A STREAM CONDITION INDEX FOR
WEST VIRGINIA WADEABLE STREAMS
Prepared for:
U.S. EPA Region 3 Environmental Services Division,
and U.S. EPA Office of Science and Technology, Office of Water
Work Assignment Managers:
James Green (Region 3) and William Swietlik (OST)
Prepared by:
Tetra Tech, Inc.
10045 Red Run Boulevard
Suite 110
Owings Mills, MD 21117
March 28, 2000 (Revised July 21, 2000)
-------
A Stream Condition Index for West Virginia Wadeable Streams
acknowledgments
This report was prepared under 3 work assignments of EPA contract #68-C7-0014 to Tetra Tech, Inc.
Authors of this report are Jeroen Gerritsen, June Burton, and Michael T. Barbour. We thank Maggie
Passmore and Jim Green of EPA Region 3 for helpful guidance, discussions and review. The biological
index was made possible by the intensive data collection efforts and discussion of West Virginia DEP; in
particular, Janice Smithson, Jeffrey Bailey, Pat Campbell, and John Wirts. This report was prepared with
the assistance of Jeffrey White, Erik Leppo, and Brenda Fowler.
Tetra Tech, Inc.
iii
March 28, 2000 (Revised July 21, 2000)
-------
A Stream Condition Index for V/est Virginia Wadeable Streams
THIS PAGE LEFT INTENTIONALLY BLANK
Tetra Tech, Inc.
iv
March 28, 2000 (Revised July 21, 2000)
-------
A Stream Condition Index for West Virginia Wadeable Streams
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS -. iii
LIST OF FIGURES . . vii
UST OF TABLES viii
ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS ix
1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1
2.0 THE APPLICATION OF STREAM BIO AS SES SMENT IN WEST VIRGINIA 3
3.0 ESTABLISHING BIOREGIONS AS A BASIS FOR BIOASSESSMENT 5
4.0 TRANSFORMING BIOLOGICAL ATTRIBUTES INTO METRICS 13
5.0 AGGREGATING METRICS INTO A BIOLOGICAL INDEX 18
6.0 TESTING AND REFINING THE INDEX USING INDEPENDENT DATA 20
7.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 22
7.1 Rating System 22
7.2 Refining the index . 22
7.3 Maintaining the index 24
APPENDICES
A ANALYTICAL METHODS AND STEP-BY-STEP PROCESS A-l
B LITERATURE CITED B-l
C METRICS AND METRIC SCORES C-l
D SUPPORTING GRAPHS D-l
Tetra Tech, Inc.
V
March 28, 2000 (Revised July 21, 2000)
-------
A Stream Condition Index for West Virginia Wadeable Streams
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
Tetra Tech, Inc.
vi
March 28, 2000 (Revised July 21, 2000)
-------
A Stream Condition Index for West Virginia Wadeable Streams
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure Page
.3-1 Geographic distribution of benthic macroinvertebrate sampling sites by data source .
andecoregion 6
3-2 Ordination (NMDS) of EMAP (a) and West Virginia (b) reference site macroinvertebrate
data by 3 ecoregions: Ridge and Valley (67), Central Appalachians (69) and Western
Allegheny Plateau (70) 9
3-3 Ordination (NMDS) of West Virginia reference site macroinvertebrate data by month
of sampling 10
3-4 Metric values in 67 West Virginia reference sites plotted by Julian day 12
5-1 Working SCI discriminates between West Virginia reference and impaired sites in the
1996-1997 calibration data 18
5-2 Effect of sampling season on working West Virginia stream index (SCI) 19
6-1 Working SCI discriminates between West Virginia reference and stressed sites in the new
independent data (b) as well as in the original data set (a) ................ 20
7-1 Reference and stressed sites, combined 1996-1998 data, and possible rating categories 23
Tetra Tech, Inc.
vii
March 28, 2000 (Revised July 21, 2000)
-------
A Stream Condition Index for West Virginia Wadeable Streams .
LIST OF TABLES
Table Page
3-1 Strength of alternative classifications of macroinvertebrate assemblages in
reference sites 10
3-2 Frequency and relative abundance of top 20 taxa in West Virginia reference sites,
"by ecoregion. * 11
4-1 Candidate metrics: expected response to stress, discrimination ability, and final
recommendation for WV stream condition index 16
4-2 Pearson Correlation Coefficients among 15 Candidate Metrics 17
6-1 West Virginia final SCI: Metric standard values and standardization formulas 21
6-2 Percentile distribution of Index (SCI) values in all 1996-1998 reference samples 21
7-1 Example rating system for West Virginia SCI scores 22
Tetra Tech, Inc. viii March 28,2000 (Revised July 21, 2000)
-------
A Stream Condition Index for West Virginia Wadeable Streams
ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS
ATV All terrain vehicle
B-IBI Benthic Index of Biotic Integrity
BPJ Best professional judgement
DE Discrimination efficiency
DEP Division of Environmental Protection (West Virginia); also WVDEP
EDAS Ecological Data Application System
EMAP Environmental Monitoring and Assessment Program (USEPA); also
EMAP-MAHA
EMAP-MAHA Environmental Monitoring and Assessment Program—Mid-Atlantic
Highlands Assessment (USEPA)
EPA invironmental Protection Agency (U.S.); also USEPA
D3I ndex of Biotic Integrity
[CI nvertebrate Condition Index
IQR nterquartile range
NMDS Non-metric multidimensional scaling
OWR Office of Water Resources (West Virginia)
RBP Rapid Bioassessment Protocol
SCI Stream Condition Index
SWRB State Water Resources Board (West Virginia)
TMDL Total Maximum Daily Load
USEPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency; also EPA
WAP Watershed Assessment Program (West Virginia)
WQ Water quality
WVDEP West Virginia Division of Environmental Protection; also DEP
Tetra Tech, Inc. ix March 28, 2000 (Revised July 2], 2000)
-------
A Stream Condition Index for West Virginia Wadeable Streams
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
Tetra Tech, Inc.
x
March 28, 2000 (Revised July 21, 2000)
-------
A Stream Condition Index for West Virginia Wadeable Streams
1.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Over the past century, land use activities such as mining, agriculture, urbanization, and industrialization
have seriously threatened the quality of surface waters by contributing to nonpoint-source pollution. In
West Virginia, the investigation of these nonpoint sources of water pollution has become a priority. It is
the responsibility of West Virginia Division of Environmental Protection (DEP) to maintain and protect
the ecosystem health of the state's waters. In keeping with the Clean Water Act and technical guidance
from USEPA, DEP developed water quality standards for the protection of ecosystem, health. In support
of the state's water quality standards, which mandate the implementation of biological and chemical
criteria and a strict antidegradation policy, the ambient monitoring program has established an
assessment "toolbox" that includes physical, chemical, and biological techniques.
West Virginia DEP uses a rotating basin network of monitoring, scheduled on a 5-year rotation. A core
team of biologists, naturalists, and chemists provides the technical resources to conduct the monitoring.
Biological data (e.g., the diversity of organisms) are necessary to assess the health of West Virginia's
surface waters and to measure the attainment of biological integrity goals as directed by USEPA and
characterized by the state of West Virginia. DEP established a Biological Assessment Program patterned
after the Rapid Bioassessment Protocols of EPA (Plafkin et al. 1989). The results presented in this report
establish a framework for the assessment and monitoring of West Virginia's streams using rapid
bioassessment procedures.
Bioassessment consists of comparing the
biological condition of a stream to a reference
condition, which is an aggregate of conditions in
unimpaired streams of a region. Reference
conditions are "best available" conditions where
biological potential is at its highest for the
particular region or area. These reference
conditions are representative of sustainable
ecosystem health. For West Virginia, the
Mountain State, a single region appears sufficient
for statewide and rotating basin assessments.
Partitioning the streams and watersheds into Level
3 ecoregions does not appear to improve biological assessment. The information derived from a survey
is aggregated into a Stream Condition Index (SCI) for West Virginia. This SCI is used as a primary
Biocriteria: under the Clean Water Act,
numerical values or narrative statements that
define a desired biological condition for a
waterbody and are part of the WQ standards.
Bioassessments: evaluations of the biological
condition of a waterbody that use biological
surveys of the resident biota.
Biosurveys: the collection, processing, and
analysis of representative portions of a resident
biotic community or assemblage.
Tetra Tech, Inc.
March 28, 2000 (Revised July 21, 2000)
-------
A Stream Condition Index for West Virginia Wadeable Streams
indicator of ecosystem health and can identify impairment with respect to the reference (or natural)
condition. The index includes six biological attributes, called metrics, that represent elements of the
structure and function of the bottom-dwelling macroinvertebrate assemblage. Metrics are specific
measures of diversity, composition, and tolerance to pollution, that include ecological information.
The SCI is to be used as the basis for
bioassessment in West Virginia and has been
calibrated for a long-term biological index period
extending from April through October. A data
analysis application has been developed to ensure
consistency in data management and analysis
throughout the state as DEP biologists conduct
biological monitoring.
Benefits expected from the implementation of the
WV SCI will apply to a broad spectrum of
management programs, including:
• characterizing the existence and severity of point and nonpoint source impairment;
• targeting and prioritizing watersheds and ecosystem management areas for remedial or
preventive programs;
• evaluating the effectiveness of nonpoint source best management programs;
• screening ecosystems for use attainability; and
• developing a basis for establishing biocriteria that relate to regional water quality goals,
an EPA priority.
The West Virginia SCI was tested with independent data collected in 1998 and was able to correctly
identify the majority of the stream sites stressed in some way by human disturbance or pollution. Index
scores were divided into 5 proposed rating categories for reporting on the condition of West Virginia
streams.
CORE METRICS
~ EPT taxa
~ Total taxa
sisa
~ % EPT
~ % Chironomidae
~ % Top 2 Dominant Taxa X
•* j \ y
~ HBI (Family biotic index)
See definitions in Table A-2.
Tetra Tech, Inc.
2
March 28, 2000 (Revised July 21, 2000)
-------
A Stream Condition Index for Wert Virginia Wadeable Streams
2. THE APPLICATION OF STREAM BIO ASSESSMENT IN WEST VIRGINIA
The West Virginia Division of Environmental Protection (DEP) is developing biological criteria for use
in assessing the quality of streams as part of the state's Watershed Assessment Program. Through the
303(d) and Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) framework outlined in the Clean Water Act of 1972
(and revisions of 1977, 1987), those waters considered to be impaired and threatened must be identified
and improved to meet their designated uses. The definition of impairment by natural resource
management or regulatory agencies is typically based on attainment or non-attainment of numerical water
quality standards associated with a waterbody's designated use. If those standards are not met (or
attained), then the waterbody is considered to be impaired. Resident biota in a watershed function as
continual natural monitors of environmental quality, responding to the effects of both episodic as well as
cumulative pollution and habitat alteration. Conducting ambient biological surveys is one of the primary
approaches to biomonitoring. These surveys, in turn, are used to measure the attainment of biological
integrity. The assessment of ecosystem health cannot be done without measuring the attainment of
biological integrity goals as directed by USEPA and characterized by the state of West Virginia.
The Clean Water Act of 1972 (PL-92-500) has as
one of its primary goals the maintenance and
restoration of biological integrity, which
incorporates biological, physical, and chemical
quality. This concept refers to the natural
assemblage of indigenous organisms that would
inhabit a particular area if it had not been affected
by human activities. This integrity or naturally
occurring structure and function of the aquatic
community becomes the primary reference condition
used to measure and assess waterbodies in a particular region.
Careful measurement of the natural aquatic ecosystem and its constituent biological communities can
determine the condition of biological integrity. Several key attributes are measured to indicate the
quality of the aquatic resources. Biological surveys establish the attributes or measures used to
summarize several community characteristics, such as taxa richness, number of individuals, sensitive or
insensitive species, observed pathologies, and the presence or absence of essential habitat elements.
Biological integrity is commonly defined as
"the capability of supporting and maintaining a
balanced, integrated, adaptive community of
organisms having a species composition,
diversity and functional organization
comparable to that of the natural habitat of the
regions" (Karr and Dudley 1981, Gibson et al.
1996).
Tetra Tech, Inc.
3
March 28, 2000 (Revised July 21, 2000)
-------
A Stream Condition Index for West Virginia Wadeable Streams
Multimetric, invertebrate indices of biotic integrity, variously called RBP (Rapid Bioassessment
Protocol; Plafkin et al. 1989; Barbour et al. 1999), ICI (Invertebrate Condition Index; Ohio EPA 1989),
B-IBI (Benthic EBI; Kerans and Karr 1994) and SCI (Stream Condition Index; Barbour et al. 1996) have
been developed for many regions of North America and are generally accepted for biological assessment
of aquatic resource quality (e.g., Gibson et al. 1996, Southerland and Stribling 1995, Karr 1991). The
framework of bioassessment consists of characterizing reference conditions upon which comparisons can
be made and identifying appropriate biological attributes with which to measure the condition.
Reference conditions are "best available" conditions where biological potential is at its highest for the
particular-region or area. These reference conditions are representative of sustainable ecosystem health.
Biological measurements, called metrics, represent elements of the structure and function of the bottom-
dwelling macroinvertebrate assemblage. Metrics change in some predictable way with increased human
influence (Barbour et al. 1996). They include specific measures of diversity, composition, and functional
feeding group representation and include ecological information on tolerance to pollution. Multimetric
indices, such as the EBI, incorporate multiple biological community characteristics and measure the
overall response of the community to environmental stressors (Karr et al. 1986, Barbour et al. 1995).
Such a measure of the structure and function of the biota (using a regionally-calibrated multimetric
index) is an appropriate indicator of ecological quality, reflecting biological responses to changes in
physical habitat quality, the integrity of soil and water chemistry, geologic processes, and land use
changes (to the degree that they affect the sampled habitat).
The purpose of this study was to develop a
multimetric biological index for West Virginia
streams. State Watershed Assessment Program
(WAP) stream assessment data from 1996 and
1997 were used for developing an index, and
1998 data were used to test and validate the
index. Results of the analysis were used to make
recommendations for improving the state's
biological sampling program to achieve more
reliable assessments of West Virginia streams.
This study was designed to address the following
questions:
• What is the most appropriate site classification
for assessment of ecosystem health?
• What are the seasonal differences in
biological metrics? (Are two index periods
required for monitoring?)
• What are the appropriate metrics for a West'
Virginia Stream Condition Index (SCI)?
• What are thresholds that indicate the degree of
comparability of West Virginia streams to
reference condition?
Tetra Tech, Inc.
4
March 28, 2000 (Revised July 21, 2000)
-------
A Stream Condition Index for West Virginia Wadeable Streams
3. ESTABLISHING BIOREGIONS AS A BASIS FOR BIO ASSESSMENT
Biological systems naturally vary in composition and diversity of the fauna, depending on the physical
characteristics and geomorphology of the waterbodies (in this case, streams) in which they reside.
Partitioning this natural variability into relatively homogenous classes, or bioregions, can aid in
establishing reference conditions, w benchmarks, from which to assess biological condition. The
purpose of this classification analysis is to evaluate Level 3 ecoregions as a means of establishing .
bioregions for West Virginia streams. Sites sampled in 1996-1997 were located in three Level 3
ecoregions: the Ridge and Valley (No. 67), Central Appalachians (No. 69), and Western Allegheny
Plateau (No. 70).
Identification of reference sites (i.e., those having the expected composition and diversity of biota for a
region or class of sites) provides the basis for evaluating bioregions. Out of 720 sites sampled by West
Virginia DEP in 1996-1997, there were 67 identified
as reference (see Appendix A, Table A-l, for
criteria). The relative geographic clustering of the
benthic data from the West Virginia data set
suggested that testing an ecoregional classification
might not be reliable with this data set alone.
Therefore, similar benthic data were obtained from
EPA's Environmental Monitoring and Assessment
Program (EMAP) in the Mid-Atlantic Highlands for
this analysis. From the EMAP database, 79
reference sites (using same criteria as for West
Virginia) were identified that were geographically
distributed within the same 3 ecoregions and
encompassed a broader pattern than the clustered
distribution of the West Virginia database (Figure 3-
1).
Methods of Analysis
• Non-metric Multidimensional Scaling
(NMDS) Ordination— Spatial array of sites
based on similarity/difference of benthic
composition and abundance.
• Similarity Analysis — Tests for statistical
significance and the strength of the
classification.
• Box-arid- Whisker Plots — Display of ranges
of values for the biological data oriented by
spatial and temporal groupings.
• Scatterplots by date — Tests for correlation
of biological attributes (metrics) with
sampling date.
See Appendix A for full discussion of methods.
Tetra Tech, Inc.
5
March 28, 2000 (Revised July 21, 2000)
-------
A Stream Condition Index for West Virginia Wadeable Streams
Sampling Locations
0 EMAP
• WV DE P
Ecoregions
45 Piedmont
58 Northeastern Highlands
| 60 Northern Appalachian Plateau and Uplands
Iteaftl 61 Erie/Ontario Drift and Lake Plains
BMl 62 H orth Central Appalachians
|gjj*| 63 Middle Atlantic Coastal Plain
64Northern Piedmont
fBjgH 65 Southeastern Plains
|g|y] 66 Blue Ridge Mountains
S7 Ridge and Valley
69 Central Appalachians
| | 70 Western Allegheny Plateau
Figure 3-1. Geographic distribution of benthic macroinvertebrate sampling sites by data source and ecoregion.
Tetra Tech, Inc.
6
March 28. 2000 (Revised July 21, 2000)
-------
A Stream Condition Index for West Virginia Wadeable Streams
The development of an appropriate classification for bioassessment was confounded by a broad temporal
range of collections (May - September). The issue of seasonal differences in the benthic
macroinvertebrate assemblage might require grouping the data by narrower date ranges for classification.
Therefore, analyses were performed to evaluate both ecoregions and date.
Conclusion for Classification into Bioregions
Use of ecoregions to serve as bioregions for benthic assessments of cobble habitat in streams of
West Virginia is not necessary.
While the broad collection timeframe of West Virginia DEP introduces variability into the
dataset, no clear differentiation of sampling periods was discemable.
Documentation for results are as follows:
• Ordination of the benthic data by ecoregion indicated that a spatial classification was not
distinct (Figure 3-2). Neither the EMAP data (based on genus-level taxonomy) nor the
West Virginia data (based on family-level taxonomy) were able to distinguish ecoregions
adequately to serve as bioregions.
• Ordination of the West Virginia benthic data by date was not distinct enough to partition
into separate sampling periods (Figure 3-3). There was a slight indication that the early
sampling dates May - June would provide less variability for assessments. The EMAP
data were primarily restricted to a July - August time period, and thus not tested for date
differences in this analysis.
• The classification into ecoregions did not explain differences among sites (0% difference
explained) for EMAP data, and only a weak explanation (6.5% difference explained) for
the West Virginia data (Table 3-1).
• By grouping the benthic data into individual months, classification was improved over
ecoregions (9.7% difference explained), but still inconsequential to explaining variability
(Table 3-1).
Tetra Tech, Inc.
7
March 28, 2000 (Revised July 21, 2000)
-------
A Stream Condition Index for West Virginia Wadeable Streams
• Comparisons of frequencies and relative abundance of taxa did not reveal distinct
differences among sites in the 3 ecoregions (Table 3-2).
• Correlation of various biological attributes or metrics with day of the year sampled
illustrated a weak relationship only with abundance of Chironomids (Figure 3-4).
• Box-and-whisker plots performed on various benthic attributes illustrated only weak
distinction among ecoregions and sampling periods (Appendix D, Figures D1-D2). The
lack of distinction supports using a single class structure for assessment of West Virginia
streams.
; ;
Recommendations From this Analysis
• Classification by some regional physiographic structure (e.g., ecoregions) was not supported by
this analysis of the benthic assemblage from cobble substrate in wadeable streams within the
Appalachian Mountains. The issue of using bioregions to stratify or partition the aquatic
community may still be valid if collecting methods change, level of taxonomy changes, and/or
non-cobble habitats are sampled.
• A narrower sampling window of late spring to early summer would improve the assessments by
reducing variability.
Tetra Tech, Inc.
8
March 28, 2000 (Revised July 21, 2000)
-------
A Stream Condition Index for West Virginia Wadeable Streams
(a) Ordination of EMAP reference sites
Axis 3
~
o
°
A60
O *
-------
A Stream Condition Index for West Virginia Wadeable Streams
Ordination of WV reference sites
A
Month
o 5
A 6
0 o
0 7
~ 8
Axis 3
*WAOaA
\ Z2& 0 A
~ -
~ 9
Axis 1
Figure 3-3. Ordination (NMDS) of West Virginia reference site
macroinvertebrate data by month of sampling. The plot shows a slight
effect due to time-of-sampling, but as with ordination by ecoregion,
there is considerable overlap of data points among the different
sampling months.
Table 3-1. Strength of alternative classifications of macroinvertebrate assemblages in reference sites.
Similarity analysis revealed that the ecoregional classification for West Virginia data accounted
for approximately 6.5% of the dissimilarity among sites. Similarly, month of sampling
accounted for approximately 9.7% of the total dissimilarity. We found that the effects of
ecoregion and date were confounded but that neither gave a particularly strong classification:
^____J>oth^vereJLessthanJJ)%j)fthejotaUiverag^^
¦n. . c Percent Differences
Data Source Classification „ , .
¦ ¦ Explained
EMAPdata ecoregions (n=79) 0
WV data ecoregions (n=67) 6.5%
WV data month (n=67) 9.7%
Tetra Tech, Inc. 10 March 28,2000 (Revised July 21, 2000)
-------
A Stream Condition Index for West Virginia Wadeable Streams
Table 3-2. Frequency and relative abundance of top 20 taxa in West Virginia reference sites, by
ecoregion. Frequencies of top 10 taxa in each ecoregion are in bold. Differences among sites in
this analysis are caused by differences in taxa composition. Overall, these were relatively minor
at the family level. Four families were at least 25% more common and abundant in the Ridge
and Valley ecoregion than in the Central Appalachians: the Chloroperlidae, Ephemerellidae,
Peltoperlidae, and Gammaridae. Taxa more common in the Central Appalachians were the
Tipulidae, Rhyacophilidae, and Cambaridae. There were only 3 sites in the Western
Appalachians, so estimates of frequency of occurrence are unreliable (not shown).
Ridge and Valley Central Appalachians
(Region 67) n=32 (Region 69) n=32
frequency
mean rel.
abund.
frequency
mean rel.
abund.
Chironomidae
94%
6.0%
97%
9.3%
Heptageniida<
91%
12.6%
,97%
9.0%
Baetidae
94%
18.0%
88%
9.1%
Capniidae
97%
9.8%
84%
20.2%
Hydropsychidae
100%
10.4%
81%
21.2%
Philopotamidae
84%
5.1%
81%
6.1%
Chloroperlidae
91%
5.1%
66%
6.9%
Tipulidae
63%
2.5%
91%
4.6%
Perlidae
66%
4.4%
69%
3.7%
Perlodidae
72%
3.5%
50%
3.2%
Leptophlebiidae
63%
5.1%
56% /
4.3%
Rhyacophilidae
34%
2.1%
81%
2.6%
Pteronarcydae
69%
3.8%
47%
1.8%
Ephemerellidae
63%
2.3%
38%
4.0%
Peltoperlidae
75%
6.7%
28%
3.2%
Simuliidae
47%
2.5%
41%
2.7%
Cambaridae
31%
2.6%
56%
1.4%
Elmidae
25% ,
1.8%
47%
2.8%
Oligochaeta
25%
3.1%
44%
3.7%
Nemouridae
31%
5.2%
19%
17.9%
Tetra Tech, Inc.
11
March 28, 2000 (Revised July 21, 2000)
-------
A Stream Condition Index for West Virginia Wadeable Streams
SO
40
30
O
c
o
sz
O
20
10
120
24
20
16
ra
X
— 12
«
o
1— ¦
180 200 220
Julian day
q
cs
CD
0
o
"•Os:::::::
00
O
O
...O"
O
0 0
bo oo
;o 00 ;
0- i-o—
"to *0: i
0 CD O
O O O : O : O O
-j i O- <
|
io' O O
120 140 160 180 200 220
Julian day
240
260
280
Figure 3-4. Metric values in 67 West Virginia reference sites plotted by Julian day. This analysis
showed a weak relationship in the WcChironomid metric (top), but other candidate metrics, such as Total
taxa (bottom), showed no discernible relationship.
Tetra Tech, Inc.
12
March 28, 2000 (Revised July 21, 2000)
-------
A Stream Condition Index for West Virginia Wadeable Streams
4. TRANSFORMING BIOLOGICAL ATTRIBUTES INTO METRICS
Various attributes of the benthic macroinvertebrate community have
been characterized in the form of quantitative measures called
metrics. The attributes of the community that are measured by these
metrics fall into several categories of benthic community
characteristics, and the specific metrics within those categories can
indicate different aspects of the community condition. For example,
metrics-dealing with species richness or diversity, such as Total Taxa, can be used as indicators of
community health because an ecologically healthy system is generally expected to support a more diverse
community of fauna than can be supported in an ecologically impaired area. Multiple metrics evaluated
together can give an overall indication of ecological integrity.
West Virginia's benthic macroinvertebrate samples
collected in the 1996-1997 seasons were identified to the
family taxonomic level, and 100 organisms were counted
for each sample. Within each 100-organism sample, the
number of individuals of each family were tallied. The
identifications and counts of organisms collected at each
site provide the information used to calculate a suite of
metrics for each benthic sample.
Metrics evaluated for use with the West Virginia 1996-
1997 benthic macroinvertebrate data represented four
categories: taxonomic richness, taxonomic composition,
feeding groups, and tolerance (see metric categories
box). Habit metrics were not calculated because they are
not useful with family level taxa identification. Since
classification analysis did not demonstrate the need for
partitioning West Virginia data collection sites into
separate bioregions or index periods (Chapter 3), all 720
sampling sites were considered as one site class.
Candidate metrics were calculated for each of the 720
benthic samples. Selection of specific metrics for use in
a stream condition index was based on several evaluation
criteria (see metric evaluation box).
A metric is a characteristic of
the biota that changes in some
predictable way with increased
human influence.
Metric Categories
• Taxonomic richness — counts of distinct
taxa within selected taxonomic groups.
• Taxonomic composition — proportions
of individuals belonging to specific
selected taxonomic groups.
• Functional feeding group — dominant
mode of feeding, though not the specific
nutritional source or benefits (e.g.,
suspension feeder, predator, etc.).
• Habit — dominant behavior of an
animal for moving and maintaining
physical position in its habitat (e.g.,
sprawling, clinging, etc.).
• Degree of tolerance—counts,
proportions, or weighted scores of taxa
based on ability to survive exposure to
pollutants.
See Appendix A, A.4.1 for full discussioij.
Tetra Tech, Inc.
' i
13
March 28, 2000 (Revised July 21, 2000)
-------
A Stream Condition Index for West Virginia Wadeable Streams
Criteria for identifying stressed sites were
established using parameters similar to those
used by West Virginia DEP for identifying
reference sites (see stressed site criteria box,
below). To be categorized as stressed, a site
needed to meet only one of the listed
conditions. Out of the 720 benthic samples
used in this analysis, there were 69 sites
identified, as meeting at least one of the
criteria for stress.
Stressed Site Criteria. 69 sites were deemed stressed by meeting at least one of these criteria:
• Dissolved oxygen < 4.0 mg/1
• pH < 4.0
• Conductivity > 1000 p mhos
• Epifaunal substrate score < 7 and Total habitat score <120
• Channel alteration score < 7 and Total habitat score <120
• Sediment deposition score <7 and Total habitat score <120
• Bank disruptive pressure score < 7 and Total habitat score <120
Riparian vegetation zone width score < 4 and Total habitat score <120
• Discrimination of site impairment
Box-and-whisker plots for 24 candidate metrics, comparing the distribution of values in 67 reference
sites with the distribution of values in 69 impaired sites, are presented in Appendix D (Figures D3-D6).
The distributions displayed in these plots were evaluated as described in Appendix A (section A.4.2;
Figures A-l - A-2). Eleven candidate metrics exhibited discrimination efficiencies (as described in
Appendix A.4.2) above 60% (Table 4-1).
• Representation of different community attributes
Discriminatory metrics, identified on the basis of boxplots and discrimination efficiencies, represent
three different categories of benthic community attributes: taxonomic richness, taxonomic composition,
and tolerance to environmental stress (Table 4-1).
Metric Evaluation. Metrics are included if they:
• are able to differentiate between reference and
impaired sites (methods: box plots, discrimination
efficiencies [DE]);
• represent at least some different aspects of the
community (taxa composition, richness, tolerance,
and the like); and
• minimize redundancy among individual component
metrics (method: Pearson correlations).
Tetra Tech, Inc.
14
March 28, 2000 (Revised July 21, 2000)
-------
A Stream Condition Index for West Virginia Wadeable Streams
• Minimized redundancy
•Pearson correlation coefficients (Table 4-2) identified that EPT taxa and Intolerant taxa had a correlation
of 0.92, and that %Chironomidae was highly correlated with %Diptera (0.91) and with %Tolerant (0.88).
In addition, with the family-level West Virginia data, individual component metrics involving
Ephemeroptera, Plecoptera, and Trichoptera were eliminated in favor of the more highly discriminatory
composite metrics of %EPT and EPT taxa.
The process of metric selection is iterative, with the areas of consideration being revisited and weighed
throughout the process. Table 4-1 reports the final recommended metrics for use in a stream condition
index, along with reasons for including or excluding each metric.
Recommendation for Use of Metrics to Measure Biological Attributes
For scoring West Virginia stream condition based on 1996-1997 data collected in riffle
habitats, six recommended metrics are: EPT taxa, Total taxa, %EPT, %Chironomidae,
HBI (family level), and % 2 Dominant taxa.
Tetra Tech, Inc.
15
March 28, 2000 (Revised July 21, 2000)
-------
A Stream Condition Index for West Virginia Wadeable Streams
Table 4-1. Candidate metrics: Expected response to stress, discrimination ability, and final
recommendation for WV stream condition index
Expected
Discrimination
response
efficiency1
Used
* increase
(DE)
in final
Metric
•7 decrease
index
Reason for including or excluding metric in the final index
Taxonomic Richness
Total taxa
v
71.0%
~
Good DE in this category
EPT taxa "
82.6%
~
Good DE in this category
Ephemeroptera taxa
V
58.0%
Included in EPT taxa with family-level data
Plecoptera taxa
V
59.4%
Included in EPT taxa with family-level data
Trichoptera taxa
V
65.2%
Included in EPT taxa with family-level data
Diptera taxa
V
—
Poor discrimination
Chironomidae taxa
V
—
Poor discrimination
Taxonomic Composition
%EPT
V
78.3%
~
Good DE in this category
% Ephemeroptera
•7
58.0%
Included in %EPT with family-level data
% Plecoptera
V
62.3%
Included in %EPT with family-level data
% Trichoptera
C
68.1%
Included in %EPT with family-level data
% Diptera
72.5%
91% correlated with %Chironomidae
% Chironomidae
A
73.9%
~
Good DE in this category
% Oligochaeta
A
.—
Poor discrimination
% Dominant taxon
A
49.3%
Poor discrimination
% 2 Dominant taxa
A
55.1%
~
Acceptable DE; included after ruling out %tolerant and
%diptera
Feeding groups
% Filterers
A
na
Trend opposite from expected; interpretation unclear
% Scrapers
V -
— '
Poor discrimination
% Collectors
. 7
na
Trend opposite from expected; interpretation unclear
% Predators
V
—
Poor discrimination
% Shredders
55.1%
Skewed distribution, high variance; marginal discrimination
Tolerance/Intolerance
Intolerant taxa
V
79.7%
92% correlated with EPT taxa
% Tolerant
A
73.9%
88% correlated with %Chironomidae
HBI (family level)
A
68.1%
~
Acceptable DE in this category, after ruling out other
tolerance metrics
See Appendix A, section A.4.2
Tetra Tech, Inc.
16
March 28, 2000 (Revised July 21, 2000)
-------
A Stream Condition Index for West Virginia Wadeable Streams
Table 4-2. Pearson Correlation Coefficients among 15 Candidate Metrics. Metrics for all 1996-1997 samples (n=720) were included
in the correlation. Bold R values are greater than 0.85.
Total
EPT
Ephem
Plecop
Trichop
%
%
%
%
%
%top
Intol..
%
taxa
taxa
taxa
taxa
taxa
EPT
Ephem
Plecop
Dip
Chiro
2 dom
taxa
Tolerant
Total taxa
1.00
EPT taxa
0.85
1.00
Ephemeroptera
0.72
0.76
1.00
Plecoptera taxa
0.55
0.78
0.35
1.00
Trichoptera taxa
0.64
0.66
0.36
0.25
1.00
% EPT
0.35
0.57
0.34
0.54
0.36
1.00
% Ephemeroptera
0.33
0.45
0.58
0.29
0.12
0.47
1.00
% Plecoptera
0.02
0.19
-0.11
0.46
-0.02
0.47
-0.21
1.00
% Trichoptera
0.07
0.03
-0.08
-0.13
0.38
0.27
-0.27
-0.28
% Diptera
-0.32
-0.45
-0.26
-0.42
-0.30
-0.79
-0.37
-0.36
1.00
% Chironomidae
-0.29
-0.39
-0.20
-0.36
-0.30
-0.72
-0.31
-0.35
0.91
1.00
% top 2 dominant
-0.67
-0.66
-0.56
-0.47
-0.43
-0.33
-0.33
-0.05
0.34
0.37
r:oo
Intolerant taxa
0.82
0.92
0.62
0.82
0.57
0.55
0.35
0.28
-0.45
-0.41
-0.60
1.00
% Tolerant
-0.35
-0.46
-0.27
-0.40
-0.35
-0.80
-0.36
-0.36
0.80
0.88
0.39
-0.47
1.00
HBI (family)
-0.34
-0.50
-0.22
-0.56
-0.29
-0.76
-0.18
-0.71
0.65
0.67
0.38
-0.56
0.82
Tetra Tech, Inc.
17
March 28, 2000 (Revised July 21, 2000)
-------
A Stream Condition Index for West Virginia Wadeable Streams
5.
AGGREGATING METRICS INTO A BIOLOGICAL INDEX
Using the final six selected metrics (Chapter 4), a
working index for scoring West Virginia stream
condition was determined following the steps
summarized in the box to the right. Appendix A
describes the entire procedure in detail. The range
of reference site values for the working West
Virginia stream condition index was compared
with the range of values in the impaired sites by
means of box-and-whisker plots (Figure 5-1), and
these boxplots confirmed that the working index is
able to discriminate between reference and
stressed sites.
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
.X
•
reference
impaired
Metrics and Scoring
Select metrics -
Total taxa
EPT taxa
% EPT
% Chironomidae
% 2 dominant taxa
HBI (Family)
• Calculate metrics — Calculate values for the 6
selected metrics for all 720 sampling sites.
• Standardize scores — Convert all metric values
to a standard 0-100 point scale.
• Calculate index — Average the 6 standardized
metric scores for each benthic sampling site.
See Appendix A, A.5 for full discussion.
Though classification analysis (Chapter 3) did not
indicate distinct partitioning of sampling into separate
index periods, the possible variability of a long sampling
period was examined again in the working index. Figure
5-2, showing boxplots of the working index by sampling
period and a scatterplot of reference site index scores by
Julian day, demonstrates that though the degree of
discrimination is slightly better in the May-June period
(Figure 5-2[a]), the working index does discriminate
between reference and impaired sites in both sampling
periods.
Figure 5-1. Working SCI discriminates between
West Virginia reference and impaired sites in the
1996-1997 calibration data.
Tetra Tech, Inc.
18
March 28, 2000 (Revised July 21, 2000)
-------
A Stream Condition Index for West Virginia Wadeable Streams
£
"a5
CC
O
W
O)
c
ji:
k.
o
5
May-June
July-Sept
(a) Performance of working index score by index period.
j>-
c
w
05
100
90
TS 80
a>
o
c
a>
70
60
50
5 40
30
0
>°
1
• ••••»,.
c
o --
§ i. o °: o° :
a"?—8 =
:
°
o
Co
° o : 0 «? *;
: 0 : ° :
1 1
0
0
0
! ! ° 1
i i i
120
140
160
240
260
280
180 200 220
Julian day
(b) Reference site index scores by Julian day.
Figure 5-2. Effect of sampling season on working West Virginia stream index (SCI). This
graph shows slight improvement in discrimination between reference and impaired sites in
the earlier sampling period (a), though the index does discriminate impairment in the later
sampling period as well. A narrower sampling window of late spring to early summer
might improve the assessments by reducing overall variability.
Tetra Tech, Inc. 19 March 28,2000 (Revised July 21,2000)
-------
A Stream Condition Index for West Virginia Wade able Streams
6. TESTING AND REFINING THE INDEX USING INDEPENDENT DATA
New data provided by WV DEP were used (as described in Appendix A.6) to test the discrimination
efficiency of the recommended West Virginia multimetric index. A comparison of the working index
values in the original data with those in the independent test data shows good agreement (Figure 6-1).
Discrimination efficiencies of the test data set were also good: 85% of the 40 test reference sites scored
higher than the 25th percentile of the original reference sites. Stressed sites in the test data also were
very similar to the original sites: 92% scored below the 25th percentile of the originaLreference sites.
reference
stressed
c
o
$
reference (new data) stressed (new data)
a. Original 1996-1997 data (Figure 5-1).
b. Independent 1998 data.
Figure 6-1. Working SCI discriminates between West Virginia reference and stressed sites in the new
independent data (b) as well as in the original data set (a).
Tetra Tech, Inc.
20
March 28, 2000 (Revised July 21, 2000)
-------
A Stream Condition Index for West Virginia Wadeable Streams
Final Recommended West Virginia Stream Condition Index (SCD:
To refine the working index by making use of the entire set of data provided by WVDEP (1996-1998), all
samples were combined. Percentile distributions of each metric's values were determined for the entire
set of 1996-1998 data (n=1268 benthic samples). The revised, final Stream Condition Index (SCI) makes
use of the 95th or 5th percentile (depending on the metric) standard values determined from this
combined set of all samples. Table 6-1 presents metric standard values and standardization formulas for
the six metrics that compose the final recommended West Virginia multimetric SCI. Individual metrics
in exceptionally high quality streams may score higher than 100, but a maximum metric score of 100 is
used when averaging the six metrics to determine the final SCI score; this assures that each metric
contributes equally to the multimetric index.
Table 6-1. West Virginia final SCI: Metric standard values and standardization formulas.
Metrics that decrease with stress
Standard (best value)
X95
xmn
Standardization formula
(Appendix A.5, Equation 2; X=metric value)
Total taxa
21
0
score = 100 x (X/21)
EPT taxa
13
0
score = 100 x (X/13)
%EPT
91.9
0
score = 100 x (X/91.9)
Metrics that increase with stress
Standard (best value)
x5
Y
^max
Standardization formula
(Appendix A.5, Equation 3; X=metric value)
%Chironomidae
0.98
100
score = 100 x [(100-X)/( 100-0.98)]
% 2 dominant
36.0
100
score = 100 x [(100-X)/( 100-36.0)]
HBI (family)
2.9
10
score = 100 x [(10-X)/( 10-2.9)]
Final index score (SCI) for a site is determined by averaging the site's 6 standardized metric scores, using a
maximum metric score of 100 for any metric whose individual score at a site may have exceeded 100.
Percentile distributions of the final SCI in the 1996-1998 combined set of 107 reference samples are
reported in Table 6-2. Metric values, metric standardized scores, and SCI scores for all sites in the
original and new data sets are provided in Appendix C.
Table 6-2. Percentile distribution of Index (SCI) values in all 1996-1998 Reference samples.
N minimum 5th 10th 25th median 75th 90th 95 th maximum
107 49 68 74 78 86 90 93 94 96
Telra Tech, Inc.
21
March 28, 2000 (Revised July 21, 2000)
-------
A Stream Condition Index for West Virginia Wadeable Streams
7. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
7.1 Rating System
The macroinvertebrate Stream Condition Index (SCI) for West Virginia streams is robust and repeatable
and can be used to assess the biological condition of West Virginia streams. The relatively low
variability of scores in the reference sites suggests that at least 5 rating classes can be used. A rating of
"highly comparable to reference sites" could apply to sites that score greater than the 25th percentile of
refereneVsites. A "comparable" to below-average reference sites could apply to sites- scoring greater
than the 5th percentile of reference sites (Table 7-1, Figure 7-1). Scores below the 5th percentile of
reference sites are increasingly different from the reference condition. Alternatively, the range of scores
from 0 to 100 could be divided into 5 equal categories (80-100, 60-80, etc.).
Table 7-1. Example rating system for West Virginia SCI scores.
SCI score
Rating
>78-100
Highly comparable to reference sites (above 25th percentile)
>68-78
Comparable to below-average reference sites (between 5th
and 25th percentiles)
>45-68
1
>22-45
r Increasingly different from reference condition
0 - 22
J
7.2 Refining the index
The preliminary breakdown of site scores in Table 7-1 could be refined and narrowed by reducing the
index period and by examination of outliers:
• The length of the sampling index period (spring to fall) was shown to contribute to index
variability, although not fatally. This variability could be reduced by restricting sampling to a
smaller window in spring and early summer, for example, May and June.
Tetra Tech, Inc.
22
March 28, 2000 (Revised July 21, 2000)
-------
A Stream Condition Index for West Virginia Wadeable Streams
100
90
80
o
X
0)
70
*D
C •
c
o
60
'S
c
o
O
50
E
CO
0
.
40
w
(0
"c
"5>
w
30
i>
u>
0)
20
5
. 10
highly comparable
comparable
i
reference stressed
Combined 1996-1998 sites
Figure 7-1. Reference and stressed sites, combined 1996-1998
data, and possible rating categories.
Several reference sites scored low (less than 68) in the original data (and one in the test data).
These outliers should be examined in more detail to determine if they were misidentified as
reference sites, or if they are not representative of reference sites. They should not be excluded
simply because of a low SCI score, but should be excluded if previously undetected human-
caused stress or pollution is found at the sites (unknown discharges, erosion, non-point source
pollution, habitat disruption).
The outliers also may be excluded from the reference sites if their physical-chemical habitat is
not representative of the other reference sites. For example, there were too few reference sites in
limestone valleys to identify valley streams as a separate class. Limestone valley streams may be
outliers, unless it can be demonstrated that they are similar to non-limestone streams. Another
example of a non-representative outlier is a site where the stream bed is composed entirely of
Tetra Tech, Inc.
23
March 28, 2000 (Revised July 21, 2000)
-------
A Stream Condition Index for West Virginia Wadeable Streams
bedrock. The habitat in all-bedrock sites is impaired and not representative, although it is
entirely natural. Such sites should be identified as special cases and removed from the list of
reference sites, yet they should not be listed impaired in an assessment only because the (natural)
habitat is impaired.
7.3 Maintaining the index
In West Virginia's sampling program, new reference sites will be sampled each year. Confidence in the
index will be enhanced if new data are incorporated into the index, especially as more watersheds are
sampled and a mdre representative coverage is obtained of the entire state.
New reference sites can be added to the reference data set, and both the metric standard values (Table 6-
1) as well as the distribution of reference scores (Table 6-2) can be recalculated on an annual basis. As
the database becomes more representative of the entire state, both the standard values and the distribution
should become quite stable.
A larger reference site database will allow WVDEP to revisit the issue of classification, especially with
respect to under-represented ecoregions in the current database (e.g., valley streams of the Ridge and
Valley; Greenbrier Karst streams). Limestone valley streams are thought to be different from ridge
streams, but there were not sufficient reference sites from the valley subregions to make this
determination in the current database.
Tetra Tech, Inc.
24
March 28, 2000 (Revised July 21, 2000)
-------
APPENDIX A
ANALYTICAL METHODS AND
STEP-BY-STEP PROCESS
A.l Database development
A.2 Reference site criteria
A.3 Site classification
A.4 Testing of candidate metrics
A.4.1 Metric categories
A.4.2 Metric discrimination ability
A.5 Index development
A.5.1 Scoring for metrics whose values are expected to decrease with
site degradation
A.5.2 Scoring for metrics whose values are expected to increase with
site degradation
A.5.3 Combining scores into an index
A.6 Index validation and refinement
-------
A Stream Condition Index for West Virginia Wadeable Streams
A3 Site classification
Detection of changes in the biological assemblage due to human effects must take into account inherent
differences due to natural factors. Natural variability in the macroinvertebrate assemblage may result
from natural variability in the physical and chemical site characteristics across a geographic range. Much
of the natural variability can often be accounted for by dividing the area into ecological regions
(ecoregions; Omernik 1987). Level 3 ecoregions (Omernik 1987) have been used as an accepted
geographic framework for delineating regions of relatively homogeneous natural conditions (e.g.,
Barbour et al. 1996). West Virginia data in this analysis were collected from sites in three Level 3
ecoregions: Ridge and Valley (No. 67), Western Allegheny Plateau (No. 70), and Central Appalachians
(No. 69). We examined whether the Level 3 ecoregions accounted for variability of biota among sites,
and whether additional physical and chemical information could account for the variability.
The geographic distribution of West Virginia sampling sites for 1996-1997 was not sufficiently broad to
fully address site classification based on ecoregions (see Figure 3-1). Tetra Tech obtained data from
EPA's Mid-Atlantic Highlands Assessment of the Environmental Monitoring and Assessment program
(EMAP-MAHA) from 1993-1994 to expand the data set to achieve a sufficient geographic distribution of
reference sites for analyzing possible site classification. Because of the use of different field collection
methods in the two programs, EMAP and West Virginia data were not combined. Instead, West
Virginia's reference site criteria (Table A-1) were applied as closely as possible to the EMAP data in
order to select substitute reference sites for use in classification analysis. Water chemistry (criteria 1-3;
Table A-l) and habitat (criteria 6-11; Table A-l) could b e applied to the EMAP data. Using this
procedure, 80 EMAP sites (all riffles) were selected from the three ecoregions of Ridge and Valley (67),
Western Allegheny Plateau (70), and Central Appalachians (69). The EMAP reference sites were not
required to be located in West Virginia as long as they were located in an ecoregion that extended from
an adjacent state into West Virginia. Locations of West Virginia sampling sites, EMAP sites, and EMAP
reference sites are shown in Figure 3-1.
Alternative classification schemes were examined with multivariate ordination of the sampling sites
based on their species composition, following methods outlined in Jongman et al. (1987) and Ludwig and
Reynolds (1988). Ordination is a family of methods for reducing the dimensionality of multivariate
information (many species in many sites), by placing sites or species in an order. The ordination method
we use is non-metric multidimensional scaling (NMDS) using the Bray-Curtis dissimilarity coefficient.
This method has been shown to be robust for ordination of species composition (e.g., Kenkel and Orloci
1986, Ludwig and Reynolds 1988) and has been used successfully for classification of stream
communities (e.g., Barbour et al. 1996; Reynoldson et al. 1997).
NMDS is a nonlinear ordination that attempts to place sites in a spatial orientation that agrees with some
distance measure between the sites. It is analogous to creating a map using only the distances between
cities. In the case of our ordination of biological samples, the "distance" between two samples is their
percent similarity, as measured by one of several similarity indexes. The Bray-Curtis index is the percent
that two assemblages are similar to each other.
Tetra Tech, Inc.
A-3
March 28, 2000 (Revised July 21, 2000)
-------
A Stream Condition Index for West Virginia Wadeable Streams
A matrix of Bray-Curtis similarities was calculated from the species-relative abundance data. This
matrix was then used in the NMDS procedure. The NMDS ordination (McCune and Mefford 1995)
follows the procedure of Kruskal (1964). The final ordination was required to have a stress coefficient (a
measure of goodness-of-fit of the ordination to the original data) of less than 20%. This usually required
3 ordination axes. The final NMDS configuration was plotted (as a scatteiplot) to determine any obvious
groupings and to evaluate alternative classes (Figures 3-2 and 3-3). Candidate classifications were tested
with similarity analysis (Van Sickle 1997) to determine the strength of the classification. This procedure
calculates the-mean similarity of sites within classes, and the mean similarity of sites among classes. The
difference between the two is the % of dissimilarity that is explained or accounted for by the
classification. Thus, a value of 10% indicates that the classification (say, ecoregions) explains 10% of
the total"dissimilarity (difference) among all sites (Table 3-1).
A.4 Testing of Candidate Metrics
Various attributes or the benthic macroinvertebrate community have been proposed as metrics to
quantitatively characterize aspects of the community condition (e.g., Gibson et al. 1996, Stribling et al.
1998). Twenty-four candidate measures were considered for use with the West Virginia benthic
macroinvertebrate data. These metrics were selected based upon their known or suspected ability to
discriminate impairment. The 24 candidate metrics fall into five categories of community attributes:
taxonomic composition, taxonomic richness or abundance, feeding or trophic groups, life habit, and
degree of tolerance to stress in the environment.
A.4.1 Metric Categories
Taxonomic richness. Metrics m this category are counts of the distinct number of taxa within selected
taxonomic groups. "Total taxa" and "EPT taxa" are widely used metrics that provide information on
overall and group-specific taxonomic variety. "EPT taxa" measures richness in three insect orders
known to be generally sensitive to disturbance (Ephemeroptera [mayflies], Plecoptera [stoneflies], and
Trichoptera [caddisflies]), thereby conferring information both on variety and community tolerance.
Other candidate metrics of this category are focused on different orders, families, or non-insect groups of
ecological importance.
Taxonomic composition. These metrics are based on the proportion of individuals in a sample
belonging to a specified taxonomic group. They are expressed as percentages and reveal the relative
abundance of insect and non-insect groups, each of which may respond differently to environmental
conditions and community dynamics.
Feeding group. The functional feeding group designation for an organism reflects the dominant mode of
feeding, not the specific nutritional source or benefits (Cummins and Klug 1979, Merritt and Cummins
1984, Wallace and Webster 1996). Designations for each taxon include filterers, scrapers, collector-
gatherers, predators, shredders, and others. Scrapers are those organisms that remove periphyton or other
algal material and the associated microbes from mineral or vegetable substrates. Predators engulf or
actively capture living animal tissue or prey. Collector-gatherers feed on organic materials that are
Tetra Tech, Inc.
A-4
March 28, 2000 (Revised July 21, 2000)
-------
A Stream Condition Index for West Virginia WadeabSe Streams
deposited or trapped within episubstrate layers of fine sediments or detritus. Filterers trap, engulf, or
strain suspended particulates from the water column that may be plant or animal in origin. Shredders
chew and break up woody materials, coarse organic particulates, or living macrophyte tissue.
Habit. The habit description categorizes a benthic organism's behavior with regard to how it maintains
its location or moves. Designations for a taxon include skaters, swimmers, divers, climbers, dingers,
burrowers, and others. Although habit metrics have been used successfully, they are considered
unreliable for family-level data, because there is no assurance that all genera in a family have the same
habit. Because of this, habit metrics were not tested. "
Tolerance/Intolerance. Tolerance of a taxon is based on its ability to survive short--and long-term
exposure to organic pollution. The Hilsenhoff Biotic Index (HBI) weights each taxon in a sample by its
proportion of individuals and the taxon's tolerance value. Following the basic framework established by
Hilsenhoff (1982), tolerance values were assigned to individual taxa on a scale of 0-10, with 0
identifying those taxa least tolerant (most sensitive) to stressors, and 10 identifying those taxa most
tolerant (least sensitive) to stressors. Tolerance values compiled by USEPA (USEPA 1990) and Merritt
and Cummins (1984) were used for this analysis.
Specific metrics tested with West Virginia benthic macroinvertebrate data, grouped by the five categories
described above, are presented in Table A-2 , along with the expected response of each metric to
increasing impairment of the waterbody.
A.4.2 Metric discrimination ability
Metrics are selected for use in the multimetric index on the basis of their ability to differentiate between
unimpaired, or reference, sites and sites whose physical and/or chemical quality is impaired. As
previously noted, West Virginia DEP identified 67 reference sites according to physical and chemical
parameters reported in Table A-1. Tetra Tech used the following criteria, using parameters-similar to
those used by WVDEP for identifying reference sites, to identify likely impaired sites. To be categorized
as impaired, a site needed to meet only one of the listed conditions. Using these criteria, 69 sites were
identified.
• Dissolved oxygen < 4.0 mg/1
pH <4.0
Conductivity > 1000 nmhos
• Epifaunal substrate score <7 and Total habitat score <120
• Channel alteration score <7 and Total habitat score <120
Sediment deposition score <7 and Total habitat score <120
• Bank disruptive pressure score <7 and Total habitat score <120
• Riparian vegetation zone width score <4 and Total habitat score <120
Tetra Tech, Inc.
A-5
March 28, 2000 (Revised July 21, 2000)
-------
A Stream Condition Index for West Virginia Wadeable Streams
Table A-2. Attributes of Benthic Macroinvertebrates used as Candidate Metrics, and Expected Response
of Metric to Increasing Disturbance.
Expected
response
Category * = increase
Specific Metrics Definition v = decrease
Taxonomic richness: • Number of taxa:
Total taxa in the entire sample; measures the overall variety of the y
macroinvertebrate assemblage
EPT taxa that is the sum of taxa in the insect orders Ephemeroptera, y
Plecoptera, and Trichoptera
Ephemeroptera taxa in the order Ephemeroptera (mayfly nymphs) y
Plecoptera taxa in the order Plecoptera (stonefly naiads) y
Trichoptera taxa in the order Trichoptera (caddisfly larvae) y
Diptera taxa in the order Diptera ("true" flies) y
Chironomidae taxa in the family Chironomidae (midge larvae) y
Taxonomic composition: Percent abundance (of individuals in the sample) of:
% Dominant taxon the single most abundant taxon A
% 2 Dominant taxa the 2 most abundant taxa A
%EPT Ephemeroptera (mayfly nymphs), Plecoptera (stonefly naiads), and y
Trichoptera (caddisfly larvae)
% Ephemeroptera mayfly nymphs (order Ephemeroptera) y
% Plecoptera stonefly naiads (prder Plecoptera) y.
% Trichoptera caddisfly larvae (order Trichoptera) y
% Diptera "true" fly larvae and pupae A
% Chironomidae chironomid (midge) larvae pupae A
% Oligochaeta aquatic worms A
Feeding groups Percent abundance of individuals belonging to the functional feeding
group:
% Filterers filterers A
% Scrapers scrapers y
% Collectors collectors y
% Predators predators y
% Shredders shredders y
Tolerance/Intolerance
Intolerant taxa Number of taxa with a Tolerance Value s3 y
% Tolerant Percent abundance of organisms with a Tolerance value *7 A
Hilsenhoff Biotic Index Abundance-weighted average tolerance of assemblage of organisms A
(HBI)
Tetra Tech, Inc.
A-6
March 28, 2000 (Revised July 21, 2000)
-------
A Stream Condition Index for West Virginia Wadeable Streams
Box-and-whisker plots were used to display differences
in ranges of values of the metrics between stream-quality
categories (reference and impaired sites). This type of
plot displays the statistics of median value, minimum
value, maximum value, and 25th and 75th percentile
values of a population of sites. Figure A-l illustrates
how the statistical values are displayed by the box-and-
whisker plots employed in this report (after Statsoft
1998). The box shows the range from the 25th percentile
to the 75th percentile of the metric values (the
interquartile range, or IQR), and whiskers show the range
from the non-outlier minimum (often 0) to non-outlier
maximum value. The non-outlier maximum limit is
equal to the 75th percentile value plus 1.5 times the
interquartile range, and the non-outlier minimum limit is
equal to the 25th percentile value minus 1.5 times the
interquartile range. The whiskers show the range of data
values that are within these limits, not necessarily the
actual 1.5* limits. Extremes are values that are either (1) T,. „
greater than the 75th percentile value plus 3 times the ^,gure,A"1- 0 °utllf andf e^r0ecmes
6 * ^ box-and-whisker plots (after Statsoft 1998). IQR
is the interquartile range.
interquartile range, or (2) less than the 25th
percentile value minus 3 times the interquartile
range (Figure A-l). Outliers are values falling
between the 1.5xIQR whisker threshold and the
3xIQR Extremes threshold.
Boxplots of the metrics "EPT taxa" and
"Percent Scrapers" may be examined to
illustrate differences in the ability of the metrics
to discriminate between reference and impaired
sites. Figure A-2 illustrates these metric values
calculated from the 1996-1997 West Virginia
data. For the Percent Scrapers metric (Figure
A-2, bottom), there is substantial overlap
between the interquartile ranges of the reference
and impaired populations of sampling site§.
This metric does not differentiate well between
Figure A-2. Use of boxplots to discriminate between West populations of sites. In contrast, the
Virginia reference and impaired sites. EPT taxa (top) EPT taxa metric (Figure A-2, top) shows no
shows better discrimination ability than does Percent
Scrapers (bottom).
Extreme values
Outliers •
*
"o"
o
»3*IOR
t
~ 1.5'IOR
75th -~
: median -
. 25th -»
.S...
IQR
-i.noR
t °
Outliers q -3*IQR
Extreme values
Tetra Tech, Inc.
A-7
March 28, 2000 (Revised July 21, 2000)
-------
A Stream Condition Index for West Virginia Wadeable Streams
overlap between the interquartile ranges of the reference and impaired sites. This metric differentiates
clearly between the two populations of sites.
For quantitative comparison of the discrimination ability of a metric, each metric's discrimination
efficiency (DE) was examined. The DE of a particular metric measures the agreement between metric
values and the reference status of a site. The DE is a numerical description of the degree of separation
between metric value distributions of reference and impaired sites and is calculated as a percentage
according to Equation 1 :
(Eq. 1, DE = 100*-
b
For metrics that are expected to decrease in value with increasing site impairment, such as Total taxa or
%EPT, the values for a and b are:
a = the number of stressed samples scoring below the 25th percentile of the reference
distribution
b = the total number of stressed samples
For metrics that are expected to increase in value with increasing site impairment, such as HBI or
%Diptera, the value for a is:
a = the number of stressed samples scoring above the 75th percentile of the reference
distribution
A higher DE indicated better performance of a metric, or a better ability to distinguish between
unstressed and stressed conditions.
A.5 Index development
A multimetric index is a simple additive approach for combining metric value information from different
types of biological metrics into a single numeric assessment value. Each metric, as described in Section
A.4, is a quantitative measure of some specific attribute of the benthic community structure or
composition. In developing a multimetric index, care is taken to include metrics that
• are most able to differentiate between reference and impaired sites,
• represent at least some different aspects of the community (species composition, richness,
tolerance, feeding groups, and the like), and
• minimize redundancy among individual component metrics.
The process of multimetric index development involved first scoring the selected metrics and then
averaging these scores into a single numerical index value. To score the metrics, the range of values for
Tetra Tech, Inc. A-8 March 28,2000 (Revised July 21,2000)
-------
A Stream Condition Index for West Virginia Wadeable Streams
each metric was standardized on a 100-point scale, assigning all metric values a score ranging from 0
(worst) to 100 (best). The specific scoring procedure used for achieving the 100-point scoring range
differed depending on the direction of expected response by the metric value to disturbance or
impairment. For those metrics in which higher values are considered a "better" condition and lower
values are considered "worse"(such as, %EPT in Table A-2, where the expected response to increasing
perturbation is a decrease in %EPT individuals), the scoring procedure is described in section A.5.1
below. Conversely, for those metrics in which higher values are considered "worse," such as %Diptera
in Table A-2, whose expected response to increasing perturbation is for the metric value to increase, the
scoring procedure is described in section A.5.2 below. Note: in exceptionally high quality streams, one
or more of a site's individual metrics may score greater than 100. The effect of such cases on the site
index is-addressed in Section A.5.3.
A.5.1 Scoring for metrics whose values are expected to decrease with site degradation
For metrics such as Total Taxa or %EPT, which are expected to decrease in value with increasing site
impairment (i.e., higher values represent "better" sites), the 95th percentile metric value was assigned a
score of 100. By choosing the 95th percentile value rather than the 100th percentile as the "best" score,
we reduce the effect of unusual outlier values that might otherwise skew the ultimate index (Section
A.5.3). Values between the minimum ("worst," usually 0) and the 95th percentile value (standard, or
best value) were scored proportionally from 0 ("worst") to 100 ("best") according to Equation 2:
A.5.2 Scoring for metrics whose values are expected to increase with site degradation
For metrics such as HBI or %Diptera, which are expected to increase in value with increasing site
impairment (higher values represent "worse" sites), the 5th percentile metric value was assigned the
"best" score of 100. Again, by choosing the 5th percentile value rather than the minimum value as the
"best" score, we reduce the effect of unusual outlier values that might skew the ultimate index (Section
A.5.3). For these metrics, values between the maximum ("worst") value in the range and the 5th
percentile ("best") value were scored proportionally between 0 ("worst") and 100 ("best") according to
Equation 3:
where,
x = the metric value
xM = the 95th percentile value
xmin = the minimum possible value, usually 0.
where, x = the metric value
x3 = the 5th percentile value
x^ = the maximum possible value; e.g., 100% for
percentage metrics; 10 for HBI.
Tetra Tech. Inc.
A-9
March 28, 2000 (Revised July 21, 2000)
-------
A Stream Condition Index for West Virginia Wadeable Streams
A.53 Combining scores into an index
By standardizing the metric values to a common 100-point scale, each of the metrics contributes to the
combined index with equal weighting, and all of the metric scores represent increasingly "better" site
conditions as scores increase toward 100. Once all metric values for sites were converted to scores on
the 100-point scale, a single multimetric site index value was calculated by simply averaging the
individual metric values for the site. To assure that each metric did indeed contribute equally to the
final index, any individual metrics that may have scored greater than 100 in any exceptionally high
quality stream sites were converted to a maximum score of 100 when averaging to calculate the index.
An example of metric standardization, showing raw metric values, score standardization, and index
scoringis given in Table A-3.
Table A-3. Metric standardization example for site WVMC-60-K (Glady Fork).
Metric
Change
with
impairment
Percentile for
"best" value
Standard
(best value)
Measured
metric value
Standardized
metric score
%EPT
decrease
95th
91.9
83
90
%Chironomidae
increase
5th
0.98
10
91
Total taxa
decrease
95th
21
16
76
EPT taxa
decrease
95 th
13
10
77
% 2 dominant taxa
increase
5th
36
43
89
HBI
increase
5th
2.9
4
84
Final index (SCI) value for the site:
85
A.6 Index validation and refinement
New data were received from West Virginia DEP in August 1999 for use in validating the working index.
These data consisted of sampling and taxonomic results from 549 sites, sampled from four major basins
during the 1998 field season and from one basin (Coal) during fall 1997 and not included with the
previously analyzed data. For the working index to be valid, it should separate reference from stressed
sites in the new data just as with the original data used to develop the index.
Reference and stressed sites in the new data set were identified using non-biological criteria as in the
original data set. The same parameters used for identifying reference and stressed sites in the original
1996-1997 data were used where possible to identify the new data set's reference and stressed sites.
WVDEP habitat data collection procedures differed somewhat in 1998 from earlier years, so that the
selection criteria for reference and impaired sites were slightly modified for analysis of the 1998
validation data set. West Virginia DEP personnel identified 40 reference sites in the new data set using
criteria similar to those used for the 1996-1997 calibration data set (Table A-l). To identify stressed
Tetra Tech, Inc.
A-10
March 28, 2000 (Revised July 21, 2000)
-------
A Stream Condition Index for West Virginia Wadeable Streams
sites in the new data, Tetra Tech used parameters similar to those used to identify the original data set's
stressed sites, modified according to revised data collection procedures. Table A-4 lists selection criteria
that were used to identify 102 stressed sites in the validation data.
To test the effectiveness of the working index, the six recommended metrics (Chapter 4) were calculated
for the new data set. These metric values were standardized, and index values were calculated, as
described in section A.5. The degree to which the recommended index correctly classified these new test
data was examined by calculating the discrimination efficiency (DE) of the working index as applied to
the new data. The DE of the working index for classifying the new data's reference sites was found
according to Equation 1 (Section A.4.2), where:
a = the number of reference sites from the test data (1998) scoring above the 25th percentile of
the original data's reference sites, and,
b = the total number of test data reference sites (n=40).
The DE of the working index for classifying the new data's stressed sites was found according to
Equation 1 (Section A.4.2), where:
a = the number of stressed sites rrom ine test data scoring oeiow the 25th percentile of the
original data's reference sites, and,
b = the total number of test data stressed sites (n=102).
Table A-4. Selection criteria for stressed sites in the new data set. A site was identified as stressed if it
met at least one of the listed criteria.
Stressed (sites meet at
least one of the criteria)
n=102
Dissolved oxygen (mg/L) <4
pH <4
Conductivity (pmhos) >1000
Fecal coliform (colonies/1 OOmL) not used
Channel alteration score <7 and total habitat score <120
Sediment deposition score <7 and total habitat score <120
Riparian vegetation zone width:
• Coal basin (1997); one combined score for both <4 and total habitat score <120
banks (as in original 1996-97 data)
• 1998 basins; reported separately for each bank <2 for each bank, and total habitat score <120
Tetra Tech, Inc.
A-ll
March 28, 2000 (Revised July 21, 2000)
-------
A Stream Condition Index for West Virginia Wadeable Streams •
Table A-4 (cont'd). Selection criteria for stressed sites in the new data set. A site was identified as stressed if it
met at least one of the listed criteria.
Stressed (sites meet at
least one of the criteria)
. n=102
Bank disruptive pressure:
• Coal basin (1997); one combined score for both <7 and total habitat score <120
banks (as in original 1996-97 data)
• 1998 basins; data not reported; substituted Bank <4 for each bank and total habitat score <120
^Stability scores, reported separately for each bank
Epifaunal substrate score:
• Coal basin (1997) <7 and total habitat score <120
• 1998 basins, data not reported; no substitute parameter used '
Refinement of standard "best" values
Once the discrimination efficiency of the working index was found to be acceptable, the standard, or
"best" values (section A.5) for each metric were re-determined by combining the original 1996-1997 data
with the 1998 data. Percentile distributions of each metric's values were determined for the combined
data set (n=l 268 benthic samples). The standard, or "best" values, for ea,ch metric were revised to the
95th or 5th percentile (depending on the metric) of the distribution of this combined data set.
Consideration of the effect of different organism sub-sample sizes
Because WVDEP's benthic macroinvertebrates were sub-sampled to 200 organisms in the 1998 data,
rather than 100 organisms as in the earlier data set, there was some concern over whether the difference
would cause taxa richness metrics to be over-estimated in the new data (higher numbers of taxa simply
because more organisms were counted and identified). Tetra Tech examined the correlation between the
number of organisms and number of taxa (Total and EPT) in the reference sites of both data sets (Figure
A-3) in order to determine whether it might be appropriate to apply a statistical procedure called
rarefaction to the 200-organism data. This procedure would examine the distribution of metric values
against sample size and adjust the two taxa richness metrics in larger-sized samples to what the expected
values would be at the smaller 100-organism sample size. Although there does appear to be some effect
between sample size (number of organisms) and taxa richness (wherein the number of taxa is greater, in
part simply because more organisms are counted and identified), the effect is not great with the family-
level identifications of West Virginia's data. It was decided among Tetra Tech, EPA Region 3, and.
WVDEP that rarefaction would not be applied to the data, since WVDEP plans to continue the 200-
organism subsampling protocol in their future biological monitoring, so that any effect from different
sample sizes will be diminished as the bioassessment program progresses. The adjustment to the index,
described above, of using distributions from all 1996-1998 data to determine each metric's standard/best
value also will help to reduce possible effects from the different sub-sample sizes in the data.
Tetra Tech, Inc.
A-12
March 28, 2000 (Revised July 21, 2000)
-------
A Stream Condition Index for West Virginia Wadeable Streams
a. Total Taxa vs. Individuals
28
24
5 20
0
©
6
E
1 16
12
0 ; O A AM. A : Ck
CDO O COM fA a
O poo CAAAA A O
O- r<© O- OO-O • A ©"
O CDO 00 OA At O 0
O OiO O O
O OOO AAO :GOO
<©• M> j
O :0
O 0 " 0
100 200 .300
Number of individuals
o 96-97 re! sites
_400 A 98 ref sites
b. EPT Taxa vs. Individuals
18
16
14
12
10
8
6
A MA A
i-O OOAA—i—A A-OO-
:00 © AA A AAAJ0A
O-flD-O-CD A-—A A-
000X000 COO A AA G
O— OOOO •• O -flD- *0-"A
O O;0 O A.GAA OOOO
O •
O : O :A
: -I •••••©
100 200 300
Number of individuals
o 96*97 ref sites
400 * 98 re' sites
Figure A-3. Number of taxa (Total and EPT) vs. number of individual organisms in
West Virginia benthic sampling reference sites.
Tetra Tech, Inc.
A-13
March 28, 2000 (Revised July 21, 2000)
-------
APPENDIX B
LITERATURE CITED
-------
A Stream Condition Index for West Virginia Wadeable Streams
LITERATURE CITED
Barbour, M.T., J. Gerritsen, G.E. Griffith, R. Frydenborg, E. McCarron, J.S. White, and M.L. Bastian.
1996. A framework for biological criteria for Florida streams using benthic macroinvertebrates.
J. N. Am. Benthol. Soc. 15(2): 185-211.
Barbour, M.T., J. Gerritsen, B.D. Snyder, and J.B. Stribling. 1999. Rapid Bioassessment Protocols for
Use in Streams and Wadeable Rivers: Periphyton, Benthic Macroinvertebrates and Fish. Second
Edition. EPA/841 -B-99-002. U.S. EPA, Office of Water, Washington, D.C.
Barbour, M.T., J.B. Stribling, and J.R. Karr. 1995. The multimetric approach for establishing biocriteria
and measuring biological condition. Pp. 63-76. In W.S. Davis and T.P. Simon, editors.
Biological Assessment and Criteria: Tools for Water Resource Planning and Decision Making.
Lewis Publishers, Ann Arbor, Michigan.
Cummins, K.W. and M.J. Klug. 1979. Feeding ecology of stream invertebrates. Ann. Rev. Ecol. Syst.
10:147-172.
Gibson, G.A., M.T. Barbour, J.B. Stribling, J. Gerritsen, and J.R. Karr. 1996. Biological criteria:
Technical guidance for streams and rivers. EPA/822-B-94-001. U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency (US EPA), Office of Science and Technology, Washington, D.C.
Hilsenhoff, W.L. 1982. Using a Biotic Index to Evaluate Water Quality in Streams. Wisconsin
Department of Natural Resources, Madison, Wisconsin. Technical Bulletin No. 132.
Jongman, R.H.G., C.J.F. ter Braak, and O.F.R. van Tongeren, editors. 1987. Data Analysis in
Community and Landscape Ecology. Pudoc Wageningen, The Netherlands.
Karr, J.R. 1991. Biological integrity: A long-neglected aspect of water resource management. Ecol.
Applic. 1:66-84.
Karr, J.R., K.D. Fausch, P.L. Angermeier, P.R. Yant, and I.J. Schlosser. 1986. Assessment of biological
integrity in running waters: A method and its rationale. Illinois Natural History Survey,
Champaign, Illinois. Special Publication 5.
Tetra Tech. Inc.
B-l
March 28, 2000 (Revised July 21, 2000)
-------
A Stream Condition Index for West Virginia Wadeable Streams
Karr, J.R., and D.R. Dudley. 1981. Ecological perspectives on water quality goals. Environ. Manage.
5:55-68.
Kenkel, N.C. and L. Orloci. 1986. Applying metric and nonmetric multidimensional scaling to
ecological studies: some new results. Ecology 67:919-928.
Kerans, B.L., and J.R. Karr. 1994. Development and testing of a benthic index of biotic integrity (B-
. IBI) for rivers of the Tennessee Valley. Ecol. Applic. 4(4):768-785.
Kruskalf J.B. 1964. Nonmetric multidimensional scaling: a numerical method. Psychometrika 29:115-
129.
Ludwig, J.A. and J.F. Reynolds. 1988. Statistical Ecology: A Primer on Methods and Computing. John
Wiley & Sons, New York.
Maxted, J., M.T. Barbour, J. Gerritsen, V. Poretti, N. Primrose, A. Silvia, D. Penrose, and R. Renfrow.
2000. Stream classification and biological metrics for the Mid-Atlantic Coastal Plain Ecoregion.
J. N. Am. Benthol. Soc. In Press.
McCune, B., and M.J. Mefford. 1995. PC-ORD. Multivariate Analysis of Ecological Data, Version 2.0.
MjM Software Design, Gleneden Beach, Oregon, USA.
Merritt, R.W., and K.W. Cummins, editors. 1984. An Introduction to the Aquatic Insects of North
America, 2nd edition. Kendall/Hunt Publishing Company, Dubuque, Iowa.
Ohio Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 1989. Addendum to biological criteria for the protection
of aquatic life, volume II: users manual for biological field assessment of Ohio surface water.
Ohio EPA, Division of Water Quality Planning and Assessment, Ecological Assessment Section,
Columbus, Ohio.
Omemik, J.M. 1987. Ecoregions of the conterminous United States. Ann. Assoc. Am. Geogr. 77(1):
118-125
Plafkin, J.L, M.T. Barbour, K.D. Porter, S.K. Gross, and R.M. Hughes. 1989. Rapid Bioassessment
Protocols for Use in Streams and Rivers: Benthic macroinvertebrates and fish. EPA/440/4-89-
001 . U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water, Washington, D.C.
Tetra Tech, Inc.
B-2
March 28, 2000 (Revised My 21, 2000)
-------
A Stream Condition Index for West Virginia Wadeable Streams
Reynoldson, T.B., R.H. Norris, V.H. Resh, K.E. Day, and D.M. Rosenberg. 1997. The reference
condition: A comparison of multimetric and multivariate approaches to assess water-quality
impairment using benthic macroinvertebrates. J. N. Am. Benthol. Soc. 16:833-852.
Southerland, M.T., and J.B. Stribling. 1995. Status of biological criteria development and
implementation. Pages 81-96 in W.S. Davis and T.P. Simon (editors). Biological assessment
and criteria: Tools for water resource planning and decision making. Lewis Publishers, Boca
Raton, Florida.
Statsoft, Inc.. 1998. Statistica for Windows, Volume II, Graphics. 2nd edition. Tulsa, Oklahoma.
Stribling, J.B., B.K. Jessup, J.S. White, D. Boward, and M. Hurd. 1998. Development of a Benthic
Index of Biotic Integrity for Maryland Streams. CBW-MANTA-EA-98-3. Maryland
Department of Natural Resources, Chesapeake Bay and Watershed Programs. Monitoring and
Non-Tidal Assessment Division.
TetraTech, Inc. 1999. Ecological Data Application System (EDAS), A User's Manual. Prepared by
Tetra Tech, Inc., Owings Mills, Maryland.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA). 1990 (DRAFT). Freshwater Macroinvertebrate
Species List Including Tolerance Values and Functional Feeding Group Designations for Use in
Rapid Bioassessment Protocols. EA Report No. 11075.05. Prepared by EA Engineering,
Science, and Technology for US EPA, Office of Water, Washington, D.C.
Van Sickle, J. 1997. Using mean similarity dendrograms to evaluate classifications. J. Ag. Biol.
Environ. Stat. 2:370-388.
Wallace, J.B. and J.R. Webster. 1996. The role of macroinvertebrates in stream ecosystem function.
Ann. Rev. Entomol. 41: 115-139.
TetraTech, Inc. B-3 March 28,2000 (Revised July 21,2000)
-------
APPENDIX C
SITE METRICS AND METRIC
SCORES
-------
Appendix C tsite metrics and metric scores
Stations are grouped by data set (1= 1996-1997 calibration data: 2= t997-1998 validation data) Within each data set, stations are listed by site type (reference, unlabeled, stressed), then within type by ascending Station ID.
Data
Station ID
Site
Benthle
Collect
Total
Tot. taxa
EPT
EPT taxa
%
%ept i;
*
%Chlro
% Top 2
% Top 2
HBI
INDEX
Sel
Stream Nam*
Typ.
Sample ID
Data
lava
•core
tana
ecore
EPT
•core
Chlro.
•core
dominant
ecore
HBI
•core
(SCI)
1
WVK-13
LITTLE SIXTEENMILE CREEK
reference
LOKAN
B6
5/12/1997
15
71
9
69
91
99
6
95
65
55
4
85
79
1
WVK-14-B-1-97
U.T. OF FIVEFORK BRANCH
reference
LOKAN
BIO
5/12/1997
18
86
12
92
89
97
3
98
46
84
3
98
92
1
WVK-39-E-3-(0.6)97
BAYS FORK
reference
LOKAN
B2
S/11/1997
20
95
12
92
68
74
6
95
33
105
3
95
92
1
WVK-39-M- 1-A-( 1.0)97
HOFFMAN HOLLOW
reference
LOKAN
B93
6/12/1997
17
81
13
100
83
90
4
97
43
89
3
95
92
1
WVK-43-J156.2)
ELK RIVER
reference
ELK
BI43
7/8/1997
18
86
11
85
65
71
26
75
50
78
5
76
89
78
88
1
WVKE-102-A
CAMP CREEK
reference
ELK
B1S5
7/9/1997
18
86
12
92
87
94
7
94
54
71
4
1
WVKE-111S
FLINT RUN
reference
ELK
B156
7/9/1997
12
57
8
62
93
101
3
98
71
46
3
97
77
1
WVKE-117-8
RIGHT FORK/LEATHERWOOD
reference
ELK
BI51
7/8/1997
14
87
11
85
87
. 94
5
96
55
70
4
89
84
1
WVKE-136-10.5)
PROPS RUN
reference
ELK
B128
7/6/1997
IS
71
11
85
91
99
2
99
51
77
4
90
87
86
1
WVKE-137
LAUREL RUN
reference
ELK
BI32
7/7/1997
16
76
12
92
80
87
IS
86
36
100
4
89
1
WVKE-14-P
PANTHER HOLLOW
reference
ELK
8117
6/26/1997
13
62
9
69
86
94
7
94
68
49
3
101
78
86
1
WVKE-50-B-10
IKE FORK
reference
ELK
B22S
7/29/1997
16
76
10
77
79
86
3
98
45
86
3
94
1
WVKE-76U-(0.8)
JOHNSON BRANCH
reference
ELK
821
7/22/1997
13
62
9
69
76
83
3
98
62
59
3
99
78
1
WVKE-96-C-I-O.SA
WILSON RUN
reference
ELK
B136
7/7/1997
13
62
8
62
84
91
6
95
64
56
3
96
77
1
VWKE-9B-C-M-IMJ
FALL RUN
reference
ELK .
B20
7/22/1997
f8
86
tz
92
90
98
5
96
73
43
4
85
83
88
1
WVKE-98-C*15-jt.O)
BIG RUN/LEFT FORK HOLLY
reference
ELK
B141
7/8/1997
15
71
11
85
90
98
3
98
46
84
3
93
t
WVMC-12-A-(03)
LAUREL RN/BIG SANDY CK ABOVE PATTERSON RN
reference
CHEAT
B100
6/19/1996
15
71
It
85
81
88
5
96
54
71
3
95
.84
1
WVMC2-A
DARNELL HOLLOW .
reference
CHEAT
B179
7/29/1996
18
86
12
92
79
86
7
94
42
90
. 4
85
89
1
WVMC-52-A
ROARING RUN
reference
CHEAT
B18S
7/29/1996
18
86
12
92
91
99
4
97
52
75
3
tos
92
WVMC-54A
MIKE RUN
reference
CHEAT
B213
8/7/1996
13
62
9
69
93
102
2
99
57
67
4
90
81
t
WVMC-54-C
MAXWELL RUN
reference
CHEAT
B204
7/30/1996
14
67
11
85
95
103
2
99
56
68
4
85
84
96
1
WVMC-60-C
ELKLICK RUN « FERNOW EXP. FOREST
reference
CHEAT
817
6/11/1996
18
86
14
108
93
101
2
99
39
95
3
95
WVMC-60-C-3
JOHN B. HOLLOW
reference
CHEAT
823
6/11/1996
14
87
13
100
99
108
0
101
42
91
3
104
93
1
WVMC-60-C-4
HICKMAN SLIOE HOLLOW
reference
CHEAT
B22
6/11/1996
23
110
14
108
57
62
6
95
36
100
4
87
91
VWMC-60-E
LAUREL RUN/DRY FORK
reference
CHEAT B2S
6/11/1996
12
57
8
62
90
98
0
101
78
35
2
106
75
86
1
WVMC-60F
OTTER CREEK
reference
CHEAT
B27
6/11/1996
17
81
11
85
76
83
4
97
45
86
85
WVMC-60-l
MILL RUN /DRY FORK
reference
CHEAT
B26
6/11/1996
21
100
13
100
74
81
3
98
31
107
3
94
95
1
WVMC-60K
GLADY FORK
reference
CHEAT
BSO
6/13/1996
16
76
10
77
83
90
10
91
43
89
4
84
BS
t
WVMC-60-K-2-A
HOG RUN/ PANTHER CAMP RUN
reference
CHEAT
8180
7/29/1996
15
71
11
85
74
81
6
95
37
99
3
93
87
1
WVMC-60-N-8.5
TINGLER RUN/LAUREL FK
reference
CHEAT
847
6/12/1996
16
76
13
100
97
106
1
100
48
81
3
103
93
1
WVMC-60T-1
LOWER TWO SPRING RUN
reference
CHEAT
B8
6/10/1996
19
90
14
108
79
86
4
97
73
42
4
84
83
1
WVMC-60-T-2
UPPER TWO SPRING RUN
reference
CHEAT
B1S
6/10/1996
16
76
14
108
70
77
8
93
59
64
4
89
83
1
WVMC-60-T-3
SWALLOW ROCK RUN
reference
CHEAT
B207
7/30/1996
IS
71
8
62
57
62
22
78
38
97
4
89
76
1
WVMC-60-T-8
BIG RUN/ GANDY CK NEAR LEADING RIDGE MTN
reference
CHEAT
B2
6/10/1996
17
81
12
92
90
98
2
99
50
77
3
97
91
1
WVMC-7
SCOTT RUN/CHEAT RIVER
reference
CHEAT
8147
7/23/1996
10
48
1
8
35
38
7
94
71
46
5
64
49
1
WVMCS-12
LITTLE LAUREL RUN/SHAVERS FORK
reference
CHEAT B1B2
7/29/1996
13
62
11
85
94
103
5
96
48
82
90
86
WVMCS-14
CLIFTON RUN
reference
CHEAT
B36
6/12/1996
18
06
14
108
. 89
97
4
97
42
90
4
91
94
WVMCS-28
UPPER PONDLICK RUN
reference
CHEAT
814
6/10/1996
17
81
12
92
92
100
1
100
38
96
3
105
95
1
WVMCS-53
BEAVER CREEK/SHAVERS FORK
reference
CHEAT
B189
7/30/1996
19
90
11
. 85 .
84
92
2 ,
99
39
96
3
97
93
WVMCS-54
SECOND FORK
reference
CHEAT
B11
6/10/1996
13
62
62
76
B2
12
89
61
61
3
103
76
1
WVMCS-8
LAUREL RUN/SHAVERS FK
reference
CHEAT
B220
8/8/1996
15
71
11
85
90
98
6
95
37
99
3
101
91
1
WVMT-64-(6.7|
MILL CREEK
reference
TYVAR
B377
9/10/1997
16
76
11
85
78
85
19
82
44
87
4
81
83
WVMT-64-C
GLADE RUN/MILL CREEK
reference
TYVAR
8371
9/10/1997
19
90
12
92
83
90
9
92
47
83
4
83
69
WVMTB-31
RIGHT FORK BUCKHANNON RIVER
reference
TYVAR
8363
9/9/1997
15
71
9
69
73
80
13
88
63
58
5
72
73
WVMTB-32-D
BEAR CAMP RUN
reference
TYVAR
B389
9/16/1997
13
62
7
54 .
59
65
32
69
66
53
5
67
62
1
WVMTM-1
HANGING RUN
reference
TYVAR
B287
8/25/1997
17
81
7
"."54
68
72
12
89
47
82
86
77
1
WVMTM-11-(7.6)
RIGHT FORK OF MIDDLE FORK
reference
TYVAR
B350
9/8/1997
18
86
10
77
77
84
8
93
42
91
4
83
86
t
WVMTM-11-E
JENKS RUN
reference
TYVAR
B296
8/2 £M 997
16
76
10
77
85
93
10
91
64
56
S
77
78
1
WVMTM-2S-J1.5)
SCOOLCRAFT RUN
reference
TYVAR
B320
8/27/1997
13
62
10
77
86
93
7
94
45
BS
3
93
84
WVMTM-25-A
BIRCH FORK
reference
TYVAR
8311
8/27/1997
17
81
13
100
96
104 „
1
100
65
55
4
87
67
1
WVMTM-26-B
ROCKY RUN
reference
TYVAR
8364
9/9/1997
10
48
. 6
46
54
59
41
60
72
44
5
69
96
54
1
WVPNB-18
DIFFICULT CREEK
reference
NBRPO B264
8/13^1997
16
76
11
85
78
84
5
96
30
109
3
89
86
1
WVPNB-4-EE-7-{0.4|
UT OF NORTH FORK PATTERS ON CREEK
reference
NBRPO 8259
8/12/1997
17
81
11
85
83
90
3
98
60
63
3
99
1
WVPSB-2H33.7)
SOUTH FK /SOUTH BR POT 0 FT. SEYBERT
reference
SBRPO B257
8/20/1996
22
105
11
85
52
56
3
98
54
72
.4
86
83
1
WVPSB28-D
MOYERFORK
reference
S8RPO B320
9/9/1996
14
87
12
92
96
105
1
100
37
98
2
106
93
1
WVPSB-28EE-2-A
BACK RUN /BIG RUN
reference
SBRPO B238
8/20/1996
12
57
9
69
97
106
1
100
67
51
4
86
77
1
WVPSB 28-EE-3
TEETER CAMP RUN
reference
SBRPO B261
8/20/1996
15
71
10
77
72
79
9
92
66
53
5
72
74
1
WVPSB 28 EE-3-A
HEMLOCK RUN
reference
SBRPO B246
8/20/1996
11
52
8
62
90
97
6
9S
57
67
4
82
76
WVPSB-2B-EE-3-B
LEONARD SPRING RUN
reference
SBRPO B251
8/20/1996
11
52
10
77
- 49
54
0
101
58
65
3
94
89
74
1
WVPS8-2B-EE-3-C
MIDDLE RIDGE HOLLOW
reference
SBRPO B253
8/20/1996
10
48
8
62
43
46
3
98
66
53
66
1
WVPSB 28 EE-3-D
BUD HOLLOW
reference
SBRPO B241
8/20/1996
14
67
9
69
53
58
4
97
48
82
4
88
77
1
VWPSB-28-Q
2EKE RUN
reference
SBRPO B333
9H 0/1996
18
86
f 2
92
91
99
2
99
54
73
3
94
90
1
WVPSB-28-GG-1
VANCE RUN
reference
SBRPO
B279
8/21/1996
14
67
10
77
81
88
10
91
43
89
88
83
Appendix Cf page C-1
-------
Appendix C
Site metrics and metric scores
Stations are grouped by data set (1= 1996-1997 calibration data; 2= 1997-1998 validation data). Within each data set. stations are listed by site type (reference, unlabeled, stressed), then witliin type by ascending Station ID.
Data
Set Station ID
Stream Name
Site
Benthlc -
Celled
Total
ToL laxa
CPT
EPT taxa
%
% EPT j;
%
%Chlro
% Top 2
% Top 2
HBI
INDEX
Type
Sample ID
Date
taxa
•core
laxa
ecora
EPT
•core •
Chlro.
•core
dominant
•core
HBI
•core
{SCI)
reference
SBRPO B277
8/21/1996
16
76
10
77
86
93
2
99
53
73
4
62
83
reference
SBRPO B330
9/10/1996
13
62
9
69
78
84
14
87
39
96
4
91
82
reference
SBRPO B252
8/20/1996
16
76
11
85
91 *
99
1
100
- 59
64
4
85
85
reference
SBRPO
B300
8/27/1996
16
76
9
69
42
46
34
66
«
85
5
66
68
LOKAN
813
5/13/1997
15
71
9
69
69
75
21
79
48
B2
88
4
BO
76
LOKAN
B26
S/f 4/1997
15
71
9
69
72
79
16
85
44
4
76
78
LOKAN
B52
5/19/1997
10
48
6
46
70
77
11
89
54
71
3
92
71
LOKAN
B94
6/10/1997
20
95
7
54
24
26
16
82
46
84
6
59
67
LOKAN
B90
6/11/1997
13
62
8
62
68
74
23
78
45
86
4
87
75
LOKAN
8100
6/16/1997
16
76
5
38
56
61
10
91
56
69
4
87
70
LOKAN
B47
S/19/1997
17
81
10
77
89
97
4
97
50
78
4
90
87
LOKAN
B86
6/10/1997
10
48
4
31
70
77
21
80
77
36
3
97
61
LOKAN
B37
5/14/1997
12
57
8
62
63
69
17
84
69
48
3
98
69
LOKAN
B59
5/21/1997
17
81
10
77
72
78
22
79
65
54
3
96
77
LOKAN
B97
6/16/1997
13
62
5
38
54
59
24
76
51 .
76
4
81
65
LOKAN
BS1
5/21/1997
13
62
8
62
42
46
54
46
72
44
6
62
54
LOKAN
B102
6/19/1997
11
52
3
23
23
25
66
34
82
28
6
53
36
LOKAN
BS7
5/20/1997
16
76
9
69
93
101
3
98
61
62
3
96
83
LOKAN
838
6/11/1997
10
48
7
54
80
87
15
86
55
71
4
85
72
LOKAN
B54
5/20/1997
18
86
12
92
69
75
4
97
58
66
5
70
81
LOKAN
B89
6/11/1997
12
57
4
31
29
31
47
53
69
49
6
55
46
LOKAN
B76
5/28/1997
15
71
6
46
34
37
48
53
65
55
5
67
55
LOKAN
B85
6/10/1997
10
48
4
31
56
61
35
66
58
66
S
75
SB
LOKAN
B43
5/15/1997
9
43
2
15
4
4
79
21
88
20
7
44
25
LOKAN
B42
5/15/1997
8
38
3
23
1
2
67
33
93
10
7
46
25
LOKAN
B87
6/11/1997
13
62
8
62
88
95
1
100
58
65
4
92
79
LOKAN
014
S/13/1997
13
62
8
62
68
74
26
75
74
41
86
67
LOKAN
B91
6/12/1997
12
57
8
62
79
86
13
88
62
59
4
89
73
LOKAN
B25
5/13/1997
7
33
8
5
5
43
S8
63
26
8
32
27
LOKAN
B1
5/8/1997
17
81
10
77
68
74
10
91
48
82
90
82
LOKAN
B3
S/11/1997
11
52
6
46
9
9
81
19
89
17
7
45
31
LOKAN
812
S/13/1997
7
33 .
2
15
2
.2
93
7
95
8
44
IB
LOKAN
B21
5/13/1997
17
81
12
92
73
79
19
81
51
77
88
83
LOKAN
822
5/13/1997
4
19
8
3
3
85
15
93
12
7
42
16
9
LOKAN
B41
5/15/1997
2
10
0
0
0
0
98
2
100
0
7
44
LOKAN
B40
S/15/1997
7
33
3
23
10
1.1
86
14
91
14
7
47
24
LOKAN
B23
5/13/1997
7
33
2
15
44
57
86
21
8
27
26
LOKAN
B55
5/20/1997
14
67
7
54
30
33
51
49
62
59
6
59
53
LOKAN
B3I
5/14/1997
7
33
8
2
2
22
79
95
7
9
13
24
LOKAN
B98
6/16/1997
13
62
8
62
3
4
16 *
85
96
a '
9
11
38
LOKAN
B44
5/16/1997
' 12
57
7
54
78
85
10
91
54
72
4
86
74
LOKAN
B18
5/13/1997
-6
24
8
2
2
95
S
97
5
7
43
14
ELK
B238
8/7/1997
14
67
7
54
75
82
1
100
47
84
5
75
77
ELK
B236
8/S/1997
19
90
13
100
88
95
3
98
46
85
4
88
93
ELK
B237
6/5/1997
16
76
10
77
85
92
1
100
66
53
3
94
82
LOKAN
B80
6/9/1997
14
67
7
54
64
70
9
92
52
74
4
82
73
ELK
B173
7/15/1997
20
95
11
85
82
89
1
100
45
86
4
84
90
ELK
B157
7/9/1997
10
48
6
46
92
100
5
96
76
38
S
73
67
ELK
B16I
7/9/1997
10
48
4
31
60
66
22
78
71
46
5
69
56
ELK
B153
7/9/1997
15
71
10
77
58
63
36
65
58
66
5
71
69
ELK
B1BO
7/9/1997
17
81
13
100
61
67 '
23
78
45
85
4
80
82
ELK
B158
7/9/1997
16
76
10
77
79
85
6
95
48
B1
3
98
85
ELK
B1S4
7/9/1997
15
71
10
77
87
95
5
96
61
61
4
87
81
ELK
B1S2
7/8/1997
12
57
6
46
76
83
4
97
63
58
4
81
88
70
ELK
B144
7/8/1997
15
71
11
85
83
90
10
91
42
90
4
86
ELK
B139
7/8/1997
15
71
10
77
77
84
14
87
38
97
4
87
84
ELK
B140
7/8/1997
17
81
11
85
85
93
7
94
47
83
3
97
89
ELK
B130
7/7/1997
20
95
14
108
79
86
5
96
42
91
4
89
93
ELK
B116
&W1997
9
43
6
46
85
92
0
101
57
67
4
78
71
68
ELK
BI64
7/14/1997
15
71
8
62
42
46
20
81
51
76
5
72
ELK
B134
7/7/1997
14
67
11
85
90
98
6
94
71
45
5
74
77
ELK
BI99
7/22/1997
17
81
12
92
72
78
15
86
57
67
4
78
80
ELK
B162
7/13/1997
12
57
6
46
84
92
4
97
76
38
3
102
72
WVPSB-28-GG-1A
WVPSB-28-J.2
WVPSB-2B-K-6-A
WVPSB-9-|02.2|
WVK-IO-A
WVK-IO-F
WVK-12-120.7)
SAMS RUN/VANCE RUN
SHUCKLEFORO RUN
LOWER GULF RUN
MILL CREEK/SOUTH BR POT 9 MOUTH
COOPER CREEK
BARNETT FORK
THIRTEEN MILE CREEK
WVK.I2-E-(2.4)
WVK.12E-2.5{4.0)
WVK-12-F-{5.0)
WVK-12-J
WVK-14|2.2)
WVK-14-A.5-(1.6)
WVK-16-{12.8)
WVK-16-(33.0)
WVK-I6B
WVK-16-J-3-M.0)
MUDLICK FORK
U.T. OF MUDLICK FORK
POPLAR FORK
BEE RUN
SIXTEENMILE CREEK
U.T. OF SIXTEENMILE CREEK
EIGHTEEN MILE CREEK
EIGHTEEN MILE CREEK
JAKES BRANCH
SALTLICK CREEK
WVK-I6-L
WVK-16-Q|1.0)
WVK-I6-S
WVK-22-160)
WVK-22-B
WVK-29-(6I.OJ
WVK-32-O.IA
WVK-32-A
WVK'36-(2.4)
WVK-39-I03-6I
SULUG CREEK
HARRIS BRANCH
COTTRELL RUN
HURRICANE CREEK
POPLAR FORK
POCATALICO RIVER
VINTROUX HOLLOW
ROCKSTEP RUN
FINNEY BRANCH
OAVIS CREEK
WVK-39-|12.2) DAVIS CREEK
WVK-39-A WARD HOLLOW
WVK-39-E-3-{0.4| BAYS FORK
WVK-39-F RAYS BRANCH
WVK-39-J COAL HOLLOW
WVK-39-O SHREWSBURY HOLLOW
WVK-41 TWOMILE CREEK
WVK-41-D5 RICH FORK/TWO MILE
WVK-41-DS-B CRAIGS BRANCH
WVK-41-D-1 U.T. OF LEFT FORK / KANAWHA TWO MILE
WVK-41-E-1 EDENSFORK
WVK-4t-E-2 {O t) HOLMES BRANCH
WVK-41*E-2-{1.4) HOLMES BRANCH
WVK-4I E-2H1.7) HOLMES BRANCH
WVK-42 JOPLIN BRANCH
WVK-43-(1.2) ELK RIVER
WVK-43-J63.0) ELK RIVER
WVK-43-<87.4) ELK RIVER
WVK-9-C-{5.4) LOWER NINEMILE CREEK
WVKE-I02-{14.6> LAUREL CREEK
WVKE-102-|2 83} LAUREL CREEK
WVKE-102C-1-(0.4) UT OF BROOKS CREEK
WVKE-111 -(0.2) BACK FORK
WVKE-111K SUGAR CREEK
WVKE-111 -K-2 LITRE SUGAR CREEK
WVKE-111-O BIG RUN/BACK FORK ELK
WVKEI15 STEPS RUN
WVKE-117 LEATHERWOOO CREEK
WVKE-118 BERGOO CREEK
WVKE-124 BIG RUN
WVKE-128 HICKORYLICK RUN
WVKE-13 NARROW BRANCH
WVKE-138 BIG SPRING FORK
WVKE'139 OLD FIELD FORK
WVKE-139-B CROOKED FORK
WVKE- 14-G-1 -{0.8) RIGHT FORK OF SUCK BRANCH
Appendix C, page C-2
-------
Appendix C Site metrics and metric scores
Stations are grouped by data sel (1= 1996-1997 calibration data; 2= 1997-1998 validation data). Within each data set. stations are listed by site type (reference, unlabeled, stressed), then within type by ascending Station ID.
Data
Station ID
Benthlc
Collect
Total
Tot. taxa
EPT
EPT taxa
. %
% EPT j
' %
NChlro
%Top2
% Top 2
HBI
INDEX
s»t
Stream Name
Type Sample ID
Dale
taxa
score
taxa
•core
EPT
¦core
Chlro.
•core
dominant
ecore
HBt
•core
(SCI)
WVKE-14-G-2
WHITE OAK FORK
ELK
Bill
6/25/1997
5
24
3
23
94
102
0
101
92
12
2
107
60
WVKE-14K
JOE'S HOLLOW
ELK
B19
6/25/1997
8
38 '
3
23
78
85
6
95
75
39
4
81
CO
1
WVKE-I4M
MORRIS FORK
ELK
B121
6/27/1997
7
33
3
23
91
99
3
98
' 79
33
3
95
64
1
WVKE-14-M-2
MUDLICK BRANCH
ELK
B110
6/25/1997
6
29
1
8
76
82
0
101
85
24
3
104
- 57
1
WVKE-140-(5.2)
MIDDLE FORK
ELK
. B174
7/15/1997
16
76
8
62
61
66
8
93
48
81
4 •
81
76
81
1
WVKE-14-0-0.5
MCBRIDE HOLLOW
ELK
BUS
6/26/1997
16
76
9
69
68
74
7
94
34
103
5
74
1
WVKE-19-B
TWO MILE FORK
ELK
8126
7/1/1997
IS
71
9
69
64
70
6
95
30
109
4
79
81
1
WVKE-19-H
PETES FORK
ELK
B1S9
7/9/1997
12
57
6
46
59
64
4
97
49
79
S
77
70
1
WVKE-21
LEATHERWOOD CREEK
ELK
B114
6/26/1997
IS
71
8
62
30
33
28
73
68
50
6
59
58
WVKE-23-(0.43)
BIG SANDY CREEK
ELK
B193
7/21/1997
13
62
6
46
57
62
4
97
51
76
88
4
84
88
71
WVKE-23F-1
DOELICK RUN
ELK
B19S
7/21/1997
12
57
S
38
61
66
0
101
44
4
73
1
WVKE-23-P-3-A
HORSE RUN
ELK
B25
7/23/1997
IS
71
8
62 .
. 64
70
10
91
38
97
4
79
78
1
WVKE-2-E
GREEN BOTTOM
ELK
818
6/25/1997
11
52
4
31
7
8
6S
35
79
34
7
46
34
1
WVKE-3
NEWHOUSE BRANCH
ELK
B125
7/1/1997
7
33
0
0
0
0
34
66
85
23
8
25
25
1
WVKE-34
CAMP CREEK
ELK
B181
7/16/1997
7
33
3
23
65
71
22
79
55
71
s
65
57.
1
WVKE-37-B
LAUREL FORK
ELK
Bt 13
6/26/1997
14
67
4
31
54
58
34
67
60
62
6
61
58
51
1
WVKE-37-0
SUMMERS FORK
ELK
B120
6/26/1997
15
71
5
38
43
47
46
54
74
40
6
58
t
WVKE-4
COONSKIN BRANCH
ELK
017
6/25/1997
12
57
4
31
35
38
44
56
68
50
6
61
96
49
WVKE-40
LITTLE SYCAMORE CREEK
ELK
B27
7/23/1997
9
43
5 .
38
90
98
6
95
72
14
3
69
1
WVKE-41
SYCAMORE CREEK
ELK
B213
7/24/1997
15
71
6
46
80
87
6
95
50
79
66
4
82
77.
1
WVKE-41-A
CHARLEY BRANCH
ELK
8170
7/15/1997
19
90
12
92
81
88
11
90
45
4
68
' 89
1
WVKE-41-B{0.2|
ADONIJAH FORK
ELK
B18S
7/17/1997
13
62
5
38
86
93
2
. 99
58
65
• 5
77
72
1
WVKE-41-B-1.5
LAUREL FORK
ELK
B1S9
7/17/1997
16
76
6
46
87
95
1
100
75
40
s
75
72
1
WVKE-41 -C-1
GRASSY FORK
ELK
B187
7/17/1997
9
43
4
31
57
62
33
68
56
69
5
66
56
1
WVKE-45-8
LICK BRANCH
ELK
B218
7/28/1997
13
62
5
38
64
£9
4
97
50
78
s
71
G9
WVKE-46-(1.2|
LEATHERWOOD CREEK
ELK
B235
7/31/1997
15
71
. 7
54
55
60
13
88
49
60
5
74
71
88
1
WVKE-49
PISGAH RUN
ELK
8221
7/28/1997
20
95
11
65
75
'61
4
97
54
72
68
3
98
1
WVKE 50 (0.2)
BUFFALO CREEK
ELK
B234
7/31/1997
13
62
7
54
81
88
11
90
98
56
4
65
75
1
WVKE-50-B-[0.1)
LILLY FORK
ELK
B230
7/30/1997
16
76
9
69
80
87
3
40
93
4
63
85
1
WVKE-SO-B 1-(2.0)
SINNETT BRANCH
ELK
8233
7/30/1997
16
76
10
77
77
84
S
96
56
68
3
102
83
1
WVKE-50-B-7-(0. t)
JIM YOUNG FORK
ELK
B226
7/29/1997
7
33
2
IS
50
54
9
92
64
57
5
77
55
WVKE-50-B8
BEECH FORK
ELK
B222
7/29/1997
13
62
8
62
87
94
3
98
49
79
4
87
80
1
WVKE-50-B-9
SYCAMORE RUN
ELK
B228
7/29/1997
14
67
9
69
71
77
11
90 '
57
67
4
. 81
86
75
1
WVKE-50-F-12 2]
SAND FORK
ELK
B232
7/30/1997
16
76
8
62
71
77
13
88
45
86
4
79
1
WVKE-50-l
ROCKCAMP RUN
ELK
8231
7/30/1997
.13
62
.7
54
78
85
100
30
109
3
92
82
1
WVKE-50-13
HICKORY FORK
ELK
6224
7/29/1997
3
14
2
15
95
104
0
101
95
7
s
69
51
1
WVKE-SO-O
ROBINSON FORK
ELK
8227
7/29/1997
16
76
a
62
64
70
7
94
43
69
4
es
79
1
WVKE-50-P
TAYLOR CREEK
ELK
B229
7/29/1997
2
10
50
54
SO
50
100
0
5
77
33
WVKE-50-S
DILLE RUN
ELK
8223
7/29/1997
6
29
3
23
99
108
0
101
99
2
. 3
101
59
1
WVKE-50-T
PHEASANT RUN
ELK
B220
7/28/1997
6
29
3
23
44
48
3
98
di
13
4
85
49
1
WVKE-56
SPREAD RUN
ELK
8212
7/24/1997
14
67
9
69
92
100
too
68
50
4
91
79
1
WVKE-59
TURKEY RUN
ELK
B214
7/24/1997
- S
24
8
22
24
0
101
56
69
5
74
50
1
WVKE-6-(5 6)
MILL CREEK
ELK
B127
7/3/1997
14
.67
6 -
46
39
42
: 3
98
49
79
4
81
69
1
WVKE-64
BIG OTTER CREEK
ELK
8192
7/21/1997
13
62
6
46
89
96
7
94
74
40
4
79
70
1
WVKE-69(5.6)
GROVES CREEK
ELK
B188
7/17/1997
19
90
11
85
82
89
7
94
37
98
4
88
91
1
WVKE-70-A
ROAD FORK
ELK
8183
7/16/1997
11
52
5
38
69
75
8
93
53
73
s
75
68
1
WVKE-74 -{10.4}
STRANGE CREEK
ELK
B23
7/22/1997
14
. 67
9
69
68
74
7
94
44
67
4
69
80
1
WVKE-74-F
BIG RUN
ELK
8198
7/22/1997
21
100
12
92
59
65
13
88
28
113
3
92
89
t
WVKE-76-(0.9J
BIRCH RIVER
ELK
8186
7/17/1997
10
48
5
38
64
70
19
82
49
79
4
81
66
1
WVKE-76-A
LEATHERWOOD RUN
ELK
B26
7/23/1997
13 '
62
7
54
62
68
4
97
47
83
3
97
77
1
WVKE-76-C
MIDDLE RUN
ELK
B197
7/21/1997
14
67
9
69
85
93
8
93
58
66
3 •
93
80
1
WVKE-76 0 t
BUCKEYE FORK
ELK
B10O
7/16/1997
15
71
9 .
69
65
70
13
88
37
98
5
76
79
, 1
WVKE-76-E|2.6)
LITTLE BIRCH RIVER
ELK
B182
7/1&1997
13
62
6
46
44
48
29
72
54
72
. 5
67
61
WVKE-76-E-5
WINDY RUN
ELK
B178
7/15/1997
13
62
9
69
.78
84
6
95
47
84
4
80
79
1
WVKE-76E-6-A
SENG RUN
ELK
B176
7/15/1997
12
57
7
54
90
98
2
99
75
38
4
81
71
1
WVKE-76-E-7.5
FISHER RUN
ELK
B171
7/15/1997
17
81
9
69
70
76
18
83
52
74
5
70
76
1
WVKE-76-N(2.4J
ANTHONY CREEK
ELK
B24
7/23/1997
20
9S
10
77
87
9S
100
46
84
3
96
91
1
WVKE-76-N8
RICH FORK
ELK
B211
7/24/1997
20
95
12
92
75
82
S
9S
45
86
4
91
90
1
WVKE-76-O
POPLAR CREEK
ELK
B29
7/23/1997
17
81
10
77
92
. 101
2
99
63
58
3
95
85
1
WVKE-76-S.3
OTTER HOL€
ELK
828
7/23/1997
18
86
10
77
72
78
6
95
37
98
4
90
87
1
WVKE-76W
JACKS RUN
ELK
B172
7/15/1997
7
33
2
15
10
11
23
78
80
31
6
60
38
WVKE-7-E
KAUFMAN BRANCh
ELK
BIS
&24/1997
9
43
3
23
32
35
48
S3
79
33
6
53
40
1
WVKE-84.5
BEARRUN
ELK
B191
7/21/1997
10
48
4
31
33
36
48
S3
65
55
6
62
47
Appendix C, page C-3
-------
Appendix C
Site metrics and metric scores
Stations are grouped by data set (1= 1996-1997 calibration data; 2- 1997-1998 validation data). Within each data set. stalions are listed by site type (reference, unlabeled, stressed), then within type by ascending Station ID.
Data
Set Station ID
Stream Name
Site
Typ«
Benthlc
Sample ID
Collect
Dale
Total
taxa
ToL taxa
EPT
EPT taxa
%
% EPT
% ¦'
%Chiro
% Top 2
% Top 2
HBI
INDEX
acore
taxa
•core
EPT
•core
Chlro.
•core
dominant
•core
HBI
•core
(SCI)
76
8
62
63
69
27
74
72
44
5
74
67
76
5
38
47
52
16
84
47
82
6
62
66
48
3
23
10
10
21
79
. 79
32
8
25
36
66
57
6
46
48
53
20
81
42
91
5
70
38
3
23
79
86
6
95
70
46
4
85
62
71
6
46
64
70
15
86
38
100
4
82
76
57
9
69
69
75
29
72
61
61
67
67
76
7
54
38
41
4
97
43
89
4
86
74
57
8.
62
67
73
28
73
72
44
66
62
95
12
92
.81
88
5
96
4S
86
85
90
90
9
69
69
75
19
82
45
85
4
79
60
76
10
77
85
93
6
95
41
92
94
88
62
9
69
86
93
10
91
70
47
4
79
74
95
12
92
76
82
15
86
58
66
92
86
67
7
54
82
89
4
97
66
53
4
80
73
71
9
69
74
80
21 .
80
45
85
76
77
76
10
77
85
92
4
97
45
85
4
85
85
81
8
62
81
88
12
89
58
66
4
80
78
71
10
77
62
67
10
91
41
92
4
88
81
52
7
54
92
100
5
96
89
17
105
70
62
6
46
68
74
23
78
48
82
74
69
62
10
77
76
83
S
96
39
96
4
89
84
57
8
62
89
97
4
97
59
65
4
83
77
86
10
77
77
84
7
94
60
63
4
81
¦81
52
2
15
13
14
61
40
72
44
6
54
37
62
5
38
65
71
2
99
54
72
5
76
70
62
7
54
64
70
16
85
42
90
5
77
73
71
9
. 69
. 53
57
38
63
64
56
5
68
64
80
76
8
62
81
88
4
97
53
74
. 4
83
76
9
69
55
60
12
88
44
88
4
81
77
43
2
15
2
2
75
2S
87
21
7
41
25
86
12
92
88
96
7
94
63
57
4
63
85
76
10
77
83
91
6
95
56
69
3
93
84
62
9
69
76
83
18
83
64
57
4
86
73
57
8
62
84
92
13
88
60
62
4
78
73
48
4
31
77
84
2
99
67
52
3
104
69
52
8
62
94
103
4
97
69
49
4
79
73
90
12
92
89
97
9
92
47
83
3
97
92
67
11
85
68
74
31
69
63
58
5
75
71
71
9
69
39
43
57
43
74
41
6
63
55
86
11
85
83
91
14
87
79
33
s
74
76
29
8
4
4
92
8
96
6
7
44
16
81
12
92
65
70
21
80
55
70
4
80
79
62
9
69
71
78
17
84
38
97
4
81
78
90
13
100
74
81
11
90
48
82
4
79
87
48
5
38
30
33
61
40
72
43
6
59
44
86
11
85
41
45
52
49
67
51
5
69
64
86
76
12
92
87
95
8
93 .
56
69
4
85
87
9
69
60
66
19
82
46
85
4
92
78
48
7
54
88
96
0
101
74
41
2
107
73
62
7
54
67
73
12
89
44
87
4
87
75
57
5
38
70
76
13
88
77
36
5
69
61
67
10
77
94
102
0
101
78
34
4
82
77
67
10
77
80
87
0
101
42
91
3
99
87
62
9
69
94
102
3
98
57
68
3
93
82
71
9
69
61
66
11
90
45
86
4
84
78
29-
8
4
4
12
89
65
54
S
77
44
67
9
69
84
91
13
88
50
77
4
86
60
71
9
69
60
66
33
68
48
81
4
83
73
71
10
77
7B
84
1
too
56
68
4
85
81
81
100
13
100
58
63
27
74
50
77
5
74
33
3
23
13
14
76
24
84
26
7
48
28
38
5
38
82
89
8
93
77
36
3
101
66
WVKE-85
WVKE-87B
WVKE-88
WVKE-9-{1.5)
WVKE-9-J15.0)
WVKE-91
WVKE-91 A-1
WVKE-94
WVKE-98-A
WVKE-98-0
WVKE-988 (136>
WVKE-98-B-16
WVKE-98 B-16.4
WVKE-98-B-3-{0.6)
WVKE-98 -B-8
WVKE ?8-C-(10.0}
WVKE-98-C-(13 8)
WVKE-98-C-1
WVKE-98-C-11
WVKE-98-C-tt-C
WVKE-98-C-2
WVKP-16D
WVKP-17-8-5
WVKP-17-C-1-A
WVKP-17-C-4
WVKP-17-E-(2.6)
WVKP-I7-F-I
WVKP-I7-G
WVKP-1-B
WVKP-20
WVKP-21
WVKP-2
LITTLE BUFFALO CREEK
LAUREL FORK
OLD WOMAN RUN
LITTLE SANDY CREEK
LITTLE SANDY CREEK
WOLF CREEK
SPRUCE FORK
FLATWOODS RUN
KANAWHA RUN
RIGHT FORK HOLLY RIVER
RIGHT FORK/HOLLY RIVER
DESERT FORK
UPPER MUDLICK
FALL RUN
WEASE RUN
LEFT FORK/HOLLY RIVER
LEFT FORK/HOLLY RIVER
LAURELPATCH RUN
LAUREL FORK
RIGHT FORK/LAUREL FORK
OLDLICK RUN
WVKE-98-C-2-D COUGAR FORK
WVKE-98-C-5 LONG RUN
WVKE-98-C-6 BEAR RUN
WVKE-9-B-t BIG FORK
WVKE-9-C-J0.6) AARON'S FORK
WVKE-9-E BULLSKIN BRANCH
WVKE-9-G RUFFNER BRANCH (DOUGLAS BRANCH)
WVKE 9 I-1-A HARPER HOLLOW
WVKP-16-{4.5) GRAPEVINE CREEK
WVKP-16-B BROADTREE RUN
VANCE HOLLOW
FIRST CREEK / MIDDLE FORK
DAN SLATER HOLLOW
RAILROAD HOLLOW
DUODENFORK
LOOM TREE HOLLOW
FABER HOLLOW
BIGGER BRANCH
RACCOON CREEK
PERNEL BRANCH
CAMP CREEK
ELK
ELK
ELK
ELK
ELK
ELK
ELK
ELK
ELK
ELK
B196 7/21/1997
B217.
B219
B147
B148
B179
B177
B2I6
B131
0168
B175
7/28/1997
7/28/1997
7/8/1997
7/8/1997
7/15/1997
7/15/1997
7/28/1997
7/7/1997
7/14/1997
7/15/1997
16
16
10
12
a
15
12
16
12
20
19
ELK
ELK
ELK
ELK
ELK
ELK
ELK
ELK
ELK
ELK
B166
B169
B129
B13S
B145
B146
0133
B190
B22
B150
7/M/1997
7/14/1997
7/7/1997
7/7/1997
7/B/1997
7/6/1997
7/7/1997
7/18/1997
7/22/1997
7/8/1997
ELK
ELK
ELK
ELK
ELK
ELK
ELK
ELK
B165
B149
B138
B112
B137
0122
BUB
BI23
LOKAN B03
LOKAN B4
7/14/1997
7/8/1997
7/8/1997
6/2EV1997 -
7/8/1997
7/1/1997
6/26/1997
7/1/1997
6/1Q/1997
5/12/1997
16
13
20
14
15
16
17
15
11
13
13
12
18
11
13
13
15
16
16
LOKAN B11
LOKAN B16
LOKAN B27
LOKAN B34
LOKAN B92
LOKAN B19
LOKAN B15
LOKAN 839
LOKAN BB
LOKAN B7
LOKAN B5
5/12/1997
5/13/1997
5/14/1997
5/14/1997
6/12/1997
5/13/1997
S/13/1997
5/15/1997
5/12/1997
5/12/1997
13
12
10
11
19
14
15
'•26
WVKP-28
WVKP-28-A-1-(0.7)
WVKP-28-B-1
WVKP-28-E
WVKP-29
WVKP-32-.5A
WVKP-32-{l.01
WVKP-33 {5.8}
WVKP-33-D-t0.8)
WVKP-33-G
WVKP-36-B
WVKP-37-A
WVKP-38-.8A
WVKP-38-D
WVKP-4
WVKP-40
WVKP-41-A
WVKP-43-A
WVKP-45.S
GREEN CREEK (REFERENCE)
HUNT FORK
BEAR BRANCH
ANDERSON LICK RUN
STRAIGHT CREEK
SUGAR CAMP HOLLOW
WOLF CREEK
TRACE FORK/FLAT FORK
COON RUN
CABBAGE FORK
BONER HOLLOW
SNAKE HOLLOW
GR6ATHOUSE HOLLOW
HOLLYWOOD FORK
HARMOND CREEK
ROUND KNOB RUN
SLAB FORK
SMITH RUN
VINEYARD RUN
LOKAN B74
LOKAN 894
LOKAN B72
LOKAN 871
LOKAN B9
LOKAN B77
LOKAN B96
LOKAN B81
LOKAN B79
LOKAN B67
5/12/1997
5/28/1997
6/12/1997
5/28/1997
5/28/1997
5/12/1997
5/28/1997
6/12/1997
6/9/1997
6/9/1997
"6
17
13
19
10
18
18
16
10
13
WVKP-S
WVKP-8
ROCKY FORK
SCHOOLHOUSE BRANCH
LOKAN B66
LOKAN B70
LOKAN B68
LOKAN B69
LOKAN 829
LOKAN 862
LOKAN B63
LOKAN 864
LOKAN 865
5/22/1997
5/22/1997
5/22/1997
5/22/1997
5/22/1997
5/14/1997
5/21/1997
5/21/1997
5/21/1997
5/21/1997
12
14
14
13
15
6
14
15
15
21
LOKAN B48
LOKAN 849
5/19/1997
5/19/1997
Appendix C, page C-4
-------
Appendix C
Site metrics and metric scores
Stations are grouped by data set (1= 1996-1997 calibration data; 2= 1997-1998 validation data). Within each data set. stations are listed by site type (reference, unlabeled, stressed), then within type by ascending Station ID.
Data
Set Station ID
Stream Name
Sit©
Type
WVKP-9 A SPRING BRANCH
WVM-27-J11S.0) TYGART VALLEY RIVER
WVM-27-{46.2) TYGART VALLEY RIVER
WVMC-10 BIG RUN NEAR PISGAH
WVMC-II-D-(IO) LEFT FORK BULL RUN O HEADWATERS
WVMC- 12-.5AJ0) SOVERN RUN © MOUTH
WVMC-12-.7A PARKER RUN/BIG SANDY CREEK
WVMC-12-I10I BIG SANOY CREEK O BRUCETON MILLS FALLS
WVMC-12-J14)
WVMC- 12-A-{02.5)
WVMC-12-A-1
WVMC-12-A-2
WVMC-12B-5-{00}
WVMC-12-8.5(02)
WVMC12-B-.5A
WVMC 12-B-{bl).
WVMC-12-B-(02)
WVMC-12-B106)
WVMC-12-B-(II)
WVMC-12-B-1-(0t)
WVMC-12-B-1-|04)
WVMC- 12-B-3-[02)
WVMC-12-B-4-|02)
WVMC-12-B-4-[03)
WVMC-12-B-5-C
WVMC-12B-6
WVMC-12-C-(01)
WVMC-12-D
I WVMC-12-E
1 WVMC-12-E.t
WVMC-12-F-(OO.OJ
WVMC-12-F-|OI.O)
WVMC-15-(01)
WVMC-15-A
WVMC-16-A-{0 8)
WVMC-17-.6A
WVMC-17-.7
WVMC-17-110.21
WVMC-17-(14.4)
BIG SANDY CREEK ABOVE LITTLE SANDY CREEK
LAUREL PUN/BIG SANDY CK NEAR MOUTH
LITTLE LAUREL RUN
PATTERSON RUN
WEBSTER RUN O MOUTH
WEBSTER RUN O HEADWATERS
UNNAMED TRIB/WEBSTER RUN
LITTLE SANDY CREEK NEAR MOUTH
LITTLE SANDY CREEK BELOW BEAVER CREEK
LITTLE SANDY CREEK BELOW HOGG RUN
LITTLE SANDY CREEK BELOW CHERRY RUN
BEAVER CREEK NEAR MOUTH
BEAVER CREEK NEAR HEADWATERS
HOGG RUN AT HEADWATERS
ELK RUN NEAR MOUTH
ELK RUN ABOVE UNNAMED TRIBS
THIRD UNNAMED TRIB/CHERRY RUN NEAR HEAD
MILL RUN /LITTLE LAUREL RUN NEAR MOUTH
HAZEL RUN NEAR MOUTH
GLADE RUN WEST OF BRUCETON MILLS
GLADE RUN NORTH OF BRANDONVILLE
Benthlc
Collect
Total
ToL taxa
EPT
EPT taxa
%
% EPT i;
1 %
%Chlro
% Top 2
% Top 2
HBI
INDEX
Sample 10
Date
taxa
¦core
taxa
•core
EPT
•core ' i
Chlro.
score
dominant
ecore
HBI
score
(SCI)
LOKAN
B50
5/19/1997
5
24
3
23
19
21
26
74
81
30
8
32
34
TYVAR
B341
9/3/1997
19
90
8
62
30
33
10
90
49
79
5
75
72
TYVAR
B301
9/11/1997
13
62
10
77
. 64
70
26
74
44
88
5
71
73
CHEAT
B136
7/23/1996
20
95
8
62
63
68
7
94
34
104
4
80
83
CHEAT
B103
9/1996
. 9
43
6
46
88
96
0
101
82
29
3
103
69
CHEAT
B69
6/17/1996
3
14
1
8
79
86
18
82
97
4
3
too
49
CHEAT
B159
7/24/1996
16
76
8
62
57
62
13
87
32
106
4
86
79
CHEAT
B53
6/17/1996
16
76
8
62
61
67
24
77
58
66
5
68
69
CHEAT
B54
6/17/1996
8
38
4
31
53
58
29
71
47
83
5
70
58
CHEAT
BI01
6/19/1996
15
71
It
85
94
. 102
1
100
80
32
2
. 106
96
81
69
CHEAT
B105
6/19/1996
12
57
5
38
79
86
3
98
74
41
3
CHEAT
B160
7/24/1996
8
39
3
23
56
63
0
101
77
36
5
64
54
CHEAT
B89
6/18/1996
3
14
2
15
80
87
0
101
90
16
5
77
52
80
CHEAT
888
6/18/1996
13
62
8
62
70
76
2
99
36
100
4
81
CHEAT
B87
6/10/1996
3
14
2
15
50
54
0
101
75
39
3
102
54
CHEAT
B83
6/18/1996
8
38
5
38
82
89
10
91
64
56
4
88
67
CHEAT
BI06
6/19/1996
11
52
7
54
87
9S
8
93
61
60
4
91
74
CHEAT
8107
6/19/1996
6
29
3
23
20
21
76
25
83
27
6
49
29
CHEAT
B82
6/18/1996
6
29
2
15
80
87
8
93
88
20
3
103
57
CHEAT
B92
6/19/1996
6
29
2
15
84
91
3
98
87
20
2
106
59
CHEAT
B73
6/18/1996
12
57
6
46
82
89
3
98
74
41
3
101
72
CHEAT
B78
6/18/1996
16
76
9
69
51
56
30
71
52
75
4
78
71
CHEAT
B95
6/19/1996
11
52
7
54
84
91
0
101
59
65
3
100
77
66
CHEAT
B94
6/19/1996
11
52
7
54
65
71
20
81
75
40
3
96
CHEAT
B85
6/18/1996
9
43
3
23
97
105
1
100
' 96
6
2
110
62
CHEAT
B108
6/19/1996
8
36
4
31
85
93
3
98
82
28
3
96
64
CHEAT
B98
6/19/1996
11
52
4
3t
65
71
4
97
73
42
3
94
64
CHEAT
B96
6/19/1996
13
62
10
77
71
77
25
76
60
63
4
87
74
CHEAT
B62
6/17/1996
11
52
7
54
90
98
6
95
81
29
3
96
71
CHEAT
B70
6/17/1996
14
67
8
62
64
69
30
71
77
36
. 5
69 ..
62
CHEAT
B64
6/17/1996
18 :
86
10
77
49
53
12
89
35
102
4
82
81
CHEAT
B156
7/24/1996
16
76
10
77
63
68
4
97
39
96
4
84
83
CHEAT
B102
6/19/1996
13
62
8
62
90
97
3
98
49
80
3
94
82
CHEAT
B183
7/29/1996
16
76
9
69
77
83
1
100
37
99
4
80
85
CHEAT
B68
6/17/1996
• 4 •
19
2
15
40
44
40
61
60
63
6
59
43
CHEAT
BS2
6/17/1996
10
48
7
54
94
102
2
99
88
19
2
106
70
CHEAT
B57
6/17/1996
9
43
4
31
3
3
5
96
96
6
4
82
43
CHEAT
B109
6/19/1996
20
95
14
108
81
88
7
94
46
81
4
82
. 90
CHEAT
B110
6/19/1996
18
86
9
69
68
74
23 4
78
76
37
5
68
69
CHEAT
B66
6/17/1996.
11
52
7
54
64
70
29
72
71
46
5
71
61
CHEAT
884
6/18/1996
6
29
4
31
84
91
3
98
84
25
2
109
62
CHEAT
B86
6/18/1996
13
62
7
54
72
79
19
82
58
65
. 5
76
70
CHEAT
B99
6/19/1996
9
43
4
31
87
94
2
99
83 .
27
2
106
66
CHEAT
B163
7/24/1996
15
71
7
54
87
95
5
96
69
49
3
97
77
CHEAT
B91
6/19/1996
15
71
7
54
74
81
14
86
67
52
5
77
70
CHEAT B112
fl/19/1996
12
57
7
54
58
63 .
4
97
46
85
4
84
73
CHEAT
B111
6/19/1996
24
114
17
131
84
91
5
96
51
77
4
89
92
CHEAT
B75
6/16/1996
17
81
10
77
82
89
7
94
54
72
4
78
82
CHEAT
B93
6/19/1996
18
86
12
.92
68
74
6
95
30
110
3
94
90
CHEAT
B14S
7/23/1996
19
90
10
77
61
66 ,
15
86
41
93
5
77
82
CHEAT
8139
7/23/1996
11
52
3
23
42
46
8
03
68
49
5
68
55
CHEAT
B137
7/23/1996
18
86
7
54
32
35
23
78
36
100
5
68
70
CHEAT
8142
7/23/1996
7
33
2
15
54
59
1
100
96
7
5
64
47
CHEAT
B76
6/18/1996
16
76
. 13
100
88
96
6
94
53
74
4
88
88
68
CHEAT
BS8
6/17/1996
17
81
9
69
46
50
33
67
59
65
4
78
CHEAT
B72
6/18/1996
14
67
8
62
67
73
10
91
.46
84
5
72
75
CHEAT
BS6
6/17/1996
12
. 57
8
62
84
92
9
92
72
44
3
103
74
CHEAT
BSS
6/17/1996
12
57
8
62
88
95
2
99
72
44
2
109
76
CHEAT
B71
6/18/1996
17
81
8
62
21
23
68
32
75
40
6
60
50
CHEAT
B80
6/18/1996
8
38
6
46
61
66
34
66
78
. 34
4
83
56
CHEAT
B162
7/24/1996
11
52
7
54
63
69
2
99
56
69
5
72
69
CHEAT
B152
7/24/1996
14
67
10
77
61
66
6
95
49
80
5
' 69
76
CHEAT
B1G6
7/25/1996
8
38
1
8
31
34
13
88
56
68
4
78
52 .
U.TJBIG SANDY CK NEAR CLIFTON MILLS
LITTLE SANDY CREEK O MOUTH
LITTLE SANDY CREEK NEAR CLIFTON MILLS
LAUREL RUN/CHEAT RIV ABOVE HOGBACK RUN
LONG HOLLOW
SOUTH FORK GREENS RUN ABOVE MIDDLE FORK
2ND UNNAMED TRIB /MUDDY CREEK
CRAB ORCHARD CREEK 9 MOUTH
MUDDY CREEK ABOVE SUGARCAMP RUN
MUDDY CREEK NEAR HEADWATERS
I WVMC-17-{3.2) MUDDY CREEK ABOVE MARTIN CREEK
1 WVMC-17-|6.8) MUDDY CREEK O BRANDONVILLE TURNPIKE
I WVMC-17-A. 1 UNNAMED TRIB/MUDDY CREEK • MOUTH
1 WVMC-17-B JUMP ROCK RUN AT MOUTH
1 WVMC-17-C SUGARCAMP RUN/MUDDY CREEK
t WVMC-10 .1A 1ST UNNAMED TRIB /ROARING CREEK O MOUTH
1 WVMC-18-10.0) ROARING CREEK O MOUTH
1 WVMC-18-{6 01 ROARING CREEK O HEADWATERS
1 WVMC-19 DAUGHERTY RUN
WVMC-19-A DORITY RUN O MOUTH
WVMC-2 MORGAN RUN
WVMC-2.5 COLES RUN
WVMC-2.5-A BIRCH HOLLOW
WVMC-2.7 KELLY RUN
WVMC 2(^(0 0) ELSEYRUN
WVMC-20-|6.0J ELSEY RUN NEAR HEADWATERS
WVMC-21 ASHPOLERUN
WVMC-22-|1.5} BUFFALO RUN BELOW 1 ST UNNAMED TRIB
WVMC-22-(2.0| BUFFALO RUN ABOVE 2ND UNNAMED TRIB
I WVMC-22-B
I WVMC-26-(0.0l
1 WVMC-28
1 WVMC-31.7
1 WVMC-31-jO.OJ
2ND UNNAMED TRIB /BUFFALO RUN
JOES RUN NEAR MOUTH"
STAMPING GROUND RUN
FILL HOLLOW
BUCKHORN RUN,
Appendix C, page C-5
-------
Appendix C
Site metrics and metric scores
Stations ate grouped by data set (1= 1996-1997 calibration data; 2= 1997-199B validation data). Within each data set, stations are listed by site type (reference, unlabeled, stressed), Ihen within type by ascending Station ID.
Data
Set Station ID
Stream Name
Sita
Typ»
Benthlc
Sample ID
Collect
Date
Total
l»a
Tol. taxa
score
EPT
taxa.'
EPT taxa
ecore
%
EPT
%Chlro * Top 2 % Top 2
•eore dominant score
H8I
•core
INDEX
(SCI)
WVMC-32
WVMC-32B
WVMC-32-C-1
WVMC-32-D
WVMC-32 E
WVMC-4 3-A
WVMC-43-B
WVMC-44-(0.0)
WVMC-46
WVMC-46-A
WVMC-46-B
WVMC-47
WVMC-49
WVMC-50
WVMC-51
SALTLICK CREEK
SPRUCE RUN/SALTLICK RUN
CABBAGE RUN
WOLF RUN/SALTLICK CREEK
BUCKLICK RUN/SALTLICK CREEK
WVMC-32F LITTLE BUCKLICK RUN
WVMC-32-G IRISH RUN
WVMC-33-|0.0) BUFFALO CREEK O MOUTH
WVMC-33-A FLAGG RUN
WVMC-33-A.5 BELL HOLLOW*
WVMC-33-B.5 DOG RUN
WVMC-33-C BIRCHROOT RUN
WVMC-33-D LITTLE BUFFALO CREEK
WVMC-33-E BUCKLICK RUN/BUFFALO CREEK
WVMC-33-F SUGARCAMP RUN/BUFFALO CREEK
CHEAT B214
CHEAT Bt73
CHEAT B169
CHEAT BI74
CHEAT B167
8/7/1996
7/25/1996
7/25/1996
7/25/1996
7/25/1996
16
18
!5
WVMC-34-10.0) SCOTT RUN/CHEAT RIVER NEAR MACOMBER
WVMC35 MADISON RUN
WVMC-35.5-{0.0| KEYSER RUN
WVMC-36-{0.0) WOLF CREEK
WVMC-36-A LITTLE WOLF CREEK
WVMC-39 MUDDY RUN
WVMC-4 WHITES RUN
WVMC-40 FORD RUN
WVMC-42. LOUSE CAMP RUN
WVMC-4 3-(0.01 LICKING CREEK
CHEAT B172
CHEAT B154
CHEAT B168
CHEAT B1S3
CHEAT B150
CHEAT B140
CHEAT BI51
CHEAT 8143
CHEAT 8138
CHEAT B148
76
86
71
11
to
11
10
85
77
65
77
BEARPEN HOLLOW
JACOBS RUN
BEARWALLOW RUN
BULL RUN
LEFT FORK BULL RUN
RIGHT FORK BULL RUN
JOHNATHAN RUN
CLAY LICK RUN
UPPER JOHNATHAN RUN
CLOVER RUN
CHEAT B161
CHEAT B1S8
CHEAT B1S5
CHEAT B164
CHEAT 8157
CHEAT BI46
CHEAT B149
CHEAT B141
CHEAT B144
CHEAT B171
7/25/1996
7/24/1996
7/25/1996
7/24/1996 ,
7/24/1996
7/23/1996
7/24/1996
7/23/1996
7/23/1996
7/23/1996
B5
03
75
B7
78
92
91
81
95
8S
14
20
20
15
16
17
15
13
17
67
95
95
71
76
81
71
62
81
7/24/1996
7/24/1996
7/24/1996
7/24/1996
7/24/1996
7/23/1996
7/23/1996
7/23/1996
7/23/1996
7/25/1996
CHEAT B165
CHEAT B170
CHEAT B175
CHEAT B190
CHEAT 8176
CHEAT B177
CHEAT B198
CHEAT B191
CHEAT B209
CHEAT B192
CHEAT B206
7/25/1996
7/25/1996
7/26/1996
7/30/1996
7/26/1996
7/26/1996
7/30/1996
7/30/1996
7/30/1996
7/30/1996
15
20
t6
17
15
15
9
12
14
15
12
13
11
11
12
10
7
10
92
69
92
100
85
85
92
77
54
77
14
5
. 3
6
10
95
91
54
47
33
44
57
71
95
76
81
71
71
43
57
67
71
14
11
13
18
15
16
15
10.
16
18
67
52
62
86
71
76
71
48
76
9
15
9
10
10
11
3
9
11
10
67
83
66
74
83
72
78
77
82
72
73
90
72
80
9t
76
85
83
89
79
115
69
77
77
85
23.
69
85
77
71
85
75
90
13
77
73
72
78
93
82
97
15
83
95
97
26
4
25
13
10
20
6
12
12
15
104
88
67
74
97
76
87
91
81
65
89
89
86
42
48
50
43
34
49
36
44
42
41
90
81
78
89
103
79
101
88
91
92
11
8
9
11
12
11
11
5
11
11
85
62
69
85
92
85 .
85
38
85
85
8
19
14
8
14
5
10
12
8
4
93
81
87
93
87
96
90
89
93
97
54
36
35
51
53
41
69
50
48
71
91
90
75
51
71
78
85
96.
74
77
99
98
82
55
77
85
72
100
101
76
73
93
49
77
81
BO
9
4
9
17
4
4
5
29
15
5
92
87
92
84
97
97
96
72
86
96
41
65
38
33
52
37
46
52
31
47
92
54
97
104
75
98
84
74
108
83
102
88
74
82
103
73
81
92
97
85
86
84
82
87
91
90
73
100
6S
74
87
84
77
87
97
93
83
89
78
84
81
89
82
78
83
77
89
83
85
77
90
47
75
85
84
85
74
79
86
89
91
83
59
85
WVMC51-A
WVMC51-B
WVMC-51-B-2
WVMC-51-B-3
WVMC-51-B-4
WVMC-52
WVMC-S2-.7A
WVMC-53
WVMC-54
WVMC-54-0
WVMC-54-F
WVMC-54-H
WVMC-54-H-1
WVMC-541
WVMC-54-M
WVMC-54-J
WVMC54-K
WVMC-56
WVMC-57
WVMC-S9-100.01
RIGHT FORK CLOVER RUN
LEFT FORK/CLOVER RUN
MILL RUN /LEFT FORK
BEAR RUN
VALLEY FORK
MINEAR RUN
BRIDGE RUN
DRY RUN NEAR ST. GEORGE
HORSESHOE RUN
HYLE RUN
LAUREL RUN/HORSE SHOE RUN
THUNDERS TRUCK RUN
WALNUT HOLLOW RUN
LEADMINE RUN
LIME HOLLOW RUN
WOLF RUN /HORSESHOE RUN
TWELVEMILE RUN
MILL RUN /CHEAT RIVER
WOLF RUN/CHEAT RIVER
SHAVERS FORK 8 PARSONS
WVMC-59-120.4) SHAVERS FORK « STEWART PARK
WVMC-60-P1 6) DRY FORK NEAR CANAAN VALLEY
WVMC-60-(25.1) DRY FORK ABOVE JOB
WVMC-60-A ROARING FOFJK
WVMC-60-D-1« YOOKUM RUN
WVMC-60-D-12 FREELANDRUN
WVMC-60-D-14 MILL RUN /BLACKWATER RIVER
WVMC-60-D-3-B MIDDLE RUN
CHEAT B202
CHEAT 8205
CHEAT B168
CHEAT B210
CHEAT B184
CHEAT BI78
CHEAT 8193
CHEAT B195
CHEAT B196
7/30/1996
7/30/1996
7/30/1996
7/30/1996
7/30/1996
7/29/1996
7/29/1996
7/30/1996
7/30/1996
7/30/1996
CHEAT B200
CHEAT B217
CHEAT B219
CHEAT B201
CHEAT B203
CHEAT B211
CHEAT 8208
CHEAT B221
CHEAT B222
CHEAT B4S
18
14
15
16.
. 12
14
IB
14
14
23
86
67
71
76
57
67
66
67
67
110
7/30/1996
8/7/1996
a/7/tggfi
7/30/1996
7/30/1996
7/30/1996
7/30/1996
8/8/1996
8/8/1996
6/12/1996
18
18
12
16
15
13
14
18
12
17
57
76
71
62
67
86
57
81
CHEAT B30
CHEAT B5
CHEAT B4
CHEAT 829
CHEAT 8128
CHEAT 8124
CHEAT 8126
CHEAT 8125
6/11/1996
6/10/1996
6/10/1996
6M1/1996
7/16/1996
7/16/1996
7/16/1996
7/1&M996
12
9
10
12
13
10
9
13
12
12
10
12
12
10
9
12
8
13
92
69
77
92
69
69
100
77
69
100
81
84
79
71
91
95
85
84
82
71
89
92
86
78
99
103
92
91
90
77
92
92
77
92
92
77
69
92
62
100
19
17
1S
14
12
14
24
11
81
90
80
84
86
84
88
86
81
51
7
9
3
2
4
10
3
12
90
92
94
92
98
99
96
91
30
63
38
35
45
63
30
57
55
26
110
57
98
102
86
58
109
68
71
116
97
87
91
94
91
96
94
88
56
90
81
71
67
57
67
114
52
12
12
10
11
8
8
12
4
92
92
77
85
62
62
92
31
10
5
10
12
7
4
15
43
82
92
90
89
94
97
85
58
47
44
48
48
31
51
38
40
85
54
82
87
82
81
107
76
96
94
24
71
73
87
50
87
S5
26
45
72
79
94
55
95
59
29
49
78
16
8
13
5
40
66
35
5
B5
93
88
96
61
35
36
41
56
56
60
81
58
69
100
92
69
68
62
30
65
48
95
78
97
B9
105
83
99
81
82
84
87
101
86
90
92
78
101
93
68
70
82
97
83
90
67
55
61
85
92
76
87
88
85
79
96
79
79
92
88
93
78
87
90
79
87
93
64
73
88
92
74
83
61
46
72
65
Appendix C, page C-6
-------
Appendix C Site metrics and metric scores
Stations are grouped by data sel (1= 1996-1997 calibration data; 2= 1997-1998 validation data). Within each data set, stations are listed by site type (reference, unlabeled, stressed), then wilh'in type by ascending Station ID.
Data
Site
Benlhlc
Collect
Total
Tot. taxa
EPT
EPT taxa
%
% EPT j
% '
Y.Chlro
% Top 2
% Top 2
HBI
INDEX
Set
Station 10
Stream Nam*
Typ«
Sample ID
Date
taxa
•core
lara
•core
EPT
score
' Chlro.
score
dominant
•core
HBI
•core
(SCI)
1
WVMC-60-D3-C
SNYDER RUN
CHEAT
BI27
7/16/1996
8
38
4
31'
77
83
14
87
78
35
3
95
62
1
WVMC-60-D3E
SAND RUN
CHEAT
B134
7/17/1996
9
43
5
36
84
92
7
93
75
39
4
80
64
1
WVMC-60-G
RED RUN/ DRY FORK
CHEAT
B28
6/11/1996
10
48 .
7
54
83
90
5
96
60
63
82
72
1
WVMC-60-J
ELKLICK RUN NEAR ELK
CHEAT
B18
6/11/1996
18
86
13
log
71
77
1
100
30
109
97
93
t
WVMC-6Q-K16
WEST FORK OF GLAOY CREEK
CHEAT
B90
6/18/1996
23
110
14
108
90
98
2
99
52
75
4
90
94
1
WVMC-60K-17
EAST FORK OF GLADY FORK
CHEAT
B38
6/12/1996
14
67
10
77
B4
91
8
92
42
9t
97
86
1
WVMC-60-K-17-A
LOUK RUN
CHEAT
842
6/12/1996
22
105
IS
115
88
96
0
101
41
92
93
88
97
1
WVMC-60-K-S
WOODFORD RUN
CHEAT
B187
7/29/1996
18
86
13
100
56
61
100
59
65
83
' 86
1
WVMC-60-K-8
FLANNIGAN RUN
CHEAT
839
6/12/1996
14
67
11
85
92
101
5
96
54
72
96
t
WVMC-60-L
BIG RUN/ DRY FORK
CHEAT
B1
6/10/1996
14
67
12
92
78
85
5
96
47
83
90
85
1
WVMC-60-N(01)
LAUREL FK/DRY FK NEAR MOUTH
CHEAT
B51
6/13/1996
17
81
13
100
71
77
23
78
42
91
81
.85
1
WVMC-60-N {20|
LAUREL FK/DRY FK 9 LAUREL FK CAMPGROUND
CHEAT
B24
6/11/1996
22
105
14
108
93
101
100
36
100
100
100
1
WVMC-60N4
8EAVERDAM RUN
CHEAT
B34
6/12/1996
17
81
10
77
61
66
. 18
82
46
85
88
79
99
78
WVMC-60-N-8
FIVE LICK RUN/LAUREL FK/ DRY FK
CHEAT
820
6/11/1996
18
86
13
100
88
93
4
97
43
94
1
WVMC-60 0 (Ot 0}
RED CREEK NEAR MOUTH
CHEAT
B133
7/17/1996
14
67
9
69
83
90
10
91
58
66
4
80
66
77
WVMC-60O (07 0)
RED CREEK NEAR LANEVILIE
CHEAT
B132
7/17/1996
13
62
8
62
44
47
.19
82
57
67
64
1
VWMC-600-1
BIG RUN/ RED CREEK
CHEAT
BI30
7/17/1996
13
62
8
62
67
73
26
75
46
84
71
71
1
WVMC-60-P
SPRUCE RUN/DRY FORK
CHEAT
B13
6/10/1996
15
71
11
85
88
96 .
9
92
86
50
78
4
65
84
WVMC-60-Q
HORSE CAMP RUN
CHEAT
B7
6/10/1996
to
48
7
54
79
86
15
55
71
82
71
1
WVMC-GO-R
TORY CAMP RUN
CHEAT
B218
8/7/1996
14
67
7
54
6
7
.100
92
12
4
64
54
t
WVMC 60-T-|02.5)
GANDY CREEK 9 WHITMER
CHEAT
B6
6/10/1996
16
76
10
77
86
94
2
99
47
82
94
87
1
WVMC-60-T-113.01
GANDY CREEK/BELOW SINKS GANDY
CHEAT
021
6/11/1996
15
71
10
77
81
88
7
94
52
76
85
82
1
WVMC-60-T-10
NARROW RIDGE RUN .
CHEAT
B9
6/10/1996
16
76
11
85
83
90
100
61
61
90
88
84
. 86
1
WVMC-60-T-11
WARNER RUN
CHEAT
832
6/11/1996
16
76
10
77
89
97
100
St
76
1
WVMC-60-T-I3
BIG RUN NEAR GANDY SINKS
CHEAT
816
6/11/1996
20
95
14
108
80
87
6
95
36
100
4
88
94
1
WVMC-60-T-9
GRANTS BRANCH
CHEAT
B194
7/30/1996
16
76
11
85
82
90
14
87
46
84
104
87
1
WVMCS-13
LITTLE BLACK FORK
CHEAT
8181
7/29/1996
18
86
13
100
92
100
3
98
35
102
95
96
1
WVMCS-1S
RATTLESNAKE RUN
CHEAT
B44
6/12/1996
16
. 76
13
100
86
93
11
90
29
112
4
90
91
WVMCS-16
JOHNS RUN
CHEAT
B199
7/30/1996
14
67
10
77
82
89
14
87
48
82
4
90
82
1
WVMCS-18
WOLF RUN /SHAVERS FORK
CHEAT
B33
6/11/1996
18
86
14
108
97
105
0
101
62
59
92
90
1
WVMCS-2
HAWK RUN
CHEAT
B41
6/12/1996
18
86
: 13
100
80
87
1
100
45
86
87
91
1
WVMCS-22
TAYLOR RUN
CHEAT
B31
6/11/1996
18
86
14
108
93
101
4
97
37
99
99
97
1
WVMCS-25
COLLETT GAP RUN
CHEAT
B37
6/12/1996
19
90
15
115
58
64
0
101
57
67
100
87
1
WVMCS-3
HADDIX RUN
CHEAT
B40
6/12/1996
16
76
11
85
81
89
g
93
42
91
86
87
1
WVMCS-33
FISHING HAWK CREEK
CHEAT
B19
6/11/1996
10
. 48 :
8
62
89
96
0
lot
66
54
2
112
77
WVMCS-3-A
SOUTH BR ANCH/H ADD1X RUN
CHEAT
0216
8/7/1996
16
76
11
. 85
86
93
3
98
40
94
3
101
91
1
WVMCS-46
RED RUN/SHAVERS FORK
CHEAT
BIO
6/10/1996
9
43
6
46
92
100
1
100
82
28
2
107
69
1
WVMCS-47
BLISTER RUN
CHEAT
B3
6/10/1996
17
81
12
92
89
97
4
97
46
85
3
98
92
1
WVMCS-5
LAUREL RUN/SHAVERS FK 9 MOUTH
CHEAT
B212
B/7/1996
17
81
11
85
90
98
. 4
96
44
88
3
98
91
t
WVMCS-6
PLEASANT RUN
CHEAT
B43
6/12/1996
13
62
8
62
89
97
4 •
97
42
91
3
93
83
1
WVMCS-6-0
AARONS RUN/PLEASANT RUN
CHEAT
B48
6/13/1996
17
81
12
92
92
100
2
99
64
57
3
97
88
1
WVMCS-6-E
CHOKE TRAP RUN
CHEAT
B49
6/13/1996
20
95
12
92
87
94
99
41
91
3
92
94
WVMCS-7
STONELICK RUN
CHEAT
846
6/12/1996
22
10S
16
123
80
87
3
98
23
121
3
96
97
1
WVMCS-7.5
CANOE RUN
CHEAT
B3S
6/12/1996
18
86
14
108
86
93
10
91
31
108
4
88
93
1
WVMT-11-{6.6|
BERKELY RUN
TYVAR
B310
8/27/1997
8
38
3
23
51
58
3
98
54
72
4
78
- 61
WVMT-11-B
LONG RUN
TYVAR
B300
8/26/1997
11
. 52
3
23
21
22
9
92
47
83
7
42
52
1
WVMT-12-(10.2)
THREE FORK CREEK
TYVAR
B327
9/2/1997
6
29
8
8
9
42
59
67
52
5
68
37
1
WVMT-18E3A(1.2J
U.T. OF LEFT FORK/LITTLE SANDY CREEK
TYVAR
8342
9/3/1997
18
86
10
77
50
55
16
85
39
96
4
80
68
80
1
WVMT-18-E-4-A
TIBBS RUN
TYVAR
B340
9/3/1997
15
71
9
69
46
50
25
76
46
85
5
70
1
WVMT-18-G-2
U.T. OF LEFT FORWUTTLE SANDY CREEK
TYVAR
B343
9/3/1997
14
67
6
46
63
69
2
99
51
77
5
7t
71
1
WVMT-22
CUNNINGHAM RUN
TYVAR
8356
9/9/1997
13
62
7
54
63
6B '
10
91
33
. 105
4
86
77
t
WVMT-23
TETER CREEK
TYVAR
B366
9/9/1997
16
76
9
69
59
65
1
100
44
87
4
80
80
1
WVMT-23-B-1
STONY RUN/RACOON CREEK/TETER CREEK
TYVAR
B347
9/4/1997
12
57
5
38
34
37
t
100
60
62
5
77
62 '
1
WVMT23-C-|5.6)
BRUSHY FORK
TYVAR
B344
9/4/1997
13
62
9
69
88
96
9
92
54
71
3
95
81
1
WVMT-23-F
MILL RUN /TETER CREEK
TYVAR
B359
9/9/1997
12
57
6
46
77
64
15
85
40
93
5
77
74
1
WVMT.24-10.03)
LAUREL CREEK
TYVAR
8374
9/10/1997
14
67
7
S4
73
80
9
93
46
85
5
76
76
1
WVMT-24-A
FROST RUN
TYVAR
8370
9/10/1997
10
48
2
15
60
65
31
69
89
17
6
63
46
WVMT-24-C
SUGAR CREEK
TYVAR
8365
9/9/1997
17
. 81
6
46
57
62
7
94
49
80
6
63
71
WVMT-24-C-3.5
HUNTER FORK
TYVAR
B373
9/10/1997
11
52
5
38
63
68
7
94
51
76
4
62
69
WVMT-26-(0.4|
HACKERS CREEK
TYVAR
B313
8/27/1997
14
67
3
23
55
60
27
74
75
38
6
62
54
WVMT-26-B
FOXGRAPE RUN
TYVAR
B390
9/16/1997
9
43
2
15
25
27
57
43
82
29
6
54
35
WVMT-29
ANGLINS RUN
TYVAR
B379
9/11/1997
11
52
3
23
40
43
47
54
76
38
6
53
44
WVMT-33-{11.0)
MIDDLE FORK RIVER
TYVAR
B3I7
8/27/1997
10
48
6
46
57
62
2
99
60
63 .
5
74
fiS
Appendix C, page C-7
-------
Appendix C
Site metrics and metric scores
Stations are grouped by data set (1= 1996-1997 calibration data; 2= 1997-1998 validation data). Within each data set, stations are listed by site type (reference, unlabeled, stressed), then within lype by ascending Station ID.
Data
Sal Station ID
WVMT-36
WVMT-37-{2.8|
WVMT-39
WVMT-4
WVMT-40
WVMT-4 0-A
WVMT-43-{13.2J
WVMT-4 3(15.6)
WVMT-43-F-1
WVMT-4 3-H
WVMT-4 3-M
WVMT-4 3-0
WVMT-45
WVMT-4 S
WVMT-5
WVMT-50-A-I
WVMT-50B-3
WVMT-57-J0.4)
WVMT-61-120)
WVMT-64-A.5
WVMT-64-E
WVMT-64-F
WVMT-66
WVMT-68
WVMT-68-D
WVMT-69
WVMT-7
WVMT-74
WVMT-74-B-1
WVMT-78
WVMT-8
WVMTB-IO-A
. WVMTB-11
WVMTB-tl-B
WVMTB-18B
WVMTB-1B-B-3
WVMTB-t8-D-(3.9J
WVMTB-19-{0.9)
WVMTB-ao
Stream Name
Slla
Typa
Banthlc Collect
Sample ID 0»ta
ISLAND RUN
BEAVER CREEK
LAUREL RUN
GOOSE CREEK
BIG LAUREL RUN
LITTLE LAUREL RUN
LEADING CREEK
LEADING CREEK
LOGLICK RUN
DAVIS LICK
CAMPFIELD RUN
LAUREL RUN
CHENOWETH CREEK
KINGS RUN
LOST RUN
LIMEKILN RUN
KILL RUN
JONES RUN
SHAVERS RUN
BUCK RUN
MEATBOX RUN
POTATOHOLE FORK
RIFFLE CREEK
BECKY CREEK
WAMSLEY RUN
POUNDMILL RUN
PLUM RUN
ELKWATER FORK
FORTLICK RUN
RALSTON RUN
WICKWIRE RUN
SUGAR RUN
FINK RUN
MUDLtCK RUN
BULL RUN
MUDLICK RUN
LAUREL FORK/FRENCH CREEK
TRUBIE RUN
SAWMILL RUN
WVMTB-24
WVMTB-25
WVMTB-25-A
WVMTB-27
WVMTB-3
WVMTB-30
WVMTB-31-C
WVMTB-31-0
WVMTB-31-F-1
WVMTB-31-F-2-(0.B)
LAUREL RUN
TENMILE CREEK
RIGHT FORK OF TENMILE CREEK
PANTHER FORK
BIG RUN
HEROLDS RUN
ALEC RUN
MILLSITE RUN
TROUT RUN
UPPER TROUT RUN
WVMTB-31-F-5
WVMTB-32-H
WVMTB-32-M
WVMTB'7-(1.0)
WVMTB-7-A-|05)
WVMTB-7-A-(2 9)
WVMTB-7-C-{032)
WVMTB-8
WVMTM-0.5-{0.6J
WVMTM-1H0.3)
SALT BLOCK RUN
BEECH RU N
PHILLIPS CAMP RUN
SAND RUN
LAUREL FORK/SAND RUN
LAUREL FORK/SAND RUN
UT OF SAND RUN
BIG RUN
SWAMP RUN
RIGHT FORK MIDDLE FORK
TYVAR B385
TYVAR B383
TYVAR B386
TYVAR B286
TYVAR B3B4
TYVAR B387
TYVAR B323
TYVAR B316
TYVAR B289
TYVAR B380
TYVAR B312.
TYVAR B315
TYVAR B293
TYVAR B297
TYVAR B290
TYVAR B299
TYVAR B29S
TYVAR B314
TYVAH B339
TYVAR B331
TYVAR B376
TYVAR B378
TYVAR B325
TYVAR B329
TYVAR B367
TYVAR B36I
TYVAR B303
TYVAR B357
TYVAR B358
TYVAR B362
TYVAR B308
TYVAR B326
TYVAR B322
TYVAR B324
TYVAR B332
TYVAR B336
TYVAR B375
TYVAR B34B
TYVAR 8346
TYVAR B345
TYVAR 8394
TYVAR B393
TYVAR B391
TYVAR B392
TYVAR B372
TYVAR B354
TYVAR B360
TYVAR B352
TYVAR B353
TYVAR B351
TYVAR B35S
TYVAR B388
TYVAR B337
TYVAR B333
TYVAR B334
TYVAR 8395
TYVAR 8330
TYVAR B291
TYVAR B304
TYVAR 8349
Total
taxa
9/15/1997
9/15/1997
9/15/1997
8/25/1997
9/15/1997
9/15/1997
9/2/1997
8/27/1997
8/25/1997
10
10
12
2
12
13
13
17
18
9/11/1997
8/27/1997
8/27/1997
8/26/1997
8/26/1997
8/25/1997
8/26/1997
8/26/1997
8/27/1997
9/3/1997
9/3/1997
9/10/1997
9/10/1997
9/2/1997
9/3/1997
9/9/1997
9/9/1997
8/26/1997
9/9/1997
' 9/9/1997
8
19
15
19
16
16
15
15
16
15
13
13
13
16
19
16
12
14
20
20
9/9/1997
8/26/1997
9/2/1997
9/2/1997
9/2/1997
9/3/1997
9/3/1997
9/10/1997
9/4/1997
9/4/1997
9/4/1997
9/17/1997
9/17/1997
9/16/1997
9/17/1997
9/10/1997
9/9/1997
9/9/1997
9/8/1997
9/8/1997
9/8/1997
9/9/1997
9/15/1997
9/3/1997
9/3/1997
9/3/1997
9/22/1997
9/3/1997
8/25/1997
8/26/1997
15
13
8
10
4
11
17
19
21
5
6
8
-16
13
11
14
14
14
15
IB
15
14
11
17
14
16
15
10
16
19
Tot taxa
•core
EPT
taxa
EPT taxa
•core
%
EPT
% EPT
•core
%
' Chlro.
T.Chlro % Top 2 % Top 2
acore dominant ecore
48
48
57
10
57
62
62
81
86
38
90
71
90
76
76
71
71
76
71
62
62
62
76
90
76
57
67
95
95
71
62
38
48
19
52
61
90
100
24
29
38
76
62
52
67
67
67
71
86
71
67
52
81
67
76
71
48
66
90
2
4
5
1
6
7
5
7
12
15
31
38
8
46
54
38
54
92
50
60
57
67
63
41
54
54
90
54
65
62
73
69
45
59
58
97
21
0
20
24
11
4
7
2
11
6
12
10
8
. 8
15
85
46
69
38
62
92
77
62
62
77
93
80
101
81
77
90
97
64
12
77
40
65
42
SO
82
88
63
84
8
9
9
7
11
10
7
6
10
11
62
69
69
54
85
77
54
46
77
85
13
84
43
71
46
54
89
96
68
91
71
50
61
100
47
46
59
47
53
45
79
61
0
82
84
63
82
74
51
11
40
7
21
7
14
3
18
12
50
90
61
94
79
94
61
73
88
41
73
72
28
40
75
67
53
73
56
55
42
49
55
38
57
79
96
44
79
79
31
44
81
70
. 22
20
10
42
24
15
67
12
7
4
62
46
15
15
0
23
15
69
62
23
78
81
91
59
77
86
34
89
94
97
49
44
66
77
57
59
78
49
56
46
60
24
14
35
0
70
4
72
41 .
82
65
26
15
38
0
76
4
78
44
89
18
14
74
38
19
12
59
10
9
7
B3
87
26
63
82
89
42
91
92
94
23
15
69
46
38
38
62
85
69
85
86
70
58
58
57
74
92
77
64
79
47
64
87
71
93
B1
66
59
41
91
94
76
63
63
62
80
10Q
83
8
4
7
10
85
69
62
69
69
46
62
31
54
77
8S
61
77
72
64
45
67
56
33
45
6
21
.26
36
4
13
3
21
24
14
95
80
74
65
97
88 .
98
60
76
87
45
71
57
63
67
55
63
58
93
66 .
84
78
70
49
73
61
36
49
24
15
5
33
31
7
17
12
12
91
77
B6
96
67
69
94
84
69
69
63
' 44
41
44
68
44
42
58
34
59
52
74
43
68
71
91
80
71
96
67
80
87
53
36
67
64
35
80
68
84
83
56
20
45
12
29
53
64
92
t5
24
19
86
45
67
58
52
70
58
65
92
87
60
87
91
66
103
64
HBI
•core
71
70
72
74
73
75
41
75
64
76
69
78
82
84
79
81
72
95
116
58
76
81
55
73
91
79
71
49
48
12
66
46
76
74
67
73
67
83
70
81
79
87
76
72
82
80
70
107
80
65
69
83
INOEX
(SCO
61
43
68
66
64
75
67
35
83
55
78
63
76
83
83
77
77
70
79
79
55
79
77
44
66
84
86
74
58
27
43
21
56
40
78
77
52
56
49
75
59
66
68
78
77
69
82
80
73
79
82
65
66
79
59
75
73
86
61
WVMTM-13
WVMTM-17
WVMTM-2
WVMTM-21
LONG RUN '
THREE FORKS RUN
LAUREL RUN
PLEASANT RUN
TYVAR 8321
TYVAR B298
TYVAR 8319
9/8/1997
8/27/1997
8/26/1997
8/27/1997
IB
15
22
16
86
71
105
76
10
6
13
5
77
46
100
38
46
44
93
10
50
48
5
55
16
24
96
45
6S
76
74
70
37
62
41
46
98
59
Appendix C, page C-8
-------
Appendix C Site metrics and metric scores
Stations are grouped by data set (1± 1996-1997 calibration data; 2= 1997-1998 validation data). Within each data set. stations are listed by site type (reference, unlabeled, stressed), then within type by ascending Station ID.
Data
Site
Benthlc
Collect
Total
Tot. laxa
EPT
EPT taxa
%
%EPT|;
i
%
%Chlro
% Top 2
% Top 2
HBI
INDEX
Set
Station 10
Stream Name
Typ«
Sample ID
Date
taxa
score
taxa
score
EPT
' score ' |
Chlro.
•core
dominant
•core
HBI
•core
(SCI)
1
WVMTM 27
MITCHELL LICK FORK
TYVAR B396
9/29/1997
15
71
9
69
64
69
29
72
52
75
4
79
73
1
WVMTM-3
HOOPPOLE RUN
TYVAR B288.
8/25/1997
3
.14
2
15
67
73
33
67
78
35
5
70
46
1
WVMTM-5
SERVICE RUN
TYVAR B30S
8/26/1997
13
62
7
54
73
79
14
87
51
76
3
94
75
1
WVMTM-7
SHORT RUN
TYVAR B307
8/26/1997
18
86
9
69
79
86
11
90
59
64
4
81
79
1
WVMY-11
SOUTH BRANCH LAUREL RUN
YOUGH B117
7/8/1996
17
81
8
62
36
39
11
90
46
84
4
82
73 :
1
WVMY-2
SNOWY CREEK .
YOUGH B116
7/8/1996
9
43
3
23
63
68
5
95
75
40
6
60
55
1
WVMY-2-A
NORTH BRANCH
YOUGH Bt 15
7/8/1996
13
62
7
54
89
97
2
99
73
42
5
77
72
1
WVMY-2-A-1
WARDWELL RUN
YOUGH B118
7/8/1996
13
62
5
38
39
42
36
64
67
51
6
60
98
53
1
WVMY-2-B-1
PINE RUN
YOUGH B121
7/9/1996 .
18
86
13
100
85
92
4
97
51
76
3
92
1
WVMY-3-A
LITTLE LAUREL RUN
YOUGH B114
7/8/1996
8
38
3
23
73
79
7
94
83
27
3
95
59
1
WVMY-4
RHINE CREEK
YOUGH B122
7/9/1996
14
67
9
69
64
69
25
76
47
83
5
71
88
72
1
WVMY-9
BUFFALO RUN
YOUGH B113
7/8/1996
9
43
4
31
72
78
1
too
78
34
4
62
25
1
WVP-20 (52.0)
NORTH BRANCH POTOMAC RIVER
NBRPO B318
8/27/1997
7
33
8
16
18
74
26
91
15
7
49
ao
1
WVP-20-{81.6)
NORTH BRANCH POTOMAC RIVER
NBRPO B301
8/26/1997
11
52
6
46
85
93
11
90
72
45
4
68
65
WVP-20-{82.6) -
NORTH BRANCH POTOMAC RIVER
NBRPO B302
8/26/1997
10
48
5
38
84
92
11
90
73
43
4
81
WVP-20-{88.9]
NORTH BRANCH POTOMAC RIVER
NBRPO B244
8/11/1997
10
48
5
38
68
74
24
77
68
18
5
68
54
WVP-20 {97.9}
NORTH BRANCH POTOMAC RIVER
NBRPO B268
8/13/1997
14
67
7
54
81
88
8
93
56
69
5
76
74
1
WVPNB-1-{4 2)
GREEN SPRING RUN
NBRPO B279
8/19/1997
22
105
10
77
52
57
24
77
39
95
5
74
80
1
WVPNB-1S
DEEP RUN
NBRPO B263
8/13/1997
11
52
8
62
93
101
4
97
57
67
4
84
77
WVPNB-16-.5A-{0.4)
U.T. OF ABRAMS CREEK
NBRPO B27S
8/14/1997
9
: 43
4
31
58
63
0
101
83
27
s
75
57
WVPNB-16-{05.4)
ABRAM CREEK
NBRPO B273
8/14/1997
3
14
8
71
77
25
76
96
7
5
65
41
1
WVPNB-16-{16.8}
ABRAM CREEK
NBRPO B309
8/27/1997
: 6
29
3
23
83
91
6
95
78
35
5
71
57
1
WVPNB-16-A-J0.8)
EMORY CREEK
NBRPO B274
8/14/1997
6
29
3
23
79
86
9
92
81
29
s
74
69
55
1
WVPNB-16-B.S
LAUREL RUN
NBRPO B282
8/19/1997
7
33
3
23
78
85
11
90
86
22
5
54
1
WVPNB-17{15.6)
STONY RIVER
NBRPO B2B4
8/19/1997
10
48
S
38
47
52
47
53
83
26
6
61
46
1
WVPNB-17-B
MILL RUN
NBRPO 8266
8/13/1997
16
76
10
77
75
81
8
93 .
42
91
4
B5
84
t
WVPNB-I7C
FOURMILE RUN
NBRPO B278
8/19/1997
5
24
8
17
18
33
67
50
78
6
63
43
1
WVPNB-17E
HEMLICK RUN
NBRPO B280
8/19/1997
9
43
3
23
15
17
33
68
78
35
8
60
41
WVPNBI9(I.4}
BUFFALO CREEK
NBRPO B239
8/11/1997
. 20
95
13
100
78
85
9
92
39
88
96
4
87
92
1
WVPNB-I9-A
LITTLE BUFFALO CREEK
NBRPO B241
8/11/1997
4
19
2
15
88
9S
0
101
20
5
73
54
1
WVPNB-22
DEAKIN RUN
NBRPO B262
8/13/1997
9
43
3
23
49
53
23
78
57 .
67
73
56
1
WVPNB-4-(04 .6}
PATTERSON CREEK
NBRPO B269
8/13/1997
26
124
13
100
30
33
38
63
58
66
6
61
70
1
WVPNB -4-120.2}
PATTERSON CREEK
NBRPO B255
8/12/1997
21
100
10
77
67
73
100
32
107
84
69
86
1
WVPNB-4-|29.7J
PATTERSON CREEK
NBRPO B245
8/1 i/1997
23
110
11
85
77
. 84
10
91
48
81
5
77
t
WVPNB-4-|33.0)
PATTERSON CREEK
NBRPO B270
8/13/1997
23
110
12
92
70
77
7
94
35
101
83
91
WVPNB-4-139.4)
PATTERSON CREEK
NBRPO B246
8/11/1997
23
110
13
too
82
89
7
94
57
67
87
90
1
WVPNB-4-C.5
HORSESHOE CREEK .
NBRPO B281
8/t9/1997
22
105
11
85
88
96
5
96 .
66
54
5
71
84
1
WVPNB-4CC
ROSSER RUN
NBRPO 8248
8/11/1997
20
95
9
69
60
65
19
82
53
73
5
76
77
WVPNB-4D0-(2.0)
THORN CREEK
NBRPO B257
8/12/1997
17
81
9
69
82
89
9
92
56
68
3
97
83
1
WVPNB-4-FF
MIDDLE FORK/PATTERSON CREEK
NBRPO B242
8/11/1997
18
86
8
62
36
39
21
80
46
85
5
71
70
WVPNB-4-FF-5-A-|0 6}
UT OF UT OF MIODLE FORK / PATTERSON
NBRPO 8260
8/12/1997
12
57
3
23
18
20
8
93
68
49
90
55
1
WVPNB-4-J-J1.6)
CABIN RUN
NBRPO 8251
8/12/1997
14
67
6
46
46
50
23
77
55
70
5
71
64
1
WVPNB-4-J-1
PARGUT RUN
NBRPO B254.
8/12/1997
13
62
6
46 .
29
31
55
46
68
51
8
59
49
t
WVPNB-4S-(04.7)
MILLL CREEK
NBRPO B243
8/11/1997
14
67
4
31
46
50
15
86
73
42
5
72
58
1
WVPNB-4-S-{5.6|
MILL CREEK
NBRPO B277
8/18/1997
19
90
to
77
81
88
15
86
59
64
4
84
82
1
WVPNB-4-V
ELLIBER RUN
NBRPO B240
8/11/1997
IS
71
6
46
95
104
2
99
83
26
3
99
74
1
WVPNB-4W-3
WHIP RUN
NBRPO B272
8/13/1997
15
71
9
69
85
93
13
88
46
84
88
82
1
WVPNB-7-{03.8)
NEW CREEK
NBRPO B267
8/13/1997
14
67
8
62
66
72
13
88
35
101
4
87
79
WVPNB-7-108.4)
NEW CREEK
NBRPO B2S2
8/12/1997
15
71
9
69
85
93
12
89
75
39
3
95
76
1
WVPNB-7-|l0.4|
NEW CREEK
NBRPO B253
8/12/1997
16
76
7
54
75
62
13
88
63
57
80
73
1
WVPNB-7-F-(0.6)
ASH SPRING RUN
NBRPO B250
8/12/1997
17
81
10
77
82
89
9
92
47
83
86
85
WVPNB-7-H
LINTON CREEK
NBRPO B265
8/13/1997
21
100
12
92 .
86
94
2
99
86
59
64
3
99
91
1
WVPSB-0.5
1ST UNNAMED TRIB /SOUTH BR POTOMAC
SBRPO B296
8/27/1996
11
S2
6
46
S8
63
15
58
65
79
65
1
WVPSB-1
STONEY RUN/SOUTH BR POTOMAC
SBRPO B285
8/26/1996
14
67
7
54
79
86
12
88
47
83
•
84
77
1
WVPSB-1.8
ABERNATHY RUN
SBRPO 8280
8/26/1996
13
62
5
38
35
38
4
97
77
36
81
59
1
WVPSB-1.9
2ND UNNAMED TRIB /SOUTH BR POTOMAC .
SBRPO B288
8/27/1996
14
67
6
46
46
50
33
68
56
69
66
61
1
WVPSB-11
MCDOWELL RUN
SBRPO B298
8/27/1996 .
11
52
6
46
18
19
61
40
79
33
6 .
54
41
1
WVPSB-13
MILL RUN
SBRPO B301
8/27/1996
15
71
9
69
70
76
22
78
54
71
4
82
75
1
WVPSB-14
BUFFALO RyN
SBRPO 8309
8/28/1996
12
57
6
46
71
77
4
97
58
66
70
69
t
WVPSB-16
DEVIL HOLE RUN
SBRPO 8311
8/28/1996
11
52
8
62
73
79
20
81
44
87
83
74
1
WVPSB-16-A
SAWMILL RUN
SBRPO B315
8/28/1996
14
67
7
54
58
63
14
87
27
114
80
75
1
WVPSB-17-A
CLIFFORD HOLLOW
SBRPO 8310
8/28/1996
9
43
6
46
78
85
20
81
68
50
89
66
1
WVPSB-18
ANDERSON RUN
SBRPO 8281
8/26/1996
9
43
4
31
43 .
47
37
64
59
64
6
59
51
Appendix C, page C-9
-------
Appendix C
bite metrics and metric scores
Stations are grouped by data set {1= 1996-1997 calibration data; 2- 1997-1990 validation data). Within each data set, stations are listed by site type (reference, umaoeiea, siresseoj, inen wtinin type Dy ascending Station 10.
Dale
Set Station 10
Stream Nam*
Site
Type
. Benlhte
Collacl
Total
ToL laxs
EPT
EPT taxa
%
%eptI;
1 *
fcChlro
% Top 2
% Top 2
HBI
INDEX
Sample ID
Date
taia
ecore
taxa
eedre
EPT
ecore
1 Chlro.
•core
dominant
ecore
HBI
ecore
(SCI)
SBRPO B332
9/10/1996
11
52
8
62
92
100
4
97
67
52
3
103
77
66
SBRPO 6284
8/26/1996
13
62
8
62
45
49
28
72
45
85
S
67
SBRPO B287
8/26/1996
10
48
S
38
49
53
31
69
51
76
5
63
58
SBRPO 6286
8/26/1996
14
67
8
62
59
65
IB
83
56
69
4
84
71
SBRPO B317
8/2 0/1 996
14
67
9
69
68
74
17
84
45
86
5
73
75
SBRPO B3t8
8/28/1996
14
67
6
46
63
69
23
78
51
76
4
86
70
66
SBRPO B297
8/27/1996
12
57
8
62
44
48
IB
83
53
73
5
72
SBRPO B23S
8/19/1996
14
67
9
69
61
66
8
93
52
75
5
73
74
SBRPO B27t
8/21/1996
8
38
2
15
33
36
11
90
66
54
6
60
49
SBRPO B228
8/19/1996
16
76
6
46
12
. 13
1
100
85
23
4
82
57
SBRPO B335
9/19/1996
1
5
1
8
100
109
0
101
100
. 0
5
70
47
SBRPO B269
8/21/1996
13
62
7
54
65
70
4
97
63
58
5
64
68
SBRPO B278
8/21/1996
13
62
7
54
85
93
1
100
67
52
5
76
73
SBRPO B246
8/20/1996
19
90
11
85
60
65
21
79
44
88
5
75
80
SBRPO B265
8/21/1996
11 .
52
6
46
80
88
14
87
68
50
4
87
68
SBRPO B233
8/19/1996
14
67
8
62
64
69
22
79
43
89
4
78
74
SBRPO B229
8/19/1996
13
62
7
54
55
60
30
71
• 50
79
4
79
67
SBRPO B244
8/20/1996
12
57
8
62
63
69
12
89
53
73
6
61
68
SBRPO B262
8/20/1996
13
62
8
62
66
72
13
88
50
78
5
69
72
SBRPO B243
8/20/1996
18
86
10
77
57
62
29
71
41
92
5
73
7/
SBRPO B2SB
8/20/1996
8
38
2
15
43
47
IB
82
70
48
6
59
48
SBRPO B267
8/21/1996
16
76
5
38
26
28
44
56
57
67
S
63
66
55
SBRPO B323
9/1CV1996
9
43
4
31
57
62
5
96
65
55
5
59
SBRPO 6327
9/10/1996
12
57
6
46
59
64
7
94
64
56
5
66
88
64
SBRPO 6231
8/19/1996
11
52
5
38
81
88
.3 •
98
57
67
4
72
SBRPO B329
9/10/1996
10
48
6
46
72
78
8
92
38
97
5
77
73
SBRPO 6328
9/10/1996
13
62
8
62
85
92
7
94 '
55
70
4
79
77
SBRPO B227
8/19/1996
14
67
8
62
42
46
7
94
61
61
5
74
67
SBRPO B236
8/19/1996
10
48
4
31
49
53
5
96
76
37
5
65
55
SBRPO 6223
8/19/1996
16
76
11
85
86
93
9
92
30
109
... 4 '
90
89
89
SBRPO B230
8/19/1996
15
71
13
100
78
85
11
89
27
114
4
91
SBRPO B232
8/19/1996
IS
71
8
62
75
81
4
97
42
91
5
74
79
SBRPO 6234
8/19/1996
16
76
6
46
66
72
2
99
53
74
. 4
82
75
. SBRPO 6274
8/21/1996
11
52
6
46
27
29
31
70
63
57
7
42
49
SBRPO B273
8/21/1996
14
67
8
62
73
79
17
84
52
75
4
78
74
SBRPO B2S4
&20/1996
13
62
7
54
86
94
10
91
69
48
5
75
71
SBRPO 6239
020/1996
18
86
11
85
75
82
13
88
37
99
4
82
86
87
SBRPO B2S0
8/20/1996
16
76
12
92
83
91
10
91
39
95
4
B9
SBRPO B321
9/9/1996
IS
71
10
77
56
60
6
95
52
75
5
64
74
SBRPO 6237
8/19/1996
IS
71
7
54
47
51
37
63
56
69
6
61
96
62
SBRPO B319
9/9/1996
13
62
12
92
98
107
0
101
73
42
3
82
SBRPO 6264
8/21/1996
10
48
7
54
96
104
3
98
72
44
4
78
70
SBRPO 6242
8/20/1996
14
67
9
69
72
78
13
88
32
106
4
82
81
SBRPO B255
8/20/1996
13
62
11
85
97
105
2
99
73
42
4
78
77
SBRPO B249
8/20/1996
13
62
7
54
79
86
9
92
55
70
5
73
73
66
SBRPO 6260
8/20/1996
14
67
8
62
50
55
34
67
51
76
5
67
SBRPO 6256
8/20/1996
12
57
7
54
60
66
25
76
66
53
5
68
62
SBRPO 6240
8/20/1996
12
57
10
77.
59
65
35
66
53
73
5
73
68
SBRPO 6275
8/21/1996
13
62
7
54
91
99
4
97
66
53
4
84
75
S6RPO 6247
B/20H996
14
67
11
8S
71
78
26
75
66
53
5
70
71
SBRPO B259
8/20/1996
16
76
10
77
86
94
5
96
53
73
4
85
B3
SBRPO B24S
8/20/1996
17
81
11
85
87
95
4
97
42
91.
3
96
91
SBRPO B263
8£ 0/1996
15
71
11
85
91
99
4
97
74
41
5
76
78
SBRPO B276
8/21/1996
9
43
5
38
56
61
10
90
6S
5S
5
63
58
SBRPO B322
9/10/1996
17
81
13
too
93
101
3
98
51
77
4
89
91
SBRPO 6224
8/19/1996
13
.62
10
77
96
104
1
100
69
48
4
81
78
68
SBRPO B226
V19/1996
9
43
6
46
79
86
3
98
61
61
5
7S
S8RP0 B268
8/21/1996
11
52
4
31
31
33
9
92
74
41
8
34
47
68
SBRPO B272
8/21/1996
13
62
8
62
89
97
7
94
85
23
5
69
SBRPO 622S
8/19/1996
10
48
6
46
94
102
2
99
88
19
5
72
86
64
88
SBRPO B312
8*8/1996
19
90
12
92
63
.68
9
92
32
106
4
SBRPO B316
8/28/1996
13
• 62. '
7
54
58
64
25
76
60
63
6
61
63
SBRPO B308
V28/1996
13
62
9
69
93
101
3
98
79
33
5
76
73
WVPS8-18.2 UNNAMED TR1B/S BR POT SOUTH OF MCNEIL
WVPS9-18-A-( 1.0} MUDLICK RUN AT MOUTH
WVPSS IB-A O S UNNAMED TRIB/MUDLICK RUN
VWPSB-18 A-1 TURNMILL RUN/MUD LICK RUN
WVPSB-18-B WALNUT BOTTOM RUN
WVPSB-19 WILLIAMS HOLLOW/ GLEBE RUN
WVPSB-2 JOHN S RUN
WVPSB-21 -(01.0) SOUTH FK /SOUTH BR POT NEAR MOUTH
WVPSB-21-AA MILLER RUN
WVPSB-21-F OUMPLING RUN/MOOREFIELD RUK
WVPSB-2 t-F DUMPLING RUN/MOOREFIELD RUN
WVPSB-21 -GG LITTLE FORK
WVPSB-21-HH STONY RUN/MOOREFIELD RUN
WVPSB-21-I KETTLE CREEK
WVPSB-21-II BRUSHY FORK
WVPSB-21-K ROUGH RUN/MOOREFIELD RUN
WVPSB 21 K I LITTLE ROUGH RUN
WVPSB-21 -N DICE RUN /SOUTH FK/SOUTH BR POT
WVPSB-2t-O WAGNER RUN
WVPSB-2 l -O DEAN GAP
WVPSB-2 1-R STONY RUN
WVPSB-2 t-T HIVELYGAP
WVPSB-23-A DURGEON RUN
WVPSB-23-A-1 MITCHELL RUN/OURGEON RUN
WVPSB-26 LUNICE CREEK
WVPSB-26-A ROBINSON RUN
WVPSB-26-B NORMAN RUN
WVPSB-26-C BRUSHY RUN/LUNtCE CK
WVPSB-26-D SOUTH FORK/LUNICE CREEK
WVPSB-26D-2 BIG STAR RUN
WVPSB-26 D-3 LITTLE STAR RUN
WVPSB-26-E NORTH FK EUNICE CREEK
WVPSB-26-E 2 SALT BLOCK RUN
WVPSB-2B-.5A POWERS HOLLOW
WVPSB-28{00.5J NORTH FK /SOUTH BR POT NEAR PETERSBURG
WVPSB-28-{18.8) NORTH FK /SOUTH BR POT NEAR SENECA ROCKS
WVPS8-28-A-1 BIG RUN/JORDAN RUN
WVPSB-28-A2 LAUREL RUN/JORDAN RUN
WVPSB-28-B SAMUEL RUN
WVPSB-28-CC TETER GAP
WVPSB-28-E HIGH RIDGE RUN
WVPSB 28 EE BIG RUN/ NORTH FORK
WVPSB-28EE-I COLD SPRING RUN
WVPSB-28-EE-2 SAWMILL BRANCH/BIG RUN
WVPSB-28-GG LAUREL FORK/NORTH FK/SOUTH BR POTOMAC
WVPSB-2B HH STRAIGHT FORK/NORTH FK/SOUTH BR POT
WVPSB-28-K SENECA CREEK
WVPSB-2B-K-1 BRUSHY RUN/SENECA CREEK
WVPSB-28-K-2 ROARING CREEK
WVPS8-28-K-3 HORSECAMP RUN
WVPSB-28-K-4 STRADERRUN
WVPSB-28-K-5 GULF RUN
WVPSB-28-K-6 WHITES RUN
WVPSB-
WVPSB-
WVPSB
WVPSB
WVPSB-
WVPSB-
WVPSB
WVPSB
WVPSB
WVPSB
28-P
28-0
28-R
28-S
28-U
28-V
28-2
30
-30.S
32
ROOT RUN
DICE RUN /NORTH FK/SOUTH BR POTOMAC
BLIZZARD RUN
BRIERY GAP RUN
JUDY RUN
NELSON RUN *
BOUSES RUN
LONG RUN/SOUTH BR POTOMAC
UNNAMED TRIB/SOUTH BR POTOMAC
BRIGGS RUN .
Appendix C, pageC-10
-------
Appendix C
Stations are grouped by data set (1= 1996-1997 calibration data; 2=
Site metrics and metric scores
1997-199B validation data). Within each data set, stations are listed by site type (reference, unlabeled, stressed), then within type by ascending Station ID.
Data
Site
Benthlc
Collect
Total
Tot. taxa
EPT
EPT taxa
%
% EPT |
1 %
%Chlro
% Top 2
% Top 2
HBI
INDEX
Sal
Station ID
Stream Name
Typ«
Sample ID
Date
taxa
•core
taxa
score
EPT
•core
Chlro.
•core
dominant
•core
HBI
•core
(SCI)
1
WVPSB-33
REEOS CREEK
SBRPO
B314
8/28/1996
14
67
7
54
62
68
28
73
80
31 '
5
65
60
1
WVPSB-34
MILL RUN /SOUTH BR POTOMAC
SBRPO
B313
8/28/1996
10
48
5
38
32
35
56
44
69
48
6
51
44
1
WVPS0-4
FOX RUN
SBRPO
B293
8/27/1996
12
57
6
46
56
61
23
78
40
95
4
78
69
1
WVPSB-40
PETERS RUN
SBRPO
B302
8/27/1996
19
90
11
85
75
82
7
94
49
79
4
82
85
1
WVPSB-4
TROUT RUN
SBRPO
B305
8/27/1996
16
76
9
69
81
88
10
91
56
69
4
86
80
1
WVPSB-46
SMITH CREEK
SBRPO
B303
8/27/1996
12
57
8
62
26
28
71
29
84
25
6
55
43
I
WVPSB-46-A
LITTLE CREEK
SBRPO
B326
9/10/1996
19
90
13
100
86
94
7
94
63
59
4
79
86
1
WVPSB-46-B
TWIN RUN /SMITH CREEK
SBRPO
B331
9/10/1996
16
76
11
85
89
97
6
95
63
S7
4
79
81
1
WVPSB-47
THORN CREEK
SBRPO
B304
8/27/1996
16
76
9
69
51
56
10
82
St
76
5
76
73
1
WVPSB-47-B
BLACKTHORN CREEK
SBRPO
B289
8/27/1996
13
62
7
54
71
78
14
87
40
94
5
71
74
1
WVPSB-47-C
WHITETHORN CREEK
SBRPO
B307
8/27/t996
19
90
11
85
64
70
19
81
37
98
S
73
83
1
WVPSB-5
BUFFALO CREEK
SBRPO
B282
8/26/1996
9
43
4
31
16
18
58
43
80
31
6
57
37
!
WVPSB-50
HAMMER RUN/SOUTH BR POTOMAC
SBRPO
B325
9/10/1996
15
71
11
85
90
98
3
98
57
67
4
84
84
1
WVPSB-53
EAST DRY RUN
SBRPO
B324
9/t0/f996
S
24
3
23
98
107
too
97
4
5
71
54
1
WVPSB-9-(10.7)
MILL CREEK/SOUTH BR POT « HEADWATERS
SBRPO
B299
8/27/1996
18
86
9
. 69
76
83
4
97
39
95
4
84
86
1
WVPSB-9-B
DUMPLING RUN/MILL CREEK
SBRPO
B291
8/27/1996
10
46
2
15
71
77
13
88
82
28
5
64
53
1
WVPSB-9-B-2
MAYHEWRUN
SBRPO
8334
9/11/1996
11
52
5
38
27
29
61
39
67
SI
6
59
45
1
WVPSB-9-F
CAMP RUN /MILL CREEK
SBRPO
B290
8/27/1996
14
67
8
62
76
83
8
93
44
87
4
84
79
WVPSB 9-F.5
UNNAMED TRIB/MILL CREEK .
SBRPO
B306
8/27/1996
16
76
8
62
80
87
8
93
47
83
4
84
81
1
WVPSB-9-G
ELKLICK RUN
SBRPO
B292
8/27/1996
19
90
10
77
73
80
11
90
45
86
4
78
83
1
WVK-11
POND BRANCH
stressed
LOKAN
820
5/13/1997
14
67
8
62
38
42
52
49
66
50
5
65
56
\
WVK-12(120|
THIRTEEN MILE CREEK
stressed
LOKAN
B51
S/19/1997
14
67
8
62
71
77
16
85
55
70
3
92
75
WVK-12-A
ROCKY FORK
stressed
LOKAN
B35
5/14/1997
17
81
9
69
61
67
27
74
53
73
5
74
73
WVK-12-F
POPLAR FORK
stressed
LOKAN
B33
5/14/1997
14
67
9
69
36
39
56
45
78
34
5
69
54
1
WVK-12-H
BAKER BRANCH
stressed
LOKAN
B46
5/19/1997
17
81
10
77
83
91
9
92
45
85
3
93
86
1
WVK14
SIXTEENMILE CREEK
stressed
LOKAN
836
5/14/1997
14
67
8
62
55
59
35
66
54
72
5
77
67
1
WVK-16-(25.0|
EIGHTEEN MILE CREEK
stressed
LOKAN
B60
5/21/1997
14
67
8
62
75
81
18
83
57
67
3
98
76
WVK-16-G-1-(0.4)
LEFT FORK TURKEY BRANCH
stressed
LOKAN
899
6/16/1997
15
71
9
69
55 .
60
37
64
57 .
67
5
73
67
1
WVK-19-C
LEFT FORK FIVE AND TWENTY MILE CREEK
stressed
LOKAN
BS6
5/20/1997
12
57
8
62
64
70
34
67
72
43
5
67
61
1
WVK-22-{10.6)
HURRICANE CREEK
stressed
LOKAN
BIOS
6/24/1997
10
48
1
8
48
53
34
66
83
27
6
S9
43
1
WVK-22-(14.4)
HURRICANE CREEK
stressed
LOKAN
B104
6/24/1997
6
29
1
8
5
6
39
62
93
12
6
51
28
1
WVK-22-B-2
COW CREEK
stressed
LOKAN
873
5/28/1997
11
52
S
38
23
25
65
36
79
33
6
56
40
1
WVK-22-B-3
LONG BRANCH
stressed
LOKAN
875
5/28/1997
12
57
7
. 54
6
7
88
12
91
15
7
47
32
1
WVK-22-B-5B
U.T. OF CROOKED CREEK
stressed
LOKAN
878
5/20/1997
8
38
3
23
4
4
45
56
72
44
7
36
33
1
WVK-22-J-|1.3)
RIDER CREEK
stressed
LOKAN
8101
*19/1997
10
48
5
38
57
62
20
80
61
61
6
61
59
1
WVK-30
ARMOUR CREEK
stressed
LOKAN
B38
5/15/1997
3
14
0
0
0
0
68
12
99
1
7
37
11
I
WVK-33
GALLATIN BRANCH
stressed
LOKAN
028
5/14/1997
4
19
2
15
2
2
89
11
98
3
7
40
15
1
WVK-41-A
WOODWARD BRANCH
. stressed
LOKAN
B4S
5/16/1997
2
10
0
0
0
0
10
90
100
0
10
4
17
»
WVK-6
FIVE MILE CREEK
stressed
LOKAN
817
5/13/1997
9
43
6
46
89
97
9
92
76
37
3
99
69
1
WVKE-14-G-2-A
SCHOOLHOUSE FORK
stressed
ELK
8119
6/26/1997
7
33
4
31
87
95
6 '
95
86
22
2
107
63
1
WVKE-23-J12.6)
BIG SANDY CREEK
stressed
ELK
B163
7/14/1997
11
52
5
38
33
36
27
74
59
63
5
6S
55
1
WVKE-23-D-6
COLEMAN RUN
stressed
ELK
6194
7/21/1997
8
38
4
31
65
71
0
101
63
58
4
85
64
1
WVKE-23-P-3-B
SIMONS FORK
stressed
ELK
B210
7/23/1997
13
62
5
38
53
58
14
87
44
88
5
74
68
1
WVK E -26-A- (0.16)
LEFT FORK OF MORRIS CREEK
stressed
ELK
B167
7/14/1997
5.
. 24
1
8
54
59
23
78
77
36
4
89
49
1
WVKE-78
UPPER MILL RUN
stressed
ELK
B1B4
7/16/1997
13
62
5
38
39
42
30
71
51
77
5
64
59
1
WVKE-B7-C
U.T/GRANNY CREEK
stressed
ELK
821S
7/24/t997
6
29
1
8
20
22
10
91
50
78
7
44
45
1
WVKE-9J
JAKES RUN
- stressed
ELK
B124
7/1/1997
11
52
4
31
71
77
11
90
71
45
5
68
61
1
WVKP-1
HEIZER CREEK
stressed
LOKAN
B30
5/14/1997
11
52
6
46
49
53
16
85
41
92
4
88
69
1
WVKP-13-{1.3)
TUPPERS CREEK
stressed
LOKAN
853
5/19/1997
¦7
33
3
23
17
1?
54
46
67
52
7
48
37
1
WVKP-13-{3.0|
TUPPER CREEK
stressed
LOKAN
B106
&24/1997
S
24
0
0
0
0 .
29
72
81
30
6
59
31
t
WVKPI3-A-IA
TURKEYPEN BRANCH
stressed
LOKAN
B58
5/20/1997
14
67
9
69
SI
56
43
58
57
68
5
68
64
1
WVKP-I-A
MANILA CREEK
stressed
LOKAN
B32
5/14/1997
9
43
4
31
74
80
0
101
68
51
121
67
WVKP-43{1.6)
LAUREL FORK
stressed
LOKAN
B9S
6/12/1997
10
48
7
54
66
71
24
77
55
70
4
85
67
1
WVMC-11-0(00)
LEFT FORK BULL RUN 0 MOUTH
stressed
CHEAT
881
.6/18/1996
9
43
3
23
89
96
2
99
87
20
2
109
63
WVMC-l2-C-(04)
HAZEL RUN AT HEADWATERS
stressed
CHEAT
897
6/19/1996
12
57
8
62
93
101
0
101
62
60
2
110
80
WVMC-13-(01)
GIBSON RUN
stressed
CHEAT
860
6/17/1996
18
86
10
77
69
75
5
96
46
84
4
90
85
WVMC-14-(02)
HACKELBARNEY RUN NEAR HEADWATERS
stressed
CHEAT
863
6/17/1996
15
71
9
69
71
77
0
101
56
69
85
79
WVMC 17(2.6)
MUDDY CREEK BELOW MARTIN CREEK
stressed
CHEAT
B67
6/17/1996
6
29
2
15
18
20
18
83
55
71
5
70
4B
WVMC-17-A-5-J0)
FICKY RUN fT MOUTH
stressed
CHEAT
859
6/17/1996
7
33
0
0
0
0
40
61
72
44
6
55
32
WVMC-17-A-.5-P)
FICKY RUN NEAR HEADWATERS
stressed-
CHEAT
877
&18/1996
4
19
4
31
100
109
0
101
78
35
3
99
64
WVMC-17-A-(0.0)
MARTIN CREEK 9 MOUTH .
s tressed
CHEAT
865
6/17/1996
it
10
0
0
0
0
50
50
100
0
5
77
. 23
WVMC-17-A-1 -(0.0)
GLADE RUN AT MOUTH
stressed
CHEAT
861
6/17/1996
s
24
0
0
0
0
84
16
91
15
7
44
17
WVMC-18-A
LICK RUN /ROARING CK ABOVE LITTLE LtCK RUN
stressed
CHEAT
8104
6/19/1996
12
57
5
38
67
73
11
90
74
41
3
92
65
Appendix C, page C-11
-------
Appendix C
Site metrics and metric scores
Stations are grouped by data set (1- 1996-1997 calibration data; 2= 1997-1998 validation data). Within each data set, stations are listed by site type (reference, unlabeled, stressed), then within type by ascending Station ID.
Data
Set Station ID
Stream Name
Site
Type
Benthlc Collect
Sample ID Date
Total
taxa
Tot. taxa
•eore
EPT
taxa
EPT taxa
ecore
%
EPT
%
Chlro.
%Chlro Mop 2 %Top2
•core dominant score HBI
HBI
•core
INDEX
(SCI)
WVMC-23A-|2 9) CHURCH RUN NEAR HEAOWATERS
WVMC-26-(1.5) JOES RUN ABOVE 1ST UNNAMED TRI8
VWMC S1-B 5 INDIAN RUN
WVMC-60-0-1 BIG RUN/BLACK WATER RIVER
WVMC-60-D-4.5 SHAYS RUN
WVMC-60-D-4.7 ENGINE RUN NEAR ELK
WVMCS-.5 SMOKY HOLLOW
WVMCS-6-C
WVMT-11-A
WVMT-16-{9.6)
WVMT-24-C-2
WVMT-37-j0.0)
WVMT-42-B-3-J1.0}
WVMT-43-A
WVMT-66B
WVMTB-I1-B5
WVMY-tA
SLABCAMP RUN
SHELBY RUN
SANDY CREEK
BILLS CREEK
BEAVER CREEK
U.T. OF FLATBUSH FORK
CRAVEN RUN
MCGEE RUN
WASH RUN
WHITE OAK SPRING RUN
WVMY-2-B
WVMY-5
WVPNB-IO
WVPNB»16-|18.1|
WVPN0-I7-D
WVPNB-4-{45 2|
WVPNB-7-C.4-1-|0.2|
WVPNB-7-H-2-(1.0)
WVPSB-18A-{6.7)
SOUTH BRANCH
MAPLE RUN
SLAUGHTERHOUSE RUN
ABRAM CREEK
LAUREL RUN
PATTERSON CREEK .
U.T OF U T. OF NEW CREEK
U.T. OF UNTON CREEK
MUDLICK RUN AT HEADWATERS
stressed
CHEAT
B74
6/18/1996
6
29
1
8
61
67
stressed
CHEAT
B79
6M 8/1996
7
33
1
8
39
43
stressed
CHEAT
B197
7/30/1996
18
86
10
77
77
84
stressed
CHEAT
B129
7/17/1996
10
48
7
54
92
100
stressed
CHEAT
B135
7/18/1996
10
48
7
54
76
83
stressed
CHEAT
B131
7/17/1996
11
52
6
46
93
101
stressed
CHEAT
B12
6/10/1996
8
38
3
23
62
67
stressed
CHEAT
B21S
8/7/1996
19
90
12
92
78
85
stressed
TYVAR
8306
8/26/1997
12
57
4
31
SO
54
stressed
TYVAR
B338
9/3/1997
13
62
4
31
6
7
stressed
TYVAR
B369
9/10/1997
11
52
5
38
34
37
stressed
TYVAR
B382
9/15/1997.
6
29
0
0
0
0
stressed -
TYVAR
B292
8/25/1997
6
29
3
23
18
19
stressed
TYVAR
B285
8/25/1997
10
48
3
23
15
16
stressed
TYVAR
B335
9/3/1997
7
33
4
31
18
20
stressed
TYVAR
B328
9/2/1997
10
48
2
15
4
4
stressed
YOUGH B119
7/8/1996
12
57
7
54
57
62
stressed
YOUGH
B123
7/9/1996
14
67
9
69
74
81
stressed
YOUGH
B120
7/9/1996
15
71
7
54
29
31
stressed
NBRPO
B249
8/11/1997
11
52
6
46
45
49
stressed
NBRPO
B276
8/10/1997
5
24
1
8
20
22
stressed
NBRPO
B203
B/19/1997
11
52
3
23
24
27
stressed
NBRPO
B247.
8/11/1997
16
76
10
77
74
81
stressed
NBRPO
B271
8/13/1997
12
57
2
15
3
3
stressed
NBRPO
B258
8/12/1997
16
76
11
85
83
90
stressed
SBRPO
B283
8/26/1996
8
38
4
31
8
8
27
3
S
S
7
73
98
96
96
94
97
82
89
90
S3
73
57
72
SB
18
16
73
43
67
44
1
3
63
23
61
59
36
78
66
3
38
77
22
34
98
36
74
87
47
82
77
57
88
85
44
99
41
21
83
28
36
67
19
24
87
40
21
20
41
10
2
2
71
91
61
79
B1
60
91
45
56
46
40
61
48
95
55
85
85
94
61
82
8
70
23
91
110
80
108
85
94
73
100
71
49
71
66
62
46
49
37
94
89
63
65
48
58
81
84
48
50
83
73
72
72
58
94
59
35
60
27
35
44
29
27
75
81
58
63
46
47
81
45
8S
30
Appendix C, pageC-12
-------
Appendix C Site metrics and metric scores
Stations are grouped by data set (1= 1996-1997 calibration data; 2= 1997-1998 validation data). Within each data set, stations are listed by site type (reference, unlabeled, stressed), then within type by ascending Station ID.
Data
Site
Benthlc
Collect
Total
Tot. taxa.
EPT
EPT laxa
%
% EPT |
I %
%Chlro
% Top 2
% Top 2
HBI
INDEX
Set
Station ID
Stream Nam*
Typ®
Sample ID
Dale
taxa
•core
taxa
•core
EPT
•core
Chlro.
•core
dominant
score
HBI
•core
(SCI)
2
WVBST-27-C
MILL FORK
reference
TUG98
B60
7/7/1998
20
95
10
77
39
42
16
85
46
84
5
75
76
2
WVBST-60-E
GEORGE BRANCH
reference
TUG98
B88
7/7/1998
19
90
11
85
90
98
1
100
69
48
4
87
85
2
WVBST60-F
CRANE CREEK
reference
TUG98
B89
7/7/1998
19
90
11
85
88
95
2
99
54
73
4
83
87
2
WVBST-60-G-[0.9)
HURRICANE BRANCH
reference
TUG98
890
6/17/199B
19
90
13
100
90
98
4
97
66
53
3
99
90
2
WVBST 60-1-2
WHITE OAK BRANCH
reference
TUG98
B91
7/8/1998
21
100
t4
108
87
94
3
98
64
56
3
103
91
2
WVBST-70-Z-J2 3}
VALLCREEK
reference
TUG98
8110
7/1/1998
IB
86
13
100
81
B8
8
93
63
58
3
97
87
2
WVBST-76-E
DAYCAMP BRANCH
reference
TUG98
8116
6/24/1998
15
71
9
69
90
98
5
96
63
58
3
96
81
2
WVK-14-B-1-98
U.T. OF FIVEFORK BRANCH
reference
LOK98
B1
5/26/1990
17
81
9
69
71
77
15
86
35
102
4
90
84
2
WVK-39-E-3-(0.6)98
BAYS FORK
reference
LOK98
B2
6/4/1998
24
114
14
108
53
58
21
80
38
98
4
83
86
2
WVK-39-M-1-A-|10}98
HOFFMAN HOLLOW
reference
LOK98
B3
6/4/1998
25
119
11
85
71
77
8
93
42
91
4
91
89
2
WVKG-19-V-5
LAUREL CREEK/LITTLE CLEAR CREEK
reference
GAU98
B43R
7/29/1998
17
81
13
100
92
100
too
34
104
3
96
96
2
WVKG-34-H-14
BEAR RUN
reference
GAU98
B97
8/3/1998
15
71
12
92
86
94
7
94
60
63
3
102
86
2
WVKG-34 H-4
HUNTERS RUN
reference
GAU98
B98
8/4/1998
13
62
8
62
91
99
5
96
51
77
3
92
81
2
WVKG-34-H-9
ARMSTRONG RUN
reference
GAU98
BtOO
8/3/1998
15
71
11
85
90
98
8
93
51
77
3
102
87
2
WVKG-5-F-3
BEARPEN FORK
reference
GAU98
B119
7/22/1998
23
110
15 .
115
B2
90
9
92
60
63
3
98
90
2
WVKG-5H
ASH FORK
reference
GAU98
B120
7/21/1998
19
90
13
100
80
87
14
87
30
110
3
96
93
2
WVKG-5-J
NEIL BRANCH
reference
GAU98
B121
7/21/1998
22
105
13
100
63
69
26
75
39
95
81
87
2
WVKGC-23 |2.3)
SOUTH FORK CRANBERRY RIVER
reference
GAU98
B152
8/S/199B
23
110
14
108
78
85
10
91
31
107
87
94
2
WVKGW-22-(0.4)
LITTLE LAUREL CREEK
reference
GAU98
8180
8/6/1998
21
100 ,
13
100
83 .
91
7
94
47
83
92
93
2
WVKGW-27
MOUNTAIN LICK RUN
reference
GAU98
B181
8/11/1998
20
95
. 15
• 115
92
100
4
97
47
83
91
94
2
WVO-2-P-23
ARKANSAS BRANCH
reference
TUG98
8138
7/7/1998
19
90
8
62
63
68
t6
85
46
84
4
85
79
2
WVO-2-P-26
LONG BRANCH
reference
TUG98
81
7/7/1998
17
81
9
69
80
87
9
91
60
62
95
81
2
WVO-2-Q-t7
ALUM FORK
reference
TP098
87
5/28/1998
16
76
10
77
83
90
8
93
63
58
90
81
2
WVO-2-O-10-A
LITTLE LAUREL CREEK
reference
TP098
B8
S/28/1998
23
110
14
108
57
62
B
93
46
84
92
8B
2
WVOG-29-C
HORSESHOE BRANCH
reference
LGU98
B24
5/13/1998
24
114
13
100
84
. 91
5
96
50
78
68
92
2
WVOG-32F
PLUM BRANCH
reference
LGU98
B28
5/27/1998
18
86
12
92
74
81
7
93
52
74
4
91
86
2
WVOG-34-E-1-(0 8)
NELSON FORK
reference
LGU98
B33
5/11/1998
15
71
9
69
48
52
6
95
34
104
83
79
2
WVOG-37
LITTLE UGLY CREEK
reference
LGU98
B36
5/11/1998
19
90 .
13
100
89
97
4
97
62
59
4
89
89
2
WVOG-38|1t6J
BIG UGLY CREEK
reference
LGU98
B45
5/19/1998
19
90
10
77
79
86
6
95
69
48
74
78
2
WVOG-38-A
PIGEONROOST CREEK
reference
LGU98
B37
5/19/1998
13
62
8
62
80
87
97
62
59
4
81
75
2
WVOG38-D-|3.9)
LAUREL CREEK
reference
LGU98
B38
5/18/1998
24
114
15
115
80
87
100
39
96
93 .
96
2
WVOGM-8-B
LEFT FORK/MILL CREEK
reference
LGU98
B135
5/3/1998
12
57
8
62
69
76
•'4.
97
SO
78
4
86
76
2
WVP-16|0.1)
ROCKWELL RUN
reference
POT98
B68
6/3/1998
24
114
15
115
69
75
13
88
35
102
4
89
92
2
VWP-6-A.5-[0.2)
U.T. OF BACK CREEK
reference
POT98
B42
6/3/1990
17
81
6
62
63
69
28
72
69
49
85
69
2
WVP-6-G-1-(0.0)
LITTLE BRUSH CREEK
reference
POT98
B64
6/2/1998
18
86
10
77
61
66
17
84
44
88
4
86
81
2
WVP-9-B-(0.0)
MEADOW BRANCH
reference
POT98
B21
6/1/1998
16
76
11
85
57
61
38
63
53
73
75
72
2
WVP-9-B-{12.8)
MEADOW BRANCH
reference
POT98
B65
6/3/1998
18
86
7
54
40
43
30
70
62
59
4
80
65
2
WVP-9G-2-(0.0)
SOUTH FORK/INDIAN CREEK
reference
POT98
B66
6/3/1998
18
86
14
108
66
72
16
84
35
102
88
88
2
WVPC0.9A-(0.2|
CONNOR HOLLOW
reference
CAP98
B70
6/3/1998
25
119
15
115
64
70
20
81
31
107
4
8>6
90
2
VWPC-t-10.2)
CONSTANT RUN
reference
CAP98
B69
6/4/1998
17
81
12
92
81
88
16 '
85
4B
81
3
93
87
2
WVBS-|47.4)
TUG FORK RIVER
TUG98
B6
7/8/1998
15
71
7
54
64
69
13
08
49
79
5
72
72
2
VW0S|516)
TUG FORK RIVER
TUG96
B7
7/8/1998
* 17
81
6
46
73
79
4
97
54
72
5
77
76
2
WVBS-(76.4)
TUG FORK RIVER
TUG98
B9
. 7/7/1998
9
43
3
23
29
32
29
72
52
76
5
64
51
2
WV8ST-100
LITTLE INDIAN CREEK
TUG98
B11
6/17/1998
15
71
4
31
38
41
46
54
76
38
6
55
48
2
WVBST-103
ROCK NARROWS BRANCH
TUG98
813
6/23/1998
10
48
5
38
41
45
53
48
77
36
6
60
46
2
WVBST-104
HARRIS BRANCH
TUG9B
B14
6/18/1998
15
71
.7
54
70
76
2
99
63
58
5
75
72
2
WVBST-105
MITCHELL BRANCH
TUG9B
B15
7/1/1998
13
62
8
62
62
67
30
71
80
31
S
66
60
2
WVBST-109-(0.0)
SANDLICK CREEK
TUG98
B20
6/17/1998
4
19
2
15
50
54
0
101
67
52
5
77
53
2
WVBST-109-{1.7)
SANDLICK CREEK
TUG90
B21
7/1/1998
5
24
2
15
71
77
10
91
73
42
5
68
53
2
WVBST-109-A
RIGHT FORK / SANDLICK CREEK
TUG98
B18
7/1/1998
11
52
4
31
27
29
57
44
77
36
6
56
41
2
WVBST-I09-B
LEFT FORK / SANDLICK CREEK
TUG9B
B19
7/1/1998
4
19
2
15
69 .
75
8
93
69
48
5
68
53
2
WVBST-t 10
ADKIM BRANCH
TUG98
B22
6/17/1998
11
52
3
23
30
33
13
88
56
69'
5
75
57
2
WVBST-111
BELCHER BRANCH
TUG98
B23
6/16/1998
10
. 48
4
31
68
74
10
91
65
54
6
63
60 .
2
WVBST-t 12
TURNHOLE BRANCH
TUG98
B24 .
6/30/1998
13
62
4
31
63
68
If
90
55
71
5
71
66
2
WVBST-113
HARMON BRANCH
TUG9B
B2SR
6/30/1998
7
33
2
15
38
41
12
89
58
66
5
71
52
2
WVBST-115
SOUTH FORK
TUG9B
B27
7/6M998
15
71
6
46
• 44
48
18
83
48
81
5 .
72
67
2
WVBST-115-A
TEA BRANCH
TUG98
B2B
7/1/1998
17
81
9
69
74
80
12
89
50 .
79
4
79
80
2
WVBST-115-B
MCCLURE BRANCH
TUG98
B29
6/25/1998
19
90
10
77
85
92
2
99
53
74
3
96
88
2
WVBST-115-D
JUMP BRANpH
TUG98
B30
6/25/1998
21
100
11
85
52
57
31
70
51
76
5
74
77
2
WVBST-115E
SPICE CREEK
TUG98
B31
6/24/1998
15
71
8
62
75
82
11
89
47
82
. 4
86
79
2
VWBST-t 15-F
LAUREL BRANCH
TUG98
B32
7/6/1990
15
71
8
62
81
88
4
97
47
82
4
84
81
2
WVBST-i tS-G
ROAD FORK
TUG98
B33
6/25/1998
15
71
6
45
71
77
6
95
65
SS
3
94
73
2
WVBST-117
LOOP BRANCH
TUG98
835
6/24/1998
12
57
5
38
30
33
13
88
64
57
5
71
57
Appendix C, page C-13
-------
Appendix C
Site metrics and metric scores
Stations are grouped by data set (1= 1996-)997 calibration data; 2= 1997-1998 validation data). Within each data set. stations are listed by site type (reference, unlabeled, stressed), then within type by ascending Station ID.
Data
Set Station ID
' WVBST-11B
WVBST-119
WVBST-120(0.0}
VYVBST • 120- (2 -0J
WVBST-120-A
WVBST-121
WVBST-14-8
WVBST-17-(2.7J
WVBST-24
WVBST-24 (29.3)
WVBST-24(31.8|
WVBST-24N
WVBST-24-0
WVBST-24P
WVBST-24Q-7
WVBST-27|2.5)
WVBST-318
WVBST-32
WVBST-34
WVBST-35
WVBST40
WVBST-40C
WVBST-40H •
WVBST-41
WVBST-42
WVBST-42-A
WVBST-42-B
WVBST-43
Stream Name
Site
Type
MILL BRANCH
ORY BRANCH
LITTLE CREEK
LITTLE CREEK
INDIAN GRAVE BRANCH
MILLSEAT BRANCH
RIGHT FORK/BULL CREEK
JENNIE CREEK
PIGEON CREEK
PIGEON CREEK
PIGEON CREEK
ELK CREEK
MILLSTONE BRANCH
PIGEONROOST CREEK
SPRING BRANCH
MILLER CREEK
SOUTH FORK / BUFFALO CREEK
SUGABTREE CREEK .
SYCAMORE CREEK
LICK CREEK
MATE CREEK
MITCHELL BRANCH
DOUBLE CAMP FORK
SULPHUR CREEK .
THACKER CREEK
SCISSORSVILLE BRANCH
MAUCHINVILLE BRANCH
GRAPEVINE CREEK
Benthlc
Collect
Total
- ToLtaxa
EPT
EPT laxa
%
%EPT(;
%
%Ch1ro
% Top 2
% Top 2
HBI
INDEX
Sample ID
Date
taxa
•core
laxa
•core
EPT .
score ,
Chlro.
score
dominant
score
H81
score
(SCI)
TUG98
B36
6/24/1998
18
86
9
69
61
66
4
97
54
72
. 4
82
79
TUG98
B37
6/24/1998
23
110
12
92
84
91
5
96
52
76
3
93
91
TUG90
B40
6/23/t998
12
57
3
23
20
21
62
39
75
39
6
54
39
TUG98
B41
6/23/1998
23
110
12
92
63
68
6
95
53
73
4
09
06
TUG9B
B38
6/23/1998
17
81
9
69
27
29
33
67
61
61
5
67
66
62
TUG98
B42
6/24/1998
20
95
10
77
76
82
7
94
34
103
4
69
TUG98
B44
6/24/1998
15
71
6
46
80
87
3
98
65
54
4
79
73
TUG90
B46
6/30/1998
13
62
S
38
30
33
43
57
59
64
6
63
53
TUG98
849
7/6/1998
12
57
5
38
25
27
27
74
56
69
6
49
53
TUG9B
B57
6/23/1998
7
33
2
15
38
41
55
45
91
14
6
55
34
TUG98 .858
6/3/1998
16
. 76
11
85
86
94
3
97
42
91
4
90
89
TUG98
8139
G/16/1998
9
43
4
31
19
21
3
97
86
23
96
5
71
48
TUG98
BS4
6/16/1998
15
71
6
46
48
52
13
87
38
5
76
71
TUG90
BS5
6/15/1998
18
86
10
77
62
67 .
7
94
38
97
5
75
03
TUG98
B56
6/16/1998
11
52
4
31
63
69
17
03
63
57
6
63
59
TUG98
B61
6/17/1998
12
57
7
54
46
51
9
92
54
73
5
74
67
TUG98
BS3
6/15/1998
18
86
8
62
44
48
19
81
47
83
5
69
71
TUG90
B6S
6/1S/1998
7
33
3
23
55
59
9
92
55
71
4
81
60
TUG98
B67
6/22/1998
16
76
6
46
47
51
2
99
64
. 56
5
71
67
TUG98
868
6/15/1998
g
43
3
23
63
69
17
B4
77
36
6
61
53
TUG90
871
6/15/1998
9
43
3
23
7
7
50
51
74
40
7
45
3S
TUG98
B73
6/16/1998
8
38
1
0
10
11
8
93
01
30
9
17
33
TUG9B
B75
6/15/1998
16
76
6
46
65
70
26
75
65
55
5
64
64
TUG98
B76
6/16/1998
4
19
0
0
0
0
40
61
60
63
6
59
34
TUG98
B77
6/16/1998
7
33
1
8
13
15
40
61
63
57
6
59
39
TUG98
B78
6/16/1998
6
29
2
15
63
68
13
88
66
54
3
96
58
TUG98
B79
6/16/1998
4
19
1
8
54
59
4
97
92
13
4
65
47
TUG98
Bao
6/1&I998
7
33
2
15
75
82
2
99
92
13
5
70
52
TUG98
B84R
7/7/1998
10
48
4
31
51
55
40
61
77
36
6
62
49
TUG90
B86
7/7/1998
14
67
3
23
2
2
79
21
86
23
7
44
30
66
TUG98
B87
6/17/1998
21
100
12
92
77
84
13
88
48
85
5
77
TUG98
B92
7/7/1998
19
90
0
62
59
64
17
83
41
92
5
71
77
TUG98
Bill
7/7/1998
13
62
6
46
59
64
5
96
69
49
5
72
6S
TUG98
0112
7/6/1998
16
76
7
54
30
32
50
50
63
57
6
59
55
TUG98
8113
7/7/1998
14
67
0
62
44
47
31
69
5t
77
5
64
64
TUG9B
893
7/2/1998
16
76
10
77
73
80
17
84
44
88
5
71
79
TUG98
B94
7/2/1998
14
67
6
46
53
58
41
60
88
19
6
61
52
TUG98
695
7/2/1998
12
57
7
54
80
96
3
98
76
38
5
76
70
TUG98
B98
7/9/1998
17
81
6
46
35
30
50 .
50
68
49
6
62
54
TUG98
B96
7/5/1998
. 11
52
3
23
8
9
61
40
84
25
7
38
31
TUG98
B97
7/6/1998
IB
06
7
54
41
45
41
60
65 .
55
6
58
59
88
TUG98
8101
7/8/1998
19
90
11
85
84
91
2
99
49
79
4
83
08
TUG98
B99
7/6/1998
19
90
13
100
74
00
14
87
44
87
4
B9
TUG98
8103
7/9/1998
17
81
7 .
54
48
52
33
68
60
63
5
74
65
TUG98
B104
7/1/1998
a
38
2
15
4
5
66
3S
07
20
6
54
28
86
TUG98
B105
7/6/1998
19
90
12
92
84
91
5
96
70
48
3
103
' TUG98
8107
6/30/1998
14
67
S
38
66
72
22
79
49
60
5
71
68
TUG98
8108
7/1/1998
15
71
6
46
39
43
32
69
65
S4
5
60
59
TUG98
8t06
7/2/1998
10
48
5
38
63
68
25
76
72
44
6
62
56
TUG98
8109
7/1/1998
17
81
9
69
67
73 ,
21
79
47
83
4
70
77
TUG98
8114
6/25/1998
10
48
3
23
5
6
63
38
84
25
7
40
30
TUG98
B115
6/25/1998
16
76
9
69
89
97
4
97
58
65
4
79
81
TUG98
B117R
7/7/1998
13
62
7
54
81
88
2
99
54
72
4
00
76
TUG 98
B119
6/30/1998
14
67
5
38
10
10
62
38
82
28
6
63
41
TUG98
B120
6/24/1998
13
62
4
31
46
50
17
83
48
82
5
71
63
TUG98
B122
7/9/1998
18
86
5
38
70
76
12
89
61
61
3
92
74
TUG98
B123
7/9/1998
14
67
5
38
25
27
42
59
63
58
6
55
51
TUG9B
B124
6/3Q/1998
19
90
8
62
. 76
82
13
88.
64
57
5
72
7S
TUG98
B126
6/24/1998
11
52
2
15
1
1
89
11
93
11
7
43
22
TUG98
B127
6/24/1998
14
67
5
38
60
65
9
92
56
69
5
67
66
TUG9B
B128
6/23/1998
10
48
5
38
48
52
23
78
44
87
5
70
62
TUG98
B129
6/23/1998
21
. 100
11
85
75
82
0 .
101
61
61
4
89
86
TUG98
B130
6/12/1998
15
71
9
69
80
87
5
96
59
64
4
88
79
WVBST-60
WVBST-60-A-I2 0)
WVBST-60-D
WVBST-63-(1.2|
WVBST-70-(1.3)
WVBST-70-(18.4)
WV8ST-70-(7.4)
WVBST-70-C
WVBST-70-F
WVBST-70-l
PANTHER CREEK
GREENBRIER FORK
CUB BRANCH
HORSE CREEK
DRY FORK
DRY FORK
DRY FORK
MILE BRANCH
GRAPEVINE BRANCH
BEARTOWN BRANCH
WVBST-70-M-it.S)
WVBST-70-M-1
WVBST-70-M-3
WVBST-70-N-(2.7)
VWBST.70-N-(4.5i
WVBST-70-Q
WVBST-70-T-2
WVBST-70-U-1
WVBST 70-W-(0 8)
BRADSHAW CREEK
GROUNDHOG BRANCH
WOLFPEN BRANCH
LITTLE SLATE CREEK
LITTLE SLATE CREEK
BARTLEY CREEK
CLEAR FORK
BIG BRANCH / WAR CREEK
JACOB FORK
WVBST-70-W{7.8)
WVBST-70-W-1-A-{0.8)
WVBST-70-Z-JO.O)
WVBST-71
WV8ST-72
WVBST-76-(0.0)
WVBST-76-(10.2)
WVBST-76-(5.6)
WVBST-78-D
WVBST-78-E
JACOB FORK
MOUNTAIN FORK
VALL CREEK
LICK BRANCH
HARM AN BRANCH
CLEAR FORK
CLEAR FORK
CLEAR FORK
HONEYCAMP BRANCH
COONTREEBRANCH
WVBST-78-F
WVBST-78-H
WVBST-78-I
WVBST-85A
WVBST-85-A-{0 B)
WVBST94
STONECOAL BRANCH
NEWSON BRANCH
MOORECAMPBRANCH -
LEFT FORK / DAVY BRANCH
LEFT FORK / DAVY BRANCH
SHANNON BRANCH
Appendix C, pageC-14
-------
Appendix C Site metrics and metric scores
Stations are grouped by data set (1= 1996-1997 calibration data; 2= 1997-1990 validation data). Within each data set, stations are listed by site type (reference, unlabeled, stressed). Ihen within type by ascending Station ID.
Data
Slt« Banthlc
Collect
Total
Tol. taxa
EPT
EPT taxa
' %
% ept [¦
' %
%Chtro
% Top 2
V. Top 2
HBI
INDEX
Set
Station 10
Str«am Name
Type Sample ID
Dale
taxa
•core
taxa
acore
EPT
•core
1 Chlro.
•core
dominant
•core
HBI
•core
(SCI)
2
WVBST-95
UPPER SHANNON BRANCH
TUG98 B131
6/17/1998
8
38
2
15
16
18
74
27
89
17
7
49
27
2
WVBST-90-A
PUNCHEON CAMP BRANCH
TUG98 BI32
6/17/1998
11
52
' '4
31
94
102
3
98
93
11
5
70
60
2
WVBST-99-J0.0)
ELKHORN CREEK
TUG98 8136
&22/1998
11
52
2
15
34
37
36
64
62
60
6
59
48
2
WVBST 99-116.4)
ELKHORN CREEK
TUG98 B137
6/22/1998
8
38
4
31
46
50
5
96
51
76
6
57
58
2
WVBST-99 L {0.0)
NORTH FORK / ELKHORN CREEK
TUG98 B134
6/22/1998
6
29
3
23
68
74
25
75
83
26
5
65
49
2
WVBST-99-L-{6.2)
NORTH FORK / ELKHORN CREEK
TUG98 B135
6/16/1998
10
48
2
15
24
26
64
36
80
31
7
49
34
2
WVBST-99-L-1
BUZZARD BRANCH
TUG98 B133
6/22/1998
10
48
6
46
75
62
4
97
B2
68
29
5
72
62
80
2
WVK-34|238)
BIG COAL RIVER
-COAL97 BIS
10/8/1997
18
86
10
77
82
89
2
99
50
4
79
2
WVK-34-{584)
COAL RIVER
COAL97 B16R
10/7/1997
16
76
9
69
78
85
5
96
51
77
4
82
81
2
WVK-82-{186)
GAULEY RIVER
GAU90 62
7/15/1998
10
48
4
31
20
21
61
40
72
43
6
56
40
2
WVK-82-J55.2)
GAULEY RIVER
GAU98 B4
7/29/1998
15
71
10
77
69
75
IS
86
47
83
5
73
78
2
WVK-82-{6l.6j
GAULEY RIVER
GAU98 B5
7/30/1998
14
67
9
69
75
81
11
90
55
70
5
. 75
75
86
2
WVK-B2-{80.2)
GAULEY RIVER
GAU98 B6
6/5/1998
16
76
10
77
87
94
5
96
44
87
4
82
2
WVKC-10-I-6-C
RATTLESNAKE HOLLOW
COAL97 B65
9/22/1997
13
62
S
38
28
31
20
81
42
90
5
70
62
2
WVKCtO-L
CAMP CREEK
COAL97 B11
9/23/1997
16
76
8
62
71
77
8
93
56
69
4
83
77
2
WVKC-10-N-J3.0)
ROCK CREEK
COAL97 860
9/25/1997
16
76
6
46
25
28
32
68
65
55
5
64
56
2
WVKC- I0-P-.5
LONG BRANCH
COAL97 B46
9/24/1997
16
76
5
38
27
29
17
84
46
85
5
76
65
2
. WVKC-10-T-|17.4)
SPRUCE FORK
COAL97 B75
9/25/1997
12
57
5
38
52
57
10
91
45
86
5
74
67
2
WVKC-tO-T-{18.5)
SPRUCE FORK
COAL97 B76
9/25/1997
10
48
5
38
27
29
10
90
74
40
5
71
S3
68
2
' WVKC-10-T-11-(15.3)
SPRUCE LAUREL FORK
COAL97 B79
9/15/1997
12
57
7
54
88
96
4
97
79
33
5
72
2
WVKC-10-T-11-H.5-(0.3)
TICKLE BRITCHES FORK
COAL97B86
9/1S/I997
6
29
5
38
36
39
O
101
76
64
38
4
86
55
2
WVKC- IO-T-2
LAUREL BRANCH
COAL97B38
9/24/1997
17
81
7
54
60
66
13
BS
57
60
4
81
71
2
WVKC-10-T-9
HEWITT CREEK
COAL97 B30R
9/24/1997
11
52
4
31
72
79
11
90
62
4
79
65
2
WVKC-10-T-9B
MISSOURI FORK/HEWITT
COAL97 B58
9/23/1997
13 .
62
3
23
8
9
8
93
56
69
5
74
55
2
WVKC-10-T-9-B.5
ISOM BRANCH
COAL97B34
9/24/1997
15
71
4
31
48
52
13
88
48
82
5
76
67
2
WVKC-10-T-9-C-2
SYCAMORE BRANCH
COAL97 B85
9/24/1997
16
76
4
31
26
28.
3
98
52
74
5
76
64
68
2
WVKC-tO-U-13
GRAPEVINE BRANCH
COAL97 B28
9/23/1997
16
76
8
62
62
67
24
77
62
59
5
68
2
WVKC-10-U-I7
JASPER WORKMAN BRANCH
COAL97B35
9/22/1997
18
86
9
69
65
70
18
83
64
56
5
67
72
2
WVKC-10-U21
LACEY BRANCH
COAL97 B37
9/22/1997
14
.67
7
54
43
47
34
66
62
59
5
64
59
2
WVKC- 10-U-3-B
BENNETT FORK
COAL97B4
9/23/1997
14
67
7
54
60
65
15
86
44
88
5
74
72
2
WVKC-10-U-7-A
ROACH BRANCH
COAL97B67
9/22/1997
14
67
7
54
46
50
16
85
66
54
4
82
65
2
WVKC-11*(5.6)
ALUM CREEK
COAL97B2
9/18/1997
16
76
6
46
31
34
31
69
50
78 .
6
63
61
2
WVKC-14
FORK CREEK
COAL97 B27
10/&M997
19
90
9
69
73
80
12
89
56
69
5
77
79
68
2
WVKC-t6*A
LEFT FORK/BULL CREEK
COAL97B40
9/26/1997
11
52
4
31
84
92
4
97
64
57
4
81
2
WVKC-21
BRUSH CREEK
COAL97B9
9/26/1997
14
67
4
31
9
10
54
46
73
42
6
54
41
2
WVKC2IC
RIDGEVIEW HOLLOW
COAL97 066
10/8/1997
14
67
3
23
3
3
58
43
67
S2
7
45
39
2
WVKC-29
JOES CREEK
COAL97 B36
9/17/1997
12
57
5
38
38
41
30
71
57
68
6
57
55
2
WVKC-29-A
LEFT FORK JOES CREEK
COAL97 B42
10/7/1997
16
76
7
54
56
61
12
89
59
64
5
71
69
2
WVKC-29-A-3
SPICELICK FORK
COAL97 B73
9/17/1997
22
105
8
62
50
54
10
91
42
91
4
78
79
2
WVKC-31-10.4)
LAUREL CREEK
COAL97 B39
10/7/1997
12
57
7
54
61
67
7 '
94
71
46
5
72
65
2
WVKC-3l-B-(0.2)
HOPKINS FORK
COAL97B32
10/7/1997
14 *
67
6
46
72
78
4
97
41
93
5
77
76
2
WVKC-31-B-( 10.9)
HOPKINS FORK
COAL97 B33
10/6/1997
- 19
90
12
92
73
79
6
95
54
71
4
85
85
2
WVKC-31-C .
COLD FORK
COAL97B1B
10/7/1997
14
. 67
9
69
85
93
9
92
79
33
5
75
71
2
WVKC-35-J3.0)
WHITE OAK CREEK
COAL97 B92
10/8/1997
8
38
4
at
43
47
29
72
68
50
5
64
50
2
WVKC-35F
LEFT FORK OF WHITE OAK CREEK
COAL97 B4I
10/8/1997
16
76
8
62
67
73
19
82
63
58
5
70
70
2
WVKC-43-{0.0)
ELK RUN
. COAL97B24
10/7/1997
20
95
7
54
38
41
35
66
55
70
6
62
65
2
WVKC-43-{2.8)
ELK RUN
COAL97 B25
10/7/1997
19
90
9
69
41
44
34
67
65
54
6
63
65
2
WVKC-46-{0.0)
MARSH FORK
COAL97 BSO
10/6/1997
13
62
5
38
80
87
4
97
62
59
4
88
72
2
WVKC-46-{15.3)
MARSH FORK
COAL97B5I
10/&1997
14
67
6
46
70
76
6
96
55
71
5
77
72
2
WVKC-46-{20.2)
MARSH FORK
COAL97 B52
9/29/1997
<15
71
1
54 .
72
78
4
97
52
74
4
80
76
2
WVKC-46-15.8)
MARSH FORK
COAL97B54
10/6/1997
15
71
6
46
80
87 *
5 .
96
47
83
4
82
78
2
WVKC-46-C
HAZY CREEK
COAL97B29
10/6/1997
14
67
7
54
85
92
9
92
73
42
5
72
70
2
WVKC-46E
STINK RUN
COAL97 B81
10/6/1997
17
81
6
46
52
57
10
91
50
79
5
69
70
2
WVKC-46-G
PEACHTREE CREEK
COAL97 860
9/25/1997
17
'81
8
62
79
86
5
96
66
53
4
78
76
2
WVKC-46-G-1
DREWS CREEK
COAL97 B22
9/25/1997
16
76
9
69
90
98
7
94
81
29
5
74
99
73
2
WVKC-46-G-1-.5A
CANTERBURY BRANCH
COAL97 B12
9/25/1997
2
10
1
8
50
54
0
. 101
100
0
3
45
2
WVKC-46-G-2
MARTIN FORK
COAL97 B55
9/25/1997
19
90
8
62
84
92
4
97
69
49
4
82
79
2
WVKC-46-H
DRY CREEK .
COAL97 B23
10/6/1997
13
62
7
54
66
72
7
94
62
60
S
76
.70
2
WVKC-46-l
ROCK CREEK
COAL97 B69
10/7/1997
18
86
9
69
60
66
9
92
43
88
4
80
80
2
WVKC-46-J-2
BEE BRANCH
COAL97B3
9/29/1997
8
38
3
23
24
26
21 .
80
64
57
5
77
50
2
WVKC-46-K
COVE CREEK
COAL97B19
9/29/1997
20
95
10
77
59
65
21
80
37
99
4
82
83
2
WVKC-46-L.5
SHILOH FORK
COAL97B71 .
9/29/1997
10
48
4
31
81
68
7
93
74
40
3
95
66
2
WVKC-46-P
SURVEYOR CREEK
COAL97B84 .
10/7/1997
14
67
7
54
29
31
48
52
66
53
6
58
53
Appendix C, pageC-15
-------
Appendix C
Site metrics and metric scores
Stations are grouped by data set (1= 1996-1997 calibration data; 2* 1997-1998 validation data). Within each data sel, stations are listed by site type (reference, unlabeled, stressed), then within type by ascending Station ID.
Data
Sat Station ID
Stream Nam*
Site
Typa
Benthlc
Sample ID
Collect
Data
Total
taxa
ToL taxa
•cora
EPT
taxa
EPT taxi
•core
%
EPT
% eptj; i %
•cora Chfro.
%Chlro % Top 2 % Top 2
•cora dominant scora
HBI
•cora
INDEX
(SCI)
MILLERS CAMP BRANCH
WVKC
WVKC
WVKC
WVKC
WVKC
WVKC
WVKC
WVKC
WVKC
WVKC'
WVKC
WVKC-
WVKG
WVKG
WVKG-
WVKG
WVKG-
WVKG-
WVKG
WVKG
47
•47-A-(1.3)
•47-C
•47*F
47G
•47-G-1
•47-H
•47-N-|t.4)
-47-O-JO.O)
47Q-i2.4)
CLEAR FORK
ROCKHOUSE CREEK
PANTHER BRANCH
STONECOAL BRANCH
LONG FORK
DOW FORK
MARE BRANCH
MCDOWELL BRANCH
WORKMAN CREEK
WORKMAN CREEK
2 WVKG-
2 WVKG
WVKG
WVKG
WVKG
WVKG
WVKG-
WVKG-
WVKG
WVKG
5
9
13(0 01
•13-{7.9|
•13 B
•13-F
•13-K
19(14.4)
19(18.0}
19-140.4)
FALLS CREEK
CROOKED CREEK
PETERS CREEK
PETERS CREEK
OTTER CREEK
JERRY FORK
BUCK GARDEN CREEK
MEADOW RIVER
MEADOW RIVER
MEADOW RIVER
19-E-{2.0)
19-0(2 8)
19G-{9.6]
19 G 3 {1.0}
19G9(7.5)
19
19-H-1A-(t.2)
19-J-l
I9-J-2
19-P
GLADE CREEK
ANGLINS CREEK
ANGLINS CREEK
SUGARGROVE CREEK
U.T. OF ANGLINS CREEK
yoUNGS CREEK
NORTH PRONG CREEK
HAYNES BRANCH
ROAD FORK
MEADOW CREEK
WVKG-
WVKG
WVKG-
WVKG-
WVKG-
WVKG
WVKG
WVKG-
WVKG
WVKG
19-P-J5.4)
19-0
19Q-1A-{1.4)
19-Q-5
19U(3 8)
19-U{7.8)
19-U-2-C
19-U-2-D
19-U-4
19-V-J4.4)
MEAOOW CREEK
SEWELL CREEK
BOGGS CREEK
GOULD HOLLOW
BIG CLEAR CREEK
BIG CLEAR CREEK
OLD FIELD BRANCH
JOB KNOB BRANCH
ELIJAH BRANCH
LITTLE CLEAR CREEK
2 . WVKG-24-(4.0) HOMINY CREEK
2 WVKG*24-|6.2) HOMINY CREEK
2 WVKG24-E-(1.0) GRASSY CREEK
2 WVKG-24-E-2 BRUSHY MEADOW CREEK
2 WVKG-24G ROARING CREEK
2 WVKG-26-(1.6) MUDDLETY CREEK
2 WVKG-26-|8.8) MUDDLETY CREEK
2 WVKG-26-O CLEAR FORK
2 WVKG-26-0-2 FALLS RUN
2 WVKG'26-P LAUREL FORK
COAL97B57 10/7/1997
COAL97 B13R
COAL97B70
COAL97 B59
COAL97BB3
COAL97B47
COAL97B21
COAL97B49
COAL97 B56
COAL97 B93
COAL97 B94
9/23/1997
9/23/1997 .
9/24/1997
9/24/1997
9/24/1997
9/24/1997
9/24/1997
9/22/1997
9/22/1997
9/22/1997
20
18
6
12
13
15
11
14
15
38
9S
86
29
57
62
71
S2
67
71
5
11
6
2
8
5
10
7
6
8
COAL97B26
COAL97B20
GAU98 618
GAU98 B20R
GAU98 B12
GAU98 B14
GAU98 BIS
GAU98 B48
GAU98 B49
GAU98 B51
9/17/1997
9/17/1997
7/14/1998
8/4/1998
7/14/1998
8/4/1998
8/4/1998
7/29/1998
7/22/1998
7/27/1998
38
85
62
15
62 •
38
77
54
46
62
87
66
48
49
78.
52
84
19
11
15
14
16
16
13
11
26
15
GAU98 B22
GAU98 B25
GAU98 B26
GAU98 B23
GAU98 624
GAU96 828
GAU98 B27
GAU98 B29
GAU98 B30
OAU98 B31
90
52
71
67
-76
76
62
52
124
71
7
9
8
12
6
62
38
46
38
62
54
69
62
92
46
7/30/1998
7/30/1998
8/13/1998
7/30/1998
8/3/1998
7/27/1998
7/27/1998
7/29/1998
7/29/1998
7/29/1998
11
22
22
12
t8
15
9
14
19
15
52
105
105
57
86
71
43
67
90
71
38
29
46
63
65-
76
B4
95
43
55
4
13
13
8
12
M
5
9
11
31
100
100
62
92
85
38
GAU9B B32
GAU98 B33
GAU98 B34
GAU98 B35
GAU98 B39
GAU98. B40
GAU98 B36
GAU98 B37
GAU98 B38
GAU99 B46
7/21/1998
7/2B/1998
7/28/1998
7/27/1998
8/10/1998
7/21/1998
7/21/1998
7/21/1998
7/21/1998
7/30*1998
21
13
25
17
18
18
19
17
20
12
59
64
71
80
79
85
56
84
78
76
100
62
119
81
86
86
90
81
95
57
9
5
13
7
10
12
13 .
It
12
5
GAU98 B59
GAU98 B60
GAU98 B54
GAU98 B52
GAU98 B55
GAU98 B71
GAU98 B72
GAU98 868
GAU98 B69
GAU98 B70
7/15/1998
7/16/1998
7/20/1998
7/16/1998
7/20/1998
7/20/1998
7/14/1998
7/20/1998
7/22/1998
7/22/1998
20
19
20
19
17
14
16
15
24
13
69
38
100
54
77
92
100
85
92
38
90
95
90
81
67
76
71
114
62
11
11
11
7
9
8
6
7
12
55
36
63
38
69
86
90
95
83
79
85
85
85
54
69
62
46
54
92
62
53
72
68
74
72
49
27
77
55
89
95
72
53
53
8S
72
79
97
56
91
41
32
50
69
71-
83
91
103
46
60
64
70
78
87
86
93
61
91
85
83
39
69
41
75
94
98
104
90
88
57
78
74
80
79
54
29
83
60
97
6
2
27
20
7
13
12
4
27
10
29
43
8
5
- 11
15
3
2
13
0
95
99
74
81
89
97
73
91
71
58
93
96
90
86
98
60
51
49
67
72
73
62
58
53
63
62
76
79
52
43
43
59
65
73
58
10
17
4
3
B
It
2
6
14
13
88
101
91
84
97
98
93
89
99
95
87
48
62
45
41
40.
69
54
82
32
55
82
59
86
92
.94
49
72
28
106
70
22
11
16
42
7
9
3
2
55
45
45
50
38
52
47
61
38
42
71
86
86
79
96
75
84
61
97
91
79
90
84
59
94
92
98
99
95
94
43
39
42
73
47
51
65
67
50
77
89
95
91
43
83
77
54
51
78
36
10
5
7
9
14
22
7
9
20
8
91
96
94
92
87
79
94
92
81
92
32
%
57
57
43
66
67
45
57
106
108
60
67
67
89
53
52
B0
79
69
75
76
74
77
91
71
62
68
82
-75-
68
81
74
67
75
77
65
86
79
82
74
64
77
56
80
81
81
82
77
86
75
73
80
83
72
73
85
78
84
70
51
70
63
75
76
64
75
70
50
69
74
78
69
79
69
82
64
86
90
79
90
83
67
77
89
62
79
65
B7
55
82
87
87
83
89
65
84
89
81
76
77
72
62
71
84
2 WVKG-27 PERSINGER CREEK
2 WVKG-3 BIG CREEK
2 WVKG-30-(0 4) BIG BEAVER CREEK
2 WVKG-30-(3.B) BIG BEAVER CREEK
2 WVKG-30-(4.3) BIG BEAVER CREEK
2 WVKG-30-D-(0.8) WYATT RU N
2 WVKG-30-E LITTLE BEAVER CREEK
Z WVKG-30-H LEFT FORK/BEAVER CREEK
2 WVKG-304. BEARPEN FORK/BEAVER"CREEK
2 WVKG-3Q-N LOWER LAUREL RUN
2 WVKG-30-P
GAU98 B73
GAU98 B74
GAU98 B83
GAU98 B84
GAU98 B85
GAU98 B76
GAU9S 677
GAU98 678
GAU98 B80
GAU98 B61
7/29/1998
7/15/1998
7/29/1998
7/28/1998
7/28/1998
7/30/1998
7/28/1998
7/28/1998
7/27/1998
7/27/1998
22
18
14
21
19
18
13
17
8
10
105
86
67
100
90
86
62
81
38
48
11
7
8
12
10
10
2
5
2
2
85
54
62
92
77
77
15
38
15
15
73
56
75
69
67
92
61
23
52
36
79
61 .
81
76
73
100
66
25
56
40
7
3
12
2
9
3
7
36
6
9
88
99
91
98
94
64
95
92
53
48
40
45
39
70
79
49
64
BS
74
81
93
85
95
46
33
80
57
24
82
64
80
85
B3
76
66
52
61
60
86
74
79
90
85
80
56
57
54
46
61
70
UPPERLAUREL RUN
PANTHER CREEK
GAU9B BB2
GAU98 B87
7/27/1998
8/5/1998
22
14
105
67
38
54
9
85
10
93
25
2
75
99
41
77
92
37
52
74
Appendix C, pageC-16
-------
Appendix C Site metrics and metric scores
Stations are grouped by data set (1= 1996-1997 calibration dala; 2* 1997-1998 validation data). Within each data set, stations are lisled by site type (reference, unlabeled, stressed), then within type by ascending Station ID.
Data
Site
Benthlc
Collect
Total
ToL laxa
EPT
EPT laxa
%
% EPT jj
' %
%chlro
% Top 2
% Top 2
HBI
INDEX
Set
Station ID
Stream Name
Typ«
Sample ID
Date
laxa
o
u
m
laxa
score
EPT
•core
7 Chlro.
score
dominant
score
HBI
score
(SCI)
2
WVKG-34-|0.0)
CHERRY RIVER
GAU98
B103
7/30/1998
15
71
11
85
85
92
2
99
56
68
4
79
82
2
WVKG-34-{8 8)
CHERRY RIVER
GAU98
BI04
8/4/1998
17
81
8
62
52
57
36
65
57
66
5
67
66
2
WVKG-34-B
COAL SIDING RUN
GAU90
B89
8/5/1998
17
81
12
92
88
96
5
96
45
B6
3
92
91
2
WVKG-34-E
LAUREL CREEK
GAU93
B90
8/5/1998
20
95
14
108
81
88
7
94
32
106
4
89
94
2
WVKG-34-E-3
SPRING RUN
GAU90
B91
8/5/1998
19
90
11
85
66
72
11
89
38
97
. 4
89
87
2
WVKG-34-F(1.8}
LITTLE LAUREL CREEK
GAU90
B92
8/4/1998
18
86
11
85
79
86
11
90
30
109
60
4
85
89
2
WVKG-34-G-{ 1.01
SOUTH FORK/ CHERRY RIVER
GAU98
995
8/4/1998
20
95
12
92
86
93
10
9t
62
4
80
65
2
WVKG-34G-J9 6)
SOUTH FORK/CHERRY RIVER
GAU98
B96
8/4/1998
18
86
13
100
. 91
99
4
97
57
68
4
83
69
2
WVKG-34-G-6
BECKY RUN
GAU98
B94
8/4/1998
15
71
12
92
95
104
3
98
65
55
4
84
83
2
WVKG-34H|0 3}
NORTH FORK/CHERRY RIVER
GAU98
B101
8/4/1998
18
86
11
85
73
80
10
6
91
46
84
68
s
77
84
2
WVKG-34-H-I9.5)
NORTH FORK/CHERRY RIVER
GAU98
8102
8/4/1998
14
67
12
92
94
102
95
56
4
81
88
84
2
WVKG-34H-1I.5
CARPENTER RUN
GAU98
B93
8/5/1998
10
48
7
54
88
96
11
90
48
82
4
76
2
WVKG-34-H-0
WINDY RUN
GAU98
B99
8/3/1998
10
48
8
62
92
too
0
101
59
64
3
92
78
86
2
WVKG-35|0.0)
CRANBERRY RIVER
GAU98
B105
7/15/1998
17
81
11
85
81
68
8
93
99
44
87
4
84
2
WVKG-35-jl7.5)
CRANBERRY RIVER
GAU98
B106
7/16/1990
17
81
12
92
92
101
2
55
70
4
86
68
2
WVKG-35|19.7)
CRANBERRY RIVER
GAU98
8107
7/16/1998
19
90
13
100
9t
99
4
97
54
71
4
90
91
2
VWKG-35-|23.7)
CRANBERRY RIVER
GAU98
B108
7/16/1998
21
100
14
108
78
B5
15
86
52
75
4
78
87
2
WVKG-5-|0.0|
TWENTYMILE CREEK
GAU98
6126
7/16/1998
14
67
8
62
49
53
19
82
59
64
5
63
65
2
WVKG-5-IIS.6)
TWENTYMILE CREEK
GAU9B
B127
7/20/1998
14
67
7
54
79
86
3
98
81
30
5
74
68
2
WVKG-51-{0 2|
WILLIAMS RIVER
GAU98
B120
8/5/1990
18
86
11
85
69
75
8 . .
93
42
90
4
78
84
2
WVKG 51(1.2)
WILLIAMS RIVER
GAU98
B129
8/4/1998
13
62
7
54
63
69
7
94
42
91
s
76
74
2
WVKG-S1-J100)
WILLIAMS RIVER
GAU98
B130
8/4/1998
20
95
11
85
71
77
13
88
46
84
4
80
85
86
2
WVKG-51-|20.0)
WILLIAMS RIVER
GAU98
B131
8/4/1998
21
100
15
115
74
81
20
81
49
80
5
72
2
WVKG-5-A
BUCKLES BRANCH
GAU98
B110
7/16/1998
22
105
11
85
65
71
20
8
81
67
52
4
89
80
2
WVKG-5 8(13)
BELLS CREEK
GAU98
bus
7/22/1998
13
62
7
54
77
84
93
67
52
5
73
• 70
2
WVKG-5-B-1
OPEN FORK
GAU98
Bill
7/22/1998
13
62
6
46
32
35
39
61
60
63
6
58
54
2
WVKG-5-8-2
SMITH BRANCH
GAU98
8113
7/16/1998
13
62
7
54
84
91
11
90
68
51
5
75
70.
2
WVKG-5-B-7
CAMPBELL FORK
GAU98
Q114
7/16/1998
9
43
2
15
11
12
81
19
91
14
7
47
25
2
WVKG-5-F
ROCKCAMPFORK
GAU98
B117
7/22/1998
7
33
2
15
70
76
15
86
70
47
4
89
58
2
WVKG-5-L
PEACH ORCHARD BRANCH
GAU98
B122
8/4/1998
13
62
7
54
77
84
4
97
63
57
5 .
74
66
71
2
WVKG6-I0.6)
RICH CREEK
GAU98
B135
8/5/1998
17
81
7
54
39
42
32
68
50
78
5
65
2
WVKG-6-{4.8)
RICH CREEK
GAU98
B136
8/5/1998
15
71
8
62
82
90
5
96
68
50
5
75
74
2
WVKG-60
TURKEY CREEK
GAU98
8137
8/S/1998
17
81
10
77
62
67
24
77
50
78
4
84
77
90
2
WVKG-60A
RIGHT FORK/TURKEY CREEK
GAU98
B130
8/5/1998
20
95
11
85
94
102
2
99
53
74
4
89
2
WVKG-65
WILLIAMS CAMP RUN
GAU98
B139
8/S/1990
22
105
15
115
83
90
4
97
48
81
4
89
93
2
WVKG-6-B(1.6}
BRIDGE FORK
GAU98
B133
7/15/1998
20
.95
12
92
80
87
10
91
58
G6
3
93
67
2
WVKG-6-O-p 0)
KELLY FORK
GAU98
B134
7/15/1998
17
81
9
69
81
88
2
99
61
61
4
89
61
2
WVKGC-14
LICK BRANCH
GAU98
B145
8/4/1998
16
76
11
85
76
82
10
91
24
119
3
95
88
2
WVKGC-15
HANGING ROCK BRANCH
GAU9B
B7
8/4/1998
18
86
12
92
90
98
3
98
32
106
3
101
96
2
WVKGC-17.3
LITTLE ROUGH RUN
GAU98
B147
8/4/1998
15
71
10
77
24 ¦
26
2 '
99
68
50
4
90
69
2
WVKGC-17.6
PHEASANT HOLLOW
GAU98
B140
8/&1998
22
105
14
108
65
71
9
92
37
99 .
3
92
92
2
WVKGC-10
COLD RUN
GAU98
Bt49
8/6/1998
' 18
86
. 10
77
43
47
26
75
52
74
4
84
74
2
WVKGC-21
BIRCHLOG RUN
GAU98
B9
7/16/1998
15
71
10
77
85
92
10
. 90
40
93
3
99
87
2
WVKGC-23(3.6)
NORTH FORK / CRANBERRY RIVER
GAU98
B153
7/14/1998
13
62
. 8
62
62
87
.4
97
98
51
60
77
4
83
75
2
WVKGC-23-C
LEFT FORK/NORTH FORK/CRANBERRY RIVER
GAU98
B10
7/14/1998
. 13
, 62
10
77
81
88
3
62
3
103
81
2
WVKGC-4*(0.4)
BARRENSHE RUN
GAU98
B161
7/15/1998
19
90
12
92
87
95
" 4 '
97
44
87
4
86
91
2
WVKGC-4-A
LITTLE BARRENSHE RUN
GAU98
B160
7/15/1998
21
100
13
100
82
89
6
95
38
97
4
88
95
2
WVKGW-10
MIDDLE FORK WILLIAMS RIVER
GAU98
B166
8/12/1998
13
62
9
69
77
83
7
94
40
94
3
103
84
2
WVKGW-IO-C
BEECHY RUN
GAU98
B169
8/12/1998
16
76
12
82
91
99
4
97
49
79
2
111
91
2
VWKGW-IO-E
HEU-FOR-CERTAIN BRANCH
GAU96
Bt7|
8/12/1998
19
90
12
92
92
100
2
99
51
76
3
too
93
2
WVKGW-16.5
BRIDGE CREEK
GAU90
B176
8/4/1998
15
71
10
77
95
103 '
3
98
77
37
4
90.
79
2
WVKGW-19
UPPER BANNOCK SHOALS RUN
GAU98
BI77
a/13/1998
21
100
12
92
90
98
4
97
52
75
3
94
93
2
WVKGW-20
TEA CREEK
GAU98
B178R
8/13/1998
17
81
12
92
74
80
20
80
53
74
4
80
81
2
WVKGW-8
WHITE OAK RUN
GAU98
8102
8/4/1998
15
71
9
69
95
104
2
99
52
74
3
96
85
2
WVO-2H-2-B.5
U.T. OF MILLERS FORK
TPO90
B4
5/7/1998
14
67
7
54
75
82
5
96
59
65
5
72
72
2
WVO-2-H-3
RUBENSBRANCH
TP098
85
5/27/1998
12
57
4
31
31
33
t
100
87
20
7
49
48
2
WVOG-IO
MERRITT CREEK
LGU90
BIO
5/21/1998
8
38
4
31
11
12
75
26
86
21
7
49
29
2
WVOG-IO-A
RIGHT FORK OF MERRITT CREEK
LGU98
Bit
5/21/1998
13
62
7
54
11
12
87
13
93
11
7
47
33
2
WVOG-11
SMITH CREEK
LGU90
B12
S/12/1998
11
52
4
31
14
IS
57
43
70
47
6
55
41
2
WVOG-14-D-(0 4)
U.T. OF TRACE CREEK
LGU90
B13
5/12/1998
1S
71
1
8
26
29
41
60
67
52
7
41
43
2
WVOG-2-{3.6)
MUD RIVER
LGU90
B16
5/29/1998
10
48
5
38
19
21
46
54
71
45
6
51
43
2
WVOG-2(47.0)
MUD RIVER
LGU98
B17
5/28/1998
11
52
6
46
55
60
20
80
56
68
5
67
62
2
WVOG-2-{48.7]
MUD RIVER
LGU98
B18
5/28/1998
17
81
9
69
49
53
26
74
47
82
5
67
71
Appendix C, pageC-17
-------
Appendix C
Stations are grouped by data set (1s 1996-1997 calibration data; 2»
Site metrics and metric scores
1997-1998 validation data). Within each data set, stations are listed by site type (reference, unlabeled, stressed), then within type by ascending Station ID.
Data
Site
Benthlc
Collect
Total
Tot. tax*
EPT
EPT taxa
%
%EPT|:
' %
V.Chlro
% Top 2
V. Top 2
HBI
INDEX
Set
Station ID
Stream Nam*
Type
Sample ID
Data
taxa
•core
taia
•core
EPT
•core .
' Chlro.
¦core
dominant
•core
H8I
¦core
(SCI)
2
WVOO-23.5
STALEY BRANCH
LGU98
820
5/22/1998
8
38
3
23
5
6
63
37
83
27
7
43
29
2
WVOG-27-A
LOWGAP BRANCH
LGU9B
B22
5/22/1998
20
95
9
69
55
60
27
74
48
82
5
70
75
2
WVOQ-27-H-J1 8)
FALLS BRANCH
LGU98
B23
5/27/1998
13
62
8
62
93
101
3
98
. SB
66
4
91
80
2
WVOG-3-0.5A
EOENS BRANCH
LGU9B
B26
5/18/1998
10
48
5
38
35
38
7
94
87
21
6
51
48
2
WVOG-3CM1.2I
STOUT CREEK
LGU9B
B27
5/13/1998
16
76
8
62
87
95
3
98
64
56
4 '
84
78
2
WVOG-34
FOURTEEN MILE CREEK
LGU98
B29
5/6/1998
13
62
7
54
78
65
12
89
53
73
5
75
73
2
WVOG-34A
LICK BRANCH
LGU98
030
5/6/1998
7
33
3
23
83
90
IS
86
84
25
s
72
63
55
64
2
WVOG-34-B
EAST FORK/FOURTEENMILE CREEK
LGU98
B31
5/6/1998
19
¦ 90
9
69
31
34
34
67
95
59
63
6
2
WVOG-34-E-1
NELSON FORK
LGU98
B32
5/6/1998
20
95
12
92
77
83
6
51
77
3
93
64
89
53
60
2
WVOG-3S
AARONS CREEK
LGU98
B34
S/11/1998
10
48
5
38
44
48
35
66
65
54
5
2
WVOG-36
HAMILTON CREEK
LGU98
835
5/11/1998
8
38
4
31
94
102
4
97
87
20 .
5 .
75
2
WVOG-38-0 |4 5)
LAUREL CREEK
LGU98
B39
5/18/1998
21
100
13
100
71
77
7
94
34
69
103
4
87
86
93
82
78
64
2
WVOG38-G
SULPHUR CREEK
LGU98
B40
5/19/1998
16
76
11
85
92
100
3
98
48
4 • -
2
WVOG38-K
LEFTHAND CREEK
LGU98
B4I
5/19/1998
16
76
10
77
88
96
4
97
71
45
4
79
2
WVOG-38 K.7
LITTLE DEADENING CREEK
LGU98
B43
5/19/1998
11
52
7
54
82
89
17
84
80
3t
5
72
2
WVOG-38-K-5
PIGEONROOST FORK
LGU98
B42
5/19/1998
19
90
8
62
67
73
1
100
35
102
4 .
90
86
63
23
2
WVOG-40
SAND CREEK
LGU98
B46
5/11/1998
10
48
7
54
77
84
15
86
76
37
5
71
2
WVOG-41
DRY BRANCH
LGU98
B47 .
5/11/1998
8
38
3
23
7
7
90
10
93
11
7
46
2
WVOG-42A
SHORT BEND
LGU9B
B48
5/11/1998
8
38
4
3t
83
68
34
66
68
49
5
71
57
54
53
2
WVOG-42-C-|0 2)
LAUREL FORK
LGU9B
B49
5/11/1998
13
62
7
54
43
47
50
51
70
47
6
2
WVOG-42-D
MUDUCK BRANCH
LGU98
B50
5/11/1998
19
90
10
77
59
65
13
88
48
82
4
78
80
79
79
2
WVOG-42-E
GARTIN FORK
LGU98
BS1
5/11/1998
16
76
11
85
60
65
16
84
40
94
5
73
2
WVOG-44-A.5
WORKMAN FORK
LGU9B
B53
5/20/1998
16
76
10
77
74
81
13
88
52
75
4
80
2
WVOG-44-A-2-{2.8|
MARSH FORK
LGU98
BS2
5/20/1998
13
62
8
62
78
85
14
87
74
41
5
72
6B.
2
WVOG-44C.3
CANEY BRANCH
LGU98
B54
5/14/1998
20
95
9
69
68
74
16
84
55
70
5
77
78
2
WVOG-44-C.7
THOMPSON BRANCH
LGU98
B55
5/14/1998
18
86
11
85
85
92
3
97
48
81
4
88
88
2
WVOG-44-6
SMOKEHOUSE FORK
LGU98
BS6
5/14/1998
15
71
9
69
47
51
28
72
51
76
6
62
67
92
86
2
WVOG-44-E-.5
WOLFPEN BRANCH
LGU9B
B57
5/4/1998
18
86
13 •
too
87
95
1
100
50
79
3
92
2
WVOG-44-F-1
ADAMS BR ANCH
LGU98
B58
5/4/1998
19
90
10
77
91
99
4
97
66
54
3
98
2
WVOG-44G{1,9)
BUCK FORK
LGU9B
BS9
5/14/1998
16
76
10
77
54
59
16
85
41
92
4
79
78
2
WVOG-44-H
HOOVER FORK
LGU98
B60
5/4/1998
24
114
15
115
74
80
9
92
35
101
4
89.
91
94
92
84
2
WVOG-44-l
HENDERSON BRANCH
LGU98
B61
S/4/1998
20
95
12
92
73
79
9
92
32
106
66
4
2
WVOG-44-K
BULWORK BRANCH
LGU98
B62
5/4/1998
18
86
10
77
82
90
7
94
58
¦ 4
90
2
WVOG-48
LIMESTONE BRANCH
LGU98
B63
5/6^998
13
62
5
38
42
45
15
86
31
107
4
86
70
2
WVOG-49-13.31
BIG CREEK
LGU98
B73
5/20/1998
15
71
8
62
30
33
19
82
62
59
5
67
62
2
WVOG-49-A
EO STONE BRANCH
LGU9B
B66
5/5/1998
6
29
2
15
21
23
29
72
57
67
5
69
46
2
WVOG-49-A-1
NORTH BRANCH/ED STONE BRANCH
LGU98
B67
5/5/1998
9
43
4
31
67
73
5
96
64
S6
5
73
62
79
2
WVOG-49-B-1
CHAPMAN BRANCH
LGU9B
B68
5/5/1998
12
57
7
54
85
92
8
93
44
88 .
4
88
2
WVOG-49C
VICKERS BRANCH
LGU98
B69
5/5/1998
6
29
2
15
47
51
13 ,
88
77
36
4
78
88
50
2
WVOG-49-D-2
DOG FORK
LGU9B
B71
5/5/1998
.17
81
9
69
83
90
11 '¦
89
48
82
4
83
2
WVOG49E-1
PERRYS BRANCH
LGU98
B72
5/6/1998
6
29
1
8
1
1
97
3
98
3
7
43
14
76
2
WVOG-50
LILY BRANCH
LGU9B
B74
5/6/1998
is
62
8
62
85
92
3
98
63
58
4
83
2
WVOG-51.5
FOWLER BRANCH
LGU98
B77
5/13/1998
8
38
1
8
39
42
43
57
82
28
5
74
41
69
2
WVOG-51-B
CANOE FORK
LGU98
B75
5/&1998
13
62
8
62
66
72
30
70
56
69
4
79
2
WVOG-S3
GODBY BRANCH
LGU98
B78
5/13/1998
12
57
4
31
11
12
82
18
87
20
6
52
32
2
WVOG-59
MILL CREEK
LGU9B
B82
5/13/1998
18
86
7 .
54
28
31
49
51
64
56
6
55
56
2
WVOG-60
BIG BRANCH
LGU9B
B84
5/13/1998
17
81
11
85
88
96
6
95
38
97
4
90
91
2
VWOG-61
BUFFALO CREEK
LGU9B
B85
5/13/1998
13
62
7
54
91
99
1
100
58
66
3
99
80
2
WVOG-9-A(0 3)
UPPER HEATH CREEK
LGU9B
B86
5/21/1998
14
67
8
62
45
48
38
63
61
61
6
61
60
2
WVOGM-13
BRUSH CREEK
LGU98
B89
5/15/1998
18
86
9
69
27
29 .
6
95
71
45
6
51
62
2
WVOGM-16-A
' FALLEN FORK
LGU98
B91
5/4/1998
23
110
15
115
80
87
11
90
51
77
4
82
89
2
WVOGM-19
TRACE CREEK
LGU98
092
5/4/1998
16
76
10
77
67
72
10
91
54
72
4
79
78
2
WVOGM-20-A
COON CREEK
LGU98
B93
5/4/1998
7
33
4
31
39
43
30 .
70
5S
71
5
69
53
2
WVOGM-20-K-1
LEFTHAND FORK
LGU98
B99
5/7/1998
17
61
10
77
88
96
3
97
57
66
4
84
84
2
WVOGM-20-M-(1.81
BRIDGE CREEK
LGU98
B102
5/27/1998
17
81
8
62
SO
55
5 •
96
56
69
4
79
73
2
WVOGM-20-M-1
FLINT HOLLOW
LGU98
BI01
5/&1998
18
86
12
92
97
106
0
101
52
74
3
94
91
2
WVOGM-20R-2
DONLEY FORK/HAYZLETT FORK
LGU98
8103
5/27/1998
21
100
9
69
56
61
21
80
41
93
4
80
81
2
WVOGM20V
ROCKHOUSE BRANCH
LGU98
BIOS
5/7/1998
14
67
9
69
96
104
0
101
78
35
4
78
75
2
WVOGM-22-A-J0.7)
STRAIGHT FO^K
LGU98
B108
5/4/1998
18
86
9
69
31
34
54
46
63
59
e
59
59
2
WVOGM-25-A
MEADOW BRANCH
LGU98
B109
5/6/1998
13
62
5
38
9
10
64
36
79
33
6
58
40
68
2
WVOGM-25B-J2.3} .
TRACE CREEK
LGU98
0111
5/28/1998
16
76
7
54
36
39
24
77
45
86
4
78
2
WVOGM-25-B-1
TINCTURE FORK
LGU98
0110
5/6/1998
15
71 .
9
69
79
86
14
87
53
73
4
86
79
2
WVOGM-25-l
SUGARTREE FORK
LGU98
BUS
5/26/1998
9
43
5
38
63
68
5
96
79
33
5
73
59
Appendix C, pageC-18
-------
Appendix C Site metrics and metric scores
Stations are grouped by data set (1= 1996-1997 calibration data; 2= 1997-1990 validation data). Within each data set, stations are listed by site type (reference, unlabeled, stressed), then within type by ascending Station ID.
Data
Site
Benthlc
Collect
Total
Tot. taxa
EPT
EPT tasa
%
V.EPTI:
%.
y.Chlro
% Top 2
% Top 2
HBI
INDEX
Set
Station 10
Stream Name
Type
Sample ID
Dal*
taxa
score
taxa
•core
EPT
•core ,
Chlro.
•core
dominant
•eore
HBI
' score -
(SCI)
2
WVOGM-25-1-4
SAND FORK
LGU98
B114
5/26/199B
16
76
10
77
70
76
' 4
97
48
82
4
83
82
2
WVOGM-31
SANDLICK BRANCH
LGU98
B117
S/21/1998
17
81
10
77
52
56
9
92
51
76
4
86
78
2
WVOGM-33-B
DRY FORK
LGU98
B1I8
5/21/1998
20
95
11
85
88
95
3
98
40
93
3
96
94
2
WVOGM-33-C
BIG BRANCH
LGU98
B119
5/20/1998
21
100
11
85
62
68
17
84
39
95
4
81
85
2
WVOGM-35-E
LAUREL FORK
LGU98
BI20
5/28/1998
19
90
12
92
41
4S
13
88
52
75
4
81
79
2
WVOGM-39
LEFT FORK/MUD RIVER
LGU98
B123
5/27/1998
20
95
10
77
60
65
12
89
39
96
4
80
84
2
WVOGM39-{10 2)
LEFT FORK/MUO RIVER
LGU98
B12S
5/27/1998
11
S2
6
46 .
40
43
IS
86
61
61
S
70
60
2
WVOGM-39-G
FLAT CREEK
LGU98
B124
5/27/1998
15
71
9
69
49
53
32
69
55
70
5
69
67
2
WVOGM-4-|2.0)
BIG CABELL CREEK
LGU98
B127
5/26/1998
18
86
8
62
70
76
17
84
58
66
5
70
74
2
WVOGM-40.3 (0.0)
UPTON BRANCH
LGU98
8128
5/19/1998
21
100
10
77
72
78
' 6 '
95
53
73
4
80
84
2
WVOGM-43
STONECOAL BRANCH
LGU98
B130
5/18/1998
14
67
8
62
91
99
3
98
64
57
4
87
78
2
WVOGM-44-(0.2)
BERRY BRANCH
LGU98
B131
5/19/1998
17
81
9
69
79
86
4
97
55
71
4
85
81
. 2
WVOGM-SO
LUKEY FORK
LGU98
0132
5/18/1998
23
110
14
108
84
92
3
98
46
85
3
98
95
2
WVOGM-7-B-1
TONY BRANCH
LGU98
B133
5/3/1998
20
95
tl
85
70
76
14
87
51
77
4
83
84
2
WVOGM-8-|4.0)
MILL CREEK
LGU98
0137
5/3/1998
16
76
10
77
43
46
15
86
44
88
4
84
76
2
WVOGM-8-C
RIGHT FORK/MILL CREEK
LGU98
B136
5/26/1998
13
62
6
46
43
46
33
67
67
52
5
66
57
2
WVP-12-|5.2)
SIR JOHNS RUN
POT98
B63
6/1/1998
15
71
8
62
66
72
13
68
45
86
83
77
2
WVP-15-10.4)
WILIET RUN
POT98
B67
6/4/1998
19
90
12
92
89
96
6
95
50
78
3
94
91
2
WVP-2.2-{0 3}
UT POTOMAC RV (TEAGUES RUN)
POT98
B29
" 6/2/1998
11
52
4
31
15
16
20
80
63
58
5
67 •
51
2
WVP-4.5
JORDANRUN
POT98
B14
6/25/1998
14
67
5
38
38
42
17
84
55
70
- 4
81
64
2
WVP-4-(1.3)
OPEQUON CREEK
POT98
B27
6/2/1998
12
57
2
15
5
6
10
91
75
40
5
74
47
2
WVP-4-|17.8|
OPEQUON CREEK
POT98
828
6/9/1998
11
52
5
38
14
15
81
19
88
18
6
50
32
2
WVP-4-(29.2)
OPEQUON CREEK
POT98
B31
6/9/1998
14
67
7
54
33
36
29
72
56
68
5
67
61
2
WVP-4-B
EAGLE RUN
POT98
at
6/10/1998
5 .
24
1
8
1
94
6
97
. 4
7
42
14
2
WVP-4-C-(02)
TUSCARORA CREEK
POT98
B2
6/10/1998
4
19
1
8
4
4
68
33
93
12
6
53
21
2
WVP-4-C-(l.5)
TUSCARORA CREEK
POT98
B32
6/2/1998
7
33
1
8
4
¦ 4
77
23
89
17
7
39
21
2
WVP-4-C*(6.0)
TUSCARORA CREEK
POT98
B62
6/1/1998
13
62
5
38
31
33
48
52
69
48
6
.57
49
2
WVP-4-D
EVANS RUN
POT98
B4
6/10/1998
13
62
6
46
24
26
61
40
73
43
6
56
45
2
WVP-4-1
HOPEWELL RUN
POT98
B5R
6/9/1998
11
52
6
46
25
27
66
34
80
32
6
54
41
2
WVP-4-J
MIDDLE CREEK
POT98
B7
6/9/1998
14
67
6
46
32
35
44
56
61
60
5
65
55
2
WVP-4-K-J1.2)
GOOSE CREEK
POT98
B33
6/8/1998
17
81
6
46
20
22
56
44
69
48
6
57
50
2
WVP-4-M-[7.8}
MILL CREEK
POT98
B34R
6/10/1998
9
43
3
23
9
10
60
40
88
19
6
50
31
2
WVP-4-M-1
SYLVAN RUN
POT98
B11
6/8/1998
16
76
8
62
27
29
67
33
86
21
6
54
46
2
WVP-4-M-2
TORYTOWN RUN
POT98
89R
6/3/1998
7
33
2
15
.
1
61
40
79
33
7
47
28
2
VWP-4-P
SILVER SPRING RUN
POT98
B12R
6/4/1998
13
62
3
23
14
16
59
41
79
32
6
54
38
2
WVP-5
HARLAN RUN
POT98
B15
6/23/1998
12
57
5
38
34
37
19
82
60
62
6
63
57
2
WVP-5 A-{1.4)
TULLIS BRANCH (TULISUS)
POT98
035
6/24/1998
15
71
6
46
40
43
11
90
52
75
5
70
66
2
WVP-6-11.2)
BACK CREEK
POT98
B36
6/2/1998
16
76
9
69
51
58
9
92 .
40
93
4
78
77
2
WVP-6-07.3)
BACK CREEK
POT98
644
6/3/1998
: 18
86
9
69
76
83
5
95
57
67
3
94
82
2
WVP-€[tB4)
BACK CREEK
POT98
B4S
6/3/1998
15
71
9
69
B5
93
5
96
65
54
3
94
80
2
WVP-6-{33,8|
BACK CREEK
POT98
B46
6/8/1998
20
95
11
85
63
69
18
85
43
89
80
84
2
WVP-6-A.I
UT OF BACK CREEK #2
POT98
B16
6/2/1990
15
71
9
69
72
79
23
78
76
38
4
91
71
2
WVP-6-A.2
KATES RUN
POT98
B17
6/2/1998
15
71
8
62
32
34
10
91
48
81
4
82
70
2
WVP-6-A-(0.5)
TILHANCE CREEK
POT98
B38
6/9/1998
17
81
9
69
53
, 58
31
70
50
78
S
72
71
2
WVP-6-A-{1.3)
TILHANCE CREEK
POT98
B39
6/9/1998
20
95
10
77
55
60
29
72
56
69
5
70
74
2
WVP-6A-{9.4)
TILHANCE CREEK
POT98
B40
. 6/9/1998
17
81
10
77
77
83
5
96
38
98
3
94
88
2
WVP-6 A-1-{l.6)
HIGGINS RUN
POT98
B41
6/2/1998
15
71
9
69
80
87
15
66
81
30
3
98
74
2
WVP-6-C.8-{0.6)
U.T. OF BACK CREEK O GANOTOWN
POT98
B43
6/3/1998 .
18
86
12
92
89
96
5
96
6S
55
3
96
87
2
WVP-6-0
SAWMILL RUN
POT9B
B18R
6/3/1998
.15
71
9
69
53
58
40
60
74
41
5
77
63
2
WVP-8
BIG RUN
POT98
B20
6/2/1998
18
86
10
. 77
51
55 ,
32
68
48
B2
5
. 74
74
2
WVP-9-(1.0)
SLEEPY CREEK
POT98
B47
6/1/1998
20
95
10
77
63
68
28
73
52
75
4
81
78
2
WVP-9(10.0}
SLEEPY CREEK
POT98
B48
6/1/1998
15
71
a
62
63
69
8
93
52
76
3
96
78
2
WVP-9-(12.2)
SLEEPY CREEK
• POT98
B49
6/2/1998
20
95
10
77
51
.56
25
75
45
87
83
79
2
WVP-9-(15.2)
SLEEPY CREEK
P6T98
B50
6/2/1998
18
86
10
77
76
83
7
93
50
78
3
100
86
2
WVP-9-jl8.2|
SLEEPY CREEK
POT98
B51
6/3/1998
18
86
9
69
47
51
33
68
49
80
6
62
69
2
WVP-9-(21.6)
SLEEPY CREEK
POT98
052
6/3/1998
19
90
10
77
67
73
20
61
48
81
4
82
81
2
WVP-9|236)
SLEEPY CREEK
POT98
B53
6/3/1998
16
76
10
77
88
96
6
95
45
86
3
97
88
2
WVP-9-(33.2)
SLEEPY CREEK
POT98
857
6/10/1998
19
90
11
85
54
59
38
62
50
77
5
75
75
2
WVP-9-{35.6)
SLEEPY CRfEK
POT98
B59
6/10/1998
20
95
12
92
53
58
33
68
47
84
5
77
79
2
WVP-9-(36.8)
SLEEPY CREEK
POT98
860
6/10/1998
19
90
12
92
64
69
17
84
56
69
5
76
80
2
WVP-9-BI-AjO.I)
ROARING RUN
POT98
B71
6/^1998
16
76
7
54
79
86
10
61
67
52
3
98
76
2
WVP-9-D.8-{0.5|
LICK RUN
POT98
B54
GO/1998
15
71
9
69
62
68
9
92
43
69
4
85
79
2
WVP-9-E-|1.5|
MIDDLE FORK/SLEEPY CREEK
POT98
B55
6/3/1998
15
71
10
77
43
47
6
95
68
49
88
71
Appendix C, page C-19
-------
Appendix C
Site metrics and metric scores
Stations aie grouped by dala set (1= 1996-1997 calibration data: 2= 1997-1998 validation data). Within each data sel, stations are listed by site lype (reference, unlabeled, stressed), then within type by ascending Station ID.
Data
Set Station ID
Stream Nam*
Slta
Type
Benthlc Collect
Sample ID Data
Total
laxa
Tot taia
•core
EPT
laia
EPT taxa
•core
%
EPT
% EPT J; f % %Chlro % Top 2 %Top2
acota ' | Chlro. eeore dominant aeoro
HBI
•core
INDEX
(SCI)
WVP-9-E-1
WVP-9-F
WVP-9-G-(0 2S)
WVP-9-G-1
WVP-9G-3
WVP-9-1
WVBS-{104.2J
WVBST-10
WVBST-107
SOUTH FORK/SLEEPY CREEK
ROCK GAP RUN
INDIAN RUN
NORTH FORK RUN
MIDDLE FORK / INDIAN RUN
HANDS RUN
TUG FORK RIVER
DRAG CREEK
GRAPEVINE BRANCH
WVBST-116
WVBST-120-B
WVBST-14
WVBST-16
WVBST-19-IOOJ
WVBST-19-(8.0)
WVBST-24-(9.0|
WVBST-24E-2-(0.1|
WVBST-24-K-8
WVBST-3
BELCHER BRANCH
PUNCHEON CAMP BRANCH
BULL CREEK
SILVER CREEK
MARROWBONE CREEK
MARROWBONE CREEK
PIGEON CREEK
SPRUCE FORK
SIMMONS FORK
POWDERMILL BRANCH
WVBST-3I-(I.0J
WVBST 33
WVBST-36
WVBST-38
WVBST-40B
WVBST-40-D
WVBST-43-A
WVBST-57-{0.6J
WVBST-57-B
WVBST-70Nt0.01
BUFFALO CREEK
WILLIAMSON CREEK
DICK WILLIAMSON BRANCH
SPROUSE CREEK
RUTHERFORD BRANCH
CHAFIN BRANCH
LICK FORK/GRAPEVINE
BULL CREEK
LEFT FORK BULL CREEK
LITTLE SLATE CREEK
WVBST-70-0
WVBST-78B
WVBST-78-G
WVKC-10-(03.6)
WVKC-I0-I17.0)
WVKC-10-l-{0.0)
WVKC-tO-l-{12.5)
WVKC*t0-t-(5.6)
WVKC-10-J
WVKC-10-T-t0.3l
WVKC- I0-T-{4.6|
WVKC-10-T-10
WVKC- 10-T-t 1-J0.2}
WVKC-IO-T-11-{4.1)
WVKC-10-T-21
WVKC-10-T-24-{0.6)
WVKC-tO-T-3
WVKC-10-U-{0.4)
WVKC-10-U{24.4}
WVKC-10-U-H.9)
ATWELL BRANCH
SHABBYROOM BRANCH
BADWAY BRANCH
LITTLE COAL RIVER
LITTLE COAL RIVER
BIG HORSE CREEK
BIG HORSE CREEK
BIG HORSE CREEK
LITTLE HORSE CREEK
SPRUCE FORK
stressed
stressed
stressed
POT98 B22
POT98 024
POT98 BS8
POT98 B73R
POT98 B75
POT98 B74
TUG98 B3
TUG98 BIO
TUG98 B17
stressed
stressed
. stressed
stressed
stressed
stressed
stressed
stressed
stressed
stressed
TUG98 B34
TUG98 B39
TUG98 B43
TUG98 B45
TUG98 847
TUG98 B48
TUG98 BS9
TUG98 B51
TUG9B B52
TUG98 B62
6/4/1998
6/2/1998
6/10/1998
6/1/1998
6/2/(908
6/10/1998
7/6/1998
6/30/1998
6/17/1998
18
19
17
18
18
22
12
18
4
90
81
86
86
105
57
10
11
10
13
4
9
0
stressed
stressed
stressed
stressed
stressed
stressed
stressed
stressed
stressed
stressed
TUG98 B64
TUG98 B66
TUG98 B69
TUG98 B70
TUG98 B72
TUG98 B74
TUG98 B81
TUG90 B83
TUG98 B82
TUG98 B100
6/25/1998
6/16/1998
7/7/1998
6/30/1998
7/7/1990
7/6/(998
. 6/22/1998
6/24/1998
6/22/1998
6/2S/1998
12
10
20
13
8
29
76
43
57
48
95
62
38
52
67
6/23/1998
6/17/1998
6/22/1998
7/1/1998
7/1/1998
6/15/1998
6/16/1998
7/7/1998
7/7/1998
7/8/1998
77
65
77
85
77
100
31
69
0
8
69
31
31
31
69
31
IS
15
23
68
70
87
03
67
75
17
71
0
74
76
94
90
73
82
19
78
0
7
8
13
21
15
60
12
0
92
94
93
4
57
74
51
54
62
16
34
12
7
15
7
6
12
. 7
13
12
10
71
33
29
57
29
43
33
62
57
48
stressed
stressed
stressed
stressed
stressed
stressed
stressed
stressed
stressed
stressed
TUG98 B102
TUG98 B121
TUG98 B125
COAL97 B43
COAL97B44
COAL97B5
COAL97 B6
COAL97B7
COAL97B45
COAL97 B74
46
15
15
23
8
15
8
38
23
38
9
46
60
49
56
72
14
16
7/8/1998
7/B/1990
7/1/1998
9/2? 1997
9/22/1997
9/22/1997
9/23/1997
9/22/1997
9/22/1997
9/24/1997
21
14
12
16
12
14
13
9
13
14
100
67
57
76
57
67
62
43
62
67
62
31
31
46
38
23
23
31
1S
46
50
64
38
02
00
24
35
20
22
73
5
62
01
56
59
67
18
37
13
8
33
19
10
50
73
53
61
78
15
10
54
67
8
9
16
21
2
4
3
62
69 .
29
54
62
ei
72
50
74
70
50
110
72
59
30
44
70
41
47
70
34
93
92
05
80
99
97
90
30
32
83
63
45
68
51
60
83
78
76
74
26
57
86
50
76
62
26
34
38
40
11
18
19
25
8
26
17
17
61
79
90
63
02
75
93
74
04
84
39 "
21
59
53
78
70
85
74
80
68
78
88
64
74
34
47
23
40
31
50
34
18
41
89
87
26
39
21
24
80
26
29
41
6
2
28
20
30
31
11
75
72
60
95
99
73
81
71
70
•90
58
81
64
63
76
65
87
76
50
52
66
30
57
57
34
54
51
37
77
75
88
81
92
100
91
101
57
43
74
81
76
67
72
72
71
46
54
25
57
70
55
77
68
S2
52
57
61
59
01
76
62
83
80
75
91
41
24
72
69
59
60
77
51
49
34
37
61
44
33
52
49
47
49
63
37
33
55
51
74
65
51
54
44
51
72
SPRUCE FORK
STOLLINGS BRANCH
SPRUCE LAUREL FORK
SPRUCE LAUREL FORK
ADKINS FORK
BRUSHY FORK
LOW GAP CREEK
POND FORK
POND FORK
PONO FORK
WVKC-10-U-{9.0j
WVKC-10-U-12-A
WVKC-IO-U-7^00)
WVKC-10-U-7-{4.3)
WVKC-10-U-7-J7.9J
WVKC-2-{2.0)
WVKC-4-{2.5)
WVKC-46-{32 8)
WVKC-47-L-J0.8)
WVKG-1
POND FORK
TRACE FORK/COW CREEK
WEST FORK
WEST FORK OF POND FORK
WEST FORK OF POND FORK
BROWNS CREEK
SMITH CREEK .
MARSH FORK
TONEY FORK
SCRABBLE CREEK .
stressed
stressed
stressed
stressed
stressed
stressed
stressed
stressed
stressed
stressed
COAL97 B77
COAL97 B82
COAL97 B78
COAL97B80
COAL97B1
COAL97B10
COAL97 B48
COAL97 861
COAL97B62
COAL97 863
stressed
stressed
stressed
stressed
stressed
stressed
stressed
stressed
stressed
stressed
COAL97 B64
COAL97 B88
COAL97B89
COAL97B90
COAL97B91
COAL97B8
COAL97 B72
COAL97B53
COAL97BB7
GAU98 811
9/24/1997
9/24/1997
9/2S/1997
9/25/1997
9/25/1997
10/8/1997
9/24/1997
9/23M997
9/22/1997
9/23M997
9/23/1997
9/22/1997
S/22/1997
9/18/1997
9/18/1997
9/17/1997
9/17/1997
10/6/199 7
9/22/1997
7/15/1998
16
J5
12
9
11
13
7
18
10
13
19
16
10
10
10
17
11
13
13
76
71
57
43
52
62
33
86
48
62
90
76
48
48
48
01
52
62
62
43
54
46
31
23
36
46
6
46
31
38
51
60
39
67
62
57
4
59
62
72
55
65
43
73
64
60
79
12
26
14
23
7
9
9
11
7
93
89
74
87
78
94
92
92
90
94
46
46
31
8
23
54
31
30
46
15
47
44
73
46
61
41
30
17
48
4
51
46
79
50
67
44
33
19
52
4
49
47
S5
62
71
64
81
52
71
74
80
03
70
60
46
56
30
75
46
41
10
33
(6
19
19
30
45
63
30
73
03
67
65
01
62
62
55
30
63
27
49
69
77
66
77
64
63
76
83
07
00
48
35
54
37
57
56
38
27
20
73
79
60
82
58
74
60
71
50
62
67
66
64
63
60
61
60
72
72
57
59
56
67
38
73
56
64
67
50
50
51
53
60
40
43
52
26
2 WVKG*13|15.6)
2 WVKG-13-L
2 WVKG-13-M
2 WVKG-19-V-{1.0J
PETERS CREEK
ROCKCAMP BRANCH
MCCLUNG BRANCH
LITTLE CLEAR CREEK
stressed
stressed
stressed
stressed
GAU90 B19
GAU98 B16
GAU98 B17
GAU98 845
7/29/1998.
8/4/1998
8/5/1998
7/2 8/1998
12
t9
12
0
57
90
57
30
31
46
54
15
56
64
81
12
63
70
88
13
10
9
39
92
91
92
61
56
57
54
58
68
67
73
66
70
69
85
50
63
72
75
41
Appendix C, page C-20
-------
Appendix C Site metrics and metric scores
Stations are grouped by data set (1= 1996-1997 calibration data; 2- 1997-1998 validation data). Within each data set, stations are listed by site type (reference, unlabeled, stressed), then within type by ascending Station ID.
Data
Station ID
Site
Benthlc
Collect
Total
ToL taxa
EPT
EPT taxa
V.
Y. EPT j
' %
Y.ChlfO
% Top 2
% Top 2
HBI
INDEX
Set
Stream Name
Typ«
Sample ID
Date
taxa
score
taxa
score
EPT
score .
' Chtro.
score
dominant
•core
HB!
. score
(SCI)
2
WVKG-19-V-(6.0)
LITTLE CLEAR CREEK
' stressed
GAU98
B47
7/30/1998
10
48
4
31
62
67
14
87
58
66
4
91
65
2
WVKG-24-|12.4)
HOMINY CREEK
stressed
GAU98
658
7/22/1998
8
38
3
23
29
31
21
79
50
78
7
48
so
2
WVKG-24-l
COLT BRANCH
stressed
GAU98
BS7
7/22/1998
23
110
11
85
45
49
44
56
61
61
6
60
68
2
WVKG-26-B-2
JONES RUN
stressed
GAU98
BSI
7/15/1998
13
62
3
23
30
33
49
51
78
34
' 6
55
43
2
WVKG-26 F
TROUT RUN
stressed
GAU98
B63
7/14/1998
25
119
9
69
38
41
45
55
75
39
6
60
61
2
WVKG-26-K-1
LOWER SPRUCE RUN
stressed
GAU98
B66
7/22/1998
20
95
7
54
35
38
16
85
• 44
88
4
84
74
2
WVKG-26K-1-A
SPRUCE RUN
stressed
GAU98
B67
7/22/1998
19
90
4
31
51
55
17
84
40
93
4
84
73
2
WVKG-30-K
PADDY RUN
stressed
GAU98
B79
7/27/1998
28
133
12
92
47
52
25
76
56
6B
5
76
77
2
WVKG-31
LITTLE LAUREL CREEK
stressed
GAU98
B86
8/5/1998
8
38
4
31
86
94
2
99
83
27
5
75
61
2
WVKG-5B 1-C
SANGAMORE FORK
- stressed
GAU98
B112
7/16/1998
7
33
3
23
38
41
0 '
101
38
98
3
97
65
2
WVKG-5-F-1
SPRING BRANCH
stressed
GAU98
B118
7/22/1998
6
29
0
0
0
0
64
37
85
24
6
61
25
2
WVKG-5-P
ROBINSON FORK
stressed
GAU98
B12S
7/20/1998
11
52
S
38
80
87
10
91
86
22
5
69
60
2
WVKG-6-A
LICK BRANCH
stressed
GAU98
BI32
8/5/1998
7
33
0
0
0
0
85
15
94
g
7
42
17
2
WVKGW-10G
MCCLINTOCK RUN
stressed
GAU98
B172
8/5/1998
13
62 .
to
77
92
100
6
95
72
44
3
94
79
2
WVOG-2-(77.2|
MUO RIVER
stressed
LGU9B
B19
5/18/1998
16
76
8
62
42
45
32
68
64
S7
5
64
62
2
WVOG-3
DAVIS CREEK
stressed
LGU90
B2S
5/18/1998
S
24
2
15
8 .
9
B7
13
93
11
7
45
19
2
WVOG-38-(08)
BIG UGLY CREEK
stressed
LGU9B
B44
5/19/1998
11
52
6
46
48
52
9
92
52
99
74
4
79
66
2
WVOG-49C.1
U.T. OF BIG CREEK
stressed
LGU98
B70
5/6/1998
4
19
2
15
2
2
98
2
2
7
43
14
2
WVOG-51-G.5
SOUTH FORK/CRAWLEY CREEK
stressed
LGU98
B76
S/13^1998
7
33
2
15
S
5
43
58
94
to
6
59
30
2
WVOG-6-{0.1)
MILL CREEK
stressed
LGU98
B83
5/18/1998
6
29
2
15
10
11
73
27
86
22
6
50
26
2
WVOGM-1.S
TANYARD BRANCH
stressed
LGU98
B87
5/18/1998
5
24
0
0
0
0
75
25
98
3
8
33
14
2
WVOGM-12
INDIAN FORK
stressed
LGU98
888
5/15/1998
7
33
3
23
5
5
57
43
88
19
7
47
28
2
WVOGM-14-(7.2)
CHARLEY CREEK
stressed
LGU90
B90
S/29/1998
10
48
5
38
37
40
22 .
79
52
75
5
75
66
59
2
WVOGM-20-(21.2)
TRACE FORK
stressed
LGU98
8106
5/29/1998
13
62
6
46
39
42
38
63
57
68
5
58
2
WVOGM 20 (6.4)
TRACE FORK
Stressed
LGU98
B107
6/9/1998
17
81
7
54
60
65
18
83
56
69
s
74
71
68
2
WVOGM-20O-I4.6)
BIG CREEK
stressed
LGU98
B94
5/28/1998
15
71
7
54
44
48
12
89
60
63
4
83
2
WVOGM 20-H
CLYMER CREEK
stressed
LGU98
B96
5/27/1998
20
95
8
62
50
54
16
85
48
81
6
61
73
2
WVOGM-20-M-0 5)
KELLYS CREEK
stressed
LGU98
B97
5/28/1998
17
81
8
62
44
48
9
92
47
82
5
66
72
2
WVOGM-20-K
MARTIN RUN
stressed
LGU98
B98
5/6/1998
15
71
g
69
89
96
6
95
63
58
4
85
96
79
2
WVOGM-20K-{0.1}
NELSON HOLLOW
stressed <
LGU98
B100
5/4/1998
12
57
9
69
82
89
11
90
40
94
3
83
2
WVOGM-20-T-{3.5|
JOES CREEK
stressed
LGU90
B104
5/28/1998
13
62
7.
54
50
54
20
B1
43
90
5
73
69
2
WVOGM-25-H-1
VALLEY FORK
stressed
LGU98
B112
5/26/1998
15
71
10
77
16
17
16
84
79
33
5
68
59
2
WVOGM-25-l-pO)
SUGARTREE FORK
stressed
LGU98
BUS
5/26/1998
17
81
9
69
51
56
9
92
58
66
4
78
74
2
VWOGM-3-(0 9)
LJDTTLE CABELL CREEK
stressed
LGU98
B116
5/26/1998
10
48
5
38
26
28
60
40
72
44
6
56
42
2
VWOGM35{t8j
8IG CREEK
stressed
LGU98
B12I
5/21/1998
14
67
8
62
69
75
7
94
50
66
4
80
74
2
WVOGM35-t4.il
BIG CREEK
stressed
LGU98
B122
5/19/1998
16
76
8
62
80
87
1
100
50
78
4
89
82
2
WVOGM-4-10.2)
BIG CABELL CREEK
stressed
LGU98
BI26
5/29/1998
10
48
3
23
41
44
47
54
85
23
6
55
41
2
WVOGM-40.3-|2.2|
UPTON BRANCH
stressed
LGU98
BI29
5/19/1998
24
114
11
65
67
73
8
93
40
93
3
94
90
2
WVOGM-7-{0.4J
LOWER CREEK
stressed
LGU98
B134
5/26/1998
17
81
8
62
42
46
40
60
64
56
6
61
61
2
WVP-1-A-(0.8J
ELK BRANCH
. stressed
POT98
B25
6/2/1998
10
48
4
31
9
10
31 *
69
66
53
5
64
46
2
WVP-4-{18.8)
OPEQUON CREEK
stressed
POT98
B30
fi/3/1998
19
90
10
77
40
44
40
60
54
71
5
69
69
2
WVP-4-C-1
DRY RUN
stressed
POT98
B3
6/3/1998
- 14
67
4
31
8
9
44
. 56
65
55
6
55
46
2
WVP-4-M
MILL CREEK
stressed
POT98
B8
6/9/1998 .
15
71
8
62
42
46
43
58
72
44
5
65
58
2
WVP-6-|9.1)
BACK CREEK
stressed
POT98
B37
6/2/1998
17
81
g
69
83
90
8
93
63
57
3
92
80
2
WVP-9-E-17.0)
MIDDLE FORK/SLEEPY CREEK
stressed
POT98
B56
6/10/1998
12
57
5
38
48
53
23 *
78
44
88
4
79
65
Appendix C, page C-21
-------
APPENDIX D
SUPPORTING GRAPHS
Figures D1-D2. Distributions of metric values in reference sites separated into
potential site classes by ecoregions and by index periods.
Figures D3-D6. Discriminatory ability of each candidate metric for West
Virginia streams using calibration data (1996-1997) reference
and impaired sites.
-------
A Stream Condition Index for West Virginia Wadeable Streams
Figure D-l. Benthic attributes (candidate metrics) in 67 reference sites divided into 2 Ecoregion
groups. Three Western Allegheny Plateau reference sites combined with 32 Ridge and Valley
reference sites were compared with 32 Central Appalachian reference sites. The %Diptera metric shows
the most noteworthy difference in ranges of values between the two ecoregion groups, with somewhat
lesser separation also shown by % Chironomid and % Tolerants; these three metrics are highly
correlated (Table 4-2). In most of these candidate metrics, there is no clear difference in ranges of
values between the two ecoregion groups.
Tetra Tech, Inc.
D-l
March 28, 2000 (Revised July 21, 2000)
-------
A Stream Condition Index for West Virginia Wadeable Streams
Mar-juM July-Sap
May-Jtma J«i»-Sap
:ili
Map*JvM JiMySap
Mav-jwNa Jal»-S*p
••ft-
May-Juna July-Sap
. 30
M
T.
1
2 «
I
* so •
May-Jwna July-Sap
May-Jufta July-Sap
Six
MayJuna July-Sap
Ilx;
Mar-Juna JirifS**
Mav-Juna July-Sap
UtfJam Juty*S«p
i
l 4>
XTt
x i 1
May-Jvna Mlr-Svp
Figure D-2. Benthic attributes (metrics) in 67 reference sites divided into 2 sampling periods. Twenty
reference sites, sampled in May and June were compared with 47 reference sites sampled in July
through September. Possible classification is exhibited by % Filterers, EPT taxa, and Intolerant taxa.
However, % Filterers was eliminated as a metric for use in the index because of its poor discrimination
of impairment (Chapter 4; Figure D-5). EPT taxa and Intolerant taxa measured essentially the same
thing in the WV family-level data (Table 4-2, 92% correlated). The distinction shown here by these
metrics most likely reflects the presence of more Ephemeroptera in the earlier sampling period and may
support possible improvement in the assessment program by concentrating sampling earlier in the
summer. However, combined with other analyses (Chapter 3), we did not conclude that classification
by index period was required.
Tetra Tech, Inc.
D-2
March 28, 2000 (Revised July 21, 2000)
-------
.4 Stream Condition Index for West Virginia Wadeable Streams
a
s i
a .
Non-OiriM' Mi
Man-Owl Mr Km
O ri\
M
n
E
3Z Mon^uthat Mti
Non-OwHW Mm
C3
1i%
i'
a
J, Non-Owl Uw Uu
Neo>0
Q »S%
Figure D-3. Discriminatory ability of candidate metrics for West Virginia streams using 1996-1997
calibration data reference and impaired sites: Total taxa, EPT taxa, Ephemeroptera taxa, Plecoptera taxa,
Trichoptera taxa, and Diptera taxa.
Tetra Tech, Inc.
D-3
March 28, 2000 (Revised July 21, 2000)
-------
¦4 Stream Condition Index for West Virginia Wadeable Streams
01
e
o
*
a
e
o
c
a
e
•
j. 0.4
o
I
•
1
0.2
3C — Oil*— Mm
Ml*
_L
2C NMMO«flv> Km .
•
>IV
CJ n\
r
1
unpaired
• El Puil
ret unptHtd
• KaMi
100
T
:¦
¦
• 70
K
•
¦
E
h-
O. 80
(N
' 40
' .
1 40
* 30
I Nai-Ocltar Mai
Mit
MM
a 't\
0
O ?i%
m
1 .
noiirit
¦ IMIUI
r
1
unpaired
¦ OMMn
to
•
6 "
a
a "
e
a 50
UJ
' £
40
j!
¦
rc MM-OdMt MM
33 MU
CD tt\
¦
O '»*
npawad
rt
Figure D-4. Discriminatory ability of candidate metrics for West Virginia streams using 1996-1997
calibration data reference and impaired sites: Chironomidae taxa, % dominant, %2 dominant, %EPT,
%Ephemeroptera, and %Plecoptera.
Terra Tech, Inc.
D-4
March 28, 2000 (Revised July 21, 2000)
-------
A Stream Condition Index for West Virginia Wadeable Streams
&. 90
5
- • mmi.
• OWM't
-fir
*T* hm.omimi t
NlwOriMt I
• OKlMI*
Figure D-5. Discriminatory ability of candidate metrics for West Virginia streams using 1996-1997
calibration data reference and impaired sites: %Trichoptera, %Diptera, %Chironomidae, %01igochaeta,
%Filterers, and %Scrapers.
Tetra Tech, Inc.
D-5
March 28, 2000 (Revised July 21, 2000)
-------
A Stream Condition Index for West Vireinia Wadeablc Streams
% "
u
T
X
O II*
tl
&
*
X —
a »»•-
10
• •
M
o •'«
ftM-ttaHMf I
~ ris
•0
TO
•0
4>
SO
O
J?
40
•
• —•
_L ;
CD H-.
>k'.
Figure D-6. Discriminatory ability of candidate metrics for West Virginia streams using 1996-1997
calibration data reference and impaired sites: %Collectors, %Predators, %Shredders, Intolerant taxa,
7rTolerants, and HBI (Family biotic index).
Terra Tech, Inc.
D-6
March 28, 2000 (Revised July 21, 2000)
------- |