimpacted are likely to be impacted by further stress and to evaluate the sensitivity of individual
bioindicators along stress/contaminant gradient. EMAP-NC is Interacting with the EPA Research Labora-
tories in Gulf Breeze, Fl_ Cincinnati, OH, and Narragansett, Rl, and the NMFS Research Laboratory in
Seattle, WA, to develop a basic research strategy that will help to incorporate suborganismal indicators into
the program in future years.
Primary production is an important component of the estuarine conceptual model but is not being
measured in the Louisianian Province Monitoring Demonstration because of large temporal variability in
conventional measures that could be used to estimate the status and trends for primary producers.
However, there appear to be two feasible methods that might be used to overcome this problem: (1) remote
sensing techniques for estimating status and trends in chlorophyll stocks (a measure of algal biomass), and
(2) automated in situ fluorometers with digitizing capability. Remote sensing of chlorophyll by satellite has
the advantage of allowing multiple estimates of a site over a season without having to visit the site once
89
-------
initial ground-truthing was completed. This would permit integration over time at a reasonable cost. The
technique has been tested to a limited degree, with mixed success. The principal problem appears to be
one of turbidity. Automated fluorometers would solve the temporal variability problem for primary production
in the same way that the deployed dissolved oxygen meters solve this problem for dissolved oxygen.
Analogous instrumentation for fluorescence that includes data logging capability is just becoming available
on the market, and EMAP-NC is working with several potential manufacturers to examine the feasibility of
such an instrument.
The EMAP-NC Louisianian Province Team will be working with NOAA's Coastwatch Program and the U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service's Wetlands Research Laboratory to identify core, developmental, and research
indicators for submersed aquatic vegetation communities. Our intent is to implement necessary indicators
of SAV in 1992 once we have delineated the extent and locations of the SAV beds in the Louisianian
Province in 1991.
EMAP-NC in the Louisianian Province will be evaluating the need for the assessment of additional
contaminants beyond those listed in Table 4-3. Additional contaminants would focus primarily on pesticides,
insecticides, and herbicides widely used in the Gulf States. However, some industrial contaminants of
special interest (e.g., dioxin) could be evaluated by joint efforts between EMAP-NC and the entity requesting
information on that contaminant. In this case, EMAP-NC would collect the samples and the requesting
organization would provide the laboratory analysis.
90
-------
5.0 LOGISTICS
5.1 Sampling Sub-regions
The Louisianian Province sampling will be conducted from July 8 through September 15, 1991. Three
sampling regions (Fig. 5-1) have been established within the Louisianian Province which include only the
estuarine and tidal river portions of the near coastal resources. These sub-regions are: (1) Eastern Gutf of
Mexico, (2) Delta, and (3) Western Gulf of Mexico.
o The East Gulf Region extends from Andote Key, FL to the western boundary of the Mississippi
Sound
o The Delta Region includes the Lake Borgne/Lake Pontchartrain complex and continues around
southern Louisiana to Terrebone Bay, LA including Chandeleur and Breton sounds.
o The West Gulf Region starts at Terrebone Bay, LA and follows the coastline of the Gulf of Mexico
to the Rio Grande. TX.
5.2 Sampling Logistics
5.2.1 Crew Composition
There will be two sampling teams operating in the Louisianian Province in 1991. Team #1 (comprised
of personnel from ERL/GB, the Gulf Coast Research Lab, and the University of Mississippi) will be
responsible for the East Gulf Region; Team #2 (comprised of personnel from Texas A&M University and
Louisiana State University) will be responsible for the Delta and West Gulf Regions. The East Region team
will consist of two 5-member crews, each alternating on 6-day sampling schedules. There will be a Crew
Chief in each crew who will be responsible for the overall performance of the crew with one Crew Chief (i.e.,
the Team Leader) having overall responsibility for the team. The West Region will also have two teams but
91
-------
Mississippi
Louisiana
Figure 5-1. Regional divisions of the Louisianian Province.
92
-------
these teams will operate simultaneously for 8-12 day periods within a common sampling area. For example,
both vessels used In the West Region could sample the 16 stations in the Lake Pontchartrain area over a
four day sampling window. The west regions will have two Crew Chiefs and two Team Leaders. The Crew
Chiefs will be stationed on the two vessels in the Delta/West Region while the Team Leaders may be
stationed in either the mobile laboratory associated with the two vessels, or on the vessels themselves.
At a minimum each will consist of: a Crew Chief (who may also be the Team Leader), 2 boat crew
members and 2 shore crew members. The Crew Chief has the responsibilities of boat captain, specifically,
the safety and performance of the crew, boat operation and navigation, adherence to sampling protocols,
maintenance of the boat, vehicles, and assigned field equipment during field operations. At least one
member of the boat crew will be familiar with finfish and shellfish taxonomy so that he/she can readily
identify these species in the field. The boat crew, under the supervision of the Crew Chief will deploy and
retrieve gear to collect samples and hydrographic data, process and store samples for the interim period
after collection and before release to the shore crew, and perform maintenance on the boat, vehicle, and
field equipment.
The shore crew will be responsible for: computer entry of previously collected field data, transmission
of data files to ERL/GB, preparation and shipment of samples that have been previously collected,
preparation of data sheets and sample containers for subsequent field activities and delivery of samples to
overnight shippers. The qualifications of all crew members may be mixed so that back-up capabilities are
available for each skill position. All crew members will have basic first aid/CPR training skills.
5.2.2 Equipment
Each team will be supplied by ERL/GB with all equipment and supplies required to perform the sampling.
This will include:
o 26 ft sampling vessel (SeaArk aluminum workboat) equipped with a
heavy duty hydraulic winch assembly (astern)
93
-------
- Loran navigation, with backup
- 2 VHP radios, 1 of which is handheld
- Bottom depth and profile recorder
- 7.4 L (330 HP) V8 engine
- Bravo II outdrive with 20' propeller
- All required safety equipment and lines
- Corrosion resistant drive-on trailer with brakes
o Heavy duty 4-wheel drive pickup truck equipped with:
- 454 V8 engine
- Dual rear wheels
- Towing package for up to 12,000 Ibs
- Camper shell for equipment storage
o Passenger van for transport and exchange of field crews
o Truck set up as a mobile preparation lab and shipping/receiving site. The truck will be
equipped with
- VHP radio for communication with the boat
- Grid 386 portable computer
- Maintenance tools
- Calibration kits and spare parts
- Nautical charts
- Coolers
- Reagents
- Sample and shipping containers
- Safety equipment
94
-------
o Sampling gear
- (2) 16' otter trawls
- Modified Van Veen sediment sampler
- Bivalve rake/dredge
- Hydrolab Surveyor II
- Multiple Hydrolab Data Sonde 3
- Ucor Quantum Irradiometer
ERL/GB will maintain a backup sampling vessel to be provided to the teams as necessary. Spares for
selected pieces of sampling gear will be provided to each team with additional spares to be kept at ERL/GB.
In the event of equipment failure the replacement equipment will either be shipped overnight or delivered
to the team in the field. The repair of the disabled equipment can then be expedited.
5.3 Sampling Activities
5.3.1 Station Types
Within each of the sampling subregions, there are 4 types of stations to be sampled: (1) Base Sampling
Stations, (2) Indicator Testing and Evaluation (ITE) Stations, (3) Index Stations, and (4) Supplemental Spatial
Stations. The distribution of samples in the 1991 Louisianian Province Monitoring Demonstration among
these station types is shown in Table 5-1.
Each of the base stations has been selected according to the sampling strategy described in Chapter
3.0. The base stations provide the basis for the analysis to be performed to quantify the ecological status
of the estuarine waters of the Louisianian Province. Ten sampling locations for the base characterization
lie in water < 1.0 m in depth. As a result, these sites cannot be sampled using the proposed techniques.
These sites will provide an estimate of the 'unsampleable* area of a province. ITE stations are intended to
represent extremes 0.e., 'good' and "poor* condition) in both dissolved oxygen and contaminant
95
-------
Table 5-1. Distribution of 1991 Louislanian Province Monitoring Demonstration samples among station
types and sampling sub-regions.
Number of Samples
Station Type East Gulf Delta West Gulf Total
Base 37* 40 35e 112
Indicator Testing
& Evaluation
Index
Spatial Supplements
TOTAL
8
20
13"
78
1
17
0
57
0
20'
0
63
16
57
13
198
" 3 stations are too shallow to sample
b 3 stations are too shallow to sample
0 7 stations are too shallow to sample
d 3 stations are too shallow to sample
96
-------
concentrations due to industrial contamination and/or agricultural runoff. The ITE will be sampled for all of
the »ame monitoring parameters as the base sampling sites, as well as for several 'research' indicators.
Index stations are judgementally determined locations (i.e., non-random) chosen in each tidal river segment
and small estuary sampled. They were selected to represent the locations in these systems most likely to
display "poor" environmental condition based on local geomorphometry (i.e., sediment type and depth).
Three Index sites are located in estuarine systems that are very shallow (i.e., < 1 m) over their entire surface.
These sites will represent the proportions of systems in the Louisianlan Province that cannot be sampled by
the present program.
Supplemental Spatial Stations consist of 13 locations in Mobile Bay, AL These samples will be taken
to evaluate the effect of the selected sampling grid density on the estimation of regional conditions. The
monitoring parameters sampled at the spatial supplement stations will be the same as the base stations.
This information will be used to identify appropriate sample density for systematic sampling for the
Louisianian Province. Three sampling sites for spatial supplements are located in less than 1 m of water
and, thus, represent unsampleable areas.
5.3.2 Sample Types
Seven different sampling activities will be performed during the 1991 Louisianian Province Monitoring
Demonstration. The specific activities performed depend upon the type of station sampled (Table 5-2).
Hydrographic profiles, include vertical water column profiles of salinity, temperature, dissolved oxygen, pH,
and light energy and will be taken at all 198 sampling sites. Continuous '24-hour* monitoring of bottom
dissolved oxygen concentration will be completed at all sampling sites. Deployed continuous monitors will
be placed at a site prior to 6 pm and retrieved after 6 AM on the following day. Fish trawling will be
performed at all sites and will collect pelagic fish and invertebrates to determine composition and
abundance, perform gross pathology screening on individual fish and shellfish, select specimens for
subsequent histopathological analysis, collect tissue for contaminant analysis, and collect specimens for
suborganismal bioindicator assessment. Sediment grabs will be taken at all sites. These grabs will provide
97
-------
Table 5-2. Activity performed at each station type to be sampled in the Louisianlan Province.
Activity
Hydrographic
Profile
Continuous DO
Fish Trawling
Sediment Grabs
Bivalve Sample
Additional
sediment
Research Indicators
Station at Which Activity Is Performed
Base Indicator
Base Indicator
Base Indicator
Base Indicator
Base Indicator
Indicator
Indicator
Index LSS1
Index LSS
Index LSS
Index LSS
Index LSS
1 Large Supplemental Stations
98
-------
material for benthic Identification of organisms to determine abundance, community composition, and
biomass; contaminant analysis; sediment characterization; and, toxicity testing of sediment with mysids and
amphipods. Large bivalve sampling will be conducted at all sites. An oyster dredge will be used to collect
bivalves from the site to assess abundance and composition as well as to collect tissue for subsequent
contaminant analysis. Additional sediment grabs will be taken at ITE sites toprovide sediment to perform
toxicity tests with penaeid shrimp species and pdychaetes. This collection is in addition to the sediment
collected for the mysid and amphipod testing performed at all base and ITE sites. Additional samples from
target fish and shellfish species (i.e., blood, bile) will be taken for analysis of suborganismal bioindicators
which may provide an indication of the sub-lethal effects on the target populations. In addition, some
research and developmental indicator measures will be collected by personnel not associated with the
Louisianian Province sampling teams. These include: (1) aerial mapping of submerged aquatic vegetation
beds (samples collected by NOAA/NMFS and Fish and Wildlife Service personnel), and (2) ground-truthlng
of submerged aquatic vegetation beds (samples collected by NOAA/NMFS, USFWS, and resource agencies
of Florida, Alabama, Mississippi, Louisiana, and Texas).
5.3.3 Field Sample Handling
Specific handling and processing procedures must be followed for each sample type. The actual
methologies for the collection of the different samples will be described in the field manual for The
Louisianian Province (Macauley et al. 1991 a). Some samples may require immediate attention while others
may be held for a period of time. A homogenized benthic sediment sample comprised of several sediment
grabs will be split for shipment for subsequent toxicity testing and contaminant analysis. These sediment
samples will be kept on ice, returned to the mobile laboratory where they will be frozen and shipped within
24 hours for overnight delivery to the appropriate processing laboratory. Fish and shellfish tissue for
contaminant analysis must be quick-frozen and shipped for overnight delivery.
It seems reasonable that each crew, at the end of its 6-day rotation should be responsible for shipping
the remainder of the samples they have accumulated during the week. These samples, shipped weekly,
99
-------
consist of: histopathology samples which had been preserved immediately following collection by opening
the gut and placing in Dietrich's Solution; benthic samples for faunal identification which were immediately
preserved in formalin/ rose bengal; and benthic samples for sediment characterization which have been kept
on ice. Each crew should ship these samples, along with the backup data diskettes and sheets, using
overnight delivery on the last day of their rotation.
5.4 Field QA/QC
During sampling activities, the boat crew will receive a check sheet provided to them daily by the shore
crew. This sheet will include (1) the stations to be sampled, (2) type of sampling to be performed, (3)
number of samples to be taken, and (4) the navigational information on the station. Prelabeled sample
containers and data sheets will also be provided. These containers and data sheets will correspond to the
data on the check sheet. It is the responsibility of the Crew Chief to see that the proper jars are filled with
the correct samples and that they are correctly preserved. This check sheet may also serve as a daily log
of the sampling activities with spaces for comments and other pertinent information. Once the samples have
been turned over to the shore crew, a hard-copy chain of custody / shipping form will be completed for
each sample or batch of samples as they are shipped. This chain of custody form will document the
location of the sample and its condition at the sample's destination. One copy of the form will be retained
by the shipper another by the recipient; both, in turn, will forward a copy to the operations center at
ERL/GB.
All equipment will be maintained and calibrated according to the procedures identified in the Louisianian
Province field manual (Macauley et al. 1991 a). A log for the maintenance and calibration of the equipment
will be established. The calibration log will document all of the information regarding how, when, and why
the standardization was performed.
Independent checks by EMAP-Louisianian Province QA personnel will be performed periodically on each
team during sampling activities; upon initiation of the sampling activities, each team will be visited and spot
100
-------
checks will be performed during the remainder of the sampling period. QA personnel will generate blind
duplicate samples to be sent to each of the analytical labs for analysis.
Data entered into the computer in the field and electronically transmitted to ERL/GB will be spot checked
in the field by another team member. Once the data are at the laboratory they will be checked against the
original data sheets that were sent in from the field. The Louisianian Province Information Management
System (LPIMS) data manager at ERL/GB will be responsible for performing this check.
5.5 Communication
There has been a toll-free commercial telephone number established at the field operation center (FOC)
located at ERL/GB (1-800-321-3968). This will be backed up with a standard commercial number (904-
934-9200). The toll free line will allow field teams to contact the operations center from any telephone. Field
teams will be required to check-in daily with the field coordinator or designee upon the initiation and
termination of sampling activities. The Crew Chief will report on the progress of the days activities and any
problems encountered. Communications with the operations support staff, to help the field teams to resolve
any problems they encounter, will also be facilitated by the toll-free line.
The Field Coordinator, or his designee, will be available after normal hours of operation via a paging
system or a portable phone system by contacting the operations center's number (1-800-321-3968) which
will be automatically forwarded to the paging service. This will allow the Field Coordinator to receive urgent
or emergency communications during the period in which sampling activities are performed. In order to
maintain the rigid sampling schedule, decisions concerning altering sampling stations or changing the
schedule must be made in a timely manner.
At the end of each crew's 6-day rotation, the Crew Chief will check in with the Field Coordinator to
discuss the progress of the stations sampled. The Crew Chief will also submit a weekly status report
101
-------
covering the stations sampled, problems that were encountered and the solutions used to resolve them, and
the condition of the boat and crew.
ERL/GB operations center will maintain a toll free communications line to the VAX 11-785 for data
communications. Shore crews will use this line to transfer data electronically to the mainframe data base
at LPIMS on a daily basis. In the event of the VAX being down there will also be a commercial number
which they may use and communicate the data to a backup PC.
Data collected in the field will be tracked and identified according to Province - Year - Station Number -
Station Class - Type of Sample - and replicate number. There may be times when individual organisms
collected in the trawl or dredge may need to be tracked. Each of these individuals will be given a unique
sample number in addition to the standard identification. This sample identification information will be used
to track samples from time of collection where the samples will be placed into prelabeled containers, through
shipping and receiving reports, data entry, and reporting of final results.
The Crew Chief is responsible for air data collected and entered on board the boat, along with assuring
that the samples are in the correct containers. Once ashore, the data and samples are transferred to the
shore crew which is then responsible for entering the data into the computer and storing/shipping the
samples. A chain of custody form will be established for each set of samples shipped, this chain of custody
form may also be used as a shipping report. The report must contain airbill information, sample information,
condition at shipment, and signature of shipper.
Laboratories receiving samples will report the condition of the samples upon receipt by entering the data,
in specified formats, into the computerized sample tracking system and by returning a copy of the chain of
custody form to ERL/GB. The processing laboratories will be required to maintain the established sample
identification with the samples and report their results using the same identification. Problems with the
shipping or receiving of samples will be recorded and reported to the Field Coordinator.
102
-------
ERL/GB will receive copies of all reports and data both electronically and by hard copy. In this manner
the status of each sample or station data will be tracked using two methods to minimize the loss of
information should one of the systems prove unreliable.
5.6 Equipment Inventory and Maintenance
A full equipment inventory will be maintained by the operations staff at ERL/GB. Equipment that is
required to perform the sampling activities will be assigned to the sampling teams. The Team Leader will
sign for the issued equipment and maintain an inventory of the issue along with the Field Coordinator. Team
Leaders and their respective institutions are responsible for the issued equipment and they will maintain the
equipment in a serviceable condition during the period of issue. The Field Coordinator will be responsible
for replacement and major repairs of equipment, as needed. The Crew Chiefs are responsible for reporting
maintenance problems to the Field Coordinator. A maintenance log will be furnished with each piece of
major equipment and it is the responsibility of the Crew Chief to maintain the equipment and update the log
while the equipment is assigned to the team. The operations staff at ERL/GB will schedule all annual
maintenance of the major equipment. All equipment will be returned to ERL/GB at the completion of
sampling and will be stored at ERL/GB until the equipment is needed for subsequent sampling periods.
The Field Coordinator will be responsible for issuing supplies of consumables (sampling containers,
shipping containers, data diskettes and sheets) to each team. He will maintain an inventory of consumables
adequate to replenish the sampling teams while they are in the field.
5.7 Reconnaissance
Suspected problem sites in each of the regions were visited prior to April 1991. Access to the sample
sites will be evaluated by field operations staff to determine the availability of adequate boat launching
facilities, fuel availability, a usable route to travel to the site, and availability of unrestricted access. The
adequacy of the area for remote staging wHI be evaluated in terms of availability of acceptable
103
-------
communications, lodging, suppliers of ice and dry ice, access to overnight delivery services, and mechanical
repair services.
A mock sampling was performed during the reconnaissance by operations center personnel to evaluate
whether the proposed sampling schedule can be accomplished. Ten stations in the eastern Gulf were
successfully sampled over a six-day period by a boat crew of three with a land-support crew of two.
5.8 Training
Training will be performed in two segments at ERL/GB. Crew Chiefs will undergo 2 weeks of training
from May 20-31, followed by 3 weeks of crew training from June 1-21. Training manuals have been
prepared (Macauley et al. 1991 b) and there is some overlap in the material covered at both training sessions.
Because of earlier training, the Crew Chiefs will be able to help guide their the crew members through some
of the training material and begin building team identities and expertise. The emphasis during the training
will be on 'hands on* field activities with the actual gear to be used (e.g., boat handling, use of the Van Veen
grabs, shipping).
5.9 Contingency Plan
The Crew Chiefs will implement all decisions about alterations to the sampling schedule made by the
Field Operations Center staff. Crew Chiefs will have final word on determining whether sampling at a
particular site on a particular day can be accomplished within an acceptable margin of safety. A problem
leading to possible cancellation of a sampling event is severe weather. Unless small craft advisories have
been issued, Crew Chiefs generally will proceed with scheduled sampling activities. If inclement weather
is anticipated, Crew Chiefs will be encouraged to sample only at sites that are sheltered or dose to shore.
Decision to proceed in Inclement weather will be at the individual Crew Chiefs discretion. The sampling
period in the Louisianian Province coincides with the occurrence of hurricane season in the Gulf of Mexico.
In small craft advisories and/or gale warnings, the Crew Chief will assess the situation and determine the
104
-------
feasibility of sampling. If sampling cannot be done, the team will contact the FOC as soon as possible. If
a hurricane warning is posted for a scheduled sampling area, all sampling activities will cease and the
crews will pack up and evacuate to a safe area.
The other likely reasons for cancellation of sampling are site inaccessibility and/or equipment
malfunction. Site inaccessibility problems have been minimized by site reconnaissance activities conducted
by Field Operations personnel during the 2 - 4 months before crew training. Any navigational hazards or
other potential problems noted during the field reconnaissance were entered into the field log for reference
by the Crew Chiefs. If the station location was unacceptable for sampling (e.g., too shallow, located in a
busy navigational channel), the Information was transmitted to the Province Manager, who made a decision
regarding whether the station was discarded and whether an alternate site was selected.
Crew Chiefs will advise the Field Coordinator via phone prior to making any decisions which alter the
sampling schedule. The Province Manager or the Field Coordinator will be available to respond to telephone
communications at all times during the data collection phase of the project. During nonworking hours, either
the Project Manager or his designee will be assigned a pager to receive incoming calls from the field crews.
Despite these precautions, unforeseen circumstances, such as Coast Guard restrictions due to an
accident or other regulations that close an area to boat traffic, may cause field crews to cancel sampling
at a specific location. If this should occur, the Crew Chief should contact the Field Coordinator immediately
for instructions. The Province Manager will have determined, in advance, the types of sites that can be
moved without adversely affecting the sampling design, as well as the protocol for choosing an alternative
site. If the site is one that can be moved, the Operations Center will inform the Crew Chief of the location
of the "new* site. If the site cannot be moved, the Province Manager will contact the Technical Director, who
will decide on appropriate actions.
Most equipment malfunctions will be handled by Crew Chiefs, using repair facilities within the sampling
area. Crew Chiefs will coordinate this activity with their Team Leader and the Field Coordinator. At least
105
-------
one spare for each piece of equipment will be located at ERL/GB. In the event that a piece of field
equipment fails and requires extensive repair beyond what can be provided locally within one day, the
Operations Center should be notified immediately. Arrangements will be made for the transport of the
needed replacement equipment to the crew as quickly as possible to avoid interrupting the sampling
schedule. The Project Manager or the Field Coordinator will assume responsibility for the rapid repair of
damaged or malfunctioning equipment.
The Province Manager is responsible for the day-to-day operation of the project. He will be supported
by a Field Coordinator and the staff of the Operation Center as shown in the province organization chart
(Fig. 5-2). The Field Coordinator will be the major point of contact between field crews and other individuals
wtthin EMAP-NC.
The Province Manager will prepare weekly progress reports for the Technical Director that will include
the following:
o A list of the sites successfully sampled;
o A list of sites not sampled, the reason why, and what plans have been made for obtaining these
samples at a later time;
o Status of supplies and equipment;
o A general overview of the data collected; and a brief evaluation of the quality of the data which were
collected.
When logistical problems threaten the integrity of the project, the Technical Director will convene a
meeting of the Contingency Committee, who will advise the director on potential alternative sampling
designs or strategies. He will be responsible for making decisions that alter the sampling design or the
field/laboratory/QC procedures manuals. The committee will be composed of experts who are familiar
106
-------
Associate Director
N«ir Coastal
John Paul
Acting Technical Director
Estuaries
Richard Latimer
JL
EMAP QA Officer
Near Coastal
Ray Valente
Province Manager
Kevin Summers
QA
Coordinator
Tom Heltmuller
Contingency Committee
Fred Holland
ReW Activities
Coordinator
Tom Heltmuller
Processing Laboratories
• SMhwOuN Co* ftM. L*.
• ToxtoNr-CNL, Ou« »*•»
West Gulf
Team
Texas A&M
Data Management
Support Group
Matt Adams
Operators Center
Support Staff
John Macauley, Jim Patrick
Delta
Team
Texas A&M/LSU
Field Crew
East Gulf
Team
GCRL/TRI
SAV
Team Leader
FWS/NOAA
Reid Crew
Reid Crew
Overflight
Analysis and
Ground Truthlng
Figure 5-2. Management structure for the 1991 Loulslanian Province Monitoring.
Demonstration.
107
-------
with the sampling design, analysis scheme, indicators, sampling methodologies, and logistics and will advise
the Technical Director on topics related to their respective areas of expertise. Decisions of the Contingency
Committee will be relayed to sampling crews by the Field Coordinator.
5.10 Crew Assignments
Sampling for each sub-region is presently scheduled to occur in blocks of sites randomly distributed
during the index period. The identification of the sampling blocks was based on their proximity to common
staging areas. The Eastern Region crew will follow a 6-day-on, 6-day-off cycle, with travel occurring on the
1 st and 6th day of the off cycle. Crews should be able to sample at least 2 stations per day on the
average.Areas with higher station density may facilitate daily sampling of 3 stations while travel distance may
limit daily sampling to a single station. The West Region crews will operate on schedules of varying length
and should sample a combined 4 stations per day on the average. A Hydrolab Datasonde III will be
deployed overnight at each station to perform automated monitoring.
At present, all of the sampling sites and potential staging areas have been selected (Table 5-3). All
staging areas currently under consideration are serviced by Federal Express with a minimum of next day
service. Complete logistics plans for the implementation of EMAP-NC in the Louislanian Province have been
completed for the East Region (Macauley, 1991) and for the Delta and West Regions (Phifer 1991).
5.11 Example Six-Dav Sampling Scenario - (East Gulf)
A sampling crew sets up staging out of Tarpon Springs, FL The Field Coordinator at the Operations
Center is notified that sampling activities are about to begin and any communications relevant to the Center
or the crew are exchanged. The boat crew receives a check sheet and two, initialized, quality-checked, and
calibrated, Datasonde III continuous recorders with their associated deployment systems for stations LA91
108
-------
Table 5-3. Station locations with associated staging areas for the 1991 Louisianian Province Monitoring
Demonstration.
East Gulf Region
Number Stations
2
2
2
2
2
2
3
2
2
1
2
1
1
2
1
2
2
1
2
2
2
1
3
2
2
8
4
1
2
2
2
1
2
4
2
3
3
Number Stations
5
1
2
Location
Anclote Anchorage
Homasassa River
Crystal Bay
Withalacoochie River
Suwanee River
Ecofina River
Apalachee River
Oyster Bay
Ochlocknee River
Apalachicola Bay
St. Josephs Bay
Watson Bayou
St. Andrews Bay
Choctawhatchee Bay
Escambia Bay
Bayou Grande
Big Lagoon
Perdido Bay
Old River
Bay La Launch
Bon Secour River
Bon Secour Bay
Lower Mobile Bay
Pelican Bay
Tensaw River
Mobile Bay
Lower Mobile Bay
Mississippi Sound
Grand Bay
Mississippi Sound
Pascagoula River
Bayou Cassette
Biloxi Bay/
Bernard Bayou
Mississippi Sound
Bay St. Louis
Mississippi Sound
North Chandeleur Sound
Delta Region
Location
Lake Ponchartrain
Lake Maurepas
Amite River
Staging Area
Tarpon Springs, FL
Crystal River, FL
Crystal River, FL
Crystal River, FL
Suwanee River, FL/Hwy13
St. Marks, FL
St. Marks, FL
St. Marks, FL
St Marks, FL
Apalachicola, FL
Port St Joe, FL
Panama City, FL
Panama City, FL
FL Walton Bch., FL
Gulf Breeze, FL
Gulf Breeze, FL
Gulf Breeze, FL
Gulf Breeze, FL
Gulf Breeze, FL
Gulf Shores, AL
Gulf Shores, AL
Gulf Shores, AL
Gulf Shores, AL
Gulf Shores, AL
Mobile, AL
Mobile, AL
Dauphin Island, AL
Dauphin Island, AL
Pascagoula, MS
Pascagoula, MS
Pascagoula, MS
Pascagoula, MS
Biloxi, MS
Biloxi, MS
Gutfport, MS
Gulfport, MS
Gulfport, MS
Staging Area
New Orleans, LA
New Orleans, LA
New Orleans, LA
109
-------
Table 5-3. (continued)
Number Stations
1
3
2
2
3
2
5
8
3
8
2
2
2
2
1
2
Number Stations
2
2
1
1
2
1
2
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
1
2
2
2
1
2
2
Delta Region
Location
Lake Salvador
Lake Borgne
Lake St. Catherine
East Lake Ponchartrain
Upper Mississippi River
Miss. River Gulf Outlet
Chandeleur Sound
Mid Mississippi River
Breton Sound
Lower Miss. River
Garden Isle Bay
Little Lake
Barataria Bay
Lake Raccourci
Terrebone Bay
Lake Pelto
West Gulf Region
Location
Belle River
Lake Palourde
Caillou Bay
Atchafalaya Bay
East Cote Blanche Bay
Vermillion Bay
Weeks Bay
Grande Lake
Calcasieu Channel
Calcasieu River
East Bay
Star Lake
Highland Bayou
Galveston Bay
Cedar Bayou
Galveston Ship Channel
Cedar Lake
San Juacinto Bay
Moses Vay/Dollar Lake
Brazos River
Bastrop Bay
Matagorda Bay
Carancahua Bay
Staging Area
New Orleans, LA
Slidell, LA
Slidell, LA
Slidell, LA
New Orleans, LA
Chalmette, LA
Chalmette, LA
Buras/Empire, LA
Venice, LA
Venice, LA
Venice, LA
Grande Isle, LA
Grande Isle, LA
Houma, LA
Houma, LA
Houma, LA
Staging Area
Houma, LA
Houma, LA
Morgan City, LA
Morgan City, LA
Franklin, LA
Abbeville/
New Iberia, LA
Abbeville/
New Iberia, LA
Lake Arthur, LA
Lake Charles, LA
Lake Charles, LA
High Island, TX
High Island, TX
Galveston, TX
Galveston, TX
Galveston, TX
Galveston, TX
Galveston, TX
Galveston, TX
Galveston, TX
Freeport, TX
Freeport, TX
Port Lavaca/
Port O'Conner, TX
Port Lavaca/
Port O/Conner, TX
110
-------
Table 5-3. (continued)
Number Stations
2
1
2
2
2
2
2
1
3
3
2
2
West Gulf Region
Location
Lavaca River
Lavaca Bay
Powderhom Lake
San Antonio Bay
Hynes Bay
Campano Bay
Tule Lake Channel
Corpus Christ! Bay
Laguna Madre
(S. Baffin Bay)
Laguna Madre
South Bay
Rio Grande
Staging Area
Port Lavaca/
Port O/Conner, TX
Port Lavaca/
Port O/Conner, TX
Port Lavaca/
Port O/Conner. TX
Port Lavaca/
Port O/Conner, TX
Port Lavaca/
Port O/Conner, TX
Fulton/Rockport, TX
Corpus Christ!, TX
Corpus Christ!, TX
Loyola Bch./
Wngsvllle. TX
Port Mansfield. TX
Brownsville, TX
Brownsville, TX
111
-------
S4 and LA91-S4I (Homasassa River) from the shore-based crew prior to launch. The boat is launched at
the Homasassa River at about 0630. The boat crew travels to station LA91-S4 (located by LORAN), deploys
a continuous meter, and takes a manual bottom profile of temperature, salinity, depth, pH, and dissolved
oxygen using the Surveyor II (afterward, this procedure will simply be referred to as deployment). After
securing the meter, the boat crew travels to LA91-S4I and deploys an other continuous meter at that
location. At the same time, the shore-based crew is organizing all sample containers, sampling gear, and
performing shore-based functions for the continuous meters for Stations LA91-S1 and LA91-S1I (Anclote
Anchorage). The boat crew returns to the Homasassa River launch point, trailer the boat, and the boat crew
and shore crew proceed to the Anclote River (approximately one hour travel time).
The boat is launched at the Anclote River after being loaded with all the appropriate sampling gear, pre-
labeled sample containers, processing gear, and two continuous monitors prepared in the morning by the
shore crew. The boat crew has received a check sheet and appropriate quantities of ice and dry ice prior
to launch. (A six-day supply of dry ice has been brought with the crew from the base of operations.) The
boat crew travels to station LA91-S1 and deploys a continuous meter. They then anchor and perform the
water column profiles followed by sediment sampling. Once the three replicate benthic samples have been
collected and stored in the appropriate pre-labeled containers, additional sediment grabs are taken to secure
enough sediment for toxicology and contaminant analysis. These samples are placed in the appropriate pre-
labeled containers. The crew sets up and performs the fish trawl and properly counts, identifies, measures,
and examines all specified fish for gross pathologies. Target fish are selected for contaminant analysis and
prepared as required and placed in sample containers. All fish failing the gross pathology screen are
prepared (i.e., opening the body cavity) and placed in Dietrich's solution. The bivalve dredge sample is
taken and all samples are counted, identified, measured, and selected individuals are retained for preparation
and storage in prelabelled containers. The crew proceeds to station LA91-S1I and deploys a continuous
meter before 6 PM. The same sequence of sampling events is performed. Once the samples are collected,
they are stowed and the boat returns to the staging area. The boat is moored at the Anclote River. All
samples and data sheets are transferred to the shore crew for storage and processing.
112
-------
Earlier in the day, as the boat crews worked on the Homasassa River, the shore crew prepared all pre-
labeled sample containers and data sheets for the next day's sampling sites (LA91-S4 and LA91-S4I). The
boat and shore crews leave the Andote River and travel to lodging in Tarpon Springs, FL The Team
Leader/Crew Chief notifies the Reid Coordinator that sampling has ceased for Day 1 and conveys any
necessary information.
Dav 2
The sampling vessel and gear are prepared for the morning's activities. The crew chief notifies the Field
Coordinator that sampling operations are about to commence. If there is sufficient time, the shore crew,
who will be in radio contact with the boat, will begin processing the samples from the previous day and
perform the data entry into the PC. Processing the samples involves preparing them for shipment to the
analytical and processing labs as well as the shipping reports and airbills. Samples which require overnight
delivery will be taken to the express delivery office and shipped. The remaining samples will be properly
stored until there is sufficient quantity to warrant shipping or until the end of the 6-day rotation.
The boat is launched at the Andote River after being loaded with all the appropriate sampling gear, pre-
labeled sample containers, and processing gear prepared by the shore crew the previous day. The boat
crew has received a check sheet and appropriate quantities of ice and dry ice prior to launch. The boat
crew travels to station LA91-S1. They then anchor, retrieve the continuous monitor and its deployment
hardware, and take a bottom profile of temperature, salinity, dissolved oxygen, pH, and depth (afterward
referred to as retrieval). They then perform the standard field activities described in Day 1. All samples are
stored in pro-labeled containers as directed by the Field Operations Manual. The crew proceeds to station
LA91-S11 and retrieves the continuous meter. The same sequence of sampling events is performed. Once
the samples are collected, they are stowed and the boat returns to the staging area on the Andote River.
All samples and data sheets are transferred to the shore crew for storage and processing. The boat is
traflered to the Homasassa River.
113
-------
The boat is launched from the Homasassa River and the boat crew proceeds to LA91-S4, retrieves the
continuous monitor. The boat proceeds to LA91-S4I and retrieves the continuous monitor located there.
The boat returns to the Homasassa River launch point, trailers the boat and transfers the Homasassa
continuous monitors to the shore crew.
Earlier in the day, as the boat crews worked in the Andote Anchorage, the shore crew began preparation
of samples for shipment and data entry. After the launch of the boat crew in the Homasassa River, the shore
crew completes the processing of the previous day's samples and data, debriefs the 2 continuous monitors
from the Andote Anchorage, and prepares all pre-labeled sample containers and data sheets for the next
day's sampling sites (LA91-S8 and LA91-S8I, Withlacoochie River). Finally, the shore crew prepares four
continuous monitors for deployment at the next day's sampling stations. The boat and shore crews leave
the Homasassa River and travel to lodging in Crystal River, FL The Team Leader/Crew Chief notifies the
Field Coordinator that sampling has ceased for Day 2 and conveys any necessary information. All data are
transferred to the Louisianlan Province Information Management System (LPIMS).
Dav 3
The sampling crew sets up staging out of Crystal River, FL The Field Coordinator at the Operations
Center is notified that sampling activities are about to begin and any communications relevant to the Center
or the crew are exchanged. The boat and shore crew proceed out of Crystal River, north to the
Withlacoochie River. The sampling vessel and gear are prepared and the boat crew receives a check sheet
and two initialized, quality-checked, and two calibrated Datasonde III continuous recorders with their
associated deployment systems for stations LA91-S8 and LA91-S8I (Withlacoochie River) from the shore-
based crew prior to launch. The boat is launched at the Withlacoochie River. The boat crew travels to
station LA91-S8 (located by LORAN) and deploys a continuous meter. After securing the meter, the boat
crew travels to LA91-S8I and deploys the continuous meter at that location. At the same time, the shore-
based crew is organizing all sample containers, sampling gear, and performing shore-based functions for
the continuous meters for Stations LA91-S5 and LA91-S5I (Crystal Bay). The boat crew returns to the
114
-------
Withlacoochie River launch point, trailers the boat, and the boat crew and shore crew proceed to the Crystal
River (approximately one hour travel time).
The boat is launched at the Crystal River after being loaded with all the appropriate sampling gear,
prelabelled sample containers, processing gear, and two continuous monitors prepared in the morning by
the shore crew. The boat crew has received a check sheet and appropriate quantities of ice and dry ice.
The boat crew travels to station LA91-S5 and deploys a continuous meter. They then anchor and perform
all sampling activities. All samples are stored in pre-labeled containers as directed by the Field Operations
Manual.The crew proceeds to station LA91 -SSI and deploys a continuous meter before 6 PM. The same
sequence of sampling events is performed. Once the samples are collected, they are stowed and the boat
returns to the staging area. The boat is moored at the Crystal River. All samples and data sheets are
transferred to the shore crew for storage and processing.
Earlier in the day, as the boat crews worked on the Withlacoochie River, the shore crew prepared all pre-
labeled sample containers and data sheets for the next day's sampling site and debriefed the Homasassa
continuous meters. While the boat crew is sampling Crystal Bay, the shore crew is preparing the previous
day's samples for shipment and data entry. The boat and shore crews travel to lodging in Crystal River, FL
The Team Leader/Crew Chief notifies the Field Coordinator that sampling has ceased for Day 3 and conveys
any necessary information. All data are transferred to LPIMS.
Dav 4
The sampling vessel and gear are prepared for the morning's activities. The crew chief notifies the Field
Coordinator that sampling operations are about to commence. The shore crew begins processing the
samples from the previous day and perform the data entry into the PC.
The boat is launched at the Crystal River after being loaded with all the appropriate sampling gear, pre-
labeled sample containers, and processing gear prepared by the shore crew the previous day. The boat
115
-------
crew has received a check sheet and appropriate quantities of ice and dry tee prior to launch. The boat
crew travels to station LA91-S5. They then anchor, retrieve the continuous monitor. They then perform the
•tandarxJ field activities. All samples are stored in pre-iabeled containers as directed by the Field Operations
Manual. The crew proceeds to station LA91-S5I and retrieves the continuous meter. The same sequence
o< campling events is performed. Once the samples are collected, they are stowed and the boat returns to
the staging area on the Crystal River. All samples and data sheets are transferred to the shore crew for
storage and processing. The boat is trailered to the Withlacoochie River.
The boat is launched from the Withlacoochie River and the boat crew proceeds to LA91-S8, retrieves the
continuous monitor. The boat proceeds to LA91-S8I and retrieves the continuous monitor located there.
The boat returns to the Homasassa River launch point, trailers the boat, and transfers the Homasassa
continuous monitors to the shore crew. The crews travel to lodging in Crystal River, FL The Team
Leader/Crew Chief notifies the Field Coordinator that sampling has ceased for Day 4 and conveys any
necessary information. All data are transferred to LPIMS.
Day5
The Field Coordinator at the Operations Center is notified that sampling activities are about to begin and
any communications relevant to the Center or the crew are exchanged. The boat and shore crew proceed
out of Crystal River, north to the Suwanee River (about 2.5 hours). The sampling vessel and gear are
prepared and the boat crew receives a check sheet and two initialized, quality-checked, and calibrated
Datasonde III continuous recorders with their associated deployment systems for stations LA91-S10 and
LA91-S1 Ol (Suwanee River) from the shore-based crew prior to launch. The boat is launched at the Suwanee
River. The boat crew travels to station LA91-S10 (located by LORAN), deploys a continuous meter. After
securing the meter, the boat crew travels to LA91-S10I and deploys the continuous meter at that location.
They then anchor and perform all sampling activities. All samples are stored in pre-labeled containers as
directed by the Field Operations Manual. Once the samples are collected, they are stowed and the boat
116
-------
returns to the staging area. The boat is moored at the Suwanee River. All samples and data sheets are
transferred to the shore crew for storage and processing.
Earlier in the day, the shore crew prepared all pre-labeled sample containers and data sheets for the next
day's sampling site, debriefed the Crystal Bay continuous meters, and prepared the previous day's samples
tor shipment and data entry. The boat and shore crews travel to lodging in Suwanee River/ Highway 13,
FL The Team Leader/Crew Chief notifies the Field Coordinator that sampling has ceased for Day 5 and
conveys any necessary Information. All data are transferred to LPIMS.
Pay 6
The sampling vessel and gear are prepared for the morning's activities. The Crew Chief notifies the Field
Coordinator that sampling operations are about to commence. The shore crew begins processing the
samples from the previous day and perform the data entry into the PC.
The boat is launched at the Suwanee River after being loaded with all the appropriate sampling gear, pre-
labeled sample containers, and processing gear prepared by the shore crew the previous day. The boat
crew has received a check sheet and appropriate quantities of ice and dry ice prior to launch. The boat
crew travels to station LA91-S10 where they anchor, retrieve the continuous monitor, and then perform the
standard field activities. All samples are stored in pre-labeled containers as directed by the Field Operations
Manual. The crew proceeds to station LA91-S10I and retrieves the continuous meter. The boat returns to
the staging area on the Suwanee River. All samples and data sheets are transferred to the shore crew for
storage and processing. The Team Leader/Crew Chief notifies the Field Coordinator that sampling has
ceased for Day 6 and conveys any necessary information. The crew prepares the boat and vehicles for the
return trip to the FOC at Gulf Breeze, FL
117
-------
Post-Sampling
This crew will meet its follow-up crew at the FOC In Gulf Breeze, FL on the evening of Day 6. All vehicles
and equipment, as well as the samples collected on Day 6, will be transferred to the oncoming crew to be
sampling and sample processing the following day.
This scenario does not include sampling other types of stations than base and index Some stations may
take longer to sample than others depending on the station type. On days when research indicator samples
are to be taken, an additional technician will be provided to take the samples.
118
-------
6.0 INFORMATION MANAGEMENT
During the course of sample collection in the Louisianian Province, thousands of samples will be
collected from the 198 stations. Many of the indicators (e.g., dissolved oxygen, contaminants in sediments
or tissue) will produce hundreds of data points for each station. The ability of the Louisianian Province
Information Management Team (Fig. 6-1) to manage, collate, quality-check, and transfer this large amount
of data to the Near Coastal Information Management Center will have a significant influence on the success
of the program. Major portions of the Near Coastal Information Management System have been developed
and are described elsewhere (Near Coastal Team 1990, Rosen et al., 1990). To the extent possible, the
Louisianian Province Information Management System (LPIMS) will utilize data management tools and
protocols developed and tested by the Near Coastal Information Management Center at Narragansett, Rl.
In outline, the strategy for information management within the Louisianian Province is straightforward - data
are collected in the field or samples are processed in laboratories; transmitted to LPIMS at Gulf Breeze, FL;
screened, quality-assured and composed into data sets by LPIMS; and transmitted to the Near Coastal
Information Management Center while retaining copies of the data for subsequent analysis. In practice, data
management schemes rarely are straightforward and multiple contingencies will be 'built* into the system
to address potential sources of error and miscommunication.
Monitoring activities in the Louisianian Province will include a range of functions (e.g., sample collection,
laboratory processing, statistical analysis) over a period of 9-10 months. In order to manage the flow of
information in the Province effectively, the Province Manager must have the ability to identify problems,
develop alternative plans, control costs, and modify schedules. The key to successfully attaining this ability
is to review the flow of information in as close to a real-time mode as possible. The generation of
computerized and/or hand-generated daily and weekly reports on the status of each element in the
monitoring program will provide the information necessary to oversee and control the combined efforts of
numerous field and laboratory personnel and to trace effectively the progress of sample collection, shipping
and processing.
119
-------
Louisianian Province
Manager
Kevin Summers
EMAP Estuarlne and
Coastal Waters
Information Management
Jeff Rosen
Louisianian Province
Information Management
Support (LPIMS)
Man Adams
1
Programming
Louisianian Province
QA Coordinator
Tom Heitmuller
Data Base Operations
Communications
and
Sample Tracking
Figure 6-1. 1991 Louisianian Province Iformational Management Team.
120
-------
The remainder of this chapter is organized into three sections that parallel the general types of
Information management activities to be completed by LPIMS: (1) Communications and Sample Tracking,
(2) Data Management and Storage, and (3) Data Transmittal.
6.1 Communications and Sample Tracking
The Louisianian Province Manager will require frequent and accurate information concerning the status
of field operations, laboratory processing activities, sample shipping, and 'in-field' data transmfttal. The
Louisianian Province Information Management Team will use, and modify if necessary, a Project
Management Information System developed for the 1990 Virginian Province Demonstration to conduct all
activities with the exception of the field communications and "in field' data transmittal. An electronic bulletin
board and field communications package will be developed by LPIMS for use in the Louisianian Province
in 1991. 'In field' transmittal will be facilitated by software developed by the LPIMS to simplify data entry
in the field and Its subsequent electronic transmittal to the Gulf Breeze facility. The elements of the Project
Management Information System, the communications package, the data entry and 'in field* transmittal
packages and the sample tracking system are discussed below.
6.1.1. Communications
Daily communications with the field crews and laboratory processing centers wPI be facilitated by an
electronic bulletin board that will store messages from, and to, the field crews and laboratory processing
facilities. Field crews (land-based component) will access the bulletin board twice daily (early morning and
late evening) to retrieve and send messages of general and specific use. In addition, field crews will
communicate with operation center personnel by telephone on a daily basis. The bulletin board will be used
to provide back-up information concerning the day's sampling locations; including, latitude and longitude,
sample Identification numbers, and expected field collection activities. The bulletin board will provide a
system for recording logistical events and problems as well as observations made by the field crews
concerning ramp facilities, shipping agents, and operational facilities (e.g., motels, tee houses) for future
121
-------
refinement of logistics in subsequent years. In addition, the bulletin board will provide access to a database
of information concerning ramp locations, motels, restaurants, hospitals, emergency personnel and
telephone numbers, boat repair facilities, and shipping agents.
6.1.2. 'In Field" Data Entry and Transfer
LPIMS has facilitated the 'in field" entry of data into computer-compatible form by devising on-screen
forms identical to the hand-written field data sheets. These "forms" will be used by the land-based support
team for entry of the previous day's data. Thus, the field crews will be submitting data to LPIMS in
established formats within 24 hours of collection. These data include:
o Instantaneous water quality data
o 24-hour continuous dissolved oxygen data
o Logistical and operational data (e.g., coordinates, weather conditions)
o Fish trawl data (i.e., abundance, composition, lengths, gross pathology)
o Benthic dredge data (i.e., abundance, composition)
o Shipping data for sediments (i.e., analytical chemistry, sediment toxicity, and benthos), tissues (i.e.,
analytical chemistry), blood (i.e., bioindicators), and fish (i.e., pathology).
Once data have been entered at the land-based site, the information files will be transferred electronically
to the VAX located at Gulf t aeze, FL via a ;oll-free number. Transferred data will be extracted daily by
LPIMS personnel, then data ctean-up and quality checking will commence.
6.1.3. Sample Tracking System
The sample tracking system will track the history of samples from their initial collection, through sample
shipping, and to final completion of all laboratory analyses and/or processing. To accomplish this, each
sampling event and sample type will be assigned a unique identification number. These numbers will be
122
-------
entered into the LPIMS system prior to sample collection. Sample numbers will be bar-coded to facilitate
data entry by the field crews.
Information entered for each sample in the sample tracking system that will be available for retrieval and
review will include:
o Sampling site name
o Time of sample collection and duration, if applicable
o Type of sample
o Identification of sampling team responsible for collection
o List of projected activities for that sample (e.g., shipment, sieving, sorting, data processing, analyses
for any of fifty analytes) and the status of each of these activities (e.g., completed, received broken,
etc.)
o Names of 'raw* data files for continuous data (i.e., continuous dissolved oxygen records)
o Names of textual files containing descriptive information about the sampling event (e.g., field team
comments).
When the samples are transferred from the field crews to analytical laboratories, a record of the
exchange will be entered into the sample tracking system, both upon release to the shipper and receipt by
the laboratory, as to time of exchange and sample condition. The identity and disposition of any sample
can be established, through the sample tracking system, by checking the sample status. The status of all
samples and results will be available through the sample tracking system.
6.2 Data Management and Storage
Data management of concern to the 1991 monitoring activities in the Louisianian Province involves the
management of regional Information for subsequent transfer to the Near Coastal Information Management
System (NCIMS) early In 1992. The LPIMS will work with and cooperate with NCIMS personnel to facilitate
123
-------
the subsequent transfer of information. This activity will include prior confirmation of data formats and a
determination of compatibility with the overall Near Coastal data base system. As it is the responsibility of
the Near Coastal Program (I.e., NCIMS) to archive near coastal data and respond to data inquiries, LPIMS
has not been constructed to address data requests outside the immediate user-group associated with
province activities.
6.2.1 Data Storage
EMAP-NC uses a distributed data base system that consists of a central site and multiple regional remote
nodes. LPIMS represents one of these remote nodes. In addition, LPIMS acts as a central site for several
province-level remote nodes: (1) sub-regional coordination nodes (i.e., operational centers for field teams),
(2) field teams (i.e., in situ data entry and communications), and (3) processing laboratories (e.g., benthic
lab, analytical chemistry labs). Field and laboratory nodes will transfer data and preliminary analytical
results to the LPIMS for subsequent data dean-up and processing. Communication messages and selected
data outputs will be provided to the sub-regional operation centers by LPIMS. Specific data management
activities that will occur at the LPIMS include:
o Incorporation of field data into database
o Initial calculation of parameter values
o Preliminary data screening and quality control
o Preliminary data analysis and summarization
o Quality assurance for sample tracking, sample preparation, and analytical techniques
o Transfer of appropriate data, in specified electronic formats, to NCIMS at the conclusion of the 1991
sampling program.
The central repository of all Near Coastal data generated within EMAP is the Near Coastal Information
Processing Center (NCIMS) located at Narragansett, Rl. Personnel at this facility are responsible for the
long-term storage of near coastal data which includes maintaining a comprehensive data inventory, a data
124
-------
set index, code libraries, and a data dictionary. The remote facility, the Louisianlan Province Information
Management System (LPIMS), is located at Gulf Breeze, FL and is responsible for the collection, collation,
quality assurance, and transfer of all near coastal data collected in the Louisianlan Province.
At a minimum, LPIMS will collect, organize, quality assure, and subsequently transfer to NCIMS the
following information for all base, index, and supplemental monitoring stations:
o Complete logistical records of each sampling event
o Complete data for vertical profiles for instantaneous salinity, temperature, water depth, dissolved
oxygen concentration, pH, and photosynthetlcally active radiation (PAR)
o Complete data for 24-hour continuous measurements of bottom salinity, temperature, water depth,
pH, and dissolved oxygen
o Complete data on concentrations of selected contaminants, organic content, and grain size of
sediments
o Complete data on the abundance, composition, and biomass of benthic organisms
o Complete data on the abundance, composition, and length of large bivalves
o Complete data on the abundance and size of fish and shellfish species taken by otter trawl (i.e., only
base, spatial supplemental, and index stations with water depths > 1 m), concentrations of selected
contaminants in fish and shellfish flesh of targeted species, and gross pathological disorders for
targeted fish species
o Complete data for standard toxicity test results using two benthic species exposed to sediment
samples collected from the base stations.
In addition, LPIMS will augment this information with data collected from Indicator Test and Evaluation (ITE)
sites as follows:
o Detailed histopathology information for target fish species observed to have gross external
pathological abnormalities
125
-------
o Detailed histopathdogy for non-target fish species observed to have no external abnormalities
o Complete data for standard toxicity test results using shrimp exposed to sediment samples collected
from the ITE stations
o Complete data for selected physiological bloindicators for target fish and shellfish species and black
crown night heron nestlings at selected ITE sites
o Complete data on concentrations and uptake rates of selected contaminants in black-crown night
heron nestlings from selected ITE sites
All data received by LPIMS will be quality assured by using procedures described in Chapter 7.0 and
converted into SAS data sets. All data will be stored in SAS data libraries by indicator and topical area
(eg, benthic species composition and biomass, estuarine class, contaminants in nestling flesh). Following
Initial data processing, required data analyses will be completed to produce summary data reports.
6.3 Data Transmittal
Upon completion of data library and data set construction, as well as quality assurance on those data,
LPIMS will transmit all data collected during the 1991 Louisianian Province Monitoring Demonstration and
its subsequent processing by laboratories to the central Near Coastal data repository located in
Narragansett, Rl. This transfer will be completed using predetermined electronic formats compatible with
the existing formats developed for the 1990 Virginian Province Demonstration. We anticipate these transfers
will take place in early 1992.
All data requests for near coastal information from outside the province-specific synthesis and integration
team, regardless of province, will be handled by the NCIMS (e.g., requests from non-EMAP personnel,
requests from EMAP administrative personnel). The protocols for these requests are described in Rosen
etal. (1990).
126
-------
7.0 QUAUTY ASSURANCE
The 1991 Louisianian Province Monitoring Demonstration will use 30 to 40 staff members to collect
samples and four different laboratories to process samples. Monitoring programs that Involve multiple field
crews and laboratories frequently encounter problems in obtaining data that are comparable among the
many individuals and laboratories involved (Taylor 1978,1985; Martin Marietta Environmental Systems 1987;
NRC I990a). Such problems usually result because in the haste to initiate the data collection program, the
field crews are not adequately trained in applying standardized collection methods and the comparability
of the laboratory processing methods and capabilities are not evaluated (Taylor 1985).
The Louisianian Province will implement a quality assurance (QA) program (Heitmuller and Valente 1991)
to ensure that the data produced are comparable, known and acceptable quality. This program will consist
of two distinct but related sets of activities: quality control and quality assessment.
Quality control includes design, planning, and management actions to ensure that the types and amounts
of data are collected in the manner required to address study objectives. Examples of some quality control
activities that will be employed by the Louisianian Province are the employment of EMAP-NC standardized
sample collection and processing protocols and the requirement for specific levels of training for field crews
and technicians who will collect and process samples. The goals of quality control procedures are to ensure
that collection, processing, and analysis techniques are accomplished consistently and correctly; the number
of lost, damaged, and uncollected samples is minimized; the Integrity of the data record is maintained and
documented from sample collection to entry into the data record; data are comparable with similar data
collected elsewhere and that study results are reproducable.
Quality assessment activities will be implemented to quantify the effectiveness of the quality control
procedures. These activities ensure that measurement error and bias are identified, quantified, and
accounted for or eliminated (if practical). Quality assessment consists of both internal and external checks
Including repetitive measurements, internal test samples, interchange of technicians and equipment, use of
127
-------
independent methods to verify findings, exchange of samples among laboratories, use of standard reference
materials, and audits (Taylor 1985; USEPA 1984).
7.1 Data Quality Objectives
While quality assurance (QA) is a necessary part of any sampling program, defining the proper level of
QA is difficult. If QA is defined too rigorously, it can consume a disproportionate share of program
resources; if QA is defined too loosely, the ability to quantify the quality of the data collected may be
insufficient to meet program objectives. Within EMAP, the balance between cost and uncertainty will be
established by using the Data Quality Objective (DQO) process (Fig. 7-1).
Developing DQOs is a multistage, iterative process that involves individuals at all levels of the project
(Fig. 7-1). The first stage is initiated by the manager or decision maker, who identifies the central question
to be addressed and the degree of acceptable uncertainty associated with the answer. In identifying
acceptable uncertainty, the manager must weigh the cost of collecting samples against the "cost" of reaching
incorrect decisions based on the sampling effort The second stage is conducted by the project scientific
staff, who formulate a sampling strategy for addressing the question and then estimate the cost of
developing an answer with the satisfactory level of accuracy, precision, representativeness, comparability,
and completeness. If the cost estimates are acceptable to the decision maker, then the project proceeds
to the third stage, where the technical staff develops quality control and quality assessment procedures
for each aspect of the program (e.g., field collection, laboratory analysis and processing, data management
analysis) that are consistent with the defined level of quality. If cost estimates are too high, then the
scientific staff and the decision makers jointly modify the design and expectations of the proposed program
until an acceptable balance of cost and uncertainty is achieved.
Two sources of error are considered in establishing DQOs: sampling error and measurement error.
Sampling error is the difference between a sampled value and the true value and is a function of natural
spatial and temporal variability and sampling design. The temporal variability relevant to EMAP-NC is that
128
-------
STAGE
Purpose
Personnel
With Lead Role
1
Develop „.„„.
Major
Questions Qu"tk>n'
Data User
(decision
maker)
2
Establish „.„„
Design
Constraints Qu""°™
Project
Management
Staff
3
Design
Program to
Meet Constraints
Technical
Staff
Figure 7-1. The three stages of developing Data Quality objectives.
129
-------
which occurs within the index period. Measurement error is the difference between the true sample values
and the reported values, and can occur during the act of sampling, data entry, data base manipulation, etc.
While "good" data are available to estimate measurement error for all of the parameters that will be measured
by EMAP-NC, data for estimating sampling error are either unavailable or unaccessible for many, if not most,
of the indicators to be measured. Acceptable estimates of variability at the appropriate regional scale are
unavailable because EMAP is the first program to measure most of these parameters on a regional scale,
using standardized methods and a probability-based sampling design.
Reliable estimates of temporal and spatial variability are essential to the DQO process because they are
required for quantifying the degree of uncertainty that will be produced by the sampling design. Without
them, the scientific staff cannot provide the decision makers with an estimate of cost for a desired level of
uncertainty (Fig. 7-1). For this reason, DQOs will not be implemented in the 1991 Demonstration Project.
Rather, a major goal of the Demonstration Project will be to gather the necessary data to establish DQOs
as the program continues in subsequent years. The Demonstration Project will be implemented by using
Measurement Quality Objectives (MQOs). MQOs establish acceptable levels of uncertainty for each
measurement process but differ from DQOs in that they are not combined with sampling error to estimate
programmatic uncertainty. In subsequent years, DQOs will be developed to replace the MQOs. MQOs were
established by obtaining estimates of achievable data quality based on manufacturer specifications, the
judgment of knowledgeable experts, and available literature information. Each measured parameter will have
an associated MQO for each of the attributes of data quality: representativeness, comparability, complete-
ness, accuracy, and precision. Data quality attributes are defined below, along with the MQO established
for each measured parameter within EMAP-NC.
o Representativeness is the degree to which the data represent a characteristic of a population
parameter. In EMAP-NC, representativeness is most germane to the proper siting of a sampling
location, and the MQO will be to ensure that all samples, with the exception of fish trawling, are
within 100 meters of the planned sampling site. Fish trawling should occur within 500 meters of the
designated sampling site.
130
-------
o Completeness is a measure of the amount of valid data (I.e., data not associated with some criterion
of potential unacceptability) collected from a measurement process compared to the amount that
was expected to be obtained. The MQO completeness criteria for EMAP-NC will range from 75 to
90 percent, depending on the measurement process. The specific completeness criterion for each
measured variable Is presented in Table 7-1.
o Comparability is defined as "the confidence with which one data set can be compared to another"
(Stanley and Vemer 1985). Comparability of reporting units and calculations, data base
management processes, and interpretative procedures must be ensured if the overall goals of EMAP
are to be realized. The MQO for the 1991 Louisianlan Province Demonstration Project Is to apply
accepted methods in a standardized way and to generate a high level of documentation so that
future EMAP efforts will be comparable to baseline collections.
o Accuracy is defined as the difference between a measured value and the true or expected value and
represents an estimate of systematic error or net bias (Kirchner 1983; Hunt and Wilson 1986; Taylor
1985).
o Precision is defined as the degree of mutual agreement among individual measurements and
represents an estimate of random error (Kirchner 1983; Hunt and Wilson 1986; Taylor 1987).
Together, accuracy and precision provide an estimate of the total error or uncertainty associated with
measured value. Accuracy and precision goals for the indicators to be measured are provided in Table 7-
1. Accuracy and precision cannot be defined for all parameters because of the nature of the measurement
type. For example, accuracy measurements are not possible for toxicity testing, sample collection activities,
and fish pathology measurements. In addition, accuracy and precision goals are not established for stressor
Indicators. Control of the data quality attributes of stressor indicators is beyond the scope of EMAP-NC.
131
-------
Table 7-1. Measurement Quality Objectives for EMAP-NC indicators and associated data
as they will be implemented in the Louisianian Province
Indicator/Data Type
Sediment Contaminant
Concentration
Organics
Inorganics
Sediment Toxicity
Benthic Species Composition
and Biomass
Sample collection
Sorting
Counting
Taxonomic identifications
Biomass
Sediment Characteristics
Grain size
Total organic carbon
% water
Acid volatile sulfides
Apparent RPD
Water Column Characterization
Dissolved Oxygen
Concentration
Salinity
Temperature
Depth
PH
Contaminants in Fish and Bivalve,
Tissue
Organics
Inorganics
Gross Pathology of Fish
Accuracy
Goal
30%
15%
NA
NA
10%
10%
10%
NA
10%
10%
NA
'10%
± 5 mm
± 0.5 mg/l
±1 ppt
±1 °C
0.5m
± 0.2 pH units
30%
15%
NA
Precision
Goal
30%
15%
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
10%
10%
Completeness
Goal
90%
90%
NA
90%
90%
90%
90%
90%
90%
(most abundant
size class)
10% 90%
20% 90%
10% 90%
NA 90%
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
30%
15%
NA
90%
90%
90%
90%
90%
90%
90%
90%
132
-------
Table 7-1. Continued.
Accuracy Precision Completeness
Indicator/Data Type Goal Goal Goal
Fish Community Composttoin
Sample collection NA MA 75%
Counting 10% NA 90%
Taxonomic identifications 10% NA 90%
Length determinations +_ 5 mm NA 90%
Relative Abundance of Large
Burrowing Bivalves
Sample collection NA NA 75%
Counting 10% NA 90%
Taxonomic identifications 10% NA 90%
Histopathology of Fish NA NA NA
133
-------
7.2 Quality Control
Establishing MQOs is of little value if the proper quality control activities are not undertaken to ensure
that program objectives are met. Quality control In EMAP-NC will be achieved in three ways:
o Developing standardized sampling protocols for all sampling activities that are consistent with MQOs
and the associated data quality attributes
o Documenting those procedures in a manner that allows for easy reference and evaluation by all
personnel involved In the project
o Training personnel responsible for each protocol to ensure that they are qualified to conduct
assigned tasks using the specified method.
Most of the indicators that will be measured during the Demonstration Project are those for which
standardized protocols, with known and acceptable levels of error, already exist. The first year (or more)
of the program will be used to develop, refine, and standardize the measurement methods for indicators for
which standard methods presently do not exist.
Although standard protocols are being used for many of the measurements that will be made, an
essential aspect of the EMAP-NC QC program is written documentation of all sampling, laboratory, and
quality assurance protocols. EMAP-NC has produced three documents to accomplish this objective:
o Laboratory Operations Manual - A document containing detailed instructions for laboratory and
instrument operations, including all procedures designed to ensure quality control of the
measurement process (US EPA, 1991).
134
-------
o Field Operations Manual - A document containing detailed instructions for ail field activities
(Macauley and Summers, 1991).
o Quality Assurance Project Plan - A document that specifies the policies, organization, objectives,
and functional activities for the project. The plan will also describe the quality assurance and quality
control activities and measures that will be Implemented to ensure that the data produced will meet
the MQOs established for the project (Heitmuller and Valente, 1991).
Copies of these documents are available upon request.
A critical aspect of quality control is to ensure that the individuals involved in each activity are properly
trained to conduct the activity. Laboratory personnel involved in the Demonstration Project do not require
extensive training, since most of the samples will be processed by established laboratories, using the
standard protocols presently employed on a production basis. The field sampling personnel, who are being
assembled specifically for this project and who are being asked to conduct a wide variety of activities In the
same consistent manner, will receive approximately one month of training.
Training of the sampling teams will be accomplished in two sessions, one for the Team Leaders/Crew
Chiefs and one for the remaining crew members; both sessions will be based out of the U.S. EPA
Environmental Research Laboratory, Gulf Breeze, FL (ERL/GB). Training of Crew Chiefs will begin in mid-
May. Qualifications for the Crew Chiefs include experience in small boat handling and familiarity with the
use of most of the required sampling equipment (trawls, dredges, sediment samplers, etc.). Training of Crew
Chiefs will emphasize project objectives and design, sampling protocols, computer use, and navigation
protocols required to locate sites. In addition, the Crew Chiefs will be instructed in public relations and
policy issues relating to EMAP-NC.
Once the Crew Chiefs have completed training, they will help to train the remaining crew members in
boat operations, navigation, use of sampling gear, and general sampling protocols. The first part of this
135
-------
crew training, to be held June 1-21, will be oriented toward classroom and laboratory work. The final week
of training will involve "hands-on/in-field" application of sampling methods.
Training at ERL/GB will place the Louisianian Crews in direct contact with leading authorities In several
of the specialized areas of particular interest to the EMAP-NC Program (e.g., EMAP-NC conceptual and
design aspects - Dr. Kevin Summers, Louisianian Province Manager; fish pathology, Dr. Jack Foumie).
Other staff members of ERL/GB and selected experts will instruct the crews in routine sampling procedures,
boat and equipment operation, navigation, computer use, and sample preparation.
All EMAP equipment (e.g., boats, sampling gear, computers) will be used during the training sessions,
and by the end of the course, all crews members must demonstrate proficiency in the following areas:
o Towing and launching the boat
o Boat operation
o Making predeployment checks of all sampling equipment
o Locating stations using the navigation system
o Entering data into and retrieving data from the lap-top computers
o Using all the sampling gear
o Administering first aid, including CPR
o Using general safety practices.
136
-------
In addition, all field crew members must be able to swim and will be required to demonstrate that ability.
Some sampling activities (e.g., fish taxonomy, gross pathology, net repair, etc.) require specialized
knowledge. All crew members will be exposed to these topics during the training sessions but it Is beyond
the scope of the training program to develop proficiency for each crew member in all of these areas. Thus,
two members of each team (one per crew) will have been selected (prior to training) for their specific
expertise in the identification of Gulf fish and shellfish.
All phases of field operations will be detailed in the Field Operations Manual for the Louisianian Province
(Macauley et al. 1991 a). Copies of this manual will be distributed to all trainees prior to the training period.
The manual will include an equipment checklist, instructions on the use of all equipment, and procedures
for sample collection. In addition, the manual will include a schedule of activities to be conducted at each
sampling location. It will also contain a list of potential hazards associated with each sampling site.
7.3 Quality Assessment
The effectiveness of quality control efforts will be measured by quality assessment activities, including
quality assessment samples and audits. The goal of these activities will be to quantify accuracy and
precision, but most importantly, they will be used to identify problems that need to be corrected as data sets
are generated and assembled. Details of the quality assessment activities that will be conducted during the
1991 Demonstration Project can be found In the Quality Assurance Project Plan (Heitmuller and Valente,
1991). A brief overview of these activities is provided below.
Quality assessment procedures will include using standards and check samples to verify instrument
calibrations in the field, as well as collecting duplicate samples, field blanks, and performance evaluation
samples. Quality assessment samples generally will be blind or double-blind. The expected values of blind
samples are not known to the analyst, while double-blind samples cannot even be identified by the analyst
137
-------
Table 7-2. Quality Assurance Sample Types, Frequency of Use. and Types of Data Generated for the EMAP-Near Coastal Loulslanlan
Province Monitoring Demonstration.
Variable
Sediment tox-
fctty tests
Benthlc Species
Composition and
Bkxnass:
Sorting
Sample counting
and ID
Bkxnass
Sed. grain size
Organic carbon
and add vote-
tie sJfkJe
QA Sample Type
or Measurement
Procedure
Reference toxicant
tests
Resort of complete
sample including
debris
Recount and ID of
sorted animals
Duplicate weights
Splits of a sample
Sample splits
and analysis of
standards
Frequency
of Use
2 wk Intervals
10% of each
tech's work
10% of each
tech's work
10% of samples
10% of each
tech's work
10% of samples
Data Generated
for Measurement
Quality Definition
Variance of replicated
tests over time
No. animals resorted
No. of count and ID
errors
Duplicate results
Duplicate results
Duplicate results
-------
Table 7-2. (Continued)
Variable
QA Sample Type or Frequency
Measurement Procedure of Use
Data Generated
for Measurement
Quality Definition
Dissolved
Oxygen Cone.
Hydrolab
Surveyor II
Air-saturated water
measurement following
water saturated air
calibration
Daly
Difference between
probe and saturation
table
u
(0
Hydrolab
DataSonde 3
Salinity
Temperature
Depth
pH
Side-by-slde measure-
ment against calibrated
Hydrolab Surveyor II
Refractometer reading
Thermometer check
Check bottom depth
against depth finder
on boat
QC check with buffer
solution standard
At deployment
and retrieval
of unit
Daly
Daly
One at each
sampling
location
Daly
Difference between
DataSonde 3 and
Surveyor II (based
on saturation table)
Difference between
probe and refractometer
Difference between
probe and thermometer
Replicated difference
from actual
Difference from
standard
-------
Table 7-2. Continued
Variable
Fish
community
composition
Fish gross
pathology
Fish
nistopathotogy
Abundance
of large
bivalves
Apparent RPD
depth
QA Sample Type or
Measurement Procedure
Duplicate counts
Field audits
NA
Random recount and
Identification
Duplicate measurements
Frequency
of Use
10% of trawls
(or 1 trawl/crew
change)
Regular Intervals
or as needed
NA
10% of
collection
10% of samples
Data Generated
for Measurement
Quality Definition
Replicated difference
between determinations
Number of mls-
Identfflcattons
NA
Duplicate results
Duplicate results
-------
Table 7-3. Warning and control limits for quality control samples
Analysis Type
Recommended
Warning Umit
Recommended
Control Umit
Method Blanks
(organic and inorganic)
Matrix Spikes 50%"
Less than detection
limit
Not specified
Laboratory Control Sample
Organic 80% - 120%w
Inorganic 90%-110%
Laboratory Duplicate
(organic and inorganic)
Ongoing Calibration Check
(organic and inorganic)
Standard Reference Material*"'
Organic 80% -120%
Inorganic 90%-110%
70% -130%
85%- 115%
± 30% relative
percent difference
±15% of the
initial calibration
70% -130%
85%-115%
w Units are percent recovery
w Units are percent of true value
141
-------
Table 7-4. Recommended detection limits (ppm) for EMAP-NC chemical analyses in the Louisianian
Province
Analyte
Tissue
Sample
Sediment
Sample
Inoraanics (concentrations in com. dry weight)
Al
Cr
Mn
Fe
Ni
Cu
Zn
As
Se
Ag
Cd
Sn
Sb
Hg
Pb
Organics (concentrations in ppb,
Hydrocarbons
PCB congeners
ODD, DDE, DDT species
Pesticides
*Not measured in fish tissues
10.0
0.1
5.0*
50.0
0.5
5.0
50.0
2.0
1.0
0.01
0.2
0.05
0.2*
0.01
0.1
dry weight)
20.0*
1.0
1.0
1.0
1500.0
5.0
1.0
500.0
1.0
5.0
2.0
1.5
0.1
0.01
0.05
0.1
0.2
0.01
1.0
5.0
0.1
0.1
0.1
142
-------
as a control sample (Taylor 1985). The type and frequency of quality assessment activities that will be
performed for each sampling activity are summarized in Table 7-2.
Field/laboratory technicians and analysts will be apprised routinely of their performance on quality
assessment samples. Actions taken, upon failing an assessment sample, will depend on the magnitude of
the problem. Criteria will be established for both warning and control limits. Exceeding warning limits will
require only rechecking of calculations or measurement processes, but exceeding control limits will require
that all samples processed since the last assessment sample be reanalyzed. Reid/ laboratory technicians
and analysts who repeatedly fail criteria will be removed from their positions and/or retrained. Examples
of the warning and control limits that will be used in conducting chemical analyses of sediments and tissue
samples collected during the Demonstration Project are shown in Table 6-4. Recommended detection limits
for chemical analyses are shown in Table 7-5.
Reid and laboratory aspects of the 1991 Louisianian Province Monitoring Demonstration will be subjected
to audits. Initial review of the field team will be performed during the training program. Following training,
a site assessment audit will be performed by a combination of QA, training personnel, the Province Manager,
and the Technical Director. This audit will be considered a "shakedown* procedure to assist field teams In
obtaining a consistent approach to collection of samples and generation of data. At least once during the
field sampling program, a formal site audit will be performed by QA personnel to determine compliance with
the Quality Assurance Project Plan, the Field Operations Manual, and the Laboratory Methods Manual.
Checklists and audit procedures will be developed for this audit that are similar to those presented in USEPA
(1985).
EMAP-QA personnel will conduct a performance audit of all laboratory operations at the outset of the
project to determine whether each laboratory effort is in compliance with the procedures described in the
Quality Assurance Project Plan. Additionally, once during the study, a formal laboratory audit will be
conducted following protocols similar to those presented in USEPA, 1985. Checklists that are appropriate
143
-------
for each laboratory operation will be developed and approved by the EMAP-NC QA Officer prior to the
audits.
7.4 Quality Assurance of Data Management Activities
EMAP-NC must ensure and maintain the integrity of the large number of values that eventually will be
entered into the data management system (NRC 1990; Risser and Treworgy 1986; Packard et al. 1989).
EMAP-NC will use the procedures highlighted below to ensure the quality of the data in the EMAP Near
Coastal Information Management System (NCIMS).
To the extent possible, data will be captured electronically to minimize the errors associated with entry
and transcription of data from one medium to another. When manual entry is required, a hard copy of the
entered data will be checked against the original by a second data entry operator to identify non-matches
and correct keypunching errors. When data are transferred, the transfer will be done electronically, if
possible, using communications protocols (e.g., Kermit software) that check on the completeness and
accuracy of the transfer. When data are transferred using floppy disks or tapes, the group sending the
information will specify the number of bytes and the file names of the transferred files. These data
characteristics will be verified upon receipt of the data. If the file can be verified, it will be incorporated into
the data base. Otherwise, new files will be requested. Whenever feasible, a hard copy of ail data will be
provided.
Erroneous numeric data will be identified using range checks, filtering algorithms, and comparisons to
lists of valid values established by experts for specific data types (i.e., lookup tables). When data fall outside
an acceptable range, they will be flagged and reported to the Louisianian Province Quality Assurance Officer
(LP/QAO). Similarly, when a code cannot be verified in the appropriate lookup table, the observation will
be flagged and reported to the LP/QAO.
144
-------
All identified discrepancies and errors will be documented. This documentation will be a permanent part
of the NCIMS. Data will not be incorporated into the LPIMS until all discrepancies have been resolved. The
near coastal LP/QAO will be responsible for resolving all errors. Data sets for which discrepancies have
been resolved will be added to the appropriate data base. A record of the addition wUI be entered into the
Data Set Index and kept In hard copy. Once data have been entered into the LPIMS, changes will not be
made without the written consent of the LP/QAO.
To ensure that complete records of all field activities are maintained, the field computer system will not
allow modification of the data files. Instead, correction values will be entered Into the data file and
associated with the incorrect entry. Corrections will be made then and a record of the original data and the
correction will become a permanent part of the file.
7.5 Quality Assurance Reports to Management
Control charts (see example shown in Fig. 7-2) will be used extensively to document measurement
process control. Control charts will be used with the following: (1) QC check standards for controlling
instrument drift, (2) matrix spike or surrogate recoveries to measure extraction efficiency or matrix
interference, (3) certified performance evaluation samples to control overall laboratory performance, and (4)
blank samples. Control charts will be maintained at each participating laboratory and reported with the data.
The first Annual Statistical Summary for the Louisianian Province is scheduled for June 1992, after
completion of the 1991 Louisianian Province Monitoring Demonstration. Precision, accuracy, compara-
bility, completeness, and representativeness of the data collected during the Demonstration will be
summarized in this document, and detection limits reported. Interpretive Assessment Reports will be
prepared every four years by the program element of EMAP-NC and Special Scientific Reports will be
produced periodically to address concerns raised about the program, such as the ability of the sampling
design to detect trends. The data quality attributes of precision, accuracy, comparability, completeness, and
representativeness will also be provided for each of the reports.
145
-------
s
!
0)
3
>
T-3»
, T»3«
T+2»
, CERTIFIED MEAN (X")
. Y-2l
I i I I I I I I T
TME SCALE
T± 2s « WARMNQ UNIT
(95% CONRDENCE)
T± 3* x ACTION UNIT
Figure 7-2. Example of a control chart.
146
-------
8.0 REFERENCES
After R.C. 1982. The effects of macrobenthos on chemical properties of marine sediment and overlying
water, pp. 53-102. !Q: Animal-Sediment Relations: The Biogenic Alteration of Sediments, 53-102. P.L
McCall and M.J.S. Tevesz, eds. New York: Plenum Press.
Bell. S.S. and B.C. Coull. 1978. Field evidence that shrimp predation regulates meiofauna. Oecdogla
35:141-148.
Blyard, G.R. 1987. The value of benthic infauna in marine pollution monitoring studies. Mar. Poll. Bull.
18:581-585.
Boesch, D.F. 1977. Application of numerical classification in ecological investigations of water pollution.
Spec. Sci. Rpt. 77, EPA-600/3-7703.
Boesch, D.F. and R. Rosenberg. 1981. Response to stress in marine benthic communities, pp. 179-200.
in: Stress Effects on Natural Ecosystems. G.W. Barret and R. Rosenberg, eds. New York: John Wiley
and Sons.
Boynton, W.R., W.M. Kemp, J. Garber, J.M. Barnes, LL Robertson, and J.L Watts. 1988. Chesapeake Bay
water quality monitoring program ecosystems processes component. Level 1 Report No. 5. Prepared
for Maryland Department of Environment by University of Maryland Center for Environmental and
Estuarine Studies.
Breteler, R.J., K.J. Scott and S.P. Shepurd. 1989. Application of a new sediment toxicity test using the
marine amphipod, Amoelisca abdita. to San Francisco Bay sediments. In: Aquatic Toxicology and
Hazard Assessment, Volume 12. U.M. Cowgill, and LR. Williams, eds. ASTM.
147
-------
Brongersma-Sanders, M. 1957. Mass mortality in the sea. pp. 941-1010. In: Treatise on Marine Ecology
and Paleoecdogy. J.W. Hedgpeth, ed. Mem. Geol. Soc. Am. 67.
Broutman. MA and D.L Leonard. 1986. National Estuarine Inventory: Classified Shellfish Growing Waters
by Estuary. Rockville, MD: NOAA.
Broutman, MA and D.L Leonard. 1988. The Quality of the Shellfish Growing Waters in the Gulf of Mexico.
Rockville, MD: NOAA
Brown, A.C.. 1964. [Lethal] Effect of hydrogen sulfide on Bullia [laevissima, B. digitalis] (Gastropoda)
[behavior]. Nature 203:205-206.
Buhler, D.R. and D.E. Williams. 1988. The rde of biotransformation in toxicity. Fish. Aauat. Toxicd. 11:303-
311.
Cabelli, V.J. 1977. Clostridum perfrinaens as a water quality indicator. Special Technical Publ. 635.
Philadelphia, PA: ASTM.
Capuzzo, J.M., M.N. Moore, and J. Widdows. 1988. Effects of toxic chemicals in the marine environment:
Predictions of impacts from laboratory studies. Aquat. Toxicol. 11:19-28.
Carriker, M.R. 1967. Ecology of estuarine benthic invertebrates: A perspective, pp. 442-487. In: Estuaries,
Publ. No. 83. G.H. Lauff, ed. Washington, DC: American Association for the Advancement of Science.
Chao, LN. and JA. Musick. 1977. Life history, feeding habitats, and functional morphdogy of juvenile
sciaenid fishes in the York River estuary. Rsherv Bull. 75:657-702.
148
-------
Chapman, P.M. 1988. Marine sediment toxlcity tests, pp. 391-402. hr Chemical and Biological
Characterization of Municipal Sludges, Sediments, Dredge Spoils, and Drilling Muds. ASTM STP 976.
J.J. Uchtenberg, FA Winter, C.I. Weber and L Fredkin, eds. Philadelphia, PA: ASTM.
Cloem, J.E. 1982. Does the benthos control phytoplankton biomass in South San Francisco Bay? Mar.
Ecol. Proa. Ser. 9:191-202
Connell, D.W. and G.J. Miller. 1984. Chemistry and Ecotoxicology of Pollution. New York: John Wiley and
Sons.
Continental Shelf Assocates (CSA), Inc. and Martel Labs. 1985. Florida Big Bend Seagrass Habitat Study:
Narrative Report. A final report by CSA submitted to the Minerals Management Service, Metarie, LA
Contract 14-12-0001-30188.
Dame, R., R. Zingmark, and D. Nelson. 1980. Filter feeding coupling between the estuarine water column
and benthic subsystems, pp. 521-526. in: Estuarine Perspectives. V.S. Kennedy, ed. New York:
Academic Press.
Dauer, D.M., T.L Stokes, Jr., H.R. Barker, Jr., P.M. Ewing, and J.W. Sourbeer. 1984. Macrobenthic
communities of the Lower Chesapeake Bay. IV. Bay-wide transects and the Inner Continental Shelf.
Int. Revue Ges. Hvdroblol. 69:1-22.
Dawes, C.J., and J.M. Lawrence. 1979. Effects of blade removal on the proximate composition of the
rhizome of the seagrass Thalassia testudinum Banks ex K6nig. Aauat. Bot. 7:255-266.
DiToro, D.M., J.D. Mahony, D.J. Hansen, K.J. Scott, M.B. Hicks, S.M. Mayr, M.S. Redmond. 1990. Toxicity
of cadmium in sediments: The role of acid volatile sulfide. Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 9:1487-1502.
149
-------
Doering, P.H., CA Oviatt, and J.R. Kelly. 1986. The effects of the filter-feeding dam Mercenaria mercenaria
on carbon cycling in experimental marine mesocosms. J. Mar. Res. 44:839-861.
Dunton, K.H. 1990. Production ecology of Ruppia maritima Ls.l. and Halodule wriahtii Aschers in two
subtropical estuaries. J. EXD. Mar. Blol. Ecd. 143:147-164.
Eleuterius, LN. 1987. Seagrass ecology along the coasts of Alabama, Louisiana, and Mississippi, pp. 11-
24. In: Proceedings of the Symposium on Subtropical-Tropical Seagrasses of the Southeastern United
States. M.J. Durako, R.C. Phillips, and R.L Lewis, eds. Florida Marine Research Publ. No. 42, St.
Petersburg: Florida Department of Natural Resources.
Elmgren, R., and J.B. Frithsen. 1982. The use of experimental ecosystems for evaluating the environmental
impact of pollutants: A comparison of an oil spill in the Baltic Sea and two long-term, low level oil
addition experiments in microcosms, pp. 109-118. jn: Marine mesocosms: Biological and Chemical
Research in Experimental Ecosystems. G.D. Grice and M.R. Reeve, eds. New York: Springer-Verlag.
Forstner, U. and G.T.W. Wittmann. 1981. Metal pollution in the aquatic environment 2nd revised edition.
New York: Springer-Veriag.
Frithsen, J.B. 1989. The benthic communities within Narragansett Bay. An assessment completed for the
Narragansett Bay Project. Providence, Rl: Rhode Island Dept. Environ. Mgt.
Frithsen, J.B., A.A. Keller and M.E.Q. Pilson. 1985. Effects of inorganic nutrient additions in coastal areas:
A mesocosm experiment data report. Volume 1. MERL Series, Report No. 3. Kingston, Rl: The
University of Rhode Island.
Galtsoff, P.S. 1964. The American Oyster, Crassostrea Virginia (Gmelin). Fish. Bull. 64:1-480.
150
-------
Goede, R.W. 1989. Fish Hearth/Condition. Assessment Procedure. Utah Division of Wildlife Resources,
Fisheries Experiment Station, Logan, Utah. (Internal Mimeo Report). 51 pp.
Grassle, J.F., J.P. Grassle. LS. Brown Leger, R.F. Petrecca and N.J. Copely. 1985. Subtidal macrobenthos
of Narragansett Bay. Field and mesocosm studies of the effects of eutrophication and organic input on
benthic populations, pp. 421-434. Jn: Marine Biology of Polar Regions and Effects of Stress on Marine
Organisms, J.S. Gray and M.E. Christiansen (eds.). New York: Wiley.
Haedrich, R.L and S.O. Haedrich. 1974. A seasonal survey of the fishes in the Mystic River, a polluted
estuary in downtown Boston, Massachusetts. Estuarine Coastal Mar. Scl. 2:59-73.
Heitmuller, T. and R. Valente. 1991. Near Coastal Louisianian Province Monitoring Quality Assurance
Project Plan. U.S. EPA, Office of Research and Development, EPA/600/1-91/XXX (Draft). January,
1991.
Hinga, K.R. 1988. Seasonal predictions for pollutant scavenging In two coastal environments using a model
calibration based upon thorium scavenging. Marine Environmental Research 26:97-112.
Holland, A.F., N.K. Mountford, and J.A. Mihursky. 1977. Temporal variation in upper bay mesohaline benthic
communities: I. The 9-m mud habitat Chesapeake Scl. 18:370-378.
Holland, A.F., A.T. Shaughnessy, and M.H. Hiegel. 1987. Long-term variation in mesohaline Chesapeake
Bay macrobenthos: Spatial and temporal patterns. Estuaries 10:227-245.
Holland, A.F., AT. Shaughnessy, LC. Scott, V.A. Dickens, J. Gerritsen, J.A. Ranasinghe. 1989. Long-term
benthic monitoring and assessment program for the Maryland portion of Chesapeake Bay: Interpretive
report. Prepared by Versar, Inc. for Maryland Department of Natural Resources, Power Plant Research
Program. CBRM-LTB/EST-2.
151
-------
Homer, M., P.W. Jones, R. Bradford, J.M. Scoville, D. Morck, N. Kaumeyer, L Hoddaway, and D. Elam.
1980. Demersal fish food habits studies near the Chalk Point Power Plant, Patuxent Estuary, Maryland,
1978-1979. Prepared for the Maryland Department of Natural Resources, Power Plant Siting Program,
by the University of Maryland, Center for Environmental and Estuarine Studies, Chesapeake Biological
Laboratory, Solomons, Maryland, UMCEES-80-32-CBL
Honeyman, B.D. and P.H. Santschi. 1988. Metals in aquatic systems: Predicting their scavenging residence
times from laboratory data remains a challenge. Envir. Sci. and Tech. 22:862-871.
Hunt, D.T.E. and A.L Wilson. 1986. The Chemical Analysis of Water: General Principles and Techniques.
2nd ed. London: Royal Society of Chemistry, 683 p.
Jeffries, H.P., and M. Terceiro. 1985. Cycle of changing abundances in the fishes of the Narragansett Bay
area. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 25:239-244.
Jorgensen, C.B., P. Famme, H.S. Kristensen, P.S. Larsen, F. Mohlenberg, and H.U. Riisgard. 1986. The
bivalve pump. Mar. Ecol. Proa. Ser. 34:69-77.
Kirchner, C.J. 1983. Quality control in water analysis. Environ. Sci. and Technol. 17(4):174A-181A.
Livingston, R.J. 1987. Field sampling in estuaries: The relationship of scale to variability. Estuaries 10:194-
207.
Long, E.R., and M.F. Buchman. 1989. An evaluation of candidate measures of biological effects for the
National Status and Trends Program. NCAA Tech. Memo.
Macauley, J.M. 1991. Near Coastal Louisianian Province Monitoring Demonstration Logistics Plan - East
Region. U.S. EPA, Office of Research and Development. EPA/600/2-91 /XXX (Draft). February, 1991.
152
-------
Macauley, J.M., P.T. Hertmuller, and J.K. Summers. 1991a. Near Coastal Louisianian Province Monitoring
Demonstration - Reid Operations Manual. U.S. EPA, Office of Research and Development EPA/600/X-
91/XXX (Draft). February. 1991.
Macauley, J.M., P.T. Heitmuller, and J.K. Summers. 1991 b. Training Manual for the Louisianian Province -
EMAP-NC. U.S. EPA, Office of Research and Development (mimeo report) Gulf Breeze, FL May, 1991.
Malins, D.C., B.B. McCain, D.W. Brown, S.L Chan, M.S. Myers. J.T. Landahl, P.G. Prohaska, A.J. Friedman,
LD. Rhodes, D.G. Burrows, W.D. Gronlund, and H.O. Hodgins. 1984. Chemical pollutants in sediments
and diseases in bottom-dwelling fish in Puget Sound, Washington. Environ. Scl. Technol. 18:705-713.
Malins, D.C., B.B. McCain, J.T. Landahl, M.S. Myers, M.M. Krahn, D.W. Brown, S.L Chan, and W.T. Roubal.
1988. Neoplastic and other diseases in fish in relation to toxic chemicals: An overview, pp. 43-67. in:
Aquatic Toxicology, Toxic Chemicals, and Aquatic Life: Research and Management D.C. Malins and
A. Jensen, eds. Amsterdam: Elsevier Science.
Martin Marietta Environmental Systems. 1987. Statistical and deliverable analytical support contract: Final
report. Prepared for the Chesapeake Bay Program Water Quality Data Analysis Working Group.
Mayer, F.L, Jr., LL Marking, LE. Pedigo, and J.A. Brecken. 1989. Physiochemical factors affecting
toxicity: pH. salinity, and temperature, Part I. Literature review. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Gulf Breeze, FL
NOAA. 1988. Federal plan for ocean pollution research development, and monitoring: Fiscal years 1988-
1992. Prepared by the National Ocean Pollution Program Office for the National Ocean Pollution Policy
Board. Rockville, MD.
153
-------
National Research Councy (NRC). 1983. Fundamental Research on Estuaries: The Importance of an
Interdisciplinary Approach. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
NRC. 1989. Contaminated Marine Sediments - Assessment and Remediation. Washington, DC: National
Academy Press.
NRC. I990a. Managing Troubled Waters: The Role of Marine Environmental Monitoring. Washington, DC:
National Academy Press.
Nixon, S.W., C.D. Hunt and B.L Nowicki. 1986. The retention of nutrients (C.N.P), heavy metals (Mn, Cd,
Pb, Cu), and petroleum hydrocarbons in Narragansett Bay. pp. 99-122. jn: Biogeochemical Processes
at the Land-sea Boundary. P Lasserre and J.M. Martin, eds. New York: Elsevier.
O'Connor, J.S., J.J. Ziskowski, and R.A. Murchelano. 1987. Index of pollutant-induced fish and shellfish
disease. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Special Report, NDS, Rockville, MD.
Office of Technology Assessment (OTA). 1987. Wastes in Marine Environments. Washington, DC.
Officer, C.B., R.B. Biggs, J.L Taft, LE. Comin, M.A. Tyler, and W.R. Boynton. 1984. Chesapeake Bay
anoxia: Origin, development, and significance. Science 223:22-27.
Onuf, C. and M.L Quammen. 1990. Seagrass status and trends in the Laguna Madre of Texas. Draft
Report; Research Information Bulletin, U.S. Department of Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service.
Overton, W.S. 1989. Design report of the environmental monitoring and assessment program. U.S. EPA
Environmental Research Laboratory, Corvallis, OR.
154
-------
Oviatt. CA 1981. Some aspects of water quality in and pollution sources to the Providence River. Report
for Region I. EPA, September 1979-September 1980, Contract #68-04-1002.
Oviatt, CA, and S.W. Nixon. 1973. The demersal fish of Narraganset Bay: An analysis of community
structure, distribution and abundance. Estuar. and Coastal Mar. Sci. 1:361 -378.
Pait, A.S., D.R.G. Farrow, JA Lowe, and PA Pacheis. 1989. Agricultural pesticide use in estuarine
drainage areas: A preliminary summary for selected pesticides. Rockville, MD: Strategic Assessment
Branch Office of Oceanography and Marine Assessment, NOAA.
Pearson, T.H. and R. Rosenberg. 1978. Macrobenthic succession in relation to organic enrichment and
pollution of the marine environment. Oceanogr. Mar. Biol. Ann. Rev. 16:229-311.
Phifer, S. 1991. Near Coastal Louisianian Province Monitoring Demonstration Logistics Plan - Delta and
West Regions. U.S. EPA, Office of Research and Development, EPA/600/X-91 /XXX, (Draft). April, 1991.
Plumb, R.H., Jr. 1981. Procedures for handling and chemical analysis of sediment and water samples.
Prepared by Great Lakes Laboratory, State Univ. College at Buffalo, Buffalo, N.Y., for the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency/Corps of Engineers Technical Committee on Criteria for Dredged and
Fill Material. Published by, U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, CE, Vicksburg,
Mississippi. Technical Report EPA/CE-81-1.
Pruell, R.J., J.G. Quinn, J.L Lake, and W.R. Davis. 1987. Availability of PCBs and PAHs to Mytily? gduNs
from artificially resuspended sediments, pp. 97-108. in: Oceanic Processes in Marine Pollution. Vol.
1. Biological Processes and Wastes in the Ocean. J.M. Capuzzo, and D.R. Kester, eds. Malabar, FL
Krieger.
155
-------
Reish, D.J. and J.L Barnard. 1960. Field toxlcity tests in marine water utilizing the polychaetous annelid
Caoltella caoitata (Fabricius). Pacif. Nat. 1:1-8.
Remane, A., and C. ScWieper. 1971. Biology of Brackish Water. New York: John Wiley and Sons.
Rhoads, D.C. 1974. Organism-sediment relations on the muddy sea floor. Oceanoor. Mar. Biol. A. Rev.
12:263-300.
Rhoads, D.C., P.L McCail, and J.Y. Yingst. 1978. Disturbance and production on the estuarine sea floor.
Amer. Scient. 66:577-586.
Rhoads, D.C., and J.D. Germano. 1982. Characterization of organism-sediment relations using sediment
profile imaging: An efficient method of remote ecological monitoring of the seafloor (REMOTS System).
Mar. Ecol. Proar. Ser. 8:115-128.
Rhoads, D.C., and LF. Boyer. 1982. The effects of marine benthos on physical properties of sediments:
A successions! perspective, pp 1-52. in: P.L McCail and M.J. S. Tevesz (eds.), Animal-Sediment
Relations: The Biogenic Alteration of sediments. Plenum Press, New York.
Roesijadi, G., J.S. Young, A.S. Drum, and J.M. Gurtisen. 1987. Behavior of trace metals in Mvtilus edulis
during a reciprocal transplant field experiment. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 18:155-170.
Rosen, J.S. and J.Beaulieu, M.Hughes, H. Buffum, J. Copeland, R. Valente, J. Paul, F. Hollland, S. Schimmel,
C. Strobel, K. Summers, K. Scott, J. Parker. 1990. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment Program
Data Management System for Near Coastal Demonstration Project. U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Office of Research and Develoment. EPA-600/X-90/207.
156
-------
Sanders, H.K., P.O. Mangelsdorf, Jr., and G.R. Hampson. 1965. Salinity and faunal distribution in the
Pocasset River, Massachusetts. Umnol. Oceanoqr. 10:R216-R229.
Sanders, H.L. J.F. Grassle, G.R. Hampson, LS. Morse, S. Gamer-Price, and C.C. Jones. 1980. Anatomy
of an oil spill: Long term effects from the grounding of the barge Florida off West Falmouth,
Massachusetts. J. Mar. Res. 38:265-380.
Schimmel, S.C. 1990. Implementation Plan for the Environmental Monitoring and Assessment Program Near
Coastal Demonstration Project. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and
Development. EPA/600/2-91/XXX(Draft). February, 1991.
Schubel, J.R., and H.H. Carter. 1984. The estuary as a filter for fine-grained suspended sediment in: The
Estuary as a Filter,81-104. V.S. Kennedy, ed. Orlando, FL: Academic Press.
Scott, K.J., and M.S. Redmond. 1989. The effects of a contaminated dredged material on laboratory
populations of the tubificious amphipod Ampelisca abdita. Jn: Aquatic Toxicology and Hazard
Assessment, 12th volume. U.M. Cougill and LR. Williams, eds.
Sharpe, J.H., J.R. Pennock, T.M. Church, T.M. Tramontane, and LA. Cifuentes. 1984. The estuarine
interaction of nutrients, organics, and metals: A case study in the Delaware Estuary, pp. 241-258. In:
The Estuary as a Filter. V.S. Kennedy, ed. Orlando, FL Academic Press.
Slnderman, C.J. 1979. Pollution-associated diseases and abnormalities of fish and shellfish: A review. Fish.
Bull. 76:717-741.
Sloan, R., B. Young. V. Vecchio. K. McKnown, and E. O'Connel. 1988. PCB concentrations in the striped
bass from the marine district of New York State. Tech. Report 88-1. Department of Environmental
Protection, New York.
157
-------
Sprague, J.B. 1985. Factors that modify toxicity. pp. 124-163. in: Fundamentals of Aquatic Toxicology:
methods and applications. G.M. Rand and S.R. Petrocelli, ed. New York: Hemisphere Publication Corp.
Stanley, T.W. and S.S. Verner. 1985. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's quality assurance
program, pp. 12-19. Jn: Quality Assurance for Environmental Measurements, ASTM STP 867. J.K.
Taylor and T.W. Stanley, eds. Philadelphia: American Society for Testing and Materials.
Summers, J.K. and V.D. Engle. 1991. Evaluation of Sampling Strategies to Characterize Dissolved Oxygen
Conditions in Northern Gulf of Mexico Estuaries. Environ. Monitoring and Assessment (submitted).
Swartz, B.C. 1987. Toxicological methods for determining the effects of contaminated sediment on marine
organisms, pp. 183-198. In: Fate and Effects of Sediment Bound Chemicals in Aquatic Systems. K.L
Dickson, A. W. Maki, and W.A. Brungs, eds. New York: Pergamon Press.
Swartz, R.C. 1989. Marine sediment toxicity tests, pp. 115-129. Contaminated Marine Sediments -
assessment and remediation. National Research Council Committee on Contaminated Marine Sediments,
Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
Swartz, R.C., W.A. DeBen, J.K. Jones, J.O. Lamberson, and F.A. Cole. 1985. Phoxocephalid amphipod
bioassay for marine sediment toxicity. pp. 284-307. In: Aquatic Toxicology and Hazard Assessment:
Seventh Symposium. R. D. Cardwell, R. Purdy, and R.C. Bahner, eds. Philadelphia, PA: American
Society for Testing and Materials.
Taylor, J.K. 1978. Importance of inter-calibration in marine analysis. Thai. Jugo. 14:221.
Taylor, J.K. 1985. Principles of quality assurance of chemical measurements. NBSIR 85-3105. National
Bureau of Standards, Gaithersburg, MD.
158
-------
Taylor, J.K. 1987. Quality Assurance of Chemical Measurements. Chelsea, ME: Lewis Publishers, Inc.
Theede, H. 1973. Comparative studies on the resistance of marine bottom invertebrates to oxygen
deficiency and hydrogen sulphide. Mar. Bid. 2:325-337.
Thorson, G. 1957. Bottom communities, pp. 461-535. In: Treatise on Marine Ecology and Paleoecology.
J.W. Hedgpeth, ed. New York: Geological Society of America.
Turekian, K.K. 1977. The fate of metals in the oceans. Geo. et Cosmochimica Acta 41:1139-1144.
USER A. 1984. Chesapeake Bay: A framework for action. Prepared for the U.S. Congress by the
Environmental Protection Agency, Region 3, Philadelphia, PA.
USEPA. 1985. Standard Operating Procedures for conducting Surplus and Sample Bank Audits. U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Environmental Monitoring and Support Laboratory, Cincinnati!, OH.
EPA/600/4-79-019.
USEPA, 1989. Briefing Report to the EPA Science Advisory Board on the Equilibrium Partitioning Approach
to Generating Sediment Quality Criteria. EPA 440/5-89-002. USEPA, Criteria and Standards Division,
Washington, DC.
USEPA. 1990. Near Coastal Program Plan. U.S. EPA, Office of Research and Development. EPA/600/10-
90/XXX. October 1990.
USEPA. 1991. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment Program. Laboratory Methods Manual-Near
Coastal Demonstration Project. Office of Research and Development EPA/600/10-90/XXX. (draft).
159
-------
Vemberg, F.S. 1972. Dissolved gases, in: Marine Ecology, Vol. I, Parts, 1491-1526. O.Kinne, ed. New
York: Wiley-lnterscience.
Warwick, R.M. 1980. Population dynamics and secondary production on benthos, pp. 1-24. Jn: Marine
benthic dynamics. K.R. Tenore and B.C. Coull, eds. Belle W. Baruch Library in Science Number 11,
University of South Carolina Press, Columbia, SC.
Weaver, G. 1984. PCS contamination in and around New Bedford, Mass. Environ. Sci. Tech. 18:22A-
27A.
Weinstein, M.P., S.L Weiss, and M.F. Walters. 1980. Multiple determinants of community structure in
shallow marsh habitats, Cape Fear River estuary, North Carolina, USA. Mar. Bid. 48:227-243.
Wolfe, D.A., MA Champ, DA Remer, and A.J. Meams. 1987. Long-term biological data sets: Their role
In research, monitoring, and management of estuarine and coastal marine systems. Estuaries 10:181-
193.
160
LIBRARY
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
GULF BREEZE ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH LABORATORY
SABINE ISLAND
GULF BREEZE, FL 32561-5290
------- |